ORIGINALISSIMO IL PEZZO IN UN PROBABILE MOMENTO DI IMPASSE CON MARTINA HINGIS ROGER SI METTE A SUONARE LA CHITARRA,BASTA CHE SUONA LA RACCHETTA ANCORA PER QUALCHE ANNO.
royer es el mejor a pesar de k a veces nadal le gane pero royer siempre sera historia en el tenis el es leyenda el unico k ha logrado 16 gran slam y seguira haciendo mas .............bravo royer eres el mejor de toooooooooooooooodooooooooooooooosssssssssssss
Although I do think that Fed is at the very least tied for greatest with Laver (and maybe not, maybe Rog is the best by far) I think matches between him and Sampras on grass at Wimbledon would make for the most entertaining, competitive tennis in history.
Well, the only players now that have any chance of being talked about in the same sentence are probably Samparas (14 slams) and Nadal (Federer's arch nemesis)
Too me the "best ever" question comes down to this..If Laver, Lendl, Connors, Sampras, Borg, Becker, Agassi, Nadal, Federer..etc had the best tennis day of their lives..who would win? That's an impossible question to answer. Based on pure skill I trully believe Federer is the best ever. His stats back that. His record backs that. The fact that he won grand slams on 3 surfaces backs that. His size, power, and mental toughness back that..
The only great I wonder about is Laver. I wonder if he had been born in this time, with his talent and tactical genius, might he have been able to top Fed on a consistent basis?
How much do you think size comes into it? Would Laver in your view be at a huge disadvantage because of his height of only 5'8 versus a 6'1 Roger?
man, no shit. i am typing this with one hand ... i just got done watching thisand went into my kitchen where i proceeded to "hit" a slice serve ... i slammed my hand into the top of my coffee maker.
He may be the best ever, but we will never know as he is not tested by good enough competition. The men's division is the weakest it's been in decades.
I kinda agree, kinda disagree. For sure Safin, Roddick, Hewitt aren't in the same league as Courier, Kafelnikov, or Rafter. Talent wise, I think many of Feds rivals are the equivalent or superior of Pete's, but mentally they are far inferior. The result is that they don't compete as well as Pete's rivals did, and that's why Fed's get dominated by him so routinely, whereas Pete's could stage upsets on him. I think Nadal is a slightly stronger player than Agassi however.
r u blind or something... roddick ,nadal, djokovic, karlovic,base players like ferrer gonzales,..he has beaten them all and i think very easily...i dont know dude u sure gotta open ur eyes...
you have to be joking... nadal, murray, djokovic even del potro and roddick have tested federer to the limit they are all badass and are more than strong enough competitors
Well i would say Pete Sampras was a great player, but Federer is probably the best tennis player ever so far. Pete Sampras did have more rivals, but the only reasons he had more rivals was because he wasnt as dominant as Federer. If Federer were like Sampras, Nadal would have beatin him many more times and roddick, Hewitt, Safin, Murry, Djokovic, would have been more of a threat. And Pete Sampras could not hold his #1 spot for very lonf and Federer held it for 237 weeks. So Federer is the BEST!!
Great video, hopefully Roger will pull of the French Open this year and get the career slam before Nadal, in which case I'll have to change my user name.
dude, as matts wilander said a couple years ago, the fed has small cajones. and we're completely seeing this in his horrific performances since the french open of last year. do you really believe that djokovic and murray are so much better than nalbandian, or safin? heck no.but they're performing much better against federer than either of those players. it's simple; they're not giving federer matches. they don't give up and they don't genuflect when he walks on court.
Mats Wilander is one to talk. How many majors did he win? 5 or 6? Not even half of what Roger has achieved. Roger Federer was number one for 4 1/2 years straight and so I don't think its unusual to expect him to have a dip in his game now. Every player goes through them, without exception.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
sorry folks. you cannot be the GOAT if you consistently lose to one of your contemporaries. not possible. pete sampras did not have a losing record to ANY one of his contemporaries (he was 4-5 vs. the ten years his junior Hewitt). federer has a significant losing record vs. nadal (6-13) and a burgeoning losing record vs. murray (2-5). these are simply not acceptable stats for the supposed GOAT.
Here's a stat: Roger won 3 slams in a single season 3 different times. How many times did Sampras do that? Also, how many times did Sampras make a French Open final?
let me be clear as possible. sampras' class of contemporaries were FAR greater players and competitors than is the class of federer's contemporaries. i consider contemporaries to be players within 3-4 years of your age. this probably seems arbitrary, but keep in mind how tennis players age. most of the greatest recent mega champions (sampras, mcenroe, borg, lendl, becker, edberg, etc.) won most of their slams between the ages of 22-26. nadal, djokovic, murray are not federers contemporaries
so, sampras' contemporaries were becker, agassi, courier, chang, kafelnikov, rafter, ivanisevic, muster, brugera. these players are FAR better and stronger competitors, as a group, than the fed's contemporaries: who are hewitt, safin, rodick, davydenko, ljubicic, robredo, nalbandian. the fed's contemporaries are, generally mental midgets. now that fed is facing players who are not afraid of him, you see how hes going down to them. murray is not a better player than nalbandian, hes a mentally
tougher player. same for djokovic. i like both murray and djokovic. but what gives them a better chance against federer is that they don't give him sets in the locker room, before the match has even begun. and, of course, this is obviously true of federer's greatest nemesis, NADAL. what federer was was the beneficiary of a time in tennis where there was much money for any player who could make it into the top 10. they were lazy or unfocused, or both. sampras' contemporaries would have
cleaned the clock of federer's contemporaries in their respective primes (so don't quote me stats about how fed's contemporaries actually did against players 10 years older than them). that's why federer is NOT the GOAT/BOAT. and that's why he will likely not surpass sampras' record of 14 majors.
I agree; He's the best of our time but i don't think the best ever. Compare ages is useless, but also consider Federer better than Laver, Connors, Borg, McEnroe, Edberg, Sampras, etc... just because he's won more GS, is not a very serious way to judge.
Him and Nadal have won in total 20 of the 24 GS in the last 6 years, which means that they have no competence; that's because of their irregular rivals.
In spite of that i'm a Roger's fan; in recent history only Edberg had a similar technique.
Hewitt Safin and Roddick all owned (admittedly not in his prime) Sampras.
Furthermore, don't even try to tell me that players like Agassi and Rafter didn't choke away slams to Sampras, or that one time French Open winner Chang was a real threat.. Mental strength was Sampras' greatest attribute other than a nearly unbreakable serve that would carry him through match after match.
Right...tell that to Lleyton Hewitt at the 2000 US Open, Marat Safin at the 2001 US Open, and Andy Roddick at the 2002 US Open.
"Mental Strength was Sampras' greatest attribute"
Well...supposing that's true, THAT"S THE MOST IMPORTANT ELEMENT IN TENNIS. Witness Safin, who was extremely talented but had no mental focus, what happened to him?He retired early with only 2 slams in his pocket, as opposed to Sampras' FOURTEEN.
I know that genius, but Sampras was ten years older than all of them when he lost to them, nowhere near his prime. You honestly think that Hewitt, Safin, and Roddick were better players than Sampras?!!!?
You may have a point there to some extent but I don't think players like Hewitt, Safin, Roddick would have been considered slouches if not for Federer's godlike level of play from 04-06.
And although Nadal doesn't fit your category of contemporaries...I can only imagine how Sampras would have fared against a high looping lefty forehand to his backhand...Sampras struggled with the high backhand even more so than Federer.
We'll never know that, but even statistics say that Sampras had tougher rivals; In titles, in game quality, in constance, etc. About Safin and Roddick, they've owned Sampras when Pete was 30.
I have no doubt that Federer would be one of the 5 - or even 3 - best players of the 90s, but he couldn't have win 14 Grand Slams in only 6 years against such tough rivals.
Well, these arguments about who had the greater rivals are slippery at best. If Sampras had been more dominant, his rivals would have obviously had less impressive statistics. We can't reward him for being less dominant and punish Federer for being more dominant. That makes no sense.
The truth is, Sampras wasn't even a threat to win on slow courts. In my mind, that is what puts him below Fed. Fed would have probably won 5 French Opens by now if he had played in Sampras' era.
That's true: suppose all that is just a game of hypotesis. I really admire Roger; but i've asked myself many times "what he could do if he would play in the 90s?". Off course, the same question could also be different: "what Sampras would have done if Federer was a player of the 90s?"... I think if both were playing in the same era, no-one of them could have won more than 7 or 8 GS... The record would be still Emerson's, hehe.
what are you even talking about? I was comparing Pete's record against the players he beat at the Big W v. Fed's record in order to make the point about competitiveness of their respective eras.
Federer, what a champion! 14+ slams (prob if he avoids nadal!), became nadals bunny, cried like a baby once the battering from nadal took its toll. He will always have that in the back of his mind and so will any objective tennis viewer that he got owned by nadal repeatedly!. His legacy as the greatest is a joke irrespective of what he wins and i am glad this illusion of him being the greatest is being eroded very quickly every time nadal batters the shit out of him.
Roger Federer has been through tough times, overcame obstacles, positive, happy, nice, a great tennis player, and a great man. Yeah, he has lost his temper in the early days, but so what? he changed and stopped that. He is the best tennis player I have ever known.
Roger. Please fuck off back to switzerland and retire for good. Nadal is going to keep fucking you good. If you dont, it will get very embarrassing for you and your pathetic fans will not be able to cope and will get depressed and suicidal. So for everybodys' sakeplease dont show your face on a tennis court ever again. You know it makes sense.
aw, now i confirm you're just a bunch of resentful losers who can't cope with your lame asses and admit federer is much better than nadal. nadal is all about running a lot and passion but he's gonna destroy his knees and other joints very soon if he keeps hitting the ball so hard without using the brain .
federer sure did stomp a mudhole in sampras and walk it dry, when sampras was at the very very top of his game and roger was just up and coming. king fed need 25+ slams and 5 of each slam. yes he needs the french at least 3 times, best would be 5 times!
umm im a huge roger fan too..but why would he need 25?? he could very well get 60 grand slams..lol but he dosint need to many more to proove hes the best ever..
Hey, I was wondering...where did you get that footage of Roger at the 2003 wimbledon...the footage of the interview where he started crying.?I've been looking everywhere for that interview and can't find it!
this is triumth!
ssmilbah 10 months ago
ORIGINALISSIMO IL PEZZO IN UN PROBABILE MOMENTO DI IMPASSE CON MARTINA HINGIS ROGER SI METTE A SUONARE LA CHITARRA,BASTA CHE SUONA LA RACCHETTA ANCORA PER QUALCHE ANNO.
alexadrebirre 1 year ago
@alexadrebirre Non ti preoccupare,ci regalera ancora grandi giocate!
johannjackunterweger 1 year ago
royer es el mejor a pesar de k a veces nadal le gane pero royer siempre sera historia en el tenis el es leyenda el unico k ha logrado 16 gran slam y seguira haciendo mas .............bravo royer eres el mejor de toooooooooooooooodooooooooooooooosssssssssssss
jessmad100 1 year ago
Although I do think that Fed is at the very least tied for greatest with Laver (and maybe not, maybe Rog is the best by far) I think matches between him and Sampras on grass at Wimbledon would make for the most entertaining, competitive tennis in history.
jfkpublicservant 1 year ago
Comment removed
donkerskaduwee 2 years ago
Well, the only players now that have any chance of being talked about in the same sentence are probably Samparas (14 slams) and Nadal (Federer's arch nemesis)
frankystein12 2 years ago
Comment removed
omniexistus 2 years ago
... and yet you're the one hunting around federer videos looking to embarass yourself. Face it. You're the biggest fag around.
Sonic2710 2 years ago
Too me the "best ever" question comes down to this..If Laver, Lendl, Connors, Sampras, Borg, Becker, Agassi, Nadal, Federer..etc had the best tennis day of their lives..who would win? That's an impossible question to answer. Based on pure skill I trully believe Federer is the best ever. His stats back that. His record backs that. The fact that he won grand slams on 3 surfaces backs that. His size, power, and mental toughness back that..
jeffgiles2006 2 years ago
@jeffgiles2006 I agree with you for the most part.
The only great I wonder about is Laver. I wonder if he had been born in this time, with his talent and tactical genius, might he have been able to top Fed on a consistent basis?
How much do you think size comes into it? Would Laver in your view be at a huge disadvantage because of his height of only 5'8 versus a 6'1 Roger?
jfkpublicservant 1 year ago
man, no shit. i am typing this with one hand ... i just got done watching thisand went into my kitchen where i proceeded to "hit" a slice serve ... i slammed my hand into the top of my coffee maker.
mawmaw87 2 years ago
Ha! Fed playing guitar at the start of this vid cracks me up for some reason.
Samprasisthebest 2 years ago 5
the same here;)
RubinJayJay 2 years ago
He rocks.
Samprasisthebest 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
He may be the best ever, but we will never know as he is not tested by good enough competition. The men's division is the weakest it's been in decades.
Raindogs111 2 years ago
I kinda agree, kinda disagree. For sure Safin, Roddick, Hewitt aren't in the same league as Courier, Kafelnikov, or Rafter. Talent wise, I think many of Feds rivals are the equivalent or superior of Pete's, but mentally they are far inferior. The result is that they don't compete as well as Pete's rivals did, and that's why Fed's get dominated by him so routinely, whereas Pete's could stage upsets on him. I think Nadal is a slightly stronger player than Agassi however.
Samprasisthebest 2 years ago
r u blind or something... roddick ,nadal, djokovic, karlovic,base players like ferrer gonzales,..he has beaten them all and i think very easily...i dont know dude u sure gotta open ur eyes...
maviehs 2 years ago
you have to be joking... nadal, murray, djokovic even del potro and roddick have tested federer to the limit they are all badass and are more than strong enough competitors
565656gooner 2 years ago
Well i would say Pete Sampras was a great player, but Federer is probably the best tennis player ever so far. Pete Sampras did have more rivals, but the only reasons he had more rivals was because he wasnt as dominant as Federer. If Federer were like Sampras, Nadal would have beatin him many more times and roddick, Hewitt, Safin, Murry, Djokovic, would have been more of a threat. And Pete Sampras could not hold his #1 spot for very lonf and Federer held it for 237 weeks. So Federer is the BEST!!
streetguy1234 2 years ago 3
federer will get his no1 spot back if he wins wimbledon aswell. come on federer!!!! best ever!!!!
mikehuncho1 2 years ago
He is No. 1 now...
satishsatishiyer 2 years ago
@streetguy1234 And he did he not prove that today?
Scoclamor 1 year ago
he got french too...finally !
bluemoon2181 2 years ago
Great video, hopefully Roger will pull of the French Open this year and get the career slam before Nadal, in which case I'll have to change my user name.
Samprasisthebest 2 years ago
The sight of a long agony destroys a legend. It´s a big vitue to say goodbye on the right time
jamhiereus 2 years ago
dude, as matts wilander said a couple years ago, the fed has small cajones. and we're completely seeing this in his horrific performances since the french open of last year. do you really believe that djokovic and murray are so much better than nalbandian, or safin? heck no.but they're performing much better against federer than either of those players. it's simple; they're not giving federer matches. they don't give up and they don't genuflect when he walks on court.
geellis 2 years ago
Mats Wilander is one to talk. How many majors did he win? 5 or 6? Not even half of what Roger has achieved. Roger Federer was number one for 4 1/2 years straight and so I don't think its unusual to expect him to have a dip in his game now. Every player goes through them, without exception.
Ryan81M 2 years ago 2
Wilander is a jealous prick and always has been.
Ryan81M 2 years ago 3
thanks:) Nelly Furtado : Forca
ancsipancsiko 2 years ago
SONG NAME PLEASE?
very good video
rogeristhelord 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
sorry folks. you cannot be the GOAT if you consistently lose to one of your contemporaries. not possible. pete sampras did not have a losing record to ANY one of his contemporaries (he was 4-5 vs. the ten years his junior Hewitt). federer has a significant losing record vs. nadal (6-13) and a burgeoning losing record vs. murray (2-5). these are simply not acceptable stats for the supposed GOAT.
geellis 3 years ago
roger federer the best
kevin189618 2 years ago
Here's a stat: Roger won 3 slams in a single season 3 different times. How many times did Sampras do that? Also, how many times did Sampras make a French Open final?
bobomber 2 years ago 2
let me be clear as possible. sampras' class of contemporaries were FAR greater players and competitors than is the class of federer's contemporaries. i consider contemporaries to be players within 3-4 years of your age. this probably seems arbitrary, but keep in mind how tennis players age. most of the greatest recent mega champions (sampras, mcenroe, borg, lendl, becker, edberg, etc.) won most of their slams between the ages of 22-26. nadal, djokovic, murray are not federers contemporaries
geellis 2 years ago
so, sampras' contemporaries were becker, agassi, courier, chang, kafelnikov, rafter, ivanisevic, muster, brugera. these players are FAR better and stronger competitors, as a group, than the fed's contemporaries: who are hewitt, safin, rodick, davydenko, ljubicic, robredo, nalbandian. the fed's contemporaries are, generally mental midgets. now that fed is facing players who are not afraid of him, you see how hes going down to them. murray is not a better player than nalbandian, hes a mentally
geellis 2 years ago
tougher player. same for djokovic. i like both murray and djokovic. but what gives them a better chance against federer is that they don't give him sets in the locker room, before the match has even begun. and, of course, this is obviously true of federer's greatest nemesis, NADAL. what federer was was the beneficiary of a time in tennis where there was much money for any player who could make it into the top 10. they were lazy or unfocused, or both. sampras' contemporaries would have
geellis 2 years ago
cleaned the clock of federer's contemporaries in their respective primes (so don't quote me stats about how fed's contemporaries actually did against players 10 years older than them). that's why federer is NOT the GOAT/BOAT. and that's why he will likely not surpass sampras' record of 14 majors.
geellis 2 years ago
I've got a feeling the ol' Fedex still has a couple Wimbys/USOpens left in him but only time will tell.
bobomber 2 years ago 3
@bobomber Well, if today was any indication...Or this tournament...
Scoclamor 1 year ago
I agree; He's the best of our time but i don't think the best ever. Compare ages is useless, but also consider Federer better than Laver, Connors, Borg, McEnroe, Edberg, Sampras, etc... just because he's won more GS, is not a very serious way to judge.
Him and Nadal have won in total 20 of the 24 GS in the last 6 years, which means that they have no competence; that's because of their irregular rivals.
In spite of that i'm a Roger's fan; in recent history only Edberg had a similar technique.
TheAnkleSam 2 years ago
Hewitt Safin and Roddick all owned (admittedly not in his prime) Sampras.
Furthermore, don't even try to tell me that players like Agassi and Rafter didn't choke away slams to Sampras, or that one time French Open winner Chang was a real threat.. Mental strength was Sampras' greatest attribute other than a nearly unbreakable serve that would carry him through match after match.
bobomber 2 years ago 3
"Hewitt,Safin, and Roddick all owned Sampras"
Right...tell that to Lleyton Hewitt at the 2000 US Open, Marat Safin at the 2001 US Open, and Andy Roddick at the 2002 US Open.
"Mental Strength was Sampras' greatest attribute"
Well...supposing that's true, THAT"S THE MOST IMPORTANT ELEMENT IN TENNIS. Witness Safin, who was extremely talented but had no mental focus, what happened to him?He retired early with only 2 slams in his pocket, as opposed to Sampras' FOURTEEN.
Bottom line,you make me laugh.
Samprasisthebest 2 years ago
Safin, Hewitt and Roddick all have career winning records against Sampras.
Don't be a little crying fanboy please. I happen to agree with most of your assertions.
bobomber 2 years ago
I know that genius, but Sampras was ten years older than all of them when he lost to them, nowhere near his prime. You honestly think that Hewitt, Safin, and Roddick were better players than Sampras?!!!?
Samprasisthebest 2 years ago
You may have a point there to some extent but I don't think players like Hewitt, Safin, Roddick would have been considered slouches if not for Federer's godlike level of play from 04-06.
And although Nadal doesn't fit your category of contemporaries...I can only imagine how Sampras would have fared against a high looping lefty forehand to his backhand...Sampras struggled with the high backhand even more so than Federer.
bobomber 2 years ago
We'll never know that, but even statistics say that Sampras had tougher rivals; In titles, in game quality, in constance, etc. About Safin and Roddick, they've owned Sampras when Pete was 30.
I have no doubt that Federer would be one of the 5 - or even 3 - best players of the 90s, but he couldn't have win 14 Grand Slams in only 6 years against such tough rivals.
TheAnkleSam 2 years ago
Well, these arguments about who had the greater rivals are slippery at best. If Sampras had been more dominant, his rivals would have obviously had less impressive statistics. We can't reward him for being less dominant and punish Federer for being more dominant. That makes no sense.
The truth is, Sampras wasn't even a threat to win on slow courts. In my mind, that is what puts him below Fed. Fed would have probably won 5 French Opens by now if he had played in Sampras' era.
bobomber 2 years ago 3
That's true: suppose all that is just a game of hypotesis. I really admire Roger; but i've asked myself many times "what he could do if he would play in the 90s?". Off course, the same question could also be different: "what Sampras would have done if Federer was a player of the 90s?"... I think if both were playing in the same era, no-one of them could have won more than 7 or 8 GS... The record would be still Emerson's, hehe.
TheAnkleSam 2 years ago
You just might be right about that.
bobomber 2 years ago
sampras's main rival andre agassi said that federer is the best player he ever played against so its hard to argue otherwise.
mikehuncho1 2 years ago 2
@bobomber 1) 0, compared to 3 times so far for Fed!
2) 0, compared to 4 times in a row for Fed. 4 total so far!
Scoclamor 1 year ago
@Scoclamor
what are you even talking about? I was comparing Pete's record against the players he beat at the Big W v. Fed's record in order to make the point about competitiveness of their respective eras.
geellis 1 year ago
@geellis What am I talking about? Forget it for now. Lets talk about todays final vs Nadal! I'm all ears as!
Scoclamor 1 year ago
@geellis And what of Pete Sampras' record against the other players to win the big W during Pete's time? Richard Krajicek? Michael Stich?
Scoclamor 1 year ago
This is a great video, put together really well :)
picnic4 3 years ago
roger nazionale... sarai sempre il migliore! sei nato per essere un campione!
ajeje1234567890 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Federer, what a champion! 14+ slams (prob if he avoids nadal!), became nadals bunny, cried like a baby once the battering from nadal took its toll. He will always have that in the back of his mind and so will any objective tennis viewer that he got owned by nadal repeatedly!. His legacy as the greatest is a joke irrespective of what he wins and i am glad this illusion of him being the greatest is being eroded very quickly every time nadal batters the shit out of him.
cric321 3 years ago
OMG This video is GREAT ..Music Videos...Everything...
ROGER IS SIMPLY THE BEST!!!
THANKS FOR POSTING THIS VIDEO!!
TarkanFanatic 3 years ago 2
hes so gr8 and its obvious tht wimbledon is his favourite
blowingbubbles123 3 years ago 4
2:17 is so incredeble...
RubinJayJay 3 years ago 2
no one like roger simply the best foreverr...
rodrigocs666 3 years ago 4
Roger Federer has been through tough times, overcame obstacles, positive, happy, nice, a great tennis player, and a great man. Yeah, he has lost his temper in the early days, but so what? he changed and stopped that. He is the best tennis player I have ever known.
HSEperson 3 years ago 8
great video.thanks for posting this!
Sharky428 3 years ago 4
very nice.the song is good also
TheMasterOfTennis1 3 years ago 4
Roger is the best
faisal802 3 years ago 7
I love Roger!!!!
brailleonsundays 3 years ago 15
Roger is soo hottt xD Great vid xD
brunokicek 3 years ago 11
best playe ever no1
jebosamtimamu 3 years ago 8
This has been flagged as spam show
insisto...rafa nadal nummero 1 del mundo
erfhsrfh 3 years ago
de tu país.
Pectiniculus 3 years ago
GOOOOOOOOO ROGER!!!!
42RoXXs 3 years ago 4
thanks:))
ancsipancsiko 3 years ago
Oh i really liked this vid. I cant believe I didnt see it sooner. good job!
Bigbeautifulwoman 3 years ago
nadal suck...he's only an atlethe...he' s not a tennis player
RoGeRthebest92 3 years ago 7
This has been flagged as spam show
Roger. Please fuck off back to switzerland and retire for good. Nadal is going to keep fucking you good. If you dont, it will get very embarrassing for you and your pathetic fans will not be able to cope and will get depressed and suicidal. So for everybodys' sakeplease dont show your face on a tennis court ever again. You know it makes sense.
roger federer 2003-2007
cric321 3 years ago
aw, now i confirm you're just a bunch of resentful losers who can't cope with your lame asses and admit federer is much better than nadal. nadal is all about running a lot and passion but he's gonna destroy his knees and other joints very soon if he keeps hitting the ball so hard without using the brain .
Pectiniculus 3 years ago 7
AND.....why roger just try to be and atlethe and pass any round??
salvinho1985 3 years ago
naldal allways n1..haha ;) he playes a verry good tennis BUT the real n1 is rogerfederer...
besttenisplayer ever!!!
feanNo 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
nadal always number 1
erfhsrfh 3 years ago
since when? federer rules. he has the elegance of the game.. nadal only hits the ball hard, he's all muscles no brain. ahhahha
dreamgirl23 3 years ago 7
This has been flagged as spam show
vamos rafaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
salvinho1985 3 years ago
why would someone write a comment for Nadal under a video dedicated to Nadal's rival???
just wondering.
NIKAFRO2 3 years ago 9
forca nelly furtado
vicibibilici 3 years ago
como se llama esta cancion, por favor m lo puedes decir?
luisluisluis86 3 years ago
forca nelly furtado
vicibibilici 3 years ago
nadal great player but has he won 5 wimbeldon titles in succession like this man has..federer always number 1!
00cravenk 3 years ago 7
He's a great tennis player.
He deserves to stay at the top of the ATP Ranking for many more weeks!
HE'S MY FAVORITE TENNIS PLAYER!!!
pqmhe99 3 years ago 6
Not only is he the best player ever...but he's also such a well-mannered gentleman...i love him..:)
vrush253 3 years ago 8
He´s the greatest athlete ever.
ischtwan1 3 years ago 9
federer sure did stomp a mudhole in sampras and walk it dry, when sampras was at the very very top of his game and roger was just up and coming. king fed need 25+ slams and 5 of each slam. yes he needs the french at least 3 times, best would be 5 times!
stealthpakfa 3 years ago 4
umm im a huge roger fan too..but why would he need 25?? he could very well get 60 grand slams..lol but he dosint need to many more to proove hes the best ever..
jnicholsgotalknetau 3 years ago 5
to be fair sampras was not at the top of his game in 2001, but of course federer wasn't either
bobomber 2 years ago
Hey, I was wondering...where did you get that footage of Roger at the 2003 wimbledon...the footage of the interview where he started crying.?I've been looking everywhere for that interview and can't find it!
Great Video!
keckarose 4 years ago
yeah the best ever and a charming player ever:)
incyvincy 4 years ago 9