MensTennisForums.com - Reply to Topic
Thread: Does anyone believe Jim Courier was a greater claycourter than Federer/Djokovic? Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
02-12-2012 04:35 AM
Mountaindewslave
Re: Does anyone believe Jim Courier was a greater claycourter than Federer/Djokovic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by buzz View Post
Borg was probably more ahead of his generation than Courier, so that will make it closer. But Couriers forehand would be a hell of a lot bigger than any forehand in that era. So I would put my money on courier.
rofl the day i hear someone on this forum say they think that Courier would EVER beat Borg on clay..... truly embrassing that you would say such a thing...

Courier would have no way to beat Borg, Borg is way too fast and if they played in the same era with the same racket technology his power would not be much of an advantage...

put money on COurier absolutely ridiculous
02-12-2012 12:35 AM
leng jai
Re: Does anyone believe Jim Courier was a greater claycourter than Federer/Djokovic?

DC just proved it. Courier's mere presence on clay = Federer insta-lose.
02-12-2012 12:24 AM
BigJohn
Re: Does anyone believe Jim Courier was a greater claycourter than Federer/Djokovic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by thrust View Post
LOL! Still, overall, I would rate Roger above Jim on clay.
But below Sampras Rome 94.
02-12-2012 12:18 AM
thrust
Re: Does anyone believe Jim Courier was a greater claycourter than Federer/Djokovic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimnik View Post
Jim Courier not even playing and still defeating Federer on clay.
LOL! Still, overall, I would rate Roger above Jim on clay.
02-12-2012 12:11 AM
Sunset of Age
Re: Does anyone believe Jim Courier was a greater claycourter than Federer/Djokovic?

No. Next!
Fed and Djoko have had to deal with the greatest clay courter ever bar Borg in the past 5, 6 years of time, and Nadal catching up with Borg might well just be a matter of time.
02-12-2012 12:09 AM
thrust
Re: Does anyone believe Jim Courier was a greater claycourter than Federer/Djokovic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sexybeast View Post
AJ also says all greats would find a way in any era, I dont fully agree with that statement (Rosewall and Mcenroe would not find a way in the modern era, even Sampras doubtfully would achieve much, that is what I think atleast). However, I see absolutely no reason to question Borg's ability to learn a great forehand with 90s raquets or modern raquets, ofcourse it would be great and he would love to play in the modern grinding era of the 2000s, even if Djokovic and Nadal probably would give him a hell of a fight.

Anyway, Borg would beat Courier in any era on clay, that much I can say without any doubt.
Players can only be judged by their achievements in the era they played in. It is all that simple. True some eras are stronger than others, but one can only play those who are available at that time. Rosewall played in very tough eras as an amateur, pro and the open era. He was a top 20 player for at least 20 years. At 5-7, he acknkowledges that he would have a very tough time in todays game. Still, he as an all-time great for what he achieved in eras he competed. Sampras at 6-2, would have been very successful in today's game using today's equipment. The same is true of Agassi, Courier, Edberg, Becker, Connors, Borg, Lendl, Wilander and a few others.
02-11-2012 07:33 PM
Marc23
Re: Does anyone believe Jim Courier was a greater claycourter than Federer/Djokovic?

I do...
02-11-2012 05:57 PM
pray-for-palestine-and-israel
Re: Does anyone believe Jim Courier was a greater claycourter than Federer/Djokovic?

courier and agassi would win calender grand slams if they played on these joke surfaces that all play the same

its a disgrace to see how low tennis has sunk just to get viewing figures

its used to be

AO- medium pace high bounce
RG- slow high bounce
WIM- fast no bounce
US OPEN- fast high bounce

now its

AO- medium high bounce
RG- medium high bounce
WIM- medium high bounce
US OPEN- medium high bounce

and people wonder why suddenly everyone has a career slam in their pockets
02-11-2012 04:46 PM
LawrenceOfTennis
Re: Does anyone believe Jim Courier was a greater claycourter than Federer/Djokovic?

I don't know but he is a great clay court expert for sure. He taught Isner how to play on clay.
02-11-2012 03:53 PM
SapELee
Re: Does anyone believe Jim Courier was a greater claycourter than Federer/Djokovic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimnik View Post
Jim Courier not even playing and still defeating Federer on clay.
I think some of the players actually improve on clay since he took over I noticed that Ryan, for one, has greatly improved his movement since he started practicing with the Davis cup team last year.
02-11-2012 03:48 PM
EddieNero
Re: Does anyone believe Jim Courier was a greater claycourter than Federer/Djokovic?

Jim speaks the best english amongst them so yes.
02-11-2012 03:46 PM
romismak
Re: Does anyone believe Jim Courier was a greater claycourter than Federer/Djokovic?

Courier got 2 RG, but his record on clay was nothing special, those 2 RG are i would say, because he was so good that time, ha also has 2 AO, simply he prefers to play on slower surfaces, clay back than played more like clay, not like nowadays, but still with Courier style, clay courts suited him, but besides RG he didn´t care to play much clay matches, hard to tell how good of a clay-courter he was because of this things, but Roger is for sure best of this, so many RG finals, being defeated only by best clay-courter plus Soderling unplayable that QF, so really Roger´s clay record is much more impressive, Nole on other hand needs to win RG to proove himself, but he is very good on clay, his record, number of clay Masters 1000 finals-titles is really good, much better than guys like Ferrer for example, but at this moment i would pick Jim´s 2 RG over Nole´s clay achievemets, but in moment Nole will hold RG trophy in my mind he is greater clay-courter
02-11-2012 03:28 PM
Jimnik
Re: Does anyone believe Jim Courier was a greater claycourter than Federer/Djokovic?

Jim Courier not even playing and still defeating Federer on clay.
02-03-2012 09:38 AM
Mae
Re: Does anyone believe Jim Courier was a greater claycourter than Federer/Djokovic?

For some reason he's a forgotten player in my mind. I know at one time he was #1 in the World, but I can't even remember seeing Courier play
02-03-2012 04:40 AM
Shinoj
Re: Does anyone believe Jim Courier was a greater claycourter than Federer/Djokovic?

Honestly who gives so much F**K to just being a Clay Courter. Jim Courier without having a Clay Back ground won the two Roland Garos dominating the tournament for a good 3 years. Its more than good enough for the History records. He is one of the RG legends.Take That.
This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome