Raghav_12 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 ahh sorry it was 4-2 , i stand corrected, but what the rest of my post, u only stuck to one minor point...what about 5-6 vs davydenko, what about 14 or 15 matches nadal played vs federer in clay only out of their 28..had these many matches been played on other courts, the h2h would have been different...i for one am no one who looks to h2h to prove who is better or not... it was u who brought it into the debate so i also pursued with it... and u know what fedex has a .82 match winning index on clay, nadal has .76 on other surface barring clay...and please read the other part of my earler post nd not just stick with the njalbandian part, which i was wrong :hatsoff: Out of 28, 14 were on Clay which Nadal leads 12-2. Rest of the court it is 6-8 (hardly any difference if you take out two Wimbledons which Nadal played at the beginning). What about overall grandslam records of 8-2 in favour of Nadal, including all FO, Wimbledon, USO and Australia open? Oh yeah I am troll to question Federer's greatest-ness..!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adi B Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 Out of 28, 14 were on Clay which Nadal leads 12-2. Rest of the court it is 6-8 (hardly any difference if you take out two Wimbledons which Nadal played at the beginning). What about overall grandslam records of 8-2 in favour of Nadal, including all FO, Wimbledon, USO and Australia open? Oh yeah I am troll to question Federer's greatest-ness..!! ok again u come to h2h...ok then u keep ur superior h2h , i keep the 17 GS nd #1.. i think u only judge a player by h2h? strange.. then in that case davydenko is a better player than nadal, rosol also :yay: and also the guy u think is better than superior himself considers fedex has GOAT....i am out now, nthing much to say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raghav_12 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 ok again u come to h2h...ok then u keep ur superior h2h , i keep the 17 GS nd #1.. i think u only judge a player by h2h? strange.. then in that case davydenko is a better player than nadal, rosol also :yay: and also the guy u think is better than superior himself considers fedex has GOAT....i am out now, nthing much to say Valid point from you for a change. I agree H2H can not be a sole criteria to ascertain greatness and the fact that Nadal has had wood over Federer doesn't make him a better player than him necessarily. However, point which OP made and I totally agree is that Federer won a huge majority of grand slams in the time when overall ATP tour was least in depth for last 30-40 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vamos_rafa Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 u know what' date= i say had djokovic,rafa had played against roddick,heywitt,davydenko,safin at their prime, the 2 would have lost badly, yes i say that, any proof to make me wrong? if u have one? regarding rafa`s superior h2h vs fedex, he has a 12-3 or something like that record vs fed at clay, so most of their macthes were played at the surface where nadal is by far the greatest of all time..if they had played 15 matches on hard court or grass court instead of clay, fed would have had a superior h2h vs nadal...but oh wait, nadal gets out in earlier rounds in these courts, oh no, he only has 4 GS outside clay, he didnt have balls to reach finals in these GS earlier.... and u know what,talking about h2h, davydenko leads nadal 6-5 in h2h nd nalbandian has a 4-4 h2h vs nadal, both of them were the players u consider as weak from fed era...glad to know this h2h eh? :hatsoff: You got to be kidding when you say that. These guys managed hardly 1,2 GS's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jusarrived Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 1st deserved Grandslam for the crybabay :finger: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raghav_12 Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Well, if I ask without emergence of Nadal and a late surge of Djokovic, would Federer have won more grandlams, what would be the answer of Federer fans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raghav_12 Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 1st deserved Grandslam for the crybabay :finger: I would agree with that. This is one of the GS wins of which Federer would be really be proud of? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adi B Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 really man shocked at the idiotic sense of some people :facepalm: u guys are mad haters of fedex, nothing much can be said... okay then do this- kill fedex, make him reborn again then make him grow quick to the age of 25-26 so that he`ll be of the same age group as rafa nd nole, then u guys would be satisfied with 3 at their prime and playing against each other ..right? seriously man, some of these comments will even make rafa nd novak laugh, 1st GS deserved? just pathetic and sick comment :headshake: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vamos_rafa Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 really man shocked at the idiotic sense of some people :facepalm: u guys are mad haters of fedex, nothing much can be said... okay then do this- kill fedex, make him reborn again then make him grow quick to the age of 25-26 so that he`ll be of the same age group as rafa nd nole, then u guys would be satisfied with 3 at their prime and playing against each other ..right? seriously man, some of these comments will even make rafa nd novak laugh, 1st GS deserved? just pathetic and sick comment :headshake: I concur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 howcome this is trolling? Just because I don't agree with Federer's greatest-ness (i agree with greatness) I became troll? I am talking everything with facts and i am troll. Your friend is giving wrong number to mislead forum' date=' he is serious poster ::hatsoff: to you.[/quote'] if u do'nt agree with some ones Idol as greatest you will be called troll...its happen in most of the 'who is greatest' threads here :giggle: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daryl1985 Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 1st deserved Grandslam for the crybabay :finger: :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sooda Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 I don't think if this win for Federer's proves anything related to the question OP asked. OP didn't ask if Federer deserves to win a GS or not. OP's question was did he deserve to win 16 (now 17), answer to which is - Clear No. Just have a look at Head to Head records. Current generation Rivals Nadal - 18-10 (Grandslam 8-2. Last win coming in 07, against a 20 yr old Nadal) Andy Murry -8-8 Djoko 12-15 Old era rivaals Roddick - 2- Infinity Hewitt - 8-18 Nalbandian - 8-11 This H2H record clearly shows that if Federer had same quality opponents in 2003 to 07, his record would have been far less impressive. You may be enchanted by his style of play, but facts are facts. I agree that the standard of play was generally weaker then...given how his opponents from then c ompare to today..as you have pointed out...by the same token though you could argue rafa is lucky no good clay court player about to challenge him in RG...or that he was not around when the grass was quick, as has been pointed out....so where does it end...??! also given how good roger is now its safe to say both rafa and novak would have lesser slams had he now been at his peak, or the same age as they are..so theyre pretty lucky..adis point about h2h is a good one...rafas chances vs philipousis in 03 or roddick in 04 are not as straightforward as you seem to think, those guys are not novak and murray of today but on that early noughties grass, were not mugs particularly given rafa can still be tested on the green stuff...also very valid is adis point about rafa on hards..he was losing to guys like tsonga, ferrer and gonzalez around that time fed was winning slams... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Tendulkar Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 F me this is one harsh thread on a champ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sachin=GOD Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Roger Federer's grey army Mukul Kesavan | Jul 13, 2012, 12.00AM IST Why do middle-aged spectators love Roger Federer? The answer to this question isn't 'duh'. This is a love that can't be explained by merely gesturing at his unprecedented achievement. Pete Sampras was the man who held all the records before Federer emerged - seven Wimbledontitles, 14 Grand Slam championships, the No. 1 ranking on the ATP computer for the most weeks ever - but while he was admired for his awesome serve, his killer smash, his all-round niceness, he wasn't loved. Federer is adored by the over-40s. Take Vijay Amritraj. Amritraj is the best tennis commentator in the world: genial, funny, someone who understands the game, knows its great figures and has the great advantage of being a natural at the microphone. But put him in charge of commentary about a match that features Federer and he becomes an infatuated fan. There was a moment in Federer's match against Novak Djokovic where he was tucked up by a down-the-line shot, which forced him to improvise a high, cramped forehand that went over the sideline. Amritraj exclaimed (to no one's surprise) at Federer's quick hands; the fact that he had lost the point seemed beside the point. He isn't alone in his adoration. The novelist, the late, great David Foster Wallace wrote an appreciation of Federer in the New York Times which makes Amritraj's enthusiasm seem judicious. "Roger Federer is one of those rare, preternatural athletes who appear to be exempt, at least in part, from certain physical laws... a type that one could call genius, or mutant, or avatar. He is never hurried or off-balance. The approaching ball hangs, for him, a split-second longer than it ought to...in the all-white that Wimbledon enjoys getting away with still requiring, he looks like what he may well (i think) be: a creature whose body is both flesh and, somehow, light." So Wallace begins with the thesis that Federer is uber-human and escalates to the conclusion that he's probably divine. Amongst retired tennis greats, the sentiment in Federer's favour is overwhelming. Rod Laver thinks that hard though it is to compare tennis players across generations, Federer's probably the best of the Open era. Sampras declares that there's no one he'd rather lose his records to and Sampras's great rival, Andre Agassi, manages to diss Nadal and praise Federer in a single sentence: "If it hadn't been for the freak from Mallorca, Federer would have won all the slams a few times." The reference to Nadal is the key to understanding the middle-aged attachment to Federer. Nadal is the anti-Federer. Where Federer's signature style is cha-racterised by gliding effortlessness, Nadal's tennis is defined by explosive physicality. Nadal is a two-handed southpaw, Federer makes fans old enough to remember Ken Rosewall swoon with his flamboyant, single-handed backhand. If Federer is a two-legged Saluki, Nadal is a turbo-charged Rottweiler; ferocious, unremitting, inexhaustible. If Federer is Gatsby (and he has sometimes been parodically country club in his piped blazers and long flannels), Nadal is Popeye, his ham-like arms powered by some mysterious Mallorcan spinach. Federer, despite being a tho-roughly modern tennis player in his athleticism, in the power and weight of his groundstrokes and his willingness to rally from the baseline, still manages to embody for the middle-aged a classicism that they believe is nearly extinct. So they ooh when he uses the backhand slice, sigh when he (occasionally) follows it in to the net to volley and become incontinent with delight when he scimitars that backhand down the line "on the dead run" as Amritraj loves to say. Nadal, on the other hand, is the negation of this style. His groundstrokes are massively topspun on both flanks and his ability to retrieve and to counter-attack from extreme defensive positions is, as Agassi points out, freakish. Unlike Federer, most of Nadal's most fervent supporters are to be found amongst the young who feel no need to defer to classicism because it wasn't the dominant style when they began following tennis and secondly because they revel in Nadal's athleticism. Unlike the middle-aged they aren't invested in the defensive, compensatory old-person idea that grace and economy of effort and skill ought to prevail over unbridled strength and speed. Nor do they see any virtue in Federer's unwillingness to adopt the latest racquet technology. Federer uses a smaller racquet head than most other players do on the men's tour, choosing to sacrifice power for feel. His racquet is also partly strung with natural gut unlike Nadal who was an early adopter of copoly strings, which grip the ball more firmly and make his topspun groundstrokes kick unplayably. To the young, Federer often seems a preening has-been fighting a losing rearguard action against both youth and modernity. For the not-so-young his victories seem to offer a vindication of classicism's first principles and the illusion of continuity with the tennis of their youth. The power of classical forms is such that even Agassi, a creature of tennis's two-handed transformation, and Nick Bollettieri, the coaching Svengali who more than anyone promoted that transition, prefer Federer to Nadal, the great legatee of the changes they wrought. As Federer, almost 31, enters his tennis dotage, his victory at Wimbledon and his unlikely return to the No. 1 ranking allows his greying groupies to believe that 'some work of noble note may yet be done', that 50 is, perhaps, the new 35. The writer is an author, academic and critic. Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akshayxyz Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Agassi won his last GS at the age of 33 or something, Federer has another 2 years for couple more, I hope. Ideal situation would be, Rafa taking next two FOs, Federer taking Ws, and others shared randomly among rest all :). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b555 Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 federer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoda-esque Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Another record broken today..287 weeks at #1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adi B Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 federer :theman: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akshayxyz Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 He plays for records :beee: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoda-esque Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 ktCBNOCG5cE&feature=player_embedded Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now