Tennis Planet

Official Freaking Site Of Tennis Freaking Fans Worldwide.

Wall Of Fame contest.

Posted by tennisplanet on October 12, 2010

Of all the slants Nadal owns against Federer like lopsided H2H, beating him at two non-clay Slam finals etc. etc. there’s a near-equally if not stronger nugget Federer possesses to offer as rebuttal. What is it?

First correct answer = Wall Of Fame listing.


92 Responses to “Wall Of Fame contest.”

  1. Barbara said

    Federer is not going bald!

  2. Sarah said

    23 consecutive GS semi finals

    • banti said

      = I have beaten the field day in and day out for eternity on every known surface known to man= consistency= respect from peers= GOAT

      • overcaffeinated said

        Dang right!! He is the best player of his generation on all surfaces (exc. clay) where he is a only (shockingly) second best, well ahead of other clay court “Specialists”.

      • Jenny said

        “second best, well ahead of other clay court “Specialists”.

        Have to disagree, according to the ATP stats on clay.

        Federer – Career 151/46 – 9 Titles, inc 1 FO
        Ferrero – Career 238/83 – 12 Titles inc 1 FO

        I think you’ll find there are also others ahead of Fed on clay.

      • Jenny said

        PS, I think this is partly due to the fact that Fed doesn’t play the full clay court swing, as do most of the other specialists, but most of them can play successfully on all surfaces. If Moya was still playing, his career high was over 337 wins on clay with around 16 titles.

      • banti said

        Jenny I looked up every player in the top 15 during the Open. I think Fed has a positive career record against all of them on clay. Unlike Rafa on hard courts. 9-3 vs Ferrero overall. 3-0 on clay. Fed lost his first two hard court matches with him when he was 19. What you’ll find with Fed on clay is quite a high winning percentage but a low title count bc of Rafa.

      • Jenny said

        Hi Banti,
        Thanks. I didn’t make any comparison to Fed as it were, I just looked up certain individuals [basically JC, bearing in mind he had played more clay tourneys than Fed] career record on clay alone and their match wins, JC has more match wins, would you not agree? obviously I didn’t work out percentages. Sorry O/c if I misinformed you.

  3. overcaffeinated said

    16 major titles.


    Backing up previous year’s results time and time again.

    A strong hairline.

    A better looking cloting logo,

    Having worn a neopolitan ice-cream looking outfit this year.

    Wearing a nicer shade of pink shirts.

    Earning power off the court.

    A greater fandom base.

    A healthier body.

    • banti said

      Love the clothes he’s wearing in shanghai, nice colors. Gota get me a pair!

      I’m going with a larger respect from peers.

    • M said

      “A strong hairline.”

      LOL, OC – even Roger’s beautiful hair is starting to thin a bit at the sides and on top.
      Take a close look at the pictures Claire gave us from his Hong Kong stop.

      (And no, it’s not just that he cut it short — he had it cut short because it’s thinning … just like Rafa is having his hair shaped now to soften his thinning spaces.)

      “Having worn a neopolitan ice-cream looking outfit this year.”
      LOL! Though I also enjoyed Rafa’s shades of pink this year, you’re right — Roger’s neapolitan ice cream outfit was one of a kind, I think.


  4. Bettyjane said

    No gamesmanship tactics.

    Additionally He’s done it all alone (i.e. no coaching… looking up at his box!)

    • overcaffeinated said

      Dang right #2!

      And antoher one to note is: none of that overdone (thanks Pat Cash for starting this trend, though it was a pretty kick arse moment in tennis history given WHERE it happened in 87) climbing into the stands, or rushing over to his support team after winning a major.

  5. SN RAO said

    More than 10 Titles for Three Years in a ROW.
    2004 —- 11
    2005 —- 11
    2006 —- 12
    3 Grand Slam Titles in Three different years ( 2004,2006,2007)
    23 consecutive GS semi finals
    4 Year end Masters Titles ( 2003,2004,2006,2007)

  6. M said

    Because I’ve already said so many times that the GOAT debate should be terminated because they are both stellar — I mean, there are only three Career Slams in the open era, people! They have two of them! And only two Golden! And Rafa has one of those! — and they each have different *kinds* of tennis achievements …

    I’m going to have to go with Google and Facebook.

    There are 7,050,000 results when you google Roger Federer, and 5,080,000 for Rafael Nadal.

    On Facebook, Roger has 3.4 million fans, and Rafa has 2.3 million.

    (I think here it is important to point out that both Roger and Rafa have more FB fans than LeBron James, Kobe Bryant, the immortal Michael Jordan, or even David Beckham!

    But not, I don’t think, more than Christian Rinaldo. *headshake* )


    • RafaFan said

      M, Roger has 4.660.327, Nadal 4.151.908 fans on facebook. Cristiano Ronaldo has 12.896.975 fans. Soccer is for dull people. Tennis is for intelligent people.

      • banti said

        Crazy how Rafa caught up with him on Facebook. A break down of their friend lists would be cool:)

      • M said

        RafaFan, my stats are pre-US Open, ’cause you know I was a little busy right around then 😀 and haven’t looked recently. So I’m sure you’re right.

        It would still answer TP’s question as Roger’s still ahead – though the gap continues to close.
        Annoys me sometimes though. I mean, where were all these people in 2005? Johnny- and Jane-Come-Latelies, I say. 😛

        “Soccer is for dull people. Tennis is for intelligent people.”
        LOL. I’m not touching that. 😀

      • M said

        Plus, you know, RafaFan, Roger is an FC Basel devotee, and we know Rafa does not miss his Real Madrid matches, and flew to South Africa to cheer Spain on in the World Cup.
        And we know they’re top tennis minds of this generation.

        So, y/k … you know what they say about those generalizations … 😛

      • Jenny said

        “Soccer is for dull people”

        LOL You better not say that in the UK, RafaFan! I’m no footie fan, but I’m in the minority 🙂

      • D.S.G. said

        RafaFan: I double dog dare you to put that on a bumper sticker and drive around Europe with it.


      • M said

        LOL. D.S.G., I’m wondering if he’d make it out of the house driveway 😛

    • chipnputt said

      Speaking of football. As you know, Spain won the WC but you might remember Switzerland beat Spain in the round robin stage of the tournament. In short, WC: ESP 1, CH 0; but of course, in the H2H: CH 1, ESP 0.

      Did anybody else see the irony in this?

      • M said

        I do remember that.
        I think both Roger and Rafa asked to know the World Cup scores after their matches. 🙂

  7. chipnputt said

    As it concerns Roger vs. Rafa, it could be 5 Wimbledons and 5 USOs in a row, i.e, 5 titles in a row for Roger on what is not even his favorite surface for, take your pick, only one of these surfaces can be his favorite. Rafa does not have even 5 FOs in a row.

    Having a slow day, so here is a small rant —

    The question is really disingenuous. The H2H is brought up to simply try and undermine Federer’s achievements and not really to prove much else. Suppose Rafa stopped playing tomorrow — would he be the GOAT? As great as Rafa is not even his more ardent fan could give him that — 9 slams, only 4 outside clay, no WTFs, etc. By GOATness standards, there are serious gaps in his c.v. So, I guess the point of the H2H is to say that Rafa is better than Federer, so Roger can’t be the GOAT. Roger undermined, job done. But if Rafa is not the GOAT, who is?

    Also, we’ve been through this several times so you’d figure it would register — the H2H is a highly dubious statistic to judge people’s relative merit. Take the latest USO as an example. If Roger had beaten Novak and reached the final but lost to Rafa there, Roger would clearly have done better (Final vs. SF) in the tournament but the H2H against Rafa would have worsened. In short, according to the H2Hers, Roger would have taken a backward step from GOATness by doing better in the USO. Strange. The H2H is 14-7 is in Rafa’s favor because of a lopsided 10-2 record on clay and it’s 10-2 because Roger has been good enough to get to many clay court finals though, of course, not good enough to beat Rafa. Outside of clay, Roger leads 5-4. I’d submit it would be lot more in Roger’s favor if Rafa had reached a few more hard court finals in Roger’s prime.

    The truth is Roger has 16 majors and Rafa has 9. Of Roger’s 16 majors, 13 were won when Rafa was in the draw. Roger was in the draw in all 9 of Rafa’s major wins. To me, if you must count H2H, it stands 13-9 in Roger’s favor. I haven’t done the calculations, but I think you’d get a similar advantage for Roger if you check all tournaments that either was won when the other guy was also in the draw.

    GOAT is an evolving thing. It was Laver, then perhaps Borg, then perhaps Sampras, and now Federer. Maybe it will be Rafa one day and good luck to him for if he does get there, we would have been privileged to have seen some truly great tennis along the way. But he’s a long way from there right now.

    • M said

      I’m a little scared, since you said you had time on your hands, lol. But …

      “GOAT is an evolving thing”

      Doesn’t that, then — especially since Rafa himself has said both that Roger’s achievements in tennis are special, *and* that there will be plenty of time to talk about history at the *end* of his own career — make it much more sensible to drop the “Who is GOAT debate” once and for all?

      • chipnputt said

        Actually, no. Yes, GOAT maybe an evolving thing but you can still judge it at a given point in time. Just like, say, “fastest man in the world ever”. Right now it’s Bolt but who knows who it will be five years from now. Similarly, in tennis, as matters stand, Roger is the GOAT. Rafa may become the GOAT and will be great for tennis fans if he does, for we’ll see some truly awesome tennis just as it will be great for athletics fans to see someone run faster than Bolt.

        Note what Rafa is saying. He’s not saying don’t discuss GOAT — in fact, he pretty much says that based on achievements, Roger is the GOAT right now. All he says is that he, Rafa, doesn’t belong in the conversation right now. His career is far from over and who knows where it’ll end. Totally agree.

      • M said

        Um, okay.


    • banti said

      Chipnputt thanks for this. This was all very well said. Agree completely.

  8. Barbara said

    In 2009 Federer was given another Stefan Edberg Sportsmanship Award – as voted by the fellow players – for a record sixth consecutive year! Nadal hasn’t been voted even once.

  9. TheHumbleOne said

    A longer shaft on his, um… racquet?

  10. crispytuck said

    “In 2009 Federer was given another Stefan Edberg Sportsmanship Award – as voted by the fellow players – for a record sixth consecutive year! Nadal hasn’t been voted even once.”


    M you seem to post a lot here – so respect for that – but not for the way you are so clearly blind to the fact that Nadal is a cheater. Mildly so, because he has top-ten talent and works hard, but a cheater nonetheless. It’s hidden in plain sight for millions of fans around the world who are so taken by Nadal’s muscles and false humility (and it IS another facet of the team’s carefully planned pyschological/popularity contest warfare). History will record his pursuit of match “W”s was at the expense of sportsmanship.

    His gamesmanship from the very outset provided the fine line between “L”s and “W”s. His tight 5-setter against that virtual unknown in Wimbledon this year was a prime example. Disgusting behaviour.

    • M said

      Crispytuck, all I’ll say here is that
      a) there is a difference between cheating and gamesmanship, and
      b) there isn’t a top player in the ATP that does not indulge in/has not indulged in the latter.

      If you know that I post a lot, I hope you also know
      a) I’m as much of a fan of Roger as I am of Rafa, if you feel your assertions are some sort of defense of the former, however weirdly shaped, and
      b) I feel I already articulated quite clearly in another thread that the ATP has made it clear to all of us what their delineations of the definitions are, and in light of that how little further discussion I feel the subject merits.

      Anyone else who feels free to go on bickering about it can go right ahead.
      As I have some other things to do, however, this will be my last response to you on the matter.
      You have yourself a nice day.

    • Bjornino said

      “because he has top-ten talent”
      That comment sort of disqualifies the poster from be taken seriously.

      • chipnputt said

        In politics, Bjornino? Discredit the messenger so you can ignore the message? May I ask:

        (1) In your book what constitutes cheating? Merriam Webster has it as : “to violate rules dishonestly”. And in case you were wondering, here is gamesmanship defined: “the art or practice of winning games by questionable expedients without actually violating the rules”


        (2) Has Rafael Nadal knowingly violated the rules of tennis?

        Note: The answer is not everybody else does it. We are talking Nadal, and only Nadal, here.

      • sperry said

        Chip…this is the internet. Expect nothing and you will never be disappointed.

      • Bjornino said

        No, we’re NOT just talking Nadal here. Federer admitted to gamemanship when taking that bathroom break to throw off his opponent’s rythm. That was BLATANT cheating/gamemanship/whatever you wanna call it. You don’t know if Nadal was injured or not at that Wimby match. Your post reeks of Nadal-hatred and the notions therein are proof of that being the fact. Preposterous stuff.

      • Bjornino said

        And yes, “because he has top-ten talent”, is a pretty laughable statement, I think everyone here who knows anything whatsoever about tennis agrees about that. We’re talking about one of the greatest players of all time, and you call him “top ten talent”. That’s just…well…beyond ridiculousm, to put it mildly.

      • RafaFan said

        @Bjornino: “We’re talking about one of the greatest players of all time…” I agree with you. Federer is still The Greatest.

    • D.S.G. said

      Chill, Crispy!

  11. wuiches said

    At this point of their careers I do think that Roger is the best of both. His records sheet is just amazing. However I think that they are not competing in equal circumstances.

    Tennis has a complexity, it’s played in 3 different scenarios that change considerably the skills needed to succeed on each one. There are a lot of examples that prove that, past and present.

    That’s why I consider that to compare 2 tennis players you must be able to compare each player’s performance on each of the 3 surfaces that tennis has. But to see such performance you must give them exactly the same opportunities on each surface.

    All of you say: “Roger has won 100 titles per year during 100 years” or “Roger has been the #1 for 100 years” or “Roger has won 100 slams”. It’s true he has been impressive, but also keep in mind that Roger has had much more chances than Nadal to reach such numbers.

    Roger is a hard court specialist. All of you know that the ATP calendar has almost 70% of the tournaments on hard courts, 2 out of 4 GS and 6 out of 9 1000’s(and Rafa has more). Now imagine this scenario, where would Nadal be right now if the Calendar was exactly the opposite, 2 clay slams and 6 1000’s and 70% of the calendar on clay every year? And where would Roger be? Nadal would have now more than 60 clay titles(now has 29) including 10 slams! And of course he would be the #1 since 2005!!!

    I’m not saying that because of this Nadal is better, in fact Roger has proved to be so far the best all court player of his generation and maybe all time (so far), that’s why I consider him a much greater player than Sampras, because Sampras performance on slow courts was almost non-existent, even at the OZ he had a “bad performance” compared to the USO and Wimby being the OZ a much slower court than the other 2.

    Again, I’m not saying that for this Nadal is the best, I’m just asking you not to be so unfair with the kid, actually he has a hard court record a little bit better than Roger’s clay court record. If we had 3 1000’s on each surface, 3 slams per year 1 on each surface, and the same amount of 250’s and 500’s on each surface so every player can sign on his favorite tournament then we would have equal circumstances to compare each player performance on each surface and then we could compare their records sheet.

    I’m just saying that this is another reason (age) why is so difficult to compare them.

    • banti said

      “actually he has a hard court record a little bit better than Roger’s clay court record”

      I would not say better, if anything Fed performs better. 1/4 of Fed’s losses on clay have been in finals with Rafa.

      Rafa Nadal : Hard Win-Loss 222–69 76.29%
      11 titles
      Hard court slam winning percentage: 81.4
      Hard court slam won/contested: 2/14

      Roger Federer: Clay Win–Loss 151–46 76.64
      9 titles
      Clay court slam winning percentage: 79.63
      Clay court slam won/contested: 1/12

      • wuiches said

        I repect your point of view Banti, but percentage means nothing to me, only titles and how great those titles are, Nadal has 2 slams, 1 gold medal and the same amount of 1000’s than Roger if my memory is working well. 11 titles overall and Roger 9. Roger with 1 slam.

        Roger is what he is cuz’ his 64(?) titles and his 16 slams, we all know that slams are the hardest titles to get.

        There are many players with finals, semis and good percentages in slams and 1000’s but without titles, keep in mind that you build % with wins over many low profile players.

        It takes a true champion with winning mentality to rise a trophy, and Nadal has more and better than Roger.

        But if you still think that Roger’s performance on clay is better than Rafa’s on hard court I respect that.

      • banti said

        I was not able to find the exact numbers on this, so rough estimate. Rafa has won 11 titles in close to 80 hard court tourneys attempted. Roger has won 9 titles in the far fewer clay court tourneys (around 60) attempted. This was using the search function on the ATP site.

        Another shocker I found , using the head to head records on wiki they have for the World tour finals 09. If you compare Rafa’s and Roger’s career record against other players (excluding their own h2h) in the top 8 last year, Rafa had a career winning percentage of 60%. Roger was closer to 70%. Larger than I expected.

      • banti said

        If you filter his clay court success over the top players out, I’m thinking he may have lost more than won against them in his career. Can not say that about Roger.

      • banti said

        Players often do not match up well against specific opponents. These career results with other top players explains this. There is a reason Roger has come out on top more often than not in his career in slams with Rafa in his draw.

  12. Dinesh said

    237 weeks at No. 1..

  13. Gerard said

    Wuiches comments are very well worded and worthy of consideration in dissecting both Nadals and Federer’s parallel careers and their H2H’s.

    Those that argue against Nadal’s better and lopsided H2H against Federer as being a yardstick to measure his claims on GOAT status and therfore denting Federer’s claim, do so based on Nadal’s clay court dominance. Wuiche puts up a good rationale and defence for not trying to undermine Nadal’s better H2H all based on his clay court supremacy in that the opportunities to play on court only make up less than 30% of a season, So considering Nadal is the ultimate clay court specialist of his generation, how good has his game adapted and improved, such that he is now a golden career Grand Slammer. Build into this discussion this intangible as well, he is a natural born right-hander in everything he does except tennis, but who under Uncle Tony’s guidance early on in his life and his own sheer determination to succeed – plays left handed, it is quite a feat. One could then begin to imagine, would his stats be even more mind-boggling greater, when knowing his tenacity and will to win are inherant traits regardless of handedness, if he had played with his natural right hand … and even Federer’s gifted deftness with a racquet may have never been seen if he had tried like Nadal to play his brand of tennis with his left hand and not allow his fluid hand eye coordination to transfer to his natural side. It is an incredibly huge attribute in Nadal’s favour to know he is winning at the highest level against whom many see as the GOAT (in Federer) with a will to win like no other player since Borg, and all this with a fight he has won over the natural handedness he was born with but opted against. Has anyone ever tried to play any ball game with their non dominant hand, it is a non-event as to the coordination and timing difference being so much more attuned to the dominant side over the non-dominant side.

    But back to Wuiche’s point. Nadal’s rise and rise on all other surfaces to give him 9 Grand Slams, 4 of which are on non clay surfaces and all of these had Federer in the draw is phenomenal. Federer’s dominace and majesty on the hard courts and grass has been dented by Nadal. Would Nadal’s Grand Slam total be even greater had he not lost most of 2009 through injury which started during the 2009 French Open in his loss to Soderling. Federer I believe only in Nadal’s absence subsequently won his 15th and 16th Grand Slams. Accepting Nadal was in the draws for the 2009 US Open and 2010 Aus Opens, where Federer lost in the final of the US to Del Potro and won against Murray in the Australian Open, Nadal’s comeback from the injury forced lay-off was still embryonic and his best was not possible, he was a work in progress. A fit Nadal for those 2 Grand Slams, as we have seen in 2010 would have left Federer’s Grand Slam total at 15 and Nadal’s would now be on 11 such is his dominance when he is fit, this I have no doubt and his record in 2010 is testament to that. Let’s watch how hard it will be for Del Potro to return to the top after his layoff. So for Nadal to achieve the results he did in 2010 on the back of his lay-off in 2009 is truly phenomenal and escalates his esteem even higher.

    Nadal’s better H2H is lopsided for two clear reasons; he has the game that dominates Federer, his style of game troubles Federer and two – his mental toughness is superior to Federer’s, these facts are undeniable. In the 7 Grand Slam finals they have both contested together, Nadal has won 5 of them. He has beaten Federer 3 from 3 on clay, 1 from 3 on grass and 1 from 1 on hardcourt at the Australian Open. His only losses to Federer in grand Slam finals were on Federer’s best surface grass and these tellingly were early in Nadal’s career. Nadal by H2H and Grand Slam match-ups against Federer is the greater player, there can be no questioning of this. I think 7 Grand Slam finals where they are pitted against each other over the last 6 years and the result is a very lopsided 5-2 in Nadal’s favour cannot be argued against. They are 2 of the 4 greatest players of all time, there is no doubt and Federer’s 23 consecutive Grand Slam semi-final run and 16 Grand Slam titles is unquestionably a resume that gives him exclusive entry into this debate, in that there is no question, but he cannot be the greatest player of all time if he is not the greatest of his own era and Nadal has unquestionably to this point put paid to that being possible. Nadal (barring injury) is on the rise, his 2010 results reflect and support that and similarly Federer’s decline has been happening since his loss to del Potro, his 2010 results also undeniably reflect this trend. so for a H2h to be already in Nadal’s favour and their Grand Slam H2h’s as well, and both at the opposite ends of their careers, one waning the other waxing … the only conclusion we await is Nadal’s final number of Grand Slams he racks up, will it surpass Federer’s, I believe it will, if he can keep his body in shape. He will equal then pass Borg’s 6 French Opens surely, he will also equal and then pass Borg’s 3 back to back Wimbledon titles. He will join Laver as the only player to have won 2 or more titles at each of the 4 Grand Slams before his career is over and that my friends will escalate his worthiness in this discussion to the certainty level. He may even get a double chance at Gold in the Olympics to already add to his one Gold medal he has won already. All of these possibilities are not far from reality but equally still not certain I agree. Interesting times await us on this debate especially if these above scenarios pan out for Nadal. He is riding the cusp of exulted greatness and 2011 and 2012 (Olympic year) look to me to be the greatest 2 years of tennis that I can remember. The talent pool is growing and surely, Soderling, Djokovic, Murray and maybe del Potro will try to put a spanner in the works for both nadal and Federer at every Grand Slam …. so looking forward to next year.

    • ClayBuster said

      Ah, I get it. “Rafa can only lose when he’s Tired and/or Injured”, and of course, that kind of things never ever happens to any of his opponents, including Roger.

      Stop those silly excuses, please.

      As of now, Roger is still the greatest of the two. Whatever happens in the future is a great unknown. Judge the two players on ‘greatness’ (which both of them already are) when they’ve both retired, not now.

  14. banti said

    What could be his largest achievement to date on a hard court and gain him essential respect on the surface from many (including fellow players) is if he wins a WTF. This incredibly tough task in having to face each of the top 8 players without having the luxury of avoiding certain players to win a championship is what Fed excelled in and Nadal has not. As much as Nadal “has the game that dominates Federer” he surely does not dominate that format as he hasn’t made a final in 3 attempts. And “my guess” is that he will not this year as well.

    Rafa in my opinion needs not one more of each of the hard court slams as your suggesting but atleast two of each and/or surpass Fed’s slam count. Winning a WTF would be quite impressive as well. He needs to outshine Fed’s clay court play on a hard court. Fed who has better career statistics (win loss %), better head to head to records against the majority of the other players on either of the surfaces is a few steps above him in that regard.

    Curious how do you see Nadal matching up against Potro if there both in form? Who’s dominating who there?

  15. Ricke said

    Wow, some really long responses…..uhm…..what was the question again?

  16. dishank said

    the 14-7 H2H is just too much
    23 sf is impressive, but remember ,it is a part of trivia
    lots of players own plenty of trivia

  17. mircea said

    Why is Nadal going bald? No one in his family is. Why does Nadal look gaunt and sickly?

  18. xeres said

    My guesses are as follows

    1. Behind every successful man there is a woman “Mirka” : In Federer’s own words I have a partner who pushes me towards tennis. I think that has to be it..among all the present tennis WAGs Mirka reigns supreme in this matter.All the others may create distractions but in Mirka’s case Tennis is her world too.She was there when he had won nothing major and that ponytail grungy look and she’s still there despite all the titles and the new stylish looks he flaunts,of course we all know she is the stylist 😉
    2. I doubt if Nadal would be married with two kids when he reaches 29 😉

  19. O said

    Federer has never retired a match, win or lose.

    • overcaffeinated said

      “Federer has never retired a match, win or lose.”

      O – pardon being pedantic, however not sure how you retire a match after you win or lose. I will assume you mean he hasn’t retired whether he is in a winning or losing position in the match.

      Amazingly enough, in his entire career, RF has only has only defaulted a match once… I think in 2008 where he had to withdraw prior to the match. Again, goes to show how dang fit and healthy he has kept his body over the years.

      • O said

        Amazing, just saw Roddick retired leading the match… Still no declared winner yet?

      • overcaffeinated said

        Are you referring to Roddick retiring in Shanghai?

        One of the weirdest withdrawals I have ever seen also relates to Andy Roddick. Was I think at Cincinnati in 2008. He was warming up in his match, then retired hurt before the match started, after hurting his neck.

      • Jenny said

        I remember that. Seems there’s just as many injuries before a match as during it.

  20. Stella said

    so who won this thing ?

  21. Correct answer: Federer pinned Nadal down so hard and for so long that the period turned into a record Nadal may not be too proud of: Most consecutive weeks as World Number 2 than any player in the history of the computer rankings maintained by the Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP): 160 weeks.

  22. Haya said

    Too late, alas! Consecutive weeks as no.1 would’ve been my answer had I come here earlier 🙂

    It’s actually shocking how no one knew the answer!!!! O_O

  23. Haya said

    Oooooops, I just realized it wasn’t the correct answer anyways.. loool.. sorry *blush* 😀

    Brilliant TP! Thanks for reminding us 🙂

  24. Ricke said

    Face Palm!!! How could I have forgotten that?

  25. wuiches said

    Wall of Shame for all of us, nobody got this one!!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: