[megadeth]

'04 - 3 slams, 3 masters, 11 titles all in all, 70-6 W/L

'05 - 2 slams, 4 masters and coutning, 10 titles and counting. so far, 71-3 W/L

question is if fed surpasses the 11 titles this year, would his '05 be better even if he didn't win 3 slams?

discuss

 

[Experimentee]

04 was better. The Slams are what matters in tennis.

 

[wcr]

'04 - 3 slams, 3 masters, 11 titles all in all, 70-6 W/L

'05 - 2 slams, 4 masters and coutning, 10 titles and counting. so far, 71-3 W/L

question is if fed surpasses the 11 titles this year, would his '05 be better even if he didn't win 3 slams?

discuss

2005 appears to be Roger's best year. Struggling with a foot ailment that started before the AO he goes on to defend all but three of his titles so far. Misses Toronto and Gstaad and adds Cincy and Miami to his list of titles. And in the middle of the year he takes off 6 weeks to heal his ailing feet only to return and win two titles in a row. 2005 makes 2004 look like a walk in the park for Roger.

There's only one title left to defend and he is scheduled to play more indoor events including Basel.

Amazing.

And yes, 2005 = better hair.

 

[megadeth]

roger failed to defend 2 titles actually - AO and Canada

personally, i believe '05 is his best as well because he managed to live up to the hype of being the best even when people were downplaying him for failing to win the first 2 slams.

he really showed them who's still the boss.

 

[megadeth]

2 more titles to defend - thailand and shanghai..

i hope he can add madrid, basel, and paris to that list this year..

 

[PaulieM]

personally, i believe '05 is his best as well because he managed to live up to the hype of being the best even when people were downplaying him for failing to win the first 2 slams.

he really showed them who's still the boss.

that's probably the most impressive things he did this year.

that and he got even hotter in '05, i didn't think it was possible but i was wrong.
Amazing! :angel:

 

[megadeth]

and the other factor he did well at - handle the pressure of the new rising star - nadal

they may have only faced twice so far this year, but when nadal was bagging all these titles and threatening the race to number 1, fed was cool and calm and also stealthely won as much titles... even more now

 

[Tourmalante]

Yes 2005 is more impressive and despite the AO loss, is actually his more dominant year in terms of wins, rankings points, and titles. The fact that he won two slams, defeating precedent for triple slam titlists in the following year was huge.And he defended Wimbledon with even more panache then last year. The way he beat Roddick was integral, by showing that they have only drifted farther in ability rather than Roddick closing the gap. To look only at slams is a narrow and fallacious view.

 

[Billy Moonshine]

2005.
In 2004 he proved he was the real deal. But still, myself included, people doubted.
In 2005 he really showed the tennis world what he was: An all time great.
2005: The year federer became my favorite player.

 

[Experimentee]

I think Roger would much prefer to have won the AO than to have a few less losses on his record. In 2005 he only showed he could still beat the same guys as last year, and Nadal is just coming up and not at his peak. The real test will be next year when Nadal is better, whether Roger can continue beating him on hard and start beating him on clay.

 

[megadeth]

yes, it would be interesting how the 2 will match up next year.

will nadal keep that fire burning and improve on faster courts?
will federer close the gap on nadal on clay?

 

[Fergie]

2005! :yeah:

 

[Federerhingis]

Hard to say, However, if he's able to defend his masters cup theres no if or buts that '05 would be an even more dominant year for him. Nevertheless,I just loved how dominant he began the year by winning the Aussie and playing at his very best in '04, guess his dominance from the '03 masters cup just carried over.

 

[Billabong]

If he wins another TMS, Basel and the TMC, I would definitely say 2005

 

[Havok]

2004 easily. 3 Slams compared to 2 this year, that seals the deal and there really shouldn't be a discussion going on about this topic imo :shrug:. He was also better vs top 10 players in 04 than this year ( didn't he not lose one single match vs a top 10 player last year? I know he lost to Henman early in the year, but Tim wasn't close to top 10 at that time).

 

[NYCtennisfan]

IN the long run people will remember 2004. Technically, it was this year. This is as close as someone will get to going undefeated probably ever. He has played 13 tournaments and won 10 of them, made the SF in at least 12 of them and made the QF in all of them. He had match points in two of his defeats and played a truly horrible match in Paris lost decisively for the only time this year (so far). That's just incredible.

 

[rofe]

2005.

2004 was when he realized his potential but 2005 is when he matured while defending his titles.

It is much harder to defend titles especially GS and he has done an admirable job of doing it this year. This year (more than last year) probably will give him a lot of confidence in his abilities which will help him immensely in 2006.

 

[BlackSilver]

You should have waited until the end of November

 

[etiage]

2005
backed up a great 2004 and showed that he can stand up to the pressure of defending

 

[megadeth]

You should have waited until the end of November

for sure someone will bring up this thread again as the season comes to a close..