Tennis 2017

[Enigma_87]

I sort of agree with the fact that he has a lot of wins against poor opposition but years down the line, people won't really look at his opponents, just his Slam count.
You can't deny the fact that Federer barely won anything in the last 5-7 years because he had either in form Rafa or Djoko to deal with and now that Djoko has forgotten how to play, he's winning again. But again, that's not in Federer's control and he's doing what he's got to do. Even Nadal won RG without really having to play any of Djoko, Fed or Murray.
I'll maintain though that this golden season for Rafa and Roger would absolutely not happen if Murray and Djoko hadn't fallen off a cliff this season.

I think that's due to the standard Rafa and Fed set in the past years. Djokovic had amazing 5-6 years. I mean he was pretty much at the top of his game for 6 straight years - that's a lot. You can't expect him to maintain the same level year after year, especially considering his style of play. Bound to wear and tear at some point whilst Rafa is the top dog at clay still and Federer with his unique style preserves his body much more.

In a way Federer/Nadal are victims of their own success.

I really don't rate Murray as being a rival for either Nadal or Federer tho, especially at slams. He's Fed's lap dog when it comes to slam meetings and is 2-7 against Nadal as well.

 

[Raoul]

I think the Federer fans on here are perfectly fine but he's absolutely right about the bunch of glory hunting fans Fed has. It's how United was when we were successful or how Chelsea picked up their fans here in India. You have so many Federer "fans" who have been nowhere and not even bothered watching matches over the last few years but have suddenly magically reappeared this year. I mean these guys won't be arsed watching any ATP titles, any early Slam matches but just turn up when he makes it to the second week and go all "RF for life". He's extreme in his views but Federer does have the biggest bunch of glory hunters just like United.

I'm sure there are a good number of glory hunters among Fed fans. It is after all human nature to like a winner.

 

[K2K]

I'm sure there are a good number of glory hunters among Fed fans. It is after all human nature to like a winner.

Probably glory hunters amongst Nadal and Djokovic fans too.


It's just normal.

 

[Raoul]

Probably glory hunters amongst Nadal and Djokovic fans too.


It's just normal.

There are a few. Mostly I get the impression it's a lot of people who have never played much tennis in their life.

 

[wr8_utd]

I think that's due to the standard Rafa and Fed set in the past years. Djokovic had amazing 5-6 years. I mean he was pretty much at the top of his game for 6 straight years - that's a lot. You can't expect him to maintain the same level year after year, especially considering his style of play. Bound to wear and tear at some point whilst Rafa is the top dog at clay still and Federer with his unique style preserves his body much more.

In a way Federer/Nadal are victims of their own success.

I really don't rate Murray as being a rival for either Nadal or Federer tho, especially at slams. He's Fed's lap dog when it comes to slam meetings and is 2-7 against Nadal as well.

Djoko hasn't even gone off physically anymore. It's mental with him. He even comes out with stuff like "winning isn't really that important anymore and it's all about family" and stuff along those lines. To go from holding all 4 Slams and being unbeatable to suddenly losing to all sorts of randoms takes some doing and that's when you're pretty fit as well.
Murray from last years form would be a huge threat to Rafa/Fed at the Slams and so would Djoko and the fact that there's no real depth beyond these guys is making it easier for these two to come back to the top. I want Nadal winning so from that point of view I'm happy those two are off form but it's making for poor competition right now. The last 2 Slams have been disasters in terms of really competitive matches.

 

[saivet]

I think the Federer fans on here are perfectly fine but he's absolutely right about the bunch of glory hunting fans Fed has. It's how United was when we were successful or how Chelsea picked up their fans here in India. You have so many Federer "fans" who have been nowhere and not even bothered watching matches over the last few years but have suddenly magically reappeared this year. I mean these guys won't be arsed watching any ATP titles, any early Slam matches but just turn up when he makes it to the second week and go all "RF for life". He's extreme in his views but Federer does have the biggest bunch of glory hunters just like United.

I know a fair few of those, but you get those people in every sport. It's just something that comes naturally with winning.

 

[wr8_utd]

Probably glory hunters amongst Nadal and Djokovic fans too.


It's just normal.

While Fed is around, I really don't think you'll get even close to the amount of glory hunters those two have. Maybe after he retires.

 

[saivet]

There are a few. Mostly I get the impression it's a lot of people who have never played much tennis in their life.

Why do you think that?

 

[Raoul]

Why do you think that?

just a noticeable observation.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

An incredibly silly discussion. Success attracts glory hunters, obviously.

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

just a noticeable observation.

Most people who follow tennis don't play the sport regularly. It's quite a strange point to make.

Tennis is an upper or at worst middle-class sport. Not like you can just find some balls and racquets and have a knock-about in some empty car park.

 

[Enigma_87]

Djoko hasn't even gone off physically anymore. It's mental with him. He even comes out with stuff like "winning isn't really that important anymore and it's all about family" and stuff along those lines. To go from holding all 4 Slams and being unbeatable to suddenly losing to all sorts of randoms takes some doing and that's when you're pretty fit as well.
Murray from last years form would be a huge threat to Rafa/Fed at the Slams and so would Djoko and the fact that there's no real depth beyond these guys is making it easier for these two to come back to the top. I want Nadal winning so from that point of view I'm happy those two are off form but it's making for poor competition right now. The last 2 Slams have been disasters in terms of really competitive matches.

Mental is even worse for him as that's his best attribute along with his movement and defence. I don't think he can keep or come back to the same level as 1 year ago in his 30's, unless he drastically changes his game.

For Federer it was an amazing work to revamp his game, change racket, grow mentally and change his approach to matches when he realized he's not a spring chicken anymore.

I mean look at his game now and 10 years ago - completely different yet he again dominates the sport like no other at the "tender" age of 36.

People were blabbering about weak competition yet he's doing the same - much older and way past his physical peak - to Djokovic and Nadal's very same competition.

He outlasted even Nadal despite being 5 years younger and you can't really say it's Nadal having a dreadful season with 1 Slam title, 1 Slam final along with MS title and other titles this year, yet he's 4-0 against him.

If you consider the competition is poor then same goes for Djokovic domination really as he faced the same competition in his most lucrative years.

That's the issue I always had with people claiming Fed had it easy during 04-07 - he's playing at around 60-70% of his peak level yet 34-2 against players much younger than him this year sweeping slams and masters.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Again, that's your assumption and its anyone's guess really. The fact speaks for itself. Federer has a losing H2H record against Nadal and Djokovic, and its no guarantee he would have beaten them in a grand slam final.

The only fact that speaks for itself is that Federer won Wimbledon without dropping a set whereas Djokovic and Nadal weren't good or fit enough to meet/lose to him him in the final.

 

[K2K]

While Fed is around, I really don't think you'll get even close to the amount of glory hunters those two have. Maybe after he retires.

I really thinks it's petty to go around claiming that 'my favourite tennis player has less gloryhunter fans than yours'

I don't see why it's a relevant thing to even worry about.

It's unnecessarily hipster. I prefer Roger but I have never bothered to consider what type of fans support Rafa, Novak or Murray. It's their tennis that is my sole focus.

I really don't get all this bitterness. Nadal probably caused one of the saddest ever moments for me in watching sports in 2008. But ive never felt the need to belittle him or his achievements or opponents.

 

[Gandalf Greyhame]

I think the Federer fans on here are perfectly fine but he's absolutely right about the bunch of glory hunting fans Fed has. It's how United was when we were successful or how Chelsea picked up their fans here in India. You have so many Federer "fans" who have been nowhere and not even bothered watching matches over the last few years but have suddenly magically reappeared this year. I mean these guys won't be arsed watching any ATP titles, any early Slam matches but just turn up when he makes it to the second week and go all "RF for life". He's extreme in his views but Federer does have the biggest bunch of glory hunters just like United.

I probably fit into that category. I only watch the Grand Slams, and that too not all the matches - just Federer's, when I can. Today was the first time I've talked about tennis on this forum. But I've been a Federer fan since very childhood, mostly because my dad used to watch almost all his matches. I don't see how that deprives me of a right to call myself a fan or how it gives you a right to be judgmental about it. It's like that 'true red' nonsense some of you lot spout out.

I think it is always a pleasure to watch Federer play. He makes it look so graceful, it's hard not to like him.

But sure, suit yourself.

 

[Enigma_87]

While Fed is around, I really don't think you'll get even close to the amount of glory hunters those two have. Maybe after he retires.

It really doesn't bothers me about glory hunters or who is supporting who. I loved Sampras game before Federer and he was considered the GOAT at the time. Like Federer his game was quite unique and as a fan of tennis I supported him not only due to his success but also the way he made his game look THAT simple. The beauty of the game IMO is in its simplicity - whilst being damn effective.

If that makes me a glory hunter so be it, I really don't care about labels, but his and Pete's game (along with Edberg before them) is really what I've enjoyed most whilst watching the sport.

 

[wr8_utd]

Most people who follow tennis don't play the sport regularly. It's quite a strange point to make.

Tennis is an upper or at worst middle-class sport. Not like you can just find some balls and racquets and have a knock-about in some empty car park.

Yeah I think the majority of tennis fans wouldn't be playing tennis. I've followed tennis for around 15 years now and I've played 20 mins of tennis in my life I really want to but it's difficult to ever get place to play it.

 

[AndyJ1985]

Don't know why people always have to align themselves with a sports player and then attack other players in order to loyally protect a person they'll never even meet. It's cool to appreciate one of Federer, Nadal, or Djkovic without belittling the other two, or arguing childish nonsense like "so and so has more glory hunters" who the feck even cares about something so trivial? My mum loves Federer because she enjoys taking two weeks off work each year to watch Wimbledon and she's grown to enjoy watching him, and she thinks he's a really nice bloke. Is she a glory hunter? Should she even care that such a thing exists? I mean seriously, grow up and enjoy living in an era that has so many great players, instead of trying to get one over on other people for such trivial shit that most normal people don't even care about.

 

[Jippy]

Unusual having a Brit on both sides in the mixed doubles. One Murray won at least, I guess. Nice to see Hingis again too. Another oldie still going.

 

[wr8_utd]

The Muller fellow was talking about glory hunting fans and I get his point. Not attacking anyone but the types (like a lot of United fans) can be annoying when they suddenly spring up out of nowhere and it happens a lot on social media. I doubt he was attacking anyone on here personally.

 

[MullerUtd]

The only fact that speaks for itself is that Federer won Wimbledon without dropping a set whereas Djokovic and Nadal weren't good or fit enough to meet/lose to him him in the final.

And yet NONE of the opponents were from the Big 4. Djokovic is injured so shame on that and Nadal struggle against big servers on grass so no surprise. Saying they weren't good enough to meet/lose to him is laughable. The fact that Federer pulled out of the French Open to prepare for Wimbledon also shows that he has an extended break of rest and more time to prepare, but it also goes to show he is a coward.

No coincidence that Federer started winning slams again when peak Nadal and Djokovic aren't in the picture. Congrats to Federer the greatest flat-track bully in tennis.

 

[Enigma_87]

Don't know why people always have to align themselves with a sports player and then attack other players in order to loyally protect a person they'll never even meet. It's cool to appreciate one of Federer, Nadal, or Djkovic without belittling the other two, or arguing childish nonsense like "so and so has more glory hunters" who the feck even cares about something so trivial? My mum loves Federer because she enjoys taking two weeks off work each year to watch Wimbledon and she's grown to enjoy watching him, and she thinks he's a really nice bloke. Is she a glory hunter? Should she even care that such a thing exists? I mean seriously, grow up and enjoy living in an era that has so many great players, instead of trying to get one over on other people for such trivial shit that most normal people don't even care about.

I don't get it either. I usually discuss competition when opposing fans try to discredit Federer, but don't want Rafa/Djokovic to fail. Granted I'm not fond of either game but appreciate it to say the least.

I also want Rafa to do well this year, as you have Federer at very high level competing (and winning) against Rafa at a high level, not beat a shadow of the past clay king just to rack up numbers.

 

[shaggy]

And yet NONE of the opponents were from the Big 4. Djokovic is injured so shame on that and Nadal struggle against big servers on grass so no surprise. Saying they weren't good enough to meet/lose to him is laughable. The fact that Federer pulled out of the French Open to prepare for Wimbledon also shows that he has an extended break of rest and more time to prepare, but it also goes to show he is a coward.

No coincidence that Federer started winning slams again when peak Nadal and Djokovic aren't in the picture. Congrats to Federer the greatest flat-track bully in tennis.

You sound a hundred times more salty than wr8. Get a grip.

 

[Raoul]

Most people who follow tennis don't play the sport regularly. It's quite a strange point to make.

Tennis is an upper or at worst middle-class sport. Not like you can just find some balls and racquets and have a knock-about in some empty car park.

It's not strange in the least. Spectators obviously know little about the technical nuances of the game which leads to a distinctly more simplistic analysis of player performances. People who are avid players tend to see things a bit differently.

And Tennis isn't an upper class sport at all. A vast majority of all players come from average middle class backgrounds.

 

[wr8_utd]

Federer's comment on Murray

 

[Acole9]

How old do you have to be in order to be considered for the boys category? These lads look older than just 'boys'.

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

And yet NONE of the opponents were from the Big 4. Djokovic is injured so shame on that and Nadal struggle against big servers on grass so no surprise. Saying they weren't good enough to meet/lose to him is laughable. The fact that Federer pulled out of the French Open to prepare for Wimbledon also shows that he has an extended break of rest and more time to prepare, but it also goes to show he is a coward.

No coincidence that Federer started winning slams again when peak Nadal and Djokovic aren't in the picture. Congrats to Federer the greatest flat-track bully in tennis.

This is just sad.

So rather not playing in a surface that he and his medical team knew would have an averse effect on his reconstructed knee made him a coward?

Federer missed 3 Grand Slams in 17 years on tour. Yeap. Such cowardice.

 

[Enigma_87]

And yet NONE of the opponents were from the Big 4. Djokovic is injured so shame on that and Nadal struggle against big servers on grass so no surprise. Saying they weren't good enough to meet/lose to him is laughable. The fact that Federer pulled out of the French Open to prepare for Wimbledon also shows that he has an extended break of rest and more time to prepare, but it also goes to show he is a coward.

No coincidence that Federer started winning slams again when peak Nadal and Djokovic aren't in the picture. Congrats to Federer the greatest flat-track bully in tennis.

Does it really matter?

Nadal this year won the French against none from the Big 4. Same in the 2010 FO. Should we discredit him for those slam wins just because he didn't beat Nadal or Federer or Murray?

How is Federer decision to prepare for Wimbledon(the slam he loves and puts above all others) at 36 makes him a coward?

He has to enter all clay tournaments just to appease some random blokes(Nadal fans) on the internet as he might lose to Rafa? Nadal who he has beaten 3 times already this year on rather slow surfaces?

Should we put asterisk to Nadal's win at the FO this year as the best player so far in the season (Federer) decided to skip the event? That's just silly.

People would never be appeased. Djokovic entered Wimbey obviously not at his top level and lost. If he lost to Federer people would still be unhappy as he wouldn't be 100%? Well that is how sports work really. Djokovic/Nadal taxed their bodies year after year so that they can achieve that success, yet people are unhappy they can't stay injury free and mentally strong for a decade. Not really surprising mind.

 

[Raoul]

And yet NONE of the opponents were from the Big 4. Djokovic is injured so shame on that and Nadal struggle against big servers on grass so no surprise. Saying they weren't good enough to meet/lose to him is laughable. The fact that Federer pulled out of the French Open to prepare for Wimbledon also shows that he has an extended break of rest and more time to prepare, but it also goes to show he is a coward.

No coincidence that Federer started winning slams again when peak Nadal and Djokovic aren't in the picture. Congrats to Federer the greatest flat-track bully in tennis.

He won 2 of 3 slams at the age of 35. He is the GOAT. Deal with it.

 

[saivet]

Mental is even worse for him as that's his best attribute along with his movement and defence. I don't think he can keep or come back to the same level as 1 year ago in his 30's, unless he drastically changes his game.

I wouldn't rule him out. I'd use Nadal as an example. In 2015 he was low on confidence, got nervy in big match/points. 2016 he still had those confidence issues and injuries yet he's had a very good 2017. He's made tweaks to his game, but nothing ground breaking.

I think next year we'll see Novak playing well again injuries permitting.

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

It's not strange in the least. Spectators obviously know little about the technical nuances of the game which leads to a distinctly more simplistic analysis of player performances. People who are avid players tend to see things a bit differently.

And Tennis isn't an upper class sport at all. A vast majority of all players come from average middle class backgrounds.

It started out as a sport among the elites and still retain some flavours from its roots there, most evident during Wimbledon. You have to go to greater lengths in general for time and equipments in order to play regularly than most common sports.

Of course those who have played the game may have a better feel of the technicalities involved, but it doesn't mean avid followers who don't play much can't appreciate the nuances. I think this attitude in general hampers discussion in sports (not saying that's what you are doing). Debate the opinions, not the background of people you are debating.

Anyhow, we are to one degree or another all glory hunters. It's human nature to associate themselves with dominant figures.

 

[Enigma_87]

I wouldn't rule him out. I'd use Nadal as an example. In 2015 he was low on confidence, got nervy in big match/points. 2016 he still had those confidence issues and injuries yet he's had a very good 2017. He's made tweaks to his game, but nothing ground breaking.

I think next year we'll see Novak playing well again injuries permitting.

Nah I don't mean he's done. He still has couple of slams in him IMO, I just don't see him dominate the pack in the same way as year(s) ago.

 

[Raoul]

It started out as a sport among the elites and still retain some flavours from its roots there, most evident during Wimbledon. You have to go to greater lengths in general for time and equipments in order to play regularly than most common sports.

Of course those who have played the game may have a better feel of the technicalities involved, but it doesn't mean avid followers who don't play much can't appreciate the nuances. I think this attitude in general hampers discussion in sports (not saying that's what you are doing). Debate the opinions, not the background of people you are debating.

Anyhow, we are to one degree or another all glory hunters. It's human nature to associate themselves with dominant figures.

How it started out 100 years ago and how it is today are obviously completely different things. Today anyone can afford a cheap racket and a can of balls and play at any number of free public parks or publicly accessible school courts. The barrier to entry is very low so it's not accurate to suggest it's some posh snobby sport for the wealthy. That's a stereotype, and an inaccurate one at that.

 

[Dyslexic Untied]

I am a Federer fanboy.

I mostly watch only him and mostly only slams (which are the tournies televised here). I don't feel the need to watch tennis in general, as my main point with following is to watch Federer. The same way I am not that interested in football in general, but I follow United closely.

Played both tennis and football my whole life, not that that is important, and with the rest of life happening I tend to put priority on other stuff than (watching) sports.

 

[Bojan11]

How it started out 100 years ago and how it is today are obviously completely different things. Today anyone can afford a cheap racket and a can of balls and play at any number of free public parks or publicly accessible school courts. The barrier to entry is very low so it's not accurate to suggest it's some posh snobby sport for the wealthy. That's a stereotype, and an inaccurate one at that.

Free public parks?

What are you going on about?

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

How it started out 100 years ago and how it is today are obviously completely different things. Today anyone can afford a cheap racket and a can of balls and play at any number of free public parks or publicly accessible school courts. The barrier to entry is very low so it's not accurate to suggest it's some posh snobby sport for the wealthy. That's a stereotype, and an inaccurate one at that.

I have a mate working construction and he'd go golfing any chance he got, but it's not a working class sport is it?

Barrier to entry maybe lowered but it's only the case in developed nation. In developing countries or worse tennis is still pretty much an upper-middle class sport.

Anyhow, in my original post I already said it's a middle class sport so the assertion that it is some 'posh snobby sport' isn't mine.

The point stands. Accessibility is steeper than football, rugby or basketball.

 

[Raoul]

Free public parks?

What are you going on about?

Tennis Courts in public parks. How much self explanatory can it get.

 

[Claymore]

He may have 8 now but Sampras still the daddy, that quick serve, that smash. Oh my.

 

[Raoul]

I have a mate working construction and he'd go golfing any chance he got, but it's not a working class sport is it?

Barrier to entry maybe lowered but it's only the case in developed nation. In developing countries or worse tennis is still pretty much an upper-middle class sport.

Anyhow, in my original post I already said it's a middle class sport so the assertion that it is some 'posh snobby sport' isn't mine.

The point stands. Accessibility is steeper than football, rugby or basketball.

Golf is obviously a more expensive sport because of the price of clubs. Significantly more expensive than Tennis, where you can buy a beginners racket and some balls for $40 and hit the public courts. I've done it as if many others from a middle class background. No champagne, strawberries and cream or Rolex required.

 

[Rawls]

The fact that Federer pulled out of the French Open to prepare for Wimbledon also shows that he has an extended break of rest and more time to prepare, but it also goes to show he is a coward.

I think calling Federer a coward is somewhat unfair. Federer is 36 next month; there is absolutely no way he can play 4 Grand Slams each year plus the 10 Masters tournaments. If Nadal were to pull out of Wimbledon in order to prepare better for the USO, I would have absolutely no problem with it, even as a Federer fan. Federer, Nadal and Djokovic have won 19, 15, and 12 Grand Slams respectively and what's more, they're all in their 30s; they have earned the right to pick and choose what tournaments they want to play on tour.