Someone explain "tennis talent" to me

deltox said:
hmm, i think petes first serve might have been just as deadly, although i wont argue your other points.
Click to expand...

I love Pete but No one could touch Gorans 1st Serve. Goran is one of the primes reasons the game has been slowed. Watching his service games were a joke at times.
 
btw, Roger is in the semifinal.
Not bad for somebody without any talent. He must be sooo lucky!

Why don't you watch 20-25 years of tennis before opening another thread like this.
 
Last edited:
Azzurri said:
hey jackie-arse...why don't you save your comments about match results. MOST people are at work and can't watch the matches until early evening and what does Fed's result have to do with anything at this point? The guy has made 3 finals in a row so a SF is NOTHING. Man, you are one big idiot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

The OP stated in of his posts that Monfiels would kill Fed today
 
I apologize I didn't realize that.
but please keep your nasty words for somebody in your family, not for me.
I never offended anybody in this forum.
I made a mistake by posting here and I apologize again, I didn't realize I could have spoiled the results.
but there is plenty of threads talking about the results (outside the Match Results forum).
but you got nasty at me. :(
you have to watch your words.
 
Last edited:
Azzurri said:
It would be sad for anyone to actually read this.:|

Thanks to this ridiculous thread, this poster has to take up so much wasted space with this garbage. you don't even realize not a single person that knows you cares what you think. whether you are right or wrong.
Click to expand...

Conquistador?? When has he ever been right?? Did I miss something??
 
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 don't know what to do... beat the living hell out of this nonsense or just laugh???

Leave TINA alone!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please!!!!!!!! She's no good for you.
 
Why am I even wasting my time by trying to read this one..Give me another player who has been consistent he has been then I will talk.. Talk to my Hand. Astala Vista..
 
I'll explain talent to you:

Safin (2 slams) is at least as talented as Federer (13 slams) because:

He smashes rackets and gets pissed a lot.
He doesn't care about tennis, but if he cared...
He is good looking and cool and gets loads of chicks.
He says cool stuff on press conferences.

Santoro (0 slams) is at least as talented as Nadal (6 slams) because:

He does weird strokes.
He does weird jumpings.
He does weird faces.
He is a nice guy.

Hope this helped.
 
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...

So I was watching today's Monfils and Fed match and ummmm Fed won in straight sets?
 
Dilettante said:
I'll explain talent to you:

Safin (2 slams) is at least as talented as Federer (13 slams) because:

He smashes rackets and gets pissed a lot.
He doesn't care about tennis, but if he cared...
He is good looking and cool and gets loads of chicks.
He says cool stuff on press conferences.

Santoro (0 slams) is at least as talented as Nadal (6 slams) because:

He does weird strokes.
He does weird jumpings.
He does weird faces.
He is a nice guy.

Hope this helped.
Click to expand...

you forgot :

Nadal is extremely talented because:

Is fist pumps are not arrogant like tsonga's and fake like Ivanovic's
he can say whatever he wants in after major losses in FO because he is humble
he owns a tenager crying girl who won 13 slams
he lines up bottles like no one

ps: if you are having a dump at Safin and Santi you better have you knickers in place...
 
TennisFan481 said:
Best slice...what does that mean, anyway? Every player on tour can hit a slice. When Federer hits a slice, players just step right around it and pummel it. He hits the slice a lot because he has the worst backhand on tour. Every two hander in the game has a better backhand, as does every one hander. I don't even see how people can not notice this.

His volleying/net game has always been suspect because he drops his wrist. Even McEnroe has stated this. Federer himself said in 2005 that if he could add one element to his game, it would be "Henman's net game," all-the-while knowing how horrendous his backhand is. He blows too many floaters and smashes and has never been natural at the serve-and-volley.

Yes, he has a very good serve and a very good forehand, but I don't see how a big serve and forehand player with great movement is "the most talented player ever." It doesn't add up. Most players build their game around the serve and forehand, and many of them can move pretty well, too. His forehand doesn't kick up half as high as Nadal's, yet he doesn't have the hard, devastating flat forehand that the likes of Verdasco, Soderling, Sam Querry, Berdych, Gonzalez, and even, at times, Monfils have. And need I repeat how many unforced errors he makes off that wing?


Now, for the all important "Why has he dominated, then?" question. Simple.

*Lack of competition. An old, beat up Agassi was able to hang with Federer in his prime.

*Enormous mental edge he has over players with bloviating pundits massaging his figurative genitalia ad nauseum.

You can literally see these players cowering in fear when they get up on him. Look at Haas today...if he had even mediocre composure he would've won in straight sets.

And he just so happens to lose regularly to Nadal, Murray, and Djokovic. Wow...we just have 4 of the 10 or so greatest players of ALL-TIME playing in this era now. Yep, that must be it. Federer didn't get 9 of his slams in a super-weak era or anything...
Click to expand...



Your sir, wouldnt know the difference between a forehand and a backhand if you got hit in the face by one. Totally, utterly PATHETIC....seriously...what are you smoking?
 
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...

wow this is some serious trolling talent kudos
 
gflyer said:
I apologize I didn't realize that.
but please keep your nasty words for somebody in your family, not for me.
I never offended anybody in this forum.
I made a mistake by posting here and I apologize again, I didn't realize I could have spoiled the results.
but there is plenty of threads talking about the results (outside the Match Results forum).
but you got nasty at me. :(
you have to watch your words.
Click to expand...

you ruined the match for me.
 
lol i bet this kid is better than all of us at the game

but anyway i see his point of a serious mental edge. fed is the first player that i have seen to have already beaten the player before he even plays them.

case in point blake vs. fed at indian wells. fed already beat him during the warmup. i could see it on blakes face
 
ormynameisntbill said:
lol i bet this kid is better than all of us at the game

but anyway i see his point of a serious mental edge. fed is the first player that i have seen to have already beaten the player before he even plays them.

case in point blake vs. fed at indian wells. fed already beat him during the warmup. i could see it on blakes face
Click to expand...

Fed beats them because he's the best.
 
Azzurri said:
you ruined the match for me.
Click to expand...
I already apologized, and I am sorry for that, honestly.
I genuinely thought that everybody knew about the score. There were posts and threads everywhere on the forum.
but your reaction was WAY beyond acceptable.
I guess i deserve an apology as well.
 
gflyer said:
I already apologized, and I am sorry for that, honestly.
I genuinely thought that everybody knew about the score. There were posts and threads everywhere on the forum.
but your reaction was WAY beyond acceptable.
I guess i deserve an apology as well.
Click to expand...
why the hell would any sane human come on tt if they didnt want to know the score/result in a match? stay off tt ffs.....
:shock:
 
gflyer said:
I already apologized, and I am sorry for that, honestly.
I genuinely thought that everybody knew about the score. There were posts and threads everywhere on the forum.
but your reaction was WAY beyond acceptable.
I guess i deserve an apology as well.
Click to expand...

the problem is you did not "think". you do realize the match is in another time zone (for us in the States) and most people work during the day. I never discuss match results until well after or if it has been brought up and well discussed.
 
<3tennis!!! said:
why the hell would any sane human come on tt if they didnt want to know the score/result in a match? stay off tt ffs.....
:shock:
Click to expand...

you are obviously a newbie clueless poster. THIS section is NOT for match results and what did the result have anything to do with the discussion...NOTHING. He knows, after the fact, he screwed up. You obviously still don't get it..no surprise.:roll:
 
Dilettante said:
I'll explain talent to you:

Safin (2 slams) is at least as talented as Federer (13 slams) because:

He smashes rackets and gets pissed a lot.
He doesn't care about tennis, but if he cared...
He is good looking and cool and gets loads of chicks.
He says cool stuff on press conferences.
Santoro (0 slams) is at least as talented as Nadal (6 slams) because:

He does weird strokes.
He does weird jumpings.
He does weird faces.
He is a nice guy.

Hope this helped.
Click to expand...

Biggest load of BS i've heared about Safin.
 
Azzurri said:
the problem is you did not "think". you do realize the match is in another time zone (for us in the States) and most people work during the day. I never discuss match results until well after or if it has been brought up and well discussed.
Click to expand...

And you do not think before using words against people you do not even know. Which is way worse.
And you not even have guts to apologize.
And as I already told you many times, if you just opened the main page of the board there were tons of threads outside the Match Results.
But for some reasons you decided that I was your "victim".
And after all i would never call anybody and idiot just because he/she spoiled the results of a tennis match. But that's me. I guess we are different...thank God.
Most likely you have other reasons to be so angry with everybody. I don't. Sorry for you.
 
Azzurri said:
you ruined the match for me.
Click to expand...
Come on. After almost 4500 posts you haven't figured out that especially during a grand slam, you run a big risk coming on to TT when you don't want to see a score of a match? There are a lot of people that don't understand the different sections. I wouldn't be surprised if most people sign on and just hit "new posts" and not go into different forum sections. Then, when the get into a thread don't pay attention to what section it is.
 
gflyer said:
And you do not think before using words against people you do not even know. Which is way worse.
And you not even have guts to apologize.
And as I already told you many times, if you just opened the main page of the board there were tons of threads outside the Match Results.
But for some reasons you decided that I was your "victim".
And after all i would never call anybody and idiot just because he/she spoiled the results of a tennis match. But that's me. I guess we are different...thank God.
Most likely you have other reasons to be so angry with everybody. I don't. Sorry for you.
Click to expand...

sorry, but again you just don't get it. his MATCH RESULT had nothing to do with the discussion. I stay away from certain threads or areas because I realize sometimes people have big mouths. in this case, you are the big mouth.
 
woodrow1029 said:
Come on. After almost 4500 posts you haven't figured out that especially during a grand slam, you run a big risk coming on to TT when you don't want to see a score of a match? There are a lot of people that don't understand the different sections. I wouldn't be surprised if most people sign on and just hit "new posts" and not go into different forum sections. Then, when the get into a thread don't pay attention to what section it is.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. please see my post above. that is exactly why I stay away from many of the other threads. THIS thread should not have had discussion about Fed's result against Monfils. It had NO POINT and NO BUSINESS being discussed. That is like me being in the shoe section and everyone is talking about a shoe fit and I chime in with "hey, I love the Vapor 6, especially now that Fed just beat Monfils". It has no place. GFlyer is clueless and he has shown this type of ignorance in the past. I don't dislike him as a poster, but he tends to not "understand" what is going on. Again, I have basically stayed away from the boards and many threads..check my posts and you will see.
 
The OP did accomplished something... I have never seen (and enjoyed) so many "FAIL" pictures in a single thread. Those were hilarious. Thank you!
 
Conquistador said:
Federer is the greatest of all time. His mental ability and how he plays with class wins him over with the crowd. His strokes are like works of art if you think about it. Every stroke is classy and perfect. Federer is close to being a perfect human being as anyone that Ive seen. You look at how he plays the game. He plays tennis beautifully. Even in his hard shots--they all look like they are being done by a robot. This is why Federer hails as the best of all time. Federer's game has no flaws. The strokes are what modern tennis instruction is all about. Nobdody can dublicate what federer has done. His grace and his sense of urgency also make him great. Talent is the ability to create shots. Federer has that ability. Federer creates shots and creates them beautifully. Nadal and a host of others look like barbarians whenever they make tennis strokes. Look at Federer--he has the pefect pace and the perfect follow through. Everything about this guy spells perfect. Also Federer has the ability to serve the ball at a very effective rate. His winners are almost never contended. You look at his aces and wonder how he generated soo much speed on the ball. People dont give credit to federer for the amount of time he has spent on his strokes, pefecting them and making them into works of art. There are a lot of naysayers, but federer has titles to show for. Tennis talent is federer. Like it or not federer controls the game-he dictates the pace of play and also counters any attack that an opponent has for him. You see-federer is the guy that dictates the match with his strokes--if he wants to play defensively he will--he will also open up offensively as well as he makes players stretch vertically and horizontally. The placement of shots that federer has is unreal. He is the only player that you can say of all time that has the ability to wear out the chalk line. the amount of winners that he has on the line is unheard of. Federer's ability to move along the baseline shows that he has great defensive tactics. You watch him move and you notice that he is always in position for every counteratttack. What makes Federer great is his ability to play into any style that an oppponent features. You watch how some players sit and hit from the baseline, federer has the ability to sit there as well and to play the opponents game. Most fans dont give federer this credit that he deserves. You see federer can play any game that you throw at him. He is the best tennis player to adjust to an opponents game. Federers glory is his tennis talent. Federers ability to create and disguise his game make are an attribute to his winning ways. That is tennis talent
Click to expand...

Sorry Nadal troll, but our Federer troll beats you.
 
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...


Didn't read. You are an idiot. Seriously, stop posting while you are still behind.


I bet you don't even play tennis.
 
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...

Ok obviously you dont know JACK. Have you seen roger play at his prime. His backhand isnt the worst its just hard to hit a high ball with a 1handed backhand so you dont know anything and stopped reading your pathetic comment after a good slice. You really dont know what your talking about so keep your middle school mouth shut. Heres some linnks to show you how crappy federer's backhand is.http://www.youtube.com/user/charliewuu
 
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...

You just won the award for the stupidest thread/post I have ever seen on these board. Congrats..
 
Dgpsx7 said:
You just won the award for the stupidest thread/post I have ever seen on these board. Congrats..
Click to expand...

No way... our Fed troll Conquistador is still edging out I think. At least Conquistador has more threads started under his belt. :D
 
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...

This whole post is a joke. Arent you the one who predicted Monfeels would crush Federer. :oops:
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=3502652#post3502652

TennisFan481 said:
Of course, Federer has no chance whatsoever of beating Monfils, so it's irrelevant.
Click to expand...

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=3504709

TennisFan481 said:
Of course, Federer has no chance of beating Monfils, who is also way more talented, so it's irrelevant.
Click to expand...

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=3505375#post3505375

TennisFan481 said:
Federer can't win the FO. He won't even take a set of Monfils. He's not a top 10 player anymore.
Click to expand...

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=3506276#post3506276

TennisFan481 said:
The Federer lovefest is out of control. He's going to get steamrolled by Monfils in a few hours
Click to expand...



Roddick never had a better forehand than Federer even at his peak in 2003-2004. Compare the forehand stats in their 7 or so matches those years then get back to me. Nor did he ever have a better backhand. How did Roddick get dominated in the baseline rallies by Federer their whole careers by ever having a better forehand and better backhand, LOL!

Also I am a huge Nadal fan but a pretty equal serve? Do you realize how much you embarass yourself.

Federer hits more winners and fewer errors off the forehand than Verdasco, Soderling, or any of those you mentioned. He might have the best forehand of all time, it is definitely the best in the game today with only Nadal having an argument as well. That is even past his prime too.
 
Last edited:
Andres Guazzelli said:
Tell THAT to Goran Ivanisevic's first serve ;)
There hasn't been a bigger weapon. Ever.
Click to expand...

zagor said:
And there won't be,ever.Who doesn't believe should watch any Goran match from 2001 Wimbledon(especially against Roddick).
Click to expand...

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...

deltox said:
hmm, i think petes first serve might have been just as deadly, although i wont argue your other points.
Click to expand...

pmerk34 said:
His aces were a foot inside the lines.
Click to expand...

pmerk34 said:
I love Pete but No one could touch Gorans 1st Serve. Goran is one of the primes reasons the game has been slowed. Watching his service games were a joke at times.
Click to expand...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKIUYkop5tY

Greatest server ever, right there ;)
 
Leublu tennis said:
Just awsome. Loved that hair style. Kafelnikov looks so young at 22. He was in top 10 in both singles and doubles in those years. What a player. One of my favorite of all time. I am just glad I got to see him play.

LT
Click to expand...

There were too many service games like that from a lot of players during that era which is why they had to slow everything down.
 
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