The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Federer is out then...didn't expect that!
Reply 7961
Federer to announce his retirement in the next few days.
Reply 7962
Could be for the best. Nadal might have 6-0 6-0 6-0 against Federer on this form. Really disgusting performance - should really reconsider his career and aims at this point.
Reply 7963
Original post by Roger1
Oh shut up. He isn't a wuss like your guy was between 04-09 to face him at the US Open.

I dont see how you can say that it wasn't until 5 years on tour until Federer first made his first US open final. Ediaat.:angry:
Can't believe he lost, for some reason he didn't seem on form today. Perhaps he'll have a better 2014 but until then he should seriously get things under way.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 7965
Original post by ubi1
I dont see how you can say that it wasn't until 5 years on tour until Federer first made his first US open final. Ediaat.:angry:


But Nadal was an early bloomer unlike Federer. What was he doing losing to mugs like Mikael, Gonzalez, Blake, when he was beating Federer on hard courts in 2004 in Fed's prime? And you call me an idiot, after all you post is idiotic childish stuff.

Nadal is just an opportunist. Deal with it.
(edited 10 years ago)
Reply 7966
I would say Federer should quit while he's ahead but that ship has sailed a long time ago. He should've done a Bartoli and bowed out after Wimbledon 2012 because now it's just painful. :frown:
Reply 7967
2013 is the first year Federer hasn't reached a GS final since 2002...
Reply 7968
Original post by Roger1
But Nadal was an early bloomer unlike Federer. What was he doing losing to mugs like Mikael, Gonzalez, Blake, when he was beating Federer on hard courts in 2004 in Fed's prime? And you call me an idiot, after all you post is idiotic childish stuff.

Nadal is just an opportunist. Deal with it.

I will deal with it if you deal with Federer being a bigger opportunist from 03-07 you could also say 09 as well.
Reply 7969
Original post by Roger1
But Nadal was an early bloomer unlike Federer. What was he doing losing to mugs like Mikael, Gonzalez, Blake, when he was beating Federer on hard courts in 2004 in Fed's prime? And you call me an idiot, after all you post is idiotic childish stuff.

Nadal is just an opportunist. Deal with it.


Wow, didn't even watch the match. Shame Federer lost. Hope Murray wins the title now.
Reply 7971
Kohlschreiber on edge of taking first set from Nadal in the tiebreak.
Reply 7972
Lol Nadal's dropped a set. Wtf is going on today?! :rofl:
Reply 7973
Original post by ubi1
I will deal with it if you deal with Federer being a bigger opportunist from 03-07 you could also say 09 as well.


Lol, Federer was the best of his generation. But Nadal best years (2008, 10 and 13) were all classic examples of taking your opportunities. In 2008, Federer had mono, which destroyed his aura, his confidence to the point where he lost to Nadal on his yard.

Then 2010, Nadal 3 slam year, Federer began his proper decline after the AO and didn't do anything until the indoor season. Murray was injured and didn't do much either after the AO. Nole couldn't register a top 10 win until September FFS. Talk about luck.

And now obviously this year, where Federer is too old now. Nole isn't the player he was in the last couple years, slowly regressing back to his pre 2011 level. Andy only focusing on slams. I wish I had Nadal's luck, I would be so successful in my life by now.

And you mention 2009, there is no evidence to suggest that Federer would have lost to Nadal at Wimbledon, as he at that point and still leads the H2H on grass. FO, I agree he got lucky, but he deserved that luck unlike Nadal who won on his first outing in the US Open final after a cake draw, whereas Federer had already previously made 3 finals in a row.

And if Federer is a weak era champion, then what does that make Nadal too considering he has to play Federer in most of his major finals? Playing a weak champion in the final. Surely, that isn't so tough, is it?
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Roger1
Nadal is just an opportunist. Deal with it.


Original post by ubi1
I will deal with it if you deal with Federer being a bigger opportunist from 03-07 you could also say 09 as well.


You guys do realise that calling someone an "opportunist" isn't an insult, don't you? In fact, I'd say it's one of the greatest compliments you could pay anyone.
Reply 7975
Original post by Xotol


Oh, big deal. Crying is a human emotion. Women and men both cry.

And at least Federer was a man enough to cry in front of everyone, unlike your boy who locked himself in the room to cry after losing the wimbledon final 07.
Reply 7976
I think the most amazing thing about this performance is that Robredo didn't really have to play that much out of his mind.

All he had to do at points was get the ball into play and watch Federer choke. I'm sure Fed has lost to lower ranked and less glamorous players, but at least he managed to take them to more than 3 sets and they probably played out of their skin. For Fed to choke this much... it's just not feasible.
Reply 7977
Original post by TheMagicRat
You guys do realise that calling someone an "opportunist" isn't an insult, don't you? In fact, I'd say it's one of the greatest compliments you could pay anyone.


I agree with that. I just can't stand when butthurt Nadaltards call Federer an opportunist by pointing to his domination of the supposed "weak era", when Nadal himself had his fair share of luck with draws and his top rivals playing badly.
Reply 7978
Original post by Roger1
Oh, big deal. Crying is a human emotion. Women and men both cry.

And at least Federer was a man enough to cry in front of everyone, unlike your boy who locked himself in the room to cry after losing the wimbledon final 07.


It was a joke dude... but just listen to yourself atm...

And I'm not a Nadal fan. I like Federer more than him dude.
Ferrer to make a second slam final at this rate.

Latest