Tiger Woods vs. Federer

The difference is huge. Its not even close. Look at the numbers.

Read more!

Can Maria Sharapova be stopped this year

Maria has finally come into her own. I think the only one who has any chance of beating her is the vastly improved Petrova..

Read more!

Federer vs. Sampras----Break it down.

The great debate on GOAT is on.

Physical attributes---five setters.Oliver Rochus.
Level of competition.
Court coverage abilities and defense.
Service power.
Clay court mastery.
Repertoire of shots.
Court demeanor.
International appeal.
Popularity of tennis in traditional 'tennis big' nations.
Hall of famers.
Record against arch rival or nemesis.
Is the competition weak or Fed too good.
Was the old better---Agassi 4 sets after 3 five setters.
Opponets in finals and the score.
Transcending the sport.
The age factor.---after 25.
Number 1 ranking. (nickle and dimed).



Physical attributes.

Comparing Fed and Sam physically, there are some subtle differences.

Although the same height, Sam definitely looks thicker and more capable of going the distance with the five setters. In fact, just to win his 14 grand slams, he had to win 9 tough five-setters.


Fed admitted after the 2006 'Madrid' win that "Physically, I've improved so much that I'm not scared of any five-setters, or of any tournament anymore,". Maybe, the 2005 Australian open Final loss to Marat Safin, was what he was hinting at, or was it the 2006 five setter against Nadal at Roland Garros.

In his defense, he has had just one five-setter in his 9 grand slam wins. Well, one could argue if that's because of Fed's dominance or something else. (Covered later). It is impressive, nevertheless.

Also remember, due to Sam's serve and volley game, most points did not last long. There were fewer long rallies. So the time spent of the court was about the same as Fed, even though he played more sets...which could narrow the 'physical' margin Sam may appear to have to the naked eye.

Although physical attributes and conditioning do indirectly enhance the performance on the tennis court (better stamina, court coverage, leg cramps---Baghdatis, Gasquet @ US open etc.), it may not necessarily improve creative shot making ability, better placement etc.

I am tempted to mention Oliver Rochus (5' 5") win over Safin (6' 4") or even Leyton Hewit's (5' 11') win over Safin.

All the same, it has to be taken in the mix, however slender or arguable the edge is.

So far, Sam seems to have the slight edge here or take a poll based on above criteria and we will see.

Level of competition.

These are some of the players Sam beat on his way to 14 slams.

Year Player No. of sets. Slam

1990 Ivan Lendl Qtr 5 US Open
John McEnroe S 4
Andre Agassi F 3

1993 Andre Agassi Qtr 5 Wimbledon
Boris Becker S 3
Jim Courier F 4

1993 Micheal Chang Qtr 4 US Open
A. Volkov S 3


1994 Ivan Lendl R4 3 Australian Open
Jim Courier S 3
Todd Martin F 3

1994 Micheal Chang Qtr 3 Wimbledon
Todd Martin S 4
Goran Ivanisevic F 3

1995 Goran Ivanisevic S 5 Wimbledon
Boris Becker F 4

1995 Jim Courier S 4 US Open
Andre Agassi F 4

1996 Goran Ivanisevic S 4 US Open
Micheal Chang F 3

1997 Thomas Muster S 3 Australian Open
Carlos Moya F 3

1997 Boris Becker Qtr 4 Wimbledon
C. Pioline F 3

1998 Tim Henman S 4 Wimbledon
Goran Ivanisevic F 5

1999 Tim Henman S 4 Wimbledon
Andre Agassi F 3

2000 Patrick Rafter F 4 Wimbledon

2002 Tommy Haas R4 4 US Open
Andy Roddick Qtr 3
Andre Agassi F 4




These are some of the players Fed beat on his way to 9 slams:

2006 Nikolaï Davydenko S 3 US Open
Andy Roddick F 4

2006 Jonas Björkman S 3 Wimbledon
Rafael Nadal F 4

2006 Nicolas Kiefer S 4 Australian Open
Marcos Baghdatis F 4

2005 Leyton Hewitt S 4 US Open
Andre Agassi F 4

2005 Lleyton Hewitt S 3 Wimbledon
Andy Roddick F 3

2004 Tim Henman S 3 US Open
Lleyton Hewitt F 3

2004 Sebastien GrosjeanS 3 Wimbledon
Andy Roddick F 4

2004 Juan Carlos FerreroS 3 Australian Open
Marat Safin F 3

2003 Andy Roddick S 3 Wimbledon
Mark PhilippoussisF 3


Number of Hall of Famers (HOFs): Against Sam Against Fed.

Ivan Lendl Rafael Nadal
John McEnroe
Andre Agassi
Boris Becker
Jim Courier

Conclusions from above analysis:

Either Fed is so dominant that players don't have a chance or the talent pool is depleted and lacks depth compared to Sam's adversaries. The number of sets needed to dispose off opponents should also be figured in. Fed more often than not, gets them in straight sets, whereas for Sam it was never that easy.



Compare the following:

Sam's Fed's

Non-HOFs Non-HOFs
Goran Ivanisevic Andy Roddick
Patrick Rafter Lleyton Hewitt
Tim Henman Nikolaï Davydenko
Micheal Chang Ivan Ljubicic
Carlos Moya Marcos Baghdatis

Off-peak HOFs Off-peak HOFs
Ivan Lendl Andre Agassi.
Boris Becker
Jim Courier
John McEnroe

In-peak HOFs. In-peak HOFs
Andre Agassi Rafael Nadal
(All surface) (Clay court specialist).

More conclusion:

Even if you conclude that the non-HOFs have the same talent in the two eras, Sam had more Off-peak HOFs to deal with and the in-peak HOF (Agassi) during Sam's era was much more deadly because of mastery of all surfaces, whereas Nadal has yet to prove that.

The following also needs a notable mention:

Andre Agassi: Elite member of the former generation, who at 35 years, is clearly off his prime, should not be expected to defeat any of the top five players of the current generation and certainly not be a challenge to the dominating reigning number 1 player in the world.

But he beat Roddick, Hewitt, Moya among others--in straight sets--- to win the Cincinate Masters in 2004. More importantly, he took Roger Federer to four sets in last year's US Open, despite having played three grueling consequetive 5-setters leading up to the final---at age 35. He should have been demolished 6-0, 6-0, 6-0.

Does that reflect lack of depth or is it the unique talent of Agassi? What do you think?

Court coverage and defense.

Fed apparently seems to have a clear edge here. He undoubtedly is able to cover more ground very deceptively. He gets very little credit for his ability to track down balls since he makes it look easy and does it with grace unlike Nadal who gives the impression he is scraping for everything.

Sam was never known for being a gritty defender. I think it also had to do with the fact that he preferred the serve and volley game plan which eliminates the need to run from side to side by cutting the angles. Or was it to compensate for lack of all court / baseline ability.

.

Read more!