Alright, I feel you. The thing I give Roger a lot of credit for is the evolution and transition of his game.
agreed 100%, to still keep with guys that are 25-26 is amazing.
Alright, I feel you. The thing I give Roger a lot of credit for is the evolution and transition of his game.
There hasn't been new racquet tech. The new "tech" has been strings.new racket tech.
There hasn't been new racquet tech. The new "tech" has been strings.
well it is easy to compare Feds generation with current one. Fed generation was not the greatest. The only one that had enormous talent(other then Fed) was Safin, but he was more injured then he was playing. Sadly. Roddick is good player, but not a world class talent. But I would not compare Sampras era with Rogers or current because sport changed a lot with slowing of the courts and new racket tech.
Kind of moot when Fed still beats top 5 players and was No 1 last year for a time.
Not really its quite simple. Last year after USO Novaks gets injured, if i remember well he comes back during Basel loses SF to Kei and wins only one match at WTF - no points after USO. Roger has great fall and wins some tournaments that others were not playing or were injured/burned out by the time they were played, namely Basel, Paris and WTF. During WTF last year Murray plays only one match, gets injured pulls out. Novak wins only match due to shit form. Nadal also burned out goes out in the group section also winning only one against Fish.
Next year(2012) Roger plays a lot of tournaments early on to collect points, playing Rotterdam after many years. But that's okey nr was his goal. Let's get back to the point. Novak had a lot of points to defend early in the year. And luckuly for Roger there was no Nemesis of his at Wimbledon Known as Rafa. A lot of things fell his way but he deserved it.
Let's not forget that he has negative record vs Rafa 18 vs 10, against Andy 10-9, and probably soon to Novak atm 16-13 for Roger.
my point was not that roger suck (which is something you would like to believe) but that current era is much better then his when he played like of Roddick, Safin, Hewitt, Naldbandian, Davidenko, etc. and won most of his slams. We see how one injured player (Nadal) makes a difference in a year. Roger and andy winning Wimbledon, and USO - I don't think that would have happened if Rafa was injury free. That was one point. How thougher it is today to win slams. Even someone like Berdych has taken Roger twice (or more not sure) in slams. This year and 2010 Wimbledon. Much better better players today then fed generation. Pure and simple. Fed still world class.
...poor Fed.
His achievements are always marred by the fact that his rivals are getting injured/not at their best.
....
...........
...................
Well tough luck for them.
I mean give me a break, come on. The tennis competition is not limited to just what happens in the court; taking care of your body is also the integral part of the whole competition of the sport. Thinking that Fed's achievements are somewhat lessened due to Novak/Nadal/Murray/Whoever else is there are injured or not present or not at their best is just.... gah... Well in that case they should have taken better care of their bodies then since getting/staying fit is part of the competition whether you like it or not.
If Nadal cannot compete for whatever reason, that's his own fault, it has nothing to do with Fed, and all it shows that Fed took care of his body much better than Nadal took care of his. End of story.
Of course, some injuries are really unfortunate, such as Muster getting hit by a car or Seles getting stabbed. But Nadal's and to some extent Djokovic's injuries can be at least partly attributed to their style of play. Also, them being burnt out or having 'shit form' at the end of 2011 is definitely their own fault. And Nadal lost fair and square at Wimby 2012, he was in the draw and got knocked out, can hardly hold that against Fed.
Yeah, a consistent Lisicki would be godlike.Lisicki's game is pretty amazing when it works. Too bad she only playing like that for one month of the year.
Don't underestimate Hewitt, Safin, Nalbandian, etc. just because of their slam numbers/record vs prime Roger. They were really great players. Hewitt, particularly, is almost underrated because he couldn't dominate at the top and was no. 1 in a transition period between greats. (And also he was pretty annoying in many ways.) But damn, could he play. He was no walkover. Even hobbled in the last few years, he can compete with top players for stretches. I think back to Roland Garros '06 and Hamburg '07 vs Nadal - both clay, Nadal at the top, Hewitt on comebacks, Hewitt's worst surface, but his class shines through. NOTE: I am not suggesting Hewitt is anything near as great as Nadal. But nor is he anything like a Ferrer (the best 'retreiver' atm).
Tomic vs Djokovic @ Hopman Cup going on now.
http://lsh.streamhunter.eu/static/popups/127925839318020.html
Lisicki's game is pretty amazing when it works. Too bad she only playing like that for one month of the year.
As great as Federer was in 2004, I don't think Djokovic or Nadal would lose two sets to love against him in a slam final.Don't underestimate Hewitt, Safin, Nalbandian, etc. just because of their slam numbers/record vs prime Roger. They were really great players. Hewitt, particularly, is almost underrated because he couldn't dominate at the top and was no. 1 in a transition period between greats. (And also he was pretty annoying in many ways.) But damn, could he play. He was no walkover. Even hobbled in the last few years, he can compete with top players for stretches.
As great as Federer was in 2004, I don't think Djokovic or Nadal would lose two sets to love against him in a slam final.
As great as Federer was in 2004, I don't think Djokovic or Nadal would lose two sets to love against him in a slam final.
i think prime federer could destroy djoker on a fast hardcourt. but nadal no way, nadal is just a nightmare match up for federer. the game got slowed down way to much.
What happened?Well, looks like Azarenka won't become people's champion anytime soon.
What happened?
Victoria Azarenka is blaming a bad pedicure for the injury that forced her out of a Brisbane International semi-final against Serena Williams.
The top-ranked Azarenka announced half an hour before the scheduled start of Fridays match that she had to withdraw after having treatment for an infected big toe on her right foot, saying she couldnt risk aggravating the problem ahead of her attempt to defend her Australian Open title starting Jan. 14.
Didn't want to get destroyed again, huh?
Didn't want to get destroyed again, huh?
What is with tennis players these days and the lame excuses? First it was Nadal with his fake flu, now Azarenka can't play because of a pedicure.Yeah, her excuse is ridiculous. She had destroyed her opponent 61 60 the preceding day, she was perfectly capable of playing. I would be extremely pissed if I'd bought tickets for the match and waited on-site only for Azarenka to come out and spew some lazy apologies.
In other news, Davydenko destroyed Ferrer. It's a joy to watch Davy playing like this
Yeah, her excuse is ridiculous. She had destroyed her opponent 61 60 the preceding day, she was perfectly capable of playing. I would be extremely pissed if I'd bought tickets for the match and waited on-site only for Azarenka to come out and spew some lazy apologies.
In other news, Davydenko destroyed Ferrer. It's a joy to watch Davy playing like this
In other news, Davydenko destroyed Ferrer. It's a joy to watch Davy playing like this
So much for Davydenko destroying Aus Open.
Such a choke.
Anyways, really pulling for Dimitrov to beat Murray tonight. He needs it far more.