Welcome back to Net Talk. This is our section for tennis comment and analysis. As well as commenting on the latest issues in the game, I'll include links to things such as our regular betting tips. But I also want you to contribute. I'm happy to publish some of your comments and answer, if I can, any questions you may have about all things tennis. The email address is: tennisfeedback@sportinglife.com.
Suggestions are also welcome. The page will be regularly updated, so don't forget to check back soon.
Andy Schooler
YOUR FEEDBACK: ROGER FEDERER - posted June 8-15
Here's some of your feedback to my recent article about Roger Federer and the argument about him being the greatest player of all time. The full article is published below the comments:
I agree with your assessment completely. For me, there are two components to the "GOAT" reference: statistics and the x-factor. He's already proven statistically after winning the French that he stepped up to a level beyond Sampras' amazing achievement. Roger Federer is clearly now considered greater than Pete Sampras and at 27, he will surely surpass the number 14 maybe as early as this July. But then there really is his style, his genius of play that perhaps is subjective...but then really not. He's so smooth and so gifted that most people who are not great tennis players themselves don't recognise what a maestro he truly is - the way he slices, drop shots a service return so effortlessly, the way he glides around the court and never hearing footsteps. The angles he finds are unfathomable even by the likes of McEnroe who had some of the best hands in tennis. He is superior to anyone who has ever held a tennis racquet. Moreover, how do you argue with Sampras, Agassi, McEnroe and Emerson - giants of tennis who have all now stated that in their minds, Federer is the Greatest of All Time? I think if anyone knows, those four would.
Fay Ann Lee
The way Federer plays represents all that is pure and skilful in the game of tennis. All you critics should open your mouth and swallow your computers, cameras, and words. You don't deserve to witness a man as great as Roger who wants nothing more than to compete with his heart on his sleeve and do it in a way strictly defined by "class!" He symbolizes the spirit of us who love the game before money, politics, news reporters, and two-faced commentators get involved. Similar to a Barcelona football squad of 2009 it brings tears to my eyes!
Desio Prodotto
I wholeheartedly agree with Andy - he is the greatest ever. He is a good sportsman, a true gentleman (on and off court) and as someone once likened him to Mohammed Ali - he floats around the court like a graceful butterfly with what appears to be minimal effort, but can sting like a bee with both his powerful ONE-HANDED forehand and backhand when required. He has a brilliance on the court that I have never seen before and it is a pleasure and a privilege to be able to watch him. The last 18 months have been tough for Roger but he has bounced back and I truly believe that with his determination he will be #1 again by the end of the year - he never stopped being #1 in my eyes, and in the eyes of his many fans around the world. As one of those loyal fans, I am sure I was not alone when I openly sobbed when he won the French Open - I am looking forward to Wimbledon and seeing him regain his title.
Maureen Piercy
Federer has not impressed during the past year and even in the French Open he had struggles against eminently beatable opponents like Acasuso, Haas and Del Potro who all took him to five sets. He has only one title on the tour this past year and although he took the French Open final it was made easy as Soderling caved in from the very first set as he lost serve three times and played a very weak game. Murray, Djokovic, Nadal and others are more than capable of beating Federer and all have winning records against him in recent times. He can beat his drum all he wants but until he shows better form he is not going to be seen as a sure-fire winner.
Phil Coates, Palo Alto CA
Roger Federer is definitely the 'Greatest-Of-All-Times-Ever'! Who can beat that?
Elizabeth Salayo
Let's face facts here. Rafael Nadal has "owned" Roger Federer over the past few years - the "peak" years of Federer's career. Nobody could convince me that Nadal has not proven himself to be a truly better tennis player than Federer. In seven grand slam finals against Federer, Nadal has won five and on all three surfaces too. In singles Nadal has won thirteen of their twenty contests. In 2008 Nadal won four clay court titles defeating Federer in three finals. He beat Federer at Wimbledon and took the number one title. In 2009 Nadal won at Indian Wells, Monte Carlo, Barcelona and Rome. During that time Federer won one solitary title, Madrid. Until the past three years Federer has feasted on the weakest set of tennis players in history. How things have changed and how much has Nadal shown he is Federer's master! In this year's strange Paris tournament Federer was called upon to face only one top ten player and in the end a pathetic performance from a wavering unknown gave him the title. As for comparisons with Pete Sampras, the American's career was played against a formidable set of opponents ranging from Lendl, Becker, McEnroe, Chang, Stich, Ivanesevic, Edberg, Courier, Agassi at his height and Pat Rafter. By contrast, Federer's list of defeated slam opponents is like the "Who's not who" of tennis less-than-greats ..... Phillipousis, Hewitt, Roddick (three), Murray, Baghdatis, Gonzalez and now Soderling fits right in there. The lack of depth and talent of Federer's era can be measured by the fact that a one-shot big server like Roddick could make it to four grand-slam finals.
Phil Coates, Palo Alto CA
THE GREATEST OF ALL TIME - posted June 7
The sprinter Maurice Greene famously has a tattoo of the word GOAT, standing for 'Greatest Of All Time', on his arm.
Don't expect Roger Federer to be heading out to get the same thing done this week, although he'd be fully entitled to do so.
For by finally winning the French Open title at Roland Garros on Sunday he has surely cemented his legacy as the best player to ever hold a racquet.
In lifting the trophy on Court Philippe Chatrier, Federer became only the sixth man ever - Fred Perry, Don Budge, Rod Laver, Roy Emerson and Andre Agassi being the others - to win all four Grand Slam titles in his career.
Just how difficult is to win on all the different surfaces is probably best summed up by considering the names not on that list.
The likes of Pete Sampras, Boris Becker and Stefan Edberg all never got to grips with the slow clay. Ditto John McEnroe. In contrast it was the Wimbledon grass which cost Ivan Lendl the full set, while Bjorn Borg never won away from Wimbledon and Roland Garros. And these are just the players from the Open era.
Federer has eclipsed them all - and is also now level with Sampras at the top of the all-time Grand Slam winners list on 14.
But even the biggest Sampras fan would surely struggle to argue their man's case to be the greatest now.
Federer's career Grand Slam is a great 'tie-breaker' to play in that debate and that's before we even leave the stats behind and talk about style.
The Swiss has a style that knocks Sampras' into a cocked hat.
I always felt Sampras was somewhat harshly treated by media and fans. Never loved like Federer is, the American was the total professional but showed little of his character. His style of play, certainly at Wimbledon, relied heavily on the best serve - first and second - the game has ever seen. It would be utterly foolish to suggest he had little else, but he didn't have Federer's all-round game.
Federer has produced a court craft better than anyone this pundit has ever seen. Some of his shots have to be seen to be believed; he literally plays some you would never have thought possible before.
Some will point out that racquet technology has stretched what is possible and that is certainly true, but what Federer has come up with is brilliance - and, with the possible exception of Rafael Nadal, it's not being produced by any others with the same state-of-the-art racquets.
I pertinently remember back in 2004 when Federer won his second Grand Slam title at the Australian Open almost laughing at Andrew Castle's suggestion that the Swiss could be become the greatest of all time.
Five years on and can honestly say I am happy to be proved wrong.
The entertainment provided by this master of his trade in the years since has taken tennis to new heights and attracted interest in the sport not seen since the era of Borg, McEnroe and Jimmy Connors.
And if you're still not convinced, here's a frightening thought to finish on - Federer is still just 27. Surely greater greatness awaits.
Do you agree with Andy? Is Federer the greatest ever? If not, who is? Let us know your views by emailing: tennisfeedback@sportinglife.com
ONE MOMENT IN TIME FOR ROGER - posted June 2
One of the great aspects of tennis is the ability of a match to swing on a single point.
Football pundits often mention 'turning points' in a game but if you really want to look at pivotal moments, then tennis is the game to study.
And a textbook case came at the French Open on Monday when Roger Federer stood at the precipice only to conjure up something special and drag himself back away from the abyss.
Despite playing arguably the better tennis against Tommy Haas for two sets, Federer - possibly struggling mentally having been installed as everybody's title favourite following the previous day's sensational demise of Rafael Nadal - found himself two sets down in the pair's fourth-round clash.
And when he was serving at 3-4 and fell break point down, the expectation looked to be weighing heavily on his shoulders.
Had he lost the point, Federer's hopes of finally adding the French Open crown to his CV, thus completing a career Grand Slam that only five men have previously managed, were surely over.
Instead the Swiss legend showed the nerve of the champion he is, crunching a forehand just inside line for a clean winner.
If Federer does indeed go on to lift the trophy and write another chapter in the history books, it will be this moment he looks back at.
There were plenty of other majestic shots from the second seed during the match - the half-volley he produced to break serve in the following game surely deserves a mention - yet it was the forehand winner, and its timing, that did the damage.
Having looked so close to a famous win, Haas, aformer world number two, crumbled.
He would win just two more games, proving another old tennis adage - that the game is almost as mental as it is physical.
Federer's struggle will certainly give hope to the rest of the field, not least Andy Murray, now the bookies' fancy to reach the final from the opposite side of the draw.
However, what Murray et al will also have learned from this match, if they didn't know it before, is that it ain't over til it's over against Federer.
The 13-time Grand Slam winner has already dropped four sets in his four matches so far so is hardly looking a dominant figure, yet none of his opponents has been able to cash in on the chances they have created.
Federer plays the big points better than anyone still on the drawsheet and, as he showed against Haas, if he can keep the thoughts of never having a better chance to win at Roland Garros out of his mind, no-one will mentally get the better of him.
Instead they will have to outplay him and the only man who has been able to do that with any regularity still left in is Murray.
If that final unfolds, we will be in for history either way.
We could be in for quite a weekend.
Click here for May's Net Talk
Click here for April's Net Talk
Click here for March's Net Talk
Click here for February's Net Talk
Click here for January's Net Talk
Click here for December's Net Talk
Click here for November's Net Talk
Click here for October's Net Talk
E-mail Article 
Print-Friendly
Subscribe to RSS Feed 
Post to del.icio.us
Facebook
