Can Fed compete with the next batch?

by reckoner Mon 07 Jul 2014, 3:00 pm

In interviews he is rightly dismissive of the endless questions about retirement, so presumably he feels he can take them on.

However Dimitrov (the next big thing) is 10 years younger than him! Kyrgios is a whole 14 years younger.

Given his age is it realistic of Roger to believe he can compete with another emerging cohort of young players?

by Guest Mon 07 Jul 2014, 4:32 pm

Depending on how long he plans on playing for, and on his performances the last 2 weeks, I don't see why he would need to fear the youngsters. Look what he did to Raonic. Made him look ordinary.

by The Special Juan Mon 07 Jul 2014, 4:50 pm

legendkillarV2 wrote:Depending on how long he plans on playing for, and on his performances the last 2 weeks, I don't see why he would need to fear the youngsters. Look what he did to Raonic. Made him look ordinary.

He is ordinary Run

I think the Fed, realistically, can compete with this next batch for a couple of years but I don't see him sticking around that long. Dimitrov might be the exception but didn't they play each other recently and the old man won?

by DirectView2 Mon 07 Jul 2014, 6:55 pm

lets be realistic he almost pulled off the title yesterday against the current World no.1.

Can Fed compete with youngsters, answer would be yes.

Can Fed win consistently against yongsters, answer would be No.

Whats important is the belief to play at the highest level, and if he starts to think that he can't compete then he simply can't compete, and if he thinks he can compete then he can at the least try to compete with them and which is what he is doing.

by **laverfan** Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:25 pm

The Special Juan wrote: Dimitrov might be the exception but didn't they play each other recently and the old man won?

Basel 2013 QF - d Dimitrov 6-3, 7-6(2).

by reckoner Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:29 pm

I guess I meant consistently compete. Contend for the #1 spot, win slams.

Even now when Fed is "on" I'd back him against anyone, but those perfect patches are rarer and rarer when it matters. I'm not sure I fancy watching the likes of Raonic (who is distinctly ordinary) push a legend like Fed round the court to then be anointed as the greatest ever by the latest crop of numbnut fans (and McEnroe).

by Guest Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:34 pm

In terms of competing for number 1, I think that day has passed him by. It won't stop him aiming for it.

I do believe he has another Slam left in him. Maybe he can get the breaks that Nadal did at the US Open last year Wink

by reckoner Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:38 pm

legendkillarV2 wrote:In terms of competing for number 1, I think that day has passed him by. It won't stop him aiming for it.

I do believe he has another Slam left in him. Maybe he can get the breaks that Nadal did at the US Open last year

Arguably he got those breaks this year at Wimbledon...

I foresee the tour changing conditions to suit Fed's style of play just as he's too long in the tooth to profit from it.

by CaledonianCraig Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:40 pm

legendkillarV2 wrote:

I do believe he has another Slam left in him. Maybe he can get the breaks that Nadal did at the US Open last year

Sorry to be a party-pooper or dream-crusher but Federer had as great a chance as he'll ever get to win one last slam yesterday and didn't take it so I will say wit confidence that he won't win another one now.

Firstly, he got through to the final in quick time and short matches with the draw opening up for him.

Secondly, he was on his most favourite surface.

Thirdly, he faced Djokovic who is not recognised as a great grass-courter who was on a losing streak in slam finals.

And Roger lost. That was his chance right there.

by reckoner Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:43 pm

CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:

I do believe he has another Slam left in him. Maybe he can get the breaks that Nadal did at the US Open last year

Sorry to be a party-pooper or dream-crusher but Federer had as great a chance as he'll ever get to win one last slam yesterday and didn't take it so I will say wit confidence that he won't win another one now.

Firstly, he got through to the final in quick time and short matches with the draw opening up for him.

Secondly, he was on his most favourite surface.

Thirdly, he faced Djokovic who is not recognised as a great grass-courter who was on a losing streak in slam finals.

And Roger lost. That was his chance right there.

I agree. Same applies to Murray of course - can't see him bagging another Wimby either.

by Guest Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:44 pm

reckoner wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:In terms of competing for number 1, I think that day has passed him by. It won't stop him aiming for it.

I do believe he has another Slam left in him. Maybe he can get the breaks that Nadal did at the US Open last year

Arguably he got those breaks this year at Wimbledon...

I foresee the tour changing conditions to suit Fed's style of play just as he's too long in the tooth to profit from it.

I still think there is a lucky break out there for him.

A virgin Slam finalist would be a dream for him.

by reckoner Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:45 pm

legendkillarV2 wrote:
reckoner wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:In terms of competing for number 1, I think that day has passed him by. It won't stop him aiming for it.

I do believe he has another Slam left in him. Maybe he can get the breaks that Nadal did at the US Open last year

Arguably he got those breaks this year at Wimbledon...

I foresee the tour changing conditions to suit Fed's style of play just as he's too long in the tooth to profit from it.

I still think there is a lucky break out there for him.

A virgin Slam finalist would be a dream for him.

Eugenie?! He's a married man lk!

by Guest Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:45 pm

CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:

I do believe he has another Slam left in him. Maybe he can get the breaks that Nadal did at the US Open last year

Sorry to be a party-pooper or dream-crusher but Federer had as great a chance as he'll ever get to win one last slam yesterday and didn't take it so I will say wit confidence that he won't win another one now.

Firstly, he got through to the final in quick time and short matches with the draw opening up for him.

Secondly, he was on his most favourite surface.

Thirdly, he faced Djokovic who is not recognised as a great grass-courter who was on a losing streak in slam finals.

And Roger lost. That was his chance right there.

The Djokovic that showed up yesterday was in pale comparison to the one who showed up the year before.

by Guest Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:46 pm

reckoner wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:
reckoner wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:In terms of competing for number 1, I think that day has passed him by. It won't stop him aiming for it.

I do believe he has another Slam left in him. Maybe he can get the breaks that Nadal did at the US Open last year

Arguably he got those breaks this year at Wimbledon...

I foresee the tour changing conditions to suit Fed's style of play just as he's too long in the tooth to profit from it.

I still think there is a lucky break out there for him.

A virgin Slam finalist would be a dream for him.

Eugenie?! He's a married man lk!

by reckoner Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:48 pm

legendkillarV2 wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:

I do believe he has another Slam left in him. Maybe he can get the breaks that Nadal did at the US Open last year

Sorry to be a party-pooper or dream-crusher but Federer had as great a chance as he'll ever get to win one last slam yesterday and didn't take it so I will say wit confidence that he won't win another one now.

Firstly, he got through to the final in quick time and short matches with the draw opening up for him.

Secondly, he was on his most favourite surface.

Thirdly, he faced Djokovic who is not recognised as a great grass-courter who was on a losing streak in slam finals.

And Roger lost. That was his chance right there.

The Djokovic that showed up yesterday was in pale comparison to the one who showed up the year before.

Craig's just out to glory in Fed's loss as usual, I wouldn't bother indulging his "analysis".

by reckoner Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:49 pm

legendkillarV2 wrote:
reckoner wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:
reckoner wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:In terms of competing for number 1, I think that day has passed him by. It won't stop him aiming for it.

I do believe he has another Slam left in him. Maybe he can get the breaks that Nadal did at the US Open last year

Arguably he got those breaks this year at Wimbledon...

I foresee the tour changing conditions to suit Fed's style of play just as he's too long in the tooth to profit from it.

I still think there is a lucky break out there for him.

A virgin Slam finalist would be a dream for him.

Eugenie?! He's a married man lk!

by CaledonianCraig Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:50 pm

legendkillarV2 wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:

I do believe he has another Slam left in him. Maybe he can get the breaks that Nadal did at the US Open last year

Sorry to be a party-pooper or dream-crusher but Federer had as great a chance as he'll ever get to win one last slam yesterday and didn't take it so I will say wit confidence that he won't win another one now.

Firstly, he got through to the final in quick time and short matches with the draw opening up for him.

Secondly, he was on his most favourite surface.

Thirdly, he faced Djokovic who is not recognised as a great grass-courter who was on a losing streak in slam finals.

And Roger lost. That was his chance right there.

The Djokovic that showed up yesterday was in pale comparison to the one who showed up the year before.

Oh but of course. Just like the Murray that turned up in 2012 was a pale comparison of the one that turned up last year but what is your point exactly?

by Guest Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:51 pm

reckoner wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:

I do believe he has another Slam left in him. Maybe he can get the breaks that Nadal did at the US Open last year

Sorry to be a party-pooper or dream-crusher but Federer had as great a chance as he'll ever get to win one last slam yesterday and didn't take it so I will say wit confidence that he won't win another one now.

Firstly, he got through to the final in quick time and short matches with the draw opening up for him.

Secondly, he was on his most favourite surface.

Thirdly, he faced Djokovic who is not recognised as a great grass-courter who was on a losing streak in slam finals.

And Roger lost. That was his chance right there.

The Djokovic that showed up yesterday was in pale comparison to the one who showed up the year before.

Craig's just out to glory in Fed's loss as usual, I wouldn't bother indulging his "analysis".

I can see what CC is saying, but the one important factor was whatever Djokovic ate or drunk the night before or whatever Becker said to him lit a rocket under that boy's ass and he put it all out on court!

by CaledonianCraig Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:52 pm

reckoner wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:

I do believe he has another Slam left in him. Maybe he can get the breaks that Nadal did at the US Open last year

Sorry to be a party-pooper or dream-crusher but Federer had as great a chance as he'll ever get to win one last slam yesterday and didn't take it so I will say wit confidence that he won't win another one now.

Firstly, he got through to the final in quick time and short matches with the draw opening up for him.

Secondly, he was on his most favourite surface.

Thirdly, he faced Djokovic who is not recognised as a great grass-courter who was on a losing streak in slam finals.

And Roger lost. That was his chance right there.

The Djokovic that showed up yesterday was in pale comparison to the one who showed up the year before.

Craig's just out to glory in Fed's loss as usual, I wouldn't bother indulging his "analysis".

So why did you agree with me??

by Guest Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:54 pm

CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:

I do believe he has another Slam left in him. Maybe he can get the breaks that Nadal did at the US Open last year

Sorry to be a party-pooper or dream-crusher but Federer had as great a chance as he'll ever get to win one last slam yesterday and didn't take it so I will say wit confidence that he won't win another one now.

Firstly, he got through to the final in quick time and short matches with the draw opening up for him.

Secondly, he was on his most favourite surface.

Thirdly, he faced Djokovic who is not recognised as a great grass-courter who was on a losing streak in slam finals.

And Roger lost. That was his chance right there.

The Djokovic that showed up yesterday was in pale comparison to the one who showed up the year before.

Oh but of course. Just like the Murray that turned up in 2012 was a pale comparison of the one that turned up last year but what is your point exactly?

So you believe that the Djokovic that played the Wimbledon final in 2013 was the same level as the one we saw yesterday???

by reckoner Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:54 pm

The next Federer slam win will probably be by one of the four twins.

by reckoner Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:55 pm

CaledonianCraig wrote:
reckoner wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:

I do believe he has another Slam left in him. Maybe he can get the breaks that Nadal did at the US Open last year

Sorry to be a party-pooper or dream-crusher but Federer had as great a chance as he'll ever get to win one last slam yesterday and didn't take it so I will say wit confidence that he won't win another one now.

Firstly, he got through to the final in quick time and short matches with the draw opening up for him.

Secondly, he was on his most favourite surface.

Thirdly, he faced Djokovic who is not recognised as a great grass-courter who was on a losing streak in slam finals.

And Roger lost. That was his chance right there.

The Djokovic that showed up yesterday was in pale comparison to the one who showed up the year before.

Craig's just out to glory in Fed's loss as usual, I wouldn't bother indulging his "analysis".

So why did you agree with me??

Context is all.

by lydian Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:55 pm

It's not about age, it's about talent. If you have the talent and determination like Federer you can stay great for a long time. After all Agassi made USO final vs Federer at 35 years old and pushed peak Fed 11 years his junior very hard.

Despite some good younger performances besides Dimitrov I'm unconvinced about the talent coming through. Raonic is, and always will be, wooden. Kyrgios had a Rosol moment but let's see how he follows it up under expectation and things to lose. He's very good, but let's see if he's multislam good, I'm not sure.

The "big 4" have talent in abundance, look at how fast they got into the top 50 and beyond.

New young massive talent will emerge where it breaks into the top 100 before 19. I would say watch Alexander Zverev...last week he won a Challenger at just turned 17 years old, he's the 12th youngest ever to achieve this and beat 3 top 100 players en route. He's ranked 285 and rising. So outstanding talent may be coming through soon.

by reckoner Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:57 pm

That was more than a Rosol moment lydian, the kid is 19! (hello by the way, how have you been?)

Stop saying things like new young massive talent - this is a family friendly forum!

by Guest Mon 07 Jul 2014, 7:59 pm

The Raonic serve deserves a decent volleyer behind it!

by CaledonianCraig Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:00 pm

legendkillarV2 wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:

I do believe he has another Slam left in him. Maybe he can get the breaks that Nadal did at the US Open last year

Sorry to be a party-pooper or dream-crusher but Federer had as great a chance as he'll ever get to win one last slam yesterday and didn't take it so I will say wit confidence that he won't win another one now.

Firstly, he got through to the final in quick time and short matches with the draw opening up for him.

Secondly, he was on his most favourite surface.

Thirdly, he faced Djokovic who is not recognised as a great grass-courter who was on a losing streak in slam finals.

And Roger lost. That was his chance right there.

The Djokovic that showed up yesterday was in pale comparison to the one who showed up the year before.

Oh but of course. Just like the Murray that turned up in 2012 was a pale comparison of the one that turned up last year but what is your point exactly?

So you believe that the Djokovic that played the Wimbledon final in 2013 was the same level as the one we saw yesterday???

Where on Earth did I ever say that exactly? And what is the relevance in any case? Facts of the matter are that Federer got through to this final in quick time so physically he will now never be in better shape, the draw opened up and he was on his favourite surface against a player much-aligned on the net for his grass court talents (think that will change now) in Djokovic and he lost. This was his golden chance for slam No.18 and that is my point here. I've said how fabulous he did to get there and the scrap he put up on other threads by the way.

by lydian Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:02 pm

Lol. Until Kyrgios backs that up it's a Rosol moment I'm afraid. The kid is very good but one massive win doesn't make him the next greatest thing.

by reckoner Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:02 pm

legendkillarV2 wrote:The Raonic serve deserves a decent volleyer behind it!

Yep, but if you spend all that time gelling your quiff until it's just so, who's got time to practice?

by reckoner Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:04 pm

lydian wrote:Lol. Until Kyrgios backs that up it's a Rosol moment I'm afraid. The kid is very good but one massive win doesn't make him the next greatest thing.

clear difference between a mature player like Rosol beating Nadal and a kid aged 19 IMO. I'm not at all saying he's the next big thing but he has demonstrated extraordinary potential.

by lydian Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:05 pm

Don't forget Nadal beat the defending French Open champion at Monte Carlo Masters at age 16. This is outrageous talent. Federer beat Sampras in his own backyard at 19. Kyrgios has a lot to prove yet...but it's a good start for sure.

by bogbrush Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:09 pm

CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:

I do believe he has another Slam left in him. Maybe he can get the breaks that Nadal did at the US Open last year

Sorry to be a party-pooper or dream-crusher but Federer had as great a chance as he'll ever get to win one last slam yesterday and didn't take it so I will say wit confidence that he won't win another one now.

Firstly, he got through to the final in quick time and short matches with the draw opening up for him.

Secondly, he was on his most favourite surface.

Thirdly, he faced Djokovic who is not recognised as a great grass-courter who was on a losing streak in slam finals.

And Roger lost. That was his chance right there.

Again with this myth

1. In the quarter he faced the world #3, only possible because of Wimbledons seeding system. Anywhere else that couldn't happen before the semi.

2. In the final he played a Djokovic at far above the level he showed last year. I'm not having a dig by saying he'd have beaten Murray on Sunday quite decisively.

On the basis of this year I give make Federer 3rd favourite (just as the rankings are telling us). The guy finally plays with a modern racquet, who knows what is possible?

by The Special Juan Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:12 pm

lydian wrote:
New young massive talent will emerge where it breaks into the top 100 before 19. I would say watch Alexander Zverev...last week he won a Challenger at just turned 17 years old, he's the 12th youngest ever to achieve this and beat 3 top 100 players en route. He's ranked 285 and rising. So outstanding talent may be coming through soon.

I've had half an eye on him since last year's FO when Inverdale was all but proclaiming his unrequited love for the kid. Not a bad performance - Kamke, Golubev and PH Mathieu all fell by the wayside.

by Guest Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:13 pm

CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:

I do believe he has another Slam left in him. Maybe he can get the breaks that Nadal did at the US Open last year

Sorry to be a party-pooper or dream-crusher but Federer had as great a chance as he'll ever get to win one last slam yesterday and didn't take it so I will say wit confidence that he won't win another one now.

Firstly, he got through to the final in quick time and short matches with the draw opening up for him.

Secondly, he was on his most favourite surface.

Thirdly, he faced Djokovic who is not recognised as a great grass-courter who was on a losing streak in slam finals.

And Roger lost. That was his chance right there.

The Djokovic that showed up yesterday was in pale comparison to the one who showed up the year before.

Oh but of course. Just like the Murray that turned up in 2012 was a pale comparison of the one that turned up last year but what is your point exactly?

So you believe that the Djokovic that played the Wimbledon final in 2013 was the same level as the one we saw yesterday???

Where on Earth did I ever say that exactly? And what is the relevance in any case? Facts of the matter are that Federer got through to this final in quick time so physically he will now never be in better shape, the draw opened up and he was on his favourite surface against a player much-aligned on the net for his grass court talents (think that will change now) in Djokovic and he lost. This was his golden chance for slam No.18 and that is my point here. I've said how fabulous he did to get there and the scrap he put up on other threads by the way.

Like I said, if he faced the Djokovic of 2013 I would share the sentiment that it was a 'golden' chance.

by bogbrush Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:20 pm

Recent form has got me quite cross with Federer. This is unusual for me but there's a good reason.

Like, why the Hell didn't you get a proper racquet six years ago instead of playing with Pete's old stick??!!!!!

by CaledonianCraig Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:21 pm

Here we have the double standards again you see. In the semis he faced Raonic who, lets face it, is not ready for such a challenge. I recall last year how everyone swore the draw opened up for Murray when Nadal got knocked out but the same happened this year for Federer so please leave it out. In any case that does not detract from Fed's achievement as you can only beat what is put in front of you . As for your second point that is speculation. If you are talking of Murray of today then definitely but if we are talking of the Murray of last year then who knows.

Prior to Wimbledon this and last year I do recall saying Fed had a chance at Wimbledon but needed things to fall his way. This year they did and he still lost - that is the point I am making here. He may have another great run at Flushing Meadows but finds Rafa awaiting in the semis or final after he perhaps has to overcome Novak in the semis.

by bogbrush Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:22 pm

Great body swerve on him getting the #3 in the quarters, Craig.

What "fell his way" apart from Nadal? Dimitrov beating Djokovic, that would have been falling his way.as it was he faced the World #3 and #2 (now #1). What was he supposed to do, beat #'s 1, 2 & 3?

I mean, lucky guy!!

by Guest Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:25 pm

CC Murray faced 1 top 10er in his Wimbledon triumph.

Federer faced 3!

by CaledonianCraig Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:25 pm

bogbrush wrote:Great body swerve on him getting the #3 in the quarters, Craig.

Yes and by all accounts an ill one at that after making a flying start. In any case like I say you play the cards you are dealt and take it from there and Federer played them very well.

by CaledonianCraig Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:26 pm

legendkillarV2 wrote:CC Murray faced 1 top 10er in his Wimbledon triumph.

Federer faced 3!

What is the relevance of that to this discussion please?

by Guest Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:27 pm

I am more than happy Murray won Wimbledon. I was over the moon.

Yes Federer spent less time on court, but he faced an inspired opponent in the final. Even for Federer at this stage of his career that is tough odds to overcome even on grass.

by YvonneT Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:27 pm

bogbrush wrote:Again with this myth

1. In the quarter he faced the world #3, only possible because of Wimbledons seeding system. Anywhere else that couldn't happen before the semi.

2. In the final he played a Djokovic at far above the level he showed last year. I'm not having a dig by saying he'd have beaten Murray on Sunday quite decisively.

On the basis of this year I give make Federer 3rd favourite (just as the rankings are telling us). The guy finally plays with a modern racquet, who knows what is possible?

I half agree, but the draw (as it ended up) and the scheduling issues certainly worked out nicely for him.
I doubt he'll get an another slam purely because of Nadal and Djokovic, but if someone else takes Nadal out and Djokovic isn't at his best (and he has got some life-changing events coming up), then sure he's next favourite.

by Guest Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:28 pm

CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:CC Murray faced 1 top 10er in his Wimbledon triumph.

Federer faced 3!

What is the relevance of that to this discussion please?

Explain to me the draw opened up for Federer?

by bogbrush Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:30 pm

CaledonianCraig wrote:
bogbrush wrote:Great body swerve on him getting the #3 in the quarters, Craig.

Yes and by all accounts an ill one at that after making a flying start. In any case like I say you play the cards you are dealt and take it from there and Federer played them very well.

More cliches saying nothing.

What next? "The Jury is out"?

by CaledonianCraig Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:32 pm

legendkillarV2 wrote:I am more than happy Murray won Wimbledon. I was over the moon.

Yes Federer spent less time on court, but he faced an inspired opponent in the final. Even for Federer at this stage of his career that is tough odds to overcome even on grass.

I have certainly not said Novak played poorly at all but context is needed here. Roger is seen as the greatest grass-courter (or at least one of the greatest) of all-time whereas it is regarded as Novak's weakest surface. I wonder now whether that idea should change - perhaps Novak's weakest surface now is actually clay?

by CaledonianCraig Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:35 pm

legendkillarV2 wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:CC Murray faced 1 top 10er in his Wimbledon triumph.

Federer faced 3!

What is the relevance of that to this discussion please?

Explain to me the draw opened up for Federer?

Nadal (forget his grass court form) was knocked out and was scheduled to meet Roger in the slam semi. Sorry but Raonic is not in the same class. Look back to last year and see how many people here were saying Murray's draw opened up when Rafa lost early doors so I fail to see the difference here.

by Guest Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:41 pm

CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:CC Murray faced 1 top 10er in his Wimbledon triumph.

Federer faced 3!

What is the relevance of that to this discussion please?

Explain to me the draw opened up for Federer?

Nadal (forget his grass court form) was knocked out and was scheduled to meet Roger in the slam semi. Sorry but Raonic is not in the same class. Look back to last year and see how many people here were saying Murray's draw opened up when Rafa lost early doors so I fail to see the difference here.

Federer has only ever faced 3 top 10ers twice at Wimbledon. 2005 when he won and this year.

I fail to see how you can compare a draw that compiled of 3 top 10ers to one that featured just 1.

by YvonneT Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:41 pm

Not specifically to do with the "next batch", but in regard to whether Fed can win another slam, does what happened with Gulbis at the French raise concerns with Fed fans now, or showing pretty good mental resilience at Wimbledon, does that just seem a one-off blip?

by bogbrush Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:43 pm

Murray didn't play the #3 in the quarters.

Murrays not the point here but it's the only way to get your attention. The trouble with you Craig is that you get your opinions in bite size portions ready made from the media. They say it, someone repeats it, you eat it.

It's nonsense, he went through quickly because his serve was awesome right through until the latter stages of Sunday. Going into the 3rd set with Novak he'd dropped serve twice all event. That helps speed matches up.

by CaledonianCraig Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:45 pm

legendkillarV2 wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:CC Murray faced 1 top 10er in his Wimbledon triumph.

Federer faced 3!

What is the relevance of that to this discussion please?

Explain to me the draw opened up for Federer?

Nadal (forget his grass court form) was knocked out and was scheduled to meet Roger in the slam semi. Sorry but Raonic is not in the same class. Look back to last year and see how many people here were saying Murray's draw opened up when Rafa lost early doors so I fail to see the difference here.

Federer has only ever faced 3 top 10ers twice at Wimbledon. 2005 when he won and this year.

I fail to see how you can compare a draw that compiled of 3 top 10ers to one that featured just 1.

But a big difference you are over-looking is Roger is seen as GOAT (in many people's eyes) whilst I am convinced Andy's title now that he should be handed is the luckiest ever multiple slam winner of all-time. So you see the difference there nullifies the difference in draw difficulties in my opinion. Besides as we know seedings/rankings don't mean everything when it comes to how players match-up - some lower rankers provide stronger challenges than higher ranked players.

by bogbrush Mon 07 Jul 2014, 8:46 pm

Drivel

by Sponsored content