Federer is that good

#26
#26
milohimself said:
I'm just amazed that over the last couple years, the waning of Federer's career has come up time and again, yet he just keeps winning.
Click to expand...

Any alleged waning of Federer's greatness over the last couple years is strictly limited to his struggles against Rafa. Federer has been -- and still is -- better than every player in the world not named Rafael Nadal.

I admit that I thought Federer was done after he lost the Aussie Open final to Nadal. At that point, Rafa officially had Fed's number on every surface and appeared poised to string together his own run of greatness. Alas, the Spaniard's knees had different ideas.

So, although I do think that Nadal has been a better player than Federer for a couple years now (and upon examination of their record, this is barely even an arguable point) , he'll end up being little more than a historical footnote. Longevity is a big part of the game. Federer, at age 28, shows no signs of being broken-down physically. Nadal, on the other hand, is now damaged goods at the ripe age of 23.

I'm a fan of Nadal. I love the way he plays, and I'd love to see more of him at his best. But I'm not optimistic.
 
Last edited:
#27
#27
kidbourbon said:
Yes, I am resurrecting a three-year old thead. Why?

1. To re-emphasize the brilliance of the DFW Federer piece, and to respectfully invite anyone who enjoyed the Federer piece to read this one as well ( The String Theory by David Foster Wallace - David Foster Wallace on Tennis - Esquire), also penned by the late DFW.

And

2. Because Federer at his best is better than both Sampras* and Agassi at their best.

BUT

3. Rafael Nadal -- at his very best (which we saw throughout 2008) -- is the single greatest tennis player I have ever seen. Unfortunately, we may not see a whole lot more of this version of Nadal. His style pretty much precludes longevity.

I guess the more interesting question is how I even stumbled upon this three-year old thread. By accident.

*exception: I believe Sampras may have the edge on grass courts in a prime vs. prime battle with Federer. Also, fwiw, Sampras may be the best pure athlete that has ever played the game.
Click to expand...

I am a huge tennis fan and have played with some world class players.

Federer is the best ever, no question. He is also the best to watch (opinion). He has revolutionized the game, showed everybody that one doesn't have to pretend to be a baseball player to have a powerful backhand and is the most rounded player ever (can serve/volley if need be but prefers the baseline).

Prime vs prime Fed/Samp on grass would be awesome. I would give Samp the edge on serve (best serve ever) but Fed has a very underrated serve.

Nadal may be a better "athlete" than Fed but I still thing Fed is the better "tennis player".

One can't argue with what Fed has done, it is unparralled.
 
#28
#28
gasguy98 said:
Nadal may be a better "athlete" than Fed but I still thing Fed is the better "tennis player".
Click to expand...

If you're going by the creativity of their shotmaking or the gracefulness of their style, then Federer is better. I can see why you -- and a lot of other tennis fans -- appreciate the beauty of Federer's game. He is unique prototype for a tennis player, that's for sure.

Nadal is a different type of player than Federer. His game isn't beautiful and graceful like Federer's, but it's rather brilliant in its simplicity. Nadal's style says to his opponent: I can get to more balls than you; I can hit those balls harder than you; I can do all of this for a longer period of time than you; and I will make you earn each and every point you win.

This style -- whether you appreciate it or not -- has gotten the better of Federer's more graceful style. They have met in 7 grand slam finals, with Nadal prevailing in 5. Federer's two victories came at the finals of Wimbledon against a 20 and then 21 year old Nadal who was really just figuring out how to play on grass.

FWIW, here is Agassi on Nadal (from his autobiography):
I go to Montreal [this is 2005] and scratch and claw my way to the final against a Spanish kid everyone is talking about. Rafael Nadal. I can't beat him. I can't fathom him. I've never seen anyone move like that on a tennis court ... He's a brute, a freak, a force of nature, as strong and balletic a player as I've ever seen.
 
#29
#29
If you're going to make true comparisons you need to factor in a few other points. Nadal is 5 years younger than Federer and clearly should be (and is/was) in better physical condition when they played each other, which is one of the strengths you claim (and I agree) that Nadal has... he runs down more shots than any player I've seen play before. Another benefit not mentioned is that Nadal plays left handed (even though he is right handed). This gives his ground strokes and serves a different spin than most players, and requires some adapting by his opponents. However, the biggest consideration is the wins/losses based on court surface. Nadal has the better overall record because of the number of times they have played on clay, which clearly favors Nadal's game over Federer's.

Clay courts: Nadal 9–2
Hard courts: 3–3
Grass courts: Federer 2–1

I'm not taking anything away from Nadal, who is a great player, but Federer is without question (IMO) the better tennis player hands down. His records will likely never be matched.
 
#30
#30
kidbourbon said:
Any alleged waning of Federer's greatness over the last couple years is strictly limited to his struggles against Rafa. Federer has been -- and still is -- better than every player in the world not named Rafael Nadal.

I admit that I thought Federer was done after he lost the Aussie Open final to Nadal. At that point, Rafa officially had Fed's number on every surface and appeared poised to string together his own run of greatness. Alas, the Spaniard's knees had different ideas.

So, although I do think that Nadal has been a better player than Federer for a couple years now (and upon examination of their record, this is barely even an arguable point) , he'll end up being little more than a historical footnote. Longevity is a big part of the game. Federer, at age 28, shows no signs of being broken-down physically. Nadal, on the other hand, is now damaged goods at the ripe age of 23.

I'm a fan of Nadal. I love the way he plays, and I'd love to see more of him at his best. But I'm not optimistic.
Click to expand...
much effort has been made to take the speed out of places like Wimbledon so that guys roaming the baselines keep it from being a service fest.
 
#31
#31
Nadal is not better than Federer in each of their respective primes. Nadal had just reached his prime before these injuries and then it's just a struggle with it going either way against a past his prime Federer. Nadal owns clay, but all around player, it's still Federer. And Nadal isn't close.
 
#33
#33
volfanbill said:
Nadal is not better than Federer in each of their respective primes. Nadal had just reached his prime before these injuries and then it's just a struggle with it going either way against a past his prime Federer. Nadal owns clay, but all around player, it's still Federer. And Nadal isn't close.
Click to expand...

Nadal isn't close? To be clear, we're not talking career resume. We're talking prime vs. prime. Not even close? The unfortunate part of this discussion is that Nadal may never have a prime. He was getting better and better every year until his body started to break down in '09. So all we have is a body of evidence from '06-'08 where Nadal is getting the better of Federer.

When exactly did Federer come out of his prime? If you're conveniently defining Federer's prime as "the time before Nadal emerged on the scene", then how do you explain Federer's dominance in '09 when Nadal was essentially out of the picture? And what about those pesky head to head numbers?
 
Last edited:
#35
#35
Many have predicted that this year -- 2010 -- is the end of the Federer and Nadal rivalry. Rankings, injuries, etc., will make it harder and harder for both players to make it to finals. We have been lucky for sure. Of course, no one in the tennis commentating business knows what they are talking about.

I have seen Federer and Nadal both play up close and personal. Here are a few things that struck me about each player:

#Nadal is a lot taller in person than he appears on tv. I knew he was ripped, but I had no idea that he was built like a linebacker. He is huge in person.

#Federer is also taller in person and he has really big feet. During practice, Federer is basically a showoff trying all sorts of trick shots.

#Federer's forehand strokes in person make a distinct whizzing noise traveling through the air. I've played tennis for 20 years and have never heard that sound from anyone else's strokes.

#There are some tremendously hot babes that hang out at professional tennis tournaments. Top notch. It is something you have to see to believe.

I've followed tennis since I was 7 years old. Federer is the best I've ever seen. I also think that Federer figured something out about how to beat Nadal last May just before the French Open. Too bad they didn't get to play each other after that Madrid final that Federer won on clay. The key for Federer is running around his backhand against Nadal and keeping a high serve percentage.
 
#36
#36
DyronNix said:
Many have predicted that this year -- 2010 -- is the end of the Federer and Nadal rivalry. Rankings, injuries, etc., will make it harder and harder for both players to make it to finals. We have been lucky for sure. Of course, no one in the tennis commentating business knows what they are talking about.

I have seen Federer and Nadal both play up close and personal. Here are a few things that struck me about each player:

#Nadal is a lot taller in person than he appears on tv. I knew he was ripped, but I had no idea that he was built like a linebacker. He is huge in person.

#Federer is also taller in person and he has really big feet. During practice, Federer is basically a showoff trying all sorts of trick shots.

#Federer's forehand strokes in person make a distinct whizzing noise traveling through the air. I've played tennis for 20 years and have never heard that sound from anyone else's strokes.

#There are some tremendously hot babes that hang out at professional tennis tournaments. Top notch. It is something you have to see to believe.

I've followed tennis since I was 7 years old. Federer is the best I've ever seen. I also think that Federer figured something out about how to beat Nadal last May just before the French Open. Too bad they didn't get to play each other after that Madrid final that Federer won on clay. The key for Federer is running around his backhand against Nadal and keeping a high serve percentage.
Click to expand...

Recent evidence suggests Federer still has not figured out how to beat Nadal.
 
#37
#37
DyronNix said:
#Nadal is a lot taller in person than he appears on tv. I knew he was ripped, but I had no idea that he was built like a linebacker. He is huge in person.

#Federer is also taller in person and he has really big feet. During practice, Federer is basically a showoff trying all sorts of trick shots.

.
Click to expand...

Yeah, they're the same height. This surprises a lot of people. Most people tend to assume Nadal is shorter than he is. I guess 6-1 guys aren't supposed to move like that.

I haven't seen either guy in person. I'm gonna work on changing that this summer. I really want to see Federer. I want to see the ease with which he hits his forehand. David Foster Wallace gave me some excellent mental imagery, but I do wanna see it for myself.
 
#39
#39
Not surprised by Roddick. Dissappointed... yes, surprised... no.

But the Bryan brothers? That's a shocker.
 
#41
#41
Fed got ousted by Soderling* today. This snaps his streak of 23 consecutive grand slam semifinals appearances.

Most of my posts in this thread have been pro-Nadal arguments. I make these arguments because I think the fact that the consensus greatest player of all time has been pretty fairly dominated by a guy in his own era is a point that merits discussion. BUT, I have to give props to Federer on this streak. The second longest streak of this nature is Ivan Lendl with 10.

Federer's 23 straight is arguably the most impressive streak in all of sports, and I doubt I will see it broken in my lifetime.

*Soderling is obviously 100% legit. I didn't see the match, but by all accounts Federer played a very good match. Soderling just played better.
 
#42
#42
BigPapaVol said:
McEnroe, with the older and faster Wimbledon without the ridiculous new racquets and strings, could have handled Federer in the big kahuna.
Click to expand...

No....I loved McEnroe and the way he played but Roger is a MUCH better player. And yes, Federer would beat him with a Wilson Jack Kramer
 
#44
#44
volfanbill said:
Nadal is not better than Federer in each of their respective primes. Nadal had just reached his prime before these injuries and then it's just a struggle with it going either way against a past his prime Federer. Nadal owns clay, but all around player, it's still Federer. And Nadal isn't close.
Click to expand...

Federer's game has aged nicely.

Your post, on the other hand.....
 
#45
#45
So, does Federer have a shot at Wimbledon this year, with one nemesis already gone?
 
#49
#49
Holy crap. I don't even remember posting in this thread all that time ago.

Federer is playing great the first week, his serve is the key to him winning and it is in spectacular form. However, his serve was spectacular in Australia at the first of the year and then packed up and went home before he played in the semis.

His serve also abandoned him in the semis against Djokovic at the FO a few weeks ago. A lot of that has to do with Federer taking more chances with his serve when he plays the likes of Nadal or Djokovic. But, in order to win a slam, his serve has to be there for him.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top