Final is Over, Nadal will get one set??only if djokovic too tired ..Roger really missed chance here to win against Nadal in straight set. Murray lost in earlier thus the reason lucky nadal entered in final
I don't think Djokovic can stop him. Meanwhile don't be misguided by my comments because whenever it comes to Federer VS Nadal, I will say Federer is superior than Nadal until Nadal cross his records.
Being a Federer fan, I am very happy at the result, for it has saved him of a humiliating defeat at the hands of Nadal. Will somebody calculate the points he lost and Djokovic gained? I think Djokovic gets the no. 2 slot tomorrow.
Re: @ Anurag Rathore......
by aishwarya patil on Sep 12, 2010 10:10 AM
You are getting so excited as if you have won it. Let Anurag, bango tango and Kareem absorb the shock. They cannot resist this site, but you have to give them some time.
Re: @ Anurag Rathore......
by Anurag Rathore on Sep 12, 2010 11:01 AM
Me! Are you crazy? When US Open 2010 started I said A.Murray or R.Nadal is favorite this year. I think yesterday my clone has talked nonsense here.
It looke like end of era of Great player. We should accept this, there is always an end of everything. Now he should hang his racket. He will always be remembered as one of the all time greatest player of tennis.
Re: Fedex
by aishwarya patil on Sep 12, 2010 09:58 AM
I disagree. He is still one of the best in the world, and will have chances to win more slams, though not with the regularity of earlier times, only if he continues to play. He must continue. If your logic were to be followed, every one except Nadal should retire.
Re: Re: Fedex
by mouli guha on Sep 12, 2010 10:16 AM
I have been following tennis since 1973. All the players who are considered to be legends in their own rights like, Borg, Connors, McNroe, Becker, Edberg, Wilander, Agassi, Lendl, jim Courier, Pete Sampras, had won six or more grand salm in their carrer. But in those times, there were atleast four legends playing at a time. Hence you could see various champions at various tournaments. There were many tennis rivalries. But the basic thing with Fed. is that in the first five-six years of his career there were not a single legends he faced in any GS tournament. Only in 2003 he defeated 35 year ols Agassi in five setter in US Open. His real test started after Nadal emerged and the record between them is known to all. Creear was 16-10 to Nadal and in GS tournaments 5-2 to Nadal. Federrer defeated Nadal only in 2006 and 2007 Wimbledon. Nadal's credit lies in the fact that from the begining of his career he is facing Federrer and still has wom eight Grandslam. Thus it proves that he is really great. whereas if one sees Federrers GS wins he has won against various players in the finals. there has been no standard competitor for him. In the case of Nadal he has won five GS by defeating FEd., out of eight. So that proves that Nadal is no less greater than fed if not better.
Re: Re: Fedex
by sandeep singh on Sep 12, 2010 11:34 AM
mouli guha did not understand ur word? fed is not great becuse he does not have competion. nadal is great because fed is against him. either there are not great player after pete or we have. if there are not great player after pete than ATB goes to pete or laver. then definately fed is not great or Atb than also nadal can not become ATB, any time in his carear. if there is competetion after pete than ATB bw nadal & fed, so u need to choose. i know ur are die hard fan of nadal & hater for fed. can u tell me who is best on clay-- definately nadal, which play in fed era. so if fed is ATB than nadal can overtake him in 2-3 yrs. if fed is not ATB now, nadal can not become ATB. even if nadal win 5-6 GS he will near or cross the fed because he had olympic . so wait or conclusion is both are fake. this is for all fed hater. also enjoy because at fed age & his reducing speed & nothing more to achieve more player can bat him in 2011
