Federer Passes Pete, Returns to No. 1

Yeah, Roddick didn’t get that volley in the 2nd set tiebreak, but Federer had break point in the first and missed a down the line forehand (a shot he’s made thousands of times) by a millimeter. If he gets that shot, he probably wins the first set and the tenor of the match changes completely. There are always points we can look to that seemed to turn a match. Usually, though, there are many such points if we really look at it. Both players played well. Andy deserves full credit for bringing something new to the match.

July 6th, 2009 at 8:07 pm

Sean,
This is a well-written article, far better than the last. You deserve kudos there!
Ref:
“I don’t think Fed played his best tennis Sunday” because he was not allowed to. That’s what happens when the opponent comes with a plan and executes to the letter. Fed admitted that he never felt he was in control. He had to improvise and hold his ground. His serve turned out to be pretty reliable in this regard. Through out, A-Rod had him out of the usual comfort zone that Fed thought he would be customarily enjoying against him.

“Roger simply handled it better than Roddick who by 14-all looked like it was all getting to him.”
I agree Fed “outlasted,” if not outplayed, A-Rod in the last game, rather in the last 2 points of the match. So, at the end, fortunately or unfortunately, it is a couple of points that decided the match. But if you look at the last 2 grueling matches that Roddick had to play (Hewitt and Murray) and compare those to Fed’s 2 pre-final matches, it was obvious Fed was in a better position to handle the endurance battle. It seemed like physical exhaustion slowed Roddick down a bit in the end, particularly in the last game, as evidenced by his not being able to get his first serve in or return effectively, and get out of the hole when 0-30 down and facing break point. Roddick was in another technical disadvantage: He was serving 2nd, and that certainly eliminates a chance to break back.

But A-Rod was gifted with two opportunities to avoid the endurance battle of the longest 5th set of the Slam history. Once in 2nd 2nd set and another in the early 5th set tie breaker when he had double break points. One may call it a bad luck for him.

Roger is what Roger does, finds “a way to win in the end.”

July 6th, 2009 at 8:44 pm

Sean deserves a ton of credit for writing so much during these big events. I like his take on things. I am not sure what to expect this Summer. Will Nadal not play before New York? It is a possibility. Will Federer not play before New York? Seems likely. I just became a dad in November 2008 and no way would I want to leave my child behind or fly a newborn to North America for 5 weeks. So I see Roger making a trip to the U.S. maybe 5 days before the event begins and seeing what happens. I think Murray or Roddick will win the U.S. Open this year before seeing any of the events unfold. Del Potro could build upon Roland Garros as well.

July 6th, 2009 at 9:12 pm

what a close match like that, it would be interesting to see how well Roddick face Federer next time. Will he finally believe he can win him and no loner a ‘Fed’s personal punching bag’, or would this be a one-off only display?

July 6th, 2009 at 9:15 pm

Alex that is a key question. They have played 4 times this year and once last year with a 4-1 split to Roger but the matches have been closer. I could see as they get into their late 20’s early 30’s the rivalry being a lot closer to 50-50. However, this is by no means a given. After the 2004 Wimbledon final, I expected Roddick to win their next encounter and at Canada it was pretty one sided for Federer. After the Masters Cup 06 it looked like Roddick had closed the gap and then Australia 07 happened. So it may just be another near miss. We shall see.

July 6th, 2009 at 9:25 pm

Assuming Andy can get over the emotional scars, I think this was more than a blip on the radar. He has some idea how to keep Fed uncomfortable. And he can make Federer pay with backhands down the line. Maybe Stefanki can help him improve his return just a bit. That’s all he needs. A slightly better return. I’m not sure if this is something you can get better at or not. Return of Serve is so instinctive.

July 6th, 2009 at 10:05 pm

Sean, why do you think Nadal’s going to dominate upon return? You gotta think players aren’t going to fear him as much on the hard courts after his performance on clay and lack of on grass.

July 6th, 2009 at 10:06 pm

roger owes a ton of thanks to rafa’s knee’s. if not for rafa’s knee’s rog would still have 13 slams.

get better rafa and come back soon. we miss you.

July 6th, 2009 at 10:24 pm

Again,
congratz to Fed fans for his achievements. He needs a manners 101 and repect your fellow players 101 class, but he is fine otherwise.

I think the fubk/trunk ppl have got it wrong. The roof gets precedence over fed who broke a record and got to be number 1 again? And Tommy Haas is better than Roddick and Murray? No way!

I am very impressed by Andy Roddick. Less by Andy Murray. He had the home advantage and was not able to use it.

I don’t know what will happen when Rafa returns. I just hope that he will be 100% and make better decisions regarding his schedule. Federer certainly is far from his best. To me a 5-set win with a single break at 16-14 is not domination. Andy Roddick got unlucky. That match was his to win. So I expect to see more action during the hard court season.

July 6th, 2009 at 10:34 pm

Fed is afraid,
Yeah, Roger owns a ton to Rafa’s knees… he should share the Rafa’s medical expense for that knee treatment and make sure it recovers.. but slowly enough for Fed to gather a few more grand slams.

July 6th, 2009 at 10:45 pm

Dan, I thought Nadal’s team announced his schedule and he’s playing Canada, Cincy, and the USO (plus the indoor events thereafter).

Tennis Freak, I agree with paragraph 2 of your 8:44 post, beginning “I agree Fed “outlasted,”…” and ending with “certainly eliminates a chance to break back.”

SG, I, too, think this is no “one-off” for Roddick, as he’s been extending their matches consistently now, and on all three surfaces: hard (Miami), clay (Madrid) and grass. So I see Roddick pulling out a win soon.

fed is afraid, I miss Rafa too. He’s a great challenger for Fed; he’s always stepped up and taken it to him. I’d like to see them play again before the season is up.

July 6th, 2009 at 10:49 pm

I don’t think it is just the knees. Apparently his parents’ separation has hurt Rafa a lot. we will see when he returns.

July 6th, 2009 at 10:57 pm

I definitely agree with Mr. Randall and Mr. Martin. At 14-14, I did notice as well that Roddick was a little bit fatigued – perhaps more mental than anything (let’s not forget that Roddick had Federer at 15-40 in one of the games of that set, and if he pulled off the improbable it would have been Roddick serving for the match in the fifth set). The court seemed a little darker too – maybe that’s just me, and it was the same for both players. Then again, Federer saw these conditions last year, and if anything he did not want a repeat of “losing in the darkness” – so in a sense, that prepared him well for 14-14.

I do know it’s a loss for Roddick, but it seems like a trap. Before the final, Roddick was so excited to “be in the final”, but after the final, devastated because of the chances. To me, and I hope to Roddick, it’s really important for him to see that none of it was guaranteed, and that he did give himself all the chances – which means he can do it again.

I really would like to see Roddick win another Slam. I didnt think it was possible, but with Stefanki in his corner and some great play (Roddick has not been blown out by Federer in the last two years – his Australian Open result was vintage Federer but the other matches looked pretty good!) So if Roddick is down 2-19 against Federer but game within second of a victory at Wimbledon, that is nothing to be ashamed of.

Truly, I know how Boris Becker and other champions say that Roddick “did not believe enough” – but I think that’s unfair and Boris Becker trying to stay relevant. Roddick believed plenty. He plays like he did on Friday and Sunday, and there is no doubt he will raise another Grand Slam as champion, rather than runner up.

July 6th, 2009 at 11:18 pm

fed is afraid,
Rafa has no one to blame for his knees than himself and his team. He traded wimbledon and Roland Garros for Barcelona and Madrid and Rotterdam!

If this is the way he needs to learn to prioratize, then its the way.

My feelings for Fed are very obvious but what should he do? Retire because Rafa is not playing?

July 6th, 2009 at 11:26 pm

I would also like to erase that sentiment out there that “no one ever remembers who was runner up.” Hail, I remember a lot of it.

July 6th, 2009 at 11:26 pm

Roddick’s twitter mentioned something about getting his hip checked out. Although he seemed to imply that this wasn’t a serious injury, could that be why he withdrew from Davis Cup rather than mental fatigue from the loss?

Dan – I imagine flying with a newborn baby is much easier on a private plane than commercial which can be a total nightmare. That being said, I could definitely see him opting to taknig more time off to spend with Mirka and the new baby. He’s far enough ahead now in the rankings and Rafa has so many points to defend this upcoming season (he’ll automatically lose 800 because there are no Olympics this year), he’ll probably still be able to hold onto #1 until the USO even if he doesn’t play much or at all.

July 6th, 2009 at 11:32 pm

Zola..
we are not talking abt domination here, we are talking about wins.. and Fed won that match, fair and square ..and he had to fight for it? He is on a 19-match win streak including 12 in GS which is clearly dominance overall. All the other GOAT candidates have also be stretched to 5-setters and have lost some of them to lesser players during their tenure.. so its nothing different here. Sampras was stretched to 5-sets in a wimbledon final by Ivanesevic during his peak.. i guess, Roddick is clearly more accomplished than Ivanesevic.

Regarding class and respect to fellow players.. well, these very same fellow players have voted him 5 staright years for sportsman ship award.. so they know more abt his class than you do. Most of those players including his top-10 opponents wanted him to make history at RG this year… thats how much they respect him.
By just taking a ‘line’ out of his interview and then suggesting that he wasnt all class when asked abt missing Rafa at wimbledon.. comon.. read the whole interview.. He did say that, Rafa still deserves the top-spot even if he wasnt able to defend his points during the last 2-months. He also said that, reclaiming the top-spot by winning the championship is a better way than waiting for the top-guy to lose points. He has been clearly vocal in his appreciation for Rafa and Andy. What do u want him to say.. that he doesnt deserve RG and Wimbledon cuz Rafa wasnt there in the final?

July 6th, 2009 at 11:55 pm

Zola says: “He [Federer] needs a manners 101 and respect your fellow players 101 class.”

Why does he need them? Like I said earlier, he cannot please all no matter how he comports himself. Most of over 70% of tennis fans, i.e. his global fan base, think he is well-mannered and like him the way he is. Personally, as a Fed admirer, I wish he were more disparaging to those players who wish / wait for him to age and wither away, and dream of Slam freebies in his absence, incapacitation, or decline.
And respect what way, kneel down? He will respect those players who are respect worthy, say, those who will exceed him; for instance, he duly respects Rafa on clay.
Are you Federer’s school adviser or councilor to spell out his “needs”?
Maybe you need those classes. Save the manner crap for yourself.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:01 am

Federer can only win when Nadal, the true world number one, isn’t around to beat some sense and humility into him.

Come back qickly Rafa! Tennis needs you more than ever.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:02 am

just saying,

exactly, like the last time they played…. oh wait.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:05 am

Mina: Roddick never likes to discuss his injuries and he plays them down. It’s obvious why he wouldn’t don’t you think? If he did, everyone would be saying he’s using that as an excuse for his losing the match yesterday. Also, in the future it would plant a seed in the minds of his competitors where they’d feel he’s an easy out, due to an injury. I’d say it’s the smart thing to do. There are many players who like to pull out the injury card, but Roddick is not one of them.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:07 am

Tejuz,
you may or may not believe that the sole reason I came here today after a couple of weeks, was to congratulate the Fed fans here and say how sorry I was for Andy’s loss. That was it. Then I read that article and fed’s statement and I found it very insensitive.
You and tennis freak may like it or defend it. I don’t. I find it mean and insensitive and wishful thinking on Fed’s part. he already had said he was tired of the journalists bringing up Rafa in every interview and had said before, that his problem was Rafa, not the clay courts.

Anyway, I leave you and other Fed fans to enjoy this moment and celebrate his achievements. It is barely a day after all this has happened. We can argue another time.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:08 am

Tennis freak,

touched a nerve? huh?

Suddenly the “classy guy” glass castle collapsed right in front of you and you have to resort to a language suited to your own to put those pieces back together! Good luck!

July 7th, 2009 at 12:12 am

zola,
what article are you talking about?? I read Feds post match interview and found nothing offensive about Nadal… in fact, he said:
“Of course, I would have loved to play him again.”
“it’s sad he couldn’t even give it a fair chance, Rafa.”

July 7th, 2009 at 12:15 am

Also, when the interviewer mentioned that ha was getting world no.1
He said:
“Well….I mean I guess its nice to have but of course Im aware that Rafa didnt play here”.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3s_ywumJzI4#t=5m21s

July 7th, 2009 at 12:20 am

Zola,
Ref: “he [Fed] already had said he was tired of the journalists bringing up Rafa in every interview.”

Why are you trying to hide behind Rafa? Was Rafa playing Wimbledon? How was he insensitive to Rafa? Did Rafa say it was insensitive of Fed to say so and so or you just fabricated? You should answer this before making any accusation and whining over Fed’s Wimbledon victory.

“Rafa” came up once in Fed’s post-final interview and nowhere it sounded to me he was insensitive.

Q. “You’ve reclaimed the tennis throne, winning the French, here, No. 1 spot, without facing Rafael Nadal. Does that take anything out of it in any way?”

ROGER FEDERER: “No, I don’t think it should. Just because tennis, that’s the way it goes, you know. Everybody expected Murray to be in the finals. He wasn’t there. It’s not the mistake of the one who wins at the end.
Of course, I would have loved to play him again. But, then again, I’ve also played Andy now in three great Wimbledon finals, you know, and I think he deserves the credit, too, for playing so well.
You never know how he would have played, but it’s sad he couldn’t even give it a fair chance, Rafa. He had the injury. Tennis moves very quickly, you know.
I’m happy at least that I became No. 1 in the world by winning the tournament, not just by him not playing at all, or me playing decent or someone else playing decent and getting to No. 1. That’s not the way it’s supposed to be.
It’s supposed to be that you win big matches, big tournaments. That’s how you get back to it.”

Why are bringing what was said in old interviews and why are you bent on making Fed look guilty of your guilt of whatever? Why is this attack on Fed’s manner? I don’t smell a good intention.

Show me which one of Fed’s interviews is worse and more insensitive than yours: “congratz to Fed fans for his achievements. He needs a manners 101 and repect your fellow players 101 class, but he is fine otherwise.”

July 7th, 2009 at 12:30 am

NachoF
I really appreciate your efforts. what I was referring to was this article. The quote is probably from another presser. If I find it i will post the link. I sure hope it is taken out of context, because it was very hurtful to me.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/tennis/federer-slams-murrays-grand-ambition-1732047.html

July 7th, 2009 at 12:31 am

Tennis freak,
be careful with the glass pieces!

July 7th, 2009 at 12:32 am

Q. What do you think that you and the event have missed by not having Nadal here?

ROGER FEDERER: Look, I mean, sort of the tournament goes on. You know, if I or Rafa doesn’t win the tournament, somebody will, and there will always be a story. I think the story definitely was Murray in this tournament, you know, because of where he comes from, because of how good his game’s gotten, you know, that he had a real chance of winning here.

I think that’s why Rafa got forgotten quite quickly, to be honest. There was a good semifinal match, that was Roddick, and there you go. It’s unfair to a degree. But at the same time you have to move on, you know. I’m sure Rafa will be coming back next year and playing great tennis here. So that’s the way this sport works really.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:42 am

Q. A few weeks ago the story was about Nadal winning everything, you struggling a little bit. Then you won Madrid, you won Paris. Now you’re about to regain maybe the No. 1. Tennis seems to change fast. What’s your reflection on this?

ROGER FEDERER: Yeah, I mean, there’s a good side and a bad side, because it’s kind of a very important period in tennis, the French Open and Wimbledon stretch.

So if you get injured ‑‑ I think like what Murray got injured as well with his wrist a couple of years ago, and Rafa now a little bit. I don’t quite remember now who else got injured ‑‑ but you can lose so many points. Especially him being back‑to‑back champions, Paris and Wimbledon last year, you can’t play, you lose four thousand points. It goes like in a hurry. From being invincible, you’re all of a sudden No. 2, No. 3 in the world, having to prove yourself.

Other tournaments are looming around the corner which you have to defend again. Does that just mean that he’s only the second best, you know, or third best just because he couldn’t play? Probably not. He deserves to be all the way up there in the rankings, but somebody has to win the tournament.

All you can do is put yourself in that position, and I did. Of course, I’m very happy. Shouldn’t be forgotten what a great player, what a great champion he is. Stories come about very, very quickly in tennis.

At the same time, because they go so quickly, some fade quickly as well. Sometimes it’s not fair towards certain players, if you achieved a lot like I did for so many years and then you don’t win some tournaments, people say you’re already on the decline very quickly.

So that’s the way this business works, unfortunately. But I hope it just opens some eyes at least these last few months, because they have been very different maybe to what people expected.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:45 am

thanks NachoF, again.

I am glad you have all the quotes here. Now I can be sure that it was not some out of context quote. He really means it when he says it.
Please tell me honestly, don’t you feel he always tries to say something positive about himself and something negative about an opponent? Did he really think Rafa was forgotten so quickly? How? maybe he did forget about him, but I am sure millions of fans did not.

Anyway, I have said what I wanted to say and again congratz to you and all Fed fans here. Enjoy his achievements.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:58 am

Zola… did you actually read that link you posted? He said essentially that the media picks a story and goes with it, and at wimbledon being in GB became a murray story and everyone forgot about Nadal.

Maybe this is a translation problem. That article there isn’t exactly Roger’s worst press moment… he comes off looking pretty good.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:04 am

But he meant it in the sense that he feels he would have been forgotten too….
“if I or Rafa doesn’t win the tournament, somebody will, and there will always be a story.”
“It’s unfair to a degree. But at the same time you have to move on, you know. I’m sure Rafa will be coming back next year and playing great tennis here. So that’s the way this sport works really.”

July 7th, 2009 at 1:04 am

Insensitive and ungracious Swiss Guy that is easy to hate and demonize said:

-Federer said he thought that Nadal’s absence had not deprived the tournament in any significant way, adding Murray had become the story of the fortnight. “If I or Rafa doesn’t win the tournament, somebody will, and there will always be a story. I think the story definitely was Murray in this tournament because of where he comes from, because of how good his game’s gotten, you know, that he had a real chance of winning here.

“I think that’s why Rafa got forgotten quite quickly, to be honest.”-

July 7th, 2009 at 1:05 am

Sean,
I am glad you can self-criticize. It is the whole media, not just you. When a player is playing well and winning, he is in *Godhood*! and when he is down, free kicks are awarded. I hope Fed’s story will be a good learning experience for many sports writers. In fact the number one in the trunk can well be the sports-writers!

July 7th, 2009 at 1:05 am

“Shouldn’t be forgotten what a great player, what a great champion he is. Stories come about very, very quickly in tennis”

July 7th, 2009 at 1:06 am

“Does that just mean that he’s only the second best, you know, or third best just because he couldn’t play? Probably not. He deserves to be all the way up there in the rankings, but somebody has to win the tournament.”

July 7th, 2009 at 1:06 am

zola,
those were all in the same interview… seriously, he is not dissing Rafa at all, and you know it… he is praising him, in fact.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:09 am

NachoF
just see how many times Fed talks about Rafa being forgotten. Who else has said anything about Rafa being forgotten? That is what HE wants to think.

I think me and you ( and shaky) have different takes from the same quote. Again, thanks for your good intentions. the fact that you (and shaky) do not agree with what that quote can potentially mean, is great by itself.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:12 am

Maybe it was only the presumption that “Rafa got forgotten quite quickly” that comes off negatively – especially without the context. After all, Rafa *wasn’t* forgotten. Fans at Wimbledon were holding up placards spelling out the sentence “We Miss you Rafa” and many people on this blog commented throughout the tournament about missing Rafa. Maybe Fed meant Rafa was “forgotten” *by the press* but it wasn’t specified so that could lead to some misinterpretation. In any case, the context helps clarify things.

It just goes to show how the media do this ALL THE TIME. They take a quote from a player and spin it into an entire story! It’s all about getting hits/readers.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:14 am

Zola,
You are irritating.
Zola says: “Did he really think Rafa was forgotten so quickly? How? maybe he did forget about him, but I am sure millions of fans did not.”
He did. Why should Fed be remembering about Rafa? He had better things to do, think about next match and win. As much as I like Rafa, I was not thinking much about him, either. I was watching Wimbledon matches, and Fed and other players were playing. And why should Fed care about how the touchiest of Rafa’s fans would react to his mentioning of this fact of Rafa not being the center of media attention?
The way I took it Fed meant Rafa was not the center of media attention after the tournament picked up its gear, and that’s true. Sensitivity about what? Was Rafa hurt because of what Fed said? Did he complain? Why are you complaining, pulling out this old interview, if you are not intending to diminish Fed’s victory, which, by the way, does not make any dent except make you look sour grape?

Where were you all these times to vent out your nonsense now?

Seraphim and I already answered you in the other thread. Still you are going on and on. What’s your intention?
In case you overlooked.
Zola says, “Fed might have 15 GS titles. But class? I don’t think so…But Federer uses every moment to shoot a dart at other players. Doesn’t he know how hurtful his remarks are?”

First off it is not classy at all to call out someone is not classy, whatever it means. Then, other questions follow like classy to whom? You tread into an irresolvable area.

It is a fact Rafa was not in the media soon after 2nd or 3rd day of the SW19. His absence was mentioned only cursorily as a defending champion.
Why would Fed be thinking (remembering) about Rafa after he pulled out of the tournament? Was it a requirement of the tournament to remember Rafa? Did I miss something? Is Rafa Fed’s best friend or girlfriend that he should be worrying about his knees? Instead of practicing and playing matches, should Fed be doing some memorials for Rafa, as if he were already dead, or press conferences talking about how classy Rafa is? What kind of dumb questions are these? If Fed said Rafa was forgotten, he was summarizing London tabloids and British sports channels that he did not read or hear much about Rafa on: It was all about Murray mania and England’s hope for winning the home Slam in 73 years (this is my agreement with Seraphim).

Sorry, Fed does not use “every moment to shoot a dart at other players.” I wish he did. I wish he were like Ali. He seems to do it occasionally in a subdued and subtle manner as per the tradition of “tennis-is-a-gentle-man’s-sports.” I have never heard of players complaining about his “shoot[ing] a dart,” except one Scott: “he has said negative things about my game.” Even this complaint does not say Fed’s comment has hurt him, “It doesn’t bother me,” adds Murray.

Do you have a quote from Rafa something along the line of Murray’s?

July 7th, 2009 at 1:18 am

Jane
Rafa was not forgotten by the press either. How many articles did you read about **wimbledon not being the same without Rafa***

To me that is what Fed wants to believe and yes, it comes out as a negative comment.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:18 am

“Did he really think Rafa was forgotten so quickly? How? maybe he did forget about him, but I am sure millions of fans did not.”

The media didn’t talk about Nadal after the first day until the finals. I watched feeds from all over the world online because NBC is terrible.

They didn’t talk about Nadal. He may as well have been paralyzed: the media didn’t say a peep about him. People read the newspaper for sports coverage?

July 7th, 2009 at 1:22 am

Well it’s difficult to know precisely what Fed wants to believe, zola, but the statement that Rafa was “forgotten quite quickly” is in actual fact wrong. Fans clearly remembered him and missed him throughout Wimbledon. If you say there were articles discussing him I’ll take your word for it. It could be that in Britain there were less people discussing Rafa, though, as the press may have been more about Murray.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:24 am

This is from day three @ Wimbledon, during Fed’s match with G-Lo.

http://view.picapp.com/Default.aspx?term=federer&iid=5031085

July 7th, 2009 at 1:26 am

zola-no roger shouldn’t retire because rafa isn’t playing, but he should be honest with himself about why he has won the french and wimbledon

and roger admitted to mcenroe that he was lucky this year at wimbledon, of course he then had to say that rafa was lucky in last year’s final.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:31 am

Jane,
some just from the british media:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/jun/19/rafael-nadal-injury-andy-murray-wimbledon

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/wimbledon/5697641/Wimbledon-2009-five-nailbiters.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2009/jul/06/roger-federer-greatest-rafael-nadal

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-1197696/Nadal-s-camp-insist-ll-ready-Montreal.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/tennis/article6645053.ece
….

July 7th, 2009 at 3:14 am

Jane
I gave a few links about Rafa from the British media (waiting to be moderated).
I read eurosports.com almost daily and it always discusses Andy Murray more than other players. I have no objection, because he is their native player. Discussing Andy and having hopes in him does not mean Rafa or other players are forgotten. I agree, any way you look, that was a wrong statement.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:19 am

Anyway, I didn’t want to discuss this anymore. Just wanted to reply to your comment and give these links. I will be back when the matches start again.

btw, sorry for Djoko’s loss. he was on a great run just before FO. Perhaps he is tired too and some rest will help him. Can’t wait for the US Open.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:22 am

Fed is afraid,
I think the final was about Andy Roddick. I think Fed was lucky because Andy played better but still lost. We don’t know what would have happened if Rafa played. But who is to blame for Rafa’s absence?

July 7th, 2009 at 3:25 am

Von, I’ve gotta ask you something. Has Fed substance in his character or not? In your opinion?

July 7th, 2009 at 4:40 am

SG Says:
“Von,
It’s a zoo in here”…………. Why? Is it because you think Federer fans are animals? Would you like to cage them and crush their voice with the help of the zoo?

July 7th, 2009 at 4:48 am

MMT has a good post. Kudos to him/her!

July 7th, 2009 at 4:53 am

I think Zola would have been happy if Federer had said he does not deserve FO and wimbledon titles as well as the number 1 position.

Zola, Injuries are part of the sport, you are not there somebody else will win…sometimes somebody else will be number 1 and somebody else will be the darling of the media. Federer was right.. Rafa was forgotten, i did not see many Rafa articles after the 3rd/4th day at wimbledon, if you saw them its probably you had to dig deep. It was about Murray, even federer was forgotten a little until after Murray lost.

Instead of looking at what fed say or did not say about Rafa…it will be best for you to hope for Rafa to comeback strong and healthy because if he doesn’t he will really be forgotten after few weeks from now, tennis stories change very quickly.

July 7th, 2009 at 4:54 am

huh Says:
Von, Fed’s comment to Roddick was not dumb or uncaring at all. Your brain is working havoc with you these days to give you some false sense of satisfaction. You clearly think that most of the supporters of Fed are blind and Fed-worshippers, but you either conveniently forget or deliberately want not to accept that Roddick has become some sort of PERFECT PERSON to you, which he’s not. You have nothing to do with sour grapes at all, you are delusional and in denial of the truth on certain things, but I cannot blame you for that as human nature’s not perfect or even close to perfect. However I really got the feeling that you think that you know everything otherwise you’d not have told me assuring that you know more than I’d ever care to realise. Can you really bet I’d not know more than you as time passes? If you were my classmate, then only you’d have known how unrelenting I’m in the matter of knowledge. And don’t make the blunder of considering youself THE knowledgeable or THE ethical one.

July 7th, 2009 at 4:59 am

Zola says, “Federer uses every moment to shoot a dart at other players. Doesn’t he know how hurtful his remarks are?”

Well, Fed’s not like you. You are the most biased fan ever of Rafa that I’ve ever come across. And I thought that mem’s actually the one who’s mostb trouble accepting Fed, but NO, it’s you! Don’t spew the classless ideas that you’ve gathered of by being a member of RafaelNadal.com coz people there say good things too and I know it pretty much being a member of Rafa’s official website. Believe it or not, I’m a member of the official sites of Fed, Rafa, Murray and also Djokovic and I’m pretty much aware of the venom spewed in those places. And all that you did, unfortunately for you I guess, was that you picked up the bad elements of Rafa’s site as your buddies.

July 7th, 2009 at 5:00 am

NachoF Says:
“sensatiionalsafin,
He doesnt have to… but he simply is”

Completely agree.

July 7th, 2009 at 5:01 am

TejuZ Says:
Zola..
we are not talking abt domination here, we are talking about wins.. and Fed won that match, fair and square ..and he had to fight for it? He is on a 19-match win streak including 12 in GS which is clearly dominance overall. All the other GOAT candidates have also be stretched to 5-setters and have lost some of them to lesser players during their tenure.. so its nothing different here. Sampras was stretched to 5-sets in a wimbledon final by Ivanesevic during his peak.. i guess, Roddick is clearly more accomplished than Ivanesevic.

Regarding class and respect to fellow players.. well, these very same fellow players have voted him 5 staright years for sportsman ship award.. so they know more abt his class than you do. Most of those players including his top-10 opponents wanted him to make history at RG this year… thats how much they respect him.
By just taking a ‘line’ out of his interview and then suggesting that he wasnt all class when asked abt missing Rafa at wimbledon.. comon.. read the whole interview.. He did say that, Rafa still deserves the top-spot even if he wasnt able to defend his points during the last 2-months. He also said that, reclaiming the top-spot by winning the championship is a better way than waiting for the top-guy to lose points. He has been clearly vocal in his appreciation for Rafa and Andy. What do u want him to say.. that he doesnt deserve RG and Wimbledon cuz Rafa wasnt there in the final?”

Very true.

July 7th, 2009 at 5:31 am

Zola, actually you are on a mission here coming from RN.com. You are here to preach hatred towards Fed, to force misconceptions about him, to demonize him, to denigrate his achievements, to literally stab the Fed fans from the back and to spoil their moment of joy by stating that Fed’s zero class and also claiming that Fed’s luck made him the winner. But you deliberately ignored that Fed played better than Roddick in the most important moments and that’s what counts in the end. It’s when the chips are down that a champion proves that he can still outclass others. You are of the FULLEST hatred for Fed, you are jealous of him, you have the BIGGEST ego concerning Rafa and what not! And for God’s sake, at least speak your heart out. Be straightforward and honest about your beliefs and let it be known to all. Speak the way fed is afraid, I like tennis bullies and mem speak. They are so honest when surfacing their exact feelings about Fed and they do it without fear of Fed fans. But you are exactly the opposite. You’ve taken our peace away by slaughtering Fed’s character (unjustly) and game at each and every point and then adding your nurtured belief re Rafa’s supremacy in both aspects. Do you really believe what you say? Is there nothing in your conscience preventing you from hurting the Fed fans by unnecessarily casting aspersions on Fed’s character calling him classless, arrogant and narcissist. Zola, remember one thing: respect begets respect and that’s why most of the players praise his character and have stamped their approval with regards to that by voting him for 5 consecutive years for the sportsmanship award.That is nothing if not tantamount to admitting the fact that Fed’s way more generous than any other player in terms of giving respect to the fellow players. And nobody’s the evidence to prove things to the contrary. Any unbiased interpreter would easily be able to find out, when going through Fed’s comments in this year’s award ceremony as to how Fed’s not said a bad thing about Rafa or anyone else for that matter. Fed stated what is expected from a wise man. He’s not a fool or jealous person coz otherwise God would have never been so merciful to him and gave him bucks,fame,respect, success and all that. Don’t question destiny as it is the decision of God. Fed deserves everything including the periodical pounding from Rafa and learn to live with that.

July 7th, 2009 at 6:30 am

Tennis Freak Says:
“Zola,
You are irritating.
Zola says: “Did he really think Rafa was forgotten so quickly? How? maybe he did forget about him, but I am sure millions of fans did not.”
He did. Why should Fed be remembering about Rafa? He had better things to do, think about next match and win. As much as I like Rafa, I was not thinking much about him, either. I was watching Wimbledon matches, and Fed and other players were playing. And why should Fed care about how the touchiest of Rafa’s fans would react to his mentioning of this fact of Rafa not being the center of media attention?
The way I took it Fed meant Rafa was not the center of media attention after the tournament picked up its gear, and that’s true. Sensitivity about what? Was Rafa hurt because of what Fed said? Did he complain? Why are you complaining, pulling out this old interview, if you are not intending to diminish Fed’s victory, which, by the way, does not make any dent except make you look sour grape?

Where were you all these times to vent out your nonsense now?

Seraphim and I already answered you in the other thread. Still you are going on and on. What’s your intention?
In case you overlooked.
Zola says, “Fed might have 15 GS titles. But class? I don’t think so…But Federer uses every moment to shoot a dart at other players. Doesn’t he know how hurtful his remarks are?”

First off it is not classy at all to call out someone is not classy, whatever it means. Then, other questions follow like classy to whom? You tread into an irresolvable area.

It is a fact Rafa was not in the media soon after 2nd or 3rd day of the SW19. His absence was mentioned only cursorily as a defending champion.
Why would Fed be thinking (remembering) about Rafa after he pulled out of the tournament? Was it a requirement of the tournament to remember Rafa? Did I miss something? Is Rafa Fed’s best friend or girlfriend that he should be worrying about his knees? Instead of practicing and playing matches, should Fed be doing some memorials for Rafa, as if he were already dead, or press conferences talking about how classy Rafa is? What kind of dumb questions are these? If Fed said Rafa was forgotten, he was summarizing London tabloids and British sports channels that he did not read or hear much about Rafa on: It was all about Murray mania and England’s hope for winning the home Slam in 73 years (this is my agreement with Seraphim).

Sorry, Fed does not use “every moment to shoot a dart at other players.” I wish he did. I wish he were like Ali. He seems to do it occasionally in a subdued and subtle manner as per the tradition of “tennis-is-a-gentle-man’s-sports.” I have never heard of players complaining about his “shoot[ing] a dart,” except one Scott: “he has said negative things about my game.” Even this complaint does not say Fed’s comment has hurt him, “It doesn’t bother me,” adds Murray.

Do you have a quote from Rafa something along the line of Murray’s?”

July 7th, 2009 at 6:38 am

Tennis Freak Says:
“Zola,
You are irritating.
Zola says: “Did he really think Rafa was forgotten so quickly? How? maybe he did forget about him, but I am sure millions of fans did not.”
He did. Why should Fed be remembering about Rafa? He had better things to do, think about next match and win. As much as I like Rafa, I was not thinking much about him, either. I was watching Wimbledon matches, and Fed and other players were playing. And why should Fed care about how the touchiest of Rafa’s fans would react to his mentioning of this fact of Rafa not being the center of media attention?
The way I took it Fed meant Rafa was not the center of media attention after the tournament picked up its gear, and that’s true. Sensitivity about what? Was Rafa hurt because of what Fed said? Did he complain? Why are you complaining, pulling out this old interview, if you are not intending to diminish Fed’s victory, which, by the way, does not make any dent except make you look sour grape?

Where were you all these times to vent out your nonsense now?

Seraphim and I already answered you in the other thread. Still you are going on and on. What’s your intention?
In case you overlooked.
Zola says, “Fed might have 15 GS titles. But class? I don’t think so…But Federer uses every moment to shoot a dart at other players. Doesn’t he know how hurtful his remarks are?”

First off it is not classy at all to call out someone is not classy, whatever it means. Then, other questions follow like classy to whom? You tread into an irresolvable area.

It is a fact Rafa was not in the media soon after 2nd or 3rd day of the SW19. His absence was mentioned only cursorily as a defending champion.
Why would Fed be thinking (remembering) about Rafa after he pulled out of the tournament? Was it a requirement of the tournament to remember Rafa? Did I miss something? Is Rafa Fed’s best friend or girlfriend that he should be worrying about his knees? Instead of practicing and playing matches, should Fed be doing some memorials for Rafa, as if he were already dead, or press conferences talking about how classy Rafa is? What kind of dumb questions are these? If Fed said Rafa was forgotten, he was summarizing London tabloids and British sports channels that he did not read or hear much about Rafa on: It was all about Murray mania and England’s hope for winning the home Slam in 73 years (this is my agreement with Seraphim).

Sorry, Fed does not use “every moment to shoot a dart at other players.” I wish he did. I wish he were like Ali. He seems to do it occasionally in a subdued and subtle manner as per the tradition of “tennis-is-a-gentle-man’s-sports.” I have never heard of players complaining about his “shoot[ing] a dart,” except one Scott: “he has said negative things about my game.” Even this complaint does not say Fed’s comment has hurt him, “It doesn’t bother me,” adds Murray.

Do you have a quote from Rafa something along the line of Murray’s?”

Tennis Freak, just very well said !

July 7th, 2009 at 6:40 am

Why is this Zola cingratulating the Fed fans despite having so much of hatred for Fed? Is it coz she considers us fool? May be yes! Is it to spoil our moment? Of course yes! Is it her way of reminding us of her perceived superiority of Rafa? For sure. Is it for grabing attention? Obviously yes! Or is it by way of this congratulating that she only sees a chance to get into our minds to force her biased ideas on us and even more importantly to seize the chance of destroying our happiness by saying every possible negative stuff about Fed’s attitude? BIG yes. And I can just go on and on. But lastly, beware of this pretending-to-be-graceful Zola!

July 7th, 2009 at 6:51 am

I suppose that even the irritating butt-scratching by Rafa appears to some of his fans as one of the classiest acts in the game of tennis and that should have made him more popular! ;)

July 7th, 2009 at 7:08 am

huh: I have a comment, you are neglecting your studies again!

July 7th, 2009 at 7:14 am

Kimmi, don’t care about Zola if you can.

July 7th, 2009 at 7:15 am

margot Says:
“huh: I have a comment, you are neglecting your studies again!”…………………………… Thanks mrs. margot, I’m out! :)

July 7th, 2009 at 7:17 am

Hi All, Is this forum to express one’s opinion on different matches and players OR for fighting between a group of people over player x and y.

What is the moderator doing? By allowing these in the blog, is he/she justifies this site being an
EXTREME Tennis website!!! I don’t think so, it need to be like that.

Please stop this nonsense of throwing volleys against each other to gain some points over the arguments. All the arguments and counter arguments
something crosses the politeness barrier and that should never have been allowed here……

So, the moderator the BALL IS IN YOUR COURT NOW…
Act fast and be effective for everyone’s sake.

Cheers,
Tennis Fan.

July 7th, 2009 at 7:40 am

I’m usually not one to criticize others but I must say.

Both Zola and Von are so clearly blinded by their own fanatical allegiances to their players (Nadal and Roddick) they come of as reaching for things that aren’t there and very bitter sore losers.

Both of them need to take a step back and be happy that their guys did so well this year instead of trying to find evil things to say about Federer. Federer has said nothing but kind things about both Nadal and Roddick. But Zola and Von try to spin and twist his words to mean something that they don’t. Very petty and small of them!

I just hate people who can’t find the good in things and are always looking for the bad.

July 7th, 2009 at 8:27 am

I agree with Tennis Fan.

You would think some people would have something NEW to say, or would at least stick to the topic.

So far we have had what? – nearly 70 comments on a column entitled “Federer Passes Pete, Returns to No. 1” and so far Sampras has been mentioned no more than twice.

It’s all Rafa Rafa Rafa.

The parrots in here just keep repeating the same tired – and sometimes odd – opinions and when someone has a differing opinion they get downright snarky, sometimes incredibly rude and occaionally outright insulting.

Fed lovers of the world – yeah, he’s great. He’s achieved a lot. Enjoy. But not everybody is enamoured with him. Live with it.

Rafa lovers of the world – yeah, he’s great. And when he gets back watch out. But he’s 10 slams behind Fed. Gloat when he gets there and returns to form, but don’t dis Fed.

If you are a true fan of tennis you would have heaped way more credit on Roddick and Murray for what they did these past 2 weeks. Instead for a lot of you it was dismissive disdain.

Sheesh guys and gals – c’mon. Let’s get back to saying interesting things about the sport instead of ridiculous banter we’ve been seeing for the past month.

July 7th, 2009 at 8:40 am

Sean – Federer has said in interviews that he’s not sure how things will look after the baby is born but does say that he will remain committed and do what it takes to keep playing. We might see a Mirka-less box for quite a few months if he commits to the U.S. Open series. Not sure though, be interesting to see what happens. Perhaps the baby will signify the end of slams for The Fed, who knows for sure right now. Good article.

July 7th, 2009 at 8:41 am

I’m a huge fan of Nadal, my friend teases me because of my obsession. But I think he peaked last year, and he is a spent force now. And Federer is back for good. I can’t see him losing another match this year. Another 5+ slams for him before he hangs up his racquet. His serving in the final was ridiculooouuusss. 22 aces in the final set, and 50 overall. He is god-like!!!! I hate him, but I do appreaciate, and accept that Nadal will never ever come even close to him in greatness. I think by the time Fed retires, he’ll have a winning record over Nadal. Come on, take away the clay matches and Fed leads 5-4. The head to head lopside is because Fed was such an all surface player that he could often meet Nadal in clay finals. Whereas Nadal has never played well enough to meet Fed in the US hard court season. He got Wimbledon and Aus Open, but he was at his best, and Fed was not like he is today. Anyway, I’m rambling, but Murray will overtake Nad after US Open. Still, put in perspective, Nadal has 6 slams, at least 4 more than any active player on the tour not named Fed, so he’s done alright.

I look forward to some good replies proving me wrong.

July 7th, 2009 at 8:43 am

Green Ball,

I for one, hope Federer plays the US Open. Nadal comes back. Djokovic gets his head on straight. Del Potro steps up on hard courts. Roddick continues his comeback and Murray ups the anti.

What an exciting US Open it would be. The best in years if everyone is on the same page. Can’t wait!

July 7th, 2009 at 8:51 am

I wonder what will happend to Federer now that he has reached 15 slams – will he (1) play without pressure and (2) would that be a good thing?

July 7th, 2009 at 9:30 am

Some fools are still in denial and still writing him off on several blogs. Every victory of his is a fluke according to them and for every single opponent who lost against him, they have some excuse or the other.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:31 am

MMT Says:

I wonder what will happend to Federer now that he has reached 15 slams – will he (1) play without pressure and (2) would that be a good thing?

Hmmm? That’s the big question. We all know he still wants to play, but to what degree?

My opinion, is he will go more in the Sampras direction the rest of his career. Use the Super nine’s and smaller tournaments for warm ups. Not so interested in winning them as warming up and peeking at the slams.

If Federer is anything, he’s always been very intelligent about scheduling. That can’t be said of some other notable players.

I truly believe, Federer would never publicly state, his ultimate goal is to reach 20 slams. Could he do it, maybe? If he continues to play at the same high level into his early 30s and stay healthy it’s possible.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:44 am

Zola,

I was in London reading severel papers every day in underground and watching the matches in sports pubs. Rafa was totally forgotten by the media, I say the MEDIA, no people. Even at Wimbledon the day I attended I didn’t saw a single person with his name, or flag, nothing. Maybe because I did attended centre court, where is alaways more people trying to show support for their players, but once Murray got on track, it was all about him.
The only mention I saw was one time a photo of he in his pool with shorts resting, I think before day 10. Other tan that it wsas all about Murray, insanity like. The articles you mention about how he was missed it was during week 1 if most.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:58 am

Cindy and MMT,

Just saw a video on the ATP site where Federer says he needs some time away from tennis now, then he will be practicing to get ready to the US Open. And, that one of his main goals is to finish the year as number 1. So he will probably miss Toronto and get back in Cincy, or not even plays this 2 masters. But he intend to get ready for US Open and the rest of the year.

His rankings will be pretty much secure untill US Open, even if Nadal wins Toronto and Cincy, with the points lost due to Olympics he can´t regain it by the Open, nor Murray, so…will see, but I think he will return to courts in Cincy which is ultra fast, good prep for US Open.

July 7th, 2009 at 10:06 am

Fed is GOAT. So all you people jealous out there, suck it up.

Nadal’s game is not good enough to preserve his body. That’s the reality. His game is effective in the short run, not in the long run. He plays by destroying his body. So his not being there at Wimbledon due to injuries is his problem, and reflects on a big weakness in his game (that his game eats up his body). Playing efficiently is as important as playing well. Nadal never learnt that. Staying fit is part of being a sportsman. And his injury is not a freak unlucky thing like rolling an ankle on a ball (a la Haas). Its simply an overuse injury.

July 7th, 2009 at 10:23 am

huh,
I don’t hate Fed. I don’t like his attitude. Unlike you, I am able to separate his tennis and his personality.

Daniel,
Thanks for the post. I gave some links above from some British media and they are all about Rafa or mention him. Jane posted a picture of Rafa fans and I have seen a couple too. I still find that comment very strange.

July 7th, 2009 at 10:23 am

Why don’t Fed haters think this way: Roddick played his A-game…the best ever he has played yet he lost. Federer did not play his best game, yet he won. Still he’s lucky? Or is Roddick not that great? Time to re-evaluate the rules in your self-made rule book.

July 7th, 2009 at 10:25 am

Cindy_Brady
**
I just hate people who can’t find the good in things and are always looking for the bad.***

what happened to the kisses? But then again, you pretty much hate everyone!

Sean,
I don’t know if it is being band-wagonish! It is rushing too soon to judge a player’s fate. Trying to predict a player’s future based on one or two games and it usually doesn’t work!

Sean, who said people had to miss Rafa in evey match? But it was a different Wimbledon without him. At least for millions of Rafa fans. For Fed to come out cold-hearted to make such a comment is just “being Federer”!

July 7th, 2009 at 10:29 am

Kimmi,
No. I would have been happy if Fed just went on celebrating his own win. I think it is quite an achievement to win FO and Wimbledon back to back, have 15 majors and get back to number one after a year and half of having all sorts of trouble.

But it seems with all this, Fed still needs to make comments like that to stay happy.

July 7th, 2009 at 10:36 am

Zola,
Stop your Fed-bashing BS. You are a troll. A troll is what a troll does best.
Stop using Rafa for your
There are NO “millions of Rafa fans.” Show me the concrete evidence like I can show you Fed has 3.5 million fans on Facebook plus half million in his website. Conjecture: The ratio of tennis fans is split like 7 Fed-2 Rafa-1 others out of every 10.
Accept it.

You are insulting Rafa when you said Fed’s remark hurt him. If it were that simple to hurt the lion, Fed would be doing that very often. Rafa is not a chicken-hearted like you, wailing over what Fed said of him. He will answer every question on the court. Don’t try to bring down Rafa to your level to make him look like he’s a coward like you.
This is my last post for a pitiful, mindless wailer.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:04 am

Sean,
I simply said my opinion. That his comment was hurtful to me and it was not true. To me it was just wishful thinking on Fed’s part. I understand if you or other Fed fans do not agree.

Yes,There is an element of luck all the time and there is no harm in acknowledging it. Still as I said before no one wins 15 GSs just by pure luck.

That is all for me now. Good luck to everyone.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:05 am

I love the idea that based upon the health of the draw some slams mean less than others. Let’s take Kafelnikov’s 1999 Aussie title away because Pete took a mental break. Agassi lost to Sampras at Wimbledon 99 and 2 hard court events, but Pete pulled his back the day before the event starts so Agassi’s 99 U.S. Open is gone. Hmmmm Krajicek beat Pete in straight sets in 1996 but really had a lot of injuries so maybe we shave Pete from 14 down to 12 or 11 because a healthier Krajicek would have won another Wimbledon or two and maybe a U.S. Open in the mid 1990’s. Heck, being old with a bad elbow Krajicek lost in 5 sets at the 2002 Wimbledon quarters so that is reasonable. Why don’t we just revise everyone’s total down because at some point in a 128 person draw someone pulled out or was upset in a way that helped the champion take the title. While we are at it Georgetown beat Villanova in 1985, the Patriots beat the Giants to win the Superbowl and stay undefeated, and the Yankees have never lost a game due to having the most talented roster. Yeah, sports minus anything unexpected would be a lot more interesting … Not (to borrow from Borat).

July 7th, 2009 at 11:19 am

I was in London last week and at Wimbledon on Thursday. Saw Serena playing Dementieva on the big screen TV.

Huh is right. Nadal was indeed forgotten. I read the papers every day — Sun, Times, Guardian…it was all about Murray. Even Federer was relegated to one column or so in the inside pages.

Zola and Von, grow up. Act your age. Federer exhibits a lot more class than either of you ever can. You are blinded by your own pettiness. The tennis players are not fools to vote him Number One five consecutive years for best sportsmanship.

The day I was at Wimbledon, Federer was practicing on one of the outside courts. I had a hard time getting in. The place was packed. Throngs of people were waiting outside. Everyone had eyes only for Federer. At that time, I can safely say, no one was thinking of Nadal.

I am a big Nadal fan, but even I will have to say that when the tournament was in full swing, Nadal was forgotten. Only you two see it as a sleight or insult. Grow up. Out of sight when matches are going on means out of mind, and players especially need to be focused on who they are playing next instead of thinking about Nadal.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:22 am

Dan – I couldn’t have said it better myself – the whole concept is silly. As for my previous question – I wonder what people think. Billie Jean King said that “pressure is a privilege”, and I think she’s right. I’ve written a blog entry about it, but basically, I think without the pressure of just one more question to answer, I think it’s only going to get harder for Federer.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:33 am

congrats to federer on achieving his life dream of beating sampras. he can FOAD now.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:38 am

Abesy16 said: „Come on, take away the clay matches and Fed leads 5-4. The head to head lopside is because Fed was such an all surface player that he could often meet Nadal in clay finals. Whereas Nadal has never played well enough to meet Fed in the US hard court season. He got Wimbledon and Aus Open, but he was at his best, and Fed was not like he is today.“

1) In case you didn’t notice it, 2 of those 4 defeats which Fed suffered to Nadal outside clay occured in SLAM FINALS! Repeat, SLAM FINALS!
2) Who cares if Fed was at his best or not in those 2 matches?! The point is, it’s not that he’s somehow “unable to play his best” when facing Nadal – it’s NADAL who prevents him from doing so!

July 7th, 2009 at 11:41 am

Sean Randall said: “sensationalsafin, I just think when Rafa does come back at 100% strength – knees, parental issues behind him – I still think he’s ahead of the pack. I don’t think Federer, Roddick, Djoko or even Murray can consistently beat him.“

Which bring us to the ultimate question: IS Fed (who’s just regained the No. 1 spot) the real number one or not? ;-)

July 7th, 2009 at 11:42 am

Cindy Brady you’re too much. Why are you lying?
Why don’t you tell the posters here how much you hate Federer and are playing sides. Ever since you began posting you’ve called everyone names, but I’ve been called more because I disagreed with you on some issues. You’ve accused Nadal of using drugs, and you’ve stated you hate Roddick and his fans and it’s the reason you’re lying and making more of a situation than it is. Tell me Cindy do you really like Tennis or any of the players or the posters who post here? Anyway, your treachery will serve you well. I suppose out of all the posters who post here, someone would be decent enough to speak the truth on this Cindy Brady. Tennis.x can have you with all your treachery. since you hit this site it’s readership must have taken a nose dive Enjoy the ride.
__________________
Pelchan: I don’t need to be scolded for another poster’s venom and here perpetuation of hate. If you’ve been posting here long enough you’d be wise enough to not listen to Cindy Brady.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:05 pm

Skorocel: “IS Fed (who’s just regained the No. 1 spot) the real number one or not? ;-)”
Yes its not even a question, until Nadal or someone else takes it away than it is theirs to defend. That’s the way it goes… Who says Nadal comes back healthy enough to regain No 1? I hope he does but you simply don’t know. And who says he doesn’t get hammered in the 3rd round of the US Open by some other Soderling, we didn’t think it would ever happen at Roland Garros… The point is let them play it out and we’ll find out who ends the year at no 1 without any silly debates that can’t be answered.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:05 pm

Zola,

You are delusional. You are reading your own words in fed’s interview. What you are reading is not written there, period. Of course, you are free to imagine whatever you want.

Skorocel,

Like I said earlier, people forget that Nadal is about 5 years younger than Federer. They are half a tennis generation apart, in Nadal’s favor. Nadal beating Federer outside of clay a couple of times in 2008-09 (narrowly) is a peak nadal beating a past his prime Federer. Yes, Federer is past his prime, in case you didn’t notice. 2006 was his peak year. Nadal’s peak year was 2008, early 09. Federer will never be what he was in 2006. Remember Shanghai when Fed beat nadal 6-4, 6-1 on hard courts? Nadal’s domination of Fed was largely on clay, and still is largely on clay. Going forward as well, now that the pressure is off, Nadal will not be able to dominate federer anywhere other than on clay.

And while we are at H2H – by that token, Hrbaty, Blake, and Nalbandian are better players than Nadal, since they dominate him on H2H overall.

Fed is the real No 1 – its not like Safina where you can still question, since she has NEVER won a slam. The hard truth is (and its hard for Nadal fanatics) – the guy wins by literally dsstroying his body. And the destruction is done. If that is your idea of “top notch” tennis, so be it. Tha fact is – Nadal’s game is one of the most inefficient of all players. That has taken a toll on his body. He just isn’t fit enough anymore to be No 1. He just wasn’t fit enough to defend Wimbledon. Fitness is a big part of sports (Nadal fans should agree with that – he won largely on his fitness and speed).

When Nadal wins 15 slams, lets resume this discussion of federer vs Nadal.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:05 pm

Since becoming No 1 last year, Nadal has lost 9 matches, and missed a few tournaments (some important ones like year end masters and wimbledon) due to injuries. this was Nadal at his peak, when he finally managed to squeak a wimbledon and an AO.

9 losses in his best year. Federer had 4 losses in 2005 and 5 losses in 2006. Federer at his beast was tougher to beat than Nadal at his best.

And Nadal is likely to lose many more matches the rest of 2009, because no more clay!

Remove Nadal’s clay victories, and his career record looks like Safin, Roddick, or Hewitt. In fact, it would look worse than them.

Nadal is where he is still primarily because he is one of the best clay courters ever.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:13 pm

Yes, Skorocel, he is the real number one because he hold 3 out of 4 Slams. Simple!

July 7th, 2009 at 12:13 pm

Since Nadal has never reached the U.S. Open final in his entire career (Good knees or not) what makes people think he is suddenly going to do so now? – coming off a severe injury. An injury which will be directly effected by hard courts more than any other surface?

If anything, Nadal will be lucky to win a few rounds at the U.S. Open. If he can’t realistically win it, I don’t see the point of entering it in the first place.

It makes far more sense for him to rest the knees and come back healthy next season. Throwing him out too soon on tender knees could worsen the condition further and really shorten his career. Do what Tiger Woods did, get surgery if needed. Take time off and come back strong. Nadal still young and has many good years left. No need to do things in haste.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:15 pm

Now that I thought of it, Serene has 3 out of 4 Slams. Go figure!! :)

July 7th, 2009 at 12:17 pm

Daniel: The difference is that Serena does not play in enough tournaments to get the no 1. And aside from the GS she doesn’t really win many other masters series tournaments if any, which help pad Safina’s lead. Safina has also gotten to the finals at Australia and RG as well as Semis at the other 2 slams.
I’m not saying she should be No 1, but the rankings are what they are.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:23 pm

Nadal lost 10 matches on hard courts in 2008, 12 in 2007, 10 in 2006.

On the other hand, he went 24-1, 31-1, 26-0 on clay in those years (and 50-2 on clay in 2005 – yes, 50 wins on clay in a single year!!!!!).

Evidence for what I said above.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:25 pm

Fedfan: agree with every word. Rafa was not at his peak when Roger hit his, we cannot go back in time so the whole arguement is just silly. Also agree with you that in order to chase, catch and pass Roger, Rafa has damaged his body. how severely, we don’t know at mo. Meanwhile after that 5 setter against DelPotro Fed looked as if he could go another 5, while DLp looked exhausted.
These GOAT rows are doing my head in.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:26 pm

Its likely that Nadal will come back in the US hard court season, even if he is not exactly 100%. He has made such mistakes in the past, so why not now?

Given that he would have had a nearly 3 month layoff, its not going to be that easy for him, since he won’t have any clay tournaments to build up his confidence. He’s also got to be sore at losing the French, losing out on wimbledon, then losing his No 1 ranking.

The French would probably hurt the most. Almost as much as Fed’s loss at Wimbledon. The chance to win 5 straight majors! Nadal is NEVER going to have that again.

And Nadal is not THAT young any more. he is 23, and has quite a lot of miles on his body and mind – he has already been playing non stop for about 5 years.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:30 pm

Daniel: I think Serena currently holds only 3 titles, all of the slams. That’s crazy! She’s done well in the other tournaments, but a quick peek through her profile shows only those 3 titles in the past 52 weeks. That’s definitely a very unique situation.

Imagine if Fed starts playing mainly at GS and doesn’t win anything else. Even with winning 2 slams he could be no 3 or no 4 in the world.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:31 pm

Should be some sort of rule that states the #1 ranked player should at least be required to hold 1 of the 4 grand slams in a calender year. If not, no matter what their pts are, that player should be ranked #2, and the player with the next highest number of pts and a grand slam should be ranked #1. This would only apply to the #1 position.

The “real world” computer rankings would make more sense. If a player is truly the best player in the world, then doesn’t it stand to reason, that player should own one of the 4 biggest titles? If they don’t, do they really deserve to be called the best?

July 7th, 2009 at 12:35 pm

People underestimate Federer’s fitness – have you ever seen him tired, hunched over? Never. I have even seen Nadal tired, at the USO against Ferrer.

He has the best and most complete game ever. He has the most slams ever. He has tons and tons of other records, the most records of any tennis player ever. And he is still just about 28.

That is GOAT.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:35 pm

‘Daniel Says:
Now that I thought of it, Serene has 3 out of 4 Slams. Go figure!! :)’

But those are the ONLY 3 titles she has won in last 12 months and Miami being the other final. Plus she failed to win a match on european clay warm-ups and did not play much last Summer/Fall. So if she is able to translate her slam success to other events, she will be #1. As of now, Safina has been the most consistent player week-in/week-out. Yeah, she needs to win a slam. But let her enjoy #1 spot for now.

Roger has earned his spot here by showing remarkable consistency. His only loss before semis this year was in Monte Carlo. Nadal could have played wimbledon and still lost the #1 spot had he lost before semis. Rafa is ONLY 500 points behind Roger….so its still a very close race.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:36 pm

Ranking is ranking – you cannot dispute that. If Serena is so good, which she probably is, then why doesn’t she play and win at least some other tournaments? The grand slams have the most points, so players already have the benefit of extra points for winning slams. I don’t believe they should get more.

If you really are the best player in the world, then play and win for the ranking. Winning 3 out of 4 slams would make that quite easy – she could just play a few more tournaments, win them (if she really is that good), and then be no 1.

Serena calls herself an entertainer first and a tennis player next. So she really deosn’t deserve the no 1 ranking. You may say she is the best tennis player right now though, except on clay…..

July 7th, 2009 at 12:39 pm

Gordo:

“If you are a true fan of tennis you would have heaped way more credit on Roddick and Murray for what they did these past 2 weeks. Instead for a lot of you it was dismissive disdain.”

Thank you Gordo. The Roddick fans have not had one peaceful moment to savour since he beat Murray and got to the finals of Wimby. Cindy Brady has done her darndest to ensure we never did, by harassing us, especially me. What a joy killer this woman is!

July 7th, 2009 at 12:49 pm

I hear some people talking about luck being a factor. Of course luck is a part of every match to a certain extent. Federer was lucky that he didn’t lose the 2nd set, Roddick was unlucky.

At the same time like Sean said, you can look a match in terms of who handles the pressure situations better and who comes up with the goods, who produces that one extra shot that their opponent cannot return?

Even Federer himself mentions the word luck in his post-Wimby interviews – of course luck is an element but it is not the be all. If tennis were pure luck then Zola you may have won Wimbledon by now.

Great tennis players are able to create situations where luck is able to fall on their side from time to time. But their luck is always earned.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:52 pm

It is unrealistic to presume Rafa’s state of body and tennis at this point. A lot of things have changed since his loss to Soderling on CLAY. Has he already peaked? If he has, can he stay there? If so, how long? Is he yet to peak? Is he already in the declining phase? He leaves these questions for us to speculate upon and him to answer. Whatever we hope for, it does not change a thing. In the next few months (and in the next or two) Rafa will answer both cynics and faithfuls. In any case, we are restless for his return.

Back to the present, as this moment is still Roddick’s to seize upon. Can he capitalize on this resurgent 2nd life, intensify his re-commitment, go through rigorous training (in the desert of Vegas?), refine his newly acquired weapons, and become the Agassi of 1999-2003? It is all up to him. But he has shown he can. Mighty Federer, who is not often lavish in his acknowledgment, recognized this new Roddick, implying a 2nd possible life. Fed’s press room remark was not limited to the usual Andy-played-great: “But it felt different. It was so different to what I experienced the last few years with Rafa, you know, where it was a baseline game. Today it was a serve and return game, which is more classical for grass.
You know, I mean, it’s frustrating at times because I couldn’t break Andy till the very, very end. So satisfaction is maybe bigger this time around to come through, because I couldn’t control the match at all.
The phrases that caught my attention are bolded above: “different,” “frustrating,” “couldn’t break,” “couldn’t control the match at all.”
In retrospect, esp. how perfectly Fed played the previous 6 matches coming into the final, these phrases speak more about Roddick than Fed. They are attributive of the new, Stefankized Roddick, and I hope he continues this course, only improving a little further to dazzle more.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:53 pm

With all due respect,

Tennis greatness is defined by performances in the slams. That’s all that any one will remember 50-100 years from now. Not how well someone did in a lower tier or warm up event where the pressure was not so great and not all the best players were entered.

The slams have everyone there, on equal footing. They are the defining moments of tennis greatness.

This garbage that Safina has been consistent week in and week out, and racks up superficial pts, so she can be a paper #1 is very weak. Win a huge historical event like a slam, Safina, then you can be a legitimate #1 with respect. Until then, you are a consistent #2 promising player who has yet to achieve greatness on the biggest stages in tennis.

July 7th, 2009 at 12:56 pm

MMT: Look to the t-shirt “There is no finish line…”. LOL. Seriously, I would assume two things (1) that Fed will want to try and break Pete’s weeks at number 1 record, and (2) that therefore he will go after slams and masters events.

———————–

JCZ ” The difference is that Serena does not play in enough tournaments to get the no 1.”

This is not true; actually she’s played only 2 less tournaments that Safina all season. It just that she’s lost early in all but the slams, whereas Safina has gone deep in everything, masters, slams, etc.

————————

Nadal has gone only as far as the USO semis, imo, not because he can’t compete on fast hard courts but because he’s been wiped out by this time each year, with his knees in bad shape. Look at last year: by the time he reached the USO, he’d won the French, WImbledon, Canada, Olympic gold, and still managed to get to the semis at Cincy and USO!

I agree with Sean: when Rafa is rested, healthy and motivated, he’s a beast.

And if he is back, will he be motivated to win the USO? And complete a career SLAM the same year Fed did? What do you people think? ; )

July 7th, 2009 at 12:59 pm

Slams are the most important – but people also remember who was No 1, and for how long. Can’t discredit that either.

Sampras fans still cling along to his 286 weeks as no 1. Cindy_brady, are you saying that Sampras fans are wrong to emphasize his record of max weeks at No 1? I don’t think so.

Both are important. Safina has one of them. Serena has the other. You have to work really hard to be no 1, which Serena is probably not willing to do.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:00 pm

And about Nadal making a mistake of coming back too early, please balance that with the fact that Federer played throughout 2008 with mono and therefore risked rupturing his spleen.

I am sure both Nadal and Fed make poor choices and good choices and that they have doctors who can assess just where they are at.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:02 pm

I bet when Rafa comes back and himself says he’s 100%, and then if Federer defeats Rafa, again people will cry that Rafa was unlucky because of this fitness and Roger was lucky. Their agenda is simple: Find fault with Federer any way you can: call him lucky, call him arrogant, call his game poor, blame him for your favorite player not participating, call his draw as easy, his health lucky, for your favorite player having a generally bad deficient game for several years and suddenly when he improves, expecting him to win any Grand Slam against RF, call Federer lucky for the opponent’s unforced errors, say he doesn’t deserve to win because he’s already won 5. and such endless crap. The truth remains that in tennis, the most versatile game’s Federer’s and his comments are entirely being taken out of context and the wrong way. Every interpretation of his words is adjusted as per the Fed hater’s convenience. If he outright makes some clear and insulting remarks, then it would have been understandable but leave that poor champion alone. He’s happy with his victory, wife and child. He doesn’t need to bash other players, his game is most complete and superior to former and would-be No.1s. That alone makes him GOAT. With the exception of Nadal and Murray (recently in his bad year), he has the most winning record against any other player. Nadal doesn’t have that, neither does Murray. That alone makes him No.1.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:04 pm

Jane,
It all depends on Nadal’s knees. However, I don’t think being “rested” will be an advantage for Nadal. It will actually be a disadvantage. He is a player who thrives on playing more and “being in touch”. It will take many matches for him to get into the groove again. He is not used to taking breaks.

The competition is only getting better. Murray will be stronger this year than last. Djokovic? Who knows. Del Potro will come out stronger. Roddick will be a much stronger candidate this year than last. Haas is no slouch on hard courts, now with renewed confidence. Federer will be MUCH more relaxed and confident than last year. It just doesn’t look too good for Nadal. And he doesn’t have too many more years in the future – this is not clay where he can be 90% and yet win. He needs to play at 120% to win the USO.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:05 pm

TF: “They are attributive of the new, Stefankized Roddick, and I hope he continues this course, only improving a little further to dazzle more.”

I hope Andy can take positives from this loss and continue to work hard, although at this point in time, he’s probaably asking himself some serious questions. For example, is it worth it? And, does he have what it takes to move on, or allow self-pity to envelop him? Andy, still has a lot to prove to himself and the tennis world. One positive he could take, is that he’ll no longer be considered an ‘also ran’ but a true contender. Thus, when he appears on the side of the draw of any of the top four (4) he will not be taken for granted as an easy out. Whomever he faces will definitely have to work for the win. Can he bounce back from this disappointment? I think he can. Once a fighter, always a fighter! Things are looking up for American Tennis with Roddick still in the conversation.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:09 pm

Jane,

I think Nadal’s knees must be in worst shape than ever before for him to have bowed out of Wimbledon.

I don’t buy the fact that his knees or fitness had all that much to do with his performances in New York. The nature of his high top spin game is not as effective on that surface. A hot player who hits flat and hard can hurt Nadal. We’ve seen it over and over again. Fast hard courts reward pace and depth.

If he were to enter this year with suspect knees, it would be just that much harder for him to win.

Not saying he can’t. He has a will of iron and can win on hard courts but imo his body has to be 100 % for him to do so on that surface.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:09 pm

Federer’s losing record to Nadal and Murray is largely an age issue as well – Nadal is 5 years younger, Murray is 6 years younger. Federer is 2-3 years past his prime, while these guys are at their peak. Doesn’t mean that much. None of them would have a winning record against the Federer of 2006, at least outside of clay as far as Nadal is concerned. Even on clay, Fed-Nadal matches were pretty darn close in 2006 (remember Rome?). Nadal used to have a tough time beating Federer even on clay (in 2006).

July 7th, 2009 at 1:09 pm

Jane,
Honestly, I am not quite sure if Rafa will win the USO this year. We will have to wait for some early signs in Montreal and Cincinnati.
He’s gotta do it. He does not have an option not to do it, does he? If he does, he will have answered those who doubt. I will be rooting for him all the way.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:12 pm

If Roddick continues to play this way..and I really hope he does…he will be a contendor at wimbledon and us open, the AO is a little slower but you never know since his base line game is now at a very high level. This can only make tennins more interesting as we will have more guys, fighting at the deep end of major tournaments.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:12 pm

FedFan,

Cindy_brady, are you saying that Sampras fans are wrong to emphasize his record of max weeks at No 1? I don’t think so.

No not at all….LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sampras had 14 grand slams to legitimize that #1 ranking length. No dispute at all.

Safina has ZERO

Do you see the difference?

July 7th, 2009 at 1:13 pm

We will soon find out if you’re right Fedfan. Certainly, you’ve overlooked one recent historical example that proves your theory wrong. Nadal took a hiatus at the end of last year; he didn’t play Davis Cup or the YEC. But what happened? He came back, played a couple warm ups, and won the Australian. I suspect he’ll come back, play the two Masters (Canada and Cincy) and do his darndest to win the USO.

I am not saying he will win it though; but he’s such a tough competitor. He has winning records against a lot of the competition you mention, although I agree with you that many of them have improved.

It’s just wait and see … but the season isn’t over.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:14 pm

FedFan the 2006 clay example – Nadal was 20. Is 20 prime in tennis? Federer was 24/25.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:19 pm

Fedfan says “Nadal used to have a tough time beating Federer even on clay (in 2006).”

For sure, but don’t forget that Nadal beat Fed on a fast indoor hard court at Dubai that very year, 2006.

Nadal can flatten out his shots and use the geometry of the court to his advantage. He doesn’t have to always hit deep or through the court as he has a lot of variety. His serve has also improved and he is one of the best returners.

Sure, hard fast courts may be one of his toughest surfaces, but he won in Canada – did anyone SEE his match with Gasquet there? When Rafa is fit he mentally and physically wears down the competition.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:21 pm

Cindy,

The No 1 ranking doesn’t need to be “legitimized”. Slams are one thing. No. 1 ranking is another. They are largely correlated, but not always. Both are important. Having both is certainly better than having just one. So its wrong to undermine Safina’s ranking – she deserves it.

Jane,

I am not overlooking anything. The AO is a slower hard court. And at that time Rafa was on top of the world. The situation now is very different. AO is played after a 2 month break for everyone, so nobody is really in top touch then. Nadal’s loss at the FO has got to have shattered his confidence at least a little bit. Then not defnding wimbledon, losing the ranking, and other players making strides – it just doesn’t look good for him.

I do hope Roddick wins the USO, if Fed doesn’t!

July 7th, 2009 at 1:23 pm

Sorry Dubai was played outdoors then wasn’t it?

July 7th, 2009 at 1:23 pm

“Sure, hard fast courts may be one of his toughest surfaces, but he won in Canada”

jane, I have heard that canada is slower surface compared to Cincy and US open.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:26 pm

“I do hope Roddick wins the USO, if Fed doesn’t!”

One can only hope.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:26 pm

Jane,

Dubai is an outdoor court, not indoor. And Montreal is a slower hard court (Cincinnati is blazing fast).

Green Balls,

Prime varies for every player. Remember Becker? He won his first slam in 1985, age 17. His peak year was 1989 (won Wimbledon and USO). He was 20. He never won wimbledon again. Remember? Becker peaked at 20…. If you start early, you peak early. Everyone has only a few years at the peak. Certainly, hardly anyone peaks after 25. Agassi managed a second wind at 30, which is incredible.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:26 pm

Perhaps you have a point about confidence Fedfan, but if Rafa has shown us anything, it’s that he loves to win. I think if he does okay, even very good, at the MS events, his confidence will be fine by the time the USO rolls around.

I’d be happy to see Roddick win the USO also. And/or a few others.

I am only contending that Rafa can win the USO – because he can win on fast outdoor hard courts. I am not saying he will necessarily do it this year, but I do see him doing it at some time in his career.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:27 pm

Yes, I know Dubia is outdoor (I corrected myself above); I also know Canada is slower than Cincy. But Nadal got to the semis of Cincy last year, and he was wiped. I think he can win it if he can get to the semis when not at his best. It’s just two more steps. Anyway, this is all conjecture, but there is evidence to support the notion.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:31 pm

Fedfan Says:

Cindy,

The No 1 ranking doesn’t need to be “legitimized”. Slams are one thing. No. 1 ranking is another. They are largely correlated, but not always. Both are important. Having both is certainly better than having just one. So its wrong to undermine Safina’s ranking – she deserves it.

The #1 rank certainly does. Safina’s rank is an embarrassment to the WTA in light of her blow outs in grand slam finals and semis. Paper #1 she is but real #1 she is not.

In foot ball the New England Patriots finished with a record of 18-1 a couple of years ago. They lost the Super Bowl, the big one. And went from potentially the best team in NFL history to just another super bowl loser with a good regular season record.

The slams are like that in tennis. They are the Super bowls of the sport. If you don’t win them you are not the best and certainly not #1.

July 7th, 2009 at 1:39 pm

@ Cindy_Brady: Hey if it’s any consolation, when the bookies’ numbers come out after the super bowl for the following year’s favorites the Patriots were ahead of the Giants…

July 7th, 2009 at 1:53 pm

Pehchan,
I think you should act your own age. Stop your insults.

federer’s statements are read by millions and you don’t criticize him saying another fellow player is quickly forgotten, but you are ready to insult me because I say as a Rafa fan those words were hurtful?

To me this discussion is closed. All I said was that I did not like those comments. To me it just shows how much Federer likes to forget about Rafa.He has said it before. And I don’t find that classy. You may or may not agree with me but you have no rights to insult me. Read my comments and yours and then you can judge for yourself.

This discussion is being dragged because likes of you take a word and try to bash another poster because she doesn’t agree with you.

This discussion is done for me. But if you or others insist on posting insults, it will continue.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:00 pm

Cindy,

By that reasoning, Fed should be christened No 1 for 2009 already, since he has won 2 slams out of 4, so nobody can top that.

By that reasoning, why even have other tournaments?

Its a bit ridiculous.

Slams get 2000 points (in mens). Masters get 1000. Other tournaments get 500 or 250. So it is very difficult to get to no 1 without winning slams. But if you win enough, you can, and then you deserve it. Serena lost in all the smaller tournaments she played. Perhaps she was not motivated enough – but then, just like fitness, motivation is a necessary part of sport.

Safina is No 1, and deserves to be No 1. Serena is probably still the best player today, outside of clay. The two don’t always overlap, but we cannot undermine one or the other. That’s plain wrong.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:05 pm

rafa’s misfortune has been roger’s fortune. enjoy it while it lasts roger, cause rafa is coming back and i have a feeling things will be different.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:05 pm

I put a selected posts on this thread as well as the previous one coz in the last thread it was almost 500+ posts and so I thought those posts, if remained in the other thread, may not be looked into. But if by doing that, anybody has faced problems, I won’t post such posts twice, once in the older and second in the newer thread next time.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:05 pm

of course roger wants to forget about rafa.
13-7 speaks volumes.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:07 pm

Zola,

Stop being so touchy. You know it as well as everyone else that Fed did not insult NAdal AT ALL. Read the whole statement. Its English, not some foreign language that you may not understand. He in fact complemented Nadal. Stop being delusional.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:07 pm

Lets see what Nadal does on hardcourts. That will settle all speculation.

The most important numbers right now are: Federer 15, Nadal 6. I don’t think anyone in their right mind thinks that will tilt in Nadal’s favor.

In fact, the gap may increase. Federer has a legitimate shot at 3 slams every year for the next few years. Nadal has almost a lock on one slam only, and will struggle at the other three. Odds are Federer will continue to win more slams than Nadal. 2008 was an aberration – a subpar, ill, injured Federer won one slam, Nadal in his peak year won two.

The stats are all just too much in Fed’s favor.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:12 pm

I’m not a Safina fan, but does she deserve this kind of bashing? sheesh. The kid earned her ranking by being consistent. So she chokes in slams, big deal, not everyone can perform on the big stage, and is that a reason for her ranking to be termed ‘illegitimate’? The players all have different personalities and some players live for the big moments and shine when the limelight is on them, e.g., the Williams sisters, and some don’t — it’s all a matter of personalities. I think the ATP and WTA tournaments would be quite boring if everyone just waited to peak at the GS, by choosing to play only in the GS, and then what will happen during the rest of the year? for us looking in, it’s so easy to knock these players who aren’t GS winners. Maybe the other tournaments should be scrapped, since the GS are where everything’s supposed to be.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:15 pm

fed is afraid: Sure you don’t want a do over on the nick? Why are you such a hater anyway? Did the guy hit you with a tennis ball while you were in the stands one day? Did he not give you an autograph? Does he make you afraid about Rafa’s chances of winning a bazillion slams? Maybe you’re the one who’s afraid… Because honestly the guy can go 0 for life from now on and be considered by many to be the GOAT or at least one of them. He has nothing significant left to win or prove so what can he be afraid of? Nadal? What’s he gonna do whack him with a racket?

July 7th, 2009 at 2:16 pm

And its not been rafa’s “misfortune”. He didn’t get injured in some freak accident or slip. His style of play wore out his knees. The blame is on his style of play, not his luck.

This is like blowing through your savings by going on a spending spree, and then saying you have the misfortune of being poor. Well, you should have saved some money…..

Nadal could have easily skipped Barcelona, and perhaps even the hard court tournaments after AO. He (or his managers) should have had the sense to rest his body enough, after having the knee problem just late last year. What’s the sense in overplaying in smaller tournaments when you know you have a problem? That is really bad judgment. Again, not really something you would expect from a great player.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:19 pm

Since I’ve been at the receiving end of some unjustified scolding, why is scolding of any poster allowed? Is this a situation of teacher and student? I thought this was a blog, not a classroom where opinions can be discussed. What’s really wrong is that some posters are allowed to engage in name calling and vituperative utterances, with lies included, and there’s the real problem, so if anything needs to be done, it should begin there.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:21 pm

For the 3 upcoming tournaments.
Fed remains the man to beat, though he will be taking it easy in the first two events. He remains above the fray as far as goal-setting is concerned. Now he has it; he just expressed the desire to finish year-end number 1, so who knows? I like him winning every event he enters, but I suspect he’ll be aiming for just 1 out of 3 (plus the YEC) since he has nothing much to defend at Cincy and Montreal.

Among the top challengers: Rafa will be looking to improve on Cincy semi, Canada title and USO semi, so he should be aiming for 1-2 titles and 1 final.

Murray has to defend Cincy, Canada semi, and USO final. Can he improve on that? There are some questions marks, but he sure will try and be aiming for 2 titles.

Djokovic has to defend Cincy final, Canada quarter, and USO semi. He would like at least 1 title and 1 final. As always, he will be the most uncertain piece among the top 6, albeit a little better than Nalby.

DelPo has USO quarter to defend but nothing at Cincy and Montreal. Before Cincy begins, he has tons of points to defend, 4 titles in smaller events: Stuttgart, Kitzbuhel (which has been sort of replaced by Hamburg), LA, and Washington. He is in a precarious situation. He should be happy if he makes a couple semi or finals, of the Maters and USO.

Roddick has to defend only Montreal R16 and USO quarter. But leading to Cincy, he has to defend LA final and Washington quarter, though he can forgo both. So, he should at least be aiming for a title and a final, of these Masters and Slam. In any case, he will be gaining bunch of points and almost certain to get past DelPo.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:30 pm

roger has only won two slams against rafa.
all of rafa’s slams have gone through roger.
so i guess rafa is the real GOAT.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:31 pm

Von, look, my english language knowledge’s not extremely good, but I try to convey my messages and/or question to you trying my best to be as particular about my intentions as I can. However, I’ve often not been able to express my exact thoughts and ideas with as much clarity as I’d have liked to as I’m not a FLE poster. But anyway, some of my posts may have been probably very harsh to you, but it’s again due to my incomplete ability to perfect presentation of my views in English. You know, vocabulary I may master someday but the Eng/American touch of English language would never be there. I only wanna tell you that I’ve no hard feelings towards you, and you are , as I have said before, as unbiased as I have ever come across. I also feel that I share many of your views and they’re coming as natural to me, e.g., liking for the oldies, disbelieve in the GOAT theory, maximum appreciation for Laver as the best tennis player etc. So I’d just say, I respect you and by that I’m not obliging you in anyway, you rather deserve it. So sorry if you have been hurt very much, but I did not intend that in my heart. As far as defending me against Cindy is concerned, I saw a certain sense of affection for me in that post where you did it. And that touched my heart though I preferred not to respond to it by thanking you at that very time. Still I was happy for your support then. But if in the future, Cindy attacks me, I’d deal with her by myself as I don’t want you to unnecessarily take on such senseless ones for my sake and get offended by them in return, it’d be a shame if you come under flak in anyway due to my childishness/folly/fault, particularly coz you’re a good lady and one of the most objective posters. But unfortunately, that would never mean, we’d both agree in every respect. But that also doesn’t mean I’d want to lose your good company. I don’t care about the Vareds or Cindy Bradys or Zolas, but I certainly care for you coz I feel you’re more good than bad, but the same may not be true for others. FINALLY MY APOLOGIES once again and I hope to be forgiven. I’m eager to change our level of interaction and would like to put you in the same respectable category as I’ve put Mrs. Jane in. I really love and respect you Mrs. Von. Waiting for kind your response.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:31 pm

Fedfan Says:

Cindy,

By that reasoning, Fed should be christened No 1 for 2009 already, since he has won 2 slams out of 4, so nobody can top that.

By that reasoning, why even have other tournaments?

Its a bit ridiculous.

No, you are not paying attention. Are you always this thick? What’s ridiculous is calling someone #1 who can’t win the sport’s premiere events. In fact getting blown embarrassingly in them.

I said, the criteria for a player being a legitimate #1 at any one time is to own a grand slam title in the previous 12 months. Not too much to ask of a #1 player. Serena’s 3 grand slam titles >>> than anything Safina has offered all year. Safina may be consistent and accumulate points but she is still no champion and does not deserve to be #1.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:36 pm

TF: Thanks for the breakdown, and placing things into perspective.

I mentioned during Wimby that Roddick was just a few hundred points from catching up to DelPotro, and from your breakdown I do think it’s possible considering how little he has to defend. I’d like to see him forego Washington, but defend LA since they are his sponsors. If Andy does this and concentrates on Montreal and Cincy, I’d say he’d accumulate several hundred points to give him a convenient lead over DelPotro, but that’s also dependent on DelPotro’s performance at the two HC MS tournaments.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:37 pm

This one if for “fed is afraid”.

the real goat is hrbaty, who has a winning record against nadal, since nadal is the GOAT in your opinion!!!

LOL…

Outside of clay, in slam finals, Fed Nadal are 2-2. Again, Nadal’s domination is a clay thing, and partly due to age advantage.

Wait another year or two. Someone younger will come along and just whip Nadal, even on clay. Then you will understand what a difference 5 years makes in tennis.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:38 pm

Abesy16 Says:
“I’m a huge fan of Nadal, my friend teases me because of my obsession. But I think he peaked last year, and he is a spent force now. And Federer is back for good. I can’t see him losing another match this year. Another 5+ slams for him before he hangs up his racquet. His serving in the final was ridiculooouuusss. 22 aces in the final set, and 50 overall. He is god-like!!!! I hate him, but I do appreaciate, and accept that Nadal will never ever come even close to him in greatness. I think by the time Fed retires, he’ll have a winning record over Nadal. Come on, take away the clay matches and Fed leads 5-4. The head to head lopside is because Fed was such an all surface player that he could often meet Nadal in clay finals. Whereas Nadal has never played well enough to meet Fed in the US hard court season. He got Wimbledon and Aus Open, but he was at his best, and Fed was not like he is today. Anyway, I’m rambling, but Murray will overtake Nad after US Open. Still, put in perspective, Nadal has 6 slams, at least 4 more than any active player on the tour not named Fed, so he’s done alright.

I look forward to some good replies proving me wrong.”

Abesy16, I think you should not be worried at all. I personally like Rafa as a player less than others but that, I think, doesn’t take anything away from him. He’d surely cross Borg’s GS tally IMHO.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:40 pm

Cindy,

Since you are hell bent on making up your own rules – perhaps you will like this one – the last name should start with W.

The fact is – on court, Serena is not good enough to win outside of slams (maybe because she is a slouch in other tournaments – but that is enough to not deserve to be no 1). You have to show SOME consitency to be no 1. Serena doesn’t have that right now. So right now, its Safina who deserves the no 1 ranking.

Its a ranking, its based on points, I am sure you understand that, right?

July 7th, 2009 at 2:43 pm

huh: Don’t worry about anything, all’s OK. I’m sorry if I can’t be more responsive but I’m angry due to the wicked lies of another; I hope you understand, and we’ll talk again in the future. I bear you no ill-will and I do like you very much. I hope for now this is satisfactory to you, but it’s the best I can do at the moment.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:44 pm

zola Says:
“huh,
I don’t hate Fed. I don’t like his attitude. Unlike you, I am able to separate his tennis and his personality.”

You must be joking when you proclaim that you’ve rightly seperated his tennis from his personality.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:47 pm

Von,
No prob.
This is unrelated to my post: as a legal assistant, would it not help these people if you discuss the distinction between legitimate and illegitimate?

July 7th, 2009 at 2:48 pm

Thanks Mrs. Von.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:48 pm

if you can’t tell the difference between hrbaty, who has 0 slams, and rafa who has 6 slams, then i can’t help you.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:50 pm

TF: “This is unrelated to my post: as a legal assistant, would it not help these people if you discuss the distinction between legitimate and illegitimate?”

Sorry, I’m not going there, and won’t touch that with a 10 foot pole — I mean just look at who’s in the conversation. need I say more? BTW, Thanks for the demotion. LOL.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:52 pm

Fedfan said: „Going forward as well, now that the pressure is off, Nadal will not be able to dominate federer anywhere other than on clay.“

Excuse me, but how can you be so sure about that? Sure, Fed may play a bit more freely, knowing he’s already won that darn FO title & broken Pete’s slam record, but that doesn’t mean he’ll suddenly forget how big of a dent Nadal has become in his career over the last 5 years… Or why do you think he cried after that AO final? It wasn’t just because he lost – it was because Nadal (by winning at SW19 and now at AO) had thus SERIOUSLY damaged Fed’s reputation as a possible GOAT! Everyone knows it. After that match (in fact, already after the Wimby 2008 final, which Nadal could’ve easily won in 3 straight sets), Fed had NO excuses or refuge anymore… He could no longer say: „Listen, he’s beaten me mainly on clay, I’ll wipe the floor with him at Wimby or AO/USO!“ The cold fact is, Nadal got him on his 2 favourite surfaces, and it happened on the biggest stage this sport can offer – a grandslam. Now it’s up to Fed to redeem himself against the Spaniard, or he may end up being only a GOATWA (GOAT with asterisk) instead of the true GOAT…

——————-

„Like I said earlier, people forget that Nadal is about 5 years younger than Federer. They are half a tennis generation apart, in Nadal’s favor. Nadal beating Federer outside of clay a couple of times in 2008-09 (narrowly) is a peak nadal beating a past his prime Federer.“

Really? Then what about Miami 2004? As far as I know, Fed was at his peak back then, yet he got a beating like only a handful of players (Fish or Volandri) would duplicate in the future… Dubai 2006 anyone? Miami 2005? Fed got lucky as hell in that match! Serving at 3-4 in the 3rd & trailing 0-30, he hit one of his FHs clearly wide (as the TV Hawk Eye later proved), but luckily for him, neither the umpire Steve Ulrich nor the line judge noticed it. We know what happened after that…

July 7th, 2009 at 2:54 pm

Tennis Freak Says:
“Zola,
Stop your Fed-bashing BS. You are a troll. A troll is what a troll does best.
Stop using Rafa for your
There are NO “millions of Rafa fans.” Show me the concrete evidence like I can show you Fed has 3.5 million fans on Facebook plus half million in his website. Conjecture: The ratio of tennis fans is split like 7 Fed-2 Rafa-1 others out of every 10.
Accept it.

You are insulting Rafa when you said Fed’s remark hurt him. If it were that simple to hurt the lion, Fed would be doing that very often. Rafa is not a chicken-hearted like you, wailing over what Fed said of him. He will answer every question on the court. Don’t try to bring down Rafa to your level to make him look like he’s a coward like you.
This is my last post for a pitiful, mindless wailer.”

A superb post as usual to put Fed-hater Zola in her place. Ohhhhh Tennis Freak, you’ve made me sort of a fan of yours ! Continue like this, I’m loving your posts.

July 7th, 2009 at 2:56 pm

To Fedfan: Why do we have to apply this „generation argument“ only to Nadal? As far as I know, Del Potro, Djokovic, Berdych, Monfils, or Soderling are almost of the same age (if not younger) as is the Spaniard, yet they managed to win 8 matches less than what Nadal has thus far won against the Swiss… Any explanation for that?

July 7th, 2009 at 2:56 pm

Just pure speculation, but anyway, imagine Nadal wins the USO by beating Fed in the finals… How will the tennis world (including the Fed fanatics) assess those Fed’s two wins at FO and SW19 then? Just curious…

July 7th, 2009 at 2:57 pm

GreenBalls said: „FedFan the 2006 clay example – Nadal was 20. Is 20 prime in tennis? Federer was 24/25.“

Fedfan, are you listening?

July 7th, 2009 at 2:58 pm

Fedfan: „Dubai is an outdoor court, not indoor. And Montreal is a slower hard court (Cincinnati is blazing fast).“

I’m only speculating here, but anyway, what will you say if Nadal wins in Cincy? „Blazing slow“? ;-)

July 7th, 2009 at 2:59 pm

Dory said: „With the exception of Nadal and Murray (recently in his bad year), he has the most winning record against any other player.“

There you go! That alone doesn’t make him the GOAT ;-)

July 7th, 2009 at 3:00 pm

Tennis Freak: “Stefankized Roddick?” :-) LOL! I would rather say “Double-Deckerized Roddick” :-) Von, what do you think about that? ;-)

July 7th, 2009 at 3:00 pm

Damn I was just going through Nadal’s H2H matchups against the top players. He has winning records against every member of the top 10. That is CRAZY!I think he has a winning record against players ranked 1-15 (although he’s never played Cilic). The highest ranked player with a winning record against him is Nalbandian who is ranked 16 and has beaten him 2 out of 3 times. That’s pretty damn dominant.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:01 pm

Fedfan Says:

Cindy,

Since you are hell bent on making up your own rules – perhaps you will like this one – the last name should start with W.

The fact is – on court, Serena is not good enough to win outside of slams (maybe because she is a slouch in other tournaments – but that is enough to not deserve to be no 1). You have to show SOME consitency to be no 1. Serena doesn’t have that right now. So right now, its Safina who deserves the no 1 ranking.

Its a ranking, its based on points, I am sure you understand that, right?

LOL…..Serena is good enough to win anywhere. She just knows what’s important to win in the sport. Safina knows it too. She has failed when it’s counted the most more than once. Safina is the worst female player to have ever been ranked #1 since the rankings began. She being ranked #1 while doing so poorly in slam semis and finals while Serena having captured 3 of 4 have raised eyebrows on the credibility of the current ranking system.

You are more delusional than both Von and Zola combined if you believe Serena can’t beat Safina consistently outside the slams. She just doesn’t care. She knows the priorities are the slams.

I’ve heard it all now.

Safina with 0 slams is better than Serena with 11.

Good Grief!!

July 7th, 2009 at 3:02 pm

Von says: “BTW, Thanks for the demotion. LOL.”
I don’t know your position or what office you hold. I think you said you are a legal analyst. My poor knowledge of the field assumed if you are not a lawyer, you will be assisting him/her, right?
Sorry for the “demotion,” but if my recommendation were to work for your raise, I would.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:02 pm

Skorocel: “I would rather say “Double-Deckerized Roddick” :-) Von, what do you think about that?”

I’d say it’s a combination of both. ha, ha.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:03 pm

TF: I’ve not stated my position and/or office held — let’s just leave as it is; it’s better this way. LOL. How about an extra 100K per year? I can live with that. LOL.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:06 pm

Skorocel,

Didn’t you read my response to Greenballs above? Looks like you didn’t.

Jog your memory a bit Skorocel. in 2004 Miami, Fed was about to withdraw from this match due to illness – but he didn’t. He was sick. Yes, the Dubai victory that Nadal has was against federer at his peak, on hard courts.

Regarding imagination, I think your runs farther than anyone else! So you can imagine whatever you like (Nadal winning Ciny, Nadal winning USO, etc.). I won’t engage in hypotheticals with you. There are enough plain facts to discuss.

The other young guys not been able to win against an aging federer reflects badly on them. My argument is still valid. Nadal is better than those other younger guys – sure, I never disputed that, did I skorocel? Perhaps you can point out where I said that these other young guys were as good as nadal.

And BTW, in case you didn’t know or realize, Fed’s two favorite surfaces are grass and USO hard courts, not the AO hard courts, which are much slower than the USO hard courts. For a long time everyone believed that if ever Nadal has a shot at winning a hard court slam, it will be at the AO. I think you missed that point. Yes, he did get him at Wimbledon, in his 3rd attempt, just barely 9-7 in the fifth, in near darkness, when randomness plays a greater role than skill.

Got it? Or do you need it to be explained again?

July 7th, 2009 at 3:10 pm

Fed’s the real no.1, he was being treated as the no.1 even when Rafa held the top spot in points race. Is that clear to Skorocel?

July 7th, 2009 at 3:10 pm

‘Skorocel Says:
Just pure speculation, but anyway, imagine Nadal wins the USO by beating Fed in the finals… How will the tennis world (including the Fed fanatics) assess those Fed’s two wins at FO and SW19 then? Just curious…’

Roger will still have his 15 slams including a career slam and that’s the new bar he has set. No one can take that way. But I will be moving Rafa to top of the list of possible contenders to raise that bar.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:10 pm

Cindy,

you just said it yourself – Serena “just doesn’t care”. That itself is reason enough for her not being deserving of the no 1 ranking, unless she really earns it by winning tournaments.

Keep on deluding yourself – that’s not going to make Serena no 1, however hard you try! Try it..

July 7th, 2009 at 3:12 pm

Huh,

nothing is clear to Skorocel. He keeps repeating the same incorrect statements.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:14 pm

Fedfan Says:
“Zola,

You are delusional. You are reading your own words in fed’s interview. What you are reading is not written there, period. Of course, you are free to imagine whatever you want.

Skorocel,

Like I said earlier, people forget that Nadal is about 5 years younger than Federer. They are half a tennis generation apart, in Nadal’s favor. Nadal beating Federer outside of clay a couple of times in 2008-09 (narrowly) is a peak nadal beating a past his prime Federer. Yes, Federer is past his prime, in case you didn’t notice. 2006 was his peak year. Nadal’s peak year was 2008, early 09. Federer will never be what he was in 2006. Remember Shanghai when Fed beat nadal 6-4, 6-1 on hard courts? Nadal’s domination of Fed was largely on clay, and still is largely on clay. Going forward as well, now that the pressure is off, Nadal will not be able to dominate federer anywhere other than on clay.

And while we are at H2H – by that token, Hrbaty, Blake, and Nalbandian are better players than Nadal, since they dominate him on H2H overall.

Fed is the real No 1 – its not like Safina where you can still question, since she has NEVER won a slam. The hard truth is (and its hard for Nadal fanatics) – the guy wins by literally dsstroying his body. And the destruction is done. If that is your idea of “top notch” tennis, so be it. Tha fact is – Nadal’s game is one of the most inefficient of all players. That has taken a toll on his body. He just isn’t fit enough anymore to be No 1. He just wasn’t fit enough to defend Wimbledon. Fitness is a big part of sports (Nadal fans should agree with that – he won largely on his fitness and speed).”

This post is a good slap on the face of Skorocel and Zola, ha ha ha!!!

July 7th, 2009 at 3:17 pm

lol federer “the goat” cant win a slam or regain his world number one status unless nadal is injured, some goat, lol.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:20 pm

and LOL, nadal, the former No 1, can’t play 3 tournaments in a row without hurting his knees over and over again. That’s some former No 1. Or that’s some former player, that many people try to argue is better than Federer!

July 7th, 2009 at 3:22 pm

I liked the article Sean. Reading the somments makes me understand why tennis needs security guards. Fed is Afraid and Zola have a lot of anger built up over people they don’t know and based upon who knows what? Tennis Bullies saying a player should FOAD is a disgrace. Maybe try some exercise and meditation to get a grip on life.

I love tennis. I am a huge Nadal fan. I have no problem when other players win other than being sad for my matador de tenis. Feeling bad for your favorites is normal when they lose. Raging for days about a non-favored player when he wins is sad.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:25 pm

Nadal lost 10 matches on hard courts in 2008, 12 in 2007, 10 in 2006.

He lost 9 matches during his 46 week No. 1 reign.

These are facts, even Skorocel can’t dispute these.

He is just not that tough to beat, even at his peak, on hard courts. Federer was practically unbeatable during 2004-06 – lost 15 matches in 3 years total, about half on clay, mostly to Nadal.

Nadal just loses to too many players, even when he was at his peak.

Would love to hear Skorocel’s take on these numbers.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:28 pm

Huh,
Thanks. I am still in my mild-modest phase. Lol.

——————–
Walk with me to see my soul inside. The difference between me and some others is I can not hate success, so I like the most successful of any time, and I also like challengers to the most successful, those who have proven that they can take over the mantle by beating the most successful at the big stage, not by waiting or idling away their time. Those who think the most accomplished will go away by ill-wishing, desiring, expressing dislike or rumor-mongering, or fabricating some fuzzy math are defeatists. They don’t earn my respect as much.
Another principle that I strive to follow is: I don’t and will not criticize a player for his or her looks, outfits, character, personality, education, religion, language, gender, and nationality. I don’t and will not discredit a winner for any reason, be it easy draw, opponent’s retirement, physical condition, or whatever. I am not a Fed fanatic. I am simply his admirer, but I will not give a clean pass to those who criticize him with extraneous and fabricated attributes.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:32 pm

Von Says:
“I hope Andy can take positives from this loss and continue to work hard, although at this point in time, he’s probaably asking himself some serious questions. For example, is it worth it? And, does he have what it takes to move on, or allow self-pity to envelop him? Andy, still has a lot to prove to himself and the tennis world. One positive he could take, is that he’ll no longer be considered an ‘also ran’ but a true contender. Thus, when he appears on the side of the draw of any of the top four (4) he will not be taken for granted as an easy out. Whomever he faces will definitely have to work for the win. Can he bounce back from this disappointment? I think he can. Once a fighter, always a fighter! Things are looking up for American Tennis with Roddick still in the conversation.”

I’m also hoping for the same.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:34 pm

Federer has regained his serve in the last couple of months. That has made the difference. He said it in an interview also – his back was still bothering him a bit at the AO – he didn’t play Dubai this year to rest his back. Only in April, just before Rome, he tested it out fully, and found that his back was fully OK again. Yes, he lost Rome, but after that, he beat Nadal on clay, and then FO and Wimbledon.

Mononucleosis? Gone. Back Problem? gone. Pressure? Gone. I am really looking forward to the USO – rooting for 6 in a row for Fed. He won last year even in the midst of all the pressure and negativity. This year should be better for him.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:34 pm

fedfan says that rafa just isn’t that tough to beat
except for poor roger who can’t manage it.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:41 pm

Why is it that the Fed-haters insist that Fed got lucky because Roddick did not convert four set points in the second set tie-breaker? I don’t get it.

Chronologically speaking, didn’t Roddick get lucky first when Federer squandered four break points in the first set BEFORE Federer got “lucky” in the second set?

Imagine, if Fed had convered one of the four break points (he missed a forehand by a a fraction of an inch), the course of the entire match would have been different.

The point is, never base an argument on “ifs and buts. Federer got no more lucky than Roddick. Did Nadal get lucky last year when they played in near darkness? No. He deserved to win last year. Federer deserved to win FO and Wimby this year. Deal with it.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:49 pm

Roger can’t manage it mostly on clay.

God, these nadal fans just don’t get it….

July 7th, 2009 at 3:52 pm

roger didn’t manage to beat nadal at wimbledon last year and Australian this year. they are not on clay.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:56 pm

What’s happened to Nadal is not some random accident, like getting mono or slipping on a banana peel, but a necessary consequence of his playing style.

Much is made of his ability to play at 100% on every point, but the flip side of that is that you wear out your body much faster.

That’s why he has such lopsided victories in the early rounds of tournaments, whereas other top players don’t. He is compelled to grind and win every point, because otherwise he will lose. He just doesn’t know any other way to play.

It’s a bit amazing to hear his fans say that he should completely throw away his style and become an attacking player. That’s the style that’s won him so many Grand Slams at such a young age. It’s the very reason for his success. It is part of him.

There’s no way he could be as successful if he tried to become a primarily attacking player. It’s just not going to work for him, and he could never get as good at it as Federer or Tsonga or Roddick.

You dance with the girl that brung you. And that girl has gotten him 6 Grand Slams, an Olympic gold medal, and the #1 ranking, so she ain’t too shabby.

Sure, he’ll take several more Grand Slams (I predict a total of around nine, maybe ten) but he isn’t going to get close to Sampras’ record, let alone Federer’s.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:56 pm

Fedfan Says:

Cindy,

you just said it yourself – Serena “just doesn’t care”. That itself is reason enough for her not being deserving of the no 1 ranking, unless she really earns it by winning tournaments.

LMAO,

You really aren’t very smart.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, but it appears I gave you too much credit for rational thinking.

Serena doesn’t care because she knows the tournaments don’t mean “a hill of beans”. They are fillers until the real tests come, the slams.

Serena proves herself over and over again on the biggest stages in tennis when it counts the most. Safina does not.

Who would you put your money on to win a big match Serena or Safina?

Oh yes, probably Safina because she’s ranked #1 right?

July 7th, 2009 at 3:59 pm

I’m sure Rafa will do everything physcially possible to get back on track, but mentally, I don’t think Rafa would be as tough as he used to be.

Whenever he is caught in a long rally running from side to side, don’t you think that, mid-rally, in the back of his mind, he will start wondering: “Maybe I should stop coz this can’t be good for my knees.” You bet he will, and it would affect him terribly. Rafa retrieved the balls better than anyone. While he has the most loopy forehand in tennis history, one that can go deep, can be hit cross-court or down the line, or as a passing shot, and his backhand is as solid a stroke as can be, despite all of this, his game is built around movement. Without it he can’t win. When his movement fails him, whether it’s because he’s tired or because his knees are hirting, he loses in astonishing ways. Remember Paris Masters final against Nalby in 2007? or the Chennai final against Youzhny in 2008? When Rafa is slower by a step, he gets crushed.

Now look at Roger. He’s definitely a step slower now than he used to be from 2004-2006. Yet he is still winning slams and when he loses at least he makes it competitive. When his movement is not so good he can fire 3 aces and a service winner to win a game. To me, Rafa just doesn’t have that.

Rafa’s mental fortitude got a huge mental blow this year at RG and at Wimbledon, just like Rafa dealt Roger an even bigger blow at RG, Wimbledon and the Australian Open. Roger came back and won RG and Wimbledon back to back and got his no.1 title back. It’ll be intersting to see how Rafa recovers.

If he comes back with the same game I’ll doubt he’ll reach the heights of the the last year or so, but then again, you can’t just change your game, especially when it’s one that has got you to 6 slams on three surfaces. He just won’t have the mental fortittude to keep a 30 stroke rally going, that’s all I’m saying.

July 7th, 2009 at 3:59 pm

Green Balls Says:
“FedFan the 2006 clay example – Nadal was 20. Is 20 prime in tennis? Federer was 24/25.”

But don’t forget that it was only at that time when Rafa was the most unbeatable on clay, his 81 match winning streak on clay was in progress, which is the open era record for the longest winning streak on a single surface, bearing testimony to how untouchable he really then was on that red surface. Rafa didn’t lose a single clay match during 2005 or 2006, so his best clay court run was certainly going on during 2006. And at that very time Fed gave him the toughest fight in FO and that legendary epic match of Rome Masters which clearly speaks something about Fed.

July 7th, 2009 at 4:09 pm

Fedfan said: „and LOL, nadal, the former No 1, can’t play 3 tournaments in a row without hurting his knees over and over again. That’s some former No 1. Or that’s some former player, that many people try to argue is better than Federer!“

Who said Nadal’s better than Federer? The bottom line is, he has Fed’s number virtually on ANY surface! He’s no Krajicek or Stich (who maybe had positive records vs Sampras, but were only remotely as successful as is Nadal). He’s been the No. 2 ranked player for some 150 + weeks before reaching the No. 1 spot, won 6 (six) grandslams, 15 (fifteen) MS events, and 15 other tourneys. If Fed wants to be the so-called GOAT, do you really think he can come away with such a poor record against a player of Nadal’s calibre? I don’t.

July 7th, 2009 at 4:09 pm

Fed is Afraid,

You are going to turn me into a Federer fan. I did think maybe you should change your name to Fed is Afraid He Might Need a Bigger Trophy Case

July 7th, 2009 at 4:13 pm

that people are still debating why nadal has gotten the better of fed in their head to head, especially when the level of knowledge of the sport on this blog here is quite high, is amusing.

if nadal were not a lefty and roger did not have a one handed back hand, we can safely assume that the results would be different. it’s a terrible match up and we’ve seen the consequences of it time and time again.

(in fact roddick employed almost the same game plan as nadal and anyone else that plays fed….hammer the back hand.)

July 7th, 2009 at 4:19 pm

Skorocel,

I am little confuse, are you still a Fed fan or are you just against the GOAT debate concerning Fed – Nadal HxH? Because I am here for a long time and you were always a Fed supporter, and now your recent posts are only concerning this “asterix” in Fed’s legacy…

July 7th, 2009 at 4:21 pm

Skorocel,

Nadal doesn’t have Fed’s number on “Any” surface. Fed is still 5-4 on nadal outside of clay (or did you forget that yet again!).

Steve and Kimo have put it very well above – exactly what I said earlier – Nadal’s game, which is the reason for his success so far, is also the reason for his injuries. And he can’t win without that kind of game.

As for Cindy, Oh Cindy, you just can’t write anything without mudslinging and personal insults, ha? Well, if that makes you feel more of a man (or woman, whatever), go ahead, continue with it. Bottomline is, you still don’t get it. Perhaps never will. And now, predictable as you are, I am sure you will come out with more insults, maybe even abuses, who knows with your kind. But I am sure you will spew your venom again.

July 7th, 2009 at 4:22 pm

Kimo:

I agree that Nadal depends on movement, but one thing to consider with him is this – in 2008, he began to develop a forehand that finished more consistently across his chest – taken in an advanced position in the court. This stroke was probably developed to help shorten points, but the irony is, it actually made him the player that he was in 2008 and at the AO this year. That change, precipitated by a need to shorten points, has made him a better player. If he makes similar improvments during his hiatus, the season will get very long for the competition.

Ironically, the opposite has become true of Federer – he has had a tendency to try to end points long before their natural expiration, and as a result was making a lot of errors. Tactically as his movement has improved, he’s developed more patiences, as well as, in fact, a reverse forehand, similar to (but less effective than) Nadal’s. All of which helped him win the French, and definitely helped him beat Roddick this Sunday.

Roddick’s game has improved significantly – whereas he was a little to patient under Gilbert, and a little reckless under Connors, under Stefanki he appears to have found a happy medium, and I think his variation of spin, pace and depth at Wimbledon was brilliant.

After all the talk of belief and luck and all other manner of what amounts to side issues, to me, tennis is a technical game, and 99% of issues players face at this level are technical. After all, if you don’t have a proper slice backhand, or flat forehand, how can you employ the tactics of attacking the net or the strategy of putting your opponent under “low-risk” pressure.

This game is technical, and the players that address their technical issues succeed, the rest appear to me to take paychecks and make up the numbers.

July 7th, 2009 at 4:22 pm

zola Says:
“Pehchan,
I think you should act your own age. Stop your insults.

federer’s statements are read by millions and you don’t criticize him saying another fellow player is quickly forgotten, but you are ready to insult me because I say as a Rafa fan those words were hurtful?

To me this discussion is closed. All I said was that I did not like those comments. To me it just shows how much Federer likes to forget about Rafa.He has said it before. And I don’t find that classy. You may or may not agree with me but you have no rights to insult me. Read my comments and yours and then you can judge for yourself.

This discussion is being dragged because likes of you take a word and try to bash another poster because she doesn’t agree with you.

This discussion is done for me. But if you or others insist on posting insults, it will continue.”

Another rhetoric from Zola.

July 7th, 2009 at 4:24 pm

And this one is for Skorocel,

Again, you can be as superficial as you want – and just blindly look at the 13-7, without realizing that 13-7 = 9-2 + 4-5. I hope you get what I have written – you should, considering how often it has been said.

Blindly looking at numbers is just that, blindly looking at numbers. And it leads to nothing sensible. You need to pay attention to the details.

July 7th, 2009 at 4:25 pm

Rafa has missed the Masters Cup twice: 2005 and 2008. Do Nalbandian and Novak’s masters cup wins in 05 and 08 get tossed out due to Rafa not playing?

July 7th, 2009 at 4:29 pm

And again for Skorocel, since he insists Fed has a poor record against Nadal.

For the nth time – Fed has a poor record against Nadal ONLY on clay. Skorocel and some others seem to have a hard time getting it.

I wouldn’t call 5-4 a poor record (its a winning record) – this is Fed’s record on Nadal outside of clay.

Considering Nadal is probably the best clay courter ever, 2-9 against Nadal is bad, but understandable. Sampras would have fared worse.

July 7th, 2009 at 4:29 pm

Fedfan,

As for Cindy, Oh Cindy, you just can’t write anything without mudslinging and personal insults, ha? Well, if that makes you feel more of a man (or woman, whatever), go ahead, continue with it. Bottomline is, you still don’t get it. Perhaps never will. And now, predictable as you are, I am sure you will come out with more insults, maybe even abuses, who knows with your kind. But I am sure you will spew your venom again.

Still failed to answer my question. Who would you put your money on in a big match? Safina or Serena?

We both know why you conveniently skirted the question and resorted to gibberish instead.

As I suspected. Lame

July 7th, 2009 at 4:32 pm

Fedfan said: “And BTW, in case you didn’t know or realize, Fed’s two favorite surfaces are grass and USO hard courts, not the AO hard courts, which are much slower than the USO hard courts. For a long time everyone believed that if ever Nadal has a shot at winning a hard court slam, it will be at the AO. I think you missed that point. Yes, he did get him at Wimbledon, in his 3rd attempt, just barely 9-7 in the fifth, in near darkness, when randomness plays a greater role than skill.”

Are you kidding? The guy’s won 3 AO titles and you’re saying he didn’t favor the Rebound Ace? Huh, if he really didn’t, he wouldn’t even play there, would he?

Near darkness? Pleeeeease! The conditions were THE SAME for both players. Excuses, excuses!

July 7th, 2009 at 4:33 pm

And this one question is also for Skorocel, since he is so opposed to Fed being called the GOAT.

So who is the GOAT in men’s tennis, in your opinion? Lets hear your answer, and if it is not Fed, the reasons for why that player is overall superior to Fed.

And don’t give me the crap that laver was saying – you can’t compare generations. That’s hiding behind the obvious truth. Of course you can compare across generations, if you are detailed and careful enough.

July 7th, 2009 at 4:34 pm

I can’t wait for Federer to win his 8th Wimbledon so all the Federer fans can remind us how much better Federer is than Sampras on grass. That should be fun!

July 7th, 2009 at 4:38 pm

Skorocel,

Apply some logic, please…

You said 2 (yes two) favorite surfaces. WHich do you think Fed favors more – the USO surface (5 consecutive wins) or the slower AO surface ( 3 wins). If you want his TWO favorite surfaces, that will be grass and USO, not grass and AO.

And Cindy, yes, you did exactly what I predicted – spew more venom. As to the answer to your question – in a big match – I would favor Serena over Safina on grass and hard, and Safina over Serena on clay. Still, safina deserves to be No 1 right now, not Serena.

Skorocel seems to have joined the Cindy “venom bandwagon” too. So come on guys, spew some more, I am sure you will do it!

July 7th, 2009 at 4:38 pm

SG,

And I am sure even if Federer wins 8 wimbledons (as if 7 straight finals and 6 titles is not enough), sampras fans will still argue that Sampras was better on grass!

July 7th, 2009 at 4:41 pm

Skorocel said:

“Are you kidding? The guy’s won 3 AO titles and you’re saying he didn’t favor the Rebound Ace? Huh, if he really didn’t, he wouldn’t even play there, would he?”

Clay is not really favorable for Federer’s game. By Skorocel’s logic, Federer would never play the FO! LOL…

All top players play all the slams, even if the surface is not entirely favorable for them.

July 7th, 2009 at 4:45 pm

Fedfan: I just don’t get it why you must attribute almost every single Nadal’s success outside of clay to the courts being slower?! Slower or not, who cares? The fact is, of all the 9 matches Fed’s played against Nadal outside of clay, only 1 (the Shanghai 2007 TMC semi) can be described as a domination from the Swiss. Others (except maybe Shanghai 2006 TMC semi) were pretty much a tossup. So quicker or not, it still took Fed virtually all what he’s got to win these matches…

July 7th, 2009 at 4:46 pm

Kimo,

Rafa had an injury like that in 2005, he had to retire after Madrid and did not come back until Dubai the year after.

I think the purpose of taking such a long time off for Rafa is to heal completely and come back 100%. As you said, he perhaps doesn’t want to think about an injury while playing. He also needs to reset mentally as he said himself. I think his parents’ separation has not done him good.

Steven Tignor had a great arrticle about Rafa and Roger’s mentality. He says ( and I agree) that Rafa comes to the court knowing that he can lose. That’s why he has to play the best he can. I read that from Roig ( his other trainer) as well. whereas Roger or Sampras come to the court expecting to win. That’s why a loss is such a shock to them.

I hope Rafa takes as much time as necessary to heal completely. I also hope this year he makes some changes to his calendar.

I also hope for Roddick’s speedy recovery. That fall did not look good.But the fact that he was able to play afterwards , was very encouraging.
———–
nice to see the funk/trunk finally changed. But why bash Safina? Why would she be the worst number 1 of all times? Give her a break!

————-
On the other thread there is the news of Mountcourt’s sudden death. What a tragedy at such a young age. Is this the most bizzare two weeks or what? I don’t know how many death news I have read on yahoo alone. Really sad.

July 7th, 2009 at 4:47 pm

Fedfan,
as if actually beating Sampras the one time they played isnt enough either.

July 7th, 2009 at 4:47 pm

Daniel: Yes, I’m still a Fed fan, first and foremost. I just try to look at things more objectively than some people here do ;-)

July 7th, 2009 at 4:48 pm

Skorocel said:

“Fedfan: I just don’t get it why you must attribute almost every single Nadal’s success outside of clay to the courts being slower?! Slower or not, who cares? The fact is, of all the 9 matches Fed’s played against Nadal outside of clay, only 1 (the Shanghai 2007 TMC semi) can be described as a domination from the Swiss. Others (except maybe Shanghai 2006 TMC semi) were pretty much a tossup. So quicker or not, it still took Fed virtually all what he’s got to win these matches…”

First, I never attributed ALL of nadal’s success outside of clay to courts being slower. He did win in Dubai where courts are fast.

Secondly, as you said, other than the Shanghai beat down, all matches have been close, with Fed being 5-4. Then how can you or anyone else say that Nadal dominates Fed outside of clay?

Second, even on clay, other than the 2008 FO beatdown, ALL their matches have been close. So even though Nadal is 9-2 on clay against Fed, if you look at it closely (as you did just now by saying all matches were a toss up), Fed’s record against Nadal is not as bad as 7-13 makes it sound. Wouldn’t you agree?

BTW, now YOU are skirting my question about who YOU think is the GOAT, since you obbiovusly think Fed is GOATWA.

So, why don’t you come out in the open, finally.

July 7th, 2009 at 4:55 pm

Lets find out the objectivity that Skorocel claims he has – who is the GOAT in men’s tennis, and why?

Let’s see if skorocel has the guts to answer this question.

July 7th, 2009 at 4:57 pm

And lets see if he can answer it directly, rather than hiding behind ifs and buts and “can’t compare across generations” type arguments

July 7th, 2009 at 4:58 pm

Coco you have hit the nail on the head. Every style of play has its weak spots and various surfaces either accentuate or help hide those weaknesses. Match-ups matter and Nadal who is a stud and a great fighter also matches up ideally with Roger’s game. My guess is that Roger despite being older matches up better against this younger crop of tall two handed backhand baseline players. Of course, any of the tall teens or 20 year olds need to put it together mentally to challenge either Roger or Rafa who are two tough customers when it comes to guts and brains on the court.

July 7th, 2009 at 4:58 pm

I think whoever it is you think is the GOAT (Laver, Borg, Sampras, Lendl, federer, Nadal – whoever) – you should be able to say and defend your choice.

July 7th, 2009 at 4:59 pm

Fedfan: “As for Cindy, Oh Cindy, you just can’t write anything without mudslinging and personal insults, ha? Well, if that makes you feel more of a man (or woman, whatever), go ahead, continue with it. Bottomline is, you still don’t get it. Perhaps never will. And now, predictable as you are, I am sure you will come out with more insults, maybe even abuses, who knows with your kind. But I am sure you will spew your venom again.”

I can’t believe it, a lightbulb is slowly being turned on. There is justice after all! woo-hoo!!!

FF: Be thankful that what you got from CB is really, and I mean really, extra mild, as compared to what I’ve had to endure. And please, don’t place that in the female category — I’m repulsed.

July 7th, 2009 at 5:03 pm

I just looked into this year stats so far and to my suprise Andy Roddick is 4th overall in winning percentage. Here is the link.

http://www.tennis.com/statistics/men_percentage.aspx

I hope he takes positives from Wimbledon and performs well in US hard court season. Since Cincy and US Open are fast hard courts he should do well there.

July 7th, 2009 at 5:03 pm

Von,

Well, Cindy seems to be quite for some time. Quite a surprise. But I am quite certain she will spew her venom again, very shortly.

July 7th, 2009 at 5:07 pm

Skorocel Says:
“Fedfan said: „Going forward as well, now that the pressure is off, Nadal will not be able to dominate federer anywhere other than on clay.“

Excuse me, but how can you be so sure about that? Sure, Fed may play a bit more freely, knowing he’s already won that darn FO title & broken Pete’s slam record, but that doesn’t mean he’ll suddenly forget how big of a dent Nadal has become in his career over the last 5 years… Or why do you think he cried after that AO final? It wasn’t just because he lost – it was because Nadal (by winning at SW19 and now at AO) had thus SERIOUSLY damaged Fed’s reputation as a possible GOAT! Everyone knows it. After that match (in fact, already after the Wimby 2008 final, which Nadal could’ve easily won in 3 straight sets), Fed had NO excuses or refuge anymore… He could no longer say: „Listen, he’s beaten me mainly on clay, I’ll wipe the floor with him at Wimby or AO/USO!“ The cold fact is, Nadal got him on his 2 favourite surfaces, and it happened on the biggest stage this sport can offer – a grandslam. Now it’s up to Fed to redeem himself against the Spaniard, or he may end up being only a GOATWA (GOAT with asterisk) instead of the true GOAT…”

This however makes sense to me.

July 7th, 2009 at 5:08 pm

Fedfan, Sampras was the best player on grass that I have ever seen. Federer included. By the same token, Federer is the best hardcourter I’ve ever seen. Clay…well, I didn’t see Borg play very much early on so Nadal is my only choice. Kuerten was a nice claycourter too but he doesn’t have enough FO titles to qualify.

July 7th, 2009 at 5:08 pm

OK, I am signing out now. Skorocel seems to have no answer to my question.

See you when the Toronto Masters starts.

Till then, Enjoy Federer’s achievements, or feel jealous, whichever camp you are in.

20 slams for the GOAT!

July 7th, 2009 at 5:10 pm

Fedfan: Sampras

Phenomenal talent (almost right up there, if not equal to Fed), mentally tough as hell (FAR tougher than Fed), and no slouch even on clay (here, though, advantage goes to Fed). 14 slams, 286 weeks at No. 1, 6 consecutive No. 1 year-end finishes, 64 tourneys overall – you name it. For me, it’s Sampras.

July 7th, 2009 at 5:11 pm

Jugadora de Tenis Says:
“I liked the article Sean. Reading the somments makes me understand why tennis needs security guards. Fed is Afraid and Zola have a lot of anger built up over people they don’t know and based upon who knows what? Tennis Bullies saying a player should FOAD is a disgrace. Maybe try some exercise and meditation to get a grip on life.

I love tennis. I am a huge Nadal fan. I have no problem when other players win other than being sad for my matador de tenis. Feeling bad for your favorites is normal when they lose. Raging for days about a non-favored player when he wins is sad.”

Oh friend, I really wish good people like you were posting more often in this site!

July 7th, 2009 at 5:15 pm

Fedfan Says:

And Cindy, yes, you did exactly what I predicted – spew more venom. As to the answer to your question – in a big match – I would favor Serena over Safina on grass and hard, and Safina over Serena on clay. Still, safina deserves to be No 1 right now, not Serena.

Skorocel seems to have joined the Cindy “venom bandwagon” too. So come on guys, spew some more, I am sure you will do it!

You would bet on Safina over Serena on Clay when the stakes are high? LMAO

You must sniff paint!…Your logic reminds me of the band that kept playing while the Titanic was sinking. They were clueless to what was going on around them, until they were floating ice cubes.

Serena is a money player while Safina is probably the biggest choker in Woman’s tennis history. Safina’s resume in big matches is Butkis. I’ll pitt my #1 (Serena) against your paper #1 (Safina) on any surface, anywhere.

Ya’ Rly

July 7th, 2009 at 5:16 pm

Sampras’ problem was injury and the chronic Thalassemia that drained his energy caused some lethargy. The two issues may have even been related. Hard to say if Sampras would have won more without this stuff. I suspect he would have won 3 more slams over his last 10 years. Perhaps an FO, perhaps not. Clay really didn’t suit him or his game.

Federer has been more fortunate in terms of health. Yes, Federer has had some injuries but who doesn’t when you play at the upper levels of a major sport. All in all though, he’s escaped relatively unscathed.

July 7th, 2009 at 5:17 pm

‘Fedfan Says:
I think whoever it is you think is the GOAT (Laver, Borg, Sampras, Lendl, federer, Nadal – whoever) – you should be able to say and defend your choice.’

hmm..By that logic, we can start debate about the greatest religion???

Look, Roger is my fav player among the current lot and he also happens to the most successful among my other former favs (I loved Edberg, Agassi, Navratilova etc with equal passion). I don’t understand this obsession with calling him the greatest. In fact, if he is the greatest and the ultimate truth, then what am I supposed to look forward to the next 30-40 yrs as a tennis fan?

I am nobody to stop people from the GOAT debate. But I really wish that debate was more focussed on appreciating the great things all these players have achieved as opposed to the countless posts about any small negative they can find (like Roger’s loosing H2H against Nadal, Sampras’s clay record or how Laver did not have to play on hard court and so on…)

July 7th, 2009 at 5:19 pm

Fedfan Says:
“Von,
Well, Cindy seems to be quite for some time. Quite a surprise. But I am quite certain she will spew her venom again, very shortly.”

Is the Pope catholic, and does the Queen live in Buckinham Palace? Of course, without a doubt, these are two truths that stand firm and have been time tested, likewise, Cindy Brady will most definitely be back. My reason for her being happy as to her unveiling is based on the bad influence she has on this site, but no one seems to care. Many were witnesses to how much she lambasted me with her crude remarks, yet NO ONE saw fit to rise to my defense, instead many were gullible and fell for her likes. I got scolded for stuff I didn’t even write. It’s unbelievable, but it has taught me a hard, cold lesson about blogging on this site. So I say, Cindy Brady have fun being nasty, many are on your side. LOL.

July 7th, 2009 at 5:21 pm

Sampras had to abandon a lot of his all court game the last 4 or 5 years of his career. He just couldn’t stay back for as long and work the points the way the Sampras of ’93-’96 could. He ended up drained.

July 7th, 2009 at 5:21 pm

Fedfan Says: “And lets see if he can answer it directly, rather than hiding behind ifs and buts and “can’t compare across generations” type arguments.”
Earlier, you said, “Federer’s losing record…is largely an age issue.”

One cancels out the other: there is a logical contradiction between these two reasonings. On the one hand, you say generations can be compared; on the other, you say there is age (half generation) difference; therefore, it is unfair to compare. I am not taking side here, just pointing out logical fallacy if you want to be consistent with one standard.

July 7th, 2009 at 5:25 pm

Fedfan Says:
“Skorocel said:

“Are you kidding? The guy’s won 3 AO titles and you’re saying he didn’t favor the Rebound Ace? Huh, if he really didn’t, he wouldn’t even play there, would he?”

Clay is not really favorable for Federer’s game. By Skorocel’s logic, Federer would never play the FO! LOL…

All top players play all the slams, even if the surface is not entirely favorable for them.”

Great post!

July 7th, 2009 at 5:32 pm

Some people here are really freaky.

I’m new to this interweeb and frankly shocked, shocked I tell you, at the bitter catty childish bickering that goes on.

Are you tennis fans or gossip columnists?

Is this a sport or a soap opera?

Get over the bitchiness ladies.

I swear, I’ve heard all kinds of violent barroom arguments about sports before, but never this weird stuff.

It does do my heart good though, to see all the freaky Fed haters out there who eat breathe and sleep Fed bile, and to consider what they’ve had to put up with for 15 grand slams over the last few years!

Here’s to you haters enjoying the fellas game some more!

cheers.

July 7th, 2009 at 5:32 pm

What makes you think it’s only the ladies? Read again.

July 7th, 2009 at 5:36 pm

Huh, Thanks and Vagabond I agree it is a little strange to see the anger and vitriol based upon what? An excerpt of a press conference or winning a tournament I might have preferred someone else to win? Strange strange stuff

July 7th, 2009 at 5:41 pm

SG: Also, at 29, Sampras began having severe back problems which side-lined him for over a two-year period. Had Pete been healthy, I’m sure he would have won more slams. He’s said on many ocasions that he fought to get the 14th slam against all the odds, and didn’t push for more because he thought 14 was enough. Well, Pete, surprise, surprise, 14 wasn’t enough. I give him credit for going back to Wimby, and from what I’ve heard and read, it was a last minute decision. He’s to be admired for so doing considering what he had to deal with — someone surpassing his record. I tell you he’s more charitable that many because I don’t think many would have done that, and speaking for myself, my brotherly love would not have enabled me to put on such a show. So hats off to Pete Sampras, a man for all seasons!

July 7th, 2009 at 5:44 pm

Vagabond, Its a pitty you are new, if you would have been here long enough, the insults and the bitching are a norm here.

July 7th, 2009 at 5:56 pm

Jugadora

what is strange is that no one can write a comment here without being attacked by certain people.

The forums are to express opinions. If a comment from a player hurts me, I want to write it here. Look at the reactions and some of the posts. The words that have been used! such a rage, because someone dared to say something about a comment by Federer.

Thanks to NachoF, Kimo and Daniel for using logic rather than rage to make their points.

July 7th, 2009 at 5:56 pm

Oh wow.

July 7th, 2009 at 5:57 pm

Pehchan, you must have watched another match. apparently, you didnn’t watch the match that we watched, because the match that i saw, roddick outplayed federer. in the end, roddick made crucial mistakes that possibly cost him that match. maybe, you can enlighten us on what match you were watching, because what you are saying didn’t take place in the 2009 wimbledon final that i watched.

Fedfan, who doesn’t get it! i’m a nadal fan and i got it a long time ago. i get it that federer is phony and deliberate in his comments about rafa and other players. i get it that some people will do anything to make sure rafa is out of roger’s way because they know as great as they want us to believe federer is, he’s terrified of nadal! i get it that nadal has been undermined because people at the top and bottom know that the only way that federer could have gotten 15 majors before nadal got 5 french opens was for nadal to be out of the way! so, you and those who share your absurb thoughts can save it for the unborn, because i for one, know the truth and ain’t nothing you or no one else can say or do to change the truth!

July 7th, 2009 at 5:57 pm

Well, it’s never been easy for a non-Fed fan to comment and/or express their opinions, so freedom of speech is not the norm here. Some of the same people who are complaining are the ones who have been guilty of so doing in the past, which means, no one is exempt from the ‘bitching’ shingle that is being placed around others’ necks. Let he who is without blemish cast the first stone, if not, allow others to voice their opinions on this or any other forum minus the ganging up.

July 7th, 2009 at 6:01 pm

I don’t want to get into who is the greatest on a particular surface. Regardless of the era, Fed has the most slams, no fuzzy math. If somebody wants to raise the Pistol higher by a few inches for consolation, here is a math that a TP poster did.
Sampras’ opponents had the following number of Slams, given in parenthesis:

J. Courier (4) S. Edberg (6)
G. Ivanisevic (1) M. Safin (2)
B. Becker (6) L. Hewitt (2)
C. Pioline (0) A. Agassi (8)
G. Ivanisevic (1)
A. Agassi (8)
P. Rafter (2)
A. Agassi (8)
C. Pioline (0)
A. Agassi (8)
T. Martin (0)
C. Moya (1)
M. Chang (1)
A. Agassi (8)
For Samprass, average No of Grand Slams per opponent is just fractionally under 2.5 .

Federer’s opponents in Slams finals had the following number of Slams, given in parenthesis:

M. Philippoussis (0)
A. Roddick (1)
A. Roddick (1)
Soderling (0)
L. Hewitt (2)
A. Agassi (8)
A. Roddick (1)
N. Djokovic (1)
A. Murray (0)
A. Roddick (1)
M. Safin (2)
M. Baghdatis (0)
F. Gonzales (0)
R. Nadal (6)
R. Nadal (6) (
For Federer, average No of Grand Slams per opponent is just fractionally under 2, a little less than Sampras’.

If you are/were not Sampras fan, read the stat interpretation at TP.

Extra–For those who love(d) Connors, his Slam final opponents had most Slams in their career, average per opponent going just fractionally under 7:

K. Rosewell (8)
K. Rosewell (8)
P. Dent (0)
B. Borg (11)
B. Borg (11)
I. Lendl (8)
I. Lendl (8)
J. McEnroe (7

July 7th, 2009 at 6:04 pm

Yeah, on the GOAT discussion… I also don’t think its fair to bring Laver into this. The eras are too different, especially given the pro/am split.

I do think Fed’s beaten down and dominated an era comparable or tougher than Sampras’. I know that Sampras STARTED with some tough competition: Edberg, Becker, Courier, Agassi… but Edberg and Becker were done very early, Courier flamed out after a couple years, and Agassi, Sampras’ supposed nemesis, took WHOLE YEARS out to lunch.

So Sampras really had a long run against the likes of Pioline, Henman and Muster, not really world beaters.

Federer on the other hand came into a world of up and coming slam winners Safin, Hewitt, JCF, and Roddick and basically demolished their careers. That’s impressive.

I get the complaint that How can Fed be greatest when he’s lost the H2H to Nadal, and that’s a valid argument- but at the same time, Fed’s won more GS than Nadal since Nadal started winning them. As well, Sampras had losing records to several major players- so is Kraijek the GOAT? Is Hrbaty the GOAT for beating Nadal? I don’t think H2H on one player is a crucial component. Fed has won a LOT of Slams that Nadal has been in but not made the finals. THAT is a victory over Nadal.

But hey. that’s only logic.

So I’m with Fed as GOME- Greatest of Modern Era.

But geez, I could care less if some people think he’s “really” a nice guy or a fake.

July 7th, 2009 at 6:08 pm

About the GOAT, COAT or GOAM discussion,

Sampras made a great point in his interview, that these can be discussed at the END of someone’s career. He was reluctant to call federer the GOAT, because Laver and Borg were there. And Laver was reluctant to call fed the GOAT too. It was JMAC who was trying to force them to say so.

Regardless of the GOAT argument ( which I think is invalid), it is not possible to compare a 23-year old rafa with a 28-year old Federer. Who knows what will happen in the coming years. will Rafa retire or will he continue to have more slams?

We have had numerous discussions here on the GOAt subject. I think fed has done a great job for his own era to win 15 majors and stay as number one as many weeks as he did. These are great records. But I have no way of comparing him to sampras or Laver or others. There are too many factors.

I think GOAT will always be a subjective matter.

July 7th, 2009 at 6:16 pm

Zola,
You are a trickster. Your trick of neutralizing “NachoF, Kimo and Daniel” is not going to work. They all are Fed fans, and we don’t like you for making Fed look bad. We are not a fan of those who do not think before they speak and just fabricate meaningless stuff to hurt Fed fans. This is not an exclusively Rafa site where you can just target Fed for your frustration, of whatever. Period.

July 7th, 2009 at 6:18 pm

Von Says:

Well, it’s never been easy for a non-Fed fan to comment and/or express their opinions, so freedom of speech is not the norm here. Some of the same people who are complaining are the ones who have been guilty of so doing in the past, which means, no one is exempt from the ‘bitching’ shingle that is being placed around others’ necks. Let he who is without blemish cast the first stone, if not, allow others to voice their opinions on this or any other forum minus the ganging up.

Oh Paleaaaaase!

And Von’s up for best Drama Queen Award of 2009..
http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z135/ubascuba/applause.gif

July 7th, 2009 at 6:27 pm

Take another look at the two points that allowed Fed to break Andy for the first time in the match:
Andy’s serve comes off Fed’s frame and finds its way just over the net to a spot impossible for Andy to create a good return. Result- Andy misses it. Ad to Fed.
Fed’s deep ground groundstroke comes out of the chewed up turf that Centre Court becomes at the end of Wimbledon. Andy’s attempt comes of his frame and nearly goes into orbit. Game, set and match.
So the record-setting match comes down to two shots off the players’ frames. This is not to take anything away from Fed but rather to compliment the play of both. It was truly a match that no one deserved to lose.

July 7th, 2009 at 6:27 pm

Fedfan says re: Rafa’s schedule “That is really bad judgment. Again, not really something you would expect from a great player.”

But let’s not forget that Federer played the enitre of 2008 risking a ruptured spleen, if were to believe he had mono through most of it. And then were to believe he play the YEC and the AO with an injured back. He pulled out of Davis cup and Dubai – guess what? So did Rafa.

Players play injured often. Yes Rafa over-did it. I don’t disagree. But he is not the first, and guess what? He won’t be the last.

———————————

Tennis Freak says re: Djoko “a little better than Nalby.” Really? Only a little? I’d check how many Master Series titles or slams Nalby has won before you say Djoko is only a little better. Djoko is 22, just turned. Nalby is what? 28? When Djoko reached 28, if he’s done nothing more, maybe you can say that. But I think we need to wait and see on the Serb just now.

As far as pure talent goes, if Djoko is in the ballpark of Nalby he is lucky! I’d say he’s already more motivated. But that’s just an opinion, of course.

——————–

“In fact getting blown embarrassingly in them.” – Safina has reach the finals and semis of slams though – you see she’s not getting “blown away” by everyone. She’s making her way through the field and then she’s choking in the “big” matches. But the point is, along the way, she’s ousting most of her competition. She’s reaching the finish line; she’s just not been able to go over it when it really matters. It’s likely some kind of mental block? Yeah, Serena/Venus have WAY more experience at doing that and they are the best at winning the slams. But since they tank at the other events, they are not consistent and thus do not have as many points. It’s a ranking system based on points so consistency is rewarded. If the ATP & WTA want to change it to a system based on “slam titles” then they will. But until then, it is what it is.

—————————

Coco R says “it’s a terrible match up and we’ve seen the consequences of it time and time again.(in fact roddick employed almost the same game plan as nadal and anyone else that plays fed….hammer the back hand.)”

I agree with you, and have been saying for some time that tennis is, in large part, about match ups. But what you’re saying here is kind of insulting to Federer as it implies he can’t adjust his game plan/strategy, so that all the rest of the field simply has to imitate Nadal and “hammer the back hand”. If Fed can’t recognize and alter his game accordingly, what does that say? I’d imagine if this strategy is working for Nadal, Murray, Roddick, etc., Fed better come up with a plan B! One thing I’ve noticed about Djoko’s matches with Fed – often he target’s the Swiss’s forehand! Sometimes that works masterfully, since we know that it can be erratic also. Fed’s serve, imo, is his biggest weapon of late, as well as his mental toughness and ability to “weather the storm” so to speak. Roddick brought a tornado, but Fed held on. : )

July 7th, 2009 at 6:41 pm

Zola and Freak
Both make good points.
Definitely its too soon to talk about Nadal. The big question is: does his incredibly early success mean that he will only be better as he matures? Or is this as good as he gets? Certainaly he has done increidble improvements technically in the last 2 years, so he may get better yet. The 2ndary question, regarding The Rivalry (which frankly I think is the best thing tennis has going for it), is, was ’08 an abberation or the beginning of a trend in terms of Nadal’s dominance on all surfaces? Personally, I think (and hope) it will not be a trend, as I like Rog, but I LOVE the Rivalry, and there’s no Rivalry if Nadal gets even better on Rog.

Freak- on your point, you have to remember that Rog has been winning Slams at a MUCH higher pace than Sampras ever did. There’s just been no room for anyone other than Nadal to win slams. So that stat is definitely interesting, but in a way it hurts Fed for being too dominant. If you honestly look at that list, and if you watched tennis through the ’90’s, to me, Fed’s competition has been tougher.
Indeed, if you look closely at your list, whose name skews the stat? Andre, with 8 slams and 5 losses to Sampras- that is what weighs your stat well above 2. But Andre was gone out of the top hundred!! for huge amounts of time where Pete had free rein over the lesser lights, Pioline, Ivanisevic, Moya, Muster…

Andre played against everyone from the 80’s to now, and won slams in Feds time, and I remember Agassi saying, (and I paraphrase by memory): With Pete, there was always a place you could get to that was safe and you had a chance to beat him from. With Rog, there’s no such place.”

July 7th, 2009 at 6:45 pm

Tennis Freak,
I don’t know how long you have been posting here. These discussions come and go. Posters stay here and discuss more. You want to rip my guts out because I said Fed’s comments were hurtful to me, that’s your choice.

I don’t need to trick or nuetralize anyone. They are not coming at me with guns as you do. NachoF was nice enough to post fed’s quotes here. Daniel wrote about his observations at wimbledon and Kimo was nice and gracious. Not all Fed fans are freaks!

There are several others who do not post right now, but it is possible to conduct a discussion with them without being bashed and bruised by insults.

July 7th, 2009 at 6:56 pm

Vagabond,

It will be always very hard to compare two different generations. To me it will always be apple and oranges.

The weak or strong era is another question. what are the criteria to brand an era weak or strong? The number of players with Grand Slams? The wins per number of tournaments they had to play?

Physically, the players are getting taller and stronger by generation. I think the game has changed a lot.

The easiest exercise would be just to compare Sampras and Federer. Even though their time overlapped, such a comparison is very hard, because of so many changes that has happened in the past 10 years.

nice quote from Andre, but he met Fed in his peak and his own decline. Apparently Rafa was able to find that place with Fed right from the beginning. Nalby was there and Murray and Djoko joined later. So I am not quite sure.

Again, I think perhaps it is easiest to compare the records. The number of slams, weeks at number one, etc. And they are quite telling for Federer.

July 7th, 2009 at 7:12 pm

btw,
I wish tennis-x added a comment section for the news on Mountcourt.

July 7th, 2009 at 7:19 pm

Tennis Vagabond,

I did not and will not interpret the stat. Stats are stats because they are objective, but again the variables that you choose decide the outcome. If Slams are to be chosen as the most reliable one, it does not matter who your opponents are, double digit slam winners or zero slam winner. I put the Stat above for fun only.
I am not taking any official position on the stat above. However, a player’s opinion is a player’s opinion, and competition being tougher or weaker is highly subjective as it is often used in an effort to make look one better than the other. I don’t like comparing eras, whether they yield what I like or not.
———————
Jane,
“Really? Only a little? I’d check how many Master Series titles or slams Nalby has won before you say Djoko is only a little better.”
I take back my words because I did not mean Djoko overall is “only a little better” than Nalby overall in accomplishment. Sorry if that hurt your feelings. I meant Djoko is a little bit more consistent than Nalby, in producing results, keeping his focus, and motivation going. That “a little” may have made a lot of difference, though, and can still continue to do so.

July 7th, 2009 at 7:19 pm

Tennis Freak, no apology necessary at all; you didn’t hurt my feelings. I was only pointing that out ’cause Djoko already has more titles than Nalbandian (13 vs. 10), and Djoko has won a slam and more Master Series shields than Nalbandian. He’s young still so I will hold out hope that he’ll become more consistent. Just clarifying the difference is all. And don’t get me wrong: I love Nalby’s game; he’s loaded with talent and one of the most sublime and effective two-handed backhands on the tour. I hope he comes back from his surgery.

July 7th, 2009 at 7:32 pm

From Rafa’s website:
http://www.rafaelnadal.com/nadal/en/home

Apparently him and Montcourt played together during their junior years:

**************************************
JULY 07 | 2009
MON AMI MATHIEU MONTCOURT
Manacor, Spain – July 7th 2009

This morning I woke up with one of the worst news anyone can receive. I heard about the death of our friend Mathieu Montcourt. I am still under shock for this. I can’t believe it.

I knew Mathieu since we were kids. We competed together at all the events at an international level there is since you are a kid: Les Petit As, Copa Borotta, etc. and of course afterwards once becoming professionals,.

When someone like this disappears, when something like this happens, you really know where we are and the relativeness of winning or losing a tennis match, of not competing at an event or anything else. This is the loss of a guy who was only 24 and that was sports person. He won’t be playing with us again.

I would like to send my most deep and sincere condolences to his family, to his friends and to the French fans.

Mathieu, Rest in peace.

Rafa Nadal

*******************************************

July 7th, 2009 at 7:37 pm

Zola,
You have been hurtful to Fed fans. Here is a fact if you stay in the Rafa’s fan site, no matter what you say against Fed will not be hurtful because there you don’t have Fed fans. It is a little acclimatization problem for you right now here after suddenly coming out of that hole since FO (?).
Do you know that you do not have much info about tennis to share or to contribute except to say my-Rafa-baby, your imaginary friend?

You looked really good when you were palling around with posters like “Fed is afraid” earlier. I give you that much.
You won’t hear from me again until you spew another venom against Fed.

July 7th, 2009 at 7:38 pm

Jack Elzinga: “It was truly a match that no one deserved to lose.”

True.

July 7th, 2009 at 8:00 pm

never forget that all roger has achieved these last two months have come about because his main rival has been injured. if rafa’s knees had been healthy i dare to say roger would still have 13 slams.

July 7th, 2009 at 8:13 pm

zola doesn’t pall around with me. i know she doesn’t approve of my nickname and has been quite vocal about it in the past. zola is very respectful towards roger, she has never done ad homien attacks on roger.

July 7th, 2009 at 8:17 pm

I think if Roger pull’s off his 6th consecutive US Open in a field that has an eager and improving Murray, a Roddick thirsty for a major win with a whole new arsenal, a Rafa that wants to prove he’s still right up there with the top 4, a Djokovic who is suffering from a series of successive disappointments, a Del Potro who wants to prove that he deserves his place in the top five and nearly threatened robbing Roger from his French Open, all doubts will be shattered about whether or not anyone else can be considered “the man to beat” other than Roger.

If he loses though I don’t think anyone would be hurt, even huge Fed fans like myself.

On a side note, it would be VERY interesting to see if Rafa loses his no.2 ranking before the US Open and is put on Roger’s side of the draw.

July 7th, 2009 at 8:19 pm

fed is afraid says:

“never forget that all roger has achieved these last two months have come about because his main rival has been injured. if rafa’s knees had been healthy i dare to say roger would still have 13 slams.”

We haven’t forgotten. Why is it that Rafa’s knees weren’t healthy? Oh yes, because he was STUPID.

I have huge respect for Rafa, but he kept ignoring advice about his health for years. You reap what you sow.

Ever wonder why Fed is always healthy in time for slams? I bet you haven’t thought about it. Thinking doesn’t seem to be your thing.

July 7th, 2009 at 8:24 pm

Murray and Rafa have a lot to defend during this period. Fed doesn’t – until the USO that is. Djoko has a bit, but no titles. JMDP has a number of smaller titles to defend. Correct me if I am wrong anyone, but I think Roddick has the least points to defend – and he didn’t play the Olympics. Roddick could get to number 4! Maybe higher who knows? I think there will still be shifting in the rankings before the YEC though. It’ll be interesting to see how it all plays out.

July 7th, 2009 at 8:25 pm

jane, I think Roddick would be considered a tough opponent no matter what his ranking is inside the top 10. I don’t thinkg it matters to him that much if he’s no.4 or no.6

July 7th, 2009 at 8:28 pm

Kimo said: “If he loses though I don’t think anyone would be hurt, even huge Fed fans like myself.”

Not even when he loses to Rafa? ;-) Come on!

“On a side note, it would be VERY interesting to see if Rafa loses his no.2 ranking before the US Open and is put on Roger’s side of the draw.”

Good point.

July 7th, 2009 at 8:29 pm

I know this is closely related to Roger’s consecutive finals, semifinals and quarterfinals streaks – but when was the last major Roger did not either win or lose to the eventual champion? It is the French Open 2004. Therefore, Roger is 15-5 in major finals and lost the Aussie Semifinal in 05 (Safin) and 08 (Djokovic) and French semi in 05 to Rafa – basically Roger has found a way to peak at the right times and/or to get to later rounds even when not playing well. If someone beats Roger at a major they tend to be playing great because they either beat him in the final or go onto win from the semifinals.

July 7th, 2009 at 8:30 pm

Skorocel said:

“Not even when he loses to Rafa? ;-) Come on!”

ok you got me there, but I think ROger at this point doesn’t care about slams as much as he does about his H2H against Rafa and Murray. I don’t think he’ll let them of the hook easy. He will put up a better fight against both men, he won’t have fifth set collapses like he did in the wimbledon 2008 and AO2009 finals. He wants to imrove those H2H records coz they are the ONLY blemishes on his resume.

July 7th, 2009 at 8:33 pm

Dan Martin, excellent point.

July 7th, 2009 at 8:35 pm

fed is afraid Says:

zola doesn’t pall around with me. i know she doesn’t approve of my nickname and has been quite vocal about it in the past. zola is very respectful towards roger, she has never done ad homien attacks on roger.

One question. If Federer and Nadal do somehow meet in the US Open AND Fed beats Nadal…Will you finally change your name to something like:

Rafa has bad Knees so Fed wins.

:)

July 7th, 2009 at 8:43 pm

Tennis Freak,
I don’t need to prove myself to you and it is none of your business who I do or don’t pal around with.

what a miserable person you are! You are a freak allright and you do not represent the Fed fans here. Not everyone is rude and mean as you are. There are people here who can actually carry a discussion and make their points without attacking another poster and you are not one of them.

July 7th, 2009 at 8:52 pm

Kimo says: “it would be VERY interesting to see if Rafa loses his no.2 ranking before the US Open and is put on Roger’s side of the draw.”

It will be a disaster, a complete break down, for Rafa if he is to relinquish his no. 2 to Murray, the only possible candidate for the spot (?). It is not impossible, though, if Murray wins both, wins 1 and reaches the final in another, or Rafa falls early, in whatever combinations.
Where is that stat guy Gordo? Could you volunteer, please?

July 7th, 2009 at 8:52 pm

Jane
At this point Rafa’s participation in pre-US Open tournamnents is questionable. I would say Roger will be number one at least till US Open and I don’t know if Rafa would be number 2 or 3 ( depends on what Murray would do).

And if Rafa comes to the US Open with no preparation after such a long rest, I wouldn’t bet much on him.

July 7th, 2009 at 8:56 pm

zola, I thought the most recent announcement claimed that Rafa was coming back for Montreal. Maybe I am mistaken. In any case, I wish him well and hope he’s back soon.

July 7th, 2009 at 8:59 pm

someone on another blog said that Roddick did not speak to McEnroe after the match. Does anyone know about that?

July 7th, 2009 at 8:59 pm

fed is afraid,
Are you that scared that s/he will take your position that you are distancing from and alleviating him/her? Sorry, s/he beat you this time. This time, you are afraid that somebody has taken your position!

———
Zola,
You are freakier than me with your imaginary baby. Ok, you beat me, and you also beat “Fed is afraid” with your fabrication of Fed hurting Rafa fans and not having class. You are the number 1 Fed hater of this site.
Who discusses what with you? Rafa is my baabyy nonsense?

July 7th, 2009 at 9:06 pm

Just for fun – and I know some of you will not find this “fun,” especially those of you who are always pointing our Rafa’s 6 – 2 slam record against Fed, ignoring the fact that there are 126 other players in each of these tournaments…

=========

Here is how Nadal and Federer have fared in the 21 Grand Slams they have both played in (Wi = Wimbledon, US = US OPEN, AU = Australian Open, RG = Roland Garros) –

EVENT Nadal Federer

Wi 03 lost in 3rd WON
US 03 lost in 2nd lost in 4th
AU 04 lost in 3rd WON
US 04 lost in 2nd WON
AU 05 lost in 4th WON
RG 05 WON lost in SF
Wi 05 lost in 2nd WON
US 05 lost in 3rd WON
RG 06 WON lost in final
Wi 06 lost in final WON
US 06 lost in QF WON
AU 07 lost in QF WON
RG 07 WON lost in final
Wi 07 lost in final WON
US 07 lost in 4th WON
AU 08 lost in SF lost in SF
RG 08 WON lost in final
Wi 08 WON lost in final
US 08 lost in SF WON
AU 09 WON lost in final
RG 09 lost in 4th WON

Nadal’s won – loss record: 90 – 15
Federer’s won – loss record: 134 – 8

Record in the 19 tournaments in the round where they did or would have met each other (meaning at least one player advanced to this round. [US 03 and AU 08 are the only tournaments where both players lost prior to the round where they would have met]) –

Nadal – 6 – 13
Federer – 13 – 6

So yes, Nadal’s Head to Head in Slams over Federer is impressive (6 – 2), but Roger could have had more opportunities if Rafa had been good enough to have reached the rounds where he would have met Fed.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:08 pm

Mem,
If you cared to look at the final stats, Federer had better numbers in just about every category:
Total points – 213 vs 200
Aces 50 vs 28
First serve percentage
first serve points won
Second serve points won
Net points won
The only stat that was better for Roddick was break point conversion. Federer even had more break points than Roddick.

Roddick saved four points in the first set. Federer saved four points in the second set. Logically, Federer should have won the first set, Roddick the second, so I guess justice was served in the end.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:10 pm

Rafa and Murray both defend 1450 points in Canada and Cincy. But Rafa has another 800 points from the Olympics. basically the points difference between them will be about 500 and both have to defend a title and reach the semis in another.

If they both defend their points, Rafa will still be number 2. Roughly speaking, if Rafa is out before the semis and Murray can defend his points, he will be number 2.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:12 pm

Gordo,

Can you do us a favor, please, compute a possible combination of scenarios Rafa may lose his number 2 to Murray before the USO?

July 7th, 2009 at 9:12 pm

Jane and Zola –

Here appears to be an official word.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-1197696/Nadal-s-camp-insist-ll-ready-Montreal.html

July 7th, 2009 at 9:12 pm

tennis freak-i have no idea what you just said.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:15 pm

Gordo, thanks; I knew I’d read somewhere that he was coming back for the MS tournaments/USO.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:16 pm

vared-andy did not speak to mcenroe
can’t blame the guy.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:17 pm

Jane,
I read that on the ATP site too. I had read somewhere else that his return might be delayed. But I hope he will be back in Montreal and I hope he will be 100%.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:19 pm

Thanks Gordo for the link.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:20 pm

Tennis Freak –

Zola nailed it.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:21 pm

Pehchen –

You missed a couple of stats that Roddick did win.

Be fair now!

Most sets lost – Roddick 3, Federer 2

Most set points lost – Roddick 4, Federer 0

:)

July 7th, 2009 at 9:25 pm

Fedfan:

“Remove Nadal’s clay victories, and his career record looks like Safin, Roddick, or Hewitt. In fact, it would look worse than them.”

It would look worse than them? How many of these guys managed to beat Federer in a slam final? All of Nadal’s slam wins had to go through Federer.

They’ve won 2, 1, and 2 slams respectively. Nadal would have 2. How is that worse?

“Nadal is where he is still primarily because he is one of the best clay courters ever.”

Name a good clay courter that won Wimbledon. I’ll start you off: Borg. You fill out the rest of the list.

Cindy_Brady Says:

“Since Nadal has never reached the U.S. Open final in his entire career (Good knees or not) what makes people think he is suddenly going to do so now?”

I love this argument. Let’s rewind to 2004. Since Federer has never advanced past the 4th round at the US Open or Australian Open, what makes people think he is suddenly going to do so now? Except, that’s what he did. The same can be said for Federer before Wimbledon 2003. He had never even made a SF there. Were you there saying what makes people think he can do so now?

Here’s some simple logic for you. There’s a first time for everything. Before it happens the first time, you can pull your quote and it will apply to ANYTHING for ANYONE. A year ago you could say the same thing about Nadal never reaching a final at the Aussie Open. Utterly meaningless. You can say the same thing about all of Federer’s first time slam wins too before he won them.

You’re basically writing off Nadal’s chances of making a final at the US Open because.. at 23 years of age, he’s never done it? You’re a genius.

Can I ask which player you are a fan of? I recall you saying you disliked Federer. So who do you actually like?

“If anything, Nadal will be lucky to win a few rounds at the U.S. Open. If he can’t realistically win it, I don’t see the point of entering it in the first place.”

Well you see the ATP and ITF have these rules which say that if you make direct entry, it’s mandatory for you to show up. Believe it or not, players are not at liberty to not show up if they don’t feel like they can realistically win it. Just imagine.. how many out of 128 players CAN realistically win it in your opinion? Maybe 5 at most. If all but 5 don’t bother entering because they don’t realistically feel they can win it, there wouldn’t be a tournament.

I think you need to grow a brain.

“It makes far more sense for him to rest the knees and come back healthy next season. Throwing him out too soon on tender knees could worsen the condition further and really shorten his career. Do what Tiger Woods did, get surgery if needed. Take time off and come back strong. Nadal still young and has many good years left. No need to do things in haste.”

He knows his own body better than you do. He said it wasn’t serious. For all we know, he might be 100% again when Montreal begins. And I think he will be. He’s had 5 weeks off now, and has another 5 weeks off before the next tournament. That’s 10 weeks to recover from an injury that he said was not serious. If it was serious, he wouldn’t say that it wasn’t. There’s nothing to gain from doing that.

Fedfan Says:

“Nadal lost 10 matches on hard courts in 2008, 12 in 2007, 10 in 2006.

On the other hand, he went 24-1, 31-1, 26-0 on clay in those years (and 50-2 on clay in 2005 – yes, 50 wins on clay in a single year!!!!!).

Evidence for what I said above.”

I like how you only post the losses on hard courts but not the wins. While for clay you post both. It’s called data massaging. You can paint any picture you want if you are selective with the data presented. I don’t dispute that he’s an awesome clay player, but that doesn’t automatically mean he sucks on every other surface and is worse than Roddick, Safin or Hewitt. His record at Wimbledon in finals reached and/or won is better than the three of them. For a guy who can only play on clay, that is remarkable.

“Given that he would have had a nearly 3 month layoff, its not going to be that easy for him, since he won’t have any clay tournaments to build up his confidence. He’s also got to be sore at losing the French, losing out on wimbledon, then losing his No 1 ranking.”

The same thing happened at the end of last year. No tennis for 3 months or so, and no clay to build up confidence. Didn’t stop him in Melbourne.

“Its likely that Nadal will come back in the US hard court season, even if he is not exactly 100%. He has made such mistakes in the past, so why not now?”

You contradict yourself. If he plays, he will be 100% or close enough to it. If he really does do as you say (play without being 100%), he would have played Wimbledon, no? He didn’t, because he knows he’s not ready. And he wouldn’t return for the US if he wasn’t ready either. If he does, then he is ready. Simple.

“The French would probably hurt the most. Almost as much as Fed’s loss at Wimbledon. The chance to win 5 straight majors! Nadal is NEVER going to have that again.”

It didn’t hurt him when he was interviewed after losing. He said he was going to lose at some point eventually, and that there was nothing to be surprised about. He took it quite well I thought. He said the usual “it’s disappointing” but I didn’t sense any bitterness or pain. Not like Fed crying after losing Wimbledon 2008 and showing up to the press room (with bloodshot eyes and a cap hung low) late in order to cut short his interview. Nadal didn’t take losing the French hard at all, and I don’t think he cares much for records. 5 in a row vs 5 not in a row.. the difference is bragging rights, and he’s not a bragger.

“And Nadal is not THAT young any more. he is 23, and has quite a lot of miles on his body and mind – he has already been playing non stop for about 5 years.”

So has everyone who’s 23 or older. Who cares? All he missed was one slam, and you speak as if it’s the end of his career. Name someone who’s never missed a slam from injury and never will. Perhaps you’re hoping it will be the case because he’s the only man that can intimidate your man Fed at the slams? The fact is, Fed should have won Australia this year (Fed was well rested, Nadal was tired), but he didn’t. He choked. Against any other player (except maybe Murray) he wouldn’t have choked in a 5th set.

Perhaps you hope Nadal’s injuries are serious so he doesn’t challenge Fed. I don’t think they’re that bad. He pulled out of later events in the year before with bad knees, and always came back strong after his recovery period. I see no reason to believe it won’t happen again.

It’s one thing to say that Nadal’s clay results helped his CV. But to say that without them he sucks (and is worse than Hewitt, Safin and Roddick) is idiocy and frankly I think a sign of insecurity, Fedfan.

Cindy_Brady Says:

“Should be some sort of rule that states the #1 ranked player should at least be required to hold 1 of the 4 grand slams in a calender year. If not, no matter what their pts are, that player should be ranked #2, and the player with the next highest number of pts and a grand slam should be ranked #1. This would only apply to the #1 position.”

I think it’s fine the way it is. #1 is more than just about slams. It’s about year long consistency. Even if we did the way you proposed, the #1 could have one slam, and the #2 could have three slams, and we’d still have the same discussion. Why should the girl with 3 slams be #2 while the one with 1 slam be #1? You have to earn your points. Winning slams does not mean you get to skip the rest of the year and still be #1. It wouldn’t be fair for the other hard working girls who have to play week in week out. If Serena wants #1, she needs to play more tournaments.

Slams are big, but they’re not the be all and end all of tennis. If they were, then we may as well get rid of all of the other tournaments.

“The “real world” computer rankings would make more sense. If a player is truly the best player in the world, then doesn’t it stand to reason, that player should own one of the 4 biggest titles? If they don’t, do they really deserve to be called the best?”

Well there’s your misconception. Being #1 does not make you the ‘best’ player in the world. It just means you’re defending the most points. People use the two synonymously because they usually are, but it’s not necessarily the case.

Fedfan Says:

“People underestimate Federer’s fitness – have you ever seen him tired, hunched over? Never. I have even seen Nadal tired, at the USO against Ferrer.

He has the best and most complete game ever. He has the most slams ever. He has tons and tons of other records, the most records of any tennis player ever. And he is still just about 28.

That is GOAT.”

You keep reinforcing this as though you don’t feel people are aware of it yet. And every time you sing Federer’s praises it appears you need to take a jab at Nadal to further strengthen Fed’s greatness. Does anyone seriously still argue that Fed is not the GOAT? This I absolutely have to attribute to insecurity.

Cindy_Brady Says:

“With all due respect,

Tennis greatness is defined by performances in the slams. ”

That appears to be the case, but no one here is arguing that Safina is GREATER than Serena. What’s being argued is the #1 ranking, which in itself does not equate to greatness.

“This garbage that Safina has been consistent week in and week out, and racks up superficial pts, so she can be a paper #1 is very weak. Win a huge historical event like a slam, Safina, then you can be a legitimate #1 with respect. Until then, you are a consistent #2 promising player who has yet to achieve greatness on the biggest stages in tennis.”

I’m going to go back to your proposed new ranking system and why it doesn’t work. Suppose 4 slams go to 4 different players, and none of them are Safina. But Safina has the most points. With your system, that would make her #2. But she will still be ahead of 3, 4, and 5 who each have a slam to their name. Does this still solve the problem you’re having issue with?

A more practical way would be to demote all of the non-slam tournaments, and reduce the number of Tier I’s. That would make it harder for a player to be #1 without winning a slam.

jane:

“This is not true; actually she’s played only 2 less tournaments that Safina all season. It just that she’s lost early in all but the slams, whereas Safina has gone deep in everything, masters, slams, etc.”

I think consistency should be a factor. If Serena is so great and able to win slams, she should be able to win the smaller tournaments she enters against weaker fields as well. There’s no reason why the #1 player should be losing early in these smaller tournaments unless she is tanking. And if she is tanking, she’s not exactly a good representative for the sport.

“Nadal has gone only as far as the USO semis, imo, not because he can’t compete on fast hard courts but because he’s been wiped out by this time each year, with his knees in bad shape. Look at last year: by the time he reached the USO, he’d won the French, WImbledon, Canada, Olympic gold, and still managed to get to the semis at Cincy and USO!”

I don’t think that was it. Murray was just better that day. The 2nd set tie break was crucial, and Nadal didn’t win it. If he won it, it would be a set apiece and he’d be mentally rejuvenated. Being two sets down, the finish line is a long way away, and you’ll feel more tired than you really are. He actually wasn’t that tired or injured going in. It was definitely winnable but Murray found the answer to his game.

Fedfan Says:

“Slams are the most important – but people also remember who was No 1, and for how long. Can’t discredit that either.”

Nah. Rod Laver was never #1. People remember the slams won. Period. Do you remember the exact number of weeks Llendl, Borg, Wilander, Connors and Edberg spent at #1? Chances are, you don’t.

“Sampras fans still cling along to his 286 weeks as no 1. Cindy_brady, are you saying that Sampras fans are wrong to emphasize his record of max weeks at No 1? I don’t think so.

Both are important. Safina has one of them. Serena has the other. You have to work really hard to be no 1, which Serena is probably not willing to do.”

How you measure greatness is very subjective. And Serena has been #1 before, so for her it doesn’t matter. Sampras and Laver fans can add further criteria to account for the player’s competition. Many argue (I’m not one of them) that Fed’s competition was weaker than Pete’s. Others say you just can’t compare across eras because they’re too different. Give Federer a wooden racquet and see how good he is. And so on.

I personally think Federer is the GOAT, but other people might measure it differently.

Dory says:

“He’s happy with his victory, wife and child. He doesn’t need to bash other players, his game is most complete and superior to former and would-be No.1s. That alone makes him GOAT.”

Whoa, that’s a pretty lax criteria for deciding a GOAT.

“With the exception of Nadal and Murray (recently in his bad year), he has the most winning record against any other player. Nadal doesn’t have that, neither does Murray. That alone makes him No.1.”

I’m not quite sure what this means. Do you mean win-loss record? There are players with superior records to him. Or do you mean H2H on an individual basis with every other player? If so, Nadal has fewer losing records than Federer does, I believe. In any case, if this “alone” makes him #1, then I’d say you are using lax criteria for deciding #1 too. I just look at points held.

Fedfan Says:

“It all depends on Nadal’s knees. However, I don’t think being “rested” will be an advantage for Nadal. It will actually be a disadvantage. He is a player who thrives on playing more and “being in touch”. It will take many matches for him to get into the groove again. He is not used to taking breaks. ”

Do you know what happens between early november and mid January every season? Players take a break from tennis. Does that hurt them? He is always complaining about playing TOO much tennis and the season being too long and the off season being not long enough. Why would it hurt him to be resting? I think he’s better off this way.

“The competition is only getting better. Murray will be stronger this year than last. Djokovic? Who knows. Del Potro will come out stronger. Roddick will be a much stronger candidate this year than last. Haas is no slouch on hard courts, now with renewed confidence. Federer will be MUCH more relaxed and confident than last year. It just doesn’t look too good for Nadal. And he doesn’t have too many more years in the future – this is not clay where he can be 90% and yet win.”

This isn’t the first time I’ve heard this before pertaining to hard courts, and it won’t be the last. Wasn’t the same thing said last year and the year before that? He must have bribed Fed into throwing the AO final and crying fake tears.

“He needs to play at 120% to win the USO.”

Of course that’s physically possible right? I mean, if my car has a max speed of 100 mph, I can make it drive at 120 mph right?

Cindy_Brady Says:

“I think Nadal’s knees must be in worst shape than ever before for him to have bowed out of Wimbledon.”

No, it’s just a matter of timing. If Wimbledon was scheduled in November last year, he would have bowed out of Wimbledon last year too. His knees are probably no worse than they were at the end of last year. Wimbledon just happened to occur during the injury this time around. It’s Wimbledon’s schedule, not his knees.

Fedfan Says:

“Federer’s losing record to Nadal and Murray is largely an age issue as well – Nadal is 5 years younger, Murray is 6 years younger. Federer is 2-3 years past his prime, while these guys are at their peak. Doesn’t mean that much.”

If you’re going to discount these losses because they are younger than him, will you also discount his WINS against other players who are not at their peak when he beat them?

Were Dominic Hrbaty and Tim Henman also 5 or 6 years younger than him?

“None of them would have a winning record against the Federer of 2006, at least outside of clay as far as Nadal is concerned.”

Yeah but Murray wasn’t at his peak in 2006. Nadal hadn’t made the improvements to his game yet at that time either.

In this long post I’ve only covered a fraction of half of the replies. I’ll do the rest later, if I bother. Fedfan, I think you need to lay off on the kool-aid a bit. Just have a beer and celebrate Fed’s latest win. No need to get insecure about a guy who just won his 15th. He is the best, regardless of what Nadal has/hasn’t done.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:25 pm

Gordo, “Most sets lost – Roddick 3, Federer 2 / Most set points lost – Roddick 4, Federer 0.” This really encapsulates how close it was.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:27 pm

Supposedly Roddick said: “Talk to Federer. That’s who you were rooting for.”

Then when Jmac interviewed Federer he said:

“You have got so many. Think you can throw him a bone next year?”

I heard the second part but was wondering about the first part.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:30 pm

Gordo,
Thanks for the stats.
I have a question. Why did you choose 2003?
Roger became professional at 1998 and started cometeing in GSs since 1999.
Rafa became professional at 2001 and started competing in GSs since 2003.

So you are comparing Rafa’s early career results with Fed’s peak time results. I think to be fair, you should include all fed’s GS results starting from 1999.

If you look at those results on Wikipedia, the the GS win-loss will be:

Fed: 182-26 (87.5%)
Rafa: 90-15 (85.7 %)

July 7th, 2009 at 9:41 pm

Giner –

Your last post may not be the longest post ever logged onto this site, but it sure seemed to be the most arrogant.

By my count you tell no less than 4 people that they are wrong and you even insult someone by telling them to “grow a brain,” then you go on and challenge 3 more points they have posted in here.

If you really think they need to grow a brain – why bother?

Wow. And lines suggesting that Fed fans HOPE Rafa doesn’t come back – that’s just downright mean.

I for one am a Federer fan, but I do not dislike Rafa and I hope he comes back 100% so the 2 dudes can continue their great rivalry.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:41 pm

Giner,

Good post, especially the logic. Though sometimes, for scrolling’s sake, I wish you’d break up your replies to separate posters since you’re so thorough.

To me you said: “I don’t think that was it. Murray was just better that day.”

You may be right, Murray may’ve been better and that tiebreak was crucial, but having the thing stretch over two days couldn’t’ve helped either one of them.

I don’t think Murray had “found the answer to his game” though – Maybe just on the day – as Murray doesn’t have a great H2H against Nadal. Nadal often gets the better of him. It would be interesting, if there is a battle for number 2, if these two have to play each other for it. Like it was for Djoko those 2 or 3 times.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:44 pm

Zola – I only compared the tournaments that Rafa and Fed both played in. I know there are some in here that believe if a 12 year old Rafa could have gotten a wild card he would have beaten Federer, but a fact is a fact – Fed is nearly 5 years older than Rafa. The true comparison can only happen once both men have retired, or at least once Fed has retired. Everything else in here is just speculative.

Except Fed is Afraid, who will always say Fed will never win another tournament so whenever Federer retires he can gloat and say “See – I told you so.” Then we will all know how brilliant he is.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:47 pm

Gordo does make a good point – even though your logic is very sound, Giner, you could curb the put downs. In fact everyone could! We’ve had our fill of those around here in the last two or four days. Phew!

July 7th, 2009 at 9:49 pm

Gordo,

It’s true. The real comparison will be when they are both retired. But having the stats when one is just starting and one is already at the top of his game makes it a bit lopsided.

That’s why I think it is good to show the whole stats. we are comparing performance in the GSs . Not performance against each other. I think having the whole picture for both players will help.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:51 pm

i don’t believe roger will ever beat rafa in a grand slam again.
but roger will win tournaments by beating other players.

July 7th, 2009 at 9:56 pm

Jane: “So I see Roddick pulling out a win(over Fed) soon.”

If it ever happen, I hope it’s at a Slam final. I am not a Roddick fan for some of his on-court antic, but that guy deserve that much if not more. After watching that match I really feel sorry for him.

July 7th, 2009 at 10:01 pm

fed is afraid Says:
i don’t believe roger will ever beat rafa in a grand slam again.
but roger will win tournaments by beating other players.

=======

Okay, FiA (for short – no disrespect meant!) – let’s you and I have a small bet (for no money, just bragging rights) that unfortunately you have to wait a little longer if you are to win.

For you or I to win, one of the following two things has to happen –

1) If Roger beats Rafa at a Grand Slam match you must come out in the next 10 postings on tennis-x posts with a paraphase that says something like –

“I honestly believed that Fed could not beat Rafa again in a Grand Slam. I am so wrong and I would like to now admit it. Roger Federer is a better player than I had given him credit for.”

2) When Roger retires having not defeated Rafa I will come out in the next 10 postings on this site with the following –

“Fed is Afreaid said back in 2008 that Roger would never beat Rafa agin in a slam tournament. I, along with dozens in here thought he was crazy, but as it turns out he was right all along and we were all wrong. Way to go, Fed is Afraid.”

Fed is Afraid – do we have a virtual handshake and an active bet?????????

July 7th, 2009 at 10:19 pm

Let’s see how many ways Rafa can lose his No. 2 to Murray before the USO (correct me if I am wrong).
After dropping the points for Montreal, Cincy, and Olympic and adding any countable tournament in waiting:

Rafa…10735 -800-450-1000 (zero to add) =8485
Murray…9450-1000-450+250 (Queens added)= 8250

(1)

Rafa 8485+ 960 (1 final + 1 semi)=9445
Murray 8250+ 1360 (1 title+ 1 semi) =9610

(2)
Rafa 8485+1360 (1 title+1 semi) =9845
Murray 8250-1600 (1 title + 1 final)=9850

(3)
Rafa 8485 + 720 (2 semis) =9205
Murray 8250 +960 (1 final+1 semi)=9210

(4) Rafa 8485+ 780 (1 final + 1 Qtr) =9265
Murray 8250+1200 (2 finals) =9450

(5) Rafa 8485+ 540 (1 semi+1 qtr.)= 9025
Murray 8250+780 (1 final +1 qtr.)=9030

Basically, Murray has to do just a little bit better than Rafa, in all these pairs of combination. For below quarters, you can add a few more possible scenarios.

July 7th, 2009 at 10:23 pm

yes, i will bet you on that.

July 7th, 2009 at 10:24 pm

FiA – then the bet is on!!!

July 7th, 2009 at 10:25 pm

“FiA – then the bet is on!!!”

No, the bet is not on, it’s null and void. To begin with, Gordo spelt your name incorrectly, an he has written the wrong year. The bet is invalid, moot, null and void.

July 7th, 2009 at 10:29 pm

No, Gordo, he will have to change his name into “Federer is not afraid” or “I am afraid of Federer.”

July 7th, 2009 at 10:29 pm

when i say fed is afraid i mean of rafa
he is not afraid of any other player
but something happens to him when he looks across
the net and sees nadal.

July 7th, 2009 at 10:36 pm

I don’t think Giner’s post has even come close to the ‘put downs’ that has been ongoing since the FO. He pales in comparison to the queen of put-downs, not to mention the name calling by her and several others. At least he didn’t call anyone a ‘delusional psycho’. Where were all of you self-righteous people when the other name calling has been taking place? Oh, I forgot fraternizing with the offenders and letting them think it’s OK to be krass to anyone save yourselves? Double standards.

At least Giner’s posts are based on sound logic, as opposed to those posters who become fixated on a word and use that one word as a platform to engage in harassment toward another poster. sheesh.

July 7th, 2009 at 10:37 pm

Fedfan said: “It all depends on Nadal’s knees. However, I don’t think being “rested” will be an advantage for Nadal. It will actually be a disadvantage. He is a player who thrives on playing more and “being in touch”. It will take many matches for him to get into the groove again. He is not used to taking breaks.

The competition is only getting better. Murray will be stronger this year than last. Djokovic? Who knows. Del Potro will come out stronger. Roddick will be a much stronger candidate this year than last. Haas is no slouch on hard courts, now with renewed confidence. Federer will be MUCH more relaxed and confident than last year. It just doesn’t look too good for Nadal. And he doesn’t have too many more years in the future – this is not clay where he can be 90% and yet win. He needs to play at 120% to win the USO.”

Wishful thinking, wishful thinking ;-)

July 7th, 2009 at 10:43 pm

Von – I did not say Giner lacked logic. But, as with Jane, I am again asking for the put-downs to stop.

Gee Von – the grow a brain line was directed at your favourite poster in here, so if I were you I would defend Giner as well. LOL

July 7th, 2009 at 10:44 pm

FIA,

If Fed beats Rafa at a Slam, will you change your name to “Federer Is not Afraid”?
It is a 50-50: Fed may or may not beat Rafa ever at a Slam. If it never happens, you will get to stick with your name forever.

July 7th, 2009 at 10:47 pm

fed is not afraid… his game just doesnt match Nadal’s very well…. hence the 13-7 head to head…..

July 7th, 2009 at 10:47 pm

Tennis Freak said: “No, Gordo, he will have to change his name into “Federer is not afraid” or “I am afraid of Federer.”

This may come as a surprise to you, but as far as I remember, after the last year’s SW19 final FIA indeed changed his nick to: “Fed is not afraid” (!) Am I right, FIA?

July 7th, 2009 at 10:47 pm

vared: “Supposedly Roddick said: “Talk to Federer. That’s who you were rooting for.”

If Roddick indeed said that to McEnroe, then I’d love to kiss him for speaking up just once as to the bias that’s been indulged in and ngoing for so many years, that he’s had to endure. McEnroe needs a good smacking around for his unbridled favoritism.

I read a blog written by an American writer several months ago which in gist was a put-down for Roddick and his Davis Cup achievements. The writer went as far as to zero in on Roddick’s Davis Cup designation of ‘Team leader’ and seemed to find it a topic for disdain. I mean how awful can anyone get considering how much Roddick has contributed to Davis cup?

Considering the amount of disrespect and zero appreciation Roddick receives for his Davis Cup participation, if I were he, I’d give up on Davis Cup and let the McEnroe clan find another winner. James Blake for sure is not going to cut it as he has been piggybacking on Roddick’s DC success ad infinitum. Let’s see how many matches Blake will win over Croatia.

People complain and wonder why American TV does not care about broadcasting tennis Well, let’s get to the heart of the problem. The American commentators keep putting down the American players and keep boasting up other players to the hilt. If I were the head of an American corporation like hell I’d want to invest an/or contribute to any TV station that promotes players over and above American players. I mean that’s tantamount to supporting treason.

July 7th, 2009 at 10:53 pm

Tennis Freak –

I am so sorry to do this to you, but your calculations are wrong. Here is why – the ranking rules state:

“In 2009, any player who finished in the 2008 year-end Top 30 will be required to compete in four Grand Slam tournaments and eight ATP World Tour Masters 1000 tournaments. In addition, the Best 4 ATP World Tour 500 and Best 2 other events (ATP World Tour 250 and Challengers) will be counted towards a player’s ranking.”

Now, Murray only has 2 countable World Tour 500 events, so he could play some of those and gain points.

For Best 2 other events he has St. Petersburg (500 points) and Doha (250 points). St. Petersburg is now an ATP World Tour 250 Event and when it drops off at the end of October only then can Queens replace it. When that happens Murray will actually lose 250 points because of the downgrading of St Pete.

So getting back to your calculations, drop Murray down to 8000 points by not adding Queens and carry on from there.

Sorry – I hope this makes sense.

– G.

July 7th, 2009 at 10:53 pm

yeah, but only for a couple posts.

July 7th, 2009 at 10:54 pm

One more key stat I missed completely…
Winners: Federer 100 vs Roddick 70

Yet, mem believes Federer was completely outplayed. In reality, the first two sets cancel each other out in terms of who should have most likely won. Federer dominated the third set, Roddick dominated the fourth, while the fifth was a toss-up. Federer was down two break points once service game, Roddick was down a break point earlier, while in the latter stages Federer dominated on serve. Who blinked at the end? Roddick.

July 7th, 2009 at 10:58 pm

Gordo,
What about the spot that will be vacated by Indianapolis on 7.10 ?

July 7th, 2009 at 10:59 pm

Not 7.10, but 7.20.

July 7th, 2009 at 10:59 pm

Von –

There is a ton of truth in what you wrote.

Andy Roddick has never failed to show up and play for his country. He has served the US well, and I don’t know what bug has crawled up J. McEnroe’s butt, but he always fails to acknowledge Roddick.

I do not know if there was a more embarassing moment than McEnroe trying to get Pete to say Fed is the best of all time. It was a cheesy display.

In Canada we have an ex-coach who is a between period commentator on NHL games named Don Cherry. He has great insight into the game, but he dresses like a buffoon and makes occasional outlandish statements that cause people to not take him seriously.

McEnroe dresses alright, but he is moving up the buffoon ladder, methinks!

July 7th, 2009 at 11:00 pm

Gordo: “Von – I did not say Giner lacked logic. But, as with Jane, I am again asking for the put-downs to stop.”

Why didn’t you say something when I was called a ‘delusional psycho’ by another Fed fan — yesterday to be precise. Man, was I called names yesterday, even though my posts were misinterpreted due to poor comprehension and one poster even confused my posts with SG’s and lambasted me, because he claimed SG sounded like me. hello, why are the names at the top of our posts? But, this is why commenting on any Federer based thread is difficult, abuse en masse.

“Gee Von – the grow a brain line was directed at your favourite poster in here, so if I were you I would defend Giner as well. LOL”

I’m well aware of who’s at the receiving end of the post. At least he doesn’t fraternize with the offender. Even though I don’t like name calling, at least Giner had the guts to do what many can’t. Is ‘growing a brain’ any worse than that poster calling people ‘dumb’, moronic, idiotic’ et al.? Not in my book.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:03 pm

See guys – Fed is Afraid, not unlike myself is stubborn and sticks to his opinions, but he is not mean so this is fun.

And on a completely different subject – huh – if you are around – I did indeed misread something you wrote yesterday and answered in a dumb and condescending manner. I apologize and I should never have posted that. So I guess the old Gordo is back indeed!

July 7th, 2009 at 11:03 pm

Von – no it is not and I hope we all keep the dirt down in here.

As for yesterday – I was on set for 12 hours and when I saw how much had been written when I got home I barely had time to skim it.

If I had been online I would have come to your defence. You and I are on the same page on a lot of things, and where we are not it is cool.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:06 pm

i’m a girl.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:06 pm

Tennis Freak – the Indy spot is from last year’s scoring system that is being replaced over the year. Eventually all top 30 players will be dropped down to 2 tournaments in this category. If more were allowed Queens would have already bumped Indy.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:11 pm

Gordo: “McEnroe dresses alright, but he is moving up the buffoon ladder, methinks!”

McEnroe borders on the edge of effectiveness — just listen to him when he talks — he repeats himself and he fumbles for the correct words. What does that tell you — his brain and speech center is in decline big-time. The guy is on the precipice of dotage, and in a few years he’ll need someone to take him by the hand to help him through the door. And, that’s my take on John McEnroe the supposedly astute American NBC tennis commentator! OY VEY to us all!

July 7th, 2009 at 11:12 pm

Fed is Afraid – I am sorry. I did not know you were female. Please forgive the he/him references. Make them she/her.

Wow – who would have thought it??? :)

July 7th, 2009 at 11:12 pm

Von – LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!

The best 8 words posted in here this year –

“The guy is on the precipice of dotage.”

Ha ha ha – I have to pee.

– G.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:14 pm

Gordo: “See guys – Fed is Afraid, not unlike myself is stubborn and sticks to his opinions, but he is not mean so this is fun.”

Since i’m on a roll, I’ll say this, and who takes umbrage, then so be it (Take note all: I won ‘t dignify the post with a reply.) At least Fed is afraid has the chutzpah and courage of her convictions and stays on the same side of the fence, all of time and I respect that. Unlike many who are vacillators, want tol please all and sundry, and don’t know if they are coming and/or going. It’s yes, no, I agree, I disagree — take a stand for God’s sake and stick to it. sheesh.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:18 pm

Gordo: I thought you knew FIA was a girl. I’ve addressed her as ‘she’. Not very observant are ya. LOL.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:20 pm

Von, just remember that Cindy_Brady has a bit of a schadenfreude fetish. I wouldn’t put too much heart or thought into what she says. She writes that she’s objective, but she’s not. Go take a look at the “Historical Maneuvering” thread after the AO; she declares Fed will never win another slam. And yet, some of the Federer fans have taken her side of late. Well, just know that you are aware of her objectivity. It swings to where-ever the winners are now doesn’t it? Is that objective? Hmmmm….
She can’t even see that the rankings system is based on points. If she has an issue, it shouldn’t be with Safina, after all, who’s done nothing but be consistent and collect points, even though she has choked now and again for sure. BUT WHO HASN’T? Fed has choked vs. Nadal; Djoko has choked vs. Fed, and so on and so forth ad infinitum. So what? It says little. Her issue is really with the WTA and the ATP. Not so much with Safina.

Anyhow, you’re right that Giner shouldn’t take the brunt of the mud-slinging curb. He’s generally an excellent poster who argues based on logic and thought. Not to try and incite anyone.

Sigh – here’s to better days!

July 7th, 2009 at 11:20 pm

Gordo,
As far as I know but I could be wrong, Indy’s zero point is sitting there for Murray as a penalty (for a late withdrawal) and will be replaced by Queens on 7.20. We will have to wait till then to find out what happens.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:22 pm

so this guy who needs class 101 and manners 101, ends up winning the sportsmanship award 5 years running, an award voted by his peers.

Any thoughts, Zola?

July 7th, 2009 at 11:26 pm

Mac and Sampras are in a unique little clique of “all time greats.” If they root for Roddick, they might snub the so-called GOAT. There may come a time they will all gather together for a future legends event. Fed probably has an elephant memory.
Mac was drooling all over the Murray match too. He was sitting next to a Brit during Wimbledon. He is a corporate man, don’t forget. They all make me sick, except Borg. LOL

July 7th, 2009 at 11:27 pm

P.S. to my above post: Murray’s zero pointer came from withdrawing from Indy 2 years in succession – the ‘zero pointer’ will drop off next month on 7.20 and be replaced by his 250 Queen’s points.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:27 pm

Tennis Freak – you may be right about that. It is only 250 points, and this might be moot if Rafa misses getting deep into either round.

Von – guilty as charged. I did miss that, but I thought maybe you were changing the gender as a put down. (Kidding – I know you are female also!:))

July 7th, 2009 at 11:27 pm

vared: “Supposedly Roddick said: “Talk to Federer. That’s who you were rooting for.”

This does not sound right who started this nasty rumor? I can say with certainly that from what I have witnessed Andy has never turned down an interview request, unlike the “classy” Roger who dissed a legendary tennis reporter a few years ago after losing a heartbreaking final to Nadal and then failing to give Nadal any credit for great play.

I am so glad my favourite Andy Roddick does not behave like a spoiled egotistical sore loser e.g. Roger. His stoicism during the trophy ceremony is so admirable especialy when you compare it to the ridiculous sloshing that Federer did at the Australian Open, acting like it was the end of the world of him and his precious 14 slams. booo hoo hoo! poor me, says Roger. what disgrace!

and now Andy is out of Davis cup can this week get any worse? Is his injury serious does anyone know?

I wont be able to watch tennis for a while I fear.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:29 pm

Gordo: “Von – no it is not and I hope we all keep the dirt down in here.”

I agree, I’ve never liked name-calling. It’s the stuff kids indulge in due to their limited vocabulary. So what does that tell you of the knowledge of some — linguistically challenged I’d say.

“As for yesterday – I was on set for 12 hours and when I saw how much had been written when I got home I barely had time to skim it.

“If I had been online I would have come to your defence. You and I are on the same page on a lot “of things, and where we are not it is cool.”

OK, you’re excused and I’ve got to say you’ve not indulged in condoning that behavior, overlooking it and exchanging posts. The only way bad posters are discouraged is by ignoring them and their unkind posts. If we engage them, then we are not better than they are, because by engaging them we are affirming and/olr validating their mean/krass behavior, n’est ce pas? I give you credit for trying to do what’s sort of an impossibility, and kudos to you mon ami, but believe me it’s a lost cause.

Obiter dictum — back to Johnnie McEnroe, I have to mute the guy or else I’d break my TV, he makes me that mad, and I’m not a violent person — he sure knows how to push the Roddick fans’ buttons, and then some.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:31 pm

Vared – I also found it interesting that Agassi was absent. Had he been there all the top Slam Winners except Emerson (who is the asterisk boy) and Lendl would have been there.

I wonder if it was because at the unveiling the roof exhibition Agassi was putting down Fed’s accomplishments and predicting a slam for Nadal.

You really can’t underemphasize consistancy. And if Fed has anything it is that.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:31 pm

Gordo,
If I am right about Murray’s zero point for Indy and Queens’ points taking that spot on 7.20 (I believe I am right), then the math I did above is right.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:32 pm

all of you whiners out there – you know who you are ;-) – it’s awesome that you can get some sort of catharsis by posting. At the end of the day, Rafa wasn’t good enough to defend this year at the FO and then unfortunately could not defend Wimby. Roddick played great, but Roger weathered the storm.

Simple truth is you can slice it and dice it any way you want, but it won’t change the results!

July 7th, 2009 at 11:36 pm

Gordo: “Von – guilty as charged. I did miss that, but I thought maybe you were changing the gender as a put down.”

Nah! I never go there with anyone. As I said, I happen to like FIA, she’s a WSYWYG, what you see is what you get, up-front and honest, and that’s what I like about her.

“(Kidding – I know you are female also!:))”

Well last time I checked I was one — I mean female that is. LOL.

Last time I checked. LOL.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:37 pm

Von – Let me know the next time you check. I love cheap thrills!!!

July 7th, 2009 at 11:41 pm

tennis fan: Don’t start because you do a lot of whining yourself and then some. I happen to read posts on TP and when I watch live streaming you feature a lot in the chat-room on the side, so I do know quite a bit about you. As I said, don’t go there. i suppose you kn ow about those who live in glass houses, don’t you?

BTW, if you don’t like something I say confront me, don’t hide behind a verbal smoke screen, because it comes across as an egg layer.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:41 pm

Gordo — OK — it’s a date. LOL..

July 7th, 2009 at 11:42 pm

Murray possibe n. 2 scenarium before US Open

As for today they are:
Nadal – 10735 pts
Murray – 9450 pts

Taking away Canada and Cincy wich will drop before August when they wil be played this year:
Nadal – 9285 pts
Murray – 8000 pts

Taking away Olympics:
Nadal – 8485 pts
Murray – 8000 pts

OBS: Murray will add 250 pts from Queens due to Indianapois 0 pts from last year penalty droping off (where he didn’t play), so they will be:
Nadal – 8485 pts
Murray – 8250 pts

With the Masters to be played in August pretty much who ever does better will be n. 2 come the US Open. There is only going to be a 235 pts difference.

It will be realy weird to have a possibe Fed x Nada SEMI at the US Open.
Well at least if Nadal beats Fed in this situation it wouldn’t be that bad as if he does it in the final where he could complete a career Slam beating Fed in all Slams finals! :)

July 7th, 2009 at 11:43 pm

Guys there are 4 areas that define the greatness of a player……

1. longevity
2. majors
3. weeks ranked #1 (consistency)
4. masters cups (yec)

Roger Federer blows Nadal out of the water in all these categories…….Example (sorry nadal fans this is gonna hurt)

1. 15 majors
6 majors

2. 4 masters cups
0 masters cups

3. 237 weeks ranked #1
43 weeks ranked #1

4. 5 straight majors at two different venues (Wimbeldon and US Open)

4 srtaight majors at 1 venue (French Open)

July 7th, 2009 at 11:44 pm

Okay, now this I am serious about.

There has been a re-appearing post, stating that Roddick refused to be interviewed by John McEnroe post-Wimbledon, supposedly saying ““Talk to Federer. That’s who you were rooting for.”
TD (Tam) asked who started this nasty rumor?

Well, in my profession I have a pretty good ability to research and find things in the news.

I just went through every source I have and there is NOT ONE NEWS ITEM ANYWHERE THAT SAYS THE ABOVE TOOK PLACE.

Believe me – if it had we would have read about it by now.

So Tam – rest assured. There may be a tad of tension between JMac and AndyR, but no out is outbursting in public.

So there!

July 7th, 2009 at 11:46 pm

jane: What can I say about CB. I mean we’ve got multiple personalities , ala Sybil ongoing. sheesh. I’m not even going to bother with her, and I’ll give her enough rope so she can hang herself. I’ve stopped replying to her.

__________________
vared; Johnnie Mc is indeed a corporate man. Agassi is not in the clique as McEnroe and Sampras. Andre is involved with furthering kids’ education and helping our tennis youth, not text messaging.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:48 pm

Nadal is not even in the top 10 of all time greats until he can get his act together and stop faking injuries because he does not want to get his ass kicked……He cannot even finish an entire season for goodness sakes………Federer is without a doubt the GOAT because the numbers say he is……And, the only reason Nadal beat Federer at the past few majors is because he either had mono, was getting over mono, and or had a bad back………..Sorry Nadal Fans you will always lose these arguments so save your comments for another post…….BTW this is coming from a tennis fan in general who likes Nadal and Federer…….I hate to get mean like this, but everyone is sick of the jealousy that Nadal fans show because of Federer’s unrivaled success…….

July 7th, 2009 at 11:50 pm

sports fan –

I too am a huge Fed fan, but c’mon…

NADAL HAS 5 YEARS TO CATCH UP.

It’s not his fault that he is younger than Fed.

I understand if you are posting because there is a lot of irrational garbage coming from the other side.

But career comparisons between Fed and Nadal have to wait until both are no longer swinging a racquet.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:51 pm

And no Gordo………roddick did not say that to Mcenroe…..He was dissapointed and did not want to talk…..Stop starting rumors because that pisses people off!………

July 7th, 2009 at 11:53 pm

Von – I am almost afraid to bring this up, for fear it will push a dormant CB button, but remember in Jan and Feb her “I know everything about performance enhancing drugs and no one else in here does. Nadal is so juiced it is not funny” rants? You know she is going to rev this one up again.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:55 pm

Gordo…….it does not matter if Nadal is younger we are talking about the numbers as of today……Yes, if Nadal has those numbers in 5 years I will revise my statement, but we are talking about now…..

July 7th, 2009 at 11:55 pm

Sports fan – I am not starting the rumors – I am trying to quash them. That rumor was posted 3 times in this blog already.

July 7th, 2009 at 11:56 pm

Gee sports fan – how can you like Nadal is he is “faking injuries?”

July 7th, 2009 at 11:58 pm

“read IF he is”

July 7th, 2009 at 11:58 pm

Top contenders for the US Open are…….

1. Federer (because of 5 in a row)
2. Murray ( finals last year and very hungry)
3. Roddick (playing with renewed confidence if healthy)
4. Nadal (can never be counted out with his will to win)
5. Delpotro (great attitude and playing best tennis of his career)

July 7th, 2009 at 11:59 pm

sports fan – I agree 100% with your top contenders list. It will be interesting to see if Rafa plays, whose quarter will Del Potro and Roddick wind up in. It could make for interesting quarter finals, no?

Also, a killer semi will hurt the eventual winner, for unlike Wimbledon, at the US Open the finals are played the following day after the semis.

July 8th, 2009 at 12:02 am

Gordo: “Nadal is so juiced it is not funny” rants? You know she is going to rev this one up again.”

She said so last week when she jumped on Federer’s bandwaggon. She stated Nadal uses stuff and it’s not vitamins (not verbatim but close). Some people like to listen to themselves chirp. What will you do when it’s next revisited? Varoom!!

July 8th, 2009 at 12:03 am

Nadal is mentally drained and is burnt out after 4 years of chasing Federer……Yes, he has some tendonitis, but nothing and I repeat nothing that should keep him from trying to defend his Wimbeldon Title…….He new he was not going to win therefore he pulled out……..Roger Federer played the whole of 2008 with Mono and made 2 finals, a semifinals, and won a major at New York which is what champions do………He played the Australian Open with his back in pain and still it took 5 sets for Nadal to win which says more for Federer’s greatness than anything else…….

July 8th, 2009 at 12:03 am

Daniel,
I came up with the same math, and stated from a number of combination, that Murray will have to do just a little bit better than Rafa at Montreal and Cincy for Rafa to lose number 2 before USO.
———————————-

Von,

Good news for you. It is more or less guaranteed Roddick will be number 5, at least.
Here is how DelPo will lose about 700+ points (I would say 1000 points).

(1) DelPo loses 500 points because Kitzbuhel has been removed from the tour.

(2) Hw will lose another 250 because Stuggart has become an ATP 250 instead of the 500 points he earned there last year.

(3) Let’s say he makes it to the finals at L.A., he will still lose 200 points there. (Even if he wins he loses 100 points.)

(4) Washington is the only upgraded tournament that Del Potro is defending. But since he’ll be seeded two, let’s say he is a finalist for now, which means he will lose 50 points.

So Del Potro is very likely to lose 1000 points, which will guarantee Roddick’s ascension to number 5.

July 8th, 2009 at 12:05 am

I feel bad for safina when the media and other players(serena and indirectly fed) dissing safina for her #1 rank. It’s not her fault that the ranking system was made this way. If serena want to bitch about it, maybe she should play more tournaments and see if her body can take the strain to be injury free or continue to do as well in slams? No one can answer that because she didn’t and the ranking system awarded her lack of tournaments play with lesser points. True maybe Safina is not the best and yeah maybe the system should award more pts for slams or maybe the system should gradually diminish slam pts from past years so that the ranking is less volatile, but this is what currently is. And it is not Safina’s fault.

July 8th, 2009 at 12:05 am

sports fan – are you a girl sports fan or a boy sports fan???

July 8th, 2009 at 12:05 am

Guys…..I do not think in anyway Nadal is using steroids or ever has used them…..If he was or has he would be caught and do not think uncle Toni and Rafa could sleep at night if it was the case……..The only thing that I question about Federer at the US Open this year is how much motivation he will have since he has broken the record…..This could play a major role……

July 8th, 2009 at 12:08 am

I am a man…….Why do you ask?

July 8th, 2009 at 12:10 am

TF: “So Del Potro is very likely to lose 1000 points, which will guarantee Roddick’s ascension to number 5.”

Thanks! I know that the 5th place ranking does not help too much in the draws, but it’s good for Andy’s image to hear No. 5 and not No. 6. However, DP can again add points depending on how well he does in Montreal and Cincy, so I’m not going to count my chickens before they are hatched. Thanks again for your hard work. I suppose you know by now I’m not into stats, which means your computation is greatly appreciated.

July 8th, 2009 at 12:11 am

I am out for the night guys……..

July 8th, 2009 at 12:11 am

sports fan – just curious. I was wrong about 2 others in here recently, and I was wondering if you didn’t have a crush on Fed. :)

July 8th, 2009 at 12:11 am

Nope…..Happily Married with two children….And like I said I am no more a fan of Federer than I am of Nadal……Just sick of all the Fed bashing because of the jealousy……

July 8th, 2009 at 12:14 am

Tennis Freak

I made the same mistake as you, I think Gordo is right.
Now they are showing at the ATP site 3 best of other coutable tourneys (the 250) with St Petersburgh already as a 250, even if it scores 500. Queens will only be added when this points drop off.

Will see in a couple of weeks, but it won’t make that big of deal. Which one of them wins a Masters before the US Open pretty much will be n. 2.

This US Open seems to be a very exciting one. All top 6 are legitime contenders each with pros and cons due to last events:

– Fed has a baby coming and already 15 Slams which can drop his motivation, but the possible n.1 year end will motivate him, and the 6 GS finals in a row going, he is always favorite in slams.

– Nadal will be freshier as we never saw this time of the year, but is coming from injury with not that much match play as he usually gets better as much as he plays. The masters will be crucial for his performance.

– Murray plays his best on hard and got only better in Slams this year, but the pressure of the first slam will be there, untill he brokes it.

– Djoko is playing under the radar with no pressure, but his last results are missing a spark, who can return any minute (same as Fed after Madrid).

– DelPo also plays his best on hard and is hungry for it. Of the 6 is still the more vunerable when iut comes to HxH agaisnt them.

– Roddick also improved his performance in all slmas compared to last year, and if he keeps playing 4-5 unforced errors per set and serve like he did in Wimby, he could be between top 3 favorite to win in his soil.

July 8th, 2009 at 12:14 am

“The only thing that I question about Federer at the US Open this year is how much motivation he will have since he has broken the record…..This could play a major role……” sports fan

I think you had a premature answer when he won the 15th. He didn’t throw himself on the ground and/or cry as he’s done in the past — remember the FO, plus he seemed lethargic after the match. Or wait, maybe he was too drained. Anyway, I think the thrill and excitement has somewhat abated. Gosh, I’ve done it again, I’ve commented on Federer — save the pieces.

July 8th, 2009 at 12:16 am

Remember the hospital scene in Rocky II? Right after Adrian shows Rocky that ugly newborn she looks up at him and says “There’s something I want you to do for me.” Rocky says “Da-uh, uh wot?” And as the music chimes in she just says “Win!”

I think life is going to imitate art.

July 8th, 2009 at 12:18 am

Von……..I just read your comment and it makes no sense…….Revise it to where people can understand or do not post…..Thank you for your time!

July 8th, 2009 at 12:19 am

***until he (Nadal) can get his act together and stop faking injuries because he does not want to get his ass kicked***

Worst statement ever! EVER!

*BTW this is coming from a tennis fan in general who likes Nadal and Federer…*

Really? coz you sound fake here!

July 8th, 2009 at 12:19 am

Gordo……That would be pretty sweet if it happens but we will see………I also agree the #1 ranking will be a big motivation for Roger!

July 8th, 2009 at 12:23 am

Actually, realistically Fed has to win this US Open if he wants to set the consecutive year string of winning the most number of any one Grand Slam in a row in the modern era.

I doubt if he can start now from zero at the AO and from 1 at SW19 and RG and win 6 or 5 in a row. He would have to be winning these at 32 years of age. Not very likely.

July 8th, 2009 at 12:24 am

I have to stop posting and get some sleep – I can’t believe I just labelled “Rocky II” as art!!!

LOL.

Good night all!

– G

July 8th, 2009 at 12:26 am

If Federer wins the US Open this year and ends the year with 16 majors than the possibility of 20 majors at careers end is not out of the question…….I personally see 16-18 at careers end…..Also, if Nadal gets it together he could end with 12-14 majors…….All speculation!

July 8th, 2009 at 12:26 am

sports fan: Are you for real? Unbelievable. What’s so diffictult to understand? Was the emotion shown the same? NO. Don’t worry, I’ll remember the next time to not engage in posting with you.

July 8th, 2009 at 12:27 am

Daniel,
I agree we don’t know for sure. I read in the Tennis Warehouse Blog as well from a couple of other tennis outlets that the Queens’ points will be added as soon as Indy vacates the spot, i.e. on July 20. It is a matter of less than 2 weeks to find out the truth. We will just wait until then.

In any case, it is just a matter of 250 points. Both players will be fighting hard for a better result. So, it’s all good.

The source I based my conclusion about Murray’s Queens’ points is Bleacher Report (the same source I sort of paraphrased for DePo-Roddick ranking scenario):
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/212875-a-complete-breakdown-of-the-rankings-before-the-canada-and-cincy-masters

July 8th, 2009 at 12:28 am

Von…..you have no idea what you are talking about….Federer was beside himself after his win in Paris and was thrilled after he won Wimbeldon…..He was showing respect to Roddick because of how close the match was….Since when are you the man or woman who knows about everybody’s emotions……..Start posting comments that make sense or nobody is going to take you seriously!

July 8th, 2009 at 12:30 am

Did I say I know his emotions? I’m speaking from my observation and that’s what most people speak from their olbservations. No one knows what the other is thinking and it’s call supposition. No more from me to you. Ask me if I care about you takikng me seriously, then ask yourself if I take you seriously. Bye.

July 8th, 2009 at 12:34 am

BTW, you’re talking as though you are 100 percent sure you know why Federer behaved as he did — e.g., his respect for Roddick. That’s surmising, because you can’t see his thought processes. It works both ways, yolu know.

July 8th, 2009 at 12:37 am

Von,
Before you go to bed, here is one still better news for you. “Roddick’s Road Back Into The Top Four…Again”
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/213798-roddicks-road-back-into-the-top-4-again

——————-
Daniel,
This one also has the same Ranking points as yours and mine: Rafa 8,485 and Murray 8,250.

July 8th, 2009 at 12:41 am

TF; Thanks for the article. I wasn’t aware that Djoko had lost so many ranking points. Wasn’t it a couple of months ago he had close to 7,500 points? Anyway, there’s a lot to ponder for Roddick and many scenarios to be played out, but the future looks promising and only time will tell. I’m hoping for the best possible scenario.

July 8th, 2009 at 12:46 am

Skorocel Says:”Just pure speculation, but anyway, imagine Nadal wins the USO by beating Fed in the finals… How will the tennis world (including the Fed fanatics) assess those Fed’s two wins at FO and SW19 then? Just curious…”

Kudo’s to Nadal then for completing his Grand Slam (all of them beating Fed).. Fed will be the only player to have won all 4 grand slam and lose the finals of all 4 grand slams… But Fed’s wins at FO and SW19 will not be undermined in anyways.. cuz FO, Nadal was there and was whipped thoroughly by Soderling. Infact, fed would have also had 22 straight semi-finals and 7 straight finals at that time, which itself would be a great achievement.

Credit to Fed for bouncing back this year after losing 2 soul-shattering finals to Nadal at Wimb 08 and Au Open. Many dint give him a chance to regroup and come back after Feb. But he did… and that too in great style.

July 8th, 2009 at 1:47 am

His fans are so impressed for his recent victories. But I couldn’t remember anyone else, but him winning two Grand Slams in a row. Without playing the top 4 players. And besides that, he was beating all those players he used to beat quite handily in tough matches! And those guys are taking care of the guys that he couldn’t beat in real competitions.

July 8th, 2009 at 3:47 am

zola Says:
“Jugadora

what is strange is that no one can write a comment here without being attacked by certain people.

The forums are to express opinions. If a comment from a player hurts me, I want to write it here. Look at the reactions and some of the posts. The words that have been used! such a rage, because someone dared to say something about a comment by Federer.

Thanks to NachoF, Kimo and Daniel for using logic rather than rage to make their points.”

This is called hypocrisy at its best from Zola!

July 8th, 2009 at 4:33 am

Rafa butt-kisser mem is back with his/her usual garbage.

July 8th, 2009 at 5:01 am

Tennis Freak Says:
“Zola,
You are a trickster. Your trick of neutralizing “NachoF, Kimo and Daniel” is not going to work. They all are Fed fans, and we don’t like you for making Fed look bad. We are not a fan of those who do not think before they speak and just fabricate meaningless stuff to hurt Fed fans. This is not an exclusively Rafa site where you can just target Fed for your frustration, of whatever. Period.”

Very well put by Tennis Freak! :)

July 8th, 2009 at 5:28 am

with all my respect,I think that Soderling is not Rafael Nadal, Roddick too, Karlovic is not Novak Jokovic or Andy Murray. So we can’t talk here about anything except the luck.

July 8th, 2009 at 6:00 am

Ok folks, it’s obvious that emotions are running high here, so let’s just all take a deep breathe and settle down.

…..

Ok, now we can talk. I thought during Rafa’s reign at no.1 that Rafa was a shoe-in for the year end no.1. I always thought the pundits were really wrong when they kept saying for the last two years that he has only two more years becasue his body starts to fail him. He always seemed so strong, especially after he came back from his five set epic against Verdasco to win another five setter two days later against the main who is most likely the GOAT at the Australian Open. Even though I’m Fed’s biggest fan, I never doubted what Rafa is capable of.

Having said that, I would be hugely surprised if Rafa wins any more slams outside of Roland Garros, maybe not even that. Rafa was in denial about what everybody was telling him, and to give him credit, his denial made him apprear mentally invincible at times. Nothing would rattle him. Not even that demoralising backhand down the line that Fed hit last year in the fourth set TB in the Wimbledon final on Championship point.

But Rafa’s cage finally got rattled, and by the most unlikely of players at the most unlikely of venues, Soderling (by no means a clay wizard) at Philippe Chatrier (Rafa’s backyard). All of sudden he started acknowledging his hurting knees, and that alone is a sign that he lost his mental edge. I’m sure his knees were not 100%, but they haven’t been in a long time, his mental toughness always overcame the pain he was in.

Rafa was not in more pain at RG than he was any other tournament, believe me. I’m not saying he lied about it till he lost, I’m saying he didn’t know better. His knees were hurting just as badly when he won Monte Carlo, Barcelona and Rome (he said so himself, that he’s been playing in pain for months). But finally he got his wakeup call by losing at RG. That loss was a blessing for his knees and his body (they needed a break), but not for his mind.

You don’t win slams just by being talented, that’s not enough. Throughout his career he was the toughest guy mentally out there, now he finally realizes that he is human after all.

July 8th, 2009 at 6:15 am

Now I’ll move onto Roger. I seriously can’t believe that after all he records that he’s broken people are still disputing his GOATness, and some are even going further than that by saying that the 2000s is not ROGER’S DECADE OF DOMINANCE, just like the 90s was Sampras’s.

I mean for goodness people, nobody’s record is perfect, and Roger’s is certainly the most perfect. People like to point out that his H2H against Rafa in slams is 2-6, while failing to rezlise that four of those 6 wins were on Rafa’s turf. Roger has 8 hardcourt slams includeing 5 consecutive US opens, Rafa has ONE. Rafa is yet to make it to the final of the US open, Fed has made 10 slams finals in a row and 16 out of the last 17. Federer has six wimbledons, Rafa has ONE. Excuse me guys, but their records are incomparable.

And some people are clinging onto the Laver argument. Excuse me guys, but he has and 11-6 record in slam finals. Roger’s record of 15-5 kicks that record’s butt. Laver had two calendar slams? Big deal!!! They were on only two surfaces. Roger could on four different surfaces have done that in 2006 and 2007 had he not faced Nadal, and he won three slams out of four for three years (and this year could be the fourth). Laver missed many slams because of the pro/amateur divide? Well, there’s nothing Roger can do about that!! Excuse me, but it’s Roger for me hand down. Even McEnroe who grew up watching Laver play, who idolized him as a youngster, says that Fed is the GOAT. You say eqiuipment are in Roger’s favor? Well, do you think with a new racquet in today’s game a 5’9″ guy would be a force to be reckoned with? IMO, he’s lucky he played in the sixties and not today because he wouldn’t have been nearly as successful.

July 8th, 2009 at 6:29 am

zola Says:
“Tennis Freak,
what a miserable person you are! You are a freak allright and you do not represent the Fed fans here. Not everyone is rude and mean as you are.”…………………………………. Zola, Tennis Freak is nowhere as mean as you, he won’t come even close to you if he single-mindedly decides to try to become the meanest person in this world. YOU, yes , are YOU the sole flag-bearer of Rafa fan brigade? Who the hell are you to not allow anybody to reject your theories? As long as your theories are baseless, you’d be criticised. And if you call Fed a disgraceful person, you’re bound to face the consequences. And I also know how much disliked Rafa is, around the world, by many, solely based on his ridiculous fist pumping with an angry sort of look at his opponents when playing. There’s a reason why many players have bad rapport with him, I’m sure you know at least two of them. But those two guys are nice guys overall or at least not hateworthy. But there are many classless acts which Rafa have been doing and that has earned him enough flak, not from me though, to be honest, coz I have never admired some player for being Mr./Ms. Soft Spoken/Humble/Down-to-earth unless he plays really well, though such moral things may add to their repute. But while watching sports, I’m solely concerned with a guy’s talent, fighting spirit, relentlessness, determination and finesse. Rafa possesses all of these apart from being a good guy on tour. But he’s pretty avoidable stunts at times as well, which turns/turned people off, not me, I don’t care about even Mr/Ms Terrible manners, if any, in anyody’s opinion. I’ve nothing to do with manners of players at all unlike you, who supposedly consider yourself, as the most flawless, unbiased and intelligent of all Rafa fans here or anywhere, to do as tough a duty as to judge the character of other players. I’ve no desire to be a sensor-board member or moral police like you. You yourself stoop lower than any other and yet you shamelessly accuse others of insulting you, heck! And rudeness is pretty much a feeling. You are rude to Fed, unjustly blaming him for some perceived fault of his which he did not do at all, he’s a guy whom you’ve never probably met or have catched a glimpse of even, and you are still going on alleging him to be nursing some sort of grudge and/or ill-will and even disrespect to Rafa! What a shame!

July 8th, 2009 at 7:15 am

my god. can i just say that many of you do not qualify as tennis fans (but only as rabid fans of individual players)? it is simply astonishing that you idiots will do what even the players you so ardently (albeit inarticulately) support would never do – throw invective against some of the greatest tennis players to have walked this earth.

how easily you put down the liked of laver, sampras and nadal, all clearly brilliant pliers of the trade and lovers of the sport?

the things i like so much about federer (aside from his amazing tennis, of course), is that he appears to know and love the history of the sport so thoroughly, and that he appreciates and admires his rivals, none more so than nadal.

some of you need to try and emulate the players you purportedly admire.

July 8th, 2009 at 7:35 am

http://blogs.tampabay.com/pointafter/2009/07/yes-federer-is-terrific-but-at-wimbldon-im-sticking-with-sampras.html

July 8th, 2009 at 7:47 am

“fed is afraid Says:
i don’t believe roger will ever beat rafa in a grand slam again.
but roger will win tournaments by beating other players.”

Man, you’ve already become a false prophet!

July 8th, 2009 at 7:48 am

“Gordo Says:
fed is afraid Says:
i don’t believe roger will ever beat rafa in a grand slam again.
but roger will win tournaments by beating other players.

=======

Okay, FiA (for short – no disrespect meant!) – let’s you and I have a small bet (for no money, just bragging rights) that unfortunately you have to wait a little longer if you are to win.

For you or I to win, one of the following two things has to happen –

1) If Roger beats Rafa at a Grand Slam match you must come out in the next 10 postings on tennis-x posts with a paraphase that says something like –

“I honestly believed that Fed could not beat Rafa again in a Grand Slam. I am so wrong and I would like to now admit it. Roger Federer is a better player than I had given him credit for.”

2) When Roger retires having not defeated Rafa I will come out in the next 10 postings on this site with the following –

“Fed is Afreaid said back in 2008 that Roger would never beat Rafa agin in a slam tournament. I, along with dozens in here thought he was crazy, but as it turns out he was right all along and we were all wrong. Way to go, Fed is Afraid.”

Fed is Afraid – do we have a virtual handshake and an active bet?????????”……………………………… Funny post by Gordo, ha ha.. liked it!

July 8th, 2009 at 7:52 am

jhc – amen to that.

A few hours ago a lot of us were requesting that everyone be nice.

An example of small progress –

A female poster in here named “fed is afraid” is firm in the belief that Federer will never beat Rafa again in a Grand Slam event again. Personally I think that is outlandish, but rather than insult her mentality or hurl insults her way – because she herself has never been insulting or rude (unlike others) – we decided to have a little bet on it.

see the above post on July 7th, 2009 at 10:19 pm

It’s way more fun than being isulting or name-calling.

———

Speaking of – Hello huh. Did you get my apology earlier? What you just did in your last post caused the confusion from earlier. By bunching your reply onto the quote you are responding to I misread your comments and I thought the original comment came from you. Sorry, again – from the real Gordo

July 8th, 2009 at 8:02 am

Von Says:
“At least Giner’s posts are based on sound logic, as opposed to those posters who become fixated on a word and use that one word as a platform to engage in harassment toward another poster. sheesh.”

Mrs. Von, I hope you’re not referring to me in this post. Reason for saying this is I became a bit fixated perhaps, IYO.

July 8th, 2009 at 8:02 am

Gordo, sorry I did not get your apology. In fact I thought when you posted as ‘gordo’ that it were not you at all, hence the use of the words “duplicate gordo”. Anyway, I’m with you friend. :)

July 8th, 2009 at 8:08 am

Huh – Von and I were chatting a lot yesterday, along with Jane and we all agreed that some people were just too downright nasty in here.

No – you were not mentioned. Going through the posts it is pretty easy to see the nasty boys and girls in here.

July 8th, 2009 at 8:10 am

Huh – apology at

-Posted July 7th, 2009 at 11:03 pm

July 8th, 2009 at 8:12 am

Kimo,

I think Federer is GOAT too but don’t be so quick to dismiss Rod Laver based on his 5-9 stature. Jimmy Connors was 5-10. John McEnroe, Borg, and Agassi all 5-11. They were not giants themselves. Leyton Hewitt can play with the strongest as well. Tennis has never been about height.

Did you ever see Rod Laver play? If you didn’t then you missed out on a remarkable player. Laver could volley better than Federer on both sides. He also introduced exaggerated top spin off the back hand as a weapon for both approach shots and passing shots. Borg took it to another level but Laver started it. Previously most players sliced the back hand or flattened it out only. Rod’s back hand (period) was better than Federer’s. Yes at 5-9. He had no glaring weaknesses in his game at all. Mentally was tough just like Federer

Laver’s left arm was twice the size of his right arm. He was stronger than you think. Don’t be so quick to assume he was not a strong man. Rod Laver could do it all.

July 8th, 2009 at 8:20 am

Wimbledon 2009 – What a tournament, shame like every year it always goes too quickly. Murphy’s law that it barely rained to use the new roof… mind you us in London our pretty happy about that. Just read a really good blog by Russell Fuller of the BBC regarding the tournament. Very interesting to hear it from a commentators prospective. Check it out on http://ensland.blogspot.com/2009/07/russell-fuller-of-bbc-5-live-on.html. All hail King Fed.

July 8th, 2009 at 8:39 am

Kimo: „Having said that, I would be hugely surprised if Rafa wins any more slams outside of Roland Garros, maybe not even that.“

When he won the AO, some were even proclaiming him as a future GOAT candidate, talking about a possible career slam in 2009, etc. Now that he’s (finally) lost at RG and withdrew from Wimbledon, everyone’s suddenly thinking he won’t be that good anymore, won’t last long, etc. Unbelievable, how quickly the opinion can change on these forums…

July 8th, 2009 at 8:56 am

Skorocel said:

“When he won the AO, some were even proclaiming him as a future GOAT candidate, talking about a possible career slam in 2009, etc. Now that he’s (finally) lost at RG and withdrew from Wimbledon, everyone’s suddenly thinking he won’t be that good anymore, won’t last long, etc. Unbelievable, how quickly the opinion can change on these forums…”

I never said that and I shouldn’t be held accountable for what other people presume.

And I explained in my last two posts, quite thoroughly I might add, Rafa has lost his mental edge. He lost his aura of invincibility. Not only that, but his injury hit the most crucial part of his game: his movement. I he comes back from such setbacks I would be pleasantly surprised, but I have to remain objective.

As I said before: from now on he will not be happy with 30 stroke rallies, rallies that he used to relish. Mid-rally he’ll think about his knees. He won’t give 100% to every point like he used to, because frankly you can’t play at 100% and expect a long career.

While I was discussing with my frineds the Wimbledon final one of them said: “Federer wasn’t even running after many balls in that fifth set, it was like he didn’t care if he kept losing Roddick’s service games even though he HAD TO break him in order to win.” That is absolutely 100% true, except that Roger did care. That’s why even though Roger is almost always the oldest guy in the last 8 in slams, he ends up winning them. He knows how to pace himself. He never plays at 100%. Rafa has maximized his potential and then some, while Roger is being content at playing at 80% of his ability. One guy is no.1 at 28 years of age, the other is 23 and might retire by the age of 25.

I’m not being mean, I’m just stating facts. Fed realizes that an integral part of stacking up slams and records is staying fit long enough to achieve them. Let’s say that some hypothetical tennis player shows up, wins every match from January to November, including all four slams and the tennis masters shields and cup, but to do that he will have to be content with a one-year career, would he be considered GOAT? No, because longevity is part of the GOAT requisites.

July 8th, 2009 at 10:19 am

Cindy,

I’m not saying that Laver was not a remarkable player with a remarkable career, I’m just saying that Roger is a more impressive player with a more impressive career.

July 8th, 2009 at 10:23 am

Kimo Says:

Cindy,

I’m not saying that Laver was not a remarkable player with a remarkable career, I’m just saying that Roger is a more impressive player with a more impressive career.

Just remember Rod lost all of his prime years playing pro and wasn’t allowed to play the slams. Had he, Fed would be chasing him right now, probably 20 something.

Rod & Comapany paved the way for the Federer’s, and Nadal’s to do what they do today. They also payed the price.

My feeling is, if they played at their primes with everything being equal, Federer would win but not by as much as you might think.

Just sayin’

July 8th, 2009 at 11:14 am

when will the authorities test federer for obvious doping?

July 8th, 2009 at 11:21 am

People unhappy about Nadal winning down under cried wolf on doping. Now the same thing is happening for Federer. Tennis players get tested quite a bit. The standards are stringent to the point of intrusive. I am sure some players try to beat the system and some probably do, but I don’t think Federer is doping.

July 8th, 2009 at 11:36 am

Just reading thru some of the posts – I must say, some of you guys are nuts. The long posts, and arguments and counter arguments… too much time on your hands.

Just enjoy tennis. There never has been such an era….

July 8th, 2009 at 11:40 am

Dan Martin,

The doping allegations are nothing new. Last year after Rafa-Fed final at Wimbledon an LA newspaper alleged that about both Rafa and Fed. The reason was “they did not look tired!”….

The players get tested 17-19 times a year and with the new regulations they have to report where they are for a certain hour “every day” so that the anti-doping aganets can find them.

I think it is most unfair to accuse any player of doping just because they won a match. I also think if the players pursue this legally and take some of these self-appointed detectives to the court and make them pay some million bucks of fine, they will be more careful with their baseless allegations.

July 8th, 2009 at 11:50 am

I like tennis bullies:

“when will the authorities test federer for obvious doping?”

They take a drug test immediately after each final, so you can rest assured there is no doping.

July 8th, 2009 at 11:52 am

btw,
I am sure both Fed and Roddick were tested immediately after the match.

July 8th, 2009 at 11:54 am

Guys……If Federer wins the US Open this year than he would be going for 4 in a row in Australia 2010……..I believe they would call this the Roger Slam, but it will be very difficult to win in New York this year with the new baby being born and a lack of preperation…….We will see though……I would not mind Nadal winning and than we would have to career slams in the same year………

July 8th, 2009 at 11:56 am

The doping talk is getting really old guys…….Give it up!…..Can we not stay positive in these posts and forget all the negativity for once……

July 8th, 2009 at 11:59 am

sports fan, Rafa didn’t reach a US open final when he was well, do you think he can do it when he’s not?

July 8th, 2009 at 12:01 pm

Kimo: Obviously, I didn’t mean YOU saying these things. My apologies!

Anyway, I’m sorry to say that, but your post seems to me like a wishful thinking… A wishful thinking of a Fed fan who’s afraid of all the threat which Nadal poses to the Swiss. Or why do you think he’s lost his mental edge? The guy still has a POSITIVE H2H with almost every single player on the tour, Soderling included. You may think of that RG loss as a surpise, but for me, it wasn’t all that surprising – firstly because it HAD to happen sometime, and secondly because Soderling’s game matches up pretty well against Nadal’s (not to mention that Nadal is pissed off BIG TIME with Soderling’s on-court antics!). The fact that he lost to Fed in Madrid and then later withdrew from Wimby doesn’t automatically mean he’ll suddenly struggle or something… Yes, his knees may be in bad shape, but then again, the same could’ve been said at the end of 2005 and 2008 – yet he came back even stronger…

Anyway, don’t get me wrong, Kimo! Contrary to what some people here may think, I’m a big Fed fan, but I’m NOT BLIND to see the most obvious… The guy virtually swept the first 4 months of the season, winning at AO, IW, MC, Rome and Barcelona. Heck, even in Miami, it took Del Potro all what he got (and then some) to knock him out – yet there are still some people here (I don’t mean you, obviously) who have the courage to say Nadal’s not a great hard court player (!)… LOL! Gimme a break!

July 8th, 2009 at 12:12 pm

Federer doesn’t use performance enhancing drugs.

He shows no physical signs of it at all.

Kimo Says:

sports fan, Rafa didn’t reach a US open final when he was well, do you think he can do it when he’s not?

Good point Kimo!

This is what I was trying to say yesterday but some poster (who will remain nameless) told me to grow a brain. Actually it’s the other way around.

If Nadal reaches the U.S Open final I will change my name to Brain Dead Cindy Brady. But I know, I won’t have to.

July 8th, 2009 at 12:19 pm

Kimo……Yes he can get to a US Open final…….That does not mean he will……It would be great if Nadal and Federer played in the Final at New York because I believe it would be a great match………After Madrid though I believe it will be tough for Nadal to ever beat Federer again because Federer is healthy and has figured something out against Nadal to turn the rivalry around……Roddick, Delpotro, Murray, and Djokovic will be very tough in New York so the draw could be interesting…..Also, if Nadal falls to 3 in the world it could be that Federer plays Nadal in the semis which would be interesting……..Usually though at Wimbeldon and the US Open the 2 and 3 seeds play in the semis and the 1 and 4 seeds play in the semis……This would mean a possible Murray vs Nadal semifinal, and a possible Federer vs Djokovic semifinal………The interesting part will be if Roddick comes to New York and passes Delpotro and gets the 5 seed……What side of the draw he lands on would be very interesting……If he landed on Murray and Nadals side you could see a repeat of the Wimbeldon final assuming Federer is motivated and is well prepared…..If Federer is not well prepared and motivated and should lose early than Roddick has a real chance to win the US Open and jump way up in the rankings…….

July 8th, 2009 at 12:27 pm

It’s not wishful thinking Skorocel because I DO want Fed to meet nadal on many more occasions so that he can improve his H2H against him, and the same goes for Murray.

Wanna know what wishful thinking is? It’s wishing for Nadal to get well enough to be better than he was so that he can win the US Open, which is not realistically possible.

Time will tell.

July 8th, 2009 at 12:30 pm

sports fan, I mentioned the possibility of Rafa losing his no.2 ranking and meeting Fed in the semis at an earlier post. It’s something that I actually want, because they never met at the US Open, and Rafa never managed to be there on final Sunday.

And btw, the 3rd and 4th seeds spots on either half are determined by draw, for example Djoko met Fed last year at the US Open when they were no.3 and no.2

July 8th, 2009 at 12:46 pm

Gordo,
Let me start with your comment on Giner, which you described as “the most arrogant” (superlative degree) and one of the two reasons (that is 50% of evidence) that you gave was “you tell no less than 4 people that they are wrong.”

How is that different from your telling me, “your calculations are wrong”? Oh, you mean you can hide your arrogance by adding a formula clause “I am so sorry to do this to you” and ending the post with “Sorry- if this makes sense.” Go back to Zola’s 1st remark on this thread: “congratz to Fed fans for his achievements. He needs a manners 101 and respect your fellow players 101 class, but he is fine otherwise.” This remark and yours are similar in style as both start with a nice clause, insert the substance (“you are wrong,” “Fed needs a manners 101…,” and end with a nice one (“Sorry”/ “he is fine otherwise”).

This is hoodwinking, but a good officer at the border sees what you are carrying underneath.
To me those additives/ cover-ups do not change the substance of what you are saying/ carrying (ill-wishes in her case or arrogance in your case, according to your own formula, but I don’t care whether you are polite or arrogant).

Let me mimic you (just an attempt).

I am so sorry to do this to you, but your conclusions are so wrong [underlying subtext: better you shut up about stat / math because I am genius around here. I said she nailed it. Why did you have to do the math to show off? You are questioning my authority. It pinched my old math teacherly ego].
(1) Your Fed-hating dude did not “nail it.” It is not the whole truth, only one of many possible scenarios, that “if Rafa is out before the semis and Murray can defend his points, he will be number 2.”
(2)
–You say: “the Indy spot is from last year’s scoring system that is being replaced over the year. Eventually all top 30 players will be dropped down to 2 tournaments in this category. If more were allowed Queens would have already bumped Indy.”
That’s not quite true AT THIS POINT. We are not talking about eventuality: We are talking about ranking points before USO draw. Murray’s Indy zero pointer is counted as 1 of the 18 otherwise it would be a meaningless penalty. It would not be sitting there without a reason. Murray’s ranking has been based on 17 ( 18 ) events these last 11+ months as his 18th event is always zero. Once the zero pointer “falls off” on 7:20, Queen’s points become 18th on the list and are counted. (B.t.w. your C&P from the FAQ assumed that I am ignorant about the system.)

(3) On the basis of what I just discussed above, the teacherly, authoritative “drop” and “carry on” cannot be followed. May be wait until the 20th, for your full satisfaction.

(4) On a different note, w.r.t. “Here appears to be an official word” and the article link only adds confusion. Five days ago, I posted Rafa’s Revised Schedule, which can be found in his forum (a poster name Sofie had it up there on July 4, Rafa News, page 115). And now, Rafa confirmed a fan yesterday in the ASK RAFA that he’d be playing Montreal for sure.

(5) About the increased negativity, esp. in a big part of this thread, it all started with your buddy’s false claim: whatever Fed said, “Rafa quickly forgotten,” was to hurt Rafa and his fans. People are complaining about negativity because they are constantly forced to expose who they are, in all-out war, or desire to have back the old glorious days of “anything goes,” or a false sense of security is in jeopardy? Do you agree with her claim? Why is the abstinence, then? So, you only jump in when you feel safe, like in my math case?

Sorry–I hope this makes sense.

July 8th, 2009 at 12:55 pm

I don’t put Murray in the same class as Fed, Nadal, and Djokovic. He’s yet to break through and win a slam. He still plays too passive at times. That cat and mouse game he has, breaks down sometimes when he gets nervous. Also, Roddick proved pure consistent power can beat it.

Murray’s game is more vulnerable than the other top players. If he’s slightly off, there is no plan B.

Another thing, I would love to see Nadal meet Soderling in the 4th round or Quarters of the open. Wouldn’t that be interesting? Soderling’s flat ground strokes and heavy serve on hard courts Vs Nadal’s heavy exaggerated top spin shots and speed.

Very interesting, indeed!

July 8th, 2009 at 12:58 pm

Kimo
***
sports fan, Rafa didn’t reach a US open final when he was well, do you think he can do it when he’s not?
***

I don’t think Rafa will be back unless he is well. I think he will be fine in the US Open.

July 8th, 2009 at 1:04 pm

Kimo,
Fed had a chance to improve his H2H in GSs with Rafa in AO and another one in wimbledon. I hope they get to meet in the US Open final too. It will be very exciting.

July 8th, 2009 at 1:08 pm

Kimo,
Granted I have your permission, let me humbly take the liberty of disagreeing with you, partially. I do think that if Rafa sets (already has?) his sight on USO, even with his two hands and two legs broken, he will win the title. Call it my “wishful thinking” or my admiration of his determination. That’s fine with me. I still want Fed to win and make it 6th straight, though.

July 8th, 2009 at 1:15 pm

Skorocel

Great post at 12:12 pm.

Your assesment of Rafa’s mental edge is spot on. He had to lose in RG some day. It was ridiculus that he had not lost for the past 4 1/2 years anyway. It is of course hard to withdraw from Wimbledon with an injury, but it is not the end of the world. Fed had gone through a rough time too and many even here on this forum wrote him off at that time (well, then I was accused of being too protective of Federer!)

That is the magic of the sport. What attaches me so much to tennis is this will to improve and get back to one’s best. Rafa had gone through this in 2005 when he was out for about 6 months. In 2007 when he was out for two months. Last year he missed the DC final and the Master cup and he was back. I will be very surprised if I do not see a similar attempt from Rafa this time.

July 8th, 2009 at 1:35 pm

Tennis Freak –

Boy do you go into detail.

If I am wrong on the 250 points then I will admit it. But I don’t believe I am, but I do stand corrected – I should have written “I believe you are wrong.” Sorry about that.

The arrogance comment I directed towards Giner was for the insulting manner he told another blogger in here to “grow a brain.”

If you really think my comments exhibit the same degree of arogance then I suggest you and I stop exchanging comments in here, as we clearly do not understand each other’s intent.

July 8th, 2009 at 1:39 pm

Von Says:
“I think you had a premature answer when he won the 15th. He didn’t throw himself on the ground and/or cry as he’s done in the past — remember the FO, plus he seemed lethargic after the match. Or wait, maybe he was too drained. Anyway, I think the thrill and excitement has somewhat abated.”…………………………..I Agree.

July 8th, 2009 at 1:48 pm

Kimo: “Wanna know what wishful thinking is? It’s wishing for Nadal to get well enough to be better than he was so that he can win the US Open, which is not realistically possible.”

It is hoping (see HOPING, not wishing) that Nadal’s knees won’t hold up in the years / tournaments to come ;-) That’s what you wrote in your post at 10:19

And why “not realistically possible”? Nothing’s impossible, especially for Nadal…

July 8th, 2009 at 1:48 pm

Skorocel Says:
“Kimo: „Having said that, I would be hugely surprised if Rafa wins any more slams outside of Roland Garros, maybe not even that.“

When he won the AO, some were even proclaiming him as a future GOAT candidate, talking about a possible career slam in 2009, etc. Now that he’s (finally) lost at RG and withdrew from Wimbledon, everyone’s suddenly thinking he won’t be that good anymore, won’t last long, etc. Unbelievable, how quickly the opinion can change on these forums…”

Unbelievable INDEED!

July 8th, 2009 at 1:53 pm

Gordo,

Giner told me to grow a brain. I thought it was funny as Hell.

He/She thinks I don’t understand the game. I was watching pro tennis when He/She was just tad pole inside his dad.

I was going to say something very rude to Giner but I always try to rise above that sort of thing. Well, most of the time. I’ve have been known to post an aggressive comment or two.

I assure, it’s all in fun. I respect everyone’s opinions in here. Even Zola’s and Von’s.

July 8th, 2009 at 1:57 pm

Anyway I must make it clear that I have nothing against Kimo in my last post.

July 8th, 2009 at 1:58 pm

let’s see! what will the headlines read if the washed-up nadal(as some prefer to call him) comes back and pick up where he left off with beating king federer. my guess is, they will probably read, federer just had a baby and is not focused or federer has made history and everything else is a bonus or nadal had more time to rest than federer. which will it be? one thing is for certain, it will be interesting!

be that as it may, i hope rafa is enjoying himself while recovering. he deserves it! it’s refreshing to know that rafa doesn’t live, sleep, and eat, ranking points, trophies, and the limelight. they all come and go! words can’t express how much he’s missed, but no need to rush back! tennis will be here when he gets back! love you, rafa, see you when we see you! take all the time you need!

July 8th, 2009 at 2:01 pm

huh Says: “Anyway I must make it clear that I have nothing against Kimo in my last post.”

Me, too. I did not mean to take sides. It only appears that way when you express your position. Both Kimo and Skorocel make valuable contributions to the ongoing discussion. It is not a contest about who turns out right at the end. Both are expressing their beliefs, hopes, or whatever you want to call it. I am not exception to that. Keep it up, guys ! Disagreement is all good. How else to discuss?

July 8th, 2009 at 2:10 pm

Kimo Says:
“sports fan, Rafa didn’t reach a US open final when he was well, do you think he can do it when he’s not?”

Kimo, why do you think Rafa won’t be at his best in the USO? It’s a future thing. All that we can do is wait and/or speculate.

July 8th, 2009 at 2:13 pm

mem Says:
… it’s refreshing to know that rafa doesn’t live, sleep, and eat, ranking points, trophies, and the limelight. they all come and go!

Uh mem … Rafa’s injured, so he hasn’t been able to play. You think he enjoys not being at the centre of the tennis world?

Why don’t you say “Gee it’s great that Michael Jackson doesn’t have to worry about those 50 concerts in London”?

==========

Besides, for a close-knit family, as Rafa’s has been, it must not be a lot of fun being around while his parents are divorcing.

==========

And as to the first part of your post – sure, if Rafa beats Fed there will be a host of excuses from the Fed supporters, just like you will trot out the “What do you expect? Rafa hadn’t picked up a racquet in 5 weeks” excuse if Federer beats him.

Although my guess is that it will be moot, at least for a while. I believe that Nadal will not progress beyond the semis in any of Canada, Cincy or the US Open, so Roger will not be a likly opponent.

I hope I am wrong. Nothing I like better than seeing numbers 1 & 2 clash. It is the best rivalry in sport!

July 8th, 2009 at 2:14 pm

Mem says: “tennis will be here when he gets back!”

Tennis will be here even after the entire batch of the present ATP players retires, and the next, and the next… Its life has never been and never will be about one player of an era.

And about beating the king, Rafa has done plenty, but Fed is not the only player on his path to a Slam title. There are a quite number of really good hard court players Rafa will have to go through before he can meet Fed, and it won’t be easy.
Such sensationalist headlines you conjecture will be of low tabloids’ foods to dream about. Have you thought about who has been attributing defeats and withdrawals to extenuating circumstances since Madrid beating, definitely not Federer?

July 8th, 2009 at 2:31 pm

Gordo, what part of what i said, did you not understand? yes! i think rafa has learned not to push himself beyond his limits for people like you who wouldn’t see the truth if it slapped you on the forehead. it’s hard to digest that losing the #1 ranking is not destroying rafa, isn’t it? rafa is injured, that has nothing to do with his mind and making smart decisions! i’m sure he not at home worrying about how he’s going to get back to #1 or beat roger again. he’s injured, not dead! like i said, he doesn’t live and breathe rankings points and attention. leave that for federer! if you still don’t understand, i’ll try to reduce it to the lowest denominator!

July 8th, 2009 at 2:45 pm

Gordo,

***
Uh mem … Rafa’s injured, so he hasn’t been able to play. You think he enjoys not being at the centre of the tennis world?
*****

It is true that Rafa really does not care much about publicity. Last year after he won the Wimbledon, his agent turned down many interview requests because Rafa wanted his privacy.

If Rafa is suffering, it is because he is not able to play a sport he loves, not because he is not the center of attention.

I am not one for speculations. In the past Rafa was able to come back from injuries and play better. Hope it will happen this time too.

mem,
I think Rafa is enjoying the sun and the sea in Mallorca. I have seen pictures of him in a yachtclub in Mallorca.Don’t have a link unfortunately. He looks great.

July 8th, 2009 at 3:14 pm

Dan,
looking forward to read your article.

July 8th, 2009 at 3:23 pm

Sports Fan, maybe you can help me understand your comments more clearly. you say that rafa is not even in the top 10 greats of all time. if that is true, why do you guys spend so much time worrying about his whereabouts, whether he will return fit or unfit, whether he’s burnout or not! whether his knees will hold up or not! i wouldn’t expend the kind of energy you expend on a player who’s not in the top 10 and who has only beat the great roger federer more times than federer has beaten him! doesn’t make sense to me! does it make sense to you? you should at least spend your time discussing topics like, “what makes federer so afraid of nadal” or “what other tips can we give federer to help him beat rafa consistently” or “how can we plot to stop rafa from winning the usopen or achieving the career slam.” now, those of some interesting topics you might want to address. i suggest you don’t waste your time deciding how great rafa will be; that’s out of our hands! we have no control over his destiny!

July 8th, 2009 at 3:47 pm

All Fed fans also thought Fed was enjoying the sea and sun after the end of TMC 08, ha ha! And I dunno how Fed can run away from the public unless the public stops running after him. And Fed is automatically the no.1 center of attention, he doesn’t invite anybody, but everybody is willing to invite him/talk with him/have his glimpse, that’s the way it is. If the ones in denial of this truth are being jealous about this, I mean especially some Rafa fanatics like mem (who by the way’s displayed his/her folly by supposing me to be a Fed butt-licker), so be it! It’s fun to see their utter frustration, ha ha ha!!! ;)

July 8th, 2009 at 4:00 pm

Fed is just more appealing than Rafa, plain and simple truth. Why? Evidence is seen at slams. Rafa was no.1 in 2008, but who was cheered more at USO O8?… Fed! Rafa won the 08 olym singles gold, Fed won the doubles gold and Rafa fan Michael Phelps broke all the records in swimming, which is phenomenal from every angle. Yet which was described as the most beautiful moment by the Chinese fans and the IOC president?… Fed’s celebration on the podium after winning the olympic doub. gold!! :) Rafa beats Fed consistently, yet who’s better in the opinion of the past greats?… Fed!!! So much appreciation of Fed drives even me nuts. Hence I can only try to imagine how much it must be pissing off Fed hater mem! ;) So I suggest mem to have some sour grapes to deal with this truth which must be hurting him/her so very much! ;)

July 8th, 2009 at 4:20 pm

huh, in all due respect, i suggest you seek counseling. it’s not humanly possible for you to believe everything you write.

of course, i’m a nadal fan and couldn’t be more proud. i’ve been a fan of rafa since he was in his teens and that will never change, especially for a phony, boring, player like roger. one of things i admire about rafa is that he’s geniune and he doesn’t try to impress anyone. if you like him, so be it, if you don’t, so be it! fact is, you and some of these other people who are members of a federer’s brainwashing club, want everybody to agree in favor of federer on this blog and you’re angry with me, because i speak up for the one i support, just as you and the majority do for federer. i’m not a coward, if i support nadal, which i wholeheartedly do, i’m not afraid to speak out and say it! so, if you think what you and others say will muzzle me or get to me, you’re fighting a losing battle!

July 8th, 2009 at 4:31 pm

fed is afraid: y is it federer’s fault that nadal had to pull out w/bad knees. it seems those hardcore fans of nadal always seem to put federer down. lets see, at the french open, i suppose it was his fault that nadal lost to soderling and it was federers fault that djokovic lost to kolschreiber, and it was federers fault that murray lost to roddick so he didn’t get to play the other top 4 players who lost to lower ranked players whom federer beat. they are all great players who have good matches and bad matches on any particular day or any particular tournament. oh yes, roddick may have been weary from his 5 setter w/hewitt and his 4 setter w/murray. well, if i recall, at the french federer played 2 intense 5 setters and a 4 setter and yet he managed to overcome his weariness. i don’t think roddick was weary. he is in too good a shape. better shape than murray in my opinion. i am a die hard federer fan although i totally agree w/laver. there are no goat. there are great players in every generation and federer happens to be one as does nadal. murray and djokovic will eventually win majors and they will also be a part of the ongoing conversation of great players of their generation. i have been to a lot of chatrooms and roger federer gets criticized a lot because of his losing record to nadal. he still has 15 majors, has gotten to 21 semi finals in majors, etc. it is the media who hypes federer as goat and i think that causes criticism from non federer fans. i just wish the media would stop doing that kind of hype

July 8th, 2009 at 5:28 pm

“Tennis will be here even after the entire batch of the present ATP players retires, and the next, and the next… Its life has never been and never will be about one player of an era.”

Well said, Tennis Freak!

July 8th, 2009 at 5:52 pm

von – whatever. I really should pick a different name, but no, I have not posted ‘everywhere’. But if you think you are a whiner, then hey, knock yourself out.

July 8th, 2009 at 6:15 pm

Mem,
Let me start by saying that there are people here who like both Fed and Rafa equally, e.g. me. Extremists of both camps are making it difficult, especially when you hurl unwarranted insults at the other side, picking on extraneous elements like character (e.g. you just called Fed “phony,” reminding me of the bratty protagonist in Catcher in the Rye). I am not against negatives, but I’d appreciate if you keep it to tennis.

But question like “what makes federer so afraid of nadal” is for posters like the one who goes by the name of Federer is afraid (acronymed FIA). I don’t think you want to degenerate yourself to that level. Had Fed been afraid (fear factor were to always determine a match), he would not have been able to beat Rafa in Madrid, in front of his roaring home crowd and on his most favorite surface, twice at the Wimbledon, at Masters Cup, and a couple of other occasions. If Fed lost to Rafa, it was because Rafa played better on those occasions. If you credit Fed’s fear factor to Rafa’s victories, you are not doing any service to the player that you claim to support, imo.

However, other questions that you suggest are not entirely irrelevant like “what other tips can we give federer to help him beat rafa consistently” Just a reminder: Tennis is not boxing that you win Heavy Weight Championship by challenging and beating the title holder. So there is no point for Fed to be focusing ENTIRELY on defeating Rafa consistently. Instead, it could be beneficial for Rafa if he focuses on consistently getting to the final of the majors, winning them, and bridging the staggering Slam gap, which Fed leads by 250% (15-6), which is more lopsided and of greater value than Rafa’s 185% (13-7) H2H lead.

Another question that you suggest verges on criminality: “how can we plot to stop rafa from winning the usopen or achieving the career slam.” Plot against Rafa? Tennis is neither a gang fight between mafia groups, nor a state of lawlessness, nor are we Nixonian dupes.

I am not here to proselytize you, so keep admiring Rafa (I do, too), the only proven challenger, but I’d appreciate if you keep it to pure tennis and leave aside those tangential elements to tennis like a player’s characters, bodily features, etc. I’d suggest the other side do the same.
Peace !

July 8th, 2009 at 6:27 pm

mem and other Rafa fans,

some recent photos of Rafa, enjoying life:

http://www.imnotobsessed.com/photogallery?nid=59965&fid=43328

July 8th, 2009 at 6:56 pm

I agree with Zola that wrote:

“It was JMAC who was trying to force them to say so.”

And like someone said he before: “This GOAT nonsense is fueled by The Tennis Media, most by John McEnroe. This Federer-as-GOAT stuff can basically be traced back to John McEnroe and his brother Patrick, who occupy lots of television broadcasting perches to spew this stuff. The supposed inside scoop behind-the-scenes gossip of the tour is that the brothers do this because Sampras didn’t particularly like either one of them, especially Johnny Mac. It’s surmised that this is why J Mac can’t resist any chance to get in front of a camera and start opining Federer is better than Sampras (which JMac does ad infinitum).”

Pete Sampras seems to have been overlooked on so many levels since Federer came along. Fed vs Sampras in their prime? There’s no comparison really…all hands down to Sampras. He’ll win AO,Wimby and US Open. Give the French O to Fed…that will suffice his big ego. Many said that Fed played flawless tennis…doesn’t anyone wonder why? He emulates Sampras that’s why. Sorry Fed fans. You need to know the truth. Sampras is the epitome of greatness. Great Serve & deft touch volley, running forehand, Smashing lob and he seems to float like dander on court. AND lastly, his a class act and gracious in any defeat was the true role of a great champion. Oh and before i forget, he doesn’t rub his wins in front of the loser by wearing something ostentatious like a jacket with #15 on it. How tacky. Now that’s The Mighty Fed……Arrogant.

It’s easy to make an argument for Federer, but not off a single match in 2001. Sampras was no longer what he had been, and Federer was not yet what he would become.
If you remember, 2001 was the year the slippage began to show in Pete’s game. He was just short of turning 30, hadn’t made the quarters of a Grand Slam all year. He would win only one more Grand Slam in his career.
For goodness sakes, Federer lost in the next round after beating Sampras to Tim Henman. And no, you wouldn’t suggest that Henman was a better player because he won that match, would you?

Moving to Rod Laver.

Rod Laver won a real grand slam–all four titles in a single year in 1962, then was banned from Slams until 1969–when the slams changed their policy to admit pros, and he again won all four slams in a single year. Nobody has done it since.

Take seven years out of the middle of any other “greatest” player’s career and consider the effect: In the case of Borg, there would be no career.

What everybody has forgotten is why the Slams changed their policy to allow pros to play–why there is an “Open Era”. They changed their rules to allow pros because the amateur-only policy excluded the best players and threatened to destroy any credibility the Slams could claim.
During the years of Slam exile, Laver won the US Pro Championship five times, including four in a row beginning and 1966 and ending with the opening of the Slams to pros. Nobody thought whoever was appearing in Slam finals during those years were the best players in the world.

Laver’s competition during those pro years in exile had names like Pancho Gonzales (4 Grand Slams before turning pro early), Ken Rosewall (12 Grand Slam Titles), Lew Hoad (5 Grand Slams) and Tony Trabert (5 Grand Slams).

During those years, Laver won 13 of 18 matches against Rosewall. In ten finals against Gonzales, Laver won eight. Laver’s record against Rosewall in the years both were eligible for slams, was 12 to 3.

In 1967, Laver won 19 titles, including the Wimbledon Pro, the U.S. Pro Championships, the Wembley Pro Championship, and the French Pro Championship, which gave him a clean sweep of the most important professional titles. The problem the Slam tournaments had was that In 1967, when Rod Laver won all the major professional tournaments, those professional tournaments collectively started calling themselves the “Professional Grand Slams” It would not have been long before the prestige of the amateur slams would have completely dissipated: The college World Series is interesting but not the real World Series.
As the Times reported Monday, during Laver’s exile from Grand Slam events, Roy Emerson won 10 titles. Laver went 14-1 in his career against Emerson.
Laver won 198 career titles, compared to Sampras (64), Borg (63) and Federer (62), though “recognition” of titles was done by different authorities when the pros were excluded from the amateur slams.
Laver change the game, forced the Slams themselves to knuckle under to his greatness and allow him to play in them in order to keep their credibility. He and the other great pros of his times caused the “Open Era.” Even the seven year Slam title hole in Laver’s career–created by Slam rules, is proof of his singular greatness. He did his double feat of actual calendar year slams (not done since) on either side of the hole and played for many years after he’d come back to the Slams.
Finally, if the statistics don’t convince you, go to YouTube and see the match between Laver, well into his 30s, and Jimmy Connors at the peak of his powers. Connors was arguably the greatest return of service specialist in the history of the game. Laver’s serve and volley game was like a wall at the net. He was a freak of nature the likes of which haven’t been seen since.

July 8th, 2009 at 8:24 pm

Mem……..I could careless about your opinion……The bottom line is Rafa is not in the top 10 of alltime……..Also, I do not worry about Rafa and all his faking of injuries, and all this crap about my parents divorced, and my knees are sore bull shit!……….Do not get me wrong I am a nadal fan as well, but I also know a spoiled rotten baby when I see one…….Afetr his parents excuse is over and the knee thing is done I am sure his cat will die or something…….

July 8th, 2009 at 8:31 pm

No GOAT………You do not know what you are talking about……Federer is the GOAT and Sampras is behind Laver so deal with that!……Federer would win 70% of the time in Australia, 100% of the time in Paris, 60% of the time in London, and 70% of the time in New York……Pete Sampras had the best second serve of all time but everywhere else Federer would own him……In fact when they played at Wimbeldon Federer out aced him by 32 aces to 29 aces………I understand you are a Sampras fan but a little delusional to say the least!

July 8th, 2009 at 8:36 pm

BTW…..I am watching the Federer vs Roddick final and really enjoy the look on Sampras’s face when Federer breaks his record…….It is a look that says I know Roger you are the man, but please do not break my record by too much…..And the look of Federer’s face says sorry dude I am going to destroy your record because I am the best……..Also, the more cocky Federer seems the more people will realize that he is the GOAT, and them and you and everybody else will know it as well!

July 8th, 2009 at 8:40 pm

no need to get all emotional sports fan.. I think you are more delusional than I am. YOu cant dream to compare statistics against an era where pete had stronger competition than todays era. Your stats dont hold.

As I mentioned..you have to read what i wrote. If you remember, sorry.. i should say, if you have FOLLOWED tennis during sampras’s era.. (if you had, then you’ll probably agree or understand with what im saying) 2001 was the year the slippage, out of his prime, began to show in Pete’s game. He was just short of turning 30, hadn’t made the quarters of a Grand Slam all year. He would win only one more Grand Slam in his career.
For goodness sakes, Federer lost in the next round after beating Sampras to Tim Henman. And no, you wouldn’t suggest that Henman was a better player because he won that match, would you?

Federer has decidedly losing records to two of his contemporaries: Nadal and Murray. Overall, Nadal has beaten Federer in the Final of three Majors on three different surfaces, and Murray has won 6 of their 8 career meetings. Where Sampras has winning records against the vast majority of his most serious rivals: Agassi, Courier, Chang. Pete he had more all time greats playing with him than Roger has. Agassi (8) Becker (6) Edberg (6) Courier (4) Kuerten (3) not to mention single surface specialists like Ivanesievic (1) Brugera (2) Rafter (2) Philippoussis, Rusedski, and Corretja. If there were no Andre or Edberg, you could add 3 more majors to his tally at least. Fed has Nadal (6) and then the list drops off with Safin (2) Hewitt (2) Djokovic (1) and that’s pretty much it. I think the mid to lower level ranked players are better than in Pete’s era. But the quality of the championship level players is not as great. I really do hate to seem as if I don’t like Roger, but he is capable of losing to great players. He has been beaten by guys like Murray and Djokovic, and Nalbandian. There is no reason for me not to believe that if he had played in the 1990’s, with the level of competition at the top being as it was, that he would have the same numbers that he has now. You see what has happened since he finally got one player who was on par with him talent wise. One slam in the past year and a half.

Federer only plays his best tennis while playing lower ranked players. Put him against players within his caliber or in the top 5 and he starts to play an average game and can cave in under pressure. Whereas pete would never be dominated by a single player the federer has against nadal.

Even rod laver agrees. Are you going to argue with him?

http://www.espnstar.com/tennis/wimbledon/news/detail/item290224/Laver-hails-Federer-achievement/

July 8th, 2009 at 9:00 pm

Gee sportsfan.. now you are a facereader and a mindreader..

July 8th, 2009 at 9:01 pm

No Goat – can you add Roddick (1) to the Federer list?. After all, Fed has met Roddick in four slam finals now. Thanks.

July 8th, 2009 at 9:09 pm

sports fan: “Pete Sampras had the best second serve of all time but everywhere else Federer would own him”

LOL!

July 8th, 2009 at 9:19 pm

No GOAT: “Whereas pete would never be dominated by a single player the federer has against nadal.”

Amen to that!

July 8th, 2009 at 9:21 pm

And for everyone who wants to know what’s at stake at the USO

http://www.usopen.org/USOpen/Global/News/News/2009/07/07/2009_US_Open_Base_Prize_Money_Increases.aspx

July 8th, 2009 at 9:33 pm

It is true that no one owned Sampras the way Nadal has owned Federer. Sampras’ era was different. It was much more of an attackers game at that time. Sampras had an overpowering, attacking game and moved like the wind. It was an era of really big serving and a hot hand could carry you far. Probably explains Sampras’ record against Stick and Krajicek.

July 8th, 2009 at 9:40 pm

Stich…

July 8th, 2009 at 9:40 pm

NO GOAT………..Read it and weep…….

Federer=
15 majors (alltime record)
4 masters cups
237 consecutive weeks ranked #1 (Alltime Record)
6 Wimbeldons (5 consecutive) record shared with Borg
5 US Opens (5 consecutive) alltime record
3 Australian Opens
1 French Open
5 consecutive titles at 2 seperate majors (record)
65 consecutive grass court wins (Alltime Record)
56 consecutive hard court wins (Alltime Record)
21 consecutive semis in majors (Alltime Record)
16 of last 17 major finals (Alltime Record)
42 match winning streak in 20006-2007 (Co-AlltimeRecord)
24 consecutive finals won 2005-2006 (Alltime Record)
1 of two players to regain # ranking (Lendle)
5 Lauras Awards (Alltime Record)
5 sportsmanship awards (Alltime Record)

Any questions……

Nadal don’t got shit!

July 8th, 2009 at 9:52 pm

Hi all, entertaining thread and Sean, always nice to read your articles.
One thing besides the fact how fast things can change is the fact that most tennis fans/posters seem to be stubborn and repetitive. The majority of the posts remind me of the vast amount of re-runs of Seinfeld episodes. But….that is a good thing imo, cause it shows the enthusiasm of the individual fan whoever he or she supports or doesn’t like. Thank god for diversity!
I will say this: As a statistician and historian and of course an avid tennis-fan for 25 years it is my conviction that: in comparing great players from different era’s, we have only one tool: we collect the data, or numbers if you will, on the respective players, put them against eachother in a predetermined setting, and try to allocate values and weights to each statistic which might contribute to the argument and make inferences that will suit any hypothesis as to who is better or the best…
We as humans have a need to qualify and quantify everything that can be expressed in data not only to make comparisons, but also in order to show differences between people….We want people, and top atletes especially, to stand out and be quantified outside the pack which consists of the mere mortal athletes. The most interesting thing, besides the fact that for some reason we are never satisfied until there is a unity among all on who is the greatest, is that in stead of ranting and discussing endlessly why someone is or is not the greatest(which makes for very interesting debates nonetheless) is that hardly nobody, when emotionally attached to the subject discussed, is capable of recognizing that comparing players from different eras should not only be irrelevant, but every assumption made in who ever’s favour concerning the greatest(Bill Tilden, Pancho Gonzalez, Lew Hoad, Rod Laver, Bjorn Borg, Pete Sampras, Roger Federer to name a few) can be falsified immediately. And imo this holds for every statement about who is the GOAT.

Still love the discussions from all different angles, but I won’t meddle in them.

Sorry, for the longevity of my obviously equal insignificant post.

July 8th, 2009 at 9:54 pm

vared: “Supposedly Roddick said: “Talk to Federer. That’s who you were rooting for.”

This does not sound right who started this nasty rumor? I can say with certainly that from what I have witnessed Andy has never turned down an interview request
—————-
TD: I read it on another blog, plus he didn’t get interviewed by Jmac afterwards. Who knows if it is true or not but ….. I wouldn’t blame him if he said it.

July 8th, 2009 at 9:56 pm

I was a Johnny Mac fan, then an Edberg fan, then a big Pete fan and loved his battles with Andre, and now a Federer fan and I have never had the urge to compare them.

July 8th, 2009 at 9:58 pm

sportsfan,

you are closed minded and caught up in federer’s cloud.
i could only imagine if nadal/murray/djoko started there careers at the same time federer started his, and both peaked at the same time. He only achieved those records only because he was playing nobodys for 4 years and peaked at the right time – when nobody was around.

bring it on sportsfan.

July 8th, 2009 at 9:59 pm

I am surprised you did not say Nadal does not have those records because his freakin parents were divorced………

Bring it on Chump!

July 8th, 2009 at 10:02 pm

I agree with SG,

Imo you can’t compare the competition Sampras had with the competition Fed faces….All assumptions or conclusions drawn from the numbers are irrelevant.
Sampras playing now could have had worse records against Murray, Nadal, Djokovic etc than Fed has just as well as Fed could have had a way worse record against Pete’s competition.
It’s the coulda woulda shoulda phenomenon again…

A shout-out to all Roddick fans. I always loved him, but he scored major kudos during last Sunday’s final. I was happy for Fed but felt sorry for Andy. I really hope he’ll win his second major soon. The guy deserves it!

July 8th, 2009 at 10:04 pm

Here’s a thought…transport Agassi to the Federer era and he may have 11 or 12 majors. These crazy Luxilon strings would have him licking his chops. Agassi’s 8 majors is pretty impressive given the era he played in. Just as Sampras’ game was beneficial for him during his run, Agassi’s baseline game was a bit of a hindrance. Agassi would have won more than one Wimbledon these days at a time where this tournament is decided from the baseline.

July 8th, 2009 at 10:07 pm

Hey Sportsfan and No GOAT:

How about this? Are following assumptions mutually exclusive in your opinions?
– Rafa has a lopsided winning record against Rog because Roger’s game style matches up perfectly to Rafa’s and the majority of matches have been played on clay.
-Rafa has a lopsided winning record against Rog because Rafa is the first player who was able to get into Fed’s head and won the mental battle between the 2 in their first couple of big matches.

Let me know :)

July 8th, 2009 at 10:13 pm

Hey Veno,

Roddick really emptied his bucket on Sunday didn’t he! I have been one of Roddick’s most vehement critics. The way he played Sunday has forced me to re-evaluate his game and his mentality. He is GS material and I do firmly believe he’ll get a couple more before he’s done.

July 8th, 2009 at 10:14 pm

SG, following your reasoning I have to note the following….Agassi won 3 of his 8 majors(all Ozzie Open) in the new Milennium, 2000, 2001 and 2003.
I agree that Agassi would have had better chances playing Wimbledon now, but again that is still educated guessing at best.

July 8th, 2009 at 10:17 pm

No doubt that when he’s healthy and fierce, Rafa is deep…deep into Roger’s head. That match in Rome…it changed everything. From that point on, Rafa believed there was no hole he couldn’t dig out of against Fed. In contrast, Federer faced a man does not how to back down. A guy who eats pressure for breakfast. A guy who’s game is the perfect foil for his. There’s only so many nose high backahands you can hit before you get frustrated and tired.

July 8th, 2009 at 10:19 pm

Hey SG, I also hope he does!
I hope he feeds off all the praise he got around the world for his efforts(although he would rather have the title of course, in the end words don’t bring the satisfaction for the hard work)

I think he’s going to be a strong force at the UO.

July 8th, 2009 at 10:19 pm

I agree Veno.

“A shout-out to all Roddick fans. I always loved him, but he scored major kudos during last Sunday’s final”

I was never a big fan of roddick because he just wouldnt change his one dimensional game over the years until that final I now love the guy. He has a new and improved game which is a delight to see and major kudos to the guy as well. My heart did go out to him. i think from here he will go from strength to strength. And if only he won the big points when needed, he could of easily closed out the match. Playing much better than Fed off the ground that’s for sure. Fed did play an average game and it was his served that saved him.

July 8th, 2009 at 10:23 pm

Veno,

You’re right. You can never know for sure. But, Agassi’s ground game, when his head was screwed on right, was pretty sick. Only Borg and Lendl compare off the ground. Hard to believe he wouldn’t have found a way to eke out a couple more Wimbledon’s in today’s era. The game, balls and surface have slowed a fair bit. Hard to imagine a guy like McEnroe winning any majors right now. Not enough power.

July 8th, 2009 at 10:24 pm

Agreed, and although I have watched Fed lose some frustrating matches to him last year(not too sad about the Wimby final though, that was classic and every great athlete needs losses like that)
I had to applaude Nadal for capitalizing on the mental edge he took over Fed after the Rome match. In hindsight(which is easy talking of course) I think it’s possible Fed took that loss as something that would happen only sporadically and if so, he paid dearly there after. On the other side, I love Nadal is there to cause problems for Fed and the other way around. Irrespective of who you support and cheer for, they define eachother and the rest of the field for that matter. I hope Rafa is well soon.

July 8th, 2009 at 10:26 pm

Hey No GOAT,

I agree in principle with both your arguments, but I wouldn’t go as far as to say Fed played only average. Imo it had a lot to do with the pressure and variety Andy threw at him as well as the mental resolve he showed throughout the match. Especially after losing the 2nd set tiebreaker. Drawing conclusions from the match statistics is open to any debate of course, but Fed’s serve was definitely a weapon, it had been throughout the championship. I’m glad my man won, but I wouldn’t have felt too sad if Andy would have been the one on the lucky side and won the title.

July 8th, 2009 at 10:31 pm

I agree SG,

hypothetically Andre’s return game would have been very suited on the slower grass and his movement on grass was very very good to say the least. His only weak point could be his serve with todays returners(Murray, Nadal, Djokovic, Hewitt in his best days…also enforced by the new strings, which make it easier to absorbe the power of the serve and still control the direction because the ball “grips” more now)

July 8th, 2009 at 10:36 pm

Have a good night every one!

Can’t wait for the US Open Series!!!!

July 8th, 2009 at 10:40 pm

Hi Veno,
“Imo it had a lot to do with the pressure and variety Andy threw at him as well as the mental resolve he showed throughout the match”

Very true. It was Andy’s game that made feds game look a little average. He couldn’t play the game he wanted because of that. Which is why an attacker with good volleying skills, such as approach shots, chip/charge and a serve to back it up can put away a good baseliner any day. This is the solution to how Fed can be beaten. Take away his time and you will take away his game. I take my hat off to Andy. Would love to see a re-match of them two at the USO. Cant wait.

July 8th, 2009 at 10:43 pm

A final shout-out to No GOAT before I tuck in :)

I cannot disagree with you on your reasoning and as a Fed fan I am glad Andy showed great tactics to attack Fed’s vulnerabilities as he did Andy Murray’s passive play as his weakness and executed perfectly.
It will keep Fed grounded and realize that keeping the status-quo won’t be enough to stay on top. He will have to adjust and move forward to and that makes me glad cause he’ll have motivation to keep on playing! And let’s be honest, whether you root for him or not, you can’t but hope he’ll grace the tennis courts for years to come!!!

July 8th, 2009 at 10:48 pm

Veno: A very sound and in-depth analysis of what’s transpiring here at the present moment.

“The majority of the posts remind me of the vast amount of re-runs of Seinfeld episodes.”

I call it ‘peat and repeat’. LOL.

“I will say this: As a statistician and historian We as humans have a need to qualify and quantify everything that can be expressed in data not only to make comparisons, but also in order to show differences between people….”

It’s the reason we are seeing the repeated long posts incorporating stats — there is a huge need for validation and affirmation of what some feel so strongly about their opinions on who’s the best and/or greatest. Those pushing the ‘for’ arguments won’t cease until they are satisfied they have converted all of the opposition. What a huge, laborious and time consuming undertaking.

“We want people, and top athletes especially, to stand out and be quantified outside the pack which consists of the mere mortal athletes. The most interesting thing, besides the fact that for some reason we are never satisfied until there is a unity among all on who is the greatest,… ”

Brainwashing, gagging, verbal strong arm tactics and verbal abuse are employed until the dissenters come around in their thinking, give up, and/or write what some want to see. Additionally, those in disagreement need to just acquiesce, and roll over and play dead, leave the topic alone and let the master-minds have their way. These tactics have been used with all naysayers; there isn’t freedom of speech to air one’s views unless it’s in favour of Federer.

As a Roddick Fan I have to keep my lips shut on the topic of the match. No one can discuss the match unless they say Federer was the better player, or else a stat card is pulled out and the whole abusive scenario is rehashed. I always thought forums comprised of differing opinions being entertained, but surprise, surprise it’s not so here. The road is mapped out: either we say Federer is the greatest, or shut up. Nothing else would suffice. LOL.

If a naysayer says differently he/she is thought of as ‘sour grapes’, blacklisted or are accused of not speaking clearly and/or don’t know what they are talking about, and that’s subjective, because look at who’s making those assertions. The rudeness has reached epidemic proportions, and disgusting new heights by the minute. The pro advocates will stop at nothing, be it name calling, demonizing and/or tarring and feathering of the opposition until they are either broken down, shut up, and acquiesce in agreement in an effort to put the topic to rest — I mean enough already!. LOL.

“…. is that hardly nobody, when emotionally attached to the subject discussed, is capable of recognizing that comparing players from different eras should not only be irrelevant, but every assumption made in who ever’s favour concerning the greatest(Bill Tilden, Pancho Gonzalez, Lew Hoad, Rod Laver, Bjorn Borg, Pete Sampras, Roger Federer to name a few) can be falsified immediately. And imo this holds for every statement about who is the GOAT.”

Unless one has an open mind, they should not engage in debates where there is disagreement, as their passion for the topic clouds their judgment. With respect to the stats, we see it displayed all of the time. It’s the one and most profound reason I dislike employing the use of stats in a debate. However, people will pull out those stats/figures which they feel best enhance their arguments, make them appear to be more knowledgeable, and reinforce their arguments. On the other hand, they will try to circumvent those stats which they perceive will cast the slightest doubts on their arguments.

“Still love the discussions from all different angles, but I won’t meddle in them.”

It’s an exercise in futility due to the ratio of those ‘for’ and against. We have bifurcation in front of our eyes. The two groups comprise of: (1) the Federer fans v. every other tennis fan that’s not in agreement; and (2) what is perceived to be ‘all’ Roddick fans. It’s funny, all who are not in agreement are suddenly seen as ‘Roddick fans’, and have given the Roddick fans a bad name even though they include Nadal, Djokovic, Murray and to a small extent a few Roddick fans.

July 8th, 2009 at 10:50 pm

Nighty Nite Veno :-)

July 8th, 2009 at 10:50 pm

Veno: “A shout-out to all Roddick fans. I always loved him, but he scored major kudos during last Sunday’s final. I was happy for Fed but felt sorry for Andy. I really hope he’ll win his second major soon. The guy deserves it!”

Thank you. unfortunately, we are just a small handfull, maybe 4, if that much, but we are suffering from ‘gagging’. As I mentioned above, our civil right to speech has been taken away. LOL.

July 8th, 2009 at 10:53 pm

Ok, ok, the final one then……

I hope he tells Nike next year before Wimbledon to “shove it” if they come up with another ridiculous white and gold ensemble. Man, I really don’t think he realizes that he looked more like Captain Stubing(minus the cap) than a tennis player out there.
It’s ok that he likes it, but come on Fed…go classic tennis gear next year, please. You have too much class for that and it felt awkward to me to see you like that!!!!

July 8th, 2009 at 10:56 pm

Hey Von! You’re welcome and lol back at ya.
Kudos to you, I have read regularly(only started posting myself since yesterday but have been reading the threads on this site for months) what you have had to deal with in many threads.
Good to see you handle it with humour, intellect and yet stick by your man! FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS THE BIGGEST RIGHT! (I’m Dutch and we;ve had some issues involving freedom of speech)
I am a big Fed fan, but only for myself. Imo it’s senseless to try and force my preference onto any body.
I love the sport of tennis, always have, always will and there will unfortunately always be a lot of self proclaimed fans of players who have imo never looked at the definition given for the word “fan”
In my close group of friends I am the only Fed fan, but my friends forgive me this flaw among many others.

July 8th, 2009 at 11:04 pm

No Goat:

“I was never a big fan of roddick because he just wouldn’t change his one dimensional game over the years until that final I now love the guy. ”

Glad to see you changed your opinion, but I don’t think Roddick ever had a ‘one dimensional’ game as you put it — his serve was not the only part of his game. He’s got a very good forehand, except at times, he’s had a tendency to hit his forehand with too much spin, and the balls would stay up, and be attacked by the opponent.

“My heart did go out to him. i think from here he will go from strength to strength. And if only he won the big points when needed, he could of easily closed out the match.”

One can only hope that Andy does not give up. I’ve followed him since the Juniors and stuck with him through thick and thin, despite the fact many others moved on to other faves.

“Playing much better than Fed off the ground that’s for sure. Fed did play an average game and it was his served that saved him.”

Sorry, we are NOT allowed to go there, and our lips have been sealed shut by the opposition, or else name calling and abuse would be the order of the day. I’m now labeled as a ‘you people’ ‘delusional psycho’, ‘sour grapes’ and ‘don’t know what I’m talking about’. OY VEY.

My compliments to you — an unbiased Fed fan, which is a rarity indeed.

July 8th, 2009 at 11:04 pm

I agree Von. :-)

“I hope he tells Nike next year before Wimbledon to “shove it” if they come up with another ridiculous white and gold ensemble”

Maybe next year Nike will design him a cap to go with it? :-) I think he chose to wear that Don Johnson outfit himself. Sneakers didn’t match though. ;-P

July 8th, 2009 at 11:07 pm

@Von: Although a Federer fan, I have always had huge respect for Andy, especially his big heart and his great sense of humour. And more so after his performance last Sunday. Good for him he has a beautiful wife to comfort him :)

July 8th, 2009 at 11:09 pm

Veno:

“Hey Von! You’re welcome and lol back at ya.
Kudos to you, I have read regularly(only started posting myself since yesterday but have been reading the threads on this site for months) what you have had to deal with in many threads.
Good to see you handle it with humour, intellect and yet stick by your man!”

Thank you so much. I needed to hear an assuring and/or voice, because I’m now beginning to think I’m becoming ‘delusional’ and about to have a ‘nervous breakdown’ as I’ve been told. Not to mention the fact that I whine, I’m a troublemaker I’m dumb, because my writing is unclear and “I won’t be taken seriously”. LOL.

I’m glad you read from the beginning, because some posters come in at the middle and/or tail-end, don’t know how some of the topics began and then lambaste me. Then we have those who have severe and I mean severe comprehension problems, who don’t understand and again they lambaste me. Gee, I can’t seem to even stay afloat..

“In my close group of friends I am the only Fed fan, but my friends forgive me this flaw among many others.”

I’d forgive you also, because you seem like a pleasant and fair-minded person. LOL.

Have a great night and nice chatting with you!

July 8th, 2009 at 11:13 pm

lol@ No Goat:

I know he chose it himself, but you know that “ignorance is bliss” so I’ll just assume Nike had more than a 50% share in choosing this particular outfit.

Same with the stitched 15!!!! Did not care for that 1 bit! Also his remark about knowing how it is to lose(although he didn’t mean it the way it sounded)like that to Andy was not his finest moment, but….he’s not perfect thank god. Glad as a fan to see him fault sometimes!

I’ve been his fan since I saw him play live in Rotterdam(I’m Dutch) as a 20 year old in 2001. He did an interview there and it’s on youtube. It’s a great interview!

July 8th, 2009 at 11:18 pm

Veno:

“It’s ok that he likes it, but come on Fed…go classic tennis gear next year, please. You have too much class for that and it felt awkward to me to see you like that!!!!”

Bite your tongue, we’re not allowed to talk about that also. LOL.

With respect to Andy’s heart and his appeal as an athlete it’s the reason I love the guy. I have a great sense of humor, which has been stifled on these threads, but I simply love a humorous person = Andy Roddick.

Veno, I can’t tell you how much you’ve inspired me to keep on rooting for my little guy. I always think of him as ‘lttle’ considering i’ve watched him grow up from ‘Sweet litte Andy’ into a generous and intlligent huma being. BTW, Decker is ALL good. I mean with her around, has Andy got it or what? The deck is stacked in Andy’s favour big-time. LOL. — ‘Baby did a bad, bad thing. ha ha.
________________
No Goat: Thanks and you make good sense in yolur posts. i’ve been told also that i don’t know what i’m talking about and I should rewrite my post or don’t do so at all. That said we are in a ‘slect’ group of those who don’t know what they are talking about. LOL.

July 8th, 2009 at 11:22 pm

Lol Von, thanks for the sarcasm…..Love it!

don’t know about the “pleasant” remark(probably many would disagree), but “fair-minded” I think I am, in most cases :)
Not afraid to compliment someone and at the same time criticize the same person if called for, but to lambaste someone, especially if I don’t know that person, seems a waste of energy to me, but hey, who am I?

July 8th, 2009 at 11:25 pm

Veno: “Same with the stitched 15!!!! Did not care for that 1 bit! Also his remark about knowing how it is to lose(although he didn’t mean it the way it sounded)like that to Andy was not his finest moment, but….he’s not perfect thank god. Glad as a fan to see him fault sometimes!”

Nope, verboten, can’t talk about that either — ‘sour grapes’. LOL. I thought that was such a slap in Roddick’s face. it’s almost like saying, I know I’ll beat you and i don’t respect you. But I digress, can’t talk about that. Verboten. For me it’s OK to say such encouraging remarks if you’re also in the same boat as the other guy, but when you have 5 and the other has zero, what consolation is that? Also, why would a guy who’s won a title in a specific tournament many times be overcome with sorrow if he lost one of those times. It’s unfathomable to even try to understand what the loser, who doesn’t have one of those titles, it’s been his life’s dream to win it, has come so close, but yet still no cigar. The pain has got to be unbelievable. Thus, that statement, as I mentioned before was not the best at the time. people say Roddick was joking around, I don’t think so, his face showed his true emotions, when he said you’ve got five (5). however, the justification, rationalization and mind reading goes on, and on, ad infinitum.

July 8th, 2009 at 11:30 pm

@Von and No GOAT….Sorry for the philosophical topspin I’m giving to the ball in saying that: If you are knowledgable and you are able to express your views based on solid arguments about topics you’re passionate about please share your thoughts with anyone willing to hear what you have to say, however wrong your views may be.
On the other hand, if you aren’t or haven’t got any of the above, please refrain from statements and in stead ask questions on every topic you need to acquire additional knowledge from to form your own views. Those not willing to go through the process, refrain from talking at all :)

July 8th, 2009 at 11:35 pm

Veno:

“Lol Von, thanks for the sarcasm…..Love it!” Not sarcasm just stating the facts. LOL.

“don’t know about the “pleasant” remark(probably many would disagree), but “fair-minded” I think I am, in most cases :)
Not afraid to compliment someone and at the same time criticize the same person if called for, but to lambaste someone, especially if I don’t know that person, seems a waste of energy to me, but hey, who am I?”

Oh, but you are fair-minded, at least that’s how you come across to me. In fact, maybe just a couple more can fall into that category. Stay that way — it’s better than falling onto the dark side. Now I had better stop before I’m accused of becoming fuzzy toward those who talk nicely about Roddick. LOL and LOL again.

BTW, you shouldn’t just read, but post more often — we’ll probaably disagree on some things, but even so, it’s alright to agree to disagree, isn’t it, as long as we keep our boundaries clean from name calling. Now I’ll be accused of whining also. ha ha.

Veno, hope to see you around more often, and thanks again for the laughs, your olbjectivity and lifting me up. Josh Groban’s song ‘You lift me up’ comes to mind.

July 8th, 2009 at 11:37 pm

Veno: “On the other hand, if you aren’t or haven’t got any of the above, please refrain from statements and in stead ask questions on every topic you need to acquire additional knowledge from to form your own views. Those not willing to go through the process, refrain from talking at all :)”

Again, very sound thinking. Isn’t that the way kids learn from asking questions? And, isn’t life a continuous learning process. The saying ‘you can’t teach an old dog new tricks’ is not true and/or carved in stone, and it’s why we so many revamp their thinking, moving on to better and more fulfilled lives. colleges give credits for experiential learning, because wisdom cannot be matched.

July 8th, 2009 at 11:41 pm

Von, 1 of the things I respect about Andy is that you can think what you like of him but he always speaks his mind. Of course that remark stung! If it had been the first and only final he had lost in Wimby to Fed it would have been ok, but not after earlier beating him twice in ’04 and ’05…
However, I don’t think he meant to say it like that…I truly believe he meant well….English isn’t his first language and as it isn’t mine, I can relate to the fact that translating can put an unfortunate spin on the context of the words you put together in the language you translate it to.

And regarding that you can’t comment(because of the sour-grapes reactions loool) on these things….you don’t have to….I have been a true Fed fan for over 8 years now and I tell ya: I will comment on these things :) I love Roger, but to worship someone is idiocrisy imo, but as well as I praise his accomplishments I only deem it healthy to look at his faults too and I have earned the right I think through the years to also express them and I will keep on doing that!

July 8th, 2009 at 11:43 pm

tennis fan: I apologize if I’ve confused you with another poster. The reason for my post is that there have been quite a few posts by ‘tennis fan’ also on the same topic, so now I’m really confused. Perhaps a digit next to your post name could end the confusion, e.g., #1, or #2. Again, my apologies if I’m guilty of confusing you with another poster.

July 8th, 2009 at 11:46 pm

Appreciate it Von and right back at ya!

No doubt we won’t agree on many things and that’s the way I like it. And don’t worry, I won’t ever resort to name-calling or cross any personal boundaries any one sets him or herself in posting. What’s the sense in that? In every discussion(talking from opposite sides) or conversation(just generally discussing any topic) I determine for myself what I can learn from what the other parties bring to the table, whether I agree with them or not. If there is no such incentive in any form of interaction I will retract myself from it.

As for your last remark: “colleges give credits for experiential learning, because wisdom cannot be matched.”

I can only say that drawing from my own experience is that where I used to think that being knowledgable about a lot of things and being able to express myself very clearly made me also wise….I could not have been more wrong I know now :)

July 8th, 2009 at 11:51 pm

Von,
I not responding to your post, but it has to do with dissenters in general, say Fed fans vs. the rest. The problem with dissenting is that there is not much to dissent with the guy. This does not mean that Fed is perfect and satisfies all demographic groups. Yet, when you go after a couple of his imperfections, especially during the week he has reached the zenith of history, that you will appear to be discounting all the goodies that he has brought to tennis. Whether you are discounting or not, you will be taken as such. Now, there are some Fed fans who may not appear to be completely plausible or may appear implausible in various degrees, and you may be tempted to disagree with them, but you will be perceived as or portrayed as dissenting with Fed’s greatness. And you become a piñata of a Mexican fiesta. There is no escape until this party is over, more challengers populate the field, and history slowly recedes to background, but this is a moment history is celebrating its birthday. Let’s say you are in the midst of that party that you are not really very fond of. You know your options. Sorry.

July 9th, 2009 at 12:30 am

TF; I appreciate you comments, but I don’t think I’ve in any way, form or fashion discounted Federer’s greatness. i may have mentioned something in one of my posts the day after the match, but since then I’ve steered clear. If you feel, I haven’t or didn’t please show me where.

Meanwhile I appreciate the fact that it’s Federer’s greatness that’s historical, but yet I don’t understand why others opinions cannot be entertained in an objective manner, if even they disagree. I mean have you been blind to the assaults that’s been taking place? I’m not and I find it sad, that his fans are so closed-minded and/or insecure with Fed’s greatness that they have to shut up those whose opinions are not in line with their thinking on his greatness. Even Laver is being attacked for being candid. Everything is now under two categories ‘sour grapes’ and/or whining. This speaks volumes in and of itself.

“Let’s say you are in the midst of that party that you are not really very fond of. You know your options. Sorry.”

Yes, I’m fully well aware of my options, and my option is to remain silent, which I’ve pretty much done. However, it’s difficult to do so when I see Roddick fans being blamed for what Nadal and/or other players’ fans are implying and/or disagreeing with, and it’s why I feel I should speak up in an attempt to set the record straight so to speak. For instance, I’ve mentioned a few areas which I perceive to be taboo for non-Fed fans, and it’s to those I’m referring. Look regardless of what I say, ‘sour grapes’ will be thrown out at me, which means that the better and safest path = silence and /or ignoring the topic completely.

July 9th, 2009 at 12:49 am

BTW, TF, I hope you’ve noticed that I’ve steered clear of the new Dan martin thread — some bickering has alredy begun. I most probably will only read until I see a meaningful post, then I’ll probably chime in. other than that, or if roddick fans are being senselessly and unjustifiably bashed, it’s hands off, verboten, won’t go there, taboo, et al. Hope you understand.

July 9th, 2009 at 12:54 am

SG Wrote:

“Sampras had an overpowering, attacking game and moved like the wind.”

Moved like the wind. Nice and so true. He had such great court speed, movement and athleticism. Within secs he will be at the net putting weak shots away from his volleying or serve. Was so explosive and covered the court better than anyone I know.

July 9th, 2009 at 1:31 am

“Jojo Says:
***until he (Nadal) can get his act together and stop faking injuries because he does not want to get his ass kicked***

Worst statement ever! EVER!

*BTW this is coming from a tennis fan in general who likes Nadal and Federer…*

Really? coz you sound fake here!”
__________________
Absolutely, and zero objectivity. sounds like a one-sided Federer fan, IMO.

July 9th, 2009 at 1:34 am

Von Wrote:

“I mean have you been blind to the assaults that’s been taking place? I’m not and I find it sad, that his fans are so closed-minded and/or insecure with Fed’s greatness that they have to shut up those whose opinions are not in line with their thinking on his greatness. Even Laver is being attacked for being candid. Everything is now under two categories ’sour grapes’ and/or whining. This speaks volumes in and of itself.”

Couldn’t agree more. Don’t get so defensive people. People need to hear the other side of the facts as well. Tennis doesn’t revolve around Federer. Rod Laver speaks his mind and the truth. He is a meat and potatoes guy. He wouldn’t say it for any other reason just to please cameras or the tennis media.

July 9th, 2009 at 1:38 am

Two arguments have been repeatedly used to argue that federer is not GOAT (the other arguments have now been squashed – like winning the FO, amx number of slams, etc.)

1. Laver could have won many more slam titles had he been allowed to play during 1963-67.

This is a wrong argument. First, 6 of Laver’s 11 slam titles were won when he was an amateur (1960-62), when the OTHER top players were not allowed to play. Would he have won these 6 had the others been allowed to play? Doubtful, since, even in the Pro circuit, he became the top player only in 1965. Remove these 6 and he has 5 left. But, of course, from 1965-67, Laver WAS the top player, so had he been allowed to play, he would have definitely won a few slam titles. How many? That is impossible to guess. So Laver’s tru tally should be 11-6+X, with X being the unknown. People just say it should be 11+X, and THAT is the wrong argument.

2. How can Federer be the best player of all time, when he has a losing record to Nadal?

Well, firstly, the losing record is only on clay. Second, tennis is a sport where EVERY top player always has a losing record to SOMEONE in his generation (Krajicek, Bruguera, Haarhuis, etc. for Sampras). In addition, if Federer is not the best player of this generation, who is? Will you now suggest that Nadal is the best player of this generation? Nobody will buy that – overall, even in the last 4 years, Federer’s record is superior to Nadal’s in almost every dimension. So if Federer is not the best player of THIS generation, who is? Someone’s gotto be.

3. Sampras had tougher competition.

Well, that theory has been squashed so many times on this board that I won’t even go into it. In fact, you can make a very good case that the nineties were the WEAKEST competition of any decade in the open era. I can prove it. I challenge you to disprove it if you want to get into it.

So live with it. Fed was rightly called the GOAT even a couple of years ago. Now he has all the numbers to back it up.

July 10th, 2009 at 12:22 pm

Again, however entertaining the GOAT-debate may be, it’s still useless imo(not trying to take away anything from anyone who thinks it is relevant)
But, extrapolating the notion on the comparison between the ’90’s field of players to the current field I feel compelled to agree with “FED IS GOAT” in saying that the field now is considerably stronger than 10-15 yrs ago. The fact is that the level of professional athletes(from top to bottom for players and on average in a field)inevitably goes up. This has been, is and always will be the case in any professional sport as long as it is commercially exploitable.
And on a final note: this is exactly why stating that Fed would be more or less dominating facing Pete’s competition and vice versa is futile, because Pete would have developed into another player if he were 10 yrs younger(the advanced racket technology, the slowing down of the faster courts and the speeding up of the slower courts, the change to generally an all-round baseline game in tennis etc would have made sure) and exactly would have been true for Fed if he were born 10 yrs earlier.

July 10th, 2009 at 2:15 pm