Will Federer Win Another 'Slam'

Brophs

The One and Only
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
52,617
Will Federer Win Another 'Slam'?

Serious question, so if anyone wants to come in and start slagging him off as a person etc., I'm sure there are other threads for that.

I think what today(and the last year or so) has proven, is that even on Federer's best surfaces(grass and hard), he is likely to be second best to Nadal. I don't like saying it as he's probably my favourite player of all time, but I never see him beating Nadal when they play in the slams. Nadal just has too much for him physically, and has the talent to go with it.

IMO, the French Open is a waste of time while Rafa's playing. He doesn't stand a chance. Nadal on his worst day is twice the clay court player Federer is(and conversely, Federer is better than the rest by a distance). The only hope he has is if somehow, someone else beats Nadal, or if Nadal isn't fit for the tournament.

At Wimbledon last year, Nadal showed he has learned how to play on grass. He's still a work in progress, but if he continues to improve, I can't see any reason he can't keep winning the trophy for years to come. That said, it's a much closer contest on this surface, and Federer would have a chance against Nadal all things being equal-although if I was a betting man, Rafa would get my money right now.

As for the US Open, it's much like the Aussie. If Rafa is fit, and no one beats him beforehand, I think he'll beat Federer in any final they might play. Rafa has shown today that the hard courts don't phase him, and he beat the player that most would have regarded as probably the best hard court player in the world.

The problem for Federer is that his game is completely cancelled out by Rafa's strengths. His cross-court forehand kills Federer's backhand, and Rafa's so good with his passing shots that Roger doesn't feel as comfortable coming to the net as he would against anyone else.

So, in my opinion, Federer will probably win one more at least. But that will be because Rafa will slip up prior to a final somewhere, and Federer will have enough know-how to win against whoever he faces. But in any final he plays against Nadal, I'd make Nadal a huge favourite. The scars that Nadal has inflicted on him may be such that it's impossible for him to play Nadal with any sort of confidence. I think he'd need Nadal to buckle to be able to see the winning line at this stage, and Rafa doesn't do that.

Strangely, I think Andy Murray may be Federer's best chance of winning a major. He has the confidence to beat Nadal prior to a final, but Federer would at least be more confident facing him than Rafa(although the day is coming when Murray overtakes Federer too).

What do you lot reckon?
 
yes...

infcat i think he will win wimbledon this year... well i hope he does rather than that dour scotish cnut (no not gordon brown the other one)
 
He'll definitely win one more at least. But I think it also depends if he has the hunger and desire to grind it out in the tour for few more years. I wonder if the motivation will still be there. I thought he basically threw the fifth set away today.

I think people now have to accept that Nadal is the better player and he could well win the Grand Slam. No one can touch him on French, Wimbledon he's improving and he could easily win the US open.
 
Hopefully, would love it if he beat Murray at Wimbledon in the final, 6-0 6-0 6-0
 
I think his tears today were out of frustration more than anything. He has a hit a brick wall named Nadal and he simply can not break it. He does realise that he can very well go down in the history as the best player ever. Surpassing Sampras in grandslams won't do it. He has to break down Nadal. He is the biggest challenger 'Rafa' has faced and it won't look favourably on him if he comes second best.
 
Think he has a few more wins in him, it is quite clear that he is the only one who is close to Nadal at this point. As you say though, Nadal's physicality, age and endurance as well as the experience he has gained on all surfaces is a huge stumbling block. At this point the mental aspect of going into a final with him seems a huge factor as well, even if both of the finals were close encounters (Wimbledon in particular).

As a fan of tennis I am happy to see the Nadal - Federer rivalry, it is good for the sport and I think Nadal is a brilliant player and athlete. However, I would be lying if I said Federer not rising to the challenge of Nadal in terms of coming out on the other side of a few more of these close battles, even at this stage of his career would not be disappointing. Do not want to see him stumble over the record when Nadal is struggling with his knees etc or is knocked out by Murray or Djokovic. I personally think the outcome of their future games is more important than passing the great Sampras or pundits labelling him the greatest ever, in terms of his career.

Great sportsmen, no matter what the sport is, are supposed to rise to the biggest challenges of their careers regardless of circumstances. I still think he has the desire to put maximum effort into that, especially after seeing what it meant to him today.
 
Federer was never at his best last year and only got close to Rafa at Wimbledon because of the free points a player like him gets on serve. A fitter Federer would therefore be the favourite in June.

Rafa is usually fecked for the US Open and I think Murray will be Federer`s main danger there.
 
People were asking the same thing last year, and got an answer at the US Open. I think Federer's got a mental block against Nadal, and I'm not sure he'll be able to beat him in a final, but if someone removes Nadal for him - like Murray at the US - then of course.
 
Mental block thing is bollocks. Nadal has now proven he is currently better than him. It is not like United losing to WHU three times in a row, when the gulf in quality between two competitors is obvious.
 
How epic would it be if he wins the french open

I know doubtful, but i reckon he will win more slams in his career. Theres no doubt Rafa is number one but the divide between those 2 players and everyone else is HUGE.
 
crappycraperson said:
Mental block thing is bollocks. Nadal has now proven he is currently better than him. It is not like United losing to WHU three times in a row, when the gulf in quality between two competitors is obvious.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Federer has played brilliant tennis several times on big occasions and Nadal matched and surpassed him in every of them.

I have said this before: Federer is not the best player of all time if he does not overcome Nadal's domination over him.
 
Rahul said:
the divide between those 2 players and everyone else is HUGE.
Click to expand...

That was true from 2005-2007. It is not true anymore. In those three years the two of them won at least 10 of the 14 big tournaments (GS, Masters series and cup) each year. Nadal was the only player in the world who could regularly give Federer a game in those years.

Since then the gap has closed with Murray and Djokovic right up with them. Last year they only won 6 of the big tournaments between them. Murray now has a 5-2 head to head record against Federer and has beaten him three times in a row (four if you count their exhibition match this month). On ATP points won Murray was the best player in the world for the second half of last year.

I would say that Nadal is the best player in the world right now closely followed by Murray, Federer and Djokovic in no particular order.
 
Kevin said:
Indeed. Federer has played brilliant tennis several times on big occasions and Nadal matched and surpassed him in every of them.

I have said this before: Federer is not the best player of all time if he does not overcome Nadal's domination over him.
Click to expand...

Federer is past his prime as most tennis players are in their prime maybe between the ages of 22 and 25. Federer is 27 and a young Federer would have stood up to Nadal a lot more.

If Federer does manage to win two more Slams, he will be rightfully recognised as the best ever.

I think Nadal will overtake him though.
 
Name Changed said:
Federer is past his prime as most tennis players are in their prime maybe between the ages of 22 and 25. Federer is 27 and a young Federer would have stood up to Nadal a lot more.

If Federer does manage to win two more Slams, he will be rightfully recognised as the best ever.

I think Nadal will overtake him though.
Click to expand...

At 25, he already got beaten by a 20-year old Nadal regularly. When he just turned 21, he pushed Federer to a five-setter on his best surface (grass) int he Wimbledon final. Need I say more what happened after? Their head to head statistic says it all.

I'd say Nadal's simply the better player.
 
Name Changed said:
I think Fed has a couple of Slams left in him anyway.
Click to expand...

If he does not meet Nadal: yes.

Basically, Nadal had a day less rest after a gruelling match, then went on to beat Federer anyway. I think the writing's on the wall for their future encounters.

It's a bit sad for Federer though. In last year's French Open final Nadal basically showed Federer the gap's only getting bigger between them on clay (shitting on his hopes of ever winning Roland Garros and completing his set of Grand SLams), then he took away his Wimbledon title by beating him in his backyard (and best surface, although people then pointed toward Federer being better on hardcourt) and now he's completed a hattrick of public humiliation for Federer by even picking off the Australian Open title in front of Fed's teary eyes...

Destroyed in their last three meetings on three different surfaces in Grand Slam finals... Domination.
 
Kevin said:
At 25, he already got beaten by a 20-year old Nadal regularly. When he just turned 21, he pushed Federer to a five-setter on his best surface (grass) int he Wimbledon final. Need I say more what happened after? Their head to head statistic says it all.

I'd say Nadal's simply the better player.
Click to expand...


Nah! i dont think so. Nadal's unbelievable but i think its premature to say he's better. they are very different. I play tennis regularly and i can tell you its a bit easier to 'try' to play like nadal than federer. Federer's an absolute genius. I think the age factor's come into place here, and also for some reason i think he's usually intimidated before he even plays against him. I mean how come nadal always has a tough time with people like djokovic, roddick and even murray. whereas fed kinda walks by them? :smirk:
 
If Roger had served well today he would have won that match today. Really Roger should have won that 3rd set and then would have won the match. I think it is in Roger's head right now. I think he very well could win Wimbledon and the U.S. this year.
 
I reckon he will win at least one more Wimbledon or US Open
 
roon_ronnie said:
Nah! i dont think so. Nadal's unbelievable but i think its premature to say he's better. they are very different. I play tennis regularly and i can tell you its a bit easier to 'try' to play like nadal than federer. Federer's an absolute genius. I think the age factor's come into place here, and also for some reason i think he's usually intimidated before he even plays against him. I mean how come nadal always has a tough time with people like djokovic, roddick and even murray. whereas fed kinda walks by them? :smirk:
Click to expand...

That is true, Federer is the better player (talent wise anyway) and how he would love to win the French open, that would be absolutely sweet.
 
I think he will without a doubt, Nadal won't always stop him and if it's a GS final and it's not Nadal in the final he'll win 100% surely considering how shit other tennis players are compared to the top 2
 
I think he'll win quite a few more Slams yet, hes simply to good a player not too and all it takes is for Nadal to get an injury or have an off-day earlier in a tournament. My money would be on Nadal winning more Slams eventually though, and probably going on to be regarded as the best ever, hes unbelievable.
 
kouroux said:
I think he will without a doubt, Nadal won't always stop him and if it's a GS final and it's not Nadal in the final he'll win 100% surely considering how shit other tennis players are compared to the top 2
Click to expand...

Djokovic and Murray can't be ruled out of beating him.

Murray's proved he can do it of late. I'd be interested to see if he could cope with the pressure of a slam final..
 
Kevin said:
Destroyed in their last three meetings on three different surfaces in Grand Slam finals... Domination.
Click to expand...

I never realised Nadal whipped Federer 6-0, 6-0, 6-0 at Wimbledon and in Melbourne.
 
roon_ronnie said:
Nah! i dont think so. Nadal's unbelievable but i think its premature to say he's better. they are very different. I play tennis regularly and i can tell you its a bit easier to 'try' to play like nadal than federer. Federer's an absolute genius. I think the age factor's come into place here, and also for some reason i think he's usually intimidated before he even plays against him. I mean how come nadal always has a tough time with people like djokovic, roddick and even murray. whereas fed kinda walks by them? :smirk:
Click to expand...

I agree with this. Nadal is fantastic, but he is also a very frustrating opponent, there were many occasions where he couldn't quite put Roger away so instead just kept exchanging with him, eventually forcing Roger to make a mistake. But Roger Federer in his best form... just out of this world... he can consistently hit those corners and pull magic seemingly out of nowhere.
 
roon_ronnie said:
Nah! i dont think so. Nadal's unbelievable but i think its premature to say he's better. they are very different. I play tennis regularly and i can tell you its a bit easier to 'try' to play like nadal than federer. Federer's an absolute genius. I think the age factor's come into place here, and also for some reason i think he's usually intimidated before he even plays against him. I mean how come nadal always has a tough time with people like djokovic, roddick and even murray. whereas fed kinda walks by them? :smirk:
Click to expand...

I wouldn't agree with that. To hit the ball as accurately as he does, and as hard as he does, requires amazing technique. It's not a coincidence that so many of his shots dip onto the line when it looks like they're going well out. It may look like he's just thumping the ball, but that's just his style. Because of his swing and technique, and can look like he's just thrashing at the ball. He isn't.

I play plenty of tennis myself, and I've never seen a player who could do anything like Nadal, even in terms of style. It's incredibly difficult, and requires great physical abilities along with technique. Federer is the master of playing in the style that most coaches will teach you, no doubt about that. But what Nadal does is no less difficult that that-just different.
 
brophs said:
I wouldn't agree with that. To hit the ball as accurately as he does, and as hard as he does, requires amazing technique. It's not a coincidence that so many of his shots dip onto the line when it looks like they're going well out. It may look like he's just thumping the ball, but that's just his style. Because of his swing and technique, and can look like he's just thrashing at the ball. He isn't.

I play plenty of tennis myself, and I've never seen a player who could do anything like Nadal, even in terms of style. It's incredibly difficult, and requires great physical abilities along with technique. Federer is the master of playing in the style that most coaches will teach you, no doubt about that. But what Nadal does is no less difficult that that-just different.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Apart from his never-say-die attitude, Nadal's style of play is not particularly different from the likes of djokovic, murray, roddick, blake, safin etc. They all have the same two-handed backhand, they all chase after the ball with amazing pace, "just the way they were taught by their coaches" and i enjoy watching them. But in terms of technique, and pure skill, Federer is the only one on the tour with a different backhand;one handed, his backhand slice is also the best out of em', his 'run-around' forehand shot is sheer class, he's the only one that uses the forehand slice, i havent seen anyone else pull off a smash lob apart from him. and to top it all up; his footwork is out of this world, he positions himself with geometric precision, that's what makes him stand out.

I like Nadal too, but let's give credit where it's due!
 
manxmanc said:
Djokovic and Murray can't be ruled out of beating him.

Murray's proved he can do it of late. I'd be interested to see if he could cope with the pressure of a slam final..
Click to expand...

Joke-ovic and Murray are so far behind Nadal and Federer on their day. They're just not good enough at the moment
 
kouroux said:
Joke-ovic and Murray are so far behind Nadal and Federer on their day. They're just not good enough at the moment
Click to expand...

That's why Murray has beaten Nadal and Federer in their last few meetings?

It can go either way now.
 
In the big games though - he's beat Nadal once.

In the US Open final he got slapped around by Federer
 
He'll win one more Slam, possibly two, but Nadal is going to outshine him for the rest of his career.

The only people who can possibly combat Nadal for that number one spot now are some of the younger guys who haven't reached their potential yet. Murray seems to fare reasonably well against Nadal (better than Federer does, at least) and Djokovic could easily battle with him if he could stop being such a tit.

Possibly some of the even younger lads coming through might stand a chance, too, but I can't see anyone challenging Nadal for at least the next few years. I honestly think 2009 might be the first time in a while that one player has won all of the slams.
 
Tibs said:
In the big games though - he's beat Nadal once.

In the US Open final he got slapped around by Federer
Click to expand...

He was clearly nervous and off his best in the US open final - to be expected as it was his first slam final. In the six other games they've played in the last three years Murray has beaten Federer. That includes a match at the world tour finals and two at masters tournaments - including a semi-final.

Murray has to be the clear favourite to beat Federer on any surface other than grass.
 
kouroux said:
I do actually,I'm talking about the big picture. Yes in some matches Murray or Djokovic could beat the top 2 but when it comes to delivering at the right times and not bottling, they're not in the same level.
Click to expand...

Yes, Murray was clearly off his game in the US open final but apart from that he has fairly comfortably beaten Federer every time he has palyed him for the last three years.
It is not "in some matches" - Murray has beaten Federer six times out of seven over the last three years. Some of these were huge games; Master semifinals etc. Grand slam finals are not the only big games.

Since Wimbledon last year Murray has performed better than any other player in the world, including Nadal and Federer.

Djokovic is also right up there with the best in the world. He won the Aussie open last year beating Hewitt, Blake and Federer on his way to the final without dropping a set.

Murray was rightfully the bookies favourite to win the Aussie Open this year and was very unlucky to hit Verdasco in the form of his life in the last 16. Remeber that Verdasco only just beat Murray, taking five sets to do so. The same player was then only just beaten by Nadal, again in five sets. In both of these games the players were only seperated by a single point in the overall match stats.

For some (maybe obvious) reasons the public have not too Murray that much and seem not to rate him much as a player. In actuality he is right up there with the best in the world. He is behind Nadal on clay but probably ahead of him on the hard courts. He is clearly better than Federer on hard and indoor courts -they have not yet on clay so it is hard to make a judgement about that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.