This entry is now closed for comments.
@138 you are utterly ill informed Jr. RF said in the press conference the "better man won" when he lost to Zverev in Montreal he said to Alex " you played a great game" As for his back injury it was public knowledge so no excuses by him. Where are your examples of his smugness?!? There are opinions and people talking utter tosh on here. False? I State FACT unlike half the haters in here!
@135 khurramFederer hasn't been gracious in defeat - what you are saying is simply false. He always has an excuse, and often cries like a spoilt kid!People are entitled to their opinion mate. It doesn't simply mean they are jealous!
115Not that your other comments haven't mostly been tosh, but you've lost any last smidgeon of credibility saying Federer 'bottled it' in the 2008 final. Did you even watch the match? It was an astonishing performance from Nadal (and from Fed, in even defeat).
135 - Khurramsomebody who speaks wise words. well said totally agree with you
People on this feed criticise RF. He is smug or he is lucky or others are injured or won titles in a lesser era?!? Fact is he has won 19 majors and managed to stay gracious in defeat. Jealousy is what I see. At 36 still going strong. Let's see if the other big 3 are still going at 36 and beyond! TBH does he really care what you haters think?!? Haters who will never achieve his level of success!
Great victory for Delpo but the US open really screwed up the seeding with Andy Murray's last minute withdrawal. I never thought he would play with that sort of hip injury. RF should have been in the other half of the draw. People criticise Rf's achievement. He is simply the GOAT. We are in an era of a baseline slugfest and the ATP slowed courts to help the others and still RF longevity cont!
Phew! Just watched the match replay. Del Potro out-Federer-ing Federer, a sight to behold!!
117. Andrew178You need to rethink your argument. Federer was a late developer and didn't win his first slam until 2003, Wimbledon. Are you seriously suggesting he started fading in his mid twenties? He only went on to win another 18 slams - he was 22 in 2003 when he won wimbledon. Those who claim Nadal is BOAT, strip out his clay wins & he does not compare to Laver, Sampras to name but 2.
Constantly saying wins don't count because X, Y and Z are not at their peak is crazy Why not? So if X peaks for 2 years and noone can touch them, they play the best tennis ever seen, then fade So u think that X is the GOAT baedx on 2 years?
We're having some problems displaying the comments at the moment. Sorry. We're doing our best to fix it.
You must sign in to rate comments