Roger Federer is not the GOAT

[Mint Condition]

I never considered Federer's dominance boring because he was just so good to watch. And also because I like to watch a champion competing against history. And it's not like he won every single match or tournament he played easily. There were always challenges. Some matches he had with the likes of Safin, Nalbandian and Roddick etc were incredible. I think Federer has helped to lift the profile of the sport globally over the last 10 years with the way he plays. When an all time great who plays with some extra flair/style/skill comes along that's what happens...even if results become more predictable. It was the same with Tiger Woods and golf. Style can't be underestimated. It's the difference between Federer and Sampras for example...the artist vs the machine. Sampras I think fits more into what Caesar has said. While some people might not like Federer because of his dominance or any other reason, I think most people just love to watch him play and that's evident by the fact he's pretty much always the crowd favourite wherever he goes. Sampras on the other hand never had that kind of support.

 

[Caesar]

Saying that uncompetitive sport is not a good thing and that Roger Federer was the main reason for this is a fine opinion to have. I may disagree that watching dominance is boring but I take no issue that someone else could lose interest in the sport. There's no disputing Roger made the sport uncompetitive. As you say, that was the reality of the situation.

But it's another step entirely to resent a person because of this. I just find it immature and short sighted. It's not the person you should resent. Resent the sport, resent the lack of competition, resent the lack of difference between surfaces, resent anything but the guy that consistently plays the best tennis anyone has ever seen. In my opinion, by 'resenting' the person himself you are implying blame.

Did you also lose interest in cricket when Australia had their period of utter dominance? Can you understand people that now hate the Australian cricket team because they dominated for so long?

Wait, what? I didn't say anything about resenting Federer.

I just took issue with someone who said that everyone should love Federer because he's everything good about the sport. He's not. I fail to see why there is an imperative to love someone who, for many people, made the sport unwatchably boring.

 

[pessimiser]

Wait, what? I didn't say anything about resenting Federer.

I just took issue with someone who said that everyone should love Federer because he's everything good about the sport. He's not. I fail to see why there is an imperative to love someone who, for many people, made the sport unwatchably boring.

you are mad, this is a world sport and these guys are the best they have ever been, incredibly fit and strongand athletic, and there's Federer so superior to any player in the world for so long, and the guys like Nadal and novak thank him for lifting nthe standard. just enjoy somebody who was so humble yet honest, so talented and so graceful, he wont be around forever.

 

[getthefooty]

Wait, what? I didn't say anything about resenting Federer.

I just took issue with someone who said that everyone should love Federer because he's everything good about the sport. He's not. I fail to see why there is an imperative to love someone who, for many people, made the sport unwatchably boring.

Well, you said you aren't surprised people resent him because of his domination. Personally I am very surprised at this. I am not surprised that people start to dislike him because he seems smug, or because they prefer Nadal, or because he could do better than Mirka, or because of his flaky backhand - but if someone told me that they dislike him because he was just so good I would find it hard to believe. Usually people that dislike him like are still able to respect his domination rather than cast aspersions over it.

I don't think 'imperatives' come into it at all. Obviously not everyone will love Federer - no one is completely universally loved. No one here is proclaiming that everyone that exists should bow down to the great man simply because he was such a force.

I guess to some degree it does come down to our respective attitudes towards watching someone obliterate their opposition. Personally I could watch every match Federer dominated in that era and not get bored at all. You obviously differ.

 

[Caesar]

Well, you said you aren't surprised people resent him because of his domination. Personally I am very surprised at this. I am not surprised that people start to dislike him because he seems smug, or because they prefer Nadal, or because he could do better than Mirka, or because of his flaky backhand - but if someone told me that they dislike him because he was just so good I would find it hard to believe. Usually people that dislike him like are still able to respect his domination rather than cast aspersions over it.

When I say resenting him as a product and representative of his era, I don't mean resenting him personally. There is nothing wrong with Federer as a person. His domination is a fine personal achievement and a credit to him. Nonethless I spent the better part of half a decade wishing he'd just piss off.

I don't think 'imperatives' come into it at all. Obviously not everyone will love Federer - no one is completely universally loved. No one here is proclaiming that everyone that exists should bow down to the great man simply because he was such a force.

That was the impression I got from the post I initially responded to.

I guess to some degree it does come down to our respective attitudes towards watching someone obliterate their opposition. Personally I could watch every match Federer dominated in that era and not get bored at all. You obviously differ.

Part of the reason I like competitive sport is because it's competitive. That's all.

 

[getthefooty]

Nonethless I spent the better part of half a decade wishing he'd just piss off.

See, this is what I fail to understand. You say part of the reason you like competitive sport is because it is competitive. What is the other part? I'd wager it is to see the brilliance that athletes at the peak of their sports can produce.

If he pissed off, you'd be left with the same players, minus the utter brilliance of Federer. Where's the fun in that? Yeah, you'd have some better contests, but with the knowledge that the one guy who can produce better tennis than what you see is gone.

Personally, I hoped that rather than him pissing off, someday another person might reach the incredible heights that he has.

 

[Caesar]

There is not really a whole lot of benefit in Federer producing brilliance if I am not watching to see it.

I would rather watch a competitive match between two less talented players than a beatdown by a superstar. That's just how it is.

 

[Hunters Host #3]

I am not surprised that people resent him for that.

I can understand people resenting him both as a product and representation of that development.

That is a negative, in many people's eyes.

Wait, what? I didn't say anything about resenting Federer.

I fail to see why there is an imperative to love someone who, for many people, made the sport unwatchably boring.

For one, I don't understand where you're coming from with regards to you putting across a notion that a majority of people resent Federer. For his domination of a sport? It defies all logic. I would be surprised if an absolute minority took your stance.

Secondly, you do not speak on behalf of everyone else. 'In many people's eyes', 'for many people'? Come on, these are attempts to strengthen your claims. Who's eyes? What people?

Nonethless I spent the better part of half a decade wishing he'd just piss off.

It seems as though you simply do not like Federer. There's nothing wrong with that.

No one is asking you as getthefooty stated, to bow down and kiss his ring because of his dominance.

I'll say it again the 'weak generation' is a complete fallacy and simply laughable.

Personally, I hoped that rather than him pissing off, someday another person might reach the incredible heights that he has.

Exactly right. It is exactly what I hoped for.

Nadal and Djokovic saw the bar, and raised it. Simple. It was good for tennis and make no mistake Federer was surpassed in areas of his game such as fitness, court movement and even ground-strokes from the baseline (Nadal is a case in point).

 

[jod23]

Federer didnt make it boring. He was amazing to watch. Plus he was chasing history. He has been fantastic since day dot.

 

[Hunters Host #3]

If Nadal one day surpasses Roger on the all time singles grand-slams list.

There'll be someone who claims that Rafa's, let's say 9 or 10 French Opens, inflate his standing in the game, and that he had no real competition on clay.

That sort of stuff is nonsense. His domination in that regard should not be resented, the same with Federer, the same with Agassi and Sampras or Borg and McEnroe.

 

[Caesar]

For one, I don't understand where you're coming from with regards to you putting across a notion that a majority of people resent Federer. For his domination of a sport? It defies all logic. I would be surprised if an absolute minority took your stance.

Secondly, you do not speak on behalf of everyone else. 'In many people's eyes', 'for many people'? Come on, these are attempts to strengthen your claims. Who's eyes? What people?

1) I didn't say a majority of people resent Federer
2) This whole discussion is predicated by the assumption by everyone involved that there is a group of people, however small, who do not slavishly adore Federer. I am putting forward a reason for that, one which is not uncommon.

It seems as though you simply do not like Federer. There's nothing wrong with that.

No one is asking you as getthefooty stated, to bow down and kiss his ring because of his dominance.

Wrong on both points. Read the discussion.

I do like Federer as a person, and I like the way he plays. I just don't like what he's done to the tour.

The post I initially responded to, and everyone took offence to, was where I objected to someone stating that everyone should love him and he is everything good about tennis. That very much came across to me as an invitation to kiss his ring.

 

[Flameboy]

Yeah, for me when Federer was winning everything in that 04-07 period bar the French, the sport became fairly boring and predictable IMO. Certainly compared to what it is now anyway.

You just knew what the result would be - even in Slam finals, before he stepped out there.

Not everyone has to love him. Not everyone should love him. That's not to say they hate him.

As a side note, I think a reason why Nadal has so many fans is because he was the one to break the Federer dominance. The crowds had a different face to cheer at the end of a GS, and they revelled in that.

 

[Hunters Host #3]

1) I didn't say a majority of people resent Federer

Repetitively using phrases such as 'for many people' or in 'many people's eyes', would suggest otherwise.

2) This whole discussion is predicated by the assumption by everyone involved that there is a group of people, however small, who do not slavishly adore Federer. I am putting forward a reason for that, one which is not uncommon.

I do like Federer as a person, and I like the way he plays. I just don't like what he's done to the tour.

The post I initially responded to, and everyone took offence to, was where I objected to someone stating that everyone should love him and he is everything good about tennis. That very much came across to me as an invitation to kiss his ring.

I think you've jumped the gun and reacted a little too seriously.

He may correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that jod23 was referring to the fact that rather than people trying to discredit the wonderful achievements of Roger and bring down his dominance, that we should applaud his feats in tennis. He would have most certainly been referring to the way he conducts himself on and off the court as well.

His comment was one that was made in light of people discrediting Roger. You surely must understand that.

 

[Hunters Host #3]

Yeah, for me when Federer was winning everything in that 04-07 period bar the French, the sport became fairly boring and predictable IMO. Certainly compared to what it is now anyway.

You just knew what the result would be - even in Slam finals, before he stepped out there.

Not everyone has to love him. Not everyone should love him. That's not to say they hate him.

As a side note, I think a reason why Nadal has so many fans is because he was the one to break the Federer dominance. The crowds had a different face to cheer at the end of a GS, and they revelled in that.

I actually think that's a fair and valid post.

I concur that Federer's dominance of the sport became predictable. You knew he was going to dominate Gonzalez or Baghdatis, or to an extent a young Djokovic and Nadal in those finals. It is probably why Nadal's period of dominance over Roger was viewed favourably. It's the same with me, like I 'assume' others were pleased to see Djokovic dominate Nadal in recent times.

It's undeniably good for the sport.

You've summed it up in a more understanding and less farfetched way.

I just don't understand how someone can resent Federer for his dominance.

 

[gaelictiogar]

I never considered Federer's dominance boring because he was just so good to watch. And also because I like to watch a champion competing against history. And it's not like he won every single match or tournament he played easily. There were always challenges. Some matches he had with the likes of Safin, Nalbandian and Roddick etc were incredible. I think Federer has helped to lift the profile of the sport globally over the last 10 years with the way he plays. When an all time great who plays with some extra flair/style/skill comes along that's what happens...even if results become more predictable. It was the same with Tiger Woods and golf. Style can't be underestimated. It's the difference between Federer and Sampras for example...the artist vs the machine. Sampras I think fits more into what Caesar has said. While some people might not like Federer because of his dominance or any other reason, I think most people just love to watch him play and that's evident by the fact he's pretty much always the crowd favourite wherever he goes. Sampras on the other hand never had that kind of support.

I agree with every word of this. Federer has a streak of self important arrogance and has struggled with nadal and Djokovic and indeed several others but what Minty is saying is correct.

His tennis is unarguably the most attractive. He is the Messi of tennis. He is the aesthetic image of the game at its best. Both Rafa and Nole have needed to reach insane levels of physical intensity to live with him and he always outwinners everyone. I cannot remember a match in which he has been outwinnered.

he is a cavalier in a age of relentlessly running two handed backhand roundheads hunting for errors from the opposition.

Its impossible to like soccer without liking Messi, to like rugby without appreciating dan Carter, you can't be a boxing fan without liking Ali at his slick best and it is impossible to be a tennis fan without appreciating Fed's game for what it is....the ultimate expression of effective beauty brought to a court.

 

[JolyV]

Feb 9/2010
John McEnroe said: “Roger is just the greatest player of all time. He is the most beautiful player I’ve ever seen and I don’t ever get tired of watching him. Rod Laver is my idol, Pete Sampras is the greatest grass court player ever, but Roger is just the greatest player of all. I think we can all appreciate how incredible he is even more lately, because he’s shown a bit more emotion on court and he’s become a father so he seems a bit more human, more relatable. That makes what he’s doing seem even more amazing.”

 

[Steven Gerrard]

I actually think that's a fair and valid post.

I concur that Federer's dominance of the sport became predictable. You knew he was going to dominate Gonzalez or Baghdatis, or to an extent a young Djokovic and Nadal in those finals. It is probably why Nadal's period of dominance over Roger was viewed favourably. It's the same with me, like I 'assume' others were pleased to see Djokovic dominate Nadal in recent times.

It's undeniably good for the sport.

You've summed it up in a more understanding and less farfetched way.

I just don't understand how someone can resent Federer for his dominance.

Who resents his dominance? Someone started a post claiming Federer is not the GOAT and people are discussing that point. Some say he is, some say he is not. Those that say he is not point to his inferior record against Nadal. In a round about way, Federer winning Wimbledon confirms the point that so long as Nadal is not standing on the other side of the net, Ferderer pushes his point hard to claiming a stake for GOAT. If he faced Nadal at Wimbledon, would he have held up the trophy? Who knows, but history suggests no. Nadal losing early at W shows that he is certainly not the GOAT.

 

[Macca19]

I never considered Federer's dominance boring because he was just so good to watch.

This. GOAT or not, the type of tennis he plays, the fluid way he moves around the court, the ease in which he pulls off ridiculous winner after ridiculous winner makes him by far the greatest tennis player to watch imo, since ive been alive. In fact, imo, he's probably been the best sportsperson to watch of any sport.

I always think back to the way he completely dismantled a huff and tuff Roddick in a semi at the AO back in 07 when after a tight first set he raised the bar and pulled out a 6-0 destruction of Roddick in the 2nd set in what was probably the best set of tennis by an individual.

 

[Macca19]

There is not really a whole lot of benefit in Federer producing brilliance if I am not watching to see it.

I would rather watch a competitive match between two less talented players than a beatdown by a superstar. That's just how it is.

I can understand why some people would feel that a dominance like what Federer had would be boring and predictable. But I could never get bored of seeing a brilliant sportsperson perform at the absolute top of their game in their chosen sport. I never got sick of watching Warney bamboozle batsmen, or Ponting when you just knew everytime he came out to bat he'd be in for a ton, or watching Gilchrist smash the * out of a bowling lineup in one dayers, or watching Jordan at his best, or watching Woods destroy a golf course, or watching Ablett snr, or Carey etc etc.

And its not like Federer was beating down on riff raff Hawthorn v GWS style, he was smashing the crap out of guys who would have likely won many slams between them if not for Federer (Roddick, Hewitt as 2 examples).

 

[Hodgepodge]

There's nothing boring about Federer. It's like watching Wayne Carey or Lance Franklin or Gary Ablett Sr in full flight. He does the outrageous so consistently that I'm laughing at my television screen.

 

[Hunters Host #3]

Who resents his dominance?

I'm referring to one poster in particular.

Nothing to do with the majority. That's my point.

 

[Hunters Host #3]

If he faced Nadal at Wimbledon, would he have held up the trophy? Who knows, but history suggests no.

History would suggest he's a good chance. 2-1 to Federer in Wimbledon finals and on grass.

Rafa will be setting himself for a big US Open this year. He'll be thereabouts.

 

[Hunters Host #3]

I always think back to the way he completely dismantled a huff and tuff Roddick in a semi at the AO back in 07 when after a tight first set he raised the bar and pulled out a 6-0 destruction of Roddick in the 2nd set in what was probably the best set of tennis by an individual.

Roddick was playing some of his best tennis through that period as well Macca.

He had just come off a US Open Final where he lost to Roger in 4 sets. For memory, he then had a strong end to the year and good off-season where he even beat Roger at Kooyong in the lead up to that Australian Open.

His demolition was ruthless, ridiculous half volleys from the baseline and touch at the net. Andy's serve didn't fire a shot.

The post match press conference is one of the best you'll see.

 

[Hunters Host #3]

Found it.

 

[jod23]

Hahah that is classic from Roddick.

His answer to Gonzalez's chances in the final.

Slim.

Hahah