Federer was playing better in 2008 - Page 11

AAAA · 10-01-2009, 12:40 PM

Nadal is lucky aswell.

mandy01 · 10-01-2009, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyan

Nadal and Nole were playing better claycourt tennis than Fed until the Madrid SF which was where they both exhausted/killed themselves and then bombed at the FO.

And Roger was smart enough not to kill himself

Roger wasnt going to play MC.And he just said his aim was first to reach the semis at Rome, before the tourney.He practiced even harder after after that then said he would want to win Madrid before the tournament.He won it

He fulfilled what he set out to do.He got the confidence he wanted and he got it smartly.He paced himself unlike Nadal and Djokovic.And that is a part of the game.

Cyan · 10-01-2009, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mandy01

And Roger was smart enough not to kill himself

Roger wasnt going to play MC.And he just said his aim was first to reach the semis at Rome, before the tourney.He practiced even harder after after that then said he would want to win Madrid before the tournament.He won it

He fulfilled what he set out to do.He got the confidence he wanted and he got it smartly.He paced himself unlike Nadal and Djokovic.And that is a part of the game.

Oh, definetely agree. That is why Fed will win like 16/17 slams and Rafa and Nole will not come close to that achievement.

TMF · 10-01-2009, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyan

Agreed. Roger is not to blame for Nadal's physical injury or Nole's mental destruction after losing the Madrid SF. But Roger got really lucky at the FO. Fact.

No.

Fact is Roger beat him in Madrid.

Fact is Soderling was BETTER than him on that day. Period.

Fact is Roger was waiting for him in the final and he didn't show up.

Fact is Roger earned more ATP points on clay than Nadal this year.

Cyan · 10-01-2009, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TMF

No.

Fact is Roger beat him in Madrid.

Fact is Soderling was BETTER than him on that day. Period.

Fact is Roger was waiting for him in the final and he didn't show up.

Fact is Roger earned more ATP points on clay than Nadal this year.

All of this because Rafa destroyed his knees because he played too many matches in the first 5 months of the year.

TMF · 10-01-2009, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyan

All of this because Rafa destroyed his knees because he played too many matches in the first 5 months of the year.

Maybe he should pray every night and ask God to give a better, durable knees.

If that doesn’t work, maybe he should only play 4 tourneys a year and only the clay season.

Cyan · 10-01-2009, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TMF

Maybe he should pray every night and ask God to give a better, durable knees.

If that doesn’t work, maybe he should only play 4 tourneys a year and only the clay season.

He has to modify his schedule for sure.

Ledigs · 10-02-2009, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mandy01

You're just so clueless about tennis,its funny

BTW-Are you trying to tell us that just because it was Del Po's first slam final we should discredit his win? Sounds fine to me

Fed won 'only' 2 slams in 2005 as compared to his other dominant seasons.I still consider the year better for him level-wise.

You really have to stop with the personal insults on this forum.

mandy01 · 10-02-2009, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ledigs

You really have to stop with the personal insults on this forum.

Ledigs · 10-02-2009, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mandy01

Fair warning.

mandy01 · 10-02-2009, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ledigs

Fair warning.

cork_screw · 10-02-2009, 10:10 AM

Does it matter? Here's one thing you'll learn more later in life. You don't have to be the best to beat someone or to earn something. A lot of it is luck, timing and persistence.

The irony is federer played better french open tournaments in 2006 and 2007 and still he won when he was pushed to 5th sets in 2009.

You don't have to be better than your competitors to get a job, but you do need side factors like network connections. I've seen a lot of incompetent and under skilled people at work because they know someone who got them in as opposed to a truly skilled individual.

It also works the other way where truly skilled people don't get in and get rejected. A great case in point is the director of District 9 and his involvements with Halo the movie. District 9 would have never been made if microsoft hadn't rejected him based on their lack of faith on his experience and look at how District 9 has done.

You really don't have to be the best to accomplish what you set out to accomplish. Fate deals a lot of random cards in life...

abmk · 10-02-2009, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ksbh

I agree with the thread title.

Federer was playing incredible tennis in 2008, far superior to 2009.

correct and nadal was playing incredible tennis in 2007, far superior to 2008 !

abmk · 10-02-2009, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flying24

However in Masters events and overall he has played much better this year, despite that he only won 1 (last year he won 0 anyway of course). So I would say overall his form this year is definitely improved.

He's won 2 master series this year - Madrid and Cincy

shabby · 10-02-2009, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TMF

Period.

Fact is Roger was waiting for him in the final and he didn't show up.

Fact is Roger earned more ATP points on clay than Nadal this year.

These blistering statements just crack me up. An individual with half a brain would know that Nadal was injured at the French. And maybe he skipped Wimbledon where he was champ just for fun?

ksbh · 10-02-2009, 11:37 AM

You mean the year he won back to back slams and the Olympic title before taking the coveted number 1 from your hero? Remind me ... how many times did Nadal beat Federer in 2008? And 2009? LOL!

Quote:

Originally Posted by abmk

correct and nadal was playing incredible tennis in 2007, far superior to 2008 !

abmk · 10-02-2009, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ksbh

You mean the year he won back to back slams and the Olympic title before taking the coveted number 1 from your hero? Remind me ... how many times did Nadal beat Federer in 2008? And 2009? LOL!

No, I mean the year 2009 in which federer won back to back slams and took back the coveted no 1 from your hero

Federer who was playing incredible tennis in 2008, loses to stepanek, blake, karlovic, simon ( 2x ) etc etc .... , wins ZERO masters titles , doesn't reach the semis of the TMC, loses in straights to novak in a GS semi, wins only 4 games in a GS final. LOL !

ksbh · 10-03-2009, 07:09 AM

We'll have to just agree to disagree. It'll save us some keystrokes!

Quote:

Originally Posted by abmk

No, I mean the year 2009 in which federer won back to back slams and took back the coveted no 1 from your hero

Federer who was playing incredible tennis in 2008, loses to stepanek, blake, karlovic, simon ( 2x ) etc etc .... , wins ZERO masters titles , doesn't reach the semis of the TMC, loses in straights to novak in a GS semi, wins only 4 games in a GS final. LOL !

jackson vile · 10-03-2009, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyan

Fed didn't lose at the USO in 2008... If Rafa was injured in 2008 at both FO and Wimbledon, Fed would have won FO, Wimbledon and USO in 2008.
So take Rafa out of the equation in 2008 and Fed would have won 3 slams in 2008. Take Rafa out of the equation at FO and Wimbledon in 2009 and Fed wins 2 slams.

So without Rafa at FO and W, Fed's 2008 at slam finals would have been better than Fed's 2009 at slam finals...

I just find it strange that Roger had the worst begining to his tennis season ever where he is glad that the 1st part of the hard court season is over and cries at the AO.

And that is considered a better year, he played far less tennis, he got beat by a kid at he USO.

The only reason he won the FO was because Nadal was not there in the final, and he struggled against Andy Roddick!

How is that a better year?

If anything it is not better than 2008, he lost AO and Wim, but those especially Wim was extremely close matches.

Fact is that Roger lost more grandslam sets in 2009 than 2008, and Roger played much less in 2009 than 2008.

namui · 10-03-2009, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roysid

To me, he is playing at the same level or slightly decreased level than last year.
There was no Nadal to throw him away that he won French and Wimbledon.

Nadal was at French Open. Just failed to earn the right to throw Fed away.

View Poll Results: Federer played better in 2008 or 2009
2008	19	15.70%
2009	102	84.30%
Voters: 121. You may not vote on this poll

10-01-2009, 12:40 PM	#201
AAAA Hall Of Fame Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,390	Nadal is lucky aswell. __________________ Fed 2010: Federer aged 28 16 Slams(inc. career slam) vs Sampras aged 28 14 Slams(no FO)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode