federer is more dominant in tennis than tiger is in golf already.
I think it's easier to dominate a sport like tennis than it is golf, because it has much less to do with consistency. Don't get me wrong, tennis takes a lot of consistency in the ability to take out an oponent, but IMO, it is harder to win a golf tournament than it is a tennis tournament. That's why you see so many more upsets in golf, because it's much harder for a great player to dominate the game. Even Tiger.
It's hard to explain what I mean. I play both sports, so I do know the games, but I don't really know how to put it. Oh well.
The reason Federer's competition seems so bad is because he doesn't let them win.
Pretty much.
There is a lot of good high level talent in men's tennis with Nadal and the other Spaniards, the Russians, Blake and Roddick, Nalbandian, Hewitt (although he's on a strange quick decline it seems) but they simply are nowhere near the level and consistency that Federer is. Men's tennis isn't bad, Roger Federer is just that damn good.
Federer has been quietly dominating tennis for several years now. Nadal may be better than him on clay, but besides Nadal and noone seems to be able to beat him. He's only 23 I think.
woops title is messed up lol
Actually I like it.
"You Have Just Been Federed."
Sampras had some weaknesses, like clay, baseline, and footspeed. But he did have that booming serve and the steadiness.
Federer does not seem to have a glaring weakness. He has great shot making and placement, and is affective on all surfaces.
I'll take Federer although Sampras was a career killer.
Federer will never be the goat. Anyone who's watch him and Sampras pretty much know Sampras in his prime could smash Federer. Sampras' game was much more fluid. He has a better back hand, equal or better forearm, better serve and a wayyy better volley. Federer coasts too much in his game, but I bet if they played 10 times, Sampras would win 7.
Sampras offense was a little better than feds but feds D was in another leagues from sampras. Fed is probably the second best returner in the game. I really wish they would have played at their peaks would have been fun to watch sampras serve to Fed.
i really like Federer and think he's a helluva player. still i remain more amazed by Nadal's impressively developed skills at his young age.
personally, i feel more interested to see if Nadal can find his way to be the GOAT. moreover, i'd like to see an epic rivalry developed between Nadal and Federer. but i guess more is to merge in the tenis world.
Federer will never be the goat. Anyone who's watch him and Sampras pretty much know Sampras in his prime could smash Federer. Sampras' game was much more fluid. He has a better back hand, equal or better forearm, better serve and a wayyy better volley. Federer coasts too much in his game, but I bet if they played 10 times, Sampras would win 7.
agassi played against both sampras and federer.
he said he thought federer is the better player of the two:
"I haven't seen it before. Pete (Sampras) was great. I mean, no question. But there was a place to get to with Pete. There's no such place with Roger. I think he's the best I've ever played against."
Sampras offense was a little better than feds but feds D was in another leagues from sampras. Fed is probably the second best returner in the game. I really wish they would have played at their peaks would have been fun to watch sampras serve to Fed.
sampras smashed them by Aggassi, if Feds was second best, how would the results be any greater? I do agree, Federer's baseline play is very defensively sound. He also can place that ball anywhere he wants.
Well, Sharpova destroyed the number one player in the world, Amelie Mauresmo. So she can play and tommorow she will have a good challenger in Justine. Federer is 25 and he should have not much difficulty facing Roddick but you never know with Roddick and his 130mph serve.
