Originally Posted by Indio
Before I present my take on Federer's opposition, I want to respond to some of the comments that have appeared in this thread, beginning with the most recent one questioning my sanity, concerning the one-dimensional Ivanisevic.
First of all, why was John Isner brought up? In which year did he finish in the Top 10?? And if GI isn't the most one-dimensional Top 10, who is?? What would have been his Plan B had his serve not been firing on all cylinders?? Watch some of his stuff on Youtube.
Biaggi35: How do you know how much Safin had left for the Australian 2004 final? Did he tell you?? The guy was about 24 years old at the time. Was he already over the hill? By the way, Safin finished 2-10 versus RF. If there was an anomaly at the Australian Open, it took place in 2005, not 2004, but in my opinion, each winner was fully deserving of his victory.
Federer did play Safin again at a major, Wimbledon 08.
Greg Rusedski was not a big threat at Wimbledon. He reached one QF. The US final he reached in the same year was the last time he got past the 4th round in any major.
Bjorkman, SF at Wimbledon vs Federer: You forgot to mention the semi-finalist PS played at the 2000 Wimbledon. It was Voltchkov, and he was ranked 237th.
Ferrero did decline badly in 2004, but not until after the Australian, where he reached the SF.
You're correct about Ljubicic: He and Federer never met in a major. He was notoriously weak in the majors, so I doubt that anyone thinks of him when discussing RF's opposition.
Look at Safin's draw and results that year. Anyway, this isn't important, the fact is he is 1-1 against Federer in Slams during the 2004-2006 period. They played a few times after that when Safin was nowhere near the top 10 and was losing to journeymen every week...
Greg Rusedski WAS a threat at Wimbledon, he was underachieving at all the Slams (a bit like Ljubicic). But he had one of the biggest serves in the history of the game and a great touch at the net, so he was always dangerous on grass.
I didn't say Voltchkov is better that Bjorkman. I'm just pointing out that Pete played against Bjorkman at Wimbledon '00, the same guy who was a semifinal opposition for Federer six years later, at the age of 34, so his draw clearly wasn't that easy when you also consider that he faced Gambil (destroyed your favourite LH 0-3 in R1) and Pat Rafter in the finals. Still, can't understand what kind of argument is Wimbledon 2000? Yes, I agree that Pete Sampras, during his 15 year career, has had draws which weren't that difficult, just like Federer.
Ljubicic was number 3 in the world. Ljubicic WAS one of Federer's biggest rivals and they never ever met in Slams. Pathetic.