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.

So does that one result prove 2006 was stronger. No...
You have to look at the ranking- 12 months accumulated points- to get the true picture. Not 1 masters.

OMG

The points are accumulated against each other. So every year contains players whose total ranking points add up to the same number.

Are you thinking of drawing any conclusions from that?

Well obviously, but no one was good or consistent enough to launch a significant challenge to Federer apart from Rafa on clay.

You say "obviously", but you brought ranking points into it.

I'm trying to point out to you how pointless it is to assess eras based on whether players were dominant or not.

amritia3ee wrote:6-5

You can keep creating arbitrary polls and prove whatever point you wish to prove.

1962 and 69 Laver won Grand Slams. No one has done it since. Is 1962 or 69 better or worse than 2011?

Pancho Gonzales won 8 US Pro titles during 1953-1961. Has anyone in the open era won 8 titles at a given championship (Nadal has 7)? Does it make Pancho better than Nadal?

Your desire to make one player look better than another by such polls is the same as 'my-dad-is-bigger-than-yours'.

Enjoy the tennis that you see.

bogbrush wrote:You say "obviously", but you brought ranking points into it.

I'm trying to point out to you how pointless it is to assess eras based on whether players were dominant or not.

Of course some eras can be weaker and some can also be stronger. For example if all the current players withdrew for one year and a bunch of beginners from N.Korea played for the duration of 2012- we can safely say that 2011 would be a stronger year than 2012. However the ranking points would add up to the same amount- the level of play would just be lower.
Of course I am not saying 2006 was just played by a bunch of amateurs but I am pointing out that one year can be 'weaker' than another.

Save yourself some energy and continue your debate on Tenez's thread. It is the same debate on this and that one. At least there is Lydian on the other thread.

amritia3ee wrote:Yh they are good players. I believe that was Ljubicic's only Masters win and Roddick has only won 1 other Masters.
I am not saying they are sh*t, but neither of them are as good as Djokovic/Murray.

If only these current crop of players were to face Federer in 2006 in relatively faster conditions, I assume you would have seen different results of these so-called 2011 greats! And if those 2006 guys were playing at their peak today - I am absolutely certain that they would be playing a different brand of tennis and more importantly would have won few more silverware because Fed was not always blocking the roads.

Fed was so much better than others that noone got a chance and today, the field is more level allowing everyone to sneak a masters and 500s in between. Can you honestly not see that Fed didnt leave a lot for any of these guys to win in 2004-07?

As articulated by Tenez somewhere else that those guys were different kind of players and today Fed cannot play 97 matches in a year like in 2006 (due to his age etc) at peak intensity. Honestly, I will pick Baghdatis to beat Nadal on grass in faster conditions and Gonzalez to beat Murray in faster conditions and similarly even this 2011 Djokovic to struggle against 2006-08 Nadal on clay. While today, I still dont see anyone other than Nadal to beat Fed on clay and Fed's peak still good enough to win or bring very close to winning most of the matches on surfaces other than clay!

Not supporting any era theory but this is a weird poll.

Disclaimer: My favorite players from the current crop are Federer, Murray, Berdych, Tsonga and Del Potro and I am not trying to wind anyone up.

Fedex_the_best wrote:Not supporting any era theory but this is a weird poll.

Exactly. If 7 people are taking the p*ss, the OP might care to consider why they would do that.

Fedex_the_best wrote:

amritia3ee wrote:Yh they are good players. I believe that was Ljubicic's only Masters win and Roddick has only won 1 other Masters.
I am not saying they are sh*t, but neither of them are as good as Djokovic/Murray.

If only these current crop of players were to face Federer in 2006 in relatively faster conditions, I assume you would have seen different results of these so-called 2011 greats! And if those 2006 guys were playing at their peak today - I am absolutely certain that they would be playing a different brand of tennis and more importantly would have won few more silverware because Fed was not always blocking the roads.

Fed was so much better than others that noone got a chance and today, the field is more level allowing everyone to sneak a masters and 500s in between. Can you honestly not see that Fed didnt leave a lot for any of these guys to win in 2004-07?

As articulated by Tenez somewhere else that those guys were different kind of players and today Fed cannot play 97 matches in a year like in 2006 (due to his age etc) at peak intensity. Honestly, I will pick Baghdatis to beat Nadal on grass in faster conditions and Gonzalez to beat Murray in faster conditions and similarly even this 2011 Djokovic to struggle against 2006-08 Nadal on clay. While today, I still dont see anyone other than Nadal to beat Fed on clay and Fed's peak still good enough to win or bring very close to winning most of the matches on surfaces other than clay!

Not supporting any era theory but this is a weird poll.

Disclaimer: My favorite players from the current crop are Federer, Murray, Berdych, Tsonga and Del Potro and I am not trying to wind anyone up.

The first part said if this current crop were to face Federer in 2006 under fast conditions. Didn't an 18 year Old Murray dismiss Federer on straight sets at Cincinnati? Or was that match played on sticky glue?
Well if the current crop were at peak level in 2006, Federer would win the same amount of slams as he won this year.

I thought i wouldn't waste time reading through Fedex is best's post but i did and i came up with this gem: "I'll pick Baghdatis to beat Nadal on grass under fast condition and Gonzales to beat Murray in faster conditions"

Confirms my initial suspicion i was about to waste time

At least they have a sense of humour.
Henman beat Federer once on a fast surface- by the great logic of Tenez Henman>Federer.

As has been said before. It is tough to compare the two different years. Do you do it individually like has been done in the opening post or is it a collective thing. For me, Federer 2006 is the best out of the whole lot by a fair bit. Does this make up for Roddick and Ljubicic 'weakness' when compared to their 2011 equivalents? I don't know. What I can say is that titles are more evenly distributed nowadays than in 2006. That doesn't make it a better year, just different. I now I definitely preferred 2006 though. Federer in full flow was a joy to watch.

Federer is only one player. One good player (along with Rafa on clay) doesn't portray the level of tennis.
Of course if you are a Fed fan you will prefer 2006 more, but ask yourself this:
In which year did he face harder competition, irrelevant of his own form?

Simple_Analyst wrote: I thought i wouldn't waste time reading through Fedex is best's post but i did and i came up with this gem: "I'll pick Baghdatis to beat Nadal on grass under fast condition and Gonzales to beat Murray in faster conditions"

Confirms my initial suspicion i was about to waste time

Baghdatis in 2006 was playing good tennis and is a good grass court player. Gonzo, at his best, can demolish anyone. As I said, Murray is one of my favorite but Gonzo on a fast hardcourt would blow Murray away. Did you even watch any of Gonzo's matches?

Problem with many of Nadal fans (I know it comes as condescending but can't help it) is that they have little or no idea about tennis and are no real tennis fans (I know 3 such persons in my family, my wife included, big Nadal fangirls and think he is the greatest but have no idea on who Tommy Haas is but will argue till end on Nadal H2H with Federer!). Hand on heart, did you see Gonzo's Semis in AO 07? If you have, then well done to have watched a match where Nadal isnt involved and now tell me if you still think that that Gonzo would not win against Murray in 3 easy sets! To my mind, that is a level of tennis which only Fed and Djoko now have acheived in some matches! Did you see Gonzo dismissing Nadal with ease in that AO?

Djokovic is good but otherwise 2006 players were not inferior to 2011 players, if you just level the base for comparisons!

And please, please - dont pick up one match and jump to conclusions. That is immature and shows lack of tennis understanding - Murray did beat Fed once but he lost to a whole lot of hard courters in that year. In tennis, you will always lose matches and sure, Fed did lose to Safin, Nalbandian, Murray, Nadal, Gasquet in his hey days but think for a bit before you use that as an argument to justify their credentials!

I think you are absolutely right.

Nadal 7-3 Gonzalez http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=G415&oId=N409

Nadal 17-9 Federer http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=N409&oId=F324

Federer 12-1 Gonzalez http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=F324&oId=G415


Of course! Now I see how you came to the conclusion Gonzalez is better than Nadal. I should have noticed earlier.

amritia3ee wrote:Federer is only one player. One good player (along with Rafa on clay) doesn't portray the level of tennis.
Of course if you are a Fed fan you will prefer 2006 more, but ask yourself this:
In which year did he face harder competition, irrelevant of his own form?

Sure - it was 2010 and 2011.

But now ask yourself, if the conditions were faster, do you see Nadal doing anything at USO or Wimby. Would he win against a Gonzo of AO 07 or a Roddick of Wimby 05. Put the current Nadal in the conditions of 2005 Wimby and not only Fed but the current Djoko, Murray, Berdych, Tsonga and the yester-years' Roddick, Nalby, Davydenko are vastly superior to him.

Fedex_the_best wrote:

amritia3ee wrote:Federer is only one player. One good player (along with Rafa on clay) doesn't portray the level of tennis.
Of course if you are a Fed fan you will prefer 2006 more, but ask yourself this:
In which year did he face harder competition, irrelevant of his own form?

Sure - it was 2010 and 2011.

Well thats my point. 2010/2011 were harder, therefore more competition.

Fedex_the_best wrote: Put the current Nadal in the conditions of 2005 Wimby and not only Fed but the current Djoko, Murray, Berdych, Tsonga and the yester-years' Roddick, Nalby, Davydenko are vastly superior to him.

How exactly did you come to this conclusion my friend.
Of course in 2005/2006 Nadal was just starting to play and was only really a clay courter. You have no evidence to show that an improved Nadal would lose to these people. And I do believe apart from Davydenko the H2H's are also in favour of Nadal....

And have we forgotten Nadal's win over Federer in Miami- on a fast hard court in 2004. And this was when he wasn't even accustomed to hard courts.

Fedex is best so can you tell us what happened wheb Baghdatis met Nadal on 2006 grass.

amritia3ee wrote:I think you are absolutely right.

Nadal 7-3 Gonzalez http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=G415&oId=N409

Nadal 17-9 Federer http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=N409&oId=F324

Federer 12-1 Gonzalez http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=F324&oId=G415


Of course! Now I see how you came to the conclusion Gonzalez is better than Nadal. I should have noticed earlier.

Like all Rafa fans - H2H and results!!

Ok, but if we are arguing, first understand what I said/meant without any ambiguity. Yester-years Gonzo, on a fast court, will beat Nadal and I think Nadal is the best clay courter ever - better than Borg even.

Now, shall we look at the H2H!

Till 2008, they met thrice on hard courts. Once at Miami where Gonzo won in 3 sets and once at AO 07 (where Gonzo played his absolute, majestic best) and he beat Nadal in 3 easy sets. Gonzo lost to Rafa in Beijing Olympics. So its 2-1 and now can you make sense of my logic? Anyways, have you watched matches of people not named Nadal then do you think Nadal will beat the Gonzo of AO 07?

SA
So come on then Fed ex...
What happened when Baghdatis met Nadal in the fast grass surface in 2006 (which was Feds best year).

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.

Simple_Analyst wrote:Fedex is best so can you tell us what happened wheb Baghdatis met Nadal on 2006 grass.

Baggy played a shocker - did you watch that match? His was miles away from the form that he displayed in his previous matches - I remember commentators saying that Baggy is injured.

But I am sure, you, true to Nadal fanbase, did only look at the result!

Have voted for the fun of it. But let's start a comparison with the multi-Slam strewn top four of the mid 80s, or the Agassi/Sampras mid-90s, rather than a Looby/Hewitt top four.

My point wasn't that Federer was better in 06 so that's the better year. It was that despite the current Nadal and Djokovic possibly being better than the other 06 players, Federer's superiority in 06 might mean that 06 was better. The question ask which top four is better. I was just suggesting that Federer in 06 might make up for the others 'weaknesses' for want of a better word.

Lol really think i'm wasting time on Fedex. Yes i know what Gonzales did to Nadal at AO 07. Care to tell us what Nadal did to hin at AO 09 and USO 09? I'm confident your wife does know more about tennis about
you.

Fedex_the_best wrote:

Simple_Analyst wrote:Fedex is best so can you tell us what happened wheb Baghdatis met Nadal on 2006 grass.

Baggy played a shocker....His was miles away from the form that he displayed in his previous matches - I remember commentators saying that Baggy is injured.

I watched the match live mate- he wasn't injured. Not physically anyway. Let me guess was Federer also injured for his 18 losses against Nadal?

Simple_Analyst wrote:Lol really think i'm wasting time on Fedex. Yes i know what Gonzales did to Nadal at AO 07. Care to tell us what Nadal did to hin at AO 09 and USO 09? I'm confident your wife does know more about tennis about
you.

Yes, Nadal greatly improved from 2007-2009. In the former he was an average player on hard courts losing to players like Gonzalez but in 2009 he won the event.

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.

Nadal still doesnt play well on fast hardcourts. He played well on fast hardcourts once - USO 2010 when he somehow found magical serves and pace on forehands!

Gonzo is a hardcourt animal - I am not syaing that Gonzo on clay is better than Nadal, nobody is. But had you watched enough tennis, you would have known why Gonzo's forehand are tailor-made for fast hardcourts.

Just asking, did you watch any of Gonzo's matches during the AO 07?

Well he has just confirmed his ignorance si next. You know Fedex, youtube can help you a bit if you did not watch the match.

amritia3ee wrote:

Fedex_the_best wrote:

Simple_Analyst wrote:Fedex is best so can you tell us what happened wheb Baghdatis met Nadal on 2006 grass.

Baggy played a shocker....His was miles away from the form that he displayed in his previous matches - I remember commentators saying that Baggy is injured.

I watched the match live mate- he wasn't injured. Not physically anyway. Let me guess was Federer also injured for his 18 losses against Nadal?

http://www.tennisdvdwarehouse.com/2006_Wimb_NADALvBAGH.htm

You see the problem is Gonzales is easily a better player on clay than hard courts. Simply put, he is a better player on slower surfacrs but i bet you haven't even watched him enough to realise.

Fedex_the_best wrote:

amritia3ee wrote:

Fedex_the_best wrote:

Simple_Analyst wrote:Fedex is best so can you tell us what happened wheb Baghdatis met Nadal on 2006 grass.

Baggy played a shocker....His was miles away from the form that he displayed in his previous matches - I remember commentators saying that Baggy is injured.

I watched the match live mate- he wasn't injured. Not physically anyway. Let me guess was Federer also injured for his 18 losses against Nadal?

http://www.tennisdvdwarehouse.com/2006_Wimb_NADALvBAGH.htm

One journalist commenting 'his movement may have been hampered by injury' doesn't explain a straights sets loss. He didn't mention injury in his pre-conference injury unlike Fed in Wimby 2010.

Simple_Analyst wrote:Well he has just confirmed his ignorance si next. You know Fedex, youtube can help you a bit if you did not watch the match.

Same to you - do watch the AO 07 semis once. And I am sure as any Rafa fan, you did watch Baghdatis match against Nadal in that Wimbledon but you certainly dont know how Baggy plays and what levels he can reach, would you just try and watch some of his matches of hardcourts and grass earlier that year and see if he had some problems or not.

Titles won by Gonzo:
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Top-Players/Fernando-Gonzalez.aspx?t=tf


2009 (1) Vi±a del Mar (Outdoor/Clay)

2008 (2) Munich (Outdoor/Clay) , Vi±a del Mar (Outdoor/Clay)

2007 (1) Beijing (Outdoor/Hard)

2005 (3) Basel (Indoor/Carpet) , Amersfoort (Outdoor/Clay) , Auckland (Outdoor/Hard)

2004 (1) Vi±a del Mar (Outdoor/Clay)

2002 (2) Palermo (Outdoor/Clay) , Vina del Mar (Outdoor/Clay)

2000 (1) Orlando (Outdoor/Clay)

8/11 titles won on clay...

amritia3ee wrote:

Fedex_the_best wrote:

amritia3ee wrote:

Fedex_the_best wrote:

Simple_Analyst wrote:Fedex is best so can you tell us what happened wheb Baghdatis met Nadal on 2006 grass.

Baggy played a shocker....His was miles away from the form that he displayed in his previous matches - I remember commentators saying that Baggy is injured.

I watched the match live mate- he wasn't injured. Not physically anyway. Let me guess was Federer also injured for his 18 losses against Nadal?

http://www.tennisdvdwarehouse.com/2006_Wimb_NADALvBAGH.htm

One journalist commenting 'his movement may have been hampered by injury' doesn't explain a straights sets loss. He didn't mention injury in his pre-conference injury unlike Fed in Wimby 2010.

My humble request to both of you would be to just watch some of the tennis that Gonzo, Tsonga, Berdych have played on hard courts and just compare it with Nadal's showing on hard courts (other than 2010) and honestly tell me if you think Nadal playes better than them on hard courts or not? Will you do that please?

amritia3ee wrote:Titles won by Gonzo:
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Top-Players/Fernando-Gonzalez.aspx?t=tf


2009 (1) Vi±a del Mar (Outdoor/Clay)

2008 (2) Munich (Outdoor/Clay) , Vi±a del Mar (Outdoor/Clay)

2007 (1) Beijing (Outdoor/Hard)

2005 (3) Basel (Indoor/Carpet) , Amersfoort (Outdoor/Clay) , Auckland (Outdoor/Hard)

2004 (1) Vi±a del Mar (Outdoor/Clay)

2002 (2) Palermo (Outdoor/Clay) , Vina del Mar (Outdoor/Clay)

2000 (1) Orlando (Outdoor/Clay)

8/11 titles won on clay...

Nadal is much better than Gonzo on clay but at his best, Gonzo would destroy Nadal on hardcourts!

Nadal has more Grand Slams on HC than all of Gonzo, Tsonga, Berdych, Baghdatis, Ljubicic combined.

Sorry I dont agree Fedex...if both are at their absolute best I'd have to go with Nadal on HC every time. Beijing 2008 was probably as close as we can judge and we know the result there in a 5 set match, straights to Nadal.
For a HC demon, Gonzalez' record at AO and USO is pretty poor actually. He got to the latter stages of FO more often.
Nice forehand though...

Lydian
Logic sensible comments from you as usual.
Gonzalez was a good player but not great IMHO.

amritia3ee wrote:
Nadal has more Grand Slams on HC than all of Gonzo, Tsonga, Berdych, Baghdatis, Ljubicic combined.

Results - we all know that, right? I am genuinely asking you to watch tennis and not focus on results. And may be you will start appreciating the easy power of Berdych, touch at the net of Tsonga, variations on Fed's forehands and disaster of a talent of Gulbis.

May be you would start liking tennis and not Nadal alone and believe me, it is a wonderful sport.

'Easy power' 'touch at the net' 'variations' blah blah blah
But they still can't win Grand Slams or beat Nadal in Grand Slams 2008+.
In 2012 they might but not 2008-2011

The facts are very clear. Up to 2007, Nadal was good enough to beat Gonzo on clay...but not good enough to beat him on faster surfaces....despite being much fitter than the Chilean. Only by slowing teh courts down and becoming even stronger physically that he managed to extend his wins outside clay.

A simple truth Nadal fans don't want to hear about.

Tenez wrote:The facts are very clear. Up to 2007, Nadal was good enough to beat Gonzo on clay...but not good enough to beat him on faster surfaces....despite being much fitter than the Chilean. Only by slowing teh courts down and becoming even stronger physically that he managed to extend his wins outside clay.

A simple truth Nadal fans don't want to hear about.

Load of b*llshit

Firstly Nadal improved on Hard Court- you know just like Federer lost to Henman once but then improved.
Secondly in that case how did Nadal beat Federer in Miami 2004?
Of course we will get no reply from Tenez on this...

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.

amritia3ee wrote:
Load of b*llshit

Firstly Nadal improved on Hard Court- you know just like Federer lost to Henman once but then improved.
Secondly in that case how did Nadal beat Federer in Miami 2004?
Of course we will get no reply from Tenez on this...

As expected Tenez has nothing to say

Y I Man wrote:Red Pen time!

Stop having a go at eachother. Either debate in relative peace or not at all. Im sick and tired of the petty bickering. Any more and I get nasty. Understand?

Is it true that Tenez drove out all the Nadal fans earlier by using his aggressive means? I am hearing rumours that this is the case.