Fededer not winning the French has been bugging me lately!?

Question

For almost five years I've been in total awe of Federer's tennis brilliance. To me he is the greatest tennis player that has ever lived. That being said, the missing French title has been bugging that sh.. out of me.

Health and inspiration intact, I know he's got another 5 or 6 shots at the d**n French. I know Nadal has been the hindrance, but Fed please figure out a way to beat Nadal just once on the stupid French clay for the sake of history and the millions of adoring fans. What do you guys think?

Answer 1

It is incorrect to say Federer can't be called the GOAT unless he wins the French. He does not need the French. All he needs to be considered the GOAT is 1) to break Pete's 14 grand slams, OR 2) win the French.

If winning all grand slams is a criteria for greatness, then that would make Agassi greater than Sampras, which is an absurd conclusion. Thus the premise is wrong. The career slam is not necessary.

Another answerer above said that if FEderer does not win the French, then he'll not be the best on clay. HUH? Even if Federer does win the French, no one will ever consider him a better clay courter than Nadal. According to that criteria, you have to be better than Nadal on clay to be the best of all time. That would mean only Borg qualifies. Oh but wait, Borg never won the US or Australian Open. I guess then, no one is the greatest of all time. According to that answerer's logic, it's like having a 100 m race where everyone loses.

Oh by the way, welcome back Vick. We need good Q&Aers back in this tennis section. Too many trolls and stalkers around here.

Answer 2

Its actually qute refreshing to once and awhile see ppl having a legitimate well thought out discussion about tennis. All this

"Rafa will beat Federer because i say so" or "Rafa will win because he so s**y!" or even "Roger because he kInG of GrAsS" nonsense is starting to grate on my nerves.

On topic: It has been bugging me that Fed hasnt been able to win the French yet, but saying that winning their is a pre-requisite for even being considered as GOAT material is ridiculous. Sampras, Agassi,Borg all considered Roger to be the most gifted natural player theyve ever seen. Surely their praise (having collectivel;y won 33 slams) is more than enough to convince you that hes up there already.

Fed to win in 3 or 4 sets in the final.

Answer 3

Interesting debate, and I'm sorry this has been bugging you, it bugs all fans of Federer's, I think. I'm a fan, and I know I would LOVE to see him get a French Open title.

Because different people have different criteria for determining the greatest ever, this is a discussion that will never end to everyone's satisfaction. Even so, everyone has an opinion, so here's mine:

If Federer surpasses Sampras's slam record, he will have definitely earned the right to be called GOAT. More than 14 slam titles HAS to be respected, I don't care where you're from.

And let's not forget that Federer is no slouch on clay - he has won clay tournaments and has proven to be the 2nd best clay courter in the world for the last few years. Sampras was nowhere near the clay courter that Roger is - neither was McEnroe or any of the others that notoriously couldn't win the French. Roger has a legitimate fighting chance to do it one day.

This, in addition to being far and way the best on all other surfaces, makes him a dominant figure in the game. His achievements, despite being pushed by Nadal, are absolutely mind-boggling.

For me, I'm just enjoying watching him play while I have the chance. He's amazing, and I too hope he gets at least one French title before he's done. Even if he doesn't though, he will still have to be part of any serious discussion of GOAT.

Cheers!

Answer 4

For me, Federer will still be the Greatest Player of All Time if he can surpass Sampras 14 Grand Slams record regardless any result he gets in French Open.  If he can win more than 14 Grand Slams, it shows that he deserve some respect.  He was so unlucky that THE GREATEST CLAYCOURTER OF ALL TIME appear in his era.  If it wasn't Nadal, he had won The French Open at least thrice.  I think other than Nadal, he can beat anyone on clay (he beat Nadal once before on clay!!).  Even Sampras can't reach the final of the French.  Borg did not win the U.S Open & Aussie Open.  Rod Laver and Roy Emerson did win all of them but most of the Grand Slam were played on Grass and Federer has already surpass Laver in terms of no of slam and tie with Emerson and highly likely will surpass him in the future.  Agassi did complete all four but he only manage to win 8 grand slam, 4 fewer than Federer.  Others tennis great such as Rosewall, McEnroe, Connors, Lendl, Wilander, Becker, Edberg, they either can't beat Federer in terms of no of slam or can't even reach the final of all four.  Therefore, as a 3 times French Open runner-up doesn't hurt his chance to become THE GREATEST PLAYER OF ALL TIME if he can surpass 14 Grand Slam record..

Answer 5

he would never win it

Answer 6

the best ones not means the perfect one.

:-)

http://www.gtbshop.com/

Answer 7

The only way I see Federer winning the French is if Nadal gets ousted before the final and/or if Nadal isn't 100% healthy when they play each other.

Answer 8

he is not bad on clay.. infact he is a good clay court player.. but he is always going up agains't a super good Nadal on Clay..

other problem is too.. clay is all about defence, and running around... nadal is so strong...

also, federer likes to control rallies from the baseline.. the ball bounces higher on clay.. that hinders some of his shots...

i think federer will win it next year... because nadal will beat him tommorow at wimbledon.. so he will get him back

Answer 9

Federer was just outplayed at the French. Can't Nadal fans say the same thing about him winning the US Open or Wimbledon?

Answer 10

I beg to differ.

Federer cannot be called the "best tennis player that has ever lived" unless he wins the French.

How can you call someone the best tennis player ever if he cant win the ultimate tournament of all surfaces. Not winning French means that he is not the best tennis player on clay. Hence he is not the best tennis player ever to live.

Federer is close to being the best tennis player that has ever lived. But you gotta win the french!!

Answer 11

Federer will win french next year. That is my dream. I don't care about me. I care only about federer winning all the slams. not career grand slams but, all 4 slams in one year. Federer really deserve it. He would. why nadal is there distracting federer not to win french open?? ****....why??/ nadal is nothing. all nadal do is distracting federer only on french open when nadal can't even win anything but french. Federer will win the french next year. this year should be new record of 6 consecutive wimbledon titles. Federer should figure out the way to beat nadal on clay to be perfect player. Federer is already the greatest tennis player in tennis history. He just only need to be perfect now to win the clay season.

Answer 12

I'm sorry you've been bugged by this, but rest assured however you must be feeling pales in comparison to how Federer himself must feel about not having won the French Open yet.  He may never win it as long as Nadal is around.

Answer 13

FEDERER WILL NOT WIN THE FRENCH OPEN UNLESS NADAL IS DEAD. NUFF SAID

Answer 14

I think Federer is definitely one of the best tennis players in the world. However i dont think he`s the greatest, not just yet until he does win that French Open. The way i see it to be classed as one of the ``greats`` you have to win on all grandslams. For e.g Agassi !!! Ok sooo Roger has won many grandslams compared to Agassi which is amazing however he`s not won them all, question is as he gets older can he do it ? Ofcourse he can its just going to be tougher and whether has motivation for the game stays high considering how many times he`s lost their to Rafa !!! I think Nadal will win on all surfaces he definitely wont win as many grand slams as roger but i think at some point in Rafa`s career he will manage at least once to win all the grand slams :) ! Vamos Rafa

Answer 15

yes, i was surprised (and sad!) that Federer lost to Nadal...although Nadal is a great athlete and fighter, Federer is arguably better than him at these tactics. But you have to give credit to Nadal b/c he played great...i guess it just wasn't Fed's day!