Wrong, Federer will be back in action in Basel, one week before Master Series in Paris.

"It means the world to me to win this title,"........... did he really MEAN this??????

@McQ , 10/25/10 8:50 AM

His world has become really small.

impressive how federer changed his tactics when he got broken at 3-3 in the first. he started playing more lose shots to give mayer less to play with. it worked very well.

@McQ
no. he was just making the tournament organisers happy. lol

It's always nice winning in a place like this with a tennis heritage and a lot of history."
This is the reason why it means the world to him.

Ten years after his only other appearance in Stockholm, he beat Taylor Dent to reach 900 matches on the tour ? 12 years after his first.
He?s the only active played to reach this landmark and, even more startling, he has not retired from a single one.

The next landmark was his 50th match win for the season. That, however, was not the news.

*That this would be the ninth straight year Federer had achieved 50 wins was. Only four other men in the Open era have managed it before, and with Federer still playing near the top of the game, his chances of making it 10 in a row?joint second with Stefan Edberg and Guillermo Vilas?look very good indeed*.

The fact that he has won stockholm for the very first time means he would overtake Bjorn Borg?s tally of 64 to join Pete Sampras at fourth in the Open era.

"You never know when it's your last one, that's why you want to savour every tournament," said Federer, who won for the first time in Sweden to take his tally to 18 countries in which he has lifted titles.

well done federer. no wonder this means the world to you.

Nice to see Federer winning titles and doing well again! I also noticed the change in tactics and raise in level of play after he got broke, which was good to see.
I also thought Mayers comment was very nice after the match, he said something to Federer like 'I hope you become world number one again', what a nice/good sportsmanship like thing to say!

I don't find it so normal that Mayers would say such a thing (if he indeed said it), unless Mayer's favourite tennis player, after himself, is Federer.
Otherwise I don't know why he would you wish for him to be nr 1 again after he's beaten him in a final.
This goes behond congratulating and wisihing your oponent well for the future - which would be the sporty thing to say (but that's just my opinion).

Shireling, i agree with you!!

That is the highest form of kissing a**e, if there was ever!! If he wishes for Fed to be number one then that just means then there is no room for him, Mayer, to be no.1!!.............so stupid!!!!! Lets just hope he did not say that!

why cant players have their own idols? we all know murray loves rafa and openly says he is his idol. Same goes for mayer. He did say it and i suppose it is something that we should get used to. federer is loved amongst the players, even when he beats them.

"Early on, I think that feeling of wanting to prove yourself to the world and all the doubters is a very strong one, so you're very aggressive in your ways of winning and not enjoying them.
"Today it's much more of the enjoyment part because I don't need to prove myself to anyone anymore, except to myself."
The 47th-ranked Meyer, who is still without a win from three career finals, said: "Roger really deserved to win. I hope you get back to number one as soon as possible."
On the all-time list of winners, Guillermo Vilas clinched 62 titles, Andre Agassi won 60, Ilie Nastase won 57 and Boris Becker claimed 49.

http://www.thesportreview.com/tsr/2010/10/roger-federer-stockholm/

so monalysa, it's okay for murray to kiss rafa's a**e but not mayer to kiss roger's? Fairplay.

He did say it, so get used to it! It's not stupid at all. Completely understandable. Even players have their idols. Not just the fans.

maxi,
Thx for the excerpt,
I still don't share your opinion.
I won't go in to say whether it's stupid or not - he's entitled to his opinion of course.
But Murray saying his fav. player is Rafa and wishing him to retain his Nr. 1 spot is a very different story.
Of course, we all have our favourites.
Whilst you can't compare Murray's and Meyer's positions in the ATP rankings of course, nor their possible chances of one day being Nr. 1, Meyer's statement strikes me as - at least- very out of place.

Mayer can have his own opinion of course, but to say it out loud in an occasion like this is certainly unwise. Why? Because whether he means it or not, he would be taken as kissing Fed's a_s, knowing full well that the Stockholm spectators loved Fed and Mayer may be doing it just to please the crowd. Unlike Mayer, Murray mentioned about his 'fondness' of Rafa in his presser, not in front of the spectators. I can really feel that Murray was truthful about what he said about Rafa, and that to me is the difference between Murray and Mayer (though Mayer may still be sincere about what he said about Fed).

Whether Fed is Mayer's idol or not is anybody's guess, and who cares if he is. He is entitled to idolize whoever he wants.

shireling,

it wasn't out of place.

have a look at the youtube here which I found and you can see/hear what he said - you'll need to forward to around 11 minutes if you don't want to see the whole thing.

luckystar, there's no real difference whether it is said 'out loud' in the public arena at stockholm, or 'out loud' in the presser, or 'out loud' in the papers - it's ALL in the public arena. your word 'fondness' for rafa is a little on the tame side. He 'loves' rafa and makes no secret of it, plus, there is nothing wrong in that. healthy bro love if you ask me!

Mayer has the utmost respect for roger and why not? it's nothing new amongst the players.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxFCWtl_TEQ&feature=related

Whether Fed is Mayer's idol or not is anybody's guess, and who cares if he is. He is entitled to idolize whoever he wants.


luckystar
, 10/25/10 8:00 PM

I agree.

I wonder what Mayer would have said if it had been Rafa who defeated him.... "I hope Roger takes your ranking and gets back to no. 1 as soon as possible"!!!! ;)

It is nice that he wishes that for Roger but it probably would have been more diplomatic for him to have just wished him future success or something along those lines. Openly wishing him to return to no. 1 as soon as possible kinda insults the other players vying for the top spot.

Ah c'mon, everyone knows Federer is like 1 or 2 weeks shy of the all-time most weeks at No.1, I think it's fine for Mayer to want Federer to achieve that.

It's no disrespect to anyone.

I think all players know that Federer is very obsessed of No 1. Recently he said either No 1 or nothing.... cannot believe someone, according to fans is very classy, could say thing like this. So he means players like Djokovic, Murray, etc are nothing? Well, he is nothing at the moment then...

My interpretation of that comment from Federer is that the only position he himself cares about is being No.1 and beating the Sampras record for the most ever number of weeks at that position - i.e. if he isn't No.1 he doesn't care what his ranking is.

He already holds the record of 237 consecutive weeks but is one week short of equalling Sampras's overall record of 285 weeks.

I rather like the headline to this match report. Makes a change from 'battling' and 'stunning'

Andy has said he "loves to watch Rafa play" slightly different! It is well known that Andy knows Rafa really well, from his early days in Spain and likes him very much. But Mayer,indeed, seems to be Fed's new best friend. How sweet ;)

Federer said that No 1 or the rest are the same.... he did not talk about beating Sampras record...

This is exactly what Federer said.... "It?s not that important to be two, three or four... For me it?s either No. 1 in the world or everything else".... he did not talk about beating Sampras record!

In Mayer's defence, I would say that since he doesn't see himself in many finals, he's not that used to speeches - he wanted to be the healthy loser and please the crowd acknowledging his rival's superiority.
I'd wager that had it been Nadal at the other side he would have said something in the lines of 'you deserve to be Nr. 1, blablabla'.
No biggie

you're probably right shireling. how many times have we all said things on the spur of the moment. to be saying what he said on a big occasion like this, in front of the swedish royal family is a big occasion by anyone's standards.

Mayer's been in 3 finals and came across as sincere and respectful.

tettylds: I was giving my interpretation of his comment about the significance of being No.1 - not quoting what he said. You know full well how much importance he attaches to surpassing any record set by Sampras - particularly when it pertains to the GOAT debate.

For anyone who missed the famous 'I'm almost a legend' BBC interview in May 2009 which from which tettylds quotes, here is the link:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/8030695.stm

It caused a furore at the time and provoked some heated slanging matches here on TT.

According to Roger, it's not that important to be two, three or four... No 1 is the only thing that matters, that means, in Federer's world, Rafa is the only player that matter at the moment, and Roger being No 2 is just the same as being No 10, or 20 or 30.

One day Roger will be outside the top 10, unless he retires soon, then he'll remember what it felt like when he was struggling to make his way up the rankings. Roger is in decline, his tally of trophies is seriously taking a nose dive, his ranking might be moving in the opposite direction to the No 1 spot, so he should think twice before talking as if he OWNS the No 1 ranking. The only GS title he owns now will be up for grabs in a few months time and if he doesn't defend it he'll be under pressure for the rest of the year to stay in the top 10.

Taking cover already from FedUps.

I see lack of motivation in Fed?s game and to me he seems he would use just about any incentive to keep on fighting...the goal is to get back to No1 and we all know how keen Fed is to equal and break Pete?s record and there is nothing wrong with that...however, I think Fed?s game is in decline and there is little chance for him to get back to No1. He will have to be much better than what he displayed in Stockholm to achieve such a goal...and with Rafa, Nole and Andy in action it is getting more demanding on Fed...he was recently beaten by all three of them and it seems to me he is becoming the one whom they just know how to deal with...Fed is right to express his wishes and his expectations, but the way he does it just does not seem to be wise at all...discrediting and disrespecting the rankings beyond No1 is not the proper way to reach the top...and the guys at the top know how difficult it is to be there for years...

yeah do us all a favour nadline, take cover and don't come up for air. your comments get more boring by the second.

Let's see if nadal, at age 29 will still be world no. 2 or whether he decides to spend more time with shakira.

taking cover already from the kneedals.

ed, thanks for the link. I like the way Federer says he is not one for making excuses, and then goes on to reel out one after the other - mono, sars, swine flu, bird flu, back pain etc. He also said he know the crowd always want him to win, in fact when Rafa beat him at Wimbledon he said the crowd were more sorry that he lost than happy that Rafa won.

Maxi - lol

I'd quite happily sacrifice the no2 ranking to spend more time with shakira. Most definitely..

Maxi, whether Rafa will be no.2 or still be no.1 at age 29 is anybody's guess, but please don't insult him by saying that he'll enjoy himself with shakira when he has a decent and steady girl friend with him who may one day becomes his wife. Do you feel good if we talk about Fed and he having some affairs with some celebrities? Just talk about tennis and stop insulting the players.

I have not seen any signs of Roger becoming significantly more motivated than he has been this last year to improve his game so that he could beat the top players most of the time. Even with his hiring a new coach. There is no indication that next year he will play significantly better than this year. His only realistic chance at regaining number one, therefore, seems to be to have another lucky year like 2009 where Rafa is injured during a couple of slams and a few other tournaments.

Someone with a tad more humility would be more happy with his accomplishments, having surpassed Pete's slam record and nearly surpassing his number of weeks at number one, etc. It is a display of a lack of grace when Roger pouts of what the world owes him and refuses to give him: breaking any remaining records of Pete's.

Oh, and how dare Rafa come along at age 15, 17, 19 and spoil so much for Roger? Rafa must have no class whatsoever.

Let's see if nadal, at age 29 will still be world no. 2 or ... .maxi , 10/26/10 12:53 PM

Does this not ring a bell to anyone? tennisnba was keep on repeating a question two days ago before maxi re-appeared. She was spamming TT with that same line of question of ... can murray/nadal/novak stay at the top 10 when they aged 29? Snip Snip Snip hehe!

Some of Roger's fans are just as graceless as he is, and when you are taken or mistaken for tennisnba, what does that say about you? Gosh, just winning a 250 tournament makes some people so pig-headed, I even read an article by a FedUp saying the Stockholm title was historic, what is historic about that, is this not his 2nd title in Stockholm, I'm not sure, and I can't spare the time to look it up. I can only imagine what nonsense we would have to put up with if Fed had anything close to Nadal's glorious 2010.

A bit of humility when your stars are fading wouldn't go amis, especially when the player putting your nose out of joint is 5 years younger than you. One day Roger will give anything to be in the top 10, never mind No 2 in the world. Rafa would have held the No 1 ranking for the last 2 years continuously but for injury, so Roger should count himself fortunate that he was able to regain the No1 ranking, but if Rafa stays healthy as chlorostoma says, he's got not chance.

Hey,
We need another Rafa thread, so we can leave the Fed lovers in their pool of joy!

@ Maxi

"taking cover already from the kneedals"

lol.........................Maxi you are so funny, you had my work cooleagues asking me if I am going crazy laughing so loud all by myself!! I just love it!!

If Fed and Rafa are able to have such a laugh with each other while shooting the add for Federer's charity.............why cant we?!!!!

Keep on keeping on with the jokes all you Kneedals and FedUps!!.............its all good!!!

And I thought that maxi always gloated literally, that she NEVER said anything bad about Rafa or his fans or dismissed his talent. She is showing what we already knew she was, whether it's under maxi or any of her other aliases.

fan4tennis,

Yes, all it took was for Fed to win a 250 tournament and now she's baaaccckkk!

We all know who is two-faced beyond belief. When Rafa was winning everything and making history, she conveniently disappeared. Now she is back to show just how phony she is, no matter what name she happens to be using these days.

For me, it does not matter at all where will Rafa be when he is 29. The more important thing is, he is the best at the moment, and Rafa performs better than Roger when they are in the same age.... 9 slams, 18 masters, etc when he is just 24.... and logically if he remains healthy, he will be having more slams. Shame on you haters... because the only thing you can do is hoping that Rafa would retire because of his knees...... VAMOS RAFA!!!!!

Fed won a tournament 250....are you kidding me.
Why is this even news? Umm...its actually an insult to his talent that its being proclaimed that he is back, based on the back of this win.

* Shakes head in bewilderment

Just read an article whose title was "Nadal looking to prove doubters wrong at WTF, London"

Seriously what more does he have to prove??
the article also quoted Peter Bodo saying some of his usual bullshit.
these guys can just get so irritating....
Why dont we read articles which state that Federer has to priove himself on clay??
Why doesnt Federer's 64 articles dont come with an asterix..."But 42 of them were in hard courts"..

correction,

"Federer's 64 titles"

Last year we were being told that Federer was only interested in winning slams when he was losing minor tournaments left right and centre, now that he can't buy a slam, 250s are all the rage.

See below for interesting read:

Roger Federer: Is He In His Prime? : What Are a Tennis Superstar's Best Years?-2
By Vijaylakshmi Shetty (Contributor) on October 24, 2010 1,212

So what are a tennis superstar's best years?

I looked at the Grand Slam data of champions who had won at least six slam titles in the Open era.

All age referred to is age as on last birthday.

The summarized results are as under:

81% of the achievements were between 21 and 29, with most being clustered between 21 and 27. The maximum GS titles were at age 22 and 24.

For Federer, in particular, all but one of his GS titles were between 21 and 27. He had 3 at each of the ages 24, 25 and 27.

We can classify the findings as:

17-20: Pre-prime or precocity

21-27: Core Prime

28- 29: Secondary Prime (or Second wind?).

30-32: Last gasp?

We could obtain additional insight into the prime of superstars by looking at the ages of players having year-end top 10 rankings.


Ages of Top Ten Players from 1973 to 2009 This group has the multiple champions as well as other superstars enjoying the best ranking of their careers. In other words, this group includes superstars in their prime playing years.

I analysed the data from 1973 to 2009 and it has been summarized in the chart alongside. As can be seen, the curve looks very much like our familiar friend, the normal curve. Not surprisingly, the mean, median and mode are nearly equal.

Median ( Age having equal number of ages above and below ): 24

Mode ( Age occurring most often): 24

Mean ( Average Age): 24.85

This supports the hypothesis that the peak is between 24 and 25.

The upper cap of the curve has ages 21 to 27.

So the prime can be taken to be between 21 and 27.

Ages 19, 20 on the left side and 28, 29 and 30 on the right side constitute pre-prime (precocity) and secondary prime respectively.

Players like Connors, Agassi, Laver and Rosewall have given the curve a long tail on the right hand side (the post prime heroes) .

His best playing years are behind him. He is unlikely to achieve four-in-a-row. However, his winning one or two slams in 2011 cannot be ruled out.

Oops! I forgot. None of the above analysis is applicable to him!

2) What does this mean for Rafael Nadal?

He is at his peak. His best chance to win four-in-a-row or a calendar slam or whatever difficult feat he wants to achieve is in 2011. I hope Team Nadal manages the superstar's schedule properly so that his fitness matches his potential.

" There is a tide in the affairs of men. Which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune; Omitted, all the voyage of their life Is bound in shallows and in miseries "

3) What does this mean for Djokovic, Murray and Del Potro?

2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 are likely to be their best playing years.

However, because of the presence of Nadal, their best results may come only in 2012 or 2013 or thereafter.

4) What does this mean for tennis fans?

Nadal, Djokovic, Murray and Del Potro would be at or near their peak in 2011.

Roger Federer would be in decline. This means the Federer of 2011 can be beaten by the Federer of 2006 or 2007. But he cannot be beaten by anybody else!

So, if there are no mono, back or leg issues, he can be counted upon to trounce the rest!

So we can look forward to a tennis feast fit for the Gods!

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/500152-roger-federer-is-he-in-h is-prime-what-are-a-tennis-superstars-best-years-2

What does that mean, that Fed of 2011 can be beaten by the Fed of 2006-2007, but cannot be beaten by anybody else? What nonsense is that, when even in 2006-2007 Fed was beaten by a few guys but mainly by Rafa. So in 2011, Fed would not be beaten by anybody, including Rafa, Nole and Murraywho are in their prime while Fed is in decline? What theory is that? Fed can be beaten in his prime but not while he is in decline?

So why does this theory no apply to Federer? Anyway saying that the Federer of 2006 or 2007 can only be beaten by the Federer of 2011 flies in the face of reality when he is constantly beaten by Nadal and Murray.

The fact is, Federer is not trouncing anyone now. These writers are so biased.

classy greatest Roger. love you, Roger

Roger win the champion in Stockholm. Roger said. "which becomes the last victory for me, not understood, a sincerely glad"

...poor Roger. I love you

I hope it's not his last victory.

@luckystar
that comment you talked about was tongue in cheek. The writer said as much when someone asked her that in the comments.

OK tj, point taken. A bit confusing I must say, one moment the talk looks all serious and another moment tongue in cheek comment. Going by the age analysis, Rafa/Nole/Murray/Delpo are all in or reaching their prime, so we can expect keen competition among them.

I must say Rafa won't have it easy, especially on the hard courts, as all these players are very good on hard courts and the majority of tournaments on the tour are hard court tournaments. More importantly, Rafa's main rivals all have the intention to become no.1 and would therefore concentrate on their tennis career.

Compared to Fed, Fed had it a lot easier during his prime from 21 onwards, as besides Rafa on clay, he was not faced with any serious challenges on grass and hard courts. Hewitt couldn't challenge Fed anymore after 2003; Roddick managed to reach the Wimbledon final in 04/05 and USO final in 06 but couldn't beat Fed in those finals. Nalby and Safin, the two most talented of the challengers, didn't live up to expectations, either due to injuries or loss of focus.

" Hewitt couldn't challenge Fed anymore after 2003" Wrong. Hewitt could NEVER challenge federer. It was quite obvious when watching them play as teens that federer was the bigger talent. The main reason that hewitt owned federer in their younger days was that federer was immature and inconsistent. Once Federer matured in 03,hewitt struggled immensely against federer. Btw,Hewitt is overrated. He won his 2 slams in an era where sampras and co were declining,and federer had not found his game yet. As for roddick,he couldnt beat federer at wimbledon,but aside from nadal,I cant think of any of the young rivals(djokovic,murray,delpo etc) that would be able an in prime federer on grass. As for Nalbandian,the match was never in his hands when he played federer. Federer was simply a better athlete and had more variety. But nalbandian did challenge federer every now and then in his prime. As for Safin,he could have challenged federer from 05(it was around the time when Safin started to mature) but unfortunately he suffered a bad knee injury in the clay season of 05,and he played on with pain killers. Then he needed surgery in the off season. Unfortunately for Safin,whilst he had matured,after coming back from knee surgery he was never the same mover around the court again. Safin himself admitted that his knees ached perpetually until early 08. Thats why safin couldnt challenge federer that much.(although he did play federer reasonably tough in the 08 WImbledon SF) Btw,there isnt much difference between the talent levels of djokovic,murray,delpo etc and the talent level of safin,nalbandian,ferrero,roddick,davydenko etc

I don't agree with you tj, on the talent level of Nole/Murray/Delpo vs Safin/Nalby/Roddick etc. While Safin/Nalby may be more talented than Nole/Murray, I doubt Ferrero, Roddick are more talented than Nole and Co. or as talented (though I think Davy maybe is as talented but he is a late developer, only after 2005 that he shot to prominence).

Ferrero/Roddick were world no.1 but that was before Fed became TMF, same with Hewitt. I'm not wrong to say that Hewitt couldn't challenge Fed anymore after 2003, when prior to that he did challenge and beat Fed. Can you argue about that fact? I didn't say that Hewitt is more talented than Fed, though. Nole did overtake Roddick to become world no.3 in 2007, when Nole was 20 year old and not yet hit his prime, while Roddick, at 25 was still in his prime. Nole had proven his worth as a top player and remained in the top three since, and during Fed's TMF days, managed to beat him in a Masters final and also reached his first slam final at age 20 in 2007 USO, lost to TMF in that final.

When Murray became world no.4 in 2008, he was just 21 years old and since then he maintains his position in the top 4 until now. The fact that Roddick couldn't handle the challenges of these youth when he was still in his prime, unlike Fed, says something about both his and their talent levels. Of course, we have to take into consideration circumstantial factors, like injuries, loss of motivation, illnesses etc. I don't know much about Ferrero, only about some illnesses that he suffered after 2004 that had led to his 'downfall' and since then couldn't compete with the likes of Fed/Roddick, not to mention the younger generation of Rafa/Nole/Murray.

What I'm saying about Fed being fortunate during his prime was that those who ought to challenge him didn't turn up to challenge him; some who challenged him were not of the same caliber as him; some talented ones had fallen away due to illnesses, injuries; some developed late and therefore couldn't handle the TMF who was quick to stamp his authority on you and never allowed you to start your challenges against him. Only one young guy withstood the test, held his ground and finally got the better of Fed. However, this young guy himself would have to take over from Fed and withstand all challenges thrown upon him from now on, if he is to reign supreme over all his competitors.

@luckystar
Sorry,I should have made myself clearer. I did say that there was little difference between the talent levels of Nole /Murray/Delpo vs Safin/Nalby/Roddick. I mean just that. If you were to average out the talent off all those players,I dont think you would see much difference. As for federer's challengers,yeah some werent good enough,but thats really the case for all champions. SOme did fall away due to illness/injury,but most of them could not have challenged him anyway. But the point is,in federer's generation,I can only think of 1 guy who was as talented as federer,but he was very injury prone. I dont think it would have mattered if ferrero hadnt fallen away due to illness,or nalbandian had been a touch more consistent.

Ok tj, point taken. I'm waiting to see for the next five years, how Rafa, Nole, Murray, Delpo, Cilic, and also Berdych, Tsonga, Monfils, Gasquet will fare. Also the next tier of Dolgo boy, De Bakker, Golubev may make things interesting. By the time Rafa is 27/28, the batch of Harrison/Tomic/Dimitrov/Krajinovic/Bambri/Beluda will be in their early twenties and may pose a challenge to Rafa & Co.

luckystar-well it will be interesting. Nadal should continue to win more slams at a constant pace. Novak and Andy should try to win a few slams. I am intrigued to see what happens the next time the two guys play each other. As for Berdych,he is far too inconsistent for my liking. I hope he becomes consistent next year. As for Tsonga,Monfils and Gasquet,they all have problems. Gasquets has a very similar skill set to federer. Unlike Federer,Gasquet hasnt learnt to harness his talent. He has a ton of variety like federer,but just like federer did in his early days,he consistently hits the wrong shots at the wrong times. I hope he matures soon. Monfils is a showman who doesnt seem to care about winning or losing. As for Tsonga,he reminds me of Boris Becker.(minus the slam wins) Unfortunately,he is very injury prone and this prevents him from playing well consistently. As for the younger generation of harrison/tomic,it will be interesting to see if any of them become all time greats. Btw,who is Beluda? Never heard of him..

tj, Carlos Beluda is a 16/17 year old from Spain. I think he won some under 14 championships when he was younger and even Rafa was excited over him. However this Beluda is not tall, shorter than 6 ft, but he is muscular like Rafa. I saw some youtube videos about him practising shirtless, like Rafa he 'made a lot of noise' ie grunts, while he was hitting the ball, I think even louder than Rafa! So far, I have not seen him in any match yet. Well I certainly hope this Beluda guy will be Spain's next hope after Rafa, as right now after Rafa, I can't see any youngsters from Spain (between age 19-22) being promising and take after Rafa's footsteps(though I must say its unlikely that anyone can match Rafa anytime soon).

tj, what do you think about Dolgopolov, De Bakker and Golubev? I like these three guys: Dolgo's game is special though he is inexperienced and inconsistent; I like De Bakker the most among the three as he is relatively more consistent and has a good game; Golubev is more solid on clay and has a good SHBH, he is the oldest among the three.

tj, I think Murray is more like Fed where skill set is concerned. Murray also has all the shots in the book, its just that his approach to the game is different from Fed's. Murray plays more like Rafa despite having the skill set of Fed, and what Murray lacks that both Fed and Rafa have is the killer instinct, though Murray may start to have that, after getting fed up of his own failures at the slams time after time.

Gasquet may have the talent and skills like Fed's but what he lacks is mental toughness and physical fitness. I was surprised that after so many years in the tour, he still did not build up his physical fitness. We saw how many times Gasquet started a match with the upper hand of being two sets up in a best of five sets match, only to lose the next three sets. I blamed it on his physical fitness, for when you are physically unfit, you can't get your mind to work properly to control your body's movement. Conversely, if you are physically fit and less tired, you may be able to tell your mind to concentrate and hang in there. Its sad to see Gasquet still struggling to find his game, though he is now in the twenties rankings wise. Compare him to Rafa, both had shown promises at a young age of 15/16, in fact Gasquet was the one who showed more talent at that time, yet it was Rafa who came through and now is at the top of the rankings. I think Gasquet is good on grass and I sincerely hope that with his talent, he can get one Wimbledon title, though not at Rafa's expense. Gasquet would have to fight with Rafa/Murray/Nole/Berdych/Sod/Tsonga, not to mention Fed/Roddick at Wimbledon, certainly not an easy task, but who knows, one day the stars may align for him.

I agree on your take on Berdych/Tsonga/Monfils, though I hope Berdych and Tsonga can get at least one slam during their career. I also hope for Rafa to win many more slams and if possible match or surpass Fed's slam count; for Nole/Murray/Delpo, even Cilic to be multiple slams winners, and for De Bakker and even Sod to win one slam too! Lots of hopes from me, oh yes, not forgetting Roddick too, for him to win a Wimbledon title before he calls it quit.

How can I forget Davy, one of my favorite players. Hoping against hope that he too can finally get his acts together and seriously challenge at slam level. It will be nice if he really can win one slam - be it AO, FO or the USO - before he retires. I think Davy will be one guy who will play for a long long time if he is not hampered by major injuries, maybe he'll play till he is thirty five. For Fed, I think he is more like Sampras than Agassi, so I think he'll work hard to get may be one or two more slams before calling it a day; he'll want to retire in glory like Sampras, rather than fading into the sunset like Agassi.

luckystar: lol, I don't think there are enough slams to go round for all your wishes!
Tsonga, Gasquet, Monfils, Berdych, Davydenko, Cilic, Sod, Davy, de Bakker :nah
Delboy - hard, : possibly, Roddick -Wimbles: possibly
Andy, Novak: definately ;),

tj or maxi:
Did you try the new RF website there is some thing wrong with my computer did you face any difficulties there once i logg in the it keeps asking me for the passward!