Home > Tennis > How Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal have PROVED that tennis is in good hands
by Sabarish Chirayil on 30 September 2008
Email this Article (10) Comments
Free £10 bet when you register at
What if you watched tennis for a few years till 1992, went into a deep sleep afterwards and woke up again in 2008? Would you believe what happened during that decade and a half?
At the time this is what Tennis looked like:
What happened?
So if you woke up today and are in shock, keep heart - for tennis is in good hands.
Comments (10)
by Sabarish Chirayil on September 30, 2008
Correction: In the past decade only two American men have won multiple Grand Slams.
by fiona rrr on September 30, 2008
Why 2008? the best tennis started in 2003/2004 with Federer on fire, 2008 is not that great to be honest. Fed did three 'little' slams in 2004.2006.2007 and two in 2005. That were the best years of tennis
by Casper on September 30, 2008
The style of tennis has changed so you have to ask yourself, who has worked the hardest to get what they have got. The titles the racket types the speed of the game the power. Federer has 56 titles, a full mixture of courts, Nadal 2 grass wins only mostly clay, the slowest of courts. So who has done the most, who has brought tennis on to the front page. I would have to say Roger Federer.
by sasha slater on October 01, 2008
What a well-written, well thought out article. It does a great job of chronicling the time periods covered. It is far reaching and obviously well researched. It is about tennis. It is not about Roger Federer. As far as I can see, the author does not raise a question about the Federer/Nadal rivalry - he does not ask us to choose between them or defend one or the other. So it is very strange to me to see that the comments thus far are about Federer. One, asking its own question "who has done the most" and answering it "Roger Federer" and the other deciding that the author has claimed that 2008 is the greatest year in tennis and voicing an opinion that the "Roger" years (every year beside 2008) were the greatest. These opinions are valid for sure, it's just that they have little to do with this particular article. I have read other comments by Federer fans and I am aware of their tendency towards tunnel vision, but I feel that the author had so much to say and wrote with such care here that they deserve more.
by Sabarish Chirayil on October 01, 2008
Thanks a lot Sasha for attemptong to clear the point although a reader will pick what he/she wants to. But just for the record this article is not about who is greater than whom or whose contribution is bigger. I like the comment about how technologies have brought about changes, let me add, changes have also been made to plying surfaces and conditions. What I have tried to point out is the huge difference in where Tennis looked to heading 15 or so years back and where it is now, a place better than we thought it would be. By the way for all Fed fans, I did mention in the article that he has been closest to perfection, so cut me some slack here please. Coming back to the question of contribution, no one can dare say Sampras, Graf, Becker, Borg, Mc, Connors, Martina or Chris made lesser than another. As for the cultural ikons what about King and Ashe? They have all helped bring Tennis to its current state. It is just thatas a game it is at a highly evolved and competitive state today which we must cherish.
by bobby mky on October 01, 2008
I think that many federer fans are so sensitive and sometimes over react.Maybe it is because of their insecurity.Only insecure people react like this.Federer does not require this kind of reaction from his fans.It doe not suit him.I think more balanced approach will do more good to federer than being cry babies.
by T.ks on October 02, 2008
I also think that you 'bobby mky' is so sentitive when you know well that most people around the world love Roger. Roger's tennis is so fantastic and awesome, but ok you disagree. I'm roger's fan and have watched tennis for more than thirty years so i can say to everyone that roger's game plans and the way he plays is the best. I love Pete, Becker,and those outstanding players but in the end Roger is the best. For me, I used to like Borg but it diappeared when he did and said something badly about my favorit player. And have you ever cried when you are happy because normal people do that!
by sasha slater on October 02, 2008
Yes, you are right that people think what they think, etc. I just felt your article was about so much more than Mr. Federer. And just to correct your correction, I did not say that your article was "about who is greater than whom or whose contribution is bigger." I said exactly the opposite.
by Nadia Pierce on October 05, 2008
Those years where Federer won 3 titles were not the greatest years in tennis. they were the most boring in tennis. Agassi & Sampras were on they wary out. Federer peaked at the perfect time. You knew Federer was going to win before the tournaments even started. HE HAD NO COMPETITION. Before Nadal, What Legendary players did Federer have to battle for his 13 titles? Anybody can be great when they have NO COMPETITION. Gime me a breaK.
Add your comment here
PERSONAL ABUSE WILL NOT BE TOLERATED
First Name
Last Name
Email
Heading
Display your favourite sport or football team badge with your comment.
Sport
League
Team
Comment *
Please enter the text you see in the picture into the textbox below. *
Goodbye Gallas! Arsenal's supergrass pays penalty for behind-the-scenes revelations
New York Knick-ers in a twist over no-play, full-pay Stephon Marbury
Munster 16 New Zealand 18: Rokocoko's late show saves All Blacks from repeat of 1978
Arsenal Champions League Chelsea Cricket news Euroleague Fantasy football Football news Formula 1 Liverpool Manchester United NBA Newcastle United Premier League Sports news Tottenham Hotspur Transfer rumours Twenty20 UEFA UEFA Champions League