Federer's failure to win the French [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Federer's failure to win the French

FedFan_2007
03-31-2008, 05:18 AM
I think when historians will look back at 2005-2007, they will realize how great Nadal was and not hold it against Fed for failing to win those 3 matches. I definitely don't. Nadal is such a monster on clay that it will take a truly all-time special performance for Fed to break Nadal's career undefeated streak in best-of-5 clay matches. But if ANYONE can pull it off, it's Fed. After all, who could've believed anyone could possibly win 3 slams 3 times? Fed is used to breaking records and pulling off the unthinkable. Will it finally happen this June? We'll see.

Action Jackson
03-31-2008, 05:20 AM
We've already got a Federer and RG thread.

Branimir
03-31-2008, 05:20 AM
It will not happen this year. If it didn't happen last few years when Federer played much better, it will not happen this year when he plays totally average. Unless he is really saving freshness for clay season.

FedFan_2007
03-31-2008, 05:24 AM
It will not happen this year. If it didn't happen last few years when Federer played much better, it will not happen this year when he plays totally average. Unless he is really saving freshness for clay season.

I agree that the next few weeks will tell everyone if Fed is ready to still contend for the French. Unlike some others who say he doesn't have to do well at Monte Carlo & Rome, I think he HAS to win one of them(vs Nadal) to prove to himself that he can beat Nadal on the type of red clay that is featured at Roland Garros. Of course, even beating Nadal in a best-of-3 at Monte Carlo doesn't mean anything, unless he does it straight sets.

JimmyV
03-31-2008, 05:28 AM
Fish will win the French this year.

FedFan_2007
03-31-2008, 05:30 AM
Of course first things first, Fed better take the Miami title to have the confidence heading into clay season.

Branimir
03-31-2008, 05:55 AM
Hmmm. Didn't Federer win Hamburg against Nadal to prove himself he beat Nadal on clay? It didn't help.

FedFan_2007
03-31-2008, 08:04 AM
Hmmm. Didn't Federer win Hamburg against Nadal to prove himself he beat Nadal on clay? It didn't help.

I think it's more important to win Monte Carlo then Hamburg. The winner of MC usually wins Roland Garros.

TheMightyFed
03-31-2008, 08:34 AM
Hmmm. Didn't Federer win Hamburg against Nadal to prove himself he beat Nadal on clay? It didn't help.

Hamburg clay is different, with a lower bounce, which helps Roger. But still stopping Nadal's streak on clay was a huge achievement for Roger.
The good thing is that he's gonna have to prove he's still the best and for that he needs to win titles. It's gonna be a great clay season...

keroni
03-31-2008, 08:43 AM
is there actually a correlation between MC and RG?

apart from Nadal, who else has won both of them in the same year? (i'm not history expert)

CyBorg
03-31-2008, 02:26 PM
Lame thread.

Puschkin
03-31-2008, 02:34 PM
apart from Nadal, who else has won both of them in the same year? (i'm not history expert)

Ferrero, Moya, Muster come to my mind without thinking, there must be many more...

elessar
03-31-2008, 02:42 PM
is there actually a correlation between MC and RG?

apart from Nadal, who else has won both of them in the same year? (i'm not history expert)

A lot... Ferrero, Nadal (all 3 years), Moya, Kuerten (in 2001), Muster, Bruguera (1993) so that's 8 in the last 14 years

juninhOH
03-31-2008, 02:44 PM
I think Federer can beat Nadal at Roland Garros. It's not like only "god" can beat Nadal, it all depends on day form.

ionah
03-31-2008, 04:50 PM
never will happen

SwiSha
03-31-2008, 04:53 PM
another useless thread from a useless poster

ionah
03-31-2008, 04:54 PM
nadal for the french

Mansave_75
03-31-2008, 05:35 PM
I think it's more important to win Monte Carlo then Hamburg. The winner of MC usually wins Roland Garros.

That's a FACT, who wins Monte Carlo wins Roland Garros too, :)

RagingLamb
03-31-2008, 07:58 PM
Lame thread.

+1

FluffyYellowBall
03-31-2008, 08:12 PM
Who thought Nadal could be a 2 time wimbledon finalist? Of course hes closer to winning the french then Nadal is to Wimbledon. I wouldnt be surprised.

groundstroke
03-31-2008, 08:35 PM
Nadal is so young yet he looks like he's past his prime?

FedFan_2007
03-31-2008, 09:15 PM
That's a FACT, who wins Monte Carlo wins Roland Garros too, :)

Monte Carlo/French connection(1990-present)

2007 - Nadal
2006 - Nadal
2005 - Nadal
2003 - JCF
2001 - Guga
1998 - Moya
1995 - Muster
1993 - Bruguera

So it happens less then half the time. Maybe it's Nadal's recent total dominance that skews our perspective here. However it's because of the Nadal-factor that Roger must win Monte Carlo to have the confidence of beating him at the other red clay.

Rogiman
03-31-2008, 09:23 PM
French is a lost cause

gusman890
03-31-2008, 09:39 PM
There is a thread with the connection between the clay AMS events and RG somewhere.

Blondie1985
03-31-2008, 09:44 PM
Fish will win the French this year.

AGREED

ionah
03-31-2008, 10:01 PM
French is a lost cause

a lost cause for roger, agreed.

FedFan_2007
03-31-2008, 11:06 PM
Yeah it's all over for Rog. :shrug: He might as well retire.

JediFed
03-31-2008, 11:26 PM
Kuerten did it, lost in the first round of Monte Carlo and won Hamburg and went on to win RG.

I'm not sure if Kafelnikov did it too. All the others are folks like Costa, Agassi and Gaudio who came out of nowhere to win the French Open.