After Wimbledon, a reporter asked Rafa "Federer is universally held as the GOD of tennis, what's your opinion?" to which Rafa replied "Yes, you are absolutely right, there's no doubt about it. But I have beaten that GOD 14 times!!!". This reply points to 2 things, Rafa's humbleness and the actual Reality.
On the other hand Nadal is cruising past his goals. If his level of fitness stays what it is now for coming 2 yrs, he will have raining of slams. After some improvements in service Nadal is looking complete player to the competition. Fedrer's greatest weapon was consistency of his form and his fitness. Nadal has to show consistency both in form and in fitness. Fedrer being classy and Nadal being bully are all BS-talks.
I think Rafa is very close to dominating the game. grandslams bring the best in him. Murray is doing great its just matter of time. Novak is volatile so can't predict Roddick is no threat Fedex will keep playin unless he starts losing in early rounds, he still has in him to add couple more to his kitty. If Rafa gets his hands on the Aus open, I guess he will always have that mental dominance over other players.
Is their an arguement? With a Grand Slam as an ameture and as a professional, the GREAT Rod Laver was, is and will be unsurpassed. NO DOUBT. Mind you he got them in a Single Calendar year.
Re: Who is the best?
by Sudeepta Chakraborty on Sep 15, 2010 11:00 AM
Not once but twice.. 1962 and 1969.. however why not Pancho Gonzales.. he was largely self taught.. perhaps the best service game anybody ever had.. and an unequalled 8 times number 1 professional player.. he was obviously not allowed to play in Grand Slams since he was a professional..
Re: Who is the best?
by Sudeepta Chakraborty on Sep 15, 2010 11:01 AM
Not once but twice.. 1962 and 1969.. however why not Pancho Gonzales.. he was largely self taught.. perhaps the best service game anybody ever had.. and an unequalled 8 times number 1 professional player.. he was obviously not allowed to play in Grand Slams since he was a professional..
I feel the sublimeness, ease and effortlessness in Federer's game rather Nadal's hard work,,,BTW in sports spirit Nadal is better than Federer,,also I like Djokovic a lot,,
Look at the type of players Fedex had in his heydays - Hewitt, Agassi, Roddick, Safin, Ferrero, Moya.. most of these players were either beyond their prime years or not much consistent (barring Roddick).
While, Rafa has and faces Fedex, Roddick, Djokovic, Murray, Soderling..who are all in their primes and very competitive (barring now inconsistent Roddick). And he's been winning more than Fedex these last 3 years (6 slams for Rafa, 4 for Fedex).
Before this win, I still considered Federer as the undisputed best of his generation (by his good luck), if not of all times. But after this win, I'm somewhat thinking otherwise. Rafa is emerging victorious in a far more competitive time.
But, Fedex still has quite left in him and only the next 2 years will tell us as to who's the best of the generation and/ or even of all time. And, Fedex must win more than any other of the new challengers and Nadal, if he's to be truly regarded as all time greatest.
Re: Fedex vs. Rafa
by sandeep singh on Sep 15, 2010 04:25 AM
you know the average age of tennis player. so if fed win it is luck- 5 times in us, 6 time wim, 4 time-aus, 1 french. but if nadal win , he has tough competition. great logic. at age 29 he left something. hewit & fed age , there is huge gap , are u sleeping. u believe fed is great or not, but one thing is sure, he can not play his whole life & win. what happen to nadal against del porto last year, against murray in aus & us open. why he could not reach final in cicnitti & roger cup. what happen to him in quaterfinal of french in 2009. now do not say , he is injured . enjoy nadal win, he is third youngest to complete gs. day will come nadal will start lossing & but at that time no body can take away the credit from nadal at that time. pete start lossing at 30, borg at 26, mcnore, becker,edberg never reach to same level. only aggassi was wining at 35 yrs age. congrats to nadal for wining & completin gs. best of luck to him for 2011
Re: Re: Fedex vs. Rafa
by John Lennon on Sep 15, 2010 05:03 AM
You misread me. I said most of Fed's wins were at a time when he was NOT facing stiff competition. His challengers were either off-peak or inconsistent. While, most of Nadal's wins are at a time when we have new, competitive players along with Fedex and Roddick. I never said if Fedex wins it's automatically luck and if Nadal wins it's automatically tough competition. I based my arguments on facts. And facts suggest that Nadal is winning in tougher times.
Re: Re: Re: Fedex vs. Rafa
by sandeep singh on Sep 15, 2010 11:04 AM
nadal win look tougher because of his serve,which other person can attack easily. what happen to verdasco lost in 5 tough set in aus open & 3 set in us open. this mean nadal improve that much, opposition is almost zero. same thing happen to fed, his level was such that there was no competion. 2008-09 so much tough period for fed, i think he is mentally satisfied. for fan fed - nadal will be treat to watch, even if nadal win. best match i remeber is fed-nadal at aus if u have seen. no other match reach at same level because both of them are master of killing opposition
Re: Re: Re: Fedex vs. Rafa
by madanmohan siddhanthi on Sep 15, 2010 06:41 AM
I Fully agree when Federer in his early part of career - the gap between him and others i like -if Federer was 9 the others were in the scale of 5 or 6 occassionally a player may be able to play at alevel of 7 or 8 .Today the gap between Nadal and atleast 4 other palyers is one or even equal.The point is that Federer is a great player even now . At times it becomes very difficult to make comparisions - take for example it was same with Serena and Venus at their prime they were in 9 scale of ten others were at 4or 5 at best. Even today the competition in Women tennis is not of high order.Finally it is an opinion and if one wishes to disagree it is fine.
Re: Fedex vs. Rafa
by Anoop Narambron on Sep 15, 2010 08:02 AM
You can't win 16 grandslam titles just by luck. Fedex showed his class when he beat Sampras at his best in Wimbeldon, though he could not win it that year. Even Agassi had stated that Fedex is better than what Pete was at his best.The truth is Fedex was just too good for the others during his prime time. If your logic holds good that he never faced proper competition, then it's like saying Rod Laver doesn't deserve what he has achieved. Each decade you find a dominating player and you have to admire them for what they are. In tennis I guess, the number of grandslams you win is what sets you apart from the rest.
And by the way, my favourite is still Pistol Pete though he is not the greatest.
Re: Re: Fedex vs. Rafa
by John Lennon on Sep 15, 2010 08:27 AM
You also didn't get my point or are intentionally twisting it to vouch for Fedex. 'By good luck' - I meant it in the sense that he didn't have players good and consistent enough to really challenge him during his top form. Did I ever say he won just by luck?
And this is immature logic - more the number of grand slams, greater the player. The greatness of a player depends on the quality of opposition he faced, dominated and the number of times he did that.
Re: Re: Re: Fedex vs. Rafa
by Sudeepta Chakraborty on Sep 15, 2010 10:01 AM
That is a very foolish argument.. since 2005, nadal had been a constant threat, Djokovic since 2007..why don't you consider that too when considering Federer's challengers?What is more compelling - a 20-24 year old (nadal since 2005)fending off challenges from somebody 5 years his senior or the other way around? If one(Federer) is winning it automatically means others are not at their best/peak.. however for another person the argument reverses(Nadal)...point is when Federer won 2004 wimbledon, Roddick was defending US Open champion, was world # 1 till Feb 2004, Obviously not at his peak:-)..Marat Safin, Hewitt are all 1 year senior to federer so obviously when they were being defeated throught-out 2004-06 they were in the declining phases of their career..and why forget Nalbandian 1 year his junior (Mats Wilander stated(this US Open) , when asked about David Nalbandian, that "he's probably the most talented player out there, except from maybe Roger Federer, but he might even be the most talented player." ) Sir ji Lennon get your facts right...Federer was not winning his matches against players not at their peaks or on the decline.. he was forcing them towards their decline...
Re: Re: Re: Fedex vs. Rafa
by Anoop Narambron on Sep 15, 2010 09:02 AM
I'm not twisting to favour Fedex. Most of the tennis greats and commentators consider him to be the greatest. I don't think they will be that dumb not to analyse his opponents etc. Till Fedex came, Sampras was considered the greatest, though he never won the French Open. What was the logic to call him the greatest? Fedex won these many titles because he was a level better than the others. Same with Rafa now and the only player that has the game to stop him is Fedex.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Fedex vs. Rafa
by walu on Sep 15, 2010 09:30 AM
Points made by Lennon are spot on - Federer won most of his slams between 2003-2007 when there was no one on the scene, Agassi was close to retirement, Hewitt was passed his best, Roddick was maybe the only person who could be considered and Nadal was yet to come on whereas Sampras and Nadal had to battle a number of great players - Sampras had Agassi, Hewitt, Stich, Edberg, Becker, Goran, Rafter and Nadal had Federer, Murray, Djoko and host of others. Federer while among greatest is not the greatest .. greatest --- Laver, Borg, Sampras, Federer with Nadal joining that elite bunch if he gets another 3-4 slams.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Fedex vs. Rafa
by Sudeepta Chakraborty on Sep 15, 2010 10:05 AM
Another bit of foolishness.. Rafa had/has Federer, but obviously Federer didn't have Rafa:-)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Fedex vs. Rafa
by Another Critic on Sep 15, 2010 09:21 AM
Most of the commentators were saying that Federer the greatest in the history before but not any more. Trailing against his main rival by 7-14 does not make you the greatest. People (probably all Federer prejudiced fans) who still say that Federer is the greatest must go and see a psychiatrist.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Fedex vs. Rafa
by Sudeepta Chakraborty on Sep 15, 2010 10:12 AM
Yes it is foolish to say that Federer is the greatest ever.... at least none of the commentators have seen the past players like Emerson, Budge or Rod Laver, pancho Gonzalez etc. But I have been watching the game since about 1986, and Federer looks to be the best since then overall.... right now today Rafa is the best
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Fedex vs. Rafa
by Anoop Narambron on Sep 15, 2010 09:30 AM
Definetely agree with you. He will soon have to pass that mantle to Rafa or maybe time has already come.Moreover he has won French & Wimbeldon the same year twice and that too once by beating Fedex. This definetely shows he has the game on all surfaces. I still believe Fedex won French b'se Rafa was injured. Now that was called luck :)
Both Nadal and Federer are great players but, Nadal has to surpass federer's level of achievment to be called the greatest. Many people forget that federer has been in the sf and finals in every slam for the past 5-6 yrs, its not an easy feat. People half his age got injured and faded away. he has come back every single time and has reached that level, its not easy to show that level of consistency. Another thing, its not that he didn't have good opponents when he won all these, it was just that he was a level above others that emerging players like Nadal, djokovic, Murray and the likes had to raise their level to stand up to him.He was the first one to invent such new angles and shots that the rest had to follow to match him and thats why tennis is at a great place today coz the level is raised high.
Nadal may surpass fedex but for that he has to show the level of consistency and fitness that fedex displayed all these years.
for me, federer is the greatest coz he made others look ordinary by his game and consistency.
Re: Both Nadal and Fedex are great players but.....
by Another Critic on Sep 15, 2010 09:25 AM
What can we say about you when you consider someone that loses 2 out of every 3 matches against his main rival the greatest and yet believe that his game makes other look ordinary?
Re: Re: Both Nadal and Fedex are great players but.....
by mercitron on Sep 15, 2010 09:51 AM
u can criticize all u want...lets discuss this once they are done with their tennis careers...coz if its the h2h record is what u r relying on then davedenko is better than nadal.STFU n enjoy the moment when u can...
Re: Re: Re: Both Nadal and Fedex are great players but.....
by Another Critic on Sep 16, 2010 10:12 AM
You look like another frustrated federer fan. Oh ya, we will see when the Nadal retires, he will win more than Federer's number of grand slams. Until then STFU.
Re: Re: every player knows hez a doper ..
by hi hi on Sep 15, 2010 01:06 AM
Oh yes its time for Federer to collect those sportsmanship awards after the Grand Slam trophies drying out. Why dont Bango Tango himself collect them on Federers behalf?
Well done Nadal. Even as lot of Nadal fans are heaping praise on him, they are also taking pot shots at Federer and his fans. This is unfair. To put the record straight, this is the first time Nadal has won three slams in a single calendar year. Federer has done it thrice - 2004, 2006 and 2007. Nadal fans say that Nadal has won three consecutive slams this year (French, Wimby and US Open). Federer did it twice - 2004 Wimby, US Open and 2005 Australian Open and repeated the sequence in 2006-07. Federer has 5 year end Masters and Nadal has none. Yes, Nadal has age on his side and may surpass Federer, but certainly Federer as on date deserves more credit and the cloak of greatness for his achievements vis-a-vis every contemporary Tennis player, including Nadal. As for Nadal fans saying Federer won French Open and Wimby in 2009, because Nadal was injured, please understand staying fit enough to compete in every Grandslam is in itself a great achievement. It is a tribute to Federer's greatness that he has stayed fit and competed in every grandslam without break and there are no ifs and buts here. If Nadal was injured, it simply means he did not take care of his body and paid the price. If he is fit now and continues to be fit in the coming years to surpass Federer, let us hail King Nadal without demeaning the achievements of Federer!
Re: Re: Well done Nadal!!
by Solomon on Sep 14, 2010 02:57 PM
You are right Abhijit Nair. The sequence is: 2005 Wimby and US Open and 2006 Australian Open and 2006 Wimby and US Open and 2007 Australian Open. Thus, he has done 3 consecutive Slams twice. However, I stand corrected with regard to the correct sequence!
Re: Well done Nadal!!
by Anuraug Rathor on Sep 15, 2010 11:43 AM
Fedex NEVER won 3 consecutive slams in the SAME calendar year...that's the point,Solomon.That's mainly because he was always having trouble not winning the French.He was a beaten finalist there many times which is itself not a mean achievement.And he was losing to the best claycourt player ever...Rafa Nadal.I agree that Fedex should not be demeaned.However,also take a look at some of the Fedex fans here like my clone,Shiva MS,Vasudevan,Bango Tango etc who are now calling Rafa a cheat and drug abuser,just becuase he has shattered their hopes of a Fedex win.And by winning the US Open,he has shut the omouths of the ignorant among the tennis community.....FOREVER!!Vamos Rafa, and of course Fedex is surely one of the greatest tennis players EVER.
