Print

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[gouravk]

while federer may not have been playing at his best he was playing much better than he did in last year's final.

[ramshorns]

I agree with Mary .. Roddick after today .. if he takes this right.. will win a few GS's. He showed he has the game.

good for tennis.. we need rivalries

Take it from me.  He does not have it in him to string together weeks of consistency to win it big.  If not by now after he had so many high profile coaches he would have won 6-7 slams.  This guy to me looks like a one trick pony with a great serve and mediocre overall game.

It is easy to get carried away by one off performances like this and get caught up in the occasion.  I have seen such occurrences many a time when a player shows great promise during a course of a GS only to fall back to their level of play eventually.  History of Roddick shows that.

I am not so sure I agree with this. Agassi followed a similar path and he ended up winning most of his majors after the age of 29. From the looks of it Roddick also seems to be improving some of his basic tennis sense - in the past his court position and the ability construct /finish off points was crappy. He also seems a lot more balanced on is feet making it easier for him to move sideways or up and down the court. I hope he continues working on his game because he seems like one of the good guys.

I will be pleasantly surprised if that happens.  It is a long shot IMO.  I always thought Agassi had a better allround game in comparison to someone like Roddick.  He had one of the best returns ever.  Agassi's fascination for food and joints like Taco Bell and Taco John's is what did him in before he took it more serious in the 1998 time frame to win a quite a bit in the back end of his career.  With Andre he was always tipped higher and had the game.   

With Roddick I do not see that.  How many titles did he win as of now. 25 or so and just one GS in about 6 years of Professional life and no GS title since 2004.   Like I said it is easy to get carried away with one week of promise.  His game is the same since the time he won the U.S in 2004.   He has been working on his game all along and his problem is partly mental too.  Nothing I have seen of him yesterday was a revelation.  His unforced errors were at a minimum that made him look so good.  Who is to say we will not see the Roddick of old?  The same Roddick who flatters every now and then to deceive.   I have seen a lot of one slam wonders over the years appearing great and their game flawless in that two week span never to show up again.

As of now I classify Roddick as a mediocre player whose best still cannot beat an off-color Federer.  It is our mis-fortune we are in a phase where there is not much excitement in men's tennis but for the Nadal-Federer matches.  No wonder no one cares much about the sport as much and its ratings so low especially in the U.S. where no one even bothers to tune in.  Tennis needs better players than Roddick IMO to revamp.

[poondu]

Extending the discussion by including another sport.

------------------------------

Who's the greatest?

Post categories: golf

Iain Carter | 09:36 AM, Monday, 6 July 2009

It seems absurd that events in a different sport can influence another, but doesn't Roger Federer's Wimbledon success further shorten the odds on a Tiger Woods win at The Open?

Federer's record-breaking 15th Grand Slam title no doubt generated a congratulatory call/text from the Woods mobile just as soon as Tiger had wrapped up business in Bethesda where he enjoyed his latest PGA Tour win at the Congressional Country Club.

The two greatest individual sports stars of our time (who don't propel darts for a living) are big buddies. They have us believe their bond is down the unique insight they share on how to utterly dominate a global sport.

Their conversation topics must include how to keep the opposition down, the media at arms length and how to make sure the noughts keep being added to the sponsor contracts they share.


They act as spokesmen for each other, bigging up the other's triumphs and excusing their disappointments. "And most people forget he was ill then," Woods has said many times to explain Federer's failure to win the 2008 Australian Open.

These two do share much in common and being mates makes a lot of sense at all levels. Tiger will be dispensing nappy changing and night feed advice before long.

But, perhaps more significantly, they remain big rivals as well. The BBC Television commentary on Federer's epic win over Andy Roddick duly noted that the great Swiss had rolled past not just Peter Sampras in the major stakes "but also Tiger Woods."

What was a golfer doing muscling in on such a huge moment for tennis?

Well, it is a reflection of how intertwined the careers of these two have become and it provides a reason why Woods becomes an even more dangerous prospect at Turnberry.

And this makes me wonder whether Federer is in some way Woods' biggest rival? Certainly no current golfer comes close to Tiger's achievements and it is hard to imagine one emerging soon.

So do we have to look to another sport to identify a true rivalry? If we do, then we should look no further than the six-time Wimbledon champion.

It was a question that floated around throughout my time at Wimbledon (I hot-footed there for Five Live straight from the US Open). Inevitably the other was who the greater sportsman, Federer or Woods?

The nature of the Federer's extraordinary victory will surely have nudged him to the front, just as Woods' US Open win on one leg last year (combined with Rafael Nadal's rise in tennis) had the American golfer ahead.

It's a fascinating argument with no definitive answer - and the fact that golfers don't have to run to play their sport is irrelevant. It is a debate about the skill and nerve required to beat all comers at games played the world over.

It is a story of two great competitors from two great sports plying their trade simultaneously at a level rarely seen before.

Yes there is an element of comparing apples with oranges here but there is enough common ground to still make the discussion as tasty as the best fruit salad.

Top golfers and tennis players share much mutual respect. That was evident from the golfing talent that joined us in the Five Live Wimbledon commentary box over the fortnight - Sergio Garcia, Rory McIlroy and Graeme McDowell all joined us and Adam Scott was also spotted at the All England Club.

But back to the two arguably biggest individual sportsman in the world. Federer moved from 13 to 15 Grand Slams to eclipse Sampras' major record by winning the French Open and then Wimbledon in quick succession.

Were Woods to perform at a similar level and capture the Open and PGA, Federer would be playing catch up again by the time he arrives at Flushing Meadows for his US Open defence at the end of August. This fact will surely not be lost on Woods.

Indeed, both would like nothing more than to continue a tit for tat rivalry and for the golfing world that means Woods will be as motivated as ever at Turnberry and Hazeltine.

Mind you, that would have been the case anyway - competitors at this level don't tend to need any extra gee up. Not that that should stop the discussions thrown up by the greateness of these two extraordinary athletes.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/iaincarter/2009/07/is_roger_federer_tiger_woods_g.html