Will Roger lose a set in the whole tournament? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Will Roger lose a set in the whole tournament?

ORGASMATRON
01-24-2009, 07:17 PM
The way Roger is playing now i wouldnt be surprised if he wins the Open without dropping a set. If he can beat Safin in straights i dont see why he has to lose a set to anyone else. Safin wasnt playing bad, Roger was just on fire. If he plays like this the only person he can lose a set to is Djoke. In the final if he meets Murray i think Murray will be done like he was at the US, cos here his draw is even tougher. Plus its hotter and Murray has the flue. So probably Federer could win in straights there too. Its not like it would be the first time since he wins slam without dropping a set...

Ps. Mods cant move this thread since there is a similar thread about Murray.

A_Skywalker
01-24-2009, 07:18 PM
"If he can beat Safin in straights i dont see why he has to lose a set to anyone else."

This is funny.

Ozone
01-24-2009, 07:24 PM
With a lot of players big serves he will probably get beat in a tie-breaker somewhere down the road. And if Safin put him in one, I assume he will lose 1 somewhere.

Sebby
01-24-2009, 07:24 PM
He'll lose 3 sets in a single match. Believe me.

A_Skywalker
01-24-2009, 07:25 PM
This statement makes Safin look like a good player.

Vin Judah
01-24-2009, 07:27 PM
troll

Dini
01-24-2009, 07:31 PM
Yeah he will lose one or two along the way to the final in my opinion. Murray will be a problem, and if Del Potro plays like he can, the he might be able to take a set off him too. But in the end what really matters is the title, whether you have dropped two sets every match or not lost a single set the whole tournament means nothing in the end, the prize money is still the same, the title is still the same.

Certinfy
01-24-2009, 07:33 PM
Berdych may get a set, considering hes beaten Fed before. But i doubt it.

I'm pretty sure the Del Potro will get a set, due to the way hes playing. If that is the QF.

Djokovic is SF's... Hmm... If this does happen i would say Fed will drop at least a set.

Murray or Nadal in final against Fed... Yeh he'll defo drop a set if not more.

In otherwords. Fed will drop a Set.

MalwareDie
01-24-2009, 07:37 PM
if Del Potro plays like he can, the he might be able to take a set off him too.

Del Potro's flat game is not even remotely threatening to Federer.

moon language
01-24-2009, 07:39 PM
If he can beat Safin in straights i dont see why he has to lose a set to anyone else. Safin wasnt playing bad, Roger was just on fire.

:lol:

jules101
01-24-2009, 07:39 PM
The way Roger is playing now i wouldnt be surprised if he wins the Open without dropping a set. If he can beat Safin in straights i dont see why he has to lose a set to anyone else. Safin wasnt playing bad, Roger was just on fire. If he plays like this the only person he can lose a set to is Djoke. In the final if he meets Murray i think Murray will be done like he was at the US, cos here his draw is even tougher. Plus its hotter and Murray has the flue. So probably Federer could win in straights there too. Its not like it would be the first time since he wins slam without dropping a set...

Ps. Mods cant move this thread since there is a similar thread about Murray.

Where did you get the idea that Murray has flu (unless you were being particularly facetious (sp). He looks pretty fit to me.

Allegretto
01-24-2009, 07:47 PM
The way Roger is playing now i wouldnt be surprised if he wins the Open without dropping a set. If he can beat Safin in straights i dont see why he has to lose a set to anyone else. Safin wasnt playing bad, Roger was just on fire. If he plays like this the only person he can lose a set to is Djoke. In the final if he meets Murray i think Murray will be done like he was at the US, cos here his draw is even tougher. Plus its hotter and Murray has the flue. So probably Federer could win in straights there too. Its not like it would be the first time since he wins slam without dropping a set...

Ps. Mods cant move this thread since there is a similar thread about Murray.
L3ZAwk_gXY8

Clydey
01-24-2009, 07:51 PM
Where did you get the idea that Murray has flu (unless you were being particularly facetious (sp). He looks pretty fit to me.

He does. He mentioned it after the Melzer match. Surely you noticed the massive cold sore on his face?

Diprosalic
01-24-2009, 07:51 PM
i think he will lose a set against every opponent from now on. but just one ; )

habibko
01-24-2009, 08:02 PM
It will be tough against Del Potro, but I can't see him losing a set to Djokovic.

out_here_grindin
01-24-2009, 08:08 PM
Who says Del Potro will beat Cilic?

ORGASMATRON
01-24-2009, 08:20 PM
Yeah he will lose one or two along the way to the final in my opinion. Murray will be a problem, and if Del Potro plays like he can, the he might be able to take a set off him too. But in the end what really matters is the title, whether you have dropped two sets every match or not lost a single set the whole tournament means nothing in the end, the prize money is still the same, the title is still the same.

Exactly. But it would be nice if Roger doesnt lose a set. That would make tennis REALLY intersting.

octatennis
01-24-2009, 08:24 PM
someone is going to beat him so duhh.

habibko
01-24-2009, 08:25 PM
I beat you to it Ruanz

http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=136954

it's a serious discussion, as serious as Nina's thread.

habibko
01-24-2009, 08:27 PM
who says Blake won't beat Tsonga?

acionescu
01-24-2009, 08:28 PM
My take is that he's not losing a set in whole year :rocker2: And that includes Davis Cup :cool:

Quakes
01-24-2009, 08:30 PM
My take is that he's not losing a set in whole year :rocker2: And that includes Davis Cup :cool:

Careful my friend, because he might retire undefeated some time in the year, making your claim true (unfortunately).

ORGASMATRON
01-24-2009, 08:42 PM
Wow this poll is wayyy closer then i thought, i figured people would laugh at me for creating this thread. Now im glad i did :)

tennizen
01-24-2009, 08:48 PM
ruanz33, why did you first copy my signature and then remove it so quickly:sad:

moon language
01-24-2009, 08:49 PM
Wow this poll is wayyy closer then i thought, i figured people would laugh at me for creating this thread. Now im glad i did :)

Your poll question is worded the opposite of the question in the thread title. I almost voted yes because that is the answer to the question in the thread title.

q.j.
01-24-2009, 08:52 PM
if an revelation was to come to you ruanz33, in a dream, that by mentioning fed's name, nickname, or merely by implying at him in a discussion here on GM , that you are exponentially decreasing his chances of winning AO, would you stop...mentioning him, for a higher cause??

and if not, what would have to happen, for you to stop talking about Fed ??
for a day...

Vida
01-24-2009, 08:53 PM
mtf is sinking to new lows...:sad:

ORGASMATRON
01-24-2009, 08:57 PM
Your poll question is worded the opposite of the question in the thread title. I almost voted yes because that is the answer to the question in the thread title.

You forget how smart i am :haha:

Knightmace
01-24-2009, 08:59 PM
Exactly. But it would be nice if Roger doesnt lose a set. That would make tennis REALLY intersting.
He did it in 2007. :)

Knightmace
01-24-2009, 09:00 PM
ruanz33, why did you first copy my signature and then remove it so quickly:sad:
hes an idiot

ORGASMATRON
01-24-2009, 09:02 PM
ruanz33, why did you first copy my signature and then remove it so quickly:sad:

Glad you asked. I love your quote its the best on this forum. I found the 'Am I Evil?' video from Roger by chance though and i just had to put it up. At least until the end of the Open when Murray finally get the message :devil:

ORGASMATRON
01-24-2009, 09:03 PM
He did it in 2007. :)

Wow you genius you how did you know that?!

tennizen
01-24-2009, 09:04 PM
Glad you asked. I love your quote its the best on this forum. I found the 'Am I Evil?' video from Roger by chance though and i just had to put it up. At least until the end of the Open when Murray finally get the message :devil:

Ah, I see. Thanks for explaining. As long as you understood the meaning behind the quote, it doesn't matter.

ORGASMATRON
01-24-2009, 09:07 PM
if an revelation was to come to you ruanz33, in a dream, that by mentioning fed's name, nickname, or merely by implying at him in a discussion here on GM , that you are exponentially decreasing his chances of winning AO, would you stop...mentioning him, for a higher cause??

and if not, what would have to happen, for you to stop talking about Fed ??
for a day...

Answer to your first question is yes. But by mentioning Fed in a positive way im actually increasing his chances.

No comment to your second question, it doesnt merit an answer :)

q.j.
01-24-2009, 09:13 PM
Answer to your first question is yes. But by mentioning Fed in a positive way im actually increasing his chances.



:clap2:

No.

Knightmace
01-24-2009, 09:21 PM
Wow you genius you how did you know that?!
I didn't mean that, jeez!

I meant he did it in 2007 so why not do it again.

biological
01-24-2009, 09:25 PM
He can do it, I know he can. C'mon Fedex!

ORGASMATRON
01-24-2009, 09:28 PM
I didn't mean that, jeez!

I meant he did it in 2007 so why not do it again.

Nevermind that, you called me an idiot. I expect more class from a Fedfan.

FedFan_2007
01-24-2009, 09:28 PM
Not likely he can str8 sets Berdych/Del Potro/Nole/Murray/Nadal. Heck I'd be happy with just winning the damn title, who cares about sets?

ORGASMATRON
01-24-2009, 09:30 PM
Heck I'd be happy with just winning the damn title

Would you now?

FedFan_2007
01-24-2009, 09:31 PM
Would you now?

At this point I'm not looking ahead of Berdych. He's beaten Feds before and is always a super danger on hard courts.

ORGASMATRON
01-24-2009, 09:34 PM
At this point I'm not looking ahead of Berdych. He's beaten Feds before and is always a super danger on hard courts.

You misunderstood what i meant. I think your just concerned about success, you dont care for Roger. If he doesnt win the Open youll say something like "Roger is done, he should retire and kill himself while he's at it".

FedFan_2007
01-24-2009, 09:37 PM
You misunderstood what i meant. I think your just concerned about success, you dont care for Roger. If he doesnt win the Open youll say something like "Roger is done, he should retire and kill himself while he's at it".

I never said Roger should retire if he fails to win this slam. However, it will be quite ominous for his chances to surpass 14 if he doesn't.

ORGASMATRON
01-24-2009, 09:37 PM
if an revelation was to come to you ruanz33, in a dream, that by mentioning fed's name, nickname, or merely by implying at him in a discussion here on GM , that you are exponentially decreasing his chances of winning AO, would you stop...mentioning him, for a higher cause??

and if not, what would have to happen, for you to stop talking about Fed ??
for a day...

Instead of replying to your second question let me ask you a question. If it wasnt me posting about Roger but different people all the time, would it still bother you? By answering this question honestly you will know wether you are full of shit or not.

sammy01
01-24-2009, 09:41 PM
He'll lose 3 sets in a single match. Believe me.

i have to agree with this, don't see him winning the oz open so hes gonna lose 3 in one match.

ORGASMATRON
01-24-2009, 09:41 PM
I never said Roger should retire if he fails to win this slam. However, it will be quite ominous for his chances to surpass 14 if he doesn't.

Not really. He has about 5 more years to be a serious contender at slams and he has made it clear that he will still be motivated for a long time to come. The AO isnt even his favorite slam, he's got a better chance at wimby and the US. Breaking Pete's record is a given.

yavore
01-24-2009, 09:42 PM
Exactly. But it would be nice if Roger doesnt lose a set. That would make tennis REALLY intersting.

Yes indeed. And even more interesting would be if frau pederer is gifted every single tounrney she plays. What a pathetic disgusting arsekissing dependence in it's ugliest form.

Knightmace
01-24-2009, 09:42 PM
Nevermind that, you called me an idiot. I expect more class from a Fedfan.
So I have tio always say something nice to you always?

Knightmace
01-24-2009, 09:43 PM
Nevermind that, you called me an idiot. I expect more class from a Fedfan.
So I have tio always say something nice to you always?

q.j.
01-24-2009, 09:45 PM
Instead of replying to your second question let me ask you a question. If it wasnt me posting about Roger but different people all the time, would it still bother you? By answering this question honestly you will know wether you are full of shit or not.

What's in a name?
that which we call a troll
By any other name would troll as sweet
:zzz:

ORGASMATRON
01-24-2009, 09:49 PM
What's in a name?
that which we call a troll
By any other name would troll as sweet
:zzz:

:rolleyes:

finishingmove
01-24-2009, 10:12 PM
who says federer will beat berdych?

Certinfy
01-24-2009, 10:19 PM
Lol @ u 2 guys:

Cilic Beating Del Potro.
Berdych Beating Federer

But yh it can happen :P

scarecrows
01-24-2009, 10:32 PM
who says mono wont be back?

finishingmove
01-24-2009, 10:34 PM
don't jinx poor rogi like that

Rafa = Fed Killa
01-24-2009, 11:01 PM
and people wonder why I hate FedTards.

Delusional scum of the Earth.

meihaditalab
01-24-2009, 11:04 PM
In fact he's not going to be dropping a set but 3 in his next match

ORGASMATRON
01-24-2009, 11:05 PM
and people wonder why I hate FedTards.

Delusional scum of the Earth.

Funny coming from a guy whose username makes no sense. 10/18 matches on clay, Rafa's gay favorite surface. Roger leading Rafa in both hard an grass.

MalwareDie
01-24-2009, 11:08 PM
In fact he's not going to be dropping a set but 3 in his next match

Computing possibility of this scenario... possibility has been found to be 0%.

ORGASMATRON
01-24-2009, 11:13 PM
Computing possibility of this scenario... possibility has been found to be 0%.

Correction, possibility of Roger lsoing a set is 0%. There is a small possibility that Berdych will in fact not win a game. And an extremely slim possibility that he wont win a point, but its there.

amonb
01-24-2009, 11:18 PM
Feds gonna struggle against novak in the semis and if he gets through that then murrays gonna smash him in the final.... Simple.

habibko
01-24-2009, 11:20 PM
who says mono wont be back?

I'm hearing something like Murray is getting the flu and stuff, sounds like he is having mono or something.

ORGASMATRON
01-24-2009, 11:21 PM
Nah he'll beat Djoke in four and Murray should he get there wont be able to walk.

habibko
01-24-2009, 11:33 PM
you know, comparing ruanz with FedFan2007, I'm starting to love FedFan, he is so adorable, really.

ORGASMATRON
01-24-2009, 11:44 PM
you know, comparing ruanz with FedFan2007, I'm starting to love FedFan, he is so adorable, really.

Are you male or female?

FedFan_2007
01-24-2009, 11:55 PM
you know, comparing ruanz with FedFan2007, I'm starting to love FedFan, he is so adorable, really.

Then I can count on your support in 2009 ACC? :cool:

ORGASMATRON
01-25-2009, 12:01 AM
Then I can count on your support in 2009 ACC? :cool:

Lol your actually kinda funny sometimes :shrug:

DekuTheEvilClown
01-25-2009, 12:02 AM
Not really. He has about 5 more years to be a serious contender at slams and he has made it clear that he will still be motivated for a long time to come. The AO isnt even his favorite slam, he's got a better chance at wimby and the US. Breaking Pete's record is a given.


I'd be curious to know your rationale for believing that fed can still be competitive in GS's at age 32.

Over the last 30 years 75% of GS's have been won by people aged 20-26. With 22 being the peak age for winning a slam. Stats consistantly show that the peak ages of a tennis player is much earlier than in many other sports. Although there are anomolys as always players like agassi make sense when you take into account he only really dedicated himself and worked hard when he got older. In fact when you look at the stats closely it implys that it's not actually age it is tied to but the amount of time a player has been at their peak and deicated 100% to the game.

Fed's been giving it everything he has since a teenager. Imo there's no way he'll still be competitve in even 3-4 years.

Players like edberg, borg, macenroe, willander etc never won a single slam at 27 or older. All dominated in early 20's then slowly got caught up and passed over and left behind.

habibko
01-25-2009, 12:02 AM
Are you male or female?

if you cared enough to know you would have checked my profile before asking.

Then I can count on your support in 2009 ACC? :cool:

NO.

ORGASMATRON
01-25-2009, 12:13 AM
I'd be curious to know your rationale for believing that fed can still be competitive in GS's at age 32.

Over the last 30 years 75% of GS's have been won by people aged 20-26. With 22 being the peak age for winning a slam. Stats consistantly show that the peak ages of a tennis player is much earlier than in many other sports. Although there are anomolys as always players like agassi make sense when you take into account he only really dedicated himself and worked hard when he got older. In fact when you look at the stats closely it implys that it's not actually age it is tied to but the amount of time a player has been at their peak and deicated 100% to the game.

Fed's been giving it everything he has since a teenager. Imo there's no way he'll still be competitve in even 3-4 years.

Players like edberg, borg, macenroe, willander etc never won a single slam at 27 or older. All dominated in early 20's then slowly got caught up and passed over and left behind.

Thanks for the reply, ts not often that you get to have an intelligent conversation here. I say this because Roger bloomed late, he was like 23 or 24 before he started coming into hs own. A player of Feds caliber dont stay at the top for just 4 years. He might not stay at nr 1 all this time but he'll be a contender at slams for a long time to come if he wants it, and he does. Im not even convinced last year was a decline, e was sick at the start of the year and had to work his way back to form slowly. If he wins the AO we might as well say he was just in a slump, i mean two slams in a row is pretty much the old Fed.

If Fed wins the AO thers no telling how many slams he can still win, and judging by his current form that can easily happen. Another thing to consider is Roger's talent, talent is something that never fades. Players can get better at playing him but he will still have that magic factor. So mentally and talent wise he's still fine for a long time, the only thing is physical. I think Roger has got a great physique and he's probably taking care of it real well. So yes i think he can still compete for slams at 32, if Agassi did it ge can surely. He gets a lot more cheap points then Agassi did on his serve.

DekuTheEvilClown
01-25-2009, 12:23 AM
The talent vs hardworker is something that is discussed a lot. The general belief is always the natural talented player will last longer.

This is not actually the case so far though. Macenroe is the closest thing in the open era to fed probably. He was an absolute genius with a racket but faded quickly in his mid 20's. Whereas mentally strong hard working grinders like lendl and connors are the top level players who've managed the longest careers at the top level.

I think fed can push for the no.1 spot this year. After that though, I'm leaning towards the belief he doesn't have a whole lot left after that.

Also i'd say fed peaked at 22, right on the ball. He won wimbledon at 21 then the next year won 3 out of 4 for the first time.

ORGASMATRON
01-25-2009, 12:33 AM
The talent vs hardworker is something that is discussed a lot. The general belief is always the natural talented player will last longer.

This is not actually the case so far though. Macenroe is the closest thing in the open era to fed probably. He was an absolute genius with a racket but faded quickly in his mid 20's. Whereas mentally strong hard working grinders like lendl and connors are the top level players who've managed the longest careers at the top level.

I think fed can push for the no.1 spot this year. After that though, I'm leaning towards the belief he doesn't have a whole lot left after that.

Also i'd say fed peaked at 22, right on the ball. He won wimbledon at 21 then the next year won 3 out of 4 for the first time.

Well actualy i had my facts wrong there a little so Roger started coming into his own at about 22. I just think Roger is so talented that he will be able to stay there. Mcenroe was a different situation because he was a bit of a nutcase and the modern game started catching up with him. I dont see that happening to roger really. And the is so many workhorses who burned out, Hewitt, Courier, Chang etc. Roger is hard working enough to stay in there but doesnt work too hard. He's playing less tournaments and looking after himself. Whatever the case may be i think a lot depends on the AO now. If Murray makes the final and beat Fed that would not be a good thing for him. He needs to hold of Murray and a good way to do that would e to win the AO, whether Murray makes it to the final or not.

RagingLamb
01-25-2009, 12:36 AM
he's gonna get a quality opponent sooner or later

ORGASMATRON
01-25-2009, 12:38 AM
he's gonna get a quality opponent sooner or later

Safin isnt a quality opponent? I think people are overlooking the fact that Roger was his old self again in that match.

prima donna
01-25-2009, 12:53 AM
Suffice to say, yes.

shawshank
01-25-2009, 01:03 AM
"Safin wasnt playing bad, Roger was just on fire. If he plays like this the only person he can lose a set to is Djoke"
Yeah, sure, you mean Safin is the same stuff like Rafa, Nole or Murray?
I really can't see Roger wining this title. If you say about Fed's form that is high, what do you have to say about Rafa'a form? It is even higher and I still think that Rafa won't win it!

Vin Judah
01-25-2009, 01:05 AM
fed is not gonna lose a set until finals

ORGASMATRON
01-25-2009, 01:27 AM
"Safin wasnt playing bad, Roger was just on fire. If he plays like this the only person he can lose a set to is Djoke"
Yeah, sure, you mean Safin is the same stuff like Rafa, Nole or Murray?
I really can't see Roger wining this title. If you say about Fed's form that is high, what do you have to say about Rafa'a form? It is even higher and I still think that Rafa won't win it!

Fed will toy with Rafa in this form. It doesnt matter who you put in front of him. Put Murray at his very best there and Fed will **** him.

FedFan_2007
01-25-2009, 01:29 AM
Lol your actually kinda funny sometimes :shrug:

What I learned from Barack Obama is that it is NEVER to early to start campaigning... :devil:

FedFan_2007
01-25-2009, 01:30 AM
Fed will toy with Rafa in this form. It doesnt matter who you put in front of him. Put Murray at his very best there and Fed will **** him.

That's what the Raftards, Noletards and MurrayTards don't get. Jesus Fed can't be beaten by anyone. They can beat MonoFed and son of MonoFed, but not JesusFed.

groundstroke
01-25-2009, 01:31 AM
i only see 2 people being able to beat federer
Nadal - 100% sure
Murray - 60% sure

Djokovic has no chance against him.

ORGASMATRON
01-25-2009, 01:31 AM
Well you pissed me off at the start but i came to the conclusion that its better to have you around and laugh at how you piss off the others :lol:

ORGASMATRON
01-25-2009, 01:34 AM
i only see 2 people being able to beat federer
Nadal - 100% sure
Murray - 60% sure

Djokovic has no chance against him.

I cant agree. I honestly think Fed is on a mission and can ose to Nadal here. But i doubt anyway Nadal will make the finals, i think Murray, Zonga, Simon and Monfils all have a better chance.

Nathaliia
01-25-2009, 01:37 AM
i only see 2 people being able to beat federer
Nadal - 100% sure
Murray - 60% sure

Djokovic has no chance against him.

I see that maths stepped down on MTF today

Nadal 60% sure
Murray 100% sure for me

:scratch:

groundstroke
01-25-2009, 01:41 AM
I cant agree. I honestly think Fed is on a mission and can ose to Nadal here. But i doubt anyway Nadal will make the finals, i think Murray, Zonga, Simon and Monfils all have a better chance.
ive watched federer for too long to see him losing to Monfils or Tsonga.. Simon is very unlikely, and then you get Murray and Nadal

did you see when nadal first defeated federer in 2004? (when rafa was a teenager) that match dealt huge psychological blows to federer, if only he had won that match... nadal is a terrible match up for him, he has to play very good to beat him, and federer cant play very good every match

as for murray, he's getting fitter and smarter, before federer would completely outclass him, he still does in Grand Slams, but in the smaller tournaments Murray is catching up, 4 straight wins against Federer... shows confidence

I would rather Nadal beat Federer than Murray, Murray is everything tennis should not be; boring and dull as hell.

You may not know, but I have a strong dislike to Nadal, and just like last year when no one saw it coming, I really do hope someone like Tsonga absolutely rapes him in the upcoming matches, but I can only see Murray doing that. Nadal is phenomenal at the moment.

FedFan_2007
01-25-2009, 01:42 AM
Nadal 0% sure
Murray 0% sure

Feds will take this, 100% guaranteed now.

groundstroke
01-25-2009, 01:43 AM
I see that maths stepped down on MTF today

Nadal 60% sure
Murray 100% sure for me

:scratch:

oh look, you're from Scotland... well.. no bias there...

Murray is too inconsistent to be 100% sure of beating Federer, while everyone will put their money on Nadal beating Federer on just about any surface

Can you take the same risk with Murray? Nope.

ORGASMATRON
01-25-2009, 01:49 AM
ive watched federer for too long to see him losing to Monfils or Tsonga.. Simon is very unlikely, and then you get Murray and Nadal

did you see when nadal first defeated federer in 2004? (when rafa was a teenager) that match dealt huge psychological blows to federer, if only he had won that match... nadal is a terrible match up for him, he has to play very good to beat him, and federer cant play very good every match

as for murray, he's getting fitter and smarter, before federer would completely outclass him, he still does in Grand Slams, but in the smaller tournaments Murray is catching up, 4 straight wins against Federer... shows confidence

I would rather Nadal beat Federer than Murray, Murray is everything tennis should not be; boring and dull as hell.

You may not know, but I have a strong dislike to Nadal, and just like last year when no one saw it coming, I really do hope someone like Tsonga absolutely rapes him in the upcoming matches, but I can only see Murray doing that. Nadal is phenomenal at the moment.

I made a typo in my previous post, i meant that Nadal canT beat Roger here and i stand by that. I just feel he is due for a win and anyways Nadal wont make the finals, it will be one of the other four i mentiones. Nadal is too shit on hard court i feel. Last year Tsonga owned him and Murray beat him in the US. Im hoping hoping Tsonga makes the finla cos that should be the easiest match up for Fed.

groundstroke
01-25-2009, 01:56 AM
Easiest match up for Federer? Just about every player except Nadal, and who says Murray will make the final?

If Federer is to prove he is the greatest, he must prove he can beat players that are on the verge of becoming better if not just as good as him (Nadal).

Beating Nadal in the final, 6-2 6-3 7-5 or something like that, and well, the media would go bat-shit crazy.

But a 3 set victory over someone like Tsonga? Then you get the same delusional shit on MTF about how Federer gets the usual terrible player in the final. Just like he had Safin and Baggy in AO, Hewitt in USO, Nadal a couple of years back at grass. THis is all MTF logic. So I'd rather Fed beating Nadal than anyone.

FedFan_2007
01-25-2009, 02:00 AM
Easiest match up for Federer? Just about every player except Nadal, and who says Murray will make the final?

If Federer is to prove he is the greatest, he must prove he can beat players that are on the verge of becoming better if not just as good as him (Nadal).

Beating Nadal in the final, 6-2 6-3 7-5 or something like that, and well, the media would go bat-shit crazy.

But a 3 set victory over someone like Tsonga? Then you get the same delusional shit on MTF about how Federer gets the usual terrible player in the final. Just like he had Safin and Baggy in AO, Hewitt in USO, Nadal a couple of years back at grass. THis is all MTF logic. So I'd rather Fed beating Nadal than anyone.

Ah no I'd rather not play Nadal right now. :o:o

groundstroke
01-25-2009, 02:04 AM
Ah no I'd rather not play Nadal right now. :o:o

then federer isn't the greatest, if you're scared of him playing nadal, what does that tell you about your character and what you think of fed's feeling towards nadal?

i remember a lot of people thinking "federer is finished" when he was 2 sets down against nadal in the wimb 08 final and i remember people criticising his BH heavily, but you know what federer did? he dug deep in, really deep in and showed unbelievable mental toughness to come up with 2 sets

now he must do that again, because just like he was 2 sets to love down to rafa last year at wimbledon, no one believes in him when he plays nadal

i would rather federer faced nadal than anyone. he is the closest player to knock nadal out while playing beautiful tennis at the same time.

ORGASMATRON
01-25-2009, 02:17 AM
then federer isn't the greatest, if you're scared of him playing nadal, what does that tell you about your character and what you think of fed's feeling towards nadal?

i remember a lot of people thinking "federer is finished" when he was 2 sets down against nadal in the wimb 08 final and i remember people criticising his BH heavily, but you know what federer did? he dug deep in, really deep in and showed unbelievable mental toughness to come up with 2 sets

now he must do that again, because just like he was 2 sets to love down to rafa last year at wimbledon, no one believes in him when he plays nadal

i would rather federer faced nadal than anyone. he is the closest player to knock nadal out while playing beautiful tennis at the same time.

I can see where your coming from. However for me Murray is a bigger danger then Rafa at the moment when it comes to Fed. So if i knew Federer was going to win id want Murray to be there. That would just be so sweet in the mouth. But i agree with you Rafa would be very sweet as well. I remeber last year they asked Roger who he would wana play in the Us final and he said Nadal without a doubt. So i dont think he's scared of Rafa at all. Roger isnt scared of anyone, he said himself he fears no one but respects everyone. Sometimes i feel watching him is more of a torture then what he is going through himslef when he is playing a tight match. I think if he played Murray in the final it would be nerve wrecking to watch so id prefer he plays Rafa actually, but not because i dont believe in his abilities to beat Murray.

Aight i should go to sleep and continue this stimulating discusiion when i get up in a few hours to watch Fed :sleep:

groundstroke
01-25-2009, 02:39 AM
murray is too inexperienced in GS finals, remember the bagel Nadal received at Wimbledon in 2006 from Fed? it takes a while to compete with federer in grand slams. hence why i think nadal is a bigger danger... i think we can agree to disagree :P

ORGASMATRON
01-25-2009, 02:45 AM
murray is too inexperienced in GS finals, remember the bagel Nadal received at Wimbledon in 2006 from Fed? it takes a while to compete with federer in grand slams. hence why i think nadal is a bigger danger... i think we can agree to disagree :P

Well im not necessarily disagreeing with you, if i did then this conversation would mean nothing. What you just said in this post is a very valid point. I just feel that Murray has a bit of a hold on Fed atm, but hoping thats still not the case in a slam final.

Rafa = Fed Killa
01-25-2009, 03:30 AM
Funny coming from a guy whose username makes no sense.

12 > 6

Spartan > Pansy

Rafa > Fed the ballet boy

ORGASMATRON
01-25-2009, 03:33 AM
12 > 6

Spartan > Pansy

Rafa > Fed the ballet boy

13>12>5

Talent>Moonballing

Jesusfed>Nadull

pwnage

ORGASMATRON
01-25-2009, 03:52 AM
http://www.atpworldtour.com/5/images/deuce/january2009/federer2_750.jpg

Serenidad
01-25-2009, 05:02 AM
Yes, Fred will.

Warrior
01-25-2009, 05:02 AM
This thread is definately a perfect jinx

RagingLamb
01-25-2009, 05:07 AM
http://www.atpworldtour.com/5/images/deuce/january2009/federer2_750.jpg


http://www.tennisthoughts.com/images/roger-federer-lost.jpg

asmazif
01-25-2009, 05:09 AM
Yep. About 10 minutes ago.

finishingmove
01-25-2009, 05:09 AM
fed picked up some new antics.

a facepalmish gesture

Clydey
01-25-2009, 05:13 AM
:haha:

You tool, Ruanz.

shawshank
01-25-2009, 05:15 AM
Hahaha!!!
Sorry that I lough but it is so funny :)
Somebody has just lost a set. How is it possible? And he is still playing like a crap.
Yeah, but he beat Safin in straight so he must win the whole tourney... :devil:

Clydey
01-25-2009, 05:16 AM
fed picked up some new antics.

a facepalmish gesture

I don't know why, but when I think of you this is the image I get. Maybe it has something to do with the furry creature reminding me of a wombat, but you definitely look like Marin Cilic in my head.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/media/photo/2008-04/37965401.jpg

GugaF1
01-25-2009, 05:17 AM
this is funny, radical Fedfans talking about Fed not losing set, while he is in the fight of his life in here. Berdych is playing really well.

Serenidad
01-25-2009, 05:17 AM
Fred. :rolls: