French Final -- Federer v. Nadal, call it

[poptart]

Nadal is looking to become the first man since Bjorn Borg (78-81) to win 4 straight French Opens.
Federer is looking to win his first French Open and become just the 6th man to win a 'career' slam.
Nadal owns Federer on dirt, with a 8-1 record against him on the surface, including 3-0 in Paris.

Bjorn Borg is the best clay courter I have ever seen, but when all is said and done I think Nadal will rightfully be mentioned in the same breath as him.

He's 27-0 at Roland Garros.
Make it 28-0 after tomorrow.

Nadal in 4 sets.

[Goober McTuber]

Amazing that Borg was the best on both clay and grass. And Borg himself says that if Federer wins tomorrow, he'd be the best ever.

[MuchoBulls]

The only French Open Final that matters:

[trev]

Nadal has it all. I'm going to block out the Federer half of my screen and just watch Nadal.

[L45B]

As long as Nadal is standing in his way, Federer just won't beat him at Roland Garros. The reverse is true at Wimbledon. I think both of these guys will eventually win the opposite slam, but it will have to be when the other one is either upset early or retired from playing. Nadal wins four in a row tomorrow. And Ana Ivanovic is arguably the hottest chick on the WTA tour.

[RumpleForeskin]

I hate to say this, but it kinda sucks that Federer's dominance is taking place during the time period of clay court's greatest player ever in Nadal. I have no dount that Federer would be a Grand Slam winner had he played during any other time period, because the only difference between him and Sampras is that Federer is great on clay, just that nobody will ever eclipse Nadal's skils on that surface.

I know Federer is not a popular champion but you can't deny his place among the greats in professional tennis. I think critics will never give him the credit he diserves because there isn't a true rival to Federer except on clay.

I honestly think if there was an equal to Federer like Connors to Mac or Borg to Connors, then Federer would be even better.

In my mind, by the time his career is over, he will be #1.

[Goober McTuber]

Federer is not a popular champion? I disagree. He is the classiest champion in any sport right now and it appears to me that the fans appreciate it. He is regularly mentioned when discussions of the greatest ever come up, though he has a little more work to do to displace Laver.

[Smackie Chan]

Federer is not a popular champion? I disagree. He is the classiest champion in any sport right now and it appears to me that the fans appreciate it. He is regularly mentioned when discussions of the greatest ever come up, though he has a little more work to do to displace Laver.

He suffers from the same problem Sampras did. Classy, humble, non-controversial, and better than everyone else, but perceived as boring. Compounding it is the fact that he has no rival on grass courts the way that Sampras had Agassi and Borg had McEnroe. Nadal is his clay court nemesis, but that hardly matters in the public's mind. And of course, most importantly, neither he nor Nadal are American, which makes the sport inconsequential here.

[PSUFAN]

Who stole poptart's password and avatar...and made him care about tennis?

[smackaholic]

I don't think anyone can step to Borg for the greatest evah title. Consider he walked away from the sport at his peak. He could have hung around and won another half dozen or so wimbledons and probably a bunch of other shit.

I hate that fukker for all the potential wars he and mac could have treated us to.

[Mister Bushice]

Just wait until the beijing olympics rolls into town. It's a clusterfuck over there already. The chinks are bailing out on their promises to allow journalists free access, and now they're teaching their own people the "Official" cheer:

"Add Oil?" Are they expecting some fucked up version of neckcar?

Add oil! Add oil!

Thu Jun 5, 2:52 PM ET

BEIJING (Reuters) - Beijing organizers are promoting an officially sanctioned chanting routine for Chinese spectators at August's Olympics, state media said Thursday.

Incorporating the ubiquitous Chinese sporting chant, "Jiayou" or "add oil," the four-step routine is designed to help spectators cheer in a "smooth and civilized manner" at the August 8-24 Games.

The chant will be promoted by television programs, video presentations and squads of cheering volunteers at the venues as well as by the education ministry, the People's Daily reported.

The routine begins with "Olympics -- add oil" accompanied by two claps and a double thumbs up, before continuing with "China -- add oil" with two more claps and raised fists.

The "China" and "Olympics" can be replaced to allow support for other countries or individuals, the paper said.

Possible lack of sporting etiquette has been a major concern for city authorities during preparations for the Games and a series of educational programs have been instituted.

Users of public transport in the Chinese capital are briefed on the rules of Olympic sports on special television screens, while special projects have taken place in many city schools to teach the children about the history of the Games.

[poptart]

Smackie is right on with the 'non-American' angle.
Federer would be a MEGA-star in the U.S. if he were American.

He's easily among the top 10 all-time players, and probably in the top 5, IMO.
He'll never win the French Open, though.
His window is coming to a close, due to age.
Not that he is really old yet, but he's getting there, in tennis terms, and clay is a young man's surface, and especially if it is not your BEST surface, although Federer is much better on clay than say, Sampras or McEnroe ever were.
If not for Nadal, Rog would have a couple/few French titles by now.
Oh well.

It says here that Nadal will unseat Federer as the top player in the world by either winning Wimbledon or the U.S. Open -- probably Wimbldeon.

JMO.

[L45B]

Compounding it is the fact that he has no rival on grass courts the way that Sampras had Agassi and Borg had McEnroe. Nadal is his clay court nemesis, but that hardly matters in the public's mind.

I would argue that Nadal is just as much a rival to Federer on grass courts as Agassi was to Sampras on grass courts. Agassi won Wimbledon before Sampras did, yet when Sampras started piling up gold trophies Agassi couldn't touch him at the All England Club head-to-head. Heck, they only played in one final-- Nadal & Federer have played in two. And let us not forget that Nadal took Federer to five sets last year in the final.

Actually, if one were to ask me who Sampras' biggest rival on grass courts was, I would probably put Ivanisevic, Rafter and Becker before Agassi.

[Goober McTuber]

I don't think anyone can step to Borg for the greatest evah title. Consider he walked away from the sport at his peak. He could have hung around and won another half dozen or so wimbledons and probably a bunch of other shit.

I hate that fukker for all the potential wars he and mac could have treated us to.

Borg never won the Australian or the US Open. Rod Laver won a calendar grand slam in 1962, and then was prevented from playing in grand slam tournaments for five years (age 24-28). He then came back and won another calendar grand slam in 1969. Do some reading. Laver is still widely considered the best ever. Borg is probably fifth.

[poptart]

In some order, my top 5 all-time might be ...

- Rod Laver
- Pete Sampras
- Roger Federer
- Bill Tilden
- Bjorn Borg

A few names that are in the next tier ...

Pancho Gonzalez
Jack Kramer
Don Budge
John McEnroe
Lew Hoad
Ken Rosewall
Elseworth Vines
Ivan Lendl
Jimmy Connors
Roy Emerson


There are just a whole lot of other names that could be in that 2nd tier.
That's a short list.

[bbqjones]

the only time i really followed tennis was when boris becker was killing wimbledon as a 17 year old. i have really nothing much to add.

[smackaholic]

the only time i really followed tennis was when boris becker was killing wimbledon as a 17 year old. i have really nothing much to add.

rack!

sin,

[smackaholic]

I don't think anyone can step to Borg for the greatest evah title. Consider he walked away from the sport at his peak. He could have hung around and won another half dozen or so wimbledons and probably a bunch of other shit.

I hate that fukker for all the potential wars he and mac could have treated us to.

Borg never won the Australian or the US Open. Rod Laver won a calendar grand slam in 1962, and then was prevented from playing in grand slam tournaments for five years (age 24-28). He then came back and won another calendar grand slam in 1969. Do some reading. Laver is still widely considered the best ever. Borg is probably fifth.

really not interested enough to read up on it and I ain't quite old enough to remember him playing. Actually, I remember him playing, but, he was well past his prime by then. Why did he miss all those tourneys? Yeah, I know. Goggle is my fliend.

[bbqjones]

becker won wimbledon in 1985. i dont know what month that tournament is played in, but that would have put me at 10-11. doesnt take a fester to remember that dude.

be quiet today smackonothin. its not going to go well for you.

[Get fucked]

the only time i really followed tennis was when boris becker was killing wimbledon as a 17 year old. i have really nothing much to add.

Well then just



Get fucked.

[Goober McTuber]

I don't think anyone can step to Borg for the greatest evah title. Consider he walked away from the sport at his peak. He could have hung around and won another half dozen or so wimbledons and probably a bunch of other shit.

I hate that fukker for all the potential wars he and mac could have treated us to.

Borg never won the Australian or the US Open. Rod Laver won a calendar grand slam in 1962, and then was prevented from playing in grand slam tournaments for five years (age 24-28). He then came back and won another calendar grand slam in 1969. Do some reading. Laver is still widely considered the best ever. Borg is probably fifth.

really not interested enough to read up on it and I ain't quite old enough to remember him playing. Actually, I remember him playing, but, he was well past his prime by then. Why did he miss all those tourneys? Yeah, I know. Goggle is my fliend.

He missed all those years because pros weren’t allowed in the slam events. He won his first calendar slam as an amateur. Read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_Laver" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting that Jack Kramer tried to make a case for Laver being a second tier player. Not sure why Kramer was such a bitter little bitch regarding Laver. And if you saw Laver play, you immediately noticed his Popeye type left arm as it was twice the size of his right.

[RumpleForeskin]

Loved Becker when I was a kid. He and Edberg had some classic matches back in the day. Of course, it didn't have the flare of Mac/Connors, but the raw athleticism was there.

Dude had a great serve.

[smackaholic]

Mac-Connors was fun to watch because it was 2 spoiled brats throwing tantrums in stereo, but, it didn't hold a candle to the Mac-Borg wimbledon wars. those matches were, IMHO the best one on one matchup in the history of sports with the possible exception of Ali-Frazier.

[Mister Bushice]

becker won wimbledon in 1985. i dont know what month that tournament is played in, but that would have put me at 10-11.

Too bad you didn't play more. You might have broke .500

[L45B]

In some order, my top 5 all-time might be ...

- Rod Laver
- Pete Sampras
- Roger Federer
- Bill Tilden
- Bjorn Borg

A few names that are in the next tier ...

Pancho Gonzalez
Jack Kramer
Don Budge
John McEnroe
Lew Hoad
Ken Rosewall
Elseworth Vines
Ivan Lendl
Jimmy Connors
Roy Emerson


There are just a whole lot of other names that could be in that 2nd tier.
That's a short list.

Definitely have to add Fred Perry & Andre Agassi to that list, at least to the 2nd tier. These two, along with the aforementioned Laver, Budge & Emerson are the only men to win a career grand slam. Agassi's career, as I was able to follow growing up, was rather ironic. He was never expected to show up at WImbledon, let alone win it. And it was his first grand slam title in '92. Whereas the grand slam he should have won first (and had the chance to do so early in his career) was the one that eluded him until near the end of his career-- the French Open. And he had to climb back from two sets down-- something he rarely did-- to beat Medvedev in the '99 final.

[poptart]

Agassi and Perry are definitely on the '2nd tier' list, L45B, no doubt you're right.
Much of Agassi's early career was a disappointment, but his '2nd wind' was terrific and he showed a lot of heart and class.
Although Sampras thumped him in nearly every big match they played, the 'career slam' IS a big feather in his cap.

Jack Kramer shows himself to be a hopeless boob if he thinks Laver is a 2nd echelon player.
He's easily in the top 5 and a strong case can be made for him being #1 all-time.