Re: Lucky
by prasath mull on Jun 09, 2009 11:44 AM
Please dnt talk about Leander. He is fit for doubles. Who asked him not to come to participate singles. You can see individual ability in Singles only. Please stop the crap!!!!!!!
Re: Lucky
by prasath mull on Jun 09, 2009 11:45 AM
Please dnt talk about Leander. He is fit for doubles. Who asked him not to come to participate singles. You can see individual ability in Singles only. Please stop the crap!!!!!!!
Re: Lucky
by prasath mull on Jun 09, 2009 11:45 AM
Please dnt talk about Leander. He is fit for doubles. Who asked him not to come to participate singles. You can see individual ability in Singles only. Please stop the crap!!!!!!!
Re: Re: Lucky
by himanshu singhal on Jun 09, 2009 12:15 PM
Dont look at negatives.Look the positive way.Atleast he has won something for country.wt have u done man.
Re: Re: Lucky
by cooldiffusion on Jun 09, 2009 12:21 PM
Mull you are null! Leander's (9 slams) achievements and Bhupati(11 slams) have been awesome and every Indian should be really, really proud.
Federer is a total cry baby....not a single slam he has won with a smile on his face...always crying...and he always cries after the match is over....while sampras can cry,vomit,breakdown even in the middle of a match and still win....he's the greatest !
Re: Cry Baby Federer !
by manish on Jun 09, 2009 12:50 PM
yeah, u dont know how it feels to win a grand slam...so u write all this crap. did u ever win something in your street?
Re: Re: Cry Baby Federer !
by Toby Maguire on Jun 09, 2009 01:12 PM
baby...perhaps u should explain to me "how it feels to win a grand slam"...since u seem to be able to feel it !
Re: Cry Baby Federer !
by Gaurav Mathur on Jun 09, 2009 11:21 AM
Sampras is no doubt a gr88 player...fantastic on Grass and Hard court...won US Open at a very young age...prob youngest but on clay and on carpet...he wasn't comfortable. He wasn't as consistent as Federer and did not dominate the way Federer did FEDERER is def. a far more accomplished player...and yes the artistry...oh la lalalla
Roger Federer’s French Open title cut in half the points gap between him and number one Rafael Nadal in the ATP rankings. World No 2 Federer trailed Nadal by 4,490 points before Roland Garros; the deficit is 2,070 in Monday’s rankings. Federer held the No. 1 ranking for a record 237 consecutive weeks. French Open runner-up Robin Soderling moved up to a career-best No 12 from No 25.
nadal is a just a fat butt immature player... whom not many seem to support, except for in his own country.... nadal's coach is calling the paris spectators as stupid because they didnt root for him. nadal doesnt even have the poise of soderling or del potro or murray.
Federer’s achievements make him the greatest player of all-time.Playing under the most pressure of his career, Federer came up with his best performance of the Paris fortnight to win his first French Open. Abs. no doubt that he has 7-13 record against Nadal(lead due to Caly wins), abs. no doubt Nadal is the greatest Clay cout player but then we are talking who is the Greatest overall...it is Federer. Consistent performance on all surfaces, artistic tennis, ability to come out of tough situations, rarely loses to below top 5 seeded players (exception 2008 yr). Yes, he is not as dominant as he was in 2007 or earlier but then at this age with young talent coming up, and still reaching finals of slams, semis of masters and even beating Rafa RECENTLY on clay in master series finals is simply awesome. He is the only player who comes close or actually beats Rafa on clay. Sampras took almost double time and 40% more matches to win 14 slams than Federer and he never came close to French except 1 semis. Rafa is close, having already won 6 slams, 15 master series already equal to Federer...so he is def a great player...or one of the greatest but just the way Federer plays, the aura, the artistry, the court speed, 1 hand backhand...u fall in luv with tennis...thx to GREATEAT PLAYER OF ALL TIME...ROGER FEDERER
Nadal is a good player and only thing he has to learn to achieve Federer's records is only by staying fit and competing in all the grand slams. Now itself he is not playing in a major grass court tourny and is also doubtful for Wimbeldon. Nadal's game is faulty and better players dont run around too much and retrieve balls, thats why he lost against a low ranked player in the French open.
Re: Re: A coward's tactics
by partha sarathy vemuru on Jun 09, 2009 02:02 PM
It is not his fault to be ranked 2nd and defeat other low ranked players...
Re: Re: A coward's tactics
by gyanendra singh on Jun 09, 2009 01:25 PM
@You See FYI Whom federer def in finals Wim 2003 def Philppousis, Wim 2004 & 2005 Final def Roddick, Wim 2006 & 2007 def Nadal, Wim 2008 got def by Nadal in Final. French Open 2005 def by Nadal in Semis Nadal went on to win, French open 2006-2008 final got def by Nadal, French open 2009 winner def Soderling who def Nadal in 4th round. Aus open 2004 def Safin, Aus Open 2005 got def by Safin in semis & Safin went on to win, Aus open 2006-2007 def Baghdatis, Gonzales. Aus open 2008 got def by Djokovic in semis n he went on to win,in 2009 got def by nadal. US open 2004-2008Lleyton Hewitt, Andre Agassi, Roddick, Djokovic, Andy Murray. Bro if u have little bit of analyitical skill you can see whoever def Federer since 2004 in any Grand slam has went on to win the final. LOlz but it didn't happen in case of Nadal he lost to Soderling in the 4th round of french open 09, although he was able to reach the final but there was Federer who spoilt his party.
Re: Re: A coward's tactics
by SREENU RAO on Jun 10, 2009 04:27 PM
You have a good mail name You see. but the problem is you cant see. When you say that Federer has defeated only low ranked players in this French Open dont you understand that Nadal has not even been able to defeat the low ranked players. Hahahahahahahahahah
Now that Federer has won 5 england open, 5 us open, 3 aus open and 1 french open, it equals 14 grand slam record of Pete . Nadal is now at 6 grand slams and to match Federer's 14 at the same age, Nadal has to win 2 grand slams a year on a average. Federer would play to see that Nadal doesnt win any more grand slams. If not him then someone like Soderling would also be there.
Re: Some TENNIS HISTORY for the very young !!!!!!
by Perumunda Sharma on Jun 09, 2009 08:07 AM
Tennis fan is absolutely correct. The greatest player of all times is Rod Laver. If Laver was allowed to play between 1963 and 1967, he probably would have repeated the complete grand slam a few more times taking the total to an unbeatable height.
Re: Some TENNIS HISTORY for the very young !!!!!!
by tennis fan on Jun 09, 2009 01:09 AM
LAVER turned professional in 1963 when pros were barred from playing in the grand slams; otherwise he might have won all four in another year or two from 1963 to 1967 before the OPEN Era began from 1968
Re: Re: Some TENNIS HISTORY for the very young !!!!!!
by tennis fan on Jun 09, 2009 01:29 AM
As for competition LAVER had Emerson, Newcombe, Rosewall, Krishnan playing in those years. Connors had Borg to contend with, McEnroe came along for Borg and Lendl nudged McEnroe into the shadows. Sampras and Agassi were worthy opponents for each other. There is no doubt that Fedex is a great tennis player but he has had no consistent challenger till Nadal came along and that too on clay to begin with till Nadal progressed enough on grass and hardcourts to beat him at Wimbledon and at the Australian Open.
Re: Re: Re: Some TENNIS HISTORY for the very young !!!!!!
by tennis fan on Jun 09, 2009 01:42 AM
BTW NADAL has a positive head-to-head record against FEDERER. Though most of his wins have come on clay Nadal did beat Federer at Wimbledon and Aus Open. Commentators at the French Open observed how scratchy Federer's play was at this year's French Open; Tommy Haas could have knocked him out, Del Potro could have, too. If Soderling had played the Final with the power and precision that he played against Nadal, Soderling would have easily beaten Federer. Instead, Soderling seemed completely overwhelmed by the occasion of his being in his FIRST Grand Slam Final. Federer won this year's French Open in spite of no longer playing the way he used to. Finally, who would have bet on Federer winning the Final if he had been playing Nadal ????
Re: Re: Re: Re: Some TENNIS HISTORY for the very young !!!!!!
by Anurag Rathore on Jun 09, 2009 02:06 AM
nadal was beaten comprehensively at the madrid open by roger in straight sets... who would have bet on that. nadal's days are over, now that many players know his game inside out.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Some TENNIS HISTORY for the very young !!!!!!
by sandeep singh on Jun 09, 2009 03:40 AM
not sure what you want to write.Comparing Laver with Federer, than why u donot want to compare Laver with Pancho Gonzales, because that was pro era & top players not allowed to participate in slams by their sponsor.Different b/w Nadal & Federer success is that b/w nadal & every slams their is one man federer stands & he need to beat federer on other hand Federer faces different opponents for most of Slams he won.So not a Federer fault that Nadal is not there in the final of every Slams.Federer is the greatest at this point of time & Nadal will definitely cross Federer marks within 3-4 years so wait for that time & as Pete said u do not who is practicing in net at any part of world to become greatest. & do not says that world stops playing tennis when Federer was at peak
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Some TENNIS HISTORY for the very young !!!!!!
by You See on Jun 09, 2009 11:32 AM
Federer is greatest this point in time but not greatest for ever... Who knows whats in store and who would rule 10 years down the line!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Some TENNIS HISTORY for the very young !!!!!!
by siva kumar on Jun 09, 2009 11:27 AM
I agree with Lavers record winning perfect slam in a year... Now no player can do that because conditions are different now.. When laver played the US and Australian open surface was also grass... Now it is hard courts... Also the level of tennis got much higher now... we cant compare two eras... Federer is greatest of all for years to come..
Re: Luck favoured him.
by Amit on Jun 08, 2009 11:27 PM
Some people and some of the commentators for sure are not willing to concede that federer is greatest. I was fan for Sampras once and then came the time when my interest in tennis begin to weaken. But Federer brought me back and so he did to many of the fans who forgot what quality tennis means. Nadal is a good athelete but you want to see the shot making, so no beyond than Federer
Re: Luck favoured him.
by Mahesh Kishore on Jun 08, 2009 11:38 PM
Nadal became a bunny for Soldering..So what to do yaar.... Better luck for Wmbdn. Lets see whom nadal becomes a bunny for :) heheheh
Re: Luck favoured him.
by narmada thampan on Jun 08, 2009 11:14 PM
..........for those who say “oh Federer didn’t beat Nadal”, well,he already beat Nadal on clay this year.Fed and Soderling were the only players to beat Nadal on clay this year. Federer is 1-0 against Nadal in 2009...What a satisfying final to see Roger finally win a French Open title. He has been so great and so dominating in his career but his inability to win the French was its only blemish. This win is a validation that distinguishes him from all the other tennis greats. This title is his just reward. Great!
Re: Re: Luck favoured him.
by venkat a on Jun 09, 2009 01:38 AM
Dont worry for all Roger's fault finders... Fedx already defeated nadal in Clay this year...
Still not satisfied.. Wait for French open 2010... Fedx will prove again he is the grestest..
Federer is no doubt the greatest tennis player ever. when comparing with others (Before 80's), one must remember that competition has only grown all these years. There are more players taking on tennis and its hard out there. He plays tennis and real tennis shots and not like some of the guys out there who depends on powershots to win the matches. Nadal has managed to just scrap past Federer on surfaces other that Clay. Nadal is exciting but has long way to go. We saw him go out of french this year and that also in 3rd round, while federer has reached 26th succsesive grand slam semi finals. The day Nadal wins more grand slams than Federer He will be greatest,but for now FEDERER is the KING
Re: Federer is the greatest
by gyanendra singh on Jun 09, 2009 12:30 PM
Well rightly said Federer is more consistent in grand slams than any other player even better than Nadal. Nadal is great player but we still have to wait and see how how he plays in coming years.
