Roger's stellar season (ESPN)

[Federberg]

REREAD the post.. I said some Fed Fans say Roger didnt practice or had back injuries not Roger.. So it is FACT and has Basis..

This is your post that I had an issue with...

not really clutching at straws BB..by not facing Andy and Novak..Roger's lone obstacle was just to minimize Rafa's time to hit the ball. On one hand it's absolute brilliant by Roger and team Fed and complete bafoonism by Rafa not to counter Roger..There isn't one player in the top 10 including Berydch that struggles with Roger like Rafa does on the hardcourts. It's absolutely embarrassing that Rafa can barely win a set vs Roger but lesser player like Tiafoe can force Roger into uncomfortable position on the court. This is Worst than Rafa's problem vs Novak the past 5 years.

I read it quite well. I repeat it is pure fantasy to think that Murray would have been able to deter Roger. On what basis can you say that given the results they've had in recent years? As for what Fed fans have said to contextualise 2017? He hasn't been playing well for the past few years, I'm not sure that can be solely attributed to back issues although clearly he's had episodes, that's just something he'll have to deal with for the rest of his playing career. But frankly his improvement, to me, is down the cumulative work he has done on his backhand, turning it into a strength (instead of a relative weakness). It is clear to most observers that his movement was noticeably better at the start of the year, but that has deteriorated again probably from over playing. I'm not sure if anyone was going to be able to handle him at the start of the year but for sure Novak of prior years would have eaten him alive in the 2nd half of the year, I have no problem saying that. But for goodness sakes delete any talk of Andy Murray, when you bring him up you just sound lost to me.

PS, not sure where the "Roger didn't practice" bit comes from, feel free to direct me to that. Thanks

 

[the AntiPusher]

This is your post that I had an issue with...

not really clutching at straws BB..by not facing Andy and Novak..Roger's lone obstacle was just to minimize Rafa's time to hit the ball. On one hand it's absolute brilliant by Roger and team Fed and complete bafoonism by Rafa not to counter Roger..There isn't one player in the top 10 including Berydch that struggles with Roger like Rafa does on the hardcourts. It's absolutely embarrassing that Rafa can barely win a set vs Roger but lesser player like Tiafoe can force Roger into uncomfortable position on the court. This is Worst than Rafa's problem vs Novak the past 5 years.

I read it quite well. I repeat it is pure fantasy to think that Murray would have been able to deter Roger. On what basis can you say that given the results they've had in recent years? As for what Fed fans have said to contextualise 2017? He hasn't been playing well for the past few years, I'm not sure that can be solely attributed to back issues although clearly he's had episodes, that's just something he'll have to deal with for the rest of his playing career. But frankly his improvement, to me, is down the cumulative work he has done on his backhand, turning it into a strength (instead of a relative weakness). It is clear to most observers that his movement was noticeably better at the start of the year, but that has deteriorated again probably from over playing. I'm not sure if anyone was going to be able to handle him at the start of the year but for sure Novak of prior years would have eaten him alive in the 2nd half of the year, I have no problem saying that. But for goodness sakes delete any talk of Andy Murray, when you bring him up you just sound lost to me.

PS, not sure where the "Roger didn't practice" bit comes from, feel free to direct me to that. Thanks

Reference your dark Sith Lord, Darth.. its in some of his recent posts

As for Murray.. I never said he was a Fed Killer.. As you guys typically take the littlest things..blow it out of portion..

However,, there’s no need to continue, you have made this an Anti Andy post which isn’t necessary.

 

[Federberg]

Reference your dark Sith Lord, Darth.. its in some of his recent posts

As for Murray.. I never said he was a Fed Killer.. As you guys typically take the littlest things..blow it out of portion..

However,, there’s no need to continue, you have made this an Anti Andy post which isn’t necessary.

I responded to your specific post. Where you and I are concerned it has nothing to do with DF.

If it's anti- Andy to say he doesn't represent a significant match up threat to Roger based on the last 3 or 4 years then I guess I have. I'm not sure why you refuse to admit the flaw in your argument. A Djokovic in top form and there's not much to argue about, he's no easy out, but your desire to bolster your case with Andy Murray is flawed. Why not just admit it and move on? There are a host of players who would be a drain on Roger going through a draw, Murray is simply not one of them if you've watched any of their last 4 or 5 matches. And bear in mind this is over a period where Roger wasn't even playing particularly well. The so called pundits were doubting his ability to win anything significant and he was still tuning your boy

And by the way trying to label Fed fans as a unitary community makes no sense whatsoever. You weaken your arguments by saying that. If anyone is blowing anything out of proportion it's you, the simple thing to do would have been to concede the point, but perhaps your ego wouldn't let you

 

[the AntiPusher]

I responded to your specific post. Where you and I are concerned it has nothing to do with DF.

If it's anti- Andy to say he doesn't represent a significant match up threat to Roger based on the last 3 or 4 years then I guess I have. I'm not sure why you refuse to admit the flaw in your argument. A Djokovic in top form and there's not much to argue about, he's no easy out, but your desire to bolster your case with Andy Murray is flawed. Why not just admit it and move on? There are a host of players who would be a drain on Roger going through a draw, Murray is simply not one of them if you've watched any of their last 4 or 5 matches. And bear in mind this is over a period where Roger wasn't even playing particularly well. The so called pundits were doubting his ability to win anything significant and he was still tuning your boy

And by the way trying to label Fed fans as a unitary community makes no sense whatsoever. You weaken your arguments by saying that. If anyone is blowing anything out of proportion it's you, the simple thing to do would have been to concede the point, but perhaps your ego wouldn't let you

wait just a second..are you slow or what..you said you wanted to know the source of Roger's lack of practice. blah.blah blah. SO I serve up your boy Darth as the source ..now you say this is between you and I but has nothing to do with Darth..not that I said anything bad about Darth but You should fear getting pimp slapped by me instead of being AFRAID of Darth's wrath.. I didn't label you as a Fed fan because you have stated vitomy before you don't want to be associated with that tribe but your post speaks the opposite wouldn't you agree. I Am trying to be civil about this but you are trying to make me Angry. "MR Magee, Don t make me Angry , You won't like me when I am Angry ".

 

[the AntiPusher]

Where is Carol..on early Christmas break.. I am not as nice as her or Moxie...good grief..this guy have me label as an Andy Murray apologist. Where's Front..i rather engage in Roger juiced up backhand discussion than defending Andy ..i am gonna get my Rafa fan card taken from me..urrggg

 

[Federberg]

wait just a second..are you slow or what..you said you wanted to know the source of Roger's lack of practice. blah.blah blah. SO I serve up your boy Darth as the source ..now you say this is between you and I but has nothing to do with Darth..not that I said anything bad about Darth but You should fear getting pimp slapped by me instead of being AFRAID of Darth's wrath.. I didn't label you as a Fed fan because you have stated vitomy before you don't want to be associated with that tribe but your post speaks the opposite wouldn't you agree. I Am trying to be civil about this but you are trying to make me Angry. "MR Magee, Don t make me Angry , You won't like me when I am Angry ".

Do you turn green? I'm terrified.

You weren't clear about why you referenced DF. Perhaps if you structure your responses properly? Just a thought...

As for being pimp slapped? I think that's exactly what I've been serving up to you for your Andy Murray nonsense

I'm an unabashed Fed fan. I just reject any attempt to group all of us as one unit. If you're able to read, it should be clear to you we have differing views about many things. Your main problem is that you're trying to project based upon the justifiable criticisms that have been directed your way in the past.

PS, please don't try to threaten to mix it up with me. If you're going to do it, just do it. Otherwise it's just girly

 

[the AntiPusher]

Do you turn green? I'm terrified.

You weren't clear about why you referenced DF. Perhaps if you structure your responses properly? Just a thought...

As for being pimp slapped? I think that's exactly what I've been serving up to you for your Andy Murray nonsense

I'm an unabashed Fed fan. I just reject any attempt to group all of us as one unit. If you're able to read, it should be clear to you we have differing views about many things. Your main problem is that you're trying to project based upon the justifiable criticisms that have been directed your way in the past.

PS, please don't try to threaten to mix it up with me. If you're going to do it, just do it. Otherwise it's just girly

It’s all Good.. Happy holidays dude

 

[Moxie]

Lol! This is truly the age of Trump. You're now trying to flip injury excuses back on to Federer fans? Puh-leeze. I refer you to the CNN adverts, just because you say it's a banana doesn't stop it from being an apple

I'm going to defend AP here. Some Fed fans have been trading on the injuries to bring up the what-ifs. You may not truck in that, but some do. If you're ignoring that, then you're being either blithely ignorant, or stubbornly blind. In any case, I agree with him that bringing in Trump is a bit over the top. And I definitely agree with him that, if Rafa fans had said that 'if only Nadal hadn't played Montreal,' we'd be crucified around here. There are people here making the case for if-only and Roger winning the USO and the YE#1. Or whining about it pretty hard. That's not "fake news."

 

[brokenshoelace]

I haven't followed the argument between Federberg and AP, but more than one Fed fan has said "playing in Canada cost Roger the US Open." We can play willfully dumb as to what this implies, or take it as "he would have likely won it had it not been for Montreal" which, I don't have a problem with someone saying, but I have a problem with disingenuously trying to hide what they actually mean.

 

[Front242]

You are truly missing my point, Roger had the luxury of not battling the twins(Novak and Andy) as he cruise to all his tournaments titles in 2017.. Regardless of Andy’s recent struggles with Roger, their matches still takes a toll on Roger as he tries to claim a grand slam title. Look at Roger's record the past 5 years especially in the grand slam when he had to encounter the other big 3. If you think its folly, then the same came be said of Darth’s ascertain that Roger should have a better H2h vs Nadal.. As for Tiafoe.. he is a bigger threat to Roger on hardcourts than Rafa. It’s the truth

You do realize that ball bag you support didn't have to play Murray or Djokovic either? While I don't think Murray poses any major challenge to Federer, even if hypothetically they had played at a slam this year and it turned out to be a long match, no one still would know how that would have affected the following match. For the record, Murray is much more likely to have given Nadal a long match so I have no idea why this bs is all directed towards Federer not playing him. Pretty hilarious also reading this bs if you even dwell for 1 second on who Nadal faced to win the USO. Clearly butthurt that Federer won 2 slams this year, you're trying to come up with moronic ways to diminish his results while blindly ignoring the frankly rubbish opponents Nadal faced at the USO and failing miserably to diminish his results for that reason. Neither of Federer's slam wins had a 250 equivalent field in his draw...

 

[Front242]

I haven't followed the argument between Federberg and AP, but more than one Fed fan has said "playing in Canada cost Roger the US Open." We can play willfully dumb as to what this implies, or take it as "he would have likely won it had it not been for Montreal" which, I don't have a problem with someone saying, but I have a problem with disingenuously trying to hide what they actually mean.

Given both their respective forms this year, Federer losing to Del Potro in the USO 1/4 final was a very poor result. Don't think too many people would have expected him to lose that early if fully fit which he wasn't. Much to AP's disappointment too (since he claimed DP "brought him back down to Earth), even with a gammy back Roger barely lost that match. Getting injured in Montreal cost him winning that match for one thing and if anyone thinks it's normal for Federer to struggle and go 5 sets with Youzhny at this point in their careers, they need to give up watching tennis and take up a new sport. He was clearly hampered all that tournament so, yes, playing Montreal was a dumb move and cost him going much deeper in the USO. No one said he was clearly penciled in as the winner if fit but he would've been the clear number 1 favourite.

 

[Ricardo]

wait just a second..are you slow or what..you said you wanted to know the source of Roger's lack of practice. blah.blah blah. SO I serve up your boy Darth as the source ..now you say this is between you and I but has nothing to do with Darth..not that I said anything bad about Darth but You should fear getting pimp slapped by me instead of being AFRAID of Darth's wrath.. I didn't label you as a Fed fan because you have stated vitomy before you don't want to be associated with that tribe but your post speaks the opposite wouldn't you agree. I Am trying to be civil about this but you are trying to make me Angry. "MR Magee, Don t make me Angry , You won't like me when I am Angry ".

bhahahahaha......what are you Hollywood actor wanna-be? you are a douche lets not pretend no more

 

[Ricardo]

You do realize that ball bag you support didn't have to play Murray or Djokovic either? While I don't think Murray poses any major challenge to Federer, even if hypothetically they had played at a slam this year and it turned out to be a long match, no one still would know how that would have affected the following match. For the record, Murray is much more likely to have given Nadal a long match so I have no idea why this bs is all directed towards Federer not playing him. Pretty hilarious also reading this bs if you even dwell for 1 second on who Nadal faced to win the USO. Clearly butthurt that Federer won 2 slams this year, you're trying to come up with moronic ways to diminish his results while blindly ignoring the frankly rubbish opponents Nadal faced at the USO and failing miserably to diminish his results for that reason. Neither of Federer's slam wins had a 250 equivalent field in his draw...

have to agree with you on this here, that it's only Fed who had it easy by not having to play a six-hour match with Murray.....while there is no mention of Nadal, who is without a doubt much more possible to have a long one with Murray. However i am not surprised, as the douche is always capable of the most blind argument. Obviously anti-puss would again forget that the USO is the weakest draw ever.....only because Nadal won it.

 

[Federberg]

I'm going to defend AP here. Some Fed fans have been trading on the injuries to bring up the what-ifs. You may not truck in that, but some do. If you're ignoring that, then you're being either blithely ignorant, or stubbornly blind. In any case, I agree with him that bringing in Trump is a bit over the top. And I definitely agree with him that, if Rafa fans had said that 'if only Nadal hadn't played Montreal,' we'd be crucified around here. There are people here making the case for if-only and Roger winning the USO and the YE#1. Or whining about it pretty hard. That's not "fake news."

Hail ye defender of Rafa fans!

First of all, I do recall having conversations with other Fed fans before Montreal started talking about how his participation there was likely to jeopardise his chances at Flushing. In fact there were conversations about what was more important going for YE no 1 or winning a slam at this point in Roger's career. You might know better than me about whether others then used that as an excuse for his loss at the US Open but for my part I pretty much wrote off his chances once he became physically impaired in the final. This isn't woulda coulda it's just common sense. That's entirely different from what we've had to put up with from some Rafa fans for a decade. I'll say that again... a DECADE! That's how long we've had to put up with injury excuses from some Rafa fans. I find it highly amusing that some Rafa fans are now trying to equate Federer injuries to Rafa fan injury excuses. That seems like what aboutism to me, which is a Trumpian tactic. I'm just calling it like I see it

 

[Federberg]

I haven't followed the argument between Federberg and AP, but more than one Fed fan has said "playing in Canada cost Roger the US Open." We can play willfully dumb as to what this implies, or take it as "he would have likely won it had it not been for Montreal" which, I don't have a problem with someone saying, but I have a problem with disingenuously trying to hide what they actually mean.

Are you sure they've been saying that explicitly? I do know that the consensus amongst Fed fans was that after Montreal he went from being favourite to a lottery. That's entirely different from asserting that he would definitely have won

 

[brokenshoelace]

Are you sure they've been saying that explicitly? I do know that the consensus amongst Fed fans was that after Montreal he went from being favourite to a lottery. That's entirely different from asserting that he would definitely have won

I'm sure we can find nuances to every argument (or, as these boards call them, "excuses"), but yes, "playing Montreal cost Roger the US Open" has definitely been explicitly claimed.

 

[Federberg]

I'm sure we can find nuances to every argument (or, as these boards call them, "excuses"), but yes, "playing Montreal cost Roger the US Open" has definitely been explicitly claimed.

hmmm... no doubt they meant a chance at the US Open. Even the most deluded Fed fanboy wouldn't think it was a lock

 

[brokenshoelace]

Given both their respective forms this year, Federer losing to Del Potro in the USO 1/4 final was a very poor result. Don't think too many people would have expected him to lose that early if fully fit which he wasn't. Much to AP's disappointment too (since he claimed DP "brought him back down to Earth), even with a gammy back Roger barely lost that match. Getting injured in Montreal cost him winning that match for one thing and if anyone thinks it's normal for Federer to struggle and go 5 sets with Youzhny at this point in their careers, they need to give up watching tennis and take up a new sport. He was clearly hampered all that tournament so, yes, playing Montreal was a dumb move and cost him going much deeper in the USO. No one said he was clearly penciled in as the winner if fit but he would've been the clear number 1 favourite.

I don't disagree with a single sentence in this post (truly), but if a Nadal fan said something similar about Rafa we know how the reaction would have been...

 

[brokenshoelace]

A-P giving Carol a run for her money lately.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Hail ye defender of Rafa fans!

First of all, I do recall having conversations with other Fed fans before Montreal started talking about how his participation there was likely to jeopardise his chances at Flushing. In fact there were conversations about what was more important going for YE no 1 or winning a slam at this point in Roger's career. You might know better than me about whether others then used that as an excuse for his loss at the US Open but for my part I pretty much wrote off his chances once he became physically impaired in the final. This isn't woulda coulda it's just common sense. That's entirely different from what we've had to put up with from some Rafa fans for a decade. I'll say that again... a DECADE! That's how long we've had to put up with injury excuses from some Rafa fans. I find it highly amusing that some Rafa fans are now trying to equate Federer injuries to Rafa fan injury excuses. That seems like what aboutism to me, which is a Trumpian tactic. I'm just calling it like I see it

moxie. Will you please,tell him who brought up ROGER'S ailments..hint..it wasn't Rafa's favorite poster