finally its over, the uefa under-21 championship can finally be televised 
The Roland Garros Thread
- Thread starter ILBB15
- Start date
Nadal is a class apart on Clay.
Well done to him.
Well done to him.
Nadal is unplayable on clay, especially at Roland Garros. Both of these players could well do the Grand Slam. But Federer won't win the French if Nadal plays and Nadal won't Wimbledon if Federer plays.
Yep, it's strange how a change in surface can make such a significant change in a player's standard
So Nadal once again crushes the greatest player in the World ever
Their head to head record is 8-4 in favour of Nadal. 6-1 on clay and a very close 2-3 on other courts.
Federer has never had any serious rivals in the other grandslams and IMO he can crack if put under pressure. The greats of the past like Sampras have had great rivals and have had to play out of their skins to win. I would like to see Federer play under pressure more often and deliver before calling him a true great.
If Pete had been playing in this era instead of Federer, I doubt anyone could have stopped him either. In footballing terms, comparing Federer and Sampras is like comparing two teams playing in different leagues and saying Rangers are better than United because they have more trophies. Yet ignoring the fact that they pretty much have no competition in their league apart from one other club.
Their head to head record is 8-4 in favour of Nadal. 6-1 on clay and a very close 2-3 on other courts.
Federer has never had any serious rivals in the other grandslams and IMO he can crack if put under pressure. The greats of the past like Sampras have had great rivals and have had to play out of their skins to win. I would like to see Federer play under pressure more often and deliver before calling him a true great.
If Pete had been playing in this era instead of Federer, I doubt anyone could have stopped him either. In footballing terms, comparing Federer and Sampras is like comparing two teams playing in different leagues and saying Rangers are better than United because they have more trophies. Yet ignoring the fact that they pretty much have no competition in their league apart from one other club.
So Nadal once again crushes the greatest player in the World ever
Their head to head record is 8-4 in favour of Nadal. 6-1 on clay and a very close 2-3 on other courts.
Federer has never had any serious rivals in the other grandslams and IMO he can crack if put under pressure. The greats of the past like Sampras have had great rivals and have had to play out of their skins to win. I would like to see Federer play under pressure more often and deliver before calling him a true great.
If Pete had been playing in this era instead of Federer, I doubt anyone could have stopped him either. In footballing terms, comparing Federer and Sampras is like comparing two teams playing in different leagues and saying Rangers are better than United because they have more trophies. Yet ignoring the fact that they pretty much have no competition in their league apart from one other club.
I expected you would post after this game. Who exactly were Sampras' great rivals?
Federer has basically made the competition look mediocre. He's reached 8 grand slam finals in a row. His game is far superior to Sampras'. He's nearly won the French Open twice, Sampras never even came close.
If 10 grand slams doesn't make you a great, I don't know what does. And I'd say the overall level of tennis has generally improved over the last 10 years or so.
So Nadal once again crushes the greatest player in the World ever
Their head to head record is 8-4 in favour of Nadal. 6-1 on clay and a very close 2-3 on other courts.
Federer has never had any serious rivals in the other grandslams and IMO he can crack if put under pressure. The greats of the past like Sampras have had great rivals and have had to play out of their skins to win. I would like to see Federer play under pressure more often and deliver before calling him a true great.
If Pete had been playing in this era instead of Federer, I doubt anyone could have stopped him either. In footballing terms, comparing Federer and Sampras is like comparing two teams playing in different leagues and saying Rangers are better than United because they have more trophies. Yet ignoring the fact that they pretty much have no competition in their league apart from one other club.
Federer would have ruined Sampras' career had they been in the same era. He usually beat Agassi for fun as well, although late in the latters career. Its just that on clay he cant beat this one man. Its a pity because today i genuinely believed he had a chance. Nadal wasnt great on the day and Federer made so many errors and lost the plot in the 3rd. I kept thinking feck if he cut out these completely unforced error, he'd be ahead. But oh well, Sampras never won the french and Rogers going to have many more chances.
So Nadal once again crushes the greatest player in the World ever
Their head to head record is 8-4 in favour of Nadal. 6-1 on clay and a very close 2-3 on other courts.
Federer has never had any serious rivals in the other grandslams and IMO he can crack if put under pressure. The greats of the past like Sampras have had great rivals and have had to play out of their skins to win. I would like to see Federer play under pressure more often and deliver before calling him a true great.
If Pete had been playing in this era instead of Federer, I doubt anyone could have stopped him either. In footballing terms, comparing Federer and Sampras is like comparing two teams playing in different leagues and saying Rangers are better than United because they have more trophies. Yet ignoring the fact that they pretty much have no competition in their league apart from one other club.
Spastic postFederer did beat Sampras. On grass
So Nadal once again crushes the greatest player in the World ever
Their head to head record is 8-4 in favour of Nadal. 6-1 on clay and a very close 2-3 on other courts.
Federer has never had any serious rivals in the other grandslams and IMO he can crack if put under pressure. The greats of the past like Sampras have had great rivals and have had to play out of their skins to win. I would like to see Federer play under pressure more often and deliver before calling him a true great.
If Pete had been playing in this era instead of Federer, I doubt anyone could have stopped him either. In footballing terms, comparing Federer and Sampras is like comparing two teams playing in different leagues and saying Rangers are better than United because they have more trophies. Yet ignoring the fact that they pretty much have no competition in their league apart from one other club.
You should stick to football, and maybe not even to that. There is only one reason that Federer doesn`t have any real rivals on grass and hard court and that is Federer himself. He`s way in front of any one else. I would think that players like Roddick and Hewitt might be able to compete with the likes of Sampras in his day, but unfortunately for them they live in the same era as Roger Federer. On hardcourt he is unbeatable because he is the best, not because there is no competition. I don`t think that there are many around tht deny that Federer is the best ever, many of the old winners are going out and saying it. He has raised the bar.
Federer is unfortunate though, to have this Nadal on clay around.But that is just one man, on one surface. It doesn`t take much away from Federer though. Anyone who has played some tennis knows that hard court and clay are almost two different sports. Federer will get his Roland Garros next year.
Sampras never won it and i doubt Agassi would have either meeting Nadal in the final every time. I really think Federer fecked it up this time himself though, too many points he should have put nadal away but made silly errors. Do agree, i feel he'll win the French soon, he has a few years to go and i fancy his chances of making the finals/semis every time.
You should stick to football, and maybe not even to that. There is only one reason that Federer doesn`t have any real rivals on grass and hard court and that is Federer himself. He`s way in front of any one else. I would think that players like Roddick and Hewitt might be able to compete with the likes of Sampras in his day, but unfortunately for them they live in the same era as Roger Federer. On hardcourt he is unbeatable because he is the best, not because there is no competition. I don`t think that there are many around tht deny that Federer is the best ever, many of the old winners are going out and saying it. He has raised the bar.
Federer is unfortunate though, to have this Nadal on clay around.But that is just one man, on one surface. It doesn`t take much away from Federer though. Anyone who has played some tennis knows that hard court and clay are almost two different sports. Federer will get his Roland Garros next year.
Nadal has always looked class against Federer though except on grass courts, where they have played twice? I am backing Nadal ton win Wimbledon before Federer wins French open.
Good final, shocking how many break points Federer didn't take.
I wish he'd beaten that moaning little bitch.
I wish he'd beaten that moaning little bitch.
So Nadal once again crushes the greatest player in the World ever
Their head to head record is 8-4 in favour of Nadal. 6-1 on clay and a very close 2-3 on other courts.
Federer has never had any serious rivals in the other grandslams and IMO he can crack if put under pressure. The greats of the past like Sampras have had great rivals and have had to play out of their skins to win. I would like to see Federer play under pressure more often and deliver before calling him a true great.
If Pete had been playing in this era instead of Federer, I doubt anyone could have stopped him either. In footballing terms, comparing Federer and Sampras is like comparing two teams playing in different leagues and saying Rangers are better than United because they have more trophies. Yet ignoring the fact that they pretty much have no competition in their league apart from one other club.
Do you actually watch the sport or do you just know some names?It would be interesting to see Nadal vs. Kuerten (both at top form). I am afraid Federer is creating some sort of a mental block against Nadal on French Open. He needs third player to stop Nadal.
he should play a couple of grass tournaments before every French Open to remind himself that he's the best.
Or he should ask directors to play his matches on green clay.
Problem is yesterday it was bloody evident that he was capable of beating Nadal. The amount of times he was on top in the rally and made unbelievably non Federer like errors was shocking.
So Nadal once again crushes the greatest player in the World ever
Their head to head record is 8-4 in favour of Nadal. 6-1 on clay and a very close 2-3 on other courts.
Federer has never had any serious rivals in the other grandslams and IMO he can crack if put under pressure. The greats of the past like Sampras have had great rivals and have had to play out of their skins to win. I would like to see Federer play under pressure more often and deliver before calling him a true great.
If Pete had been playing in this era instead of Federer, I doubt anyone could have stopped him either. In footballing terms, comparing Federer and Sampras is like comparing two teams playing in different leagues and saying Rangers are better than United because they have more trophies. Yet ignoring the fact that they pretty much have no competition in their league apart from one other club.
Although Sampras is my favorite player but I have to admit Federer is better even though I really hate him .Not far from being the best ever.Just needs to win on clay often.
He was below par all tournament long. What the feck happened to his forehand?
You never got the same consistency in (attempted) winners that you associate with his genius. Been visible only in patches and hence his defeat was easily predicted before the match
i sortof expected it at the back of my mind. Federer at his best IMO is impossible to beat. Just the game he has. No doubting on clay Nadal is magnificent. But you could see that if he had his usual game he could have taken Nadal in that 3rd set. More a mental thing, those forehand errors were plain shocking. So dissappointing that the guy who usually lifts himself on the big points just seems to mess it up a little on clay under pressure.
Credit to Nadal, true fighter, has so much bottle for his age its amazing.
So Nadal once again crushes the greatest player in the World ever
Their head to head record is 8-4 in favour of Nadal. 6-1 on clay and a very close 2-3 on other courts.
Federer has never had any serious rivals in the other grandslams and IMO he can crack if put under pressure. The greats of the past like Sampras have had great rivals and have had to play out of their skins to win. I would like to see Federer play under pressure more often and deliver before calling him a true great.
If Pete had been playing in this era instead of Federer, I doubt anyone could have stopped him either. In footballing terms, comparing Federer and Sampras is like comparing two teams playing in different leagues and saying Rangers are better than United because they have more trophies. Yet ignoring the fact that they pretty much have no competition in their league apart from one other club.
you should stick to football
i cant stand federer.
yes he is a fecking beautiful tennis player, but he has the personality of an orange.
yes he is a fecking beautiful tennis player, but he has the personality of an orange.
Excellent post. Agree 1000 %
100% agree, but Instant Karma's post (#85) is ridiculous
as much as I don't like him, I doubt any player will be better than Federer, he'll beat all tennis records (IF he ever wins RG, and I don't doubt it)
and in the next 100 years or so there will be no player perfect as he is
well, maybe Djokovic
Nadal will lose to Djokovic at Wimbledon this year. you heard it here first
I'm so fecking proud of Serbian tennis players at RG, two finals and five semis...
I like ivanovic. Nice smile
I was watching the final on and off...but got the feeling that quite a few of Roger's unforced errors were from his backhand due to the heavy topsin. Could it be that single-handed backhand players are at a disadvantage on clay? I'm trying to recollect some recent top players who've never won the French...like Edberg, Sampras, Federer, etc. Dunno how Kuerten managed his wins. Moya, Nadal, Agassi, Chang all had double-handed backhands. Just a thought.
If Federer is gonna win almost everything, then he might as well win it all. I wanted him to get this.
He doesn't have much personality, but the way he plays is kingly. I've never seen a player look so obviously superior, even when he loses.
Problem is, it looks like we're gonna go back to watching him sweep everything until next year again.
He doesn't have much personality, but the way he plays is kingly. I've never seen a player look so obviously superior, even when he loses.
Problem is, it looks like we're gonna go back to watching him sweep everything until next year again.
Yeah, guys like Kuerten prove how crazy the French Open is. It's been the bogey tournament for lots of great players.
Federer has been my favourite non-Aussie player since the very first time I saw him, partnering Martina Hingis in the Hopman Cup when he was 16 or 17. Even at that age his sheer class and elegance was obvious - the way he plays is simply beautiful.
The other non-Aussie male player that I've been a fan of since before most had heard of him was Paradorn Schrichapan, also from watching him play in the Hopman Cup (a couple of years after Federer). He had that big year a few years back, but seems to have fallen off the map a bit.
Most agree that Federer is the best ever, but is it fair to say that Nadal has a claim to being the best clay courter ever? He's certainly the best I've seen, with all due respect to the likes of Kuerten.
I'm a big fan of his. But its just irritating that he keeps losing in the French to the same guy, whose much younger and yet to probably reach his prime, and this time he really ahd a chance.
So Nadal once again crushes the greatest player in the World ever
Their head to head record is 8-4 in favour of Nadal. 6-1 on clay and a very close 2-3 on other courts.
Federer has never had any serious rivals in the other grandslams and IMO he can crack if put under pressure. The greats of the past like Sampras have had great rivals and have had to play out of their skins to win. I would like to see Federer play under pressure more often and deliver before calling him a true great.
If Pete had been playing in this era instead of Federer, I doubt anyone could have stopped him either. In footballing terms, comparing Federer and Sampras is like comparing two teams playing in different leagues and saying Rangers are better than United because they have more trophies. Yet ignoring the fact that they pretty much have no competition in their league apart from one other club.
Good lord. How did i miss this?!