View Single Post
Old 04-01-2005, 08:32 PM   #8
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 919

Actually I don't know why people keep comparing the two other than their dominance of their sport. Pete would win all his service games and wait on a lazy break where you weren't as sharp on your service. Routine score for him would have been 6-4, 6-4, 6-4. In Roger's case, he actually returns very well and doesn't have the kind of serve Pete could rely on so he tries to take it to you every game. What I take from the last couple lines from the interview was that Roger makes you play amazing the whole match which is hard for even pros to do. Wheras with Pete you had raise your game tremendously on the big occasions, otherwise he'd leave you in the dust. Pete is all about the big points: the big break in a set, the small break in a tiebreaker, if you want to compete with Pete, you gotta win those crucial points in the match. Any one of the break points you give Roger is crucial, however as hard as it is to break Roger's serve, I would rather do that than try to break Pete.
ragnaROK is offline   Reply With Quote