MensTennisForums.com - View Single Post - Does anyone believe Jim Courier was a greater claycourter than Federer/Djokovic?

View Single Post

Old 01-30-2012, 04:32 PM   #1
country flag sexybeast
Registered User
 
sexybeast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,258
sexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond reputesexybeast has a reputation beyond repute
Default Does anyone believe Jim Courier was a greater claycourter than Federer/Djokovic?

In the same spirit as my thread comparing Djokovic and Wilander when Djoko had won only 2 slams, I would like to ask the numerologists in MTF if they think Courier is a greater claycourter than Federer and Djokovic because 2>1>0?

I always find Courier high up in lists comparing greats on clay because of his 2 titles in RG, but besides those what has he really acomplished on clay? I look at 5 clay titles in his whole career, I look at those draws and wonder what was going on with clay when his main rival on the surface was a very young Andre Agassi, one year I see he beats Todd Martin in R4, Edberg in QF and Stich in SF and finaly barely teenager Agassi in the 5 sets final. 3 serve and volleyers and one american who barely ever played on red clay and doesnt know how to move on the surface, really?

I watched the whole match against Agassi and I really wondered these 2 americans who cant properly move on clay and didnt grow up on the surface would match up against Djokovic who grew up on the surface and has beyond incredible movement, how come they are both consider greater claycourters than Djokovic?

Further more I would like to ask you if Courier would have a chanse to win RG in this era, not only that but would he win RG in Borg's era? You see, I am not trying to say players are better today than before, I am just saying Courier's era sucks, not Kuerten's or Borg's eras. Please dont bring up the raquet technology BS, Nadal would beat Courier with 90s raquet had he been born 15 years earlier and you know it.

Anyway, I will move on and give MTF numerologists some numbers aswell on clay:

Courier vs Federer vs Djokovic on clay:

Number of RG titles: 2/1/0

Number of RG finals: 3/5/0

Number of clay master series: 2/5/3

Number of clay master series finals: 2/12/5

Clay titles: 5/9/7

Clay W/L: 68.5%/76.5%/76.2%


Keep in mind that taking into consideration without playing Nadal Federer got 80.9% and Djokovic impressive 81.6% on clay, Courier's 68.5% is truly mediocre in comparassion. Also look at Federer beeing in 17 big clay finals (master series+RG) compared to Courier's 5 big clay finals, Federer losing 10 times to Nadal in big clay finals, Djokovic losing 8 times in SF or F of big clay tournaments.

As you see Courier only got the lead in one cathegory which is most RG titles, against Djokovic he leads in 2 cathegories (both RG and RG finals), keep in mind that Djokovic in his peak lost to Nadal and Federer before the final 4 times.

So, I would love to hear some counter arguments from all those who put Courier as nr6 or 7 as in the greatest claycourters of all time, will be interesting to hear what you have in mind.
__________________
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.

Last edited by sexybeast : 01-30-2012 at 04:50 PM.
sexybeast is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote