Chances of Roger winning the French Open? He needs at least another french major to balance his titles

Chances of Roger winning the French Open? He needs at least another french major to balance his titles

Other urls found in this thread:

tennisabstract.com/cgi-bin/player.cgi?p=RogerFederer&f=ACareerqq&q=DavidFerrer&q=DavidFerrer
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

He's skipping clay again and for good reason, it's too hard on the body.

Since he won AO I think he might play RG, but I'd say there are 30% chances

source? It bothers me that he only has 1 french

French Open is barely a Grand Slam anyway, there have been talks to downgrade it

Even before Nadal arrived on the scene, Federer couldn't win RG. It was sheer luck that he faced Söderling in the final that one time.

Without Nadal, Federer would’ve played:
>2005 SF vs Ferrer
>06 final vs Ljubicic
>07 and 08 finals vs Djokovic
>2011 final vs Murray
Not a stretch to imagine that he could’ve won 4 of those years if it weren’t for Rafa. It took the GOAT clay player to stop him from several calendar year grand slams.

lost to Ferrer
won to Ljubicic
lost both to Djokovic
lost to Murray

nah only 1 more

>lost to Ferrer
>lost to Murray
nah

0

>lost to Ferrer
tennisabstract.com/cgi-bin/player.cgi?p=RogerFederer&f=ACareerqq&q=DavidFerrer&q=DavidFerrer

Traceback (most recent call last): File "player.cgi", line 4868, in if 'q' in form: opponent = 'var opponent="' + form['q'].value + '";' AttributeError: 'list' object has no attribute 'value'

they never played in Rolland Garros

Only if Nadal is out for clay season

...

If Nadal is healthy for the clay season he won't even play it.

youre absolutely fucking retarded. federer only lost to nadal the greatest clay player ever at RG. if nadal wasnt there, federer would be undisputed king of clay for this wave of players. he consistently ended up in the finals beating the rest of the competition.

...

No point in playing if he can't win it —and he can't. He'll skip clay again to arrive at full strength at Wimbledon and stay healthy until the USO.

t. clay baby

>lost to ferrer
>losing to 07/08 djokovic
Yeah... nah.

finaly australino pen is over (didnt watch a single match hehe)
i can now post agaain en paz


big congratz 2 jon smith 4 winning 10ys braquet

jt btfo

>lost to Ferrer
no matter what you are smoking juan, I want it too

Federer is actually a Top 5 clay player of all time

name all of them

>1.Nadal
>2.Borg
>3.Kuerten
>4.Vilas
>5.Federer

redpill me on the differences between tennis surfaces and why they matter so much

In order of high to low bouncing angle for balls
>clay
>hard
>grass

In order of high to low ball speed after bouncing
>grass
>hard
>clay

So it's understandable that clay surface favors the guy that can play long rallies more while grass favors the guy who plays short points. Hard courts are versatile because depending on the material used, you can end up with a fast or slow, high-bouncing or low-bouncing hard court. In addition to this, because of the nature of the grass court (people trample over the grass, leaving only dirt behind), the ball bounce at a given area can be very tricky and hard to predict.

Grass also naturally decays over the course of a tournament, which reduces its speed greatly. And then there’s the height of the grass, the type of seed, and other stuff. This is the reason why the Rod Laver Arena court (AO) is actually faster nowadays than Wimbledon’s Centre Court, meanwhile Arthur Ashe’s court at the USO is quite slow for a hardcourt (even moreso last year when it was freshly painted).
I should add that, while clay is the most physically demanding of the surfaces (because of the kind of game it forces: defensive, long rallies and baseline play), hard is actually the most damaging surface to a player’s legs and joints.

Nadal
Borg
Lendl/Wilander/Kuerten