Please understand that he defeated Sampras when the latter was still winning. And in the next round Tim Henman beat him. Borg, Rod Laver and even Sampras himself had predicted that we may be watching the greatest ever player in Fed. Fed is one step above the current generation and thats his acheivement. Other players like Nadal, Djokovic, Murray are giving him enough tough time. But he is a clear leader. Sampras was one of the greats of his time alongside Agassi, becker etc. Fed is cut above all the legends in this game not because he has no competition but because he is simply great for anyone to compete against him. Please understand that Fed does not have any weaknesses for opposition to latch on and he figures out the game of anyone in first few games. The next one to watch is Djokovic..mark my words. He is equally good. Nadal will be exposed by Djokovic or Fed in next Roland Garros.
RE:Its wrong to say Federrer does not have competition
by vivek goel on Oct 18, 2007 10:44 AM
I would slightly rephrase the above mentioned things. 1. Federer is truly a gr8 champion and he makes his opponents look like also-rans in most of his matches (just ask Roddick) 2. To compare times would also not be right as right from the days of Fred Perry, Arthur Ashe, Rod Laver, Borg, Mcenroe, Connors to Sampras and now Federer everybody mentioned above can lay claim to be the best 3. But i guess the right way to judge a player is to see his performances on all type of surfaces and i guess we are now left with only Rod Laver and Roger Federer to be the rightful challengers of being greatest of all 4. also we have to look at the competition that was put forth for these players and we can now safely say that these two brush away challenges with ease on most of the surfaces (though in current times Nadal has been the nemesis for Federer on clay)
so looking at all these arguments we cannot clearly say who the greatest of all is. but one things for sure Sampras is not even among the top 2 of all time greats (clay was always his achilees heel)
RE:Its wrong to say Federrer does not have competition
by Keerthi Raj on Oct 18, 2007 11:49 AM
lets keep it simple guys: "Pete was the best player of his generation and Federer the current best". Its ridiculous to even compare the two. All u Roger fans, if Roger and Pete were playing in the same period, do u think Pete would not have won all those Grand Slams????....no way...He was unstoppable most of the times....The only area were Roger has an edge over Pete is that he is a better clay court player than Pete. But if u check clay court history, no serve-n-volleyer has everdominated on clay....Becker, Edberg, Rafter, etc....its only those boring baseliners that rule there...And like so many people say, Roger is lucky that there are no grass court specialists in today's game....its left to a clay-court player(Nadal) to challenge him on grass....that tells the whole story...absolutely ridiculous....there are just no serve-n-volleyers....Roger's best competitors are Nadal, Djokovic, Davydenko and Andy....if u compare that with Pete's opponents, he had some fabulous players who were specialists in their own right like Becker, Edberg, Ivanisevic or Rafter and of course Andre Agassi...and please remember Becker was 22 when Pete won his first Grand Slam...A lot of people have this misconception that Boris was well past his prime when Pete started winning those Grand Slams....So there, please stop comparing Roger with Pete....even if Roger goes on to win 20 Grand Slams!!!!
RE:Its wrong to say Federrer does not have competition
by prabhanjan tattar on Oct 18, 2007 05:46 PM
To say that Nadal is only clay-court player is a big joke. Ok, u tell me that Beckar was not past his prime when Sampras was playing. SUrely u know that Sampras started dominating 93 onwards, right. After which Beckar won only one GS, and that Australian Open in 96, and not at Wimbledon. Beckar was surely good, but not that brillaint that he was 93 onwards.
Game has changed a lot, and today its for the baseliners, nothing wrong in being a baseliner. If u feel baseliners are boring, its ur prerogative. I don't think Hewitt or Safin are boring players. If ROger wins 20 GSs and u r not convinced, I pity you. Coz its very difficult to win even 1 these days. THank u
RE:Its wrong to say Federrer does not have competition
by Keerthi Raj on Oct 18, 2007 07:26 PM
y dont u read what i hav written?...i didnt say Federer has anything to prove...i have clearly mentioned that Roger has an edge over Pete as well...my point is that it is very unfair to keep comparing the two for no reason....and yes, u say Becker won just one GS after 93...that was cos Pete beat him a few times during the era...Boris was 25 in 1993...:)...u just cant ignore the opponents of Roger n Pete...u cant say Roger is way better than Pete looking at the no. of Slams he has won...its the same in every sport...Take cricket for example...u cant judge the greatness of a player by the no. of centuries scored...the opposition bowlers shud be taken into account....if u take records into account, lukn at the no. of centuries scored, u can never say Sachin/Ponting is better than Vivian Richards, can u???? Its the same here as well....Roger just has a slight edge over Pete bcos he is a gud clay court player as well...
RE:RE:Its wrong to say Federrer does not have competition
by abishek on Oct 22, 2007 02:28 AM
hai friends, really federer is wonder of tennis. i have been all replys and most of the people told that there is no competition between federer and and the current players. no.. i can't accept it. because he is overdominating to all players agaist who have been played. i am sure if he would have played against sampras, becker, ivanisevik, agassi and others to the same form which he playing now, he ll be the winner. don't think nadal, roddick, murrey hewitt are not a good competitors. roddick is the best player as he the way of playing. but he win against him. the same way nadal struggling to win other than clay court. so i think he is very dominating to the currentn players. so he is the best player in the tennis history. may be it ll be break by future players only .and some of replys coming here richards best player than sachin and ricky. i want to clear no of centuries don't make a great player. as far your view, sachin also had to play against the world class players like macgrath, alan donald, shane warne, muralitharan. shaun polluk,. wasim akram, waqur younis, chaminda vass, coutny walse, amburose, daniel vettori, etc. they also very graet players. he had scored lot of runs against this world bests. but you know richards faced only some of the best like ian botham, hart lee (NZ) (SORRY SPELLS MIS), KABIL DEV, imrankhan dennis lilly etc. so don't think sachin is not played against a good bowling attack. sachin is the cricket history and federer is the tennis histor
RE:Its wrong to say Federrer does not have competition
by prabhanjan tattar on Oct 19, 2007 12:03 PM
I have read and well understood ur points. I know very well that the style of playing has changed. Let me make one thing clear, "I am not into comparison at all". Similarly, one can't say the current opponents are "weak", and this weakness is coming because u r taking the opponents of 90's into picture. But for Agassi, there is almost a striking similarity in Feds and Petes opponents. See this;If you r talking abt opponents .. lets compare them :
1. Ivansevic - Roddick (one GS each ... both gr8 servers ... both reached Wimb deep)
2. Courier - Hewitt (though i consider hewitt far better thn courier)
3. Pat Raft - Safin (2 GS each ..)
4. Kuerten - Nadal (although everyone knows its nt true ... Nadal is enuf fr Kuerten, muster etc)
The same way as u can say Safin, Hewitt, Roddick, and Nadal could not be good serve-and-volleyers, one can also say that Rafter,Ivansevic, Courier, Kuerten would not be good baseliners.
RE:Its wrong to say Federrer does not have competition
by Suresh Kumar on Oct 18, 2007 01:58 PM
Hey Keerthi , When did Becker, Edberg become boring baseliners???? Hello sir, Rip van winkle....wake up....Becker and edberg would rank among the best serve and volleyers that ever played the game!!Have you seen anybody else serve and volley better than these guys???
RE:Its wrong to say Federrer does not have competition
by Shankar Anand on Oct 18, 2007 02:59 PM
Read properly. Keerthi says serve and volleyers like Becker/Edberg never dominated clay and only baseliners did.
No one in an ounce of tennis knowledge would call Becker as a baseliner.
RE:Its wrong to say Federrer does not have competition
by Keerthi Raj on Oct 18, 2007 04:54 PM
Thanks Shankar....:)...As for Suresh, well, read properly b4 u comment!!!...:)
RE:Its wrong to say Federrer does not have competition
by Ram mar on Oct 18, 2007 08:31 AM
I agree Fed shud b placed among the greats but definetly not the greatest. U simply cant compare opponents sampras faced and today's players. Who said he doesn't have weakness? He still doesn't have answers to Nadal's heavy topspin forehand that lands on Fed's backhand. Projected as the only original serve and volley guy around, he wins less points at net than his baseline opponents. Djokovic and Nadal r the only guys who can give a fight. One more guys is Safin but he doesn't have time for others as he fights with himself all the time. Djokovic has to be intelligent and reduce the number of matches leading to a grand slam.
RE:RE:Its wrong to say Federrer does not have competition
by freak on Oct 27, 2007 11:23 AM
dude dont be a creap fed is only winning bcaus he s got immense luck .. the luck factor plays the role unlike nadal whois a true champ
RE:Its wrong to say Federrer does not have competition
by freak on Oct 23, 2007 10:39 AM
no chance fed will be exposed by nadal in every tournament next year
RE:Its wrong to say Federrer does not have competition
by SATYAPAL on Oct 25, 2007 11:11 AM
To be brief, Federer's game certainly has not been tested or put to fierence to a certaiin degree in real sense of the competition from greate players of the same quality or their not being available in the tournament or moreover, lesser & lesser number of players at internatonal circuits are emerging on the international level to rise to the occassion.
To challenge Federer, you need a player with a great service and combing his game with serve & volley at times and most importantly, a person who can return the serve better and play a point prudently and vigorously.
Height of Federer is a great advantage to him. However, Safin was the only confidnet men to take him to the bitter end of the game but unfortunately, he has fallen to injries in his career and Andy Roddick must have matured into a unparalled talent player and it appears he lacks apetite to come to that level.
Nadal has great potential and limited to a baseline game with great power that suits predominatly the clay court.
Above would point to the fact "Why there has been less fought-games against Federer.
It points to a time-phase where the Federe is sailing through untroubled water under his boat.
RE:Its wrong to say Federrer does not have competition
by Keerthi Raj on Oct 26, 2007 12:03 PM
very well put Satya...thats exactly my point...I am a die hard fan of the serve n volley game...and I really miss that style of play...if u read my comments above, its the point i make as well....Its basically left to Nadal to give him a fight on grass as well!!!!....I mean, isnt that telling something???...Nadal is a gritty player, period. His topspin shots are very good, but that doesnt essentially mean he is a grass court or hard court specialist....I just wish Pete n Roger were playing in the same era u know....We would've witnessed some amazing battles...I dont think they wud've dominated each other....its only on clay where Roger has the edge...but again, no serve n volleyer has ever dominated on clay....Pete's unbelievable serves are still fresh in every tennis fan's memory...not to mention the incredible volleys as well....I mean even those second serves were just out of this world...phew!!!
RE:Its wrong to say Federrer does not have competition
by prabhanjan tattar on Oct 26, 2007 01:04 PM
just wish Pete n Roger were playing in the same era u know....
Can't agree more, and this dream is thanks in part to the awesome play of Federer.
RE:Its wrong to say Federrer does not have competition
by Varun ccs on Oct 26, 2007 03:25 PM
You said "Nadal has great potential and limited to a baseline game with great power that suits predominatly the clay court." I think you have not watched him play this year's wimbledon final. Go watch it and then listen to what Federrer said after winning. And then comment.
RE:Wowww
by sach sum on Oct 17, 2007 10:01 PM
the point everyone should note is federer is no doubt a good player but the simple fact is he has no opponents in this era, whereas samparas had becker agassi hewitt ivanisevic edberg and so on...... these days there is hardly any opponent for federer except nadal on few occassions it is like the current Aus cric team
RE:Wowww
by Ashwin Sardeshpande on Oct 18, 2007 02:46 PM
Sampras always had the upper hand against Becker, Ivanisevic, Kafelnikov,Rafter , Kraijecek,etc. But his greatest rival was Agassi. Sampras had almost 70% win record against Agassi. But Federer has too played Agassi on quite a few occassions and he has a 100% win record against Agassi and that too at a time when Agassi was still playing great tennis. Agassi himself has commented that Roger is the greatest player he had played against.
I feel Federer will still make it through because age has caught with Sampras. People lose the touch even if they don't practice for even 3 months and he has been out of action for nearly 5 years now. Moreover, Federer is on the top of his game. It will be very tough to beat him!!!!!!!
RE:Federer will win!!!!
by anthony sunil on Oct 18, 2007 01:51 AM
Nothing can be compared to the great Sampras. He had formidable opponents while Federer has none. it is highly unfair to compare the legend against an upcoming star. Federer is a great player, but nobody will come close to the BOSS
RE:Federer will win!!!!
by Ramanathan Kumarappan on Oct 18, 2007 07:19 AM
You are absolutely right! Pete is the champion of champion. The simple reason is that he played against champions like Agassi, Becker, Edberg, Goran Ivansveich (may be wrongly spelled). Its good to see Pete on court again! Come on Pete, you would do it.
RE:Federer will win!!!!
by rajesh tegta on Oct 18, 2007 09:09 AM
what are u saying man fed has no formodable opponent infact he has more then pete.pete was only one aggasi close to him.but pete have many likes nadal,novan,hewwitt,and many and good too close to fed express itself....
RE:Federer will win!!!!
by ramadali vasu on Oct 18, 2007 09:58 AM
we should not compare like that. what gaurentte that pete would loose his game if players like nadal, hewwit etc. exists.
RE:Federer will win!!!!
by Ditty Chacko on Oct 20, 2007 10:39 AM
What ever is the end result it is the game of tennis which is going to be the winner... Can't wait for November 22.
RE:Federer will win!!!!
by bharat bharat on Oct 22, 2007 02:29 PM
of course, we all r waiting 4 that match, but i think the match between Roger and Nadal (Wimbeldon Final, 2007 is the greatest match ever i had seen)
RE:Federer will win!!!!
by kavita bhosle on Oct 18, 2007 03:53 PM
It really doesn't matter who wins in them as they both are considered as great in their time.
