- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Roger Federer Fans LOL
Posted on 2/25/15 at 12:57 pm to SystemsGo
Posted on 2/25/15 at 12:57 pm to SystemsGo
quote:
Oh, and Rafa gets the better of Pete on both clay and hard courts. You just don't come at Nadal with a serve and volley game plan and walk away with a W more often than not. Dude has the probably the best passing shots in the history of the sport. And unlike Agassi, Sampras can't out-athlete him.
This. Rafa's passing shot is possibly the most underrated weapon in tennis history. His development of this, especially off his backhand, is what allowed him to pass Fed IMO.
2
Posted on 2/25/15 at 1:00 pm to FootballNostradamus
If Fed and Rafa were 10 years younger, Fed would have about 4-6 more Wimbledon titles and Nadal would bust his balls to make the quarters once in his career. Amazing as a tennis player how much Wimbledon changed their grass and how much the new polyester stings shut down net players ability to succeed
Posted on 2/25/15 at 1:07 pm to FootballNostradamus
quote:
This. Rafa's passing shot is possibly the most underrated weapon in tennis history. His development of this, especially off his backhand, is what allowed him to pass Fed IMO.
Dat forehand doe.
He puts some serious lefty witchery on that thing. How you defend against a passing shot that starts out comfortably in the alley and bends back in play is beyond me.
Posted on 2/25/15 at 1:13 pm to lsupride87
quote:
If Fed and Rafa were 10 years younger, Fed would have about 4-6 more Wimbledon titles and Nadal would bust his balls to make the quarters once in his career. Amazing as a tennis player how much Wimbledon changed their grass and how much the new polyester stings shut down net players ability to succeed
You mean ten years older?
If so, are you putting them at the same age? Because if you're putting Nadal and Federer at the same age, Fed would have 4-6 fewer majors and I don't know how a reasonable person could argue to the contrary.
And even if you aren't, you're still putting Federer right smack in the middle of Pete Sampras' prime. And while I think Federer is a better all around player than Pete, PP's a better player on the old Wimbledon courts.
So either way, I think you're looking at a number less than 17, and possibly a good bit less.
Posted on 2/25/15 at 1:21 pm to SystemsGo
Pete is not better on the old wimbledon courts. Go watch Feds first few Wimbledons when the courts were fast and the string technology wasn't there, he served and volleyed every, single, point. It is amazing he was able to change his game in the middle of a career.
Posted on 2/25/15 at 1:24 pm to lsupride87
What I always find interesting is that in the high level tennis community, it is almost unanimous Fed is the best ever. Amongst casual fans, it is closer to 50/50 with more leaning to Nadal
Posted on 2/25/15 at 1:32 pm to lsupride87
quote:
Pete is not better on the old wimbledon courts.
Sample size isn't great. I think they switched in '02. Pete lost to George Bastl in the second round, but he also got fricked by being put on a graveyard court. But, I think it tells you a lot that the '01 final was Ivanesivec/Rafter, and the '02 final was Nalbandian/Hewitt.
Posted on 2/25/15 at 1:41 pm to Bunk Moreland
What I was saying is pete is not better than fed on the old wimbledon courts. Fed was a serve and volleyer as well
This post was edited on 2/25/15 at 1:42 pm
Posted on 2/25/15 at 9:20 pm to lsupride87
quote:
Pete is not better on the old wimbledon courts. Go watch Feds first few Wimbledons when the courts were fast and the string technology wasn't there, he served and volleyed every, single, point. It is amazing he was able to change his game in the middle of a career
Having a serve and volley game in your arsenal and being a better grass court player than Pete Sampras are two very different things.
Pete has a better serve and significantly better second serve.
Pete has a better net game.
Pete's the better athlete.*
______________________________
*I should note that this isn't a knock on Fed's athleticism, but a testament to the most overlooked aspect of Pete Sampras' game. Dude was a craaaazy good athlete. If we're rating tennis players on raw athleticism, I'm not certain he isn't at the very top.
Posted on 2/25/15 at 9:35 pm to lsupride87
quote:
What I always find interesting is that in the high level tennis community, it is almost unanimous Fed is the best ever. Amongst casual fans, it is closer to 50/50 with more leaning to Nadal
Eh, it's become almost politically incorrect to publicly opine in a negative fashion on the subject of one Roger Federer -- like the equivalent of daring to say that Jordan isn't the best basketball player of all time, even though the argument that Federer isn't the best tennis player of all time is like way way easier to make -- but many in the "high level tennis community" have strongly hinted at what is the absolute truth of the matter: that Federer got crowned GOAT a bit prematurely.
Mcenroe has said it straight away more than several times, god bless him.
It should also be noted that many in the tennis community loathe Nadal for stylistic reasons (and the other side of tat coin is idolizing Federer on account of alleged aesthetic superiority*). I say these people should embrace Nadal's sui generis style for its sui generis-ity and use all the energy they saved to fight the good fight and hate on the servebots instead.
Down with Milos!
______________________________
*If we're talking fluidity and "easy" movements and shotmaking, I'll take Marcelo Rios all day errday.
This post was edited on 2/25/15 at 9:45 pm
Posted on 2/25/15 at 9:49 pm to Bunk Moreland
quote:
Sample size isn't great. I think they switched in '02. Pete lost to George Bastl in the second round, but he also got fricked by being put on a graveyard court. But, I think it tells you a lot that the '01 final was Ivanesivec/Rafter, and the '02 final was Nalbandian/Hewitt.
Eh, Mark Phillipoussis was in the final the following year. I think you might be reading a bit too much into the '02 result.
I'm not saying the change in grass didn't change things, but what also changed was Pete Sampras getting old.*
*and also prolly a bit pussy whipped too. Though who can blame him?
That Veronica Vaughn...
Posted on 2/25/15 at 9:50 pm to lsupride87
quote:
What I was saying is pete is not better than fed on the old wimbledon courts. Fed was a serve and volleyer as well
As noted, I agree with half of the above.
Posted on 2/25/15 at 10:07 pm to SystemsGo
Nadal's better.
You're welcome.
You're welcome.
Posted on 2/26/15 at 7:55 pm to OchoGregO
An interesting question is where to put Djokovic....like if he were to retire tomorrow. He's kind of quietly established himself as an all-time great A-lister while everyone argues Nadal v. Federer.
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News