Fresh start and the Australian Open.

There’s something therapeutic about a fresh canvass, isn’t it? It lets you drop all the baggage from the past and start anew. That to many is like a new lease of life encasing within it the potential to either salvage from the rubble or re-energise the engines again in pursuit of the elusive goal.

New year resolutions are symbolic of that. What are the top two most likely new year resolutions for these clowns?

Federer:

1. Pull even with Sampras @ No. 14.

2. Win Roland Garros and No. 15.

Nadal:

1. Win a hard court major. Australian Open appears most within reach purely because it precedes the energy sapping clay season.

2. Extend point lead for the top rank.

Djokovic:

1. Win one major.

2. Take over No. 2 spot.

Murray:

1. Win Wimbledon.

2. Take over No. 3 rank.

I think one of the reasons Agassi won the Australian Open four freaking times (half of his total 8) is because of how seriously he took the new lease of life. He set his goals and like all of us was most motivated to achieve them in the first month of the year. The intensity and the results waned as the year progressed. Sure others resolved to duplicate that too, but Agassi’s passion to attain was a lot higher among other factors.

Agassi even beat his nemesis Sampras to win one of them. 

Some are able to start great but are unable to sustain the run. Others leave the best for last. Of course there are extenuating circumstances like the kick Nadal received from Djokovic this year, that add an extra spark to the pursuit of excellence.

The freaking point is this: The start of the new year brings everyone to the startiing block. Goals and expectations for the new year are reset essentially raising the win at the Australian Open a good measure of what the rest of the season may look like, specially now when very little appears to be separating the top four cats on that surface.

For each one of them, a lot more will be riding on it than any of their previous appearance here.

Federer can hope to play more freely and his natural game for the rest of the season if he can bag No. 14. Nadal will have covered another post in his quest to trounce Federer by clinching the career slam. Djokovic will have restored his position as the next best hard court player in the world. Murray will be hoping to duplicate Djokovic’s run last year by winning the AO after losing to Federer in straight sets at the US Open.

With so much at stake, whoever wins the Australian Open may draw first blood likely to dictate the rest of the year. Or will it?

Presidential election: Is the train wreck round the corner?

With the hits McCain has taken in the last few days, this election may turn out to be the most lopsided one ever, specially when it was ‘down to the wire’ barely 40 days out.

Two notable hits:

-McCain proclaiming ‘The fundamentals of the economy are strong’ barely two days before the biggest crash since the big depression.

-Irrefutable evidence proving the utter stupidity and irrelevance of Palin. Imagine this: IF McCain wins the election and if WHEN he dies, Palin WILL become the president. That will certainly catapult Bush to genius status alongwith Mondale, or what was his name?

Unless Obama magically turns into Osama, this can be over in a hurry.

For all those hurting due to this fiscal crisis, here’s my lame attempt to mitigate the suffering.

Click here.

The bunch in Japan in photos.

 

 

Deconstructing a Roger Federer Fan… From Allen. Thanks.

J A Allen

Deconstructing a Roger Federer Fan…
by J.A. Allen
Bleacher Report, CA September 29, 2008

Back in the days when we wrestled ice cubes from funny metal trays stacked precariously in refrigerator freezers and Microsoft Windows was just a gleam in the eye of Bill Gates—Bjorn Borg walked away from tennis, taking with him his wanton white shorts, his cat-like prowling along the baseline and his amazing game.

He vanished. Living in my provincial hometown in rural USA, there was no information about Borg—he disappeared into a media black hole after the 1981 U.S. Open.

Sounding sublimely sinister, rumors surfaced about a threat on his life. More than likely, after failing to capture his sixth Wimbledon championship and after losing his fourth US Open final, Borg had enough…

As a huge Borg fan, I was numb with loss. No blogs, no fan sites, no websites existed, and no news surfaced—therefore no communal commiseration.

Not another tennis fan lived within 50 miles, let alone one who worshiped at the altar of the adroit and unendingly appealing Borg.

For a long time, I actually hated John McEnroe because I blamed him for driving Borg away from tennis and into oblivion…

In the absence of Borg, and after a brief panicky hiatus, I found myself leaning toward another Swede, Mats Wilander—who won the French Open at age 17 in 1982.

With long blond hair—and what self-respecting, tennis-playing Swede didn’t sport such tresses—Mats wasn’t rock-star magnetic like Borg but he was cute and terrier-tough—a real fighter. His tenacious game soon diluted my sorrow, and I could freely love again.

After six years of gut-wrenching, grueling tennis, Wilander became the No. 1 player in the world in 1988. Then, he too, blinked out like a bad bulb…probably burnt out from the extreme effort involved in securing the No. 1 ranking. Another sinkhole swallowed my second tennis phenom.

Understandably, I had to spurn Stefan Edberg, afraid to love a Swede again… My tennis tank stuck on empty.

Eventually I found myself living the life of a sub-species—a slug, because I could only root against Ivan Lendl. Out of deep-set desperation and lingering depression, I had deteriorated into an anti-Lendl fan. There was no passion, no thrill—just retribution.

I tried to move on, flirting with the Aussies: first Cash, then Rafter. I was quite fond of Rafter’s aggressive serve and volley game. Becker was intriguing and Edberg—well, I explained about Edberg.

I have to confess that Americans have never held much appeal. It started with the abrasive duo of Connors and McEnroe. When I imagined interacting with either, I kept seeing myself being shoved out the door of an auto speeding along the Champs Elysees…No thanks—too rude, too volatile and too full of themselves. It remains a harsh assessment.

Early on I placed Agassi on par with McEnroe and Connors. Eventually Andre evolved into an exemplary tennis ambassador—but he was too wild and arrogant in the beginning. Those clothes! That hair!

Sampras was too remote and too sullen, and Courier’s game was too boring.

I was beginning to lose hope.

Then at Wimbledon in 2001 during a fourth-round match, 19-year-old Roger Federer conquered his mental demons long enough to take down Pete Sampras who, at that time, ruled Centre Court. It was Roger’s first big win at a major.

The world watched, waiting for another Sampras win. They bore witness instead to Federer’s immense potential and his astonishing shot-making.

Even though he lost in the next round and did not win his first Grand Slam final until two years later in 2003, Roger arrived on the big stage that afternoon. Accolades reverberated as Roger finally realized the scope of his destiny.

He played serve-and-volley tennis with the master and beat Pete at his own game by serving superbly and subjugating his emotions, which always skirted dangerously close to the surface. His body language remained positive, and he did not wither under the pressure or allow his focus to fade. It was a remarkable 5-set win.

Being a tennis fan is often an emotional journey. For me, Federer finally filled the void left by the departed Swedes Borg and Wilander.

He became the logical successor after more than a decade of waiting…in my estimation, he is the best tennis player on the planet and if I have a vote, the best of all times.

And you want to know what got me about Federer besides his phenomenal talent—the fact that he cried when he won…and the way he bit his lower lip when serving. What’s not to love???

Tennis outsiders don’t really get it. Fans don’t follow tennis just because of the sport. Most fans follow the player who captures their interest…whose game or personality excites…who arouses the fan’s pride, passion, or fire.

Whatever you wish to label it—it is entirely personal. You own it…you learn to live with it. It makes you get up at 2 a.m. to watch tennis from Australia, sometimes on a minuscule, blinking screen. It makes you sweat and scream and pace the floor.

It isn’t always pleasant, because losing is never fun. Moods can become suicidal…but the highs are worth it. Winning is exalting, breathtaking, surreal. It is pure release, accompanied by pleasure and joy. Astonishingly, all you did to sustain this high is watch a master at work.

I am a sports fan who loves tennis and more to the point, Roger Federer. Please, don’t expect me to be rational—to apply sane standards to my appraisals. Don’t expect me to be a good sport and accord Rafa or any other opponent his due.

I cannot do that. I can only howl like a child for what I want. I will pout, and with others like me—hold a collective breath—do what I can to have an impact. I will be unreasonable and demanding and unshakable in my defense…

For you see, losing Roger Federer is not an option for me. I have loved and lost too many times to find another like the mesmerizing Swiss maestro…

Is Seles really better than Graf? From Gerard. Thanks.

GERARD

Replying to ATPTennis on Graf vs Seles in the GOAT status ….

….. many good replies, and a great article to start with. It provoked some pondering about that period of time that Seles was the dominant player in the midst of Graf’s reign. IMHO … Graf is still the GOAT and the reasons have been provided in the other responses herein this thread, with a sad aside, what happened to Seles was a sad day for sport and it more than likely denied her a legitimate chance to increase her 4-3 win loss h2h against Graf which as it stands is not a dominating h2h like Nadal’s is over Federer’s (I think ATM is 13 – 7 in Nadal’s favour over a longer period of time (4+ years) than the 2 and a half years Seles and Graf’s career h2h were amassed).

but to use a few of the above quotes from the leading article in this thread by ATP ….

1. “The Monica Seles incident in Hamburg, Germany at the end of April in 1993 — especially when you take into consideration how dominant the young teenage Seles was in the months November 1990 through April 1993 — SEALS it that Graf was not the best of all time.” ….. based on the same logic minus the stabbing incident in Hamburg that prefaced this statement then the same ‘SEALED IT’ analysis / logic applies to Federer, he also can not be irrefutably considered the best player of all time (GOAT Status) as Nadal’s 13 – 7 dominance precludes him from that conclusion that he could or should be hailed as GOAT, which until he corrects and reverses that convincing h2h deficit he has with Nadal, he can never have an argument that would stand similar scrutiny as this article also provides about Seles Vs Graf for the same reasons as discussed. … or as Anna’s reply stated ……”There you have it folks . . . .”

2. Then Anonymous in their reply to say how skewed ATP’s article was, added this to the discussion …. “Why? There is no doubt that Graf was on a downturn in her career, but in consideration of the GOAT one looks at the overall career of a tennis player. This is unacceptable. In 1990, Graf won ten tournaments. In 1991, she won 7 events. In 1992, she won 8 events. She had injuries during this period and was already being hounded by the press over the scandals connected with her father.” …. point valid and noted ….. pro Federer fans who abound in this forum can take a minute to digest this genuine point and realise that Federer’s amazing 4 year run from 2004 – 2007 inclusive, where he amassed 11 of his 13 (to date) Grand Slam titles which now can be assessed as at the start of his 11th year on the circuit (which he is now beginning) was from the 16 Grand Slam tournaments that he entered in that 4 year period. Which when you do the maths and look at the whole of his career as most people need to do when looking at a player who is to be considered a GOAT of their sport, then the other 6 years that he has played on the circuit have only bought him 2 titles, one being this year, the 2008 US Open. So, even taking a point from the dissenting view on this Seles vs Graf thread, one can see the argument for establishing a person as GOAT has to be from the WHOLE career not just the biased best parts of a career. In the males GOAT discussion, when one does look at the WHOLE of a players career and in the same way as Federer has not won the French Open, but made the finals on 3 occasions, his career lags Borg’s. Borg won at least a Grand Slam title in 8 of his 9 years that he played, made the US Open final 4 times and we know like Federer he didn’t win this particular tournament. Federer took 4 years to win his first, so that reveals a stat of at least 1 Grand Slam title in 5 out oh his first 9 years. So in whole careers and in Federer’s case Career to date, Borg stands alone with 11 Grand Slam titles from 27 (40.74%) in a 9 year career as compared to Federer’s 13 from 38 currently from a 10 year career (34.2%). To put this in to perspective do you realise how many more titles Federer would have to win to equal a 40.74% career percentage equivalent to Borg’s, he would have to win the next 4 Grand Slams on offer which would be 17 from 42 and this would give him 40.47% winning record over his whole career (well at least to that moment in his career), just short but close enough. As possible as it may be for him to achieve this, 2008 has possibly shown us that the gap has closed between the players, or Federer has just had a poor year for him (which was not really that bad at all, making 3 Grand Slam finals and winning one). Either way if Federer can win the next 4 in a row, he will win a Grand Slam and join Laver, he will have finally won a French Open and he will most certainly earn without any debate the title of GOAT. For Federer and all his loyal fans I hope that he can do this, a worthy champion he certainly would be. Unless he can though then for the point made by ATP and discussed above in point 1 and this point 2 then he cannot be considered GOAT….. “There you have it folks ….”

Also in Anonymous’s response in her point 4, that person stated ….. “4) No, you look at the whole arc of a career, the surfaces on which she won, the record of head to head she has with other players, etc.”
again, Federer is flawed here vis-a-vis, h2h with Nadal and not winning at Rolland Garros as of yet. The closest any player got to a career head to head with Borg was 7-7 by McEnroe. Borg dominated all other h2h with all of his contemporaries.

History played its role in downgrading Borg’s stats even more. Very few of the top players ever supported or played at the Australian Open in his heydays, Connors, McEnroe & Borg amongst many others missed many, in Borg’s case he only played once as a 17 year old in 1974 at the beginning of his career. The historical significance has 2 considerations, (1) … as the AO was played on grass in these years at Kooyong, and realising that very few of the top players supported the event, imagine how many times Borg would more than likely have won it, with the hindsight of how dominant he was and his record on grass. But, … (2) …people would have then had an argument that they were ‘unworthy’ titles as the competition was decimated, as no one has really lauded or paid much homage to those players who did win their only Grand Slam titles in those years at the AO the same years that Borg dominated but didn’t play at the AO, e.g., Mark Edmonstone, Johann Kriek (x2), Guillermo Vilas, Roscoe Tanner (I think). The AO was the last of the 4 Grand Slams, played in the heat of the Australian summer at Christmas time, on the other side of the world and this was how it was perceived by the top players back then and on a second rate, tired facility that Kooyong had become. Whereas now and before Borg’s career, the Australian Open was valued by the top players who were predominantly the Australians and the Americans with the likes of Hoad, Laver, Newcombe, Rosewell, Roche, Emerson, Anderson, Stolle, Connors, Smith, Ashe and Trabert etc. winning most of the majors pre-Borg and it was the first of the Grand Slams not the last. So, that is why people need to acknowledge Borg’s 11 titles could have been many more if history had not conspired against that particular era of tennis and the fact he didn’t play the AO is not his fault, as it wasn’t for most of the top players of that era. So, too does history suggest that the 2x Grand Slam’s won by Laver were only played on 2 surfaces unlike the 4 it would take to win a Grand Slam today. We don’t denigrate Laver’s achievement due to that historical evolution of the different surfaces evolving but acknowledge it as being rightfully extraordinary. Borg along with most of the top players back then historically did not play at the AO and therefore should not be penalised for not doing so and that blemish on his record would not be there if he did play.

So, to conclude … I have found great support in this article for the same reasons I have put forward in other threads on the Borg Vs Federer GOAT debate, to suggest the same, a career which will be considered for GOAT status has to be taken over a whole career not just the dominant or best few years taken in isolation and devoid of the whole career for one player in Federer’s case. Federer has a way to go, i.e., 4 straight Grand Slams to equal Borg’s career stats. If he does so, well done and certainly well deserved. I think however, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Gulbis and possibly a few others may have some control in denying Federer this possibility.

Graf is the Female GOAT with Evert-Lloyd her closest rival, IMHO and statistically.
Borg is the male GOAT, with Laver and Federer very close behind and serious contenders without a doubt, but IMHO and statistically Borg is still the GOAT.

Cheers for a great topic,
Gerard

Cardinal rule to follow when giving for charity.

NO ONE SHOULD FREAKING KNOW ABOUT IT – NOT EVEN YOUR LEFT FREAKING OK HAND.

Anytime you indulge in it to gain fame and show off, you are shooting yourself in the foot. Can there be any other reason for doing it so publicly, when the other option is openly available?

Do it freaking anonymously to really feel the power of the action. Otherwise it’s as hollow as the trunk of a fallen tree infested with termites.

Roddick’s gimmick is no different from Djokovic’s blatant and shameful attempt to win over fans. People with real balls don’t need this affirmation from anyone. Their objective is pure and restricted to satisfying their own need to be magnanimous.

Failure. From Mike. Thanks.

Is Djokovic going over the top to project a ‘good loser’ image?

Is this his way of getting back at Federer or just learning from Federer?

After all, certain frustration and disappointment is more than expected by now, considering he has won nothing since March 13 (on hard court) this year. Including grass that means eight freaking tournaments with no title – six on hard courts on which he was unanimously declared the best player of the year. Two of those eight losses have come in the first (Miami) and the second round (Wimbledon).

If all that was not enough, two losses to Murray, one to Federer (h court) and one to Tsonga should drive home the point to bring out the long face.

Clearly the booing he has received ever since the ‘Roddick’ scandal has put him on the defensive with very little margin of error left now. With the extreme need for him to be worshipped by fans all over the world, it may not be too much of a stretch to credit fans for those losses.

Of course his losses against Murray are the most troubling in the long run, but if even Federer and Tsonga are still able to get the better of him on his favorite surface, Djokovic’s best may not be good enough, now that Cilic, Del Potro, Gulbis and Querrey have already landed.

Broadly speaking, it appears there are two major road blocks to Djokovic winning his share of titles on the tour: Physical endurance and the dying need to be loved and adored.

All the forced hugs at the net and ear to ear smiles after straight set losses are only shoving the dirt under the carpet.

Mortgage Crisis 101. From Mike. Thanks.

MIKE

Mortgage Crisis 101

http://docs.google.com/TeamPresent?docid=ddp4zq7n_0cdjsr4fn&skipauth=true

More on Palin-Katie.

Click here.

Has YOUR world collapsed? From Adrian. Thanks.

ADRIAN

Has YOUR world collapsed?

As an economist, I hear all day about the meltdown of financial markets all over the world. Today, Congress rejected the US$700 billion bailout and markets went down all over the world, expecting even worse things to come.

In light of the recent events, I want to ask you guys two questions:

1. What do you think of the bailout?
2. Have you been affected by the crisis? And if so, how?

I personally haven’t been affected much… I have some small savings in a mutual market fund and I have lost about 10% of my initial deposit but I think I will eventually gain that back, when things get better… other than that, things are pretty much the same. But I wonder how the rest of the people are doing out there…?

In any case, I send you all my best wishes!
Adrian

Roddick donates $25,000. From Ricke. Thanks.

RICKE

You can say what you want about Roddick, but here is a perfect example of why I like him:

After the match, Andy then announced he would be donating $25,000 of his prize money to the Chinese Tennis Association (CTA) to support in assisting and helping those who suffered in the catastrophic earthquake in the Sichuan Province.

“I would really like to contribute a part of my prize money to those families affected, to those who lost everything they had, suffered painful injuries or lost loved ones in the earthquake,” said Andy. “It’s my great honor to be in Beijing to work with CTA to assist those kids who are in need. It is an athlete’s privilege and responsibility to give back”.

Congrats on your win Andy, Well done!!!!

Palin with Katie. From Brooke. Thanks.

 

BROOKE

Oh. My. God.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezxqgDDND6Q (I live near Cuba. Vote me for president!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vbg6hF0nShQ

Lift this list and paste it where you can see it everyday, like in your crappy car.

Things to do every freaking day:

-Roll up your car windows and just freaking laugh out loud for at least five minutes.

-Resolve to carry a smile for five straight minutes.

-Take an afternoon nap for at least 15 minutes. Just putting your head down will work – the one above your shoulders.

-15 minutes of sunshine.

-Walk for at least 30 minutes. If you cannot squeeze that in a 24-hour cycle, just go drown yourself in the kitchen sink.

-Floss after every meal.

-Eat papaya after dinner. If you do just this one, you will see a marked difference in the way you look the very next day. GUARANTEED. TRY FREAKING IT NOW. GEEEEEZZZZZZ!!!!!

-Compliment someone.

Biggest feather(s) in their cap.

Laver:

-At barely 3′ 4″, he was able to consistently demolish stronger and bigger competition at the top level. BTW, Laver gained height after he turned 50 to now 5’9″.

Sampras:

-Overcame a complete title drought for two years to win his last slam. Not many can do that.

Federer:

-Five straight Wimbledon and US Open titles.

-Most adored tennis player ever by a mile.

Nadal:

-Unmatched 81-match winning streak on clay.

Roddick:

-Has the largest female following ever in the sport.

-Longest stay at top five in the world ever, without getting to No. 1?

Djokovic:

-Beating top three players in the world, including an in-peak form Federer, back to back to back, to win at Montreal.

Agassi:

-Longevity.

Connors:

-109 titles, a record that’s on the ‘never to be broken’ list.

-Longevity.

McEnroe:

-82-3 record in 1984 on the ‘never to be broken’ list.

Lendl:

-Killer work ethic and focus.

-8 straight US Open finals.

Tsonga’s sweet revenge against Djokovic in photos.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 
 

 

Graf vs Seles debate. From ATPtennis. Thanks.

ATPTENNIS

The Monica Seles incident in Hamburg, Germany at the end of April in 1993 — especially when you take into consideration how dominant the young teenage Seles was in the months November 1990 through April 1993 — SEALS it that Graf was not the best of all time.

Graf was in the middle of her career in the early 1990s — and yet Seles as a teenager was the one ranked #1 and the one winning 9 of those 11 biggest titles between November 1990 and January 1993 — and this, within itself, eliminates Graf from consideration as the top woman tennis player of all time.

Martina Navratilova is the Greatest Woman Tennis Player of All Time.

In these 12 major events between the end of 1990 and the stabbing of Monica Seles by a crazed Graf fan in the first half of 1993 …

Monica Seles:

• entered 11 of the 12 events.
• won 10 of the 12 events.
• reached the final round in 11 of the 12 events.

Steffi Graf:

• entered 11 of the 12 events.
• won 2 of the 12 events.
• reached the final round in 4 of the 12 events.
• lost in the semis or earlier in 8 of the 12 events.

The problem with Graf, of course, is that she was limited to 1 major event in 1990, 1991 and 1992 because of a teenager named Monica Seles before the teenage phenom was stabbed in the back with a knife on a changeover in Hamburg in April 1993. Obviously, the best player in the middle of Graf’s career was a teenager named Monica Seles.

Federer putting Roddick in his place. From Schop. Thanks. Good work.

SCHOP

You are so mean, TP!
A-Rod just puts in order his tennis-shirt!
I am so sorry for you, he doesn’t grab where you want him to grab! -lol-
Roddick is a great and humble player and I prefer him over many US politicians! (Except Osama (Mu)Barrack) Or what was his name? -rotfl-
Andy Roddick is so funny even after having lost a tournament, so watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUi7Is7H54M
Go Andy Go! You are awesome! I like your habits and your #1 fist serve at 140 mph!

How tennis players perform at soccer. From Schop. Thanks.

SCHOP

How tennis players perform at soccer:
#1 Federer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8XNDOi3OkY&feature=related
Watch how natural he dominates the ball. Very graceful! GOAT, like -lol-
#2 Monfils:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPdphluddb4&feature=related
Monfils is an artist. To win tournaments he has to play more straightforwardly.
Nadal:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiMfUQArwfg&NR=1
Rafa has some control over the ball. Good but not that amazing.
If Nada(l) wants to get close to Rog he has to win RG09 and 4 more times Wimby in a row.

Howsoever these vids make clear that soccer could easily be dominated by tennis cracks!
But it doesen’t work the other way around. YEAH!

Federer vs Nadal. From mircea. Thanks.

MIRCEA

There are several ways of looking at the Nadal Federer rivalry. One concerns Federer’s failures or missed opportunities – misfirings which took place when so much was at stake. Despite his rampaging vulgarity and envy, Mats Wilander has a point: Federer plays small when he goes against Nadal, in particular when both are in top shape. There are several matches that can been discounted e.g., Hamburg 2007. Nadal was exhausted. Take all the French Open finals. Federer’s reputation as GOAT was at stake. Take the clay court season. Would Federer be the only one to defeat Nadal in a clay-court final? Take Wimbledon 2008. Could Federer make it 6 in a row? On all these occasions, Federer’s claim to immortality was under scrutiny. What happened? Federer blinked, choked, lost composure,etc.,
In this sense, Nadal totally ruined Federer’s reputation. “If you’re the greatest player ever, why can’t you beat me in these matches that really count?”

Unfortunately, there are many questions regarding Nadal’s longevity and, now, his motivation. Longevity-wise, I am surprised Nadal made it through the summer, though his showing at the US Open corroborates his tendency to fade after July. What about next year, will Nadal be able to sustain his amazing rhythm? And this brings us to his motivation. After having annihilated Federer’s dream of being the greatest ever, what is left for Nadal? Most teen prodigies do not last very long: Borg, Wilander, and Becker are good examples of this phenenomenon. So, how will Nadal motivate himself for next year? Can he motivate himself again? For what purpose? He has proven time and time again that when it matters, he owns Federer. He has nothing left to prove.

Any chance of Federer regaining the # 1 position. Sure. Nadal has too many points to defend? Any chance that Federer will win # 14 & 15? Undoubtedly. Any chance that Nadal will go down as the GOAT? Rather unlikely. His body will break down. Any chance that Federer will ever get another whiff at the GOAT trophy? Too late. How many re-matches can you ask for? To date, Federer has had at least 5 chances at redemption. Competitive sports are not about charity.

Where does this leave us? In a tie. Neither Federer, nor Nadal will ever be annointed as the greatest ever. Then again, they’ve made tennis a beauty to watch for the last 5 years, and for this everyone should be greatful, especially the negative old-timers…

Any miracles for die-hard Federer fans, of which I am one. Hard to tell. Nadal would have to be at his best over the next three years, motivated and in great shape, and Federer would have to tie their head-to-head count. Only then could the debate be re-opened. Which means that Federer would have to annihilate once again all his opponents, win 10 tournament a year, and dominate Nadal on clay. To be the greatest, you have to beat your opponent when it matters most to them. Will Federer get his last chance? Does he deserve it?

Respect the peculiarity of your body, if any.

Mine is not physical, so I have a field day, but all you lazy cheap freaks have one, don’t you?

Whether it’s the overused right hand or the pinkie going wild, respect it, unless you want to add to your already miserable life.

Restrict or eliminate the activity that aggravates the ‘peculiarity’. For most of you that means not straining the brain too hard. Why do you think I have inserted the photo thread lately? Large size text is next, followed by giving away walkers and adjustable beds.

Which body part(s) will hurt the most by the time these clowns retire?

 

Roddick: Cheeks and his ‘address’?

Nadal: Duh!!!!!

Federer: Ego and pride, if 14 is not achieved. The left arm will completely vanish, considering where it is with this hectic an activity – unless Wawrinka can ‘revive’ it.

Djokovic: Hair and nails won’t.

Blake: Tight headband is forcing all growth to his fanny. If not regulated NOW, that may be all we will see of him.

Baghdatis: Have you noticed how often he scrapes his right wrist band on his right cheek during the match? He may soon have to shift to scraping his ‘address’, because that’s where his cheek will be by the time he is done with tennis.

Davydenko: Scalp will start to erode once whatever is left of the hair evaporates.

Safin: Will walk with the swing of the elephant walk. Have you noticed his walk lately? He swings from one end of the court to the other just to get to the net.

Nalbandian: Ankles and knees from the humongous weight they will be forced to carry?

Stepanek: The part that’s more than compensating for lack of a human face, by being subjected to overtime duty?

Monfils: This may not wait till retirement – watch the eyes to pop out on the court anytime now.

Funny Fed. From Roddick’s Girl (aka Fatma). Thanks.

RODDICK GIRL’S (AKA FATMA)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZ4-WKeChIs&feature=related

funny Fed , U must watch it

Federer’s full potential.

Just because you have achieved more than anyone else in history and have set records that may never be broken does not freaking mean that you reached your full potential. There can be many factors contributing to your stunning records, realizing and milking your potential to the last drop may not be one of them.

Here’s what Federer SHOULD have achieved:

-Three calendar Grand Slams.

-Career Grand Slam.

-Undisputed GOAT.

-18 Grand Slams.

There’s always room for improvement no matter how good you are vis a vis history. But when you violate the most sacred and cardinal of all laws, speculation of what could have been is inevitable and painful.

And what is that cardinal law? Hiring a worthy coach and sticking with him throughout your career. There are many instances in practically every field of human endeavor that substantiate that basic claim.

Besides, it’s not that he was so far removed from attaining each of the above feats, to lend the ‘coach’ theory credence beyond reality.

There comes a point in every player’s career when coach becomes more of a nuisance than an asset. And what is that fork in the road?

As a player you are more apt to respect, trust and listen to your coach when you are just starting out or have not reached rock star status. Another argument that sustains ‘hiring a coach early AND staying with him’ argument. Nadal, Djokovic and Henin among others are glaring exhibits to that case.

You think Shaq listened to his coaches as intently and purely as he did before he became a super star. You bet!!!! His free throw woes are a direct result of that.

Once you miss that boat before you launch into that ‘rock star’ phase, it becomes a amalgamation of ego, needlessness, dollars, personality BS to preclude any gain, essential to milking your talent and potential to the last freaking drop.

In reality, if you have had a coach since your early days, it doesn’t really matter how good that person is with the nuances of the game, because sooner or later you reach a point where the relationship transcends sport, friendship and mentor. It evolves into a unique medium that makes it nearly impossible for you to engage the reverse gear despite huge obstacles and impediments.

Richard Williams, Tony, Bartoli etc. shine bright in that group. Being a relative helps, but it’s not that big a component of the whole paradigm as it’s made out to be. The longevity of the relationship, originating in the days when you were a nobody is the ‘life changing’ ingredient.

Once you pass that fertile period to plant that seed in your make up, as Federer has ever since his first Wimbledon win in 2003, you end up being another Shaq where you will always have a ‘free throw’ that will get exploited by the competition.

‘One and one is eleven’ is not a great adage for nothing in this respect.

So has Federer sacrificed his full potential by skipping that vital step to immortality? Are you freaking kidding me??? Absolutely.

Pitchkers.

 

 
 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

For freaks just emerging from under that rock.

Roddick doing what he does best.

What Nadal has to do now to cement his domination of Federer / ruin Federer’s legacy?

Duh!!!!

Nadal has to beat Federer at an Australian Open or US Open finals. Even a five-set win will achieve the objective, just as the one at Wimbledon did this year.

What could be worse?

It could be the sharpest and the most painful sting from Nadal ever, if that ends up being the last final Grand Slam appearance for Federer.

Can it get ever ‘worser’?

Sure. If that loss prevents Federer from reaching No. 14 OR No. 15, ever in his career.

While Federer won the US Open this year and produced some scintillating vintage classic Federer tennis in the last two matches, it also pointed to the heightened uncertainty of him winning another Grand Slam. Why?

Because of his showing against both Andreev and Muller, not to mention the losses to Simon, Karlovic and Blake leading up to the event.

So the possibility of Federer not getting to No. 14 ever is not that big of a stretch. Nadal stepping in to deny that will haunt Federer forever.

That would mean five huge body blows from Nadal: Denying GOAT status by shutting Federer out of the FO, grabbing the No. 1 rank, denying history making 6 straight Wimbledon titles, crushing two calendar Grand Slams and No. 14.

It’s obvious that while the run Nadal is currently on was mainly spurred by Djokovic’s threat to dethrone him from his No. 2 perch, it is now being fed by his insatiable desire to eclipse Federer to gain ground on the GOAT turf.

There is no better way to gain prestige and stature than to trounce the widely acclaimed best ever to pick up the racket, over and over again – particularly at his own home and game.

While Djokovic may have triggered this mindset, he is nowhere in the picture now. Nadal wants to muster as much hay he can, before Federer’s losses against him start to get labelled as against the ‘over the hill’ player.

Nadal knows he may not be able to get to No. 14 or win a Slam on hard courts ever, but if he can stifle Federer the best he can, he may have some passing mention as the one of the best who ever played his game. Just his brilliance on clay will not get him there.

Translation: Federer vs Nadal matches, if they happen now, will have so much more at stake for both players than years past that only the finest out of the world tennis can be the outcome. Five setters galore? Why not?

Where does Nadal have an edge on Federer in the big picture so far? It’s his corresponding achievement at the age bracket. Federer was a nobody at age 17 to 22. If Nadal can use that motivation to continue this age advantage (since he is now entering a phase where Federer went ballistic), he will owe his everything to Federer and his records.

Clearly Nadal CANNOT match Federer’s four some year’s run, but he has a huge head start to cushion the effects considerably and still come out on top. With Djokovic still way off the real danger mark on hard courts, this is Nadal’s time to capitalize before the window held now by the teenagers comes crashing down.

Two likely reasons why Nadal won’t quit his ‘picking’ disgrace.

1. The down syndrome has grazed him just enough to not realize how offensive it is, despite billboards all over the world.

2. He doesn’t give a rat’s ass what other people think. If that’s true, the ‘naive’ BS that he puts out becomes even more of a put on, than it was earlier conceived. Those are two extreme behaviors reflecting contradictory personality traits.

You cannot be so stubborn on ignoring worldwide opinion on so gross, disgraceful and easily remedied an act, while acting so naive and harmless on the other end when dealing with the press and fellow players.

Wouldn’t a naive and respectful person be the first one to give up all and any socially unacceptable acts? By continuing with the picking aren’t you saying just the opposite of what comes out of you when the mike is on?

Biggest knock(s) on biggest names in tennis.

Laver:

-’Grass only’ Grand Slams.

Nadal:

-Despicable picking habit.

-Barely able to duplicate his success on clay on other surfaces.

-Unable to sustain play for full season.

-Extremely weak serve.

Roddick:

-One slam wonder.

-Unable to solve Federer.

-Unable to add variety / new weapons to his game.

-Failure to improve his backhand, forget about turning it into a weapon like Nadal.

-Inability to do his homework before selecting a coach for the long haul, resulting in a revolving door, hindering real progress.

-Not known as one of  the hardest working player on the tour.

-Unable to hold himself back from fondling his baggage in public / on court.

Djokovic:

-Wrong selection of parents.

-Face growing in the wrong direction.

-Not physically prepared for the gruelling season at this level.

-Too needy for other’s approval and adoration.

-Needs hair transplant surgery to mitigate the horse face syndrome.

Murray:

-Acts out to seek revenge on his parents getting a divorce when he was too young.

-Believes the best way to proclaim he is a real man is to be abusive and ill mannered to everyone.

-Wrong impression that his half baked beard makes him look manly and brash.

-Classic example of ‘pride cometh before a fall’.

Sampras:

-Never won the French Open.

-No personality. Big bore, machine-like operation.

-Not too talented. Without the serve, he was just mediocre, OK above average.

Agassi:

-Attention seeking disorder.

-Eating disorder.

-If you get to just eight Grand Slams after having been schooled and coached minutes after you were born, you are a gross under achiever.

-Inferiority complex fed by a need to over reach when selecting female partners. Complexes? Height, baldness and smothered by Sampras all his life.

Federer:

-Not only has he not won the French Open, he has been bageled, after having a great run up to the finals this year with no excuse of fatigue etc. to use as crutch.

-One of the worst, if not the worst, loser in the history of tennis.

-Why is Wawrinka always on the ground at each one of their gay celebrations?

-Zero sense of humor.

-Has a losing record against his arch rival, unravelling the best player in his generation theory, forget about best ever. It doesn’t freaking matter even if all your losses were on clay, considering you have reached the finals twice at Roland Garros and have more shots in your armory than Nadal. Not to mention that you are widely regarded as the second best player in the world on clay.

How can the difference be so huge to win just one of ten meeting on clay? Conversely, Nadal is far from being considered the second best player in the world on anything other than clay, yet he has defeated you handily on hard and grass, considering how dominant you have been against everyone else, widely acknowledged as better players than Nadal.

-Was defeated by the former great ten years his senior. It was an exho, coming off a long season and other BS certainly narrows it down to rationalize losing a set,  but not to the extent where you freaking lose the whole freaking match. It will stick until you beat a 25 year old dude when you are 35.

-Unable to realize full potential due to stubbornness on not hiring a good coach.

-History of berating opponents after practically every loss.

What a freaking catch!!!!!!

Roger Federer: The Unfinished Masterpiece. From Neeraj. Thanks.

NEERAJ

Roger Federer: The Unfinished Masterpiece

Federer, I truly believe, is the most watchable and highest-achieving tennis champion so far. At least the one I have seen in the past decade and a half. People keep talking about his failures at Roland Garros but seriously, should it matter? How many consecutive Grand Slam finals has he made it to? Or semis for that matter?

I will highlight some of the noteworthy nuggets of information within the world of Federer. He has won 13 Grand Slam titles (Wimbledon, U.S Open, Australian Open), 56 singles tournament titles (ATP Masters included), and 1 Olympic Gold medal to date. He was ranked world’s No.1 male tennis player for 237 consecutive weeks (February 2004 to August 2008), a feat that has not been accomplished by any other tennis player. He has won 3 Grand Slams (Wimbledon, U.S Open, Australian Open) in the same year 3 times over (in 2004, 2006, 2007). He also holds the record for being the only man to win 5 U.S Open titles and 5 Wimbledon titles consecutively. That means he has appeared in 10 consecutive Grand Slam men’s singles finals, which is no easy feat! … Do I need to say anymore? Which one of his close predecessors or those who rival him for all-time greatness can hold a candle to such a record? And if he has not won at Paris then it is because there is someone who is greater (possibly the greatest ever) on that surface.

Former World No.1 Jimmy Connors said, “In an era of specialists – you’re either a clay court specialist, a grass court specialist, or a hard court specialist … or you’re Roger Federer.”

The ‘rise’ of Nadal should not be equated with the ‘fall’ of Federer. Of course it’s a sport, so you will always have a winner and a loser. But it’s important to realize that one player’s win does not diminish all chances of the other player’s future successes. And Federer proved that with winning this year’s U.S Open Grand Slam title!

I think Nadal has the game and the mind to go greater than Fedex, too. I know there is so much stigma attached to the physical nature of his game questioning its longevity, but it is plain jealous wishful thinking on the part of Federer fans.

Funny how many ‘Federer is the real deal’ kind of opinions are resurfacing post US Open. It’s as if all the suppressed anguish of Fed fans during the months between Wimby and the Open have burst forth now.

Everyone will want his head, but Federer will merely pluck at his, adjusting his hair, and then unveiling his artful mayhem. Federer has a sweet echo of old-fashioned values, he has respect for the game of tennis, he feels he has an obligation to the game, he cares about the game.

There’s no such thing as the perfect tennis player, but hell, Federer occasionally has us fooled. Federer’s natural mastery of the groundstrokes, whether it’s a blasting topspin forehead or a crisp one-handed backhand, is a delight to watch. He is an excellent base-liner and also an attacking volleyer, moving around the court with flexible and quick strides, showing off his extreme proficiency on the tennis court. Besides his elegant skills and focused attention on the game, he easily seduces the audience with his graceful demeanor and endearing presence.

it’s hard not to fall for this man when watching the magic unfold in person. Federer is an affable man. Federer’s magic touch is intact. And he is, still, in a class of his own. In fact he is still an unfinished

Sept 26th’s photo shoot.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here are the H2H between Nadal and Federer. From Anonymous. Thanks.

CLAIRE

Here are the H2H between Nadal and Federer:

Nadal won:
Grass – 2008
Clay – 2005,(1), 2006(3), 2007(3), 2008(2)
Hard – 2006(1), 2004 (1)
Total = 12

Federer won:
Grass – 2006(1), 2007(1)
Clay – 1 (2007)
Hard – 2004(1), 2005(1) 2006(1)
Total = 6

H2H:
Federer/Nadal – Grass 2/1
Federer/Nadal – Hard – 3/2
Federer/Nadal – Clay – 1/9

TEN Things You’ll Never See Roger Federer Do. From Neeraj. Thanks.

NEERAJ

TEN Things You’ll Never See Roger Federer Do

1) Bang on his chest like Djokovic and his tribe. Too much class and not big enough a chest.

2) Appear in a sex scandal video. Not the type to film his lovemaking and too devoted to his girlfriend.

3) Play in a band. We’ve heard him sing and play air guitar. ’nuff said.

4) Turn up for a game on sleeping pills. Boris Becker: this one’s for you. Roger cares too much about his legacy to waste his talent like that.

5) Play Pete Sampras in an another exhibition game. Don’t prove me wrong on this Roger; these games are good for Pete but potentially disastrous for you. Can’t kick arse—will look bad. Can’t lose—look even worse.

6) Beat Rafa Nadal on clay. Big Federer Fan; but saw him get thrashed at the French. Not a pretty sight.

7) Cry on John McCenroe’s shoulders. Mac tried it, but Federer walked away.

Break a tennis racquet. This is because we know that Federer is cheap. He’d rather save the racquet and not pay a fine. No, it’s also because he is a classy sportsman.

9) Write an autobiography. Woke Up. Played Tennis. Went to sleep. Played tennis. Turned on the TV. Watched Tennis.

10) Read this article: It’s all done in good humour. We love ya!

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/61667-10-things-youll-never-see-roger-federer-do