Emerson, Laver predict more slams for Federer

  • Thread starter Thread starter aprilfool
  • Start date Start date
A

aprilfool

Guest
Posted November 21, 2011 18:38:12


Australia's most successful tennis greats, Rod Laver and Roy Emerson, have tipped Roger Federer's two-year grand slam title drought will come to an end this summer....

"I think Federer has a chance to come back and, if anywhere, I think the Australian is a good place for him," said Laver, who swept through two calendar grand slams in 1962 and 1969..."

"...Emerson, who won a career total of 12 slam titles, one more than Laver and behind only Federer and Pete Sampras (14), is even more convinced there is plenty of life left in Federer's all-court game.

"Federer has still got some grand slams in him," the 76-year-old said.

"He's an incredible player and he should have beaten Djokovic (in New York).

"Even now he's too good to count out.

"If he serves well, no-one is going to beat him."

Full article:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-11-21/greats-tip-federer-to-bounce-back/3684778?section=qld
 
NoShitSherlock.jpg
 
Last edited:
federer is going to retire with the YEAR GS in 2012 + Olympics + 2012 Real Slam

Then he'll go straight to Elysium for his retirement
 
Federer has the best and most efficient tennis game since Sampras and is along the same great classic lines as Sampras, Laver, Kramer, Gozales, ... I believe he will have a much longer career, winning more slam championships, and play seniors like many of the other greats. I think he will also be like some of these other GOAT contenders I mentioned and have the ability to beat the best players in the world till almost 50 years in age. The reason is based on a very classic and efficient game that does not break down the body parts.
 
Federer has a good shot to win 1 or 2 more slams. He's beaten Djokovic this year. had he done it in Australia instead of Paris, I'm sure hed won there. No excuses for a slamless year, but he still has a shot everytime.

Even if he doesn't, I'm thankful for watching him play as long as possible.
 
joeri888 said:
I'm thankful for watching him play as long as possible.
Click to expand...

Yeah but I really prefered him when he was on Fedex God Mode.
Yesterday's match against Tsonga was really tough to watch. First set he's here, then he leaves and then he can thank tsonga for that last failure of a serve game.
Still thankful for watching him play
As long as possible
 
They say he "should have beaten Djokovic in New York..."

What does that even mean? "Should have"?

Federer has displayed fragility in big moments all year, it's part of who he is now and a big reason why he may never be able to win a slam again. His mind isn't tough enough, while the minds of Nadal and Djokovic are tougher, at least when they play him. Winning Paris and Basel didn't change anything.
 
nadalwon2012 said:
They say he "should have beaten Djokovic in New York..."

What does that even mean? "Should have"?

Federer has displayed fragility in big moments all year, it's part of who he is now and a big reason why he may never be able to win a slam again. His mind isn't tough enough, while the minds of Nadal and Djokovic are tougher, at least when they play him. Winning Paris and Basel didn't change anything.
Click to expand...

Don't you think it means that Fed was serving at double match point? IMO, that pretty much = he should have won!
 
OddJack said:
Actually, FO 2012 is a good possibility.
Click to expand...

IMO, Fed is still my top pick to win the hard court majors despite his ranking/seeding. He would have to do something different than he's doing to beat Nadal on clay. Frankly, I think Fed could out-moonball Nadal if he wanted to.
 
nadalwon2012 said:
They say he "should have beaten Djokovic in New York..."

What does that even mean? "Should have"?

Federer has displayed fragility in big moments all year, it's part of who he is now and a big reason why he may never be able to win a slam again. His mind isn't tough enough, while the minds of Nadal and Djokovic are tougher, at least when they play him. Winning Paris and Basel didn't change anything.
Click to expand...

At least he's not 0-6 against Djokovic, and at least he won't need a 3rd set TB to beat Fish :rolleyes:
 
I could see Federer winning 0-2 more majors the remainder of his career. Definitely not a FO or Wimbledon, the hard court majors are his only real chance at this point and most would agree on that. LOL at someone saying he has a good chance to win the FO at nearly 31 when he almost never won one in his prime years. I think overall 0 is 50% likely, 1 is 35% likely, and 2 is 15% likely.
 
We've gotta be realistic about Roger. The hardcourt majors have been slowed to such a degree that they suit Djokovic and Nadal more than the maestro.

At RG there's Nadal. Wimby, he's declined the most(not even crossing QF).

So where are his next majors coming from really?

The thing that bothers me the most about Roger is his side to side movement, its just not good enough tbh.
 
NadalAgassi said:
I could see Federer winning 0-2 more majors the remainder of his career. Definitely not a FO or Wimbledon, the hard court majors are his only real chance at this point and most would agree on that. LOL at someone saying he has a good chance to win the FO at nearly 31 when he almost never won one in his prime years. I think overall 0 is 50% likely, 1 is 35% likely, and 2 is 15% likely.
Click to expand...

I see his chances of winning another FO as being very good, and excellent if Nadal and Novak have to battle it out in the semis. He is no slouch on Parisian clay...
 
gunnd5000 said:
If Federer wins the AO he's gonna be in buisness for the rest of the year - you herd it first here
Click to expand...


Question is, how? If the AO organisers ATLEAST use lighter balls next year , then Fed's got a chance.
I mean AO 2011 was a complete flop show. Worst AO ever by a mile.
 
To be honest, I believe Federer has the best chance to win on clay.

Too many big hitters have found out how to win against him on the grass at Wimbledon, and there are too many good hardcourt players.

On clay, there is Nadal, and Djokovic. Everyone else he can essentially walk-over. Despite Nadal winning as much as he has on clay, I really believe Federer is the second best clay courter of all time, bar none.
 
He is a top-3 threat at least everywhere. And we know that if he turns it on full blast for a stretch of 2 weeks, especially towards the tail-end, nobody can stop him. I think he will win at least 2 Slams here on. And when he finally starts to actually plan his schedule to peak for the Slams (instead of playing every tourney like it means a great deal), he will continue to threaten. He ain't going nowhere for a while.
 
Summarizing the obvious, Fed has to translate his indoor fall/autumn form to the outdoor season, and also figure out a way to consistently beat Nadal and Djoker who will be in the way to more GS wins.
 
As a die hard Federer fan, I have to admit his chances of winning a major is ZILCH, ZERO, NADA.

He can definitely win a few more Masters / 500 / WTF, where it is best of 3 sets , but to see him win 3 tough 5 setter matches from QF of any major is impossible, given how inconsistent he is .
 
tennisaddict said:
As a die hard Federer fan, I have to admit his chances of winning a major is ZILCH, ZERO, NADA.

He can definitely win a few more Masters / 500 / WTF, where it is best of 3 sets , but to see him win 3 tough 5 setter matches from QF of any major is impossible, given how inconsistent he is .
Click to expand...


are you die hard nadal fanboy??:-?
 
sportsfan1 said:
Summarizing the obvious, Fed has to translate his indoor fall/autumn form to the outdoor season, and also figure out a way to consistently beat Nadal and Djoker who will be in the way to more GS wins.
Click to expand...

If things continue to go as they have been, Federer may have an easier time winning a couple more slams than I thought because he may be the only one left standing. Murray, Nadal and Djokovic have a new injury or condition every day it seems!
 
As long as Fed can make the semis of slams he's got a chance to play two good matches anywhere and take one.
Any of his toughest opponents could lose early also.
 
cc0509 said:
If things continue to go as they have been, Federer may have an easier time winning a couple more slams than I thought because he may be the only one left standing. Murray, Nadal and Djokovic have a new injury or condition every day it seems!
Click to expand...

This is the end of the year where everyone usually seems more beat up. I wouldnt read much into it unless it is still this way early next year.
 
NadalAgassi said:
This is the end of the year where everyone usually seems more beat up. I wouldnt read much into it unless it is still this way early next year.
Click to expand...

Let's hope it is just end of the year issues because it is annoying as a tennis fan to watch a tournament when you know there could be multiple retirements by top players.
 
I think he has a good chance to win more slams if he can stop going on mental walkabouts during matches. Those mental walkabouts cost his his match against Tsonga at Wimby,and definitely cost him in the semi at the USO.
 
Clarky21 said:
I think he has a good chance to win more slams if he can stop going on mental walkabouts during matches. Those mental walkabouts cost his his match against Tsonga at Wimby,and definitely cost him in the semi at the USO.
Click to expand...

The mental lapses are definitely one problem. The other is he is slower than before.
 
They said Federer "should have" beaten Djokovic. But even then, that doesn't mean Federer would've won the title because there was still Nadal waiting for him in the final.:lol:
It's almost impossible to beat Djokovic and Nadal back to back in a Slam.
 
Talker said:
As long as Fed can make the semis of slams he's got a chance to play two good matches anywhere and take one.
Any of his toughest opponents could lose early also.
Click to expand...

Djokovic and Nadal don't lose early in Slams. Federer is guaranteed to play the both of them to win a Slam and not even God Mode Federer can go through the both of them. What's worse is Federer has been straight setted by Djokovic in the AO twice. To even go through Djokovic alone is hard enough, then factor in Nadal who is waiting for him in the round after that.
Federer has no chance in hell to win a Slam if Djokovic and Nadal are in form. Sorry.:( He may go through one if he's lucky but not both. Doesn't matter if it's Djokovic in the semi and Nadal in the final or Nadal in the semi and Djokovic in the final. He hasn't beaten Nadal in a Slam since 2007 and even then he needed to pull out some miracle serves to escape being broken in the 5th.
 
The only place Federer could possibly go through Djokovic and Nadal back to back at this point of his career is the U.S Open, but the U.S Open is the place where there are the most dangerous people who love fast hard courts and would give themselves a fighting chance vs an old Federer. He would also have the handle the semi to final short time frame turnaround. U.S Open is his best chance by far of another slam though.

Wimbledon Federer was played equal by Nadal way back in 2007-2008, he would lose for sure now if they played. It is Djokovic's worst surface so maybe he could beat him if Djokovic cant duplicate his 2011 form, but Federer's grass game has declined so much he can lose to alot of people there. I cant see him winning another Wimbledon the way he looked at the last 3 Wimbledons (even 2009 where he won despite looked very ragged, but his toughest opponent was his pigeon Roddick who he was lucky not to lose to).

French Open forget it. 0% chance if he plays Nadal, and Djokovic is the only one with any chance to beat Nadal for Federer, but Djokovic has yet to make a French final, and Nadal dropping to #3 by then is unlikely. So a scenario of getting to the final (aka he was in Djokovic's half) and not seeing Nadal if he is there does not exist barring another Soderling Hayleys Comet like miracle (which is still more likely than Fed ever beating Nadal head to head at Roland Garros, lol), thus neither do his title chances. Not to mention Djokovic would probably win a rematch there anyway.

Australian Open, beating even one of Nadal or Djokovic in that heat and those slow courts would be hard enough, let alone both. He needs everything to break right there including an upset of 1 or both of Nadal or Djokovic by someone else. Aussie is still the 2nd best, and only other chance.

If Murray more strongly enters the mix it might help Federer's chances at the Australian and U.S Open, but if Murray strengthens Federer might find his slam dominance of Murray a thing of the past considering their overall H2H in Murrays favor for years now suggests the slam matchup is overdue to turn around as Federer ages.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
aprilfool said:
Posted November 21, 2011 18:38:12


Australia's most successful tennis greats, Rod Laver and Roy Emerson, have tipped Roger Federer's two-year grand slam title drought will come to an end this summer....

"I think Federer has a chance to come back and, if anywhere, I think the Australian is a good place for him," said Laver, who swept through two calendar grand slams in 1962 and 1969..."

"...Emerson, who won a career total of 12 slam titles, one more than Laver and behind only Federer and Pete Sampras (14), is even more convinced there is plenty of life left in Federer's all-court game.

"Federer has still got some grand slams in him," the 76-year-old said.

"He's an incredible player and he should have beaten Djokovic (in New York).

"Even now he's too good to count out.

"If he serves well, no-one is going to beat him."

Full article:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-11-21/greats-tip-federer-to-bounce-back/3684778?section=qld
Click to expand...

Silly journalist clearly just looking at amateur/Open era Major count. Ken Rosewall says hello.

In regards to Fed, I do think he has another 1 or 2 in him. The great thing is that if it happens, wherever it is, it will mean something big for him.

An Australian Open would give him the stand alone Open era record of 5 and at least 5 titles at 3 of the 4 Majors.

A French Open would mean he joins Laver and Emerson in having at least 2 titles at each Major.

A Wimbledon would tie him with Sampras' Open era record of 7.

A US Open would give him the stand alone Open era record of 6.

As a fan, if he was to win 1 more I'd pick the French, so he has 2 of each. He has 5 finals there already, which is phenomenal, but only the 1 title.

If he was to win 2 more, it would be a tough choice for what I'd prefer to join the French. Wimbledon and US Open really are the big two and passing Sampras/Connors in New York or tying Sampras at Wimbledon would be special. Getting another Australian for at least 5 at 3 of the 4 would also be a phenomenal achievement. Another option (incredibly, incredibly unlikely) would be for the 2 to both be at the French, giving him at least 3 of each. Personally I think I'd go with a French and Wimbledon for 2 of each and joint-record at 3 of the 4.

Basically, what is obvious from this is that everything from now on is sugar on top for Fed.
 
Well put.
I also wish he wins that damn Olympic medal. I don't know what the big deal is about that but everybody keeps mentioning that.


Strobe Lights said:
Silly journalist clearly just looking at amateur/Open era Major count. Ken Rosewall says hello.

In regards to Fed, I do think he has another 1 or 2 in him. The great thing is that if it happens, wherever it is, it will mean something big for him.

An Australian Open would give him the stand alone Open era record of 5 and at least 5 titles at 3 of the 4 Majors.

A French Open would mean he joins Laver and Emerson in having at least 2 titles at each Major.

A Wimbledon would tie him with Sampras' Open era record of 7.

A US Open would give him the stand alone Open era record of 6.

As a fan, if he was to win 1 more I'd pick the French, so he has 2 of each. He has 5 finals there already, which is phenomenal, but only the 1 title.

If he was to win 2 more, it would be a tough choice for what I'd prefer to join the French. Wimbledon and US Open really are the big two and passing Sampras/Connors in New York or tying Sampras at Wimbledon would be special. Getting another Australian for at least 5 at 3 of the 4 would also be a phenomenal achievement. Another option (incredibly, incredibly unlikely) would be for the 2 to both be at the French, giving him at least 3 of each. Personally I think I'd go with a French and Wimbledon for 2 of each and joint-record at 3 of the 4.

Basically, what is obvious from this is that everything from now on is sugar on top for Fed.
Click to expand...
 
In this interview, Federer talks about what motivates him.

http://www.youtube.com/user/KickServeTennis?feature=mhee

We all have been there before. Facing the challenge of maintaining motivation. He mentioned that he used to want to prove himself to the previous generation, like Pete, Agassi, etc. Then he went on to prove himself to the peers. And he lost his motivation to prove himself to the next generation. I can only imagine the mental changes he has gone through within a 10-ish year period.

I think the key is whether he has anything else he think he wanted to prove.
 
let's see.
djoker has clearly bust his shoulder. and his game is as physical as nadal's is.
nadal looks half his peak self.
murray's has a pea sized heart and seems to get injured put under stress.

who can challenge fed, except may be his own doubts?
 
I think Federer is good enough, but the problem is just overcoming Djokovic and Nadal both back to back. They are both too consistent right now will likely be in most of the SFs. Djokovic I worry less about because Fed has had much more success against him, and the losses were so close he could've won with a little more luck. Nadal on the other hand is his nemesis. Nadal will probably own Fed all the way into his retirement. I would love to see Fed/Nadal USO at least one time though.
 
Ryoma said:
In this interview, Federer talks about what motivates him.

http://www.youtube.com/user/KickServeTennis?feature=mhee

We all have been there before. Facing the challenge of maintaining motivation. He mentioned that he used to want to prove himself to the previous generation, like Pete, Agassi, etc. Then he went on to prove himself to the peers. And he lost his motivation to prove himself to the next generation. I can only imagine the mental changes he has gone through within a 10-ish year period.

I think the key is whether he has anything else he think he wanted to prove.
Click to expand...

thanks for the link, it was interesting to hear the GOAT speak.
 
I, like many, got my hopes up for #17 after his indoor Europe success last fall. I won't be as overconfident in '12, even if he wins in London. Still, he has a very good chance to grab a major and very soon. The AO schedule, if he gets the first semi, would allow any extra time needed to recover if he faces the Djokdal daily double. I hope he sees fit to train in Dubai prior to the Aussie jaunt. The conditioning could be critical to triumph.

All that being said, it will be a treat to know he's still capable of pushing the big boys to beat him, even if he doesn't walk with the trophy. His game is pure eye candy for me. I am truly blessed to have witnessed his career.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
The Empire Slam
Replies
3
Views
732
Antonio Puente
Antonio Puente
TripleATeam
  • Poll Poll
Do Laver's Pro Slams Count?
2
Replies
82
Views
8K
pc1
pc1
S
Slams record
Replies
0
Views
546
Surfie
S
M
More Impressive Achievement of Federer and Nadal
Replies
13
Views
1K
FrontHeadlock
F
F
GOAT: Federer or Laver?
Replies
21
Views
3K
reaper
R
Back
Top