Hypothetically visualised battles - Best matches we could never have
So much of deliberations and discussions have always been going on in the world of tennis among fans to know who is the greatest of all times. Many tennis experts and players seemed to have reached a consensus, considering the all court game of Federer, that the Swiss Maestro deserves to be called so. A few have also disagreed with this verdict. There are many fans who are of the opinion even today that Sampras is the all time best. This seems to be a never ending debate. Due to their recent achievements, even Nadal and Djokovic have been pushed into the argument.
There are very little commonalities seen between the players of the last two decades and the current decade. Most of them have been serve and volleyers in the past, barring, ofcourse, a few like Borg and Lendl. The present set up consists of players who thrive primarily on the baseline game. So, I thought of putting on my thinking cap and deciding for myself the way a few of the matches would have gone if the present professionals were pitted against some of the former greats.
Doing so, I could come up with some of the very interesting matches. Taking into account the strengths and the weaknesses of the players, I have analysed and figured out what would be the outcome of those matches. Assuming that the chosen players play against each other 10 times on various surfaces, we will be ascertaining who would be leading the head to head.
Nadal vs Becker:
The first match, hypothetically chosen by me, is the one between Rafael Nadal and Boris Becker. Let me first brief as to what made me go for this confrontation in particular. Both Nadal and Boris are known to be very quick on their feet plus both of them have been used to hanging on for long on tennis courts. They have played matches which have lasted for more than four to five hours many a times. Besides, my desire to pit a pure baseliner up against an instinctive serve and volleyer gets perfectly fulfilled here.
First we will try to single out the strong and weak points of the players which would give an idea for us to come up with a conclusion.
Nadal:
Positive sides: Forehand top spin, Fetching abilities down the baseline, Keeping unforced errors to the minimum possible.
Negative sides: Unreliable and weaker double handed backhands, Weaker serves, Propensity to play longer points.
Becker:
Positive sides: Faster and well placed serves, Superior net game, Strong Forehands, Better return of serves.
Negative sides: Fragile single handed backhands, Less penetrative baseline game.
Possible results:
Clay:
The German has never won a French open title whereas Nadal has won it 7 times out of 8 attempts. So, in a court where serve and volley game hardly works, we cannot even imagine Becker surging ahead of the Spaniard. Not wasting much time and giving the verdict hands down in favour of Nadal (8-2), let me move to the other two surfaces.
Grass:
In Grass, there is not much to choose between the two. Becker has reigned supreme thrice in Wimbledon and Nadal has held the trophy twice so far. Now, it is time for us to determine who will prevail. I am forced to go mildly with Becker here. The German can serve big and can follow it up with a quick approach to the nets. The weaker backhands of Nadal here will find it harder to get the balls past Boris who is a penchant volleyer. Even though the forehands of Rafa are handy he requires a perfect bounce for executing them sharply. With Boris at the nets the ball will drop closely to the Spaniard which could cripple the latter’s ability to strike it harder. Plus Nadal’s weaker serves against a better return of serves of the German do not augur well for the Spaniard either. So, my verdict would be 6-4 in favour of Becker.
Hard Courts:
Becker is not used to play on the faster hard courts like what we are witnessing nowadays. However, that is not going to stop me from announcing my judgment. On harder courts, where the bounce is going to be more, the single handed back hand of Becker will be a liability whereas it would be just in the trajectory for Nadal to work with. The efficiency in the volley game will drop while patrolling on harder surfaces for the German. On a safer side, I go for a tie between the two on harder courts. The end result would be 5 all I presume.
Novak vs Pete:
Since Djoker is one of the best returners of the game and Sampras has one of the best serves in the game, I reckon the contest between the two would have been worth watching. As we have done earlier, we would discriminate them based on their pros and cons.
Novak:
Positive sides: Deep return of serves, Strong double handed backhands both ways, Attacking forehands, Fetching abilities
Negative sides: Weaker serves, staying too much on the baseline, ineffective net game.
Sampras:
Positive sides: Accurate and strong serves (both first and second), Timely Aces, Great running forehand, back hand cross court passing shots.
Negative sides: Unaccustomed to playing longer points from the baseline, Susceptible to playing rallies on one handed back hand.
Possible Results:
Clay:
Just I have done before, since the clay court game would suit Djoker’s game better, I am granting it in Serb’s favour (9-1) and I step ahead for grass courts, where the competition may be a bit healthy.
Grass:
Pistol Pete has seven Wimbledon titles in comparison to a lone title which is with Nole. I don’t believe in statistics but I rely on quality of the game. So, not relying totally on the number of Grand Slams won by the American, I contemplated deciding it based on the skills of both the players on grass. Even then, I had to go with the Greek-American simply because he has the best game for this surface. Nole can return well for sure but Sampras’ serves have always been untouchable as he serves so well on deuce courts. Even his second serves are delivered with the same amount of power as the first. With Pete in control, it will not be possible for Djoker to initiate rallies as the American is used to storm to the net every now and then. I prefer to give an upper hand in Sampras’ favour and the head to head might be 7-3 between them.
Hard courts:
The competition in harder courts will be much more interesting as compared to grass. In the current era, Nole is probably the best hard courter after Federer. In Sampras’ case, he has 2 Australian and 5 US open titles. That tightens the competition further. However, looking into the movements of Djokovic on harder courts and the two fold aggression that he shows, I thought I should go with the Serb. But again the game of the American, in my view, will not just suit Nole to adapt to his own style of approach. So, I adjudicate Pete to win the battle hands down 7-3 against the current world No.2.
Federer vs McEnroe:
The Swiss is regarded as the greatest player ever by John McEnroe, who himself was the best in his era by the way. While the former is a composed player, the latter is known for his boorish behaviour. So, how about bringing both against each other on courts? This is never going to happen in reality for sure and so let me envisage as to how the matches between the two would have transpired had it happened.
Federer:
Positive sides: Wider serves, All court play, One of the best forehands, Intelligent net game, All shots in the books, Back hand slice and flicks.
Negative Sides: Backhand errors, Casual return of serves at times.
McEnroe:
Positive sides: Being lefty, Supreme serves, Unbreakable net game.
Negative Sides: Prone to lose temper, one handed back hand
Possible Results:
Clay:
The contests on clay may not be as one sided as we have seen above where I had to go with Nadal and Djoker, without second thoughts. It is not that Federer is bad on clay but it is because McEnroe, unlike Sampras and Becker, was not very poor at it. At least Roger’s game would suit the American on clay because the former is not equipped to playing the grinding game. This would infact help McEnroe a bit but on a longer run, I think it is better to go with the Swiss. So, I expect Federer to prevail over his adversary 7-3.
Grass:
Like Sampras, though Federer has 7 Wimbledon titles and five at Halle, the head to head has to be determined only after carefully going through the pros and cons of the style of play of both the players. One should not forget that McEnroe has defeated Borg in Wimbledon which was not a mean thing to accomplish. A cool and composed Federer with his all court game can challenge the net game of the American though it is tough to get the balls go past him. But again Federer can hit passes from many different angles which can bamboozle the game of McEnroe. Also, the Swiss Maestro can adjust his game quickly by coming to the nets and confronting his rival face to face. Though he will not be able to match the best volleyer in the game shot for shot at the nets, the current World No.1 has more than one weapon to tackle anyone’s game, if it is not Nadal. I visualize the head to head in grass courts to go in favour of Federer 7-3.
Hard courts:
Again, McEnroe has not played much on harder courts in contrast to Federer. And the single handed back hand of his, especially being a south paw, will be a big drawback in the tracks with faster and bigger bounce. Fedex can adjust his game here better as the net game of McEnroe cannot be as consistent as it would have been in grass. I rule this contest, therefore, to go in Fed’s pocket 7-3.
Before concluding, I sum up putting forward the fictitiously inferred results before you.
Clay Grass Hard
Nadal vs Becker: 1-0 0-1 1-1 (Tie)
Novak vs Pete: 1-0 0-1 0-1 (Old generation rules)
Federer vs Mcenroe : 1-0 1-0 1-0 (New generation rules)
Seeing the above results, I think we have ended in a stale mate. Both baseline and net games have reached a break – even level. Probably I should go for one more. But I feel it is better to stop with it because it is always nice to go for a compromise rather than go about fighting endlessly isn’t it?