Seven reasons why Roger won't win in Melbourne

[Tchocky]

Seven reasons why Fed won't lift the trophy in January...

There's only one problem with invincibility - small minded people can't help but see it as a challenge. From the Daleks to Superman, invincibles have always had to put up with someone trying to find the chink in their armour so that they can say "Ha! Not so invincible now, are you!"

For Roger Federer, this sort of petty irritation has become a fact of life, although until recently he brushed off most engagements without fear of being exposed as human. In the first big event of 2008, however, January's Australian Open, The Contrarian believes the great Federer, who has won the event for the last two years, will not be needing an extra bag for the trophy. [You can lay Roger Federer to win the Australian Open on Betfair at 1.63.

1. Because no one has ever won it in three successive years before.
Eight players (Ken Rosewall, Guillermo Vilas, Johan Kriek, Mats Wilander, Stefan Edberg, Ivan Lendl, Jim Courier, and most lately Andre Agassi) have won two consecutive Australian Open titles but none has ever added a third.

2. All great players lose an Australian Open final
There are only five players in tennis history who have won more Grand Slam titles than Roger Federer. Three of them won the Australian Open (Pete Sampras, Roy Emerson and Rod Laver) and they all lost at least one Australian Open final as well. Federer is yet to lose an Australian Open final.

3. Federer is having a lousy year (by Roger Federer standards).
Federer has already lost nine games in 2007, the combined total of his losses for 2005 and 2006. His win rate for this season is currently 88.3% compared to a winning rate of 94.8% and 95.3% in the previous two years - the build up years before he went on to win the Australian Open the following January.

4. Federer is having a lousy year on hard courts (by Roger Federer standards).
Federer's record on hard courts this year has also been well below his form in his two previous years. Federer won 97.6% and 95.9% of his games on hard courts in 2005 and 2006 respectively. This year he has won just 90.9%. Federer has won just six of the eleven competitions he has played on hard courts this year, just 55% of them. In 2006 he won 82% of competitions on hard courts, and he won 89% in 2005.

5. Federer is due a tougher ride to the trophy.
In the two previous Australian Opens that he won, Federer never faced anyone ranked above fifth in the ATP World Rankings at the time of playing. In theory his 'toughest' game was against the then fifth seeded Nikolay Davydenko in the quarter finals on the 2006 tournament. Federer's opponents in the two finals were the 54th ranked Marcos Baghdatis in 2006 and the 9th ranked Fernando Gonzalez in 2007.

6. Federer has had some recent hard court misery.
Federer has lost on a hard court as recently as last month in the ATP Masters Series in Paris, to David Nalbandian in straight sets, then ranked 21st in the ATP rankings. He lost again to Nalbandian on a hard court in October when Nalbandian was ranked 25th. He also lost to Novak Djokovic, ranked 4th, in the final of the ATP Masters Series in Montreal in August on a hard court.

7. It's about time Federer met Nadal in Australia.
Rafael Nadal is the only player to have beaten Federer in a Grand Slam final, beating him in the last two French Open finals, a title Federer is yet to win. Federer is yet to face Nadal in the final of an Australian Open.

Source: The Betfair Contrarian, Nov. 23

 

[racquet_jedi]

How would you feel and what would you say if Roger did win?

Hoping for actual answer...

 

[grizzly4life]

seven words... put money where mouth is, talk cheap!... thanks for posting though!!

 

[msc886]

1 and 2. It's really hard to predict that Federer will lose based on those results.
3. and 4 In 2006, there are also cases where he could have lost eg vs Rochus in Halle, Nalbandian in RG and masters cup, Roddick in masters cup. and other close matches
5.true but it doesn't mean he won't beat them.
6.When Nalbandian or gonzalez is on, they can play extremely well
7.I wouldn't count on Nadal making it to the final yet. Even so, Federer can still beat him.
5.

 

[barbadosan]

I love No. 1: Because no one has ever won it in three successive years before.

Of course, no one's ever reached 7 consecutive finals before; no one's ever won wimby & USO back to back 4 times etc etc....

The writer chooses an odd theory to put at no. 1 in view of Fed's penchant for doing what hasn't been done before

 

[Swissv2]

so the OP is just saying records are not meant to be broken. hmmmmm.

 

[IanRichardson]

when we thought of going to the moon i wonder where this guy was to remind us "nobody has ever been there before"

the person who wrote that article really needs to give what he says a bit more thought.

nobody had ever hit a 155mph serve before andy roddick did it, but it still happened.

 

[Leelord337]

Seven reasons why Fed won't lift the trophy in January...

There's only one problem with invincibility - small minded people can't help but see it as a challenge. From the Daleks to Superman, invincibles have always had to put up with someone trying to find the chink in their armour so that they can say "Ha! Not so invincible now, are you!"

For Roger Federer, this sort of petty irritation has become a fact of life, although until recently he brushed off most engagements without fear of being exposed as human. In the first big event of 2008, however, January's Australian Open, The Contrarian believes the great Federer, who has won the event for the last two years, will not be needing an extra bag for the trophy. [You can lay Roger Federer to win the Australian Open on Betfair at 1.63.

1. Because no one has ever won it in three successive years before.
Eight players (Ken Rosewall, Guillermo Vilas, Johan Kriek, Mats Wilander, Stefan Edberg, Ivan Lendl, Jim Courier, and most lately Andre Agassi) have won two consecutive Australian Open titles but none has ever added a third.

2. All great players lose an Australian Open final
There are only five players in tennis history who have won more Grand Slam titles than Roger Federer. Three of them won the Australian Open (Pete Sampras, Roy Emerson and Rod Laver) and they all lost at least one Australian Open final as well. Federer is yet to lose an Australian Open final.

3. Federer is having a lousy year (by Roger Federer standards).
Federer has already lost nine games in 2007, the combined total of his losses for 2005 and 2006. His win rate for this season is currently 88.3% compared to a winning rate of 94.8% and 95.3% in the previous two years - the build up years before he went on to win the Australian Open the following January.

4. Federer is having a lousy year on hard courts (by Roger Federer standards).
Federer's record on hard courts this year has also been well below his form in his two previous years. Federer won 97.6% and 95.9% of his games on hard courts in 2005 and 2006 respectively. This year he has won just 90.9%. Federer has won just six of the eleven competitions he has played on hard courts this year, just 55% of them. In 2006 he won 82% of competitions on hard courts, and he won 89% in 2005.

5. Federer is due a tougher ride to the trophy.
In the two previous Australian Opens that he won, Federer never faced anyone ranked above fifth in the ATP World Rankings at the time of playing. In theory his 'toughest' game was against the then fifth seeded Nikolay Davydenko in the quarter finals on the 2006 tournament. Federer's opponents in the two finals were the 54th ranked Marcos Baghdatis in 2006 and the 9th ranked Fernando Gonzalez in 2007.

6. Federer has had some recent hard court misery.
Federer has lost on a hard court as recently as last month in the ATP Masters Series in Paris, to David Nalbandian in straight sets, then ranked 21st in the ATP rankings. He lost again to Nalbandian on a hard court in October when Nalbandian was ranked 25th. He also lost to Novak Djokovic, ranked 4th, in the final of the ATP Masters Series in Montreal in August on a hard court.

7. It's about time Federer met Nadal in Australia.
Rafael Nadal is the only player to have beaten Federer in a Grand Slam final, beating him in the last two French Open finals, a title Federer is yet to win. Federer is yet to face Nadal in the final of an Australian Open.

Source: The Betfair Contrarian, Nov. 23

lol, Ok...LOL...you knew they changed the surface to Hardcourt right??? Fed dominates on hardcourt, and hopefully nalbandian won't be on his side of the draw...if he is...then there is a chance he will lose. but Federer is a HUGE favorite...much like Mike Tyson was a favorite in his prime.

 

[Leelord337]

nobody had ever hit a 155mph serve before andy roddick did it, but it still happened.

Bill Tilden hit one over 163.3 mph according to wikipedia.

check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Tilden

its in the 2nd paragraph under "greatness as a player"

 

[ananda]

most of these sound like superstitious bunk!
... no one has won 3 in a row, everyone has lost one etc etc
Only dimwits try to see patterns where none exist (i mean the orig writer).

But interesting piece, nevertheless.

 

[Tennis-Chris]

One Reason He Will Win

He is Roger Federer.:mrgreen:

 

[hoosierbr]

I think we can agree that Federer looked vulnerable at times last year, even shaky in the GS finals where he excels. Gonzo served for the first set in Australia, Djokovic had, what, 5 set points the first set at the USO?

With him having no match play coming in it'll make it interesting to see if he can keep it up.

 

[JKN666]

Bill Tilden hit one over 163.3 mph according to wikipedia.

check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Tilden

its in the 2nd paragraph under "greatness as a player"

ya but it also says its questionable because of the technology.

 

[Morrissey]

Seven reasons why Fed won't lift the trophy in January...

There's only one problem with invincibility - small minded people can't help but see it as a challenge. From the Daleks to Superman, invincibles have always had to put up with someone trying to find the chink in their armour so that they can say "Ha! Not so invincible now, are you!"

For Roger Federer, this sort of petty irritation has become a fact of life, although until recently he brushed off most engagements without fear of being exposed as human. In the first big event of 2008, however, January's Australian Open, The Contrarian believes the great Federer, who has won the event for the last two years, will not be needing an extra bag for the trophy. [You can lay Roger Federer to win the Australian Open on Betfair at 1.63.

1. Because no one has ever won it in three successive years before.
Eight players (Ken Rosewall, Guillermo Vilas, Johan Kriek, Mats Wilander, Stefan Edberg, Ivan Lendl, Jim Courier, and most lately Andre Agassi) have won two consecutive Australian Open titles but none has ever added a third.

2. All great players lose an Australian Open final
There are only five players in tennis history who have won more Grand Slam titles than Roger Federer. Three of them won the Australian Open (Pete Sampras, Roy Emerson and Rod Laver) and they all lost at least one Australian Open final as well. Federer is yet to lose an Australian Open final.

3. Federer is having a lousy year (by Roger Federer standards).
Federer has already lost nine games in 2007, the combined total of his losses for 2005 and 2006. His win rate for this season is currently 88.3% compared to a winning rate of 94.8% and 95.3% in the previous two years - the build up years before he went on to win the Australian Open the following January.

4. Federer is having a lousy year on hard courts (by Roger Federer standards).
Federer's record on hard courts this year has also been well below his form in his two previous years. Federer won 97.6% and 95.9% of his games on hard courts in 2005 and 2006 respectively. This year he has won just 90.9%. Federer has won just six of the eleven competitions he has played on hard courts this year, just 55% of them. In 2006 he won 82% of competitions on hard courts, and he won 89% in 2005.

5. Federer is due a tougher ride to the trophy.
In the two previous Australian Opens that he won, Federer never faced anyone ranked above fifth in the ATP World Rankings at the time of playing. In theory his 'toughest' game was against the then fifth seeded Nikolay Davydenko in the quarter finals on the 2006 tournament. Federer's opponents in the two finals were the 54th ranked Marcos Baghdatis in 2006 and the 9th ranked Fernando Gonzalez in 2007.

6. Federer has had some recent hard court misery.
Federer has lost on a hard court as recently as last month in the ATP Masters Series in Paris, to David Nalbandian in straight sets, then ranked 21st in the ATP rankings. He lost again to Nalbandian on a hard court in October when Nalbandian was ranked 25th. He also lost to Novak Djokovic, ranked 4th, in the final of the ATP Masters Series in Montreal in August on a hard court.

7. It's about time Federer met Nadal in Australia.
Rafael Nadal is the only player to have beaten Federer in a Grand Slam final, beating him in the last two French Open finals, a title Federer is yet to win. Federer is yet to face Nadal in the final of an Australian Open.

Source: The Betfair Contrarian, Nov. 23

I like your post, especially #7 but we'll see. I won't say anything until it's over. But one thing is for certain, Roddick won't make the final. That's for damn sure.

 

[flying24]

Seven reasons why Fed won't lift the trophy in January...

There's only one problem with invincibility - small minded people can't help but see it as a challenge. From the Daleks to Superman, invincibles have always had to put up with someone trying to find the chink in their armour so that they can say "Ha! Not so invincible now, are you!"

For Roger Federer, this sort of petty irritation has become a fact of life, although until recently he brushed off most engagements without fear of being exposed as human. In the first big event of 2008, however, January's Australian Open, The Contrarian believes the great Federer, who has won the event for the last two years, will not be needing an extra bag for the trophy. [You can lay Roger Federer to win the Australian Open on Betfair at 1.63.

1. Because no one has ever won it in three successive years before.
Eight players (Ken Rosewall, Guillermo Vilas, Johan Kriek, Mats Wilander, Stefan Edberg, Ivan Lendl, Jim Courier, and most lately Andre Agassi) have won two consecutive Australian Open titles but none has ever added a third.

2. All great players lose an Australian Open final
There are only five players in tennis history who have won more Grand Slam titles than Roger Federer. Three of them won the Australian Open (Pete Sampras, Roy Emerson and Rod Laver) and they all lost at least one Australian Open final as well. Federer is yet to lose an Australian Open final.

3. Federer is having a lousy year (by Roger Federer standards).
Federer has already lost nine games in 2007, the combined total of his losses for 2005 and 2006. His win rate for this season is currently 88.3% compared to a winning rate of 94.8% and 95.3% in the previous two years - the build up years before he went on to win the Australian Open the following January.

4. Federer is having a lousy year on hard courts (by Roger Federer standards).
Federer's record on hard courts this year has also been well below his form in his two previous years. Federer won 97.6% and 95.9% of his games on hard courts in 2005 and 2006 respectively. This year he has won just 90.9%. Federer has won just six of the eleven competitions he has played on hard courts this year, just 55% of them. In 2006 he won 82% of competitions on hard courts, and he won 89% in 2005.

5. Federer is due a tougher ride to the trophy.
In the two previous Australian Opens that he won, Federer never faced anyone ranked above fifth in the ATP World Rankings at the time of playing. In theory his 'toughest' game was against the then fifth seeded Nikolay Davydenko in the quarter finals on the 2006 tournament. Federer's opponents in the two finals were the 54th ranked Marcos Baghdatis in 2006 and the 9th ranked Fernando Gonzalez in 2007.

6. Federer has had some recent hard court misery.
Federer has lost on a hard court as recently as last month in the ATP Masters Series in Paris, to David Nalbandian in straight sets, then ranked 21st in the ATP rankings. He lost again to Nalbandian on a hard court in October when Nalbandian was ranked 25th. He also lost to Novak Djokovic, ranked 4th, in the final of the ATP Masters Series in Montreal in August on a hard court.

7. It's about time Federer met Nadal in Australia.
Rafael Nadal is the only player to have beaten Federer in a Grand Slam final, beating him in the last two French Open finals, a title Federer is yet to win. Federer is yet to face Nadal in the final of an Australian Open.

Source: The Betfair Contrarian, Nov. 23

Pretty much the biggest pile of crap from start to finish. The only guys who have the slighest prayer to beat Federer here are Nalbandian or Djokovic, and one is dealing with an injury, the other is coming in not in good form. Federer pretty much has it in the bag. Every match to the semis is a sure thing, a final vs anyone in the bottom half is a sure thing, and the only challening opponent in the semis is likely subpar at this point in time.

 

[roller~]

Seven reasons for Roger.

Seven reasons why Fed won't lift the trophy in January...

There's only one problem with invincibility - small minded people can't help but see it as a challenge. From the Daleks to Superman, invincibles have always had to put up with someone trying to find the chink in their armour so that they can say "Ha! Not so invincible now, are you!"

For Roger Federer, this sort of petty irritation has become a fact of life, although until recently he brushed off most engagements without fear of being exposed as human. In the first big event of 2008, however, January's Australian Open, The Contrarian believes the great Federer, who has won the event for the last two years, will not be needing an extra bag for the trophy. [You can lay Roger Federer to win the Australian Open on Betfair at 1.63.

1. Because no one has ever won it in three successive years before.
Eight players (Ken Rosewall, Guillermo Vilas, Johan Kriek, Mats Wilander, Stefan Edberg, Ivan Lendl, Jim Courier, and most lately Andre Agassi) have won two consecutive Australian Open titles but none has ever added a third.

2. All great players lose an Australian Open final
There are only five players in tennis history who have won more Grand Slam titles than Roger Federer. Three of them won the Australian Open (Pete Sampras, Roy Emerson and Rod Laver) and they all lost at least one Australian Open final as well. Federer is yet to lose an Australian Open final.

3. Federer is having a lousy year (by Roger Federer standards).
Federer has already lost nine games in 2007, the combined total of his losses for 2005 and 2006. His win rate for this season is currently 88.3% compared to a winning rate of 94.8% and 95.3% in the previous two years - the build up years before he went on to win the Australian Open the following January.

4. Federer is having a lousy year on hard courts (by Roger Federer standards).
Federer's record on hard courts this year has also been well below his form in his two previous years. Federer won 97.6% and 95.9% of his games on hard courts in 2005 and 2006 respectively. This year he has won just 90.9%. Federer has won just six of the eleven competitions he has played on hard courts this year, just 55% of them. In 2006 he won 82% of competitions on hard courts, and he won 89% in 2005.

5. Federer is due a tougher ride to the trophy.
In the two previous Australian Opens that he won, Federer never faced anyone ranked above fifth in the ATP World Rankings at the time of playing. In theory his 'toughest' game was against the then fifth seeded Nikolay Davydenko in the quarter finals on the 2006 tournament. Federer's opponents in the two finals were the 54th ranked Marcos Baghdatis in 2006 and the 9th ranked Fernando Gonzalez in 2007.

6. Federer has had some recent hard court misery.
Federer has lost on a hard court as recently as last month in the ATP Masters Series in Paris, to David Nalbandian in straight sets, then ranked 21st in the ATP rankings. He lost again to Nalbandian on a hard court in October when Nalbandian was ranked 25th. He also lost to Novak Djokovic, ranked 4th, in the final of the ATP Masters Series in Montreal in August on a hard court.

7. It's about time Federer met Nadal in Australia.
Rafael Nadal is the only player to have beaten Federer in a Grand Slam final, beating him in the last two French Open finals, a title Federer is yet to win. Federer is yet to face Nadal in the final of an Australian Open.

Source: The Betfair Contrarian, Nov. 23

1. He won Wimbledon/US open and is chasing history.
2. He is better than the former players.
3. Nobody can judge it is his downhill. It is just only figures.
4. He is one of the best yet on Hard court.
5. They were outrun by the weaker oppoents anyhow.
They did need to advance to the Final, but they were unable to do so.
6. It happens. But this is the GRAND SLAM~! He shows always something.
7. There you are~!
'Rafael Nadal is 'the only player' to have beaten Federer in a Grand Slam final'
Is nobody there, but roger?

 

[Nadal_Freak]

I like this thread. :lol:

 

[sacha_v]

i'd still put some money on fed's win

 

[Vision84]

Absolute garbage except for a few points. Making trends with other players from other generations is a weak and desperate argument for obvious reasons. Federer was a little more vulnerable last year and that was a good point. Sure his competeition may be a bit stronger this year on his way to the final but that doesn't mean he won't win. Using Gonzalez as an example like that is saying that he wasn't the best player of the 2 weeks to get to the final. He played better than his ranking or seeding suggested so he deserved to be in the final. Same goes for Baghdatis in 2006. Nadal may have a great record against Federer but that is on clay and point #7 doesn't acknowledge the variety of surfaces. Sure Nadal has beaten Federer on hard courts but the last 2 times they met on this surface Federer was the victor and in straights. Nadal has never gotten past a quarter final in a grand slam that is played on hardcourts. The surface may be a bit slower this year favoring Nadal but his body is showing signs of wearing down so it is likely he won't be 100% as well. Nalbandian who beat Federer recently is having back problems so should be less of a threat to Federer. Djokovic hasn't been playing well but if he ups his game he certainly has a shot.

 

[Turning Pro]

8th Reason: Safin

 

[andyroddick1]

Seven reasons why Fed won't lift the trophy in January...

There's only one problem with invincibility - small minded people can't help but see it as a challenge. From the Daleks to Superman, invincibles have always had to put up with someone trying to find the chink in their armour so that they can say "Ha! Not so invincible now, are you!"

For Roger Federer, this sort of petty irritation has become a fact of life, although until recently he brushed off most engagements without fear of being exposed as human. In the first big event of 2008, however, January's Australian Open, The Contrarian believes the great Federer, who has won the event for the last two years, will not be needing an extra bag for the trophy. [You can lay Roger Federer to win the Australian Open on Betfair at 1.63.

1. Because no one has ever won it in three successive years before.
Eight players (Ken Rosewall, Guillermo Vilas, Johan Kriek, Mats Wilander, Stefan Edberg, Ivan Lendl, Jim Courier, and most lately Andre Agassi) have won two consecutive Australian Open titles but none has ever added a third.

2. All great players lose an Australian Open final
There are only five players in tennis history who have won more Grand Slam titles than Roger Federer. Three of them won the Australian Open (Pete Sampras, Roy Emerson and Rod Laver) and they all lost at least one Australian Open final as well. Federer is yet to lose an Australian Open final.

3. Federer is having a lousy year (by Roger Federer standards).
Federer has already lost nine games in 2007, the combined total of his losses for 2005 and 2006. His win rate for this season is currently 88.3% compared to a winning rate of 94.8% and 95.3% in the previous two years - the build up years before he went on to win the Australian Open the following January.

4. Federer is having a lousy year on hard courts (by Roger Federer standards).
Federer's record on hard courts this year has also been well below his form in his two previous years. Federer won 97.6% and 95.9% of his games on hard courts in 2005 and 2006 respectively. This year he has won just 90.9%. Federer has won just six of the eleven competitions he has played on hard courts this year, just 55% of them. In 2006 he won 82% of competitions on hard courts, and he won 89% in 2005.

5. Federer is due a tougher ride to the trophy.
In the two previous Australian Opens that he won, Federer never faced anyone ranked above fifth in the ATP World Rankings at the time of playing. In theory his 'toughest' game was against the then fifth seeded Nikolay Davydenko in the quarter finals on the 2006 tournament. Federer's opponents in the two finals were the 54th ranked Marcos Baghdatis in 2006 and the 9th ranked Fernando Gonzalez in 2007.

6. Federer has had some recent hard court misery.
Federer has lost on a hard court as recently as last month in the ATP Masters Series in Paris, to David Nalbandian in straight sets, then ranked 21st in the ATP rankings. He lost again to Nalbandian on a hard court in October when Nalbandian was ranked 25th. He also lost to Novak Djokovic, ranked 4th, in the final of the ATP Masters Series in Montreal in August on a hard court.

7. It's about time Federer met Nadal in Australia.
Rafael Nadal is the only player to have beaten Federer in a Grand Slam final, beating him in the last two French Open finals, a title Federer is yet to win. Federer is yet to face Nadal in the final of an Australian Open.

Source: The Betfair Contrarian, Nov. 23

I would love to see it happen but unless he gets injured, the chances of him losing are less than 3%. Unless Safin gets to face him and is really on.

 

[bagung]

federer has the ability of winning the australian open again this year...
do not think nadal will get into the final and able to stop fed....
if there is a possiblity of stopping federer, the chances is djokovic...but, djokovic has a tough draw...

 

[Leublu tennis]

8th Reason: Safin

No way, Jose, and I a big, big Safin fan.

 

[MEAC_ALLAMERICAN]

8th Reason: Safin

I would love to see it happen but unless he gets injured, the chances of him losing are less than 3%. Unless Safin gets to face him and is really on.

Why do you guys constantly put Safin on this pedestal, while there are other worthy opponents capable of beating Federer? :neutral:

 

[Maestro Nalbandian]

2. All great players lose an Australian Open final
There are only five players in tennis history who have won more Grand Slam titles than Roger Federer. Three of them won the Australian Open (Pete Sampras, Roy Emerson and Rod Laver) and they all lost at least one Australian Open final as well. Federer is yet to lose an Australian Open final.
. 23

Yes they do but too bad Federer doesn't belong to the "great players" category. He is the Greatest Of All Time....

 

[Maestro Nalbandian]

Why do you guys constantly put Safin on this pedestal, while there are other worthy opponents capable of beating Federer? :neutral:

Because Safin just beat Gonzalez who beat Federer the last time they met......j/k

 

[bobby]

2. All great players lose an Australian Open final
There are only five players in tennis history who have won more Grand Slam titles than Roger Federer. Three of them won the Australian Open (Pete Sampras, Roy Emerson and Rod Laver) and they all lost at least one Australian Open final as well. Federer is yet to lose an Australian Open final.

Uh. . . there is only one male player to win more Grand Slam titles, Pete Sampras.

 

[Clay lover]

Good read.

 

[Mick]

He is Roger Federer.:mrgreen:

my thought exactly
about the only time Roger Federer isn't (the invincible) Roger Federer is when he plays on the red clay courts of Roland Garros.

 

[Aeropro master]

good job tchocky, it would be really cool if nadal played fed in the finals this year.

 

[2 Cent]

8. the flu

 

[RoddickAce]

Seven reasons why Fed won't lift the trophy in January...

2. All great players lose an Australian Open final
There are only five players in tennis history who have won more Grand Slam titles than Roger Federer. Three of them won the Australian Open (Pete Sampras, Roy Emerson and Rod Laver) and they all lost at least one Australian Open final as well. Federer is yet to lose an Australian Open final.

But federer has 12 grand slam titles now...Rod Laver has 11, Emerson has 12,...Only Pete Sampras has more grand slam titles. And I think Federer is gonna try to win every grand slam so he can pass Sampras's record.

 

[lambielspins]

8th Reason: Safin

So do you believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny still.

 

[Pancho]

I think Nadal will win Australian Open.

 

[thalivest]

I think Nadal will win Australian Open.

The Australian Open is played on hard courts.

 

[psamp14]

one thing forgotten.....this is roger federer, and he's distinguishing himself from even the greatest players in the history of this sport

he's done and is doing things that no one had ever done before

 

[IanRichardson]

Bill Tilden hit one over 163.3 mph according to wikipedia.

check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Tilden

its in the 2nd paragraph under "greatness as a player"

now look at his early tennis career paragraph shows how accurate wikipedia is. Everyone can change it! (even me)

 

[theone]

I hope federer gets totally stuffed by nalbandian/murray/djokovic

 

[Thor]

I can find one reason he will win - he is Federer...

 

[drakulie]

I think Nadal will win Australian Open.

I hope he makes the finals but don't believe he will make it past the 4th round/quarters.

 

[Leublu tennis]

Why do you guys constantly put Safin on this pedestal, while there are other worthy opponents capable of beating Federer? :neutral:

Because we can not forget 2005. I don't think anyone noticed but Safin then beat Djokovic in the first round. Djokovic was ranked 188.

 

[RoddickAce]

I hope he makes the finals but don't believe he will make it past the 4th round/quarters.

Cause Roddick's there (I apologize if I posted this like a million times)

But anyway, It doesnt look like Federer's gonna be stopped at the AO, but I bet he'll be feeling a lot of pressure with all the expectations on him.

 

[plain jane]

i for one am hoping for a Nadal vs Fed final (not because i think nadal can beat fed, just to see the quality of tennis that each will bring). I dont see fed not winnning this year's AO however but will still be backing Rafa all the way!!

Oh and the article giving the seven reasons is basically a load of crap.

 

[MEAC_ALLAMERICAN]

Because we can not forget 2005. I don't think anyone noticed but Safin then beat Djokovic in the first round. Djokovic was ranked 188.

Well, it must be nice to live in the past, but this is 2008 and if he wins a few rounds, even Safin would be happy.

 

[coloskier]

I hope federer gets totally stuffed by nalbandian/murray/djokovic

I don't think any of those players are in his half of the draw, so they will beat up on each other and get worn out before they meet Federer in the finals. Even Nadal has to meet Roddick before he even gets to the semis, and now matter what you say, Roddick on a hard court will give Nadal fits, especially the way Roddick played last week. His serve is on, which in Nadals weakest point (return of serve). Federer has an incredibly clean draw. None of his nemesis's are in his half of the draw.

 

[naffi]

Betfair? BETFAIR?
If you want a reason Fed won't win, try Djokovic.
Betfair.

http://www.tenniswithattitude.blogspot.com

Seven reasons why Fed won't lift the trophy in January...

There's only one problem with invincibility - small minded people can't help but see it as a challenge. From the Daleks to Superman, invincibles have always had to put up with someone trying to find the chink in their armour so that they can say "Ha! Not so invincible now, are you!"

For Roger Federer, this sort of petty irritation has become a fact of life, although until recently he brushed off most engagements without fear of being exposed as human. In the first big event of 2008, however, January's Australian Open, The Contrarian believes the great Federer, who has won the event for the last two years, will not be needing an extra bag for the trophy. [You can lay Roger Federer to win the Australian Open on Betfair at 1.63.

1. Because no one has ever won it in three successive years before.
Eight players (Ken Rosewall, Guillermo Vilas, Johan Kriek, Mats Wilander, Stefan Edberg, Ivan Lendl, Jim Courier, and most lately Andre Agassi) have won two consecutive Australian Open titles but none has ever added a third.

2. All great players lose an Australian Open final
There are only five players in tennis history who have won more Grand Slam titles than Roger Federer. Three of them won the Australian Open (Pete Sampras, Roy Emerson and Rod Laver) and they all lost at least one Australian Open final as well. Federer is yet to lose an Australian Open final.

3. Federer is having a lousy year (by Roger Federer standards).
Federer has already lost nine games in 2007, the combined total of his losses for 2005 and 2006. His win rate for this season is currently 88.3% compared to a winning rate of 94.8% and 95.3% in the previous two years - the build up years before he went on to win the Australian Open the following January.

4. Federer is having a lousy year on hard courts (by Roger Federer standards).
Federer's record on hard courts this year has also been well below his form in his two previous years. Federer won 97.6% and 95.9% of his games on hard courts in 2005 and 2006 respectively. This year he has won just 90.9%. Federer has won just six of the eleven competitions he has played on hard courts this year, just 55% of them. In 2006 he won 82% of competitions on hard courts, and he won 89% in 2005.

5. Federer is due a tougher ride to the trophy.
In the two previous Australian Opens that he won, Federer never faced anyone ranked above fifth in the ATP World Rankings at the time of playing. In theory his 'toughest' game was against the then fifth seeded Nikolay Davydenko in the quarter finals on the 2006 tournament. Federer's opponents in the two finals were the 54th ranked Marcos Baghdatis in 2006 and the 9th ranked Fernando Gonzalez in 2007.

6. Federer has had some recent hard court misery.
Federer has lost on a hard court as recently as last month in the ATP Masters Series in Paris, to David Nalbandian in straight sets, then ranked 21st in the ATP rankings. He lost again to Nalbandian on a hard court in October when Nalbandian was ranked 25th. He also lost to Novak Djokovic, ranked 4th, in the final of the ATP Masters Series in Montreal in August on a hard court.

7. It's about time Federer met Nadal in Australia.
Rafael Nadal is the only player to have beaten Federer in a Grand Slam final, beating him in the last two French Open finals, a title Federer is yet to win. Federer is yet to face Nadal in the final of an Australian Open.

Source: The Betfair Contrarian, Nov. 23

 

[Turning Pro]

Everyone forgot about Djokovic.

 

[budkid]

Great! Go Joker!

 

[Deleted member 13755]

OP should get the "Official-and-only-person-who-can-post-match-results-before-they-even-happen-without-getting-flamed" award.

 

[Photoshop]

I hate threads/articles like this one where people go against the heavy favorite, so when they're wrong it's nothing out of place, when they're right they claim to be the next prophet.