It's been the Kryptonite for Sampras, Connors, Becker and McEnroe too. None of them have won the French Open during their careers. Wazzup with that?
2007-01-29 11:41:02 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Tennis
dic*heads... don have minds to play on clay bcs they don have the natural stamina n legs.... tahs y girls excel on clay bcs they have legs....
2007-01-29 23:21:34 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of the recent non-French winners, Sampras and Becker had the toughest time on clay. Connors won one of the few US Opens played on the American facsimile; McEnroe and Edberg both had the French title on their rackets with a few service holds.
Federer seems a notch above all of them on clay. Over the past two years, if players were ranked surface-by-surface, Federer would be ranked #2 on clay and #1 on everything else. He's come into the French three times as the top seed, made two serious runs at the title, and both times been stopped by the man with the longest male winning streak ever on the surface. It's really almost tragic for both Federer and Nadal that they have to be around at the same time. During the Australian Open, both Agassi and Sampras predicted that Federer would end up closer to Jack Nicklaus' 18 majors than Sampras' 14; without Nadal, people might predict he'd end up closer to Steffi Graf's 22. Nadal could easily end up as being the greatest player never to be ranked #1 if he can maintain his clay dominance a bit longer without overtaking Federer on other surfaces, especially if he wears himself out in the next few years and is past his peak by his mid-20's.
2007-01-29 23:21:08 · answer #2 · answered by giggledude 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He does win on clay surfaces except when Nadal is his opponent. Actually, he almost defeated Nadal in one of the Masters series clay court tournaments last year, in Rome I think. Federer had 2 or 3 match points but Nadal saved them all and won the tournament. I think if there is any criticism about Federer on clay, it is that he doesn't have a perfectly natural clay court game. You can see it in his movement -- he doesn't slide as well as Nadal or even Coria, but he has the tactical game to defeat Nadal on this surface and I'm sure he'll prove that this time around.
2007-01-29 21:54:46 · answer #3 · answered by xander 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Unfortunately Federer is the 2nd best clay court player behind Nadal. Federer has all the shots to play on clay. Roger just has problems with that lefty top spin high kick to his back hand side. If Federer can improve on that shot, he will win the French Open.
2007-02-02 14:56:13 · answer #4 · answered by C L 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's because clay courts are a slower surface meaning the ball bounces slower thus giving opponents more time to get to the ball and set up to hit good shots;and the way to win tennis matches is to hit shots that take time away from your oponent to hit a good shot or to just to hit outright winners to were they can't get to it at all.
So Shots that would normally be outright winners or very tough shots to handle on grass and hard courts are not on clay so you have to work harder to win points on clay and that can get very tiresome and effect your fitness as well. People like Nadal and them who are used to playing on clay like to play those long points where as people like Sampras and the others you mentioned but especially Sampras like to end points early with those winners they hit on other surfaces but it just isn't gonna be done on clay because it slows down the ball to much. So,again to sum up my answer to your question. The shots that you see Federer normally hit for winners on hard courts and grass are shots players can get to on clay because of the slow bounce thus extending the point; and the longer they can keep the point going the more chance they have of winning the point and that makes a huge difference in a match.
2007-01-31 10:37:34 · answer #5 · answered by andre 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Federer can't win because Nadal pwns on clay. All of those people never really grew up playing on clay, unlike Nadal, who feels at home on clay. That's probably the reason why.
2007-01-29 19:43:29 · answer #6 · answered by shakeyourpapaya 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
he wins on clay,he doesnt win against nadal cos the lefty nadal's heavy topspin backhand bounces really high for federer's one handed backhand.also his movement is not too great and i feel that until nadal is there federer will find it tough to win the french open.most great players have been unable to win the french open cos clay is a completely differernt surface-slower,where ur movement really matters and serves dont matter much.
2007-01-30 05:20:51 · answer #7 · answered by suvs 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Haha... he can win.. just not against Nadal (who lives on clay.) It's like asking another question: why can't anyone play on grass?
answer= Federer is like a cow... he lives on grass!
2007-02-04 11:30:00 · answer #8 · answered by Sharks Fan 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think Federer is Sampras's descendant. he can win all of title but France open on clay surface
2007-01-30 03:06:23 · answer #9 · answered by dani ng 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
federer can and does win on clay he has only lost to nadal on clay. moreover this guy only gets better and he will win the french open this year, he was too close to winning the match in last year's roland garros final and surely won't be so mentally weak again. The best player ever will win this year>FEDERER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2007-01-30 06:32:50 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He can win because is can beat the King of clay Nadal!!!
2007-01-31 09:07:24 · answer #11 · answered by shanti804 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋