PDA

View Full Version : Is Federer an all-court player?


Pages : [1] 2 3

Cesc Fabregas
10-18-2009, 11:55 AM
Carrying on from another thread. I vote no, what do you think?

Agassifan
10-18-2009, 11:58 AM
The options shouldve been

Yes
Obviously yes

NGM
10-18-2009, 12:03 PM
Carrying on from another thread. I vote no, what do you think?

Your signature is obviously right: you are a clown.

Xenakis
10-18-2009, 12:07 PM
There should be a 'who cares?' option, I would have voted for that, no offence intended though, just my opinion, it's a free world (almost, bits of it.)

Claudius
10-18-2009, 12:08 PM
According to Wikipedia, he is an all-court player, and if Wikipedia says so, it has to be true.

BreakPoint
10-18-2009, 12:08 PM
The options shouldve been

Yes
Obviously yes
And also add these four options:

3. Of course!
4. No doubt!
5. Without question!

and

6. You have to deaf, dumb, and blind to think otherwise!

:)

viduka0101
10-18-2009, 12:10 PM
Carrying on from another thread. I vote no, what do you think?

i dont know which is worst
your signature or this ridiculous poll
btw my answer is yes

JeMar
10-18-2009, 12:10 PM
Carrying on from another thread. I vote no, what do you think?

Well, there you go.

BreakPoint
10-18-2009, 12:12 PM
The OP is the ONLY one that has voted "No".

That's the definition of pure "Ownage" and "Massive Fail"! :oops:

Cesc Fabregas
10-18-2009, 12:13 PM
The OP is the ONLY one that has voted "No".

That's the definition of pure "Ownage" and "Massive Fail"! :oops:

Give it time. Theres plenty of people who will agree with my intelligent view.

Carsomyr
10-18-2009, 12:14 PM
He had to have known the reaction he'd get; really boggles the mind why he found it necessary to post this in the first place.

Carsomyr
10-18-2009, 12:15 PM
Give it time. Theres plenty of people who will agree with my intelligent view.

Yep, including GSF, GJ011 (whatever incarnation he's under now), 8pNADAL, etc.

mandy01
10-18-2009, 12:15 PM
Give it time. Theres plenty of people who will agree with my intelligent view. LMAO! :lol:

JeMar
10-18-2009, 12:17 PM
Yep, including GSF, GJ011 (whatever incarnation he's under now), 8pNADAL, etc.

Don't forget Azzari or whatever that dude's name is.

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 12:17 PM
Federer's not an all court player.

volleynets
10-18-2009, 12:28 PM
Those of you who say no, what kind of player is he then?

OJ ROD
10-18-2009, 12:31 PM
Yep, including GSF, GJ011 (whatever incarnation he's under now), 8pNADAL, etc.


ROFL!!!LOL!!!!

IvanAndreevich
10-18-2009, 12:31 PM
Yes he is. Usually he stays on the baseline because he's the baseline GOAT. Other times he comes in a lot.

Check out his Wimbledon match against Tommy Haas - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dctc8_RnhJk

He's coming in a lot, S&V'ing occasionally, coming in off the return. What the hell do you want him to do - come in on every point to acknowledge his all-courtness? The most all court player of Top 10 by a long shot.

BreakPoint
10-18-2009, 12:33 PM
Federer's not an all court player.
So what do you call it when he takes a short ball and hits an aggressive approach shot and follows it to the net? Or when he pounds or chips an opponent's 2nd serve and follows it into the net? Or when he throws in the occasional serve and volley?

If Federer is not an all-court player then what does that make Nadal? A baseball player because he stands out in left field? :) LOL

Cesc Fabregas
10-18-2009, 12:39 PM
So what do you call it when he takes a short ball and hits an aggressive approach shot and follows it to the net? Or when he pounds or chips an opponent's 2nd serve and follows it into the net? Or when he throws in the occasional serve and volley?

If Federer is not an all-court player then what does that make Nadal? A baseball player because he stands out in left field? :) LOL

Nadal does that, does that make him an all-court player. :oops:

BreakPoint
10-18-2009, 12:43 PM
Nadal does that, does that make him an all-court player. :oops:
Um... No. Nadal only comes in when his opponents drop shot him or mishits a ball that lands inside the service line. Federer will come into the net even if he's behind the baseline if he hits a hard aggressive shot into the corner.

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 12:46 PM
Carrying on from another thread. I vote no, what do you think?

So this is the old argument. I see the majority disagrees with you.

The options shouldve been

Yes
Obviously yes

Quoted for truth.

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 12:47 PM
The OP is the ONLY one that has voted "No".

That's the definition of pure "Ownage" and "Massive Fail"! :oops:

Actually NamRanger thinks Fed is a pure baseliner as well.

Bud
10-18-2009, 12:48 PM
He has the ability to be an all-court player but he doesn't exercise that ability enough to be called a true all-court player.

He has a nice transition game and he can serve and volley but he rarely incorporates those elements into his game unless he's in trouble.

IMO, a true all court player will volley at least 50% of the time... whether it's S&V or transitioning to the net on a good approach shot.

Does Federer win 50% of his points at net? No.

Cesc Fabregas
10-18-2009, 12:49 PM
Actually NamRanger thinks Fed is a pure baseliner as well.

NamRanger is a smart guy and a very good poster.

Bud
10-18-2009, 12:50 PM
The OP is the ONLY one that has voted "No".

That's the definition of pure "Ownage" and "Massive Fail"! :oops:

The thread is young... give it time.

JennyS
10-18-2009, 12:51 PM
Federer's net approaches in notable matches this year...

Australian Open final: 60
Wimbledon final: 59
US Open final: 47
Wimbledon semi: 38
US Open semi 36
US Open quarterfinal: 32
Wimbledon final: 59

Bud
10-18-2009, 12:53 PM
Those of you who say no, what kind of player is he then?

He's primarily a baseliner with a good transition game... and who serve's and volleys when he's in trouble.

President
10-18-2009, 12:56 PM
I think the OP is confusing all court will serve and volley. Just because Federer doesn't come in behind each serve doesn't mean he isn't an all court player.


Yes he is. Usually he stays on the baseline because he's the baseline GOAT. Other times he comes in a lot.

Check out his Wimbledon match against Tommy Haas - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dctc8_RnhJk

He's coming in a lot, S&V'ing occasionally, coming in off the return. What the hell do you want him to do - come in on every point to acknowledge his all-courtness? The most all court player of Top 10 by a long shot.

I beg to differ. Tsonga is definitely more all court than Federer.

Cesc Fabregas
10-18-2009, 12:58 PM
I know Federer and his fans have romantic ideas about him S&Ving like Rod Laver but Roger is a baseliner, all his strengths indicate that forehand, movement, footwork etc.

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 01:03 PM
NamRanger is a smart guy and a very good poster.

Maybe he is, but the majority has a different opinion than his (and yours).

volleynets
10-18-2009, 01:05 PM
I know Federer and his fans have romantic ideas about him S&Ving like Rod Laver but Roger is a baseliner, all his strengths indicate that forehand, movement, footwork etc.

IF you believe that Federer is a baseliner than how one-dimensional does that make Nadal?:confused:

You need to stop making Nadal look bad with all your posts.

Bud
10-18-2009, 01:05 PM
Maybe he is, but the majority has a different opinion than his (and yours).

What exactly is your definition of an 'all court player'?

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 01:05 PM
I know Federer and his fans have romantic ideas about him S&Ving like Rod Laver but Roger is a baseliner, all his strengths indicate that forehand, movement, footwork etc.

Federer has superb skills at the net. He has the best net game in men's tennis today, and while it's not as good as some of the guys in the 90s, if he could beat Pete Sampras with it, it's good enough. Someone posted here a video from Federer vs. Hass from this year's Wimbly, I think you'll be surprised by the number of times Federer came in. He hit drop shots, volleys, lobs, he chipped and charged, a lot of drive volleys. Federer is all court.

Bud
10-18-2009, 01:06 PM
IF you believe that Federer is a baseliner than how one-dimensional does that make Nadal?:confused:

You need to stop making Nadal look bad with all your posts.

Being a baseliner does not make a player one-dimensional :roll:

JeMar
10-18-2009, 01:06 PM
I can already tell you how this thread's going to pan out.

It's going to be a 80/20 split between people that either automatically like everything Federer does (or actually know what an all-courter is) and people that have a kneejerk reaction against anything Federer does (like Cesc) and a very small group of people that happen to see this issue differently from those in the 80%.

egn
10-18-2009, 01:07 PM
Roger circa 2002-2006 was definitely an all court player.. 2007-2009 he has turned more into a baseliner. He still plays the all court game half the time but he has become more of a solid consistent baseliner for the most part. He doesn't utilize his net game as much anymore. When he does it makes a pretty big difference though. I still consider him an all court player but he has been leaning towards more baseline game than all court game as of late.

Now a question to the crazy fed tards? What the **** is the big deal? Fed being all court or not doesn't take away 15 slams. Pete Sampras serve and volleyed his way to 14 slams..thats not really all court game in my eyes...I still acknowledge him as great. Lendl baselined his way to 8 slams and 3 dominant seasons..where does being a baseliner take away from that. Nadal played tennis practically in the stands at points on his way to 6 slams..never once did that hurt him. Since when has being a baseliner been a bad thing? Tell Ivan Lendl, Bjorn Borg, Jimmy Connors, Andre Agassi, Jim Courier, Steffi Graf, Monica Seles and Chris Evert that. Nothing wrong with playing at the line for 2/3 of the match.

Federer doesn't play his all court game as much anymore. He still uses it as Jenny points out in the big moments, but face it when you can win more than half your matches without stepping foot away from the baseline..why bother?

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 01:08 PM
What exactly is your definition of an 'all court player'?

A player who knows and uses every shot in the book. To say Federer is just a baseliner is a false statement. He chips and charges, he comes in, he drive volleys a lot, his drop shots are the best in the game by far, he's got decent overheads (both FH and BH), he uses change of pace well with his deadly slice, he hits nice lobs (even invented the overhead lob which he uses from time to time).

JeMar
10-18-2009, 01:09 PM
Federer has superb skills at the net. He has the best net game in men's tennis today, and while it's not as good as some of the guys in the 90s, if he could beat Pete Sampras with it, it's good enough. Someone posted here a video from Federer vs. Hass from this year's Wimbly, I think you'll be surprised by the number of times Federer came in. He hit drop shots, volleys, lobs, he chipped and charged, a lot of drive volleys. Federer is all court.

Hyperbole doesn't help our cause, either. Federer has decent volleys that are made to look better by his approach shots, that's it. He does not have the best net game in tennis today.

That said, if Federer is not an all-court player, Nadal must be a half-dimensional player, considering that he wins the overwhelming majority of his points with one shot.

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 01:09 PM
IF you believe that Federer is a baseliner than how one-dimensional does that make Nadal?:confused:

You need to stop making Nadal look bad with all your posts.

ROFL! Go learn something.

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 01:10 PM
Roger circa 2002-2006 was definitely an all court player.. 2007-2009 he has turned more into a baseliner. He still plays the all court game half the time but he has become more of a solid consistent baseliner for the most part. He doesn't utilize his net game as much anymore. When he does it makes a pretty big difference though. I still consider him an all court player but he has been leaning towards more baseline game than all court game as of late.

Now a question to the crazy fed tards? What the **** is the big deal? Fed being all court or not doesn't take away 15 slams. Pete Sampras serve and volleyed his way to 14 slams..thats not really all court game in my eyes...I still acknowledge him as great. Lendl baselined his way to 8 slams and 3 dominant seasons..where does being a baseliner take away from that. Nadal played tennis practically in the stands at points on his way to 6 slams..never once did that hurt him. Since when has being a baseliner been a bad thing? Tell Ivan Lendl, Bjorn Borg, Jimmy Connors, Andre Agassi, Jim Courier, Steffi Graf, Monica Seles and Chris Evert that. Nothing wrong with playing at the line for 2/3 of the match.

Federer doesn't play his all court game as much anymore. He still uses it as Jenny points out in the big moments, but face it when you can win more than half your matches without stepping foot away from the baseline..why bother?

That's exacly the issue. Sampras fans say Pete was a true all-courter while Federer is a pure baseline player. We are simply saying it's a wrong statement.

Bud
10-18-2009, 01:10 PM
Roger circa 2002-2006 was definitely an all court player.. 2007-2009 he has turned more into a baseliner. He still plays the all court game half the time but he has become more of a solid consistent baseliner for the most part. He doesn't utilize his net game as much anymore. When he does it makes a pretty big difference though. I still consider him an all court player but he has been leaning towards more baseline game than all court game as of late.

Now a question to the crazy fed tards? What the **** is the big deal? Fed being all court or not doesn't take away 15 slams. Pete Sampras serve and volleyed his way to 14 slams..thats not really all court game in my eyes...I still acknowledge him as great. Lendl baselined his way to 8 slams and 3 dominant seasons..where does being a baseliner take away from that. Nadal played tennis practically in the stands at points on his way to 6 slams..never once did that hurt him. Since when has being a baseliner been a bad thing? Tell Ivan Lendl, Bjorn Borg, Jimmy Connors, Andre Agassi, Jim Courier, Steffi Graf, Monica Seles and Chris Evert that. Nothing wrong with playing at the line for 2/3 of the match.

Federer doesn't play his all court game as much anymore. He still uses it as Jenny points out in the big moments, but face it when you can win more than half your matches without stepping foot away from the baseline..why bother?

You hit the nail on the head. Federer plays an all-court game when he needs to. He wins more points (by far) from the baseline.

egn
10-18-2009, 01:12 PM
That's exacly the issue. Sampras fans say Pete was a true all-courter while Federer is a pure baseline player. We are simply saying it's a wrong statement.

Where was once in this thread said sampras is an all court player? Who says that..almost everyone agrees Sampras serve and volleys. You are saying the fact that someone considered Federer a baseliner a wrong statement..if you point me to someone saying Sampras is an all court player I will surely make a counter arguement there.

namelessone
10-18-2009, 01:12 PM
I can't understand how someone can ask this with a straight face. Yes Federer is an all-courter but in today's tennis climate he doesn't need to be. He can S&V but it isn't something he does often because he DOESN'T NEED DO.

Federer beat a past his prime Sampras(who still played very well) on the old fast grass of wimbledon.That says something. The first final after wimbledon changed the grass was between hewitt and nalbandian,two baseliners. Federer saw this and stuck to the baseline game,not only at wimbledon but on all the surfaces. As much as some Federer fans want to hype up his S&V game I doubt Federer could have made 7 straight WB finals on fast grass using S&V as the main style(if the best S&V'er in history couldn't do it,I doubt Fed could) like he did on slower grass with his baseline style. Why? Because while Federer knows how to S&V,he is much,much better from the baseline.

But make no mistake,he is an all courter.

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 01:13 PM
You hit the nail on the head. Federer plays an all-court game when he needs to. He wins more points by far from the baseline.

I think Wimbledon is truly the place where Fed's all-courtness shines. He just loves to express himself there in every way possible, and his variety of shots usually at Wimbly is insane.

JeMar
10-18-2009, 01:13 PM
Where was once in this thread said sampras is an all court player? Who says that..almost everyone agrees Sampras serve and volleys. You are saying the fact that someone considered Federer a baseliner a wrong statement..if you point me to someone saying Sampras is an all court player I will surely make a counter arguement there.

Cesc Febregas and the rest of the Sampras brigade would like a word with you.

Also, watch Sampras matches before 1999. He was all-court.

World Beater
10-18-2009, 01:14 PM
nadal is an all court player. his all court skills were evident yesterday.

daydenko made him run all over the court!!!

ZhengJieisagoddess
10-18-2009, 01:14 PM
Well, he's sure not baseline or serve-and-volley. Of course he's an all-court player.

luvly
10-18-2009, 01:14 PM
Where was once in this thread said sampras is an all court player? Who says that..almost everyone agrees Sampras serve and volleys. You are saying the fact that someone considered Federer a baseliner a wrong statement..if you point me to someone saying Sampras is an all court player I will surely make a counter arguement there.

it hasnt been said in this thread but OP has said it in other threads....

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 01:14 PM
Where was once in this thread said sampras is an all court player? Who says that..almost everyone agrees Sampras serve and volleys. You are saying the fact that someone considered Federer a baseliner a wrong statement..if you point me to someone saying Sampras is an all court player I will surely make a counter arguement there.

This is a sequel thread to another thread in which Cesc and NamRanger hailed Pete's baseline game and called him a true all-courter while Fed was simply a baseliner. I can't remember the thread's name, it's been a week or so since then. Maybe Cesc can provide a link.

JeMar
10-18-2009, 01:15 PM
nadal is an all court player. his all court skills were evident yesterday.

daydenko made him run all over the court!!!

Zing.

(10)

JeMar
10-18-2009, 01:17 PM
This is a sequel thread to another thread in which Cesc and NamRanger hailed Pete's baseline game and called him a true all-courter while Fed was simply a baseliner. I can't remember the thread's name, it's been a week or so since then. Maybe Cesc can provide a link.

Clicky, clicky! (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=291305&page=11)

egn
10-18-2009, 01:17 PM
Cesc Febregas and the rest of the Sampras brigade would like a word with you.

Also, watch Sampras matches before 1999. He was all-court.

Sampras in his early career had an all court game but at the same time I would never consider him to be an all court player. He won far more points at the net then at the baseline. He is in a way the opposite of Federer. Then again it is all a matter of opinion, but Sampras definitely was a serve and volley player at least in my eyes. It definitely wasn't as numerous at the beginning but by 96-97 he was always getting to the net. Again nothing wrong with that.

So does this make Johnny Mac, Stefan Edberg and Boris Becker all court players? They too could hit shots from the baseline.

JeMar
10-18-2009, 01:19 PM
Sampras in his early career had an all court game but at the same time I would never consider him to be an all court player. He won far more points at the net then at the baseline. He is in a way the opposite of Federer. Then again it is all a matter of opinion, but Sampras definitely was a serve and volley player at least in my eyes. It definitely wasn't as numerous at the beginning but by 96-97 he was always getting to the net. Again nothing wrong with that.

So does this make Johnny Mac, Stefan Edberg and Boris Becker all court players? They too could hit shots from the baseline.

This goes with my opinion that there are different kinds of all-court players. Sampras was more aggressive than Federer, but they're both all-court players.

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 01:19 PM
I can't understand how someone can ask this with a straight face. Yes Federer is an all-courter but in today's tennis climate he doesn't need to be. He can S&V but it isn't something he does often because he DOESN'T NEED DO.

Federer beat a past his prime Sampras(who still played very well) on the old fast grass of wimbledon.That says something. The first final after wimbledon changed the grass was between hewitt and nalbandian,two baseliners. Federer saw this and stuck to the baseline game,not only at wimbledon but on all the surfaces. As much as some Federer fans want to hype up his S&V game I doubt Federer could have made 7 straight WB finals on fast grass using S&V as the main style(if the best S&V'er in history couldn't do it,I doubt Fed could) like he did on slower grass with his baseline style. Why? Because while Federer knows how to S&V,he is much,much better from the baseline.

But make no mistake,he is an all courter.

Many people refer to an all couter is a guy who can both play from the baseline and also plays S&V. My definition of an all courter is a bit different, it is more about the variety of shots a player uses rather than the quantity. In every match of Federer, for example, you'll see at least one drive volley, at least one chip and charge attempt, some aces, great variety on 1st and 2nd serves, occasional rush to the net, mixing up the pace with slices (short slices to bring players in, or deep defensive slices), some drop shots, overheads, etc.

Yes, most of the time he stays at the baseline, but Fed is a player who's tranistion game is very good and can adapt his gameplan at any given time.

Bud
10-18-2009, 01:19 PM
I guess we all have different definitions of what an 'all-court' player is, exactly.

IMO, Federer has the ability to play all-court tennis but he chooses not to the majority of the time.

IMO, a true all-court player enjoys and uses every facet of the game and all parts of the court equally. Federer seems to go into all-court mode when he's in trouble and wants to mix it up against certain opponents. That's smart tennis but it doesn't necessarily make him an all-court player, IMO.

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 01:20 PM
Clicky, clicky! (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=291305&page=11)

Thanks JeMar :)

egn
10-18-2009, 01:21 PM
This goes with my opinion that there are different kinds of all-court players. Sampras was more aggressive than Federer, but they're both all-court players.

Agreed. It really is all how you look at all court tennis and what you think it is.

TMF
10-18-2009, 01:22 PM
This thread just reminds us once again about these *****...

http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/9343/sampras3.jpg

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 01:23 PM
This thread just reminds us once again about these *****...

http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/9343/sampras3.jpg

This never gets old. An instant classic.

egn
10-18-2009, 01:26 PM
Many people refer to an all couter is a guy who can both play from the baseline and also plays S&V. My definition of an all courter is a bit different, it is more about the variety of shots a player uses rather than the quantity. In every match of Federer, for example, you'll see at least one drive volley, at least one chip and charge attempt, some aces, great variety on 1st and 2nd serves, occasional rush to the net, mixing up the pace with slices (short slices to bring players in, or deep defensive slices), some drop shots, overheads, etc.

Yes, most of the time he stays at the baseline, but Fed is a player who's tranistion game is very good and can adapt his gameplan at any given time.

In my opinion an all court player is one who was meshed all the various styles together seamlessly into their game. They don't favor one more than the other and are not as predictable. They can utilize a specific style when they need to and are comfortable in most situations. Honestly all court players are rare and some players might play more of an all court game depending on the surface. Borg is a great example. At the French Open Borg was defensive baseliner true and true while at wimbledon Borg played this all court game that was pretty wowing. One of the things that made Borg so good at wimbleodn was his all court style there made him unpredictible at times. Just watch that five set thriller with Johnny Mac and then watch his five set thriller with Lendl at the French Open and you would think you are watching two different tennis players.

cuddles26
10-18-2009, 01:32 PM
Carrying on from another thread. I vote no, what do you think?

That should be considered in the context of the current game. The game today has morphed into a baseline fest. So relative to the field today yes Federer is definitely an all courter. In the past he probably wouldnt have been, but by todays standards he is one of the most all court players.

Carsomyr
10-18-2009, 01:37 PM
In my opinion an all court player is one who was meshed all the various styles together seamlessly into their game. They don't favor one more than the other and are not as predictable. They can utilize a specific style when they need to and are comfortable in most situations. Honestly all court players are rare and some players might play more of an all court game depending on the surface. Borg is a great example. At the French Open Borg was defensive baseliner true and true while at wimbledon Borg played this all court game that was pretty wowing. One of the things that made Borg so good at wimbleodn was his all court style there made him unpredictible at times. Just watch that five set thriller with Johnny Mac and then watch his five set thriller with Lendl at the French Open and you would think you are watching two different tennis players.

But there's almost no doubt that Federer favors baseline play most of all and Sampras fancies his chances at net. Federer S&V's occasionally to mix up his play and even in the early/mid 90s, Sampras still preferred getting to the net.

I like JeMar's definition; all-court isn't necessarily characterized by one concrete and unmalleable style. It can be more broadly interpreted depending on the level of aggression that players prefer.

paulorenzo
10-18-2009, 01:47 PM
Roger circa 2002-2006 was definitely an all court player.. 2007-2009 he has turned more into a baseliner. He still plays the all court game half the time but he has become more of a solid consistent baseliner for the most part. He doesn't utilize his net game as much anymore. When he does it makes a pretty big difference though. I still consider him an all court player but he has been leaning towards more baseline game than all court game as of late.

Now a question to the crazy fed tards? What the **** is the big deal? Fed being all court or not doesn't take away 15 slams. Pete Sampras serve and volleyed his way to 14 slams..thats not really all court game in my eyes...I still acknowledge him as great. Lendl baselined his way to 8 slams and 3 dominant seasons..where does being a baseliner take away from that. Nadal played tennis practically in the stands at points on his way to 6 slams..never once did that hurt him. Since when has being a baseliner been a bad thing? Tell Ivan Lendl, Bjorn Borg, Jimmy Connors, Andre Agassi, Jim Courier, Steffi Graf, Monica Seles and Chris Evert that. Nothing wrong with playing at the line for 2/3 of the match.

Federer doesn't play his all court game as much anymore. He still uses it as Jenny points out in the big moments, but face it when you can win more than half your matches without stepping foot away from the baseline..why bother?

great post. i've noticed that he doesn't attack the net as much as before. but i also did notice a pleasant change in his baseline game. especially in Cincinnati against murray this summer. he was hitting huge forehands from neutral positions a lot more often than before. honestly, in the first set, i think that's the biggest i've seen federer hit the whole year.

and i agree with the general consensus' definition that an all court player is one who has options in how he or she plays a point, in accordance to who he or she plays across the net. an all courter is not one who finishes 50% of the points at net and 50% of the points at the baseline in every match. an all courter will use whatever option he has that can work well against the opponent, which a lot of times against good players who can pass really well, is not going to be serve and volleying every point, unless your pete sampras who lived and died by his s&v.

grafselesfan
10-18-2009, 02:02 PM
No, not really. A true all courter is fairly balanced as far as both how much they play, and how well they play, from all parts of the court. Federer is neither.

boojay
10-18-2009, 02:11 PM
And also add these four options:

3. Of course!
4. No doubt!
5. Without question!

and

6. You have to deaf, dumb, and blind to think otherwise!

:)

I vote 6, which makes the OP the only one! It's ok, he's blind so he can't read this. Even if he weren't, he'd be too dumb to understand. Lastly, I can always say it to his face since he's deaf. My ultimate weapon would be to remove his bridge, then he'd have nowhere to hide.

UsualSuspect
10-18-2009, 02:11 PM
Why are people attacking Cesc continously?

Anyways, I think he is Cesc, He actually attacks short balls most of the time and transitions into the net. He also uses chip and charge and S&V sometimes.

Cesc Fabregas
10-18-2009, 02:16 PM
Why are people attacking Cesc continously?

Anyways, I think he is Cesc, He actually attacks short balls most of the time and transitions into the net. He also uses chip and charge and S&V sometimes.

Thanks for the support man.

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 02:20 PM
The current result for this poll is hilarious. Federer is NOT, and i repeat is NOT an all court player. Haas is a typical all court player.

World Beater
10-18-2009, 02:21 PM
The current result for this poll is hilarious. Federer is NOT, and i repeat is NOT an all court player. Haas is a typical all court player.

agreed.

federer is an all-court mug.

UsualSuspect
10-18-2009, 02:22 PM
Thanks for the support man.
No Problem man.

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 02:24 PM
Why are people attacking Cesc continously?

Anyways, I think he is Cesc, He actually attacks short balls most of the time and transitions into the net. He also uses chip and charge and S&V sometimes.

Nobody's attacking Cesc, but he made a poll to hear people's opinions, so here they are. I actually respect Cesc (although I disagree with him on many things), which is why I bothered writing a full reply in this thread and explain why I disagree with him.

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 02:25 PM
The current result for this poll is hilarious. Federer is NOT, and i repeat is NOT an all court player. Haas is a typical all court player.

Funny as many call Haas a Federer clone.

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 02:26 PM
Funny as many call Haas a Federer clone.

Are you kidding me? Haas has a greater backhand, greater volley and MUCH more variety as opposed to Feddy.

NamRanger
10-18-2009, 02:29 PM
Funny as many call Haas a Federer clone.



Since when is Haas a clone of Federer. Haas came before Federer mind you.

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 02:32 PM
Are you kidding me? Haas has a greater backhand, greater volley and MUCH more variety as opposed to Feddy.

Right. Haas also has a better BH slice, a better serve and a better forehand.

NamRanger
10-18-2009, 02:36 PM
Right. Haas also has a better BH slice, a better serve and a better forehand.


No, it's definitely true Haas has a better backhand drive, a better volley, and better allcourt abilities. Federer is simply a better athlete and a better ball striker off the forehand and the serve, two of the most important shots in tennis. Thus his ranking and thus Haas' ranking.

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 02:37 PM
Right. Haas also has a better BH slice, a better serve and a better forehand.

Haas is vastly underated it seems. When he's on, his serve is a weapon and so too is the forehand. He S&V's often, plays from the baseline frequently and changes his game depending on the opponent and score. Just accept it, Haas has more variety than Federer.

Steve132
10-18-2009, 02:38 PM
Right. Haas also has a better BH slice, a better serve and a better forehand.

Indeed. That's why Haas has won 15 majors and Federer has none - oh, wait .... :)

Swissv2
10-18-2009, 02:39 PM
Are you kidding me? Haas has a greater backhand, greater volley and MUCH more variety as opposed to Feddy.

Unfortunately Haas' greater backhand, greater volley, and better variety (in otherwords a "better" player than Federer) hasn't really gotten him that many grandslams.

Sucks how the "better player" isn't as successful.

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 02:39 PM
Haas is vastly underated it seems. When he's on, his serve is a weapon and so too is the forehand. He S&V's often, plays from the baseline frequently and changes his game depending on the opponent and score. Just accept it, Haas has more variety than Federer.

God I love it when people can't get other's opinions so they just force them to accept it. Don't get me wrong, Haas is a player I really like, but just watch his match with Fed this year at Wimbly, there's no way Haas had more variety.

boojay
10-18-2009, 02:40 PM
That settles it, Haas is the GOAT, which makes Nadal a pusher.

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 02:42 PM
Indeed. That's why Haas has won 15 majors and Federer has none - oh, wait .... :)

I wonder how many slams would Haas have by now if it wasn't for injuries. 17? 20? Maybe more? I mean, he's the perfect player, has more vairety, better serve, better strokes, better volleys. The one dimentional Federer should thank Haas was never in top form thus Haas allowed Fed to win all those slams.

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 02:42 PM
That settles it, Haas is the GOAT, which makes Nadal a pusher.

Actually, Hrbaty is GOAT, Haas is 2nd.

boojay
10-18-2009, 02:44 PM
Actually, Hrbaty is GOAT, Haas is 2nd.

My bad.....

President of Serve/Volley
10-18-2009, 02:44 PM
All Courter is: Marat Safin?

But, yes, TMF is an all courter, although he doesn't volley like he had in the past.

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 02:45 PM
God I love it when people can't get other's opinions so they just force them to accept it. Don't get me wrong, Haas is a player I really like, but just watch his match with Fed this year at Wimbly, there's no way Haas had more variety.

I'm just clarifying the truth. Nothing more, nothing less. It's your loss if you don't want to take that into account. Furthermore, the reason Federer won that match was because he was striking the ball well and Haas can't compete when it comes to those rallies. Just to remind you, losing to someone does not mean they have more variety. Unless your P_Agony of course.

JohnnySpot
10-18-2009, 02:46 PM
According to P_Agony,

it's better to be the "best player in the world" than to win "grand slams".

Whahhahahahahahaha

DarthFed
10-18-2009, 02:47 PM
According to P_Agony,

it's better to be the "best player in the world" than to win "grand slams".

Whahhahahahahahaha

Wait, what?

boojay
10-18-2009, 02:50 PM
Wait, what?

It's ok, kids and crack these days.

DarthFed
10-18-2009, 02:50 PM
It's ok, kids and crack these days.

Oh i see..makes sense.

zagor
10-18-2009, 02:58 PM
Back in 2003,2004,2005 I'd say he was an all-courter,since 2006 he was more of a pure baseliner with a bit of an all-court flair.He did play some nice all-court tennis in 2008 USO though,went to the net quite a bit,was nice to see for a change.

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 03:00 PM
Don't get me wrong, Haas is a player I really like, but just watch his match with Fed this year at Wimbly, there's no way Haas had more variety.

This is just soo daft i had to create a new sig.

Omega_7000
10-18-2009, 03:02 PM
This thread just reminds us once again about these *****...

http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/9343/sampras3.jpg

Hilarious! :D

Noveson
10-18-2009, 03:10 PM
God I love it when people can't get other's opinions so they just force them to accept it. Don't get me wrong, Haas is a player I really like, but just watch his match with Fed this year at Wimbly, there's no way Haas had more variety.

Actually, Hrbaty is GOAT, Haas is 2nd.

Hahaha. I love it when trolls whine about things where they are the worst offenders.

Has anybody else ever just looked down the list of P_Agony's posts? They are ridiculous.

Federer is obviously an all court player. What gets me is when people say Nadal isn't because the elitists don't want him to play the "correct" way. They try as hard as they can to relegate Nadal to having no style, no brain, no skill, etc and it is ridiculous.

NamRanger
10-18-2009, 03:13 PM
Unfortunately Haas' greater backhand, greater volley, and better variety (in otherwords a "better" player than Federer) hasn't really gotten him that many grandslams.

Sucks how the "better player" isn't as successful.



Federer has two shots over Haas, which are the forehand and the serve, which both happen to be the most important shots in the game. Federer is also taller, stronger, and a better athlete, which also happens to help alot.



Haas definitely plays at the net better, and covers the net better. He transitions well, and he hits the stronger backhand drive. However, Haas lacks athleticism and power, two things that are integral to the modern game.

President
10-18-2009, 03:16 PM
Federer has two shots over Haas, which are the forehand and the serve, which both happen to be the most important shots in the game. Federer is also taller, stronger, and a better athlete, which also happens to help alot.



Haas definitely plays at the net better, and covers the net better. He transitions well, and he hits the stronger backhand drive. However, Haas lacks athleticism and power, two things that are integral to the modern game.

Haas is 6 feet 2 inches tall..he has an inch on Federer. He is also heavier; makes sense that he should have at least a similar degree of power.

Haas's career was really crippled by injury..if not for that I think he could have been a potential GS winner. He definitely uses more variety than Federer, but its not as effective as Federer's limited use of variety most of the time.

Sartorius
10-18-2009, 03:27 PM
Looks like a lot of posters said the same thing, but no harm in repeating it: He might be playing more from the baseline now, but that's because he chooses to do so; it's a more beneficial style in today's game. This doesn't take away the fact that he can, he did and actually he still does play all-court tennis.

Speaking of Haas reminds me, his match with Federer at Wimbledon was high quality and should answer the question in this thread:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dctc8_RnhJk (the first point alone should tell you something...)

JeMar
10-18-2009, 03:34 PM
Unfortunately Haas' greater backhand, greater volley, and better variety (in otherwords a "better" player than Federer) hasn't really gotten him that many grandslams.

Sucks how the "better player" isn't as successful.

Remember it was the great Roger Federer who once said, "the better player doesn't always win."

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 03:40 PM
Remember it was the great Roger Federer who once said, "the better player doesn't always win."

Is that reminiscent of the French Open 2009?

Sartorius
10-18-2009, 03:41 PM
Remember it was the great Roger Federer who once said, "the better player doesn't always win."

..."in a fifth set."

boojay
10-18-2009, 03:42 PM
Hilarious! :D

That dude's post needs to be made into a quick reply button. It's the most epic of all epic posts.

JeMar
10-18-2009, 03:44 PM
The current result for tgis poll is hilarious. Federer is NOT, and i repeat is NOT an all court player. Haas is a typical all court player.

Is that why, when they played at Wimbledon, Federer came in 43 times and won 88% of his points at net, while Haas only came in 37 times and only won 57% of those points?

Eagerly awaiting your response.

Swissv2
10-18-2009, 03:45 PM
Remember it was the great Roger Federer who once said, "the better player doesn't always win."

...but the better player needs to win most of the time, otherwise, that person really isn't the better player.

Hence:

Haas (0 Grandslams)
Federer (15 Grandslams)

Swissv2
10-18-2009, 03:46 PM
Is that why, when they played at Wimbledon, Federer came in 43 times and won 88% of his points at net, while Haas only came in 37 times and only won 57% of those points?

Eagerly awaiting your response.

Because Adi-das believes that unless you come to the net 100% of the time, you are not an all court player AND in his own mind, Haas went to the net three times as many as Federer and won 4 times as many points as Federer ;)

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 03:47 PM
Is that why, when they played at Wimbledon, Federer came in 43 times and won 88% of his points at net, while Haas only came in 37 times and only won 57% of those points?

Eagerly awaiting your response.

Federer is a better ball striker. That's why Haas struggles against him. Nonetheless, Haas has more variety in his game. BTW, please add a link to these stats or i will just presume they came out of your rear end.

Sartorius
10-18-2009, 03:47 PM
Federer is NOT, and i repeat is NOT an all court player.

Like a radio call to control tower from a falling airplane.

"Federer is not an all court player I repeat NOT an all court player mayday-mayday!"

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 03:52 PM
Because Adi-das believes that unless you come to the net 100% of the time, you are not an all court player.

That's quite simply false. You obviously don't know the meaning of an all court player.

volleynets
10-18-2009, 03:52 PM
Being a baseliner does not make a player one-dimensional :roll:

Um yea.......... I know. I was trying to figure out what kind of game he considers Nadal to have if Federer is a "baseliner." Pay attention next time.

JeMar
10-18-2009, 03:54 PM
Federer is a better ball striker. That's why Haas struggles against him. Nonetheless, Haas has more variety in his game. BTW, please add a link to these stats or i will just presume they came out of your rear end.

I'm on my BlackBerry right now, so it's a little too time-consuming to do all that. Just google "2009 Wimbledon Federer Haas stats" and are for yourself. It takes all of two seconds. If you are measured by the game you employ when the chips are down and the pressure is on, we can see that Haas is less willing to go to net than Federer.

volleynets
10-18-2009, 03:57 PM
Is that reminiscent of the French Open 2009?

Your sig is so stupid. Not to mention backwards of what he was saying. By the way, Federer had more success at net than Haas in that match. What match did you watch? Reading comprehension?

volleynets
10-18-2009, 03:58 PM
That's quite simply false. You obviously don't know the meaning of an all court player.

Then explain it smart one. Your sig also implies that Haas has more variety because he lost. Didn't you mean it the opposite way? FAIL.

Also, mention a few examples of current players you consider to be open-court so that people may actually know what you are talking about and possibly even agree.

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 04:01 PM
I'm on my BlackBerry right now, so it's a little too time-consuming to do all that.

Classic! You're not fooling anyone i'm afraid! :lol: Please, don't act like a fool. I've caught you out and there's no hiding.

Looking forward to your reply.

Bud
10-18-2009, 04:01 PM
Um yea.......... I know. I was trying to figure out what kind of game he considers Nadal to have if Federer is a "baseliner." Pay attention next time.

Who cares... this thread is about Federer in case you're having trouble reading the title :-?

msc886
10-18-2009, 04:01 PM
Federer is one of the most complete players of all time. Although his strength is on the baseline, he could do a variety of other things quite well. He serves well, he can volley well as seen in his early days by winning Wimby 2003 by S&V. Even on the baseline, he can attack well defend well, has good variety (flat, topspin, angle, slice) and has a good defence to offence transition.

Yes I would consider him an all-courter.

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 04:04 PM
Your sig is so stupid. Not to mention backwards of what he was saying. By the way, Federer had more success at net than Haas in that match. What match did you watch? Reading comprehension?

Haas is more solid at the net than Federer. you are implying the opposite, which makes you come across as naive.

luvly
10-18-2009, 04:07 PM
Federer is a better ball striker. That's why Haas struggles against him. Nonetheless, Haas has more variety in his game. BTW, please add a link to these stats or i will just presume they came out of your rear end.

Centre Court - Gentlemen's Singles - Semis
Tommy Haas GER (24) 63 5 3
Match Completed

Roger Federer SUI (2) 77 7 6
Match Statistics Serve Statistics

Elapsed Time by Set: 46 44 32




Match Summary

Haas (GER) Federer (SUI)

1st Serve % 72 of 110 = 65 % 62 of 83 = 75 %

Aces 11 11

Double Faults 5 1

Unforced Errors 31 15

Winning % on 1st Serve 53 of 72 = 74 % 55 of 62 = 89 %

Winning % on 2nd Serve 17 of 38 = 45 % 17 of 21 = 81 %

Winners (Including Service) 28 49

Receiving Points Won 11 of 83 = 13 % 40 of 110 = 36 %

Break Point Conversions 0 of 0 = 0 % 2 of 8 = 25 %

Net Approaches 21 of 37 = 57 % 38 of 43 = 88 %

Total Points Won 81 112

Fastest Serve Speed 127 MPH 130 MPH

Average 1st Serve Speed 119 MPH 118 MPH

Average 2nd Serve Speed 102 MPH 98 MPH


http://wimbledon.org/en_GB/scores/stats/day19/1602ms.html

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 04:07 PM
Then explain it smart one. Your sig also implies that Haas has more variety because he lost. Didn't you mean it the opposite way? FAIL.
.

You clearly don't know anything about tennis. You are just like P_Agony, Federer worshipper who can't see through the smoke. I think your incompetence can truly be marked as failure.

TheFifthSet
10-18-2009, 04:11 PM
He's a baseliner with some all-court tendancies.

By todays standards, yes, I would call him an all-courter.

TheFifthSet
10-18-2009, 04:12 PM
Centre Court - Gentlemen's Singles - Semis
Tommy Haas GER (24) 63 5 3
Match Completed

Roger Federer SUI (2) 77 7 6
Match Statistics Serve Statistics

Elapsed Time by Set: 46 44 32




Match Summary

Haas (GER) Federer (SUI)

1st Serve % 72 of 110 = 65 % 62 of 83 = 75 %

Aces 11 11

Double Faults 5 1

Unforced Errors 31 15

Winning % on 1st Serve 53 of 72 = 74 % 55 of 62 = 89 %

Winning % on 2nd Serve 17 of 38 = 45 % 17 of 21 = 81 %

Winners (Including Service) 28 49

Receiving Points Won 11 of 83 = 13 % 40 of 110 = 36 %

Break Point Conversions 0 of 0 = 0 % 2 of 8 = 25 %

Net Approaches 21 of 37 = 57 % 38 of 43 = 88 %

Total Points Won 81 112

Fastest Serve Speed 127 MPH 130 MPH

Average 1st Serve Speed 119 MPH 118 MPH

Average 2nd Serve Speed 102 MPH 98 MPH


http://wimbledon.org/en_GB/scores/stats/day19/1602ms.html

Really great serving day for Federer.

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 04:13 PM
Centre Court - Gentlemen's Singles - Semis
Tommy Haas GER (24) 63 5 3
Match Completed

Roger Federer SUI (2) 77 7 6
Match Statistics Serve Statistics

Elapsed Time by Set: 46 44 32




Match Summary

Haas (GER) Federer (SUI)

1st Serve % 72 of 110 = 65 % 62 of 83 = 75 %

Aces 11 11

Double Faults 5 1

Unforced Errors 31 15

Winning % on 1st Serve 53 of 72 = 74 % 55 of 62 = 89 %

Winning % on 2nd Serve 17 of 38 = 45 % 17 of 21 = 81 %

Winners (Including Service) 28 49

Receiving Points Won 11 of 83 = 13 % 40 of 110 = 36 %

Break Point Conversions 0 of 0 = 0 % 2 of 8 = 25 %

Net Approaches 21 of 37 = 57 % 38 of 43 = 88 %

Total Points Won 81 112

Fastest Serve Speed 127 MPH 130 MPH

Average 1st Serve Speed 119 MPH 118 MPH

Average 2nd Serve Speed 102 MPH 98 MPH


http://wimbledon.org/en_GB/scores/stats/day19/1602ms.html

Fair enough, but again, Federer being soo dominant with the forehand allowed him to put away easy volleys.

volleynets
10-18-2009, 04:13 PM
You clearly don't know anything about tennis. You are just like P_Agony, Federer worshipper who can't see through the smoke. I think your incompetence can truly be marked as failure.

Even if I was a Federer worshipper. Seeing through the smoke would still tell the obvious, like that Federer was more successful at net than Haas at Wimbledon. And that Federer is an All-Court Player. Waiting for your examples still. Posters like you when asked questions to prove their point just ignore it to come up with troll posts like that one. Why don't you prove for once that you actually know something about tennis.

In fact there are the stats for you thanks luvly. There is your fail right there. And your sig is still the opposite of what you meant to say. How old are you?

JeMar
10-18-2009, 04:14 PM
Classic! You're not fooling anyone i'm afraid! :lol: Please, don't act like a fool. I've caught you out and there's no hiding.

Looking forward to your reply.

Since you're apparently too stubborn (or thickskulled) to look it up yourself, Lemme go ahead and google that for you. (http://tinyurl.com/yjqexbh)

volleynets
10-18-2009, 04:17 PM
nadal is an all court player. his all court skills were evident yesterday.

daydenko made him run all over the court!!!

HAHA that is funny. Sorry if I interpreted your posts wrongly before.

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 04:18 PM
Since you're apparently too stubborn (or thickskulled) to look it up yourself, Lemme go ahead and google that for you. (http://tinyurl.com/yjqexbh)

Sorry, you brought up the stats, you acknowledge them. You failed to do so, and therefore i had every right to call you out. Oh, i'm on an ipod touch and the internet browser doesn't allow me to use Google...

volleynets
10-18-2009, 04:20 PM
You clearly don't know anything about tennis. You are just like P_Agony, Federer worshipper who can't see through the smoke. I think your incompetence can truly be marked as failure.

By the way thank you for ignoring half of my post let me repeat it for you.

What do you define all-court as and name some examples of current players you consider all court. Why don't you prove to me that you know anything about tennis since you tell everyone else they don't.

JeMar
10-18-2009, 04:20 PM
Sorry, you brought up the stats, you acknowledge them. You failed to do so, and therefore i had every right to call you out. Oh, i'm on an ipod touch and the internet browser doesn't allow me to use Google...

Why would I, or anyone, make something like that up?

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 04:22 PM
Even if I was a Federer worshipper. Seeing through the smoke would still tell the obvious, like that Federer was more successful at net than Haas at Wimbledon. And that Federer is an All-Court Player. Waiting for your examples still. Posters like you when asked questions to prove their point just ignore it to come up with troll posts like that one. Why don't you prove for once that you actually know something about tennis.

In fact there are the stats for you thanks luvly. There is your fail right there. And your sig is still the opposite of what you meant to say. How old are you?

The fact that you don't know what an all court player is just leaves me to think that you don't know anything else regarding the game. The funny thing is, you have yet to add any light on what an all court player is when asked. Again, i will simply presume that you are either small minded, or just quite simply naive.

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 04:25 PM
Why would I, or anyone, make something like that up?

It's happened with other posters, most recently Drakulie. Made up stats to make Federer appear greater than Sampras by a landslide. Fortunately, he got caught out. Could of easily been the same regarding you however.

volleynets
10-18-2009, 04:27 PM
The fact that you don't know what an all court player is just leaves me to think that you don't know anything else regarding the game. The funny thing is, you have yet to add any light on what an all court player is when asked. Again, i will simply presume that you are either small minded, or just quite simply naive.

Well then for the LAST time tell me what an all-court player is. You are the one being asked and ignoring all the posts. The fact that you fail to even define it shows that you simply have NO idea what you are talking about. It's pretty funny how you are trying to shift that over to me. Are you a new username for King Of Aces or something?

JeMar
10-18-2009, 04:32 PM
Well then for the LAST time tell me what an all-court player is. You are the one being asked and ignoring all the posts. The fact that you fail to even define it shows that you simply have NO idea what you are talking about. It's pretty funny how you are trying to shift that over to me. Are you a new username for King Of Aces or something?

Ahhhhh! He who must not be named!!!

volleynets
10-18-2009, 04:42 PM
Ahhhhh! He who must not be named!!!

Sorry! I saw a similarity in lack of information.

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 04:45 PM
This is just soo daft i had to create a new sig.

Who said it's because he was losing. Fed had more variety in that match, just watch the video and stop making up stuff.

JeMar
10-18-2009, 04:45 PM
Sorry! I saw a similarity in lack of information.

This one's for you.

http://el.toonpool.com/user/1679/files/rafael_nadal_418195.jpg

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 04:46 PM
Hahaha. I love it when trolls whine about things where they are the worst offenders.

Has anybody else ever just looked down the list of P_Agony's posts? They are ridiculous.

Federer is obviously an all court player. What gets me is when people say Nadal isn't because the elitists don't want him to play the "correct" way. They try as hard as they can to relegate Nadal to having no style, no brain, no skill, etc and it is ridiculous.

The 2nd post was sarcasm. Have you ever heard of that, gj011?

JeMar
10-18-2009, 04:46 PM
It's happened with other posters, most recently Drakulie. Made up stats to make Federer appear greater than Sampras by a landslide. Fortunately, he got caught out. Could of easily been the same regarding you however.

Oh, and when are you going to change the ******** sig? Federer did come to net more often that Haas and was a LOT more successful there.

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 04:47 PM
According to P_Agony,

it's better to be the "best player in the world" than to win "grand slams".

Whahhahahahahahaha

Exactly. :)

10 chars.

JeMar
10-18-2009, 04:47 PM
The 2nd post was sarcasm. Have you ever heard of that, gj011?

Pretty sure that one's not gj011.

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 04:50 PM
Oh, and when are you going to change the ******** sig? Federer did come to net more often that Haas and was a LOT more successful there.

But don't you get it JeMar, if a player wins it means the loser had more variety (Adi-das's fascinating way to analyze a tennis match)

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 04:51 PM
Pretty sure that one's not gj011.

I know he isn't, but he's just as bad. He's a gj011 at heart.

JeMar
10-18-2009, 05:06 PM
The sig reminds me of

http://memegenerator.net/Instances/164/Philosoraptor-Has-anyone-really-been-far-even-as-decided-to-use-even-go-want-to-do-look-more-like57.jpg

P_Agony
10-18-2009, 05:06 PM
You clearly don't know anything about tennis. You are just like P_Agony, Federer worshipper who can't see through the smoke. I think your incompetence can truly be marked as failure.

So this is what, the 4th guy who knows nothing about tennis? And I guess you do, your trolliness.

volleynets
10-18-2009, 05:15 PM
This one's for you.

http://el.toonpool.com/user/1679/files/rafael_nadal_418195.jpg

HAHAHA! If only we could add friends on this forum.

BreakPoint
10-18-2009, 06:30 PM
I know Federer and his fans have romantic ideas about him S&Ving like Rod Laver but Roger is a baseliner, all his strengths indicate that forehand, movement, footwork etc.
Yet, Federer spanked Sampras at Wimbledon by serving and volleying almost 100% of the time. :oops:

kishnabe
10-18-2009, 06:35 PM
If it weren't for these trolls that appear and make funny polls and funny posts I wouldn't be coming on TT.

Noveson
10-18-2009, 06:41 PM
I know he isn't, but he's just as bad. He's a gj011 at heart.


:rolleyes: You're just going to accuse everyone who favors Nadal over Federer of this. It's completely ridiculous when to accuse me of being a troll when I post less than 3 times a day, and probably one in 10 of those are about Nadal/Federer. Even the Fed fans can see how ridiculous you are. You post more than almost all the population, and EVERY SINGLE post you making is defending federer or attacking Nadal. Biggest troll ever.

Can someone tell me how to quote things from different threads?

drakulie
10-18-2009, 06:41 PM
Give it time. Theres plenty of people who will agree with my intelligent view.

so far 84 disagree, and 9 clowns (just like you) agree with you.

Noveson
10-18-2009, 06:42 PM
Yet, Federer spanked Sampras at Wimbledon by serving and volleying almost 100% of the time. :oops:

That was eight years ago. Federer's game has changed a bunch. But anyway I agree he's an all court player haha:)

Noveson
10-18-2009, 06:42 PM
so far 84 disagree, and 9 clowns (just like you) agree with you.

Why did you have to go and change your picture!? can't recognize it at all

UsualSuspect
10-18-2009, 06:45 PM
:rolleyes: You're just going to accuse everyone who favors Nadal over Federer of this. It's completely ridiculous when to accuse me of being a troll when I post less than 3 times a day, and probably one in 10 of those are about Nadal/Federer. Even the Fed fans can see how ridiculous you are. You post more than almost all the population, and EVERY SINGLE post you making is defending federer or attacking Nadal. Biggest troll ever.

Can someone tell me how to quote things from different threads?
I have no clue what you see in P Agony. From what I have seen, there are Fed fans 10 times worse than he is.

And to quote things from different threads you just go to an old thread, click on the quote button on the bottom right hand corner of the post you want. Copy the quote (dont forget to copy the [QUOTE] part as well from the begining and end of the sentence). Then just paste the quote into your post and it will show up. Hope it helps. I am not a great writer.

BreakPoint
10-18-2009, 06:48 PM
Thanks for the support man.
Um....he just voted against you, dude. :oops:

Noveson
10-18-2009, 06:54 PM
I have no clue what you see in P Agony. From what I have seen, there are Fed fans 10 times worse than he is.

And to quote things from different threads you just go to an old thread, click on the quote button on the bottom right hand corner of the post you want. Copy the quote (dont forget to copy the [QUOTE] part as well from the begining and end of the sentence). Then just paste the quote into your post and it will show up. Hope it helps. I am not a great writer.

I've seen too many times where someone goes, "Nadal is a pusher" and P_Agony goes, "great post well thought out." He posts in every single thread related to Nadal and Federer and does the exact same thing in every one. There's like no thought process with him, it's all, no federer is perfect and nadal sucks. No matter the topic. At least you can argue with the intelligent ones that disagree, he just straight up says "no you're wrong" followed by "you don't know anything about tennis" followed by "you're GJ-whatever whatever that trolls name is".

And thanks for the quoting help I got it now.

BreakPoint
10-18-2009, 06:54 PM
Federer is obviously an all court player. What gets me is when people say Nadal isn't because the elitists don't want him to play the "correct" way. They try as hard as they can to relegate Nadal to having no style, no brain, no skill, etc and it is ridiculous.
I guess you must have missed this morning's match against Davydenko then. :)

Conquistador
10-18-2009, 06:59 PM
To answer your question...Federer is an all world player. Federer is a man with a mission every time he steps on that court. I love the way he plays. Its soo fluid.

abmk
10-18-2009, 06:59 PM
^

LOL, nadal is no all-courter, but he's not a pusher either, although he did play like one yesterday :)

he is a baseliner, who can play both defense and offense well

BreakPoint
10-18-2009, 07:00 PM
Federer has two shots over Haas, which are the forehand and the serve, which both happen to be the most important shots in the game. Federer is also taller, stronger, and a better athlete, which also happens to help alot.



Haas definitely plays at the net better, and covers the net better. He transitions well, and he hits the stronger backhand drive. However, Haas lacks athleticism and power, two things that are integral to the modern game.
Haas is taller than Federer and I think the only thing that Haas does clearly worse than Federer is his movement. To me, that's about it, but of course movement is the most important part of singles tennis. But from a non-physical/skills standpoint, Haas also has a much weaker mental game. He's just not nearly as mentally tough as Federer and can't keep his emotions under control. I think that's the main thing that has hindered Haas throughout his career. I think if he was as mentally tough as Federer, he would have won a few Grand Slams.

Noveson
10-18-2009, 07:03 PM
I guess you must have missed this morning's match against Davydenko then. :)

psh get out of here BP don't wanna hear your crap:) And I did miss it I got two channels on the tv in my hall:(

BreakPoint
10-18-2009, 07:04 PM
That dude's post needs to be made into a quick reply button. It's the most epic of all epic posts.
Agreed! It's an instant classic. It should be at least stickied on top of the Pro Player's forum. I still can't stop laughing. :lol: LOL

BreakPoint
10-18-2009, 07:06 PM
psh get out of here BP don't wanna hear your crap:) And I did miss it I got two channels on the tv in my hall:(
So you admit you have no idea what you're talking about since you never even saw the match! :-?

BreakPoint
10-18-2009, 07:12 PM
Fair enough, but again, Federer being soo dominant with the forehand allowed him to put away easy volleys.
But then why didn't Haas serve and volley 100% of the time or even 50% of the time? That would have prevented Federer from hitting big forehand approach shots and putting away the easy volleys on Haas's service games.

Noveson
10-18-2009, 07:13 PM
So you admit you have no idea what you're talking about since you never even saw the match! :-?

Woah hah was a joke. That was meant to be seen as yeah you got me I'm clueless.

Serve_Ace
10-18-2009, 07:18 PM
You hit the nail on the head. Federer plays an all-court game when he needs to. He wins more points (by far) from the baseline.

So he is any all court player....The question is, if Federer is an all court player, which he is. Just because he chooses not to play that way doesn't make him not one. All the people that have been saying that he isn't, don't get it. They say that he is capable of playing an all court game but sticks to the baseline and then go on the say that he is capable of playing an all court game. So if he's capable that means he's an all court player. Please if you're trying to put down Roger at least make sense.

Polvorin
10-18-2009, 07:25 PM
If Federer isn't an all court player, then there is no such thing as an all-court player because nobody other than Gasquet uses half the variety of shots and strategies he does.

Noveson
10-18-2009, 07:48 PM
So he is any all court player....The question is, if Federer is an all court player, which he is. Just because he chooses not to play that way doesn't make him not one. All the people that have been saying that he isn't, don't get it. They say that he is capable of playing an all court game but sticks to the baseline and then go on the say that he is capable of playing an all court game. So if he's capable that means he's an all court player. Please if you're trying to put down Roger at least make sense.

God what an awful argument haha. Any pro is capable of playing another style. Would they win as much? No. Would Fed win as much if he served and came in everytime? No. So can we call him a serve and volley player? No. Choosing to play a certain way defines what kind of player you are.

They aren't even trying to put him down? They are classifying his style as something other than an all-courter. Why do you think that means putting down?

kimbahpnam
10-18-2009, 09:00 PM
unanimous decision: yes.

NGM
10-18-2009, 09:24 PM
The most lop-sided poll I've ever seen in TT. Finally we can agree about something.

Someone can make a poll about how one-dimensional player Nadal is. It would be interesting.

volleynets
10-18-2009, 09:33 PM
The most lop-sided poll I've ever seen in TT. Finally we can agree about something.

Someone can make a poll about how one-dimensional player Nadal is. It would be interesting.

I am sure adi-das does not agree. But who cares as he does not know the definition of all-court player.

FedSampras1
10-18-2009, 09:42 PM
This poll is stupid

nfor304
10-18-2009, 09:51 PM
No. He is an aggressive baseliner. That's the style of play he uses in 90% of his matches.

lawrence
10-18-2009, 09:53 PM
Finally got over the fact that Federer is better than Sampras in terms of overall tennis, and now you're looking for more thread ideas to try and argue over Federer about.

lawrence
10-18-2009, 10:11 PM
Also, can someone please link me to the post/thread where drakulie made these apparent Agassi/Sampras statistics up?

Agassifan
10-18-2009, 10:31 PM
Dumbest thread ever.

EtePras
10-18-2009, 10:50 PM
Federer and Agassi are the only all-court players in the open era. Maybe Nadal too if he wins the US Open.

boojay
10-18-2009, 10:59 PM
It's amazing how this started out as a troll thread and has turned into a very effective tool in exposing who the trolls are (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=9696).

lawrence
10-18-2009, 11:13 PM
Federer and Agassi are the only all-court players in the open era. Maybe Nadal too if he wins the US Open.

I believe the thread is about all-court in terms of shot variety etc., and not so much the different surfaces.

Ripster
10-18-2009, 11:33 PM
Is this even up for debate?

Federer is the definition of an all-court player.

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 11:37 PM
Oh, and when are you going to change the ******** sig? Federer did come to net more often that Haas and was a LOT more successful there.

My sig makes sense, Just because 80% of your posts do not.

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 11:40 PM
So this is what, the 4th guy who knows nothing about tennis? And I guess you do, your trolliness.

LOL. Talk about double standards!

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 11:41 PM
:rolleyes: You're just going to accuse everyone who favors Nadal over Federer of this. It's completely ridiculous when to accuse me of being a troll when I post less than 3 times a day, and probably one in 10 of those are about Nadal/Federer. Even the Fed fans can see how ridiculous you are. You post more than almost all the population, and EVERY SINGLE post you making is defending federer or attacking Nadal. Biggest troll ever.

Can someone tell me how to quote things from different threads?

P_Agony knows nothing about tennis. he's just trying to cover it up by calling you and myself trolls.

dropshot winner
10-18-2009, 11:41 PM
Definately not, Federer is a moonball&volleyer.

SerbWhoLovesDelPo
10-18-2009, 11:44 PM
Definately not, Federer is a moonball&volleyer.

How do you compare Federer and Tsonga in terms of all-courterness?

JeMar
10-18-2009, 11:46 PM
My sig makes sense, Just because 80% of your posts do not.

Which of my posts don't make sense?

My post history is easy to view, so please, have at it.

dropshot winner
10-18-2009, 11:50 PM
How do you compare Federer and Tsonga in terms of all-courterness?
That's a though thing to do.

I think Federer has more all-court game, but often he decides not to use it.

Tsonga seems more willing to play at the net, sometimes he's even forced to do it because his groundstrokes fall apart.

What gives Federer the edge IMO is that he can win points from every part of the court on every surface. Tsonga sometimes looks really lost on clay, unable to consistently win points at the net and baseline.

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 11:50 PM
Which of my posts don't make sense?

My post history is easy to view, so please, have at it.

I can't view that, it's too time consuming with an Iphone.

JeMar
10-18-2009, 11:52 PM
I can't view that, it's too time consuming with an Iphone.

When I said that I wasn't blatantly making crap up, like you are.

I give you... three days. Three days before you're banned.

I will get started on not missing you right now.

Oh, and have you tried surfing the web on a BB (not a Storm) vs. an iphone? It's worlds different. So, you fail on two counts.

JeMar
10-18-2009, 11:56 PM
It's amazing how all the biggest, most ******** trolls are sock puppet accounts that are all anti-Federer. I don't want to say that Nadal attracts these kinds of losers, but there might be some kind of correlation.

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 11:58 PM
When I said that, I wasn't blatantly making crap up, like you are.

I give you... three days. Three days before you're banned.

I will get started on not missing you right now.

Oh, and have you tried surfing the web on a BB (not a Storm) vs. an iphone? It's worlds different. So, you fail on two counts.

I don't give a monkeys whether you were not "making crap up" as you so eloquently put it. The fact that i demanded for the source of those stats and you failed to provide it just makes me presume you were indeed "making crap up". Why should i get banned? To please yourself? Get a life, moron.

JeMar
10-18-2009, 11:59 PM
I don't give a monkeys whether you were not "making crap up" as you so eloquently put it. The fact that i demanded for the source of those stats and you failed to provide it just makes me presume you were indeed "making crap up". Why should i get banned? To please yourself? Get a life, moron.

Make it two days.

Oh, and it's not my fault you apparently suck at Google.

Adi-das
10-18-2009, 11:59 PM
It's amazing how all the biggest, most ******** trolls are sock puppet accounts that are all anti-Federer. I don't want to say that Nadal attracts these kinds of losers, but there might be some kind of correlation.

Are you going to cry from making these "********" bold assumptions?

JeMar
10-19-2009, 12:05 AM
I don't give a monkeys whether you were not "making crap up" as you so eloquently put it. The fact that i demanded for the source of those stats and you failed to provide it just makes me presume you were indeed "making crap up". Why should i get banned? To please yourself? Get a life, moron.

Quit trolling. momo.

Talk about eloquent, lol. :)

Adi-das
10-19-2009, 12:08 AM
Talk about eloquent, lol. :)

Those two were direct replies to incompetent individuals (yourself being one of them). Using those as examples is just pathetic. Hey, arn't you involved in Education? Your pupils must not be learning much then...

lawrence
10-19-2009, 12:11 AM
I don't give a monkeys whether you were not "making crap up" as you so eloquently put it. The fact that i demanded for the source of those stats and you failed to provide it just makes me presume you were indeed "making crap up". Why should i get banned? To please yourself? Get a life, moron.

Why would you still presume he made it up, when you saw the stats (posted by another poster though) yourself, and even quoted them and came up with a classic excuse as to why those stats are irrelevant anyway.

Fair enough, but again, Federer being soo dominant with the forehand allowed him to put away easy volleys.

Speaking of your excuse, do you realize that by saying Federer only put away "easy volleys due to his forehand", it's like saying "Sampras only volleyed well because of his serve".

Please.

TheFifthSet
10-19-2009, 12:11 AM
Those two were direct replies to incompetent individuals (yourself being one of them). Using those as examples is just pathetic. Hey, arn't you involved in Education? Your pupils must not be learning much then...

Ha, you really left yourself open. :)

Adi-das
10-19-2009, 12:13 AM
Ha, you really left yourself open. :)

Typo. Anyway, as if JeMar would of spotted it. :lol:

qindarka
10-19-2009, 12:13 AM
Just ignore Adidas.

SerbWhoLovesDelPo
10-19-2009, 12:16 AM
Ha, you really left yourself open. :)

:shock:

Zemljak?

TheFifthSet
10-19-2009, 12:17 AM
Typo. Anyway, as if JeMar would of spotted it. :lol:

Boy, you're a riot. :)

Adi-das
10-19-2009, 12:19 AM
Why would you still presume he made it up, when you saw the stats (posted by another poster though) yourself, and even quoted them and came up with a classic excuse as to why those stats are irrelevant anyway.



Speaking of your excuse, do you realize that by saying Federer only put away "easy volleys due to his forehand", it's like saying "Sampras only volleyed well because of his serve".

Please.

No, you're wrong. Once they got into rallies, Federer was always going to come out the winner. And this is due to the fact Federer is a better ballstriker than Haas. So please, Haas has way more variety than Federer, although to some of you naive individuals (most notably the Fed fans) "The winner, automatically has more vairety".

fastdunn
10-19-2009, 12:29 AM
In 1999-2000ish, when we still had plenty of S&Ver's and all courters on tour, the young Federer definitely looked like a hard core baseliner.

I remember when I first saw Federer 1st time on indoor hard court in maybe late 1990's. Still majority of players played S&V's at least for their 1st serves on indoor carpet. He was playing baseline games on indoor carpet !(when we still had them!).

In fact, I thought Federer was a clay courter when I first saw him against Agassi. Agassi was hitting very flat strokes while Federer's strokes were much more spinny compared to other players at the time.

I also remember Federer absolutely overpowered Chang from baseline (on hard courts and clay. In fact, only time Chnag beat Federer was on grass).

Then Federer tried to add more net game, say, between 2002 - 2005 (especially with the legendary volleyer Tony Roche). But on the contrary, he turned increasingly more to the baseline game, obviously because the whole tennis world switched to the baseline completely.....

NonP
10-19-2009, 12:41 AM
This thread is comedy gold. I don't know what's more funny, the kiddies who don't have a clue what being an all-court player entails, or the focus on a single match to decide which player has more variety, or the ongoing sh*tfest started with a mockery of a sig.

NonP
10-19-2009, 12:50 AM
He's a baseliner with some all-court tendancies.

By todays standards, yes, I would call him an all-courter.

Zing! We have a winner.

P_Agony
10-19-2009, 01:48 AM
:rolleyes: You're just going to accuse everyone who favors Nadal over Federer of this. It's completely ridiculous when to accuse me of being a troll when I post less than 3 times a day, and probably one in 10 of those are about Nadal/Federer. Even the Fed fans can see how ridiculous you are. You post more than almost all the population, and EVERY SINGLE post you making is defending federer or attacking Nadal. Biggest troll ever.

Can someone tell me how to quote things from different threads?

You again mention Nadal who has nothing to do with this thread. Stop with the flame wars, this is a Federer thread, not a Nadal thread. As for my posts, you don't like them, don't read or reply them. There's an ignore list you know, and I've used it quite effectively myself. I have never spoken to you before the last few days and I have no idea where all of that crap is coming from, maybe you are such an obssesive Nadal fan you cannot see anything past your hero. You also cannot post stuff like that and then call others trolls, it's just patheitc. Go bug someone else.

P_Agony
10-19-2009, 01:51 AM
[QUOTE=Noveson;4038387]I have no clue what you see in P Agony. From what I have seen, there are Fed fans 10 times worse than he is.

And to quote things from different threads you just go to an old thread, click on the quote button on the bottom right hand corner of the post you want. Copy the quote (dont forget to copy the

I've seen too many times where someone goes, "Nadal is a pusher" and P_Agony goes, "great post well thought out." He posts in every single thread related to Nadal and Federer and does the exact same thing in every one. There's like no thought process with him, it's all, no federer is perfect and nadal sucks. No matter the topic. At least you can argue with the intelligent ones that disagree, he just straight up says "no you're wrong" followed by "you don't know anything about tennis" followed by "you're GJ-whatever whatever that trolls name is".

And thanks for the quoting help I got it now.

Are you kidding me? I was one of the peoplr who defended Nadal when he was called a pure pusher. You are confusing me with someone else buddy, I actually don't think Nadal is a pusher (although he was against Davydenko).

P_Agony
10-19-2009, 01:56 AM
P_Agony knows nothing about tennis. he's just trying to cover it up by calling you and myself trolls.

Yeah, yeah, you accused a few people in this thread for not knowing anything about tennis. Maybe I should just stop watching because his troliness said so. It's amazing how you think I know nothing about tennis without even knowing me nor ever having a discussion with me.

Gorecki
10-19-2009, 02:07 AM
This thread is comedy gold. I don't know what's more funny, the kiddies who don't have a clue what being an all-court player entails, or the focus on a single match to decide which player has more variety, or the ongoing sh*tfest started with a mockery of a sig.

you are my long lost twin...

Polvorin
10-19-2009, 02:08 AM
Yeah, yeah, you accused a few people in this thread for not knowing anything about tennis. Maybe I should just stop watching because his troliness said so. It's amazing how you think I know nothing about tennis without even knowing me nor ever having a discussion with me.

Unless of course he has had discussions with you. Sock account?

wyutani
10-19-2009, 02:11 AM
federer is an all court player.

P_Agony
10-19-2009, 02:13 AM
Unless of course he has had discussions with you. Sock account?

I have my suspicions about the guy, but his way of typing doesn't fit the pattern. Maybe gj011, after a billion accounts, finally learnt to change his writing so people won't notice who he is after his 1st post.

abmk
10-19-2009, 02:16 AM
Can someone get fed's net stats at the USO and wimbledon over the past 5 years ( and the total no of points played at each ) ?

lawrence
10-19-2009, 02:18 AM
No, you're wrong. Once they got into rallies, Federer was always going to come out the winner. And this is due to the fact Federer is a better ballstriker than Haas. So please, Haas has way more variety than Federer, although to some of you naive individuals (most notably the Fed fans) "The winner, automatically has more vairety".

Oh wow, you just confirmed it. You're either really stupid, or a really good troll. I'm out of this thread I'm not going to get baited into this dupe accounts trap.

abmk
10-19-2009, 02:20 AM
lol @ haas having more variety than federer. Haas comes to the net more than fed and is more of an all-courter than fed ( these days atleast ) , but he doesn't have the variety that fed has

NonP
10-19-2009, 02:50 AM
you are my long lost twin...

Um, thanks. I think.

lol @ haas having more variety than federer. Haas comes to the net more than fed and is more of an all-courter than fed ( these days atleast ) , but he doesn't have the variety that fed has

Another winner here. Style of play and variety are two different things. Good one, abmk, though I should mention that Tommy is no slouch himself.

abmk
10-19-2009, 03:27 AM
I have my suspicions about the guy, but his way of typing doesn't fit the pattern. Maybe gj011, after a billion accounts, finally learnt to change his writing so people won't notice who he is after his 1st post.

Don't you think its about time you got over this "so called obssession" with gj011 ?

Gorecki
10-19-2009, 04:13 AM
Um, thanks. I think.


what i meant is that your post is exactly what i think about this specific point...

NonP
10-19-2009, 04:20 AM
what i meant is that your post is exactly what i think about this specific point...

I know. I was being facetious.

JennyS
10-19-2009, 06:41 AM
In my opinion, Federer is a natural all-courter, who has adapted his style to fit the current demands of the game. To win in the modern game, you have to stay on the baseline. He still mixes it up when he needs to. But how many Slams have the likes of Tsonga, Gasquet, Haas and Fish won playing all court tennis?

However, anyone who saw his match against Sampras knows that he
is a natural all courter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFf8szWA3t8

tintin
10-19-2009, 07:29 AM
no doubt about it

Polvorin
10-19-2009, 02:23 PM
The Fed fans/***** have to give credit to the Nadal fans/***** in this thread. A 90% vote that Fed indeed has an all-court game doesn't happen without Nadal fan support. Of course it's obviously true that he does, but still there are those who think it would be insulting to Fed if his game were labeled somewhat more one-dimensionally and therefore try to say that black is white.

Clearly a good percentage of Nadal fans aren't crazy trolls like Cesc. :D

Azzurri
10-24-2009, 09:03 AM
Fed over the past 5 years is pretty much a baseline player with absolute abilities of an all-courter. He does not come to the net (on his serve or attack weak shots) often enough to be considered a true all-court player. he is a baseliner. again, he plays baseline tennis. but he does have the ability to be an all-court player.

P_Agony
10-24-2009, 09:17 AM
Don't you think its about time you got over this "so called obssession" with gj011 ?

No.

10 chars.

Talker
10-24-2009, 09:24 AM
He's pretty much an all-court player, could come to the net more if he wanted but has to stick with what works in todays game.

beckstennis
10-24-2009, 01:10 PM
LOL I swear to god no matter how bad my day gets I can always come on here and read posts / polls like the OP`s and it makes me laugh my ***** off :)

sh@de
10-24-2009, 09:14 PM
The options in the poll are wrong. They should be:

Yes

AND

Yes

Agassifan
10-24-2009, 09:30 PM
local idiots

Adi-das, Bud, Cesc Fabregas, Crispix, ender666, fastdunn, grafselesfan, HAL9001, nfor304, Serendipitous, theZig, The_Steak, Yoh

You're talking about a guy that has made the finals of each grandslam at least 5 times!!!!!

NonP
10-24-2009, 09:58 PM
You're talking about a guy that has made the finals of each grandslam at least 5 times!!!!!

Ooh, and this somehow shows that Federer is indeed an all-court player. What a brilliant point. Gotta love these fanboys.

nfor304
10-24-2009, 11:26 PM
local idiots

Adi-das, Bud, Cesc Fabregas, Crispix, ender666, fastdunn, grafselesfan, HAL9001, nfor304, Serendipitous, theZig, The_Steak, Yoh

You're talking about a guy that has made the finals of each grandslam at least 5 times!!!!!

So whoever doesn't share your opinion is an idiot?

Your a genius. That attitude will serve you well in life.

8pNADAL
10-24-2009, 11:41 PM
federer misses a lot of easy volleys at wimbledon for an all-court player, or at least when hes up against a decent passer like nadal

Mafia13
10-25-2009, 07:43 AM
federer misses a lot of easy volleys at wimbledon for an all-court player, or at least when hes up against a decent passer like nadal

What does Nadal have to do with Federer being an all-court player. And Fed has won 2 of his 3 encounters against Nadal at Wimbledon. So I fail to see your logic here. He was coming in and missing easy volleys, but he still won? What's your point?:confused::confused:

flyinghippos101
10-25-2009, 09:12 AM
Give it time. Theres plenty of people who will agree with my intelligent view.

16 votes...a clear indication of the "plenty of people" that agree with you.

EPIC FAIL

All-rounder
10-25-2009, 09:26 AM
Saying Federer isn't a all courter is the same as saying nadal isn't one dimensional

NamRanger
10-25-2009, 09:43 AM
By what standards are we using, because if we're using the 80s/90s standards, Federer is more of a baseliner than Lendl was.

mandy01
10-25-2009, 10:06 AM
By what standards are we using, because if we're using the 80s/90s standards, Federer is more of a baseliner than Lendl was.
80s I can understand to an extent..but 90s?
Why? Because he dosent volley like those guys?
Lame....
Man,I thought we'd been over this before :roll:

FlamEnemY
10-25-2009, 10:36 AM
Ooh, and this somehow shows that Federer is indeed an all-court player. What a brilliant point. Gotta love these fanboys.

All-court != all-around.

Even so, he indeed is both all-court and all-around player.

PS: VERY nice of you calling people 'fanboys' :|

BreakPoint
10-25-2009, 12:08 PM
By what standards are we using, because if we're using the 80s/90s standards, Federer is more of a baseliner than Lendl was.
Um...no. Remind me again how many times Lendl and Federer have won Wimbledon? :-?

Cesc Fabregas
10-25-2009, 12:19 PM
Um...no. Remind me again how many times Lendl and Federer have won Wimbledon? :-?

On today's grass Lendl would be a multiple Wimbledon champion, and Lendl S&Ved way more on grass than Federer does.

NamRanger
10-25-2009, 12:21 PM
Um...no. Remind me again how many times Lendl and Federer have won Wimbledon? :-?




Lendl came to the net alot more often than Federer did even in the old days. Against Edberg at the USO in 92 or 91 (I forgot which year it was), he came to the net something like 60-80 times over a 5 set match. Federer doesn't even come 60 times to the net in a tournament sometimes. Come on BP, both me and you know why Federer doesn't come to the net. He doesn't have to with his godlike forehand, anticipation, superior placement, etc.




Hell, Bjorn Borg, who is supposedly is not talented according to you since he doesn't take the ball on the rise, S&Ved more often than Federer does today.

NamRanger
10-25-2009, 12:22 PM
80s I can understand to an extent..but 90s?
Why? Because he dosent volley like those guys?
Lame....
Man,I thought we'd been over this before :roll:



Lendl has higher net number in a single match than Federer does in a whole tournament sometimes. Please, don't even try and argue against FACTS.

BreakPoint
10-25-2009, 12:25 PM
On today's grass Lendl would be a multiple Wimbledon champion, and Lendl S&Ved way more on grass than Federer does.
That's why Lendl never won Wimbledon. He was never known as a great volleyer. Why? Because he was mainly a baseliner. You can't win with a style you're not comfortable with.

Cesc Fabregas
10-25-2009, 12:28 PM
That's why Lendl never won Wimbledon. He was never known as a great volleyer. Why? Because he was mainly a baseliner. You can't win with a style you're not comfortable with.

Ivan wasn't a great volleyer but he is a better volleyer than Federer.

BreakPoint
10-25-2009, 12:28 PM
Lendl came to the net alot more often than Federer did even in the old days. Against Edberg at the USO in 92 or 91 (I forgot which year it was), he came to the net something like 60-80 times over a 5 set match. Federer doesn't even come 60 times to the net in a tournament sometimes. Come on BP, both me and you know why Federer doesn't come to the net. He doesn't have to with his godlike forehand, anticipation, superior placement, etc.




Hell, Bjorn Borg, who is supposedly is not talented according to you since he doesn't take the ball on the rise, S&Ved more often than Federer does today.
Just because Borg and Lendl came to the net at Wimbledon doesn't mean they were good at it. Both were better from the baseline.

NamRanger
10-25-2009, 12:31 PM
Just because Borg and Lendl came to the net at Wimbledon doesn't mean they were good at it. Both were better from the baseline.



So your definition of an all court player is different from mine. I think we can just agree to disagree then. I do agree Federer has a good net game (not great though, although potential to be), it's just that he rarely uses it and practices it, so sometimes he can flub some easy ones (particularly on the forehand side).




Also Borg won Wimbledon 5 times S&Ving alot. So his net game can't have been as bad as you say it is. Certainly stronger than given credit for on these boards. Borg is no McEnroe, but who is?

BreakPoint
10-25-2009, 12:31 PM
Ivan wasn't a great volleyer but he is a better volleyer than Federer.
Yeah, yeah, we know. Anybody does everything better than Federer because according to you, Federer is a "clown". :-?

Heck, I'd bet you think even Davydenko is a better volleyer than Federer. :-?

crazylevity
10-25-2009, 12:34 PM
Federer can hit ANY shot he wants from ANY part of the court. How is this not all court? Heck, I've seen points where he served and volleyed from the baseline. Tell me who else can do that!

Cesc Fabregas
10-25-2009, 12:34 PM
Yeah, yeah, we know. Anybody does everything better than Federer because according to you, Federer is a "clown". :-?
Heck, I'd bet you think even Davydenko is a better volleyer than Federer. :-?

That's why I voted Federer to have the best forehand in the game in another thread? Try again.

BreakPoint
10-25-2009, 06:00 PM
That's why I voted Federer to have the best forehand in the game in another thread? Try again.
Who said "clowns" can't have great forehands? Soderling has a great serve AND a great forehand, yet you still call him a "clown".

BTW, "Try again" should be the title of this thread. :oops:

grafselesfan
10-25-2009, 06:03 PM
Who said "clowns" can't have great forehands? Soderling has a great serve AND a great forehand, yet you still call him a "clown".

BTW, "Try again" should be the title of this thread. :oops:

Soderling is flat out overrated period. He doesnt have even close to the best serve, the best forehand, the best anything, other than being the biggest flavor of the month fraud on TW at the moment, replacing past recepients of the award like Gasquet following Wimbledon 2007, Nalbandian following his indoor season in 2007 (though he is a much better player than Soderling atleast), and others. He has been dressed down by a slumping Djokovic, and a series of lower ranked players in his last several events, and he is still being hyped up as a potential slam winner next year. What a joke.

The fact Cesc voted for Federer as having the best forehand shows he does actually Federer's abilities, even though he is not a fan. Federer's abilities are predominantly an outstanding and dominant baseliner with a very good serve, and a stronger mental game than most of his contemporaries like all other champions (mind you still below the mental games of a Sampras or Nadal). He does volley better than many in todays one dimensional baseliners only field, but his net game certainly is not close to on par with his baseline game, nor is how often he plays in the various parts of the court. Thus he is not a true all courter.

All-rounder
10-25-2009, 06:05 PM
Soderling is flat out overrated period. He doesnt have even close to the best serve, the best forehand, the best anything, other than being the biggest flavor of the month fraud on TW at the moment, replacing past recepients of the award like Gasquet following Wimbledon 2007, Nalbandian following his indoor season in 2007 (though he is a much better player than Soderling atleast), and others.
This fraud took out the king of clay at RG

grafselesfan
10-25-2009, 06:07 PM
This fraud took out the king of clay at RG

Good for him. What has he done since. Got his *** whooped by Federer a bunch of times which is , been destroyed by a slumping Djokovic, lost to a past his prime Hewitt, been clearly outclassed by Lopez. And who has he beaten since the French Open, one decent win over Davydenko and that is it. His 15 minutes are up. He is not a top 10 caliber player, let alone a potential slam winner.

All-rounder
10-25-2009, 06:09 PM
Good for him. What has he done since. Got his *** whooped by Federer a bunch of times which is , been destroyed by a slumping Djokovic, lost to a past his prime Hewitt, been clearly outclassed by Lopez. And who has he beaten since the French Open, one decent win over Davydenko and that is it. His 15 minutes are up. He is not a top 10 caliber player, let alone a potential slam winner.
These words will bite you in the future just like all those who said the same about Del Potro

grafselesfan
10-25-2009, 06:09 PM
These words will bite you in the future just like all those who said the same about Del Potro

LOL at comparing Soderling to Del Potro. Del Potro was already a top 5 player in the World at age 19. Soderling is a 25 year old who other than his dream French Open has 2 Masters quarterfinals and 1 other slam quarterfinal his whole career.