Roger Federer v Lleyton Hewitt: 2004 TMC Final Part 2

Roger Federer v Lleyton Hewitt: 2004 TMC Final Part 2

Category:

Sports

Tags:

• roger
• federer
• lleyton
• hewitt

[69wiwi69]

lol even in 2004 commentators already said that he could become best player in history. Would they say that when Nadal becomes no 1? No. Why? because you don't have to watch Federer' s results to see he has talent.

Federer isn't the best player in history becaus he won 15 grand slams, he won 15 grand slams because he is the greatest player in history!!!

he is a genius!!!

[AAMLfan]

I love how he's so freakin calm, silent and expressionless throughout the match...then "YEAH!!"

:D

[QuantumMaths]

7:39

"Perhaps the best player of *all time*."

This said with ONLY 4 grand slams to his name. Top commenter is correct.

[ancasilviana]

@89Pleasek i couldn't agree more on this. it's the exact same feeling i've been having for years. pity that everyday fed isn't 2004 fed

[69wiwi69]

@nvkhuang819 I said "Would they say that when Nadal becomes no 1" I didn't talk about Nadal at 17 years old.

you must admit that the only time you hear Nadal can become the greatest is when people are impressed by his quick results.

Ivanisevic said Fed was the greatest player to have ever touched a racquet when Fed won his second title.

Djokovic and Nadal won their first grandslams younger, but nobody said they were genius

It seems obvious when you see roger that you see a perfect technique

[nvkhuang819]

@69wiwi69 by this time in 2004 i believe fed had already won wimbledon twice, australia once, and us once, yes?

nadal at this point was...17? just starting to become solid on tour with no wins under his belt. he was new, ranked 47, had talent, but had only been in a handful of big matches. there was no indication he would be great because his career hadn't even taken off yet.

did anyone know fed at 17? no.

fed's a genius, but when nadal took him down a few times people were talking too.

[89Pleasek]

Nadal was not even mentioned as the potential greatest of all time untill he won the US Open (9th Slam) and some still treat him as a clay courter with decent results on other surfs

There was already talk about Federer's future domination after he won the 2003 Masters Cup in style (remember he only had 1 single Slam!) and McEnroe (who now jumped on the Nadal bandwagon -freaking glory hunter!) said that Federer could be the greatest player of all time before he even won his first US Open in 2004

[69wiwi69]

@irfanulhaq1 it's true it's not very fairplay from fed fans to say "he's the greatest cause he won more slams" and then "he's the greatest cause he's more talented" when his record is in danger.

but I just wanted to say that I am a fed fan not because he wins. Federer is a genius and I don't think anybody will have his talent.

[irfanulhaq1]

@69wiwi69 yeh but at the end it aint gnna matter, its only gnna matter who has more grand slams, and if rafa overtakes him hes the greatest no doubt,

[foul01]

@89Pleasek

and some of these guys have seen scored some impressive wins over Sampras and Agassi (a few even with positive head-to-heads)

and in comes Federer,

..."what competition?"

[aleztfu]

wow at the end of 2004 he had already cut the ponytail

[89Pleasek]

the way he was dealing with competition in 2004 is beyond imagination, Roddick, Safin, Hewitt, Nalbandian, Ferrero, Coria all in their primes, Henman enjoying his best tennis, Moya, Agassi still dangerous and Federer beat everyone of them. I really think that Federer was at his absolute best 2004, he was fresh, wanted every tournament badly, since 2005 it's more routine