Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Mansewerz, Jun 20, 2009.
How much flak will he get for not beating Nadal?
No one would care (outside of Nadal trolls, not fans) because Federer would be world #1 again.
I'm sure IF he wins he'll get plenty of flak here but it wouldn't really matter in the grand scheme of things.I'm kinda used to whining from some Nadal fans here-rigged draws,rigged schedules,exhaustion,altittued,bounce,rain etc. etc. etc. but like I said it wouldn't really matter,all Fed or any other professional player for that matter can do is play who's in front of him.
Doesn't matter to me, and it clearly doesn't matter to Federer. Looking at his reaction at RG, he doesn't care about all this talk of matchups as much as fans do. He just wants to win trophies cause that's what tennis is about.
besides, Murray and Djokovic and Roddick and Del Potro etc. should be tough enough for someone "going down the drain", with "no slam left in him", or someone who we should" stick a fork in, because he's done". People've been whining about Roger as long as I can remember, especially since January 2008, and he's proven everyone wrong. Who cares about playin Rafa Nadal.
Man, if they were talking about asterisks for his French Open win, they'll have add pages of footnotes to this win!
Wont matter because nadal has never owned federer at wimbledon.Federer has the edge 2-1 at wimbledon anyways.
There will always be some haters, but it doesn't really matter that he won't play Nadal at Wimbledon this year. After all, he hasn't played Nadal in most his Slam wins. Nadal being the defending champ definitely throws a wrench, but in the end, there's nothing Federer can do about Nadal not playing, so people shouldn't take it out on Federer.
It's like when (before the rise of Nadal) people kept getting on Federer's case for not having a big rival, or at least someone who could keep up with him. That's all just normal fan blathering, though---nothing Federer can do about it
Who's going to give him flak? Does anyone give Andre Agassi flak about Pete Sampras withdrawing from the '99 US Open?
Nobody will remember in a couple of years. He's already won it five times, he'll have 15 GS titles if he wins again, his final opponent means nothing.
Absolutly no matter win F or not. He already has 5 W championships. And he is already the GOAT.
Anyhow if he win he will be the first in open era with 15 Grand slam championships.
Actually yeah. A LOT of people say Sampras would have won had he played. Also Agassi still gets flak for his 99 FO because of his incredibly weak draw. So the answer, is yes.
Oh yeah, because the defending champion Carlos Moya at the peak of his clay powers was such a weak opponent
Agassi lucked out, but luck is apart of the game. You create situations to minimize it, but sometimes the dice rolls in favor of the other player. There's nothing you can do about it.
He should get flak for not beating Gasquet. Nadal was never a threat.
He beat Nadal at Wimbeldon 2 times before. I think that's enough proof he can beat him there. It's time to move on.
Would of, could of, should of..... It's all just sore grapes.
What if Sampras was never born? How many Slams would Agassi have then?
At least Agassi beat Moya(the defending champ) on route to his 1999 FO. Fed on the other hand... Fed's FO has a big ass asterisk, as big as his nose!
Federer beat the guy who whipped the clay court with the 4 time defending champion. That is even more impressive. :lol:
It doesn't matter really!!!
He could do with improving his head to head with Nadal though in general
(And with Murray as well)
Since Federer is a 5-time Wimbledon champion, I'd think that it would be Nadal who would get flak if he were to win Wimbledon at any point without beating Fed.
If that's going to be the way in which we assess winning a GS, why do the officials bother with a generally random draw then? Why not just have the defending champion only play the final round like they used to do at Wimbledon decades ago? Oh and they'd have to write in all the opponents they thought any eventual winner should face... of course, they'd first have to pre-decide who the eventual winner should be in order to do that....
I couldn't care less.
Wow that was stupid. He destroyed the man that destroyed Nadal. It should be Nadal who has an asterisk *whipped by a nobody*
in straight sets with a breadstick to add
By YOUR "logic", Nadal's WO win has an asterisk as big as Serena's butt, cos he won it hitting his lefty moonbally forehand to fed's single handed BH till Fed made a UE, for 4.5 hours LOL, ROTFL !!!!
Not my real opinion, but just a reply to your crippled logic.
In the General Pro section of this forum? A ridiculous amount. There will be the Fed should retire, Nadal was just scared, and a few Mono threads just to grate on the collective nerves of everyone who doesn't check off Troll or Under 15 on their personal questionnaires.
In real life with his peers? Not at all.
Separate names with a comma.