Players' Comment on Roger [Archive] - Page 4 - MensTennisForums.com

Players' Comment on Roger

Pages : 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10

RogiFan88
07-07-2006, 12:14 AM
Sampras - Federer will surpass me

Sampras is returning to competition but not on the ATP Tour
American tennis great Pete Sampras has backed Roger Federer to surpass his record-breaking feats.

The 14-time Grand Slam winner said: "I just think Roger's got all the tools, he's got the demeanour. He really has the whole package to do it."

Sampras, 34, who spent an unsurpassed 286 weeks at the top of the rankings, said: "Records are made to be broken.

"I'm pretty confident that he's well on his way to not only breaking the No. 1 ranking, but this Grand Slam record."

Federer is on track to claim his fourth straight Wimbledon title and at the age of 24 already has won seven Grand Slams.

–BBC

Federerhingis
07-07-2006, 12:42 AM
Mario Ancic:

“He is a completely different grasscourt player to 2002. It was much easier to be aggressive against him then. Now it’s very tough. If you attack, he passes you. If you stay back, he’s all over you. You have to be a man and say: ‘Well done, Roger, then put your head down and start work again.

Hey Mrs. B you dear one thanks for your message. Merci vilmal. Wie gehts est ihnen? Allez magst gut? I am sorry I have forgotten your first name I believe it starts with an E? :o Nevertheless, I hold you dearly as one of the nicest and warmest MTF posters. :hug:

fed4ever
07-07-2006, 02:57 AM
More comments from Sampras:

http://www.noticias.info/asp/aspComunicados.asp?nid=198826&src=0

Q. Can you talk a little bit about Roger. Obviously this tremendous run that he's having on grass, is he likely -- they are really on a crash-course right now with a couple of guys standing in their way. What do you think about the likelihood of a Roger/Nadal final? Is Roger going to roll through this?

PETE SAMPRAS: Yes and yes.



Q. Can you tell us a little more?

PETE SAMPRAS: Well, I think Roger is pretty much unbeatable on grass, pretty much unbeatable anywhere but maybe a little bit on clay against Nadal. I think Nadal has a good chance to get to the final. I think Federer will have his way with him on grass if they both make the final. I just think, you know, too much power, the fast surface will help him. I think Nadal will compete hard against him, but I don't see him winning.


Q. When you watch Wimbledon, you see Federer getting close to winning four titles there, your own records, what kind of goes through your head when you see someone making a legacy for himself in some of the same ways you did?

PETE SAMPRAS: Well, I think when I look at Roger, I mean, I'm a fan. I mean, I'm a fan of how he plays, what he's about, just the fact that I think he's a class -- I don't know him personally, but seems like he's a class guy on and off the court. He's fun to watch. Just his athletic ability, what he's able to do on the run. I think he can and will break every tennis record out there.

I just think he's the only really great player I see playing. I think Nadal is really good, shows -- and he's a great player, but I just think there's less of him. Today I think Roger is two, three levels above the rest. The fact that he seems like he's even getting better. You combine all that, I don't really see anyone threatening the No. 1 ranking. I think he's just too consistent and too good and has a fear factor in everyone else that I had at times, but I think he has it even more.



Q. Do you have any mixed feelings when you see him getting close to the record books?

PETE SAMPRAS: I don't believe in that. I don't believe in rooting against someone. You know, records are made to be broken. I'm pretty confident that he's well on his way to not only breaking the No. 1 ranking, but this Grand Slam record. I mean, I just think he's got all the tools, he's got the demeanor. He really has the whole package to do it.


Q. When you played Federer back at Wimbledon, when you lost to him, was it clear to you this might be the heir apparent?

PETE SAMPRAS: At the time, I wasn't sure. I knew he was talented. I mean, I knew he was really, really good. I actually didn't play a bad match. I just lost a tight one at the end.

I didn't know how far he was going to take it and where he was going to go. I think I've seen him the last couple years just get a little better, a little better, just kind of figure it out. I mean, that's what I think guys -- I figured it out. You just kind of figure it out on your own. He has his formula for being the best player in the world, like I had.

I didn't know if he was going to dominate like he is today, but just who I see, him playing the way he's playing, I just think he's really, really good. Kind of sit back and watch him, put myself on the other side of the net, see how I would play him. You know, I think we both would have our hands full.

SUKTUEN
07-07-2006, 04:19 AM
Thankyou so Much~!! :worship:

Pete~!! Thanks for your kind!! :hug: :hug: :hug:

nobama
07-07-2006, 10:41 AM
Interesting what he thinks about #2. I have a feeling he's not the only one who thinks that way. You gotta wonder what Sampras really thinks about someone like #2 possibly being in the finals of W.

ExpectedWinner
07-07-2006, 12:57 PM
I don't trust Pete. His records had always been safe to begin with. Now with Nadal in picture he's got an insurance.

He should read my signature. LOL

SUKTUEN
07-07-2006, 06:39 PM
I think Pete dislike Nadal, he very less to talk about him. :o

nobama
07-07-2006, 10:34 PM
I don't trust Pete. His records had always been safe to begin with. Now with Nadal in picture he's got an insurance.

He should read my signature. LOLI'm cautious with his comments as well. But I do agree with mangoes that Pete is a bigger fan of Roger's game than he is of #2. And he understands as well as anyone when your at the top how quickly people can turn on you and be ready to crown someone else the "king". I honestly don't believe, say in the Wimbledon final, he'd be rooting for #2 over Roger.

RogiFan88
07-08-2006, 02:57 AM
Suktuen, we don't know if Pete dislikes Nadal; all we know is that Pete seems to only watch Rogi [he doesn't even watch Pandy]. ;)

SUKTUEN
07-08-2006, 05:16 PM
Suktuen, we don't know if Pete dislikes Nadal; all we know is that Pete seems to only watch Rogi [he doesn't even watch Pandy]. ;)

Yes, Pete seems Look like very enjoy to watch Roger's match!! :hug:

Hope my LORD Please Bless Roger to hug the Golden Cup tommorrow! :bounce: :bowdown: :bowdown:

Stevens Point
07-10-2006, 04:27 PM
I just watched an ESPN video, and Brad Gilbert says Roger winning 20 Grand Slam titles by the time of his age of 30 is not out of possibility.

SUKTUEN
07-10-2006, 04:30 PM
Really? I have ESPN too, I want to see it too

Stevens Point
07-10-2006, 05:09 PM
Really? I have ESPN too, I want to see it too
Go to http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/index?&lpos=globalnav&lid=gn_Tennis find "Motion Video" on the right side middle of the page, click on More Video and find ROGER FEDERER WINS FOURTH WIMBLEDON TITLE (the small image of Roger holding the Wimbledon Trophy is it."

nobama
07-10-2006, 05:54 PM
I just watched an ESPN video, and Brad Gilbert says Roger winning 20 Grand Slam titles by the time of his age of 30 is not out of possibility.And how many does he predict Nadal will win? 30? :lol:

World Beater
07-10-2006, 05:58 PM
And how many does he predict Nadal will win? 30? :lol:

he is quite the bandwagoner. :rolleyes:

from federer=poor man's sampras to federer=lendl +sampras, then to rafa winning wimbledon and then now 20 slams...Looks like bipolar disorder to me.

ExpectedWinner
07-10-2006, 06:38 PM
I just watched an ESPN video, and Brad Gilbert says Roger winning 20 Grand Slam titles by the time of his age of 30 is not out of possibility.


The anecdote of the day.

RogiFan88
07-10-2006, 10:21 PM
Brat, you do exaggerate so...

SUKTUEN
07-11-2006, 04:04 PM
thanks

nobama
07-22-2006, 02:01 PM
http://www.pga.com/openchampionship/2006/news/notebook072106.html
Q. I come from another country and I come from another sport. I come from Italy, and I come from tennis. A few minutes ago, Nick Faldo talked about yourself and Bjorn Borg. He said you are able to control your emotions in many situations like Bjorn Borg. What do you know about Bjorn Borg? What do you know about tennis? And what do you know about Italy, if you can?

Tiger: Where do I start with this one?

Tennis, I'm an avid tennis fan. I watch tennis all the time. I was a huge [Pete] Sampras fan and now obviously, I'm a huge [Roger] Federer fan. I just love watching them play and anytime I get a chance to watch them play, I do.

I do follow tennis quite a bit, but as far as any comparison to Bjorn Borg, he's one of the greatest ever to play the sport. I guess any comparison with somebody that's played their sport and been considered one of the greatest of all ties is awfully flattering because he did it on different surfaces and he was able to control his emotions and played in different generations. What he was able to do has been truly remarkable, especially going from -- obviously going from the French [Open] to Wimbledon and making that transition, not everybody can do that.

SUKTUEN
07-22-2006, 03:48 PM
thanks Tiger!

clin
08-12-2006, 11:27 AM
From Toronto:

Berdych interview after his victory over Nadal:

Q. You seem not to fear Nadal at all. Is that true and why? A lot of players seem to fear when they play him.
TOMAS BERDYCH: Yeah, I think this is the biggest advantage of these two guys, which is now top two, Federer and Nadal, because I think when they go on the court, the opponents are, I don't know, down one set because they are fear of them, they think that they are, I don't know, Gods or whoever.
So I know him well because we are similar age and we play couple of matches in the juniors and we know long time, so I don't have any reason to be fear from him. So I'm just concentrate on my tennis and play my best.

Q. Is it the same with Roger Federer?
TOMAS BERDYCH: No, it's a little bit different because I think he is a much better player and we don't know well each other like with Rafael, so it's different.


I totally agree with Tomas -- it is so obvious.

SUKTUEN
08-12-2006, 01:33 PM
Berdych thanks!!!! :inlove:

although I don't like to watch your match, :p but thanks for your words~! :wavey:

Eden
08-13-2006, 11:39 AM
Ivan Lendl used to tear through opponents with ease, but figures he wouldn't stand much of a chance against Roger Federer.

"He is capable of hitting shots which other players don't even think about trying," Lendl said at the Rogers Cup yesterday. "He has so many (skills).

"There is no one thing you can go on the court and say, 'Okay, this is how I am going to play the guy.' Even if it starts working, he's going to change it around and all of a sudden you have to adjust yourself. He is a master of that."

source: slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Tennis/ATP/2006/08/09/1726166-sun.html

landoud
08-13-2006, 01:59 PM
well said Ivan :yeah:

SUKTUEN
08-14-2006, 03:46 AM
thanks

Eden
08-14-2006, 06:10 PM
Afterwards, Gasquet was asked whether Federer would pass Pete Sampras as the greatest of all time should he ever win the French Open. Gasquet, in his rough English, spoke at length. But one sentence stood out:
"I think he is like Sampras now."

Richard Gasquet after the Toronto final

SUKTUEN
08-15-2006, 06:38 AM
Richard Gasquet ,I like him more now

knoxy
08-16-2006, 01:05 PM
August 15, 2006
A. RODDICK/D. Bracciali

Andy Roddicks Post-Match Interview


Q. Do you think that this rivalry that people have been talking about between Federer and Nadal is actually going to shape up to be something that could be good for the sport and generate a lot of fan interest as past rivalries have, or not? Do you think Nadal might not have it to keep it up?

ANDY RODDICK: Well, that remains to be seen, but right now it's very good for the sport, you know. The fact that I think he matches up well against Roger, you know. Other people are going to beat Rafael. I don't think there's any question about who the best player in the world is, you know. :yeah: But, fortunately, for the game of tennis and for that rivalry's sake, Rafael matches up well against Roger by being lefty, by kind of playing a little bit heavier. So, yeah, I mean, tennis thrives on rivalries and, you know, right now I think it's very good for the game.

-----------

I think Andy’s cool. He always has good things to say about Roger.

SUKTUEN
08-17-2006, 10:54 AM
thankyou So much Andy!!! :yeah:

GOD Bless you go to US Open Final to play with Roger! :hug: :hug: :worship:

Eden
08-17-2006, 07:50 PM
I think Andy’s cool. He always has good things to say about Roger.

That's true. I always find it amazing how much the players on the tour respect Roger. I think no number one before received so many eulogistic comments for the play on the court and the behaviour off the court :)

fed4ever
08-17-2006, 09:43 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/4790323.stm

Comments from Marcelo Rios:

Greatest of all time: Sampras or Federer?
Eileen, Scotland

Federer by far. At the time when I was retiring from the ATP circuit he was only playing serve and volley. He didn't play that well from the baseline back then. Now he just won Wimbledon from the baseline and that shows that he is a really complete player.

What do you think of the young guns at the moment- Berdych, Monfils, Gasguet, and what do you think of Andy Murray?
Shane Roche, UK

I don't know the youngsters that much. I know them by name but I haven't been following the ATP circuit that closely lately. But from what I hear they are pretty good and hopefully more young guys will come up.

I think Federer is the best player though and he is going to be the best player ever and hopefully he will.

I saw Murray play Massu at Wimbledon but I don't know him that much. Was I impressed by his game? No.

landoud
08-18-2006, 10:16 AM
:yeah: on Andy's words

SUKTUEN
08-18-2006, 06:20 PM
Andy is a good friend woth Roger very much! :devil:

Hope they can play more matches each other! :D

NYCtennisfan
08-18-2006, 06:35 PM
I saw Murray play Massu at Wimbledon but I don't know him that much. Was I impressed by his game? No.

:haha: Classic Rios.

SUKTUEN
08-18-2006, 06:38 PM
:haha: Classic Rios.
:haha:

RogiFan88
08-18-2006, 08:10 PM
From Juanqui's interview at Cincy06 r3, def. Soderling:

Q. When Roger goes out early in a tournament, which doesn't happen often, does everyone remaining, like you, think suddenly, Now I have a good chance, a better chance?

JUAN CARLOS FERRERO: Well, maybe a little bit, but anyway, you know, all the times that I played against Roger I play great matches. Last year I had two matchpoints. You know, of course it's very difficult to beat him, but I love to play against him. So, you know, is better I think to play in the final against him than not.

Q. Than not?

JUAN CARLOS FERRERO: Yeah, for me.

Q. What makes him a good player to play against? What makes it an enjoyable thing to play him?

JUAN CARLOS FERRERO: Well, I think he dominate all the shots, you know. He can do whatever. He plays with a lot of rhythm, and I like this. He's very nice person. So everything total, it's wonderful to play against him.
http://www.cincytennis.com/en/playe...06/ferrero3.asp

SUKTUEN
08-19-2006, 09:15 AM
thankyou JC~~~handsome kind man! :D :D

World Beater
08-20-2006, 11:25 PM
:haha: Classic Rios.

its funny, everytime i see a clip of the old marcelo playing, i cant but notice the similarity to federer in the footwork. Federer's talent off the ground reminds more of rios than anyone else.

SUKTUEN
08-21-2006, 08:59 AM
Congrat Andy!~~Roger's Good Friend!!! :D :yippee: :yippee:

mays
08-24-2006, 09:05 PM
I was just watching John Mcenroe on Letterman. and he was talking about the us open. he mentioned roger a couple of times.

once when he was asked about agassi, and his chances of winning the usopen, he said well he's got Roger Federer, and a young spaniard Rafael Nadal.

and then when he was asked who was gonna win, he said something like "well federer i think ultimately"

and then when he was asked who he'd like to win the tournament he said
agassi because its his last year and stuff. but i think Roger Federer who i think IS THE GREATEST PLAYER THAT EVER LIVED. and i like this guy nadal, he plays with alot of intensity etc..

well just thought id post it, sorry these probably arent his exact words, but what can i say, i tried hehe!!

RogiFan88
08-24-2006, 09:25 PM
its funny, everytime i see a clip of the old marcelo playing, i cant but notice the similarity to federer in the footwork. Federer's talent off the ground reminds more of rios than anyone else.

Well, Rogi does admire Marcelo's tennis... another absolutely talented guy... w the "artistic" temperament to go along w the talent. ;)

SUKTUEN
08-25-2006, 04:38 AM
Mcenroe just say this year USO will not be final of Roger nad Nadal! :rolleyes:
And he say Roger is the best ? :confused:

Eden
08-27-2006, 04:28 PM
Mcenroe just say this year USO will not be final of Roger nad Nadal! :rolleyes:

No, he didn't say this ;) Read mays words once again, Suktuen: McEnroe mentioned Roger and Nadal when he was asked about Agassis chance of winning the US Open.
McEnroe wants Agassi to win, but he thinks that Roger will win :)


And he say Roger is the best ? :confused:

Yes. He even declared that Roger would be the greatest player ever in his opinion :)

Oriental_Rain
08-28-2006, 06:48 AM
Rios was once coach by Ljundgren wasnt he? :confused:

nobama
08-28-2006, 08:52 AM
No, he didn't say this ;) Read mays words once again, Suktuen: McEnroe mentioned Roger and Nadal when he was asked about Agassis chance of winning the US Open.
McEnroe wants Agassi to win, but he thinks that Roger will win :)



Yes. He even declared that Roger would be the greatest player ever in his opinion :)I don't know which McEnroe we're talking about but Patrick McEnroe said the final would be Roger/Andy Roddick.

Corey Feldman
08-28-2006, 10:23 AM
That's true. I always find it amazing how much the players on the tour respect Roger. I think no number one before received so many eulogistic comments for the play on the court and the behaviour off the court :)True.... but if im honest im finding it more and more cringe worthy as the years go by, Fed is so nice this that everything bla bla....
he is not mother teresa and has shown some faults when things are not going his way.
and what is so great about wanting to be known as the ultimate nice guy all the time anyway, id prefer roger if he had a bit of an edge to him.. in other peoples eyes.
everything is to f'en nicey nicey thesedays.
it doesnt mean anything, everyone wants to beat him and have another No1 player anyway as we've seen lately, Fed should remember this.

nobama
08-28-2006, 12:52 PM
I just want Roger to be who he is and if that's being Mr. Nice Guy than so be it. I don't think he needs to cop some attitude to compete with Nadal or anyone else. When you say "everyone wants a new #1", I'm not sure who "everyone" is. Seems to me there are too many paranoid people here thinking those in power are trying to sabatoge Roger or do whatever they can to get him dethroned from the #1 spot. I think that's nonsense.

Corey Feldman
08-28-2006, 04:44 PM
I mean the media.... they are loving Rafa's ass so much lately, you know it yourself... we seen all the comments this summer from wilander, Mac, connors, whoever.
and off course, i dont want Fed to change... my critism wasnt of him, it was at all these ppl that always give the "he's such a nice guy!!!" stuff all the time.
i dont think he is, personally i think he's a 'normal guy' with faults which has been clearly shown with some of the stuff he's said when Nadal has been beating him.... and i LIKED that he showed that side to him.

Corey Feldman
08-28-2006, 04:47 PM
and off course every player wants to see a different No1, as in - themselves hehe.

ExpectedWinner
08-28-2006, 05:06 PM
I think that's nonsense.


Install nonsense detectors on yourself first. Nobody managed to spam the board as much as you did.

nobama
08-28-2006, 05:17 PM
Install nonsense detectors on yourself first. Nobody managed to spam the board as much as you did.Just because I don't buy into all these conspiracy theories I'm spamming the board? Whatever. :rolleyes: I'm actually going to enjoy this US Open. How about you?

ExpectedWinner
08-28-2006, 05:26 PM
Just because I don't buy into all these conspiracy theories I'm spamming the board? Whatever. :rolleyes: I'm actually going to enjoy this US Open. How about you?

Your spamming abilities have nothing to do with conspiracy theories.

And dont' worry about me, bad smell from the tennis kitchen doesn't affect my appetite.

SUKTUEN
08-28-2006, 05:46 PM
Patrick McEnroe said the final would be Roger/Andy Roddick.
:haha: :haha:

nobama
08-28-2006, 05:59 PM
:haha: :haha:I thought you liked Andy?

SUKTUEN
08-28-2006, 06:02 PM
I thought you liked Andy?
yes!!!!

He is my sec Love in tennis world now!! :devil: :devil:

nobama
08-28-2006, 06:03 PM
yes!!!!

He is my sec Love in tennis world now!! :devil: :devil:He should be playing soon! Can you watch him on TV?

SUKTUEN
08-28-2006, 06:04 PM
I can't , I have no channel of USO

Eden
08-28-2006, 07:33 PM
I mean the media.... they are loving Rafa's ass so much lately, you know it yourself... we seen all the comments this summer from wilander, Mac, connors, whoever.
and off course, i dont want Fed to change... my critism wasnt of him, it was at all these ppl that always give the "he's such a nice guy!!!" stuff all the time.
i dont think he is, personally i think he's a 'normal guy' with faults which has been clearly shown with some of the stuff he's said when Nadal has been beating him.... and i LIKED that he showed that side to him.

Of course Roger is a guy with faults like everyone. I never noticed that he said something about an opponent apart from the happenings during the Rome final against Nadal :confused:

And the media hype around Nadal is in my opionion mainly because of his head to head with Roger. I doubt that he would receive this huge attention without his rivalry with Roger. For the media and some experts Rafa is the man who troubles the player who so many people already call the greatest player of all time.

Don't get me wrong, even without the rivalry with Roger Nadal would quite be popular for the media but I just think that most of the hype comes because of his ability to beat Roger.

SUKTUEN
08-29-2006, 09:29 AM
I think if Roger have less unforce error he win USO this year is not promble.
I don't think Nadal can beat Roger in hard court again.

faso
08-29-2006, 01:09 PM
i dont know if this was posted but whatever

from dmitry´s new blog:
"Another reason I’m resuming was just the sheer whining I had to put up with in the locker room. “Can you please write something about me?”, “Can you write something about Tommy?”, “Say something mean about Bobby! I don’t like him!”, “Johnny bageled me! Tell everyone he sucks!” - and so on and so forth. Thomas Johansson is calling me “Maestro”, “Blog King”, “The Chosen One”, and “Richard Pryor of Blogging” after he realized how difficult it is to blog on my level, and even Roger asked for blogging lessons for his own web site. He is trading 3 of his Grand Slam titles because he spent all of his money on some pastures for his cow, or something like that, so he just wants to trade instead of paying cash!"

http://www.atptennis.com/1/en/blog/tursunov/

SUKTUEN
08-29-2006, 03:07 PM
Roger is the " Boss" ?

rofe
08-29-2006, 04:32 PM
i dont know if this was posted but whatever

from dmitry´s new blog:
"Another reason I’m resuming was just the sheer whining I had to put up with in the locker room. “Can you please write something about me?”, “Can you write something about Tommy?”, “Say something mean about Bobby! I don’t like him!”, “Johnny bageled me! Tell everyone he sucks!” - and so on and so forth. Thomas Johansson is calling me “Maestro”, “Blog King”, “The Chosen One”, and “Richard Pryor of Blogging” after he realized how difficult it is to blog on my level, and even Roger asked for blogging lessons for his own web site. He is trading 3 of his Grand Slam titles because he spent all of his money on some pastures for his cow, or something like that, so he just wants to trade instead of paying cash!"

http://www.atptennis.com/1/en/blog/tursunov/

:haha:

This guy goes overboard with the exclamation marks but he does have flair.

SUKTUEN
08-29-2006, 04:37 PM
Is Roger say some thing about Agassi in USO?

TenHound
08-29-2006, 04:41 PM
Rofe, perhaps he goes overboard w/exclamation points 'cuz he's not sure that his deadpan humor will be conveyed w/a period. HIs future will be interesting to watch. Art. in NYT said he has a natural talent for drawing. I'm waiting to see if he adds them to his blog. Unfortunately, they could only cajole him into doing it once a month, so he won't really be chronicalling the tour.

SUKTUEN
08-29-2006, 04:43 PM
I waiting for Roger's blog in ATP web site

Daniel
08-30-2006, 12:18 AM
From an interview with Jim Courier last weekend.

Jim Courier, formerly the No.1 tennis player in the world and a four-time Grand Slam champion, will be part of the announcing crew for the U.S. Open. Courier will work for USA Network, which will broadcast more than 107 hours of tennis spread over the next two weeks.

Courier talked with Observer sports columnist Scott Fowler recently, sharing his thoughts on the Open /and the tennis tournament Courier is promoting and will play in Charlotte at The Palisades Sept.20-24.

Q. What's the No.1 story at this U.S. Open? It's all going to be about Andre Agassi early. It's his swan song at the Open. But health has been an issue for him -- he's not been able to play a lot this summer or really this year, for that matter. That's going to make it challenging for him in the early stages. If he can get through the first couple of rounds, he could be a threat to go deep in the tournament. If his body is holding up, his hands aren't going anywhere. He's going to be the story of the tournament, male or female, until he loses -- if he loses.

Q. How do you see the men's field shaping up overall? It's set up as a showdown between (Roger) Federer and (Rafael) Nadal to settle the score this year, with Federer winning Wimbledon after Nadal won the French. Whoever wins this tournament should be the year-end No. 1. The rivalry would reach a fever pitch if they both make the final.

Q. Will they? Federer will -- I'm 100 percent confident of that. Nadal? I don't know. He's played some spotty tennis this summer and doesn't have as many matches under his belt since Wimbledon as he'd like. But the guy is such a fighter. The best-of-five-set format favors his physicality, as do the hot, humid conditions. He'll be tough.

SUKTUEN
08-31-2006, 10:24 AM
thanks

Eden
09-05-2006, 04:46 PM
From Nikolay Davydenko on the Roger Federer tank in Cincinnati: "We know already that Federer should have retired before Cincinnati because when he won the event in Toronto (the previous week), I heard from his girlfriend that he was not going to play Cincinnati, so I am surprised that he went there and not surprised that he lost, because when Federer wants to play, he doesn't lose to anybody."

Source: http://www.tennis-x.com/story/2006-09-05/j.php

World Beater
09-06-2006, 04:03 AM
That's why I think Roger's not the greatest player, ever, not by a long shot. Not yet, anyway. In this way, he's very suspect, in terms of having the ability to think and execute a strategy where you say, 'You're the better player in this situation, so I'm going to do something that I feel really uncomfortable about, but you're gonna feel worse.' That takes guts. Roger didn't do that. He hasn't done it against Nadal ever, except in Rome. So that's kind of a bail-out. I mean, it was the same at Wimbledon, in a way, where I don't believe Roger came in behind a single second serve. But okay, it's different at Wimbledon, where Roger's entitled to think, 'I can play exactly in the most comfortable way for me and I'm going to beat everyone, including Nadal, seven out of ten times.' But anywhere else, it's a different story." And from Bodo: "It's an added bonus that it looks like Mats had a few pops before letting it rip in the [original interview on his Nadal-Federer thoughts], and he uses his infamous phrase ["has no balls"] so often that by the end I was rolling on the floor laughing; it's just so over-the-top that it borders on the obsessional." - from tennis-x.


in a twisted sort of way, i hope roger finds out about this, and that he takes out his fury against nadal.

Corey Feldman
09-06-2006, 04:26 AM
“I’ve met both Tiger and Roger, and they’re both very impressive,” said Ivan Lendl, the tennis great who is well placed to compare because he has become an avid golfer. “I would say it’s almost a below-the-belt question to ask which is more impressive. I think what you find in both of them is that they are both trying to keep focused and keep getting better.

“Top players in any sport who have any kind of staying power are guys who draw energy from success and use it to improve. I believe that’s the difference between a champion and a No. 1 who comes and goes.”

From the greatest player of the 80's, Ivan Lendl.

Eden
09-06-2006, 09:14 AM
in a twisted sort of way, i hope roger finds out about this, and that he takes out his fury against nadal.

Do you really think Roger cares about the words of Mats? ;) I don't know what some experts expect of Roger. Any top player had an oppnonent which caused him trouble, but no one would say that a player who had a positive head to head against someone like Sampras was the better player.

In my opinion all these negative comments about Rogers problems with Nadal only prove the expectations the people have in Roger. They always demand perfection of him. But Roger is only a sportsman and to sports belong win and loss. Roger is blessed with so many success at his young age and the pressure he is up to every day is incredible high. I don't know how he handles this most of the time.

I'm so proud of Roger during this clay season. He had improved and was the only one who would have been really able to beat Nadal on this surface. Where were all the other clay court specialists? It speaks for Roger that he was able to come so close to Nadal on this surface.

When you read some opinions about the head to head between Federer and Nadal you get the feeling that Nadal always thrashed Roger. Thats not the fact.

I'm pretty confident that Federer will turn around the head to head. He always found a solution to players who caused him problems at the beginning.

SUKTUEN
09-06-2006, 03:13 PM
Roger make many people like him.

nobama
09-07-2006, 12:00 AM
Justin Gimelstob talking about memories of the US Open and meeting Roger:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/justin_gimelstob/09/06/my.open/
I have so many great stories like this. I just hope my memory doesn't give out before I get a chance to absorb and savor them all. Last year, the night before the Open began, I was collecting my things in my locker after a late practice and found myself alone in the locker room with Roger Federer.

I know Federer pretty well and I saw he was carrying a framed plaque. When I asked him about it, he walked toward me to show me the humanitarian award he had just received. On his way out, he stopped and turned to me and said, in the most sincere tone I have ever heard, "Justin, I just wanted to wish you luck in the upcoming tournament."

I was not as much shocked as mesmerized. All I could think of was how much goodwill he was sending my way. Then my second thought was how much I was going to need it -- the only luck he needed was to not get hurt! Sometimes it's nice to see the good guys succeed, and that's how I feel about Federer.

soraya
09-07-2006, 06:48 AM
Do you really think Roger cares about the words of Mats? ;) I don't know what some experts expect of Roger. Any top player had an oppnonent which caused him trouble, but no one would say that a player who had a positive head to head against someone like Sampras was the better player.

In my opinion all these negative comments about Rogers problems with Nadal only prove the expectations the people have in Roger. They always demand perfection of him. But Roger is only a sportsman and to sports belong win and loss. Roger is blessed with so many success at his young age and the pressure he is up to every day is incredible high. I don't know how he handles this most of the time.

I'm so proud of Roger during this clay season. He had improved and was the only one who would have been really able to beat Nadal on this surface. Where were all the other clay court specialists? It speaks for Roger that he was able to come so close to Nadal on this surface.

When you read some opinions about the head to head between Federer and Nadal you get the feeling that Nadal always thrashed Roger. Thats not the fact.

I'm pretty confident that Federer will turn around the head to head. He always found a solution to players who caused him problems at the beginning.

Agree 100%.

Eden
09-07-2006, 09:46 AM
Justin Gimelstob talking about memories of the US Open and meeting Roger:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/justin_gimelstob/09/06/my.open/

Great one :) Thanks for sharing :)

RogiFan88
09-07-2006, 02:27 PM
Eden, what bugs me is that they constantly give Rafa high praise and credit for reaching Wimby Final whereas when Rogi reached the RG Final, all they could do was criticize him forever for not beating Rafa and winning it. The only reason Rafa reaching Wimby F was SOOOOOOOOOOO incredible was that they vastly underestimated him on grass in the first place. They simply don't know Rafa and his determination to be exceptional -- he always wanted to win Wimby; winning RG is too normal and expected for a Spanish claycourter. He wants to go down in "the history" as one of the greats, if not the greatest ever, no question about it.

RogiFan88
09-07-2006, 02:32 PM
From Justin Gimelstob's Blog:

Where dreams come true
As a player, the U.S. Open is the top of the mountain
Posted: Wednesday September 6, 2006 12:34PM; Updated: Wednesday September 6, 2006 5:30PM

Tennis legend and five-time U.S. Open champion Jimmy Connors has been a fixture at this year's Open as Andy Roddick's coach.
Jamie Squire/Getty Images

NEW YORK -- The 2006 U.S. Open will always belong to Andre Agassi, but while it paled in comparison, my 12th year here will be the highlight of my year.

This tournament is one of the rare cases on the sports calendar when tennis crosses into the mainstream. It was a perfect setting for Andre to walk away from the sport -- its biggest attraction on the grandest stage.

While I have enjoyed moderate success at the U.S. Open during my career, having reached the third round in 1997 and '99 (I lost to David Ferrer in the second round this year), it has always been an incredible experience playing here. As a kid growing up in New Jersey, I attended the Open all the time. Now, to actually participate every year is always a surreal experience.

I'm lucky to have some of the greatest perks in the history of the workplace. I get to hang out, practice and compete against the greatest tennis players in the world. I turn around in the locker room, survey the restaurant and the players' lounge and everywhere I look are legends of the sport, both past and present.

This year, most of my highlights had nothing to do with anything that happened on a court. One of my all-time tennis heroes, Jimmy Connors, has been around this summer because of his newly formed coaching relationship with Andy Roddick. While I'm sure that infusing Roddick with a jolt of confidence was Connors' first priority, the indirect benefit to me was getting to hang out with the player who was the subject of my fifth-grade book report.

These are the kinds of experiences that make me pinch myself. Last week, while I was home practicing at my parents' house in New Jersey (where my dad built a court modeled after that of the U.S. Open), I walked by an old picture of my two brothers and me with Aaron Krickstein and the great Connors, taken after a pre-tournament practice at the Open nearly 20 years ago. Now I see Jimbo in the locker room and get to discuss my matches and strategy with him.

I have so many great stories like this. I just hope my memory doesn't give out before I get a chance to absorb and savor them all. Last year, the night before the Open began, I was collecting my things in my locker after a late practice and found myself alone in the locker room with Roger Federer.

I know Federer pretty well, and I saw he was carrying a framed plaque. When I asked him about it, he walked toward me to show me the humanitarian award he had just received. On his way out, he stopped and turned to me and said, in the most sincere tone I have ever heard, "Justin, I just wanted to wish you luck in the upcoming tournament."

I was not as much shocked as mesmerized. All I could think of was how much goodwill he was sending my way. Then my second thought was how much I was going to need it -- the only luck he needed was to not get hurt! Sometimes it's nice to see the good guys succeed, and that's how I feel about Federer.

Hanging with Connors and exchanging pleasantries with Federer are awesome, but nothing compares with sitting front and center to watch Agassi fight through his final professional matches. I sat in the front-row box reserved for the U.S. Open referee and tournament director and had the best seat in the house when Marcos Baghdatis collapsed with cramps -- almost literally in my lap -- late in their second-round match.

Unfortunately, I also had the same seats to one of the most painful sights I have seen on a tennis court: that of an obviously injured and hampered Agassi laboring through his third-round loss to Benjamin Becker. What followed was a memory that made me proud to be a professional tennis player.

The farewell speech and eight-minute standing ovation were incredible, but what most people weren't privileged enough to see was the thunderous applause Andre received when he walked into the locker room from all of his fellow players, and the subsequent standing ovation Andre was given by the international media during his postmatch news conference.

These are the experiences that make me feel lucky to be a professional tennis player, regardless of whether I ever get to stand in the glorious spotlight on Center Court again. Just being a part of it is an honor and a privilege.

Outspoken ATP tennis pro Justin Gimelstob is a frequent contributor to SI.com. He's competing in his 12th U.S. Open.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/justin_gimelstob/09/06/my.open/

SUKTUEN
09-07-2006, 03:13 PM
Thankyou so much Gimelstob~!

TenHound
09-08-2006, 07:01 AM
After his match tonight, Blake ante'ed up a lifetime membership in the RF Admiration society. (from tennis.com)

Blake makes case for Federer as "best*athlete of our time"


By Kamakshi Tandon


James Blake took a set from Roger Federer for the first time in their five career meetings, saved a match point, broke Federer when he was serving for the match – twice*– and had break points to do it a third time. All that gives him hope. "A wise man*– or, well, maybe not a wise man, just Todd Martin*– told me if you win one set, you can win two.* If you can win two sets, you can win three," said Blake. "I was one point away from winning a first set, too. I guess he's human."


But he's a human who's also the best tennis player in the planet, and Blake offered a laundry list of reasons why:


"He doesn't panic. He plays offense unbelievably well. He plays defense better than anyone I've ever played*– he makes so many gets, and when he gets to it, he doesn't just put it back, he puts it where it's difficult for you to hit the next shot. Volleys well. Serves well. Handled the pressure of being No. 1 in the world. He's handled the pressure of being against a crowd tonight that was clearly on my side. He handles that very well. He obviously puts pressure on himself to succeed, and has handled all that. Got the biggest forehand in the game. Seems to be able to create pace out of nothing."


"I could keep going probably, too," Blake added.


He did.


"I heard something on ESPN about two weeks ago saying Tiger Woods is going to pass Michael Jordan as the best athlete of our time, and I think that's a joke," said Blake. "Not to take anything away from Tiger Woods because he's unbelievable, best golfer,*[but] I'd make a case for Roger Federer being the best athlete of our time – not tennis player, athlete."


Federer was touched by Blake's praise. "That he says something like this, puts me ahead of basically my own idol, Michael Jordan, that's something very special, of course," said Federer. "For me, it's impossible to say if it's true or not, you know, because it's so hard to compare sports.* But it's definitely nice to be all the way up there, that's for sure."


Federer, who was pushed hard for three out of the four sets in the match, was also positive about the direction of Blake's game. But the top-ranked American*did ultimately come up short, and so the list of superlatives was also comparably shorter. "He's been really improving a lot over the last couple of years, I think," said Federer. "Returns so much better. His backhand's so much more steady. His forehand has always been good, you know. It's amazing how far he's come."

landoud
09-08-2006, 07:51 AM
James is such a nice guy

SUKTUEN
09-08-2006, 04:15 PM
yes!!!

He always said he like Roger so much!! :D

Bagelicious
09-11-2006, 12:56 AM
I thought this was a pretty telling quote from Andy's press conference today:

ANDY RODDICK: Trust me, I don't need to let people know. It's extremely apparent, if you read anything.

But, uhm, yeah, I don't know. It wasn't I was just correcting him. Obviously, Roger is at the top and he's the only person at the top regardless of how much people want to make rivalry comparisons and this, that and the other. He's the best player in the game. There's no question in my mind or if you ask any player's mind about that.

He's deserved that spot.

He doesn't seem to think much of the whole 'Rivalry' thing either.

Bagelicious
09-11-2006, 12:58 AM
Here's another one:

Q. Tough question. You had to boil it down to two or three aspects of Roger's game that makes him so tough, what would be the two or three elements that you'd focus on?

ANDY RODDICK: Well, I mean, I think his ability to play big points. I think he sees the court a little bit differently. I don't know if you can boil it down to two or three. I think his movement's underrated, and what he can do with his hands is unparalleled.

lucashg
09-11-2006, 02:25 AM
I thought this was a pretty telling quote from Andy's press conference today:


He doesn't seem to think much of the whole 'Rivalry' thing either.

Which rivalry are you thinking of? I think he's talking about the so-called rivalry between him and Roger that the US media used to hype so much and talks about every now and then. 1-11 is not the best mathematical example of rivalries, so he's right. I don't think he's talking about the Fed-Nadal rivalry if that's what you originally thought.

Bagelicious
09-11-2006, 03:14 AM
Which rivalry are you thinking of? I think he's talking about the so-called rivalry between him and Roger that the US media used to hype so much and talks about every now and then. 1-11 is not the best mathematical example of rivalries, so he's right. I don't think he's talking about the Fed-Nadal rivalry if that's what you originally thought.


That's what I thought he was talking about - a reference the fact that people have been questioning Roger's dominance since Nadal has such a favourable h2h against him. Clearly Roddick hasn't been much of a factor this year, so I don't see why he'd be referring to a rivalry with him.

Basically, I take it to say: "Look guys, even though Nadal may give him a hard time on clay and has a favourable h2h, Roger is so far above everyone else that there's no questioning his being #1."

Edit: while he's talking about rivalries in general, I believe he means any rivalry anyone could choose to cook up, a Roddick-Roger rivalry one, or a Rafa-Roger one.

robinhood
09-11-2006, 04:15 AM
Which rivalry are you thinking of? I think he's talking about the so-called rivalry between him and Roger that the US media used to hype so much and talks about every now and then. 1-11 is not the best mathematical example of rivalries, so he's right. I don't think he's talking about the Fed-Nadal rivalry if that's what you originally thought.

I am almost certain it was Fed-Nadal he was referring to, because that is the only rivalry people have been talking about for a year now.

"Who is the real number one?"
John McEnroe certainly asked that question several times.

SUKTUEN
09-11-2006, 04:48 PM
I think Andy think only he can beat Roger at well.

Eden
09-13-2006, 11:35 AM
Eden, what bugs me is that they constantly give Rafa high praise and credit for reaching Wimby Final whereas when Rogi reached the RG Final, all they could do was criticize him forever for not beating Rafa and winning it.

I can understand your anger as I felt the same :hug:

It really seemed that noone paid tribute to Rogers draw in Wimbledon. I don't know if they took it for granted that Roger was facing Gasquet, Henman and Ancic on grass and defeat them in 3 straight sets.

We don't have to talk about Nadals draw in Wimbledon ;) . This combined with the slow grass court gave him the once in a lifetime opportunity to reach the final.

I really think most of the Nadal "mania" comes because of his head to head with Roger, who has only lost to a handful of players in the last years and now there is a player who beat him 4 times in this year.

Roger has so much pressure on his shoulders. He is the player who gets hunted by the other players. When he wins everyone takes it for granted, but when he loses some people don't seem to understand that this is only natural.

He is a human being and not a machine. I guess we will never know how Roger must have felt before the Roland Garros final. The day had come that he could make history, but there was the player who beat him in the 2 previous tournament finals on clay.

Only Roger knows what he had felt after winning the first set... I confess that I had started dreaming in that moment. For me Roger really reserved to win that tournament, but time wasn't ready that day. I was sad after the loss because Roger had put so much in the clay court season. He had reached 3 finals, which was amazing counsidering that he isn't a clay court specialist.

But I couldn't blame him for not winning Roland Garros. He didn't played the way he wanted to in the final and there was a player who was better than him. You have to accept such things. I ask myself why former players have problems with this. They must know better than us fans that such days happens in sport.

Roger did it and I'm more than proud how he handled this loss :)


The only reason Rafa reaching Wimby F was SOOOOOOOOOOO incredible was that they vastly underestimated him on grass in the first place.
They simply don't know Rafa and his determination to be exceptional -- he always wanted to win Wimby; winning RG is too normal and expected for a Spanish claycourter. He wants to go down in "the history" as one of the greats, if not the greatest ever, no question about it.

Well, he has a long ride before him to achieve this.

SUKTUEN
09-13-2006, 04:00 PM
Roger he really a Great man.

Eden
09-13-2006, 10:44 PM
“Roger (Federer) is a legend in the making, he’s such a great mover and can go from defence to attack in an instant. Regardless of whether he stopped tomorrow, he’s dominated his generation more than anyone has."

Pete Sampras in the current report "Dreaming of SW19" on http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,5205-2350458,00.html

SUKTUEN
09-14-2006, 03:57 PM
Sampras thankyou So much!! :D :D
You are Great too!!!!! :worship:

Eden
09-16-2006, 12:34 PM
Some nice words about Roger by Ljubicic in this article

http://english.people.com.cn/200609/15/eng20060915_303067.html

The relevant parts:

Bring it on: Ivan lives for the Federer challenge

While American Andy Roddick complains about competing in the Roger Federer era, Ivan Ljubicic of Croatia said playing against the Swiss wizard on the tour was his biggest joy.

"Maybe I could win more championships and prize money if Federer was not in the same age with me, but you have to know that there is something money can not buy - that's playing against Federer," said the World No 3.

"He is the best man in the game, on and off the court, and he has a great personality. I enjoy so much having opportunities to compete against him."

Despite his pure respect, Ljubicic's head-to-head experience against Federer is far from pleasant. The two started their rivalry as soon as they turned pro in 1998 and the Swiss leads the showdown 10-3. The 27-year-old Croat has never taken a singles win from Federer since 2003 and lost five times last season. The defeats included three finals, and there have been two losses so far this year, both in the Masters Series.

But Ljubicic doesn't see the results humiliating.

"Disappointed? Of course not," he said. "I am so proud to have him around. It is very pity that I am not able to play with Pete Sampras, but it's OK, I can see Federer on the tour. I could tell my grandson someday that I have competed against the greatest player on the planet."

:) :) :)

SUKTUEN
09-16-2006, 05:16 PM
thankyou So much!!

landoud
09-17-2006, 11:52 AM
I could tell my grandson someday that I have competed against the greatest player on the planet."
:yeah:

SUKTUEN
09-17-2006, 03:16 PM
:worship:

nobama
09-19-2006, 11:12 AM
This is from a tennis week interview with Todd Martin:
Tennis Week: To me one of the exciting by products of Federer's success is the hope that juniors will try to emulate his ability to play all-court tennis and develop an all-court game, master all shots and play from all areas of the court. You could play all-court tennis as did some of your contemporaries including Sampras, Mal Washington, Cedric Pioline, Wayne Ferreira and others. Do you think Federer's stylistic success will trickle down and juniors will try to develop complete games so they can play from the baseline or transition to net or do you think the surface-specific nature of the game sort of coerces players to be locked into one style?

Todd Martin: I'm not certain that Federer is a complete all-court player. He's able to be complete, but I'm not certain that he is. He does not come to the net nearly as much as I think he should, but certainly he's got the skills to do so. I think the more he plays Nadal and some of these other younger players, then the more you might see him come in more. The more he gets pushed by the guys who will be with him the next five to eight years the better it will be for him. He will be forced to be more aggressive and attack and I think it's great. I think it will make a huge difference for Federer personally and I think it will trickle down and promote the use of more all-court skills — at least to the point that there is a comprehension of how to play at the net and how to get to the net and play in the transitional area of the court and the benefit of doing so. I am hopeful that will happen.
Interesting comments considering just about everyone usually refers to Roger as an "all court" player. But he is right about Roger not coming to net all that often. Maybe it's just how one defines "all court"? And maybe because Roger's play is easy on the eyes and he is decent when he does come to net people think of him as an "all court" player?

refero*fervens
09-19-2006, 11:43 AM
Ohh, they are very nice words from Ljubicic!

Interesting article mirkaland. I don't know, I see Roger as an all-court player. He comes to the net when he needs to and stays back when he can control the point from the baseline; also he doesn't use the court as 'net' and 'baseline', he seems just as comfortable in supposed no-man's land in the middle and that really is one of the best things about watching him.

SUKTUEN
09-19-2006, 03:55 PM
Ljubicic Love Roger so much :devil:

Corey Feldman
09-25-2006, 12:54 AM
"She's a natural athlete. Like Federer, she makes the game look effortless."

from WTA indian player Sania Mirza, talking about Hingis..... and mentioning fed. :)

World Beater
09-25-2006, 01:18 AM
This is from a tennis week interview with Todd Martin:
Interesting comments considering just about everyone usually refers to Roger as an "all court" player. But he is right about Roger not coming to net all that often. Maybe it's just how one defines "all court"? And maybe because Roger's play is easy on the eyes and he is decent when he does come to net people think of him as an "all court" player?

wtf....what huge difference is martin talking about?

it really cant get any better for fed atm, except perhaps on clay, and coming into net on a slow surface isnt wise against nadal.

SUKTUEN
09-25-2006, 03:46 PM
"She's a natural athlete. Like Federer, she makes the game look effortless."

:hearts: :hearts: :hearts:

Daniel
09-26-2006, 03:03 AM
Source : http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1055191

Moya on Federer:

“Things were different in the 90s. There were quite a few great players like (Pete) Sampras, (Boris) Becker, (Andre) Agassi, (Patrick) Rafter with virtually the same kind of skills. They were all in the same league. But today, there’s a big gap between the top two-three players and the rest. See (Roger) Federer and (Rafael) Nadal. There is hardly anyone who can come close to them,” he says.

But for him, Sampras was and always will remain the best. “He was a class apart. Federer and Nadal are good, but not in his league,” Moya says.

And he does feel that Federer is not unbeatable. “Nadal has beaten him twice this year. Murray beat him recently. He’s after all human. He has his weaknesses,” he says.

mangoes
09-26-2006, 05:04 AM
Source : http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1055191

Moya on Federer:

“Things were different in the 90s. There were quite a few great players like (Pete) Sampras, (Boris) Becker, (Andre) Agassi, (Patrick) Rafter with virtually the same kind of skills. They were all in the same league. But today, there’s a big gap between the top two-three players and the rest. See (Roger) Federer and (Rafael) Nadal. There is hardly anyone who can come close to them,” he says.

But for him, Sampras was and always will remain the best. “He was a class apart. Federer and Nadal are good, but not in his league,” Moya says.

And he does feel that Federer is not unbeatable. “Nadal has beaten him twice this year. Murray beat him recently. He’s after all human. He has his weaknesses,” he says.

Didn't Moya say, some time back, that he thought Federer was better than Sampras?????

Mechlan
09-26-2006, 05:44 AM
I don't think his comments are a slight against Fed (and we all know he loves Rafa ;)). In fact, I agree with Carlos... the top 10 today is not what it was 10 years ago. No offense to guys like Davydenko, Stepanek, Robredo and Blake, but I would be extremely surprised if these guys were still in the top 10 in another 2 years. Compare that to 1998 where the top 10 included Sampras, Agassi, Rios, Corretja, Rafter, Moya, Henman, etc. Like he says, the overall level of the ATP is much higher than it used to be, but at the very top, the depth is lacking a little bit. That's why I'm happy to see guys like Baghdatis step up. If some of the other youngsters could take that next step, the next few years could be really great.

Daniel
09-26-2006, 06:14 AM
Didn't Moya say, some time back, that he thought Federer was better than Sampras?????


I think he did. some omonths ago he said FEderer was much better than Sampras. Seems like he changed his mind.

refero*fervens
09-26-2006, 08:35 AM
I guess that 'opinion' about the lack of competition will continue to spring up for as long as Roger dominates :sad: .

On a different note, Tursunov mentions Roger in his new blog entry as the inspiration for a therapeutic food eating rampage :lol:.

nobama
09-26-2006, 11:28 AM
Didn't Moya say, some time back, that he thought Federer was better than Sampras?????Not the first to change their opinions. :lol:

Earlier this year Sampras made some comments about there being more competition in his day. Then during Wimbledon he said some really complementary things about Roger (which I wondered at the time if he was doing that because the press was questioning whether Roger or Rafael was the "real" #1, and I've gotten the impression Pete's not a big fan of Nadal, or at least his style of play). Now I read that after the US Open he contacted Roger to congratulate him and told Roger that he thinks Roger is better than he [Pete] was.

nobama
09-26-2006, 11:33 AM
I don't think his comments are a slight against Fed (and we all know he loves Rafa ;)). In fact, I agree with Carlos... the top 10 today is not what it was 10 years ago. No offense to guys like Davydenko, Stepanek, Robredo and Blake, but I would be extremely surprised if these guys were still in the top 10 in another 2 years. Compare that to 1998 where the top 10 included Sampras, Agassi, Rios, Corretja, Rafter, Moya, Henman, etc. Like he says, the overall level of the ATP is much higher than it used to be, but at the very top, the depth is lacking a little bit. That's why I'm happy to see guys like Baghdatis step up. If some of the other youngsters could take that next step, the next few years could be really great.But you could say if the Roger Federer of 04-06 and Nadal of 05-06 was playing back then what would the top 10 have looked like? When you have two players hogging most of the points it's easy to get a top 10 like that. I suppose some would say neither player would have dominated like they do now back then. I know the Peter Bodo's of the world feel a guy like Rafter would give Roger all sorts of trouble.

RogiFan88
09-26-2006, 01:05 PM
from the goofy Dima blog:

A Few Summer Memories... (September 21, 2006)


Hi everyone! Below is the start of Part III of my most recent blog.

Oh, before I start, I must point out that this photo has nothing to do with today's post, but I thought you may enjoy it. It's me, Paradorn Srichaphan and Vince 'Ain't Afraid of Ya' Spadea taking a little tea break during the US Open. It was all very civilized!

'Bageled' By The Best
The night I got "bageled" by Roger I went out and found comfort on a corner of a street where a Hot-Dog cart was parked. After all you don’t get “bageled” that often so to celebrate it I went on a dietary rampage. The cart was full of yummy treats and I felt like a kid in a candy store. There were Hot-Dogs, Hamburgers, and sausages on the grill all waiting for their new owner. Patties of real ground beef were singing to me, I heard sausages rambling in Polish and German and hot dogs were oinking in unison. All willing to sacrifice themselves to bring me peace of mind.
http://www.atptennis.com/1/en/blog/tursunov/

Breakdown
09-26-2006, 02:30 PM
Tursunov is just :hug: :banana:
I wish he played Roger more often;
Their matches are usually great! :worship:

RogiFan88
09-26-2006, 03:54 PM
Dima played well vs. Rogi until the 3rd set bagel. After Rogi fell in the 2nd set, Dima took advantage of a wary Rogi. Dima's brave to take on a hotdog that could have been sitting on that hotdog stand all evening -- by the time HE got to it anyway! :haha:

Corey Feldman
09-26-2006, 04:10 PM
Moya is starting to sound a bit bitter to me.. he was happy to talk fed up as the best ever when Rafa was dominating him earlier this year - it made rafa look better.
but since fed handed rafa his ass in that wimbledon final, won a us open, rafa's form has dipped and fed has wrapped up another No1 season........... now we hear old carlos backtrack.
he should also remember he is Fed's bitchn (0-6) and yet he has beat Sampras in his prime, indoors as well.
idiot doesnt know his shit to say sampras 'is in another league'
he's really no different from most of the tossers here at MTF who wanna talk down fed's acchievments... its jealousy of some sort, if a player you dont support is the best - lets talk him down.

Corey Feldman
09-26-2006, 04:18 PM
the top10 stuff is valid, for this year only id say..........
dont forget Fed has dealt with some great players when they were in top form and fit in the last 3-4 years.
Nadal, Roddick, Safin, Ferrero, Agassi, Coria, Nalbandian, Hewitt..... throw is some other solid champs like Moya himself, Tojo, Gaudio, Kuerten... and another solid top10'er who gave fed trouble - Henman.
then it doesnt look easy for fed as Moya and a few always like to imply.
alot of those players just got injured, or lost form or retired in the last 18 months... fed was still top and winning most of the biggies when they were all in good form in 2004, you could even say 04 is still his best year ever.

Breakdown
09-26-2006, 04:50 PM
:angel:

1997 (http://http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B000002BQK/ref=dp_image_0/102-9972125-9396947?ie=UTF8&n=5174&s=music)


the top10 stuff is valid, for this year only id say..........
dont forget Fed has dealt with some great players when they were in top form and fit in the last 3-4 years.
Nadal, Roddick, Safin, Ferrero, Agassi, Coria, Nalbandian, Hewitt..... throw is some other solid champs like Moya himself, Tojo, Gaudio, Kuerten... and another solid top10'er who gave fed trouble - Henman.
then it doesnt look easy for fed as Moya and a few always like to imply.
alot of those players just got injured, or lost form or retired in the last 18 months... fed was still top and winning most of the biggies when they were all in good form in 2004, you could even say 04 is still his best year ever.
If Roger wins TMC, 2006 will be his BEST year to date!!! :worship:

Eden
09-26-2006, 07:15 PM
Didn't Moya say, some time back, that he thought Federer was better than Sampras?????

He said: Yeah, this guy is unbeleaveable. I played against Sampras and Agassi, you know, but Federer plays on a higher level. You really have to enjoy his game.

I don't mind that Moya got a little bit impressed by Nadals head to head with Roger ;) Roger will give the answer on the court :)

And in the meantime I enjoy Santoros words:

”There are a lot of players I have a lot of respect for. Guys like Sampras, Agassi, Becker, Connors...encounters that strike you. But Federer, yes. I'd like him to win 15 GSs. He's brought tennis to a level nobody had ever reached before him. It would only be justice that he reaches the greatest palmares. Take just all the best of before at their best- Federer is above. He's the best of the best.“
:angel:

RogiFan88
09-26-2006, 08:04 PM
Sorry, no time to translate!

Entrevista con Carlos Moya
Nadal puede ser número 1 si mantiene este nivel´
Diario de Mallorca - 22sep06

"Para el tenis sería bueno que Roddick se uniera a Federer y a Rafel, porque es espectacular y norteamericano"
"Llegar a la victoria 600 es lo que me motiva para seguir".

- Confeccione el retrato robot del jugador perfecto.
- Me quedo con la derecha de Federer, el revés a una mano de Gaudio y Albert Costa, y Safin a dos manos; Sampras fue el mejor en la red; el servicio también Sampras y ahora Karlovic, que hace una media de veinte aces por partido.

- No ha citado ni a Federer ni a Nadal.
- Federer no es el que mejor saca. El drive de Federer es de los mejores y de Nadal destaco su fuerza mental. Tiene muy buena derecha y el revés lo ha mejorado mucho.

- ¿Ganará Wimbledon algún día?
- Ha estado cerca, más de lo que la gente se piensa. De él te puedes esperar cualquier cosa porque ha hecho cosas increíbles.

- ¿Hasta dónde puede llegar Nadal?
- Lo que ha conseguido con 20 años es algo increíble. Si no hubiera coincidido con Federer en su mejor momento hubiese conseguido muchas más cosas. Si se mantiene dos o tres años más a este nivel podría intentar incluso ser número 1.

- Es curioso, pero podría llegar a retirarse sin haber llegado a ser número 1.
- Has de tener la suerte de aprovechar el momento que te toca. Michael Chang, por ejemplo, fue un magnífico jugador y no llegó a ser número 1 porque coincidió con el mejor Sampras. Vamos a ver cuánto aguanta Federer a este nivel. Creo que Nadal podrá llegar a tener su oportunidad.

- ¿El dominio de Federer y Nadal es perjudicial o beneficioso para el tenis?
- Permite ver más partidos entre ellos dos. Hasta ahora pasaba poco. Ahora juegan en todas las superficies. Para el tenis sería bueno que Roddick se uniera, porque es espectacular y norteamericano. El mercado americano es lo que mueve todo esto.

- Sorprende lo bien que se lleva con Nadal.
- No se puede disimular. Le quiero mucho y sabía que algún día me llegaría a superar. Está a otro nivel.

- Lleva una década al más alto nivel. ¿Ha cambiado mucho el tenis?
- El nivel medio es muy alto. Ahora se tiene mucho más fácil acceso a buenos entrenadores, academias o preparadores físicos.

- Ha jugado contra Agassi, contra Sampras, contra Federer. ¿Con quién se queda? ¿Si Sampras y Federer se hubieran enfrentado, quién habría ganado?
- En tierra seguramente Federer y en las otras superficies estaría bastante igualado. El hecho de que Federer sea más humano hace que el poder de intimidación sea menos que el de Sampras. Cuando entrabas a la pista a jugar contra Sampras casi ni te saludaba, se le respetaba mucho. Federer habla con todo el mundo, es muy simpático. Como jugador probablemente sea mejor Federer.

- Alguien ha dicho que es el mejor deportista de la historia.
- Como tenista va camino de serlo. Al final de su carrera se verá.

...

Moya says in Diario de Mallorca 22sep06

The perfect “robot” tennis player
Federer’s FH, Gaudio and Costa’s one-handed BH, Safin’s two-handed BH [a player w both BHs?], Sampras at the net and serve, Karlovic’s serve

He also says Federer doesn’t have the best serve [maybe not the fastest or biggest, I say, but effective nonetheless] and Nadal has toughest mental, a good FH and his BH has improved a lot

Will Rafa win Wimby one day?
He has come close, closer than people thought; you can expect anything fr him because he’s done incredible things

How far can Rafa go?
What he’s done at 20 is incredible. If he wasn’t playing in the Federer time [at his peak] he could have achieved many more things. If he can keep up his level for the next 2 or 3 yrs, he could even be No 1.

It’s funny but Rafa could retire without being No 1
You have to have luck and take advantage of the moment. Chang was a great player but wasn’t No 1 because he played in Sampras’ time. Let’s see how much longer Federer can maintain this level. I think that Rafa will be able to have his opportunity.

Federer and Nadal domination – good for tennis?
It lets us see more matches betw them. Up to now this hardly happened before [betw No 1 and 2]. Now they play on all surfaces. For tennis it would be good if Roddick was up there because he’s fantastic and he’s North American. The Amer market is what drives all of this.

It is surprising how well you get along w Rafa.

I can’t hide it. I love him a lot and I knew that one day he would surpass me. He’s at a different level.

You’ve been at a high level for a decade now. Has tennis changed much?
The average level is very high. Now it’s easier to have good coaches, academies and trainers.

You’ve played vs. AA, Sampras, Federer. If Sampras and Federer had played each other, who w have won? [duh, they HAVE played each other and we all know who won… where!]
On clay, definitely Federer and other surfaces they’re pretty even. The fact that Federer is more human makes him less intimidating than Sampras. When you entered the court to play Sampras, he hardly even said hi to you, there was so much respect for him. Federer talks to everyone, he’s very nice. As a player probably Federer is better.

Someone said that he [Federer] is the best athlete in history.
As a tennis player he is on the way to being the best. At the end of his career, we’ll see.

Eden
09-26-2006, 08:24 PM
I don't know if these ones have already been posted earlier on, but it can't be wrong to post them again anyway :)

Patrick Rafter
"Roger's the greatest, most complete player I have ever seen."

*************

Goran Ivanisevic
"Federer is a genius. He's got more talent than Sampras. I don't know if he'll win as much as Pete, but potentially he's stronger."

*************

"He's the best player I've ever played against, full stop... and he was just too good today."

Tim Henman after this years Wimbledon match

*************

John McEnroe

"He's probably the greatest player that ever lived."

"He can beat half the guys with his eyes closed!"

*************

Jimmy Connors

"[In the modern game], you're either a clay court specialist, a grass court specialist or a hard court specialist... or you're Roger Federer."

NYCtennisfan
09-26-2006, 11:40 PM
Many people say this:

1) The overall depth of the game is as high as it has ever been
2) The players at the top i.e. the to ten or the top 5 or the GS champs are not as good as in years past.

Hmmmm....

If the overall depth is greater, isn't it harder for the top 10er to win slams since they will be facing someone tough in the 3rd round or even in teh 1st or 2nd rounds in TMS events? Add to that the 32 seed system means that you will generally have to play better player to win a slam and you have the result of a seemingly "weak" upper echelon.

Then again, this could be the top 10 next year: Federer, Nadal, Roddick, Nalbandian, Berdych, Safin, Gasquet, Murray, Baghdatis, Djokovic. It won't happen, but that would be one hell of a top 10. The players are out there, but not all of them have put it together or ever will.

World Beater
09-27-2006, 01:35 AM
Many people say this:

1) The overall depth of the game is as high as it has ever been
2) The players at the top i.e. the to ten or the top 5 or the GS champs are not as good as in years past.

Hmmmm....

If the overall depth is greater, isn't it harder for the top 10er to win slams since they will be facing someone tough in the 3rd round or even in teh 1st or 2nd rounds in TMS events? Add to that the 32 seed system means that you will generally have to play better player to win a slam and you have the result of a seemingly "weak" upper echelon.

Then again, this could be the top 10 next year: Federer, Nadal, Roddick, Nalbandian, Berdych, Safin, Gasquet, Murray, Baghdatis, Djokovic. It won't happen, but that would be one hell of a top 10. The players are out there, but not all of them have put it together or ever will.

gasquet, federer, djoko, murray, baggy, berdy, safin do not have glaring weaknesses. if your top 10 becomes reality, this will be the first in a while where sizable portion is devoid of weaknesses.

in the past, the top 10 have been littered with great players, but nevertheless were not as complete. whether it is edberg, becker, krajicek and goran at the baseline, or courier at net.

all the players mentioned have true all court potential.

landoud
09-27-2006, 07:41 AM
Jimmy Connors

"[In the modern game], you're either a clay court specialist, a grass court specialist or a hard court specialist... or you're Roger Federer."
:lol: :yeah:

nobama
09-27-2006, 11:18 AM
It's funny when people talk about lack of competition or weak field. As you guys just pointed out, with a number of players there is not a glaring weakness. Except maybe that they're still young and need to work on their fitness and get it together mentally.

In golf you have a lot of very talented players and then you have Tiger Woods who's from another planet. I would say the same thing with regards to men's tennis. Roger is just on another level right now. Watching him play is unlike watching anyone else. Like McEnroe said during the US Open Final - "the most beautiful player I've ever seen".

Corey Feldman
09-27-2006, 03:02 PM
someone in GM made a good point that 10-15 years ago Sampras' serve stood out because not many hit 125-130 MPH serves all the time, on today's tour... 40 players can do that.

i think another reason why ppl moan about the depth is because Fed and Rafa are sweeping the slams between them all the time.... if it was more spread out, no one would be coming up with these conspiracy theories.
not Fed's fault he is too good :p
and just think. these theories would be 10 times worse if Rafa wasnt around and at least winning those RG titles and beating fed a few times :o

RogiFan88
09-27-2006, 03:12 PM
finally "translated" Moya's Spanish interview on previous page

SUKTUEN
09-27-2006, 03:28 PM
Roger vs Pete, we need to wait for Roger ~~~ :devil:

because he is making the history!!!! :worship:

ExpectedWinner
09-27-2006, 04:34 PM
Well, this is not a player's comment. Djokovic's father speaks up:

1. Roger is afraid of my son
2. my son will soon be nr. 1 player in the world
3. my son is the only player in the world that applauds after good points from his opponents
4. Roger is a great player, but also a very little man

mangoes
09-27-2006, 04:51 PM
Well, this is not a player's comment. Djokovic's father speaks up:

1. Roger is afraid of my son
2. my son will soon be nr. 1 player in the world
3. my son is the only player in the world that applauds after good points from his opponents
4. Roger is a great player, but also a very little man

:haha: :haha: :haha: For some reason, I think these statements may come back to bite Djokovic in the butt:haha:

But, I'd like to thank him for making those statements. He just took the heat off Roger. I can hear the reporters now, "Roger said that Djokovic's time outs are a joke, to which Djokovic Father said that Roger is only fussing because he is afraid of Djokovic."

Breakdown
09-27-2006, 05:01 PM
Originally Posted by ExpectedWinner
Well, this is not a player's comment. Djokovic's father speaks up:

1. Roger is afraid of my son
2. my son will soon be nr. 1 player in the world
3. my son is the only player in the world that applauds after good points from his opponents
4. Roger is a great player, but also a very little man

Funny :haha: :zzz:

any source?

ExpectedWinner
09-27-2006, 05:24 PM
any source?

Someone posted it in GM. The source is the serbian newspaper http://www.novosti.co.yu/code/navigate.php?Id=13&status=jedna&vest=94395&datum=2006-09-26

RogiFan88
09-27-2006, 05:48 PM
perhaps it is losink somethink in the translation, no??

nobama
09-27-2006, 06:26 PM
:haha: :haha: :haha: For some reason, I think these statements may come back to bite Djokovic in the butt:haha:

But, I'd like to thank him for making those statements. He just took the heat off Roger. I can hear the reporters now, "Roger said that Djokovic's time outs are a joke, to which Djokovic Father said that Roger is only fussing because he is afraid of Djokovic."Just shows why all the fuss over Roger's comments are a joke. As far as applauding opponents shots, I guess Nole's father has never watched Andy Roddick or James Blake play. :shrug:

mangoes
09-27-2006, 06:52 PM
Just shows why all the fuss over Roger's comments are a joke. As far as applauding opponents shots, I guess Nole's father has never watched Andy Roddick or James Blake play. :shrug:

:lol: I guess not. I've also seen Henman, Coria, and Paradorn applaud their opponents' shots:shrug:

Corey Feldman
09-27-2006, 10:38 PM
:lol: Djoko's dad
:haha:
yes terrified of him, that must be why he bitchslapped him at the weekend
lol.

anyhow, i actually like Novak (despite some of his antics) so i wont hold his dad against him :hug:
alot of tennis fathers from that kinda place in the world seem to be like that :scratch: Damir Dokic anyone..
probably beats Nole anytime he loses :sad:

soonha
09-28-2006, 12:53 AM
probably beats Nole anytime he loses :sad:
You're kidding, right? :eek:

MissMoJo
09-28-2006, 01:09 AM
Well, this is not a player's comment. Djokovic's father speaks up:

1. Roger is afraid of my son
2. my son will soon be nr. 1 player in the world
3. my son is the only player in the world that applauds after good points from his opponents
4. Roger is a great player, but also a very little man
I see where djokovic got the nutter gene from :lol:

soraya
09-28-2006, 05:23 AM
probably beats Nole anytime he loses :sad:


:rolls: :rolls: I doubt they have CPS in Serbia, otherwise papa djoke would have a visit from the local police.

SUKTUEN
09-30-2006, 04:32 PM
Roger's said is not a joke, but I don't mind~

MisterQ
10-04-2006, 03:50 AM
Forgive me if this was already posted. :) Agassi talking about Roger at last year's USO (and footage of Roger in his semi with Hewitt):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjyWXOfIBy4&mode=related&search=

Mrs. B
10-04-2006, 10:59 AM
Thank you, Mr. Q :wavey:

SUKTUEN
10-04-2006, 03:50 PM
MisterQc welcome~!!!!!:wavey:

Eden
10-05-2006, 06:47 PM
Agassi talking about Roger at last year's USO (and footage of Roger in his semi with Hewitt):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjyWXOfIBy4&mode=related&search=

That's a nice one :yeah:. And how sweet is the scene when Andre meets his kids :inlove:

nobama
10-06-2006, 01:22 PM
TTC has been showing the Seniors tour this week. MaliVai Washington is one of the commentators. Last night after talking about the criteria to play on that tour they joked about what the criterea would have to be once Roger is retired. Then Washington said that the 90s had better players and more depth. Now I've heard many players say the top 10 was stronger back then, but not many that the overall tour was stronger. Seems to me these guys still can't deal with the fact that someone is dominating the tour so soon after Sampras retired. So they chalk Roger's dominance up to weak competition and no depth on the tour.

Seraphim
10-07-2006, 01:21 AM
TTC has been showing the Seniors tour this week. MaliVai Washington is one of the commentators. Last night after talking about the criteria to play on that tour they joked about what the criterea would have to be once Roger is retired. Then Washington said that the 90s had better players and more depth. Now I've heard many players say the top 10 was stronger back then, but not many that the overall tour was stronger. Seems to me these guys still can't deal with the fact that someone is dominating the tour so soon after Sampras retired. So they chalk Roger's dominance up to weak competition and no depth on the tour.

Well damn! How many are there saying this now?

SUKTUEN
10-07-2006, 04:24 AM
thankyou

Eden
10-07-2006, 08:00 PM
Tim Henman on playing to Roger in the Tokio final:

"Roger is trying to prove he's the best player that's ever played the game," said Henman. "To play him in the final will be very special."

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/5415378.stm

SUKTUEN
10-08-2006, 04:04 AM
thanks

refero*fervens
10-08-2006, 11:12 AM
Tim Henman after playing Roger in the Tokyo final, from his website timhenman.org :) :

---------------------------------

"It's been really enjoyable. Last week in Bangkok I played some good tennis and this week I was able to build on that.

"I've had some good wins against higher-ranked players in both tournaments and, here in Tokyo, I was able to get stuck into the event and I put in some really good performances throughout the week.

"Unfortunately, I wasn't able to go the whole way but there are plenty of positives for me to take from the trip as I feel I've showed on the match court what I've been feeling in practice for a while now.

"Roger was too strong for me today and he's a phenomenal player - there's very few that can live with him on any surface other than clay at the moment.

"It's difficult to hurt him as he's got so many strengths and so few weaknesses and, the scary thing is, he's still improving.

"So it's tough to compete with him, especially in the latter stages of tournaments when he's had a chance to build up his confidence, but that's what we've all got to try to do.

"It's a formidable challenge - but competing against arguably the greatest player of all time is the ultimate test and so it's one that I still enjoy."

---------------------------

Eden
10-08-2006, 07:24 PM
Thanks refero :wavey:

Here is another one from Tim:

Asked after the match which elements of Federer's game are hard to notice without playing against him, Henman said "the consistency and variation of his first and second serves and his athleticism -- not only how fast he is moving to the ball, but his balance and footwork moving around the ball."
Asked to compare Federer to Pete Sampras, Henman said, "He has a more complete game than Sampras. Sampras had a bigger first and second serve. In the conditions Pete was playing, it was easier to be more aggressive all the time. Now with the courts and the balls much slower, Roger is so effective because he has so many attributes to his game."
Asked how long Federer can stay No. 1, Henman said, "I think it will still be a few years. One question when you get older is health. His game is economical. It doesn't take a lot of stress out of him. So I wouldn't be surprised if he's on top of the game for a few years yet."

Source: http://www.atptennis.com/1/en/newsandscores/news/news4.asp

SUKTUEN
10-08-2006, 10:54 PM
thanks

World Beater
10-08-2006, 11:23 PM
Tim Henman after playing Roger in the Tokyo final, from his website timhenman.org :) :

---------------------------------

"It's been really enjoyable. Last week in Bangkok I played some good tennis and this week I was able to build on that.

"I've had some good wins against higher-ranked players in both tournaments and, here in Tokyo, I was able to get stuck into the event and I put in some really good performances throughout the week.

"Unfortunately, I wasn't able to go the whole way but there are plenty of positives for me to take from the trip as I feel I've showed on the match court what I've been feeling in practice for a while now.

"Roger was too strong for me today and he's a phenomenal player - there's very few that can live with him on any surface other than clay at the moment.

"It's difficult to hurt him as he's got so many strengths and so few weaknesses and, the scary thing is, he's still improving.

"So it's tough to compete with him, especially in the latter stages of tournaments when he's had a chance to build up his confidence, but that's what we've all got to try to do.

"It's a formidable challenge - but competing against arguably the greatest player of all time is the ultimate test and so it's one that I still enjoy."

---------------------------


actually there are very few who can live with him on clay as well...that few comprises of nadal these days. he has pretty much beaten everyone except him on the surface.

Daniel
10-08-2006, 11:52 PM
Nastase talking about Federer:

Source: http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/06/10/03/10071885.html

Parts of the article:

The temperamental Romanian, who now spends a lot of time on the seniors tour in an attempt to further the cause of the sport, puts Federer and Woods on par with the Schumacher.

"Both Federer and Woods are great champions.

"But we have to give them time to enjoy their careers and reach whatever greatness their incredible talent reserves for them. They have many years in front of them," Nastase said.

Daniel
10-09-2006, 12:30 AM
Michael Chang has this to say about Roger:

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/08/sports/tennis/08seconds.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

IS FEDERER BETTER THAN PETE SAMPRAS IN HIS PRIME? I think in certain aspects Federer’s game is a little more complete. I think Pete had a little more firepower. It would be interesting to see them play at both the peak of their careers. I think it is a little easier for Federer nowadays because he doesn’t have to deal with too many pure serve-and-volleyers. I think in Pete’s day we had a combination of pure serve-and-volleyers in guys like Becker and Edberg and also really strong baseliners as well.

refero*fervens
10-09-2006, 11:32 AM
actually there are very few who can live with him on clay as well...that few comprises of nadal these days. he has pretty much beaten everyone except him on the surface.

Yeah, it just seems to be disregarded because of Nadal. But actually, he reached the final of every clay tourney he entered this year. Sad that he doesn't have a title to show for it, but it is a remarkable achievement. Hopefully the clay success carries into next year (except for the losing in the finals bit :) ).

nobama
10-09-2006, 12:59 PM
Michael Chang has this to say about Roger:

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/08/sports/tennis/08seconds.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

IS FEDERER BETTER THAN PETE SAMPRAS IN HIS PRIME? I think in certain aspects Federer’s game is a little more complete. I think Pete had a little more firepower. It would be interesting to see them play at both the peak of their careers. I think it is a little easier for Federer nowadays because he doesn’t have to deal with too many pure serve-and-volleyers. I think in Pete’s day we had a combination of pure serve-and-volleyers in guys like Becker and Edberg and also really strong baseliners as well.This is funny because Roger said in Tokyo that he likes playing a s/v player because he likes a target. Chang is right in that the game is dominated by baseliners now, but no one can know for sure how Roger would fare against more s/v type players. It's not like he couldn't have adapted his game.

Corey Feldman
10-09-2006, 03:03 PM
its amazing how many ppl discard that Fed - Sampras match at Wimbledon 01 like it never happened coz neither was at their peak..
Pete couldnt have been that much past it, i mean he did win a US Open a year later.

lsy
10-09-2006, 03:23 PM
To be honest, I never quite understood the need to compare Rogi to Sampras but I do find it funny that when Rogi first started his sign of "domination" in 2004, most people (the ex-players/medias etc) talked about Rogi like he's already the next Sampras or he's going to be greater than Sampras for sure when he's hardly close yet. Now that he's getting a bit closer, the talk is going the other way round it seems :lol:

SUKTUEN
10-09-2006, 04:35 PM
some Chinese Tennis fan said that Roger's tennis skills is more better than Pete.

Eden
10-24-2006, 05:21 PM
Mr. Federer is a Gentleman on the tenniscourt and is a Gentleman off the court. And please stay like that.
I have more than 50 years in this sport. As a player I played most of all of. I play Mr. Santana and Mr. Pentrangeli. So many GrandSlam Winner. I play against Laver, I saw Sampras. And in my book, Mr. Federer, you are the best techniker of all times.

Ion Tiriac at the Trophy Presentation at the Madrid tournament

oz_boz
10-25-2006, 09:53 AM
In the latest ed of the Swedish sportsmag "S", Nick Bollettieri tells in an interview that in his opinion, Fed is not only the most talented, but actually the best player of all time. (He also mentions that the most talented player that has trained in his academy is Rios.)

SUKTUEN
10-25-2006, 04:08 PM
yes, he is really a gentleman~!!:worship:

refero*fervens
10-26-2006, 07:59 AM
Well, it's not really a player comment - not tennis player, anyway - but I read somewhere that Raul sent Nadal a card saying that he was the best player on the planet. Upon Nadal pointing out that he was no. 2, Raul apparently replied with the unoriginal but rather popular sentiment, "Federer is a martian." :D Well he is out of this world I guess.

nobama
10-26-2006, 11:21 AM
In the latest ed of the Swedish sportsmag "S", Nick Bollettieri tells in an interview that in his opinion, Fed is not only the most talented, but actually the best player of all time. (He also mentions that the most talented player that has trained in his academy is Rios.)Interesting comment, especially when many think Fed is more like Rios than anyone else.

nobama
10-26-2006, 11:26 AM
I've never gotten the Sampras comparisons - other than both were dominant in their prime. I don't think their games are much alike. And Roger has said that he admired Pete a lot but didn't model is strokes after him. I know I'm biased, but honestly, outside of the serve I don't think there is much that Sampras did better than Roger does right now. Volleys I suppose. But I don't think his fh, bh, movement was better. I think Roger plays better defense and has a better transition game.

SUKTUEN
10-26-2006, 03:46 PM
nice words!:D

nobama
10-28-2006, 12:41 AM
This is a hoot....I'm watching a Champions Tour event on TTC and they're talking about Wilander (who's playing in the event). They're talking about who Wilander says are greatest players of all time. And #1 on his list is Roger (you know, the guy with no balls). :lol: Ahead of Sampras, Borg, McEnroe, Connors, ect. One of the commentators, Jimmy Arias then chimes in saying he thinks it's a bit early to be calling Roger the best ever.

SUKTUEN
10-28-2006, 05:43 AM
thanks

trickcy
10-28-2006, 05:14 PM
This is a hoot....I'm watching a Champions Tour event on TTC and they're talking about Wilander (who's playing in the event). They're talking about who Wilander says are greatest players of all time. And #1 on his list is Roger (you know, the guy with no balls). :lol: Ahead of Sampras, Borg, McEnroe, Connors, ect. One of the commentators, Jimmy Arias then chimes in saying he thinks it's a bit early to be calling Roger the best ever.

:rolleyes: Isn't he the one who said he doesn't think ROger is even the best of this generation.... :confused: :p

SUKTUEN
10-29-2006, 02:02 AM
They're talking about who Wilander says are greatest players of all time.~~~~

:devil: :devil:

Daniel
11-01-2006, 02:33 AM
Source : http://rawstory.com/news/2006/Brazilian_Kuerten_says_Sampras_was__10312006.html

Brazilian Kuerten says Sampras was "much better" than Federer

dpa German Press Agency
Published: Tuesday October 31, 2006

Rio de Janeiro- Former Brazilian tennis star Gustavo Kuerten on Tuesday said Pete Sampras was "much better" than current world number one Roger Federer and that the late Formula 1 champion Ayrton Senna was also better than current star Michael Schumacher. Kuerten, a former world number one himself who beat both Sampras and Federer during his career, told Brazilian TV Globo that the Swiss number one only stands out due to the absence of retired American Sampras.

"In Formula 1, Schumacher took advantage of Senna's death to conquer his triumphs, just like Federer took advantage of the vacuum left by Sampras to obtain his victories. Both are good players, but I prefer Sampras," Kuerten said.

© 2006 dpa German Press Agency


-------

I dont agree with you Guga :p

NYCtennisfan
11-01-2006, 02:49 AM
Source : http://rawstory.com/news/2006/Brazilian_Kuerten_says_Sampras_was__10312006.html

Brazilian Kuerten says Sampras was "much better" than Federer

dpa German Press Agency
Published: Tuesday October 31, 2006

Rio de Janeiro- Former Brazilian tennis star Gustavo Kuerten on Tuesday said Pete Sampras was "much better" than current world number one Roger Federer and that the late Formula 1 champion Ayrton Senna was also better than current star Michael Schumacher. Kuerten, a former world number one himself who beat both Sampras and Federer during his career, told Brazilian TV Globo that the Swiss number one only stands out due to the absence of retired American Sampras.

"In Formula 1, Schumacher took advantage of Senna's death to conquer his triumphs, just like Federer took advantage of the vacuum left by Sampras to obtain his victories. Both are good players, but I prefer Sampras," Kuerten said.

© 2006 dpa German Press Agency


-------

I dont agree with you Guga :p


Could Pete bagel Guga on clay like Federer did? :p

Daniel
11-01-2006, 03:08 AM
Could Pete bagel Guga on clay like Federer did? :p

No.

no one can forget:

2002 Hamburg TMS Germany Clay Q Federer bt Guga 6-0 1-6 6-2 :lol:


Source: www. atptennis.com

Corey Feldman
11-01-2006, 03:34 AM
Sure guga.. and the only reason you won 3 RG's was the vacuum left by bruguera/muster.
who were actually 10 times the player you ever were on clay anyway.

mop top muppet.

refero*fervens
11-01-2006, 03:42 AM
I think that's what's meant to happen when you retire; someone else starts winning ;) . I pity the guy who cleans up in Fed's 'vacuum':D . "Much better"? Well, time will tell (though I think I can already :p )

aussie12
11-01-2006, 04:21 AM
you just need to see there RG records to see whos better

soraya
11-01-2006, 05:09 AM
Source : http://rawstory.com/news/2006/Brazilian_Kuerten_says_Sampras_was__10312006.html

Brazilian Kuerten says Sampras was "much better" than Federer

dpa German Press Agency
Published: Tuesday October 31, 2006

Rio de Janeiro- Former Brazilian tennis star Gustavo Kuerten on Tuesday said Pete Sampras was "much better" than current world number one Roger Federer and that the late Formula 1 champion Ayrton Senna was also better than current star Michael Schumacher. Kuerten, a former world number one himself who beat both Sampras and Federer during his career, told Brazilian TV Globo that the Swiss number one only stands out due to the absence of retired American Sampras.

"In Formula 1, Schumacher took advantage of Senna's death to conquer his triumphs, just like Federer took advantage of the vacuum left by Sampras to obtain his victories. Both are good players, but I prefer Sampras," Kuerten said.

© 2006 dpa German Press Agency


-------

I dont agree with you Guga :p

I usedto follow up Formula 1 back then, and boy! Ayrton Senna was a risktaker daredevil, charismatic, and handsome man. I loved him so much and his death touched me deeply. I can not make any comparison with Shumaker cause I don't follow formula One anymore.

World Beater
11-01-2006, 05:30 AM
a case of my time was better than your time syndrome.

moya and guga are good friends and this is no surprise.

i do think that sampras has a bigger fear/intimidation factor than federer because he was so much more cutthroat. federer is like one of the guys...pete was aloof, and guys are much more in awe of him.

i also think guga never had the chance to play prime federer...i think he would change his mind.

ExpectedWinner
11-01-2006, 06:20 AM
Guga can prefer whoever he wants. However, to say that Fed is taking advantage of the vacuum left by Sampras is stupid. It's not like Sampras died/left the game in his prime time (22-26 years). At the end of his career he was beaten by many players and his footspeed/reactions faded.

Even if Sampras somehow could have repeated his miraculous 2002 USO run every year from 2003 to 2006 (highly unlikely), he wouldn't be able to do a lot of damage in most of the tournaments. Fed still would have been quite a dominant No1.

nobama
11-01-2006, 10:54 AM
I don't get the filling the vacuum comment. :confused: If anything I'd say Hewitt filled the vacuum in between Sampras and prime Federer. These guys seem to change their opinions all the time. Last year during Wmbledon Stich was going on about Roger being the best he's ever seen, this year he wrote a piece for one of the newspapers say he reckoned he had a shot against Roger on grass (the whole theory of a decent s/v player would give Roger all sorts of trouble).

SUKTUEN
11-01-2006, 02:25 PM
I don't agree Guga too~~

I think Roger had more prepect skills than Pete.

Eden
11-01-2006, 04:40 PM
Roger is still playing and nobody knows how he will end up to in the history books of tennis. Maybe Guga will say something different in a few years.

By the way, I'm surprised that he was asked about Roger and Pete and not about Rafas success on clay ;)

RogiFan88
11-01-2006, 05:24 PM
Yes, Eden, I am curious to know what Guga thinks of Rafa [his tennis anyway], who has deposed him as the King of Clay.

Maybe Billabong can tell us. ;)

SUKTUEN
11-02-2006, 03:22 PM
Guga always dislike Roger~~same as he in 2003~~:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Eden
11-02-2006, 06:44 PM
Yes, Eden, I am curious to know what Guga thinks of Rafa [his tennis anyway], who has deposed him as the King of Clay.

Maybe Billabong can tell us. ;)

Shotgun mentioned in Gugas thread the following:


It's not the first time Guga diminishes Federer's importance in tennis history. I remember last year he said something to the effect that it wouldn't take long for Nadal to take Federer's 1st place in the rankings.

Corey Feldman
11-02-2006, 11:39 PM
who cares what guga says anyhow... he's washed up now.

these hasbeens always come out with comments just to make sure a few ppl remember them.

he might have 3 RG's but he is and will always be light years behind Federer in wins, talent and greatness.

he and Moya are best buds btw. :lol:

RogiFan88
11-03-2006, 01:11 AM
If people think Moya is jealous of Rogi's success, he wasn't too happy when Juanqui was the ESP DC00 F hero...

mangoes
11-03-2006, 04:16 AM
I don't get the filling the vacuum comment. :confused: If anything I'd say Hewitt filled the vacuum in between Sampras and prime Federer. These guys seem to change their opinions all the time. Last year during Wmbledon Stich was going on about Roger being the best he's ever seen, this year he wrote a piece for one of the newspapers say he reckoned he had a shot against Roger on grass (the whole theory of a decent s/v player would give Roger all sorts of trouble).

I suppose he means the space between Sampras and Nadal's future reign as no. 1. Roger was just filling the vacuum of time between those two generations:rolleyes:

I like Guga, but his statements come off as rather sour to me. So sour, that it will take quite a bit for me to be cherri...o about him again. In essense, he is saying that Roger, with 9 grand slams, isn't shit. I don't even think McEnroe has leveled such an insult at Roger.

World Beater
11-03-2006, 04:35 AM
I suppose he means the space between Sampras and Nadal's future reign as no. 1. Roger was just filling the vacuum of time between those two generations:rolleyes:

I like Guga, but his statements come off as rather sour to me. So sour, that it will take quite a bit for me to be cherri...o about him again. In essense, he is saying that Roger, with 9 grand slams, isn't shit. I don't even think McEnroe has leveled such an insult at Roger.

well, roger didnt exactly play all that well against guga...imo, he was total crap almost every time they played...i dont blame guga for thinking this way honestly or prefering pete...but for him to downplay federer is totally :retard: , as if pete was still beating everyone consistently as an oldie.

i think a lot of it has to with the fact that "gee i beat this guy, and he didnt impress me very much, why is he #1...i dont get it"

World Beater
11-03-2006, 04:36 AM
I suppose he means the space between Sampras and Nadal's future reign as no. 1. Roger was just filling the vacuum of time between those two generations:rolleyes:

I like Guga, but his statements come off as rather sour to me. So sour, that it will take quite a bit for me to be cherri...o about him again. In essense, he is saying that Roger, with 9 grand slams, isn't shit. I don't even think McEnroe has leveled such an insult at Roger.

just watch, if federer wins 15 slams, guga will still say he is a transitional #1. :lol:

soraya
11-03-2006, 05:33 AM
He is just a not so young, wounded lion. Forgive guga, there will be the day he will make amends to his statement.

bokehlicious
11-03-2006, 07:49 AM
Guga is a prick and has always been, nothing new here :shrug:

yanchr
11-03-2006, 08:30 AM
It's not the first time Guga diminishes Federer's importance in tennis history. I remember last year he said something to the effect that it wouldn't take long for Nadal to take Federer's 1st place in the rankings.
Oh yes...let's see

Puschkin
11-03-2006, 08:40 AM
Il est très gentil. Il n'a pas le melon. Il est étonnant parce qu'il est capable d'être parfait dans tous les domaines de la vie. On ne peut pas dire QUE du bien de lui. Je le regarde agir sur le court, en dehors. Oui, il est super partout. C'est un example.

He is very nice. He is not arrogant (my French leaves me with this sentence;)). He is remarkable because he is capable of being perfect in every aspect of life. One can only say good things about him. I watch him act on and off the court. Yes, he is superb in everything, - a role model.

Richard Gasquet in French Tennis Magazine, January 2006. Sorry if this has been posted already.

bokehlicious
11-03-2006, 08:45 AM
Il est très gentil. Il n'a pas le melon. Il est étonnant parce qu'il est capable d'être parfait dans tous les domaines de la vie. On ne peut pas dire du bien de lui. Je le regarde agir sur le court, en dehors. Oui, il est super partout. C'est un example.

He is very nice. He is not arrogant (my French leaves me with this sentence;)). He is remarkable because he is capable of being perfect in every aspect of life. One can only say good things about him. I watch him act on and off the court. Yes, he is superb in everything, - a role model.

Richard Gasquet in French Tennis Magazine, January 2006. Sorry if this has been posted already.


I guess Richard said rather someting like that: "On ne peut pas dire du mal de lui" :o ;)

Puschkin
11-03-2006, 08:47 AM
I guess Richard said rather someting like that: "On ne peut pas dire du mal de lui" :o ;)

no, but I missed the "que" in the French quote, I will edit the text. I translated it correctly though;). But did I get the "Il n'a pas le melon" right?

bokehlicious
11-03-2006, 08:51 AM
no, but I missedt the que in the French quote, I will edit the text. I translated it correctly though;). but did I get the "Il na pas le melon" right?

He said something like "on ne peut dire que du bien de lui" (the quote you wrote means that Roger is NOT good, which is certainly not what Richard said).

You translated correctly "il n'a pas le melon", which means he's not arrogant and down to earth. Richard should also have said "il ne pète pas plus haut que son cul" which means the same :lol:

Kosm
11-03-2006, 08:52 AM
From Safin's russian intervew (translated by Annie)
- Federer or Nadal? Whose style is more appealing to you?
Marat: Federer. I get the impression he was born for tennis. There was noone like him before. The best of the best. He's got the most elegant style of play, which can leave noone who appreciates tennis indifferent

Puschkin
11-03-2006, 08:55 AM
From Safin's russian intervew (translated by Annie)
:yeah: Marat.

mangoes
11-03-2006, 02:18 PM
Yep, Marat's summary about sums up my feelings about Roger's style.

mangoes
11-03-2006, 02:24 PM
well, roger didnt exactly play all that well against guga...imo, he was total crap almost every time they played...i dont blame guga for thinking this way honestly or prefering pete...but for him to downplay federer is totally :retard: , as if pete was still beating everyone consistently as an oldie.

i think a lot of it has to with the fact that "gee i beat this guy, and he didnt impress me very much, why is he #1...i dont get it"

My issue isn't with him preferring Sampras over Roger. Everyone will have a preference. I'm personally happy that Sampras and Roger are not from the same generation.

But, Guga saying that Roger was merely filling a vacuum, I do find insulting and demeaning. Personally, I find that statement more insulting then Wilander saying Roger lacked balls :shrug: :lol: :lol:

It's at moments like this when the MTF:devil: surfaces and I want to make catty comments like, "wouldn't it be quite a funny scenario if Nadal became one of the best players to never become no. 1??" or "Nadal more fits the description of the transition player."

Puschkin
11-03-2006, 02:54 PM
But, Guga saying that Roger was merely filling a vacuum, I do find insulting and demeaning.
:topic: In my view Roddick, Hewitt and Ferrero filled the vacuum (if there was any, which I rather doubt) between Pete and Roger.

SUKTUEN
11-03-2006, 03:29 PM
Thankyou Marat!:D

World Beater
11-04-2006, 06:37 AM
:topic: In my view Roddick, Hewitt and Ferrero filled the vacuum (if there was any, which I rather doubt) between Pete and Roger.

i dont like to use the term vaccuum because it slights these players achievements. hewitt beat pete regularly when pete was still winning, and roddick did get a win over him. these guys are good players who are really underappreciated because of these legends trying to elevate their status by denigrating rogi's competition.

World Beater
11-04-2006, 06:38 AM
My issue isn't with him preferring Sampras over Roger. Everyone will have a preference. I'm personally happy that Sampras and Roger are not from the same generation.

But, Guga saying that Roger was merely filling a vacuum, I do find insulting and demeaning. Personally, I find that statement more insulting then Wilander saying Roger lacked balls :shrug: :lol: :lol:

It's at moments like this when the MTF:devil: surfaces and I want to make catty comments like, "wouldn't it be quite a funny scenario if Nadal became one of the best players to never become no. 1??" or "Nadal more fits the description of the transition player."

yeah but i dont see the need to slight nadal. he's not the one making these remarks. anyways, my post wasn't intended to disagree with your opinion but rather to offer an explanation of why guga isnt impressed with federer.

nobama
11-04-2006, 12:38 PM
yeah but i dont see the need to slight nadal. he's not the one making these remarks. anyways, my post wasn't intended to disagree with your opinion but rather to offer an explanation of why guga isnt impressed with federer.People in GM say crap about Fed all the time. A lot of them are just saying it to rile up/piss off Fed fans, not to slight Fed himself.

SUKTUEN
11-05-2006, 01:49 AM
Andy Roddicks Post-Match Interview
Q. Do you think that this rivalry that people have been talking about between Federer and Nadal is actually going to shape up to be something that could be good for the sport and generate a lot of fan interest as past rivalries have, or not? Do you think Nadal might not have it to keep it up?
ANDY RODDICK: Well, that remains to be seen, but right now it's very good for the sport, you know. The fact that I think he matches up well against Roger, you know. Other people are going to beat Rafael. I don't think there's any question about who the best player in the world is, you know. But, fortunately, for the game of tennis and for that rivalry's sake, Rafael matches up well against Roger by being lefty, by kind of playing a little bit heavier. So, yeah, I mean, tennis thrives on rivalries and, you know, right now I think it's very good for the game.
I think Andy’s cool. He always has good things to say about Roger.


:devil: :devil:

World Beater
11-05-2006, 09:35 AM
People in GM say crap about Fed all the time. A lot of them are just saying it to rile up/piss off Fed fans, not to slight Fed himself.


why do you care so much about what they think?

i know that i used to get involved in fan wars...but its just a total waste of time, and its better to sit back and laugh at the hysteria.

lsy
11-05-2006, 09:39 AM
Sorry if this had been posted.

I watched some clips of Basel ceremony (yeah I'm so behind schedule :o but I'm SOOOOO happy for Rogi finally winning his home tourney! :bounce: :banana: )...I blinked and Rogi had 3 new titles...unbelievable :worship:

and Gonzo with his cute English said in the ceremony (probably not the exact word but sth to the extent) :

"We are all very jealous, he has many titles and we don't but we are proud that he's the no.1, he's a great person not only just a great player..."

Gonzo :hug:

I wish I get to watch all these basel matches, esp the one vs Paradorn.

SUKTUEN
11-05-2006, 01:13 PM
Gonzo thankyou so much~~~!!

It seems to be " Everybody Love Roger! " :devil:

che_rry
11-09-2006, 06:54 AM
http://www.pga.com/news/tours/european/hsbcinterview110806.cfm
HSBC Champions interview with Tiger Woods
.....
Q. You are good friends with Michael Jordan and also the No. 1 tennis player, Roger Federer, you are also good friends with him. Mr. Federer is competing in the Masters in Shanghai this week, will you be having any opportunity to go and watch him play or is he coming to watch you play? The tournament starts on Sunday.

TIGER WOODS: Busy on Sunday. (Laughter).

Roger is just a fantastic, fantastic individual, I mean, just a great person that I've gotten lucky enough to get to know him this year. He invited me to the U.S. Open and we've become good friends since. I would like to go watch him play tennis any time. He's a marvel to much watch how good he is. He just makes it look so easy. Maybe one day I'll have a hit at him and maybe he's never seen anything coming at him that slow; so it will be a bit different, but we'll have fun.

refero*fervens
11-09-2006, 07:10 AM
Oh that's nice :D

landoud
11-09-2006, 07:28 AM
Lucky Tiger... friend with Jordan and Federer

nobama
11-09-2006, 11:20 AM
I wonder how the Roddick fans will spin that one. :lol: They're so convinced that Roger and Tiger aren't friends and it's all PR orchestrated by Nike and IMG. I guess they're still bitter because Tiger sat in Roger's box at the US Open.

SUKTUEN
11-09-2006, 01:56 PM
HA HA HA~~so Andy also great friend of Roger, but the need to fight in the court.:o

NYCtennisfan
11-09-2006, 01:59 PM
I wonder how the Roddick fans will spin that one. :lol: They're so convinced that Roger and Tiger aren't friends and it's all PR orchestrated by Nike and IMG. I guess they're still bitter because Tiger sat in Roger's box at the US Open.

While it is true that they *might* be friends, it's also pretty likely that Nike and IMG have a LOT to do with these meetings i.e. if Feds wasn't with IMG and/or Nike, these meetings would not take place.

SUKTUEN
11-09-2006, 02:04 PM
you mind IMG " Let " they be friend.:p

Seraphim
11-09-2006, 04:03 PM
First off, you DO NOT have to have the same management and/or PR reps to have anything made up. I always knew Rod/Sharapova was nothing but a PR song and dance because the media and most of our single-minded society would automatically believe, hope, wish, and pray for a relationship between the GWH's(Great White Hopes) of Men's and Woman's Tennis.

99% of every relationship reported by the media, be it casual or intimate, is set up by Management and/or Public Relations. 99%. So those who are picknicking at Fed and Tigers budding friendship are just being resentful of his advantages. They don't want Fed to be any more sucessful or admired than he already is so they find a way to tear down, minimize, and or falsify any little thing about him to, in their own twisted heads, balance his positive with some negative. And if he isn't throwing out the right amount negativity, they'll make damn sure they do.

These people, like most of us, are called "HYPOCRITES". Except unlike most of us, these individuals revel in their make-believe tribes and findings to which they over-exaggerate.

You can find the SAME EXACT pr/mgr manipulations for any popular and well known celebrity.

But why in hell is it so nearly vomit-inducing to some when it's about Fed, and when it's about Roddick, Nadal, Safin, Sharapova, Kornikova, and/or Blake it's nearly taken as a given?

Sounds like a double-standard to me. I guess what's good for the goose, ISN'T good for the gander.

nobama
11-09-2006, 06:17 PM
While it is true that they *might* be friends, it's also pretty likely that Nike and IMG have a LOT to do with these meetings i.e. if Feds wasn't with IMG and/or Nike, these meetings would not take place.Look I don't doubt that Tiger or Roger work with their agents to get these meetings set up. I'm sure that's how they came in contact in the first place. But the suggestion by certain Roddick fans (and tards like Adam) is that this is all a PR stunt by Nike and IMG. That's what I disagree with. I think Tiger Woods can pretty much do whatever he wants at this point and I don't think Nike or IMG could force him into these meetings with Roger if he had no interest in meeting/talking to him. Tiger said they have become good friends. I don't know why that's so hard to believe. Tiger I'm sure is friends with lots of athletes. :shrug:

Eden
11-09-2006, 09:16 PM
Somehow I find it a bit premature to use the word friendship to describe the relationship of Roger and Tiger. Friendship develops. I don't know how often they have met now (it must be the second time, right?) and although they get along well with each other I would say that it is to early to call each other friends.

nobama
11-09-2006, 11:03 PM
Somehow I find it a bit premature to use the word friendship to describe the relationship of Roger and Tiger. Friendship develops. I don't know how often they have met now (it must be the second time, right?) and although they get along well with each other I would say that it is to early to call each other friends.I'm not calling them friends, Tiger Woods is. :shrug: How do we know how often they speak to each other? How do we know Roger didn't get a text message from Tiger after he won Madrid or Basel? I'm not saying I think he did, just that we don't know.

TenHound
11-10-2006, 12:31 AM
Eden, Agree totally. Affinity or kinship would be a better term than friendship.

NYCtennisfan
11-10-2006, 01:19 AM
Eden, Agree totally. Affinity or kinship would be a better term than friendship.

Yep.

World Beater
11-10-2006, 03:10 AM
tiger :rolleyes:

...he's met roger what twice?

i get the feeling that tiger is much more insecure about his position in the sporting world because of roger. you can read between the lines when he talks about tennis and golf.

nobama
11-10-2006, 11:16 AM
According to local news reports Tiger invited Roger and Mirka to dinner yesterday evening. They had dinner in Sheshan (where Tiger is staying), and apparently they stayed there quite late. So maybe it's to early to call it a friendship, but it looks as though they're trying to build one. My guess is not just anyone gets invited to dinner by Tiger Woods.

nobama
11-10-2006, 11:22 AM
tiger :rolleyes:

...he's met roger what twice?

i get the feeling that tiger is much more insecure about his position in the sporting world because of roger. you can read between the lines when he talks about tennis and golf.Why should he be? Tiger's by far still considered the best athlete in the world. He has more name recognition and appeal world wide than Roger does. What's there to be insecure about?

SUKTUEN
11-10-2006, 03:11 PM
Roger also the best athlete in the world

World Beater
11-11-2006, 07:11 AM
Why should he be? Tiger's by far still considered the best athlete in the world. He has more name recognition and appeal world wide than Roger does. What's there to be insecure about?

im not saying roger is the best athlete in the world...but tiger is NOT the best athlete in the world...only a clown or a tiger jock sniffer/ us centric analyst would say that, sorry.:)

easy to be insecure when tiger gets asked questions about roger, and when he is asked to compare tennis to golf. easy when you have lost the laureus award twice the last two years.

nothing against tiger...great golfer, but i cant believe any golfer would ever be the best athlete in the world...or any race car driver either.

calling them sports is a stretch. but thats just the way i see it.

i also dont see why you should be celebrating at the thought of them being friends :confused:...as if tiger is some sort of saint or hero. who the heck cares...

SUKTUEN
11-11-2006, 08:17 AM
I think Tiger and Roger are sure they can be good friend.

Daniel
11-13-2006, 04:09 AM
Some quotes from cute Blake:

And the American is thinking bigger.

"Yes, Andy (Roddick) and I have been talking about what Roger (Federer) does well, how we try to have our best chances against him. It's tough though because he has proved he apparently has the answer for everything. But guys like me and Andy and many other guys out there are thinking in the way Karl Malone and (Patrick) Ewing did in the Michael Jordan era (in the NBA). It's not easy to deal with the greatest of all time. But it's not impossible."



Article : http://www.shanghaidaily.com/art/2006/11/13/296938/Blake_starts_new_era.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This one from sexy Mario:

Q. Do you ever bemoan your luck that you're playing in the Roger Federer era?

A. No, I see it as a great challenger. Roger is already one of the best that ever played the game and it makes me work even harder. It is a great challenge for me.

Article: http://edition.cnn.com/2006/SPORT/11/10/tennis.ancic/

refero*fervens
11-13-2006, 05:43 AM
Hehe. The Americans collaborating against the greater evil, the "Federer effect". :p

Bremen
11-13-2006, 06:07 AM
. But guys like me and Andy and many other guys out there are thinking in the way Karl Malone and (Patrick) Ewing did in the Michael Jordan era (in the NBA). It's not easy to deal with the greatest of all time. But it's not impossible."



Um....why would he compare ewing and malone to jordan? They never won an NBA championship!!

NATAS81
11-13-2006, 06:09 AM
Because Ewing and Malone never actually beat Jordan to win a championship.

nobama
11-13-2006, 02:04 PM
Johnny Mac and co. speaking out on Roger's supposed lack of competition. :rolleyes:

Federer's competition not impressive
By DALE ROBERTSON

The eight seniors who played at River Oaks for the past week share the utmost respect for Roger Federer's talents and all concede he's one of the greatest players.

But none is ready to pronounce him the greatest. Why? Mostly because they aren't enamored with the quality of Federer's competition. Names such as Nikolay Davydenko, Ivan Ljubicic and Tommy Robredo — all ranked in the top 10 and all part of the elite Masters Cup field in Shanghai this week — don't send too many shivers down their spines.

"When Tommy Robredo makes (the Masters Cup)," the outspoken Goran Ivanisevic said, "something's wrong."

Added Wayne Ferreira, who retired with a 10-6 career record against the Masters Cup participants (and beat Federer in two of their three meetings, all in 2001): "I won't mention any names, but when you see some of the guys at the top and you remember how they played ... it's hard to believe they could have improved so much."

John McEnroe specifically laments Federer's shrinking serve-and-volley game, saying he doesn't use it as much as he once did because there's no need to. He wins easily by just staying at the baseline, a simpler and sufficient tact given the cowed state of the competition, save for Rafael Nadal.

McEnroe is also critical of a rankings system that he says rewards grinding it out week after week over rising to the occasion in big events. Davydenko is No. 3 in the world despite getting as far as the semifinals in just one of the Slams. But he has won 67 matches by entering 31 tournaments, the same number Guillermo Vilas played in 1977 when he won an Open era-record 130. Ljubicic? The world No. 4, has been as far as the semis just once in 29 majors.

Also galling to the Outback Series gang is the disrespect the top players show the Davis Cup competition. Most of them were fervent supporters of their national teams, none more so than McEnroe, who represented the United States for 12 years, winning 59 of 69 matches as the Americans won five championships.

Federer and Nadal have begged off for what could have been a monumental first-round meeting next year between Switzerland and Spain, with Nadal, 20, saying, "I don't usually play the first round."

"He's 20 years old and he doesn't play the first round?" McEnroe said with a smirk.

MissMoJo
11-13-2006, 03:31 PM
"When Tommy Robredo makes (the Masters Cup)," the outspoken Goran Ivanisevic said, "something's wrong."
:lol:Damn, just about everyone's taking potshots at Robredo
Jmac and his DC lectures are getting really old.

SUKTUEN
11-13-2006, 04:18 PM
Roche, Feder-Bear Read ATP Confidential

Tony Roche, the coach to Roger Federer, took time out in the private locker room of the ATP World No. 1 to read the ATP Confidential blog book to Feder-Bear at Tennis Masters Cup Shanghai on Sunday.

Get Your Very Own "Feder-bear" Beanie Baby®

You can support the ATP's charitable efforts for UNICEF through the purchase of the "Feder-bear" Beanie Baby®. The "Feder-bear," a take-home version of UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador and ATP's #1 ranked player Roger Federer, will be available for purchase this holiday season. The Feder-bear is an official Ty Beanie Baby® produced exclusively for ATP by Ty.

Proceeds from the sale of each $8 bear will benefit the "ACE" program (Assisting Children Everywhere), a global partnership between the ATP and UNICEF to help ensure health, education and protection of children around the world.

For more information on the Feder-Bear please log on to the ATP Charity page.
www.atptennis.com/en/charity/bear.asp

Buy "ATP Confidential" the Book Full of ATP Blogs

The ATP is producing a coffee table book featuring excerpts of player blogs this year written by the likes of Federer, Rafael Nadal and Dmitry Tursunov. Available in early December you can pre-order this great holiday gift idea now!
www.tennis-warehouse.com/descpage.html?PCODE=ATPBLOG&from=atp

Eden
11-20-2006, 08:39 PM
Some words from James Blake after the TMC final:

"He played too good. I've probably run out of adjectives to describe him on the court to talk about his excellence," Blake said. "He's just unbelievable. Steps it up even more in finals."

"I appreciate the support you gave me when I was playing great, or when Roger was giving me a lesson," Blake told the crowd at Qi Zhong Stadium. "I'm honored to be considered a colleague of his."

“Obviously, we’re all chasing Roger,” Blake said. “It’s no secret. He’s playing head and shoulders above the rest of us. It’s going to be tough for anyone to dethrone him.”

Oriental_Rain
11-21-2006, 08:24 AM
thank God they know

SUKTUEN
11-21-2006, 04:05 PM
thanks James Blake

Stevens Point
11-22-2006, 07:54 AM
don't know if this belongs here, but he speaks of Roger.

www.english.people.com.cn

Tennis's Federer "best in history by long way": soccer star Maradona
UPDATED: 13:48, November 22, 2006

Former soccer star Diego Maradona told media on Monday that Switzerland's Roger Federer is "by far, the best tennis player in history".

"Pelusa" (fluffy), as Maradona is known by his fellow Argentines, joked that Federer, now number one in the world and winner of three Shanghai Master Cups in the last four year, "appears to have no feelings. When he is 40-0 down he wears the same expression as when he is winning".

Maradona told media that he would travel to Russia in December for the Russia-Argentina final in tennis's Davis Cup.

Source: Xinhua

SUKTUEN
11-22-2006, 02:46 PM
James is a Good Roger's Fan!:devil:

Eden
12-04-2006, 07:27 PM
I translated a few comments from Thomas Muster from a current interview:

Sport1: What do you think of Roger Federers unbelievable year? Why is he far ahead of the rest of the tennisworld?

Muster: Because he is an exceptional player who can everything a bit better than all the others. Its that simple. If Federer has a shortcoming than it is - as it had been with Sampras - his claycourt tennis. But I uprate Federer on clay. Every generation has a dominator. This had been with Borg, Lendl, McEnroe or Sampras and after Federer there will also be one who will dominate. Maybe not in the way Federer does, but on the other hand we have said the same when Sampras was on. I'm wary of saying that there will never be a player like Federer again.

Sport1: Do you think that someone can endanger Federer in the next one or two years?

Muster: To judge from the current situation: No way. But when a player can improve a bit and Federer abates or get hurt, then everything can change quickly.

Sport1: Federer had adjusted your title record of 12 tournament victories in one season. Are you annoyed a little bit about this?

Muster: Records are there to be broken. I don't have a problem with it at all.
The record lasted a long time. We have to be fair and say that the tournaments which Federer had won are in another class than mine. Among his 12 titles are 3 GS victories.

Quote: http://www.sport1.at/128+M5707e59e1d4.html

Stevens Point
12-04-2006, 10:15 PM
Ivanisevic on Roger

-----------------------
Ivanisevic expects Federer to dominate again in 2007, but is cautious about his chances of becoming the first player since Rod Laver in 1969 to complete a Grand Slam - winning all four major titles in the same year.

"The Grand Slam for Roger will be very tough," said Ivanisevic, 35. "I don't think he will win the French Open because Rafael Nadal is a better player on clay.

"If he stays healthy, Nadal can dominate the French Open for another five or six years.

"Nadal has had his difficulties this season but when the clay comes it is a different story. To beat Nadal on clay, I'd probably have to shoot him - and I don't know how to beat Federer either!

"There are only two guys who can beat Federer at the moment and that is Nadal on clay and Ivan Ljubicic on the hard courts and indoor.

"Ljubicic always gives Federer a tough battle with his huge serve but after he and Nadal nobody else comes close.

"Federer is the only player who can win the Grand Slam. He has a chance to become the best ever in the history of tennis - and for him anything is possible."

Sunset of Age
12-04-2006, 11:14 PM
I wonder what Ivanisevic had been smoking when he gave this interview!

He seems to have forgotten that Rafa's clay court-season where he did so well is some 7 months ago now. It all depends on whether he'll be as healthy as he was in 2006.
There's another thing Mr. I. apparently hasn't noticed: that Rogi has raised his game level to ... well, extra-terrestial level.
We'll all just have to wait and see what happens.

nobama
12-05-2006, 01:47 AM
Ljubicic can beat Roger? What is he smoking indeed. :cuckoo:

bokehlicious
12-05-2006, 04:57 AM
Goran Goran Goran :rolleyes: If Ljubo were American would you also gloat that he's the only one who can threat and beat Roger on hard/indoor ? :o

SUKTUEN
12-05-2006, 12:32 PM
Ljubicic can beat Roger? :rolleyes:

Tess Gray
12-05-2006, 04:50 PM
Ljubicic can beat Roger? :rolleyes:

When did thát happen:rolleyes:

Sunset of Age
12-05-2006, 05:27 PM
When did thát happen:rolleyes:

<silly> Don't you know? Somewhere on Mars, a few years ago. Fed-the-Martian player invited Lubjo for an exhibition match and Fed got payed to feed the entire Martian population if he'd loose. </silly>

Sorry guys. Couldn't help myself.

SUKTUEN
12-06-2006, 09:49 AM
When did thát happen:rolleyes:

never.:o

Stevens Point
12-06-2006, 10:27 AM
Well, Ljubicic has beaten Roger 3 times in their direct meetings, but the last loss of Roger against the Croat happened back in Basel 2003. He is the last one to have beaten Roger in the World No.1's hometown. Since then, their H2H record is all the way Roger 8-0, although there were some tough matches between them.

If Ivanisevic is making a reason of the matter of "huge serves," that Ljubicic has a chance to beat Roger, so does Roddick, and for this reason, I think Roddick has a bigger chance to beat Roger... :shrug:

Eden
12-06-2006, 11:10 AM
Andy Roddick is well aware that his record is 1-12 against top-ranked Roger Federer, but he said he ''can't wait'' to play the seemingly invincible Swiss in 2007 because ``for the first time in three years, I feel the gap's going my way.''
His last two losses to Federer -- at the season-ending Master's Cup and the U.S. Open final -- were close. Federer won 4-6, 7-6 (12-10), 6-4 in Shanghai and 6-2, 4-6, 7-5, 6-1 at Flushing Meadows.
''I was the better player for the better part of two sets in our last match, and I felt unlucky not to win, as opposed to feeling lucky to be in it, and that's a big difference,'' said Roddick, who was at the Seminole Hard Rock Casino in Hollywood on Tuesday promoting his charity celebrity poker tournament, which is set for Friday. ``I respect Roger as a person and a champion, like everyone else, but I'm going after him a bit more next year. I'm looking forward to playing him.''

Source: http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/sports/16173430.htm?source=rss&channel=miamiherald_sports

Eden
12-06-2006, 11:13 AM
With Sampras, considered by many as the greatest tennis player ever, and Agassi, one of the game's most dominant personalities, now out of competitive tennis — and both raising young children — the sport has declined in popularity in America. Younger Americans such as Andy Roddick, James Blake and Ginepri have not had the success of the previous generation.
"The slams will still have big sellouts at the stadium. But in order to be transcendent, they still need an American presence. Fans don't know (Rafael) Nadal from (Richard) :confused: Ljubicic. In order to get those football guys, those basketball guys and baseball guys, they need an American presence," Sampras said.
That's why few outside tennis circles have noticed the dominance of Swiss star Roger Federer. Federer, who has nine Grand Slam championships, is threatening to overtake Sampras' record for major titles — but lacks a true foil.
John McEnroe had Bjorn Borg and Jimmy Connors. Sampras had Agassi. Federer has Nadal, occasionally, and little else.
"No one is really pushing him consistently. He's going to break all the records in tennis. He could win as many as 16, 17 majors. He could stay No. 1 as long as he wants. Clearly, he's the best player," Sampras said.
Sampras regrets that their careers did not overlap, but he knows how he would take on Federer: by rushing the net as he did against the other great baseliners, including Agassi.
But would he win?
"It's hard to say. When I was on my best, I felt like I was unbeatable. It's hard to say who was better in his prime," said Sampras, who finished ranked No. 1 from 1993 through 1998.

Source: http://www.idahostatesman.com/101/story/62774.html