@@Bambotb no it's not. It's not even close. His forehand 04-06 was the greatest shot in the history of tennis. He actually specifically stated after his racket switch that his backhand has improved but he lost some juice on his forehand
@@Bambotb It was some post match interview within the last 5 years. Possibly during the 17 Australian Open but could have been before. I just remember it clearly because I noticed the difference in his forehand and he finally spoke about it.
No question that Arazi was a talented player. But like so many talented tennis players, shot selection and then execution at critical moments was the key differentiator between them and Fed.
4:41 "Left handers cant hit a good forehand volley" wth is that commentator talking about? Mcenroe, connors, ivanevic, rios, nadal and many more left handers can hit a good forehand volley
Contrary to what people below were saying about Arazi's shot selection, the real factor was height; 5''7 playing in a time of big hitters on fast surfaces, you're never going to be great. Only small players who did well were Hewitt (who had joke draws and played in a weak period) and Agassi - who played like a big man (aside from the serve).
@밥사줄게I'll take you out for dinner Sorry, but what exactly did those guys actually conquer? 1 masters title between the three of them. Agassi and Hewitt are the only examples of small guys who were able to conquer and have a lasting legacy in the sport, and even then I would never watch Hewitt as his style bores me to death. Height isn't a big factor nowadays because aside from Djokovic, Nadal and Federer, everyone on the tour quite simply sucks. The truth is, a 40 year old Federer is the third best player on tour. That's not a testament to how good Federer is - it's a statement to how bad the depth is in the game.
@@yassintriggerdellarobia What did Ferrer win? Davydenko was a choker with an average game who was made to look better than he was because he scored a few wins over Nadal who was not playing well during the end of 2009. The guy didn't even make a slam final. I do not watch tennis anymore. The only small players I have seen been able to have great careers were Hewitt and Agassi. Hewitt managed to win a Wimbledon with a weak field in a transitional era, there is no way Hewitt wins Wimbledon in any other era. Agassi was a very good player.
Arazi was a stunning underrated player, the most elegant in ATP
Just passing through on my journey to watch every Federer match.
Federer's forehand at the moment was incredibly powerful and destructive for his opponents.
It's better now man he says it himself
@@Bambotb no it's not. It's not even close. His forehand 04-06 was the greatest shot in the history of tennis. He actually specifically stated after his racket switch that his backhand has improved but he lost some juice on his forehand
@@slamandjam2 where does he say it ?
@@Bambotb It was some post match interview within the last 5 years. Possibly during the 17 Australian Open but could have been before. I just remember it clearly because I noticed the difference in his forehand and he finally spoke about it.
@@Bambotb after his win against Nadal in Indian wells
No question that Arazi was a talented player. But like so many talented tennis players, shot selection and then execution at critical moments was the key differentiator between them and Fed.
Just passing through on my journey to find every "Just passing through on my journey to watch every Federer match" comment
Me too
Golden legend in universal
4:41 "Left handers cant hit a good forehand volley" wth is that commentator talking about? Mcenroe, connors, ivanevic, rios, nadal and many more left handers can hit a good forehand volley
That was one of the more retarded comments I’ve heard
Seriously though, I wish I could hear the rest of that comment. wtf is his logic
Forehand at that time was murderous
what happened to this guy arazi, looks decent
Contrary to what people below were saying about Arazi's shot selection, the real factor was height; 5''7 playing in a time of big hitters on fast surfaces, you're never going to be great. Only small players who did well were Hewitt (who had joke draws and played in a weak period) and Agassi - who played like a big man (aside from the serve).
@밥사줄게I'll take you out for dinner Sorry, but what exactly did those guys actually conquer? 1 masters title between the three of them.
Agassi and Hewitt are the only examples of small guys who were able to conquer and have a lasting legacy in the sport, and even then I would never watch Hewitt as his style bores me to death.
Height isn't a big factor nowadays because aside from Djokovic, Nadal and Federer, everyone on the tour quite simply sucks. The truth is, a 40 year old Federer is the third best player on tour. That's not a testament to how good Federer is - it's a statement to how bad the depth is in the game.
@@usefulidiot9896 david ferrer . Nikolay davydenko i think you are just started watching tennis
@@yassintriggerdellarobia What did Ferrer win? Davydenko was a choker with an average game who was made to look better than he was because he scored a few wins over Nadal who was not playing well during the end of 2009. The guy didn't even make a slam final.
I do not watch tennis anymore.
The only small players I have seen been able to have great careers were Hewitt and Agassi. Hewitt managed to win a Wimbledon with a weak field in a transitional era, there is no way Hewitt wins Wimbledon in any other era. Agassi was a very good player.
"Better with the point combinations." What does that even mean? This guy has no idea what he's talking about.