He lose vs Djokovic and Rafa now, but he have best moves and he play so nice, Rafa don t have elegancy like Roger, for me he is the best player ever (16 Grand Slams)
Classy music. Classy watch. Classy video. And the classiest sports-playing man alive with a classy name, classy accent, classy playing style, classy appearance, and classy personality.
It's so rare to see perhaps the best player ever of a sport being so elegant and classy at the same time, including when he speaks. I think the commercial is brilliant, including the music of course, although there's a sense of sadness in it, in my opinion. Thanks for the video!
Got to love Roger as a tennis player but THIS IS THE MOST OBNOXIOUS and stupidest commercial ever made. And I thought his gold and white post Wimbledon victory jacket with the RF logo was bad. Love to watch him play tennis, but this highfalutin pompous crap makes him so much less attractive.
The music is " Lang Land Rolex" and the suit I bet no one knows. LOL but surely looks really nice and expensive. I have never even seen anybody wearing that one. LOL LOL
haha no youre not alone. this is the song written for all rolex commercials! it s really beautiful, isnt it?? but the composer of this song is for some reason unknown.. at least as far as i ve searched..
dicepro: Do you have the "making of" of this commercial. if you do, please upload it!.
BTW, if you're in Asia, do you know the other Rolex commercial of Rog at Wimbledon 2008 on Star Sports with the Rolex Song. That commercial is just like the others in previous years! If you do once again, please upload it for me.
Sure, Roger doesn't dominate Rafa or Murray like he has dominated basically every other player for like the last years. But I personally am not sure if Rafa (or Murray for that matter) will dominate everyone else like Roger has done year after year on all surfaces.
So for me, in terms of a proven track record in amazing consistency, Roger has to be one of the greatest ever, possibly even the greatest of all time. That's an indisputable fact.
But I'm content to just enjoy the mens game right now
Ok so firstly, people, ease up! This is a Rolex ad featuring Roger, who by the way looks extremely classy. I'm not exactly sure why there's a massive debate about whether or not Roger is the G.O.A.T on this video, but whatever.
As to the G.O.A.T question, I think everyone knows there is no definitive answer. There are obviously some past legends of the game (e.g. Laver, Borg, etc.) and there are some awesome players right now (e.g. Roger, Rafa, etc.)
Hey does anyone know what song's playing in the background for the commercial?
And for all you Nadal/ Federer fans out there, personally I do favor Federer, but respect has to be given to both players. After all, only having one player is just one half of the rivalry that basically revived tennis.
I must admit, this is a cool ad. Rolex knows what they are doing, from a marketing standpoint.
Having said that, I just don't PERSONALLY like Roger Federer much as a player. Is he great? Yes. But is he great enough to be annointed the Greatest of All Time? No.
Federer faced no genuine resistance in the years he was dominant. Roddick?! An aging Agassi? Philippoussis?! Baghdatis? Fernando Gonzalez?! And now we can add poor Soderling to the list of Federer victims in Finals.
Nadal has had to go THROUGH Federer for all 6 of his majors. That is quite an accomplishment. You beat the best in order to BE the best, right?
But Fed has only gone through Nadal for TWO of his 14 majors. He failed the other 6 times. Federer FINALLY captured his big victory on clay at Roland Garros, but he didn't have to go through Nadal. He lost the four times that he did.
Nadal, on the other hand, had to finally break through on grass (Wimbledon) and hard courts (Australian Open)
Unfortunately, Nadal has trouble staying healthy it seems. He just turned 23 and his knees are fragile. When he is at 100%, can anyone HONESTLY say he's not better than Federer? No. Not if they wish to be taken seriously. So, if Nadal is the best player of this ERA, and Federer can't beat Nadal...is Federer the G.O.A.T.?
Your points are nonsense to be honest. Nadal is better than Federer on clay (obviously) but Federer has an equal H2H to Nadal on hard, and leads him on grass.
Also, where was Nadal in all the US Open finals Federer won? Federer got to Roland Garros finals, but Nadal didn't get to US Open finals. This obviously tips the H2H in favour of Nadal, as clay is his best surface.
Safin had a leading H2H against Sampras. Is Safin better?
MrRippy, as I already said to someone else, Nadal is 23 years old. Federer is 28 years old. 14 slams IS greater than 6. It doesn't take a genius to figure that one out.
Unfortunately, it DOES seem to take a genius (among Federer fans, anyway) to realize that Federer has played about 20 more slams (4 a year for 5 years) than Nadal has. When you have competed in 40 slams (which Fed has), your stats are going to be a bit padded against the guy who has played about 20 slams.
Also, you've just said Nadal is better without any justification. Are you actually serious?
Federer from 2004-2007 was basically unbeatable. Nadal has never seen such dominance. Nadal beating Federer doesn't make him better than him. Tennis is all about match ups. Nadal's style is very effective against Federer.
Also, the only reason Federer's slam opponents look weak is because Federer was so dominant that he just steamrollered his opposition.
To Kurozuguchi: Nadal reached his best ever form when federer lost his form.Federer lost to nadal at the french because nadal's the better clay courter,but the losses of federer at wimbledon and the aus opens to nadal were purely because federer is not the player he was two years ago.Has Nadal beaten him at the other majors except at the french before 2008?NO.He still hasn't regained the form he lost,But the way he played at his prime in 2004-2007, showed the world that he is the greatest
Nadal wasn't in his prime then either though. Just as Federer hit his stride at about 22 years of age, Nadal did the same. A lot of people seem to forget Nadal is 5 years younger than Federer. He is on a better pace than Federer when it comes to wins at majors, and he has a superior win percentage for his career, but unfortunately Nadal's body probably won't hold up...
Nadal didn't/couldn't make the final. Safe to say he WASN'T one of the best in the 2009 French Open. Simple as that. In sports, you have to prove yourself each time.
Nadal had to go though Fed for all 6 majors because Roger was good enough to make it to the final ALL those times.
Man, you take Federer's consistency for granted. You always see him at the end of slams and don't think about the work it takes to get there again and again.
Now if Nadal can do that, we'll get back to your argument.
First, you're wrong on the point about Federer getting to the Final all six of the times Rafa beat him. One of those times was in the semifinals, the other five were in finals. Rafa is still 6-2 against Federer when they meet in Slams, and that just looks plain BAD when considering Fed for the G.O.A.T.
Also, I disagree that your point is "simple as that". Nadal won't even be playing Wimbledon, that is how injured his knees are. He's not 100%. His level of skill had nothing to do with
The main point is that their rivalry is uneven. Rafa is no doubt better on clay, hence the really lopsided H2H. However, Rafa was not consistent enough to make it again and again and again to the hard court finals and play Roger, we can know, but Roger is definitely better on hardcourt. This was true for 2005 all the way til around 2008. Things got a bit wierd in 2008, with federer dropping out due to various reasons, and rafa on an amazing winning streak. and their rivalry continues this year..
HNC, wouldn't we also have to take into account that in Fed's first 4 or 5 years he did almost NOTHING? In his first 16 slams, from 1999 to 2003, Federer's best achievement was getting to the QFs twice. Nadal, in his first 16 slams, had 4 wins.
Nadal has played 21 slams in his career, and he's won 6. When Federer had played 21 slams, he had won 3. Nadal is on a better pace, that's all I'm saying.
so what does that fact proof? i guess nothing. success has nothing to do with age. it always takes time until you get a clear mind to play at your best level. it is just a mental problem. nadal solved that earlier. ok, but that does not have to assure that nadal will dominate tennis longer than anyone else. maybe nadal gets his knees cured but then starts losing more and more matches because his time is over. he had been No.2 for so long because he played very constantly at a high level.
Obviously Nadal's knees could ruin his chances to be the GOAT, but he hit his dominant stride at 22, just like Fed. So, when someone says Nadal has proven he can't consistently get to hard court or grass slam finals like Federer, I have to remind them that until about age 22, Federer couldn't consistently get to the final of ANYTHING. We must consider Nadal's age and the fact that he only recently 2008, when he turned 22, found his dominant form as a player.
the thing is, injury isn't just distributed randomly across the tour. it's up to the player to take care of themselves. federer takes A HUGE AMOUNT of precaution to not get injured which is why he was able to do what he did. nadal's playing style, his scheduling, etc. is behind his injuries. you can't just say nadal achieved more younger, a lot of people achieved more than einstein before 25, but einstein is still the genius.
AAMLfan is spot on.Smart athletes take care of their bodies rather than running like roosters all over the court to win everything.And as I remember watching Fed's victory at the french,It was all about fed's acheivements,not nadal's inability to take care of himself.
Well, I happen to respect that Nadal gives his best at every tournament, regardless of the prestige involved. Nadal has won as many Masters event tournaments as Federer has, despite being 5 years younger.
One could say that Federer doesn't give his all at those tournaments, and they may be right. He "saves his body" for the slams. Sometimes I wish Nadal would do that, I admit.
Then I snap out of it. Because part of what I love about Nadal is his competitiveness, regardless of the venue.
And yes, your experience watching the French, as a Federer fan, may have been utter elation regardless of the factors involved. I don't dispute that you were absolutely thrilled by Federer's "achievement".
However, many sports articles the next day carried headlines like:
"Federer Should Thank Nadal's Knees For French Open Win"
Anyone with decent common sense and a true love of the sport has to admit that it would have been greater if Fed went through Nadal to win the French, like Nadal went through Fed at Wimbly and the AO.
I mean, for FOUR STRAIGHT YEARS, once in a semifinal and three times in a Final, Federer was turned away by Nadal when trying to capture the French trophy. Now, Federer finally "wins" it, but he didn't have to face Nadal.
That just doesn't look very impressive, except perhaps to Fed fans.
I would not say Roger does not gives his all every time. He does. Is just that his style of game is way smoother than Nadal's. Thats a fact. He dominates in such a way that you would not think is possible. You have to admire Nadal's determination, I do, but I think Federer's game is superior.
Another thing to factor is that while its true that Nadal is younger than Federer by 5 years, Federer's reign began in 2003 and Nadal's in 2005, thus 2 years difference. Nadal had his breakthrough earlier than Federer. So you could argue that technically there's is a 2 year advantage to Federer, not 5. Nonetheless is impressive that Nadal's already has so many Masters in his belt. My prediction is that he most likely will end with more Master Series events than Roger, but not with more GS.
You are talking like Nadal faced the Great Roger Federer who was in the form of his life in those two finals!!!Guess what??Nadal faced the weakened federer who was low on confidence anyway.Check the record of fed just before those two tournaments
two tournaments won before Wimbledon for the whole year.Before the aus open,nothing
It is a lot easier for me to argue that Nadal was physically injured, since he lost in the 4th round of his most dominant tournament and can't even defend his Wimbledon title, than it is for you to argue that Federer wasn't in fine form in the summer of 2008.
Federer has gotten to five slam finals in a row going back to the 2008 French, where was this "weakened" Federer? He wasn't physically injured, and he was part of arguably the greatest match of all time...he did everything but win.
Why aren't you mentioning the aus open in your argument?That means that you clearly believes that fed was not the great fed at the aus open final.Besides,It's easy for you to say that nadal was injured.I watched that match against soderling.Robinwas playing the best tennis of his life serving brilintly and hitting every shot with power.Nadal just had an off day.He wasn't injured during the match.He didn't say that he had an injury WHILE PLAYING after the match .
First of all, I'm not cheering Nadal like I think he's greatest ever or something. For the record, I think Bjorn Borg is the greatest ever (he won 41% of the slams he competed in, 11 of 27, had 11 majors while only setting foot at the Australian ONCE, and retired at the young age of 26 despite being on a roll of getting to 6 straight slam finals). Neither Nadal or Fed can claim anything like that.
Still, if you think Nadal wasn't playing injured in that match, you haven't seen his norm.
The fact that Borg retired at the top itself degrades his claim of being the GOAT. You are GOAT not by just talent (which btw I think Federer has far far more than Borg and Rafa put together) but by the mentality you project. Fed wants to win more even after getting to 14! GOAT is more than just some numbers you rattled...Federer can boast some numbers which Borg can only dream of having.
Look. Nadal got pwned. Roger didn't. The victory went to Roger. Seems fair to me?
Anyway, get a life, stop making excuses and cheer Nadal somewhere else, this is a Rolex commercial here and not a scene from one of their previous matches. I say this to everyone...
Yeah but it's not Federer's fault ... I mean Nadal was knocked down by Soderling, what else could he have done except grabbing the opportunity to win RG'09 ... I hope we see more of Roger-Rafa matches in future, I am a great fan of both of them ...
why he lost. Injuries happen, and I can accept that. But to say it's "as simple as that" when you are trying to claim Nadal "wasn't one of the best in the 2009 French Open" is completely unfair.
He lost early, yes. But we must take into consideration that he was injured. It's like one sports article said, "Federer can thank Nadal's knees for French Open trophy". It's probably true.
This argument is going nowhere. Different people believe different stuff.You believe he is not the greatest.fine.But most including me think he is.gosper23 made a great point.Read it
Look, I'm a Dallas Mavericks fan, and I can fully admit they only got to the WCF's in 2002 because Chris Webber of the Sacramento Kings got injured in Game 2 of the series. Injuries do change the face of sports.
I can accept that Nadal LOST in the French Open. But there IS a reason why, and it had nothing to do with his skill level. He was not 100%. Federer got the trophy, and there is an asterisk next to that "achievement".
Let's put an asterisk next to Nadal's first FO win because he didn't play against Federer, one next to his Wimby win because Fed had mono, and one next to his AO win because Fed had immense pressure and was not 100% relaxed.
Heck, let's put asterisks next to all of Laver's wins cos he didn't play against Federer or Nadal.
People can go on all day about asterisks & "if onlys".
The best player at that particular tourney wins the trophy - Federer or Nadal.
First, get your facts straight. It's rather embarrassing to see you try to defend Federer when you possess suck a lack of knowledge about the man.
Nadal DID play Federer in his first French Open win. He defeated him in the semifinals. Second, Federer got diagnosed with mono in December 07. Wimbledon was half a year later and Federer showed no ill effects, getting to the Final at FO and Wimbly. Third, feeling "pressure" and not being "relaxed" at the AO is not an asterisk.
But not being able to bend your knees or run fast to get to balls, and thus losing, does put an asterisk next to the guys name who FINALLY won the FO after the best player went out with injuries. Injuries that genuinely hamper one's mobility are part of tennis. Federer won the FO, yes. Congrats. But 99% of people would admit it only happened because Nadal got injured.
Like I said before, this is sports. The fittest, strongest and best OF THE MOMENT, wins and deserves the trophy. Smart athletes take care of their bodies.
Injuries, illnesses, mental pressure, personal problems - you can go on ALL DAY if you talk about the surrounding factors - all of which are a part of life and sports. Accept it.
And frankly, 99% people didn't even think about Nadal when Federer won that trophy.
The time always at 10:10.
010200711 1 week ago
if tennis was heaven, then Roger must be God.
Rog your the best!!!
flippybelow 1 week ago
Rolex is the best, just like Federer.
AntiSocialChannel85 3 months ago
Novák, imádkozz !!!
MrVandris 5 months ago
nobody looks better in a suit then Tennis
auroraflyx 5 months ago
Oh come on, Roger. Yeah, we all know that you're the best player of all time and that you're amazing! :D
msbrunette8 6 months ago
Some how this ad is more famous for the suit
manicindhouse 10 months ago
SO SEXY in this commercial omg!
kurfurstus 10 months ago
God of tennis :)
MarkoK87 10 months ago
@MarkoK87
sorry was but Rafa is now, i know how u feel i felt the same but gave up as he kept losing all games to Rafa
kirkb4u 10 months ago
@kirkb4u
He lose vs Djokovic and Rafa now, but he have best moves and he play so nice, Rafa don t have elegancy like Roger, for me he is the best player ever (16 Grand Slams)
MarkoK87 10 months ago 2
Favorite commercial of all time.
jmeier37 10 months ago
Forget Rolex. What a great suit!
diseezvishalful 11 months ago
OMG I LOVE THIS COMMERCIAL ITS SO EXCITING!!!!!!!!!!!!(:
lalalala2209 11 months ago
I´m not a Roger-Fan but that´s one of the best commercials on TV!
ArjenFCB92 11 months ago
Every1 who sees this comments ont he suite and not the watch???
manicindhouse 1 year ago
that suit is sick
Augmarh 1 year ago
OMG He is so elegant, classic, handsome!
GOAT!
jinkailai 1 year ago
what is this song?
ravenfrost626 1 year ago
@ravenfrost626 : Rolex song :))
shouron2 11 months ago
HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
petra108991 1 year ago
Man idol
dziungles 1 year ago
anyone know the actual name of the song?..
kousseye155 1 year ago
best sponsor
wwesucks221 1 year ago
does anybody know what suit is he wearing?
dinamofan1986 1 year ago 2
ALLA Hu FUCKBAR!
The guy is the next God!
manicindhouse 1 year ago
Comment removed
dinamofan1986 1 year ago
Is that sexy or what?! Love him!!!!!! -3
MsMiReable 1 year ago 2
Comment removed
MsMiReable 1 year ago
Classy music. Classy watch. Classy video. And the classiest sports-playing man alive with a classy name, classy accent, classy playing style, classy appearance, and classy personality.
listen2acoustic 1 year ago 4
only a badass like feds can pull off a commercial like this that flawlessly
slickwilly9684 1 year ago 3
sexy Roger :) love
federerbestclass 1 year ago
Awsome leg movement @ 0:10
WestsTigersFan 1 year ago
KOCHAM GO NAD ŻYCIE! ON ON TYM NIE WIE. KOCHAM GO BEZWZGLĘDNIE:-)
megszym 1 year ago
What a suit! Guys hint hint! A suit like this will have women chasing you all over:)
labeautenoire 1 year ago 3
Comment removed
labeautenoire 1 year ago
I'm not a fan of Federer but watching this video makes me fall in love with him. He is the epitome of Elegance!!!!!!!!!
labeautenoire 1 year ago 4
haunting
rexsonyful 1 year ago
It's so rare to see perhaps the best player ever of a sport being so elegant and classy at the same time, including when he speaks. I think the commercial is brilliant, including the music of course, although there's a sense of sadness in it, in my opinion. Thanks for the video!
crusader92 1 year ago 5
federer shud play all his matches in a suit, damn sexy
and wtf this video has so much class ITS RIDICULOUS
katherineli 1 year ago 3
@katherineli HAHA he'll sweat to death :D
christarboy 1 year ago
The suite is The HUGO BOSS Signature series.....
manicindhouse 1 year ago
what song is this i feel like i could pull off a Hitman scene with that suit and song on :)
let me know if you find it.
and what suit is that.
IxRAT3xYOURxGAMEPLAY 1 year ago
WHOS THE DESIGNER OF THE SUITE ?
ladykilmer 1 year ago
epic ..just epic!
mrvishal1000 1 year ago 2
He´s playing with white balls, just like in the old times.
That´s because he´s such a classic talent, whose grace belongs to the 60´s and 70´s like Nastase or Big Mac.
alejamdq 1 year ago
YES
sithXrebel 1 year ago
On of my favorite RF commercials. simple yet powerful & a bit haunting
rachray83 1 year ago
Got to love Roger as a tennis player but THIS IS THE MOST OBNOXIOUS and stupidest commercial ever made. And I thought his gold and white post Wimbledon victory jacket with the RF logo was bad. Love to watch him play tennis, but this highfalutin pompous crap makes him so much less attractive.
hmsister 1 year ago
sooooo sexy..great fitting suits especially the dress pants, outlined his thick thighs and butt.
MrButtlover 1 year ago
I hate the attitude of your wife when you playing Roger, look like shes a golddigger you deserve better!
drgreendick 1 year ago
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa I LOVE HIIIMMM!!!!
lanyzekRoger 2 years ago
must be a 5 million dollar suit.... for 17,000 dollar watch..
AhmadStpats 2 years ago
A $3000 suit, and the watch is actually $25,000.
PALballer917 2 years ago
golden silence, classy, powerful, stunning editing
violetwood12 2 years ago
what you said....Epic commercial. And the suit..omg!
mugiwaragear2 2 years ago 2
Federer is so handsome here, got so much style! The rolex music definitely suits him! And yeah... love his suit ;-)
Isa3scad 2 years ago 3
The music is " Lang Land Rolex" and the suit I bet no one knows. LOL but surely looks really nice and expensive. I have never even seen anybody wearing that one. LOL LOL
ilovemushi 2 years ago
LOL I was thinking the same thing. Then again, you gotta have federer's class to rock such a neat suit. lol.
mugiwaragear2 2 years ago
only federer can make playing tennis in a suit look good.
casablancaaccent 2 years ago 65
completely agreeed
kottenball 2 years ago
My friend, you don't know how true that is! I cannot see nadal playing tennis in a suit....lol.
mugiwaragear2 2 years ago
Not a single rich person here
that can tell us about his suit?
We are all poor
=(
hahahahah
pablonbd 2 years ago
It's Ermengildo Zegna I am pretty sure ..
BEAUTEEM 2 years ago
name:roger federer
hobby:winning tennis matches
career: won 15 grand slam titles and 52 ATP titles
personality:friendly,kind,nice and finally OWNAGE!
hiimpaul6 2 years ago 3
62 ATP titles....
nandouniandino 2 years ago
omg the music is super kool....and fedex is super hottt....btw wht suit is tht?
1324abdul 2 years ago
i'd guess armani lol
cottoncandyqueen66 2 years ago
wooo i bet he makes major money jus off rolex....i love his suit man i bet it costs thousands and thousands
jack3641 2 years ago
Does anyone know what suit that is?
Bwin7 2 years ago
rolex song
EuropeanImperialist 2 years ago
am i gonna be the only one who asks what song this is? lol
loloutloud874 2 years ago
haha no youre not alone. this is the song written for all rolex commercials! it s really beautiful, isnt it?? but the composer of this song is for some reason unknown.. at least as far as i ve searched..
mariaiomorfh 2 years ago
That was an Awsome Forehand 0:11.
mroshanali 2 years ago 31
roger must have made major bank signing with rolex.. or maybe he was so flattered he signed for free
joeynovak2 2 years ago
Have you got the music of this spot??
please
mimilelovemetal 2 years ago
Roger I love you :)
DeNNiSXRuud 2 years ago
omg i love the music! lol
Masterthief66 2 years ago
Federer, you're the best!!!!
sw33tdog 2 years ago
Cool. I saw this on TV and wanted to put it on one of my Fed channels. So classy and cool.
RogerFSimplyTheBest 2 years ago
my favorite player of all time
baseliner52094 2 years ago
no one will ever get cooler than this guy
daoliiang 2 years ago
perfection
luison19 2 years ago
Respect!
alybhai1990 2 years ago
i love you federer!
placid109 2 years ago
awesome..!!!!
poetry in motion.
redmist09 2 years ago 3
Well Said .... Poetry in Motion ....
riddler820 2 years ago
OMG
<3
crevette57260 2 years ago
dicepro: Do you have the "making of" of this commercial. if you do, please upload it!.
BTW, if you're in Asia, do you know the other Rolex commercial of Rog at Wimbledon 2008 on Star Sports with the Rolex Song. That commercial is just like the others in previous years! If you do once again, please upload it for me.
Thanks a lot! ^_^
rogerfederer08081981 2 years ago
He really looks like the "King of Tennis" in this ad ... I mean he's so handsome ... A perfect Rolex Swiss Ambassador ...
riddler820 2 years ago 3
best ad ever! it's way better than the one with him and ana ivanovic!
jackswastedlife1 2 years ago
Love this Commercial..get a life people..lets not talk about Nadal here.....
ilovepanday 2 years ago 3
I thought this argument ended yesterday......
1990kop1990 2 years ago
why is there no music??
michaelroddick 2 years ago
Try to connect the lead between your speakers and your soundcard ;)
dicepro 2 years ago 13
thank you dicepro, it's my computer problem and it's alright now!
michaelroddick 2 years ago
Sure, Roger doesn't dominate Rafa or Murray like he has dominated basically every other player for like the last years. But I personally am not sure if Rafa (or Murray for that matter) will dominate everyone else like Roger has done year after year on all surfaces.
So for me, in terms of a proven track record in amazing consistency, Roger has to be one of the greatest ever, possibly even the greatest of all time. That's an indisputable fact.
But I'm content to just enjoy the mens game right now
gosper23 2 years ago
Good point...
1990kop1990 2 years ago
Ok so firstly, people, ease up! This is a Rolex ad featuring Roger, who by the way looks extremely classy. I'm not exactly sure why there's a massive debate about whether or not Roger is the G.O.A.T on this video, but whatever.
As to the G.O.A.T question, I think everyone knows there is no definitive answer. There are obviously some past legends of the game (e.g. Laver, Borg, etc.) and there are some awesome players right now (e.g. Roger, Rafa, etc.)
gosper23 2 years ago 3
Pause at 0:12 - that image is awesome. *blush*
With his face sideways, his jacket flying outwards...so manly and yet, so beautiful.
AAMLfan 2 years ago 2
aand he looks hot too!
rodrido93 2 years ago 4
greaaaaaaaaaat=)
rodrido93 2 years ago
Can we just talk about the VIDEO itself please!
fighttoexcel 2 years ago 2
Hey does anyone know what song's playing in the background for the commercial?
And for all you Nadal/ Federer fans out there, personally I do favor Federer, but respect has to be given to both players. After all, only having one player is just one half of the rivalry that basically revived tennis.
frankjiang1 2 years ago
I must admit, this is a cool ad. Rolex knows what they are doing, from a marketing standpoint.
Having said that, I just don't PERSONALLY like Roger Federer much as a player. Is he great? Yes. But is he great enough to be annointed the Greatest of All Time? No.
Federer faced no genuine resistance in the years he was dominant. Roddick?! An aging Agassi? Philippoussis?! Baghdatis? Fernando Gonzalez?! And now we can add poor Soderling to the list of Federer victims in Finals.
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
Nadal has had to go THROUGH Federer for all 6 of his majors. That is quite an accomplishment. You beat the best in order to BE the best, right?
But Fed has only gone through Nadal for TWO of his 14 majors. He failed the other 6 times. Federer FINALLY captured his big victory on clay at Roland Garros, but he didn't have to go through Nadal. He lost the four times that he did.
Nadal, on the other hand, had to finally break through on grass (Wimbledon) and hard courts (Australian Open)
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
by going through Federer and proving his worth.
Unfortunately, Nadal has trouble staying healthy it seems. He just turned 23 and his knees are fragile. When he is at 100%, can anyone HONESTLY say he's not better than Federer? No. Not if they wish to be taken seriously. So, if Nadal is the best player of this ERA, and Federer can't beat Nadal...is Federer the G.O.A.T.?
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
Your points are nonsense to be honest. Nadal is better than Federer on clay (obviously) but Federer has an equal H2H to Nadal on hard, and leads him on grass.
Also, where was Nadal in all the US Open finals Federer won? Federer got to Roland Garros finals, but Nadal didn't get to US Open finals. This obviously tips the H2H in favour of Nadal, as clay is his best surface.
Safin had a leading H2H against Sampras. Is Safin better?
14 Slams, and career slam > 6 slams
MrRippy99 2 years ago 5
MrRippy, as I already said to someone else, Nadal is 23 years old. Federer is 28 years old. 14 slams IS greater than 6. It doesn't take a genius to figure that one out.
Unfortunately, it DOES seem to take a genius (among Federer fans, anyway) to realize that Federer has played about 20 more slams (4 a year for 5 years) than Nadal has. When you have competed in 40 slams (which Fed has), your stats are going to be a bit padded against the guy who has played about 20 slams.
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
Also, you've just said Nadal is better without any justification. Are you actually serious?
Federer from 2004-2007 was basically unbeatable. Nadal has never seen such dominance. Nadal beating Federer doesn't make him better than him. Tennis is all about match ups. Nadal's style is very effective against Federer.
Also, the only reason Federer's slam opponents look weak is because Federer was so dominant that he just steamrollered his opposition.
MrRippy99 2 years ago 3
To Kurozuguchi: Nadal reached his best ever form when federer lost his form.Federer lost to nadal at the french because nadal's the better clay courter,but the losses of federer at wimbledon and the aus opens to nadal were purely because federer is not the player he was two years ago.Has Nadal beaten him at the other majors except at the french before 2008?NO.He still hasn't regained the form he lost,But the way he played at his prime in 2004-2007, showed the world that he is the greatest
1990kop1990 2 years ago
appears that nadal has withdrawn from wimbledon. he got what he deserved.the way he runs around like a hamster all over the court..
chameleonbob 2 years ago 2
LMAO
Badaboomboom19 2 years ago
Nadal wasn't in his prime then either though. Just as Federer hit his stride at about 22 years of age, Nadal did the same. A lot of people seem to forget Nadal is 5 years younger than Federer. He is on a better pace than Federer when it comes to wins at majors, and he has a superior win percentage for his career, but unfortunately Nadal's body probably won't hold up...
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
Comment removed
1990kop1990 2 years ago
Nadal didn't/couldn't make the final. Safe to say he WASN'T one of the best in the 2009 French Open. Simple as that. In sports, you have to prove yourself each time.
Nadal had to go though Fed for all 6 majors because Roger was good enough to make it to the final ALL those times.
Man, you take Federer's consistency for granted. You always see him at the end of slams and don't think about the work it takes to get there again and again.
Now if Nadal can do that, we'll get back to your argument.
AAMLfan 2 years ago 4
First, you're wrong on the point about Federer getting to the Final all six of the times Rafa beat him. One of those times was in the semifinals, the other five were in finals. Rafa is still 6-2 against Federer when they meet in Slams, and that just looks plain BAD when considering Fed for the G.O.A.T.
Also, I disagree that your point is "simple as that". Nadal won't even be playing Wimbledon, that is how injured his knees are. He's not 100%. His level of skill had nothing to do with
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
The main point is that their rivalry is uneven. Rafa is no doubt better on clay, hence the really lopsided H2H. However, Rafa was not consistent enough to make it again and again and again to the hard court finals and play Roger, we can know, but Roger is definitely better on hardcourt. This was true for 2005 all the way til around 2008. Things got a bit wierd in 2008, with federer dropping out due to various reasons, and rafa on an amazing winning streak. and their rivalry continues this year..
HNCS2006 2 years ago
HNC, wouldn't we also have to take into account that in Fed's first 4 or 5 years he did almost NOTHING? In his first 16 slams, from 1999 to 2003, Federer's best achievement was getting to the QFs twice. Nadal, in his first 16 slams, had 4 wins.
Nadal has played 21 slams in his career, and he's won 6. When Federer had played 21 slams, he had won 3. Nadal is on a better pace, that's all I'm saying.
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
so what does that fact proof? i guess nothing. success has nothing to do with age. it always takes time until you get a clear mind to play at your best level. it is just a mental problem. nadal solved that earlier. ok, but that does not have to assure that nadal will dominate tennis longer than anyone else. maybe nadal gets his knees cured but then starts losing more and more matches because his time is over. he had been No.2 for so long because he played very constantly at a high level.
deagmomo 2 years ago
Obviously Nadal's knees could ruin his chances to be the GOAT, but he hit his dominant stride at 22, just like Fed. So, when someone says Nadal has proven he can't consistently get to hard court or grass slam finals like Federer, I have to remind them that until about age 22, Federer couldn't consistently get to the final of ANYTHING. We must consider Nadal's age and the fact that he only recently 2008, when he turned 22, found his dominant form as a player.
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
the thing is, injury isn't just distributed randomly across the tour. it's up to the player to take care of themselves. federer takes A HUGE AMOUNT of precaution to not get injured which is why he was able to do what he did. nadal's playing style, his scheduling, etc. is behind his injuries. you can't just say nadal achieved more younger, a lot of people achieved more than einstein before 25, but einstein is still the genius.
HNCS2006 2 years ago 3
AAMLfan is spot on.Smart athletes take care of their bodies rather than running like roosters all over the court to win everything.And as I remember watching Fed's victory at the french,It was all about fed's acheivements,not nadal's inability to take care of himself.
1990kop1990 2 years ago 4
Well, I happen to respect that Nadal gives his best at every tournament, regardless of the prestige involved. Nadal has won as many Masters event tournaments as Federer has, despite being 5 years younger.
One could say that Federer doesn't give his all at those tournaments, and they may be right. He "saves his body" for the slams. Sometimes I wish Nadal would do that, I admit.
Then I snap out of it. Because part of what I love about Nadal is his competitiveness, regardless of the venue.
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
And yes, your experience watching the French, as a Federer fan, may have been utter elation regardless of the factors involved. I don't dispute that you were absolutely thrilled by Federer's "achievement".
However, many sports articles the next day carried headlines like:
"Federer Should Thank Nadal's Knees For French Open Win"
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
Comment removed
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
Anyone with decent common sense and a true love of the sport has to admit that it would have been greater if Fed went through Nadal to win the French, like Nadal went through Fed at Wimbly and the AO.
I mean, for FOUR STRAIGHT YEARS, once in a semifinal and three times in a Final, Federer was turned away by Nadal when trying to capture the French trophy. Now, Federer finally "wins" it, but he didn't have to face Nadal.
That just doesn't look very impressive, except perhaps to Fed fans.
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
A strange thing I noticed about competition is that the people who play better tend to advance while the people who play worse tend to...not.
tyronusbiggums 2 years ago
Very true. 100% true, in fact. Just as true as the fact that players who are injured tend to not defeat the players who are healthy.
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
Except Nadal who wins 3 Masters series and makes it to the 4th round of the FO while "injured."
tyronusbiggums 2 years ago
Ask Nadal to not suck next time?
xenero 2 years ago
I would not say Roger does not gives his all every time. He does. Is just that his style of game is way smoother than Nadal's. Thats a fact. He dominates in such a way that you would not think is possible. You have to admire Nadal's determination, I do, but I think Federer's game is superior.
NoelAndres17 2 years ago
Another thing to factor is that while its true that Nadal is younger than Federer by 5 years, Federer's reign began in 2003 and Nadal's in 2005, thus 2 years difference. Nadal had his breakthrough earlier than Federer. So you could argue that technically there's is a 2 year advantage to Federer, not 5. Nonetheless is impressive that Nadal's already has so many Masters in his belt. My prediction is that he most likely will end with more Master Series events than Roger, but not with more GS.
NoelAndres17 2 years ago
Nadal has more masters series because half of them are played on clay every year
1990kop1990 2 years ago
They have the same amount, 15 each.
dvoraklargo 2 years ago
You are talking like Nadal faced the Great Roger Federer who was in the form of his life in those two finals!!!Guess what??Nadal faced the weakened federer who was low on confidence anyway.Check the record of fed just before those two tournaments
two tournaments won before Wimbledon for the whole year.Before the aus open,nothing
1990kop1990 2 years ago
It is a lot easier for me to argue that Nadal was physically injured, since he lost in the 4th round of his most dominant tournament and can't even defend his Wimbledon title, than it is for you to argue that Federer wasn't in fine form in the summer of 2008.
Federer has gotten to five slam finals in a row going back to the 2008 French, where was this "weakened" Federer? He wasn't physically injured, and he was part of arguably the greatest match of all time...he did everything but win.
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
Why aren't you mentioning the aus open in your argument?That means that you clearly believes that fed was not the great fed at the aus open final.Besides,It's easy for you to say that nadal was injured.I watched that match against soderling.Robinwas playing the best tennis of his life serving brilintly and hitting every shot with power.Nadal just had an off day.He wasn't injured during the match.He didn't say that he had an injury WHILE PLAYING after the match .
You just can't acept that he lost
1990kop1990 2 years ago
First of all, I'm not cheering Nadal like I think he's greatest ever or something. For the record, I think Bjorn Borg is the greatest ever (he won 41% of the slams he competed in, 11 of 27, had 11 majors while only setting foot at the Australian ONCE, and retired at the young age of 26 despite being on a roll of getting to 6 straight slam finals). Neither Nadal or Fed can claim anything like that.
Still, if you think Nadal wasn't playing injured in that match, you haven't seen his norm.
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
The fact that Borg retired at the top itself degrades his claim of being the GOAT. You are GOAT not by just talent (which btw I think Federer has far far more than Borg and Rafa put together) but by the mentality you project. Fed wants to win more even after getting to 14! GOAT is more than just some numbers you rattled...Federer can boast some numbers which Borg can only dream of having.
kudekariyo 2 years ago
And by the way,Cheer nadal somewhere else
1990kop1990 2 years ago
Look. Nadal got pwned. Roger didn't. The victory went to Roger. Seems fair to me?
Anyway, get a life, stop making excuses and cheer Nadal somewhere else, this is a Rolex commercial here and not a scene from one of their previous matches. I say this to everyone...
chloewhite 2 years ago 2
Yeah but it's not Federer's fault ... I mean Nadal was knocked down by Soderling, what else could he have done except grabbing the opportunity to win RG'09 ... I hope we see more of Roger-Rafa matches in future, I am a great fan of both of them ...
riddler820 2 years ago
why he lost. Injuries happen, and I can accept that. But to say it's "as simple as that" when you are trying to claim Nadal "wasn't one of the best in the 2009 French Open" is completely unfair.
He lost early, yes. But we must take into consideration that he was injured. It's like one sports article said, "Federer can thank Nadal's knees for French Open trophy". It's probably true.
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
Comment removed
1990kop1990 2 years ago
This argument is going nowhere. Different people believe different stuff.You believe he is not the greatest.fine.But most including me think he is.gosper23 made a great point.Read it
1990kop1990 2 years ago
Look, I'm a Dallas Mavericks fan, and I can fully admit they only got to the WCF's in 2002 because Chris Webber of the Sacramento Kings got injured in Game 2 of the series. Injuries do change the face of sports.
I can accept that Nadal LOST in the French Open. But there IS a reason why, and it had nothing to do with his skill level. He was not 100%. Federer got the trophy, and there is an asterisk next to that "achievement".
It's as simple as that.
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
You want to talk about asterisks? OK.
Let's put an asterisk next to Nadal's first FO win because he didn't play against Federer, one next to his Wimby win because Fed had mono, and one next to his AO win because Fed had immense pressure and was not 100% relaxed.
Heck, let's put asterisks next to all of Laver's wins cos he didn't play against Federer or Nadal.
People can go on all day about asterisks & "if onlys".
The best player at that particular tourney wins the trophy - Federer or Nadal.
AAMLfan 2 years ago
First, get your facts straight. It's rather embarrassing to see you try to defend Federer when you possess suck a lack of knowledge about the man.
Nadal DID play Federer in his first French Open win. He defeated him in the semifinals. Second, Federer got diagnosed with mono in December 07. Wimbledon was half a year later and Federer showed no ill effects, getting to the Final at FO and Wimbly. Third, feeling "pressure" and not being "relaxed" at the AO is not an asterisk.
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
But not being able to bend your knees or run fast to get to balls, and thus losing, does put an asterisk next to the guys name who FINALLY won the FO after the best player went out with injuries. Injuries that genuinely hamper one's mobility are part of tennis. Federer won the FO, yes. Congrats. But 99% of people would admit it only happened because Nadal got injured.
Kurozuguchi 2 years ago
Now you're going into specifics.
Where are you going to draw the line?
Like I said before, this is sports. The fittest, strongest and best OF THE MOMENT, wins and deserves the trophy. Smart athletes take care of their bodies.
Injuries, illnesses, mental pressure, personal problems - you can go on ALL DAY if you talk about the surrounding factors - all of which are a part of life and sports. Accept it.
And frankly, 99% people didn't even think about Nadal when Federer won that trophy.
AAMLfan 2 years ago 4
Roger is sooo hott!!I love him so much!
Good Luck Roger!!
mrskellyfederer 2 years ago
Execellent
RonniArbitiaas 2 years ago
that shot on 0:10 0:11 was so damn unbelievably awesome!!!
OBeymydreamz 2 years ago
wow!!! *drooling*...how hot was THAT!??!! my god...best ad ever...EVER...actually its an understatement....no words!!
Good luck federer!! lets show those pro-nadals wat ur made of!!!
RFED99 2 years ago
is this showing during wimbledon?
aaannngus 2 years ago
Drooooooooooooool...he's gorgeous.Awesome adv.
diehardFedfan 2 years ago
WOW LOVE IT <333333
42RoXXs 2 years ago
ohhhhhhh!!Love him=)
shanying30 2 years ago
oh He is COOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL!!
polychronio 2 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
be my daddy
kurfurstus 2 years ago
Wow!!! I think I fainted, what a beauty... he and the whole commercial... and that flying forehand Stunning!!! Looks like James Bond, wow!
Caroblue31 2 years ago 6
he is so damn HOT...
love you rodi.. good luck for wimby :)
nickyrko 2 years ago 7
Beautiful !!!!
poppyf01 2 years ago 5
Good..!!!
kovi93 2 years ago 3
Roger+suit+all-surface/all-around game=Perfection=Rolex!
timafi 2 years ago 6
there is something revealing me in this commercial is that last year's wimbledon was bitter to him and he's going to bounce back this year
n77332 2 years ago 4
COOL!!!!
n77332 2 years ago 3
Damn! He's so HOT!
rapidista21 2 years ago 11
peRFect
Dany3R9 2 years ago 3
perfect
massachampion2009 2 years ago