Roger: "20 is Doable"

Which one is more Likely?

  • 20 for Federer

    Votes: 78 78.8%
  • 16 for Nadal

    Votes: 21 21.2%

  • Total voters
    99
  • Poll closed .

swordtennis

G.O.A.T.
The commentators were correct in saying Federer's 2009 rise was related to Nadal's 2009 slump/absence. Federer's rise wouldn't have happened if Nadal was in usual condition at Roland Garros, because it would have been another Federer-Nadal final with Nadal winning. And at Wimbledon we saw Federer play very poorly off the ground and only his serve saving him. If that had been Nadal in the final instead of Roddick there is a good chance Nadal would have dominated the rallies (based on Federer's groundstroke form). So I do think Federer would have lost both RG and Wimbledon if Nadal played RG in normal condition and if Nadal played Wimbledon. RG especially, considering Federer played very messy tennis, he didn't even play well compared to past years.
O god no not again.
You mean the normal Synthetic condition, right? Just what is Nadal's "normal" condition?
 

NADALbULLS

Banned
O god no not again.
You mean the normal Synthetic condition, right? Just what is Nadal's "normal" condition?
Well any year apart from 2009, because even in the lead-up events in 2009 before RG he wasn't moving well. He was winning the lead-up events (not Madrid though) but he wasn't finishing points as quickly, and seemed late on the ball. A lot of fans were pointing this out during the clay season. So any version of Nadal apart from 2009 would have beaten Federer in the 2009 RG Final (in fact 2009 Nadal may have beaten him, but that's not the point). I really don't think Federer was playing well in 2009 RG by his standards either.
 
J

Jchurch

Guest
The commentators were correct in saying Federer's 2009 rise was related to Nadal's 2009 slump/absence. Federer's rise wouldn't have happened if Nadal was in usual condition at Roland Garros, because it would have been another Federer-Nadal final with Nadal winning. And at Wimbledon we saw Federer play very poorly off the ground and only his serve saving him. If that had been Nadal in the final instead of Roddick there is a good chance Nadal would have dominated the rallies (based on Federer's groundstroke form). So I do think Federer would have lost both RG and Wimbledon if Nadal played RG in normal condition and if Nadal played Wimbledon. RG especially, considering Federer played very messy tennis, he didn't even play well compared to past years.

Nadal's rise was due to Federer's mono. Had it not of been for mono Federer would have continued to dominate all of the field for 1000 years.

But seriously..... IT WORKS BOTH WAYS!
 

NADALbULLS

Banned
Nadal's rise was due to Federer's mono. Had it not of been for mono Federer would have continued to dominate all of the field for 1000 years.

But seriously..... IT WORKS BOTH WAYS!
I would believe you but Federer played better in 2008 Wimbledon (mono year?) than 2009 Wimbledon. Plus he was medically cleared of mono early in 2009 anyway. He played better at Wimbledon in 2008 than he played in 2009 and 2010!
 
J

Jchurch

Guest
I would believe you but Federer played better in 2008 Wimbledon (mono year?) than 2009 Wimbledon. Plus he was medically cleared of mono early in 2009 anyway. He played better at Wimbledon in 2008 than he played in 2009 and 2010!
Mono never leaves your system. Case in point Ancic. Now the problem isn't getting over it, the real problem is what it can do to your cardiovascular level. It can be lowered quite severely by mono.
 

NADALbULLS

Banned
Mono never leaves your system. Case in point Ancic. Now the problem isn't getting over it, the real problem is what it can do to your cardiovascular level. It can be lowered quite severely by mono.
According to the doctor, Federer had the absolute lightest case of mono. And I still think he was a better athlete in 2008 than he was in 2009 and 2010. He looked very physically sharp in 2008 Wimbledon. It doesn't add up.
 

Mustard

Talk Tennis Guru
According to the doctor, Federer had the absolute lightest case of mono. And I still think he was a better athlete in 2008 than he was in 2009 and 2010. He looked very physically sharp in 2008 Wimbledon. It doesn't add up.
Federer was in much better form in the 2008 clay and grass seasons than he was at the same stage of the season in 2009 and 2010. In 2008, he was runner-up in Monte Carlo, runner-up in Hamburg and runner-up of the French Open, as well as winning Halle and not dropping a set on his way to the Wimbledon final.
 

powerangle

Legend
I think you are very wrong about Berdych having a chance, his game is nowhere near complete enough to beat Nadal (on fast hardcourt or any surface). He has a joke game to matchup with Nadal. Berdych matches up with Federer but its unlikely he'll even win a set from Nadal. And I think you are wrong about Tsonga, if you watch their last 4 meetings, its clear Nadal worked him out a while ago. Nadal did exactly the same to Blake. Next Nadal will dominate the Del Potro head-to-head. Soderling I'm not convinced, Nadal beat him in an exhibition early this year on hardcourt, then beat him at Roland Garros, I just don't see Nadal letting Soderling off the hook after what happened in 2009. But I do think Soderling is a bigger threat than Tsonga/Berdych/Roddick.

Whatever you think of these matchups you got to admit your statement of "All I was saying is that it's possible for him to win and it's also possible for a plethora of guys to take him out" is wrong. 'Plethora' is the wrong word.
No, "plethora" is fine. You don't think certain guys can beat Rafa at USO while I can. I think an excess of people can beat him (even lower ranked players/lesser known names) if they play a great match and Nadal is playing less than stellar. Of course, this applies to other top players, not just Nadal but I never said otherwise. Nadal certainly isn't an exclusion to the rule. And USO is the slam where Nadal has the highest chance in going out.
 
Last edited:

Rippy

Hall of Fame
On a related note, I found it interesting that during Rafa's match against Anderson last night, the commentators (Jason Goodall and Doug Adler) were saying they didn't believe the fact that when Rafa was down and out in 2009Federer was winning slams again and now Rafa's back on top Fed is struggling, is a coincidence. They were pretty clear in saying that actually and I was quite surprised because I've always felt both men are pretty ardent Fed fans.
.
Pretty stupid view though, considering that it was Soderling and Berdych beat Federer in the 2 slams, and not Nadal.
 

Benhur

Hall of Fame
P_Agony:If you get out of your clown mode for just a second..
[FONT=&quot]
Aren't you the one who keeps wailing theatrically about other people's habit of resorting to insults and claims never to go there himself, as in:
[/FONT]
P_Agony:
Thing is, I'm not going to personally insult Nadal fans for disagreeing with me
[FONT=&quot]
There is a word in every dictionary to describe those who pretend to have principles or beliefs they don't have, or who falsely assume an appearance of virtue, or who publicly profess to feel intense scorn for vices they themselves practice.
Send your picture to the illustrated versions of those books, so they put it next to that entry.
[/FONT]
 

Fedex

Legend
I sure hope so. He is gonna do his best to get a few more. And why not, he has never had serious injuries and says he will play fewer tournies.. so at 29 he has got lots of juice left in him, plus getting new ideas from the likes of Annacone..I say it's doable too.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...hts-on-20-Grand-Slams/articleshow/6301443.cms
Possible but very unlikely.
Would probably end his marriage.
If he manages to win several more slams whilst holding down a marriage with kids.
Now that is GOAT material.
 

FeVer

Semi-Pro
I think Federer's past it. Everything's gotta end sometime. He may get one or two more slams but not 20.
 

FeVer

Semi-Pro
There is a word in every dictionary to describe those who pretend to have principles or beliefs they don't have, or who falsely assume an appearance of virtue, or who publicly profess to feel intense scorn for vices they themselves practice.
Send your picture to the illustrated versions of those books, so they put it next to that entry.
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
Jeez, that's the most long-winded insult I've ever seen! It is meant to be an insult, right?
 

powerangle

Legend
Whatever you think of these matchups you got to admit your statement of "All I was saying is that it's possible for him to win and it's also possible for a plethora of guys to take him out" is wrong. 'Plethora' is the wrong word.
No, "plethora" is fine. You don't think certain guys can beat Rafa at USO while I can. I think an excess of people can beat him (even lower ranked players/lesser known names) if they play a great match and Nadal is playing less than stellar. Of course, this applies to other top players, not just Nadal but I never said otherwise. Nadal certainly isn't an exclusion to the rule. And USO is the slam where Nadal has the highest chance in going out.
Add Baghdatis to the 'plethora' of players that can take Nadal out at the USO. Nadal can be favored against many players, but all those players can be very dangerous for him and beat him.
 
According to the doctor, Federer had the absolute lightest case of mono. And I still think he was a better athlete in 2008 than he was in 2009 and 2010. He looked very physically sharp in 2008 Wimbledon. It doesn't add up.
I think we all have to agree with this. Sign me up for Roger's mono
 
I think we all have to agree with this. Sign me up for Roger's mono
If by 'all' you mean Fed-hating Nadal ****s, then yes.

Federer was diagnosed with food poisoning just prior to Melbourne, which severely disrupted his preparation, and appeared off his game there despite reaching the round of four.

That effort, combined with his loss to Murray, fueled speculation that Federer’s dominance of the ATP Tour was perhaps nearing an end.

“As you can imagine, the beginning of this season has been rather tough for me,” Federer said on his web site. “(Last year) ended with an illness which cost me a lot of energy.

“I was unable to play at the beginning of January. I was still taking antibiotics five days before the Australian Open, making a recovery in time for the tournament impossible.”

The 26-year-old Swiss superstar said he began to feel poorly again following his appearance in Australia and decided to see a doctor.

“It was at this time that they found out what was bothering me all along – mononucleosis,” Federer said. “I had had it for six weeks already, meaning it would normally be over.

“It was relieving to finally know why I had felt weak in Australia and also later on. So the good news really is to be certain of what has occurred. The bad news is that I have quite some catching up to do in terms of fitness.”
http://www.bumeral.net/blog/roger-federer-sick-with-mononucleosis-federer-suffered-illness/
 

AM95

Hall of Fame
According to the doctor, Federer had the absolute lightest case of mono. And I still think he was a better athlete in 2008 than he was in 2009 and 2010. He looked very physically sharp in 2008 Wimbledon. It doesn't add up.
were you his doctor?..if not, will you please be kind enough to show me where you found this quote and information. last time i checked doc's arent allowed to disclose medical information on patients ...
 

bolo

G.O.A.T.
I thought federer looked sweaty at that australian, but looked good by the middle of the clay court season; then Nadal really took him to clay tennis school at the 08 FO. :)
 

kOaMaster

Hall of Fame
Transcript of the interview:

BBC: Roger, really good crowd at this event, don't you think?

Roger: Ya, the fan support is great.

BBC: And some really hot chicks in the crowd

Roger: Ya, Canada has a lot of babes

BBC: Anyone in particular catch your eye (shows him a photo of crowd at the match).

Roger: (Smiles and looks at the photo).....that girl in seat 20.

BBC: Oh ya, she's a hottie.

Roger: 20 is doable
Love that one! :D
 

TheFifthSet

Legend
We know, we know, he also thinks he'll win the Olympics in 2012, 5 more RGs and 10 more W.
Reality is not Fed's favorite hangout...
LOL, a guy that has won 16 slams is living in a fanstasy world because he thinks that 4 more is possible?

Every day brings us another dunce quote from you. :)
I actually remember this exchange, and was hoping someone would bump the thread it occurred in.

Good job folks.
 

JackGates

Legend
Federer had chances in 2014-2015 to win another GS title. Some just thought that Federer would give up or get too old along with overestimating certain players being a threat to stop him. Never giving up was the key for Federer.
Yeah, he also made some mistakes. He never addressed his main weakness till 2017. Even vs peak Nole, Fed mostly was trying to come to the net and abandon his baseline game.

Finally Fed is trusting his talent and he is hitting two hours of backhands every day before real practice since 2017, his camp said it.

So, Fed was being very arrogant in his prime.
 

Rudiiii

Rookie
Best threads, there are some like: Will Djokovic surpass Fed's 17 GS record, or Will Djokovic surpass Nadal, or Nadal will surpass Fed... So many arrogant fans making completely wrong predictions, just for us to make fan of them. And not even a single mention of Djokovic, who was strongforce in those years, just loosing so many SF and F of GS
 

topher

Hall of Fame
Best threads, there are some like: Will Djokovic surpass Fed's 17 GS record, or Will Djokovic surpass Nadal, or Nadal will surpass Fed... So many arrogant fans making completely wrong predictions, just for us to make fan of them. And not even a single mention of Djokovic, who was strongforce in those years, just loosing so many SF and F of GS
The only person who thought Novak would get to 20 slams back then was Srdjan, but he probably predicted 40 slams and a cure for cancer from Novak so we can’t give him full credit (yet).

The real takeaway is humans are unpredictable and any prediction involving them is mostly guesswork.
 

Rudiiii

Rookie
The only person who thought Novak would get to 20 slams back then was Srdjan, but he probably predicted 40 slams and a cure for cancer from Novak so we can’t give him full credit (yet).

The real takeaway is humans are unpredictable and any prediction involving them is mostly guesswork.
Well slam count was 16-4, after Djokovic 2011 year,my point is, don't downgrade other players in favour of yours. Most of TTW look down on Med,Zed,CC and many more just because they can't win slams,but they reach finals more often then not. What if some of them reach 10 GS? Cheer for your player, don't boo other
 

topher

Hall of Fame
Well slam count was 16-4, after Djokovic 2011 year,my point is, don't downgrade other players in favour of yours. Most of TTW look down on Med,Zed,CC and many more just because they can't win slams,but they reach finals more often then not. What if some of them reach 10 GS? Cheer for your player, don't boo other
Sure, although if we didn’t put down other players and their achievements there’d be a lot less discussion here! I could live with that, although I do think pointing out the LostGen and the NexyGen’s lack of success is fair game, but no need to name call.

I will point out this thread was in 2010, not 2011, so Novak was still stuck on 1 slam.
 
Top