Nadalfan89
Hall of Fame
It's not that he isn't a fighter, it's just that he picks his battles a lot more than Rafa does.
Federer and "Not a Fighter" Label
- Thread starter McEnroeisanartist
- Start date
IvanisevicServe
Banned
Uh...when has Nadal come back from 2 sets down again?
I seem to remember him dominating at the French Open...first time he ever lost 2 sets in a match there, he lost the very next set to lose the match (Soderling).
Remember Federer's 2005 comeback from 2 sets down in Miami? That's not even listed here...
Federer has never retired in a match. Nadal...well...we can't say the same for him, now, can we?
I seem to remember him dominating at the French Open...first time he ever lost 2 sets in a match there, he lost the very next set to lose the match (Soderling).
Remember Federer's 2005 comeback from 2 sets down in Miami? That's not even listed here...
Federer has never retired in a match. Nadal...well...we can't say the same for him, now, can we?
Last edited:
powerslave
Rookie
Some of the comments here are hillarious what do you expect Federer to prove his so called fighting ability in a center court ? Jump over the net and knock down his opponent ? :roll:
Or just grunting and lobbing balls into play qualifies as fighting ? :twisted:
Or just grunting and lobbing balls into play qualifies as fighting ? :twisted:
borg number one
Legend
No, I disagree with any assertion that "Federer is not a fighter". Federer can be very tough, even when he is very far down against a tough opponent. The Hass match at the 2009 French Open is a good example.
Yet, I've also seen him somewhat "give way" during long matches versus Nadal in particular ('08 Wimbledon, '09 AO, and FO finals). He has definitely proven to be a greater "fighter" than Murray, Tsonga, and even Roddick on a very consistent basis. I would agree with that. Federer has to have been a "fighter" to achieve what he has achieved in terms of GS results. Yet, besides Nadal, there aren't a slew of "great fighters" around the top ranks, in my opinion.
How does Federer compare to Borg, McEnroe, Connors, Lendl, Sampras, Agassi, and Nadal when it comes to "being a fighter" during matches? It's also worth it to consider that "being a fighter" against lower ranked players is much different than consistently doing well in very close matches against other truly great players. Picture a Wimbledon final, during a tight fifth set. Who in the group above to hit those clutch shots under maximum pressure, when players are the most tired and "fragile" at times? Which player gets that critical break and serves out the match in the fifth set? That's the guy who is the "greatest fighter".
Yet, I've also seen him somewhat "give way" during long matches versus Nadal in particular ('08 Wimbledon, '09 AO, and FO finals). He has definitely proven to be a greater "fighter" than Murray, Tsonga, and even Roddick on a very consistent basis. I would agree with that. Federer has to have been a "fighter" to achieve what he has achieved in terms of GS results. Yet, besides Nadal, there aren't a slew of "great fighters" around the top ranks, in my opinion.
How does Federer compare to Borg, McEnroe, Connors, Lendl, Sampras, Agassi, and Nadal when it comes to "being a fighter" during matches? It's also worth it to consider that "being a fighter" against lower ranked players is much different than consistently doing well in very close matches against other truly great players. Picture a Wimbledon final, during a tight fifth set. Who in the group above to hit those clutch shots under maximum pressure, when players are the most tired and "fragile" at times? Which player gets that critical break and serves out the match in the fifth set? That's the guy who is the "greatest fighter".
Last edited:
J
Justdoit10
Guest
And? I can pull out Federer vids where he produced on match points as well. Vortex is just a giant moron.
swordtennis
G.O.A.T.
Nadal should have no problem surpassing 16 GS's then. He is stronger than Federer and fights harder.
jamesblakefan#1
G.O.A.T.
Also add the 2007 Wimbledon final where he was down break points several times in the 5th and still came through to win the match.
Fed gets no credit b/c his skills are such that he doesn't play close matches as often as other players do.
plum556
Semi-Pro
This is addressed to the trolls and trollettes.............you know who you are. I saw the end of the match and IMO, at the end of the 4th set Fed put up a tremendous fight to keep from losing the match. Falla had too much hang time, if Fed hadn't come with that late rally,I believe he would have definitely lost.
Fed and Rafa are both great fighters they didn't get
to #1 and #2 in the world by just laying down and dying in matches.
All of you MD's out there who are ready to diagnose when someone is injured and when they aren't.............
Rafa has tendonitis of the knees, I don't know if you have any idea how painful this is but I had tendonitis in my wrist and I couldn't imagine doing anything when it was bothering me,no less play a pro tennis match. Since the match that is most talked about is the one when he retired against Murray at the AO, let's revisit that. Rafa is down 2 sets and having problems with his knees.............should he:
A. continue to play no matter what?
B. stand in the middle of the court for the rest of the match and pray for rain?
C. retire,as to not aggravate the injury any further,especially since you have
no shot at winning at this point?
D. Explain to all the dipwads and haters that he is going to continue to play
injured and possibly cause permanent injury for naught, so he won't have
to hear a whole crock of bullsh*t when all is said and done?
Rafa is a professional tennis player and his work ethic is something to be admired. God forbid we give him the benefit of the doubt.....oh no....we think he's lying, he's losing that's why he retired. There is just no possible way he could have been in pain...........we know this because................
The experts have spoken.........watch out world.
Fed and Rafa are both great fighters they didn't get
to #1 and #2 in the world by just laying down and dying in matches.
All of you MD's out there who are ready to diagnose when someone is injured and when they aren't.............
Rafa has tendonitis of the knees, I don't know if you have any idea how painful this is but I had tendonitis in my wrist and I couldn't imagine doing anything when it was bothering me,no less play a pro tennis match. Since the match that is most talked about is the one when he retired against Murray at the AO, let's revisit that. Rafa is down 2 sets and having problems with his knees.............should he:
A. continue to play no matter what?
B. stand in the middle of the court for the rest of the match and pray for rain?
C. retire,as to not aggravate the injury any further,especially since you have
no shot at winning at this point?
D. Explain to all the dipwads and haters that he is going to continue to play
injured and possibly cause permanent injury for naught, so he won't have
to hear a whole crock of bullsh*t when all is said and done?
Rafa is a professional tennis player and his work ethic is something to be admired. God forbid we give him the benefit of the doubt.....oh no....we think he's lying, he's losing that's why he retired. There is just no possible way he could have been in pain...........we know this because................
The experts have spoken.........watch out world.
fednad
Hall of Fame
Right. just pulling the undies and shouting Vamos on unforced errors is fighting for sure
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
He fights his guts out especially vs Nadal but Nadal has the better tennis.
jUSToNEpERSON
Rookie
The bottom line is that Federer is human, just like the rest of us. If he has a bad day, that doesn't take away the fact that he's a fighter- it justs reminds us he isn't perfect.
Nadal, Federer, and everyone else who can get out there and play as well as they do practically every time, is a fighter.
Nadal, Federer, and everyone else who can get out there and play as well as they do practically every time, is a fighter.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
Good post. Very well balanced.
P_Agony
Banned
Sure, which is why Nadal was #1 all those years and won all those slams. Oh wait...
P_Agony
Banned
Well, if you ask me, I think Rafa is a greater fighter than Roger. Rafa will fight to the last point and can turn around matches where he faced MPs against him (although credit has to go to chokers Nalbandian, Robredo, Alamagro, etc. as well).
Federer is a huge fighter, he can really stick around in those 5 setters and steal the victory eventually. However, I've also seen Fed fade away mentally in matches before. AO 09 final, USO 09 final, 3 setters against the like of Murray in IW 09, Djokovic in Miami and Rome 09. Federer's game just completely falls apart because of that and he loses the last sets easily. If Fed was a better fighter, maybe the AO 09 final would have had a better result (this match should have been ended in 4 sets IMO in Rog's favor). Maybe he wouldn't fade away like he did in the USO 09 final set.
Granted - Tipsy, Andreev, Berdych, Falla, Haas, DP, Roddick - all have proved Federer is a big fighter. I just think Nadal's fighting spirit is 2nd to none.
I think you don't give Roger enough credit for his mental game. Sure it's weak vs Nadal and he has random ass choke matches every now and then, but to be this consistent for so long is incredibly tough, not just on the body but on the mind.
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
It's really weird, but maybe the terms are being used incorrectly. Fighter? Hard to say, since he doesn't have to fight that much. He usually gets to play his matches on his own terms.
His 5-setters that he's won? Not sure about that since the quality of his opponents haven't been fighters themselves. If I was down two sets to love against those people I would hang in there too, but is that fighting? I see that more as playing the odds.
Then again, it depends on what you're defining. Maybe, it's the mental fight to stay on top of the game for such an extended period of time. The necessary fight needed to vanquish all comers for six years in a row (Nadal excepted).
I think it's a different kind of fighting, but in terms of on the court I don't see him that way. Fight has much to do with the quality of your opponents too.
Fighter mentally? Unparalleled, to stay at the top of the game.
Fighter physically? Only up to a certain point.
His 5-setters that he's won? Not sure about that since the quality of his opponents haven't been fighters themselves. If I was down two sets to love against those people I would hang in there too, but is that fighting? I see that more as playing the odds.
Then again, it depends on what you're defining. Maybe, it's the mental fight to stay on top of the game for such an extended period of time. The necessary fight needed to vanquish all comers for six years in a row (Nadal excepted).
I think it's a different kind of fighting, but in terms of on the court I don't see him that way. Fight has much to do with the quality of your opponents too.
Fighter mentally? Unparalleled, to stay at the top of the game.
Fighter physically? Only up to a certain point.
Polaris
Hall of Fame
..
P_Agony
Banned
His match against Haas at the FO last year was a huge fight IMO. Federer was down 2 sets to love and was down 3-4 in the 3rd facing a BP, which basically was a virtual MP. Federer, being in quite a shank mode the whole set, saved that BP with a killer FH, went on to win the game, upped his level to break Haas later and serve for the set. After that he was in cruise control.
TomatoSoup
Semi-Pro
Federer is not a fighter - Because he's so good to the extent that most of the matches he played are fairly straightforward,or doesnt require him to put up a tough fight!
Face it,Federer is the goat!
Face it,Federer is the goat!
flyinghippos101
Legend
You are a young troll, but I sense great potential within. I see you're a fed fan, that's good, we need more fed trolls to balance out the mass number of nadal trolls.
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
I know he fights sometimes, everybody does. He had to fight back in that Tipsarevic match, the Safin match, Haas, and others, I'm sure, but he doesn't have to fight that much, so it's hard to give him that title.
To me, he's not known as being a fighter, mostly because he hasn't had to. In his long reign at the top, about seven years, we can all probably remember each match in which he had to fight for survival. that's not enough to earn that title. Who knows, now that he's getting older maybe he'll have to put his fighting ability on display more.
Similar threads
