MSYtristar From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 1640 times:
I think Roger has 12 Grand Slam titles now with his recent win at the U.S Open. That would make him only two short of tying Pete Sampras for the all time record. And Federer is only 26, and has stated publicly that he wants to play until 2012. If he wins 2 Grand Slams a year for the next five years, that would put him at 22 Grand Slam titles, which would be a number that wouldn't be eclipsed in a long, long time...if ever. Even if he wins just one a year, he'd be at 17, which would be awfully hard for anyone in the forseeable future to match.
This guy is unstoppable. It seems that as soon as his opponent wins a set from him...or breaks him...he has this inate ability to raise his game to a whole new level. Also, he never appears tired out there. He has incredible, almost super human, conditioning.
At first I didn't like Federer too much because I was always a huge Agassi fan and well, Federer beat him the last half dozen or so times they played, although to Andre's credit, they were always pretty tough matches. But recently I have started to really admire Federer's greatness and his excellent sportsmanship. He's very proud to hold that #1 title, be certain of that, but he doesn't ever seem to take it for granted, and he always is very humble in his post match interviews.
I think this is a man who just really enjoys and appreciates the game. His work ethic proves that.
767Lover From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 1630 times:
I admit that I used to root for his opponent du jour just because Federer is viewed as "the almighty" in terms of tennis, but I have grown to really like him. My impression is that he is a really nice guy who as you said has a true love for the game as opposed to just wanting fame. And you can't deny that he is just an amazing player.
AA61Hvy From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 13977 posts, RR: 56
Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 1620 times:
Quoting 767Lover (Reply 2): I admit that I used to root for his opponent du jour just because Federer is viewed as "the almighty" in terms of tennis, but I have grown to really like him. My impression is that he is a really nice guy who as you said has a true love for the game as opposed to just wanting fame. And you can't deny that he is just an amazing player.
Vikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10446 posts, RR: 26
Reply 11, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 1446 times:
Quoting 767Lover (Reply 2): I admit that I used to root for his opponent du jour just because Federer is viewed as "the almighty" in terms of tennis,
I still do root for his opponents, in general, mostly just because it would be so great for an opponent to actually beat Federer - not because I have anything against him at all.
I was/am a Sampras fan, but if Federer were to eclipse his Grand Slam record, that would be very fitting.
Quoting Banco (Reply 9): Thing about Federer, is that he makes the game look so damn easy, that you think you ought to be able to pick up a racquet and give him a good game. THAT, is a mark of a truly great player.
Seriously....It's absolutely amazing how Federer makes the court look 5 feet wide. He moves from one side to the other without seeming to strain at all, and without EVER seeming to have to sprint. His opponents will hit a shot that would get by any other player, and Federer is already there and waiting. He has an immensely good ability to read where his opponents are going to place their shots.
Just look at Roddick's match against him in the US Open. Roddick played a great match - but he was still no match for Federer.
DeltaOwnsAll From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1173 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1364 times:
Quoting QANTAS077 (Reply 12): never will be until he wins the French open...now he's a great tennis player but not the all-time great.
that honour goes to Margaret Court who is streets ahead of anyone in the modern era with her phenomenal record...
I guess it depends on your particular qualifications. Court's numbers are unworldly, but do you really think she'd be anywhere close to Roger Federer in a match?
Plenty of other arguments too, obviously. She played in a completely different era where the men wouldn't even be able to compete with today's field (or even the women's field maybe), and where women's tennis was nowhere near as developed as it is now. Most dominate in his/her time, Court is the far and away choice. Greatest tennis player? Its got to be either Federer or Sampras...