"I'm happy because I have not used much of my energy so far," said _________. "I think I can go deep in the tournament. I feel totally relaxed. Mentally I'm okay. I'm quite confident. I can feel it, which is what you need if you want good results at Roland Garros."
Who do you think said this quote:
a) 7 time RG champion, potentially best clay player of all time, Rafael Nadal
b) 1 time RG champion, potentialyl best clay runner-up of all time, Roger Federer
Obviously it's Roger. I don't think Nadal has ever used so many positive emotions about his chances/feelings about a tournament in one interview. But yeah, old man Roger got lucky once again, Benneatau who was coming off a 5 setter, and will next face Simon, yet another player coming off a 5 setter. Both French with some home crowd support for sure.
Do you understand that players like Benneteau or Simon don't have enough stamina after a 5 set match since they don't tend to go deep in a Major? Or do you want to ignore that and stay either naive or ignorant or sarcastic?
Btw, I read a lot of comments by Federer fans who said Federer lost the Olympics to Murray because he was too tired after his match against Del Potro. So keep that in mind too when you make comments like above.
I should also let you know that I was kind when I said Federer holds 30% of his total success on clay. It's actually 13% (10 out of 76 titles), so basically 1 clay title each year if you count from 2003. And he did not win any clay title in the year 2006, 2010, 2011 - unheard of any other clay court champion who won FO multiple times - be it Guga or Borg or Lendl or Nadal and their career dominates with clay titles. In fact, Federer won only 1 clay title in the last 3 years and that was the blue stuff in Madrid. And some of you want to line him up with these great clay players.
And you don't need a sample size against a player like Kuerten who has more than enough credential on clay. In other words, it was no fluke that he lost to Guga. They were both at their best at that time - Federer ranked 1 and already 2 Slams behind him. Keep in mind that Federer didn't have any problems winning the three other Majors in that same year. So why did he suddenly need to come into his own terms on clay? Well, there's a puzzle for you. And what about Nadal? He was given a very big sample size against him and still wasn't able to win even one RG off Nadal. How big a sample size or how many opportunities do you need? But I bet had he played Nadal only a couple of times like he did against Kuerton, you would have made the same excuse about Nadal. Sample size needed etc.
And if you feel you are so great then you need to beat a player who is equally great at a Major level because players tend to give their best in GSs and it is where the ultimate superiority is established. I mean the very reason you brag about Federer is because he won 17 Slams. If you go to Masters level, then it's Nadal who leads it. I suppose then he's the most successful and goat of all goats.
And why do people insist on including 'all time' when they want to brag about their players? All time also includes the future. Do they mean they've seen the future too? Well, I know one Federer fan who seriously claims Federer is not from this planet. I guess nothing is far fetched when it comes to certain fans. Alas.