PDA

View Full Version : if Justine is female Federer, whom should other top players be?


Slumpsova
Nov 20th, 2006, 07:49 AM
me thinks

Maria - Roddick
Amelie - Nalby
Lindsay - Agassi
Nicole - Tomas Berdych :drool:

LoveFifteen
Nov 20th, 2006, 07:51 AM
Sam Stosur is the female Billie Jean King.

jas_aussie
Nov 20th, 2006, 07:59 AM
Sam Stosur is the female Billie Jean King.

why are you so mean to stosur??

Kunal
Nov 20th, 2006, 08:15 AM
reality check.....there is nobody in the womens field right now...who can be a female federer....justine does not stack up

BUBI
Nov 20th, 2006, 08:49 AM
:lol:

Mauresmo - Haas
Dementieva - Nieminen

Slumpsova
Nov 20th, 2006, 09:03 AM
reality check.....there is nobody in the womens field right now...who can be a female federer....justine does not stack up
you seem to not understand the IF clause :rolleyes:

Sharakim
Nov 20th, 2006, 09:11 AM
Maria Sharapova
Mental: Rafa Nadal
Game: Andy Roddick

Ameile Mauresmo
Mental: David Nalbandian
Game: David Nalbandian

Lindsay Davenport
Mental: Goran Ivanesvic
Game: Marat Safin

azmad_88
Nov 20th, 2006, 09:12 AM
nalbandian = dementieva

horrible serve but great grounds...only have like 5/6 titiles...both under yonex sponsorship...have this sudden losses to player ranked below them...

MrSerenaWilliams
Nov 20th, 2006, 09:13 AM
Serena is the female Safin, although she's done more.

Kunal
Nov 20th, 2006, 09:45 AM
serena is not the female safin...although i see what u are tryna get to ....

their games are lethal and all conquering....when they are playing their best tennis

Ben.
Nov 20th, 2006, 10:09 AM
why are you so mean to stosur??

he's being an idiot, honestly :rolleyes:

these comparisons i reckon r just plain silly & ridiculous if u ask me.

die_wahrheit
Nov 20th, 2006, 10:35 AM
Haas is the female version of Mauresmo

rottweily
Nov 20th, 2006, 10:42 AM
Haas is the female version of Mauresmo

A bit rude, but I admit I was ROTFLMAO.

Lindsayfan32
Nov 20th, 2006, 11:03 AM
Lindsay Davenport
Mental: Goran Ivanesvic
Game: Marat Safin

Has the game of Marat Safin but the mental side Goran Ivanesvic I've followed Lindsay for most of her career and I can't recall her being defaulted from a match because she ran out of equipment to finish the match with. Come on she not in Goran league as far as being a head case concerned.

Shoulderpova
Nov 20th, 2006, 11:20 AM
Sharapova is much better than Roddick
Mauresmo is way much better than Nalbandian
lame comparisons :)

Sam L
Nov 20th, 2006, 11:24 AM
Sam Stosur is the female Billie Jean King.

:haha:

LoveFifteen
Nov 20th, 2006, 11:54 AM
why are you so mean to stosur??

he's being an idiot, honestly

these comparisons i reckon r just plain silly & ridiculous if u ask me.

I was making fun of Billie Jean King, not Stosur, you hypersensitive, unintelligent loveable Aussies!

zakketiello
Nov 20th, 2006, 01:16 PM
Ivanovic-Berdich
Hingis-Coria
Schnyder-Nadal:rolleyes:

nikita771
Nov 20th, 2006, 01:18 PM
reality check.....there is nobody in the womens field right now...who can be a female federer....justine does not stack up

I agree. I don't even think about Justine or anyone when I think of my guy Federer at this time. He is untouchable by any other man or woman.

Kunal
Nov 20th, 2006, 02:00 PM
Haas is the female version of Mauresmo

im not sure who that is an insult to...tbh

Kunal
Nov 20th, 2006, 02:01 PM
I agree. I don't even think about Justine or anyone when I think of my guy Federer at this time. He is untouchable by any other man or woman.

i never thought that pete sampras's record could be broken....he was my favorite player.....and soon enough....federer comes to the stage.....if he goes on like this he will be setting standards as high as tiger woods....

they are both amazing athletes in this era....

vutt
Nov 20th, 2006, 02:02 PM
Serena is the female Safin, although she's done more.

...and girls like more Safin than boys Serena!

vutt
Nov 20th, 2006, 02:04 PM
...federer comes to the stage.....if he goes on like this he will be setting standards as high as tiger woods....

they are both amazing athletes in this era....

golf and athlete in one sentence :tape:

Stamp Paid
Nov 20th, 2006, 02:10 PM
...and girls like more Safin than boys Serena!

:confused:

Sam L
Nov 20th, 2006, 02:19 PM
:confused:
Meaning Safin is more popular with the opposite sex than Serena is with hers. Fact.

matthias
Nov 20th, 2006, 02:22 PM
Schnyder is Davidenko
Davidenk is Schnyder

(number of tournaments)

Stamp Paid
Nov 20th, 2006, 02:24 PM
Meaning Safin is more popular with the opposite sex than Serena is with hers. Fact.

He/She can speak for him/herself, thanks. :weirdo:

Shoulderpova
Nov 20th, 2006, 02:27 PM
Schnyder is Davidenko
Davidenk is Schnyder

(number of tournaments)

Who is Davidenko? :confused: If you refer to current number 3 in the world then his name is Nikolay Davydenko. And for your information he won 5 titles this season(including 1 TMS title) and got to Shanghai as well. How many titles did Schnyder win this year? :rolleyes:

Dexter
Nov 20th, 2006, 02:31 PM
Who is Davidenko? :confused: If you refer to current number 3 in the world then his name is Nikolay Davydenko. And for your information he won 5 titles this season(including 1 TMS title) and got to Shanghai as well. How many titles did Schnyder win this year? :rolleyes:Kolya = Nadia. Both playing 36347347 tournaments per year. :yawn: :rolleyes:

Shoulderpova
Nov 20th, 2006, 02:38 PM
Kolya = Nadia. Both playing 36347347 tournaments per year. :yawn: :rolleyes:

Kolya :hearts: Nadia :hearts:

spencercarlos
Nov 20th, 2006, 02:41 PM
Who is Davidenko? :confused: If you refer to current number 3 in the world then his name is Nikolay Davydenko. And for your information he won 5 titles this season(including 1 TMS title) and got to Shanghai as well. How many titles did Schnyder win this year? :rolleyes:
No need to bash Mathias for the writing, and i find even more ridiculous your wyne and compare the two players with the acomplisments for the year when he clearly stated "(number of tournaments)" as the point of comparisson... you are blind or what :rolleyes:

tenn_ace
Nov 20th, 2006, 02:44 PM
Sveta=Federer 4 years ago :drool:

she just needs a little more time to develop :bounce:

fufuqifuqishahah
Nov 20th, 2006, 02:45 PM
people r so nasty on this thread lol

its so hard to compare any man to woman... the games are so much different.

Shoulderpova
Nov 20th, 2006, 02:49 PM
No need to bash Mathias for the writing, and i find even more ridiculous your wyne and compare the two players with the acomplisments for the year when he clearly stated "(number of tournaments)" as the point of comparisson... you are blind or what :rolleyes:

no, i'm short-sighted but not blind. I was just trying to point out the obvious: Davydenko is better than Schnyder in every department :angel:

spencercarlos
Nov 20th, 2006, 02:50 PM
people r so nasty on this thread lol

its so hard to compare any man to woman... the games are so much different.
I find it really ridiculous, somehow how people can compare Davenport with Agassi, when we know Agassi is a WAY better mover for the men than Lindsay is for the women. Not even mention anticipation. :rolleyes:

spencercarlos
Nov 20th, 2006, 02:51 PM
no, i'm short-sighted but not blind. I was just trying to point out the obvious: Davydenko is better than Schnyder in every department :angel:
Yet again the point of comparisson was # of events played for the year, he never mentioned an analogy about their respective results, you are still blind.

thrust
Nov 20th, 2006, 02:59 PM
To be compared to BJK, as a tennis player, is praise of the highest order. I think we are talkin game styles here, not accomplishments. Therefore, I would say that: Justine-Roger, Lindsay-Andre, Amelie-Haas, Maria-Andy are good comparisons.

Sam L
Nov 20th, 2006, 03:06 PM
He/She can speak for him/herself, thanks. :weirdo:

:rolleyes: Don't give me attitude.

matthias
Nov 20th, 2006, 03:07 PM
i'm blind or not it has nothing to do with you you fucking stupid moron :rolleyes: shut the fuck up and piss off. i was trying to arrive at a compromise. you have no business interferring my problem anyway. so get lost :wavey:

you have really problems, you taking this thread way to serious

fufuqifuqishahah
Nov 20th, 2006, 03:08 PM
To be compared to BJK, as a tennis player, is praise of the highest order. I think we are talkin game styles here, not accomplishments. Therefore, I would say that: Justine-Roger, Lindsay-Andre, Amelie-Haas, Maria-Andy are good comparisons.

they are poor comparisons... RELATIVELY good ones??? maybe, but still rather inadequate.

Shoulderpova
Nov 20th, 2006, 03:10 PM
you have really problems, you taking this thread way to serious

if you think so :)

fufuqifuqishahah
Nov 20th, 2006, 03:13 PM
if you think so :)

not that she's taking the thread itself so serious....

rusik is just upset cuz people are attackig him/her

s/he doesn't feel like s/he has to come on to the thread just to be attacked lol

i think wtaworld can be very nasty and unpleasant to me & other people sometimes.

Shoulderpova
Nov 20th, 2006, 03:15 PM
I'm HE :tape:

Shoulderpova
Nov 20th, 2006, 03:19 PM
if someone got angry with me, it has to be matthias. but that moron spencercarlos came and tried to stir up the shit :rolleyes:

matthias
Nov 20th, 2006, 03:35 PM
if someone got angry with me, it has to be matthias.

why me? just because you didnīt liked my replay to the thread? i can handle it.

but you called spencercarlos "you fucking stupid moron" so i think he can be angry with you.

Shoulderpova
Nov 20th, 2006, 03:40 PM
why me? just because you didnīt liked my replay to the thread? i can handle it.

but you called spencercarlos "you fucking stupid moron" so i think he can be angry with you.

yes i didn't :angel: but you have the right to get angry, not that poster from venezuela. of course i mean att he first place ;)

Slumpsova
Nov 20th, 2006, 04:01 PM
you have really problems, you taking this thread way to serious
tell me about it :haha:

vejh
Nov 20th, 2006, 04:22 PM
Amelie-Gasquet
Sveta-Nadal

barmaid
Nov 20th, 2006, 04:27 PM
If you're making comparisons between how a male and female play the game of tennis...they should at least exhibit the same style of play. For me, Martina Hingis is the one female who plays like Federer...not Justine...Justine's counterpart would be a player like Lleyton Hewitt who plays with a lot of fire and fight..and he yells his "come on" like Juju yells her "Allez"....Martina's talents and skills on the court are reflected in Roger's game ..and vice-versa..they both exhibit smooth and effortless motion on the court..they are artistic and have a lot of variety in their game...to quote Mary Carillo "There's something about the Swiss"....:worship: :hearts: Maria Sharapova looks like Joachim Johannsen..very tall and blonde with small cute features so for the physical reasons alone I'd compare the two...Maria is more successful but Joachim is a talented tennis player as well. :kiss: :hearts:

barmaid:wavey:

Craigy
Nov 20th, 2006, 04:28 PM
Serena - Tursunov :lol:

Apoleb
Nov 20th, 2006, 04:31 PM
For me, Martina Hingis is the one female who plays like Federer.

:haha: :weirdo:

Warriorroger
Nov 20th, 2006, 04:37 PM
Federer is the male improved version of Steffi Graf/

spencercarlos
Nov 20th, 2006, 04:50 PM
yes i didn't :angel: but you have the right to get angry, not that poster from venezuela. of course i mean att he first place ;)
This poster from Venezuela, thinks that you a poster from Russia are retarded because not only that you keep arguing about something that was NEVER said by Mathias (Schnyder similar to Davydenko for the year`s acomplishments) :rolleyes: , but also because i reminded you of this and instead of acepting your stupid mistake you opted to insult me and kept arguing with no reason.
:wavey:

ViennaCalling
Nov 20th, 2006, 05:06 PM
Justine is female Federer? :spit:

:haha: How weird :tape:

Lefty.
Nov 20th, 2006, 05:33 PM
Apart from movement, Nadal is somewhat like Sharapova. The over the head forehand, the backhand is the generally more technically sound side, and both are very very intense on court. (Not to mention that he's a righty turned lefty and she's a lefty turned righty)

DavyJone96431
Nov 20th, 2006, 05:39 PM
interesting

The Dawntreader
Nov 20th, 2006, 05:41 PM
I liken Venus to Blake at times, although she has the better groundstrokes and much more aggressive movement:worship:

harloo
Nov 20th, 2006, 05:44 PM
Justine or Martina's game should NEVER be compared to Federer. Some people need to stop with the comparison because that man is in a league of his own. UNTOUCHABLE!!!

King ROGER!:worship: :worship:

fufuqifuqishahah
Nov 20th, 2006, 07:41 PM
Apart from movement, Nadal is somewhat like Sharapova. The over the head forehand, the backhand is the generally more technically sound side, and both are very very intense on court. (Not to mention that he's a righty turned lefty and she's a lefty turned righty)

and apart from top spin on strokes and angles used

fufuqifuqishahah
Nov 20th, 2006, 07:42 PM
I liken Venus to Blake at times, although she has the better groundstrokes and much more aggressive movement:worship:

and is more inconsistent and has a better backhand to forehand ratio and has more top spin on her shots and has amazing reach

QUEENLINDSAY
Nov 20th, 2006, 07:51 PM
I find it really ridiculous, somehow how people can compare Davenport with Agassi, when we know Agassi is a WAY better mover for the men than Lindsay is for the women. Not even mention anticipation. :rolleyes:
Agassi is lucky to be compared to Lindsay;s serve and grounstrokes as Lindsay in refernence to WTA.

Agassi's serve in ATP is like Mykina!

LefandePatty
Nov 20th, 2006, 07:58 PM
Patty Schnyder - Gaston Gaudio

The Daviator
Nov 20th, 2006, 07:59 PM
Maria Sharapova
Mental: Rafa Nadal
Game: Andy Roddick

Ameile Mauresmo
Mental: David Nalbandian
Game: David Nalbandian

Lindsay Davenport
Mental: Goran Ivanesvic
Game: Marat Safin

I totally agree with this :yeah: On both counts :lol: I'd actually maybe compare Lindsay to Safin in BOTH mental and game, Marat also looks like he doesn't give a damn at times :p

I can never understand why people always compare Lindsay to Agassi? :confused: Yeah, they both have great groundstrokes, but Lindsay's game is much more serve-orientated and she can actually volley :tape:

Beny
Nov 20th, 2006, 08:17 PM
nalbandian = dementieva

horrible serve but great grounds...only have like 5/6 titiles...both under yonex sponsorship...have this sudden losses to player ranked below them...

I definitely agree.
I saw Hewitt-nalbandian AO2005 and Nalbandian`s serve was :o :o :o no weapon at all....so weaaaaaaaaak...yes plus those racquets

I would compare Lena to Aggasi..because of that BH:drool: the head of racquet is some kind of up when they hit the ball..special holding:)

Beny
Nov 20th, 2006, 08:18 PM
LeFande..you`re right..
I add Patty=Nadal=Gaudio

Patty=Nadal... a smart, the smartest left hand ever..they can both hit :kiss: shots like no other
Patty=Gaudio..some kind of defenders, great strokes, clay-courters...
Nadal=Gaudio

spencercarlos
Nov 20th, 2006, 09:15 PM
Agassi is lucky to be compared to Lindsay;s serve and grounstrokes as Lindsay in refernence to WTA.

Agassi's serve in ATP is like Mykina!
Donīt be stupid, Agassi is one of the greatest strikers of the ball in mens tennis ever, just like Lindsay is for the women.
Your comparisson of Agassiīs serve to Myskinaīs just shows how poor ignorant you are, even more when you should know that in mens tennis the serve is WAY more important than for the womenīs, and its not like Agassi bought his 8 grand slams in a store or took them at expenses of breaking serve because his serve was broken a lot. :rolleyes:

As i have stated before Tood Martin= Lindsay Davenport . Tecnically and movement wise pretty similar.. period... but Lindsay canīt be compared to someone who hit the ball and moved and anticipated as great as Agassi..

QUEENLINDSAY
Nov 20th, 2006, 09:43 PM
Don´t be stupid, Agassi is one of the greatest strikers of the ball in mens tennis ever, just like Lindsay is for the women.
Your comparisson of Agassi´s serve to Myskina´s just shows how poor ignorant you are, even more when you should know that in mens tennis the serve is WAY more important than for the women´s, and its not like Agassi bought his 8 grand slams in a store or took them at expenses of breaking serve because his serve was broken a lot. :rolleyes:

As i have stated before Tood Martin= Lindsay Davenport . Tecnically and movement wise pretty similar.. period... but Lindsay can´t be compared to someone who hit the ball and moved and anticipated as great as Agassi..
You are the one acting stupid and ignorant.

Lindsay could actually volley and had a career in doubles. She is one of the best servers on tours and Agassi is not a good server if you compare him to his generation of top players like Sampras and Rafter.

Im not diminishing Agassi's achievement, as you dissed Lindsay when she was being compared to her. Agassi should be flattered instead your claim and Lindsay vise versa.

I only respond stupid to stupid comments like you did first.

Lindsay is comparable to Todd Martin only with regards to leadership and brain. Gamewise, Lindsay is more of a factor in WTA than Todd Martin in ATP. Way way way more factor.

SIN DIOS NI LEY
Nov 20th, 2006, 09:48 PM
Kim Clijsters = Lleyton Hewitt .

Nadia Petrova = Kolya Davydenko ... number 3 of the world as best ranking without GS final

Mightymirza
Nov 20th, 2006, 09:51 PM
Roddick hardly has a BH :p..His slice is good tho but Sharpys slice :tape: But sharpy hits her BH much better than Roddick anyday!!

MrSerenaWilliams
Nov 20th, 2006, 09:52 PM
Meaning Safin is more popular with the opposite sex than Serena is with hers. Fact.

He/She can speak for him/herself, thanks. :weirdo:


Exactly, not everyone thinks Nicole Kidman and Carrie Underwood are gorgeous...it's all about preference. :wavey:

timafi
Nov 20th, 2006, 10:32 PM
Ame/Nalbandian:lol: :lol:
David would give his right nut to have Mauresmo's career:tape: :tape:
David's backhand is better than Andy R and Ame backhand>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>David/Andy's backhand by a mile:worship: :worship:

spencercarlos
Nov 20th, 2006, 11:50 PM
She is one of the best servers on tours and Agassi is not a good server if you compare him to his generation of top players like Sampras and Rafter.

Ok now if you tell me that Lindsay is one of the best servers for the womens while Agassi is not on that top of the list that`s a point, but to say Agassi`s serve on the mens tour is the equivalent of Myskina`s serve for the women, which was your initial statement that`s what i consider beyond the ridiculous and INGNORANT.

Lindsay is indeed a great server no doubt, but Agassi is not a weak server either which was my point.


Lindsay could actually volley and had a career in doubles.
Add Lindsay`s singles and doubles carreer and she does not even get to half of Agassi`s acomplishments for the mens :lol:
And don`t come here and tell me that Lindsay`s number one finishes in 2001, 2004 and 2005 mean more than Agassi`s complete grand slam, and 8 grand slams in total.

Im not diminishing Agassi's achievement, as you dissed Lindsay when she was being compared to her. Agassi should be flattered instead your claim and Lindsay vise versa.

No you dissed Andre by saying his serve was a bad for the mens as Myskina :lol: very ignorant to say the least.
You are trying to diminish Agassi`s achievements, but you will fail time after time because Andre`s slam count i WAY WAY WAYYYY better than Lindsay :tape:

I only respond stupid to stupid comments like you did first.

My initial comment was that Andre Agassi, a great mover, with great anticipation should never be put to an analogy beside a player like Davenport, because it does not make sense :help: Period.

You can put Davenport in counterpart with a player with great groundstrokes but with a poor movement, because that`s all what Lindsay`s got in that department. Lets not even mention anticipation and ability to return big serves.:tape:

That being said both are great champions indeed and i like a lot both, but to say they have similar games? No sorry :tape:

The Daviator
Nov 20th, 2006, 11:59 PM
^

Why are you creating a Davenport v Agassi discussion? Who said she's got a better record? QL said Lindsay was a better volleyer (which is true) and you start talking about how Agassi has achieved way more? :confused:

Also, QL agrees that they shouldn't be compared, read his posts :lol:

IceHock
Nov 20th, 2006, 11:59 PM
I liken Venus to Blake at times, although she has the better groundstrokes and much more aggressive movement:worship:


Blake is faster, has a way better forehnad, can volley better.

spencercarlos
Nov 21st, 2006, 12:18 AM
^

Why are you creating a Davenport v Agassi discussion? Who said she's got a better record? QL said Lindsay was a better volleyer (which is true) and you start talking about how Agassi has achieved way more? :confused:

Also, QL agrees that they shouldn't be compared, read his posts :lol:
Lindsay can volley, but will you actually tell me when wins her matches from there? :lol:
Lindsay is a complete player IMO, but Agassi had everything on the package as well, despite not having a great volley, he knew how and when to get in to end a point, in a way similar to Lindsay who would get there only after a big grounstroke to end the point.
Not even to talk how Agassi could play with the short court, whereares Lindsay was always hopeless mainly because of her movement.

And for QL i did not read the part where he said they could not be compared, but what i read was this

"Agassi is lucky to be compared to Lindsay;s serve and grounstrokes as Lindsay in refernence to WTA.

Agassi's serve in ATP is like Mykina!"

which is completly bullsht because everybody knows that Agassi had the better carreer and was a biger icon for tennis than Lindsay, that to talk about the lucky part and for the analogy of Agassi´s serve to Myskina.. oh well :tape: no more comments.

The Daviator
Nov 21st, 2006, 12:21 AM
Lindsay can volley, but will you actually tell me when wins her matches from there? :lol:
Lindsay is a complete player IMO, but Agassi had everything on the package as well, despite not having a great volley, he knew how and when to get in to end a point, in a way similar to Lindsay who would get there only after a big grounstroke to end the point.
Not even to talk how Agassi could play with the short court, whereares Lindsay was always hopeless mainly because of her movement.

And for QL i did not read the part where he said they could not be compared, but what i read was this

"Agassi is lucky to be compared to Lindsay;s serve and grounstrokes as Lindsay in refernence to WTA.

Agassi's serve in ATP is like Mykina!"

which is completly bullsht because everybody knows that Agassi had the better carreer and was a biger icon for tennis than Lindsay, that to talk about the lucky part and for the analogy of Agassiīs serve to Myskina.. oh well :tape: no more comments.

It goes without saying that Agassi has a better record, no-one is saying otherwise :)

The Myskina comparison is crazy though, I agree :lol:

shap_half
Nov 21st, 2006, 12:56 AM
I agree. I don't even think about Justine or anyone when I think of my guy Federer at this time. He is untouchable by any other man or woman.

I think if Justine hadn't gotten sick in '04, Justine would be dominating women's tennis, and the comparison would be reversed.

Oh, the IFs... :(

Mightymirza
Nov 21st, 2006, 01:23 AM
Agassis serve like myskina :lol: LMAO

anlavalle
Nov 21st, 2006, 03:07 AM
Amelie`s game is not like nalby`s, come on :help:
i think amelie`s game is more like tommy haas or tim henman or even gasquet, all beautiful to watch

LUIS9
Nov 21st, 2006, 05:08 AM
reality check.....there is nobody in the womens field right now...who can be a female federer....justine does not stack up

Correct!!!!!! Henin comes the closest in terms of all around game and aggresive style. Hingis has all the shots except she can't hit winners at will like Roger.

LUIS9
Nov 21st, 2006, 05:10 AM
nalbandian = dementieva

horrible serve but great grounds...only have like 5/6 titiles...both under yonex sponsorship...have this sudden losses to player ranked below them...

Spot on. Except that Nalbi's best shot is his backhand lovely shot by the way and Dementieva's best shot is her forehand. Neither has a weak forehand or backhand respectively but those shots can be vulnerable and can get ovepowered at times.

LUIS9
Nov 21st, 2006, 05:22 AM
Federer is the male improved version of Steffi Graf/

He's not quite there but he's getting to the Graf type of status as a tennis player. He's still to make another 6 or 7 straight grand slam finals and and win 2 or three of those to reach Graf status. She made like 13 straight slam finals from 1987 Roland I believe and won like 9 or so of them. Besides she had win loss percentages for a year of 97% a couple of times. Roger's Highest was 95% last year in '05 and close enough this year with 94.80% in '06.

While it seems like he's getting there he still has the Seles in Nadal to contend with; he still has not completely figured him out like Graf did overall over Seles. Moreover Roland Garros and therefore winning the career slam, or even a Grand slam within a year is still something he needs to achieve to reach Graf status. Nevertheless yes he is close.

QUEENLINDSAY
Nov 21st, 2006, 06:13 AM
Ok now if you tell me that Lindsay is one of the best servers for the womens while Agassi is not on that top of the list that`s a point, but to say Agassi`s serve on the mens tour is the equivalent of Myskina`s serve for the women, which was your initial statement that`s what i consider beyond the ridiculous and INGNORANT.

Lindsay is indeed a great server no doubt, but Agassi is not a weak server either which was my point.



Add Lindsay`s singles and doubles carreer and she does not even get to half of Agassi`s acomplishments for the mens :lol:
And don`t come here and tell me that Lindsay`s number one finishes in 2001, 2004 and 2005 mean more than Agassi`s complete grand slam, and 8 grand slams in total.


No you dissed Andre by saying his serve was a bad for the mens as Myskina :lol: very ignorant to say the least.
You are trying to diminish Agassi`s achievements, but you will fail time after time because Andre`s slam count i WAY WAY WAYYYY better than Lindsay :tape:


My initial comment was that Andre Agassi, a great mover, with great anticipation should never be put to an analogy beside a player like Davenport, because it does not make sense :help: Period.

You can put Davenport in counterpart with a player with great groundstrokes but with a poor movement, because that`s all what Lindsay`s got in that department. Lets not even mention anticipation and ability to return big serves.:tape:

That being said both are great champions indeed and i like a lot both, but to say they have similar games? No sorry :tape:

:tape: you are such a head case
I'm not the first one who cries with the comparison.
My first point was there's no way Agassi would be dissed becaused she was being compared to Lindsay in which Im opposing to your statement.

Comparing his serve to Myskina was more of an exageration to say what Lindsay has and which Agaasi has'nt.

I did say also that no one is lucky nor insulted if ever they will be compared.

Dont exagerate things with Agassi's accomplishment for they dont belong on the same league, different opponents. By the way, Agassi singles titles is only 60, so if you double lindsays 51 singles and 31 doubles is way too much. i did'nt include the mixed titles.

Again, you tried to dissed Lindsays return game which is obsolutely obsurd and pointless. Agassi's serve is average and not even belong in the top 10 of ATP, That;s his weakness actually. Lindsay's movement was overly criticized and used to dissed her achievement, while the fact is, with her long arms and reach, she can smack her racket on your face while you watch in the side court acting like that stupid.

Yes, Agassi is more of a legend because he was a star! even a bigger star than Sampras, though Pete is the better tennis player. Being a star does'nt translates into bigger tennis game.

I like Agassi too and I respect him, but to cry like a ****** when he was being compared to Lindsay is IGNORANT and STUPID!!!!

AGASSI accomplished more in his career, not by a mile but to compare them is fair and not an insult as you are implying with your first ignorant reply.

fufuqifuqishahah
Nov 21st, 2006, 06:16 AM
Agassis serve like myskina :lol: LMAO

heheoheoheo

cracks me up

fufuqifuqishahah
Nov 21st, 2006, 06:18 AM
I think if Justine hadn't gotten sick in '04, Justine would be dominating women's tennis, and the comparison would be reversed.

Oh, the IFs... :(

u cant assume that, cuz then u'd have to assume that for serena, venus, etc.

QUEENLINDSAY
Nov 21st, 2006, 07:11 PM
can we actually compare Justine to Guga?

Both clay court specialist.
Smaller body frames compare to their rivals.
Both can be over powered, though Justine works hard a lot on her power game better than Guga.

Guga may have not won as much as Justine but he sure can do damage on any surface at his peak time if only he did'nt got injured.

AJZ.
Nov 21st, 2006, 07:18 PM
Ai and Max Mirnyi are similar, not in game but in achievements (a few Doubles Slams, a few good Slam results, etc.)

In game, well... there aren't many that play like Ai on ATP!

Stamp Paid
Nov 21st, 2006, 08:10 PM
I think if Justine hadn't gotten sick in '04, Justine would be dominating women's tennis, and the comparison would be reversed.

Oh, the IFs... :(

And if Serena hadn't gotten injured in '03, I could say the same.
Unfortunately none of our faves will have done as well as they could have. :(

urock34
Nov 29th, 2006, 12:53 PM
i think serena is the female version of agassi. even though agassi has gotten lots more success serena still hasnt reached her potential. both showed up with fashion statements with image is everything. and they both came out on tour with huge returns and they both use oversize rackets

athake
Nov 29th, 2006, 01:20 PM
Goran Ivanisevic-Maria Sharapova

:)

oliverbecken
Nov 29th, 2006, 02:27 PM
Srebotnik-Gaudio

oliverbecken
Nov 29th, 2006, 02:28 PM
Srebotnik-Gaudio

oliverbecken
Nov 29th, 2006, 02:29 PM
Srebotnik-Gaudio

oliverbecken
Nov 29th, 2006, 02:29 PM
Srebotnik-Gaudio

ioni
Nov 29th, 2006, 04:05 PM
^
:bolt: ^^^ :eek:

ioni
Nov 29th, 2006, 04:09 PM
:scratch: i think i just found a way to make more v-cash just post the same thing like 4 or 5 times who knows maybe 200 times :lol: :lol:

shap_half
Nov 29th, 2006, 07:52 PM
u cant assume that, cuz then u'd have to assume that for serena, venus, etc.

Actually no. Noone ever compares Venus or Serena to Roger. So I don't know what you're talking about.

Stamp Paid
Nov 29th, 2006, 08:29 PM
Actually no. Noone ever compares Venus or Serena to Roger. So I don't know what you're talking about.

No one ever truly compares Justine to Roger either (the thread starter was :weirdo: ), whether it be game-wise or legacy wise. The only way that they are similar is that they both have 1 handed backhands.

And Serena was having much more Roger like dominance in 02-03 before she had surgery (5 out of 6 grandslams) than Justine ever did, even in 2004.

Apoleb
Nov 29th, 2006, 08:33 PM
No one ever truly compares Justine to Roger either (the thread starter was ), whether it be game-wise or legacy wise. The only way that they are similar is that they both have 1 handed backhands.


Really? John McEnroe made the comparison, as well as David Mercer who's currently a Eurosport commentator, and previously was a chair umpire. I'm sure those two understand tennis better than half the people here on WTA world. Other fans just have to live with the comparison, and keep their blood pressure low. :lol: Ofcourse they have a similar game, and it's not only that they have a one handed backhand. :haha:

cheyk
Nov 29th, 2006, 08:44 PM
Sam Stosur is the female Billie Jean King.
:haha: :haha: :haha:

MisterQ
Nov 29th, 2006, 08:45 PM
I always thought there were a lot of comparisons to be made between Seles and Agassi, particularly in the early 90s.

Both took aggressive baseline play to a new level off both sides. They took the ball earlier than anyone else on their respective tours and hit the ball hard, dictating from the center of the court. Their returns were deadly. They were both accused of one-dimensionality, but they were extraordinary at that dimension. Their net play was poor, their serves were nothing to write home about, but no one could rival their precision and the way they saw the ball. They were both quick to react and had good anticipation, and by hugging the baseline they were able to compensate for deficiencies in raw footspeed and fitness.

cheyk
Nov 29th, 2006, 08:45 PM
Haas is the female version of Mauresmo
:haha: :haha: :haha:

LH2HBH
Nov 29th, 2006, 09:01 PM
REASONS JUSTINE & ROGER ARE SIMILAR

1. Both have an all-court game with great court sense and anticipation!
2. Both possess a dazzling one-handed backhand.
3. Both win points often with dazzling, unexpected shots.
4. Both are multiple slam winners.
5. Both are #1 in the world.

Justine is not dominating the field. Also she excels on the slower surfaces whereas Roger is a little better on the quicker surfaces. These are the only reasons I can think of them as different!

Justine Fan
Nov 29th, 2006, 10:48 PM
Really? John McEnroe made the comparison, as well as David Mercer who's currently a Eurosport commentator, and previously was a chair umpire. I'm sure those two understand tennis better than half the people here on WTA world. Other fans just have to live with the comparison, and keep their blood pressure low. :lol: Ofcourse they have a similar game, and it's not only that they have a one handed backhand. :haha:

Surely "King and some of the WTAWorld posters" know more than Johnny Mac and David Mercer ... oh and Sam Smith and Jo Durie, two more Eurosport commentators and ex-professional tennis players? :haha: :haha: :rolleyes:

It just goes to show that King et al know absolutely "sweet FA" and just talk out of their azz for the sake of it! :haha: :haha: I bet he/she only started watching tennis because of Vee & Ree! :lol: :lol:

LH2HBH
Nov 29th, 2006, 10:53 PM
Another reason they are different...

Roger is known for great sportsmanship.

vejh
Nov 29th, 2006, 11:04 PM
I don't think Roger's known for great sportsmanship more than most on the ATP tour..

Justine Fan
Nov 30th, 2006, 12:04 AM
Obviously UNESCO know absolutely nothing :rolleyes:

faste5683
Nov 30th, 2006, 01:04 AM
No one ever truly compares Justine to Roger either (the thread starter was :weirdo: ), whether it be game-wise or legacy wise. The only way that they are similar is that they both have 1 handed backhands.


Justine is also similar to Rodger in that she has an all court game, can serve and volley, is terrific at the net and has an uncanny overhead. Other than that, yeah, it's just the backhands...

:wavey:

Nico_E
Nov 30th, 2006, 01:31 AM
i still wouldnt compare Henin as Roger Federer is classy on and offthe court.

Mauresmo is like a female federer to me.

henin=nadal.

serena williams= roddick

MisterQ
Nov 30th, 2006, 01:37 AM
When Nalbandian is playing well, he can take on a Hingis quality -- not very powerful but very precise and consistent, with great counterpunching as well as the ability to throw in delicious drop shots and slices at unexpected moments.

Nico_E
Nov 30th, 2006, 01:47 AM
I don't think Roger's known for great sportsmanship more than most on the ATP tour..??
he has won the sportsmanship award for the last 2 or 3 years - voted by his peers.

Stamp Paid
Nov 30th, 2006, 02:42 AM
Justine is also similar to Rodger in that she has an all court game, can serve and volley, is terrific at the net and has an uncanny overhead. Other than that, yeah, it's just the backhands...

:wavey:

Well for every similarity there is an equal difference. Roger is forehand dominant, Henin is backhand dominant. Roger is dominant on serve, Henin is not. Roger's worst surface is clay - Justines favorite surface is clay. Roger dominates his sport - Justine does not. Roger's best surface is grass (4 Wimbledons) - Justine's only grass titles are Eastbourne (II)and 'S-Hertogenbosch (III).

Lets not mention the character differences. ;)

What I mean is, there is no professional woman tennis player who is a suitable equivalent female version of Roger Federer.

:wavey:
Every way you described that Justine is similar to Federer, Mauresmo is too. Why do we never hear the Mauresmo/Federer comparisons?

!<blocparty>!
Nov 30th, 2006, 03:01 AM
Myskina - Davydenko -- both quite slight, good solid all round game, nice groundstrokes and great timing.

Justine - Federer -- all-court game, can play every shot. Underrated movement.

Martinez - Santoro -- lots of wicked spins, difficult opponents for many.

Davenport - Agassi -- camp out on the baseline dictating when playing well. Superb timing off both wings, great accuracy.

Coria - Dementieva -- well not really, but the both have a crap serve, good movement, solid ground strokes.

!<blocparty>!
Nov 30th, 2006, 03:15 AM
Well for every similarity there is an equal difference. Roger is forehand dominant, Henin is backhand dominant. Roger is dominant on serve, Henin is not. Roger's worst surface is clay - Justines favorite surface is clay. Roger dominates his sport - Justine does not. Roger's best surface is grass (4 Wimbledons) - Justine's only grass titles are Eastbourne (II)and 'S-Hertogenbosch (III).

Lets not mention the character differences. ;)

What I mean is, there is no professional woman tennis player who is a suitable equivalent female version of Roger Federer.

:wavey:
Every way you described that Justine is similar to Federer, Mauresmo is too. Why do we never hear the Mauresmo/Federer comparisons?

Henin is not backhand dominant, LOL. Even she says her forehand is her best shot now.
The surface 'difference' doesn't work... we're not comparing results. The most important thing is that they both play well on pretty much EVERY surface. They're both capable of winning every slam.

And Mauresmo iswas one of the biggest chokers in the game. Justine and Roger are famous for their mental toughness.

Apoleb
Nov 30th, 2006, 03:44 AM
And Mauresmo iswas one of the biggest chokers in the game

Not to mention that her ground strokes aren't really that good, especially that horrible forehand.

harloo
Nov 30th, 2006, 04:16 AM
Well for every similarity there is an equal difference. Roger is forehand dominant, Henin is backhand dominant. Roger is dominant on serve, Henin is not. Roger's worst surface is clay - Justines favorite surface is clay. Roger dominates his sport - Justine does not. Roger's best surface is grass (4 Wimbledons) - Justine's only grass titles are Eastbourne (II)and 'S-Hertogenbosch (III).

Lets not mention the character differences. ;)

What I mean is, there is no professional woman tennis player who is a suitable equivalent female version of Roger Federer.

:wavey:
Every way you described that Justine is similar to Federer, Mauresmo is too. Why do we never hear the Mauresmo/Federer comparisons?


:worship: :worship: :worship:

spencercarlos
Nov 30th, 2006, 04:23 AM
Well for every similarity there is an equal difference. Roger is forehand dominant, Henin is backhand dominant. Roger is dominant on serve, Henin is not. Roger's worst surface is clay - Justines favorite surface is clay. Roger dominates his sport - Justine does not. Roger's best surface is grass (4 Wimbledons) - Justine's only grass titles are Eastbourne (II)and 'S-Hertogenbosch (III).

Lets not mention the character differences. ;)

What I mean is, there is no professional woman tennis player who is a suitable equivalent female version of Roger Federer.

:wavey:
Every way you described that Justine is similar to Federer, Mauresmo is too. Why do we never hear the Mauresmo/Federer comparisons?
I agree with you on this one.

spencercarlos
Nov 30th, 2006, 04:25 AM
Henin is not backhand dominant, LOL. Even she says her forehand is her best shot now.
The surface 'difference' doesn't work... we're not comparing results. The most important thing is that they both play well on pretty much EVERY surface. They're both capable of winning every slam.

And Mauresmo iswas one of the biggest chokers in the game. Justine and Roger are famous for their mental toughness.
She can say whatever, you can see that her forehand breaks down more and can have huge troubles to get the ball even in play, see recently her second set at the YEC vs Hingis from 5-2 or the last two sets of Wimbledon final.
Her backhand is more powerful, more consistent and has more variety with that great slice she owns.

spencercarlos
Nov 30th, 2006, 04:30 AM
Myskina - Davydenko -- both quite slight, good solid all round game, nice groundstrokes and great timing.

Justine - Federer -- all-court game, can play every shot. Underrated movement.

Martinez - Santoro -- lots of wicked spins, difficult opponents for many.

Davenport - Agassi -- camp out on the baseline dictating when playing well. Superb timing off both wings, great accuracy.

Coria - Dementieva -- well not really, but the both have a crap serve, good movement, solid ground strokes.
Yeah another Agassi-Davenport comparisson :lol:
And of course the movement and anticipation is so similar too.. :hearts:
And their clay court results as well. :help:
And their respective dominant serves :rolleyes:

Brett.
Nov 30th, 2006, 04:36 AM
Amelie Haas!

Derek.
Nov 30th, 2006, 04:52 AM
Patty Nadal. :p

Elena Nalbandian.

Nastya Davydenko.

Nicole Berdych.

Daniela Tursunov. :scratch:

Brett.
Nov 30th, 2006, 05:04 AM
Paradorn Clijsters

!<blocparty>!
Nov 30th, 2006, 11:31 AM
She can say whatever, you can see that her forehand breaks down more and can have huge troubles to get the ball even in play, see recently her second set at the YEC vs Hingis from 5-2 or the last two sets of Wimbledon final.
Her backhand is more powerful, more consistent and has more variety with that great slice she owns.

Erm :weirdo:. Justine is not 'backhand dominant'. She doesn't blow people off court with floods of winners off that side. It's a pretty shot that has a lot of variety. Sure it's a weapon, but is it bigger than her forehand? No. You rarely see her with more backhand winners during a match.

Yeah another Agassi-Davenport comparisson :lol:
And of course the movement and anticipation is so similar too.. :hearts:
And their clay court results as well. :help:
And their respective dominant serves :rolleyes:

You could have come up with better differences there. :lol: Andre wasn't known for his great movement. He was known for his ball striking abilities. Ditts for Lindsay.
Clay was their WORST slam surface.

I'm not saying Lindsay Davenport IS the female Andre Agassi. I'm saying they are both similar in some departments. I couldn't think of another ATP player more like Lindsay than Andre. :D Thanks.

faste5683
Nov 30th, 2006, 11:51 AM
Well for every similarity there is an equal difference. Roger is forehand dominant, Henin is backhand dominant. Roger is dominant on serve, Henin is not. Roger's worst surface is clay - Justines favorite surface is clay. Roger dominates his sport - Justine does not. Roger's best surface is grass (4 Wimbledons) - Justine's only grass titles are Eastbourne (II)and 'S-Hertogenbosch (III).

Justine has proven that can win on all surfaces, just look at her record this year. However, when these comparisons are made, I think that they are talking about the similarities in playing styles, not domination.

Lets not mention the character differences. ;) You shouldn't go there:kiss:


Every way you described that Justine is similar to Federer, Mauresmo is too. Why do we never hear the Mauresmo/Federer comparisons?I don't know, it would be fine with me. It's something the John McEnroes and Tracy Austins of the world bring up..perhaps Amelie hits with too much topspin?

:wavey:

Apoleb
Nov 30th, 2006, 11:55 AM
You must spread some reputation before giving it to blockparty again.

Seriously though, I wouldn't waiste much time convincing people. They are so bitter on the comparison that they can't see ahead of their noses. Justine is by no means "backhand dominant" especially now. She hits most of her winners on her forehand side. And saying that everything that can be said about the comparison between Justine and Roger can be said about Amelie and Roger is really ridiculous.

Jogi
Nov 30th, 2006, 12:18 PM
Kuznetsova - Nalbandian
Schiavone - Baghdatis
Mauresmo - Haas

in terms of appearance

spencercarlos
Nov 30th, 2006, 01:36 PM
Erm :weirdo:. Justine is not 'backhand dominant'. She doesn't blow people off court with floods of winners off that side. It's a pretty shot that has a lot of variety. Sure it's a weapon, but is it bigger than her forehand? No. You rarely see her with more backhand winners during a match.
Thatīs your opinion, as i said she can maybe try to attack from her forehand more, but she gets a lot of errors from that side while her backhand remains the more consistent (and powerful) of the two shots.

You could have come up with better differences there. :lol: Andre wasn't known for his great movement.

Andre was not known for his great movement because he was not a Chang/Nadal like player, but he was very quick around the court. Agassi was mostly known by his big return of serve, that thanks to his quickness, anticipation and reflexes. Lets say Davenport if got to the ball she would return it big, quickness,anticipation,reflexes similar to Davenport? :lol:

He was known for his ball striking abilities. Ditts for Lindsay.

Ditts for a lot of other players, Sampras, Federer are great ball strikers too :rolleyes:
Or to name a few double handed backhands and clean ball strikers Kafelnikov, Enqvist, Larsson, Ferreira were pure ball strikers from the back of the court.
Or todayīs Berdichs, Blake or Ancicīs of this worlds have a great striking ability from the back of the court, so all of them are very similar to Davenport :tape:


Clay was their WORST slam surface.

This shows how much do you know about Andre. At Roland Garros Andre won 1 title, reached 2 finals, 2 SF and 4 QF, at Wimbledon he won 1 title, 1 final, 3 SF and 2 QF. Itīs clear pretty much which slam had Agassiīs worst surface and itīs not clay :rolleyes:
Agassi was not a poor mover that all you had to do was to make him move to beat him, Agassi moved very well, very capable to hit great shots on the run and play some great defense too, yeah Lindsay does that great as well :lol:

I'm not saying Lindsay Davenport IS the female Andre Agassi. I'm saying they are both similar in some departments. I couldn't think of another ATP player more like Lindsay than Andre. :D Thanks.
No offence to Lindsay yet again she a wonderful player and i love watching her play but once again there are a lot of players that can strike the ball very clean from the back of the court and according to most Lindsay Fans thatīs their ONLY similarity, i donīt think thatīs enough to say they are similars.
You have to put Davenport in counterpart with someone with great groundstrokes but bad movement, and Agassi does not fall in that cateogry. Unless you think Agassi in his younger years moved like he did in 2004-2006 :tape:

faste5683
Nov 30th, 2006, 02:13 PM
Thatīs your opinion, as i said she can maybe try to attack from her forehand more, but she gets a lot of errors from that side while her backhand remains the more consistent (and powerful) of the two shots.


I'm not certain, but it doesn't appear that you've noticed how Justine's game has evolved over the past several seasons. Her forhand is a huge weapon now, extremely powerful and consistent. Watching her play Amelie in the YEC finals was a great example: you could just see Justine putting Amelie on the defensive in almost all of the forehand exchanges.

Justine's got a great backhand, but she'd rather run around it now to blast an inside-out forehand. I believe it's something she and Carlos have worked hard on, to avoid the high, topspin-heavy balls hit to her one-handed backhand.

:wavey:

!<blocparty>!
Nov 30th, 2006, 05:08 PM
Thatīs your opinion, as i said she can maybe try to attack from her forehand more, but she gets a lot of errors from that side while her backhand remains the more consistent (and powerful) of the two shots.

My point was that Justine is not backhand dominant. To say Justine's backhand is 'dominant' is ridiculous.


Andre was not known for his great movement

Thanks.

Agassi was mostly known by his big return of serve, that thanks to his quickness, anticipation and reflexes. Lets say Davenport if got to the ball she would return it big, quickness,anticipation,reflexes similar to Davenport? :lol:


Lindsay and Andre both had AMAZING returns off both wings. Of course, Lindsay is definitely not in the same league as Andre... but she had one of the best returns of serve on tour.


Ditts for a lot of other players, Sampras, Federer are great ball strikers too :rolleyes:
Or to name a few double handed backhands and clean ball strikers Kafelnikov, Enqvist, Larsson, Ferreira were pure ball strikers from the back of the court.
Or todayīs Berdichs, Blake or Ancicīs of this worlds have a great striking ability from the back of the court, so all of them are very similar to Davenport :tape:

WTF. Sampras and Federer both had single handers and dominated off the ground with their forehand. Yes they were/are great strikers of the ball but not in the same way A&L were OFF BOTH WINGS. Lindsay and Andre would regularly use their backhands to dictate play.

Blake and Ancic? :tape: Please. They may strike the ball well... but they are both wildly inconsistent. Their backhands aren't ACCURATE, and defintely a class below A&L's.

This shows how much do you know about Andre. At Roland Garros Andre won 1 title, reached 2 finals, 2 SF and 4 QF, at Wimbledon he won 1 title, 1 final, 3 SF and 2 QF. Itīs clear pretty much which slam had Agassiīs worst surface and itīs not clay :rolleyes:

Andre won 67% of his matches at Roland Garros and 72% of his matches at Wimbledon, that's why I said it. But you can have that one. Their clay court results aren't identical but RG was the hardest slam for them to win.


No offence to Lindsay yet again she a wonderful player and i love watching her play but once again there are a lot of players that can strike the ball very clean from the back of the court and according to most Lindsay Fans thatīs their ONLY similarity, i donīt think thatīs enough to say they are similars.
You have to put Davenport in counterpart with someone with great groundstrokes but bad movement, and Agassi does not fall in that cateogry. Unless you think Agassi in his younger years moved like he did in 2004-2006 :tape:

K.

1. Both were incredible strikers of the ball, off both wings.
2. Excellent technique.
2. Both had AMAZING timing off the ground.
3. Their shots were pin-point accurate.
4. Both came across as very intelligent and articulate in interviews.
5. Almost always had great results at the AO and USO.
6. Struggled on the RG clay at times, a few early losses.
7. They were at their best camped out on the baseline dictating play.

That's why I think they are comparable. Sure you could nit pick and come up with a huge list of why they're totally different, but you could do that for pretty much everyone else.

I'll agree to disagree.

vutt
Nov 30th, 2006, 05:15 PM
if Justine is female Federer then...
...Elenad D feels like Andy R ;)

QUEENLINDSAY
Nov 30th, 2006, 05:25 PM
My point was that Justine is not backhand dominant. To say Justine's backhand is 'dominant' is ridiculous.




Thanks.



Lindsay and Andre both had AMAZING returns off both wings. Of course, Lindsay is definitely not in the same league as Andre... but she had one of the best returns of serve on tour.



WTF. Sampras and Federer both had single handers and dominated off the ground with their forehand. Yes they were/are great strikers of the ball but not in the same way A&L were OFF BOTH WINGS. Lindsay and Andre would regularly use their backhands to dictate play.

Blake and Ancic? :tape: Please. They may strike the ball well... but they are both wildly inconsistent. Their backhands aren't ACCURATE, and defintely a class below A&L's.



Andre won 67% of his matches at Roland Garros and 72% of his matches at Wimbledon, that's why I said it. But you can have that one. Their clay court results aren't identical but RG was the hardest slam for them to win.



K.

1. Both were incredible strikers of the ball, off both wings.
2. Excellent technique.
2. Both had AMAZING timing off the ground.
3. Their shots were pin-point accurate.
4. Both came across as very intelligent and articulate in interviews.
5. Almost always had great results at the AO and USO.
6. Struggled on the RG clay at times, a few early losses.
7. They were at their best camped out on the baseline dictating play.

That's why I think they are comparable. Sure you could nit pick and come up with a huge list of why they're totally different, but you could do that for pretty much everyone else.

I'll agree to disagree.

Spencecarlos is a headcase, He is trying to pick a player as exactly the same as the other and he wont get that.

We are comparing WTA and ATP player and of course men vs women so there should be no exact comparison rather men and women equivalents.

That's the headcase did'nt get eversince.

!<blocparty>!
Nov 30th, 2006, 05:27 PM
Spencecarlos is a headcase, He is trying to pick a player as exactly the same as the other and he wont get that.

We are comparing WTA and ATP player and of course men vs women so there should be no exact comparison rather men and women equivalents.

That's the headcase did'nt get eversince.

He's not a head case... I mostly agree with his GM posts. :D

alfonsojose
Nov 30th, 2006, 05:29 PM
Sexual : Hingis - Safin

MrSerenaWilliams
Nov 30th, 2006, 05:32 PM
Safin is so sexy, he's male AND female :lick::drool:

Ellery
Nov 30th, 2006, 05:34 PM
Nadia and Nikolay (both are top Russian players, both play almost every week)

QUEENLINDSAY
Nov 30th, 2006, 05:36 PM
He's not a head case... I mostly agree with his GM posts. :D

Well, I'm talking about Agassi-Davenport comparison, he's a real headcase.

As for other of his post, I dont pay particular attention.

spencercarlos
Nov 30th, 2006, 06:10 PM
Lindsay and Andre both had AMAZING returns off both wings. Of course, Lindsay is definitely not in the same league as Andre... but she had one of the best returns of serve on tour.
Lindsay has an amazing return for the women, but only when she is not stretched, on this department then Serena is more similar to Agassi because she could hit it way better than Lindsay on the stretch.. So Serena similar stlye to Agassi ? :lol:

WTF. Sampras and Federer both had single handers and dominated off the ground with their forehand. Yes they were/are great strikers of the ball but not in the same way A&L were OFF BOTH WINGS. Lindsay and Andre would regularly use their backhands to dictate play.
If you donīt know Agassi dominated the rallies on the back of the court with his forehand, his backhand was darn too consistent but the punishing one was his forehand.
Lindsayīs best shot is her bakchand.

Andre won 67% of his matches at Roland Garros and 72% of his matches at Wimbledon, that's why I said it. But you can have that one. Their clay court results aren't identical but RG was the hardest slam for them to win.

Agassi reached 3 GS finals at Roland Garros, won 1 and lost 1 of those finals in 5 sets to Courier, 2 at Wimbledon, won 1 and lost in straight sets to Sampras in the other, numbers donīt lie he was closer to get Roland Garros than Wimbledon, period.


1. Both were incredible strikers of the ball, off both wings.
2. Excellent technique.
3. Both had AMAZING timing off the ground.
4. Their shots were pin-point accurate.
5. Both came across as very intelligent and articulate in interviews.
6. Almost always had great results at the AO and USO.
7. Struggled on the RG clay at times, a few early losses.
8. They were at their best camped out on the baseline dictating play.

That's why I think they are comparable. Sure you could nit pick and come up with a huge list of why they're totally different, but you could do that for pretty much everyone else.

I'll agree to disagree.
1-4 are the same related if not the same :rolleyes: you canīt be a great striker of the ball without having a great tecnique, and if you are a good striker of the ball it means you have a great amount of accuracy :rolleyes:

5. I donīt see what the interviews have to do with the similarity of the way they play :tape:

6. Donīt see the comparisson here. Agassi has 4 Australian Open crowns, as his best GS and surface to play on, never lost before the 4th round of this event. Davenport best grand slam has to be Wimbledon where she reached 3 GS finals and won 1 of them, and almost won another 1, never lost before the 3rd round at this event. Lets agree on the Usopen where Agassi reached 6 finals but won only 2 of those, and lost rather easily in the other finals, has 4 first round exits.
So to sum this point up Agassi "almost always" had always great results in Australia, Lindsay "almost always" had great results at Wimbledon.

7. You can only compare their early round exits at Roland Garros ( i give you this one), but their success on the event is not even a point of comparisson :tape: . Agassi 1 title out of 3 finals, 2 semis, 4 QF canīt be compared to just 1 SF and 3 QF.

8. Another general statement, then all baseliners have a similar game to Agassi :help: .

I agree to disagree Agassiīs explosive speed, eye-hand coordination, and reflexes enabled him to return any serve on the planet, and be considered by his oponnents the best return of serve ever. Lindsay lacks two of those three atributes.
Lindsayīs game yet again always needed that first strike attack ability, otherwise she is toasted because she canīt and does not know how to defend.
Agassi for his part had the ability to not only to hit the ball cleanly and dictate, but his game was not build on the first strike ability and end points off the first or second shot, but also could defend and outlast his oponnents with his impecable consistency.

Even Safin would be a better comparisson to Lindsayīs game, another beatiful ball striker with a dominant serve (like Lindsay) and with the ability to ran off his oponnents off the court with the raw power and precision.

QUEENLINDSAY
Nov 30th, 2006, 06:22 PM
Lindsay has an amazing return for the women, but only when she is not stretched, on this department then Serena is more similar to Agassi because she could hit it way better than Lindsay on the stretch.. So Serena similar stlye to Agassi ? :lol:


If you donīt know Agassi dominated the rallies on the back of the court with his forehand, his backhand was darn too consistent but the punishing one was his forehand.
Lindsayīs best shot is her bakchand.


Agassi reached 3 GS finals at Roland Garros, won 1 and lost 1 of those finals in 5 sets to Courier, 2 at Wimbledon, won 1 and lost in straight sets to Sampras in the other, numbers donīt lie he was closer to get Roland Garros than Wimbledon, period.


1-4 are the same related if not the same :rolleyes: you canīt be a great striker of the ball without having a great tecnique, and if you are a good striker of the ball it means you have a great amount of accuracy :rolleyes:

5. I donīt see what the interviews have to do with the similarity of the way they play :tape:

6. Donīt see the comparisson here. Agassi has 4 Australian Open crowns, as his best GS and surface to play on, never lost before the 4th round of this event. Davenport best grand slam has to be Wimbledon where she reached 3 GS finals and won 1 of them, and almost won another 1, never lost before the 3rd round at this event. Lets agree on the Usopen where Agassi reached 6 finals but won only 2 of those, and lost rather easily in the other finals, has 4 first round exits.
So to sum this point up Agassi "almost always" had always great results in Australia, Lindsay "almost always" had great results at Wimbledon.

7. You can only compare their early round exits at Roland Garros ( i give you this one), but their success on the event is not even a point of comparisson :tape: . Agassi 1 title out of 3 finals, 2 semis, 4 QF canīt be compared to just 1 SF and 3 QF.

8. Another general statement, then all baseliners have a similar game to Agassi :help: .

I agree to disagree Agassiīs explosive speed, eye-hand coordination, and reflexes enabled him to return any serve on the planet, and be considered by his oponnents the best return of serve ever. Lindsay lacks two of those three atributes.
Lindsayīs game yet again always needed that first strike attack ability, otherwise she is toasted because she canīt and does not know how to defend.
Agassi for his part had the ability to not only to hit the ball cleanly and dictate, but his game was not build on the first strike ability and end points off the first or second shot, but also could defend and outlast his oponnents with his impecable consistency.

Even Safin would be a better comparisson to Lindsayīs game, another beatiful ball striker with a dominant serve (like Lindsay) and with the ability to ran off his oponnents off the court with the raw power and precision.

The point is, this thread was created to name who's the female/male equivalence of a player. The closest one and not teh exact same one because you can never have that.

Now, you always completely disagreeing with the Lindsay-Andre comparison and yet you never ever mentioned a WTA player who is at least closer to Agassi's game.

And by the way, Lindsay's return game wether stretch or not is the best in women's game and so does is agassi in the mens game. You can never compare them point to point because there's a different server on the other side of the court. Men's serve are way harder, faster, kicks higher, well everything is better so this goes for a better return is'nt it?

The Daviator
Nov 30th, 2006, 06:49 PM
I agree with SC, I don't see Agassi-Davenport at all :shrug: I think it's mostly due to their age that people put them together, but in movement, net play and serve, they cannot be compared...

Davenport-Safin is a better comparison...

!<blocparty>!
Nov 30th, 2006, 06:51 PM
Lindsay has an amazing return for the women, but only when she is not stretched, on this department then Serena is more similar to Agassi because she could hit it way better than Lindsay on the stretch.. So Serena similar stlye to Agassi ? :lol:


If you donīt know Agassi dominated the rallies on the back of the court with his forehand, his backhand was darn too consistent but the punishing one was his forehand.
Lindsayīs best shot is her bakchand.


Agassi reached 3 GS finals at Roland Garros, won 1 and lost 1 of those finals in 5 sets to Courier, 2 at Wimbledon, won 1 and lost in straight sets to Sampras in the other, numbers donīt lie he was closer to get Roland Garros than Wimbledon, period.


1-4 are the same related if not the same :rolleyes: you canīt be a great striker of the ball without having a great tecnique, and if you are a good striker of the ball it means you have a great amount of accuracy :rolleyes:

5. I donīt see what the interviews have to do with the similarity of the way they play :tape:

6. Donīt see the comparisson here. Agassi has 4 Australian Open crowns, as his best GS and surface to play on, never lost before the 4th round of this event. Davenport best grand slam has to be Wimbledon where she reached 3 GS finals and won 1 of them, and almost won another 1, never lost before the 3rd round at this event. Lets agree on the Usopen where Agassi reached 6 finals but won only 2 of those, and lost rather easily in the other finals, has 4 first round exits.
So to sum this point up Agassi "almost always" had always great results in Australia, Lindsay "almost always" had great results at Wimbledon.

7. You can only compare their early round exits at Roland Garros ( i give you this one), but their success on the event is not even a point of comparisson :tape: . Agassi 1 title out of 3 finals, 2 semis, 4 QF canīt be compared to just 1 SF and 3 QF.

8. Another general statement, then all baseliners have a similar game to Agassi :help:

I agree to disagree Agassiīs explosive speed, eye-hand coordination, and reflexes enabled him to return any serve on the planet, and be considered by his oponnents the best return of serve ever. Lindsay lacks two of those three atributes.
Lindsayīs game yet again always needed that first strike attack ability, otherwise she is toasted because she canīt and does not know how to defend.
Agassi for his part had the ability to not only to hit the ball cleanly and dictate, but his game was not build on the first strike ability and end points off the first or second shot, but also could defend and outlast his oponnents with his impecable consistency.

Even Safin would be a better comparisson to Lindsayīs game, another beatiful ball striker with a dominant serve (like Lindsay) and with the ability to ran off his oponnents off the court with the raw power and precision.

God, why are you going into such detail on everything? :unsure: You can nit-pick as much as you like at the end of the day, what i've said is really GENERAL.

Lindsay has an amazing return for the women, but only when she is not stretched, on this department then Serena is more similar to Agassi because she could hit it way better than Lindsay on the stretch.. So Serena similar stlye to Agassi ? :lol:

:rolleyes: You don't get it, do you?

But back on topic... Agassi had the best return on the ATP for years. Lindsay had one of the best returns on the WTA for years. SIMILAR!!!!!!

If you donīt know Agassi dominated the rallies on the back of the court with his forehand, his backhand was darn too consistent but the punishing one was his forehand.
Lindsayīs best shot is her bakchand.

I would disagree, again. Peak Lindsay's forehand was DOMINANT just like Andre's, even compared with her backhand. Go back and watch some of her best matches... the Wimbledon 4R 2005 comes to mind here, where she was clubbing forehand winners from everywhere for most of the match.

1-4 are the same related if not the same :rolleyes: you canīt be a great striker of the ball without having a great tecnique, and if you are a good striker of the ball it means you have a great amount of accuracy :rolleyes:

Oh REALLY? So why did you say James Blake was a great ball striker. His technique is piss poor on the forehand and backhand. Far from textbook.

6. Donīt see the comparisson here. Agassi has 4 Australian Open crowns, as his best GS and surface to play on, never lost before the 4th round of this event. Davenport best grand slam has to be Wimbledon where she reached 3 GS finals and won 1 of them, and almost won another 1, never lost before the 3rd round at this event. Lets agree on the Usopen where Agassi reached 6 finals but won only 2 of those, and lost rather easily in the other finals, has 4 first round exits.
So to sum this point up Agassi "almost always" had always great results in Australia, Lindsay "almost always" had great results at Wimbledon.

:yawn: Again, why are you going into so much detail? Lindsay's won more matches at the Aus Open than any other player in the OPEN ERA. Lindsay almost always had great results in Australia, so did Andre. Do you SEE?!

8. Another general statement, then all baseliners have a similar game to Agassi :help:

Of course they do, especially the younger generation. Who do you think they modelled their games after? And yes of course (before you throw a hissy fit) Andre is and always will be one of the best basliners ever (along with Jimmy), most pros will never come close to it.

Even Safin would be a better comparisson to Lindsayīs game, another beatiful ball striker with a dominant serve (like Lindsay) and with the ability to ran off his oponnents off the court with the raw power and precision.

Yeah, that's really good one. Actually, a great one. Similar mentalities too if you think about it.