J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
But it's not . :evil:
Tennis talk
- Thread starter J.R. Hudson
- Start date
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
Lol ! :laugh: :grin:
monte
Bag of Douche
Hey John - you'd be surprised - I'm the tennis mastah
They call me Elbow Monte round these parts - cus of my tennis elbow, ya see what I'm sayin boy?
Next time I'm in SoCal (in a few months) I'll give you a ring sucka - we'll film it too!
Hmm... this was a poorly written comment... oh well
They call me Elbow Monte round these parts - cus of my tennis elbow, ya see what I'm sayin boy?
Next time I'm in SoCal (in a few months) I'll give you a ring sucka - we'll film it too!
Hmm... this was a poorly written comment... oh well
John_Hudson said:
You seem to make light of Federer's accomplishments.This is what I take offense to. If he were to stop playing today, he would still be known as an all time great. Yes he has only 7, but how many other tennis players have that many? Also take into consideration that he is only 23. Its taken Agassi almost all his 20 years in the game to win that many. Its only taken Federer 5 years to amass his first 7 titles. Anyways, if the number of slam titles are all that is important in this game, then none of the aforementioned players can hold a candle to Stephi Graff; she doesn't count I guess, cuz she's a girlee. Anyways, I still believe Andre Agassi is the best; however, that is a personal preference.
Tennis is a sport, btw. Its frustrating as hell to play, but it is a sport.
I believe that if you pitted all these players we're talking about, in their prime, against each other, on all the surfaces, Agassi would come out on top. Dude was insane when he was dedicated. Now as far as longevity, you obviously have to go with Sampras for the moment. And while I do believe that Federer has the potential to win the most majors in history, like someone else posted above, you NEVER KNOW. Borg could've won 20 majors. But he decided to retire with 4 good years left. When McEnroe went like 63-2 that one year, people were saying he would undoubetly be the greatest player in history. Who could stop him? Oh yeah, and then some 8 hours of practice a day robot named Lendle just outfitnessed him. Sampras was cruising to like 18-20 majors when that little blond actress of his showed up. All of a sudden, tennis wasn't as interesting. Seles, greatest ever? Hmm, stab. Capriati, greatest ever? Hmm, crack. Venus best ever? Hmm, sister. Serena, best ever (predicted she would go undefeated in 2003)? Hmm, clothing. Hingis, best ever. Hmm, bad shoes.
People's priorities change during life. Federer is 24 years old. When you're 24, tennis is the only f*cking thing that matters to a tennis pro. When you're pushing 30, a lot of your priorities change. It's only a matter of time before that wife of his becomes pregnant and a baby is born and once he sees that baby, do you think tennis will be the most important thing in his life? This is why players amass these huge stats early on in their careers and everybody talks about how they'll be the best ever. And then 3 years later it's like, 'what happened to them?'
I believe the reason why people think Federer is different is because he's basically injury proof. His game is so smooth that his chance of injury is a tenth that of the rest of the players (Roddick's herky-jerky game for example). And a smooth game prevents all that wear and tear on your body allowing you to have a much longer career.
But the French is the wild card. That red clay is such a different surface that unless you practice on it all year long like the Spaniards, the Argentines, the Italians, and the French, you are at a serious disadvantage, even if you're Roger Federer. There's always going to be a Nadal or Guga who's going to hit that heavy high-bouncing ball to your one-handed backhand, the hardest shot in tennis, and you're going to struggle.
That's why I believe Agassi is the best, because he can win on all those surfaces.
Well, that's all I gotta say. Oh, and bend your knees and watch the ball.
People's priorities change during life. Federer is 24 years old. When you're 24, tennis is the only f*cking thing that matters to a tennis pro. When you're pushing 30, a lot of your priorities change. It's only a matter of time before that wife of his becomes pregnant and a baby is born and once he sees that baby, do you think tennis will be the most important thing in his life? This is why players amass these huge stats early on in their careers and everybody talks about how they'll be the best ever. And then 3 years later it's like, 'what happened to them?'
I believe the reason why people think Federer is different is because he's basically injury proof. His game is so smooth that his chance of injury is a tenth that of the rest of the players (Roddick's herky-jerky game for example). And a smooth game prevents all that wear and tear on your body allowing you to have a much longer career.
But the French is the wild card. That red clay is such a different surface that unless you practice on it all year long like the Spaniards, the Argentines, the Italians, and the French, you are at a serious disadvantage, even if you're Roger Federer. There's always going to be a Nadal or Guga who's going to hit that heavy high-bouncing ball to your one-handed backhand, the hardest shot in tennis, and you're going to struggle.
That's why I believe Agassi is the best, because he can win on all those surfaces.
Well, that's all I gotta say. Oh, and bend your knees and watch the ball.
kyledroid said:
Yeah, but he looked vulnerable for a bit -- and he's been doing that lately.
Again, could go the distance, yes. Is it assured? No.
Whoa, it took him a little bit, but then Federer decided to try and it was over.
Actually, things looked interesting there for awhile. If Baghdatis would have figured out that second set, Federer looked to be done. He sure doesn't look like the 'best ever' in a close match. He looks nervous and scared most of the time. But, he still wins. So you gotta give it to him.
Actually, things looked interesting there for awhile. If Baghdatis would have figured out that second set, Federer looked to be done. He sure doesn't look like the 'best ever' in a close match. He looks nervous and scared most of the time. But, he still wins. So you gotta give it to him.
c.g._eads said:
Yes, and this scenario has played many times before.
Do NOT be surprised if this year or the next some kid you've never heard of comes out of nowhere and cleans his clock in an early round.
Terry_Lasater
All about the Caption
David Jimerson said:
Of course not. In fact, count on it.
Circle of life, baby. Circle of life.
Terry_Lasater said:
'Zall I'm sayin'.
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
Why are you taking offense ? Is Federer your brother ?
I make no light of Federers accomlishments but only slay claim of GREATEST EVER. Is he amongst the greats ? Most definate. He achieved that status at the 2004 Wilmbledon.
7 I think ?
He is on pace to do what only Sampras has done (12 Slams). Here are some nice bites:
---- Federer's seven major titles tie him with eight other players -- including John McEnroe, John Newcombe and Mats Wilander -- and leave him one behind Andre Agassi, Jimmy Connors, Ivan Lendl, Fred Perry and Ken Rosewall.
--
Sampras won his seventh major in his 22nd try. Federer was playing in his 27th. Their birthdays are four days apart, and they won their seventh Grand Slam titles at the same age. ----
Who are you talking to ? I have not seen that sentiment expressed around here. I believe Graf to be the greatest womans player ever. But Graf couldnt beat the 1000 Ranked mens player so I can't put her at GREATEST OF ALL TIME
Monte was kidding in reference to another thread where we debated the idea of Golf being a sport or not. I find tennis to not be frustrating at all; that's because I'm actually pretty good at it (for a hack)
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
Like, I don't know. Maybe Nadal ?
John_Hudson said:
No kidding. You'd think the guy bet all his possessions on Federer.
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
You get that alot with sports talk for some reason; people lose all rational and objective viewpoints.
I admit "offense" was too strong a word. I should have edited that. And yes I am his brother; thats why I am here....lol. Also, one must not look to Federer's performance in this slam and assume he is gonna have a hard time with the faster paced courts of Wimbledon and the U.S Open. Why? Rebound ace is a much slower surface than grass or hardcourts, and Federer's game is more suited to faster courts. Furthermore, I say the test for Federer is going to be the French because of how slow that surface can be.
Onto a another point: Im not a Federer super fan by any means. I dont think Federer will win the french this year. However, I do speculate he will win one more slam this year atleast. Also, there is a chance he might not win another slam this year, and he might get injured, but those chances are highly unlikely. I only brought Stephi Graff into the convo cuz she has more slam titles that Federer and Sampras combined. Why should'nt she be mentioned in this thread? Why is the women's game not included in this convo. If someone had said Samprass, Agassi, or Federer was/is the greatest "male" tennis player ever, I would not have mentioned Stephi. However, we said greatest "tennis player", so i thought it was only fair to mention her and the womens's game. I was being a dick when i mentioned the girlee part. Also, if you dont get frustrated when playing tennis, then you ain't playin it right, son...j/k.
Onto a another point: Im not a Federer super fan by any means. I dont think Federer will win the french this year. However, I do speculate he will win one more slam this year atleast. Also, there is a chance he might not win another slam this year, and he might get injured, but those chances are highly unlikely. I only brought Stephi Graff into the convo cuz she has more slam titles that Federer and Sampras combined. Why should'nt she be mentioned in this thread? Why is the women's game not included in this convo. If someone had said Samprass, Agassi, or Federer was/is the greatest "male" tennis player ever, I would not have mentioned Stephi. However, we said greatest "tennis player", so i thought it was only fair to mention her and the womens's game. I was being a dick when i mentioned the girlee part. Also, if you dont get frustrated when playing tennis, then you ain't playin it right, son...j/k.
I never said he was the greatest tennis player. Someone mentioned Samprass, and I thought it would be prudent to make a case for Federer. I was surprised by baghdatis. He was great last night. He just ran out of fuel. Nalbandian does have a chance too. He beat him last year at the year end championships I think. Also, I called the result of this mornings match. 4 and out...Federer winning. DAP to me. lol
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
kyledroid said:
Well in that case. :huh: :laugh:
Roland Garros has been alot of players weaknesses. Bravo to Andre for winning all 4 surfaces! And here is truly unique statistic:
Jimmy Connors holds a record unique in US Open competition and one that will probably never be matched, much less broken. He is the only player, male or female, to win the singles championship on three different surfaces. Connors won in 1974 on the grass at Forest Hills, in 1976 on the clay court (Har-Tru) then in use at the West Side Tennis Club and in 1978 on the hard-court surface (DecoTurf II) at the USTA National Tennis Center
Who said we couldn't ? We can talk about the womans game. Steffi isn't the best tennis player ever; only the best womans tennis player ever.
Tell that to the 28 year old I'm hitting 100 mph passing shots from the baseline on last week :thumbsup: :engel017: I think he'd say I was playing right.
---
I don't think anyone said you said that.
I believe this was the general prediction all along.
---
My opinion on the greatest ever ? Sampras (I grudgingly admit) :undecided
My favorite player ever ? Connors. On pure Never say die guts!
Best womans player ever? Steffi
Favorite womans player ? Capriati.