Qui est le meilleur ?
Selon moi, Federer, il battra le record de Sampras, et il est plus complet.
De plus, dans les faces-à-faces, Rodgeur l´a battu, alors que c´était, à Wimbledon, sur la surface fare des deux joueurs.
Donc pour moi, la question ne se pose pas, FEDERER !!

Si la question ne se pose pas, pourquoi l´as-tu quand même posée

Lis bien !
Pour moi, la

question ne se pose pas, mais pour vous, j´aimerais avoir votre avis ?
Après, c´est, pas la peine de faire les intelligents, avec vos remarques à deux balles

Hi,

I think this is a stretch. Pete was better suited than Roger to Wimbledon during the "fast grass" era. So I think Pete would have won probably five or so Wimbledons, anyway.

But yeah, Fed would have won many of the titles against Pete + the field Pete faced, and certainly wouldn´t have lost to Hewitt, e.g.

I figure, in that era, Fed would have won something like:

Pete´s 14...

Minus the five Pete would have won anyway...

Plus a handful of Agassi´s

Plus a bunch of Frenches, where there was no real dominant force on clay during that era.

I figure 16-20 total, if their careers had coincided, against the pseudo-competition Pete played in his reign. Andre would be a sad panda, who might have eked out one lucky title...two at the most.

Er, man... Are-you speak French please ?

Are-you want speak French ?

Sorry, but I don´t think so.
My wife could!

So could you ask your wife for a short traduction ?

She´s at the supermarket for now, so it´s gonna be tough.

Well guys, gotta go, see ya.

translation lol et pas "traduction"

ben roger a déjà battu un bon nombre de ses records...

victoire consécutives en master serie
victoire consécutives en grand chelem (je crois)
et nb de semaines consécutives n°1

restent:
nb de semaine totales passé n°1
nb de Wimbledon gagnés
nb de grand chelem (Roger à mi-chemin)

See ya

Jimmy_Connors je suis sur que c´est Agrippa

Hi, I sure think I´m better than Roger, especially on the mentally side... Indeed, as you saw yesterday, Roger hasn´t been able, again, to push himself in order to turn that match in his favor. Nadal was quite nervous whereas Federer stayed on the backline... SUICIDE, man !

Well, see ya ´round, guys !

Yeah but you never won Roland Garros so if I were you, I wouldn´t give advice^^

"PeteSampras Posté le 12 juin 2006 à 13:01:41

Hi, I sure think I´m better than Roger, especially on the mentally side... Indeed, as you saw yesterday, Roger hasn´t been able, again, to push himself in order to turn that match in his favor. Nadal was quite nervous whereas Federer stayed on the backline... SUICIDE, man !

Well, see ya ´round, guys ! "

Hi Pete,

I wished Federer heard McEnroe´s comments about changing a losing strategy.

Federer was coming over the backhand *far* too much and not mixing it up. Federer simply isn´t used to hitting huge topspin one-handed backhands all day, not to mention the ncode 90 isn´t designed for that.

The times Federer hit the occasional slices, Nadal made more errors, was forced up to the net where he bricked some volleys. Federer should have been hitting alot of severe sliced backhands. Critical error. This change alone could have won him the match.

Standing *too far behind the baseline*. What the hell ? When was the last time Federer stood that far back. And why on clay, where the ball loses speed. And worse, standing back on *second serve*, when he should have been punishing the weak Nadal second serve.

On numerous occasions, Federer should have come in and finished things off with volleys. The few times he came in, Federer was successful.

Nadal´s second serve. Federer did *absolutely nothing* with it, partly because of standing so far back.

On top of all these strategic mistakes, Federer apparently just lost mental concentration and missed two easy points at the net which would have given him two critical games.

So disappointed more the way Federer played than at the final outcome. The first set Federer played brilliantly, then all of sudden changed his strategy to a losing one, what the heck ?

I still maintain that Federer has all the weapons to dismantle Nadal. He just doesn´t seem to be able to use the right shots at the right time. For someone who I thought had one of the best tennis minds, strategically his play at the French open was just terrible.

Peut être que Federer peut battre Sampras sur le nombre de titres remportés mais Sampras possédait tout de même une toute autre adversité, car en ce moment, personne ne peut rivaliser avec Federer sur dur et sur herbe vraisemblablement...

Et sur terre à part Nadal je vois pas non plus à noter