A Federer Fan has hung up his ninja gear for good [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

A Federer Fan has hung up his ninja gear for good

Pages : [1] 2

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 02:35 PM
Now hear me out. Perhaps you think I am being irrational or unduly harsh in the face of a lone defeat but I am heartfelt in this sentiment. I have decided to give up tennis for a while at least and pursue other hobbies because of my dissapointment at the manner of Federer's loss. It is my fault that I have grown too pychologicallly attached to his success and this let down has left me completely drained and depressed for the forseeable future. The fact that Federer lost is not the main reason for my disgust. Only the manner in which he lost.

Today all of Roger's glorious achievements meant nothing. When somebody actually gave him a challenge he folded just like the Federer who folded to hewitt in Australia. Though I was sad after Federer's losses in Australia and Roland Garros I could deal with them because I felt Roger had played his heart out in Melbourne and never really looked right from the start at the FO semifinal. Here i cannot accept his loss. Sjengster was completely right about the growing fragility he sensed in Federer, especially on break point conversion. We saw the seeds of his defeat in the second and third sets of his US Open Final win over Agassi (also some shaky moments vs. hewitt, and many other matches this year) where he let Agassi off the hook in humerous service games when he was up 40-15 or 40-30. In the end it didn't matter there but the fault lines were clear to see for an inquiring mind. In today's match Federer had his moment of truth at 6-5 in the fifth.

He was just about to cement one of the greatest comebacks in recent years. The match was on his racket and he only needed to dig out four first serves and a few potent groundstrokes against a tight Nalbandian in order to save the day. It was here that Roger's true mettle was found wanting. A sign of a true tennis great is the ability to close out matters when blood is smelt. With a match on his racket Sampras never failed to deliver on the big stage. But amazingly Roger's serve, the assumed better serve of the two players in today's final, proved to be the more impotent one.

We saw that when faced with a talented and highly motivated opponent Roger does not have the ability to take a match out of their hands with forcing play like Pete could with his serve-and-volley game. He was at 30-00 and managed to double fault yet again, and then surrender the game in an astonishing display of fragility that harkened to his early days on the tour. In the ensuing tiebreak he managed to let Nalbandian get an early lead which the Argentine never relinquished and the five set conquest was complete.

I can honestly say that i am disgusted with Roger's performance today, injury or no. He realized the stakes and history on the line. but as soon as he won the second set on tiebreak he seemed so relieved that he immediately handed Davide the third set. Make no mistake, this final featured great play by Nalbandian and was markedly better than any other match at the Cup and many other matches played this year. But it was a choke of the highest order by Roger, and one that may be a turning point(for the worse) of his career.

The end of this year ends on a sharply sour note, he has once again let nalbandian pyschologically enter his head, and future success at the majors is less than clear if he meets similar resistance from other players next year without doing some soul searching, a lot of offseason work, and a retooling of his repertoire, game, and style of play. Roger's serve was so pathetic in this match that even at 40-00 I expected nalbandian to fight to deuce and eventually win the game. There was no certainty at all in his shots and his first serve percentage was attrocious. But I witheld my anger thinking that Roger would win the "big points" and not fail to capitalize on any big break tha came his way. Today he had the match handed to him on a silver platter and tossed it away. My respect for Federer dropped significantly. He lacked professionalism in closing out after having a two-sets to love lead. I believe this match will break his spirit much in the way that Sharapova's loss to Serena in Australia has seen her in a decline.

There is no excuse for the lacksadaisicalness and lack of focus and hunger Roger exhibited today, and I was ashamed to be his fan for the first time in my life. I cringed with each netted return, each netted first serve, each stoned volley. I could not see any areas in which Roches tutelage has helped him I am sorry to say. His netplay seems to have weakened since 2003. And his aggresiveness has waned since last year. He thought that slicing deep balls to Nalbandian, and playing half-hearted service games would get the job done against Nalbandian. Today we saw that Federer the headcase and choker we once new is not a vanished man but a persona hiding in Roger who only rears his ugly head when the going gets tough. I hope Roger had a good hard cry after this loss because I wouldn't want the match to hurt me more than it did him.

This was not one of those matches where you gamely sallute your opponents superior play and content yourself to the fact that you gave all of yourself. This was a loss that should make him weep, curse his weakness, and make him spend hours reviewing tape and retooling himself on the practice court. He blew it today. And I hope other federer fans don't meekly salute him for his "fight" in the last set but actually call him on his incredibly poor and "soft" performance today. I know some of you will try to laugh at the fact that I am criticizing one of four losses he has held on the year, but such is federer's position at the moment that one can never be content to look at a glass as half full but honestly evaluate his play. Please all of you tell me of your thoughts on this subject. Even if you say I am totally crazy, spoiled by Roger's successes, etc. I would appreciate hearing from you.

rofe
11-20-2005, 02:39 PM
I can't be bothered to read the logic behind your decision but good luck to you.

Scotso
11-20-2005, 02:40 PM
It's clear you were not a Federer fan. You were a whoever-is-#1-and-winning-every-match fan.

Flibbertigibbet
11-20-2005, 02:41 PM
Of course, six Slams at the tender age of 24, two Masters Cup, eight Masters Series, #1 for a 100 something weeks, etc., etc. is a sign of a failing ninja. I think I'm going to go strangle myself now, I have nothing in my life now that Federer has finally lost a final.

(Yes, I did read your whole post.)

P.S. If you're being sarcastic, I have to say - this is some genius work. :worship:

rexman
11-20-2005, 02:42 PM
Thank god you're not a Myskina fan like me. You'd have killed yourself years ago.

Fergie
11-20-2005, 02:44 PM
What a fan! :rolleyes:

Saumon
11-20-2005, 02:44 PM
Thank god you're not a Myskina fan like me. You'd have killed yourself years ago.
or a Safin fan :retard:

*Ljubica*
11-20-2005, 02:44 PM
It's clear you were not a Federer fan. You were a whoever-is-#1-and-winning-every-match fan.

:worship: :worship: And how the hell can someone be "disgusted" with the performance of a man who fought til the end of a match, came back from 0-4 in the final set and took that match to a final set tie-break, despite recent injury and lack of proper preparation? If I was Roger I would be delighted to lose a "fan" like this - he deserves better.

sigmagirl91
11-20-2005, 02:44 PM
OK.....whatever floats your boat, dude.

Sjengster
11-20-2005, 02:44 PM
Oh, good God. Where are the violins when you need them?

Yes, I was the one who pointed out Federer's appalling breakpoint conversion, but that has ALWAYS been a problem with him, it's not a new development in the last few tournaments. At least these days he usually wins the match despite blowing so many chances to break, this time it was the reverse. No doubt this loss is demoralising and dispiriting for him, but I really don't think it was a choke, and there is absolutely no basis for suggesting that it signals a downturn in form next year - unless, of course, the ankle still remains troublesome.

The most offensive part of this cavalcade of crap is the way it completely downplays the role Nalbandian played in his victory. He has always been a tough opponent for Federer, and always will be - you have to play at your very best level to put him away, and Federer wasn't at his best level today for one reason or other.

MissMoJo
11-20-2005, 02:45 PM
K. Good riddance

wowfed
11-20-2005, 02:46 PM
Sorry mate.. if you favor any player blindly thats what happens. Tennis is a game which is bigger than the players themselves. Only cure for your disease is to like the game instead of players.. Then you will appreciate who ever hits beautiful shots of that racket.. Its truly your loss if you stop watching or playing tennis.

As for as todays match David beat Federer in a wonderful match fair and square. With all due respect to Fed, David deserved to win this match. I was surprised to see David bashing in some threads for he didn not qualify for the event. I think people should stop this hatred and be happy for this guy.. So what if he didn't qualify for the event. Its not his fault others were injured. Could you have imagined Roddick or Hewitt beating Federer in this way. Not in my dreams. Only a fully fit Safin could have challenged Fed. As for as Fed he deserved to loose this match. I donno the state of his injuries but he was having serious trouble putting his first serves in. All he had to do was to put two good first serves in while serving for the match. He choked.. Im not blaming him for anything. Appreciate Fed's mental toughness for being able to come back from down 0-4 in the final set to push a tie break. Isn't this good that Fed knows there are lot of serious challengers to his throne now. May be he will come back even stronger next year.
For now lets all raise a toast to David Nalbandian. He played the big points well and rightly smacked Fed's struggling poor second serves. Nalbandian proved why he is such a great returner and a excellent ball striker. As for as the standard of the match I would say it will come close to AO semis and Miami finals . Only difference is that Fed's performance was much much better in those two matches. I would still say a wonderful performance from Fed. Its no easy feat coming back into the match from 0-4 down in the fifth set. Excellent end to the season finale. Both Mens and Womens's YEC finals lived up to its hype and expectations....

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 02:46 PM
It's clear you were not a Federer fan. You were a whoever-is-#1-and-winning-every-match fan.


Can't a person be both? I don't see what is wrong with gravitating towards the great players of each generation. It seems like some people here think you should be a fan of Acasuso or whom have you simply because it makes you unique and a more eclectic tennis fan. I won't deny that I am a Fed fan because he wins just as I was a Sampras and Agassi fan because they won. The very qualities that allow a player to be a dominant #1 as well as his goodness as a person are why I am a fed fan.

nobama
11-20-2005, 02:47 PM
:haha: This is funny. I'm sure Roger's glad to know he has fans like you that he can count on in good times and bad...

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 02:48 PM
Sorry mate.. if you favor any player blindly thats what happens. Tennis is a game which is bigger than the players themselves. Only cure for your disease is to like the game instead of players.. Then you will appreciate who ever hits beautiful shots of that racket.. Its truly your loss if you stop watching or playing tennis.

As for as todays match David beat Federer in a wonderful match fair and square. With all due respect to Fed, David deserved to win this match. I was surprised to see David bashing in some threads for he didn not qualify for the event. I think people should stop this hatred and be happy for this guy.. So what if he didn't qualify for the event. Its not his fault others were injured. Could you have imagined Roddick or Hewitt beating Federer in this way. Not in my dreams. Only a fully fit Safin could have challenged Fed. As for as Fed he deserved to loose this match. I donno the state of his injuries but he was having serious trouble putting his first serves in. All he had to do was to put two good first serves in while serving for the match. He choked.. Im not blaming him for anything. Appreciate Fed's mental toughness for being able to come back from down 0-4 in the final set to push a tie break. Isn't this good that Fed knows there are lot of serious challengers to his throne now. May be he will come back even stronger next year.
For now lets all raise a toast to David Nalbandian. He played the big points well and rightly smacked Fed's struggling poor second serves. Nalbandian proved why he is such a great returner and a excellent ball striker. As for as the standard of the match I would say it will come close to AO semis and Miami finals . Only difference is that Fed's performance was much much better in those two matches. I would still say a wonderful performance from Fed. Its no easy feat coming back into the match from 0-4 down in the fifth set. Excellent end to the season finale. Both Mens and Womens's YEC finals lived up to its hype and expectations....

You are completely right when you say I should like the game and not the players, and I do to some extent...tennis is a sport of personalities. It is going to be incredibly hard to wean myself from an excessive dependence on fed winning, though I realize I should.

cobalt60
11-20-2005, 02:49 PM
Sorry mate.. if you favor any player blindly thats what happens. Tennis is a game which is bigger than the players themselves. Only cure for your disease is to like the game instead of players.. Then you will appreciate who ever hits beautiful shots of that racket.. Its truly your loss if you stop watching or playing tennis.

....
I am in total agreement with you at this point in my tennis watching career.
Kudos.

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 02:51 PM
Thank god you're not a Myskina fan like me. You'd have killed yourself years ago.

I definitely feel for you. I pretty much trashed my dorm room and considered doing more before I calmed down. But actually writing this thread despite its receival has proven cathartic for me. Maybe the rest of the day won't be too much of a bust.

rofe
11-20-2005, 02:52 PM
Can't a person be both? I don't see what is wrong with gravitating towards the great players of each generation. It seems like some people here think you should be a fan of Acasuso or whom have you simply because it makes you unique and a more eclectic tennis fan. I won't deny that I am a Fed fan because he wins just as I was a Sampras and Agassi fan because they won. The very qualities that allow a player to be a dominant #1 as well as his goodness as a person are why I am a fed fan.

There is another term for it - a bandwagoner. Someone who gets on a player's bandwagon only because he/she is winning. If you were a true Fed fan, you would also be a fan of his game not just of his win/loss ratio.

Anyway, hope you have better luck jumping on Nadal's bandwagon when he starts winning a lot more.

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 02:53 PM
:worship: :worship: And how the hell can someone be "disgusted" with the performance of a man who fought til the end of a match, came back from 0-4 in the final set and took that match to a final set tie-break, despite recent injury and lack of proper preparation? If I was Roger I would be delighted to lose a "fan" like this - he deserves better.

The fact that he fought that much to get the match on his racket only made the loss that much harder to swallow. It wasn't much of a consolation for me despite the outstanding effort. I would have rather he retired as soon as his movement started looking noticably impaired rather than fight that hard only to come up short, and short because he couldn't hold serve for one game when it mattered the most.

nkhera1
11-20-2005, 02:53 PM
Fed will be fine. I remember everyone saying that after Safin's lost he wouldn't be the same and he went on to have a really dominant year. I don't think Federer will do as well (he will still do great but i think more than 4 losses) next year as this year but that has more to do with the fact that others will raise their game not that Fed will choke.

*Ljubica*
11-20-2005, 02:55 PM
Can't a person be both? I don't see what is wrong with gravitating towards the great players of each generation. It seems like some people here think you should be a fan of Acasuso or whom have you simply because it makes you unique and a more eclectic tennis fan. I won't deny that I am a Fed fan because he wins just as I was a Sampras and Agassi fan because they won. The very qualities that allow a player to be a dominant #1 as well as his goodness as a person are why I am a fed fan.

A true fan is someone who supports their player even when they're down - in fact it's when a player is down that they need their fans the most.....The very fact that you say you were an Agassi fan (so presumably not any longer even though he is still playing) - proves that you only support the winners, and as soon as they have a bad result or a losing streak you forget their "goodness as a person" and scarper off to the next Number 1 player. I can assure you that Roger will be as good a person tonight as he was yesterday - so why desert him just because he lost one match? Just totally pathetic :rolleyes: And - yes - I do support Acasuso and very proud to do so, win or lose ;)

As for trashing your room over a tennis result - there are people dying out there in the real world - grow up :rolleyes:

Sjengster
11-20-2005, 02:55 PM
I definitely feel for you. I pretty much trashed my dorm room and considered doing more before I calmed down. But actually writing this thread despite its receival has proven cathartic for me. Maybe the rest of the day won't be too much of a bust.

Hmmm... I must admit, I have cried once after a defeat ('twas not a Federer one, and it was a few years ago when I was a relatively new tennis fan), but this seems like an overreaction to me. A tough defeat for Federer still gives him far more as a consolation prize, like 2 Slams, 4 Masters Series and a career-best winning streak, than other players who have lost tough five-setters this year will probably ever have (e.g. Ljubicic in his indoor losses).

Billabong
11-20-2005, 02:56 PM
Why the hell are you letting one single defeat lose your " Federer fan status"? That's ridiculous, Roger was far from 100% today and accomplished awesome things this year. Why don't you want to remember his Wimbledon, US Open, Miami, Indian Wells, Hamburg and Cincinnati wins?? Or you would have preferred Roger did not fight today and lost 6-0 in the 5th set, as it was going to be before he fought?? I guess you can't be a fan of any tennis player, as each of them will have a heartbreaking defeat one day. At least, don't show up again here if Roger wins slams next year.

Carlita
11-20-2005, 02:58 PM
:tape: oh dear......the guy lost 4 matches all year!!!:rolleyes: My goodness......and you give up on someone like that:cuckoo:??? Where do I sign so that my 3 favs (Moya, Verdasco and Nadal) will also only lose 4 matches in 2006????? Please, I'd even pay big money to make that happen!!!

Nice fan you are.......:rolleyes:

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 02:58 PM
Oh, good God. Where are the violins when you need them?

Yes, I was the one who pointed out Federer's appalling breakpoint conversion, but that has ALWAYS been a problem with him, it's not a new development in the last few tournaments. At least these days he usually wins the match despite blowing so many chances to break, this time it was the reverse. No doubt this loss is demoralising and dispiriting for him, but I really don't think it was a choke, and there is absolutely no basis for suggesting that it signals a downturn in form next year - unless, of course, the ankle still remains troublesome.

The most offensive part of this cavalcade of crap is the way it completely downplays the role Nalbandian played in his victory. He has always been a tough opponent for Federer, and always will be - you have to play at your very best level to put him away, and Federer wasn't at his best level today for one reason or other.

what more do you want me to say? I acknowledged that nalbandian played great- more power to him. But how can you not deny getting broken when serving for the match and then promplty folding in the succeeding tiebreak is not a choke at some level?- especially for a player as mentally tough as Federer? Am I supposed to shut up and salute Roger because critcizing him makes me a fickle fan and a bandwagoner?

Carlita
11-20-2005, 02:58 PM
A true fan is someone who supports their player even when they're down - in fact it's when a player is down that they need their fans the most.....The very fact that you say you were an Agassi fan (so presumably not any longer even though he is still playing) - proves that you only support the winners, and as soon as they have a bad result or a losing streak you forget their "goodness as a person" and scarper off to the next Number 1 player. I can assure you that Roger will be as good a person tonight as he was yesterday - so why desert him just because he lost one match? Just totally pathetic :rolleyes: And - yes - I do support Acasuso and very proud to do so, win or lose ;)

As for trashing your room over a tennis result - there are people dying out there in the real world - grow up :rolleyes::yeah: well said hun!! :hug:

Flibbertigibbet
11-20-2005, 02:59 PM
Thanks to you, I am imagining an actual ninja sitting in the bleachers at Shanghai, clutching a Federer poster and openly weeping. :haha:

What a beautifully tragic image. :eek:

lau
11-20-2005, 03:00 PM
Thanks to you, I am imagining an actual ninja sitting in the bleachers at Shanghai, clutching a Federer poster and openly weeping. :haha:
:haha: :haha: :haha:

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 03:02 PM
A true fan is someone who supports their player even when they're down - in fact it's when a player is down that they need their fans the most.....The very fact that you say you were an Agassi fan (so presumably not any longer even though he is still playing) - proves that you only support the winners, and as soon as they have a bad result or a losing streak you forget their "goodness as a person" and scarper off to the next Number 1 player. I can assure you that Roger will be as good a person tonight as he was yesterday - so why desert him just because he lost one match? Just totally pathetic :rolleyes: And - yes - I do support Acasuso and very proud to do so, win or lose ;)

As for trashing your room over a tennis result - there are people dying out there in the real world - grow up :rolleyes:

Rosie, of course I know that looking at the big picture I have better things to do with my time than pitch a hissie fit because Federer lost one of four times this year. But on some level we have to be a little shallow to even like the game of tennis in the first place. I mean it's just some guys hitting a stupid ball around right. If we took a universal outlook on everything we would all have to become monks ridding the world of societal ills every moment of our waking lives.

Sjengster
11-20-2005, 03:02 PM
what more do you want me to say? I acknowledged that nalbandian played great- more power to him. But how can you not deny getting broken when serving for the match and then promplty folding in the succeeding tiebreak is not a choke at some level?- especially for a player as mentally tough as Federer? Am I supposed to shut up and salute Roger because critcizing him makes me a ficke fan and a bandwagoner?

I can deny it because of the physical factors involved. Federer was always hanging on a knife edge on his serve in the final set even though he had held the last couple of times fairly easily, he had to depend on first serves and quick points to stand any chance of winning. He made two, he got to 30-0; he didn't make another one and he lost four points in a row, simple as that. Considering that he had been missing the first serve regularly as a result of fatigue from the start of the fourth to 0-4 down in the fifth, I don't think his failure to produce one here was a sign of nerves. Two of those four points were clean winners from Nalbandian, BTW.

basil333
11-20-2005, 03:04 PM
Tourmalante

I just have one thing to say to you...

What match were you watching?

The rest of the world were watching David Nalbandian (he's another tennis player btw, he's Argentinian, he was the one wearing the white bandana with YY on it) and Roger Federer fight tooth and nail for a title in Shanghai.

The match everyone else around the world was watching was the sort of match EVERY single match should be like - electric and nail-biting - NOT an "ok Roger's in this match lets just give him the trophy" match.

SO... I ask again .... what match were you watching?

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 03:04 PM
:tape: oh dear......the guy lost 4 matches all year!!!:rolleyes: My goodness......and you give up on someone like that:cuckoo:??? Where do I sign so that my 3 favs (Moya, Verdasco and Nadal) will also only lose 4 matches in 2006????? Please, I'd even pay big money to make that happen!!!

Nice fan you are.......:rolleyes:

I hate this relativistic approach to being a fan. The very fact that Roger is such a good player means he has to be judged by higher standards. Of course we could just salute him for being better than everyonelse. But are we just to count our blessings everytime he loses instead of trying to call it like it is?

Flibbertigibbet
11-20-2005, 03:05 PM
What literary finesse, J'torian! What a heartbreaking tale! It makes my tears seep blood. :D

(Unfortunately, the good reputation thing doesn't seem to be working for me, but as soon as it does...)

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 03:06 PM
I can deny it because of the physical factors involved. Federer was always hanging on a knife edge on his serve in the final set even though he had held the last couple of times fairly easily, he had to depend on first serves and quick points to stand any chance of winning. He made two, he got to 30-0; he didn't make another one and he lost four points in a row, simple as that. Considering that he had been missing the first serve regularly as a result of fatigue from the start of the fourth to 0-4 down in the fifth, I don't think his failure to produce one here was a sign of nerves. Two of those four points were clean winners from Nalbandian, BTW.

Nalbandian came up with some phenomenal points. But Roger's inability to get a first-serve in couldn't be due to fatigue because he was already failing to do so in the third set.

Tennis Fool
11-20-2005, 03:06 PM
Tourmanlante: As a Safin-fan I will say (and to quote the Governator) you'll be back.

When Feds plays at a level so far above the others it's almost a shock when he comes back to earth. But come on! He only lost 4 times this year! He won all of his finals in a 2 1/2 year span! He matched Muster's record (the second best in Open Era) and you know JMac was sweating there for a moment :lol: He's won 6 Slams, and this year became the first person to repeat the Wimbledon/USO double in Open Era! He's already matched Becker and Edberg's number of Slams. Next year, he will have the opportunity to taken on another JMac record of 7 Slams. If he wins two Slams next year he'll match Agassi. He's already on the track to match Sampras.

Take a break, have something cold to drink and come back fresh for the AO.

Flibbertigibbet
11-20-2005, 03:08 PM
I hate this relativistic approach to being a fan. The very fact that Roger is such a good player means he has to be judged by higher standards. Of course we could just salute him for being better than everyonelse. But are we just to count our blessings everytime he looses instead of trying to call it like it is?

Sampras was such a good player. Sampras lost many matches. Lendl was such a good player. Lendl lost many matches. Federer is compared to the Samprases, the Lendls, etc. - and even if you can say he's superior to them, I still don't see why your standards are that much higher for him. Perhaps 'just' counting your blessings might be better right now. Don't wallow in depression - I know what you're feeling, and I felt similarly after Federer's loss to Nadal in the French, but Roger surpassed expectations for the rest of the year, despite not being at his best (physically or game-wise) at many occasions.

sigmagirl91
11-20-2005, 03:10 PM
Tourmalante, pal, you wouldn't last sixty seconds over in Bandy-land; I promise you.

nobama
11-20-2005, 03:11 PM
I can deny it because of the physical factors involved. Federer was always hanging on a knife edge on his serve in the final set even though he had held the last couple of times fairly easily, he had to depend on first serves and quick points to stand any chance of winning. He made two, he got to 30-0; he didn't make another one and he lost four points in a row, simple as that. Considering that he had been missing the first serve regularly as a result of fatigue from the start of the fourth to 0-4 down in the fifth, I don't think his failure to produce one here was a sign of nerves. Two of those four points were clean winners from Nalbandian, BTW.And this is why it pisses me off when fans and non-fans say Roger choked. Roger wasn't holding serve comfortably for most of the match so why would anyone think he would when he was serving for it. :shrug:

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 03:11 PM
Tourmanlante: As a Safin-fan I will say (and to quote the Governator) you'll be back.

When Feds plays at a level so far above the others it's almost a shock when he comes back to earth. But come on! He only lost 4 times this year! He won all of his finals in a 2 1/2 year span! He matched Muster's record (the second best in Open Era) and you know JMac was sweating there for a moment :lol: He's won 6 Slams, and this year became the first person to repeat the Wimbledon/USO double in Open Era! He's already matched Becker and Edberg's number of Slams. Next year, he will have the opportunity to taken on another JMac record of 7 Slams. If he wins two Slams next year he'll match Agassi. He's already on the track to match Sampras.

Take a break, have something cold to drink and come back fresh for the AO.

Thanks for the words tennisfool. And you are probably right. Tennis is like crack for me I suppose. I'll always need another hit. But I can't help but feel majorly depressed. I tried to tell myself to go to sleep at the start of the fourth set but I couldn't help myself and just waited with my heart beating at like 200 and this agonizing lump in my stomach. And to compound my depression it is 30 degrees outside and overcast. Now I know what Roddick meant when he said he needed a beer.

nobama
11-20-2005, 03:14 PM
Did Sampras ever have a year where he won 11 titles, 80+ matches and only had 4 losses? It's pretty sad when you can jump ship after the year Fed's had. Most players could only dream of playing that well in one season.

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 03:14 PM
Sampras was such a good player. Sampras lost many matches. Lendl was such a good player. Lendl lost many matches. Federer is compared to the Samprases, the Lendls, etc. - and even if you can say he's superior to them, I still don't see why your standards are that much higher for him. Perhaps 'just' counting your blessings might be better right now. Don't wallow in depression - I know what you're feeling, and I felt similarly after Federer's loss to Nadal in the French, but Roger surpassed expectations for the rest of the year, despite not being at his best (physically or game-wise) at many occasions.

Sampras did lose more matches in a year than federer does in three, but he just had more of an assasin's mentality than I see in Fed. When a match was on his racket he let the aces fly and the volley's skid away. Federer's game relies much more on patience and letting his creative wizardry flow then taking time and the match away from his opponent with forcing play. And when you are fighting tooth and nail for a championship forcing play is the only thing that will get the job done.

Carlita
11-20-2005, 03:18 PM
I hate this relativistic approach to being a fan. The very fact that Roger is such a good player means he has to be judged by higher standards. Of course we could just salute him for being better than everyonelse. But are we just to count our blessings everytime he looses instead of trying to call it like it is?My goodness!! The guy was fighting his ass off!!!! And so was Nalbandian for that matter.....
SO... I ask again .... what match were you watching? :yeah:

as a Federer supporter you should be greatful he even played this week! Last weekend he was close to withdrawing... I'd give anything so Rafa could have played.... oh hang on... that was a BIG disappointment too......And Carlos Moya should have been there....cause he's been there every year......:scratch:

*goes to kick those 2 OUT of her sig...they are NOT worthy:rolleyes: *


Someone tell me who's HOT now so I can support them :D :haha:

Tennis Fool
11-20-2005, 03:18 PM
Thanks for the words tennisfool. And you are probably right. Tennis is like crack for me I suppose. I'll always need another hit. But I can't help but feel majorly depressed. I tried to tell myself to go to sleep at the start of the fourth set but I couldn't help myself and just waited with my heart beating at like 200 and this agonizing lump in my stomach. And to compound my depression it is 30 degrees outside and overcast. Now I know what Roddick meant when he said he needed a beer.
I don't know where you are, but my advice: Log off the computer NOW and go outside. If you have some friends around, go and hang with them. If not, go to the park or go get some ice cream. Even if it's 30 degrees. Staying cooped up in the dorm is not helping your mood one bit.

Carlita
11-20-2005, 03:19 PM
Tourmalante, pal, you wouldn't last sixty seconds over in Bandy-land; I promise you.:lol: or in Armada Land for that matter...

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 03:21 PM
I don't know where you are, but my advice: Log off the computer NOW and go outside. If you have some friends around, go and hang with them. If not, go to the park or go get some ice cream. Even if it's 30 degrees. Staying cooped up in the dorm is not helping your mood one bit.

Actually this is why I am saying that i should divorce myself from fed fandom and tennis in general. Because sometimes it hurts way too much. I was sort of living vicariously through Rog at a time when my life was not so hot, and now the wind is completely out of my sails. I need to find a new hobby where dissapointmen is much more manageable.

Carlita
11-20-2005, 03:22 PM
Actually this is why I am saying that i should divorce myself from fed fandom and tennis in general. Because sometimes it hurts way too much. I was sort of living vicariously through Rog at a time when my life was not so hot, and now the wind is completely out of my sails. I need to find a new hobby where dissapointmen is much more manageable.:wavey: bye then....oh you still here ???? :rolleyes:

Baseline
11-20-2005, 03:22 PM
“You’ve got to get to that stage in your life where going for it is more important than winning or losing.” “Never equate losing with failure.”
Arthur Ashe

“Tennis became easier once I realized I was putting too much emphasis on winning.”
Michael Chang

“There is no disgrace in defeat. Champions are born in the labor of defeat.”
Bill Tilden


Earlier during the MC I was thinking Federer should not have set the goal of winning every single match, because he put himself in the position of being afraid of losing, a dangerous and eventually self defeating mindset.

After his loss I looked at it differently. If Federer were afraid to lose he would not have played MC at all. He said in an interview recently that he was not the leading contender to win it - maybe now people will take that remark more seriously? He was clearly not in top condition, but he came and he played anyway and played well in spite of it. He did not stay home or quit during the tournament. I haven't seen the match yet (ESPN2 on tape delay again!), so I can't say until I watch, but coming back from 0-4 in the 5th set to force a tie-break doesn't sound like a player who gave up easily.

Wondering how ESPN will butcher the match as they only scheduled 2 1/2 hours for a 4 1/2 hour final?

nobama
11-20-2005, 03:23 PM
More of what Roger said today:

"It's been a fantastic year ... unfortunately I couldn't win the last one, but this year will be a great memory for me," Federer said. "To be back after the injury -- I'm happy I made it so far. I'm proud of that."

At least he can keep things in perspective.

Tennis Fool
11-20-2005, 03:24 PM
Actually this is why I am saying that i should divorce myself from fed fandom and tennis in general. Because sometimes it hurts way too much. I was sort of living vicariously through Rog at a time when my life was not so hot, and now the wind is completely out of my sails. I need to find a new hobby where dissapointmen is much more manageable.
Well, divorce now. Log off (I mean it) and get some ice cream :wavey:

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 03:26 PM
Well, divorce now. Log off (I mean it) and get some ice cream :wavey:

Hell, it's so cold all I have to do is open the window and expose the pepsi I have right beside me to the elements in order to have a pity-party slushie.

nobama
11-20-2005, 03:29 PM
Earlier during the MC I was thinking Federer should not have set the goal of winning every single match, because he put himself in the position of being afraid of losing, a dangerous and eventually self defeating mindset.

After his loss I looked at it differently. If Federer were afraid to lose he would not have played MC at all. He said in an interview recently that he was not the leading contender to win it - maybe now people will take that remark more seriously? He was clearly not in top condition, but he came and he played anyway and played well in spite of it. He did not stay home or quit during the tournament. I haven't seen the match yet (ESPN2 on tape delay again!), so I can't say until I watch, but coming back from 0-4 in the 5th set to force a tie-break doesn't sound like a player who gave up easily.I've thought this all along. I'm proud of the fact he stayed there and fought when he easliy could've withdrawn, especially after all the other big names did. And even during this match he could've retired. According to Reuters near the end Roger was on his feet but barely able to run. I haven't seen the match yet so I don't know how true that is. But he didn't pull any funny stuff, no gamesmanship, he just got beat fair and square. And I think he was quite gracious in defeat.

Deea
11-20-2005, 03:30 PM
The match today was AMAIZING! With all my respect to Roger, I'm really happy for David. He deserved to win. It was a fantastic tournament for him. As for Federer, he fought until the very end, which is admirably! :yeah:

Tennis Fool
11-20-2005, 03:31 PM
Hell, it's so cold all I have to do is open the window and expose the pepsi I have right beside me to the elements in order to have a pity-party slushie.
I'm not responding to you again until you've GONE OUTSIDE and reported that you got some air. :wavey: :wavey: :wavey:

Carlita
11-20-2005, 03:32 PM
I'm not responding to you again until you've GONE OUTSIDE and reported that you got some air. :wavey: :wavey: :wavey::haha::haha::haha:

star
11-20-2005, 04:21 PM
Can't a person be both? I don't see what is wrong with gravitating towards the great players of each generation. It seems like some people here think you should be a fan of Acasuso or whom have you simply because it makes you unique and a more eclectic tennis fan. I won't deny that I am a Fed fan because he wins just as I was a Sampras and Agassi fan because they won. The very qualities that allow a player to be a dominant #1 as well as his goodness as a person are why I am a fed fan.

There's nothing wrong with being a Fed fan because he's the dominant player. I'm sure he has many fans for just that reason.

You say you were a fan of Sampras and Agassi because they won, but you overlook the periods in their careers where they didn't win. It's not like Sampras won every match he played or even every final he played. Agassi for sure stank up the place for years on end.

But yeah, I'd say you need to take a big step back if one heartbreaking loss -- one loss where your favorite didn't live up to your expectations sends you into a tail spin. You are WAY too emotionally involved with someone who doesn't even know you are alive. It's sport. It's for entertainment and diversion. If it actually affects your emotional life for more than say --- oh... a few hours --- or even a day for the most fanatic -- then please--- seek help.

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 04:45 PM
There's nothing wrong with being a Fed fan because he's the dominant player. I'm sure he has many fans for just that reason.

You say you were a fan of Sampras and Agassi because they won, but you overlook the periods in their careers where they didn't win. It's not like Sampras won every match he played or even every final he played. Agassi for sure stank up the place for years on end.

But yeah, I'd say you need to take a big step back if one heartbreaking loss -- one loss where your favorite didn't live up to your expectations sends you into a tail spin. You are WAY too emotionally involved with someone who doesn't even know you are alive. It's sport. It's for entertainment and diversion. If it actually affects your emotional life for more than say --- oh... a few hours --- or even a day for the most fanatic -- then please--- seek help.

You are completely right. But I don't know how to step back. By the way I am feeling better now after talking to my brother and resting a bit. My room is still a mess though and I have a stupid french redaction to write summarizing the events of La Femme Nikita, and some physics and chem to read up on. This was definitely one of those matches that I cannot bear to watch a second time though.

star
11-20-2005, 05:22 PM
Ways to step back:
1. Volunteer at a soup kitchen
2. Be nice to your family
3. Help out at a hospice
4. Go for a run
5. Take your dog for a walk
6. Read a book about the genocide in Rwanda -- or the Sudan
7. Write a letter to Federer and realize he won't be writing you back

Shoudl I go on? :lol:

prima donna
11-20-2005, 05:35 PM
Now hear me out. Perhaps you think I am being irrational or unduly harsh in the face of a lone defeat but I am heartfelt in this sentiment. I have decided to give up tennis for a while at least and pursue other hobbies because of my dissapointment at the manner of Federer's loss. It is my fault that I have grown too pychologicallly attached to his success and this let down has left me completely drained and depressed for the forseeable future. The fact that Federer lost is not the main reason for my disgust. Only the manner in which he lost.

Today all of Roger's glorious achievements meant nothing. When somebody actually gave him a challenge he folded just like the Federer who folded to hewitt in Australia. Though I was sad after Federer's losses in Australia and Roland Garros I could deal with them because I felt Roger had played his heart out in Melbourne and never really looked right from the start at the FO semifinal. Here i cannot accept his loss. Sjengster was completely right about the growing fragility he sensed in Federer, especially on break point conversion. We saw the seeds of his defeat in the second and third sets of his US Open Final win over Agassi (also some shaky moments vs. hewitt, and many other matches this year) where he let Agassi off the hook in humerous service games when he was up 40-15 or 40-30. In the end it didn't matter there but the fault lines were clear to see for an inquiring mind. In today's match Federer had his moment of truth at 6-5 in the fifth.

He was just about to cement one of the greatest comebacks in recent years. The match was on his racket and he only needed to dig out four first serves and a few potent groundstrokes against a tight Nalbandian in order to save the day. It was here that Roger's true mettle was found wanting. A sign of a true tennis great is the ability to close out matters when blood is smelt. With a match on his racket Sampras never failed to deliver on the big stage. But amazingly Roger's serve, the assumed better serve of the two players in today's final, proved to be the more impotent one.

We saw that when faced with a talented and highly motivated opponent Roger does not have the ability to take a match out of their hands with forcing play like Pete could with his serve-and-volley game. He was at 30-00 and managed to double fault yet again, and then surrender the game in an astonishing display of fragility that harkened to his early days on the tour. In the ensuing tiebreak he managed to let Nalbandian get an early lead which the Argentine never relinquished and the five set conquest was complete.

I can honestly say that i am disgusted with Roger's performance today, injury or no. He realized the stakes and history on the line. but as soon as he won the second set on tiebreak he seemed so relieved that he immediately handed Davide the third set. Make no mistake, this final featured great play by Nalbandian and was markedly better than any other match at the Cup and many other matches played this year. But it was a choke of the highest order by Roger, and one that may be a turning point(for the worse) of his career.

The end of this year ends on a sharply sour note, he has once again let nalbandian pyschologically enter his head, and future success at the majors is less than clear if he meets similar resistance from other players next year without doing some soul searching, a lot of offseason work, and a retooling of his repertoire, game, and style of play. Roger's serve was so pathetic in this match that even at 40-00 I expected nalbandian to fight to deuce and eventually win the game. There was no certainty at all in his shots and his first serve percentage was attrocious. But I witheld my anger thinking that Roger would win the "big points" and not fail to capitalize on any big break tha came his way. Today he had the match handed to him on a silver platter and tossed it away. My respect for Federer dropped significantly. He lacked professionalism in closing out after having a two-sets to love lead. I believe this match will break his spirit much in the way that Sharapova's loss to Serena in Australia has seen her in a decline.

There is no excuse for the lacksadaisicalness and lack of focus and hunger Roger exhibited today, and I was ashamed to be his fan for the first time in my life. I cringed with each netted return, each netted first serve, each stoned volley. I could not see any areas in which Roches tutelage has helped him I am sorry to say. His netplay seems to have weakened since 2003. And his aggresiveness has waned since last year. He thought that slicing deep balls to Nalbandian, and playing half-hearted service games would get the job done against Nalbandian. Today we saw that Federer the headcase and choker we once new is not a vanished man but a persona hiding in Roger who only rears his ugly head when the going gets tough. I hope Roger had a good hard cry after this loss because I wouldn't want the match to hurt me more than it did him.

This was not one of those matches where you gamely sallute your opponents superior play and content yourself to the fact that you gave all of yourself. This was a loss that should make him weep, curse his weakness, and make him spend hours reviewing tape and retooling himself on the practice court. He blew it today. And I hope other federer fans don't meekly salute him for his "fight" in the last set but actually call him on his incredibly poor and "soft" performance today. I know some of you will try to laugh at the fact that I am criticizing one of four losses he has held on the year, but such is federer's position at the moment that one can never be content to look at a glass as half full but honestly evaluate his play. Please all of you tell me of your thoughts on this subject. Even if you say I am totally crazy, spoiled by Roger's successes, etc. I would appreciate hearing from you.

This is non-sense, Roger doesn't need supporters like you anyway. I was annoyed with him this morning, but after taking a nap I'm only sad for him.

Sjengster
11-20-2005, 05:37 PM
prima donna finds something that Tourmalante said nonsense?? Now I've seen everything!! :haha:

World Beater
11-20-2005, 05:40 PM
:haha: This is funny. I'm sure Roger's glad to know he has fans like you that he can count on in good times and bad...

when do players ever need "to count" on fans? Other than fan support which he will always have, but not necessarily need.

The fans I doubt mean that much to the players, other than the origins of their checkbooks.

Hey, i wouldnt mind signing an autograph for someone who is paying for my car and house.

Freddi22cl
11-20-2005, 05:41 PM
yeah that is pretty amazing given 'prima donna' stated this;

"Nalbandian is a punk, Roger is a legend. Something like this should never occur, the unpleasant snarl of the Argentine is enough to keep me from watching tennis for quite some time. "

i'm still trying to digest this statement. My goodness.

RonE
11-20-2005, 05:44 PM
prima donna finds something that Tourmalante said nonsense?? Now I've seen everything!! :haha:

Quite a revelation of events. The world is coming to an end! Everyone down to the bunkers now with your anti-radioactive gear! :bolt:

DrJules
11-20-2005, 05:44 PM
Fed will be fine. I remember everyone saying that after Safin's lost he wouldn't be the same and he went on to have a really dominant year. I don't think Federer will do as well (he will still do great but i think more than 4 losses) next year as this year but that has more to do with the fact that others will raise their game not that Fed will choke.

In 2004 Roger Federer had more defeats but won 3 grand slams and the masters cup. The reality is that in 2005 he had only 4 defeats but 3 were on very big days.

prima donna
11-20-2005, 05:46 PM
prima donna finds something that Tourmalante said nonsense?? Now I've seen everything!! :haha:
A peasant like this would have no other motivation for posting if not for my words to leach from. Bravo, well done.

rofe
11-20-2005, 05:47 PM
when do players ever need "to count" on fans? Other than fan support which he will always have, but not necessarily need.

The fans I doubt mean that much to the players, other than the origins of their checkbooks.

Hey, i wouldnt mind signing an autograph for someone who is paying for my car and house.

Tut tut - such a pessimistic view of a player's relationship with his fans.

You are right on one level but also wrong. Money is an important factor and many players do view fan participation from a monetary point of view but many players also invest a lot of time with fans because they can act as an emotional crutch when things go wrong with their careers. It also strokes their egos to know that there are so many people hanging on their every word and has nothing to do with money.

prima donna
11-20-2005, 05:49 PM
yeah that is pretty amazing given 'prima donna' stated this;

"Nalbandian is a punk, Roger is a legend. Something like this should never occur, the unpleasant snarl of the Argentine is enough to keep me from watching tennis for quite some time. "

i'm still trying to digest this statement. My goodness.
I am known for making statements that the average poster won't, call it stupidity or bravery - atleast when I die, I will have no regrets. I am going to share my opinion, maybe you should address specifically what's worth of criticism, because I firmly believe my assessment was rather accurate.

Sjengster
11-20-2005, 05:52 PM
Apres toi, le deluge.

Freddi22cl
11-20-2005, 05:52 PM
how can your assesment be accurate? You have stated 'something like this should never occur'?

what are you talking about? David is one of Fed's toughest opponents. His win here surely can't be too much of a shock given the form of both players entering this match and THE HISTORY between the two. Fed was ripe for the taking here and David got the job done

Sjengster
11-20-2005, 05:55 PM
If that's an accurate assessment, then I marry Jogy upon the morrow. Where is the little genius today, anyway? Still exhausted from that multiple orgasm right after Nalbandian's win?

prima donna
11-20-2005, 05:58 PM
how can your assesment be accurate? You have stated 'something like this should never occur'?

what are you talking about? David is one of Fed's toughest opponents. His win here surely can't be too much of a shock given the form of both players entering this match and THE HISTORY between the two. Fed was ripe for the taking here and David got the job done
Nalbandian used to be one of Roger's toughest opponents, guess what ? So did many people on tour, until he became what he is now. The last time Roger was 100% healthy in NYC, he made Nalbandian's contra-tennis look anemic and inferior in routine straight set victory. Not to mention he played awful tennis his first match and still was able to beat Nalbandian. The only real rival is Marat Safin and Rafael Nadal if you care to add clay into the equation, but a handful are capable of giving Roger fits on clay.

nobama
11-20-2005, 06:03 PM
when do players ever need "to count" on fans? Other than fan support which he will always have, but not necessarily need.

The fans I doubt mean that much to the players, other than the origins of their checkbooks.

Hey, i wouldnt mind signing an autograph for someone who is paying for my car and house.They don't really. But I don't know how someone can call themselves a fan if they jump ship when they're player doesn't perform as expected. Especially a player that more often than not does play as expected.

Freddi22cl
11-20-2005, 06:04 PM
Nalbandian used to be one of Roger's toughest opponents, guess what ? So did many people on tour, until he became what he is now. The last time Roger was 100% healthy in NYC, he made Nalbandian's contra-tennis look anemic and inferior in routine straight set victory. Not to mention he played awful tennis his first match and still was able to beat Nalbandian. The only real rival is Marat Safin and Rafael Nadal if you care to add clay into the equation, but a handful are capable of giving Roger fits on clay.

you still haven't addresed your 'this should never occur'

what do you mean? You stated this was an accurate assesment.

It was FED THAT DECIDED to take the court, no one put a gun to his head to play Shanghai (dont start crying that he wasnt 100%)--he has to live with the consequences. And that was a defeat to relentless Nalbandian, who, incidentally could have given up shop down 2 sets to none Vs wolrd number 1. He didn't he persevered--if you choose to downplay his play today that's your purrogative. But it is FAR from being an 'accurate assesment'.

rofe
11-20-2005, 06:05 PM
Nalbandian used to be one of Roger's toughest opponents, guess what ? So did many people on tour, until he became what he is now. The last time Roger was 100% healthy in NYC, he made Nalbandian's contra-tennis look anemic and inferior in routine straight set victory. Not to mention he played awful tennis his first match and still was able to beat Nalbandian. The only real rival is Marat Safin and Rafael Nadal if you care to add clay into the equation, but a handful are capable of giving Roger fits on clay.

Injury is always a convenient excuse. Roger knew how he was playing better than you so if he didn't throw in the towel, he was healthy enough.

Results are everything and everything else is pure conjecture. I could, for example argue that Nalbandian's mind was not in the match against Fed in the US Open so he lost it. If he had focussed more, he would have won it. But I won't because ultimately Fed won and that is it.

Same with the TMC final, Nalby won and thats the end of it. Time to move on to the next match.

holagirl56
11-20-2005, 06:07 PM
I doubt you were ever a 'fan'. Fair weather anyone?

Good riddance for Feds.

prima donna
11-20-2005, 06:08 PM
you still haven't addresed your 'this should never occur'

what do you mean? You stated this was an accurate assesment.

It was FED THAT DECIDED to take the court, no one put a gun to his head to play Shanghai (dont start crying that he wasnt 100%)--he has to live with the consequences. And that was a defeat to relentless Nalbandian, who, incidentally could have given up shop down 2 sets to none Vs wolrd number 1. He didn't he persevered--if you choose to downplay his play today that's your purrogative. But it is FAR from being an 'accurate assesment'.

Roger took the court because anything less from the world #1 would quite frankly, be viewed as irresponsible and selfish. Being in such an important position means that you have obligations and many people (specifically tournament directors) feel that it is your responsibility to oblige them.

It's true. None of this should have ever occured, because Nalbandian didn't even qualify for the championships. Roger should have bailed on tournament play and hung around for press obligations, he had nothing to gain and everything to lose. If Roger wins, so what ? Ho Hum. If Roger hangs around, he risks injury and humiliation, I do consider this lost humiliating and I feel such pain for him.

I mean, David Nalbandian? :rolleyes:

EDIT: I need to apologize for my earlier accusations in this tournament that Roger's injury was exaggerated for time off. Big mistake.

Freddi22cl
11-20-2005, 06:14 PM
Roger took the court because anything less from the world #1 would quite frankly, be viewed as irresponsible and selfish. Being in such an important position means that you have obligations and many people (specifically tournament directors) feel that it is your responsibility to oblige them.

It's true. None of this should have ever occured, because Nalbandian didn't even qualify for the championships. Roger should have bailed on tournament play and hung around for press obligations, he had nothing to gain and everything to lose. If Roger wins, so what ? Ho Hum. If Roger hangs around, he risks injury and humiliation, I do consider this lost humiliating and I feel such pain for him.

I mean, David Nalbandian? :rolleyes:

that's right the same Nalbandian that has now beaten him in 3 of 5 best-of-five matches and is career 7-5 vs Federer. The same Nalbandian that Federe HIMSELF STATED--'it's never easy to play David'

give it a rest with your argument that David ' is not deserving to be here'--people pulled out, the tournament must go on, he filled the gap and HE BEAT WORLD NUMBER 1, DOWN 2 sets to none (inaddition to spanking Ivan and Davy both in straights)

enough from me, with all due respect your not making any sense. Just give the trophy to Fed cause people pulled out? cause Nalbandian is a punk? cause all these records are in the balance? cause Fed is a legend?

Legends LOSE matches, prima donna. Legends are HUMAN

champlingo
11-20-2005, 06:16 PM
I would much rather Federer lose more soundly like 2-1-0 straights rather than this. It's better to the wiped out big time than to lose the way he did. It doesn't do him much good to lose like this.

I see where your sentiment is coming from. As you pointed out before, Fed's game requires tweaking and this clearly proves it. You're supposed to win on your serve especially with a TMC, win streak, finals win streak, and history on line, but to faulter is absolutely a disagrace. You need to pull through when you need to. As a number 1 player of his caliber and so-called arguably most talented player ever, this is a choke job of titanic proportions. Even if he were not 100%, he should have found a way to win. This loss stings more than the one to Safin at the AO or the one to Nadal RG (which likely would have given him the career slam). Had he won, it would have set him up nicely for next season, but instead, it may haunt him for months to come. I sure hope this is the wake up call. Today's performance was to me inexcusable and not befitting of his stature. You don't let a non-player (in historical terms), a fill-in walk away with the cup.

Black Adam
11-20-2005, 06:16 PM
It's clear you were not a Federer fan. You were a whoever-is-#1-and-winning-every-match fan.
I second this thought.

Bubba08
11-20-2005, 06:17 PM
Roger isn't God, surprisingly he has to lose like everyone. If you can't accept that, maybe it's a good thing that you forget tennis for a while. :angel:
Moreover you can't live your life across someone else. You shouldn't be disappointed, it's not you who lost today. ;)

prima donna
11-20-2005, 06:27 PM
that's right the same Nalbandian that has now beaten him in 3 of 5 best-of-five matches and is career 7-5 vs Federer. The same Nalbandian that Federe HIMSELF STATED--'it's never easy to play David'

give it a rest with your argument that David ' is not deserving to be here'--people pulled out, the tournament must go on, he filled the gap and HE BEAT WORLD NUMBER 1, DOWN 2 sets to none (inaddition to spanking Ivan and Davy both in straights)

enough from me, with all due respect your not making any sense. Just give the trophy to Fed cause people pulled out? cause Nalbandian is a punk? cause all these records are in the balance? cause Fed is a legend?

Legends LOSE matches, prima donna. Legends are HUMAN
It's not so much that this post is different from any of my others, it's making sense, it's just that you are so emotionally invested in this dispute. No, I will not give Nalbandian credit for beating an injured opponent that's owned him the last 4 out of 5 meetings. Doesn't Hrbaty have a winning record against Rog too? I suppose that on these grounds it would be acceptable for the Federer of today to lose to him.

Legends lose matches at 100% and there is no one on tour right now, aside from Safin (possibly) that can handle Roger when he's healthy. I have a nasty taste in my mouth because Juan Carlos Ferrero would have beat THIS Roger at Wimbledon, Santoro would have beat THIS Roger in NYC and Nalbandian did beat THIS Roger in Shanghai.

champlingo
11-20-2005, 06:36 PM
It's not so much that this post is different from any of my others, it's making sense, it's just that you are so emotionally invested in this dispute. No, I will not give Nalbandian credit for beating an injured opponent that's owned him the last 4 out of 5 meetings. Doesn't Hrbaty have a winning record against Rog too? I suppose that on these grounds it would be acceptable for the Federer of today to lose to him.

Legends lose matches at 100% and there is no one on tour right now, aside from Safin (possibly) that can handle Roger when he's healthy. I have a nasty taste in my mouth because Juan Carlos Ferrero would have beat THIS Roger at Wimbledon, Santoro would have beat THIS Roger in NYC and Nalbandian did beat THIS Roger in Shanghai.

There's no need to give Nalbandian too much credit. The fact is Federer choked. That's all there is to it. Up 2-0 and serving for the match and to lose...This is Henman and Goran-like, not Federer-like. In my books Federer stunk the joint. You cannot use the injury argument. He was healthy enough to win the first 4 matches. And healthy enough to go up 2-0.

Castafiore
11-20-2005, 06:36 PM
Prima donna,
Tell me, why do you bother talking to people who are so 'emotionally invested' in disputes like this that they won't see the 'facts' as you present them?
Why do you waste your time here because you're certainly not interested in a two-sided conversation.
:scratch:
What do you get out of threads like this apart from attention?

Freddi22cl
11-20-2005, 06:38 PM
"It's not so much that this post is different from any of my others, it's making sense, it's just that you are so emotionally invested in this dispute"

LMFAO!!!!!!!!!

no my friend, not at all.................not even close. That was funny though.

You mean all your posts are similar to these? Sorry I bothered you, have a good day.

prima donna
11-20-2005, 06:43 PM
Prima donna,
Tell me, why do you bother talking to people who are so 'emotionally invested' in disputes like this that they won't see the 'facts' as you present them?

Hey, I'm not the problem. It's just that because I present my opinion in such a manner that maybe comes off as a bit pompous, that people come at me in a hostile manner. It is one thing to disagree with me, but to say that anything I've ever said is completely senseless is insane and you'd have to be fairly biased yourself to make such a remark. All of my arguments have a fairly steady foundation, some more than others.

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 06:45 PM
Guys I am Federer's fan not his friend. You can't be a fair weather fan. Think of it in terms of a music listener and his favorite band. If the band releases a new CD that is a dud upon listening are you going to simply say it is good out of loyalty to their past body of work or just chalk it up to the failure that comes every now and then, or will you admit that it just isn't a good CD? You are a somebody's fan because of some mixture of qualities they have be it a humanitarian spirit, talent, or charisma. When the said person ceases to exhibit these qualities you shouldn't remain a fan. And deciding to come to the TMC and lose rather than remain on the sidelines and recuperate was a bonehead decision in light of his defeat. Not only did he extinguish the majority of his hard-earned records, but he managed to also exascerbate any problems that still remained with his ankle, give the top five players recuperating more ideas on how to neutralize him, and give nalbandian an incredible boost of confidence that might end up biting him in the ass at the majors next year. People years from now won't remember Federer's courageous effort. They'll just know that he lost that day. The fact that he was so heartbreakingly close to victory only makes things worse. You should only bother to fight that hard if you have hardened yourself to winning no matter the cost. It was puzzling to see Federer try to break back in the last set of the fourth set because it was completely energy inefficient given his condition. He should have learned from Safin, the trick when you are already that far behind in a set is to tank it and make sure to start all guns blazing in the next set.

Baseline
11-20-2005, 06:47 PM
Thanks for the words tennisfool. And you are probably right. Tennis is like crack for me I suppose. I'll always need another hit. But I can't help but feel majorly depressed. I tried to tell myself to go to sleep at the start of the fourth set but I couldn't help myself and just waited with my heart beating at like 200 and this agonizing lump in my stomach. And to compound my depression it is 30 degrees outside and overcast. Now I know what Roddick meant when he said he needed a beer.

I'm not sure reading La Femme Nikita is helping matters either - couldn't they assign something a little more cheerful? All the studying must be wearing thin too - finals coming up? Good luck and I hope you find a little time to rest and recup, because that is important too. Tennis seems a relatively pleasant diversion, or at least it did before this match. Tennis is stressful to follow, very competitive, so perhaps another hobby would be better for you?

If you decide to stick it out, maybe you could think about or watch some of Federer's great successes and ponder that he'll probably defend his Doha title and if Safin can't play AO, Federer could win the 06 AO - would you trade this impaired MC for the AO? Losses like this one are often the very best motivator for a player to get to work, because it is the hard work behind the scenes that propels players to the top. It can be hard to stay motivated when you are #1 - even Sampras I believe got a little bored with it.

LLeytonRules
11-20-2005, 06:51 PM
U Fed fans are trying to make excuses for Fed, the bottom line is that he came up small when he could have won an epic match that shouldnt have been won, but he had it and he blew it.Take ur lumps!

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 06:53 PM
If this loss truly fires Roger up and makes him work to improve and comepte with new vigor than I will think this loss as a marvellous blessing. But somehow I think Roger is taking this as an unfortunate occurence, a sort of probability thing, rather than a wake up call to become a uber serve-and-volleyer and to develop a more forcing game and repertoire. If he takes the former route he is doomed to further dissapointment...and soon :sad:

DDrago2
11-20-2005, 06:54 PM
You obviously have no idea what injury means, and what six weeks of not playing means. What you wrote is utter crap. You will see in the future that Federer will play in the similar manner as he did during last few years, no worse. But that ofcourse does not mean he will dominate on exactly the same way, I don't know where you got that idea - nothing is guarantied in advance for anyone.

As for comparison with Sampras, every player is different and everyone motivates on somewhat different way. Federer is not Sampras and there is nothing wrong with that. You could also accuse Sapras for not being Federer... Federer indeed had some troubles with attitude in his game before, but he got over it. He now plays more relaxed and never looses while playing better tennis as he used to and is so tough to beat even when you think you have him. It wasn't different this match neither.

Freddi22cl
11-20-2005, 06:55 PM
"You should only bother to fight that hard if you have hardened yourself to winning no matter the cost."

wow, Tourmalante. Are you serious? The man gathered himself gave it a go and was defeated. END OF STORY. Would you be happier if he tanked the 5th set and lost 6-0?

btw, when it's all said and done very few folks will remember this match. They will remember his Grand Slam triumphs and his place in the history of the game.

HIs main goal, IMHO for '06 should be Roland Garros. He has an opportunity to separate himself from Sampras, Connors and McENroe who all never won there. There's a kid called 'Nadal' that stands in his way there. Don't worry too much about SHangahi, 81-4 ytd 2 GS--incredible year. Tomm is a new day.

i'll borrow this from 'ATennisfan'

“There is no disgrace in defeat. Champions are born in the labor of defeat.”
Bill Tilden

Maybe, just maybe Fed may be a better player from this defeat when he's say in a battle with Nadal at RG in the 5th set ..........in the final

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 06:59 PM
There is a very fine line that Roger must walk. In press conferences he has to be gracious in defeat and laud his opponents good play but in his mind he can't allow thoughts of "he was just too good" or "he played better" to enter because they spawn a comfortableness in losing. They make it easier for you to feel helpless in the face of an opponents onslaught. Instead you must always berate yourself for the mistakes your make, review long and hard your bad decisions and play and work to rectify these faults so you never lose the same way twice. It should be mandatory that you watch at least a few minutes of every match you play to ascertain what you did well, not so well, and what can be done to shore up your weak points. Leaving it all to the coach is a recipe for failure. That is one reason why I like Roger he takes an independent approach, and more responsiblilty for his own play than most players. Still I think he could do more.

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 07:07 PM
You obviously have no idea what injury means, and what six weeks of not playing means. What you wrote is utter crap. You will see in the future that Federer will play in the similar manner as he did during last few years, no worse. But that ofcourse does not mean he will dominate on exactly the same way, I don't know where you got that idea - nothing is guarantied in advance for anyone.

As for comparison with Sampras, every player is different and everyone motivates on somewhat different way. Federer is not Sampras and there is nothing wrong with that. You could also accuse Sapras for not being Federer... Federer indeed had some troubles with attitude in his game before, but he got over it. He now plays more relaxed and never looses while playing better tennis as he used to and is so tough to beat even when you think you have him. It wasn't different this match neither.

I have some familiarity with the concepts of injury and lack of match play thank you. Perhaps that's why I suggested he should have never entered the tournament in the first place if you bothered to read closely. I am not asking Federer to win all his matches. He will occasionaly run into hot players who are better on the day and receive some drubbings. I only want him to win all the matches he has where the match is on his racket-where he has a huge break that he needs to capitalize on. With as good serve as Roger has, his opponent shouldn't even enter the equation when serving for a match since the serve is the only shot in tennis that a player has complete control of. He can't let freebies run away from him. When he got that break to go up 6-5 in the fifth, the match itself was telling him "Please take me now!" and he spurned it. That is unacceptable

mp3junkie
11-20-2005, 07:10 PM
I'm sorry but your post is stupid. Get a life.... Damn, it's only tennis it's not brain surgery.

lau
11-20-2005, 07:10 PM
:bolt:

mp3junkie
11-20-2005, 07:12 PM
Now hear me out. Perhaps you think I am being irrational or unduly harsh in the face of a lone defeat but I am heartfelt in this sentiment. I have decided to give up tennis for a while at least and pursue other hobbies because of my dissapointment at the manner of Federer's loss. It is my fault that I have grown too pychologicallly attached to his success and this let down has left me completely drained and depressed for the forseeable future. The fact that Federer lost is not the main reason for my disgust. Only the manner in which he lost.

Today all of Roger's glorious achievements meant nothing. When somebody actually gave him a challenge he folded just like the Federer who folded to hewitt in Australia. Though I was sad after Federer's losses in Australia and Roland Garros I could deal with them because I felt Roger had played his heart out in Melbourne and never really looked right from the start at the FO semifinal. Here i cannot accept his loss. Sjengster was completely right about the growing fragility he sensed in Federer, especially on break point conversion. We saw the seeds of his defeat in the second and third sets of his US Open Final win over Agassi (also some shaky moments vs. hewitt, and many other matches this year) where he let Agassi off the hook in humerous service games when he was up 40-15 or 40-30. In the end it didn't matter there but the fault lines were clear to see for an inquiring mind. In today's match Federer had his moment of truth at 6-5 in the fifth.

He was just about to cement one of the greatest comebacks in recent years. The match was on his racket and he only needed to dig out four first serves and a few potent groundstrokes against a tight Nalbandian in order to save the day. It was here that Roger's true mettle was found wanting. A sign of a true tennis great is the ability to close out matters when blood is smelt. With a match on his racket Sampras never failed to deliver on the big stage. But amazingly Roger's serve, the assumed better serve of the two players in today's final, proved to be the more impotent one.

We saw that when faced with a talented and highly motivated opponent Roger does not have the ability to take a match out of their hands with forcing play like Pete could with his serve-and-volley game. He was at 30-00 and managed to double fault yet again, and then surrender the game in an astonishing display of fragility that harkened to his early days on the tour. In the ensuing tiebreak he managed to let Nalbandian get an early lead which the Argentine never relinquished and the five set conquest was complete.

I can honestly say that i am disgusted with Roger's performance today, injury or no. He realized the stakes and history on the line. but as soon as he won the second set on tiebreak he seemed so relieved that he immediately handed Davide the third set. Make no mistake, this final featured great play by Nalbandian and was markedly better than any other match at the Cup and many other matches played this year. But it was a choke of the highest order by Roger, and one that may be a turning point(for the worse) of his career.

The end of this year ends on a sharply sour note, he has once again let nalbandian pyschologically enter his head, and future success at the majors is less than clear if he meets similar resistance from other players next year without doing some soul searching, a lot of offseason work, and a retooling of his repertoire, game, and style of play. Roger's serve was so pathetic in this match that even at 40-00 I expected nalbandian to fight to deuce and eventually win the game. There was no certainty at all in his shots and his first serve percentage was attrocious. But I witheld my anger thinking that Roger would win the "big points" and not fail to capitalize on any big break tha came his way. Today he had the match handed to him on a silver platter and tossed it away. My respect for Federer dropped significantly. He lacked professionalism in closing out after having a two-sets to love lead. I believe this match will break his spirit much in the way that Sharapova's loss to Serena in Australia has seen her in a decline.

There is no excuse for the lacksadaisicalness and lack of focus and hunger Roger exhibited today, and I was ashamed to be his fan for the first time in my life. I cringed with each netted return, each netted first serve, each stoned volley. I could not see any areas in which Roches tutelage has helped him I am sorry to say. His netplay seems to have weakened since 2003. And his aggresiveness has waned since last year. He thought that slicing deep balls to Nalbandian, and playing half-hearted service games would get the job done against Nalbandian. Today we saw that Federer the headcase and choker we once new is not a vanished man but a persona hiding in Roger who only rears his ugly head when the going gets tough. I hope Roger had a good hard cry after this loss because I wouldn't want the match to hurt me more than it did him.

This was not one of those matches where you gamely sallute your opponents superior play and content yourself to the fact that you gave all of yourself. This was a loss that should make him weep, curse his weakness, and make him spend hours reviewing tape and retooling himself on the practice court. He blew it today. And I hope other federer fans don't meekly salute him for his "fight" in the last set but actually call him on his incredibly poor and "soft" performance today. I know some of you will try to laugh at the fact that I am criticizing one of four losses he has held on the year, but such is federer's position at the moment that one can never be content to look at a glass as half full but honestly evaluate his play. Please all of you tell me of your thoughts on this subject. Even if you say I am totally crazy, spoiled by Roger's successes, etc. I would appreciate hearing from you.

I'm sorry but your post is stupid. Get a life.... Damn, it's only tennis it's not brain surgery.

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 07:17 PM
I'm sorry but your post is stupid. Get a life.... Damn, it's only tennis it's not brain surgery.

I am amazed at your gall for even saying this statement given your post history. A bunch of one line zilchers. Would you at least have the graciousness to detail your reservations with the post?

lau
11-20-2005, 07:20 PM
Tourmalante, what you say in your posts is simply not healthy....

DDrago2
11-20-2005, 07:21 PM
With as good serve as Roger has, his opponent shouldn't even enter the equation when serving for a match since the serve is the only shot in tennis that a player has complete control of. He can't let freebies run away from him. When he got that break to go up 6-5 in the fifth, the match itself was telling him "Please take me now!" and he spurned it. That is unacceptable

What you say is true, but this match was an exception. Federer' serve is very good ussualy in important moments and he has Sampras-like habbit of Serving him out the trouble. This time it didn't work and it probabbly has to do with lack of match play - he simply lost a bit of his sharpness, a bit of his routine and focus, just couldn't completely develope...

Instead of attacking him you should actually congratulate Federer because he fought well under the circumstances and almost won a match, instead of badly loosing last three sets. That is how I see it... I think Nalbandian would have little chance if Federer was in better condition.

alfonsojose
11-20-2005, 07:23 PM
:yawn:

kjo
11-20-2005, 07:27 PM
Hi Tourmalante,
Just wanted you to know that I applaud your thread for its honesty and because you've said some things that I (and probably some others) have been thinking for a while.
I haven't seen the match yet, and I wasn't surprised Fed lost today - I pretty much expected it given his physical condition. He had the trainer massaging him already in the Ljubo match and has been saying in the press that his leg muscles aren't where they should be. Having spent some time on crutches myself recently, I know what he's talking about. Best of five against an in-form Nalbandian was a bit much to ask from his body.
HOWEVER, when I read that he blew it after being up 6-5, 30 love, I rolled my eyes. Because, you're right, he's been blowing opportunities to serve out sets and convert break points so much lately, and that's nothing to do w/ injury. He keeps on "cutting it close" as Dirk has pointed out, and while he's been able to win a huge amount of these super close matches, you knew it was eventually going to come back to haunt him. I've been calling him "Houdini" for most of the past year - he gets himself into trouble and then gets himself out (most of the time).
That said, for the record I'm still a huge fan. I tend to root for people who are super-talented but emotionally fragile (eg Sasha Cohen in skating) and was completely surprised over the past couple years how unfragile Fed became. I'm disappointed he seems to have regressed a bit, but professional tennis is hard and he clearly tries his best. Anyway, I'm a fan because I love his style of play and his personality/charisma and I think mens tennis wouldn't be nearly as much fun w/out him.
So let's all hope he enjoys his time on the beach and comes back recharged.
I wish him all the best.

Tourmalante
11-20-2005, 07:27 PM
Why did he leave himself and his legacy at his fellow players mercies when he clearly knew that he was not at his best physically and mentally? Just to earn the goodwill of some chinese fans? I think this one instance where the adage that Roger likes and so closely adheres to-"It's nice to be important, but it's important to be nice-was wrong. He has to be a little success about his wellbeing as a player. Life isn't a popularity contest. The TMC sucked enough as it was, even Roger's presence couldn't mitigate it's horrible entry list. Instead of trying to please a few people and be the upstanding guy he should have rested at home.

lau
11-20-2005, 07:30 PM
GET OVER IT
This is a sport not a life or death issue...

mp3junkie
11-20-2005, 07:44 PM
I am amazed at your gall for even saying this statement given your post history. A bunch of one line zilchers. Would you at least have the graciousness to detail your reservations with the post?

No I will not....What the hell kind of fan are you? You write as though this is the only thing you have in your life. I'm sure Roger could care less what you have to say. It's just a game....it's not that serious.

Roger will bounce back and win many more tournaments except the one's that Nadal competes in :worship: .

You really need to take a chill pill and look for other interest in your life. I guess you derseved what you are feeling since you live and breathe everything Roger.

If you have to leave....don't let the door hit you where the sun don't shine.

Bye Bye

jzpyt06
11-20-2005, 07:58 PM
Shame on u, only his fourth loss in 11 months and u aren't hapi with his over all performance. Come on pls save ur sob story, if feds can handle losing so should u. Besides next year presents new things. His 83-4 record is nothing to scoff at. The endless titles and slams and records equaled and shamed and new records made, mind u feds is still young and still playing at the top of his level. That hole book u wrote, r u sure ur a fan?? Fans stick by there man no matter what win, lose, bad play, injuries wateva thats a fan, fans that can also take a loss and be gracious enough to say D.N was better on the day, pushed that much harder and played that much better and deserved his first major title of his career over the year ending world number one 2 years in a row (ohhhhhh that sounded nice :) ). Not this hoop la of giving up and find greener pastures in some other sport. Fix up and look sharpe, ever heard of dust yourself and try again

It was a long match and feds never gave up or lost sight of winning, it was indeed davide's day to win something big and finally achieve what most of us know. David is a great player and i think is now ready to fill the big shoes we have been asking him to step into ever since he reached wimbledon final 4 the first time.

Im a fed fan but was hapi Davide won.

See that was easy to say now your turn :aparty: :rocker2: :nerner:

wcr
11-20-2005, 08:18 PM
Now hear me out ... I have decided to give up tennis for a while at least and pursue other hobbies ...

So this means we won't be hearing from you for awhile? Good luck with those other hobbies. I hope there are plenty of message boards related to your new hobbies where you will be kept very busy.

brujyster
11-20-2005, 09:40 PM
Why did he leave himself and his legacy at his fellow players mercies when he clearly knew that he was not at his best physically and mentally?


Could it be that $1.4 millions + a Mercedes is just too tempting even for a millionaire?

pesto
11-20-2005, 11:34 PM
This thread actually scares me.

Tourmalante, you're coming across like the next Guenter Parche. Please try to get some perspective.

bad gambler
11-20-2005, 11:36 PM
if you think this is comedy, read this clown's posts in the livescore thread

:retard:

jole
11-20-2005, 11:44 PM
if you think this is comedy, read this clown's posts in the livescore thread

:retard:

I just have, and I am currently terrified.

Freddi22cl
11-20-2005, 11:46 PM
if you think this is comedy, read this clown's posts in the livescore thread

:retard:

you mean stuff like this.......


"Please ROGER WIN THE TIEBREAK you have to hold you have the skill no show your backbone please i believe in you please for my life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

........sounds normal to me :p

oh, cant forget this beauty.......

"OH MAN YOU CAN DO IT I LOVE YOU just hold please and i will tickle your balls while Mirka does her thing to you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!WIN!!!!!!!!!!HOLD!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!GO NINJA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

......were talkin' bent noodle here folks....... ;)

and last, but not least....

"THis game can rewrite history!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!FIGHT FOR ALL THAT YOU HAVE against the evil minions of the empire!!!!!!!!!!!Go NINJA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!PLEA SE I LOVE YOu and I am a man!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

.....great finds at these message boards...... :bolt:

Leo
11-20-2005, 11:47 PM
Can't a person be both? I don't see what is wrong with gravitating towards the great players of each generation. It seems like some people here think you should be a fan of Acasuso or whom have you simply because it makes you unique and a more eclectic tennis fan. I won't deny that I am a Fed fan because he wins just as I was a Sampras and Agassi fan because they won. The very qualities that allow a player to be a dominant #1 as well as his goodness as a person are why I am a fed fan.

That is so shallow and pathetic. If you were a true fan of a player, you would stick by him through all ups and downs.

If you can't be happy with Federer after a year in which he lost just 4 matches, then obviously you will never find a "good enough" player to follow/salivate over. I mean, come on! He loses his first final in over 2 years and you're complaining? Boo-fucking-hoo. Get over it. I don't see any other Federer fans complaining. They have nothing to complain about!

Finally, Federer fights back from 0-4 down in the 5th to 4-4 and you accuse him of not giving it his all? He showed so much heart, so what if he encountered a better opponent for once? Nalbandian outplayed Federer throughout the entire match and if not for some very unfortunate calls, he probably would have won more easily.

star
11-21-2005, 12:01 AM
you mean stuff like this.......


"Please ROGER WIN THE TIEBREAK you have to hold you have the skill no show your backbone please i believe in you please for my life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

........sounds normal to me :p

oh, cant forget this beauty.......

"OH MAN YOU CAN DO IT I LOVE YOU just hold please and i will tickle your balls while Mirka does her thing to you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!WIN!!!!!!!!!!HOLD!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!GO NINJA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

......were talkin' bent noodle here folks....... ;)

ad last, but not least....

"THis game can rewrite history!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!FIGHT FOR ALL THAT YOU HAVE against the evil minions of the empire!!!!!!!!!!!Go NINJA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!PLEA SE I LOVE YOu and I am a man!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

.....great finds at these message boards...... :bolt:

Ohmygod :spit:

jole
11-21-2005, 12:02 AM
Ladies and gentlemen, I present you Tourmalante's Greatest Hits! :D :D :D


THE FATE OF THE FREE WORLD DEPENDS ON YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am lighting incense for you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OH MAN YOU CAN DO IT I LOVE YOU just hold please and i will tickle your balls while Mirka does her thing to you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!WIN!!!!!!!!!!HOLD!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!GO NINJA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

YOU are at the PRECIPICE THE SHINING MOMENT! BREAK HIM and serve out the match ninja. THis is incredible do it show them your mental strength. NEVER ON A SUNDAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

YOu CAN DO IT YOU CAN DO IT ALL NIGHT LONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Roger retire please before i collapse!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Roger please hold and then fight like a bulldog or just retire. Make your choice now. Please don't humiliate yourself. Fans get nothing out of you continuing to play if you just pull a Gaudio in the last set. All the people on the forums will just gloat and dismiss his injury tommorrow. Do you want to see that? Are you going to cry at the end?

Please...If there is a GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

mangoes
11-21-2005, 12:03 AM
It's clear you were not a Federer fan. You were a whoever-is-#1-and-winning-every-match fan.

No need to say more, you sum it up beautifully.

Whistleway
11-21-2005, 12:18 AM
A red dot from me,. enjoy !!

Racket88
11-21-2005, 12:21 AM
He lost one stinkin' match, Get over it!!!!!!!!

He's won 6 majors, 2 masters cups, 2-time year end #1 and you're going to stop being a fan because he lost ONE match???

sigmagirl91
11-21-2005, 12:23 AM
Ladies and gentlemen, I present you Tourmalante's Greatest Hits! :D :D :D


Paging Dr. Phil!!!

mangoes
11-21-2005, 12:30 AM
Paging Dr. Phil!!!


LOLOLOL :lol:

Tourmalante
11-21-2005, 12:32 AM
you mean stuff like this.......


"Please ROGER WIN THE TIEBREAK you have to hold you have the skill no show your backbone please i believe in you please for my life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

........sounds normal to me :p

oh, cant forget this beauty.......

"OH MAN YOU CAN DO IT I LOVE YOU just hold please and i will tickle your balls while Mirka does her thing to you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!WIN!!!!!!!!!!HOLD!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!GO NINJA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

......were talkin' bent noodle here folks....... ;)

and last, but not least....

"THis game can rewrite history!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!FIGHT FOR ALL THAT YOU HAVE against the evil minions of the empire!!!!!!!!!!!Go NINJA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!PLEA SE I LOVE YOu and I am a man!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

.....great finds at these message boards...... :bolt:

Guys those were written to purposefully be funny, though I do admit to being sort of in a crazy state at the time. If you can't see the obvious humor and exaggeration with the cheering then I did my job too well.

Tourmalante
11-21-2005, 12:33 AM
This thread actually scares me.

Tourmalante, you're coming across like the next Guenter Parche. Please try to get some perspective.

So now you expect me to break Nalby's knees next time he plays Roger, or perhaps stab him in the back? Come on man. Lighten up.

Tourmalante
11-21-2005, 12:38 AM
That is so shallow and pathetic. If you were a true fan of a player, you would stick by him through all ups and downs.

If you can't be happy with Federer after a year in which he lost just 4 matches, then obviously you will never find a "good enough" player to follow/salivate over. I mean, come on! He loses his first final in over 2 years and you're complaining? Boo-fucking-hoo. Get over it. I don't see any other Federer fans complaining. They have nothing to complain about!

Finally, Federer fights back from 0-4 down in the 5th to 4-4 and you accuse him of not giving it his all? He showed so much heart, so what if he encountered a better opponent for once? Nalbandian outplayed Federer throughout the entire match and if not for some very unfortunate calls, he probably would have won more easily.

I wrote a post about the fan and player relationship a couple of pages back. I have already addressed the slant you are using in your argument. People come in here and say the same things over again even though I have already preempted them in my posts. Please read my posts for a minute, see if your point was addressed and if not then say your piece. How many times have I heard the "you're not a true fan, he's only lost four matches!, yadda yadda" I have already talked at length about this attitude please.

Tourmalante
11-21-2005, 12:41 AM
No need to say more, you sum it up beautifully.

Again a regurgitation. I have already written my definition of a fan and hi/her obligations to their favorite player. It doesn't include sticking by them through fair weather or foul like I'm their spouse. When they mess up it should be my duty to call them on it.

Tourmalante
11-21-2005, 12:44 AM
A red dot from me,. enjoy !!

Whistling away!!!!!!

rofe
11-21-2005, 12:48 AM
Ladies and gentlemen, I present you Tourmalante's Greatest Hits! :D :D :D

This guy really needs to go out more. Inspiration is one thing but obsession is something else. He is living his life vicariously through Fed and that is just sad and dangerous. Sad because Fed doesn't know him and probably doesn't care and dangerous because, well...I won't spell it out.

RodLo
11-21-2005, 12:58 AM
Now hear me out......

Wow...way too much reading for me. I'll admit, I'm just skipping it all and waving you goodbye. :bigwave:

Tourmalante
11-21-2005, 01:02 AM
This guy really needs to go out more. Inspiration is one thing but obsession is something else. He is living his life vicariously through Fed and that is just sad and dangerous. Sad because Fed doesn't know him and probably doesn't care and dangerous because, well...I won't spell it out.

I do have a life beyond Roger and Tennis though it may seem otherwise. I did make the mistake of becoming too emotionally attached to his continuing success. That is why I will be concentrating on improving at chess, watching Bladerunner for the upteenth time, and reading jhumpa lahiri(my mom reccomends her for the simplicity of her prose). If I lose a chess game I can only be mad at myself so I hope it will be a healthier dynamic for me.

Noelle
11-21-2005, 01:18 AM
I should just say...

Isn't this thread just an attempt to make vCash? Tourmalante's done this before. :rolleyes:

Tourmalante
11-21-2005, 01:28 AM
And now my mental image is that of a horny ninja/Federer/Mirka menage a trois. :eek:

It's all about the homoeroticism. :drool:

And I love how the guy is supposed to be taking time-off from tennis fandom and yet... he's still here. :D

http://ninjapanda0.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/backninja.jpg.w300h300.jpg

Well I did say tennis is addictive and I do have to defend myself against the army of clone posters telling me i am not a fan. By the way do the fantasies of me and the happy couple turn you on? (just joking!)

Tourmalante
11-21-2005, 01:29 AM
I should just say...

Isn't this thread just an attempt to make vCash? Tourmalante's done this before. :rolleyes:

My ability to draw in crowds of angry posters with a single post amazes me. These threads are not merely vcash gimmicks though it never hurts making money while doing something you would have done anyway.

RodLo
11-21-2005, 01:30 AM
Well I did say tennis is addictive and I do have to defend myself against the army of clone posters telling me i am not a fan. By the way do the fantasies of me and the happy couple turn you on? (just joking!)

I do believe I've already said goodbye to you. Now please leave before I'm forced to say it again.

Thank you.

deadbitch
11-21-2005, 01:50 AM
the lesson to learn now is to detach.
appreciate, criticize, but never attach.

if you plug too much umbilical cords to yourself, it will only stranggle you along the way. [does metaphor come across this page? ;) ]

RodLo
11-21-2005, 01:52 AM
the lesson to learn now is to detach.
appreciate, criticize, but never attach.

if you plug too much umbilical cords to yourself, it will only stranggle you along the way. [does metaphor come across this page? ;) ]

Ummm...:unsure:

I think this is my cue to get the hell outta this thread :bolt:

sigmagirl91
11-21-2005, 02:00 AM
the lesson to learn now is to detach.
appreciate, criticize, but never attach.

if you plug too much umbilical cords to yourself, it will only stranggle you along the way. [does metaphor come across this page? ;) ]

Yes, you are mixing your metaphors, but it's for a good cause. ;)

-ernie-
11-21-2005, 02:49 AM
or a Safin fan :retard:
or hantuchova fan :retard: :smash:

Noelle
11-21-2005, 03:16 AM
This just called to mind that strange story about the rugby fan who cut off his own balls...
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2005/11/16/1132016820398.html?oneclick=true

jole
11-21-2005, 03:30 AM
This just called to mind that strange story about the rugby fan who cut off his own balls...
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2005/11/16/1132016820398.html?oneclick=true

Shut up, ok?! I almost did that when Dominik Hrbaty lost to George Bastl and Bob Bryan (in singles). I attribute myself being talked out of it to Gigan. Thank you. :hearts:

prima donna
11-21-2005, 03:33 AM
Nobody believes in Roger, it's really quite sad. Aside from Dirk and mirkaland, no one has had anything to say on his behalf. A little adversity and people run, that's fine, just don't try coming back and pretending you believed all along, when Roger is back with a vengeance next season.

megadeth
11-21-2005, 03:43 AM
Can't a person be both? I don't see what is wrong with gravitating towards the great players of each generation. It seems like some people here think you should be a fan of Acasuso or whom have you simply because it makes you unique and a more eclectic tennis fan. I won't deny that I am a Fed fan because he wins just as I was a Sampras and Agassi fan because they won. The very qualities that allow a player to be a dominant #1 as well as his goodness as a person are why I am a fed fan.

if you were a real fan, you'd stand by your man win or lose... seems to me you only like those who win since you're so ready to turn your back on fed. he doesn't need fans like you....

MissMoJo
11-21-2005, 03:46 AM
Nobody believes in Roger, it's really quite sad. Aside from Dirk and mirkaland, no one has had anything to say on his behalf. A little adversity and people run, that's fine, just don't try coming back and pretending you believed all along, when Roger is back with a vengeance next season.
Who has 'run' besides the thread starter ?:confused:

kosmikgroove
11-21-2005, 03:52 AM
or a Safin fan :retard:

or a fan of anyone human... humans lose matches from time to time. shit happens.

mangoes
11-21-2005, 03:55 AM
Who has 'run' besides the thread starter ?:confused:

I wondered the same myself, but then I realized the author of the post...........and well :rolleyes: typical crap from the poster!

prima donna
11-21-2005, 03:57 AM
Who has 'run' besides the thread starter ?:confused:
I just find it odd, seeing all these posts and avatars with Roger's face in them (when he wins, of course) and then being able to count the amount of people that actually said something positive on his behalf on one hand. It's sad, really and that doesn't go for you of course. This is bad though, because, people that don't even support Roger are having to come to his defense. It's nice to see where he stands, good thing he's a millionaire and this board means nothing to him, obviously people in Roger's forum remain supportive, but GM has turned into Nalbandian-mania and it is the end of Roger as we know it because he lost a 4th match.

rofe
11-21-2005, 03:59 AM
I wondered the same myself, but then I realized the author of the post...........and well :rolleyes: typical crap from the poster!

Prima donna is single-handedly carrying the weight of Roger's fan representation on his poor shoulders. :sad: :retard:

Tourmalante
11-21-2005, 04:07 AM
I wondered the same myself, but then I realized the author of the post...........and well :rolleyes: typical crap from the poster!

Speak for yourself

prima donna
11-21-2005, 04:09 AM
Prima donna is single-handedly carrying the weight of Roger's fan representation on his poor shoulders. :sad: :retard:
Actually, not. I'm just enjoying fun at the expense of front-runners, that can't wait 2 months for Roger to win the Australia Open and have bailed out on him. I don't identify with any particular group, because being a fan of Roger's means people expect for you to be as nice as polite as he is, if the world were full of Roger Federer's, we'd need no policemen and there would be no wars. Sadly, each individual has their own individual persona. :)

Tourmalante
11-21-2005, 04:11 AM
I just find it odd, seeing all these posts and avatars with Roger's face in them (when he wins, of course) and then being able to count the amount of people that actually said something positive on his behalf on one hand. It's sad, really and that doesn't go for you of course. This is bad though, because, people that don't even support Roger are having to come to his defense. It's nice to see where he stands, good thing he's a millionaire and this board means nothing to him, obviously people in Roger's forum remain supportive, but GM has turned into Nalbandian-mania and it is the end of Roger as we know it because he lost a 4th match.

I am not coming to Roger's defense because the weaknesses that made him lose the match were apparent for a while and haven't yet been addresed or rectified by him. His blase attitude to his defensive mode of play and inability to convert break points makes me mad at him. He lost to Gasquet precisely because he couldn't cope with a player aiming to tee off on every shot because of his excessively defensive game and got hammered in the second set of the match like he stole something from Richard's mom.

Tourmalante
11-21-2005, 04:13 AM
Staying with a player just because it is the definition of being a "true fan" is stupid. When a company fails to deliver on a fourth quarter product release you sell their stock before you lose money.

prima donna
11-21-2005, 04:15 AM
I am not coming to Roger's defense because he the weaknesses that made him lose the match were apparent for a while and haven't yet been addresed or rectified by him. His blase attitude to his defensive mode of play and inability to convert break points makes me mad at him. He lost to Gasquet precisely because he couldn't cope with a player aiming to tee off on every shot because of his excessively defensive game and got hammered in the second set of the match like he stole something from Richard's mom.
Okay, that's fine. You sit there and be angry because Roger lost 4 matches and didn't win a tournament that would have proven nothing, considering that nobody that was anybody was actually present. I'll be happy with him winning 2 grand slams and his 81 victories. Roger has weaknesses, everyone does and he did correct his game plan against Richard, dismissing him in straight sets in the Hamburg Final.

He had a lot of pressure coming into this year.
81-4
36 Match Winning Streak
Undefeated until now in Finals
2 Grand Slams
11 Titles Total

This is not enough, you're inadequate. Ciao.

prima donna
11-21-2005, 04:16 AM
Staying with a player just because it is the definition of being a "true fan" is stupid. When a company fails to deliver on a fourth quarter product release you sell their stock before you lose money.
Roger is neither a company or a product, he's a human being.

LCeh
11-21-2005, 04:16 AM
Staying with a player just because it is the definition of being a "true fan" is stupid. When a company fails to deliver on a fourth quarter product release you sell their stock before you lose money.

So let me get this right. In other words, you are not his fan anymore cause he lost the match? I didn't have time to read through everything, but that post certainly indicates that.

If that's the case, then are you a fan of ANY player? Unfortunately Roger just can't seem to reach your standards. :sad:

jole
11-21-2005, 04:18 AM
Guys, tennis fandom is truly nothing but a virtual "tennis stock market". If you guys don't treat it as so, you're going at it all wrong.

MissMoJo
11-21-2005, 04:22 AM
I just find it odd, seeing all these posts and avatars with Roger's face in them (when he wins, of course) and then being able to count the amount of people that actually said something positive on his behalf on one hand. It's sad, really and that doesn't go for you of course. This is bad though, because, people that don't even support Roger are having to come to his defense. It's nice to see where he stands, good thing he's a millionaire and this board means nothing to him, obviously people in Roger's forum remain supportive, but GM has turned into Nalbandian-mania and it is the end of Roger as we know it because he lost a 4th match.
oh :lol: you haven't been here long enough to realize every one of his loses spells doom and gloom in GM. As for fair weather fans, every fan base has them :shrug: i'm sure nalbandian picked up a few today too. There will always be people only concerned with being associated with a winner, who are gutless at the slightest hint of adversity *see Tourmalante*

megadeth
11-21-2005, 04:27 AM
tourmalante, you're an idiot. fed would be glad that he lost a fan like you.

and would you please stop exaggerating your posts? you don't have to go for 30 sentences when only 5 would do. :rolleyes:

MissMoJo
11-21-2005, 04:28 AM
Staying with a player just because it is the definition of being a "true fan" is stupid. When a company fails to deliver on a fourth quarter product release you sell their stock before you lose money.
You have really lost it. I actually tried to sympathize with your disappointment as a fan, but in light of this statement, i'm glad you're cutting ties.

Tourmalante
11-21-2005, 04:37 AM
oh :lol: you haven't been here long enough to realize every one of his loses spells doom and gloom in GM. As for fair weather fans, every fan base has them :shrug: i'm sure nalbandian picked up a few today too. There will always be people only concerned with being associated with a winner, who are gutless at the slightest hint of adversity *see Tourmalante*

What does guts have to with anything? Roger is the one playing not me. I would say it takes more guts to actually acknowlege your fav. player's weakness and move on from there rather than constantly trying to remain chipper and consoling of his defeats. ( doesn't necessitate cutting ties with him like I am). If I knew this loss would make roger work harder I would remain a devoted fan. But I think he will just maintain the same level of preparation and practice and log the usual hours. This I cannot condone. For the last time, fandom is not a marriage. I owe him nothing. There is no such thing as a fair weather fan. Only the critical and the sightless.

LCeh
11-21-2005, 04:39 AM
What does guts have to with anything? Roger is the one playing not me. I would say it takes more guts to actually acknowlege your fav. player's weakness and move on from there rather than constantly trying to remain chipper and consoling of his defeats. ( doesn't necessitate cutting ties with him like I am). If I knew this loss would make roger work harder I would remain a devoted fan. But I think he will just maintain the same level of preparation and practice and log the usual hours. This I cannot condone. For the last time, fandom is not a marriage. I owe him nothing. There is no such thing as a fair weather fan. Only the critical and the sightless.

So you THINK he wouldn't work harder after this loss, which is why you are cutting ties with him? :o

Tourmalante
11-21-2005, 04:40 AM
Guys, tennis fandom is truly nothing but a virtual "tennis stock market". If you guys don't treat it as so, you're going at it all wrong.

You don't have to go about it this way but it is the unemotional, rational approach. If you are a fan of a player primarily because of his altruism, charisma, humor, etc. than remaining with him despite several tough losses is entirely acceptable.

Tourmalante
11-21-2005, 04:41 AM
tourmalante, you're an idiot. fed would be glad that he lost a fan like you.

and would you please stop exaggerating your posts? you don't have to go for 30 sentences when only 5 would do. :rolleyes:

Megadeath, always with the clever insult. Now if you could string a sentence together, maybe with a point we would be getting somewhere.

Tourmalante
11-21-2005, 04:44 AM
So you THINK he wouldn't work harder after this loss, which is why you are cutting ties with him? :o

What would make me believe he is going to redouble his efforts? He has been working with Roche and still stones volleys almost as much as Roddick does(especially at pressure moments). If he can't develop a decent S-V game in 12 months of seemingly dedicated practice what would convince me that he is in fact returning to the drawing board?

megadeth
11-21-2005, 04:55 AM
Megadeath, always with the clever insult. Now if you could string a sentence together, maybe with a point we would be getting somewhere.

comparing a defeated federer to a bum stock market in q4? hoo boy! you really think your analogies are something huh? :rolleyes:

and what makes you so sure that he won't work harder after this loss? i'm sure you've been proven many times especially after fed lost the first two slams this year.

you want analogies? i've got 2 for you:

1. on fed's loss - like in the stock market, the bear would sometimes emerge to halt the bull.

2. on a fan like you - a parasite who milks everything good from his host (in this case, the winning trend and consistent good form of fed) only to bail out once that host stumbles a bit, waits again for him to regain form, and cling patheticly once more.

once fed gets back to winning next year, don't try to have the nerve of rooting for him again... moron...

LCeh
11-21-2005, 04:55 AM
What would make me believe he is going to redouble his efforts? He has been working with Roche and still stones volleys almost as much as Roddick does(especially at pressure moments). If he can't develop a decent S-V game in 12 months of seemingly dedicated practice what would convince me that he is in fact returning to the drawing board?

Then maybe you really don't know him well enough. I don't see why he wouldn't make an effort to improve his game seeing as how much he wants to continue winning, especially after a painful loss, he always comes back strong and reimposes himself. I don't know where have you been over the past couple years, but hasn't he responded to questions whenever they arise after he suffers a tough loss?

From what you said up there, I highly doubt that you know much about Roger.

Noelle
11-21-2005, 04:56 AM
Tourmalante: :bs: And I'm not even a Roger fan.

megadeth
11-21-2005, 04:58 AM
the only reason he didn't up the ante much in '05 was he was beating his opponents silly with his current form. fed's mature enough to adjust and improve when a need calls for it.

you think you know more than fed himself. :rolleyes:

ugotlobbed
11-21-2005, 05:07 AM
HAHAHAH NOOB federer lost cuz he was injured and out of shape, i thought losing a set to coria was obviously a sign that he isnt in shape...duh ....if he was in shape he wouldve not lost a set in the tourney



Now hear me out. Perhaps you think I am being irrational or unduly harsh in the face of a lone defeat but I am heartfelt in this sentiment. I have decided to give up tennis for a while at least and pursue other hobbies because of my dissapointment at the manner of Federer's loss. It is my fault that I have grown too pychologicallly attached to his success and this let down has left me completely drained and depressed for the forseeable future. The fact that Federer lost is not the main reason for my disgust. Only the manner in which he lost.

Today all of Roger's glorious achievements meant nothing. When somebody actually gave him a challenge he folded just like the Federer who folded to hewitt in Australia. Though I was sad after Federer's losses in Australia and Roland Garros I could deal with them because I felt Roger had played his heart out in Melbourne and never really looked right from the start at the FO semifinal. Here i cannot accept his loss. Sjengster was completely right about the growing fragility he sensed in Federer, especially on break point conversion. We saw the seeds of his defeat in the second and third sets of his US Open Final win over Agassi (also some shaky moments vs. hewitt, and many other matches this year) where he let Agassi off the hook in humerous service games when he was up 40-15 or 40-30. In the end it didn't matter there but the fault lines were clear to see for an inquiring mind. In today's match Federer had his moment of truth at 6-5 in the fifth.

He was just about to cement one of the greatest comebacks in recent years. The match was on his racket and he only needed to dig out four first serves and a few potent groundstrokes against a tight Nalbandian in order to save the day. It was here that Roger's true mettle was found wanting. A sign of a true tennis great is the ability to close out matters when blood is smelt. With a match on his racket Sampras never failed to deliver on the big stage. But amazingly Roger's serve, the assumed better serve of the two players in today's final, proved to be the more impotent one.

We saw that when faced with a talented and highly motivated opponent Roger does not have the ability to take a match out of their hands with forcing play like Pete could with his serve-and-volley game. He was at 30-00 and managed to double fault yet again, and then surrender the game in an astonishing display of fragility that harkened to his early days on the tour. In the ensuing tiebreak he managed to let Nalbandian get an early lead which the Argentine never relinquished and the five set conquest was complete.

I can honestly say that i am disgusted with Roger's performance today, injury or no. He realized the stakes and history on the line. but as soon as he won the second set on tiebreak he seemed so relieved that he immediately handed Davide the third set. Make no mistake, this final featured great play by Nalbandian and was markedly better than any other match at the Cup and many other matches played this year. But it was a choke of the highest order by Roger, and one that may be a turning point(for the worse) of his career.

The end of this year ends on a sharply sour note, he has once again let nalbandian pyschologically enter his head, and future success at the majors is less than clear if he meets similar resistance from other players next year without doing some soul searching, a lot of offseason work, and a retooling of his repertoire, game, and style of play. Roger's serve was so pathetic in this match that even at 40-00 I expected nalbandian to fight to deuce and eventually win the game. There was no certainty at all in his shots and his first serve percentage was attrocious. But I witheld my anger thinking that Roger would win the "big points" and not fail to capitalize on any big break tha came his way. Today he had the match handed to him on a silver platter and tossed it away. My respect for Federer dropped significantly. He lacked professionalism in closing out after having a two-sets to love lead. I believe this match will break his spirit much in the way that Sharapova's loss to Serena in Australia has seen her in a decline.

There is no excuse for the lacksadaisicalness and lack of focus and hunger Roger exhibited today, and I was ashamed to be his fan for the first time in my life. I cringed with each netted return, each netted first serve, each stoned volley. I could not see any areas in which Roches tutelage has helped him I am sorry to say. His netplay seems to have weakened since 2003. And his aggresiveness has waned since last year. He thought that slicing deep balls to Nalbandian, and playing half-hearted service games would get the job done against Nalbandian. Today we saw that Federer the headcase and choker we once new is not a vanished man but a persona hiding in Roger who only rears his ugly head when the going gets tough. I hope Roger had a good hard cry after this loss because I wouldn't want the match to hurt me more than it did him.

This was not one of those matches where you gamely sallute your opponents superior play and content yourself to the fact that you gave all of yourself. This was a loss that should make him weep, curse his weakness, and make him spend hours reviewing tape and retooling himself on the practice court. He blew it today. And I hope other federer fans don't meekly salute him for his "fight" in the last set but actually call him on his incredibly poor and "soft" performance today. I know some of you will try to laugh at the fact that I am criticizing one of four losses he has held on the year, but such is federer's position at the moment that one can never be content to look at a glass as half full but honestly evaluate his play. Please all of you tell me of your thoughts on this subject. Even if you say I am totally crazy, spoiled by Roger's successes, etc. I would appreciate hearing from you.

drf716
11-21-2005, 05:19 AM
federer can be beaten

*Ljubica*
11-21-2005, 05:31 AM
I seriously cannot believe this thread is still running.................Roger lost a damn tennis match for God sake - that's all - so get over it! There are children dying out there and millions of people starving to death - one tennis match involving someone you have likely never met is NOT a tragedy :rolleyes: As someone said earlier - time for me to :bolt: out of this thread - and go to work. Reading this thread has made me really :unsure:

champlingo
11-21-2005, 05:46 AM
Well at least I'm one of the few who can see where Toul is coming from. As a Federer fan, I find this defeat most disturbing. Those who think the lost might inspire him to be more hungry are wrong. It will do the opposite, mostly because of the way he lost. A true champion will not let the match slip away on his serve with just 2 measly points to victory. It's absolutely unforgiveable. Federer choked. The fact the he fought back is immaterial. He never should have needed to fight back having been up 2-0. This lost will only weaken his confidence and call to the value of what his part-time coach really brings to him.

He will have about 7 weeks to think about this and it will haunt him. And don't use the injury excuse or the fact that he made it this far under very low expectations. Baloney. He was healthy enough to win 4 matches. The fact is, he and the majority of us expected him to win in the championship match. He didn't. He failed. As the elite player that he is, this must truly hurt. Things like the lost today do not happen to "real" champions. Today, he proved to be human alright. Seriously, he needs to improve a lot in his game, otherwise you can forget him chasing down any future records.

shanks
11-21-2005, 06:11 AM
Get a life for cryin' out loud!!! Fdererwas tired. So he lost. Simple!!!!!!
Nalbandian played like shit to let Fed back in the 5th set. But at 5-6 down, he stopped making the errors. Federer simply could not stay in the rallies as his legs had minimum strength left in them. He was very fatigued. Right from the start of the 3rd set, you could see that he was moving very slowly.
Your really DUMB!!!

Puschkin
11-21-2005, 06:16 AM
I am not coming to Roger's defense......

There is no need to defend Roger on a thread like this.

nobama
11-21-2005, 06:56 AM
Get a life for cryin' out loud!!! Fdererwas tired. So he lost. Simple!!!!!!
Nalbandian played like shit to let Fed back in the 5th set. But at 5-6 down, he stopped making the errors. Federer simply could not stay in the rallies as his legs had minimum strength left in them. He was very fatigued. Right from the start of the 3rd set, you could see that he was moving very slowly.
Your really DUMB!!!Fed supposedly told the trainer that his legs were gone, he had no energy in his legs, yet he still came within two points of the match. If you're a real Fed fan which Tourmalante obviously isn't you'd be proud of the fact that he came that close, that he fought to the end.

shanks
11-21-2005, 07:13 AM
Agree with u completely. Fed sounded very upbeat in his interview. He knew that the match was not an accurate barometer of his level of play. He can play better.
Nothing to panic abt. He is really smart.

Kristen
11-21-2005, 07:24 AM
K. Good riddance
ditto. My care factor is below zero (yet, high enough to enter the thread and reply ;))

Doris Loeffel
11-21-2005, 04:22 PM
I agree with you Puschkin
Still I will ad a few more words to it.
Tourmalante somehow I can understand you really I do - couse I guess every Roger fan is somehow disapointed that there was no fairytail ending to his great year he had. Even more so after beeing 0:4 down in the 5th - but gee he fought back - and even better he broke him again to lead 6:5 and he litterally had it in his hands - better in his serve. He got two in - but missed the rest and the end is history...
...but Roger didn't lose the match on that last service game he lost it way before that - better Nalby won it way before that. Couse Nalby made him run from the very first point that has been played. Perfectly knowing that the longer the match goes the higher his chaces are. As he knew Roger's fitness isn't a 100% and in the end it worked out for him. You need to give kuddos to Nalby for giving it all and taking his chances of a Roger who visibly wasn't a 100 %. Roger may have had a better chance of winnig would the first two sets not last that long well over two hours almost 3 when I remember right!! And that was it for Roger. And when we are honest - Roger was lucky to win that second set as he actually did profite from some bad line calls as well as in the first as also in the second set.
Sure he should have closed out the match when serving for it - but unfortunately there was a fitter Nalby on the other side of the net who had something against it. And Roger just no longer was able to serve like he usualy does as his body better his legs were aking - and believe me he for sure will work on that as he hates to lose!
But he at least is realistic enough that he gave everything he had but it still wasn't enough and is able to acknowlege Davids achivement. Something each and every true Roger Fan should do, no does as well. No matter how much this loss may hurt, and it does hurt even more so as he was sooo close as we all know.

But I know for sure that Roger will do everything possible that his ankle will heal a 100% and he will work on his fitness. And not like you I actually do believe Tony is a help for him - or have you seen these drop shots before I for sure didn't. And I believe there are a few more just little things Roger will learn from Tony just watch out next year.

So this were my two cents in defence of Roger.

sigmagirl91
11-21-2005, 05:32 PM
Well at least I'm one of the few who can see where Toul is coming from. As a Federer fan, I find this defeat most disturbing. Those who think the lost might inspire him to be more hungry are wrong. It will do the opposite, mostly because of the way he lost. A true champion will not let the match slip away on his serve with just 2 measly points to victory. It's absolutely unforgiveable. Federer choked. The fact the he fought back is immaterial. He never should have needed to fight back having been up 2-0. This lost will only weaken his confidence and call to the value of what his part-time coach really brings to him.

He will have about 7 weeks to think about this and it will haunt him. And don't use the injury excuse or the fact that he made it this far under very low expectations. Baloney. He was healthy enough to win 4 matches. The fact is, he and the majority of us expected him to win in the championship match. He didn't. He failed. As the elite player that he is, this must truly hurt. Things like the lost today do not happen to "real" champions. Today, he proved to be human alright. Seriously, he needs to improve a lot in his game, otherwise you can forget him chasing down any future records.

Everyone is treating this match like it's life or death for Roger. Damn, get over it already. I agree with Rosie..there are more pressing things to worry about than a friggin' tennis match. Please get a life, people. And...it's not like Nalby is shit player #3460430.

tangerine_dream
11-21-2005, 05:34 PM
Now hear me out. Perhaps you think I am being irrational or unduly harsh in the face of a lone defeat but I am heartfelt in this sentiment. I have decided to give up tennis for a while at least and pursue other hobbies because of my dissapointment at the manner of Federer's loss. It is my fault that I have grown too pychologicallly attached to his success and this let down has left me completely drained and depressed for the forseeable future. The fact that Federer lost is not the main reason for my disgust. Only the manner in which he lost.

Today all of Roger's glorious achievements meant nothing. When somebody actually gave him a challenge he folded just like the Federer who folded to hewitt in Australia. Though I was sad after Federer's losses in Australia and Roland Garros I could deal with them because I felt Roger had played his heart out in Melbourne and never really looked right from the start at the FO semifinal. Here i cannot accept his loss. Sjengster was completely right about the growing fragility he sensed in Federer, especially on break point conversion. We saw the seeds of his defeat in the second and third sets of his US Open Final win over Agassi (also some shaky moments vs. hewitt, and many other matches this year) where he let Agassi off the hook in humerous service games when he was up 40-15 or 40-30. In the end it didn't matter there but the fault lines were clear to see for an inquiring mind. In today's match Federer had his moment of truth at 6-5 in the fifth.

He was just about to cement one of the greatest comebacks in recent years. The match was on his racket and he only needed to dig out four first serves and a few potent groundstrokes against a tight Nalbandian in order to save the day. It was here that Roger's true mettle was found wanting. A sign of a true tennis great is the ability to close out matters when blood is smelt. With a match on his racket Sampras never failed to deliver on the big stage. But amazingly Roger's serve, the assumed better serve of the two players in today's final, proved to be the more impotent one.

We saw that when faced with a talented and highly motivated opponent Roger does not have the ability to take a match out of their hands with forcing play like Pete could with his serve-and-volley game. He was at 30-00 and managed to double fault yet again, and then surrender the game in an astonishing display of fragility that harkened to his early days on the tour. In the ensuing tiebreak he managed to let Nalbandian get an early lead which the Argentine never relinquished and the five set conquest was complete.

I can honestly say that i am disgusted with Roger's performance today, injury or no. He realized the stakes and history on the line. but as soon as he won the second set on tiebreak he seemed so relieved that he immediately handed Davide the third set. Make no mistake, this final featured great play by Nalbandian and was markedly better than any other match at the Cup and many other matches played this year. But it was a choke of the highest order by Roger, and one that may be a turning point(for the worse) of his career.

The end of this year ends on a sharply sour note, he has once again let nalbandian pyschologically enter his head, and future success at the majors is less than clear if he meets similar resistance from other players next year without doing some soul searching, a lot of offseason work, and a retooling of his repertoire, game, and style of play. Roger's serve was so pathetic in this match that even at 40-00 I expected nalbandian to fight to deuce and eventually win the game. There was no certainty at all in his shots and his first serve percentage was attrocious. But I witheld my anger thinking that Roger would win the "big points" and not fail to capitalize on any big break tha came his way. Today he had the match handed to him on a silver platter and tossed it away. My respect for Federer dropped significantly. He lacked professionalism in closing out after having a two-sets to love lead. I believe this match will break his spirit much in the way that Sharapova's loss to Serena in Australia has seen her in a decline.

There is no excuse for the lacksadaisicalness and lack of focus and hunger Roger exhibited today, and I was ashamed to be his fan for the first time in my life. I cringed with each netted return, each netted first serve, each stoned volley. I could not see any areas in which Roches tutelage has helped him I am sorry to say. His netplay seems to have weakened since 2003. And his aggresiveness has waned since last year. He thought that slicing deep balls to Nalbandian, and playing half-hearted service games would get the job done against Nalbandian. Today we saw that Federer the headcase and choker we once new is not a vanished man but a persona hiding in Roger who only rears his ugly head when the going gets tough. I hope Roger had a good hard cry after this loss because I wouldn't want the match to hurt me more than it did him.

This was not one of those matches where you gamely sallute your opponents superior play and content yourself to the fact that you gave all of yourself. This was a loss that should make him weep, curse his weakness, and make him spend hours reviewing tape and retooling himself on the practice court. He blew it today. And I hope other federer fans don't meekly salute him for his "fight" in the last set but actually call him on his incredibly poor and "soft" performance today. I know some of you will try to laugh at the fact that I am criticizing one of four losses he has held on the year, but such is federer's position at the moment that one can never be content to look at a glass as half full but honestly evaluate his play. Please all of you tell me of your thoughts on this subject. Even if you say I am totally crazy, spoiled by Roger's successes, etc. I would appreciate hearing from you.

Ass.

prima donna
11-21-2005, 05:37 PM
Please get a life, people.
Hypocrisy at it's best. :bigclap:

kosmikgroove
11-21-2005, 06:11 PM
He will have about 7 weeks to think about this and it will haunt him. And don't use the injury excuse or the fact that he made it this far under very low expectations. Baloney. He was healthy enough to win 4 matches. The fact is, he and the majority of us expected him to win in the championship match. He didn't. He failed. As the elite player that he is, this must truly hurt. Things like the lost today do not happen to "real" champions. Today, he proved to be human alright. Seriously, he needs to improve a lot in his game, otherwise you can forget him chasing down any future records.

Great, I would REALLY enjoy you defining what a REAL champion is. Ivan Lendl? Pete Sampras? Let me show you some of their tight losses and blow-out losses:

Ivan Lendl:
Year Championship Opponent in Final Score in Final
1981 French Open Björn Borg 6-1, 4-6, 6-2, 3-6, 6-2
1982 US Open Jimmy Connors 6-3, 6-2, 4-6, 6-4
1983 Australian Open Mats Wilander 6-1, 6-4, 6-4
1983 US Open Jimmy Connors 6-3, 6-7, 7-5, 6-0
1984 US Open John McEnroe 6-3, 6-4, 6-1
1985 French Open Mats Wilander 3-6, 6-4, 6-2, 6-2
1986 Wimbledon Boris Becker 6-4, 6-3, 7-5
1987 Wimbledon Pat Cash 7-6, 6-2, 7-5
1988 US Open Mats Wilander 6-4, 4-6, 6-3, 5-7, 6-4
1989 US Open Boris Becker 7-6, 1-6, 6-3, 7-6
1991 Australian Open Boris Becker 1-6, 6-4, 6-4, 6-4

Pete Sampras:
Wimbledon 1996 Quarter-final: lost to Richard Krajicek 7-5, 7-6, 6-4. Sampras' only loss at Wimbledon between 1993 and 2000 inclusive.

Australian Open 1995 Final: lost to Andre Agassi 4-6, 6-1, 7-6, 6-4 in what would prove to be his only loss to Agassi in a Grand Slam Final for his career. As a result of this match, Agassi became the top-ranked player on the tour.

My point is that TRUE champions are not these mythological gods that we create, and they are certainly not JUST A NUMBER as some of you "true" fans want to speculate. This is life, not some snow-globe fantasy land where you feel that you can control everything including the weather. A loss is a loss, wether it comes in 2 sets or 5, and as such everyone is suseptible to such a defeat. The uncertainty of the match is what makes each and every one of us here.

Turkeyballs Paco
11-21-2005, 07:47 PM
It's clear you were not a Federer fan. You were a whoever-is-#1-and-winning-every-match fan.

:yeah:

I guess the tennis world will really suffer now that Tourmalante has turned his back on our world. :cuckoo:

sigmagirl91
11-21-2005, 07:48 PM
:yeah:

I guess the tennis world will really suffer now that Tourmalante has turned his back on our world. :cuckoo:

What a loss!! Tragic....

*Ljubica*
11-21-2005, 07:50 PM
Don't worry guys - something tells me he'll be back real soon.......... ;)

sigmagirl91
11-21-2005, 07:53 PM
Don't worry guys - something tells me he'll be back real soon.......... ;)

With another soliloquy. I'm really gonna enjoy reading hour with Uncle Tourmy. :devil:

DrJules
11-21-2005, 08:28 PM
I think he has gone to write a novel: "My depressing life as a tennis fan"

prima donna
11-21-2005, 09:18 PM
Great, I would REALLY enjoy you defining what a REAL champion is. Ivan Lendl? Pete Sampras? Let me show you some of their tight losses and blow-out losses:

Ivan Lendl:
Year Championship Opponent in Final Score in Final
1981 French Open Björn Borg 6-1, 4-6, 6-2, 3-6, 6-2
1982 US Open Jimmy Connors 6-3, 6-2, 4-6, 6-4
1983 Australian Open Mats Wilander 6-1, 6-4, 6-4
1983 US Open Jimmy Connors 6-3, 6-7, 7-5, 6-0
1984 US Open John McEnroe 6-3, 6-4, 6-1
1985 French Open Mats Wilander 3-6, 6-4, 6-2, 6-2
1986 Wimbledon Boris Becker 6-4, 6-3, 7-5
1987 Wimbledon Pat Cash 7-6, 6-2, 7-5
1988 US Open Mats Wilander 6-4, 4-6, 6-3, 5-7, 6-4
1989 US Open Boris Becker 7-6, 1-6, 6-3, 7-6
1991 Australian Open Boris Becker 1-6, 6-4, 6-4, 6-4

Pete Sampras:
Wimbledon 1996 Quarter-final: lost to Richard Krajicek 7-5, 7-6, 6-4. Sampras' only loss at Wimbledon between 1993 and 2000 inclusive.

Australian Open 1995 Final: lost to Andre Agassi 4-6, 6-1, 7-6, 6-4 in what would prove to be his only loss to Agassi in a Grand Slam Final for his career. As a result of this match, Agassi became the top-ranked player on the tour.

My point is that TRUE champions are not these mythological gods that we create, and they are certainly not JUST A NUMBER as some of you "true" fans want to speculate. This is life, not some snow-globe fantasy land where you feel that you can control everything including the weather. A loss is a loss, wether it comes in 2 sets or 5, and as such everyone is suseptible to such a defeat. The uncertainty of the match is what makes each and every one of us here.


There's more than just that.

Pete Sampras:
2001 - Hewitt (6-7, 1-6, 1-6) U.S Open Final
2000 - Safin (4-6, 3-6, 3-6) U.S Open Final
2001 - Federer (6-7, 7-5, 4-6, 7-6, 5-7) Wimbledon

If you're going to include 1991 on Lendl's resume, when he was cleary old and washed up, then it's only fair that we include these beatings Pete was recipient of.

Flibbertigibbet
11-21-2005, 09:22 PM
Well at least I'm one of the few who can see where Toul is coming from. As a Federer fan, I find this defeat most disturbing. Those who think the lost might inspire him to be more hungry are wrong. It will do the opposite, mostly because of the way he lost. A true champion will not let the match slip away on his serve with just 2 measly points to victory. It's absolutely unforgiveable. Federer choked. The fact the he fought back is immaterial. He never should have needed to fight back having been up 2-0. This lost will only weaken his confidence and call to the value of what his part-time coach really brings to him.

He will have about 7 weeks to think about this and it will haunt him. And don't use the injury excuse or the fact that he made it this far under very low expectations. Baloney. He was healthy enough to win 4 matches. The fact is, he and the majority of us expected him to win in the championship match. He didn't. He failed. As the elite player that he is, this must truly hurt. Things like the lost today do not happen to "real" champions. Today, he proved to be human alright. Seriously, he needs to improve a lot in his game, otherwise you can forget him chasing down any future records.

Here are my responses to your many horrid statements in your post:

1) Toul isn't coming from anywhere except la-la land.
2) You're a Federer fan? :o
3) This isn't disturbing. This is a tennis match. Seeing the tragedies that occur in our world - murders, natural disasters, terrorist attacks, rapes, bombings, wars, etc., etc. - is disturbing. This is nothing but a couple of guys hitting some balls. There have been some disturbing things that have happened on a tennis court, but this certainly isn't one of them.
4) Federer is a true champion, and true champions have also lost tight matches like this.
5) This is not unforgiveable. What Hitler, or Stalin, or Hussein, or the numerous serial killers/rapists/what-have-yous might be called unforgiveable. This? Nothing. Insignificant, almost.
6) Federer did not choked. He was thoroughly beaten in the third and fourth sets, and actually, if Federer had won that match, it would have been Nalbandian that choked, since it looked like David was going to win a routine fifth set at 4-0.
7) The fact that he fought back is very material - it's something that most of you who criticize Federer, and most of us that praise Federer, wouldn't have been able to do, especially against the Nalbandian that played on Sunday.
8) He was up 2-0, but had barely won the second set, and was dismissed in the third and fourth sets. There was a need to fight back.
9) Federer lost equally important matches against Nadal and Safin this year, and bounced back incredibly well. He lost a final, big freakin' deal. Sampras lost finals. Agassi lost finals. Borg lost finals. Lendl lost finals. And I can keep going on. The only reason why it's special is because Federer had kept up an amazing streak going on in finals that would have been impossible to keep going forever.
10) Tony Roche coached Lendl and Rafter, and Roger Federer himself has said that Roche is a valuable, decent guy. Don't be so presumptous as to judge the value of a person to another person - you're no god.
11) Haunt him? :tape: Federer has had dozens of losses - I'm sure you never followed him before he became the Federer he is today (a transformation which most will say happened at the Masters Cup in 2003), but as others more qualified than me can attest (I only became a fan in 2003, and really only started following tennis then, too), he was nothing mentally compared to what he is now.
12) He was injured before the Masters Cup went, and wasn't fully fit when he was at the Masters Cup. It's not an excuse, it's a fact - it's not a justification, either, because he chose to play, and Nalbandian beat him, and it was a well-deserved victory.
13) He won two of those matches incredibly narrowly, and lost a 6-1 set to Coria on this surface. He could have very well not even made it to the semifinals, and don't tell me any differently.
14) So Federer has to always fulfill the majority's expectations? Bullshit. Do you have any idea how hard it is to do what Federer, and the other top players, are doing? Clearly you do not. You think he's just magically so talented that he can play his best all the time? You think he's such a genius and so mentally focused and concentrated that he can keep away all emotions - never feeling nervous or tight or angry or sad? You think he hasn't put in his hours, that he hasn't worked hard to keep his game this way?
15) As was displayed by another user, all truly great players have had horrible losses to their name as well. Lendl, anyone? He lost more major finals than he won - whileas Federer is 6-0 in those major finals. Lendl is considered by any astute tennis historian to be one of the best ever to play the game. Appreciate what they do, because you and me can't even hope to come to such heights in the game.
(You finally got something right, he does have to improve. Of course, every other player on Earth has to improve, and most of them have to improve more than Federer.)
16) ...but he's still chasing down future records and will be until he retires, unless some injury or tragedy occurs that prevents him from doing so.

And all this in two paragraphs. Too bad that you don't seem to show much true appreciation for the game or its players, or else I wouldn't have had to waste my time writing this post (though, of course, it was my choice).

Horatio Caine
11-21-2005, 09:28 PM
Thank god you're not a Myskina fan like me. You'd have killed yourself years ago.

You've not been reborn an infinite number of times as a result of supporting a certain Mr. Henman ;) :lol:

kosmikgroove
11-21-2005, 09:51 PM
There's more than just that.

Pete Sampras:
2001 - Hewitt (6-7, 1-6, 1-6) U.S Open Final
2000 - Safin (4-6, 3-6, 3-6)
2001 - Federer (6-7, 7-5, 4-6, 7-6, 5-7)

If you're going to include 1991 on Lendl's resume, when he was cleary old and washed up, then it's only fair that we include these beatings Pete was recipient of.

very true!

The Ivan Lendl stats were just a little easier for me to find. I was pressed for time, and would have included Sampras' losses as well. My point was to show that it's impossible to be a "fan" of a "champion" that never loses.

SwissMister1
11-21-2005, 09:53 PM
Well I suppose you are looking for a new favourite player, then? I suggest you start your search here:

http://www.menstennisforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=437

Just what you are looking for!

prima donna
11-21-2005, 09:58 PM
very true!

The Ivan Lendl stats were just a little easier for me to find. I was pressed for time, and would have included Sampras' losses as well. My point was to show that it's impossible to be a "fan" of a "champion" that never loses.
Good point!

Flibbertigibbet
11-21-2005, 09:58 PM
Oh my God. I need to fix that goodrep thing! :worship:

missbungle
11-22-2005, 12:18 AM
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a264/missbungle_82/comicbookguy-worst-thread-ever.jpg

champlingo
11-22-2005, 12:25 AM
Here are my responses to your many horrid statements in your post:

1) Toul isn't coming from anywhere except la-la land.

Every person has his views. I tend to agree with Toul.

2) You're a Federer fan? :o

I'm a supporter of Federer, but also a critic of his poor play.

3) This isn't disturbing. This is a tennis match. Seeing the tragedies that occur in our world - murders, natural disasters, terrorist attacks, rapes, bombings, wars, etc., etc. - is disturbing. This is nothing but a couple of guys hitting some balls. There have been some disturbing things that have happened on a tennis court, but this certainly isn't one of them.

Disturbing in that he couldn't close out the match that he clearly should have on his serve with 2 points to go.

4) Federer is a true champion, and true champions have also lost tight
matches like this.

A true champion does not fold within 2 points of a match with history on the line. A true champion sucks it up and find ways to win. He didn't.

5) This is not unforgiveable. What Hitler, or Stalin, or Hussein, or the numerous serial killers/rapists/what-have-yous might be called unforgiveable. This? Nothing. Insignificant, almost.

Federer is not equal to dictactors. He is a tennis player. Get that straight.

6) Federer did not choked. He was thoroughly beaten in the third and fourth sets, and actually, if Federer had won that match, it would have been Nalbandian that choked, since it looked like David was going to win a routine fifth set at 4-0.

Losing on your serve with 2 points to go is a choke. That fact is, Nalbs pulled through and did not choke. He open the door and Fed did not take it.

7) The fact that he fought back is very material - it's something that most of you who criticize Federer, and most of us that praise Federer, wouldn't have been able to do, especially against the Nalbandian that played on Sunday.

He clawed back in the 5th only to come up short. He in fact did not fight back to win. He failed in his mission. He never should have let this go to a 4th or 5th set in the 1st place.

8) He was up 2-0, but had barely won the second set, and was dismissed in the third and fourth sets. There was a need to fight back.

He needed to fight back because he packed it in early. A real champion does not let that opportunity to exist.

9) Federer lost equally important matches against Nadal and Safin this year, and bounced back incredibly well. He lost a final, big freakin' deal. Sampras lost finals. Agassi lost finals. Borg lost finals. Lendl lost finals. And I can keep going on. The only reason why it's special is because Federer had kept up an amazing streak going on in finals that would have been impossible to keep going forever.

What happened in the past does not = what will happen in the future. You will see. The streak, will impossible to maintain indefinitely, certain was via in this match, but it wasn't meant to be because he blew it.

10) Tony Roche coached Lendl and Rafter, and Roger Federer himself has said that Roche is a valuable, decent guy. Don't be so presumptous as to judge the value of a person to another person - you're no god.

And Roche is the same coach who couldn't help Lendl or Rafter to win a Wimby. Is the idea of a coach to come within inches of victory or to win the big one? Let there be no doubt, Roche is not the problem, I suggesting the Federer should have done more especially with Roche there.

11) Haunt him? :tape: Federer has had dozens of losses - I'm sure you never followed him before he became the Federer he is today (a transformation which most will say happened at the Masters Cup in 2003), but as others more qualified than me can attest (I only became a fan in 2003, and really only started following tennis then, too), he was nothing mentally compared to what he is now.

Put it this way, it might have served him better to lose soundly than to come so close but to lose. Your mind begins to doubt your own abilities after a psychological downer like this.

12) He was injured before the Masters Cup went, and wasn't fully fit when he was at the Masters Cup. It's not an excuse, it's a fact - it's not a justification, either, because he chose to play, and Nalbandian beat him, and it was a well-deserved victory.

No. Nalby did not deserve to win. It was more that Federer gave it away. You must pull through on serve in win the TMC staring at you. He was fully fit to wipe out Gaudio and good enough to win 3 other matches. Fully fit was not the issue. Even when you're injured, your mind can make you do things you normally wouldn't. Federer was not mentally tough enough in this match

13) He won two of those matches incredibly narrowly, and lost a 6-1 set to Coria on this surface. He could have very well not even made it to the semifinals, and don't tell me any differently.

He lost 6-1 because there was nothing at stake. That score in that set and match means next to nothing.

14) So Federer has to always fulfill the majority's expectations? Bullshit. Do you have any idea how hard it is to do what Federer, and the other top players, are doing? Clearly you do not. You think he's just magically so talented that he can play his best all the time? You think he's such a genius and so mentally focused and concentrated that he can keep away all emotions - never feeling nervous or tight or angry or sad? You think he hasn't put in his hours, that he hasn't worked hard to keep his game this way?

Think of it on the basis of one singular match. Better yet, singular game on his serve. That was the expectations. Nobody is expecting him to move mountains.

15) As was displayed by another user, all truly great players have had horrible losses to their name as well. Lendl, anyone? He lost more major finals than he won - whileas Federer is 6-0 in those major finals. Lendl is considered by any astute tennis historian to be one of the best ever to play the game. Appreciate what they do, because you and me can't even hope to come to such heights in the game.
(You finally got something right, he does have to improve. Of course, every other player on Earth has to improve, and most of them have to improve more than Federer.)

This is Federer first "horrible" loss. It's worse than the AO to Safin for many reasons.

16) ...but he's still chasing down future records and will be until he retires, unless some injury or tragedy occurs that prevents him from doing so.

And how wise was he to come to Shanghai in the first place?

And all this in two paragraphs. Too bad that you don't seem to show much true appreciation for the game or its players, or else I wouldn't have had to waste my time writing this post (though, of course, it was my choice).

I appreciate what I see, and I did not appreciate how Federer blew it in the fifth. I feel bad for Toul who has suffered emotionally. Me, I'm just angry, but not heart-broken - there's a clear difference there.

champlingo
11-22-2005, 12:31 AM
Great, I would REALLY enjoy you defining what a REAL champion is. Ivan Lendl? Pete Sampras? Let me show you some of their tight losses and blow-out losses:

Ivan Lendl:
Year Championship Opponent in Final Score in Final
1981 French Open Björn Borg 6-1, 4-6, 6-2, 3-6, 6-2
1982 US Open Jimmy Connors 6-3, 6-2, 4-6, 6-4
1983 Australian Open Mats Wilander 6-1, 6-4, 6-4
1983 US Open Jimmy Connors 6-3, 6-7, 7-5, 6-0
1984 US Open John McEnroe 6-3, 6-4, 6-1
1985 French Open Mats Wilander 3-6, 6-4, 6-2, 6-2
1986 Wimbledon Boris Becker 6-4, 6-3, 7-5
1987 Wimbledon Pat Cash 7-6, 6-2, 7-5
1988 US Open Mats Wilander 6-4, 4-6, 6-3, 5-7, 6-4
1989 US Open Boris Becker 7-6, 1-6, 6-3, 7-6
1991 Australian Open Boris Becker 1-6, 6-4, 6-4, 6-4

Pete Sampras:
Wimbledon 1996 Quarter-final: lost to Richard Krajicek 7-5, 7-6, 6-4. Sampras' only loss at Wimbledon between 1993 and 2000 inclusive.

Australian Open 1995 Final: lost to Andre Agassi 4-6, 6-1, 7-6, 6-4 in what would prove to be his only loss to Agassi in a Grand Slam Final for his career. As a result of this match, Agassi became the top-ranked player on the tour.

My point is that TRUE champions are not these mythological gods that we create, and they are certainly not JUST A NUMBER as some of you "true" fans want to speculate. This is life, not some snow-globe fantasy land where you feel that you can control everything including the weather. A loss is a loss, wether it comes in 2 sets or 5, and as such everyone is suseptible to such a defeat. The uncertainty of the match is what makes each and every one of us here.

Lendl is my favorite player of all time, though I never considered him to be a "true" champion. He lost more in the big ones than he did. He also never conquered Wimby. Samprass is the biggest overachiever in tennis of all time.

The point is this: when you're supposedly as good and talented and mentally strong as Federer, you cannot allow this disaster to happen with 2 points to go in the 5th. It's absolutely unbefitting of someone of his stature. A true champion does not let that happen. Federer did just that.

LCeh
11-22-2005, 12:41 AM
Lendl is my favorite player of all time, though I never considered him to be a "true" champion. He lost more in the big ones than he did. He also never conquered Wimby. Samprass is the biggest overachiever in tennis of all time.

The point is this: when you're supposedly as good and talented and mentally strong as Federer, you cannot allow this disaster to happen with 2 points to go in the 5th. It's absolutely unbefitting of someone of his stature. A true champion does not let that happen. Federer did just that.

Then what is he? He is a fake champion? He is not a champion? He is overrated? :confused:

jole
11-22-2005, 12:43 AM
Hehe, I am such a glutton for punishment for continuing to read this thread.

Flibbertigibbet
11-22-2005, 12:53 AM
1) Fine, agree with his views all you want.
2) Unfortunately, Federer cannot win every match, nor he can win every match easily. Unfortunately, for you, this means that he's playing poorly in those matches (which aren't that frequent as of the past two years).
3) If you think it's disturbing, then fine, but I equate the word 'disturbing' with far more important, and horrifying, things.
4) Tell me, who do you think is a true champion?
5) Actually, I wanted you to get that straight. Federer is not as important as a dictator who killed millions, or as important as a benevolent leader who led a country to its independence, or as important as many other people. Thus, as long as he doesn't commit some grave sin, losing on a tennis court is not some unforgiveable crime.
6) And losing when you're 4-0 up in the fifth set is also a choke, so if Nalbandian had lost that, then we could easily have said that Nalbandian choked it away in the final set.
7) OH NO, POOR ROGERERER. He lost a tennis match! He won't ever join the echelon of 'true champions' (which would be, according to your definition, two people? one? ... zero?) because of this match, which is a step below a Grand Slam final, where he has won six times and lost zero (as of now).
8) This is a broken record now. Federer isn't a real champion, OK, OK, we get it, which is why he's won all six of his Grand Slam finals (definitely less important than losing one Masters Cup final).
9) So? I'm going by the past few times he's lost, but you've showed no evidence that this is such a psychological or physical wound that there will be something to the contrary happening this time now that he's lost.
10) Didn't Roche coach Federer at Wimbledon this year, or was I hallucinating?
11) He lost a very close match to Safin (which he had opportunities to win) as well, and it didn't seem to destroy him as you say it did - but of course, you know Federer's psyche and its fragility very well.
12) The winner of the match deserves to win, as long as there was no cheating or blatant disruption of said match. In this case, you yourself said it, Nalbandian was mentally tougher, so he deserved to win.
13) He also lost 6-1 because he played horrible tennis, but fine, I'll give you that one. You still haven't explained his fortune in winning against Nalbandian and Ljubicic.
14) No, but you're expecting him to fulfill your high, bloated desire for a 'true' champion, which is nearly as bad as expecting him to move mountains.
15) Elucidate, then.
16) He won 4 matches and reached the final. If he isn't badly injured, and there won't be any major physical repercussions to coming to Shanghai, then I don't see anything wrong in his decision.

It is solely Tourmalante's fault if he vested so much of his emotions and heart into a single tennis match, not Federer's. You can't blame a sports icon for some brokenhearted fan's horrid reaction (the reaction of which will probably never reach Roger himself) to a loss. As the cliche goes, it is just a game.

Now, I'll ask the question again: who, according to your narrowminded definition, is a true tennis champion?

champlingo
11-22-2005, 12:54 AM
Then what is he? He is a fake champion? He is not a champion? He is overrated? :confused:

He's a champion in a lower order. He's not over-rated. He just happened to play in an era where there was the stiffest competition. That's why I admired what he did, although he did not always meet his challenges, I always rooted for him.

Skyward
11-22-2005, 01:01 AM
1997 USO

Korda def Sampras

6 7 7 5 7 6 3 6 7 6

Does anybody remember that?

Tourmalante
11-22-2005, 01:18 AM
After an extremely short hiatus of a day or so (laugh away!) I had to return to respond to several posters arguments.

1) First of all showing us a list of Ivan Lendl's losses doesn't do anything to support your claims. Before the 84 RG Ivan was known as the biggest big-match choker of the decade. It was ridiculous the number of times he let himself get trampled by Borg, McEnroe, and others at Majors etc. To his credit, he managed to distance himself from his former choker persona by paying his dues in the fitness room. But Ivan the choker never truly left. And any matches on grass shouldn't have been shown at all because Ivan was always subordinate to true grass players on grass. Becker, McEnroe, and so forth always trounced him at the all-england club.

2) The majority of Sampras's losses that you have so kindly listed for us are during his decline (eg. after 96). Even though he had two majors in 97 he never managed to win another major outside of wimbledon till 2002 from then on. If you think showing us Sampras losses to highly motivated and decade younger opponents in his twilight years is a good example of a fellow champion losing than you are sadly mistaken.

If you want to give at least a modicum of evidence to me and others who agree with me show us any matches where Sampras lost with a two-set to none lead and 30-00 or more in a decisive service game in either the fourth or fifth sets.

Skyward
11-22-2005, 01:32 AM
If you think showing us Sampras losses to highly motivated and decade younger opponents in his twilight years is a good example of a fellow champion losing than you are sadly mistaken.


Korda was 3,5 years older than Pete, and Sampras was hardly on the decline in 1997. Get a clue. :rolleyes:

Tourmalante
11-22-2005, 01:39 AM
Korda was 3,5 years older than Pete, and Sampras was hardly on decline in 1997. Get a clue. :rolleyes:

Do you people never learn? I have already preempted this in my earlier post by saying that despite his two slams in 97 he was not able to capture a major outside of wimbledon till 2002. The AO can really be thought of as a result of the last bit of momentum from his 1996 US Open win. Once the momentum fizzled...Sampras was not the same. You think you actually rebutted something when I already addressed your non-point before you posted. Please read someone's post before you respond!

Tourmalante
11-22-2005, 01:40 AM
Korda was 3,5 years older than Pete, and Sampras was hardly on decline in 1997. Get a clue. :rolleyes:

And this match is irrelevant because Sampras did not have a two sets to none lead. It was a complete see-saw affair.

Skyward
11-22-2005, 01:48 AM
:lol:

He was up a break in the 5 th set.

Experimentee
11-22-2005, 01:51 AM
It is incredible how hard some fans are being on Federer. Nalbandian's great play had a lot to do with the loss, as well as Fed's injury break. It was amazing enough that he was even two points away from the title just coming abck from injury. Fed fans should consider themselves lucky that they only have to deal with 4 losses a year, instead of numerous choking losses like other players have had.

Skyward
11-22-2005, 01:55 AM
Do you people never learn? I have already preempted this in my earlier post be saying despite his two slams he was not able to capture a major outside of wimbledon till 2002. The AO can really be thought of as a result of the last bit of momentum from his 1996 US Open win. Once the momentum fizzled...Sampras was not the same. You think you actually rebutted something when I already addressed your non-point before you posted. Please read someone's post before you respond!

Winning one slam per year is a very good result. But you don't get it, do you? Pete was very strong in 1997. Korda came up with unbelievable returns. Sometimes it happens on the ATP tour. :rolleyes:

1994 USO Yzaga def Sampras 6-3 3-6 6-4 6-7(4) 5-7

I guess he was on the decline then. Oh, no, it's irrelevant, Pete wasn't 2 sets up. :wavey:

nobama
11-22-2005, 02:02 AM
There's more than just that.

Pete Sampras:
2001 - Hewitt (6-7, 1-6, 1-6) U.S Open Final
2000 - Safin (4-6, 3-6, 3-6) U.S Open Final
2001 - Federer (6-7, 7-5, 4-6, 7-6, 5-7) Wimbledon

If you're going to include 1991 on Lendl's resume, when he was cleary old and washed up, then it's only fair that we include these beatings Pete was recipient of.I have that match against Safin on tape and it was not good. :tape: Obviously for Safin it was though. :D I know Pete was towards the end of his career, but I'm sure it didn't make him feel any better being crushed in straight sets like that.

champlingo
11-22-2005, 02:18 AM
1) Fine, agree with his views all you want.
2) Unfortunately, Federer cannot win every match, nor he can win every match easily. Unfortunately, for you, this means that he's playing poorly in those matches (which aren't that frequent as of the past two years).

No Fed cannot win every match. But this particular match is what we're talking about. And he should have won it. It should not be uneasy to win on your serve with 2 points to go.

3) If you think it's disturbing, then fine, but I equate the word 'disturbing' with far more important, and horrifying, things.

Okay. Let's try alarming.

4) Tell me, who do you think is a true champion?

I was hoping Federer would be. I guess he'll have to prove me wrong in the future.

5) Actually, I wanted you to get that straight. Federer is not as important as a dictator who killed millions, or as important as a benevolent leader who led a country to its independence, or as important as many other people. Thus, as long as he doesn't commit some grave sin, losing on a tennis court is not some unforgiveable crime.

It's unforgiveable in the context of the match. I don't think we should look much beyond that.

6) And losing when you're 4-0 up in the fifth set is also a choke, so if Nalbandian had lost that, then we could easily have said that Nalbandian choked it away in the final set.

But he didn't did he? We can't go with "what ifs" - let's discuss the facts. The fact would show Federer choked with 2 points to go on his serve.

7) OH NO, POOR ROGERERER. He lost a tennis match! He won't ever join the echelon of 'true champions' (which would be, according to your definition, two people? one? ... zero?) because of this match, which is a step below a Grand Slam final, where he has won six times and lost zero (as of now).

To me he lost more than a tennis match. He lost the mystique of invinsiblity to close things out, he lost an level of aura of aweness that you would come to expect on a Sunday. Yesterday, was not a good day for him in that regard.

8) This is a broken record now. Federer isn't a real champion, OK, OK, we get it, which is why he's won all six of his Grand Slam finals (definitely less important than losing one Masters Cup final).

As a supporter, I sure hope this trend does not spill into future finals.

9) So? I'm going by the past few times he's lost, but you've showed no evidence that this is such a psychological or physical wound that there will be something to the contrary happening this time now that he's lost.

That's because I can't write the future. The past is the past. Nobody knows how he would respond after this. All I'm saying is that it could hurt him more than help him in losing like this.

10) Didn't Roche coach Federer at Wimbledon this year, or was I hallucinating?

Yes, and Roche also coached Lendl in 1990 where he got streamrolled by Edberg. Again, I'm not going to bash Roche. I like him as Federer's coach. What I'm suggesting is that with all the support (even a part-time coach who was absent at the USO), he could not pull it out. That's a bit disappointing.

11) He lost a very close match to Safin (which he had opportunities to win) as well, and it didn't seem to destroy him as you say it did - but of course, you know Federer's psyche and its fragility very well.

Refer to #9. I don't know his psyche, but can't help but think that this loss would be deflating to his psyche.

12) The winner of the match deserves to win, as long as there was no cheating or blatant disruption of said match. In this case, you yourself said it, Nalbandian was mentally tougher, so he deserved to win.

Nalby was mentally tougher in the 5th. What I suggested was that it never should have gotten to that stage in the first place. 4 sets max if Fed knew what he was doing. So no, Nalby did not deserve to win because he never should have gotten that opportunity to do so.

13) He also lost 6-1 because he played horrible tennis, but fine, I'll give you that one. You still haven't explained his fortune in winning against Nalbandian and Ljubicic.

Because he didn't choke in those matches. He choked when it mattered most in the 5th set on his service game of an ATP finals. Sorry, but a Federerish player should not do that. By no means am I harping on him other than the match in question.

14) No, but you're expecting him to fulfill your high, bloated desire for a 'true' champion, which is nearly as bad as expecting him to move mountains.

I don't think it was a high expectation for me to think that he could win this match. Even before the first ball was ever tossed. No, Federer cannot be expected to win every one. But this one, he should have.

15) Elucidate, then.

I'm not disagreeing with you here. Federer losses from time to time. Expect this one was especially painful to take and should not have came to being.

16) He won 4 matches and reached the final. If he isn't badly injured, and there won't be any major physical repercussions to coming to Shanghai, then I don't see anything wrong in his decision.

He wasn't badly injured, but at least he could have rested even more to ensure a full and complete recovery. I just hope this does not set him back in any way.

It is solely Tourmalante's fault if he vested so much of his emotions and heart into a single tennis match, not Federer's. You can't blame a sports icon for some brokenhearted fan's horrid reaction (the reaction of which will probably never reach Roger himself) to a loss. As the cliche goes, it is just a game.

Now, I'll ask the question again: who, according to your narrowminded definition, is a true tennis champion?

Federer is as close to a true champion as you will find in tennis. Yesterday, he was un-Federer-like, playing a final set unbefitting of a true champion that he normally is.

Rafa = Fed Killa
11-22-2005, 03:26 AM
Cry me a river :D

nobama
11-22-2005, 04:06 AM
Federer is as close to a true champion as you will find in tennis. Yesterday, he was un-Federer-like, playing a final set unbefitting of a true champion that he normally is.So the man is human after all. Wow. :eek:

~EMiLiTA~
11-22-2005, 05:16 AM
let this be a lesson to all blind fans...:rolleyes:

Action Jackson
11-22-2005, 05:20 AM
I see the Land of Delusion has been experiencing a population growth even higher than India's population at the moment.

World Beater
11-22-2005, 05:24 AM
There's more than just that.

Pete Sampras:
2001 - Hewitt (6-7, 1-6, 1-6) U.S Open Final
2000 - Safin (4-6, 3-6, 3-6) U.S Open Final
2001 - Federer (6-7, 7-5, 4-6, 7-6, 5-7) Wimbledon

If you're going to include 1991 on Lendl's resume, when he was cleary old and washed up, then it's only fair that we include these beatings Pete was recipient of.

What abt this one...


safin def sampras in tmc canada i believe. I remember pete double faulting on match poin and losing.

prima donna
01-08-2006, 07:02 PM
Where's the genius author of this thread these days ?

heya
01-08-2006, 07:53 PM
Invite chloe to this thread. :hearts: prima/lucifer

star
01-08-2006, 10:01 PM
Well at least I'm one of the few who can see where Toul is coming from. As a Federer fan, I find this defeat most disturbing. Those who think the lost might inspire him to be more hungry are wrong. It will do the opposite, mostly because of the way he lost. A true champion will not let the match slip away on his serve with just 2 measly points to victory. It's absolutely unforgiveable. Federer choked. The fact the he fought back is immaterial. He never should have needed to fight back having been up 2-0. This lost will only weaken his confidence and call to the value of what his part-time coach really brings to him.

He will have about 7 weeks to think about this and it will haunt him. And don't use the injury excuse or the fact that he made it this far under very low expectations. Baloney. He was healthy enough to win 4 matches. The fact is, he and the majority of us expected him to win in the championship match. He didn't. He failed. As the elite player that he is, this must truly hurt. Things like the lost today do not happen to "real" champions. Today, he proved to be human alright. Seriously, he needs to improve a lot in his game, otherwise you can forget him chasing down any future records.


I think you are wrong, but I'm hoping you are right! :devil:

megadeth
01-09-2006, 12:28 AM
if tourmalante ever starts a thread again about fed, i'm gonna be pissed!

some fan he is...

nobama
01-09-2006, 01:19 AM
Exactly why was this thread resurrected? :retard:

prima donna
01-09-2006, 02:49 AM
Exactly why was this thread resurrected? :retard:
Roger wins, life goes on.
He loses and certain users are ready to jump off a bridge.

Generally, it must be the most amusing display ever on this board.

Anyway, your reaction to this reminds me of one of your posts on a thread created by GWH. It is always nice to see a display of hypocrisy.

Got to love the double standards that some choose to apply on this board. No one held a gun to your head and forced you to acknowledge this thread being bumped. Move on.

Exactly. But of course people always have to find a reason to bitch now don't they? :rolleyes:

Chloe le Bopper
01-09-2006, 03:25 AM
Invite chloe to this thread. :hearts: prima/lucifer
HI HEYA!

nobama
01-09-2006, 05:28 AM
Roger wins, life goes on.
He loses and certain users are ready to jump off a bridge.

Generally, it must be the most amusing display ever on this board.

Anyway, your reaction to this reminds me of one of your posts on a thread created by GWH. It is always nice to see a display of hypocrisy.

Got to love the double standards that some choose to apply on this board. No one held a gun to your head and forced you to acknowledge this thread being bumped. Move on.I asked a question, I didn't know that was bitching. The last post in this thread was back in November, so I'm just wondering what the point was in bumping it. :shrug:

prima donna
01-09-2006, 06:09 AM
I asked a question, I didn't know that was bitching. The last post in this thread was back in November, so I'm just wondering what the point was in bumping it. :shrug:

It was the smiley that came after it, the "retard" face.

Now, seriously - most people on this board are misfits, but I have a sincere liking for you.

Don't give me a reason to think otherwise. :hug:

star
01-09-2006, 12:26 PM
Exactly why was this thread resurrected? :retard:

You might ask that about countless threads on this board.

I assure you it's not strange for a thread to be bumped and you needn't rush into Rogerjello defense mode.

adee-gee
09-05-2006, 08:53 AM
:lol:

scoobs
09-05-2006, 10:25 AM
So lemme get this straight - a supposed Federer fan stopped being a Federer fan because he lost to Nalbandian in the final of the Masters Cup?

O-Kay!

I'm torn between admiring the flair for the dramatic and wondering what fair-weather fandom is actually like.

Mistaflava
09-05-2006, 03:38 PM
:haha:

jwoodrx
09-05-2006, 04:34 PM
Well, it's a good thing he got out then because he really would have killed himself when that RG final came along. :devil:

scoobs
09-05-2006, 04:46 PM
ROFL

atheneglaukopis
09-05-2006, 04:48 PM
Well, it's a good thing he got out then because he really would have killed himself when that RG final came along. :devil:Rome, as Roger dumped that easy forehand into the net on matchpoint. :lol:

BD006
09-05-2006, 04:51 PM
Well, it's a good thing he got out then because he really would have killed himself when that RG final came along. :devil:

:lol:

federated
09-05-2006, 05:41 PM
Well, it's a good thing he got out then because he really would have killed himself when that RG final came along. :devil:

:haha:

Corey Feldman
09-05-2006, 06:00 PM
Well he would have had a hell of a lot more to celebrate than kill himself over a couple of clay losses to Mowgli
Australian Open, Wimbledon, Miami, Indian Wells, Toronto anyone.
:angel:

atheneglaukopis
09-05-2006, 06:01 PM
Well he would have had a hell of a lot more to celebrate than a couple of clay losses to Mowgli
Australian Open, Wimbledon, Miami, Indian Wells, Toronto anyone.
:angel:Well, you'd think he'd have had that last year, with an 81-4 win-loss record, but this guy's obviously not stable. Cincinnati would have been another nail in the coffin.

Corey Feldman
09-05-2006, 06:03 PM
He just couldnt bare Nalbandian winning lol:

Deivid23
09-05-2006, 07:13 PM
Well he would have had a hell of a lot more to celebrate than kill himself over a couple of clay losses to Mowgli


Still struggling at counting, burro? :lol:

Daniel
09-05-2006, 11:51 PM
:lol:

Corey Feldman
09-06-2006, 01:34 AM
Still struggling at counting, burro? :lol::lol: actually, burro... i know its 3.

but at the posts above mine, you will see they spoke about the Rome final and French final... not Monaco
;)
:lol:What are you laughing at queer boy? :silly:

atheneglaukopis
09-06-2006, 02:19 AM
:lol: actually, burro... i know its 3.Weighing in with my couple of cents...In informal usage, which your post clearly was, even the very prescriptivist American Heritage Dictionary accepts "few" as one meaning of "a couple".

Action Jackson
09-10-2006, 05:31 PM
I wonder if there are any other Fed fans that will do this, if the Federer loses tonight.

Merton
09-10-2006, 05:35 PM
I wonder if there are any other Fed fans that will do this, if the Federer loses tonight.

This is the thread I had in mind when speculating about the upcoming thread "Why I can no longer remain a fan of Roger Federer".

cmurray
09-10-2006, 05:38 PM
Surely people can't be that fickle. My God, the man's only lost 5 times the whole year.

It's a good thing we Safin fans don't think that way, huh? Nobody would like him.

atheneglaukopis
09-10-2006, 05:40 PM
Surely people can't be that fickle.In the plural, no. :) There's only one, and he abandoned ship last year.

FedFan_2007
07-10-2007, 06:29 AM
*BUMP*

Federer is a true Spartan ninja now.

Marek.
07-10-2007, 06:46 AM
We need this guy back. He seems like the only Fedtard that could match RFK's level of logic.

bokehlicious
07-10-2007, 06:49 AM
Yeah MTF misses Tourmalente badly :sad: :o

krystlel
07-10-2007, 08:11 AM
One of the classic posts of MTF. I, of course, didn't bother reading all of it, but I love the part where Tourmalante pretty much admits to being a huge fan of players only because of their success. :worship:

Mateya
07-10-2007, 08:18 AM
What a :retard: the thread starter must have been.
:confused:

dkw
07-10-2007, 02:47 PM
C'mon Tourmalante was a legend, the kid single handily put the "tard" in retarded and that "Ninja" thing... well priceless!!

Someone please get him back, I need to LOL!

stebs
07-10-2007, 03:14 PM
For sure this thread would enter my top 20 all time MTF threads. What a joker.

Naranoc
07-10-2007, 03:24 PM
:rolls: This thread's always worth bumping up every now and then.

Fee
07-10-2007, 05:06 PM
I didn't read all 17 pages of this thread, but did anyone ever tell Tourmalente that Federer lost to Safin and not Hewitt at the AO that year? His first post was wrong.

cmurray
07-10-2007, 08:11 PM
I'm still highly amused at the mental image of a weeping ninja with a Federer poster. :haha:

:haha: