"In Depth" Federer Interview (BBC site) [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

"In Depth" Federer Interview (BBC site)

l_mac
05-02-2009, 10:06 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/8030695.stm

In depth :haha: 4 questions :o

Highlights:

Fed is happy to be playing with the "new" crop of players but misses his rivalries with Sampras, Agassi and Henman.

Fed doesn't make excuse, but did have mono and a bad back last season. He won Basel while being in great pain :awww:

Every match is still won his racket and not on theirs (Nole and the rest)

icedevil0289
05-02-2009, 10:11 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/8030695.stm

In depth :haha: 4 questions :o

Highlights:

Fed is happy to be playing with the "new" crop of players but misses his rivalries with Sampras, Agassi and Henman.

Fed doesn't make excuse, but did have mono and a bad back last season. He won Basel while being in great pain :awww:

Every match is still on his racket and not on theirs (Nole and the rest)

:scratch:

finishingmove
05-02-2009, 10:12 PM
quote, roger federer:

"i am a legend now"

l_mac
05-02-2009, 10:14 PM
quote, roger federer:

"i am a legend now"

Be fair.

He said: "I'm now, you know, almost, you know, a legend in the game." :)

jonathancrane
05-02-2009, 10:14 PM
But when he lost he is injured, no?
Or is tired, no?
Inhuman schedule, no?

finishingmove
05-02-2009, 10:17 PM
Be fair.

He said: "I'm now, you know, almost, you know, a legend in the game." :)

absolutely.

thank you for correcting me

scarecrows
05-02-2009, 10:17 PM
I think l_mac hasnt missed a single Federer interview in the last 3 year

Commander Data
05-02-2009, 10:23 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/8030695.stm

In depth :haha: 4 questions :o

Highlights:

Fed is happy to be playing with the "new" crop of players but misses his rivalries with Sampras, Agassi and Henman.

Fed doesn't make excuse, but did have mono and a bad back last season. He won Basel while being in great pain :awww:

Every match is still won his racket and not on theirs (Nole and the rest)

Interesting that the highlights for you are his questionable comments. you should try to see the good in people, then the world becomes an better place for you :hug:

e.g. He said many nice things about Nadal and was very polite...:secret:

Commander Data
05-02-2009, 10:25 PM
I think l_mac hasnt missed a single Federer interview in the last 3 year

hmmm... then she certainly has a secret love for him. maybe buried deep in her subconsciousness?

l_mac
05-02-2009, 10:25 PM
Interesting that the highlights for you are his questionable comments. you should try to see the good in people, then the world becomes an better place for you :hug:

e.g. He said many nice things about Nadal and was very polite...:secret:

I don't see the fun in that. :shrug:

And even though he was mostly nice about Rafa, he still managed to get in a few little Rogi moments.

Commander Data
05-02-2009, 10:28 PM
I don't see the fun in that. :shrug:



aha!....I also like bad girls better ;) so..

l_mac
05-02-2009, 10:30 PM
I think l_mac hasnt missed a single Federer interview in the last 3 year

:)

I was even transcribing this one, but I accidently shut the tab and lost it. :(

scarecrows
05-02-2009, 10:33 PM
:)

I was even transcribing this one, but I accidently shut the tab and lost it. :(

arent there any good pubs in Scotland?

l_mac
05-02-2009, 10:34 PM
arent there any good pubs in Scotland?

Loads.

Matt01
05-02-2009, 10:37 PM
Really nice of Roger to remind us that he is "almost a legend" and that he had mono and a bad back last year :rolleyes:

scarecrows
05-02-2009, 10:38 PM
Where is your BF these days Linda? ;)

he mali2 while she transcribes interviews :D

l_mac
05-02-2009, 10:39 PM
he mali2 while she transcribes interviews :D

What does that mean?

scarecrows
05-02-2009, 10:42 PM
What does that mean?

you should have taken the kastoria language course :shrug:

Richardgm
05-02-2009, 10:42 PM
Very humble... this Federer...

Vida
05-02-2009, 10:43 PM
a girlish interview. bunch of merry man hopping in yard...

"Sampras', Agassi's, Henman's... as my rreewr..rilv..rivals" is my favorite.

l_mac
05-02-2009, 10:44 PM
you should have taken the kastoria language course :shrug:

Don't have time. Most of my spare time is taken up trawling the web for Fed quotes to put a negative slant on. And when I'm not doing that I'm busy with Paint and my Nole hate. :shrug:

pogotheorist
05-02-2009, 10:48 PM
You left out the British-press, how-about-that-Murray question. Answer: the really worthwhile rankings stop at #2; #3 is kind of lame.

«Ivan»
05-02-2009, 10:57 PM
one of the biggest fails,epic fail by imac,this 'woohoo,can't you see how funny,duplicitous i am' tread.i'm blushing.

l_mac
05-02-2009, 10:59 PM
Hi chooper :D

habibko
05-02-2009, 11:14 PM
he is more than a legend and all his matches depend on him and how he plays and are on his racquet, nothing wrong in what he said, if the fact that HE says it bothers you: no one cares :)

heya
05-02-2009, 11:45 PM
Top 10 ranking positions prove talent and intellect. Ooh, yes, they do!:worship: Who cares what the majority of intelligent, charismatic folks think?????




I do hope the Gaudio and temporary Ferrero fans don't change their opinion of me again. They're always changing their minds. I care so much about recovering Federer bandwagon-jumpers.:cool:

ezgi
05-02-2009, 11:49 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/8030695.stm

In depth :haha: 4 questions :o

Highlights:

Fed is happy to be playing with the "new" crop of players but misses his rivalries with Sampras, Agassi and Henman.

Fed doesn't make excuse, but did have mono and a bad back last season. He won Basel while being in great pain :awww:

Every match is still won his racket and not on theirs (Nole and the rest)

Are they wrong?
He is a legend at tennis and his rivals accept it too. He is also gentleman so that he won sportmanship award again and again...

FlameOn
05-03-2009, 12:25 AM
Hold on, so he reckons all of the matches lost to Nadal, Djokovic and Murray are on his racket, yet he says in order to win at the French, he'll have to wait until Rafa has an off-day, thus making it a loss on Nadal's racket?

Nice self-contradiction Roger. :lol:

heya
05-03-2009, 12:26 AM
"He's so fit. Fed's the next coming. He can analyze the situation and then make the decision better than you or I. He got a hold of my leg but he's not the dog!"
http://www.radiotennis.com/archived_feed.php?scheduled_event_id=269
"Serve and volley... No, he destroyed Roddick!
Be more consistent...make his backhand beat you. It's not doable. He's human." "Canas is a clay court specialist." :rolls:

2008: "Fed had mono. He's special. I love him. He lost because he was distracted by Sampras and their tennis exhibitions," says J. McEnroe, who plays wth Federer, Borg and Blake (money-loving troll boy) in exhibitions.

«Ivan»
05-03-2009, 01:09 AM
opener (imac) disappeared crying:worship:

heya 'n tvtennis-nice posts.

fast_clay
05-03-2009, 01:58 AM
federer is a beautiful man who loves to reflect on his beautiful career before he is even finished... he is not just a living legend... he is a playing legend... i think people should at least let him be as he chooses without the negativity...

star
05-03-2009, 02:38 AM
Here's my transcription. I resisted the (very strong) temptation to annotate with smileys. :lol: I may have missed a couple of "uh"s or "you know"s -- you know. This is what I do know. The guy talks fast!

Roger hard to believe you’ve been around ten years now. I just wonder you’ve had that period of total domination. Now, there’s three players really vying with you for that those top positions. How does this period compare with to that period of domination?

I mean it’s definitely a different feeling. You know, because when I was going from one tournament victory to the next it was it’s pretty stressful actually because I remember I had to get the whole excitement you know of being a new number one, uh Being the one who’s being chased all of a sudden, being the one who has to keep up the expectations, and trying to stay injury free and looking for vacation and looking for preparation and just looking for enough rest as well between all the wins. It was a very difficult time for me to take the right decisions., but I think I took very many good decisions. I think very few bad decisions quite honest because I always questioned myself again how can I improve instead of maybe sort of relaxing and saying, “You know what? My dream came true. I won Wimbledon and became number one in the world and every thing now is just a bonus.” I saw it actually as a great challenge and I think I did. I took the right decision because looking back now, I uh am sort of almost a legend you know in the game now and I have so many years to go if I look forward. It’s a great feeling and that’s why it’s nice actually now when I come out on court and I actually feel like uh the spectators are really – really want to see me do well again after maybe seeing me loose some big and important matches like Wimbledon and the Australian Open. So, it’s a good feeling and I’m -- actually I like the challenge of the new players are coming up even though, of course, I still miss, you know, the Samprases and the Agassis, the Henmans and all those guys, you know, who I had great rivalries with so, I’m uh yeah I’m still feeling well and strong, and, you know, uh I can win the big ones and I look forward hopefully to many more years on tour.

An awfully lot was made of your smashing your racquet I remember last month. (small laugh from Federer) Now those of us who have been around for a while remember your doing that quite a lot in your early years, but that was a little unusual a month or so ago. Have you been worried at all about your form?

Ummm. Well, I mean I wasn’t happy. That’s why I smashed the racquet. But, it was good to see the reaction that people say oh my god he smashed a racquet. Before it was like, oh look, he smashed one again. So, you know, it’s a different uhh reaction which I’m happy about – that I was able to change my uh image around sort of to speak and uh I think I just had a very tough last one and a half years. It’s not making excuses. I’m not that type of person, you know, but I did have the mononucleosis. I did have a bad back toward the end of the season when actually I was trying – actually was playing my best tennis again and I won Basel having, you know, a lot of back pain and then, you know, going to Paris. I even played well – really well in Madrid so I think I was really actually starting to play my best again and then it hit me with the back problem and then the season was over so I had to start all over again and actually played well in Australia but ended up losing so tightly against uh against Rafa so all of a sudden people start questioning you even though you played a great match and actually maybe they don’t give enough credit to -- to Rafa for some reason which is strange, but uh I think I’m playing well and maybe some uh some bad matches in Indian Wells and Miami against Murray and then Djokovic in the semis, but uh I think when I’m playing my best, it’s still me who controls the match and I think uh I think that’s a good thing because I would be pretty worried if I uh know that Djokovic and those guys are putting me away and I don’t know what to do anymore. I think still the match is won on my racquet and not theirs and I that is a very, very good thing.

Now uh uh, a lot of self-belief you obviously have and with good reason, but on this surface in particular, Rafa has been so dominant the last years. What, what makes you think you can beat him on this surface and ultimately get a Roland Garros?

Um. Uh. Well, I think the belief was always there. I’ve played him so many times. I mean I don’t draw too much out of beating him, beating him in the finals of Hamburg, but I really had the feeling he was playing uh pretty close to his very, very best in Australia and I still hung with him even though I wasn’t serving that great for instance and since I know clay is obviously a different story, different animal, he plays extremely well and he crushed me at the last year French Open final so for me it’s about, you know believing that I can win playing aggressive, you know, not playing his style which is tough to get out of, you know, just because he’s such a great shot maker, great defense, and everything, and you’ve got to hope for that one day, you know, where he’s not that sharp, or maybe he’s won that much that he will start to question himself how many more times can I really do it, and that's what --- I don’t say that’s what happened to me, but you start to wonder when you’re a player when you dominate so much on a particular surface like me on grass . You go out there and you think how many more can I really do because you know the press keeps on asking you over and over again and I think he knows guys are chasing him even though he’s dominating clay in an unbelievable way right now and honestly what he’s been able to achieve even at his young age on clay is phenomenal so…. But we’re there. We’re there to challenge him and we’ll wait uh and take hopefully the opportunity when it comes. – Especially me.

Now final question. Unless Djokovic wins this title, Andy Murray becomes the first ever British player to become a world number three. (small “hmm” from Federer) How big an achievement would that be?

Well, I mean, I think it’s nice, you know, but is there a big difference between number three and number four in the world? Well, I don’t think so. I think at this stage, it’s about being number one or number two, about being top seed, being the top dog, you know, and I think that’s what it’s about for Andy so I mean it is nice. It’s a nice story and I mean of course he would deserve it you know just because he’s you know he’s had I think probably, maybe the best hard court season you know with me and Rafa obviously just because you know I won the U.S. Open. Rafa won the Australian Open and he actually Murray unfortunately didn’t win the Shanghai – Djokovic did. So, he didn’t win the big ones, but he was very, very solid in Masters Series play and uh I think if he becomes number three in the world. Everybody will agree that uh absolutely he deserves it.

I'm sure people will let me know where I made mistakes. :p

marvin0211
05-03-2009, 02:47 AM
Hello everyone. Like to know how come he said his great rivalry with Sampras Agassi and Henman, IMO they did not play so many matches with Fed and most of them are already past their prime when roger starts fulfilling his great career. Anyway probably his on self denial, and most of the news are hyping about his rivalry with Nadal, well I guess he doesn't think its a great rivalry especially if he is on the losing side of it.

Neumann
05-03-2009, 07:22 AM
I found this bit about Murray funny:

he’s had I think probably, maybe the best hard court season you know with me and Rafa obviously just because you know I won the U.S. Open. Rafa won the Australian Open and he actually Murray unfortunately didn’t win the Shanghai – Djokovic did


Best hardcourt season... except for everybody else :lol:

A nice interview, as usual with Fed
And he is still seems to have the belief and motivation, which is key :)

Steelq
05-03-2009, 02:34 PM
I just had a very tough last one and a half years. It’s not making excuses. I’m not that type of person, you know, but I did have the mononucleosis. I did have a bad back toward the end of the season when actually I was trying – actually was playing my best tennis again and I won Basel having, you know, a lot of back pain and then, you know, going to Paris
Classic.

andylovesaustin
05-03-2009, 02:41 PM
Very humble... this Federer...

:spit:

Yeah, somebody sure believes his own hype!

But... most players want to believe winning is in their control, not whether or not the other guy plays badly.

There is just something about Roger's delivery.. like he's Caesar referring to himself in the third person. LOL

We all see where that kind of talk got Jules. ;)

heya
05-03-2009, 09:32 PM
He had a physical weakness and illness. Somehow, he managed to win Thailand against an injured opponent who played Davis Cup 4 days before the final. Yet, he escaped the Indonesia/Thailand hurricane and had a long-awaited vacation that he talked about so much. Then, he won Masters Cup, HALLE against Fish, faced down choker Nadal + Baghdatis, escaped 3 match points, faced 0-40 holes on serve in the US Open 3rd set, won Cincinnati against choking Paradorn and won 2008 Basel. Sometimes, you can't beat one-dimensional tough players each week.:sad:

A_Skywalker
05-03-2009, 10:26 PM
Federer loses only when he want to give a little happiness to Rafa and Nole :sad:

Har-Tru
05-03-2009, 11:58 PM
He still sounds too stubborn.

Swiss Mountain
05-04-2009, 12:34 AM
Hello everyone. Like to know how come he said his great rivalry with Sampras Agassi and Henman, IMO they did not play so many matches with Fed and most of them are already past their prime when roger starts fulfilling his great career. Anyway probably his on self denial, and most of the news are hyping about his rivalry with Nadal, well I guess he doesn't think its a great rivalry especially if he is on the losing side of it.

I was thinking about that.
He regrets the Sampras, Edberg, Henman, Agassi area, because he respect them more, regarding their game.
They were more skilled, single backhand players, not always attacking his backhand. He is bored now.

He might feel it's unfair the new tennis game is coming now: "a lefty with great topspin", that didn't existed while Sampras played.etc.

I like this interview. He is positive, as he should be. The victory is in him.

Bazooka
05-04-2009, 12:56 AM
Um. Uh. Well, I think the belief was always there. I’ve played him so many times. I mean I don’t draw too much out of beating him, beating him in the finals of Hamburg, but I really had the feeling he was playing uh pretty close to his very, very best in Australia and I still hung with him even though I wasn’t serving that great for instance and since I know clay is obviously a different story, different animal, he plays extremely well and he crushed me at the last year French Open final so for me it’s about, you know believing that I can win playing aggressive, you know, not playing his style which is tough to get out of, you know, just because he’s such a great shot maker, great defense, and everything, and you’ve got to hope for that one day, you know, where he’s not that sharp, or maybe he’s won that much that he will start to question himself how many more times can I really do it, and that's what --- I don’t say that’s what happened to me, but you start to wonder when you’re a player when you dominate so much on a particular surface like me on grass . You go out there and you think how many more can I really do because you know the press keeps on asking you over and over again and I think he knows guys are chasing him even though he’s dominating clay in an unbelievable way right now and honestly what he’s been able to achieve even at his young age on clay is phenomenal so…. But we’re there. We’re there to challenge him and we’ll wait uh and take hopefully the opportunity when it comes. – Especially me.

Wow, not trying to play Freud or anything, but this guy just told us what has happened to him.

w78dexon_y
05-04-2009, 01:02 AM
I think at this stage, it’s about being number one or number two,

he lost his mind! A year ago, he said that 'being #1 is all that matters. #2, #3 or #4 is less'.


...he’s [Murray] had I think probably, maybe the best hard court season you know with me and Rafa obviously just because you know I won the U.S. Open. Rafa won the Australian Open and he actually Murray unfortunately didn’t win the Shanghai – Djokovic did.

this speaks for itself. So, he admitted BY MISTAKE that Djokvovic did Shanghai!?/ Poor guy. ready for retirement.

heya
05-04-2009, 01:43 AM
You see, he's dominant...and has great touch like Murray. Everyone else is just one-dimensional, and unimpressive. Unfortunate for Murray and Federer, Djokovic won another event in '08. Poor Fed thinks so much.

star
05-04-2009, 02:12 AM
this speaks for itself. So, he admitted BY MISTAKE that Djokvovic did Shanghai!?/ Poor guy. ready for retirement.

I should have punctuated that better. I think he started to say that Murray won Shanghai -- except he realized mid phrase that Murray had only beaten him, not won Shanghai.

So

..he’s [Murray] had I think probably, maybe the best hard court season you know with me and Rafa obviously just because you know I won the U.S. Open. Rafa won the Australian Open and he -- actually Murray, unfortunately, didn’t win the Shanghai – Djokovic did.

StanisKing
05-04-2009, 09:03 AM
People, just don't yet write him off.
Just one click.
Anyone remember how bad he was last summer. Losing to Simon, Karlovic and Blake at the Olypmics.
And then US Open 2008 came.......

FlameOn
05-04-2009, 11:09 AM
People, just don't yet write him off.
Just one click.
Anyone remember how bad he was last summer. Losing to Simon, Karlovic and Blake at the Olypmics.
And then US Open 2008 came.......
Well for starters, at the US Open he was treated well by the draw - the first real consistently tough opponent he came up against was Djokovic in the semifinals, and then he faced Andy Murray in what was his first Grand Slam final.

As for the rest of the year, he might've had illness to blame for that, but in 2009 he has no excuses - he's just playing like crap. His only win over a highly-ranked opponent since the AO has been a let-cord aided victory over Roddick.

Chiseller
05-04-2009, 11:42 AM
Both didn't stand a chance so who do you think was a bigger threat than those two guys he played against? Obviously though, if it had been Murray's second slam final, he would have won.

Commander Data
05-04-2009, 11:55 AM
Well for starters, at the US Open he was treated well by the draw - the first real consistently tough opponent he came up against was Djokovic in the semifinals, and then he faced Andy Murray in what was his first Grand Slam final.

As for the rest of the year, he might've had illness to blame for that, but in 2009 he has no excuses - he's just playing like crap. His only win over a highly-ranked opponent since the AO has been a let-cord aided victory over Roddick.

As far as I know all matches with top 4 players against Fed have gone over the full distance. So what does this tell us? certainly not that he is finished. rather that when he manages do get things right in his head he will be very dangerous again. He still has the Game to beat anyone. otherwise he wouldn't wins sets everytime he plays the top guys only to falter in the decider.

StanisKing
05-04-2009, 12:14 PM
Well for starters, at the US Open he was treated well by the draw - the first real consistently tough opponent he came up against was Djokovic in the semifinals, and then he faced Andy Murray in what was his first Grand Slam final.

As for the rest of the year, he might've had illness to blame for that, but in 2009 he has no excuses - he's just playing like crap. His only win over a highly-ranked opponent since the AO has been a let-cord aided victory over Roddick.
Well,

He faced Andreev (who in that match played greatly) in the 4th round and Stepanek who has beaten him in the previous meeting (Rome).
Not hardest but neither easiest of the draws.

Rafa#Uno:-)
05-04-2009, 12:26 PM
well fed thinks the win in his own racket

well that is what you shall think

Rafa thinks that too and djoker too.

Thats not a new thing.
All players like to think that after a winning point.

The new federer is loses more thats just it.
He will be a father soon and Mirka will not be looking so much maybe that will help the guy.

The classic one from federer I dont make excuses I am not that kind of a person and then the excuses come out of his mouth------

johnny_dhk
05-04-2009, 12:54 PM
Federina is the ultimate loser. He will never win another grand slam.

johnny_dhk
05-04-2009, 01:00 PM
Nadal is the GOAT. He will win 25 grand slams including 3 calendar slams.

Matt01
05-04-2009, 01:12 PM
:lol:

johnny_dhk
05-04-2009, 01:26 PM
As for now:


1. Pete Sampras 14
2. Roger Federer 13
3. Roy Emerson 12
4. Björn Borg 11
4. Rod Laver 11
.
.
.
.
.
.


21. Rafael Nadal 6



I suggest you shut your dumb mouth now


Players followed by their age:


1. Pete Sampras 37
2. Roger Federer 27
3. Roy Emerson 62
4. Bjorn Borg 52
5. Rod Laver 70
.............
.............
Rafael Nadal 22

Rafa has plenty of time to catch up and surpass them by a long long way.

FlameOn
05-04-2009, 02:16 PM
Well,

He faced Andreev (who in that match played greatly) in the 4th round and Stepanek who has beaten him in the previous meeting (Rome).
Not hardest but neither easiest of the draws.
Andreev and Stepanek are not big occasion performers at all. It was a cake draw. :)

pogotheorist
05-04-2009, 05:36 PM
As far as I know all matches with top 4 players against Fed have gone over the full distance.
Nadal has 4 straight-set wins over Fed, including of course the absolute rout at RG last year; Nole beat him in straights at AO 2008; Murray in Cinci 2006.

Regarding slams versus age:
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Rafa 1 1 2 2
Fed 0 0 1 2 2 3 3 1 1

So Rafa has doubled Fed's slam count at the same age. (Peak year for slams is age 24, btw.)

The retard smiley is a poor substitute for attention to facts.

tangerine_dream
05-04-2009, 05:50 PM
Classic Roger interview, full of contradictions, patting himself on the back, backhanded compliments to his opponents, and talking out of both sides of his mouth. It sure beats giving nothing but boring, politically-correct safe answers.

He misses his "rivalry" with Pete Sampras, all of 1-0. :lol:

The best part was when he yawned in the British reporter's face who was clearly so excited about Murray being the new WORLD. NUMBER. THREE!!! Roger: "Yeah it makes a nice story." :haha:

Commander Data
05-04-2009, 06:02 PM
Nadal has 4 straight-set wins over Fed, including of course the absolute rout at RG last year; Nole beat him in straights at AO 2008; Murray in Cinci 2006.

I was talking about 2009 you punk.

Regarding slams versus age:
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Rafa 1 1 2 2
Fed 0 0 1 2 2 3 3 1 1

So Rafa has doubled Fed's slam count at the same age. (Peak year for slams is age 24, btw.)

The retard smiley is a poor substitute for attention to facts.

This facts are useless. Some players peak early others a bit later. Fed is at 13 Nadal at 6, thats the fact that counts.


Go and check for how many years players typically are able to deliver peak performance after they hit no. 1 spot. If Nadal wants to get to 25 Slams as the poster to whom I directed the retarded smiley suggested, then (at current rate) he needs to hold his level about then more 10 years . hmmm now go find some facts that suggest that a tennis player can keep up his level for 11 years after turning no. 1..

I'll stay tuned.....

johnny_dhk
05-04-2009, 06:08 PM
This facts are useless. Some players peak early others a bit later. Fed is at 13 Nadal at 6, thats the fact that counts.


Go and check for how many years players typically are able to deliver peak performance after they hit no. 1 spot. If Nadal wants to get to 25 Slams as the poster to whom I directed the retarded smiley suggested, then (at current rate) he needs to hold his level about then more 10 years . hmmm now go find some facts that suggest that a tennis player can keep up his level for 11 years after turning no. 1..

I'll stay tuned.....

Rafael Nadal will win calendar slams in 2009, 2010 and 2011. He will win the French Open for the next 8 years and the Wimbledon for the next 6 years. He can easily remain the world no. 1 till he is 30 years of age.

w78dexon_y
05-04-2009, 06:16 PM
Here's my transcription. I resisted the (very strong) temptation to annotate with smileys. :lol: I may have missed a couple of "uh"s or "you know"s -- you know. This is what I do know. The guy talks fast!



I'm sure people will let me know where I made mistakes. :p

great job. :cool:Thanks.

pogotheorist
05-04-2009, 06:21 PM
Go and check for how many years players typically are able to deliver peak performance after they hit no. 1 spot.
That discussion is in this thread:
24 is the best age to win a slam -- age of grand slam champions in the open era (http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=140497&highlight=slams)

Commander Data
05-04-2009, 06:21 PM
Rafael Nadal will win calendar slams in 2009, 2010 and 2011. He will win the French Open for the next 8 years and the Wimbledon for the next 6 years. He can easily remain the world no. 1 till he is 30 years of age.

:banghead: You have not understood a word I wrote did you?!

w78dexon_y
05-04-2009, 06:22 PM
Rafael Nadal will win calendar slams in 2009, 2010 and 2011. He will win the French Open for the next 8 years and the Wimbledon for the next 6 years. He can easily remain the world no. 1 till he is 30 years of age.

just slow it down a bit. There are a lot of chasers, and they're progressing by time.
You know what Djoker said to Rog after he beat him at Montreal 2007:

"You cannot win everything"! So, I am sure Djoker and Murray now think the same about Rafa. For Rafa winnig=ng FO this year, I can see that. BUT for W...I do not see it. B/C the field is way wider there: Djoker, Murray, Roger, Roddick, Tsonga...they all are capable of beating Rafa there. And each other too. So, Wimby this year is open for grab.

Commander Data
05-04-2009, 06:28 PM
That discussion is in this thread:
24 is the best age to win a slam -- age of grand slam champions in the open era (http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=140497&highlight=slams)

You have not understood me. the thread linked does not cover the important question. The important question is: For how many years can a player collect more then 1 Slam a year?.

johnny_dhk
05-04-2009, 06:38 PM
You have not understood me. the thread linked does not cover the important question. The important question is: For how many years can a player collect more then 1 Slam a year?.

What you need to understand is that Rafael Nadal is not an ordinary tennis player, not even an ordinary world no. 1. He is physically, mentally and technically the greatest player ever. There has never been anyone like him before, at least not in the game of tennis. So he will achieve what no one has ever achieved and that's why he is the GOAT.

pogotheorist
05-04-2009, 06:59 PM
^ nicely done.

You have not understood me. the thread linked does not cover the important question. The important question is: For how many years can a player collect more then 1 Slam a year?.
The linked thread covers that question in depth, with Henry Kaspar initially arguing that Rafa as an early bloomer will also be an early peaker. My rejoinder was that an early bloomer is not necessarily an early peaker: and if you think about what the curve of the GOAT is likely to be, an early bloomer with a normal peak age is likely.

Rafa will either fade early or climb to the upper reaches of the all-time list; which it will be simply can't be decided from known data. (His knees, for example, may very well give out.) What we do know is that so far he has kept both possibilities open.

Commander Data
05-04-2009, 07:04 PM
^

Rafa will either fade early or climb to the upper reaches of the all-time list; which it will be simply can't be decided from known data. (His knees, for example, may very well give out.) What we do know is that so far he has kept both possibilities open.

Nothing wrong with that. I agree with you.

Albop
05-04-2009, 07:17 PM
Rafael Nadal will win calendar slams in 2009, 2010 and 2011. He will win the French Open for the next 8 years and the Wimbledon for the next 6 years. He can easily remain the world no. 1 till he is 30 years of age.

what a boring troll :zzz:

If you are going to make a double-acount, at least post something funny. :zzz:

Foxy
05-04-2009, 07:47 PM
Interesting that the highlights for you are his questionable comments. you should try to see the good in people, then the world becomes an better place for you :hug:

e.g. He said many nice things about Nadal and was very polite...:secret:

There are very few good things in rog. For example his BH. :haha:

FedFan
05-04-2009, 08:42 PM
There are very few good things in rog. For example his BH. :haha:

Are you always laughing about your own lame jokes or attempt of jokes? :retard:

Commander Data
05-04-2009, 08:57 PM
There are very few good things in rog. For example his BH. :haha:

Thats a lame one, Foxy, girly man...


here is a better one. Google for "Foxy" and add "lady" ;)

Federerhingis
05-04-2009, 10:32 PM
just slow it down a bit. There are a lot of chasers, and they're progressing by time.
You know what Djoker said to Rog after he beat him at Montreal 2007:

"You cannot win everything"! So, I am sure Djoker and Murray now think the same about Rafa. For Rafa winnig=ng FO this year, I can see that. BUT for W...I do not see it. B/C the field is way wider there: Djoker, Murray, Roger, Roddick, Tsonga...they all are capable of beating Rafa there. And each other too. So, Wimby this year is open for grab.

I definitely have to disagree with this one, Nadal moves a lot better on grass than Murray, Novak and Tsonga and the grass of these days takes on Nadals uber spin extremely well. Nevertheless we'l get a better forecast for Wimbledon once Halle and Queens results come in. Until then is mere speculation, but one can safely say Nadal and Roger are good bets to do very well at the all england club.

Swiss Mountain
05-05-2009, 12:57 AM
Both didn't stand a chance so who do you think was a bigger threat than those two guys he played against? Obviously though, if it had been Murray's second slam final, he would have won.

So Murray is a loser to you, because he can't win his first slam final.
True because compare to Fed who won his first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh finals, Murray is a joke.

FedFan_2007
05-05-2009, 01:17 AM
Nadal, Fed, Murray and Djoko are TOTAL LOSERS!!!!*

* what does that make me? :retard:

Swiss Mountain
05-05-2009, 01:30 AM
Nadal, Fed, Murray and Djoko are TOTAL LOSERS!!!!*

* what does that make me? :retard:

What are you talking about dear?

Sunset of Age
05-05-2009, 01:48 AM
Nadal, Fed, Murray and Djoko are TOTAL LOSERS!!!!*

* what does that make me? :retard:

The ultimate breakdown of the Sun turning into a Red Dwarf. But we already knew that. :o

Commander Data
05-05-2009, 10:17 AM
The ultimate breakdown of the Sun turning into a Red Dwarf. But we already knew that. :o

...lacking the needed mass to turn into a black hole, the red dwarf will slowly burn out and only most welcome silence will remain.

vamosinator
05-05-2009, 11:02 AM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/8030695.stm

In depth :haha: 4 questions :o

Highlights:

Fed is happy to be playing with the "new" crop of players but misses his rivalries with Sampras, Agassi and Henman.

Fed doesn't make excuse, but did have mono and a bad back last season. He won Basel while being in great pain :awww:

Every match is still won his racket and not on theirs (Nole and the rest)

There goes any chance of people feeling sorry for him :D

I could borrow a phrase from Superman II when Clark Kent said to the guy in the coffee shop: "That's funny....I've never seen garbage eat garbage before" though in this case it's "I've never seen garbage talk garbage before" haha

Bernard Black
05-05-2009, 11:53 AM
I could borrow a phrase from Superman II when Clark Kent said to the guy in the coffee shop: "That's funny....I've never seen garbage eat garbage before" though in this case it's "I've never seen garbage talk garbage before" haha

That pretty much sums up MTF at the moment, well done.

JolánGagó
05-05-2009, 01:13 PM
Thats a lame one, Foxy, girly man...


here is a better one. Google for "Foxy" and add "lady" ;)

Your constant tinkering with other guy's masculinity or alleged lack thereof might indicate you don't have one of your own to care about. I hope that's not the case.

«Ivan»
05-05-2009, 05:35 PM
Nadal moves a lot better on grass than Murray, Novak and Tsonga

whoever is your god you need his forgivness for this nonsence.i guess roger is rocket on this one.

kingfederer
05-08-2009, 06:37 AM
http://www.tennistalk.com/en/news/20090507/Federer_unimpressed_with_Murray%27s_rise_to_No._3

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-1177648/Up-game-Federer-challenges-world-No-3-Murray-win-Grand-Slam.html


big pimp daddy federer calling out murray on his credentials.
go rog u good thing. expose those scavenging frauds murray and djokovic.
murray feeling the heat already at number 3 by big rog.

here is the actual audio:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/8030695.stm

FedFan_2007
05-08-2009, 07:32 AM
Yup I'm not impressed by Andy until he wins a slam.

Dougie
05-08-2009, 07:39 AM
I don´t think he questioned Murray´s ranking, he just said that it´s not that big a deal.

finishingmove
05-08-2009, 08:05 AM
he better say everything that's on his mind now, while he's still ranked high enough to be interesting to the media.

Black Adam
05-08-2009, 08:07 AM
Agree with finishing move. This is pure attention seeking.

BaselineSmash
05-08-2009, 08:10 AM
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/6154/pdvd001cm9.png

kingfederer
05-08-2009, 08:31 AM
he better say everything that's on his mind now, while he's still ranked high enough to be interesting to the media.

ouch!

salut235
05-08-2009, 09:03 AM
Wow all the excuses in that interview "injuries blaming for the last year and half"... hmmm excuse me, but Federer did as good as ever, he just met someone called NADAL who beat him in the final, the injuries had nothing to do with that he was fine. And he has such an ego "I'm a legend", "I control all the matches against my opponents it's on my racket"... MY GOD... and now no.3 is not important? What matters is no.1 AND no.2? LOL. Why not just "no.1"? And I wonder when Federer becomes no.3, will he not say "oh well I'm still in the top 3 I'm doing well". I'm starting to really dislike Federer, but I knew that the "humble" thing was EASY in the past since he was winning all the time, but now that he's not winning like before he's just showing his true colors from so many different angles, the whole interview is a turn off.

vamosinator
05-08-2009, 09:09 AM
Wow all the excuses in that interview "injuries blaming for the last year and half"... hmmm excuse me, but Federer did as good as ever, he just met someone called NADAL who beat him in the final, the injuries had nothing to do with that he was fine. And he has such an ego "I'm a legend", "I control all the matches against my opponents it's on my racket"... MY GOD... and now no.3 is not important? What matters is no.1 AND no.2? LOL. Why not just "no.1"? And I wonder when Federer becomes no.3, will he not say "oh well I'm still in the top 3 I'm doing well". I'm starting to really dislike Federer, but I knew that the "humble" thing was EASY in the past since he was winning all the time, but now that he's not winning like before he's just showing his true colors from so many different angles, the whole interview is a turn off.

Yeh I always wonder when I'll feel sorry for Federer, but it never happens. He keeps saying things that make me want Nadal to play him every week :o

Duncan
05-08-2009, 09:14 AM
What's wrong with what he said?

People look into these things too much.

kingfederer
05-08-2009, 09:15 AM
Wow all the excuses in that interview "injuries blaming for the last year and half"... hmmm excuse me, but Federer did as good as ever, he just met someone called NADAL who beat him in the final, the injuries had nothing to do with that he was fine. And he has such an ego "I'm a legend", "I control all the matches against my opponents it's on my racket"... MY GOD... and now no.3 is not important? What matters is no.1 AND no.2? LOL. Why not just "no.1"? And I wonder when Federer becomes no.3, will he not say "oh well I'm still in the top 3 I'm doing well". I'm starting to really dislike Federer, but I knew that the "humble" thing was EASY in the past since he was winning all the time, but now that he's not winning like before he's just showing his true colors from so many different angles, the whole interview is a turn off.

remember last year fed said that only number 1 matters when he was clinging onto the number 1 ranking i think it was in toronto after wimbledon. now its number 1 AND 2 that matters. atleast be consistent, fed is really tarnishing his reputation he has built over the years.

ORGASMATRON
05-08-2009, 09:39 AM
http://www.tennistalk.com/en/news/20090507/Federer_unimpressed_with_Murray%27s_rise_to_No._3

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-1177648/Up-game-Federer-challenges-world-No-3-Murray-win-Grand-Slam.html


big pimp daddy federer calling out murray on his credentials.
go rog u good thing. expose those scavenging frauds murray and djokovic.
murray feeling the heat already at number 3 by big rog.

here is the actual audio:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/8030695.stm

:haha::haha::haha: Well said!

Wow all the excuses in that interview "injuries blaming for the last year and half"... hmmm excuse me, but Federer did as good as ever, he just met someone called NADAL who beat him in the final, the injuries had nothing to do with that he was fine. And he has such an ego "I'm a legend", "I control all the matches against my opponents it's on my racket"... MY GOD... and now no.3 is not important? What matters is no.1 AND no.2? LOL. Why not just "no.1"? And I wonder when Federer becomes no.3, will he not say "oh well I'm still in the top 3 I'm doing well". I'm starting to really dislike Federer, but I knew that the "humble" thing was EASY in the past since he was winning all the time, but now that he's not winning like before he's just showing his true colors from so many different angles, the whole interview is a turn off.

Stop your whining will ya? Take resposibility for your life and stop critisizing others.

HattonWBA
05-08-2009, 12:17 PM
I understand what Federer is saying in terms of the press maybe going a bit too far and putting too much significance on Murray becoming number 3, but what does he expect when Murray will be the first ever brit to be number 3 in the world rankings the press are not exactly going to shrug it off, I dont however understand why he always has to come out with excuses on his own performances and kind of put down his rivals achievments, not just Murray but also with Djokovic, and although Murray has not won a slam i believe what he has done since Wimbeldon 08 more than justify the number 3 ranking.

ORGASMATRON
05-08-2009, 12:31 PM
I understand what Federer is saying in terms of the press maybe going a bit too far and putting too much significance on Murray becoming number 3, but what does he expect when Murray will be the first ever brit to be number 3 in the world rankings the press are not exactly going to shrug it off, I dont however understand why he always has to come out with excuses on his own performances and kind of put down his rivals achievments, not just Murray but also with Djokovic, and although Murray has not won a slam i believe what he has done since Wimbeldon 08 more than justify the number 3 ranking.

I dont think he is saying Murray dont deserve the nr 3 spot. He is just saying Murray needs to win a slam before he can be considered in league with him and Rafa, which is true of course. He's just putting on some pressure which is good to see.

Commander Data
05-08-2009, 12:38 PM
That interview had been posted before by I_Mac

vamosinator
05-08-2009, 12:39 PM
Whats the point of Federer commenting on Murray in the first place? Why does he have to give an opinion on Murray's ranking, has he ever heard of being diplomatic? It is as if Federer thinks if a journalist asks him a question then he has to give a detailed honest answer. That is a dangerous way to deal with the media who love to get their subjects into controversy. Plus I'm sure Murray doesn't want to hear Federer saying this. Is tennis now a trash-talking sport?

miura
05-08-2009, 12:53 PM
Whats the point of Federer commenting on Murray in the first place? Why does he have to give an opinion on Murray's ranking, has he ever heard of being diplomatic? It is as if Federer thinks if a journalist asks him a question then he has to give a detailed honest answer. That is a dangerous way to deal with the media who love to get their subjects into controversy. Plus I'm sure Murray doesn't want to hear Federer saying this. Is tennis now a trash-talking sport?
How is what Federer says trash talk? He just expressed his opinon on what matters ranking wise.

tennis2tennis
05-08-2009, 12:53 PM
this is so taken out of context....he said that Andy's goal will be more on winning a slam than the 3 or 4 world rank...most people don't even remember who was 3 or 4 in history...but winning a major is more significant and that's what andy's gonna focus on, and that he's got what it takes to win a major!!

federer didn't just give his opinion he's ASKED THE QUESTION on Murray

Daniel
05-08-2009, 12:55 PM
Go Roger :rocker:

cocrcici
05-08-2009, 12:56 PM
this is so taken out of context....he said that Andy's goal will be more on winning a slam than the 3 or 4 world rank...most people don't even remember who was 3 or 4 in history...but winning a major is more significant and that's what andy's gonna focus on, and that he's got what it takes to win a major!!

federer didn't just give his opinion he's ASKED THE QUESTION on Murray

:clap2:

ORGASMATRON
05-08-2009, 01:00 PM
Whats the point of Federer commenting on Murray in the first place? Why does he have to give an opinion on Murray's ranking, has he ever heard of being diplomatic? It is as if Federer thinks if a journalist asks him a question then he has to give a detailed honest answer. That is a dangerous way to deal with the media who love to get their subjects into controversy. Plus I'm sure Murray doesn't want to hear Federer saying this. Is tennis now a trash-talking sport?

That is something you need to ask yourslef my friend. Its funny how the psoters on this forum who keep complaining about Federers comments are also the biggest trolls around here.

Forehander
05-08-2009, 01:06 PM
He's just saying Andy should now pick up the paste to challenge him and Nadal. It's not being cocky but sending out a challenge in a way. Nothing wrong.

vamosinator
05-08-2009, 01:06 PM
That is something you need to ask yourslef my friend. Its funny how the psoters on this forum who keep complaining about Federers comments are also the biggest trolls around here.

I only comment on the issues, whereas a troll would comment on the poster.

As for Federer ONLY answering a question, thats the point, the reporters ask loaded questions and most smart people don't give them an honest/specific answer.

nsidhan
05-08-2009, 01:10 PM
Er...Federer was ASKED the question about Murray :shrug:. All your attacks on him are BASELESS. Listen to the audio first.

And he is absolutely right. Other than the number, there is no big difference between #3 and #4. Depending on the draw you are always going to face either #1 or #2 in the semis. Goal should be to win a Grand Slam and get to #1. In sport it is always about the top 2. Who is #1 and who is chasing right behind. No one cares about #3 or #4.

vamosinator
05-08-2009, 01:14 PM
Exactly, Federer was ASKED a question about Murray by a reporter fishing for something that will make a headline, and again Federer falls for it. I think this establishes that Federer is not the sharpest tool in the shed. That and his belief that he shouldn't work on his weaknesses only his strengths....

ORGASMATRON
05-08-2009, 01:16 PM
I only comment on the issues, whereas a troll would comment on the poster.

As for Federer ONLY answering a question, thats the point, the reporters ask loaded questions and most smart people don't give them an honest/specific answer.

Or maybe the smart ones are honest. Its not like Roger cares what people want to read into his words. He is an honest person and therefor he can live with himself, n matter what other think. You think he cares about this slime in the media and forums who keep taking his words out of contest? Nevermind you dont have to answer that.

vamosinator
05-08-2009, 01:18 PM
Or maybe the smart ones are honest. Its not like Roger cares what people want to read into his words. He is an honest person and therefor he can live with himself, n matter what other think. You think he cares about this slime in the media and forums who keep taking his words out of contest? Nevermind you dont have to answer that.

Good point, Federer is smart he just doesn't care about what Murray or Djokovic might think of his 'honest' comments. That is consistent with his arrogant reputation I guess.

nsidhan
05-08-2009, 01:22 PM
Exactly, Federer was ASKED a question about Murray by a reporter fishing for something that will make a headline, and again Federer falls for it. I think this establishes that Federer is not the sharpest tool in the shed. That and his belief that he shouldn't work on his weaknesses only his strengths....

That reporter was British and he was asking Federer what he thought about a Brit FINALLY making #3 after a long time which IS a big deal. A very valid question. If Fed was interviewing in Thailand when Paradorn had made top 10, he would been asked the same question.

Again nothing wrong in Fed's response re: Murray. But Fed has said worse things though about other players...actually only Djokovic.

Goldenoldie
05-08-2009, 01:24 PM
Rankings must matter, otherwise why bother to have them? Should we go back to the 60s and 70s when there weren't any?

Of course slams are important and whether Murray will or won't win one (or more) is in the future. For the time being let's respect him as the highest ranking Brit (Scot) since the rankings began. There are currently 2 players ranked above him and (last time I looked) 1,907 ranked below him.

Whether he will be able to maintain his number 3 ranking, or even improve it to number 2, is, in my opinion, just as interesting as whether he will win a slam.

star
05-08-2009, 01:31 PM
http://www.tennistalk.com/en/news/20090507/Federer_unimpressed_with_Murray%27s_rise_to_No._3

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-1177648/Up-game-Federer-challenges-world-No-3-Murray-win-Grand-Slam.html


big pimp daddy federer calling out murray on his credentials.
go rog u good thing. expose those scavenging frauds murray and djokovic.
murray feeling the heat already at number 3 by big rog.

here is the actual audio:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/8030695.stm

l_mac posted a thread about this interview at least one week ago.

vamosinator
05-08-2009, 01:31 PM
According to Federer, Nadal is one-dimensional. Thats kind of cool how one-dimensional Nadal will get the Calendar Year Grand Slam ey?

munZe konZa
05-08-2009, 01:39 PM
Rankings matter only so that same players don't play each other. Great players do not focus on rankings

Chair Umpire
05-08-2009, 01:41 PM
I don't see anything wrong in Fed's words on Murray.

ORGASMATRON
05-08-2009, 01:44 PM
According to Federer, Nadal is one-dimensional. Thats kind of cool how one-dimensional Nadal will get the Calendar Year Grand Slam ey?

You are even more clueless ten i thought. Of course NAdal is one dimensional! First of all he hasnt won the CGS yet and even if he does its cause the tour has become one dimensional!

vamosinator
05-08-2009, 01:49 PM
Typical Federer arrogance by his fans ^^

Dougie
05-08-2009, 01:50 PM
Typical Federer arrogance by his fans ^^

You´re not making Rafa-fans look that smart, either.

miura
05-08-2009, 01:56 PM
Everything I've said is correct, how is that not smart? Making excuses for a player winning on all surfaces is smart? blaming the grass for being too much like CLAY?
:spit:

You post more shit on a daily average than a fertiliser distributor manages on full power in a year!

vamosinator
05-08-2009, 01:57 PM
Making excuses for a player winning on all surfaces is smart? blaming the grass for being too much like CLAY? I'm smarter than that guy.

Dougie
05-08-2009, 01:57 PM
:spit:

You post more shit on a daily average than a fertiliser distributor manages on full power in a year!

I was trying to come up with something funny, but can´t beat this! :haha:

vamosinator
05-08-2009, 01:58 PM
:spit:

You post more shit on a daily average than a fertiliser distributor manages on full power in a year!

If that be the case then you'd be able to prove me wrong.

ORGASMATRON
05-08-2009, 02:00 PM
:spit:

You post more shit on a daily average than a fertiliser distributor manages on full power in a year!

:spit:

FedFan
05-08-2009, 02:24 PM
If that be the case then you'd be able to prove me wrong.

You are like Nadal, who has not the language skills to give some in depth interviews.

That's why he seems to be humble and politically correct, no? ;)

Nadals fans are obviously not able to understand an interview, mainly if it is from Roger. That is why they keep citing phrases out of context and then blame the player for it, instead of blaming themselves for their misunderstanding and wrong interpretation.

shotgun
05-08-2009, 02:34 PM
Not a big deal what he says about Murray, but what he says about #3 ranking doesn't really fly with me. I think once he said that all that mattered for him was #1 ranking, it didn't make any difference for him to be #2, #3 or #10. Now he says that what matters is to be #1 OR #2, "the top dog". :lol: He could at least try to be more consistent in his words.

finishingmove
05-08-2009, 02:37 PM
good spot, shotgun.

i wonder how much longer can he keep deluding himself, especially if the results don't come.

"being top 10 is what it's all about"

kingfederer
05-08-2009, 02:37 PM
You are even more clueless ten i thought. Of course NAdal is one dimensional! First of all he hasnt won the CGS yet and even if he does its cause the tour has become one dimensional!

funny how a 'one-dimentional' player consistently beats a complete player on every surface isnt it?
id rather be a 1-dimentional player with nadal's career record so far than be a complete player that never was.


federer's anger being passed is eating him alive in his head, the more he talks this and that the more he thinks about it, and the more he will be affected when the match becomes close. he keeps digging a bigger hole each time trying to say nadal is this and that. i remember after rafa won wimbledon fed said rafa wont do great on hard court and he can get his number 1 ranking back. but nadal did better than him on hard court as well. its better to concede for the moment than give others extra motivation to improve esp. when those others are younger and fearless. fed is trying to find a way to justify in his mind that he is still number 1, but the younger guys keep proving him wrong and he is running out of things to convince himself that he is still top dog.

fed's game is high risk and if ur off 10% u will hit error after error, he was so good back in 2004-2007 because he played a high risk game and executed it very well and got his reward. but he has slowed down, u can see it when u make him run to his forehand side that he is a step too slow getting there and he cannot get that speed back no matter how hard he tries or trains. he will still be a threat at every tournament but he will have to play his best to beat the young guys. its tough for anyone to accept a different role when they have been in a dominant position for so long, fed has a big ego, and u need an ego to be the best in any sport but his age making him a touch slower which affects his footwork and causes him to go for winners when not in the best position causing alot of errors and that the others are entering their peak in his head he cannot still believe how things have changed so fast and that ego is showing in interviews when he really wants to get it outta his head.

its the art of psychology, i know this as ive studied psychology and federer's reactions are normal for a person being on such a high for so long and in a few months suddenly crashing back to earth, its human nature to not accept reality. but as time goes by, federer will slowly accept it in his mind that the good old days are gone forever. roger will take his time and sort out the how and why in his own mind. thats why the tears at the aussie open, racket smashes and tears in the press after the djokovic defeat in miami are all part of the realisation prospect. it happens to everyone, and federer wont be the last guy it happens to. it will happen to rafa on clay someday, it happened to borg on grass when mac won, its a tough pill to swallow but rog will get over it in his own time.

pica_pica
05-08-2009, 03:13 PM
Nothing wrong about Roger's words, he just talked about how Murray can make his #3 ranking more convincing. Though I must say Roger has the tendency to link the talk to himself a bit.

tangerine_dream
05-08-2009, 03:35 PM
Roger's not questioning Murray's ranking he's just doesn't think being world number three is something to crow about.

decrepitude
05-08-2009, 03:40 PM
I wonder if he thought that when he was first #4 and eyeing the #3 position :shrug:

Sapeod
05-08-2009, 03:43 PM
Federer didn't question Murray, He said that he deserves the number 3 ranking, but didn't really do a lot to get it (especially in the slams)

But I think Federer should watch out as Murray doesn't have anything to defend (except for the quarter final at Wimbledon) until Cincinnati.

pica_pica
05-08-2009, 03:46 PM
Roger's not questioning Murray's ranking he's just doesn't think being world number three is something to crow about.
Agree :yeah:
Even Roger Federer thinks that the UK media is over-hyped about a number three ranking.
Did Switzerland get all hyped like that when Roger rose to #3?
It show just how desperate UK wants a top 3 player and how pathetic it is for a nation which put so much resources into tennis not to yield proper results. The UK is a joke next to Switzerland and Serbia. And look, Spain has 15 players in the Top 100 and Great Britain? The only one Andy Murray :shrug: And to me, Andy Murray is a once-in-many-years genius phenomenon which happens in every nation, rather than the result of Great Britain's effort in tennis.

philosophicalarf
05-08-2009, 03:55 PM
And to me, Andy Murray is a once-in-many-years genius phenomenon which happens in every nation, rather than the result of Great Britain's effort in tennis.


That's well accepted in Britain too - we just have to look at the other top Brits. Have a look:
http://www.atpworldtour.com/tennis/3/en/rankings/entrysystem/default.asp?showall=1&RankDate=5%2F4%2F2009&country=Great+Britain&rank=0&image1.x=31&image1.y=15

Even Switzerland have useful journeymen like Bohli and Chiudinelli.


It's not a coincidence that our top player spent his formative junior tennis years abroad.

ZakMcCrack
05-08-2009, 04:24 PM
According to Federer, Nadal is one-dimensional. Thats kind of cool how one-dimensional Nadal will get the Calendar Year Grand Slam ey?

Gosh, you're truly pathetic - now you dig some phrase out of a hole that was said years ago. Common, why do you even bother since Rafa beats Roger almost on any occasion lately?! Who are you, Nadal's mother trying to be thus overly protective all the time?! Tztztz...:rolleyes:

habibko
05-08-2009, 04:27 PM
perfect trolling thread, the sad part is that we already have this thread opened by the troll queen a week ago.

tennis2tennis
05-08-2009, 04:29 PM
Gosh, you're truly pathetic - now you dig some phrase out of a hole that was said years ago. Common, why do you even bother since Rafa beats Roger almost on any occasion lately?! Who are you, Nadal's mother trying to be thus overly protective all the time?! Tztztz...:rolleyes:


he is one-dimensional BUT AFFECTIVE!!!

Audacity
05-08-2009, 04:32 PM
Fed questioned his ability to win a Grand Slam. He stated there is not much of a difference between 3 and 4, but Murrays goal should be rank no.2.

nsidhan
05-08-2009, 04:42 PM
Thread title is BS. Fed questioning Murray's ranking would mean he said or implied that Murray does not deserve to be #3. No where in the interview does he say that. :retard:

Sunset of Age
05-08-2009, 04:45 PM
Gosh, you're truly pathetic - now you dig some phrase out of a hole that was said years ago. Common, why do you even bother since Rafa beats Roger almost on any occasion lately?! Who are you, Nadal's mother trying to be thus overly protective all the time?! Tztztz...:rolleyes:

This is in fact an insult to Rafa's mother, who seems to be a very classy lady, the opposite of this poster. ;) BTW, thread reported as yet another sick trolling attempt. ;)

r2473
05-08-2009, 04:53 PM
Excuse
~noun
1. Anything a player says in the press conference and doesn’t sound like “my rival PWNED me badly”, “my rival is a god and I couldn’t win while being so in awe with his divine light”, “I was 100% today, absolutely ON, healthier than ever, totally focused, no mono, no tiredness, no headcase, but I would never won this match because my rival is the ultra-GOAT and his mother looks like Scarlett Johansson and his coach is Einstein and I praise him every night before going to sleep and I’m so thankful for having the honour of being arse-kicked by him”.
2. Anything a player says in the press conference unless it sounds like “I was threatened by the Mafia not to win this match, and I wasn’t focused because my girlfriend ran away with Radek Stepanek, and my coach ran away with all my earnings, and my whole family died yesterday in a plane crash while coming to see this match, and during this morning’s medical routine I found out to be dying of a strange disease that came to Earth in a meteorite”.
3. Anything Roger Federer says.

johnny_dhk
05-08-2009, 05:45 PM
Federina is a pathetic loser. He will never win another grand slam.

star
05-08-2009, 05:50 PM
Agree :yeah:
Even Roger Federer thinks that the UK media is over-hyped about a number three ranking.
Did Switzerland get all hyped like that when Roger rose to #3?
It show just how desperate UK wants a top 3 player and how pathetic it is for a nation which put so much resources into tennis not to yield proper results. The UK is a joke next to Switzerland and Serbia. And look, Spain has 15 players in the Top 100 and Great Britain? The only one Andy Murray :shrug: And to me, Andy Murray is a once-in-many-years genius phenomenon which happens in every nation, rather than the result of Great Britain's effort in tennis.

I remember the Swiss press being very enthusiastic about Federer even before he got to be No. 1. Blick had a reporter assigned trailing him everywhere. There were articles all the time about him in the press -- most of them quoting him as saying that all he lacked was "selbstvertrauen." He licked that problem.

Sunset of Age
05-08-2009, 10:25 PM
I remember the Swiss press being very enthusiastic about Federer even before he got to be No. 1. Blick had a reporter assigned trailing him everywhere. There were articles all the time about him in the press -- most of them quoting him as saying that all he lacked was "selbstvertrauen." He licked that problem.

Yes, and it's a very understandable reaction for a country that doesn't get a possible GS champ very often (of course Switzerland already had Hingis, but noone ever before in the men's department).
It was exactly the same with Richard Krajicek in my country not that long ago, and I can tell you, Thiemo de Bakker winning against Rainer Schuettler two days ago was mentioned here in about every paper thinkable. :)

That said, I think the British press is way, way worse when it comes to overhyping a countryman.

nastoff
05-08-2009, 11:10 PM
Federer is a fantastic guy and a huge credit to the sport but right now he's a defeated man.
By 2010 he'll be telling us that it feels incredible to still be in the top 10 and in 2011 that it's amazing that he still competes.
It's obvious that he has resigned to his fate. Wouldn't be surprised if he won zero titles from now till the end of his careeer with such an attitude.

Sunset of Age
05-08-2009, 11:15 PM
Federer is a fantastic guy and a huge credit to the sport but right now he's a defeated man.
By 2010 he'll be telling us that it feels incredible to still be in the top 10 and in 2011 that it's amazing that he still competes.
It's obvious that he has resigned to his fate. Wouldn't be surprised if he won zero titles from now till the end of his careeer with such an attitude.

Short History Lesson:
'Everyone' said exactly the same thing of Sampras when he went on without any title for two years - just to rack up his #14 GS before he retired. ;)

salut235
05-08-2009, 11:39 PM
Can someone please explain to me how Nadal is one dimentional???

He can play incredible attack, winners all over the court
He can play unbelievable defense too
He can play unbelievable angles
He takes his opportunites to attack the net and volleys pretty good
He can do anything on his backhand, from hitting topspin, to flatting it out or a wicked slice
He can do anything with his forehand too
He adapts to the surface, on clay he adds way more topspin but on the faster courts he becomes more agressive and hits more flat
He has an amazing drop shot, and good lob
He mixes up his serve very well, he can hit it hard & fast, or he can add a lot of spin & action to it...
He can goes from defensive to attack with one shot
Amazing passing shots
Extremely strong mentally
ETC. ETC. ETC.

to me, he's a complete player, he can do it all!!! In fact Nadal doesn't even have a weakness, unlike Federer who has mental problems sometimes on the court and litterally loses concentration, or when all of a sudden he starts hitting homeruns on his backhand, and sometimes on his forehand too. Nadal has no weakness and he can do it all very good, from every aspect of the game and from everywhere on the court. Some people need to open their eyes.

Chiseller
05-08-2009, 11:49 PM
easy DeeJay, easy, you've just learned how to spell Rafael Nadal, next step will be to distinguish between the different surfaces.

Hugh Jaas
05-08-2009, 11:49 PM
Short History Lesson:
'Everyone' said exactly the same thing of Sampras when he went on without any title for two years - just to rack up his #14 GS before he retired. ;)

PRAY FOR DEATH
http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee147/ItzDucky/this-is-sparta.jpg

FedFan_2007
05-08-2009, 11:52 PM
^^^ that is too painful.

heya
05-09-2009, 12:23 AM
The crying mother added to the appreciation I have for the rarity of his Swiss modesty, which was beautified by honesty, physical loveliness, a wonderful imagination, classy game and regal personality. I will have to record the Tennis Federer Church Channel's divine biography.

Hugh Jaas
05-09-2009, 12:30 AM
Short History Lesson:
'Everyone' said exactly the same thing of Sampras when he went on without any title for two years - just to rack up his #14 GS before he retired. ;)

THE crying pic was removed. the mods are obviously FEDTARDS.

SPARTA TENNIS

heya
05-09-2009, 12:31 AM
By 2010 he'll be telling us that it feels incredible to still be in the top 10 and in 2011 that it's amazing that he still competes.
It's obvious that he has resigned to his fate. Wouldn't be surprised if he won zero titles from now till the end of his careeer with such an attitude.
Now, don't be silly, goose. Injured, heartless mental clowns from the greatest country (red white blue) will save one of the kings.

luie
05-09-2009, 02:51 AM
THE crying pic was removed. the mods are obviously FEDTARDS.

SPARTA TENNIS
Or maybe they are not fans of the talentless suspicious moonballer.:angel:

star
05-09-2009, 03:57 AM
Short History Lesson:
'Everyone' said exactly the same thing of Sampras when he went on without any title for two years - just to rack up his #14 GS before he retired. ;)


Not exactly.

But, I take your point that Sampras as well as Agassi delivered the lesson that a supremely talented champion can't be counted out as long as there is physical fitness and desire.

W!MBLEDON
05-09-2009, 04:05 AM
Don't have time. Most of my spare time is taken up trawling the web for Fed quotes to put a negative slant on. And when I'm not doing that I'm busy with Paint and my Nole hate. :shrug:

the time spent would almost be worth it if you were clever or funny

vamosinator
05-09-2009, 04:34 AM
Can someone please explain to me how Nadal is one dimentional???

He can play incredible attack, winners all over the court
He can play unbelievable defense too
He can play unbelievable angles
He takes his opportunites to attack the net and volleys pretty good
He can do anything on his backhand, from hitting topspin, to flatting it out or a wicked slice
He can do anything with his forehand too
He adapts to the surface, on clay he adds way more topspin but on the faster courts he becomes more agressive and hits more flat
He has an amazing drop shot, and good lob
He mixes up his serve very well, he can hit it hard & fast, or he can add a lot of spin & action to it...
He can goes from defensive to attack with one shot
Amazing passing shots
Extremely strong mentally
ETC. ETC. ETC.

to me, he's a complete player, he can do it all!!! In fact Nadal doesn't even have a weakness, unlike Federer who has mental problems sometimes on the court and litterally loses concentration, or when all of a sudden he starts hitting homeruns on his backhand, and sometimes on his forehand too. Nadal has no weakness and he can do it all very good, from every aspect of the game and from everywhere on the court. Some people need to open their eyes.

The truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth :)

nastoff
05-09-2009, 08:04 AM
Short History Lesson:
'Everyone' said exactly the same thing of Sampras when he went on without any title for two years - just to rack up his #14 GS before he retired. ;)

Federer doesn't possess the weapons Sampras had to win titles in his 30's. It is not inconceivable that Federer might win another grand slam but if he now thinks he can only win the French if Rafa gets tired of winning it himself and becomes "generous", well I don't how that would be called, I call it defeatism. He wasn't like that before. You have to at least want to do something to do something. The guy is almost happy he loses these days cause he has less pressure than before? Now that is bloody funny
He's losing his winning mentality and soon enough he will be losing to guys from his own generation who are however more hungry than him such as Roddick.
He's gonna have the ending his defeatism deserves.

Daniel
05-09-2009, 12:06 PM
Roger you are the best :worship:

the pig sucks.

johnny_dhk
05-10-2009, 09:22 AM
Federina has no talent. Nadal is the GOAT.

FedFan_2007
05-10-2009, 09:24 AM
Federer doesn't possess the weapons Sampras had to win titles in his 30's. It is not inconceivable that Federer might win another grand slam but if he now thinks he can only win the French if Rafa gets tired of winning it himself and becomes "generous", well I don't how that would be called, I call it defeatism. He wasn't like that before. You have to at least want to do something to do something. The guy is almost happy he loses these days cause he has less pressure than before? Now that is bloody funny
He's losing his winning mentality and soon enough he will be losing to guys from his own generation who are however more hungry than him such as Roddick.
He's gonna have the ending his defeatism deserves.

Federer doesn't have weapons? His serve isn't quite Sampras-level, but the rest of his game is so far ahead of Sampras it's not even worth discussing. You fail.

finishingmove
05-10-2009, 09:26 AM
his footwork is failing him on a constant basis already.

JolánGagó
05-10-2009, 10:18 AM
Federina has no talent. Nadal is the GOAT.

So true.

FedFan_2007
05-10-2009, 11:10 AM
his footwork is failing him on a constant basis already.

Ouch. That one hurt.

Sunset of Age
05-10-2009, 12:39 PM
Not exactly.

But, I take your point that Sampras as well as Agassi delivered the lesson that a supremely talented champion can't be counted out as long as there is physical fitness and desire.

I know their situations weren't the same, but you got my point - it's just too early to write off somebody that talented after a year of slumping. A 'slump' including 4 GS finals, and even one victory, no less. ;)

Commander Data
05-10-2009, 01:03 PM
So true.

Whats your motivation to post things you exactly know are not true? The joy to maybe annoy? Just mindless BS-ing?

Commander Data
05-10-2009, 01:05 PM
I know their situations weren't the same, but you got my point - it's just too early to write off somebody that talented after a year of slumping. A 'slump' including 4 GS finals, and even one victory, no less. ;)

Look. I'm sure 95% of the people actually know it. They just find it funny to say other things. It is hard to ignore their trolling, I know...but it is really just that.

Sunset of Age
05-10-2009, 01:13 PM
Look. I'm sure 95% of the people actually know it. They just find it funny to say other things. It is hard to ignore their trolling, I know...but it is really just that.

:) - I know. But a little reminding now and then doesn't hurt, just to balance the score for a bit in this obvious troll thread.

l_mac
05-10-2009, 02:52 PM
:) - I know. But a little reminding now and then doesn't hurt, just to balance the score for a bit in this obvious troll thread.

How is this a troll thread? Because I started it rather than a Fed fan? Unlike many of the Fed interviews so kindly posted on GM, this one is relevnt to GM because he spends time talking about other players.

I included a link to the audio, star provided a transcript :shrug: Just because I don't interpret his words through :hearts: doesn't mean I'm trolling. I haven't tried to misinterpret or misreport what he said. People can make their own conclusions. I didn't call the thread "Fed disses Murray/Djokovic - believes every match depends on his form."

Sunset of Age
05-10-2009, 03:19 PM
How is this a troll thread? Because I started it rather than a Fed fan? Unlike many of the Fed interviews so kindly posted on GM, this one is relevnt to GM because he spends time talking about other players.

Sorry Linda, my post is slightly off. I agree with you that this interview is indeed relevant.
I should rather have posted "... to this thread currently infested by trolls."

l_mac
05-10-2009, 03:25 PM
Sorry Linda, my post is slightly off. I agree with you that this interview is indeed relevant.
I should rather have posted "... to this thread currently infested by trolls."

This is the world we live in :shrug:

I find all the new Fed hating trolls very tiresome. :sobbing:

Commander Data
05-10-2009, 05:03 PM
I find all the new Fed hating trolls very tiresome. :sobbing:

:smooch: I knew it, beneath that rough exterior there beats a heart of gold.

ORGASMATRON
05-10-2009, 05:19 PM
I wrote a blog post about this Fed criticism, no point in wasting my opinion in this troll thread anymore. If you can handle the truth then read my blog.

star
05-10-2009, 05:22 PM
I wrote a blog post about this Fed criticism, no point in wasting my opinion in this troll thread anymore. If you can handle the truth then read my blog.

I repeat what Linda said: How is a thread a trolling thread when the starter posts a link to an interview -- one that is actually revealing and interesting -- without making any kind of sensational title for it?

If that's a trolling thread, then no one can make any posts about any player without trolling. The word loses its meaning entirely -- although that appears to be the way with words or MTF.

Commander Data
05-10-2009, 05:27 PM
I repeat what Linda said: How is a thread a trolling thread when the starter posts a link to an interview -- one that is actually revealing and interesting -- without making any kind of sensational title for it?

If that's a trolling thread, then no one can make any posts about any player without trolling. The word loses its meaning entirely -- although that appears to be the way with words or MTF.

I think what they meant is that a large fraction of the thread (meaning many posts) are trolling.
It does not imply that the starting post by Linda was a troll post. But the thread is infected by trolls...

FedFan
05-10-2009, 05:46 PM
I think what they meant is that a large fraction of the thread (meaning many posts) are trolling.
It does not imply that the starting post by Linda was a troll post. But the thread is infected by trolls...



Everybody with a brain knows exactly, that these kind of threads are attracting the trolls.

It is always the same sort of dishonesty and hypocrisy from Linda and Co.

Start a thread with some positive comments about Roger, where words can not be distorted or taken out of context and you will hear these trolls complaining and asking to post it in the Fed forum.

star
05-10-2009, 05:46 PM
I think what they meant is that a large fraction of the thread (meaning many posts) are trolling.
It does not imply that the starting post by Linda was a troll post. But the thread is infected by trolls...


That's true of almost any thread in GM -- particularly when they go more than a few pages.

star
05-10-2009, 05:48 PM
Everybody with a brain knows exactly, that these kind of threads are attracting the trolls.

It is always the same sort of dishonesty and hypocrisy from Linda and Co.

Start a thread with some positive comments about Roger, where words can not be distorted or taken out of context and you will hear these trolls complaining and asking to post it in the Fed forum.

Total crap.

ORGASMATRON
05-10-2009, 05:59 PM
I think what they meant is that a large fraction of the thread (meaning many posts) are trolling.
It does not imply that the starting post by Linda was a troll post. But the thread is infected by trolls...

Exactly. I dont know much about Linda's posts.

FedFan
05-10-2009, 06:00 PM
Total crap.

The truth hurts, I know. ;) But what I have said, is 100 % true.

As long as there is a thread bashing Federer it is ok, and nobody asks to remove it.

Linda knows exactly, what she does with the kind of article she is posting here and she likes to put words and phrases out of context.

Don't behave as if you are not aware of it. She can't even post a unbiased draw.

Commander Data
05-10-2009, 06:04 PM
That's true of almost any thread in GM -- particularly when they go more than a few pages.

Probably. IMHO most of GM is trolling. Either that or people are alarming stupid. I take option one :angel:

star
05-10-2009, 06:10 PM
The truth hurts, I know. ;) But what I have said, is 100 % true.

As long as there is a thread bashing Federer it is ok, and nobody asks to remove it.

Linda knows exactly, what she does with the kind of article she is posting here and she likes to put words and phrases out of context.

Don't behave as if you are not aware of it. She can't even post a unbiased draw.

So, here's the truth. Linda posted the link to an INTERVIEW not an article. It's Federer's own words -- so when you say "the kind of article" what you are really saying is "the kind of interview." So if you think the link was to an unflattering view of Federer, you have only Federer's own words to blame.

Further, I don't see how you can say that she has taken words and phrases out of context when I posted the ENTIRE interview without any comments of any sort. The words were there, and you could dispute her use of them or not.

And still further, the rants about trolling aren't any more enlightening than the trolling itself. The interview was fascinating in my opinion. I'm sure I have a different take on it than people who are Federer fans, but the words are there to discuss, and you could be doing that -- which might be more interesting than what you are doing -- which appears to be casting aspersions on the messenger rather than dealing with the message.

JolánGagó
05-10-2009, 06:11 PM
Whats your motivation to post things you exactly know are not true? The joy to maybe annoy? Just mindless BS-ing?

i thrive in disorder.

Commander Data
05-10-2009, 06:16 PM
i thrive in disorder.

:scratch:


...okay, fair enough....

FedFan
05-10-2009, 07:23 PM
So, here's the truth. Linda posted the link to an INTERVIEW not an article. It's Federer's own words -- so when you say "the kind of article" what you are really saying is "the kind of interview." So if you think the link was to an unflattering view of Federer, you have only Federer's own words to blame.

Further, I don't see how you can say that she has taken words and phrases out of context when I posted the ENTIRE interview without any comments of any sort. The words were there, and you could dispute her use of them or not.

And still further, the rants about trolling aren't any more enlightening than the trolling itself. The interview was fascinating in my opinion. I'm sure I have a different take on it than people who are Federer fans, but the words are there to discuss, and you could be doing that -- which might be more interesting than what you are doing -- which appears to be casting aspersions on the messenger rather than dealing with the message.


This is Lindas start in the thread:

In depth 4 questions

Highlights:

"Fed is happy to be playing with the "new" crop of players but misses his rivalries with Sampras, Agassi and Henman.

Fed doesn't make excuse, but did have mono and a bad back last season. He won Basel while being in great pain

Every match is still won his racket and not on theirs (Nole and the rest)"


This is not the way to begin a fair discussion about a whole article, the more she uses smilies to ridicule Rogers statements.

She is clearly trying to influence the opinion of the reader.

l_mac
05-10-2009, 08:44 PM
She is clearly trying to influence the opinion of the reader.

As thread starter I am still entitled to an opinion. If a Fedfan had started the thread, picked their highlights, and given Rogi :worship: and :hearts: would they be influencing the reader? :confused:

Are all your posts about me now? You know I love that.