even after the fact that he can not win on clay with much dominance
2007-06-03 00:53:39 · 17 answers · asked by ISAEINS 3 in Sports ➔ Tennis
I believe in records, and obviously Roger doesn't have as many wins yet as some of the true greats, but if he can win the French Open and a couple of other slams he will really be there. I've seen quite a few great players, and what they could do, Federer can do. He doesn't have a major weakness and because of his technique and the weapons he has at his disposal, some of the shots he can play defy the imagination. Andre Agassi, for example, said he was the best he ever played, that he could hurt you from every part of the court, and Andre's a pretty good judge of these things. Federer has great speed, obviously, and his serve is great. It's not perhaps as potent as Pete Sampras's, say, in terms of the number of aces that he hits, but while he may not be unreturnable he sets himself up so well for his own second shot. His forehand is awesome and his backhand is very good - perhaps there might be a very slight vulnerability on the high backhand which Rafael Nadal alone can exploit. His volleying is very good and getting better. His variety is fantastic and his imagination is superb - he creates shots of his own and is capable of carrying them out. Physically, he's in very good shape and he's deceptively powerful. His temper and his demeanour are very good as well.
2007-06-03 07:18:57 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Ivan Lendl was a great fighter but he could never win a Wimbledon.Pete Sampras would have been the all time best,but for French Open. However Roger Federer seems to be more more consistant than both of them. With one French Open in his name....yes, probably he will become the best Tennis player ever.
2007-06-06 08:08:46 · answer #2 · answered by sistla c 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
He still has yet to beat Pete Sampras's record for the most grand slams won, but for the last three years he has been pretty much unbeatable except to Nadal on clay. I wouldn't yet say that he's the best player ever, but right now he certainly is.
2007-06-03 08:04:02 · answer #3 · answered by cgc17788 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No but Roger Federer might be if he can win the French.
2007-06-03 07:59:51 · answer #4 · answered by john t 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
NO, with respect to Roger of course.
2007-06-03 08:55:33 · answer #5 · answered by Monk & his Ferrari 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Just put him up there with Laver, Conners, Borg......etc. No way of really telling. Right place, right time.
2007-06-03 09:21:57 · answer #6 · answered by jotray2001 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋
yes
2007-06-04 01:28:55 · answer #7 · answered by john 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
he is the ruler of the court presently...and if it hadn't been for some rafael nadal...he wouldn't have left any title
2007-06-03 08:33:29 · answer #8 · answered by Mi§§ KĦÅÑ™® 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
yes stats do say the same
2007-06-03 07:58:32 · answer #9 · answered by nobody_rahul 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
yes,, he is the best at the moment
others were:
Agassi
Samprass
Ivanisevic
Becker
2007-06-03 08:11:21 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋