Which is the home turf for Federer – Wimbledon ? Definitely not. It is only the US Open. Look at his amazing record there. Five consecutive wins and even that last year’s loss was a blip where Federer lost his concentration midway during the way and allowed Potro breathing space. It was a match he should have definitely won, but lost not due to the brilliance of Potro and it happened only because Federer lost his touch. I hope this year he will make amends for this loss and go all the way to win the Tournament. Afterall, the US Open is his most favourite surface and Federer has always performed incredibly in North American tournaments. His last two final streak in Toronto and Cincinnati proves that Federer’s streak in America continues.
The greatest achievement I would say for Federer is not his 16 Grand slam titles, but 23 consecutive semi-final streak in Grand Slams which is monumental and difficult to surpass by the current or future generation of players. What it takes is just not good play, but it all boils down to fitness level and add to that a bit of luck. Federer had it all in his armoury and created this amazing record. By doing so, he proved to one and all that he is a Master of all Surfaces – Clay, Grass, Hard Court etc., an unique feat to call that aptly. If such an astounding achievement does not merit the “Greatest” tag, then whatelse can. All this talk of adverse H2H with Nadal diminishing his greatness are just crap talk. H2H is 14-7 in favour of Nadal, but 10 of those wins of Nadal have been on Clay where everyone knows about Nadal’s prowess. Moreover, most of Nadal’s win against Federer have been won in tough five setters or three setters where anybody could have won. Again it boils down to luck which Federer unfortunately did not have when confronted against Nadal.
When most had written off federer, he won the recent cincinnati masters. He is 29yrs and has another 3 yrs of competitive tennis in him. Roger has won everything tennis has to offer. Whereas Nadal is yet to win the US open. So if anyone has to prove between them, then its Nadal. Federer is consider the greatest because of his over-all record.
Though the achievements of Federer are phenomenal, it is not correct to say he has nothing left to prove. 1. He is yet to prove that he can win another Grand Slam. 2. He is yet to prove that he can beat Nadal not just on clay, on any surface. 3. He is yet to prove that he can regain the World no. 1 title. Unless he has done all three, there will be doubts about his being the greatest of the era.
Re: Roger Federer
by sun m on Aug 27, 2010 10:49 AM
i dnt think tht there is any think for him to prove..Its like asking Tendulakar to WIN THE WORLD CUP FOR INDIA to prove himself.He is the BEST and always be the BEST.
Re: Roger Federer
by Rajesh Shetty on Aug 27, 2010 10:47 AM
Dear Ash, hope u r not that stupid Aishwarya Rai's cousin. Your points are simply not worth the salt. Dont forget that since 2004 he has been in almost all the finals of grand slams, winning many. So another win is not needed to prove he is great. And that win mind, u could happen any day, even 3-4 yrs down the line too. Bcos dont forget Kim Clijsters won after becomding a mom. He has beaten Nadal on all surfaces including clay. Yes Nadal has been his nemisis, but that could just be bcos of the fact that they both have contrasting styles. Federer is the Rahul Dravid of tennis, Nadal maybe like Sehwag. Somehow against Nadal's atheletism, his chess like methods have failed. But then many lesser ranked players have beaten Nadal. So that does not make both any less great players. He has been No. 1 for so many years, and as long as he can beat top players, rankings dont really matter much. Y do u think he needs to reinvent the wheel to prove his greatness..?
Re: Roger Federer
by Anurag Rathore on Aug 27, 2010 11:23 AM
1.He has won 4 GS after sidelined by experts. 2.He has beaten Nadal at every surface. 3.He has regain number 1 ranking after losing it to Nadal in 2008.
Re: Roger Federer
by Rohith Nigam on Aug 27, 2010 10:53 AM
1.He already have won one grandslam this year and you want one more if he wins that and then if he loses in the aus open next year then again you will pose the same question. So to your first qusetion will not be answered everytime sometime later he will not win one more and you will say he is not greatest.
2. Beating Nadal, if he beats then the question comes in head-to-head difference nadal still leads. So as of now he can defeat nadal but to increase the head-to-head meeting there is no enough time left out for that as he is still 29 and more they play it is advantageous to nadal as he is young but still think they have met mainly in clay reason they can meet only in the final and Federer is better than all expect nadal which proved beneficial to nadal but when it comes to hard court nadal doesn't reaches final so they hardly meet though there so many hard court tournaments. So it is upto your perception how you take it and say Federer not greatest or whatever you want.
3. To regain no.1 this again somewhere it has to end if he regains and again loses next year then you will again comeup with the same statement.
That's why the simplest way to check the greatest is no. of grandslams and Federer is leading by miles compared to the current generation.
Re: At least QF........
by Shiva MS on Aug 27, 2010 02:29 PM
and what are the expectations for nadal? you folks wont have the back bone to say that??!???
I am sure Federer will regain all that he has lost and when he decides to retire, there will be nothing left to criticize... He is the greatest of all times.....
