Help

loading...

Article

  • Sampras pays tribute to new tennis king Federer

    7/5/09 11:12 PM | Johan Lindahl
    Sampras pays tribute to new tennis king Federer Pete Sampras added his congratulations to the man who stole away his tennis throne as Roger Federer won his sixth Wimbledon trophy to set the all-time mark of 15 singles titles at Grand Slams.

    "In my book Federer is the greatest. The guy is a legend. He's an icon. He's a credit to the game."

    The American whose record of 14 had stood from 2000 until a month ago when Federer pulled level on 14 majors after finally winning the French Open, made a late decision to fly with his wife from their home in LA to London to witness potential history.

    They were heading back on Monday after Sampras rubbed shoulders againt with fellow heros Rod Laver and Bjorn Borg, among others, who watched the heroics over Andy Roddick which lasted four and a quarter hours.

    Sampras called the task of winning 15 majors in just seven seasons "a lot of work". "He serves big, he's smooth and a great athlete".

    "I feel bad for Andy, this was his chance and he came up short. But Roger just had a little bit more".



Tell a friend »

Comments

"I feel bad for Andy, this was his chance and he came up short. But Roger just had a little bit more".

Sampras Spoken like another true CHAMPION!


I would agree with Sampras completely here. I'm a Roger Federer fan and I wanted Roger to win, but in a match like the one played I don't like to see one guy lose. Roger deserves the WIn cause he did what he had to do, and I'm very happy for him. Roddick well, better luck next time I guess. What else can one say about losing this way. Roger is a GREAT Champion, and the GREATEST of Champions usually find a way to WIN. I like Roddick. He fought hard. I liked him before this match, but I'm more impressed with him now after this match. I'm really hoping Roddick will come up with someday BIG before long... As for Roger, well he is MAGNIFICANT! A SUPERB ATHLETE! The GOAT as far as I am concerned.

sky , 7/6/09 12:21 AM


sky...hi buddy..there you are!

what a day! what a match! sky! I am actually going to email ARod on twitter..to tell him what a G-R-E-A-T champion he is ....what a match! sky...how close was that match? how close? but when all is said and done...towards the end...ARod was just a step slower...not by much...but just enough for fed to move in......

gotta say tho' that fed served B-R-I-L-L-I-A-N-T-L-Y....more aces than ARod....his first serves were brilliant....just completely s-i-c-k...the guy is just amazing.....at the end of the match...he just leapt up those stairs at wimby as if he hadn't played any tennis...just ridiculous!

this is THE BEST match have seen at wimby since last wimby...i mean honestly sky...what a c-r-a-z-y day!

If sampras says then fed is the GOAT sky...who are WE to argue?

Allez Federer!

malteser1 , 7/6/09 12:41 AM


fedfans and roddick fans...i just wanted to post here the statistics for the wimby match....A-W-E-S-O-M-E from BOTH players!

Andy Roddick USA (6) 7 6 (6) 6 (5) 6 14
Match Completed

Roger Federer SUI (2) 5 7 (8) 7 (7) 3 16

Match Statistics Serve Statistics

Elapsed Time by Set: 39 43 47 32 95




Match Summary

Roddick (USA) Federer (SUI)

1st Serve % 168 of 239 = 70 % 127 of 197 = 64 %

Aces 27 50

Double Faults 4 4

Unforced Errors 33 38

Winning % on 1st Serve 140 of 168 = 83 % 113 of 127 = 89 %

Winning % on 2nd Serve 31 of 71 = 44 % 42 of 70 = 60 %

Winners (Including Service) 74 107

Receiving Points Won 42 of 197 = 21 % 68 of 239 = 28 %

Break Point Conversions 2 of 5 = 40 % 1 of 7 = 14 %

Net Approaches 42 of 69 = 61 % 38 of 59 = 64 %

Total Points Won 213 223

Fastest Serve Speed 143 MPH 135 MPH

Average 1st Serve Speed 127 MPH 118 MPH

Average 2nd Serve Speed 105 MPH 98 MPH


Fed SERVED out of his skin! PLUS 50 aces! A record for him in a match!

I dont feel that fed played his best today in terms of his 'best' tennis...he wasn't able to break roddick as much as he had in the past...i think that both players will reflect on this after having a long rest....before the US Open starts up....

107 winners tho' for fed is just s-i-c-k!

Well done federer...roddick....what to say? just feel the love from the fans....on twitter!

malteser1 , 7/6/09 1:31 AM


Agree 100% with Pete. In his on-camera interview, he said he couldn't choose with legends right there beside him. He was being kind. Laver is in a class all his own. I've met him and he autographed my "Life is Good" tennis shirt - which I'll treasure forever!

We all were treated to great tennis today. I feel like Andy knows he's in the club now, and he's gonna tear it up this summer. I think he'll take the U.S. Open.

Roger was phenomenal - just phenomenal - the way he returned so many of what would normally be Andy's aces! He said he couldn't read the serve that well, but how did he get a racket on so many serves then? And he served like a maniac!

Sooooooo happy for Roger. He deserves this!

Roger is the GOAT and still and always THE ONE!

Rafterfan , 7/6/09 3:19 AM


He is the greatest of his era, full stop. We should not compare his greatness to other legends. Too many ifs and buts comes to mind. Would he have won 5 straight Wimby if he had played in Sampras era? I would think Sampras has a slight edge on the green stuff when it played faster 10 years ago.

How would he have played with older racquet technology, or in an era where great serve and volleyers were common? And would those legends in their prime had possessed the sort of technology at Federer's disposal be more lethal than what Federer is now?

Federer is great but lets not diminish the accomplishment of other legends. They played in much different circumstances and environment.

cable , 7/6/09 8:21 AM


cable...... same applies with all players of this era......

Itzz not his fault that the ear of the older generation was way diff...... not his fault that he was ot born on that era.........

the truth is that he has most no of GS title in his pocket !!!!

he is undoubtedly the GOAT ........... I will consider n e one else...... who breaks his record..... which does seem to me be broken in recent times !!!!!

hE iS bAckY hOmE .... the No.1 !!!!

Go Roger go........

tomnjerry2 , 7/6/09 8:55 AM


read this...... it gives immense pleasure......

http://www.smh.com.au/news/sport/tennis/federers-gra nd-slam-wins/2009/07/06/1246732263820.html

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

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

tomnjerry2 , 7/6/09 9:16 AM


Congratulations to Federer. Hope his fans are having a party like they always do celebrating his success. So humble of Sampras to say such words. It shows great sportsmanship on his part. The match was good 5 sets long. The aces really bored me though in-between there were glimpses of excellent shot making. However I don't believe in the GOAT thing. If needed then comparing different eras is better left to history. On a lighter note this GOAT talk in any sport reminds me of that GOAT that wanted to cross the road and jammed the traffic. :)

tejas , 7/6/09 9:39 AM


If I'm not wrong Federer didn't need to go to college to get his 15 slams. That's a lot of work in the right direction without going to college.

tejas , 7/6/09 10:20 AM


Hi deny
Everything in life comes to an equation of balances how you balance your effort to your result you need more to achieve more or you need to less to last more, that is the equation Roger did nail through his long career even in his private life if that doesn?t make a genius I don?t what does
Sure Nadal is a first class champion a great athlete but do you see him being able to satisfy the hard equation the effort- result one , his outstanding performance happens to be an outcome of huge physical effort but the real question : for how long he can do that? Can you see that going for let say 8-9 years from now, even if the reason behind this absence is not only physical ( as a lot of experts suggested ) that adds more factors to the case how he handled the pressure of defending and ranked number 1 didn?t go well either.
Am basically saying Nadal is great but Roger is greater because he was able to make it to huge number of finals because he is huge pile of talent and love of the game. Yesterday's match was hard to digest Roger should've won it in straight sets I know Andy played his skin out but Roger should have been able to dig deep in the 2nd serve still I don?t know how he kept his nerves tell the last game against such serve. Speaking of mental strength! That sure was one
Bottom line here Nadal will come back strong but for how long? Soderling opened the door in the French open so don?t expect the others to stand out they will get inside for a look to see
Roger is number one again, good fight budy???????..that is your arena Wimbledon is your house, just the invitation lacked one who couldn?t bare the test not your fault
so please have the decency to applaud to number one the 15 GS champion Mr. Federer

tennislover , 7/6/09 12:07 PM


As we've seen, it's not always the best player who wins. It's about momentum and in Roger's case a lot of luck - with the draw, with mistakes from Roddick, etc. Poor Roddick, he doesn't usually give these sorts of matches away. Smugalot didn't win it, Roddick lost it. 15th time lucky! Bravo Roger, bravo!

homos , 7/6/09 12:21 PM


danny...the H2H between Rafa&Roger does not mean much because most of thier matches have been on clay.when Roger was at his peak Rafa was climbing to his peak and he did not make it to hardcourt final.on grass they are 2-1...no doubt Rafa is great,probably the GOAT on clay but his career is far from finished whereas Roger is going to the end.

homos....u say the 'smug' was lucky.ok,the 'smug' said that :"I was on the lucky side",so what's your problem.btw,take a look at the match stats.

niloofar , 7/6/09 12:47 PM


let me add another comment from Sampras about Fed:"he's humble and I like that"

he said this yesterday......!! thank u Pete!!

niloofar , 7/6/09 12:51 PM


homos, it is absurd to think that someone can achieve 15 career majors by being lucky every single time. You can dislike Rog but to diminish his achievements makes me think you weren't really watching tennis.

And as for Rog's "arrogance"...I admit that as a Rog fan, some things he did and said don't always sit well with me (i.e. the number 15 jacket yesterday) but again there is a line I feel between arrogance and confidence. Rog to me sits on the line and tips over to what is perceived as arrogance at times. It is not arrogant to have confidence and belief in yourself. And it really is confidence and belief that earned Rog his 15th - at one point his body language was like "i'm gonna lose this" but he believed that he can still pull out some rabbits out of his hat and he did. That is not PURELY luck. It may be "luck" that Andy shanked his forehand, but it isn't luck that Rog held on the way he did.

But reading all the previous posts...I think whatever I say is irrelevant to all the Rog-haters, but everyone's entitled to their own opinion, so go with whatever flow you like. I just don't get why people have to trash other players in order to appear dedicated to their favourite, it's silly. Rog is my ultimate favourite but I love Nadal's play and Djokovic's touch, and Andy Roddick as well, and Tsonga. I dislike Murray immensely but I do not downplay his talent and skill and the fact that he is heading towards a Slam title, it's a matter of when and where. I think Hewitt was an absolute jerk during his No.1 heydays but I do not deny that he worked hard to get there and deserved to be there, and his two Slam titles were won through hard work and not luck.

In the end I really come on here to read about tennis and enjoy discussions but it seems that people are more interested in mud-slinging and calling names, degrading other posters as well as players (to the point of almost shockingly unfair and degrading I feel...therefore I don't think I will be back here. Intellectual and unbiased tennis discussions do not exist anymore. There's probably a lot more other tennis forums/pages where I believe the exchange is more civilised and centralised.

Pity, this used to be a really good site.

juney , 7/6/09 1:56 PM


If Nadal is so dominating, why is the 3 matches against Nalby, he was easily the worse of the two and only won the last one when nalby choked. And also he got beaten by Blake, Berdych, Youzhny a lot of times. I wouldn't say Nadal is so dominating either.

H2H is the ONLY flaw in Fed's statistics and unlike GS count which he can work on, H2H can only be improved by luck. He couldnt work on meeting Nadal more times becoz if nadal loses, he wont be able to meet him and vice versa. And also why did he meet Djoker more when Djoker were younger than young Murray? Simple: Djoker came out as a threat earlier so he met Djoker a lot why Muzza only met him recently.

torres9 , 7/6/09 2:17 PM


Sampras also said Roger is a stud - loved that!

I agree with juney - I'm so tired of the mudslinging. I'm not saying don't be baised toward your fave, but play nice, or take your toys and go home!

Rafterfan , 7/6/09 4:25 PM


juney , 7/6/09 1:56 PM :
I hope u DO come back. excellent post.I also like the fact that you're one of the Fed fans who is not biased.I totally agree with u.I don't think he's perfect and there has been times when I did not like what he said or did.the same example u gave about his jacket.but I will never understand why some ppl hate him so much.I don't know what he has done that was so unhumanlike! one just needs to read his postmatch interview after playing Tommy Haas(the GOAT discussion)and his yesterday's interview to see that he 's fine and 'most' of the time sounds quite modest considering how much praise he receives.I think overall his attitude is great though I don't like 'everything' about him.the same for other players,no one is an angel.it's just a matter of who u like more for his game and character.even if ppl don't like a particular player,it does not mean they've got to hate 'everything' about him. and neglect every nice thing about him.I wonder why,all these ppl who are hurt by Roger's words from a long time ago,why don't they remember Roger's comments on losing his rank to Rafa?(compared to other player's reaction to losing ranks)...I don't see where all this hatred comes from. actually I don't think there is a tennis forum in which tennis is really being discussed.it's all bias on players.

niloofar , 7/6/09 5:32 PM


homos....how on earth can you say that federer had a 'lucky' draw...that's just utterly ridiculous....particularly as early on in the tourny RICKY had mentioned that fed's draw was VERY TOUGH in terms of the opponents he potentially going to be playing.....

okay....even the second round against Yen..Hsun Lu...no. 63 who took out Andy Murray in the Olympics last year was no push over...the early rounds are ALWAYS dangerous.....he beat him 7:5 6:3 6:2....

then a former no. 1 Guillermo Garcia Lopez...

then Kohlschreiber who is a killer player...then

soderling...well...we all know what this guy is capable of...right? dispatching rafa...the then...world no. 1 fourth round...FO...then

Karlovic...'Dr. Dangerous..! the killer server......

then Tommy Haas....recently beaten No. 4 Djokovic at Halle....this was NO easy draw for fed...he earnt his place in the final and above all else fed does not get the credit for the incredible mental strength that he possesses...when it is needed and boy was it needed yesterday.....

C'MON! Homos be fair for once...

then finally..a new...revitalised...more dangerous ARod...these are top...top....players...how on earth you can say that fed was lucky...in fact homos why do you continue to comment on fed in such a way...forget about him....just concentrate on rafa and his recovery....

malteser1 , 7/6/09 5:46 PM


niloofar...you said you didn't sit easy with roger's jacket.......did you know that NIKE sewed in no. 15....IF....he had won wimby as a 15th....he also had his normal RF sports top as well...so don't be too harsh on him...he was doing what his sponsors had provided for him........

i dont really care what people say about roger...niloofar...so many fed haters on this forum...it is unbelievable....he IS a humble champion....the mighty sampras said he is a 'stud'...a 'humble' man.....a 'nice' guy.....so i would want to believe the people who nearest to him and know him.....it's just all so silly when fedhaters.....wont recognise his achievements...but lets face it....i don't think he would really care that much.....

malteser1 , 7/6/09 6:10 PM


malteser, Fed could have told his sponsors he didn't want to have the 15 sewn on his jacket, couldn't he? It is one of those things that he does that others perceive as being arrogant. I know you love him, but he is no innocent angel.

Agree with what juney wrote regarding the trashings that goes around here in the name of their dedication to their tennis idol and also the lack of intellectual and civil discussions and debating.

cable , 7/7/09 7:56 AM


This is a piece from the Gaurdian, which clearly supports the points Rafans have been making about Federer's dubious accolade as the GOAT.

Shadow of Nadal hangs over Federer's claim to be the greatest

Roger Federer's head-to-head record against Rafael Nadal means the title of 'greatest ever' may remain just out of his reach.


Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer

Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer after the 2008 Wimbledon final. Photograph: Carl De Souza/AFP/Getty Images

It is always unwise to predict with any degree of certainty what is going to happen in sport in the long term, particularly tennis which is open to sudden and dramatic shifts of fortune. This time last year, after Rafael Nadal had beaten Roger Federer in the greatest of all men's finals at Wimbledon, one of the questions being asked was whether the Swiss was a spent force.

He answered that promptly by winning the US Open and this year has added the French Open, for the first time, and a sixth Wimbledon title to break Pete Sampras's record of 14 majors. Even when not playing at his best, which has been the case for the past 18 months, Federer has lifted his game at crucial moments and clearly deserves all the plaudits coming his way.


But here comes the uneasy part of the great man's towering performances. All those five slam finals he has lost have been against Nadal, while the last three he has won have seen the Spaniard either absent, as at Wimbledon, or knocked out before the final - by Andy Murray at Flushing Meadows and Sweden's Robin Soderling in Paris, both of whom lost to Federer in the final. Nadal, almost five years younger than Federer, has won 13 of their 20 meetings; in slam finals he holds a 5?2 advantage, and in all finals leads 11?5. While not detracting from the achievements of the Swiss, these results might, with some justification, call into question whether he can really be deemed the greatest player of the modern era.

Statistics, their head-to-heads aside, point overwhelmingly Federer's way, although this year he had a huge slice of good fortune in Paris. Had the Spaniard been fully fit it seems unlikely Federer would have won the French Open; Wimbledon is more debatable.

The degeneration of Nadal's knees is something that has yet to be fully explained. The problems began some time ago, though at the start of this year's clay-court season the young Spaniard abandoned the support strapping above them, the reason apparently being that they were no longer hurting him as much. He duly defended his Monte Carlo and Rome Masters titles, as well as the lesser tournament in Barcelona, but even then there were signs he was short of his best.

The Madrid Masters, just before Roland Garros, was a tournament too far with Nadal beaten in the final by Federer the day after a four-hour semi-final against Novak Djokovic. Toni Nadal, the uncle and coach, monitors his nephew's physical condition constantly, while also modifying his style. As he showed when beating Federer on the Australian hard courts, his game is still developing, and this shook the confidence of the Swiss to the roots. The new fascination will be to see how he will react when he plays Nadal again.

By regaining the Wimbledon title, Federer also deposed Nadal as the world No1. His aim is to stay there until the end of the year, just as he intends to carry on playing the game he so dearly loves for some time yet: "[My wife] Mirka would not let me retire. She wants to see me play, and just sitting at home is not the life for me." Just how much the arrival of their first child will change matters, nobody can be sure. He only managed to get two hours' sleep on Sunday night, and he may have to start getting used to that.

Between them Federer and Nadal have now won 17 of the last 18 slams, with only Djokovic breaking up the duopoly in the 2008 Australian Open. Andy Roddick came preciously close on Sunday and the rest, including Andy Murray, will take encouragement from this. But most eyes will now be fixed on Nadal in New York. Privately he let it be known, even before the French Open, that his main aim after winning the Australian Open was to capture the US Open title.

Tennis has been fortunate to have two such great players around at the same time, and it is to be hoped it stays that way for another couple of years at least. It might be harsh to suggest that to be truly deserving of the "greatest ever" title (and many remain on Rod Laver's side) then Federer needs to beat Nadal a few more times in slam finals, but it remains an intriguing basis for an argument.

carrie , 7/7/09 9:52 AM


The GOAT debate will be never ending bcause in truth, there really is NO GOAT!
To compare players of different eras is like comparing apples and oranges (pardon the cliche). Conditions then are very much different to conditions now.
The question that could possibly be settled among impartial tennis fans is whether Federer dominated and continues to dominate his era. Let us shift the debate to answering this question.

phoenix , 7/7/09 10:37 AM


Good point phoenix!

carrie , 7/7/09 10:57 AM


malteser1 , 7/7/09 12:07 PM


If we are looking at the argument in h2h aspect, there's no way we can decide. Roger never played Laver and Nadal never played Sampras.

To beat Nadal in Slams final, Nadal needs to be there in the 1st place and also Roger needs to be there. WHat if one of them loses before final?

Murray also has 6-2 h2h against Roger. Is he better than Federer? Not in my book.
Same for Nadal. The truth is this is only ONE flaw but like the article said, other numbers favour HEAVILY to Fed.

Nadal has so many flaws too. Losses to players outside top 10 in Slams is happening so much in the last 5 years. Losses to too many outside-top-10 players during reign as no.1.

And also Nadal hasnt manage to stay at no.1 even for a year. Only thing is he is young but his knees are older than Fed and Fed is not retiring soon.

torres9 , 7/7/09 12:11 PM


fed is the gr8est of his era, of course he is, there's no debate.However, having watched the match I'd say he won by never giving in and drawing on the reserves of a gr8 champion, he certainly was not as fluid, accurate and devastating on grass as he was 2004-07. I think we are now looking at changes in the tennis world and new faces at the very top and whether it's Rafa back injury free and rareing to go, or one of the others pushing to get there, well we'll just have to wait and see.

deuce , 7/7/09 12:18 PM


as a Fed fan,I don't claim that he's the GOAT,and I agree that there is no end to this discussion.it's hard to compare players of different eras.what I disagree about is that some say he's not the GOAT becasue Rafa 'owns' him in H2H...most of their matches have been on CLAY.it's not Roger's problem that rafa is 5 years younger than him and reached his peak later than roger,so he didn't make it to hardcourt finals between 2004-2007..that's my point.

cable...
I said I didn't like that jacket,and if Roger asked me(!) I would have told him not to wear it.but it's not as bad as some are trying to say.it was so small noone would notice if Sue Barker didn't mention it.btw,what he says about his achievements is way more important than what he 'wears'. he has been very modest about the GOAT discussion and breaking Pete's record.he said he feels they still share the record. and NO ONE is an innocent angel.

niloofar , 7/7/09 12:23 PM


niloofar: completely agree with you re Roger and Rafa. Rafa is coming in at the end of Roger's career and didn't peak when Roger did, not Roger's fault. Perhaps Roger should've retired last year, like Borg did?? No, of course he shouldn't and to me showed great courage to come bck and win USOpen, when too many people were writing him off. As for the jacket, I thought that was OK and only appeared AFTER he'd won, fine only stating the truth but that bag was horrible!! Bling! Not a good look. In fact the whole outfit was tacky and not befitting for the maestro

deuce , 7/7/09 1:25 PM


malteser1 , 7/7/09 3:12 PM


niloofar,

I don't have a problem with the 15 on his jacket, if you've got it flaunt it, why not. They have those emblems on their racquet bags and shoes etc., and there is nothing wrong with that.

I do have an issue with the military jacket. Being married to an RAF Officer, I know it was in the style of the mess kit, but Roger's was badly cut. It was too baggy, and the trousers also too baggy. The mess kit is a tight fitting suit, including the trousers along with the waist coat. Nike should have asked military tailors to make it for Roger, then he would have looked very smart.

I hope they come up with something more dapper when it's Rafa's turn - maybe dressed as a matador - how awesome would that be!

carrie , 7/7/09 3:58 PM


To those who must know the jacket was a surprise and a kind of a tribute from Nike to Roger,just like that ad.He didnt know about it till that man wearing a kilt handed it to him.
So there...

janhavi , 7/7/09 4:12 PM


janhavi: I didn't mind the jacket at all, see previous post, but didn't know this. Should be more widely known, cos on another site, not this one I don't think, people are criticising him for it. However, it seems people will take opportunity to jump on players they don't like, whatever the truth is..

deuce , 7/7/09 9:10 PM


Hey carrie - you made me smile! I would like to see Rafa dressed as a matador, too! I surely miss his piratas. I liked Roger's Wimby outfit this year - much better than the cardigan. No worries, fellow Fedfans! All this chatter about Roger's track jacket is falling on deaf ears. I wish I could get one!!

Rafterfan , 7/7/09 10:48 PM


"I hope they come up with something more dapper when it's Rafa's turn - maybe dressed as a matador..."

That would be AWESOME! :D

-Arvis

Arvis , 7/7/09 10:58 PM


fedfans...a really nice...article about both fed and roddick......actually a little different............ as the journo talks about mental strength, speed and no grunting (that's just for the women!).....with a comparison to football and golf.....enjoy.....sky and zoey especially......

Tennis: Old-fashioned virtues well worth preserving
Wednesday, July 08, 2009,

It was a typically lazy Sunday reaction, to switch on the television and see how the Wimbledon final was progressing.

From that, you may deduce that I am not a close follower of tennis and the first set had been played by the time I joined the action.

After that, the only reason to leave my chair in more than three hours was to make a pot of tea. The match, as everyone who watched it knows, was utterly compelling, played between two titans of the game.

It can be taken for granted that a Grand Slam final will feature skill, athleticism and the occasional stroke that more resembles a conjuring trick.

There was so much else to admire about Roger Federer and Andy Roddick. Their mental strength was astonishing. Of course they made or were forced into errors but always came back for more.

In the amazing fifth set, which looked likely to go on until floodlights were required, Roddick constantly served to stay in the match and kept doing it. His serve was not broken until the 77th game and that was enough to earn Federer a record 15th major title.

That must have been heartbreaking for the American, to be so close for more than four hours and to finish as the loser.

Roddick was dignified and graceful in defeat, Federer humble in victory. Those are old-fashioned virtues but worth preserving.

It is certainly better than the brat-pack days of McEnroe, Connors and Nastase, who were fine players but permanently at war with officials. The Hawkeye technology helps because it stills any arguments before they begin.

The level of fitness is intriguing because tennis players cannot be sure how long the match will last.

Footballers know the game lasts for 90 minutes, with the possibility of another 30 in Cup ties and golfers can estimate roughly how long it will take to play 18 holes, depending to an extent on conditions.

There is an unknown factor in cricket, because losing the toss can mean a long time in the field.

But tennis is a series of explosive movements and there is a good deal of ground to cover. They must have been drained physically and mentally.

The power of the serves demands instant reaction from the receiver. In my days at school, courts were available but I played only occasionally.

My serve was certainly an advantage ? to my opponents. On the rare occasions the ball landed in the right segment, no speed-gun would have registered it.
The friendly loop was dangerous only if the receiver stood too deep. If that happened, he was liable to meet it on the third bounce.

Federer and Roddick conferred another favour by demonstrating that it is possible to play intense, high-speed tennis without grunts reverberating after every stroke.
It would be a relief if some of the manly women players were to take the hint.

malteser1 , 7/8/09 11:34 AM


malteser, is that last paragraph from the journo still? Why target only the "manly women players"? Some of the more glamorous and beautiful women players are the ones who make the loudest grunts, eg. Sharapova.

cable , 7/8/09 1:56 PM


If one wants to be a 'purist' then probably the only sport where you can actually measure 'progress' is athlectics, because there one uses a purely quantitative measurment, viz., time, height or distance. You can 'measure' how much faster Bolt is in relation to say Lewis. Of course some would argue that equipment may have played a role: Bolt's running shoes were more aerodynamic than Lewis's. Or tracks were faster. But the point still remains that you can actually measure time, or height or distance. In other sports, it is not so straightforward. Which brings us to the debate about Federer. In terms of sheer numbers, he is clearly the greatest of all time. But the more diffuclt question is: is he the best of all time? That is such a subjective question that there will always be heated dispute. It is spurious to question his greatest status against his loss-win ratio to Nadal. In Sampras's case, for example, Sampras has a loss-win ratio against Richard Krajick. Would anyone seriously argue that because of that, Sampras was not the greatest player until surpassed by Federer? Anyone who has played tennis even half-seriously knows that even though you may 'dominate' your sport, it is often the case that there is one or other player who just happens to have your 'number', as it were. That player may not be as dominant overall as you are, but may have a winning record against you. Nadal is such a player when it comes to Federer. It may have to do with a psychological advantage or it may be because of different styles of play. This does not detract from Federer's overall dominance or from the fact that he has won more grand slams than anyone else in the history of the game. Federer can only take responsibility for Federer. If Nadal fails to make a final or cannot play a tournament because of injuries, how does this in any way 'diminish' Federer's achievemnts? If anything, it enhances it, given that we all know how formidable an opponent and athlete Nadal is! That Federer is so dominant, despite that fact that Nadal has a winning record against him, just proves what a great competitor Federer is. How many other players would rise above such a big challenge? It is not inconceivable that Nadal could surpass Federer in grand slam wins. That would make Nadal the greatest player ever. But would it make him the best? The answer to that question will always provoke a very subjective response.

rally6942 , 7/8/09 3:29 PM


cable...what i posted was ALL from the article...including the final paragraph...he didn't make reference to any of the men grunting...just the women....

Rally....your post was lush.....very interesting and I agree! (i would...wouldn't i?)....

fedfans.....read this....i found it quite funny......'specially the matrix and shirt button references'....what do you think the answer is?!

GLOBALIST
The Federer Mystery
ROGER COHEN
Published: July 8, 2009
NEW YORK ? After losing to Jimmy Connors in 16 consecutive matches and then doing the unthinkable by winning, Vitas Gerulaitis commented: ?And let that be a lesson to you all. Nobody beats Vitas Gerulaitis 17 times in a row!?

Tennis can be a crushing sport. Andy Roddick must have had Gerulaitis? sinking feeling many times in the course of his 19 defeats in 21 matches to Roger Federer. I watched several of those encounters and Roddick, hustling through his unvarying game, tugging at his sweat-soaked shirt, resembled a guy banging his head against a wall.

It was different in Sunday?s epic Wimbledon men?s final. A slimmer, smarter, more purposeful Roddick played the game of his life, holding serve 37 times in a row and reinventing his long vulnerable backhand as a down-the-line weapon of choice, before coming up short against the Federer machine. The case that Federer, 27, is not the greatest player of all time has become untenable.

It?s not merely Federer?s five U.S. Opens, three Australians, one French and six Wimbledons ? a record of 15 Grand Slam singles titles, one better now, as the world knows, than Pete Sampras. It?s not just his 21 consecutive Grand Slam semifinals. It?s not only his relentless consistency, uncanny timing, impossible angles, ferocious forehand, dinking deftness or big-point cool.

No, there?s something else at work here.

People develop Federer obsessions the way teenagers have crushes. They can?t get the guy out of their heads. The late novelist David Foster Wallace, a devotee, said of one Federer forehand against Andre Agassi that, ?It was impossible. It was like something out of ?The Matrix.??

I think that gets us close to the heart of the matter. Let me put this bluntly: Is Roger Federer part of a Matrix-like artificial reality or is he flesh and blood?

During the final, I couldn?t help focusing on three things. The first was the button on Federer?s Nike shirt. Through more than four hours of punishing tennis, sun-baked by British standards, it remained buttoned up. I mean, come on!

Think back to the upstart Andy Murray, the latest Brit who couldn?t quite, in his losing semifinal to Roddick. The Murray shirt was unbuttoned, of course, and somewhat disheveled, like his game on the day, and there was absolutely no question about the young man?s appurtenance to the human race, a rather surly branch of it at that.

The second was the absence from Federer?s face of even a bead of sweat as droplets poured from Roddick?s forehead and slid from the underside of his endlessly adjusted cap ? further evidence for The Matrix theory.

The third was the fact that Federer wore a belt ? a belt ? in his stylish shorts, as if he was ambling through a Calvin Klein ad rather than serving 50 nonchalant aces and putting on a record-breaking athletic display.

Perfection is always a little unworldly, the more so when it?s packaged in Switzerland, and of course perfection can be galling. I wanted Roddick to win because he may never play that well again while Federer will seldom play much less well. I wanted Roddick to win because he broke a sweat.

So is Federer real, or is he in fact the computer-simulated perfect tennis player, a science fiction hero, his body heat drawn invisibly into energy creation, switching from slice to topspin backhand on the basis of some nerd?s formula no opponent can grasp or grapple with for long?

I know, Federer broke down at the Australian Open after his five-set loss to Rafael Nadal in February, sobbing into the microphone and saying, ?God, it?s killing me.? A few weeks later, in Miami, he lost the plot entirely during an error-strewn semifinal loss to Novak Djokovic, smashing his racket as he often did during his tantrum-filled youth.

My colleague Christopher Clarey wrote then that it ?was like watching the owner of a health food store start fumbling through his desk drawer for a long-lost pack of cigarettes.?

Case closed, it seems. Federer, he of the warm smile and perfect love affair with Mirka Vavrinec, is indeed human. He rages, he cries, he gets sick, he has back aches and doubts, and occasionally he just can?t take it any more.

Unless, of course, all this is only further proof of the devious genius of Federer?s cyber-creators, who imbued him with a touch of human vulnerability in order to lull young upstarts like Murray and Djokovic and Nadal into thinking he was past his peak, and so open the way for the French and Wimbledon triumphs this year.

Perhaps I?m over-suspicious, or undergoing a severe case of obsessive envy, but when Vavrinec gives birth in the next few weeks, I?d say there?s a case for the Association of Tennis Professionals ordering a quick examination of what flows in the baby?s veins.

And then of course, as a last resort, we can ask the masterful, charming and irresistible Federer to take the red pill and reveal all to the human world.

sky and zoey...i'll catch you later guys......(zoey...come back girl!).....

C'MON!

malteser1 , 7/8/09 3:41 PM


Wow! WOW! WOW! What an AMAZING GOD of PHILOSOPHY! SUCH an INSIGHT! Such a P E R C E P T I O N! A THRILL to read! ROGER COHEN put into words BRILLIANTLY what I FEEL is the "ULTIMATE TRUTH" about our ROGER! LOL What a "FUN" read Malty! Thank you soo much! Mwah! Thank you for sharing this MASTERPIECE article with us mere humans! LOL :) Go ROGER go! May you live long and prosper MORE! FEDERITES UNITE! Where is "that" (our) zoey?! (hmm...) Zoey come out, come out wherever you are. :)

sky , 7/8/09 4:04 PM


Great article by Roger Cohen. I always wondered why Fed never have sweat in his face. Of course he has the headband but other players have too but you can see the sweat. And his movement is other-worldly it's almost cheating. It's like the movement i see when I play FIFA09 where the computer-generated player is like floating on air.

Maybe Federer is an alien...

torres9 , 7/8/09 4:41 PM


Hi sky...Hi torres.....TORRES! you say that you don't want fed to win the US open?! shame on you! I feel that this is roger's year and he will end the year No. 1! why not?! I think these are very interesting times for Mr. Federer.....who would have thought that a year after having been written off...(by most journos...) he won US Open 2008...made the OZ final 2009 and won French open and Wimby...it's just fan...dabby....dozey...man! now up to 15 slams......(did you see tomnjerry's results list above?...i mean bloody WOW guys....bloody WOW....now...what is there left for fed to achieve this year? More records? a US Open 2009? a 'calendar golden slam.....Oh My God! 6 US Opens.....who knows...but why not?

The thing that I find most interesting is that points table...not just between fed/nadal/murray...yeah..it could all change depending on the result of the US Open....should fed win...(go:roger:go!)....then no probs...he is there for the rest of the year....nadal got to the semis last year...so points to defend there....should rafa win...then just about back on top...then you have Murray.....he has points to defend after having made the final....and roger gotta defend his points too....so...it's close....but look at situation between roddick (no.6) and del potro...(no.5)....so close......and who knows...Novak may spring a surprise....?

again...it's really exciting times again......but just feel really happy that fed is where he should be! Redemption!

Barry cowan..sky sports presenter...gotta say...so two-faced....go onto youtube and hear what he gotta say about fed last year....I'll summarise it for you...'Fed will NEVER be No. 1 again...(this was less than 12 months ago)...and now...JUST BEFORE the wimby final....on BBC.....this is what he said....'without a shadow of a doubt Federer gonna win the wimby 2009...'...........obviously once the slam is won...the rankings take care of themselves..but i just cannot take the guy (cowan)...seriously any more...full of crap....back peddling so much he has fallen of his bike!

anyway......torres...as a fed fan....are you getting bored with fed winning everything which is why you want someone else to win? i feel that i would like roddick to win another slam...but would just like fed to round off the year with another slam...am i being greedy?

malteser1 , 7/8/09 9:07 PM


Malty, I am not getting bored winning, I just pity his rivals who give 150% and still fed ends up winning.

Here's a list of what happened to his rivals
1. Nadal- so paranoid of losing no.1 that he played too much tournament and ends up thrashing his knees.
2. Murray- so eager to beat Fed that he added speed and fitness but still can't win Wimby
3. Djoker - after going to a very high level in the early part of 2008, now seems to be burned out
4. Arod- Added speed and fitness like Murray and Nadal but lost the final so closely...

I really feel a little bit of pity for his rivals who have pushed themselves over their limitations and ends up injured and also failure. And Fed has reached 15 so he can just relax.

torres9 , 7/9/09 8:55 AM


it's all gravy torres......

i don't think fed is gonna relax tho'......when baby boy fed is here....gonna be an added incentive to him for baby to be at USO.....

C'MON!
Allez Federer!

malteser1 , 7/9/09 10:23 AM


carrie , 7/9/09 3:41 PM


That was a good article, carrie. You might be interested in this comment by a user by the name of "vero1984." It says:

"Oliver, people like you are what?s wrong with the world ? even with Federer?s momentous achievement, even though we witnessed history in the making, a man accomplishing a lifelong dream, you choose to focus on the most trivial of issues. Your pessimistic views show your total lack of respect, not mention understanding of what you witnessed Sunday. Instead of focusing on what?s truly important, you waste time and space by writing about a jacket as opposed to using said space to pay tribute to a champion for the ages. Two weeks of effort, two decades of training and a lifetime of hoping were condensed into that Sunday afternoon, and Federer made history. Wearing a jacket emblazoned with the number 15 is the last thing any true admirer of the sport would have taken away from that moment, but good on Roger for being proud enough to wear his achievement on his shirt for everyone to see."

But I suppose the reasonableness of this comment is lost on you?

-Arvis

Arvis , 7/9/09 5:43 PM


It is.

carrie , 7/9/09 5:56 PM


do you know what carrie...i was waiting for one of the fed haters to post that article....and it turned out to be you....what a crock of....cr*p that article is....you forget to mention one thing however...and i will come back and post it here for you...Firstly the article written by Oliver Holt...(i think)...is a renowned fedhater...he really is...he adores Andy Murray....he hates federer....you should have posted some of the comments to his article...in fact..you know what..i'll do that....it is a terrible article and honestly carrie it sums you up...it really does...to gloat and find happiness in an article that is so damning about Federer is so shallow....adds nothing....except hypocricy....i read it and i binned it because what would you do carrie if an author wrote something like that about rafa? you tell me? you would have read it....ignored it...binned it...we all know what you think of federer..why do you continue to gloat...? why does it make you happy to read such crap about a guy you care nothing for? it's just rubbish and adds nothing to the game of tennis...if you wanna talk about the clothes..why don't you join a fashion magazine? I think you will be better suited.....

malteser1 , 7/9/09 6:45 PM


to all fedfans...there are hundreds of comments on the Oliver Holt article that carrie has very kindly posted to fedfans as a show of her gratitude towards roger winning his 15th SLAM...in 6 years guys! Sick... I have posted three here.....so when you read it....IGNORE OLIVER HOLT...A renowned...awful journo...who is pro murray....

First poster.....

To be quite honest I am staggered at your remarks regarding Roger Federer?s dress sense. Without wishing to snipe too low I would suggest you look in the mirror occasionally.

As an avid Federer fan I don?t believe that the clothes have any bearing on his tennis ability & personally speaking I didn?t care for the jacket either, but the waistcoat, trousers, training jacket & other items of his ensemble were immaculate. Why do you assume with one hand that he is being big headed & then say he has become completely ?Nikefied?? Is it him you are sniping at or Nike?

With regard to the kilted gentleman that handed Roger the jacket (I actually met both Roger & the kilted serviceman at Wimbledon) if Nike deemed to have a Training Jacket ready for Roger if he won his 15th Major where is the problem? I love Andy Roddick?s game, but there has to be a loser, why does it make it any worse? Should they have handed Andy the cup & then given it to Roger just to make Andy feel better? I am sure he wouldn?t.

Then there is the BBC who immediately showed a ?Congratulations? video of many famous people congratulating Roger. Was that wrong as well?

Some of us are winners in life, some are losers ? I know whose side I would prefer to be on!

Hope20 wrote:
My goodness, what has his clothes got to do with winning. What was so funny about the jacket?
I'd like to know how long you've been covering tennis. Did you see the 1989 French Open final where Michael Chang brought out a prepared speech after winning the title? Afterwards they asked him why, he said he had prepared two speeches, one for winning, one for losing. In a final, there are two outcomes - a winner and a loser. Nike knew Roger would either win GS No 15 or he would not. They prepared for his win with the No 15 jacket and he wore it. If he had lost, he would not have worn it. Surely that is obvious.
Nadal wears 4RG, 1W, 1AO on his shoes. Do you see anything arrogant in that. I bet you do not.
What is it about journalists that they write such negative articles thinking it would give them a wider readership. It doesn't. It makes people question your knowledge of what you are writing about.
Visit Roger Federer facebook page, you'll see his growing legion of fans of over 2 million. Visit his website you will see he has almost 260,000 fans and growing.
No, sir, you make a mistake. Roger Federer is not arrogant or 'crassly vain' in the eyes of the world, he has not become over bloated and self important in the eyes of his fans. He is voted the fan favourite every year and the most popular player by his fellow pros.
I'd like to know, what are you trying to say here.
I tell you writing to fill up your page does NOT make good reading.

JoJo2009 wrote:
In agreement with the other comments here I have to take exception to this article and all the other rubbish being churned out about the 15 on the jacket and the great man's dress sense in general. Why shouldn't he go on court prepared for the eventuality of making tennis history - it may well have been an incentive in a match where he may not have played his best (with a weight of history like that who would) but dug in to the bitter end. And, frankly, if Roddick had outplayed him as you suggest then Roddick would have won! Federer has shown an 'interesting' fashion sense at Wimbleodn for a few years now (as 6 times Champion I reckon he can wander on in a gold and white grass skirt if he feels like it) and it's part of what I love about him, a little hint of flamboyance which he can show when he's not actually playing. And he wears clothes well that might look ridiculous on others. Good. Do we want all players to look the same? And as for the '15' - it was pretty subtle and good point about Nadal's shoes Hope20. I have never heard Federer be less than gracious about anything to be honest - he may have been somewhat shell shocked on this occasion. I have no doubt he felt Roddick's pain (we all did) what do you want him to do - apologise for winning? I always feel Federer has an childlike, innocent delight in his own success, as if it amazes him too. For me, coupled with his glorious tennis, this is what makes him my all time great!

you know what fedfans...i could go on...but i know that it will bore silly both fft and carrie....after all...i am hugely surprised that carrie has even put 'federer' into her search engine....i would have thought her laptop would have self-destructed or she would have eaten herself in the process! well....we live in hope.....

C'MON!

Allez Federer!

malteser1 , 7/9/09 6:58 PM


Malt, I already pretty much covered this, sorry. :)

Carrie knows she's being petty, but you've got to kind of give her a little space and not spend so much time arguing with her. She's bitter and upset because her player is out of commission for the time being. It's best to let the grieving grieve sometimes and not hold it against them.

When Nadal comes back, he may very well start beating Federer again, and we'll have to deal with it when it happens. And it'll suck. But he might not, and Nadal's fans will have to deal with it and it'll suck for them. But the arguing isn't making any of this happen any faster, and it only makes it all suck MORE when the proverbial feces hits the metaphorical fan.

Short version: let's all chill a bit, shall we? :)

-Arvis

Arvis , 7/9/09 7:28 PM


Arvis...thanks honey..but honestly i am chill....

i laugh a lot of the time at carrie...so perhaps you could have a word with her.....? it's just a bit childish that she even wants to do this.....trust me...am chill...don't worry about me buddy....it's all gravy.....xx

Arvis...did you hear about fed? He won 15 slams! Oh My God! Goooooooooo Roger!

malteser1 , 7/9/09 7:59 PM


I wouldn't believe a word of malt's posts because she has proven that she changes people's words to fit her needs and then tries to pass them off as real quotes. So anything coming from her 2-bit liar mouth is suspect. Also is funny, is that as everyone knows, malt has NOOOOO problem talking about anything and everything (put her posts all together and you'd have a book longer than "War And Peace")
YET she refuses to answer why she lied about quoting me. Instead she changes the subject or buries it behind her long rambling posts. So until she fesses up to lying when supposedly quoting me, any stat or quote from her is quite likely a lie to fit her needs.

fan4tennis , 7/10/09 5:35 AM


"I have no doubt he felt Roddick's pain (we all did) what do you want him to do - apologise for winning?"

You mean like Rafa did as he consoled fed at the AO while fed was crying? How Rafa empathized with fed in that ceremony showed the ultimate gracious winner.

fan4tennis , 7/10/09 6:05 AM


Haha... Rafans always talks about the same thing over and over again... AO triumph. H2H... We Fed fans talk about a lot of things but Rafans is the same thing over and over again...

21 SF in a row
15 GS
No.1 238 weeks and counting

Just the best...

torres9 , 7/10/09 6:30 AM


carrie...I can't believe u posted that article,from a tabloid,u who talked about respect.

fan4tennis:
yes Rafa looked truely sad for Roger but Roger had cried,he had sobbed...did Rafa not celebrate last year in wimbledon just because Roger had a tough loss??
roger kept his celebration very quiet and didn't keep Andy waiting for him by the net. and here are his actual words:
"Andy played an unbelievable tournament and don't be too sad, I went through some rough ones as well, one on this court last year, and I came back and won," Federer, who returns to the number one ranking, said.

Roddick quipped that Federer had already won five Wimbledon titles when he lost to Nadal but Federer added: "I won five but still it hurts, so you're going to come back and win it, I hope so.

"You're an unbelievable guy and you played unbelievable today. Unfortunately there has to be a winner and today I was on the LUCKY side

what else should he have done,didn't smile? did Rafa do that in last year's Wimbledon or this year before Roger cried?the winner has the right to celebarte but he should respect the oponent as well.
even the US media mentioned how subdued Roger's celebration was.

niloofar , 7/10/09 11:23 AM


btw,Andy Roddick is the one who has said nice things about Roger's character many times in the past.
like:"I'd love to hate u,but you're too nice"

niloofar , 7/10/09 11:34 AM


Is there now a ban on posting tabloid articles?

carrie , 7/10/09 11:44 AM


niloofar and the rest of the fedfans...you are all intelligent guys....but remember that carrie and fft are on here for no other reason than to cause us grief....fft once again resorting to calling me a liar...she has been warned by TT and is on very...very dodgy ground right now...she knows it...i know it.....AGF....you know you and i have had our differences but they were sorted out a while ago now...so peace to you my man....having said that...try to be objective here....we fedfans have put up with enough from both carrie and fft...far too much..there is only so much a fedfan can take without the right to reply......so agf...have a word with your own and dont slate the fedfans for celebrating the return of the fed....these are happy times right now....and who knows how long that will last....no one....everything from now on for fed is a huge...huge bonus...he doesn't have to prove himself to anyone.....

if all carrie and fft can do in their boredom is come on here and fft call me a liar? D'oh! huh? because she feeds off me and needs me to retaliate..well then that's just sad....and as all carrie can do is stalk the journos who write about fed's bling rather than his swing...well that just shows she knows nothing......

so niloofar....as you have said to me in the past....try not to retaliate (i know its hard...but your advice really does fall on deaf ears with them...remember they feed off your retaliation...they need US to retaliate..it keeps them going...)...

tomnjerry and torres are right.....and recordbreaks..you cannot change them....they will always hate fed because he is better than rafa...certainly this year for sure.....but they cannot call themselves true fans as true fans are loyal to their man...and also have that sporting streak....they do NOT have the streak....way off target....

Enjoy the POSITIVE PRESS about Fed...niloofar..there is plenty out there.....

C'MON!

malteser1 , 7/10/09 11:50 AM


carrie...
I didn't say there is a ban,but I was surprised that u did so,because it was sth u yourself don't believe in.as u said before that u don't have a problem with the jacket.
overall there is no need to post trashing articles from a person who is not more legitimate than we are. there are some trashing articles about Rafa out there but I don't think I have to believe them becasue I'm a fed fan!!

niloofar , 7/10/09 12:28 PM


I hope my last sentence doesn't cause misunderstanding,I meant just because I like Fed doesn't mean I have to be against Rafa or believe negative things about him...
2nd language problems..:)

niloofar , 7/10/09 12:38 PM


I post anything that I feel is of interest to all posters, I have even posted articles about Roger that are complimentary, and I've even been thanked for doing it by some of his diehard fans. I live in England, so I have access to articles that overseas posters may not see, and I would welcome anything from overseas as well.

There is nothing wrong with posting controvertial articles, it gets the forum going, whoever it's about. You will notice that I simply posted the article, I did not comment on it, but certain people are blaming me for the content. Whilst I said there is nothing wrong with Roger flaunting his achievements, they all have their various ways of doing it, I still believe that he is arrogant and that he is ungracious in defeat. If he has any conscience, he would now feel really ashamed of the way he ruined Rafa's celebration of his 1st GS title on h/c, now that he's got his 15 GS, and 6th Wimbledon title and the rest. He somehow begrudges any other player anything at all, even though he has been so successful, that I think is SELFISH.

By all means post whatever about Rafa, I can take it, it wouldn't diminish my admiration for or opinion of him. I would respond in his defence, but I would not insult or damn anyone for not seeing what I see in Rafa as a tennis player. Roger happens to be someone whose game doesn't appeal to me, it's my right, I live in a free country, and I am not going to be bullied into not expressing my opinion.


carrie , 7/10/09 12:55 PM


If my memory serves me correctly, Andy had a commercial (for American Express, I think) where he was carrying the USO trophy home buckled in the seat next to him (before he LOST). This, too, was done 'ahead of time'. This is just the way it is currently in sports. The sponsors prepare for the celebration ahead of time. What in the he#% is wrong with that? When there is a Super Bowl winner, they all have their celebration hats and RINGS. Same thing with World Series, and (not being a soccer officianado) World Cup, I would assume. Just because tennis is an individual sport, doesn't mean Roger can't have his celebration for a monumental feat. That old commercial that said, "Don't hate me because I'm beautiful" could translate here: "Don't hate Roger because he's the best freaking player in the history of tennis!"

Rafterfan , 7/10/09 3:02 PM


carrie..
I didn't blame u for anything I just said I'm surprised.
about that nightmare in AO ceremony,Roger said on court:"I don't want to ruin everything,this guy really deserves it" so he knew what he had done. in his post match interview I accept that he was not complimentory the way he should have been.but there has been MANY more occasions whichhe's been very complimentory to opponents and most of all Rafa.he also compensated for Austrailia by calling Rafa's performance there 'phenomenal'many times afterward...and he's been very modest about the GOAT discussion and regaining the no.1 spot.
look after AO I was so overwhelmed with Roger's anguish I didn't even realise what Rafans were mad about,after a while I perfectly understood them and realised they were 100% correct.now Rafans should also get over it,and understand that what that loss meant to Roger.most ppl lost hope in him,even himself maybe for a while.
I think that's the main reason most Rafans hate roger.

niloofar , 7/10/09 4:40 PM


malt: "fft once again resorting to calling me a liar...she has been warned by TT and is on very...very dodgy ground right now...she knows it...i know it"

I responded on the other thread when you said that also so here is my answer in case you missed it:

malt, I called you a liar BECAUSE YOU LIED!!!! Very simple! You changed my words on a post to make me look bad and THEN claimed what you wrote as "quote unquote". You have had more than enough time to justify why you did it, seeing as I asked you in several posts. Your silence and refusal speaks volumes!!!!
Here is the post:

malt: "I am NOT a liar fft"
You stated: "..i also asked you what you thought of certain people on this thread calling me MALTOSSER....your response was
quote...
'How the hell should I know....go and ask them!' unquote..."

**Here is the proof that you change things to fit your needs. This was the ACTUAL conversation that you took liberties in changing and claimed as quotes of mine:

"fft..as a matter of interest...what do you think about homos,danny,carrie, posmatrac calling me MALTOSSER? "
malteser1
, 7/4/09 10:05 PM

"Why don't YOU ask them? And you can answer why you called them danielle, posey boy and of course, what you called homos, to name a few. I don't recall you making a play on words of carrie, you just filled up posts with insult-filled tirades against her."
fan4tennis
, 7/4/09 10:09 PM

As far as the warnings, sorry to disappoint you malt, but I have received ZERO!!!!!!! On the other hand, I have saved the emails where the admins AND mods all state you received a warning letter, then they all wrote again (after you kept calling homos that name) saying that you received ANOTHER warning letter. (Have noticed you stopped calling him that all of the sudden...wonder why???) Not surprising your buddy zoey got banned after all her "F" bombs and cursing she did shoving fed's win into Rafa fans faces. I can't even quote her taunts at us because of the disgusting words she used.

fan4tennis , 7/10/09 6:28 PM


Whoa, wait, Zoey got banned!? Ha ha, that's awesome! She totally deserved it! :D

Hope it wasn't a permaban, though, as it was really out of character for her and she probably regrets it.

-Arvis

Arvis , 7/10/09 6:42 PM


James Bucci

SF Sports Examiner

Find out more about James:

James is a regular high school sports correspondent for the Contra Costa Times and the Oakland Tribune. A Bay Area native, he's a lifelong Giants fan and avid observer of the local sports scene.


Federer must solve Nadal to be the greatest
July 10, 9:12 AM


Now that the curtain has dropped to close another fortnight at the All England Club and the hyperbole thrust upon Roger Federer as the greatest tennis player of all-time has died down, it's time to objectively consider this claim.

Let's start the discussion on the clay courts of Roland Garros where Federer won his first French Open title, a championship that closed up the obvious gap on his resume. The title, won over Robin Soderling, gave Federer victories at all four major championships and completed his career Grand Slam.

Missing Rafael Nadal, who went out to Soderling, the championship match felt like a routine coronation for a king without a challenge.

Soderling had already had his French Open moment by ousting the defending champion Nadal, while Federer received a scare from Tommy Haas and a bit of a test from Juan Martin del Potro, but wasn't thoroughly challenged. He wasn't pushed the way Nadal would have muscled him around the court if they'd met in the final.

But, there's something to be said for winning when everyone expects you to win. And once Nadal exited the tournament, the spotlight fell upon Federer, as did the pressure. And Federer, as well as every spectator, knew the championship was his to lose and possibly his best shot.

We turn to Wimbledon, just a few weeks after the French, and the Spaniard?s tender knees nixed the hope for another dual between Federer and Nadal. Nadal is forced to pull-out before the tournament started, which removed Federer's most imposing roadblock before play even began.

After Federer's French Open win, the endorsements for him as the greatest started as a hum, but once he beat Andy Roddick to win Wimbledon for his record 15th Grand Slam title, those calls turned into roars.

History only remembers what you did and not whom you did it against. Roddick gave his best performance against Federer, a man who held an 18-2 record over him, but he's no Nadal. It's hard to image Nadal missing the volley that Roddick did during the second set tiebreaker, which would have given him the first two sets of the match.

Fortunately, we don't have to settle the discussion right now because this rivalry has miles to go before it's done. At 27, Federer has several solid years left, while Nadal is still in the infancy of his career.

To be called the greatest, Federer must solve Nadal. He's 7-13 against Nadal and has lost the last three times they've met in a Grand Slam final.

Nadal is the only one who has broken Federer and cracked his usually calm and ultra-smooth demeanor. After his loss to Nadal at the 2009 Australian Open, Federer broke down in tears.

If Federer thinks he can saunter off into the tennis sunset as the greatest, he's wrong. He still has work to do. How can one be considerer the greatest of all-time if they aren't the best of their era?

Federer must solve Nadal. He must silence the doubters, those who whispered their concerns, while everybody else cheered with wild abandon.



carrie , 7/10/09 7:34 PM


Fed solved him 7 times. This article is irrelevant.

torres9 , 7/10/09 7:47 PM


Nadal solved him 13 times. Just because an article does not say what you want it to say does not make it irrelevant.

fan4tennis , 7/10/09 8:00 PM


"James Bucci, SF Sports Examiner
Find out more about James:
James is a regular high school sports correspondent for the Contra Costa Times and the Oakland Tribune. A Bay Area native, he's a lifelong Giants fan and avid observer of the local sports scene."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I don't think a high school correspondent is qualified to sway MY opinion. He's entitled to his own, and undoubtedly some Rafans will agree.

FFT, Roger solved Rafa last, so we shall see what the future holds. I for one cannot wait!

About zoey - I hope it's not a permaban either. She was enthusiastic (ok, that's an understatement for THAT day--she was in the ozone then, but normally she's perfectly fine), so come on, TT, please let zoey come back!



Rafterfan , 7/10/09 8:14 PM


How could you say Roger solved Rafa when he got the formula wrong 13 out of 20 times.

carrie , 7/10/09 8:17 PM


Nope.... He solved it more than anyone. And also 2 times on clay where the maths problem become more complicated. Rafa never solved USOpen problem so he is not as great as Fed yet.

torres9 , 7/10/09 8:25 PM


Rafa beat fed in GS finals on HC, clay AND grass!!! fed can only claim that he beat Rafa in GS finals on grass.

fan4tennis , 7/10/09 8:35 PM


Fed solved WImby 6 times > Rafa solved 1 time
Fed solved USOpen 5 times > Rafa solved 0 time
Fed solved OzOpen 3 times > Rafa solved 1 time

And also let's not forget Fed's straight sets win over Rafa in year-ending Tennis Masters Cup which many consider as the '5th Slam'.

torres9 , 7/10/09 8:50 PM


We were talking Rafa vs Roger H2H. Quit digressing and changing the subject. You are always so hung up on stats, numbers and numerology. You can't ignore or dismiss as irrelevant stats that are not favorable to fed. Since you love GS stats, how do you explain the Rafa-Rog H2H in GS as 6-2 in favor of Rafa?

fan4tennis , 7/10/09 9:03 PM


torres, I notice you "conveniently" forgot to say in your post:
"Rafa solved FrenchOpen 4 times > fed solved 1 time"

Another instance of you ignoring and dismissing any stat that is not favorable to fed as if you ignore it long enough, it will cease to exist--lol.
BTW, the GS Rafa-Rog H2H might be only 5-2 instead of 6-2 as I stated. But it proves that whenever Roger DOES face Rafa in a GS final, Rafa is the winner the majority of times.

fan4tennis , 7/10/09 9:14 PM


4 of those 6 are on clay, FFT.

We'll see if Roger can improve the H2H in the future. The problem is, Nadal has to actually MAKE it to a grand slam final, which likely won't be happening in New York.

-Arvis

Arvis , 7/10/09 9:14 PM


If we go according to torres's reasoning, then Simon is better that Federer, because he has a 2:0 lead over Federer.

carrie , 7/10/09 9:18 PM


I already talked about H2H for ages and already pointed out so much that you Rafans can't even focus on and you guys still bring up this lame statistics... Even if I left out Rafa's FO count. Fed still has more than overall.

Another instance of you ignoring and dismissing any stat that is not favorable to Rafa, lol

torres9 , 7/10/09 9:20 PM


fft..just get the hell off my back..you are completely and utterly psychotic...you need me to feed your habit of dissing fed time and time again....that's very strange fft because I have saved your posts and i'll do so again....you are an inflammatory poster and you use me as your target.....you have been reported to TT...along with homos...pos...carrie....and danny as well as gordana....

you are a very accomplished twister of words fft...you know it...i know it...you can post all you like about what you think i have said/not said...add a bit here and there...to please your posters.....put a different take on what i meant...that is your prerogative...i don't like you...trust you...or rate you in terms of what you say...i care nothing for you...many times i have asked you questions and you have repeatedly refused to answer them...i haven't got the time or the inclination to keep dragging this up time and time again...fedfans must be getting bored to tears...i also notice fft that you have STOPPED calling me names....I wonder why? A warning perhaps...me thinks you protest too much.....so try not to come across as the angel here...you are not and you know it....i

absolutely 100% couldn't give a frig about what you think of me...you are a zero to me....you simply cannot grow up and be grown up about federer in any way shape or form...you are a sad...sad...woman...lonely...with nothing better to do than bully other people into your way of thinking...Let's see now...despite the requests that i have made...if you post me yet again...DON'T.....i have to really try very hard not to rise to the bait that you throw at me...and it's difficult...because i realise that you need me more than i need you....so really do me the HUGE favour and get lost....really...the other fedfans am sure will fight their own corner.....and come back at you....in good and ready fashion.....

one day you will get tired of your own voice and your own mind and choose to pick on people who rise to your bait...and you grow to become even more sad and even more lonely..your choice.....

Fed is 5:4 h2h with nadal on grass and hard courts......go check the stats.

torres...don't even worry about arguing with the woman...she just doesn't understand....many times you have said to me to ignore the woman...don't rise to the bait....she is deranged.....ewwwwww...

zoey will be back am sure....just taking a break....there isn't really much going on right now..am sure she will be back for the US Open....

Zoey...if you are reading this...the fedfans love you and support you and respect you.....you played a major part in the discussions regarding federer at wimby and before...so whatever fft tries to throw at you....forget her...and all the best to you honey...mwah! xxx

malteser1 , 7/10/09 9:22 PM


Yup.... They all never get tired bringing up this ONE statistics.

5 reason why Fed is better than Nadal

1) 15 GS >6GS
2) 21 SF in a row
3) No.1 for 238 weeks and yes, Nadal was NO.2 to Fed for 3 good years
4) 4 Masters Cup > 0 Masters Cup
5) Beat nadal 2 times on clay(favourite Nadal's surface) > Nadal beat Fed only 1 time on grass(Fed's favourite surface)

And carrie, my reasoning is based on GS count and weeks at no.1 not H2H. IS is your reasoning to look at H2H

torres9 , 7/10/09 9:28 PM


Arvis wrote:
"4 of those 6 are on clay, FFT.

We'll see if Roger can improve the H2H in the future. The problem is, Nadal has to actually MAKE it to a grand slam final, which likely won't be happening in New York."

It's not Rafa's problem that fed could not beat Rafa on clay, a surface fed grew up on. What difference does it make that the surface was clay?? FO is still a GS! It was so important for roger to win on clay to get the career slam, but Rafa's wins in GS on clay against fed mean nothing because it was on clay?

As far as the second part of your post, I repeat, that when Rafa DOES face Roger in a GS final, he has won all but 2 encounters. Rafa has beaten fed in GS finals on HC, clay AND grass. As far as the USO, Rafa will be healed and healthy and raring to go, as he has stated his goal is to win the USO. Many people dismissed Rafa's chances to win at the AO on hardcourt and we all know what happened there. I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss him for the USO.

fan4tennis , 7/10/09 9:32 PM


To me, Nadal winning the USO is about as likely as Andy Roddick winning the French. But neither of those things is impossible. If Nadal is healthy, he could nab the USO this year, even! We know he can win on hardcourts.

But the point I was trying to make is that, this year Federer hasn't had much of a chance to improve his Slam record against Nadal. Nadal destroyed his own body to win the Australian, and it seems to have caught up with him (I will never believe that he was playing "injured" at the French). If he tries to do the same thing for the US Open, he'll end up having to retire from tennis before Federer does.

Either way, I don't care, as long as Nadal comes back. Wimbledon felt a little odd without him around.

-Arvis

Arvis , 7/10/09 9:44 PM


"You can't ignore or dismiss as irrelevant stats that are not favorable to fed. Since you love GS stats, how do you explain the Rafa-Rog H2H in GS as 5-2 in favor of Rafa?"

You never explained. You just trotted out other stats that ARE favorable to fed and ignore those that aren't.

malt: LMAO!!!!! Your ravings are hilarious!!! Count on you to provide another insult filled tirade and you always deliver--lol! Just proves my point!

fan4tennis , 7/10/09 9:44 PM


Arvis: "Nadal destroyed his own body to win the Australian, and it seems to have caught up with him (I will never believe that he was playing "injured" at the French)."

How can you say in ONE sentence that he destroyed his body and it caught up with him, yet say you don't believe he was injured at the FO?

fan4tennis , 7/10/09 9:49 PM


Nope f4t, I already explained it is 11 of 20 on clay and if it's 11 out of 20 on grass, fed would have a bigger margin than Nadal. Please read my other posts.

torres9 , 7/10/09 10:02 PM


We are talking FACTS torres, not if's and's or but's!! Fact is that Rafa has a better H2H total (13-7) against Roger and a better GS H2H (5-2) against Roger. There are no IF'S in those statistics.

fan4tennis , 7/10/09 10:05 PM


FACTS:

5 reason why Fed is better than Nadal

1) 15 GS >6GS
2) 21 SF in a row
3) No.1 for 238 weeks and yes, Nadal was NO.2 to Fed for 3 good years
4) 4 Masters Cup > 0 Masters Cup
5) Beat nadal 2 times on clay(favourite Nadal's surface) > Nadal beat Fed only 1 time on grass(Fed's favourite surface)

torres9 , 7/10/09 10:09 PM


We are talking FACTS torres, not if's and's or but's!! Fact is that Rafa has a better H2H total (13-7) against Roger and a better GS H2H (5-2) against Roger. There are no IF'S in those statistics.
Rafa has beaten fed in GS finals on HC, clay AND grass. Fed has only beaten Rafa in a GS on grass.

fan4tennis , 7/10/09 10:18 PM


quote:...malt: LMAO!!!!! Your ravings are hilarious!!! Count on you to provide another insult filled tirade and you always deliver--lol! Just proves my point!...unquote.....

you are the one raving fft...go take a chill pill honey....

you just keep going ON and ON and ON and ON..you are just BORING me now fft....you have nothing to say...Arvis says something and you jump down her throat...you just cannot help yourself...bye fft...why dont you give us all a break? if you stopped your constant rantings about how much you hate fed...and what he wears and actually start commenting on what a great tennis player it is....you might even turn a corner......

FEDFANS...some interesting comments about the new rankings.....how close no.1....no.2....no.3...and now roddick back in the mix.....this should promote a lot of healthy discussion......

Nadal has 790 more points to defend than Roger does by the end of the U.S. Open. If Roger loses early or skips Canada, Cincy and the U.S. Open, Nadal may still stay in the #2 spot. If Murray or Djoko wins the U.S. Open, Nadal may slip to #3. It is a fast moving sport on or off the court!
And if I?m doing my math right, Murray could grab the #2 spot/seed before the US Open. Nadal?s lead on Murray entering the hard court season will be down to 1035 points, once Murray drops his 0-pointer from 2008 Indy. Murray defends 800 fewer points than Nadal this summer, so he?ll be #2 if he outperforms Nadal by 240 points over the next 6 weeks.

Also of note: Looking at the year to date ATP ?Race? numbers (unofficial of course, since the ATP no longer publishes them), Federer leads Nadal by 655 points. But Roddick is back in the conversation - he trails #3 Murray by 850 points, and #4 Djokovic by 490 points. And he?s played fewer events than both, which could factor into things later in the season.

Even though Roddick pushed Federer to the limit, the quality of tennis against Nadal is at a completely different level. Hopefully Nadal will be in good form soon, so that Federer can improve his record against him, and then be the undisputed GOAT.

As for Federer and Nadals rivalry, I hope Nadal recovers soon. They both are very important to each other and for the game of tennis. Murray does not deserve #2. He hasn?t proved anything yet. He will not win a GS unless he changes his passive, ?wait for point to develop? game. I?m sure he knows it, maybe he is working on it, or maybe not!


so fedfans....interesting stuff re: the points......i wonder whether nalbandian will be back....always liked his style of play...as well as baghdatis of course.......

malteser1 , 7/10/09 10:19 PM


torres..i don't know whether it was you...or sky...but here is latest on nalby..for some rason i thought he might just about recover for USO....but doesn't look that way....WOW...a hip operation...at the age of 27......come back soon.....!

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina -- David Nalbandian has begun to recover from recent hip surgery with the goal of returning to top-level tennis.

The 15th-ranked Argentine had surgery on his right hip two weeks ago in Barcelona, Spain, and is recovering in his hometown of Unquillo, which is northwest of Buenos Aires.

"We'll see how it goes," Nalbandian said at a news conference on Friday. "It's a new injury and they all do not evolve in the same way. We'll see how it works out with time."

He will be sidelined for fourth months, leaving him out of Wimbledon, the U.S. Open and Argentina's Davis Cup quarter-final at the Czech Republic in July.

Nalbandian was a Wimbledon finalist in 2002 and reached the French Open semifinals in 2004 and 2006. He said his goals had not changed.

"They are the same as always," he said. "Try to win the Davis Cup and also the Grand Slam tournaments."


malteser1 , 7/10/09 10:56 PM


Hey, F4T, how long did Nadal hold on to the #1 ranking after he go it?

And how long Federer hold on to it?

The answers to those two simple questions should tell you a lot about the respective greatness of these two players.

-Arvis

Arvis , 7/10/09 11:01 PM


46 weeks vs 238 weeks. I never said I disputed that. But the habit of some fed fans to ignore stats that aren't favorable to fed is delusional at the least. Here and in the other thread are perfect examples of fedfans trying to explain away Rafa's positive H2H total against Roger and Rafa's positive GS H2H total against Roger as if they don't really exist.

fan4tennis , 7/10/09 11:13 PM


BTW: Nalby had his hip surgery almost 2 months ago. There was even an article on TT about it.

fan4tennis , 7/10/09 11:19 PM


Arvis...have ALWAYS enjoyed reading your posts....but you should have learnt by now that to post anything remotely true to her is futile......leave it...no point....we all know what the truth is...enough said......

for those of you who also support Marcos Baghdatis.........the latest...sorry to post here...but.....looks as if he will be okay for USO but not Nalby....

Marcos Hopeful For Davis Cup
Marcos is hopeful of being able to represent Cyprus in its Davis Cup clash with Ireland from 10-12 July, despite suffering stretched ligaments in the fall he had at the Ordina Open last week.
Marcos was midway through the first set of his second-round match with Raemon Sluiter when he slipped and injured his left knee.

As a result of the injury, Marcos will need to rest for 2-3 weeks ? meaning he will not be able to take his place in the draw at the The Championships at Wimbledon this week.

malteser1 , 7/10/09 11:26 PM


I'm just wondering if the TITLE of this article fits FEDERER? Can we call him the NEW tennis KING? He's a KING, right, but NOT NEW. HE was a DETHRONED king, who came back to take his kingdom when the REIGNING KING is not around to defend it!

SO next year, WE HAVE 2 (TWO) kings defending only ONE crown!
Am I adding it correctly?......gd nite ALL!

agf25agf , 7/10/09 11:46 PM


Haha... f4t, If I ignored the h2h statistics, why do I reply to it. Like I said, most of it is on clay. You mean Guga can't own Sampras on clay? Sure he can. What is Sampras meets Guga 11 times on clay and then meet Guga 9 times in other surfaces. It will probably be the same h2h like Fed-Nadal.

torres9 , 7/10/09 11:52 PM


IF you want to COMPARE ROGER and RAFA fair and square.....GO BACK To the time when FEDERER was 23 and put his STATS side by side with that of NADAL.......O*R*........ wait 'till Rafa become 27 and compare his RECORDS with that of Roger at 27!.........EASY!!!!

agf25agf , 7/10/09 11:56 PM


well, if you compare boris becker and Fed at 23, of course Boris Becker is better, but who ended up being the greater player? ... EASY!!!

torres9 , 7/11/09 12:04 AM


wait 'till Rafa become 27 and compare his RECORDS with that of Roger at 27

If you notice here agf, it's f4t and carrie who started all this comparisons. For me, I still believe Fed is the best but they have a problem with that so they bring this H2H thing up for the 1000th time so you see that I am not the one who started the comparisons.

For me, Rafa has every chance to be better than Fed but NOT YET. Fed still the better player and this guys have failed to provide me anything else other than h2h.

FED IS THE BEST!

torres9 , 7/11/09 12:09 AM


torres---So you got the point there when you compared becker and fed...you can't judge them according to those stats 'till they're OVER! For you FeD is the better player but we think OTHERWISE....so that's IT!.....It's CRYSTAL clear that we'll not meet eye to eye EVER!

RAFA is the BEST!

agf25agf , 7/11/09 12:46 AM


it's been a while, but some things never change!

torres9, re-read your comments and i guarantee, you will start vomiting like some of us! if "ignorance" could be packaged and sold, you would be one of the richest people in the world.

you are still harping on this outdated crap about federer and nadal! everybody knows that if roger had met nadal in the finals of the french and wimbledon, his chances of winning were slim to none! why you think the roland garros crowd went to great lengths to support soderling over nadal, who i don't deny is good player, but is nowhere near the champion nadal is and furthermore, three-fourth of the crowd, probably did'nt know who soderling was, but they.were focused on the bigger picture of doing whatever they could do to ensure that nadal was defeated, so that federer would have the chance to win. if you noticed, soderling played the match of his life against nadal, but interestingly enough, when he got to the final vs. federer, he had forgotten how to serve the big bombs that he served against nadal; he had forgotten to take advantage of the weaknesses of an opponent if you want to win! not only that, but nadal wasn't treated fair at all, no wonder he was lost; one of his matches was squeezed in on suzanne lenglen late in the afternoon and i read that he asked to play earlier and was turned down; remember now, he was the #1 seed and 4-times champion. do you think in your wildest dreams that if federer had asked to play a match earlier, he would have been turned down. NOT IN THIS LIFETIME! i even heard that the balls were changed, disadvantage rafa, among other things!

so, do you guys come up with all of this psycho-noise all by yourself or does an unknown presence guides you. I'm curious! you couldn't possibly believe everything you write!

torres9, you fear what nadal is able to do, particularly, to federer so much so until you can't construct a sentence without using rafa's name in some kind of belittling way, but what you fail to realize is that you are the one , who looks "very small" because you can only defend your point of view by getting repeating stuff about nadal that you got from the sewer. your words are empty and lacking substance. However, on the other hand, in a weird way, your comments are a compliment to nadal's greatness and to how terrified you are of what he is going to accomplish upon his return/future. it's frightening isn't it to not know what great men are going to do from one moment to the next. you will never destroy nadal and what he stands for, because everytime a great man falls, he rises that much more stronger!

this is all just a figment of your imagination. if you are going to continue this utterly boring discussion about rafa and how good-for-nothing he is, why don't you approach from a different angle, because honestly, you have milked this imaginary story of yours, dry! please, come up with something new! don't be so easy to read!

memi , 7/11/09 12:50 AM


Hi memi! welcome back!!!!

agf25agf , 7/11/09 12:57 AM


very kind of you, agf25agf, thanks!

memi , 7/11/09 1:28 AM


memi, i doubt u read the posts correctly because it was not me who posts negative Fed articles on a FED thread. I doubt Rafa can win in Wimby if he meets Fed again. Fed has nothing to lose.

All this talk about FO not fair to rafa is just excuses, a lost is still a lost and Rafa lost to Soderling. Full stop. I can give you excuses too.

Why am I terrified with nadal? I don't get it. Sorry. And you assume that he is going to 'accomplish' after his return. thanks for the prediction.

For me, his achievements is still far behind Fed. Sorry. You all predicted he would be no.1 this year and that Fed is over but turned out he flamed out and got kicked out of no.1 before 1 year.

I am not the one who starts this discussion. Mind me. I am just reminding people what Fed has accomplished that Rafa may accomplish but NOT YET.

Honestly, I am seeing everything from a different angle. Shallow Rafans just see 13-7 h2h as it is but I see it from an angle that 11 of those is on clay. So, who's the close-minded ones here.

Don't make excuses for Rafa, mimi. He wasnt there in finals in FO because he wasn't gud enough to beat Soderling. Full Stop.

FED IS THE BEST!!

torres9 , 7/11/09 1:35 AM


torres- I think you said that well. Nadal does have every chance to one day be better then Fed, but if he stops winning now, all hope is lost. (I doubt he will stop winning, no one jump on me as if I think he is dead weight.) I do think the H2H has to be dissected like you mention. The head to head is important, but it is true that a lot of the meetings were on clay, and if Nadal and Rog had gone at it more on hard, who knows just how much more even of lopsided another way it could be.

Still the H2H does have value...don't get me wrong, but it does. I love Fed but it does. But Rog can't do anything about where the meetings took place, if Nadal couldn't get to the hardcourt finals. Granted, well probably see him in a lot more Hardcourt finals now that he has improved, so again I'm not implying he isn't worth his weight on surfaces apart from clay.

Recordbreaks , 7/11/09 1:48 AM


torres9, thanks for the immediate reply! again, your fears are becoming more and more evident as days go by! however, i don't have a problem with your perspectives, no problem at all. anyway, these are not excuses, just the facts! if soderling had played federer as tough a he did rafa, he would have sent roger packing also, he has the game to do it; but that's wasn't in the overall plan. there were a lot of players who wanted federer to capitalize on nadal's absence and finally win a french open title! tommy haas admitted that he was happy roger beat him, haas said that he knew how much roger wanted to win the french. very telling, isn't it? i know you don't want to see the truth, but don't assume everybody is as blind and naive as you! federer said himself, "i know i can win the french one day if rafa is out of the tournament." by the way, i don't make predictions, i voice my opinions! i'm not God therefore, i can't foretell the future!

i didn't know that it was logical to think that nadal's accomplishments should be the same as federer, after all, federer is 27 and nadal is 23. i learn something new every day!

memi , 7/11/09 2:05 AM


memi, your conspiracy theories are not facts. Facts are things beyond theories. Can you prove that Soderling and Haas planned to lose to fed just so he can win it.I'm sorry but you can't call things 'facts' without proof. That is just ludicrous. You call me naive but your interpretations on events that happened are that of a schizophrenic and paranoid person.

if you guys don't want to compare achievements, then why are rafans keep starting to compare h2h statistics and then when I challenge the validity of your reasonings, you can't counter back and all you can give me is personal attacks which I not in the very least affected.

Memi, it is you who is paranoid to admit that Roger is better than Rafa. I have admitted Rafa CAN be better just NOT YET.

No matter how much Slams Fed win, Rafans will just ignore as evident with all the 'I don't care how much Slams he wins' comments, and this is ultimate ignorance.

Recordbreakers, I think h2h are important too but no more important than GS count, reign as no.1

I have 1 question for rafans and please answer with an answer, not a question. If h2h is as important as you guys put it to be, why is the ATP rankings based on who performs the major tournaments better, not who beats who?

torres9 , 7/11/09 3:39 AM


torres, I was completely agreeing with you. I think head to head can be comprised of bad match ups sometimes, it is also important to think of number of slams, more so even then head to head. I mean honestly, Blake is not better then Nadal, Andy Murray doesn't touch Fed in terms of skill, or at least how Fed was more in the past. Nalby, I love, but is not better then Nadal, he would work on his fitness if he had the mental wherewithal. You are right. Winning is more often more important then when you lost. Because Andy Murray will not be remember the same way as Fed is if he never wins a slam just because he has the better head to head. Reign as no.1 is without a doubt important because it takes constancy into account. Alas, I feel that a lot of people only take the thing that makes their guy look best into consideration...even some Fed fans who ONLY use the number of GS someone has to prove Fed is best. (Not you torres, you seem to understand that other things are important too but sometimes people don't)

I'd like to hear someone answer that question too though.

Recordbreaks , 7/11/09 5:15 AM


I'm still waiting on torres to answer why he dismisses the Rafa-Rog H2H solely because most were on clay. Is clay not an important surface? All he has given is a bunch of "IF it had been HC" or "IF it was on grass." Well, the FACT is, no if's about it, is that most were on clay and it was up to Roger to perform on clay against Rafa and he didn't.

fan4tennis , 7/11/09 5:59 AM


It is clear that both sides of the arguments can't be swayed from their positions so lets end this hostility and debate this with a level head and with more than just bare numeric facts. This is my contribution:

It isn't fair to compare the two until they have finished their careers. But without a doubt if Federer can't narrow his H2H with Nadal then there will always be a question mark of who is the better player. Federer can claim on consistency in performance but there will always be that niggling thought behind ones mind if he really could have won number 14 & 15 if Rafa had been fully fit and reached the finals.

Sorry Fedfans, but some of you haven't been willing to give credit to Rafa for beating him on the biggest stages at FO, Wimby and AO. Special mention must be made to AO final where Rafa had less time to recover from his marathon semi against Verdasco. Rafa was obviously on a roll up until the Madrid final. Perhaps he overplayed a claycourt tourney or 2 too many and in the process did himself no favour. Basically, what it comes down to is that Federer does not like to play Nadal and seeing how he performed at Wimby'08 and AO'09 tells me that he even fears playing his biggest rival.

Nadal reached the semis at last year's USO. I think it is within his reach and I don't think it is impossible given his Wimby and AO wins. And most certainly is not as far away as Roddick winning FO! If he does complete his trophy cabinet there, he will join Agassi as the only male players to have won the career golden slams, something that Federer will most likely not achieve.

I've said before somewhere that there can't be a GOAT because it's just not fair to compare players from different eras where playing conditions, style and technology are very different. Fed can only lay claim to being one of the greatest and certainly the most successful at singles grand slams but not GOAT.

cable , 7/11/09 6:20 AM


Thank you cable!

fan4tennis , 7/11/09 6:31 AM


My last post was favourable to Rafa but it doesn't mean I am putting down Federer's achievements. If I had a choice I would rather play like Federer and have his all round skills and court movement. And as for his clay "weakness", well, he had made 4 FO finals and many more claycourt tourney finals so he is clearly the 2nd best on the red stuff. If not for Rafa, he would have won 2 maybe even 3 Grand Slams. At his peak from 2004-2007, he just about blew away all competition. And that is where his greatness will make the most lasting impression.

cable , 7/11/09 6:43 AM


Nadal?s recent losses and especially his absence from Wimbledon proved costly, in a short period of time. In Federer?s past three tournaments ? Madrid, Roland Garros and Wimbledon ? he gained 4,220 points on Nadal. Add in the expiration of Nadal?s victory at Wimbledon last year, worth 2,000 points, and he finds himself looking up at Federer going into the summer hard-court season.(Article)

yessshhhhh........ hard court season....... Fed won't let it go this easy .........


wohoooo....... he played awesome tennis to get backy #1 spot.........

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


Go Roger go......

tomnjerry2 , 7/11/09 7:31 AM


"wohoooo....... he played awesome tennis to get backy #1 spot......... "

Really? Well, here's a quote from a fellow Rafa fan to douse cold water to your bragging.
"Federer lost his number 1 ranking because he was repeatedly outplayed by Nadal. Rafa lost his number 1 ranking ONLY because he?s injured and unable to play.




phoenix , 7/11/09 9:09 AM


Rafa is unable to play ........ Y ?? he is incapable ...lol...... Y he become incapable........ coz he exhausted himself....... he is not for long run........... he can play good tennis for a shorter period of time ......... not in longer version......

he will be physically damaged again..... if he tries ....... coz he does not have got a pure class like Fed ....... even Murray or Djoker ..... totally power game will never take to to top...... u will loose ur strength a day .....

he probably knew that he will loose at frist round of Wimby.... so decided to quit...... yuccckkkkyyyy......... looser...... !!!!!!

Consistently ...... itz not his cup of coffeee........ (tea is old fashioned now).

U know wt consistency is ..... 21 str8 GS .....,237 weeks at top...... 7 str8 GS finales on a row....... !!!! n many more....... u know who only can do that .......

hE iS tHe fEd ...... tHe OnE n OnLy .....

well..... Fed of corzz played awesome tennis in his last three tourneys ...... (out of which in 2 Rafa was there that too on his all time fav surface ) .........he won all three on a row to minimize the deficit of over 4000 points to become no.1.

he fought both mentally n physically in Madrid..... FO ........n at wimby to regain the lost crown....... n he got it ........ wooohhhhoooooooo........

Today I only know that he is no.1 player in the world coz Rafa is still crying at home for loosing in 4th round on his fav GS !!!! lol


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


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

tomnjerry2 , 7/11/09 10:04 AM


I just hope that Rafa will come back with all guns blazing and put Roger where he belongs............behind him.

memi, this quote from the article corroborates your point. I did not see the final at RG because I was on holiday, but I saw highlights of it and I did not recognise the same player in Soderling who beat Rafa. As you say, his serve deserted him. On so many occasions Roger has been lucky to win a match he has no right to win, he certainly has lady luck on his side.

'Soderling had already had his French Open moment by ousting the defending champion Nadal, while Federer received a scare from Tommy Haas and a bit of a test from Juan Martin del Potro, but wasn't thoroughly challenged. He wasn't pushed the way Nadal would have muscled him around the court if they'd met in the final.'

Another article also pointed out that the last time Roger played Roddick in a Wim final, Roddick won 12 games, this year, he won 39, so Roger is on the wane. He doesn't sail through like he used to.

Believe me, I simply don't think Roger deserves all the accolades he gets. Also what gets me is the preferential treatment he gets from tournament organisers. At Wimbledon he only plays on Centre court and this year all his matches were first on the schedule. I remember defending champions like McEnroe being put on court, No 2, even the Williams sisters were put on outside courts for most of the tournament. The old court No 2 used to be known as the champions graveyard because so many of them got beaten there.

Rafans, let's just hope and pray that Rafa is fit and well and well over his problems so that he can play his A game. Rafa rekindled my interest in tennis, because I got so bored with the ballet dancer winning lack lustre matches all the time. The passion had gone out of tennis, and tennis should be grateful to Rafa for giving the sport a profile it had not enjoyed for years. Many many more people are now interested in the sport.

carrie , 7/11/09 11:16 AM


Why Roger Federer has become a preening poser in the emperor's new clothes


Andy Roddick wore a T-shirt and shorts when he walked out on Centre Court on Sunday. He looked like a tennis player.

The bloke walking next to him looked like an extra from Bruno.

Either that or Roger Federer had got dressed early for the Champions Ball.

It felt uncomfortable seeing him like that, seeing a great champion who has become so intoxicated with his own image that he is making himself a laughing stock. A man who was once the epitome of modesty and humility but is now tarnishing his genius with increasingly graceless arrogance.

Someone needs to tell the guy that not only is he making a fool of himself but he's losing admirers fast, 15 Grand Slam titles or not.

Someone needs to tell him that there was a reason the crowd was cheering for Roddick, and it wasn't because the American was the underdog. Someone needs to point out we're getting deep into The Emperor's New Clothes territory now.

When the six-time Wimbledon champion walked out for the men's final on Sunday in his ridiculous high-collared jacket and gold monogrammed shirt, it was hard not to laugh.

Federer looked every inch the preening, posing, head-tossing narcissist that Novak Djokovic captured so perfectly in his famous locker room impersonation of the Swiss.

Federer is said to have rebuked Djokovic for his impudence. You know why? Because Djokovic got him spot-on.

Federer is still the most graceful, brilliant, mesmerising tennis player the world has ever seen. I still consider it an immense privilege every time I get to see him play.

And yet the world No.1 is in danger of losing the qualities that have made him so popular: his humility and his graciousness.

Part of the problem is that the poor guy has been Nikefied. And I mean totally and utterly Nikefied. So Nikefied that he has lost his judgment.

I mean, how on earth did he allow himself to be persuaded to rush to put on that tracksuit top with the No.15 etched on his back a couple of minutes after he had outlasted Roddick on Sunday? What a pathetic, smartass, gloating, selfregarding stunt that was.

But why would someone demean himself and his opponent by doing something so crassly vain and self-regarding?

I wonder if Federer gave a thought to how Roddick might feel when he saw that tracksuit top and that 15 on Federer's back.

I suspect Roddick felt a sharp sting of irritation when he saw that. I bet he felt patronised and belittled.

Because by wearing it, Federer was making it obvious it had been made for him before the match. It had been made in the assumption of victory. It had turned a proud moment into a marketing moment. It was cheap, cheap. It lacked class.

Nor, in his acceptance speech, was there any real recognition of how desperately close Roddick had come to winning the final. There was no hint that Roddick had outplayed him - which he did - or that the American had pushed him to his very limit.

Instead, Federer chose to draw attention to the fact that he had had a tough loss against Rafael Nadal last year.

Even Roddick felt moved to speak up then. "Yeah," he shouted out, "but you had won it five times by then."

It was, a former Wimbledon star told me yesterday, "the most graceless acceptance speech I have ever heard".

Sadly, it fits a pattern. As cracks have appeared in Federer's invincibility, he has found it harder and harder to give credit to those who have beaten him.

He seems to find it particularly difficult with Andy Murray. When Murray beat him at the Masters Cup in Shanghai last November, Federer was ready with a raft of excuses.

He trotted them out again before Wimbledon. "I was ill and suffering with my back and I still almost beat him," Federer said. How gallant.

A couple of years ago, I would have considered it sacrilege to criticise Federer. Not any more.

He's the best there's ever been but if he doesn't want to be remembered as a genius who became bloated with self-importance and pomposity, he needs to get a grip.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/more-sport/2009/07/08/federer-h as-become-a-preening-poser-in-the-emperor-s-new-clothes-115875-2150327 7/

homos , 7/11/09 11:40 AM


carrie...your argument is lame....roger was the player in the FO that had played THE MOST HOURS on court that fortnight....before going into the final with soderling......so add a couple of extra hours on top.....and yeah...you are right...you weren't there to watch the tourny cos you were away on holiday...watching highlights is not the same thing as watching the whole of the tourny......but i hope you enjoyed your holiday....

secondly at wimby...even ricky...(go read his initial posts on the draw at wimby).....said fed had the HARDEST draw...if rafa had been playing...his draw would have been 'cup cake' in comparison....

Federer was tested and challenged BIG TIME in the FO and he came through....he showed everyone (except you of course 'cos you weren't watching it).....that he can come back from 2 sets down to love and go on to win the match...he proved this at the AO against Berdyche....the FO against Haas...and also came back to win the match against Del potro 2 sets down to 1....at the semi finals....at FO.....this shows an incredible amount of mental strength to do that...even at wimby final.....roddick said...(go read his interview)...that this is something that federer 'does not get enough credit for'...to say that he is on the wane is just utter...utter...rubbish...
Federer was just TOO good....it may not have been the EPIC final that we all wished for...but it was certainly a MARATHON FINAL....

so....rafa loses 4th round at FO.....and soderling goes on to beat him...where is Rafa's mental strength at this point? and don't use excuses please....rafa didn't use any so dont let him down by saying rafa was injured...when rafa went into the FO he very clearly said he was feeling fine.....so honestly....any argument here is completely lame...you have to accept sometimes that rafa sometimes is just not good enough to win....it happens to the best of them as you should know.....

because of fed's draw at wimby.....which was the most difficult draw......he was challenged and he came through....and ultimately went on to win....so by using the argument that he was 'lucky'...shows how dismissive you can be in terms of who he plays...how long he plays...and his incredible mental strength that he possesses in order to come through...

yeah.....................right.......................he is sooooo lucky.....pah!

(posted already....)
Federer and Nadal have been playing each other since 2004 and their rivalry is a significant part of both men's careers. They are the only men in the open era who have played each other in 7 Grand Slam finals, which include 3 Wimbledon finals (2-1 Federer), 3 French Open finals (3-0 Nadal) and 1 Australian Open final (1-0 Nadal).[91] Nadal leads their overall head-to-head series 13-7 (Nadal leads 9-2 on clay,

Federer leads 5-4 on grass and hard courts).

Their 2008 Wimbledon final has been lauded as the greatest match of all time by many long-time tennis critics, while many critics consider their rivalry to be the greatest in tennis history.

another thing carrie.....as you brought this up earlier.....nadal is NOT a multi slam winner EXCEPT on clay....FEDERER is multi slam winner on both hard courts and grass....but then i guess he is just lucky....right?

and if you are so bored with federer carrie...then why do you have sooo much time in posting ridiculous articles about federer if you hate him so much.....he obviously is more interesting to you than you want to admit......You actually said above how 'BORED' you are....obviously NOT bored enough tho'.....

Torres..you are doing great buddy...keep it up....

you are right torres...FED IS THE BEST...and always will be....over 2 million fans now on face book...and growing.....

Rather than everyone talking about the ages of our respective favourite players.....why not look at it from a different angle...fed turned professional in 1998 and rafa in 2001....so three years between them in terms of professional tennis......

you could talk about the fantastic match that rafa had against Carlos Moya at the FO....it was unbelievable......rafa was really pushed by Moya on clay...hailed as ONE OF THE BEST MATCHES EVER...where is Moya now? he is a retired player turned to tennis commentary...got busted earlier for drug taking and apart from anything else also shows the LONGEVITY of federer's game...whether you like him or not...this is FACT......

Look at the injuries that Rafa has sustained since turning professional....fractured left ankle......muscle torn in shoulder....tendinitis...so many more than fed......

malteser1 , 7/11/09 11:41 AM


You just have to laugh at Nadal fans.Roger dosent deserve his accolades?That is some of the worst crap I've ever heard.I also have to laugh at them clutching at H2H straws to say Roger isnt the GOAT (BTW-I dont believe he's the GOAT but thats because its just downright unfair to compare eras) and their coulda,woulda,shoulda, of the events had Nadal played.And Roger's chances slim at Wimbledon?? RG I can understand but Wimby? LOOOL.Oh and their ever so ridiculous conspiracy theories ROFL.Poor Rafa.
If Nadal overplayed its his problem.
He did not look dead on his feat to me in RG.He just thrashed Hewitt the previous match.His injury couldve caught up with him after the tournament or had started to catch up with him before but Robin Soderling's victory over him was no fluke.
Its funny how these fans dont want to give credit to Fed at all(I've been here since 08 and I've barely noticed change) and just make all his wins look flukes then complain about their boy not getting a fair share.I guess,one just has to stop hoping because with his detractors Fed will always be in a lose-lose situation no matter what.Roger's proved himself as a Champion and no matter what Nadtards like to claim,he deserves to where he is today.

janhavi , 7/11/09 12:15 PM


homos...you have clogged the forum up again..the article you have posted by OLIVER HOLT...has been posted ALREADY by Carrie....she beat you to it and it has been responded to....read the posts again before sending repeat articles...it gets boring...PLUS OLIVER HOLT is a renowned MURRAY FAN...and anti-federite.....i posted three comments to that article which basically knocks it into a cocked hat.....

move on......

janhavi....i know....

malteser1 , 7/11/09 12:44 PM


homos...these were three of the hundreds of posts in response to the repeat article you posted.....only putting them here so you can get the gist of the discussion....up to you whether you want to read them or not....

My goodness, what has his clothes got to do with winning. What was so funny about the jacket?
I'd like to know how long you've been covering tennis. Did you see the 1989 French Open final where Michael Chang brought out a prepared speech after winning the title? Afterwards they asked him why, he said he had prepared two speeches, one for winning, one for losing. In a final, there are two outcomes - a winner and a loser. Nike knew Roger would either win GS No 15 or he would not. They prepared for his win with the No 15 jacket and he wore it. If he had lost, he would not have worn it. Surely that is obvious.

Nadal wears 4RG, 1W, 1AO on his shoes. Do you see anything arrogant in that. I bet you do not.

What is it about journalists that they write such negative articles thinking it would give them a wider readership. It doesn't. It makes people question your knowledge of what you are writing about.

Visit Roger Federer facebook page, you'll see his growing legion of fans of over 2 million. Visit his website you will see he has almost 260,000 fans and growing.
No, sir, you make a mistake. Roger Federer is not arrogant or 'crassly vain' in the eyes of the world, he has not become over bloated and self important in the eyes of his fans. He is voted the fan favourite every year and the most popular player by his fellow pros.

I'd like to know, what are you trying to say here.
I tell you writing to fill up your page does NOT make good reading.

Dearls wrote:
I love Federer, he is amazing. But the Bag with Gold sides has got to go. Its kitch, hideous, yeaaachhh.
8/7/2009 12:24 BST on Mirror.co.uk
JoJo2009 wrote:
In agreement with the other comments here I have to take exception to this article and all the other rubbish being churned out about the 15 on the jacket and the great man's dress sense in general. Why shouldn't he go on court prepared for the eventuality of making tennis history - it may well have been an incentive in a match where he may not have played his best (with a weight of history like that who would) but dug in to the bitter end. And, frankly, if Roddick had outplayed him as you suggest then Roddick would have won! Federer has shown an 'interesting' fashion sense at Wimbleodn for a few years now (as 6 times Champion I reckon he can wander on in a gold and white grass skirt if he feels like it) and it's part of what I love about him, a little hint of flamboyance which he can show when he's not actually playing. And he wears clothes well that might look ridiculous on others. Good. Do we want all players to look the same? And as for the '15' - it was pretty subtle and good point about Nadal's shoes Hope20. I have never heard Federer be less than gacious about anything to be honest - he may have been somewhat shell shocked on this occasion. I have no doubt he felt Roddick's pain (we all did) what do you want him to do - apologise for winning? I always feel Federer has an childlike, innocent delight in his own success, as if it amazes him too. For me, coupled with his glorious tennis, this is what makes him my all time great!

so homos...whether you like it or not...Oliver Holt is not well-respected as a journalist...spend some time reading the articles he has written in the past...he is a complete turn off...totally unobjective...but then you are intelligent enough to make your own mind up about this.....

malteser1 , 7/11/09 12:52 PM


f4t, like I said, Rafa's game is suited on clay, so it's the hardest to beat him on clay and hence since Roger meets him more on clay it clearly explains why the h2h is lopsided. Had it been more matches on grass, we'll be looking at a different statistics.

You havent answered me on why Rafa is better when he has been no.2 to Roger longer than he is no.1?

Plz answer, ol 'wise' woman f4t

torres9 , 7/11/09 1:27 PM


torres....haven't you realised yet that the woman does not answer questions.....she will answer a question with a question.....end of....

here is a great article about sport...oh my god..this is for you agf baby!

The signs of decline and fall are always there, and so easy to whip into columnar rage and disappointment.

But this summer, surely, has made it hard for us to keep kidding ourselves that sport is going to the dogs. The evidence ? the quality, the spectacle, the behaviour ? just won't fit the theory any more. Has sport ever been better than this?


Sport on television Wimbledon first. If you rolled the clock back to when I was growing up in the mid-1980s, everyone predicted that John McEnroe-style tantrums were the inevitable future of professional sport. It was all very well for the old amateurs to say 'jolly good shot' over an iced lemonade. But this was tough, this was modern, this was win-at-all-costs. McEnroe, we all thought, would soon be the rule, not the exception.

Gamesmanship was moving not just on to Centre Court, but on to centre stage. Allan Border, the hardened cricket captain who made Australia great again in the Eighties, summarised the prevailing view when he said: "I'd sooner be a prick and win."

What happened? We have just witnessed a Wimbledon final that went to 16-14 in the final set, with two relentless competitors unflinching and defiant to the last. They inspired us with their tennis, but they also inspired us as people.

Immediately after the match, Andy Roddick's thunderbolt serve was replaced by a light, gracious tone. Roger Federer was as natural and dignified as ever. The only thing more remarkable than the tennis was the players' dignity under pressure.

Why to do we love sport? Because it reminds us what human beings can do, the limits they are prepared to exhaust, the refusal to take an easier path. Roddick and Federer could not have done more as warriors ? or human beings.

Nice.

malteser1 , 7/11/09 3:30 PM


Malty, yes, f4t never truly read my posts and never countered my argument properly. All she does is continue with her ignorance which he accused me of.

I watched the acceptance speech in Youtube again and I thought Roger was graceful in saying Andy played unbelievable and that he was lucky.

He probably thought of how is the best way to congratulate Andy and he chose to console him but I thought he thought comparing his loss to Nadal last year with Andy's this year was a gud idea but Andy wasn't going to be consoled especially by the player who beat him.

Roger even mentioned Rafa in his speech and I noticed that the tennis legend didn't even talked about Rafa.

torres9 , 7/11/09 3:49 PM


Which tennis legend didn't talk about Rafa?

carrie , 7/11/09 3:55 PM


all of them in during the interviews.

torres9 , 7/11/09 4:13 PM


thanks homos for reposting an article from a tabloid paper...to your response I post a nice article about Roger instead of trashing articles about Rafa.

Roger Federer epic helps sport raise its game
By Ed Smith
Published: 6:43PM BST 10 Jul 2009

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/wimbledon/5796364/Roge r-Federer-epic-helps-sport-raise-its-game.html

niloofar , 7/11/09 4:15 PM


carrie you did not see the same player in Soderling against Rafa cause this is one of Roger's gifts. He has a habit of dismantleling the other player's game play. Check out what the players are saying about Roger. It's all there. The players find Roger the most difficult to play against. Roger plays the game of tennis better than anybody else. Roger is #1 again. Pesonally I don't care how long he will keep being #1, but it will nonetheless be interesting to see how that will fan out. LOL He is such a thrill. What I like about Roger Federer the most is the way he manages to WIN most of the time. It's AWESOME!!! He is a GREAT tennis player! I don't care if he is the GOAT, or if there will ever be one. In the end it is WINNING that counts, and there is someting to be said for the consistency of Roger Federer. Whatever our personal opinions may be. Some of this guy's records will most likely take decades to surpass. It will not be easy. He's soo good. For now, Roger Federer has taken #1 back, and I'm LOVING it! Just LOVING it! Go Roger go! C'MON! Hello Malty! Fedfans! Federites! the FED ROCKS!!! We have the GREATEST pleasure of all! Being FEdfans! :) C'MON!

sky , 7/11/09 4:31 PM


sky,
this just goes to show how supreme Rafa is because the Fed can't dismantle his game. It's funny how the tutu and ballet shoes are packed away when he is playing Rafa because he doesn't dance when Rafa is on the other side of the net, he runs around like a headless chicken.

Roger even mentioned Rafa in his speech and I noticed that the tennis legend didn't even talked about Rafa.

torres9 , 7/11/09 3:49 PM

torres, in the interview Sampras gave, when asked : 'When somebody eventually writes a tennis book, assuming nobody beats his record, he'll go down as the greatest ever?'

Samprass: 'Yea, I have to give it to him, you hear the critics say Laver, Nadal has beaten him a few times, but in my book he is.'

torres, don't make unsubstantiated comments, stick to the facts. I have this on record, and I am watching it right now as I am writing this. NOTE: ASSUMING NOBODY BEATS HIS RECORD. The jury is still out!!!!!!!

carrie , 7/11/09 4:59 PM


homos , 7/11/09 5:08 PM


homos...you are way too late buddy...these articles that you are posting...carrie has done it all! congratulate your rafafan for discussing the bling and not the swing....go read THAT article...but please...before you start posting repeat articles that we have discussed ad infinitum....READ the PREVIOUS ones first and it will save you some time......C'MON! homos..you are better than that...just a bit of laziness creeping in me thinks......

malteser1 , 7/11/09 5:13 PM


homos, thamks a lot for the above, I hadn't posted it on here, infact this is the first time I've seen it.

carrie , 7/11/09 5:26 PM


The one that goes running around like a headless chicken is nadal. Sorry, you got the wrong guy. And Nadal runs like a headless chicken in ALL of his matches because he can't depend on his inferior skills.

Sampras didnt talk about Nadal, he was talking about Fed.

torres9 , 7/11/09 5:57 PM


torres, I don't think you carefully read te reported soeech, herit is again:

torres, in the interview Sampras gave, when asked : 'When somebody eventually writes a tennis book, assuming nobody beats his record, he'll go down as the greatest ever?'

Samprass: 'Yea, I have to give it to him, you hear the critics say Laver, NADAL has beaten him a few times, but in my book he is.'

carrie , 7/11/09 6:23 PM


Let me make it a bit clearer:

orres, in the interview Sampras gave, when asked : 'When somebody eventually writes a tennis book, assuming nobody beats his record, he (Roger) will go down as the greatest ever?'

Samprass: 'Yea, I have to give it to him, you hear the critics say Laver, NADAL has beaten him a few times, but in my book he is.'

carrie , 7/11/09 6:30 PM


RAFA IS BOX OFFICE!!!!!!!!!!!!

U.S. Open needs Rafael Nadal to top Wimbledon's drama

BY Filip Bondy
DAILY NEWS SPORTS WRITER

Tuesday, July 7th 2009, 1:08 AM
Ena/AP

The U.S. Open needs both Rafael Nadal (right) and Roger Federer to have a chance at topping the drama of Wimbledon.


LONDON - Wimbledon has outdone itself again. There was a ridiculously theatrical men's final with a 30-game fifth set, capped by Roger Federer's historic 15th major title. Andy Roddick reinvented his game and pushed Federer beyond conventional limits. Serena Williams rose to the occasion once more, proving again she can win whenever any tournament is important enough.

Legends like Pete Sampras, Rod Laver and Bjorn Borg came to watch. The weather was perfect, in very un-Wimbledon fashion. The new roof was nifty, even if it served as just a one-night novelty act starring local hero Andy Murray.

What can the U.S. Open do in August for an encore? There really is only one answer: Rafael Nadal. The U.S. Tennis Association must hope that Nadal's aching knee is sufficiently healed for him to leave Majorca and tackle the hard-court season. After such a Wimbledon, there is no other untold drama available.

Federer was keenly aware of Nadal's absence here, noting several times that he really couldn't do much about it. Nadal has beaten Federer in their last three major finals on three different surfaces at the French Open, Wimbledon and the Australian Open. Federer would love to prove he can still defeat Nadal during one big match in the Spaniard's prime, and in that way dispel all nitpicking about his career achievements.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_sports/2009/07 /06/2009-07-06_us_open_needs_rafael_nadal_to_top_wimbledons_drama.html #ixzz0KyIDGC7K&D

carrie , 7/11/09 7:08 PM


Rafa is good, but he is not that good. Roger beat him in Madrid, and he will "beat" him again. We are all waiting for the next Rafa/Roger game. It will be sizzleling no doubt. LOL :) C'MON Roger! C'MON! Your the MAN! :)

sky , 7/11/09 7:10 PM


Yeah we are sky!!! Cuz this time fed will have to play a healthy Rafa and he doesn't stand a chance!!! Rafa has nothing to lose at USO, fed has everything to lose!!!!!!

fan4tennis , 7/11/09 7:56 PM


torres9, don't blame me, i didn't say it, federer said that he could win if nadal was out of the tournament. if you want to argue as to why he said it, contact him. the truth is, if you think the rafa nadal we know is going to all of sudden become fearful of federer because of a win in madrid over a clearly fatiqued nadal, wake up!
you know as well as i know that federer will always fear nadal, and you will too because you know what nadal is capable of. we can discuss this from now until forever, but the fact remains, we will all see when they meet again! it's a good thing that federer is #1 because the pressure is on him to prove that he didn't win the french, wimbledon, and #1 ranking only because he didn't have to face nadal. now, that is going to be some pressure, believe or not! he's telling everybody that there is no pressure, but that's just his disguise! we will see!

memi , 7/11/09 7:57 PM


by the way, torres, why would tennis legends talk about rafa when they all support this nonsense about federer being the greatest of all time. i wish someone would give a logical explanation as to how eras can be compared. i don't get it! you want the real reason why they fail to discuss rafa; rafael has already equal boris becker's six major titles and he's one away from equally mats wilander's and john mcenroe's seven titles, he's two masters shields away from equally agassi's seventeen and so on and so on; you think these jealous former players are going to exalt a spanish guy like nadal who doesn't suppose to be where he is at age 23. come on! get real!

memi , 7/11/09 8:46 PM


Yes memi, there is definitely a tinge of jealousy in all this. Roger doesn't have Rafa's looks for a start. Rafa has too much going for him, with a presence that none of them can boast of, and the fact that a spaniard is achieving all this is hard to take, because Spain was not supposed to be in their league.

carrie , 7/11/09 9:04 PM


carrie..YOU posted the article on fed..why all of a sudden are you saying that this is the first time you have seen the article posted here?

fft...ha...hummm.....remember that ROGER is going to have to play A HEALTHY RAFA....RAFA...has been out of action for a while because he has been UNHEALTHY...and i think you need to prepare yourself for a fine match fft...with roger the eventual winner..he is on a roll...rafa will have severe lack of match practice.....try to take off your rose coloured glasses...

malteser1 , 7/11/09 9:27 PM


malt1: there's a brilliant article on Fed and I, as a generous soul, will give you the reference, it's http://allineedisapicketfence.wordpress.com/2009/07/11kool-aid-open-ba r/ Hope that's right, enjoy!

deuce , 7/11/09 9:36 PM


DEUCE is the KING OF TENNIS...forget FED...forget NADAL....the NEW KING OF TENNIS IS DEUCE! Deuce...have just read the article...it's WOW... I am posting half of the comments here...and it soooo knocks what carrie...fft...and zoe say into touch BIG TIME.....

Let me preface by saying that I have no problems with anyone hating Roger Federer?s Wimbledon gear ? it was highly risky fashion to start with. Nor do I care that a lot of people may be feeling more sorry for Roddick than happy for Federer right now. What I don?t like is how the media has branched out on those two premises into what I consider to be a personal attack on the Fed.

Among other things, Tennis.com, SI, the Times and the infamous Mirror have accused Federer of being arrogant, disrespectful of Andy Roddick, and classless. All this is apparently based on his post-victory interview and a jacket with an inconspicuous 15 on it.

Nevermind that Federer admitted he didn?t know about the 15 jacket beforehand - the fact that the jacket was a surprise from Nike was never really relevant in the media portrayal of ?Jacketgate?. Instead, tennis fandom has used a gift from Nike to its most valuable player as the premise to launch some rather vitriolic attacks on Federer. Head over to GTT for some sense on this Wimbledon dead horse.

The notion that a jacket with a small 15 on the side, neither designed nor orchestrated by Federer, could equate to him being arrogant and dismissive of his opponent is just ludicrous and cruel.

Similarly ludicrous is the idea that Federer was somehow rubbing it in Roddick?s face when he said that he knew what Roddick was going through in his trophy acceptance speech.

Yeah, what an insensitive, heartless jerk. How could he possibly know what it feels like to lose an epic final to a long time nemesis?

The fact that Nadal gave Federer, almost word for word, the same consolation ? ?tough losing an epic match, I know how you feel yada yada? ? just a year ago on the very same court was irrelevant and couldn?t possibly be regarded as condescending. It?s only condescending coming out of the Mighty Fed?s mouth. A guy who said this about his opponent is obviously deserving of some serious bashing:

Federer acknowledged his celebrations were somewhat reserved after a marathon 30-game final set but this was partly out of respect for an opponent he has now beaten three times in Wimbledon finals.

?It was a combination of being maybe a little bit sad for Andy after seeing Rafa was sad for me at Wimbledon last year,? he explained.

?I felt like it was such a gruelling match, everybody was tired and felt for Andy so I didn?t want to make a drama about it but I knew the importance and that it was one of the greatest moments in my tennis career.?

Source: BBC

Yup, the guy?s an arrogant, insensitive ass. Was I the only person who thought Roddick?s quip was just part of his dead pan humor rather than any offense taken on his part? How about a truer representation of what happened during the post-match speech instead?

But there?s something even more insidious on than these allegations of unsportsmanship. Let me see if I can put a finger it ? some writers have gone as far as saying that Federer misrepresents the sport of tennis by portraying the image of ?a lucky, privileged Porsche-driving, mummsy-loving, polo-watching, country club dandy?.

Ummm ? Do I really have to point out the irony that Federer?s being accused of portraying an elitist image at a tournament where the umpires and linesmen wear Ralph Lauren blazers?

And of all the things you can accuse Federer of, misrepresenting the sport of tennis ain?t one of them. Let?s see: did the guy take drugs? Snort cocaine? Did he pick out his wife from an SI swimsuit issue? Has he married and/or divorced a Hollywood actress? Does he ball-bounce excessively, grunt or cheat on court? Has he ever gone off at the umpire or the linesmen?

Instead, he marries the girl-next-door that he?s dated for almost 10 years. He carries himself so calmly on court that when he smashed a racket in Miami, it made headline news on CNN and became instant youtube sensation. He sells his RF merchandise and uses the funds to affect change in South Africa. He gives up more time for the press than any other player in order to promote tennis. This is a guy voted by his peers for the Stefan Edberg Sportmanship Award year after year. And somehow, because of a tracksuit jacket, we?re far too willing to toss his long standing credentials out the window, and cry ?where is the old Roger??

I?ll tell you how Federer has ?misrepresented? tennis: the day after the final, the two main newspapers in Melbourne ? the Age and the Herald Sun ? were inundated with letters to the editor congratulating Federer for his win. Not in the sports section, but in the general opinion section, next to discussions of government policy and international politics.

The Age dedicated its editorial of the day to Federer. Months earlier, when Federer lost to Djokovic in Miami, the Herald Sun ran a chatroom to discuss the crisis. I have never seen a foreign player spark so much interest for a sport that essentially expires mid-February in this country. Did anyone give a hoot that Federer wore a jacket with gold piping to celebrate his victory?

I just don?t get this bullshit. Among other things, I am truly shocked at how quickly haters, wait ? ?proper? journalists, will jump on Fed?s perceived actions/inactions with a mob-like mentality.

What disheartens me more is the stuff that?s been left out of the discussion:

Lost amongst all this brouhaha over Jacketgate and sympathy for Roddick is the very human story of Roger Federer.

A few months ago, he was written off, thought to be done and dusted. Incapable of winning another slam.

A few months ago, he was serving poorly, and losing clutch sets with epic meltdowns, and crying about it too.

He rebounded from that. He coped with the immense pressure and ?the Monster? he?s created for himself. He achieved slam No 15, and got back to World No 1. And did I mention he worked his ass off in Dubai and in Italy to get his serve back?

Did I mention he didn?t choke in the clutch set, and came through the fifth set in this Wimbledon final with some serious wilanders of steel?

But all this seems so insignificant compared to a jacket.

If a celebratory jacket is capable of amounting to a scandal in Roger Federer?s career, then I?d say that?s a pretty good reflection on his character. If I were him, I?d take all this as a compliment and a sign that he?s playing well again. After all, no one kicks a dead dog.


DEUCE...you are now my official IDOL.....good on you!

C'MON! Allez Federer!

malteser1 , 7/11/09 10:20 PM


GUARDIAN.CO.UK---the sport blog----Shadow of Nadal hangs over Federer'sclaim to be the greatest.---by Steve Bierley

agf25agf , 7/11/09 10:37 PM


agf..i thought you were going to stop this? don't criticise others if you are not listening to your own voice...

malteser1 , 7/11/09 10:51 PM


malteser, i don't want to be the one to mock your ability to foretell what federer will do, how he will do it, and who he will do it. don't you think you are being a bit premature in your rush to judge whether rafa will be prepared. of course, if anyone knows you would considering the infamous psychic powers that you seem to possess. although i do believe that somewhere deep, down, inside you are hoping and praying that rafa will come back stumbling and falling. we will see, won't we? you must remember federer came within a hair of losing to roddick on a grass surface, where he is supposingly king, and let's add to that, his phenomenal record against roddick going into the final. no one expected roddick to push roger; very, very, very few people even entertained the thought of roddick taking one set. you need to also consider that roddick outplayed federer, but he made critical mistakes, especially in the second set tiebreak to let roger back into the match, and eventually roger outlasted him. now, if you take all of that into consideration, you will know that if federer had played that same way against nadal, in a wimbledon final, he would still have five wimbledons, not six; roddick played excellent tennis, but roddick is no nadal! your obsession with federer is beyond anything i have ever seen from a fan, and it has clearly distorted your vision. however, i don't see it changing, i think it's rooted too deep. but then, that's your choice! there is a such thing as admiring and supporting a player, but my goodness, you define "blind faith."

memi , 7/11/09 10:55 PM


I offered you refused!!!.....What do you expect me to do sit back and let go of those negative comments about rafa?

I JUST SUGGESTED that article for ANYONE or EVERYONE who WANTS to READ IT!

I DIDN't WRITE that article....take it or ignore it!

agf25agf , 7/11/09 10:58 PM


Wrong again malt. Didn't expect that article to be any different than it was seeing as the writer of it lists herself as "Melbournian Arts/Law Student. Aspiring kick-ass lawyer. Tennis Blogger. Wannabe writer. Federer Fanatic. Fashionista." Was simply an opinion by someone who opened themselves a site to do so. Cannot compare that to an article from an esteemed paper like the NYT or established mag like SI.

fan4tennis , 7/11/09 11:00 PM


fft..have a word with DEUCE who posted the link...hail to you deuce...(glad to see deuce that you read articles that also support the fed...

fft....Oliver Holt one of the journos that was mentioned earlier on this thread is NOT...repeat...NOT an esteemed journalist...NOR is the mirror (where the article was published)..an esteemed one.....it is a TRASHY TABLOID.....but you wouldn't know that cos you don't reside in the UK......as i said to you fft...bye...you just dont listen anymore...

memi....oh to be psychic.....not me buddy...but i respect what you say and the rafa....

agf....just saying what you said to the fedfans earlier...by you posting this...just stokes it up even more..and you said to calm it down for a month? just listen to your own words buddy....don't claim to be calming the waters when you add flames to the fire....

malteser1 , 7/11/09 11:19 PM


hey fedfans....an article from the European Times.....read and enjoy....

Federer's magical touch does it again

12 Jul 2009, 0004 hrs IST, Krishna Gopalan, ET Bureau


The wheel came a full circle for Roger Federer at Wimbledon this year. This was the first grand slam he had won in 2003 and on July 5, his sixth
title at the famed grass court put him ahead of Pete Sampras as the player with the most number of majors.

It was fittingly appropriate that the American was there to witness his record being overhauled. After all, 15 grand slams is no small number and considering it had taken Federer just six years to do it was just an indication of the genius of the magician from Basel.

Of course, the debate and then the almost unanimous consensus that Federer was the greatest ever continued without a break. If numbers could tell the story, this was a no-brainer of a topic. For Sampras, his 14 grand slams were spread between 1990 and 2002 with the first and the last coming at Flushing Meadows.

It was never easy for the American as he came up against top-notch players like Becker, Edberg, Courier and Agassi at regular intervals. For a large part of the 1990s, Sampras and supremacy on the tennis court were often synonyms.

Federer, quite interestingly, burst on the scene when he beat Sampras at Wimbledon in 2001. The American was the defending champion and the world was quick to sit up and take notice of the Swiss sensation. At 19, the boy had grace, poise and finesse. Those who predicted a bright future for him were pretty accurate in their judgment. Federer?s game looked complete and there was not too much that could stop the lad?s progress.

With talent and style came levels of consistency that often was almost embarrassing to be true. If cynics sniggered at the man for not winning at Roland Garros before he clinched it this year, it was unfairly forgotten that he had been runner-up between 2006 and 2008 only to lose to Rafael Nadal on all three occasions. For the record, Sampras never got past the last four ever.

If Wimbledon has been Federer?s backyard, the US Open is his second home. After a fourth round defeat in 2003, he has not lost a match here. This record needs to be looked at from the perspective that the US Open remains among the toughest tournaments to win. Little wonder that the great Swede, Bjorn Borg, reached the finals four times only to lose on each occasion.

It is hard to guess how many more majors Federer will win from here. The missing link was the French Open which came his way this year. What will be interesting is how things will shape up when Nadal is back. The Spaniard is still recovering from a knee injury which made sure he could not defend his Wimbledon title.

For Federer, the win at Wimbledon over Andy Roddick this year was, by the Swiss? own admission, his biggest ever. Sampras, in his most eloquent fashion, said Federer was the greatest ever. The debate over that appears to be dead for the moment at least.

sky...let's see what happens in a few weeks...i might be wrong...but i don't think fed is back until US Open....catch you later buddy...xx

malteser1 , 7/11/09 11:34 PM


No need to question deuce about it. All I said was " Didn't expect that article to be any different than it was." It was a fed fan who wrote it on her blog so it was expected to be pro-fed opinion.

I have no problem with deuce posting it as I believe that people should be able to post dissenting views and articles since this site is for debate. Only posting one view defeats that purpose.

fan4tennis , 7/11/09 11:35 PM


malteser---- i didn't say for a month--- A DAY PER MONTH was what i said!
i didn't requestedthe "truce" to the FED fans ONLY but for "US" as well....common sense will tell you that to have a TRUCE there should be AT LEAST 2 parties involved.
AND like everybody here, I guess I can suggest an article FOR EVERYONE to read, regardless of who they're idolizing!.....I'm NOT claiming to be calming this forum...WHO am I to even think about INFLUENCING other people! I suggested "PEACE" for A DAY , but , as I've said it would be the GREATEST MIRACLE if that happens......buddy!



agf25agf , 7/12/09 12:01 AM


deuce that was/is an AMAZING article! Thanks for sharing. What insight! Always nice to read information pertaining to what is inside a soul rather than the garbage that may be surrounding it... (Often plays havoc with the true colours, and meaning or what is important!) LOL The article displays an honourable perception where honour never dies and where PERCEPTION "in" everything is important. :) Good night Malty! Pleasure read from you as always! Thank "YOU" girl!!! You continue an amazing, and wonderful demonstration as a FEDfan, and as a fan for tennis! Mwah! :)

sky , 7/12/09 12:28 AM


LOL!......let's kiss each others' a**!.....HE HE HE!!!!

agf25agf , 7/12/09 1:37 AM


Memi, there's no proof that Roger can't beat Rafa in FO even if Rafa has beaten him in 3 straight finals. You can only say most probably, or most likely but seeing Roger beat Rafa in Madrid and Hamburg gave me the belief that Rafa has to be at his best to beat Roger even on his favorite surface. And if you say Rafa lost Madrid and Hamburg because of fatigue, Roger lost Wimby because of the effects of mono so anyone can give excuse if they want to.

Carrie, mentioning NADAL one time in a sentence is not really talking about him rite? Like if I say 'no one cares if carrie is the friend of Rafa Nadal because Rafa has many friends like Fernando Verdasco who is a playboy, Feliciano Lopez who is a male model'. It would have been better if they said,' Rafa already has 6 titles at 23 yrs-old so he could well surpass Fed' but all they said was 'Fed is the GOAT'. Just show that even them value the Slams more than H2H.

But all the greats know that there are players who have a very good start to a career and than just fizzle out. I think it's hard for Nadal to keep playing like he does and be in the tour long enough. But that is just my opinion.

I think Nadal will have a high chance to get USOpen2009 but to get it 5 times like Fed or get WImby 6 times like Fed, errmmm., let's just say I don't believe it yet.

torres9 , 7/12/09 2:17 AM


janhavi you are a laughing stock yourself. i've been here since 08 too and you fed fans haven't changed either so dismount from your high horse and quit the hypocritical criticism. you think only nadal fans have to change? look at you guys, coming with the same rubbish all the time and quick to put down nadal fans while you think you are perfectly behaved tennis fans. i said before and i say it again. only certain types of people will admire fed (except for those sensible enough to admire his tennis but not his character). he is arrogant, full of himself and pompous. so are his fans.

you know the old saying:
birds of a feather... fits perfectly.

homos , 7/12/09 2:55 AM


Wimbledon
GREAT SHOW THANKS RODDICK
Roger Federer's 15th Grand Slam title at Wimbledon is good news not only for those who revere him, but for those who have grown to dislike his thinly-concealed ego as well. Charles Bricker

Everyone wins in this final, and a match this close is also good for tennis.

The difficulty he had in winning this major against Andy Roddick is a signal that the coming summer season of hardcourt tournaments in the U.S. is going to be closely competed and uncertainty at tournaments translates into viewership. There are going to be as many as a half-dozen tightly-packed players in every important event in the coming two months. The upshot should be a big uptick in TV ratings for the men's game.

In the leadup to the U.S. Open we now have Rafael Nadal, Federer, Andy Murray, Novak Djokovic, Roddick, Juan Martin Del Potro and perhaps Jo-Wilfried Tsonga. If Tommy Haas can stay out of the rehab centers, he also becomes a big factor out there.

As memorable as Federer's record-breaking major title is, Roddick's performance will be equally recalled, at least by American fans. It marked his rebirth as a Grand Slam competitor and showed that he is now good enough to join Nadal, Federer, Murray and Djokovic among the elite in the game.

Most of the credit for this resurgence has to go to Roddick, who is the man on the court hitting the ball. But he'd be the first to tell you that coach Larry Stefanki has shown him a better way to play -- with more patience without giving up aggression and to be unafraid to start whacking those backhands instead of using them simply as strokes to keep himself in rallies.

There were a great number of flashback moments in this Wimbledon, but it also seemed a bit hollow with Nadal not there, leaving all of us who watched this four-hour plus marathon final to not only congratulate Federer but to ponder how things would have turned out if Nadal wasn't home rehabilitating his patellar tendons.

The hope now is that Nadal gets back on tour, though not prematurely. He remains, in the minds of the best experts, the No. 1 player in the world, despite his loss of the top spot to Federer as a result of this Wimbledon. Tennis needs him back on the court and, even at this early moment, I don't think it's unreasonable to make him the favorite to sweep New York.

If he did, he would become the second youngest player to hold titles in all four majors. Don Budge had just turned 23 when he won the French Open to collect all four. Nadal was 23 on June 3.

Charles Bricker can be reached at bricker@tennisnews.com

fan4tennis , 7/12/09 4:19 AM


torres, are you kidding me! did i read your comments correctly; did you say that there is no proof that roger can't beat rafa at french open. oh yes, there is proof until proven otherwise! how about four consecutive years of defeat at the hands of rafa; 2005-semifinal, 2006-08 finals. is that proof enough? if it isn't enough, i'll throw in the monte carlos finals on clay and maybe 2006 rome and 2008 hamburg too! until roger can prove to me that he can beat rafa in the finals at roland garros, just as rafa proved that he could beat him at wimbledon and in australia, as far as i'm concerned, you can save your words! i'm sure some experts see it my way as well. whether nadal is at his best or not when he plays federer is irrelevant to me. what's relevant is to win in the end!

memi , 7/12/09 5:49 AM


torres, it's breaking my heart that you have to always resort to one statement in particular, which is: "I think it's hard for nadal to keep playing like he does and be in the tour long enough." you're predictable! may i suggest that you don't worry so much about something that neither you nor i have control over, how long nadal will last on tour. whether nadal wins 5 usopens or no usopens is not a matter of life or death to me. i just want him to be the best he can be and go as far as his skills and talent will carry him. rafa is not into trying to impress or prove to people he can win more majors or keep the #1 ranking longer than federer. one of the things that i love and admire about him is he doesn't need approval from tennis legends and others to believe in himself! he plays tennis and accepts the good and bad! he's happy being who he is and with what he has already accomplished because he knows whether some admit or not, what he has done at his age, is unquestionably extraordinary! that's a good attitude to have in life!

memi , 7/12/09 6:15 AM


folks, folks, admire Roger and Rafa. Thought article reference I posted put some of the critisicms of Fed in perspective. If I find equally good one on Rafa will post that too. You can love 'em both you know!

deuce , 7/12/09 8:49 AM


memi, you are twisting my words, and when I wrote 'FO', I meant FO2009. I said there's no proof that he can't beat Rafa not that Rafa can't beat him. All start from zero when a match starts, there's no way you can say for sure that Rafa will beat Roger even if they met in FO2009.

And I have boldly predicted that rafa's knees is gonna break down this year 5 months ago and I proved it right. It is just common sense. There's a reason why most players don't focus too much on physicality because it will destroy the body even if you can achieve a good result here and there.

And you are wrong if you say Rafa doesn't want to break records. He already said that he wants to beat Fed's records. I admire him for that. But he have to win back2back WImby or AO to convince me that he is as great as Roger.

At the moment, it is just a question of IFs.

torres9 , 7/12/09 9:19 AM


deuce thats a wonderful and balanced article.One of the many I read and thank goodness there are more writers ( and I mean serious writers)that can really appreciate the sport for what it is and can appreciate the two best guys we have.There hasnt gone a day when I stopped loving tennis ever since I started following it as a child.I always watch DVDs and official films of the 80s though I did not folloe tennis back then- which was truly the golden era of tennis and the 90s. and its great to see writers,not swayed by their personal bias and dropping to a condescendig level,write a good,thoughtful article.Its easy to be an armchair critic but really difficult to put things into perspective.
And the end of it all,I guess one just has to remember that the athletes and celebrities people idolize are human too and they come with their faults like anybody else.They've just risen above the ordinary.I guess its upto the admirers of the sport to take what is good and leave what is slightly on the negative side.

janhavi , 7/12/09 11:20 AM


Another great and well-balanced article.The writer pays a tribute to both Roger and Andy.

Roger Federer epic helps sport raise its game
We all love to gaze into our sporting crystal ball. Nearly always it tells a bleak story. It's all going to the dogs, you see ? there's no more sportsmanship, no true heroes, just over-paid spoilt brats.

By Ed Smith
Published: 6:43PM BST 10 Jul 2009

Great inspiration: Roger Federer and Andy Roddick could not have done more as warriors ? or human beings Photo: EDDIE MULHOLLAND
The signs of decline and fall are always there, and so easy to whip into columnar rage and disappointment.

But this summer, surely, has made it hard for us to keep kidding ourselves that sport is going to the dogs. The evidence ? the quality, the spectacle, the behaviour ? just won't fit the theory any more. Has sport ever been better than this?
Sport on television- Wimbledon first. If you rolled the clock back to when I was growing up in the mid-1980s, everyone predicted that John McEnroe-style tantrums were the inevitable future of professional sport. It was all very well for the old amateurs to say 'jolly good shot' over an iced lemonade. But this was tough, this was modern, this was win-at-all-costs. McEnroe, we all thought, would soon be the rule, not the exception.

Gamesmanship was moving not just on to Centre Court, but on to centre stage. Allan Border, the hardened cricket captain who made Australia great again in the Eighties, summarised the prevailing view when he said: "I'd sooner be a prick and win."

What happened? We have just witnessed a Wimbledon final that went to 16-14 in the final set, with two relentless competitors unflinching and defiant to the last. They inspired us with their tennis, but they also inspired us as people.

Immediately after the match, Andy Roddick's thunderbolt serve was replaced by a light, gracious tone. Roger Federer was as natural and dignified as ever. The only thing more remarkable than the tennis was the players' dignity under pressure.

Why to do we love sport? Because it reminds us what human beings can do, the limits they are prepared to exhaust, the refusal to take an easier path. Roddick and Federer could not have done more as warriors ? or human beings.

janhavi , 7/12/09 11:33 AM


RAFANS, HERE IS AN ARTICLE BY SOMEONE ELSE WHO ABSOLUTELY AGREES WITH US.

Nadal is the greatest
By BILLY HARRIS - Sunday Star Times
Last updated 05:00 12/07/2009

OPINION: The argument that Roger Federer is the greatest tennis player ever gained more credibility when the Swiss won Wimbledon, his 15th major title, last week.

But is durability the key to his greatness? Would a player who won 20 majors over 10 years be better than a player who who won 12 in three years? One star shone for a long time but the other shone brighter.

And shouldn't the strength of the opposition be taken into account? Before Federer won the French, he was on 13 majors, one behind American Pete Sampras, and the argument of "best ever" was flawed. Then favourite Rafael Nadal, a player with a winning record over Federer, is injured, Federer wins the French, and then Wimbledon, and suddenly he's the best ever? Moreover, Federer couldn't win on clay. With Nadal out, Federer wins, and now he's the "complete" player? What if Nadal, Andy Murray, Andy Roddick and Novak Djokovic all packed up tennis tomorrow, allowing Federer to win another 12 majors? Does his greatness grow with every title?

Clearly, greatness depends on who else is around at the time.

And how do you compare sportsmen and sports teams from different eras? That one's easy. Today's best are usually the best ever. Yes, it may be because they benefit from better sports science, better equipment and better nutrition, but they're still better. In the 100m sprint, Usain Bolt has run faster than anyone else in history, so he's the best ever. So it is with sports teams, who are bigger, stronger and faster than yesteryear's men.

Ah, but sportsmen such as Jack Nicklaus and Rod Laver were using sub-standard equipment compared to the weapons wielded by today's golfers and tennis players. Tough cheese. Just as we don't take equipment into consideration today we don't, for instance, give the gold medal in the 100m freestyle to the guy who came second just because his swimsuit was inferior then we can't make allowances for the clubs and racquets they used back in the day.

Who, with the equipment, athleticism and know-how at their disposal, is the better package that's what we're talking about. Getting back to who's the greatest tennis player of all time. Imagine all the greats in one tournament. Roy Emerson, Pancho Gonzales, Rod Laver, Jimmy Connors, Bjorn Borg, Sampras, John McEnroe, Federer, and whoever else you like, all at their best. Who's going to win?

The answer is: Rafael Nadal.

Billy Harris is a former All White, and a tennis fan.














carrie , 7/12/09 12:02 PM


"...Imagine all the greats in one tournament. Roy Emerson, Pancho Gonzales, Rod Laver, Jimmy Connors, Bjorn Borg, Sampras, John McEnroe, Federer, and whoever else you like, all at their best. Who's going to win?"

The answer is: Rafael Nadal.

I like this! Thanks Carrie:-)

phoenix , 7/12/09 12:37 PM


Carrie... Simple is that .... u said it all...... it has been written a man like u !!! so obviously he will think like u do !!! lol

he is a Rafa fan...... done !!!!

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

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

tomnjerry2 , 7/12/09 12:59 PM


LOL carrie LOL! Some people will write anything, and it appears others are prepared to believe anything... This BILLY HARRIS person is a joke. Who in their right mind would dare say that Rafa Nadal is the "best" package of all past and present tennis "GREATS"! In "real" tennis you have to consider every element of the game, and ifs and buts don't cut it (or make a logical argument). For instance how can the "best" package of tennis have to withdraw, or worse not even participate in Wimbledon this year cause of health problem. Can you IMAGINE?! If people like Rafa were the "best" package of tennis, we would not even have tennis, as the "best" package would be spending "his" (their) time being hurt, and recuperating (not on the tennis court where the "best" package belongs). In the "real" world the "best" package is someone who is playing tennis consistently, as well as the
"ONE' who has been WINNING or has won the most over time.

sky , 7/12/09 1:02 PM


Therefore the "best" package is Roger Federer. :) He has proven consistency and records which come with this consistency as only the "best" package can. More than any other player in the history of tennis. POWERFUL! Very POWERFUL! and to boot! He is "STILL" playing! AMAZING! and Even more AMAZING Roger Federer is "STILL" #1! INCREDIBLE! ABSOLUTELY! Go Roger! Go! :)

sky , 7/12/09 1:12 PM


FANTASTIC! :)

sky , 7/12/09 1:34 PM


"This BILLY HARRIS person is a joke. Who in their right mind would dare say that Rafa Nadal is the "best" package of all past and present tennis "GREATS"!"-sky , 7/12/09 1:02 PM

When will you guys ever learn? OPINION is always subjective. Just because the guy's opinion is different from yours makes him a "joke". Who and what gave you the right to judge him that way?

phoenix , 7/12/09 1:40 PM


phoenix, point well taken, the word "laughable" (as regards to the article) rather than the word joke (in reference to the person) would have been more appropriate, the extent of the meaning of the article was "quite" funny

sky , 7/12/09 1:55 PM


wow, a tournament like that would be in..cred..ible....but... would Federer beat Borg on grass, would Rafa beat Borg on clay? The answer for me is no in both cases, but as phoenix says that's just my opinion.

deuce , 7/12/09 2:01 PM


I don't know if anyone has posted this article or not:

http://www.wimbledon.org/en_GB/news/articles/2009-07-05/200907 051246804638656.html

Rafterfan , 7/12/09 2:30 PM


One last one from Steve Tignor, Executive Editor of Tennis Magazine:

http://tennisworld.typepad.com/thewrap/2009/07/w-the-luck y-few.html

Rafterfan , 7/12/09 2:34 PM


Rafterfan, these two paras from your link says what I have been saying..........Federer is lucky, that's all!!!!!!!

And nobody else would have hung around long enough to win that match. As in 2007, when he beat Rafael Nadal in five sets, Federer snuck past an opponent who was frankly the better player on the day. He did it the same way, by serving lights out?the only thing you?re given on a tennis court is your serve, and he took it with everything he had?and saving his best tennis for the tiebreakers. Like the man he passed on the all-time Slam list, Pete Sampras, Federer continues to succeed in his late 20s because he does nothing more, or less, than win. Sometimes that means finding a way to take a match that belongs to someone else.

After last year?s Wimbledon final, it appeared that Federer, whatever his other achievements, would be known for losing his greatest battle. Now, along with his 15 majors and umpteen other records, he has an epic victory to his credit as well. This is a fitting capstone to a fantastical six weeks for Roger Federer. While his French-Wimbledon double will be remembered as one more historic achievement from the greatest player ever, those of us who were watching Federer all year know that fortune has smiled on him to an unusual degree since the 4th round of the French Open. In tennis, however, ?fortune? has a narrower meaning than it does just about anywhere else.

As Bill Harris says, and I totally agree - Rafael Nadal is the greatest of them all, past and present. Admit it.

carrie , 7/12/09 3:08 PM


carrie..not so long ago..YOU were blasting the fedfans for posting long articles AND on the WRONG thread.....there is a thread on rafa...'shed a tear'...why don't you post it there and you along with your fans..can all discuss together....you then come onto a fedthread and expect fedfans to agree with you? D'oh? Huh?...do you see what I mean.......if you post this article on the rafa thread....ALL THE RAFA fans will AGREE with you carrie..you could even stand on a podium and take a bow...and have your moment of glory....


Arvis...fft won't answer your questions...she 'doesn't do answers when other people question her'...

federer leads rafa 5:4 on grass and hard courts...
rafa is a MULTI SLAM winner on clay ONLY...NOT on grass and hard courts...like federer...

It is amazing if any ONE tennis player WINS a slam...let alone 15 SLAMS.....

they are BOTH great champions...but rafa is not as great as Roger....in terms of longevity in the game....

you use the word 'lucky' a lot in your posts....carrie...have you noticed? .....accept the genius of the fed my friend....accept it and also if you think fed is sooooo lucky...then nadal was 'lucky' at Wimby '08....fed was 2 points away from taking the match.......rafa was LUCKY that he was knocked out in the fourth round of RG.....as Fed would have whooped his ass in the final......it is fed's time...it is written carrie....

tomnjerry..you make me laugh so much........

malteser1 , 7/12/09 3:53 PM


malteser1 , 7/12/09 4:05 PM


carrie, you are a ridiculous person. End of discussion.

Rafterfan , 7/12/09 6:29 PM


I already read the Bill Harris article and the last sentence just proved how disrespectful the person is for former greats. I personally think Rafa wont have a chance against Sampras and Becker at their prime because as shown by Tsonga, the counter to his game is supreme volleying skills which Fed can acquire but never really got into it.

It's just that Fed introduced the aggresive baseliner game that results now in having top 5 consists of all baseliners because everyone models their game to counter Roger's baseline game. The serve-and-volley art is well dead and we got a glimpse of how well Roger can play it in USOpen2008 tournament to shorten points.

The scary thing about Fed is, his game is almost perfect but he still can improve, just that he is lazy to.

FED IS THE BEST!!!

torres9 , 7/12/09 6:47 PM


Malt..... my pleasure ..... lol

I don't know y ppl r shouting so much against Roger ...... is is a complete case of

hatred .....

or they r just like that ......

or his his record makes them feel jealous .......

oopppzee..... I will go with the third option........

His blazing record...... is the main factor ...... which makes ppl jealous of him....

letzz see how...... Rafael Nadal has been competing wit Roger since 2005 ..i mean he won his first FO in 2005....... rite.....then he went on to win...... the same for four consecutive years ..... in b/w he could not win a single GS from other courts...... rite.........

In 2008 he won ..... Wimby....... n in 2009 he won ..... AO....... but lost his FO......

so after winning his first GS ........ he could grab only 6 in total in almost 5 seasons !!!! rite....

... if m not wrong ...correct if m wrong.... since Roger has won ....... 3 wimby..... 2 FO..... 4 USO .....on different surfaces .........Hard Court n Grass Court...... in 2009 he won his due ..... FO.... on clay !!!!

Now in b/w those years .... only once Djoker could get a GS....... !!

isn't it a stat to get jealous n disregard the person who the dislike coz due to him...... their favs r not been able to win GS .....

Some more reasons........ he is backy to top again..........that's no.1

he stands alone .......

15 GS .....21 str8 semis.......10 consecutive GS finales...... 4 consecutive years at least 2 majors....20 GS finale (15 won) all 5 losses came against Rafa ....... rite ....

And now u can tell....... Rafa is still young ........ he is yet to be 27 or 28 ....... u know wt ..... after winning one major..... u r qualified to win second n more.....

How could he wono 4 FO on a row....... n could not win n e other GS for once till wimby 2008 .........

And could not even able to reached finales to be thrashed by Roger at AO N USO ...... (lost twice at Wimby) ....... if he had reached all finales like Fed did..... the H2H would have been ....... now at par......... rite ...... yshhhh... would have been better !!!!!!

He could not reached o finals of those tourneys where Fed was winning those dayzzz........ rite ........yessssshhhhhh ......m rite !!!! Roger would have crushed him...... in straight setzzz........... lol

so wt say now......... i don't believe in would have could have n should have ......... but I had to write coz u ppl use !!!!!

now only time can tell....... for now there is only gr88888....... standing at top........ alone is our Roger ...... with 15 slams....... we don't care H2H ...... u ppl keep...... repeating ........

as torres says..... u have nothing else to show..... whenever u come to loose the debate ....... just jumped to H2H ..... nothing else !!!! rite !!!!

Sorry for the long post ........ which m not used to .......


Final sentence ....... Rafa is yet to achieve ..... wt Roger has achieved ...... rite !!!!!! let him cross Roger ........ we will simply n whole heartedly accept Rafa as the best ever ....

For Now....... Roger is the best of all !!!! rite .......... yup..... m again !!!!

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

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

tomnjerry2 , 7/12/09 6:52 PM


sky, explain to me why when articles are written about "how great federer is" , no matter who writes them, you guys think they are the gospel of truth, they are all legitimate; but when Billy Harris or someone else writes something inspiring and positive about rafa, the first thing you can say is that Billy Harris is a joke, he doesn't know what he's talking about. why is that? is everybody a joke that writes or presents a positive perspective about someone other than roger federer?

memi , 7/12/09 7:42 PM


Anyway, on a more present basis, are Rafans ready to embrace the possibility of Rafa being no.3?

torres9 , 7/12/09 8:04 PM


Roger was within 10 points of being No 3 the end of 2008, so what, Rafa's will be due to injury time out, whilst Roger's was due to poor performance.

carrie , 7/12/09 8:17 PM


torres, i'm sorry to burst your bubble, but a player's game always look perfect when he's playing lesser players; winning over players that you are suppose to win over makes you look pretty unbeatable, but it can also be deceptive. we've seen it happen many times; it can happen to any player. i think the real deal is when a player can consistently prove himself against "the best." that's the way i determine how good a player is. in my mind, a player can win 50 small tournaments, but it's not the same as being able to perform at the highest levels in masters' series and slams/majors. that's not hard to understand, is it?

memi , 7/12/09 8:19 PM


memi,
I think Fedfans are just shocked to see that not everyone prays at Fed's altar, Billy Harris for a start, and other sport writers.

Call me ridiculous if you like, that's the Fedfan's style, to insult people who dare to express views contrary to theirs. Roger himself said he was lucky to win Wimbledon.

carrie , 7/12/09 8:32 PM


torres, you just had a light bulb moment! it's funny that you brought up rafa being #3. my sister and i were just discussing the possibility of rafa dropping to #3. i read that murray was closing in on #2. so, we decided that iwith all things considered, t would be a interesting and great because for one thing, it doesn't bother rafa whether he's #1, #3, or #25, secondly, we would love to see which side of the draw he would be placed in; whether it would be federer's side or murray's side. wouldn't that be interesting? i can tell you now, it won't be federer's side because they don't anyone to prevent roger from reaching the final. all i can say is,"be careful what you wish for, you just might get it." if and when rafa falls to #3, andy murray look out because you're be the one to deal with him more often than federer. of course, rafa won't care one way or the other. a player without pressure is dangerous!

memi , 7/12/09 8:36 PM


memi, I agree with you 100% on the consistency thing and Big tournaments. And this is eaxactly what Fed did: performing at the big stage. 15 GS, 4 year-ending tournaments against the best 8 players. And in consistency, the best measure is 238 weeks of No.1 and also 4 year-ending no.1.

WHich is why I say Nadal has a long way yet to go not that he can't do it. Just not there YET. And I say 'almost' perfect not perfect. Only Nadal and Murray has been able to exploit his weakness consistently but Nadal and Murray's game also has it weaknesses which is against players who overpowers them.

Still much more tennis to played to determine if Nadal and Murray or anybody else can match to Fed's consistency.

torres9 , 7/12/09 8:37 PM


carrie, you are absolutely, spot on! i understand that i have to give Fedfans time to accept the article that Billy Harris wrote. they must be still in shock that there's a writer in the world, whose opinion doesn't favor federer. i'll take your advise and give them time to grieve!

memi , 7/12/09 8:46 PM


memi-Great post re:the GOAT.I agree...the articles proclaiming Fed as the greatest ever are just as ridiculous as the one procaliming Nadal imo.

janhavi , 7/12/09 8:50 PM


What is the big deal with 1 writer when almost every other writer claims that he is the best? Grieve? Rafans are the one grieving now that their hero is injured and no.2. We fed fans are more than happy that our champion just won FO and Wimby.

What is there to be sad? LOL

torres9 , 7/12/09 8:55 PM


The last thing Federer wants is the possibity of meeting either Rafa or Djokovic in the SF, if Rafa was No 3, that means Fed is unlikely to make any finals, wouldn't that be great! Fed was so happy when Murray moved up the ranks, because Murray dispatched him in the early rounds often.

carrie , 7/12/09 9:03 PM


Hurmmm... Judging by their last encounter, I think he can beat Rafa even in the semis.

ANd carrie, he never said that so you have no proof that he is happy about that. Either you are Fed or you are close to him to know what he is happy or not happy about.

torres9 , 7/12/09 9:08 PM


I'm so ready to accept whatever ranking RAFA will end up with for as long as he BEAT FEDERER ALL THE TIME!!! I think #3 is STILL very high to put RAFA into (wishful thinking) .....IF YOU WANT TO DREAM ,make it B*I*G* ....hence pray that NADAL be #50!!!

RAFA IS THE B*E*S*T*!!!

agf25agf , 7/12/09 10:56 PM


agf25agf, that's what i'm talking about! you said it right! it doesn't matter to me what ranking rafa is as long as he brings the heat especially when he plays the top guys. it would look pretty bad to be #1 or #2 with #3 or #4 beating up on you more often than not. it will be worth the wait to see what will actually transpire in the weeks and months ahead!

memi , 7/12/09 11:17 PM


haha... the same people who boasted on rafa being no.1 is now not caring what ranking he is... You guys change principles so fast...

Well, if you guys just care on Rafa beating Fed, then is it OK if he beats Fed in say Montreal and then stilll Fed win USO?

torres9 , 7/12/09 11:44 PM


AS LONG AS HE BEATS FEDERER A*L*L T*H*E* T*I*M*E*!!!

TWISTING the QUESTION won't change the ANSWER! However you put it, WE'd LOVE to see RAFA beat the hell out ofthe Swiss!... THE SAME PRINCIPLE......Just use your COMMON SENSE and you'll get the essense of the answer! ....... I suppose FED fans are so intelligent that they WILL not fool themselves expecting to put "us" in a situation where we'll be swayed away from our convictions!

agf25agf , 7/13/09 12:11 AM


LOL... whateva you say... Thanks for the compliment that we are intelligent.

We also love the 7 times Fed beats Nadal but no more than the 15 GS moments he won.

Anyway, malty, do you have an e-mail?

torres9 , 7/13/09 12:17 AM


OMG!!!...SUCH INTELLIGENCE!!!!........taking the insult as a compliment! RLOL!!!

agf25agf , 7/13/09 12:25 AM


Any fed fans have a personal blog here?

torres9 , 7/13/09 1:10 AM


torres9 , 7/13/09 1:32 AM


a real life hero?!!!! so many of these suckups make me laugh. YES the guy is a great player & YES he won the most majors & YES his record may never be touched. roosevelt was a hero, mlk was a hero, mother teresa was a hero. gimme a break for cripes sakes!!

sampras is class. takes a guy with a big set to be gracious when he's out of the books.

trixxyfest , 7/13/09 2:53 AM


don't know why this strong urge to brainwash everyone with Fed is the best/greatest propaganda; objectively he lacks so many features of a true great champ on the personality level; now they will come an tell us how many sportsmanship rewards he has in his portfolio and those were genuine - no politics involved. if you want to believe he is the best/greatest please, you are welcome to do so; if you are not a believer - than you deserve no to be pestered at least.

posmatrac , 7/13/09 3:16 AM


Agree posmatrac

jean , 7/13/09 3:22 AM


Roger's gracefulness and nice gestures is exemplary to all tennis players which is followed by Rafa himself.

5 Stefan Edberg's Sportmanship
5 Prix Orange

No need for politics, just good sportsmanship. :D

torres9 , 7/13/09 6:03 AM


pos and jean...you come across as sooooo jealous...oh my god......

torres....G-R-E-AT....A-R-T-I-C-L-E.......thanks for the read...

g-r-e-a-t...........s-p-o-r-t-m-a-n-s-h-i-p.......

F-E-D .........I-S...............T-H-E..............B-E-S-T.............

malteser1 , 7/13/09 7:45 AM


That Billy Harris article lacks credibility. Who is he to say that Nadal will beat all the other greats?

He wrote: "And how do you compare sportsmen and sports teams from different eras? That one's easy. Today's best are usually the best ever. Yes, it may be because they benefit from better sports science, better equipment and better nutrition, but they're still better. In the 100m sprint, Usain Bolt has run faster than anyone else in history, so he's the best ever. So it is with sports teams, who are bigger, stronger and faster than yesteryear's men."

Sorry mate but tennis is not just a numbers game. There are more to a tennis match like toughing it out mentally when down break/set/match point. There are also changes to court surface speed too, a move to blunt the big server's advantage during Sampras' era.

"Who, with the equipment, athleticism and know-how at their disposal, is the better package that's what we're talking about. Getting back to who's the greatest tennis player of all time. Imagine all the greats in one tournament. Roy Emerson, Pancho Gonzales, Rod Laver, Jimmy Connors, Bjorn Borg, Sampras, John McEnroe, Federer, and whoever else you like, all at their best. Who's going to win?

The answer is: Rafael Nadal."

On what court and what surface buddy? If you put Nadal against Sampras on grass at Wimbledon, I would have to give the match to Sampras hands down even if he used his racket with older technology. Hell, I even think Sampras in his prime could beat Federer in his prime on the same court. But they are a tennis generation apart so we won't know and we can't compare it the way Billy Harris is making it out.

cable , 7/13/09 7:48 AM


Just to clarify, what I meant by tennis is not just a numbers game is that a player can still win a match even if they did not win more points or games than his/her opponent. You can't simply "measure up" a tennis player like you can with a lot of the athletics events. All we have tangibly is the titles they have won, against who, on what surface/venue and perhaps to a certain degree the final scorelines.

cable , 7/13/09 8:07 AM


I have only just seen this:

carrie..YOU posted the article on fed..why all of a sudden are you saying that this is the first time you have seen the article posted here?

malteser1 , 7/11/09 9:27 PM

Homos article was from Sports Illustrated, entitled: 'Ridiculous attire doesn't fit Federer. Mine was from the Daily Mirror, entitled: 'Why Federer has become a preening poser in the emperor's new clothes.'

Two completely different articles. I know what I've posted, as usual, you mangle everything to suit yourself. Don't ever imply that I am not stating honestly what I know to be the case. Of course the first article Homos posted was a duplication, but that's not the one I said I hadn't seen before, and I hadn't seen the Sports Illustrated one before.

You are only trying to put people off posting articles that are embarrasing to the Fed.

carrie , 7/13/09 10:25 AM


malteser, you also accused me of telling you that Federer doesn't know you exist in another thread, which I never did, even though I agree with the sentiment. Please get your facts right if you insist on relating what people have said in their posts.

carrie , 7/13/09 10:49 AM


Rafa is not the greatest player. He has not even reached a U.S open final! and he has won just 1 Wimbledon and 1 AO. And hes already out of the tennis court at this age. The only thing that makes Rafa a better player is his 4 FO. Roger has wn 6 Wimby 5 US straights, 3 AO . Guyz wake up from ur dreamz . Out of 15 slams Fed won , Rafa have mised only 2 slams , rest 13 Rafa had played. If he is the greatest why was he not able to win them all .and I think Rafans dont want me to list with whom all Rafa lost during those 13 slams .

Max , 7/13/09 12:04 PM


WhO says Rafa is the GREATEST???......RAFA is the BETTER player!!!..........GREATEST(?), later when his career is over.........the same for Federer, wait 'till he puts down his racket!......for now you can JUST SETTLE FOR the word GREATER......or, do you want to end Roger's career right now?

agf25agf , 7/13/09 12:38 PM


Even if Roger decide to retire now, he is already hailed as the GOAT by the greats. But he wants keep on playing, which is better still.

HAIL KING FEDERER!!! World's Greatest!!!

torres9 , 7/13/09 12:44 PM


However you put it , Rafa is STILL better than Federer!!!.....You can compareRoger to all the players and say he's the BESTand I might probably agree...BUT when it comes to NADAL he's halfway through. Fed won a lot, and I mean a LOT of titles, but when FACED with that freaky lefty, he, MOST OFTEN than not, needs a lot of help from LUCK, all the gods of HEAVEN, and forces of NATURE to win! WELL....that's my opinion!....you can just roll over and DISAGREE!

agf25agf , 7/13/09 12:52 PM


torres never forget this:

Who, with the equipment, athleticism and know-how at their disposal, is the better package that's what we're talking about. Getting back to who's the greatest tennis player of all time. Imagine all the greats in one tournament. Roy Emerson, Pancho Gonzales, Rod Laver, Jimmy Connors, Bjorn Borg, Sampras, John McEnroe, Federer, and whoever else you like, all at their best. Who's going to win?

The answer is: Rafael Nadal.

carrie , 7/13/09 12:52 PM


Gretaest joke , The one who cannot win a tournament where players like Soderling is playing is going to win the tourney having Roy Emerson, Pancho Gonzales, Rod Laver, Jimmy Connors, Bjorn Borg, Sampras, John McEnroe, Federer. ROFL O God!!!

Max , 7/13/09 1:00 PM


Nope... I dont think Nadal is better than federer and also not better than the greats. I think he's way behind.

More often than not, Rafa loses to a player outside out of top 10 which shows that he is not consistent. Fed is more consistent.

FED IS THE BEST!!!
WORLD NO.1... 15 GS.. 4 TMC...

torres9 , 7/13/09 1:00 PM


Haha.. Bitter losers always say the winner is lucky. Well Fed is lucky he is more talented than Rafa and need not rely on speed, power, distracting grunts and time-delaying to win which enables him to play consistently without destroying his knees and body.

So yeah, Fed is Lucky he is better than Nadal

FED IS THE BEST!!!

torres9 , 7/13/09 1:09 PM


Federer BETTER stop NOW....because if (hypothetically speaking) he gets beaten, say , 1st round of a grand slam>>> or a year without a single trophy>>> or a year without a semi appearance, THAT will be the cherry on his cake....that will always be mentioned after his name BEFORE the multiple titles that he's collected throughout his career........and that's what you will call a "questionable" greatness!.... Frightening scenario.....BUT HE is the GREAT FEDERER......his FANS will ALWAYS HAVE a reason to JUSTIFY whatever happens to him......BOW your heads and HAIL To the KING!!!

agf25agf , 7/13/09 1:10 PM


deary...deary....me carrie....i think perhaps because YOU have posted soooo many articles ABOUT FED....loving EVERY SINGLE NEGATIVE article about him......that i saw far too many 'carrie's' postings...the articles that both YOU AND POS posted were still both negative carrie...i have a whole list of your postings here in front of me....which quite frankly show that YOU are a closet fed fan...particularly when you came on here as well.....saying...how 'impressed' you were with federer...and don't deny it carrie...you are the one here who says ONE THING does ANOTHER.....you go on holiday for what...a week? two weeks? then come back and say you 'watched the highlights of a match'....and then give a full breakdown on the highlights WITHOUT EVEN HAVING SEEN A FULL match....when you come on here posting CRAP about federer because YOU LOVE TO TWIST what the journos say....carrie....i'll admit to you IN THIS ONE INSTANCE...i got TWO VERY SIMILAR ARTICLES MIXED UP....not surprising carrie because they were along the same lines as you have been posting for ages now....

PLUS....everyone....here...we have a woman by the name of Carrie....having a right old screaming habdab moment telling US..NOT TO POST LONG ARTICLES...and what does she do? Hullo? anybody there? ..........she POSTS LONG, NEGATIVE ARTICLES ABOUT FEDERER...

and then...

she expects me to say nothing...to skim over her words when SHE CALLS ME A CLASS BULLY? This is the woman who portrays herself as whiter than white, who is allowed to call people names, to post long articles about a guy she doesn't even like...who then changes her mind to post how 'impressive' she is with fed's game...what a pile of crock you talk carrie....YOU are the one one babe who twists things to suit your needs......

accept it..........MOVE ON......there is a thread for rafa...go have a conversation over there carrie..you are just jealous and want to spoil our party...you sad...sad...confused woman.

malteser1 , 7/13/09 1:15 PM


Sampras didn't have the best period later in his career. Everything is bonus from here on. He already the greatest!!!

Nadal should retire now before he break his leg into two trying to keep up with Fed's flowing tennis.

FED IS THE BEST!!!

torres9 , 7/13/09 1:30 PM


Hey torres...just re-read a few of your posts....yeah..i have email...but if you give me your mail address...i'll send you one...I don't wana post it here as carrie and fft will prob send me hatemail, spam,junk..you get the score......and keep stalking me....i need some peace in my life!

Rafafans...do I think that rafa is a GREAT CHAMPION? Hell yes.....absolutely...a credit to the game of tennis...

Do I think that Rafa is THE BEST? hell...no.....no way....have you seen the losses that rafa has had (and I am just going from 2007 to present...cos far too many)....

if we are having a discussion about consistency...you simply CANNOT compare rafa to roger..roger wins hands down...no contest...no question..put ya guns away boys.....n' girls......

I know rafa is a 'better' player now in terms of his game...but fact is fact....apart from this...rafa is experiencing MORE injuries being NO.1 than he ever has during his whole career! that's why everyone now is gunning for him...i am pretty sure (but what do you guys think?)...that the first match rafa plays..whoever his opponent is...is gonna have him hitting the ball from side to side on the court...they are gonna be running him ragged......UNLESS he changes his game....the beauty of rafa's game is that he is soooo powerful.....he IS a powerplayer but in order to gain the longevity which he needs to stay in the game...he is going to HAVE to change...as Roger has changed his game...(more volleys...more DROPSHOTS..)...in order to evolve.....

In 2007...rafa lost in QF to gonzales at the AO and in dubai.....he was defeated by novak in the miami masters QF...He lost to fed in the masters series at Hamburg...

Nadal was also upset in the QF of the Stella Artois queens club (now renamed for this year onwards)....rafa lost in cincinnati FIRST MATCH.....defeated by Ferrer in US Open FOURTH ROUND...beaten by nalby in QF of madrid and paris masters....defeated by Fed in tennis masters cup in shanghai SF.

In 2008....chennai open YOUZHNY beat rafa 6:0....6:1...Rafa reached the semis of the AO and finals of 2008 masters...(there are plenty more stats...go read his stats).

In 2009, rafa has lost to murray, fed, soderling (which i feel was the turning point)..... warwinka, et al.....you simply cannot argue consistency guys...it just doesn't work......rafa has lost MORE matches as a No.1 player than roger EVER has.....

torres you are right...we fedfans said after the FO this year...that everything was a bonus for fed....he then went on to win wimby...fed is beyond orbit....he is beyond reason....he is beyond man....the guy has picked himself up....started to believe in his game more...changed some of his tactics (and he needed to)...and has gone on to win the main tournys with a couple of 'minor' ones along the way...

FED IS THE BEST!!! this is the truth....

C'MON!

Go: roger: go!

malteser1 , 7/13/09 3:56 PM


Malteser, there you go again, making things up. Tell me the time and date that I asked posters NOT TO POST LONG ARTICLES, and copy my text here!!!

You simply cannot get your facts right. I asked that people stick to the subject matter of the thread, and when you criticised me for posting the article which said Rafa was the greatest on this thread, you should realise that this thread is dealing with Samprass saying he thinks Federer is the greatest, so an article disputing that is very relevant to this thread.

Your professors must be pulling their hair out with your incapacity to grasp the relevance of simple text.

carrie , 7/13/09 4:05 PM


may i add to your post malt that the way he kept the balance between his private life and his tennis life is another strenght issue about him
i mean look to rafa he lost it when his parents got separated, but he is a guy who is on tour for what 10 months a year and his parents had issues for years so it is not a news for him, when Roger made it to 21 semi final in row no body has a perfect life he must had some of them in not a perfect time but some how he ended up in so perfect way, amazing, even the planning for the baby couldnt be more perfect this guy is something else!

tennislover , 7/13/09 4:09 PM


carrie, i think it's special ed, maltosser can't possibly be in normal class!

isn't it interesting that quite a few fed fans here (not all of course) never get their facts right. torres has been corrected numoerous times and maltosser too who didn't even know there was a difference between seeding and ranking, yet rampages on about fed. much as I hate fed, these retards don't deserve to be his fans! do you even understand the technicalities of the game maltosser?

homos , 7/13/09 4:18 PM


tennishater, that's why rafa is a better peson than cry baby (CB) can ever hope to be. see rafa knows what is important beyond tennis and in life. he's not obsessed like CB who'll do anything to win or be called the greatest like taking suspicious no. of toilet breaks during FO and Wimb after he loses a set, takes swipes at Djokovic and Murray or accuse others of gamesmanship if they beat him like Safin at AO 2005 SF, and we know the list of that category. CB doesn't give a shit about anyone or anything but himself so why would he care about his parents or anyone else? rafa on the other hand is a better human being and knows the world doesn't revolve around tennis. i said it before and i say it again - fans admire a player or put him on a pedestal because they posesses and/or admire the same characteriestics. simple as that. that's why you guys get so agressive like CB when he loses, starts with the excues and digs. it's a ritual with him and his fans.

homos , 7/13/09 4:28 PM


Absolutely Homos, couldn't agree with you more. Rafa is a far more caring and rounded person, his parents' welfare mean more to him than tennis, unlike the SELFISH Federer who doesn't want anyone else to win a single title, or match, and who couldn't care less about what is going on with people closest to him. This is probably why he attracts the likes of posters here who are prepared to go to any lengths to discredit other posters even if they have to make it up.

carrie , 7/13/09 4:36 PM


homos your comments are not even worth commenting on....start calling me names again? i will just send them straight to Cheryl...in fact...it's done...you are an idiot of the highest nature....you cannot argue with the facts homos....your problem is your own ego...you are a loser of the game of tennis..you don't understand sportsmanship or the technicalities of the game...you just come on here when you have had a bad day and take it out on me...because i am the one that responds to you..you need me to keep you alive..to fire you up..because you see your own unintelligence shining as bright as a light...you need to go and get an education because you talk gutter mouth...it's the only way you can respond....homos...GROW UP or GET LOST.

malteser1 , 7/13/09 4:38 PM


homos...no different to fft NOT KNOWING WHAT A GOLDEN SLAM was.....and why should it be something to gloat at (in your case) that one person amongst thousands doesn't know EVERYTHING about tennis? I am here to learn as much as the next person homos...do YOU know everything about tennis or are YOU the exception to the rule? Oh to be in such esteemed company sir homos!

homos why are you calling tennislover...tennishater? are you testing out the alphabet or something....abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz....go learn the alphabet homos..you might then be able to spell people's names right....

carrie...honey...sugarlumps....pllllzzz don't worry about me...just past my masters exams! Hallelujah! am soooo happy...was such hard work to get to that level...but am learning all the time....

carrie...DONT LIE...every time an article was posted that was positive about fed...you came on and posted a negative one..you thrive on it girl...it makes your day...i have no respect for you whatsoever because all you do is twist things when you get found out...are you going to admit that you posted you were 'impressed' with federer or are you ducking out now that you have a bit of support from your minder? so pathetic carrie.....you are the ONLY one here that discredits me...you must have a real thing for me carrie....but hate to tell you am not interested in your nasty spirit...you are just a wannabe here carrie...if you actually discussed some proper tennis and articles..you might actually enjoy it instead of constantly flooding a fedthread with anti fedcomments...don't you get tired carrie of being such a hypocrite?

malteser1 , 7/13/09 4:49 PM


Malteser, you can't produce the evidence so you resort to abuse. In future, before you open your mouth, engage brain.

Well what can I say, you are giving the masters degree a bad name, but then there are masters and masters, and I'M NOT AT ALL IMPRESSED WITH YOURS.

carrie , 7/13/09 4:55 PM


you wouldn't be impressed with my masters carrie...because you couldn't even begin to understand the nature of the content...to research things PROPERLY...and not to quote ridiculous sources.....who the hell cares about whether you are impressed carrie? the only other time you used the word 'impressed' was when YOU SAID YOU WERE IMPRESSED WITH FEDERER'S GAME....are you now denying that carrie....

1. Did you or did you not carrie post that YOU WERE IMPRESSED WITH FEDERER'S GAME? YES OR NO...try and answer a direct question for once.

2. Did you or did you not carrie...on a REGULAR BASIS post ANTI-FED ARTICLES on this thread...carrie...yes or no?

3. Did you or did you not agree carrie that you 'liked' the twist on my name.....yes or no?

4. are you...pro fed or anti fed...yes or no carrie...

I am all ears....

malteser1 , 7/13/09 5:40 PM


Malteser, I have tried to avoid you, because you are trouble, but you insist on mentioning me in virtually all your posts which I am prepared to ignore, but when you misrepresent me, I am forced to set the record straight.

So what if I was impressed with Federer on one occasion, that doesn't mean I am impressed with him full stop, and yes I have posted many negative articles about Federer because they are in tune with what I think.

I scroll through your posts because I am tired of your relentless tirade against people who don't agree with you, that's why it was only this morning that I happened to see the one where you accused me of saying I hadn't seen an article that I said I was seeing for the first time. Please save yourself the anguish and do not read anything I post, then we won't have to communicate with each other, because I've stopped reading yours, because I'm not interested in anything you have to say.

carrie , 7/13/09 5:54 PM


malt: I wouldn't go on too much about your masters stuff ("because you couldn't even begin to understand the nature of the content...to research things PROPERLY...and not to quote ridiculous sources.") when you've PROVEN that you cannot provide a simple definition that has to do with your subject, you always CHANGE quotes to fit your need, TWIST quotes, you hardly ever post sources, you post 2 month old articles trying to pass them off as new (all articles have the date they were posted so you conveniently left it out), you spend half your time trying to tell others not to listen to me or carrie or whoever (as if they aren't smart enough to figure out who they can talk to or not??) and the other half is spent insulting people.

I remember when carrie said 'fed's game was impressive' after he won Wimby. A simple one line post. I also remember how you attacked her in a huge rambling post and called her a hypocrite, fake fan (and quite a few other names also) and how you would never believe anything she says (and told others to do the same) after she dared post an article that debated whether fed was the GOAT. Do YOU deny that????

".no different to fft NOT KNOWING WHAT A GOLDEN SLAM was"
I knew what an OFFICIAL CAREER GOLDEN SLAM was. Another one of your changing and twisting quotes. Recordbreaks had said that fed had it and I disagreed saying the I thought the exact opposite. I then asked Cheryl or Ricky, to confirm what I thought and Cheryl did.

Also, that list of Rafa's losses.....you kept saying "rafa has lost MORE matches as a No.1 player than roger EVER has." Hate to break it to you since you think you're soooo smart, Rafa WASN'T number 1 in 2007 and he didn't reach number 1 until mid August of 08. True comparison is if you also list fed's losses along side rafa's losses as number 1!!!!

fan4tennis , 7/13/09 6:29 PM


you've been busted carrie and you know it!

a list of your posts showing how negative you have been about federer..and have you noticed fedfans how much carrie uses nadal's injuries as an excuse...and how the woman has the biggest ego on this thread by saying that 'billy harris agrees with 'us'....NOT that she agrees with billy harris..

seriously carrie..once again..don't twist this...it is YOU that have posted NEGATIVE ARTICLE AFTER NEGATIVE ARTICLE about fed...time and time again...and trying to spoil the celebrations that the fedfans have been having...each time we have been happy...you have come on and posted a negative thread.....

i counted 23 negative posts from you...here are just a few...even niloofar asked you to stop....and counter argued what you were saying...what does that say about YOU carrie.....?

and when i had left a thread...YOU then proceeded to call me a bully IN MY ABSENCE....so that allowed YOU to be the bully carrie and then blame me...you are a real piece of work...BUSTED CARRIE! ...look at all the excuses that carrie has made for federer's wins.....rafa was injured...roddick was injured..the tennis ball was injured....bla bla bla...talk tennis carrie and STOP POSTING YOUR NEGATIVE ARTICLES...give us all a break....

QUOTE CARRIE:
I'm glad Sue Barker pointed out to Roger that he has been able to reclaim the No1 position because Rafa couldn't compete this year, Roger's response was that injury was part of the game, so I don't want to hear him use his back as an excuse anymore.
carrie , 7/5/09 9:34 PM

RODDICK HURT: Roddick will not play in this weekend's Davis Cup quarterfinal against host Croatia after injuring his hip during his five-set loss to Federer. His spot on the U.S. squad will be filled by Mardy Fish. (Reuters)

If Andy hadn't got injured, who knows what would have happened.
carrie , 7/7/09 6:22 PM

Daily Mirror

Why Roger Federer has become a preening poser in the emperor's new clothes

By Oliver Holt 8/07/2009

Read Oliver Holt's column every Wednesday on Mirror.co.uk
Roger Federer and Andy Roddick (Pic:Getty)He's the best there's ever been but if he doesn't want to be remembered as a genius who became bloated with self-importance and pomposity, he needs to get a grip.
carrie , 7/9/09 3:41 PM

Is there now a ban on posting tabloid articles?
carrie , 7/10/09 11:44 AM

carrie...
I didn't say there is a ban,but I was surprised that u did so,because it was sth u yourself don't believe in.as u said before that u don't have a problem with the jacket.
overall there is no need to post trashing articles from a person who is not more legitimate than we are. there are some trashing articles about Rafa out there but I don't think I have to believe them becasue I'm a fed fan!!
niloofar , 7/10/09 12:28 PM

Roger was within 10 points of being No 3 the end of 2008, so what, Rafa's will be due to injury time out, whilst Roger's was due to poor performance.
carrie , 7/12/09 8:17 PM

there are plenty more but i think the fedfans get the gist....it's just soooo boring now carrie.....think of something new...and exciting for a change.....

there's your evidence honey.....

malteser1 , 7/13/09 6:34 PM


One simple question malt. Is this a fedfan site or is it a site to debate tennis topics? Debate involves pro and con. Some provide articles for the pro and some provide articles of the con. Do you not get that concept, after all, you should be familiar with that seeing as you are going for your masters? If not, just go back to RF.com.

malt said to carrie: "and when i had left a thread...YOU then proceeded to call me a bully IN MY ABSENCE..."
You have done the EXACT same thing!!! The day Rafa withdrew, I stopped responding to you and I quit posting in fed threads and stayed in the Rafa threads and the Murray threads for over a week. YET, you could not stop calling me names and talking trash about me IN MY ABSENCE! Even others commented on that, knowing that I had not been responding. EVERYDAY for over a week, you bad-mouthed me, even tho I was not posting in the fed threads.

malt: I wouldn't go on too much about your masters stuff ("because you couldn't even begin to understand the nature of the content...to research things PROPERLY...and not to quote ridiculous sources.") when you've PROVEN that you cannot provide a simple definition that has to do with your subject, you always CHANGE quotes to fit your need, TWIST quotes, lie, you hardly ever post sources, you post 2 month old articles trying to pass them off as new (all articles have the date they were posted so you conveniently left it out), you spend half your time trying to tell others not to listen to me or carrie or whoever (as if they aren't smart enough to figure out who they can talk to or not??) and the other half is spent insulting people.

I remember when carrie said 'fed's game was impressive' after he won Wimby. A simple one line post. I also remember how you attacked her in a huge rambling post and called her a hypocrite, fake fan (and quite a few other names also) and how you would never believe anything she says (and told others to do the same) after she dared post an article that debated whether fed was the GOAT. Do YOU deny that????

".no different to fft NOT KNOWING WHAT A GOLDEN SLAM was"
I knew what an OFFICIAL CAREER GOLDEN SLAM was. Another one of your changing and twisting quotes. Recordbreaks had said that fed had it and I disagreed saying the I thought the exact opposite. I then asked Cheryl or Ricky, to confirm what I thought and Cheryl did.

Also, that list of Rafa's losses.....you kept saying "rafa has lost MORE matches as a No.1 player than roger EVER has." Hate to break it to you since you think you're soooo smart, Rafa WASN'T number 1 in 2007 and he didn't reach number 1 until mid August of 08. True comparison is if you also list fed's losses along side rafa's losses as number 1!!!!




fan4tennis , 7/13/09 7:02 PM


"So what if I was impressed with Federer on one occasion, that doesn't mean I am impressed with him full stop, and yes I have posted many negative articles about Federer because they are in tune with what I think.
I scroll through your posts because I am tired of your relentless tirade against people who don't agree with you"
carrie 7/13/09 5:54 PM

malt: all you did in posting excerpts of carrie's posts was prove her point!!!

fan4tennis , 7/13/09 7:08 PM


THANK YOU f4t!!!

carrie , 7/13/09 7:12 PM


FAN4TENNIS....Don't you EVER come on here accusing me of calling your names FIRST....you know as well as i do because i have a whole list of names here before me...that you SUPPORTED homos' posmatrac's use of names and insults...so much so that you chose to use your own twist....want a reminder? 'Moldy'...how grown up of you fft....I then AFTER you had called me the name and agreed with homos...as did carrie...BOTH OF YOU....loving the 'maltosser' name...i have it in front me...carrie...'yes....i like that name'....etc....both called names FIRST...don't you EVER...EVER twist this to suit YOUR purposes....PLUS fft....you then came on and told me to...your words...'butt out'...so I am gonna return the favour....butt out of a conversation fft that you were NOT a part of......just ridiculous....you are ridiculous...i have told you TIME AND TIME again NOT to post me because I am sick of your ridiculously negative posts....yes of course this is a debate...but all you do fft is come on here saying how much YOU and the same goes for carrie....how much the both of you hate federer.....I have NEVER said that I hate rafa...i respect him as a champion...he is just not my favourite......nothing wrong in that....what i have NEVER done is post...article after article of all the BAD PRESS about rafa...that is something that the both of you have done time and time again...it is utterly pointless and utterly boring....the both of you are responsible for that....

and...

fft...dont use ME as an excuse for not posting here...i have thought long and hard about responding to you fft because i don't like you...i don't like what you say...i don't like what you stand for...fft=hatred and bad sportsmanship...you are not a nice person and you do rafa no favours supporting him...or is it murray? or is it roddick...i kind of lose track with you.......... you see....

go and count the number of posts FFT that YOU have posted on this thread and do the same for me and do the same for carrie and do the same on the other fedthreads and see how many posts YOU have written guys.....you take the gold award....then once you have done that....count the number of posts from me on the rafa thread.....see what I mean...once you have done that....count the number of negative articles I have written about rafa...and compare that to yours....absolutely no contest..

whilst i agree with the healthy debate about federer/nadal...what is sooo healthy ladies about what YOU BOTH post about OUR CHAMPION....particularly when he has won the most recent slam...you have both done nothing to add to the thread other than bring it down....if you choose not to post fft...that is your choice....i doubt very much whether a 28 year old woman can teach a 50 year old woman anything in terms of how to behave...and the fact that you are using me as an excuse fft shows just how childish and purile you are.....

me posting carrie's excerpts fft...were asked for by carrie and show the excuses that she uses each time rafa loses/withdraws..she uses injuries as an excuse...but that is nothing to do with you so butt out...listen to your own voice....

furthermore......carrie....you haven't answered q).4 that i asked you previously...it doesn't surprise me...both you and fft i assume are the same person.....you both dodge questions like you dodge bullets.....

if you want a healthy debate and discussion..then the both of you should stop calling names...which you both have done....i can hold my head up and state categorically that it was only when you called me names that i retaliated..you started this fft...not me...so i'll thank you to get back on track and clean up your own act.....you should know better being the age that you are....

malteser1 , 7/13/09 8:04 PM


malt: your post reminds me of a 5 year old, sticking his bottom lip out in a pout, whining to his mother..."Well SHE called me name first!" LMAO!!! If torres jumped off a bridge, would you do it too since he did it first????

"whilst i agree with the healthy debate about federer/nadal...what is sooo healthy ladies about what YOU BOTH post about OUR CHAMPION...." Obviously you STILL don't understand what the term "debate" means! Pros vs cons!!! Very simple.

"you should know better being the age that you are...."
And you should know better also at 28 years of age!!!!! The only reason I started responding back was to complain about you using a term for a large group of people as an insult to homos. You used that term REPEATEDLY and in a derogatory manner. You insulted a group of millions of people and you are now showing that all you care about is YOU!!!! MOST people at 28 years of age understand NOT to make a sick 'play on words' that offends a large group of the world!

fan4tennis , 7/13/09 8:30 PM


I don't think carrie minded me "butting in" malt, otherwise she wouldn't have said "THANK YOU f4t!!!"
BTW, thanks for proving carrie's point AGAIN!!!

fan4tennis , 7/13/09 8:35 PM


I have some comments on that SI article and the rest of the stupid articles about the jacket( a bit out of the topic,sorry)

it seems that the sportswriters were out of any new topic because they had paid all their tributes after the FO,I honestly don't like Fed's attires for Wimby BUT He does it for fun, he doesn't wear it to play in.

Nike sponsors Fed... of course they would have something ready to celebrate IN CASE Fed made history.it was brought to him after the match and he said he did NOT know about it on ESPN.and some one on another forum said that when Sue barker asked him about it he said it's 14,(though I'm not sure about this part).

Fed was the only guy who mentioned Roddick as a force on the other half of the draw when Rafa pulled out.
I feel some journo's anguish for Roddick has clouded their judgement.all this stupid talk for a barely visible 15 on his back. why wouldn't anyone listen to his words to see how much he respects Roddick? when everyone considered Roddick to be done,Roger kept saying ppl don't give enough credit to him.

niloofar , 7/13/09 8:43 PM


fft..am going to respond to your first post and then your second...and we'll take it from there......debate is simple..you are right....secondly...you and i are NEVER going to agree about anything......you are right about me acting like a 5 yr old child...as i was writing the first post..i felt like one....i didn't like what i was writing..so i was trying to get down to basics and it does sound that way...so don't know how else to explain it.....but its done now.....

i am NOT answerable to you fft....you are not answerable to me...having said that....i found it strange that despite the person who started the names....homos....by calling me '....tosser'..you did not berate him...but flew at me in his defence...despite me saying categorically that i was not homophobic..and i am not....yet you continued with the argument that i was...you are a very mad woman fft...mad in the sense that you pick up on words and go with what YOU think i meant....i know what i meant...i put a caveat after i had the play on words with homos...job done...like i said..whatever you think of me is irrelevant...you are nothing to me....i care not one jot about you...end of..i know the same is returned....what i don't like about you is you don't berate homos...pos for calling names when they started first...yet you berate a fedfan whom the insult was aimed at....doesn't make sense to me.....

moving to your next post.....you told me not to 'butt in' on many conversations you were having despite this being a debating forum...are you now denying that? oops...i asked you a question...and i know you don't do answers....

you seem to take great pleasure in putting people down...i guess that is your right as a mother? a parent? a 'grown up'..and whilst i am sort of a grown up...i accept the fact that i am still learning about life and loving life....you are not so...you are at an age where you are not prepared to learn...you dig your heels in...you are stubborn...hateful...and spiteful sometimes...but i know that means nothing to you....so what the hell...

finally...and in order to move this conversation on...you and i need to make a truce...i am sick to the teeth of replying to you....of arguing with you of trying to get you to see my viewpoint and i am sure you are feeling the same...tho' that is presumptious of me...you are probably far too old to even care anymore...

the only way i can see forward is that YOU IGNORE what i post.....I IGNORE what you post...and everytime we see each other's name...we just IGNORE each other.....what i would say to you is that you don't call me names and if one of your rafa fans calls me a name....dont justify it fft...don't condone it....just be aware that calling names is not professional...is not the done thing and is one thing that i have not ever done to anyone on this forum...without them doing it to me first....it is not what i am about....but you will have your own view on that.....

you don't speak for the world fft...you speak for yourself and no one else....so please try to get off your soap box every now and again...or run for president....dont put me into the category of the one who insults...i don't...far from it....

so a truce to ignore each other....i can stick to that.....i don't think you can tho'...i think you secretly enjoy it when you see my name....example......deuce posted a link and described it as an article....i then posted half of the link...you then FLEW at me....blogger this...blogger that...don't you know what a blog is malt...haha.....etc....i then responded that the initial link was from deuce...you completely backed down....you had realised your mistake...but your initial reaction was to have a go at me.....and then when you realised it was not initially from me, but from deuce...you realised your mistake....and took an entirely different tack...that just proves beyond doubt that you have an issue with me.....

so....a choice....choose anothe fedfan to stalk....ignore me completely and i will do the same and we could then after what....a month? realise that this 'love affair' is what we both need and who knows? we may have a future?

malteser1 , 7/13/09 8:52 PM


What about the respect that Murray deserves niloofar? He didn't get to #3 by twiddling his thumbs.

"I feel some journo's anguish for Roddick has clouded their judgement"
I'm sorry, but the articles I posted did not like fed's clothes, same as your 'judgement' ("I honestly don't like Fed's attires for Wimby") and none of them claimed he played in them also.

I live in the US niloo, and believe me, fed was not the ONLY guy who mentioned Roddick as a force. Maybe he was in the articles THAT YOU READ, but NOT in all the articles out there. No one person can read EVERY article out there. You read some I can't and vice versa. We post them here to debate an issue! Posting only one side defeats the purpose of debate.

fan4tennis , 7/13/09 8:57 PM


malt: "despite the person who started the names....homos....by calling me '....tosser'..you did not berate him...but flew at me in his defence...despite me saying categorically that i was not homophobic..and i am not..."

I did not defend homos calling you names. I defended the fact that the name you used to make fun of homos was a term that, used in the context you did, was an insult to a large group of people. You still don't get that do you?? Your adding a disclaimer (only the first time you used it) doesn't make it any better or make you unaccountable. You repeatedly used it over a span of 2 weeks in the same negative context even after being warned! Insulting you and insulting a whole demograph of people is NOT comparable!

fan4tennis , 7/13/09 9:08 PM


fft...this is my last post to you tonight..and i sincerely hope forever on this forum to be honest.....you seem to be bringing up old news...you seem to fail to understand who the person was who started the mud slinging....i responded....play on words with a caveat...a long time ago...In UK law...you only have to put a caveat ONCE and you don't have to repeat it time and time again...i dont expect you to know that as you are an american and so would not understand how the word 'caveat' works over here....nothing i can do about that....once is enough and it automatically carries on...

i do get it fft..i get it very well...so you don't need to try and say to me that i dont understand things...when i do...when rafafans (those named above...including you)....get onto the bandwagon and support the name calling..it isn't nice...i was told by TT to IGNORE the comments and i think i did pretty good for a while but when it started up again...i felt i had no choice but to report you and some of the other rafafans because it was becoming childish and silly.....when a remark is made to ONE person that does not mean it applies to the whole world...that is just silly thinking fft...and you know that....i don't have to justify my thoughts/feelings on any one person around the world...that is too personal and you strike me as the sort of person that would say something was yellow when it was clearly pink...so there is no point...

i cannot say that i have enjoyed our discussions...i haven't...so from now on the truce has to be put in place for the sake of this forum rafa/fed fans...i know that people like torres...niloofar..janhavi...fedex...sky will be able to battle with you and give you a good run for your money....but we have to stop corrresponding with each other...we dislike each other intensely....i feel it...i dont like it...i dont want it....so we both need to ignore each other from now on.....so leave it now fft....

malteser1 , 7/13/09 9:29 PM


Here is my response to the article:
"Wrong again malt. Didn't expect that article to be any different than it was seeing as the writer of it lists herself as "Melbournian Arts/Law Student. Aspiring kick-ass lawyer. Tennis Blogger. Wannabe writer. Federer Fanatic. Fashionista." Was simply an opinion by someone who opened themselves a site to do so. Cannot compare that to an article from an esteemed paper like the NYT or established mag like SI."
fan4tennis 7/11/09 11:00 PM

Here is my response to your LONG tirade:
"No need to question deuce about it. All I said was " Didn't expect that article to be any different than it was." It was a fed fan who wrote it on her blog so it was expected to be pro-fed opinion.
I have no problem with deuce posting it as I believe that people should be able to post dissenting views and articles since this site is for debate. Only posting one view defeats that purpose."
fan4tennis 7/11/09 11:35 PM

NOW you post: "deuce posted a link and described it as an article....i then posted half of the link...you then FLEW at me....blogger this...blogger that...don't you know what a blog is malt...haha.....etc....i then responded that the initial link was from deuce...you completely backed down....you had realised your mistake...but your initial reaction was to have a go at me.....and then when you realised it was not initially from me, but from deuce...you realised your mistake....and took an entirely different tack...that just proves beyond doubt that you have an issue with me....."

NOW who is the one sounding hysterical and totally changing the context of what people write????

fan4tennis , 7/13/09 9:37 PM


way to go fan4tennis!!! (-:

agf25agf , 7/13/09 10:24 PM


nice one agf! glad she entertained you buddy.....

sky....haven't seen you on the forum tonight...so this one is especially for you.....and for zoey.....and for torres...hell! for ALL those FEDFANS out there.....mwah to you all!

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! Sky did you say you were going to the US Open...or was it recordbreaks?

malteser1 , 7/13/09 10:28 PM


malteser--- i do enjoy your exchanges! You're both REMARKABLE pillars of your respective groups!!!.....it's just that you know where i'm inclined to gravitate!

agf25agf , 7/13/09 10:33 PM


agf..it's not a problem at all....really....it's all cool.........enjoy....i know that she sees herself as a bit of a comedian..so job done agf...she has a fan - you!

torres...i think in an earlier post you mentioned something about rankings....this has just come out...so this is for you....RODDICK has swapped places with DELPO....(by 15 points!)....it's all so close!


Hamburg - Wimbledon champion Roger Federer stayed ahead of Rafael Nadal and Andy Murray at the top of the men's tennis rankings, issued on Monday by the ATP.

The leading 10 was largely unchanged, with losing Wimbledon finalist Andy Roddick of the United States moving up one place to fifth, exchanging places with Argentina's Juan Martin del Potro.

The Swiss Federer had dethroned Spanish rival Nadal last week after 10 and a half months at the top.

Federer stays on 11,220 points, with currently-injured Nadal on 10,735 and British Wimbledon semi-finalist Murray on 9,450.

ATP top 10 as of July 13 (previous ranking in parenthesis): "#" 1. (1) Roger Federer, Switzerland, 11,220 points 2. (2) Rafael Nadal, Spain, 10,735
3. (3) Andy Murray, Britain, 9,450 4. (4) Novak Djokovic, Serbia, 8,150 5. (6) Andy Roddick, United States, 5,440 6. (5) Juan Martin del Potro, Argentina, 5,425 7. (7) Gilles Simon, France, 4,000 8. (9) Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, France, 3,600 9. (8) Fernando Verdasco, Spain, 3,500 10. (10) Fernando Gonzales????

malteser1 , 7/13/09 10:38 PM


Thanks Malty.. The losers kept getting louder and louder...

And homos, when did I get corrected? f4t said that Sue Barker asked about Rafa in the acceptance speech and said that Fed frowned but when I saw the trophy presentation, it was fed who mentioned Rafa.

And if you think we don't deserve to be Fed fans, at least we don't call Rafa names as much as the Rafans here call fed names like crybaby, smugalot etc. Rafa is a polite boy so none of the Rafans here even follow the example of their hero so I think it's clear who doesn't deserve to be the fans.

Sorry, Rafans can't even answer my questions, they just run away from it:
1) If H2H is as important as what Rafans put it, why is the ATP rankings based on performance in Major events, not H2H?

2) If Rafa is better than Fed, why has Rafa been no.2 to Fed for 3 years plus?

FED IS JUST THE BEST!!!!

torres9 , 7/13/09 11:15 PM


as a tennis fan:

1) atp rankings are implicitly based on h2h, the better h2h vs. other players the more atp points, that's a simple logic

2) list us all Fed's achievements when he was 23

posmatrac , 7/14/09 12:12 AM


post, nice try but
1) Not really, Rafa has better H2H towards Federer but he was no.2 all the time because he lost to numerous players which he has better H2H as well, losing to a player in 1st round counts as 1 loss and losing to a player in the final also counts as 1 loss. So it is not H2H, but how far you go in tournaments. Which is why Fed is so dominating.

2) This is not an answer but a question shows that you can't argue the fact that Rafa has always been no.2 to Fed, hence no.2 can't be better than no.1? Have a nice day.

torres9 , 7/14/09 2:14 AM


I dare to disagree with the writer of the article malt posted:

"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 winning more Wimby's than fed has no bearing? The fact that Rafa WON 4 FO instead of merely reaching the finals has no bearing? Those include TWO different surfaces! He has NOT played "at a consistently higher level than anybody ever, on every surface." He has reached more finals than anybody, but as we all know, in history, it only matters whether you won or not (one of torres's fave comments to make). He is NOT better ON EVERY SURFACE. If he wants to make that claim, then fed should be judged on each surface, THEN if he comes out on top of ALL FOUR surfaces, that claim would be true.

fan4tennis , 7/14/09 2:15 AM


Even if Rafa@Borg@Guga and Sampras is the best on clay and grass, no one is at a HIGH LEVEL on every surface. Rafa is not at a high level on US Hardcourts in the past 5 years and also Sampras is not at a high level on clay. Only Fed plays well ON EVERY SURFACE!!

FED IS THE BEST!!!!

torres9 , 7/14/09 2:24 AM


Like the article said, Micheal Jordan may not be the best passer or best rebounder or the best defensive player ever but he is still regarded as the best ever.

Fed may not be the best ever on grass (yet) or best ever on clay but no one is better as a player on every surface.

torres9 , 7/14/09 2:30 AM


"Fed may not be the best ever on grass (yet) or best ever on clay but no one is better as a player on every surface. "

That makes no sense! How can you be the best player of all time, as the writer claims he is, if he is NOT the best on ALL surfaces as you admit torres. Being the most consistent and being the best is 2 totally different things. Everyone admits he is the most consistent, and that can lead to being the best on a particular surface, but not yet in this case.

fan4tennis , 7/14/09 2:50 AM


Haha... Not yet?

15 GS... already surpassed everyone.... Do you want him to win 20 SLams, f4t? You must be kidding me...

torres9 , 7/14/09 3:34 AM


"Fed may not be the best ever on grass (yet) or best ever on clay but no one is better as a player on every surface. "

"Haha... Not yet?"

Both comments by torres. You already have admitted he isn't the "best ever" on grass and clay. My comment (" Everyone admits he is the most consistent, and that can lead to being the best on a particular surface, but not yet in this case.") was just agreeing with you and now you change your mind?

fan4tennis , 7/14/09 4:39 AM


"So it is not H2H, but how far you go in tournaments"

if you go far in tournaments your h2h against players you beat, improves undeniably.

posmatrac , 7/14/09 6:17 AM


what I don't get as a non-Roger tennis fan is why we have to be bombarded with this "Roger is GOAT" propaganda.It's a subjective issue and I don't have to consider Roger as GOAT even though I respect all his achievements...

sisterofnight12 , 7/14/09 7:20 AM


fft...are you not agreeing to the truce? don't use my name.....just have a good old chat with everyone else.......the article was from an American journo...if you 'dare to disagree with him'...your words..then take it up with him....it was actually nice to read an article from someone who wasn't an hysterical American for a change...he left an email address...so go contact him and tell him how you feel...am sure he will reply....

malteser1 , 7/14/09 7:28 AM


Guys never forget this very apt assessment, case closed:

?Who, with the equipment, athleticism and know-how at their disposal, is the better package that's what we're talking about. Getting back to who's the greatest tennis player of all time. Imagine all the greats in one tournament. Roy Emerson, Pancho Gonzales, Rod Laver, Jimmy Connors, Bjorn Borg, Sampras, John McEnroe, Federer, and whoever else you like, all at their best. Who's going to win?

The answer is: Rafael Nadal.?

carrie , 7/14/09 9:34 AM


f4t, the best student in the class is sumone who scores A in every subject for 5 years, not a student who only scores A in 1 subject and get B for other subjects. For me, it's as simple as this.

In this case, Roger's level in all surfaces overall is the BEST EVER and consistent for 5 years. Sue Barker said: How's the feeling being the most successful player ever in Grand Slam history?. SPOT ON.

15 GS. 21 SF = most consistent ever. 20 Finals. WOW...

He may not be the best on each and every surfaces but overall he's the BEST EVER.
The way I see it, there's no other.

Postmatrac, your shallow analysis is what I expected from you. H2H against ALL players do not necessarily go up even if you win the major tournaments. There are players you just don't meet often. Like Nadal never met Fed in USO for 5 years because he was not good enough. So it just shows that H2H doesn't improve indeniably if you go far in tournaments over players you don't meet.

"In my book Federer is the greatest. The guy is a legend. He's an icon. He's a credit to the game." -Sampras (the most qualified person to assess GOAT)

FED IS JUST THE BEST

torres9 , 7/14/09 9:52 AM


carrie , 7/13/09 4:36 PM

Exactly, carrie, exactly. the only redeeming feature of the tennis fan world is having rafa and nole fans (and some reasonable fed fans of course) like the ones here who can accept varying opinions without going... shall we say...insane with rage!

homos , 7/14/09 10:40 AM


The ones that is insane with rage are the ones who linger around Fed threads with jealousy and hate like carrie,f4t and you, homos and can't stand someone getting compliments. If that is not jealousy and envy, what is it then?

torres9 , 7/14/09 10:54 AM


Spot on torres9, they have no business to be on this thread if they have nothing good to say about Federer. It is jealousy and envy of the highest degree.

eqm , 7/14/09 11:21 AM


torres...eqm...absolutely...and when a certain person.....on a FEDTHREAD....says 'case closed'....shows the arrogance of the woman..apart from them some rafa fans think that it is rafa's god given right to reach a slam final.....as torres said earlier....rafa needs to be more consistent in a slam...he isn't and you cannot argue that.......federer has earnt his place.....time and time and time and time again...(I would write it 21 times consecutively...but it becomes a bit boring)...

it never ceases to amaze me how every now and again homos will pop up to criticise the fedfans...doesn't actually say very much except argues with fedfans all the time and then has the audacity to say that WE cannot accept varying opinions...and then you get people like carrie who refuses to accept by saying things like 'case closed'....

but i do agree with homos on one thing...fft does go 'insane with rage....' homos.....you are right about something.....perhaps you could give your pal some advice? you are good at giving the advice...i'll give you that....

eqm..pure jealousy and hatred...it comes out in droves.......

malteser1 , 7/14/09 11:34 AM


How could we possibly be jealous of someone that Rafa regularly thrashes, and who has admitted himself that Rafa is his only rival.

Listen guys: 13:7. That's a ratio you need to have in the back of your mind when you post. I understand that Fedfans want to keep us away from this thread so that they can make bogus claims about his greatness with no one disagreeing with them. Also, if you don't want us to comment here, don't bring Rafa into the discussion, see torres post:

Even if Rafa@Borg@Guga and Sampras is the best on clay and grass, no one is at a HIGH LEVEL on every surface. Rafa is not at a high level on US Hardcourts in the past 5 years and also Sampras is not at a high level on clay. Only Fed plays well ON EVERY SURFACE!!

FED IS THE BEST!!!!

torres9 , 7/14/09 2:24 AM

Comparing a 23 year old to a 28 year old in terms of number of titles, is like comparing a 28 year old's academic qualifications to those of a 23 year old.

carrie , 7/14/09 12:22 PM


carrie...i am feeling very sorry for you right now..because you are becoming hysterical...if you have a problem with what torres says.....then you are not listening to your own voice..you can say what you like about federer...but when 11 million people watch the wimbledon final.....the most since 2001...what does that say about the game....yes of course there will be fans of roddick...but 11 million viewers carrie is PHENOMENAL.....you keep droning on and on about rafa's head to head.....so carrie...get this....5:4 to fed on hard and grass courts.....and go to the 'roger federer show' thread where the stats are posted....boring..boring...boring...you are becoming boring.....it is all about consistency..it is no good if rafa keeps damaging his knees..they are damaged partly because of the reason that federer has pushed him so hard....however you wanna look at it....they are great for each other's game........your argument doesn't work.....rafa is not a multi slam winner (save on clay)...not the way that roger is...F-A-C-T.....

fedfans.....read the following...that's F-E-D-F-A-N-S!

Federer - a worthy champion

Bunmi Ashebu
July 10, 2009

I have been accused of being too biased where Roger Federer is concerned and for the sake of Rafeal Nadal fans, I tried to be as objective as possible, but I have to admit that, that has not been possible especially when it concerns someone who is as flawless as the ?great? Federer.

Even Pete Sampras, the man whose record of 14 grand slam titles was broken by Federer, shares my thoughts. He was full of praises and had this to say after the final: ?He?s a legend, now he?s an icon.?

What we witnessed in the Wimbledon final was world class tennis. For me, there were two winners, only that the trophy went to one person, and the tray to the other.

If only Andy Roddick had taken his chances when he had four break points in the second set tie break, it might have been a different story today especially as Federer couldn?t break the man he had beaten 18 out of 20 times before.

?Sports, or tennis, is cruel sometimes. We know it,? Federer said. ?I went through some five-setters in Grand Slam finals, too, and ended up losing. It?s hard.?

It was indeed hard for Roddick who played the best tennis of his life. As much as I wanted Federer to win, I couldn?t help but feel sorry for Roddick who nobody gave a chance. Roddick broke twice in the first four sets making it clear that he is a new-and-improved version and Federer, considered a superior returner, couldn?t come through until the last game of the match.

For those who confidently predicted that this year?s men?s final was not going to be as entertaining as last year?s when Rafael Nadal won against Federer on Centre Court, we were all wrong. It turned out to be the longest men?s Grand Slam final in history at 77 games and was the longest fifth set in a men?s Grand Slam final. The previous Wimbledon record was 62 games (last year?s final).

It was only fitting that Sampras, seated in the box of legends alongside Rod Laver and Bjorn Borg, was there to watch Federer pass his all-time Slam record of 14.

That is the story of the Swiss Maestro. Always present when records are made and broken. What can we say about a man who finds himself in trouble and calmly digs deep to get himself out? Or a man that served a career-high 50 aces in one match? Talk less of reaching 21 consecutive grand slam semis and at 27, recorded 182 career victories in Grand Slam events.

In Paris last month, Federer won his first French Open title, a victory that meant that he had won all four of the grand slam tournaments, and put him level with Sampras on a record 14 majors.

He became the first man to play in seven consecutive Wimbledon final last Sunday. Not only did he break Sampras? record, he also regained the number one spot, which he lost just under a year ago. Also note that it took Sampras 12 years to win 14 and it?s taken Federer six years to win 15.

Federer makes the game look easy, that is why Rod Laver said ?take your eyes off the ball and watch Federer?s legs when he is playing, and you will appreciate him more?. For me, I can only liken the movement of his legs on the tennis court to Michael Jackson?s legs on a dance floor.

Even Alex Ferguson, who was seated in the royal box at the final must have wished Federer was a footballer.

And as for his critics, who say he only won because Nadal didn?t play, he had this to say: ?I?m happy at least that I became number one in the world by winning the tournament, not just by him not playing at all.?

What I admired the most is his humility. It?s hard not to get carried away yet when asked about the ?legend tag? placed on him, he said, ?I don?t know if you?re a legend as long as you?re still playing the sport. So let?s wait and see?.

Even though he is taking five weeks off the game to prepare for daddy-hood, looking through name books, getting ready to change diapers he says ?Of course, my career is far from over, I?m too young, too eager to really do well?.

How many more titles does this young man have in him? Sampras predicts 18 or 19 but I say if the ?old Roger? is truly back, then the beat goes on and on and on...



malteser1 , 7/14/09 1:27 PM


fan4tennis:
did I say Murray did not deserve respect?!Roger mentioned BOTH guys as forces on the other side of the draw. I apologise if the word 'only'was not accurate ,all I meant was to say it's ridiculous to think Roger did not consider Andy a worthy opponent.they have a good realtionship off the court so it's a shame that the media is trying to create a fight. the jacket was handed to Roger after the match and it was a surprise from Nike,after playing 77 games I believe Roger couldn't think what ppl would take out of this.I didn't like the whole fashion thing but NO BIG DEAL. what the media is doing now is really merciless,Roger's own fault,but still.

niloofar , 7/14/09 4:49 PM


the fact that some of the rafa fans have nothing better to do than discuss what roger was wearing....yawn...yawn...shows how desperate they are....stick to the tennis not the bling...it really is irrelevant now....niloofar..oh..niloofar...when will you learn that you simply cannot argue with fft..she is the oracle on everything......you'll learn....

malteser1 , 7/14/09 5:09 PM


you have to laugh at fed fans on this thread they are like kindergarten kids! grow up guys - for a change but i won't hold my breath.

homos , 7/14/09 6:12 PM


"Postmatrac, your shallow analysis is what I expected from you"

i suggest you brush up on your english and then we can talk. have a nice day.

posmatrac , 7/14/09 6:40 PM


SOME fed fans cannot seem to grasp that this is an article written to debate. In their glee at having fed's name in the title, they fully expect it to be one huge lovefest for fed with ZERO negative remarks, no debate at all.....in other words, no different than RF.com.
Torres and I were debating civilly, I might add (no name calling), and were talking tennis and the subject of this article, until someone came back!

niloofar: How long are you going to let her keep trying to tell you who to talk to and who not to??? Is she your boss or mother? I brought up Murray's name because you said no one else was giving Roddick the respect he deserves but fed and Murray is treated the same way. Murray did not get the respect he deserved also and SOME fed fans talked of him like he was the devil. Some of them blamed the press for their attitude and some just said they didn't like him.

The problem with certain fedfans is that they don't realize we are allowed to debate here. They take anything that isn't praising fed to the roof or putting him up on a god-like pedastal as a personal affront. Articles are posted by both sides. Everyone is allowed to ignore, disagree or agree with whatever is posted! Quit taking people disagreeing with you personally!!!! The person we disagree with is either in a media room or on the tennis court!!! Not you!

fan4tennis , 7/14/09 7:12 PM


"but fed and Murray is treated the same way."

Typo there--meant to say Roddick and Murray

fan4tennis , 7/14/09 7:28 PM


fedfans...have just read THE best article ever..you know about 'THAT JACKET!'...and i promise that once you have read the comments fedfans..you really dont need to worry about any of the rafa fans that ever comment on THAT jacket again...so hopefully..(tho' i doubt it..)...it will end the discussions....published in the bleacher report....by Chloe Davies.......go read the article...but have posted some of the comments here by some lovely Americans who...as you will see from their comments have been horrified by the crazy nuts bad press.....enjoy guys...and i apologise to the fedfans for adding to the debate..am just sick of hearing about the jacket cos it's so not important and so wrong in terms of what happened....fed didn't even know about it! i also watched the ending again..and i think it was either niloofar or torres much...much earlier that talked about the a guy in a kilt handing it to him? anyway...read on....

This whole uproar about the jacket is beyond ridiculous. The man won his 15th grand slam, more than anyone before. He did it in 6 years when the last guy took 12 years to reach 14. He won his 6th Wimbledon out of 7 successive finals (which is another record). And all the people have to say about it is his jacket showed he was arrogant and confidant? And even if he were (which he is not) so what? Don't you think he had a bloody good reason to be proud?

I thought the jacket was quite nice and the subtle 15 in the corner was a great idea! Its not unheard of for players / teams to have stuff like this made to celebrate in case they win. And its not like the jacket had any obnoxious message on it, not like it said 'In your Face Rod / Pete'. It simply had a small embroidered 15. Which hardly anyone noticed till Sue pointed it out in the interview.

And heres a thought, if Roger won that match say 6-3, 6-4, 6-1 and then wore the jacket, would anyone have said anything? I think not!

Federer himself admitted that it felt weird to celebrate such a feat with Roddick enduring so much disappointment; clearly those and Nike and elsewhere believed the final would be easier than it was.

Donald Fincher about 21 hours ago
EVERY, I repeat EVERY team in pro sports (and most college sports) have their hats or t-shirts made and ready to wear if they win. It's not a statement that they expected to win as much as it is a recognition that it's at least a 50/50 proposition and the money spent for that is fairly paltry so why not have it ready. But I want to be clear here. There is absolutely nothing wrong with thinking you're going to win. The way teams get to championships is by having confidence and mentally visualizing themselves winning. Great teams think they are going to win and sometimes that belief is exactly what separates them from the pack. So who cares if Roger thought he was going to win. He has more slams than anyone and has beaten Roddick 19 of 21 times they've played. If you were in his shoes, wouldn't you expect to win too? Whenever anyone is successful, people will find reasons to hate on him/her. Roger has tried to negate that and has been as nice as he can be to the other players, the press, the fans, etc. But, when someone is successful, people overlook that. My biggest question was why did they place the 15 where they did. I understand that it was meant to be a muted thing so they didn't put it in the center or top. But as it stood, it looked like that writing that sorority girls get on their shorts. The first thing I asked myself was why they put "15" on his butt? That's about the last I thought of it until this hullabaloo started. Some people need to get a life and stop thinking that hating on successful people is going to do anything to improve their own situation.

Chloe Francis about 20 hours ago
Thanks for your comments. Interesting take on things - confidence is indeed a virtue but with this particular match meaning so much to Federer, it is surprising that Federer (or indeed Nike, as I tend to believe) thought it would be so easy that they commissioned a jacket straightaway. I am all for seizing the moment but one has to admit that this was a little out of the ordinary for Federer (although, again, the event was once-in-a-lifetime and should be 'exploited' beyond belief). As for the positioning... I guess the off-centredness and understated location was the best that Nike could produce...


fedfans there are many replies to this article...it is kind of reassuring that there are thousands of reasonable Americans out there who see federer as one of the good guys....

another point that Clarabella davies (different writer to chloe) makes is that 100% of the proceeds of all baseball hats with the RF logo goes to Federer's third world foundation for kids.....something which is frequently forgotten...plus the white/gold T shirt that fed was wearing at the tourny....ALL sold out.....go:fed:go..not only THE best tennis player...but what a heart...what a soul...

fft...let's just move on and IGNORE each other..you do my head in...stop ya ranting and go take a triple espresso...it's great for the mind, body and soul.....yes you are allowed to debate..but stop getting too personal and also telling other people what to do...the mother hen is coming out of your in droves....cool it lady....

malteser1 , 7/14/09 7:33 PM


malty to niloofar: "stick to the tennis not the bling...it really is irrelevant now"

Shows how she never even listens to herself. Go read the past posts and see who has been bringing up the jacket more...it's fedfans. We stopped talking about it (and nothing in my posts to niloofar on here have mentioned it) but you can't! The last Rafa fan to comment on it was me yesterday morning in response to niloofar bringing it back up again. I said to niloo: "I'm sorry, but the articles I posted did not like fed's clothes, same as your 'judgement' ("I honestly don't like Fed's attires for Wimby") and none of them claimed he played in them also."

fan4tennis , 7/14/09 7:45 PM


malt:" ..but stop getting too personal and also telling other people what to do."

Nah, that's your specialty!

fan4tennis , 7/14/09 7:50 PM


fft...you say it best...when you say nothing at all.....

malteser1 , 7/14/09 8:13 PM


only if you agree to do the same!

fan4tennis , 7/14/09 8:23 PM



Sampras Says Nadal Challenges Federer's GOAT Claim By Raymond Lee
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
click to preview
Sampras: Do I think I could have beaten Roger in my prime? Sure, I don't think anyone could beat me in my prime on grass.

From his prominent perch in the Royal Box behind a pair of stylish shades, Pete Sampras joined Hall of Famers Rod Laver, Bjorn Borg and Manolo Santana in watching Roger Federer break the Grand Slam record they shared.

The second-seeded Federer withstood an inspired Andy Roddick rally in the fourth set, then scored his sole service break in the last game to earn a dramatic 5-7, 7-6(6), 7-6(5), 3-6, 16-14 triumph to regain the Wimbledon championship, recapture the World No. 1 ranking and re-write tennis history in stirring style. After the match, Sampras and John McEnroe were among the former champions who dubbed Federer with the mythical Greatest of All Time title.

"I have to give it to him," Sampras said after the record-breaking 77-game final. "The critics say Laver. And (Rafael) Nadal has beaten him a few times at majors. He's won all the majors, he's won 15 now, he's going to win a few more here. So in my book he is (the GOAT)."

Yet, Sampras concedes there is one player who threatens the Federer's status as GOAT ? Rafael Nadal. The World No. 2 owns a 13-7 career record vs. Federer, including three consecutive wins in major finals.

In a conference call with the media today to promote his exhibition match against Marat Safin on July 27 at UCLA on opening night of the L.A. Tennis Open, Sampras conceded the quandary Federer faces is that while many champions have named the Swiss stylist the Greatest Of All Time, you can make a clear the case he is not even the best of this time.

Skeptics point to Nadal's mastery of Federer in their head-to-head series and the fact Nadal has won six of their eight meetings in major finals ? including victories on three different surfaces in the Australian Open final, Roland Garros final and Wimbledon final ? as a sign the strong-willed Spaniard has the World No. 1's number.

While Sampras himself has bestowed the GOAT on Federer, he suggested today Federer must find a way to beat Nadal consistently in order to truly be called the GOAT.

"Tough question to answer. I do understand the argument as being the best ever you have to be the best of your generation and he has come up short against Nadal," Sampras said. "I can see the point and it's hard to answer it. It's not done yet. Roger's careeer isn't done yet and he has to beat (Nadal) and he's got to beat him in the final of majors. In my book he is (the greatest of all time), but he has to figure this kid out. He has to beat him. You've gotta be the man of your generation. Roger certainly is the man of his generation, but he's got to figure out how to beat Nadal."

Federer can play shots that only a tennis genius can produce. While Federer's brilliance is undeniable, his losing streak to Nadal makes me wonder: was his genius magnified by the fact he was playing people like Hewitt and Roddick in major finals who could not take advantage of his vulnerabilities the way Rafael Nadal can?

That's one of the challenges of rating players beyond their generation as I did in statistically examining the greatest players of all time: Federer is unquestionably a great champion, but was his dominance due in part to the fact that there was no one to push him except Nadal?

Sampras, for example, had Andre Agassi at his best (at least most years), Boris Becker, Jim Courier, Stefan Edberg, Gustavo Kuerten, Richard Krajicek, Michael Stich, Goran Ivanisevic, Michael Chang, Marcelo Rios, Ivan Lendl, Petr Korda and Thomas Muster.

It seems to me that the competition was a lot stronger than the competition Federer has played over the years. Now I think it's changing with Nadal pursuing his own career Grand Slam and Andy Murray, Novak Djokovic and Roddick all improving. Federer's foes in the top four are all quick and Nadal, Murray and Djokovic all have better backhands.

Sampras and Andre Agassi are two of the greatest Grand Slam champions of all time and over the years their riveting rivalry has produced some timeless tennis ? and tireless debate among fans over which will own the more prominent place in history.

The archrivals began the 2002 U.S. Open as the two oldest seeded players in the draw and concluded it with a climactic clash that saw Sampras capture his 14th and final career Grand Slam crown with a 6-3, 6-4, 5-7, 6-4 victory over archrival Agassi. It was the 34th and final professional meeting between the old rivals with Sampras holding a 20-14 career edge.

Recalling his rivalry with Agassi, Sampras said if Agassi had led their head-to-head series, it would have caused the 14-time Grand Slam champion to question his own status as his generation's top player.

"It would bother me if I had a losing record against Andre in majors," Sampras said. "Does it mean I was the greatest or not the greatest? The greatest of all time is (a label) we want to pin it on someone. With the numbers you have to give it to Roger; with (Federer's) record against Nadal you might not give it to him. If I was 7-13 against Andre it would be hard to say I was the best of my generation. It's hard to give a definitive answer when he's not done yet. Roger knows he has to figure out this kid, but it's a tough match up. Nadal is one of the few guys who believes he is better than him."

Sampras said he believes Federer's most formidable foe on Wimbledon's Centre Court could be himself ? a big server who could bring the heat, attack net and pressure the multi-talented Swiss into hitting shots from defensive positions on court. Laver himself said he would give Sampras the edge on grass over Federer because of Sampras' searing serve and his ability to attack.

"A true serve and volleyer that's willing to come in and put the pressure on him (would be a threat)," Sampras said. "As big as Andy serves I don't think anyone really scares him. I think my game would make him a little bit more uncomfortable. I would obviously come in on both serves and put the pressure on his backhand. Would I beat him? I felt at my best on grass I was unbeatable there. It's a flattering comment (Laver made). Do I think I could have beaten Roger in my prime? Sure, I don't think anyone could beat me in my prime on grass. Roger probably feels unbeatable now. He'd be a tough guy to break, especially if he was hitting 50 aces. It would be a great match up."

carrie , 7/14/09 9:50 PM


He he he!!!!!!! Well said Pete.

Sampras has made Rafans point for us. This is what we have been trying to point out over and over again.

carrie , 7/14/09 9:57 PM


No worries, Fedfans - Pete said he's the GOAT in his book, and that's good enough for me. I can't wait for Roger to play Rafa - seriously! And, not just when Rafa's on the comeback trail. When he's 100%. Put up or shut up carrie.

Rafterfan , 7/14/09 10:16 PM


If that's not a CRYSTAL CLEAR explanation on what we've been pointing out to the FED fans, I don't know what kind of LANGUAGE do we have to use for them to understand!

FEDERER is unquestionably the best player amongst the best in his generation, BUT NADAL is undeniably BETTER than him!............. no need to ENUMERATE so many stats in favor of Roger AGAIN and AGAIN and AGAIN, because the whole world knows it pretty well! So, we can't DEFINITIVELY tag him with the GOAT until the end of his and his greatest RIVAL's career!
Can we call RAFA....the GREATEST RIVAL of ALL TIME?

agf25agf , 7/14/09 10:21 PM


i think you need glasses in your old age fft..........

me: quote......and i apologise to the fedfans for adding to the debate..am just sick of hearing about the jacket cos it's so not important and so wrong in terms of what happened....fed didn't even know about it! i also watched the ending again..and i think it was either niloofar or torres much...much earlier that talked about the a guy in a kilt handing it to him? anyway...read on...'

i then posted article to try to bring an end to discussion that you raised fft a while ago now....yeah...when you were in 'i hate fed mode'........bla bla bla......

there was a huge thunderstorm here last night fft.....it was smashing against the windows...the wind was blowing...the trees were swaying...the rain was pouring...hailstones...boy...oh....boy...that thunderstorm...like a tempest at sea...it reminded me of you....

fft...you say it best when you say nothing at all....

malteser1 , 7/14/09 10:46 PM


If Samprass says Federer had weak competition, who am I to disagree?

carrie , 7/14/09 10:48 PM


Rafterfan, I have put up - 13:7............you can't argue with that!!!!!!!!

carrie , 7/14/09 10:52 PM


Great article carrie! Doesn't matter if they want to pick and choose parts of what Sampras said to cling to. Sampras simply said all the things we've been saying!!

Stealing from Alison Krauss's song lyrics are we? How unoriginal! And as I stated in my post, the ones talking about the jacket are STILL the fedfans! Your post proved it!

fan4tennis , 7/15/09 1:18 AM


Sampras said Fed is GOAT... that's the main thing...

The similarity between Sampras's 14 and Fed's 15 is that Sampras also beat a lot of non-great(very good but not great) players like Todd Martin, Micheal Chang etc etc.

And also he played 34 matches against Agassi, not 20, and also Agassi is 1 year younger than him not 5... LOL...

Nadal,Murray Djoker to Fed is just like Hewitt, Safin, Fed (all have a better H2H against Sampras) to Sampras.

'Roger's careeer isn't done yet and he has to beat (Nadal) and he's got to beat him in the final of majors'

Wooppsss, been there done that... Beat Nadal in Wimby 2 times, check..

FED IS JUST THE BEST!!!

So According to Sampras Fed's field is weak, then so is Nadal's field of clay courters. If Fed is not the GOAT, then Nadal is also not the greatest clay court player ever.

And also Sampras said the best rival of Fed on WImby is himself, not NADAL... LOL... I can't believe Rafans loves this article...

And another thing, if Nadal is being lauded as better than Fed, than Murray who have a 6-2 H2H, should be better than Fed too.

But alas, these 2 guys just

torres9 , 7/15/09 4:13 AM


But alas, this 2 guys just get beaten a lot in majors it's hard to see that there are anywhere as good as Fed. It just shows that there's a lot to be done for Murray and Nadal and Djoker to even get near to Fed's greatness.

And I hope you Rafans realize that Nadal is not young anymore. He is 23, not 17-18, Young players like Delpo proved that he can beat Nadal and also Gregor Dimitrov took a set out of the then invincible No.1 Rafa.

I think Rafa will get worse as he gets older IF he relies on speed and power because this will go down inevitably.

And Fed is still here, lively and winning Slams even with the presence of the youngsters.

FED IS JUST THE BEST!!!

torres9 , 7/15/09 4:21 AM


FEDERITES ...hows the going ?
Been a log time since ive wrote here ...been soaking in fed recent double . The world feels right again :)
Looks like so much has happened over the last week .

Rafafan , the article given by carrie above is a thorn in Fed records . But if thats the ONLY thing that is holding him back from the GOAT title than i think he is already the GOAT. I would concede that it would be better for the H2H record to be the other way but then again Fed cant do much to improve that and its simply because whilst he makes it to most of the GS finals ... rafa does not ! Over the past 5 years ( which is about how long the H2H marks back to ) , Fed pretty much has always kept his part of the bargain and made it to the finals ...
I think the title of GOAT should be bestowed upon someone at the end of their career s ...not now ...however ...if you HAD TO pick someone 2day .....that would be the FedExpress and thats without a shadow of a doubt ...which is why the legends have gave him that title .
What actually really comforts me is that at this point ...no one can really be called GOAT but Federer ..(and since these are Lavers words i guess he is out of the running ) ...nadal , muz , novak ...are all just soooooooo far away ...and they are just thorns to dismiss Feds title but they are not running for the title itself ...yes yes ....they are young ....the might go on to wins many majors ( after fed retires that is ) but at the same time they might just start going downhill from now be it because of confidence or injuries ..no one knows what will happen ...but as for 2day ....FedExpress ...is the best all rounder in ATP...best ever on hard ...best ever on grass ...and i would say 2nd best ever on clay...all that put together ...to me ...is GOAT ....till someone comes along and shows as much consistency as this ...the title is Feds ..and at this point ...no one in the top 5 comes close to this .....

but again ...i would really like to leave this debate till the retires ...cos then ...i reckon we will be talking 18-19 slams ... :)

Here to hoping that nadal makes it to the finals more consistently .... we nip these thorns out :)

WIMBY09 ...where we've right the wrong .
C'MON !


fedexfan , 7/15/09 4:31 AM


Ideal US Open Scenario:
Points from tourneys previous to US lead to following rankings: 1-Federer; 2-Murray; 3-Nadal; 4-Roddick (this allows for the bracket play I need for the scenario to occur).
Djokovic's not playing or is out before semis (or he and his fans are very well behaved and nice; then scenario has Murray or him in semis).
Federer, Roddick, Nadal and Murray are all in great shape and play great through to semis.
Federer plays Nadal and wins in close 5-set match. Roddick beats Murray in close 5-set match. Federer and Roddick play final even better than at Wimbledon (Roddick ups returns of serve and rallies more; Federer even converst break points -- both break each other some; both return serves better and have longer rallies, even though serves stay at 120's-140 and high 1st serve %). This time, after 5-set nail-biter, Roddick takes the match in NY and becomes #3 or 2, or is this rank change even possible?
Directly following final match Mirka calls in to tell Roger she's in early labor, so he still has something to do with himself and to celebrate -- he grabs a quick flight home to wife and to help with baby. This gives him a few months to get used to fatherhood before the Austrailian warm up, as well.

ilovetennisvt , 7/15/09 5:03 AM


...not to mention he'll use the labor as an excuse for the loss.

same old, same old!

homos , 7/15/09 5:38 AM


"If that's not a CRYSTAL CLEAR explanation on what we've been pointing out to the FED fans, I don't know what kind of LANGUAGE do we have to use for them to understand!" - agf25agf , 7/14/09 10:21 PM

That's why they are called fanatics, agf.You cannot change their mind.They always wear their rose tinted glasses when it comes to Federer. I recalled one of them even calling him "god" at one time. If they want to make Federer the center of their universe, let them be.

phoenix , 7/15/09 5:42 AM


Why couldn't we settle on Federer being one of the greatest? Why do some Fedfans have to insist that he be the GOAT? It's only a label, not life and death. And there is undeniable fact that his record has a blemish on it in the name of Rafael Nadal. And unless he can narrow that substantially, even if still on a losing record, but at least even up their H2H in finals, then he could have a somewhat legitimate chance to claim GOAT. Also, why should Nadal's claycourt victories be omitted and grass (being Federer's most favourable surface) isn't?

As for Rafafans, why do you insist on Rafa being better than Federer? Sure he has no fear and makes Fed more uncomfortable than anyone else can. Even beats Fed 2 out of 3 times but that does not make him "better". What is meant by better anyway? Nadal has the better of Fed in their meetings but Fed has played the grand slams on offer better than Nadal and this is reflected in his number of grand slam titles, grand slam finals appearance, semi-final streak and longest week-on-week No.1.

cable , 7/15/09 6:28 AM


I am not saying that Rafa is better than Fed. I am saying that Fed is not the GOAT, simply because there realy IS NO GOAT. To paraphrase a saying, the GOAT and to be obsessed by it is a lonely word, simply because it DOES NOT EXIST!!!

phoenix , 7/15/09 7:25 AM


fan4tennis:
did I say I took it personally? I don't know how u read my posts! u responded to my commnet and I answered politely.
btw,it's obvious you've not been on RF.com becasue it's not 'all praise',actually I take all my criticism about Fed there. if other players' fan didn't look like they were all hatred towards Fed,Fed fans wouldn't be so defensive on general tennis forums.if I say sth negative about Fed,Fed haters will all agree even if it's not their genuine idea...so u should understand why Fed fans would hardly cirticize Federer here,though they do it on RF.com.

niloofar , 7/15/09 7:29 AM


phoenix : as a Fed fan I totally agree with u.Roger is NOT the GOAT but not because of the H2H with Rafa.there is no GOAT and Roger has said this himself.what I object to is when Rafans say Rafa is better,MAYBE HE IS,but we will see when he's at Fed's age.I don't take it because the h2h has been on clay and it's not Roger's problem that Rafa did not make to hardcourt finals during 2004-2007 whereas Roger was on clay finals.Rafa's career is far from over so maybe by the end of his career he will be better that Roger.

niloofar , 7/15/09 7:36 AM


phoenix, I never said you did but there are others who have and they know who they are. And I agree with your opinion on fanatics and they are the ones that keep posting when someone disagrees with them. I miss the Tennis Fan app on Facebook.

cable , 7/15/09 7:38 AM


300th post!!... Talking about Fed is just irresistible even for Rafans. Us fedfans only focus on Roger, the most dominant player ever in ATP tour, most successful person in Grand Slam history, and the best all-round player ever... Maybe he's not the GOAT to some but he must be the Most Talked About Player ever!!!

FED IS JUST THE BEST!!!!...

torres9 , 7/15/09 10:02 AM


"Us fedfans only focus on Roger, the most dominant player ever in ATP tour, most successful person in Grand Slam history, and the best all-round player ever... "

Really now? It's fanatics like you that we are talking about before you came with your ad hominems. How many times do you need to say that Fed is the best? Or you really need to convince yourself that this is true.

phoenix , 7/15/09 10:24 AM


it's just a slogan. It's a reminder to the haters that FED IS JUST THE BEST!!...LOL

You Rafans can't stand that Roger is being praised by many as GOAT and as fanatics, you just have to come to people's party and say, 'NO Rafa is better!!! Please support our Rafa!!! He is injured... poor him!!!' Boo Hooo...

torres9 , 7/15/09 10:51 AM


Boo Hooo...
torres9 , 7/15/09 10:51 AM

Try to be original please, this is Roger's line!!!!!

homos , 7/15/09 11:21 AM


Homos, cry or not, he's still the BEST!!! WOOHOOO!!!!!

torres9 , 7/15/09 12:09 PM


count the rafafans replies on a fedthread ..then add a spoonful of jealousy....a barrel load of bitterness and shake a bit of fft...carrie...homos...and a few explosives....that what you have on a fed thread....enjoy the cake guys....

torres you are soooo right.......

fft...you say it best when you say NOTHING at all.....it's taken you a while to figure out where that phrase came from? i think i gave you too much credit.....

brrrrrappppp!

malteser1 , 7/15/09 12:24 PM


homos..
you accused Fed fans of not getting their facts right whereas there is actually a problem with your own facts.specially when u try to fabricate stories about toilet breaks,because it's sth of the past.nowadays players can only go to toilet WITHIN the set break...some players might leave a little late so that there might be a delay,but that was not the case for Fed he leaves promptly and when returnes still has time to drink water and everything...in FO in 1 match he had a cold and running nose,that's why he left 3 times.he has won the sportsmanship ward and prix orange 5 years in a row...it's funny the way u act...if u and ppl like u would give credit to Roger for ONE thing at least, you would seem less biased...

torres:

you're right about the ceremony.Roger mentioned Rafa's name without being asked.gorafago said this for the 1st time and carrie admitted.
I don't know why when some Rafans see sth nice from Roger they just can't say:"ok maybe he's human too."
they neglect it,forget it or twist it.'some' of course.

niloofar , 7/15/09 4:23 PM


yeah...we see roger through rose coloured glasses....and the rafa fans don't see rafa through rose coloured glasses? Plllllzzzzzzzzz...get a grip ya self phoenix....

despite rafa being the 'king of clay' he was beaten by fed in final and almost by novak in semis at madrid....novak had 2 match points...but blew it.....again...despite rafa being king of clay ....at FO he was out in the fourth round knocked out by soderling......nadal has had his losses too this year......as has fed..but more recently fed has displayed his mental toughness and agility.....rafa hasn't ...........sorry to say.....and all the rafa fans (because of course they look at rafa through their own rose coloured glasses.....come up with injuries as excuses....bla bla bla).......Yes... I can very easily say...along with the other fedfans that rafa is a great champion...always will be.....the problem with some of the rose tinted rafa fans cant even say ONE nice thing or complimentary word for fed....what does that say?.......

but fed is sublime...and why is it that not one of the rafa fans seem to recognise that fed is above rafa in terms of wins on hard courts and grass....REPEAT....5:4 in fed's favour.....

C'MON!

malteser1 , 7/15/09 4:56 PM


THIS THREAD IS DEAD, IT IS OUTDATED. SAMPRASS HAS REVISED HIS OPINION ABOUT THE GOAT.

carrie , 7/15/09 5:39 PM


he still says Fed is the GOAT... SPOT ON!!!

torres9 , 7/15/09 5:54 PM


torres this is what Samprass says now:

Pete Sampras says that Roger Federer must ultimately earn a winning career record against rival Rafael Nadal to be considered the greatest player of all time.

Stop burying your head in the sand.

carrie , 7/15/09 6:00 PM


Nope... that's not the full interview... He says in his book he is...

He says he may or may not be GOAT... He didn't say Fed isn't GOAT....

torres9 , 7/15/09 6:40 PM


Pete Sampras calls Roger Federer ?greatest ever?
By HOWARD FENDRICH, AP Tennis Writer
Jun 7, 1:55 pm EDT

Pete Sampras already figured Roger Federer would go down as the greatest tennis player in history.

That Federer tied Sampras? record of 14 Grand Slam titles by winning the French Open on Sunday only reinforced that opinion.

?What he?s done over the past five years has never, ever been done?and probably will never, ever happen again,? Sampras said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. ?Regardless if he won there or not, he goes down as the greatest ever. This just confirms it.?

Federer added his first French Open championship to five titles at Wimbledon, five at the U.S. Open and three at the Australian Open. He?s the sixth man with a career Grand Slam; Sampras won three of the majors but not the French Open.

Sampras was home in Los Angeles on Sunday and watched on TV during part of Federer?s 6-1, 7-6 (1), 6-4 victory over Robin Soderling in the final at Roland Garros. Federer lost three previous three French Open finals to Rafael Nadal.

?I?m obviously happy for Roger,? Sampras said. ?If there?s anyone that deserves it, it?s Roger. He?s come so close.?

In what turned out to be Sampras? last match, he beat Andre Agassi in the 2002 U.S. Open final at age 31 in his 52nd career Grand Slam tournament. Federer is 27 and has collected his 14 major championships in 40 Grand Slam tournaments.

?He just is a great, great player that is a credit to the sport and is a positive influence for young kids and just tennis in general,? Sampras said. ?It looks pretty tough to beat now with 14 majors, and I?m sure he?s going to go on and win a lot more.?

Federer will get his first chance to break Sampras? mark at Wimbledon, which starts June 22. Sampras isn?t sure whether he?ll go to the All England Club.

?We?ll sort of see what happens,? Sampras said.

Agassi completed his career Grand Slam at the French Open in 1999, and he was on hand a decade later to present Federer with the champion?s trophy Sunday.

?How do you sort of argue with his numbers? It?s pretty incredible,? Agassi said. ?A lot of people say it?s better to be lucky than good. I?d rather be Roger than lucky.?

As for the debate about tennis? greatest player, Sampras long has pointed to Rod Laver as his idol.

Laver won a true Grand Slam?all four major titles in one season?in both 1962 and 1969, the last man to do it. Laver finished with 11 Grand Slam titles, although he was barred from competing in those tournaments from the time he turned pro in 1963 to the start of the Open era in 1968.

Sampras? choice at this point is Federer.

?Now that he?s won in Paris, I think it just more solidifies his place in history as the greatest player that played the game, in my opinion,? Sampras said. ?I?m a huge Laver fan, and he had a few years in there where he didn?t have an opportunity to win majors. But you can?t compare the eras. And in this era, the competition is much more fierce than Rod?s.?

Brraaaappp!

malteser1 , 7/15/09 8:18 PM


hmmm, H2H between Nadal and James Blake - it's 2-3 in Blake's favor. WOW, that means James Blake is a better player than Nadal!! LOL!

scorpiongirl , 7/15/09 8:26 PM


From sl.com
Roger Federer: By The Numbers

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.

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.

$48,072,634 -- Career earnings as of June 2009 according to ATPWorldTour.com, an all-time record.

scorpiongirl , 7/15/09 8:33 PM


scorpion girl...am loving what you are saying honey BUT stats already posted...and trust me fft and carrie....aint gonna like you repeating stuff...(they get a little bit edgey ya see)...but yeah sg...we know don't we? even cheryl on her thread has agreed fed's stats are pretty awesome...problem is you cannot teach the blind to see....know what i am saying?

Fed is the best...we know it and that's all that matters...the rest is history as they say...and like you said....based on fft's sorry analysis...blake is better than rafa....

fed is the best...it's so good hearing that you know?!

malteser1 , 7/15/09 8:45 PM


Sampras Says Nadal Challenges Federer's GOAT Claim By Raymond Lee
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
click to preview
Sampras: Do I think I could have beaten Roger in my prime? Sure, I don't think anyone could beat me in my prime on grass.

From his prominent perch in the Royal Box behind a pair of stylish shades, Pete Sampras joined Hall of Famers Rod Laver, Bjorn Borg and Manolo Santana in watching Roger Federer break the Grand Slam record they shared.

The second-seeded Federer withstood an inspired Andy Roddick rally in the fourth set, then scored his sole service break in the last game to earn a dramatic 5-7, 7-6(6), 7-6(5), 3-6, 16-14 triumph to regain the Wimbledon championship, recapture the World No. 1 ranking and re-write tennis history in stirring style. After the match, Sampras and John McEnroe were among the former champions who dubbed Federer with the mythical Greatest of All Time title.

"I have to give it to him," Sampras said after the record-breaking 77-game final. "The critics say Laver. And (Rafael) Nadal has beaten him a few times at majors. He's won all the majors, he's won 15 now, he's going to win a few more here. So in my book he is (the GOAT)."

Yet, Sampras concedes there is one player who threatens the Federer's status as GOAT ? Rafael Nadal. The World No. 2 owns a 13-7 career record vs. Federer, including three consecutive wins in major finals.

In a conference call with the media today to promote his exhibition match against Marat Safin on July 27 at UCLA on opening night of the L.A. Tennis Open, Sampras conceded the quandary Federer faces is that while many champions have named the Swiss stylist the Greatest Of All Time, you can make a clear the case he is not even the best of this time.

Skeptics point to Nadal's mastery of Federer in their head-to-head series and the fact Nadal has won six of their eight meetings in major finals ? including victories on three different surfaces in the Australian Open final, Roland Garros final and Wimbledon final ? as a sign the strong-willed Spaniard has the World No. 1's number.

While Sampras himself has bestowed the GOAT on Federer, he suggested today Federer must find a way to beat Nadal consistently in order to truly be called the GOAT.

"Tough question to answer. I do understand the argument as being the best ever you have to be the best of your generation and he has come up short against Nadal," Sampras said. "I can see the point and it's hard to answer it. It's not done yet. Roger's careeer isn't done yet and he has to beat (Nadal) and he's got to beat him in the final of majors. In my book he is (the greatest of all time), but he has to figure this kid out. He has to beat him. You've gotta be the man of your generation. Roger certainly is the man of his generation, but he's got to figure out how to beat Nadal."

Federer can play shots that only a tennis genius can produce. While Federer's brilliance is undeniable, his losing streak to Nadal makes me wonder: was his genius magnified by the fact he was playing people like Hewitt and Roddick in major finals who could not take advantage of his vulnerabilities the way Rafael Nadal can?

That's one of the challenges of rating players beyond their generation as I did in statistically examining the greatest players of all time: Federer is unquestionably a great champion, but was his dominance due in part to the fact that there was no one to push him except Nadal?

Sampras, for example, had Andre Agassi at his best (at least most years), Boris Becker, Jim Courier, Stefan Edberg, Gustavo Kuerten, Richard Krajicek, Michael Stich, Goran Ivanisevic, Michael Chang, Marcelo Rios, Ivan Lendl, Petr Korda and Thomas Muster.

It seems to me that the competition was a lot stronger than the competition Federer has played over the years. Now I think it's changing with Nadal pursuing his own career Grand Slam and Andy Murray, Novak Djokovic and Roddick all improving. Federer's foes in the top four are all quick and Nadal, Murray and Djokovic all have better backhands.

Sampras and Andre Agassi are two of the greatest Grand Slam champions of all time and over the years their riveting rivalry has produced some timeless tennis ? and tireless debate among fans over which will own the more prominent place in history.

The archrivals began the 2002 U.S. Open as the two oldest seeded players in the draw and concluded it with a climactic clash that saw Sampras capture his 14th and final career Grand Slam crown with a 6-3, 6-4, 5-7, 6-4 victory over archrival Agassi. It was the 34th and final professional meeting between the old rivals with Sampras holding a 20-14 career edge.

Recalling his rivalry with Agassi, Sampras said if Agassi had led their head-to-head series, it would have caused the 14-time Grand Slam champion to question his own status as his generation's top player.

"It would bother me if I had a losing record against Andre in majors," Sampras said. "Does it mean I was the greatest or not the greatest? The greatest of all time is (a label) we want to pin it on someone. With the numbers you have to give it to Roger; with (Federer's) record against Nadal you might not give it to him. If I was 7-13 against Andre it would be hard to say I was the best of my generation. It's hard to give a definitive answer when he's not done yet. Roger knows he has to figure out this kid, but it's a tough match up. Nadal is one of the few guys who believes he is better than him."

Sampras said he believes Federer's most formidable foe on Wimbledon's Centre Court could be himself ? a big server who could bring the heat, attack net and pressure the multi-talented Swiss into hitting shots from defensive positions on court. Laver himself said he would give Sampras the edge on grass over Federer because of Sampras' searing serve and his ability to attack.

"A true serve and volleyer that's willing to come in and put the pressure on him (would be a threat)," Sampras said. "As big as Andy serves I don't think anyone really scares him. I think my game would make him a little bit more uncomfortable. I would obviously come in on both serves and put the pressure on his backhand. Would I beat him? I felt at my best on grass I was unbeatable there. It's a flattering comment (Laver made). Do I think I could have beaten Roger in my prime? Sure, I don't think anyone could beat me in my prime on grass. Roger probably feels unbeatable now. He'd be a tough guy to break, especially if he was hitting 50 aces. It would be a great match up."

fan4tennis , 7/15/09 8:46 PM


f4t, Fedfans simply do not want to accept that Sampras has reviewed the situation and has come to a sensible conclusion which is what we have been saying all along. They are completely blind to the facts, even though it's staring at them in the face.

carrie , 7/15/09 8:59 PM


malteser1 , 7/15/09 10:28 PM


Yeah, we saw "Roger Unbound" at Wimby, a fortnight away, as the article states because he KNEW he wouldn't have to face Rafa! Real easy to relax when you know you don't have to play the guy that has your number! But just wait til he sees Rafa across the net, and then his confidence goes out the window again!

fan4tennis , 7/15/09 11:05 PM


sorpiongirl---obviously you're not reading ALL the articles and comments here.....you JUST posted the same "OLD" piece. .... it has been written in DIFFERENT VERSIONS a ZILLION times before!!!......waste of space!!!

IT would have been easier for Fed fans to REFER those WHO wants to be reminded of FED's glory to Fed's official site.....wit bonus pix and the latest activities of the tennis god!

agf25agf , 7/16/09 1:58 AM


hmmm, H2H between Nadal and James Blake - it's 2-3 in Blake's favor. WOW, that means James Blake is a better player than Nadal!! LOL! -scorpiongirl , 7/15/09 8:26 PM

Are you saying then than 2-3 equals 13-7? Oranges the same as apples?
Girl, having a one game edge over your rival is not as definitive as having a 13-7 record!

phoenix , 7/16/09 5:45 AM


Phoenix, there's no definitive measure if u look blatantly on H2H, whateva you say, James Blake has a WINNING RECORD against Nadal, so according to Rafans' view, James Blake is better than Nadal. And let's add Murray and Simon as better than Fed for that matter... WOW... Fed is the 4th best player in his era although he wins 15th GS and was much longer as no.1 to Nadal than Nadal is no.1 against Fed.

FED IS JUST THE BEST!!!

torres9 , 7/16/09 9:34 AM


OK let me put it this way. A 2-3 record is a contest between rivals. It's not a definitive indicator of who is the dominant player.A 13-7 record on the other hand is no contest at all. It's a rout with one player dominating over his opponent. In other words, the dominant player owns the LOSER!
Now if you really want to offer comparisons, give one that is similar or even near the magic record 13-7. I repeat, 2-3 IS NOT EQUAL TO 13-7!

phoenix , 7/16/09 9:48 AM


'A 2-3 record is a contest between rivals'

So Fed is no contest to Nadal but James Blake is... Yeah, great analysis, phoenix... Clap Clap Clap....

FED IS THE BEST!!!

torres9 , 7/16/09 10:00 AM


And phoenix, other than clay H2H, is there anything else that Nadal is better than Fed? Errrr... None??

torres9 , 7/16/09 10:03 AM


"...other than clay H2H..."

The fact that you have to offer exceptions negate the whole GOAT thingy. If you are the best, you are the best, period. No exceptions.

phoenix , 7/16/09 10:28 AM


Things Fed is better than Nadal,
1) Better GS count
2) Weeks at no.1
3) Better year-ending ATP tournaments count
Yup.. FED IS THE BEST... period, no exception.

torres9 , 7/16/09 11:55 AM


fed 5:4 on hard courts and grass over nadal.

fed a MULTI SLAM WINNER at AO...Wimby...USO.....
nadal MULTI SLAM WINNER ONLY AT FO

malteser1 , 7/16/09 12:20 PM


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-1195751/WIMBLEDON-2009 -Federer-loses-set-tournament-eases-16.html

niloofar if you cannot accept the truth that's your problem. I don't fabricate things, that's the habbit of fed and his fans when they don't get their way.

homos , 7/16/09 12:35 PM


"fed 5:4 on hard courts and grass..."

Remember what I'm saying about giving exceptions? What happened to clay?
I am the best except... How ridiculous can you get!!!

phoenix , 7/16/09 12:43 PM


From Jon Wertheim's mailbag...LOL @ Jon's response to the second question.

Can you imagine how very different the narrative would have been over the last four weeks if Federer had hired a coach, say Darren Cahill, back in the spring? He hires a coach, and suddenly he bags two more Slams, including the elusive one at Roland Garros, and reclaims No. 1. We wouldn't be talking about the greatness of Federer, but the brilliance of his coach. It would have felt cheap. Hindsight is 20/20, but this narrative is so much sweeter.
-- Dale Stafford, Atlanta

? And we would have been deprived Cahill's presence on the ESPN set. A lot of credit to Federer here. Just two months ago -- hard to believe -- everyone and their cousin had a recommendation. He needed a bigger racket. He needed a new coach. He needed a sports psychologist. John McEnroe went so far as to volunteer his services. Federer stayed the course, didn't panic, didn't make any radical changes or hires, caught a few breaks and presto! A lesson for all the portfolio managers out there?



In the last year, we witnessed two epic gentlemen's finals at Wimbledon. Sixty-two games were played in the 2008 final that lasted 288 minutes. Seventy-seven games were played in the 2009 final that lasted 256 minutes. I contend more balls were hit in the 2008 final and it was, therefore, more grueling. Is this true?
-- Joe Phoenix, Pearland, Texas

? I didn't count balls, but I wouldn't be so sure. Yes, Federer and Andy Roddick combined for 77 aces (Federer, amazingly, had 50) but there were also many long rallies. While it's true the 2008 final spanned a longer period of time (4:48 vs. 4:12) despite fewer games, I suspect much of that time was caused by Rafael Nadal's leisurely pacing. Anyone at IBM want to give us an exact ball count?

janhavi , 7/16/09 1:37 PM


Now we're counting balls? This gets more ridiculous by the second! :-)

phoenix , 7/16/09 1:53 PM


Nothing is more ridiculous than counting H2H when GS is what counts... WOOHHOOO

FED IS THE BEST!!!

torres9 , 7/16/09 1:55 PM


hey janhavi ...
i think you made a good point .
Its the same point that ricky brought up during the djoker - nadal match ....take away the time wasting and the match aint really that long ....anyways...its a pointless discussion.
Fed - Roddick match actually had a lot more play time especially since roddick is actually quite quick to recover between points ...both Fed and A-Rod just want to get it on .....ur rite ...this could have actually been a longer match when taking play time into consideration .

WIMBY09 ...where we've right the wrongs
C'MON !!!

fedexfan , 7/16/09 2:49 PM



Current ATP-rankings

1. Djokovic 12 500 pts
2. Murray 8 750 pts
3. Federer 8 670 pts
4. Ferrer 6 970 pts
5. Nadal 6 385 pts

Unibet Mobile prematch,live betting

Unibet Mobile betting Unibet Mobile betting

Scan QR code to access Unibet mobile.
Bet on Sports wherever you are and whenever you like, with Unibet's quick and simple mobile client you can place bets, check results and see live odds.
 For more info about QR codes & scanners click here.

ATP Calendar

Date
Tournament

Recommend Tennistalk



Follow us

Follow Tennistalk on Facebook Follow Tennistalk on Twitter

Tell a friend

Your name:

Friend's name:

Friend's email:

Other tennis links