2009 French Open: Roger's Grand Slame to lose?

[Sylvanfan]

Monfils did look pretty good yesterday. He'll be a tough match for Federer in the quarters.

It was nice to see Wozniak get to the 4th round too, it's been years since there was a Canadian singles player who could get through more than two rounds at a tournament like this. At least a Canadian who was playing as a Canadian, even Rusedski or whatever his name was had his run at Wimbledom like 14 years ago.

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Monfils is good. I like his chances against Roger.

Roger definitely hasn't been lights out for awhile now. My comments were not against Monfils, but rather the fact that Andy Roddick is such a disappointment.

[HelloHockeyFans]

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

To get a rise out of people...

Any way, I'm a big Federer fan... He IS good enough (his record clearly shows that) and an absolute class guy. Hope he does it... He's been having a rough time lately.

[Mango]

It's off to the semis for Robin Soderling. He just disposed of Nikolay Davydenko very easily!

[HitterD]

Originally Posted by HelloHockeyFans

To get a rise out of people...

Any way, I'm a big Federer fan... He IS good enough (his record clearly shows that) and an absolute class guy. Hope he does it... He's been having a rough time lately.

I'm not sure why so many people say federer is having a rough time lately. Other than the 2008 Aussie Open, he has been in the final of every single major tournament since wimbeldon 2005.

I guess he has to win them all to be considered playing very well. The way i see it, there is no shame in losing to Nadal, and doing so does not diminish Federer's abillity. All of his recent matches with Nadal have been razor close as well. He is still dominant in the big tournaments. I'm just disappointed that Nadal is out as i'd like to have seen Federer defeat him to win this tournament. He beat Nadal on clay at Madrid just a few weeks ago, so i would have liked to see him get a shot at him again.

I think this is Federers year to win the French, it's just a shame it wont be against Nadal as he still may not get full credit for a win unless he defeats Nadal on Clay to do it.

[HelloHockeyFans]

Originally Posted by HitterD

I'm not sure why so many people say federer is having a rough time lately. Other than the 2008 Aussie Open, he has been in the final of every single major tournament since wimbeldon 2005.

I guess he has to win them all to be considered playing very well. The way i see it, there is no shame in losing to Nadal, and doing so does not diminish Federer's abillity. All of his recent matches with Nadal have been razor close as well. He is still dominant in the big tournaments. I'm just disappointed that Nadal is out as i'd like to have seen Federer defeat him to win this tournament. He beat Nadal on clay at Madrid just a few weeks ago, so i would have liked to see him get a shot at him again.

I think this is Federers year to win the French, it's just a shame it wont be against Nadal as he still may not get full credit for a win unless he defeats Nadal on Clay to do it.

Well, not to discredit his opponents, but from what I see when I watch him play is he makes a lot of errors on his own (eg. firing drives long/wide under no pressure) to really get himself behind the 8-ball... and he seems to be doing this with a lot more frequency of late.

[HOOT]

Roddick is a ######bag!

That is all...

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

Roger definitely hasn't been lights out for awhile now. My comments were not against Monfils, but rather the fact that Andy Roddick is such a disappointment.

Oh I know, I was just replying in general how good Monfils is.
Roddick has always been a dissapointment, he's not that good.
Other than a big serve, he's hired coach after coach to help him with the other aspects but they've all failed.

[albertGQ]

HitterD, I beleive Nadal beat Roger in straight sets at last year's French final. So although most of the matches are close (see Winbledon 2008), there was a blowout in there as well.

[HitterD]

Originally Posted by albertGQ

HitterD, I beleive Nadal beat Roger in straight sets at last year's French final. So although most of the matches are close (see Winbledon 2008), there was a blowout in there as well.

right, i should have excluded the French as that tournament has always been a specialty for Nadal and of course Federer has not won it yet. Heck, Sampras never won it himself. The clay game is just so different it is really hard to compare Tennis greats on that court.

Federer did beat Nadal on clay a couple of weeks ago at Madrid, so he is capable.

but, yes, i forgot about the 08 French Open. I just think expectations are unrealistic for a legend like Federer. If he is not dominating every match on the way to the final, people think he is not on top of his game. As great a Federer is, no player can completely dominate all the time. The guy will soon hold the record for most career Majors.

Tiger Woods does not dominate every tournament, (or even 1/3 for that matter). Nobody seems to be in any doubt that he is still a dominant player, however.

/rant

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Oh I know, I was just replying in general how good Monfils is.
Roddick has always been a dissapointment, he's not that good.

But, but Roddick told Monfils, "You're not good enough to be that cocky!"

Truth is...Roddick, you're not good enough anymore to be as cocky as you are.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

But, but Roddick told Monfils, "You're not good enough to be that cocky!"

Truth is...Roddick, you're not good enough anymore to be as cocky as you are.

Is Roddick really that cocky? All tennis players are pretty cocky. Look at Jokeovic who gets mad at the opposing crowds.

[albertGQ]

Originally Posted by HitterD

right, i should have excluded the French as that tournament has always been a specialty for Nadal and of course Federer has not won it yet. Heck, Sampras never won it himself. The clay game is just so different it is really hard to compare Tennis greats on that court.

Federer did beat Nadal on clay a couple of weeks ago at Madrid, so he is capable.

but, yes, i forgot about the 08 French Open. I just think expectations are unrealistic for a legend like Federer. If he is not dominating every match on the way to the final, people think he is not on top of his game. As great a Federer is, no player can completely dominate all the time. The guy will soon hold the record for most career Majors.

Tiger Woods does not dominate every tournament, (or even 1/3 for that matter). Nobody seems to be in any doubt that he is still a dominant player, however.

/rant

Yeah, as a Roger fan, I too try to forget last year's French final.

I think the reason people critisize Roger for not dominating all the time is because he used to be that dominant. It used to be a big deal if he didn't win a tournament. Now we no longer see the invincable Roger like we once did. Prior to Nadal's rise, if you had to bet whether Roger would win 2 or 4 grand slams in a year, your money had to be on 4.

Tiger has never dominated golf like Roger dominated tennis. Roger created this monster himself by being so dominant. I just hope he can win some more grand slams because eventually Rafa will be challenging for the most grand slams in a career

[malcolmk14]

It's not very fair to compare dominant in golf to dominant in tennis. In tennis, you're going up against one person at a time. In golf, you're challenging the course and simultaneously taking on 100+ people at a time for four days straight for the best score.

If you compare Federer's accomplishments to his competition, and Tiger's accomplishments to his competition, I would say Tiger is arguably more dominant at his respective sport.

Federer has 13 grand slam wins and the next best active player (Nadal) has 6.

Tiger has 14 major wins and the next best active players (Mickelson and Harrington) have 3.

I would argue it's much more difficult to win a golf major than a tennis grand slam.

[HitterD]

Originally Posted by albertGQ

Yeah, as a Roger fan, I too try to forget last year's French final.

I think the reason people critisize Roger for not dominating all the time is because he used to be that dominant. It used to be a big deal if he didn't win a tournament. Now we no longer see the invincable Roger like we once did. Prior to Nadal's rise, if you had to bet whether Roger would win 2 or 4 grand slams in a year, your money had to be on 4.

Tiger has never dominated golf like Roger dominated tennis. Roger created this monster himself by being so dominant. I just hope he can win some more grand slams because eventually Rafa will be challenging for the most grand slams in a career

Oh, i totally see your point, but i would attribute the lack of Federer dominance more to just how damn good Nadal has become rather than Federer regressing.

At least i hope this is the case, Federer is no spring chicken, but he is still young enough to stay at this level for a few more years.

One thing for sure, and i am a BIG federer fan, but i'm sure glad Nadal emerged. Things were getting a little stale when, like you said, you could bet on Federer winning 3 out of 4 majors every year. Now Nadal provides a good rivalry and the 2 play such exciting matches because of the contrast in their styles. They are fun to watch and i like them both.

[HitterD]

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

It's not very fair to compare dominant in golf to dominant in tennis. In tennis, you're going up against one person at a time. In golf, you're challenging the course and simultaneously taking on 100+ people at a time for four days straight for the best score.

If you compare Federer's accomplishments to his competition, and Tiger's accomplishments to his competition, I would say Tiger is arguably more dominant at his respective sport.

Federer has 13 grand slam wins and the next best active player (Nadal) has 6.

Tiger has 14 major wins and the next best active players (Mickelson and Harrington) have 3.

I would argue it's much more difficult to win a golf major than a tennis grand slam.

You say it's not very fair to compare, then you go ahead and do it anyway?

Well, in Tennis you need to win a 112 person tournament. in golf the numbers are a few more, but both high numbers.

Really, they are hard to compare because Tennis is a match play style tournament, whereas most golf tournaments are cumulative. I would argue the match play is more difficult. In Golf, if you have a bad round, you can recover with a good round 2 or whatever. In Tennis a bad round means you are out.

Also consider that Tiger has not faired particularily well in Match Play tournaments in Golf, which does not in any way diminish his dominance in stroke play.

It's just a very hard comparison.

[malcolmk14]

Haha I realize I said it wasn't fair and did it anyway, I was just trying to lend some perspective to how dominant Tiger truly is.

As far as his Match Play resume goes, Tiger has won the WGC Match Play championship 3 times and was runner-up once in ten tries.

Tiger also won the US Amateur Championship (a match play event) three consecutive times.

He also has a 3-1-1 record in Match Play at the Ryder Cup, the only loss coming in 1997.

I would say he is one of the best match play golfers in the world.

[ricoFlame]

monfils is gonna give roger a match in front of the french fans, hopefully...

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

Haha I realize I said it wasn't fair and did it anyway, I was just trying to lend some perspective to how dominant Tiger truly is.

As far as his Match Play resume goes, Tiger has won the WGC Match Play championship 3 times and was runner-up once in ten tries.

Tiger also won the US Amateur Championship (a match play event) three consecutive times.

He also has a 3-1-1 record in Match Play at the Ryder Cup, the only loss coming in 1997.

I would say he is one of the best match play golfers in the world.

But he doesn't play well with a buddy.

And he lost to Mike Weir!

[albertGQ]

Andy Murray was upset as well.

THis definately opens the door wide open for Roger to get that career grand slam