You're joking, right?
Federer retaliates
- Thread starter kishnabe
- Start date
You're joking, right?
You mean the same Rusedski who was subsequently beaten and Sampras won the US Open in question? So basically you're looking for someone who doesn't know what country he's from, talks out of his ass and then gets completely embarrassed when "gramps" wins the biggest slam of the year. Right.
BrooklynNY
Hall of Fame
Dude, Sampras is my all time favorite. His run over Greg and Haas on the way to winning was one of my favorite moments in tennis.
What I was trying to say was I actually think the current generation respects the good/great players like Nadal and Federer way too much. I don't like Greg Rusedski per say, but I used him as an example of someone who is a competitor of an all time great in Pete and actually saying something of that nature,something that is a fact and a part of life, and not the usual "roger is the greatest" or that nonsense Roddick was saying today about doing your job great in order to speak on what you see. haha.
Jones101, You are right. Your quotation is the correct.
Sorry for my mistake, but IMO Navratilova suggested Henin is the better player.
BTW Henin won 2 more GS after 2007 FO, FED won 6.
Carsomyr
Legend
To be honest, can't really admonish Martina on that one. Sounds like some goofy commentary box banter or perhaps putting a feminist spin on the comparisons. I don't think she meant anything negative toward Federer by it.
Sid_Vicious
G.O.A.T.
Martina has made ******** statements by the truckload in her past. Just sayin..
As for her comments, there is nothing valuable about them. 80% of this tennis forum has been declaring the same sentiments.
Federer's not even close to Nav in my opinion. She has something like 59 major titles in all. That's some serious tennis...
Fiji
Legend
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Sentinel
Bionic Poster
Martina did not have to play Nadal ever so each slam has 0.5 value.
18 x 0.5 = 9 slams only.
Federer played in the era of Nadal, Đoković and Murray so its 16 x 3 = 48 slams.
Omega_7000
Legend
Amazing how things can be twisted in the media to sell articles. There was absolutely nothing wrong with what either said. They were just stating their honest opinions unlike some other trained baboons who spout the the same lines over and over...pretend to be politically correct all the time.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
Yes Martina has made stupid comments in the past but this comment made about Federer was not stupid.
In terms of Martina's comment having no value I disagree. She is a lot more credible to speak on this subject than the majority of posters on a forum. Her comments because of the fact that she is a multi slam tennis champion carry more weight.
Datacipher
Banned
Hhhhhhhhhhh
It's what Sally Federer does....don't you know she says EXACTLY what she means?
Martina is you know, like my bff don't you know? Maybe she just didn't know what she was talking about, but like, that's ok you know! Maybe she's just busy with other things, and doesn't even know...you know...like..what's going on...but I love her to death you know, like she's the best, and probably if she like, you know, knew what she was talking about, or had seen me play, then like, we'd agree...but it's all good you know.
I don't believe a slam in WTA has equal weigh as the ATP. It's a lot harder to win on the men's tour. Just compare all the tennis records between the atp and wta. It's no comparison...the WTA blows away the ATP. It's much easier to dominate in women's tennis.
D
Deleted member 120290
Guest
Even I know that Fed will realistically never regain #1 Ranking and I have yet to win 1 major at this point in my career, and I'm only 40.
Fed winning his 16 slams was more difficult than her 18. Just b/c she has more title doesn't mean she has more credible. The other poster said 18 >> 16, but without realizing that it's apple to orange comparison.
Polaris
Hall of Fame
I'm inclined to think that Navratilova is right, but it is also good to know that Fed cares enough to retaliate mildly.
And a thumbs-down to the OP for selectively quoting the most controversial parts, thereby proving that TW is more about the tasty soundbite than about actual information.
And a thumbs-down to the OP for selectively quoting the most controversial parts, thereby proving that TW is more about the tasty soundbite than about actual information.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
Yes, I understand your point. I am only saying that Navratilova is certainly more than credible to comment on her opinion regarding Roger and his current status in the rankings. She has gone through almost everything there is to go through as a top tennis pro that has lasted for so many years and has achieved so much.
BrooklynNY
Hall of Fame
Yeah, I don't really think any of us have the right to comment on whether or not Martina has the right to comment on Federer.
I agree with her.
I agree with her.
OLYMPICLEGEND
New User
But it's far from 'likely'. It's more likely Djokovic will lead Federer in their h2h in 2 years. If Federer can't beat Djokovic, and he can rarely beat Nadal, then he can't get the number one ranking :lol:
World Beater
Hall of Fame
martina was a great player but she is as insightful about the game as john mcenroe.
Sid_Vicious
G.O.A.T.
Rubbish. Martina is not more credible than Federer just because she won 18 grand slams on the women's tour. It is an apples to oranges comparison as TMF said.
MotherMarjorie
Banned
McEnroe, who continues to enjoy commentating for many tennis tournaments on network sporting channels, does indeed critique women's matches. Connors and Becker have largely stayed away from the sport for the past decade plus.
Given Navratilova's historical standing in the sport, she is probably one of the few qualified to critique both the ATP and WTA. She's won more matches, more tournaments singles and doubles than any other human being in the history of the sport which makes her uniquely qualified to say whatever she wants about anything tennis.
And while Mother Marjorie doesn't always agree with Navratilova, she's generally right most of the time and has a right to her opinion.
Mother Marjorie Ann
Empress of Talk Tennis Warehouse
dennis10is
Banned
The abilty to win double digits single majors and countless doubles/mixed doubles major titles is insignificant compared to the POW-ARR of the TW posters <<deep mechanically assisted breathing>>
We TW poster understand the pressure and the privilege that comes with playing for the tennis public. Just last summer, I was hitting at Ike and I could have sworn that two, two homeless people were watching us. The pressure to keeping up the pretense, ahem image, of being a park tennis player is intense so I feel qualified to speak about Federer, another fellow tennis player playing in front of an admiring public.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
You are missing my point. Martina was asked a question about Roger and whether he will get back to number 1. She gave her opinion on the subject. What difference does gender make here? She was a tennis pro for many many years. She has won countless matches and is one of the greatest women players of all time. If she does not know about everything tennis, who does? I hardly think that just because she played in the WTA as opposed to the ATP, that that makes her opinion any less worthy. Sorry that is silly. If a former male tennis pro such as McEnroe or Lendl made a comment about a current female tennis pro would anybody think their comment was out of place? NO way, but because Martina is a woman all of a sudden her opinion does not matter? Not buying that for a minute.
Rickenbacker4003
Hall of Fame
At this point can we really disagree? Djokovic is at his highest point and Nadal is playing very well too. I think Fed cares more about winning another major than being #1 again to be honest.
Sid_Vicious
G.O.A.T.
you are changing the scope of the argument. I did not say that Martina's opinion does not mean anything because she is a woman. I am just saying that her thoughts are not more credible than Roger's simply because she won 18 grand slams and Federer won 16 grands slams (like you implied). That is bs. Federer knows mens tennis today far better than Martina or Mcenore. Indeed, it was people like Martina and John Mcenroe who were talking about how Federer is done at the start of 2009. It was great to see Federer silence big mouth critics like Martina and Mcenroe.
Last edited:
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
Okay taking gender completely out of the equation, any former tennis great such as Martina, Chris Evert, Ivan Lendl, etc. etc. is clearly more than credible to give their opinions on tennis players today. Just because they were from a different era does not mean their opinion is not a valid one. Martina was asked a question and using her experience and past tennis knowledge she is extremely qualified to give her insight on the subject.
Of course Roger knows himself better than anybody else and his opinion is the one that matters the most obviously, but that should not discount opinions of former tennis greats who have all been through similar experiences.
Sid_Vicious
G.O.A.T.
The reason I don't really care much for the opinions of the past pros, especially ones that are commentators, is because majority of the time they like sharing wisdom they acquired through hindsight. The moment Federer loses a match, they are in your face about how they think Federer is done. What is so special about Martina's opinion here? After Federer lost at the AO people on TW, who do not even possess a fraction of tennis knowledge as Martina, were talking about how Federer will never become number 1.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
I understand your point, but what is she supposed to say when she is asked a question? "No comment?"
I do agree though that many times the former players say incredibly stupid things about current players--Hello Mats Wilander!
Sid_Vicious
G.O.A.T.
Interesting info. Did you know that Martina is good friends with Howard Stern? She has been on his show like a dozen times.
It's hard to trust what former pros and greats say about players because often they are carrying "baggage" that is personal toward the player and their views are biased. Sometimes they don't like the coach of the player, or someone else they like has an issue with the player, or they don't like the country the player is from.. former players can be as biased as anybody else when they make statements, they have favorites and non-favorites and it affects their comments.
beast of mallorca
G.O.A.T.
The real reason you can not accept criticism against Fed is because you're his blind fan. As such any criticism is not acceptable to you, that's the bottom line. It's even harder to accept because it's probably true.
Sid_Vicious
G.O.A.T.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
That is simply fascinating! :razz:
