http://desicritics.org/ Superior South Asian bloggers on Culture, Media, Politics, Sport, Business, and Technology. en Copyright 2006 by the authors Thu, 31 Jul 2008 12:19:57 EDT http://backend.userland.com/rss BC custom software http://desicritics.org/2008/07/26/092450.php#comment-338126 Agassi?? Agassi is like some of our cricketers..played long enough to win everything atleast once..... Our man fed had an easy time...it is a little tough now .... 338126@desicritics.org Thu, 31 Jul 2008 12:19:57 EDT http://desicritics.org/2008/07/26/092450.php#comment-338112 Lily, "Borg had McEnroe, and Sampras had Agassi, were any of them as tough a rival as Rafa". As John McEnroe would have responded to this: "you cannot be serious !" :-) 338112@desicritics.org Thu, 31 Jul 2008 08:14:17 EDT http://desicritics.org/2008/07/26/092450.php#comment-338086 Nishit, First off, just wanted to thank you for this article. It is the first that I've read all year that isn't filled with doubts about Roger. I personally find it insane that ppl could actually suggest the fact Roger is a lesser player than Rafa. Sure the guy's having the season of his life, but compare Roger's 12 slams to Rafa's 5, that pretty much says it all. I mean Roger Federer is undoubtly the greatest man who has ever picked up a racket. Sure, he's two behind Pete in the slam count, but really, name one other person who has dominated the game like Roger. Borg, McEnroe, and Sampras dominated for like two and half years tops during their careers, but Roger owned tennis for 4, and is still going. And no offense, sure Borg had McEnroe, and Sampras had Agassi, were any of them as tough a rival as Rafa. I bet if any of them had someone like Rafa on the other side of the net all the time, they wouldn't have won half the titles that they did. And to all the people making all the fuss about him losing #1, here's my response. WHO CARES!!! Even he does loose it, he is still the greatest player in tennis history. No one has ever been #1 for as long as Roger has. In fact, the runner-up is Sampras, and Roger's lapped him twice already. And whos to say that even if he does loose it, he won't get it back. I think ppl are forgetting that Roger is still the only all-surface player in the circuit. Djokovic is only as good as the hard court season, while Rafa is pretty much restricted to clay(is it even a doubt that he will hand the Wimbleton trophy back to Roger next year, if not someone else). I mean did all the critics really just think that Rafa was gonna be the new Roger? Come on, get serious, no one has the grace, style, and just that natural born ability that Roger has. In fact I thnk that losing the number one ranking might be a good thing for Roger, I thnk that he's been #1 for so long that I thnk it might be refreshing for him to be #2. It'll give him that extra drive. Lastly, for all the idiots wanting him to retire and step aside, all I say is, ARE U STUPID?!?!? how can you possibly even imagine tennis without Roger. Can u imagine how lame the sport will be. Sure Rafa's good, but lets face it, his grunts are no match for Roger's style and grace. A lot of people think that Nadal hits harder shots that Roger, but really its about the same. Its only that Nadal is working really hard for his shots, nd showing it, while Roger, working equally hard, makes it look easy becuase again, of his undeniable grace on the court. Anyway, I just wanted to thank you for this article. And, I too will cheering loud and proud as Roger makes his comeback(which, lets face it, he will!) 338086@desicritics.org Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:21:19 EDT http://desicritics.org/2008/07/26/092450.php#comment-337848 As a devoted Federer worshipper I'm not giving up on him yet! Remember we still have three Masters, Olympics, USO and Masters Cup in the season. Never say never! Who is willing to bet that Federer won't win at least two of those? I'm betting Cinci this week and USO. Nadal's rise to the top has undoubtedly been awe-inspiring -- he's been wayyyyy overdue for that #1 position. All said and done, possibly a "horrible" year for him and he'll still probably be the 2nd best player in the world? Not so bad, IMO. 337848@desicritics.org Mon, 28 Jul 2008 16:48:00 EDT http://desicritics.org/2008/07/26/092450.php#comment-337839 I am not ready to count Federer out. The man is too magnificent and he'd be a fool to quit after a rough year and at his relatively still young age. He needs to dig down and find his drive again...and I know he can and will do it. And after being tested as he was this year, the next victories will be even sweeter just as Sampras' and Agassi's were. I hope Rog talks to his friends Tiger and Pete...two greats who have not always won. But onward they fought. I like Rafa Nadal but there is no one who plays like Federer. Ranked number one or not, Federer is the master and a joy to watch on the court. Tennis would be lesser without him. 337839@desicritics.org Mon, 28 Jul 2008 09:55:38 EDT http://desicritics.org/2008/07/26/092450.php#comment-337760 "Not that the Wimbledon loss did not hurt." When the devil gets slayed, everybody should be happy! 337760@desicritics.org Sun, 27 Jul 2008 11:56:55 EDT http://desicritics.org/2008/07/26/092450.php#comment-337751 Hi Nishit That is a very gud blog ...... liked it a lot .... like u I'm also roger's fan n vil continue to be no matter vat .... 337751@desicritics.org Sun, 27 Jul 2008 10:30:47 EDT http://desicritics.org/2008/07/26/092450.php#comment-337691 roger federer wasting his time and focus in playing exhibition matches with the retired sampras pretty much explains his attitude the past year.IN FACT HE HAS NOT BEEN THE SAME PLAYER since then 337691@desicritics.org Sat, 26 Jul 2008 16:36:12 EDT http://desicritics.org/2008/07/26/092450.php#comment-337690 roger federer wasting his time and focus in playing exhibition matches with the retired sampras pretty much explains his attitude the past year.IN FACT HE HAS NOT BEEN THE SAME PLAYER since then 337690@desicritics.org Sat, 26 Jul 2008 16:35:57 EDT http://desicritics.org/2008/07/26/092450.php#comment-337689 roger federer wasting his time and focus in playing exhibition matches with the retired sampras pretty much explains his attitude the past year.IN FACT HE HAS NOT BEEN THE SAME PLAYER since then 337689@desicritics.org Sat, 26 Jul 2008 16:35:36 EDT http://desicritics.org/2008/07/26/092450.php#comment-337679 I am a huge Roger fan and i would want to see Roger play for real next year Wimbledon. I personally don't think trophies matter that much, For me if Roger wins French Open next year from Rafa, it'll be good. He's certainly done all the great things that you need to, but here's where you draw the line. People often commit mistake of comparing Roger with Pete, well Roger's game (IMHO) is much much graceful, natural and better than Pete's. The thing that stood apart in Pete from these greats was his NEVER ENDING and incredible hunger to win. It was this hunger that made him win some 7 titles and remember he was in 4th Round for the 8th Wimbledon title when Federer thrashed Pete's hopes. But when i watched that match i liked what Federer was doing on the court; and actually found myself supporting federer more than Pete. Before Pete, I never liked any of the tennis players except Bjorn Borg (who was off course before my time, but still). Bjorn's style matches Federer's playing style. Both of them have same kind of forehands (with minor differences). I just think that Bjorn was lucky enough not to have someone like Rafa in his time to challenge him, and funny part is that when someone did (i.e. when Bjorn Lost in 1981 from McEnroe) he Quit! I mean, that says a lot about his character doesn't it? The official reason was that he was tired of winning and playing tennis (because at the time he was defending wimbledon for the 6th time and gunning for 6th consecutive title, and also had 5 french opens ...) I don't think it was the reason, IMHO it was the fact that Bjorn didn't like loosing and he realized that he wouldn't be having same kind of dominance over the game once John was there. I am kind of fearful that since Bjorn and Federer have same kind of game, similar looking persona (both are very quiet during their matches, very serene) he will retire soon, because of a similar reason. That will be a big loss to Tennis. Justin's retirement this year was a shock to me, in many ways she was the Federer of women's tennis and her game was so much similar to Federer's own (single handed backhand, court coverage etc.) and now Federer may be? I like Nadal, he's a great baseline player, he can be a great grass court player if he continues to play the way he is right now; But its just that i find Federer's game more natural than Nadal's. Had Federer not been there, i would have rooted for Nadal too, but hey! :) Regards Vyas, Anirudh 337679@desicritics.org Sat, 26 Jul 2008 10:44:34 EDT