Is Federer ever going to have the great rivals other great players like Borg had? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Is Federer ever going to have the great rivals other great players like Borg had?

the cat
09-13-2004, 05:42 PM
Bjorn Borg is the best tennis player I have ever seen! :D He won 11 grand slam singles titles in only a several year span and he could have won more grand slams if he ever concentrated on playing the Australian Open. But Borg had to go through great players Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe, Ivan Lendl and Ilie Nastase to win many of his grand slams singles titles. Borg was the best of a great group of tennis players in his era. What I'm wondering is where are the rivals for Roger Federer? I have never seen a men's tennis player so much better than his competition. Congratulations to Federer on becoming the first men's tennis player since Mats Wilander in 1988 to win 3 grand slam singles titles in a year. :) That is a great accomplishment in any era of men's tennis. But where are his rivals? Mats Wilander had to compete against tremendous players like Stefan Edberg, Ivan lendl and Boris Becker to win his 3 grand slams in 1988. And Wilander hasd to compete against great players throughout his career. Where are the great opponents for Federer? Alot of tennis fans thought Andy Roddick would be a great rival for Federer. But that's just not the case so far although at this point Roddick seems like the choice almost by default for being Federer's top rival in the future. I had high hopes for Marat Safin at the beginning of the year when he made the Australian Open final. But his game has slipped badly this summer. And David Nalbandian has a history of playing Federer very tough and he has alot of talent. But Nalbandian had an injury plagued year this year and wasn't a factor is the grand slams and that was shame. :( So who will be a real rival for Federer in 2005? I don't see anyone emerging so I think there is a good chance Federer could win 3 grand slam singles titles again next year. That would be incredible for Federer! But men's tennis needs to find a couple of true rivals for Federer so these grand slam finals with Federer playing in the finals become compelling on a regular basis. I think we all would agree the the 2004 Wimbledon final between Federer and Roddick was compelling. Roddick was supposed to be closing the gap between himself and Federer. But since Wimbledon the gap between Fedrer and Roddick has even widened! :eek: I just can't believe in a time of so many good men's tennis players that 1 player in Roger Federer is so far and away the best player. I think 21st century sports is all about parity at the top. But that's not the case with men's tennis in 2004. One man stands alone and his name is Roger Federer.

Marc Rosset is Tall
09-13-2004, 05:48 PM
Could you please use paragraphs, my eyes are hurting from reading that. Spacing is underrated you know.

How many Federer threads have we had today?

Ok, there will be rivals for Federer, he is not a god as some people think, yes, he has had a fantastic year so far, but there will always be challenges for him and the rest of the field. Roddick is not a long-term rival as there isn't a rivalry between them.

The rest of the players will have to improve their games, and just because his name is Roger Federer it doesn't mean his name is always on the title, before the tournament has started.

Black Adam
09-13-2004, 06:16 PM
i would like to trust wilander on this one......... in maybe 3 or 2 years time andy will have developped more his game and then will be able to give rogere a fight... but until then roger is gonna rule in a boring manner he might even end the year 2005without losing!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FryslanBoppe
09-13-2004, 06:19 PM
i would like to trust wilander on this one......... in maybe 3 or 2 years time andy will have developped more his game and then will be able to give rogere a fight... but until then roger is gonna rule in a boring manner he might even end the year 2005without losing!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I love your sense of humor thinking that Roger will go through 2005 without losing a match.

TheBoiledEgg
09-13-2004, 06:34 PM
There is only one hope
sadly that hope is like the scarecrow in "Wizard of Oz"

and just like that classic
he only seems to find his brain in the land of Oz

someone please dont tell him that Oz was just an old man hiding behind the curtain :o

Fumus
09-13-2004, 07:09 PM
I disagree Roddick could be a rival if he improved his ROS and his movement. Looking at the wimbly final, I have hope that this is possible. Roger's potential rivals could be Donald Young Jr., Gael Monfifs, and Rafeal Nadal but, only time will tell. One thing is for sure, it's going to be really boring with Roger winning everything, I hope for a rival, preferably an American one.

maratski
09-13-2004, 07:11 PM
I haven't watched any of the all time great players apart from Sampras and wonder one thing. When they were playing and having those great rivalries, where they all full of confidence, healthy and on top of their game at the same time?

When Marat ruled in 2000 the other "new balls" were still developing. In 2001 Marat was injured and lost confidence, while the others still weren't there yet, apart from Lleyton. In 2002 Lleyton was still the man to beat, but slowly we started hearing more from Ferrero, Federer and Roddick. In 2003 they finally won their first slam, were competing for the #1 ranking, and played some great matches. In 2004 all players apart from Federer are in a bit of a slump/injured so it's hard to make predictions or comparisons. I believe they will develp a rivalry, but give it some time.

the cat
09-13-2004, 07:45 PM
Marc, thanks for bearing with my long paragrah. :rolleyes: And it seems you can't find a rival for Federer either.

Good question Maratski. For some of the time Borg was a great player, Borg and his main competitors like Connors and McEnroe werevhealthy and playing great tennis at the same time and that made for some legendary rivalries. :D But that's hard to do today because so mnay of the top male tennis players have had injury problems and I think it's partly because the players try to hit the ball so hard which puts alot of pressure on their arms and shoulders.

Supersonik
09-13-2004, 07:53 PM
Tennis has ended and this should be last year of the game as we know it, because we can't find a rival for Federer.

Well for one there is himself, two there are things he still needs to achieve, three he has had a great year, but one great year and this does not mean he will be winning 3 Slams year after year.

It's funny all the reactionary threads, just like last year when Roddick was blazing the hardcourt season, and many thought he would be # 1 for a while, and then the unbeatable tag starts happening, the same with Coria when he was on his claycourt streak, but came up short in the biggest matches.

Federer will have rivals, as no one dominates forever and the other players know they have to improve and has he won at RG yet, ahem no?

maratski
09-13-2004, 07:55 PM
Actually only the duckfans thought andy would be #1 for a long time ;)

Supersonik
09-13-2004, 07:59 PM
Actually only the duckfans thought andy would be #1 for a long time ;)

Stop pointing the obvious :) Then the people comparing Coria to Borg during the clay season was stupid, just like all the reactionary threads that continue to pop up.

Maybe Federer should be suspended for 2005, and not allowed to train for the year, so the other players can catch up. :)

maratski
09-13-2004, 08:04 PM
I must have missed the Coria Borg comparisons. Why not compare Ferrero to Borg? ;)

Supersonik
09-13-2004, 08:07 PM
I must have missed the Coria Borg comparisons. Why not compare Ferrero to Borg? ;)

I was here when the Coria trolls were running rampant and there was a BBC article about Borg/Coria, though I am not sure about the comparison's myself.

Borg is and will always be better than Ferrero, that's the reason as to why there is no comparison.

maratski
09-13-2004, 08:13 PM
I just mentioned Ferrero cause he has done more on clay then Coria, that's all. I was busy finishing my thesis at the time and took an internet break. I forgot about that :o

Supersonik
09-13-2004, 08:18 PM
Ferrero does have the potential to win at least 3 RG's, but he really needs to add some more to his game.

Federer will have challengers, and nothing is forever. Federer fans enjoy this year, and don't rub into everyone else, then again we need more "reactionary" threads.

maratski
09-13-2004, 08:21 PM
Federer has nice fans. I know the ones who have been supporting him for a few years now, no bandwagon jumpers ;)
They're just quiet like the man himself.

Supersonik
09-13-2004, 08:30 PM
Federer has nice fans. I know the ones who have been supporting him for a few years now, no bandwagon jumpers ;)
They're just quiet like the man himself.

That's why Federer trolls are unusual, and as a fanbase they are better than most.

the cat
09-13-2004, 08:50 PM
I hope Ferrero is healthy next year so he can have a fine year after his struggle this year. :)

Supersonik, we assume Federer will have challengers next year. But I'll have to see it to believe it.

Supersonik
09-13-2004, 08:54 PM
I hope Ferrero is healthy next year so he can have a fine year after his struggle this year. :)

Supersonik, we assume Federer will have challengers next year. But I'll have to see it to believe it.

If you are scared at the prospect of Federer not having any challengers. How many claycourt events have you watched then? He has been vulnerable on that surface.

Not good enough, ban Federer from the tour for the whole 2005, and he is not allowed to train at all, so the others can catch up and win tournaments. Like there is a need to be alarmist, you wouldn't be whining if Roddick was in this situation.

MisterQ
09-13-2004, 09:00 PM
Rivalries and head-to-heads can sometime change quite unexpectedly. Right now I don't see any reason for Federer to start losing to any particular player on tour, but you never know. The dynamic changed considerably over the course of Evert/Navratilova, Borg/McEnroe, and V. Williams/S. Williams, for example. Maybe some player will figure Roger out, who knows...

alfonsojose
09-13-2004, 09:20 PM
JesusFed can't be touched by any human tennis player. God sent Guga to RG just to test our loved savior :angel:

Leo
09-13-2004, 10:38 PM
There's always the future generation.

RonJeremy
09-13-2004, 10:41 PM
Not good enough, ban Federer from the tour for the whole 2005, and he is not allowed to train at all, so the others can catch up and win tournaments. Like there is a need to be alarmist, you wouldn't be whining if Roddick was in this situation.

:haha:

naiwen
09-13-2004, 10:54 PM
It's still too early to say Roger can win 3 majors out of 4 next year. Everyday is a new day and we will never know what will happen on court. Maybe crazy wind comes again next year and Santoro wins the Grand Slam.
:wavey:

MisterQ
09-13-2004, 11:11 PM
It's still too early to say Roger can win 3 majors out of 4 next year. Everyday is a new day and we will never know what will happen on court. Maybe crazy wind comes again next year and Santoro wins the Grand Slam.
:wavey:

That would be cool. :cool:

Allez Fabrice. :rocker2:

Crazy_Fool
09-13-2004, 11:21 PM
I think on hardcourts Nalbandian, Ferrero, Agassi(if he's still around), and some other headcases(Hi marat ;) ) can beat him if they get their acts together. On grass it'll be more tough, can't really see anyone doing it except possibly Roddick on a good day. When it comes to clay there are many who can challenge him.

I think JC and Nalbandian could be good rilvaries, but they'll have to be fit first

the cat
09-13-2004, 11:33 PM
I'm not counting clay courts as one of Federer's dominanat surfaces. He could win the French Open next year but he has much better odds at winning any of the other 3 grand slams.

I call 'em as I see 'em, Supersonik. I don't whine. :mad: :p

Excellent post, C_F.

heya
09-13-2004, 11:46 PM
That's why Federer trolls are unusual, and as a fanbase they are better than most.
Trolls made
excuses for his losses, but they accused
other fan bases of doing the same thing, even if it had nothing to do with tennis.

There're trolls that tried to get under the skins of non-English speakers even though the trolls made grammatical errors too.
Everyone has excuses for his own stupidity but the liars are perfect.

A troll lied that he was bad-repped & insulted (some people really believed it).
Another called players fags & injury-fakers in other fan forums.

SLICK
09-14-2004, 12:36 AM
The Borg, Mcenroe, Connors era was a magical time because you had three exceptional all time greats going toe to toe in virtually every Grand Slam they played in. Watching Borg win 5 consecutive Wimbledon's was the reason i became interested in the game. His matches with Mcenroe in particular were unbelievably exciting. Don't think the game will ever see a rivalry quite like it again. Right now i think Federer is the most likely person to complete the Grand Slam since Borg came so close in 1980, where he held the French and Wimbledon. Had he beaten Mcenroe in the US Open final that year, he would have gone to play the Australian in December. But it was not to be as Mac got his revenge in 5 sets.

Gonzo Hates Me!
09-14-2004, 01:44 AM
Federer has a bandwagon??

Federer has nice fans. I know the ones who have been supporting him for a few years now, no bandwagon jumpers ;)

rue
09-14-2004, 03:23 AM
it is hard to say because he has not lost to a top ten player in over a year and no one seems to know how to beat him really. I think that if Ferrero did get back to 100%, he could build a rivalry with him considering that he got to the US Open finals last year and both of them could square off on clay. They can play against each other on every surface. We will have to see how the next year turns out to be.

oxy
09-14-2004, 07:55 AM
it is hard to say because he has not lost to a top ten player in over a year and no one seems to know how to beat him really. I think that if Ferrero did get back to 100%, he could build a rivalry with him considering that he got to the US Open finals last year and both of them could square off on clay. They can play against each other on every surface. We will have to see how the next year turns out to be.

i agree that ferrero and federer match up quite well in all surfaces except grass...actually hewitt should have match up quite well with federer but somehow somewhere went wrong...another person would be nalbandian...:)

the cat
09-14-2004, 04:26 PM
Excellent post Slick. The Borg, Connors and McEnroe era was truly a magical era in tennis. :D

FryslanBoppe
09-14-2004, 05:57 PM
I'm not counting clay courts as one of Federer's dominanat surfaces. He could win the French Open next year but he has much better odds at winning any of the other 3 grand slams.

I call 'em as I see 'em, Supersonik. I don't whine. :mad: :p

The French Open is still part of the calendar and you are whining. I highly doubt you would make these threads if Roddick or Safin was in this position that Federer is in at the moment.

The melodrama is funny nevertheless.

kim-fan
09-14-2004, 07:52 PM
I think on hardcourts Nalbandian, Ferrero, Agassi(if he's still around), and some other headcases(Hi marat ;) ) can beat him if they get their acts together.

so you think lleyton can't beat him on hardcourt?

the cat
09-14-2004, 08:11 PM
Thanks Fry. Kind of. ;) Actually I don't start alot of threads like these and I try to be consistent and if Safin or Roddick had won 3 grand slams this year I might have started a thread about one of them not having a real rival.

kim-fan, besides Hewitt C_F left Roddick off his list of those who could possibly beat Federer on hard court.

Hopefully David Nalbandian can stay healthy next year and pose a threat to Federer's dominance. But Roger is now so far ahead of the rest of the pack that Nalbandian's great record against Federer might not even bother Roger anymore.

FryslanBoppe
09-14-2004, 08:16 PM
Well cat, I doubt whether you would start threads about Roddick or Safin being in the same position as Federer and yes you are being over dramatic. It's funny to see people overreact actually, apart from banning Federer from the tour as Supersonik suggested, should they initate rule changes to stop Federer then? Nothing is permanent, and there is always prospects of injuries, that's why it has to be enjoyed now, but at least you alarmist thread, gave me some good chuckles.

the cat
09-14-2004, 08:29 PM
Fry, I didn't know that yearning for the great rivalries of years gone by in men's tennis and hoping for great rivalries in the future of men's tennis was unfair. :rolleyes:

FryslanBoppe
09-14-2004, 08:34 PM
Fry, I didn't know that yearning for the great rivalries of years gone by in men's tennis and hoping for great rivalries in the future of men's tennis was unfair. :rolleyes:

Rivalries happen naturally and don't need to built up, it's just a marketing tool.

You whined about Federer domination, yet overlook the fact that in the old days it had more of a sameness about things than it does now, look overall and not just at this year.

While these players were greats. It was the same people dominating and there was an overall lack of depth. The game has moved on and will continue to do so, they were good days, but the mythology of them tends to overlook that it was predictable, if that was interesting to you then good.

CoriaFan4ever
09-14-2004, 08:47 PM
it depends on whether they can stay healthy and regain their form, but if they can there are some players that can challenge him on different surfaces, namely ferrero and coria on clay as well as nalbandián or even safin on hard courts.
on grass however i dont see anyone challenging him in the enar future ;)

martirogi
09-14-2004, 11:29 PM
he will in a year or two

the cat
09-15-2004, 12:50 AM
Fry, I respectfully disagree with you about the old days. The old days was unpredictable compared to Federer's dominance today becauase you didn't know who would win between Borg, McEnroe, Connors and Lendl. And please don't overrate the depth in todays men's tennis. While their are more good men's tennis players now than there were 20 years ago there are far fewer great players today than there were 20 years ago. And it was those great players that made men's tennis so exciting back in the day. :D

Marc Rosset is Tall
09-15-2004, 01:28 AM
Fry, I respectfully disagree with you about the old days. The old days was unpredictable compared to Federer's dominance today becauase you didn't know who would win between Borg, McEnroe, Connors and Lendl. And please don't overrate the depth in todays men's tennis. While their are more good men's tennis players now than there were 20 years ago there are far fewer great players today than there were 20 years ago. And it was those great players that made men's tennis so exciting back in the day. :D

Actually you are the one who is overrating the old days. Yes, they were a time when tennis fandom was at its peak, well in America that is anyway, and that was mainly due to Mac and Connors. Yes, has it occured to you, that it's possible that was a very rare generation and might not be repeated for some time?

You still don't get it, and you are not consistent at all and have been called on that. Whining about alleged dominance of a player who has had one great season and that particular player happens to probably the closest to an old school player who is on the tour at the moment with style.

When Borg played at the FO he won that is worse than your whining about Federer. The Aus Open nobody took seriously. The US Open Borg hated New York and he could have played 25 US Opens and not won, and that was between Connors and McEnroe. Lendl in those days was a choker and took him a while to come to terms and once he did he was dominant.

You loved the old days so much, it was so predictable that they may as well have started tournaments at the R3 and Wimbledon they should have started at the QFs, they were that predictable.

Time to write a new chapter in the melodrama.

WyveN
09-15-2004, 02:28 AM
Fry, I respectfully disagree with you about the old days. The old days was unpredictable compared to Federer's dominance today becauase you didn't know who would win between Borg, McEnroe, Connors and Lendl.

One year does not equal dominance.
You talk about Mac/Connors/Lendl yet you forget 1984 when Mcenroe had 3 losses in a season and was thrashing all his "rivals". Lendl beat him at the FO but it needed a miracle comeback.

And guess what? Mac never won another slam after 1984.

Billabong
09-15-2004, 02:29 AM
we'll see;)!

WyveN
09-15-2004, 02:32 AM
By the way if your thecat from bookiebusters then I dont know how you can say Federer's domination is to predictable when you spent the entire 2 weeks saying Roger will lose.

heya
09-15-2004, 07:35 AM
Ferrero, Coria & Nalbandián aren't themselves anymore.
It would take great fitness for them to stay healthy and win at least 4-5 titles/year.
Roddick won't be interested in getting better & will quit tennis within 5-7 years because he'll never make his own decisions.

Ferrero Forever
09-15-2004, 07:38 AM
it is hard to say because he has not lost to a top ten player in over a year and no one seems to know how to beat him really. I think that if Ferrero did get back to 100%, he could build a rivalry with him considering that he got to the US Open finals last year and both of them could square off on clay. They can play against each other on every surface. We will have to see how the next year turns out to be.

yes. There are a lot of top players that could rival federer in the near future (ferrero, coria, nalby, hewitt, roddick etc.) federer can't win every slam and i agree that if certain players get back to full form then they can take him on and perhaps win :worship: i'm waiting for ferrero to do just that and it will happen

Experimentee
09-15-2004, 08:36 AM
There are lots of great players that can rival Federer. He just makes it seem like theres no competition because hes jsut that good that hes a class above the rest.

Its a bit of a dilemma that people consider you a better player in history if you actually lose some matches rather than dominating everyone! To have a great rivalry, Roger would have to lose sometimes, and thats not what he wants to do.

PerezRoldan
09-15-2004, 09:27 AM
By the way if your thecat from bookiebusters then I dont know how you can say Federer's domination is to predictable when you spent the entire 2 weeks saying Roger will lose.

:haha:

Crazy_Fool
09-15-2004, 12:33 PM
so you think lleyton can't beat him on hardcourt?
Beat him, of course i do. I think there are many guys that can beat him on a given day, but in terms of rilvaries, I'm not quite sure at the moment. I think he has the ability, but he needs to show it on the hardcourts against him more for it to develop into a rilvary :)

the cat
09-15-2004, 04:35 PM
No Wyven, I'm not the cat from bookiebusters. Maybe you shouldn't be at bookiebusters. It sounds like a gambling site. :eek: ;)

What can I tell you Marc. I preferred the old days today. And part of the reason I preferred the old days is because of the rivalries in men's tennis. And that was the genesis of this thread.

Good post Experimentee. You make a pertinent point about how Federer would have to lose more often to create rivalries. And to Roger's credit he isn't lsoing enough to have rivalries with other top players. Maybe Rafael Nadal can find some consistency in his game and challenge Federer in the coming years.

UseTheSearchTool
09-16-2004, 05:39 AM
One year does not equal dominance.
You talk about Mac/Connors/Lendl yet you forget 1984 when Mcenroe had 3 losses in a season and was thrashing all his "rivals". Lendl beat him at the FO but it needed a miracle comeback.

And guess what? Mac never won another slam after 1984.

:worship:

Baffle them with logic.

Speed of Light
06-22-2014, 04:26 PM
LOL @ this thread. Old memories.