I'm pretty sure your evidence for this is "he took Federer to 16-14 in the 5th!!!!!" which is obviously kind of circular.
No it isn't, he played his best tennis that tournament. I based it on his play, not the score in the final. He was amazing. His performance vs Murray in the semi also outstanding etc. I am pretty sure your evidence against this is, well you don't have any obv.
No it isn't, he played his best tennis that tournament. I based it on his play, not the score in the final. He was amazing. His performance vs Murray in the semi also outstanding etc. I am pretty sure your evidence against this is, well you don't have any obv.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingRat
Roddick was in the best shape of his life and serving like a mad man in that Wimbledon.
I agree with both of you.
I still think that if he didn't miss that set point in the second set (iirc) to go 2-0 up he'd have won that game in 3 sets imo that was huge and cost him the game imo
He served like a nutter that game and fed only broke him once and that was to take the title.
Yeah, just checked, he was 6-2 up in the second set tie breaker and missed a glourious chance at 6-5 to take it.
No it isn't, he played his best tennis that tournament. I based it on his play, not the score in the final. He was amazing. His performance vs Murray in the semi also outstanding etc. I am pretty sure your evidence against this is, well you don't have any obv.
He also got taken to 5 sets by that beast of mid 2009, unseeded Lleyton Hewitt. His first 3 matches all went to 4 sets. The only 3 set match he played was against Berdych. This does not look particularly dominant to me, even if he did beat Murray. EDIT: A former world #1 playing the best tennis of his life should not be getting taken to 4 sets by chumps as a matter of course.
The overall evidence for Roddick being worse is that his world ranking was down substantially from the earlier Federer-Roddick matches, where they were often 1 and 2 in the world. This is why I said that if you think Roddick is not substantially worse than he used to be, then the alternative is that 2010 competition is substantially stronger than 2005 competition.
Pete Sampras believes Rafael Nadal could surpass Roger Federer on the all-time Grand Slam winners' list.
The Spaniard made it nine major titles when he won the US Open for the first time earlier this month, some way off Federer's record of 16.
However, at just 24 Nadal has many years left on the tour - injuries permitting - and Sampras, himself a winner of 14 Grand Slams, says he can go on and set a new mark.
"If he's smart with his schedule and the fact that he has so many at such a young age, he could very well do it," said the American.
"It's a huge goal, it's a lot of majors, a lot of work.
"The only question with Rafa is physically how much his body can handle the pounding with how hard he works for every point. You just watch him play, the kid is relentless."
Sampras believes Nadal has already done enough in the game to cement his place amongst the sport's greats.
Dominant
"Quite honestly I don't think he needs to (win any more). He's won all the majors. He's won the Olympics. He's dominated his main rival, in Roger," Sampras said, referring to the Spaniard's 14-7 head-to-head edge over the Swiss.
"I don't think his goal is 16, or 17 or 18, he's just going to try to improve as a tennis player and if it happens, great.
"He could do it, it's a lot of work ahead and he works so hard in every match he plays. But he's a beast."
However, Sampras warned that Federer is no back number and insists he could win several more Grand Slam titles.
"He's a strong favorite for every major he plays. He had two match points against (Novak) Djokovic (in the US Open semi-final)," he added.
"He could very well have been in the final. He's playing fine, I don't see any big decline. Other guys are playing better. The next two or three years is a challenging time.
"But Roger is up to the task and can win more majors."
I got goose bumps after reading that Sampras article...The next 2-3 years could be one of the most exciting in tennis history if everyone remains healthy and other up and comers keep on improving...
They're playing an exhibition match at 1pm est today. This one's on clay in Madrid. They played one on hard courts in zurich which Federer won in 3 sets. Both exos raising money for their respective charities to help the needy in Africa. Classy stuff from 2 of the best athletes ever!
It is not on clay, it is on Madrid's hard court. They play a bit ATP event there during the season.
I would also like to point out that they are playing best 2 out of 3, so the Zurich match went to a decisive set. Hopefully the Madrid match will be good too.
Wow, this match sucks. I know it's an exhibition, but Nadal isn't even trying to win. Think he needs some lessons from Herm Edwards. 'You don't play to just play'
