Why Roger is the greatest ever Tennis player
Its been a long time to have hit some Realistic Thoughts. Got some free time yesterday and hit one which is close to my heart. Tennis and Roger Federer. I used to watch Tennis right during the days of Stefan Edberg, Becker, McEnroe, Connors, Lendl. Those people played some quality tennis. Next came the likes of Sampras, Agassi, Ivanesevic and all those clay court players from spain, france argentina, chile etc. Thats when i stopped following Tennis.
Yes Sampras and Agassi where great players(not the greatest). But some how they did not impress me. May be because of the two fisted play of Agassi. May be because to much reliance on power by Sampras, Ivanesevic. They never had the elegance of Edberg. There was one fella who played some quality tennis during that era. Patrick Rafter. I could not name anyone else.
Then came Roger Fedrer. Ho what a player he is. He is an amazing player and more than that he is a natural sports person. I am sure he would have posed a tough challenge to Tiger Woods or Sachin Tendulkar if has chosen Golf or Cricket. Unfortunately for the likes of Roddick, Nadal he took Tennis.
To me he is greater than others because, he is a sort of player who do not rely two much on Power(Look at the number of Aces in the recent U.S.Open. 66 after playing 7 matches compared to 100 odd by Roddick. Others in the list surpassed 50+ before quaterfinal stage, but none could surpass this guy.
He gives an opportunity to others. He is not one sided like Sampras, who relies more on his serve. He has a good serve(not booming), but if you can return well you have a chance against him. But again you have to be consistent.
He plays from the baseline. May be if you have the power and stamina of Nadal, you can beat him in some clay courts. Other than that you should be extremely talented to match his angles to win rallies. C'mmon if you want to win a Set/Match against him you have to win more such rallies. That means you have to consistent through out.
Roddick and Nadal are playing some amazing tennis too. If they were born in a different era they would have become greats. Unfortunately for them, they are in the same era of Roger. Unlucky for them.
As James Blake summed up.
“There are just too many things he does well,” said James Blake, after falling to Federer in the quarters here. “He doesn’t panic. He plays offense unbelievably well. He plays defense better than anyone I’ve ever played. He makes so many gets…volleys well, serves well. He’s got the biggest forehand in the game…. He’s handled the pressure of being No. 1 in the world.”
To me he is not King of Tennis. He is God.
Yes Sampras and Agassi where great players(not the greatest). But some how they did not impress me. May be because of the two fisted play of Agassi. May be because to much reliance on power by Sampras, Ivanesevic. They never had the elegance of Edberg. There was one fella who played some quality tennis during that era. Patrick Rafter. I could not name anyone else.
Then came Roger Fedrer. Ho what a player he is. He is an amazing player and more than that he is a natural sports person. I am sure he would have posed a tough challenge to Tiger Woods or Sachin Tendulkar if has chosen Golf or Cricket. Unfortunately for the likes of Roddick, Nadal he took Tennis.
To me he is greater than others because, he is a sort of player who do not rely two much on Power(Look at the number of Aces in the recent U.S.Open. 66 after playing 7 matches compared to 100 odd by Roddick. Others in the list surpassed 50+ before quaterfinal stage, but none could surpass this guy.
He gives an opportunity to others. He is not one sided like Sampras, who relies more on his serve. He has a good serve(not booming), but if you can return well you have a chance against him. But again you have to be consistent.
He plays from the baseline. May be if you have the power and stamina of Nadal, you can beat him in some clay courts. Other than that you should be extremely talented to match his angles to win rallies. C'mmon if you want to win a Set/Match against him you have to win more such rallies. That means you have to consistent through out.
Roddick and Nadal are playing some amazing tennis too. If they were born in a different era they would have become greats. Unfortunately for them, they are in the same era of Roger. Unlucky for them.
As James Blake summed up.
“There are just too many things he does well,” said James Blake, after falling to Federer in the quarters here. “He doesn’t panic. He plays offense unbelievably well. He plays defense better than anyone I’ve ever played. He makes so many gets…volleys well, serves well. He’s got the biggest forehand in the game…. He’s handled the pressure of being No. 1 in the world.”
To me he is not King of Tennis. He is God.
posted by rsrirams | 1:03 AM
|
0 comments
