Roger Federer

[Dark Savante]

The best male tennis player of all time?

I hate modern tennis. It's all power play and very little finesse so I rarely watch it, but Federer? He's like an artist out there. Manipulates the ball and his opponents in a way I don't think tennis has seen before. Is he the best male player there has ever been?

[MtP07]

Don't know if I'm qualified to say he's the best ever, as I've only been watching tennis since the Sampras/Agassi era. But I must say I've never seen anyone dominate the way Federer does.

[Teso Dos Bichos]

I would say so.

[SirManchester]

I watched the final against Baghdatidis just a few hours ago, and been following the guy for almost two years now, he's something else. I agree with DS, he incorporates power, technique and has total understanding of the game. he's also very fun to watch.

[Dark Savante]

It's just how...he controls his opponents, like they are puppets on a string. On any surface! >_< in any fashion he pleases.

He must be so demoralising to play against. He's going to win so many slams before he retires if he stays fit. Unreal.

[SirManchester]

The record for amount of slams is fourteen by Sampras, Federer already has seven. That's astonishing, and he's also on his way to do what no one has done before, win four consecutive grand slams.

[Dark Savante]

The record for amount of slams is fourteen by Sampras, Federer already has seven. That's astonishing, and he's also on his way to do what no one has done before, win four consecutive grand slams.
Yes and Sampras was rubbish on clay. Isn't Federer only 23 or 24 IIRC he's relatively young. Who knows how many he'll amass by the time he retires.

[haven]

We'll see. Part of the key to being a great player is longevity. When Federer starts approaching Sampras #'s, then we'll talk.

Federer needs a good foil, though. Part of it's that he's great - but he also lacks serious competition. He really needs a true rival. All of his better adversaries are seriously flawed.

I'll also acknowledge the opposing proposition that his chief opponents are great, but that he's just the greatest ever. I don't see it, though. Safin, Hewitt, Roddick, etc, all seem to have holes in their game in a way that the true greats don't.

[littleman]

We'll see. Part of the key to being a great player is longevity. When Federer starts approaching Sampras #'s, then we'll talk.

Federer needs a good foil, though. Part of it's that he's great - but he also lacks serious competition. He really needs a true rival. All of his better adversaries are seriously flawed.

I'll also acknowledge the opposing proposition that his chief opponents are great, but that he's just the greatest ever. I don't see it, though. Safin, Hewitt, Roddick, etc, all seem to have holes in their game in a way that the true greats don't.

That he can deal with all his different adversaries only shows how "fully equipped" Federer is.. he might not have the forehand of Pete Sampras, or Agassi's backhand, or Roddick's serve but he has everything in great quality, such that he can pull out ANYTHING against any opponent.

I think one of the reason why so many tennis greats have proclaimed Federer as one of the best, if not the best ever, is because of how "complete" he is. Whether he can match up to Sampras' record is a different matter; that is wholly dependent on competition. Right now there is no dispute he is the best in the world, and probably the most complete in the history of tennis.

[Motterman]

Federer needs a rival.

[Achtung]

Federer is well on pace to break most of Sampras' records, but then he still has a long ways to go. They just did a comparison on Sportscenter today, and at the same age he has pretty much the exact same stats as Sampras did. But Sampras was always so consistent, as Federer has been so far. I see a lot of similarities in the two of them personally. I also think Sampras had better competition in his day, which is to say he faced more players who can be considered some of the greatest players of all time.

[StrikerCW]

I don't watch much tennis but it is definatelly a tough game to play (off topic).

Sampras is IMO the greatest ever. If Federer can get the records above Sampras then he will have it, because he is a damn good player.

All he needs now is Sharapova......

[Vermont Red]

I agree with those that think Federer needs to perform longer at this level to be considered the best all-time. Kind of like a certain professional golfer who is chasing a legend.

[Stud83]

I'd take Agassi and Sampras both over Roger at this point, as Agassi is the only one of them who won on all surfaces.

Gamewise the only player that can challenge Federrer on his best day is Safin. Too bad he's got issues with his knees and temper.

[prymetyme]

yeah, my parents are tennis fanatics and based of what they say and what ive seen I'd say he's defenetly one of the best if not the best

[johno]

The sad thing about Federer is his lack of competition as some have pointed out.

He's certainly got the talent to be regarded as one of the best, but he really hasn't had to overcome a great player at his peak and that's a necessity for someone to be considered the best of all time. Even without a rival he's got such a well rounded game, the serve, the forehand and backhand... his control of tempo and his shot placement, selection and angles are phenomenal. He plays tennis completely disconnected. He's like a robot. He doesn't get emotionally invovled in points and rarely ever makes unforced errors, which indicates how sure he is of his shots.

He's also quite unique, there hasn't been many players that have had anywhere near as complete a game as he has.

[haven]

I wouldn't compare Agassi to Federer. And I'm a guy who always rooted for Agassi against Sampras.

Agassi was fun. And he was great at some things. But I wouldn't put him amongst the all-time greats. He was a great anti-hero, a fantastic rival...but he did not dominate his era. He was an excellent tennis player for a long time.

[Dark Savante]

People! Come on!

We're witnessing the best to ever do it!

I've never seen a player who is so complete with such technique.

Federer is the tennis equiv. of Pele :eek:

[Uniteder]

People! Come on!

We're witnessing the best to ever do it!

I've never seen a player who is so complete with such technique.

Federer is the tennis equiv. of Pele :eek:
Scary thing is he's only 25 :eek: The way he eased through this touramnet was frightening.

[johno]

Federer wasn't even extended today. Fernando Gonzalez was in superb, superb form through out the tournament and lost in straight sets while being broken like 3 times! Federer is a machine. The scary, scary thing is that he wasn't even at his best. His technique won out for him today, but he didn't have his angles with him at all. He got several short balls that he didn't kill with wide shots and its a testament to his consistency and greatness that he can defeat an inform, very good player and make it look routine while not being at his best.

I loved his volleys today. He didn't waste a chance and put away some stunners.

Hell, I could rave about Federer all day. One last one... he's got the best backhand in the business.