Just know a great cel eb site ___BigTalls CO M___­ where you can me et many big beau tiful wo man and hand­ some guys.

forget that post winston bunn i meant timjo and not­ cotrell and the cynical part was aimed at another post,­ sorry for the confusion am feeling a bit spaced out­ from a long journey yesterday.

to true hatsuking

winston bunn it was a cynical dig at cotrells statement­ that fed had won slams on all surfaces insinuating­ laver wouldnt have done so necessarily on hard courts.­ ok

Roger Federer is now the greatest player in history of­ tennis. Nobody who really watches tennis can doubt­ that!

he is the greatest of them all ! he floats like a­ butterfly and sting's like a bee...........
he­ just dug in deeper, and got the result....... i do feel­ sorry for roddick, but really roger missed the­ opportunity
to take the first set !!! just missed­ three long shots by virtually nothing, it could have­ been over a lot earlier....
roddick was lucky to have­ won back three break points in the first set ..... that­ was the start of the epic match...
why does his career­ have to be analysed and picked to pieces, surely­ statistics show his career to be second
to none.. we­ can all say what if...roger would have been defending­ his own title,had he not been struck down
with­ glandular fever,and back problems last year !!!! rafa­ just kept his title warm...he could'nt even defend­ his
own title...he's played the game fast and­ furiously and unfortunately for him has gained bad­ injuries!!!!!
as for roger,he's been the perfect­ player in every department,has'nt gained­ inguries..only a back problem...
as for andy murray ,­ he has only beaten roger when he was suffering with his­ back problem.. i doubt if murray
could even have won­ that final against either roger or roddick,,he got­ close with roddick,but only because
roddick was thrown­ off balance by murrary's exit after the first set..­ until then roddick had the upper hand.
and would­ probably have won the next set too !!! it say's it­ all about murray,when world media would take
more­ notice of our queen when commentating on final's­ day!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Roger is now the greatest player of all times, and I­ guess no one can doubt this, since numbers,performance­ and Charisma all are proofs on this

I think todays final had two winners.Federer­ won,Roddick won.I have never seen a competitor with­ such passion,vigor and belief.Roddick is a true­ definition of a worthy competitor.He is a credit to the­ game.But for the trophy at 16-14 in favour of Federer,­ I think Roddick deserved more.Keep it up Roddick.You­ are getting there

congratulations Roger,no matter what they say about­ Nadal, you are the best, and again nr.1
Tfe

ralph,

Eh? That Federer won on clay doesn't mean­ Laver would master hardcourt...what sort of pathetic­ logic is that!?

You need arrogance to be number 1, every top player­ regardless of which sport they play have it, eg­ maradonna, ali, etc. They seem to have that belief they­ can win even when they are losing! Thats what keeps­ them ticking, when they lose that belief they are­ finished regardless of how well they are physically. I­ hear a few people mention laver, yes he won year round,­ but that was donkey years ago and the surface at each­ grand slam was the same! Fed has set some high­ standards, we might not see another like him, they call­ him the greatest because he has beaten a lot of­ talented people in his generations agassi, samprass,­ roddick, hewitt and the upcomming legend in Nadal! You­ cant ask for more! The only person now that can match­ his record is Nadal, but that depends how often he­ beats feds!

and yeah.. show some respect

i_cottrell: yeah right.. everybody has done something­ that somebody else hasn't. Ok:
Rod laver - grand­ slam TWICE - fact
Roger - 5 consecutive Wimbledon, 5­ consecutive US Open, 7 consecutive wimbledon titles, 21­ or 22 or 23 (i lost the count already) consecutive­ semi-finals, 4 and a half years number 1, and 15 GS­ titles - something that nobody has done it in the­ history except ROGER FEDERER - FACT
so which fact is­ better???
live with it ;)

i_cottrell, while i appreciate rod laver did the­ calender grand slam twice, i don't know if you­ realise at that point that the aussie open and us open­ were both on grass, so no 3rd surface, whether he­ could've achieved it if they were hardcourt is a­ question we just cant answer.

I still cant understand how people can like andy­ murray. he is such a gimp, doesnt have any kind of­ personality and is the most boring defensive player in­ the top 10. theres just nothing liekable about him. He­ wouldnt have beaten federer today in my opinion, even­ though he has a winning record against him as we saw in­ the us open final last yr when it comes to the crunch­ murray would have been found wanting. What people see­ in him I will never know. What I am sure of however is­ that majority of fans and media will never love murray­ like they do federer or nadal. I think Del Potro will­ prove to be better over the coming years. If federer­ maintains his appetite for the game then surely there­ are still many grand slams in him, I see him possibly­ winning upto 20 and for me he is the big favourite for­ the us open in sept. Next year he will try and tie­ sampras's record in winning 7 wimbledons. Good luck­ to him and no doubt that hes the best of all time, bo$$

janekralj,
how can u say murray is a kid, isn't in­ a kid u find strength, endurance, maneuver and­ determination.
the game is not about age, nor is it­ physical appearance.
murrays time is not yet and may­ never be, he lacks ............

You are all bandwagon jumpers following media hype. Rod­ Laver was the greatest. He did the Grand Slam TWICE.­ Until a modern player does it at least once, I will not­ consider him to be in the same category as Rod. People­ talk about eras and generations. Although certain parts­ of today's game are tougher, back then there was no­ technology involved in the making of the rackets, no­ nutritionists, coaches, physio, psychologists etc.­ Also, the money involved was not a motivating factor.­
People just seem to assume back then it was easier and­ today it is harder. Not so.
Think of all the great­ players down the ages, all the genius's of the­ racket each decade throws up. Now consider that Roger­ was, of all those, only the sixth player who managed to­ win all four slams in their entire careers. And­ frankly, if Nadal had been fit in Paris, who knows? Now­ imagine how difficult it must therefore be to win all­ four slams in the SAME year.
Now think about doing­ that TWICE.
Roger should have acknowledged this on the­ microphone today. Rod Laver is the greatest.