2013 US Open Thread

[gigantes]

Greatest Of All Time in Men's Tennis:




- 200 career titles, far and away the most in history.

- played on a different mix of surfaces than today (grass, clay, wood) but still dominated them all.

- only male player in history to win a calendar grand slam... and he did it twice. (1962, 1969)

- was ineligible to compete in grand slams during five of his prime years, as they were restricted to amateurs until 1968. this would likely have added about ten more majors to his total.

- in spite of that, still won 19 singles majors, i.e. 11 grand slams and 8 pro slams, which were of equal standing to grand slams in that era.

- won nine more majors in doubles... a rare feat for a men's single player, for a total of 28 total majors.

- set the all-time record for winning 22 titles in one season in 1962.

- he holds many more records, but that's good for now.

- interesting side-notes: he was one of the shortest top players ever at 5'8" and still dominated the sport in to his mid-30's.




GOAT!

[DuMa]

Reflecting back on the match, sure the drama was high but it didnt meet the hype imho. Rafa and Nole had far better matches against each other. This one was very disappointing in terms of their usual high quality matches. Nole only brought it for 1.5 sets of tennis. everything else was just an error fest from Djokovic. Nadal served like shit and was able to hold it together because hes mentally stronger. He was just wise not to go for many winners since Djokovic was collasping after each error penetrated his weak fragile mind.

2013 Roland Garros SF and Aussie '12 Final are the bars of quality for their matches. They will probably meet again in a GS Final but i hope they can beat the quality of those 2 matches

[bdreason]

Actually Nadal's dominance in H2H vs Federer probably means he can be GOAT with only 16 Slams. He's also won on every surface including 2 at Wimbledon.

Stay mad.

The majority of their matches when Fed was still in his prime took place on clay, because Nadal wasn't good enough at the time to make the finals of any other GS. Also, styles makes fights, and just because Nadal has a good record H2H against Fed, doesn't make him the better tennis player.

I respect Nadal. The greatest clay court player of all-time, and proving to be one of the greatest players ever. However, he could win 20 GS's and I still wouldn't think he was better at Tennis than Federer. Nadals game is rough (ugly IMO) and one-dimensional (although his serve has improved), while Fed's game is far more technical and refined.

If Nadal goes on the win more GS's than Fed, I have no problem with people claiming he's the GOAT... but he'll never be a better Tennis player in my opinion. Prime Federer was simply better at more aspects of the game. That said, Nadal has really improved his serve over the past year, and it's a big reason why he's taken his game to another level.

[bdreason]

agreed but Tennis players dont have to jump or play with contact as much as basketball players. Its really pointless to debate between the two sports because theyre completely different workouts on your body.

I think the constant lateral movement associated with Tennis is actually worse on your body than playing Basketball. Until recent times, 30 years old was considered a senior citizen in the Tennis world. These guys are essentially running suicides for 4-5 hours, and typically have less than 48 hours between matches.

[gigantes]

... I respect Nadal. The greatest clay court player of all-time, and proving to be one of the greatest players ever. However, he could win 20 GS's and I still wouldn't think he was better at Tennis than Federer. Nadals game is rough (ugly IMO) and one-dimensional (although his serve has improved), while Fed's game is far more technical and refined. ...

that seems a bit harsh. you wouldn't hold federer's or sampras' dominance at wimbledon against their major count, would you? nadal is also a career slam winner, so you can't say he skipped any particular surface, either. and isn't the most effective game the ultimate measure of 'better'?


having said that, i can only admire nadal SO much. he plays a game which is not healthy and is not wise for the average person to play. already in his mid-20's he has somewhat arthritic knees and probably has to use every tool in the trainer's arsenal to keep his body in playing condition, including cortisone injections, i would think. who knows how easily he'll be able to even walk around once his career is over?


but federer is someone everyone can emulate for his tremendous range of technique and fluid game. djoker and murray, everyone can admire and emulate for their tremendous commitment to defense and all around games. fed in particular, you could be 80+ years old and still apply more from his game than any other player.

nobody who wants to play healthy tennis all their lives should be playing like rafa, IMO.

[bdreason]

that seems a bit harsh. you wouldn't hold federer's or sampras' dominance at wimbledon against their major count, would you? nadal is also a career slam winner, so you can't say he skipped any particular surface, either. and isn't the most effective game the ultimate measure of 'better'?


having said that, i can only admire nadal SO much. he plays a game which is not healthy and is not wise for the average person to play. already in his mid-20's he has somewhat arthritic knees and probably has to use every tool in the trainer's arsenal to keep his body in playing condition, including cortisone injections, i would think. who knows how easily he'll be able to even walk around once his career is over?


but federer is someone everyone can emulate for his tremendous range of technique and fluid game. djoker and murray, everyone can admire and emulate for their tremendous commitment to defense and all around games. fed in particular, you could be 80+ years old and still apply more from his game than any other player.

nobody who wants to play healthy tennis all their lives should be playing like rafa, IMO.

As I stated before, if Rafa wins more GS's than Federer, I have no problem with people claiming he's the GOAT. However, in my opinion, he lacks the pure technical skills of Federer. Nadal's game is predicated on playing defense, and wearing down his opponents. His goal isn't so much to hit winners, as it is to force his opponents to hit unforced errors. It works for Nadal, because he's an amazing athlete, and a win is a win, so I can't hate him for his strategy and/or approach to the game. However, from a technical standpoint, his game is raw and unrefined IN MY OPINION. It's like Foreman (Nadal) vs. Ali (Federer). Both have completely different approaches to the fight/match, but both styles are very effective.

[gigantes]

As I stated before, if Rafa wins more GS's than Federer, I have no problem with people claiming he's the GOAT. However, in my opinion, he lacks the pure technical skills of Federer. Nadal's game is predicated on playing defense, and wearing down his opponents. His goal isn't so much to hit winners, as it is to force his opponents to hit unforced errors. It works for Nadal, because he's an amazing athlete, and a win is a win, so I can't hate him for his strategy and/or approach to the game. However, from a technical standpoint, his game is raw and unrefined IN MY OPINION. It's like Foreman (Nadal) vs. Ali (Federer). Both have completely different approaches to the fight/match, but both styles are very effective.

IMO that view of nadal is years outdated. to call him technically raw and unrefined at this point is pretty far beyond the pale.

meh, nevermind... pointless sports arguments are pointless.

[bdreason]

IMO that view of nadal is years outdated. to call him technically raw and unrefined at this point is pretty far beyond the pale.

meh, nevermind... pointless sports arguments are pointless.

What variety does he have in his game? He doesn't hit winners with his backhand. Doesn't hit winners with dropshots. Isn't great at the net. He essentially just punishes players from the baseline with his defense and heavy topspin forehands until they physically wilt or hit unforced errors. I will admit his serve has improved a lot over the past year, but before that he wasn't a great server either.

[Sarcastic]

I love how Fed fans always move the goalposts. As soon as Fed got to 15, he became the undisputed GOAT. Yet if Nadal catches him, he's not GOAT despite having a superior H2H record vs Fed. If Nadal gets to 17, then all of the sudden style of play becomes the issue.


Look I think Fed has the most aesthetically pleasing game to watch of all time. His shot making is a thing of beauty. But there are flaws in his case for GOAT, namely the competition in the early 2000s, or lack thereof, when he racked up most of his wins. He played against the same cookie cutter baseliners, and none of them were names anyone will remember. The 2 best players in the first half of the decade other than Fed were past prime Agassi, and Lleyton Hewitt. As soon as the competition began to heat up in the second half of the decade, then Fed's dominance began to diminish.


I am not saying Fed is not worthy of his 17, but I don't think he gets to that number if the competition had been more fierce early on.

[Jasi]

A guy with a double-handed backhand will never be the GOAT in my book.

[EnoughSaid]

I'm sorry but since 2010, Rafa has not proven that he can consistently compete, largely due to injuries. I feel like if you're going to only come back for the French and play well there while getting upset on other surfaces, that's not greatness. If Nadal wants to be in the GOAT convo, he'll need to have more than just 1 Australian, 2 US Opens and 2 Wimbledons.

Anyone else still think Fed might reinvent his game and come back strong next year? I feel like he still has a major or two left in him, and seeing him win would be awesome and so so satisfying.

[Lebowsky]

I'm sorry but since 2010, Rafa has not proven that he can consistently compete, largely due to injuries. I feel like if you're going to only come back for the French and play well there while getting upset on other surfaces, that's not greatness. If Nadal wants to be in the GOAT convo, he'll need to have more than just 1 Australian, 2 US Opens and 2 Wimbledons.

Anyone else still think Fed might reinvent his game and come back strong next year? I feel like he still has a major or two left in him, and seeing him win would be awesome and so so satisfying.

No, I don't think so. Federer looks has been looking extremely pedestrian lately. He can still beat anyone on a good day, but those days are starting to be more and more far and between. You have to beat several top players in order to win a major, and I don't think he has enough gas left in the tank. I'm not saying it won't happen, but I wouldn't bet on it.

[pethuel03]

IMO, Nadal is the most mentally tough player ever. This guy wins solely due to heart and mental toughness. Gotta respect that even though he's not the most technical guy.

[bagelred]

I think Sampras would have trouble nowadays because the surfaces have changed and the game has "slowed down". Sampras is like the best serve and volleyerererer ever. But no one plays that style nowadays.

But still.....

Sampras > Lebron

[Jasi]

Game has slowed down? If you mean that serve-and-volley is dying, sure, but that's because the game has sped up.
Players got so strong and racquets got so effective that they don't need to take the risk to charge the net, when they can simply launch bombs from the baseline to win points... that's it.
And you didn't have returners like Nole or Murray until some years ago.