Internazionali BNL d'Italia- Rome ATP1000 - 14th May to 21st May

[the AntiPusher]

Roger's main problem at Wimbledon the past ten years has been his ROS. It has been quite pathetic and I'm hoping his new aggressive mindset on that shot (instead of chipping it back) will pay dividends. I hear you about Nole's depth giving Fed a lot of trouble though and that's regardless of the surface. But if Fed can return Nole's serves like he's done against better servers this year he will have the edge at Wimbledon and even USO in a potential meeting.

Possibly but I give the edge back to Novak.. he knows once the point is started, Roger doesnt have the ability to hit through him unless he is having a bad day.. Can Roger duplicate what Stan did at USO and RG plus AO twice versus Novak.. its possible if Roger continues to come over his backhand..

 

[the AntiPusher]

Not disputing ATP is much tougher than WTA but how many years have gone by since the 70's and have we seen any female or male player win anything even close to that many consecutive matches on any surface? That's a resounding no. It's not about slam count but the best player player on a given surface. Serena Williams may have won tons more slams than Evert but she couldn't win 125 consecutive matches on clay in her dreams and neither could any of the other women currently out there so Evert was clearly superior to any player in history on clay imo.

Front you are saying that ATP tour is on par with the WTA.., you may be alone in this universe with that philosophy

 

[the AntiPusher]

Best player in history doesn't distinguish between male and female. I merely pointed the player who has clay stats that put everyone's to shame, even Nadal's.

Again El Dude previous post about this was on point.. Front you dug real deep for this one.. I give you that..I doubt if anyone comes to your defense this time

 

[El Dude]

Front, you're talking about one stat. A very impressive one, indeed, but even if we accept the notion that we can compare across genders, we have to look at the total picture: win streaks, but also Slam titles, other titles, overall record, etc. Now maybe if we do that, Evert comes out ahead, but my point is that you can't just rely upon that one stat.

 

[El Dude]

Here's an article that compares the two:

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2017...er-all-timechris-evert-or-rafael-nadal/65545/

 

[rafanoy1992]

If Zverev wins tomorrow, then he will be in the Top 10 for the first time in his career. Pretty amazing considering he just turned 20 years old a month ago....

While I don't think he will win tomorrow, I do hope he continues this amazing play until the end of the season. I really do want to see a new young superstar in tennis.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Not disputing ATP is much tougher than WTA but how many years have gone by since the 70's and have we seen any female or male player win anything even close to that many consecutive matches on any surface? That's a resounding no. It's not about slam count but the best player player on a given surface. Serena Williams may have won tons more slams than Evert but she couldn't win 125 consecutive matches on clay in her dreams and neither could any of the other women currently out there so Evert was clearly superior to any player in history on clay imo.

If you had your life to bet on

If Zverev wins tomorrow, then he will be in the Top 10 for the first time in his career. Pretty amazing considering he just turned 20 years old a month ago....

While I don't think he will win tomorrow, I do hope he continues this amazing play until the end of the season. I really do want to see a new young superstar in tennis.

there's a reason why only the big 4 plus Stan and a few others win the Grand Slams and the master series 1000 tournaments.. you will see.. Novak will take it to another level, grab young Sasha by the throat just as he did Thiem , drag the young pup up to the stratosphere, and drop him freefailing back to Earth like the Silver Surfer did Johhny Storm (the Human Torch) in the Fantastic Four movie..

 

[DarthFed]

Possibly but I give the edge back to Novak.. he knows once the point is started, Roger doesnt have the ability to hit through him unless he is having a bad day.. Can Roger duplicate what Stan did at USO and RG plus AO twice versus Novak.. its possible if Roger continues to come over his backhand..

Roger has often blasted him off fast courts even as a geriatric, but Nole did win the last few matches at slams on fast courts. Fed returning better would go a long ways to flipping it. There's no reason he should lose to Djokovic or anyone on grass, he's underachieved there starting in 2008 (2 titles and 3 finals in past 9 years)

 

[the AntiPusher]

Roger has often blasted him off fast courts even as a geriatric, but Nole did win the last few matches at slams on fast courts. Fed returning better would go a long ways to flipping it. There's no reason he should lose to Djokovic or anyone on grass, he's underachieved there starting in 2008 (2 titles and 3 finals in past 9 years)

Roger had no business loosing to the big stiff last year at Wimbledon. I am convinced Roger would've figured out a way to get past Andy in the final

 

[Front242]

Front you are saying that ATP tour is on par with the WTA.., you may be alone in this universe with that philosophy

Clearly my very first sentence in my post says the complete opposite lol ("Not disputing ATP is much tougher than WTA") but equally so I don't care whether ATP is more difficult than the WTA because NO ONE has come close to winning 125 consecutive matches since Evert on the WTA either and she won 189 out of 190 matches played on clay from 1973-1981 which is absolutely phenomenal and utterly insane and will never ever be beaten I guarantee.

 

[Carol]

I don't think Novak is doing so well but Thiem has helped him to look better because his game has been horrible, 10.000 errors trying to do as well as yesterday with Rafa (second parts never are the same) but nothing was working well today, he played an awful match. I don't know if he was exhausted or probably impossible to repeat the good shots which Rafa had a lot to do with that but the poor guy looked worse than any amateur

 

[Front242]

Here's an article that compares the two:

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2017...er-all-timechris-evert-or-rafael-nadal/65545/

Cheers El Dude. Read that when they posted it and if others here did they'd see what I meant. She was also clean Cough.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Even though Novak played two matches today, he only played 20 games compared to Zverev who played 30 games in a single match.
So, fatigue won't be a factor at all in tomorrow's match. I think Novak will win considering Sasha is a green horn at this level.

 

[DarthFed]

Roger had no business loosing to the big stiff last year at Wimbledon. I am convinced Roger would've figured out a way to get past Andy in the final

He should've won that match but I'm not convinced he'd have beaten Murray. He was playing crappy and obviously not 100%, but it certainly wouldn't have been much of a surprise if he got past Andy. Usually he beats him handily on the big stage but last year he definitely wasn't himself after the surgery.

 

[Moxie]

Clearly my very first sentence in my post says the complete opposite lol ("Not disputing ATP is much tougher than WTA") but equally so I don't care whether ATP is more difficult than the WTA because NO ONE has come close to winning 125 consecutive matches since Evert on the WTA either and she won 189 out of 190 matches played on clay from 1973-1981 which is absolutely phenomenal and utterly insane and will never ever be beaten I guarantee.

I'm just sitting back chuckling a bit that you've suddenly become the poster boy for equality in tennis. Evert is the greatest ever on clay. And by many accounts, (similar to your arguments) Navratilova is the greatest of all on grass. (@atttomole brought up the grass question.) It's a wonder, then, that we have so many arguments about equal pay, when women have dominated two of the three surfaces.

 

[Moxie]

Cheers El Dude. Read that when they posted it and if others here did they'd see what I meant. She was also clean Cough.

As if you know, regarding either.

 

[Front242]

I'm just sitting back chuckling a bit that you've suddenly become the poster boy for equality in tennis. Evert is the greatest ever on clay. And by many accounts, (similar to your arguments) Navratilova is the greatest of all on grass. (@atttomole brought up the grass question.) It's a wonder, then, that we have so many arguments about equal pay, when women have dominated two of the three surfaces.

Navratilova was indeed brilliant on grass but the issue of pay is a joke. You can't pay someone the same for less work though many employers do but that's beside the point and is their fault but it shouldn't happen. Ever. Best of 3 versus best of 5. It's a no brainer. If the men played best of 3 imagine the slam count

 

[Moxie]

Navratilova was indeed brilliant on grass but the issue of pay is a joke. You can't pay someone the same for less work though many employers do but that's beside the point and is their fault but it shouldn't happen. Ever. Best of 3 versus best of 5. It's a no brainer. If the men played best of 3 imagine the slam count

At the risk of letting this thread devolve into total mishmash and chaos...oh, what the hell, it already has...men play best of 5 in four tournaments of the year. Count 'em...4. That's a faulty argument. And you've just admitted that the best players of all time on two surfaces are women. Also, to your point of making the men's slams 2 of 3, the slam count would go down on the men's side for individuals. The best of 5 favors top players. Now if women played best of 5 in Slams, imagine the epic matches that they've been deprived of.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Cheers El Dude. Read that when they posted it and if others here did they'd see what I meant. She was also clean Cough.

Okay..explain to the new board how a 36 year old man takes off 6-7 months for a supposedly knee injury and comes back ..wipes out the entire tour with the lone exception of the number 116 ranked or whatever the guy was in DOHA and is otherwise unbeatCoughable..

You and Darth says it's because of a juicedCough backhand and aggressively play....Sampras was just as good but fathertime got the best of him but Roger has defied him..explain again Fronty

 

[Front242]

At the risk of letting this thread devolve into total mishmash and chaos...oh, what the hell, it already has...men play best of 5 in four tournaments of the year. Count 'em...4. That's a faulty argument. And you've just admitted that the best players of all time on two surfaces are women. Also, to your point of making the men's slams 2 of 3, the slam count would go down on the men's side for individuals. The best of 5 favors top players. Now if women played best of 5 in Slams, imagine the epic matches that they've been deprived of.

No one could stand listening to all that grunting and screeching for best of 5 sets although some of the men are as bad. I don't believe the men get paid anymore outside the slams and why should they. But when it comes to slams the money should be paid appropriately based on the number of sets. Don't agree either about the men's count potentially going down if slams were best of 3 'cos the energizer bunnies on tour who have won so many matches due to their stamina would have to win fast which they're often incapable of doing.