Because I don't think a guy who is third in his own era can be Top 5 all time. That would be absurd. There have been a hell of a lot of great champions in the 145 year history of tennis. Big 3 supporters insult the game when they assume their favorites are automatically among the three best players ever.But you didn't even say top 5.
That was a sharp reporter over there, you can tell when people have studiesLast paragraph:
“However, it appears unlikely that Federer will reach the stratospheric heights from the early stages of his career.”
Negative.
They are in shock. And will be in shock.
You cannot easily rebuild your imaginations if your expectations were extremely high, but the reality has ruined it in so relentless way.
Fedbase was expecting him to remain the first in the race forever.
That's the problem number 1.
Millions of comments from the 2008-2020 period are the proof.
And it's in the internet easily available in the archives. Hard to deny it, hard to hide it.
That's the problem number 2.
And the last but not least: it's not only Nadal (instrumentally nowadays so-called a friend of Roger) who rose above Federer.
It's Djokovic as well.
That's the problem number 3.
Maybe at first but he obviously corrected it as evidenced by his dominance over Nadal after 2014. Of course the correction came a little late though.. if he did it sooner Nadal could theoretically have no slams outside of Roland GarrosHis weak one-handed backhand is the reason he couldn't make it to the level of Djokovic and Nadal.
He used a 90 sq inch frame for most of his career, what happened when he switch to a 97? Neo backhand, hitting winner from wverywhere with that thing, federers backhand is one of the sport most precious things, including his slice thereHis weak one-handed backhand is the reason he couldn't make it to the level of Djokovic and Nadal.
He was anything but a victim of the transition. He was its greatest beneficiary.Federer was caught in the transition between the classical style of play derived from the woodie and gut days and the modern topspin game derived from bigger graphite rackets and polys. He tried his best to adjust by moving from a 90 to a 97 but he still could not keep up with the modern game. He was basically the victim of technology changes.
Having said that, I have modeled my game after him due to reasons of injury prevention.
Correct. This is a guy who never got past the first round at Wimbledon on the fast grass. The change of surface and homogenization played right into Federer's hands. It was always inevitable someone else would arrive who would take the game to the next level. It was unlucky for Roger that two arrived!He was anything but a victim of the transition. He was its greatest beneficiary.
The fairy tale had to end at some point. Don't cry because it's over, smile that it happened.Correct. This is a guy who never got past the first round at Wimbledon on the fast grass. The change of surface and homogenization played right into Federer's hands. It was always inevitable someone else would arrive who would take the game to the next level. It was unlucky for Roger that two arrived!
Uh? He beat sampras on the fast grass in 2001, what are you talking about? Before that he was 18, and very little experience on grassCorrect. This is a guy who never got past the first round at Wimbledon on the fast grass. The change of surface and homogenization played right into Federer's hands. It was always inevitable someone else would arrive who would take the game to the next level. It was unlucky for Roger that two arrived!
The grass was slow in 2001. They changed it in time for the tournament.Uh? He beat sampras on the fast grass in 2001, what are you talking about? Before that he was 18, and very little experience on grass
His weak noggin is probably the biggest reason. His serve and forehand mostly covered up his deficiency on that side.His weak one-handed backhand is the reason he couldn't make it to the level of Djokovic and Nadal.
He also won wimbledon juniors in 1998, to say that he wasnt a good grass player because he didnt pass first round with 17 and 18 years old is absurd, specially taking in account that he developed later than most tennis atgs, and in 2001 everyone was playing serve and volley at wimbledon, it was fast, and nothing like todayThe grass was slow in 2001. They changed it in time for the tournament.
They changed the grass in time for the tournament. NY Times and Wimbledon itself confirm.He also won wimbledon juniors in 1998, to say that he wasnt a good grass player because he didnt pass first round with 17 and 18 years old is absurd, specially taking in account that he developed later than most tennis atgs, and in 2001 everyone was playing serve and volley at wimbledon, it was fast, and nothing like today
Correct. This is a guy who never got past the first round at Wimbledon on the fast grass. The change of surface and homogenization played right into Federer's hands. It was always inevitable someone else would arrive who would take the game to the next level. It was unlucky for Roger that two arrived!
Nole won against an old fed that was playing good, last year of semi young federer playing his game was 2012, and that year federer did some amazing things with a 90 sq inch racquet) i agree he was the one to take full advantage of the new technology to create more spin, in fact, he was one of the players puting more rpms on the ball before nadal came along, but he was always all court and a much more traditional style for grass, when he beat sampras ( it was not sampras peak, but he was 30, so not crazy past his peak) he beat him at his own game, all match was serve and volleying, he atacked him, he wasnt deffending on grassThey changed the grass in time for the tournament. NY Times and Wimbledon itself confirm.
Winning juniors isn't the same as the big leagues. His playing style isn't conducive to the fast grass where his rhythm would be constantly disrupted and his poor clutch against equals would see him bounced. It was perfect for the slow grass. Unfortunately, along came Nole...
I appreciate your perspective although I disagree.Nole won against an old fed that was playing good, last year of semi young federer playing his game was 2012, and that year federer did some amazing things with a 90 sq inch racquet) i agree he was the one to take full advantage of the new technology to create more spin, in fact, he was one of the players puting more rpms on the ball before nadal came along, but he was always all court and a much more traditional style for grass, when he beat sampras ( it was not sampras peak, but he was 30, so not crazy past his peak) he beat him at his own game, all match was serve and volleying, he atacked him, he wasnt deffending on grass
With what exactly? Because most of the things i said were facts, you cant disagree with facts, maybe you think that beating a 34 years old that never took care of his body like djokovic and never moved so good again after he made 30, is so significantI appreciate your perspective although I disagree.
Because I don't think a guy who is third in his own era can be Top 5 all time. That would be absurd. There have been a hell of a lot of great champions in the 145 year history of tennis. Big 3 supporters insult the game when they assume their favorites are automatically among the three best players ever.
Just wait for TTWers to trash his achievements in the coming years like they've done to Sampras.
Well see, that's why what comes around goes around. Had they been more respectful to him, and the past greats of the game, then they'd receive far less of this.Just wait for TTWers to trash his achievements in the coming years like they've done to Sampras.
Man, that’s a shocker. Is the sky blue and is water wet as well?Last paragraph:
“However, it appears unlikely that Federer will reach the stratospheric heights from the early stages of his career.”
How can a man barely in the top 5 of his own time be in the top 5 of all time?But you didn't even say top 5.
Ewww 2015 Nadal ewww ewww ewww“I don’t need the tennis. I need The Good Tennis, to my BH” — FEDR
As Mariah Carey's song goes "If it's over, won't you let me know?"
The uncertainty sucks.
Honestly, unless he just is bored with tennis - which I don’t think he is - I don’t understand why he doesn’t play another 6-7 in doubles and try to rack some doubles slams…An interesting interview with Roger which seems to suggest that Roger is adopting a different viewpoint about the role of tennis in his life going forward:
![]()
‘I don't think I need the tennis’ – Federer looks to life after sport after missing Wimbledon
Roger Federer has given the clearest indication yet that he could be about to retire after more than 12 months out with a knee injury.www.eurosport.co.uk
Tragic perhaps, but also a pretty legendary performance overall even with the tragic moments.It's so sad that his last final appearance was so tragic.
Honestly, unless he just is bored with tennis - which I don’t think he is - I don’t understand why he doesn’t play another 6-7 in doubles and try to rack some doubles slams…
4th place. Top 3 of all time are Laver, Nadal and Djokovic.
You’re almost certainly right. Just wish it would happen cause it would be so cool and make doubles excitingHe has played for a long time and his knees may well be a problem. In any case, the returns are surely diminishing such that it may be that he sees it that way himself at this point.
Are you taking seven spots?Somone said he was #3, I said he was #4 and now he might even be 10th LOL.
Sadly, unlike you, your Only Fans can be quite obnoxious and overbearing at times.Having said that, I have modeled my game after him due to reasons of injury prevention.
His weak one-handed backhand is the reason he couldn't make it to the level of Djokovic and Nadal.
Listen, I'm not saying Djokovic wouldn't give Rod Laver a game if both were using modern rackets. Of course he would, Rod is 83!Why not @Spencer Gore ?
Of course someone who is 3rd today is better than Laver/Rosewall/Perry/Pancho etc etc
Modern day athletes are all better due to evolution.
It is like saying Carl Lewis was the GOAT of 100M sprinting in the late 1980s and early 1990s but sprinters like Bolt, Gay, Blake, Gatlin, Powell, Coleman, Maurice Greene are/were all faster, so they are all better.
Here are a list of sprinters who are quicker than Carl Lewis ever was, being the GOAT 30-35 years ago assured you of nothing !
![]()
that's too bad. if Russians can't play wimbledon for invading ukraine then Americans can't watch ES for invading Iraq.Can you cut and paste the article? I can’t access it from the USA.
The game has moved on. Time to hang the racquet up Fed. He’s been a great player. Third place is still a great achievement for him.
that took me to drowning in sorrowThat took me to:
Do you have to let it linger?
The Cranberries.
2015 was early in his career? lololol.Last paragraph:
“However, it appears unlikely that Federer will reach the stratospheric heights from the early stages of his career.”
inb4 three knee surgeries and chronic back issues.Federer was caught in the transition between the classical style of play derived from the woodie and gut days and the modern topspin game derived from bigger graphite rackets and polys. He tried his best to adjust by moving from a 90 to a 97 but he still could not keep up with the modern game. He was basically the victim of technology changes.
Having said that, I have modeled my game after him due to reasons of injury prevention.