Its stunning to hear Cliff Drysdale at the start saying that Federer has more weapons than anyone he can remember watching - this was before Roger's FIRST Slam final...talk about pressure of expectations!
He was just different, everyone could tell. That's why so many were speculating about him being the best ever even as early as the next year. He looked completely unstoppable.
You can say Swiss German is close to German, but I can tell you, Germans don't understand anything when Swiss people really speak Swiss. Like, maybe a word here and there. It really is different. High German is a bit like a second language for them.
Why the fcuk were the commentators kissing Federer's a$$ as much as they were.Yes...we all could see phillipousis had a lesser chance of making it since he was a serve and volleyer and his baseline game scuked.But I think it was very disrespectful to anyone out there,the way they almost wanted the match to go the way they did.
now thats how you attack roger's return! he never really played against serve'n volleyer's most of his career so he could afford to chip and block returns on big serves. didn't work against a big dude camping at the net who knew what to do with a soft return. too bad mark couldn't rally for shit himself, and too bad roddick never learned how to properly serve'n volley.
Federer grew up playing against serve-volleyers. He's one of the best S&V returners ever. Even in this match he won the 2nd set 6-2 so I think he knew how to return Mark's serve.
it's a weak era... imagine thinking Bagdathis or Philippoussis are even great players. Imagine calling a no-brain serve-bot bum like Roddick a great player. With the eclosion of Djokovic and Nadal, Federer had as much GS as Murray whereas Novak and Nadal took all their GS with the 3 of them at their high level. Easy to see who had trash competition.
Real weak era in tennis is from year 2013 only till date. From year 1969 ( 0pen era tennis srarted) every 8 years 1 or 2 great players came viz: 1967 to 1974 were Rocket laver, ken rosewall, 1974 to 1980 jimmy connors, borg, 1980 to 1986 mcenroe, ivan lendl, 1986 to 1992, becker, edberg, 1993 to 2001 sampras, agassi, 2002 to 2009, the only & only greatest Roger federer , 2009 till date only nadal & novak ( as federer is past his prime after 2011, but as he is a once in a life time player, he is still plying & almost world no: 2 or 3 player, he could have retired in year 2013 as he achieved everything in tennis , also aged 32 years past his prime)So properly looking into details from year 1967 onwards , from year 2016 onwards 1 or 2 great players should have come ( born somewhere in year 1994 or 1995) to become top player(s) by beating nnadal & djokovic, but this did not happen & they still win grand slams & tournaments. So from year 2013 till date is the weakest era in tennis history, as federer became old past his prime & only 2 players are still winning with no real challenging players & no player ( born post 1987) has not even won 1 grandslam or any 1 major tournament. This is the worst era in the history of tennis no great player has come after year 2014 ( born around year 1995). What a pathetic state this sport is now, as there is no really talented new generation players
@@andrewgreener But you have to agree that the youngsters that were supposed to overtake were disappointing. Nishikori, Dimitrov, Raonic, Goffin, were part of a "lost generation" that helped the big 4 keep dominating. The new generation, Zverev, Medvedev, Kyrgios, De Minaur, Tsitsipas, are delaying way too much to step in. Only Thiem seems to be doing so, but the rest seem unpassionate, leaning towards the celebrity side rather than the tennis new forces. The big 4 deserved better opposition the last 6 years.
Its stunning to hear Cliff Drysdale at the start saying that Federer has more weapons than anyone he can remember watching - this was before Roger's FIRST Slam final...talk about pressure of expectations!
He was just different, everyone could tell. That's why so many were speculating about him being the best ever even as early as the next year. He looked completely unstoppable.
The commentator said, “may be the coronation is today”! Wow
We want full match in that wimbeldon 2003 final
Wah, man this seems so OLD and I was already 13yo, definitely I'm getting old....😢😅
Ah, the tournament when Roger Federer invented the modern game. A true genius.
thanks!
4:00 some little bad boy has been arrested hahahaha
You can say Swiss German is close to German, but I can tell you, Germans don't understand anything when Swiss people really speak Swiss. Like, maybe a word here and there. It really is different. High German is a bit like a second language for them.
Il primo slam
what was philippousis ranking
Unseeded.
But what was his ranking.
@@MrBjorn6 if he is unseeded he had no ranking
@@melissaterare8763 No he had a ranking, but not high enough to be seeded.
86
Why the fcuk were the commentators kissing Federer's a$$ as much as they were.Yes...we all could see phillipousis had a lesser chance of making it since he was a serve and volleyer and his baseline game scuked.But I think it was very disrespectful to anyone out there,the way they almost wanted the match to go the way they did.
now thats how you attack roger's return! he never really played against serve'n volleyer's most of his career so he could afford to chip and block returns on big serves. didn't work against a big dude camping at the net who knew what to do with a soft return. too bad mark couldn't rally for shit himself, and too bad roddick never learned how to properly serve'n volley.
Federer grew up playing against serve-volleyers. He's one of the best S&V returners ever. Even in this match he won the 2nd set 6-2 so I think he knew how to return Mark's serve.
Tough era 😂😂😂
Only an ignorant will call this weak Era tennis
"Weak era tennis"
Arthur Fungai Mvududu yeah it was a stupid thing to say that. Every time Federer wins, it was not an easy one. He fought hard to lift every trophy.
it's a weak era... imagine thinking Bagdathis or Philippoussis are even great players. Imagine calling a no-brain serve-bot bum like Roddick a great player.
With the eclosion of Djokovic and Nadal, Federer had as much GS as Murray whereas Novak and Nadal took all their GS with the 3 of them at their high level. Easy to see who had trash competition.
@@jshanker2005 why, because Federer dominated?
@@andrewgreener He challenged ignorants to call it "weak era tennis". I accepted the challenge and called it. But it was anything but.
Real weak era in tennis is from year 2013 only till date. From year 1969 ( 0pen era tennis srarted) every 8 years 1 or 2 great players came viz: 1967 to 1974 were Rocket laver, ken rosewall, 1974 to 1980 jimmy connors, borg, 1980 to 1986 mcenroe, ivan lendl, 1986 to 1992, becker, edberg, 1993 to 2001 sampras, agassi, 2002 to 2009, the only & only greatest Roger federer , 2009 till date only nadal & novak ( as federer is past his prime after 2011, but as he is a once in a life time player, he is still plying & almost world no: 2 or 3 player, he could have retired in year 2013 as he achieved everything in tennis , also aged 32 years past his prime)So properly looking into details from year 1967 onwards , from year 2016 onwards 1 or 2 great players should have come ( born somewhere in year 1994 or 1995) to become top player(s) by beating nnadal & djokovic, but this did not happen & they still win grand slams & tournaments. So from year 2013 till date is the weakest era in tennis history, as federer became old past his prime & only 2 players are still winning with no real challenging players & no player ( born post 1987) has not even won 1 grandslam or any 1 major tournament. This is the worst era in the history of tennis no great player has come after year 2014 ( born around year 1995). What a pathetic state this sport is now, as there is no really talented new generation players
Not a weak era. An era dominated by three players. I wouldn't call this a weak era.
@@andrewgreener But you have to agree that the youngsters that were supposed to overtake were disappointing. Nishikori, Dimitrov, Raonic, Goffin, were part of a "lost generation" that helped the big 4 keep dominating. The new generation, Zverev, Medvedev, Kyrgios, De Minaur, Tsitsipas, are delaying way too much to step in. Only Thiem seems to be doing so, but the rest seem unpassionate, leaning towards the celebrity side rather than the tennis new forces. The big 4 deserved better opposition the last 6 years.
not a week era. just 3 dominant players. had they played in those time no other player would be remembered.. ;-)