Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Somewhere in space
Re: Roger first player to win 5 slams in 2 years...
When you are in Laver's company only, you have to make something right... the debate over the quality of the field today is not fair because when you lose three times in more than a year you prove that you can beat every style of play, young guns and experienced players. The fact that Fed is the only one to control Roddick's serve on grass and in the same time beat every year the clay-specialists in a Masters Series, say a lot on his abilities. The difference with Pete's era is that the only 5+ slam winner still in shape is Agassi today, while at the time, for pure generation reasons, there were Lendl, Edberg, Becker, Agassi, then Hewitt. But that is more a question of chance than anything. Roger's direct rivals are his age or so. They didn't have time to win many slams. There was a gap between Agassi/Sampras and Fed's generation, with Rafter retiring early, Safin being inconsistent, and Guga being mostly a claycourter. Now it's gonna change with Gasquet and Nadal, but for me it's more a matter of chance than of weak field... Edberg, Becker, Lendl or Agassi had all their weaknesses, like Roddick and Hewitt today.
"I asked a bloke in the front row if he liked the serve-and-volley stuff," said Rafter. "He said he did but asked if he was going to get to see any rallies. 'Not today, mate,' I told him."