Federer: Hero or Villain? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Federer: Hero or Villain?

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-12-2005, 03:29 AM
It seems like everyone on this forum is either black or white on the issue of Fed. Some people seem to hate his guts for constantly winning all the time. Others love him for his undeniable talent.

So is he the hero who will usher tennis into a golden age.
Or is he the villain who will destroy tennis by his dominance.

For people who don't like metaphors:

Is Roger good for the ATP's popularity or bad for it?

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 03:34 AM
This is the Agassi/Sampras debate.

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-12-2005, 03:35 AM
Agassi and Sampras was a rivalry...How is this the same?

Phunkadelicious
09-12-2005, 03:41 AM
He's probably good for tennis from an international standpoint, and bad for tennis from an american standpoint.

I am not a fan of federer but I certainly don't hate him. Maybe if he wasn't such a nice, well rounded guy.....

So I am a subtle shade of gray i guess.

disturb3d
09-12-2005, 03:42 AM
Roger's not a bad or good guy, he has no color or personality. So he can't be classified.

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-12-2005, 03:43 AM
I meant hero and villain metophorically in terms of tennis' growth or diminishment.

Daniel
09-12-2005, 03:52 AM
He is good for tennis for sure. He is more talented than the rest and s in the proccess of becoming a legend.

The Pro
09-13-2005, 10:38 AM
Roger's a hero.

So there.

1sun
09-13-2005, 10:50 AM
hero for me

robinhood
09-13-2005, 12:38 PM
H E R O

Nikki♥
09-13-2005, 12:53 PM
He's a villain, he beats all the other hot guys. :bigcry:

JeNn
09-13-2005, 12:58 PM
He's a villain, he beats all the other hot guys. :bigcry:

And the guys with big penises :sad:

Nikki♥
09-13-2005, 12:59 PM
And the guys with big penises :sad:

Exactly.

mangoes
09-13-2005, 01:10 PM
Hero

I appreciate his winning streak.

Curls
09-13-2005, 01:20 PM
Hero - No
Villain - No
Talented - Absolutely
Good for Tennis - Jury's Still Out - Fans should appreciate his talent and be astounded at how he is able to dominate ... but the general public only ever hear Federer, Federer, Federer ... enough already
Boring / Monotonous - Absolutely

Curls
09-13-2005, 01:22 PM
And the guys with big penises :sad:
and maybe the ones with eensy ones too!! :tape:

Nikki♥
09-13-2005, 01:31 PM
and maybe the ones with eensy ones too!! :tape:

Who has got an eensy one? :eek:

The Pro
09-13-2005, 03:33 PM
And the guys with big penises :sad:

Don't forget the guys with big asses, he beats them too.

Nikki♥
09-13-2005, 04:22 PM
Don't forget the guys with big asses, he beats them too.

And even the ones with no asses.

willie
09-13-2005, 05:17 PM
he is villain, no doubt about it.

Sjengster
09-13-2005, 07:08 PM
Rafa is the only guy who can stop him sawing his hapless ATP colleagues in half while cackling demonically through his Swiss moustache.

Papakori
09-13-2005, 07:13 PM
I think he is a hero :)

tinuviel_estel
09-13-2005, 07:33 PM
Hero

Marine
09-13-2005, 07:47 PM
This thread just means like the others: Is he good or bad for tennis. Or great or boring to see ... :rolleyes:

He's great. Everybody should enjoy watching him. That's all.

lilfairyprincess
09-13-2005, 07:51 PM
Hero - No
Villain - No
Talented - Absolutely
Good for Tennis - Jury's Still Out - Fans should appreciate his talent and be astounded at how he is able to dominate ... but the general public only ever hear Federer, Federer, Federer ... enough already
Boring / Monotonous - Absolutely

:clap2:
i agree with this

DDrago2
09-13-2005, 08:08 PM
I agree that Federer should grow mustache, and also maybe a beard. That would make him far more colorfull, I think.

tennisinparis
09-13-2005, 08:12 PM
Hero - No
Villain - No
Talented - Absolutely
Good for Tennis - Jury's Still Out - Fans should appreciate his talent and be astounded at how he is able to dominate ... but the general public only ever hear Federer, Federer, Federer ... enough already
Boring / Monotonous - Absolutely



PERFECTLY described. I agree with you a 100%. I think he is amazing, but boring to watch, and i am tired of him winning everything. so basically i just repeated what you said.

DDrago2
09-13-2005, 08:27 PM
If Federer is truly not perfect, he is at least very original. I know no similar case in any other sport - in a sense that such a superior player is still some kind of "alternative", "oposition", and not mainstream. I find that eccentric, despite he may often look monotonous.

Marine
09-13-2005, 08:40 PM
I agree that Federer should grow mustache, and also maybe a beard. That would make him far more colorfull, I think.

He's perfect like that, with not too hort hair. :angel:

oneandonlyhsn
09-13-2005, 10:42 PM
Hero no doubt about that in my mind.
I love how he is such a dominating sport but doesnt suck up to corporate giants, which is 1 thing I dont like about North American athletes. I like his independence, working and managing things on his own. A huge part of the reason why he is succesful is he does and fixes things for himself, which is apparent when he plays. When things are not working, he starts thinking differently and more strategically and changes things to his advantage :yeah:

Billy Moonshine
09-13-2005, 11:20 PM
UNtil very recently I saw fed as the villain. B ut then something happened this weekend. I watched him play Nalby, hewitt and Agassi and finally it dawned on me why i didn't like him.
Beacuse I am madly in love with him.
So now i have accepted this and he is my hero.
He is good for tennis as he is a genius, as tennis freak, but he is not going to do much for tennis on his own. He needs better competition. If that were so, tennis would attract more people because conflict/drama draws people in. It drew me into tennis in the form of Edberg/ becker, garf/ navratilova, Graf/ seles,

NewTennisFan
09-13-2005, 11:25 PM
Wow. Federer's not boring! He's got a wonderful personality. You just take what you see at press conferences, and see how calm and cool he is during matches, and assume that makes him boring. What would you rather? That he smashes his tennis racquet around, threatens to start fights and does stand up comedy?

JeNn
09-14-2005, 12:03 AM
and maybe the ones with eensy ones too!! :tape:

:haha: but he has an eensy one himself :haha:

JeNn
09-14-2005, 12:05 AM
Don't forget the guys with big asses, he beats them too.

Yes but the guy with the hugest arse is very difficult for him.

So possibly a huge arse is Federer's Kryptonite.

He certainly has no trouble with guys with big penises like Hewitt and Safin and Kiefer.

Raul-Lopez
09-14-2005, 12:37 AM
HERO, great hero. Great guy and nice person.

But Rafa can finish his crowd very soon

pmhong
09-14-2005, 12:46 AM
Roger's not a bad or good guy, he has no color or personality. So he can't be classified.

No color or no personality??? I've watched tennis since 1984. Amongst some colorful players like Rios, Agassi, and Guga, this guy has been just as colorful and showed some unique personality on the court. Just watch him play. No one ever hit the ball like him. I'm not a Federer fan, but he simply looks colorful. He looks like a Hawk on the court. So fast and so dynamic, especially when he turns from defense to offense. He looked even better when he had the long hair and put on the white head band.

If Roger is not a good guy, then who is? Roger is a hero because tennis could have become majorly boring if Andy Roddict won all the Wimbledon with the Serve and Forehand. Roger saved tennis by rasing the bar to a new level that we have not seen before.

Fi-Fi
09-14-2005, 05:28 AM
hero definately!!
whether you're a fan or not you have to have some respect for his game and his personality as well :yeah:

AgassiFan
09-14-2005, 05:49 AM
Federer: Hero or Villain? ?


Neither.

He's a crusty but benign eminence grise with a maniacal bent.

Nikki♥
09-14-2005, 08:29 AM
Yes but the guy with the hugest arse is very difficult for him.


The guy with the hugest ass. :drool:

disturb3d
09-14-2005, 08:41 AM
No color or no personality??? I've watched tennis since 1984. Amongst some colorful players like Rios, Agassi, and Guga, this guy has been just as colorful and showed some unique personality on the court. Just watch him play. No one ever hit the ball like him. I'm not a Federer fan, but he simply looks colorful. He looks like a Hawk on the court. So fast and so dynamic, especially when he turns from defense to offense. He looked even better when he had the long hair and put on the white head band.

If Roger is not a good guy, then who is? Roger is a hero because tennis could have become majorly boring if Andy Roddict won all the Wimbledon with the Serve and Forehand. Roger saved tennis by rasing the bar to a new level that we have not seen before.An ability to play tennis, does not give you a personality. Silly willy.

A good guy? You are what you're born. And he was born a noisy, temperamental bihatch.
To this day, thats what he is. Although he's gone to many lengths to disguise it.

sigmagirl91
09-14-2005, 08:42 AM
Roger is a hero, in my opinion.

Mechlan
09-14-2005, 08:47 AM
Wow. Federer's not boring! He's got a wonderful personality. You just take what you see at press conferences, and see how calm and cool he is during matches, and assume that makes him boring. What would you rather? That he smashes his tennis racquet around, threatens to start fights and does stand up comedy?

Yes, on the stand up.

Brizio
09-14-2005, 09:27 AM
Fed is neither a hero or a villain. He's just a wonderful player. How can you imagine he could diminish tennis. He takes this sport to its higher level, to its higher majesty. Federer is the best thing that could happen to tennis. Because his tennis is a model for any tennis player, because his behaviour on court is just perfect, and because he is such a nice guy. I am not a fan, I am just admirative (I'm more a Safin and Ferrero fan).
However, you're right when you say that competition can suffer from his dominance. But on an other hand, if every player improves in order to beat him one day, then it's all benefit for tennis!

aneevar
09-14-2005, 11:30 AM
a HERO for sure. i simply cant understand why we are debating this , and why he is considered not to have a personality . the guy plays great tennis , showcases the sport in such a subtle and beautiful manner to even casual watchers- this is definitely good for promoting tennis . about the charge that he lacks a personality i beg to differ. he comes across quite open and honest in his pressers , gives opinion on most of the issues freely , doesnt commit social gaffes , tries to keep a level head and people accuse him of not having personality . in recent past no other no 1 was so responsible and well behaved( he certainly is more open than sampras & can have fun on court as well- see the TB of sontoro-fed match).
another thing that people are so sure is feds dominance , sure hes winning ,but he's not winning ugly - thats the difference . two types of games appear interesting - 1. when there is a close contest with possibly high quality tennis(fed-safin AO SF) OR 2 when one player though he thrashes other plays a superlative game hitting great winners(fed-roddick WIMBY F). While the 1st is always > over second , 2nd is far better than watching a 4/5 setter prone with UEs and scratchy play.
lastly the dominance of any player can come to an end anytime (anybody remembers graf being pushed aside by seles in early nintes ,when she was at her prime ).who knows rafa might just do the same to fed on hard courts in a couple of years ( he has a lot to improve but in past he has shown great capacity and attitude). Also dominance throws in a certain thinking aspect to the game - how should the champ be approached , what to try, whether to change style and so on - great for learners of game !!

Shabazza
09-14-2005, 11:36 AM
a HERO for sure. i simply cant understand why we are debating this , and why he is considered not to have a personality . the guy plays great tennis , showcases the sport in such a subtle and beautiful manner to even casual watchers- this is definitely good for promoting tennis . about the charge that he lacks a personality i beg to differ. he comes across quite open and honest in his pressers , gives opinion on most of the issues freely , doesnt commit social gaffes , tries to keep a level head and people accuse him of not having personality . in recent past no other no 1 was so responsible and well behaved( he certainly is more open than sampras & can have fun on court as well- see the TB of sontoro-fed match).
another thing that people are so sure is feds dominance , sure hes winning ,but he's not winning ugly - thats the difference . two types of games appear interesting - 1. when there is a close contest with possibly high quality tennis(fed-safin AO SF) OR 2 when one player though he thrashes other plays a superlative game hitting great winners(fed-roddick WIMBY F). While the 1st is always > over second , 2nd is far better than watching a 4/5 setter prone with UEs and scratchy play.
lastly the dominance of any player can come to an end anytime (anybody remembers graf being pushed aside by seles in early nintes ,when she was at her prime ).who knows rafa might just do the same to fed on hard courts in a couple of years ( he has a lot to improve but in past he has shown great capacity and attitude). Also dominance throws in a certain thinking aspect to the game - how should the champ be approached , what to try, whether to change style and so on - great for learners of game !!

you're speaking my mind :yeah:

Jimnik
09-14-2005, 12:05 PM
Is Roger good for the ATP's popularity or bad for it?
Hard to say. You certainly can't criticise his efforts. In one year he's done more to try to promote the sport than Sampras did in his entire career. The Dubai helipad, the Hamburg tennis boat and all the charity events he's done shows he's trying.

The problem is his dominance. He wins every match too easily and, while hard-core tennis fans say it's great to watch such a talented player, the other fans think it's boring and too predictable. Generally it's better for a sport to have a few rivalries at the top but I'm not sure Fed has any rivals at the moment. Hopefully next year Nadal and Gasquet can play better on hard courts.

Another problem is he comes from such a small country. When Becker and Graff were winning Wimbledon, Germans became hugely interested in the sport. Americans were kept interested with the Sampras-Agassi rivalry. And now, Spain and Argentina have dozens of players in the top 100 to keep their countries interested in the sport. But Switzerland has only 7 million people compared to Germany's 80 million, America's 300million, Spain's 40 million and Argentina's 30 million. And, off course, UK and France have 60 million each so you can see why it's in the ATP's interest for players like Murray and Gasquet to do well over the next 10 years.

PamV
09-14-2005, 12:43 PM
I think he's good for tennis. He is what got me as interested as I currently am where I follow even the minor tournaments.

As for the dominance I don't assume that's going to last 6 years like Sampras stretch as #1. I don't think Sampras played as many tournaments as Federer has been playing getting to the finals of most of them. I would like for Roger to exceed Sampras record, but I wonder if it's physically possible?

If Nadal wasn't such a close second with his wins then Federer could afford to play less and win less, but as it is he can't relax.

PamV
09-14-2005, 12:46 PM
The problem is his dominance. He wins every match too easily and, while hard-core tennis fans say it's great to watch such a talented player, the other fans think it's boring and too predictable.

It doesn't appear to me that Federer wins all of his matches easily. It's often said he appears to be struggling and that he's not playing well etc. He didn't have an easy time with Santoro or Kiefer in the USOpen, did he?

So far Nadal is completely dominant on clay and I always assume he's going to win every clay match and that seems boring to me. In fact, I don't think Nadal struggles or hardly ever goes to tiebreaks in his clay matches ....does he?

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-14-2005, 06:36 PM
Well Nadal still loses sets on clay.
Federer dominates on grass and almost never loses a set.
Remember the Wimbledon final it was a slaughter, while the French final was a closer match which people find more exciting.

Neutral people love an underdog having a chance at winning.

ExpectedWinner
09-14-2005, 07:01 PM
Another problem is he comes from such a small country. When Becker and Graff were winning Wimbledon, Germans became hugely interested in the sport. Americans were kept interested with the Sampras-Agassi rivalry. And now, Spain and Argentina have dozens of players in the top 100 to keep their countries interested in the sport. But Switzerland has only 7 million people compared to Germany's 80 million, America's 300million, Spain's 40 million and Argentina's 30 million. And, off course, UK and France have 60 million each so you can see why it's in the ATP's interest for players like Murray and Gasquet to do well over the next 10 years.

According to this logic it's the ATP's interest for players from China/India to do well over the next 200 years.
IMO, a true talent doesn't have a nationality. Personally I never root for a "flag".

croat123
09-14-2005, 07:05 PM
roger is good for tennis internationally, but he could single-handedly kill men's tennis in the u.s. because americans are xenophobic :o

AgassiFan
09-15-2005, 12:26 AM
.The Dubai helipad

Whatever it costs, I am going to spend at least one night of my future honeymoon(s) on that thing. I made that promise to myself.

pmhong
09-15-2005, 03:31 PM
An ability to play tennis, does not give you a personality. Silly willy.

A good guy? You are what you're born. And he was born a noisy, temperamental bihatch.
To this day, thats what he is. Although he's gone to many lengths to disguise it.

Ability to play tennis is what gives personality on tennis court. Not just the behavior, looks, or clothes. All tennis players have ability, but players like Federer, Guga, and Agassi make it shine in a special way.

Federer does not cuss at umpires, or put down other player during interviews. This is self control and that makes him a good guy on the tennis court and in the locker room. I don't know what he does in private and most people don't. We judge professionals by how they behave in public. There are a lot of tennis players who don't do this well. Everyone knows that he showed a lot of temper when he was a junior player. He became a role model for young player by turning it around. This point also is not very hard to understand and agree on, unless you are silly.

yanchr
09-15-2005, 04:14 PM
Remember the Wimbledon final it was a slaughter, while the French final was a closer match which people find more exciting.
Note to you: this 'people' doesn't include many, surely not most.

yanchr
09-15-2005, 04:17 PM
This point also is not very hard to understand and agree on, unless you are silly.
No doubt it is hard to understand and agree on for him/her, so he/she is silly. Just stop making sense to a hater.

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-15-2005, 04:19 PM
Yanchr are you saying blowouts are more exciting than close matches?

yanchr
09-15-2005, 04:25 PM
Yanchr are you saying blowouts are more exciting than close matches?
Blowouts like Wimbledon final is surely more exciting than some tedious long rallying counterpunching close ones, for me, at least.

Rafa = Fed Killa
09-15-2005, 04:29 PM
I guess we have different tastes. That's cool.
I just feel new people to tennis or neutral people would be more excited with a close match where it seems either guy can win than a foregone conclusion.