Remove this Banner Ad

The Roger Federer Appreciation Thread

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

fantastic_crows said:
Andy Roddick anyone??

Lots of people were saying the same thing.

Remind me what happened there?
Click to expand...

We know what happened, but Nadal is no worser than Roddick is, Haas aint that far behind Roddick. Gonzalez's form has been equally outstanding, so there's no reason to suggest that the final would be interesting. Still Federer will win.
 
docker_azza said:
We know what happened, but Nadal is no worser than Roddick is, Haas aint that far behind Roddick. Gonzalez's form has been equally outstanding, so there's no reason to suggest that the final would be interesting. Still Federer will win.
Click to expand...

What I was getting at is everyone was saying Roddick had a chance.

Federer proved them all wrong, I am fully expecting the same thing to happen again
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Funny enough Roger is a nice guy and that's why most tennis players like him. He's just a nice guy playing his game. But because of his "boring" personality he doesn't get much promotion by sports gear and companies.

Now what's this, No. 9 Cup?
 
whythelongface said:
Personally I agree with you. I believe he is easily the best player I have ever seen as far as the way he plays the game. He doesn't just rely on a huge serve and has no real weakness.

Statistically one could argue that Sampras/ Laver are still the greatest ever due to the no. of grand slam events/ grand slams that they have won.

Federer would beat Laver in canter but in his day Laver would have been awesome.
Click to expand...


Sampras has a 20:14 career lead V Aggassi but when only looking at second serve points won ( the test of a players ability apart from his serve ) Agassi was clearly ahead of him. Sampras bullied behind a booming serve but did not - repeat DID NOT - have the stellar all court came Federer has.

Federer is a far more rounded player, more complete, easier on the eye and more effective on all surfaces. Federer is a better tennis player than Sampras was at his peak and is currently on a run of form unequalled in tennis history.

We are currently seeing the greatest ever player playing his greatest tennis. The first time a Slam has been won without dropping a set since Paris 1980 and Borg. No one in history has perfornmed consistently at the level Federer has played since arriving at halle pre Wimbledon last June.

It is a privilege to see him and he is incomparable.
 
Big Nasty said:
Federer wipes the floor of Sampras, will no doubt be the greatest player ever.
Click to expand...

He already is. Take away Sampras bullying serve by having a one serve only rule and Fed would beat him in straight sets as indeed Agassi would have. Apart from the serve Agassi let alond Federer was a better all court player. Apart from when relying on serve I doubt there is one stat on which Sampras leads Federer.

Greatness is not just number of Slams. It is about presence and style as well. Sampras came nowhere near the total dominance of his generation Fed enjoys. Even Nadal whose head to head lead depends totally on playing most matches on clay, is slipping away. I mean Gonzo is a top player playing at his career's best and now in top 5. He is a gun. What's his record V Fed? 10 defeats in as many matches whilst taking a total of 2 sets!!! Was Sampras so utterly indestructible even against top 5 players? No.

federer is a better player than Sampras. Indeed so was Agassi.
 
Sampras > Fed >>>>>> Agassi
 
gaelictiogar said:
Sampras has a 20:14 career lead V Aggassi but when only looking at second serve points won ( the test of a players ability apart from his serve ) Agassi was clearly ahead of him. Sampras bullied behind a booming serve but did not - repeat DID NOT - have the stellar all court came Federer has.

Federer is a far more rounded player, more complete, easier on the eye and more effective on all surfaces. Federer is a better tennis player than Sampras was at his peak and is currently on a run of form unequalled in tennis history.

We are currently seeing the greatest ever player playing his greatest tennis. The first time a Slam has been won without dropping a set since Paris 1980 and Borg. No one in history has perfornmed consistently at the level Federer has played since arriving at halle pre Wimbledon last June.

It is a privilege to see him and he is incomparable.
Click to expand...


Rod Laver? imagine if he didnt have those accidents and didnt retire early, he easily could have ended up with 20 slams but not many people recognise he won 2 calender grand slams.
 
He is an absolute champion on an off the court, how can you not like him?
Pulls off incredible shots every match and is just so dominant, i happy to
see this genious in his prime.
 
I suspect that when Fed is finished Laver will be the only legitimate comparison. 2 Grand slams is unique. It is 28 from 28 in a year in slams. Even Federer only managed 27 from 28 in 2006 and while he is 7 from 7 so far in 2007 he does have to negotiate the run and grunt brigade in Roland Garros where he looks good enough but mortal on the slowing grippy clay.

Certainly Sampras does not deserve comparison with either if only on aesthetic grounds. i read recently the stats on head to head second serve points won with him and Agassi. Agassi miles ahead. Take away the serve and he is not the player Laver was or Fed is.

Other contenders? Borg couldn't win in the uniquely febrile athmosphere of NYC. Fed is currintly on a 21 match streak there. Fed is better on clay than mcenroe and Sampras.....TP is right to focus on laver as the only real comparison though i suspect fed probably has more game than laver had. I never saw Laver live but surely its impossible to imagine he had more game than Fed who is without a weakness I can see.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

gaelictiogar said:
I suspect that when Fed is finished Laver will be the only legitimate comparison. 2 Grand slams is unique. It is 28 from 28 in a year in slams. Even Federer only managed 27 from 28 in 2006 and while he is 7 from 7 so far in 2007 he does have to negotiate the run and grunt brigade in Roland Garros where he looks good enough but mortal on the slowing grippy clay.

Certainly Sampras does not deserve comparison with either if only on aesthetic grounds. i read recently the stats on head to head second serve points won with him and Agassi. Agassi miles ahead. Take away the serve and he is not the player Laver was or Fed is.

Other contenders? Borg couldn't win in the uniquely febrile athmosphere of NYC. Fed is currintly on a 21 match streak there. Fed is better on clay than mcenroe and Sampras.....TP is right to focus on laver as the only real comparison though i suspect fed probably has more game than laver had. I never saw Laver live but surely its impossible to imagine he had more game than Fed who is without a weakness I can see.
Click to expand...
I agree, partially. A few points though. Sampras had one of the best running forehands in the game.If a guy like Agassi had trouble returning his serves, federer would have the same.Also he had the best 2nd serve in the game. Its a bit unfair when you say "take away his serve". He was the first big server in the game of tennis (with Goran).His volley's were exceptional too. Winning 5 wimbledon title is no joke, i will wait till federer does that. I think you are underrating Sampras.Sampras didnt win a french open title, but dont forget he has 2 clay court masters series title.Federer is no doubt a legend and could very well end up with 20 slams, but its unfair to compare generations because of obvious reasons.They are both champions in their own right
 
Just looking at a few stats. Since losing the final at Roland Garros Federer has entered 10 ATP events winning 9 including 3 Slams and the Masters Cup so in effect 4 of the top 5 annual events. he has won on 3 surfaces. Grass, hard and carpet. he has lost once when Murray beat him at Cincinatti. his record in singles including 2 Davis Cup matches is 55 from 56 a SR of better than 98%.

Is that the most compelling run of form ever? surely no one has put together a 10 tournament run like that.
 
Ah yes, the great William Tell tennis serve hoax. Can't believe so many people are accepting that as a genuine video. As if anybody would be so confident in their abilities as to smash a 200kmh serve as somebody's head... Yet most people believe it to be true.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

gaelictiogar said:
Just looking at a few stats. Since losing the final at Roland Garros Federer has entered 10 ATP events winning 9 including 3 Slams and the Masters Cup so in effect 4 of the top 5 annual events. he has won on 3 surfaces. Grass, hard and carpet. he has lost once when Murray beat him at Cincinatti. his record in singles including 2 Davis Cup matches is 55 from 56 a SR of better than 98%.

Is that the most compelling run of form ever? surely no one has put together a 10 tournament run like that.
Click to expand...

lol how things change...try 3 slams in a row maybe?


p.s where are you these days GT? I dont see you around much :D jumped the fed bandwagon like your fellow mates already?
 
After you beat Roger, he was in this press room, and he said, Yeah, it feels bad, but it doesn't feel as bad as if it were in the final, as if getting to the final and losing is, you know, is the most hurtful thing. And yet, to be in the final, be out there in that theater and to be able to play as well as you did, I mean, do you find this talk about that in terms of getting there but not getting there all the way.

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Well, you know, I cannot hide the disappointment. It's just I'm not gonna cry or complain about that, you know. It's just the way it is.







GOLD!!! :D :D :D
 

Remove this Banner Ad

The Roger Federer Appreciation Thread

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top