Correct Cheryl. I am not even convinced of the putative decline of Federer last year. To me there wasn't so much a decline, as it was Nadal elevating his game.

Last year Federer was on a tear, playing sublime tennis in Wimbledon ( awesome match against Mario Ancic in the QF), didn't loose a set in the entire grass court season (including Halle) before the Wimbledon Final. This year, frankly, he could have lost to Roddick had the American held his nerve in the 2nd set TB or returned Federer's serve better.

Federer was also playing great tennis,(last yr) in the French Open, where as this year he struggled against Acasuso, DelPotro, and almost lost against Haas.

Put it simply the Federer of Wimb 2008, F.O 2008 > Federer of Wimb 2009, F.O 2009. Yet he has the channel slam this year.

OF course the difference is Nadal. In some ways we are reminded even more of Nadal in Federer's dominance. IMV, there are only 2 great players in tennis at the moment - Roger and Rafa. The others are not even close. Let's hope to see them continuing with the glorious rivalry in the near future.

i like your article cheryl....a lot more complimentary this time..... which does make a change..........i saw your unhappy emoticon face when roddick lost at the wimby final........

With his epic 5-7, 7-6 (6), 7-6 (5), 3-6, 16-14 victory over Andy Roddick in Sunday's Wimbledon men's final, Roger Federer bagged his 15th major championship. The victory propelled the 27-year-old Swiss past Pete Sampras atop the all-time Grand Slam leaderboard, further bolstering his argument for Greatest Of All-Time status.

Here's a numerologist's-eye view of Federer's unsurpassed greatness.

0 -- Losses in Grand Slam tournaments since Wimbledon 2004 in 119 matches against players outside the top five. Federer's last such loss at a major came against No. 30 Gustavo Kuerten at the '04 French Open.

1 -- Opponents who have defeated Federer in a Grand Slam final (Rafael Nadal).

2 -- Men who have achieved a career Golden Slam, winning each of the four majors plus an Olympic gold medal. Federer is one. Andre Agassi is the other.

3 -- Seasons where Federer has won three of the four Grand Slams (2004, '06 and '07).

4 -- Different surfaces where Federer has won Grand Slams: grass, clay and two different kinds of hard courts. Only Agassi has equaled the feat.

5 -- Consecutive U.S. Open victories from 2003 through 2008, an open era record.

6 -- Years without losing a match on grass. Federer won 65 straight matches on his favorite surface between a first-round loss at Wimbledon 2002 and last year's final.

7 -- Consecutive years with at least one Grand Slam title. Only Borg (1974-81) and Sampras (1993-2000) have longer runs, which Federer can match in 2010.

8 -- Losses suffered throughout his streak of 21 consecutive appearances in Grand Slam semifinals.

9 -- Career ATP singles titles on clay, traditionally his weakest surface.

10 -- Consecutive Grand Slam finals reached between Wimbledon 2005 and the '07 U.S. Open, a record. Federer also owns the second-longest streak, his current run of six from the '07 French Open through Wimbledon '09.

11 -- Grand Slam titles won from 2004 through '07, an all-time record for major titles in a four-year span (male or female).

17 -- Countries where Federer has won ATP singles titles: Australia, Austria, Canada, People's Republic of China, England, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Portugal, Qatar, Spain, Switzerland, Thailand, United Arab Emirates and the United States.

18 -- Consecutive Grand Slam tournaments where Federer was seeded No. 1 from the '04 French Open through '08 Wimbledon, a record.

20 -- Appearances in Grand Slam singles finals, where he's 15-5. Ivan Lendl (19) held the all-time mark until this year.

21 -- Consecutive appearances in Grand Slam semifinals, perhaps the most extraordinary metric of Federer's otherworldly consistency.

24 -- Appearances in the finals of ATP Masters Series events, a record. His 15 victories in these prestigious tournaments ranks second all-time to Agassi (17).

26 -- Consecutive matches won against opponents in the top 10 from October 2003 through January 2005, a record.

34 -- Consecutive victories at the U.S. Open from 2004 through last year, an open era record. Federer is the only player in history to win 34 or more consecutive matches at two different Grand Slam tournaments (in addition to his Wimbledon streak from '03 through '08.)

56 -- Consecutive wins on hard courts during 2005 and '06, an open era record.

94.3 -- Percent of singles matches (247-15) won from 2004 through '06.

182 -- Victories in major tournaments (against 26 losses), a win percentage of 87.5 percent. The only other men's players in the open era with winning percentages above 80 are Bjorn Borg (89.8), Rafael Nadal (85.7), Pete Sampras (84.2), Jimmy Connors (82.6), Ivan Lendl (81.9), John McEnroe (81.5), Andre Agassi (80.9) and Boris Becker (80.3).

237 -- Consecutive weeks spent at No. 1, a record. Federer is the first player to reign atop the ATP rankings for four consecutive years from Feb. 2, 2004, through Aug. 18, 2008.

C'MON!

Allez Federer US OPEN 2009!

And Rafa is only 23, should he stay fit, by the age of 28 there'll be a chasm between what he would have achieved by then and what Federer has achieved up to now.

Tennis owes a lot to Rafa for breathing new life into tennis, I for one thought it had become a yawn, with one person dominating all the time, until the great Rafa came along and rushed Federer off his feet

Rafa is so exciting to watch. After losing interest in tennis during the years of Federer's domination, I turned on one day, and there was this bright young thing playing a game that blew me away, and I have been hooked since then. Long may he continue.

We musn't write the others off though, there are a lot of good players out there, but so long as Rafa stays on top, it suits me.

That is so true. He is playing better then mono-Fed and slightly better than this years post AO, with 0 confidence Fed but not like 2006 or even "failure 2008" Fed. Everyone but Nadal wilts before him at this point, and I think if they don't have the balls it is fine. (Cause I'm sorry, Fed played well, at the AO in patchy places, but better then the patchyness of the season that followed. Cause he took Nadal to five for a reason and fell to Wawarinka in two for another all together.)

The Rafa Roger show is back when they play in Montreal if everyone isn't careful though, I know it is not a slam, but for a least that tourney Fed will at least have the confidence to beat someone me might have lost to early this year, like one Wawa and one Nole.

Alas, I love the man. Go Rog! I want you to win in my hometown now. I'm going to see you and you better not suck. I love living near Flushing Meadows that time of year.

excellent article,cheryl as always and I agree completely.

I also agree that last year,Roger was better in Wimbledon and even in Roland Garros than this year and especially in the final this year,he was there for the taking.Congratulations to Roger for all his achievements and really without Rafa,he doesn't have any challenge in Grand Slams.So,I hope the return of Rafa to see some challenge to him...

Same here carrie! I followed tennis for a long time but toward the end of the Sampras era and beginning of fed, I lost interest as it became boring for me. Rafa brought that spark and passion back into it. It's all just a matter of preference!

There are so many players that are continuing to show their talent and promise, and many others that are starting to show that. Tennis is exciting again!!!!!!

malteser, in all due respect, i suggest you seek professional help! no one is questioning roger's achievements. you don't have to write a book to remind everyone of what roger has achieved since he was born. it's normal for people to have differing perspectives on the same topic! what are you so afraid of! it's only tennis! get a grip!

memi--- that's just the TRADITION here...KEEP on REMINDING people of Federer's achievements ALL THE TIME....we might forget what he has DONE for tennis! You'll hardly see a thread here that MISSES such enumeration. ----INSECURITY AT ITS B*E*S*T*!!!!

memi..it's all gravy buddy...am totally fine..at least that what my shrink tells me....am afraid of nothing except the candy man.....

of course have different perspectives...as the article was about the roger federer show....showing a few stats isn't that bad is it memi? what are YOU scared of buddy?

fedfans...sky and torres..and my homegirl zoey if she is out there....this is for you....roll up...roll up...it's the roger federer show..(with an angle on Tiger...) brace yourself memi....now don't be scared...........! Nice one cheryl!

Federer, Woods two of a kind in best-ever

debateby Michael Rosenberg
Detroit Free Press columnist Michael Rosenberg is a frequent contributor to FOXSports.com. His new book, "War As They Knew It: Woody Hayes, Bo Schembechler and America in a Time of Unrest," has been released nationwide.


Roger Federer is the best tennis player of all time.

He clinched this title by winning Wimbledon over the weekend, which is to say that he eliminated the last fair argument against him. And in doing so, Federer established a standard for another weekend winner: Tiger Woods.

What does it mean to be the best ever? We usually measure this in Grand Slam championships; Federer now has 15, one more than Pete Sampras for the most all-time in tennis, and Woods has 14, four behind Jack Nicklaus in golf. But this should not be as simple as simply counting trophies.

Federer is the best ever not just because he has won the most Slams, but because he has played at a consistently higher level than anybody ever, on every surface. Sampras never made the finals of the French Open and only made the semifinals once. Federer has played in the last five French finals, winning one, and has made it to the semifinals of an astounding 21 consecutive Grand Slam events.

Grass, hard court, clay ? it doesn't matter. They could play a Grand Slam event on ice and Federer would skate to the final weekend.

He is the best ever. I don't see how anybody can even argue the point now.

Yes, Rafael Nadal has a 13-7 career edge over Federer. ......- But 11 of those matches were on clay, Nadal's favorite surface.

Former Wimbledon champion Pat Cash recently told S.L. Price of Sports Illustrated that since Nadal is the better clay-court player and Sampras (in Cash's opinion) was the better grass-court player, it is hard to say Federer is the best ever.

It is an interesting argument, but I don't buy it. Let's switch sports for a moment. I don't think Michael Jordan was the best shooter in basketball history, and he certainly was not the best rebounder or passer, and as great as he was defensively, I don't think he was the best defensive player ever.

But Jordan was the best overall player. He did everything exceptionally well. In an all-time draft of players, most NBA executives would take Jordan No. 1.

Federer and Woods are friends and fellow Nike shills, and for a few years now they have compared career tracks. And if you accept my premise that Federer's all-around dominance and consistency makes him the best tennis player ever, we should then ask if Tiger lives up to the same standard in golf.


Roger Federer is no longer second best to Pete Sampras.

Golf's four majors, like the four tennis majors, provide different tests. The British Open, played on links courses, is the equivalent of the clay courts in Paris ? it emphasizes skills that players might not use in the other three Grand Slam events. The U.S. Open golf tourney requires the most patience and discipline. The Masters is on the same course every year, where the rough is scarce and the greens appear to be made of glass. And the PGA is ... um, none of those things.

C'MON!

Allez Federer!....memi...pass me my medication buddy!......

malteser, no need to convince me, i for one believe you when you say you're on medication. you would have be on something to write basically the same script everyday all day long, endlessly! don't worry, if your fingers can take it, i certainly can!

I watched Sampras played and also started following tennis additively when Fed came along. This guy is just pure art. And then the youngsters came along: Nadal, Djok, Muzza. Good but none play like Fed (yet).

So for me, It has always been the ROGER FEDERER SHOW and sometimes there are commercial interruptions from Nadal and then on with the SHOW

FEDISTHEBEST!!!

No need to convince me, Malteser. I am fully aware of the magnitude of Federer's accomplishments - though seeing all of the written out IS pretty darned impressive.

torres - I'd call what Rafa does to Roger more than a commercial interruption. :) The fact that two so accomplished players are competing at the same time is...well, it sort of makes the Rafa and Roger show. They're both such amazing competitors.

Agree, cheryl... LOL... I just enjoy rubbing salt on Rafans' wounds because they like to spoil us fedfans party... ^^

torres - fair enough. ;) I understand completely.

Cheryl, your article does do justice to these two GREAT tennis players. It is as you say, the Roger Rafa rivalry simply tennis at it's BEST! Looking forward to some HOT action at the US OPEN! C'MON Roger! Go MAN! GO!!! :) Hi Malty! Not around here much at the moment... Always enjoy a small peak though! LOL Take good care girl! Roger is AWESOME! What will he do for us at the US OPEN?! LOL FUN! FUN! FUN! C'MON! C'MON ROGER! C'MON! Cheers Federites! Cheers!

torres,who likes to spoil Roger's party? who's having a good time now,Rafa or Roger? at the beginning of this year,you were all whining and crying together with Roger in Melbourne and personally,I did not even say a bad word to your hero.Now that Roger is back to his winning days,just go and enjoy his victories,rather than attacking Nadal fans.We are already suffering enough from Rafa's absence.
It's good to see you having fun,torres!

Comparing Federer's achievements against Nadal's, is like comparing the academic achievements of a 20 year old against a 15 year old.

The fact that only Nadal seems able to beat Federer in a GS just proves the point that he had a weak field before Rafa came along, and I wouldn't dismiss Murray and Djokovic just yet, they've only met Federer once in a GS, that's not enough to judge them on.

Sorry sisterofnight12, the people who I target is carrie,f4t, homos, posmatrac who are the bad breed of Rafans who do not follow the example of their humble and polite hero. As you can see, they are getting louder and louder with every Fed GS win. Fed's wins are making them closer and closer to commit suicide.

I respect Rafa and I dont think he reads this blog. If I meet him, for sure I will be happy and ask for autograph as I respect him.

Sorry it's 1:1 Roger/Djokovic in GS.

Also the Wimbledon final 2009, could have been anybody's.

Carrie, Wimby2008 could have been anybody's too

Carrie, are you sure it's 1:1 Roger/Djoker in GS? I think your statistics are wrong there. Just show your lack of tennis knowledge.

And Rafa only had Roger to challenge him on clay which show he has a weak field too so he probably isnt the greatest clay courter too, no?

USO 08...fed beat novak.
USO 07...fed beat novak.
AO...07...fed beat novak.

the one slam (AO)...that novak beat fed was 08.

carrie...where did you get your stats from? in fact..don't answer that....this was in reply to torres.....

well,if some people are really getting closer and closer to commit suicide with the achievements of one person they don't even know,then it's their psychological problem.I study psychology and I can say that they need some therapy.
But,there are also some Roger fans who are so obsessed with him that they think Roger's victories are their own and who think Roger is beyond human or something.Nobody is superhuman but they assume Roger is flawless.I don't wanna give names but the blind worshippers of Roger just make me sick...

torres, I am referring to GS finals. As far as I know they have only contested 2 GS finals against each other.

sisterofnight, I so agree with you, I was just thinking the other day, that some people think they are Federer.

you would know carrie...you post more on fed threads than any one else on this forum....and considering you hate the guy...what does that say about you? go support rafa carrie....oh....i forgot.....you kinda R rafa.....

malterser, what part of NO don't you understand.

I DO NOT WISH TO HOLD A DIALOGUE WITH YOU!

Hey Carrie, Did Fed n Novak play each other in a GS Final??

carrie...if you can honestly say that you were NOT referring to me then we have a deal...however...when you make subtle innuendos..the way that you do....you leave me no choice...when you grow up carrie..then i will too.....however...when you continually make your subtle jibes....at me...then what do you want me to do? STOP the crap carrie and let's debate...or is it 'case closed?'

Yes Max, they played the USO finals in 2007. I forgot that Novak played Tsonga when he won the AO in 2008, that's the other one I was thinking about.

carrie said, "I was just thinking the other day, that some people think they are Federer."

and then malteser said, "when you continually make your subtle jibes....at me...then what do you want me to do?"

so,does that mean malteser admits that he/she thinks he/she is Roger?

sisterofnight, Exactly.

You still come here guys ,wow ,still too long time until Montreal
Nice piece though I wish I can read all the posts specially the ridiculous ones. loved the one talking about opessesd fans about a tennis players and "considering his won as their's" last time I checked Federer slams did not pay my cell bell! Does that took you a degree to come up with. What a waste
Rafa and Roger ,Roger and Rafa ?????????????the debut can go forever, the thing is like it or not Rafa destroyed his body to beat Roger in AO it took him that much to adjust his game " according to Toni " to be able to win a major title on the hard courts against Federer ,that what take to beat gods, losing your all , it is funny though all the chase for 5 years behind the man then crumbling and fading away after just 10 months " talking about who laughs load ???.huh!" I guess he is thinking now did it worth it? He had this knee condition since 06 still he pushed it hard to be able to climb to number one then he lost it without a fight! And after waiting the draw of wimbledon!
Speaking of eras sportsmanship I don?t know what is the funniest part
Make your pick:
Toni Nadal speaking so badly about French people when he knows they will be back next year!
Murray excepting to be number 2 ahead of Federer and behind Nadal by the end French open in the beginning of the year!
Reporters thinking Nadal can tie Sampras before Federer after the loss of AO this year!
Gods stands alone while other just fade way without a fight waiting a draw and feeling bad about mamy and daddy getting a divorce!

PS : do you have federer's cell phone?????..i want to send him my bell!
I made my pick the one with the psych. Degree is the funniest one!

GO FEDERER

sisterof...whatever..you wanna call yourself.....you have both been busted...especially carrie....you really are being very thick....carrie was making the subtle innuendos....so ask her.....and as she has said...'exactly'....(because SHE WAS REFERRING TO ME...THAT'S CARRIE...who is equally as transparent)..then it just proves MY point....you are both ridiculous in your comments....so carrie you were referring to me you just having got the balls to admit it......your so childish carrie....what a baby....

yeah...right.....because ALL fed fans....11 million plus of them all love federer...we are federer...yeah right...that makes REAL sense carrie....so...with the ENDLESS posts that carrie makes on 'poor rafa'....i guess carrie is rafa's pscyche...doctor..nurse...nutritionist....trainer...water carrier...cleaner....bla bla bla...
carrie you are boorrringgg..!

fedfans...here is an interesting article from livetennis...by sam miranda.....titled 'The chasing pack of men's tennis'...it gives an an interesting slant on other players in the top ten...and may provide a much needed break for the rafa fans who simply cannot leave the fedthread alone......

With a formidable 21 Grand Slam titles between them, Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal are the dominant forces on the ATP tour. In reality, the ?Top Ten? of male tennis has its own sub-division. Nadal and Federer aside, the remaining eight players total just two Grand Slams between them. So, who will break the Swiss Spanish stranglehold on male tennis?

Tennis buffs ran out of superlatives to describe Novak Djokovic?s devastating Australian Open 2008 form, which saw him clinch a maiden Grand Slam title. His form since then has petered out more than a Tim Henman second serve.

A dip following initial success seems to be customary for youngsters across many sports ? Wayne Rooney?s bursting onto the global scene at Euro 2004 was followed by a mediocre season by his standards, and all the hype following Amir Khan?s Olympic and first few professional fights success was given a dose of stone cold reality, when he was floored by Breidis Prescott in 45 seconds.

2009 has been a disappointing season for Djokovic; plagued with fitness problems and exhaustion, he bowed out of the Australian Open in acrimonious fashion to Andy Roddick. Djokovic vaguely cited muscle cramps and soreness as the reasons for his retirement, but the problems were not a one off - his dependency on the trainer following his tie with Tommy Robredo at the 2008 US Open drew lots of criticism.

Novak?s game has become altogether more passive, his ground strokes lack conviction, and he is starved of any confidence in his own abilities ? evident in the second set tiebreak against Tommy Haas at this year?s Wimbledon. If he is to avoid being mentioned in the same vein as Marat Safin and Juan Carlos Ferrero, players who failed to live up to their true potential and fell by the wayside, his consistency will have to improve dramatically, along with his fitness.

Andy Murray?s rise to prominence over the past few seasons has left many pundits tipping him to become Rafael Nadal?s major rival when Roger Federer retires. As early as 2005, when Murray?s career was in its infancy, John McEnroe commented, ?With Murray the sky's the limit?. His record over his closest rivals is impressive ? he captured the Madrid Masters title in 2008, and defeated Nadal and Federer on the way to victory in the 2009 Capitala World Tennis Championship.

But there is a key ingredient missing in the Murray concoction, and that?s a Grand Slam title. Murray succumbed miserably to Roger Federer in the final of last year?s US open, and was ousted by Andy Roddick at the semi-finals of SW19, when he was hot favourite. A winning ?know how? or mentality in Grand Slams is a priceless attribute, and what divides the good from the very best. A Grand Slam, as Federer testified, is a different ?animal? ? the two week slog and media pressure requires exceptional mental strength to thrive.

But if Murray can continue to hone the offensive aspect of his game, and negate a resurgent Andy Roddick, he will be amongst the favourites for the US open. Murray must also keep a cool head. The British media is notorious for hyping up all if its sportsman with an iota of talent, resulting in inordinate pressure. The longer Murray goes without a Wimbledon title, the harder it will become, as Tim Henman knows only too well.

Then there?s the rest. Juan Del Potro?s gangly frame may not make him the most mobile player, but his solid baseline play and powerful ground strokes have seen him endure a meteoric rise up the rankings to 5th, and reach the semi-finals of Roland Garros where he took Roger Federer to a fifth set. The question is, as with every player heralding from a clay-court specialist country, is whether he can make the successful transition onto all surfaces. The Argentinean followed up his French Open exploits with a lacklustre straight sets defeat to the un-seeded Lleyton Hewitt at SW19. At just 20, however, time is on his side.

Andy Roddick received his fair share of plaudits for his titanic effort in the Wimbledon final, and deservedly so. But the thing that eluded him, and what distances Roddick from greatness, was knowing how to cross the winning line. At 6-2 up in the second set tiebreak, he had a chance to put the match out of Federer?s reach, and failed. Although Roddick recovered admirably to take the match into fifth-set sudden death, by the end the American was flagging. Having reached three Wimbledon finals, and succumbed to the Swiss wizard in each one, there?s a feeling that Roddick lacks the mental edge. With an impeccable serve and such powerful ground strokes, Roddick should have capitalised on his sole Grand Slam triumph back in 2003 at the US Open.



In truth, there?s no-one else capable of disrupting the Federer and Nadal dominance. The rest have huffed and puffed, but failed to find any real consistency. Jo Wilfred Tsonga?s superb athleticism and robust ground strokes make him a potential spanner in the Federer Nadal works, but he?s had an indifferent Roland Garros and Wimbledon. The likes of Robin Soderling and Fernando Gonzalez have all looked desperately out of their depth in their Grand Slam final appearances.



If Federer and Nadal are playing to their full potential on the day, there?s little prospect of anyone overcoming them. If Nadal can rid himself of the knee injuries that have scuppered his 2009 slam hopes, and Federer?well continue being Federer, the outlook is bleak for the rest, at least for the next few years. It would take Djokovic 2008 Australian Open and Murray 2008 US Open form to stand a chance.

"and may provide a much needed break for the rafa fans who simply cannot leave the fedthread alone......"

is this a fedthread? I didn't know that,thanks for the information.

anyway,I don't wanna go into a stupid discussion here under cheryl's well-written article.
whatever you say,malteser...

Carrie!!!- No...they only played one GS final...and Fed won. It was only one final. Fed lost to Nole in the semi's of the AO 08 not in the final. He beat Tsonga to win. Ya...so is is 1-0 in that case, in favor of Federer. It is probably better to think of semi's where Nole at least gets one point in the head to head.

As for a bleak prospect malteser...is Fed really in fine form again, I still think he is a bit worse for wear. Not that I don't want him to win, I cling desperately to the Fed train, but I feel Murray stands a chance, if he is confident, if he doesn't go in thinking he can beat rog, he'll succumb though. Nole I have a little less faith in with his failure to make a GS semi this year, it is odd he'd beat Fed a few times and start losing to everyone else. Could b ethat thing that everyone talks about, a player working too hard to bet one guy start losing to everyone else.

Go Rog though!

RB, I've corrected my post above. I was speaking from memory, but have now checked on the ATP website.

whatever...sister.....jeeezzzzzz...sister...you don't get it do you? okay....'The Roger Federer show'...how explicit do you want cheryl to be sister?....the 15 slam winner who stands alone? of course it's a fed thread...it's the one that actually uses his name...but you know...i don't get you...you don't get me...that's fine...i can live with that...i posted an article sister...that incorporated roger/rafa..and another consideration of the other top ten players to initiate a discussion....to move away from the rafa/roger temper tantrum....that we are all guilty of sister...even YOU....and even that is just not good enough...well...ya know what...couldn't give a crock what you think....not one iota....nope...not one.....if all you can do sister is say....in a silly...childish...'voice'...i dont want to get into a stupid discussion..then WHY THE HELL RAISE IT IN THE FIRST PLACE? are you for real lady? so YOU raise it..then YOU don't wanna discuss...yeah..I see that....a really fair...assertion....well done....

recordbreaks....i don't think that the wimby final this year was as good as last year...don't get me wrong..it had its moments...but i love it when rafa/roger play and was looking forward to a final with them....last year's wimby final was so close...could have gone either way (similar to this year)...but it had that something special...the long rallies...the 'out of this world' shots...and we all know that both rafa and roger push each other to take their game to the next level....so i missed that....

i think he (roge) didn't play his best tennis at sw19 this year...but when you count the hours of tennis he played at FO....more than any other player out there.....then the quick turnaround to play wimby.....i think he did brilliantly....i know he is an athlete and used to it..but i think sometimes he handles the pressure so brilliantly.....(it's got to take its toll somewhere along the line).....i know that Kohlschreiber had taken a set from him...and that was a first (at wimby) ...as did del potro (who took 2) at the FO...a first for delpo as well...so i think with the pressure, the expectation...(more from him (fed)...i think)...it was good to see him play well enough to win...to beat the guys..and whatever anyone says recordbreaks....ricky made the prediction and analysed the draw on the wimby fedthread and said that fed had the most difficult draw..which he did....and he came through...mental strength as well was incredible.....i was surprised that fed did not use as many drop shots in the wimby tourny....but that's for him to decide i guess.

i think having this 5 week break..will do him the world of good...he will feel refreshed and ready to go to US open.....with no pressure (in terms of HAVING to win a slam this year....he's won 3 out of the last 4 slams and reached the final of the second slam....so really...much i want fed to win the US....(go:fed:go!)....it's all a bonus from now on......

it's just interesting how the media are now hyping up murray again for the usopen...and i wonder whether murray is gonna be another nalby....insofar as....great players....BUT no slam to their name....we will just have to see.......

it's all good though...am interested to see whether baghdatis will make a return to the baghdatis of 'old' 2006.....i know my family would be jumping for joy in cyprus where he is an icon over there....amongst the whole of limassol..i would think.....

what makes you think RB that he is 'worse for wear'...i think he is riding high..having the time of his life......just needs some well earned rest...i watched some of the FO again recently...and that guy that came onto the court...oh my god....i watched on replay fed's face...sheer fear...honestly...can you imagine what he was feeling at that time..and then having to continue...(he made that choice..when he could have taken a few minutes to compose himself)....when i see things like this and how he handles the scary moments...it just makes me realise what an incredible athlete he is......

when i see the other threads where there are no comments...yet when you see threads on either roger or rafa...they always usually pass the 200 mark..their popularity is just second to none.....Roger Federer is the best!

calm down,malteser.I really don't wanna argue about Roger/Rafa thing.In the first place,I was just having a go at torres because he was making fun of Rafa fans.So,that was it.Let's peacefully agree to disagree,ok? I'm not an arguing person.

Hey wonderful article........ Just loved it while reading....... well done !!!!!

malt..... u rock grl !!!!!

====== Roger Rafa rivalry continue ============

N e wayzzz....... i just wanna say that ..... ppl even don't get wt it takes to win a slam.....do u know .... ??? wt it takes to win a slam........ even i dunno..... as I have not won !!!!! lol

But the man who has word not 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 ...... in total 15 ..... knows better of us !!!!! rite !!!!!

better than everyone else.......it was never a cake walk for him.....but he did extremely well to over come all those obstacle in these 6 years to win 15 majors....... :O

oh god ...... wt a mann he is ..... after winning a slam in 2003 he get to win 15 slams in next 6 years only ....... and on the other hand ...... Rafa won his first FO in 2005 .... n went on to win it .......for 4 consecutive years ...... well done !!!!! on the process he crushed Roger 3 times !!!!! okey okey.........

letz kompare here.......

Roger from 2005 ....... Rafa from 2005 .......

Fed has won ....... 11 grand slams...... Rafa has won 6 only ..... 5 behind ..... Roger won on different surfaces ..... 4 USO..... 4 wimby..... 1 FO 2 AO........dominant all over !!!!! Sorry Rafans....... that poor Rafa could not reached finals of all GS Fed won .......to be hammered !!!!!

where as Rafa dominated clay ....... 4 times won an AO n a Wimby to his credit.......

then how can u say Rafa is better than Roger ....... no wayzzzzzzzzz..........Itzz all abt winning tourneyz........ no of GS won......... so Roger is way way ahead...... even Rafa was there !!!!!

Itz pity (for Roger) that Rafa could not reached those finals of GS where he would have been mercilessly hammered by Roger !!!!! lucky guy !!!!!

hE iS bAcKy HoMe..... tHe No.1 (m lovin it)..........


Go Roger Go........

tomnjerry..hi buddy....just to keep this fair...wasn't sure about your stats above?..in so far as fed didn't win FO until this year....2009....not sure whether i read it right....anyways.....both great champions right? (as you said in your previous post)...just roger is a little bit more incredible right now....rite?

love you tnj!

take it easy..and even tho' we are a week on from the celebrations...still feels good...rite?

see malteser,that's what I get angry at.Not you but the thing tomnjerry is doing.If this is a Roger thread as you are claiming,then just celebrate Roger's victories and don't try to convince people that Rafa (or any other player for that matter) is way way inferior to Roger.He's one of the greatest and I really respect his achievements but please,no more comparisons of Rafa and Roger.People can have different favorite players!

http://www.tennisweek.com/news/fullstory.sps?inewsid=6636251
interest ing article!

Reviewing The Great Debate By Raymond Lee
Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Over the last few years Roger Federer has been accustomed to having incredible praise heaped upon him for the amazing feats that he has performed on the tennis court. There is no doubt that he is a fantastic player. Clearly if he retired right now he would be considered at the least one of the finest players in tennis history.

Federer, as virtually all tennis aficionados know, just recently broke the official record for majors with his victory over a very game Andy Roddick in an epic 77-game showdown that was the longest Wimbledon final ever. Federer now owns 15 Grand Slam titles, he completed the career Grand Slam by winning Roland Garros last month and is the reigning US Open, Roland Garros and Wimbledon champion.

Federer's resurgence this season has prompted people to again ask the obvious and too often repeated question, "Is Roger Federer the Greatest of All Time (GOAT)?"

What is amusing to me about this question is that just earlier in the year many (a few of them the same people) were asking "Is Rafael Nadal the GOAT?" Now maybe it?s just me but I would like to think there is only one GOAT in the history of tennis and definitely not two GOATS simultaneously. At the rate GOATS are popping up I feel we should have a shepherd to tend to the flock. The emergence of a new GOAT in tennis should be a very rare occurrence, not every few months. Even potential GOATS should be very rarely seen.

This question is now being asked mainly because Federer is the all-time Grand Slam singles king. It is clearly the majors record that Federer broke but at the same time it really isn?t the record. No, this is not like the riddle of the Sphinx but it?s an attempt to explain the different conditions in which Federer, Sampras and many in the Open Era have played under as opposed to the players in the past.

Bill Tilden, at his peak in the 1920?s, was widely acclaimed as the Greatest Player of All Time. According to Bud Collins? Tennis Encyclopedia he won 138 of 192 tournaments as an amateur and had a 907-62 match record. Bill Tilden?s match winning percentage was .936! All the top players were in the amateurs at the time so clearly Tilden was the best player in the world.

With this type of dominance you would think Tilden would have won close to thirty majors in his long career and yet Tilden won only ten majors in his career. Why is that you may ask? Simple, the man didn?t enter many majors in his best years. If you don?t enter a tournament you can?t win it.

In the 1920?s and the 1930?s boat travel was the best way to go from place to place. This could take many weeks and the player or players would not be able to practice or keep in shape. The travel lag also must have been horrible. Most players chose not to do this as spending weeks aboard a boat could wreck their entire year on the tournament circuit.

It?s not unreasonable to think that if Tilden played all of the majors in the 1920?s, assuming he had the airplane travel we have today that he would have won at least 20 majors out of 40 entered.

Later the Professional Tournaments were formed and many players like Tilden chose to turn pro in order to make a living at the sport they loved. The primary problem with this was that once a player committed the unpardonable sin of turning pro, they were banned from playing the majors. And if you can?t play the major tournaments, you?re not going to win the major tournaments.

In 1937 Don Budge won the last two majors of the year and in 1938, the next year he chose to travel by boat to go to all four majors in an attempt to win the Grand Slam. Budge succeeded, sweeping all four majors in the same season to give rise to the term "Grand Slam" and extend his streak to six straight majors.

Budge decided to turn pro to compete and make a living on the professional tour and never played a major again. To be fair, I?m not sure if Budge would have won six majors in a row if all the top pros like Ellsworth Vines, Hans Nusslein and Fred Perry were allowed to play the majors but I think you get the point. Budge, like many following him and some before him never had a chance to break the majors record because once he turned pro he wasn?t allowed to enter the majors.

The record for majors is 15 currently (I expect Federer to probably add to that total in the future) but it really should have been higher if Open tennis existed earlier and if the transportation was better in the past. So given the same conditions over tennis history I would tend to think the record should have been in the mid-twenties. I was not surprised at all when a great player like Federer broke Pete Sampras? majors record so quickly. I felt at the time Sampras? record of 14 was very very vulnerable.

I think Sampras was and still is a fabulous player but Pete won his 14 majors in 52 attempts. It?s a very good record but all he had to do was break Roy Emerson record of 12 at the time. What are the odds that a player as great as Sampras isn?t going to win more than 12 tournaments out of 52 attempts? The law of numbers clearly favors the Great Pete Sampras here. It was wonderful that he did it but it was hardly a superhuman achievement given his 52 entries into major tournaments.

Let?s look at this from another perspective. Margaret Court started playing in the 1950?s and continued into the 1970?s and won 24 majors out of I believe 48 attempts, an excellent percentage of fifty percent. She played all the top players whether she was an amateur or a professional and still holds the majors record to this day, men or women. In 1970 Court won the first Open Grand Slam for women. Court, unlike great players like Pancho Gonzalez, Ken Rosewall, Lew Hoad and Rod Laver was never banned from playing the majors. I?m sure if she was banned from playing the majors during her best years that her record would be diminished in the eyes of many, yet Court would have been every bit as magnificent a player but many wouldn?t know it when they looked at her record..

Yet this very thing happened to great players like Don Budge, Jack Kramer, Pancho Gonzalez, Ken Rosewall and Rod Laver. They weren?t allowed to play the majors and played tennis in the obscurity of the old great pro tours. In the old pro tours there was tremendous competition, awesome players and yet very few knew they were playing. Gonzalez, Rosewall and Laver were all at their peaks as tennis players when they played in the old pro tours and when Open tennis started in 1968, all of them were no longer in their physical primes, despite the fact Laver won the Open Grand Slam in 1969.

Steffi Graf only played in the Open Era and won 22 majors in 54 attempts plus a Grand Slam in 1988. Graf?s winning percentage for majors won and majors entered is an excellent .407. Like Court and many top players, Graf was able to play in every major during a great portion of her career. Many consider Graf to be the true major tournament record holder because Court won double digits in Australian Championships that had weaker fields.

Actually Federer?s style is quite similar to Graf?s. Both have super forehands (both Graf?s and Federer?s forehands have been called the best in tennis history) and only good one handed backhands. Both cover the court very well and are extremely smooth movers. Graf and Federer have the ability to serve their way out of danger with excellent serves. They both play it relatively safe generally off the backhand, with Federer driving the ball a little more while Graf usually plays a heavy slice. Both are very content to rally from the baseline, waiting for the opportunity to hit a forehand winner.

The importance of the major tournaments tends to differ over certain periods of time. During a good portion of the 1970?s and early 1980?s, the Australian Open, which is traditionally a major, did not draw the all of the top players as majors do today. It was played toward the end of the year which is the holidays for many players and because of this many of the players did not want to enter. The Australian lost much of its importance during this period of time.

Tournaments including the year-end Masters, the WCT championships were considered clearly more important than the Australian Open. So during the 1970?s and early 1980?s you had winners like Mark Edmondson, Brian Teacher, Johan Kriek (198-82), and Vitas Gerulaitis. All of these players were excellent players and perhaps they may have won even if the top players came but it is doubtful. The top players usually skipped the Australian Open to either relax or prepare for other tournaments.

Essentially in that period, there were only three majors, the French Open, Wimbledon and the US Open. Great players like John McEnroe, Bjorn Borg and Jimmy Connors would have probably added to their majors resume if they decided to play the Australian Open during this down period. Nowadays the tournament has regained its importance.

Let?s look at some of Federer?s other accomplishments and see how they fare against other greats. Federer has won 60 tournaments in (if my count is correct) 175 tournaments entered as of July 11, 2009. Roger?s tournament winning percentage is 34.29%. An excellent total and percentage but far behind the official ATP tournament record of 109 by Jimmy Connors. Connors? approximate tournament winning percentage incidentally is 31.2%. Bjorn Borg has an approximate tournament winning percentage of 48.3% and 100 tournaments won.

Now Connors has what is the official record but record keeping in the early days of Open Tennis were to say the least a bit confusing to be nice about it. The differences in tours like the ATP, the WCT and the Bill Riordan tours and other factors made accurate records virtually impossible. Jimmy Connors has actually won far more tournaments than recorded officially. I believe it may be in the 140?s. Bill Tilden is in the 160?s and Rod Laver is at 199 tournaments victories, according to my research. Laver?s total of 199 is staggering and I can?t imagine it being broken, at least for the next few decades.

Federer currently has 15 majors but if you include the old pro majors in the 1940?s to 1960?s (they are not recognized as majors), Ken Rosewall has 23 total majors and Laver has 19. Considering there were no more then three pro majors every year as opposed to four majors a year in the Open Era, the totals of Rosewall, Laver and other pros from that time are even more impressive. Rosewall at one point won 10 majors out of 11 entered, including nine straight during his best streak. Rosewall has also won approximately 130 tournaments in his career.

Here's my conclusion: when you factor in decades of tennis history that many seem to have forgotten, then Roger Federer may or may not be the GOAT in the future. His record is staggering but to be honest if you look at his career record compared to the greats of the past, he is not a giant among ants, as many seem to make him out to be. He is one of the giants among the many other giants that have played tennis in the past. He has the majors record because the Open Era has been only around for a bit over 40 years and I think he probably will add to the record.

It?s a quirk of tennis history that the record for majors among the men isn?t in the twenties or even the thirties. Right now I will write that Federer may possibly be the GOAT in the future but nothing indicates in his career statistics that he is definitively the GOAT now. It is very debatable whether he is even the greatest of the Open Era.

Federer is about to turn 28 and he has plenty of time to add to his remarkable resume of accomplishments. Laver for example at 28 would in the future win a pro Grand Slam and an Open Grand Slam.

We have to wait and see how Federer?s career continues in the future. Right now I would venture to say that we have two potential future GOAT candidates, Federer and Nadal, because of Nadal?s youth and established record. Their rivalry, along with Murray, Djokovic and the resurgent Roddick should be something to treasure in the future.

I apologise for the length of this article, but I think it's worth it.

WOW! That was loooooooong CARRIE, but very enlightening to THOSE who has an OPEN MIND!!!

This one: http://www.tennisweek.com/news/fullstory.sps?inewsid=6636251

from the same publication is also pretty good with comments from Pistol Pete.

Pete Sampras hailed Roger Federer as the greatest player ever after the new world number one clinched a record 15th Grand Slam title at Wimbledon.

Swiss ace Federer surpassed Sampras' haul of 14 Grand Slam titles with an epic five-set victory over Andy Roddick in an enthralling final at SW19.

The victory also sees the 27-year-old reclaim his world number one status from Spain's Rafael Nadal.

"I think you have to give it to him," said Sampras, who had shared the record of titles following Federer's French Open triumph last month.

"The critics say (Rod) Laver, and (Rafael) Nadal's beaten him a few times in majors. But he's won all the majors, he's won 15 now, he's going to win a few more. In my book he is (the greatest)."
Tremendous

Federer saved four set points in the second-set tie-break and eventually beat number six seed Roddick 5-7 7-6 7-6 3-6 16-14 to win a sixth Wimbledon crown on Centre Court.

"It was tremendous," added Sampras, who flew in from California overnight to watch the match from the Royal Box. "Andy played great and had his chance, he was up a set and 6-2 in the breaker and missed a few (shots) but Roger is a great champion.

"He fought hard, the fifth set was great tennis. It was fun to watch, it was an epic."

Sampras insisted he was happy to see Federer claim the record outright, adding: "Roger is a friend, a great player, he's a good guy. He's got 15 now, he could get 17, 18 majors when it's all done.

"He's only 27 and he'll contend here for many years, at the US Open, at all the majors, so if he just keeps it going and stays healthy he could go to 18 or 19.

"He's a great guy, he's humble, which I like. He's sort of effortless. It doesn't seem like he's working that hard out there. He just plays at that level so easily. He serves big, he's got a great forehand, his backhand is solid, he's got everything.

Incredible

"He's got the belief. He's a legend, an icon. He's got 15 majors, that's a lot of work. He's a credit to the game. He's smooth, he's a great athlete.

"I feel bad for Andy, I really do. He was distraught. He's upset, this was his chance, he came up short but Roger, the great ones at the end, he just had a little bit more."

Australian three-time Wimbledon champion Laver was also on Centre Court to watch the match and added: "There was some unbelievable tennis, especially that fifth set, there were more winners than errors and the serving ability of both of them was incredible.

"Roger is one of those people that keeps the ball in play and he comes up with

some miraculous forehands and backhands.

"Andy is always a threat because he has that huge serve but he probably got a

little tired at the very end. A few mis-hits and a couple of bad bounces and

you're in trouble."

After his record 15th Grand Slam win, can anyone argue that Roger Federer isn't the greatest ever?

The sun was already bright in the sky by the time Roger Federer drifted off to sleep after his historic Wimbledon triumph on Sunday.

It was 7 a.m. He had spent a giddy night celebrating with family and friends, attending the Champions Ball and surfing the net to see fan and media reaction to his 15th Grand Slam victory.

Tweet, tweet

Don't miss a moment of the latest tennis coverage from around the world. Follow us on Twitter and stay informed. Join »

Newspapers around the world featured photos of his victory on the front pages, and inside was glowing praise of his performance. The only quibble was about his postmatch choice of jacket, which had a pre-printed "15" on the back.

By this point, there wasn't much time left for the champion to sleep; he was due back at the All England Club in just three hours for more interviews.

Not surprisingly, Federer woke up feeling stiff and sore. On top of the short night, he had barely survived a bruising battle against Andy Roddick in the final, winning a 16-14 fifth set and a match that lasted four hours and 18 minutes.

But memories of the win quickly resurfaced, making it easy to forget the pain and roll out of bed. "You wake up and you're like, 'Man, you did it again!'" he laughed during one of his sessions with reporters Monday. "Off you go, and then you talk about good things again. It's wonderful."

It's a routine Federer has become familiar with in the process of building one of the most impressive tennis résumés of all time, but his latest triumph could be the highlight. In just the past month-plus, Federer has completed a career Grand Slam by winning the French Open and -- with the victory at Wimbledon -- has broken Pete Sampras' record of 14 Grand Slam titles.

"I don't know if I can ever top this," Federer said. "This last month, with all the records on the line and coming through both times ? it's quite amazing.

"I don't know if I've had a more happy period in my tennis life."

It was the exact opposite a year earlier, when Federer had just lost an epic five-set final to Rafael Nadal. He fled to the nearest island retreat, shutting himself off from the outside world and avoiding all images of the match.

Now, even those dark moments seem to have a bright side.

"I came out being horribly sad; it was a tough loss," said Federer. "But then again, I look back and go -- and it's going to be similar to this time around for Roddick -- like, 'What an amazing match we played.'

"Sometimes it takes a loss to make you strong," he said. "As you can see, I reacted, I've come back."

Severin Luthi, the Swiss Davis Cup captain who acts as a part-time coach for Federer, believes the rebound was spurred by Federer's passion.
[+] EnlargeRoger Federer
AP Photo/Lionel CironneauA back injury hampered Federer early this year, but those who saw it as the start of a career decline couldn't have been more wrong.

He identified a five-set defeat to Nadal in the Australian Open final in January as his friend's lowest moment this season. "Australia was pretty tough," Luthi said. "It's huge that he loves tennis. That helps him a lot. Otherwise, he would maybe need some time off afterwards.

"But he loves tennis, so he went on. He was practicing hard, he was staying focused, and everything paid off now."

Federer feels that completing the long and sometimes rocky road to 15 Slams is testament to his "fight."

"I'm famous for being all casual and relaxed out there, not showing much," said the man sometimes known as Artful Roger. "But we all know how different it was."

It's apt that Federer's official return to the tennis summit was marked by a five-set win, because his early-season slump had been defined by a string of collapses in the deciding set. After fading badly in the fifth set against Nadal in Australia, Federer fell to Andy Murray 6-1 in the third set at the BNP Paribas Open in Indian Wells, and lost in three sets again to Novak Djokovic at the Sony Ericsson Open in Miami.

What changed? "I have no more back pain," said Federer, who began to struggle with the problem last fall.

"I'm not scared any more of going into the very corner of the court and digging out a ball, which I was scared of doing at times. And that's why my serve sometimes faltered in important moments, because I didn't have belief that my body was holding up.

"So I would play way too offensive, and against the top guys, that was too risky, and this is why I would lose."

It was only at the end of April, at the Internazionali BNL d'Italia in Rome, when Federer began to feel "like the old guy again."

It has had a big effect on his game: "Now I feel so much better, and I can play the way I normally play -- use offense, use defense. My serve is clicking. I know in the important moments I'll make the right decisions."

With his biggest career goals accomplished, Federer has returned to Switzerland to turn his attention to his personal life. He married longtime girlfriend Mirka Vavrinec in April, and the two are expecting their first child this summer.

"[I'm] looking forward to going back to Switzerland and staying put for a little bit, because I've been on the road. It's been a lot of dedication trying to achieve this back-to-back with Paris and Wimbledon," said Federer. "Mirka helped me in a big way, so now it's my turn to support her as much as I can, and I hope everything's going to go well."

But when he returns to the tour later this summer, Federer plans to be as determined as ever. After Sunday's victory, he came to his press conference wearing a T-shirt that read: "There is no finish line."

Still, the question remains: What now? "I'm still young in tennis terms, I think," said the 27-year-old Fed. "It's only after 30 that the clock starts ticking."

While there are more Slams left to try to win and other records to chase, the most meaningful challenge may come from those just behind him in the rankings. In particular, there is the task of improving his 7-13 match record against the 23-year-old Nadal, which has been used to undercut Federer's case for greatest-ever status. And Federer is just 2-6 against Murray, 22, and an increasing number of other players are threats when they're in form.

That may be why remaining No. 1 is again a goal for Federer, who returned to the top spot after winning Wimbledon. "Getting there was awfully hard, [but] once I was No. 1, everything just clicked," he said. "I beat all the other top-10 guys, I won every final I played. And I hope that's going to return again, that I'm able to dominate my fellow rivals again and go from there."

Federer has faced history and won. Now there are only flesh-and-blood opponents left to battle.

Sorry for the long articles, but I think it's worth it...

FED IS THE BEST for the open-minded fans around the world!!!!

imjimmy, that's an interesting article you posted. it's food for thought, but how can one ever argue (in favor or against) that either federer is more dominant that sampras was or that sampras had more competition than federer had? it's an impossible debate.

i'm reminded of a question that a media person asked rafa in madrid just before his semifinal match with djokovic. the person asked rafa what he thought about djokovic saying that he had finally figured out how to beat him on clay and that he would probably beat him the next time they played. i will always remember rafa's reply because it is a good example to live by in life. rafa replied, "the match is not played off court, it is played on court and you have to play the match before you can win it." i think what rafa meant is that words are cheap, they don't win matches; you have to face the opponent on the court to win! he let the media know in his masterful way that boasting means nothing to him and he doesn't get caught up in it. his actions will speaker louder when he gets on the court! the same applied to the federer/nadal rivalry, we'll see when they step on the court against each other. great lesson!

Wt ever u say ppl........ the year has been The Roger Federer show.......2 GS on a row...... equaled n broke Sampras's all time record fo 14 GS.......... won elusive FO.......get back his #1 position........ reached 21st semi on a row........ 6 th Final on a row at major level.........wt more we need to say one to be grtttest ........ n e wayzzzzz............ itz his year ....... n will remain his ..........wohoooooooooooo

@malt..... i was meant to state that ...... how many GS Roger n Rafa have won after Rafa winning his first FO ..... lol !!! Roger is way way ahead.........

hE iS bAcKy HoMe..... tHe No.1 (m lovin it)..........

Go Roger Go........

======= No One Near Roger n Rafa ===============

Tennis buffs ran out of superlatives to describe Novak Djokovic?s devastating Australian Open 2008 form, which saw him clinch a maiden Grand Slam title. His form since then has petered out more than a Tim Henman second serve.



A dip following initial success seems to be customary for youngsters across many sports ? Wayne Rooney?s bursting onto the global scene at Euro 2004 was followed by a mediocre season by his standards, and all the hype following Amir Khan?s Olympic and first few professional fights success was given a dose of stone cold reality, when he was floored by Breidis Prescott in 45 seconds.



2009 has been a disappointing season for Djokovic; plagued with fitness problems and exhaustion, he bowed out of the Australian Open in acrimonious fashion to Andy Roddick. Djokovic vaguely cited muscle cramps and soreness as the reasons for his retirement, but the problems were not a one off - his dependency on the trainer following his tie with Tommy Robredo at the 2008 US Open drew lots of criticism.



Novak?s game has become altogether more passive, his ground strokes lack conviction, and he is starved of any confidence in his own abilities ? evident in the second set tiebreak against Tommy Haas at this year?s Wimbledon. If he is to avoid being mentioned in the same vein as Marat Safin and Juan Carlos Ferrero, players who failed to live up to their true potential and fell by the wayside, his consistency will have to improve dramatically, along with his fitness.



Andy Murray?s rise to prominence over the past few seasons has left many pundits tipping him to become Rafael Nadal?s major rival when Roger Federer retires. As early as 2005, when Murray?s career was in its infancy, John McEnroe commented, ?With Murray the sky's the limit?. His record over his closest rivals is impressive ? he captured the Madrid Masters title in 2008, and defeated Nadal and Federer on the way to victory in the 2009 Capitala World Tennis Championship.



But there is a key ingredient missing in the Murray concoction, and that?s a Grand Slam title. Murray succumbed miserably to Roger Federer in the final of last year?s US open, and was ousted by Andy Roddick at the semi-finals of SW19, when he was hot favourite. A winning ?know how? or mentality in Grand Slams is a priceless attribute, and what divides the good from the very best. A Grand Slam, as Federer testified, is a different ?animal? ? the two week slog and media pressure requires exceptional mental strength to thrive.



But if Murray can continue to hone the offensive aspect of his game, and negate a resurgent Andy Roddick, he will be amongst the favourites for the US open. Murray must also keep a cool head. The British media is notorious for hyping up all if its sportsman with an iota of talent, resulting in inordinate pressure. The longer Murray goes without a Wimbledon title, the harder it will become, as Tim Henman knows only too well.



Then there?s the rest. Juan Del Potro?s gangly frame may not make him the most mobile player, but his solid baseline play and powerful ground strokes have seen him endure a meteoric rise up the rankings to 5th, and reach the semi-finals of Roland Garros where he took Roger Federer to a fifth set. The question is, as with every player heralding from a clay-court specialist country, is whether he can make the successful transition onto all surfaces. The Argentinean followed up his French Open exploits with a lacklustre straight sets defeat to the un-seeded Lleyton Hewitt at SW19. At just 20, however, time is on his side.



Andy Roddick received his fair share of plaudits for his titanic effort in the Wimbledon final, and deservedly so. But the thing that eluded him, and what distances Roddick from greatness, was knowing how to cross the winning line. At 6-2 up in the second set tiebreak, he had a chance to put the match out of Federer?s reach, and failed. Although Roddick recovered admirably to take the match into fifth-set sudden death, by the end the American was flagging. Having reached three Wimbledon finals, and succumbed to the Swiss wizard in each one, there?s a feeling that Roddick lacks the mental edge. With an impeccable serve and such powerful ground strokes, Roddick should have capitalised on his sole Grand Slam triumph back in 2003 at the US Open.



In truth, there?s no-one else capable of disrupting the Federer and Nadal dominance. The rest have huffed and puffed, but failed to find any real consistency. Jo Wilfred Tsonga?s superb athleticism and robust ground strokes make him a potential spanner in the Federer Nadal works, but he?s had an indifferent Roland Garros and Wimbledon. The likes of Robin Soderling and Fernando Gonzalez have all looked desperately out of their depth in their Grand Slam final appearances.



If Federer and Nadal are playing to their full potential on the day, there?s little prospect of anyone overcoming them. If Nadal can rid himself of the knee injuries that have scuppered his 2009 slam hopes, and Federer?well continue being Federer, the outlook is bleak for the rest, at least for the next few years. It would take Djokovic 2008 Australian Open and Murray 2008 US Open form to stand a chance.


hE iS bAcKy HoMe..... tHe No.1 (m lovin it)..........

Go Roger Go............

memi, I agree with you that all this talk does not matter.

Here's what Nadal said in the If you were interview.
A meeting that you hope

Roger Federer. Small, I was a dream: I was at the foot of a huge mountain and I looked at the top. When I beat Federer in January, in Melbourne, in the final of the Australian Open, I felt excitement animal. But then I felt an emptiness and a loneliness indescribable, as if I had no other purpose. For me Federer is still the No. 1 worldwide. I want to meet again on the court. I know it can beat me.

Rafa regards Roger as the best ever which is why his ultimate dream is to beat Roger... And also he knows Roger can beat him anytime..

As for Roger, all he cares is the major tournaments and winning. Beating Nadal is not necessarily his primary target.

In achieving their target both of them have been very successful.

RAFA FANS!!! our champion is back on track..MRI reports have shown positive results and he wil resume practice from monday ;)..VAMOS RAFA...

Techinically Federer's Doubles gold wouldn't count towards a career golden slam since it isn't singles? You wouldn't say a player had a career grand slam if he won Wimbledon and US Open in singles and AO and RG in doubles

The Bleacher Report: Roger Federer the Greatest: critical analysis......
There is no doubt to all of the men and women experienced and cultivated with the history of tennis, that Roger Federer of Basel, Switzerland is the most graceful player the sport has ever seen. All of us have asked ourselves or our companions at some point, "Is he floating to the ball?"

Among the most potent of these thoughts are what the late great writer David Foster Wallace termed, "Federer Moments."

"These are times, as you watch the young Swiss play, when the jaw drops and eyes protrude and sounds are made that bring spouses in from other rooms to see if you?re O.K. The Moments are more intense if you?ve played enough tennis to understand the impossibility of what you just saw him do." (article here)


There is no question about his grace and elegance and the genius with which he plays.

The statement that irks a few people is "Roger Federer is unquestionably greatest tennis player of all time," not as much because of the content, but the ire is with the way it can be considered unquestionable.

The John McEnroes and the Mary Carillos of the world, state it without the critical questioning and analysis from a tennis mind. So three fundamental questions rise up.

a. Why is Roger Federer the greatest player of all time, besides the menial reference to the 15 grand slams?

b. Are there arguments against his status and how credible are they? and


c. Could anybody be considered greater?

To come to a firm conclusion, each of these questions have to be answered and the end result should result in a definite affirmation.

Why is Roger Federer considerered the greatest player of all time, besides the menial reference to the 15 grand slams?,

First and foremost, the answer to why he could be considered the greatest. As in the introduction to this article, the grace and the genius with which Roger Federer plays is unquestionable.

But to answer this most subjective of questions quantitatively, would require the test of any tennis player.

Namely the qualities would be, forehand, backhand, footwork, serve, return game, mental toughness, fitness, net Play, adapability to style/surface and anticipation and they will be rated on a scale of 1-10 and be added out of 100.

Forehand?10/10. The greatest forehand in tennis history. "The great liquid whip."

As modern as Federer?s forehand seems, it?s also a remarkable amalgamation of many of the greatest forehands from prior years?from the powerful topspin of Bjorn Borg to the crackling penetration of Pete Sampras, or back to the forceful discipline of Ivan Lendl, the opportunism of Rod Laver and even the power of Andre Agassi with the precision of a neurosurgeon.

Its greatness moves the rating of all of those shots to 8's. Not much more can be said, he can hit all of the shots ever invented and has himself invented hundreds. Its greatness cannot be underestimated, his genius can be attributed to this shot. It will be taught in textbooks everywhere in the coming future.

Backhand?9/10. It is arguably the most powerful, versatile one-hand backhand of any tennis player ever.

It is the basis of his style and fundamental to the importance of change of pace, he can hit one of the best slices in history, one of the greatest dropshots, developed in 2009, with sufficient topspin and a great defensive lob, with great creativity.

Now as most tennis players remember when they started tennis, the pros and cons of the single-handed. The one con of the single-handed backhand, is the ability to handle highballs. Nadal is the only player in history to have the lefty topspin forehand that allows high balls to disrupt Federer, which is the reason he attacks only the backhand and avoids the forehand at all costs.

Footwork ?10/10. Initially when we talk of movement in tennis we think of those who best track down one ball after another. These are the rabbits, the men and women who oppress opponents by dint of their exceptional defense. When we think of these, there are only two, Borg and Nadal.

Then there?s footwork, not to be confused with footspeed. The race in tennis is not necessarily won by the one who is most swift but the most disciplined. After all, the vast majority of movement in tennis is rarely further than four yards. But when it comes to harnessing speed and discipline together, no one does it better than Roger Federer.

So adept is Federer at tracking the ball that he seems able to float to it. Of course he?s actually moving swiftly. Yet Federer?s feet rarely scamper. With unsurpassed posture, he is always able to adjust his feet and strike the ball precisely on his terms.

To be great at tennis, you have to have great footwork, all the greats have it relatively at the same level, except Federer, it is the most unique and singular in the history of tennis. He never seems hurried and all of us have asked ourselves or our companions at some point, "Is he floating to the ball?"

Serve?10/10. Federer's serve is one of the great serves in tennis history. He can play all the shots, with all the spins and slices and is a vital part of his success. The consistency it has is only touched by the greatest of the great It is not at the level of Pete Sampras, but nobody's is.

Return Game?10/10. Federer's return game is perfect.



Mental Toughness?10/10. Rod Laver, Bjorn Borg, Pete Sampras, Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, Roger Federer their games are different, what single quality is in all of them. The quality you can see on their faces and recognize it. The losses to Nadal, dont constitute lack of mental toughness. This is one place where you can point to the 15 grand slams.

Fitness?10/10. Nobody has ever seen Federer tired on the court, even when injured in AO 2008 and AO 2009.

Net Play?10/10. The best net player of the era of groundstrokes. Whenever he does come into net, he finishes.

Adaptibility to Style/Surface?10/10. Adaptibility to style can only be attributed to Federer. He can play any sort of style of tennis at the highest level.

Serve and volley, power groundstrokes, mix and match play, spin and touch play, passing shots. You can see Rod Laver's aggressive play, Borg's top spin groundstrokes, Connors' return game McEnroe's hands, Lendl's passing shots, Sampras' serving and volleying, Agassi's power strokes in his game and added to the genius of his play.

He can play all the styles, attacking the net, baseline groundstrokes, counter punching, junk balling, all court. He can not only play them, he can defeat them. No pushers have beaten him.

His dominance on all surfaces is documented. He has won on all surfaces and is dominant on all of them. No player in history has shown this wide array of dominance on all surfaces.

Laver's calendar year grand slam had three grand slams with grass and one with hard court. Borg never won the US Open on hard court. Sampras never won on clay. Only the Mallorcan can and has beaten him on clay.

Anticipation?10/10. Rod Laver on the Charlie Rose show, upon being asked what he admired most about Federer, "Well, his creative play is great, but the thing I most admire, well what we all admire, is his anticipation. It is the most amazing thing I've ever seen on the court."

It is the root of his genius, it is at the root of tennis excellence, it leads to his great movement, fitness, return game, net play. It has led to the federer moments we have all felt.

Federer's forehand is considered the greatest in history, but the most unattainable and admirable quality of Federer, the quality that will go with him when he leaves tennis, is this occult anticipation.

Conclusion 99/100?He is truly worthy of the title, no other player has ever been this complete.

But this does not mean the questions about the title of greatest of all time are wrong. What is wrong is dismissing them. These questions need to be addressed.

Are there arguments against his status and how credible are they?

There is only one word against his status of greatest of all time it is Nadal. There is the question of his 7-13 record against Nadal. This is a very credible question and needs to be analyzed from both views.

One thing has been proven, Nadal with Borg, is at the height of defensive tennis on clay. He is one of the greatest athletes in tennis history. The question is, is Rafael Nadal's game greater than Federer's?

As proven with the above discussion, Federer is far and above better, in terms of tools and play, than his predecessors. So it leads to the question, is Rafael Nadal the greatest tennis player ever?

The answer is no to both. There is an old adage to winning in tennis, beat your oppenent by taking his best and being better, or beat your opponent by forcing him to not play well. Nadal has a winning record against Federer, 13-7 but it does not mean he is better.

Nadal is a lefty, and Federer has a single handed backhand. Now as most tennis players remember when they started tennis, the pros and cons of the singlehanded. The one con of the singlehanded backhand, is the ability to not handle highballs.

Nadal is the only player in history to have the lefty topspin forehand that allows high balls to disrupt Federer, which is the reason he attacks only the backhand and avoids the forehand at all costs. Nadal also has a lefty serve so on the deuce court, it allows him to kick serve federer out of the court thus setting up an easy point.

These are the only two ways Nadal gets most of his points against Federer. Also, Nadal's athletic prowess helps, but it does not last as evidenced by his injury

Thus, Federer does not play his best. If Federer plays his best, he is the best in the history of the game and nobody can beat him. That is why Nadal, always describes Federer as the greatest of all time, even after he won the Australian Open.

Secondly, on the 13-7 record, 11 of those matches were played on clay, Nadal's preferred surface. In the rest, on hard court and grass, Federer has an advantage. Also, when Federer was at his absolute apex on most of the hard courts and grass courts, Nadal, would have to play his best and reach the finals of those tournaments to play Federer.

The few times he did, Federer, usually won. When he started reaching them, Federer was injured with mononucleosis and had turned 27, while Nadal was 22.

In conclusion, Nadal's winning record is a great counter point against Federer's status, but it is not completely credible when it is omitting, the number of times they have played on clay, Federer's injury and relative age, when they did not play on clay.

Could anybody be considered greater?

The only players in the discussion of greatest of all time are, Rod Laver, Bjorn Borg, Pete Sampras and Roger Federer.

If Federer is the greatest of them all, his achievements have to surpass all of them.

Pete Sampras: Sampras was one of the most dominant grass players ever and also a very great hard court player, he won until this month the most grand slams, 14, but never won on clay at the French open and made the semifinals only once.

Bjorn Borg: Borg has a very similar temperament and similar era of dominance to Roger. He has 11 grand slam titles, but never won the US open on hard courts. He played the Australian Open only once, but since it was a hard court slam, Borg could not have won more than one if he did play it. He retired at 26.

If he kept playing and played all of the Australian Opens, he, at a generous maximum, would have ended up with 14 grand slams. The major hole in his record is that he did not win the US open on hard courts.

Rod Laver: The Rocket Laver is the only challenger to Roger Federer's push as the greatest tennis player ever. His two calendar year grand slams, in 1962 and 1968, are his supporters' arguments and the missed time in his career is also a big argument.

But the fact is that, the Tennis tour at that time consisted of 25 amateur players in 1962 and 42 total professional players in 1968. This is very huge deterrant which suggest that the era in which he won them cannot be compared to Federer's or Sampras' or Borg's.

Also another huge deterrant, is the fact that when Laver won the calendar year grandslams, three of the four slams were played on grass and one on a very fast form of clay.

With those standards, Bjorn Borg would have won five calendar slams, Pete Sampras would have ended up with 20 slams and Roger Federer would not lose to Nadal on clay due to the fast courts and would have ended up with 20-25 slams. Laver also only one hard court title in his career.

In conclusion, Roger Federer is truly the greatest player in the history of tennis and his achievements surpass anything that has ever been done.

His win in the French Open, after four straight finals, his 15 career grand slams, his 21 consecutive semifinals on all surfaces, show the form of dominance that cannot be matched by the aforementioned players.

Also, in addition to his achievements, Federer has played with an artistry, genius and grace that has not been seen in tennis, there are 4 or 5 moments in every match, where he achieves something that has never been done in a tennis match.

He is the tennis equivalent of Mozart and Baryshnikov, as he mostly plays in beauty and with genius.

Yup. Laver has no technology but with the media coverage nowadays, I'd imagine it'll be harder for the players in the past to cope with the pressure and also when everyone has access for racket technology, advanced training method, analysts, coaches, it is even harder to dominate.

The most impressive thing is no one is yet to emulate how Fed play and that he figured out how to hit his forehand himself. We see a lot of players who play like Nadal. Jimmy Connors plays like Nadal and also won more tournaments than Fed will ever will.

And what I love most is when the crowd and commentators gasp in shock seeing a 'Federer Moment' shot.

For me, even if Fed has zero Slams, his play is the best ever!!!

even if it wasn't mono-fed but stereo-Fed, Djokovic would have eaten him equally; Fed was ripe for munching by Nole. AO 2008 was Novak's 100%! And I think Tsonga would have done the same had he had to play him.

finally a pro federer article...
cheeeeeeeeeeeeeeers

yeah torres...it's great being a part of the roger federer show as a fan....it will be great to see all of the players at the US Open....have been trying to find out if fed is playing montreal...i have read one article saying that he is and another saying that he isn't....i guess i need to do a bit more digging.....

as you have said.....fed's play is the BEST EVER.....a joy to be alive watching such an incredibly gifted player......unmatchable in terms of technique and talent.....

C'MON!
Allez Federer!

haha... Tsonga destroyed Nadal becoz Nadal stay 20 metres behind the baselines and when you have no variety, you can't really counter a pure volleyer like Tsonga. Which is why Nadal is LUCKY, Fed is not a great volleyer.

Sampras and Becker would definitely own Nadal.

OOOOOOOH! Coming from the same person who said Agassi owned Sampras!!!.... I'll believe a 5 yr.-old if he says Nadal is LUCKY!

Well - Sampras certainly thinks he would have owned Nadal. I'm not buying it. None of us has any idea what Sampras would have done with Nadal's topspin.

And saying that Nadal has no variety is just craziness. He has been constantly improving his game since he started playing professional tennis. Perhaps as a 19 year old, you could say that - no longer. You don't win WImbledon without a big serve if you don't have variety.

AMEN to that Cheryl!!!

Tsonga was super hot at AO 2008, he was eating his opponents literally no matter who he played. Too bad he can't repeat his form since.

And saying that Nadal has no variety is just craziness. He has been constantly improving his game since he started playing professional tennis. Perhaps as a 19 year old, you could say that - no longer. You don't win WImbledon without a big serve if you don't have variety.

cherylmurray , 7/17/09 2:29 PM

torres, take note! These are the facts.

I wish Fedfans will stop calling this a Federer thread, a number of players were discussed, not least of all Murray and Djokovic, and of course Nadal. This is the final paragraph:

Yes, Rafael Nadal was hurt for the past 2 months. No, he didn?t lose his number one ranking so much as he sort of?drifted out of the spot. And for the record, I don?t for a MOMENT think that Nadal is washed up or that his ?time in the sun? is over. I know what happened when he came back rested after being injured at the end of last year ? he won the Australian Open. If you think he isn?t a contender in New York, think again. But there is this undeniable fact and it has been true for 4 years now ? Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal are just?better. They?re better than everyone else. They?re mentally better, their tennis is better, their stamina is better. And if Nadal drifts to No. 3? He?ll still be the second best player in the world.

Please stop kidding yourselves that it's all about Federer. I suspect that they have not even bothered to read the content of the article, just the word Federer in the title is enough for FED fanatics.

agf, you are worse when you say a great never got beaten by the same player 13 times. I just mistyped the thing.

Cheryl, I was exaggerating when I say 'no variety'.^^

carrie,take note of 'and if Nadal drifts to No. 3? He?ll still be the SECOND best player in the world'

Vamos Rafa, second best player

Cheryl, I was exaggerating when I say 'no variety'.^^

torres9 , 7/17/09 9:23 PM

You heard it here first: torres exaggerates when he berates Rafa!!!!!!!

carrie...can you take a chill pill please..you are coming across as hysterical...

rafa has NOT got a god given right to be in a grand slam final...he's got to get there first......stop using his injuries as an excuse.....he lost in madrid...he lost at FO...you just have to deal with his losses a bit more calmly....

AND now TORRES is making his "EXCUSE ME for MISTYPING" on every thread........DEFENSIVE huh!!!!

"carrie...can you take a chill pill please..you are coming across as hysterical...

rafa has NOT got a god given right to be in a grand slam final...he's got to get there first......stop using his injuries as an excuse.....he lost in madrid...he lost at FO...you just have to deal with his losses a bit more calmly...."

lol at the irony coming from malteser...

malteser, I just don't know where you are coming from. Again, when did I say Rafa had a God given right to be in a GS final.

This makes me wonder........if Rafa wins the USO (and his official golden calendar slam at the same time) which he has already stated that is his goal to win the USO, then Rafa will have 2 slams this year, same as fed. Rafa will also have a calendar slam, same as fed (except Rafa's will have the Golden Touch). What will be the argument by torres and malt that fed is better in 2009? Or is that a possibility that they cannot grasp?

Eh....I still kind of think Rafa had a better year in some respects. I don't mean to jump on the Nadal bandwagon by jumping off Roger's, still completely devoted to Fed first, but I think Nadal was more consistent minus injury. Granted, if he loses at the Roger's Masters early and has a terrible year FOR HIM after this point, I'll definitive say Rog had a better year, that is unless he flounders as wel, even if neither wins the Open. If one of them does, I'll give that guy the better year. For me this is fair, since both are beyond the realm of capability of any other player this year. Well if the other wins the Masters Cup, I''ll question the idea again.

I mean to say, it doesn't matter if Fed beat Rafa at the the FO because in the end no one will remember who either of them beat in some 20 years. Yes, if Rafa completes the career slam that would be fabulous, and despite the Golden touch you have to feel for Rog cause he technically played his best in between Olympics, and Nadal truly was at the pinnacle of greatness last Summer into injury this year.

Kinda of want Rafa and Rog to complete career slam in the same year because it would just make their rivalry that much scarier...but I'd prefer if Rog won only because Nadal has plenty more time than Rog, who might implode after changing his first diaper.

Please Nadal refrain from children, until your married and are over the age of 30. Unless you've already retired...then go ahead, but don't potentially ruin the remaining fibers of your career at at 27.

To me, it would be great for Rafa to get the Career Golden Slam because:
1. Never have 2 players done it in the same year
2. It would be great to complete it on his first try
3. He would have 2 slams in one year on his worst surface

I don't think you can bring fed's baby into this as a reason for Rog doing good or not. Many said that the divorce of Rafa's parents was personal and should not have affected his tennis. Same goes with the baby for fed.

Well, you're probably right. You'd think you should bring it into account if either of them start playing subpar. They are only human, and have emotions. But everything you get past/over is part of what makes you a champion. So...you shouldn't but...it is kind of hard not to feel both of them will be a little...off? Nadal is so strong mentally, and other than when he plays Rafa, Rog seems to be okay too, even sometimes against Rafa...so I suppose your right. But you have to admit, just because many people have said it should not effect Rafa's tennis it doesn't mean it won't.

Still it is hard to fathom that either would be the same. Who knows though, might make them both better. Everyone about other than there opponents would be happy about that. Unless...their not Rafa and Roger fans....then maybe not. =P

I always say this and I'm saying this again: In malteser's article,they are comparing Rafa to Roger for the millionth time.Nobody is arguing Rafa is better than Roger in terms of their tennis,Roger is clearly the better right now.Nobody is doing it except Roger fans.So,why do they compare Roger to Rafa and then decide that "Roger is clearly better" like it's a new thing? Just to boost their egos? They themselves compare the two players and they say that Roger is better.That's just ridiculous...

sister..you are right....fedfans are ridiculous...i am ridiculous....rafafans are ridiculous....we are all ridiculous....

this is just a bit of fun...put it into perspective....we can all get on our high horses once in a while and more often than not....it's nothing to do with egos...it's all to do with freedom of choice and supporting the player we love the most....simple.....

are you referring to the critical analysis of the bleacher report article? you didn't make it clear...if you are...then firstly...i posted it as it was a critical analysis...secondly that it would promote discussion...that's what it did....so am not sure what your problem is? if you don't agree with it...great! you've made a choice! if you do agree with it....then great again! you've made a choice!

this isn't rocket science sister....is it? fedfans think fed is better.....rafafans think rafa is better....that's it really....the analysis just gave a different slant on things...that's all.....

fft in answer to your question...i think anyone having won a slam is a 'major' feat...'xcuse the pun.....of course i would like roger to win the USO.....and i will be rooting for him in the same way i have always done.....if some one else wins it then it means they will have played better on the day....FACT....

will that detract from me believing that Roger is still a stud..(Pete Sampras's words at end of wimby final)or the best, most consistent player ever in a major tourny?......No...

will it detract from his MASSIVE achievements this year? No.....

Will i still support roger forever more.....?

Yes......

if rafa wins then am sure you will be jumping up and down like a mad thing....zooming around the room like speedy gonzales...as i was with fed at FO and at Wimby...it is a great feeling when your champ wins......right?

what i won't be doing tho' fft is congratulating you as a rafafan because of all the nasty posts you sent to us fedfans after fed won wimby...i will remember that...

it was you in the main that posted your negative,insulting posts and seemed to enjoy the moments all too often....i have no problem recognising rafa's achievements and i would not post a negative article about him because i know that would have hurt the rafafans...that's the difference between you and me.....you get off on that kind of stuff....and that's a shame...but it's done now...

so am not sure where you are coming from fft....and a reminder to you..there are other fedfans on this thread apart from torres and me...you could also include them you know............... and see what they think?

malteser, I just don't know where you are coming from. Again, when did I say Rafa had a God given right to be in a GS final.

carrie , 7/17/09 11:08 PM

malteser, answer my question.

carrie....only terrorists make demands not reasonable people and you are not one of them.....

i mentioned to you to calm down because of the number of exclamation marks you are starting to use to get your point across....and when you don't want to discuss something you say 'case closed'....and regarding rafa having a 'god given right to reach a slam final or win any tournament.......that is implicit in what you say when rafa doesn't win a tournament or get past the fourth round of one.....or semi final in another....you use the excuses time and time again that he is injured....you cannot deny that carrie....and don't ask me to cut and paste your endless posts saying...'rafa was injured' because i counted 23 in other threads......there are far too many of them here and on other threads where you say it all the time......rafa doesn't make excuses...so why do you do that for him?

like i said before accept your losses...and move on....we as fedfans have had to put up with your constant posting of negative articles after fed's wimby triumph and you showed your true colours by calling fed names and what he is going to wear in the next tournament....you are a joke.....

the reason you are a joke is because you seem to be more keen on roger's dress sense than his tennis.....

and you...a grown woman....going on and on about fashion.....oooh....have you seen rafa's pink shirt......ooooh...go on to rafa's homepage and doesn't he 'cut a dash in leathers'...you are the one who is obsessed with rafa carrie....and the guy is 23....i find it a bit sick actually......try and turn your discussion to the tennis rather than knocking roger all the time......

you said very clearly that you didn't want dialogue....so make up your mind what you want..you cannot have it both ways....

guys....i didn't know where to post this but as roddick gave fed a great run for his money at wimby.....have posted it here....roddick has pulled out of the next tourny....bad news....was really looking forward to seeing him back in action.....

Injured Roddick puts off return

Roddick fell during the Wimbledon final and has not played since

Wimbledon finalist Andy Roddick has pulled out of the Indianapolis Championships with a hip injury.

The American was hurt during the marathon final against Roger Federer, who won 16-14 in the fifth set.

Roddick said in his Twitter feed he was disappointed to miss the tournament, which he has won twice, but is "not properly prepared at this point".

Tournament organisers are hoping James Blake will accept a wildcard for the event, which begins on Monday.

Roddick was also forced to pull out his country's Davis Cup quarter-final against Croatia, which the US lost.

The world number five fell during the fourth set of the Wimbledon final, but afterwards denied he had hurt himself.

carrie..have waited for a reply....but am off out for a while now....so perhaps catch you later...if not...have a good weekend...

"so am not sure where you are coming from fft....and a reminder to you..there are other fedfans on this thread apart from torres and me...you could also include them you know............... and see what they think?"

The question was a general question open to all to answer. I do welcome the OTHER fedfans to speculate also, since many of them are quite nice and fair and reasonable. I only know that you and torres will be the most vocal about defending fed, that is all my statement said and for you to read more into it, is a tad conceited of you.
Quit spouting off that you never say anything bad about Rafa and always are supportive. I also remember all the nasty things you said about Rafa when he pulled out of Wimby ("Sore knees? I don't think so", "he's not hurt......he's afraid of fed", "nothing but a lie"). You, zoey and torres were a triple tag team saying BS like that constantly. No one can ever believe your lies that you never say anything bad about Rafa after that day!

The only one that keeps bringing up fed's clothing is YOU all in the name of insulting another poster.

As far as if Rafa wins the USO (per my general question), I don't NEED or EXPECT congrats from you. I won't be the one that played the match! Rafa deserves the congrats, not me. I can promise you that I won't be demanding (as you did) that people congrat fed AND the fedfans and then get mad when they don't. You kept asking where homos, carrie, Raindrops, Gordana, danny and posmatrac were. It was obvious (since you do nothing but insult them) that all you wanted them around for was to rub it in their faces. You wanted to gloat ...that is all you wanted to do!! You told carrie "carrie....only terrorists make demands not reasonable people and you are not one of them" so I guess by your own definition that makes you a terrorist (harmless fed one) and unreasonable.

fft...your question was not a 'general one'....shall i quote you?

What will be the argument by torres and malt that fed is better in 2009? Or is that a possibility that they cannot grasp?
fan4tennis , 7/17/09 11:38 PM

unquote....

why do you lie fft? why do you twist things to suit your purposes? you directed your question specifically to torres and me..hence the above post....do you need glasses my friend? or do you need to book yourself back into your clinic for rest and relaxation? 'cos you is seriously crazy nuts right now.....

and lady....dont you EVER...EVER.....call me a gloater...EVER...YOU are someone on this forum who led zoey down a very dark alley....always gloating and stabbing her in the back....until one day she just had enough and was very 'unzoeylike'...you are not a nice person fft....but i think your age has a lot to do with it and the fact that you are probably a bit lonely in the USA...may be you should go out and be with friends and perhaps leave the forum for a while.....? just a thought... you do 'butt' in an awful lot into conversations which don't concern you fft...i can only think that you are one of those 'nana windows'....you know.....those people that like to twitch the curtains to see what is going on...a nosey nora.....

am not going to go down this road with you anymore fft...it has been lovely to IGNORE your posts for the past couple of days.....i actually feel a lot more refreshed without you in my life...but somehow i feel you have the need to stoke things up again.....so you go ahead and hopefully you will dig your own grave on this forum.....fft.....behave and stop reacting in such a childish fashion...being the oldest person on this forum...you should be setting an example..to all your 'grandchildren' here.....yet you are not.....take a chill pill lady....

the difference between you and me...is that i will have no problem in congratulating the rafafans for any of his future achievements....unlike you...who continually has nothing nice to say about federer.....we have been down this road before....you can twist it however you like lady...but the truth hurts doesn't it? go away fft...and dont come back...do the fedfans a favour....we wont miss you..honest.....

Why are you so hung up on my age? What has that got to do with anything??? You're posting here and other threads cracks about me being 50 (WRONG....told you before I'm in my 40's but leave it to you to keep lying) as if it's an insult. Being in my 40's (or 50's or 30's or 60's....doesn't matter) is not an insult. I've earned every one of the years that I've lived!!!

Also, quit blaming me for zoey getting HERSELF banned! ("YOU are someone on this forum who led zoey down a very dark alley.") She is a grown woman, responsible for her own actions, and she made the choice to post SIX times, expletive filled rants.

Let's take The Roger Federer Show on the road! How about the US Open? Lovely article, Cheryl!

Carrie said "And Rafa is only 23, should he stay fit, by the age of 28 there'll be a chasm between what he would have achieved by then and what Federer has achieved up to now".

Well,it has to be noted that another aspect of men's tennis is being fit & at the prime of one's physical abilities and remain injury free,only then can one expect to win matches. But,the way people talk,it seems that being that fit and injury free has been taken for granted. As if,Federer did the same,so will every other player could find it as easy as cake walk to do it. Looking at players like Nadal it can be big games had been so strenousfor them that winning a year full of great grandslam matches on all surfaces have left them stricken with injury and empty stomach,that they had to pull out for 2 months at the supreme of their form and at 23.
This is one aspect of the game that the Federer has mastered,and no other player, either active or retired is anywhere near to him! That also states how hard it is to win matches at that level for so,and why shouldn't anyone with lesser number of time on top could ever be compared with him.

As for Nadal,the way his physical fitness is at 23,it really remains to be seen if he would still be playing at 27,or even if he does, whether he would be playing at a level he played last year or not.

And it's true that the achievements of Federer will come every now and then,you people out there like it or not, because everytime anyone would have the slightest doubts about Federers ability, those "Same old things" and the books on records will be repeated and then the one doubting will have to be put to rest!

Come on people,just acknowledge the fact that, what the great Fed has achieved in Tennis had never been done before,and none in the present group of players is visible in the distant future to emulate that or even come anywhere near to it.

So memi,agf2agf and all others like that, stop being rude to malteser1 because you find it hard to accept the truth. It's not "INSECURITY AT ITS B*E*S*T*",because there is nothing to be insecure of, it's just to remind you blokes who momentarily forget the reality and also the English proverb at times "All that glitters is not gold";
There is still not a successor of Fed in Tennis as of now.:)

Well, I doubt the understandings of certain people when they say that watching Federer play, especially in the absence of Nadal, is boring! I am sure they are either blind fans of Nadal or just never watched Tennis for the sheer pleasure of watching Tennis and never true lover of the game of tennis.

I have been following Tennis since end of the 80's,and seldom have I ever watched a player play with such finess, perfecting the game that way,and transforming the game of tennis from just winningmatches to a special captivating art form which left you wanting for more.

Every single moment Federer spends on court makes it worth watching and the word like "Boredom" flies past the moment he is on court,and that is why he produces such great matches as of the Wimby final this, be it with Nadal or not. He is just great,not just for winning matches for such a long time, but for presenting the spectators the best game any player can ever produce!

No one comes nearer to him in anyway.

Oh geez, another fedfan who says if we don't like watching fed play, then we aren't fans of tennis. I liked tennis long before fed was playing and I'll like it long after he stops. You like his style. I don't. It's that simple! It is just your preference and my preference. Get over the fact that not everyone likes fed and if they don't, that does NOT make them nonfans of tennis!

Excellent post solitudine! The truth is that they cant accept the fact that Federer is the most popular male tennis player at this moment and his achievements are unprecedented. Without Rafa playing the final at Wimbledon, tv viewing for that match in England rose to a 10 year high, higher than when Federer played Nadal last year. Another thing, Federer's number of registered fan on facebook is second only to Michael Phelp and is expected to overtake Phelp in two weeks.

Do you really think all that info will make people all of the sudden go, "Oh, i like fed now!" When you fedfans realize that NOT everyone likes him, and just accept that Rafa, Murray, and Nole, and all the other players out there all have fans too, things will be much easier.

That is merely stating the fact, not an invitation for Rafafans to like Federal which will never happen.

Do you think it is only Rafa fans that don't like fed?

"...Another thing, Federer's number of registered fan on facebook is second only to Michael Phelp and is expected to overtake Phelp in two weeks." -eqm , 7/19/09 7:26 AM

This does not prove anything. if at all, it just goes to show that there are a lot of Fed fans who have nothing better to do other than envading all sorts of sites and sing hossanas to Federer. They are not tennis fans but Roger fanatics. He's as human as the rest of us people. Stop making him out as a god!

To the people who do not like the FED. We KNOW that not everyone likes the FED, but that does not deminish the fact that the FED is what he is. #1 ATP tennis player, "as well as" the most popular male tennis player in the history of tennis (when looking at the numbers, as well as the trophys WOn as a tennis player, and as a liked person by the public and the tennis family of players alike the trophys are there in GREAT numbers). No not every FEDfan is a fanatic, NO not every FEDfan makes Roger to be a GOD, No some tennis fans who like Roger may not consider him their favourite player. The fact is the majority of people like Roger Federer, you do not. So what?! Do you not like Roger Federer to the point of no return?! LOL I mean how is it that you feel you must tell us over and over that you dislike Roger Federer. We get it. To be honest, many of us don't care whether or not you like Roger Federer. Surprised YES, but care no! Normally people who dislike someone are something stay away from it, or they should (it is not the healthiest of behaviour). Perhaps you should consider doing the same. Unlesss you enjoy being unhappy (that is a different matter). Roger Federer is a GREAT tennis player. When he finishes playing tennis, he will be noted in the history books logically speaking, as the GREATEST TENNIS PLAYER of ALL TIME. Already many people consider his achievements "as a whole" to be GREATER then anyone else in the history of tennis. The Future is the future, but the present and the past speak for themselves, and the name Roger Federer is written all over it/them! Take good care. :) Go Roger go! C'MON Roger! Your the "ONE"! YOU ROCK! Cheers FEDfans! CHEERS!

sky...i just wanted to say...you are a b-e-a-u-t-i-f-u-l person....

we understood..right from the start when we joined this forum...(and before of course)....how special roger federer is...along with millions of people around the world.....as a player...as a wonderful person in terms of his philanthropic activities outside of tennis.....the proceeds of his RF baseball cap..ALL going to his third world charity....plus 1/3 of the sales on his RF attire as well...the guy is a beautiful human being.....the reason why i think he is such a role model is in terms not only of what he does on court, but what he achieves off court.....and yet still staying humble, giving his time to the media and......the beat goes on......

you said something very true in your post above....quote:

The fact is the majority of people like Roger Federer, you do not. So what?! Do you not like Roger Federer to the point of no return?! LOL I mean how is it that you feel you must tell us over and over that you dislike Roger Federer. We get it. To be honest, many of us don't care whether or not you like Roger Federer.......

unquote.....

that's the difference...we don't feel the need to slag off nadal....yet the rafafans (some...three in particular...)...do nothing else but slag off roger....why? it can only be jealousy...the guy is a winner...and everyone hates a winner if you are on the opposing side.......right? the guy is a shining beacon in terms of aspiring, young tennis players.....

it's a real shame that there are people on this forum that feel the need to constantly have a pop at what he has accomplished so far.....

plus sky...i miss zoey..and i hope she is reading this and i hope she is back soon....read for the US Open in particular........ZOEY! We love you!

"this isn't rocket science sister....is it? fedfans think fed is better.....rafafans think rafa is better....that's it really....the analysis just gave a different slant on things...that's all...."

look malteser,I respect you and your opinions but this is really what I was trying to say,really. I've already told you that even some die-hard Rafa fans like me don't think Rafa is better than Roger in terms of their tennis or their achievements. Rafa is my favorite player simply because of his character,his mental strength and his general attitudes. I was referring to the article you sent. Why this constant comparison between Rafa and Roger? To constantly repeat that Rafa's knees are very bad,he won't win another slam,Roger is way better than Rafa etc.? I was objecting to the article because it asks the question if Rafa is the greatest or not (which nobody claims) and then,he himself rejects this "no,he's not,he's worse than Roger,he's this,he's that" bla bla bla.

anyway,I guess in the end,we'll have to agree to disagree...

maltosser stfu and get a life instead of repeating your brainless drivel about a sport you know nothing about. you are just obsessed with an ugly personality which reflects your own!!

Ricky, could you explain to me what criteria the ESPYs Awards (Excellence in Sports Performance Yearly) are based on? i'm not sure but i thought it was based on the previous year's achievements; i.e. the awards given in 2009 are based on 2008 achievements. if that is correct, how did roger federer get the ESPY for Best Male Tennis Player when Rafa's achievements were better than his in 2008? how does it work!

sky: " To be honest, many of us don't care whether or not you like Roger Federer. Surprised YES, but care no!"

Obviously you do because you fedfans are constantly reciting stats to anyone who doesn't like fed, and accusing them of not being true tennis fans.


sky again: "Normally people who dislike someone are something stay away from it, or they should (it is not the healthiest of behaviour)."

What?? Am I supposed to stay away from tennis just because Roger is there? I happen to be a fan of other players so sky, how bout this! How about YOU accept that not everyone likes him and quit shoving him down our throats? How about YOU accept that there are other players to discuss than Roger? How about YOU accept that people are ALLOWED to debate here and some things said will NOT put your god on a higher pedestal than you already put him on!

Hi sister.....first of all honey....i posted the article written on the bleacher report.....i didn't do the full blown critical analysis..(am not that clever!)...but i read it and thought it was a really interesting article and it was awarded a five star review..so thought it was worth posting...

of course...i hear what you are saying...and you are right....we are never going to agree on such things are we?...but that doesn't mean to say that we cannot debate things and see where it takes us....the author of the article itself looked at both roger and rafa and gave THEIR OPINION.....purely subjective....so hope that it explains it....

sky...don't be bullied by fft..she is in bullying mode right now.....i simply cannot understand why someone of her 'life experience'..simply wants to have a bash at people who disagree with her.....she says...'quite shoving him own our throats'...

this is the woman who posted negative article after negative article when fed won wimby.....we already know there are a whole range of talented players out there sky...but you have always maintained that federer in the ONLY player that you are interested in...you have maintained that from day one...and because fft thinks differently to you and wants to change your way of thinking to hers (god forbid)..she gets grouchy...when hola hola....you are responding to THE ROGER FEDERER SHOW....she talks in riddles half the time.....and if you wanna put roger on a pedastal sky..you do it....do what you like...don't be mashed by this woman who has got nothing better to do than insult fedfans....i mean if she doesn't want to discuss roger...why doesn't she 'get the hell outta here'....? problem is...she cannot help herself...he is like an attraction to her...she cannot stop herself...

homos.....why do you have to start things up again...honestly...you are getting boring now....you are the one with the ugly personality buddy....take a chill pill and relax.....

"we are never going to agree on such things are we?...but that doesn't mean to say that we cannot debate things and see where it takes us..."

Debate involves positive AND negative, yet you go on about how I am bullying because I disagree and I post (GASP!) negative articles about fed (most of them debating his claim to GOAT). Sounds like you don't want debate, you just want a pure fed lovefest!

A whole long paragraph to sky about how he should think of me? And I thought sky was smart enough to know on his own how and what to think, but obviously you don't think the same.

homos: she also claims I am boring too but keeps talking to us. She doesn't get that maybe we could take a chill pill but she took them all and it did no good!

sky & malteser, with people in high places making sure federer gets what he wants, with players on tour choking so that he can win, and obsessed fans like you supporting him, who knows, he just might end up with 30 majors 40 or 50 master shields, countless awards and a host of other titles and finally the Quinness Book of Records for the greatest athlete in all of sports history! am i close?

memi...are you going for the 'sarcasm award of 2009?'....if you are...that's the ONE award that fed isn't gonna get!

we love federer. simple. in our opinion. he is the best of our era. the best ever. in our opinion of course....memi...why do you have to come on a thread and track down fedfans to make us feel as if we are committing a crime? have we ever done that to you? does it make you feel better?

sky....on tuesday...am off to france to hopefully get to see the final stages of the tour de france...right now...we are in an ashes tourny with Australia....so it's biting nails time....not sure whether you like the cricket...so if you dont..you won't know what i am talking about! but it is a big thing here in the UK.....the ozzies need 215 runs to win....we have got 5 more wickets to try to bowl 'em out!

anyhow..will touch base with you tomorrow....memi and fft are making me feel sick...

So what if Rafa cuts a dash in leathers, as opposed to looking a mess in a badly cut military uniform.

Malteser, you've decided to mis-interpret my posts as me saying Rafa has a right to get to every GS final, so that you could copy what I just said to torres to calm down, by telling me to take the chill pill whatever that is. You couldn't find any direct quote from me saying anything of the sort, so you made it up as usual. You have a tendency of copying other people's expressions, because you don't have any original thought of your own, and you are in the habit of changing things round to prove your point. You certainly do not let the facts get in the way of a good story.

Get off my back will you. I only scan through your posts to see if you mention my name, because you are good at making things up and misrepresenting people to suit yourself, so I want to have the opportunity of getting the records straight. I really do not read your posts anymore, because you simply do'nt make sense, and you only come on here to have a fight, probably because you get a kick out of it.

All you do is pick on people, insult them and behave as if no one else is allowed to comment unless they pray at Federer's altar. You claim that virtually all the threads are Federer threads, even though they evidently are not. You seem to be having difficulty understanding the line of thought in the threads, like this one for instance where there is a clear comparison being made of the top four players, but just because the title's got Federer's name in it, you've decided it's a Federer thread.

You simply go to all the threads and repeatedly regurgitate all Federer's achievements, as if you need to convince yourself of his 'greatness.' Just remember that Federer is only a tennis player, he is not a rocket scientist, and he hasn't discovered a cure for cancer, nor has he discovered whether there is another planet with life on it. He just hits a ball to bounce between boundaries, so get things into perspective.

"...Another thing, Federer's number of registered fan on facebook is second only to Michael Phelp and is expected to overtake Phelp in two weeks." -eqm , 7/19/09 7:26 AM

Just show that Fed is the most exciting player to watch. The majority of fans appreciate what is TRUE greatness and are not really impressed by other players just because they win.

The fact that he's always on TV to give us a look at his art is something to be grateful about. And winning so many Slam titles is just a proof of how great his game is and people LOVE watching his play.

FED IS THE BESTEST!!!

malteser,don't want to cause you any health problems. i'm sure it takes all of your energy to support federer! rest assure, i won't be receiving an award, because i just don't think i have the connections that you guys have, being loyal supporters of federer and all!

BREAKING NEWS: GREATNESS is NOW measured by the number of fans in F*A*C*E*B*O*O*K*!

"FEDERER is second to MICHEAL PHELP" ( he will DROWN himself --- eqm YOU MURDERED his name!) "S" after the "P" PLEEEEEEEEEASE!--- in # of supporters!

TORRES CONCURS!!!

agf, not only do you have lack of tennis knowledge but also lack of the ability to correctly intepret things.

FEDERER being POPULAR means a lot of people apprecitate him and love him for his GREATNESS. And the extreme hate from Rafans who really have unknowingly bash Fed more than support Nadal shows how his immense success is the ENVY of haters.

Keep on hating and proving that FED IS THE BEST!!!

Interesting fft. If you feel I am "shoving Roger Federer down your throat", it is only because you are posting on what is primarily a Roger Federer artitle (dah) "The Roger Federer Show". As a Roger Federer fan you will find me on such a thread from time to time. It is very fitting, and most appropriate (don't you think?). Yes there are other players, but I have very little interest in any of them (as posted by me in the past), and this is why I seldom read or participate in threads about them. Obviously the title of a thread, nor it's content appears to matter little to you. This is a behaviour I find in people such as yourself, and others like you "remarkable" (to be polite) LOL. I don't get the impression your comments and others similar to yours are in the least interested in debate in the true sense of the word. What I sense is unhappy people doing their best to spread unhappiness. It is one thing to say an occasional something negative about Roger Federer, but to do so on a constant frequent bases as some of you non FEDfans have been doing is just "weird". Amplified by the fact that you have chosen FED threads to do it. It is very disrespectful of a GREAT tennis player, and the GREAT person (which is demonstrated by his actions to world causes) loving and caring Roger Federer. I think you do it, precisily because this is where is will have the most impact. After all, people/fans like myself would seldom be subjected to comments such as yours otherwise. That's one way of looking at it. I know nothing I write here is going to change anything "you" do, I really feel it is "too bad" you feel (most of the time) you have to write such non positive things about such a GREAT guy. You will reap what you sew... CHEERS FEDfans! Go Roger go! Your the "ONE"! YOu ROCK!!! Thanks for the info Malty. I will be looking forward to your posts again when you get back. Happy/safe trip to you! Mwah! I will miss you... :)

WE HATE THE FED FANS!!!.....not particularly FEDERER!....though most of the time his actions and reactions attracts hatred!

"Keep on hating and proving that FED IS THE BEST!"--- HOW CAN YOU NOT HATE SUCH A*R*R*O*G*A*N*C*E!!!......yeah, just following the footstep of their idol!

" Obviously the title of a thread, nor it's content appears to matter little to you. This is a behaviour I find in people such as yourself, and others like you "remarkable" (to be polite) LOL"

Sky, did you actually read Cheryl's article or just the title? If you had read the content of her article, you would have realized that it was also about Nadal! So after ALL your statements above, it appears that it is YOU that only looks at the title and disregards the content.

Your idea of disrespect and dishonor is for anyone to speak against fed. We should all be the "happy, perky, little cheerleader type" like you, spreading the news of fed's greatness. I have called fed arrogant, childish and a fashion queen. I do not do that, as you claim, on a constant basis. The last name was the most recent and it was obviously awhile back. I do not deny that. But sadly, what you consider "negative about Roger Federer" is actually called DEBATE! If you look at my posts fairly, (which I doubt you will do but I will say it anyway), you will see that I was debating fed as GOAT, and was not calling him any sorts of names. It is only the fact that I did not agree with fed as GOAT is what you consider negative.

I suggest this to you sky:
1. Read more than the title before you rag on someone for not understanding the content of a thread!
2. Understand that in a debate, there are pros vs cons and in the cons, there are negatives! This isn't a fed fantasy site! Go to RF.com for that!
3. I am not trying nor do I expect to "convert" you. I am merely articulating another view!

fft At the beginning of my post I did address you as you were the one who responded to the previous post, but the content of the last post was more of a generalized impression of non FEDfans, and not just directed at you. I did say the article was primarily about the FED, although I do realize the article is also about Nadal, and how the FEd and Nadal have dominated tennis (abeit primarily Roger). I never got the impression you were trying to convert me. There are pros and cons in a debate, I agree, but some of the stuff said against the FED on this site at times is enough to raise an eyebrow to say the least. Your right everyone has the right to their opinion, but there is also something to be said for fair play, especially when common sense is compromised. The GOAT thing is the GOAt thing. Until the rules have been written down the subject will retain a flair for contravercy.

homos: she also claims I am boring too but keeps talking to us. She doesn't get that maybe we could take a chill pill but she took them all and it did no good!
fan4tennis , 7/19/09 8:50 PM

yeah fan4, i cherish the moments... :)

honestly, carrie, fan4, memi, agf, you guys are wasting your time trying to explain to dimwits ANYTHING. people who go on an endless mad rampage with anyone who dares speak against their god will forever remain blind, ignorant and intolerant. you can only tell someone something when they are ready to listen and accept varied opinions. still, i applaud you for your efforts in trying to explain what should be simple elements of a debate. notice the differences in views and the manner in which these are expressed - endless repetitive mundane worship vs reason and intelligence???

I understand what you are saying homos, but at the same time, not all fed fans are the same. Take sky for example. He makes no bones that fed is his fave and that he really doesn't follow other players. He also prefers to 'stay positive' and ignore the negative (that's paraphrasing sky from an earlier post). I have no problem with that. Sky and I have disagreed in the past and after a few posts, things are smoothed over. He is NOT like malt or torres. Sky does not fill his posts with insults and tirades against everyone that disagrees with him. Janhavi also is a fair fedfan, whom I don't always agree with (and we've gone toe to toe), but the fact remains is she/he knows tennis and makes fair assessments. Cable, Recordbreaks and Arvis are the same way. I just refuse to lump them with the other two because they aren't the same as them.

These "other two" are a league of their own when it comes to insulting people who don't agree with them. To ignore them would be better for your hearts and peace of mind.

homos, you make an excellent point! i will definitely keep that in mind! i agree we are wasting words! the damage has been done!

too true fan4. i should have clarified i didn't have sky in mind, it was directed at those 'other two' for sure. i only realised after i sent it.
you didn't know janhavi since last year i take it? an absolute monster, insutling all fans who didn't like fed with very personal attacks, telling some to go to hell and calling them stupid, stupid haters, etc. basically was doing what torres and maltosser do - cannot at all accept differeing opinions. maybe she's better now but tbh, most - not all - but most fed fans are idiots. and these two are beyond!

how very droll.....homos...fft..and carrie....the WORST posters on this forum...knowing that they twist and insult at every opportunity...and fft...to BULLY sky into submission with your ridiculous attempts at 'trying to be nice' but in a seething way....you are right...sky is an intelligent guy who sees through your blanket of disguise...you are a bully fft....carrie you live in your own dream world....homos you are just insulting with your name calling again.....why do you do this? and fft...you are the one who always bangs on about name calling....so have a word with homos or is he exempt from this? you always seem to ignore insults coming from team rafa..i wonder why....

thanks for dropping by fft...homos...carrie.....it's so nice to do business with you....

malteder, I can see that you have no response to my reply to you (07/19/09 9:42), so I take it that you admit that I have proved that you continuosly make statements that you know to be untrue, such as your post above, and in one word, that makes you a liar.

homos/f4t/memi/carrie---true ,this is getting boring.... ok, then...I'll rest my case...FOR NOW!

VAMOS RAFA!!!

carrie...let me make myself crystal.....i answered your initial post with the following reply....malteser1 , 7/18/09 1:47 PM ....kindly revisit it as my answer has not changed from then....if you want to continue to calling me a liar...carrie...you carry on....you just degrade yourself doing this tho'...you know that you have been more than rude and insulting to federer.....whats this about him wearing a 'tutu'? haha...very funny carrie...you are the joker of the forum...nothing nice to say about anyone except when they agree with you....you are turning into the class bully now carrie....so what i would do is try to relax a little more when people disagree with you...stop calling them names..(me in particular)...and try to work on your own character...yeah...so we know you don't like federer but like sky said...you dont need to keep ramming it down our throats...we dont reciprocate that to you or the rest of your 'team rafa'.....shireling said something very true on another thread carrie.....go read it and learn.....

sky...i'll catch up with you soon...am off now to tour de france....by the way....England won the second test at Lords....beat the Aussies by 115 runs....Flintoff was awesome! man of the match!

take care sky...and torres..you are a legend buddy.....

roll on montreal..........

C'MON!

Allez Federer!

LOL..Talk about gossiping..we have character-analysis of posters now?
So I get the rules of this site now-
Defending Federer = being a monster.Trash-talking him or not raising a voice against anyone doing so is being fair and nice.
I used the term 'stupid haters' once for which I profusely apologised later and it makes me a monster?
And whenever did I tell anyone to go to hell?
Maybe posters had better keep a track-record of just how many times they'd been insulting posters around here and then talk nonsense.

you told gordana to go to hell. I remember it very clearly. are you a liar now as well???
defending roger is NOT being a monster. Behaving the way you do IS!

Why dont you have the decency to look at yourself first? and please show me the post where I said it and show me the context.If I am wrong I will apologise.I feel no shame in that and certainly dont consider it beneath me.
And care to elaborate reasonably exactly how I must behave to please you?

First & Last Warning: Please don't take anything that follows too seriously!

"The Roger Federer show"
- I may or may not like this show but I definitely like The Tom & Jerry Show.

PS: All criticism is welcome.

tejas--- i think the people here are "too serious" for your kind of "comedy"! Try to hit some characters like RAFA and FEd and you'll CERAINLY get the CRITICISMS you're welcoming! CHEERS!

tejas, I appreciate the humor. :D

Wow. you guys sure do fight a lot. LOL.

I sent a post about a week ago but it has not been published. It was my first post so I'm wondering if I missed doing something I should have.