PDA

View Full Version : Is there anyone here that does not like Federer..?


FedSampras
06-03-2007, 07:56 PM
Federer is a magnificent player and a great champion. He is highly revered by his peers because of his good sportmanship, friendly attitude and never let his tremendous success get into his head.

As a person, he is decent goodlooking and sexy ( to many women fans) and is widely known as one of the most humble and likable sport champions the world have ever seen. He is a champion in giving back to the sport of tennis as well as the fans. He is also involved in numerous charities all over the world.

zapvor
06-03-2007, 08:05 PM
yea i am a Federer fan :) you should start a poll and tally it up with exact numbers

Morrissey
06-03-2007, 08:12 PM
There are but that would be considered trolling. Also I think the Fed police would rip them all just for not liking him.

boojay
06-03-2007, 08:14 PM
hard not to like the best. why do you think Jordan was so popular?

MEAC_ALLAMERICAN
06-03-2007, 08:15 PM
From what I have seen over the past four and a half years, he seems like a nice guy.

psamp14
06-03-2007, 08:18 PM
no i dont like federer....he's nice, he's humble, he's friendly, he's got a nice sense of humor, he's good at tennis, he's the 21st century version of sampras but a little better in some areas, his serve is faulty, ....

just kiddding...

how can a tennis fan not like federer?? :)

zapvor
06-03-2007, 08:19 PM
its not just that he is the best. him as a tennis player and a person as a whole is just likeable to me. you dont see him raping girls at colorado hotels, buying bling bling necklaces, tattoos, divorces, none of the athelete celebrity scandals that you so often hear with high profile sports stars. he isnt married to some supermodel, singer,etc but is with a fairly down to earth girl as far as we know. sure he drives nice cars and wears rolex but he deserves it. and he is swiss. they are good people as far as history is concerned. he also does so much charity, also he threw a pizza party for the ballboys at Basel last year i believe. he is someone i admire. oh and thats not mentioning his tennis game.

boojay
06-03-2007, 08:21 PM
its not just that he is the best. him as a tennis player and a person as a whole is just likeable to me. you dont see him raping girls at colorado hotels, buying bling bling necklaces, tattoos, divorces, none of the athelete celebrity scandals that you so often hear with high profile sports stars. he isnt married to some supermodel, singer,etc but is with a fairly down to earth girl as far as we know. sure he drives nice cars and wears rolex but he deserves it. and he is swiss. they are good people as far as history is concerned. he also does so much charity, also he threw a pizza party for the ballboys at Basel last year i believe. he is someone i admire. oh and thats not mentioning his tennis game.

OMFGROTFLMAO x 10000!!!!

zapvor
06-03-2007, 08:26 PM
OMFGROTFLMAO x 10000!!!!

lol what? its a Kobe reference

Heavy Metal Tennis Star
06-03-2007, 08:26 PM
Andy Noddick

boojay
06-03-2007, 08:29 PM
lol what? its a Kobe reference

I know, I think I used it in different thread last week.

Classic!

zapvor
06-03-2007, 08:30 PM
I know, I think I used it in different thread last week.

Classic!

oh snap. hahhaa high5! classic indeed.

Heavy Metal Tennis Star
06-03-2007, 08:31 PM
its not just that he is the best. him as a tennis player and a person as a whole is just likeable to me. you dont see him raping girls at colorado hotels, buying bling bling necklaces, tattoos, divorces, none of the athelete celebrity scandals that you so often hear with high profile sports stars. he isnt married to some supermodel, singer,etc but is with a fairly down to earth girl as far as we know. sure he drives nice cars and wears rolex but he deserves it. and he is swiss. they are good people as far as history is concerned. he also does so much charity, also he threw a pizza party for the ballboys at Basel last year i believe. he is someone i admire. oh and thats not mentioning his tennis game.

HEY MAN!, tattoos are cool.

Heavy Metal Tennis Star
06-03-2007, 08:32 PM
Roger Federer, the best there was, the best there is, the best there will ever be. I am always honored, to watch you courtside every september in new york.

zapvor
06-03-2007, 08:34 PM
HEY MAN!, tattoos are cool.

they can be. my post made it sound negative. i am not sure why i did that....

Heavy Metal Tennis Star
06-03-2007, 08:35 PM
they can be. my post made it sound negative. i am not sure why i did that....
yeah, i love my tats, i have one done in the tattoo parlor of vince neil, the singer of motley crue.

zapvor
06-03-2007, 08:48 PM
yeah, i love my tats, i have one done in the tattoo parlor of vince neil, the singer of motley crue.

oh snap. where at? you should make that your avatar or something

Heavy Metal Tennis Star
06-03-2007, 09:52 PM
oh snap. where at? you should make that your avatar or something

yeah, but i think my avatar is the best now haha. plus i dont like people ripping on my ink, nothing special, just a tat in the arm of a flying v bass guitar.

Fedace
06-03-2007, 10:13 PM
Federer is just too BOOOOOring. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zapvor
06-03-2007, 11:38 PM
yeah, but i think my avatar is the best now haha. plus i dont like people ripping on my ink, nothing special, just a tat in the arm of a flying v bass guitar.

haha true a lot of people would diss it for all sorts of reasons. cool beans.

pound cat
06-04-2007, 02:38 AM
From what I've seen on this board, everyone likes Roger, as well as liking Rafa, & Sharapova. Such a happy, loving bunch of posters.

ktownva
06-04-2007, 05:40 AM
I think I speak for most Americans when I say that we do like Roger. Even though he prevented our best guy from collecting two Wimby titles. He was very gracious in victory on both occasions.

sureshs
06-04-2007, 05:54 AM
Federer has just been nominated for the Nobel Prize in medicine. But instead of taking the money, he will donate it to charity.

Andres
06-04-2007, 05:58 AM
I love him as a player, and as a professional, but I hate the guy.
For the same reason I hate Schumacher: I can't stand a person winning all the time.

Of course, I also hated Nadal on clay, but only when he didn't face Federer.

Federer vs. Nadal on clay? It's a tough... but at least, Nadal prevents Federer from winning everything.

I love the way he plays, but for god's sake! Start losing more! :D

erik_PS95
06-04-2007, 09:53 AM
Do you guys think Federer would be this good had he lived in the Sampras, Agassi, Becker Era? Late 80's Early 90s? I think what makes Federer good is his weak competition, except for Nadal.

ksbh
06-04-2007, 10:13 AM
I fully endorse your opinion.

If a 1-dimensional player such as Nadal (in Federer's own view) can spank him time and again, you would have to rate the chances of Sampras & Agassi way higher!

Do you guys think Federer would be this good had he lived in the Sampras, Agassi, Becker Era? Late 80's Early 90s? I think what makes Federer good is his weak competition, except for Nadal.

Baghdatis72
06-04-2007, 10:27 AM
From what I've seen on this board, everyone likes Roger, as well as liking Rafa, & Sharapova. Such a happy, loving bunch of posters.

Rofl :lol:

Spread the love.

danb
06-04-2007, 10:28 AM
I like his fantastic tennis but I don't like him as a person, he is too cocky.

ksbh
06-04-2007, 12:18 PM
I'd like to echo Dan's words. I like his tennis (though I don't think it's the best I've ever seen) but dislike the person.

I like his fantastic tennis but I don't like him as a person, he is too cocky.

tricky
06-04-2007, 12:37 PM
Federer was my favorite player aside from Agassi, and that was true before 2004.

That said, it's really easy to be the fan of the frontrunner. It means that you don't have to work as hard in understanding the other 100 players in the game.

edmondsm
06-04-2007, 12:48 PM
The only reason to hate Fed is because he is abusing your favorite player.

ACE of Hearts
06-04-2007, 12:55 PM
Fed would have the same success he has had if he played in the 90s.Your a hater if u dont think so.His weapons would be too much for those type of players.He would have the same amount of GSs that Pete collected.The 90s had alot of clowns as well.

dunloplayah
06-04-2007, 12:58 PM
I like him. Great player. Great presence. down to earth and unimposing. I like his court ethics and attitude. He brings a lot of grace and honor back to the sport. Plus that old style all-courter play is nice!

I hope he Wins FO, WIM & USOPEN!!!

WillAlwaysLoveYouTennis
06-04-2007, 01:02 PM
I don't like or dislike Federer. Certainly he is a great player, and headed towards all time great if judging from what's done thus far and could do, but I would always prefer to watch another player than him, and I think he's rather ugly in a Neanderthalish way: heavy brow, jutting jaw...often looks like he doesn't have any teeth because of a certain expression on his face.

clymb420
06-04-2007, 01:04 PM
Do you guys think Federer would be this good had he lived in the Sampras, Agassi, Becker Era? Late 80's Early 90s? I think what makes Federer good is his weak competition, except for Nadal.

Roger would be as competitive with that goup as anyone else in history. He has a leg up on the group of greats because he is an overall more powerful cat than anyone in that group. He bangs with and dominates all the modern players who have these power games only afforded to them by their equipment, but with the finesse and touch of a classic all-courter. He's the only guy still playing the same game as all the greats...the beautifully elegant game of "tennis". Even Nadal plays a game only afforded to him by his racquet technology. The only guys that could really compete with Federer on the court day in and day out are from an even earlier era, like McEnroe, Edberg, Lendl, Sampras, Becker, Smith, Bjorg, Big Bill, Nastase and Laver. I don't even know if I'd put Agassi in there...the combination of the huge racquet, 2-hand backhand, and lack of net skills may preclude him from the "great" group.

clymb420
06-04-2007, 01:19 PM
I think I speak for most Americans when I say that we do like Roger. Even though he prevented our best guy from collecting two Wimby titles. He was very gracious in victory on both occasions.

It makes me soooo sad to know that our best guy is Roddick, who will go down in history as a Spinks/Holmes like champion, a poser who was around at just the right time to get a championship, in between a time when one group of greats was in decline and another group of new dominant players was on the rise.

Federer and Nadal, and perhaps eventually one of these talented youngsters, will develop into one of the great match-ups of all-time, and Roddick will be a guy who pushes 'em to a fourth set every once in a while. Hewitt is the same way. Hewitt = Spinks while Roddick = Holmes. Only left to fight on the undercard for the rest of their careers.

forzainter
06-04-2007, 01:23 PM
i am not a big fan of federer on court, i would say even that i dont like him on court. But off court i find him to be a very nice and outgoing person, at least he seems that way on tv

Nadal_Freak
06-04-2007, 01:34 PM
Federer is an alright guy. I just don't find his game that interesting. I prefer Nadal's style.

cujays
06-04-2007, 03:00 PM
he is too good
i like roddick

zapvor
06-04-2007, 06:46 PM
I like him. Great player. Great presence. down to earth and unimposing. I like his court ethics and attitude. He brings a lot of grace and honor back to the sport. Plus that old style all-courter play is nice!

I hope he Wins FO, WIM & USOPEN!!!

i hope so too.

boojay
06-04-2007, 06:54 PM
i find it funny that people have a problem with him because he's TOO perfect.

the world needs heroes, you know

ktownva
06-04-2007, 07:35 PM
It makes me soooo sad to know that our best guy is Roddick, who will go down in history as a Spinks/Holmes like champion, a poser who was around at just the right time to get a championship, in between a time when one group of greats was in decline and another group of new dominant players was on the rise.

Federer and Nadal, and perhaps eventually one of these talented youngsters, will develop into one of the great match-ups of all-time, and Roddick will be a guy who pushes 'em to a fourth set every once in a while. Hewitt is the same way. Hewitt = Spinks while Roddick = Holmes. Only left to fight on the undercard for the rest of their careers.

The history books aren't done being written yet, lamo. Andy will always get every player's best shot, because beating the guy with the biggest serve will always be some sort of feat. That's a lot of pressure on him everytime he steps on a court, and you can sense his opponents are always fired up. He doesn't seem to have the advantage of intimidating opponents into poor play the way Nadal and Federer do. If Andy ever wins Wimbledon you will be back on the bandwagon, you know it.

krz
06-04-2007, 10:13 PM
its not just that he is the best. him as a tennis player and a person as a whole is just likeable to me. you dont see him raping girls at colorado hotels, buying bling bling necklaces, tattoos, divorces, none of the athelete celebrity scandals that you so often hear with high profile sports stars. he isnt married to some supermodel, singer,etc but is with a fairly down to earth girl as far as we know. sure he drives nice cars and wears rolex but he deserves it. and he is swiss. they are good people as far as history is concerned. he also does so much charity, also he threw a pizza party for the ballboys at Basel last year i believe. he is someone i admire. oh and thats not mentioning his tennis game.

my thoughts exactly, on another note I read tennis players are the most giving out of all the athletes even when the amount they make is no where near that amount that basketball, baseball, football players make.

Federer would be my second fav player behind Roddick... people hate how he acts on court but I think its hilarious as well as his post match interviews.

fednad
06-04-2007, 11:01 PM
Federer has just been nominated for the Nobel Prize in medicine. But instead of taking the money, he will donate it to charity.

Right! And the medicine he invented would be used to treat mental cases like you

clymb420
06-05-2007, 06:19 AM
The history books aren't done being written yet, lamo. Andy will always get every player's best shot, because beating the guy with the biggest serve will always be some sort of feat. That's a lot of pressure on him everytime he steps on a court, and you can sense his opponents are always fired up. He doesn't seem to have the advantage of intimidating opponents into poor play the way Nadal and Federer do. If Andy ever wins Wimbledon you will be back on the bandwagon, you know it.

History books are written as everyday (every slam) passes. What would yesterday be considered, oh, maybe...history! Call me a lamo, then make excuses for your TigerBeat dreamlover Roddick...nice post. This board needs less teenage posters subscribing to it.

Ohh, wahhhh! Roddick gets everybody's best shot, and then he has to overcome sooo much pressure, and it makes it sooo hard for him to intimidate other athletes like a truly great athlete does!!! Boo-hoo for Andy! Every excuse in your statement above is exactly why Andy's days of "great" tennis are over...and why he won't go down in the books as a true "great", like Federer surely will, and Nadal might (mostly for his rivalry with Fed).

Guess who overcomes the pressure of everybody's best shot everyday...Federer and Nadal. Guess who has the mental edge and competitive drive to intimidate their opponents everyday...Fed and Rafa. You'd think, hopefully, working with Connors would help him with his competitveness...some of it would rub off. But, alas its not natural for Roddick, he'll be a self-pitting pouter for the rest of his career. Until he learns to stand "on" the baseline and bang with the other two (instead of his passive groundstroke game from 15 feet behind the basesline), he'll never get close.

Sorry, kid. Roddick will go down as a popular american player who could hang out in the top 10, even be #1 for a moment, but couldn't make that final step to "great" for one reason or another...like Chang. I'm telling you, he's the Spinks/Holmes middle-child of tennis (see above post). I'm not arguing that he isn't a good player, a good guy, or that he won't even win another slam event...my original post was in response to him and his buddies being considered great...which Andy never will. Btw, Roddick's bandwagon and me...never! There are to many teenage fan-clubbers and TigerBeat subscribers on that bandwagon for me.

ktownva
06-05-2007, 07:20 AM
History books are written as everyday (every slam) passes. What would yesterday be considered, oh, maybe...history! Call me a lamo, then make excuses for your TigerBeat dreamlover Roddick...nice post. This board needs less teenage posters subscribing to it.

Ohh, wahhhh! Roddick gets everybody's best shot, and then he has to overcome sooo much pressure, and it makes it sooo hard for him to intimidate other athletes like a truly great athlete does!!! Boo-hoo for Andy! Every excuse in your statement above is exactly why Andy's days of "great" tennis are over...and why he won't go down in the books as a true "great", like Federer surely will, and Nadal might (mostly for his rivalry with Fed).

Guess who overcomes the pressure of everybody's best shot everyday...Federer and Nadal. Guess who has the mental edge and competitive drive to intimidate their opponents everyday...Fed and Rafa. You'd think, hopefully, working with Connors would help him with his competitveness...some of it would rub off. But, alas its not natural for Roddick, he'll be a self-pitting pouter for the rest of his career. Until he learns to stand "on" the baseline and bang with the other two (instead of his passive groundstroke game from 15 feet behind the basesline), he'll never get close.

Sorry, kid. Roddick will go down as a popular american player who could hang out in the top 10, even be #1 for a moment, but couldn't make that final step to "great" for one reason or another...like Chang. I'm telling you, he's the Spinks/Holmes middle-child of tennis (see above post). I'm not arguing that he isn't a good player, a good guy, or that he won't even win another slam event...my original post was in response to him and his buddies being considered great...which Andy never will. Btw, Roddick's bandwagon and me...never! There are to many teenage fan-clubbers and TigerBeat subscribers on that bandwagon for me.

Sounds like you have an ax to grind with Roddick in particular. What, did you whiff a serve trying to hit like him or something? It's interesting that you seem to think his fans are all lusty teens, and not knowledgeable tennis players. Did anyone here claim that Roddick was one of "The Greats"? No. He's the best we have right now and he's not some f'ing chump so what's with the bashing? Are you even American?

ksbh
06-05-2007, 08:10 AM
Let's just agree to disagree :)

Fed would have the same success he has had if he played in the 90s.Your a hater if u dont think so.His weapons would be too much for those type of players.He would have the same amount of GSs that Pete collected.The 90s had alot of clowns as well.

clymb420
06-05-2007, 08:13 AM
Sounds like you have an ax to grind with Roddick in particular. What, did you whiff a serve trying to hit like him or something? It's interesting that you seem to think his fans are all lusty teens, and not knowledgeable tennis players. Did anyone here claim that Roddick was one of "The Greats"? No. He's the best we have right now and he's not some f'ing chump so what's with the bashing? Are you even American?

Sorry, I overreacted to your mentioning him as our best...which he is, but it's just dissappointing that America's best at any sport, at any certain time, is not in the conversation as the elite champions in the sport. Earlier in this thread we were speaking about Fed in regards of the all-time greats, so I guess I was still in that train of thought. I am an American, a pretty proud one at that. That's why I'm disappointed in Roddick, because he has the potential, but not the will to take it to the next level and be great. When it comes right down to it, I think he's satisfied with his one big weapon and the level of fame, or celebrity, he's achieved. I hope I'm wrong and he begins to routinely beat his elite-level rivals, Fed and Rafa. But until then he is just a second-tier pro, which in my opinion, isn't good enough for our best player. I'm really just sad that he is a "Chang" and we (USA) are without any Samprases.

Oh, and btw, back to the point of this thread, there are no good reasons to dislike Federer. It's too bad we can't get him to become American like Martina did back in the day. Not as many people want to be american these days, I'm afraid.

Swinging Simian
06-05-2007, 08:33 AM
That's why I'm disappointed in Roddick, because he has the potential, but not the will to take it to the next level and be great.


You're kidding right? NO will to take it further? Sooo... that thing with working with Connors was just hero worship then? The experiment to add new weapons to his game such as serve and volley, just for kicks? Training day in and day out, killing himself to get just the slightest edge, just a job requirement? Sorry but you can rag on the guy for failing spectacularly, but I don't think anyone can and should say that a man who is 3rd out of a million in his profession doesn't have the will to be great.

ktownva
06-05-2007, 08:38 AM
No problem, Clymb.

I too would like to see better results from Roddick, Blake, Ginepri, Fish, ect. ect. Going Slamless for 4 years just sucks but I'm ok with Roddick making finals at Wimby/USO and especially how he turned things around last year. I think he has the tools to win against anyone, so it is disappointing that he doesn't have more slams.

IvanYentl
06-05-2007, 09:14 AM
hard not to like the best. why do you think Jordan was so popular?

true, but over time the die-hard fans begin to get bored and start wishing for a rival. I thought Jordan was so much fun to watch, until his stellar performances became routine, almost effortless. I like to see the effort and I like to see the new faces and talent.

at this time I'm a Federer fan, but someone better come along soon and start beating him. How about a Rafter clone? Now that would be fun.

IvanYentl
06-05-2007, 09:16 AM
No problem, Clymb.

I too would like to see better results from Roddick, Blake, Ginepri, Fish, ect. ect.

What I'd like to see is all those guys wiped from the face of USA tennis and replaced with players who have games that are fun to watch.

Roddick and Ginepri are in the "watch paint peel" group, Blake is too robotic, and Fish -- while he is able to mix it up -- looks like a hacker much of the time

clymb420
06-05-2007, 10:46 AM
You're kidding right? NO will to take it further? Sooo... that thing with working with Connors was just hero worship then? The experiment to add new weapons to his game such as serve and volley, just for kicks? Training day in and day out, killing himself to get just the slightest edge, just a job requirement? Sorry but you can rag on the guy for failing spectacularly, but I don't think anyone can and should say that a man who is 3rd out of a million in his profession doesn't have the will to be great.

He's going through the motions, that's sure 'nough. But! If the kid really had the will, or heart of champion, he better damn well be able to make it past the first round of a slam! Any slam! Oh, and btw, "Training day in and day out, killing himself to get just the slightest edge, just a job requirement?" You're damn straight that's a job requirement of a pro. I'm sure there are dozens of guys and gals on the tour who work harder than Roddick, but just don't have the natural skill set to crack the top 20, or 30, or 50. What I'm saying is he's got the skill set, duh, that's why he's at #3, but he doesn't have the intangible will, or heart, or balls, or eye of the tiger...whatever you want to call it, to be ranked amongst the greats in history. Again, in the context this conversation was born, getting to and staying at #3 in the world at any certain time is not the definition of great, at least not the one we were using. I had previously related Roddick to Spinks or Holmes in boxing. Lucky enough to be #1 for a minute, while the true greats declined behind him (Ali) and the new greats blossomed in front of him (Tyson/Hollyfield). Sampras is to Ali as Tyson/Hollyfield is to Rafa/Fed. If you did well on the SATs you might be able to keep up.

Again, back to the subject...I've pretty much made up my mind that Federer is a much greater "great" than Sampras because he has already done so well at the French. Even if he doesn't win in the next few years, which I think is inevitable, his success on every surface puts him past Pete.

Azzurri
06-05-2007, 11:12 AM
hard not to like the best. why do you think Jordan was so popular?

HHHHAAAAA!!! Jordan??? Please don't compare Jordan's demenour to Fed's. Jordan is a pompous jerk and he hates...HATES white people. Jordan is a fake and last I checked he was not such a humanitarian. Jordan...please.

ktownva
06-05-2007, 11:59 AM
Sampras is to Ali as Tyson/Hollyfield is to Rafa/Fed.

Sampras: "I'm pretty, I'm the greatest OF ALL TIMES!"

Roddick: "I aint got no slams, I ain't got no Davis Cup, and I sho don't have no teefus".

Rafa: "I want to eat your babies and bite your ear off."

Fed: "I will win Dancing With The Stars."

chris1992
06-05-2007, 12:27 PM
Federer...well, do i like him? He has an extremely optimistic attitude on everything not just tennis. He gives to charity. He signs autographs at almost anytime. He makes double handed backhanders want to have a 1 handed backhand. He is an all rounder, can play virtually any style of game he wants against practically all players. The only reasons you seem him in magazines are if he has won a tournament or is posing for rolex, unlike certain footballers. Up for anything at any time. A graceful loser when that time comes but an even more graceful champion. Unlike former world number ones, he isnt frowned upon as arrogant (Hewitt). The whole world adores him not just his own Swiss fans.

He WILL be the best if he wins the french at some point and although not my favourite player, definetly the most graceful and worthy champion and world number 1!

Swinging Simian
06-05-2007, 01:03 PM
He's going through the motions, that's sure 'nough. But! If the kid really had the will, or heart of champion, he better damn well be able to make it past the first round of a slam! Any slam! Oh, and btw, "Training day in and day out, killing himself to get just the slightest edge, just a job requirement?" You're damn straight that's a job requirement of a pro. I'm sure there are dozens of guys and gals on the tour who work harder than Roddick, but just don't have the natural skill set to crack the top 20, or 30, or 50. What I'm saying is he's got the skill set, duh, that's why he's at #3, but he doesn't have the intangible will, or heart, or balls, or eye of the tiger...whatever you want to call it, to be ranked amongst the greats in history. Again, in the context this conversation was born, getting to and staying at #3 in the world at any certain time is not the definition of great, at least not the one we were using. I had previously related Roddick to Spinks or Holmes in boxing. Lucky enough to be #1 for a minute, while the true greats declined behind him (Ali) and the new greats blossomed in front of him (Tyson/Hollyfield). Sampras is to Ali as Tyson/Hollyfield is to Rafa/Fed. If you did well on the SATs you might be able to keep up.

Again, back to the subject...I've pretty much made up my mind that Federer is a much greater "great" than Sampras because he has already done so well at the French. Even if he doesn't win in the next few years, which I think is inevitable, his success on every surface puts him past Pete.

Nope sorry, Think you're confusing that intangible will, with ability. He wants and strives to be the best. He wants to be great. Unfortunately his best is not good enough. Yes he won't be one of the greats as you've put it. But I don't think anyone who has rebuilt his ranking career and his game, is striving to be a "mediocre" champion. To be Sphinx or Holmes as you've put it. The will is there. Hell I think he'd give himeslf an anuerism willing himself to greatness if he could. I have no problems with people slamming AR's game even that he might only be a one slam wonder. I do take issue with anyone who does question the fighting spirit, the will of any man who fights that hard. Even if he does get pummeled. That eye of the tiger, Rocky Balboa, intagible heart, the balls that you're talking about, it's there. Unfortunately it keeps slaming into the hard knee of reality that is Federer Nadal or just some one who is just on fire.

zapvor
06-05-2007, 04:04 PM
HHHHAAAAA!!! Jordan??? Please don't compare Jordan's demenour to Fed's. Jordan is a pompous jerk and he hates...HATES white people. Jordan is a fake and last I checked he was not such a humanitarian. Jordan...please.

thats true. as great as Jordan is as a baketball player, i dont know about him as a person...

tennishead93
06-05-2007, 05:11 PM
Federer is just too BOOOOOring. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz
sampras was boring. feds game always has that element of suprise. Im not saying im a fed fan but his game is just unbelievable. he is a tennis god.

tennishead93
06-05-2007, 05:11 PM
also after watching him beat robredo i rele do think he is the best ever.