MensTennisForums.com - Reply to Topic

Thread: Endless Era Debates 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)
07-10-2016 01:13 PM
SamprasHewittLOL
Re: Hewitt and Roddick played much tougher competition than Federer/Nadal

Quote:
Originally Posted by redshift36188 View Post
This does not make any sense. Going by this logic you should actually be saying Fed had tougher competition since it was Fed who had it tougher vs Nadal.
Nobody, because teenager/mysteriously a "baby" on all surfaces but clay.
07-10-2016 01:11 PM
SamprasHewittLOL
Re: Hewitt and Roddick played much tougher competition than Federer/Nadal

Quote:
Originally Posted by TooBadFed View Post
so what you're saying is..

when you're so good, then you make everyone else look better because they had to face you

this is pretty much the same as the weak/strong era debate. is a strong era when random nobodies win every other week? or when only a few people dominate? while you think you're being profound starting this thread, in reality you've brought nothing new to the table. good try though.
I'm pointing out the ridiculous logic idiots use in claiming Federer dominated weak competition, but since other players faced him, they didn't.

Because after all, the only difference between Federer's competition and Nadal's competition was Federer himself. They accumulated almost all of their slams in the exact same era - the pre-Djokovic being better than #3 years.

In other words, the difference is that Federer can't play himself, hence he's playing "weaker competition" than others, which is hilarious logic.
07-10-2016 01:07 PM
SamprasHewittLOL
Re: Hewitt and Roddick played much tougher competition than Federer/Nadal

Quote:
Originally Posted by finishingmove View Post
So you're saying that Federer & Nadal is a stronger combination than Djokovic & Nadal or Djokovic & Federer, which is not true, as Djokovic is the best player among them.

Roddick and Hewitt were simply inferior to even pre-peak Federer and Nadal. Federer actually peaked in that era, unfortunately for him, because unchallenged as he was, it impaired his growth. His peak was enough to beat the Roddicks, Hewitts and Baghdatises. Post 2008 he stubbornly refused to try and improve his game, which will ultimately result in Djokovic surpassing him.

Even not counting his early career, Federer still overachieved greatly.

If you want to prove the weak era was not weak, you'll have to use an argument other than Federer. We know Federer was #1, we know he was good enough to beat players who were inferior to him and never moved from being that.
How is/was Djokovic a better player than Federer or Nadal? Oh, yeah, he wasn't, and nobody with any functioning brain cells thinks so.

Nice try, though. Sorry that you started watching tennis in 2011 and hopped on the bandwagon, desperate for your sudden interest in tennis to mean that your favorite is the best evarrrrr.
07-10-2016 11:09 AM
redshift36188
Re: Hewitt and Roddick played much tougher competition than Federer/Nadal

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamprasHewittLOL View Post
Just like how Federer's competition was weak and Nadal's was strong because Federer beat a bunch of mugs but Nadal beat those same mugs, but also Federer, who never had to play himself.
This does not make any sense. Going by this logic you should actually be saying Fed had tougher competition since it was Fed who had it tougher vs Nadal.
07-10-2016 10:50 AM
MIMIC
Re: Hewitt and Roddick played much tougher competition than Federer/Nadal

Wrong perspective, but OP knows that.
07-10-2016 08:17 AM
TooBadFed
Re: Hewitt and Roddick played much tougher competition than Federer/Nadal

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamprasHewittLOL View Post
Because Roddick and Hewitt had to face both Federer and Nadal.

Federer and Nadal never had to face themselves.

Proof of weaker competition.

Just like how Federer's competition was weak and Nadal's was strong because Federer beat a bunch of mugs but Nadal beat those same mugs, but also Federer, who never had to play himself.
so what you're saying is..

when you're so good, then you make everyone else look better because they had to face you

this is pretty much the same as the weak/strong era debate. is a strong era when random nobodies win every other week? or when only a few people dominate? while you think you're being profound starting this thread, in reality you've brought nothing new to the table. good try though.
07-10-2016 08:15 AM
PerfectAce753
Re: Hewitt and Roddick played much tougher competition than Federer/Nadal

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Kuerten View Post
Ferrer had to face Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Agassi, Murray, Kuerten, Safin, Hewitt, Roddick, Moya, Ferrero and Coria, most underrated player of all-time, IMO.
And for most of those players' eras he was useless, so what's your point?
07-10-2016 04:48 AM
finishingmove
Re: Hewitt and Roddick played much tougher competition than Federer/Nadal

So you're saying that Federer & Nadal is a stronger combination than Djokovic & Nadal or Djokovic & Federer, which is not true, as Djokovic is the best player among them.

Roddick and Hewitt were simply inferior to even pre-peak Federer and Nadal. Federer actually peaked in that era, unfortunately for him, because unchallenged as he was, it impaired his growth. His peak was enough to beat the Roddicks, Hewitts and Baghdatises. Post 2008 he stubbornly refused to try and improve his game, which will ultimately result in Djokovic surpassing him.

Even not counting his early career, Federer still overachieved greatly.

If you want to prove the weak era was not weak, you'll have to use an argument other than Federer. We know Federer was #1, we know he was good enough to beat players who were inferior to him and never moved from being that.
07-10-2016 03:26 AM
theseth1119
Re: Hewitt and Roddick played much tougher competition than Federer/Nadal

There was plenty of competition always, but it's that Rogie was just head and shoulders above players born before 1986!
07-10-2016 02:53 AM
Moonball Pusher
Re: Hewitt and Roddick played much tougher competition than Federer/Nadal

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamprasHewittLOL View Post
Because Roddick and Hewitt had to face both Federer and Nadal.

Federer and Nadal never had to face themselves.

Proof of weaker competition.

Just like how Federer's competition was weak and Nadal's was strong because Federer beat a bunch of mugs but Nadal beat those same mugs, but also Federer, who never had to play himself.
Circular logic. Not that I disagree with your premise.
07-10-2016 02:46 AM
houtanko
Re: Hewitt and Roddick played much tougher competition than Federer/Nadal

They are just far away from Federer.

Fed himself progressed quickly and cause the no competition.
07-10-2016 02:33 AM
Johnny Groove
Re: Hewitt and Roddick played much tougher competition than Federer/Nadal

1998-2004 era very under-rated
07-10-2016 01:15 AM
Chris Kuerten
Re: Hewitt and Roddick played much tougher competition than Federer/Nadal

Ferrer had to face Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Agassi, Murray, Kuerten, Safin, Hewitt, Roddick, Moya, Ferrero and Coria, most underrated player of all-time, IMO.
07-10-2016 01:07 AM
SamprasHewittLOL
Hewitt and Roddick played much tougher competition than Federer/Nadal

Because Roddick and Hewitt had to face both Federer and Nadal.

Federer and Nadal never had to face themselves.

Proof of weaker competition.

Just like how Federer's competition was weak and Nadal's was strong because Federer beat a bunch of mugs but Nadal beat those same mugs, but also Federer, who never had to play himself.
06-08-2016 09:24 PM
mike_g
Re: Endless Era Debates

Quote:
Originally Posted by retister View Post
Literally everyone but djokofans is going on and on about Tsonga/Berdych/Ferrer etc. group sucking, Raonic/Tomic/Nishikori etc. group sucking, Thiem and younger players sucking. Pretty much everyone, Djokovic included, sucking.
Look, it was a simple enough question, if you don't feel like answering it, fine.
I answered your question about "enough" earlier. Here is my personal opinion on topic:

Ferrer is a part of generation of Federer, Hewitt, Roddick, Safin, Ferrero, etc. This generation was great. He is far from being the best player of his generation, but he had extremely long and consistent career. Tomorrow he will play his 1000th match at ATP level, that is very, very many matches (10th most in Open Era). Right now he is old and played so much, so he is in terminal decline. For similar careers check Brian Gottfried or Tom Okker.

Tsonga and Berdych are of the same generation as Wawrinka and Nadal, i would say even the same generation as Djokovic and Murray. Their generation is great. These 2 players have pretty good careers and a pretty good game for somebody without slam wins. Right now they are in a phase of natural and probably terminal decline.

I don't have a clear opinion on Nishikori, sorry. Don't know if he should be added to the generation of Del Potro and Cilic and to the previous one altogether, or to the 90-94 generation.

Entire generation 90-94 is undoubtedly the weakest generation in Open Era. We have only 7-8 players of top-20 potential, only 4-5 players of top-10 potential. Even these players are developping really slowly. I wrote this a couple of pages earliler more concretely.

Generation 95-... seems to become great eventually. It is too early to say anything about them although, won only 1 title altogether so far, barely played top-players. Not Djokovic's regular competition yet.

Djokovic is an aging player, 29yo, played almost 900 matches already, so he plays accordingly, concentrating on winning with as few effort as possible. Nothing wrong with that, although it is not very spectacular. The problem is that all his competition is either older than him, or are players from the Generation Useless who wouldn't beat #1 player more than once no matter who this #1 is and how well does he play. So Djokovic needs to apply really few effort to win. That sucks for neutral spectators, but is enough to win, so good for him, his legacy and his fans.
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