by the next big thing, Djokovic in straight sets. Federer's prime is over boys and girls. Dude is 26 and is heading toward that no-man's-land age in tennis where things begin to slip a little bit. And in the same boat, Djokovic and Nadal are in that 20-24 range which is the true prime for tennis. Roger will still win a ton, just because he is that much better than everyone else is. And he may still win 2-3 grand slams this year, but my point is that the days of him winning tournaments without losing sets and stuff are over.
Not so fast my friend. Just cuz dude lost one match does not in any way shpae or form mean his past his prime. Once he starts losing with regularity, then I'll believe that. He won't win the Australian or French, but I bet he still wins Wimbledon and the US Open.
well if you took the time to read the rest of my post, you'd see that I still think he will win a ton. But look at his matches. He had a 5 set match, he had 3 close sets with Blake. All my point was that the days of him winning every match 6-3, 6-1, 6-2 en route to the titles are over.
Okay, Wimbledon is grass, Australian is clay (Pretty sure), what is French? Was just wondering if there was any connection in the court surface to you feeling that cause I haven't kept up with tennis for years and haven't watched him. Just wondering here. *EDIT* Just checked, it's the French that's clay and the Australian is plexicushion* Still wondering about his play on various surfaces.
he is a master on grass. if he chokes at wimbledon it will say something. he is very close to hitting the downslope of his career but he still made the semis so it wasnt that bad.
If he's money on grass he should be killer on clay since clay courts are slower. Kinda what I was wondering- how his game differs from one surface to the other... being Wimbledon was a pick for him to win. Some players, in the past, haven't played as well on clay though.
clay has a real, real high bounce... which means a guy like Nadal, who can outrun anything becomes more of a weapon. It's not that Roger isn't good on clay. it's just that Nadal is probably the best ever on clay.
only tennis ive seen in a yr was the highlights of the first round of venus williams and her counterpart ana ivanovic. the new ana i suppose. Im suddenly a fan of the serb and tennis highlights. /hijack
Not sure why Federer has so much trouble with the French. It's not like he's horrible, he usually makes it to at least the semi-finals but then loses to one of the expert clay court specialists. I think the real problem for Federer is that the clear winners he gets on grass or hard court he can't seem to manage on clay since great clay courters can always run them down and return them. From a mental aspect, he hasn't seemed to conquer his demons on this court which would allow him to ultimately hoist that trophy. Federer will be the all time greatest men's player ever when its all said and done, but he badly wants to win the French to complete his legacy. I think he needs to win it this year somehow, as his chances are fleeting. As tiga states, you gotta have patience to win the French. It takes a totally different mentality.
