federer is more of a fraud than i ever believed the last 9 years.
he claimed that he dominated opponents for 5 months while djoker was injured. he and nadal had to depend on a fake, lame, dull unextraordinary rivalry and hoped that no one noticed that they needed djoker's collapse and crowd
prejudice to get to match point against djoker on clay & US Open courts.
if fed couldn't deal with nadal's level, then why did nadal only win on clay and only
when djoker's totally bored with
clay, & nadal's obsession with fed?
I hung on for the first paragraph but things went pitch black by the end of the second. Please rephrase paragraph 2, learn about punctuation, and when to hit the enter button to start a new line. C-