@fathemi i dont agree... sampras definitely was not at his prime if you look all his results at majors before that surprise us open win in 2002 were weak by his standard. sampras was already thinking about retirement at the stage where he palyed federer in 2001 but he was jsut waiting for a good result at a major before he bowed out. however, im not saying sampras wouldve beaten federer at his peak, im just saying the wimbledon matchup cant be used as a definitive ultimatum as to who was better.
@LuniaVideo he beat sampras in 5 sets at the wimbledon... and dont use that 'Sampras' was 30 years old excuse... cause Sampras was still playing like he was in his prime at that age..(hence why he won a grand slam the following year) tbh i think he could have gone on for a couple more years b4 he really started to deteriorate.
@fuzfighter better consistency now... seeing as federer isnt as physically capable.. plus i dont think he is so worried about winning grand slams anymore.. i think he is just playing tennis now for the fun of it/money/family etc.
Fucckkkkk - miss the days when Federer was a tennis god - he was lightyears ahead of the other players on tour - he could hit a shot with pin point accuracy, + he was the one that defied tennis conventions with all his insane shiots
he was the embodiment of grace, speed, elegance on the court
no longer tho - age has caught up with him - he can't keep up with improved nadal/djoko.
Altho current nadal/djoko was not as good as Federer was in his peak around 2006-9
@TraXXXtar Federer is a better shotmaker than both Nadal and Djoker, but most often he can't keep that play up a whole match. When he does, he wins. But both Djoker and Nadal has nowadays better consistency than Federer, especially over five sets.
@fathemi i dont agree... sampras definitely was not at his prime if you look all his results at majors before that surprise us open win in 2002 were weak by his standard. sampras was already thinking about retirement at the stage where he palyed federer in 2001 but he was jsut waiting for a good result at a major before he bowed out. however, im not saying sampras wouldve beaten federer at his peak, im just saying the wimbledon matchup cant be used as a definitive ultimatum as to who was better.
sid2day 6 hours ago 2
@LuniaVideo he beat sampras in 5 sets at the wimbledon... and dont use that 'Sampras' was 30 years old excuse... cause Sampras was still playing like he was in his prime at that age..(hence why he won a grand slam the following year) tbh i think he could have gone on for a couple more years b4 he really started to deteriorate.
fathemi 1 day ago
@fuzfighter better consistency now... seeing as federer isnt as physically capable.. plus i dont think he is so worried about winning grand slams anymore.. i think he is just playing tennis now for the fun of it/money/family etc.
fathemi 1 day ago
lol @1:37 he said run that shit down
ilmrd11707 4 days ago 2
@yogifcb Nadal - Federer 6-0 6-0 6-0
ComeonArod 6 days ago
hahahahaha keep dreaming roger ur time is up..!!!
TheD3JANO 1 week ago
@TraXXXtar hes getting older?
TheFooche 1 week ago
Fucckkkkk - miss the days when Federer was a tennis god - he was lightyears ahead of the other players on tour - he could hit a shot with pin point accuracy, + he was the one that defied tennis conventions with all his insane shiots
he was the embodiment of grace, speed, elegance on the court
no longer tho - age has caught up with him - he can't keep up with improved nadal/djoko.
Altho current nadal/djoko was not as good as Federer was in his peak around 2006-9
he needs to retire
cssftw100 1 week ago
@TraXXXtar Federer is a better shotmaker than both Nadal and Djoker, but most often he can't keep that play up a whole match. When he does, he wins. But both Djoker and Nadal has nowadays better consistency than Federer, especially over five sets.
fuzfighter 1 week ago
i love how the title used "federer" and "impossible" in the same sentence... I laughed.
blubird243 1 week ago