Someone explain "tennis talent" to me

Conquistador said:
Its no wonder why Federer has surpassed the classless Sampras. Federer has won the world over with his class and humble nature. Sampras was a bigot, a self centered person who would purposfully make fun of opponents. Sampras went as far as to putting his hand by his ear as if saying "I can't hear you" to the crowd. Look at Federer. He is a man's man. Federer has traveled the seas, has crossed continents and has beaten the world over. Now embarking on the most grand slam titles ever, it is apparent that Roger Federer is the symbol of excellence in the world of tennis. Federer has honored past champions such as laver, tilden, etc, and has always played a traditional gain. Federer has played the game the way its supposed to be played. Pete Sampras was very arrogant and wanted to take take and take from the game. Whether it be riches or the spotlight--that was for Sampras's personal game. Look at Federer, he shys from the spotlight until it is put forth for him to deliver. Federer is a champions champion, a noble player who honors the tradition of the game unlike most players today. Roger Federer gives more back to children and charities--and is a global leader in world issues such as war, poverty, and famine. Remember that Federer is a godly man above all. Federer plays this game and lives his life like God wants him to. Above all Federer has already won in the game of life. Looking at today's youth, they should be honored by players that are humble like Federer and Nadal. Those two guys are the epitime of excellence and humble nature. Tennis talent is not only personal skill, but it is the way you handle yourself out there. Federer has done this. To me this is what it is all about--How you make a difference in the world through tennis. Roger has done this. Roger is the best example of "Its not whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game". Lets just say Roger has both.
Click to expand...

roger_federer3.jpg


This is a funny thread, in so many ways.
 
TennisFan481 said:
How many times did Federer break Nadal over 5 sets last year at Wimbledon?

Why wasn't he able to even touch Haas' serve today until he completely self-imploded?
Click to expand...

Just go away. Seriously, just ****ing leave. Register a new name and only post half-assed sarcastic replies for the rest of your life. Edit your original post and replace it with a cool picture of a sailboat. Thanks.
 
TennisFan481 said:
In particular, how it pertains to Roger Federer. I don't understand how a player who has quite possibly the worst backhand in all of tennis can be considered "the most talented player ever." Huh?

People talk about how he has "so many weapons"...what weapons are these? He has a forehand...and that's about it. Occasionally he'll hit a drop shot and a low slice (so can just about everyone else). His serve is solid and he can win cheap points off it, but it's inconsistent from match-to-match.

In every component of the game, there are numerous players better than him.

Basically, his game breaks down like this:

Serve: Very solid, but not nearly as tough as Ivo Karlovic's. Top 10, maybe.

Forehand: Excellent, but vastly overrated nonetheless. He hits a lot of winners, he also hits a lot of errors. Fernando Verdasco has a way bigger forehand. So does Robin Soderling. Federer MIGHT make the Top 10 in this attribute, but even that's pushing it.

Backhand: As bad as it gets. Not only the worst in tennis today, but quite possibly the worst in the history of professional tennis. Most club level players have a better backhand.

Volley: Federer once said that this was the weakest area of his game. Don't know what he was smoking in that it's nowhere near as bad as his backhand, but Edberg/Henman/Rafter/Sampras he is not. He's merely above average in this area.

Return of serve: Good on the forehand side and absolutely abysmal from the backhand side. He's probably the worst in tennis at backhand returns.

Movement: Exceptional, but he's not as good in this area as Nadal or Monfils.


So again, how does he still manage to be considered "the most talented player ever?" How do you make up for having such a horrendous backhand?

Maybe if he served like Sampras, volleyed like Edberg, had Verdasco's forehand, Nadal's movement, and Agassi's return of serve, it would make up for having such an atrocious backhand. But he doesn't come close.

I've seen so many people talking about how much more talented Federer is and has always been that Andy Roddick, but why? Roddick has a much bigger serve, he used to have a bigger forehand, and he has actually had a better backhand (though weak, it's not as horrible as Federer's). Federer moves much better and volleys better, but that's about it. For me, it's a toss-up. Andy has gotten deep in many tournaments and ultimately lost to Federer in large part because he has folded mentally. That's where Federer beats people the most, not with his actual "talent."

And people say he's more talented than NADAL? Are you kidding? Why, because he hits more winners? Is that all "tennis talent" is about?

Nadal has an equally effective forehand (even if he doesn't hit as many winners with it), a way better backhand, even better movement, a pretty equal serve, equal volleys, and a much better return of serve. Maybe Nadal beats Federer most of the time because he's the better player...you think?

Federer's an overachiever if I've ever seen one. What he has done with a fairly limited game for a top 5 player (considering the glaring backhand weakness) is quite remarkable.
Click to expand...

Are you aware that Tennis Magazine rated Federer's "excellent" forehand as the greatest in history? Yet it can't crack your top 10 of current players.
 
pmerk34 said:
I think the poster was trying to be funny. Because as you know most club players (that's us btw) have better backhands than Fed.
Click to expand...

Yeh, i can never tell with these trolls or frolls (failing trolls)

But i do think that federer's backhand is awesome for a one hander (i am not saying one handers are bad, i have one myself) as most pros try to exploit it as a weakness.

Forgive my poor structuring. :)
 
Conquistador said:
Its no wonder why Federer has surpassed the classless Sampras. Federer has won the world over with his class and humble nature. Sampras was a bigot, a self centered person who would purposfully make fun of opponents. Sampras went as far as to putting his hand by his ear as if saying "I can't hear you" to the crowd. Look at Federer. He is a man's man. Federer has traveled the seas, has crossed continents and has beaten the world over. Now embarking on the most grand slam titles ever, it is apparent that Roger Federer is the symbol of excellence in the world of tennis. Federer has honored past champions such as laver, tilden, etc, and has always played a traditional gain. Federer has played the game the way its supposed to be played. Pete Sampras was very arrogant and wanted to take take and take from the game. Whether it be riches or the spotlight--that was for Sampras's personal game. Look at Federer, he shys from the spotlight until it is put forth for him to deliver. Federer is a champions champion, a noble player who honors the tradition of the game unlike most players today. Roger Federer gives more back to children and charities--and is a global leader in world issues such as war, poverty, and famine. Remember that Federer is a godly man above all. Federer plays this game and lives his life like God wants him to. Above all Federer has already won in the game of life. Looking at today's youth, they should be honored by players that are humble like Federer and Nadal. Those two guys are the epitime of excellence and humble nature. Tennis talent is not only personal skill, but it is the way you handle yourself out there. Federer has done this. To me this is what it is all about--How you make a difference in the world through tennis. Roger has done this. Roger is the best example of "Its not whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game". Lets just say Roger has both.
Click to expand...

i did not read this.:roll:
 
Conquistador said:
Its no wonder why Federer has surpassed the classless Sampras. Federer has won the world over with his class and humble nature. Sampras was a bigot, a self centered person who would purposfully make fun of opponents. Sampras went as far as to putting his hand by his ear as if saying "I can't hear you" to the crowd. Look at Federer. He is a man's man. Federer has traveled the seas, has crossed continents and has beaten the world over. Now embarking on the most grand slam titles ever, it is apparent that Roger Federer is the symbol of excellence in the world of tennis. Federer has honored past champions such as laver, tilden, etc, and has always played a traditional gain. Federer has played the game the way its supposed to be played. Pete Sampras was very arrogant and wanted to take take and take from the game. Whether it be riches or the spotlight--that was for Sampras's personal game. Look at Federer, he shys from the spotlight until it is put forth for him to deliver. Federer is a champions champion, a noble player who honors the tradition of the game unlike most players today. Roger Federer gives more back to children and charities--and is a global leader in world issues such as war, poverty, and famine. Remember that Federer is a godly man above all. Federer plays this game and lives his life like God wants him to. Above all Federer has already won in the game of life. Looking at today's youth, they should be honored by players that are humble like Federer and Nadal. Those two guys are the epitime of excellence and humble nature. Tennis talent is not only personal skill, but it is the way you handle yourself out there. Federer has done this. To me this is what it is all about--How you make a difference in the world through tennis. Roger has done this. Roger is the best example of "Its not whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game". Lets just say Roger has both.
Click to expand...

LOL! You gotta be kidding me,nobody's this crazy.I think this guy is jerking us around.
 
Cody said:
Yeh, i can never tell with these trolls or frolls (failing trolls)

But i do think that federer's backhand is awesome for a one hander (i am not saying one handers are bad, i have one myself) as most pros try to exploit it as a weakness.

Forgive my poor structuring. :)
Click to expand...

What you fail to realize is that your backhand is clearly better than Federer's
 
TennisFan481 said:
How many times did Federer break Nadal over 5 sets last year at Wimbledon?

Why wasn't he able to even touch Haas' serve today until he completely self-imploded?
Click to expand...

So tell me. Why does Federer have 13 GS titles? And also have you seen his backhand passing shots?

His forehand is overrated? YEA RIGHT! It is the greatest shot of all time. He can hit the most impossible shots with it. Something tells me you only began watching tennis less than a year ago.
 
Cody said:
As i think about it now, i am pretty sure my backhand is superior to federer's on just about every level.
Click to expand...

Haha to the noob OP Federer could hit service winners with his backhand off every single serve you hit. Ive seen him practice with another pro from Switzerland. He just hit down the line backhand winners and cross court backhand winners in order off of the guy's serve.
 
volleynets said:
Haha to the noob OP Federer could hit service winners with his backhand off every single serve you hit. Ive seen him practice with another pro from Switzerland. He just hit down the line backhand winners and cross court backhand winners in order off of the guy's serve.
Click to expand...

Yeh his backhand is awesome
 
Last edited:
TennisFan481 said:
Um, Roddick can hit serves 140+ miles per hour. How is THAT not TALENT?

Mardy Fish doesn't serve as hard and is just as bad at the net as Roddick.

For some reason, tennis fans have something against power. They don't acknowledge it as a talent...only "beauty and elegance" are "talent" in tennis. It's ridiculous.

"Oh look at Roger, he's so pretty. I love how he looks like a ballet dancer and doesn't move his head until after he's hit the ball, then exaggerates it...while it drops in the middle of the court and is pummeled by his much stronger opponent."

The reality is, Federer has very ordinary power in the men's game. He's a finesse player with a well placed serve and he goes for a lot with the placement of his forehand.
Click to expand...

man u r stupid. mardy fish is 1 of da few s & v left on tour. talent is the ability to hit a vast array of shots smoothly and make it look ez like many others said. in this era of heavy topspin ball bashers, fed is sort of a throwback 2 a much older era. his racket, his grips, his fashion lol, r reminiscent of the days of wood. roger has proven that sheer beauty and elegance can overcome raw power.
 
TennisFan481 said:
In particular, how it pertains to Roger Federer. I don't understand how a player who has quite possibly the worst backhand in all of tennis can be considered "the most talented player ever." Huh?

People talk about how he has "so many weapons"...what weapons are these? He has a forehand...and that's about it. Occasionally he'll hit a drop shot and a low slice (so can just about everyone else). His serve is solid and he can win cheap points off it, but it's inconsistent from match-to-match.

In every component of the game, there are numerous players better than him.

Basically, his game breaks down like this:

Serve: Very solid, but not nearly as tough as Ivo Karlovic's. Top 10, maybe.

Forehand: Excellent, but vastly overrated nonetheless. He hits a lot of winners, he also hits a lot of errors. Fernando Verdasco has a way bigger forehand. So does Robin Soderling. Federer MIGHT make the Top 10 in this attribute, but even that's pushing it.

Backhand: As bad as it gets. Not only the worst in tennis today, but quite possibly the worst in the history of professional tennis. Most club level players have a better backhand.

Volley: Federer once said that this was the weakest area of his game. Don't know what he was smoking in that it's nowhere near as bad as his backhand, but Edberg/Henman/Rafter/Sampras he is not. He's merely above average in this area.

Return of serve: Good on the forehand side and absolutely abysmal from the backhand side. He's probably the worst in tennis at backhand returns.

Movement: Exceptional, but he's not as good in this area as Nadal or Monfils.


So again, how does he still manage to be considered "the most talented player ever?" How do you make up for having such a horrendous backhand?

Maybe if he served like Sampras, volleyed like Edberg, had Verdasco's forehand, Nadal's movement, and Agassi's return of serve, it would make up for having such an atrocious backhand. But he doesn't come close.

I've seen so many people talking about how much more talented Federer is and has always been that Andy Roddick, but why? Roddick has a much bigger serve, he used to have a bigger forehand, and he has actually had a better backhand (though weak, it's not as horrible as Federer's). Federer moves much better and volleys better, but that's about it. For me, it's a toss-up. Andy has gotten deep in many tournaments and ultimately lost to Federer in large part because he has folded mentally. That's where Federer beats people the most, not with his actual "talent."

And people say he's more talented than NADAL? Are you kidding? Why, because he hits more winners? Is that all "tennis talent" is about?

Nadal has an equally effective forehand (even if he doesn't hit as many winners with it), a way better backhand, even better movement, a pretty equal serve, equal volleys, and a much better return of serve. Maybe Nadal beats Federer most of the time because he's the better player...you think?

Federer's an overachiever if I've ever seen one. What he has done with a fairly limited game for a top 5 player (considering the glaring backhand weakness) is quite remarkable.
Click to expand...

LOL. Strong work.
 
Kelcher said:
LOL. Strong work.
Click to expand...

I agree but he has some very strong competition:

Conquistador said:
Its no wonder why Federer has surpassed the classless Sampras. Federer has won the world over with his class and humble nature. Sampras was a bigot, a self centered person who would purposfully make fun of opponents. Sampras went as far as to putting his hand by his ear as if saying "I can't hear you" to the crowd. Look at Federer. He is a man's man. Federer has traveled the seas, has crossed continents and has beaten the world over. Now embarking on the most grand slam titles ever, it is apparent that Roger Federer is the symbol of excellence in the world of tennis. Federer has honored past champions such as laver, tilden, etc, and has always played a traditional gain. Federer has played the game the way its supposed to be played. Pete Sampras was very arrogant and wanted to take take and take from the game. Whether it be riches or the spotlight--that was for Sampras's personal game. Look at Federer, he shys from the spotlight until it is put forth for him to deliver. Federer is a champions champion, a noble player who honors the tradition of the game unlike most players today. Roger Federer gives more back to children and charities--and is a global leader in world issues such as war, poverty, and famine. Remember that Federer is a godly man above all. Federer plays this game and lives his life like God wants him to. Above all Federer has already won in the game of life. Looking at today's youth, they should be honored by players that are humble like Federer and Nadal. Those two guys are the epitime of excellence and humble nature. Tennis talent is not only personal skill, but it is the way you handle yourself out there. Federer has done this. To me this is what it is all about--How you make a difference in the world through tennis. Roger has done this. Roger is the best example of "Its not whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game". Lets just say Roger has both.
Click to expand...

Good rivalry.
 
I was going to hijack this thread and turn it into a decent thread about trains, but the fact that this thread sucks beyond imagination just kind of kills it - this thread can't be saved. The OP should go hide in a closet and rethink his life.
 
Federer's forehand the greatest ever?

Let me put it this way. He goes for a lot with his forehand. He hits a lot of winners. He also hits a lot of errors.

Don't the two kind of balance out?

Nadal doesn't hit as many winners as Federer, but he still hits his fair share. AND...he doesn't make nearly as many errors. Not to mention, he creates TONS of FORCED errors with that shot.

Nadal's forehand > Federer's...same era, yet Federer's is the "best ever?" Please.

The Federer lovefest is out of control. He's going to get steamrolled by Monfils in a few hours despite being "the most talented player ever" and having "the greatest forehand ever, which is the greatest weapon in tennis history."
 
TennisFan481 said:
Federer's forehand the greatest ever?

Let me put it this way. He goes for a lot with his forehand. He hits a lot of winners. He also hits a lot of errors.

Don't the two kind of balance out?

Nadal doesn't hit as many winners as Federer, but he still hits his fair share. AND...he doesn't make nearly as many errors. Not to mention, he creates TONS of FORCED errors with that shot.

Nadal's forehand > Federer's...same era, yet Federer's is the "best ever?" Please.
Click to expand...

Are you new to the game..?
 
TennisFan481 said:
Federer's forehand the greatest ever?

Let me put it this way. He goes for a lot with his forehand. He hits a lot of winners. He also hits a lot of errors.

Don't the two kind of balance out?

Nadal doesn't hit as many winners as Federer, but he still hits his fair share. AND...he doesn't make nearly as many errors. Not to mention, he creates TONS of FORCED errors with that shot.

Nadal's forehand > Federer's...same era, yet Federer's is the "best ever?" Please.

The Federer lovefest is out of control. He's going to get steamrolled by Monfils in a few hours despite being "the most talented player ever" and having "the greatest forehand ever, which is the greatest weapon in tennis history."
Click to expand...

I admire your courage and strength. But no offence, you are an idiot.
 
TennisFan481 said:
Federer's forehand the greatest ever?

Let me put it this way. He goes for a lot with his forehand. He hits a lot of winners. He also hits a lot of errors.

Don't the two kind of balance out?

Nadal doesn't hit as many winners as Federer, but he still hits his fair share. AND...he doesn't make nearly as many errors. Not to mention, he creates TONS of FORCED errors with that shot.

Nadal's forehand > Federer's...same era, yet Federer's is the "best ever?" Please.

The Federer lovefest is out of control. He's going to get steamrolled by Monfils in a few hours despite being "the most talented player ever" and having "the greatest forehand ever, which is the greatest weapon in tennis history."
Click to expand...


as mentioned before, youre making this judgment based on his performances over the last 1.5 years. yes he is more error prone now but in his prime he hardly made many errors on his forehand. hav u ever seen any of his matches between 04-07? clearly you havent
 
Last edited:
TennisFan481 said:
Federer's forehand the greatest ever?

Let me put it this way. He goes for a lot with his forehand. He hits a lot of winners. He also hits a lot of errors.

Don't the two kind of balance out?

Nadal doesn't hit as many winners as Federer, but he still hits his fair share. AND...he doesn't make nearly as many errors. Not to mention, he creates TONS of FORCED errors with that shot.

Nadal's forehand > Federer's...same era, yet Federer's is the "best ever?" Please.

The Federer lovefest is out of control. He's going to get steamrolled by Monfils in a few hours despite being "the most talented player ever" and having "the greatest forehand ever, which is the greatest weapon in tennis history."
Click to expand...

Just admit you've never played nor watched tennis during 04-07. And, I think you're edging out on Conquistador atm... damn. I want Conquistador to win. You might wanna start more threads btw. Otherwise there won't be enough of a rivalry. Conquistador has quite a bunch right now.
 
volleynets said:
So tell me. Why does Federer have 13 GS titles? And also have you seen his backhand passing shots?

His forehand is overrated? YEA RIGHT! It is the greatest shot of all time. He can hit the most impossible shots with it. Something tells me you only began watching tennis less than a year ago.
Click to expand...

Federer's horrible at passing shots. He consistently attempts them and his opponent usually gets the racket out and front and volleys it right on back.

Now PETE SAMPRAS had passing shots. It's amazing how much better BOTH his strokes were than Federer's.
 
TennisFan481 said:
In particular, how it pertains to Roger Federer. I don't understand how a player who has quite possibly the worst backhand in all of tennis can be considered "the most talented player ever." Huh?

People talk about how he has "so many weapons"...what weapons are these? He has a forehand...and that's about it. Occasionally he'll hit a drop shot and a low slice (so can just about everyone else). His serve is solid and he can win cheap points off it, but it's inconsistent from match-to-match.

In every component of the game, there are numerous players better than him.

Basically, his game breaks down like this:

Serve: Very solid, but not nearly as tough as Ivo Karlovic's. Top 10, maybe.

Forehand: Excellent, but vastly overrated nonetheless. He hits a lot of winners, he also hits a lot of errors. Fernando Verdasco has a way bigger forehand. So does Robin Soderling. Federer MIGHT make the Top 10 in this attribute, but even that's pushing it.

Backhand: As bad as it gets. Not only the worst in tennis today, but quite possibly the worst in the history of professional tennis. Most club level players have a better backhand.

Volley: Federer once said that this was the weakest area of his game. Don't know what he was smoking in that it's nowhere near as bad as his backhand, but Edberg/Henman/Rafter/Sampras he is not. He's merely above average in this area.

Return of serve: Good on the forehand side and absolutely abysmal from the backhand side. He's probably the worst in tennis at backhand returns.

Movement: Exceptional, but he's not as good in this area as Nadal or Monfils.


So again, how does he still manage to be considered "the most talented player ever?" How do you make up for having such a horrendous backhand?

Maybe if he served like Sampras, volleyed like Edberg, had Verdasco's forehand, Nadal's movement, and Agassi's return of serve, it would make up for having such an atrocious backhand. But he doesn't come close.

I've seen so many people talking about how much more talented Federer is and has always been that Andy Roddick, but why? Roddick has a much bigger serve, he used to have a bigger forehand, and he has actually had a better backhand (though weak, it's not as horrible as Federer's). Federer moves much better and volleys better, but that's about it. For me, it's a toss-up. Andy has gotten deep in many tournaments and ultimately lost to Federer in large part because he has folded mentally. That's where Federer beats people the most, not with his actual "talent."

And people say he's more talented than NADAL? Are you kidding? Why, because he hits more winners? Is that all "tennis talent" is about?

Nadal has an equally effective forehand (even if he doesn't hit as many winners with it), a way better backhand, even better movement, a pretty equal serve, equal volleys, and a much better return of serve. Maybe Nadal beats Federer most of the time because he's the better player...you think?

Federer's an overachiever if I've ever seen one. What he has done with a fairly limited game for a top 5 player (considering the glaring backhand weakness) is quite remarkable.
Click to expand...

OP is trying too hard.
 
Gj011 comes back !!! tennisfan481 must be him :)

or at least he is not aware of it but gj011 capture his spirit and he is now storenger than ever :)
 
TennisFan481 said:
Federer's horrible at passing shots. He consistently attempts them and his opponent usually gets the racket out and front and volleys it right on back.

Now PETE SAMPRAS had passing shots. It's amazing how much better BOTH his strokes were than Federer's.
Click to expand...

ok ok PHail. Like, epicly.
 
TennisFan481 said:
In particular, how it pertains to Roger Federer. I don't understand how a player who has quite possibly the worst backhand in all of tennis can be considered "the most talented player ever." Huh?

People talk about how he has "so many weapons"...what weapons are these? He has a forehand...and that's about it. Occasionally he'll hit a drop shot and a low slice (so can just about everyone else). His serve is solid and he can win cheap points off it, but it's inconsistent from match-to-match.

In every component of the game, there are numerous players better than him.

Basically, his game breaks down like this:

Serve: Very solid, but not nearly as tough as Ivo Karlovic's. Top 10, maybe.

Forehand: Excellent, but vastly overrated nonetheless. He hits a lot of winners, he also hits a lot of errors. Fernando Verdasco has a way bigger forehand. So does Robin Soderling. Federer MIGHT make the Top 10 in this attribute, but even that's pushing it.

Backhand: As bad as it gets. Not only the worst in tennis today, but quite possibly the worst in the history of professional tennis. Most club level players have a better backhand.

Volley: Federer once said that this was the weakest area of his game. Don't know what he was smoking in that it's nowhere near as bad as his backhand, but Edberg/Henman/Rafter/Sampras he is not. He's merely above average in this area.

Return of serve: Good on the forehand side and absolutely abysmal from the backhand side. He's probably the worst in tennis at backhand returns.

Movement: Exceptional, but he's not as good in this area as Nadal or Monfils.


So again, how does he still manage to be considered "the most talented player ever?" How do you make up for having such a horrendous backhand?

Maybe if he served like Sampras, volleyed like Edberg, had Verdasco's forehand, Nadal's movement, and Agassi's return of serve, it would make up for having such an atrocious backhand. But he doesn't come close.

I've seen so many people talking about how much more talented Federer is and has always been that Andy Roddick, but why? Roddick has a much bigger serve, he used to have a bigger forehand, and he has actually had a better backhand (though weak, it's not as horrible as Federer's). Federer moves much better and volleys better, but that's about it. For me, it's a toss-up. Andy has gotten deep in many tournaments and ultimately lost to Federer in large part because he has folded mentally. That's where Federer beats people the most, not with his actual "talent."

And people say he's more talented than NADAL? Are you kidding? Why, because he hits more winners? Is that all "tennis talent" is about?

Nadal has an equally effective forehand (even if he doesn't hit as many winners with it), a way better backhand, even better movement, a pretty equal serve, equal volleys, and a much better return of serve. Maybe Nadal beats Federer most of the time because he's the better player...you think?

Federer's an overachiever if I've ever seen one. What he has done with a fairly limited game for a top 5 player (considering the glaring backhand weakness) is quite remarkable.
Click to expand...

good story brah.

true story brah?
 
im more surprised with some of the posters who are mostly federer fans that found some time to post youtube videos of federers matches to prove a point to this genius
 
oh and my favorite lines are :
"Then how come he has won 13 slams if he is..."
nice,youre really going to make him wonder:-?
 
TennisFan481 said:
Federer's forehand the greatest ever?

Let me put it this way. He goes for a lot with his forehand. He hits a lot of winners. He also hits a lot of errors.

Don't the two kind of balance out?

Nadal doesn't hit as many winners as Federer, but he still hits his fair share. AND...he doesn't make nearly as many errors. Not to mention, he creates TONS of FORCED errors with that shot.

Nadal's forehand > Federer's...same era, yet Federer's is the "best ever?" Please.

The Federer lovefest is out of control. He's going to get steamrolled by Monfils in a few hours despite being "the most talented player ever" and having "the greatest forehand ever, which is the greatest weapon in tennis history."
Click to expand...

nadal forehand is better than federer's? clearly you are a recently banned user under a new account. and still on the i hate fed train rides i see to.
 
It may be argued that Ivo Karlovic's first serve is just as big as a weapon as Goran's, but their careers are not over yet.

Let's put it this way: Goran served over 10,000 aces in his career (and the ace stats only started in 1991)... Has Federer hit 10,000 forehand winners?
Has Federer even hit 4,000?

And that doesn't include the direct points from serves that weren't aces.

Goran's 1st serve was (and is) the most devastating weapon tennis has ever seen.
 
Andres Guazzelli said:
It may be argued that Ivo Karlovic's first serve is just as big as a weapon as Goran's, but their careers are not over yet.

Let's put it this way: Goran served over 10,000 aces in his career (and the ace stats only started in 1991)... Has Federer hit 10,000 forehand winners?
Has Federer even hit 4,000?

And that doesn't include the direct points from serves that weren't aces.

Goran's 1st serve was (and is) the most devastating weapon tennis has ever seen.
Click to expand...

hmm, i think petes first serve might have been just as deadly, although i wont argue your other points.
 
Andres Guazzelli said:
It may be argued that Ivo Karlovic's first serve is just as big as a weapon as Goran's, but their careers are not over yet.

Let's put it this way: Goran served over 10,000 aces in his career (and the ace stats only started in 1991)... Has Federer hit 10,000 forehand winners?
Has Federer even hit 4,000?

And that doesn't include the direct points from serves that weren't aces.

Goran's 1st serve was (and is) the most devastating weapon tennis has ever seen.
Click to expand...

His aces were a foot inside the lines.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
Why is Federer like this on grass? Someone must explain this to me.
Replies
9
Views
2K
cc0509
cc0509
Federer20042006
Active players more talented than Federer
2 3 4
Replies
157
Views
17K
zagor
zagor
B
Greatest Player Ever ... vs. the Greatest Talent
2
Replies
68
Views
12K
LuckyR
LuckyR
K-H
WHAT DOES NATURAL TALENT ACTUALLY MEAN?
2
Replies
53
Views
8K
Deleted member 743561
D
Sysyphus
  • Poll Poll
What if Federer had the talent of Dimitrov?
Replies
28
Views
3K
oble
oble
Back
Top