Federer is so boring... (part 2)

[eric draven]

Hey guys, just to be clear in regards to my last post: I am a huge Federer AND Sampras fan. I was being sarcastic when I called him boring and wished he would show some emotion. Federer and Sampras have two things in common: They show complete class on the court and let their racquet do the talking. I'll take that kind of tennis player any day.

 

[match]

Great Topic!

i think Federer is much more animated then Pete ever was...........Pete in my opinoin was obviously the greatest players ever, but was a complete and total bore of a personality........however he had a game that was so sweet he didnt need 1. In his prime Pete could take Federer any day of the week............but not sure if he could when Federer reaches his prime??

 

[tennisfreak]

I agree about the sarcasm. Federer is perhaps the most intriguing player to watch. I especially love how he so easily turns a defensive position into an offensive one with one shot.

 

[ZhuangCorp]

I actually think Federer has a really interesting personality. I think it's really cool that he takes care of his cow, he hangs out with his friends, he watches tv, plays video games. He seems like a really nice guy, he talks about his family and his sister and his girlfriend.

I really enjoy watching the Federer interviews. He's so open and just tells whatever is on his mind. And i think he actually does show quite a bit of emotion on the court. His shouts are far better than anything Hewitt or anybody can do.

 

[VashTheStampede]

Federer is a fantastic player to watch. In my opinion, when he shows his emotions, he does it better than anyone else on the atp tour (except for those spasms on the ground when he won the US open.) Hewitts "come on's" are so high pitched he reminds me of a hobbit shouting. On the other hand, when Federer shouts he shows more intensity IMO.

 

[eagle]

Hi,

It was interesting during the interview right after the US Open that the tennis world just witnessed his creative and finesse shotmaking ability from fore, back, volleys, etc. He was asked what else the world expects to see from him. He just smiled and said, "That's all I got". I thought that was great humility since some might have said "you ain't seen nothin yet".

r,
eagle

 

[Tolip]

That is what u call class.

 

[B E Allen]

Great Topic!

i think Federer is much more animated then Pete ever was...........Pete in my opinoin was obviously the greatest players ever, but was a complete and total bore of a personality........however he had a game that was so sweet he didnt need 1. In his prime Pete could take Federer any day of the week............but not sure if he could when Federer reaches his prime??

I disagree with you about pete beating federer. Pete in his prime and federer now, federer would win in stait sets! Heres the reason, petes main weapon was his serve. He would only break or even try to break someone once a set. Think about it, in todays game federer dominates the biggest servers ever, ala Andy Roddick. The breakdown, serve, slight edge to Sampras, forehand, huge edge to Federer. Remember Federers forehand is probably the best the game has ever seen! Moving on, backhand, slight edge to Federer, volleys, slight edge to Sampras, movement, Federer!! Federer is the best all around player the game has ever seen!! I think he will easily break petes 14 slam record, unless Rafael Nadal has something to do with it!

 

[alienhamster]

Great Topic!

i think Federer is much more animated then Pete ever was...........Pete in my opinoin was obviously the greatest players ever, but was a complete and total bore of a personality........however he had a game that was so sweet he didnt need 1. In his prime Pete could take Federer any day of the week............but not sure if he could when Federer reaches his prime??

I disagree with you about this being a great topic.

Can someone just do a search a repost the 500 threads about Sampras and Federer?

My bottom line: Sampras--great player, tough as nails, but boring to watch when dominant. Federer--great player, fascinating and versatile game, never a bore to watch, whether dominant or struggling to win matches.

 

[quest01]

Bjorn Borg showed no emotion whatsoever. Even when he won a match he showed no emotion, he just walked up to the net like a robot shook the opponents hand and that was it. Now thats abnormal.

 

[AAUS]

I disagree with you about pete beating federer. Pete in his prime and federer now, federer would win in stait sets! Heres the reason, petes main weapon was his serve. He would only break or even try to break someone once a set. Think about it, in todays game federer dominates the biggest servers ever, ala Andy Roddick. The breakdown, serve, slight edge to Sampras, forehand, huge edge to Federer. Remember Federers forehand is probably the best the game has ever seen! Moving on, backhand, slight edge to Federer, volleys, slight edge to Sampras, movement, Federer!! Federer is the best all around player the game has ever seen!! I think he will easily break petes 14 slam record, unless Rafael Nadal has something to do with it!

I'm pretty sure Pete at his prime would find a way to hold his service games against federer. I dont see the huge, huge edge to federer in the forehand, I'd say it gets a slight edge but on the run federer just cant come up with the same shots the sampras could which really stops his forehand from being that much better. I really dont think the match would be as onesided as you think

 

[arosen]

I think it's really cool that he takes care of his cow

Geez, c'mon, Mirka is actually kind of sexy in her own rustic way.

 

[Phil]

Geez, c'mon, Mirka is actually kind of sexy in her own rustic way.

A bit of "rustic" sexiness is okay, but sometimes the musky body oder can be really overpowering...and sometimes...not.

 

[FromThailand]

It's true that Federer is something to watch but I've always wondered why is he always crying when he receives his trophy? I've never seen a top player that emotional. It's a bit unusual isn't it?

 

[Galactus]

Bjorn Borg showed no emotion whatsoever. Even when he won a match he showed no emotion, he just walked up to the net like a robot shook the opponents hand and that was it. Now thats abnormal.

That's cos Borg was 'The Iceman'!! :mrgreen:

 

[pound cat]

It's true that Federer is something to watch but I've always wondered why is he always crying when he receives his trophy? I've never seen a top player that emotional. It's a bit unusual isn't it?

It's his emotional side. Similar to the emotions he showed as a youngster yelling and screaming on the court and throwing rackets around. Only he's all grown up now. LOL

 

[Galactus]

It's true that Federer is something to watch but I've always wondered why is he always crying when he receives his trophy? I've never seen a top player that emotional. It's a bit unusual isn't it?

It is, for any sportsman...but I think deep-down, Federer is someone who, at the age of 24, maybe still having to keep his original emotional outburts in check.
So, for 2 weeks at a time, it's all bottled up inside until he's actually there receiving whatever Slam trophy it is in front of one of the greatest players ever (i.e. Laver at the AusO), and it all comes flooding out.

He did shed some tears at the last 2 Wimbledon's before he was awarded the trophy, but I don't think he cried at all at last year's USO though did he?