2009 French Open: Roger's Grand Slame to lose? - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

albertGQ · 06-01-2009, 08:46 AM

I know there aren't a lot of tennis fans on CP, but this could be the year that Roger gets that elusive career grand slam. After years of experts saying this was an inevitability, this may actually happen in less then a week. Nada was upset over the weekend in the fourth round leaving this tournament Roger's to lose. And he almost did this morning. He was down two sets to love and roared back to win it in five. Novak was also an early upset.

I think Roger can do it this year. He won a clay tournament just prior to the French Open too, beating Nadal in the finals

Anyone else watching this great tournament?

ricoFlame · 06-01-2009, 08:59 AM

well, he damn near blew it vs. haas.

moon · 06-01-2009, 09:22 AM

What a very lucky break for Federer because despite the pre-French win I don't think there is any way that he would have beat Nadal at the French.

I hope he doesn't win because I don't like him, don't think he is good enough to have a career slam (but neither was Agassi) and think it would be unfortunate for him to win it like this as well.

Luckily lately Federer has shown that he can lose to anyone at anytime so it isn't just Nadal that he has to worry about.

albertGQ · 06-01-2009, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moon

What a very lucky break for Federer because despite the pre-French win I don't think there is any way that he would have beat Nadal at the French.

I hope he doesn't win because I don't like him, don't think he is good enough to have a career slam (but neither was Agassi) and think it would be unfortunate for him to win it like this as well.

Luckily lately Federer has shown that he can lose to anyone at anytime so it isn't just Nadal that he has to worry about.

What are your reasons for thinking that he's not good enough for a career grandslam? I'm very curious by that comment of yours

HOOT · 06-01-2009, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albertGQ

What are your reasons for thinking that he's not good enough for a career grandslam? I'm very curious by that comment of yours

You need a reason? Anyone with only a 683-255 (80.6 W%) career record, 58 Tour Titles, 13 Gland Slam titles and 237 weeks at number 1 is obviously not good enough.

malcolmk14 · 06-01-2009, 09:42 AM

The only people to beat him in a Grand Slam since January 2005 are Nadal (6 times) and Djokovic (once).

I imagine he'll take this one and tie Sampras.

145-10 (.935) in Grand Slams since Wimbledon 2003. Pretty amazing.

moon · 06-01-2009, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albertGQ

What are your reasons for thinking that he's not good enough for a career grandslam? I'm very curious by that comment of yours

Because he hasn't been very good on clay throughout his whole career. He has made a few finals but really isn't a guy who is great on clay and hasn't done much to show that he deserves to win the French Open.

Also as I said I would have preferred him to beat Nadal to get it if he did rather than luck out by having him get beat early.

malcolmk14 · 06-01-2009, 10:17 AM

Yeah, terrible on clay.

Three French Open Finals in a row a semi-final before that, three Monte Carlo Finals in a row from 06-08, two wins at Madrid (06, 09) and a Final in 07, and a Final in Rome (06).

Not to mention he finally beat Nadal (the best clay player ever) on clay two weeks ago in Madrid.

albertGQ · 06-01-2009, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

Not to mention he finally beat Nadal (the best clay player ever) on clay two weeks ago in Madrid.

That wasn't the first time he beat Nadal on clay either

malcolmk14 · 06-01-2009, 10:29 AM

Right, it was the second. My bad. He beat him in 07 in Hamburg if I remember correctly.

moon · 06-01-2009, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

Yeah, terrible on clay.

Sorry I missed the post in which someone said he was terrible on clay.

Where was that exactly?

albertGQ · 06-01-2009, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moon

Sorry I missed the post in which someone said he was terrible on clay.

Where was that exactly?

You said he wasn't very good on clay and Malcolm replied with

Quote:

Three French Open Finals in a row a semi-final before that, three Monte Carlo Finals in a row from 06-08, two wins at Madrid (06, 09) and a Final in 07, and a Final in Rome (06).

This clearly shows that Roger is very good on clay

Machiavelli · 06-01-2009, 11:27 AM

Roddick is still in this, so I'm cheering for that fat chance.

moon · 06-01-2009, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albertGQ

You said he wasn't very good on clay and Malcolm replied with

This clearly shows that Roger is very good on clay

Still don't see where he was called terrible.

Anyways not very good was a poor choice of words.

Meant that he wasn't so good on clay that it would be a big surprise if he never won.

He had good success playing against sub-par competition but he wasn't ever the top player on clay and it isn't a shock that he hasn't ever won it.

Mango · 06-01-2009, 11:35 AM

He had a bit of a scare earlier today, but was able to battle through it against a streaky Haas. I think Federer's biggest threat now is Andy Murray. I haven't had a chance to look at the bracket yet today, but I do know Murray beat Ancic to get into the quarters, so I'm not sure when he and Roger may meet?

And I know she was defeated by Serena today, but Alexsandra Wozniak is a bright spot in Canadian tennis! Good for her making the fourth round and upping her ranking.

malcolmk14 · 06-01-2009, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mango

I think Federer's biggest threat now is Andy Murray. I haven't had a chance to look at the bracket yet today, but I do know Murray beat Ancic to get into the quarters, so I'm not sure when he and Roger may meet?

They could meet in the Final.

Regorium · 06-01-2009, 01:42 PM

Fed's been the #2 clay player in the world for several years now, something Sampras could never say he was.

But yeah, with his recent play, who knows. If he wins, it'll be through a lot of heart and fight, and not luck at all.

Monfils up next.

Bertuzzied · 06-01-2009, 01:53 PM

Woohoo!! i actually bet Nadal to lose on the weekend! $20 won $700!

It is Feds' time!

Clever_Iggy · 06-01-2009, 02:29 PM

Andy Roddick out in straight sets. He whines that he cant see the ball due to lighting. That didn't seem to stop Gael Monfils from b**** slapping you 6-4, 6-2, 6-3, Andy. Get your eyes checked.

IMO, he's the most disappointing male Tennis player in memory. When he faces Federer or Nadel he rarely (ever?) upsets them. When the path is a little clearer (Nadel gets upset and Federer looks as vulnerable as he ever has), he goes out in straight sets.

GirlySports · 06-02-2009, 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

Andy Roddick out in straight sets. He whines that he cant see the ball due to lighting. That didn't seem to stop Gael Monfils from b**** slapping you 6-4, 6-2, 6-3, Andy. Get your eyes checked.

IMO, he's the most disappointing male Tennis player in memory. When he faces Federer or Nadel he rarely (ever?) upsets them. When the path is a little clearer (Nadel gets upset and Federer looks as vulnerable as he ever has), he goes out in straight sets.

Monfils is good. I like his chances against Roger.