Mr. Andy Murray have won just 1 maters after joining with Mr. Lendl ( Two years)

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

Courier actually said it himself, far as I know, that once Pete got going, he knew his time was up...

fine..but it wasn't just pistol pete..courier lost the edge like McEnroe, borg, wilander, cash etc..Sampras did not lose his intensity.

anyway we have gone way off topic..MURRAY IS GRASS DADDY OF 2012-13

but NADAL is overall longterm grass superior over whole career, but not 2012, 2013 cos rafa is rubbish on grass in those years.

 

[DarthFed]

Darth, you don't know that for sure. Emma makes a good point. I know, everyone thinks todays greats can travel anywhere unhindered. Well, maybe if Pete played today he'd similarly fit in.

And maybe Fed might struggle in the 90's, in a totally different style of game, played against different players, in a different time. I happen to not rate Fed as highly as you, and agree with Emma...

Well we know you don't rate Federer high at all. He is just some worthless hack that lucked into 17 slams.

Now this does little to argue the point. If Rafa is the best/greatest clay court player we've seen, then he is going to make everyone look a lot worse on clay. The more even field meant that 1 of 5 or 6 players in the 90's was going to win RG. You don't have that anymore. I'd imagine Roger would love to go to the 90's on clay and hate going to it on grass. More RG's and less Wimbledon's, and then ironically he'd almost be viewed as equal on clay and grass. That's just the way it's worked out.

 

[DarthFed]

Courier was strongest at RG and AO where Sampras was weakest. Courier is just one of those guys who peaked early and burned out quick. It wasn't all about Sampras otherwise the guy would have been top 5 for awhile.

 

[tented]

anyway we have gone way off topic..MURRAY IS GRASS DADDY OF 2012-13

but NADAL is overall longterm grass superior over whole career, but not 2012, 2013 cos rafa is rubbish on grass in those years.

Agreed. And it wouldn't surprise me if Murray is the king of grass again in 2014.

 

[Kieran]

Oh I don't rate him that lowly, Darth! I give the guy credit all the time, when he bails poor Rafa out against Novak! :snigger

 

[Front242]

So you'll take a semifinal appearance at RG over a win, and beating past his prime Courier and Brugera before getting destroyed by Kafelnikov is way more impressive than winning the tournament.

Have you ever figured that the reason there doesn't appear to be many great clay courters in this era might have something to do with the fact that Nadal has won everything there. Guess what happens if Rafa is in the 90's, those clay court specialists Muster, Brugera and probably even Guga, would not be looked at as clay court specialists, they'd just be a few guys who won nothing but got to the semis and finals of some tournaments.

Are you kidding me with this? Neither past their prime. They all turned pro almost at the same time and they were all almost of same age.

Being the same age means nothing. Lleyton's Hewitt's prime was only 2 years and was over a decade ago (2001-2002) when he won his 2 slams and he's only 6 months older than Fed. Ferrer hit his prime at 30-31. you can have vastly differing peaks/primes even if you're the same age as your competition. Courier was past his in 1996.

 

[Front242]

anyway we have gone way off topic..MURRAY IS GRASS DADDY OF 2012-13

but NADAL is overall longterm grass superior over whole career, but not 2012, 2013 cos rafa is rubbish on grass in those years.

Agreed. And it wouldn't surprise me if Murray is the king of grass again in 2014.

Me either. Not one bit.

 

[Fastgrass]

Where is OBE and where thread is going?

 

[DarthFed]

Oh I don't rate him that lowly, Darth! I give the guy credit all the time, when he bails poor Rafa out against Novak! :snigger

I've seen you give countless backhanded compliments and that's usually the most.

I also notice the whole sentimental "I hope he plays forever" after he loses to a powderpuff in the slams. Gee, I wonder why :lolz:

 

[Kieran]

I think Andy will face huge pressure to retain Wimbledon. He didn't cover himself with glory at Flushing Meadows when trying to retain his title there, and I wouldn't be so confident that he can do as well on grass next season...

 

[Front242]

I think Andy will face huge pressure to retain Wimbledon. He didn't cover himself with glory at Flushing Meadows when trying to retain his title there, and I wouldn't be so confident that he can do as well on grass next season...

Well he's missed a lot of the season and will take time to get back in his stride since the surgery so that'll definitely have some bearing on the outcome but he always does well in grass season. I suspect this year will be no different in that regard.

 

[Kieran]

I agree, he'll do well, but it'll be hard for him to do as well as last year. Andy has a history of letdowns when you expect more from him...

 

[Front242]

I agree, he'll do well, but it'll be hard for him to do as well as last year. Andy has a history of letdowns when you expect more from him...

That's true but your favourite player has never defended a title off clay so cut Andy some slack

 

[Kieran]

I agree, he'll do well, but it'll be hard for him to do as well as last year. Andy has a history of letdowns when you expect more from him...

That's true but your favourite player has never defended a title off clay so cut Andy some slack

I. Have. No. Answer! :clap

 

[Front242]

I agree, he'll do well, but it'll be hard for him to do as well as last year. Andy has a history of letdowns when you expect more from him...

That's true but your favourite player has never defended a title off clay so cut Andy some slack

I. Have. No. Answer! :clap

 

[brokenshoelace]

Tennis was a lot different in the nineties to now. Transference between clay and other surfaces, and from other surfaces to clay, was rarer and more difficult.

Fed came into his best as an all-round player after 2003 but we shouldn't underestimate the smacking he took from Kuerten in 2004. Kuerten was a master on clay and he was past his best, bogey hip and all, but he still manhandled Roger easily in the second round. Sure, Roger improved, and became better on the surface, about the same time clay ceased to be a good hunting ground for clay court specialists.

Except one...

I'm curious. Which clay specialists stopped doing well on clay? Because pretty much all the Spanish clay specialists kept doing well, and the south american guys did well too.

 

[Front242]

Tennis was a lot different in the nineties to now. Transference between clay and other surfaces, and from other surfaces to clay, was rarer and more difficult.

Fed came into his best as an all-round player after 2003 but we shouldn't underestimate the smacking he took from Kuerten in 2004. Kuerten was a master on clay and he was past his best, bogey hip and all, but he still manhandled Roger easily in the second round. Sure, Roger improved, and became better on the surface, about the same time clay ceased to be a good hunting ground for clay court specialists.

Except one...

I'm curious. Which clay specialists stopped doing well on clay? Because pretty much all the Spanish clay specialists kept doing well, and the south american guys did well too.

Potato Starch

 

[brokenshoelace]

So, I'll gladly take Sampras 1996 run to semi-final at RG over Federer's run in 2009 on any given day because even when he didn't win it, it has more value and meaning to it.

Federer's 2009 RG run made him achieve a career slam. Sampras' 1996 RG run made him...reach the semis for the first time.

Yeah, value and meaning indeed.

 

[Front242]

So, I'll gladly take Sampras 1996 run to semi-final at RG over Federer's run in 2009 on any given day because even when he didn't win it, it has more value and meaning to it.

Federer's 2009 RG run made him achieve a career slam. Sampras' 1996 RG run made him...reach the semis for the first time.

Yeah, value and meaning indeed.

laydownlaughing

 

[Kieran]

Tennis was a lot different in the nineties to now. Transference between clay and other surfaces, and from other surfaces to clay, was rarer and more difficult.

Fed came into his best as an all-round player after 2003 but we shouldn't underestimate the smacking he took from Kuerten in 2004. Kuerten was a master on clay and he was past his best, bogey hip and all, but he still manhandled Roger easily in the second round. Sure, Roger improved, and became better on the surface, about the same time clay ceased to be a good hunting ground for clay court specialists.

Except one...

I'm curious. Which clay specialists stopped doing well on clay? Because pretty much all the Spanish clay specialists kept doing well, and the south american guys did well too.

When? There's only one guy wins everything. And guys like Sod have a better record in Paris the last few seasons than any other spaniards or Sth Americans...