Time for change in mens game?

Question

i really like federer but i think it is time some of these young guys stepped up and beat federer. not to lose 1 set shows how pathetic mens tennis is in now.the second djokovic lost, u knew federer would be unlucky to lose more than 40 points in his matches. even though i like fed, its starting to be really become boring when 1 player wins everything at wimbledon. nadal has to win this wimbledon to give wimbledon some real excitement or ppl would gradually become less interested and get bored of this dominance by federer! i have even seen hate towards fed for his dominance and increasingly talking himself up sayin he can win the golden slam,etc! even though i dont like novak, he does have a point about fed winning everythin, and if it wasnt for nadal, fed would totally have owned mens tennis since 2004 winning nearly every slam! i mean when ppl cant take a bloody set off him or even put up a decent challenge unless its nadal or novak,it really gets dull as a tennis fan!

Answer 1

I agree with you to a certain extent, but I think Wimbledon has been really exciting this year so I'm not bothered if the final is a bit boring.

Answer 2

somehow I find federer boring and it is not only his dominance. whatever his anger management instructor said to him the result is that, perfect as he is, he seems more clinical than passionate on court. As for his being dethroned I guess he still need to win the french. that question -who wins first nadal at W or Fed at garros- will add excitement to mens tennis for some time unless of course Nadl triumphs tomorrow

Answer 3

I LOVE Federer and yr qstin is rlly hrd to read.

He's just too good. Change will come after he retires. Wait!

Answer 4

idk

Answer 5

blah blah blah

*yawn*

Answer 6

Here we go again

The fleet, lissom seraph of the lawns, whose temperament flows like a cool stream over the rocky bed of his desire," is how one of this paper's sports writers described him this week.

But not everybody gets it.

Outrageously, some would bracket Roger in this gallery of bores.

The reasons offered are usually (a) he's Swiss and (b) he's so damned cool under pressure. Well, prejudice against Switzerland aside, to my mind the case against Federer is one of sour grapes.

He has dominated the grass game since 2004. He is as equable in victory as in defeat, bespeaking a confidence that I and fellow Federettes everywhere find more alluring than any Murrayesque petulance or Henmanlike fist-pumping. But detractors should note his self-control is hard won. In fact, in his early years, he was prone to tantrums and even racket-flinging. Then he grew up.

The appeal of Roger isn't only that he possesses a forehand that John McEnroe calls, "the greatest shot in our sport". With dash beyond his years, he relishes the old-world glamour of lawn tennis. Rather than flaunt his fine, loose-limbed musculature, Federer has single-handedly brought class back to the tradition of Wimbledon whites.

If you want dull look to the mud wrestling Williams sisters.

Answer 7

true...the younger players have to step it up...