1999 Andre can easy to beat 2006 Roger, Do you agree? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

1999 Andre can easy to beat 2006 Roger, Do you agree?

jcempire
09-14-2006, 03:57 AM
99% Agree.

Why.

I told you 2005 Andre can even to beat Roger one set.

I told you 1999 and 2000 Andre can easy to beat 2005 Roger, may be little tough to beat 2006 Roger/

But I told you 30 years old Andre will easy to beat 25 years old Roger at all games.

robinhood
09-14-2006, 04:00 AM
I'm sorry, but I don't see much difference between 2005 Federer and 2006 version.

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-14-2006, 04:55 AM
Andre is a far superior player in his prime.

Only reason Fed wins is because all other players (not including Nadal) are afraid little boys who need to grow some balls and beat the Fed the Ballet dancer.

GlennMirnyi
09-14-2006, 04:59 AM
Well, the assclown tournament is really making people show up.
:haha:

That's utter nonsense. Andre with that baseline-only game would never beat Roger. Even tough, the comparison can't me made, as we're talking about different generations.

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-14-2006, 05:00 AM
GlennMirnyi you have that contest wrapped up.

Your demented views on Nadal show your lack of logic.

GlennMirnyi
09-14-2006, 05:02 AM
GlennMirnyi you have that contest wrapped up.

Your demented views on Nadal show your lack of logic.

:haha:

I hope I don't face you, because I'm losing for sure. You know nothing about what you're talking... Andre superior to Federer... :haha:

TennisGrandSlam
09-14-2006, 05:02 AM
99% Agree.

Why.

I told you 2005 Andre can even to beat Roger one set.

I told you 1999 and 2000 Andre can easy to beat 2005 Roger, may be little tough to beat 2006 Roger/

But I told you 30 years old Andre will easy to beat 25 years old Roger at all games.


Definitely NOT

Sampras 1994 > Agassi 1999

Roger The Great
09-14-2006, 05:03 AM
I'm sorry, but no. I love Andre and am a huge fan of his, but Roger is a superior player. Andre in 2004 and 2005 hit the ball pretty much as well as he did in the late 90's. The difference was that he didn't move quite as well as he used to.

Take it straight from Andre's mouth. He said that Roger is the best player he's ever faced and that it was tougher playing him than Pete. And Pete had a winning record against Andre.

I just don't see what difference it would have made.

Besides, these versions of these players will never play each other, so it's a un-winable debate.

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-14-2006, 05:06 AM
Federer only beats players who are afraid of him.

He can only beat someone who is not afraid on grass. If he is playing on clay or hardcourt then any player with no fear (Nadal) can beat him.

GlennMirnyi you must be seeded in the top ten with Prima Donna as #1. Too bad you will never reach his insane status. You are and always will be a poor man's Prima Donna. :D

TennisGrandSlam
09-14-2006, 05:07 AM
GlennMirnyi you have that contest wrapped up.

Your demented views on Nadal show your lack of logic.


Fed hater! :rolleyes:


http://www.tennis.com.cn/bbs/uploadFiles/2006-09/13_3857110_1.jpg

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-14-2006, 05:08 AM
Fed hater!

Correction Fedtard hater :D

Roger The Great
09-14-2006, 05:14 AM
Federer only beats players who are afraid of him.


Fear is something that takes time to build in other players. A player needs to develop a certain mystique about them first. What about for most of 2004 at the start of Fed's dominance? He beat pretty much everyone then as well and he hadn't yet achieved his current reputation. :shrug:

GlennMirnyi
09-14-2006, 05:17 AM
Federer only beats players who are afraid of him.

He can only beat someone who is not afraid on grass. If he is playing on clay or hardcourt then any player with no fear (Nadal) can beat him.

GlennMirnyi you must be seeded in the top ten with Prima Donna as #1. Too bad you will never reach his insane status. You are and always will be a poor man's Prima Donna. :D

:haha:
I'm just moderated. I don't express like 10% of my views here or I'd be banned again. I just behave very well.

About the championship, I'm just an amateur there. Of course I'll be seeded, but not higher than you. :worship:

About Roger, you know NOTHING about what you're talking. People are not afraid of Federer, they just have nothing to do against him. His game is just too complete. I know it's hard to think of real tennis when Nadal is your favorite player, but his game is nothing like what tennis is about. Watch some older games and you'll see what's class in tennis.

Fedex
09-14-2006, 05:21 AM
99% Agree.

Why.

I told you 2005 Andre can even to beat Roger one set.

I told you 1999 and 2000 Andre can easy to beat 2005 Roger, may be little tough to beat 2006 Roger/

But I told you 30 years old Andre will easy to beat 25 years old Roger at all games.
:confused: :lol: :rolls: This is so bad, its good.

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-14-2006, 05:25 AM
Heart and fight = real tennis

Glenn that is only 10% of the real you. Wow the 100% must be a legend :worship:

Mimi
09-14-2006, 05:27 AM
i do think most players are afraid of roger, and many lost before they face him :p but i have to admit that its also because he has great skills :wavey:

TennizFan
09-14-2006, 05:34 AM
It is hard to think that Roddick gave up more than a million dollar in US Open final just because of "fear". Furthermore, believing that nearly all of the top-ranked professional tennis players, who earn their living by winning matches, collectively "fear" Federer and thus lose money is even harder. If fear was a major reason, I would expect more players to overcome it and beat Federer, just because the lust for money.

There must be something else in the equation... something about Federer ;)

ServeAlready81
09-14-2006, 05:51 AM
Honestly, the last few matches I've seen between these two it was Agassi's mobility that lost him the match. However, Federer I think would just change his gameplan against a more mobile Andre :shrug:

ServeAlready81
09-14-2006, 05:52 AM
i do think most players are afraid of roger, and many lost before they face him :p but i have to admit that its also because he has great skills :wavey:

Yes, because it took great skill to GET the players to be afraid of him in the first place. They didn't just start fearing him out of no where.

GlennMirnyi
09-14-2006, 06:04 AM
Heart and fight = real tennis

Glenn that is only 10% of the real you. Wow the 100% must be a legend :worship:

Heart and fight are things for gladiators, not tennis.

My 100% would make Prima Donna seem like a Rafatard. :haha:

atpSUPERMAN
09-14-2006, 06:45 AM
:worship: :worship: :worship: Both 1995 Andre and 1999 Andre would beat 2005/2006 Federer. :worship: :worship: :worship:

GlennMirnyi
09-14-2006, 06:48 AM
:worship: :worship: :worship: Both 1995 Andre and 1999 Andre would beat 2005/2006 Federer. :worship: :worship: :worship:

:haha:

bokehlicious
09-14-2006, 07:09 AM
Only reason Fed wins is because all other players (not including Nadal) are afraid little boys who need to grow some balls and beat the Fed the Ballet dancer.

Spot-on :yeah: Roger plays crap tennis, he's no weapons but his 'aura' is that amazing that his opponents (except the Mighty Nadal) always shit their pants before going on court :mad:



:retard:

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-14-2006, 07:10 AM
Spot-on Roger plays crap tennis, he's no weapons but his 'aura' is that amazing that his opponents (except the Mighty Nadal) always shit their pants before going on court

You finally see the light :lol:

bokehlicious
09-14-2006, 07:11 AM
Correction Fedtard hater :D

Wrong. To state such bullshit you're obviously a Fed hater as well :wavey:

hitchhiker
09-14-2006, 07:16 AM
1999 agassi barely beat martin in a USO final (and also got bitch slapped around by sampras the whole 99 summer hardcourt season).......case closed

bokehlicious
09-14-2006, 07:16 AM
i do think most players are afraid of roger, and many lost before they face

That's why Pete will always remain ahead on the GOAT scale, even if Roger surpasses his slam record, isn't it ?

:retard:

DrJules
09-14-2006, 07:17 AM
i do think most players are afraid of roger, and many lost before they face him :p but i have to admit that its also because he has great skills :wavey:

I think most number 1 players have enjoyed this aspect of being number 1.

Mimi
09-14-2006, 07:31 AM
no need to be so aggressive and sensitive, i also praise roger that he has great skills :rolleyes: , when did i mention pete :rolleyes:
That's why Pete will always remain ahead on the GOAT scale, even if Roger surpasses his slam record, isn't it ?

:retard:

TennisGrandSlam
09-14-2006, 07:33 AM
:worship: :worship: :worship: Both 1995 Andre and 1999 Andre would beat 2005/2006 Federer. :worship: :worship: :worship:


I don't think so :rolleyes:

CooCooCachoo
09-14-2006, 07:36 AM
:rolls: No way.

Are you really American, by the way?

bokehlicious
09-14-2006, 07:37 AM
no need to be so aggressive and sensitive, i also praise roger that he has great skills :rolleyes: , when did i mention pete :rolleyes:

When it comes to Fed greatness you're just an Angiel clone and never miss your bashing stuff. Anyway, I'm not being aggressive nor sensitive, reading such bitter comments keeps the fun on here :yeah:

Mimi
09-14-2006, 07:40 AM
i do think you are really too sensitive, i suggest you to read the thread about "roger is not close to tiger", i replied "I think roger is even more dominating than tiger", do you still think i am putting down roger :rolleyes: :rolleyes:?? , its truth that i like pete more than roger but that does not mean i am putting down roger's greatness :rolleyes: :retard:

http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=86073&page=5

When it comes to Fed greatness you're just an Angiel clone and never miss your bashing stuff. Anyway, I'm not being aggressive nor sensitive, reading such bitter comments keeps the fun on here :yeah:

oz_boz
09-14-2006, 08:50 AM
1999 agassi barely beat martin in a USO final (and also got bitch slapped around by sampras the whole 99 summer hardcourt season).......case closed

:lol: :yeah:

Agassi with his ca 2000 run capitalized on the lack of achieving players born in the mid 70s.

1995 Agassi vs. 2004-06 Fed could have gone either way.

moulux
09-14-2006, 10:06 AM
so bored with this kind of thread

missbungle
09-14-2006, 11:10 AM
so bored with this kind of thread

You and me both. There ARE other tennis players besides Federer, believe it or not.

Polikarpov
09-14-2006, 11:46 AM
Heart and fight = real tennis

Glenn that is only 10% of the real you. Wow the 100% must be a legend :worship:

You equate real tennis to heart and fight because that's what the qualities of you favorite player posseses. And because it's what your favorite player have, you try to convince yourself that that's what real tennis is all about.

Have you ever heard of "objective" and "unbiased" opinion?

Peace! :)

Corey Feldman
09-14-2006, 11:54 AM
Federer only beats players who are afraid of him.

He can only beat someone who is not afraid on grass. If he is playing on clay or hardcourt then any player with no fear (Nadal) can beat him.Back in full force talking :bs: mode after recovering from another heartbreaking US Open i see.

next 3 posts in this fed/agassi thread, all about mentioning Jungle boy..
Only reason Fed wins is because all other players (not including Nadal) are afraid little boys who need to grow some balls and beat the Fed the Ballet dancer.
Federer only beats players who are afraid of him.

He can only beat someone who is not afraid on grass. If he is playing on clay or hardcourt then any player with no fear (Nadal) can beat him.

Your demented views on Nadal show your lack of logic.you of all ppl are accusing someone else of demented views?
:haha:

Agassi of 99 wouldnt beat Federer of 06 IMO, face it... he finished his career as a Fed bitch and admitted he was the best he ever played

end of.

Corey Feldman
09-14-2006, 12:00 PM
1999 agassi barely beat martin in a USO final (and also got bitch slapped around by sampras the whole 99 summer hardcourt season).......case closed:lol: :yeah:
little rafa = No2 killa needs to stop the crying and whining and accept Fed is 10 times superior to his two backcourt boring grinders agassi and nadal :D

always this crap from some of these types after Fed cleans up another slam :rolleyes:

jcempire
09-14-2006, 11:09 PM
Of course

1995 Andre is big than 1999 Andre

But, I still have to tell you,

1999 Andre is enough to beat 2006 Roger

30 Andre is just enough to beat 25 Roger

25 Andre is too easy

1994 Pete is also big than 1995 Andre

25 Roger play 25 Pete, He can never win a set.

25 Roger play 25 Andre, He also can't even win a set.

Rogiman
09-14-2006, 11:12 PM
99% Agree.

Why.

I told you 2005 Andre can even to beat Roger one set.

I told you 1999 and 2000 Andre can easy to beat 2005 Roger, may be little tough to beat 2006 Roger/

But I told you 30 years old Andre will easy to beat 25 years old Roger at all games.
Dude, have you taken the GRE test...?
I wonder what your Analytical Writing score is like :scratch:

thrust
09-14-2006, 11:17 PM
I think that a 1999 Agassi would have an advantage over Roger on clay and hard courts, but it would not be easy. On grass, Roger would have the advantage. In 2005 Andre did not nearly have the mobility and physical health he had in 1999.

All_Slam_Andre
09-14-2006, 11:21 PM
I personally think that if two were to play each other and both were in peak form, Federer would win on grass and decoturf, while Agassi would win on rebound ace and clay.

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-14-2006, 11:25 PM
Fedtards :worship:

What hilarious lunatics :D

Keep up the Rafa hate :wavey:

Pea
09-14-2006, 11:29 PM
Of course

1995 Andre is big than 1999 Andre

But, I still have to tell you,

1999 Andre is enough to beat 2006 Roger

30 Andre is just enough to beat 25 Roger

25 Andre is too easy

1994 Pete is also big than 1995 Andre

25 Roger play 25 Pete, He can never win a set.

25 Roger play 25 Andre, He also can't even win a set.

Pattymac?:scratch:

All_Slam_Andre
09-14-2006, 11:29 PM
Fedtards :worship:

What hilarious lunatics :D

Keep up the Rafa hate :wavey:

With all due respect buddy, are you the biggest loser on this board? Everytime a thread title has the word 'Federer' in, you always swarm in. Why? Are you obsessed with Federer? Can't get enough of him can you? You are one of the main contributors to Federer discussion on this board so you must have some sort of admiration for him which you're refusing to admit to. Have you ever thought about praising the players you like (i'm guessing Agassi and Nadal?) instead of criticising Federer?

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-14-2006, 11:51 PM
I just said Agassi in his prime could beat Federer. Meaning Agassi in his prime could beat every current player in this era.

I think that would be called praise :D

P.S. Fun of MTF is making people defensive and Federer fans are the easiest to pick on :D

RonE
11-20-2007, 10:03 AM
*BUMP*

Ah, what a great thread. So many memories :D

Time to pay homage to those who are no longer with us here today :sad:


Andre is a far superior player in his prime.

Only reason Fed wins is because all other players (not including Nadal) are afraid little boys who need to grow some balls and beat the Fed the Ballet dancer.

Well, the assclown tournament is really making people show up.
:haha:

That's utter nonsense. Andre with that baseline-only game would never beat Roger. Even tough, the comparison can't me made, as we're talking about different generations.

GlennMirnyi you have that contest wrapped up.

Your demented views on Nadal show your lack of logic.

:haha:

I hope I don't face you, because I'm losing for sure. You know nothing about what you're talking... Andre superior to Federer... :haha:

Federer only beats players who are afraid of him.

He can only beat someone who is not afraid on grass. If he is playing on clay or hardcourt then any player with no fear (Nadal) can beat him.

GlennMirnyi you must be seeded in the top ten with Prima Donna as #1. Too bad you will never reach his insane status. You are and always will be a poor man's Prima Donna. :D

Correction Fedtard hater :D

:haha:
I'm just moderated. I don't express like 10% of my views here or I'd be banned again. I just behave very well.

About the championship, I'm just an amateur there. Of course I'll be seeded, but not higher than you. :worship:

About Roger, you know NOTHING about what you're talking. People are not afraid of Federer, they just have nothing to do against him. His game is just too complete. I know it's hard to think of real tennis when Nadal is your favorite player, but his game is nothing like what tennis is about. Watch some older games and you'll see what's class in tennis.

Heart and fight are things for gladiators, not tennis.

My 100% would make Prima Donna seem like a Rafatard. :haha:

You finally see the light :lol:

Dude, have you taken the GRE test...?
I wonder what your Analytical Writing score is like :scratch:

Fedtards :worship:

What hilarious lunatics :D

Keep up the Rafa hate :wavey:

Heart and fight = real tennis

Glenn that is only 10% of the real you. Wow the 100% must be a legend :worship:

:haha:

I just said Agassi in his prime could beat Federer. Meaning Agassi in his prime could beat every current player in this era.

I think that would be called praise :D

P.S. Fun of MTF is making people defensive and Federer fans are the easiest to pick on :D

Action Jackson
11-20-2007, 10:08 AM
Allez Federer.

Shirogane
11-20-2007, 10:36 AM
a thirty-year old Agassi would likely beat Federer more often than not...
one just has to see what Nalbandian is sometimes capable of.

TennisGrandSlam
11-20-2007, 12:19 PM
1995 and 1999 Agassi can beat 2003 Federer.

But 2004-2007 Federer will sweep 1995 and 1999 Agassi.

Adler
11-20-2007, 12:26 PM
2006 Federer would beat 2006 Federer. Or vice versa