Federer without an iota of doubt is great. A true legend indeed. Federer undoubtedly is one of the greatest players in tennis as he has proven time & again.
Federer is one of the greatest players in tennis and has proven from time to time.Likewise Sachin is one of the greatest players in cricket and has proven from time to time. But the jealous people have bad habbit at hitting them with faultfindings of them..but its like showing lamp to sun.....every player has weaknesses and had bad phase in their career. so both of them has had.
Re: FEDERER IS GOOD; NOT GREATEST
by UsualSuspect on Oct 29, 2010 07:17 PM
Federer is the greatest right now based on the way he dominated the scene for the past 5 years and the number of grand slams he has won !
Nadal has a great chance at becoming the greatest ! But Nadal has to win more grand slam titles than Federer to become the greatest.
first time when i saw roger playing against very strong player i didn't remember his name but in that match roger palyed wonderfully against powerful player his tecnies are wonder and I Become fan of him .
Great Ace hitting capability - Karlovic (In fact holds the record for hitting most aces in a match ; the % of aces in terms of no. of games) ( btr than Ivanisevic n any other player)
Best Serve @ Crucial Points - Pete Sampras
Best Kick Serve - Roger Federer
Best Sliding Serve - Verdasco
Best spinning Serve - Micheal Stich ( once Sampras had said that Stich does nt hit at a huge pace but very much spinning serve that is difficult to return)
Best 2nd serve - Again Sampras
Best Serve Action- Roger Federer (smooth, not too much bending action, tossing the ball to the same place but putting the ball at different places)
Re: BEST SERVES LIST ...
by bango tango on Jun 01, 2010 01:42 AM
but 4 me two best ever serves are 1. Roddick serve when the ball got stuck in the clay n no one could not get to know where the ball was ( available in u tube)
2. Roddick Serve to Fabrico Santoro for the last 2 points in 2008 US open ....the first one was hit so furiously (body serve) that Santoro had to avoid himself, forget about returning...next point, he dd not want to return :-)
Re: BEST SERVES LIST ...
by Sudden Lee on Jun 01, 2010 12:13 PM
Great ace hitting: Ivanisevic (cos he hit them when they were needed the most- although Karlovic has a better stat record) Best serve: Agree- Sampras Best Kick serve: Roddick (better than Fed's) Best sliding serve: Edberg (won him 5 Slams- the one to the deuce court) Best 2nd serve: Agreed- Sampras again (thats why he was so difficult to break as there was hardly any difference. Best motion: No one can beat Stich's- sheer poetry in motion. My no 2 would be Krajicek (these are the top two in Bud Collin's list too)
Re: Re: BEST SERVES LIST ...
by bango tango on Jun 01, 2010 09:11 PM
dont agree on Ivanisevic ....if he could have hitted when most reqd, then many tournamemts/GS were in his pocket ...rather i remember , he would hit 3 aces , then loose the game..
Re: Re: Re: BEST SERVES LIST ...
by Sudden Lee on Jun 03, 2010 02:20 PM
well, i haven't seen anyone who can make the ball jump as high as Roddick does. Also for Goran to win tournaments, he needed to have something else in his armoury apart from a big serve. He didn't win many for the same reason Safin didn't- they didn't have the reqd temperament! Btw, did u see Soderling pounce on Fed's second serves? That goes to show his kick is not that effective. And i also don't agree when u say he has the same ball toss for kicks and slices- he doesn't. The only one who disguised the ball toss well was Sampras- again reason why his serve was so difficult to break!
Re: Re: Re: Re: BEST SERVES LIST ...
by Sudden Lee on Jun 03, 2010 02:22 PM
Also, if u don't remember Goran hitting a second serve ace match point down against Bailey, then I don't think y've been watching tennis for too long!
I dont favour comparing players of different era. Conditions have changed a lot and keep changing. I can quote a couple of'em here. 1. Wimbledon courts have slowed down cosiderably(They use softer balls and different grass which slowed and increased the bounce) in late nineties and thru the 2000s. If this happened a decade earlier Lendl would have won atleast one.
2.Australian open abandoned the rebound ace surface which was used for last two decades. rebound ace is slightly slower and bouncier than the surface presently used. This surface heips baseliners who prefer hitting ground strokes flat without spin. It is not surprising to see Andre Agassi winning 5 of them. He must be ruing all those years he missed Ausopen b4 1995. This change had it happened a decade earlier Pete sampras would have had atleast a couple more of them.
Re: comparing players of different era.
by siva kumar on Jun 01, 2010 11:35 AM
even though pitches are changed, Advantage and disadvantages are equal same for each and every player, we have to see who has won and how many had won thats all.
Re: Re: comparing players of different era.
by bango tango on Jun 01, 2010 09:55 PM
abs correct...at least opponents r same....
I dont understand that 2 of Federer's records are not going be broken by billion of years, not even God can do that.... 1. Consc. 23 GS SF's 2. The No. of victories over top 10 players
Re: comparing players of different era.
by Sudden Lee on May 31, 2010 05:39 PM
Good observations, Alex! I really miss the serve and volley era of the 80s-90s. I wish Wimbledon courts were back to their old quck pace- oh, for another Edberg-Becker classic!
Re: Re: comparing players of different era.
by alex victor on May 31, 2010 07:02 PM
The last classic I remember from Wimbledon apart from the Roger-Rafa match-ups is from 2001 semis when Pat Rafter defeated Andre agassi in a five set thriller. Now-a days to get this kinda match is rare. Highlights are available in youtube.
Re: Re: Re: comparing players of different era.
by bango tango on Jun 01, 2010 01:14 AM
Alex, i had read in atpworldtour(doooot)co(m) that once Rafter & Ivanisevic asked Federer y hez not playing serve n volley in wimbledon ...Fedex had told them that the court has become considerably slow to do serve n volley....n according to Rafter & Ivanisevic, Federer is the Best serve n Volley player....
but contradicting u , Aus open is now played on Deco Turf which is considerably fast though not fastest....The Fastest court now is the Centre Court(Arthur Ashe) of US open n the slowest court is center court of French Open(Phillip La hartier)...
Re: Re: Re: Re: comparing players of different era.
by Sudden Lee on Jun 01, 2010 09:09 AM
The Aus Open court is neutral to both baseliners and serve'n'volleyers bcos it offers predictable bounce. A serve 'n' volleyer thrives where there is indifferent bounce. Thats why India used to hold all its Davis Cup matches on grass courts as our players weren't simply technically as good as the foreigners. As for the best serve'n'volleyer, I don't think anyone's been better than Edberg (maybe Mcenroe or Sampras. Fed's got exceptional hands but he's still not the best volleyer, not by a long mile!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: comparing players of different era.
by bango tango on Jun 01, 2010 09:51 PM
i didnt say federer...it was said by Rafter & Ivanisevic n i had read that article in atpworldtour(tod)(moc) ...
I guess Rafter & Ivanisevic know more tennis than us :-)
Re: Re: Re: Re: comparing players of different era.
by alex victor on Sep 01, 2012 04:42 PM
Bango, U r right, it is playedin Deco turf since 2009, the same as usopen. I'm taking about the years 1989-2009 when it was played on rebound ace surface.
Re: Re: Re: comparing players of different era.
by Sudden Lee on Jun 01, 2010 09:05 AM
Another rather un-heralded classic was Goran vs a Brit player called Chris Bailey..down two sets to love, 4-5 and 30-40, Goran prangs his first serve...so what does he do...slam a second serve ace! I bet any of the current generation to do that! That was a time when tennis had a lot of charisma and drama, and the players weren't really as technically perfect as the current lot...when u watch tennis nowadays, u need to keep wondering if there's actually a shot, humanly possible, not played by the lot...takes away something from the game..become more machine-like
Re: Re: Re: Re: comparing players of different era.
by bango tango on Jun 01, 2010 09:53 PM
one more from my side...the match btwn Alex Corretja & Sampras in 96 US open... cracker of a match ...In fact, sampras had vomitted during the match still continued playing !!!
Re: How can you miss Borg and Rafa
by Niranjan Dake on May 31, 2010 05:20 PM
It is list of players who have won more than 700 singles matches. Not list of great players. Otherwise Rod Laver would have been on top.
Federer is regarded as the greatest as he has won more slams than anyone in the game,and barring Nadal will be the No.1 on Clay too .Though for me his being the 'Greatest' is questionable as he loses to Nadal in tight matches which otherwise against other opponents he would hav won specially last years Australian and the Wimbledon 08 .He is much higher than Sampras in my books as Sampras never even reached the French Open final in his entire career.Federer is great and already a Legend no doubt but to be regarded as greatest he has to beat his competitors more often than not but same is not the case where Nadal is concerned
Re: Federer is Great !
by Ali M on May 31, 2010 05:25 PM
Nadal at 28..
We r discussing now that Federer is great wen he is 28yrs.. same goes to Nadal.. wait untill he is 28.. then try and compare the records.. He won all Grand slam Titles in the presence of Federer..That says is all.
Re: Re: Re: Federer is Great !
by Niranjan Dake on May 31, 2010 06:36 PM
He wants to say Nadal has won all his Grand Slams titles with Federer also competing in it. Not case with Roger as his earlier titles were without competing Rafa.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Federer is Great !
by Sudden Lee on Jun 01, 2010 08:58 AM
which of his titles were without Rafa competing? u mean to say the 16 slams he has won didn't feature Nadal?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Federer is Great !
by bob dsouza on Jun 01, 2010 11:48 AM
Again he lost to Nadal on hardcourts of Australian Open 09 and grass of Wimbledon 08.Prior to that he won in 5 sets on grass against Nadal in Wimbledon 07.He is not the favourite even on hardcourts if Nadal on the other side of the court,that the prblm his being the greatest is extremely debatable .
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Federer is Great !
by Sudden Lee on Jun 01, 2010 12:21 PM
Isn't it a pity that most of the Fed-Nadal GS finals have been at the French (clay)? Its a pity that only three of them have been anywhere apart from clay and the reason for that has been that Nadal has been beaten in the other rounds
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Federer is Great !
by VASUDEVAN V on Jun 01, 2010 10:30 AM
Here is the correct position dear all. The breakthrough year for Federer was 2003, when he won his first grandslam. Nadal won his first grandslam in 2005 (French Open), by which time Federer had 4 in his kitty. Starting from 2005 Wimbledon, Federer won 12 to Nadal's 5 and Nadal did not figure in only one of them, Wimbledon 2009 which he opted out because of injury. What it means is that, other than the French Open and Wimbledon, where Nadal reached the finals consistently, he reached the finals only once in Australian Open (which he won) and rest of the time, when Federer won 11 of them, Nadal fell on the wayside before the finals including in 2009 French Open. People are trying to undermine the achievement of Federer in spite of the fact he is the best at three of the four grandslams and the second best at French Open during the era of Nadal, who is considered as the best after Borg on clay by critics! Nadal himself has said in an interview yesterday that his triumphs against Federer on clay (10-2 H2H) does not make him greater than Federer and he has a long way to go before he is considered on par with Federer! This should shut all critics up!
Re: To Nadal Fans....
by Venkat Raman on May 31, 2010 05:06 PM
Every one is best in the above list. They are true professionals. In a given day some may play well and win. Nadal is king of Clay and he is a tough competetor for Fedrer.All the best for both of them.
Re: To Nadal Fans....
by aishwarya patil on May 31, 2010 04:18 PM
It may be so, Nadal is better than Federer. Perhaps Nadal himself doesn't know how good he is.
Re: Re: To Nadal Fans....
by Sudden Lee on May 31, 2010 05:43 PM
nadal is def better on clay as it assists his roll-heavy hitting the most. his success on grass is primarily bcos of his sthleticism and the fact that the courts have been made considerably slower...wonder how he wud have fared if he faced the likes of Sampras, Stich, Krajicek, Goran,etc on grass. Pace is his undoing and that has been proved at the US Open.
