Topic: ATP - 2009 Australian Open: Jan. 19 - Feb. 1

[TennisVeritas]

I remember Wilander mocking Federer a couple years ago saying his balls shrink to peas or something to that effect whenever he plays Nadal, and Federer and many others were furious at the time.   More and more it is looking like Wilander is the genuis after all like I always suspected he was.
 

Wilander a genius.. ..Sure by picking some of his comments and forget about the rest: This was the guy who told us before last RG final that FED had a real chance to beat Rafa, the guy who said that he was changing in the right way his game on clay and now he was ready to beat Rafa on clay  ..Yes he said that...When ANYONE with a minimum of brain was easily able to realize that the FED of last year at RG was not prepare for Rafa: No way..BUT you have to play your fav role as Wise-man-coming-from-the-mountain so you are just picking on Wilander's barrel of (idiotic) remarks those that satisfied your "opinions"..

[kittens25]

It is interesting to see some people implying they see signs of the things I have seen signs of for years now.  I said while Federer is mentally tougher than the average ATP tour player, Federer is not one of the mentally tougher champions by any stretch, never has been, and in fact for top player standards was mentally weaker than the average.  His titles have come inspite of his mental game, not because of it.   In the past when asked to explain how all these titles were possible in this circumstance I pointed out things such as the relative lack of competition compared to past mens tennis eras, or the current emerging competition and was deemed a troll, especialy by the Federer fanatics.   Well ok with more competition he has only won 1 major of the last 5 and won only 3 tournaments, and is 0-5 in that span vs his biggest rival and 1-4 vs his second or third biggest rival, so draw your own conclusions at this point I guess.   Put it down to what you want though but it is what it is.    

And they are coming from where these numbers?? I saw those against Rafa..But against Djoko is what, on major FED played 2 times last year in major and he was 1-1..Against Andy he played once in a major and he won!! You are mixing up thinks (as often) only to prove that you-are- the-Wise-man-coming-from-the-mountain and that your opinions are always right..

But they remain opinion without any sound ground if, as it is clear IMO, we take into account that: 10 FED was not at his best last year (physically), 2) he is definitely in the second part of his career (no more at his peak) and he is definitely focusing on slams and no more to other events..If we take 1) +2) His results last year was far from being so horrible: three GS final, with one win and a close match in London..And a start of the year, this one, better than last year, i.e. a final in a GS is better than a semi..But anyway: you are so biased...

I was combining his head to heads with Nadal and Murray with the 1-4 and 0-5 head to heads.   I am not going to start another Murray vs Djokovic battle which can get almost as ugly as the Federer vs Nadal ones, but in the last 6 months Murray has overall outplayed Djokovic by quite a bit.    So the two top players now on recent form Federer is a combined 1-9 vs in the last year.   If you want to add Djokovic though just for kicks it is now 3-9, you happy.

[TennisVeritas]

It is interesting to see some people implying they see signs of the things I have seen signs of for years now.  I said while Federer is mentally tougher than the average ATP tour player, Federer is not one of the mentally tougher champions by any stretch, never has been, and in fact for top player standards was mentally weaker than the average.  His titles have come inspite of his mental game, not because of it.   In the past when asked to explain how all these titles were possible in this circumstance I pointed out things such as the relative lack of competition compared to past mens tennis eras, or the current emerging competition and was deemed a troll, especialy by the Federer fanatics.   Well ok with more competition he has only won 1 major of the last 5 and won only 3 tournaments, and is 0-5 in that span vs his biggest rival and 1-4 vs his second or third biggest rival, so draw your own conclusions at this point I guess.   Put it down to what you want though but it is what it is.    

And they are coming from where these numbers?? I saw those against Rafa..But against Djoko is what, on major FED played 2 times last year in major and he was 1-1..Against Andy he played once in a major and he won!! You are mixing up thinks (as often) only to prove that you-are- the-Wise-man-coming-from-the-mountain and that your opinions are always right..

But they remain opinion without any sound ground if, as it is clear IMO, we take into account that: 10 FED was not at his best last year (physically), 2) he is definitely in the second part of his career (no more at his peak) and he is definitely focusing on slams and no more to other events..If we take 1) +2) His results last year was far from being so horrible: three GS final, with one win and a close match in London..And a start of the year, this one, better than last year, i.e. a final in a GS is better than a semi..But anyway: you are so biased...

I was combining his head to heads with Nadal and Murray with the 1-4 and 0-5 head to heads.   I am not going to start another Murray vs Djokovic battle which can get almost as ugly as the Federer vs Nadal ones, but in the last 6 months Murray has overall outplayed Djokovic by quite a bit.    So the two top players now on recent form Federer is a combined 1-9 vs in the last year.   If you want to add Djokovic though just for kicks it is now 3-9, you happy.

Youp I am happy given that these results were more than enough to win an additional GS and being in 3 finals of the last 5 majors..As I said his focus is there and given the poor conditions he started last season (in term of preparation) I am more than happy with that (even if, clearly, as a fan, I would have prefered FED keeping Wimbledon with him)..

[kittens25]

Good if you as a Federer fan are happy and rosy with everything and so secure in those views, then why even care about what I think.   Quit your bellyaching over my viewpoints then.   

[TennisVeritas]

Good if you as a Federer fan are happy and rosy with everything and so secure in those views, then why even care about what I think.   Quit your bellyaching over my viewpoints then.   

You got a point here  : It is indeed a waste of time on my side..But the fact that you are using Wilander to reinforce your views (when Wilander was totally discredited before the last final at the RG)..

Or the fact that you are still referring to the "weak era" to explain the (great) FED's career (BTW: same era in which Rafa took his early slams and build his own Tennis )..

Well, only these two elements push me to react..But I agree it is quite stupid from my side: I should learn now to avoid spending time with idioc posts, I  you should indeed never react (apologise  )..

Finally your "wise" way to post hurt (frequently) my nerves: GEEEZZ, you are so emphatic, you are so pompous..LOL....It is just scaring..

But, once again, you are right: I should not pay attention to biased opinions which main purposes are to wind up FED's fans and discredit his career (which implies BTW, to discredit a lot of Rafa's results and career given that Rafa's results, till now, share the same time frame  )..

[falcon]

Ok so I've gone through posts where may be 99% of the people feel that Fed lost because he was mentally dominated by Rafa. But for a moment i'd like to say that Rafa was playing at perhaps 70% at best and Fed was playing really well so i'm sorry Fed fans but I think Rafa has overtaken Fed.

And do you believe FED was applying his best   ..With 37% of first service in the second set.. ..And less than 60% on the match  ..FED was not playing his best on his service game and this by far and the serve is KEY for him as for any that wants to beat Rafa IMO (last example Verdasco BTW) : As I have posted both were nervous and did not play their best..Rafa was able to win because he is stronger in his head, but do not tell me that he was playing 70% and FED 100% conz this proved that you did not watch tennis during the last 10 years (FED best HC Tennis yesterday   )

BTW when did I say that fed was playing at 100%?? Do you really read my posts or do you just attack them when you see 'hey falcon has posted something...lets attack!'
   Sure Fed's 37% is very bad no doubting that...but what i'm saying is that don't leave everything to that mental head block....why hasn't fed figured it out? I mean he has met him 18 times for heavens sake. And this was a dead tired Rafa mind you.  If you can't accept it then i'm sorry but rafa has overtaken Fed.

[TennisVeritas]

Ok so I've gone through posts where may be 99% of the people feel that Fed lost because he was mentally dominated by Rafa. But for a moment i'd like to say that Rafa was playing at perhaps 70% at best and Fed was playing really well so i'm sorry Fed fans but I think Rafa has overtaken Fed.

And do you believe FED was applying his best   ..With 37% of first service in the second set.. ..And less than 60% on the match  ..FED was not playing his best on his service game and this by far and the serve is KEY for him as for any that wants to beat Rafa IMO (last example Verdasco BTW) : As I have posted both were nervous and did not play their best..Rafa was able to win because he is stronger in his head, but do not tell me that he was playing 70% and FED 100% conz this proved that you did not watch tennis during the last 10 years (FED best HC Tennis yesterday   )

BTW when did I say that fed was playing at 100%?? Do you really read my posts or do you just attack them when you see 'hey falcon has posted something...lets attack!'
   Sure Fed's 37% is very bad no doubting that...but what i'm saying is that don't leave everything to that mental head block....why hasn't fed figured it out? I mean he has met him 18 times for heavens sake. And this was a dead tired Rafa mind you.  If you can't accept it then i'm sorry but rafa has overtaken Fed.

You Wrote what I have stressed now: FED WAS PLAYING REALLY WELL, means for me 100%..If it is not the case: Use another (more appropriate) sentence next time OK. .

BTW: I have no doubt about your conclusion: FED has a huge problem (in his mind) against Rafa:BUT find the right solution for a ONE HAND BH against Rafa's equation is far from being easy..Said that FED was not playing his best..

[mav140]

Ok so I've gone through posts where may be 99% of the people feel that Fed lost because he was mentally dominated by Rafa. But for a moment i'd like to say that Rafa was playing at perhaps 70% at best and Fed was playing really well so i'm sorry Fed fans but I think Rafa has overtaken Fed.

And do you believe FED was applying his best   ..With 37% of first service in the second set.. ..And less than 60% on the match  ..FED was not playing his best on his service game and this by far and the serve is KEY for him as for any that wants to beat Rafa IMO (last example Verdasco BTW) : As I have posted both were nervous and did not play their best..Rafa was able to win because he is stronger in his head, but do not tell me that he was playing 70% and FED 100% conz this proved that you did not watch tennis during the last 10 years (FED best HC Tennis yesterday   )

BTW when did I say that fed was playing at 100%?? Do you really read my posts or do you just attack them when you see 'hey falcon has posted something...lets attack!'
   Sure Fed's 37% is very bad no doubting that...but what i'm saying is that don't leave everything to that mental head block....why hasn't fed figured it out? I mean he has met him 18 times for heavens sake. And this was a dead tired Rafa mind you.  If you can't accept it then i'm sorry but rafa has overtaken Fed.

Sorry falcon, but I have to agree with TennisVeritas here... you said "But for a moment i'd like to say that Rafa was playing at perhaps 70% at best and Fed was playing really well", where in no moment did Fed actually displayed great tennis.. not in the entire match.. not in his serve or Nadal's serve... where have you seen Fed take advantage on anyone's serve, just to be broken at the next serve??? I said "This was by far the worst tennis BOTH of them displayed, Nadal was not playing "good", but Fed was not playing "good" also..." both of them played "poorly" for what they can do... In no time did I see Fed playing "really well" as you stated above...

I am not a guy to make excuses.. Nadal won fair and square, he deserves the title.. and Im glad for him and all his fans (except the fanatics  )... but NEITHER OF THEM PLAYED GREAT IN THE ENTIRE MATCH..

[falcon]

Ok so I've gone through posts where may be 99% of the people feel that Fed lost because he was mentally dominated by Rafa. But for a moment i'd like to say that Rafa was playing at perhaps 70% at best and Fed was playing really well so i'm sorry Fed fans but I think Rafa has overtaken Fed.

And do you believe FED was applying his best   ..With 37% of first service in the second set.. ..And less than 60% on the match  ..FED was not playing his best on his service game and this by far and the serve is KEY for him as for any that wants to beat Rafa IMO (last example Verdasco BTW) : As I have posted both were nervous and did not play their best..Rafa was able to win because he is stronger in his head, but do not tell me that he was playing 70% and FED 100% conz this proved that you did not watch tennis during the last 10 years (FED best HC Tennis yesterday   )

BTW when did I say that fed was playing at 100%?? Do you really read my posts or do you just attack them when you see 'hey falcon has posted something...lets attack!'
   Sure Fed's 37% is very bad no doubting that...but what i'm saying is that don't leave everything to that mental head block....why hasn't fed figured it out? I mean he has met him 18 times for heavens sake. And this was a dead tired Rafa mind you.  If you can't accept it then i'm sorry but rafa has overtaken Fed.

You Wrote what I have stressed now: FED WAS PLAYING REALLY WELL, means for me 100%..If it is not the case: Use another (more appropriate) sentence next time OK. .

BTW: I have no doubt about your conclusion: FED has a huge problem (in his mind) against Rafa:BUT find the right solution for a ONE HAND BH against Rafa's equation is far from being easy..Said that FED was not playing his best..

No doubting that....atleast Fed dragged him to 5 sets....just look at the way rafa thrashed haas....and he has one of the finest one-handed backhands...  He has been attacking Fed's backhand from time immemorial.

[TennisVeritas]

Ok so I've gone through posts where may be 99% of the people feel that Fed lost because he was mentally dominated by Rafa. But for a moment i'd like to say that Rafa was playing at perhaps 70% at best and Fed was playing really well so i'm sorry Fed fans but I think Rafa has overtaken Fed.

And do you believe FED was applying his best   ..With 37% of first service in the second set.. ..And less than 60% on the match  ..FED was not playing his best on his service game and this by far and the serve is KEY for him as for any that wants to beat Rafa IMO (last example Verdasco BTW) : As I have posted both were nervous and did not play their best..Rafa was able to win because he is stronger in his head, but do not tell me that he was playing 70% and FED 100% conz this proved that you did not watch tennis during the last 10 years (FED best HC Tennis yesterday   )

BTW when did I say that fed was playing at 100%?? Do you really read my posts or do you just attack them when you see 'hey falcon has posted something...lets attack!'
   Sure Fed's 37% is very bad no doubting that...but what i'm saying is that don't leave everything to that mental head block....why hasn't fed figured it out? I mean he has met him 18 times for heavens sake. And this was a dead tired Rafa mind you.  If you can't accept it then i'm sorry but rafa has overtaken Fed.

You Wrote what I have stressed now: FED WAS PLAYING REALLY WELL, means for me 100%..If it is not the case: Use another (more appropriate) sentence next time OK. .

BTW: I have no doubt about your conclusion: FED has a huge problem (in his mind) against Rafa:BUT find the right solution for a ONE HAND BH against Rafa's equation is far from being easy..Said that FED was not playing his best..

No doubting that....atleast Fed dragged him to 5 sets....just look at the way rafa thrashed haas....and he has one of the finest one-handed backhands...  He has been attacking Fed's backhand from time immemorial.

And on that side: FED played well with his BH during the first 4 sets IMO..IMO the real problem was really the serve: To beat Rafa you need the serve at 100% (as for instance in the '07 final at Wimbledon): Without the huge serve, in particular in the fifth set, no way to have a tight final set or even hoping for a victory: This is why IMO, FED did not play in the last set, he just realized that he did not have the "easy" weapon to keep the "war" open ..

You see I can discuss in a clam and relaxed way: just do not mix up "ambiguous:" sentences like FED WAS PLAYING REALLY WELL: OK. 

[falcon]

Ok so I've gone through posts where may be 99% of the people feel that Fed lost because he was mentally dominated by Rafa. But for a moment i'd like to say that Rafa was playing at perhaps 70% at best and Fed was playing really well so i'm sorry Fed fans but I think Rafa has overtaken Fed.

And do you believe FED was applying his best   ..With 37% of first service in the second set.. ..And less than 60% on the match  ..FED was not playing his best on his service game and this by far and the serve is KEY for him as for any that wants to beat Rafa IMO (last example Verdasco BTW) : As I have posted both were nervous and did not play their best..Rafa was able to win because he is stronger in his head, but do not tell me that he was playing 70% and FED 100% conz this proved that you did not watch tennis during the last 10 years (FED best HC Tennis yesterday   )

BTW when did I say that fed was playing at 100%?? Do you really read my posts or do you just attack them when you see 'hey falcon has posted something...lets attack!'
   Sure Fed's 37% is very bad no doubting that...but what i'm saying is that don't leave everything to that mental head block....why hasn't fed figured it out? I mean he has met him 18 times for heavens sake. And this was a dead tired Rafa mind you.  If you can't accept it then i'm sorry but rafa has overtaken Fed.

You Wrote what I have stressed now: FED WAS PLAYING REALLY WELL, means for me 100%..If it is not the case: Use another (more appropriate) sentence next time OK. .

BTW: I have no doubt about your conclusion: FED has a huge problem (in his mind) against Rafa:BUT find the right solution for a ONE HAND BH against Rafa's equation is far from being easy..Said that FED was not playing his best..

No doubting that....atleast Fed dragged him to 5 sets....just look at the way rafa thrashed haas....and he has one of the finest one-handed backhands...  He has been attacking Fed's backhand from time immemorial.

And on that side: FED played well with his BH during the first 4 sets IMO..IMO the real problem was really the serve: To beat Rafa you need the serve at 100% (as for instance in the '07 final at Wimbledon): Without the huge serve, in particular in the fifth set, no way to have a tight final set or even hoping for a victory: This is why IMO, FED did not play in the last set, he just realized that he did not have the "easy" weapon to keep the "war" open ..

You see I can discuss in a clam and relaxed way: just do not mix up "ambiguous:" sentences like FED WAS PLAYING REALLY WELL: OK. 

BTW I really was wondering why Fed did not have many aces to his credit....I think this thing is two fold...
1. fed's serve is one that was not a huge weapon the way it was with Sampras IMO right from the start...he gradually improved on it so during tighter moments it slightly goes back to its older mode.

2. Of course I don't disagree with the mental head block but i;m reminded of the wimby 07...remember the way Fed was down 0-40 twice in the 5th set but managed to hold serve? Something which Rafa with a relatively weak serve managed to do this time around...I'm unable to figure this out.

[TennisVeritas]

Ok so I've gone through posts where may be 99% of the people feel that Fed lost because he was mentally dominated by Rafa. But for a moment i'd like to say that Rafa was playing at perhaps 70% at best and Fed was playing really well so i'm sorry Fed fans but I think Rafa has overtaken Fed.

And do you believe FED was applying his best   ..With 37% of first service in the second set.. ..And less than 60% on the match  ..FED was not playing his best on his service game and this by far and the serve is KEY for him as for any that wants to beat Rafa IMO (last example Verdasco BTW) : As I have posted both were nervous and did not play their best..Rafa was able to win because he is stronger in his head, but do not tell me that he was playing 70% and FED 100% conz this proved that you did not watch tennis during the last 10 years (FED best HC Tennis yesterday   )

BTW when did I say that fed was playing at 100%?? Do you really read my posts or do you just attack them when you see 'hey falcon has posted something...lets attack!'
   Sure Fed's 37% is very bad no doubting that...but what i'm saying is that don't leave everything to that mental head block....why hasn't fed figured it out? I mean he has met him 18 times for heavens sake. And this was a dead tired Rafa mind you.  If you can't accept it then i'm sorry but rafa has overtaken Fed.

You Wrote what I have stressed now: FED WAS PLAYING REALLY WELL, means for me 100%..If it is not the case: Use another (more appropriate) sentence next time OK. .

BTW: I have no doubt about your conclusion: FED has a huge problem (in his mind) against Rafa:BUT find the right solution for a ONE HAND BH against Rafa's equation is far from being easy..Said that FED was not playing his best..

No doubting that....atleast Fed dragged him to 5 sets....just look at the way rafa thrashed haas....and he has one of the finest one-handed backhands...  He has been attacking Fed's backhand from time immemorial.

And on that side: FED played well with his BH during the first 4 sets IMO..IMO the real problem was really the serve: To beat Rafa you need the serve at 100% (as for instance in the '07 final at Wimbledon): Without the huge serve, in particular in the fifth set, no way to have a tight final set or even hoping for a victory: This is why IMO, FED did not play in the last set, he just realized that he did not have the "easy" weapon to keep the "war" open ..

You see I can discuss in a clam and relaxed way: just do not mix up "ambiguous:" sentences like FED WAS PLAYING REALLY WELL: OK. 

BTW I really was wondering why Fed did not have many aces to his credit....I think this thing is two fold...

1. fed's serve is one that was not a huge weapon the way it was with Sampras IMO right from the start...he gradually improved on it so during tighter moments it slightly goes back to its older mode.

2. Of course I don't disagree with the mental head block but i;m reminded of the wimby 07...remember the way Fed was down 0-40 twice in the 5th set but managed to hold serve? Something which Rafa with a relatively weak serve managed to do this time around...I'm unable to figure this out.

Rafa has improved a lot his serve: First and second IMO and he is constantly keeping the pressure on the BH of FED..More, IMO, in the third set when FED had those famous 6 occasions, Rafa was just able to force the rallies..I really believe that He was just his ability to be aggressive at the right moment and share FED..
FED first serve is Huge: Not at the same level of Pete for sure, but still huge..But his serve was off..IMO from the second set on FED did pay cash this "weak" serve..He was able to win the second with less than 40% of first in BUT this cost him a lot of energy (in his head mainly IMO, i.e. more at the level of his confidence than at the level of his physic):

To be honest as a FED fan I did notice that it was a bad day on serve from the first service game: He did not keep, he hit a double..FED is a guy like that: He needs a good start to feel good..Without that it will be long and difficult (as against Berdy)..

[Tennis4you]

One question-  Do you think this display of emotion is any anyway related to his mental fraility on court?
If he can't control his emotions in an award ceremony, how can he expect to under the pressure of competitive play?

He managed 13 other times.

And he cried every time too.  Really, win or lose, he was going to bawl.  I would have been more surprised if he DIDN'T cry.  He's a weepy guy, which is fine. 

Did he cry at last year's RG and Wimby after the defeat? I wouldn't know as I didn't watch the ceremony.

Lets just make one thing clear, there is a difference between a few tears, which is fine and totally understandable, and having a complete FIT in front of millions of people BECAUSE YOU LOST A FREAKING TENNIS MATCH.  He balled like a schoolgirl out there.  Lets make that clear. I just can't get over this. I know I need to get a life, but this has my brain stuck.

first of all, i don't believe that you are mentally strong if you cry like anything just for the loss of a tennis match, it's not the end of the world right? defeats like these should make a champion that much more determined..........it's understandable if he shed a few tears and get normal, but he let the emotions tangle him.........second of all, if he was feeling overwhelmed by the crowd support and simply could not overcome the emotion, better to just let it all out under a towel after the ceremony.........and everyone knows that the defeat is killing him, why utter it on the mike and add up extra stress? all this definitely took away the moment from rafael who became the first man to win 3 slams on 3 major surfaces after agassi........this might even make him uncomfortable to play federer again when they meet next time.........

overall, i can understand that fed is too emotional and we can maybe give him the benefit of doubt........it definitely wasn't intentional but he could have handled it a lot better than that........i seriously hope that rafael puts all this behind and be as ruthless as he always is the next time they meet..........

I think it was handled perfectly fine.  He held back what he could, I think he did a great job.  Heaven forbid we know how a tennis player feels.  I have no less respect for him after this, shoot, I might have more.

[FreeBird]

I think it was handled perfectly fine.  He held back what he could, I think he did a great job.  Heaven forbid we know how a tennis player feels.  I have no less respect for him after this, shoot, I might have more.

It struck me this morning that the pattern followed an exact experience I had last fall.  My dog was very sick and we were about to go on vaca, so I called a friend in Cincy to see if he could watch my dog for me.  I knew ahead of time what the topic of conversation was going to be - what happened if he got worse, etc.  I had everything straight in my head and felt fine, then called him and started to talk about it....but I couldn't say a word.  I completely lost it.  Why?  Because in some way, speaking it made it real in a way that it hadn't been before.  And then there's no time to deal with it - you're trying to talk.  Fortunately, I didn't have 15000 people listening to me, and I don't think my friend held it against me (maybe he thinks I'm "soft" now?).  I really don't think it's uncommon - it happens at funerals quite a bit as well.  Now, maybe Fed should be admonished for having it be such a big deal to him, but it's clear that it was a big deal.  But my main point is:  there's a reason why he broke down when he tried to speak, and why he couldn't "save it for the towel or the locker room".  Of course, not everyone is like this - it's clear that a couple of posters on this forum consider crying so foreign that they're having trouble relating.  I guess I'm not in that category.

I'll also point out one other famous crying incident that occurred a few years ago - Sampras breaking down in his AO semi against Courier (is that right?), after Gully had just been diagnosed with cancer.  That was in the middle of the match.  Pretty traumatic, I wasn't even a Sampras fan at the time and I got choked up - no shame in that in my book.  And another thing:  I don't think anyone would use this incident to question Sampras' mental tenacity.  Different circumstances, but really, there was alot of history riding on this AO final.  Many of Fed's goals, which seemed very reachable just a couple years ago, look seriously in doubt now.

[dmastous]

I think it was handled perfectly fine.  He held back what he could, I think he did a great job.  Heaven forbid we know how a tennis player feels.  I have no less respect for him after this, shoot, I might have more.

I'll also point out one other famous crying incident that occurred a few years ago - Sampras breaking down in his AO semi against Courier (is that right?), after Gully had just been diagnosed with cancer.  That was in the middle of the match.  Pretty traumatic, I wasn't even a Sampras fan at the time and I got choked up - no shame in that in my book.  And another thing:  I don't think anyone would use this incident to question Sampras' mental tenacity.  Different circumstances, but really, there was alot of history riding on this AO final.  Many of Fed's goals, which seemed very reachable just a couple years ago, look seriously in doubt now.

How about Sampras' tear riddled acceptance speach at the Hall of Fame a couple years ago? A ten minute speach that took 20 because be broke down about 15 times getting through it. Does that make him less of a man?

[Babblelot]

Holy crap criers! Day 3!   

[duggietoo]

Holy crap criers! Day 3!   

We'll have a GOAT of crying discussion next 

[dmastous]

Holy crap criers! Day 3!   

We'll have a GOAT of crying discussion next 

I'd say Sampras, hands down.

[Pacer]

Holy crap criers! Day 3!   

We'll have a GOAT of crying discussion next 

I'd say Sampras, hands down.

Nope. Zvonareva all the way.

[Babblelot]

Holy crap criers! Day 3!   

We'll have a GOAT of crying discussion next 

I'd say Sampras, hands down.

Nope. Zvonareva all the way.

Novotna set the standard! Pete's lacked the humiliation; after all, it was his retirement celebration. Roger is the first to challenge for the mantle.