Underrated Matches?

the AntiPusher

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,049
Reactions
7,182
Points
113
Kieran said:
DarthFed said:
Kieran said:
Careful, brother, Safin was used a sign of how strong the competition was back then, not how weak... :laydownlaughing

He was well above the likes of a Nishi, Wawrinka, Rosol, Jefferson Darcy (Darcis), Kyrgios, Stakhovsky, Gulbis, Cilic, etc. I just listed off the culprits of the "huge" upsets you'd be likely to list. Are those guys better than Safin, Roddick, Nalbs, etc? Or was it tougher to beat 25 year old Roger than it is to beat the top guys today?

According to your usual spiel, Federer today should be posting the same results as ten years ago, so you can answer this yourself.

Safin beating Federer in 2005 in Oz was a huge upset - that's how enfeebled things had become. Stakhovski, Nick, Rosol etc are a sign that the also-rans are willing to push it to the wire with the best of them, the way tennis used to always be played, and hopefully this trend continues (though not always at Rafa's expense, please...)...

Safin beating Federer in 2005 in Oz was a huge upset

There wasnt a human that Ever lived that could have defeated Marat that day. It was the ulimate display of a BEAST..
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,642
Reactions
5,729
Points
113
the AntiPusher said:
Kieran said:
DarthFed said:
He was well above the likes of a Nishi, Wawrinka, Rosol, Jefferson Darcy (Darcis), Kyrgios, Stakhovsky, Gulbis, Cilic, etc. I just listed off the culprits of the "huge" upsets you'd be likely to list. Are those guys better than Safin, Roddick, Nalbs, etc? Or was it tougher to beat 25 year old Roger than it is to beat the top guys today?

According to your usual spiel, Federer today should be posting the same results as ten years ago, so you can answer this yourself.

Safin beating Federer in 2005 in Oz was a huge upset - that's how enfeebled things had become. Stakhovski, Nick, Rosol etc are a sign that the also-rans are willing to push it to the wire with the best of them, the way tennis used to always be played, and hopefully this trend continues (though not always at Rafa's expense, please...)...

Safin beating Federer in 2005 in Oz was a huge upset

There wasnt a human that Ever lived that could have defeated Marat that day. It was the ulimate display of a BEAST..

It was an upset. Huge? That seems a bit disrespectful to Safin. I think we always knew that on his day he was an awesome player. That day was certainly his day. But to say.. huge.. it makes it seem like Rosol v Nadal :puzzled
 

the AntiPusher

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,049
Reactions
7,182
Points
113
federberg said:
the AntiPusher said:
Kieran said:
According to your usual spiel, Federer today should be posting the same results as ten years ago, so you can answer this yourself.

Safin beating Federer in 2005 in Oz was a huge upset - that's how enfeebled things had become. Stakhovski, Nick, Rosol etc are a sign that the also-rans are willing to push it to the wire with the best of them, the way tennis used to always be played, and hopefully this trend continues (though not always at Rafa's expense, please...)...

Safin beating Federer in 2005 in Oz was a huge upset

There wasnt a human that Ever lived that could have defeated Marat that day. It was the ulimate display of a BEAST..

It was an upset. Huge? That seems a bit disrespectful to Safin. I think we always knew that on his day he was an awesome player. That day was certainly his day. But to say.. huge.. it makes it seem like Rosol v Nadal :puzzled

Heck.. I didnt say that it was Kieran's post who might have been having a bit of fun with the other posters
 

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
federberg said:
Still.. I'm glad to see you refer so positively to the top 10 in Federer's peak :)

I always have.

As far as more tennis being more competitive, it's a weird issue because compared to Federer's years at the top, it is. As in, every tournament is not won by the same player (hyperbole, obviously). At the top, things are more competitive. There can be no denying that if you're Federer, Nadal, Novak or Murray, dealing with the other three on a tournament to tournament basis, especially when they dominated so much, was not an easy thing to do. It certainly is (was?) one of the most top heavy eras in tennis history and I don't want to sound like I'm donwplaying that one bit. Look at Novak Djokovic having to play back-to-back marathons with Murray and Nadal at the AO in 2012 for example, or how huge it was that Federer beat Novak and Murray back to back to win Wimbledon later that year, or Nadal going through Djokovic and Federer at the 2008 FO while dropping an obscenely low amount of games in the process. Those accomplishments are huge exactly because the tour is so good at the top.

But when looking at depth, we can't be limited to the top 4, and as such, I do think the top 10 in Federer's days was deeper. Now, was it better? That's questionable, because saying "it's better beyond the top 4", while accurate, is quite silly since I'm basically conveniently disregarding the top 4 players (which is ludicrous). So no, I would say the top 10 in 2008-2012 (just a random interval) was probably better because of who was at the top, but the top 10 in 2004-2007 was deeper.
 

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
Safin beating Federer at the AO 2005 WAS a huge upset, but not for the reasons listed. It's a huge upset because back then, it literally looked like Federer couldn't lose a match (a sign of how good he was), and Safin was known for being crazy and mentally shaky. However, Safin's talent was never in question and if before the match, someone told me that Safin would be playing great, then I wouldn't see it as a "huge" upset one bit.

It wasn't surprising so much because Federer lost, but also because Safin was able to put his game together for five sets and hang on mentally.

Safin is someone who SHOULD have been challenging Federer more than he did had he not been insane. The dude's talent is up there with anyone.
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,164
Reactions
7,447
Points
113
Wimbledon quarter-finals day, 1993, saw two great matches, one of which is definitely not remembered enough, the classic Teutonic feud between Boris Becker and Michael Stich. They'd faced off in the final two years before and that day, Becker capitulated in a manner which modern day fans might associate occasionally with Nole. He simply didn't mentally arrive to play, putting up more battle with his own inner demons than with his foe, clearly put out that a fellow German dared steal the limelight from him in his own backyard, as he himself claimed it to be.

In 1993 we saw a different Becker, a switch around reminiscent of Sugar Ray Leonard going back to his swaggering roots to defy Roberto Duran in the rematch. In four hours of riveting assault, Stich was unable to break the Becker spirit - and serve. Boris came back from 2-1 down in sets to prevail in five. 7-5, 6-7, 6-7, 6-2, 6-4. It was a incredible match by both men, but more particularly by Becker, whose discipline held, and whose nerve held.

That match was preceded by another grudge match, Sampras against defending champ Agassi, who'd labelled Pete an ape a couple weeks before in Paris. With Barbra Streisand rattling her jewels loudly in the players box, Agassi came back from two sets down to haul it into a fifth, but Pete remained cool and if memory serves, finished it off with four aces.

With Edberg and Becker in the semis for the fifth time in six years, we kinda expected them to face each other again in the final, but Pete tore Becker down in straights and defeated fellow American Jim Courier in the final...
 

DarthFed

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,726
Reactions
3,478
Points
113
Kieran said:
DarthFed said:
Kieran said:
Careful, brother, Safin was used a sign of how strong the competition was back then, not how weak... :laydownlaughing

He was well above the likes of a Nishi, Wawrinka, Rosol, Jefferson Darcy (Darcis), Kyrgios, Stakhovsky, Gulbis, Cilic, etc. I just listed off the culprits of the "huge" upsets you'd be likely to list. Are those guys better than Safin, Roddick, Nalbs, etc? Or was it tougher to beat 25 year old Roger than it is to beat the top guys today?

According to your usual spiel, Federer today should be posting the same results as ten years ago, so you can answer this yourself.

Safin beating Federer in 2005 in Oz was a huge upset - that's how enfeebled things had become. Stakhovski, Nick, Rosol etc are a sign that the also-rans are willing to push it to the wire with the best of them, the way tennis used to always be played, and hopefully this trend continues (though not always at Rafa's expense, please...)...

When have I ever said Roger should be doing what he did 10 years ago? Safin beating Roger was a huge upset because it was at a time when anyone beating Roger off clay was big news. Guys like Stakhovsky and Rosol winning were huge but they were also signs that the victims of the upsets (Federer and Nadal) had slipped a long ways from prior glories. The problem is you are equating a win vs. 2013 Federer to one vs. 2004-2007. It's not in the same universe. Similarly Nishi beating Nole at USO is a far less daunting task than someone taking Roger out at the same venue in his heyday. You're comparing apples and oranges.
 

britbox

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
27,509
Reactions
6,341
Points
113
Location
Gold Coast, Australia
At the time, I never actually thought Safin beating Federer was a huge upset. Retrospectively, looking back at what they both went on to do, it seems a huge upset with the benefit of hindsight.

Safin had finished 2004 with back to back masters titles. I was a big Safin fan and felt he was maturing into the player he was born to be. Federer was of course the favourite but Marat was very much a live dog going into that match. He was a major winner, had been a world number 1 and hadn't yet turned 25. Federer had only had one completely dominant season and won 4 majors at that point.

There was an expectation that this might be the match of the tournament and we weren't let down.

After he won the AO, I really expected him to go on and win more silver at future slams.
 

calitennis127

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,947
Reactions
459
Points
83
Kieran said:
The tour is much stronger and healthier now than it was ten years ago. You get upsets now, even Federer at Wimbledon and almost Nadal at Paris, you have upstarts who fancy themselves and you have players outside the top one or two throwing shapes and taking prizes on the big stage. This is how it should be, and it's a good sign, as opposed to what was ten years ago, where it was really dire from that perspective...


There was far more talent in the Top 30 ten years ago than there is now.
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,164
Reactions
7,447
Points
113
calitennis127 said:
Kieran said:
The tour is much stronger and healthier now than it was ten years ago. You get upsets now, even Federer at Wimbledon and almost Nadal at Paris, you have upstarts who fancy themselves and you have players outside the top one or two throwing shapes and taking prizes on the big stage. This is how it should be, and it's a good sign, as opposed to what was ten years ago, where it was really dire from that perspective...


There was far more talent in the Top 30 ten years ago than there is now.

There's a way of measuring this, is there? They were a rollover jackpot for the stars. Tour is more awake and dangerous now, even if you might think it's less aesthetically pleasing... ;)
 

mrzz

Hater
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
6,333
Reactions
3,255
Points
113
^There might not be a (direct) way to measure it, since there is no common standard to measure them both against. Even if you had the same top 3, they would be different animals now and them...

...even statiscally, if you say people now has more chance to beat the #1, this is only a question of relative dominance. The best you can do is see how much the rankings are "spread" (for example, El Dude could come up with the stats of players ranked between 20 and 30 agains the top 5). But again, this is only relative. The direct comparison between the top 30 then and the top 30 now is highly subjective. I am inclined to agree that it was better 10 years ago.
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,164
Reactions
7,447
Points
113
Well, Cali said it was "more talented", which we scan the same way we scan Nalbandian being "more talented" than Laver, Borg and Rafa put together. In other words, it could mean anything (except victories)...
 

mrzz

Hater
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
6,333
Reactions
3,255
Points
113
...uf, it hurts just by looking.