Added: 2 years ago
From: WorldSportTV
Views: 265,561
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (536)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Soon more Gs

  • he won all of em :p

  • @telmolicious  oops!!

  • thumbs up if you notice his accent has changed!!!!!

  • Comment removed

  • My Gosh, what would have happend if he had chosen football!!!

    He is the best player ever!

  • He looked so ugly then but now he's like the best looking one

  • @123456789huntier it has to be the hair lol

  • @telmolicious Federer didn't "trash" Djokovic more than once last year. The only time this happened it was 6-1 6-4 to Roger. I'm afraid the other matches went to a 3rd set in bestof3 matches. The faster the court won't count out Djokovic. Yes Federer#s chances improve but Djoker beat Federer in Basle 2009

  • this is a scary interview!

  • Yeah, Roger at 29 did solidify his name in Tennis! 16 slams...but...still counting? I don't think so. He had his time. His time is finished. He can't even beat the likes of Tsongga now in his favorite surface. Nor Rafa. But undoubtably, he was the greatest up to now...

  • @hawkmankid the faster the surface the better his chances ... He trashed djoko several time in the end of last year and even beat Nadal in th WTF.... dont count him out of the US ... he missed 2 match points in last years semi... wont happen again!

  • @telmolicious hes gunna follow sampras...next year when hes 31 he will win the us playing roddick...lol

  • @telmolicious "he missed 2 match points in last years semi... wont happen again!" - Oops...

  • @hawkmankid Tsonga played one of the matches of his life against Roger at this years Wimbledon. And don't forget Tsonga also knocked out Rafa at Queens this year, so he was on form, playing his best tennis. He won't beat Rafa and Roger back to back tournaments very often. On any given day a top player can be beaten by another top player.

  • Five year plan? 11:38 I think his 5 year plan was pretty solid.

  • 16 dislikes from 16 Grand Slam runner ups.

  • 10:18 "I don't know if somebody is ever gonna dominate the game as pete did" hahaha Well, sir GOAT, correct me if I'm wrong but I think you became that somebody.

  • its funny how he was just thinking " i hope i can win 1-2 grand slams and years later 16 grand slams in the pocket, best ever, however i dont think a tennis players career is too long. i still think fed is the favourite for wibledon for the next 3 years but the hard courts and clay will be mission impossible, i think he will get to 18 maybe 19 before retiring at 33 i think.

  • impressive, what 10 years represent, this guy went from promising kid to Best of All Time! incredible !

  • Lol there are 16 dislikes. I guess for the 16 people he beat in grand slam finals.

  • @jdude1357114 Im thinking I should dislike it once more then so he can win another one ;) Roger you're the goat !!

  • HE IS THE MASTER!!!! THE BEST PLAYER EVER!!! I REALLY LOVED TO WATCH THIS VIDEO!!!

  • HE IS THE MASTER!!!! THE BEST PLAYER EVER!!!

  • You are the MASTER ROHER!!! THE BEST EVER!!!

  • LOL he hesitated when asked "And your weaknesses?", maybe thinking "I have almost no weaknesses" :]........

  • He's my favorite tennis player and obviously the best in history so far. 17th Grand Slam coming possibly French Open if not the other 2 this year. I hope he could even get a golden slam (own/win all 4 grand slams in a year) in the next year or 2 while still in his prime, to have yet another record in the books :].......!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!­!!!

    If he get to a golden 20 grand slams, it'll be unbeatable for decades to come, just like Michael Schumacher in F1 :D!!!

  • Where does the name 'Grand Slam' come from?

    Does it have a logical meaning?

  • "Well, I mean, people started to compare me with Anna Kournikova, because I haven't won a title and...." AAHAHAHAHAHA

    Omg, young Roger Roger... at this point, you don't even have a clue what's going to happened to you... people don't even dream success you're going to have :)

  • don't you mean the hopman* cup? and Martina Hingis*?

  • a little distracting with the storm of tennis balls in the background.

  • It is crazy that this interview is from almost a decade ago. Roger has gotten so far, I am so happy for him. <3

  • LOL at 10:18

    "I don’t know if somebody’s gonna ever dominate the game as Pete did or somebody so…"

    Roger Federer

  • Comment removed

  • he wanted to win wimbeldon once and us open once... the best in history...

  • 9:47 MOST IRONIC question of the whole interview. 

  • this is so funny to watch. also scary to think then he was the age i am now! i hope the next 10 years of my life are as good as his have been, haha.

  • He is full of pimples in this video lol

  • @Snauzer67 what do you expect? he was 19 lol

  • Federer vs. Djokovic

    Live Streaming Video Tennis : Grand Slam - Australian Open - mywowtv.tk

    The Grand Slam of Asia/Pacific

  • "people starting to compare me with anna kournikova" lol

  • its a good vid but there are many mistakes in it:

    1. its Hopman Cup not Hoffmann Cup

    2. hes talking about Martina HINGIS NOT Navratilova.....

  • At the time of this interview, he had not won 16 Grand Slams yet!

  • not bad video quality for something recorded 9 years ago..

  • Federer is the Federation.

  • I'm pretty confident this man will have a good success in his carreer.

  • he's better looking now

  • I'd just like to say, clearly Federer and Nadal are BOTH great players, I don't care who you are or what kind of playing style you prefer. It's not an argument. Even if they both retired today, they'd be known as legends. Who really cares how many majors Nadal can get? He already has 9 and an olympic gold medal. Even Nadal does end with less, he's still beat Federer numerous times, just as Federer has beat Nadal. Who's the GOAT? Who cares? Let's just enjoy the outstanding tennis they give us...

  • Great to see an early interview with Federer. 

  • "-Is it getting harder for one player to dominate?

    -Yeah [...] i don't know if someone is going to dominate as pete..."

    jajaja he didint think about dominate de courts for five years as anyone did it before

    Roger el mejor de todos los tiempos!!

  • 10:19 WOW, who knew that person would be himself!! Neat interview

  • OMG, he is so real in this interview. Clearly he hadn't had all that media training yet, and clearly, here he's still got a lot to prove, so that arrogant smirk is not on his face yet. Also, somehow he sounds like Kim Clijsters in this vid. And finally, the difference between 2000 and 2001 for Roger? Meeting Mirka and being happily in love. She might have made all the difference.

  • why are people who hate roger watching & commenting here....

  • People started to compare me to Anna Kournikova because I had not won any title. Hahaha

  • @diseezvishal lol, i thought i was the only one who heard that

    anna kournikova=FAIL!!!!!

  • I'm glad he chose tennis over soccer!!!!

  • @jeggoo lol who isn't

  • @jeggoo Football ;D

  • LOL at 5:10 "People start comparing me with Anna Kournikova because I haven't won a title"

    Wonder what those people are thinking now.

  • the best tennis player....is ugly O_O

  • youre good! nadal will reach you shortly...

  • @Crackboy5 Nadal nowehere near Fed. Fed will get another couple of grandslam titles next year...

  • @mynameisbond777 Whatever...

    If it hadnt been for the help of Soderling in 2009, he would still not own Roalnd Garros title.... a GRAND SLAM!! hes lame..

  • @mynameisbond777 Yeah and Serena doesn't take steroids....;) give me a break man. He MIGHT win 1 or 2 more slams but not in a year. Also look at these stats: Nadal's Masters Shields vs Federer's (18-17) Slams (9-16) age (23-29) and how about this: nadal is 24 and as the career grand slam. Federer was 28 when he achiebed it. Nadal vs Fed (14-7). Federer is 5 yrs older and has 7 more slams. That's less that 2 slams a yr for 4 yrs or 3 slams twice and 1 slam another.. Nadal could break the record.

  • @VerdascoFan If this your prediction, I will say that the likes of Murray, Del Potro, Djokovic and Federer will dominate Grand slam title each year and within 4 years here's my prediction:

    Year 2011: Federer, Djokovic, Murray, Federer

    2012: Federer, DPotro, DPotro, Federer

    2013: Murray, Nadal, Murray, Federer

    2014: Federer, Djokovic, Murray, DPotro

    Titles: Federer 16 + 5 more= 21 Grand Slams Murray 0 + 4= 4 titles Djokovic 1 + 2= 3 titles Potro 0+3= 3 titles

  • @mynameisbond777 do you know how stupid you look like? just ONE of those predictions that dont come true (and that's something you will wish for, just to have one mistake in those predictions) and your statement here becomes a BIG FAIL. and one thing im curious about: how come you named those people in that order? why nadal is not going to win any slam anymore (he won 3 out of 4 in 2010). are you retarded or something? that would be it.

  • @juandhaltrich That's my prediction and my personal judgement you assshole SOB. Can you come out with your own prediction then everyone can comment based on your prediction? Tell me in details year to year your prediction. You dumbass. Like I told earlier, NAdal will FAIL because of INJURY and that to tell you how stupid you are.

  • @mynameisbond777 oh yeah? let's see how grumpy you get when Nole wins RG '11, like if that was going to happen at all. pfff!!! IM LAUGHING OUT LOUD! you're a jerkoff if you still think those bullshit predictions can actually happen. dont do that. with almost 100% confidence nobody can tell who's going to win any slam. you're the stupid here, dont you realize? making those predictions was very not-clever. you wont admit it 'cause then you'd see yourself with very little self-respect! LOL.

  • @juandhaltrich First of all, who asked you to trust my prediction because prediction is only prediction by individual. You might as well give you prediction who will win the Slams. If you're serious about tennis and not just backing and worshipped Nadal, I hope you're not. If you clever enough, I dare you to give your own prediction. Or otherwise you're stupid and coward.

  • @mynameisbond777 1st, is your prediction. of course i didnt trust in it. how stupid i would be if i had. 2nd, i wont give my predictions, that`s stupid and non sense. i dont make predictions about that, even less in that fashion. 3rd, im not a nadal supporter, never in this life. though i dont hate him either. 4th, im clever enough, still i wont give my prediction, by the reason i gave in `2nd`. 5th, you dont know anything about tennis, nor sports whatsoever, by your arguments written.

  • @mynameisbond777 You are SOOOOO stupid. This is classic person trying to pretend they know about tennis. Murray will never win a slam. Fed won't win one after 2012....if he evens wins one in 2011. And Nadal only there once!!!!!!! AND IN 2013!!!! YOU THINK NADAL WON'T WIN A SLAM FOR 3 YEARS??? Delpo has the talent but his injuries have been hampering him ever since he turned pro. He's gonna have to fix that....and Murray will NEVER EVER WIN 1 SLAM!!!! HIS GAMEC IS MORE SUITED TO NON-SLAMS.

  • @VerdascoFan Federer doesn't believe that he can surpass Samprass. Nobody cares about Federer during his early days. But since defeated Agassi, Agassi admitted that if Fed knows how to play tennis, he will rule the tennis sport. You cannot simply write-off Murray because we still have faith on his capabilities to win the Slams. Slams or non slams is doesn't really matters because all players keep focusing on reaching and win the Slams. Believe me Murray has changed and win the Slam 2011

  • @mynameisbond777 plus, DelPo already has 1 US Open. congratulations, you're stupid in that too. you dont even know how many slams have those players. dumbass

  • @juandhaltrich That's typo error you stupid dumbass.

  • @VerdascoFan the numbers dont mean anything JUST by themselves. there's a lot behind the stats that of course is not shown at first sight. if you consider what i will say next, you will ask yourself twice if your considerations for the best of all-times is between federer and nadal: rod laver won THE GRAND SLAM in '62, and then he didnt play in the official tour of that time, until '69, when he returned, and won THE GRAND SLAM again. imagine what would have happened in those 6 years between.

  • @juandhaltrich I already know that lol....but tennis has evolved so much since then. If u look at the rate nadal is going at he could easily win 16......if he stays healthy. So yes....Laver was great but unless all players grew up in the same era an played againstr each other its impossible to say. I would put Borg WAY up there too becausew he retired super young with 11 slams. I think he could have won more slams and eventually the US OPen the one which eluded him

  • @VerdascoFan maybe. we wont ever know. that's why is kind of unfair to compare players JUST by the numbers. even if nadal reaches 16 slams, it wouldnt be fair to federer to be put behind rafa..why? maybe if rafa reaches 16 slams without 'his rafa', you know what i mean, as his main rival, then it wont be fair the comparison. that's what i say

  • @juandhaltrich true. But since Nadal has dominated Federer is head-heads and no one consistently who's in there week after week really gives Nadal trouble. But Someone will come along. They always do. Give it time. This era will kick ass in 2-4 years i guarantee it.

  • @VerdascoFan i wish. 

  • @juandhaltrich There are som many great talents. I hope they learn how to string wins together, avoid injuries, improve tactics and just not play like an idiot trying to break the ball and then hit a stupid dropshot when there are much better options (.......Gulbis this means YOU)!

  • @VerdascoFan Do you still believe Nadal will win more slams? Look at the past stat titles. Nadal is only mastered in roland garros but not on hardcourt and grasscourt. Nadal only win 3 titles this year but not the past years. I think he needs 9-12 more years to reach 16 (due to injury and playing in different sufrace etc.)

  • @mynameisbond777 Just a stupid comment. He has 9. Im not saying he'll get to 16 but it took him 5 yrs to get to 9. He won 1/3 of them this year. So it wouldn't be unrealistic to say he can get 14.

  • @VerdascoFan What a stupid analysis. I know and everybody know it took him 5 years to get to 9. But to get 14 is nonsense.Nadal play some defensive tennis and will never get close to 14. Pete Sampras play some attacking serve and volley, Federer plays attacking all round but Nadal plays defensive can he get to 14? Are you out of your mind? Only stupid person like you will think that way.

  • @mynameisbond777 1st of all, your grammar is atrocious. I hope English isn't your first language..or even your 4th. Wait, never mind, you couldn't even NAME 4 languages because your an idiot. Nadal started off playing defensive tennis and yes, he sometimes relies on that too much. Can you tell me that Nadal hasnt started to attck more, improve his serve, volleys and groundies though? No, you can't. He attacks a lot more now while still having the option of his incredible defense. It's formidable

  • @VerdascoFan First of all, u are SOB. Are you Nadal's brother? Trying to back all I commented? Do you think DEFENSIVE IS THE WEAPON TO WIN GRAND SLAM?? You sicked and retarded!! I didn't see Nadal attacked more than Federer does in ATP Wold Tour Final. You are so blind.

  • @VerdascoFan i ask myself if laver could be the best of all-times. maybe he is

  • @VerdascoFan Nadal will get the injury soon and couldn't win the slams for next year. He's suffering and the way he was played he's career will end soon. Nadal is like Hewitt. Hewitt, during his young ages played aggressively but then fail to win any major titles at elder ages.

  • @mynameisbond777 No because Hewitt was surpassed by a generation he helped create. He created a monster he couldn't control. Nadal however has ADDED aspects to his game and he has started to win EVEN MORE NOT LESS. So there's no compariosn between Nadal and Hewitt other than their tremendous fight.

  • @VerdascoFan I disagree with you. I want to ask you, how many slams Nadal will get upon reached the age of 28? You have to be noticed that from year to year there will be new challenge and players like Del Potro, Murray, Djokovic will win the Slam. No way Nadal will reach 14 and surpass federer record. Federer even can ask for retirement if he wants but he will not stop playing and will break more. Nadal and hewitt are the same. Getting injury and finally dissappoint a fan like you!

  • Now You get compared to Sampras for many more reasons

  • Lol the hoffman cup :P

  • hahahaha that question " is it getting harder for one player to dominate" is sooooooo ironic looking at this interview, 9 years later , with this particular player who dominated so long .

  • the people in the backround SUCK

  • You have to win 16 more, Roger. You can do it!

  • @IllIIllIIIlIIIlI hahah federer got his ass kicked today loved seein that.

  • @norjak71 asshole.

  • @tchu717 lol wahh keep crying. federer is a pussy faggot. jus cares about reppin his own clothing line like a deuche bag. nadal is number 1, and that lil faggot cant stand it, now nadal has his grandslam, thats what he gets, hard work, and being a genuinely nice guy, federer looked like he didnt even wanna shake hands with novak. what a pussy. nadal owns his bitch ass.

  • @norjak71

    LOL It's funny cos you're an idiot

  • @5COT5MAN lol its funny cause nadal just won the us open and federer went home crying like a sore loser bitch that he is :)

  • @norjak71 ur an idiot

  • @redrover341 keep cryin bitch. nadal owns federer, cant argue with the fact hes ranked NUMBER 1. faggot.

  • @norjak71 Nadal Number 1.... yes.... Overall grand slams 9.... Federer, stayed number 1 for the longest.... and currently has 16... aiming for 20.... quite possibly the GOAT.... Nadal does have a chance of passing Federer, but hasn't yet, and quite raging like a little 12 year old who has just learnt the names Federer and Nadal.....

  • @champion1642 havent learnt the names? wtf are u talking about faggot. federer licks balls and is a faggot cocksucker, nadal pwns him.

  • @norjak71 I meant that they are the two names of tennis a newbie is bound to hear... and you clearly don't show any knowledge of tennis... and respect in sport... you sound more like a football hooligan..

  • @champion1642 thats your argument? lol. hahahhahaahahaha. because they are the 2 best in the world retard, you want me to name everyone in the us open cause i can do that to. fucking idiot. hahaha, yeah, on a vid where im talking about fuckin nadal and federer, ill throw in andy roddick jus to show you i know who he is, lol you fucking MORON AHHAHAHAH

  • @norjak71 I'm Afraid a slow mind like yours still doesn't get what I am trying to say... so i will forgo trying to explain.... read my last comment FULLY

  • @champion1642 no im afraid your backed into a corner looking like an idiot cause i punked you out so now you keep trying to change the subject. idiot.

  • @norjak71 you're a lost cause... you only take in a brief meaning of the written word... and I didn't change the subject

  • @norjak71 woop changed the subject again! lol. love it. to easy lol.

  • federer is a good player, now suck on my ballsack faggot

  • @norjak71 look past the muscles, heavy topspin moonballing all day, grunting, and fist pumping, there's much more to tennis than nadal..

  • @cj397 nope, nadal is classy, and a nice guy, federers a cocky asshole who doesnt deserve to win :)

  • @champion1642 i honestly dont think nadal will surpass federer..federer had 9 at 25 n nadal has 9 at 24..not a big difference n 7 slam deficit is still a mountain..n to me federer is not gonna stop at 16 n can evn go to 20 in my opinion.i dont see nadal competing that well at 28+ age given his fragile knees n his playing style 2 while federers playing style is very easy n less stressfull on his body.so to sum it up yes nadal can overtake federer but thr is a 90% chance in my opinion that he wont

  • @sabertooth7777 man. i dont agree with you. Fed has no injury but nadal will get injured next year. The maximum he reached is only 2-3 slams more.

  • @mynameisbond777 i dont knw wat u mean...u say d same wat i do but still disagree with me...didnt i say nadal is vunerable to injuries n i dont see him a big force at 28+ n also he doesnt hv a good serve to bail him out.....if federer reaches 20 i dont see nadal beating that....but nadal certainly is not done but neither is federer

  • Comment removed

  • @norjak71 not really, nadal will never play with the talent federer has.

    grow up.

  • @cj397 keep cryin. nadal owns that pussy.

  • @norjak71 Puttana se sei brutto, ho visto un paio di tuoi video e sei brutto come la fame e sei un ignorante anche.. you just know faggot, bitch and lick... che tristezza ! Gretto, meschino e stupdio ahahah poveraccio

  • 10:20 , he wonders who is going to dominate the game, IT'S HIM!!! HAHA

  • I met him in 2002 in Vienna, in a hotel during the Austrian Tennis Trophy. He wasn't really famous then, but of course I've already heard of him. I regret now SO MUCH that I didn't go to him for a signature or a photo. :( He was eating his breakfast but I was waiting for Carlos Moya.

  • shree--sorry but you are dead WRONG. a Grand Slam is winning all four majors in the calendar year. a golden slam is winning a grand slam and the olympics. a career slam is winning all 4 majors in any year. Ask any tennis expert. I am right an you are wrong. i have been in the game for 45 years. long before majors were erroneously called grand slams.

  • @tealsea

    You sir, are retarded

  • @tealsea LMFAO u just made urself sound like a farking idiot u noe that???Anyway arent u making federer sound MUCH BETTER???I mean 16GS(According to what u said)Would be winning 64 major tittles.(UNIVERSALLY IMPOSSIBLE)Yea u are very experienced so experienced in the game for 45 years.I bet u were living in a cave or something. U just killed some of my brain cells.

    Its better to let people think u r stupid than to open ur mouth and prove u are stupid

  • @tealsea ur a retard aha!

  • @tealsea "a Grand Slam is winning all four majors in the calendar year" no a grand slam is winning 1 of the major titles

  • it is very hard to win a grandslam! you not have exceptional talent!! if anyone is interested in making money visit my channel!

  • He looks like a chode in this video

  • He wanted to win one GS.. hopefully Wimbledon and Us Open ONCE! He also wanted to be number one.. I wonder how it feels that know that you have exceeded all expectations about yourslf atleast five times over! What do you do when you've achieved your dreams?

  • I tell you this guy won't amount to anything. He wants to win a grandslam! Can you believe that? A guy with a pony-tail wants to win a slam?? Lol !!! And the best part is that he wants to be No.1 some day !!! Hahahahahaha... my grandfather has a better chance of being the No.1. Some people, I tell you...

  • i don't care what anyone says. NO ONE WILL SURPASS 16 GRANDSLAMS !!

  • ahaha... " don't know if someone will ever dominate the game, as Pete made..." ... awesome...

  • Hahaha... it sound silly when you hear him speaking about reaching quarterfinals in a Grand Slam and stuff.... Now it's a total different story...

  • ugly

  • I'm not sure what happened here but the questions that come across the screen have some errors. It is called the Hopman Cup, not the Hoffman Cup. And the Martina he was referring to throughout was Martina Hingis, not Martina Navratilova.

    It's funny how it seemed like he was looking up to Martina so much even though she is a month and a half younger than him.

  • I'm not sure what happened here but the questions that come across the screen have some errors. It is called the Hopman Cup, not the Hoffman Cup. And the Martina he was referring to throughout was Martina Hingis, not Martina Navratilova.

  • Roger the greatest. :)

  • This is ridiculous. He does not have a single Grand Slam. He has 16 majors. A Grand Slam is winning all four majors in a calendar year. Only a handful of players have achieved a Grand Slam.

  • @tealsea bullshit

  • I agree with you on the calendar slam concept but, Major titles do get called grand slam titles or slams so this isn't totally incorrect either way Federer's career is probably the greatest of them all. It should also be noted he has a career grand slam. But who cares the French Open is bullshit anyways. Roland Garros is a testament of speed not skill.

  • @tealsea You have it all wrong. He has won 16 grand slams. He hasn't won THE grand slam. A grand slam does not equal the grand slam.

  • @tealsea incorrect. 

  • @tealsea looks like u started watching tennis couple of days ago......FYI it is 16 grandslam a.k.a majors......when you win 4 grandslam in a calender year, then it is career slam.......and when you win a gold medal to go along with, it is called golden slam.....this started when steffi graff won four grand slam in a calendar year in 1988 and hence called career slam

  • @tealsea Are you kidding me!?? O.o Go and SEARCH what's a GS and then make a statement! He's the ONLY ONE who reach 16! even surpassing Pete Sampras!!!

  • It's nice to see he got a nose job and used his zit medication since this interview.

  • Wow Hingis is Swiss too, like Federer! Only just found out xD That is amazing for Switzerland...

  • dumber, he is talking about playing with martina hingis, former #1 swiss player not martina navratilova!

  • People here who are bringin up Fed's head to head with Nadal to show that he is not the greatest player ever, do not know what they are talkin about. Most of his losses against Nadal came on clay, everywhere else Fed actually leads the head to head. ANd tennis is all about matchups. Nadal jsut matches up well against Fed. I love Nadal but he's one dimensional and not a complete player like Fed. Not even close. Nadal does what he does very very well..but he's not in the same class as Fed. Sorry!

  • Nice video... he would of been alot more like sampras (not winning french open) but luckily he caught a break (nadal got injured)...

    Will federer go down as a great? maybe... the big thing against him is his failure to beat nadal... he can finish off with 25 grand slams, but if his head2head vs nadal stay as the same percentage as now? he won't be the greatest because nadal will even with less grand slams.

  • @den525 FYI when Roger Federer won Roland Garros in '09, Nadal wasn´t injured. He was defeated by Robin Soderling. So, it was'n luck.

  • @marcello1286 FYI Nadal was carrying an injury, hence he didn't play any of the tournaments after roland garros, including wimbledon.

    So yes it was luck, as nadal is the king of clay, his records shows that with a 38-1 record. Soderling only player to ever beat him because he wasn't fully fit.

    Federer knows that, he has said in the past, roland garros is the hardest to win because Nadal is so good on it.

  • @den525 If Nadal was carrying an injury, maybe it wasn't a good idea to play Roland Garros. It's not Federer's fault if he was injured or not. I dont mean to argue with you. I dont hate Nadal, I just think Federer is a better player and the greatest of all time.

  • @marcello1286 I think Federer is a great player as well, and ONE of the greatest of all time. But how can anyone say Federer is a better player?? maybe WAS a better player. In recent years Federer just can't beat Nadal in any important matches.

    Federer might be superman but Nadal is his kryptonite

  • @den525 He beat him in Madrid in what I think was an important match, wasnt it? Anyway, stay with Nadal, I'll stay with Roger. Perhaps thats the beauty of sports.

  • @den525 and nadal can't beat del potro, davydenko, etc. so what's your point?

  • @azumi149 nadal/federer rivalry is arguably one of the biggest/greatest of all time. Federer to many is considered one of the greatest (to his fans probably the greatest). My point is Nadal has a tremendous record against Federer, or might you say Federer has a poor record against Nadal.

    The thing with federer is that his first 10 or so grand slams he didn't have a great rival like nadal, look at sampras, throughout his career he had great players in the same era, unlike federer.

  • @den525 when nadal won his first Roland Garros Federer only had 4 GS titles.

  • @wadewi he was also only 19!! He had to work on his game to suit hard and grass courts. Nadal didn't come into his own until 07-08, where his game moved above federer's.

    Like i said already, federer won his first 10 or so gs with ease because of lack of quality, Philippoussis, safin, hewitt, roddick, agassi, Baghdatis those players weren't exactly top class, poo and rod relied on their serve but their overall game is poor, agassi was old, if hewitt could be #1 it showed the field was weak

  • @wadewi also mind you nadal won 5 of his 8 gs against federer showed how good he is.

    anyways i'm not saying federer is bad or anything, or course not. Just saying when people say he is the greatest... but the greatest has someone that consistently beat him, doesn't really show how great he is

  • @den525 obviously you are nadal's fan and you know little about tennis.many pros claimed that federer's has been no 1 in the toughest era. Philippoussis, safin, hewitt, roddick and agassi were weak?are you kidding me?if someone in the 100th ranking beat the no 1 so consistently for example,is he the best in the world?no coz he can't probably beat anyone else.in any sport,an athlete's success is determined by their achievement.in this case,the grand slam.

  • @zanspiza no not nadal fan, just a neutral. You are obviously a federer fan if you think he was in the toughest era, NO pros have claimed that. Those players listed clearly showed the weakness of that era. Poo and Rod only had serve and that's it. Rod has shown that throughout his career. Agassi was towards the very end of his career. hewitt only chases the ball and doesn't have any purchase.

    That someone is 1st/2nd in the world, with 8 grand slams, he is not a nobody.

  • @zanspiza athlete's success most of the time is determined by their achievement but not all. The best F1 driver ever was Senna, he only had 3 WC. Like i said Federer is one of the greatest and his achievements have been amazing. Nadal is one of the greatest as well!! and when you have 2 "one of the greatest" in an era... and who is the better players h2h? nadal.

    Nadal can catch or come close to federer's grand slam record. And all nadal's grand slams has come when Federer was at his peak.

  • @den525

    You clearly don't have a full understanding if you think h2h is the only factor that determines who is a better player.

    If we were to take your logic, we would have to conclude that Krajicek was better than Sampras. Let's wait until both men have retired and then we can see who achieved more.

  • @Ryan81M and you clearly don't know much about tennis at all, as most people who have watched the game long enough would know the early 2000s was probably the weakest era in decades.

    I'm NOT using only h2h logic, Nadal is a great player in his own right, 8 grand slams at such a young age.

    I think you need to get something straight, Krajicek occasionally beat Sampras, Nadal consistently beat federer. 14-7, no one offs, and majority of nadal's wins were in grand slams. jog on kid.