In comparison with eras of Borg and Sampras, present men's tennis field is one-sided at least turf-wise. To be counted in the same rank as them, Federer needs to improve the win-loss record with Nadal on clay. Then, OK, (if my memory is right) French open was Pete's waterloo as US open for Borg.
RE:Advantage Federer
by cynic on Jul 04, 2007 11:33 AM Permalink
dude Federer is 2nd best on clay and the gap between him and Nadal on clay is not all that much. Sampras was a complete flop on clay, he never even reached a French open final.
RE:Advantage Federer
by Rudraraju Narsimha on Jul 04, 2007 12:45 PM Permalink
i don't think federer (or any body in the world) can beat nadal in clay. but nadal can beat federer in grass(only 1%). The major advantage for him is his top spin.
Sampras started his career in clay but couldn't get even 1 french open title. I bet same thing happens to Federer.
