PDA

View Full Version : Fed comments of Murray


oy vey
01-13-2009, 08:32 AM
Murray the favorite for AO

Who said that? The bookies? Good for him,” Federer said Tuesday at a news conference for the Kooyong exhibition tournament, his traditional tuneup for the year’s first major. “It doesn’t help him a whole lot. I’ve been in that position before as well and didn’t make it.”

“He’s put himself in a great position. He started off well, going well in Doha. He finished strong last year. It still does surprise me that the bookies say that,” Federer said. “He’s never won a Slam.

“Novak is the defending champion here. Rafa had an incredible season last year. I won the last slam of last season. It’s surprising to hear.”

“Not many guys have been able to win a Grand Slam in the last few years. Rafa and me took a lot of them, Novak won here last year. They don’t come easily.”

http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/news;_ylt=AplEStXpS_s4gshoqyasLLg4v7YF?slug=ap-federer-murray&prov=ap&type=lgns

Nadal_Freak
01-13-2009, 08:34 AM
Typical words from Federer. Not wanting to give his opponents credit. He only beat Fed 4 times in a row now. lol

tennisdad65
01-13-2009, 08:38 AM
Fed should have said "that is correct, murray is the favorite" just to put the pressure on murray :)

DarthFed
01-13-2009, 08:39 AM
Ignoring Nadal_Freak....

Fed's comment comes off as a tad bitter and arrogant...BUT theres some value behind it...toting Murray as the favorite when Djoker will want to defend his title, Nadal will want a crack at the title and Fed will want to reclaim his title

Fed is right, Murray is doing great but the bandwagon is growing far too quickly

He still hasn't proved his metal in a GS

And Fed, Nadal and Djoker are just a handful, we have Tsonga as well]

Hell what if Safin "shows up", you can never predict outcomes in sports

Chopin
01-13-2009, 08:44 AM
Federer tells it like is yet again. Watch him get flamed here, but he's right on. It's all about Rafa, Federer and Djokovic at the slams.

NamRanger
01-13-2009, 08:46 AM
Typical words from Federer. Not wanting to give his opponents credit. He only beat Fed 4 times in a row now. lol



Typical stupidity and trolling from your part. It is amazing that the forum administrators put up with you.

veroniquem
01-13-2009, 08:54 AM
Federer tells it like is yet again. Watch him get flamed here, but he's right on. It's all about Rafa, Federer and Djokovic at the slams.
The fact that it's been until now doesn't mean it's gonna be forever! You don't win slams until you win your first one (there's always a first, isn't there?) and Murray made the final a few months ago, he's ready for a big win. Don't know if he'll get it but definitely belongs to the top contenders group. Tell it like it is? Yeah and like it is is sour grapes, that's what, wishful thinking that Murray will never win a slam which at this point is as improbable as claiming last year that Djokovic wouldn't win one either.

flyer
01-13-2009, 09:00 AM
hes sour but hes right, good to hear federer actually speak his mind....

DarthFed
01-13-2009, 09:03 AM
The fact that it's been until now doesn't mean it's gonna be forever! You don't win slams until you win your first one (there's always a first, isn't there?) and Murray made the final a few months ago, he's ready for a big win. Don't know if he'll get it but definitely belongs to the top contenders group. Tell it like it is? Yeah and like it is is sour grapes, that's what, wishful thinking that Murray will never win a slam which at this point is as improbable as claiming last year that Djokovic wouldn't win one either.

It's not sour grapes...he never said he wont win one, he's questioning how Murray can be the favorite?

I'd like to know as well....

People are too quick to jump on a bandwagon, it's so annoying which is why i never do it your prone to be disappointed

babbette
01-13-2009, 09:09 AM
HAHA, Federer cracks me up!

NamRanger
01-13-2009, 09:13 AM
The fact that it's been until now doesn't mean it's gonna be forever! You don't win slams until you win your first one (there's always a first, isn't there?) and Murray made the final a few months ago, he's ready for a big win. Don't know if he'll get it but definitely belongs to the top contenders group. Tell it like it is? Yeah and like it is is sour grapes, that's what, wishful thinking that Murray will never win a slam which at this point is as improbable as claiming last year that Djokovic wouldn't win one either.



Uh, Rios went on a tear in 98 reaching the Australian Open final and winning multiple masters tournaments that year. Yet he didn't enter the FO, Wimbledon, or the USO as the favorite that year. Let's be serious, this is a huge bandwagon named Andy Murray right now. And I'm willing to bet that he's going to implode at some point or another.


Oh, and Rios won the YEC and STILL didn't enter the Australian Open in 99 as the favorite.



Murray should not be the favorite. Period.

In D Zone
01-13-2009, 09:23 AM
Not surprised coming from Federer! Rightfully so - he has to keep the swagger on his sleeves. Since he has 13 slams under his belt to prove it so as Rafa and Djoker. Murray has to prove himself - the slam is a 5 setter and anyone even favorites can get dropped as early as the first round.

Call it arrogant or not - Fed knows how to win in these type of long drawn out battles. Time will tell if Murray can live up to the hype!

veroniquem
01-13-2009, 09:31 AM
Actually let me try a little reasoning here just for fun. Nadal is my favorite player but on hard court recently he's been beaten by Murray, Simon, Monfils and had to retire from Master Cup with injury. Of course he is Nadal and he could pull a rabbit from his hat but I don't see putting him as the main favorite here.
Djokovic has already won AO and he defends his title but his results have been a real roller coaster recently going from losing in early rounds to winning master cup to losing in first round again. In these conditions, it's rather hard to pick him with any sense of reliability. Then comes Federer, he has a lot of experience at winning slams and he won the last slam on hard, those are strong arguments in his favor tampered by the fact that it's been downhill for him since USO: didn't make a hard court final since then and didn't even pass the round robins in the Master Cup.
Now Murray: has never won a slam, that's a big con of course but has won 3 hard court tournaments since USO (+ a master before USO), has made the final of the last hard court slam, has beaten the top 3 seeds in the last 6 months and is visibly the man in form and on the rise at the moment.
Now the decision between Federer and Murray as first favorite is hard to make: experience vs momentum, which one to favor? That's when you have to look at the head to head and all their latest matches were won by Murray (more easily so in their last encounter). For that reason (even though Federer has won their only slam match) I would put Murray (very slightly) ahead, then Federer immediately after, Nadal in 3 (just because he's been more regular than Djoko recently) and Djoko in 4 (but with really nothing much between the 2).
Apparently professional analysts used a similar logic to mine and came to roughly the same conclusions. For Federer to claim that Murray should not be part of these conclusions is not only "right off" but suspiciously irrational.

ThugNasty
01-13-2009, 09:32 AM
excellent point from federer. Although nadal homers are about to make stuff up about him.

The Pure One
01-13-2009, 09:42 AM
Not surprised coming from Federer! Rightfully so - he has to keep the swagger on his sleeves. Since he has 13 slams under his belt to prove it so as Rafa and Djoker. Murray has to prove himself - the slam is a 5 setter and anyone even favorites can get dropped as early as the first round.

Call it arrogant or not - Fed knows how to win in these type of long drawn out battles. Time will tell if Murray can live up to the hype!

Exactly right. And precisely, A. Murray went down in the first round of the AO last year. Now is the favorite. Go figure!

Nadal_Freak
01-13-2009, 09:43 AM
Typical stupidity and trolling from your part. It is amazing that the forum administrators put up with you.
They should be thinking about banning you. You are the one abusing other users for opinions different then yours. Initiating the attacks all the time. You and Gorecki are one in the same it seems.

Leublu tennis
01-13-2009, 09:45 AM
Typical words from Federer. Not wanting to give his opponents credit. He only beat Fed 4 times in a row now. lol

I don't want to call you a troll, but this is a dumb comment. Don't you have anything at all to contribute?

Moose Malloy
01-13-2009, 09:45 AM
Uh, Rios went on a tear in 98 reaching the Australian Open final and winning multiple masters tournaments that year. Yet he didn't enter the FO, Wimbledon, or the USO as the favorite that year.

Rios was the favorite for the FO that year.

and to the OP, the sportsbook I use has Fed as the favorite at 9-4 (Murray is a very close 2nd at 5-2)

I think British oddsmakers may have Murray as the favorite since I imagine a lot of money comes in on him there, esp in light of his recent form(when a lot of money comes in on a particular player/team/whatever, oddsmakers have to adjust lines accordingly, this isn't a case of oddsmakers being 'biased' or something)

tennisgirl90
01-13-2009, 09:46 AM
Maybe he's right. I mean, there's no clear favourite this year for the AO. Murray has done so well lately, but yes, he has still to prove he can win a Slam. He's able to do so, but he can just as well lose in the first round like he did last year.

Leublu tennis
01-13-2009, 09:47 AM
Hell what if Safin "shows up", you can never predict outcomes in sports

What an interesting idea. But, even though Marat is my favorite, I honestly don't expect that he will relive the 2005 wonder.

GameSampras
01-13-2009, 09:49 AM
Typical words from Federer. Not wanting to give his opponents credit. He only beat Fed 4 times in a row now. lol

Agreed. Feds never been one for giving credit where credit is due very often.

LOL.. People just finally realizing that Fed is arrogant.. Where have they been the last 5 years? LOL

Leublu tennis
01-13-2009, 09:55 AM
They should be thinking about banning you. You are the one abusing other users for opinions different then yours. Initiating the attacks all the time. You and Gorecki are one in the same it seems.

Give it a break. Nam and Gorecki provide interesting comments. Try to learn from them.

DarthFed
01-13-2009, 09:56 AM
Agreed. Feds never been one for giving credit where credit is due very often.

LOL.. People just finally realizing that Fed is arrogant.. Where have they been the last 5 years? LOL

*facedesk*

David L
01-13-2009, 09:57 AM
The video clip is here.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24906810-3162,00.html

Nadal_Freak
01-13-2009, 10:01 AM
Give it a break. Nam and Gorecki provide interesting comments. Try to learn from them.
You must be a Nadal hater to find their comments interesting. I don't get why you are defending them but you haven't done your research to what you are defending.

David L
01-13-2009, 10:04 AM
Apparently professional analysts used a similar logic to mine and came to roughly the same conclusions. For Federer to claim that Murray should not be part of these conclusions is not only "right off" but suspiciously irrational.
Where did Federer claim that? Seems he said nothing more than he was surprised Murray was favourite amongst the bookies, which is not strictly true anyway. A lot of bookies have put him co-favourite or just behind Federer, not that this helps either of them, as Federer points out.

NamRanger
01-13-2009, 10:04 AM
You must be a Nadal hater to find their comments interesting. I don't get why you are defending them but you haven't done your research to what you are defending.


Yes, I'm that same guy who defended Nadal from steroid accusations by GameSampras. I HATE NADAL. I REALLY DO. HE'S TERRIBLE.

NamRanger
01-13-2009, 10:06 AM
Rios was the favorite for the FO that year.

and to the OP, the sportsbook I use has Fed as the favorite at 9-4 (Murray is a very close 2nd at 5-2)

I think British oddsmakers may have Murray as the favorite since I imagine a lot of money comes in on him there, esp in light of his recent form(when a lot of money comes in on a particular player/team/whatever, oddsmakers have to adjust lines accordingly, this isn't a case of oddsmakers being 'biased' or something)



Was he? He couldn't have been a big favorite though. I do remember Moya being one of the guys who could have won it that year (and he did). Won Monte Carlo that year and did fairly well in the other tournaments.

Nadal_Freak
01-13-2009, 10:08 AM
Yes, I'm that same guy who defended Nadal from steroid accusations by GameSampras. I HATE NADAL. I REALLY DO. HE'S TERRIBLE.
Yeah I was pretty shocked when you said that based on your history. Even some of the other Nadal fans were surprised. I guess saying Nadal doesn't take steroids really isn't that far of a stretch though. But you usually do everything you can to discredit Nadal's success. Especially at Wimbledon.

batz
01-13-2009, 10:10 AM
Murray's response:

By Frank Malley, PA Chief Sports writer

Andy Murray accepted the challenge of being installed as joint favourite alongside Roger Federer to win the Australian Open with a message for the man who many believe is the best tennis player of all time: “I don't get nervous when I play you any more.”

Murray could not have sounded more ice cool after practising in 37 degree heat in Melbourne. And while Federer has expressed surprise at the 21-year-old Scot being rated above world number one Rafael Nadal and defending champion Novak Djokovic in the eyes of the bookmakers, Murray was entirely comfortable with his odds.

He said: “It doesn’t make any difference whether people expect you to win or not. It doesn't change my mentality.

“You get used to being expected to win matches when you play at Wimbledon. The pressure that comes with that gets you used to these situations.

“The older you get, the more matches you play, you realise what the bookies are saying doesn't make any difference once you get on court, whether they are saying good things or bad things. You just get on with your job.”


More at www.andymurray.com

Of course, those nasty bookies are only making Murray one of the favourites to annoy Roger and his fans. It's not like they are qualified to make judgements about betting odds and stuff like that, what with them doing it for a living, as opposed to us fans, who do it as a bit of fun.

NamRanger
01-13-2009, 10:12 AM
Yeah I was pretty shocked when you said that based on your history. Even some of the other Nadal fans were surprised. I guess saying Nadal doesn't take steroids really isn't that far of a stretch though. But you usually do everything you can to discredit Nadal's success. Especially at Wimbledon.


More power to you and Nadal fans. Doesn't mean Nadal wasn't vastly helped out by the changing of the grass. He didn't adapt to win at all. Bjorn Borg and Jimmy Connors truly adapted to the grass. Nadal just stood on the baseline and hit 5000 rpm topspin forehands as usual.



But hey, I'm not here to hijack the thread as you normally do.

NamRanger
01-13-2009, 10:14 AM
Murray's response:

By Frank Malley, PA Chief Sports writer

Andy Murray accepted the challenge of being installed as joint favourite alongside Roger Federer to win the Australian Open with a message for the man who many believe is the best tennis player of all time: “I don't get nervous when I play you any more.”

Murray could not have sounded more ice cool after practising in 37 degree heat in Melbourne. And while Federer has expressed surprise at the 21-year-old Scot being rated above world number one Rafael Nadal and defending champion Novak Djokovic in the eyes of the bookmakers, Murray was entirely comfortable with his odds.

He said: “It doesn’t make any difference whether people expect you to win or not. It doesn't change my mentality.

“You get used to being expected to win matches when you play at Wimbledon. The pressure that comes with that gets you used to these situations.

“The older you get, the more matches you play, you realise what the bookies are saying doesn't make any difference once you get on court, whether they are saying good things or bad things. You just get on with your job.”


More at www.andymurray.com

Of course, those nasty bookies are only making Murray one of the favourites to annoy Roger and his fans. It's not like they are qualified to make judgements about betting odds and stuff like that, what with them doing it for a living, as opposed to us fans, who do it as a bit of fun.


Tim Henman obviously never got over that part. Pretty sure he pulled some epic chokes at Wimbledon.

batz
01-13-2009, 10:17 AM
Tim Henman obviously never got over that part. Pretty sure he pulled some epic chokes at Wimbledon.




The only one that springs to mind is in the semi v Goran. in 01 (I think).

I don't think you can compare Tim Henman and Andy Murray as similar in terms of talent and/or character. Murray has already achieved more than Henman did in his entire career.

tacou
01-13-2009, 10:21 AM
oh be quiet old man

egn
01-13-2009, 10:48 AM
It's funny it was okay to down on the media when they favored Nadal at the US Open..but its not okay to dump on the media when they favor Murray at the AO Open. Federer is right, and will remain right wheter or not Murray wins this slam, Murray is not that favorite. He has one slam finish past SF...no way in hell streak or not should he be favored.

ksbh
01-13-2009, 10:54 AM
One of those guys is known for going round & around in circles forever with his arguments. If that is your idea of 'interesting', I'd rather read the bland posts in here.

The other one is very interesting and he knows who I"m referring to. :wink:

Give it a break. Nam and Gorecki provide interesting comments. Try to learn from them.

LanceStern
01-13-2009, 10:56 AM
Murray's response:

By Frank Malley, PA Chief Sports writer

Andy Murray accepted the challenge of being installed as joint favourite alongside Roger Federer to win the Australian Open with a message for the man who many believe is the best tennis player of all time: “I don't get nervous when I play you any more.”

More at www.andymurray.com


EDIT: I was proven wrong

ksbh
01-13-2009, 10:59 AM
I hope Murray wins the AO open. For once, it'll help shut Federer's mouth for some time!

batz
01-13-2009, 11:06 AM
In no way, shape, or form did Murray say anything close to what the journalist quotes him as saying.

That's horrible journalism.


Lance, as a general rule I don't don't defend journalists, but Murray did say:

"“Now when I play him I don't get nervous and if I play my best tennis I can beat him.”

veroniquem
01-13-2009, 11:20 AM
Exactly right. And precisely, A. Murray went down in the first round of the AO last year. Now is the favorite. Go figure!
A lot of things have happened since last year don't you think?

DarthFed
01-13-2009, 11:32 AM
A lot of things have happened since last year don't you think?

Touche...if anyone hasn't noticed i try to be as objective as possible...but im a fed fan

I agree that January 08 Murray and January 09 couldn't be more different, but Tsonga who offed murray, has been able to back up his performance and prove that his AO performance wasn't just a Safin

So much has changed...the top 10 that fed had a winning record against (sans Nadal of course) is gone, he has a losing record against Nadal, Murray, Simon things have changed a lot

Moose Malloy
01-13-2009, 11:40 AM
A lot of things have happened since last year don't you think?

There was a lot of hype around Murray last year as well(many were picking him to make the final after he won Doha)

trivia question - who was the last player to win a major at a place where they lost 1st round the year before?

LanceStern
01-13-2009, 11:43 AM
Where does he say that? Am I going to have to go to the link?

LanceStern
01-13-2009, 11:45 AM
There was a lot of hype around Murray last year as well(many were picking him to make the final after he won Doha)

trivia question - who was the last player to win a major at a place where they lost 1st round the year before?

sampras or federer

edmondsm
01-13-2009, 11:56 AM
Federer knows more about winning slams then anyone on this board. If he doesn't think that Murray should be the favorite then I would say that it is an informed opinion.

vive le beau jeu !
01-13-2009, 12:08 PM
There was a lot of hype around Murray last year as well(many were picking him to make the final after he won Doha)

trivia question - who was the last player to win a major at a place where they lost 1st round the year before?
federer wimbledon 2003 ?
(ivanisevic did it also at wimbledon 2001)

JCo872
01-13-2009, 12:09 PM
For whatever reason, Federer has a real blind spot when it comes to Murray. Last March he said about Murray:

"I don't think he's changed his game a whole lot since I played him in the Bangkok final.

"Not that I'm disappointed but I really would have thought he would have changed it in some ways."

After losing to him 5 times now, all he can say is that Murray is a "good all around player"? How about a "great" all around player at least?

Murray is the only guy who can beat Nadal and Federer right now. He is red hot, with massive amounts of confidence. Whether or not he is the favorite to win the Australian, I think Federer is making a big mistake in underestimating Murray's incredible talent. Besides, Murray has been nothing but respectful and humble in his assertion of Federer's greatness. These continued comments from Federer are going to **** Andy off to the point where he is going to have extra motivation to not only take Federer out of the Australian, but to win the whole thing.

Regardless, it's pretty cool that at least four players have a great shot at winning the Australian. This is going to be great.

DarthFed
01-13-2009, 12:16 PM
Murray is the only guy who can beat Nadal and Federer right now. He is red hot, with massive amounts of confidence. Whether or not he is the favorite to win the Australian, I think Federer is making a big mistake in underestimating Murray's incredible talent. Besides, Murray has been nothing but respectful and humble in his assertion of Federer's greatness. These continued comments from Federer are going to **** Andy off to the point where he is going to have extra motivation to not only take Federer out of the Australian, but to win the whole thing.

He's not underestimating him...he knows...losing 4 times should open his eyes...on the other hand he shouldn't go around handing out praise and acting intimidated either

batz
01-13-2009, 12:20 PM
Where does he say that? Am I going to have to go to the link?

Lance - I didn't post the whole transcript as it would have been too long. Go to the link and you'll see it all.

coloskier
01-13-2009, 12:22 PM
Agreed. Feds never been one for giving credit where credit is due very often.

LOL.. People just finally realizing that Fed is arrogant.. Where have they been the last 5 years? LOL

When you have won 13 GS's, you have the right to be arrogant. Until someone catches him (by that I mean win 13 GS's, not beat him 4 times), no one can say anything about it (except Sampras, of course).

rubberduckies
01-13-2009, 12:37 PM
When you have won 13 GS's, you have the right to be arrogant. Until someone catches him (by that I mean win 13 GS's, not beat him 4 times), no one can say anything about it (except Sampras, of course).

When you're 2-5 against the opponent in question, you should be try to be a little classier.
You would never hear Nadal say something like that, but then again class isn't Fed's strong point.

Oui, c'est moi.
01-13-2009, 12:40 PM
Sometimes i wonder if Roger says these things to give you people something to talk about.

edmondsm
01-13-2009, 12:43 PM
When you're 2-5 against the opponent in question, you should be try to be a little classier.
You would never hear Nadal say something like that, but then again class isn't Fed's strong point.

What does being 2-5 have to do with anything? Maybe he just said what he thinks, imagine that, a player being honest with the press. Golly, Nadal is a classy guy though. He's the classiest guy to ever pick his *** in front of the entire world.

JCo872
01-13-2009, 12:45 PM
Federer is right, of course. You can't be the favorite to win a Grand Slam if you have never won one before. However, I just don't understand why Federer is so down on Murray. I think his attitude is going to bite him in the *** because he needs to focus on how to beat Andy, rather than continue to underestimate him. Andy is actually Federer's worst nightmare right now in my opinion, and I personally think Andy has a great shot at winning the Australian. The funny thing is, I can see Murray beating Federer in the finals, and Federer still saying that Andy is just a good player that needs to work on his game and change his tactics. Federer just doesn't see Andy's talent for some reason.

Nadal_Freak
01-13-2009, 12:58 PM
Federer is right, of course. You can't be the favorite to win a Grand Slam if you have never won one before. However, I just don't understand why Federer is so down on Murray. I think his attitude is going to bite him in the *** because he needs to focus on how to beat Andy, rather than continue to underestimate him. Andy is actually Federer's worst nightmare right now in my opinion, and I personally think Andy has a great shot at winning the Australian. The funny thing is, I can see Murray beating Federer in the finals, and Federer still saying that Andy is just a good player that needs to work on his game and change his tactics. Federer just doesn't see Andy's talent for some reason.
I agree. Fed also always thought he could overcome and figure out Rafa. Not only has he not been able to figure out Rafa but things just got worse for him over time.

batz
01-13-2009, 01:00 PM
Federer is right, of course. You can't be the favorite to win a Grand Slam if you have never won one before. However, I just don't understand why Federer is so down on Murray. I think his attitude is going to bite him in the *** because he needs to focus on how to beat Andy, rather than continue to underestimate him. Andy is actually Federer's worst nightmare right now in my opinion, and I personally think Andy has a great shot at winning the Australian. The funny thing is, I can see Murray beating Federer in the finals, and Federer still saying that Andy is just a good player that needs to work on his game and change his tactics. Federer just doesn't see Andy's talent for some reason.

Muster was favourite for RG in 1995 due to his outstanding form on hardcourts prior to the tournament* - the bookies were right.

*Many thanks to Zagor for this pearl.

oneguy21
01-13-2009, 01:03 PM
Murray is an absolute beast right now. He definitely is the favorite to win the AO. Federer should accept that Andy may be a better player than him right now.

Andy's best year might be ahead of him.

nevisben
01-13-2009, 01:04 PM
Federer is probably playing mind games.

A poster seemed to think the media have installed Murray as the favourite? Not true (well some might have) but the point here is that some bookmakers have him as favourite not on some hunch but because they are expecting the most money to be bet on him.

The odds and favourite will change as the tournament progresses and as money is bet and players play well/badly go out etc.

Every thread seems to descend to the same argument - my player is better than yours.:confused:

seffina
01-13-2009, 01:06 PM
So what? Does Fed not thinking Murray should be the favorite change the fact that he is? Fed was right in August about the US Open, right? In regards to Rafa? He might be right again. He thinks he should be the favorite, feels up to the challenge, and is ready to prove it. Good for him.

I agree with the bookies that Murray probably is the favorite, but Fed's right in his own way. IMO, Fed already proved everything he needed to by winning the USO last year.

I want Nadal to win the AO really badly because ... I think he's good enough and it would silence all the people that STILL claim he sucks on the hard courts. But I'll agree that he's not the favorite.

What does it matter who's the favorite? It might turn out to be correct or it might not. You still gotta play the game.

In D Zone
01-13-2009, 01:10 PM
:shock:Federer is right, of course. You can't be the favorite to win a Grand Slam if you have never won one before. However, I just don't understand why Federer is so down on Murray. I think his attitude is going to bite him in the *** because he needs to focus on how to beat Andy, rather than continue to underestimate him. Andy is actually Federer's worst nightmare right now in my opinion, and I personally think Andy has a great shot at winning the Australian. The funny thing is, I can see Murray beating Federer in the finals, and Federer still saying that Andy is just a good player that needs to work on his game and change his tactics. Federer just doesn't see Andy's talent for some reason.


In due time..... but not right now. All the pros know getting pass 1st round is the most hardly hurdle in a slam. Federer knows how the slams work and aside from Murray he has the rest of the gang (Nadal, Simon, Djoker) to worry about; not to mention Safin, Nalbandian and Del Petro.

Murray will need to fight thru his way up the ladder before he can get a taste of Federer. By then Murray will all be bruised and banged up from the long battle. If Murray is the favorite, then pressures on him. Murray knows he is also a mark target for his opponents - who has nothing to loose but to go all out to take him out. There is also this unknown factor called 'match up" - some player along the way will know how to get into Murray's game and might score an upset.

Funny thing ... focused has shifted to Murray. Forgetting the other Andy that is quietly getting ready.... Roddick? why not! (playing devil's advocate - :twisted:)

nn
01-13-2009, 01:11 PM
Poor Roger.. he lost to Andy Murry many times and can't take people call him favorite.

I mean he said something similar when Andy beat him in Dubai last year in first round. In that press conference he said Andy's game is okay & he has to improve his game otherwise he won't win and other things which were not called for.

anyways it is sign of fading Roger..will see more in 09 for sure

moonbat
01-13-2009, 01:13 PM
Exactly right. And precisely, A. Murray went down in the first round of the AO last year. Now is the favorite. Go figure!

He lost to Tsonga, who proceeded to smoke Nadal and lose in the finals to Djokovic. Tsonga played out of the trees in that tournament; Murray was just his first victim.

Djokovic has already won AO and he defends his title but his results have been a real roller coaster recently going from losing in early rounds to winning master cup to losing in first round again. In these conditions, it's rather hard to pick him with any sense of reliability.

No doubt. Djoky pretty much backed into the Masters Cup title--he didn't have to play Federer, Nadal or Murray. Plus he's lost to Tsonga and Murray the last few times they've played. I still like Djokovic, but I can't say I love him anymore. :(

In D Zone
01-13-2009, 01:18 PM
2009 is the year Federer is focusing more on winning the Slams! His goal is to surpass Sampras record.

I think Federer has alot to gas left in his tank - the lost he had on the 2 previous encounters were I think to get himself warm up for the bigger game. I remember was it two years ago when Roddick was playing really good tennis from the early rounds and had beaten Federer as well. But when the AO started - Federer just took over and started his quest towards the semi and eventually the final.

I think its Nadal is the one to watch - I can see he will go all out to get the AO title this year.

rallyjunkie
01-13-2009, 01:19 PM
Good point NF, Federer always played it off like he would eventually figure out the Nadal puzzle but he never did. Now he's playing it cool about the Murray dilemma as Murray keeps on beating him and improving.

Federer could be in denial, stubbornly refusing to accept, in his own mind, that his career at the very top is in a crisis situation.

David L
01-13-2009, 01:20 PM
Federer is right, of course. You can't be the favorite to win a Grand Slam if you have never won one before. However, I just don't understand why Federer is so down on Murray. I think his attitude is going to bite him in the *** because he needs to focus on how to beat Andy, rather than continue to underestimate him. Andy is actually Federer's worst nightmare right now in my opinion, and I personally think Andy has a great shot at winning the Australian. The funny thing is, I can see Murray beating Federer in the finals, and Federer still saying that Andy is just a good player that needs to work on his game and change his tactics. Federer just doesn't see Andy's talent for some reason.
Actually, when Federer made those comments, he was accurate. Murray's mother said Andy made changes based on Federer's comments.

Also, Federer's brusque press conferences should come as no surprise to any one. Nadal and Djokovic fans have been complaining about them for years. Federer is what he is. He does not hand out flattery easily nor is he under any obligation to. I don't think he underestimates Murray either, but you get the impression he doesn't want to be overly effusive in praising one of his main rivals.

veroniquem
01-13-2009, 01:23 PM
Touche...if anyone hasn't noticed i try to be as objective as possible...but im a fed fan

I agree that January 08 Murray and January 09 couldn't be more different, but Tsonga who offed murray, has been able to back up his performance and prove that his AO performance wasn't just a Safin

So much has changed...the top 10 that fed had a winning record against (sans Nadal of course) is gone, he has a losing record against Nadal, Murray, Simon things have changed a lot
Nice post. Being a fan doesn't mean one shouldn't retain some form of critical judgement about what's going on.

veroniquem
01-13-2009, 01:30 PM
He lost to Tsonga, who proceeded to smoke Nadal and lose in the finals to Djokovic. Tsonga played out of the trees in that tournament; Murray was just his first victim.



No doubt. Djoky pretty much backed into the Masters Cup title--he didn't have to play Federer, Nadal or Murray. Plus he's lost to Tsonga and Murray the last few times they've played. I still like Djokovic, but I can't say I love him anymore. :(
I don't think he's gonna wither away though. I know some people have that opinion but I think he will get more big wins and maintain his position in (at least) the top five.

veroniquem
01-13-2009, 01:33 PM
Federer knows more about winning slams then anyone on this board. If he doesn't think that Murray should be the favorite then I would say that it is an informed opinion.
It's a biassed opinion. It would be very convenient if the guy who beat him 4 times this year wasn't a favorite, wouldn't it?

moonbat
01-13-2009, 01:38 PM
I don't think he's gonna wither away though. I know some people have that opinion but I think he will get more big wins and maintain his position in (at least) the top five.

I knew there was a reason why I like you so much! :)

David L
01-13-2009, 01:43 PM
It's a biassed opinion. It would be very convenient if the guy who beat him 4 times this year wasn't a favorite, wouldn't it?
Why would it be convenient? What the bookies say does not affect the seeding or the draw.

Nadal_Freak
01-13-2009, 01:48 PM
I would say the bookies will decide who the favorite is. I think Murray will be slight favorite. Nadal, Federer, and Djokovic all close in 2nd, 3rd, and 4th.

moonbat
01-13-2009, 01:48 PM
Why would it be convenient? What the bookies say does not affect the seeding or the draw.

I think it would be very convenient for Fed's ego. ;)

Moose Malloy
01-13-2009, 01:52 PM
federer wimbledon 2003 ?
(ivanisevic did it also at wimbledon 2001)

I haven't researched it thoroughly or anything but here are some I came across:

Players who won a major a year after losing 1st round:
2003 Wimbledon Federer
2001 Wimbledon Ivanisevic
1999 FO Agassi
1998 AO Korda
1997 USO Rafter
1996 AO Becker
1996 W Krajicek
1994 USO Agassi
1993 FO Bruguera
1991 USO Edberg

David L
01-13-2009, 01:57 PM
I think it would be very convenient for Fed's ego. ;)
Yes, maybe for his ego. Although he only expressed surprise that Murray is considered favourite, given he has not won a Slam and is ranked behind 3 players who, combined, won the last 15 Slams.

luckyboy1300
01-13-2009, 02:03 PM
Sometimes i wonder if Roger says these things to give you people something to talk about.

didn't the same thing happen at the us open last year? federer was ticked off on how was he not the favorite for the tournament being the 4-time defending champion and instead picks nadal, who never reached a hardcourt slam final, the favorite. he's maybe doing that to fire himself again up and win the whole thing.

P_Agony
01-13-2009, 02:04 PM
I would say the bookies will decide who the favorite is. I think Murray will be slight favorite. Nadal, Federer, and Djokovic all close in 2nd, 3rd, and 4th.

Nadal 2nd? Why? He never won on HC and he just lost to Monfils. He needs to play like he did in FO 2008 if he wants to have a chance here. Your logic again doesn't exist.

Nadal_Freak
01-13-2009, 02:06 PM
Nadal 2nd? Why? He never won on HC and he just lost to Monfils. He needs to play like he did in FO 2008 if he wants to have a chance here. Your logic again doesn't exist.
Doha played pretty fast. Faster then the AO. Roddick got to the Final even. I think a slower surface would favor Nadal over Fed at this point in their careers. Nadal did better at Miami and Indian Wells. Those were slow hardcourts.

thejoe
01-13-2009, 02:12 PM
Doha played pretty fast. Faster then the AO. Roddick got to the Final even. I think a slower surface would favor Nadal over Fed at this point in their careers. Nadal did better at Miami and Indian Wells. Those were slow hardcourts.

Doha did look like it was playing fairly quick to be fair, which put Nadal at a disadvantage. He'll play better in Melbourne.

verbatim100
01-13-2009, 02:16 PM
Fed's comments yet again reveal his dark side. Sounds so pathetic and classless. For once, be gracious, or at least pretend to be gracious.

Zaragoza
01-13-2009, 02:36 PM
The thing I don't understand is why Federer makes a big deal of what some bookmakers say. If some tennis player had said that I could understand his reaction, but bookmakers? Why should he care about what they say?

jamesblakefan#1
01-13-2009, 02:38 PM
The video clip is here.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24906810-3162,00.html

For a second there, I thought he was gonna say "I'm still coming off of the mono." lol At 0:35.

veroniquem
01-13-2009, 02:39 PM
I knew there was a reason why I like you so much! :)
You do? Thanks. You seem like a great person yourself :)

veroniquem
01-13-2009, 02:46 PM
The thing I don't understand is why Federer makes a big deal of what some bookmakers say. If some tennis player had said that I could understand his reaction, but bookmakers? Why should he care about what they say?
He just can't stand not being the favorite. Federer's sense of entitlement can be disturbing at times. It was the same at Wimbledon, he should have welcomed Nadal becoming a favorite as it was taking some pressure off his shoulders. Instead of that he was offended that people would consider other favorites than him. I'm telling you the guy has some unresolved narcissistic issues...

rallyjunkie
01-13-2009, 02:58 PM
that whole mono angle seemed a bit curious as well. where was the mono when he crushed Santoro? then later it became a "strong" case of mono.

that mono excuse always did seem fishy.

egn
01-13-2009, 03:13 PM
They should be thinking about banning you. You are the one abusing other users for opinions different then yours. Initiating the attacks all the time. You and Gorecki are one in the same it seems.

All you know how to do is abuse everything anyone says. You also hijack threads, jumping to sweeping conclusion about threads and find every way possible to spread NADAL IS GOD. You create arguments, have no justification for any of the ones you start other than your undying love for Nadal and do nothing but yada on and on about it. So please do not attack people who actually submit opinions and besides you abuse everyone any anyone who says something against Nadal.

You must be a Nadal hater to find their comments interesting. I don't get why you are defending them but you haven't done your research to what you are defending

Ha way to abuse someone for their opinion. =] Prime example..also note how you bring Nadal into it. He might find his opinions interesting..nothing crime against that. Also I love how if someone goes against you they instantly hate Nadal..are usually *******s or some sort of variation..you are the biggest troll on this forum possible.

I have been here long enough to know edmondsm at least takes input from other people and read what they say and will take criticism of his favorite players. You can't accept Nadal has a flaw he is god in your world apparently. edmondsm actually provides interesting input and stays on topic...(lol at the fact that this post istelf is far off topic)...you simply troll, diss people who criticize Nadal or find a way to make it about Nadal.



----
On topic it would be quite ironic if Murray wins this after Fed calling him out. Still I just can't believe everyone is counting out Djokovic..for losing to Gulbis? Murray lost to Tsogna first round last year and they were about same rank Tsogna and Gulbis so don't count out Djoker. I honestly see Djoker going farther than Murray as Murray is more of a fast court surface player. AO is slower than US and Wimby and Murray likes fast courts, Doha is faster than AO in my opinion. I also think Murray has problems with that second serve and in five set matches that will be a problem. Fed was arrogant but to an extent Fed is right you shouldn't favor a guy on a hot streak over those who have won slams and all have had better results than Murray at the particular slam. Hot or not.

ThugNasty
01-13-2009, 03:15 PM
He just can't stand not being the favorite. Federer's sense of entitlement can be disturbing at times. It was the same at Wimbledon, he should have welcomed Nadal becoming a favorite as it was taking some pressure off his shoulders. Instead of that he was offended that people would consider other favorites than him. I'm telling you the guy has some unresolved narcissistic issues...

http://americanpatrol.com/POPUPS/IMAGES/BS-Meter.gif

moonbat
01-13-2009, 03:16 PM
You do? Thanks. You seem like a great person yourself :)

Aw, shucks, ma'am...(blushes). I have my moments...;)

Nadal_Freak
01-13-2009, 03:31 PM
All you know how to do is abuse everything anyone says. You also hijack threads, jumping to sweeping conclusion about threads and find every way possible to spread NADAL IS GOD. You create arguments, have no justification for any of the ones you start other than your undying love for Nadal and do nothing but yada on and on about it. So please do not attack people who actually submit opinions and besides you abuse everyone any anyone who says something against Nadal.



Ha way to abuse someone for their opinion. =] Prime example..also note how you bring Nadal into it. He might find his opinions interesting..nothing crime against that. Also I love how if someone goes against you they instantly hate Nadal..are usually *******s or some sort of variation..you are the biggest troll on this forum possible.

I have been here long enough to know edmondsm at least takes input from other people and read what they say and will take criticism of his favorite players. You can't accept Nadal has a flaw he is god in your world apparently. edmondsm actually provides interesting input and stays on topic...(lol at the fact that this post istelf is far off topic)...you simply troll, diss people who criticize Nadal or find a way to make it about Nadal.



----
On topic it would be quite ironic if Murray wins this after Fed calling him out. Still I just can't believe everyone is counting out Djokovic..for losing to Gulbis? Murray lost to Tsogna first round last year and they were about same rank Tsogna and Gulbis so don't count out Djoker. I honestly see Djoker going farther than Murray as Murray is more of a fast court surface player. AO is slower than US and Wimby and Murray likes fast courts, Doha is faster than AO in my opinion. I also think Murray has problems with that second serve and in five set matches that will be a problem. Fed was arrogant but to an extent Fed is right you shouldn't favor a guy on a hot streak over those who have won slams and all have had better results than Murray at the particular slam. Hot or not.
You just don't like Nadal and make a judgement on me based on the player I like most. It is quite annoying when people won't admit the reason they attack a poster more is because of their favorite player. I bet you would love me if I was a Fed fan but since I go against him, I'm a troll. Yeah I've been around TW long enough to know how things go. Gorecki hates all the top players and Namranger really seems to dislike Nadal. Drakulie just has fun trolling the Nadal fans. I'm not sure he agrees with what he writes. He just looks for attention. Btw your analysis sounds unbiased. I just wish you could how biased some of these members I mentioned were.

Aggro
01-13-2009, 03:42 PM
TBH - Bookies favourites work on statistics more than the question about murrays GS capabilities. On paper wins over Nadal and Federer lately and Djokovic being in a slump - this justifies their reasoning for Murray being their favourite. They don't consider the Potential upsets that can be caused my these players.

Tsonga - Finals last year i think he will be comfortable here if he plays well

Nadal - Well is Nadal so he will always put up a good fight untill he reaches a hard hitter who is playing like crazy

Federer - Obvious GS experience that no-one else can match and still one of the favourites to win

Djokovic - If he regains is previous form i see no reason why he shouldn't reach at least the Q finals untroubles

Safin - Is my favourite player so i obviously have to mention if he plays out of his head he might cause an upset - like Wimbledon

Murray himself - If he gets some tough 1st, 2nd, 3rd round matches and they go to 5 sets we know he has worked on his fitness but what about the mental pressure of those matches ? We shall see

Just my thoughts :)

oneguy21
01-13-2009, 03:48 PM
You just don't like Nadal and make a judgement on me based on the player I like most. It is quite annoying when people won't admit the reason they attack a poster more is because of their favorite player. I bet you would love me if I was a Fed fan but since I go against him, I'm a troll. Yeah I've been around TW long enough to know how things go. Gorecki hates all the top players and Namranger really seems to dislike Nadal. Drakulie just has fun trolling the Nadal fans. I'm not sure he agrees with what he writes. He just looks for attention. Btw your analysis sounds unbiased. I just wish you could how biased some of these members I mentioned were.



Nadal Freak,

I've read many of your posts and I have nothing against you. If you're a diehard Nadal fan, then that's that. You're entitled titled to your own opinion, but what ****es me is when you get your facts wrongs. For example, you mentioned how Djokovic is not arrogant but simply misunderstood. Well the fact is there is nothing misunderstood about him; the truth is simply that he's an arrogant, cocky guy. I could care less about your opinions concerning players, but facts need not to be altered by you.

DarthFed
01-13-2009, 03:49 PM
He just can't stand not being the favorite. Federer's sense of entitlement can be disturbing at times. It was the same at Wimbledon, he should have welcomed Nadal becoming a favorite as it was taking some pressure off his shoulders. Instead of that he was offended that people would consider other favorites than him. I'm telling you the guy has some unresolved narcissistic issues...

Veroniquem....lemme level with you...sometimes you appear to be a very level headed Nadal Fan...then at times you come off a bit condescending towards Fed

From what i gathered..he is surprised..and has good reason to be....

1 slam final (lost) and an impressive HC season is not enough make you the favorite over a 13 GS winner, the defending champion and 5 time GS winner who wants to prove that his game is not one dimensional (surface wise)

Quite frankly im surprised too

NamRanger
01-13-2009, 04:18 PM
You just don't like Nadal and make a judgement on me based on the player I like most. It is quite annoying when people won't admit the reason they attack a poster more is because of their favorite player. I bet you would love me if I was a Fed fan but since I go against him, I'm a troll. Yeah I've been around TW long enough to know how things go. Gorecki hates all the top players and Namranger really seems to dislike Nadal. Drakulie just has fun trolling the Nadal fans. I'm not sure he agrees with what he writes. He just looks for attention. Btw your analysis sounds unbiased. I just wish you could how biased some of these members I mentioned were.



No, I would still hate you. Actually, I'd probably hate you even more if you were a Federer fan.


"I'M TELLING YOU THE GRASS HAS BEEN SLOWED DOWN"


"WE KNOW THAT ALREADY YOU NITWIT. YOU HAVE SAID THAT FOR THE FIFTY BILLIONTH TIME."



I have no problem with Nadal fans that are reasonable. They are nice people actually. I don't hate Nadal; I hate Nadal fans like you who do nothing but troll 24/7 since 10:00 a.m. in the morning until now.

Mansewerz
01-13-2009, 04:31 PM
What an interesting idea. But, even though Marat is my favorite, I honestly don't expect that he will relive the 2005 wonder.

You never know with Marat. He is very selective about the tournaments he "shows up" to.

vtmike
01-13-2009, 04:32 PM
Veroniquem....lemme level with you...sometimes you appear to be a very level headed Nadal Fan...then at times you come off a bit condescending towards Fed

From what i gathered..he is surprised..and has good reason to be....

1 slam final (lost) and an impressive HC season is not enough make you the favorite over a 13 GS winner, the defending champion and 5 time GS winner who wants to prove that his game is not one dimensional (surface wise)

Quite frankly im surprised too

Exactly...I agree! He was just stating the truth and not criticizing Murray......these %$#*@# like Nadal_Freak and Veroniquem keep pouncing on Fed just because they hate him and since they know Nadal has no chance of winning in Australia, they are trying to bash Fed with any stupid excuse they can find..........

Seriously what was so wrong in what he said?...It was in no way arrogant....Hes not forcing the bookmakers to change their bet......hes just stating the truth abt how he is feeling.....I am sure Djokovic and Nadal must be feeling the same way, but just haven't said it out loud......

He did acknowledge that Murray is in good form and is a good player so many times....but these guys will completely ignore that and try to spice it up like cheap news reporters & twist his words to make him look bad....GET A LIFE YOU FREAKS!

danb
01-13-2009, 04:47 PM
A player who speaks his mind. Nothing else. With 3 players that recently won (all the) grand slams and Murray is favorite - a bit odd. You have to agree it is a bit strange but Murray is the favorite. It will be interesting. I really wouldn't bet on anybody - I just want to watch the OZ Open.

egn
01-13-2009, 05:00 PM
You just don't like Nadal and make a judgement on me based on the player I like most. It is quite annoying when people won't admit the reason they attack a poster more is because of their favorite player. I bet you would love me if I was a Fed fan but since I go against him, I'm a troll. Yeah I've been around TW long enough to know how things go. Gorecki hates all the top players and Namranger really seems to dislike Nadal. Drakulie just has fun trolling the Nadal fans. I'm not sure he agrees with what he writes. He just looks for attention. Btw your analysis sounds unbiased. I just wish you could how biased some of these members I mentioned were.

Lol way to prove my point I actually am quite fond of Nadal..way to make leaping assumptions learn facts. You are just as biased as them by the way so don't say your not. Ps I hope Nadal actually stays at the top of the world rankings next year because I would like him to prove that there are clay courters who can do more. So no I do not judge you on the fact that your favorite player is Nadal, I judge you on the fact that you assume anybody and everybody is attacking Nadal and if anyone criticizes him. I criticize them all

Besides I always weight into heavy account when people call Federer GOAT they like to all bring up 3 RG runner ups but if 4 years in a row you lose to the same guy at one slam you have a giant hole in your resume.

zagor
01-13-2009, 05:01 PM
Wasn't there another thread about the same topic today? Nevermind

When you're 2-5 against the opponent in question, you should be try to be a little classier.
You would never hear Nadal say something like that, but then again class isn't Fed's strong point.

Since when is Nadal the golden standard and a measuring stick to how other players/people should behave? He's a nice guy but let's say he has his faults(I won't go into them here but there's a thread about his time violations)and is not exactly another Edberg IMO.

Muster was favourite for RG in 1995 due to his outstanding form on hardcourts prior to the tournament* - the bookies were right.

*Many thanks to Zagor for this pearl.

No problem,I'm sure there are more examples of that happening(Moose gave you another one in this thread with Rios).

The thing I don't understand is why Federer makes a big deal of what some bookmakers say. If some tennis player had said that I could understand his reaction, but bookmakers? Why should he care about what they say?

How is he making a big deal exactly? He was asked a question and he gave his honest opinion.I reckon that a 13 slam winner(and 3 time AO winner)is entitled to voice his opinon,wouldn't you agree?

He just can't stand not being the favorite. Federer's sense of entitlement can be disturbing at times. It was the same at Wimbledon, he should have welcomed Nadal becoming a favorite as it was taking some pressure off his shoulders. Instead of that he was offended that people would consider other favorites than him. I'm telling you the guy has some unresolved narcissistic issues...

Fed didn't say he's the favourite for AO,he first said that Djokovic is defending the AO title(yet he is barely even being talked about recently),that Nadal had an incredible season last year(and rarely anybody mentions him as the potential winner either)and at the end he mentioned that he won the last HC slam.That's very different than saying:"I'm the favourite",he didn't put himself ahead of either Nadal or Djokovic.

The fact remains that unlike top 3,Murray is not a slam winner yet and while he's in the best form at the moment Fed is right in a sense that winning a slam is a whole different thing(or a whole different animal as he put it),that has always been the case.And lastly Fed did mention that Murray has put himself in a great chance,is knocking at the door and is confident and playing well at the moment.

All those things Fed said here are facts and whether people like it or not Fed does make a valid case here.Now,I personally disagree with Fed about this one as I feel that Murray is in so good form at the moment and so high on confidence that he should be considered as the main favourite along with Fed(maybe even ahead of Fed) but that still doesn't mean that Fed doesn't make some good points in this interview.

Nadal_Freak
01-13-2009, 05:10 PM
Lol way to prove my point I actually am quite fond of Nadal..way to make leaping assumptions learn facts. You are just as biased as them by the way so don't say your not. Ps I hope Nadal actually stays at the top of the world rankings next year because I would like him to prove that there are clay courters who can do more. So no I do not judge you on the fact that your favorite player is Nadal, I judge you on the fact that you assume anybody and everybody is attacking Nadal and if anyone criticizes him. I criticize them all

Besides I always weight into heavy account when people call Federer GOAT they like to all bring up 3 RG runner ups but if 4 years in a row you lose to the same guy at one slam you have a giant hole in your resume.
If you are a Nadal fan, you would not like Gorecki. You have yet to prove to me that you are. I don't see you getting ****ed when he writes some bs about Nadal. For whatever reason you went after me. Get a clue.

zagor
01-13-2009, 05:15 PM
Actually, when Federer made those comments, he was accurate. Murray's mother said Andy made changes based on Federer's comments.

Also, Federer's brusque press conferences should come as no surprise to any one. Nadal and Djokovic fans have been complaining about them for years. Federer is what he is. He does not hand out flattery easily nor is he under any obligation to. I don't think he underestimates Murray either, but you get the impression he doesn't want to be overly effusive in praising one of his main rivals.

Quoted for truth.I perfectly understand that Fed can come off as blunt and overconfident/arrogant in some of his interviews but I'm actually interested in hearing a player's true opinion,not a repeat of the same old boring copy & paste stuff I've heard or read a 100 times already from different athletes in various sports.

I always liked Fed's blunt,straight to the point interviews.Some dislike that style of giving interviews and that's fine,we can't all have the same taste.

moonbat
01-13-2009, 05:17 PM
You never know with Marat. He is very selective about the tournaments he "shows up" to.

When he's not busy getting his beautiful face bashed in.:evil:

veroniquem
01-13-2009, 05:36 PM
Nadal Freak,

I've read many of your posts and I have nothing against you. If you're a diehard Nadal fan, then that's that. You're entitled titled to your own opinion, but what ****es me is when you get your facts wrongs. For example, you mentioned how Djokovic is not arrogant but simply misunderstood. Well the fact is there is nothing misunderstood about him; the truth is simply that he's an arrogant, cocky guy. I could care less about your opinions concerning players, but facts need not to be altered by you.
Sorry for butting in unasked but saying somebody is arrogant is an opinion, not a fact. Saying that is a judgement on someone's character = opinion. Saying Djokovic has won a slam is not a judgement, it's a fact!

World Beater
01-13-2009, 05:44 PM
Actually, when Federer made those comments, he was accurate. Murray's mother said Andy made changes based on Federer's comments.
Also, Federer's brusque press conferences should come as no surprise to any one. Nadal and Djokovic fans have been complaining about them for years. Federer is what he is. He does not hand out flattery easily nor is he under any obligation to. I don't think he underestimates Murray either, but you get the impression he doesn't want to be overly effusive in praising one of his main rivals.

i would be interested in hearing about a source because i remember murray was in denial about federer's comments when asked about them claiming that his passive play was his tactic against federer.

fastdunn
01-13-2009, 06:30 PM
if you want to dominate this game, you gotta act like a dominator and talk like a dominator.

veroniquem
01-13-2009, 06:36 PM
if you want to dominate this game, you gotta act like a dominator and talk like a dominator.
I'm glad our current #1 acts like a decent human being instead. Egotistic megalomaniacs are not my cup of tea...

JeMar
01-13-2009, 06:36 PM
Most betting sites have Murray as the favorite, but there's a few that have Federer slightly ahead.

As to Federer's perceived arrogance... after holding practically the entirety of the professional tour in the palm of your hand, after having accolades sung to you on a daily basis by everyone from die-hard fans, to the player ranked behind you in the standings (Nadal) even though he consistently beats you on one certain court, to the players that most consider the greatest of all time... it's bound to be a little hard to let go.

Nadal_Freak, stop ignoring people's problems with your logic by always going back to "You must be a Nadal hater nuhnuhnuhnuhnuhnuh."

JeMar
01-13-2009, 06:37 PM
Nadal has gotten used to the role of playing second fiddle. Let's see what he's like 4 years from now if he can dominate like Federer has for the last few years. All professional athletes need to have big egos to some extent. Even Pete Sampras admits this much in his autobiography, and goes on to say that this mindset played a huge role in his success. I doubt there's anyone here that would argue that Sampras was a "classy" number one.

veroniquem
01-13-2009, 06:39 PM
Nadal has gotten used to the role of playing second fiddle. Let's see what he's like 4 years from now if he can dominate like Federer has for the last few years. All professional athletes need to have big egos to some extent.
Yes, here is to hoping he never behaves like a spoiled diva!

navratilovafan
01-13-2009, 06:42 PM
Nadal 2nd? Why? He never won on HC and he just lost to Monfils. He needs to play like he did in FO 2008 if he wants to have a chance here. Your logic again doesn't exist.

The day Nadal_Freak ever speaks with logic pink bunnies will be flying in the skies.

Nadal_Freak
01-13-2009, 06:45 PM
The day Nadal_Freak ever speaks with logic pink bunnies will be flying in the skies.
I did speak with logic. Nadal had more success on the slower hard courts last year. He is number 1 in the world. Respect the number 1 player.

veritech
01-13-2009, 06:48 PM
I'm glad our current #1 acts like a decent human being instead. Egotistic megalomaniacs are not my cup of tea...

egoistic megalomaniac? his comments aren't even that offensive.

you must've equated hewitt to hitler when hewitt was number 1...

miyagi
01-13-2009, 06:52 PM
LOL....Fed was being a little bit ****y but who cares....he obviously doesnt like Andy and he doesn't have too.....

Whether he is the favourite or not doesn't make no difference he still has to win it so I dont know why Fed is even rattled by it.

With the spot light and pressure off it's time for Djoko and Nadal to step forward I believe if either get to the final they will win regardless of who they face. Except for if it's each other then I would tip Djoko.

Neither Djoko or Nadal have had long spells of losing against one particluar player so if either get Murray or Fed I expect them to win.

:D

World Beater
01-13-2009, 07:01 PM
Yes, here is to hoping he never behaves like a spoiled diva!

lol

"the schedule is too loooooooong"

..perpetually crying about time warnings...sure nadal is no diva...lmao.

i wont forget this outburst in the middle east either when he thought hawkeye was wrong. federer was not the first nor the last to show surprise for some of the results of hawkeye

TheMusicLover
01-13-2009, 07:03 PM
lol

"the schedule is too loooooooong"

..perpetually crying about time warnings...sure nadal is no diva...lmao.

i wont forget this outburst in the middle east either when he thought hawkeye was wrong. federer was not the first nor the last to show surprise for some of the results of hawkeye

It's always funny to see certain fans so focussed on the 'faults' of one player while completely ignoring those of the other, isn't it? ;)
None of these guys are 'angels' however much some like to believe so.

hoosierbr
01-13-2009, 07:07 PM
In the past Fed has always been a bit ****y when he loses and gets questions about whether he can win such and such tournament or beat a certain player. It's understandable and a natural reaction which I happen to agree with.

It's a pretty big leap to consider Murray the favorite in Australia where, if I'm not mistaken, he's never been out of the first week.

DoubleDeuce
01-13-2009, 07:08 PM
i would be interested in hearing about a source because i remember murray was in denial about federer's comments when asked about them claiming that his passive play was his tactic against federer.

Last year I had posted the article Here (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=227420&highlight=judy+murray)

DoubleDeuce
01-13-2009, 07:16 PM
Now I am interested in your source, world beater.

veroniquem
01-13-2009, 07:22 PM
egoistic megalomaniac? his comments aren't even that offensive.

you must've equated hewitt to hitler when hewitt was number 1...
Ha ha Hewitt was pretty bad, I remember.

veroniquem
01-13-2009, 07:23 PM
It's always funny to see certain fans so focussed on the 'faults' of one player while completely ignoring those of the other, isn't it? ;)
None of these guys are 'angels' however much some like to believe so.
No they're not but some talk nicely about their rivals, others don't.

David L
01-13-2009, 07:24 PM
i would be interested in hearing about a source because i remember murray was in denial about federer's comments when asked about them claiming that his passive play was his tactic against federer.
Took a while, but I found it. Below are Judy Murray's comments, Murray's confirmation that he reassessed his game, Federer's original comments and Federer's follow up comments on his assessment. The media rarely report news accurately, but Federer's comments were an assessment of Murray's game, not a snipe at his ability as a player. Even now the media are reporting that Federer made a jibe at Murray, so Murray made a jibe back, when neither is true, Federer merely expressed surprise that Murray is considered the favourite over the 3 winners of the past 15 Slams. It was more a reaction to the pundits than anything directed at Murray.

By Judy Murray 20 Oct 2008

Federer acknowledged that Andy had grown up a lot on court. He said it took time for players to mature.

Federer probably doesn't know that the comments he made in Dubai this year, after Andy beat him in the first round, may have provoked a realisation in Andy that he had to become more aggressive more often if he was to challenge for the big prizes.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/andymurray/3230511/Andy-Murrays-great-feats-all-spring-from-a-Roger-Federer-masterclass-says-mother-Tennis.html


Murray plots aggressive path after Nadal defeat

By Paul Newman at Wimbledon
Friday, 4 July 2008

When asked to identify the areas of his game that he needed to improve in the wake of his quarter-final defeat to Rafael Nadal here on Wednesday night Andy Murray was typically frank in his assessment.

"I think I need to make sure, when I'm playing against the top guys, that I dictate more of the rallies right at the start," he said. "When I make a big first serve, I really need to be aggressive from the first ball, rather than waiting a couple of shots. The top guys can make you do a lot of running if you're a bit passive at the start of the rallies."

The remarks sounded familiar, for this was what another player had said about the 21-year-old Scot four months ago: "He's going to have to grind very hard for the next few years if he's going to keep playing this way. He stands way back in the court. He has to do a lot of running and he tends to wait a lot for his opponent to make a mistake. I think that overall, over a 15-year career, you want to look to win a point more often than wait for the other guy to miss."

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/tennis/murray-plots-aggressive-path-after-nadal-defeat-859889.html

TENNIS MASTERS CUP

November 12, 2008

Q. Andy Murray said he would like to beat you and knock you out of this competition. What is your comment on that?

ROGER FEDERER: Sure. I mean, he would be stupid saying something different.
Yeah, I'm looking forward to the match. Should be interesting. You know, he's a wonderful player. He's had a great end to the season. He's definitely, you know, the guy probably most in form, you know, with a couple of guys. It's an interesting matchup.

Q. You said earlier this year in Dubai that you were surprised that Andy
Murray hadn't changed his game a lot; that he was still basically a fairly defensive player. Would you say with his progress this year, has he changed much as a player?

ROGER FEDERER: I guess he's gotten more confident, you know. That's obviously a huge difference in a player, especially young and up-and-coming who has big potential. That makes a big, big difference. I mean, know why I said it, I guess. Because Andy can play aggressive, but he doesn't choose to do it.
I mean, it's a good option to have, I guess. It was a compliment on the highest of levels. I knew Andy took it this way. But some journalists don't understand tennis enough that they took it in the wrong context.

http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=53294

JeMar
01-13-2009, 07:31 PM
lol

"the schedule is too loooooooong"

..perpetually crying about time warnings...sure nadal is no diva...lmao.

i wont forget this outburst in the middle east either when he thought hawkeye was wrong. federer was not the first nor the last to show surprise for some of the results of hawkeye

To be fair, Nadal doesn't complain about the time warnings. He just ignores them and continues what he's doing.

veroniquem
01-13-2009, 07:35 PM
To be fair, Nadal doesn't complain about the time warnings. He just ignores them and continues what he's doing.
Nadal is very composed, he doesn't let any umpire bully him. I remember at RG in the second set. He got it on set point but he stayed super calm and didn't rush even after the warning. I admire his self-control. I would not be able to do that!

TheMusicLover
01-13-2009, 07:36 PM
To be fair, Nadal doesn't complain about the time warnings. He just ignores them and continues what he's doing.

Well I'm pretty sure I've seen him muttering against the umpires about those warnings a few times.

veroniquem
01-13-2009, 07:38 PM
Well I'm pretty sure I've seen him muttering against the umpires about those warnings a few times.
There was one time he got really mad but I can't remember which match. Other than that I've neer seen him complain about it. As JeMar said he just totally ignore them.

JeMar
01-13-2009, 07:39 PM
We cannot continue this argument on the grounds that you must obviously be a Nadal hater, TheMusicLover


(Kidding)

miniRafa386
01-13-2009, 07:42 PM
Federer tells it like is yet again. Watch him get flamed here, but he's right on. It's all about Rafa, Federer and Djokovic at the slams.

I agree.

BUT, murray has been coming on VERY strong as of late, actually i think he started coming into the scene during the US open. that was the turning point. first it was fed. then it was fed and rafa. then it was fed, rafa, and novak. then it went back to fed and rafa. now its fed, rafa, novak, and murray.

this year should be interesting.

DoubleDeuce
01-13-2009, 07:43 PM
To be fair, Nadal doesn't complain about the time warnings. He just ignores them and continues what he's doing.

I have noticed him ignoring the call and actually like him doing that. There are rules and timeframes to be met but there is no reasons for school-boy reactions either.

David L
01-13-2009, 07:49 PM
Everyone gets angry or upset at times. It's not a big deal, it's natural and human. And yes Nadal fans, even Nadal gets angry. I have heard him say "puta" on many occasions and he can even get angry when hawkeye goes against him.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Ak8GRRFBN54&fmt=18

abmk
01-13-2009, 07:51 PM
Federer did, however, admit that Murray, who has a favourable 5-2 record against him after winning the Doha title last week and is now ranked fourth in the world, had improved dramatically in the past 12 months.

"I think he has shown for a year now he has been knocking on the door to make his move.

"I just think he got used to playing at a high level consistently. Before he was very up and down.

"He has played excellent. He's a good all round player, has good tactics and has become very confident.

"He has put himself into a winning position, but winning a Grand Slam is a different animal.

"Not many guys have been able to win grand slams in the last few years."

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/13012009/58/australian-open-fed-surprised-murray-s-favourite.html

So much for federer not giving credit to his opponents. :)

DoubleDeuce
01-13-2009, 07:55 PM
you guys watching kooyong streaming?

fed 6-2 6-3 moya....

verdasco now playing

http://atdhe.net/live-tv-2300.html

JeMar
01-13-2009, 07:55 PM
Yeah, even Federer sounded like he was going to cry at the 2007 Wimbledon final over a call that was kind of like that.

egn
01-13-2009, 07:56 PM
If you are a Nadal fan, you would not like Gorecki. You have yet to prove to me that you are. I don't see you getting ****ed when he writes some bs about Nadal. For whatever reason you went after me. Get a clue.

Tennis fan. Avoid Player loyalty. Makes it hard to see things without bias. I favor some I must admit. But I ignore most of the haters or fans of specific players because honestly must argue to simply put one player on a pedistal or throw one off it.

JeMar
01-13-2009, 07:56 PM
Thanks for the stream.

TheMusicLover
01-13-2009, 08:06 PM
Yeah, even Federer sounded like he was going to cry at the 2007 Wimbledon final over a call that was kind of like that.

To be fair, here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ms_ykAweKVY :)

As I said: neither of these guys are 'angels'. ;)

DoubleDeuce
01-13-2009, 08:22 PM
There is still difference in the way they protest though. Roger keeps calm and walks slowly and does not yell. Nadal however shows anger, yells and is like he's about to bang his racket on the poor umpire's head.
:)

JeMar
01-13-2009, 08:22 PM
Yeah, that's one of the only moments when I actually thought he looked kinda pathetic out on the court. And yeah, he didn't yell... he whined.

tenniscp
01-13-2009, 09:11 PM
I would say the bookies will decide who the favorite is. I think Murray will be slight favorite. Nadal, Federer, and Djokovic all close in 2nd, 3rd, and 4th.

Murray would be a slight favorite in case he will face Federer in the semis or finals due to his recent record against him. However, there are players out there that Murray does not have that slight edge against.

It basically comes down to match-ups. Simply put, there are players that Federer has trouble with, such as Nadal, Murray now, formerly Nalbandian who was 7-0 at one point against Fed (including juniors). But the fact is that saying that Murray is a favorite to win AO because he knows how to beat Federer is only half of the picture. How about Murray possibly losing to someone before that, someone he has trouble playing. It is not an ideal world, and not all four top seeds may make it to the final four.

Many players out there that can upset the order of things. Tsonga, Del Potro, Cilic, Gulbis, Nalbandian, Safin, Simon and some others (Davydenko,Tipsarevic included), all these guys can on any given day, even in the best of five sets, beat Federer, Djokovic, Murray, Nadal. Then we do not have a much anticipated match-up where Federer goes up against Murray.

Sentinel
01-13-2009, 09:18 PM
..perpetually crying about time warnings...sure nadal is no diva...lmao.

C'mon folks, one incident becomes "perpetually" or "always" on this forum.
Lets not blow things out of proportion.

Nadal_Freak
01-13-2009, 09:20 PM
Murray would be a slight favorite in case he will face Federer in the semis or finals due to his recent record against him. However, there are players out there that Murray does not have that slight edge against.

It basically comes down to match-ups. Simply put, there are players that Federer has trouble with, such as Nadal, Murray now, formerly Nalbandian who was 7-0 at one point against Fed (including juniors). But the fact is that saying that Murray is a favorite to win AO because he knows how to beat Federer is only half of the picture. How about Murray possibly losing to someone before that, someone he has trouble playing. It is not an ideal world, and not all four top seeds may make it to the final four.

Many players out there that can upset the order of things. Tsonga, Del Potro, Cilic, Gulbis, Nalbandian, Safin, Simon and some others (Davydenko,Tipsarevic included), all these guys can on any given day, even in the best of five sets, beat Federer, Djokovic, Murray, Nadal. Then we do not have a much anticipated match-up where Federer goes up against Murray.
True. No one is unbeatable. Federer has lost to many players in the last 12 month so he is no guarantee either. This years Australian Open is going to be very unpredictable imo but I would still pick Murray though not by a lot.

shakes1975
01-13-2009, 11:49 PM
There are 3 kinds of recent top player personalities i have seen.

The first type of personality is sampras. As befits a great champion, he has a huge ego (how else can great champions achieve what they are capable of) but, being raised in the U.S, puts on a politically correct front.

Sampras on, say, Chang (in his mind): I'll be blasting my serve down that dweebs throat. He doesn't have a chance in hell. He's just a baseline-basher with good speed.

Sampras (to the press): Michael's a great player. He can get back so many balls. He returns well on the second serve. Hopefully I can serve well and play well enough to win.

The second type of personality is federer. Like sampras, he also has a huge ego. But, raised away from the US, he sees no reason to coat his comments in politically correct capsules.

He has beaten player x the last n times they played, and so he considers himself the favourite. That's what he thinks, and that's what he says.

To me, I see no difference in the "real" arrogance between these two. One is as arrogant as the other except he sugar-coats his statements to the press. Fed speaks his mind while sampras doesn't. That's all.

The third type is nadal, and imo, he is the most modest of the three. Obviously, like any human, he's prone to get pi***ed off after a tough loss and sometimes sneak out a comment or two, but on the whole he's very down to earth for a top player. Cool guy. But then, i'm a fed fan just bcos i love his game, :-).

veroniquem
01-14-2009, 12:33 AM
There is still difference in the way they protest though. Roger keeps calm and walks slowly and does not yell. Nadal however shows anger, yells and is like he's about to bang his racket on the poor umpire's head.
:)
That is one outlandish statement, Nadal almost never yells and everyone knows he has never broken a racket. If you want to see fits on the court, look at Roddick, he can get completely out of control...

veroniquem
01-14-2009, 12:38 AM
There are 3 kinds of recent top player personalities i have seen.

The first type of personality is sampras. As befits a great champion, he has a huge ego (how else can great champions achieve what they are capable of) but, being raised in the U.S, puts on a politically correct front.

Sampras on, say, Chang (in his mind): I'll be blasting my serve down that dweebs throat. He doesn't have a chance in hell. He's just a baseline-basher with good speed.

Sampras (to the press): Michael's a great player. He can get back so many balls. He returns well on the second serve. Hopefully I can serve well and play well enough to win.

The second type of personality is federer. Like sampras, he also has a huge ego. But, raised away from the US, he sees no reason to coat his comments in politically correct capsules.

He has beaten player x the last n times they played, and so he considers himself the favourite. That's what he thinks, and that's what he says.

To me, I see no difference in the "real" arrogance between these two. One is as arrogant as the other except he sugar-coats his statements to the press. Fed speaks his mind while sampras doesn't. That's all.

The third type is nadal, and imo, he is the most modest of the three. Obviously, like any human, he's prone to get pi***ed off after a tough loss and sometimes sneak out a comment or two, but on the whole he's very down to earth for a top player. Cool guy. But then, i'm a fed fan just bcos i love his game, :-).
Actually Federer considers himself the favorite when player x has beaten him the last n times they played (just a tiny correction to his logic) ;-)

DoubleDeuce
01-14-2009, 01:16 AM
That is one outlandish statement, Nadal almost never yells and everyone knows he has never broken a racket. If you want to see fits on the court, look at Roddick, he can get completely out of control...

I've seen Rod, not comparable.
I was referring to the two videos posted in the previous page. One from Fed one from Nadal protesting the calls.

Sentinel
01-14-2009, 01:24 AM
This whole crap about Fed's arrogance and ego is tiresome beyond belief and only reveals a complete lack of objectivity in some die hard fans who need to puke over pros they don't like.

Fed and Nadal are both gentlemen in their own ways, and both humble and sincere, and a great asset to the sport in every way.

Telepatic
01-14-2009, 01:53 AM
This whole crap about Fed's arrogance and ego is tiresome beyond belief and only reveals a complete lack of objectivity in some die hard fans who need to puke over pros they don't like.

Fed and Nadal are both gentlemen in their own ways, and both humble and sincere, and a great asset to the sport in every way.

Yes, I dislike Federer but he is gentleman. (and good player too of course)

JohnnyCracker
01-14-2009, 02:29 AM
This kind of threads again? *Yawn* :)
Aren't there hundreds of them already? It's always like this: Federer said something; Then, here come the usual Federer haters (you can bet your house on it) up in arms declaring how arrogant he is...blah blah blah
It really doesn't matter what comes out of his mouth, really. He could've said "Hamburger is the greatest food in the world." He's arrogant. He's ego-tripping. Same sh*t, just in another thread. *Yawn*

Back to Odds & Ends I go. :lol:

Sentinel
01-14-2009, 04:18 AM
lol, I was just watching another sport: the great australian run. The winner also spoke about jet-lag and not having slept in 2 days in the interview.

I immed thought if he was a tennis player (esp Federer) he would have got ripped apart for that.

Anything Fed does, *anything*, smacks of arrogance and ego.

shintan17
01-14-2009, 04:23 AM
Yeah. I like when people speak out what's on their mind. Roger felt that him/Djoko/Rafa got disrespected when he heard many now say Murray is the favorite going into the AO. Nothing wrong with what he said, IMO.

I still think He is the slight favorite then Djoko-Rafa/Murray and others.

vtmike
01-14-2009, 04:35 AM
Actually Federer considers himself the favorite when player x has beaten him the last n times they played (just a tiny correction to his logic) ;-)

Actually Federer considers himself the favourite when he has beaten player x the last time they met in a grand slam matchup (you know where it really matters) ;-)

But honestly he did not imply that he is the favourite from this interview....Infact he said tht one of either Nadal, Djokovic or himself should be.......I don't understand where you are getting that from....You are just blowing things wayyyyy out of proprtions! Neither Fed nor Murray must be taking these statements as seriously as you and some other freaks here do!

you are a serious Fed hater and are just trying to stir up emotions by making exaggerated statements!

vtmike
01-14-2009, 04:44 AM
This whole crap about Fed's arrogance and ego is tiresome beyond belief and only reveals a complete lack of objectivity in some die hard fans who need to puke over pros they don't like.

Fed and Nadal are both gentlemen in their own ways, and both humble and sincere, and a great asset to the sport in every way.

This kind of threads again? *Yawn* :)
Aren't there hundreds of them already? It's always like this: Federer said something; Then, here come the usual Federer haters (you can bet your house on it) up in arms declaring how arrogant he is...blah blah blah
It really doesn't matter what comes out of his mouth, really. He could've said "Hamburger is the greatest food in the world." He's arrogant. He's ego-tripping. Same sh*t, just in another thread. *Yawn*

Back to Odds & Ends I go. :lol:

LOL :)
Good Comments!
Agree +1

Sentinel
01-14-2009, 07:48 AM
Back to Odds & Ends I go. :lol:

Me, too, Johnny. God knows what love possesses me and pulls me back here every now and then :-)

I feel like a statue in a world of pigeons, in the Pro section.

zagor
01-14-2009, 08:00 AM
I feel like a statue in a world of pigeons, in the Pro section.

LMAO :)

Btw. here's another example of our "arrogant egomaniac narcissist" Fed from another thread:

I was on vacation in New York City, and as I was walking by, I saw John McEnroe in a Mets cap. I didn't know what to say, so I said "Hey John McEnroe, I'm a big fan!" All he said was yeah, and looked away...

I was disappointed, because a great tennis player turned out to be a jerk. I mean a hi would have been nice, but he completely ignored me. Am I making a big deal out of this, or... By the way, a week later my friend saw Roger Federer, talked to him, and got free tickets to the final.

So he handed a complete stranger a free tickets to the final? Such arrogance.I also hear he throws pizza parties for ballboys in Basel,that arrogant pr!ck :).

6rump
01-14-2009, 08:04 AM
hahahaha Federer....Federer, from what he said is true that Murray is not ready yet to become the favorite, but at least he can show some respect to him, that statement from Federer is right but it's too offence ("for me....").....

seffina
01-14-2009, 08:13 AM
hahahaha Federer....Federer, from what he said is true that Murray is not ready yet to become the favorite, but at least he can show some respect to him, that statement from Federer is right but it's too offence ("for me....").....

But he did give him respect. Don't take that one statement in isolation.

Not that I care either way. Fed can say whatever he wants. I'm here to watch tennis, not analyze their press conferences.

swedechris
01-14-2009, 08:16 AM
This whole crap about Fed's arrogance and ego is tiresome beyond belief and only reveals a complete lack of objectivity in some die hard fans who need to puke over pros they don't like.

Fed and Nadal are both gentlemen in their own ways, and both humble and sincere, and a great asset to the sport in every way.



yes i agree.. just because one cant identify with someone thats successful ( or unsuccessful for that matter) you dont have to 'hate ' them .. thats likley to be a sign of convoluted inferiority and or lack of empathy,IMO.
all folks have their ways i guess and so be it.

swedechris
01-14-2009, 08:17 AM
i prefer to focus on their tennis not their talk outside of the court

thejoe
01-14-2009, 08:17 AM
I did speak with logic. Nadal had more success on the slower hard courts last year. He is number 1 in the world. Respect the number 1 player.

I'm sure you had the utmost respect for Federer while he was number 1 :roll:

I understand where Federer is coming from, but I think he has to accept that people are going to doubt him now. Murray hasn't won a slam, but he's made his first run to a slam final, and the form book is how favourites are judged. Murray is the form player. Simple.

DarthFed
01-14-2009, 10:25 AM
I'm sure you had the utmost respect for Federer while he was number 1 :roll:

I understand where Federer is coming from, but I think he has to accept that people are going to doubt him now. Murray hasn't won a slam, but he's made his first run to a slam final, and the form book is how favourites are judged. Murray is the form player. Simple.

But they are also doubting Tsonga and Nadal...not just Fed

oneleggedcardinal
01-14-2009, 10:32 AM
He just can't stand not being the favorite. Federer's sense of entitlement can be disturbing at times. It was the same at Wimbledon, he should have welcomed Nadal becoming a favorite as it was taking some pressure off his shoulders. Instead of that he was offended that people would consider other favorites than him. I'm telling you the guy has some unresolved narcissistic issues...

You're not being serious, are you?

I'm glad our current #1 acts like a decent human being instead. Egotistic megalomaniacs are not my cup of tea...

Hold on...really? Are you implying Federer isn't a decent human being and flat out saying that he is an 'egotistical megalomaniac'?

There is still difference in the way they protest though. Roger keeps calm and walks slowly and does not yell. Nadal however shows anger, yells and is like he's about to bang his racket on the poor umpire's head.
:)

Federer has exploded at times but generally keeps cool. Nadal exploded there but generally keeps cool.

rich01
01-14-2009, 11:07 AM
Federer: "Tell them to get back to me when they can play with 90 square inches, pal" :twisted:

veritech
01-14-2009, 11:24 AM
You're not being serious, are you?



Hold on...really? Are you implying Federer isn't a decent human being and flat out saying that he is an 'egotistical megalomaniac'?

i think it's amazing how some people are so quick to judge a player's overall integrity when the only words they hear from him are from press conferences.

NamRanger
01-14-2009, 11:26 AM
i think it's amazing how some people are so quick to judge a player's overall integrity when the only words they hear from him are from press conferences.



Dear god, Paris Hilton must be the devil then (when in reality she's just dumb).

TheMusicLover
01-14-2009, 11:43 AM
i think it's amazing how some people are so quick to judge a player's overall integrity when the only words they hear from him are from press conferences.

- as you say, the words they hear from him - might I adjust that to "the words they WANT to hear from him in their dislike, comfortably ignoring all the guy's other words that don't fit in with their closed-minded hating opinion" ?

TennisandMusic
01-14-2009, 11:59 AM
Hating Federer is pretty extreme, but I have a hard time believing his fans simple don't see or hear his ridiculous statements. The guy is not humble in the least. Can't be a fan of that. He plays good tennis, but being a good tennis player is probably one of the least important things you can be in life. Character is far more important.

DarthFed
01-14-2009, 12:01 PM
- as you say, the words they hear from him - might I adjust that to "the words they WANT to hear from him in their dislike, comfortably ignoring all the guy's other words that don't fit in with their closed-minded hating opinion" ?

pretty much

DarthFed
01-14-2009, 12:02 PM
Hating Federer is pretty extreme, but I have a hard time believing his fans simple don't see or hear his ridiculous statements. The guy is not humble in the least. Can't be a fan of that. He plays good tennis, but being a good tennis player is probably one of the least important things you can be in life. Character is far more important.

Im guessing Nadal is humble?

The poor little boy from Mallorca, so humble i hear he enjoys golf too

veritech
01-14-2009, 12:08 PM
Hating Federer is pretty extreme, but I have a hard time believing his fans simple don't see or hear his ridiculous statements. The guy is not humble in the least. Can't be a fan of that. He plays good tennis, but being a good tennis player is probably one of the least important things you can be in life. Character is far more important.

how would you know his character? obviously he seems cocky on the press conferences, but he still gains the praise and adoration from many players and many of his peers for his personality.

thejoe
01-14-2009, 12:11 PM
Hating Federer is pretty extreme, but I have a hard time believing his fans simple don't see or hear his ridiculous statements. The guy is not humble in the least. Can't be a fan of that. He plays good tennis, but being a good tennis player is probably one of the least important things you can be in life. Character is far more important.

Nadal cops less ***** from the press though, as he hasn't been number 1 long enough for the press to start writing him off. I wonder how he will react once people start talking about his "decline." And being overly nice in interviews does not reflect good character. I'm not suggesting that Nadal is anything other than a nice guy, but I'm also saying that he knows how to preserve his squeaky clean image with the press by acting coy and complimenting Federer whenever he gets the chance.

EDIT: If Federer is so cocky, then how does he keep up his image as the perfect gentleman? I quote Andy Roddick:

'I've told him before: "I'd love to hate you, but you're really nice"'

veritech
01-14-2009, 12:15 PM
Nadal cops less ***** from the press though, as he hasn't been number 1 long enough for the press to start writing him off. I wonder how he will react once people start talking about his "decline." And being overly nice in interviews does not reflect good character. I'm not suggesting that Nadal is anything other than a nice guy, but I'm also saying that he knows how to preserve his squeaky clean image with the press by acting coy and complimenting Federer whenever he gets the chance.

good point.

DarthFed
01-14-2009, 12:58 PM
'I've told him before: "I'd love to hate you, but you're really nice"'

Wow...awsome...even though we know Andy hates him

Emelia21
01-14-2009, 01:48 PM
I think I will focus on Andy Murrays response

"The more you play against him (Federer) the less fearful you are, you are not scared to win the match"

"Now when I play him (Federer) I don't get nervous and if I play my best tennis I can beat him"

A perfect response from Andy

As for Federers comments, I find him playing mind games, a bit like Alex Ferguson :)

SempreSami
01-14-2009, 02:23 PM
I think I will focus on Andy Murrays response

"The more you play against him (Federer) the less fearful you are, you are not scared to win the match"

"Now when I play him (Federer) I don't get nervous and if I play my best tennis I can beat him"

A perfect response from Andy

As for Federers comments, I find him playing mind games, a bit like Alex Ferguson :)

Federer's mind games are rubbish compared to Sir Alex's.

Nobody's responded to Federer like this before.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=nW8p8xppxwA

veroniquem
01-14-2009, 02:25 PM
Im guessing Nadal is humble?

The poor little boy from Mallorca, so humble i hear he enjoys golf too
What does humility have to do with playing golf?

veroniquem
01-14-2009, 02:27 PM
Wow...awsome...even though we know Andy hates him
Andy Murray said he hates Federer?

All-rounder
01-14-2009, 02:34 PM
Andy Murray said he hates Federer?
andy roddick
he made a sarcastic comment but deep down inside you can see he's like I HATE THE WAY U OWN ME ALL THE TIME

Emelia21
01-14-2009, 02:35 PM
Federer's mind games are rubbish compared to Sir Alex's.
Nobody's responded to Federer like this before.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=nW8p8xppxwA

I said Federer is playing mind games, a bit like Ferguson, what I didn't say was who was better!!! I have not time for both these people mind games :)

veroniquem
01-14-2009, 02:36 PM
Hating Federer is pretty extreme, but I have a hard time believing his fans simple don't see or hear his ridiculous statements. The guy is not humble in the least. Can't be a fan of that. He plays good tennis, but being a good tennis player is probably one of the least important things you can be in life. Character is far more important.
Funny, that's what Nadal said in an interview. "It's not because I play tennis well that I should feel more important or special than other people". That's the key to a grounded attitude. I can't imagine for the life of me Nadal arriving at the FO and saying "How come this guy is the favorite? I should be!" I truly believe that the day Nadal would come up with such an attitude, he would be done. In order to succeed you have to keep believing it will be hard, and you'll have to fight all the time. The minute you feel entitled, you're done.

veroniquem
01-14-2009, 02:38 PM
andy roddick
he made a sarcastic comment but deep down inside you can see he's like I HATE THE WAY U OWN ME ALL THE TIME
Well if anybody has a good reason, I guess he has! Although on court I have never felt any hostility from Roddick toward Fed.

luckyboy1300
01-14-2009, 02:49 PM
Funny, that's what Nadal said in an interview. "It's not because I play tennis well that I should feel more important or special than other people". That's the key to a grounded attitude. I can't imagine for the life of me Nadal arriving at the FO and saying "How come this guy is the favorite? I should be!" I truly believe that the day Nadal would come up with such an attitude, he would be done. In order to succeed you have to keep believing it will be hard, and you'll have to fight all the time. The minute you feel entitled, you're done.

there's nowhere in the interview he said that!. it is clearly easy to distinguish reasonable people from just plain haters. federer was just surprised that the australian open favorite was murray, who won no slams, as against him, nadal or djokovic who won the last 15 slams. he felt disrespect for the 3 of them, not just himself.

DoubleDeuce
01-14-2009, 03:01 PM
there's nowhere in the interview he said that!. it is clearly easy to distinguish reasonable people from just plain haters. federer was just surprised that the australian open favorite was murray, who won no slams, as against him, nadal or djokovic who won the last 15 slams. he felt disrespect for the 3 of them, not just himself.

Yes, he only showed surprise and I wouldn't go so far as calling it a disrespect. Being a favorite does not help anyone, as both Federer and Murray said in their interviews. There are some posters who put everything a player says under the microscope and try to blow it up and put it in line with their already set minds.

veroniquem
01-14-2009, 03:06 PM
Ha of course, he added the 2 others for good measure (kind of ironical BTW after all the hostility he showed toward Djoko in the past). That's not the point anyway, the point is that he hinted that Murray had nothing to do among the favorites who should be him among others but certainly not Murray. Sorry but that's bull, Murray found his way to the last slam's final , several months later he's playing even better and there's no reason on earth why he shouldn't be a favorite to do it again and even a notch better.

veroniquem
01-14-2009, 03:08 PM
Yes, he only showed surprise and I wouldn't go so far as calling it a disrespect. Being a favorite does not help anyone, as both Federer and Murray said in their interviews. There are some posters who put everything a player says under the microscope and try to blow it up and put it in line with their already set minds.
It's no big deal except Fed does it all the time, it shows his mentality, that's all.

SempreSami
01-14-2009, 03:09 PM
I said Federer is playing mind games, a bit like Ferguson, what I didn't say was who was better!!! I have not time for both these people mind games :)

I'd say his mind games are more like Rafa Benitez's ;)

veritech
01-14-2009, 03:14 PM
why should murray be the overall favorite? his current form is great and while he has shown he can do well in slams, he still hasn't proven himself good enough to win a slam. he's one of the favorites but not THE favorite, imo.

Ha of course, he added the 2 others for good measure (kind of ironical BTW after all the hostility he showed toward Djoko in the past). That's not the point anyway, the point is that he hinted that Murray had nothing to do among the favorites who should be him among others but certainly not Murray. Sorry but that's bull, Murray found his way to the last slam's final , several months later he's playing even better and there's no reason on earth why he shouldn't be a favorite to do it again and even a notch better.

are you being serious? added the 2 others for good measure? hilarious. you always post as if he's so evil. you only "know" federer from his press conferences. don't be so quick to judge.

DoubleDeuce
01-14-2009, 03:24 PM
It's no big deal except Fed does it all the time, it shows his mentality, that's all.

I have to disagree. Players are generally very polite and respectful toward each other and so is Roger. "All the time" is definitely an exaggeration my friend because even this one you are mentioning here does not qualify either. Many people noted his surprise, and he praised Murray for playing well. He decided to talk his mind instead of giving empty repeating words we have heard so many times. And that's what we, as the viewers and listeners only crowd, should consider respectful and valuable. Saying it the way it is without disrespect.

veroniquem
01-14-2009, 03:27 PM
why should murray be the overall favorite? his current form is great and while he has shown he can do well in slams, he still hasn't proven himself good enough to win a slam. he's one of the favorites but not THE favorite, imo.



are you being serious? added the 2 others for good measure? hilarious. you always post as if he's so evil. you only "know" federer from his press conferences. don't be so quick to judge.
"evil" would be vastly exaggerated, I just said he was pretentious (you'll agree that sounds less dramatic than "evil") and a sore loser. It's not Fed's place to put himself as the or a favorite, that's the commentators' job. There's no doubt that Federer has a lot of other qualities but humility isn't 1 of them. A lot of Fed fans insist that he is perfect. Between "perfect" and "evil" I feel a middle ground can be reached.

zagor
01-14-2009, 03:39 PM
Funny, that's what Nadal said in an interview. "It's not because I play tennis well that I should feel more important or special than other people". That's the key to a grounded attitude. I can't imagine for the life of me Nadal arriving at the FO and saying "How come this guy is the favorite? I should be!" I truly believe that the day Nadal would come up with such an attitude, he would be done.

Please,you really think that top athletes in any sport are really that grounded and humble? I'm sure Nadal is perfectly aware of the fact that he's the best on clay,as he is perfectly aware of the fact that he's breaking the time rule yet he still does it and sometimes even gets angry at the those rare umpires that give him a warning(like Pascal Maria).If he's that humble than why doesn't he always play by the rules like most other players?
I overall think he's a nice guy and personally I don't mind him taking the extra time to serve(even if he is breaking the rule)but you're putting him on a pedestal here,he's not without faults(and certainly,neither is Federer).Players shouldn't be judged solely by what they say in interviews but by their behaviour on court as well.

In order to succeed you have to keep believing it will be hard, and you'll have to fight all the time. The minute you feel entitled, you're done.

Yes,but Nadal's certainly not the only one who worked and fought hard for his wins.So did guys like Fed and Sampras no matter how much smooth their games look,they wouldn't have achieved 1/10 of what they did without putting in tremendous hard work and without tremendous will.I doubt any of them feels "entitled" to any big title as they more than anyone else know how much hardwork does it take to win them.

Ha of course, he added the 2 others for good measure (kind of ironical BTW after all the hostility he showed toward Djoko in the past). That's not the point anyway, the point is that he hinted that Murray had nothing to do among the favorites who should be him among others but certainly not Murray. Sorry but that's bull, Murray found his way to the last slam's final , several months later he's playing even better and there's no reason on earth why he shouldn't be a favorite to do it again and even a notch better.

Actually he didn't add Nadal and Djokovic for good measure,he mentioned them first(Djokovic for being the defending champion and Nadal for having an incredible season last year)and at the end he mentioned himself and that he won the last HC slam,he didn't even bring up the fact that he's a 3 time AO champion which would be a legitimate thing to say as well since he more than anyone on tour knows how to win in AO.

He also said that Murray's put himself into great position to win in AO,is in good form and confident so it's not like he didn't give him any credit whatsoever.

veritech
01-14-2009, 03:40 PM
"evil" would be vastly exaggerated, I just said he was pretentious (you'll agree that sounds less dramatic than "evil") and a sore loser. It's not Fed's place to put himself as the or a favorite, that's the commentators' job. There's no doubt that Federer has a lot of other qualities but humility isn't 1 of them. A lot of Fed fans insist that he is perfect. Between "perfect" and "evil" I feel a middle ground can be reached.

he doesn't mention at all that he should be the favorite. he's surprised that murray's chosen to be favorite over the top 3. it's a justified opinion interpreted here as an extreme amount of arrogance.

no one insists he is perfect. don't be absurd. what fans of federer try to argue is that he's not that bad of a person that certain people try to illustrate he is.

TheMusicLover
01-14-2009, 03:58 PM
Andy Murray said he hates Federer?

He never did. Rather the contrary - Murray, by words of his mum at least, said that Roger's post-Dubai comments actually helped him to improve his game.

are you being serious? added the 2 others for good measure? hilarious. you always post as if he's so evil. you only "know" federer from his press conferences. don't be so quick to judge.

I wonder where veroniquem's hatred towards Fed comes from... it makes no sense at all. Strange, for a poster that seems to be rather okay, when it doesn't come to Feds!
Judging on a few out-of-context sentences, not even reading the full presser, in which it was obvious that Fed was in fact being very gracious towards his rivals Nadal and Djokovic - he merely explained that those two, among himself, had more validity to be called a favourite for the victory at the AO than Murray, who has only reached a final once (where he lost in straight sets), while Fed himself has ranked up 13 GS titles, Rafa has 5, and Djoko has 1 - all players that have actually proven themselves in GS tournaments. That's all he said, and rightly so.

edberg505
01-14-2009, 04:01 PM
What would be hilarious is if Murray were to go crashing out in the 3rd round. I'd personally revisit this thread to see what kind of post would pop up.

zagor
01-14-2009, 04:06 PM
What would be hilarious is if Murray were to go crashing out in the 3rd round. I'd personally revisit this thread to see what kind of post would pop up.

Doubt that will happen,he really seems to be in great form at the moment but my guess is that the wheels of his bandwagon would come off imediatelly.Actually they will probably come off if Murray comes back from Melbourne with anything less than a title.

TheMusicLover
01-14-2009, 04:09 PM
Doubt that will happen,he really seems to be in great form at the moment but my guess is that the wheels of his bandwagon would come off imediatelly.Actually they will probably come off if Murray comes back from Melbourne with anything less than a title.

If anything, those wheels will surely come off as soon as the clay season starts again.

edberg505
01-14-2009, 04:13 PM
Doubt that will happen,he really seems to be in great form at the moment but my guess is that the wheels of his bandwagon would come off imediatelly.Actually they will probably come off if Murray comes back from Melbourne with anything less than a title.

Yeah, I would actually pay to see that. LOL. Some people here have all but given him the title already. Anything can happen kinda like what happend to Djokovic at Wimbledon last year. Just because Murray has beaten Federer and Nadal both the last time they played doesn't mean he's safe from other dangerous players in the draw. I just think it'd be wise to at least wait until we see him play his first few matches.

veroniquem
01-14-2009, 04:24 PM
He never did. Rather the contrary - Murray, by words of his mum at least, said that Roger's post-Dubai comments actually helped him to improve his game.



I wonder where veroniquem's hatred towards Fed comes from... it makes no sense at all. Strange, for a poster that seems to be rather okay, when it doesn't come to Feds!
Judging on a few out-of-context sentences, not even reading the full presser, in which it was obvious that Fed was in fact being very gracious towards his rivals Nadal and Djokovic - he merely explained that those two, among himself, had more validity to be called a favourite for the victory at the AO than Murray, who has only reached a final once (where he lost in straight sets), while Fed himself has ranked up 13 GS titles, Rafa has 5, and Djoko has 1 - all players that have actually proven themselves in GS tournaments. That's all he said, and rightly so.
Only if you consider that the number of slams previously won should be the only criterium which I think is wrong. He used the same argument at Wimbledon saying: I have won 5 so I know how to do it and he never acknowledged there that Nadal was a favorite as well as him. I totally agree that having won slams before gives you confidence for the future but there are other factors to consider like form and momentum, those factors are not insignificant, they're very important too. By Federer's logic Djokovic should not have won the AO last year and Nadal should not have won a non-clay slam either. (same for Safin, Roddick and so on). The idea that the same people should be winning the same slams until they retire sounds almost naive, I know Fed has been close to turning it into a reality but still! As an analyst one has to realize things are not that simple.

veroniquem
01-14-2009, 04:27 PM
Yeah, I would actually pay to see that. LOL. Some people here have all but given him the title already. Anything can happen kinda like what happend to Djokovic at Wimbledon last year. Just because Murray has beaten Federer and Nadal both the last time they played doesn't mean he's safe from other dangerous players in the draw. I just think it'd be wise to at least wait until we see him play his first few matches.
You can say he's a favorite but of course you never know for sure, same can be said for the other favorites. Anything can happen, that's why it's fun.

TheMusicLover
01-14-2009, 04:39 PM
Only if you consider that the number of slams previously won should be the only criterium which I think is wrong.

I fully agree that it's not the only criterium, but I do happen to believe it's a very important one.

He used the same argument at Wimbledon saying: I have won 5 so I know how to do it and he never acknowledged there that Nadal was a favorite as well as him.

Well, in fact, you are wrong that he never acknowledged that Nadal was a favourite as well - might I remember you on his words after he won the (very hard-fought, could have gone either way!) title in 2007?
"I'm so happy to have won this title - before he [= Rafa] takes them all away from me in the near future..."

If that doesn't show how much he acknowledged Rafa to be a true rival at that time, I don't know what is. ;)

Besides that, in the past four years or so, he's always emphasized how much Rafa is indeed his true Main Rival. He still does to the day of today, even while there are a lot of other players giving him a run for his money right now. I happen to think Roger really likes Rafa, which seems to be the case in reverse as well. There must be a good reason for that, don't you think?

I totally agree that having won slams before gives you confidence for the future but there are other factors to consider like form and momentum, those factors are not insignificant, they're very important too. By Federer's logic Djokovic should not have won the AO last year and Nadal should not have won a non-clay slam this year. (same for Safin, Roddick and so on). The idea that the same people should be winning the same slams until they retire sounds almost naive, I know Fed has been close to turning it into a reality but still! As an analyst one has to realize things are not that simple.

Fully agree with you here. Of course, things change through the course of time, and Roger will have to come to terms with that fact, quite possibly very soon indeed. But I do think that being a multiple slam-winner (which is the case for both Federer and Nadal) gives one a certain mental advantage.
That said, 'nothing lasts forever...' :)

oy vey
01-14-2009, 06:32 PM
"I would always pick Rafael. He had an incredible season last year. I think he won the Olympics pretty comfortably, you know, crushed almost everybody on the way, and I thought he was playing well and at the US Open as well, and I thought what I saw of him playing in Doha as well he was playing that well as well. Just came up a few more, played well — best of three sets, it's over in a hurry. Let's not forget he didn't play the Masters, so he couldn't really show there." --Roger Federer, on the favorite to win Melbourne
http://www.tennisweek.com/news/fullstory.sps?inewsid=6625187

veroniquem
01-14-2009, 06:33 PM
If anything, those wheels will surely come off as soon as the clay season starts again.
Nobody ever said that Murray was a great clay courter. He's better and better on hard.

NamRanger
01-14-2009, 06:43 PM
Doubt that will happen,he really seems to be in great form at the moment but my guess is that the wheels of his bandwagon would come off imediatelly.Actually they will probably come off if Murray comes back from Melbourne with anything less than a title.


It will happen. Safin defeats Andy Murray 3rd round, 6-3, 6-2, 6-0. You heard it here first.

TheMusicLover
01-14-2009, 06:43 PM
"I would always pick Rafael. He had an incredible season last year. I think he won the Olympics pretty comfortably, you know, crushed almost everybody on the way, and I thought he was playing well and at the US Open as well, and I thought what I saw of him playing in Doha as well he was playing that well as well. Just came up a few more, played well — best of three sets, it's over in a hurry. Let's not forget he didn't play the Masters, so he couldn't really show there." --Roger Federer, on the favorite to win Melbourne
http://www.tennisweek.com/news/fullstory.sps?inewsid=6625187

What a *******, indeed, that fellow, to say such things! Absolutely no respect to his rivals at all! LOL!
:roll:

veroniquem
01-14-2009, 06:43 PM
I fully agree that it's not the only criterium, but I do happen to believe it's a very important one.



Well, in fact, you are wrong that he never acknowledged that Nadal was a favourite as well - might I remember you on his words after he won the (very hard-fought, could have gone either way!) title in 2007?
"I'm so happy to have won this title - before he [= Rafa] takes them all away from me in the near future..."

If that doesn't show how much he acknowledged Rafa to be a true rival at that time, I don't know what is. ;)

Besides that, in the past four years or so, he's always emphasized how much Rafa is indeed his true Main Rival. He still does to the day of today, even while there are a lot of other players giving him a run for his money right now. I happen to think Roger really likes Rafa, which seems to be the case in reverse as well. There must be a good reason for that, don't you think?



Fully agree with you here. Of course, things change through the course of time, and Roger will have to come to terms with that fact, quite possibly very soon indeed. But I do think that being a multiple slam-winner (which is the case for both Federer and Nadal) gives one a certain mental advantage.
That said, 'nothing lasts forever...' :)
Excellent quote! Fed said that after their 2007 match but in 2008 he acted like he had never really believed what he had said. He expressed the same surprise at analysts picking Nadal at W2008 as he's doing about Murray right before the AO. I guess it's a defense mechanism... I think what he's really saying (behind the fake surprise) is that Nadal at W and Murray at AO are the biggest threats to his chances of winning. I think that's the truth which for him is easier to deny than confront.

TheMusicLover
01-14-2009, 07:02 PM
Excellent quote! Fed said that after their 2007 match but in 2008 he acted like he had never really believed what he had said.

How so? Might I remind you of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0tKr2B6-3Q, just to fresh up your memory?
He fully acknowledged Rafa's victory. He FULLY acknowledged Rafa's victory there, and rightly so.

He expressed the same surprise at analysts picking Nadal at W2008 as he's doing about Murray right before the AO. I guess it's a defense mechanism... I think what he's really saying (behind the fake surprise) is that Nadal at W and Murray at AO are the biggest threats to his chances of winning. I think that's the truth which for him is easier to deny than confront.

All I can conclude that you throw out the 'fake'-verdict towards everything Federer says, whatever the cause or reason for it. Might it just be that there is enough of a reason to throw that exact 'FAKE!' verdict whenever you claim Rafa is such a 'humble' guy, again? I refrained myself from doing that when it came clear he drives an Ashton Martin lately. Very 'humble', indeed.
In short: Pot Meet Kettle.

ttbrowne
01-14-2009, 07:08 PM
Then I would advise all of you Murray fans to bet the bank on Murray....with real money, not talk.

veroniquem
01-14-2009, 07:13 PM
How so? Might I remind you of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0tKr2B6-3Q, just to fresh up your memory?
He fully acknowledged Rafa's victory. He FULLY acknowledged Rafa's victory there, and rightly so.



All I can conclude that you throw out the 'fake'-verdict towards everything Federer says, whatever the cause or reason for it. Might it just be that there is enough of a reason to throw that exact 'FAKE!' verdict whenever you claim Rafa is such a 'humble' guy, again? I refrained myself from doing that when it came clear he drives an Ashton Martin lately. Very 'humble', indeed.
In short: Pot Meet Kettle.
Now you're generalizing. I do not object to everything Fed says but I think Murray is the player with the best chance to beat Fed at AO (same as Djoko last year) and I'm sure Fed knows it. About Nadal at W, of course Fed acknowledges the victory after the fact (he has no choice!)That's not what I was refering to, I was refering to the beginning of the tournament when Borg and a lot of other pros picked Nadal as the favorite and Federer was clearly miffed about it (very similarly to his current reaction about Murray). As for the Aston martin, you can think whatever you want about it , it doesn't bother me.

Sentinel
01-14-2009, 08:46 PM
To add to it all, arrogant Federer opened his arrogant mouth YET AGAIN!

http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/news?slug=ap-australianopen-federer&prov=ap&type=lgns

Lendl and Federer Fan
01-14-2009, 08:50 PM
^That is not arrogant, that is what here in US we called cowboy diplomacy. :twisted::wink:

veroniquem
01-14-2009, 08:51 PM
What's arrogant about wanting to push back the AO? Maybe it's a good idea so players would have more time to prepare.

David L
01-14-2009, 08:56 PM
Anyone can check out Federer's complete interviews on the Kooyong website if they want to avoid the media slant.

http://www.aamiclassic.com.au/Media

Sentinel
01-14-2009, 08:59 PM
What's arrogant about wanting to push back the AO? Maybe it's a good idea so players would have more time to prepare.
I am only saying so before the haters say so.
Now "arrogant" Fed even praises the new ATP boss:

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/roger-federer-praises-new-atp-boss/410683/

veroniquem
01-14-2009, 09:37 PM
I am only saying so before the haters say so.
Now "arrogant" Fed even praises the new ATP boss:

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/roger-federer-praises-new-atp-boss/410683/
A little piece of criticism doesn't warranty such paranoia!

Sentinel
01-14-2009, 11:31 PM
A little piece of criticism doesn't warranty such paranoia!
ok ok, my apologies for being overly sarcastic/sensitive. Peace.

veroniquem
01-15-2009, 03:59 AM
ok ok, my apologies for being overly sarcastic/sensitive. Peace.
No problem mate :)

PCXL-Fan
01-15-2009, 04:04 AM
Excellent quote! Fed said that after their 2007 match but in 2008 he acted like he had never really believed what he had said. He expressed the same surprise at analysts picking Nadal at W2008 as he's doing about Murray right before the AO. I guess it's a defense mechanism... I think what he's really saying (behind the fake surprise) is that Nadal at W and Murray at AO are the biggest threats to his chances of winning. I think that's the truth which for him is easier to deny than confront.

Yup, Federer is only human.

*Waits for the superhuman jokes....*

luckyboy1300
01-15-2009, 04:31 AM
He never did. Rather the contrary - Murray, by words of his mum at least, said that Roger's post-Dubai comments actually helped him to improve his game.



I wonder where veroniquem's hatred towards Fed comes from... it makes no sense at all. Strange, for a poster that seems to be rather okay, when it doesn't come to Feds!
Judging on a few out-of-context sentences, not even reading the full presser, in which it was obvious that Fed was in fact being very gracious towards his rivals Nadal and Djokovic - he merely explained that those two, among himself, had more validity to be called a favourite for the victory at the AO than Murray, who has only reached a final once (where he lost in straight sets), while Fed himself has ranked up 13 GS titles, Rafa has 5, and Djoko has 1 - all players that have actually proven themselves in GS tournaments. That's all he said, and rightly so.

for someone who called federer "selfish and self-centered" after saying "i was happy i've got an olympic gold", ignoring the fact that during the very same interview federer commented on how happy he was winning that medal with his friend tell something about how "reeessonable" she is.

Federer announces that Olympic gold inspired him to win the US Open title...Is it just me or you or was the Olympic gold the most important championship to him --maybe ahead of Wimbledon--it sure sounded like thats what he said

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Olympic-gold-inspired-US-Open-win--Federer/362326


That's exactly the point. The "I'm happy that I've got an olympic gold" should be "I'm happy that we've got an olympic gold". Not that you'll ever agree to that as you're as fanatic as Federer is self-centered.

though i still believe that she's better than most of the fed-haters out here.

veroniquem
01-15-2009, 04:47 AM
for someone who called federer "selfish and self-centered" after saying "i was happy i've got an olympic gold", ignoring the fact that during the very same interview federer commented on how happy he was winning that medal with his friend tell something about how "reeessonable" she is.






though i still believe that she's better than most of the fed-haters out here.
Ha ha I totally forgot about that post. I may have a tendency to overanalyze that stuff!

oneleggedcardinal
01-15-2009, 05:42 AM
Ha ha I totally forgot about that post. I may have a tendency to overanalyze that stuff!

Understatement.

thejoe
01-15-2009, 09:27 AM
To add to it all, arrogant Federer opened his arrogant mouth YET AGAIN!

http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/news?slug=ap-australianopen-federer&prov=ap&type=lgns

I'm sorry, who complains more than anyone about the schedule, and then plays doubles? :wink:

I know you were joking :p

veroniquem
01-15-2009, 09:36 AM
I'm sorry, who complains more than anyone about the schedule, and then plays doubles? :wink:

I know you were joking :p
Complaining has nothing to do with arrogance anyway.

janipyt05
01-15-2009, 11:37 AM
I have to agree with Federer, Murray is having a big mouth problem. Murray should have some respect no matter what Federer has 13 slams to his ZERO and endless title and broken records. Federer is right again by saying it is hard to win a slam and he and Rafa have had the lions share right again. Murray should just shut up

thejoe
01-15-2009, 11:38 AM
I have to agree with Federer, Murray is having a big mouth problem. Murray should have some respect no matter what Federer has 13 slams to his ZERO and endless title and broken records. Federer is right again by saying it is hard to win a slam and he and Rafa have had the lions share right again. Murray should just shut up

Has Murray said anything?

janipyt05
01-15-2009, 11:41 AM
Has Murray said anything?
Yes in the London paper

veroniquem
01-15-2009, 12:25 PM
Yes in the London paper
What did he say that made him a "loud mouth"?

batz
01-15-2009, 12:35 PM
Yes in the London paper

Which one, got a link?

Ari Gold
01-15-2009, 12:57 PM
I have to agree with Federer, Murray is having a big mouth problem.

Unless I've missed it Federer hasn't said anything about Murray having a 'big mouth problem'.

Murray should have some respect

Murray is always very respectful of Federer. He calls him one of the greatest of all time. He also said that beating Federer was as good as winning the Masters in Shanghai. Tell us, what is disrespectful about that?

no matter what Federer has 13 slams to his ZERO

Great logic. Murray has the same amount of slams that Federer had at his age.

Murray should just shut up

If anybody should button it then it's Federer that has come out with these comments.

wangs78
01-15-2009, 01:02 PM
Typical words from Federer. Not wanting to give his opponents credit. He only beat Fed 4 times in a row now. lol

He's giving Nadal and Djokovic credit for their past accomplishments. What's wrong with that. You're an idiot, sorry.

Emelia21
01-15-2009, 02:02 PM
I have posted what Andy Murray said in response to Rogers comments on page 9 of this thread

batz
01-15-2009, 02:11 PM
I have posted what Andy Murray said in response to Rogers comments on page 9 of this thread


I psoted them on page 2 as well - surely it's not those comments that Janipy is talking about - what was wrong with what Murray said?:confused:

Cup8489
01-15-2009, 02:14 PM
Actually let me try a little reasoning here just for fun. Nadal is my favorite player but on hard court recently he's been beaten by Murray, Simon, Monfils and had to retire from Master Cup with injury. Of course he is Nadal and he could pull a rabbit from his hat but I don't see putting him as the main favorite here.
Djokovic has already won AO and he defends his title but his results have been a real roller coaster recently going from losing in early rounds to winning master cup to losing in first round again. In these conditions, it's rather hard to pick him with any sense of reliability. Then comes Federer, he has a lot of experience at winning slams and he won the last slam on hard, those are strong arguments in his favor tampered by the fact that it's been downhill for him since USO: didn't make a hard court final since then and didn't even pass the round robins in the Master Cup.
Now Murray: has never won a slam, that's a big con of course but has won 3 hard court tournaments since USO (+ a master before USO), has made the final of the last hard court slam, has beaten the top 3 seeds in the last 6 months and is visibly the man in form and on the rise at the moment.
Now the decision between Federer and Murray as first favorite is hard to make: experience vs momentum, which one to favor? That's when you have to look at the head to head and all their latest matches were won by Murray (more easily so in their last encounter). For that reason (even though Federer has won their only slam match) I would put Murray (very slightly) ahead, then Federer immediately after, Nadal in 3 (just because he's been more regular than Djoko recently) and Djoko in 4 (but with really nothing much between the 2).
Apparently professional analysts used a similar logic to mine and came to roughly the same conclusions. For Federer to claim that Murray should not be part of these conclusions is not only "right off" but suspiciously irrational.

i have to say very mature and well supported argument, and i have to agree, although i'm not sure i'd give the edge to either murray or federer, simply because while murray is definitely wiping the floor with him lately, federer has shown that he does not exit slams early, period. the last time he did was 2004 french, if i recall. thats alot of semis/finals in a row, and i dont think he'll be put off by andy murray in a 3 out of 5

but time will tell, that's for sure. is the draw out yet?

veroniquem
01-15-2009, 02:35 PM
i have to say very mature and well supported argument, and i have to agree, although i'm not sure i'd give the edge to either murray or federer, simply because while murray is definitely wiping the floor with him lately, federer has shown that he does not exit slams early, period. the last time he did was 2004 french, if i recall. thats alot of semis/finals in a row, and i dont think he'll be put off by andy murray in a 3 out of 5

but time will tell, that's for sure. is the draw out yet?
It will be out tonight.

Emelia21
01-15-2009, 02:54 PM
I psoted them on page 2 as well - surely it's not those comments that Janipy is talking about - what was wrong with what Murray said?:confused:


Nothing is wrong in what Andy Murray said in those comments I agree, Janipy probably has a problem with Andy Murray or he or she is a Roger Federer fan and see's Andy Murray as a threat to his or her God ie: Roger