BlackSheep
Rookie
If Federer went a whole year with out losing to anyone. Would this give him the edge over Pete?
And the final question is: Can it be done?
And the final question is: Can it be done?
What would this mean, is it even possible?
- Thread starter BlackSheep
- Start date
BlackSheep
Rookie
Because if you really think about it if he didn't lose to Nadal last year then his record would have been almost perfect. So, I guess it depends if he has figured out Nadal's game. Which I think he has!
whistleway
Semi-Pro
It is so sad that people even contemplate like this.. Just one slip, one ankle twist will do the trick. That is how difficult it is to win a slam.. and to go through it over a year is next to impossible. Federer has done a lot of things right, like scheduling, fitness, breaks, not too much media etc.. but, he was lucky to go through without major injuries..
Craig Sheppard
Hall of Fame
The trick to doing something like this is to play fewer tournaments, only the bigger tournaments... but it's a bit of a catch-22, b/c by playing fewer tournaments, you have less match toughness. But I'd assume Roger could easily overcome something like that. Although we did see him a bit rusty in the early rounds of the Australian, so even Roger gets some rust now and then. And remember the length of schedule--he probably lost to Murray last year at Cincy b/c he just wanted a break before the US Open. Scheduling requirements might not allow him to take as many weeks off as he would want though. I think, unbelievably though, he could actually do this.
stormholloway
Legend
This nonsense must stop. Nothing gives anyone an edge over former players. It's all a matter of opinion. If you think it will, then it will.
And of course it's possible, he only lost two matches last year.
And of course it's possible, he only lost two matches last year.
Shabazza
Legend
I don't know what your are talking about. He lost 5 matches, one more than in 2005.
ACE of Hearts
Bionic Poster
I also feel that he has figured out Nadal.I hope they meet in Dubai in the final.
drakulie
Talk Tennis Guru
"Figured out Nadals game??" One thing is "figuring out Nadals game", and another thing is being able to beat him.
It's not like Fed hadn't beaten him because he hadn't "figured out his game">>> he simply has not been able to beat him consitently. But that is already changing.
It's not like Fed hadn't beaten him because he hadn't "figured out his game">>> he simply has not been able to beat him consitently. But that is already changing.
I think Fed can go undefeated, but its unlikely, because he is human after all. You'd have to do the grind day in and day out and one of those days he might be feeling mentally or physically fatigued or just have an off day.
With that being said, isnt it amazing that we are even talking about not just winning slams or titles, but actually whether he will lose a match at all to anybody. Scary
With that being said, isnt it amazing that we are even talking about not just winning slams or titles, but actually whether he will lose a match at all to anybody. Scary
Not really. He still needs another 5 GS titles.
I'd love to see it happen but he won't because he's human.
Would that be a good or bad thing?
Lambsscroll
Hall of Fame
The edge over Pete already happened.
Haasquet
Rookie
I assume he read an article that mentioned Federer had only lost to two players last year, but omitted the fact that one of those two had beaten him four times...
