 | chipnputt on McEnroe ranks Federer ahead of… |
 | Shane on McEnroe ranks Federer ahead of… |
 | ricky on Olympics thread. |
 | Sir Vibhudi Aatmapud… on McEnroe ranks Federer ahead of… |
 | Jill on Story of the day. From Adrian.… |
| ricky on Olympics thread. |
 | Chieko on Story of the day. From Adrian.… |
 | TheHumbleOne on Ljubicic, you cannot do that w… |
| TheHumbleOne on Olympics thread. |
 | kitty on Story of the day. From Adrian.… |
 | grendle on Photos. |
 | monique on Live chat for San Jose, Rotter… |
 | clifford on Story of the day. From Adrian.… |
| Chieko on Ljubicic, you cannot do that w… |
| Chieko on Story of the day. From Adrian.… |
Posted by tennisplanet on July 5, 2009
-Extend the Slam total to over 20? Maybe past 24 where no human has ever been – male or female? After all he is still just 27, OK 28?
-Trumph Sampras’s seven Wimbledon titles.
-Extend stay at No. 1 beyond Sampras.
-Make another bid for a calendar Slam.
This entry was posted on July 5, 2009 at 6:35 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Ch said
lol, I find it funny that now you are saying “27, OK 28″, when before it was more like “55, OK 27″… Roger was on the seniors’ tour just a few months ago…
YMD said
Torn between two lovers, Fed feelin’ like a fool Lovin’ both Gavin and Warwrinka is breakin’ all the rules.
Fed’s target= choosing one.
Sol said
Lol. He should go with Wawrinka. Closer to home.
Dee said
To be a fantastic Dad
mgozinsky said
Maybe this is a wrong mindset and Fed should just ignore his detractors regarding the lopsided H2H against Nadal, but for me, cutting this down should probably be his most important target. I really want Fed to win several matches against Nadal and remove this monkey off his back and shut his critics up once and for all.
I hope now that the slam count is a little less important and he’s got the French, Fed can try and reach more masters finals on hard courts against Nadal, in which case I’m pretty sure the H2H could change significantly.
pommesdesuisse said
i exactly see it the same way! that’s what i hope for the most!!
Bento said
I don’t want to see Gavin’s face ever again. Federer almost lost this and it would be a lot due to Gavin.
pommesdesuisse said
why do you think, Bento?
just curious…
grendel said
There was an interview with Federer broadcast this morning on the BBC Today program. I have, rather laboriously, copied the damn thing out as accurately as I can (listening on the BBC i player). The interviewer is one Gary Richardson, a little chap, face like a ferret, who determinedly shoves microphones into the faces of the good and great until they are forced to respond. He is not above a spot of resolute sycophancy, but you sort of forgive him because unlike the monstrous Andrew Castle (the BBC’s blue eyed tennis “expert”)he is, at the end of the day, an honest reporter.
Gary starts off by laying on the grease in spadefuls, wondering how Federer felt about being the greatest player of all time:
Fed: Well, this is what other people are talking about right now, I’m not going to say it myself just because of respect to all the other ones and we know the history of the game is –um – very difficult to judge who is the greatest of all time. I think I should be judged at the end of my playing days and not right now though I have many unbelievable records going for myself obviously. I am very proud of what I was able to achieve today, you know in this amazing match with Roddick, I’m so happy, it’s amazing.
G.R: Have you ever wondered why you are such a good player?
Monty Python: – no, sorry, Fed: Um, well sometimes, I go through matches & going like my god, I cannot believe how well I am playing; why am I the lucky player out there who is winning so much & why can’t other players be so successful as me.
G.R.: It’s not luck is it, Roger?
Fed: No, I don’t think so, because I think I have incredible will, definitely some talent, I had to work hard on my talent to sort of perfect it you know, and er there are lots of rivals throughout my career who have obviously made it extremely hard for me to win, I’ve had a lot of success & that’s thanks to the great spirit I’ve had for the game.
G.R.: I interview dozens of sportsmen who are very, very famous & lots of them are very difficult & they won’t give the media the time of day. I don’t want to sound like a creep [laughter from Federer – sympathetic or sly concurrence with this idea of creepdom, I wonder?] but you’re totally different, Roger. [they kiss – no sorry, that was just my imagination] Why are you such an accommodating and nice person?
Fed:[some apparently embarrassed clearing of the throat – this is all rather wonderful, you know, and cold print is inadequate to reveal the subtext, you have to hear these two to perceive the richly comic dance which is going on] I don’t know, I think there was a moment in my career as a teenager when I went to Monaco. We had a, er, how d’you say, like a, I dunno, an Academy, 2 or 3 days like a test period to see what’s to come in your tennis life. They’d give you advice what to do with your money, they’d check you on your fitness to see, you know, if you’re doing well or not and then also the media side, I remember a, um, journalist coming out there and telling me, you know, people always look at me as the bad people because we’re asking silly and sometimes not so nice questions. All we’re trying to do is create a good story for the fan, you know, or the supporter or the tennis fan reading your story. They want to read a good story. That’s why I don’t mind giving them time & that’s why it is worthwhile for me.
G.R. : Two final questions. Pete Sampras, who held the grand slam record, said to me you could win 18 or 20. Do you think he is correct?
Fed: I mean, I mean I think everything’s possible right now, but then again, can you stay healthy, can you stay successful, um, who are the, who’s the new generation moving around the corner, is Rafa going to come back, you know. You don’t know, there’s many open questions right now, but er for now I want to enjoy [Federer stresses this] , and attack again at the US Open.
G.R: And lastly, you’ve been involved in one of the most gruelling tennis matches ever. What will you do this week to relax?
Fed: Just get away, go to Switzerland where I have, where I normally find peace and quiet because people are very respectful with my personal life & especially in this very exciting time with Mirka going through her, you know, a first pregnancy, it’s quite something, um, so I’ve got to put the tennis racket in the cupboard & support her as much as I can.
G.R: You mention your wife having a baby [Federer goes: mmmmmn] & it occurs to me that during the match today, something might have happened.
Fed [giggling]: no, no, she’s feeling good, you know, I saw her after the match, like er at 12 all in the 5th set I was like, oh god, I’m so sorry, she has to go through this whole thing in difficult times. She’s had a wonderful pregnancy & she’s, er, the best wife I could imagine, so I’m very happy.
G.R.: And of course, if the Federer baby had been born on centre court, we would have had a British baby.
Fed[ understanding that here we have “humour”, British humour at that, gives a polite laugh]: There you go, bad luck guys. [he laughs again, this time I’m guessing at least a little bit “at” as well as “with” Gary Richardson, a man of determined and yet fairly innocent sycophancy]
G.R: Roger Federer, it’s been a pleasure to talk to you.
Fed: My pleasure as well.
I’d like to make a couple of comments. Gary Richardson’s adoring approach is nicely deflected by Federer on several occasions, and we get some real and quite interesting information. At the same time, there is no hint of false modesty. My own feeling is that this lack is often mistaken for arrogance. It’s horses for courses, I suppose, but I find “false modesty”, once you unwrap it, to be intensely arrogant. Federer is just pretty honest. Of course, he can be ridiculous, with those absurd clothes and so on (which fool advised him here, I wonder: still, he has to take responsibility). But you and I, dear poster, are never ridiculous, are we? Federer is probably the most famous sportsman in the world, few things are more corrupting than fame, and the fact that the worst Federer does is to sport some cartoon apparel once a year, is to me a cause for wonder. When Pete Sampras says he likes Federer because he is humble, well, humble is not an epithet I would apply to Federer, and yet one sees what he means – it’s not totally absurd. He has a certain common touch, which is unusual among the stellar brigade – imagine bumping into Madonna, say, and trying to hold a simple conversation with her – she’d probably have you arrested. That’s my opinion, anyway.
Jenny said
Thank you Grendel, much appreciated. I missed it and the Woman’s Hour [goodness, how long has that be going, I think my mother used to listen to it] interview with Frew MacMillan. I always enjoy reading your thoughts, because many echo my own, love the humourous twists too. Ah! the suave Mr Castle, we shouldn’t be too dismissive of the dear man, he did reach #80 as a singles player, sssh! Sometimes his commentary is, well….!
grendel said
Castle #80, eh? I remember he took Wilander to 4 or 5 sets once, and everyone assumed he was the new British wonder boy. Well, presumably he knows his tennis, but he always comes across as promoting himself. In yesterday’s final, there was a knowing and grisly reference to Henry Kissinger (yes, old Dr.Strangelove was present, looking more corpselike than ever) as if he, Castle (a mover in high quarters) had special knowledge of him, but this was not quite the place to divulge it. At one stage, Henman’s experience in losing important matches was brought up, Becker volunteered that he, too, had suffered his traumas. So naturally little Andrew, feeling a bit left out perhaps, piped up that his fellow commentators were but “children” in the losing stakes. re What I was saying above about “false modesty”, and how Federer is never guilty of this – here was a classic instance of it. By talking about his “losses”, little Andrew Castle was somehow implying that he shared common ground with Henman and Becker. Hard to imagine more ludicrous self-deception. And this is the man the BBC intend to impose upon tennis viewers for ever more. It is just sickmaking beyond words.
Oh, well, good to get that off my chest.
chieko said
Thank you so much.
Jenny said
And it gets better, Grendel – Mr C was #45 in doubles!
MIKE__ said
- Extend the Slam total to over 20? Maybe past 24 where no human has ever been – male or female? After all he is still just 27, OK 28?
20 slams? Taking into account Nadal’s injury, Fed’s lack of injuries, and the fact that there are no “Black Swans” on the horizon, I’d give it a 33% chance (more on “Black Swans” here — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory ).
- Trumph Sampras’s seven Wimbledon titles.
85% chance. Only two more to go.
- Extend stay at No. 1 beyond Sampras.
99% chance. He’s just 48 weeks shy of Pete.
- Make another bid for a calendar Slam.
2% chance. “Never say never” but I just don’t see it happening at this stage in his career. If he was 22-25 y.o., possibly.
MIKE__ said
TP: “Trumph”
Good one TP.
Sol said
“- Trumph Sampras’s seven Wimbledon titles.
85% chance. Only two more to go.”
MIKE_, isn’t it ONE more to go?
MIKE__ said
To Triumph or Trump means to exceed. Pete has seven so Fed needs two more Wimbledons to “trumph” Sampras.
boxingary said
If I was Federer, having gone through what he has,
my top priorities for the next 12 months would be as follows,
in order of importance:
(1) continue to extend the “GS semi-finals reached” streak.
(2) make it to next year’s French Open final. That would
be a streak of 5 consecutive years….something that Borg
never did and Rafa has yet to do.
(3) WIN next year’s French. That would be the metaphorical
“stake-through-the-heart” of the criticism that he was
incredibly lucky not to have faced Nadal this year.
Sergeant said
If I was Federer, my top priority would be to win the US Open 2009 and the Australian Open 2010.
I don’t see why winning the four majors in a row would be a feat less meritorious than a calendar slam.