Roland Garros 2008 (May 25- June 8)

[Mich©]

Originally Posted by Führer

It is exaggerating to refer to Federer as the best tennis player in history.

First he hasn't borken Sampras's Grand Slam record yet, second he has never won a Roland Garros title and third he's lagging well behind in the versus games played against Nadal.

Actually even Euro Sports commentators referred to him as most probably the best player to ever play this game.

[Mich©]

Whatever happened yesterday was shocking and not at all Federer's game.
Eventhough Nadal is the King of Clay, Federer's game was really beneath anyone.

It worries me that the perception in Federer's head now is that of fear when it comes to Nadal.

[Führer]

Federer will become the best player ever to play tennis when:

1- He breaks Sampras's record of overall Grand Slam titles won. (He has 3 more to go.)
2- When he wins Roland Garros for at least one time.
3- When he masters the clay court. Until then, Nadal will always be the King of clay which is a primary ingredient for "a best player of all time" title.

And btw, Eurosport was mocking Federer's "Nadal Complex" yesterday where it was proven once again that he is not being able to overcome it no matter what.

Again, the best tennis player in history should have a "close to perfect" record in all fields. Federer until now hasn't.

[Mich©]

Originally Posted by Führer

Federer will become the best player ever to play tennis when:

1- He breaks Sampras's record of overall Grand Slam titles won. (He has 3 more to go.)
2- When he wins Roland Garros for at least one time.
3- When he masters the clay court. Until then, Nadal will always be the King of clay which is a primary ingredient for "a best player of all time" title.

And btw, Eurosport was mocking Federer's "Nadal Complex" yesterday where it was proven once again that he is not being able to overcome it no matter what.

Again, the best tennis player in history should have a "close to perfect" record in all fields. Federer until now hasn't.

Many many of the best players ever NEVER won Roland Garros and Sampras is one of them.
Not Euro sport was mocking Federer, Mats Wilander was.

For the record, I am a fan of both Nadal and Federer, I'm not defending, i'm just stating facts.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Führer

Federer will become the best player ever to play tennis when:

1- He breaks Sampras's record of overall Grand Slam titles won. (He has 3 more to go.)
2- When he wins Roland Garros for at least one time.
3- When he masters the clay court. Until then, Nadal will always be the King of clay which is a primary ingredient for "a best player of all time" title.

And btw, Eurosport was mocking Federer's "Nadal Complex" yesterday where it was proven once again that he is not being able to overcome it no matter what.

Again, the best tennis player in history should have a "close to perfect" record in all fields. Federer until now hasn't.

Name me the best player in history then. Name me on player who has the most grand slams, won roland garros AND mastered the clay court!!
That is not the criteria...

He has won 12... only a matter of time to get to 15.
He is the second best player on clay, second to the best clay court player ever. He has reached 3 finals at roland garros, to lose against the same person. If reaching three roland garros finals, winning hamburg 4-5 times, etc... is not mastering the clay court, i don;t know what is...

[Führer]

To master the clay court, you have to beat the clay court master! Again, considering Federer to be the best player ever is rather a subjective point of view, at least till now!

Federer knows very well that he's got to beat Nadal in Roland Garros and get these 3 left Grand Slams to be objectively called the Best Player Ever. Where is the big fuss about that?!

And by the way, there is no Best Player Ever in my dictionnary. All great players have different styles of play in which they mastered. From there on, audiences lean towards the player that best suits their favorable style of play.

[Jorje]

Nadal was just unbeatable. I didn't think Federer played that bad in the second set. There was nothing he can do. Nadal had answers for everything. And Federer was getting winners only out of some extraordinary ground strokes.

[Sirius]

About the match, Federer came in with a different game plan, he was aggressive, served and volleyed most of the match. That is the only way he could beat Nadal on a RG final. From the baseline, he beats everyone on any surface including Nadal except for clay. So what was wrong? You cannot play from the baseline 50 weeks a year and decide to serve and volley only during RG, nobody can do and make it work especially not infront of the best clay court player.

What should Federer do? He should serve and volley from NOW until RG next year, until he becomes a pure serve and volleyer. He has to adapt Sampras' game knowing that he is a better clay court player than Sampras was. If Fed really wants to win RG next year, that is his only chance. He simply can neither beat Nadal from the baseline nor can he beat him from the net if he's only been playing like that for 2 weeks.

[Jorje]

Originally Posted by Sirius

About the match, Federer came in with a different game plan, he was aggressive, served and volleyed most of the match. That is the only way he could beat Nadal on a RG final. From the baseline, he beats everyone on any surface including Nadal except for clay. So what was wrong? You cannot play from the baseline 50 weeks a year and decide to serve and volley only during RG, nobody can do and make it work especially not infront of the best clay court player.

What should Federer do? He should serve and volley from NOW until RG next year, until he becomes a pure serve and volleyer. He has to adapt Sampras' game knowing that he is a better clay court player than Sampras was. If Fed really wants to win RG next year, that is his only chance. He simply can neither beat Nadal from the baseline nor can he beat him from the net if he's only been playing like that for 2 weeks.

Honestly I don't think that would work. Did you see Nadal's passing shots? There was nothing wrong with Federer's approach shots or volleys. He was hitting passing shots from completely off balance positions. He's simply amazing on clay and possibly the best clay court player ever. Federer's only hope is if Nadal loses form some day in RG.

Wimbledon should definitely be exciting. There will be HUGE pressure on Federer. He's not having a good year, and after that thrashing, he will have a lot to prove.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Jorje

Honestly I don't think that would work. Did you see Nadal's passing shots? There was nothing wrong with Federer's approach shots or volleys. He was hitting passing shots from completely off balance positions. He's simply amazing on clay and possibly the best clay court player ever. Federer's only hope is if Nadal loses form some day in RG.

Wimbledon should definitely be exciting. There will be HUGE pressure on Federer. He's not having a good year, and after that thrashing, he will have a lot to prove.

His approach to the net is wrong. You need to build up your approach to the net, not just do it to win the point. Coming up to the net is a form of pressure Fed needs to exert on Nadal.

About Wimbledon, all he needs to do is win it. He has nothing more to prove... whether he beats him in straight sets or five, it doesn't really matter much. Winning six straight Wimbledon titles is proof enough.