The water cooler: Federer’s legacy
by b | July 5, 2009 at 9:00 pm
Posted in b the paper, sports, the water cooler
Sports fans love to talk about sports — especially here in Baltimore — so we’d like to give our readers with sports-savvy an opportunity to rant and rave about what’s going on in the world of sports, both locally and nationally. Each weekday, we’ll pose a new question for you to discuss at the water cooler. Here’s your chance to be an armchair quarterback. Now speak up, play nice and let us know what you think.
Today’s topic at the water cooler:
Is Roger Federer the greatest tennis player of all time?
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
July 5th, 2009 at 9:56 pm | Please log in to reply. | Log in to rate this comment | report this comment
Well I think the conversation is now down to him and Rod Laver.
July 6th, 2009 at 1:24 pm | Please log in to reply. | Log in to rate this comment | report this comment
Ugh, yes.
July 6th, 2009 at 1:40 pm | Please log in to reply. | Log in to rate this comment | report this comment
Matt, help me understand something: What's with people hating on Federer? You weren't the only person whose Facebook status after yesterday's match had less-than-kind things to say about him. I don't follow tennis especially closely, but I've never seen him conduct himself with anything less than class and dignity. What's the deal?
July 6th, 2009 at 2:10 pm | Please log in to reply. | Log in to rate this comment | report this comment
He's a great player, but I was pulling for Roddick. I mean, that was a great match and Federer outclassed Roddick during the best performance of Roddick's career. He deserves credit for outlasting Roddick.
Basically, Federer is a wizard out there on the court and one of the best ever, but I still think guys like Sampras and Laver are better players than him. It's a bummer he'll be considered the greatest of all time when he didn't have much competition until a couple of years ago. I would have loved to see him play against Sampras in his prime to settle the debate, but that can't happen, of course. That's the problem with comparing eras.
And it doesn't help that Federer is super boring and borderline arrogant when interviewed.
So do I respect Federer as a player? Yeah, tons. But am I going to root for him? Nah.
July 6th, 2009 at 3:12 pm | Please log in to reply. | Log in to rate this comment | report this comment
The thing with Federer is a lot of his stock is in his serve. I don't really think you can call him a well-rounded player when so many of his winners are just aces. Yes, that's great and it makes him an amazing athlete, but it's also a little boring. Not that yesterday's match wasn't exciting, but I was rooting for Roddick, too, so it was a big disappointment.
July 6th, 2009 at 7:22 pm | Please log in to reply. | Log in to rate this comment | report this comment
Federer is the best because of how well-rounded he is. His serves against Roddick were fantastic, but not how he usually plays. He was just in that kind of zone that day. But overall, Federer's game is that he doesn't make mistakes. Incredible touch, unmatched forehands, effortless backhands, and a whole arsenal of tricks (like that overhead slam from the baseline that looked like a curveball Sunday, for example).
July 6th, 2009 at 11:18 pm | Please log in to reply. | Log in to rate this comment | report this comment
And the angles, those curves he gets on the balls...forgot about those.