What is Fed's most important match?

[Scott]

Is it:

2009, FO final, Fed wins the NCYGS

2008 W final, Fed loses to Rafa in five (in fading light)

2009 W final, Fed beats Roddick in five, the last set goes 16-14.

2012 W final, he beats Murray for Wimbledon #7

2001 W 4th round Fed upsets Pete in five thrilling, hard-fought sets.

****

Which match is most important for Fed's legacy?

[TennisGuy]

Tough call.
But I would narrow the list down to:

> 2009, FO final, Fed wins the NCYGS

> 2001 W 4th round Fed upsets Pete in five thrilling, hard-fought sets.

Losing to someone [Rafa in five (in fading light)] is not important for
your legacy! Was it an important match? Yes.

[*skriptis]

Scott <scot...@yahoo.com> Wrote in message:

AO 2009 and 2017 are also very important.


Also, he's been literally matching peak Djokovic in 2015, reaching
Wimbledon and USO finals without losing a set and without losing
a serve.

A potential win in either of those matches there would have huge
consequences. E.g. extra wim/uso for him and no ncygs for Novak.


No boat title for Djokovic, and he gets wim/uso open era record.

--


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[Scott]

On Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 7:30:03 PM UTC-4, *skriptis wrote:
> Scott <scot...@yahoo.com> Wrote in message:
> > Is it:
> >
> > 2009, FO final, Fed wins the NCYGS
> >
> > 2008 W final, Fed loses to Rafa in five (in fading light)
> >
> > 2009 W final, Fed beats Roddick in five, the last set goes 16-14.
> >
> > 2012 W final, he beats Murray for Wimbledon #7
> >
> > 2001 W 4th round Fed upsets Pete in five thrilling, hard-fought sets.
> >
> > ****
> >
> > Which match is most important for Fed's legacy?
> >
>
>
>
> AO 2009 and 2017 are also very important.
>

Great reply. I agree this year's AO was a huge legacy boost. It gives Fed #18 and he defeated Rafa in the fifth set after being down 3-1.

[bob]

On Sun, 14 May 2017 16:04:26 -0700 (PDT), Scott <scot...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Is it:

1st off, if we're considering his legacy we'd have to pick a win, not
a loss. if we're talking about murray, it could be a l oss, but an 18
slammer, we should pick a win.

>2009, FO final, Fed wins the NCYGS

beating that swede in the final? nah. had he beaten rafa in a FO
final, it'd be really big.

>2009 W final, Fed beats Roddick in five, the last set goes 16-14.

it was huge.

>2012 W final, he beats Murray for Wimbledon #7
>2001 W 4th round Fed upsets Pete in five thrilling, hard-fought sets.
>****
>Which match is most important for Fed's legacy?

this yr's AO > rafa might actually be the kicker that keeps him the
slam champ. i'd put it pretty high.

bob

[Scott]

Good reply. That loss to Rafa in five sets and in fading light has been cited countless times by you and your entangled particle here. I included it for Fed haters. But it was one of the greatest battles in a W final.

[bob]

On Sun, 14 May 2017 18:05:08 -0700 (PDT), Scott <scot...@yahoo.com>

wrote:

>On Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 8:50:12 PM UTC-4, bob wrote:
>> On Sun, 14 May 2017 16:04:26 -0700 (PDT), Scott <scot...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Is it:
>>
>> 1st off, if we're considering his legacy we'd have to pick a win, not
>> a loss. if we're talking about murray, it could be a l oss, but an 18
>> slammer, we should pick a win.
>>
>> >2009, FO final, Fed wins the NCYGS
>>
>> beating that swede in the final? nah. had he beaten rafa in a FO
>> final, it'd be really big.
>>
>> >2009 W final, Fed beats Roddick in five, the last set goes 16-14.
>>
>> it was huge.
>>
>> >2012 W final, he beats Murray for Wimbledon #7
>> >2001 W 4th round Fed upsets Pete in five thrilling, hard-fought sets.
>> >****
>> >Which match is most important for Fed's legacy?
>>
>> this yr's AO > rafa might actually be the kicker that keeps him the
>> slam champ. i'd put it pretty high.
>>
>>
>Good reply. That loss to Rafa in five sets and in fading light has been cited countless times by you and your entangled particle here.

those were huge matches for RAFA's legacy. fed's won enough to not
pick his most important legacy match as a loss. not that his losses
don't count, they do. but if we're picking 1 match, the #1 legacy
match must be a win.

> I included it for Fed haters. But it was one of the greatest battles in a W final.

great match. rafa should've beaten him the year before too IMO.

bob

[*skriptis]

bob <b...@nospam.net> Wrote in message:

In that case it's simple. Remove any slam win other than FO and
he's pretty much the same player with the same record.


Remove FO and he's toast.



--

[Jason White]

Interesting point. Let's assume he's currently at 18 without the French Open. However his biggest rivals have completed their trophy collections. Would they be considered greater champions? He's lucky but deserves full credit for cashing in that year. Should be considered clutch. Had he lost, he probably never wins it. He would be chasing the elusive slam in a similar fashion as other past greats.

[Jason White]

On Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 4:04:28 PM UTC-7, Scott wrote:

>
> Which match is most important for Fed's legacy?

Are you limiting this to championship matches only?

[joh]

Op maandag 15 mei 2017 03:30:02 UTC+2 schreef *skriptis:

> > match must be a win.uy

>
>
> In that case it's simple. Remove any slam win other than FO and
> he's pretty much the same player with the same record.
>
>
> Remove FO and he's toast.

As in 'Remove FO and he's Sampras' level' ?
>
>
>
> --

[rec.sport.tennis]

2003 Wimbledon Semi - soundly beats tournament favorite Roddick -
announces himself as a champion rather than just a player with great
potential

[TT]

Don't kid yourself, 2008 Wimbledon final is the only match of relevance.

[kaennorsing]

Op maandag 15 mei 2017 10:46:54 UTC+2 schreef TT:

> Don't kid yourself, 2008 Wimbledon final is the only match of relevance.

And why is that? Why not, for instance, 2007 Wimbledon final?

[kaennorsing]

Op maandag 15 mei 2017 09:11:33 UTC+2 schreef rec.sport.tennis:

> 2003 Wimbledon Semi - soundly beats tournament favorite Roddick -
> announces himself as a champion rather than just a player with great
> potential

That was a superb performance and a great legacy match indeed! As to the OP's question: The 2003 Wimbledon final may be the answer as it was his first slam win. His overall dominance, Wimbledon streak and slam record started there.

[Whisper]

7th Wimbledon obviously.

[TT]

Nobody wrote a book on 2007 Wimbledon final.

[The Iceberg]

Cos everyone in the world knew it was the 2 best players, playing their best at th best tournament.

[Scott]

No, I included his R4 win over Pete.

[The Iceberg]

Nadal briefly mentions it in his book, maybe that's what kann is talking about! :)

[RaspingDrive]

For Fed it would be W 2003. For his fans AO 2017. A very memorable Jan 29 2017.

[stephenJ]

Tie between 09 FO and W, the former tied him with Sampras at 14 slams
and completed the CGS, the latter made him the slam king/open era GOAT.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Pelle Svanslös]

The match that was recently up in RST. The 2003 WTF RR match against
Agassi. That's what really opened up the floodgates.

--
“Donald Trump is the weak man’s vision of a strong man.”
-- Charles Cooke

[kaennorsing]

Op maandag 15 mei 2017 13:21:29 UTC+2 schreef TT:

Maybe because it didn't end in total darkness, no?

[kaennorsing]

Op maandag 15 mei 2017 15:35:10 UTC+2 schreef Pelle Svanslös:

> The match that was recently up in RST. The 2003 WTF RR match against
> Agassi. That's what really opened up the floodgates.

That's a strong candidate as well, agreed. That week was just a revelation for the tennis world as Federer butchered his demons one by one, totally annihilating them.

Still, his GOAT run started at Wimbledon 2003.

[PeteWasLucky]

The 2017AO may end up becoming the most important match in his career.

[bob]

On Mon, 15 May 2017 21:07:01 +1000, Whisper <beav...@ozemail.com>
wrote:

i think i'd have to agree with that one. huge for federer himself, and
his legacy.

bob

[Whisper]

....& a terrible day for Sampras fans.: )








---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[MBDunc]

Only one condender. One match which instantly turned the strongest era ever into clown era. Wimbledon 04 final. No other match ever in the history of tennis has had same impact.

.mikko

[Court_1]

On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 7:06:59 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:

>
> ....& a terrible day for Sampras fans.: )

Think how much more terrible Fed's #8 W will be for Sampras fans or what if Fed gets #8 at W and gets YE#1? That would be sweet!

[Whisper]

Indeed.

Here's hoping Rafa can make Fed cry like a baby 1 more time - for old
times' sake.

[Gracchus]

On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 5:19:20 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
> On 19/05/2017 9:19 PM, Court_1 wrote:

> > Think how much more terrible Fed's #8 W will be for Sampras fans or what if Fed gets #8 at W and gets YE#1? That would be sweet!

> Here's hoping Rafa can make Fed cry like a baby 1 more time - for old
> times' sake.

This coming from Federer's biggest fan, hmm? The one who yesterday wanted to see him win the CYGS?

[*skriptis]

Gracchus <grac...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

I'm primarily a tennis fan. Seeing cygs is my dream.

Between options of no cygs in my lifetime and Federer in 2017, I
pick Federer now.




--


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[The Iceberg]

Lol you must really hate Sampras and his fans, Canuck American rivalry alive and well.

[The Iceberg]

It's quite funny how this would mean in 9 years there's been no one better turn up since Fed and Nadal. Agassi and Sampras must be laughing at this.

[Gracchus]

I wasn't responding to you, skriptis. Your views are of course sacrosanct.

[Whisper]

I'm genuine when I say I want to see Fed win calendar slam or 8th
Wimbledon etc. But I'm also an impartial tennis fan & want players to
earn their wins. That's why I never objected to Rafa beating Fed,
because that would be retarded. It's a sport & the better man wins on
the day. That's why we watch. Fedfans have a different approach. They
only seem to be interested in Fed winning. If he loses it's 1 excuse
after another. Very tiresome.

[Scott]

Early in this thread I asked for trolls to stay away. Why are you describing off-topic views when serious, higher-tier tennis analysts on RSR have yet to check in?

[Guypers]

Poor English comprehension skills?!?

[Scott]

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 2:36:28 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
> The 2017AO may end up becoming the most important match in his career.

Yes, especially as Rafa is concerned. Even more interesting, Rafa was up 3-1 in the fifth.

[Scott]

Actually, it was a different thread I mentioned trolls. My bad. ;

[jdeluise]

On Sat, 20 May 2017 03:07:30 +1000, Whisper wrote:

> Fedfans have a different approach. They only seem to be interested in
> Fed winning. If he loses it's 1 excuse after another. Very tiresome.

But Nadal has never lost a match fair and square according to vamos
brigade... he's been injured for Every. Single. Loss.

[John Liang]

The only genuine believe you have about Federer was to knock him at every opportunity and boosting Sampras whenever you can. This is largely the result of your own massive failure in predicting this guy winning just 1 slam even after he slaughtered Roddick in 2003, a lot of people in RST changed their opinion about the guy right after that match, I think the most shattering matchs for you are Federer beating Roddick in 2004 Wimbledon and then again in 2006 USO.

[John Liang]

Much like Sampras, Sampras never lost a match when he was fully assed.

[bob]

clown era can only be determined by hindsight, and we've determined
that was a clown era, no use rehashing it. :-)

bob

[John Liang]

We also determined the Sampras era was even more of a clown era when it was proven three times with Pioline in W and USO final and then Washington got to the W final.

[Guypers]

LOL
HahahahahaHahahahahaHahahahaha
HahahahahaHahahahahaHahahahaha!!!!!

[AZ]

On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 11:07:40 PM UTC+6, Whisper wrote:
> On 20/05/2017 12:10 AM, Gracchus wrote:
> > On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 5:19:20 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
> >> On 19/05/2017 9:19 PM, Court_1 wrote:
> >
> >>> Think how much more terrible Fed's #8 W will be for Sampras fans or what if Fed gets #8 at W and gets YE#1? That would be sweet!
> >
> >> Here's hoping Rafa can make Fed cry like a baby 1 more time - for old
> >> times' sake.
> >
> > This coming from Federer's biggest fan, hmm? The one who yesterday wanted to see him win the CYGS?
> >
>
>
>
>
> I'm genuine when I say

HAHAHAHA. Genuine people never preface what they say by "I'am genuine when I say"... That's a dead giveaway for somebody who is disingenuous.

[Manuel aka Xax]

Le lundi 15 mai 2017 01:04:28 UTC+2, Scott a écrit :
> Is it:
>
> 2009, FO final, Fed wins the NCYGS
>
> 2008 W final, Fed loses to Rafa in five (in fading light)
>
> 2009 W final, Fed beats Roddick in five, the last set goes 16-14.
>
> 2012 W final, he beats Murray for Wimbledon #7
>
> 2001 W 4th round Fed upsets Pete in five thrilling, hard-fought sets.
>
> ****
>
> Which match is most important for Fed's legacy?

In that list, I'll pick NCYGS.
Was the first to achieve this, then followed by two other giants of the game.

To me this 2017 AO should be it that list, huge huge match, with absolutely incredible points (and *that* third set from Federer was divine)...
Facing his well proved worst matchup, being down a break in the decider, Fed's age...
It had a lot to be part of your list.
IMO, it had too many aspects not to be part of such list.

[Scott]

+1

[Jason White]

It's surprising that 2007 Wimbledon isn't on the list for consideration. He won tennis' most important tournament five straight years.

[RaspingDrive]

On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 6:56:12 AM UTC-4, Manuel aka Xax wrote:
> Le lundi 15 mai 2017 01:04:28 UTC+2, Scott a écrit :
> > Is it:
> >
> > 2009, FO final, Fed wins the NCYGS
> >
> > 2008 W final, Fed loses to Rafa in five (in fading light)
> >
> > 2009 W final, Fed beats Roddick in five, the last set goes 16-14.
> >
> > 2012 W final, he beats Murray for Wimbledon #7
> >
> > 2001 W 4th round Fed upsets Pete in five thrilling, hard-fought sets.
> >
> > ****
> >
> > Which match is most important for Fed's legacy?
>
> In that list, I'll pick NCYGS.
> Was the first to achieve this, then followed by two other giants of the game.
>
> To me this 2017 AO should be it that list, huge huge match, with absolutely incredible points (and *that* third set from Federer was divine)...

I would make it 'THAT FIFTH set'. Gloom for Federer fans at the beginning followed by rising hopes when Federer almost broke Nadal back in the second and fourth games, jubilation when he actually does it to draw level in the sixth game, continuing optimism when he consolidates the break by keep his serve in the seventh game, wild frenzy when he breaks Nadal again in the eighth, some nervous moments in the ninth before he clinches the 18th slam. Blistering FHs, 'nuclear' BHs, nonchalant flicks that caught Nadal napping, occasionally forays to the net as a surprise tactic, super serves when in trouble, the fifth set had everything. Just incredible. If there were any lingering doubts, he just dispelled those in a span of twenty minutes.

> Facing his well proved worst matchup, being down a break in the decider, Fed's age...
> It had a lot to be part of your list.
> IMO, it had too many aspects not to be part of such list.

It should be his best win in his career.

[bob]

On Sun, 21 May 2017 06:07:33 -0700 (PDT), Scott <scot...@yahoo.com>

-2.

bob

[John Liang]

+1, to balanced it up as your opinion only counted as one. unless you have received your master's consent.