Federer Thinks he Can Still “Dominate”
by Sean Randall | October 7th, 2010, 10:32 pm

Despite the troubles and the losses this year, Roger Federer still think he has the game and the ability to dominate anyone when he’s at his very best. ADHEREL

Speaking to the press in Hong Kong, he said, “I’m a strong believer that when I’m at my best I can beat anyone, I can even dominate anyone but there’s many guys around that play really, really well and Rafa, being the number one guy, is a tough guy to beat.”

Rafa, a tough guy to beat? Check.

Federer, who’ll be the No. 3 seed in Shanghai next week, added that “Stories in tennis move around very quickly. I went through a bad patch as well and I got back to world number one by winning last year’s French and Wimbledon and playing really well through the American summer as well.”

Federer’s always been a man of confidence, which is partly what has made him so great. If he think he can still dominate, good for him. At age 29 he’s not getting any younger and I think his days of “domination” on a regular basis are now over.

But I give him credit, he never holds back while keeping that positive attitude.

You Might Like:
Let Jo-Wilfried Tsonga Explain Why Women Players Can’t Dominate Like The Top Men, It’s Emotional, No?
Serena Williams “Absolutely” Thinks She Can Win The Calendar Grand Slam This Year
Roger Federer Returning To No. 1? Tim Henman Thinks So
Roger Federer: Rafa And Novak Will Pass My Grand Slam Title Record, And It’s OK
Sampras a Current Day Top 5 Player? Federer Thinks So

Don't miss any tennis action, stay connected with Tennis-X

Get the FREE TX daily newsletter

70 Comments for Federer Thinks he Can Still “Dominate”

Gannu Says:

atlast something from federer.. was dying to see him back in action..Lets see how he does in Shanghai.. very tournament win is a bonus.. I am just mazed by his positive attitude… He has at max 2 Gslams before he retires…

Andrew Miller Says:

Agassi did it and his game, solid as it was (few hit the ball as cleanly in the history of the game), Federer’s game is better in every departments, most importantly in the serve and movement(with honorable mention to the world’s best forehand, one-handed backhand, volleys, and transition game). The weaknesses in the armor this year: LACK OF FOCUS, SUSPECT TRAINING, INJURY. For the first time since mono-world, Federer’s looked almost tired in the sets he’s lost; in his close losses he has been taking the eye off the ball; and Federer, looking less grooved with his timing off, seemed like he did not prepare well.

Could be because he has the twins in tow, but cant really blame it on that. I suspect it’s the lack of match play.

Ben Pronin Says:

He didn’t say he can dominate the way he used to, he meant in matches. Basically, Federer at his best will crush anyone. That’s what he’s saying. It’s just that we don’t see that best anymore.

Fedend Says:

There is nothing wrong in Federer “thinking” that he can dominate Nadal which he has never ever done before. Every Tom, Dick and Harry can always “think” and “dream” of anything they want.

Fedend Says:

Even Sampras at his best can beat anyone now.

Brian Wong Says:

Hi there. I have been following Roger’s career since 2003 and he has created a legacy which no one can match, until today. Although tennis has a few fit, strong and younger players such as Rafa, Djokovic and Soderling, Roger will always maintain his legacy because of his positive attitude, his belief in the game, his ability to perform and his mental toughness. He is the player to watch and always the favorite. He may be No.3, for now, but he will definitely, once more dominate the game. He will not stop until he reaches his goal as the best ever. I am keen to see him in action again and to win the year ending tour finals. Roger, all the best and you have my support.

steve-o Says:

Federer has resources which others don’t have, and which don’t decline with age: the biggest and most varied arsenal of shots ever, matchless anticipation and court sense, and keen tactical acumen. The question is whether he has the will and desire to make use of those resources to develop a winning game plan in his later career.

He’s a free man now that he’s got all the records, he no longer has to worry about history, and can play for love of the game alone and the pursuit of excellence. His best and most beautiful tennis is still ahead of him.

C’mon Roger, I know you can do it.

pro rafa Says:

when at his best roger federer can dominate any player
well… since 20074 i wont to know when federer has been at his best against rafa!!! in grand slams it tis very difficult to beat both roger n rafa cuz 9 out of 10 times, they keep the ball in play by hitting a jaw dropping winner… now nadal is proving to be very consistent in the trend n federers twins seem to have taken a toll on his mental strength… will be very interesting to see him play a nadal again now that rafa has more weapons in his arsenal than just speed
i’d love to se federer dominate once more even though we know that that is not going to happen especially with rafa at the top of his game

pro rafa Says:

i meant 2007

Roger Federer Arrives in Madird [Video] Says:

[…] Federer Thinks he Can Still “Dominate” […]

i am it Says:

I believe you Fed that you can beat anyone on any surface if you are at your best.
What caught my attention from the same interview was his positive attitude did not ignore the ground reality:“But there’s many guys around right now playing really, really well and Rafael (Nadal) being the No. 1 guy is a tough guy to beat…Obviously he’s a stronger player today than a few years ago but the same counts for me. Even though the ranking has slipped maybe a little bit, I’ve only had time to improve as well and become physically stronger, mentally stronger as a player,” Federer said.

As for his improvement, he may have in a couple of areas, at least he is willing to. Gotta appreciate that.

Huh Says:


Huh Says:

In terms of rational thinking, Fedend<<< Tom,Dick & Harry combo <<<<<<Fed

smitcha Says:

what an ego. so he has no delusions that the only reason he won the french and wimbledon so easily was because nadal was injured at the french and out at wimby. what a guy!

Huh Says:

Fed has the most perfect game of all, like Laver, and he’s right on top. So haters gotta live with it.

Huh Says:

Nadal was beaten by Soderling fair and square in FO 09, so don’t cry buckets over it, bloody Fed hating Rafanatics! If you wanna say that Rafa was havin problem in FO 09, the same could also be said about Fed in many vital slams that he lost to players in 2008,09 or 10. So wat’s d big deal?

smitcha Says:

Roger. Over and OUT!

Gordo Says:

smitcha – (hope the scar on the front of your forehead heals) –

The “only” reason someone wins a Grand Slam – if there is “only” one reason – is because he is able to defeat 7 opponents in a row in best of 5 matches. And so far, Roger Federer has done it more than any man in the history of the game.

smitcha Says:

stick a fork in him–he’s done

Skeezerweezer Says:

Wow went from why Fed really one the FO and Wimby to “he’s done”. Sense a wee but of jealosy….lol

smitcha Says:

#3 and falling

Skeezerweezer Says:

Yes #3 & Rafa is a zillion points ahead. I don’t expect Fed to get back to #1 anytime soon if at all, but I wouldn’t count him out for GS.

Eliza Says:

He did not say he could dominate forever past the age of 29.
He said “I’m a strong believer that when I’m at my best I can beat anyone, I can even dominate anyone but there’s many guys around that play really, really well and Rafa, being the number one guy, is a tough guy to beat.”
If you are going to write a double edged article – get your facts right. x x

Gordo Says:

The interesting difference now between Sampras and Federer as the latter joins the former as a great who will soon retire is that when Sampras called it quits he probably thought most of the records were safe and didn’t realize that the guy who beat him the only time they met would tear up the record book. If he had felt his records were threatened who knows? He might have stayed an extra year or two.

Federer is all too aware that Rafa is in a position to overtake his own records, and so I think Fthe Swiss will be determined to make the chore a little more difficult for Nadal. I agree he will probably pack it in after 2012, which as noted gives him 8 more chances to add to his record total.

Even if he were to win 2 or 3 more Nadal would still have a shot. Nadal is that dominant… today.

I think the “x” factor here is not if Fed can win any more slams, but rather can the field find ways to prevent Rafa from winning everything, and that includes is there a phenom who is 18 or 19 that could take Rafa down as regularly in a couple of years the way Rafa has been able to handle Fed 2 out of every 3 times they meet?

Only time will tell, not idiotic referencing to bad pop songs.

Ben Pronin Says:

Does it really matter if Federer’s ranking falls? I know people want him to break the weeks record, but can’t Sampras have something? Besides that, though, I think it would be good if Federer had to face tougher opponents in earlier rounds. It’ll result in more losses, but it can also sharpen him and make him tougher for every odd tournament when his game happens to click.

What if I said the only reason Nadal won Wimbledon this year was because Federer had back and leg problems? Or back in 08 Federer wasn’t fully recovered from the draining disease that is mono. Cmon, the players beat who’s put in front of them. It’s not Federer’s fault Nadal wasn’t there to play him just like it wasn’t Nadal’s fault he won his 3 slams this year without playing Federer even once (a monumental first, imo).

Tom, Dick, and Harry Says:

Fedend Says:

There is nothing wrong in Federer “thinking” that he can dominate Nadal which he has never ever done before. Every Tom, Dick and Harry can always “think” and “dream” of anything they want.

Yes, he did, at World Tour final in ShangHai 2007. Beat Nadal 6-4, 6-1 playing serve and volley. Nadal CAN be dominated on a fast court by an attacking player on fire. It doesn’t even take a Federer. Just look at Tsonga AO 2008 semi.

smitcha Says:

okay, here’s a good pop song:


Kimberly Says:

Federer can still play at a very high level for many many matches, good enough to win tourneys and beat anyone including my Rafa, it’s just more often than he used to he’s having matches like USO 2010 Novak. Which results in more losses than he used to have, hence less points and a lower ranking.

It’s not Fed’s fault Rafa wasn’t in Paris 2009. Just like it’s not Rafas fault Fed didn’t play USO 2010 (but he was one point away, and I wanted to see that match so badly!) or any of the other three GS fed won.

I bet Fed would give a lot to beat Rafa at RG before he retires. Never know but I personally don’t see it happening. If Rafa stays healthy and energized and focused (a big IF) I see him as virtually unbeatable at RG until another real clay courter comes up.

skeezerweezer Says:


Ok, this is for you. You only can post oldie Roy O? All due respect to him, great voice.

GOAT FED to the music of GOAT MJ


“Don’t stop till you get enough”


fay Says:

As much as I admire the mans game I wish he would be a little less arrogant. I am sure he can dominate, he is a marvel, a huge talent and master of the game, but that is for others to say not him! This is one of the reasons I am not his primary fan. All this”how wonderful I am” talk makes me cringe, never did care for people like that however true it may be.

skeezerweezer Says:


To each his/her own.

Just curious, who is your fav?

Polo Says:

Federer was the only player not named Nadal who won a major this year. He is ranked 3rd in the world. He can say what he said.

steve-o Says:

Why is it that people think it’s “arrogant” for the man who won more majors than anyone in history, completed the career slam, made every major semifinal for a period of over five years, won two majors five times in a row, who holds the open-era records for winning streaks on grass and hard courts, who was world #1 for over four straight years, to believe he can dominate again?

Surely he has proven himself enough that he can be upfront about his ambitions without being called arrogant.

There’s a bizarre phenomenon with Federer: the more he wins, the more he has to prove. Why is that, I wonder?

Sam Says:

To smitcha rafa won the us open and wimbeldon cause fed was not in the finals that’s right hahaha hahaha now fed is back to take what is rightfully his all four grand slams next year and send rafa fishing hahaha

Thangs Says:

Yes Mr.Federer, Serena can beat anyone when she is 100%

HAHA Says:

Sam then Federer won the FO in 09 cause Nadal was not there? or Wimbeldon cause Nadal didn’t play….hmm what about when Fed cried when Rafa beat his @@ in Australia….we can’t compare like that. Fed and Rafa had played and Rafa is ahead by the numbers…I like Fed and Rafa and wish them the best to both..

BeBop4000 Says:

I would expect any champion to say much the same thing. However, it’s time for Roger to wake up and smell the coffee. meaning…..(a) His best tennis is behind him. (b)He is incapable of making any adjustment(s) in his game to help back up his statement and (c) As long as Rafa is in the same tournament, Roger will always be playing for the runner-up trophy, at best.

Clive Smith Says:

Roger Federer is right on his best day he can beat ANYONE. His game is the most beautiful to watch and he’s a great bonus for the sport. Some of the shots he’s pulled off are the best ever. His only weakness at preesent is is lack of focus at crucial moments. I just hope he wins a few more slams making his final exit after beating Rafa in a Wimbledon final.

jojostruys Says:

Tennis Planet: http://tennisplanet.wordpress.com/2010/10/08/heres-proof-federers-lost-it-completely/

Here’s proof Federer’s lost it – completely.

“Obviously he (Nadal) is a stronger player today than a few years ago but the same counts for me even though the ranking has slipped maybe a little bit.”

“With a few minor adjustments I think I can really beat the best without a problem. Without being arrogant but I know I have the game and I’m playing really well right now,”

“I have no intention to quit the game and I am looking forward to the future.”


What’s that famous quote of mine “Under promise, over deliver”? Talk about creating a monster – all by yourself. These are EXACTLY the statements Federer SHOULDN’T be barking out right about now. Is that even a no brainer now? Geeeezzzzzzzzzzzz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And that ‘no intention to quit’ crap shouldn’t be uttered even on a super direct question like ‘Are you planning to quit’ forget about when no one is even bringing it up. Nadal’s camp must be ROFL watching Federer self destruct psychologically without even stepping on the court.

How about beginning each presser from now on with “I am not retiring today”? Isn’t that the final destination of the road you are on today?

How stupid do you freaking have to be to be thinking that these words will wrest some kind of advantage back from your competition. How can his camp stand and let this go on?

Wouldn’t it be far advisable to say some stuff like this?

I have had a challenging season despite the AO title but as a competitor it only motivates me to work even harder to get back to winning ways as much as possible given the age and everything else splashed on my plate. But even if nothing materializes for whatever reason I am more than happy with what I have already achieved. I will continue to play as long as I have the passion for it – irrespective of how many titles I win.

If not, why not just revisit Mike Tyson’s famous words about Lennox Lewis’s kids and remove all speculation as to where you are headed?

Polo Says:

“Under promise, over deliver”

I like that quote. That is what Nadal does. Makes he look even better at the end.

jeffry Says:

Federer is already over, it’s only a dream, he’d better to say something calm and down on the earth, he’ll not be more than semi in Shanghai Master 2010

guy Says:

i think federer is right in that he is actually a better player than years ago. and still a contender as much as murray and novak. but his statements are the usual disrespectful bullshit he’s well known for. claiming he can beat anyone is one thing, and quite reasonable. claiming he can dominate anyone and beat the best ‘without a problem’is absurd. naturally he’s an ego maniac, that’s been clear for a long time. actually i remember listening to rolandgarros radio, matt cronin was even mentioning how irked he was at fed’s self obsession, impossible to find him or his entourage without RF initials plastered all over them.
but now federer is just sounding pathetic.

Fedend Says:

I dont know why the Fedtards here are pouring the anger against me.
I never criticised Federer for making such statements.
He has to do this to keep his sponsors (nike, etc), fans and media happy. Even after Rafa came out with the impossible hatrick his sponsorship deals havent even reached half of Federer’s present sponsorship deals.
There is a huge amount of money involved here.

Its very obvious that Federer still has massive number of fans compared to Rafa, this will be the case even if Rafa wins another 10 slams.

These days Federer is regularly overplaying and overhyping his chances ahead of any tournament and as soon as he loses he brings up back issues, leg issues, cloud issues, etc. He has to do this to keep his fans and sponsors believing that Federer is still the best in world. And it works well for him. He knows how to be in the news always irrespective of his game and he steals the media space and fan following from anyone else (Ex. AO 2009 final).

Ben Pronin Says:

If that’s not criticism then I don’t know what is.

Has anyone watched Djokovic play by any chance? I’m wondering what his serve is looking like. The one clip Tom posted of him and Roddick playing showed Djokovic serving once and it looked like the motion has really improved. And in his last 2 matches, he’s got 7 aces and only 1 DF. And both of the matches were pretty routine (compared to his whopping 2 aces against Tsonga over 5 sets in Australia).

steve-o Says:

“Even after Rafa came out with the impossible hatrick his sponsorship deals havent even reached half of Federer’s present sponsorship deals.”

“Its very obvious that Federer still has massive number of fans compared to Rafa, this will be the case even if Rafa wins another 10 slams.”

“he steals the media space and fan following from anyone else”

Such a totalitarian mentality on display here! It’s not enough for Nadal to displace Federer as the top player, not enough to complete the career slam at the tender age of 24, not enough to win three majors in a row, he must be LOVED more than Federer, the sponsors must give him MORE money, else the Nadal fanatics are furious and resentful and bitter and know no peace.

As Machiavelli said, it’s far, far easier to be feared than to be loved. Any schoolyard bully can inspire mass fear just by kicking everyone’s ass. Mass love, that’s much rarer.

Love is not won by force, it is given freely from the heart. That’s what makes it so precious. And people like “Fedend” use the language of theft, that somehow he’s stealing the audience’s love by some devious stratagem.

He’s not sneaky; precisely the opposite, and that’s why he’s loved for his openness and straightforward nature.

Someone like “Fedend” (and even the screenname concedes the primacy of Federer, though in the negative) won’t be satisfied until everyone is reduced to a broken, empty, slavishly worshipful shell of a human being like Winston Smith at the end of 1984: “He loved Little Rafa”.

And even then he’ll still be tormented by that tiny sliver of doubt. “Maybe they don’t mean it. Maybe they’re faking. Maybe they’re just saying it to avoid more humiliation. HOW CAN I EVER REALLY BE SURE THEY LOVE HIM FOR HIM?!!!”

Some people are never truly happy unless they are absolutely certain everyone else is miserable. That’s “Fedend” in a nutshell.

Polo Says:

I would like to wait and see what Federer does in his next tournament. Action always speaks lounder than words. Let us see if his game will match his statements.

Huh Says:

Ok, let me set the record straight: none has ever come close to beating Fed at his best/near best except Rafa at WIM 07. In fact Safin is the only guy who has beaten Fed at his best (in AO 05). It’s obvious that Fed at his best is unbeatable by any of the current guys on any surface except to Nadal on clay. It’s high time people accept the truth. And this is the truth!!!

And I agree completely with what Polo says: Fed is the only guy apart from Rafa to win a slam in 2010, so he’s every right to voice his opinion without being lamely accused of being arrogant. You don’t know or can’t imagine how gifted Fed is and what he’s already achieved; in the wake of this, it’s nothing abnormal of him to say that he’s great, nor is it doubtful, only it’s being truthful and honest. Live with it! Just coz you hate someone doesn’t mean he’s arrogant or all that.

Huh Says:

Fantastic post at 3.59 by steve-o, agree with it.

Huh Says:

Nadtard Fedend and Nadal worshipper ‘guy’ need to wake up to the truth. The only problem that they’ve is that they’re simply jealous of Fed being loved more than Nadal worldwide, SO FAR. Good to be the arrogant smug narcissists that they’re, which they prove by time and again making pointless, baseless, illogical, angry, provocative statements directed against Fed. Pity on them. They can’t see one bad in Nadal but all bad in Fed! Lolz are in store.

Huh Says:

Hopefully Fed will soon bounce back and win another slam so that Nadtard guy and Fedend will again go on their familiar sour grapes campaign against Fed and give us more laugh.

Huh Says:

Bringing up issues on loss is not Fed’s trick.

Huh Says:

Fed will be criticised on his loss even if he gives credit to opponents or just on opining what went against him. This is hilarious, to say the least.

grendel Says:

Ben:”Does it really matter if Federer’s ranking falls? I know people want him to break the weeks record, but can’t Sampras have something?”

First of all, we’re greedy, Ben. But then, there’s this to consider: How many of Fed’s records will be left by the time Nadal has finished? Certainly the semi-final streak, and very likely the “weeks record”. Not necessarily the big one, though (no.of slams). That said, I agree now, have changed my tune a bit, it would be good for Sampras to retain a big record. Won’t complain if Fed gets it, though!

jojostruy’s post is actually a straight quote from tennisplanet – a typically provocative piece, in that one never knows how much TP actually believes what he says, and how much he is trying to stimulate posting. A good post, though.


I’ve come to respect what you write, and since your take on Federer is (in spirit if not in language) almost identical to Zola’s (you are much more objective on Nadal than Zola, however), I am beginning to think I was incorrect, in some respects, w.r.t. Zola’s take on Federer.

There are various people who find Federer intolerably arrogant – SG, for example. I’ve long since accepted this, because I am convinced he does not have an axe to grind, in other words his distaste for Federer the person (as opposed to player) is not a covert way of boosting his own favourite – this is definitely the case with some Federer bashers.

How you see someone is,I suppose, personal – so there’s no real arguing with it. Nevertheless, accusations of arrogance and so on are rarely, if ever, objective. What you see as preening, I might see as funny – and who’s going to adjudicate? The RF initials “plastered all over the place” – it raises a smile in me; it’s daft, certainly, most things to do with fame are: and there you have it. We live very much in a celebrity culture, Federer is nothing if not normal – I’ve always maintained that, he’s an ordinary, unimaginative rather nice guy who happens to be a genius tennis player. Federer is (unlike the thoughtful Nadal or Roddick) the last person to question the norms of the culture we inhabit. His fame is almost unimaginable to people like us; how is he going to handle it? His way, basically, is not to question it. And somehow, because he is not in himself a controversial type of person, he remains remarkably modest. Yes, sounds a paradox? But it’s true. Apart from his tennis, he is very unassuming. And that just isn’t the case with all kind of celebrities, including many tennis stars.

But what about the tennis? First of all, perhaps because he has such a good ear and speaks fluently, you imagine he’s like an Englishman or American. Not true. His English vocabulary is actually quite small, and I don’t think he understands quite simple nuances in the English language which are instantly intelligible to the man in the street. But that’s not obvious. And then there’s the interviews. As a genuine tennis afficiando, I think he quite likes interviews – nevertheless, he has to deal with an uncommon number, always tending to ask the same thing too (are you basically finished, Mr.Federer? Any point in you carrying on? – that’s the sub-text.) How do you respond to this sort of stuff? Sometimes, with a bit of asperity I should think, wouldn’t you? A bit of irritable exaggeration, perhaps? “No problem in beating….” If you don’t start off by disliking Federer, you don’t have any difficulty in seeing such statements in context – you thus give him the sort of latitude you would give to your friends or even to yourself, when you don’t take everything absolutely literally as if some kind of objective statement about the universe is being made. People need to lighten up a bit, when talking about Federer, in my opinion. He’s a funny, geeky fellow, ever so normal, perhaps a little bit boring after a few beers.

Finally, the comment that Federer is actually a better player than he was that guy makes is not so innocent as it sounds. What he means is that Federer has been forced to improve by the Nadals and Djokovics etc, but he’s still not quite as good as them (apart from serve). That’s a point of view, but it’s highly contentious. It’s obviously true that Federer has been forced to respond to younger talent, and has brought some new shots to the table. But much, also, has been lost, just in the nature of things, biology being what it is. It is bizarre to deny this.

margot Says:

grendel: his mother is S. African, do you think therefore his second language is Africaans? Not being provocative here, I feel, due to his mother, his English must be quite good.
von: hi! I do remember that and now rather ruefully reflecting. But, whatever the circumstances, I feel Andy R gives his all on the court, he looked bushed at the end of his match with Monfils, I thought.
Whereas Andy M, seems quite lost at the mo. and often seems to lack these “guts.” Yes, I’m depressed…:(

margot Says:

von: replied 2 u on fedthread…..love from a dimwit…

grendel Says:

margot – his English is definitely good. But I think it’s deceptive, partly because he clearly has a good ear. That can mask the fact of a small vocab. So far as I know, Swiss German is his first language, then either French or German. Then English – no idea about Afrikaans. However, I don’t think the language thing is nearly as relevant to the point I was trying to make as all the endless interviews. And that in turn takes a back seat compared to a person’s disposition. Some people, for whatever reason, are just disposed to dislike Federer. THEN they see the “arrogance”. As opposed to they dislike him BECAUSE of the “arrogance”. I don’t say that’s universal, but it strikes me as pretty common.

mem Says:


so, we are nadal worshippers! aren’t you the pot calling the kettle black.

rafafans are supposed to be jealous of roger. i’m still trying to figure out why. as far as i can see, rafa is doing just fine. why would his fans need to envy roger? roger doesn’t have anything that rafa is stressing over,neither am i; quite the contrary! it seems to me that roger and his fans are the ones always concerned about what rafa will do next. it appears that you guys are the ones with the jealousy and fear.

as usual, your thinking is very child-like! who cares who fans love the most.

nadal didn’t get to where he is because fans loved him less or more. fans don’t play the matches! they don’t win titles! they make predictions. state opinions and criticize!

popularity doesn’t win matches. being loved the world over doesn’t win matches. i see you’re back to old self again, talking loud and spewing out the same nonsense.

sometimes, i wish players would shut their mouths about what they can and cannot do and in the words of the nike promo: JUST DO IT!

Siddy Says:

Dominate?- NO
Compete?- YES

steve-o Says:

“who cares who fans love the most.”

Um, the fans care.

Y’know, the ones who make it possible for these athletes to be paid millions of dollars to hit a little ball around all day, and without whom said athletes would have to get a normal job like everyone else.

But, hey, you’re right. Who gives a damn about the people who make these elite athletes’ lifestyles possible?

mem Says:


don’t be so melodramatic, you are misunderstanding the context! my point is, it’s petty to compare how many fans love roger to how many fans love nadal. what does it matter? will it change anything? maybe you care, i certainly don’t. when fans pay to see a match, they are not just helping to pay nadal or federer’s salary, but a whole lot of players benefit from fans buying tickets and other things.

when people start comparing fan bases, it’s an indication that they have run out of things to use against a certain player. it’s just a childish way of searching for something that favors one player over the other. the fan base is what it is! fans pick and choose who they like to support and they buy tickets to whom they like to see. like i said, i don’t poll how many fans loves whom. fans who loves tennis do not have to be in love with a certain player to pay to see a match. bottom line is, some of this stuff that posters come up with is simply a desperate attempt to make their favorite player appear greater than another player. it’s elementary!

Skeezerweezer Says:

Your self imagined fictional fan base theory has been the most laughable long winded thing I have seen since in a long time, I can’t believe I read it, No worries , it’s only my opinion.

contador Says:

grendel, just have to comment on your post @ 11:37 am.

as usual, when you describe what you think federer’s personality is like, it resonates. this part is really the way i perceive him too:

“he’s a funny, geeky fellow, ever so normal, perhaps a little bit boring after a few beers.”

maybe those who cannot stand him also cannot stand to watch the vid of him yucking it up, playing an arcade car racer game. or they don’t see what i do when he’s in one of his giggle fits.

to me something is definitely lost in translation when it comes to his english. he is far more relaxed speaking his swiss – german.

he’s misunderstood by those who think he’s arrogant. just me.

his critics are harsh. many make him out to be far more cunning and calculating than what is reality.

Fedend Says:

Again FEDTARDS are putting words in my mouth.

I never ever mentioned that mentioned I am worried that Federer has more fans and earns more money than Nadal. I just stated the facts and reasons behind Federer’s statements. If I were Federer I would have also made similar statements to protect my legacy and income. Personally I would take that. Its not a CRITICISM, Im just putting things into the right perspective.

I am just happy that Nadal wins and kicks everyones ass everytime he gets on to the court. I dont bother whether what he earns or not, Im not even going to get 0.000001% share from his earnings.

Huh Says:


M not d pot calin d ketl back, nevr was! I dont wana argu wid u about myself, I know wat I m!

Fedend Says:

And personally I dont have any grudge against Federer.

Federer has only helped Rafa by setting very high standards to emulate.
But for Federer I dont think Rafa would have improved this much. Rafa sees Federer as his role model to emulate.
Federer did not deny Rafa calendar slams.
Federer did not make Rafa cry by beating him when Rafa was a favorite.
Federer was not the reason for Rafa’s less than impressive record in hardcourt slams.
Federer did not cause any dent in Rafa’s legacy by having a commanding winning record over him.

The only heartbreak Rafa and his fans suffered because of Federer is Wimby 2007, but still even then Rafa was just 20, so it was not a huge loss for Rafa.

Rafa was never ever denied anything significant because of Federer. Federer did not steal the thunder from Rafa.

Do I need to explain the extent of damage inflicted by Rafa on Federer, his legacy and his fans ??

The biggest acievement of Rafa is that he has converted the millions of Fedfans into mentally retarded psychos.

I am personally enjoying this !!!!

dova Says:

Roger should have a glimpse to the reality; he set the bar so high that the other players on tour had no choice but, to improve their game, while he is eluded by being the best ever. The likes of Rafa improved, and beat him in Wimbledon. In Australia, he was eluded by this thing of Rafa not being good on hard-courts, and also Rafa’s marathon semifinals, and all analysts including fans writing Rafa off. He lost and cried. This year going to the US open, he won a preparatory tournament (together with Murry) and was the favorite to win it again. When asked about Roger/Rafa final, he responded that a number of years he was waiting in the finals, but Rafa failed, and yet again talked about how Rafa is not good on hard courts. Then Rafa’s serve was a revelation, and won the US open. Next week he might win the tournament, and possibly beat Rafa in the finals, but come G slams, he is still far of the mark now to beat Nadal on any surface that’s the reality. This thing of him dominating tennis and even beating the best, its just nonsense. He failed to dominate Nadal while he was still NO.1, so how can he do it now?? It is good to dream but some dreams simply just won’t come through.
Federrer, you still have to work harder to beat these improved players, let alone Rafa. For your own sake, less talk and more action. Vamoos RAFA!!!!!

grendel Says:

“yet again talked about how Rafa is not good on hard courts.” (dova)

Well, what I saw was when Fed was asked if Nadal could win US Open, he replied “of course he can”. He then went on to say that this was Nadal’s most difficult surface – hardly controversial. Of course, this opinion is close to being out of date now. Nadal’s looking terrific on fast hard, and for the time being is the overwhelming favourite in a big tourney on ANY surface. remains to be seen for how long.

@contador 11.22p.m.

“his critics are harsh. many make him out to be far more cunning and calculating than what is reality.” Well, that’s one half. The other half think he’s deluded, pathetic, out to lunch and so on. In my opinion, contador, and certainly in my own experience, hostility rarely aids insight or even just ordinary commomn sense, it just seems to embed the perceiver in his own prejudices, of which he is generally unaware. I’ve certainly gone thru that particular cul-de-sac, and I daresay it’s quite common.

steve-o Says:

Nearly everyone adopts affectations and pretends to be something they’re not.

People are always a little unnerved by those rare individuals who are as they appear to be, who come without paraphernalia of any kind.

Federer is one such. He may choose not to speak, but when he does speak he says what is on his mind. He is completely straightforward.

Andy Roddick (whose perceptiveness is often underestimated), expressed this well:

“He’s a real person. He’s not an enigma. Off the court he’s not trying to be somebody. If you met him at McDonald’s and you didn’t know who he was, you would have no idea that he’s one of the best athletes in the world.”

It’s human nature to be taken in by con artists of all kinds, even the most obviously fake, and yet to be quick to accuse the truly genuine of fraud and deceit. That’s the nature of human hypocrisy.

As grendel says, he’s an unassuming, ordinary person. He’s smart, but he’s not an abstract thinker. That’s why I like him. If he were broody and meditative, he wouldn’t be nearly as appealing, or able to handle his fame nearly as well.

Deep down, Federer is a goofball, a fan of practical jokes who loves clowning around. This essential impishness in his nature is what so many people miss.

They say that if you really want to test what a man’s made of, you should give him great success, and Federer has passed the test.

He is essentially unchanged even after accomplishing so much. With characteristic frankness, he acknowledges the magnitude of what he has done. But acquiring honors and accomplishments is not really what drives him.

It takes real purity of heart to be untainted by so much success. That’s the thing about him that fascinates me.

grendel Says:

Steve-o I know this will sound like a mutual congratulations club or something, since I obviously agree with you (on the whole – we all have qualifications to make). But it can’t be said too often – there is an essential (seeming) paradox about Federer. He is absolutely convinced about his greatness as a tennis player and doesn’t mind saying so, and he is at the same time a modest human being without airs. Lots of people think this is a contradiction – it isn’t. It can also be true of course that a person may be far from convinced of their own greatness and at the same time be very arrogant. There are other possible permutations… Nowt so odd as folk, as me old gran used to say….

Top story: Murray Overcomes Hurkacz In Vienna; Berrettini Gets Into Turin