Pat Cash: Roger Federer will be the man to beat in 2018

BlueClayGOAT said:
No, it is a knock on Fed as well. The point is that Rafa has had a very easy route to his 2017 USO win than Federer ever had for any of his Slam wins. Rafa has lost multiple times in non-clay majors to no-hopers, much more than Fed ever has.

The nub of the discussion is that Rafa had the easiest route to a Slam win in over a generation. Fed, for all the 'weak era' talk, has never had such a cakewalk to any of his 19 major titles.
Click to expand...
And yet Fed couldn’t even win in such an easy draw. And weeks after winning Wimbledon!

Nadal can only play the guy in front of him. If Fed had faced different draws chances are he would not have 19 slams today.
 
BlueClayGOAT said:
The nub of the discussion is that Rafa had the easiest route to a Slam win in over a generation. Fed, for all the 'weak era' talk, has never had such a cakewalk to any of his 19 major titles.
Click to expand...

It was probably a tougher draw than Nadal's Open draw this year but nobody sane would call the 2006 Australian Open a tough draw either (and Federer still struggled mightily all the way through it since he wasnt playing particularly well, but fortunately for him Nadal WD and Nalbandian choked in the other semi).
 
MatsPhilander said:
Roger Federer will be the man to beat in 2018 provided he can stay fit, according to former Wimbledon champion Pat Cash. Rafael Nadal, 31, extended his lead at the top of the rankings with his US Open victory over Kevin Anderson. Federer, 36, was beaten in the quarter-finals, but Cash believes the Swiss can dominate the major titles if fully fit.

"Take away the French Open and Federer is the best all-round player in the world," Cash told BBC Radio 5 live. "There's no doubts about that. He's my favourite for everything apart from the French."As long as he's fit, he's favourite for the Australian, Wimbledon and the US Open."
Click to expand...
TAke away wimbledon and nadal is the most all round player!!!! No doubt about it nadal is fabourite for FO and USO.

WOnder if cash had a lie down after he spoke
 
GabeT said:
And yet Fed couldn’t even win in such an easy draw. And weeks after winning Wimbledon!

Nadal can only play the guy in front of him. If Fed had faced different draws chances are he would not have 19 slams today.
Click to expand...
Agreed, Federer and Nadal had the same draw and same level of opponent in this tournament. If Federer had this kind of draw during his "peak" years he would have won 8 slams max.
 
metsman said:
Agreed, Federer and Nadal had the same draw and same level of opponent in this tournament. If Federer had this kind of draw during his "peak" years he would have won 8 slams max.
Click to expand...
Now, was that so hard? So happy when we can agree.
 
deacsyoga said:
I love Stan but I dont think he will ever go into a slam as the favorite, but always as a potential spoiler winner (minus Wimbledon maybe).
Click to expand...

Shame really because he is the big tournament player & has a great record since making his first semi at the US in 2013. In 2014 he won his first slam & made two quarters, in 2015 he won his second slam, made two semis & a quarter, in 2016 he won his third slam had a semi & a fourth round & in 2017 a final & an epic defeat in a semi.
 
augustobt said:
Most all around player? Are you joking? If you take wimbledon away, 71% of his major titles are on one event only! That's a ridiculous assumption.
Click to expand...
THats an illogical argument as you are basically criticising nadal for winning too many FO.

HE has three USO!!! More than agassi and edberg. One shy of mcenroe. Nadal is a hard court ATG. His clay resume elevates him to goat.
 
All depends on his fitness and confidence. Unfortunately for Roger, those go hand in hand. When he is fit, he is confident and vice versa. With Novak and Andy not around for a while, its really Roger and Rafa's year next year. An injury free Fed is an unbeatable Fed. www.justballtennis.
 
octogon said:
Nadal was not expected to make the AO final. People pegged Dmitrov or Raonic to take him out. Even Alex Zverev was seen as someone who could take out Rafa

He made the final, was a break up in the 5th set and nearly won the whole thing. Despite having an epic 5 set semi-final against Dmitrov that had to leave him exhausted. Fed had a 5 setter semi as well, but more rest and it clearly made the difference. Fed barely beat Nadal in the final. Had Nadal been a little bit fresher, he might not have let the 5th set go.

I just don't think you can automatically make Fed the favorite as the Australian Open over Nadal based on how things played out this year. It was too close, and probably came down to Fed having fresher legs on the day, despite a court advantadge.
Click to expand...
Well hang on Nadal is unlikely to make the AO final again himself.
It's much more likely that they both lose earlier than that they both make the final again.
 
ScentOfDefeat said:
....
I remember my grandfather and his friends talking about Laver, and they always mentioned the fact that he won the "Grand Slam". It was not about how many tournaments he won, how many finals or semifinals in a row he managed to reach, how much time he spent at number 1, etc.
...
Click to expand...
It is simple. We must ask our grandfathers and fathers,
"How many times did Rodney George Laver win Cincinnati?
Kidding. Amen to your poast.

I love rafa, roger, pete, and nolé, but i will never wear a pair of shoes with some guy's name on them. Except for these white/green Rod Lavers.

Anyway, Patrick Cash is an otherwise healthy person, at least in the body. Is he smoking weird stuff again these days? What an "attention prostitute."

I am all for RF having another good year or two. But, Paddy... cmon Paddy. Is coaching coco not enough for you?
 
ScentOfDefeat said:
This is like discussing why Wimbledon is more prestigious than other Slams.
It just is. And so is the classic Grand Slam compared to other records.
It doesn't matter what these tournaments happen to be played on, and it's not about winning 4 in a row when you want.
It's about winning all 4 in one season.
That's it. The holy grail of tennis has always been the Grand Slam.

I remember my grandfather and his friends talking about Laver, and they always mentioned the fact that he won the "Grand Slam". It was not about how many tournaments he won, how many finals or semifinals in a row he managed to reach, how much time he spent at number 1, etc. Tennis has gone the way of other sports and what matters now is the statistics of quantity: how many/how much/how many times. But the Grand Slam was the big thing then and is still a (herculean) possibility now (there is continuity in this), people just don't talk about it so much because no one has managed to achieve it. It's the tennis version of the 12 Labours of Hercules, and that is why Laver transcends tennis as a myth (not just as a "star" or a "celebrity", with their quantifiable fans and "likes").

But if you tell me "well, things have changed, now it's all about Slam count", then I'll have to reply "very well, but then don't talk about GOATs, because if goals and the relative importance of achievements changes from one era to another, there is no solid basis to determine a greatest player of all time".
Click to expand...
Great post. I'm glad some people around here understand tennis.
 
MatsPhilander said:
Roger Federer will be the man to beat in 2018 provided he can stay fit, according to former Wimbledon champion Pat Cash. Rafael Nadal, 31, extended his lead at the top of the rankings with his US Open victory over Kevin Anderson. Federer, 36, was beaten in the quarter-finals, but Cash believes the Swiss can dominate the major titles if fully fit.

"Take away the French Open and Federer is the best all-round player in the world," Cash told BBC Radio 5 live. "There's no doubts about that. He's my favourite for everything apart from the French."As long as he's fit, he's favourite for the Australian, Wimbledon and the US Open."
Click to expand...
The man to beat in 2018 is the guy who ends the year as #1...
 
octogon said:
Nadal was not expected to make the AO final. People pegged Dmitrov or Raonic to take him out. Even Alex Zverev was seen as someone who could take out Rafa

He made the final, was a break up in the 5th set and nearly won the whole thing. Despite having an epic 5 set semi-final against Dmitrov that had to leave him exhausted. Fed had a 5 setter semi as well, but more rest and it clearly made the difference. Fed barely beat Nadal in the final. Had Nadal been a little bit fresher, he might not have let the 5th set go.

I just don't think you can automatically make Fed the favorite as the Australian Open over Nadal based on how things played out this year. It was too close, and probably came down to Fed having fresher legs on the day, despite a court advantadge.
Click to expand...
And Federer was expected to make the AO final after 6 months off?

Dude, give it up, you have no argument.
 
Last edited:
deacsyoga said:
It was probably a tougher draw than Nadal's Open draw this year but nobody sane would call the 2006 Australian Open a tough draw either (and Federer still struggled mightily all the way through it since he wasnt playing particularly well, but fortunately for him Nadal WD and Nalbandian choked in the other semi).
Click to expand...
Federer still faced a top 5 player in Davydenko at the 2006 AO, who played better than anyone Nadal faced at this USO. He still faced a top 5 player vs no top 25 player in Nadal's case.
 
Last edited:
GabeT said:
Wait, so Fed losing with such an easy path is somehow better than Nadal winning with the same path?
Click to expand...
Listen, it is funny to see you defending the Nadal fans, since for years they have been arguing that Fed won most of his slams in a weak era without facing Nadal in the majority of them. But somehow that wasn't a knock on Nadal for not reaching Fed since he was supposedly a baby in diapers, deapite being world no.2 in that period and winning majors and beating Fed. Why couldn't Nadal beat the same guys Fed was dominating?

However, now Nadal wins with a weak draw, but gets all the credit and 36 year old Fed was to blame for not reaching him. They do not aknowledge that Fed was too old to get that far and are questioning why couldn't he beat Delpo whom Nadal dominated.

You see the double standards here?
 
MatsPhilander said:
Roger Federer will be the man to beat in 2018 provided he can stay fit, according to former Wimbledon champion Pat Cash. Rafael Nadal, 31, extended his lead at the top of the rankings with his US Open victory over Kevin Anderson. Federer, 36, was beaten in the quarter-finals, but Cash believes the Swiss can dominate the major titles if fully fit.

"Take away the French Open and Federer is the best all-round player in the world," Cash told BBC Radio 5 live. "There's no doubts about that. He's my favourite for everything apart from the French."As long as he's fit, he's favourite for the Australian, Wimbledon and the US Open."
Click to expand...
Pat cash is a comedian Roger is great player no doubt but dominating at 36 yrs old is ridiculous
 
mike danny said:
Listen, it is funny to see you defending the Nadal fans, since for years they have been arguing that Fed won most of his slams in a weak era without facing Nadal in the majority of them. But somehow that wasn't a knock on Nadal for not reaching Fed since he was supposedly a baby in diapers, deapite being world no.2 in that period and winning majors and beating Fed. Why couldn't Nadal beat the same guys Fed was dominating?

However, now Nadal wins with a weak draw, but gets all the credit and 36 year old Fed was to blame for not reaching him. They do not aknowledge that Fed was too old to get that far and are questioning why couldn't he beat Delpo whom Nadal dominated.

You see the double standards here?
Click to expand...
Federer tried to outhit Del potro very unwise strategy
 
mike danny said:
Listen, it is funny to see you defending the Nadal fans, since for years they have been arguing that Fed won most of his slams in a weak era without facing Nadal in the majority of them. But somehow that wasn't a knock on Nadal for not reaching Fed since he was supposedly a baby in diapers, deapite being world no.2 in that period and winning majors and beating Fed. Why couldn't Nadal beat the same guys Fed was dominating?

However, now Nadal wins with a weak draw, but gets all the credit and 36 year old Fed was to blame for not reaching him. They do not aknowledge that Fed was too old to get that far and are questioning why couldn't he beat Delpo whom Nadal dominated.

You see the double standards here?
Click to expand...

He predicted Djok will have a better career past age 29 than Fed and has been upset ever since Fed won 2 majors this year
 
mike danny said:
Listen, it is funny to see you defending the Nadal fans, since for years they have been arguing that Fed won most of his slams in a weak era without facing Nadal in the majority of them. But somehow that wasn't a knock on Nadal for not reaching Fed since he was supposedly a baby in diapers, deapite being world no.2 in that period and winning majors and beating Fed. Why couldn't Nadal beat the same guys Fed was dominating?

However, now Nadal wins with a weak draw, but gets all the credit and 36 year old Fed was to blame for not reaching him. They do not aknowledge that Fed was too old to get that far and are questioning why couldn't he beat Delpo whom Nadal dominated.

You see the double standards here?
Click to expand...

My goal is to keep bashing Fed and Nadal fans until Nole rises from the ashes to save tennis!
 
GabeT said:
And yet Fed couldn’t even win in such an easy draw. And weeks after winning Wimbledon!

Nadal can only play the guy in front of him. If Fed had faced different draws chances are he would not have 19 slams today.
Click to expand...

These guys keep missing the point.
Firstly, Fed's prep was messed up because of his back in Montreal. Do you really think he was at his best in NY and still went 5 sets with Youzhny and Tiafoe? Lol. When he was fit this year, Fed was nearly unbeatable.

Secondly, he played badly at the USO, and losing even with an easy draw is a knock on him. Rafa did well to take advantage of the opportunity, and he played well in the later stages. But it is also a fact that he had the easiest on paper draw for an eventual slam champion since 2002. Just two players in the top 50 and none in the top 25 is a joke.

Thirdly, when you say 'Nadal can only play the guy in front of him' (which is a fair way to look at things IMO), where does this thinking go missing when Federer was crushing all comers- among them major winners and former no.1s like Agassi, Hewitt, Safin, Roddick- and Rafa wasn't good enough to make it to the finals to face him? Fed could only play the guys in front of him then, as with Rafa now, right?
 
Even if fully fit he won't win slams once he enters his late 30's.Just too old and slow by then.So 21 slams at best for Federer(next year's AO and W).
 
It's true favouring a 37 year old in tennis seems improbable but you have 3 things to consider:

1. He's GOAT, so think Jordan at 40.
2. Loser Generation allows for a gap.
3. NextGen isn't trained for 5 sets yet.
 
mike danny said:
Federer still faced a top 5 player in Davydenko at the 2006 AO, who played better than anyone Nadal faced at this USO. He still faced a top 5 player vs no top 25 player in Nadal's case.
Click to expand...
Federer faced 4 players at 06 AO who were as tough/tougher as anyone Nadal faced at the USO.
 
BeatlesFan said:
No chance Djoker returns with a vengeance and becomes the man to beat in 2018?
Click to expand...

You've said, repeatedly, that there is no chance of that at all.

Just like when you said Nole would be a non-entity in clay this year right before he reached the Italian Open finals?
 
Not sure what Cash is smoking but he's disconnected from reality. Seeing how Fed performed and how fit he's been in the last month and a half, coming back from a lengthy pause between Wimbledon and Canada, and having skipped the entire clay season, I can't help but think that the end is near for RF. He played a very light schedule this year, but he still wasn't all that fresh for the NA hard court swing, where does he go from there? He barely had any points to defend in 2017, but will have a lot to defend in 2018, most of all 2 slams and 2 MS-1000 in the first half of the year and I don't see how he can replicate those results in 2018, especially if he skips clay again. With all due respect to Federer, if a 37 years old is still the man to beat on tour next year, then the tour is in even worst shape than I thought. 2018 will be an interesting year if all of the injured players come back healthy next year, that doesn't bode too well for Federer.
 
GabeT said:
Fed couldn't beat Delpo, who was destroyed by Nadal two days later, and you think Fed had a chance against Nadal? Alright then
Click to expand...
Doesn't work like that. Nadal standing that far back on return spamming high moonballs? Hitting those short balls? Fed would eat those up. Delpo beat Fed because he was fresher than in the SF, and Fed missed some easy putaways on key points.

Nadal would have to hope it goes to 5 sets.
 
KINGROGER said:
Doesn't work like that. Nadal standing that far back on return spamming high moonballs? Hitting those short balls? Fed would eat those up. Delpo beat Fed because he was fresher than in the SF, and Fed missed some easy putaways on key points.

Nadal would have to hope it goes to 5 sets.
Click to expand...

Fed's play has dropped markedly since Wimbledon. No reason it shouldn't, he's 36. Nadal's play has improved for most of the year.

Had they faced I suspect Nadal would have won quite comfortably.
 
GabeT said:
Fed's play has dropped markedly since Wimbledon. No reason it shouldn't, he's 36. Nadal's play has improved for most of the year.

Had they faced I suspect Nadal would have won quite comfortably.
Click to expand...
Fed would have put up a better fight than Delpo. Of that I am certain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Aussie Darcy
Pat Cash set to coach American CoCo Vandeweghe
Replies
9
Views
742
uadialej
U
5555
Pat Cash: Djokovic is better than Federer at his best
27 28 29
Replies
1K
Views
125K
Nadalgaenger
Nadalgaenger
Russeljones
Roger Federer needs to play more or consider retirement - Pat Cash
2
Replies
70
Views
3K
Im(moral) Winner
Im(moral) Winner
jm1980
Pat Cash: "Federer not even the second greatest in his own era"
22 23 24
Replies
1K
Views
37K
Sunny014
Sunny014
ninman
Who will be the next player to win a Grand Slam without having to beat Federer?
Replies
17
Views
2K
icedevil0289
icedevil0289
Back
Top