Federer

[Voltron87]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Round 1:
6-1, 6-1, 6-1
Federer won 58% of his points with second serve, do i really need to do any math? Its clear he would have won anyway since federer broke more than 50% of the time( I admit Im guilty of not taking into account stamina onto the future rounds)

[/ QUOTE ]

well those are interesting numbers you just pulled out of thin air.

is this on some tennis computer game? how does he win 6-1?

[/ QUOTE ]
You're forgetting that he's the number 1 seed and he's playing a qualifier in the first round.

[/ QUOTE ]


right, so how does it make my statement that he wouldnt be close to #1 and the other posters statement that he wouldnt be in the top 50 "ridiculous"?

[Patrick del Poker Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Round 1:
6-1, 6-1, 6-1
Federer won 58% of his points with second serve, do i really need to do any math? Its clear he would have won anyway since federer broke more than 50% of the time( I admit Im guilty of not taking into account stamina onto the future rounds)

[/ QUOTE ]

well those are interesting numbers you just pulled out of thin air.

is this on some tennis computer game? how does he win 6-1?

[/ QUOTE ]
You're forgetting that he's the number 1 seed and he's playing a qualifier in the first round.

[/ QUOTE ]


right, so how does it make my statement that he wouldnt be close to #1 and the other posters statement that he wouldnt be in the top 50 "ridiculous"?

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not going to lie - I wasn't paying that close attention. But... I'm assuming the 'simulation' we're talking about here was for this year's tournament, in which he was playing a qualifier in the first round.

[skp]

It's amazing how players just keep getting better and better. I figured I would never see the day when someone better than Sampras came along but that day is already here with Roger. Do you concur?

I still don't know though if I will see the day that someone better than Gretzky comes along (albeit Lemieux was close...damn close).

[Patrick del Poker Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
I still don't know though if I will see the day that someone better than Gretzky comes along

[/ QUOTE ]
Sidney Crosby! He is here now!

[skp]

Let's hope Crosby is all that he is made out to be. We heard the same about Eric Lindros - he was called the "Next One" - but he turned out to be nowhere close to the "Great One".

[Jack of Arcades]

[ QUOTE ]
Let's hope Crosby is all that he is made out to be. We heard the same about Eric Lindros - he was called the "Next One" - but he turned out to be nowhere close to the "Great One".

[/ QUOTE ]

Man, Eric Lindros was soooo fun to watch when he first came up.

[Patrick del Poker Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
Let's hope Crosby is all that he is made out to be. We heard the same about Eric Lindros - he was called the "Next One" - but he turned out to be nowhere close to the "Great One".

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, but to be fair, Lindros was a special talent. It just turns out he's got concussion problems.

[andyfox]

Well, I'm no expert here. I can analyze the stats, the tournaments won, the Grand Slams, etc. But if McEnroe and Agassi are saying he's a better player, I have to give their opinions a lot of weight. I mean, I think Gretzky was a greater player tham Lemieux, but if, say, Gordie Howe and Bobby Hull said Lemieux was the greater player, certainly I'd have to consider their opinions informed, to say the least.


BTW, I thought Federer might have dumped Agassi's last service game when Federer was up 5-0 in the last set, so as not to embarrass Agassi with a bagel. Of course he'd never admit it, but I thought he was a bit loose on some of those points.

[Clarkmeister]

What sport are we talking about? I don't have this "Federer" on any of my fantasy football teams.

[andyfox]

Football is for neanderthals. Just like limit poker.