- Banned
- #251
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Official Nadal vs. Federer thread.
- Thread starter wce4premiership
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
As opposed to the one trick ponies they have atm? name one player who is not a baseliner? Stupid statement mate. The players were easier?? are you on drugs???, It is much harder to play a world class serve-volleyer than a baseliner. You dont get more than 3 hits in a rally with a great serve-volleyer. The players of today would get blitzed. Had they had greater technology in rackets back then, It would have made some players invincible. Watching the Cash-Wilander legends match the other night proves my point. They made a mockery of the way tennis is played today. Cash may be in his 40s and slowed down a yard or 2, but his ability to serve and volley is still very good. How many times did he hit an unreturnable volley?. Back on the topic, Sampras is a much much much more complete player than federer. One of the best serves of all time, Great Volleyer, Very solid from the baseline and also imo a better player under pressure than federer. Not only that far greater depth of talent to deal with. Who has federer had? Roddick?? pfft Agassi? fair enough. The depth has only recently been apparent (Djokovic, Murray, Nadal, Tsonga etc). Now that there is depth all of a sudden he can't beat these players on a consistent basis ( He is Nadal's bitch ) which does not make him the greatest player of all time but the best player of a so-so era of men's tennis from 04-08.
I have said it before and i will say it again, i dont think federer is the best player ever. The slams he won was during a transition period in tennis, sampras, agassi were fading out and the new generation was not prepared to take over.Now with Murray, Nadal, Nole and others in the picture he is getting owned.Last year anyone who saw Sampras vs Federer exhibition match can tell the extreme difficulty federer had returning Sampras's serve and forehand.He almost lost the match, although exhibition, but the guy has been retired for well over 5 years now.If he is the best ever, he should have had a winning formula against Nadal, just like Sampras did against Agassi.
ManWithNoName
TheBrownDog
You seriously think Federer was trying?
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
he was enjoying the moment but he was serving a lot of aces and serving pretty hard too.He was running a lot too..maybe not 100 percent but somewhere near 70 percent , which is still supposed to be good for a guy who is now retired for over half a decade
ManWithNoName
TheBrownDog
And you don't think they would've been trying to make it close for the sake of crowd entertainment?
what makes you think they were trying to make it close? roger got steamrolled actually
The previous 2 meetings federer won easy in straight sets actually.Later next year, the encounters were a lot closer than this
- Thread starter
- #258
I'm sure federer would beat samprasnow quite easily.
To say otherwise is quite stupid imo.
To say otherwise is quite stupid imo.
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
Disagree..Federer has had some big problems against QUALITY serve volleyers..there are really no quality ones left
- Nov 23, 2008
- 12,452
- 293
- AFL Club
- Essendon
You just contradicted yourself. How can you say he has problems against QUALITY serve vollyers, when there are none left, hence, none for him to have problems against at the moment...?
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
When you are analysing whether he was the best in history, it is a factor. He'd be in my top 10, maybe top 5 but I do definately have 3 ahead of him- Laver, McEnroe, Sampras (in my opinion dominated a far better era- Aggassi, etc). There are others like Bjon Borg who would be in the top 5 as well probably.
- Banned
- #263
As I mentioned earlier in this thread (I think), Agassi was my idol when I was in juniors, but I can think of at least a half-dozen guys post-2000 that are, all things considered, better players, yet have not had nearly as much GS success. Federer has made the others look ordinary, not the other way around.
- Jul 11, 2007
- 10,821
- 83
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
^I don't think you're giving Agassi enough credit.
Remember he did have a career spanning two decades, retiring around 36, and so the last few seasons people remember of him playing, he was far from his peak.
Remember he did have a career spanning two decades, retiring around 36, and so the last few seasons people remember of him playing, he was far from his peak.
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
Who has Federer REALLY had to contend with..Hewitt just lol..Safin is a headcase..who else. The one time there is competition he got spanked by Nadal on more than one occasion, got spanked by Djokovic, etc. Agassi had to go against more quality players Ivanisovic was a quality serve volleyer, Henman at his prime, etc. Agassi beat more players with more variety than nowadays.
thats my point, competing with the likes of rafter (who played flawless serve and volley tennis in the 97,98 US open) agassi, sampras etc cannot be compared to roddick, safin, davydenko..lol please!
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
Pretty much. Now whilst I like Federer I am not blind. He was in a relatively easy era. That has to be a factor. It is the main reason why I will never rate him as the best ever. Is he up there..well on pure stats yes (and he would make my top 10 of all time) but the best ever- not even close.
I honestly think that the only way Federer will be able to win more grand slams is if Rafa is knocked out in the rounds before.
He'll need to do something remarkable in a final to beat him, and if he does that would probably give him the confidence and belief that he can do it again.
He'll need to do something remarkable in a final to beat him, and if he does that would probably give him the confidence and belief that he can do it again.
exactly.I wonder how many people in these forums understand the game.They just say, wow look he has won 13, so he must be one of the greats.Fair dinkum, number wise yeah, but classwise? nope.Who did he beat to win slams? roddick, hewitt gonzalez, a 20 year old rafa playing his 2nd grass court event and murray, playing his first finals.Wow very impressive indeed.Add to that he was completely humiliated at R.G year after year and then got his pants pulled down on his favourite surface, by a "claycourter" .Lucky to survive 2007 id say, rafas injury let federer escape, but his luck ran out in 2008.Great? i dont think so.Good? yeah.
Mentally weak tennis player, once worked out, has no plan B.Thats why he barely wins a 5 setter these days
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
The utter crap you speak about Federer is amazing. I am in no way a big fan of his, but I can accept and apreciate that he is one of the best tennis players ever. I don't understand how you can say he is not. I have pulled up some stats on match records across the 4 different surfaces (Grass, Hard, Clay, Carpet) and compared some of the all time greats winning percentages through their careers.
Borg:
Grass 85%
Hard 76%
Clay 86%
Overall 83% (603 Won/127 Lost)
McEnroe:
Grass 85
Hard 81
Clay 72
Carpet 84
Overall 82 (875/198)
Federer:
Grass 87
Hard 82
Clay 75
Carpet 72
Overall 81 (626/151)
Nadal:
Grass 82
Hard 75
Clay 92
Carpet 25
Overall 81 (348/79)
Laver:
Grass 83
Hard 82
Clay 77
Carpet 77
Overall 79 (405/106)
Sampras:
Grass 83
Hard 80
Clay 63
Carpet 77
Overall 77 (762/222)
Rosewall:
Grass 78
Hard 72
Clay 79
Carpet 68
Overall 74 (439/152)
I would say that all players in this list are all time greats. Federer ranks 3rd in overall winning percentages and he belongs in this list. No more talk about Federer please and doubting him.
Borg:
Grass 85%
Hard 76%
Clay 86%
Overall 83% (603 Won/127 Lost)
McEnroe:
Grass 85
Hard 81
Clay 72
Carpet 84
Overall 82 (875/198)
Federer:
Grass 87
Hard 82
Clay 75
Carpet 72
Overall 81 (626/151)
Nadal:
Grass 82
Hard 75
Clay 92
Carpet 25
Overall 81 (348/79)
Laver:
Grass 83
Hard 82
Clay 77
Carpet 77
Overall 79 (405/106)
Sampras:
Grass 83
Hard 80
Clay 63
Carpet 77
Overall 77 (762/222)
Rosewall:
Grass 78
Hard 72
Clay 79
Carpet 68
Overall 74 (439/152)
I would say that all players in this list are all time greats. Federer ranks 3rd in overall winning percentages and he belongs in this list. No more talk about Federer please and doubting him.
Smell The Glove
Cancelled
How would Rafa do if he wasn't left handed?
You seem to underestimate the massive advantage it gives him.
funny how no other left handers can advantage of that but only rafa? credit goes to him
not disputing that, but my question is regarding the quality of players he had to face.The other players had quality opponents, which included some of the legends in tennis, but which legendary player did federer face to win his slams? hewitt, roddick gonzalez? if he can beat the new generation which is capable of beating him, i will accept he is one of the greatest, till then, i will stick to my point.
LukeParkerno1
Post-Human
Tend to agree, and he is a guy with a fantastic plan A..but after that despite having the shots, he has no plan B, etc. Nadal seems to have plan A, B, and C. Federer is good, but until he can beat Nadal on multiple surfaces at slams, he is not the greatest ever!
- Banned
- #275
Pete Sampras had a losing record in slams against Richard Krajicek (they played 8 times). Does that mean we exclude him from greatest ever discussion as well?