Is Federer the biggest choker among ATGs?

[Front242]

Different as in Roger wins a set? Because that's the most he's managed to win against Nadal at Roland Garros, and God knows he's had enough attempts. Although you said 100% totally different. Well, if it had been 100% different it means Roger would have won the match. My question to you, on the spot, yes or no: Would Roger have won that match under different conditions?

Given Nadal was fair from unbeatable this year at RG it's not out of the question as Roger was playing extremely well prior to the crap weather in the semi. Roger had 2 match points in Rome 2006 which was best of 5 back then.

He was also conned out of the first set by the despicable one again ruining his rhythm changing his fucking socks and bandages while down 5-2 in 2011 so no one will ever know how that would have panned out if Roger had actually not been subjected to bs gamesmanship that day and won the first set.

Must feel great to be a fan of scum like that who feel the need to stoop to anything to win and especially while trailing. And that btw is one of the main reasons why I hate that pos. The cheating to win mentality.

 

[atttomole]

Given Nadal was fair from unbeatable this year at RG it's not out of the question as Riger was playing extremely well prior to the crap weather in the semi. Roger had 2 match points in Rome 2006 which was best of 5 back then.

He was also conned out of the first set by the despicable one again ruining his rhythm changing his fucking socks and bandages while down 5-2 in 2011 so no one will ever know how that would have panned out if Roger had actually not been subjected to bs gamesmanship that day and won the first set.

Must feel great to be a fan of scum like that who feel the need to stoop to anything to win and especially while trailing.

One thing that surprises me is that Roger does not seem bothered by the gamesmanship. They are supposedly good friends off the court.

 

[MikeOne]

One thing that surprises me is that Roger does not seem bothered by the gamesmanship. They are supposedly good friends off the court.

Or could it be, maybe, just maybe.. that we are making a big deal out of nothing?

 

[Moxie]

One thing that surprises me is that Roger does not seem bothered by the gamesmanship. They are supposedly good friends off the court.

Perhaps he doesn't see it as gamesmanship, and then maybe neither should you.

 

[MikeOne]

What the fuck are you exposing? You just want people to beat Federer. Whether it's Novak, Nadal or anyone else. When you say Novak was a bigger problem for Nadal, it implies you ever were a real Rafa fan, when you weren't. You're a Sampras fan/Fed hater, and whatever serves that agenda, you're on board with. This by the way, is NOT an ad hominem attack. I'm simply saying you like a certain player and hate another. An ad hominem would be calling you an idiot, which to be fair, you are.

PS: I HAVE NEVER EVER EVER EVER said Murray was better than Djokovic. In fact, @nehmeth and @imjimmy can attest that after Del Potro won the US Open there was a question as to who's the best among Djokovic, Murray and Del Potro and everyone was on board with the latter two and I said Novak is clearly better than both. So yeah, not only are you an idiot, you're full of shit.

ROFL!!!! You must be mentally retarded, like for real dude, no joke.

 

[DarthFed]

One thing that surprises me is that Roger does not seem bothered by the gamesmanship. They are supposedly good friends off the court.

He's not going to say anything about it if it doesn't work. And even when it does work it will just come off as sour grapes. Who knows if it truly does bother him or not, tough to picture it not bothering him when Nadal resorts to it so often.

 

[DarthFed]

Perhaps he doesn't see it as gamesmanship, and then maybe neither should you.

Yeah taking a piss break before someone serves for the match isn't gamesmanship. The reason this latest attempt doesn't get more attention is that Nadal took a piss break before Roger served for a match. I mean what can possibly top that? I think there is a reason we havent seen it before or since. Honestly, this is something only you and Carol can defend.

 

[Front242]

Or could it be, maybe, just maybe.. that we are making a big deal out of nothing?

No we're not. You could see the look of disgust on Roger's face before he served for the match at Wimbledon against Nadal. Kept looking towards him as if to say hurry up you churro chomping cheating pos.. suddenly you need to change your fucking socks that were fine ALL match till now.

 

[MikeOne]

No we're not. You could see the look of disgust on Roger's face before he served for the match at Wimbledon against Nadal. Kept looking towards him as if to say hurry up you churro chomping cheating pos.. suddenly you need to change your fucking socks that were fine ALL match till now.

And why would that affect Fed? If he’s the better player, these breaks should have no effect.

 

[Front242]

And why would that affect Fed? If he’s the better player, these breaks should have no effect.

Thankfully it didn't but you know damn well that the stalling tactics, MTOs for zero injury etc that pos uses while losing have won him many matches as they break momentum, rhythm, the players cool down, adrenaline drops, concentration wanders, they dwell on past losses against him, most notably in the case of Roger and that's why the despicable pos does it more against him than most, etc. See, not so hard to see how they affect you, especially given the magnitude of what was at stake at this point of their respective careers in the Wimbledon semi: a chance at making another Wimbledon final.

 

[MikeOne]

Thankfully it didn't but you know damn well that the stalling tactics, MTOs for zero injury etc that pos uses while losing have won him many matches as they break momentum, rhythm, the players cool down, adrenaline drops, concentration wanders, they dwell on past losses against him, most notably in the case of Roger and that's why the despicable pos does it more against him than most, etc. See, not so hard to see how they affect you, especially given the magnitude of what was at stake at this point of their respective careers in the Wimbledon semi: a chance at making another Wimbledon final.

I’ve seen players do the same against nadal. Players do this... it’s part of the game.

 

[Front242]

I’ve seen players do the same against nadal. Players do this... it’s part of the game.

ANYONE who cheats to win is a despicable pos, not just Nadal. He just happens to be the worst offender out there.

 

[atttomole]

And why would that affect Fed? If he’s the better player, these breaks should have no effect.

Are you trying to say this kind of behavior should not affect opponents? Why was Nadal complaining about Kyrgios’s antics?

 

[MikeOne]

Are you trying to say this kind of behavior should not affect opponents? Why was Nadal complaining about Kyrgios’s antics?

Wouldn’t that make someone mentally weak? Mental strength is a kew aspect to being great. If kyrgios can get nadal rattled and win matches by riding antics, then it says much about those who succumb to such antics.

 

[atttomole]

Wouldn’t that make someone mentally weak? Mental strength is a kew aspect to being great. If kyrgios can get nadal rattled and win matches by riding antics, then it says much about those who succumb to such antics.

That is reductive. Being mentally strong doesn’t mean that you don’t get rattled by silly behaviors. The two are not mutually exclusive. It is also about ethics. Some people may find these behaviors to be repugnant.

 

[MikeOne]

That is reductive. Being mentally strong doesn’t mean that you don’t get rattled by silly behaviors. The two are not mutually exclusive. It is also about ethics. Some people may find these behaviors to be repugnant.

It is fair to criticize cheap antics where players take injury timeouts, serve underhanded, try to create distractions. What i think is silly though, is to somehow make the argument that players may lose due to these antics as if it's an unfair advantage one player has. In the end, If Federer, Djokovic, Nadal or any other player lose and claim it's because of the opponent's antics, then it's a stupid excuse. Did Nadal's socks change alter the result of the match? Did Djokovic's 'distraction' in 2nd set alter result of second set? If a player cannot stay focused and loses concentration due to these so called antics, and loses, then that player didn't deserve to win.

There is no excuse to let a player get inside your head, it is a reflection of mental weakness. And no, if a player is truly the better player, he won't let pauses during hot streaks alter result of the match, if you are the better player, you win over course of a match. Handling these pauses, distractions is part of the game. It happens in every level of competition in tennis, from juniors, to futures/satellites, college tennis and slams. It's simply part of the game...

 

[Moxie]

No we're not. You could see the look of disgust on Roger's face before he served for the match at Wimbledon against Nadal. Kept looking towards him as if to say hurry up you churro chomping cheating pos.. suddenly you need to change your fucking socks that were fine ALL match till now.

He didn't change his socks. It was the strapping on the feet. It's not uncommon that it's too tight. You can complain about the timing, and you always will. But it's not a rare occurrence to adjust strapping. At least get the complaint right.

 

[Hamidreza Roohian]

That's the only reason Novak won.
https://us.blastingnews.com/opinion/2019/07/3-reasons-why-djokovic-won-wimbledon-2019-002948129.html

 

[Front242]

He didn't change his socks. It was the strapping on the feet. It's not uncommon that it's too tight. You can complain about the timing, and you always will. But it's not a rare occurrence to adjust strapping. At least get the complaint right.

Just like you'll always defend the timing. It was an unsporting thing to do and he's an unsporting player and has done unsporting things to distract his opponents in an attempt to turn the match around while in a losing position many times. Newsflash, there are socks over the strapping and newsflash number 2: it IS a rare occurrence to adjust them right before your opponent serves for the match. It takes a special kind of prick to deliberately choose that moment to do so. You probably thought OJ Simpson and Oscar Pistorius were innocent too.

 

[the AntiPusher]

No we're not. You could see the look of disgust on Roger's face before he served for the match at Wimbledon against Nadal. Kept looking towards him as if to say hurry up you churro chomping cheating pos.. suddenly you need to change your fucking socks that were fine ALL match till now.

My Lord..even when Roger wins, Front you still will find the most simplest frivolous shit to bitch about.