Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Do you think there could be another Brad Gilbert type of player. He had very little talent, but was in phenomenal shape and had a playing style that bothered many people. Could a player like him crack the top ten ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,012 Posts
I thought he was better then Roddick to be honest.. Maybe Roddick should have kept him around as a coach.

Awesome tennis here and he takes out Becker at the peak of his powers in 5 sets at the USO

Between BEcker and Gilbert in '87 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwC_2kSVyRE Roddick only wishes he could have attacked the net and hit some lobs and had a running FH like that.

The dude had some talent
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,504 Posts
It's harder for that sort of player to emerge in today's contemporary state of the game. The ever increasing racquet technology and homogenisation of the surfaces greatly benefits the ballbashing type of player. That's why there's an influx of them in the top 100 now. Today, the default style is to stay on or behind the baseline and bash the ball from side to side. This is now being taught from the juniors up and is very hard to overcome.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,553 Posts
Are you kidding me? Ugliness is the main style of winning nowadays. Breaking Top 10? What about Del Potro, Soderling, Berdych?
Hardly any of them play aesthetically.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
577 Posts
Are you kidding me? Ugliness is the main style of winning nowadays. Breaking Top 10? What about Del Potro, Soderling, Berdych?
Hardly any of them play aesthetically.
I don't think this thread is about your personal taste of aesthetical players (which is pretty screwed up imho if you don't enjoy risky tennis like those three display). I think it's more about a player who cracks the top 10 not by hitting talent, but by great fighting abilities and mental game. I think in the current top 10 Ferrer is as close as you can get to such a player, but generally I think he's extremly talented too. Don't see any player near top 10 who I'd describe as "very little talented" tbh.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
I thought he was better then Roddick to be honest.. Maybe Roddick should have kept him around as a coach.

Awesome tennis here and he takes out Becker at the peak of his powers in 5 sets at the USO

Between BEcker and Gilbert in '87 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwC_2kSVyRE Roddick only wishes he could have attacked the net and hit some lobs and had a running FH like that.

The dude had some talent
That clip was embarrassing for Becker. What a clown. It just shows how mentally weak that generation was when paired against a super mentally tough club level player. No wonder Sampras had no strong rivals.

Gilbert was fun to watch and root for. I still think the mental side of the game is extremely important, so yes, there could be more players in the future who have more mental strength than physical talent. Hewitt was a hybrid version in recent times. Nowadays you need a lot more tennis ability because the field is much stronger and not filled with mental midgets like Boris.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,012 Posts
That clip was embarrassing for Becker. What a clown. It just shows how mentally weak that generation was when paired against a super mentally tough club level player. No wonder Sampras had no strong rivals.

Gilbert was fun to watch and root for. I still think the mental side of the game is extremely important, so yes, there could be more players in the future who have more mental strength than physical talent. Hewitt was a hybrid version in recent times. Nowadays you need a lot more tennis ability because the field is much stronger and not filled with mental midgets like Boris.
Becker>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roddick, Hewitt, Davydenko, Monfils, Blake, Berdych, Tsonga, Gonzales, Baghaditis, Ljubicic, Murray..........................etc.


:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
I think Murray could be a modern version of Gilbert if he could keep his emotions in check. He can definitely get under an opponent's skin and give them a rope to hang themselves with.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
Becker>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roddick, Hewitt, Davydenko, Monfils, Blake, Berdych, Tsonga, Gonzales, Baghaditis, Ljubicic, Murray..........................etc.


:)
Wait, did you watch that clip? The over 40 ladies at my club play better than that. I thought strong players were supposed to rise to the occasion on the grandest of stages? US OPEN. He clearly is and was just a mug. End of story.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,012 Posts
Wait, did you watch that clip? The over 40 ladies at my club play better than that. I thought strong players were supposed to rise to the occasion on the grandest of stages? US OPEN. He clearly is and was just a mug. End of story.
Me too... So why is it Roddick only has 1 slam, Hewitt only with 2, Murray with 0, Safin only with 2, Tsonga, BErdych, Monfils, Davydenko, Nalbandian and down the line with a big ZERO.

Becker has 6
 

·
Lurrrkin'
Joined
·
18,058 Posts
Apart from Federer, everyone in the top 10 wins ugly often. Especially Nadal.. The man epitomises ugly. As does his winning.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,012 Posts
Nahh.. You want to see winning "ugly" look at Fed these past few years.. Wimbledon 09, the YEC this year and down the line............
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
Me too... So why is it Roddick only has 1 slam, Hewitt only with 2, Murray with 0, Safin only with 2, Tsonga, BErdych, Monfils, Davydenko, Nalbandian and down the line with a big ZERO.

Becker has 6
Because Federer stopped them.

In the 80s when Becker accumulated his slams, guys could not handle his power game. But in the 90s, the era of Pete, Becker no longer dominated. Becker was never a legitimate rival of Sampras except late season indoors. Go back and check.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
Me too... So why is it Roddick only has 1 slam, Hewitt only with 2, Murray with 0, Safin only with 2, Tsonga, BErdych, Monfils, Davydenko, Nalbandian and down the line with a big ZERO.

Becker has 6
Federer has defeated everyone of those players late in slams or in finals. They are/were all capable of winning those titles (with the possible exception of Monfils). IF not for Federer's consistent domination, we would have a generation of slam winners - probably at least a half dozen different guys.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,012 Posts
Because Federer stopped them.

In the 80s when Becker accumulated his slams, guys could not handle his power game. But in the 90s, the era of Pete, Becker no longer dominated. Becker was never a legitimate rival of Sampras except late season indoors. Go back and check.
ROFL. No you need to check.. So Fed stopped Nalbandian at how many slams?? Where was Nalbandian the rest of the 200 slams. ( At Crispy Cremes) WHere was Roddick for the rest of the 50 slams he didn't meet Fed.

Where was Safin between the USO in 2000 and the AO in 2005.. Did Fed stop him those 5 years too?


Did Fed stop Monfils, Berdych, and Davydenko, Baghaditis, Gonzales, etc.. from being all time greats? I think not. They all "stopped" themselves
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
ROFL. No you need to check.. So Fed stopped Nalbandian at how many slams?? Where was Nalbandian the rest of the 200 slams. ( At Crispy Cremes) WHere was Roddick for the rest of the 50 slams he didn't meet Fed.

Where was Safin between the USO in 2000 and the AO in 2005.. Did Fed stop him those 5 years too?


Did Fed stop Monfils, Berdych, and Davydenko, Baghaditis, Gonzales, etc.. from being all time greats? I think not. They all "stopped" themselves
Winning a slam is different than being an all-time great. You keep changing the goal posts. Yes Federer stopped every one of his rivals in the late stages of grand slam tournaments.

Fed stopped Nalbandian at the 2004 Australian, the 2005 US Open and the 2006 Roland Garros. This was right in the middle of Nalbandian's prime when he was beating Federer, Nadal, and everybody else.

Fed stopped Roddick at the 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2009 Wimbledon. The 2006 and 2007 US Opens. And the 2007 and 2009 Australian Opens. That means EVERY TIME RODDICK GOT TO THE SF OR BETTER except Aussi 2003, 2005 and US 2003, HE LOST TO FEDERER. And of the 3/11 times he didn't meet Federer, he won the 2003 US Open. Roddick's career was decimated by Federer.


And I said you should check about Boris being a legitimate Sampras rival. They played 3 times at slams, all at Wimbledon, when Boris was passed his best.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,674 Posts
ROFL. No you need to check.. So Fed stopped Nalbandian at how many slams?? Where was Nalbandian the rest of the 200 slams. ( At Crispy Cremes) WHere was Roddick for the rest of the 50 slams he didn't meet Fed.

Where was Safin between the USO in 2000 and the AO in 2005.. Did Fed stop him those 5 years too?


Did Fed stop Monfils, Berdych, and Davydenko, Baghaditis, Gonzales, etc.. from being all time greats? I think not. They all "stopped" themselves
You need to check your facts. You are literally so full of shit its unbelievable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,012 Posts
You need to check your facts. You are literally so full of shit its unbelievable.

Oh really?? Once again.. I ask the question. Where were all these guys at the 100 other tournaments they entered where Fed didn't take them out? The Fards on here seem to think Fed has taken all these slamless or one time slam mugs out every tournament they have entered. ROFL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,674 Posts
Yes really, now continue to tug yourself off over a by gone era.
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
Top