Am I the only one that feels like Roger Federer is now history?

Question

I mean, he's still obviously the second best tennis player in the world, but, I mean, we all loved the Fed for his ability to win and dominate everything but the French. I need someone to agree with me or disagree with me.

Answer 1

he i still good

Answer 2

If Roger loses the U.S. Open and Masters Cup, then he has something to prove next season.  To say he is finished would be BIG time premature.  If you look at the total stats of the Final today in London, you will see:

Points Won-

Federer- 204

Nadal- 209

That is hardly history...Wait until September!

Answer 3

Today's match was about as good as it gets.  Rog did struggle, and Raf played tremendous, but I have the feeling that Rog still has a couple years left before the age decline occurs.

Answer 4

I wouldn't class him as 'history', I mean, you can't deny that he showed tremendous spirit in the final at Wimbledon. I would definitely say however that this is his worst season of tennis in a few years now and may be on the steady decline, but no way is he 'history'.

Answer 5

no i do not really like tennis but raf has Rogers number

Answer 6

A top tennis player becomes history only if he gets injured (which will burden his game) or if he comes of age. Federer has neither both. At his current age of 26, I would say he still have at least 5 years ahead of him.

Federer is still ranked no.1 despite losing Wimbledon. He is still ahead of Rafa Nadal by 1,100 points in the ATP ranking. This means that Rafa need to win 3 more major grand-slams to overtake Federer at the no. 1 spot (that is, if Federer wouldn't be winning any of the future grand-slams anymore).

I am both a Federer fan and Rafa fan. It's heartbreaking for me to see either of them lose. I've got great respect for both players. Surely, the two of them had put back tennis into the sports limelight once again. They are indeed the deserving ambassadors of this sport. I just hope that Roger and Rafa will continue to play great tennis in years to come.

Answer 7

I disagree.  He started off really sluggish, but if he were "history", he would've dropped the third set too.  The fact that he even pushed the game to 5 sets, let alone 9-7, means he is definitely gonna stick around.

His first loss at Wimbledon in 6 years and all of a sudden he's history?  Come on...

Answer 8

no, roger isn't history.

however, nadal has beaten him four times already this year.

i think nadal will be a thorn in his side for a long, long time to come.

had federer not had aces in his arsenal today, the match would have been over at the third set.

Answer 9

Who told you that RF is history...he is a resilient player.

Answer 10

No ****** way.  The top contributor may not recall.  Remember, everyone is comparing Roger now to the Roger of the past 4 years wherein he had such a grip on men's tennis he was winning everything week in and week out.  Remember, Sampras did not win Wimbledon 7 consecutive times.  Sampras was not No. 1 for 286 consecutive weeks.  Roger won Wimbledon 5 consecutive times, 1 more than Sampras' 4 consecutive times and Roger has spent 72 consecutive weeks more than the old record of 160 weeks of Jimmy Connors.  Even if Fed loses the No. 1 spot now, he still has several years to be No. 1, even if it is non-consecutive to equal Sampras.  as it stands, he is only 54 weeks shy of the Sampras record.

Answer 11

Given the past 2 seasons, Roger has a better shot at not losing to Nadal at the US Open.  Nadal has a tendency to fade during the summer hard court season.  So, Roger is my early prediction to win the US Open.  I see Djokovic being the only player that might beat him, and I REALLY hope that doesn't happen.  I like Nadal, Federer, Safin, Roddick and just about every player on the Tour.  The only 2 people I don't like are Hewitt and Djokocvic.  And, I dislike Djockvic (and his family) much more than I do Hewitt, which says a lot...........

Answer 12

I'm not a Federer fan, but last time I checked, he didn't drop a set in Wimbledon until the Finals. So, to say he is 'history' is a bit of a stretch.  

Also, there are still the hard courts where his dominance is still pronounced.

Answer 13

Agreed. What we saw was a changing of the guard so to speak...in terms of confidence, Rafa has gained much but as for Roger, crying it out would do him good....

Nadal has closed the gap to 545 points in the South African Airways ATP Rankings behind Federer. Federer has 6,600 points to Nadal's 6,055. Nadal came into Wimbledon 1,145 points behind Federer.

Answer 14

I am  HUGE Federer fan and this loss has just been massively painful for my gut, heart and spirit. While I doubt we'll ever see another "golden age" like the one Federer created again, I don't think this is the absolute end for him. I do think he'll win some more big titles (he's too good not to) but will never be so comprehensively dominate as he was in past years. Besides Agassi, Roger is the only player that managed to make me take a big interest in following tennis, now that the "golden age" is over, I'll probably follow tennis much less, maybe catch a "big match" every now and then when they pop up. It's very sad, but in a way relieving. By no means am I a fan of Nadal, but you have to have a ton of respect for him, phenomenal doesn't begin to describe how he played, he's the champ for now and rightfully so. What remains to be seen is whether or not he can recreate another golden age, or if his level these last few months was him just REALLY being in the zone. Even if he can, I'll always be a Fed fan first and foremost and like I said, I'll probably follow tennis much less unless it's a huge match with Fed in it.

Answer 15

Agreed.

He is now the second best player in the world. The Federer optimists will say hard courts are his favorite, and Nadal's least. Let me remind you that earlier this year, they both reached the same round of hte Australian. Federer also got knocked out earlier than Nadal in Indian Wells and Miami. At the rate Nadal is going, I won't bet against him winning the US.

Federer's days of domination are over. He is not going to blaze past Pete. He'll be lucky to crawl past him on his hands and knees. I'm not sure Federer has it in him to win another grandslam.

This reminds me of Becker and Lendl in 1989. Lendl was still number one, but  Becker was now consistently beating him. Prior to 1989, Becker never really did great at the US Open, while Lendl was an 8 time finalist (3 time winner). Well Becker beat Lendl in the final of the US that year. So because Nadal has not done well at the US so far, look at the direction in which he is going. He's headed straight for US Open glory.