Federer's Wimbledon career = Rafa's whole­ career

Re:tunbavicki
I completely agree with that I never said­ that federer is not a great player and I consider­ federer a true gentleman and a credit to the tennis­ ...no argument there

I don't know where Raed I had been the whole time­ the Men's Single Final was being watched by­ everyone all over the world. If he didn't see what­ a great player Federer is by achieving what he did last­ Sunday at Wimbledon, either we were all blind or he­ must have completely tuned out of the globe. Roger­ made it to the top in his own style--he could focus­ well, he knew his capability and consistently played­ with grace, throughout. Even when he'd just made a­ powerful shot that won him big points, he would only­ shake a gentle fist to himself and would not display a­ "fierce" look to his opponent. He is a­ gentleman and a credit to the tennis world as one of­ their great players.

With all due repsect Raed I you justify what I said.­ You rate Borg as better then Federer and Sampras? What­ a joke. Borg only won at the French and Wimbledon. His­ game wasn't good enough to dominate on hard court­ hence thats why he lost the U.S open final 4 times. He­ retired in the face of McEnroe beating him twice in the­ U.S open final then at Wimbledon. Couldn't hack the­ competition.What kind of champion is that? Borg won­ only 2 of the 4 slams and won only 11 compared to­ Federers 15. Roger had the game for ALL surfaces. Also­ Agassi and Henman played both Sampras and Federer in­ their primes. Guess who they said was better? Nuff­ said. Your casual views mean little

With all due repsect Raed I you justify what I said.­ You rate Borg as better then Federer and Sampras? What­ a joke. Borg only won at the French and Wimbledon. His­ game wasn't good enough to dominate on hard court­ hence thats why he lost the U.S open final 4 times. He­ retired in the face of McEnroe beating him twice in the­ U.S open final then at Wimbledon. Couldn't hack the­ competition.What kind of champion is that? Borg won­ only 2 of the 4 slams and won only 11 compared to­ Federers 15. Roger had the game for ALL surfaces. Also­ Agassi and Henman played both Sampras and Federer in­ their primes. Guess who they said was better? Nuff­ said. Your casual views mean little.

re:hervé a
hi hervé a… I agree you stated all the­ qualities of roger

re:checkerboard5000,
you said "If Federer wins 18¬­ slams and Nadal stays at 6 how can anyone honestly¬­ think rafa is better. One more thing. That head to­ head¬ is not finished yet!!".. if that is the case­ when they retire you are absolutely Wright …you called­ me "ignorant casual fan" I will not call you­ names but i quote from your post " If Federer wins­ 18¬ slams and Nadal stays at 6 how can anyone honestly¬­ think rafa is better" I think this statement goes­ under the category of what you called me

Hi Raed I, good points you mentioned there! you have­ your reasons and we certainly disagree in what we call­ a great champs and/ or a GOAT... I have to admit that­ end 2008, I had my own doubt about Federer who alway­ beat himself against Nadal, except on Clay where we all­ saw that it was a learning process for Federer! What I­ c in a Great champ is falling and standing up, he got­ humiliated in some occasion by Nadal or some other­ players! but always learned from it and came back. 3­ times runner up in RG and kept going and believing. At­ the end of the day, if I ever have a to advise a kid­ and explain him why this guy is the GOAT i will be­ telling him, gees, he stayed longer than the great Pete­ as Number 1, he defeated Nadal twice on clay court­ finals (ending his winning streak), greatest price­ money, one of the best serve, an amazing forehand, the­ second or third top spin (forth and backhand), the best­ footwork on almost all surfaces, at the end of his 20s­ and still challenging so many physically, beat Sampras­ on gras, Agassi, won so many sportsmanship award etc...­ I will also tell him that there was a player who­ seriously challenged him. I recon McEnroe saying that­ games of Federer should be sent to Tennis Academies.­ The fact that he started winning so late and in 6 years­ achieved what Pete did in 12 is even more amazing. He­ knows what he is doing... He is not just a young man­ pumped up returning everything. and let wait and see­ how he almost reaches the mark of 20 GS of even­ more!
Best, and I Let's hope Nadal get fit, leans­ from the past and try to match Federer's­ achievement, without a real coach!. CONSISTENCY is­ something that no one will ever take from ROGER...­ Roddick said that nobody has ever gave Federer credit­ for his mental strength, belief and efforts to stay­ calm when things are not going his way!
Cheers!

Yes but what has Nadal won compared to Federer? Just 6­ compared to Federer's 15? Boris Becker had won 5­ slams by Nadals age. How many more did he win in the­ rest of his career? Just one. Ignorant casual fans like­ yourself can read too much into things (eg thinking­ borg is even a top 3 player!!). Nadal looks haggered­ already and has never displayed the kind of game to­ dominate the tour like Federer did. If Federer wins 18­ slams and Nadal stays at 6 how can anyone honestly­ think rafa is better. One more thing. That head to head­ is not finished yet!!

Yes but what has Nadal won compared to Federer? Just 6­ compared to Federer's 15? Boris Becker had won 5­ slams by Nadals age. How many more did he win in the­ rest of his career? Just one. Ignorant casual fans like­ yourself can read too much into things (eg thinking­ borg is even a top 3 player!!). Nadal looks haggered­ already and has never displayed the kind of game to­ dominate the tour like Federer did. If Federer wins 18­ slams and Nadal stays at 6 how can anyone honestly­ think rafa is better. One more thing. That head to head­ is not finished yet!!

Yes but what has Nadal won compared to Federer? Just 6­ compared to Federer's 15? Boris Becker had won 5­ slams by Nadals age. How many more did he win in the­ rest of his career? Just one. Ignorant casual fans like­ yourself can read too much into things (eg thinking­ borg is even a top 3 player!!). Nadal looks haggered­ already and has never displayed the kind of game to­ dominate the tour like Federer did. If Federer wins 18­ slams and Nadal stays at 6 how can anyone honestly­ think rafa is better. One more thing. That head to head­ is not finished yet!!

he is the best for ever

re:checkerboard5000
You can not take Krajicek and­ Sampras H2H record as an example to degrade the­ significance of this element …..You look at the main­ rivals of Sampras (aggasi, becker, Edberg, lendel,­ courier,) who had many grand slams to their names where­ Sampras did not have an inferior H2H record with any of­ them….since you are a tennis fan you know that the­ rival that counts is your main rival …

To Raed I comment 57. You clearly know nothing about­ Tennis. Borg Number 1?? Bjorn only won the French and­ Wimbledon. Thats two surfaces. He was never able to win­ on hard court was he? Lost in the U.S open final 4­ times. Twice to McEnroe and Connors. Hardly an all­ court player like Federer is he? Shouldn't be­ mentioned in the top 3.

As for head to head people can­ read too much into them. Krajicek beat Sampras at­ Wimbledon in his prime and has a 5-4 record against­ him. Dosen't mean he is better does it? Hewitt has­ a 5-4 record against Sampras including 2-1 on grass.­ Head to head are not as important as some make out.­ Remember Federer has beaten Nadal twice on clay as well­ as on grass ans hard court.

To Raed I comment 57. You clearly know nothing about­ Tennis. Borg Number 1?? Bjorn only won the French and­ Wimbledon. Thats two surfaces. He was never able to win­ on hard court was he? Lost in the U.S open final 4­ times. Twice to McEnroe and Connors. Hardly an all­ court player like Federer is he? Shouldn't be­ mentioned in the top 3.

As for head to head people can­ read too much into them. Krajicek beat Sampras at­ Wimbledon in his prime and has a 5-4 record against­ him. Dosen't mean he is better does it? Hewitt has­ a 5-4 record against Sampras including 2-1 on grass.­ Head to head are not as important as some make out.­ Remember Federer has beaten Nadal twice on clay as well­ as on grass ans hard court.

re:rey edmundo p
It is obvious you did not see the real­ good time of tennis and the great players I guise you­ are so young

How could anyone say that this era of tennis is­ weak?!!! We have Novac, murray, rodick and nadal! The­ current top players are all forces to reckon. These­ guys are incredible good. They can at anytime pull out­ victories against anyone. They all can play and in fact­ have shown epic matches. Some here are just too bitter­ to accept federer. So typically fanatics.

re : hervé a
Hi hervé a....I respect your reply… but­ let me explain my point 1- I follow tennis since the­ late 70s (yes I am old) 2-in this generation yes I­ support nadal I love this kid because he has a Lions­ heart and he emerged when he was very young and he­ stood to federer when nobody could challenge federer­ and he achieved the top of the sport and won so many GS­ at this young age no other player did that since BORG­ 3-when I put the head to head record I wanted to­ mention that federer is inferior to nadal in this­ department which is very significant… if you do not ­ have a positive H2H record to your main rival you can­ not be considered the greatest in your era let alone­ the greatest ever 4-from the players I saw playing I­ would put the great BORG as #1 then Sampras #2 and to­ be honest I can not put federer at # 3 because nadal is­ better than him in the H2H record and at the same time­ I can not put nadal at # 3 yet ….so we have to wait for­ a few years to see

To open minded who based their opinion on fact/records­ federer is indeed the greatest ever but to those emonal­ fool fanatics their Idol will always be the best.­ Nevermind what records/facts say. I love watching nadal­ and his ever exiting games. He works so hard to the­ point of wearing himself out sometimes. The guy is also­ possessing adorable character ang he never fails to­ show respect to his oponents pre and post matches. But­ he still has so much to achieve to be labelled as­ greatest. Just so much to even up with roger. He still­ has a lot of time to do that though i worry if he can­ because of his game style. He is so physical that i­ worry if he'd be able to keep on that level. Roger­ is so much different. He is so gracefull and naturlly­ talented that, as sampras said, he barely sweat out on­ his victories. That's what is call greatest. To­ pull out victories without exhausting yourself.

Hi Raed I, what u are say might be true! if you­ appeared so often to the end station of majors where­ your direct rival is most talented and he did not­ succeed in doing the same on your surface, it is not­ your fault! keep the grass low and fast as it used to­ be... NADAL wont make it to the final... and will­ hardly have a set from Federer... Extend the grass­ court season and let them play... that head to head­ record will disappear fast!
wouldn't it be fair to­ say that top my achievement and be called the best!­
Only super fanatics of Nadal like you keep on steering­ this debate when real legends have acknowledged the­ achievement of Fedex... how great are you of a­ competitor if you don't know your limits?
You are­ maybe just a kids who is running a 10 000m race­ starting with the pace of a 400 m... no wonder if u­ quit the race! think about it...
You all counted Fed­ out, some people even taught that it was insane talking­ about Fed regaining the N°1 spot... Open you eyes!­ Hewitt started like Nadal, and 4 years N°1..humm take a­ racket and try it... was very easy for Nadal being the­ second and the one with nothing to lose! Unfortunately­ in Tennis staying up there is not as simple as­ climbing.
Cheers buddy...