Federer and the French

[fastswingVD]

fernando gonzalez the forehand beast

 

[Morrissey]

Believe me, as much as you are a fan of RF and you seem to enjoy his game, I'm pretty sure his days of winning GS events are over. Folks point to Sampras going out on a high winning his last USO but one thing that folks/fans forget and that is RF doesnt have the serve that Sampras has. Its that serve that more than any other aspect of his game made him the champ that he was, RF as good as he is simply doesnt have that kind of velocity of the serve, in fact there maybe half a dozen guys out there with serves better than Feds but what those other big servers dont have is his accuracy.
If he never ever wins another slam which i really suspect will be the case, it wont take away from what he's already acheived in the sport, the only glaring omission will be the French and last year was the best and last chance he had of walking away with that particular piece of silverware. So to all of his fans dont feel too downhearted you got to see one of the very best do his thing but as you all should know: 'all good things must come to an end' just ask Borg, Vilas, Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Wilander, Edberg, Becker etc etc

I agree with you and I think you make very valid points. If he keeps playing like this he won't win anything this year and will very likely miss out on #1. But people here are defensive and angry about that being a realistic possibility. They dismiss it as trolling. I post the current ATP Champions Race and they say that it was a bad post. Why? Because it shows Fed in the 6th spot? I guess if he were #1 on the race they wouldn't have had a problem with it. BTW, is it ok if I ask which ex-pro you were during the 80's? I'm curious.

 

[hyogen]

I agree with you and I think you make very valid points. If he keeps playing like this he won't win anything this year and will very likely miss out on #1. But people here are defensive and angry about that being a realistic possibility. They dismiss it as trolling. I post the current ATP Champions Race and they say that it was a bad post. Why? Because it shows Fed in the 6th spot? I guess if he were #1 on the race they wouldn't have had a problem with it. BTW, is it ok if I ask which ex-pro you were during the 80's? I'm curious.

i am curious too. wasn't it in the 60s? looking at his screenname.

 

[ExPro1963]

I agree with you and I think you make very valid points. If he keeps playing like this he won't win anything this year and will very likely miss out on #1. But people here are defensive and angry about that being a realistic possibility. They dismiss it as trolling. I post the current ATP Champions Race and they say that it was a bad post. Why? Because it shows Fed in the 6th spot? I guess if he were #1 on the race they wouldn't have had a problem with it. BTW, is it ok if I ask which ex-pro you were during the 80's? I'm curious.

tut tut, anonymity is the opertative word here folks. I'll tell you that i wasnt a journeyman pro I was top 35 between 82 and 87 and stopped playing in 91. I never went past the 3rd round of any GS but I won a handful of lesser atp tour level events, and the onlybtime i had to play the Q's was when i started out in 81 and 6 or 7 in 91 when i stopped playing.

 

[daddy]

To that I will say ,'we'll see'. you are thinking as fan and by virtue of that fact you wont see things that are obvous to others but thats ok. I'm not sure about the glandular fever thing, i wouldnt want to question the legimacy of his claim but i'll tell you this: In 1984 we saw Connors get to the semis of the FO, USO and the final of wimbledon lose in the final of the Davis Cup and the guys in the locker room were noting that JC's shots were losing power the depth on his ground strokes was not what it used to be, ( he even went back to his T2000 in 85, blaming the losses on the new racket that he'd been using since 84) granted JC was 32 at the time but the decline was obvious and he didnt win another main stream event until DC in 88/89. i think then he won again in toulouse and that was the last of his tour titles, the point i'm trying to make is that he was still better than the majority of the players out there but when it got to the quarters or semis thats when he came unstuck and some times he wasn't even losing to superior players mainly it was lendl or mats other times it was a journeyman having an inspired week, much like mardy fish had this past week. RF will win tour events because he is still light years better than most of the guys out there but at the big events where the big guns are is where he'll struggle. So look closely and you'll see what i'm talking about Sampras GS records going to be safe for a while.

Your point makes some sense but as it is every tome you try to compre past to present there are a few or more flaws. Firsat of all, although his form is on a down and his movement is slower, this does not mean it is a natural decline - it is maybe due to his illness. Second I do think that although you provided great facts here *as I did when comparing many players and especially Sampras to Federer - most of them won their GS's before the 27 year old mark* this is not a concrete proof of what is to come. If you look at the past to conclude about the present remember Agassi ( granted a very much different player to Federer ) who had his slump and went out not to lose a few matches but out of top 100 to return in great style and play 10 more years of great tennis including finishing a complete slam. Just my 2 cents.

 

[daddy]

Fed's 26 years old. That's still really young if you think about it. Your muscles aren't even fully developed until you are 29ish.

Think again about what you wrote, your mnuscles have nothing to do with the speed overall and speed of your footwork as well as your reflexes and stamina, so needed for tennis. This is not bodybuilding where people are considered juniors at 27. Btw you can safely say 27 rather than 26 for fed, he is closer to that mark

 

[drakulie]

I'm pretty sure his days of winning GS events are over.

Fed just won (decisively) the year-end championships a few months ago. I highly doubt it is "over" for him.

Folks point to Sampras going out on a high winning his last USO but one thing that folks/fans forget and that is RF doesnt have the serve that Sampras has. Its that serve that more than any other aspect of his game made him the champ that he was, RF as good as he is simply doesnt have that kind of velocity of the serve,

You are **WAY** off base here. Although I agree Sampras' serve is far superior to Feds, the velocity of the two is the same. Sampras never had the fastest serve when he played, and averaged in the high teens (just like Fed).

 

[ExPro1963]

Your point makes some sense but as it is every tome you try to compre past to present there are a few or more flaws. Firsat of all, although his form is on a down and his movement is slower, this does not mean it is a natural decline - it is maybe due to his illness. Second I do think that although you provided great facts here *as I did when comparing many players and especially Sampras to Federer - most of them won their GS's before the 27 year old mark* this is not a concrete proof of what is to come. If you look at the past to conclude about the present remember Agassi ( granted a very much different player to Federer ) who had his slump and went out not to lose a few matches but out of top 100 to return in great style and play 10 more years of great tennis including finishing a complete slam. Just my 2 cents.

Lets come back to this in september after the USO. Without meaning to disrespect you and your opinion but in order to understand where i'm coming from you need to have experienced it yourself. Friendly debate is always welcome without some of the nastiness i read on here but if come september i'm wrong and RF has won 2 of the 3 remaining slams then i will wholeheartedly apologise to all his fans, however i dont think i'll be wrong on this occasion. Lets touch base in september and we'll compare notes.

 

[daddy]

Fed is about equal on all surfaces. He's been lucky not to have to face a lot of grass court specialists. He is the same as on hardcourts. It's just that everyone else is better on that surface.

I would like to correct this one a bot also. I know you being a passionate nadal fan this can be forgiven to you, but Federer dismissed all of his oponents in last 4 years except nadal. Many of whom were hc/grass court/clay court specialists. So he did face them allright, but he beat them fair and square.

Back on topic - OP :

I do think Federer stand absolutely no chance of gettnig close to winning this years FO. Regarded as his worst surface ( surely he was the 2nd best even on his worst surface ), slow and spin loving clay never suited his shotmaking style. He was so out of this world that his shotmaking and movement were so good - it was almost enough for him to win 3 RG's ... if there was not a man named Rafael. He got the better of Federer when it mattered.

These days with him being 1/2 steps slower, not so confident and phisically prepared and with Nadal being in what seems to be his top ever form and injury free, it does seem likely he would take out Federer in straights, providing the guy even makes it far. Do not forget competition on hc seems to be tough these days because we know all these guys. There are as much if not more - clay court specialists, who relish the chance to beat the shaken world nr1.

 

[daddy]

Lets come back to this in september after the USO. Without meaning to disrespect you and your opinion but in order to understand where i'm coming from you need to have experienced it yourself. Friendly debate is always welcome without some of the nastiness i read on here but if come september i'm wrong and RF has won 2 of the 3 remaining slams then i will wholeheartedly apologise to all his fans, however i dont think i'll be wrong on this occasion. Lets touch base in september and we'll compare notes.

Hey, no harm done. I do respect every poster with no regard of whom he is. I just provided a different look on things. What I think is the biggest difference is that you think he has none left whereas I think he has a great shot at Wimbledon only. I do not seriously see him challanging FO at all, as I wrote, as for the USO - hardly, very hardly. Wimbledon however is problematic due to the pressure he will have ( 6th title thing, not in form etc. ) but he surely did not forget to play tennis and his is the best suited for grass. This is the basis of why I think he has a chance there.

 

[ExPro1963]

Fed just won (decisively) the year-end championships a few months ago. I highly doubt it is "over" for him.



You are **WAY** off base here. Although I agree Sampras' serve is far superior to Feds, the velocity of the two is the same. Sampras never had the fastest serve when he played, and averaged in the high teens (just like Fed).

To know what I'm talking about you'd have had to have faced at least one of them. I first had a look at Sampras serve when he was I think 17/18 YEARS OLD at queens club in 1989 and even at that age he could sling it all the pros were in awe of his delivery, Garry Muller went up to him and told him that if he didn't get to the top of the game in 2/3 years there'd be something wrong, annacone was there at the time as the two were playing dubs that year and he told GM not to put too much pressure on the kid. in those days Sampras hardly spoke he'd just look at the ground with his tongue hanging out. I never faced RF serve but i've been present at his practice sessions many times and i can tell you, forget about what you see on tv or read in the mags, sampras had the bigger serve.

 

[Morrissey]

Lets come back to this in september after the USO. Without meaning to disrespect you and your opinion but in order to understand where i'm coming from you need to have experienced it yourself. Friendly debate is always welcome without some of the nastiness i read on here but if come september i'm wrong and RF has won 2 of the 3 remaining slams then i will wholeheartedly apologise to all his fans, however i dont think i'll be wrong on this occasion. Lets touch base in september and we'll compare notes.

Well said. I've said it before, he's not winning any slams if he keeps playing like he has this year. But it's hard to think that he won't win any slam for the rest of his career. He's too good to just fall off like that. But I'm sure no one thought back in 1993 that Courier would never win a slam again after his AO win. Especially considering he made 3 of the slam 4 finals that year. For the record you think Fed will finish the year #1?

 

[zagor]

Believe me, as much as you are a fan of RF and you seem to enjoy his game, I'm pretty sure his days of winning GS events are over. Folks point to Sampras going out on a high winning his last USO but one thing that folks/fans forget and that is RF doesnt have the serve that Sampras has. Its that serve that more than any other aspect of his game made him the champ that he was, RF as good as he is simply doesnt have that kind of velocity of the serve, in fact there maybe half a dozen guys out there with serves better than Feds but what those other big servers dont have is his accuracy.
If he never ever wins another slam which i really suspect will be the case, it wont take away from what he's already acheived in the sport, the only glaring omission will be the French and last year was the best and last chance he had of walking away with that particular piece of silverware. So to all of his fans dont feel too downhearted you got to see one of the very best do his thing but as you all should know: 'all good things must come to an end' just ask Borg, Vilas, Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Wilander, Edberg, Becker etc etc

Even though I'm a Fed fan I'll admit that what you said is a possibility even though it's unlikely IMO but it does seem to me that you have a little bias against Federer.I mean it's one thing to say that he won't be dominating the game again and will fall from number one but to say that he won't win any slam at all till the rest of his career? If he lost in the third or second round in AO I'd maybe understand but he lost in the semifinal to an eventual winner,so he may not end the year at number one as Nadal is breathing hard down his neck but he has atleast a few slams left in my opinion.Somehing I don't understand as well is that you said we can't compare Federer to Sampras in saying that he'll still win slams but then you go and compare him to Borg?.I hope you are a man of your word so if Federer wins another slam you will come here to admit you're wrong.

 

[daddy]

Well said. I've said it before, he's not winning any slams if he keeps playing like he has this year. But it's hard to think that he won't win any slam for the rest of his career. He's too good to just fall off like that. But I'm sure no one thought back in 1993 that Courier would never win a slam again after his AO win. Especially considering he made 3 of the slam 4 finals that year.

I am personally waiting for Wimbledon. I know he has pulled of some miracles there and if he is tp prove capable for winning I want him to take out a couple good grass courters there, Roddick, Ancic, Hewitt or anyone else good on grass. His place in world of tennis will be won or lost there.

Ps - it is hard to believe he can play badly through the whole year, this is why I think he has more slams in him. Remains to be seen though.

 

[daddy]

To know what I'm talking about you'd have had to have faced at least one of them....

Once again - this time from me, no disrespect but I would be really interested to hear about upcoming ( soon ) clay court season. Pick your picks now and tell me ( us ) who do you rate to be up there with Nadal. Djokovic ? Davydenko ? Ferrer ? Who is that other guy who will maybe feature in the final if Federer is not there, who will pose a threat in Europe on red clay this year ?

Asking this because I do not have to wait until late this year to see if you are credible.

 

[drakulie]

To know what I'm talking about you'd have had to have faced at least one of them.

Makes no difference who you or I have faced. If Sampras hits a 120 serve, and Fed hits a 120 mph serve>>> they are both **120 MPH**.

It's like saying "What weighs more? A pound of feathers or a pound of gold??""

Answer: They are the same. They both weigh a pound.

Like I previously stated, FACT:: Sampras never in his entire career had the fastest serve in the game. Ever. Nothing you could say will ever change that. The velocity on the Federer and Sampras serve is about the same, so you saying Fed doesn't have Sampras' velocity is plain wrong.

 

[zagor]

Once again - this time from me, no disrespect but I would be really interested to hear about upcoming ( soon ) clay court season. Pick your picks now and tell me ( us ) who do you rate to be up there with Nadal. Djokovic ? Davydenko ? Ferrer ? Who is that other guy who will maybe feature in the final if Federer is not there, who will pose a threat in Europe on red clay this year ?

Asking this because I do not have to wait until late this year to see if you are credible.

Yes,ask him to look at his crystal ball so we can all place bets.

 

[ExPro1963]

Even though I'm a Fed fan I'll admit that what you said is a possibility even though it's unlikely IMO but it does seem to me that you have a little bias against Federer.I mean it's one thing to say that he won't be dominating the game again and will fall from number one but to say that he won't win any slam at all till the rest of his career? If he lost in the third or second round in AO I'd maybe understand but he lost in the semifinal to an eventual winner,so he may not end the year at number one as Nadal is breathing hard down his neck but he has atleast a few slams left in my opinion.Somehing I don't understand as well is that you said we can't compare Federer to Sampras in saying that he'll still win slams but then you go and compare him to Borg?.I hope you are a man of your word so if Federer wins another slam you will come here to admit you're wrong.

oh if I'm wrong I'll be on here and I will apologise to you all i hve NO problem with that. The only comparison to Borg was the decline and how we saw it coming way earlier, the thing that seems to be prevalent here is the the majority of posters seem to vew it as almost a sacriledge to suggest thta RF wont win big again. I understand that his previous excellence makes the thought of him not winning big ever again a little hard to takebut what needs to be understood is that the rest of the tennis world will not be sitting around waiting for his 'mono' to clear up or for him to get his footwork sorted as one or two posters have alluded to. Thas what folks need to understand, mens tennis does not stagnate. I happen to like RF, I like way he plays, the way he constructs point and wins games BUT he does show an alarming unwillingness to alter a losing game. I've always felt that in the FO finals against Nadal, had he served / vollyed more he'd be a 2 time FO winner and i think he would have clearly sealed his place as the greatest. ( well until my son turns pro)

 

[daddy]

Yes,ask him to look at his crystal ball so we can all place bets.

Well if you claim you are expro I will not take it for granted. If you are you should know more than me. If you even claim you know omre then me, give me insight in the red clay season coming up. I did not say pick ONE winner. I said let me know about your thoughts on the upcoming red clay season and which players may feature as a major threats besodes the obvious one. Hell I can tell you this, but I can surely not back it up as a pro would. So ask a pro, why not ?

Ps - you better get paid if you go around defending people. Otherwise its a lousy thing to do.

 

[ExPro1963]

Makes no difference who you or I have faced. If Sampras hits a 120 serve, and Fed hits a 120 mph serve>>> they are both **120 MPH**.

It's like saying "What weighs more? A pound of feathers or a pound of gold??""

Answer: They are the same. They both weigh a pound.

Like I previously stated, FACT:: Sampras never in his entire career had the fastest serve in the game. Ever. Nothing you could say will ever change that. The velocity on the Federer and Sampras serve is about the same, so you saying Fed doesn't have Sampras' velocity is plain wrong.

Okay no biggie. Keep on posting.

 

[daddy]

Makes no difference who you or I have faced. If Sampras hits a 120 serve, and Fed hits a 120 mph serve>>> they are both **120 MPH**.

It's like saying "What weighs more? A pound of feathers or a pound of gold??""

Answer: They are the same. They both weigh a pound.

Like I previously stated, FACT:: Sampras never in his entire career had the fastest serve in the game. Ever. Nothing you could say will ever change that. The velocity on the Federer and Sampras serve is about the same, so you saying Fed doesn't have Sampras' velocity is plain wrong.

I think you are caught up in the speed talk way too much. Federer's serve is big no question about that. Maybe I am biased towards Pete but his was just to my liking, IMO maybe bigger. The big question when comparing serve is not only speed but as you surely know placement and spin and of course variety. I feel they are both up there, and the only reason why I said Pete's serve is MAYBE bigger - is because I feel the service in 90's and today is hardly comparable. You face a different bunch of people and different style of tennis so it really does a lot to your serve and its effects.

Conclusion - this part of the discussion in highly subjective.

 

[drakulie]

Okay no biggie. Keep on posting.

Don't get upset because I corrected you.

 

[ExPro1963]

Once again - this time from me, no disrespect but I would be really interested to hear about upcoming ( soon ) clay court season. Pick your picks now and tell me ( us ) who do you rate to be up there with Nadal. Djokovic ? Davydenko ? Ferrer ? Who is that other guy who will maybe feature in the final if Federer is not there, who will pose a threat in Europe on red clay this year ?

Asking this because I do not have to wait until late this year to see if you are credible.

I dont have all the answers but the ones you've mentioned are sort of obvious but my pick? David Nalbandian. If he goes into the FO fit with no injuries watch him. People always look at his physique and write him off but cast your minds back to the end of last year when he was fit and injury free, look at the damege he did then.

 

[zagor]

Well if you claim you are expro I will not take it for granted. If you are you should know more than me. If you even claim you know omre then me, give me insight in the red clay season coming up. I did not say pick ONE winner. I said let me know about your thoughts on the upcoming red clay season and which players may feature as a major threats besodes the obvious one. Hell I can tell you this, but I can surely not back it up as a pro would. So ask a pro, why not ?

Ps - you better get paid if you go around defending people. Otherwise its a lousy thing to do.

I don't really feel that this guy is lying but then again this is internet,I could tell you I'm Chuck Liddell if I wanted.If he is what he says he is I'm sure he could give you some good betting picks.Also,lawyery is not really my thing I'm just passionate about my favourite tennis player just as some people are passionate about their favourite soccer clubs.

 

[drakulie]

^^^LOL. Nalbandian??? He has a huge serve. :roll:

 

[ExPro1963]

Don't get upset because I corrected you.

You misunderstand, i'm not upset at all. everyone has an opinion and thats the way i view it, i'm fine really I am but thanks for consoling me)

 

[daddy]

I dont have all the answers but the ones you've mentioned are sort of obvious but my pick? David Nalbandian. If he goes into the FO fit with no injuries watch him. People always look at his physique and write him off but cast your minds back to the end of last year when he was fit and injury free, look at the damege he did then.

He was great in juniors, took one GS back then ( 1998 if I remember well ), was amasing in 2002 going deep everywhere, took The Masters '05, he is there for more less 6 years with ups and downs. Thanks for the reply, he could be the one though this year does not seem to be his best so far. Anyways I do not expect you to have all the answers but I just wanted your thoughts.

 

[Moose Malloy]

tut tut, anonymity is the opertative word here folks. I'll tell you that i wasnt a journeyman pro I was top 35 between 82 and 87 and stopped playing in 91. I never went past the 3rd round of any GS but I won a handful of lesser atp tour level events, and the onlybtime i had to play the Q's was when i started out in 81 and 6 or 7 in 91 when i stopped playing.

and how did you do in doubles? are you american? would you let me guess who you are

I mean it's one thing to say that he won't be dominating the game again and will fall from number one but to say that he won't win any slam at all till the rest of his career? If he lost in the third or second round in AO I'd maybe understand but he lost in the semifinal to an eventual winner,so he may not end the year at number one as Nadal is breathing hard down his neck but he has atleast a few slams left in my opinion.Somehing I don't understand as well is that you said we can't compare Federer to Sampras in saying that he'll still win slams but then you go and compare him to Borg?.

Well, I don't agree with him either, but I can understand his reasoning. Fed is basically a baseliner & rallies today are quite long, so if Fed really has lost a step, it could be pretty darn hard to win another slam, he can't just ace his way to victory like Sampras.
And part of me can't see him beating Djokovic in a best of 5 hardcourt match again, the age gap is pretty big. Maybe if Fed could serve 25+ aces vs him, but don't think he can.
The question for the future is, can he still beat most of the other top guys from the baseline? Like Ex Pro said, Fed is very stubborn, I doubt he is really committed to coming to net more than like 20 times in a match.

And like daddy said, Wimbledon is key. So few can really play on grass & he is the man there, if he loses there(which I can't see frankly) then I think there may be a slight possibility in ExPro being right.

Makes no difference who you or I have faced. If Sampras hits a 120 serve, and Fed hits a 120 mph serve>>> they are both **120 MPH**.

You don't think radar guns have changed? Davydenko hit a few 130 serves on Sunday that looked like a Hingis serve compared to Noah & Becker's serves in the 80s, who never hit 130 mph I believe, & yet they still made linesman duck for cover regularly. And then there's Agassi who miraculously increased mph on his pedestrian serve in his mid 30s.

Plus look at how high Sampras's aces hit on the backstop when he hits aces compared to Fed's aces. Fed himself also says that Sampras has more velocity than him(even today), its not like an insult to Fed or something.

But it's hard to think that he won't win any slam for the rest of his career.

I think Cliff Drysale said Wilander wouldn't win another slam after he lost early at '89 AO(after his 3 slam season of '88) It's all about Fed's movement, let's see if its the mono or something else.

 

[zagor]

oh if I'm wrong I'll be on here and I will apologise to you all i hve NO problem with that. The only comparison to Borg was the decline and how we saw it coming way earlier, the thing that seems to be prevalent here is the the majority of posters seem to vew it as almost a sacriledge to suggest thta RF wont win big again. I understand that his previous excellence makes the thought of him not winning big ever again a little hard to takebut what needs to be understood is that the rest of the tennis world will not be sitting around waiting for his 'mono' to clear up or for him to get his footwork sorted as one or two posters have alluded to. Thas what folks need to understand, mens tennis does not stagnate. I happen to like RF, I like way he plays, the way he constructs point and wins games BUT he does show an alarming unwillingness to alter a losing game. I've always felt that in the FO finals against Nadal, had he served / vollyed more he'd be a 2 time FO winner and i think he would have clearly sealed his place as the greatest. ( well until my son turns pro)

No problem man.It's not sacrilege to say that Federer is done chasing Pete's record,it's just a bold statement so you should expect some heat here.I do admit that your theory is a possibility,I just disagree with it.Time will tell who is right.

 

[daddy]

I don't really feel that this guy is lying but then again this is internet,I could tell you I'm Chuck Liddell if I wanted.If he is what he says he is I'm sure he could give you some good betting picks.Also,lawyery is not really my thing I'm just passionate about my favourite tennis player just as some people are passionate about their favourite soccer clubs.

I seem to be defending your favourite player, gimme some credit !

 

[TheTruth]

oh if I'm wrong I'll be on here and I will apologise to you all i hve NO problem with that. The only comparison to Borg was the decline and how we saw it coming way earlier, the thing that seems to be prevalent here is the the majority of posters seem to vew it as almost a sacriledge to suggest thta RF wont win big again. I understand that his previous excellence makes the thought of him not winning big ever again a little hard to takebut what needs to be understood is that the rest of the tennis world will not be sitting around waiting for his 'mono' to clear up or for him to get his footwork sorted as one or two posters have alluded to. Thas what folks need to understand, mens tennis does not stagnate. I happen to like RF, I like way he plays, the way he constructs point and wins games BUT he does show an alarming unwillingness to alter a losing game. I've always felt that in the FO finals against Nadal, had he served / vollyed more he'd be a 2 time FO winner and i think he would have clearly sealed his place as the greatest. ( well until my son turns pro)

That is so true! And pointing out the things you see doesn't make you a hater. It simply means you see things differently!

 

[drakulie]

You misunderstand, i'm not upset at all. everyone has an opinion and thats the way i view it, i'm fine really I am but thanks for consoling me)

Uhmmm, what I stated is not an opinion>> it is a fact. I'll post it again in case you missed it::

In his entire career, Sampras never had the fastest serve on the tour. Flipper, Krajicek, Stich, Becker, Goran, Mirnyi, etc all had faster serves than him.

 

[zagor]

I seem to be defending your favourite player, gimme some credit !

LOL,it's nice to see you on Roger's side this time but if Djokovic wins another slam this year be prepared to defend him from angry Fed trolls here.

 

[daddy]

I will add one more thing here. Finally a discussion with a few people not sharing the same opinion but pointing out their views and backing them up with their reasons. I did not witness such a fruitfull discussion here since I joined ..

 

[drakulie]

Plus look at how high Sampras's aces hit on the backstop when he hits aces compared to Fed's aces.

It's called spin.

And yes, I do think the radar guns are a bit inflated these days.

 

[daddy]

LOL,it's nice to see you on Roger's side this time but if Djokovic wins another slam this year be prepared to defend him from angry Fed trolls here.

Well maybe we are a bit blinded by his run of great results but it is really hard to expect him not to win any slams anymore. I mean we all make mistakes, even if Federer is to take the Wimbledon and this is to be his last GS I think the expro comments can be considered spot on. But this is somethign we have to wait for at least a few years to confirm.

 

[ExPro1963]

I will add one more thing here. Finally a discussion with a few people not sharing the same opinion but pointing out their views and backing them up with their reasons. I did not witness such a fruitfull discussion here since I joined ..

And that, my friend is all down to me LOL!!

 

[daddy]

And that, my friend is all down to me LOL!!

You will be able to bet with Rickson on the claims you made. I am sure he will accept a bet that Fed will not win this years wimby ..

Anyways Moose and Zagor always think before they post and post very well, Drakulie also, but he is a bit more biased. But we all are sometimes. I am just amased none of the trolls showed up, thats what made me happy.

 

[TheTruth]

No problem man.It's not sacrilege to say that Federer is done chasing Pete's record,it's just a bold statement so you should expect some heat here.I do admit that your theory is a possibility,I just disagree with it.Time will tell who is right.

Ahh, maturity! It's so refreshing to find a fan who is so fair and objective. Whether I agree with your position or not, it's pretty hard not to respect you as a poster!

 

[ExPro1963]

Well maybe we are a bit blinded by his run of great results but it is really hard to expect him not to win any slams anymore. I mean we all make mistakes, even if Federer is to take the Wimbledon and this is to be his last GS I think the expro comments can be considered spot on. But this is somethign we have to wait for at least a few years to confirm.

Becasue i've had such with this discussion let me share this with you guys a word of warning fans of Jimmy Connors: dont be offended,

I'll tell you something that you folks probably dont know about Connors and lendl, on court in the early years connors was the man and it showed but as lendls game started to flower ( as much as Lendls game could) the relality was off court, Connors was scared of Lendl. during a semi final match at the london indoor in 1984, there was a verbal altercation between the two, when it got back to the locker room, lendl was walking around in adidas warm up pants, his tennis shoes and nothing else he was carrying a racket in his hand and every time he walk past connors he'd slap the racket against his own leg and smile at connors. he did this a few times, grinning broader each time and the other players in room was watching what was going on and watching connors reaction and he just stood at his locker folding and unfolding this one towel about fifty times and nervously looking over his should every time Lendl walked by and slapped his leg with the racket, finally andres gomes told lendl to knock it off and lendl still smiling walked up to connors and stood behind him for a second or two then smashed and broke the racket on the ground directly behind connors, left it on the floor and went back to his locker whistling. Jimmy went on to beat lendl in the final of tokyo that year and that was the last time Connors ever won.

 

[Nadal_Freak]

Fed will never win the French Open. Just face it Fed fans.

 

[drakulie]

Drakulie also, but he is a bit more biased.

How am I being biased in this thread. I already agreed with him that Sampras had the far superior serve. I'm just stating the fatcs. Fed and Sampras both have about the same serve speed. How is that bias??

If anything, Expro is being biased stating Fed doesn't have the same velocity as Sampras, which is innacurate.

Furthermore, stating nalbandian, which compared to Fed is well past his prime, has a chance at the French, and fed doesn't. :roll:

 

[daddy]

How am I being biased in this thread. I already agreed with him that Sampras had the far superior serve. I'm just stating the fatcs. Fed and Sampras both have about the same serve speed. How is that bias??

If anything, Expro is being biased stating Fed doesn't have the same velocity as Sampras, which is innacurate.

Furthermore, stating nalbandian, which compared to Fed is well past his prime, has a chance at the French, and fed doesn't. :roll:

I was really talking about in general not this thread. That was a compliment so take it as that.

As for the Nalbandian/Federer thing Nalband is one year younger for what its worth and has the best h2h with him apart from Nadal. He is a great tennis player, it is not unheard of that he can be good on clay. I picked the obvious guys so he picked Nalband.

 

[fastdunn]

Radar gun changed and measuring point changed (from middle to closer to server now).

radar gun now probably register about 10 mph higher.

Federer's serving pace is nowhere near great servers of 90's including Becker, Krajicek, Ivanisvich, Stich, Sampras...

 

[edmondsm]

Well said. I've said it before, he's not winning any slams if he keeps playing like he has this year. But it's hard to think that he won't win any slam for the rest of his career. He's too good to just fall off like that. But I'm sure no one thought back in 1993 that Courier would never win a slam again after his AO win. Especially considering he made 3 of the slam 4 finals that year. For the record you think Fed will finish the year #1?

Federer is no Jim Courier. Courier's bruising style of play eventually took its toll on his body. Federer is smooth as silk, and he's won 12 slams doing it. He's just fallen off form for the first time in 5 years. I'd be really suprised if he didn't get his form back this year.

 

[Morrissey]

Federer is no Jim Courier. Courier's bruising style of play eventually took its toll on his body. Federer is smooth as silk, and he's won 12 slams doing it. He's just fallen off form for the first time in 5 years. I'd be really suprised if he didn't get his form back this year.

Or could it have been that terrible backhand and his lack of good defensive abilities when he wasn't in control of the rally. Just a thought.

 

[Nadal_Freak]

More like Courier's bruising work ethic. He burned himself out I believe.

 

[edmondsm]

Or could it have been that terrible backhand and his lack of good defensive abilities when he wasn't in control of the rally. Just a thought.

Those things didn't effect him when he was winning slams. It wasn't until his body wouldn't allow him to run around forehands for hours on end that his results suffered. Like I said, his game was bruising and thus had a short shelf life. Federer doesn't have this problem. Next question?

 

[Morrissey]

How am I being biased in this thread. I already agreed with him that Sampras had the far superior serve. I'm just stating the fatcs. Fed and Sampras both have about the same serve speed. How is that bias??

If anything, Expro is being biased stating Fed doesn't have the same velocity as Sampras, which is innacurate.

Furthermore, stating nalbandian, which compared to Fed is well past his prime, has a chance at the French, and fed doesn't. :roll:

I think he's alluding to that fact that Sampras relied more on his serve to take away the grind of long rallies in his matches. Fed uses his serve in a more strategic way, to set up certain rallies, or to get out of breakpoints. But he doesn't tend to use it from beginning to end as a weapon to avoid rallies like Sampras did. He didn't have the biggest serve but he certainly had the biggest second serve and he tried his best to make sure he got the ace or an easy volley putaway. As for Nalbandian, I fear him and Davydenko the most going into the FO as a Nadal fan. Those guys can get hot and they have solid 2 handed backhands that can change direction well and not break down like Fed's backhand. I worry about them going into the French.

 

[edmondsm]

More like Courier's bruising work ethic. He burned himself out I believe.

That's the consensus. If you look at Courier play he is obviously not a superior physical specemine like a Federer, Nadal, Sampras, etc...He worked his way to world class tennis. An average body can only keep that up for so long.