i did read it, but my point is what on earth does head to head have to do with history? until theyre retired this is going to change, no?

Slam titles are in the bag, and what plaers are judged by in the end... so Nadal is the GOAT because he's got a bunch of clay court wins over Fed? lordie...

narinder: nadal will never be able to repeat his wins over federer again? and why is that? I have every confidence he will beat roger many times in their future. In the last 13 months he's beaten him in three slam finals.

muray and djoker arent even the courier's fo their generation, COurier won 4 Slams! i really wonder if Murray will attain that level, long way to go, same with Djoker...

Djoker and Murray right now are the Marcelo Rios or Kafelnikov of their generation...

@narinder
you said: "Geelis........have some mercy on tennis players less than # 5 ranking........they are definately not "scrubs".And Murray is not all that hot.....he put up a poor show in paris and did not do well at wimbledon either (despite all the crowd support . As for Nadal he had to physically wear down his body to win against Federer , which he will never be able to repeat again"

I've posted re this issue many times and, therefore, won't waste people's time with the full argument. I think Bud Collins said it best when responding to the question re GOAT and Federer. He said, Federer's competition are lots of good players, but that Sampras' contemporaries were great players. Enuff said. With respect to your statement re Nadal and Federer, you're obviously a neophyte when it comes to following the game. Nadal beat Federer the VERY FIRST TIME they ever met, in 2004 in Miami. He's had Federer's number throughout their entire rivalry and not just one year (as you and others have suggested).

With all due respect (to the great man), Laver won his calendar grand slam when all of them(or 3?) were played on grass. So, in fact, he never won on clay. If we had all GSs played on grass today, I wonder who would have won the calendar GS more than once ;)
In the future there might be another surface that doesn't exist today, so that it's just so darn tough to compare eras.

Regarding the court condition for the olympics in 2012, the AELTC has a problem. the court was mostly packed earth today. And you can't plant fresh sod and have it root in in 3 weeks time. wonder what they'll do.

I dunno, but if you beat someone in two Wimby Finals, snap two huge winning streaks on his favorite surface, two Masters Cup semis, and two Masters finals, you might have some idea how to beat the guy... just a guess...

And i know it's late but I wanted to thank pete, rosangel, andrew and the mods for running such a great site for us. All the pictures, overflows, articles and just your being here makes it a special place. speaking of Rosangel, did anyone hear from her
today? Was she planning on attending the final?

Unbelievable match. Friends of mine who are fans of Federer were actually cheering for Roddick this time. I would have loved to see Roddick pull it out against Federer, especially since Federer has denied Roddick a Wimbledon title for the third time now. Congrats to Federer, though, he earned it. But Roddick was a true sport today!

Tim- No Tim, I'm not saying Nadal is the GOAT. What I'm saying is Federer is great. Nadal is great. No GOAT. Because Nadal leads 13:7. Grand slam finals Nadal leads 5:2. End of story.

Congratulations to Rogi and all fella rogiphiles on #15!

I feel sad for Andy, too. Funny, though... lurking on this board and reading through all the comments, I remember why I mostly lurk now. All the same, I feel goaded enough to jump into the fray....

Syd, I am sooo with you. A rabid rogiphile I am, I do have a heart, I felt for Andy, too. He made me think of Horatio Algier and all that. That said, how I feel about his pain does not in any way diminish the pure, UNADULTERATED joy I feel on this momentous day. All this talk about how Andy deserved it more and stuff... well, all I can say is...this is sports, and that's how things work in the world of sports, no?

As for Rafa, I feel bad for him and his many fans that he couldn't defend the title. Hackneyed, I am, I suppose... fitness, durability, consistency, and yeah, a bit of fortune smiling on him/her (I did not think fortune was smiling on Rogi this time last year, no definitely not)... all those are part of the recipe for making a champion, or so I have always believed, so.... that Rafa took himself out of contention (did he not say himself that he was pulling out because he did not think he could win?) in no way minimizes Rogi's feat, if you were to ask me.

I, for one, have not lost one iota of my rogi-love just because he's gotten himself #15 already. If anything, that he's lost a step or two, that TMF all too often goes in abeyance (Freddy keeps showing up, gaaah)... and that his competition grows stiffer and more valiant by the day (that Andy is as good as he is now, his desire to overcome his nemesis--Rogi--is at least a small part of his resurgence, no?)... all these things make Rogi's continuing quest for... virtu... all the more compelling for this one rabid fan! And for that, I make no apologies, a KAD I really must be, gaaah. Good night, all.

so Rod Laver is the GOAT becaase Rafa has a bunch of clay court wins over fed??

huh?

At the end of the day you are judged in your tennis career firstly the amount of Grand Slam Titles you have won,then the titles,Master Series,etc.

Hey ok Rafa has a leading edge over Federer

Murray also has a leading edge over Federer on a h/court

Federer regardless of the above has the titles at Grand Slam level to out strip them both at the present time.

Gee Murray hasnt even won a Grand Slam title as yet.

acutally Murray is the GOAT, because he leads Fed 6-2...

and Wayne Ferreira had Sampras' number too in head to heads, so that takes care of Pete's GOAT chances...

Tim-Please read my post again and understand my logic.

It's just amazing that Nadal is thought of as great only 'cause he beat Federer on many occasions on clay. Yeah, he beat him on grass and hard courts recently, but his majority of victories are on clay.
Nadal never showed up in any of the finals "on a consistent basis" on other surfaces for years. He showed up in those 4 finals in May every year, beat everyone, and then created that 9-4 record or whatever against Federer. For almost 3+ years nobody heard of him except in May of every year. The only year he does well "throughout" the year, he is too tired to play the greatest tourney in history, loses his no. 1 ranking and unsure how long it takes to recover. I don't see the making of a great player until he changes his routine and is able to play year-in and year-out.
Otherwise, it's just a flash in the pan, ok...a few flashes.

Fed won his 15 still im more impress by andy efford ---after all fed ony break him once--

siggy: why is it that you mostly lurk now? just curious.

Where did those "lack of competition in Federer era" go? Had Roddick lived in 90's, he would have matched Aggassi's feat.
Federer stopped Roddick to be a greater player in a single-handed (or single-handed backhand?) manner.
Roddick got a lot of praises today and he deserves them. Federer didn't play his best and still won the title.
I like Roddick's comments on Fed.
"he kind of digs deep and toughs it out."
Three epic Wimbledon finals in a row from Federer. That tells you how great he is.

i read it, and clearly i disagree ... when Nadal gets about 7 more Slams, it might be relevant, but 3 French Open finals dont impact tennis history the way Wimbledon and the US Open do, just a fact...

Kuerten would be more in the discussion if that were true, its a feather in the hat for Fed but its still not on par with Wimby and the Open, historically speaking..

Tennis Fan Agree,Nadal and his team Have to look at his playing schedule ASAP.Gee after Paris Masters last year you would have thought they would have taken notice of that.

This year came back won the AO,IW,then onto the clay,well we all saw what happened there.Nadal isnt a machine.Noone is full stop.

His ongoing Knee problem will always be there.

Without the correct ongoing treatment and shcedule alas the same thing will keep happening.

TheTennisFan-I hope you are not referring to my e-mail. I was in no way trying to say that Nadal is in the GOAT discussion. Rather, I was trying to say that he and Borg have similar denominators (GS tournaments entered), yet Borg is in the GOAT discussion and Nadal should not be yet. His percentage for wins to GS entered is in GOAT category, but he has not participated in enough. His career has been incredible, but it is still too early. Borg, however, in the same amount of time (more or less) did enough to be in the GOAT discussion. Is Borg the GOAT? No. He quit too early. But, he had an incredible career for as short as it was.

today's match might be the one most talked about by historians, for so many reasons, we just saw big time tennis history, quite a day, but i have to say, i need a break from all this tension, today almost killed me lol

TheTennisFan-Nadal is already one of the best player ever. At 23 years old: 6 Grandslams, 15 master shield, olympic gold medal.Is this by your standard not great enough?

Tim- I agree with you about Murray and Joker when looking at the statistics, but it certainly feels like they are both more important than their actual GS tally would indicate. Remember Murray was the favorite to win the AO. At the RG only Joker was supposed to be able to give Nadal a run for his money. Something happened to Nadal at RG (no excuses it just seems like something outside of tennis affected him), but in the end who has won the GS this year? The same old, just in a different combination. RF and RN. But Murray and Joker are really hyped up by the media. I wonder why that is. They are good, but . . . so far . . . they still have a ways to go.

Curious, ever heard the expression "lies, damned lies and statistics." Clearly, Nadal has the better record on clay, but the two are equal on hard courts and Federer is ahead on grass.

But HTH itself is not a measure of career achievement, for which you need consistency over many years. Whether Nadal's style of play is compatible with long-term consistency is a question many, including former big players, were asking before his most recent problems.

There is after all a major reason Federer has remained injury-free while winning 60 career titles, including the 15 Slams: like Borg, he glides across the court rather than pounds into it. Nadal will need to work his way into a lot more GS finals before he is in contention for true greatness rather than simply extraordinary talent. He may do it, or maybe not. Many other truly talented players (like J-Mac) have after all fallen short of their full potential.

No such question for Federer, even if he never plays another game.

ebh -

Yes, I agree that Nadal's career so far has been incredible. I never understand why ppl don't leave it at that (not directed at you) and insist on comparing him with other greats who have been at the top for years and years. The true great ones figure out how to play well on a consistent basis...let's just hope for the sake of the game that Nadal fully recovers. I have my doubts, but we'll see.

To TheTennisFan- You need to re-read your tennis history. Laver won on grass (AO, Wimby and UO) and on clay (RG). My argument against Laver is that when he won his first slam as an amateur, those tournaments were not considered the most important, so . . . it takes away from the idea that he won two true GS. He did prove himself later by winning the GS against the best in 1969, but the one in 1962(?) was not against the best players. They played on a different circuit then.

what Johnc said...

thanks

Tim-
FO is certainly as important as the UO. Wimby is the most important. Too bad there is not a longer grass court season. Thinking that the UO is more important than the FO is probably because you are from the states or an anglofile.

I love Federer, and he is the greatest ever. But, as has been commented earlier, his gold-embroidered outfit with the number 15 on it was too much for me (as was his post-match speech). This is the first time I've felt antipathy towards the man, and I lost a lot of respect for him (and Nike) today.

On the other hand, Andy played such an incredible match and deserved to win. I wish he was better able to adjust to the shadows on the court in the fifth set. Everyone has muffed volleys that look like they are going long, but the second set tiebreaker was still heartbreaking. I'm looking forward to watching Andy in action at the US Open.

ebh -

Ok, so Laver didn't win on the hard courts then, which constitute 50% of the Grand slams today. Either way, my argument holds - it's just darn tough to compare eras.

TheTennisFan-Give Nadal a chance. He has certainly been as consistent as anyone not named Federer in recent times. He goes deep into just about every tournament that he enters. His big issue are injuries and fatigue. That is no excuse for him; that is something he must work on. So, just like it is not fair to claim Nadal is a GOAT because he has a good record against RF, it is also not fair to criticize RN for not being RF. Historically speaking, RN has done well so far. This is not directed at you, but it so often feels like RN is not given a lot of credit. We hear about Murray and Joker and how they are true greats or certainly will be, but RN is some strange phenomenon. What was it that Gimelslob was saying? "Murray is much better than Nadal on every surface but clay." Murray doesn't even have a winning record against Nadal. As a Nadal fan I fear Murray, but as Tim would say, he hasn't arrived yet (although we certainly expect him to and Jon Weirthem from SI says Murray is the favorite for the UO?!?).

Quoting Bud Collins?!
Federer's competition are lots of good players, but that Sampras' contemporaries were great players.

Why do people automatically assume Sampras' contemporaries were greater just because there was a larger collection of slam winners? I think the competition is a lot stiffer at the top 3~4 in Federer's time. Sampras finished #1 several years winning only one slam. No way he could have gotten away with that in the current tour.
And it can't be said enough: it's to Federer's credit if he makes other great players look merely good.

TheTennisFan-Right! That is my point about Laver. In his time (before 1969) he wasn't even considered the greatest. His GS in 1964 was on the inferior amateur circuit. There was a completely different circuit of professional players and Laver didn't have to compete against them. I think he was considered the 8th best player then. In 1969 he truly was the greatest, but he only won on 2 surfaces. I think Nadal & Federer are the only ones to win on 3 surfaces at GS over a year period (12 months, not calendar). Wilander and Agassi did over their careers, but not in a 12-month period. Connors might have, but I don't think so.

Yes Murray was the favourite for the AO,also fav for Wimby too well according to which media hype you read.

Murray's best surface is the h/court I agree.

Lets wait and see what happens at this years US OPEN,

By the way a guy name Federer holds a 5 straight record there,funny that.

Am I missing something here? I'm reading a lot of comments that Andy played better and deserved to win the match. It's tennis folks, there's no clock, it's just the two players and thanks to "the hawk" we don't even have bad calls anymore; therefore, the better player wins. Andy played great, it was heart-breaking that someone had to lose, but Roger played better. He won with immense pressure on him and everyone expecting him to win, as for Andy "playing better", here's what you need to know: Roger had more Aces, considerably more winners (107 to 74), and a plus 69 in winners to unforced errors, as opposed to Andy's plus 41. Andy, with zero pressure played great, but Roger, with all the pressure in the world, played better--give him the respect he richly deserves but so rarely seems to get.

clb-I totally agree. Well said!

I am a Federer fan and surprised to see many other Federer fans treating the "Big 15" as the end of a journey. For me, the journey continues till Federer retires. I became a fan of Federer in 2004, not because I thought he would get to 15, but because of his aggression, lovely shotmaking and sublime movement. Along the way, of course the record became a possibility, and then an important milestone.

But Federer is obviously no longer the player he was in those days. He has to grit his teeth and fight it out there. 6 of his last 7 Slams have involved 5-setters. His movement and defensive attributes have declined. His ball-striking and shotmaking creativity can be erratic. He increasingly relies on his serve, his aura, and inducing errors by exploiting opponent's weaknesses. Still, he continues to win, and it's fascinating to watch. Even though Federer is not as "beautiful" to watch as in 2005-06, I will continue to support the new Federer (and frazzle) who is willing to fight for wins as his physical skills and reflexes decline. But the TMF who used to coast to Slam wins back in the day has given me enough beautiful memories of stunning tennis to last me a lifetime.

aussiemarge- I go by the bookies. For the AO Murray was the actual favorite. For Wimby, RN was for most of the year and then after his loss at RG, RF was.

15- cool
The Golden 15 Mantle - not

I somewhat shamefacedly love Federer and Serena's arrogance, and would usually appreciate the presumption of the 'Golden 15' track jacket. But this time, I think Federer seemed a little surprised when he was handed the jacket and put it on w/o further thinking.

Afterall, this is a man who put his pants on backward and went with the flow.

EBH Well I better look at the bookies more than lol!

Couldn't sleep. So I'll just respond to this statement:

"I love Federer, and he is the greatest ever. But, as has been commented earlier, his gold-embroidered outfit with the number 15 on it was too much for me (as was his post-match speech). This is the first time I've felt antipathy towards the man, and I lost a lot of respect for him (and Nike) today."

Seriously? First of all, he is paid millions to wear his sponsor's clothes. He was contractually obligated to wear the jacket just as he was contractually obligated to wear his Rolex watch at every final presentation win OR lose. And in addition, it's not as if he had it in his bag from the beginning. He was given the jacket AFTER the match.

Second, it was NOT flashy at all. In fact it was barely noticeable and if Federer had a choice, it seemed as if he wasn't even going to bring it up. It was the interviewer who highlighted it and again even then it wasn't some garish "15" with lights shining and covering his entire jacket.

Finally, other sport champions have had pre-made championship shirts/hats/COMMERCIALS/whatever. Think about the Lakers recently or any other basketball/football/baseball who win their respective end-of-year championships. And how about the congratulatory commercials for Michael Phelps, Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods when they win championships? Again this is NOTHING NEW in sports, so why are people up in arms that the top man in tennis who broke a record (!!!) is getting the same treatment?!

Just feel sorry for Roddick, the guy gave everything he had, and just a couple of bad shots. It's bad luck, 'cause no one should lose the longest GS final in history 'cause of two bad shots. Life's like that I suppose.
Obviously Roger can't go on forever, & I sincerely hope Roddick gets to win another GS...hopefully soon.

Three five set epic finals in three consecutive years - the only one common to all three - Roger Federer.
I guess it's Roger's Summer after all. I think he'll win a couple more GSs before he retires, but it's high time we get some new players and new challengers in the game. I don't know about Djoko and Murray...too flaky.

Interesting... number of grand slams won by the king since he supposed death =3. number of grand slam titles won by the "new king" who committed the regicide =1.

new king's ranking = 4
dead king's ranking =1

not bad for a dead king, no?

Anne, I mostly lurk now because, like Jewell's moniker, I find the eternal KAD-battles exhausting and not always constructive. But I do lurk here when time permits, especially during majors, because there are posters here who are truly stupendous... I often find something to learn from their learned (and often witty) comments.

Paul Ryan, scroll! ;) (And contrats, from one Fed fan to another.)

Russ Long live the King,

Regardless old,new or even reborn.

The 'weak generation' argument looks pretty weak these days.

TheTennisFan said: "no one should lose the longest GS final in history 'cause of two bad shots"

No one ever has, including Roddick who lost because his opponent played better over five sets.

And though I am usually reluctant to prognosticate, I believe we have just seen the pinnacle of Roddick's latter career, and I suspect that part of his wrenching despair was that he knows it as well. People underestimate how hard it is just to get to a GS final in the first place. That's part of reason Federer is the greatest player of the Open era.

On a minor point, this background noise about Roger's wardrobe just shows up the immaturity and cultural poverty of those generating the static. An annoying distraction.

Tim: Fed's the GOAT, Nadal's the GO2008

A GOAT discussion? Wow, I couldn't have imagined I'd see that here tonight. :)

Good night, everyone.

Wayne Ferreira is the GOAT because he had a winning record against Sampras

VC@1:19 -- I probably don't frazzle as much as others, but completely onboard with your second graph. Stuff you and I have discussed before, but nonetheless a shout-out for stating it well.

Btw, P. Bodo wrote a rather prescient piece along those lines during last year's USO. I've never re-read it but I think some of his stuff is archived on the site and you might find it if a) you didn't read it the first go-around, or b) you're interested.

If head-to-head is the measure of greatness... then let's follow that logic to it's conclusion:

Federer has a 1-0 lead over Sampras
Nadal has a 13-8 lead over Federer
Nalbandian has a 3-1 lead over Nadal
Federer has a 10-8 lead over Nalbandian

Who's the GOAT now? ;)

Thanks AM: Just wading back into the waters. Hope you're well.

I responded to the jacket discussion because I want to say something, but what's there to say about the 15th? Even the normally verbose Bodo kept it simple.

Morning, all.

*catching up*

about the 15 - it's right to remember that Sue Barker (former French Open champion, allow me to resurrect a little national pride...) was the one who brought up the 15, and to me Roger seemed a little embarrassed about it. I still think it hit a slightly jarring note, but, I mean, it's not enough to make me hate Roger for all time. ;-)

about Rafa's H2H with Roger - scarily, I agree with Tim. Not that I think slam numbers are the only thing that counts, but at the moment the difference in slam count is vast, and to me the H2H doesn't have all that much significance. (although as a Rafa fan I'm rather keen on it, LOL.)

about Rafa pulling out - I thought he said he couldn't give his all in competing to win. Slightly different from "I can't win so I'm not even going to try", no? But perhaps I am looking at it through KADdish eyes.

am I going to have to give Djokovic some love now? ;-) It wasn't him who said the king is dead, was it? It was his not-terribly-tactful mother. Think Djokovic is the most surprising player on the tour, so, not counting him out yet.

about the "understand how you feel" - I guess Roger was just trying to reach out, out of respect for RAndy - at the same time, I did like Roddick's response. I think he felt a bit patronised but I'm sure he'd also know that Roger was only intending empathy, however it came across.

about Pete not giving enough credit to Roger...guess I'd better read the article again, then, 'cause I didn't see that. Think Pete was maybe trying to pick up on Roddick's comment about patience and toughness more than anything else, and to give Roddick credit for a stupendous effort. *shrug*

Siggy - don't lurk, join the campaign. :)

"And though I am usually reluctant to prognosticate, I believe we have just seen the pinnacle of Roddick's latter career, and I suspect that part of his wrenching despair was that he knows it as well. People underestimate how hard it is just to get to a GS final in the first place. That's part of reason Federer is the greatest player of the Open era."

JohnC -- sadly, I think you could be right about Roddick. But at the same time part of me thinks he could be very dangerous at the next few Wimbys if he's on form. And in fact may be able to sneak one out. Seems to be his best surface in terms of matching up with the top guys. But I don't see him duplicating this run in the HC slams.

Russ I am great,

By the way keep on wading lol!

Jewell Novak is the most surprising player? hey?

i wanna kno something, hadn't fed had won it yest, wich jacket wud hv he worn?? he got another jacket printed Loser?? i was surprised to see 15 in his jacket.. lol.. Nike shud be blamed for this, maybe at UO, he ll come with jacket printed 16 from Round 1, tats unnecessary by Nike...

i wanna kno something, hadn't fed had won it yest, wich jacket wud hv he worn?? he got another jacket printed Loser?? i was surprised to see 15 in his jacket.. lol.. Nike shud be blamed for this, maybe at UO, he ll come with jacket printed 16 from Round 1, tats unnecessary by Nike...

Hey Siggy I do miss you

I love your different kind of Banter.

The bookies are not always right, but it is where the money is. FYI, RF is favorite for the UO, AO and RN for RG. Interestingly, Roddick doesn't appear on the lists and AMurray is second favorite at UO and AO. RF is second favorite at RG followed by Joker. Roddick is not in the top 5 of favorites. It is always the recent top four plus either Tsonga or Hot Sauce. I think the odds will change shortly and we will see ARod in there soon.

ebh Well please keep me with the updates

Gee roll over Bud Collins I am a true disbeliever

ps.By the way Bud you did get a few predications wrong so far,hey we are all human.

Jon Wertheim at SI.com : http://tinyurl.com/orblhq

""
Still, I give Murray a lot of credit for the way he handled ridiculous levels of attention/pressure. Andy Murray: U.S. Open champ. You heard it here first.
""

Heh.. That was my line. Let's see who's the runner up :)

TBs in a Wimbledon 5th set? *horrified face*

Noooooooooooo!

I don't know, AM, perhaps you could replace "surprising" with "inconsistent" - his fire seems to flicker more dramatically than anyone else in the "Big Four." But I still think he has it.

imjimmy Methinks Jon has been hanging around Bud and Justin too much lol!

Jewell Yeah I know what you mean.He has got the game no doubt about that.Its the upstairs department that always seem to let him down in big point situations.

mcakron : Thanks for that. I have never been as nervous about a tennis match as I was today in the fifth set. I didn't think it would be like that after the French Open, but I guess it's a hard habit to shake off. :-)

About your 2:07 post, I do think Roddick will get his second major somewhere down the line. He's only going to turn 27, so he has plenty of tennis left in him. Physically, he looks as good as he has ever been. He looked fresh in the fifth set whereas in the past, I've seen him gasping for breath against Federer by the fourth (check out US Open Final 2006). He's improving his game, and he's shown the will to fight, by beating the likes of Djokovic and Murray in the Slams, and coming within a hair's breadth of beating Federer today. Can't underestimate a guy with that mentality, it would be a bit like those who wrote Federer off after the Australian Open.

I am SO not getting on the Murray bandwagon ever again.

I am so in denial.

Still, agree that the HC season should be interesting. :)

One thing, though, some of Roddick's shots surprised me with their inspiration and pure talent - we don't tend to think of him like that, but he really did have some magic yesterday. Think he deserves some credit for that as well as his heart.

My commentators (Andrew Castle, Boris Becker and Tim Henman - ugh. Becker was fun though) talked a lot about Federer's genius, but they didn't talk much about Roddick in terms of that kind of talent, even when he showed it.

"Can't underestimate a guy with that mentality, it would be a bit like those who wrote Federer off after the Australian Open."

When I say that, I have to add that Roddick is not as natural a tennis player as Federer, Nadal, Djokovic or Murray in terms of pure talent, probably. So it's not a like-for-like comparison. But still, a RG 2009-like scenario could happen somewhere and Roddick might get his chance. By consistently making the later stages of Slams this year, he has put himself up alongside Murray and Djokovic in the Big 3/4/5 discussion, at the very least.

How did a thread on the Roddick/Fed final turn into yet another Fedal war? And a dissection of Roger's every word? *bangs head against the wall* That's why Siggy and others mostly lurk now.

CL,

I believe that was Becker who uttered those words. Loved your husband's "Swissful thinking" term. Hilarious! Does he root for Fed, too?

-------

Being happy for Roger and sad for Andy are not mutually exclusive emotions. That's exactly how I feel.

As for what Roger said to Andy on court, what gets lost is that Roger's point in saying he lost a 5-setter at Wimby the previous year is that he came back and won. "So you’re going to come back and win it. I really hope so. You’re an unbelievable guy. You played unbelievable today. Unfortunately, in tennis there has to be a winner sometimes and today I was on the lucky side." Fed seemed awkward and uncomfortable in that interview, and while his words may have been a bit clumsy, they certainly weren't ungracious.

He was much better in his interview with JMac. Of course, he'd had some time to collect his thoughts and wasn't speaking in front of thousands of people on court.

"I just tried to really hang in there. I mean it was so tough, you know. I couldn’t get a read, you know, for basically four hours on Andy’s serve and even at the end, you know, it took a little bit of luck.

It definitely doesn’t feel maybe as great as maybe winning in straight sets, you know, where people are more happy for you because this is a tough moment for Andy in his career. I hope he can really come back because he is a wonderful guy and a wonderful player.

I hung tough, you know, because he had some chances and you know, it’s cruel, tennis sometimes, we don’t have draws.

I played him already 3x this year and all 3 matches were kind of tough. So for the people who thought it was going to be an easy match, they were very mistaken. Same for the Roddick/Murray match."

VC, the problem is that Roddick will have to get to another final first before he even thinks about confronting that tourney's big banana, whether it be Federer, Nadal, Murray, whoever. He had a great Wimbledon, but his surprised elation at finally getting there doesn't inspire a lot of confidence for the future, however heroically he played in the past week.

Fed has been at his best at Wimby and AO last two years, but he has been dominant at UO for 5 years now, n he still is on a roll, so don underestimate Fed at UO, he has a chance to win sixth straight title wich he cudn't manage at Wimby..

JohnC : His Slam results in this calendar year have been very good, lost in the Australian Open semi to Federer (beat Djokovic to get there), made the second week at the French, and lost a heartbreaker to Federer after beating the favoured Murray. So he's showing the consistency AND the ability to challenge the top guys, atleast in Slams.

As for the RF on Roger's jacket, isn't that the logo for his foundation?

Wait a sec - I was running late and couldn't watch the trophy ceremony. That tracksuit jacket had the number 15 on it?

Also, I don't know if everyone was watching the same feed from Centre Court, but we got a lot of "slomoerotic" shots, of Fed wiping his upper lip, of Fed's foot movement with his golden shoes - the cameraman/person showed no such love to Roddick, it was as if Fed was playing by himself at times. Mind you, it did stop by the fifth set. But I'll have to find a better internet connection to watch the trophy presentation, I guess.

Today it struck me that Federer is increasingly being forced to play a passive, reactive game from the baseline, even on grass against hard hitters, and against the very top players like Nadal, Djokovic and Murray in the past. Not a reliable gameplan against those guys when your physical abilities to pull off a defensive strategy are declining. His footspeed and movement to the forehand side, and ability to hit passing shots on the run is no longer the same. Earlier, he had the confidence to step into the court, take the ball early and go for winners from the baseline, which are harder to come by these days. With that in mind, would it not make a smarter strategy to play a S&V-based game, and try to end points at the net instead? I think it could prolong his competitiveness against the younger generation by a couple of years if he could do it successfully on a regular basis, because his serve is a big weapon.

I think this match only gives Andy a ton of confidence going into the HC season. He came thisclose to beating his nemesis ... much closer than in any of their three previous encounters at Wimby.

That's RG and now Wimbledon without facing Murray, Nadal or Djokovic. Fed's good but he's lucky too.

tina - it was the tiniest logo and nobody would've noticed it had not Sue Barker made Roger do a twirl.

Andy Roddick won this all the way, even in sportsmanship. I sure am tired of Federer and I hope he takes his stolen trophy home and gives other players a chance. He and Tiger are so full of greed! Just like someone said two peas in a pod. How many trophies do they need for crying out loud! A real champion finally moves on like the "GREAT" best ever, Pete Sampras. He is true a GOAT. That jacket with the number 15 was way over the top for me. Too much in your face kind of thing. It just showed how Roger had been planning and trying to catch Pete Sampras 14 slams. He was planning it all along. The real Federer came out today.

For those inclined to feel sorry for Andy today, recall his own words after the match when asked by the BBC interviewer about whether tennis could be cruel (or something to that effect): "No, I'm one of the lucky ones because I get to be out here playing in front of cheering fans...". That's about as classy and well-centered a response as you'll ever see from a professional athlete, and certainly showed more perspective than a blubbering "It's just so hard..." that we've heard elsewhere. Andy's display today would have felled any but the transcendent Federer, but in defeat he showed the class that should earn him the utmost respect.

tangi - *waves madly* - yeah, I hope so too, and that it isn't a kind of Djokovic burning out against Nadal thing. I don't think it will be, with Roddick. Different kind of man.

In all great matches we just tend to talk about the Victor and how good he or she was,in this instance we are also talking about the loser who in my mind came soo close to victory.

Hey life at the top of this game is sure cruel sometimes.

Hi, jewell! LOVE the new moniker. Hilarious and hopeless all at once. lol

"Never say die" has always been Andy's motto. I think he and Larry Stefanki are just getting started! Me thinks they have big plans, and the big 4 better look out.

Do you happen to know if Josh Goodall is Jason's son?

Luck is truly where preparation meets opportunity. - the late Prof. Randy Pausch

I think so, Tangi, but Rosangel or Gauloises will know for sure.

yeah - the stupid wars are so tedious and, well, stupid. And I say that, but I'm just as bad at not getting involved as anyone else - can usually ignore people who show up purely to swipe, but when a regular commenter comes out with something dismissive of or unfair to Nadal - or Federer come to that, on occasion - I find it very hard to keep out of it, LOL.

VC@2:45 -- It's an interesting theory. Who knows, he might implement the strategy in the next year or two. But Fed's also notoriously stubborn so I expect it would take a couple of big losses for him to change what's getting him by.

About the "offensive"-minded baseline game, I still think he can do it, just that we'll never see it with the consistency we once did. If you remember last year's USO final against Muzz he came out flying in that first set, was lashing those swashbuckling FHs of his from all over the court and even had his BH in high gear. But even if his defense has slipped half-step due to age, it still gets him by about everyone except Rafa, who at this stage in their careers, Fed just can't out-defense. So with Rafa I'd like to seem him take a few more risks. If throwing in some S&V is part of the equation, it would be interesting to watch.

What is this, people claiming nadal to be the GOAT?
:O

"because his serve is a big weapon"

Federe obviously served really well -- 20 something aces. But, do you may be think Roddick's return game dropped a notch in the final set?

I completely understand, jewell, as I got sucked into defending my BFed just a few posts ago. Why do people always have to try and diminish players and their accomplishments? Grrrr. If you don't have anything nice to say ...

Anyway, I always appreciate how even handed you are when commenting on Rog even though he's not your fave. :)

With that, I must get some sleep! See you tomorrow.

Crosscourt101-Nobody is claming Nadal the GOAT, you moron. Read the posts more carefully and post something productive for a change. I'm outta here.

lol im joking around dude
calm it

"I sure am tired of Federer and I hope he takes his stolen trophy home and gives other players a chance. He and Tiger are so full of greed! Just like someone said two peas in a pod. How many trophies do they need for crying out loud! A real champion finally moves on like the "GREAT" best ever, Pete Sampras. He is true a GOAT. That jacket with the number 15 was way over the top for me. It just showed how Roger had been planning and trying to catch Pete Sampras 14 slams. He was planning it all along."

Yeah! How DARE he and Tiger push themselves to be the best! Just who does they think they are?

Are you serious? Stolen trophy? Sorry, Roddick lost - PERIOD. He played very well, but he lost. A real champion moves on? Sure, if he's no longer a champion and has lost the fire...Fed is still on top of the game - 3 slams this year, 3 finals and 2 wins, back to #1. Why on god's green earth should he move on? He's only 27!

The '15' tracksuit was NOT his idea - it was made for him, and given to him after the match. And if he wasn't planning on catching Pete, then why the hell is he playing? As for Pete being GOAT - a great player, but sorry, the guy only made one French semi-final. Not quite the same class as (off the top of my head): 15 GS wins, 20 finals, 21 STRAIGHT semis, career slam, 4 straight French finals, 7 straight Wimby finals (6 wins), 5 straight USO wins, etc, etc, etc...

Roger has won the French and Wimby slams this year = 2 slams