I can't stop laughing- truer words and all....really quick before I leave to drown myself in champagne over Rourke's (possible, most likely *sniffle* loss) Oscar run tonight.

I'll dispense with the usual "I agree with, I love this blog, etc."- you know I do, as always. :)

Pete's act was calculated, and it is ironic to you, me and most of our group that he has SO much to say, now that he's retired. It's so much easier to sling unsolicited advice from the safety of retirement, isn't it? A contact of ours once refered to Federer as "a handful." Any chance that description might fit Pete as well? Hmmm.

While I appreciate his contribution to the game- 14 slams cannot/should not be denied- I couldn't agree more with what you've said here, Love.

If anyone, Sampras included, had a magic "defeat Nadal" recipe to give to Federer, the man would have used it by now.

As always Cheryl, loved it! I can't agree with you more. Sampras was always one of my favs - if not my fav - but I noticed in the last few years he's spoken more than he did when he was tour - certainly in terms insults thrown in Rafa's direction. Sometime back, I recall reading that Pete said he could take on Federer. I thought that was quite distasteful and insulting. He could have said he'd like to have had the opportunity to challenge the guy at both their primes. We're all guilty of armchair criticism but Pete should really be more careful.

success is the sweetest revenge! nadal knows better than anyone! actions speak louder than words! sampras comments are never surprising to me. everybody knows who he wants at #1! he's never truly given rafa any credit for his well-earned position at the top! i would love to see someone organize an exhibition between sampras and nadal. in my book, this would be a tennis highlight for years to come. anyway, all nadal needs to do is what he is already doing, let his racquet do the talking and continue his winning ways! i have noticed that rafa is making history while the naysayers are talking, and he's only 22 years of age! how smart is that!

Kelli - Thank you, my dear. I think indeed Sampras might be another "handful" so to speak.

As to the secret "defeat nadal" recipe - surely Federer's been working on this for nearly 4 years. I'm almost amused by the people who think there is one easy answer. LOL.

Very true. Sampras still thinks nadal is a fantastic marathon runner and nothing more, even after wimbledon and ao. I was quite surprised by his comments.

I think Federer actually has more respect and appreciation for nadal's improvement as a tennis player, and justly so. He once said that everyone underestimates nadal and thinks nadal is just a good athlete. But in fact he is so much more than an athlete.

rujing - I think you are quite right. And indeed Federer would be in the best position to know precisely what Nadal is or is not capable of.

Agassi doesn't underestimate Nadal, I can tell you that much. he once said he's never played anyone like him.

I will say this, Nadal is a very excellent defensive player, probably the best defensive player ever. Add that with his left-hander advantage and super-fast feet is no wonder he is at the top. What Sampras say may be true in some ways. An excellent volleyer which Fed is not can neutralize Nadal's tactics of staying behind the baseline. We have seen Tsonga showed how easy it is to counter Nadal's tactic of staying behind the baseline. Fed is just as good as Sampras in volleying.

Sorry, correction: Fed is NOT as good as Sampras in volleying

Thank you Cheryl! Great stuff!!! It seems almost everyone wants to give Federer advice as to how he should/could beat Nadal. It ain't going to be easy! LOL Federer "will" put it together eventually. He can't just loose all the time to Rafa. Federer is just too good for that, he just has too much talent. We all know that except for clay the games have been close, it's just a matter of time. After he has finished feeling sorry for himself, and grown up/toughened up some, he'll be coming for the kill! (did I actually say that?! LOL) It should be interesting and fun seeing him going through this period of growth. He had been sitting on his laurels' for too long. Just winning, no need for improvement. Now he knows the time has come to make that change. It will take a miracle to stop him. Cheers.

if it's that easy for tsonga to repeat his 2008 australian open brilliance against nadal, why hasn't he been consistent in doing so? i'm not sure, but i don't think he's beaten nadal since that time! everything looks easy when you are in the audience!

I'm having trouble reacting to this article...Before Wimbledon Borg said all kinds of things about Roger & upto the semis even picked Nadal to win it. I do not remember reading any blog about it.So why is it that an article should come up about Pete when he speaks his mind.Whats wrong with being open? whats wrong with speaking your mind? If nobody put Borg under the microscope and nobody put Wilanders' frequent slights under scrutiny, why is that happening in case of Pete?
Quite honestly , I believe this is more because people here dont like his comments about Rafa . What Pete said makes a lot of sense if you come to think about it.Serve and Volley ( not on clay) is probably the best way to beat Nadal.We all give armchair advice- how to play,how to behave, how to be 'humble'.Maybe we should all show the players how its done. Yes,perhaps some of Pete's comments about Nadal may not have been liked by his fans.So what? Look,I 've always enjoyed CM's artciles for they're most of the times abiding to objectivity.But I would like to know why only Pete has been criticised for his pearls of wisdom and why not Borg,?why not Wilanders?why not JMac?? Pete has just about as much right to expressing his view points as any all-time great out there.Infact I daresay that being the all-time slam leader he's earned the right to speak what he believes in.Note-my opinion in no way intends to take a dig at the writer.I have utmost respect for CM and her writing.However , the very idea of the article is something that bothered me and I chose to voice my views in as humble a way as possible.

Cheryl,

I usually love your blog entries. That said, this one was a bit of a downer. I don't quite agree with the wordplay that you've engaged in and misconstrued what Sampras said. As you mentioned Sampras respects Federer, and so he advised him to come to the net more. Because Sampras believes that Roger has sufficient skills to do that. Coming to the net could be more successful against Nadal rather than staying back and waiting for him to kill Roger's backhand. Oh and BTW the matches that Roger tried the net tactic was on clay. Where obviously he lost since there was too much time for Nadal to pass him. Furthermore whatever little of serve volley Federer did in Wimb 08 final - it worked pretty well.

Anyway my point is NOT what Roger should do to beat Rafa, but that Sampras made a suggestion based on what he thinks is the best way to challenge Rafa. Since Sampras was a natural net player, so he proposes Roger to be likewise. It's just a little strange that serve volley tennis is on the decline considering the fact that the serves have got bigger and approach shots have become pacier.

I don't think Sampras meant in anyway that he would be able to beat Rafa on his own. He just offered suggestions on how to think about attacking Nadal. Since Serve-volley tennis is on decline, it stands to reason that it might be an approach that could prove effective were someone to do it well.

All in all, I agree with you that Federer knows better than anyone else how to beat Nadal. Federer has done a lot to improve his game and take the attack to Nadal. The problem, however, is that Nadal has improved MORE and now seems to have a stranglehold mentally over Roger.

Please don't disparage Pete Sampras who was a great champion. I am sure in his prime, with his unbelievable serve and net play, he could have provided both Roger and Rafa a run for their money.

Please let's keep the past champions in their position and talk about the current champions.

Thanks!

I agree people need to stop telling Roger what to do. I mean hes clearly tried coming to net and, in my opinion, its the worst idea in the book. Nadal (and I actually relate here) gets this extra energy when seeing an opponent at net. I always hit my best shots as passing shots- he's the same. For gods sakes, stay well away from net. I don't think Roger was aggressive enuf in the Ao final, but he didn't serve well either. Roger CAN beat Rafa, it's probably a matter of mentality. Roger will know a hell of a lot more than anyone else.

However, when Federer is retired I fully hopes he comes out and says he would put the current young guns to the test in 'his day'. The fact Sampras is not willing to sit down and admit they are better are reason he is one of the greatest ever and was a pro athlete. It's the Serena attitude of ' noone is better than me'. I think it's a great attitude and I wish Roger would adopt it on court.

Sampras does give alot of credit to Federer, and as for Nadal, well how could he not?

I too agree that people should stop pestering Roger with constant advice.But I do not understand why only Sampras should be pulled up for this.And I cannot help but get the feeling that this article is written not out of the frustration of reading the 'armchair advice' from Sampras but more because of Sampras's comments about Nadal .I read this article over and over and I keep getting the same feeling everytime.Of course I maybe entirely wrong.

Sampras, with all due respect, should think twice before he gives advice especially on how to beat Rafa. He didn't even have a Garros trophy for crying out loud! If there was someone who needed some pointers, it was him on HOW TO WIN A SLAM ON CLAY! I bet he won't win a set against Fed on that surface.

My issue with Sampras is not so much the advice. As I said, plenty of others have done the same. My issue is with the fact that Pete seems to think - without ever having played Nadal - that he would be able to beat him without breaking a sweat. I find it disrespectful to both Federer AND Nadal.

That is indeed rude. You'd think he should know better!

Imagine what Sampras would do if Federer stays at 13 and it was Nadal that eventually passed him years from now!

But in the present, it seems that ever since Roger hung out with Sampras during Indian Wells 2007, he just hasn't been the same.

i think Sampras possess much more tennis knowledge than sum of all our knowledge !!! we should respect him as well as his opinion !!!!!!!!!

Nadal is a highly strung continental! That all!

janhavi,

Mats Wilanders' comments on Nadal's game for the past couple of years have been picked apart a number of times on various websites - I can't remember if it has been done here on tennis talk as well. A lot of Wilanders' comments on Nadal have been clearly not factual and strongly biased. I don't remember anyone arguing whether or not Sampras' has a strong bias against Nadal before this article, hence it's value.

You may be right that no-one analysed Borg's comments on Nadal last year... but then I don't recall his comments straying far into total disregard of facts. Nor did he make scathing unfounded comments against Federer.

And for those of you that mention that Sampras and other greats know a lot more about tennis than the rest of us, of course that is 100% true... but the issue here is about public figures making public statements containing too much bias, wait, let's make that clearer: being very dishonest.

Maybe Sampras put some mononucleosis virus in Fed's food when they hung out in Indiam Wells 2007.

AWESUM WORK cheryl...the blog reflects sumthing very true..pete has becum arrogant and has neglible respet for rafa...whenever he is asked how far rafa will go in terms of slams his reply is like thi.."rafa is just an animal"...i mean he just focuses his ans on rafa's physicality and says nuthing complimentary abt his game.HE shud learn to respect rafa...if pete ws the best volleyer than rafa is the man wid the BEST PASSING shots...the amount of spin he imparts combined with significant pace is incredble..he has in many ways revolutionalized tennis.Remeber what john mcenroes's reaction ws when he came out of a practice session against rafa at wimby 08..he ws panting for breath and said that his racket has never xperienced these kinds of balls which rafa throws. Pete failed miserbaly to make an impact at RG...he ws simply not motivated enough to win it may b..luk at rafa...its incredble how a SPANIARD ..yes a SPANIArd comes after ages to win majors on othr surfaces rather than clay!!! for most spaniards its like a crime to even think abt winning wimbledn! sp pete...admire and praise the efforts rafa has put into his transitional game....m sure rafa will eclipse pete's record!! GO RAFA!

I am talking about this particular website.I know how much Wilanders has been criticised elsewhereOh and I'm talking about Wilanders' comments about Federer not Nadal..And it seems Borg's suggestion that Roger's lost motivation and should consider retirement wasnt worthy of a blog.IMO
Pete's comments are not rude nor are they dishonest.I'm not saying I agree with them.But he has the right to say what he thinks.He knows a lot more than the fans do.And if we sit here and give so much of armchair advice then the fact that Sampras does it shouldnt come as a surprise.

Serve and volley might have worked against nadal on grass in their past matches only becoz of the frequency with which it has always been perfomed by roger.He doesnot do it quite often so whenever he does..its like a surprise for rafa.IF roger becums predictable wid it m sure rafa will adjust and find a way to pass roger in this battle aswell...if roger has to cum to the net ..then the aproach shots shud be inch perfect...nt sure if inch perfect shots wud even work..despite the low bounce in grass rafa ws able to flick bakhand passing shots from impossible angles to pass roger who then stood helplessly on the net. "Roger is a genius".."roger is the smartest and most artistic player on the circuit" ....these statements are commonly uttered by many so m sure such a wonderful player can himself figure it out what to do against rafa.HE has tried many many things ..if they dont work he will try again.PLus ..when advise roger to aproach the net more they in a sense ask him to come out of his comfort zone..ok roger may b an xcellent vollyer but his strengths are from the baseline mainly.Its never easy to play out of ur comfort zone folks...WHY CUDNT PETE PLAY OUT OF HIS COMFORT ZONE ON CLAY AND PLAY FROM THE BASELINE WITH HEAVY SPIN???(for which he mite have needed to alter his grip a bit like nadal has had to alter his a bit to win wimby).

when we get pass what we want roger's problem to be and accept the fact that the issue is not so much his game as is his intimidation of rafa, then maybe things will turn around. you can watch them play and see what the problem is! from what i can see, he has thrown every tactic at nadal, yet unsuccessfully. one thing is for certain, being in denial is not the answer to roger's problem! you cannot fix a problem when you deny there is one!

personally, i don't care about sampras's comments about nadal or anyone else. i could care less if he writes a book on how he feels. it's not going to change anything when these guys play each other. he's entitled to his opinion! however, as a representative of the sport, he should be more neutral and maybe not publicly diminish one player, while exalting the other. leave that to fans like us to do!

liked ur approach memi...but ppl shud also remember that roger didnt have any kind of intimidation/mental block against rafa since birth!!! so full credit to nadal for beating him so often on all surfaces that roger lost self-belief and rafa got into his head

vamosrafa, that's exactly what happened!

personally,i like the article.i think that all the people that care about federer so much and want to see him beat nadal would just stop giving him advise and leave him alone maybe he would do better.everybody wants to tell the man how to beat nadal. and when fed goes on that court it is just him and nadal. back off of the man.leave him alone . then maybe he will get it together. i bet nadal is kind of tired of beating him in a way- nadal probably just want him to get to the 14th slam and be done with it (please).i know that i am tired of hearing about it -all of the advise and all. everyone wants to be a critic. all of these people comming back from the dead wants to be in the lime light again.
then you have agassi making verdasco over again .why did he not try and help blake or roddick(home boys)out.
i hope nadal will always beat federer. there i said it.

What I don't understand is that everyone seems to have a recipe to beat Rafa but then,why can nobody do it?
kaitepai,you said that "Sampras does give alot of credit to Federer, and as for Nadal, well how could he not?" but believe me he could. I've been interested in Sampras' comments for a very long time and I was especially shocked that how he was always avoiding to say anything complimentary about Rafa.Last year,he once implied that Novak was better than Rafa.Not only Sampras but also Wilander and Pat Cash have underestimated Rafa.Pat Cash was arguing that he would never consider Rafa a truly "great" unless he wins a hard court grand slam.But after Australian Open,he still doesn't give any credit to him.I'm not surprised that Agassi doesn't underestimate Rafa because he actually played against him;therefore,he knows how tough it is to beat him.

oh well if he doesnt give nadal credit then thats annoying but we all know he is wrong, and is just bitter and jealous!! he prob longs for the days of serve and volley again. it doesnt really matter what he thinks

These guys probably feel that someone without a serve and volley game shouldn't have the audacity to keep winning against a 'classy, gent' like Fed so they bitch and moan about it, frustrated watching from the sidelines thinking "He needs me to show him how it's done". These guys are sometime more out of touch than some fans, they don't necessarily KNOW MORE than fans who follow the game very closely. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, so are we. But these guys, altho retired, are high profile and should watch their tongues. It doesn't do Fed any favours. It probably pisses Nadal off that he than aims to trounce Fed like at FO last year when everyone said it was Fed's time.
Leave them both alone for goodness sake!

Federer has a 626 - 151 single record and 57 titles, $45,318,757 in price money, and a, among other records, has reached the seminfinal or best from the last 19 gran slam tournaments, 18 finals, and 13 gran slam tiltes.... Has anyone seen Federer getting old?, honestly...
One of the definition of the word Intelligence its the ability to solve probles, if look at the numbers shown above, you can see that fed has managed to solve 626 out of 767 problems, has solved 19 (gran slam) x 7 (matches) - (5 final matches loss and one semifinal loss) = 113 matches in the las five year in a row. And he is only 27 years old and healthier than Nadal or other young players.
Federer is the smartest player alive because he has solve more problems that anyone, and in the way , preserve his health.
What i am trying to say is that this whole controversy about Roger`s "inability" to beat Rafa, and try to compare both players is too in advance, because we think that rafa will follow Rogers path and stay in the top for 5 years or more. Because Roger set the standar for a top player.
if you look at the Fed - Nadal head to head you can see that while being at the top of his game, and number 1 in the world, Roger lost FIVE matches in a row to Nadal, Nadal, is like the subject that is very hard to a very talented student.
Sampras can say what ever he wants, the truth is that Fed has beaten Nadal before, and he can do it again, he doesnt have to change his game, he has to want it more than Nadal.
And we cant look this at a short scale of time, because Rogers plans to play untill he is 36 or more, and he has stayed very healthy, Nadal on the other hand its dominant player for now, but can he keep this rythm for 10 more years? for 5? for 2?, he is damaging he knees to fast and he is only 22. And thats the price to his talent

The fact that Federer is not performing well against players of better quality now and putting up a genuine challenge to his authority is testament to the fact stated by others here before - that his competition was weaker during his dominant years.
And that's the price to his talent.
You said so yourself he's the healthiest and is far from old therefore he must still be at his best.

mdmch, sounds like your reference to nadal's health issues are based on wishful thinking! when all is said and done i think what a player actually achieves in the short or long term will determine his measure. if federer plays until age 36 and win 5 or more slams, that's even greater, but i don't think who will last longer is the issue. only time will tell! that's beyond our control!

When pete Sampras says something every 1 has 2 listen...those r truly the words of wisdom...when sampras suggests federer to come to net he also means that he has to play a cleaner crisp volley to beat nadal..but he doesnt say that coz of the respect he has for fed. that will be insultin fed if he says that he has to improve on his volleyin for such a great player fed. is....
and even if he says that he would have beaten rafael nadal , that doesnt sound funny to me..a man who has won 14 grandslams can say such words coz he can see some weakness in the spaniards game ..............................
and we r no1 to question the great mans words...

since we're saying Federer lived in such a weak era the same should apply to nadal too since he's a part of the same era.In tht case , nadal's RG titles are simply not credible because he never faced any competition there.Yes,not even from Roger.Truth is, both Roger and Rafa faced good enough competition only they soared above the competition.The guys Roger's losing to are 5-6 years younger to him ( wont include nadal since he's an early bloomer)
As for Sampras's words-I personally do not agree with him.But quite honestly I dont feel the need to question him.But thats my opinion

mdmch, I like your statistics. WHat is more impressive of Fed is that he doesn't have to hit the ball hard like djokovic and nadal to win and he doesn't need to 'run like a rabbit'

Until Nadal challenged him, not one else did other than Safin briefly. Now Murray is also beating him - just not when it it really matters. Before these two, who were really good competition? By the time Nadal came up, Fed was already around. Anyway, it was in reply to mdmch because of what he/she said. Read my comment carefully.

I read your comment.You make a really good point and yes,Nadal came around when Fed had already established himself.But even then I wont call him a member of the 'era of youngsters'.I personally believe Roddick too is highly underrated.He dosent play well now but his Wimbledon ond USO finals against Federer were excellent.While it is true nobody consistently challenged Federer until nadal came around , it is also true that Federer has had to wriggle out of quite a few tough spots in slams..And even with this so called good competition Fed just made 4 slam finals in a row.I would say-Fed's game matched up well against his competitors and that was a huge advantage to him.While Nadal is a terrible match up for him . Murray is beating pretty much everyone these days so I wont say its just Federer who dosent perform well against him.

Ok, my two-sense on this issue. Sampras is my all-time favourite player, I have idolised him for a long time.

Having said this, I agree with memi, sister and the Nadal fans. Sampras only gives credit for Nadal's athleticism, something Federer probably echoed in his post AO semi interview. I think it requires a great deal of talent to play the way Nadal does, and in this way, Sampras could be more generous with the praise instead of repeating, "Rafa's such a sick athlete its hard to beat him."

Second point- On the grass where Sampras won his seven Wimbledon's, its hard to think Nadal would have beaten him had he played against the Sampras in his prime. Nadal's achievements on grass are legendary, but we did see how the pure power style of Tsonga in the AO semi last year dismantled him. Granted, he's improved since then, but on grass, and with Sampras able to dig in a great serve time and again, he probably would have been the favourite.

The problem with Sampras's advice is the nature of it. Roger cannot simply come to net and win. He's an allcourt player, not a PPP with brilliant volleys. What Federer needs to do is to find his first serves, and generally use his slice and volleys MORE EFFECTIVELY, he doesn't need to do more of it.

And Cheryl, do not distort the facts. Sampras also added that Federer needed to figure out a way to overcome his mental block after his exhibition with Haas.

Sampras does not need to prove anything, and it would be ridiculous to ask him to. His game was tailormade to suit his ambitions at that time, win Wimbledon, and racquets and strings at that time didn't really permit you to be a seven time Wimbledon champ as well as an FO champ. Borg did it, but then again there was different situation where equipment was concerned, he never won on hard court.

Oh, and "His pearls of wisdom are way more interesting than his titles". An Andre Agassi fan much? To say that you love Murray and at the same time find Sampras boring is a little hypocritical don't you think?

Vamosrafa - on a few of your points.

You're very right about comfort zone. Nadal will probably go down as the most willing and brave player where making adjustments and learning is concerned. Pete was too scared to change his game, and more importantly, his racquet.

I don't think Pete disrespects Nadal, he just feels he would have beaten him on grass in his prime. I think he should have a better way of making statements though, "Rafa is simply an animal" was a tribute to his tenacity and not a rebuke of his game, but his statements always create speculation.

Pete wouldn't be stupid to think he could Rafa without breaking a sweat after repeatedly commenting on how hard Nadal works and how good he is physically. He only feels that on a surface like grass or the USO, he would have handled Nadal better than Roger would have.

samprallica...I agree wid u to a gud xtent..i hope pete plays atleast an exhibition match against rafa soon so that he could atleast get an idea how it feels to hi those heavy balls...santoro is so xperienced but even he lukd like a beginner when playing nadal in doha this year.He highlited the fact that he has never played such balls in his career and for the first time he understands why the great roger federer misses sum simple volleys quite often against rafa.His shots are completely difrent...trajectory..3200 rpm on average on the forehand side is crazy!! sampras's chief rival..andre agassi used to generate about 1900 rpm on his forehand !!!pete ws superb in his prime...but ppl are yet to see nadal's prime..m sure..alot of room for improvement...so wait and see how much rafa improves (serve..volley..transitional game..ability to flatten out shots...........)
Regarding Wilander...he is erratic i think...he also has said many complimentray things abt rafa !! 23 jan 09..he said rafa will go on to surpass pete if he stays healthy.Wilander also labelled nadal as the smartest player on the circuit who knows very well how to xploit his opponent's weaknesses.For roger last year he said "if i had two wishes come true..one would be that paul henri mathieu wins RG and second will be that the greatest player (Roger) wins RG !!!

Sampras relies on great athletism too as far as I remember. Slamdunk smashes requires some serious athletism. It's fun that Nadal, Sampras and Federer are so different from each other which shows there are more than one way you can come out in life.

samrallica -

"He only feels that on a surface like grass or the USO, he would have handled Nadal better than Roger would have. "

But isn't that just the point? He has NO IDEA how he would have handled Nadal. I think we can all agree that Nadal is not your run-of-the-mill baseliner. I get the impression that Sampras thinks it would be like playing Agassi - except with better foot speed. I personally think that Rafa might have surprised Pete with his game.

considering Pat cash..i think he still feels a bit of hostility towards rafa coz rafa once beat him on a clay court xhibition match (RAFA WS ONLY 14 yrs old!!! yes 14!!!)..lollzz....

janhavi, my initial comment was just meant as a wind up for one person. there's no point arguing about strength of competition, people have different opinions and I don't necessarily disagree with your points. I've watched Fed since well before he turned no. 1. I wasn't trying to say he was crap and just got lucky, it was just a sarcky comment. I thought that was obvious but maybe it wasn't.

oops..sorry..i goddit ;)

Sampras knows more about tennis at the top than just about anyone, but he comes at it from a point of view: he thinks serve-and-volley is a superior style because it worked so well for him. He sees Nadal as a new Agassi, and he beat Agassi most of the time. But, Sampras never faced Nadal's game in person -- the speed, the passing shots, the heavy ball, and, above all, the mental toughness. I would love to have seen them play when both were in their prime, but my money would have been on Nadal. As for Federer, I don't agree that he had weak competition when he was winning easily. He just made them look weak. At 27, he's bound to be a fraction of a second slower and that's enough to give an opening to other players. Federer has the weapons to beat Nadal, but I agree that he needs to be more aggressive and pick the right times to move forward -- and serve well. Federer's basic problem with Nadal is between his own ears. He gets tight and can't play with his normal confidence and ability when Nadal is across the net. As for Nadal, he is a phenomenal player, with extraordinary mental strength. But I don't think he'll last at no. 1 as long as Federer did unless he can develop more of an all-court game. His present style is just too punishing to his body.

janhavi, your comments about nadal and roland garros are interesting. nadal winning RG four consecutive years competing against great clay courters, like federer, djokovic, ferrer, almagro, nalbandian, etc. and remaining unbeatable is actually a testament of just how good he is on clay. because they can't beat him, doesn't mean that the competition is weak. it does mean that he has faced tough challenges on clay and prevailed. the difference between today and yesterday is the consistency of challenges. federer did not face this kind of consistent toughness! if you don't agree that the level of competition was weaker for federer than for nadal today, then, compare the level of today's competitors to three years ago: murray, djokovic, tsonga, simon, monfils, ferrer, etc. today's players are physical and mentally stronger and getting better. name some players who consistency presented challenges for federer three or four years ago!

Sampras vs. Nadal is a good question, and while I think Pete would have been lost on clay, its still very difficult to talk of such a comparison. The reason:

1. Sampras played in an era with very different racquets and strings. Games were built on racquets those days and obviously there was less emphasis on spin.

2. Coaching techniques changed a lot in the 90s. Biomechanics became involved; this is why you see players such as Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, etc... use there bodies a lot more effectively in their strokes than Sampras ever did. Their shots are mechanically way more superior in this regard. having said this, no one used their body as effectively as Sampras on the serve.

3. There is a lot more scientific help where nutrition, fitness and injury prevention is concerned. If Rafa played with such intensity in those days, I don't know whether his body would have held up. He is an intelligent thinker, however, and does everything to stay fresh and fit.

4. There is less disparity between the speed of surfaces these days. Racquets and strings also allow you to be equally effective on all surfaces.

Sampras developed his game based on conditions those days. Rafa did it based on what was to follow. therefore, you can't compare them with what is immediately visible to us. Instead, you have to look for outside factors to fit into the equation.

Where mental strength is concerned, these two are the greatest imo. I've seen Sampras sick and ailing and finish entire tournaments, pull of second serve aces while throwing up and so on and so forth. They were and are both amazingly athletic, but Rafa overall uses his body more efficiently.

And for detractors who say he is boring:

1. Sampras rounded the pure power play by being very effective off the baseline. He owned Agassi time and again off the back of the court. This made him the best all-courter those days.

2. This is a guy who made the slam dunk a mainstay (Yannick Noah initiated it, but was never as effective) and the explosive style with shots on the run an essential part of the game.

memi-I dont remember anyone pushing nadal and the players you named are not clay-courters they're all-court players.And just because you think Federer did not face competition dosen't mean its true.Like I said-you're saying the competition's better now? Okay then-there you have it.Federer just reached 4 slam finals in a row even with this so called great competition.And since when were Simon and Monfils consistent? They're good no doubt but their yet to prove themselves at slams.
You probably dont agree but I personally believe Roddick,Hewitt,Agassi,Safin and others provided federer with good enough challenges.You're saying Federer had weak competition before nadal came along.In that case the same applies to Nadal.Nobody apart from Federer has been able to defeat Nadal in a clay court final.Nobody pushed him to 5 sets at RG.While Federer has been pushed to 5 sets at almost each of the slams he won.
We can go on about this for ages.I believe Federer had good comepition and thats not about to change ..This is my view point and so it shall remain.

SAMPRALLICA...good points made..these factors shud be taken into account.

janhavi, can't argue your viewpoint! we all see through rose-colored glasses sometimes! you're right, we can discuss this forever, but we'll still get the same results, you think federer was consistently challenged and i don't! simple as that!

Thanks for the great article. I just want to say that I have always thought Pete was boring to watch and honestly I think he likes to make these comments because Nadal is more popular and may brake his record. Pete should just go spend his millions.

Lol, you don't get it do you? Sampras didn't care about popularity. Nadal I admit has a lot more charming way of staying humble, but Sampras obviously is a fan of Federer's style of play. That he can't see beauty in Nadal's game is his mistake.

Nadal's game is defensive and people always call defensive-styled play 'ugly' no matter what sport it is. Defenders in football are the spoilers of the striker's efforts to attack. Defensive teams are always considered 'ugly' and boring. I personally think Nadal's game is ugly but it is effective nonetheless. His spin is designed to make the opponent make mistakes and his first priority is just to get the ball on the court. It is just the truth. Attack is always beautiful because it represents creativity.

Geart argument torres, i see you got your facts straight too - even better!

spot on, torres9! creativity is the word! i love it when players and people in general add a touch of creativity to whatever it is they do! sameness is boring, but creativity is attractive and exciting; rafa is soooo exciting! his ability to create a winning shot from anywhere on the court with sheer determination and agility is spellbinding! no one does it better! it's beautiful to see!

Come to think of it, IF that "ugly and boring" game of Rafa switch to "attack", he would have amassed a staggering number of titles, already!....perhaps 15 SLAMS by now... The other players must be very frustrated, they would have beaten FED if they've been playing "ugly and boring" all those times!

Yeah... everything has a counter.. no strategy is perfect. Fed's super-attacking game is countered by a super-defensive player like Nadal. But other players like Murray and Simon and Monflis gets the better of Nadal because they play the same brand of tennis. To counter a defensive game is to slow the pace which counterpuncher feed on. This is why Fed's game is suited to Nadal's strategy.

why didn't Fed get that...he's very creative, intelligent, well rounded master of tennis?
Just asking... no offense!

both of u have given good pnts.But rite now i wud like to ask the same qs as the one asked by agf25agf.... why didnt roger adopt such a strategy and adjust??!! m sure his aims are to earn more and more success rather than impressing viewers wid his elegant style of play. Nad has done an xceptionaly gud job whe it comes to making adjustments.Luk at his matches back in 05-06...and comapre them wid his present style of play..he plays so much inside the court...steps in to atack 2nd serves...plays down the line forehands so often now(hiting cross court forehands only ws his game back in 05-06..)..and flatenning out shots both wid the forehand & bakhand superbly well.....why hasnt roger been able to adopt a style of play similar to rafa so that he cud prevail on clay especially???!!!

vamosrafa--- that's exactly what's on my mind!

vamosrafa-you cant just adopt a style just out of thin air.Besides I find Roger a lot more creative and exciting.We have our own perceptions.Roger's game has been tailored to be the way it is .Same is the case with Rafa.In fact Rafa had to work much harder than Roger for his game to suit all surfaces.Roger's play on clay is very good.Just not as good as Rafa because Rafa's game was originally constructed to suit clay courts.Its difficult to change a style of play..The match up is naturally bad for Federer.While there are improvements he can bring to his game,especially against Rafa,its going to take time.IMO I personally believe Roger dosent stick to his tactics.I noticed that last year in Monte Carlo and Hamburg.

shouldn't one of the things that determine how great a player is be his ability to eventually figure out how to prevail over a bad matchup? in the past, i've watched players like blake, berdych, youzhny beat nadal on hardcourts. they were bad matchups for him on that surface, but he kept chipping away at how to get the better of them and for the most part, he has succeeded! in my mind, that's what great players do!

Look, we wouldn't be talking like this if Nadal hadn't defeated Federer at Wimbledon or the Aussie. Everyone has had their nemesis, but granted, no one has been as tough as Nadal is for Federer.

you can't say blake is to nadal what nadal is to federer.You have to keep in mind that a large part of Nadal's confidence against Federer comes due the success he has had against Federer on clay where he's as good as invincible.Roger till last year used to manage almost all clay court finals while Nadal's success on hard courts esp in slams started last year.Besides,its not like Nadal's destroying Roger everytime they meet and its not like its a given that Roger's never going to beat Rafa again.
Roger has figuered out a lot of opponents who had huge winning records against him.Just because currently nadal dosent have a technical/natural bad match up for him dosen't mean he'll never have one.Kudos to him for all his accomplishments .But that in now way downgrades Roger's accomplishments.

i will welcome the day when comments can be made about federer's weaknesses without being accused directly or indirectly of discounting his achievements!. every player (past and present) have weaknesses! i try to stay away from "if's". i only based my observations and opinions on what actually happens, because realisitically, i have never seen a championship trophy engraved with words like, ."this was a close match and this player almost didn't win." you either win or lose, whether the match is closely contested or you win in straight sets or five sets, it's all the same, a win!

Can we say then that Rafa is more CREATIVE THAN fed, and therefore not "boring" after all?

read an article in google news, Fed says he's not going to work on his weaknesses. Sigh, but I guess from what he's achieved, no one can tell him what he should do. I just realized he had won 4 year-end Tennis Masters Cup and Nadal has won errr zero. Actually there's a lot for Nadal to catch up. And Fed says he'll play for another 8 years. means he has 32 more chance to get 2 slams. ^^

I disagree that Nadal is more 'creative'. He just trained his shots much more and run much faster than Fed. Probably some changes in tactics and probably he can do a slice or two.

No matter how much Nadal's haters denouce his game or achievements, the facts still remain. An overall 13-6 H2H and a 5-2 GS H2H says it all.
And they are not all clay. HC H2H against Nadal is by no means a trashing. 9-1 clay H2S is! A 5-4 HC H2H isn't! ANd you can argue till your blue in teh face about how many times they've met on HC. The fact is that if you lose, you lose. If you're that great, you should be able to win. And now Nadal is getting the better of Fed in GSs on "Fed's" surfaces.
And if Nadal is dominating Fed with his less creative game, what does that say about Fed's game? For all his creativity and classy style, he's still losing to Nadal. And that is a fact whether you like it or not.

In all fairness Rafa is creative in his own way(just not my cup of tea).As for losing to nadal like I said its a very bad match up for Roger and I am dead sure the continuous losses on clay have affected Roger's confidence against Rafa.Kudos to Rafa for having gotten so far in Roger's head and kudos to him for beating Roger on his best surfaces.But IMO the rivalry is a lot more complex than it actually looks.Nadal isnt killing him.But Nadal has certainly dented Roger's confidence well enough to capitalise on Roger's mistakes and to take over the important points in a match.And its true Roger has to work on that.He has to work on staying strong mentally.More importantly I really feel his serve and forehand which are his strengths have to be in place coz as it is he can't do much with the backhand against Rafa.

This discussion about Fed "improving, changing his style to adapt to the other players' games" is WAY TOO LATE, already. He's almost 30 and before he can do what you're dreaming about, he'll already reach the retirement age.
The fact is HE WANT TO BEAT RAFA>>> AGAIN... period!
That would require playing him on a bad day (injured, sick, very very tired) and a sprinkle of luck. For sure after a lot of attempts, he's already done what he thought would make him win (again), but failed. After a long "hibernation", he probably have concocted already a formula to achieve this mission(impossible). He's after that sweet revenge. I wonder what will happen if he's again defeated by the same "guy"... the saga continues! (for another 8 years is it?)

agf25agf ur rounding figure is excellent "roger is almost 30".....dont need 2 read ur further comments man....than sampras is also almost 30 , let him cm and win a few more grand slams...

Again, to cover up for FED's failure, to ENUMERATE again and again his "achievements" will come in handy. Much better if we'll compare it with Rafa's collection of trophies because it goes without saying that he's got a lot for him to CATCH UP.
Wait.... WHO's catching up WHO?
Fed is trying to catch up Sampras' record.
Fed is trying to catch up Nadal's h2h record with him.
Fed is trying to catch up with time to get another Slam and another ONE to go over the record.
Fed is on a mission ...to CATCH UP!

I think Nadal is the one playing catch up with Fed...
Nadal is trying to catch up 13 grand slams
Nadal trying to catch up 237 consecutive weeks at no.1
nadal trying to get a year end Masters cup.
The list is too long for me to write down here.

Rafa has all the TIME in the world.... HE's 22!

Yeah Micheal CHang had all the time in the world when he won French open at 19 yrs old and still got only 1 slam. With Murray consistently beating Nadal and Fed, it's not easy for him to get to 10 Slams. And how bout Djoker? And I wouldn't be suprised if Nadal retires before Fed.

Pray very very hard for that to happen!
Chang is "dead", we're talking about the "living"!

I wont argue with you. Fed has achieved and Nadal hasn't achieve but I am not saying he cant. Just wait and see.

keep it up !!!!!!!!!!!!

janhavi just want to say i enjoyed reading your comment and totally agree with you. i don't think nadal is killing federer, at least not on grass and hard court but to be more informed, the next few months will tell us more. Rafa to me is creative in a lot of ways. But I also think Federer is creative. However, I don't think that Federer has 'improved' whereas Rafa has tremendously. OK Rafa had room to improve but Federer does too especially on clay but nore more so on all surfaces. Federer needs to do something about his confidence when facing Nadal and also his serve, and figure out how to counter Rafa's serve into his backhand - be more confident?
I think it's great that despite all the hype about other players, that these two have not disappointed in showing they are at the top of tennis. Until the rest of the field (nos 3 and 4 especially) genuinely prove themselves, they are not at the level of Rafa and Roger.
agf25agf, please stop wasting your time. Nadal with 4 more slams than Federer at the same age and a 13-6 H2H and Nadal hasn't achieve but Fed has!!! agf25agf, I will be disappointed in you if you keep paying attention to these sad cases.

"He says that Federer simply needs to grow a proper pair of testicles to beat the Spaniard."


That's the ONLY way he can beat Nadal. This is the only REAL advice. And let me tell you something... Federer could be a 'maestro' playing this game, but he is COLD as a template. He doesn't know what is winning a match with BALLS... and to beat the spaniard, you got to have BALLS and amour-propre... 2 things he has never got.

Hmmm, yes, Federer should be more courageous when playing Nadal, but I don't think it is an issue of "BALLS". Mats Wilander has a habit of shooting off some controversial statements and predictions.

how naive is it to think that nadal should be equal to federer in slams. of couse, federer has more slams. after all, federer was on the tour and winning before nadal even became a factor. so, how can you compare their slam history? i think the last couple of years can be compared because both nadal and federer have established themselves @#1 and #2. therefore, it's like an equal playing field. overall, i think nadal is more creative and more exciting than federer. there's no one on tour who can successfully and consistently make shots from difficult positions like nadal, but then, that's just my choice. there are thousands of people who say otherwise, and that's perfectly ok with me, because i understand that beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder!

I actually agree that all he need is to not be scared of Nadal. Nadal is a scary opponent not because of his game but his demeanour. He's like a always doing the 'vamos' thing and he has that murderous look. Not that it is illegal to do all stuff but it is intimidating. Roger, being the romantic is taken out of his comfort zone in the mental department and just get easily intimidated by this hyper-enthusiastic matador. Oh well, I don't care if Rafa beats Fed 20 more times, always will love Roger's style no matter what.

That's the spirit!
jean--- i'm following your advice! You can't break a broken glass!

Federer needs an animal in him. He's too soft sometimes.

jean, u just don't get it. Please don't assume that Nadal is going to dominate like Fed did in 4 years time. What Fed did is a crazy rate. Those 4 and a half years. Even Nadal best year which was last year was only 2 slams. Just wait and see. One thing I can tell you is Fed,Murray and Djok is not gonna just sit down and let Nadal dominate like what Fed did. Just wait and see.

Dont mind but if u have anyn sense abt tennis dont even dare to comapre roger's era of domination wid that of nadal.Simply becoz of the level of competition...nadal's era has roger the great man himself,xtremely talentd guys like murray/nole who can beat the best...and many dangerous opponents like tsonga,simon,monfils..etc.and also roddick(one of the chief rivals of roger when he ws dominating)..rodik is playing betr than he ws back in 03-06!!! so dont xpect rafa to dominate for 4.5 yrs ..apply common sense..plz dont take any offence ..just asserting...
pus...plzzz neve rcomapre rafa to michael chang!!! for God's sake!! dont degrade rafa by doing so.noway nadal's scenario has any kind of similartity wid that of chang's.

Rafa can do the impossible, he has proven it in so many occasions, the latest was his incredible run in the AO2009.
Fed fans CAN"T accept the FACT that Rafa is better than their idol so they'll resort to ridiculous comparisons, redundant enumerations of Fed's achievements, and wishful assumptions that he can STILL come back and dominate tennis.
Ok, we'll wait and see.

dude i didnt compare rafa to micheal chang, i am just saying young doesn't mean anything coz Murray and Djok are young lads too. There is no proof that the level of competition in Fed's time is lower than now. Wasn't Nadal part of the competition when Fed dominated? And this is so not Nadal's era. He hasn't dominated like Fed did even if this is his best run ever. Rotterdam he lost to Murray. He lost to Monflis earlier. Just a matter of time b4 it'll be Murray's era and then we'll have Murray fans talking a lot.

Quote from Nadal, 'When u talk about someone who has won 13 GS and 14 Masters Shield, there is no comparisons who is better'. Even Nadal admits Fed is better and Nadal fans should follow their idol and just be humble and learn some respect.

Of course, IN YOUR opinion RAFA is still SECOND to FED even if the world turns counterclockwise. IN YOUR opinion he's still not dominating tennis because FED is still there(AND HAS 8 YEARS MORE). IN YOUR opinion, FED has 13 slams, 14 masters, uncountable titles, best wimby outfit trophy, best actor trophy in a dramatic role, YOU NAME THE AWARD he definitely have it." NOTHING COMPARES TO YOU" was composed for the great FED for all we know.

Nadal ,as you eloquently put it ,is very humble (to a fault,sometimes).
I can't imagine him saying, ARROGANTLY, that he's better than FED even if the record says so. While he's saying that, he's actually saying... " I BEAT HIM 13 times and counting, so who's the better player NOW?!"

Roger never says he's better than Nadal too so he's humble too, no?. When Fed was dominating he lost only 5-7 times a year. Nadal has lost 2 times this year alone and it's still early. You know what. You can milk this moment as much as you want. Enjoy it when it last.

FEDERER... HUMBLE!
This is one for... Ripley's "BELIEVE it or NOT"!

what does what nadal says has to do with what we think and say? nadal has his opinion and i have mine. i don't agree with others just because the majority agrees. cowards to that! if i feel differently i'm not afraid to say that. cowards are afraid to speak things that may be unpopular, even though it may be something that they truly believe. anyway, in reference to murray consistently beating the top two, if that is true the head-to-head should indicate that. when i last checked, the HTH was:

federer vs. murray 2:5 favoring murray
nadal vs. murray 5:2 favoring nadal and 5:3 if you include the exhibition.

so, saying that murray has consistently beaten nadal is simply exaggerated, not true. these are facts not opinions!

you forget to mention that Murray has won the last 3 matches,memi. I was saying consistent. I never say he leads in the statistic. This is just a fact and not an opinion.

Yeah, and when Fed say what he want to say without being afraid of being unpopular, you call him Arrogant. Thanks for the double-standard.

ohh coumon!!! nadal didnt lose to murray in rotteram!! 'mr injury' gave a helping hand to muray..lol...murray said "nadal's so good,he beat me on one leg in set 2"..lol... and for all rafa critics who think he cant win consistenly on fast courts (the quote ws more suitable before OZ but still)..roger oncne said " those who think he(rafa) can only win titles on clay ,donot have any knowledge abt tennis"....
Rafa will never openly admit hez betr than roger....hez gr8.He just lets his raket do the talking...and no way murray will dethrone nadal...no way !!!rafa will rule for long..

let me waste my time torres and indulge you. I'm stating the facts as they are! I'm not pushing them and assuming Rafa will dominate like Roger. I'm not dumb as to assume things like that. I look at facts as they are up to a point that is past or present, not the future that hasn't happened yet. You, on the other hand, cannot accept facts as they are. You - like Federer - live in denial. That is why you worship him and are blind to everything else. The fact is we'll never agree. I can accept Roger amazing achievements, as can many other Rafa fans. But look at your attitide? The reason for the difference - to me - is obvious.

jean, thanks for the sensible comments! but, don't waste your time explaining to someone who is clearly in denial! you have understand that a person like that lives in fantasyland, where things are only true in the mind, not in reality!

Vamosrafa, Murray never said that. If you're going to give an excuse like an injury then I will say that the only reason why Fed is a relatively low right now is because of the mononucleosis he got last year.

Jean, what facts are you talking about? I already explained everything in my last post so I recommend you read before you post anything meaningless.

Memi, unfortunately Nadal's fans are the ones living in fantasy if they think Rafa is better than Roger just because of of a H2H statistics.

memi, you are funny and so is agf25agf's Ripley's!! thanks for your sensible advice. It seems I should have just followed my own advice to agf25agf! :) Yes, it's a case of fantasyland vs reality. Isn't it amazing what some people chose to see?

stop being stubborn torres...murray did say this..in the trophy presentation ceremony..i can give evidence if u still dont believe via a link.nadal ws barely moving in the 3rd set and u say an 'excuse'.....anything wrong mate??
Instead of criticizing rafa fans...u ppl shud b sensible nt to compare a 22 yr guy to a 27 old veteran!!! u ppl start such illogical comparisons and then say we live in fantasyland...we r nt sure whats gona in future..so just give nadal sum time he'll prove alll his fans rite...just before the Oz ..if i said rafa wud win hard court slams in his career..all fed/djo fans wud have come out speaking 'no way ,there are many better hard court players than him..bla bla..." the only man to win slams on al surfaces.if u dont think hez gud enough on decoturf..."olympic gold medal" is a big enough thing. So lets just sit bak quietly and wait ...

jean/memi--- believe me , there's nothing like blind idolatry! You can say what you want and still "they" will INSIST on what "they"think is the FACT.
FED AS #2 is an insult to their idol. What if he becomes #3, will they shave all their heads in protest... if he go down to #4, will they go on hunger strike... if he dives to #20, God help us all!

Oh vamosrafa stop wasting your time. And yes, Murray did say that, I read it in the news too. I thought it was widely publicize but looks like some avid fans don't follow up on tennis news - insinuating you are a liar just because Rafa isn't a quitter. Leave it alone mate, you can argue til your blue in the face and "they" (thanks agf!) will still not accept it.

Oh and agf, I believe you trust me :) Anyway he won't go down to no. 20. If he goes down a touch futher, he won't be around. I can only feel sorry for his other genuie fans.

well said jean...now i obey ur suggestion..wont b wasting any more time ..but a cumbak is warranted if I beleive sumthing wrong is being written...lol..

Thanks Jean...I really appreciate it. A few points I would like to put up.
1) I've actually heard many people say Federer hasnt improved.However I feel he has and he has quite a lot.Did anyone carefully observe Federer backhand in the final?
I was actually shocked that there were very few errors that came off the Federer backhand this time.He couldnt hit winners but I was surprised by how well the backhand was coping.On the other hand I personally felt Federer was shanking quite a few of his forehands.The serve, we all know was disastrous.This to is me is simply a case of not having faith in your strengths.
2)Um..some people usually say Nadal has achieved a lot more than federer did when he was 22.Kudos to him.But we all have to remember Federer was a late bloomer while Nadal matured as a player much earlier.
3) I feel Federer and Nadal are both playing catch-up as they're both chasing history in some or the other way . None of them is trying to catch up with each other.Federer in his prime was 6-8 against Nadal.That aint bad.It was pretty close till 2007 -Fed's absolute peak years.
4)I dont think Fed's in denial.But he has to work on his confidence.There are a lot of attempts I've seen from his side.But as he gets older it gets a little tougher to battle Nadal who's peaking.He has to figure out how to put it all together ( easier said than done)
5) About personalities.As the whole forum is probably aware of (lol) ,I will never never agree with Nadal fans.Sorry guys.You can say I'm wearing rose tinted glasses and I couldnt care less.I'll say I'm proud of my rose tinted glasses and Fedprotective nature ( looooool..no offence guys)
Any disagreements-Always welcome. :)

haha...not a bad to fix urself in the discussion janhavi...lol.enjoyed reading ur post. The only disagreement...abt H2H record..u said that roger ws 6-8 against rafa in his prime...well may b true but fed himself believes he still hasnt lost much in his game..he destroyed everyone in wimby 08 like routine but came up just against rafa.Secondly, when roger ws in his prime rafa ws JUST A KID!!!! despite being a kid he lead 8-6!!! simply incredible...nadal is yet to entr his prime i believe ...even if u consider the modern day rafa nadal (who may b close to his prime)..he is betr than roger on all surfaces..(may b not decoturf)..time will tell if they meet in newyork flushing meadows..

dont misinterpret my comments...rafa betr than roger..according to their current forms.Roger is the king and will remain so..u cant compare these two..5 yrs of age dif is a bit too much ..so wait for rafa to play for atleast 3 more years...i always put it this way ..Roger is one of the all time greats...rafa has the potential to becum one of the all time greats...and there is no reason to beleive why rafa cant reach there.

The only reason I brought that up was I dont believe Rafa was just a kid.He was well in his prime.IMO the fact that you're winning slams proves you're in your prime.Maybe he wasnt in his peak years.Rafa at the moment is in his peak and it can last for several years or just a couple more.Depends.The head to head in those times could've been deceiving since most of Rafa's wins that time came on clay.Look I absolutely give credit to Rafa for his accomplishments.But you cant deny that his supreme confidence against Roger has been cemented by clay courts.Yes,I agree that even now Fed's not exactly going downhill and even then he has serious issues against Nadal.I just dont think Rafa was 'just a kid' when he had 8-6 against Roger in head to heads.Its okay-thats just my opinion.All in all I'm glad you enjoyed my post and I hope nobody finds anything too offensive in it.Cheers.

vamosrafa-I assure you I'll never say that Rafa isnt the better player right now.I absolutely agree with you.

Rafa is younger means he has more determination since he has so much to catch up and more energy,no?. During those matches that he won that is all the difference. Rafa is reaching his peak and is in the same age that Fed started to dominate but I am sure Murray and Djoker are also reaching their peak so I wouldn't be so quick to assume that he'll dominate in the next 3 years if I am a Rafa fan. If you say Fed fan is blindly supporting Fed then I could say Nadal's fans are blind too so where does this end?

this is really waste of time!....we're going round in circles!
u bet, this is heading the same way....
FED has 13 slams, 14 masters, and so forth and so on....
It's getting boring!

Torres9, you have a point. I think Murray is going to be a great challenge, as for Djokovic; who is my favourite of the three, he certainly has the potential, but he needs to work on certain areas.

On the other hand however, Nadal overcame Federer. From your viewpoint (not mine), Federer is the GOAT. Who better to overcome?

I honestly think that unless Murray and Djokovic will be as determined and as wanting as Rafa to continuously improve, Rafa will overcome their challenges. The good thing about this however is that Djokovic and Murray both don't fear Nadal, which means they won't handing him cakewalks by any means.

Everybody...thnx for ur participation ...i think we shud conclude here...lol

Hello cheryl.
well , about sampras. pooer sampras
every time federer playing a slam the newspapers rush to him and asks hime , pete is it okey with you ? pete do you think he would take it ? pete what about nadal ....etc
as if they're trying to make him say" roger , Don't break my precious record , ro Nadal don't desereve it."
I don't blame sampras in whatever he say , the media is bothering him every slam . what do they want from him? he said it once and again " federer can do it , he is my friend and I won't be sad if he broke the record. I will be happy for him"
and I think he was only talking about federer because he knews exactly what is federer and how he playes.
I was happy when I read the article when pete said" 15 or may be 19 salms" at least he is someone who still belives in federer despite the whole set backs.
even though it might be very very difficult to make the 14th not the 19th , but sampras still belive and didn't give an ear to what the media is saying.
about" I would come to the net " , the media again! sampras is not a coach! if he would saysomething i would be his point of view and own opinion .
if pete thinks that federer in oz final should should have been playing on the net more , I think he had to make long ralleys because it wass working good with him , and its all opinion, at least sampras didn't try to be inteligant and talk more and more about confidence and fear .

at the end , only federer and nadal what really matters , and if federer couldn't discover something to beat nadal by his own, no one can do that for him :)

god bless you

OK I will admit that Nadal is the better player AT THE MOMENT and maybe Murray is too. Yes, Federer is not at his best in the past year but 4 consecutive finals is still phenomenal for a tennis player. People forget how hard it is to get to the final let alone win a Grand Slam. Oh well...

torres---- FOR ONCE, YOU HIT THE BULLS EYE!

I have always hit the bull's eye agf but you will never accept anything other than your beliefs so I rest my case.

Sampralicca, yes, Murray and Djok doesn't fear anyone. I believe they can give Nadal a run for his money. Fed is probably the less motivated out of the top 4. He just is taking it easy. Just be careful for for the darkhorses. Tsonga, Simon, they all are capable or beating Nadal. Just give it a year or two.

You almost got me there, it's just a blur after all!

I would say that their lopsided head-to-head record, with the last five times they played going to Nadal, could lend one to conclude that Federer does not, in fact, know how to beat Nadal anymore. I would assume that a man like Federer would actually beat Nadal if only he knew how to do so. Otherwise, why has he lost so often on so many surfaces?

Given the above and the fact that Sampras gets hounded by the media at each Slam, what would you prefer he say when asked? Would you rather he said "I don't think at this point that Federer can actually beat Nadal, and his only hope to match, let along break, my Slam record is not to face the Spaniard at all."? You'd be up in arms at that.

Sampras was an aggressive, charge-the-net, stare-him-down player who relished both the tennis and the competition. It makes total sense for him to recommend to Federer the kinds of things that worked for Sampras back in the day.

Cheryl,

Enjoyed your article, as I always do here.I think people miss the point that your aim IS to stimulate conversation, so being diplomatic and saying all things PC was never gonna interest anyone enough to post a comment. There's no need to deride Cheryl for her takes on issues...its out there so don't take it personally and bitch half the time... just get into the flow of the debate!

I think the most prevalent theme here, for people like me who really appreciate Nadal's game, is the fact that NO one else will give him the credit due to him. He is simply better than anyone else at the moment, but especially hardcore Fed Fans (including former players and so-called experts) would rather be lynched than admit that.

They would rather give mathematical permutations and over-compensate for and over-explain Fed's short-comings.

I was a fan of tennis BEFORE I was Nadal's fan, so it excites rather than worries me that there are guys like Murray and Djokovic on his trail. But having said that, I am a tennis fan enough to bow at the alter of Nadal's prowess, CREATIVITY (yes creativity) and breathtaking ability to defy common logic (from all those "logical" comments about him never ever winning GS on hard court to how he simply pulls off winning shot at an impossible angle).

Still on the issue of being first a tennis fan, I am annoyed at Fed's denialist attitude when it comes to Nadal. It doesn't make for great rivalries when a magnificent player that Roger is simply doesn't seem like he is willing to change ANYTHING fundamental in his game or attitude to again master a win over Nadal. I think someone summed it up by saying the guy is resting on his laurels... it takes away from his incredible talent that he is unwilling (or worse, unable) to change when simply waltzing onto court and blowing the opposition away is not enough anymore. At this point you either spare us the misery of seeing you're meltdown by retiring, or you shape up! Especially if you still want to bitch about not liking being referred to as "No 2".

In the same breath it should instill a sense of respect from anyone who appreciates tennis, the amount of changes that Nadal has made to his game in order to dominate someone who was once considered near-unbeatable.

But, alas, Nadal will forever remain underrated by those who are too proud to admit their earlier perceptions on his abilities were wrong, or those who simply believe Roger is superior in every way and will NEVER be surpassed. EVER!

What's interesting is how, sooner or later, and in desperation, the debate on Roger vs Nadal always drifts to Nadal-detractors almost willing Nadal's body to give out, forcing him to retire at 23... almost as if they will be delighted at the prospect, willing it to happen so their favourite Fed's record stays in tact. That speaks volumes about how this group of people think subconciously what they won't voice willingly: Nadal is a force to be reckoned with, and he will eventually dispel all the "logical" insights about the limitations of his game. Its all a matter of time.

by the way cheryl.
we love your articles and translates them to Arabic in our tennis forum.
we love the way you present things other people may not reconize the
thank you , and all the bloggers here in tennistalk :)

king sampras has earned the right to tell mr bruised swiss ego what's wrong with him, after all federer wasn't shy about stating he wanted to break sampras' records. I say: good for sampras!

kiki - I'd like to think that people aren't actively wishing early retirement on Nadal, but I suspect that you have a point.

Noody - thank you very much. :)

sheila are u in relation with swiss ego as u know him sooooooooo well.why r u always posting against him in every forum? Ur words won't evaluate his ability & he is a far better player than also gr8 SAMPRAS.He(Roger) doesn't need his (Sam) advice to advance & is capable enough to tackle his problems.

& why one would have shy to state his goal & what he want to achieve.Everyone sets his goal & he has only stated when he is asked.So where is the problem?He deserve every bit of the praise & success he is getting.Its all his hard work & talent what has put him at the top of this game.He also does not need urs or Mr.Sampras's certificate to be called gr8.

ROGER IS THE BEST EVER.GREATEST OF ALL TIME.

Kiki, thanks for your fortune-telling. Really appreciate it. As much as you try to point the finger on us predicting that Nadal will retire early, you yourself predict that he will not. So I guess we both 'in denial'.

Just watched some Fed videos in Youtube and I really noticed that his movement is 2005-2007 is so much better than 2008-2009. I guess he has slowed down a bit. But still is good enough to be in the final of the last 4 Slams and push Nadal to 2 5-set matches. the fact that Nadal has beaten Fed on all surfaces make Nadal fans forget that Fed has beaten Nadal on every surface too and had Nadal met Fed in grass all those years Fed was dominating, the H2H would not be 13-6.

Funny that Roger said he's not the GOAT and Laver is but people never see this as being humble. You guys just see the negative points.

FED IS THE BEST

I'm so looking forward to watching Federer playing again. He "is" the GREATEST player of all times! He can still beat Nadal. Don't kid yourselves. Just because he has lost to Nadal many times does not make Nadal incincible. As a matter of fact I look forward to it. Why not! I am a Roger fan after all, whatever Roger achieves is all good for tennis! Sampras took 18+ months between his #13 & #14 Slam. It won't take Roger that long... Besides I don't really care for the rest of them. Djokovic, and Murray have beaten the Fed, but they too are not invincible (No one is) So in time Federer will win games/matches against them too. Will the GREAT ROGER FEDERER ever become #1 ever again?! Who cares! I don't. I just like to watch GREAT tennis. Cheers.

But if it he did happen? That would be GREAT for tennis too.

Torres, it would really be appreciated if you read my post again before shooting from the hip. Far from making a "prophecy", I was actually articulating what people who may be willing Nadal to fail are actually thinking.

Unfortunately you just proved my point. Is it possible to give Nadal his due without quoting what Fed has or hasn't done?

Nadal fans are not "forgetting" anything just because they "dare" to voice the simple fact that he has, EVENTUALLY, gotten the better of Fed.

Fed IS one of the greatest, up there with Rod Laver, everyone acknowledges it. Nadal fans (well, most i guess) included. He got his due without people mentioning ancient histories like previous glories of this and that tennis player or obscure mathematical deductions and excuses for their favourites that seek to discredit his achievements. So why is Nadal subjected to
that?

Kiki, what you must understand is Torres first and formost never has his facts straight - claiming Fed skip tournamanets after he lost slams last year, Nadal out of DC, Fed IS the best when chearly he's no. 2 - and insists on living in a constant state of denail. I hate to break it to you Kiki, but you can't help him, no matter how much you try. Best let him dwell in his own fantasyland.
Nadal speaks via his raquet, Torrest via his keyboard from his high horse!

I really liked what you wrote in your second post kiki..plain and simple facts without any distortion.

Yeah jean, I made some mistakes. People make mistakes. So you never made any mistakes? You must be an angel. I guess you're the one living 'in denial'. It's nice that you follow my every post. I feel good having an angel as my fan. So what if Fed is No.2 now. Nadal's been no.2 to Fed for 4 1/2 years.

Kiki, I will accept that Nadal has gotten better than Fed if he has 14 Slams. At the moment he is not even halfway so mind me for not thinking like you. Predicting Nadal's body is going to break down is common sense and it has been proven time and time again. Recently, he skipped Dubai. Last year he skipped TMC. All because of the knee. It is just a prediction. Why take it so seriously? Ricky make wrong predictions against Novak all the time. Does it mean he hates the guy?

kiki please keep in perspective, Nadal looses, just like Federer. His time will come! Who will be the next Great #1? Hm...I wonder...

sorry kiki, my mistake, that comment was meant for jean

TOrres..dont repeat the same illogical pnts over and over again...firstly when did roger say laver is the GOAT nt him?? any reference or link??ill b thankful..i trust u bt still....

and once again the H2h..simply admit nadal has been better in the H2h..fed has beaten nadal on all surfaces!!! has he ever beaten rafa on clay in a slam??? ans=NO!!! rafa has beaten him on all courts at SLAMS!!!!thats the pnt...in slam h2h nadal leads 5-2..and u know wht..players are willing to xchange 5 ordinary wins for one win in a slam final!!!! murray said this when he beat fed in madrid 08 semi!!!! if roger ws in his peak in 05-06 rafa ws just no where simply nowhere his peak..onyl physically and meantally u can say may b he ws near but in terms of tennis..nw id suggest...eatch sum rafa videos on u tube...luk at his volleys!!! he used to hit them like a club level player but now he efficiently puts aaway relatively difficult volleys...and his court positioing..watch his hard court mtches back in 05-06 (when roger ws at his best)!!! in duabi 06..roger ws riding a 56 mtch hard court win streak..ws in his prime..no mental block...rafa's least favored surface...fed 100% fit physically...rafa prevails in 3!!!that ws 06 whenhis sense abt playing on fast courts ws pathetic!!!!!!

KiKi, may i give you some friendly advise! if you haven't learned already, you will! you are dealing with a couple of federer fanatics. they don't just support and defend their player like normal people do. they worship him! the moment you start giving your perspective on nadal and federer, not to mention if you say nadal has federer's number, you better be prepared to go before the firing squad. they start firing all these things that have already happened or things they are wishing for. things like: nadal days are numbered, he won't last as long as roger at the top, his knees will soon give out, federer's game is more beautiful than nadal's, murray will replace him just you wait and see, federer has more slams than nadal, and on and on and on! they can't separate when someone identifies a player's weaknesses and give an opinion from hate. they believe that when you point out facts about federer's weaknesses, you are discounting what he has achieved and you hate him. beware!

excelltenly summed up by memi..good job mate!!

oh sorry...rafa leads 6-2 in grandslam h2h..5-2 in finals..ahem ahem!!!

Beauty is perception. If Nadal's forehands on the run, and other aspects of his game aren't beautiful to anybody, something must be wrong with the human eye.

And head-to heads are a measure of a rivalry. Some argue that the meetings in the big ones (like slams) only count, but there too Rafa has beaten Federer time and again on all surfaces. On surfaces outside of clay its at 2-2, but then again isn't Federer supposedly the grass court god as Rafa is the god of clay? Shouldn't he be giving Rafa a royal whooping everytime?

No, Rafa has dominated Federer. Where history is concerened, Federer is greater; right now, Rafa is better. But Rafa has plenty of time to become better than Fed in the history books.

u have stolen sum of my thoughts samprallica...lol..good post !!

To be honest with you, I didnt like Nadal when he first broke on to the scene. But he is an acquired taste to me, and I am in awe of some of the shots and angles he makes nowadays.

The Omen.(A token to Rafa fans) Frest out of winning Wimbleton 2007. Roger walked up to the mike and said: "I'm lucky to win this one... before Rafa starts taking them all" Now Rafa Nadal is the worlds #1 tennis player. All Federer has to do is take some of that back! Can Federer brake the tide? I'm hoping...

vamosrafa, here's the link http://www.zeenews.com/sports/australian-open/2009-01-30/503093news.ht ml .Enjoy yourself. Anyway, thanks for again trying to tell me what to do. Any points I make will be deemed illogical by you but again I will repeat that h2h is no indication. Fed is 1-0 against Sampras but I am not jumping up and down saying that is why he is better.

13-6 H2H but 13-6 in Grand Slam count in favour of Fed. Memi, thanks for pointing out that I am a Fed fanatics and I presume that by saying that you are not a Nadal fanatic?

Sampralicca, Rafa never met Fed as much on grass as Fed met Rafa on clay. Sampras has losing records against Safin and Hewitt but why nobody is saying Safin and Hewitt is better? You say beauty is a perception yet you say something must be wrong with a human eye if he does not see beauty in Nadal's play. Are you saying your perception is better than other people.

memi, I couldn't have put it better! :)

Torres, I try to follow as many articles and posts as I can because I like to read peoples' opinions. Yours stand out because people seem to be correcting you all the time left, right and centre!

Sky, did I say Nadal wins ALL the time and never loses? Did I? Did you even get the message? Wait, why am I wasting my time!! Brick walls have no ...

Cheryl, you know I love you :hug: :p but frankly, you should write at vb.com, you are soooooo biased towards Nadal :hug: isn't tennistalk supposed to be for tennis fans and not only Nadal fans? :angel: Take care honey ;)

just out of curiosity,vb stands for vamosbrigade right?

jean- you didn't say that Nadal never looses. What you said was "Fed IS the best when chearly he's no.2" The only thing that is clear is that the Fed is number 2 (at the moment). To say otherwise is to imply that #1 is no longer an option for the Fed. The matter of "Nadal looses too" was mentioned as a reminder to you that the #1 position is always a temporary matter, however long it may last.

Yes janhavi, vb.com stands for vamosbrigade.com
Cheryl is so biased and yet complains about most tennis journos being pro Federer :rolleyes: :p

TOrres....wht the hell were u thinking when u comapred rafa/roger to pete-safin!!!!
nadal fed have played in 7 finals of slams..majority have been played in roger's prime....on every surface! nadal leads a whooping 13-6!!! saif leads a meager 4-3..never did the two meet on grass ..once on clay!!! all hard court meetings and 6 meetings were b.w 2000-2002..well beyond pete's prime!!! and u compared roger-lete H2h wid rafa/roger??? are u out of ur mind??? cant u see the diffrence ??? 1 mtch and 19 mtches!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
'rafa has never played fed as much on grass as fed met him on clay'.....m sorry but each time rafa played him on grass rafa ws such an improved player ..lost in 4 in 06...tite 5-setter in 07..evetually breaking the barriers to win !!!!!!!no such trend when roger payed rafa over and over again..same result...game set mtch nadal!!!!out of 10 chances fed won only once ...out of 3 chances rafa won 1!!! whose better in this regard!!!!??? ask me urself!!!!and he beat him at wimby a slam!! nt in 'an ordinary masters event'!!!! rafa is comparable to roger on grass (altho roger is better slightly)....but on clay...NO MTCH!!! RG 08..arguably the best of all time wins 4 games against a guy!!! OMG who is this guy...ans=RAFA NADAL!!! lost 4 games to ROGER FEDERER in a slam FINAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I see some posters here (fangirls of the "huge biceps") should also stick to vb.com :rolleyes: :zzz:

antonius, if you don't like it here, you should go to vb.com

huge biceps? are you stoned? people like him for his attitude not for his biceps fool! win or lose he sets a great example, doesn't cry as if his lolly got snatched away, doesn't give excuses and certainly doesn't take swipes at opponents. Open your eyes and ears woman, are you saying males like him for his biceps as well! I've hardly come across a more ridiculously stupid comment!

You guys are so funny :) sure, false modesty, ass picking, grunting, time delaying and gamesmanship is surely what tennis needed, true role model :o vb.com is your friend mates ;)

Another blog being degraded into Nadal vs Federer war.Wow.Exactly what we needed.....*sigh*

Nadal vs Federer war? Who came up with Federer? All I said is that Cheryl (and many posters here) are obviously biased towards Nadal (and I remember Cheryl complaining about journos constantly being up Roger's arse), nothing to do with Federer as I don't even care for the guy...

not talking about you.

we are here to take care of him(Roger) !!!!! don't need u too !!!!!! lol

Roger won't get another GS ever.... get over it... Nadal, Murray and his own arrogance will take care of that.

Torres 9, What I meant by perception comment was that its not a crime to think Rafa's tennis can be more beautiful than Feds. To each his own, but if NO ONE can see beauty in it then something is wrong with the human eye.

And Sampras's records against Hewitt and Safin came when he was way past his prime; past breaking the record. Also, Safin and Hewitt were playing some of the best tennis of their careers.

Also, if Federer has met Rafa more on clay, surely he would have gone more than 4 sets with him at the RG final? Nadal figured it out after two finals didn't he? Federer is superior on hard court; so surely he must have whooped Nadal in their hardcourt slam final when Nadal was exhausted?

I agree with samprallica, we've all got our favourites, difficult to be neutral when watching a tennis match, but although you may not support Rafa you can't help but admire his sheer guts, likewise Roger, even if he's not your fave the way he strikes the ball is just breathtaking isn't it? Murray's speed, Ttsonga's joie de vivre, Gasquet's backhand, I could go on and on. Life's too short to spend on dissing people.

gamesmanship? just because you can't comprehend what it's like to focus at that level? get back to your dolls woman. false modesty? you are another one who prides in admiring the negatives traits in humanity. go watch netball madam since you clearly know nothing about tennis!

Roger won't get another GS ever.... get over it... Nadal, Murray and his own arrogance will take care of that...........Emiliano55 , 3/5/09 7:55 PM




If Roger can't get another then there is every possibility of Nadal or Murray or Djoko not getting one !!any one can up his game at any point of his career & can win slams !!!!!! there are so many talented players in the likes of Tsonga !!! keep in mind that Roger has already won 13 & Rafa is still 7 behind !!! Anything can happen !!!!! u r not GOD to decide who will win & who will not !!!!!leave it on time as it will tell !!!! lol

It's funny that when I expose the flaws of referring to h2h meetings as any indication of a player's superiority, you guys react like someone who touched a hot kettle. Samprallicca and vamosrafa, i'll reply to your posts since it is practically similiar. No matter how much they lead each other, they still LEAD no matter what. You pointed that Sampras was way behind his prime when he lost to Safin and Hewitt. Guess what, Fed has lost some pace and he is not quick as before so he is not his best. Interesting that Nadal only broke Fed's dominance the year Fed got mono. You guys forget Fed leads players like James Blake 7-1 and Nadal-Blake 3-3, just show that it is just a matter of whether a player's game match up well with another. Like I said, Nadal lost to Fed in all surfaces too no matter if it's in the Slams or not. And Nadal never was good enough those days to meet Fed in a final on grass those days and also since the grass season is so short.

Fed beat Sampras in Wimby and that was when Fed was not even at his best. Nuff said for now.

FED IS THE BEST

'Any intelligent fool can make things more complex, more violent, it takes a touch of genius to move in the opposite direction'

Let me rephrase that, ' Any intelligent tennis fool can hit the ball harder, more violent like Nadal but it takes a genius like Fed to move in the opposite direction.

Food for thoughts, guys,

The genius is performing so well he's crying over it!

torres9, explain your comparison to me. i'm confused! you say that federer is a genius and nadal just hits the ball hard like an "intelligent fool" using your description. i assume you mean that nadal is a non-genius. so, if that is true, why would a genius be so intimidated by a non-genius. the genius wouldn't have any reason to be. that's puzzling to me. maybe i'm missing something, and i don't want to hear about "a bad matchup" because that's not a legitimate excuse. bad matchups are a part of the game. federer, nadal, every player has a bad matchup!

Fed is a genius and Nadal is a mere intelligent fool? If Fed is losing so much to Nadal, I think he too should be an intelligent fool. Moving in the "opposite direction" is pointless in tennis if you can't win, isn't it? Why is the genius struggling so much to figure an intelligent fool out, and then breaking down in tears (probably at the realization that this might never happen?)

I really don't get all these mono excuses. To me, they applied only to the start of Federer's season, when he was really struggling with his movement etc etc... He himself stated that he was feeling well. And in any case, the mono excuse does not apply to Federer's Aussie loss.

I'll point something out to you. 2001 was the year in which Sampras lost to Todd Martin in a slam. Now that's something that never happened before, is it? Federer is nowhere past his prime; the way he owned Roddick at the OZ was confirmation. He's only 27 and besides, you are forgetting how much Nadal has improved since the end of 2007. To say he hasn't and the only reason he's winning is because of a sudden Federer fitness decline due to unavoidable circumstances is unreasonable.

Well samprallica, you too give excuses on Sampras;s losses so why can't I give a reason why Fed declined? Fed lost to Mardy FIsh last year the same year he declined so does it matter if Sampras lost to todd martin on 2001?

Your reasoning has become poor sampralicca.m

Why should i give excuses for Sampras? Hasn't he proven himself enough already? I'm just stating my opinion on Sampras's losses to Hewitt and Safin. I could go on about the paradigm shift it takes between players of one generation to another.

What I'm saying is that Sampras's decline was very obvious he fell out of the top three before that year. Federer on the other hand is still no.2 and the only person standing in his way is Nadal. Can't you accept the fact that Nadal is better than him right now?

Fish vs. Fed was a one-off fluke. But Nadal beating Fed five times in a row is not.

just my two cents worth.
1) Nadal is clearly better than Federer at the moment.I wont say the guy isnt a genius.He's brilliant with his tactics and like I said , naturally a very bad match up for Roger.You can tell when he's playing that he's always thinking.Certainly not a mere ball basher IMO.
2) I agree with torres that Federer is no longer in his peak years.However, he's still not totally past his prime years.He IS half a step slower and anybody who's watched him can tell it.But if he's still playing well enough to reach slam finals then he has every reason to work out the Nadal puzzle.
3) For once can people please STOP calling Roger a crybaby?.Look,its a genuine request.The guy is emotional and right now is under immense pressure from literally all sides.All Champions are faced with this pressure and everyone reacts to it some or the other way.We all know he cried because of the warmth of the crowd in RLA and he genuinely did not want to spoil Rafa's moment in any way.Its easy for 'keyboard experts ' to criticise him for that but none of us actually knows what it must've been like for him.So for the love of God, please be a little sensitive.

Torres... "no matter how much they lead each other, they still LEAD no matter what"....this goes on to show ur poor reasoning and mentality.IF magnitude of sumthing doesnt matter to you then m sorry stop discussing tennis....4-3 saifn...13-6 nadal...nadal fed palying on almost every single court/tournament nadal leads a whopping 13-6!!! against blake he has won his last tow meetings on his weakest surafce...we all know what the reasult wud be when rafa plays blake in future...blake is nt gona move away from 3 or may b 4.....and all their meetin gwere on a single surface..not all surfaces!!! roger trailed nalbandian 1-5 at a time but now leas 9-8 i think...great players come back to overcome challenges....is blake ws a bad mtch up for nadal he did sumthing to overcome him ..rather than making silly xcuses "i have a mental block against blake"....nadla wud have broken fed's dominance no matter what the scenario wud have ben..typical of fed fan..."mono xcuse"..this again goes on to show how bad u are at defending ur points....so u xpect a 19-21 yr old teenager to dethrone a player of roger's caliber...no matter how early u get matured but 20 yrs old in nuthing !!!no experience ..mental fortitude and physical fortitude differ alot from a guy aged 22.....nadal kept on improving...when he reached there he earned...beat fed on every surface...
Ans it doesnt mattr to u if fed beat him on a non-slam event!!! ahahahahha.....its of equal imp for u if a player wins a slam final and the other a masters shield!!!! xcellent!!!! pros are ready to xchange 5 non-slam final victories with 1 slam final victory..but its of equal imp to u...!!! weldon...u r on the rite track...

Plus u didnt give any ans to these two qs

1...in my above post i referred to dubai 06 final..read it
2...RG 08 final...wht xcuse do u hav here?? fed cant batter rafa so badly even if rafa is 35 yrs old and fed is in his prime..still sure rafa wud be able to win more than 4 games!!!!

*even if that mtch ws played on GRASS...rafa wud still have won more than 4

^actually Roger has beaten Nadal on clay 6-0 at Hamburg in the last set.So you cant say Federer cant do it.But he certainly now lacks the confidence to do it.And no,grass is a different surface.Although slower compared to say 2005 it is still a different surface altogether . And in fairness to Roger he did have mono and although he did not carry the disease into the clay season,he missed many days of training and practice due to the recovery time needed.I'm not making this up its what his trainer Pierre Pagannini said in an interview in French.

Roger beat a dog-tired Nadal on clay, and right now, he can't do that on hard courts. We'll see how much Federer will accomplish this year. I'm not predicting, but unless we see some changes to his game and approach, I'm betting we're gonna see similar results in future.

and yet again you dont give credit where it is due.Looks like different rules apply to Roger.Granted that Nadal was tired.But give Federer the due props.Even the comms said that the match Federer played was tactically perfect.Like I said his confidence has been dented last year and I give due credit to Nadal for that.I could've mentioned Wimbledon 2006 first set but I didnt as I knew Rafa was dead nervous and Roger just played his usual game.He had a plan of course but nothing that would be defined as tactically brilliant.

Could give credit but the situation of nadals clay loss pales in comparison to his wins. i'm talking in context.

Yeah and Nadal beat a mono-Fed last year during Wimby and FO (Two can play this game). Sampralicca you clearly have lost your touch. You talked about Sampras losing to Todd Martin that was why I brought the Fish thing. Half a step slower is crucial. I admit Nadal is better now but Murray is better than Nadal now if you look at the current form. So based on current form, Murray is the best.

no Rafa did not play the mono- Fed during FO and Wimby..But yes,he played a Federer who's training had been severely affected (also a part of the reason why he lost his confidence so quickly) ,Like I said it was pretty close till 2007.I'm not saying Federer would've beaten Nadal had he been in perfect shape.But it certainly would've been closer.Anyway,Nadal saw the opportunity and took it.Kudos to him.
BTW -IMO Murray isnt better than Nadal till he wins a slam.Which he can but he hasnt done it yet.

ANother illogical comment!!! Murray better than nadal currently..wow...nadal has won the last 3/4 slams ..on all surfaces...murray is btter...recently rafa won in melbourne ...murray lost in R4..yeah murray is better...very well said....

6-0 loss to roger at hamburg..i agree roger played tactically very well in that mtch...ws very agressive and net approaches were very sensible..but once more...if u say grass has slowed down then u must also know hamburg clay is distinct in the world..so diffrent....nadal struggled to beat hewitt 7-5 in the 3rd set of their semi final...mtch ws abt 3hrs 25 mins long...it finished late in the night..rafa hardly had any time to recover....he ws dead on his feet ion the final set...if u dont believe us read the mtch reports of that mtch...evry sensible journalist mentions the fact that rafa ws damn tired..any one wud be...montecarlo-barca-rome--hamburg on the trot..not only playing bt winning...if roger had the game to beat him 6-0 at that time then wht the hell happened at RG??2-3 weeks later they had a rematch...dont say lack of confidence..roger ws the winner in their previous meeting..he and many thot he had found a way to overcome rafa on clay..ws full of confidence and motivation...result:rafa wins 3rd french title without much fuss!!!!...from that point onwards u can say roger startd losing confidence against rafa when facing him ONLY ON CLAY!!!

Yeah Fed has won 13/18 slams. Murray has won 2 titles this year and Nadal only 1. You guys are dumb enough to not realize that I am mocking you guys. Well, just shows the level of intelligence of people around here.

murray with 2 titles this year?? reallly??? nadal with 1?? OMG then yes murray is better..simpyl becoz he wins those tiny titles that hardly carry any meaning...rafa with Just 1 but sorry to say..A MAJOR!!!!!....then why is their all this fuss abt GOAT discussion...Jimmy connors had 108 titles since the open era began...by far the most...so according to torres ..he is the best since the open era...second position goes to lendl with 94...the list goes on and roger wud be out of the top 5 ...oh torres u kicked out ur own roger of the top 5 greatest since the open era!!! dont blame me...u r responsible!!!

Yeah i'm a wash up who lost my touch. Sorry.

now you know none of us are as inelligent as you tosser9, which is why everyone else has to correct you all the time! Your level of intelligence is very high and you never attack people. What a great example we have of a tennis fan we have here - knows everything, is always right and far more intelligent than all of us. Sampra, memi, vamosrafa, everyone else, I hope you guys feel fortunate and start learning whatever you can from this tennis expert!

antonius - Aren't you in a darling mood? I suggest for the future that if you don't like my opinion-based submissions, that you stick to the formal news articles. This is a BLOG, not the news.

Alrite...none of us knows more than the journalisits here do..so lets ask CHERYL what she has to say wht nadal's loss to roger in hamburg 07..so cheryl give an honest insight abt that mtch...wht were the factors according to u that led to rafa's loss??? list them in descending order of importance!! il b thankful...

yes,vamosrafa Nadal won at RG after that.I was only telling you Federer is capable of beating Nadal well enough.And no, that year's loss had nothing much to do with confidence.It was simply a case of Federer not sticking to his tactics and Nadal bouncing back.Kudos to him for that too.I was talking about one particular victory.

vamosrafa, just FYI, I read that rafa wasn't meant to play that hamburg tournament, and he was exhausted but he and Fed had argued for a change of schdule (I now don't recall the details) and Rafa only played to make a point. So at least he made the finals.

vamosrafa - I watched that Hamburg match. It was pretty clear that Nadal ran out of steam in the third set. He had played an insane amount of tennis with Monte Carlo, Barcelona, Rome then making the finals in Hamburg. He and Roger both played that tournament because they were trying to protect it's status as a Masters event and thought if they played it would help.

However, fitness is as much a part of tennis as the swing of the racket. Roger was the better player on the day, so he got the win. I sense what you're really asking is whether it tells us anything about Roger's chances on clay in the future. As in "he did it before, he can do it again." I think it's pretty clear by now that if Nadal is anywhere near top form, he is the superior clay court player. Roger knows that and Rafa knows that. But there is nothing to say that Roger won't get another chance at Rafa when he isn't at his best. You just never know.

^^^ I guess you summed it up pretty well.

a reply similar to what I ws expecting..typical of cheryl....lol...good ans... thnx again

Yup, on the same lines Cheryl, I might say Federer is the superior player on grass if he is mentally tough and plays consistent tennis. But the Nadal we see nowadays you never know. He has a way of converting near impossible shots to winners, and we possibly haven't seen the best of him yet.

Funny that Nadal or Sampras fan always find a way to discredit Fed's achievement and when i do the same to Sampras or Nadal, they can't not take it.

Do unto others as you would have others do unto you is all I have to say.

From all the comments here, the only argument that is truly objective point from all of you Nadal and Sampras' fan is that Nadal leads 13-6 in h2h and this is why according to you guys is why Nadal is better. Notice that this is the only statistic that you guys kept repeating?

There's so many statistic that Fed is superior than Nadal and what I can say that Fed has been there, done that. Nadal havent done all this so I am not playing God or fortuneteller here by saying he will not do it but you guys are presumptuous if you think that Nadal will dominate like Fed did.

Agreed smapra - and like you say only some of us here are on the same wavelength, few others just interested in hypocracy

torres...donot fabricate things when u dont have sumthing solid left to write.Who says nadal is better than fed just becoz he leads 13-6? h2h is a good indication..especially when 2 players have played 19 times (7 slam finals) on all surfaces...but only h2h is not sufficient to gauge who is better...u were trying to prove that nadal leads 13-6 becz of some reasons..bla bla...otherwise roger wud have even made the h2d in his favor(which im sorry never happened ..nor is it gona happen)..However,i never compare roger and rafa rite now to ful xtent...an age gap of 5 yrs is massive...wait for nadal atleast 3yrs to win as much as he can.then a comparsion wud becum logical.Who knows whats gona happen in future ..so one way is to bring roger bak in the past...what had he achieved at rafa's age???in comparison(ALMOST NOTHNG)..well then he dominatd like no one had ever done...ws almost unbeatable....became an invincible machine on fast courts...rafa came and slowly started to topple this trend.I can only wait and pray for rafa to feel us proud in the future...he ws 19 yrs old when I thought he wud becum no.1 and win wimby..now he has done alot....so lets wait for quite sumtime.

according to some folks, there will always be an excuse for federer. they have no intention of accepting the facts, because if they do that it would put a question mark by federer's name as the "greatest" and a lot of people want him to ultimately declare him the greatest of all time. everytime he loses, in their minds,something had to be wrong with him. everytime he wins, he's a genius, the greatest. i suppose we should all discount statistics and just believe whatever it is we want to believe, like torres9 does so well! i also wonder how nadal is suppose to equal federer's accompishments, when federer turned pro in 1998 and nadal in 2001. federer is 27 years old and nadal 22. when nadal played federer in miami, march 2004, federer has just become the #1 player in february.. considering those facts, i guess one could argue that nadal has already caught up; all the way up to #1 in the world!

Federer has achieved more than nadal so far; which is natural considering he is older. Only time will tell whether nadal can be as invincible as federer had been; thats all torres has been saying. I dont think he said federer is better at the moment; though I dont really remember the beginning of this argument. Its pointless to compare what federer achieved at nadal's age as djokovic achieved much more than federer by 22 also.

vamosrafa, I don't know what you're talking about. You clearly did not read my posts carefully. All you care is putting some lengthy comment after my comment which has nothing new. I recommend you just copy-paste your comments after this.

Memi and orion, if you guys checked my previous posts, I even admitted that Nadal is better now. I agree with both of you gys.

torres9...when ever u r unable to defend a point u cum up with crap like this....where is the reply to above post which i wrote in response to ur absurd 'opinion' ..MURRAY BETTER THAN NADAL currenly...u cleverly skip such points where u know u cannot prove ut point...tsonga is better than nadla currrently..cilic is better than nadal and so is muray becoz they have 2 titles..nadal 1!!!! so logical is ur reasoning here...great job...and everyone..torres's reasoning speaks out that jimmy connors is the greatest ever folowed by lendl becoz they won more titiles than others!!! great...i wil repeat repeat until u come up wid a logical ans..or admit u wrote sumthing odd/wrong!!! and u also skiped tht dubai discussion...u didn teven reply in the other article "djokovic ready to tacke spain"...when u said 90% of rafa's victory's were due to athleticism...i gave tons of new pnts and references...wht do u have to say then???????

Like I said... Murray has won 2 titles and nadal 1.. Since you are just referring to h2h and current form. This year Murray have beaten Nadal 2 times and won 2 tournaments so he is the best this year. If you look at Grand Slam count then Fed is the best. And yes, I was just mocking you and since you do not care at all to look at overall statistics instead of just one particular statistic which is H2H

Hi Guys! i enjoy being on the sideline for quite a while ...reading your posts is better than having ice cream on a hot summer day. Still arguing who's the BETTER player?
R A F A E L N A D A L is THE B E S T!

Muuray better than nadal currently..no need to arguw wid u any longer...this pnt has already reflectd how weak ur reasoning is!!! fed is the best in the slam coloumn..absolutely...but recent form doesnt mean career slams...it means the past 3 or 4 slams..nadal has 3/4 while roger 1/4...rafa is currently the best...who is the no.1 in the atr race rite now??? RAFA!!!!

RAFA!!!!!!!!!!
RAFA!!!!!!!!!!
RAFA!!!!!!!!!!!!

The guy said he admitted nadal is better at the moment; so why youre talking about recent form? Nadal is better right now, federer has more achievements, time will tell whether nadal can be as dominant as federer. End of discussion already!

wht abt that murray comparison orion?? discusion is over..i agree...nadal beter than muray...2 times he stubornly asserted this!!!! how the heck is murray better at the moemnt.....if its his opinion then defend..he cant becoz its not worth defending...m nt arguing rafa-roger match up now

Im too drunk to interpret what he wants to say.. Sorry, maybe tomorrow

Ok I found it.
I admit Nadal is better now but Murray is better than Nadal now if you look at the current form. So based on current form, Murray is the best.

He doesnt say murray is better player; he only says you shouldnt look at current form to tell who is a better player. Is it okay now?

I am a diehard Nadal fan but I still believe Federer has the better all round game when he is on form. The difference between the two is that Nadal learnt early on how to beat him. Fed was in love with having the No.1 title and he recognised very early that Nadal was the person who might wrestle the crown from him: now he is all too aware that Rafa may well be the reason he might never regain it again.

Nadal's strength is that he is not obsessed by being the current No.1 and in his own words says:

?Nowadays, when I go on court, I don?t say I am number one, number two - or number 50. I am there to win.? He also went on to say that he believed the person most likely to be the next No.1 could be Murray.

It is his mental strength as much as his tennis skills that enable him to concentrate point by point and game by game and to win matches that so often have looked as if he was about to lose. In all the years of watching him play I can recall only a few occasions when he appeared to give up the fight.

This time last year Djokovic was close to overtaking Nadal and at one point would have done so had Nadal lost his match (I forget the actual tournament) and Murray had only just got into the top 10: now we have Murray snapping at the heals of Nole and if Nole slumps - as he has done several times already this season - Murray could well overtake him since he has fewer points to defend in the first half of the year.

What is great for tennis and fans alike is that there is such a strong field of young talent and nine more months of enthralling battles before we know the final outcome for 2009. The pity is that in the end it might be decided by fitness alone with Murray battling a virus illness, Nadal's knees a recurring problem, Federer's suspect back, and Nole's tendency under stress to wilt in the heat.

Hey ed, glad to see you back. I'm interested by your point of Rafa only having given up a few times. I've never seen it myself, but than I've not watched all of his matches. I agree with what you say particularly paragraph 4. He reminds me a little of Hewitt in this respect, just playing one point at a time and regarding it as if it were the decider. I guess I just like competition of this sort. Good thing he's lasting longer than Hewitt :)

I remember that time when Nole almost overtook Rafa last year but like you don't remember the exact details. I think it was around mid year leading up to the FO and where it came down to Nole winning a match as to whether he overtook Rafa and he didn't but he was that close to snatching the no. 2. And again at the end of the year after the Shanghai Masters. What luck!!

We'll have to wait and see how the rest of the season pans out with injuries, wins, losses, slight storke of luck (either way), fitness, etc - I hope it's as enthralling as last year.

Vamosrafa, again, you try to imply your own standards and evaluation and trying hard to establish that those are what people should evaluate from. 'Recent form' can range from 1 year to the last tournament they played. The last tournament that is played is Rotterdam so based on the winner there, it is Murray. If you are talking about the past year, then of course it is Nadal. If it's the past decade, it's Fed. You just have to be open-minded enough. But no, all you care is your reasoning and that everyone must accept it as the absolute truth.

'There are no facts, just interpretations.

no furthr comments..jst luk for the word 'recent' in an encyclopedia or dictionary..ull understand...according to u recent cud be david cup ..nadla hardly lose any games...murray so so scratchy in dubai!!!! dont confuse us and urself....no worries for me!!! RAFA WS AWESUM TSAY..altho nt at his best clearly bt still losting jusr 9 games..scarY!!! GO rafa gO!!!

i thought that to know who is the better player we just need to see the race and nadal is obviosly number 1. nothing more to say....

I don't think there is any question that Nadal is the better player right now. The interesting bit - and perhaps the reason Federer was SO upset at the AO is that Nadal is actually improving. Time will tell what that will mean to both Federer and Nadal's legacy.

Well look it here:

Mar 7, 2009 from Fox Sports:
Roger Federer's agent, Tony Godsick, confirmed Darren Cahill was working with the Swiss right-hander in the Middle East before U.S. hardcourt and European claycourt events.

"It is a test for both. One cannot yet say whether it will be something long-term. They work together now and see how it works out.

More Interesting read here:


http://bleacherreport.com/articles/134434-federer-and-cahil l-the-tennis-worlds-brangelina

Sounds like Federer has gotten himself a coach! He must want that #1 position "back" real bad! LOL Go Roger go...! Smart move! Brilliant! Now let's see what can happen... Good luck Roger! May the "power" be with YOU! From one of your happy fans. Cheers.

thnx cheryl for the bak up..lol...and SKY thnc for the link..it really does luk like roger's abt to hire cahill officially!

Roger needs 3 coaches--- 1 for tennis... 2 for Rafa (exclusively) ... 3 for psychological purposes!

Well, good thing is, Rafa has so much to defend on clay and grass this year. If he can repeat what he did last year then there's no denying that he has what it takes to overcome Sampras and Federer.

Tenstar: Have just checked back - Djokovic closed the gap in May 08 after Nadal who was defending champion lost in the 2R of Rome Masters and went on to win the title. The following week Nadal beat Djokovic in the final of the Hamburg Masters. Had he not then ND would have been No.2. Then came RN's run of wins (RG, Wimbledon etc) which took him to No.1.

They played Hamburg semis, not final. Also, djokovic would have overtook no.2 if he won at RG as well.

Thanks orion you are right it was the SF. I stand corrected.

Thanks ed (and orion). I remember now. Phew... close call :)
Any sign of the package ed?

the author must be feeling blessed & obliged !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! what a response to his article !!!!!!!!!!! 223 comments till now & more to come !!!!!!!!!!!! keep writing !!!!!!!!! BEST OF LUCK !!!!!!!!

Tenstar: not yet but dont panic - the French postal service is a catastrophe and I am still waiting for a parcel sent from 150km away on the 27th to arrive!!

Actually there were two chances for nole to overtake nadal last year...the hamburg semi ws the deciding mtch for the no.2 ranking and so ws the RG semi final!! had novak won that rafa wud have slippd to no.3 ...but he didnt even lose a set...

Cool. It's just I don't trust Oz post either :)

In sort of keeping with the blog, have you read this one, ed?
"Sampras on Nadal: He's in Federer's Head"
http://blog.douglasrobson.com/2009/02/11/sampras-on-nadal-hes-i n-federers-head.aspx

Sampras, who spends time golfing, playing a few exhibitions (including several with Federer last year) and taking his two kids to public school in L.A., had plenty of praise for Nadal. He called the Spaniard a constantly improving ?animal? possessed with the best mental fortitude he has seen since Bjorn Borg. ?And now he has a fear factor,? Sampras said.


The victory on hardcourts in Melbourne also has thrust the mashing Mallorcan into the conversation of all-time greats before his 23rd birthday ? no small feat. ?You have to look at Nadal now as someone who can win as many majors as anyone,? he said of the Spaniard, who owns four French Opens and one Wimbledon along with his Australian title. ?Six majors at 22. You do the math. He?s going to be right there.?

From the link you posted tenstar. Apparently Sampras does give some credit to Nadal. Maybe he could elaborate more; dont blame him though, all the questions flying at him are about Federer. Its not like Pete would step out and make public statements on his own, these are definitely answers to constant questioning.

maybe, we'll all on the brink of witnessing darren cahill perform a psychological miracle, as in teaching federer how to overcome nadal psychologically. after all, roger's main focus the past few years has been "how can i overcome rafa?" i thought that was the reason why he hired tony roche and jose higueras part-time. i've always believed that conquering something that is embedded in the mind has to ultimately come from within, but if cahill can do something that tony roche, higueras, and all those other former players and coaches who have contributed tips on how to get the better of nadal couldn't do it, i'll be the first to honor cahill if he can get it done. we will see!

The reason he hired Higueras and Roche was primarily to overcome RAFA's GAME on CLAY. This is a completely different situation. He has to work out a way to overcome Rafa's game on other surfaces, and his own mental block.

Samprallica, yes, read those bits. This article wasn't bad though I did get annoyed previously by some of his comments about Nadal. But Pete was one of my favs for a no. of reasons (and Agassi after his resurgance) and it's like you say, the constant questioning can get too much. Nadal recently got irritated with a journo who questioned Fed's achiements.

I knew Fed hired Higueras for clay - but Roche for that reason too?? I thought he hired Roche after Higueras (as in after the clay season was over), no? Further thoughts on this Sampra?

Agree memi, I'm keen to see what Cahill can do for/with Fed. He is a very good coach. He did some wonders for Andre and Lleyton. Time will tell if this new partnership is effective for Fed.

Federer worked with Roche before Higueras, not after. It was after RG where he lost to nadal in semis, mainly to work on his clay game. I dont think it was particularly for overcoming nadal as nadal wasnt that much of an enigma at that time, and they did work on other tournaments that are not on clay.

Cahill certainly cannot perform any miracle.But yes,a fresh pair of eyes is never a bad idea.Even Higueras in quite a short span did introduce certain improvements.Most significant one-the use of drop shots which did give Nadal trouble.Of course I cant understand why Roger practically abandoned all that in the RG final.
Regarding Sampras's comments-I agree with Samprallica-Pete wont say something unless asked about it.But I still feel he has the right to say what he wants.If nobody questions the other former greats for their words , questioning Pete's comments just because he dosent appreciate Nadal enough ( I think he does) dosent' sound nice to me personally.

Thanks for the link tenstar. Agree with you and sampra about what constant quesitoning can bring out. Rafa gets it too about Fed as you say. I think you get more out of players on a one-on-one 'proper' interview, though some players seem to handle (intense) questioning better than others.

orion: thanks for your reply. Just to make sure I understand you correctly - so it was Roche in 2005 after RG (the year he lost to Nadal in the FO SF), and worked with Higueras after Roche - in 2008..?

ed251137: "Nadal's strength is that he is not obsessed by being the current No.1" - I think this pretty much sums up Nadal. He has said that you are the same person before a match and after a match whether you win or lose it. His attitide for me is admirable, which is why he doesn't change or let success get to his head. Maybe Sampras could comment on this aspect of tennis champions...

I particularly like this quote from Rafa:
"Losing is not my enemy..fear of losing is my enemy".
It is this that brings that extraordinary, almost superhuman, intensity to his game.

Perhaps Roger should engrave Borg's words on his shaving mirror to look at every day:
"You have to find it. No one else can find it for you".

homos, 3/10/09 7:53 AM: Totally agree - as Cheryl points out Sampras has never been complimentary about Nadal in the past and most of the time was downright disparaging. And Roger himself continues to make condescending comments to the press after a loss to Nadal. Sampras was clearly shocked when Federer fell apart after the AO and maybe is now trying to make amends by giving Nadal more credit for his success against Roger.

Rafa refuses to speak badly of anyone no matter how hard he is pressed. His handling of the AO ceremony was beyond reproach: rewatching the video makes one marvel yet again at his sensitivity towards others, his sportmanship, and his amazing maturity at the age of just 22. Roger may or may not be the GOAT but Rafa will go down in history as being amongst the nicest and most endearing champions of all time.

tenstar: Here's another interesting piece on the AO meltdown: I rather think I think the same way as Jenkins.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/02/0 2/SPJB15LKUM.DTL&feed=rss.bjenkins

BTW: I have acheived nothing this morning after going to the link you gave me - went off trawling which is when I came across the quotes above. Still no parcel but it's early days yet!!

Incidentally, Samprallica...I'm not sure I agree that calling Rafa an "animal" is particularly complimentary. It seems to me that Pete is only willing to give Nadal credit for his "brute" strength and athleticism.

cheryl i think the same. but say so is silly cos a lot of player have very good fit the diference about them and rafa is the hand that holds the raquet... david ferrer also is a very fit player(his hometown is 9 km about mine i fan of him and him and his brother always beat me uo when we were children)but dont have the same level of skill tah rafa, verdasco is very fit too and you can say a lot of players on atp that is form is at the same level than rafa

Seriously, samprallicca, there's no question Sampras is not very keen in Nadal's game which is based on physicality and speed. It's so obvious.

Omardenia, you forget to mention that Ferrer and Verdasco do not slow things down by taking so much time between points and also do not make so much noise when hitting the ball.

It just shows how much tennis you watch and how you just idolize Federer. Cilic, Tipsaravic and other players don't play quietly either. Safin took his time betwen points as well, Sharapova does both. You are the epitome of the very term Fed worshippers on this website came up with last year - a hater! Sad really, you don't watch tennis for the beauty of the sport and not to mention some of its personalities. You just like supporting an arrogant big mouth who used to win a lot until the competition caught up with him. Than he just cried... That's your champion!

ROFL X 10

i have a neighbour...who is a great athlete..abt 20 yrs old...strictly follows his routines...plays tennis and grunting while playing tennis is his childhood habit ..and u ppl know what...he will soon win 6 grandslams(on all surfaces which federer,sampras,laver ..........have never done)and becum no.1.....only becoz he has the above characteristics in his personality.....ne need to have an xcelent game/skills/talent etc to win slams on all surfaces or to becum no.1.....to have a combined 29-12 H2hd against his top 3 rivals on all surfaces..u just have to be a gud athlete...and start grunting and take time between pnts...is that clear everyone?? so lets step on the road to becoming like nadal ..its easy believe me!!!!(according to sum1 atleast)!!!!lol..

Yes let's also teach children who wants to be a Grand Slam champion to pick his underpants between points. Good idea, vamosrafa. Yes, the only one who is both noisy and takes so much time between points is Sharapova and she plays in the WTA and not suprisingly won 3 GS herself.

u just have a habbit of writing sumthing in reply...doesnt matter to u even if ur post is totally CRAP!!! u say nadal's game is just speed speed speed....okay so tell me one thing...WHY THE DOES UR ROGER FIND IT EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO PLAY NADAL's forehand??? its nuthing according to u ..bt still ur roger is unable to battle wid that forehand !!???? nadal punishes his 'stylish' bakhand with his vicious forehand...m sorry then..if nadal's game is nothing more than speed and still roger is unable to tackle those non-speed weapons...then go home roger...if u cant even battle wid sum1's groundies that are nuthing(have no effect) ,u r an ametuer..simply go and build speed to be able to beat him...all i see is a disgruntled face unable to figure out the nadal forehand mystery.....u in a sense are debilitating ur roger by ur own hands!!!

Here is what nadal has been able to do against his cheif rivals in his career at 22(using both speed and non-speed weapons to HUGE AND XCELLENT EFFECT) 29-12 h2d aginst all of them!!! OMG!!insane!!!and these opponents are creative..bt still have been able to beat him a diminutive 12 times !!!!shame on all these 3...roger has a combined 15-20 aginst the same guys!! thats a pity..shame on u roger!!! muray has 9-10 aginst them...djokovic 9-20!!!! so a sensible and SANE person wud figure out how gud is who and who has more weapons!!!

vamosrafa what is wrong with you, don't you get it?!?! According to Fed's cult, Rafa is on steroids, nothing great about him, they can only pick on his habbits and fabricate gamesmanship accusations, and noises he makes (as if Fed plays completely quietly). Rafa is crap in other words (in tennis that is, they can't find fault with his personality). So vamosrafa, tell me... what does that say about Roger being second to a player who is boring, has no beauty in his game, and actually shouldn't be on the tennis court?!?! Tell me vamosrafa, I'm interested in your explanation.

Remi...sorry mate...i dont have any reply to ur questions!!may b SUM! else might have an ans...but m sure a CRAP ans!!!lol.. ur last 3 lines are a summary of what i have been shouting !!!

Ahahaha, Roger is second to Nadal only NOW. Nadal was 2nd to Fed for 4 and 1/2 years. Big Deal. Explain why Nadal is 7-4 against youzhny and fed is 10-0 against youzhny. Explain why Nadal is 3-3 against Blake and Fed is 7-1 against Blake. Seriously, the pain Nadal fans felt during those years in the dark is nothing to us Fed fans who haven't even experience it for a year.

torres 9-to my argument to say that nadal is not only fitness... you just say that he makes noise like a lot of players.... what kind of argument is this.... you try to divert the attention and dont reply my arguments and say bullshits... and for your argument yes you have the reason feder got better head to head eith a lot of people. for me nadal is better than feder and i hope he can dominate like federer did but the problem to me is that the fed fans dont give him is credit and has 22 years old and seems you want that nadal broke his knee .... i dont want that feder get injured, i wanna him playing, i wanna him making 14th slam. for me is okay if nadal retires now he got 6 slams but the most important thing like a person he got my respect. sorry the language barrier is a problme for me if someone can't understand my points sorry again.

nadal is better right now not always and all the time, nadal when federer was24 or 25 nadal just was 19or20, but i agree that are players that grows before that doesnt made the fact that gonna retire years before as usual. the federer fans say ok is 22 with 6 majors but not gonna be that high like federer bla bla bla gonna retire soon.... i rather rafa before federer but i dont wanna federer retiring soon like federers fan want with rafa

tenstar- yes, that is how it happened.

rafa worshippers- Cant you see torres is being sarcastic most of the time? If not, why is convincing torres a lifetime goal for you?

torres-time and time again u show ur mentality!! u r comparing blake/youzhny wid djokovic/murray!!! thats like a crime!!! u seem to have lost consciousness.....4.5 yrs bak nadal ws 17 yrld old..how the hell one SENSIBLE person can xpect sum1 to tule the tennis world at the age of 17-19???!!! he improved..develpd..and nw is on top..and will remain there...and will keep on improving...but youzhny/blake duo better than murray/djokvic..wow!!!

for me is not a goal but i feel so sorry that the fed fans say that how bnadal grows like a player before fed his career gonna stop soon for end of his peak or by injuries... is so sad read things like this... i dont wanna feder get injured or retire soon i just wanna see the best tennis in the world. i support rafa yes, he is spanish, he is kind,got the feets on the ground and he knows he is no better person that anyone just to be the number 1 tennis player in the world. in olimpics he stays with all the athletes and say he loves play for his country. spain loves rafa and is easy make it.

Cheryl you can interpret it any way you want. It is obvious that Sampras does not like Nadal as much as he does Federer, but your version of the whole thing provided a distorted view. Sampras isn't a guy who's gonna waste his time analysing and pondering on these things; frankly he wouldn't make a statement if he wasn't asked to. He only gives his opinion on how to neat Nadal, and yes, Federer could use his approach, slice, and volleys more effectively against Nadal like he does. He doesn't need to do it more; but against Nadal, so many apsects of his game crumble. To me, this is a mental issue.

OK ormadenia, i'm really sorry if I upset you. If I say Nadal makes noise and also takes a long time preparing between points, I am sure it is not a sin as it is true. I do not wish for Nadal to retire early due to burnout or injury. But I only wish that one day he'll chop his head off while trying to execute his ugly helicopter finish.

Vamosrafa, if Youzhny/Blake is worse than Murray/djokovic, why is Nadal cant own them as much as he own Murray/djokovic. If you are going to cherrypick statistics and give a lame excuse as young age then your argument is obviously flawed.

Sampralicca, 'Sampras isn't a guy who's gonna waste his time analysing and pondering on these things'

Sampralicca, 'Sampras isn't a guy who's gonna waste his time analysing and pondering on these things'

??R O G E R F E D E R E R is & always be the B E S T !!!??

look a the recent trends TORRES..he is starting to own blake/berdych..etc...no one is perfect..u make mistakes..u have flaws and as time passes by ..xperience teaches u to overcome obstacles...no one is born as the no.1 player in the world..u have to earn it so obviously there come many obstacles that xploit ur weaknesses...a true champ is he who overcomes such factors and obstacles that xploit his weaknesses...like nadal has done in he past 2 years or so....he is really a definition of a true champ..a fighter personified.roger used to have a 1-5 record against nalbandian at one stage..what xplanation wud have been given at that time torres??nalbandian lead the h2hd by a significant margin even when fed ws no.1...so no one is perfect...david knew how to xploit weaknesses(if any..lol) in roger's game so he led by a good margin.gradually roger showed he is a true champ ...he now leads 9-8...doesnt OWN him at all bt still leads showing his quality..!!! sumtimes u have bad-matchups...so u need time to overcome such bad match -ups...blake for nadal ..david for roger...richard krajicek for sampras!!.so whenevr u give a true champion chance to prove himself..(i.e give him alteast 6-8 shots at that match up)...intial progress may b slow bt its just a matter of time!!!

Yeah so what? He's probably played enough tennis in his life to be sick of analysing further. We're all fans, and I can't get enough of tennis.

Finally, vamosrafa, came up with a non-biased comment by mentioning Roger too. Thank you Thank you. But u are still using h2h and fortune-telling but I guess it is an improvement. Murray is starting to own Nadal so it must be a matter of time too?

Anyways, I am happy that Fed is getting a baby. I'll quote a quote from Nadal, 'There is more important thing in life than the tennis.After the tennis, we have our life too'.

True. I wonder if the news of the baby will help Fed relax.

torres9..its not that i came up wid a non-biased comment for the first time..its that u perceived it the rite way for the first time.I dare any 1 to find any post of mine in which I have said sumthing uncomplimentary abt the swiss ace.so m diffren tfrin u and many others in this regard. Secondly...Muray is starting to own nadal??? how can u say that??? when u sum 1 owns sumone it shud refer to victories on multiple surfaces..not only on a single one(hard court here)...we all know whose gona own whom when they play on clay/grass..on hard court i dunt think murray will beat nadal always...nadal can beat him anywhere on any court...theri last meeting..any sane and wise person cud see that after 1-set all...the 3rd set ws no contest as xpected simply becoz rafa wsnt even 70% in the 3rd..murray admitted it..it ws quite visible. and i said "true champions" turn the tables in their favor !!! like roger..pete..rafa...murray is not a true champion so far...not in any category!!! he may becum one in future as he is full of potential but not now.....so u misinterpretd my words..u mean to say Simonis starting to own federer as well?? ohh sumon!!! i didnt mean that..better start thinking in a more mature way!!!!

Do you get to advertise your own blog here? Doesnt seem right

The guy who wrote this piece probably didn't start watching tennis until the Federer era had started... That he's never seen Sampras play Wilander I can understand if he was barely born, but if you're gonna imply they never played against one another, at least do your homework. I mean who doesn't know about the famous Sampras-Wilander match at the US Open in 1989 ??The then 18years old Sampras beat the defending champ Wilander in 5 sets... he would return a year later to win his first US open at age 19 beating Lendl, McEnroe and Agassi on his way. So the same comment that applies to Sampras according to him, applies to himself... If you don't know any tennis history, keep your shallow perspective for yourself. Sampras won 7 Wimbledon titles and was never troubled by the best when his game was on. He always found ways to defeat his rivals, and at Wimbledon, the closest thing to Nadal in terms of presicion shots, stamina and speed was Agassi, who made the final against Pete. Well, Pete did his classic service volley game and destroyed Agassi in straight sets. While Federer may not be able to dominate Nadal, one has to realise Federer doesn't have as powerful a service-volley game as Sampras... Sampras first serve averages 130-135 miles/hour. Second serve at 115m/hour... a 10 miles difference is all it takes for Nadal to time his return right, preventing Federer from taking risks at the net. What Federer could improve is his athleticism, work on his core strength so he can add those extra 10 miles/hour to his serve... At this level a small improvement in core strength and power can have a huge impact... Now to say that Federer tried to volley at Roland Garros and in Rome against Nadal and lost is one thing, but one must know you can't compare a fast surface like grass or indoor with clay... Service volley works best on grass and fast hard court.... and that's where Federer could do a lot more of that against Nadal. Tsonga showed during the 2008 AO how to defeat Nadal hands down with a service volley game.

Nadal beat Federer when he was dog tired at the AO, just imagine what thrashing Fed would have had if he hadn't been allowed to prance around for a day longer resting, and Nadal had had the same rest period.

I like the way Federer keeps saying he's got the Olympic gold, deliberately forgetting to mention that it was in doubles, and the commentators just mentioning in passing that Wawrinka was involved, as if he was just a ball boy on court for the 'mighty' Fed.

By the age of 22, Federer had not achieved anything close to 6 GS, an Olympic Gold Medal in singles, and a GS on three different surfaces. By the time Nadal gets to 27, he would have achieved a lot more than Federer has so far. Is the cardigan a gentle reminder that he is just waiting for his pipe and slippers to spend more time with his family?

Thanks livingdoll for making such bold predictions. Assuming that Nadal is gonna dominate like Fed just shows how shallow your knowledge in sport is.

Sampras should play some exhibition matches with Nadal in order to put his money where his mouth is. To be honest, Sampras and Roger are two of the biggest bores in tennis, since Nadal came on the scene a lot more people have sat up and taken notice of this great sport.

All the professional commentators fall over themselves to praise Federer because they don't want hiM to cry, and get hacked off with them as he did last year when they all kept saying he was finished.

VAMOS RAFA!!!!

Fed is hanging on to the No2 ranking by his finger tips.

Fed is a bore,huh? Does that explain why the TV ratings are always at the top when Fed plays and not Nadal. Nadal defensive tennis is the most boring brand of tennis any tennis player can play.

gay is now a tv ratings expert. Fed is so pupular that Nadal was 11th on the list of most influential people in the world via on-line voting and Fed no where to be found. When tennis is all over, Nadal can be proud of his values and character, Fed can be proud of the low-life foul mouth fans he attracted in his short career. Sampras as a friend should really provide him with more effective advice.

Totally agree with you livingdoll. I highly doubt Fed will regain the no. 1 ranking. He can't handle the competion now that it's stronger and interestingly, it's Rafa who is prevailing over the field and still improving. It's only a matter of time before Novak and Murray will eclipse him and when or if that happens, Fed will surely retire. If he can't stomach being introduced on court as the world no. 2, imagine what being introduced as world no. 3 or 4 would do to his ego.

Some of Federer's fans are so blinkered that I wouldn't be surprised if they don't still believe that he is better placed than Nadal to win the Grand Slam this year.

I find Federer boring, a lot of people like train spotting, but I don't find that particularly interesting either.

The fact that all the professionals spend their time advising Federer how to beat Nadal speaks volumes, they obviously can see that Federer simply doesn't have the game to beat Nadal. Nadal is a better tennis player than Federer, who cares how he does it, as long as it is done within the rules of the game.

Are u serious that Nadal is most influential person? It is Askmen.com who came up witht hat list and you are intellectually challenged if you take Askmen.com seriously. How bout the poll of most elegant man where Fed is second and Nadal nowhere to be found. During OzOpen Fed VS Roddick, 1 of the most predictable tennis matches ever gained more TV ratings than Nadal Vs Verdasco. Just show who has the most international appeal. Nadal and his boring tennis has no chance. Fed will be No.1 again sooner or later. Nadal won't get Wimby again, folks.

^torres9 is the most hideous troll ever..LOOOOL... :) you're seriously on a roll,dude.Hilarious.

Absolutely livingdoll! Few Fed fans are pretty good but yeah, most are like him in character, blind to truths and living in their own world. See how few here have been reduced to name dropping? Hilarious because that's all they can do. We've provided numerous quotes of Roger's arrogance but one pathetic thing can only ochestrate that Rafa cites his knees as EXCUSES. Where is the quote I ask you? It just reinforces what we've said over and over again. Fed still thinks he's the best so he won't listen to anyone. I wouldn't mind betting Cahill - amongst other reasons - felt Fed's ego would just get in the way of the training. And yes, there's nothing exciting about Federer, particularly his personality. To me. it's a case of Fed and some of his fans just can't handle the situation right now and that's why you see this repeated show of hostility and lowering to the lowest level they can go. Makes you wonder, doesn't it... The only thing important to him is being labelled the greatest, how he gets there and who he tramples on has no relevance whatsoever.

Yes Fed is arrogant to you but even if he is, he has every right to be arrogant with all the achievements he has got. I am sure anyone would pay for Fed's assessments of things and not some obsessed Nadal fans. I will admit that Nadal is better if he gets more Slams. Murray is slowly establishing himself and by the time he's done, he'll stop Nadal from ever eclipsing Fed and I saw Djoker plays and I am sure his level is as good as Nadal. Just wait and see.

Its still on !!!!!!!! rock on torres9 !!!!!! gr8 going !!!!!!!! Fed is gr8.

torres...whenever sum1 here talks abt future u cum out shouting bt what abt ur own post ,the previous one???!!! "Murray is slowly establishing himself and by the time he's done, he'll stop Nadal from ever eclipsing Fed and I saw Djoker plays and I am sure his level is as good as Nadal. Just wait and see."

U r predicting the future urself...u r contradicting ur urself!!watch out mate..u seem to be very confused!!! no need for nadal to eclipse anyone in terms of slams if he is to prove himself better...ofcourse he has to cum closer atleast to any of the GOAT contender if he is to entrench his own position in that category...but look numbers do count but what is more imporatant is circumstances..laver had 11 slams ..emerson had 12 but there is nobody..absolutely nobody who says emerson ws better becoz we all are aware of the circumstances of that time..again laver is considered above borg but both had 11...laver by many is considered above pete/roger despite being behind in the slams count.

You are contradicting yourself before you accused me. Look at the conditions? Notice that most Nadal wins in the h2h shows that Nadal won on clay more than anywhere? if Nadal can't rise above the circumstances himself and overcome young people like Murray and Djoker who has the same energy, hunger like him then I am sorry but he is not the best. I said 'just wait and see' at the end which at least shows that I leave room for other possibilities. You, my friend, believe in your predictions as if you are God. I'm afraid that you are the one confused here.

what prediction did I make lately??kindly highlight...talking abt conditions...6 slams...4 on clay and 1 on grass...1 on hard..thats phenomenal...by conditions i meant the level of competiton..u urself keep on mentioning djokoer and muray(2 xtremely talented players) and swiss artist roger is also present in nadal's era..plus two of roger's toughest rivals of his time(when he assumed no.1 spot in 04)...roddick and nalb are also in nadal's era..roddik is even better than before.So are u blind or u lack common sense?? drop roger and murray for xample..still u r gona b left with djo/roddik/ dangerous players like verdsaco/tsonga......etc. and then the field becums comparable to the one at the time of roger's domination era 04-05 especially...it ws 07 that nadal matured as a player on al courts..understandable becoz of his age.....so u see the imbalance of competition between the two eras ..the time when roger became no.1 and when nadal has becum??? ?? ok i'll not make predictions.....lets xamine the past..wht the hell did roger have at age 22??wht does djoker has?muraay???22!!!! ans urself.. absolutely no disprespect to roger as I rate him above pete and almost on level terms wid laver( the 2 cant be comapred properly tho)...

This article finds Sampras comment INSULTing - well, given Fed's well established reputation of condescending comments on other players now, it wont surprise anybody that in a few years time, Sampras certainly will have a wonderful armchair critic successor perhaps 10 times more precise and sharper and more INSULTing than he is now ..... hehaha

I'm really tired of this comparing the level of competition. There is absolutely no proof that Roddick or Hewitt at his prime is not better than Djoker and Murray. I suggest you see Youtube videos of Roddick forehands and it used to be so lethal. Hewitt at his prime is a right-handed Nadal with less spin and he owned Fed earlier because Fed has always had trouble with grinders. And now that Fed has relatively slowed down. Please do more research, vamosrafa. Youtube is there for us all to see.

roddick was better than djokoer/murray in his prime???mate ..rodik is in his prime rite now!!! he just has added xtra element of spin in his forehand..when he ws under connors his bakhand startd to improve and there is no doubt that his backhand now is way better than it ws in 03...its nt roddik..its all the others who are better than him and make him appear as if he is well past his prime..."hewiit is a priem rite handed nadal"...u gota b kidding...ok ...his defence and counter-punching were phenomenal but the ability to transform defence into offence from nowhere is what makes nadal way too dangerous than hewitt..hewitt's forehand wasnt so lehtal...no such variety ..bakhand ws solid but muray and djokoer are better...ask any xpert ..SO U GO DO SUM RESEARCH!!!

Yes Hewitt is a lesser nadal. Roddick is not at his prime. You got to be kidding. Like I said, go watch roddick those days are far better.

about roddick...yes his serve ws more lethal in 03-04 than it is now ..to b honest i dont see much change in andy's game since the past few years..like i said his bakhand improved under connors..but as u mentioned his forehand now lacks a bit of explosiveness...but there hasnt been alot of changes in andy since 03-09.....roger kept on in improving till 06 where he reached his peak and at that time he ws a mountain higher than andy who used to rival him fiercely in 03.

All these ex-players have an inferioty complex for Nadal, he looks like a rock star and plays like a genious. It is just pure jealousy.

They all give Federer conflicting advice on how to beat Nadal, like Wilander saying after the AO, that Federer's nerves got the better of him not his tactics, then two seconds later Resedski saying Federer never got the tactics right he didn't know whether to come in or stay back, which just goes to show that none of them knows how to beat Nadal, and should they put their money where their mouth is, they will soon find out that they are all clueless in dealing with Nadal's talents, the likes of which they have never seen before.

I don't know if it is jealousy, I just think players like Sampras can't fathom Nadal winning so much with the game that he plays.

Oh, and askmen.com is gay, can't be taken seriously.

Roddick is nowhere as talented or efficient as Djokovic/Murray, but he has a whopper serve and had an amazing forehand. You ask for Roddick's best years: 2003-2005.

OK I saw Nadal play recently. I dunno but his improvements is that he can now use his decision making is better in where to play the ball. I really seldom see him slice and show any variety. He is as quick as ever. I must say he is very good at playing the big points.

His game is a counterpuncher game. It is not a new thing. Players like Hewitt and Connors have done it before. But Nadal is different in the sense that he is a lefty and hit the ball with an extreme grip. This is why Nadal is like a very different player than anything the tennis world have seen. So I think Fed has done very well to dominate when a new type of player. I must say that Toni Nadal is a genius to train Nadal like that. I am sure Sampras or any greats will have problems handling Rafa.

To me, the job of stopping Nadal is DJoker and Murray's job now. Fed had solved the problem 6 times. I admit that Fed is declining but no one can stay top forever.

since march 08..nadal's game has been sumthing more than counterpunching(CP)...altho CO is the main feauture of his game he has done well to increase his reperotire....the use of sliced bakhand is pretty intelligent now...taking 2ns serves on the rie sumtimes with the bakhand...use his lefty serves more wisely and even employing a bit of serve and volleying to keep foes guessing.On grass,his game is sumthing more than counterpuching..the way he pummelled murray last year bears testimony to the fact..u cant beat fed and win wimby pnly by counterpunching..he is one of the most agressive baseliners on grass who tends to finish points at teh net just quite often to keep his foes guessing....go watch on youtube..rafa nadal playing on hard-courts 05-06 and in 09 Aus open...hundreds of differences!!! beleive me!!

I am saying that his game has improved but not much variety. Using a slice 1 or 2 times doesn't mean he's improved his variety. What i notice is just better placement of the ball now. I watched it a lot. It's still counterpunching. And altho he beat Fed last year on grass 1 time doesn't mean he is better. If he beats Fed this year on grass then I'll be the first to admit it. It's so obvious that It is just that Fed lost in the mental department not that Nadal improved by leaps and bound. But I am not taking away credit from Nadal. Mental is part of the game anyway. But it you say his game has improved so much than I'll have to disagree. I am a Youtube junkie and I watch Nadal matches too. In contrary I'm not sure you really do watch and analyse properly. Murray and Nalbandian game is much better than Nadal but mental department, Nadal is no.1.

i think hardly any 1 wud have watched more rafa videos than I have done..lol....the thing is that his improvements are massive..experts rate his forehand just behind federer's forehand quite often and his dble handed bakhand is becoming a big weapon...fed is beter on grass i agree.. m confident rafa will defend his title but roger is there...he can stop him any time.... If ui have any doubts abt the variety and imrpvements in nadal's game ...ask the journalists here...CHERYL and RICKY etc....
murray rated nadal's forehand as the best shot in tennis when he lost to rafa at hambirg 08...djokovic said he is the best defensive player in the hisotry of tennis..fed admitted his movement is the best on clay and the amount of power he can generate on that bakhand wing on the bakfoot his amazing....murray/nalb can hit good passing shots..but they can never generate the power rafa does (from nowhere ..5-10 feet behind the baseline)....so countless improvements...ur way of analyzing nadal is wrong may b...my friend no offence here...but i have read atleast 150 articles by diffrent analysts/xperts/journalists that hilite the spaniard's improvemnts...last year when blake lost to him twice..he said that rafa is so diffrent now..he now tries to finish of points quicly by hitting winners rather than waiting fir errors..and we know how much improved a player he is since march 08...

Like I said, he does improve but not by miles. If I am gonna give u a list of articles saying Fed game is the best then it'll be more than 1000 but that's not the point here. He has always been a great defensive. Hamburg 08 is like so long ago. I must admit his topspin forehand is the best shot on clay but it has always been like that. Improvement by a mile means he destroys opponent in every match and only lose 3-5 times a year. he already lost 2 this year. And if he had won wimbledon and AO2009 against Fed in straight sets then perhaps I will say he is miles ahead of Fed.

lol..when did I say miles ahead of fed?????i have never said this nor am i gona say this in future until sumthing miraculous starts to happen..no one..yes no one can be miles ahead of roger federer!!!!if any one says that he is an ediot to be honest....bt u have to agree...nadal's progress in relentless and thats the scary thing for everyone..he is on top of the world comfortably but he is likely to improve alot ..cant wait to see his future!!...and wow what great use of sliced backhand against delpotro..impressive...6-2 3-1 nw..good going rafa...rafa rodik semi...

tmrow..1pm roger vs murray(whats ur pick on thats one torres??)..m still wavering back and forth...

folowed by nadal-roddick (m gona go wid nadal here..u??)

You guys have lot of energy :)

OK the sliced backhand is good. But it's basically the same slice which del potro can do too. Actually the scoreline doesn't show how close the match is. Now I can see how good JMDP is but obviously Nadal is better at the big points. So many break points and of course 1 were converted I would have to say that the difference was JMDP is not used to playing against the top 4 players. He needs to learn a lot.

I would say Fed has a 30% chance against Murray. Murray is a grinder and Fed hates grinders. He is just doesn't prefer to grind as much as he was younger.

Nadal Vs ROddick. If Roddick serve 81% like today, then Roddick will have a 60% of winning against Nadal ( this is only if he serves like this and obviously the crowd is behind roddick)

I think Rafa was taken unawares of how well Juan played considering he hardly ran for a ball when he handed the QF on a plate to Federer in Australia.

The moralel is to go into every match with an open mind, because people improve so they can always spring a surprise. Against Roddick, I feel Rafa would be more prepared, he knows that Roddick serves well, so that won't be a surprise. I keep my fingers crossed that Rafa goes through. By the way, Roddick was not at his best at the AO semi, probably the Nadal/ Nalby syndrome, because Federer has got a 16-2 record against him.

I write this post to make it 300!!!!! good job and great energy guys...

Mubarak ho Vamosrafa........aap ke achievement k liye !!!!!!!! I had thought to post the 300th comment but its ok.

Keep going guys !!!!!!!! 400 then 500 are waiting !!!!!Cheryl would be proud of his writing !!!!! Congrats to him too !!!!!!!!!!

anyone who doubts nadal's variety...here is a link...a comparison to verdasco mainly.. http://tennisworld.typepad.com/thewrap/2009/03/iw-not-a-rafa.html or if this doesnt work do let me know..

tomnjerry2....ap ko bi mubarak ho..ap ka bi acha khasa hath hai is main..lol...

cheryl is a he? the ;link doesn't work, vamosrafa. Congrats to both Muzz and Rafa. They deserve to be in the final. What I notice is that counterpunchering is the trend nowadays. It started with Sampras dominating tennis with a serve-and-volley game and then Fed with his all court game and now counterpunchers rule. I guess it is part of the evolution of tennis. Maybe in the future people will figure out how to counter this type of game.

torres9 is finally admitting that Federer's days at the top are numbered.

A retraction will come out soon.....just wait!

torres..go to tennis.com..in the search bar at the top..search "nadal verdasco similarities"...the results will show 3 articles...click on the 1st one..u will find the article this way...

It should be Smapras the Wheelchair Federer critic now that we've rolled on to something else :)

Fed might get dominated now with all this rising youngsters but he still can beat anyone but Murray and Nadal. I am sure this storm can pass and it is matter of Fed raising his game when Nadal and Murray declines. Am sure Fed's game will make him able to play for many more years to come like Agassi did.

torres9, your a hater. get over it. Nadal is the shit!! all u Nadal fans, Vamos Rafa!!! all u haters keep talkin. Nadal just keeps proving you wrong. just like he did this weekend at indian wells. keep it up Nadal!!

I am not a Nadal hater. I just hate some of his fans who show no class. Nadal game is not my favourite. His strokes are ugly in my eyes. But hey, he is very effective. Your nickname make me think that nadal definitely resembles Serena williams.

torres9, is calling Nadal and his family and friends ("monkeys orangutans, etc, he goes home to play with") monkeys, etc. and his fans caged animals an indication of class on your part? You must have a different definition of class than I do.

Those are "classy" language by THEIR definition, dear!

I always try to base my arguments with statistics but I fight fire with fire. If a frog like agf spits on my foot, I will sure stomp him into green slime. It's called self defense, I will not get sued in court.

Wow! 315 comments. Looks like this blog post will be discussed till the end of time! I'm not sure whether Cheryl meant to do this, but this blog post, by misconstruing and playing with words, has actually made Sampras look foolish.
I think that is a great disservice to someone who was a true champion and quite possibly the best this sport has seen (so far) . I'm sure that Sampras regards Nadal very highly. Please do not take this article too seriously.

No one is talking about suing anyone torres, don't go overboard. If you want to step on agf, I'm sure agf himself doesn't mind, but when you say 'Nadal fans' you are not just refering to agf alone!

I was kidding about the suing. Can't you take a joke? I said 'some of Nadal fans here have no class'. Please read my post carefully. You will only get offended if you felt I was referring to you.

You always get too personal with me TORRES! When I make some comments about FED, you always feel that it's YOU I'm addressing most of the time. Aren't you the one who's FANTASIZING? You need to replace Mirka, you feel you're the CLOSEST to Fed more than anyone in this world.
DREAM ON!!!

I wasn't offended at all, just asking a question. I didn't accuse you of attacking EVERY Nadal fan, please read my post carefully too.

i m reading every one's post carefully but cannot understand any thing coz i have just joined school yesterday !!!!!!!!!!!!

I know only 1thing.......
Fed u r the best !!!!!!!! Baaki all rest !!!!!!!!!!!! Love u Roger !!!!!!!!

tomnjerry--- can you believe it you made me laugh! LOL
I like you today!

I always make people laugh as its is in my name & my character !!!!!! I just love Roger & his game that's all & i don't like one saying against him every time in his / her post !!!!!!!!! lolzzz

In that case, I'm sorry, I have to disappoint you most of the time because i'm not a fed fan. you can just bear with me or make your own defence!

ho ho no sorry pls !!!!! Its fine that u r not a fan of Fed & u can write against him !!! But i like all tennis players(excpt-Djoker & Murray) but Fed is on top followed by Rafa & others.

I don't like to defence Roger as I know He is the best or may be for me He is the best !!!!!!

Sorry ..defend Roger !!!!!! School student .....mistake is due !!!!! lol

"I always try to base my arguments with statistics but I fight fire with fire. If a frog like agf spits on my foot, I will sure stomp him into green slime. It's called self defense, I will not get sued in court."

Hey Torres9 i support what you say in the sense that if someone attacks you, you should defend yourself. (Like i had to do when i joined this site...I might not like the way you dot it but that is my problem and your choice). However attacking Nadal and his family is not exactly directing your defense/disgust at the right person. They did not offend you but the individuals on this sight.

Just pointing out. Do not come and dump bricks on me.lol

Hey TJ please clarify who you dont like Murray and Djoker game...behaviour personality.. whatever it is. It might be the same reasons why i dislike SOME of their traits (notice i said SOME). To their supporters out there i am not abusing or undermining either player so please keep any reply to this post civil. (just covering my bck TJ lol...before i get attacked and mauled)

TJ meant to say why you do not like them.

TopDOg--- You're new here and clearly you're already IN for a hell of a good time. Just be careful with whom you address your post... you might retract what you said that you're not to take sides... You have to choose from black or white... you'll be OUT FROM THAT GRAY AREA sooner rather than later!

Afg

I do not wilt so easily under pressure and if people want to be offended by what I say I don?t care as I have not been abusive to anyone. They should just remember if they do choose to be abusive/insultive to me it is actually pointless. Because as far as I am concerned there comments will not make any impact on my life in anyway,?..so why waste your energy. Furthermore as far as black and white is concerned as far as there is a grey I will be in there. Like I said for me Nadal is No1 however there are great (Federer) and there have been great tennis players before Federer and now the great Nadal who entered the scene.s Nothing takes from the fact that they are/were great players including the great Nadal (But I would love Nadal to supersede their records and there is nothing wrong in that as someone will do it and why not Nadal?). No amount of pressure is going to change my opinion on both players. I will continue to give both credit where its due and if I feel that they played badly as compared to their high standard of play I will criticise them as I feel they can do better. Nadal can recognise that he has faults in his game as he is not perfect if he did not he would not have changed/developed and modified his game to the point where he is now No1. And between you and me as I know you are a die hard Nadal fan (lol) I do not believe we have seen the best of Nadal. There is still a lot of changes he can make and skills he can add to his game so that he can last longer at No1 and win more slams (Nadal is still only 22/23). The fact that I feel that he still needs to improve on his game is not a Negative but a VERY positive thing, it not only means that he has not played his best tennis yet but also because I feel that Nadal still has a lot to offer and he can do it. He is the best, I feel at developing and modifying his game. SO conclusion = lets wait and see. I can?t wait to see the Nadal in 2/3yrs. For sure he will be a better player (which would be scary for the other players).

Thanks

Sorry meant Agf25

TopDog--- I'm beginning to believe you're THAT cool, even a mistake in spelling my ID you're quick to apologize. You're too good to be true!
Anyway, NO one here is trying to CHANGE you. BE whatever you want, and i appreciate that you recognize that I AM AN AVID RAFA supporter and I DON"T REALLY CARE about the die hards on the other side... I'll say what I HAVE TO SAY!

agf, your stupidity always make me laugh and the way you react to my comments is why I always reply to your comments.

I DON"T REALLY CARE about the die hards on the other side

You're ALWAYS guilty that's WHY.
Even if I don't address my comment to you, YOU feel that it's you I'm referring to. If that's not STUPID I don' know what it is.
For sure that line will appear in your future post... notice you're just echoing some of my lines. Be thankful because you're being educated here... but there is one BIG PROBLEM... you're intellectually challenged!

Owhhh, I'm guilty. Waiting for a life sentece. Please hang me. You are just hillarious.
Intellectually challenged? Tell that to the people who put me in university. If you dont care what people say, why are you responding? HAHAHA

there is only one(u know who) stupid in the whole website !!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!! so pls stop quarrellings with each other !!!!!!!!!!!! Keep -----------Smiling !!!!!!!!!! Watch TnJ on cartoon Network & chill !!!!!!!!

Hey Agf lots of people say Nadals personality is too good to be true but i believe that that is his true character and nature (it is rare to find such personalities like Nadals but with the billions of people on this planet people like this wil exist and Nadal is one of them and even though i know he has faults, right now i cant see any in his personality). And that is if not one but the major reason why i became an avid Nadal fan. And also because i LOVE his game obviously.

We have a cat and mouse rolled into one, a canine, a YET to be identified creature (ABOVE) ---- should I SAY MORE WHY THEY ARE REACTING THAT WAY!

agf25agf............tat's meant to me ???????????? I don't think so !!!!!!! am i right ????

torres9's said:

"""I am sure this storm can pass and it is matter of Fed raising his game when Nadal and Murray declines."""

lolz, what a flow of mind. You've seen already the decline of much younger players' but you failed the see the naked reality that FEDERER is an OLD MAN. He's obviously the one in decline, spiraling downward fast and instant. He is old, you hear, that's why he can not match the powerplay of the new-and-up coming players. Let alone Nadal.

How sure you are Federer will survive after the STORM? He's drowning and needs a life support lolz. He will get killed if he's yet to make his mind up and press the emergency button and that is ... TO RETIRE.

Fed on decline !!!!!! ha ha ha ha

Who ????? other than Rafa & Murray has beaten Fed recently or u can say in 2009 !!!!!!!!!
Yes.... he reached AO final & masters semi so he is in decline for sure !!!!!!! lolzzzz

TnJ,

Aside from Rafa & Murray, have you heard somone named Gilles Simon? check it out you may find it very interesting lolz

Okay, just hang on and may you find enjoyable practising the GREAT ART of DENIAL.

Unlike Rafa who depends 60% on his SPEED and POWER, Fed can be slow and still fight off young challengers. And Rafa will slow down unless he is a vampire or a werewolf which he is not since his bloodline is of the ApeMan.

malteser--- if you're such a FAIR tennis fan, CAN YOU GIVE ME AN ASSESSMENT OF WHAT torres IS, in terms of being a FED FAN!

Torres9
True to say that Fed can be slow and still still fight off young challengers but this was before and recently that has not been the case and will most likely no longer be the case. Why the need to call Nadal the "Apeman" his no bigger than any of the other players .You make no sense. Just goes to show torres9 when you can no longer successfully attack Nadals fans you go for there hero who cant even defend himself. This speak volumes.

TopDog, Fed only lose to Nadal and Murray. Young challengers are the likes of JMDP, Gulbis, Monflis. I wouldn't say Rafa a 'young challenger'. He is 22 year old and has almost the same experience at the highest level as Fed.

Anyways, I was just kidding around. You Rafa fans are always serious. I dunno why. Just like your idol. No smile, no personality, always defensive. But he does move like a gorilla not that it is an insult. He is 5m taller than fed and his size is 1 and a half Fed. He's a giant. Only Karlovic is bigger.

One day I woke up & what ???????? I got o see innocent TD has changed his volume of words & style of speaking, he is not n e more what he was claiming when he joined !!!!!!!!! lolzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

hence its proved that Promises are made to be broken !!!!!!!!!! ha ha ha ha ha

"""Only Karlovic is bigger"""

Can't you see the towering heights of JMDP, Isner, Querry to name a few? Yeah these guys are dwarf according to your dysfunctional scientific measurement. The elite group are almost the same in height, I think only Nalbandian is the shortest at 5'9".

torres9 add up Gilles into that list. If I am not mistaken Federer is 0-2 against the "young" frenchman.

TJ

Sorry TJ you have lost me.... no one has been insulted or abused in my post so what exactly do you base my changing on. Can you draw my attention to any post where i have bashed any of the tennnis players or individuals on this site. And exactly what did i claim i was when i entered this site. Sorry to say but the only thing i claimed was that i am and avid fan of Nadal nothing more. And i believe that when i m not pleased about name calling regarding Nadal i have the right to behave accordingly so.

P.S
one post and i have changed my volume of words, style of speaking and therefore my character. lol
What flimsy evidence you are trying to use to prove your statement, quite surprising actually.

hey TD !!!!!!!

I m extremely sorry if u r hurt !!!!!!!!! I was just teasing u !!!!!!!!!! lolzzz

But if u still have n e doubt then I apologize to u in front of around 50 users of TT !!!!!!! TD is the same what he was when he joined & wt he was claiming of !!!!!!!! cheers for him & the great Roger Federer !!!!!!!!!!!!

Apology accepted TJ(lol)
Guess i was on edge/having a bad day for no apparent reason.

Go on youtube and watch Federer on Charlie Rose.. you'll also hear a lot of mcenroe. It is amazing how little the writer of this article knows about tennis... Federer himself says if there's one part of his game he's really disappointed with, (and that's 2 years ago when he was gonna easily beat Sampras' record), it's the fact he can't serve and volley as much as he would have wanted to.. His hero was guys like Sampras with huge serves, who could just cover the net like no one... He wanted to have that too but he's disappointed he can't do it because his serve is not as strong... Also McEnroes was saying there's one area he could improve it's the serve and volley, because it's gonna be hard for him to beat Nadal at his own game. So Sampras is not alone with his advices... McEnroe knows it, and so does Federer... But improving his serve to be as fast as Sampras', that's not smth that can be done just with training... He's been working on it all his life... he just doesn't have it... so to be safe, has need to stay in the back of the court... Well, it's all on Charlie Rose from Federer himself... Go listen ... I wish people who wrote tennis articles knew what they were talking about before they became these armchair critics of all time greats like Sampras...

As an armchair critic and a no 1. Rafa fan I dare say this........

When Rafa was winning Roland Garros.....they all said he can only won on clay

After Federer beat Rafa for the first time at Wimby....they all said how Rafa can never beat Federer on his favourite surface.

After Federer beat Rafa the second time at Wimby....they all said again Rafa could never beat Federer. Bearing in mind that Rafa came near to winning that year and had made two consecutive finals!!!...but no one, not even Federer, saw it coming!!!!

When Rafa finally beat Federer at Wimby......thay all said so many things......including it could have gone either way....it was dark Fed could not see the ball.....dumb crap like that...but Rafa WON!!

Then there was nothing else to say about Rafa except that he could never win on hardcourt....it does not suit his style of play they said.......as if they still had not learnt!!!!...Rafa went on to win the Olympics.....Federer has never won there (who cares about doubles?!!!!)

But yet still....going into the Aussi open.....Murray and Roger were the heavy favourites....and what happened?...of course we all know.....Rafa WON!!!...on one lung and no knees!!!.......

And then came the Masters Series in California......Rafa still the underdog.......yet he still won.......

So after all this.....I just want to say...plzzzzzzzz keep this up....bcos everytime you guys rob Rafa of his due as a great tennis player.......he always seems to come out on top.......so now that Roland Garros and Wimby and the US open are around the corner.......lets hear the Rafa bashing!!!...come on!!!...

As a Rafa fan.....it just really turns me on!!!!!.......and i bet Rafa feels the same way!!

Nice one MonaLisa

When Nadal lost to Tsonga, nadal said he lost to a player who didn't play to his true level.

When Nadal lost to Murray in US Open 2008 semis, he say he is dead tired.

When nadal lost to JMDP, he says it's because he wasn't playing good all the time.

So after all this, I just want to say, please keep worshipping Nadal as you reveal more and more of your stupidity.

As a Fed fan, it really turns me on... and I bet Fed feels the same way.

torres9 ...clever! LOL May the sun shine on Federer and raise him to HIGHER LEVELS OF GAME PLAY! Have I gone crazy?! LOL I guess we'll just have to wait and see. Cheers

MonaLisa great post up there and i hope Nadal achieves the calender slam this year. GO Rafa

Hey everyone......lets hail Torres9 as the smartest guy here on this blog!!!! Everything he says is the cleverest and all our opinions are just trash.....

While i may 'worship' Nadal.....torres9, you have your head so far up Federer's butt....i can almost hear the popping sound when you come out for air.....but who are we to judge you?......afterall we are all stupid!!!!

......right?!!!

Monalisa,

Don't get yourself so affected with torres9's fart_foul_smell kind of talk. Just do our usual job, COUNTERPUNCHING, and if offered a chance, I'll be the first one to stamp sealed his big mouth with my feet full of athetes foot. That's what he deserved ? bacteria lolz