PDA

View Full Version : Federer wishes he could play Becker


chronicler
07-04-2006, 05:53 AM
Quoted in his interview at wimbledon. Probably sick and tired of playing grass court novices who can't volley if the ball came up in front of them and begged them and wants some real competition

KBalla08
07-04-2006, 09:37 AM
y not play sampras or borg...

ED_4.6HSE
07-04-2006, 09:42 AM
y not play sampras or borg...
I think becker was his idol when he grew up... was mine as well!

KBalla08
07-04-2006, 09:47 AM
ok but i also thought he said he grew up wanting to play like samp or sumthing to that nature... that would be the ultimate match on grass, federer vs samp...i think id take samp in 5

tnig469
07-04-2006, 09:55 AM
ok but i also thought he said he grew up wanting to play like samp or sumthing to that nature... that would be the ultimate match on grass, federer vs samp...i think id take samp in 5

they did play b4...fed won in 5 sets....

ED_4.6HSE
07-04-2006, 10:05 AM
they did play b4...fed won in 5 sets....
at the end of sampras's career after he'd won all his wimby's though

i think it would depend a lot on the court. on a faster surface like the old grass courts sampras would have the clear edge with his big serve & awesome net play but today feds baslining would have the upper hand. just my thought, we'll never know. no doubt its been over a million times!

ACE of Hearts
07-04-2006, 10:09 AM
I think it could go either way, 50/50 for both guys, Roger loves playing guys who have big serves.

KBalla08
07-04-2006, 10:10 AM
ya sorry i meant samp in his prime... not at the end of his career...

chronicler
07-04-2006, 05:38 PM
In terms of a challenge on grass, Becker at his peak would definitely be more difficult to handle than Borg. I am talking about grass here before anyone has raving fits. So i would see Sampras and then Becker as challenges to Federer

Rickson
07-04-2006, 05:53 PM
ok but i also thought he said he grew up wanting to play like samp or sumthing to that nature... that would be the ultimate match on grass, federer vs samp...i think id take samp in 5
Sampras couldn't take a single set from Federer.

arnz
07-04-2006, 05:56 PM
Sampras couldn't take a single set from Federer.

Wrong...they already played and Sampras took two sets out of 5

Rickson
07-04-2006, 05:58 PM
Wrong...they already played and Sampras took two sets out of 5
When Federer was still green, but Federer prime vs. Sampras prime = a Federer win.

Andres
07-04-2006, 06:00 PM
When Federer was still green, but Federer prime vs. Sampras prime = a Federer win.
Federer prime vs. Sampras prime + grass = Sampras in 4.

Tennis_Goodness
07-04-2006, 06:01 PM
I think Federer would beat Peat on grass!

Rickson
07-04-2006, 06:02 PM
Federer prime vs. Sampras prime + grass = Sampras in 4.
I don't think so, paisan.

Andres
07-04-2006, 06:04 PM
I don't think so, paisan.
I don't think what you think so, too, don't worry.

superman1
07-04-2006, 06:09 PM
Well, we'll never know. But all this prime stuff is somewhat nonsense. Federer in 2001 could still rip the ball like he does now, only he was playing serve and volley in that match. He was probably closer to his prime than Sampras who aged way too fast. Sampras' game when he was on was enough to give anyone in history a very hard time, especially someone who slices the return. Just watch Fed vs Mahut from last week. If Mahut could hit some nice drop volleys more often instead of volleying within Federer's range, that match would have gone longer.

Tennis_Goodness
07-04-2006, 06:11 PM
I look at Federer now and the Federer of 2001 and I see a much different player and a much better player now.

Federer rips the ball harder and more accurate and is much more consistant then he was in 2001, significantly more!

Rickson
07-04-2006, 06:15 PM
I don't think what you think so, too, don't worry.
Andres, Andres, will we ever agree on anything except mma?

Andres
07-04-2006, 06:21 PM
Andres, Andres, will we ever agree on anything except mma?
Why do you say it? In which other things have we disagreed?
Let me guess... you are a Goran hater, right!!?? :mad:

Rickson
07-04-2006, 06:39 PM
Why do you say it? In which other things have we disagreed?
Let me guess... you are a Goran hater, right!!?? :mad:
Actually, I like Goran's serve.

typingchamp
07-05-2006, 12:55 AM
Federer vs. Becker would be loads of fun to see.

HyperHorse
07-05-2006, 01:47 AM
Becker was a huge Idol of mine as well, growing up...
I totally agree with Federer... that would be an awesome match to see....

uNIVERSE mAN
07-05-2006, 06:13 AM
I think becker was his idol when he grew up... was mine as well!

yeah it was the cough and robo serve windup that has everyone hooked.

boris becker 1
07-05-2006, 04:14 PM
obvious who my hero was/is. Boris in his prime 89 on grass would have wiped the floor including sampras or Federer

mowcopian
07-05-2006, 04:15 PM
doesn't everyone. becker is federer's hero and who would n't like to play againstt there hero.

fastdunn
07-05-2006, 04:29 PM
I would take Sampras at Wimbledon, US Open
and Federer at French Open.

chronicler
07-06-2006, 07:12 AM
robo serve windup, cough, screaming in german, dive volleys, unbelievable shot making and serving(when he was on), ability to win matches he should've lost, ability to lose matches he should have won..these are what made so many Becker fans!

kicker75
07-06-2006, 07:56 AM
I think becker was his idol when he grew up... was mine as well!

Sampras was Federer's idol. He's said it a bunch of times before.

Brettolius
07-06-2006, 09:25 AM
So when Sampras and Federer played, who was further away from a slam title? You have Sampras who had won Wimby the three years prior, going for his fourth, then went on to win the US Open the next year, or Federer who didn't for 2 years after? Just sayin'... Seems that for the most part Federer was more green than Sampras was old...

Oricus
07-06-2006, 09:33 AM
actually he was going for this 5th straight wimbledon the year Federer beat him

johnkidd
07-06-2006, 09:50 AM
actually he was going for this 5th straight wimbledon the year Federer beat him

That's only past him prime to Sampras fans who don't want to acknowledge Fed might be better then Pete.

BiGGieStuFF
07-06-2006, 11:45 AM
I wonder if any of the legends would like to play Federer. They need to have exhibitions like that. i would pay good money to see matches like that.

chronicler
07-06-2006, 06:34 PM
Sampras was not federer's idol. so sampras fans wake up. He was quoted again this wimbledon saying that he grew up a becker fan and was drawn to tennis by becker's victory there at 17. Sampras has had zippo influence on europeans compared to becker and zippo influence on americans compared to agassi. Go to wimbledon.org to check out federer's interview after his fourth round

Superhuman
07-14-2006, 04:50 PM
Becker wins, 5 sets. Federer is rather overrated.

Superhuman
07-14-2006, 04:51 PM
Sampras was not federer's idol. so sampras fans wake up. He was quoted again this wimbledon saying that he grew up a becker fan and was drawn to tennis by becker's victory there at 17. Sampras has had zippo influence on europeans compared to becker and zippo influence on americans compared to agassi. Go to wimbledon.org to check out federer's interview after his fourth round

sampras had plenty of influence on tennis.

helloworld
07-14-2006, 04:56 PM
I don't know man. Federer is specialized in dealing with big serve & volleyers,too. I'm not sure Becker is the perfect match for him.

d_frank
07-14-2006, 04:58 PM
I bet Federer would like to play Mats Wilander too :p

Superhuman
07-14-2006, 05:06 PM
At today's surface speed. Nadal wouldn't have reached a wimbledon final a decade ago. Let's not take the current grass courters too seriously.

helloworld
07-14-2006, 05:06 PM
I bet Federer would like to play Mats Wilander too :p
nah, he doesn't have balls to play Federer. :)

cuddles26
07-14-2006, 05:23 PM
Well, we'll never know. But all this prime stuff is somewhat nonsense. Federer in 2001 could still rip the ball like he does now, only he was playing serve and volley in that match.

What a dumb statement, Roger in 2001 was so far from what he was now, he looked like a junior player compared to what he is today. Pete made the US Open final that year so even though both were way out of their primes of course Pete was closer if one was.

helloworld
07-15-2006, 01:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by superman1
Well, we'll never know. But all this prime stuff is somewhat nonsense. Federer in 2001 could still rip the ball like he does now, only he was playing serve and volley in that match.

What a dumb statement, Roger in 2001 was so far from what he was now, he looked like a junior player compared to what he is today. Pete made the US Open final that year so even though both were way out of their primes of course Pete was closer if one was.

I think the one who is dumb is you. Federer in 2001 does rip the ball like he does now. the difference is Federer in 2001 is immature and inexperience where Federer now is mentally stronger and much more experienced which allow him to put all his talent together.

Tennis_Goodness
07-15-2006, 06:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by superman1
Well, we'll never know. But all this prime stuff is somewhat nonsense. Federer in 2001 could still rip the ball like he does now, only he was playing serve and volley in that match.



I think the one who is dumb is you. Federer in 2001 does rip the ball like he does now. the difference is Federer in 2001 is immature and inexperience where Federer now is mentally stronger and much more experienced which allow him to put all his talent together.


Federer hits the ball harder and cleaner and is much more accurate then he was in 2001. He was much different, and is a much better player now!

chiru
07-15-2006, 07:26 AM
did anyone even see that match in 2001 against pete. there are 2 things about that match that need to be understood here if we are gonig to predict a possible head to head based on one match. if you think about it, this is like saying that george bastl would consistently beat sampras becasue bastl was pretty "young" too.

1. after 1998 Pete several times said he was tired, and although the no.1 ranking was within range in 1999, he already had the record and didn't care, didn't want to push himself, he said that the thing that kept him going was the slams. although he wouldn't admit it (so as to loose his edge in front of the competition) breaking emerson's record did the same thing to pete. what was there left for him to prove? nothing. so he didn't put in the effort needed to win another tournament at any level (let alone major) until he had something to prove, some record to break, some unattained goal to achieve. that goal for the us open 2002 according to Sampras was to do this to the news media who chided on his wife "shove it up their ***" Sampras didn't play with conviction in 2001, and i think his loss in 2002 wimbledon made him realize how low hes sunk and that he didn't wanna go out after having lost to george bastl on court 2, he wnated to go out a champion who had shoved it up everyone's ***, and i must say, ill bet all all those reporters are still sore in their rectum from the *** shoving they recieved that year.

2. Federer as a youngster had the complete game. he could serve and volley, he could hit amazing groundies, but his temper and emotions got the best of him, and he couldn't play with any level of consistency, and he has said this openly. Im sure federer can hit harder now but probably not DRASTICALLY bigger. He just hits the lines everytime now, he has perfect consistency and placement. He admits that in all his pre 2k3 wimbledon career, he never put togethor a display as consistenly throughout a match as he did against sampras. IN fact he is quoted as saying that when he was a kid and was getting frsutrated at his lack of consitency, he would yell at himself "why aren't you playing like you did against sampras." I'd say that the way he played that match (and i've seen it and i have it on my comp actually) he played at almost the level he does nowadays, but still he probably had less pace and he has a more powerful racket now, so the argument that h probably didn' have as much pace in that match as now is valid, but only a degree, its not like he was MUCH less power than then, he was pretty close i'd say.

Bottom line: Sampras played well and Federer played well, but sampras didn't have the conviction we were used to. Neither one was in their prime, fed came up with the match of his life, as pete fell further into his post 2000 wimby slump. Yet still the match was very very close in the fifth set, it could've still easily gone either way. and this match is really a terrible predictino for what would happen for example sampras of '96 vs. fed '06 etc.

pound cat
07-15-2006, 09:15 AM
So, why doesn't he play Becker? Come Roger, rent a grass venue, ask/pay Becker to play you, another life's dream fulfilled.

Chadwixx
07-15-2006, 09:33 AM
Becker wins, 5 sets. Federer is rather overrated.

Get the serve back and the beckers and sampras's just arent very good. They are like roddick today. The return game has evolved and the one dimentional server just cant make it in todays game.

Btw pete's win over becker in his only masters clay court title shows how weak the clay court field was back then.

Does becker still play tennis? I see him in the stands but unsure if he still plays.

Raistlin
07-15-2006, 10:42 AM
I think Becker plays on the Champion's tour.

Gilgamesh
07-15-2006, 11:06 AM
I think becker was his idol when he grew up... was mine as well!

I thought Sampras was Fed's idol.

Hell he cried after he beat him.

Gilgamesh
07-15-2006, 11:15 AM
Sampras was not federer's idol. so sampras fans wake up. He was quoted again this wimbledon saying that he grew up a becker fan and was drawn to tennis by becker's victory there at 17. Sampras has had zippo influence on europeans compared to becker and zippo influence on americans compared to agassi. Go to wimbledon.org to check out federer's interview after his fourth round

Don't be stupid. Sampras is ONE of Fed's idols. You think he only has one????

Read what he said during a ZDF radio Interview:

ROGER FEDERER - (Laughing) You want me to contradict my last answer don’t you! MY favourite was Rod Laver. He’s my idol.

Entire interview transcript:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mbfivelive/F2148567?thread=3040944

Laver was ONE of his idols also.

Borg as well:

http://sport.guardian.co.uk/wimbledon2006/story/0,,1815631,00.html

So is Becker and Sampras was definitely one of his as well.

Shabazza
07-15-2006, 11:35 AM
Sampras was Federer's idol. He's said it a bunch of times before.
Wrong! He said clearly and on many occasion that Becker was the one who really got him into tennis and made him want to win Wimbledon! Read some of his interviews and articles about him! Sampras came way later and in fact he already played him, but never Becker so it's understandable that he wants to play him!

cuddles26
07-15-2006, 11:57 AM
Federer hits the ball harder and cleaner and is much more accurate then he was in 2001. He was much different, and is a much better player now!

Yeah I agree, Feds was nowhere near as good in 2001 as he is now, he was just as much a shadow of his best days as Pete was or maybe more. I think when he played Agassi at the U.S Open he won only 5 games in 3 sets or something and he had won maybe one title at that point, a tier 3 or something. All his shots were much weaker, he was physicaly weaker, and mentaly he was a novice compared to today.

Shabazza
07-15-2006, 12:01 PM
I think his footwork is the thing he improved the most (with his BH) from 2001 to 2005.
I think many people still underrate his footwork, with is the main reason why he has so much time to pull of his amzing fh.

cuddles26
07-15-2006, 12:02 PM
I think his footwork is the thing he improved the most (with his BH) from 2001 to 2005

I agree. His footwork and movement were so sloppy in 2001 and his backhand on all surfaces was as bad as his backhand on clay vs Nadal is today.

chronicler
07-15-2006, 10:28 PM
Get the serve back and the beckers and sampras's just arent very good. They are like roddick today. The return game has evolved and the one dimentional server just cant make it in todays game.

Btw pete's win over becker in his only masters clay court title shows how weak the clay court field was back then.

Does becker still play tennis? I see him in the stands but unsure if he still plays.

Wrong, they didnt have one dimensional games. Becker had a killer return of serve as well at his peak. Also both Becker and Edberg had the ability to convert dipping volleys at their feet into winners. See Becker vs Ivanisevic in 1992 Masters, Ivanisevic hit a ferocious forehand at full speed to Becker's feet of the first serve and Becker volleyed it away to the corner for a winner. The commentator said "I can't find the words to describe that volley" or something of that sort. Again i am talking peak of course. Anything below that and federer would be the overwhelming favorite.

And below Federer, not even worth discussing. Becker vs Nadal at Wimbledon. It would be so embarassing to watch, Nadal might have to quit tennis after the match.

travlerajm
07-15-2006, 10:31 PM
Wrong, they didnt have one dimensional games. Becker had a killer return of serve as well at his peak. Also both Becker and Edberg had the ability to convert dipping volleys at their feet into winners. See Becker vs Ivanisevic in 1992 Masters, Ivanisevic hit a ferocious forehand at full speed to Becker's feet of the first serve and Becker volleyed it away to the corner for a winner. The commentator said "I can't find the words to describe that volley" or something of that sort. Again i am talking peak of course. Anything below that and federer would be the overwhelming favorite.

And below Federer, not even worth discussing. Becker vs Nadal at Wimbledon. It would be so embarassing to watch, Nadal might have to quit tennis after the match.

Agreed.