He really is the President of tennis.

He makes sure to say every win is special and whatever venue he is at is a special place to be.

Is he really this nice 24/7?

October 25th, 2010 at 11:11 am

Ask Mirka! She says he wakes up ‘sunny”, so yeah maybe he is just a very nice happy man!!!

October 25th, 2010 at 1:05 pm

I just read a book by a Sports Illustrated writer chronicling the classic Wimbledon 5 setter between Nadal and Federer. The writer talks about almost a “stockholm syndrome” affect Federer has on his fellow competitors- in the sense- he is so genuinaly nice and personable- that the tour players love him even though he has “tortured” them competively for years. Hence, the repeated sportmanship awards, etc.
According to this guy- across the board, he is seen by his fellow players as a truly nice guy.

Nadal too, though he is known to be more guarded and stays within himself.

It’s good to see in this day and age athletes who are gentleman.

October 25th, 2010 at 1:05 pm

Yes, Gentlemen in every way indeed!

October 25th, 2010 at 1:15 pm

He really has changed the way we have been lead to believe competition works.

I wish some of the amazing sportsmenship both he and Nadal have would carry over into politics.

I use to watch tennis for the yelling and screaming now I watch for the amazing tennis.

October 25th, 2010 at 1:33 pm

Roger’s got the funk this week. that’s right. And TGiT I do believe him every time he says a win is special. I have won a few things in my life and nothing on the scale of an international atp tournament and it certainly does feel special! No doubt that particular Swedish tennis ha is special cause its quite small and the princess hands out the trophy!
Let’s get the next title in basel, to Rog!

October 25th, 2010 at 5:43 pm

Kind and gracious as always.

October 25th, 2010 at 6:59 pm

yes he’s a real gentleman, unless he’s losing.
it’s easy to be a great guy when you’re dominating the tour. the mark of a real sportsman is how you take defeat.
hingis was also a great sport, until she started losing.
when fed first came on tour he was a petulant child.
and this is his true nature. it starts rearing its head when things aren’t going his way. even signs of it in the shanghai final last week. luckily for his fans and sponsors, he’s still winning most of the time.

October 25th, 2010 at 9:19 pm

guy,

face the music dude, your opinion, although me enjoys your insight most of the time, is NOT a majority. Give it up. Fed is not that bad my no means….we all can pick and choose quips from interviews,….right? I have done the same . :(.

And Fed is the most interviewed guy in tennis history, another record.

Let’s see, he is a sore loser, cries, arrogant, somehow he MIGHT be a illegal gambler, etc.

It’s all quite hilarious ;).

If this is the case YOUR starting to sound like Fed :)

Please keep posting though guy, your stuff 99% of the time is a great read…

He is very lucky to have won all those records,,,,

October 25th, 2010 at 9:46 pm

guy, how in the world you’d know how Federer really is? you just don’t like him and have to write a bunch of crap. Well right now I know for sure how stupid ignorant you are and that’s your true nature.

October 25th, 2010 at 9:58 pm

Ooh, guy, you’ve taken it a little too far on this one. Sure fed has his little pouty spots, but even in the majority of his losses he is gracious. People get pissed when they are playing badly/not being allowed to play well, that’s common to anybody.
Fed is not on the list of sore losers. Not buying this one!

October 25th, 2010 at 10:21 pm

great interview..always nice to listen to roger. good luck in basel!!

October 25th, 2010 at 11:04 pm

If we go by the people who actually KNOW Roger and play against him and see him in the locker room (after and win AND a loss)…I have NEVER read anything from the other players stating that Roger is a sore loser, or that he’s even arrogant. Even the players he constantly beats! lol! So I’ll go by what they say vs someone who is just a fan on a tennis board who has never ever met the guy. Just saying……

October 26th, 2010 at 1:11 am

guy Says:
yes he’s a real gentleman, unless he’s losing.
it’s easy to be a great guy when you’re dominating the tour. the mark of a real sportsman is how you take defeat.
hingis was also a great sport, until she started losing.
when fed first came on tour he was a petulant child.
and this is his true nature. it starts rearing its head when things aren’t going his way. even signs of it in the shanghai final last week. luckily for his fans and sponsors, he’s still winning most of the time.

October 25th, 2010 at 9:19 pm

worst ever comment from you guy. you have surpassed your own ego.

Having spent 7 hours at the stockholm open on saturday, I can tell you first hand, the amount of time roger spent afterwards with his fans, signing autographs and tennis balls, around the stadium, how he practised with the kids BEFORE his match, how the screams and claps rippled around the stadium. The guy is the most popular guy in stockholm, more popular than the swedish royal family, and the swedes are very proud of their royal family – fed is a star.

You say lucky for us fans that he is still winning? hell yeah! let’s face it, at least he isn’t half as petulent on court as murray (who is improving), doesn’t smash his racquets as frequently as novak this year – just count them – it’s all about the passion though – doesn’t detract from novak being a great player, at least federer doesn’t look towards his coaching box to get free coaching advice like rafa (on a regular basis).

Each player has their own weaknesses, right guy? What’s yours? Let me guess. You don’t have one.

October 26th, 2010 at 4:08 am

Well I remember Berdych complaining post match @ Wimbledon after Rogers interview so its not always like this Fot.
But lets face it players of Fed and Nadals calibre don’t get where they are being happy’ in defeat! its part of a champions mentality, their passion for what they do and to do it well.
All in all the above two are the most gracious we have had in tennis, they both have superb principles and are a credit to our sport.

October 26th, 2010 at 7:24 am

madmax,

I think what Nadal fans are referring to when they speak of Federer as being a “sore loser” is this emerging pattern of him apparently using the court speed stuff as an excuse for his waning (and Nadal’s waxing) dominance. If one so desired his statements could be interpreted as an exaggeration of how much the courts have slowed down. Several people have picked up on this emerging pattern and several (both Nadal and Federer fans) have reacted to the discussion of it. Nadal has his own problems with the undisputed fact that, during the US Open match, he broke the rules by turning to his box for advice on where to hit a serve and seemed to admit that he did so without the slightest of display of guilt over the matter.

October 26th, 2010 at 10:55 am

Fot Says:

I have NEVER read anything from the other players stating that Roger is a sore loser, or that he’s even arrogant.

True, but someone visiting this blog who doesn’t know anything about Federer would, in my opinion, get the distorted impression that he is arrogant. Several of the Federer fans here (including one of the moderators) have either implied as much or have flatly stated so.

October 26th, 2010 at 11:26 am

“So I’ll go by what they say vs someone who is just a fan on a tennis board who has never ever met the guy. Just saying……”

Yeah Tennis Fans can’t look too hard sometimes into these blogs and opinionated articles. The best source for this kind of info is the guys he plays against.

October 26th, 2010 at 12:26 pm

I would say fed and rafa are both kid of sore losers. Especially if the match or tournament is important to them.

Let’s be real. Breaking down in tears in a trophy ceremony doesn’t qualify as a graceful loss. And before I get jumpedon by fed fans, rafa is not much better. He controlled himself til he got to the locker room @ wimby 2007. And he looked like he was going to punch out a cameraman after soderling at rg.

Serena williams is really sore. But that’s why these r the champs, the winners. Because to them its NOT ok to lose. The numbers speak for themselves.

I think to some degree to be a real winner you need to hate losing. My ten cents.

October 26th, 2010 at 2:17 pm

Sore loser to me is all about the way you treat your opponent after you lose…the hardest thing to do at that moment is focus on what they did right as opposed to what you did wrong. Nadal in no way took offense to the way Federer behaved, on the contrary I suspect he fealt honored by the fact that Federer took losing to him so seriously. Showing your disappointment is one thing, failing to acknowledge your accomplishment is another, discrediting you opponent (as Serena Williams did when she said her opponent “just made a bunch of lucky shots”) is something else.

October 26th, 2010 at 2:42 pm

correction:

failing to acknowledge your opponent’s accomplishment is another

October 26th, 2010 at 2:44 pm

Vulcan Says:
Fot Says:

I have NEVER read anything from the other players stating that Roger is a sore loser, or that he’s even arrogant.

True, but someone visiting this blog who doesn’t know anything about Federer would, in my opinion, get the distorted impression that he is arrogant. Several of the Federer fans here (including one of the moderators) have either implied as much or have flatly stated so.

October 26th, 2010 at 11:26 am

Vulcan,

I have enjoyed reading your posts lately, I have it on good authority that you are a highly intelligent poster who is generally fair towards others.

That said, I really don’t think that the moderator to whom I think you are referring is the rule book on federer – likes to think he is but..

Top athletes, as Kimberly mentioned above, are what they are. If they were all smiley miley when they lost, it wouldn’t make sense – winning is their bread and butter – and when all is said and done, this is what they set out to achieve – that is, to win and then win some more and if that isn’t enough, they’ll do more ‘olivers’.

Federer is as arrogant as the next top athlete, the next usain bolt when he does his arrow to the crowd, the next tyson gaye when he runs around the track twice, the next dwayne chambers, know what I am saying? the next Muhammed Ali.

They are at the top of their game for a reason and that is one reason only. To win.

It’s called winner’s mentality. People who want to describe federer in that way only do so out of jealousy.

Self-belief is a dangerous thing only if you don’t know how to use it.

Federer does.

October 26th, 2010 at 5:13 pm

Well said kimberly! Agreed 100%.

October 26th, 2010 at 9:07 pm

It’s always baffling to me when I see the double standards employed by some fans in their defense of their faves. And, it doesn’t stop there. It’s extremely one-sided because depending on who’s the player, the entitlement to defend him seems to have much greater significance. By *entitlement* I mean that some players because of their lower ranking don’t seem to deserve any type of defense, however, the opposite occurs when it’s a top ranked player. And, that entitlement envelope is pushed even further by way of derogatory comparisons, e.g., Murray is petulant, Roddick is a Bronx street fighter, et al. I suppose it’s what we call: celebrity entitlement.

“Top athletes, as Kimberly mentioned above, are what they are. If they were all smiley miley when they lost, it wouldn’t make sense – winning is their bread and butter – and when all is said and done, this is what they set out to achieve – that is, to win and then win some more and if that isn’t enough, they’ll do more ‘olivers’.”

For starters, it’s not only top athletes who have great difficulty dealing with their losses. I’d say ALL athletes. It’s innate, except that some are more vociferous than others. Whatever happenend to be humble in winning and being gracious in defeat? Moreover, winning is not only bread and butter for the higher ranked players, it’s even more important for the lower ranked, as they very infrequently get a chance to win a big prize. Hence, if anyone should be a ungracious loser, it would be much more understandable if it’s the lower ranked player.

I don’t understand the following as it’s highly conflicting: “Self-belief is a dangerous thing only if you don’t know how to use it.”

How could self-belief be dangerous? I thought self-belief is a very powerful thought process, as it’s in many ways related to mental toughness. It’s the belief that provides any competitor to keep on fighting to the very end, despite the odds, which, at times, are stacked so highly in favour of their opponents.

Re: “… only if you don’t know how to use it .Federer does.”

The mere fact that one possesses self belief is enough evidence that he/she knows how to use it.
I see implicature rampant here. It’s like assuming that because someone is born of wealthy parents, then he/she automatically would possess all the qualities and/or dignity of the rich and famous. But, we all know that that’s not necessarily how it all pans out, isn’t it?

October 26th, 2010 at 9:19 pm

Sore losers? One only has to start at a reference point to compare, CONNORS. The press didn’t get a whisper win he lost. Gone. Didn’t he like walk out before the Finals Trophy presentation in Wimby or USO one year? Help?

But the guy no doubt was a winner. The ultimate Pirate and beginnings of the historical Tennis Warrior on the court.

Connors we are not worthy.

October 26th, 2010 at 10:56 pm

Skeezer, I don’t remember conners antics, before my time. But in modern era the sorest loser I can think of would probably be Serena Williams. But as insaid above, I think any great champ is a sore loser because they expect the best from themselves and feel they could should win. And they have a hunger to win. Part of the hunger to win is fueled by hate of losing.

How many people out there, I.e gulbis, nalbandian, davydenko have tons of talent but don’t have that champions mentality. Stability and calm of mind is part of it but desire, hunger and competitiveness drives them to win. To me being a sore loser is a natural consequence. Of course one should attempt to be political but for a true winner it is NOT ok to lose.

October 26th, 2010 at 11:15 pm

Kimberly,

One only needs to watch “The Greatest” Muhammad Ali’s story to validate your point :)

Also my guess is you’ve played competitive Tennis before for an extended period of time, and were pretty darn good at your level…

Check this out, don’t get bored they hit “a little slower” back then. You can skip to the very end @4:07 and see how happy Connors was to the camera:)

On a side note, Rafa was not the first Clay courter to have success on the grass, although many think Rafa was the breakthrough, it was Borg. With 5 Wimby titles to prove it….from mostly the baseline and on a faster grass surface……Borg also has his own story of improving his serve dramatically during his career that helped him gain his 5 Wimby titles….Not to take anything away from Rafa….as he has taken to a another level on his own but winning GS HC titles…..something Borg could never do.

:)

October 26th, 2010 at 11:57 pm

Kimberly,

Well there was nothing to check out was there? LOL…

Here it is….my bad

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BURxh1YbZD0

October 26th, 2010 at 11:59 pm

There is a difference between being upset or disappointed with a loss and not giving your opponent credit or taking spotlight away from the winner. There is also a difference between self-belief and voicing it and being dismissive of your competitors.

In these past few years – coincidently since he starts losing – Federer has said some of things in interviews or press conferences that raised eye brows. Many sportwriters said so in articles right after his 2010 Wimbledon loss when he brought up previously unannounced injuries and appeared not to give any credit to the winner.

His crying at 2009 AO took the spotlight away from Rafa and made Rafa at an uncomfortable position. Nadal cried in shower after his 2007 Wimbledon loss. He did it in private. He didn’t take the spotlight away from the winner. There is a difference.

I also heard him in press conference where he seemed very dismissive of his opponents (at least his opponents not named Nadal) before a tounament even began. It’s okay to have strong self-belief; it’s quite another to voice it in a way dismissive of your opponents before matches. Yes, it sounds arrogant.

And then there’s the 15 sweater…yuk.

Just my opinion.

October 27th, 2010 at 1:27 am

“as he has taken to a another level on his own but, winning GS HC titles…..something Borg could never do.”

This poster tried to humor everyone by mentioning Rafa’s “but” again. Geez!

October 27th, 2010 at 1:58 am

JCK Says:
There is a difference between being upset or disappointed with a loss and not giving your opponent credit or taking spotlight away from the winner. There is also a difference between self-belief and voicing it and being dismissive of your competitors.

In these past few years – coincidently since he starts losing – Federer has said some of things in interviews or press conferences that raised eye brows. Many sportwriters said so in articles right after his 2010 Wimbledon loss when he brought up previously unannounced injuries and appeared not to give any credit to the winner.

His crying at 2009 AO took the spotlight away from Rafa and made Rafa at an uncomfortable position. Nadal cried in shower after his 2007 Wimbledon loss. He did it in private. He didn’t take the spotlight away from the winner. There is a difference.

I also heard him in press conference where he seemed very dismissive of his opponents (at least his opponents not named Nadal) before a tounament even began. It’s okay to have strong self-belief; it’s quite another to voice it in a way dismissive of your opponents before matches. Yes, it sounds arrogant.

And then there’s the 15 sweater…yuk.

Just my opinion.

October 27th, 2010 at 1:27 am

JCK,

clearly the 15 jacket rumbles on. You need to understand what happened for real. google it. for the last time, federer didn’t know the 15 was on the jacket. but if you want to believe otherwise, then you are denying the truth.

von! I don’t know whether to feel honoured or sad that you think it worthy to take some of my post and put your own spin on it. I suppose I should be used to it by now. And you keep bringing up roddick the bronx fighter. von, you dont get it do you? Do you actually know what a bronx street fighter is? what a compliment it is to give this to roddick. It is only you in your heightened state of paranoia that would see this as a negative. Go and read about the history von of the Bronx street fighter and try and see the positives.

‘Self-belief is a dangerous thing’.

Tut Tut von. You don’t see it or understand this? we’re not reading our ‘Nietzsche’s superman’ are we von?

October 27th, 2010 at 3:44 am

skeezer-ok i must say connors takes the cake. Thats just not pretty.

I’ve played competitive sports for years, not tennis til a little later. Played in the leagues, nothing special. Stopped due to time constraints. I still play several times a week but as a real estate agent and newer parent I can’t make the time commitment/promises the leagues take. And yes, I hate hate hate losing.

My husband played NCAA and juniors. He is actually playing a tournament next week at the facility where the sony ericsson is played here in miami.

October 27th, 2010 at 9:58 am

Kimberly, thanks for sharing :). The hubby sounds like a player….You can put me in the “hate to lose category” also…But I hate it more if I ever couldn’t compete.

October 27th, 2010 at 10:42 am

JCK Says:

Many sportwriters said so in articles right after his 2010 Wimbledon loss when he brought up previously unannounced injuries and appeared not to give any credit to the winner.

All I can say about this is what I have always said about Federer in trying to distill everything down to one sentence:

Federer is what tennis is all about.

And from what I’ve seen Wimbledon is what tennis is all about to Federer.

His statement that losing his Wimbledon crown to Nadal was “a disaster” was probably the single most negative thing he has ever said about his career. I also wonder if the reason he got so emotional at AO 2009 was simply because he associated losing to Nadal again with that Wimbledon loss.

So yeah based on what happened I would think that in Federer’s mind the two associations that would trigger the most negative emotion for him are Nadal and losing at Wimbledon. So if Federer ever was to show any slight tendency to be a sore loser it likely could all be traced back to that match. It seems like the perception of Federer as being arrogant amongst tennis fans is directly related to the fact that Nadal has taken his place. I don’t recall him being perceived that way as much back when his rivals were Roddick, Hewitt, and the other players of that generation.

October 27th, 2010 at 12:16 pm

where did you see this vulcan? or read it?

‘His statement that losing his Wimbledon crown to Nadal was “a disaster” was probably the single most negative thing he has ever said about his career’.

He has been nothing but complimentary about rafa and his achievements. There is incredible sportsmaship and respect between the two. It would make a change for people to focus on this, for once.

October 27th, 2010 at 5:56 pm

vulcan,

take a walk down memory lane – God – was this just not the best match ever to be played?

goosepimples all over again.

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1469435/nadal_vs_federer_wimbledon_2008/

October 27th, 2010 at 6:11 pm

Vulcan: You’re being reeled in. Don’t let that backhanded compliment fool you.

October 27th, 2010 at 10:19 pm

Madmax: “It is only you in your heightened state of paranoia that would see this as a negative.”

I’d say you are speaking from experience as an authority on the subject of *heightened state of paranoia*, considering you’re perpetually in such a state.

October 28th, 2010 at 12:41 am

madmax,

His exact statement was:

“It is a disaster, the French is nothing in comparison

Here is a link that references the statement:

http://www.rediff.com/sports/2008/jul/07fed.htm

I thought I also recalled Federer making another comment about losing the French scoffing “oh I don’t care about that” – also from the presser.

Taken together with his comment:

“to lose a match over a bit of light”

Makes this the only time I think Federer has ever really faltered in the sore loser department. As dissappointed as he was he still managed to temper his comments with praise for Nadal which must have been very difficult to do.

Thanks for that link to the highlights video.
I got a chuckle out of Gilbert describing the conditions as “incredibly” slow in his description of the match in retrospect…I’m guessing he didn’t make any such hyperbolic comments before the match began…but that’s Gilbert :)

Yeah Wimbledon 2008 was indeed described by Sports Illustrated and other sources as the greatest match ever played – over the years there have been many matches that have been regarded as epic, titanic power struggles…I suspect a big part of this is the fact that unless I’m mistaken the tournament get’s more television coverage and media attention than any other…the players know the whole world is watching and for that reason they just seem to rise to the occasion when it comes to producing high drama.

October 28th, 2010 at 12:47 am

LOL Von, If he attacks with the backhand I’ll just come back with a mind buggy whipping forehand.

October 28th, 2010 at 12:56 am

Vulcan said:

“I don’t recall him being perceived that way as much back when his rivals were Roddick, Hewitt, and the other players of that generation.”

That’s because he beat those guys. As someone else said, it’s easier to be a gracious winner than a gracious loser. Nadal got into his skin because he’s one who not only can beat him on a regular basis but also can threaten his records/legacy.

Yes, he’s complimentary toward Nadal in most circumstances but his recent comments about how all the courts having been slowed down smell like a sore grape comment. Is he implying that if Nadal accomplishes a Rafa Slam or a calendar slam, it’s only because of the “slow surfaces” in all majors?

madmax, no matter whether he’s aware of the 15 on the sweater, it backfired because it smacks as self-grandeurdizing. And he’s been wearing monogramed sweater for a couple years.

October 28th, 2010 at 1:18 am

JCK,

Out of curiosity how would you rank your admiration of the following players based on the character attributes discussed:

1. Humble Winner
2. Arrogant Winner
3. Humble Loser
4. Arrogant Loser

I suspect 2 and 3 are the closest call.

The sweater is all about vanity in my opinion.

October 28th, 2010 at 1:37 am

Von, madmax:

My only observation on paranoia:

http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/35234.html

October 28th, 2010 at 1:52 am

Vulcan: that’s funny and neat :) 1 and 2 for me please! BTW do u like work of M C Escher?
kimmi: u r right, while I’ll make huge effort, and believe me living in UK it is a huge effort, to watch Andy’s matches, it’ll be less for others in top 10 and hardly any (effort) for below.
kimberly: re WTA, much same, only even less.
fedfans: the jacket and handbag were truly ghastly darlings :) Just throw your hands up and admit it. The day Andy brings a gold bag onto court, the day I keel over!
JCK: u r right of course, huge difference between the public and the private.

October 28th, 2010 at 2:18 am

morning margot.

A little unfair peeps. If you saw (and I am sure you did), what happened about THAT jacket, you’ll know that a rep from nike came onto the court with a folded jacket, which fed unfolded and put on – didn’t even know the no.15 was on there. and it was hardly large. It was no bigger than 3/4 inch, braided in gold – and what nike says, fed does. I wish people would see this more fairly. I love what fed wears, I think he enjoys the history of the tennis gear – and gets into role, it’s all good fun – surely? At least he didn’t wear those truly god awful grandad pants which rafa did earlier on in the year – let’s talk about that, eh?

And who’s to say that all the pomp and ceremony with rafa’s stars on his bag, rafa on his socks/back of his shoes is any less becoming? Fair is fair (that’s for you vulcan) – Sponsorship is the name of the game in multi media land. I happen to look through that and see the man, federer, the great tennis player that he is – if sponsors want to sign him up, then they are the experts in the business and choose their ‘stars’ wisely, don’t you think?

Oh von. I do feel for you. Now that you have lost your alter ego mindy. It must be great having conversations with yourself – what a laugh it is to see you arguing with yourself – I hope that you retook your psychology exams – I heard that you failed your last batch – Here’s a paragraph to help you on the exam you didn’t quite reach – it’s called ‘self denial’. I notice you didn’t reply to Nietzsche’s superman – probably becuase you don’t know what the hell I am talking about – out of your league von.

vulcan – whatever. seriously. if you want to listen to a deluded nutcase, your call.

Von, ‘Psychologists say that positive self-deception is a normal and advantageous part of most peoples lives, and that people lie to themselves about three things:

1) They see themselves in an implausibly positive light.
2) They think they have far more control over their lives than they actually do and
3) They think that the future will be better than the evidence of the present can possibly justify.

But, you are way beyond that now. You are on the other side of that particular mirror, lying to yourself is not going to help you anymore.

Try to get over this in a positive way.

October 28th, 2010 at 3:05 am

JCK, here is something else for you to consider. It seems to me that you are always discussing federer’s behaviour, how about nadal’s for a change? – just to keep it fair and unbiased.

I would be interested to hear your opinion on his behaviour on court? There seem to be plenty of examples out there for all players, you just seem to be fixated with federer. No one is perfect.

Nadal rips the officials
It’s not that Rafael Nadal has never been willing to butt heads with others. It’s just that you have to push him pretty hard before it happens.

“We’re finished with him,” he once said of former Spanish federation president Pedro Munoz, after witnessing some appalling behaviour that would take too long to relate here.

“I don’t have nothing to speak with this man,” he said after getting exasperated with former ATP head Etienne de Villiers’ plans for shaking up the tour.

At Wimbledon, though, there often seemed to be some nagging conflict. First, he couldn’t meet the Queen because it was scheduled for the same time he had to get ready for his practice.

Then, he got warned for receiving coaching from his uncle, Toni Nadal, during his five-setter against Phillip Petzschner in the third round. Rafa responded angrily, telling the umpire, “We gonna talk with the supervisor later.”

It didn’t stop him from being fined for the incident. “Sometimes in the past, Toni talk maybe too much,” Nadal maintained. “But not today, in my opinion.”

In the quarterfinals against Robin Soderling, he got ticked off once more. Early in the second set, the umpire decided to award a crucial point to Soderling instead of replaying it when Soderling successfully challenged the call.

Nadal did appear to have had a play on the ball, but his parting shot at the umpire still seemed a little paranoid: “So you want to see another No. 1?”

During that match, Soderling called for the trainer when Nadal was about to serve for the third set. The Spaniard wouldn’t criticize his opponent afterwards, having received mid-match treatments himself earlier in the tournament. But he did believe that the trainer took too long to arrive. “For me, the wrong thing is we wait for the physio five minutes,” he said.

Nadal has long shown a more opinionated side of himself when speaking in Spanish, and now looks to have become quite confident expressing himself in English as well.

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/wimbledon10/columns

October 28th, 2010 at 9:51 am

madmax,

Three data points:

Dostoevsky, Nietzsche, Ghandi

1. Dostoevsky: As the tattoo on Tipsarevic’s shoulder reads: “Beauty Will Save the World”
If Federer is slightly vain is that such a bad thing? I don’t think so.

2. Nietzsche’s Superman:
From what little I know about this book I understand that it can be misinterpreted in such a way that people think it’s purpose is to describe the gradient that I discussed in previous posts. If Von sees Roddick as an “overman” so be it…suffice it to say that I was struggling to beat back the laughter at the way you phrase some of your comments in reference to your perception that Von is a deluded egomaniac.

3. Ghandi:

A humble man who sought to find a way to see confluence and thought synchronization.(and yes he would of looked ridiculous out on the tennis court trying to hit a kick serve)

October 28th, 2010 at 10:54 am

Madmax,

Good morning :)

Can you re post that link? Doesn’t work?

Tx

October 28th, 2010 at 11:06 am

Vulcan: Madmax only learnt about Nietsche when I mentioned to you that Psychology is my first love, and I love philosophy, but can do without Nietsche. She’s a google queen and would never have known about the good man otherwise. This is someone who didn’t know the meaning of the word “moniker”, So go figure. I’m honest about my educational background, but is she? At one time she’s supposedly an English major, then she teaches deaf children, and now she’s a psych major. lOOL.

There’s a rule in psychology that one has to beat down another in order to be exalted. I think that’s appropos to Mad-max.

It’s sad that she has to attack 4 people to get rid of some of her frustrations, but what’s even more sad is that the moderators on this site publish her her demented p;osts ridiculing others . What’s wrong with this picture.

Maxi I leave you to the TT posters, and you know what I mean. Your rants here are a byproduct of what you aren’t allowed to do over there. I get, and many others get it.TNBA.

October 28th, 2010 at 11:32 am

correction: “Not the word *always*.” s/b now the word *always* is a goss exaggeration.

October 28th, 2010 at 11:58 am

Roger Federer. Greatest tennis player of all time. General nice guy.

Cheater?

Blasphemy, I know. But he did break rules Wednesday in his quarterfinal victory over Nikolay Davydenko at the Australian Open, and the move seemed to turn momentum his way.

What did he do? Federer went to the bathroom.

That sounds silly, but it’s actually a serious issue on tour. Players have made habit of pretending to cramp up when they’re losing, hoping to stop the opponent’s rhythm. So rules were changed, eliminating timeouts for cramps.

And now players are finding a new way to delay. Forget strategic cramping, this is strategic-, well, I’m not going to finish that sentence.

Federer was crushed in the first set and then took a bathroom break.

After the match, he explained why:

“When the sun comes from the side, the ball seems half the size and is just hard to hit. I never take toilet breaks, but I thought ‘Why not?’

I just hoped that with every minute it took, the sun would move another centimeter.”

He then threw in, as an afterthought, that he also had to go to the bathroom.

Well, tennis doesn’t have bathroom monitors. Yet. So we can’t say for sure what he did.

But Federer made it clear that he was looking for the break so the sun might set a little and wouldn’t be in his eyes. And the rules clearly state that a bathroom break “can be used for no other purpose” than going to the bathroom.

A few minutes after Federer returned, Davydenko fell to pieces.

http://tennis.fanhouse.com/2010/01/28/roger-federer-gives-new-meaning-to-being-no-1/

October 28th, 2010 at 12:10 pm

margot Says:

BTW do u like work of M C Escher?

Margot,

As far as art goes it’s not the kind of stuff that I find stimulating in terms of conveying any kind of a vibe…I tend to just view his works as a kind of a puzzle when I look at them (now) which tends to distract me from appreciating whatever emotion (if any) he was trying to convey. The work I like the best of his at the current time is the one that involves the gradual transition from fishes to birds called “Sky & Water I”. I’m pretty sure I read somewhere (I think it was in the book Godel, Escher, and Bach by Hofstadter) that his description of certain mathematical concepts in his work preceded they’re discovery by mathematicians, which is a prime example of a genius seeing the answer before anybody (including himself) has formulated the question.

October 28th, 2010 at 12:27 pm

Vucan: Yep, I know that work, I like that one also impossible stairs which is like that scene from metropolis. Just wondered cos it’s like that cube u were talking about.

October 28th, 2010 at 12:52 pm

Fedend,

For a second there I was going to take off the flack jacket thinking that this wasn’t mind chaff…but this article is from January…do we want to also post articles about Federer throwing temper tantrums when he was 12?

October 28th, 2010 at 12:53 pm

Vulcan: PS Ghandi quote is wonderful and old Shakey said much same thing, “fault lies in ourselves..” etc

October 28th, 2010 at 12:57 pm

Vulcan,
Madmax seems to be interested to go for a walk down the memory lane. So I thought I’ll accompany her.

October 28th, 2010 at 1:15 pm

Fedend,

You are not without scruples, don’t forget the tic-tac-toe board!

October 28th, 2010 at 1:35 pm

Fedend,

Fanhouse? Really?

http://tennis.fanhouse.com/2010/09/30/its-time-to-stop-rafael-nadals-cheating/5

October 28th, 2010 at 3:35 pm

Vulcan,

I’ll switch the 2 and 3. I don’t admire people I don’t like and I don’t like arrogant people, winners or losers alike.

Madmax,

Can we stick to the topic? This is a Federer thread. Do we have to bring Nadal in? Does it make Federer’s behavior more excusable because someone else also behaves badly? Two wrongs do not add to one right.

Isn’t Nadal the player representative on the board of the ATP? I don’t find it odd that he’s outspoken about the ATP’s officials. It’s his duty to speak up. BTW, some spectators in tennis matches who can understand Spanish posted that the things Toni Nadal yelled at his nephew were very generic encouragement such as “Move your feet!” It’s blown way out of proportion.

October 29th, 2010 at 1:05 am

Skeeze,

I know, I just wanted to say that if madmax applies the same yardsticks Federer too will come out as a cheat.

October 29th, 2010 at 11:19 am

I do not appreciate having my name brought up in yet another argument in which I have zero involvement. I also do not care to have myself referred to as anyone’s “alter ego”! It’s unfortunate that some must persist in dragging third parties into their self-indulgent rants.

I am quite capable of speaking for myself, when and how I wish to do so. It is getting really old when we must again bring in Rafa and throw more cheap shots at him, in order to somehow defend Fed or make him look better. Is that really what it’s come to here? Why not simply defend Fed on his merits and leave Rafa out of the conversation for once?

I have never quite understood how demeaning the greatest rival of one’s favorite player, can in any way, shape or form, be considered a cogent argument. It doesn’t address the issue of poor behavior on the part of a person’s favorite player, just serves to divert the discussion by bringing in someone else.

Kind of like bringing me into a discussion in which I had yet to even participate.

October 30th, 2010 at 1:03 am

skeezer,

no problem.

I think you’ll find this one works –

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/wimbledon10/columns/story?columnist=kamakshi_tandon&id=5361102

JCK,

that was my point. You can’t have it one way and not the other. you don’t need to go through skeezer to get through to me though.

Plus, you want to stick the point? then please do so. It doesn’t surprise me that you want to discuss Federer’s bad press, and yet when I try to provide something of the same nature related to rafa (reported), you choose to turn a blind eye. That’s okay JCK. Just be aware that you can’t have it both ways.

von – funny that. mindy appears. why should I be surprised?

I will try to ignore your distorted comments – you just bore me with your theatrics and your lies – Alice in Wonderland. Seems like your spelling is doing you no favours right now von. A bit more practise might help?

vulcan, thanks for the philosophy lesson. haven’t read much on ghandi, but nietzsche is more my thing.

fedend,

Fedend Says:
Vulcan,
Madmax seems to be interested to go for a walk down the memory lane. So I thought I’ll accompany her.

October 28th, 2010 at 1:15 pm

you would be the last person I would want to take a walk down memory lane with.

Fedend Says:
Skeeze,

I know, I just wanted to say that if madmax applies the same yardsticks Federer too will come out as a cheat.

October 29th, 2010 at 11:19 am

Fedend, you miss the point by a huge mile. I’ll let you work that one out.

You know as well as I do that Federer is no cheat. You want to believe the hype, that is your choice. What was reported about rafa was clear cheating on court – how can this be argued?

If you can provide a counter argument to this (which is what I was looking for), then please. I am all ears.

October 30th, 2010 at 10:14 am

skeezer,

here is one for you. What do you think?

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/505389-roger-federer-an-aging-king-so-much-more

what makes me laugh is that federer is the only one aging. Everyone is staying the same age!

October 30th, 2010 at 10:24 am

Re; Feds monogrammed stuff and the like. I don’t find that vain or arrogant in the slightest. The top players have them. Rafa has his glorious name on his shoes, has to wear a 500k watch immediately after a match, and if I had 15 GS titles I would have it tattooed on my forehead.

October 30th, 2010 at 10:59 am

skeeze,

I read the link you posted above – thanks.

I’d have 16 tatooed on my backside skeezer! :)

Have just watched the USO 2009 SF with novak and fed and just made me laugh when federer returned a shot to novak, whereby novak turned around, showed his backside to fed as if to say ‘this is where you need to hit it!’.

Very funny.

Your post was perfect timing!

October 30th, 2010 at 12:34 pm

Madmax,
“But Federer made it clear that he was looking for the break so the sun might set a little and wouldn’t be in his eyes. And the rules clearly state that a bathroom break “can be used for no other purpose” than going to the bathroom.”

http://tennis.fanhouse.com/2010/01/28/roger-federer-gives-new-meaning-to-being-no-1/

Federer has well and truly abused the rules.
If this not cheating then what is ??

October 30th, 2010 at 4:07 pm

fedend?

did he break the rules? I didnt think that taking a toilet break was breaking the rules?

Can you refer to the clause in the tennis book of rules which say this?

Want to talk breaking the rules? check out skeezer’s link above. I’ll do you a favour and re-post it here – be interested in your comments fed.

skeezerweezer Says:
Fedend,

Fanhouse? Really?

http://tennis.fanhouse.com/2010/09/30/its-time-to-stop-rafael-nadals-cheating/5

October 28th, 2010 at 3:35 pm

Here’s another one fed:

http://www.espn.co.uk/tennis/sport/story/52544.html

what’s your understanding of breaking the rules?

October 30th, 2010 at 4:25 pm

fed,

the one I think that is linked to skeezer’s is here.

http://orvillelloyddouglas.wordpress.com/2010/09/18/shocking-allegations-did-us-open-tennis-champion-rafael-nadal-admit-to-cheating-during-the-mens-final/

October 30th, 2010 at 4:33 pm

madmax,

You were the one who brought me into the conversation, so don’t start going off on anyone because of what you did. If you could try to just stick to the discussion and not bring in extraneous people in your ramblings, then you wouldn’t have to deal with me responding.

Don’t drag me down to your level. You have been up to your usual tricks, however, if you are going to do something, then you should try not to come across as amateurish and clumsy. Rafa fans at tennistalk know about your latest attempt to disrupt that site. Stop making it so absurdly obvious! You said the same things about Rafa on tennistalk, only using bad english in a poor attempt to hide who you really are.

Can’t you find something more worthwhile to do with your time? I realize that this has been a tough year for Fed fans, what with Rafa winning three slams, the career slam and making history in the process. Why not read the complete works of Neitzche while you are at it, since you seem to be such an expert on Superman? Why not read Tolstoy’s War and Peace. That way maybe you will have better things to do than one more time bouncing back and forth between this site and tennistalk.

Look who is hiding behind different screen names now! To think that you were the person who felt it was her personal mission in life to go outing people who used different screen names on tennis forums. Tsk, tsk! Some people never change.

Just be clear about why I came back here. If you want to bicker with someone, that’s fine with me, as long as you leave my name out of it!

October 30th, 2010 at 10:50 pm

Madmax,

Thanks for the great link on Fed. :), the King for the ages. Living legend.

October 31st, 2010 at 1:44 am

To Fedend, Mindy, Vulcan, JCK, Anna, Montecarlo, Zola, guy, Kimberly and other Nadal fans, great article about Nadal from Bleacher report..

“While on court, he is a fierce competitor but he has never smashed any rackets or hurled abuses at the linespeople or the umpires. Off-court, he is a shy and humble young man. He lives with his parents in Mallorca and he will tell you that he loves his mother, his sister and his girlfriend. A perfect role model for the new generation.

If the media people ask him if he is the greatest claycourter, he will remind them that that title belongs to Bjorn Borg. You point to his amazing haul of Grand Slam titles by age 24 and his remarkable h2h record against Roger Federer and try to proclaim him as the greatest. He vehemently denies the appellation.

He tells you that Roger Federer is the greatest and that you know nothing about tennis. He asks the rhetorical question, “You see the titles of him and you see the titles of me?”

He does not tell you that he is going to surpass Roger someday. Oh no, he humbly tells you, “The titles say he is much better than me and that’s the truth at the moment. I think that will be true all my life.”

So amazing is this modesty in an age of self-centred arrogant superstars that some are tempted to consider it a facade…”

Read more: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/505408-rafael-nadal-the-tennis-phenomenon-and-the-modest-young-man-from-mallorca

October 31st, 2010 at 2:15 am

MAD-max:
“von – funny that. mindy appears. why should I be surprised?

“I will try to ignore your distorted comments – you just bore me with your theatrics and your lies – Alice in Wonderland. Seems like your spelling is doing you no favours right now von. A bit more practise might help?”

I pity you, because you’re in total out to lunch mode, perpetually.

With respect to distorted comments and theatrics, anyone with one-quarter of a brain could see through your theatrics and lies. Every time you attack others with your nonsensical ramblings, you appear more ridiculous, and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know who’s the crazy one. For example, you have attacked four (4) people on this thread without any justification whatsoever.

Hey, I never claimed to be the spelling and/or English Major you profess to be, but I’ll say this much, what I’ve learnt and forgotten, you’ll probably never be privileged to embrace. You’ve picked up a few things here and there from writing on these blogs, and now you’re this learned English major? sheesh. But here’s a tip for you, when you write anyone’s name, proper English dictates that we use a *Capital* letter. You butchered poor Nietzsche’s name by writing it with a lowercase *n*. tut, tut. Now, go and write 200 lines spelling his name properly.

And, you and I know perfectly well, you know nothing of Nietzsche, but is only trying to impress others that you’re very acquainted with his works, because I happened to mention him. It flatters your shallow/deluded mind. Let’s not go there with spelling, you didn’t even know what was a moniker and had other posters laughing at your ignorance. And, in case you don’t know it, no one is in a classroom, which translates to, perfect spelling is not mandatory. This is a blog, GET IT. YOU SOUND VERY INFANTILE WHEN YOU MAKE AN ISSUE OF SUCH THINGS. The same goes for your rants. It’s kid’s stuff, which is what tickles your fancy, isn’t it?

BTW, whatever happenend to your code of honor, whereby you never badmouth other players? Anyway, carry on as smartless-ly as you’re accustomed to do.

Here’s a little tidbit from Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche:

“Among the emotion-driven, neither love nor any other emotion has any meaning.”

And another: “I never make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect.”

Now, BEHAVE YOURSELF.

October 31st, 2010 at 3:19 am

Skeeze,

it was a great read wasn’t it? I enjoyed it too!

you’re funny, von/mindy.

I love it when you make up stories. I just laugh even louder.
You would make a great comedian.
People (and that includes me) are entitled to disagree with you, you just don’t like it when they do and that’s the truth of it.

von, if you knew anything about the education system in the UK, you will know that Teachers qualify in two disciplines before they teach – it’s fairly standard over here. A lot of English teachers will go for History/Religious Education and philosophy, sometimes ICT, but there are a whole range of disciplines that they can choose from. I needed to clarify that with you as I don’t make up stories. Unlike some.

October 31st, 2010 at 4:52 am

jojostruys,

Thanks for the post, I think it’s safe to say that Nadal doesn’t see Federer as arrogant. As far as the question of whether Nadal’s modesty is false and a facade I find that particular view to be that of those whose mission is to dig for dirt in their quest to find fault.

About Federer and cheating: The Fanhouse site from what I have seen is basically the National Enquirer of sports publications. Until someone, somewhere can reference the statement “can be used for no other purpose” in the ATP rules (I couldn’t find it here http://www.atpworldtour.com/~/media/2654F428CEAC45139BB75DBF709F14AF.ashx)
that they used in the article I am not going to believe anything else that site has to say.
One thing is clear, Federer did violate an unwritten rule amongst players but he did come clean about it…as did Nadal about his breaking the rules.

October 31st, 2010 at 10:58 am

Vulcan:

One thing is clear, Federer did violate an unwritten rule amongst players but he did come clean about it…as did Nadal about his breaking the rules.

October 31st, 2010 at 10:58 am

Absolute rubbish – and what is the so called ‘unwritten rule’ vulcan? to have a phone conversation with someone about tennis?

untowards about that. It’s just people want to make something out of nothing. You said it. The National Enquirer, one of the lowest form of sensationalist papers in the USA, next to The People. Why would you want to even believe something like this? Not even worth discussing.

October 31st, 2010 at 1:03 pm

madmax,

The unwritten rule is that you don’t pull some BS that interrupts your opponents momentum. From what I have seen this is one of the most volatile issues that exists among players when it comes to violating an honor system that the players have agreed upon. I have seen many, many examples of players taking injury timeouts at critical times in the match with the APPARENT intended purpose of derailing their opponents momentum. As just one example take a look at this dispute between Mardy Fish and PH Mathieu where Fish got angry because PHM took an injury timeout during Fish’s serve:

http://www.youtube.com/user/vlx277#p/a/u/1/TpSt5W49Oho

October 31st, 2010 at 5:05 pm

jojostruys,

You will see that Rafa can’t win for losing on this site. No matter what he says or how he says it, the usual suspects will trot out their familiar propaganda. It never changes.

A few of the more obsessive Fed fans are just going off the deep end because they simple cannot deal with the reality of Rafa’s phenomenal year. In their alternate reality, Fed must continue to win everything and dominate until he retires. Of course, that’s not how it goes. Every great champion must inevitably get older and lose their dominance. One would think that Fed fans would be grateful for all that he has been able to accomplish, the fact that he hasn’t had any serious injuries in his career and has enjoyed a good run at the top.

Unfortunately, for a select few, that is not enough. Greedy and selfish as always, they will verbally blast any player who dares to take away from Fed that which they believe is rightfully and solely his alone. Rafa gets the worst of it, because he has been the most successful against Fed. In their eyes, it’s against God’s plan.

Rafa has given Fed the respect he deserves. I admire Rafa’s humility and believe that it is part of who he is, how he was brought up. That doesn’t mean that a fierce pride doesn’t live inside him and motivate him to win and make his mark. He is not done yet. When pressed to comment on this whole business of who is the greater player, Rafa answered honestly that Fed has the honor at this point in time. However, he did add that we will know about his place in history when he is done with his career. Rafa is in his prime and has a lot more to accomplish before he’s done.

I have to believe that if Fed could see what some of his fans have said in his name, the lengths they have gone to on some forums, he would be truly embarrassed. He and Rafa have a genuine affection and respect for one another. How unfortunate that it cannot be the same for their fans.

October 31st, 2010 at 5:53 pm

Just to clarify,

It appears that Federer did technically break the rules:

The statement in question can be found in the ITF rules on Page 19 under “Toilet Break” here:

http://www.itftennis.com/shared/medialibrary/pdf/original/IO_46962_original.PDF

I still think that Fanhouse is a tabloid for sports news but hey, even some tabloids are known for being accurate even though the information they provide is intended to generate controversy.

October 31st, 2010 at 6:33 pm

Fed cheats at Tennis. Yes, repeatedly, that is how he won 16 GS, by continually takin well time TB’s. LMAO. Next thing is Fed will get fined for court coaching, using ITO’s to cheat,, taking too much time in between serves to cheat, and pickin his nose during changeovers to cheat. WTF?

November 1st, 2010 at 1:13 am

BTW If the ATP thought for a nano second that Feds TB was breaking the rules they would have fined him or penalized him for doing so like breaking the rule of court coaching. There was no infraction because there was no fine/penalty by the officials governing the event . Oh wait. It was another conspiracy. Not!

Let’s go back to uh….oh yeah , arrogant. Let’s find some other ridiculous concoction to bring down the reigning GOAT. It’s called grasping at straws.

November 1st, 2010 at 1:21 am

“Rafa has given Fed the respect he deserves. I admire Rafa’s humility and believe that it is part of who he is, how he was brought up. That doesn’t mean that a fierce pride doesn’t live inside him and motivate him to win and make his mark.”

Mindy, thank you for wording things so eloquently and acting as the voice of reason here…it’s a tough job but somebody has to do it.

November 1st, 2010 at 9:27 am

Don’t forget to vote on the ATP site for your favorite everyone. The award will be given out in London for the Fans Favorite.

Guess who I voted for!!!!!

November 1st, 2010 at 9:32 am

Since Federer and Roddick are both competing in Basel this week how about this one from the archives: – was this the best shot Federer has ever hit in his career or what?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z9MXo3Bq-I&feature=related

November 1st, 2010 at 11:28 am

Great defense by Fed; thanks for posting Vulcan. I wasn’t sure if Roddick had played Basel before. Against most Andy’s smash volley would’ve been a put-away, although right now there are a number of great defenders in the game. Murray comes to mind as someone who continually returns shots that “should’ve” been winners, and of course Rafa…

November 1st, 2010 at 11:40 am