2006 vs 2011 Which era/top 4 was better

First topic message reminder :

The top 4 in Oct 2011 vs the top 4 May 2006:

2011:
Djokovic
Nadal
Murray
Federer

2006:
Federer
Nadal
Ljubicic
Hewitt

There has been a lot of heated debate about which era was better:
This is my verdict:

Djokovic 2011 vs Fed 2006= Draw- close call
Nadal 2011 vs Nadal 2006= Nadal 2011 no question
Murray 2011 vs Ljubicic 2006= Murray -Ljubicic has not reached a GS semi. Once did well in Miami though.
Federer 2011 vs Roddick 2006= Federer, obviously

Therefore: 3-0 to 2011's top players.

You have a pm from me amritia3ee

what a truely moronic poll this is.

What exactly is the point of it? Even if the top four of today are considered to be better, more accomplished players than the top four of 2006 it does not necessarily mean that the tour itself is overall more competitive. There are more than four players on tour!

Attempting to justify the superiority of the tour today as compared to 2006 with such a myopic and black and white poll only serves to demonstrate the limited knowledge and scope of the advocate's tennis knowledge.

Surely, it is not difficult to understand that eras are different, where conditions and playing styles vary. Hence a categoric dismissal of one era as weak is just silly nonsense.

I have no doubt that the greats of yester year, under todays conditions, would be dealt bagels and breadsticks by the current top four. Does that make them any less great, and are their respective eras relegated to the weaker classes?



emancipator - universal tennis correspondent

No amritia, Tenez did not drive anyone away through 'aggressive' means.

Tenez may be a passionate debator (and I too have clashed with him on occasion) however he always shows decorum.

Wasn't Legendkilla an admin on the tennis board? At least he knows about tennis.

emancipator wrote:No amritia, Tenez did not drive anyone away through 'aggressive' means.

Tenez may be a passionate debator (and I too have clashed with him on occasion) however he always shows decorum.

Yes righting a sarcastic article about 'shameless Rafa fans' coming back and calling me 'armpit' instead of amritia3ee shows huge decorum and respect.

Simple_Analyst wrote:Wasn't Legendkilla and admin on the tennis board? At least he knows about tennis.

LK was a moderator, but because of time constraints in real life could not continue in the role.
And what has an Admin knowing about tennis got to do with anything?

Well an admin who knows about tennis would have banned Fedex for the day for fraudulent tennis opinions and crimes against the gentlemens game with playground and Federer rose tinted antics. There is a limit to absurdity.

Opinions dont get censored. Action is only taken once site rules have been breached. Every mod or admin on this board would have the same stance, whether they know about tennis or not.

First of all, although I did vote I am not sure the extra article was really necessary. For the record, I think it's clear cut to me at least that the 2-4 ranked players were better in 2006.

I also object to the comment that Henman beat Federer once. Have a look at the head to head on the ATP site and I think you'll find it was more like 6 times, including on in 2003 and another in 2004 before Federer took complete control after that.

I also agree with the red pen useage.

Simple_Analyst wrote:Fedex would't it be more useful debating Tennis witg your wife and i mean no disrespect but you might actually convince her you know about tennis.

Thanks but I dont debate much these days - 3 years of marriage have sobered me down:)
SA and Amritia - this is the max I have ever aruged with anyone for a long long time. Thanks for bringing up that side of me but going back to being lazy and tracking markets which doesn't show any sign of coming back to those glorious days of 2004-07. Those were some days - Fed was winning, markets were shining and Zidane was still playing. Oh, I miss those times:)

Simple_Analyst wrote:Well an admin who knows about tennis would have banned Fedex for the day for fraudulent tennis opinions and crimes against the gentlemens game with playground and Federer rose tinted antics. There is a limit to absurdity.

Wow - you must really be hating Federer
Anyways, atleast I have seen enough matches of people not named Federer or Nadal. If anything, I play tennis and I am sure, I would do well against you - time permitting, would you be a game for it in 2012?

Lol trust i don't hate Federer or any tennis player for that matter. I just find the pseudo logics and opinions of Federer rather amusing.

amritia3ee wrote:

Fedex_the_best wrote: Anyways, have you watched matches of people not named Nadal then do you think Nadal will beat the Gonzo of AO 07?

Well in 2007 he wasn't good enough on hard courts. Now, easily
7-3 H2H- when he did finally start playing well on hard courts no coincidence he beat him in the Olympics.

What happaned to Nadal when he faced Youzhny in Chennai Open finals in 2008 , comparing one match is bulls, and try making a logic rather having a motto to wum.

Same Lubi, Roddick , Fish and Ferrer doing better in this pro-claimed golden era than what they did in those era. The oldies are actually finding the new era much easy at their 30's than their respective era in their prime.

I voted 2006 to add another idiot in your list. Coz there is a golden saying, be as a Roman in Rome, so I decided to be an idiot among ......... .

Amritea you certainly not an irritating poster, but trying to overdo something that certainly not needed. Anybody who thinks Nadal nor Federer not a great player means they following Golf n not tennis.

To add more Baggy on his best has played some great matches,so to insult that guy for one bad match is absolute nonsense, I remember the fight he gave against Djoko in Wimby quarters of 07, Djoko was lucky to scrap through a win.

Coming back to Gonzo, he blew Rafa away in AO 07,one of utter convincing performance I have ever seen, to say Rafa of today would beat that Gonzo of yesteryear is joke or a myth, the greatness of Rafa / Federer are defined coz of their consistency and not coz of their invincibility, every tour player is beatable like how Nishikori bageled Nole, that doesn't mean Nishikori became a great player over night.
Gonzo is a very good player on his day, so is Baggy, but they are no way close to the consistency exhibited by the Top2 and hence would never be considered for greatness.

As I have said the likes of Baghdatis and Gonzalez are very good and can be brilliant on their day. But they are not greats, and were not consistent enough to really cause Federer trouble.

amritia3ee wrote:As I have said the likes of Baghdatis and Gonzalez are very good and can be brilliant on their day. But they are not greats, and were not consistent enough to really cause Federer trouble.

But Gonzo was more than good enough to cause some serious trouble to Rafa, explains the story itself.

invisiblecoolers wrote:

amritia3ee wrote:As I have said the likes of Baghdatis and Gonzalez are very good and can be brilliant on their day. But they are not greats, and were not consistent enough to really cause Federer trouble.

But Gonzo was more than good enough to cause some serious trouble to Rafa, explains the story itself.

Not really 2008+ when Nadal matured as an all-court player.

amritia3ee wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:

amritia3ee wrote:As I have said the likes of Baghdatis and Gonzalez are very good and can be brilliant on their day. But they are not greats, and were not consistent enough to really cause Federer trouble.

But Gonzo was more than good enough to cause some serious trouble to Rafa, explains the story itself.

Not really 2008+ when Nadal matured as an all-court player.

So do u mean to say Sampras was just lucky and not a good player coz he was loosing to Hewitt, Roddick and Safin once the next generation kids matured? then yea i agree with your above point.