Originally Posted by Tennis_Hands
For starters, he won Wimbledon for Juniors in Singles AND Doubles. He won the Orange bowl as well.
Also, his fluid game was the first thing that springs to mind, when I recall memories from his matches back then (even when he was losing against Agassi quite comfortably). His game needed a lot of polishing and developing, but the promise was there.
Watch his match with Sampras. Before the match the comentators were praising Federer to the high heaven (to an extend, that one had to wonder whether he or Sampras was the multiple Wimbledon champion).
And, be careful with the comparisons. Rosol's situation and Federer's situation have NOTHING in common. It is funny, when people take one fact , that somehow they think that supports their argument out of the context and proceed to use it to construct their argument around it. A kind of self supporting ignorance.
Gud that you found it funny. I guess it doesn't take much to amuse you.You will find it even funnier that you are inadverently doing the same thing that you are falsely accusing me of doing.
You are using achievement at Junior level to answer my question on what he achieved before winning against Sampras. Leander Paes won junior Wimbledon and US open, was number 1 in junior rankings and ended up winning only 2-3 matches in GS. Gael Monifils won AO, FO and WIM in 2004 at junior level and no GS final so far. Sounds any bell on how much to read in to Junior level achievements?
If you re-read my post you will find that I was not even slightly suggesting that Rosol is the next Federer. I wanted to drive home the point that because Federer won against Sampras, that did not automatically marked him for greatness. His game was still far from complete at that time. ultradr is suggesting that it was not the case. He thinks that with the same game Federer started winning once the field got clear of booming serve and volleyers.