PDA

View Full Version : Federer's biggest choke against Nadal


Magnus
06-19-2011, 09:38 PM
What's is his biggest choke?

bolo
06-19-2011, 09:44 PM
man it's sad to see fed fanboys fall apart like this.

Can't wait to see what's next! :)

roundiesee
06-19-2011, 09:47 PM
I'm tempted to say ALL :( I think the one that hurt most was probably that '08 Wimby final. If he had won the second set things might have been very different. Poor Fed, he was in position so many times to put Nadal away but just couldn't. I think in part we have to remember that Nadal plays extremely well when his back is against the wall, so what may seem like a "choke" is actually Rafa playing at his absolute best to turn things round :(

powerangle
06-19-2011, 09:54 PM
In terms of almost crossing the finishing line, and then ending up losing...it has to be Rome 2006 because of those match points. If he had won that match, a lot of their clay matches, and matches period, that followed probably would have been different. That loss took a lot of fight and air out of Federer.

However, the AO 2009 has always resonated the most with me for some reason. The stars were aligned for Federer to win, and you almost felt like it was Fed's match to lose. Federer played very well for most of the match, but when it came to the big points, he faltered. Nadal played basically the match of his life on hard courts, his backhand was super-beastlike, and yet it was still at 2 sets all (and that's after Federer failing to seal the deal in the first set and converting on the bps in the 3rd set). Roger came totally unglued in the 5th set in a very epic fashion.

TennisandMusic
06-19-2011, 09:59 PM
Since when is being up a break and losing the set a "choke"? Does anyone understand what a choke really is? I didn't realize the second you broke someone you had the set in the bag. :rolleyes:

norbac
06-19-2011, 10:03 PM
Losing the 2008 French Open final after being on serve 2-2 in the second.

Chopin
06-19-2011, 10:04 PM
Since when is being up a break and losing the set a "choke"? Does anyone understand what a choke really is? I didn't realize the second you broke someone you had the set in the bag. :rolleyes:

Why don't you go post somewhere else?

bolo
06-19-2011, 10:05 PM
Losing the 2008 French Open final after being on serve 2-2 in the second.

lol, I can't believe that didn't make the list. :)

Sharpshooter
06-19-2011, 10:25 PM
Oh lap it up the second set in 08 Wim. LOL what about the third set where Rafa had Fed at 0-40 and failed to break? Or the 4th set TB where Rafa had a match point?

IvanisevicServe
06-19-2011, 11:49 PM
Nadal did choke in the 4th set of 08 Wimbledon. He was up 5-2 in the tiebreak, then double faulted and blew the next point on a bad error as well.

Magnus
06-20-2011, 12:06 AM
man it's sad to see fed fanboys fall apart like this.

Can't wait to see what's next! :)

What's your problem? Can't someone start a tennis poll regarding tennis in a tennis forum talking about tennis? Don't like it? Go away.

abmk
06-20-2011, 12:06 AM
^^

correct, but the matchpoint was not a choke

TheNatural
06-20-2011, 12:13 AM
His biggest choke up was probably at 2009 AO. Some others :

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39251000/jpg/_39251106_fedblub270.jpg

http://brandnewcool.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Roger-Federer-Crying-Again-300x187.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/02/01/article-1133282-034308BC000005DC-20_306x435.jpg

http://i44.tinypic.com/2d0ey6v.jpg

Comet Buster
06-20-2011, 12:20 AM
AO 2009 was the worst display of mental strength I've ever seen from Federer. Especially in the 5th where he threw in the towel after being broken for the first time in that set. It's a shame he served so horrible in that match because he played very well from the baseline. Choked on countless BP's throughout the match. That's what Federer does against Nadal.

bolo
06-20-2011, 12:24 AM
What's your problem? Can't someone start a tennis poll regarding tennis in a tennis forum talking about tennis? Don't like it? Go away.

you can, and I am allowed to comment on it too. I found it sad and funny at the same time! :)

roysid
06-20-2011, 12:32 AM
AO' 09. But a bigger choke in a HUGE match is 09 US Open final.

MichaelNadal
06-20-2011, 01:11 AM
Since when is being up a break and losing the set a "choke"? Does anyone understand what a choke really is? I didn't realize the second you broke someone you had the set in the bag. :rolleyes:

I've been trying to figure this one out myself. I think if you are a fan of a player, anytime they go up a break, and don't win the set, your reasoning is that they choked. Apparently it has nothing to do with the other player, once they go up a break, the other player is supposed to just stand there and fold. Not like the opponent is getting any balls back or anything. It's all the choker.

Sharpshooter
06-20-2011, 01:12 AM
^^

correct, but the matchpoint was not a choke

Yeah but 5-2 up in the TB and then a DF?

Plus that matchpoint could've been his had he hit his FH DTL to fed FH instead of being predictable and going across to the BH. He played it safe IMO.

Magnus
06-20-2011, 01:41 AM
I've been trying to figure this one out myself. I think if you are a fan of a player, anytime they go up a break, and don't win the set, your reasoning is that they choked. Apparently it has nothing to do with the other player, once they go up a break, the other player is supposed to just stand there and fold. Not like the opponent is getting any balls back or anything. It's all the choker.

No, it doesn't happen all the time, but with Fed's case, it does. If you've seen any of the matches you see Fed being aggressive, getting big leads, and BAM, makes 4 unforced errors in a service game and things go downhill since.

Sid_Vicious
06-20-2011, 01:53 AM
So many Federer fanboys have been acting ridiculously insecure lately. Some are starting threads with prayers to god that Nadal does not win Wimbledon. The constant whining is now getting annoying. Nadal is a bad match up for federer, Federer chokes all the matches away, Federer is past his prime etc. are all statments that have some degree of truth to them but are being abused horrendously by some fed fans here. The biggest cause of the lopsided record is not the surfaces and chokes, but rather a guy named Ralph.

Magnus
06-20-2011, 02:02 AM
So many Federer fanboys have been acting ridiculously insecure lately. Some are starting threads with prayers to god that Nadal does not win Wimbledon. The constant whining is now getting annoying. Nadal is a bad match up for federer, Federer chokes all the matches away, Federer is past his prime etc. are all statments that have some degree of truth to them but are being abused horrendously by some fed fans here. The biggest cause of the lopsided record is not the surfaces and chokes, but rather a guy named Ralph.

...OK :-|:-|

zagor
06-20-2011, 02:13 AM
I just can't pick one,they're all beautiful in their own way,let's not discriminate.

FedEx23
06-20-2011, 05:01 AM
Against Nadal, I have to say his biggest choke has to be either the 2007 and 2011 FO. 2007 was may Fed's best shot to beat Nadal at the FO and he blew that along with many break point chances. This year, although I still feel Nadal has the firepower to come back and win this match if this happens, Federer had plenty of chances to win the first set and could have very well won the second set. But...Coulda, shoulda, woulda, right?

Besides Nadal, I think his biggest chokes have been in the 2009 US Open final against Delpo when he served for the 2nd set at 5-3 to go up two sets to none. Last year against Djokovic he also held (I think) two match/break points and failed to convert those and went on to lose the match. Against Nadal, especially in his grand slam loses, he hasn't come nearly as close to winning as he was in the US Open the past couple of years. Beating Delpo could have completed the Roger-slam!

ksbh
06-20-2011, 05:05 AM
ROFL X 10,000 ... the Federer fanboys just can't stop bashing Federer!

As Sid Vicious said, completely insecure bunch of fanboys!

FedEx23
06-20-2011, 05:09 AM
ROFL X 10,000 ... the Federer fanboys just can't stop bashing Federer!

As Sid Vicious said, completely insecure bunch of fanboys!

At least I'm not delusional and make excuses for Federer. I try to be as objective a fan as possible although Federer is by far my favorite player. Am I bashing him if I admit that Federer choked away a few grand slams? No, I'm being realistic.

Mustard
06-20-2011, 05:09 AM
Nadal, of course, gets no credit for coming back from these deficits to win sets and matches. It's all Federer's "choking", apparently :roll:

zagor
06-20-2011, 05:10 AM
So many Federer fanboys have been acting ridiculously insecure lately. Some are starting threads with prayers to god that Nadal does not win Wimbledon. The constant whining is now getting annoying. Nadal is a bad match up for federer, Federer chokes all the matches away, Federer is past his prime etc. are all statments that have some degree of truth to them but are being abused horrendously by some fed fans here. The biggest cause of the lopsided record is not the surfaces and chokes, but rather a guy named Ralph.

Roger is quite old,every additional match he wins this year is a small miracle.

FedEx23
06-20-2011, 05:12 AM
Roger is quite old,every additional match he wins this year is a small miracle.

Maybe he's old, but he's still more consistent than almost anyone else on tour. Dare I say he's more consistent than Nadal?

FedEx23
06-20-2011, 05:15 AM
Nadal, of course, gets no credit for coming back from these deficits to win sets and matches. It's all Federer's "choking", apparently :roll:

Well I think it was definitely a factor of Nadal stepping up his game which caused the "choke" or lack of shotmaking. Nadal deserves all the credit with winning these matches, but there is a clear trend of Federer just sort of tailing off at the end of many of these matches, i.e. 2009 AO where Fed lost 6-2 in the 5th.

zagor
06-20-2011, 05:16 AM
It's all Federer's "choking"

Agree,hence the title of the thread.

zagor
06-20-2011, 05:18 AM
Maybe he's old, but he's still more consistent than almost anyone else on tour. Dare I say he's more consistent than Nadal?

You'd be wrong,Nadal reached 7 finals in a row since AO,the only time Fed was that consistent was back in 2006.

Fed is an ancient tennis specimen.

Magnus
06-20-2011, 05:25 AM
Nadal, of course, gets no credit for coming back from these deficits to win sets and matches. It's all Federer's "choking", apparently :roll:

When Fed makes 4 unforced errors in a row, it doesn't have much to do with Nadal.

FedEx23
06-20-2011, 05:31 AM
You'd be wrong,Nadal reached 7 finals in a row since AO,the only time Fed was that consistent was back in 2006.

Fed is an ancient tennis specimen.

Federer has been SO much more consistent over his career than Nadal. 28 straight QF appearances in majors. Not to say Nadal isn't consistent, but he has great stretches of brilliances and then flames out for a short period around the late summer or fall. Federer is much more even keel even though his success-rate has fallen off from his 04-07 high.

By consistent I don't mean he wins everything but his results are fairly even throughout the season. But this is not on the topic of this thread anymore so I'll stop there.

fps
06-20-2011, 05:34 AM
The only one that sticks in the mind as a seizure, an aberration, a man beaten before he walked on court with his head not right, was the RG final 2008. I can't believe it's not on here. It is spurious to claim some of these are chokes rather than matches ebbing away as Rafa raises his game at crunch time, always.

MichaelNadal
06-20-2011, 05:43 AM
When Fed makes 4 unforced errors in a row, it doesn't have much to do with Nadal.

Really, so who's returning the balls until the point the UE comes?

Omega_7000
06-20-2011, 05:52 AM
Really, so who's returning the balls until the point the UE comes?

So you admit Nadal keeps returning the ball until he gets an unforced error?

fps
06-20-2011, 05:54 AM
(Rafa makes players take greater risks and hit closer to the lines, so when we see Soderling and Federer makes unforced errors its because of Rafa being such a threat. They aren't UNFORCED errors they are ENFORCED errors)

Absolutely. The mental side of tennis is so important that I would say only about 20% of the shots claimed to be Unforced Errors are usually anything of the sort in a match.

norbac
06-20-2011, 05:57 AM
Really, so who's returning the balls until the point the UE comes?

Gilles Muller?

MichaelNadal
06-20-2011, 05:59 AM
So you admit Nadal keeps returning the ball until he gets an unforced error?

I admit it's not all about Federer "choking" yes. If Federer hits a UE that isn't choking, it's called being outplayed.

DjokovicForTheWin
06-20-2011, 06:09 AM
I admit it's not all about Federer "choking" yes. If Federer hits a UE that isn't choking, it's called being outplayed.

That pretty much proves Rafa is playing at his peak now and Djokovic is still murdering him on the court.

ACE of Hearts
06-20-2011, 06:28 AM
I thought this year's french open was a big choke.Never capitalized on the first set and had a chance to break in the 4th set.He never plays the big points well and little UEs start to pop up in his game.

MichaelNadal
06-20-2011, 06:43 AM
That pretty much proves Rafa is playing at his peak now and Djokovic is still murdering him on the court.

http://michaeljacksonanimatedgifs.com/images/others/mjgifs32.gif

kOaMaster
06-20-2011, 08:29 AM
just shows how close all those matches were - and how both nadal and federer managed time after time to come back after losing sets, games.

and how crucial the federer's breakpoints vs nadal are.

(maybe it's tennis's huuuge advantage of a lefty?)

Bhagi Katbamna
06-20-2011, 08:31 AM
AO' 09. But a bigger choke in a HUGE match is 09 US Open final.

I wouldn't call it a choke. JMDP stepped it up and just hit through Federer. Give the winner some credit.

Pwned
06-20-2011, 08:31 AM
None are chokes. But he should have won Rome 06 and maybe AO 09. But Nadal often has a lot of break points against him. It's not like having a break means you are a lock for the set.

icazares
06-20-2011, 08:59 AM
Gotta go with RG'11 based on his first serve percentage before and after the set point that he had in the first. Somehow, he started missing most serves after great serve performances in the first games and in his previous match with Djokovic. To me, a clear indication of a tight body not working as it should in times of distress.

Tammo
06-20-2011, 09:34 AM
all of them are pretty bad chokes

abmk
06-20-2011, 09:38 AM
Yeah but 5-2 up in the TB and then a DF?

I meant the TB was a choke when I said 'correct'. Not just the DF, but the UE after that as well . But the MP was not

Plus that matchpoint could've been his had he hit his FH DTL to fed FH instead of being predictable and going across to the BH. He played it safe IMO.

that point doesn't count as a choke. Not necessarily the best/bravest shot selection, but it didn't appear to be a nervous shot either

Sharpshooter
06-20-2011, 09:50 AM
that point doesn't count as a choke. Not necessarily the best/bravest shot selection, but it didn't appear to be a nervous shot either

Fair enough.

BTW I did a little research on the court speed to check what rating they actually have.

Miami has a category 2 rating - (medium-slow) because Laykold cushion plus is used.

WTF Barclays is also a category 2 (medium-slow) rating.

So considering WTF is indoors and Miami outdoors and with the generally hot temperatures in Miami, the heat actually contributes to making conditions a little faster.

US Open Decoturf is category 3 (medium)

So you can now admit that you were full of ***** when you posted that crap about WTF speed being closer to the USO conditions than Miami.

Semi-Pro
06-20-2011, 09:52 AM
Fair enough.

BTW I did a little research on the court speed to check what rating they actually have.

Miami has a category 2 rating - (medium-slow) because Laykold cushion plus is used.

WTF Barclays is also a category 2 (medium-slow) rating.

So considering WTF is indoors and Miami outdoors and the generally hot temperatures in Miami. The heat actually contributes to making conditions a little faster.

US Open Decoturf is category 3 (medium)

So you can now admit that you were full of ***** when you posted that crap about WTF speed being closer to the USO conditions than Miami.

You also have to consider the humidity in Miami. The humidity makes play even much slower. Similarly with Toronto.

Bud
06-20-2011, 10:07 AM
Nadal, of course, gets no credit for coming back from these deficits to win sets and matches. It's all Federer's "choking", apparently :roll:

Nadal started playing much better in the FO 11 final once he had all that excess tape cut off his foot. He was moving horribly up til that point.

Sharpshooter
06-20-2011, 10:09 AM
You also have to consider the humidity in Miami. The humidity makes play even much slower. Similarly with Toronto.

True, but heat makes the conditions faster as well as the heat makes the court play faster. With the heat in Miami the courts conditions are generally hot and dry.

Humidity and cold do the opposite. When the roof is closed, like indoor conditions humidity is higher (though they have air-conditioning, but not sure how great it is). Higher humidity makes the balls "wetter" and therefore, fluffier. The lower temperatures also slow things down due to the court surface temperature and a slight increase in air density.

I've been to the Barclays WTF and I can tell you I felt generally more cold there than at Miami that's for sure.

jackson vile
06-20-2011, 10:51 AM
I choose none of the above, Roger did not choke. He was out played period, same goes for all the other players.

tennisdad65
06-20-2011, 11:04 AM
AO09 for me, followed by Wim08. He had no business losing those matches. The Wim08 result was an after effect of the FO08 drubbing.

The rest, I think Nadal just played better.

Sharpshooter
06-20-2011, 11:21 AM
^ (In Wimbledon 08, Rafa was up 2 sets and a break in 3rd at before the rain came. And Federer only broke Rafa once in the whole match. Federer had no business making it a marathon. Don't be surprised if Rafa beats Federer in straight sets this time)

Actually BULLZ, he wasn't up a break in the third. Close, he did get Fed to 0-40 at one point, but just couldn't manage to get it.

But I do agree, the rain delay saved Fed from getting beat in straights. It allowed Fed to re-think his strategy, calm the nerves etc while it forced Nadal to think about the situation and think about being champion considering the position he was in which could've put his concentration off a little.

With both of those factors working in Fed's favor, he got back into the match.

Jchurch
06-20-2011, 11:37 AM
(Rafa has never lost in the 1st Round of a slam. While Federer lost in the 1st Round of Wimbledon THREE times. That balances things out)

Wow never losing in the first round in comparison to 10 consecutive finals. Don't delude yourself into actually believing that not losing in the first round of major actually balances things out.

Jchurch
06-20-2011, 11:39 AM
I wouldn't call it a choke. JMDP stepped it up and just hit through Federer. Give the winner some credit.

Agreed. Federer didn't choke. JMDP just starting slapping winners and Federer wanted to try to outhit him. A losing scenario for Federer.

Jchurch
06-20-2011, 11:41 AM
You also have to consider the humidity in Miami. The humidity makes play even much slower. Similarly with Toronto.

And all the sand in the surface that makes the balls kick up.

kishnabe
06-20-2011, 12:14 PM
FO 2007....was killer choke. He was bettet than Nadal that day....and the sam applied to 2011 FO!

Magnus
06-20-2011, 12:30 PM
I choose none of the above, Roger did not choke. He was out played period, same goes for all the other players.

Outplayed can also mean the other player did not choke while you did, hence you were outplayed. Fed was outplayed because he couldn't beat Nadal mentally even when his tennis was better for large portions of the matches. Fed choked in many occasions where he was serving for the set, having 3 BPs in a row, etc.

Magnus
06-20-2011, 12:33 PM
I admit it's not all about Federer "choking" yes. If Federer hits a UE that isn't choking, it's called being outplayed.

So you admit there was "some" choking.

MichaelNadal
06-20-2011, 12:54 PM
So you admit there was "some" choking.

Mentally..... to a certain degree. But just because a player is up a break doesn't mean it's a choke. A set isn't over just because someone's serving for it, that's what's so good and different about tennis.

Magnus
06-20-2011, 12:58 PM
Mentally..... to a certain degree. But just because a player is up a break doesn't mean it's a choke. A set isn't over just because someone's serving for it, that's what's so good and different about tennis.

When a player leads 5-1 and has set points, and losses the set with a double break and a horde of unforced errors, its a choke. Maybe the opponent upped his level as well, but it is still a choke. You can usually call a choke when you see one as well. The huge unforced error (usually not a small miss but a huge one), the body language, the 1st serve disappearing, all are great signs of choking.

MichaelNadal
06-20-2011, 03:33 PM
When a player leads 5-1 and has set points, and losses the set with a double break and a horde of unforced errors, its a choke. Maybe the opponent upped his level as well, but it is still a choke. You can usually call a choke when you see one as well. The huge unforced error (usually not a small miss but a huge one), the body language, the 1st serve disappearing, all are great signs of choking.

Choking, a.k.a being outplayed.
The other person is simply playing better tennis.

NadalAgassi
06-20-2011, 03:38 PM
A real choke of the match away would have to be losing a big lead in a match winning set which none of these examples show.

piece
06-20-2011, 06:06 PM
Choking, a.k.a being outplayed.
The other person is simply playing better tennis.

Not sure what you're trying to prove by reiterating the relationship between choking and being outplayed. Obviously, if you're choking, your opponent is playing better than you at the point in time. And bachelors don't have wives. So what? No one was trying to say choking and being outplayed are mutually exclusive. choking is basically getting in to a position to win the match, or at least an in important part of the match, like a set, and then failing to do so on the basis of poor, nervous play. It is exarcebated when you are in a position such that you would have to play badly, in addition to your opponent playing well, to lose whatever advantage you had.

So yeah Nadal played better than Federer did from when Fed was 5-1 up in the 2008 Hamburg final first set. This can be explained by the fact that Federer choked.

Sorry if this post has a harsh tone, I just think you're a good poster who might be getting a little bit defensive about the legitimacy of Nadal's wins. But players choke, it's not some black mark on Nadal's record that Federer has done it against him a handful of times.

tlm
06-20-2011, 06:54 PM
Its hard to pick there have been so many. This is exactly why fed will never be the goat, he will be remembered for being rafas ***** during his prime.

NadalAgassi
06-20-2011, 07:17 PM
Its hard to pick there have been so many. This is exactly why fed will never be the goat, he will be remembered for being rafas ***** during his prime.

Exactly. Someone who succumbs both mentally and physically to their main rivalry almost everytime out cannot be the GOAT. None of Sampras, Borg, Laver, Gonzales, Tilden, Budge, Navratilova, Graf, Evert, Lenglen, Wills, Connoly, Court, or Serena were anyones lapdog.

Chopin
06-20-2011, 08:53 PM
Its hard to pick there have been so many. This is exactly why fed will never be the goat, he will be remembered for being rafas ***** during his prime.

I think he'll be remembered for his amazing career. There's no such thing as a GOAT.

Chopin
06-20-2011, 08:57 PM
Exactly. Someone who succumbs both mentally and physically to their main rivalry almost everytime out cannot be the GOAT. None of Sampras, Borg, Laver, Gonzales, Tilden, Budge, Navratilova, Graf, Evert, Lenglen, Wills, Connoly, Court, or Serena were anyones lapdog.

You mean to write, to *his main rival*

I don't think Federer is Nadal's lapdog, I just think Nadal is much better on clay and around 5 years younger. Do you expect Federer at almost 30 to be beating Nadal at 25? I don't.

It's fine if people think Nadal is a better tennis player, but Federer has a winning record against Nadal off of clay, right? Right. Again, I'm not saying which one is better, but the head to head is just a number. Federer still has more grand slams than anyone in the history of mens' tennis: no one can take that away from him.

Jchurch
06-20-2011, 09:03 PM
You mean to write, to *his main rival*

I don't think Federer is Nadal's lapdog, I just think Nadal is much better on clay and around 5 years younger. Do you expect Federer at almost 30 to be beating Nadal at 25? I don't.

It's fine if people think Nadal is a better tennis player, but Federer has a winning record against Nadal off of clay, right? Right. Again, I'm not saying which one is better, but the head to head is just a number. Federer still has more grand slams than anyone in the history of mens' tennis: no one can take that away from him.

Soon someone wil pop in and say except Nadal. I agree with you statement though.

TMF
06-20-2011, 09:05 PM
The 2nd option in that poll i must point out....

Hamburg 2008, Fed failing to win 1st set after leading 5-1.

In that match Nadal called a MTO when was overwhelmed by Fed. He took away Fed's rhythm who had all the momentum. Nadal claiming injury after the MTO suddenly play god mode tennis. There was no sign of injury, it was a tactic that was taught by uncle Toni to slow down the match. These kind of tactics make other players look like they choke.

NadalAgassi
06-20-2011, 09:07 PM
You mean to write, to *his main rival*

I don't think Federer is Nadal's lapdog, I just think Nadal is much better on clay and around 5 years younger. Do you expect Federer at almost 30 to be beating Nadal at 25? I don't.

It's fine if people think Nadal is a better tennis player, but Federer has a winning record against Nadal off of clay, right? Right. Again, I'm not saying which one is better, but the head to head is just a number. Federer still has more grand slams than anyone in the history of mens' tennis: no one can take that away from him.

This apart from clay stuff is BS. Champions find way to win regardless of the opponent and surface. All the people I mentioned beat their main rivals in big matches on all surfaces. Even Evert beat Navratilova in the Wimbledon semis on grass twice, and Australian Open final on grass.

Why cant Federer even in his prime own a very young Nadal on hard courts or any other surface the way Nadal owns Federer on clay. The fact he cant proves Nadals dominance over Federer. Federer being so superior to Nadal on non clay surfaces as his fans claim, in that case should be able to go something like 9-2 or 10-1 vs Nadal on non clay surfaces and negate the clay advantage, yet he cant even come close to that. Heck he trails Nadal 4-1 on outdoor hard courts, the surface he has won 9 slams and Nadal to date only 2, and that is with most of the matches being when Nadal was a teenager.

Federer was only 27 when he lost to Nadal in the Australian Open final on hard courts, going to 0-1 in hard court slam finals to Nadal. He was only 26 when he lost to him in the Wimbledon final which led to Federer losing slam finals on all surfaces to Nadal, while eventually going 0-4 himself in French Open finals. Nadal himself was only 17 and 19 when he beat PEAK Federer in 2 of their first 3 matches on hard courts (and was up 2 sets to 0 and 5-3 in the 3rd in the one loss). Nadal himself was only 18 when he began to win every match vs peak Federer on clay.

Sorry there are only so many excuses one can come up with. Nadal owns Federer period. Of course that doesnt make Nadal the GOAT. That isnt what this is about. Nadal has a way to go still before that. It does mean Federer clearly is not however.

TMF
06-20-2011, 09:27 PM
Most GS titles
1. Roger Federer 16
2. Pete Sampras 14
3. Björn Borg 11
4. Rafael Nadal 10
5. Jimmy Connors 8
Ivan Lendl 8
Andre Agassi 8
8. John McEnroe 7
Mats Wilander 7
10. Stefan Edberg 6
Boris Becker 6

GS finals
1. Roger Federer 23
2. Ivan Lendl 19
3. Pete Sampras 18
4. Björn Borg 16
5. Jimmy Connors 15
Andre Agassi 15
7. Rafael Nadal 12
8. John McEnroe 11
Mats Wilander 11
Stefan Edberg 11

Consecutive GS finals
1. Roger Federer 10
2. Roger Federer 8
3. Andre Agassi 4
4. Jimmy Connors 3
Björn Borg 3
Björn Borg 3
Björn Borg 3
Ivan Lendl 3
John McEnroe 3
Ivan Lendl 3
Ivan Lendl 3
Mats Wilander 3
Jim Courier 3
Jim Courier 3
Pete Sampras 3
Rafael Nadal 3

GS semi-finals
1. Jimmy Connors 31
2. Ivan Lendl 28
Roger Federer 28
4. Andre Agassi 26
5. Pete Sampras 23
6. John McEnroe 19
Stefan Edberg 19
8. Boris Becker 18
9. Björn Borg 17
10. Rafael Nadal 15

Three Slams Per Year
Jimmy Connors 1974
Mats Wilander 1988
Roger Federer 2004
Roger Federer 2006
Roger Federer 2007
Rafael Nadal 2010

All Four Finals Per Year
Roger Federer 2006
Roger Federer 2007
Roger Federer 2009

All Four Semi-finals Per Year
Ivan Lendl 1987
Roger Federer 2005
Roger Federer 2006
Roger Federer 2007
Roger Federer 2008
Rafael Nadal 2008
Roger Federer 2009

Most consecutive matches won at one Grand Slam event:
1. Björn Borg (Wimbledon), 41
2. Roger Federer (Wimbledon), 40
= Roger Federer (US Open), 40
4. Pete Sampras (Wimbledon), 31
= Rafael Nadal (French Open), 31

Year-End Championships
1. Ivan Lendl 5
Pete Sampras 5
Roger Federer 5
4. Ilie Năstase 3
John McEnroe 3
Boris Becker 3

Highest Season Winning Percentage
1 J. McEnroe 1984 82-3 .965
2. J. Connors 1973 89-4 .957
3. R. Federer 2005 81-4 .953
4. R. Federer 2006 92-5 .948
5. J. Connors 1974 95-6 .941
6. I. Lendl 1985 80-6 .930
7. B. Borg 1979 76-6 .927
8. R. Federer 2004 74-6 .925
9. I. Lendl 1982 106-9 .922
10. B. Borg 1977 76-8 .906


Most Weeks at #1
1. Sampras, PetePete Sampras 286
2. Federer, RogerRoger Federer 285
3. Lendl, IvanIvan Lendl 270
4. Connors, JimmyJimmy Connors 268
5. McEnroe, JohnJohn McEnroe 170
6. Borg, BjörnBjörn Borg 109
7. Nadal, RafaelRafael Nadal 102*
8. Agassi, AndreAndre Agassi 101
9. Hewitt, LleytonLleyton Hewitt 80
10. Edberg, StefanStefan Edberg 72

Consecutive Weeks at #1
1. Federer, RogerRoger Federer (1) 237
2. Connors, JimmyJimmy Connors (1) 160
3. Lendl, IvanIvan Lendl (1) 157
4. Sampras, PetePete Sampras (1) 102
5. Connors, JimmyJimmy Connors (2) 84
6. Sampras, PetePete Sampras (2) 82
7. Lendl, IvanIvan Lendl (2) 80
8. Hewitt, LleytonLleyton Hewitt (1) 75
9. McEnroe, JohnJohn McEnroe (1) 58
10. Nadal, RafaelRafael Nadal (1) 56*

Year End #1
1. Sampras 6
2. Federer 5
3. Borg 4
4. Connors 3
= Lendl 3
= McEnroe 3

NadalAgassi
06-20-2011, 09:35 PM
You forgot the most galling stats for Federer.

Head to heads vs the other double digit slam winner of his era:

Overall: 8-17
Slam finals: 2-6
Slam meetings: 2-7
Clay: 2-12
Outoor hard courts: 1-4
Longest consecutive slam losing streak: 3 matches in 8 months
Longest overall losing streak: 5 matches
Longest slam winning streak: 1 match
Longest overall winning streak: 2 matches


And comparing the GS titles of players pre 1980 to today is stupid for obvious reasons. I guess you think Emerson is better than Laver too. He has more slams.

TMF
06-20-2011, 09:41 PM
You forgot the most galling stats for Federer.

Head to heads vs the other double digit slam winner of his era:

Overall: 8-17
Slam finals: 2-6
Slam meetings: 2-7
Clay: 2-12
Outoor hard courts: 1-4
Longest consecutive slam losing streak: 3 matches in 8 months
Longest overall losing streak: 5 matches
Longest slam winning streak: 1 match
Longest overall winning streak: 2 matches


And comparing the GS titles of players pre 1980 to today is stupid for obvious reasons. I guess you think Emerson is better than Laver too. He has more slams.

To indicate nothing but h2h as a sole measurement of an individual achievements is not only stupid, but ********.

Pwned
06-20-2011, 09:48 PM
You forgot the most galling stats for Federer.

Head to heads vs the other double digit slam winner of his era:

Overall: 8-17
Slam finals: 2-6
Slam meetings: 2-7
Clay: 2-12
Outoor hard courts: 1-4
Longest consecutive slam losing streak: 3 matches in 8 months
Longest overall losing streak: 5 matches
Longest slam winning streak: 1 match
Longest overall winning streak: 2 matches


And comparing the GS titles of players pre 1980 to today is stupid for obvious reasons. I guess you think Emerson is better than Laver too. He has more slams.

Yet Nadal vs the field is worse....

TMF
06-20-2011, 09:52 PM
Yet Nadal vs the field is worse....

Comparing each player against the entire playing is by far the most objective observation.

NadalAgassi
06-20-2011, 09:54 PM
Yet Nadal vs the field is worse....

So what, nobody is saying Nadal is the GOAT (at this point). Just that Federer clearly is not. No GOAT is the lapdog of their main and only rival.

Rippy
06-20-2011, 09:58 PM
So what, nobody is saying Nadal is the GOAT (at this point). Just that Federer clearly is not. No GOAT is the lapdog of their main and only rival.

How is Nadal Federer's only rival?

Of course Federer is going to be the "lapdog of his only rival" if your very definition of a "rival" is one that has a winning record over him.

Why have you not considered Roddick, to give the most extreme example, a rival of Federer?

TMF
06-20-2011, 09:59 PM
So what, nobody is saying Nadal is the GOAT (at this point). Just that Federer clearly is not. No GOAT is the lapdog of their main and only rival.

They are 5 yrs apart. Fed's main rivals would be like the Safin, Hewitt, Roddick or Davy since they are similar age(all have past their prime). Nadal's main rivalry are Nole and Murray, or players at around his age.


EDIT: 5 or 6 yrs apart is huge. How do we expect Safin(retired) or Hewitt compete against prime Nole today. It's impossible.

Ray Mercer
06-20-2011, 10:02 PM
They are 5 yrs apart. Fed's main rivals would be like the Safin, Hewitt, Roddick or Davy since they are similar age(all have past their prime). Nadal's main rivalry are Nole and Murray, or players at around his age.


EDIT: 5 or 6 yrs apart is huge. How do we expect Safin(retired) or Hewitt compete against prime Nole today. It's impossible.

I wouldn't bother arguing with this NadalAgassi. His sole purpose on this board is to trash Federer. He's a moron.

Sharpshooter
06-20-2011, 10:05 PM
They are 5 yrs apart. Fed's main rivals would be like the Safin, Hewitt, Roddick or Davy since they are similar age(all have past their prime). Nadal's main rivalry are Nole and Murray, or players at around his age.


EDIT: 5 or 6 yrs apart is huge. How do we expect Safin(retired) or Hewitt compete against prime Nole today. It's impossible.

And how to we expect 18 year old Rafa to compete with prime Roger? It's impossible.
...oh wait :oops:

TMF
06-20-2011, 10:11 PM
And how to we expect 18 year old Rafa to compete with prime Roger? It's impossible.
...oh wait :oops:

And I've made my point....Roger is not Rafa's main rival.

Ray Mercer
06-20-2011, 10:12 PM
And how to we expect 18 year old Rafa to compete with prime Roger? It's impossible.
...oh wait :oops:

Federer has 16 slams. That is more than anyone else. This is what makes him superior to the rest. What is difficult to understand about this? If Nadal was superior he would have stopped Fed from winning those 16 majors but the fact is he was destroyed much earlier in tournaments by lesser players. Nadal was raped by Tsonga at the Aussie in 08. Federer turned around and raped Tsonga at the Aussie in 10. This is what makes him superior. Nadal's career is littered by underachievements to lesser players in majors. Players like Tsonga, Ferrer, Blake, Gonzalez, Murray etc. would not beat a prime Fed at a major but they have shown they can beat Nadal.

martini1
06-20-2011, 10:13 PM
What's is his biggest choke?

FO2011 was no choke. A choke has to be at least a few games away from winning if not MP(s) away.

TMF
06-20-2011, 10:14 PM
I wouldn't bother arguing with this NadalAgassi. His sole purpose on this board is to trash Federer. He's a moron.

He created a thread about which player is a stronger candidate as GOAT between Graf and Fed.

NOw he said "Fed is clearly not".:shock:

Pwned
06-20-2011, 10:15 PM
So what, nobody is saying Nadal is the GOAT (at this point). Just that Federer clearly is not. No GOAT is the lapdog of their main and only rival.

No one clearly is. All you can do is be in the conversation.

Sharpshooter
06-20-2011, 10:21 PM
And I've my point....Roger is not Rafa's main rival.

Yep. tell that to Roger now, because he even said himself that Rafa's his main rival


Federer has 16 slams. That is more than anyone else. This is what makes him superior to the rest. What is difficult to understand about this? If Nadal was superior he would have stopped Fed from winning those 16 majors but the fact is he was destroyed much earlier in tournaments by lesser players. Nadal was raped by Tsonga at the Aussie in 08. Federer turned around and raped Tsonga at the Aussie in 10. This is what makes him superior. Nadal's career is littered by underachievements to lesser players in majors. Players like Tsonga, Ferrer, Blake, Gonzalez, Murray etc. would not beat a prime Fed at a major but they have shown they can beat Nadal.

He lost to all of those guys at under age 22. He would not lose to them now.

As for Murray, well he's a good player and playing him in the semi's and quarter's is a whole different aspect then in the final. In the final he is visibly far more nervous and it obviously affects his game. We'll see when Fed has to face Murray before a final for once. Murray still leads Fed in the h2h, he doesn't lead Nadal.

As for getting raped by Tsonga, yeah well Jo played incredible in that semi and was nowhere near that form ever again including the AO10 So there goes your stupid argument.

Anyway at least Rafa wasn't raped like Fed in 08RG :oops:

TMF
06-20-2011, 10:24 PM
Yep. tell that to Roger now, because he even said himself that Rafa's his main rival


If they are at the same age and peak at the same time, then I agree with you.

Ray Mercer
06-20-2011, 10:25 PM
Yep. tell that to Roger now, because he even said himself that Rafa's his main rival



He lost to all of those guys at under age 22. He would not lose to them now.

As for Murray, well he's a good player and playing him in the semi's and quarter's is a whole different aspect then in the final. In the final he is visibly far more nervous and it obviously affects his game. We'll see when Fed has to face Murray before a final for once. Murray still leads Fed in the h2h, he doesn't lead Nadal.

As for getting raped by Tsonga, yeah well Jo played incredible in that semi and was nowhere near that form ever again including the AO10 So there goes your stupid argument.

Anyway at least Rafa wasn't raped like Fed in 08RG :oops:

Tsonga playing godlike is no excuse. Nadal was already a slam winner when he lost to the guys I mentioned therefore he was a top player and near his best. James Blake blew him off the court at Rafa's best.

Sharpshooter
06-20-2011, 10:42 PM
If they are at the same age and peak at the same time, then I agree with you.

I don't care what you agree with. Roger himself said that Rafa is his main rival, can't argue with that!

Sharpshooter
06-20-2011, 10:45 PM
Tsonga playing godlike is no excuse. Nadal was already a slam winner when he lost to the guys I mentioned therefore he was a top player and near his best. James Blake blew him off the court at Rafa's best.

LOL Nadal was at his best in 2005 USO. OK troll.

Rafa blew Fed off the court in 08 RG final in the most embarrassing final in history :oops:

Sid_Vicious
06-20-2011, 10:48 PM
Federer's chokes put an asterisk on Nadal's achievements.

Ray Mercer
06-20-2011, 10:52 PM
LOL Nadal was at his best in 2005 USO. OK troll.

Rafa blew Fed off the court in 08 RG final in the most embarrassing final in history :oops:

Nadal was a slam winner by that time he lost at that US Open. He must have been pretty good.

tusharlovesrafa
06-20-2011, 10:59 PM
Federer's chokes put an asterisk on Nadal's achievements.

{Actuallu Nadala chokis put an !!!! on fad..jost imagene the sinarios if nadel didn't chuke in wimbly 2006 and 07..He most be hving 12 slums istad of 10 slums..}

Sid_Vicious
06-20-2011, 11:02 PM
{Actuallu Nadala chokis put an !!!! on fad..jost imagene the sinarios if nadel didn't chuke in wimbly 2006 and 07..He most be hving 12 slums istad of 10 slums..}

<uoy aer worng. freerder wno 2060 and 2700 slums fiar adn seqare>

tusharlovesrafa
06-20-2011, 11:09 PM
<uoy aer worng. freerder wno 2060 and 2700 slums fiar adn seqare>

turth alweys hourts sis ....20070 bimbly was e totel chuke frum nadala ..he had broke pundits in 5 th shets but didm't capataliztion so he luses..

Fugazi
06-20-2011, 11:14 PM
Not sure what you're trying to prove by reiterating the relationship between choking and being outplayed. Obviously, if you're choking, your opponent is playing better than you at the point in time. And bachelors don't have wives. So what? No one was trying to say choking and being outplayed are mutually exclusive. choking is basically getting in to a position to win the match, or at least an in important part of the match, like a set, and then failing to do so on the basis of poor, nervous play. It is exarcebated when you are in a position such that you would have to play badly, in addition to your opponent playing well, to lose whatever advantage you had.

So yeah Nadal played better than Federer did from when Fed was 5-1 up in the 2008 Hamburg final first set. This can be explained by the fact that Federer choked.

Sorry if this post has a harsh tone, I just think you're a good poster who might be getting a little bit defensive about the legitimacy of Nadal's wins. But players choke, it's not some black mark on Nadal's record that Federer has done it against him a handful of times.
Very good post, I agree completely.

Fugazi
06-20-2011, 11:23 PM
So what, nobody is saying Nadal is the GOAT (at this point). Just that Federer clearly is not. No GOAT is the lapdog of their main and only rival.
Maybe, but then Sampras conveniently avoided having such a poor H2H against any slow court rival by sucking on clay... Had Fed, too, sucked on clay, his H2H against Rafa would be close to 50-50 and the lapdog argument wouldn't be raised. He would probably have "only" 15 slams and yet paradoxically be considered the undisputed GOAT of the open era.

NadalAgassi
06-20-2011, 11:27 PM
They are 5 yrs apart. Fed's main rivals would be like the Safin, Hewitt, Roddick or Davy since they are similar age(all have past their prime). Nadal's main rivalry are Nole and Murray, or players at around his age.

EDIT: 5 or 6 yrs apart is huge. How do we expect Safin(retired) or Hewitt compete against prime Nole today. It's impossible.

They are less than 5 years apart. The age difference is about the same as Graf and Seles (only 4 months more). I guess by your logic Graf and Seles werent real rivals or contemporaries either, LOL!

PEAK Federer lost 6 of the first 7 matches he played vs Nadal. And dont give me this clay excuse since you are admitting that Federer past 26 shouldnt be expected to beat Nadal on any surface apparently, so by that logic Nadal aged 18-20 shouldnt be expected to beat Federer on clay either. Oh yeah and 17-19 year old Nadal won 2 of their first 3 hard courts matches too, playing adult peak Federer.

NadalAgassi
06-20-2011, 11:32 PM
Maybe, but then Sampras conveniently avoided that by sucking on clay... Had Fed sucked on clay, his H2H against Rafa would be close to 50-50 and the lapdog argument wouldn't be raised.

Even if Sampras had played about half of his career matches with Muster, Agassi or whomever on clay he still wouldnt be owned by any of them. Muster, Bruguera, or any other clay courter he would have won almost every match that wasnt on clay. And Sampras beat everyone of his era on clay atleast once too btw. If it was Agassi, well Sampras still won the vast majority of matches on non clay surfaces minus rebound ace, and Sampras is almost tied with Agassi on clay.

If you want to stretch further and imagine a hypothetical with Nadal it is quite possible Sampras would have just gone 10-1 with Nadal in non clay matches, rather than only merely playing Nadal even outside of clay like Federer which isnt acceptable to create a balanced rivalry when you are also getting totally owned on clay.

Fact is there is no way to know. What we do know is that all these other greats were not owned by anyone. Federer is probably the only top 8 man or women in history who was so thoroughly owned by their main rival.

NadalAgassi
06-20-2011, 11:37 PM
How is Nadal Federer's only rival?

Of course Federer is going to be the "lapdog of his only rival" if your very definition of a "rival" is one that has a winning record over him.

Why have you not considered Roddick, to give the most extreme example, a rival of Federer?

Roddick won 1 slam. Of course he is not a rival of Federer. It is silly to even compare the two. Talking about Roddick as a rival to Federer is like talking about Vitas Gerulatis as a main rival to Borg, or Andres Gomez as a main rival to Lendl.

Federer and Nadal have 16 and 10 slams. No other player of the last 8 years (other than a now retired Agassi) has won more than 2 slams. There are no other rivals, the two are by far in a class by themselves of this era and thus the only real rival of Federer is Nadal.

TennisFan3
06-21-2011, 12:14 AM
Even if Sampras had played about half of his career matches with Muster, Agassi or whomever on clay he still wouldnt be owned by any of them.

Your H2H with your rival matters IF your rival is a MULTI-slam winner and a GREAT player in his own right.

Which is why no one cares about Fed's h2h with Canas, Simon or even Murray (who isn't great yet). Ditto for Nadal; no one would give a flying
damn about his h2h with Davydenko.

By that token, the significant h2h for Sampras was with guys like Agassi, Becker, Edberg and the like.

And even if Sampras had played Agassi 13 times on clay (as many times as Nadal had played Fed on clay) NO way would their h2h be 11-2 (as Nadal-Fed's is).

Sampras did NOT get owned by anyone in the big matches when it mattered. He always found a way, and there is NO chance he would EVER be 2-8 against another great player in slams.

This is just one argument, among several other important ones, as to why Fed is not the undisputed GOAT (as the TT board believes).

Sharpshooter
06-21-2011, 12:17 AM
Nadal was a slam winner by that time he lost at that US Open. He must have been pretty good.

Yeah let's ignore that clay and decoturf are completely different surfaces. As well as the fact that Rafa's game was pretty much designed for clay at the time.

You really are an imbecile.

Tennis_Monk
06-21-2011, 12:18 AM
Your H2H with your rival matters IF your rival is a MULTI-slam winner and a GREAT player in his own right.

Which is why no one cares about Fed's h2h with Canas, Simon or even Murray (who isn't great yet). Ditto for Nadal; no one would give a flying
damn about his h2h with Davydenko.

By that token, the significant h2h for Sampras was with guys like Agassi, Becker, Edberg and the like.

And even if Sampras had played Agassi 13 times on clay (as many times as Nadal had played Fed on clay) NO way would their h2h be 11-2 (as Nadal-Fed's is).

Sampras did NOT get owned by anyone in the big matches when it mattered. He always found a way, and there is NO chance he would EVER be 2-8 against another great player in slams.

This is just one argument, among several other important ones, as to why Fed is not the undisputed GOAT (as the TT board believes).

thats because Sampras played in a weak era ;)

mandy01
06-21-2011, 12:20 AM
Your H2H with your rival matters IF your rival is a MULTI-slam winner and a GREAT player in his own right.
Why? because you said so?
I'm sorry,that's an individual opinion.Nothing more.
As to what Sampras would or would not have been on clay-that is essentially irrelevant when the guy couldn't make as much as a final at the French Open.

zagor
06-21-2011, 01:37 AM
Sampras did NOT get owned by anyone in the big matches when it mattered. He always found a way.

Oh yes he sure found a way to lose to Galo Blanco,Ramon Delgado and mighty CC specialist Scud at FO.Not to mention getting spanked in straights during his peak at Wimbledon in his sole encounter with Krajicek there or losing to a teenage green Fed(who wasn't even top 10 at the time)also at Wimbledon as a defending champ.Gotta love all this hyperbole "he always found a way" LOL,he was a great player(one of the best ever)but his career isn't perfect and has holes like anyone else's.

Man I can't stand pseudo Nadal fans who only hang on Rafa's Wilanders because he stops/stopped Fed from smashing even more of Pete's records,bunch of hilarious cheerleaders.Go Rafa! Protect the legacy of my mancrush! Beat Fed and I promise I'll be your biggest fan forever!

You got one thing right though,Fed is not the undisputed GOAT by any means but he sure as heck is one of the all time tennis greats no matter the amount of whiny excuses you people come up with as to why he achieved so much.

TennisFan3
06-21-2011, 02:04 AM
^^ When did I ever say, Sampras is the GOAT. IMO, he's not close. Fed probably has a (slightly) stronger case, though even he isn't the GOAT.

Stop being over-dramatic. I've admitted in the past that Fed's loses to Nadal have a lot to do with matchup problem than with raw tennis talent or such.

However this doesn't change the fact, that Fed should have squeezed out some more wins against Nadal: F.O '05 SF, Rome '06 F, F.O '07 F, AO '09 F etc etc. I'm pretty sure, that Fed feels the same way too..

Fed may be a more versatile player than Sampras, but I can tell you Pistol Pete was a bigger clutch player IMO. You may think otherwise..

ViscaB
06-21-2011, 02:06 AM
These are not chokes. It's just that Nadal raised his level on these occasions like greats do. Federer has done so on many occasions himself...

zagor
06-21-2011, 02:27 AM
^^ When did I ever say, Sampras is the GOAT. IMO, he's not close. Fed probably has a (slightly) stronger case, though even he isn't the GOAT.

Stop being over-dramatic. I've admitted in the past that Fed's loses to Nadal have a lot to do with matchup problem than with raw tennis talent or such.

However this doesn't change the fact, that Fed should have squeezed out some more wins against Nadal: F.O '05 SF, Rome '06 F, F.O '07 F, AO '09 F etc etc. I'm pretty sure, that Fed feels the same way too..

Fed may be a more versatile player than Sampras, but I can tell you Pistol Pete was a bigger clutch player IMO. You may think otherwise..

No I don't,Sampras was a better big match player than Fed(not that Fed is bad in that regard or anything,he's a champ as well)but nonsense like "he always found a way" makes it seem like the guy never lost a big match or got tight in his career.Fed and Sampras have different strengths,played under different conditions and had different careers but both of them are all time tennis greats,who is better is largely irrelevant for me(not that I think they should be compared before Fed hangs up the racket anyway).

As for Nadal,if Fed could have won more big matches against he would have,Nadal beat him on those occasions,period.

Magnus
06-21-2011, 02:27 AM
Oh yes he sure found a way to lose to Galo Blanco,Ramon Delgado and mighty CC specialist Scud at FO.Not to mention getting spanked in straights during his peak at Wimbledon in his sole encounter with Krajicek there or losing to a teenage green Fed(who wasn't even top 10 at the time)also at Wimbledon as a defending champ.Gotta love all this hyperbole "he always found a way" LOL,he was a great player(one of the best ever)but his career isn't perfect and has holes like anyone else's.

Man I can't stand pseudo Nadal fans who only hang on Rafa's Wilanders because he stops/stopped Fed from smashing even more of Pete's records,bunch of hilarious cheerleaders.Go Rafa! Protect the legacy of my mancrush! Beat Fed and I promise I'll be your biggest fan forever!

You got one thing right though,Fed is not the undisputed GOAT by any means but he sure as heck is one of the all time tennis greats no matter the amount of whiny excuses you people come up with as to why he achieved so much.

zagor, that is the GOAT of posts, that's for sure. Well done.

Magnus
06-21-2011, 02:39 AM
Your H2H with your rival matters IF your rival is a MULTI-slam winner and a GREAT player in his own right.

Which is why no one cares about Fed's h2h with Canas, Simon or even Murray (who isn't great yet). Ditto for Nadal; no one would give a flying
damn about his h2h with Davydenko.

By that token, the significant h2h for Sampras was with guys like Agassi, Becker, Edberg and the like.

And even if Sampras had played Agassi 13 times on clay (as many times as Nadal had played Fed on clay) NO way would their h2h be 11-2 (as Nadal-Fed's is).

Sampras did NOT get owned by anyone in the big matches when it mattered. He always found a way, and there is NO chance he would EVER be 2-8 against another great player in slams.

This is just one argument, among several other important ones, as to why Fed is not the undisputed GOAT (as the TT board believes).

Fed was never an amazing match player. I can name at least 10 player that are better match players than he is, and its no secret. Yeah, Fed did win some of the most intesne and dramatic matches in recent years, but he lost a lot too. I actually think he declined in that regard as well, along with his tennis abilities. So I agree that both Nadal and Sampras are better competitors and fighters than Fed ever was (although Fed used to be pretty clutch as well!). That is why for me it is impossible to declare a GOAT. Fed cannot be GOAT because of that, Pete and Nadal cannot be GOATS because of other issues.

I think Fed, at his prime, didn't need a lot more than his own tennis abilities to dominate matches. Other than losses to Nadal on clay and a couple losses to random players, the guy ruled the tennis world. BTW, Pete was never good enough to reach the tough clay players and therefore he has nore decent H2Hs. Imagine Pete playing Nadal in the FO final - he would lose, again and again and again, and the H2H would have looked like the Roger one or maybe worse. Sampras' clutch wouldn't have mattered in this case, he'd have been dominated with no cards to play.

rainingaces
06-21-2011, 02:53 AM
Nadal plays better when he is behind as we saw again yesterday, when 5-4 down a break to russel first set and then he gets pumped up and wins the set with a flurry of forehand winners 6-4. Not always Federer choking, its a combination of nadal improving and sometimes Federer not continuing his aggressive play.

Fedex
06-21-2011, 02:57 AM
Nadal plays better when he is behind as we saw again yesterday, when 5-4 down a break to russel first set and then he gets pumped up and wins the set with a flurry of forehand winners 6-4. Not always Federer choking, its a combination of nadal improving and sometimes Federer not continuing his aggressive play.

Nadal was very impressive yesterday.
Must be like playing a brick wall.
Everything comes back at you and the harder you hit, the harder it comes back.

Sharpshooter
06-21-2011, 03:07 AM
(Can you imagine what would happen if Rafa became a fast starter? He's only ever lost ONE match in slams after winning the 1st set. So that means if he wins the first set, he wins the match. Toni should somehow figure out how to make Rafa play brilliant in the 1st set, then he never loses a slam match [unless the change in 1st set dynamic ends up altering how he plays late in matches])

Hahaha that's what the fifth time you've posted that. LOL The ****s can't argue that one so they ignore it.

Sharpshooter
06-21-2011, 03:38 AM
(Yep gigantic implications, badcore)

Dare you to start a thread on it. The ****s would go banana's.

ninman
06-21-2011, 03:40 AM
I wouldn't call Rome 2006 a choke, or any of his losses prior to that choking either, Nadal was just better than Federer on those days. Federer got broken at 4-4 in the third in Dubai, was outplayed in Monte Carlo and RG.

But Rome 2006 was where it all started. It wasn't just the match points, there were many opportunities in the fifth for Federer to win it. 4-2, 40-30, if he wins that point/game he'll serve for the match, the match points, 5-3 up in the tiebreaker.

It was all there for Federer to take that match and he blew it. I think after that he never really believed he could beat Nadal again, at least on clay. Then after Wimbledon 2008 you started seeing it more on other surfaces.

I believe, like others do, if he had won in Rome 2006, the h2h would be different. It sucks, but that's life.

mandy01
06-21-2011, 03:41 AM
(Can you imagine what would happen if Rafa became a fast starter? He's only ever lost ONE match in slams after winning the 1st set. So that means if he wins the first set, he wins the match. Toni should somehow figure out how to make Rafa play brilliant in the 1st set, then he never loses a slam match [unless the change in 1st set dynamic ends up altering how he plays late in matches])
Ehhh...Cool story.But tennis is a dynamic sport. Just because something hasn't happened before, doesn't mean it cannot happen in the future. Nor is Nadal's performance dependent entirely on his play. He can try to be a 'fast starter' as you say,all he wants but if the opponent is in no mood to concede defeat easily,it's not going to always help.

ksbh
06-21-2011, 06:24 AM
I'm disappointed to see that Federer fans think their hero is a choker! He's certainly mentally weak but I doubt he's a choker.

abmk
06-21-2011, 09:21 AM
Even if Sampras had played about half of his career matches with Muster, Agassi or whomever on clay he still wouldnt be owned by any of them. Muster, Bruguera, or any other clay courter he would have won almost every match that wasnt on clay. And Sampras beat everyone of his era on clay atleast once too btw. If it was Agassi, well Sampras still won the vast majority of matches on non clay surfaces minus rebound ace, and Sampras is almost tied with Agassi on clay.

If you want to stretch further and imagine a hypothetical with Nadal it is quite possible Sampras would have just gone 10-1 with Nadal in non clay matches, rather than only merely playing Nadal even outside of clay like Federer which isnt acceptable to create a balanced rivalry when you are also getting totally owned on clay.



LOL, wut ? bruguera was 1-1 vs sampras outside of clay . He smoked sampras in the 2nd set in their YEC 93 encounter , 6-1. sampras barely managed to escape there and win

Muster, who was a MUCH MUCH lesser version of nadal was 2-8 vs him outside of clay - yet, you write sampras might go 10-1 vs nadal outside of clay. LOL !!!!!!

explains why sampras had a losing H2H vs ferriera in his prime - he would go 10-1 vs nadal outside of clay. LMAO !!!!!! This thread if I not mistaken, does NOT read - make jokes about players H2H

Homeboy Hotel
06-21-2011, 11:32 AM
Why is one of the hardcourt masters sf meeting not in the vote?

Indian Wells? Miami? I forgot. But that was Fed's biggest CHOKE.

TMF
06-21-2011, 02:43 PM
They are less than 5 years apart. The age difference is about the same as Graf and Seles (only 4 months more). I guess by your logic Graf and Seles werent real rivals or contemporaries either, LOL!

PEAK Federer lost 6 of the first 7 matches he played vs Nadal. And dont give me this clay excuse since you are admitting that Federer past 26 shouldnt be expected to beat Nadal on any surface apparently, so by that logic Nadal aged 18-20 shouldnt be expected to beat Federer on clay either. Oh yeah and 17-19 year old Nadal won 2 of their first 3 hard courts matches too, playing adult peak Federer.

Fed and Nadal are rivals but they are not the main one since the age difference. Unlike player Hewitt, Safin, Nalbandian, Roddick who compete along with Fed since Sampras was still on the tour. Fed’s group are older than Nadal’s group, and they all reach their prime at different time. Don’t tell me Hewitt and Nadal are both Nole’s main rivals.

Agassi would be Fed’s rival since they did compete in the 00s, but still, Sampras was his main rival since they are at the same age and their career overlap the entire 90s.

That's not so hard to understand, is it ?

NadalAgassi
06-21-2011, 03:09 PM
Fed and Nadal are rivals but they are not the main one since the age difference. Unlike player Hewitt, Safin, Nalbandian, Roddick who compete along with Fed since Sampras was still on the tour. Fed’s group are older than Nadal’s group, and they all reach their prime at different time. Don’t tell me Hewitt and Nadal are both Nole’s main rivals.

Agassi would be Fed’s rival since they did compete in the 00s, but still, Sampras was his main rival since they are at the same age and their career overlap the entire 90s.

That's not so hard to understand, is it ?

By your logic Sabatini and Novotna were Graf's real rivals and not Seles, since they are more the same age. While Hantuchova and and Dokic are Serena's true rivals and not Davenport and Capriati since they are within 1 year rather than 4 or 5. Sorry your reasoning is a huge fail.

Federer and Nadal were #1 and #2 in the World every year from 2005-2010. Since 2005 each has won atleast 1 slam every year to date. Of course Nadal is the main rival to Federer as much as you desperately try and imply otherwise.

TMF
06-21-2011, 03:26 PM
By your logic Sabatini and Novotna were Graf's real rivals and not Seles, since they are more the same age. While Hantuchova and and Dokic are Serena's true rivals and not Davenport and Capriati since they are within 1 year rather than 4 or 5. Sorry your reasoning is a huge fail.

Federer and Nadal were #1 and #2 in the World every year from 2005-2010. Since 2005 each has won atleast 1 slam every year to date. Of course Nadal is the main rival to Federer as much as you desperately try and imply otherwise.

You have to look at the number of years the players have overlapped, and at what years were they at their prime. If you disregard this reasoning, then I will say Agassi is Fed's chief rival.

Fed holds most of his weeks at #1 when he was in his prime, including 237 staight weeks. Now, Fed has faded and Nadal is at his prime to hold the #1 position.

I remember you argue extensively about Graf beating older Navratilova which wasn't fair to ignore and must brought it up. Now you want to ignore the age difference. LOL...double standard yet again !

TheNatural
06-21-2011, 05:38 PM
Fed and Nadal are rivals but they are not the main one since the age difference. Unlike player Hewitt, Safin, Nalbandian, Roddick who compete along with Fed since Sampras was still on the tour. Fed’s group are older than Nadal’s group, and they all reach their prime at different time. Don’t tell me Hewitt and Nadal are both Nole’s main rivals.

Agassi would be Fed’s rival since they did compete in the 00s, but still, Sampras was his main rival since they are at the same age and their career overlap the entire 90s.

That's not so hard to understand, is it ?

8 slam finals says otherwise. Cant argue with that.

TMF
06-21-2011, 06:29 PM
8 slam finals says otherwise. Cant argue with that.

How many yrs have fed play along with Roddick? How many?

NadalAgassi
06-21-2011, 07:08 PM
You have to look at the number of years the players have overlapped, and at what years were they at their prime. If you disregard this reasoning, then I will say Agassi is Fed's chief rival.

Dumb logic. Agassi is 11 years older than Federer and had such serious back problems he had trouble walking by the time Federer began beating him.

Fed holds most of his weeks at #1 when he was in his prime, including 237 staight weeks.

And during Federer's 237 straight weeks at #1 he lost to Nadal 12 times, including multiple times on hard courts, a Wimbledon final, nearly every match they played on clay. And that wasnt even prime Nadal for most of it either. That is why Federer is Nadal's lapdog, and no player who is their main rivals lapdog to such embarassing extremes should ever be the GOAT.


I remember you argue extensively about Graf beating older Navratilova which wasn't fair to ignore and must brought it up. Now you want to ignore the age difference. LOL...double standard yet again !

Navratilova is 13 years older than Graf. If you dont see the difference between 13 years and 5 years then I truly feel sorry for you. Graf was never beating prime Navratilova, except for one small tournament on clay. Their primes didnt even overlap for a moment really, there is no comparision to Federer and Nadal. Nadal beat Federer MANY times in his prime, even beating him on on hard courts, always beating him on clay. Yeah Nadal wasnt in his prime for much of Federer's but Federer was, and he was already losing often, making things even clearer.

And btw Navratilova at 13 years older than Graf is still much more of a rival for Graf than Sabatini and Novotna who are only 1 year apart from Graf, proving further the stupidity of your reasoning.


It is not like I believe for a second you even believe what you are saying. Your endless charade of excuses for Federer being owned by Nadal have run out, so now you are trying a different angle, aka- they are not real rivals, they are from different eras. Please.

bolo
06-21-2011, 07:26 PM
what about the 2nd set tb in the recent FO final? What do people think happened there?

TMF
06-21-2011, 07:43 PM
We should declare Bernard Tomic as Nadal's chief rivalry in the future.:roll:

That's how it works for some posters in this forum.

Spider
06-21-2011, 07:44 PM
RG 08. Federer had the match in control.

bolo
06-21-2011, 08:01 PM
Roddick is fed's sidekick, while nadal is fed's chief rival.

Roddick is like superman's best friend jimmy olsen, while nadal is like superman's lex luthor. Unfortunately, these kind of references are necessary for posters like TMF to understand basic tennis facts. :)

ksbh
06-22-2011, 06:25 AM
And just to add to Bolo's points, Roddick is the fool that said he doesn't mind losing 8 finals to Federer. Result: Roddick remains a 1 slam wonder.

Nadal, when asked about winning Wimbledon, answered in a heart beat- why not? And this was when Federer was on his 5 title streak. Result- Nadal has 10 slams.

Roddick isn't a sidekick. He's the guy that ties Federer's show laces!

Roddick is fed's sidekick, while nadal is fed's chief rival.

Roddick is like superman's best friend jimmy olsen, while nadal is like superman's lex luthor. Unfortunately, these kind of references are necessary for posters like TMF to understand basic tennis facts. :)

jackson vile
06-23-2011, 08:51 AM
That's pretty harsh, I just wish Roddick could have brought it together in 2009.

ksbh
06-23-2011, 08:58 AM
Harsh but true, Jackson! You get what you wish for. Roddick wants 8 slam runner-up titles to Federer and he's half way there!

That's pretty harsh, I just wish Roddick could have brought it together in 2009.

DjokovicForTheWin
06-23-2011, 09:03 AM
Didn't Roddick beat prime Nadal in 2010?

ksbh
06-23-2011, 09:05 AM
You can try consoling Roddick with those words but it'll do no good. He just wants his 8 losses to Federer.

Didn't Roddick beat prime Nadal in 2010?

DjokovicForTheWin
06-23-2011, 09:06 AM
You can try consoling Roddick with those words but it'll do no good. He just wants his 8 losses to Federer.

Yeah but why couldn't prime Nadal beat lapdog Roddick is an even better question.

ksbh
06-23-2011, 09:07 AM
Can you read carefully please? Roddick doesn't care for such things. He just wants his 8 losses to Federer.

Yeah but why can't prime Nadal beat lapdog Roddick is an even better question.

jackson vile
06-23-2011, 09:08 AM
You can try consoling Roddick with those words but it'll do no good. He just wants his 8 losses to Federer.

I'm not saying it isn't true, I guess I just wish it could have been different. You have to admit he played his best match ever at Wim. 2009, but yes he still lost.

DjokovicForTheWin
06-23-2011, 09:09 AM
Can you read carefully please? Roddick doesn't care for such things. He just wants his 8 losses to Federer.

But I agreed with you on the Roddick situation with regards to Fed. Now please answer why a prime Nadal lost to pathetic Roddick.

Sid_Vicious
06-23-2011, 09:11 AM
Harsh but true, Jackson! You get what you wish for. Roddick wants 8 slam runner-up titles to Federer and he's half way there!

I am still waiting to see this quote, ksbh. I think Roddick gets way too much unfair criticism on this forum. Roddick absolutely fought his heart out in many matches against Federer and came up short (WIM 04, US 06, USO 07, WIM 09) .I honestly think you are confusing Roddick with James Blake. I have watched Roddick throughout his entire career and I never recall him making such a self-defeating comment like that. Do you remember where you heard it?

Sharpshooter
06-23-2011, 09:11 AM
Didn't Roddick beat prime Nadal in 2010?

Didn't Canas beat prime Fed in 2007? Twice?

Sid_Vicious
06-23-2011, 09:12 AM
Didn't Canas beat prime Fed in 2007? Twice?

Didn't Safin beat prime Djokovic in first round of Wimbledon?

DjokovicForTheWin
06-23-2011, 09:13 AM
Didn't Canas beat prime Fed in 2007? Twice?

Oh yeah, so what were their respective year end records in 2007 (Fed) and 2010 (Nadal)

Sharpshooter
06-23-2011, 09:20 AM
Oh yeah, so what were their respective year end records in 2007 (Fed) and 2010 (Nadal)

LOL Nadal lost 1 more match in 2010 (10 total) than Fed in 2007 (9 total).

But when you factor in the fact that 66% of the tour in on HC (Fed's best surface and Rafa's worst), I'd say he did better in 2010 than Fed did in 2007.

Plus he won slams on 3 different surfaces in the one year. Fed has never done this.

DjokovicForTheWin
06-23-2011, 09:25 AM
LOL Nadal lost 1 more match in 2010 (10 total) than Fed in 2007 (9 total).

But when you factor in the fact that 66% of the tour in on HC (Fed's best surface and Rafa's worst), I'd say he did better in 2010 than Fed did in 2007.

Plus he won slams on 3 different surfaces in the one year. Fed has never done this.

So Federer near the end of his prime lost one less match than Nadal in the middle of his prime?

There are many more things that Nadal has not done that Fed has, so don't even go there.

ksbh
06-23-2011, 09:26 AM
Thanks. We'll just have to address your question when Roddick has reached his goal. It's far more important than these insignificant other details that your mind is fixed upon.

But I agreed with you on the Roddick situation with regards to Fed. Now please answer why a prime Nadal lost to pathetic Roddick.

ksbh
06-23-2011, 09:28 AM
Sid, I have to admit I didn't hear it either. I read it on the internet following his 2006 USO final loss to Federer. And the article even said Connors, his new coach at that time, called that remark bulls*hit! :)

I am still waiting to see this quote, ksbh. I think Roddick gets way too much unfair criticism on this forum. Roddick absolutely fought his heart out in many matches against Federer and came up short (WIM 04, US 06, USO 07, WIM 09) .I honestly think you are confusing Roddick with James Blake. I have watched Roddick throughout his entire career and I never recall him making such a self-defeating comment like that. Do you remember where you heard it?

ksbh
06-23-2011, 09:29 AM
^^^ and I admit that I trash talk Roddick quite a bit. But this is just an internet forum, so who really cares, dear Sid? :)

Sid_Vicious
06-23-2011, 09:37 AM
^^^ and I admit that I trash talk Roddick quite a bit. But this is just an internet forum, so who really cares, dear Sid? :)

Agreed. I was just wondering about the quote.

http://www.bollywood.ac/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/sunnydeoll11.jpg

ksbh
06-23-2011, 09:40 AM
You sir, are an epitome of intelligence ... and the best when it comes to choosing pictures of actors! One day I hope to follow in your footsteps, Sir Sid! :)

Agreed. I was just wondering about the quote.

http://www.bollywood.ac/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/sunnydeoll11.jpg

Sharpshooter
06-23-2011, 09:41 AM
So Federer near the end of his prime lost one less match than Nadal in the middle of his prime?

There are many more things that Nadal has not done that Fed has, so don't even go there.

No matter what else Fed has done, Rafa winning 3 majors on 3 different surfaces all in a row in the same year is more impressive. The 23 straight semi's, YEC/WTF, year end win-loss ratio's, slam finals in a row aren't as impressive or significant.

Dedans Penthouse
06-23-2011, 10:09 AM
Man I can't stand pseudo Nadal fans who only hang on Rafa's Wilanders because he stops/stopped Fed from smashing even more of Pete's records,bunch of hilarious cheerleaders.Go Rafa! Protect the legacy of my mancrush! Beat Fed and I promise I'll be your biggest fan forever!...
While I've no dog in this fight (Rafa/Fed/Peter), here we have a thread that's about Nadal & Fed but now that Rafa's the king dog, some *******s are now trying to deal with their frustrations by once again playing their worn-out "bash Sampras" card.....much the same way they took a sneering delight in posting their contemptuous put-downs of Sampras (and his fans) in an 'in-yer-face' manner while Fed was top dog. But I digress, let's get back on-topic:

Fed's worst choke against Nadal?

http://s3images.coroflot.com/user_files/individual_files/thumbnails/thumbnail_322791_ZagM6XTEsAtEOKVQyP9093xlR.jpg

mandy01
06-23-2011, 10:16 AM
No matter what else Fed has done, Rafa winning 3 majors on 3 different surfaces all in a row in the same year is more impressive. The 23 straight semi's, YEC/WTF, year end win-loss ratio's, slam finals in a row aren't as impressive or significant.
Ummmm..Sorry. But you're absolutely not the one who gets to decide that. Winning 3 in a row the way Nadal did is hyped by his fans because Nadal was the one to do it. In reality that was only a matter of how the slams are lined up. Three slams in a year is three slams in a year. Unless you win all four majors in a season ,their significance is entirely subjective.

mandy01
06-23-2011, 10:21 AM
There are many more things that Nadal has not done that Fed has, so don't even go there.Pretty much. Reaching all four finals is of course objectively speaking better than 3 slams and a QF . In addition, I think Roger had more tournament wins in 2007. 8 I think, to Nadal's 7.

TMF
06-23-2011, 10:23 AM
No matter what else Fed has done, Rafa winning 3 majors on 3 different surfaces all in a row in the same year is more impressive. The 23 straight semi's, YEC/WTF, year end win-loss ratio's, slam finals in a row aren't as impressive or significant.


No matter what Nadal has done, he's still well behind other great players, let alone Fed. thus, Less impressive.

Most GS titles
1. Roger Federer 16
2. Pete Sampras 14
3. Björn Borg 11
4. Rafael Nadal 10
5. Jimmy Connors 8
Ivan Lendl 8
Andre Agassi 8
8. John McEnroe 7
Mats Wilander 7
10. Stefan Edberg 6
Boris Becker 6

GS finals
1. Roger Federer 23
2. Ivan Lendl 19
3. Pete Sampras 18
4. Björn Borg 16
5. Jimmy Connors 15
Andre Agassi 15
7. Rafael Nadal 12
8. John McEnroe 11
Mats Wilander 11
Stefan Edberg 11

Consecutive GS finals
1. Roger Federer 10
2. Roger Federer 8
3. Andre Agassi 4
4. Jimmy Connors 3
Björn Borg 3
Björn Borg 3
Björn Borg 3
Ivan Lendl 3
John McEnroe 3
Ivan Lendl 3
Ivan Lendl 3
Mats Wilander 3
Jim Courier 3
Jim Courier 3
Pete Sampras 3
Rafael Nadal 3

GS semi-finals
1. Jimmy Connors 31
2. Ivan Lendl 28
Roger Federer 28
4. Andre Agassi 26
5. Pete Sampras 23
6. John McEnroe 19
Stefan Edberg 19
8. Boris Becker 18
9. Björn Borg 17
10. Rafael Nadal 15

Three Slams Per Year
Jimmy Connors 1974
Mats Wilander 1988
Roger Federer 2004
Roger Federer 2006
Roger Federer 2007
Rafael Nadal 2010

All Four Finals Per Year
Roger Federer 2006
Roger Federer 2007
Roger Federer 2009

All Four Semi-finals Per Year
Ivan Lendl 1987
Roger Federer 2005
Roger Federer 2006
Roger Federer 2007
Roger Federer 2008
Rafael Nadal 2008
Roger Federer 2009

Most consecutive matches won at one Grand Slam event:
1. Björn Borg (Wimbledon), 41
2. Roger Federer (Wimbledon), 40
= Roger Federer (US Open), 40
4. Pete Sampras (Wimbledon), 31
= Rafael Nadal (French Open), 31

Year-End Championships
1. Ivan Lendl 5
Pete Sampras 5
Roger Federer 5
4. Ilie Năstase 3
John McEnroe 3
Boris Becker 3

Highest Season Winning Percentage
1 J. McEnroe 1984 82-3 .965
2. J. Connors 1973 89-4 .957
3. R. Federer 2005 81-4 .953
4. R. Federer 2006 92-5 .948
5. J. Connors 1974 95-6 .941
6. I. Lendl 1985 80-6 .930
7. B. Borg 1979 76-6 .927
8. R. Federer 2004 74-6 .925
9. I. Lendl 1982 106-9 .922
10. B. Borg 1977 76-8 .906


Most Weeks at #1
1. Sampras, PetePete Sampras 286
2. Federer, RogerRoger Federer 285
3. Lendl, IvanIvan Lendl 270
4. Connors, JimmyJimmy Connors 268
5. McEnroe, JohnJohn McEnroe 170
6. Borg, BjörnBjörn Borg 109
7. Nadal, RafaelRafael Nadal 102*
8. Agassi, AndreAndre Agassi 101
9. Hewitt, LleytonLleyton Hewitt 80
10. Edberg, StefanStefan Edberg 72

Consecutive Weeks at #1
1. Federer, RogerRoger Federer (1) 237
2. Connors, JimmyJimmy Connors (1) 160
3. Lendl, IvanIvan Lendl (1) 157
4. Sampras, PetePete Sampras (1) 102
5. Connors, JimmyJimmy Connors (2) 84
6. Sampras, PetePete Sampras (2) 82
7. Lendl, IvanIvan Lendl (2) 80
8. Hewitt, LleytonLleyton Hewitt (1) 75
9. McEnroe, JohnJohn McEnroe (1) 58
10. Nadal, RafaelRafael Nadal (1) 56*

Year End #1
1. Sampras 6
2. Federer 5
3. Borg 4
4. Connors 3
= Lendl 3
= McEnroe 3

ksbh
06-23-2011, 10:33 AM
Brilliant! That's exactly what it is!

Have you seen how many foolish brain-dead Federer fanboys have jumped on the Djokovic band-wagon? A player that they bashed no-end simply because he beat their hero in AO 2008 and his mother said that the king was dead. And now? They're hangin' to his nuts like a chimpanzee on a tree branch!

While I've no dog in this fight (Rafa/Fed/Peter), here we have a thread that's about Nadal & Fed but now that Rafa's the king dog, some *******s are now trying to deal with their frustrations by once again playing their worn-out "bash Sampras" card.....much the same way they took a sneering delight in posting their contemptuous put-downs of Sampras (and his fans) in an 'in-yer-face' manner while Fed was top dog. But I digress, let's get back on-topic:

Fed's worst choke against Nadal?

http://s3images.coroflot.com/user_files/individual_files/thumbnails/thumbnail_322791_ZagM6XTEsAtEOKVQyP9093xlR.jpg

zagor
06-23-2011, 10:42 AM
While I've no dog in this fight (Rafa/Fed/Peter), here we have a thread that's about Nadal & Fed but now that Rafa's the king dog, some *******s are now trying to deal with their frustrations by once again playing their worn-out "bash Sampras" card.....much the same way they took a sneering delight in posting their contemptuous put-downs of Sampras (and his fans) in an 'in-yer-face' manner while Fed was top dog. But I digress, let's get back on-topic:

Fed's worst choke against Nadal?

http://s3images.coroflot.com/user_files/individual_files/thumbnails/thumbnail_322791_ZagM6XTEsAtEOKVQyP9093xlR.jpg

Not really, I'm not bashing Sampras, I'm "bashing" pseudo Nadal fans-Sampras fans who cheer on Nadal for the sole reason that he beats Federer, yes I do find those people hilarious. Genuine Sampras and Nadal fans who like their favouriters because of their game, I leave alone.

As for Sampras, I think Fed's maybe slightly better/greater player but it's very close between them, not a lot separating them by any means.

Oh and I also think Nadal will equal or surpass Fed's slam count and I'll be the first one to congratulate him when he does.

PS. Fed wasn't anywhere near being top dog when I became a fan,he was top 15 player at the time.

PSS. I wasn't the one who brought up Sampras in this thread.

zagor
06-23-2011, 10:45 AM
Brilliant! That's exactly what it is!

Have you seen how many foolish brain-dead Federer fanboys have jumped on the Djokovic band-wagon? A player that they bashed no-end simply because he beat their hero in AO 2008 and his mother said that the king was dead. And now? They're hangin' to his nuts like a chimpanzee on a tree branch!

I have been Djokovic fan since 2008 Olympics, at that time he was losing almost every big match to Nadal there is.

BTW. speaking on hangin to nuts of the player that they normally can't stand,many Nadal fans were doing just that in FO SF.

ksbh
06-23-2011, 10:48 AM
Zagor ... my post wasn't directed at you at all. You're top dog on this forum, my friend!

:)

I have been Djokovic fan since 2008 Olympics, at that time he was losing almost every big match to Nadal there is.

BTW. speaking on hangin to nuts of the player that they normally can't stand,many Nadal fans were doing just that in FO SF.

mandy01
06-23-2011, 10:52 AM
I have been Djokovic fan since 2008 Olympics, at that time he was losing almost every big match to Nadal there is.

..and I personally couldn't care less about Djokovic (although it was mighty amusing to watch Nadal fans crap their pants at the thought of him making it to the finals :mrgreen:). The one person I would really like to see win a slam(again) is Del Po (after Roger of course). The guy is adorable.

Djokolate
06-23-2011, 10:59 AM
I don't really think the following are chokes:
FO 11
FO 07
Hamburg 08
Wimby 08

zagor
06-23-2011, 11:11 AM
..and I personally couldn't care less about Djokovic (although it was mighty amusing to watch Nadal fans crap their pants at the thought of him making it to the finals :mrgreen:). The one person I would really like to see win a slam(again) is Del Po (after Roger of course). The guy is adorable.

Yeah,I like Delpo's game,his running FH mainly(the biggest running FH I've seen since Sampras)but I also think he has great timing on his BH as well,not to mention that he moves amazingly well for such a big guy.

NadalAgassi
06-23-2011, 12:03 PM
I have been Djokovic fan since 2008 Olympics, at that time he was losing almost every big match to Nadal there is.

BTW. speaking on hangin to nuts of the player that they normally can't stand,many Nadal fans were doing just that in FO SF.

You are from Serbia. It would be awful if you werent a fan of the greatest Serbian mens player ever.

zagor
06-23-2011, 12:05 PM
You are from Serbia. It would be awful if you werent a fan of the greatest Serbian mens player ever.

Not really, If I didn't like his game he could be from the same street as me for all I care, I still wouldn't be his fan except when he's playing for DC or similar.

NadalAgassi
06-23-2011, 12:08 PM
Not really, If I didn't like his game he could be from the same street as me for all I care, I still wouldn't be his fan except when he's playing for DC or similar.

If a Canadian was doing as well as Djokovic the only way I wouldnt like him or her is if they had a playing style and on court demeanor like Conchita Martinezzzzzzzz.

zagor
06-23-2011, 12:12 PM
If a Canadian was doing as well as Djokovic the only way I wouldnt like him or her is if they had a playing style and on court demeanor like Conchita Martinezzzzzzzz.

LOL,the biggest moonballer I've ever seen counting both ATP and WTA.

NadalAgassi
06-23-2011, 12:14 PM
LOL,the biggest moonballer I've ever seen counting both ATP and WTA.

Funny thing is she actually could hit a big forehand when she wanted to but it seemed most times she was just too lazy, bored, or cranky to put in the effort, LOL! Tracy Austin nicknamed her the hangdog for how she sulked around the court, especialy against top players.

NamRanger
06-23-2011, 12:54 PM
Not really, I'm not bashing Sampras, I'm "bashing" pseudo Nadal fans-Sampras fans who cheer on Nadal for the sole reason that he beats Federer, yes I do find those people hilarious. Genuine Sampras and Nadal fans who like their favouriters because of their game, I leave alone.

As for Sampras, I think Fed's maybe slightly better/greater player but it's very close between them, not a lot separating them by any means.

Oh and I also think Nadal will equal or surpass Fed's slam count and I'll be the first one to congratulate him when he does.

PS. Fed wasn't anywhere near being top dog when I became a fan,he was top 15 player at the time.

PSS. I wasn't the one who brought up Sampras in this thread.




You forgot there are those who make up excuses about how Nadal was playing so terribly when he almost swept the entire clay season in 2009. Or about how Nadal was playing so bad the entire HC/Clay season this year when the only guy he was losing to was Djokovic, lololololol.



My favorite was how namelessone stated that Murray or Federer could have beaten Nadal because he was playing so bad, and yet Nadal proceeds to beat Murray in straights cleanly, and of course just outplays Federer again in the FO final.

1970CRBase
06-23-2011, 01:04 PM
Not really, If I didn't like his game he could be from the same street as me for all I care, I still wouldn't be his fan except when he's playing for DC or similar.

I never see you raving about Dazzling Ana either :)

mcenroefan
06-23-2011, 08:12 PM
You can try consoling Roddick with those words but it'll do no good. He just wants his 8 losses to Federer.

I think Roddick's doing OK...he has a beautiful wife and a jet so life has been pretty good so far even if you feel bad for him.

ksbh
06-24-2011, 06:39 AM
Well, he'll need that jet to fly back home earlier than expected following his early loss at Wimbledump :)

I think Roddick's doing OK...he has a beautiful wife and a jet so life has been pretty good so far even if you feel bad for him.

Dedans Penthouse
06-24-2011, 02:36 PM
Not really, I'm not bashing Sampras, I'm "bashing" pseudo Nadal fans-Sampras fans who cheer on Nadal for the sole reason that he beats Federer, yes I do find those people hilarious. Genuine Sampras and Nadal fans who like their favouriters because of their game, I leave alone.

As for Sampras, I think Fed's maybe slightly better/greater player but it's very close between them, not a lot separating them by any means.

Oh and I also think Nadal will equal or surpass Fed's slam count and I'll be the first one to congratulate him when he does.

PS. Fed wasn't anywhere near being top dog when I became a fan,he was top 15 player at the time.

PSS. I wasn't the one who brought up Sampras in this thread.
Point taken (and accepted) zagor. Props.

That said, didn't Fed happen to "ape" that balding Greek-freak leaping/smashing away match point? (wink)

Sid_Vicious
06-24-2011, 02:49 PM
Point taken (and accepted) zagor. Props.

That said, didn't Fed happen to "ape" that balding Greek-freak leaping/smashing away match point? (wink)

I do apologize, but can you clarify what you mean by this? I have been scratching my head at this statement for five minutes now.

Sid_Vicious
06-24-2011, 02:55 PM
I see that most people consider the AO 2009 final to be Federer's biggest choke against Nadal. From what I remember, Federer was always the one playing from behind in that one. It was not like Rome 2006 where Federer was a break up in 5th set and ended up losing.

Some of the poll options are just strange. Dubai 2006? Federer was never in a position to put away Nadal in straights.

Pwned
06-24-2011, 02:59 PM
I see that most people consider the AO 2009 final to be Federer's biggest choke against Nadal. From what I remember, Federer was always the one playing from behind in that one. It was not like Rome 2006 where Federer was a break up in 5th set and ended up losing.

I think, given the circumstances, that most people expected Federer to win before the first ball was hit. Nadal was supposed to be tired. Federer was supposed to have the advantage of surface. I didn't think that but I am sure a lot of people did.

Sid_Vicious
06-24-2011, 03:08 PM
I think, given the circumstances, that most people expected Federer to win before the first ball was hit. Nadal was supposed to be tired. Federer was supposed to have the advantage of surface. I didn't think that but I am sure a lot of people did.
Good point. Federer played some incredible tennis in that match but never at the right moments. As a result, Federer never got any big leads on Nadal during that match. I guess the word "choke" has a more complex meaning.

zepphead33
06-24-2011, 09:08 PM
i just realized, i think federer would still be playing his peak if not for nadal. i believe nadal has just mentally beaten the hell out of him for the last 5 years. he would have probably another 5 slams, more confidence than any other player, and just **** in general.

Sentinel
06-25-2011, 03:54 AM
I do apologize, but can you clarify what you mean by this? I have been scratching my head at this statement for five minutes now.
That's a reference to Petros (oh, I mean Pete Sampras :)) -- the jumping smash at the end of Fred's game.

jackson vile
06-30-2011, 11:40 AM
Again, I don't think Federer chokes.