Feds: I waited to play my best in the finals, as usual [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Feds: I waited to play my best in the finals, as usual

Tennis Fool
09-11-2005, 11:26 PM
I'm very happy Feds won, even though he tried to bagel Agassi with that dropshot :o

However.

Maybe he was experiencing a different match from the one I watched, because he was clearly choking and we may have had a different match if he'd lost the TB.

Do you agree with him also or not?

asotgod
09-11-2005, 11:28 PM
I think he is probably saying that to just show that Agassi played well. Because if he said he played his worst match, then it will seem as if he is dissing Agassi's play IMO. I dont think Federer played well though, just in patches like against Hewitt yesterday. I also dont know what happened to his first serves. He seems to have lost a lot of pace on it compared to last year. Just my observation.

onewoman74
09-11-2005, 11:29 PM
No I don't agree...I don't think he played his best...He seemed out of sorts in the 3rd set...Agassi was changing up his game and Fed couldn't handle it...somehow Fed got his wits during the tiebreak...still don't know how he did that.

onewoman74
09-11-2005, 11:30 PM
I think he is probably saying that to just show that Agassi played well. Because if he said he played his worst match, then it will seem as if he is dissing Agassi's play IMO. I dont think Federer played well though, just in patches like against Hewitt yesterday. I also dont know what happened to his first serves. He seems to have lost a lot of pace on it compared to last year. Just my observation.

Johnny Mac kept talking about the change in his serve and how it's lost it's "pop"...why would Fed change such an important part of his game?

PaulieM
09-11-2005, 11:32 PM
he definitely did not play his best. he started out well, and then went away and decided to let andre to whatever he wanted to do with him. he was definitley choking at some points, making some poor decisions and not attacking when he needed to. but in the end as usual he stepped it up when it matterd and turned things around. i don't think he necessarily saves his best stuff for the finals he just has a way of finding his best stuff for those key moments when he's in trouble.

rofe
09-11-2005, 11:33 PM
Maybe. I was actually surprised that he said that but I would say he was not losing points in the 3rd set, Agassi was winning them by constantly attacking his backhand, changing speed of his serve etc. When Fed gets overwhelmed, his backhand becomes his first liability. He could not use his slice backhand because unlike grass, on HC the ball just sits up waiting to be pummeled and Agassi did just that.

At that point, Fed had two options - continue using his topspin backhand or run around and use the forehand. He is not comfortable running around his forehand so he had no choice but to use his horrible topspin backhand.

Agassi just overwhelmed him and Fed had no answer. Nothing to do with choking.

Doris Loeffel
09-11-2005, 11:35 PM
That's his secret ;) and that's his best tennis ;)

No serious Roger sure got testet by Andre big time - he should have broken Andre more often!! His backhand didn't work that good some winners but too many errors!! O.K. his serve was better than in matches before but not his second serve.... there he used to be much much better - oh I forgot Andre is amongst the best returners so that's why his serve wasn't that effective. You have to give some cudos to AA too!!But once again he stepped it up when it mattered most - getting that rebreak in the third and winning the tb conviningly and then rushing through the 4th set and to do that he for sure had to play his best tennis and right then he did!!

landoud
09-11-2005, 11:36 PM
all the crowd were laughing when he said this
Feds: I waited to play my best in the finals, as usual

Deivid23
09-11-2005, 11:38 PM
You can join this one to some others of his cocky statements after a big win, nothing new. Anyway Iīd probably be more cocky than Roger if I had his talent with a racket, so no big deal

nkhera1
09-11-2005, 11:39 PM
I think he is probably saying that to just show that Agassi played well. Because if he said he played his worst match, then it will seem as if he is dissing Agassi's play IMO. I dont think Federer played well though, just in patches like against Hewitt yesterday. I also dont know what happened to his first serves. He seems to have lost a lot of pace on it compared to last year. Just my observation.

I think he started bombing it too early and just god tired. Or maybe he was tired from yesterday's match.

Tennis Fool
09-11-2005, 11:40 PM
That's his secret ;) and that's his best tennis ;)

No serious Roger sure got testet by Andre big time - he should have broken Andre more often!! His backhand didn't work that good some winners but too many errors!! O.K. his serve was better than in matches before but not his second serve.... there he used to be much much better - oh I forgot Andre is amongst the best returners so that's why his serve wasn't that effective. You have to give some cudos to AA too!!But once again he stepped it up when it mattered most - getting that rebreak in the third and winning the tb conviningly and then rushing through the 4th set and to do that he for sure had to play his best tennis and right then he did!!
Hey Doris! It seems like I only hear from you once a year :lol:

amierin
09-11-2005, 11:43 PM
Roger didn't play his "A" game today. He simply waited until Agassi had nothing else to give and won. People criticize his drop shot in the fourth set but Andre had no intention of giving up and Roger was correct to use the logical shot at that point of the match.

Agassi, in Roger's place, would've done the same thing.

asotgod
09-11-2005, 11:43 PM
I think he started bombing it too early and just god tired. Or maybe he was tired from yesterday's match.

It was only his first couple of service games he bombed it. He couldn't have gotten tired from that. I think he was going for too much placement today to try to set up his forehand but Agassi got some good reads on the serve and pummelled them.

Flibbertigibbet
09-11-2005, 11:45 PM
You can join this one to some others of his cocky statements after a big win, nothing new. Anyway Iīd probably be more cocky than Roger if I had his talent with a racket, so no big deal

K.

Anyway, my first thought was that he was talking about his play in comparison to the rest of the tournament. In comparison, I'd say, the Minar match was probably better... and the Rochus match... but yeah. If he had said 'I played decent tennis in this final,' that would have been very unsportive. I guess this way, he's just cocky, but at least he got some laughs, eh? :worship:

R.Federer
09-11-2005, 11:47 PM
The TB was more vital to agassi's life than to Roge
agassi was visibly tired, and he really needed to get the mental boost from being 2-1 up. Roge would have been disappointed but he had much more in the tank if he was 1-2 down.

The TB was so crucial

mishar
09-11-2005, 11:48 PM
Roger does make cocky statements, but there's something disarming about their frankness. I don't know, he seems sweet when he says them and they're always true!

mishar
09-11-2005, 11:52 PM
What are you all talking about? Roger served brilliant in the final set. Hardly lost a point on serve, was hitting all the corners. Yes, his backhand went wildly off in some portions of the match and he squandered some break points with loose shots. But overall a well-played match with his usual moments of genius.

Doris Loeffel
09-11-2005, 11:55 PM
Hey Doris! It seems like I only hear from you once a year :lol:

Ohh don't worrie I'm around all year long ;)

nobama
09-11-2005, 11:57 PM
Who cares. He won the tournament. He raised his level when he needed to. I don't think the record books are going to put an asterisk next to this one saying 'Roger won but he didn't play his best'. Roger played good enough to beat his opponent. What if's don't mean much to me.

lucashg
09-11-2005, 11:59 PM
You can join this one to some others of his cocky statements after a big win, nothing new.

What would you want him to say? "Oh, I didn't play my best and still won comfortably at the end". Sure that wouldn't sound cocky, eh? :retard:

He probably said that to give props to Agassi, especially after Bud Collins said that Agassi played his best today. But Federer played well, he was being outplayed for part of the match, but stepped it up and won.

Anyway Iīd probably be more cocky than Roger if I had his talent with a racket, so no big deal

Downplaying a nasty comment, :lol: . I'm just not surprised. :rolleyes:

Deivid23
09-12-2005, 12:01 AM
What would you want him to say? "Oh, I didn't play my best and still won comfortably at the end". Sure that wouldn't sound cocky, eh? :retard:

He probably said that to give props to Agassi, especially after Bud Collins said that Agassi played his best today. But Federer played well, he was being outplayed for part of the match, but stepped it up and won.

Downplaying a nasty comment, :lol: . I'm just not surprised. :rolleyes:

You will start thinking when getting your head out of Rogerīs ass. Keep trying ;)

nobama
09-12-2005, 12:05 AM
You will start thinking when getting your head out of Rogerīs ass. Keep trying ;)Ok, what would you have liked him to say? And also, isn't it possible he was very overwhelmed with the moment and a bit nervous so maybe what he said didn't quite come out right. Again, I don't think there's anything wrong with what he said. But when he's winning all the time and people are sick of that they'll find something to pick on.

Deivid23
09-12-2005, 12:09 AM
Ok, what would you have liked him to say? And also, isn't it possible he was very overwhelmed with the moment and a bit nervous so maybe what he said didn't quite come out right. Again, I don't think there's anything wrong with what he said. But when he's winning all the time and people are sick of that they'll find something to pick on.

Did I say it was wrong? It was cocky, but as I said itīs not a thing that surprises me neither makes me dislike Federer.

PD: I knew I was gonna have some fun with this, and Iīm getting what I wanted, keep the laughs coming ;)

yanchr
09-12-2005, 12:12 AM
I think he played even worse in the 2nd and 3rd set than the Hewitt one.

Well he said so, but I dont believe he felt the way he said it.

lucashg
09-12-2005, 12:13 AM
Ok, what would you have liked him to say? And also, isn't it possible he was very overwhelmed with the moment and a bit nervous so maybe what he said didn't quite come out right. Again, I don't think there's anything wrong with what he said. But when he's winning all the time and people are sick of that they'll find something to pick on.

Don't waste your time, mirkaland! :p

Federer wouldn't find words good enough for him, apparently. There was nothing wrong with what he said, this is just bitter commenting from Deivid, even if he didn't want to sound so, :tape:.

I guess he better keep trying. Hm, sometimes I wish Federer was as cocky as some trolls want him to be. It'd be fun!

lucashg
09-12-2005, 12:14 AM
PD: I knew I was gonna have some fun with this, and Iīm getting what I wanted, keep the laughs coming ;)

Again, typical. :rolleyes:

You must be a quick learner from one of Queen Anti-Troll's ( :lol: ) classes, eh?

asotgod
09-12-2005, 12:15 AM
Look, Federer is arrogant. Who is not arrogant? Arrogance is a relative word. There is no doubt that with all his achievement, the likelihood of displaying arrogance will be higher. But, I sometimes think he gets lost as to how to be diplomatic there and maybe he is too excited that he just says it the way he feels. He is human at least, especially in the interviews and with the amount of talent he has, he is showing arrogance. I just dont like it when he is being painted as humble or too arrogant. I believe he is just in between and probably too blunt for his own good.

Deivid23
09-12-2005, 12:17 AM
Don't waste your time, mirkaland! :p

Federer wouldn't find words good enough for him, apparently. There was nothing wrong with what he said, this is just bitter commenting from Deivid, even if he didn't want to sound so, :tape:.

I guess he better keep trying. Hm, sometimes I wish Federer was as cocky as some trolls want him to be. It'd be fun!

Nothing to do with bitterness, itīs just a fact. If Federer said "lucas, you are dumb" youīd probably say: "Oh Roger, you canīt be wrong, sorry Iīll try to improve". You canīt be objective with anything concerning Federer and that makes you think any non-praising comment towards him is a bitter attack :rolleyes:

bad gambler
09-12-2005, 12:18 AM
Look, Federer is arrogant. Who is not arrogant? Arrogance is a relative word. There is no doubt that with all his achievement, the likelihood of displaying arrogance will be higher. But, I sometimes think he gets lost as to how to be diplomatic there and maybe he is too excited that he just says it the way he feels. He is human at least, especially in the interviews and with the amount of talent he has, he is showing arrogance. I just dont like it when he is being painted as humble or too arrogant. I believe he is just in between and probably too blunt for his own good.


agree!

R.Federer
09-12-2005, 12:21 AM
Better he save his best for finals than Round 1, no?

I think it is a compliment to the opponent, because we are aware that you need a great opponent to bring out your best tennis. roddick at W also, played well and Roge is aware of that, and had to bring his best stuff to win.

But Roge, english is not his first language in the sense he speaks it textbook like but not with the colloquim and idioms. It sometimes comes out wrong, I hope people realize that.

PamV
09-12-2005, 12:26 AM
Johnny Mac kept talking about the change in his serve and how it's lost it's "pop"...why would Fed change such an important part of his game?
Could it have anything to do with foot pain?

LCeh
09-12-2005, 12:28 AM
Nothing to do with bitterness, itīs just a fact. If Federer said "lucas, you are dumb" youīd probably say: "Oh Roger, you canīt be wrong, sorry Iīll try to improve". You canīt be objective with anything concerning Federer and that makes you think any non-praising comment towards him is a bitter attack :rolleyes:

The one not being objective is you here. Maybe if you don't look at Lucas' avatar and name, and actually answer what was being said, that would have been more evidence of "objective". Instead you go and make some personal attacks.

If I remember correctly, Roger was looking at Andre while making that comment. I feel that he was trying to say that "it took my best to beat you today", but it came out as "I can always play my best in finals". Whichever way you want to interpret that comment, but I felt he was only playing his best in patches.

Anyhow, I have Roger in my avatar, so I must not be objective here, better shut up now. :)

onewoman74
09-12-2005, 12:32 AM
Could it have anything to do with foot pain?

It could...I never thought of that could be a reason for a change in his service game...

Deivid23
09-12-2005, 12:38 AM
The one not being objective is you here. Maybe if you don't look at Lucas' avatar and name, and actually answer what was being said, that would have been more evidence of "objective". Instead you go and make some personal attacks.

If I remember correctly, Roger was looking at Andre while making that comment. I feel that he was trying to say that "it took my best to beat you today", but it came out as "I can always play my best in finals". Whichever way you want to interpret that comment, but I felt he was only playing his best in patches.

Anyhow, I have Roger in my avatar, so I must not be objective here, better shut up now. :)

Sorry but my impression is that even own Federer noticed that statement was cocky. Iīm 100% objective and Iīm not the one who attacked, Iīve been quoted first

lucashg
09-12-2005, 12:49 AM
Nothing to do with bitterness, itīs just a fact. If Federer said "lucas, you are dumb" youīd probably say: "Oh Roger, you canīt be wrong, sorry Iīll try to improve". You canīt be objective with anything concerning Federer and that makes you think any non-praising comment towards him is a bitter attack :rolleyes:

Except that he'd say: "Lucas, Deivid23 is dumb", then yeh.. I'd probably agree with him.

Point is, you never really answered what he could have said and doesn't give any margins to interpretation. I think Federer has a BIG ego, thus being self-centered and overconfident, but all that seems to be working for his own good so far, don't know if it'll change.

I can be objective when I want, and it's not the first time you quietly work your rubbish towards players whose fanbase you don't like or players you don't like at all. Just see the little sarcasm there with expecting to get some laughs with this thread. Typical!

At the beginning I really thought that you'd be more impartial, as you try so hard not to sound biased towards your favorite/against your disliked players, but NO.

And quickly you ran out of things to say and started to attack me personally. Quite pathetic, now probably you'll say I'm not worth your time that's why you didn't answer directly what I asked and started to play with the "fools" to get some laugh. Hm, no... that won't do it.

LCeh
09-12-2005, 12:54 AM
Sorry but my impression is that even own Federer noticed that statement was cocky. Iīm 100% objective and Iīm not the one who attacked, Iīve been quoted first

Well, to me it looked like an "Oops, I think I said something wrong there" look. You can definitely say he made an arrogant statement, I am not questioning that at all. What I am questioning is, did he really mean it that way?

I think it was possible that it was a statement made at the spur of the moment, and again, correct me if I am wrong here, but I thought he was looking at Andre while making that statement, to say that "I had to play my best to beat you", and then when he actually made his statement and said it out loud, he heard it himself, and thought "wait a minute, that doesn't sound right".

Again, you can say that it was an arrogant statement, but if he didn't mean it that way, then that statement doesn't prove he is arrogant, if that makes any sense at all.

Deivid23
09-12-2005, 01:02 AM
Except that he'd say: "Lucas, Deivid23 is dumb", then yeh.. I'd probably agree with him.

That was just too witty, congrats.


Point is, you never really answered what he could have said and doesn't give any margins to interpretation. I think Federer has a BIG ego, thus being self-centered and overconfident, but all that seems to be working for his own good so far, don't know if it'll change.

Itīs not about what he could have said, weīre talking about what he said. Full stop.


I can be objective when I want, and it's not the first time you quietly work your rubbish towards players whose fanbase you don't like or players you don't like at all. Just see the little sarcasm there with expecting to get some laughs with this thread. Typical!

Look. Iīll talk a bit serious. You may have fun with the 90% ass-kissing/non-sense threads at MTF, but others prefer having fun jumping on different threads. I saw the title of this one and opened it bc some friends of mine discussed about that and ALL agreed that sounded as cocky as some of their latest ones after big wins. I knew some of you blind Federer fans would deny the fact and jump on me and I would have some entertainment while doing my job, so guess (or ask Roger) who the dumb one is here ;)

At the beginning I really thought that you'd be more impartial, as you try so hard not to sound biased towards your favorite/against your disliked players, but NO.

And quickly you ran out of things to say and started to attack me personally. Quite pathetic, now probably you'll say I'm not worth your time that's why you didn't answer directly what I asked and started to play with the "fools" to get some laugh. Hm, no... that won't do it.

Sorry but you tried to discredit my opinion with some witty? icons, so I got the challenge. You are another of those brilliant minds who think Iīm a Federer hater, be happy with that. Didnīt expect other thing coming from you, though. :wavey:

Deivid23
09-12-2005, 01:06 AM
Well, to me it looked like an "Oops, I think I said something wrong there" look. You can definitely say he made an arrogant statement, I am not questioning that at all. What I am questioning is, did he really mean it that way?

I think it was possible that it was a statement made at the spur of the moment, and again, correct me if I am wrong here, but I thought he was looking at Andre while making that statement, to say that "I had to play my best to beat you", and then when he actually made his statement and said it out loud, he heard it himself, and thought "wait a minute, that doesn't sound right".

Again, you can say that it was an arrogant statement, but if he didn't mean it that way, then that statement doesn't prove he is arrogant, if that makes any sense at all.

Fair enough. Itīs not so difficult to be objective as u are. That statement was cocky and that was my point.

oneandonlyhsn
09-12-2005, 01:11 AM
If Roger said he played badly people would say that he disrespected Agassi, he said he played well he is too cocky :shrug: the man cant win either way

Skyward
09-12-2005, 01:18 AM
If Roger said he played badly people would say that he disrespected Agassi, he said he played well he is too cocky :shrug: the man cant win either way

Nobody cares, except for a couple of people on this board. I thought it was a little joke, not a serious "statement". If RF said he played badly, the crowd would have thrown spoiled eggs at him. :devil:

lucashg
09-12-2005, 01:18 AM
Itīs not about what he could have said, weīre talking about what he said. Full stop.

I know, but I asked you what you'd like him to have said instead of that and you didn't answer. I never questioned what he said because the thread titles says so.

Look. Iīll talk a bit serious. You may have fun with the 90% ass-kissing/non-sense threads at MTF, but others prefer having fun jumping on different threads. I saw the title of this one and opened it bc some friends of mine discussed about that and ALL agreed that sounded as cocky as some of their latest ones after big wins. I knew some of you blind Federer fans would deny the fact and jump on me and I would have some entertainment while doing my job, so guess (or ask Roger) who the dumb one is here ;)

Hm, so you once again is saying that you said that to piss off his fans. I get it, and if you find funny that go on, then... I think that's quite dumb, and so would Roger because he's the greatest. :p

You are another of those brilliant minds who think Iīm a Federer hater, be happy with that. Didnīt expect other thing coming from you, though. :wavey:

I don't think you're a Federer-hater. I said that you're one of those Queen Anti-Troll followers that'll chase down protective fans and piss them off with some comments. I noticed that from your first post in this thread and you just confirmed. Strange is that you'll act the same as those protective fans when things concern your favorite. Just doesn't seem right, does it?

I put that you might do that with players you don't like because Lopez doesn't seem to have enough fans to piss off in GM.

lucashg
09-12-2005, 01:21 AM
If Roger said he played badly people would say that he disrespected Agassi, he said he played well he is too cocky :shrug: the man cant win either way

No, he can't. Doesn't really matter as long as he wins :devil:, and still it sounded more polite than if he had said otherwise. Of course he could've used some language coordination there to help him, but it was way better than if he had said that he didn't play his best and still won.

its.like.that
09-12-2005, 01:24 AM
Message to Tennis Fool, stop creating so many damn stupid threads on the same topic.

Deivid23
09-12-2005, 01:28 AM
I know, but I asked you what you'd like him to have said instead of that and you didn't answer. I never questioned what he said because the thread titles says so.

I would have liked nothing, cause I couldnīt care less.


Hm, so you once again is saying that you said that to piss off his fans. I get it, and if you find funny that go on, then... I think that's quite dumb, and so would Roger because he's the greatest. :p

Almost correct, Iīd just add "you said that to piss off his blind fans". ;)
And yes, I found that more funny than saying "Roger is the greatest/Nadal has a nice butt/Safin is sexy". Just a matter of tastes. You can keep kissing Rogerīs ass, also, youīre good at that :lol:


I don't think you're a Federer-hater. I said that you're one of those Queen Anti-Troll followers that'll chase down protective fans and piss them off with some comments. I noticed that from your first post in this thread and you just confirmed. Strange is that you'll act the same as those protective fans when things concern your favorite. Just doesn't seem right, does it?
I put that you might do that with players you don't like because Lopez doesn't seem to have enough fans to piss off in GM.

Youīre wrong (again). Iīve been (at least) one of the first to stop euphoria concerning Nadal and pointing out his weaknesses to other fans, or criticizing Verdasco against some other of his fans, itīs all about being capable of being objective no matter you like or dislike the player.

And about LaLoīs, well itīs sooo easy to make fun at his tennis abilities sometimes itīs boring :(

Dirk
09-12-2005, 01:29 AM
I think he is probably saying that to just show that Agassi played well. Because if he said he played his worst match, then it will seem as if he is dissing Agassi's play IMO. I dont think Federer played well though, just in patches like against Hewitt yesterday. I also dont know what happened to his first serves. He seems to have lost a lot of pace on it compared to last year. Just my observation.

Roger doesn't usually hit in the 120 range on his first serves.

oneandonlyhsn
09-12-2005, 01:32 AM
And about LaLoīs, well itīs sooo easy to make fun at his tennis abilities sometimes itīs boring :(

Deivid you know if you'd stop making fun of Lalo I'd love you more :p

Deivid23
09-12-2005, 01:35 AM
Deivid you know if you'd stop making fun of Lalo I'd love you more :p

Looks like ours is an impossible love :sad:

asotgod
09-12-2005, 01:35 AM
Roger doesn't usually hit in the 120 range on his first serves.

Ok, ninja seer. Congrats by the way. I guess he was not really going for his serve like he did against Hewitt last year. But a win is a win, whatever means it's obtained.

lucashg
09-12-2005, 01:43 AM
I would have liked nothing, cause I couldnīt care less.

Thanks for answering. I kinda imagined it'd be something.... empty like this, but had to be sure.

Almost correct, Iīd just add "you said that to piss off his blind fans". ;)
And yes, I found that more funny than saying "Roger is the greatest/Nadal has a nice butt/Safin is sexy". Just a matter of tastes. You can keep kissing Rogerīs ass, also, youīre good at that :lol:

Not quite as good as you are at rimming Nadal's ass. But I'll get better.


Youīre wrong (again). Iīve been (at least) one of the first to stop euphoria concerning Nadal and pointing out his weaknesses to other fans, or criticizing Verdasco against some other of his fans, itīs all about being capable of being objective no matter you like or dislike the player.

No, I'm not wrong. You can get back to any thread concerning Nadal with some objective and yet relatively negative things about him and you'd find yourself and a couple more of Rafa..er, fans get over defensive and all.

Or they don't count because it was all in the name of anti-trolling? :lol:

Verdasco's weaknesses have been so exposed before it doesn't take you to inform people about them. I'd like to see what he can really do, but that's a whole other story.

And about LaLoīs, well itīs sooo easy to make fun at his tennis abilities sometimes itīs boring :(

I agree with that. It is boring.

Jimena
09-12-2005, 01:45 AM
Iīm 100% objective

No one ever is.

Deivid23
09-12-2005, 01:52 AM
Thanks for answering. I kinda imagined it'd be something.... empty like this, but had to be sure.

Maybe what Roger (or any other one) can say gives to you some life, not my case, sorry.


Not quite as good as you are at rimming Nadal's ass. But I'll get better.

You wish, anyway facts vs fantasies itīs always been a lost battle, not worth more discussion.


No, I'm not wrong. You can get back to any thread concerning Nadal with some objective and yet relatively negative about him and you'd find yourself and a couple more of Rafa..er, fans get over defensive and all.

Or they don't count because it was all in the name of anti-trolling? :lol:

If a guy says Nadal has a real weakness (i.e: he has to improve a lot of things, he canīt play indoors, etc), I agree with him. If I say Federer was cocky in that statement, you jump and say my comment is bitter. Yes you are wrong, but as I said I canīt wake you up from your fantasies.


Verdasco's weaknesses have been so exposed before it doesn't take you to inform people about them. I'd like to see what he can really do, but that's a whole another story.

:lol:

Yeah, for sure, Verdasco was very well known here, and all the discussions Iīve had about him are based on my own fantasies :rolleyes:

I agree with that. It is boring.

Yeah, Iīd like him to win some matches in order to see his name around more often.

bad gambler
09-12-2005, 01:53 AM
Message to Tennis Fool, stop creating so many damn stupid threads on the same topic.


too late for that

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 02:02 AM
Message to Tennis Fool, stop creating so many damn stupid threads on the same topic.
Note to Its.like.that. Thanks for bumping my threads, as it's the only intelligent contribution you seem to make at MTF :D :silly:

Deivid23
09-12-2005, 02:06 AM
Note to Its.like.that. Thanks for bumping my threads, as it's the only intelligent contribution you seem to make at MTF :D :silly:

I knew this was gonna be a funny thread :lol:

hablovah19
09-12-2005, 02:10 AM
bravo roger :bowdown:

I can't believe he said that he waited to play his best during the final as usual :lol::devil:

lucashg
09-12-2005, 02:14 AM
You wish, anyway facts vs fantasies itīs always been a lost battle, not worth more discussion.

You are as subtle at it (rimming Nadal's ass) as Agassi is blowing his snot on court. Fantasy, already using that "argument"? :yawn:

If a guy says Nadal has a real weakness (i.e: he has to improve a lot of things, he canīt play indoors, etc), I agree with him. If I say Federer was cocky in that statement, you jump and say my comment is bitter. Yes you are wrong, but as I said I canīt wake you up from your fantasies.

You don't see me jumping on every single negative (true or not) about Federer. Just that I thought you were trying to piss some people off and pointed out that it was just a nasty comment.

If you think you've never played overprotective on Nadal's defense, you must be the one living in fantasy land. But again, you must've interpreted as anti-trolling behavior of yours. :lol:

It's not a question of you being a blind fan of Nadal. Such thing is as blind fan is something more created by haters anyway, I think everyone is able to see positive and negative sides of every player. You can go on saying I'm Federer's ass kisser, still doesn't change that I know of and can see his faults and his merits.


Yeah, for sure, Verdasco was very well known here, and all the discussions Iīve had about him are based on my own fantasies :rolleyes:

Hm, are you the only one that knows about the positive and negative points about Verdasco? Maybe, as with Nadal, you're the expert about them because you've been following them close enough since they were "born", but everyone know the basics. It's not like he's completely unknown. If you fail to see what I was trying to say. The basic stuff are known.


Please, if you're using something lower than the fantasy argument, then just don't bother at all. I wanna sleep anyway.

:wavey:

Deivid23
09-12-2005, 02:25 AM
You don't see me jumping on every single negative (true or not) about Federer. Just that I thought you were trying to piss some people off and pointed out that it was just a nasty comment.

Iīve noticed you just on posts about blind defence of Federer (as this one). This doesnīt mean you may have others, maybe itīs just bad luck.

If you think you've never played overprotective on Nadal's defense, you must be the one living in fantasy land. But again, you must've interpreted as anti-trolling behavior of yours. :lol:

Iīve been protective when I considered it was the thing to do and Iīve been critical (the least of the times, cause I canīt be harsh with him -yet-) when needed. There are useful search tools in this forum to prove it. Learn to use them or improve your memory skills.


It's not a question of you being a blind fan of Nadal. Such thing is as blind fan is something more created by haters anyway, I think everyone is able to see positive and negative sides of every player. You can go on saying I'm Federer's ass kisser, still doesn't change that I know of and can see his faults and his merits.

Not everyone can see non-praising things from their idols as youīve perfectly shown in this thread. Keep dreaming about the fact you are objective.



Hm, are you the only one that knows about the positive and negative points about Verdasco? Maybe, as with Nadal, you're the expert about them because you've been following them close enough since they were "born", but everyone know the basics. It's not like he's completely unknown. If you fail to see what I was trying to say. The basic stuff are known.

You first talk as if what Iīve been discussing was nothing new, and you dare to say that when youīve recognized youīd first seen/noticed Nadal when playing in Brazil early this year. :rolleyes:

Please, if you're using something lower than the fantasy argument, then just don't bother at all. I wanna sleep anyway.

I thought you were already dreaming

drf716
09-12-2005, 02:28 AM
OMG Fderer is so great!!! I hope he keeps on winning until he retires!!!
Wait he cannot retire, it'll be too much for tennis. Tennis needs him so much!!!
He is the hottest man alive!!! Go Roger!!!

lucashg
09-12-2005, 02:52 AM
Iīve noticed you just on posts about blind defence of Federer (as this one). This doesnīt mean you may have others, maybe itīs just bad luck.

Oh, read below.

Iīve been protective when I considered it was the thing to do and Iīve been critical when needed. There are useful search tools in this forum to prove it. Learn to use them or improve your memory skills.

:tape:

Not everyone can see non-praising things from their idols as youīve perfectly shown in this thread. Keep dreaming about the fact you are objective.

Now you'll have to show me when and how I acted as a blind fan. Because I pointed out that your comment was nasty and bitter doesn't mean I tried to protect him anyway, as other posters have said it was arrogant and I said nothing. It may have sounded cocky, and I don't think he meant it, and if he did, I'd just find normal because I think he's all the things that I've stated in a previous post but is too polite to overrate his accomplishments and talent. I've said before why I selected your post and if you don't get it, there's nothing I can do for you. Well, keep dreaming about the fact that you know anything. That might help.

You first talk as if what Iīve been discussing was nothing new, and you dare to say that when youīve recognized youīd first seen/noticed Nadal when playing in Brazil early this year. :rolleyes:

Hm, my first time seeing Nadal was at the USO last year when he got spanked badly by Roddick. Then I saw the same Nadal beating Roddick in the DC. That was the "wake-up" point for him, I guess. I was able to watch more of his matches during the Brazil Open, but I never said it was the first time I noticed him.


I thought you were already dreaming

I will now. Good night, Deivid! :wavey:

lucashg
09-12-2005, 02:54 AM
OMG Fderer is so great!!! I hope he keeps on winning until he retires!!!
Wait he cannot retire, it'll be too much for tennis. Tennis needs him so much!!!
He is the hottest man alive!!! Go Roger!!!

Now this just failed badly. No one is a fast learner as Deivid and Capri Boy, I guess. :p

WF4EVER
09-12-2005, 04:08 AM
This final reminded me very much of the Wimby 2003 Final when it seemed Roddick was going to beat him.

Roger was as flat as I've ever seen him. In fact I didn't realize he could play worse than he did yesterday.

Andre did not do anything special today, IMO. He played the same way his last couple of matches, served well, moved well, got crucial breaks, etc, but Roger just...omg. I just kept urging him on becuase I knew he could step it up another level. I didn't think Andre had another level to go to; he was playing as well as he could play but Federer had options.

When he broke back in the third you could see he had come alive. He just started to click all of a sudden and even though he didn't break when he had those ops he showed his mental fortitude by tearing up that TB.

BTW did you hear McEnroe ask how long Andre could keep up that level of play? I'm sure he did not. DId he ask how long ROger would keep up his bad level of play? I seriously doubt it. They were out of their skins for a bit there, but Roger is a cruel one. Just when you think you have a chance he just slams that door on your hopes. It's scary, really.

While this was in no way his best match or even GS Final, he had to come up with the goods today. He had to turn this match around in order to win it and that's what makes him the best. Agassi realized it after that TB that ROger had arrived. I guess the thought of having to fight his way back in another 5-setter was more than he was mentally or physically fit for.

LCeh
09-12-2005, 04:17 AM
Andre did not do anything special today, IMO. He played the same way his last couple of matches, served well, moved well, got crucial breaks, etc, but Roger just...omg. I just kept urging him on becuase I knew he could step it up another level. I didn't think Andre had another level to go to; he was playing as well as he could play but Federer had options.

Sorry to disagree. I thought Andre played very well today. He made some unbelievable returns to put more pressure on Roger's serve, even though he still got a very high % of first serves in. Andre was dictating the points most of the time during the second and third set, moving Roger side to side, hitting shots flat and deep to push Roger far behind the baseline. He didn't serve a high % of first serves in, but it was enough against Roger's slice backhand return, which I really wondered why he didn't just go over the ball when Andre's second serve wasn't all that good. He was getting punished time and time again with that slice return and he kept hitting them until the third set tiebreak.

BTW did you hear McEnroe ask how long Andre could keep up that level of play? I'm sure he did not. DId he ask how long ROger would keep up his bad level of play? I seriously doubt it. They were out of their skins for a bit there, but Roger is a cruel one. Just when you think you have a chance he just slams that door on your hopes. It's scary, really.

Actually JMac said numerous times how he expected Roger to step up and play better, and hit the returns with more conviction. But that didn't really happen until the third set tiebreak. I don't think he mentioned about Andre's level dropping, but he certainly wondered when Roger was going to step up a gear or two.

Deivid23
09-12-2005, 10:44 AM
Now you'll have to show me when and how I acted as a blind fan. Because I pointed out that your comment was nasty and bitter doesn't mean I tried to protect him anyway, as other posters have said it was arrogant and I said nothing.

My comment wasnīt bitter at all. It reflected a fact (many other people think alike). You took it as an attack and tried to dismiss my comment as if it were a product of my imagination, thatīs enough for me to conclude youīre the blind one here. Any questions?

Hm, my first time seeing Nadal was at the USO last year when he got spanked badly by Roddick. Then I saw the same Nadal beating Roddick in the DC. That was the "wake-up" point for him, I guess. I was able to watch more of his matches during the Brazil Open, but I never said it was the first time I noticed him.

I found one of our old discussions. You say that you knew all I could talk about Verdasco and you dare to say that when you admitted you first noticed Nadal in DC final and C.Sauipe :silly:

Hardly. Most people realized his potential on clay since Davis Cup, then on Costa do Sauipe. Or even before that. I noticed in those two tournaments (match, regarding DC).


Well thatīs a quite wrong assumption. Nadal had been around a lot of time before, you donīt play a DC final if you are an unknown....

Well, that's true. But I believe his first big match was that DC Final, or at least that was the first I've heard/seen.

Hope next time you post in this thread you leave your pillow in your bed :rolleyes:

Sam L (WTAW)
09-12-2005, 10:49 AM
Roger rulez!

its.like.that
09-12-2005, 01:25 PM
Note to Its.like.that. Thanks for bumping my threads, as it's the only intelligent contribution you seem to make at MTF :D :silly:

I can't figure who you service more frequently, wanker wertheim or regal roger...

:scratch:

Action Jackson
09-12-2005, 01:31 PM
I can't figure who you service more frequently, wanker wertheim or regal roger...

:scratch:

He is Worthless's son and someone who like his hero or dad believes Slams should have 3 sets, so make your own judgements from that.

bad gambler
09-12-2005, 01:32 PM
He is Worthless's son and someone who like his hero or dad believes Slams should have 3 sets, so make your own judgements from that.


:lol:

lucashg
09-12-2005, 01:45 PM
My comment wasnīt bitter at all. It reflected a fact (many other people think alike). You took it as an attack and tried to dismiss my comment as if it were a product of my imagination, thatīs enough for me to conclude youīre the blind one here. Any questions?

You don't get it or you don't wanna show you understant it. Just move on, next time you'll do better.

I found one of our old discussions. You say that you knew all I could talk about Verdasco and you dare to say that when you admitted you first noticed Nadal in DC final and C.Sauipe :silly:

Again, you're wrong. I didn't say that all you could talk about Verdasco was known, but the basic stuff yeh, it was. Or is that not true? You do have more info about him than most of us here, that doesn't make you an authority to talk about him whatsoever. You can talk all you want, even if it's redundant bs ir exclusive ultimate news.

Regarding Nadal, I was wrong because I did see him at the USO, but the first match I've noticed him/his potential was at the DC (even though I remembered they did hype him a LOT during the USO match), and yet you said it was in Costa do Sauipe. When you try to put words in my mouth, make sure you read correctly what I said.

And if you remember the time Nadal won the DC match, and even when he started to win his first titles in 2005 (Costa do Sauipe and Acapulco), A LOT of people said it was the first time they'd see him and noticed how great potential he had. That's why I said "most people" realized how much talent he had at that time, and you jumped right in saying it was a wrong assumption. Quite for some, but for a whole of others, not.

And If I started to watch tennis during the Olympics, I couldn't have heard of Nadal before that. You don't have a point again, as usual.


Hope next time you post in this thread you leave your pillow in your bed :rolleyes:

Next time you post in this thread, make sure you have actually something to say instead of going around around, and even quoting things from past threads, making you look like a fool.

Deivid23
09-12-2005, 02:04 PM
You don't get it or you don't wanna show you understant it. Just move on, next time you'll do better.

Letīs better move on, itīs clear as water for an average IQ, canīt help u with that.

Again, you're wrong. I didn't say that all you could talk about Verdasco was known, but the basic stuff yeh, it was. Or is that not true? You do have more info about him than most of us here, that doesn't make you an authority to talk about him whatsoever. You can talk all you want, even if it's redundant bs ir exclusive ultimate news.

You talked about I didnīt say anything new in my discussions about Verdasco, as if you know much about him, which I consider unlikely given you vast? tennis knowledge (shown as you first noticed Nadal in DC final, as I said you canīt play a DC final if you are an unknown)

Regarding Nadal, I was wrong because I did see him at the USO, but the first match I've noticed him/his potential was at the DC (even though I remembered they did hype him a LOT during the USO match), and yet you said it was in Costa do Sauipe. When you try to put words in my mouth, make sure you read correctly what I said.

Just put the letters together and make words, then join them to understand the meaning of the sentence, itīs not so difficult, trust me ;)


And if you remember the time Nadal won the DC match, and even when he started to win his first titles in 2005 (Costa do Sauipe and Acapulco), A LOT of people said it was the first time they'd see him and noticed how great potential he had. That's why I said "most people" realized how much talent he had at that time, and you jumped right in saying it was a wrong assumption. Quite for some, but for a whole of others, not.
And If I started to watch tennis during the Olympics, I couldn't have heard of Nadal before that. You don't have a point again, as usual.

Nadal had already one ATP title not conceeding a set before DC final, had a 3rd and 4th rounds appearances in consecuive AMS, was the key player in Spain road to the finals that year and had had a lot of great wins over top players. Itīs all a matter of knowledge. If people didnīt know him before DC final, well, they canīt be considered as having enough knowledge about actual tennis.

Next time you post in this thread, make sure you have actually something to say instead of going around around, and even quoting things from past threads, making you look like a fool.

Chill out, dude, donīt take this too seriously, next time try to think before you make a stupid denying of a fact and youīll save these kind of discussions ;)

lucashg
09-12-2005, 02:31 PM
Letīs better move on, itīs clear as water for an average IQ, canīt help u with that.

Personal attacks. :yawn: I think that's why you don't understand it. Anyway, you always run out of arguments and start posting bullshit.



You talked about I didnīt say anything new in my discussions about Verdasco, as if you know much about him, which I consider unlikely given you vast? tennis knowledge (shown as you first noticed Nadal in DC final, as I said you canīt play a DC final if you are an unknown)

Here you come again with your trash-talk, just because I started to watch tennis recently I have a limited tennis knowledge? Hm, this statement generalized as it is does sound weird. I don't know about stats from the past and every other great player from the past, but you can't say how much I know about the game. Now who's the cocky one? :rolleyes:

And no, I never said I knew everything you had to talk about Verdasco, but that his main weaknesses were exposed since people realized he had potential but couldn't keep up, that's true.


Just put the letters together and make words, then join them to understand the meaning of the sentence, itīs not so difficult, trust me ;)

No, it's your job to quote me correctly if you're saying I said one thing and then I did not. Can't do that? Quit it.

Nadal had already one ATP title not conceeding a set before DC final, had a 3rd and 4th rounds appearances in consecuive AMS, was the key player in Spain road to the finals that year and had had a lot of great wins over top players. Itīs all a matter of knowledge. If people didnīt know him before DC final, well, they canīt be considered as having enough knowledge about actual tennis.

It's not a matter of knowledge because it was never in question whether all these people had knoledge about actual tennis or not, they just realized him there, and that's it. That's what my post from months ago said. And the vast majority of tennis fans don't follow tennis and Nadal's steps as close as you'd like them to.

Again, most probably had heard the hype before, but didn't actually see it. You can say a player is great until you see him. DC Final was his best exposure to those who hadn't see him play before that.



Chill out, dude, donīt take this too seriously, next time try to think before you make a stupid denying of a fact and youīll save these kind of discussions ;)

I never take these boards too seriously, don't you worry about that. It's funny that I deny facts and you deny fantasies, right?

It's a lost cause when you won't admit that you made a nasty comment, is overprotective of Nadal, and failed to quote me correctly, LOL!

Is that your age after your name? :haha:

nermo
09-12-2005, 02:37 PM
Roger was as flat as I've ever seen him. In fact I didn't realize he could play worse than he did yesterday.
Andre did not do anything special today, IMO. He played the same way his last couple of matches, served well, moved well, got crucial breaks, etc, but Roger just...omg. I just kept urging him on becuase I knew he could step it up another level. I didn't think Andre had another level to go to; he was playing as well as he could play but Federer had options.
BTW did you hear McEnroe ask how long Andre could keep up that level of play? I'm sure he did not. DId he ask how long ROger would keep up his bad level of play? I seriously doubt it. They were out of their skins for a bit there, but Roger is a cruel one. Just when you think you have a chance he just slams that door on your hopes. It's scary, really. posted by WF4 ever

Well, i think Roger was missing some of his famous shots (in this whole tournament, example his backhand shots except for Hewitt's match)and it was specially obvious in the second set of the final match ..where Agassi really found cruel answers to most of Federer's shots and it was one of few times that Federer was looking helpless and nervous ..No doubt Agassi raised to his highest levels in the second and third set(minus tie break)..i think the turning point there was Federer's serve which didn't betray him during the match..and his consistency when it really mattered in the third set..this gave him more confidence to give his best during the tie break, and on the other side, took a lot from Agassi 's spirit and physical condition..
it was a wonderful match from both , Agassi gave all he had whether physically and technically..and Federer simply gave it all it needs to win mentally , physically and beautifully.. :)

Deivid23
09-12-2005, 02:37 PM
Is that your age after your name? :haha:

Another witty? conclussion from you. Of course, itīs wrong.

If I were 23, is that anything to laugh about or that would mean you have more right than me to make opinions bc of being older? I know people younger than 23 that can defend their points of view better and make a much wiser approach to current tennis players than you, btw. ;)

lucashg
09-12-2005, 04:04 PM
Another witty? conclussion from you. Of course, itīs wrong.

It's not "of course", because clearly most people who have a double-digit number right by their nicknames are either telling their age or the year they were born. Since I doubt you were born in 1923, I thought you might have 23 years old, or that age when you registered here (haven't looked up the date of this sad accident). Since you say you're not, whatever.

If I were 23, is that anything to laugh about or that would mean you have more right than me to make opinions bc of being older? I know people younger than 23 that can defend their points of view better and make a much wiser approach to current tennis players than you, btw. ;)

Hm, wrong approach to know my age. Yes, if you were 23 that'd be something to laugh about.

Of course there are people under or above the age of 23 that can defend their points of view and even make a wiser approach to current tennis players better than me, but certainly NOT you.

Glad you gave up on the rest because clearly you had nothing left but personal insults, and it seems like it's the only "argument" you've always had in the first place.

I'm not wasting any more of my time in this thread because you have showed time and time that you are not worth it, :lol:. Can't argue with someone who just keeps attacking me personally without really proving their point (was there ever one?).

This is it, I hope you had your laughs. LOL, I sure ended up having mine.

The End.

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 04:17 PM
He is Worthless's son and someone who like his hero or dad believes Slams should have 3 sets, so make your own judgements from that.
I knew you just couldn't stay nice to me very long :wavey:
BTW, there is no "e" in judgments

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 04:19 PM
:lol:
If you believe everything George and Queen Rebecca throw at you, that's a *very* scary thought :scared:

Deivid23
09-12-2005, 04:36 PM
It's not "of course", because clearly most people who have a double-digit number right by their nicknames are either telling their age or the year they were born. Since I doubt you were born in 1923, I thought you might have 23 years old, or that age when you registered here (haven't looked up the date of this sad accident). Since you say you're not, whatever.

Yeah itīs "of course" indeed. Maybe you would think my name is David and my age is 23, thatīs what I wanted and what I get from simple minds ;)


Hm, wrong approach to know my age. Yes, if you were 23 that'd be something to laugh about.

Nice and convincing theory, congrats genius :lol:



Of course there are people under or above the age of 23 that can defend their points of view and even make a wiser approach to current tennis players better than me, but certainly NOT you.

Yeah, for sure. Youīve proved that enough times, for instance when first noticing Nadal on the DC final :lol:



Glad you gave up on the rest because clearly you had nothing left but personal insults, and it seems like it's the only "argument" you've always had in the first place.

I'm not wasting any more of my time in this thread because you have showed time and time that you are not worth it, :lol:. Can't argue with someone who just keeps attacking me personally without really proving their point (was there ever one?).

This is it, I hope you had your laughs. LOL, I sure ended up having mine.

The End.

Itīs all about fun, glad youīre having a great time around :wavey:

its.like.that
09-12-2005, 04:44 PM
BTW, there is no "e" in judgments

:retard::retard::retard::retard::retard:

judgement and judgment are both acceptable, although the first one is more proper.

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 04:57 PM
:retard::retard::retard::retard::retard:

judgement and judgment are both acceptable, although the first one is more proper.
Sorry, you're wrong. Plus, I wasn't writing to you, unless you happen to be an alias of GeorgeWHitler.

jtipson
09-12-2005, 05:31 PM
Judgement/judgment is a pondian difference. With an "e" is perfectly acceptable in the UK.

Angle Queen
09-12-2005, 05:52 PM
Roger does make cocky statements, but there's something disarming about their frankness. I don't know, he seems sweet when he says them and they're always true!Yep, when I heard it, I first winced...but then he gave us a little laugh, tried to deflect some of the harshness...and moved on. Like we should. The question was a set-up, albeit probably not intentional.

Roger played well. Andre played well. Some of the points were downright amazing and the very best either player had/has to offer. Some of the points stunk and remind us hacks that even the very best players make mistakes too.