Jump to content

The French Open 2010


SachDan

The French Open 2010  

  1. 1.

    • Federer
      8
    • Nadal
      5
    • Murray
      2
    • Djokovic
      0
    • Others
      1


Recommended Posts

16 slams ,most of it coming when Andy Roddick was the second best player ..Federer dominated a mediocre set of players for a few years . I think he was good for 6-8 slams at most , in category of Becker or Edberg ....not Sampras , Borg or even Agassi for that matter Not surprising Murray & Nadal have owned him in past few years . Arrogant , cos he often makes statements like 'I was not playing well , but am still god enuf to beat these guys' .
:finger: no point arguing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 slams ,most of it coming when Andy Roddick was the second best player ..Federer dominated a mediocre set of players for a few years . I think he was good for 6-8 slams at most , in category of Becker or Edberg ....not Sampras , Borg or even Agassi for that matter Not surprising Murray & Nadal have owned him in past few years . Arrogant , cos he often makes statements like 'I was not playing well , but am still god enuf to beat these guys' .
"If someone says I'm better than Roger, I think they know nothing about tennis," Nadal said after beating former world number one Lleyton Hewitt 6-3, 6-4, 6-3 to join Federer in the fourth round. "You see his titles, you see my titles. There's no comparison. "It's difficult to compare Roger with me right now. He has 16 Grand Slams, I have six. Roger's records might be impossible to beat." link :((
Link to comment
Share on other sites

:aha: I like Stan, he's a great guy. He had the upper hand for a while in the second set. Roger came back good.
He's also from Switzerland..rite? I heard one of the commentators mentioning him as Roger's hitting partner.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"If someone says I'm better than Roger' date= I think they know nothing about tennis," Nadal said after beating former world number one Lleyton Hewitt 6-3, 6-4, 6-3 to join Federer in the fourth round. "You see his titles, you see my titles. There's no comparison. "It's difficult to compare Roger with me right now. He has 16 Grand Slams, I have six. Roger's records might be impossible to beat." link :((
:hatsoff: Very humble indeed Rafa.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But we, his ardent fans thinks his game is on par with Federer :hitler: :vroam:
I'm not getting into the whole Rafa vs Roger debate with you. It'd be pointless, coz neither of us are gonna change our minds. Give Rafa some time & perhaps, barring injury woes, he'll get close to Roger's achievements. Roger will always be my No1 though.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not getting into the whole Rafa vs Roger debate with you. It'd be pointless' date= coz neither of us are gonna change our minds. Give Rafa some time & perhaps, barring injury woes, he'll get close to Roger's achievements. Roger will always be my No1 though.
:agree:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ Love to see Murray lose, really odnt like him much. He's a cracking player though. Glad to see Berdych do some damage, he great to watch when in flow. He has been around for a while and needs to start fulfilling that potential. 16 slams ,most of it coming when Andy Roddick was the second best player ..Federer dominated a mediocre set of players for a few years . I think he was good for 6-8 slams at most , in category of Becker or Edberg ....not Sampras , Borg or even Agassi for that matter Not surprising Murray & Nadal have owned him in past few years . Arrogant , cos he often makes statements like 'I was not playing well , but am still god enuf to beat these guys' There is a point re: the relative lack of quality of opposition when he was in his prime. And I kind of agree that Sampras faced higher quality of players in his day. Federer for most of his hey day played (as you say) the likes of Roddick and Hewitt who are great triers but ultimately limited in genuine talent. Gonzalez, Phillipousis, Baghdatis, Safin were other guys he beat to win slams in the early days of his career Compare that to Sampras who had to beat Agassi, Courier, Becker, Rafter to name a few... But you can only beat whats in front of you- cant argue with that amazing record, and who's to say he would not have beaten the likes of Agassi etc. He is in the later stages of his career now and is not the player he was in 04/05 in particular when he was sublime. Hence the cheap wins some of the other top 10 guys get off him. (Murray does not 'own' him btw he got thumped by Fed in two slam finals- proof that Fed turns it on when it matters)...and thats no real way to judge, Richard Krajiceck has a winning record over Pete Sampras, Krajiceck was very good, but hardly an all time great. Nadal does get the better of him of course, but Nadal is another player who will go down as an all time great. Also being a lefty gives him an adv. There are loads of stats that make Fed the greatest..his slam wins the obv one of course...another one that sticks out for me is... has appeared in an unprecedented 22 career Grand Slam finals, and as of January 2010, has reached the semi-finals or better of the last 23 Grand Slam tournaments, a record streak that spans over five and a half years Mind boggling and takes a minute to actually sink in. No one would ever say Fed is arrogant... He is very widely regarded as a gent, by any commentators and his fellow players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...