View Full Version : Roger Federer
spud_gun
08-09-06, 03:01 AM
Is there any other sportsman on the planet who is as utterly dominant in their respective sport than Federer?
I'm inclined to believe that he is actually the greatest sportsman currently plying his trade in the world.
The fella is pretty much untouchable in his chosen sport....
lfc4ever
08-09-06, 03:39 AM
Woods, had a tricky patch getting over his fathers illness & subsequent passing away, but look at the ranking points, like Feds, miles & miles ahead of No2.
And did you know Sharapova earns more money than Feds?? Strange, but true. sadly. But no-one earns more than Woods, Schuey second and was just as unbeatable during his 5 years as world champion.
Good call though, Feds just looks good, effortless & cool on the court, just "plays" opponents off the park when he's in the mood.
its all about being in the right frameof mind and when these guys are ....they are head and shoulders above others.
Phil Taylor Could be included in that.....if Darts is a sport!
I thought shuey was on more than woods?
Bah, Feds is knobbin shapranova now too :(
I thought shuey was on more than woods?
Bah, Feds is knobbin shapranova now too :(
Talk about a tennis wonderkid.....would it be better than Graf/Agassi's?
Serhij Bubka was worse (pole vault).
Serhij Bubka was worse (pole vault).
he was quality spent years raising the bar by 5cm a time so he would get a world record bonus everytime he went to an athletics meeting. Genius
he was quality spent years raising the bar by 5cm a time so he would get a world record bonus everytime he went to an athletics meeting. Genius
Nah, he didn't even do 5cm at a time. His records were always 1cm higher!!
Fair play to him I say.
Nah, he didn't even do 5cm at a time. His records were always 1cm higher!!
Fair play to him I say.
to right!! for some reason i thought u could only raise it 5cm at a time? but hey wtf do i know!
Phil "the Power" Taylor has won something like 12 world titles, that's pretty dominant.
Phil "the Power" Taylor has won something like 12 world titles, that's pretty dominant.
yeh i mentioned him....if darts is a sport !!
dirty_sanchez
08-09-06, 02:23 PM
Valentino Rossi
Although his bike is a heap of shit this year.
saveferris
08-09-06, 04:30 PM
Is there any other sportsman on the planet who is as utterly dominant in their respective sport than Federer?
I'm inclined to believe that he is actually the greatest sportsman currently plying his trade in the world.
The fella is pretty much untouchable in his chosen sport....
They were talking about this on 5live today. They said he has to be because he consistently is successful in matchplay situations. Only two defeats this year tells its story. They said Woods is amazing but he doesnt have the consistency. He would have to win every tournament pretty much to be on the same level.
Would have said Schumacher a couple of years back but thankfully others can win races now
Federer is the best sportsman in the world today.
Milan_Milan
08-09-06, 09:34 PM
Ponting is so far ahead as a batsman it's untrue. But on the other hand in a team game you cant really call him dominant in the way that Schumacher or Federer are/were.
Ponting is so far ahead as a batsman it's untrue
:confused:
You reckon??
He's obviously a class batsman but he's not the best in the world and NO WAY can he even be mentioned in a thread about "who is the greatest sportsman in the world today".
Milan_Milan
08-09-06, 09:42 PM
He's a cut above anyone else with Lara struggling for form and Tendulkar coming back from injury. Sehwag on his day can be nearly as destructive, but thats about it.
As I said, with a team sport its difficult to make assertions as to anyone being one of the greatest sportsmen in the world, but if you look at his recent record, its well in excess of anyone elses, in the same manner as Federers and Woods' are. Overall I'd go for Fed though as the best.
ningnangnong
09-09-06, 01:05 AM
If you mention Ponting, you have to mention Warne. :handshake:
Regardless of his off-field crap, he's a fuckin legendary bowler. :rock:
If you mention Ponting, you have to mention Warne. :handshake:
Regardless of his off-field crap, he's a fuckin legendary bowler. :rock:
The greatest bowler of all time no less.
lfc4ever
09-09-06, 01:27 AM
Anyone think Muri should be allowed to be a "bowler"? http://www.ynwa.tv/forum/style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif
Or, like that unconventional SA Adams, anything goes as long as it isn't baseball style chucking?
I'll allow the Warne nomination but Ponting? ? ? :confused:
He is not even the best batsman in the world, Lara is streets ahead in terms of runs and technique and Tendulkhar is also better but is suffering from chronic injuries.
I wouldn't say Ponting is the best batsman in the world, let alone the best cricketer, let alone best sportsman in the world. Are you his brother or something Milan?
Red_Al_77
09-09-06, 09:53 AM
Yousuf is up with Ponting this year and over his career Tendulkar and Lara have been better. Federer is the best player during his career, as is Tiger Woods, Schumacher, and Phil Tyalor amongst others. To pick out one sportsman over others and say he is the best is not possible. If you want to say whether one person is more dominant in his sport compared to others in theirs then I'd say Woods. Until Federer wins the French he cannot be classed as totally dominant. Woods has won all 4 majors on the trot, won 12 majors, will probably eclipse Nicklaus...and then some. Federer has 8 and with Nadal getting better I think he'll struggle to beat Sampras' record. Words will probably beat Sam Snead's record but Federer hasn't a hope in hell of overtaking Connors (even Sampras got nowhere near). The bottom line is Woods will probably go on to break every important record in Golf and Federer will probably not (looking at the stats etc). Ponting is a great batsman but he isn't a patch on Bradman.
Oh and Warne is the greatest bowler ever but the records show otherwise.
Yousuf is up with Ponting this year and over his career Tendulkar and Lara have been better. Federer is the best player during his career, as is Tiger Woods, Schumacher, and Phil Tyalor amongst others. To pick out one sportsman over others and say he is the best is not possible. If you want to say whether one person is more dominant in his sport compared to others in theirs then I'd say Woods. Until Federer wins the French he cannot be classed as totally dominant. Woods has won all 4 majors on the trot, won 12 majors, will probably eclipse Nicklaus...and then some. Federer has 8 and with Nadal getting better I think he'll struggle to beat Sampras' record. Words will probably beat Sam Snead's record but Federer hasn't a hope in hell of overtaking Connors (even Sampras got nowhere near). The bottom line is Woods will probably go on to break every important record in Golf and Federer will probably not (looking at the stats etc). Ponting is a great batsman but he isn't a patch on Bradman.
Oh and Warne is the greatest bowler ever but the records show otherwise.
Sampras has the grand slam recor (is it 14?). He'll probably get that.
Connors has the most singles titles (109), while Federer is on 40. Can he match it depends how long he decides to play for :haha:
Red_Al_77
09-09-06, 10:05 AM
There is no seeding in Golf. Woods is better.End of :D
Milan_Milan
09-09-06, 10:49 AM
Over the last 20 Test Matches (4/5 series, 2ish years) they've played:
Ponting : 2135 runs @ 68.87, 10*100, 8*50
Yousuf: 2060 runs @ 58.85, 8*100, 4*50
Lara: 1675 runs @ 44.07, 6*100, 3*50
Tendulkar: 1010 runs @ 37.40, 2*100, 4*50
Yousuf has done better than I thought I must admit. But Lara and Tendulkar, brilliant in their pomp though they were, and still capable of outstanding innings, can't match him for consistency and sheer weight of runs. Yousuf also scored over a thousand of those runs in his last 8 games, which whilst an incredible achievement suggests that the previous 12 werent that hot, and puts a doubt over his long term consistency.
Yousufs previous 12 games: 937 runs @ 39.04, 3*100, 2*50
Some others I thought might be worth mentioning:
Inzamam: 1623 runs @ 54.10, 6*100, 8*50
Kallis: 1825 runs @ 60.83, 7*100, 8*50
Dravid: 1846 runs @ 65.92, 6*100, 7*50
Jayawardene: 1617 runs @ 50.53, 5*100, 8*50
None of these scored as many runs, and their averages were helped by not outs, also none of them have topped 10 hundreds in their last 20 games.
Perhaps as I said before he cant be mentioned among the most dominant sportsmen in the world, but to my mind he's certainly the worlds premier batsman.
There is no seeding in Golf. Woods is better.End of :D
If I had to put my life on Federer to beat anyone at Wimbledon vs Tiger Woods to win a round of golf against anyone..... well it's Federer every time.:handshake:
ningnangnong
09-09-06, 12:04 PM
If I had to put my life on Federer to beat anyone at Wimbledon vs Tiger Woods to win a round of golf against anyone..... well it's Federer every time.:handshake:
Sums it up perfectly. :handshake:
Red_Al_77
09-09-06, 12:13 PM
If I had to put my life on Federer to beat anyone at Wimbledon vs Tiger Woods to win a round of golf against anyone..... well it's Federer every time.:handshake:
At Wimbledon probably. At Roland Garos...no. Therein lies the difference. Put Woods on any course in the world and against any player over 18holes he'd more often than not be better. Until Federer wins the French he's not the top man everywhere.
Federer has lost 6 times to Henman and once to Kevin the Scotsman. Hardly convincing :D
At Wimbledon probably. At Roland Garos...no. Therein lies the difference. Put Woods on any course in the world and against any player over 18holes he'd more often than not be better. Until Federer wins the French he's not the top man everywhere.
Federer has lost 6 times to Henman and once to Kevin the Scotsman. Hardly convincing :D
I'm sure we could find courses around the world that aren't suited to Tiger's game ;)
Federer's lost 14 games out of the last 220-ish*, he's amazing to watch and a true gentleman :handshake:
That's just ridiculous.:rock:
* and a few of those were down to injury ;)
Jayesh87
09-09-06, 03:46 PM
I'm sure we could find courses around the world that aren't suited to Tiger's game ;)
Federer's lost 14 games out of the last 220-ish*, he's amazing to watch and a true gentleman :handshake:
That's just ridiculous.:rock:
* and a few of those were down to injury ;)
loved his showboat against Tiger Tim :haha:
lfc4ever
09-09-06, 09:37 PM
Feds, another Slam final, the sixth on the trot, setting another record, and he didn't get out of first gear, will be well rested for tomorrow's final.
Anyone give Roddick a prayer against Federer?
To think he's won 8 (soon to be 9) Grand Slams already, he'll easily pass Sampras, probably in the next 3 years.
Only Lendl and McEnroe have won 3 consecutive US opens, Federer is about to equal that. Next year he'll equal Borg's Wimbledon record of 5 in a row.
Phenomenal.
Anyone give Roddick a prayer against Federer?
To think he's won 8 (soon to be 9) Grand Slams already, he'll easily pass Sampras, probably in the next 3 years.
Only Lendl and McEnroe have won 3 consecutive US opens, Federer is about to equal that. Next year he'll equal Borg's Wimbledon record of 5 in a row.
Phenomenal.
IF ....
I play both games at a very low level :D .............and golf is by far the harder game to master :handshake:
I play both games at a very low level :D .............and golf is by far the harder game to master :handshake:
Name me one discipline that you master apart from shagging.
CharlieMansonsSquint
11-09-06, 06:15 PM
At Wimbledon probably. At Roland Garos...no. Therein lies the difference. Put Woods on any course in the world and against any player over 18holes he'd more often than not be better. Until Federer wins the French he's not the top man everywhere.
Federer has lost 6 times to Henman and once to Kevin the Scotsman. Hardly convincing :D
Until he wins the French he can't be considered the best ever.
Still I think it's only a matter of time. Apart from Nadal on clay nobody's anywhere near him.
He's still only 25. He's already got 9 major titles. 6 out of the last 8. 20 odd is well within reach.
Until he wins the French he can't be considered the best ever.
Still I think it's only a matter of time. Apart from Nadal on clay nobody's anywhere near him.
He's still only 25. He's already got 9 major titles. 6 out of the last 8. 20 odd is well within reach.
Surely just a matter of time. He's been very close at Roland Garros a few times and I'm sure he'll win it before long.
In my eyes he's the best to ever play the game, but I guess it won't unanimously accepted until the wins the French.
Federer is not just the best, it's the way he plays - I'd have loved to have seen a clash at Wimbledon of Sampras in his prime against Federer now - what a match that would have made.
Federer would've kicked his arse.
univofchicago
12-09-06, 12:43 PM
I'd have loved to have seen a clash at Wimbledon of Sampras in his prime against Federer now - what a match that would have made.
I've always thought of that! Would be a dream matchup...
univofchicago
12-09-06, 12:43 PM
Federer would've kicked his arse.
You really think so?
I think it would be really close...
Jayesh87
12-09-06, 01:02 PM
I never realised Federer had Tiger Woods in his box for the final supporting him! Surely Tiger should have been supporting his fellow american ?
Didn't Federer beat Sampras at Wimbledon when Sampras was at his peak?
He was the first man to beat Sampras for 4 years at Wimbledon so Sampras must have been in pretty good form.
Federer wasn't half the player he is now though, he lost to Tiger-Tim in the next game :haha:
I agree with Shaggy, Sampras may have sneaked a set but federer would totally dominate Sampras.
Federer would've kicked his arse.
Is that a fact! :haha:
Whilst I'd like Federer to win, Sampras at times was similar to Federer in that he was unplayable on grass.
It would have made a classic match.
Cantankerous
12-09-06, 01:28 PM
Didn't Federer beat Sampras at Wimbledon when Sampras was at his peak?
He was the first man to beat Sampras for 4 years at Wimbledon so Sampras must have been in pretty good form.
Federer wasn't half the player he is now though, he lost to Tiger-Tim in the next game :haha:
I agree with Shaggy, Sampras may have sneaked a set but federer would totally dominate Sampras.
Yup, he ended Sampras' run of 4 consectutive titles at Wimbledon in 2001. If you also look at Sampras' record at the French, he only got to the Semi's once and was generally out way before that. Federer has already made the semi once and the final this year and only lost to Nadal, who is arguably the best player on clay today. If he can find a way to beat Nadal on clay, then he'll complete the set. I don't ever remember watching Sampras with the same feeling of awe that Federer delivers, esp when he destroyed Roddick in the last set.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.