Players' Comment on Roger [Archive] - Page 5 - MensTennisForums.com

Players' Comment on Roger

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

nobama
12-06-2006, 11:33 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
Andy Roddick is quite funny. It's good Roddick wants to challenge Roger and is willing to change up his game to do so, but they only played twice this year so he can't go after Roger if he doesn't play him. I hope history isn't repeating itself where Andy focuses all his attention on Roger and then has problems with the rest of the tour. After he ditched Dean Goldfine he basically admitted he had been too focused on Roger. But his poor performance in 2006 didn't have anything to do with Roger. By the time he played Roger his game was on the upswing.

Roger's a smart guy. If he finds that just blocking blocking the ball back to get into the point won't work then he won't continue to do that. I noticed it in the US Open final where he was a lot more aggressive on the return in the 4th set.

And even though stats don't tell the whole story the stats do not show that Andy was the better player in the second set in their match in Shanghai.

RogiFan88
12-06-2006, 02:45 PM
all players feel they have a chance to beat Rogi any time on any surface at any tournament... sometimes they do... they're going to give it a go anyway; they might get lucky... no surprise.

buzz
12-06-2006, 05:47 PM
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

I felt unbeatable when I was on my best... wel then he wasn't on his best every time during his best years since he was losing quite a lot. No way pete would dominate federer, maybe a rivalry maybe domination by fed I think.

oeps, sorry might be kind of boring and of topic. but couldn't resist

Tess Gray
12-06-2006, 06:03 PM
<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.

hahahaha:D lol

SUKTUEN
12-06-2006, 09:58 PM
I Love Andy too, he is cute~~:D

Eden
12-08-2006, 09:52 PM
Here you can find a comment from Sampras about Roger:

http://www.usta.com/news/fullstory.sps?iType=949&inewsid=320308

(Sorry if it was posted already elsewhere)

SUKTUEN
12-09-2006, 08:41 AM
thankyou so much!!

Oriental_Rain
12-09-2006, 11:40 AM
good luck to Rodduck

SUKTUEN
12-10-2006, 03:15 AM
good luck to Rodduck


Yes, Andy Good Luck!:sad:
Please GOD!!!:worship: :worship:

Stevens Point
12-15-2006, 07:38 AM
cited from an AP article


Patrick McEnroe
"This next year, I think it's going to be interesting to see who comes out of that pack of the 19, 20-year-olds to give him (Federer) a threat. I'm kind of interested in seeing how these younger guys do against him because they haven't lost to him 10 times in a row."

"You got the greatest player I've ever seen and will arguably go down as the greatest player ever and you don't appreciate it? I appreciate it. It's a marvel to be able to see what he's done in the last three years.

"I certainly thought that in Shanghai he (Roddick) outplayed Roger for the first two sets and that was the first time I'd seen that. I think the way he played was the kind of style that could bother Roger, if he could do it a little more consistently, and do it a little better, and be able to do it in a five set situation at a grand slam situation."

buzz
12-15-2006, 08:47 AM
cited from an AP article


Patrick McEnroe

"I certainly thought that in Shanghai he (Roddick) outplayed Roger for the first two sets and that was the first time I'd seen that. I think the way he played was the kind of style that could bother Roger, if he could do it a little more consistently, and do it a little better, and be able to do it in a five set situation at a grand slam situation." [/I]

I really like the amount of if Patrick uses:D but he forgot the most important one if roger's not going to adjust and play better against that style....;)

SUKTUEN
12-16-2006, 07:51 AM
thankyou

Eden
12-17-2006, 06:17 PM
Richard Gasquets translated words from an French article:

Federer is an example for any professional. He has everything: the forehand, the backhand,the service,the placement,solid nerves…... Federer evolves on another planet

Source: http://www.lalibre.be/article.phtml?id=2&subid=111&art_id=320030

Puschkin
12-18-2006, 07:49 AM
Richard Gasquets translated words from an French article:

Source: http://www.lalibre.be/article.phtml?id=2&subid=111&art_id=320030

The whole quote is interesting:


Roger Federer reste votre modèle à suivre ?
Je n'ai aucune idole. Federer est un exemple pour tout professionnel. Il a tout : le coup droit, le revers, le service, le sens du placement, des nerfs solides... Nadal est moins talentueux. Il est au sommet car il fait toujours preuve de détermination sur le terrain. Son esprit combatif déplace des montagnes. A choisir entre les deux, je préfère jouer Nadal. Le Suisse évolue sur une autre planète. Sa rivalité avec l'Espagnol tire le tennis vers le haut. Même si ce duel apporte beaucoup au tennis masculin, je préférais de loin le combat entre Agassi et Sampras à l'époque. Eux, ils étaient charismatiques. Ni Federer ni Nadal ne dégagent cette aura qu'avait un Agassi ou un Sampras.


Q. Is Federer a model to follow?
I have no model. Federer is an example for professionalism. He has everything: FH, BH, service, sense of placement, solid nerves. Nadal is less talented. He is at the top because he always proves his determination on the courts. His fighting spirit moves mountains. When I have to chose between the two, I prefer playing Nadal (let deeds follow the words, Richie;)) The Swiss comes from another planet. His rivalry with the Spaniard elevates tennis. Even if this duel brings much to men's tennis, I'd prefer by far the battle between Agassi and Sampras, at the time. They were charismatic. Neither Frederer nor Nadal possess the aura which Sampras or Agassi had.

You are walking on dangerous grounds, Richard. ;)

SUKTUEN
12-18-2006, 02:02 PM
thanks:D

Eden
12-22-2006, 04:51 PM
Thoughts from Justin Gimmelstob:


Federer's foil?

Happily retired Sampras still has game to topple No. 1

Posted: Friday December 22, 2006 10:41AM; Updated: Friday December 22, 2006 10:49AM


http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2006/writers/justin_gimelstob/12/21/sampras.federer/p1_sampras_1222.jpg
Pete Sampras officially retired in 2003, but has been playing competitively in exhibitions and World TeamTennis since April

December is the offseason for professional tennis. Exhibitions and charity events fill up the calendar as players scurry around picking up some extra holiday spending cash, all while training and preparing for the upcoming year.
In most of these types of events, the game itself is purely for entertainment value. But when you get great athletes together, competitive instincts and pride are always bubbling right underneath the surface.
During this past month, my back has healed enough that I've got on the court to practice a few times a week.
It has been exhilarating to reconnect with the sport I love and have missed dearly, and the old adage that you don't realize how much you miss something until it's gone certainly applies. That being said, the pain and frustration of trying to rehabilitate such a severe surgery has been incredibly challenging at times.

But this column isn't about me -- it's about one of, if not the greatest, tennis players of all time. Everyone, me included, has been quick to anoint Roger Federer the new alpha male of tennis history. But after spending some time practicing with retired Pete Sampras, I think we've shortchanged Pistol Pete.
Sampras has participated in a few of the aforementioned charity/exhibition events this month, so obviously he has been practicing plenty. Since we live in such close proximity to each other in Los Angeles, working out together was a convenient fit. Our practices vary in intensity -- the main factors being how my back is feeling on that particular day and how motivated Pete is -- but the tennis Sampras is still capable of playing at 35 is astonishing.
What so-called "experts" often fail to mention (and I use that term very loosely, considering that most people who spout opinions aren't qualified to do so) is how much the evolution of rackets and string have impacted the quality of the sport. Sampras now uses a racket with a little more surface area (compared to the squash-like racket he used to employ) and his weapon of choice features the in-vogue hybrid synthetic/gut string that enables players to increase the torque of the tennis ball by staggering amounts.
With the benefits of these equipment enhancements to a shoulder that I once described as "being touched by God," the tennis that is being produced in Pete's backyard (to clarify: on only one side of the court) is beyond impressive.

I was laughed at and ridiculed in ATP Tour locker rooms a few years back when I defended John McEnroe when he was boasting about his ability to still compete at the highest levels of tennis in ideal conditions. (We were both proven right by the way, with his doubles win in San Jose earlier this year.) I will probably be mocked again when I make this statement:
Pete Sampras is currently playing at a level as high as anyone in the world except for Federer.
Now let me clarify. I'm not saying Sampras could hold up to the physical rigors of tour life, or even a best-of-five-set match. But what I am saying is that, in a best-of-three scenario, he is as good as anyone in the world right now, except for perhaps a younger version of himself -- also known as Roger Federer.Sampras and the current world No. 1 are eerily similar in many ways, mostly in that they are the two best athletes the game has seen since Björn Borg dominated the ATP. Besides all of their more obvious attributes, Federer and Sampras put so much pressure on you with their court coverage, strength and ability to raise their games when it matters most.

That's why I believe the most imposing threat to Federer's stranglehold on Wimbledon is my practice partner. Pete possesses skills that could actually disrupt the Swiss master by taking his timing away, something very few people can do these days. All this being said, don't hold your breathe for some grand comeback at Wimbledon or anywhere else, for that matter.
Would Pete like to take his chances against Rafael Nadal at Wimbledon? You bet. But does he want to deal with the life of a professional tennis player again? Definitely not. And who could blame him? He had the perfect career with the perfect ending, winning the 2002 U.S. Open when everyone said he was finished. He left the sport like John Wayne, riding off into the sunset with guns blazing, something few athletes get to do.

Sampras went out on top (note to Brett Favre and Evander Holyfield). But if you're eager to see hear how accurate I am in my assessment, drive around Beverly Hills at around 1:30 p.m. a few times a week and listen for that sweet sound of a perfectly hit tennis ball. And when security chases you away, go check out Pete in an exhibition, the likes of which he has been dominating since this past fall with wins over Andy Roddick, Robby Ginepri and Todd Martin.

http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2006/writers/justin_gimelstob/12/21/sampras.federer/p1_sampras_federer_1222.jpg
In their only meeting, Roger Federer (left) upset Pete Sampras in the third round at Wimbledon '01 in a tense five-set thriller.

Source: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/justin_gimelstob/12/21/sampras.federer/index.html?eref=si_more

SUKTUEN
12-23-2006, 07:27 AM
thankyou.

refero*fervens
12-23-2006, 08:24 AM
Thanks :D It's nice how he compares them, being fair to both.

SUKTUEN
12-23-2006, 08:27 AM
;) Roger compare other one is more show off his perfect!

Oriental_Rain
12-26-2006, 09:56 AM
well said :yeah:

quick question, did Roger ever retired from a tennis match because of injury or sickness? if so when and where?

SUKTUEN
12-26-2006, 10:48 AM
No, Roger never retired from a tennis match.;)

tennis2tennis
12-26-2006, 11:29 AM
Top athlete Woods: Federer's No.1
December 26, 2006
Tiger Woods has been selected as the Associated Press Male Athlete of the Year. The world's top golfer won the award over San Diego Chargers running back LaDainian Tomlinson, with tennis great Roger Federer third.
Despite losing his father to cancer, Woods ended up having one of his finest seasons. He won at least eight PGA Tour events for the third time in his career and became the first player in history to capture multiple majors in consecutive seasons.
While pleased to hear he had won the award, Woods was perplexed it did not go to his good friend Federer, who continues to dominate tennis.
''What he's done in tennis, I think, is far greater than what I've done in golf,'' Woods said. ''He's lost what ... five matches in three years?''
Federer actually has lost a few more than that, but not many. His record in 2006 was an amazing 92-5, including 12 singles titles.
Woods received 260 points from sports editors around the country. Tomlinson received 230 points and Federer 110 points.
AP

SUKTUEN
12-26-2006, 11:38 AM
Thanks!!

refero*fervens
01-01-2007, 09:45 AM
Don't know if this has been posted, but apparently:

"Roger and Pete Sampras have been two perfect players," said Nalbandian.

"Pete was excellent, but what Roger is doing now is tougher," Nalbandian said.

"Tennis is so very tough these days, and yet Roger just lost 4-5 matches in 2006. That makes one feel as if he just can't fail."

http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/news;_ylt=AnHVFYX43LMz8qK4XYe9sow4v7YF?slug=ap-chennaiopen&prov=ap&type=lgns

SUKTUEN
01-02-2007, 09:04 AM
Thankyou David.:D

Eden
01-03-2007, 10:00 PM
A comment from Fabrice Santoro:

Having turned pro in 1989, `The Magician', as Santoro is known, is one of those few to have played both Sampras and Federer at their peak. He has troubled both; but the Swiss is the better player in his estimate.
"Federer is a more complete player, he has more variation," says Santoro.

Source: http://www.hindu.com/2007/01/04/stories/2007010413932100.htm

SUKTUEN
01-04-2007, 01:37 AM
Thankyou

Eden
01-08-2007, 02:42 PM
Something from Jimmy Connors from a current article:


"Roddick should be the best player in the world and winning grand slam titles. He is the quickest learner I have ever been around.

"How good is Federer? I'll sugar coat it for you.

He's got an incredible record, but careers are about 21 years, like Andre Agassi's. Make no mistake, there are three men in the mix now (Federer, Roddick and Rafael Nadal)."

Connors, watching a television feed of Roddick's post-final press interview in New York, erupted with a familiar blaze of anger when he heard his charge say that if he lost to Federer in "eight Grand Slam finals, that's fine - something will stick eventually".

"When Andy said that about the eight finals, he's being a gentleman. For the first three sets, he had the upper hand," Connors said.

Source:
http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,,21029997-23216,00.html?from=public_rss

SUKTUEN
01-08-2007, 03:24 PM
thanks Eden;)

trickcy
01-08-2007, 03:43 PM
Something from Jimmy Connors from a current article:



Source:
http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,,21029997-23216,00.html?from=public_rss

Umm.. the first three sets... as in the first set which he almost lost 6-0, later losing it 6-2?:o

"Roddick should be the best player in the world and winning grand slam titles. He is the quickest learner I have ever been around."

It's kinda obvious that's Jimbo hasn't been around for quite a while, isn't it? :o :o :p

Sunset of Age
01-08-2007, 03:53 PM
Jimbo talking out of his a$$ again...

SUKTUEN
01-08-2007, 03:54 PM
but I also hope Andy come back to top 3, I love the game of him too.:D

FSRteam
01-08-2007, 04:03 PM
"When Andy said that about the eight finals, he's being a gentleman. For the first three sets, he had the upper hand," Connors said.

This connors guy is just killing me!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Did he watch the match or was he having a nap for the entire 1st set?!? :confused:

FSRteam
01-08-2007, 04:09 PM
Actually, I think connors is bitter because he'll lose his record of most consecutive weeks as the n°1!!! That's why he's sh... on federer and says that roddick should be n°1 in the world!

This guy is just jealous, that's so obvious and ridiculous!!! :(

SUKTUEN
01-08-2007, 04:19 PM
jealous Roger?

FSRteam
01-08-2007, 04:40 PM
jealous Roger?

No connors is!!! The guy can's stand the fact that roger will break his record, that's it!!!

tennis2tennis
01-08-2007, 05:52 PM
I agree with Connors to an extent, sometimes it seem like fed's opponents are too ready to shower him with compliments...I'm not saying he hasn't earned it or that they shouldn't admire him, but I think they should hold back a bit, if you know what I mean... they sometimes look in awe of him, for Roddick to say he doesn't mind losing 8 slam finals, sounds a bit defeatist…Connors in my view was not as naturally gifted as Borg or McEnroe but his mentality helped him out, in his mind he was their equal

nobama
01-08-2007, 06:01 PM
I agree with Connors to an extent, sometimes it seem like fed's opponents are too ready to shower him with compliments...I'm not saying he hasn't earned it or that they shouldn't admire him, but I think they should hold back a bit, if you know what I mean... they sometimes look in awe of him, for Roddick to say he doesn't mind losing 8 slam finals, sounds a bit defeatist…Connors in my view was not as naturally gifted as Borg or McEnroe but his mentality helped him out, in his mind he was their equalThat may be true, but Andy was not in control for 3 sets at US Open. In the third set he had Roger at 0-40 and couldn't convert. Then at 5-6 he couldn't hold serve to force a TB. The first and 4th sets were pretty much all Roger.

tennis2tennis
01-08-2007, 06:25 PM
That may be true, but Andy was not in control for 3 sets at US Open. In the third set he had Roger at 0-40 and couldn't convert. Then at 5-6 he couldn't hold serve to force a TB. The first and 4th sets were pretty much all Roger.

its expected for him to hype his own player, he'll try to elimate the defeatist attitude and replace it with confidence...even if it is misplaced

Rommella
01-09-2007, 11:10 AM
Something from Jimmy Connors from a current article:



Source:
http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,,21029997-23216,00.html?from=public_rss

Borg doesn't make the 21 year-longevity cutoff but he's definitely ranked greater than Connors.

SUKTUEN
01-09-2007, 03:40 PM
No connors is!!! The guy can's stand the fact that roger will break his record, that's it!!!

I think Jimmy also a Great Champion in Tennis history!:worship:

trickcy
01-13-2007, 01:06 PM
Greg Rusedski believes that Roger Federer is the massive favourite to win the Australian Open and also believes that the world number one is well on course to become the greatest player in the history of the game.

The former US Open finalist has also picked out Ivan Ljubicic and not Federer's old nemesis Rafa Nadal as the man who could potentially upset the Swiss master in Melbourne.

"His record is just phenomenal," Rusedski exclusively told eurosport.com about Federer.

"The thing about his game is that he really has no weaknesses, I mean if you wanted to be overly critical you could mention that backhand that Nadal seems to have exploited so well in the past.

"But after the Masters Cup you heard Federer talk about how he thinks he now has the formula to beat Nadal, so maybe that is no longer a weakness either."

With Federer having possibly figured Nadal out, and also with the Spaniard coming into the tournament with injury problems, Rusedski has identified big Croat Ljubicic as the man who could possibly most trouble Federer.

"I think Ivan Ljubicic is getting so close to beating Federer" said Rusedski.

"The last couple of times they have met you have had lots of tie-break situations that Federer has edged, but if that pattern continues you just feel that Ljubicic might just have his day."

However, Rusedski also believes that all the players that come up against Federer have to overcome a psychological barrier before the match even begins.

"The problem for the opposition is that Federer just has this aura of invincibility about him, which makes it so hard for the younger players to believe they can beat him," he said.

"Once that fades away people will start challenging him more, that's what happened with Sampras, but only in the last one or two years of his career."

Such is Rusedski's respect for Federer that he thinks he is capable of becoming the first players since Rod Laver in 1969 to win the Grand Slam, although he also thinks that he has a limited time span in which to do it.

"I think he can win the Grand Slam, but it will be so, so difficult because the young generation is getting better and better all the time," he said.

"I think he had a great chance to do it last year, because really, in the end he was only two sets away from winning the French."

All the ingredients that go into the Federer's game, leaves Rusedski in no doubt that the world number one can go on and overcome Pete Sampras as the best player of all-time.

"I suppose his serve is not as refined as Sampras', but everything else marks him out as potentially becoming the greatest player of all-time," he said.

"You just have to look at the stats, he already has nine majors and he is only 25, you'd assume he will win another two or three this year if he stays healthy which would put him within touching distance of Sampras (who has 14) already, and he is also about to become the longest running world number one of all time."

"He also has a better chance of winning a Grand Slam than Sampras did, because so far it has only been Nadal that has stopped him winning the French Open"

ExpectedWinner
01-13-2007, 03:56 PM
"The problem for the opposition is that Federer just has this aura of invincibility about him, which makes it so hard for the younger players to believe they can beat him," he said.



Actually almost every decent teeenager has a win against him.

SUKTUEN
01-13-2007, 04:30 PM
"He also has a better chance of winning a Grand Slam than Sampras did, because so far it has only been Nadal that has stopped him winning the French Open"


Agree, just ub clay only.:devil: :devil:

Eden
01-13-2007, 05:38 PM
There was a very interesting article about Nicolas Kiefer in my regional daily. He mentioned Roger and the current situation of competition:


Kiefer über...

… Roger Federer:
Ein guter Typ. Großartiger Golfer, noch besserer Tennisspieler. Es ist unglaublich, was der leistet. Auch außerhalb des Platzes ein großes Vorbild.

Kiefer on Roger Federer:

A good guy. Great golfer, even better tennisplayer. His achievements are unbelievable. A huge role model also off the court.


… Ausgeglichenheit im Tennis:
Früher bei Becker, Lendl und Edberg, da haben die ersten zehn immer alles unter sich ausgemacht. Bei uns ist es mittlerweile so, dass zwischen der Nummer 3 und 70 oder sogar 100 fast jeder jeden schlagen kann.

Equilibrium in tennis:

In the days of Becker, Lendl and Edberg everything was just about the top ten players. Meanwhile a player ranked between number 3 and 70 or even 100can nearly beat everyone of these players.

Eden
01-13-2007, 07:38 PM
Love this :)

Laver tells of the tears of a champion

By Mark Hodgkinson

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/graphics/2007/01/13/sthodg2130107.jpg
Big hug: Swiss star Roger Federer with his hero, the great Rod Laver

One person who knows all about Roger Federer's emotions is Rod Laver, as it was on the Australian's shoulder that the Swiss player cried during last year's prize-giving ceremony.

Laver, talking for the first time about Federer's victory tears on that occasion, said last night that the Swiss occasionally found it difficult to cope with all the acclaim that comes his way.
"It was an honour to be asked to present Roger with the trophy on stage last year," Laver, who is Federer's idol, told The Daily Telegraph. "I think that he's an emotional guy and he was clearly thrilled to have won the championship, but I think that it's sometimes overwhelming for him to have all these accolades and all this praise heaped on top of him the whole time. Roger is a great tennis player, but he's only human."
Laver, the only man to twice win all four grand slams in a year, has previously suggested that Federer could be the finest tennis player of all time.
"But I think people get too caught up in discussing whether he's chasing history, and whether he's going to win a record number of grand slams," Laver said. "I think that Roger goes out there and plays. He just enjoys the game and really loves competing, and he also likes that people want to come and watch him. That's what's really important to him. I don't think that these records are always on his mind.
Roger is a great, friendly guy. I met him for the first time during last year's Australian Open, and it was great that he was interested in a player from a previous generation. I sat down with Roger and his coach, Tony Roche, and we had a good conversation. It was very amicable. He's a quiet individual, though, and I think that's why the praise can sometimes be too much."
Laver, who lives in the United States, said he was planning to travel to Melbourne to watch the Australian Open, where the main court is the Rod Laver Arena, for a couple of days during the fortnight. So Federer and Laver could meet again.
"Roger is, of course, the big favourite," Laver said. "There are some other talented players out there, but it will take someone on a hot streak to beat Roger."

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=A1YourView&xml=/sport/2007/01/13/sthodg213.xml

refero*fervens
01-14-2007, 02:51 AM
Thanks!

In light of the AO draw, Jim Courier says, "With Roger, it's a tough draw for everybody else." while Chris Guccione says that Roger is one of his top five tennis heroes: "Roger continually works to develop all aspects of his game. He's a brilliant shot-maker and has excellent footwork." :yeah:

DONADANG
01-14-2007, 03:52 AM
Was watching a preview of the AO on Australian TV.

Darren Cahill on 'Talking Tennis' towards the end of the show where the guests had to give their verdict regarding the AO etc.

"look out for James Blake to make the final (audience applauses) but I don't think he'll beat Roger Federer in the final":lol:

Tracey Austin also mentioned that Roger always looks good. (Austin's voice is indeed annoying)

SUKTUEN
01-14-2007, 02:20 PM
I also can watch this show tommorrw morning.

intikab
01-29-2007, 04:39 PM
http://in.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=sportsNews&storyID=2007-01-29T180507Z_01_NOOTR_RTRJONC_0_India-285456-1.xml
Federer simply the best of all time, says Noah
Mon Jan 29, 2007 6:10 PM IST140

PARIS (Reuters) - Former French Open champion Yannick Noah says he has never seen a player dominate the game as Roger Federer does.

"At this level, I have never seen that. (Bjorn) Borg could beat you any time he wanted but you always had the feeling you could have a chance, grab a game or a set," Noah, who won the French Open in 1983, told sports daily L'Equipe on Monday.

"As for Roger, he wins the tournament without losing a set and you still have the feeling he has a lot of resources left."

Federer won his third Australian Open on Sunday by beating Chile's Fernando Gonzalez 7-6 6-4 6-4.

"Gonzalez had two set points in the first set but you got the feeling that Roger told himself 'alright, it's time to push on the pedal and I will just kill him on the spot'," Noah added.

"You feel he is on gear four at the maximum while he has six gears. It's awesome."

Swiss Federer will emulate Borg and Rod Laver with an 11th Grand Slam victory if he wins the French Open in June.

The all-time record is held by Pete Sampras with 14 Grand Slam triumphs.

intikab
01-29-2007, 04:49 PM
By Zoran Milosavljevic

http://za.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=sportsNews&storyID=2007-01-28T081556Z_01_BAN829742_RTRIDST_0_OZASP-TENNIS-OPEN-DJOKOVIC-20070128.XML

Djokovic tips Federer to stay top for years
Sun Jan 28, 2007 10:16 AM GMT140

BELGRADE (Reuters) - Serbian prodigy Novak Djokovic has tipped world number one Roger Federer to reign the men's ATP tour for a long time and easily retain his Australian Open title in Sunday's final against Chile's Fernando Gonzalez.

"I can't see Gonzalez winning the match although I am sure he will fight hard to give Federer a good run for his money," world number 13 Djokovic told a news conference in Belgrade on Saturday upon his return from Melbourne.

"Federer is virtually invincible and I think he will rule men's tennis for years to come, it will take a monumental effort to depose him," said Djokovic, who was brushed aside by the defending champion in straight sets in the fourth round.

"I think I would have stood a decent chance of progressing to the latter stages of the tournament if I had been drawn against anyone else.

"Federer is too strong and too quick for everyone, he has mastered every shot in tennis to perfection. We have to remind ourselves when we play against him that he too is only human."

Djokovic was reasonably happy with his performances in the tournament and said he was looking forward to a season in which he expects to break into the top 10.

"That's my basic goal this season. I have improved over the past two years but I have to keep working hard to compete with the world's best players at this level.

"I am also hopeful that Serbia can break into the Davis Cup world group this season. I will definitely play for my country in the competition and I think we have a very good chance."

refero*fervens
01-30-2007, 06:45 AM
Fernando Gonzalez in his post-AO finals speech:

"I have to congratulate again -- again -- Roger. He's on the way to be maybe the best player ever. He makes tennis very simple. He is a great champion who played a really good match today, all week -- almost all his life." :)

trickcy
01-30-2007, 08:52 AM
"He'll win the French Open. Whether or not it's this year, I don't know. But he will win it in his career," Stefanki told Mark Stevens of The Daily Telegraph. "He's a great clay court player as well and he's only getting better."

"I would think he can win (Roland Garros)," Laver said. "He has the makings because in Switzerland you're brought up on clay to a good extent. Winning on clay is a mind game and he has the anticipation and knowledge when he plays the ball. He reminds you of the old guard."


Stefanki, a Laver fan who witnessed McEnroe produce one of the greatest single seasons in history in 1984, says Federer has already laid claim to the unofficial title as the greatest of all time.
"He'll probably prove over time, he's the best player of all time," Stefanki told The Daily Telegraph. "A year ago, 10 months ago, I'd have said no. I'm a big (Rod) Laver fan. A big Johnny Mac fan. He has the best record I ever saw in 1984, but this guy has sustained it for almost three years now. He's in another echelon. He has a couple of gears he can take it to depending on the situation."

trickcy
01-30-2007, 09:06 AM
Rod Laver speaking on the eve of the Australian Open final: "Roger Federer is a genius but he is only in the middle of his career. He's got all the shots and if he keeps going the way he is, then he will be the best player ever.

His knowledge of the game and the manner in which he likes to talk to the great players of the past impresses me. He is not in the game for what he can get out of it. The difference between him and other players is that he is so much hungrier to win tournaments. His record in grand-slam finals — I think he has only lost one, in the French Open to Rafael Nadal last year — is incredible and puts him among the great players already.

The best way to beat him would be to hit him over the head with a racquet! The only way I can think of is to do what Nadal does on clay, which is to attack his backhand with looping forehands from the baseline.
Roger could win the grand slam if he keeps playing the way he is and if he does that, it will equate to the two grand slams that I won because standards are much higher these days. Having said that, modern racquet technology has made the game easier. If Roger was playing with a wooden racquet, he couldn't have played the shots he did against Andy Roddick."

nobama
01-30-2007, 11:22 AM
This isn't another players comment about Roger but something good for a laugh. The posters on the tennis-warehouse boards constantly argue about if Roger's competition is weak and if he was playing 10-15 years ago would he be as dominant. These discussions always center around that, but never if Sampras (or others from back then) was in his prime today how would he fare?

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=115754

EDIT: Oh and those that say, put Roger back in time when the courts were faster and Sampras would smoke him...ok well what about prime Sampras now on the slower courts? Would he still be smoking Roger (or anyone else), like he smoked Safin and Hewitt at the US Open?

Stevens Point
01-31-2007, 06:48 AM
Pete Sampras during a teleconference to announce his return to tournament tennis, playing a limited number of events on a tour for over-30 players

"I don't think one guy would have dominated the other. I think our games are pretty similar. It would have been a great clash to see us in our prime. Roger is doing what I never did; dominate the way he is. He's lost five matches in two years, that's unheard of."

"But I feel like my game is too big to be dominated by someone. When my game was on, my serve was on, I felt I was tough to beat. I felt unbeatable."

"I thought it would take longer than seven or eight years. I don't see anyone pushing him so I could see him winning 17, 18, 19 majors. He has 10 already and he's in the middle of his career."

"He just came along at the right time and is playing tremendous tennis and I don't see him stopping now."

"I think he can (win French Open) because he grew up playing on clay and he's come close the last two years. I really believe he can win there."

"I'm a fan, of his game, his temperament, how he handles himself on and off the court. I marvel at things he's able to do,"

SUKTUEN
02-01-2007, 03:01 AM
thankyou Sampras , I miss your tennis too.

World Beater
02-04-2007, 05:06 AM
This isn't another players comment about Roger but something good for a laugh. The posters on the tennis-warehouse boards constantly argue about if Roger's competition is weak and if he was playing 10-15 years ago would he be as dominant. These discussions always center around that, but never if Sampras (or others from back then) was in his prime today how would he fare?

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=115754

EDIT: Oh and those that say, put Roger back in time when the courts were faster and Sampras would smoke him...ok well what about prime Sampras now on the slower courts? Would he still be smoking Roger (or anyone else), like he smoked Safin and Hewitt at the US Open?

Actually this type of thread is a very enjoyable read and is for the serious tennis fan. while some posts are indeed troll-like, there are some very good points from both sides of the argument. This is a thread about tennis and not some slash, homophobic, horny teenager garbage that i so often see on this forum.

soonha
02-04-2007, 12:21 PM
This isn't another players comment about Roger but something good for a laugh. The posters on the tennis-warehouse boards constantly argue about if Roger's competition is weak and if he was playing 10-15 years ago would he be as dominant. These discussions always center around that, but never if Sampras (or others from back then) was in his prime today how would he fare?

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=115754

EDIT: Oh and those that say, put Roger back in time when the courts were faster and Sampras would smoke him...ok well what about prime Sampras now on the slower courts? Would he still be smoking Roger (or anyone else), like he smoked Safin and Hewitt at the US Open?

Personally, I think that this "weak competition" debate is so silly and absurd. Here are two basic facts that people often neglect and misunderstand:

1) Modern sports constantly evolve with helps of advanced technology and medical science, improved management and finance, better physique of players, more informations, global involvement of more countries all over the world, etc, all of which eventually create far more competition in today's sports than ever. People claiming that players(of any sports) in 90s are better than those at present is just like denying the evolution of species or the development of science. No one says that PGA, NBA, MBL players in 90s were better than current players, let alone atheletic sports players. Ten years ago figure skaters couldn't even think about a quadraple jump but current world-class skaters do it like routine. Then how could the current ATP field be weaker than 10 or 20 years ago? How could top 10 players in 90s be much tougher and better than today's? No way. Today's top 10 players are survivors of much higher competition.

Having said that, it's amazing that Agassi had been remaining competitive for 20 years. However, then again, it's largely because of his talent, fitness and determination to improve his game, not because of a weak field(Agassi himself once said this).

2) A problem is that the game of tennis is kind of a 2-man competition on a day, like boxing. The end result of a match --a win or loss-- comes from the "relative" difference of quality of two players on the day. This characteristic of tennis often forces people to make a simple but significant mistake of comparing players from different eras with a wrong measuring stick.

For example, people often like to say that the top 10 field Sampras played against was far more competitive and tougher than that Roger has today because there were multiple Slam winners back then, like Agassi, Courier, Chang, Rafter, Kafelikov, Krajcek, etc. Again, remind that the end result in tennis is always relative, not absolute. The presence of Slam winners in top 10 indicates more the degree of Sampras' dominance than the absolute toughness of competition.

Therefore, so-called "weak competition" is just about Roger's unprecendented utter dominance that makes the whole field look weak, not about the quality of his opponents that is in fact higher than ever. He is simply that good. For this reason, I believe that Roger's achievements are far more impressive than Sampras'.

mscy
02-04-2007, 06:32 PM
originally posted by soonha
For example, people often like to say that the top 10 field Sampras played against was far more competitive and tougher than that Roger has today because there were multiple Slam winners back then, like Agassi, Courier, Chang, Rafter, Kafelikov, Krajcek, etc. Again, remind that the end result in tennis is always relative, not absolute. The presence of Slam winners in top 10 indicates more the degree of Sampras' dominance than the absolute toughness of competition.

could not agree more

nobama
02-04-2007, 09:42 PM
Therefore, so-called "weak competition" is just about Roger's unprecendented utter dominance that makes the whole field look weak, not about the quality of his opponents that is in fact higher than ever. He is simply that good. For this reason, I believe that Roger's achievements are far more impressive than Sampras'.Right but the detractors would say the only reason Roger is so good is because his competition is so weak. Others would say the competition looks weak because he's so dominant. It's like a dog chasing its tail.

SUKTUEN
02-05-2007, 02:55 PM
Federer and Schumacher spice up last day's action

By Leslie Wilson Jr, Staff Reporter
Mohammad Juma Bu Amim, Vice Chairman of golf in Dubai, was delighted with the super-star gathering: "It doesn't get better than this. For us, it was a day of champions.

"The presence of sportsmen of the calibre of Michael and Roger certainly added to the colourful atmosphere and helped enhance the event's stature."

Federer is a leading contender for the Laureus Sportsman of the Year 2007 Award.

Apemant
02-06-2007, 11:33 AM
The only way I can think of is to do what Nadal does on clay, which is to attack his backhand with looping forehands from the baseline.

I have a nasty feeling that merciless exploitation of Federer's backhand, that Nadal does (TMC Shangai he served 95% of the times to Fed's BH side. Crazy) - will only force Federer, him being a perfectionist, to further work on his BH and make it a formidable weapon as well, not just a supplementary/defensive shot. And then, heaven save us from the domination that will ensue. :devil:

tennis2tennis
02-06-2007, 12:15 PM
I have a nasty feeling that merciless exploitation of Federer's backhand, that Nadal does (TMC Shangai he served 95% of the times to Fed's BH side. Crazy) - will only force Federer, him being a perfectionist, to further work on his BH and make it a formidable weapon as well, not just a supplementary/defensive shot. And then, heaven save us from the domination that will ensue. :devil:

Steffi Graff

"Roger is improving at an alarming rate, not that there's a lot to improve..I noticed that he's hitting more and more winners from his backhand than he did before...he knew what other identified as a weakness and simply polished it"

SUKTUEN
02-06-2007, 03:16 PM
many players also serve to Roger BH side now, learn from Nadal~~ = = ''

Eden
02-24-2007, 11:38 AM
Listen to the words of Lendl about Roger and the current generation of players:

He doesn't play tennis any more - "The last time I played for pleasure was 10 years ago," he said - but he keeps up with the sport. He thinks Roger Federer is playing the best tennis ever. He was not surprised by this week's news that Federer had tied Connors' record of 160 consecutive weeks with the No. 1 ranking.
"I'm not sure that's news," said Lendl, who held the No. 1 ranking for 157 consecutive weeks from 1985-88. "He might have all the records before he's done."
Don't, however, try to tell Lendl it was tougher in his time than it is for Federer now.
True, Lendl's losses in Grand Slam finals came against the likes of Connors, McEnroe, Borg, Wilander, Becker and Cash. But Federer's dominance, he said, has nothing to do with an absence of fitting foes.
"He's just so much better than those other guys," Lendl said. "If he wasn't there, you'd have four or five guys with four or five majors. But he gobbles them all up."

Source: http://www.knoxnews.com/kns/other_sports/article/0,1406,KNS_304_5373348,00.html

Minnie
02-24-2007, 01:56 PM
Hooray for Ivan Lendl. I cheered when I read that article yesterday - an ex-player who tells it like it really is!

tennis2tennis
02-24-2007, 02:01 PM
agree 100% with lendl..if federer wasn't in the scene how many grandslams would roddick or hewitt would've had?

refero*fervens
02-25-2007, 03:16 AM
:cool: Lendl. Becker likes Roger's chances at the Grand Slam too ;):
----------------------

FORMER World No 1 Boris Becker was full of praise for present World No 1 Roger Federer and said the Swiss is quite capable of winning all the four Grand Slams this year.

"The door is open wide for him this year and his chances look very good. Because I personally feel his main rival Rafael Nadal is not in top form and struggling with injuries," said the youngest Wimbledon champion who is in Bahrain as a guest of Riffa Views.

"Federer is a unique player and at just 25 he has won so many Grand Slam titles. At the moment he is in peak form and is leading the rankings by more than 4,000 points," added the German.

"If he continues to stay injury free I think he can stay at the top for another 10 years."
-----------------------
http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/Story.asp?Article=171055&Sn=SPOR&IssueID=29342

SUKTUEN
02-25-2007, 07:24 AM
Thanks Lendl. Becker ~~~

Pete had a article in Chinese version , he said he think that Roger will win 17-19 GrandSlam.

Eden
02-26-2007, 10:35 PM
Something new from John McEnroe:

JO: Roger Federer has just broken Jimmy Connors' record to become the longest reigning world number one. Of all his achievements, where does that one stand?

JM: It's remarkable. Not the fact that he's so good, but the combination of consistency, his fitness levels and desire and absolute will to win every single week.
Because he likes the game so much and enjoys being around the sport, he makes himself available to people. I commend him for that. He really is a class act and deserves this record.

Source:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/6397593.stm

SUKTUEN
02-27-2007, 01:27 PM
thanks

nobama
02-27-2007, 06:43 PM
Something new from John McEnroe:



Source:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/6397593.stmNice comments from JMac. And he is right about Roger being a class act. Can you imagine Mac or Connors or even Sampras answering 30+ questions from the media after they just played a match. Not likely.

Corey Feldman
02-27-2007, 06:47 PM
"He's just so much better than those other guys," Lendl said. "If he wasn't there, you'd have four or five guys with four or five majors. But he gobbles them all up." At long last, someone out there gets it.

enrico
02-28-2007, 05:05 AM
http://www.wfan.com/play_window.php?audioType=Episode&audioId=180782

I don't know if this link has already been posted.

If not, then just listen to this remarkable radio interview by Patrick McEnroe concerning the sportsman of the year award (by Sports Illustrated) going to Wade and not to Federer.
:eek:

Peacemaster
02-28-2007, 05:48 AM
http://www.wfan.com/play_window.php?audioType=Episode&audioId=180782

I don't know if this link has already been posted.

If not, then just listen to this remarkable radio interview by Patrick McEnroe concerning the sportsman of the year award (by Sports Illustrated) going to Wade and not to Federer.
:eek:

Amazing stuff. After this, I may have to change my opinion about the young Mac!

enrico
02-28-2007, 11:26 AM
Amazing stuff. After this, I may have to change my opinion about the young Mac!

I like the starter to his speech: "... don't insult our intelligence!"
:worship:

SUKTUEN
02-28-2007, 02:17 PM
:worship: intelligence

Peacemaster
02-28-2007, 04:31 PM
I like the starter to his speech: "... don't insult our intelligence!"
:worship:

Me too. I wonder why Pmac did not mention Roger's Unicef Ambassadorship when he was asked about his activities off the court. He did mention the Foundation, though. The two hosts seemed utterly oblivious.

magnoliaewan
02-28-2007, 06:15 PM
Funny, Boris Becker was asked about Roger Federer at the NBA All-Star game and he said that Sampras and Laver are better than Federer in his opinion.


:cool: Lendl. Becker likes Roger's chances at the Grand Slam too ;):
----------------------

FORMER World No 1 Boris Becker was full of praise for present World No 1 Roger Federer and said the Swiss is quite capable of winning all the four Grand Slams this year.

"The door is open wide for him this year and his chances look very good. Because I personally feel his main rival Rafael Nadal is not in top form and struggling with injuries," said the youngest Wimbledon champion who is in Bahrain as a guest of Riffa Views.

"Federer is a unique player and at just 25 he has won so many Grand Slam titles. At the moment he is in peak form and is leading the rankings by more than 4,000 points," added the German.

"If he continues to stay injury free I think he can stay at the top for another 10 years."
-----------------------
http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/Story.asp?Article=171055&Sn=SPOR&IssueID=29342

Minnie
03-01-2007, 12:05 AM
I'm convinced that some of these ex-players change their opinion depending on what audience they want to suck up to.

nobama
03-01-2007, 01:46 AM
I'm convinced that some of these ex-players change their opinion depending on what audience they want to suck up to.
Yes, one minute Sampras is the GOAT, the next it's Laver, then Fed. They're almost as bad as the media. :rolleyes:

SUKTUEN
03-01-2007, 03:12 PM
Goat?

Peacemaster
03-01-2007, 04:37 PM
Goat?

Greatest Of All Time.

World Beater
03-01-2007, 05:23 PM
Funny, Boris Becker was asked about Roger Federer at the NBA All-Star game and he said that Sampras and Laver are better than Federer in his opinion.

becker, sampras, stich are all from the same school of thought. becker and stich believe that by glorifying sampras it enhances their own legacy, which is true.

agassi, courier, edberg, lendl, goran, richard, connors when he was at BBC, and jmac to an extent all endorse federer as the best they have seen.

two guys who flip flop a lot are wilander and jmac.

SUKTUEN
03-03-2007, 08:08 AM
Greatest Of All Time.

:eek: :eek: :eek: OH I see~!!!:bowdown: :bowdown:

Eden
03-04-2007, 01:02 PM
Richard Krajicek and former Dutch Soccer Player Marco Van Basten talk about Roger:

http://www.goroger.net/video/video/bastenkrajicek070212talk.html

(it's in Dutch with English subtitle)

bokehlicious
03-04-2007, 01:17 PM
Richard Krajicek and former Dutch Soccer Player Marco Van Basten talk about Roger:

http://www.goroger.net/video/video/bastenkrajicek070212talk.html

(it's in Dutch with English subtitle)

Nice words from one of the best soccer players ever :worship: :cool:

Peacemaster
03-04-2007, 03:14 PM
Nice words from one of the best soccer players ever :worship: :cool:

One of the best? You blasphemer! :) Marco is TEN of the best players I have ever seen!

Greatness recognizes greatness best, I guess.

dino
03-04-2007, 03:36 PM
Richard Krajicek and former Dutch Soccer Player Marco Van Basten talk about Roger:

http://www.goroger.net/video/video/bastenkrajicek070212talk.html

(it's in Dutch with English subtitle)

Thanks, Eden. I enjoyed the video very much.

Tess Gray
03-04-2007, 05:34 PM
Richard Krajicek and former Dutch Soccer Player Marco Van Basten talk about Roger:

http://www.goroger.net/video/video/bastenkrajicek070212talk.html

(it's in Dutch with English subtitle)

Thanks for the video!
I actually saw that live on TV, was quite nice..:)

SUKTUEN
03-05-2007, 02:38 PM
It's very nice! Thanks!!

SUKTUEN
03-05-2007, 02:39 PM
It's very nice! Thanks!!:worship:

Stevens Point
03-06-2007, 09:09 AM
www.pe.com

Q&A with James Blake
posted on March 5th

Q: Do you notice signs that Federer is slowing down at all?

A: I haven't seen any yet. Maybe when he gets married. They said that would hurt Tiger; it didn't. Maybe it will hurt Roger. I've got to hope for something.

bokehlicious
03-06-2007, 12:10 PM
One of the best? You blasphemer! :) Marco is TEN of the best players I have ever seen!

Greatness recognizes greatness best, I guess.

:worship:

:secret: IMO HE's the best ever (considering it's tough to pick one), but I didn't dare writing it hence I add "one of"... :angel: ;)

SUKTUEN
03-06-2007, 02:30 PM
Oh ~poor James~~:p :p

enrico
03-07-2007, 09:16 AM
That's what Borg said about Federer in Dubai:

"He simply does not have any more weaknesses left in him. It is such a pleasure to see him play," Borg told Gulf News.

"To me, Roger Federer is the right model for anyone aspiring to be a tennis player. It is such a pleasure to just watch him play. His shot-making has got better and I doubt there is any shot he cannot make in any part of the court," Borg said.

"All records will tumble when it comes to Roger. He is such a complete player that I do not see anyone getting better than him for a long time from now. However, he will have to ensure he stays injury free," Borg noted.

Borg says Federer's uncanny habit of playing well on crucial points sets him aside.

"He does it all the while. He is such a mental player that any player who wants to play him has to be at his very best from the first point till the end, if he wants to win against Roger," Borg remarked.

mays
03-07-2007, 11:32 AM
Richard Krajicek and former Dutch Soccer Player Marco Van Basten talk about Roger:

http://www.goroger.net/video/video/bastenkrajicek070212talk.html

(it's in Dutch with English subtitle)

Thanx so much!!
im a football fan so its great seeing a footballer admiring the rog!!

SUKTUEN
03-07-2007, 02:26 PM
thanks Borg!

artlinkletter
03-09-2007, 03:23 PM
This was pointed out to me in GM. It's a recent interview with Coria, discussing all sorts of things in his personal and professional life, as well was RR, Gaudio, Nalbandian, Canas, Carla, his return, his serve etc.
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showpost.php?p=4913941&postcount=1188

-Federer: What he is doing is very good for tennis. He is proud of sharing a locker room with him and playing against him and being from the same generation. He is incredible, a phenomenon, a monster
:)

RogiFan88
03-09-2007, 04:03 PM
So Guille says Rogi's a monster and Rafa's a beast! :lol:

Peacemaster
03-09-2007, 11:25 PM
Murray "in awe" of Federer

British teenager Andy Murray, the last player to beat Roger Federer, is in awe of the records piled up by the dominant Swiss.

Since Murray upset the world number one in the Cincinnati second round last August, Federer has equalled Bjorn Borg's total of 41 match wins in a row and stayed on top of the rankings for 161 consecutive weeks.

"It must be so hard to keep a run like that going," world number 14 Murray said as he prepared for the Pacific Life Open.

"When you've won so many tournaments and so many slams, to keep yourself mentally focused for every tournament is obviously great.

"And I guess it makes my win look better against him given that he's now won 41 in a row."

Although in awe of Federer's achievements, Murray is not at all surprised.

"He doesn't lose very often and the year before I think he lost just five or six times," said the 19-year-old Scot, who successfully defended his San Jose Open title last month.

"It's not really a huge surprise because he's one of the best players to ever play the game."

Peacemaster
03-09-2007, 11:36 PM
Lleyton on Roger on the lead-up to IW:

Click here for the audio (http://www.pacificlifeopen.com/4/assets/common/TrackItA.asp?file=http://wm.world.mii-streaming.net/media/atp/tournaments/indianwells/2007/hewitt20071.mp3)

artlinkletter
03-09-2007, 11:45 PM
Kind words from Murray and Hewitt. It's nice to see that although they are in a competitve environment, they can still respect and appreciate what Roger is doing for his own career, and tennis at large. I think it's something I noticed occurs more within individual sports. You'll hear golfers give praise about other golfers for example. But you'll hardly ever hear of a basketball player, or a hockey player speak of their rivals the way tennis players do. Pure class. It's why I love this sport so much.

soraya
03-10-2007, 07:15 AM
Lendl Focuses On Federer
http://www.sportsmediainc.net/tennisweek/lendl_profile1.jpg
Ivan Lendl By Tennis Week
03/08/2007

Two decades ago, Ivan Lendl turned the final Sunday of the U.S. Open into his own personal homecoming. Taking the drive from his Connecticut home to Flushing Meadows, Lendl reached the U.S. Open final an Open Era-record eight straight times from 1982-89, lifting the tournament title three consecutive years from 1985-88.


Times have changed and when Lendl looks at the sport he once dominated today, there's only one player that compels him to tune into televised tennis: Roger Federer.
"I only watch [Roger] Federer. He has the potential to be the best ever," Lendl told Mark Cardon of The Herald Tribune (http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070308/SPORTS/703080381/1006). "I wouldn't give it to him yet, but he is certainly on his way. I watch him and Tiger [Woods]. I feel very fortunate to be watching two who will probably be the best of all times. They are both phenomenal."
The father of five daughters, who celebrated his 47th birthday on Wednesday, maintains a weekly game with friends and former foes Petr Korda, Jimmy Arias and David McPherson, only now Lendl pulls a driver out of his bag rather than a racquet. Lendl, who has said a back injury prevents him from playing the senior tennis circuit, splits his spare time between Bradenton and Connecticut. When he isn't busy chauffeuring his daughters to junior golf tournaments, he plays himself.
"I drive my kids around to tournaments. I can't teach them how to swing, but I can teach them how to eat, how to prepare mentally, how to be sharp and how to be ready to go when it is time to go," Lendl told The Herald Tribune (http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070308/SPORTS/703080381/1006). "I may try to qualify for the U.S. Open again if I can find the time. I play [golf] once a week with Peter Korda, Jimmy Arias and David McPherson. Some weeks I play every day, some weeks never."
The devoted dad who sometimes caddies for his daughters said he hopes his children develop a passion for the sport that will last a lifetime.
"[I] want them to have fun, have a sport for life," Lendl said. "If where it takes them is good, that is even better. But you just have to love and enjoy it first and then you can start looking higher." In his prime, Lendl won 27 consecutive matches at the US Open from 1985 to 1988, marking the longest singles match winning streak in the Open Era. His tireless dedication to conditioning made him the fittest player of his era and helped transform him from a player whose mental strength was suspect in losing his first four major one finals into one of the more tenacious competitors of his time. Lendl said both sports require a sense of self-belief. "You have nobody to hide behind. You get the glory but suffer the consequences, too," Lendl said. "The differences? In tennis you move a lot. Golf you don't. In tennis, you can have a bad half-hour, but you can't in golf. You can lose the first set in tennis and still win. In golf, if you make three (double bogeys) in a half hour, you are done."

SUKTUEN
03-10-2007, 08:25 AM
Oh ~!!Lendl looks great!!!!!!!:D :D

Peacemaster
03-10-2007, 10:54 PM
Roddick talking about Roger breaking Connors' record:

Click here for the audio (http://www.pacificlifeopen.com/4/assets/common/TrackItA.asp?file=http://wm.world.mii-streaming.net/media/atp/tournaments/indianwells/2007/roddick2.mp3)

SUKTUEN
03-11-2007, 01:21 AM
thanks!

Eden
03-12-2007, 08:02 PM
Andy Murray on Rogers defeat to Canas:

"When there's a record like that on the line everybody is watching (in the locker room)," Murray told Five Live.

"Everybody was surprised to see Federer lose, but everybody loses some time and unfortunately it came in the first round here when there was such a big record on the line.

"Canas is a tough first-round match in these conditions. He makes no mistakes, has played three matches already in qualies and the guy played really well."

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/6441721.stm

SUKTUEN
03-13-2007, 03:57 PM
Murray looks like " love " Roger so much!!

Eden
03-14-2007, 06:32 PM
Tommy Haas in a German interview today on the question why Roger is nearly unbeatable for 3 years now:


Federer ist der Spieler, der in den engen Spielsituationen weiß, was er tun muss. Er bleibt ruhig und spielt den richtigen Schlag zur richtigen Zeit. Ich habe jetzt öfter gegen ihn knapp verloren und hatte immer wieder meine Chancen. Es sind nur ein paar Punkte hier und da. Ich glaube, es gibt einige Spieler, wie Rafael Nadal, Andy Murray, Marat Safin oder auch ich, die ihn an einem guten Tag schlagen können. Auch ein Roger Federer wird manchmal nervös, auch wenn ihm das in den letzten Jahren nur ganz selten passiert ist.

Federer is a player who knows what to do when the match gets tight. He stays calm and does the right hit at the right time. I have lost to him narrow several times and had my chances against him. It's only a few points here and there. I think that there a few players like Rafael Nadal, Andy Murray, Marat Safin or myself who can beat him on a good day. Even a Roger Federer is getting nervous, even if this happened to him just seldom in the last years.

Source: http://www.sportbild.de/sportbild/generated/article/tennis/2007/03/14/5744800000.html

SUKTUEN
03-15-2007, 04:05 PM
agree~~ hope Roger keep healthy as always

refero*fervens
03-16-2007, 07:23 AM
Words from Tiger:

-----------------
Tiger Woods to meet up and watch Federer in Miami---

March 14, 2007

Tiger Woods

ORLANDO, FLORIDA

Q. You and your buddy, Federer, are going to be competing in the same town at the same time next week. Currently Roger has been telling a few people at least that you're going to make a few trips to Key Biscayne.
TIGER WOODS: I would love to try and catch one of his matches, if not two of his matches, yeah.

Q. What is it about Federer's play on the tennis courts that impresses you the most?
TIGER WOODS: It's sick. (Laughter) I mean, it really is. What he does, he makes it look so effortless, and it's not. The shots and the angles and the things he can create, no one in the history of the game has ever been able to do. I mean, it's pretty neat for all of us to be watching a living legend play. You know he's going to surpass Sampras's record. It's just a matter of when.

Q. When you two guys get together, do you compare notes on success, or what do you guys talk about?
TIGER WOODS: Yeah, some of that, sometimes. Sometimes we may talk about mind-set that it takes, the discipline and the practice sessions, as well as the things you do off, for him off the court and off the course for me, to train and prepare. But a lot of the stuff is mainly BS. We're just giving each other a lot of grief all the time and it's a lot of fun.

Q. Do you pick up any tips from him, conditioning, anything in like that?
TIGER WOODS: What he does is different than what I do obviously. But still, I think the time spent away from competition is very important and what you do in that off time to prepare for the next event, I don't think people have any understanding of what -- truly what it takes to prepare.
------------------------------------ :)
http://www.tennisnews.com/exclusive.php?pID=18354

trickcy
03-16-2007, 04:17 PM
Roddick talking about Roger breaking Connors' record:

Click here for the audio (http://www.pacificlifeopen.com/4/assets/common/TrackItA.asp?file=http://wm.world.mii-streaming.net/media/atp/tournaments/indianwells/2007/roddick2.mp3)


I can't view it/ hear it:sad: Could somebody please tell me what he said?? Thanks a lot!:wavey:

SUKTUEN
03-16-2007, 05:04 PM
I can hear it!!

Peacemaster
03-17-2007, 04:15 AM
I can't view it/ hear it:sad: Could somebody please tell me what he said?? Thanks a lot!:wavey:

Courtesy of a post by refero_fervens:

Q. Can you tell us how Jimmy felt when he lost his record to Roger one week ago?
ANDY RODDICK: I mean, we haven't really talked about it. I know, that, you know, I know he has a great deal of respect for Roger and thinks a lot of him as a player, but, you know, it's not exactly like I'm starting off our conversations on the phone, "Hey, you lost your record yesterday, huh? That sucks." You know, "Oh well. Sorry."

SUKTUEN
03-17-2007, 08:34 AM
Q. Can you tell us how Jimmy felt when he lost his record to Roger one week ago?
ANDY RODDICK: I mean, we haven't really talked about it. I know, that, you know, I know he has a great deal of respect for Roger and thinks a lot of him as a player, but, you know, it's not exactly like I'm starting off our conversations on the phone, "Hey, you lost your record yesterday, huh? That sucks." You know, "Oh well. Sorry."


Andy~~~:haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha:

trickcy
03-17-2007, 11:02 AM
Courtesy of a post by refero_fervens:

Q. Can you tell us how Jimmy felt when he lost his record to Roger one week ago?
ANDY RODDICK: I mean, we haven't really talked about it. I know, that, you know, I know he has a great deal of respect for Roger and thinks a lot of him as a player, but, you know, it's not exactly like I'm starting off our conversations on the phone, "Hey, you lost your record yesterday, huh? That sucks." You know, "Oh well. Sorry."


:wavey: Thanks a lot!!

SUKTUEN
03-18-2007, 06:23 AM
Andy~~:bigcry: :bigcry: :bigcry: :bigcry:

Eden
03-21-2007, 09:38 PM
Former No. 1 Gustavo Kuerten on the Roger Federer vs. Pete Sampras debate:

"Looking head to head, I thought Sampras had the better shot for me. As he [Federer] has been growing better and better, I'm sure he's getting close...By the record and the numbers, he's breaking down one after the other. I think -- in one or two years, he's going to be the best player in tennis ever."...

Source: http://www.tennis-x.com/story/2007-04-21/d.php

RogiFan88
03-21-2007, 10:11 PM
so now Guga changes his mind about Rogi...

trickcy
03-22-2007, 07:48 AM
Guga's seen the light:p :p

Honestly though, the way these former plaers keep changing their minds is just embarrasing. The GOAT's Laver, no it's Borg, oh wait, it's Sampras, hang on, it's Federer, on second thought, it might be Laver after all.....:o :o

tennis2tennis
03-22-2007, 09:15 AM
federer said people should judge him post retirement but its like he's talking giberish 'cause no one's taking any notice

SUKTUEN
03-22-2007, 02:26 PM
read Tiger speech today.

Corey Feldman
03-23-2007, 12:19 AM
From BBC, a footballer for Bolton FC, Kevin Nolan.. who i like :)

Tiger Woods or Roger Federer?
Very tough one this. I would have to go for Tiger Woods. If given the chance to have dinner with one of them I would go for Tiger, though both are magnificent at their sports.

Peacemaster
03-23-2007, 12:08 PM
From a little while back...

Cliff Drysdale on the GOAT Debate

I go back a long way … I played Pancho Gonzales, Rod Laver and the best of my era, and have seen everyone else who is in the conversation. Roger Federer is the best I've seen -- mentally, physically and technically. He combines the best of the modern game with the historic game, and the result is the best all-around game. It's not all about power with him.

Compared to my day, when three of four majors were on grass, Federer has to be more versatile, and he proves himself on all surfaces, a tough feat to master simultaneously. People point out he hasn't won the French Open. It's immaterial. He's a good clay-court player; he reached the final in Paris last year.

The last three years, Roger has dominated like no one else ever has in the Open Era -- a higher winning percentage, more titles and more majors. The others were great, but they all had a hole in their games, either a certain surface or a certain shot. McEnroe didn't have the ground strokes. Connors' serve wasn't close. Lendl had no volley. Agassi wasn't a great volleyer, and his career had historic ups and downs. Even Borg and Sampras weren't complete. Pete never had Roger's ground strokes or return of serve.

Peacemaster
03-23-2007, 04:30 PM
Roddick on Roger during pre-Miami presser...

Q. Tiger Woods is in town this week, which, again, raises the subject of who's better: Tiger or Roger? Your thoughts?
ANDY RODDICK: Well, obviously I'm partial to Roger, I think, because I've been on the other end of a lot of unfortunate things, for me anyway. But what Roger has done over the last three years is pretty impressive. It's a big deal when he loses a match, like it was last week in Palm Springs. I don't remember the last time, or even as a fan growing up, when that was the case. Pete and Andre still lost matches. You know, I'd have to go with Roger, but I might be a little biased towards that one.

Q. How do you as an opponent, when you look at the records of him against everybody else, it's obviously phenomenal. How do you get past that when you're seeing him across the court and get over that little hump of thinking, I can beat this guy? What would make you think that I can beat him?
ANDY RODDICK: Well, I came close a couple times at the end of last year, and it's just -- you've just got to go out there and hope to play a good match. That's pretty much all I can do, and just keep working. You hope that sometime, some way, all of us can maybe affect his confidence somehow, because that's just his thing. When he gets to 4-All in a breaker, for him it seems like it's the same as 2-All in the first set. That's the difference. If you can get the guy thinking a little bit more, I think that would be the Key. But obviously that's easier said than done.

DONADANG
03-23-2007, 09:59 PM
Roddick on Roger during pre-Miami presser...

Q. Tiger Woods is in town this week, which, again, raises the subject of who's better: Tiger or Roger? Your thoughts?
ANDY RODDICK: Well, obviously I'm partial to Roger, I think, because I've been on the other end of a lot of unfortunate things, for me anyway.

:awww:

shacklebolt
03-24-2007, 01:09 AM
Interesting, that when Tiger chose a dinner guest, he chose Roger!

SUKTUEN
03-24-2007, 09:22 AM
they looks very interest in each other.

bokehlicious
03-26-2007, 05:40 PM
Nice words from Mark Streit, defender at the Montreal Canadiens .

"Who is your role model/idol and why? A guy I’m impressed with is Roger Federer. He went from being an average, 19-year-old player to dominating the whole tennis world. How he improved and how he changed his game, his personality on the court, that’s very impressive to me."

http://www.canadiens.com/eng/spotlight/streit.html

SUKTUEN
03-27-2007, 02:02 PM
Thankyou~

bokehlicious
03-29-2007, 07:30 AM
Please welcome a new Fedtard folks :D

In the doday's edition of Le Matin (French speaking Swiss paper), Florian Blatter, a Davos hockey player (currently playing Swiss hockey ligue play-off finals vs Bern) says he was not really focused in the match yesterday as he was bothered by Roger's loss... He admitted being a huge fan of his, he even said he's not sure whether he'd prefer being Swiss hockey champion with his team or shake Roger's hand :cool: :D he also added he'd be thrilled by owning some stuff of Roger, the journalist answered he'll try to get some old socks from Roger soon and give it to him :lol:

I like the way some Swiss sportsmen are referring to Roger lately... :cool:

yanchr
03-29-2007, 07:38 AM
In the doday's edition of Le Matin (French speaking Swiss paper), Florian Blatter, a Davos hockey player (currently playing Swiss hockey ligue play-off finals vs Bern) says he was not really focused in the match yesterday as he was bothered by Roger's loss... He admitted being a huge fan of his, he even said he's not sure whether he'd prefer being Swiss hockey champion with his team or shake Roger's hand :cool: :D he also added he'd be thrilled by owning some stuff of Roger, the journalist answered he'll try to get some old socks from Roger soon and give him to him :lol:

I like the way some Swiss sportsmen are referring to Roger lately... :cool:
Good to know that we are not the only group of fans who are bothered by his loss...until now;)

soonha
03-29-2007, 08:06 AM
Please welcome a new Fedtard folks :D

In the doday's edition of Le Matin (French speaking Swiss paper), Florian Blatter, a Davos hockey player (currently playing Swiss hockey ligue play-off finals vs Bern) says he was not really focused in the match yesterday as he was bothered by Roger's loss... He admitted being a huge fan of his, he even said he's not sure whether he'd prefer being Swiss hockey champion with his team or shake Roger's hand :cool: :D he also added he'd be thrilled by owning some stuff of Roger, the journalist answered he'll try to get some old socks from Roger soon and give it to him :lol:

I like the way some Swiss sportsmen are referring to Roger lately... :cool:

:lol: How sweet...Nice to hear that Roger is being so loved by his compatriot atheletes.

refero*fervens
03-29-2007, 08:28 AM
Please welcome a new Fedtard folks :D

In the doday's edition of Le Matin (French speaking Swiss paper), Florian Blatter, a Davos hockey player (currently playing Swiss hockey ligue play-off finals vs Bern) says he was not really focused in the match yesterday as he was bothered by Roger's loss... He admitted being a huge fan of his, he even said he's not sure whether he'd prefer being Swiss hockey champion with his team or shake Roger's hand :cool: :D he also added he'd be thrilled by owning some stuff of Roger, the journalist answered he'll try to get some old socks from Roger soon and give it to him :lol:

I like the way some Swiss sportsmen are referring to Roger lately... :cool:

:D Aww...welcome to the Fed-Express, Mr Blatter! :D

Eden
04-01-2007, 03:01 PM
Australian weelchair marathon champion Kurt Fearnley, who is nominated for Laureus world sportsperson with a disability, is looking forward to meet Roger at the Laureus and get his autograph:


Australia's sole nominee at the Laureus World Sports Awards, wheelchair marathon champion Kurt Fearnley, doesn't care if he wins or loses, as long as he gets Roger Federer's autograph for his pool room.
And he'd like Shane Warne, Steve Waugh and Dawn Fraser too, as a momento of his brush with the world's sporting elite on Monday night in Spain.
Fearnley, who has already won five consecutive wheelchair marathons this year, is nominated for Laureus world sportsperson with a disability for his outstanding 2006 which included a world championship and four marathon titles.
But the laidback boy from the NSW bush is more concerned with getting the chance to mix with his idols than whether or not he gets to make a victory speech.
"I like being nominated, and I'm proud to be Australia's only representative at Laureus this year," the 26-year-old from the country town of Carcoar said on the eve of the awards recognised as the Oscars of sport.
"It's a lot of fun, but I'm not too worried about it.
"The time to think about awards is when your career is over.
"Right now I'm thinking about my future pool room and getting Roger Federer's autograph on a headband or a wristband - that would be great.
"Federer is fantastic. He's proved what a champion he is by coming back and winning year after year.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=257955

Or Levy
04-01-2007, 10:46 PM
Michael Phelps, about being compared to Roger:

`To be (mentioned) in the names of guys like Tiger Woods, Roger Federer - some of those guys are just incredible - so to be able to be included in that is a pretty big accomplishment and something to be proud of.''

ezekiel
04-02-2007, 12:27 AM
Please welcome a new Fedtard folks :D

In the doday's edition of Le Matin (French speaking Swiss paper), Florian Blatter, a Davos hockey player (currently playing Swiss hockey ligue play-off finals vs Bern) says he was not really focused in the match yesterday as he was bothered by Roger's loss... He admitted being a huge fan of his, he even said he's not sure whether he'd prefer being Swiss hockey champion with his team or shake Roger's hand :cool: :D he also added he'd be thrilled by owning some stuff of Roger, the journalist answered he'll try to get some old socks from Roger soon and give it to him :lol:

I like the way some Swiss sportsmen are referring to Roger lately... :cool:


that' s a bit creepy and stalkish if you know what I mean. It's ok to admire but this guy seems to be living vicariously through someone else and he has no control over it .

bokehlicious
04-02-2007, 09:42 AM
that' s a bit creepy and stalkish if you know what I mean. It's ok to admire but this guy seems to be living vicariously through someone else and he has no control over it .

:lol: I think he went a bit over the top for the journalist... I'm sure he's not that of a fanboy actually...

SUKTUEN
04-02-2007, 11:20 AM
thanks

Eden
04-15-2007, 01:35 PM
Choupi has translated a very interesting interview with Stan Wawrinka for the French tennismagazine. Here is what he has to say about Roger:


TM: Did your compatriot Roger Federer send his sympathy to you?
SW: He calls me every day, even several times (smiles). That's nice.

TM: You're the Swiss n°2 and then, n°2 to the world n°1 Roger Federer. Mustn't be easy to catch some light in such circumstances....
SW: No, that's not really easy. But, as in everything, there's a positive side as well as some negative one. Thanks to him, there's some huge interest in tennis in Switzerland. And me, I have that luck to know him very well now. We're buddies, we can say so. If I need advice, he's always there for me. I know his phone is always turned on and that's precious. Consulting the World n°1, not everybody can do that!! So, imagine being able to do it regularly.......(smiles)

TM: But in the Swiss press, it's bound to be less space for you, all the more now that Martina Hingis also makes the headlines. How do you live this situation?
SW: It's true he gives the impression to take all the place and that's of course the case. As he wins almost all the time, for many people, I'm a bit the Swiss guy who loses (smiles). But when it comes to the media, I'm also the Swiss who stays accessible as, unlike Roger, I don't have many international journalists interested in me (smiles).

TM: His presence isn't too heavy then?
SW: No. The aura of a champion like Federer is even protective for me. I grow up, quietly in his shadow, without big pressure on my shoulders. If you have a look at my ranking evolution, you'll see that I've always had a very regular progression, even a quiet one.

TM: We're bound to talk about Roger Federer with you. Some former champions say today that his opponents respect him too much, that they just look at him, playing and winning. What is your opinion?
SW: Me, I tend to say that against Federer, you play better than usual (smiles). Because you have nothing to lose. The respect he causes has nothing to do with that. When I've watched his matches in 2006, I've often thought that the guys he was playing were more inspired than usual (smiles).

TM: You've played him twice. The 1st time was in Rotterdam, in 2004.....SW: At that time, I didn't know him so well and he hadn't won all those titles he has now. But that was impressive. The stands were full. That was something.

TM: And when did you meet him for the very 1st time?
SW: I was 16 and it was in Bienne, at the Swiss training center. He needed a sparring partner before RG. We had trained for 1h30. He was number 12 at that time, I think. But I was already stressed (smiles). The 1st points had been exhausting. Not because of the effort but because my heart was running 300 (laughs).

TM: It's like, with the years passing by and with glory, he didn't really change.
SW: No. With me, he never was haughty. He never did anything different to have me feel he was above me. He stayed simple. That's even extraordinary to see that.

TM: How's your relation with him today?
SW: It's not easy to describe. Without being pretentious, I think we can say we're buddies (smiles). We call each other often, we also text each other even if most of the time, it's total crap (smiles). It must not be the best way to say it but he's a bit my older brother on the tour. He's always told me his cellphone was on if I needed advice or had questions on some ooponents. What's great is that he only gives me advice if I ask for some. He will never interfere intentionally. He lets me come and make the 1st step (smiles).

TM: And do you often call him?
SW: Often, no. But it happened several times last year. I've also asked him for advice on how to handle a career because what's also noticeable with him, it's that he's found a balance on every level. It's like everything's in order, professionally and privately. He's an example also for that.

TM: Were you disappointed that, one more time, he decides not to play the DC 1st round against Spain?
SW: He's got aschedule and I respect that. He's got his priorities and one of them is to remain n°1. At the time, I've been disappointed, but I totally understand his decision. It's not so much that with him, it would be easier, but he would make DC weeks even nicer because we get on very well.

TM: But he wants to win DC. Maybe he's waiting for his n°2 to assert himself which means you, so that he finally considers about aiming this high goal.
SW: Maybe, maybe. Up to 2003 and this semifinal lost against Australia, he was still playing, but maybe he's seen he was too isolated. Yes, he's waiting for a tougher team and also undoubtedly for a calendar which is easier or more adapted to him.

You'll find the whole interview here: http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=99763

Thanks again to Choupi for the great translation and bringing up that interview :)

DONADANG
04-15-2007, 01:48 PM
^^^^

Does anyone else get the impression that Fed likes to call ppl?

It's a great interview btw, Stan comes across as a real sweetheart.

SUKTUEN
04-15-2007, 02:30 PM
thanks

soraya
04-15-2007, 08:11 PM
Thanks Eden and Choupi for translating it.

Me, I tend to say that against Federer, you play better than usual (smiles). Because you have nothing to lose. The respect he causes has nothing to do with that. When I've watched his matches in 2006, I've often thought that the guys he was playing were more inspired than usual (smiles).

This is so true.

lsy
04-16-2007, 08:17 AM
Thanks Eden for posting those quotes, else I would have missed the whole Stani's interview which I must say is really an interesting read :D


TM: Were you disappointed that, one more time, he decides not to play the DC 1st round against Spain?
SW: He's got aschedule and I respect that. He's got his priorities and one of them is to remain n°1. At the time, I've been disappointed, but I totally understand his decision. It's not so much that with him, it would be easier, but he would make DC weeks even nicer because we get on very well.

TM: But he wants to win DC. Maybe he's waiting for his n°2 to assert himself which means you, so that he finally considers about aiming this high goal.
SW: Maybe, maybe. Up to 2003 and this semifinal lost against Australia, he was still playing, but maybe he's seen he was too isolated. Yes, he's waiting for a tougher team and also undoubtedly for a calendar which is easier or more adapted to him.

I'd always wanted to know how the other Swiss players think about Rogi not in the team for DC, now I get to know how Stani's feel about that.

It's nice he sees Rogi like an older bro to him on tour. I can see why Rogi's so upset about Djokovic after that match of him vs Stani in DC then :lol:

SUKTUEN
04-16-2007, 01:20 PM
Agaiss said that Roger two times lost to one person make him surprised~

Eden
04-20-2007, 09:56 PM
Andy Murray, Tommy Robredo, Ivan Ljubicic and Novak Djokovic talk about Rogers chances on clay

http://youtube.com/watch?v=eDiSgLy8FW4

SUKTUEN
04-21-2007, 08:29 AM
thankyou so much!!

Eden
04-25-2007, 07:44 PM
McEnroe: Fed has two years

American legend John McEnroe says that Roger Federer has two years to win the French Open and establish himself as a candidate for greatest of all time.
"[Roger Federer] is already one of the greats, one of the best. To say that he is the best of all time, he has to win Roland Garros and I do not see that happening in the present conditions," McEnroe told Spanish newspaper As.
McEnroe, whose best finish at the French Open was a finals appearance in 1984, added that Federer was capable of overcoming his natural style of play to win Roland Garros, but gave the Swiss star just two years to do it.
"He can do it, that is obvious, but his game is not based upon clay. He does not have that base and it is difficult to overcome that," the three-time Wimbledon champion said.
"It will be very complicated for him and I only give him this year and the next to do it. If not, he will find it even harder. Also, there is the presence of [Rafael] Nadal."
McEnroe praised the Spanish claycourt king, who has won two consecutive French Open crowns and is currently carrying a 68-match win streak on the slow surface.
"[Nadal] is full of energy and that enchants me," the four-time US Open champion McEnroe said. "His game transmits emotions and his style is different to the majority of players. Tennis needs people with the character of Nadal."
McEnroe made a point to note, however, that it would be a real challenge for Nadal to reach number one in the world with Federer still in the picture.
"It will be very difficult, but, I dare not say no."

Source: http://www.eurosport.com/tennis/french-open/2007/sport_sto1161492.shtml

RogiFan88
04-25-2007, 08:43 PM
to JMac [don't project YOUR own frustration and your failure to win RG onto Rogi] and other old guys -- WHATEVER! :rolleyes:

TenHound
04-25-2007, 09:12 PM
Sounds like MacMouth's God Complex. I say he has to win RG to be considered in GOAT competition, so therefore he does. What an Arrogant Simpleton.

trickcy
04-26-2007, 04:51 AM
Agassi on Rogi

Roger Federer must win the French Open to be considered the greatest tennis player in history, Grand Slam champion Andre Agassi said.

A title for Federer in Paris in June would make him the first man since Rod Laver in 1969 to win four consecutive Grand Slam events and the first since Agassi in 1999 to claim each of them in his career.

Agassi completed his collection at the French, where the slowing effect of clay has been a disadvantage for Federer, the world's No. 1 player. Federer lost to Rafael Nadal in the semifinal at Roland Garros in 2005 and the final last year.

``There is no question that for him to be considered the best of all time, he needs to find a way to win on every surface,'' Agassi, 36, said in an interview today.

Agassi, whose career ended in 2006, also said he hopes that Federer's quest to become the game's greatest player will draw more interest in the sport. It also would boost tennis if Federer's dominance were challenged by Nadal, a Spaniard who holds a 5-0 edge on clay over the 25-year-old Swiss.

``If we could watch history and at the same time see him develop a rivalry, that would be the best of both worlds,'' said Agassi, who won eight Grand Slam events.

On surfaces other than clay, there has been little challenge to Federer. He is a 10-time Grand Slam champion, four behind the record set by Pete Sampras, who also failed to win at Roland Garros.

Federer has won 47 singles titles on the ATP Tour, capturing Wimbledon, a grass event, four times, and the U.S. and Australian Opens, on hard courts, three times apiece. He's been the world's top-ranked player since February 2004, a record for consecutive weeks atop the sport.

In taking the Australian Open in January, Federer became the first men's player since Bjorn Borg in 1980 to win a Grand Slam title without dropping a set.

Winning Streak

Nadal, who is 14-0 at Roland Garros, has won 68 straight clay-court matches, topping Federer 6-4, 6-4 on April 22 to win the Monte Carlo Masters.

Federer, who is right-handed, shows little emotion on court. Nadal, a 20-year-old left-hander who is ranked No. 2, hops and pumps his fist on big points.

``They're two dynamic personalities that are completely opposite,'' Agassi said. ``That's what existed when you looked at (John) McEnroe and (Bjorn) Borg, or Pete and myself.''

Federer and Nadal may meet on clay at the Rome Masters and Hamburg Masters next month before a possible French Open dual in Paris, which begins May 28. Federer is a 9-4 choice with U.K. bookmaker Ladbrokes to beat Nadal on clay this year.

Agassi said that if he were Federer's coach, he would recommend greater patience against Nadal on clay.

``It's a big task for Fed,'' he said. ``Sixty-eight people have tried and 68 times in a row it hasn't happened.'

soraya
04-26-2007, 05:30 AM
wonder why Agassi does not consider himself a goat, he won all 4 of them and according to many former players that should translate to be the best ever. no?

RogiFan88
04-26-2007, 01:08 PM
soraya, you're right -- in some ways he's better than Sampras because he has all four slams

but the GOAT never really exists...

SUKTUEN
04-26-2007, 03:19 PM
Agassi you are hurt Roger!!

Rommella
04-27-2007, 11:24 AM
wonder why Agassi does not consider himself a goat, he won all 4 of them and according to many former players that should translate to be the best ever. no?
I consider his French Open win as more a case of things lining up right in a big way -- meeting no tough clay court specialists in the early rounds then going up vs. Medvedev in the final, who just happened to be ranked 100th (or thereabouts), then the rain break that allowed him to re-group and come from 2-0 down.

SUKTUEN
04-28-2007, 07:56 AM
thanks~!

soonha
04-28-2007, 08:35 AM
Since when the FO has been an obligatory requirement for being a GOAT? :confused: Pete Sampras, anyone?

SUKTUEN
04-28-2007, 08:38 AM
what?

soonha
04-28-2007, 09:02 AM
what?

I mean, SUK, Sampras has been considered a GOAT by most of people even though he had never won FO.

SUKTUEN
04-28-2007, 09:06 AM
Oh, I understand now~~~:bowdown:

Yes, although never win RG in his life, I also think that He is the most Great Player in the world.:worship: :worship:

RogiFan88
04-28-2007, 12:45 PM
Suktuen, Rogi hasn't won RG YET.

I guess AA doesn't consider Pete the best then...

nobama
04-28-2007, 01:24 PM
Me thinks Andre was taking a bit of a swipe at Pete there too. ;) Anyway did Rod Laver win all 4 slams on 4 different surfaces? I think winning all 4 slams as being criteria for GOAT is silly too. To me, Pete Sampras winning 7 Wimbledons is more impressive than Andre winning 1 RG. Anyway I think the whole idea of GOAT is silly anyway. No one will ever agree and people will always argue about who had tougher competition.

ExpectedWinner
04-28-2007, 03:46 PM
Anyway did Rod Laver win all 4 slams on 4 different surfaces?

No. All Slams, except for FO, were on grass.

ExpectedWinner
04-28-2007, 04:04 PM
I guess AA doesn't consider Pete the best then...


My interpretation is that he does consider Pete the GOAT at the moment. But if Federer wins French, he'd become the GOAT in Agassi's mind.

If Federer never wins FO, he has to win 15 Slams and stay 6 years No1 to be considered the GOAT. Both deeds are unlikely.

soraya
04-28-2007, 07:40 PM
soraya, you're right -- in some ways he's better than Sampras because he has all four slams

but the GOAT never really exists...

my post was sarcastic to the whole GOAT thing. IMHO Rogi is the greatest player with or without RG, until someone better than him comes around.

NYCtennisfan
04-28-2007, 08:44 PM
Right now, there are three mentioned as GOATs: Sampras, Laver, and Borg. Federer is knocking on the door.

Each one of Sampras, Borg, and Laver have strikes against them. Sampras, never won on clay, Borg never won the USO, and Laver won most of the slams on grass where everyone basically played the same way and there was zero competition.

For those who say there really can't be a GOAT, you are not correct. If Federer wins RG once (especially in the Nadal era where Nadal will in all probability become at least the 2nd greatest clay player of all time), and wins 15 slams, he will be the all-time greatest player in most objective minds.

Federer has already put together other minor parts of the resume. He has won 3 slams in one year tiwce, something nobody else has done in the Open Era and in fact has 2 of the 5 seasons where 3 or 4 slams were won in one year. He has the finals streak, 3 of the 6 best seasons in history, only player to win 10+ titles 3 years in a row, weeks at #1 streak, consecutive finals made (not the record but close), consecutive SF's made, consecutive QF's made, closing in on the most seasons with single-digit losses, consecutive wins against top 10 opponents, consecutive matches played without losing in straight sets, longest winning streak in the TMS era, and on and on. He has done this at a time where athleticism is at an all-time high in the sport, players are coming from everywhere, and competition is at an all-time high level.

NYCtennisfan
04-28-2007, 08:45 PM
my post was sarcastic to the whole GOAT thing. IMHO Rogi is the greatest player with or without RG, until someone better than him comes around.

He is the best player that has ever played the game but greatest is of course measured in career achievements. :)

soraya
04-28-2007, 08:57 PM
He is the best player that has ever played the game but greatest is of course measured in career achievements. :)

Yes, if you measure career achievement by quantity rather than quality;)

SUKTUEN
04-29-2007, 02:41 AM
Suktuen, Rogi hasn't won RG YET.

I guess AA doesn't consider Pete the best then...

I think Roger only need to win more than 14 GS , although he never win RG, Roger also be the most Great player!!!:worship: :worship:

World Beater
04-29-2007, 06:22 PM
Right now, there are three mentioned as GOATs: Sampras, Laver, and Borg. Federer is knocking on the door.

Each one of Sampras, Borg, and Laver have strikes against them. Sampras, never won on clay, Borg never won the USO, and Laver won most of the slams on grass where everyone basically played the same way and there was zero competition.

For those who say there really can't be a GOAT, you are not correct. If Federer wins RG once (especially in the Nadal era where Nadal will in all probability become at least the 2nd greatest clay player of all time), and wins 15 slams, he will be the all-time greatest player in most objective minds.

Federer has already put together other minor parts of the resume. He has won 3 slams in one year tiwce, something nobody else has done in the Open Era and in fact has 2 of the 5 seasons where 3 or 4 slams were won in one year. He has the finals streak, 3 of the 6 best seasons in history, only player to win 10+ titles 3 years in a row, weeks at #1 streak, consecutive finals made (not the record but close), consecutive SF's made, consecutive QF's made, closing in on the most seasons with single-digit losses, consecutive wins against top 10 opponents, consecutive matches played without losing in straight sets, longest winning streak in the TMS era, and on and on. He has done this at a time where athleticism is at an all-time high in the sport, players are coming from everywhere, and competition is at an all-time high level.

i see where you are coming from but i will add that we wouldnt know how borg or sampras would have fared had they benefitted by coming AFTER roger federer in tennis history. who knows maybe sampras would have been more complete or borg. semiwest grips/super rackets and improved physical fittness. Greatness also comes from drive and determination. Both guys have that in abundance. Sampras could manufacture some incredible shots when he was in the zone with an eastern fh and bh. im wondering what he could have done with a semi-west fh and bh . im by no means a pete sampras fan.

NYCtennisfan
04-29-2007, 10:25 PM
i see where you are coming from but i will add that we wouldnt know how borg or sampras would have fared had they benefitted by coming AFTER roger federer in tennis history. who knows maybe sampras would have been more complete or borg. semiwest grips/super rackets and improved physical fittness. Greatness also comes from drive and determination. Both guys have that in abundance. Sampras could manufacture some incredible shots when he was in the zone with an eastern fh and bh. im wondering what he could have done with a semi-west fh and bh . im by no means a pete sampras fan.

True, but I was speaking in terms of accomplishments. If Federer gets 15 plus one RG in the Nadal era, there is very little argument that he is the GOAT in terms of achievements. Interestingly enough, I think Borg would then be really the only one with an argument for GOAT because even though he has only 11, he only plaed 3 a year AND won on the slowest and fastest srufaces 4 times back -to-back which nobody seems to be able to do now.

SUKTUEN
05-01-2007, 04:05 AM
may be Roger will like Andrew win RG later~~

Eden
05-03-2007, 07:44 AM
Pete Sampras talks about his meeting with Roger :)

http://sports.espn.go.com/broadband/ivp/index?id=2857811&catname=Pending%20Review

Eden
05-03-2007, 09:04 AM
From Pete as well ;)


What impresses you about today's men's game?

Two things. Roger Federer's dominance and how great he is. Just the way he handles himself on and off the court is a real credit to all sports. The other thing is I think there are less great players today, but there are a lot more good players. After Federer and (Rafael) Nadal, you look at kind of three through eight -- they're really, really good players but they're not major championship winners, like (Boris) Becker and (Stefan) Edberg, or (Jim) Courier and (Andre) Agassi. Still, the guy ranked No. 50 today is probably better than the guy ranked No. 50 when I was playing.

Anything else about Federer?

He's dominated the game probably more than anybody in the history of the game. It's just amazing how consistent he's been. I think Nadal on clay is kind of his biggest challenge now. Maybe one day he can meet that challenge and beat him.
Agassi recently said Federer needs to win the French Open to complete his resume.
When you've achieved so much - and I fell into that a little bit winning Wimbledons and the U.S. Open and Australia - it's okay, what's next? For the last couple of years of my career, it was, 'Why haven't you won the French?' It's happening to Roger now. And as he gets older and guys get a little better, it does become a little tougher. He grew up playing on clay and he's gotten to the (French Open final). I think he can win it - things really need to fall into place.

What about your generation of tennis?

I was part of an American generation that might have been the best generation ever to play the game, for sure the best American generation. Jim, myself, Andre, Michael (Chang), we combined to win more than 20 majors, we all hit or got close to No. 1 - Michael was a match from doing it. Not only that, but consider the generation of guys we competed against: Edberg, Becker, Ivan Lendl for a little bit. These were truly legends of the sport. Those mid '90s, when I played Andre in the finals of a few majors, it transcended the sport. People who didn't watch tennis were into it when I played in the finals of Wimbledon, or the U.S. Open, and had great matches with Jim. We developed a rivalry. We always had one another to be compared to, but also to push. All of us fed off one another.

Would Federer have held up well in it?

Oh yeah. He would have done just fine. I think he would have more challenges, with guys coming in a little bit more and attacking more. But I think great players figure it out. If he had played in my generation, he would have been right up there.

Source: http://www.sptimes.com/2007/05/03/Sports/Volleying_with_Sampra.shtml

SUKTUEN
05-03-2007, 02:31 PM
Thankyou so much for your kind!! Pete!

tennis2tennis
05-03-2007, 06:23 PM
Right now, there are three mentioned as GOATs: Sampras, Laver, and Borg. Federer is knocking on the door.

Each one of Sampras, Borg, and Laver have strikes against them. Sampras, never won on clay, Borg never won the USO, and Laver won most of the slams on grass where everyone basically played the same way and there was zero competition.
.

finally someone saying it like it is....i'm reminded of something courier once said..."the view always looks better from the rear view mirror", people have a tendancy to exaggerate the past or the achievements of yesteryear players

SUKTUEN
05-04-2007, 10:40 AM
Pete laways support Roger, said he can win more than 14 GS~!

DONADANG
05-04-2007, 11:23 PM
From Pete as well ;)

Source: http://www.sptimes.com/2007/05/03/Sports/Volleying_with_Sampra.shtml

Same old shit from Sampras.

CmonAussie
05-05-2007, 02:48 AM
Rod Laver talking about Federer in the times magazine<:>


Heroes and Pioneers:

Roger Federer

By Rod Laver

The most impressive aspect of Roger Federer's ascendancy to the top of the tennis world is the way he carries himself as a champion. It's quite unusual. He just lets his racquet do the talking. There's no entourage at his beck and call. He doesn't have a bunch of coaches and trainers micromanaging everything he does. Roger has so much natural talent, they would just disrupt it if they muddled his mind. He exudes energy, and you just know he enjoys the camaraderie of all his competitors. Tennis had lost that positive vibe over the years. His game is so spectacular and graceful—I can't tell you how many times I've asked friends, "Did you see Roger's shot last week, the crosscourt winner he hit a zillion miles per hour?" He has this amazing knack for raising his game just a notch more than an opponent. He never gets rattled if he's down. You can only marvel.

Every time I speak to Roger, I sense no ego on his part. He asks me questions about how I prepared for big matches—Roger has a clear appreciation for the history of tennis. (Plus, these days, I should be the one peppering him with questions. He's the big star!) When you're talking to Roger, he makes you feel important—whether you're a fan, an opposing player or an old geezer like me. People often ask me if Roger, 25, is the greatest player of all time. Let's wait until the end of his career before making the "best ever" judgment. He should definitely be in every conversation. One thing is for sure: he's the best player of his time and one of the most admirable champions on the planet. That's certainly something worth crowing over. The beauty is, Roger Federer won't.http://www.time.com/time/specials/20...615743,00.html

SUKTUEN
05-05-2007, 08:04 AM
I love your words!!

Thanks Laver!!!!!!!!:worship: :worship:

Eden
05-07-2007, 03:40 PM
There is an interview with Ivan Lendl in the current issue of the German STERN magazine. I translated it for GM. Here are Ivans words about Roger:


Do you watch tennis at least?

When Roger Federer is playing the Grand Slam tournaments. The guys today are larger, much more athletic and have these killer-shots, which has to do with the advancement of the rackets. Without Federer everyone would say how enthralling the tournaments are. That’s bad luck, but Federer is just to good.

bokehlicious
05-07-2007, 03:43 PM
Thanks Eden ;)

GonzoFed
05-08-2007, 02:16 AM
Lendl always has shown a great deal of respect for Roger. Probably the Rochey connection and the fact they've got a few things in common: both took a little while to fulfill their potential, when they did they turn into dominant players, and also in spite their dominance they had faced syshipean tasks in one GS. Hopefully Roger will succeed against this task, unlike Ivan.

SUKTUEN
05-08-2007, 02:12 PM
Sampras's interview also good~~

refero*fervens
06-01-2007, 11:09 AM
:) From the article rofe posted on GM, "Borg predicts focused Nadal has six appeal" - quotes from Borg on Federer and the rivalry:

--------------------------------------------------
"I know that a lot of people think that Rafa is still the big favourite, but I disagree. I am going to pick Roger as the winner. I watched his first match of the tournament on television, and he looked really sharp, he was playing some fantastic tennis, and I think it would be great for the sport if Roger won this year and beat Rafa.

"Roger's win in Hamburg was huge as it showed that he can beat Rafa on clay, and he will now have such great confidence if he plays Rafa in the final."
...

"The rivalry between Roger and Rafa is what tennis needs," he said. "I had my rivalry with John, and we had a lot of great matches, and I have been enjoying theirs - everyone gets psyched up when Roger and Rafa are playing. It's like a big fight when they are on court.

"Roger and Rafa have different characters, and also Roger is more of an attacking player, while Rafa is more defensive, staying at the baseline and hitting with a lot of topspin, so there is a lot of variety. I know some people have been saying that maybe they are too friendly but that's just off the court. They have a lot of respect for each other. But on the court, you can sense the atmosphere, and they are totally focused on beating the other guy. They love to win and hate to lose."

...

Borg is also convinced that greatness now beckons for Federer.

"A French Open win would definitely put him on the way to being the greatest player of all time," he said. "That would complete his set of grand slams, he would then have 11 majors, like me, and he would still be only 25.

"If Roger wins in Paris I believe that he will go on to do the grand slam this year. The French Open is the toughest one for him to win, but I am not sure who could stop him at Wimbledon and the US Open. It would be great for tennis if Roger does the grand slam, as it hasn't been done since Rod Laver in 1969, and I hope that he does it. That would be such a huge effort - and from such a nice person as well." awww
-------------------------------------



If you'd like to read the rest of the article I'll link it to the thread:
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=103110

SUKTUEN
06-01-2007, 03:08 PM
thankyou!!

Eden
06-01-2007, 08:17 PM
Thanks for including the comment of Borg in here, revero*fervens :)

Here is what Chris Evert had to say about the Roger/Rafa rivalry and who she picks as her favourite to win RG:

Q: How much of the Federer-Nadal rivalry is about the contrast in their images as opposed to their playing styles?

Evert: The beauty of that is they come from two completely different places and they have completely different personalities. Federer's calm, he keeps things inside. Nadal wears his heart on his sleeve, he's more fiery. Nadal is pumped-up and muscle-bound and hyper. Federer's more mainstream. He doesn't look like he'd be an unusual athlete until he goes out there. He's stately. He has so much stature out there. And they have completely different fan bases.

Q: So who's your pick?

Evert: Well, for Tennis Magazine, I picked Federer. It was from the heart, because I hope he wins it. He blows people off the court on grass, he blows people off the court on hard court. He's about 10 percent away from blowing people off the court on red clay. If he were losing, and not really making an effort to get better on clay, maybe I wouldn't feel this way. But I want to pull for him because of the way he conducts himself. He's such a gentleman.

(from ESPN.com)

SUKTUEN
06-02-2007, 02:03 PM
thanks ~!

Eden
06-05-2007, 07:48 PM
I'm sure some of you have already heard what Wayne Ferreira and Michael Stich had to say about Roger:

FERREIRA: FEDERER 'TOO NEGATIVE' ON CLAY

Grand Slam veteran Wayne Ferreira has rubbished Roger Federer's chances of claiming his first French Open title at Roland Garros this week.
The feisty South African - who played in a record 56 consecutive majors between 1991 and 2004 - insists Rafael Nadal remains a cut above the world number one on clay.
And despite Federer's first victory over Nadal on the surface in the Hamburg Masters last month, Ferreira insists only an unfortunate mishap will deny Nadal another crown.

Ferreira told the Blackrock Tennis Champions podcast: "Until Rafa either falls over, gets injured or quits, Roger Federer is not going to win the French Open.
"He (Federer) has become too negative on clay. He doesn't serve and volley enough. He needs to come in more against these guys. He has taken a step back rather than forward, whereas Rafael has improved his game more."

Meanwhile former Wimbledon winner Michael Stich believes Nadal is ready to mount another serious challenge to Federer at the All England Club this year.
Stich said: "I think Rafa will win Wimbledon before Roger wins the French because he is improving his game so intensively on other surfaces.

"Roger needs the weather to be hot to win the French, and he needs to play his own game. He needs to improve his claycourt game still.
"The good thing about Rafa is that he is eager to learn. He plays doubles now as well. I think the greatest player will be the man who wins most on all surfaces."

Source: http://www.sportinglife.com/tennis/news/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME=tennis/07/06/05/TENNIS_French_Federer.html

1sun
06-05-2007, 08:19 PM
blah

nobama
06-05-2007, 09:03 PM
I'm not sure when these comments were made, but these guys show what clowns they really are. After Wimbledon last year Nadal didn't make a final for the rest of the year. He didn't win AO this year. This constant talk of how much he's improving is rubbish IMO. :rolleyes:

These guys are just jealous because Roger will go down as one of the greats and they're barely a footnote.

RogiFan88
06-05-2007, 10:01 PM
do they all have to join the flaming bandwagon? honestly... :rolleyes: does nobody have an original thought or are they all cowards like the journos? :ras:

Marek.
06-05-2007, 10:07 PM
Some people have said that that interview was taken before Hamburg but he still sounds like a fool. If Federer has become so negative on clay then why has he wasted his time preparing more and more for it each year. Besides, what did Ferreira achieve in his career besides showing up at a bunch of Grand Slams in a row?

nobama
06-05-2007, 10:12 PM
What makes me :scratch: is you've got Wilander on the one hand complaining that Roger doesn't have "balls" when it comes to playing Nadal on clay. Now this year he beats Nadal and goes into the French with a determination to try and win there and you've got the likes of Ferreira basically laughing at him saying he'll never win as long as Nadal's around. What's Roger supposed to do? Just pack it up until the grass season?

I hate these B and C list players who never accomplished that much mouthing off about the current state of the game and the #1 player. You don't hear former golfers saying crap about Tiger Woods. I guess they just have more class than these clowns do. :rolleyes:

soraya
06-06-2007, 04:42 AM
The more they talk rubbish, the more our boy will be motivated.

soonha
06-06-2007, 08:32 AM
:rolleyes: Yeah, let them keep talking blah. :ras:

yanchr
06-06-2007, 11:43 AM
I think Stich talked more bullshit than Ferreira.

SUKTUEN
06-06-2007, 12:55 PM
the most bullshit is from Cash.:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

soonha
06-07-2007, 04:49 PM
From Ana Ivanovic's presser after the women's SF:)
================================================== ======
Q. Three years ago, would you have expected the dream to come true? And who were your inspirational favorite players, male or female?

ANA IVANOVIC: I start playing tennis because of Monica Seles. She was my -- she was the woman I always looked up to, and I always wanted to achieve what she did. And also, later on when I start competing and start playing more tournaments, I really admire Roger Federer. He's a great athlete and great person, so I think we can all learn a lot from him. And he brought so much to tennis.

shacklebolt
06-07-2007, 06:49 PM
From Ana Ivanovic's presser after the women's SF:)
================================================== ======
Q. Three years ago, would you have expected the dream to come true? And who were your inspirational favorite players, male or female?

ANA IVANOVIC: I start playing tennis because of Monica Seles. She was my -- she was the woman I always looked up to, and I always wanted to achieve what she did. And also, later on when I start competing and start playing more tournaments, I really admire Roger Federer. He's a great athlete and great person, so I think we can all learn a lot from him. And he brought so much to tennis.

I knew I liked that young lady for some reason!

RogiFan88
06-07-2007, 07:46 PM
isn't it amazing how many WTA players make complimentary comments about our ROGI? I don't necessarily hear or read such comments about other guys.

Sunset of Age
06-07-2007, 11:40 PM
isn't it amazing how many WTA players make complimentary comments about our ROGI? I don't necessarily hear or read such comments about other guys.

I can see a reason or two... ;) :angel:

SUKTUEN
06-08-2007, 02:39 AM
Ana Ivanovic's is a good girl!!:devil:

Eden
06-10-2007, 08:33 PM
From John Lloyd
BBC commentator and GB Davis Cup captain :


As for Federer, there has been some incredible brilliance during these two weeks but against Nadal he has to find a way of combining the power and variety he has with picking the right shots to be aggressive.
At the moment he takes more chances against Nadal than he does other players because he knows who's across the net and unfortunately he can't seem to find the right balance.
He ends up making way too many errors and didn't use the sliced backhand in the final until far too late.
His first-serve percentage in the first set-and-a-half was awful - that would have to change to beat Nadal - and he has to come into the net more.
For me he tried to hit too many big groundstrokes from Nadal's territory - four feet behind the baseline - and I just don't think he can do that. He's got to change his game plan if he's going to beat Nadal in Paris.
But Federer's only 25 and has still got three or four more years of peak tennis. He's too good a player not to learn from this.
I thought he was better this year than last - not as much as we had hoped but he can certainly play better.
I can't count him out of beating Nadal in the future, but it's going to take an awfully big effort to beat him over five sets at Roland Garros.

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/6739393.stm

SUKTUEN
06-11-2007, 11:30 AM
thanks

Rommella
06-12-2007, 12:41 PM
I liked what Nadal said in his presser:

Q. Federer is probably the best player in the world and he's won all three Grand Slam tournaments last year, except that of Roland Garros. Do you think this is something that he can achieve one day?

RAFAEL NADAL: Well, what Federer has done is something that almost nobody has done in history, so what are you going to ask of Federer? What he does is exceptional already. He's played 18, 19 tournaments last year, and he came in final in all of them except one, the one when he lost against Murray. So I know how difficult it is to be playing Toronto, and Cincinnati with the heat and all this. It is the fourth year when he'll try and be No. 1. He's been No. 1 for three years. And last day I was watching the number of points that Sampras had when he was No. 1, I think he had 5500 -- I think it was 4800 points, and Federer has scored 8,000 points. So, I think I don't need to say -- there is no need to say more.

SUKTUEN
06-12-2007, 01:44 PM
thankyou Nadal, Roger will be more strong in next time!

Eden
06-23-2007, 11:21 PM
Thought to post this article here:

Tennis: ‘Hard to see who can beat Federer’
Jun 23 2007

SWEDISH veteran Jonas Bjorkman admits he is uncertain how anyone can deny Roger Federer a fifth consecutive Wimbledon title.
The Swiss swept the evergreen Swede aside at the semi-final stage at SW19 last year before going on to defeat his arch-rival Rafael Nadal in the final – his 48th consecutive win on grass.
The Spaniard gained revenge at Roland Garros earlier this month, denying the 25-year-old a clean sweep of Grand Slam titles, but Bjorkman believes that will count for little if the world number one is anywhere near his best on his return to his favourite surface.
Asked whether the Swiss could be beaten, Bjorkman, a former world number four, said: “It’s going to be tough. He has been so dominant the last couple of years.
“At the moment I’m not sure who is the one to do it.
“Obviously we all need a little help in that he does not play at his best because when he is playing his best tennis he is unbeatable on grass.
“He’s had a tougher year than normal. He’s had a few let downs this year, obviously it gives all the players a little extra confidence that he can be beaten.”
The evergreen 35-year-old has faced legends of the game including Stefan Edberg, Boris Becker, Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi during a professional career spanning 16 years.
But the world number 31, who has lost all five of the previous meetings between the pair, insists he has never faced anyone like Federer.
Asked if the Swiss was the best player he had ever faced, the Swede replied: “I think so. He is playing with such variety and speed.
“You know you have to work really hard to win the games.
“In my semi-final last year it was not about winning, unfortunately it was about fighting for my game because of the way he played.
“I haven’t had that feeling against anyone else I have played before.
“You always felt you could stay with them even though they were fantastic players.
“I think he has the whole package. Pete (Sampras) was an unbelievable player and a great champion, but you still felt you could hold a couple of service games because he was not returning unbelievably well all of the time.
“With Roger, it’s different because he is so good all the time so if you’re a little off he will put pressure on you straightaway in your service games and at the same time is very solid in his own.
“The main difference is you always have to be on your toes when you play Roger. Against someone else you know that you will at least cruise a couple of service games.”

Source: http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0700sports/1160tennis/tm_headline=--8216-hard-to-see-who-can-beat-federer--8217-&method=full&objectid=19345002&siteid=50082-name_page.html

Eden
06-24-2007, 12:00 AM
From an article about Jack Kramer:

Although a few broken bones have limited his mobility in recent years, he has been following the game from the comfort of his home in Los Angeles and, as someone who is better placed than most to analyse players through the ages, he is ready to anoint Roger Federer as the best he has seen.
'I thought Ellsworth Vines and Don Budge were pretty good,' he says. 'And Gonzalez and Hoad could play a bit, too, but I have never seen anyone play the game better than Federer. He serves well and has a great half-volley. I've never known anyone who can do as many things on a court as he can.' Aware of the game's past and being the kind of person he is, Federer will no doubt be honoured to shake Kramer's hand when they meet in the Royal Box. Both members of the same club; champions of similar stature, reaching across 60 years of history.

Source: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/sport/story/0,,2110101,00.html

Sunset of Age
06-24-2007, 12:45 AM
I liked what Nadal said in his presser:

Q. Federer is probably the best player in the world and he's won all three Grand Slam tournaments last year, except that of Roland Garros. Do you think this is something that he can achieve one day?

RAFAEL NADAL: Well, what Federer has done is something that almost nobody has done in history, so what are you going to ask of Federer? What he does is exceptional already. He's played 18, 19 tournaments last year, and he came in final in all of them except one, the one when he lost against Murray. So I know how difficult it is to be playing Toronto, and Cincinnati with the heat and all this. It is the fourth year when he'll try and be No. 1. He's been No. 1 for three years. And last day I was watching the number of points that Sampras had when he was No. 1, I think he had 5500 -- I think it was 4800 points, and Federer has scored 8,000 points. So, I think I don't need to say -- there is no need to say more.

Lovely of Raf to acknowledge his main rival's greatness.
Yes, there IS a reason why I like Rafa as much as I like Rogi! :worship:

SUKTUEN
06-24-2007, 02:12 PM
Roddick 23 June Interview about Roger


Q. What effect has Federer's dominance had on your psyche? When you go into Wimbledon, see that he's done so much here, every year for the last few years, so much in Slams in general, what effect does that have on your psyche?
ANDY RODDICK: Well, I mean, it's disappointing. I mean, you know, I've run into him in latter stages six -- I don't know, a bunch. But at the same time, you know, I know I'm going to get questions about it after every single match, at every single press conference. But I can't do anything about it until we get to that point.
I've said it before. I just want to keep giving myself that opportunity. In order for me to be successful here, I have to beat him one time, and that's kind of the way you look at it. What are you going to do? You wake up, you work hard, you go after it again. That's what I'm going to keep doing.
Q. Until you have to play him, what sense of appreciation do you have for his accomplishments and the way he's done things?
ANDY RODDICK: Well, I mean, it's a broken record. I mean, I can sit here and talk about how much respect I have for Roger all day long. You know, I think that's a pretty easy answer.
Q. You said you can't do anything about it till you play him. What can you do when you do get there?
ANDY RODDICK: I'll get there first.
Q. Slight difference this year. Federer didn't play Halle. Seemed to particularly have taken the French Open defeat in the final quite badly, for a few days at least.
ANDY RODDICK: Did he say that or are you guys saying that?

Q. It's another year, isn't it? It's another French Open final, isn't it? Another defeat. Maybe he's thinking, Am I ever going to win this damn thing?
ANDY RODDICK: Know what that's like.
Q. Any difference this year? Any chink of light because of that?
ANDY RODDICK: I don't know. I think the one thing that we're not privy to, and you guys can read as much into it as you want, was how his body was feeling after that match. If he's beat up, he's not going to go out there and risk an injury at Halle.
I'm sure in a perfect world he would have wanted to prepare there. Obviously he's been successful doing that. I don't know if we're psychiatrists or if we're able to kind of read into his psyche. I promise you, he's one of the most mentally strong guys we've ever seen. I'm not going to throw a pity party for him, I promise you (smiling).



thanks Andy~!:D

Or Levy
06-24-2007, 02:29 PM
Great comments by Andy, he always makes me smile.

SUKTUEN
06-24-2007, 02:50 PM
Great comments by Andy, he always makes me smile.

Andy is a great guy, he is smart and kind!:D

Eden
06-26-2007, 07:48 PM
Borg on Federer
By Alistair Magowan

I think and hope that Roger will equal my record this year - it could not happen to a better person
Bjorn Borg

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42402000/jpg/_42402674_borg203.jpg

BJORN BORG

Born: 6.6.1956
Sodertalijie, Sweden
Wimbledon titles:
1976, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980
Runner up: 1981
Grand Slam titles: 11
Career titles: 61
Prize money: $3,655,751

As Roger Federer steps onto Centre Court this year aiming to match Bjorn Borg's record of winning five Wimbledon titles in a row, inevitable comparisons will be made between the two players.
If the world number one wins he will not only equal Borg's record of 11 Grand Slam titles, but he will have done so at the same point in their careers.
And while they are both renowned for their calm demeanour on the court, they also share a history of being less than graceful in their youth.
"I used to be one of the worst behaved kids on the tennis court," Borg told BBC Sport.

"When I was 11 or 12 years old I played for my hometown club outside Stockholm where I grew up and one day the club arranged a meeting with my parents to do something about my behaviour.
"Swearing, throwing racquets - you name it, I was doing it. My parents were really embarrassed.
"The club decided to suspend me for six months and I was really sad and disappointed because I loved to play tennis.
"That was a great lesson for me at the time. When I came back after six months I did not open my mouth and that's probably where I got my temperament from.
"Sure you have feelings and you get emotional and angry but I kept everything inside because I think I still had that thought in my mind - I didn't want to get suspended again."
The lesson clearly worked. Borg's determination to not get suspended lead him to six titles at Roland Garros and five at Wimbledon, six of them coming during a three-year period between 1978 and 1980.
Of course, the answer to whether he could have added to his total will never be known as Borg walked away from the game, following his defeat to John McEnroe in the 1981 Wimbledon final.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42402000/jpg/_42402676_fed203.jpg

ROGER FEDERER

Born: 8.8.1981
Basle, Switzerland
Wimbledon titles:
2003, 2004, 2005, 2006
Grand Slam titles: 10
Career titles: 48
Prize money to date: $31,237,103

Borg was just 25 when he retired in the prime of his career, the same age as Federer is now.
And although the Swiss star possesses a style that competes on all surfaces, Borg's exit suggests Federer's future may well be down to his temperament as much as his talent.
Federer has admitted he "used to carry on like an idiot" when he was a junior and "was getting kicked out of practice sessions non-stop when I was 16".
But even after winning junior Wimbledon in 1998 he found it hard to deal with the pressure of expectation. "People were coming up to me and telling me I was going to be the next great player," he said.
"But at first I wasn't mentally strong enough and I found myself getting frustrated when things didn't go my way."
That soon changed when he defeated seven-time Wimbledon champion Pete Sampras in 2001, and then went on to win his first title in 2003.
Since then, Federer has remained undefeated in 32 matches on the grass courts of the All England Club, conceding only four sets in the process.
But with such domination over the last four years, the danger is that with only Rafael Nadal posing a threat to Federer - and then only on clay - the same temptation to walk away may linger at the back of his mind.
"I lost my motivation a little bit in 1981," said Borg trying to explain why he quit just a year after what he called his "best tennis".

"I still played good tennis but I did not have the same focus that I had for many years. I always gave 100% and loved to win and hated to lose but if you lose that little bit of an edge it is very difficult to do well.
"Something was missing and for me as a person that is not right."
The concept of "something missing" seems to have perforated Federer's thoughts after his latest loss to Nadal at Roland Garros.
He let slip a clue to his current mindset when he said: "If I had won I would not have had many other goals to chase in my career."
That suggests Federer is not overly concerned with Pete Sampras's record of 14 Grand Slams and it will be interesting to see how motivated he would be should he ever taste defeat on Centre Court like Borg.
With Nadal aiming to improve on his performance last year, that prospect might not be as far-fetched as it would seem, but Borg thinks Federer will be suitably inspired to match his feat.
"This year is going to mean a lot to Roger to equal my record to win for the fifth time so he's going to be more even more focused and concentrated to try to defend his title.
"Federer is a complete tennis player. He is an artist on the court and to beat him at Wimbledon in the best of five sets is almost an impossible task.
"I think and hope that Roger will equal my record this year - it could not happen to a better person.
"He has achieved so many great things in tennis and if he stays clear of injuries, stays motivated and continues at the same pace as he is doing, he will definitely be the greatest player of all time."
Assuming Borg is right, tennis fans everywhere will hope that Federer can prove he has the motivation to carry on beyond the point Borg called it quits.

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/6758285.stm

SUKTUEN
06-27-2007, 03:09 PM
thankyou for your support to Roger, Mr. Borg!

Or Levy
07-01-2007, 09:08 PM
Did anyone see that?

http://www.dailymotion.com/relevance/search/djokovic/video/x2btjx_roland-garros


It's another one of Djoko's imitations (a different one), he's being asked to do Rafa (and he does) and then Roger. He shakes his head and say "Roger? No, no, can't, he's too perfect" and tries to do an imitation of ballet Tennis :)

SUKTUEN
07-02-2007, 11:34 AM
thanks!

Eden
07-22-2007, 06:19 PM
From Mike & Bob Bryan:


This ability to be around at the end — the Bryans earlier made seven consecutive Slam finals in one Open-era record stretch — has afforded them the opportunity to closely observe an artist at work and rest, one Roger Federer.

Nearly more than anyone else in tennis, the Bryans understand the value of promotion of the sport, and they are united in their admiration of Federer's affability and meaning to the game, giving a bit of a peek behind the Wimbledon curtain during the numerous rain delays this year.

"I first remember him in the locker room, singing, yelling at the top of his lungs," Bob said. "Kind of like a school kid. He's still like that."

Mike: "He's one of the most laid-back guys. He's going for his fifth Wimbledon title and most guys would be totally in their own world, nervous. He's just joking around, singing soccer songs. The last five days on the TV, we were watching [Marcos] Baghdatis play [Nikolay] Davydenko.

Bob: "The Cypriots were doing their Baghdatis chants, 'La, La, La.' And Federer got these songs in his head." Mike: "Then right before his match, maybe five minutes before he goes on, he gets in his own world. Jogging back and forth and you can see him snap right in."

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-bryans22jul22,1,5840762.story?coll=la-headlines-sports&ctrack=3&cset=true

Or Levy
07-22-2007, 06:40 PM
OMG, that is so funny. Can't you just see Roger walking around the locker room, singing or humming, with all the guys looking at him like he's mental?

Great story by the Bryans.

SUKTUEN
07-23-2007, 03:22 AM
Roger is a child as always~!:devil:

EternalxJourney
07-23-2007, 05:05 AM
From Mike & Bob Bryan:



http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-bryans22jul22,1,5840762.story?coll=la-headlines-sports&ctrack=3&cset=true

LOLOL! that's fantastic. i'm so glad roger has managed to find a balance between work and play. i love it. keep it up roger!!!

SUKTUEN
07-23-2007, 06:27 AM
Roger is so happy for his life, he is special and smart!!:D :D

Eden
08-02-2007, 06:53 PM
From an interview with Goran Ivanisevic for the Austrian press during the Kitzbühel tournament where Goran was playing in the Seniors Exhibitions:


Sport1: There is much complain that real personalities like a Goran Ivanisevic are missing at the current ATP tour. What do you think about this?
Ivanisevic: It was different earlier on. Tennis has changed and is much quicker today. The whole level of the game is higher as some years ago. Federer and Nadal have raised tennis to another bar. But on the other hand tennis isn't so interesting for many fans nowadays. The athletes are showing great tennis, but they are missing the personality.

Sport1: You have won Wimbledon one time in your career. Roger Federer has already 5 titles there. Do you think that he is the best player of all time?
Ivanisevic: Not yet, but he is probably going to be. He is the hugest talent of all time, that's for sure. He is a man without weaknesses. At least I haven't noticed anyone.

Sport1: One victory is missing in Federers trophy collection: The victory at the French Open. Is he going to achive it?
Ivanisevic: That is going to be very difficult even for Federer. I don't think that anyone in the world can beat Rafael Nadal at Roland Garros.

Sport1: Can Nadal on the other hand be dangerous for Federer on the faster courts? Maybe in Wimbledon?
Ivanisevic: Nadal nearly already managed it this year. When he is further going to improve it can get even tighter next year.

Source: http://www.sport1.at/128+M52c9503ad23.html

SUKTUEN
08-03-2007, 03:34 PM
:worship:

Eden
08-07-2007, 05:16 PM
Ivan Lendl in an interview for a German newspaper:


Now lets talk about tennis: Is Federer the best player of all time?

When he wins the French Open and the most amount at major titles he is the best. But there is also Nadal. Maybe he wins Wimbledon next year. It will be fascinating to follow these.

Would a Lendl in top form have any chance against Federer?

The Lendl of back then not. It would have been difficult for me to cope with Federers variety game. It would have been easier for me with Nadal.

Source: http://www.bild.t-online.de/BTO/sport/2007/08/07/lendl-tennis/interview-toechter,geo=2264788.html

SUKTUEN
08-07-2007, 05:29 PM
:worship:

didadida
08-14-2007, 07:02 PM
thank you for the posts

Naide
08-16-2007, 10:00 PM
From Fabrice Santoro in french tennis magazine

" A few words about Federer to say which champion he is, and who i hope, will win Roland Garros one day because he has more weapons than Sampras or becker had. All the clay specialists, he crushes them, except for Nadal who is incredible.
Humanly speaking, he is exceptionnal, on the court he is humble, he's a great ambassador of our sport.
One of the first message i got after my victory in Newport was signed Federer! "So happy for you. See you, Rodge" and it was very late in Europe.
Often people tell me that he is too smooth, almost too much perfect.
I'm afraid that the crowd may get bored, which would be a disaster because behind all this ease, there is a huge work. Besides, in the locker room, he's not haughty at all."

soraya
08-17-2007, 12:07 AM
From Fabrice Santoro in french tennis magazine

" A few words about Federer to say which champion he is, and who i hope, will win Roland Garros one day because he has more weapons than Sampras or becker had. All the clay specialists, he crushes them, except for Nadal who is incredible.
Humanly speaking, he is exceptionnal, on the court he is humble, he's a great ambassador of our sport.
One of the first message i got after my victory in Newport was signed Federer! "So happy for you. See you, Rodge" and it was very late in Europe.
Often people tell me that he is too smooth, almost too much perfect.
I'm afraid that the crowd may get bored, which would be a disaster because behind all this ease, there is a huge work. Besides, in the locker room, he's not haughty at all."

That is nice of Santoro, thanks for sharing.

SUKTUEN
08-17-2007, 07:06 AM
:worship: :worship:

Eden
08-18-2007, 12:57 PM
Great words from Fabrice :) Merci.

stebs
08-18-2007, 01:58 PM
Great to hear Santoro saying such things and I think the two are pretty good friends on tour. They also bring the best out of each other on court sometimes.

SUKTUEN
08-18-2007, 04:03 PM
August 16, 2007

MARCOS BAGHDATIS






Q. You've pressed him hard twice now the last two times you played. Did you feel like going into today that this was the day you might nail him?
MARCOS BAGHDATIS: Yeah, yeah. I was seeing the match, how it went. I couldn't imagine losing the first set, but I did. Because like I said, before, I didn't take my chances, and that's why maybe the reason is because I didn't like believe in it, I didn't basically he won the first set because of his name. I can say because it's Federer and I just choked.

LCeh
08-20-2007, 12:37 AM
Blake on Roger's performance in Cincy:

Q. He's been taking to three sets a couple times, and didn't look all that good in the final last week. How do you think his game has been?
JAMES BLAKE: It's he's still No. 1 in the world so he's still doing something right. I didn't see any of the final last week against Djokovic, but I know how talented Djokovic is and how great he can play. I'm assuming he played a great match. I don't know how Roger would characterize it, but he did make it to the finals. He did beat some pretty talented players to get there.
I know it may look easy what he does, but I know from experience that it's not easy to beat these type of players the way he has been doing. He maybe looked vulnerable the way he's been taken to three sets, but that just shows how dominate he's been. That that's the standard he's set. That just getting taking to three sets makes it look like he's not playing well.
But I know he's, you know, he's No. 1 in the world for a reason. Hard courts are what he plays better on than clay, so I know it's going to be tough. He's had unbelievable result in finals and I know it's not going to be easy, but I've got take my chances.
If he looks vulnerable then maybe I'll find a way to take advantage of that this week, but you never know.

A bit about Roger's game:

Q. You mentioned earlier trying to attack his second serve. You played him a few times. How easy is it to read the second serve of Federer?
JAMES BLAKE: Not very. There aren't many of his shots that are very easy to read, which is part of what makes him so dangerous. He seems to be able to hit ﷓﷓ kind of prepare the same way as Sampras prepares for his serve. Seems to prepare the same way and be able to hit any shot off his forehand as well.
It seems like he can just create pace out of nowhere. It looks like he's going to just roll the ball in and before you know it it's by you, and that's part of the reason he makes it so difficult. He can create so much spin and so much pace without making it look like it. Similar to a Mariano Rivera when he throws a pitch and it's on you before you know it. It's an amazing talent that and it's part of the reason he's the best in the world.

FedFan_2007
08-20-2007, 01:22 AM
of course, many on the main forum will criticize Blake for being overly reverential to Federer.

SUKTUEN
08-20-2007, 09:04 AM
:D Blake thankyou!!

See you in USOpen too~!

RogiFan88
08-20-2007, 03:30 PM
http://www.tennis-x.com/story/2007-08-20/h.php

Justine Henin on Roger Federer: "There's nothing I don't like in his game, but I like the person most of all. I had the occasion to have lunch with him once and he has an exceptional air about him. He's very intelligent. To be at that level for a long time, you have to be intelligent and serene and calm. And he does everything while remaining very natural and unpretentious."...
;)

neenah
08-20-2007, 04:26 PM
Very nice, thanks for sharing. :)

SUKTUEN
08-21-2007, 04:15 AM
Henin thankyou!:worship:

Or Levy
08-21-2007, 06:44 AM
Andy Ram and Jonathan Erlich about their and Roger's comments.

"Getting a compliment from the greatest player in history is amazing. There is no great compliment. He gave us positive feedbacks all week".

I wouldn't mind it at all if they start winning the same tournaments HE'S winning, like the USO? :)

SUKTUEN
08-21-2007, 09:45 AM
:worship:

Daniel
08-30-2007, 04:14 AM
Link: http://www.smh.com.au/news/tennis/im-ready-for-federer-says-hewitt/2007/08/29/1188067189366.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

I'm ready for Federer, says Hewitt


Ian Munro in New York
August 30, 2007

LLEYTON Hewitt wants another shot at world No.1 Roger Federer after powering through the first round of the US Open in straight sets.

Hewitt admitted Federer deserved favouritism at Flushing Meadows, but after his own strong form in preliminary tournaments he was hopeful of facing him again. Hewitt would need to reach the final to meet Federer, who has won the past 11 matches between the pair - most recently winning in a third-set tie-breaker earlier this month.

It took Hewitt just 97 minutes to despatch his first-round opponent, American Amer Delic. He immediately imposed himself on the contest, winning the toss, choosing to receive and promptly setting up three break points to take the opening game.

He cruised to a comfortable 6-2, 6-4, 6-2 victory after holding 11 break points without being seriously challenged on his own serve.

Hewitt has said it will be months before the influence of new mentor Tony Roche is fully evident in his game, but there were early signs of a shift in tactics in his greater willingness to attack the net.

"A lot depends on the opponent," Hewitt said of his net game. "Delic … doesn't have the best passing shots out there so it was a matter of me mixing it up.

"Roger deserves to be the favourite, but I feel the form I have been in the last couple of weeks … I look forward to hopefully getting another opportunity."

Hewitt predicted that his next match, against Argentinian Augustin Calleri, would be totally different. "Calleri's a great ball striker … likes to go for a lot of winners," he said.

Calleri, who is ranked 58th in the world but has risen as high as 16th, has vowed to play his characteristically aggressive game.

Against Delic, Hewitt said he had consciously varied his serve. "I hit some good kick serves, which opened up the forehand court. I felt like I was playing on my terms," he said.

Delic fired off nine aces for the match, but his game was exposed by 39 unforced errors and Hewitt's steadier strokeplay.

Delic, ranked 71st in the world, said Hewitt did not deserve the underdog status he had been assigned at the tournament, although he lacked the firepower of the top seeds.

"It's tough. The guy does not give you absolutely anything," Delic said. "His consistency just kind of won. I didn't put any pressure on him on his serve games and I was struggling on my serve games."

Hewitt, who varied his own service with more control than Delic, delivered his first "Come on!" as he broke Delic for a second time for 5-2.

He finished the opening set firing in 77 per cent of first serves. Hewitt gave himself a fright when he appeared to twist an ankle trying to run down a break point at 2-2 in the second set, but showed no ill effects as the match progressed. He later said he had hyper-extended his left knee. "I was not 100 per cent for a couple of games after that. It scared me a little bit," Hewitt told US television.

Hewitt moved to the net to set up four break points in the second set. With Delic relying on aces to hold serve, Hewitt finally broke through in the ninth game. He won 19 points from 22 approaches in the match.

The third set was an anticlimax as Hewitt broke Delic twice more, by which time the American's game had broken down. His first-service average had dropped from 62 per cent in the opening set to 48 per cent in the third. While Hewitt hit 31 winners to Delic's 27, it was the scarcity of Hewitt's unforced errors - just 14 for the match - and his dominance on his first serve that set up the win.

■ Serbian Novak Djokovic and local hopes Andy Roddick and James Blake all kick-started their campaigns with straight-sets wins on Tuesday.

Sixth-seeded Blake, who is in the same half of the draw as Roger Federer, had too much firepower for veteran compatriot Michael Russell, winning 7-6 (8-6), 6-3, 7-6 (7-4).

Third seed Djokovic, who could meet Rafael Nadal in the semi-finals for the third straight grand slam tournament, disposed of Dutch "lucky loser" Robin Haase 6-2, 6-1, 6-3. Haase had qualified when Croatian Mario Ancic withdrew with a shoulder injury.

And Roddick, the fifth seed, defeated his friend, retiring veteran Justin Gimelstob, 7-6 (8-6), 6-3, 6-3.

Djokovic is touted as the new "third force" in men's tennis following his back-to-back wins over Nadal and Federer at the Montreal Masters.

"I was playing against a lucky loser but I did not want to underestimate my opponent," he said.

SUKTUEN
08-30-2007, 06:30 AM
Roger Federer
Wednesday, August 29, 2007



THE MODERATOR: Questions.

Q. How do you feel you played tonight?
ROGER FEDERER: I thought it was pretty good. Had a good start, you know. I could control the rallies from the baseline. I was serving pretty well. Of course, a little bit of a hiccup in the second set. The game I got broken, I should have never lost the first point. That kind of put me under pressure. He played a good game after that.
It happens, but the reaction was right there, which was a good thing. From then on, I kind of never looked back. So it was, yeah, a pretty much controlled match. It's nice to have it the first night session, for sure.

Q. Your next match against Isner, decent chance you're going to be heading into some tiebreakers. Your tiebreak record is 19 6 this year. Can you talk about your mental preparation for this, how important tiebreakers are, particularly at a major?
ROGER FEDERER: Actually, I'm not thinking about tiebreaks at the moment, even though I'm playing a guy that serves big and is hard to break. You concentrate more on the fact that you're trying to get the ball back, making sure you serve well, and take your chances when you get them. If you got to go into the tiebreaker, you hope experience pays off and start the tiebreaker in a good way. There's never a guarantee. That's the problem with the breakers. They go ISL seven points. It's never won or lost. That's why you've always got a chance.
It's a dangerous thing, no doubt. But it's best of five sets. It's a long way. Got to be really consistent, you know, mentally and physically at your best to compete at this level. So it's going to be interesting to see.

Q. Does a guy like that have an advantage in a tiebreak with a serve like that?
ROGER FEDERER: Uhm, not necessarily all the time. But usually the big servers do have. So big that you might think, maybe not again, not any more.
Look, he's new, new kid on the block. We don't have much statistics about him, so that's why we don't know.

Q. How much, if at all, have you seen him play and what do you know about him?
ROGER FEDERER: I saw maybe four games, five games today before I went on. So that's all I saw. Yeah, maybe a game against Nieminen. I don't know much about him, no.

Q. Are you going to ask Ivo to practice with you before the next match?
ROGER FEDERER: Doesn't need Ivo to get me ready for that match.

Q. Was there any hesitancy to change color since you've worn blue here ever since you won in '04?
ROGER FEDERER: Yeah, I kind of saw the pictures and I realized they were all always blue. Got to change that. I'm just kidding.
We had the idea of maybe doing something blue at the day, black at the night. I really liked the idea. I thought it really looks cool. In New York you can do such a thing. Nowhere else in the world. I really thought it looked good. I hope the fans enjoyed it, too.

Q. Usually it's a fashion show for the girls. Guys are usually left out of that. You made a statement with the black.
ROGER FEDERER: Yeah, I mean, why not? It still looks like tennis attire. I'm not saying the women sometimes it goes overboard, but sometimes it looks more like a dress to go into the city than go on the tennis court. Of course, it's always going to look that way because they are dresses.
But for me I thought it was a cool mix with kind of the tuxedo kind of looks, all black. Why not? Especially at night. During the day you could never wear a black shirt anyway because it would be too hot. I kind of like to do sophisticated statements. Also at Wimbledon with the jacket, I kind of took a chance. I thought I was going to look like an idiot. But kind of people liked it. I thought actually it was a great idea. So I backed it up this year with an entire outfit, and here in New York with a black one. So it's good stuff.

Q. How can you not be thinking about tiebreaks with a guy that won five matches in a row 7 6 in the third?
ROGER FEDERER: Because you hope you're not going to be in it. You hope you break him early, yeah, break him apart and beat him. That's why if I go into the match thinking only about breakers, this is where we're going to probably be. Then I'm still pretty happy if I'm in the tiebreaker against him because it means I haven't been broken, and the chance is there to be taken.
In practice you sometimes play a tiebreaker here or there. But you cannot practice tiebreakers, like you cannot practice in soccer the shootouts. That you just have to be good enough in the situation itself and be able to be smart about how to play the points.

Q. You have a good record in tiebreakers. What's your strategy going into them?
ROGER FEDERER: Play tough, calculate everything that happened throughout the set, knowing where his weakness is, where his strengths are, go with my strengths. Yeah, take the right decision at the right time. This is what I'm pretty good at.

Q. You said you saw a few games of his. What did you think? Is it going to be uncomfortable to play against somebody so tall with such a big serve?
ROGER FEDERER: In the first round, it's rough, you know. Like I played Karlovic in Montréal. It was windy like crazy. I didn't see a breakpoint. He didn't have a breakpoint. There was no kind of rhythm. There I knew I was going to be stuck in breakers most likely. Now this is already third round. I'm into the tournament. It's a different feeling.
I saw he had a good serve. He's got a good second serve, too. It's going to be interesting to see how I handle that because the trajectory of a big guy like this, tall guy, it's always different. You maybe have to adjust a little bit in the beginning. It's going to be interesting to see how good he is from the baseline. I thought he hit the ball pretty well, but you never know until you face him.

Q. When did you find out he was going to be your opponent?
ROGER FEDERER: During my match.

FastScripts by ASAP Sports

Daniel
09-24-2007, 06:32 AM
Source: Calcutta Telegraph.

Federer is the best: Santoro

Calcutta: Fabrice Santoro, after having spent 19 years on the tour, is entitled to think that he has seen it all. The second oldest player in the ATP top 100 is extremely popular with the crowd.

A day before the start of the ATP meet, the Frenchman averred that the game has changed a lot since he first played at the age of 16. “The game has become so fast, everybody’s fit, everybody’s got a big serve and everybody hits the ball so hard.”

Another important development, says Santoro, who is seeded fifth in the singles draw, is that the modern player is good in every facet of the game. “In the old days, you could say that this player had a weak backhand or a weak serve so you could attack that area… Not any more, everybody is good in every area.”

Santoro, who is scheduled to meet countryman Edouard Roger-Vasselin in the opening round here, is emphatic about Roger Federer.

“Federer is dominating more than Pete Sampras... Since just 2003 he has won 12 Grand Slams and in those 12 wins he has won so many in straight sets.

“He’s strong in every part of the court and always plays the right shot at the right time. He has no perceptible weakness. In my mind, he’s the best ever.”

---------------
Santoro :yeah: :hug:

SUKTUEN
09-24-2007, 02:21 PM
thankyou Santoro ~!

Eden
10-06-2007, 05:42 PM
Some statements from Björn Borg:


I saw you at Wimbledon, hugging Federer. You seemed happy and easy-going, quite different from the Ice-Borg image everybody had of you – but I was also puzzled about why you seemed to root for a fifth Federer title, since Nadal, whose play makes him a natural heir of yours, could also equal your Wimbledon-Roland Garros combo record.

BB - I was not rooting for anyone in particular, I was hoping for a great final and I knew it would be a great match because every time they play against each other they bring out the best. They have completely different styles, they are the two best players in the world, they have a great rivalry and their matches are always great. I enjoy watching Nadal a lot and both are nice, but I said before that it could’t happen to a nicer person if Roger would equal the record. It is a difficult record to beat, but I was hoping Federer would do it.

When Federer beat Sampras in 2001, you called him, thanking him for preventing Sampras from matching your Wimbledon record. But now you wanted him to equal you?

BB - It’s funny, because I didn't think of that when I called him back then. And then there I was (at Wimbledon), thinking, "This was the guy I called before and thanked him, and now he has the chance of equaling the record". That first time I called Roger because he was coached by Peter Lundgren at the time, a very close friend of mine. Federer had the chance to do it this year and he did it. But even Nadal… he was a little bit unlucky, he had a good chance to win and if I have to pick someone to win next year, I pick Nadal. He is the player who can win both on clay and on grass.

Have you been watching all their matches? Can you explain why Roger seems to play under his best when he meets Rafa? For instance, at the Wimbledon final, he only seemed to release himself after that double 15-40 scare in the final set. . .

BB - They have a lot of respect for each other, and Roger knows he has to play his best against Nadal. It’s a different mental aspect for Roger, because Nadal is such a great player, young, strong and it is very difficult to beat him. They both respect each other on and off the court. It’s tough for Federer to face Nadal, but still you see great tennis and that’s the most important thing and the reason why I enjoy watching those guys.

It’s a healthy rivalry, while in the '80s there was a lot of animosity – not with you, because Mac always behaved while playing against you, but between McEnroe and Connors and both against Lendl. Do you think tennis needs that spark - more Soderling-Nadal moments?

BB - Well, I think tennis needs another player at the top. Back then, with myself, Mac and Connors, there were three of us. It would be even nicer three or four at the top, playing against each other throughout the world because it’s unbelievably great tennis. . .

Source: http://tennisworld.typepad.com/tennisworld/2007/10/here-is-part-2-.html

SUKTUEN
10-07-2007, 06:35 AM
:worship:

Eden
10-13-2007, 12:42 PM
There is an article about the current situation from the US tennis. Here are some comments from Mardy Fish regarding Roger:


"The thing about Roger is he's cemented himself as such a dominant player and he's not giving anything away," Fish told FOXSports.com. "When you go out and play Nadal off clay, he's had some losses that (have) been a little eye opening. He's cemented himself as the No. 2 and is an unbelievable player, but he's lost to guys like Mikhail Youzhny, Tomas Berdych and Djokovic on hard courts, so you can walk on court and think, 'This is a match I can win. If I play my game, I can beat him.'

"With Roger, he's been so dominant that he doesn't give anybody that false sense of hope that they really have a shot. That's a big thing for him. There are some guys who feel like they can beat him, he is human, but he's been so dominant that if you see your name next to his on that line on the draw sheet you're not feeling so good about yourself."

"Tiebreakers are such crap shoots, but Roger seems to pick his game up and sees those little openings and he takes it every time," Fish said. "Nadal, Djokovic and Andy think they can beat him. Andy has played him close and if Roger is just a little off, Andy can win that match. James thinks so, too. But Roger has been so dominant, he just squashes all hope."

"It's amazing," said the 25-year-old Fish. "Roger and I are the same age. I feel like with the Americans, we are only going to get better and smarter because it's not like we are playing football and our bodies are falling apart because we're getting tackled. You just have to keep it going and see if Roger slips up and gets a little nicked up like everyone else does. He never gets injured and he picks his spots as to when he's training and when he takes time off perfectly. It's amazing. I don't know how he does it."

Source of the complete article: http://msn.foxsports.com/tennis/story/7324400?CMP=OTC-K9B140813162&ATT=199