Wednesday, May 23, 2007

The Pistol vs The Mothereffing Federer

Da Realist:

if you're a tennis fan, you MUST be licking your chops to see this matchup! if only pete was 10 years younger...

Gangsta D:

Yeah, I don't know. If pete was in his prime, these matches would be epic. It'll be decent spectacle, but nothing exciting, I don't think.

Da Realist:

pete's my favorite player of all time but even in his prime he would have trouble with TMF right now on all surfaces -- even grass. and let's not even talk about clay.

the only exciting part of the match will be on pete's serve. even in his prime, pete just kind of blocked serves back and you can't let TMF have that kind of advantage on his own serve right off the bat.

if they were both in their primes...

pete would have a slight advantage at Wimbledon.

pete *may* have a slight adv on US Open hardcourts

roger with a distinct adv on Aussie Open hardcourts

roger would MURDER pete on clay

what do you think?

Gangsta D:

You're right about clay. Pete's game just doesn't translate. But on grass and hardcourts? In his prime? I don't know. When he was on, his serve and volley game was unmatched. The interesting thing is neither has/had a rival as good as the other during their playing days. Agassi was game, but he couldn't hang with Pete on a consistent basis. Nadal owns Fed on clay, but he can't compete on grass or hardcourt. I wonder how much they would've brought out in each other. Why couldn't Mama and Papa Federer have a kid 10 years earlier? lol

Da Realist:

i want to believe that, but i've seen federer take roddick's best and send it back across the net like it was nothing. he doesn't seem to have any trouble with big servers. pete's game was to dominate his serve and get one break per set -- he put all the pressure on the other guy to hold serve.

but roger would have flipped it. pete BETTER win his serve or he's got no chance at the set. my heart says go with pete, but my head says roger.

and about agassi... let's not down him too much through the eyes of history. pete won the majority of their matches, but keep in mind the majority of their matches were on grass or fast hard courts (like US Open). Agassi dominated him at the Aussie (4-0) and beat him the one time they played at the French. If most of their matches were on that slow rubber stuff or clay, then the outcome could have been a little different. it's at least something to think about.

No comments: