Federer is the greatest [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Federer is the greatest

Love
09-13-2004, 12:06 AM
He already has 4 slams, plus he's won 3 slams in the same year something that Sampras and Agassi never accomplished. In a few years he'll be past Agassi and going for Pete's record.

Plus, he has a 4-3 record over Agassi and 1-0 record over Sampras. Roger Federer is the greatest and by the time he's through he will leave all the other so-called champions in the dust.

Even now, you see people like Agassi and McEnroe bow to him and speak highly of him as if he's in another league. Agassi saying that for him to beat the King, he has to play perfect and the king has to have an off day. McEnroe saying that his wish as a tennis player would have been to be as good as Federer.

Roger Federer is the ultimate. Roger Federer is tennis. Roger Federer is success. Roger Federer is GOD.

alfonsojose
09-13-2004, 12:07 AM
JesusFed loves u too, Love. Keep praying for him :angel:

Tennis Fool
09-13-2004, 12:08 AM
What? No sex innuedos? :(

Dirk
09-13-2004, 12:09 AM
I WILL KEEP PRAYING TO JESUS!!!!!!!!!!! :worship:

Goenitz_196
09-13-2004, 12:09 AM
He already has 4 slams, plus he's won 3 slams in the same year something that Sampras and Agassi never accomplished. In a few years he'll be past Agassi and going for Pete's record.

Plus, he has a 4-3 record over Agassi and 1-0 record over Sampras. Roger Federer is the greatest and by the time he's through he will leave all the other so-called champions in the dust.

Wow. 1-0 over Pete, and that was the time when Sampras was going downhill anyway.

raghu
09-13-2004, 12:10 AM
I wouldn't say he is the greatest. Time will tell. But He is by far the most talented player I have ever seen. I don't think any body would have a chance if he plays like he did in 1st and 3rd sets today.

Raquel
09-13-2004, 12:11 AM
He certainly is one his way to greatness and definitely my favourite ever. If he surpasses Pete's GS total or not we will need to wait and see but Roger is number 1 for me! I will keep praying too Dirk :worship: :lol:

Cervantes
09-13-2004, 12:11 AM
Even if he doesn't win 14 Grand Slams, I still consider Federer to be the best ever. The way he plays the game is just amazing, he totally dominates the points by taking the ball on the rise consistently. And every Federer match I see shots I've never seen anyone else play, he's just godly :worship:

Goenitz_196
09-13-2004, 12:13 AM
Well I don't think anyone could beat Sampras at his best. Nope, not even Roger. So what are the Federer fan-girls and fan-boys going to come up with next? Federer is going to win more than 14 GS titles? He's going to triple bagel Roddick in a GS Final? Sigh...

Mrs. B
09-13-2004, 12:18 AM
Love, you're back? and singing a different tune? :lol:

sol
09-13-2004, 12:19 AM
Awesome Roger… http://www.mainzelahr.de/smile/sport/pokal.gif

There are so many Threads open about this, but Federer was amazing. http://www.mainzelahr.de/smile/sport/cheerleader3.gif
It is incredible the way in that Roger grows when has to play a final.
Great season!. Big Championship! http://www.smiliegenerator.de/smiley-flag/smiley-3326.png

Cervantes
09-13-2004, 12:19 AM
Well I don't think anyone could beat Sampras at his best. Nope, not even Roger. So what are the Federer fan-girls and fan-boys going to come up with next? Federer is going to win more than 14 GS titles? He's going to triple bagel Roddick in a GS Final? Sigh...

Hello, have you even seen this match? Roger has every shot in the book, he can easily beat Sampras at his best. Maybe Sampras could reach one tiebreak, but that's it.

alfonsojose
09-13-2004, 12:21 AM
JesusFed will forgive u all here. I'm converted :angel:

Goenitz_196
09-13-2004, 12:21 AM
Hello, have you even seen this match? Roger has every shot in the book, he can easily beat Sampras at his best. Maybe Sampras could reach one tiebreak, but that's it.

Oh yeah, where did you that from? Your crystal ball?

Jorge
09-13-2004, 12:22 AM
I dunno if he is the greatest ever, But I do know that he is definitively the best player I've seen :worship:

Cervantes
09-13-2004, 12:23 AM
Oh yeah, where did you that from? Your crystal ball?

Ok, you can never tell who would win, cause they won't be playing against each other. But I've never seen Sampras demolish a player of Hewitt's class like Roger did today.

MisterQ
09-13-2004, 12:24 AM
He already has 4 slams, plus he's won 3 slams in the same year something that Sampras and Agassi never accomplished. In a few years he'll be past Agassi and going for Pete's record.

I agree with you when it comes to Roger's excellence. He is the most complete player I have ever seen (though I never saw Laver, who by all accounts was pretty well-rounded). And I think Roger has the potential to become the most-accomplished player of all time.

But I instinctively stick up for Andre and Pete, lol ;) -- they did have some amazing streaks like this also...

Pete won 3 consective majors --- they just weren't in one calendar year. (Wimb 1993, USO 1993, AO 1994).

Andre won 3 out of four majors, and made the final of the other -- but not in a calendar year. (RG1999, finalist of Wimb 1999, USO1999, AO 2000).

alfonsojose
09-13-2004, 12:26 AM
What? No sex innuedos? :(

sex is something wrong and insane. It's just to have children. Keep working and praying for JesusFed. :o :angel:

raghu
09-13-2004, 12:27 AM
Well I don't think anyone could beat Sampras at his best. Nope, not even Roger. So what are the Federer fan-girls and fan-boys going to come up with next? Federer is going to win more than 14 GS titles? He's going to triple bagel Roddick in a GS Final? Sigh...

I disagree there. Sampras cannot match him if he plays like today.. It doesn't matter how well sampras server. Ofcourse having said that, roger is not as fearsome as pet is.

Goenitz_196
09-13-2004, 12:28 AM
Ok, you can never tell who would win, cause they won't be playing against each other. But I've never seen Sampras demolish a player of Hewitt's class like Roger did today.

Still doesn't mean Federer of now could beat Pete at his best. And Pete needed 4 sets to beat Agassi in the Final of 2002 USOpen, whereas Roger needed 5 gruelling sets to oust Agassi in the semi-final. And you can't really say Andre isn't someone of class can you, seeing as he beat Lleyton Hewitt in the USOpen 2002 and in Cincinatti earlier this year. Not to mention he beat Andy Roddick earlier as well.

sigmagirl91
09-13-2004, 12:29 AM
I disagree there. Sampras cannot match him if he plays like today.. It doesn't matter how well sampras server. Ofcourse having said that, roger is not as fearsome as pet is.

Pet? Who the hell's Pet? Is he a new tennis player or something, training out of Siberia? Tell me, who is Pet?

Goenitz_196
09-13-2004, 12:30 AM
I disagree there. Sampras cannot match him if he plays like today.. It doesn't matter how well sampras server. Ofcourse having said that, roger is not as fearsome as pet is.

Sorry, but saying Pete 'cannot match him if he plays like today' is bit of an overstatement isn't it? I'm pretty sure he could.

2Tough4Men
09-13-2004, 12:31 AM
Thank you MrQ. The truth about this Federer run is that Andre's 1999/2000 was even more amazing. Three titles and a RUP.

SLICK
09-13-2004, 12:32 AM
Federer right now is the best European player since Borg. If he can maybe win the French at least once and amass at least 10 Grand Slams, he will eclipse Sampras as the best ever, certainly of the Open era. :cool:

Cervantes
09-13-2004, 12:33 AM
Still doesn't mean Federer of now could beat Pete at his best. And Pete needed 4 sets to beat Agassi in the Final of 2002 USOpen, whereas Roger needed 5 gruelling sets to oust Agassi in the semi-final. And you can't really say Andre isn't someone of class can you, seeing as he beat Lleyton Hewitt in the USOpen 2002 and in Cincinatti earlier this year. Not to mention he beat Andy Roddick earlier as well.

Tell me you've seen Roger play today in the first set, that was the best tennis ever. I'm just saying Pete has never played like that and dominated like Federer has this year. And Roger does have a 1-0 h2h against Pete, and I'm absolutely sure Roger was further from his best than Pete during that match.

Goenitz_196
09-13-2004, 12:36 AM
Tell me you've seen Roger play today in the first set, that was the best tennis ever. I'm just saying Pete has never played like that and dominated like Federer has this year. And Roger does have a 1-0 h2h against Pete, and I'm absolutely sure Roger was further from his best than Pete during that match.

Yes I saw Roger play yesterday on Sky and I must admit it was dazzling. Pete doesn't have the same shots as that, but with his own shots he's got he can match up to that leve. This is shown in the 1999 Wimbledon Final where he totally trounced Agassi.

Yes Roger was far from his best during the 2001 Wimbledon QF against Pete, but have you forgetten about the fact that Pete was far from his best too then?

Cervantes
09-13-2004, 12:40 AM
Yes I saw Roger play yesterday on Sky and I must admit it was dazzling. Pete doesn't have the same shots as that, but with his own shots he's got he can match up to that leve. This is shown in the 1999 Wimbledon Final where he totally trounced Agassi.

Yes Roger was far from his best during the 2001 Wimbledon QF against Pete, but have you forgetten about the fact that Pete was far from his best too then?

I said Roger was further from his best tennis than Pete was from his best. But it doesn't really matter, because this argument can go on forever, it's just like comparing Sampras to Borg or Sampras to Laver, it's just impossible.

faboozadoo15
09-13-2004, 12:41 AM
Wow. 1-0 over Pete, and that was the time when Sampras was going downhill anyway.
at least it was at wimbledon, not many people can say they beat him there.

Goenitz_196
09-13-2004, 12:43 AM
at least it was at wimbledon, not many people can say they beat him there.

And earlier in the 2nd round he almost lost to Briton Barry Cowan, a total, total nobody, which surely says everything about Pete at that time.

sigmagirl91
09-13-2004, 12:46 AM
And earlier in the 2nd round he almost lost to Briton Barry Cowan, a total, total nobody, which surely says everything about Pete at that time.

And, even worse, when he lost to George Bastl (now the subject of a "where are they now") in 2002.

SLICK
09-13-2004, 01:00 AM
Thank you MrQ. The truth about this Federer run is that Andre's 1999/2000 was even more amazing. Three titles and a RUP.
Good point. If Sampras had not stopped him in the 99 final of Wimbledon, he would have done a non-calendar year Grand Slam. :cool:

Dirk
09-13-2004, 01:08 AM
Yeah then he came back after a day of rest and squash his 3rd player in 3 sets. pete was even more focused after the scare. They both played great in that match and Rogi won it. Leave it alone. Rogi is Rogi and Pete is Pete. Both god's gift to the sport.

Sjengster
09-13-2004, 01:08 AM
Hey now, don't you dare go slating Barry "undoubtably" Cowan... that's my job.

Um, the last time I checked Federer was a tennis player rather than a deity, wasn't he? Anyway, in terms of pure talent level he probably is the greatest ever (although I still hope he can improve at the net to even approach the level of an Edberg in the volleying department, something he wants to work on too), but I doubt he'll end up as the greatest in terms of achievement. A three-quarter Slam is terrific, but it doesn't automatically suggest he'll break the record. Wilander's three in 1988 were the last he ever won, and while you may point out he'd already won four before that year in comparison to Federer's one, he was actually only a year older than Federer is now.

This will certainly force other players to raise their game and I expect they will, enough for someone to overcome him in a big match. He's won his last eleven finals, and in the semis and finals of all his GS wins he has only ever lost one set, to Roddick at Wimbledon this year. The odds say he will lose a tight encounter eventually, where someone outplays him or he has an off-day, and then all of a sudden the floodgates may open. I have no objection to that happening at the fast-court Slams next year, provided he can just make a winning run at that elusive RG title...

Dirk
09-13-2004, 01:23 AM
Wilander didn't love the sport anymore and only won another title in his career after that year. Rogi will work on his volleys and will get better at the net. Its one of his goals. I am sure he will put in some more time on them before the indoor season. Rogi is only 23 and can you honestly say Tim's volleys were better or at Rogi's level when he was 23? Roger will be just fine Sjengster so just sit back and enjoy the show. I am sure this brighten up Sjeng's day back at home recovering from his illness.

Billabong
09-13-2004, 01:29 AM
Rogi you're great:D!!!

Sjengster
09-13-2004, 01:29 AM
I didn't mention Henman, so I don't know why you brought him up. I wouldn't know, seeing as I didn't follow tennis at all when he was aged 23. Anyway, I'm just avoiding getting carried away in a thread started by someone who once predicted that Nalbandian would end his career with a 20-0 lifetime record over Federer. Dare I suggest he/she has a tendency to go with the prevailing trend a little too quickly?

Federer's achievements will be cold comfort to Sjeng when he has to start defending points right off the bounce at the start of next year while ranked outside the Top 50.

Dirk
09-13-2004, 02:34 AM
sjeng loves rogi. Rogi misses his towel boy and needs to see him very soon. ;)