Is Federer That Good....Or is the Top 10 That Bad?

by Al » Wed, 22 Nov 2006 00:59

What do you think?

Is Federer THAT good? Or is it a bit of an illusion because the rest of the Top 10 are really of quite a poor standard....(Nadal aside)

I wonder how well Fed would have faired in the last decade with so many really gifted players populating the Top 10 for alot of the time like Agassi, Becker, Rafter, Ivanisavic, Kraicek, Sampras, Chang, Courier, Stich, Muster, Philappousis.......

My opinion is that these guys named above were not just a bunch of one dimensional players they were players who could really adapt their games to different circumstances, most of them Grand Slam winners in their own right, they knew a thing or two about going out their & winning the points through their skilfull play.....
The current Top 10 seem to know nothing about this....they all bash the ball as hard as possible from the baseline & wait for an error.....where's the skill in that?? Yeah they hit winners & some passing shots but that's mostly because their opponents are clueless when they get to the net....anyone could hit passing shots against most of them in that position.....

So I ask is Federer really that good or is his current competition making him appear better than he actually is?......wouldn't Sampras have faired equally as well in this decade.....hell until Agassi's body let him down he was still defeating most of these current guys & was winning Grand Slams until as recently as 2003 aswell as other titles up until 2005!!! That says alot for me about Federer & the current Top 10....

What do you think?

by **Squilari** » Wed, 22 Nov 2006 01:48

I think Federer could beat most of the times to Becker, Wilander, Edberg, Sampras, Lend, Mcenroe, Connors, Vilas, Courier , Borg , Nastasse and many top others so I´ve chosen the 1st option .
FEDERER IS THE BEST I HAVE EVER SEEN ON COURT.

by **Rob ITST** » Wed, 22 Nov 2006 05:14

I think it's both. He is up there with the best ever (Sampras, Laver, Borg), but I think he dominates so much because of everyone being so one dimensional (including Nadal, I don't think he'll be number 2 next year).

by **mar7xion** » Wed, 22 Nov 2006 09:41

Federer soooo good :lol:

by **SlicerITST** » Wed, 22 Nov 2006 11:22

I agree with Rob. His talent is up there with the like of Sampras, Agassi and McEnroe. Sampras had to face much tougher competition though so i bet Sampras level of play in his prime days was better then Federer's nowadays.

Just compare Federer at Wimbledon this year and for example Agassi his win in 1992:

Agassi his opponents were:
Chesnokov, Masso, Rostagno, Saceanu, Becker, McEnroe and Ivanicevic to win in a draw that also featured: Sampras, Lendl, Edberg, Stich and Krajicek.

Federer his opponents were:
Gasquet, Henman, Mahut, Berdych, Ancic, Bjorkman and Nadal to win in a draw that also featured the impressive likes of Bagdatis, Hewitt and Agassi?

Gasquet, Ancic and Berdych(I think next year will be his year) are great talents but no were near having to face opponents like Becker, McEnroe and Ivanisevic.

Ofcourse Federer doesnt get his victories easy and in the 1992 draw he would have been a contender as well. But he would certaintly have to exploit his talent to full potential to win Wimbledon.

by **cobarnew** » Wed, 22 Nov 2006 11:45

I think Federer is an amazing player as are the rest of the top 50 players. I have seen Federer play live and he is awsome, so fast and accurate. I think the problem is TV...it makes it all look so easy!

having a great time on the itst and hoping to offer more competion next season as I've been practising very hard.

See you in 2007!

Cobarnew

by **fred belin** » Wed, 22 Nov 2006 14:23

why there are no becker no ivanisevic no agassi agaisnt federer??
the answer is simple because federer is so good that no one candiscover his talents, he broke head of roddick who i think can have more grand slam without federer!!!
because federer is not sampras, he is damn better!!!

by Al » Wed, 22 Nov 2006 15:09

I'm just not convinced about Federer at all.....Don't get me wrong he's clearly a great talent but his record for me is completely unproven because no one attacks his game.......

No one offers any sort of challenge apart from Nadal, who will only sustain his style for a few more years before his legs give out on him (like Chang, Muster, Hewitt). Even Nadal has become one dimensional to some extent & Fed has clearly worked this out & knows exactly whats coming most of the time now.

I know it's really hard to compare different eras but for me it's the standard of ones competition that defines just how great a player is & frankly Federer has no competition so of course with his Sampras-like style he'll look unbelievable & floor them all.....you can tell he doesn't even consider his competition to be of a decent standard.....he doesn't even bother serve & volleying anymore like he used to......even being cheeky enough to win Wimbledon & from the back of the court!!!

Like I say he is obviously talented & I'm sure he would've been in the top 10 in the last decade but I'm also sure he would not have dominated in the way he is able to right now. That's not his fault of course but boy does it make most of his matches boring. I never get that excited feeling about any of his match-ups like I used to when Sampras would have to play some of the big names of the last decade.....you always knew that they were gonna push him all the way & it made for exciting games.....for Fed he has no one.....just about every match is flat because his opponents are flat.

Sorry for going on & on

but really I'm a bit tired of hearing how wonderful he is (I've also seen him play live btw), how he is the best there's ever been blah blah blah......it's a totally unjustified statement for me given the level of his competition.

Sorry I've totally allowed this whole Federer is the best ever thingy really start to affect me....mentally!!!

by **SlicerITST** » Wed, 22 Nov 2006 16:11

Al Jam wrote:I'm just not convinced about Federer at all.....Don't get me wrong he's clearly a great talent but his record for me is completely unproven because no one attacks his game.......

No one offers any sort of challenge apart from Nadal, who will only sustain his style for a few more years before his legs give out on him (like Chang, Muster, Hewitt). Even Nadal has become one dimensional to some extent & Fed has clearly worked this out & knows exactly whats coming most of the time now.

I know it's really hard to compare different eras but for me it's the standard of ones competition that defines just how great a player is & frankly Federer has no competition so of course with his Sampras-like style he'll look unbelievable & floor them all.....you can tell he doesn't even consider his competition to be of a decent standard.....he doesn't even bother serve & volleying anymore like he used to......even being cheeky enough to win Wimbledon & from the back of the court!!!

Like I say he is obviously talented & I'm sure he would've been in the top 10 in the last decade but I'm also sure he would not have dominated in the way he is able to right now. That's not his fault of course but boy does it make most of his matches boring. I never get that excited feeling about any of his match-ups like I used to when Sampras would have to play some of the big names of the last decade.....you always knew that they were gonna push him all the way & it made for exciting games.....for Fed he has no one.....just about every match is flat because his opponents are flat.

Sorry for going on & on but really I'm a bit tired of hearing how wonderful he is (I've also seen him play live btw), how he is the best there's ever been blah blah blah......it's a totally unjustified statement for me given the level of his competition.

Sorry I've totally allowed this whole Federer is the best ever thingy really start to affect me....mentally!!!

Quoting you always gives the threads some extra length.

For sure he is not the best ever seen but if he had opponents like Sampras, Agassi, McEnroe, etc every tournament i am quite convinced he could be the best ever seen.

by **mcfed** » Wed, 22 Nov 2006 17:13

I am amlost pretty sure that Federer is that good and would have been one of the best also if the other legends would play against him.
You must have a look at his style, he can play a good shot from every position.

by **Ir0kuM4t4** » Wed, 22 Nov 2006 20:10

Don't bet me wrong, I'm not supporting Federer because I like him a lot but in fact I can't agree with you Al. You say that Federer doesn't have competetion because the other players are poor. I think it's not like that. I think that Federer is so much better than the others that they look much worse on court against him. And Federer didn't have an easy draw this year on Wimbledon. I mean, I think precisely that he is so much better that maybe for him the draw was easy. But once he seems to be so good I think there will never be at least for now an hard draw...

by **EnormousNordicViking** » Wed, 22 Nov 2006 23:17

Federer is like a little kid,............ if he for some reason did not have his girlfriend and his mommy support him and take care of him he will be helpless........

Imagine this:
He arrive at a tournament without his two dominant females, what do he do?............He looses in straight sets regardless off who his opponent is..........
Why.....?

1. Because he do not know what to put in his tennis bag

2. No one told him to go to bed before nine o`clock in the evening :shock:

3. No one gave him a good night kiss and sing a goodnight song for him :oops:

4. He feels alone, and frustrated by the lack of skill to think for him self :roll:

Without his two loving females dominating his life, he is just an ordenary player Just take the time to observe this when looking at his next match......hehe

OK, i am kidding, but with a bit of truth in it

ENV

by Al » Thu, 23 Nov 2006 00:02

You really think his draw was difficult?

Henman - A Year from retiring!
Mahut - Who?? this dude has lost more than he won this year!
Berdych - Never been past R16 in any Grand Slam ever!
Ancic - A bit of a threat but ultimately has only made it to Semis in a Grand Slam once in 2004! Will never get any further either!
Bjorkman - A doubles player on the verge of calling it a day.
Nadal - On grass this was never going to be a true test for Fed.

Sorry but I disagree, this was not a tough draw. Sampras, Agassi, Becker, Edberg, Ivanisavic, Rafter etc etc would also have breezed through a draw like this.....

Really you think everyone is actually very good & Fed is so amazing they can't get a look in?......I reckon fed must be laughing to himself having such an easy time of it....it's so easy for him because everyone plays the same game against him.....every one of them is a baseline robot that can rally rally rally but ask any of them to do anything different & its game over for them....all they do is try to outlast each other in every point....not one of them goes after the point & attacks, I've never seen so many matches where points are won because the rally breaks down through a mistake.

I will say that Fed is the only one capeable of playing all styles....its just a shame that we'll never really know if he is as good as everyone keeps saying because his competition is so flat that he simply never has to do anything but stand at the back & swat it away. Imagine if his opponents really came at him, imagine those guys in the last decade charging the net behind their huge serves....they were like walls up at the net, he would really have to do something special to pass them or have to take the net himself....but instead he doesn't face any challenges like that, he has the luxury of time to get into position because no one dares to venture forward......

Sorry but I can't disagree strongly enough about the current crop of players....they are all dull & one dimensional with very little flair or natural talent.....where's the skill, the feel, the amazing shots round the net, the desire to get in there & win that point??? I can't remember the last time I saw anyone do anything that made me say OMG!!! how the hell did he do that!!! They're all incapeable of those amazing shots that make everyone gasp.

When someone comes along that has the guts & natural talent to do something different then we'll see Federer really challenged...but as everyone is just a clone of everyone else that person probably won't come along for a long time......until then Fed will just continue to romp through the dull field.

Jeez!!! I think I've said enough on this one! :shock:

But I'm sure all you guys who have been watching tennis for a long time like me will appreciate that opinions on such matters run strong & I just get frustrated that we don't see the best in the world really challenged.

by **Danish Champ** » Thu, 23 Nov 2006 09:09

hi, fist of all, sorry for my poor english..

but what a fun debat..

I thing fist of all we have to get clear what a good player is...

do he need to win a lot or just play the game like its sopose to be " play". if its his win, then is esy, but if its hes tennis geme, ther is for me only on who realy play tennis no matter what - Steffan Edberg. I know he have some wek side but over all he try all the times to win the ball. you never see him just whait for his opp. to make a mistake. and most importen, he use his head. but agian, try to compere the players is near inposibel, becurse of the game have change over the years and vill always do that.

a other thing, first then I start read this post I thing it wars about ITST players loool.... why not have this debat about ITt players - I mean most of the top 10 players use that kind of game and taktik like FED IRL use.... but in the end of the day its the win who caunt...

Dupont.

by **Ir0kuM4t4** » Thu, 23 Nov 2006 15:49

Al Jam, I can'ta agree because, in fact Federer played already for example against Sampras on Wimbledon and he won. On that time he was really a s*** compared with what he is today. His serve was much worse, his return serve was awfull, his backhand too. I mean, it's difficult to compare eras because nowadays the rackets are different too it's easier to play from the baseline too and harder to play always on the net because the balls come really more heavy and faster due to the modern top spin technic. Afterall I think we can't compare eras. But you forget Gasquet, Federer first challenger on Wimbledon. On the week before they had play and Federe won 7-6 6-7 7-6 or something like that, really close. I mean, if it was other player playing against his draw I doubt that would last so much. And finally, if it wasn't on Wimbledon he had already hard draws too. Imagine Roland Garros, ok Nalbandian retired but on the moment he did that Federer was winning already one set and going up trough the third. And it was clay, Federer worse surface and Nalbandian is very used to it. I mean, how many times did you see for example Sampras reach Roland Garros Final or even semi-final. He never did it. He only reached Quarter-finals and it was only once... :shock:

I mean, we can't say now that Federer is a bit better and the others are the ones who really play horrible tennis. I don't believe that all the players of the world are not good and that just Federer is "a bit" better. No. He wins so much because in fact he is much better than the others, but still the others are amazing players. But not enough for him.