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