I was wondering the same thingbroncoman said:7 years, federer will be 30, i wonder if he will still be unbeatable on grass, hes yet to win an olympic medal,
Like any tennis player gives a **** if they win a gold medal! Seriously, they don't get paid for it, and it isn't a grand slam. If you ask Marc Rosset if he would give up his gold medal for a Grand Slam Championship I think he would.broncoman said:7 years, federer will be 30, i wonder if he will still be unbeatable on grass, hes yet to win an olympic medal, lost in the semis to Haas in sydney then lost the bronze medal match..
in 2004 he lost 3rd round to Berdych...
forget the competition, the point is you just need to watch him play to know that he is special...honestbharani said:Man, I cannot believe it has come down to this........ Federer being compared to Rafter.... You know, Sanz, maybe it looks as though he has no competition but let me tell you.....Safin and Nadal are as good as any guy who has played tennis in the 90s barring Sampras and perhaps, Agassi. YOu are the first person, at least in my experience of watching and talking Tennis, that has suggested that Federer is not even 'great'. Guys like Sampras, Boris, Edberg, Courier, Mcenroe, Borg, Connors etc have all said that he could be "the most complete tennis player" since Laver... Some have even called him potentially the greatest..... He is just so damn good that he makes the others look very inferior to him....
true....they might consider it nice to be able to do it...but it definitely doesn't define their career or legacy...Mister Wright said:Like any tennis player gives a **** if they win a gold medal! Seriously, they don't get paid for it, and it isn't a grand slam. If you ask Marc Rosset if he would give up his gold medal for a Grand Slam Championship I think he would.
Oh he is definately special, but I think the lack of competition makes him look much better than he actually is. And when I watch tennis, I want to see a match, good match.Anil said:forget the competition, the point is you just need to watch him play to know that he is special...
So ?? After all its the finals which decide who takes the trophy and the amount home. Otherwise why not give the prize money to the guy who plays the most no. of games.marc71178 said:There's more than 1 round in it.
Common man, Rafter was one of the best serv and volley players of 90s. His career was marred by injuries and not to forget that he played in the era of two truly all time greats (Pete & Agassi).honestbharani said:Man, I cannot believe it has come down to this........ Federer being compared to Rafter.... You know, Sanz, maybe it looks as though he has no competition but let me tell you.....Safin and Nadal are as good as any guy who has played tennis in the 90s barring Sampras and perhaps, Agassi. YOu are the first person, at least in my experience of watching and talking Tennis, that has suggested that Federer is not even 'great'. Guys like Sampras, Boris, Edberg, Courier, Mcenroe, Borg, Connors etc have all said that he could be "the most complete tennis player" since Laver... Some have even called him potentially the greatest..... He is just so damn good that he makes the others look very inferior to him....
the lack of competition is because he is that better than everyone else....that doesn't necessarily make everyone else mediocre....Sanz said:Oh he is definately special, but I think the lack of competition makes him look much better than he actually is. And when I watch tennis, I want to see a match, good match.
rafter most certainly was an exceptionally gifted player and a superb athlete(his first volley was even better than sampras'), but overall he would pale in comparison to federer....Sanz said:Common man, Rafter was one of the best serv and volley players of 90s. His career was marred by injuries and not to forget that he played in the era of two truly all time greats (Pete & Agassi).
Roger may end up with 15 Grandslams (which I doubt) but I would still consider Pete's 14 better than his because Pete had to fight for every one of of those.
Federer hit 49 winners and made 12 unforced errors in the final of Wimbledon, this against the hardest hitter of the tennis ball ever to play the game, you cannot tell me thats not class!Sanz said:Oh he is definately special, but I think the lack of competition makes him look much better than he actually is. And when I watch tennis, I want to see a match, good match.
its certainly not as important as a grand slam, but im sure the players would love one, Alicia Molik says her bronze medal is the proudest moment of her career, you cannot say it doesnt mean anything to her.Mister Wright said:Like any tennis player gives a **** if they win a gold medal! Seriously, they don't get paid for it, and it isn't a grand slam. If you ask Marc Rosset if he would give up his gold medal for a Grand Slam Championship I think he would.
alicia molik very likely won't win a major in her career and she probably realizes that so she is understandably thrilled about her olympic medal but don't look for the top players to share that enthusiasm....it would be a nice addition to their list of achievements but nothing compared to say winning a slam...broncoman said:its certainly not as important as a grand slam, but im sure the players would love one, Alicia Molik says her bronze medal is the proudest moment of her career, you cannot say it doesnt mean anything to her.
By 2008 id suspect Federer would have won everything else, i bet he would love an olympic gold medal...
You need to learn to read properly. Where have I said Federer is not class ? But Roddick isn't. If Roddick/Hewitt played in 90s they wouldn't be in top 25, forget winning grandslam and that is the standard of today's Men's Tennis. There were tons of players better than these two.broncoman said:Federer hit 49 winners and made 12 unforced errors in the final of Wimbledon, this against the hardest hitter of the tennis ball ever to play the game, you cannot tell me thats not class!
compare Federer's 12 unforced errors in the final to the massive ammounts of errors there are in womens matches, its a no contest, id much prefer to watch Federer with his breath taking tennis wipe the floor with any male player than match Williams and anyone else going error for error, ause basically womens tennis is about who makes the least ammount of errors rather than who plays better tennis...Sanz said:You need to learn to read properly. Where have I said Federer is not class ? But Roddick isn't. If Roddick/Hewitt played in 90s they wouldn't be in top 25, forget winning grandslam and that is the standard of today's Men's Tennis. There were tons of players better than these two.
Molik would have been a factor at Wimbledon if he was fit, at her best shes a real chance on the faster courts now, she got to number 8 in the world this year and pushed Davenport all the way in the Australian open quarter finals, i think she may scrape a grand slam in somewhere before the end of her career. I see her a lot like Rafter, a solid player early in the career but really lifted in the mid to late twenties, shes worked so hard and her performances in the last 12 months show...Anil said:alicia molik very likely won't win a major in her career and she probably realizes that so she is understandably thrilled about her olympic medal but don't look for the top players to share that enthusiasm....it would be a nice addition to their list of achievements but nothing compared to say winning a slam...
If she can stay fit, she should be a realistic contender.broncoman said:Molik would have been a factor at Wimbledon if he was fit, at her best shes a real chance on the faster courts now, she got to number 8 in the world this year and pushed Davenport all the way in the Australian open quarter finals, i think she may scrape a grand slam in somewhere before the end of her career. I see her a lot like Rafter, a solid player early in the career but really lifted in the mid to late twenties, shes worked so hard and her performances in the last 12 months show...