Winning a world tour is much difficult than winning a GS. Because in world tour you face top players in every match while in GS you have to face only 2 or 3 tough matches. Sampras won it 5 times shows how good he was and now Federer has won it 5 times. Federer is undisputed all time best.
Once again Nadal struggled against Federer on other than clay. Head to head can be changed if they will meet frequently on grass or hard or carpet.
I am worry about aishwarya patil. What will he say now? There was no injury to Nadal this time.
Re: World Tour........
by Arijit Guha on Nov 29, 2010 10:29 AM
Point well taken. But my dear I have been following tennis since 1972. World tour started only a few years back. I have followed the achievements of various tennis legends who have won six or more GS tournaments, like John Newcombe, Ken Rosewall, Stan Smith, Connors, Borg, McNroe, Wilander, Edberg, Becker, Agassi, Sampras, Lendl or Jim Courier. If you follow the great seventies, eighties and nineties, you will see that at all the point of time, atleast four legends were competing with each other. There were great tennis rivalries. But the advantage of Federrer was the fact that during the first five years of his dominance there was not a single legendary player excluding him. If you look at his statistics, you will find that he has won most of his GS titles by defeating various players at various times. Only once did he defeat a legend named Agassi at the 2003 US open when Agassi was 35 years old and that too in five sets. Only in the later half of his career Nadal came into limelight and everybody knows his record against Nadal. It is 8 - 14 all time and 2 - 5 in GS tournament. Whereas Nadal in his lifetime has one nine Grand Slam out of which five have come by defeating Federrer who is definitely a legend. Since age is in Nadal's favor, he will break all records. But, yes he definitely need not prove any further that he is the greatest in the open era beating Borg, Sampras and Federrer.
You have not seen Agassi. Now-a-days, serve & Volley game has disappeared
Re: World Tour........
by Arijit Guha on Nov 29, 2010 10:29 AM
Point well taken. But my dear I have been following tennis since 1972. World tour started only a few years back. I have followed the achievements of various tennis legends who have won six or more GS tournaments, like John Newcombe, Ken Rosewall, Stan Smith, Connors, Borg, McNroe, Wilander, Edberg, Becker, Agassi, Sampras, Lendl or Jim Courier. If you follow the great seventies, eighties and nineties, you will see that at all the point of time, atleast four legends were competing with each other. There were great tennis rivalries. But the advantage of Federrer was the fact that during the first five years of his dominance there was not a single legendary player excluding him. If you look at his statistics, you will find that he has won most of his GS titles by defeating various players at various times. Only once did he defeat a legend named Agassi at the 2003 US open when Agassi was 35 years old and that too in five sets. Only in the later half of his career Nadal came into limelight and everybody knows his record against Nadal. It is 8 - 14 all time and 2 - 5 in GS tournament. Whereas Nadal in his lifetime has one nine Grand Slam out of which five have come by defeating Federrer who is definitely a legend. Since age is in Nadal's favor, he will break all records. But, yes he definitely need not prove any further that he is the greatest in the open era beating Borg, Sampras and Federrer.
You have not seen Agassi. Now-a-days, serve & Volley game has disappeared
Re: Re: World Tour........
by Kd Narang on Nov 29, 2010 10:39 AM
Mr. Guha.. there are good players Even in today's Era. It is simply that - in front of Federer, they look ordinary. Letan, Murray, Djoko,Safin, Nalbandian all are Talented players BUT Federer is Head and shoulder ahead of them except Nadal. If you see players from 70's and 80's on "You Tube" you will notice -they are equal to todays Murray and Djoko, Tsogna etc. Competition in Today's Tennis IS SAME as in 70's and 80's, BUT Federer and Nadal made it One sided.
This is what it means to us neutrals. A great rivalry. And both are great ambassadors to the game. Never involved in personal duals. Both respect each other. And the main thing is inspite of being successful, they are level headed. They use their charisma for the betterment of poor and downtrodden. I salute you both. God bless you and your family.
It was absolutely the breathtaking Tennis Match.The aggression shown by both the Players was outstanding.at the end fed had upper hand on Nadal but still Nadal is better than Fed Ex.
Re: Breathtaking
by Joel martins on Nov 29, 2010 10:03 AM
No. I don't agree. Let Nadal prove it consistantly over the years as Federer has done. Don't forget during Nadal's ascend in last 6 years Federer was No.1 for 4 years and Nadal number 2 during those years. No.1 is given to a person who is consistant at all tournaments. Federer has won many titles on grass, hardcourt and even clay except French open (only one)whereas Nadal has won most of his titles on clay. He has hardly won anything on grass (only 2 wimbledon's vs 6 by Federer) and hardcourt (1 australian vs 4 by Federer and 1 US open vs 5 by Federer). Even season ending championship is won (5 times) more times by Federer compared to Nadal (none). I know Nadal is a great player. But let us wait for few more years before we pass the judgement.
Its rare privilage for fans to see two greatest player in history in same era.The quality is several notches ahead copared to other great rivalries.Sachin-shane warne,Lara mcgrath are great examples but not as good this one.This is best insport.
