By Scoop Malinowski
I’m gonna catch some flak for this but I think Hewitt, at his best, his feistiest, most fired up and tenacious, could put a beating on anyone from tennis history…Federer, Nadal and Djokovic included.
Heck, we saw what Hewitt did to Pete Sampras in that U.S. Open final of 2001. Hewitt slammed Poor Pete to the tune of 76 61 61. And it wasn’t like Pete was tired from a long semi – he bested Safin, the defending champ, in straight sets. In his semi, Hewitt blasted Kafelnikov 1-2-1.
Hewitt could do that. He could just annihilate quality players like a mini steamroller, even in the business end of major tournaments, which is quite rare. Can you remember Federer or Nadal just blowing through major semis and finals like Hewitt?
I vividly remember how tough Hewitt was, as his dominance happened when I first got serious about playing competitive tennis. Eyes bulging and burning, neck veins popping, fixing that necklace, fidgeting with his strings, those smirky facial expressions, which delivered messages of intimidation and even subtle taunting at times: “You don’t have any chance, mate.” No one could match Hewitt’s intensity. Remember the time he broke Alex Corretja in the first game of an indoor match and shouted a Come Awwwn! which really irritated the cool Spaniard. But that was how extraordinarily intense Hewitt was, it was far beyond the typical levels.
Another time Hewitt was en route to putting a triple bagel on Corretja at the Australian Open and he almost got it too.
Hewitt was quicker than a cat, about as consistent as anyone in history, very solid volleys and an underrated serve. I loved that running backhand slice he could drop down the line for passing shot winners. His backhand could pass with ease either up the line or cross court. Hewitt made it look easy. But best of all he had a fighting spirit second to none. Like a professional boxing friend of mine said with a hint of respect and also annoyance, “He looks like he wants to fight (the opponent).”
Man, could he fight on the court. Out-sized or out-manned, it didn’t matter, Hewitt fought and fought until the bitter end. He’s won over 570 matches since turning pro in 1998. He’s won 28 career singles titles, the first being Adelaide as a precocious and unknown sixteen-year-old ranked 550 in the world.
Hewitt could do amazing things on the court, like come back from two sets down and two points away from death against Federer in Davis Cup. Like beating a prime Gustavo Kuerten on clay in Davis Cup in Brazil. Like manhandling a guy named Pete Sampras in a major final.
No one played with more passion, more guts, more desire, more intensity than Lleyton Hewitt, ranked #1 in 2001 and 2002.
Just 5-11, 160 pounds, Hewitt could very well be pound for pound the greatest player in tennis history. He had exactly the qualities to overcome prime Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. Yes he could.
There. I just put the chip on Hewitt’s shoulder. I dare ya to knock it off.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1 2 Next »Hartt · October 13, 2017 at 11:13 am
I enjoyed your piece about Hewitt. As Shapo continues to be the youngest to . . . whatever since whoever, I see Hewitt’s name often among those players who made breakthroughs at an early age.
This is another topic, but since this is the most recent article, will post it here.
Doubles news: The teams still standing in Shanghai are not a surprise – Kontinen/Peers, J. Murray/Soares, Rajer/Tecau, and Kubot/Melo.
For the women in Hong Kong it is Chan H-C./Chan Y.J. and Adamczak/Chang.
Hartt · October 13, 2017 at 11:16 am
Delpo won a hotly contested match against Troicki today in 3 sets. But the bad news is he fell and broke his fall with his hand. He gripped his wrist, in obvious pain. After a MTO he did continue but the word is that he is getting an MRI. After all he has been through with his wrists we have to hope that he is OK.
catherine · October 13, 2017 at 11:17 am
Scoop – what is your fascination with Hewitt ? Is it because he reminds you of a boxer ? I’ve known people who rated Hewitt very highly but held back on the ultimate accolade – can’t offer an opinion myself because I never saw him play.
( There’s been a silence here on TP the last couple of days – I presume because nothing much is happening ? Or is it that end of year feeling ? The Finals don’t mean very much maybe)
catherine · October 13, 2017 at 11:19 am
As soon as I mention ‘silence’ Hartt pops up with two pieces 🙂
Scoop Malinowski · October 13, 2017 at 11:50 am
Scoop Malinowski writes:
Thanks Hartt. Hewitt was not only young but he was physically still a kid, like a kitten before becoming a cat. Yet he still took over tennis. Not sure if you experienced Hewitt's takeover but to me it was more impressive and entertaining than this Fed Rafa Era. Hewitt's combative rebellious 'me against the world' persona was more colorful and exciting than what we have today and that's saying a lot because Fed and Rafa are like Ali and Frazier, Evert and Martina and the Yankees vs Red Sox combined. Loved Hewitt and feel that he's being forgotten and not properly remembered. There are no books out there about Hewitt other than my Facing Hewitt. Latisha Chan is winning everything, this week she is playing with her sister and letting Hingis take a break. Hingis and Chan are dominating.
Scoop Malinowski · October 13, 2017 at 11:51 am
Scoop Malinowski writes:
Let's hope everyone's beloved champion Del Potro is ok and not going to be forced to take yet another injury hiatus.
Scoop Malinowski · October 13, 2017 at 11:55 am
Scoop Malinowski writes:
Catherine; I believe Hewitt is one of the most incredible champions in tennis history and that he's being forgotten. His reign of dominance was unbelievable to watch. It was more exciting and entertaining, to me, than even this Fed and Rafa era. Just so fun to watch this lil guy with a big heart and even bigger chip on his shoulder just dominate the sport and roar like a lion. I miss it and appreciate how Hewitt inspired Federer and Rafa to become the greats they are. We all know how Hewitt dominated Fed and forced him to become his maximum best. And of course we can all see that young Rafa was shaped and inspired by watching the fire and fury and passion of young Hewitt. I see Hewitt in Rafa as clear as day and as clear as we see the image of Sampras in Federer.
Scoop Malinowski · October 13, 2017 at 12:00 pm
Scoop Malinowski writes:
Hewitt was basically a junior who dominated the ATP. Young Rafa was too but physically he was more physical than any veteran or any player in history period. Like I said, what Hewitt achieved and what he did was more impressive to me than what Fed and Nadal did. If Hewitt never played tennis and he only played Aussie Rules footy I wonder what tennis would look like today.
catherine · October 13, 2017 at 12:29 pm
Scoop – the way sport works, and time, many great and near great players are ‘forgotten’ in the sense that they are no longer talked about much except between particular and knowledgeable fans. So it goes with Hewitt. And maybe because he ‘only’ won 2 GS titles and played in the era before total saturation with Fed and Rafa and he didn’t grab the public imagination in the same way. So your book fills a gap there.
No great surprises in current tournaments. Just running up to the Finals. And on the women’s side there’s only one question which won’t be answered until next year –
which Serena Williams is going to turn up ? That’s probably all the players are thinking about although no one’s mentioning it.
Hartt · October 13, 2017 at 12:43 pm
Scoop, unfortunately I did not see Hewitt play when he was young. One thing I admire about him is the way he kept coming back after all those injuries. That takes a lot of toughness, plus a true love of the game. And also the way he continues to contribute to tennis, through the Davis Cup and mentoring young Aussie players, not an easy task!
catherine · October 13, 2017 at 12:57 pm
Hartt – Hewitt personifies the idea, and ideal, of the the ‘Aussie battler’, so strong in Australian history and literature (and art). You can find his counterpart in other sports.
One reason the Aust/Eng cricket matches (on this summer in Oz) are so bitterly fought, contrasting effete worn- out Poms with the inspiring spirit of the new country having long ago cast off colonial chains etc.
Kyrgios fits that mould quite well actually – gives all for Australia, maybe not so much for just himself.
backhandslapper · October 13, 2017 at 1:19 pm
As good and fearsome opponent Lleyton was for a couple of years (I took notice by 2000 and was sure I was watching a number one in the making), his legacy has deservedly paled in comparison with what came after him.
At the time, I thought his hiatus from the tour by late 2003 was a disaster for new era which still hadn’t fully formed by then but in fact, it was just an actual start of new era. In retrospect, Hewitt was just a prelim. And the way Federer got into his head just underscores it.
He was the last somewhat-long-term number one before the true new emperor and his main rival arrived. By 2006, Hewitt was basically forgotten.
So while it’s true hearing and seeing the tournaments end with a victorious “come on!” was common during 2001 and 2002, what we’re left with is a guy who filled a gap between true champions.
Nicely, mind you.
I think he did peak higher than any other of the Federer’s crop (other than Federer), but he never had a truly dominating year like Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Murray did, although he didn’t really have to compete with any of them at their best(let alone three of them like they all did).
Thus him beating Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and / or Murray at their best sounds a bit too balmy, even at his best.
Hewitt was back on top of his game by the US Open 2004 and Federer licked him worse than Hewitt ever trounced the old Sampras.
So… I suggest, let’s remember Lleyton for what he actually was. A precocious teenage non-mutant tennis ninja who was fun to watch because he put so much passion and infectious energy into his effort he pumped you up, literally jumping a feet up hitting the ball behind the base line, but he was bested by the best player in the open era and let down by his own body. And then just rolled over by the rest of the young guns.
I say this as a big, big fan. I told everyone he would be the number one (people hated or loved or… hated him by 2000 already), I liked his attitude, I almost prayed for him to come back and actually challenge Federer’s dominance.
But honestly, on par with the Big Four? Just no.
Joe Blow · October 13, 2017 at 1:46 pm
Turn yourself or grab a Boxing promoter you know and set up an eco tour for Hewitt and Rios. See how many people beside YOU think they changed the Sport.
Hewitt won his 2 Majors in that little blip of time between Samp/Agassi and Fed/Nadal. Never came close to winning something big by 2004 other than DC.
I know winning Newport on this blog is the greatest accomplishment, but thinking Tennis would be different without Hewitt is comical, and I like Hewitt. He was Wilander on roids( not accusing).
What’s the career achievement difference between all and Kafelnikov, other than heart and come ons?
Joe Blow · October 13, 2017 at 1:48 pm
Hewitt and Kafelnikov
catherine · October 13, 2017 at 2:23 pm
Sharapova w/c for Moscow. Should be fun.
dan markowitz · October 13, 2017 at 3:26 pm
Hewitt the greatest of all time? Come on he beat Sampras right before Samprass at like 30 had a big downturn. His only other slam was winning Wimpy vs,now get this, Nalbandian.
If Hewitt is the greatest at his peak, then Spadea at his peak 1995, should be top 10. He beat Kafelnikov at the Open 2 4 and 4 and then four years later, kicked Agassi’s butt in Aussie O. Too bad he ran into Korda and Haas, respectively, at thise two events and then lost in straight sets.
Duke Carnoustie · October 13, 2017 at 4:58 pm
Hewitt at his best was impossible to beat. But so were many top guys. Certainly he is way better than every American player to come since Sampras/Agassi. Amazing how he just crushed players’ spirits in some of these matches.
Sad to say but he will forgotten in years to come because of how Fed and Rafa have destroyed the competition for so long.
Scoop Malinowski · October 13, 2017 at 7:22 pm
Scoop Malinowski writes:
Spadea never beat Hewitt, even lost to the 16 yr old Hewitt. Nalbandian proved on many occasions he could play the calibre of tennis that could destroy prime Fed and Rafa. Nalbandian made the F at Wimbledon when it began playing like a hard court. Don't diminish this great career run by Nalbandian.
Scoop Malinowski · October 13, 2017 at 7:37 pm
Scoop Malinowski writes:
To say Hewitt just filled the gap for those two years he dominated is inaccurate. It sounds like Hewitt just luckily kind of fell into the no. 1 slot by accident and luck. Come on! that's absurd. Hewitt earned it with so many miraculous come from behind wins over and over and over. Guys like Moya Kafel Pete Andre Roddick Ferrero Corretja Blake were all trying to beat the little SOB's brains in but they could not do it. They should have done it but they all failed. Hewitt was special, very special and not just some gap filler. The very special players change the sport. And Hewitt did. Now everyone yells come on – Serena, Rafa, Fed, Maria all emulated the Hewitt spirit, Fed does it on rare special big matches like vs Djokovic in Paris SF 2011. Hewitt influenced the game with his spirit and no doubt was a huge HUGE influence on young Rafa. Hewitt also beat up on Federer and forced him to raise his game to new levels which he did, just like Joe Frazier did to Muhammad Ali. Without Hewitt sparking him to greatness, we really don't know how great Fed would have become. Imagine Ali without Frazier and Foreman.
Scoop Malinowski · October 13, 2017 at 7:40 pm
Scoop Malinowski writes:
Joe, Hewitt raised the intensity level of tennis with his fighting spirit and come ons. Before Hewitt no one did the excessive celebrations or used emotional adrenaline like Hewitt. He changed the sport. Everyone plays better with emotional adrenaline. Hewitt is the origin of it. Nobody did it like Hewiit before Hewitt.
Joe Blow · October 13, 2017 at 8:55 pm
He lost a lot of matches wasting too much energy, with all those come ons. Way too many 3rd,and 5th sets where he had nothing in the tank. Second serve was a lollipop late in matches..
Saving something late works better for me,than getting in someone’s face from the second point of a 5 setter
scoopmalinowski · October 13, 2017 at 10:28 pm
Joe, its quite presumptious to think you know more about competing and how to compete than Lleyton Hewitt. May i ask, What is your best win as a tennis player?
Joe Blow · October 13, 2017 at 11:37 pm
Just an observer, don’t claim to be a great player. Saw Hewitts whole career. From 2001-2005 he was great. After that, not so much.
He was a grinder, counterpuncher, with three weapons. His feet, passing shots, and return of serve. Forehand and serve did not hold up late in matches. Neither stroke won him any free points. Injuries slowed him down, but once the next wave of greats arrived,LL was done.
Not comparing him to all-time greats like Borg and Wilander, but those guys like Hewitt, playing counterpuncher, your window to dominate is short.
catherine · October 14, 2017 at 3:38 am
Not going to get into a conversation about Hewitt, who, as I’ve said, I never saw play, but as far as intensity and changing the game goes Jimmy Connors brought a new level of intensity to tennis and he did change the game. There was tennis before Connors and tennis after him.
Backhandslapper · October 14, 2017 at 3:53 am
Stylistically, Hewitt probably did influence Nadal. Both speedy, both sporting sleeveless shirts and long locks. Both keen on never letting up.
Yet Nadal’s ceiling was way higher. Unlike Hewitt, he can still be effective even after most of his speed has gone.
Hewitt? Uh uh.
It’s true he had a decent H2H lead on Fed, but I don’t buy the “forced him into becoming a better player / the player he is today” narrative.
Watch their 2002 Shangai semis. Federer lost the match mentally. He definitely could have beaten him by then with his skill. And he went on top just as Hewitt fell off. Federer was heading on top with Hewitt around or not.
As for Hewitt’s dominance… He won 6 titles in 2001, 5 in 2002. Not too shabby, but dominant?
Murray won 5 in 2008, 6 in 2009. And 9 in 2016…
Backhandslapper · October 14, 2017 at 4:20 am
Where Lleyton really gets exposed is his win-loss record.
In his best year (2001), he went 80-18. Frankly, not that impressive for a No1 and especially when compared with the Big Four.
It’s on par with Federer 2003 (78-17), Djokovic 2009 (78-19), Murray 2015 (71-14), Nadal 2011 (69-15).
None of them were “dominant” during those respective years. Just good, and way too often on the losing side of the court.
At his best, Hewitt was on par with the just-alright mode of the Big Four members.
Duke Carnoustie · October 14, 2017 at 5:25 am
Good arguments by the anti-Hewitt crowd. I agree – he is not a dominant force and didn’t push Fed into becoming a better player. And he wasn’t the first to play with emotion – Connors did that before. That w/l record is hardly impressive.
Scopp loses this debate IMO.
Duke Carnoustie · October 14, 2017 at 5:27 am
I know winning Newport on this blog is the greatest accomplishment…
That is correct and why Rajeev Ram is one of the underrated greats of the sport along with Rochus!
Backhandslapper · October 14, 2017 at 6:25 am
Well, he was a force, just not really dominant in the strictest sense of the word. He was dangerous, a headache to play against but never even close to “unbeatable”.
You know you’re not talking about an all-time great when you read people suggest his main contribution was a loud “come on!!!” and pumping of a clenched fist.
It may as well be that his trademark “come on” done him in as a serious contender. I remember Safin mimicking it during the AO final match, the match Hewitt lost from leading 1-0, and the match he was never the same after.
Scoop Malinowski · October 14, 2017 at 8:30 am
Scoop Malinowski writes:
No, Hewitt is best known for being the dominant kingpin of tennis for TWO YEARS. People tend to forget that. Or for some reason try to diminish it or discredit it as that he fell into the no. 1 ranking like a roulette ball falls into a slot.
Scoop Malinowski · October 14, 2017 at 8:32 am
Scoop Malinowski writes:
Now we measure dominance? Hewitt was no. 1 in the world for TWO YEARS. That is dominance. By a kid who weighed 145 and stood five foot eleven inches tall. Welterweight dominated heavyweights.
Scoop Malinowski · October 14, 2017 at 8:35 am
Scoop Malinowski writes:
If Hewitt had Nadal's height and Fed's height he'd have dominated longer in my opinion. I don't think there has been a world no. 1 under six feet tall since Hewitt.
Joe Blow · October 14, 2017 at 8:53 am
2001-2002 Hewitt wins 2 out of the possible 8 Majors.
Other winners during that stretch
Albert Costa French
Goran Ivanesivic Wimby
Thomas Jo Aussie
Like I said before the blip era
catherine · October 14, 2017 at 9:14 am
Is there that much difference between 5′ 11″ and 6 ft ?
Backhandslapper · October 14, 2017 at 9:16 am
Agassi was under 6 ft too, and he returned to number 1 after the AO 2003 (I believe). So no, Ll was not the last shrimp to rule the world.
Again, he did hold his own for a respectable length of time (not 2 years, but a year and half is pretty good), but he was never the dominant kingpin you try to depict him as. 80-18 record during his best year just doesn’t scream “dominance” or “unbeatable”.
Statistically, he lost one match out of five.
Not bad. It’s nowhere close to Federer 2006 or Djokovic 2011 though. Federer lost mere 5 matches during 2006, four of them against Nadal on clay. That’s dominance.
The one thing Hewitt will never be forgotten for is going all the way up being only twenty.
With Nadal’s or Federer’s weight, he wouldn’t have been as fast. With Federer and Nadal (as it is), he doesn’t really belong in the same sentence.
Haelfix · October 14, 2017 at 9:19 am
Hewitt was like most tennis players in the older era. His peak was from 18-23. A few things really derailed his career:
1) He lost some of his wheels due to injury. This was really significant for him, b/c he relied on them to compete with baseliners.
2) Surfaces and balls got a lot heavier. Even years later, Hewitt would still win the occassional ATP tour event with a throwback surface, and he was at his best on super fast surfaces where he didn't have to create his own pace and where he could counterpunch as much as he wanted. He was completely dominant in those circumstances and could compete with any player on tour there.
3) Federer kinda figured him out. Like a lot of players that Federer faced in his early years, he got accustomed to their games and eventually shut them out with superior talent. Hewitt owned Federer early, but once the tables turned, he was never able to come back.
4) Serve and Volleyers died out. Hewitt was their most natural counter, and once there were fewer of them it was harder to advance deep in slams as opposed to grinding out multiple 5 set matches against baseliners.
At his best, he was more than capable of beating anyone, and he really has been underrated for some time now.
Backhandslapper · October 14, 2017 at 9:22 am
Sorry, I misread “height” as “weight”. The thing is, Lleyton never really “dominated”. So saying stuff like “with Nadal’s height, he would have dominated longer” is more like, “even with Nadal’s height, he most likely wouldn’t have dominated either”.
Btw, Agassi…
Backhandslapper · October 14, 2017 at 9:37 am
So under very specific conditions, he was dominant. That’s called cherrypicking. What’s his best winning streak?
I found this table which includes the best winning streaks since 1990:
1. Novak Djokovic 43 (10-11)
2. Roger Federer 41 (06-07)
3. Roger Federer 35 (2005)
3. Thomas Muster 35 (1995)
5. Rafael Nadal 32 (2008)
6. Pete Sampras 29 (1994)
7. Novak Djokovic 28 (13-14)
7. Novak Djokovic 28 (2015)
9. Rafael Nadal 26 (2006)
9. Andre Agassi 26 (1995)
9. Roger Federer 26 (04-05)
12. Jim Courier 25 (1992)
12. Roger Federer 25 (2005)
14. Andy Murray 24 (2016-)
14. Rafael Nadal 24 (2005)
14. Pete Sampras 24 (1999)
14. Rafael Nadal 24 (2010)
18. Novak Djokovic 23 (2015)
18. Roger Federer 23 (2004)
It seems to encapsulate the most dominant players of the era pretty well, the odd one out being Muster and his clay hooray from the middle nineties.
No Lleyton. Seems the surface and opposition were never suitable / fast long enough, watcha think.
Or maybe it’s Hewitt was never really dominant.
Hartt · October 14, 2017 at 10:26 am
Federer just won over Delpo, so it will be a Fedal final in Shanghai. Fed got off to a bit of a slow start, and lost the first set, but played better as the match went on. Rafa has been playing some of the best hard court tennis of his career, reminds me of parts of 2013. And Roger loves the conditions in Shanghai. So it could be an exciting final.
Joe Blow · October 14, 2017 at 10:29 am
Beating Fed in Brisbane,is like Haas beating Fed in Halle. Fed throwing a bone to his old contemporaries in their homelands.
Scoop Malinowski · October 14, 2017 at 12:35 pm
Scoop Malinowski writes:
Hewitt beat prime Pete Sampras in the US Open final by a blowout. It was like Pete getting run over by a Mac Truck. Masterpiece of all time great tennis. Masterpiece of tennis genius and brilliance.
Scoop Malinowski · October 14, 2017 at 12:36 pm
Scoop Malinowski writes:
Catherine, Tennis is a game of centimeters and inches and everything counts. Agassi was a lot physically stronger than Hewitt.
Scoop Malinowski · October 14, 2017 at 12:37 pm
Scoop Malinowski writes:
Backhand slapper; But they couldn't knock Hewitt off the No. 1 perch for TWO years. Dominance. They all tried but Hewitt sent em all home.
Scoop Malinowski · October 14, 2017 at 12:41 pm
Scoop Malinowski writes:
Haelfix, Good analysis. Serve and volleyers lost their confidence and could no longer play that style with confidence. The Baseline power and counterpunching style became too good and destroyed the serve and volley tactics. Also the racquet and string technology probably contributed to the demise of the serve and volleyers but you wonder why didn't the racquet constructors build a frame and string which uplifted serve and volleyers? Pete Sampras once said "serve and volley works but no one does it good enough now."
backhandslapper · October 14, 2017 at 12:52 pm
This thread should be retitled "Misremember how great Hewitt was?"
Saying "Hewitt is like most players from the older era" equals saying: "Hewitt is nothing special."
Agassi, Sampras, Becker, Lendl, Edberg, McEnroe, the current stars — all those players remained competitive into their late twenties and some of them even well into their thirties.
Tell me that Lendl, a guy whose match-winning percentage exceeded 90% five different years, was dominant and would give the Big Four a run for their money if he was in his prime now.
No problem.
But Lleyton Hewitt?
The dude won only 82% of his matches during his best year. And he got over 80% twice (unless we count really small samples).
You guys call that a dominance?
He was past his best in 2003, at only 21/22. He's the walking definition of gap champion. Matured and peaked early, had his Christmas despite some suspect numbers as the eras changed, but got surpassed and left behind rather quickly by far superior players once they matured and fulfilled their potential.
He was better than Roddick and Ferrero, but notch and a half below the Big Four. You can romanticize him with rose-colored glasses, but let's not call it remembering.
Scoop Malinowski · October 14, 2017 at 12:56 pm
Scoop Malinowski writes:
I saw that Hewitt final win vs Fed in Brisbane and thought it was the last surge of Hewitt greatness. He also beat Nishikori there, and just played out of his mind turn back the clock Hewitt tennis. The last surge of Hewitt greatness. Fed did not tank that match or subconsciously tank it. I don't think Fed would ever tank a final unless the opponent was just playing too well and he would coast to the finish (like Cincy final to Zverev). I believe Hewitt beat Fed in three tough sets in that final. No tank or bone toss.
catherine · October 14, 2017 at 12:58 pm
Scoop – yes Agassi was a bundle of muscle. Strong and fast.
Height’s important, but I think there’s a limit. For women I think the ideal height is around 5’9″ – 10″ –
Serena’s 5-9.
For men maybe 6′ 2″-3″ ?
There’s always exceptions of course.
Backhandslapper · October 14, 2017 at 1:25 pm
You’re a stubborn one, I’ll give you that. And you’re a lot like Lleyton with your me-against-the-world attitude, which I like.
Now Lleyton — is it you? Just to remind you, you spent a total of 80 weeks as #1. Since a year lasts exactly 52 weeks, you only spent a year and 28 weeks as number one. I see you would love to round off the number to one whole year, but that’s not what it was, alright?
You did pretty well there with your limited skill and size.
But be a man about it, was there ever a time when such a long reign took so little? Doubt it.
Front242 · October 14, 2017 at 2:05 pm
scoop said:
↑
LOL, you seriously have to be kidding. That was a horrendously bad match by Roger and was 100% about him being crap that day more than a Hewitt resurgence. Hewitt had no business winning any match against Federer at that stage of his career unless Roger played an absolute stinker which he did that day and don't forget this was the first tournament of the 2014 season following Roger's injury laden 2013. He was making tons of errors that day and lost a lot of matches to guys he shouldn't have in 2013 too because of the back issues.
Scoop Malinowski · October 14, 2017 at 2:27 pm
Scoop Malinowski writes:
Not buying your sell. I thought Hewitt played out of his mind that week. The eyes were burning and blazing with the old fire. The veins were popping. I say Hewitt's level was too much for Fed that day. I saw the old Hewitt that day. The last surge of Hewitt's greatness emerged that day. Wondrous performance by Hewitt. Not buying your discrediting and diminishing of the tennis brilliance Hewitt summoned that day. Come AWWWWWNNNNNNNNNN!!