Federer all class no matter what Djoko's father says...

First topic message reminder :

I saw this girls pictures on twitter with Federer but here's the full story...


http://twitter.com/bktinoco


@federering well, I had cancer in 2011/2012, and there's this foundation called the Make A Wish Foundation. They grant wishes to kids, teens and yound adults who have life-threatening diseases. I made my wish in 2012, and my wish was to meet Roger Federer. I waited for more than a year, and I didn't really know if they were gonna be able to grant me this wish (you have second and third options) since Roger has such a busy schedule and it was taking such a long time. In June I was told that ESPN was doing a piece on high school tennis and they were gonna film a bit of my school tennis team. So I went there and we had practice and in the end they told us we had a culminating activity that would kinda test our knowledge of tennis. They gave us an iPad to watch something, and it was the Wimbledon 2012 match point (that already got me like really excited) but then after Roger falls to the ground they cut the video and Roger shows up in a kind of home made video or something, and he says "Hi Beatriz, I heard you're a big fan of mine, so I'm inviting you with your family to come watch me play at Wimbledon. Go pack your bags, have a safe trip, and I'll see you there!" (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) I freaked out so so so badly. I couldn't believe it haha. All I could think was "OMG ROGER FEDERER KNOWS MY NAME!" Haha. So, yeah, this was on a Monday, and my flight to London was on that Thursday (I barely had any time to freak out) and I live in the US so... But yeah, then I found out ESPN was doing a piece on my wish and it's actually gonna air in August icon_smile.gif anyway, I got there and the very next day I met Roger! First I went to the nike house, where players get their gear and everything, and they actually gave me lots of stuff, all white since it was Wimbledon. Then we went to the All England Club where I was actually gonna meet him. We were waiting on the place where players eat and hang out. However, the guys from ESPN told me we might not see him that day because schedules change a lot. So I wasn't expecting anythint, just sitting watching some practices and someone calls my name. I turn and it's FREAKING ROGER FEDERER. He comes up, gives me a hug and a kiss and then sits down and starts talking to me very naturally. I was trying hard not to freak out haha. We talked for about 10-15 minutes (which I was told later he wasn't supposed to do. He was just supposed to come and say hi and then go to practice but he's a perfect human being and talked to me for a while!) oh my gosh this is getting very long haha I'm working so I have to stop now but I'll continue the story in about half an hour





@federering after that he went to practice, but he told me to go change, because I was gonna watch his practice from inside the court and maybe we could hit a little bit after he was done. He told me that he would send someone to take me to the court because like no one is allowed in the courts except the players and coaches. So I changed and went there, and I was waiting for someone to come take me to the actual court when I hear someone call my name and oh my god it's Paul Annacone. He sent PAUL ANNACONE to get me. So I go to the court and am introduced to Sev and Steph, and then sit there watching his practice with Hewitt (!!!!). After his practice he tells me we're gonna hit for a while and Sev says "but she doesn't have a racquet" and Roger is like "she can use one of mine" (!!!!!!!) so he reaches into his bag and gives me one of his racquets to hit with (!!!!!!). I was really scared because I'm not like amazing at tennis, I'm pretty good, but not out of the ordinary, and even if I was, it was freaking Roger Federer. But Paul and Roger told me not to be scared, it was so cute haha. So we hit for a bit, then he told me to come up and volley and he went up too. Paul told me not to be scared of Roger in the net 'cause it was all pressure, he wasn't even that good haha. Then he served and oh my gosh it's fast even though he wasn't even close to full speed. After that he went over the net, shook my hand and gave me a kiss on the cheek (!!!!!!). Then we walked (and talked) together to the other court where he was going to practice more with Hewitt. I watched this second practice and then after they were done Roger came up to me and said "well that's my day" and we talked for a bit more, and then he said "I'll see you on Sunday" (this was a Friday) and I freaked out because oh my gosh I was gonna see him again!!! So yeah that was it for this day. On Sunday the guys from ESPN told me I was gonna take a tour of the grounds, even though I had already taken one when I went to London for vacation. The more time at Wimbledon the better haha. But then when I'm waiting to take the tour I find out that the people who are giving me the tour are the Chairman of Wimbledon (!!!!!!) and Roger (!!!!!!!). Like, OH MY GOD. So yeah, they took me around, and to the walk the players take to get to Centre Court, and then to actual Centre Court, with everything being explained to me by Roger and the Chairman. After we got to Centre Court Roger had to leave earlier than us because he had his press conference (which I was going to), so he left us there to see a bit more of Centre Court. AND on his way out he talked to the main guy that gets Centre Court ready, to let me actually go there. Like, I stepped on the grass on Centre Court because of Roger. He's perfect oh my god. And then we took a while there so his manager called the girl from ESPN to ask her if we were going because Roger was waiting for me to start the press conference (!!!!!!!!!!). OMG HE IS PERFECT. So we went to the press conference and saw everything, and then on my wait out I passed Roger and he was like "So did you like it? Me getting grilled by the press?" He's always so dorky and funny haha. And then the people from ESPN took us to the players lounge because Roger was gonna sign some stuff for me after he had done all of his interviews (a lot of them) and gotten a award (you know, just usual stuff). I was sitting there waiting for him and it was amazing because I saw soooo many other players. Tsonga asked to get one of the chairs in our table actually haha. I saw Murray, Nadal, Haas, Ferrer, Benneteau, Tipsarevic, Serena, Wozniacki, Radwanska, Lisicki, like, so many of them from up close. It was like heaven for a tennis fan haha. But then Roger finished his interviews and sat at out table with us. I had so many things for him to sign but I knew he was busy so I just took 4 pictures (one for each one in my family) and then 4 blank papers and my tennis bag, and gave for him to sign. He actually addressed the blank papers to each one of us, it was so perfect. In mine he wrote a bit more, and even a happy birthday!! (Did I mention it was my 18th birthday??) And then he asked me "is that it?" and I said "yes" and he was like "are you sure? Don't be embarrassed about it." He's so amazing and kind. So I gave him the rest of the stuff to sign. And he was just sitting there signing and chatting with me, but his manager was telling the guys from ESPN that he needed to go eat lunch, and Roger probably knew he had to, but he would have stayed there the whole day, just talking to us. He stayed a lot more than he had to for sure. But then the people from ESPN tried kinda finishing things up so that he could leave before his manager freaked out. So he went around the table hugging my mom, my dad and my sister, and then it was my turn. He told me I had been through a lot and hugged me really hard and I just started crying so so so much in his shoulder (it was around that time that the picture from my avi was taken haha) He was like "awnn". Then when I let go of him I was still like sobbing and I turned to him and he was kinda tearing up :') I thanked him and then he went.

i am not sure what the big deal is re the comments Djokovic's parents made. they are parents! parents are supposed to be biased and emotional. it sort of goes with the territory doesn't it?

and even if they made those comments in a calculating manner so bloody what? I do not know Federer and Nadal personally but I am reasonably sure they will not sweat it. and if they don't why are anonymous posters getting into a lather over it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlhpqh7oNOw

Despite all the trenches being dug in this thread, this, to me, shows the wonderful side of being a human being.

And mutual respect -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJ8BwuLi5ok

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94xyOpETYYs

Only if fans knew who they were a fan of, perhaps the trenches would turn into bridges.

^ laverfan. I've always thought that it was obvious that Federer and Nadal have great respect for each other and appear to really like each other too. They remind me of Navratalova and Evert in that way. I've never understood why so many fans of one have a dislike for the other but maybe that makes their rivalry more exciting to watch?

IMO the "trenches are dug" by relatives and fans of other players because Federer and Nadal reserve this sort of special respect and admiration for each other. And why not as they can admire whoever they want. Having two players who clearly like and respect each other at the top of the sport has influenced how other players behave mostly in a good way. They all try to compete with Federer and Nadal in the niceness category as well as competing with their forehands. All the buddie stuff! However disappointment can set in not only when Fed and Nadal take more than their fair share of the trophies but also when some feel they don't share enough of their respect.

Was it a coincidence that Djokovic's father made his comments just after Federer gave an interview saying once again how he felt that his rivalry with Nadal was the best ever?

This is a bit off topic but on another thread Federer's infamous "Be Quiet" to Djokovic's family was being discussed. I'm not sure if anyone made the connection that this match was the first time that the pair had played since the AO semi. After that AO semi Djokovic's mother made her famous comment about the king being dead long live the next king (her son). I thought Federer's "Be Quiet" was in the circumstances both perfectly timed and deserved. It still makes me laugh just thinking about it. My only disappointment is that I had sort of remembered it as "Shut Up!"

I can see this from all angles.

Djoko's dad - He has seen that side of Roger that has bred anger as by 'that be quiet' incident so you can expect him to have problems with Federer. Sometimes it just needs a little issue to start things off.

Federer's fans - They will always point to his Nike awards, his helping of flow pros perhaps new to the tour with advice and other stuff, his charity work and kind words aimed at likes of Roddick, Safin etc in victories over them.

His detractors - They see the other side of Roger. The side that will use what he can to gain mental edges by trying to belittle those that threatened his dominance in the game most with comments like they 'were lucky' after he had been beaten. He is fine enough when he wins so must mean he is a sore loser in their eyes. They will also point to infractions on court such as 'be quiet' incident, swearing at the umpire in US Open Final (V Del Potro) and casting a swear word at Murray in the Australian Open this year.

Someone earlier on said it all - we are all human - yes even the best tennis players in the world. None of them are whiter than white and neither should they be painted as such. Each have had their moments where they have let themselves down and each have done some really admirable stuff. Lets just leave it at that.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

His detractors - They see the other side of Roger. The side that will use what he can to gain mental edges by trying to belittle those that threatened his dominance in the game most with comments like they 'were lucky' after he had been beaten. He is fine enough when he wins so must mean he is a sore loser in their eyes. They will also point to infractions on court such as 'be quiet' incident, swearing at the umpire in US Open Final (V Del Potro) and casting a swear word at Murray in the Australian Open this year.

Someone earlier on said it all - we are all human - yes even the best tennis players in the world. None of them are whiter than white and neither should they be painted as such. Each have had their moments where they have let themselves down and each have done some really admirable stuff. Lets just leave it at that.

Each of the incidents you have listed as showing the "other side" are jumped on and used as examples of Federer not being "classy". I certainly don't see them as that they are all the reactions of someone who expects the best from an opponent and his family including "classy behaviour". To be classy you don't have to be a door mat. Most of Federer's detractors have reason's for trying to prove Federer isn't classy just like Djokovic's father. It's worth looking at where any criticism comes from.

I agree that no tennis player is whiter than white. They have all got where they are from having good forehands and not being afraid to use them in order to win prize money by making someone else lose prize money... hardly a career for someone who's personality is overtly empathetic. But part of what makes Federer so attractive is he does appear whiter than some. ie more classy. He will be remembered for it.

And likewise look at where the praise is coming from - such as Roger's fans.

How classy he seems depends on through whose eyes you are looking. Yes he will be remembered for so much - good and the less good. All I know is that each of Djokovic, Nadal and Federer came across as very nice away from the 'goldfish bowl' world of tennis when speaking on the BBC's recent Andy Murray documentary.

Darrin Cahill on Changeovertennis behind the scenes..

"DC: He was taking cortisone shots for the last six months of his career, just to get himself onto the court. Roger’s nowhere near that, obviously, but things can snowball pretty quickly if you don’t take care of business.

It might just mean that Roger may eventually have to take a good chunk of time off the tour to make sure he addresses his problem. He’s an incredible talent, wonderful on the court, and the most incredible guy off the court as well. If he can fix it up, I have no doubt that he can put himself in a place to win more majors"

I don't know how many people, that actually know him and have no reason to lie, have to say what a great guy he is for the haters to see him in a more balanced way. Not perfect by any means- but he's clearly a solid guy.

You've found some great examples truffin.  Although I am a fully paid up TMF fan, I agree with others that Fed has sometimes not been such a gracious loser in the immediate aftermath of a match, but he is always good copy with what he says about his game and others provoking many a better understanding of the game or a great discussion on here    The 'lucky shot' was a response when he was very sore after losing a very tight battle and having had match point - it wasn't his finest moment, and he made himself look silly, but it is interesting to see the passion and intensity that it takes to be at the top of a sport and that doesn't just evaporate the minute you walk off court.  It is a very rare moment and Fed is tremendous with the amount of press conferences he will do - I think out of hours and hours, there will be a few moments and he has found the constant suggestion that his time is perhaps over very difficult to deal with.  Djokovic is the best and most gracious loser of all the top guys - he was impeccable at Wimbledon controlling his face even when the camera panned away - however, he is not the most gracious winner so we can nitpick over every little nuance, loser's summing up and shirt ripping, but the fact remains that the top guys conduct themselves off court pretty well.

Fed has been the most brilliant No 1 - he has given back to tennis through a lot of work (particularly last year) on the Players' Council, has time for the other players and is an approachable and friendly player to those ranked from 1-500, and abides by the rules on court - he has as much respect playing No 489 as he will No 2 in this way.  What more does anyone want?  People forget these were all terribly young men when they hit the top, growing up with tremendous media focus on their every move - I don't think many here, with sometimes famously irascible natures when they don't like the debate, could even come close to coping with that spotlight graciously for a day.

I'm no Fed fan, but I'd agree with what Time Please says above. The odd less than gracious comment after a loss doesn't really diminish that he seems to be a pretty decent guy - as do all of the top guys.

Some people seem to have extraordinarily high expectations of how they expect players to behave after a tough loss. In fact, I'm still stunned sometimes when I see fans looking to get things signed by a losing player walking off court - to me, that's worse fan behaviour than cheering a double fault!

Yeah, I certainly think that one comment about a shot overshadows pretty much giving every effort possible in private to aid a dreadfully ill girls wishes.

Some people on this site are just stupid really. There's no other useful polite word for them, though perhaps just a bit thick might do as well.

Well thats hardly a fair comment is it bb. People have their opinions on Federer, in fact most people do, very few of them are black or white. Just because someone thinks hes not comepletely perfect does not mean they think every good thing he does can be disregarded, and importantly the other way around works too.
But to insult peoples intelligence, and quite patronisingly to fellow forum members for beign opinionated isnt nice.
Just in case you think im a "bit thick" for my opinion, Federers a human. Hes a nice man but in TENNIS hes a man who loves to win, whos been the best and still thinks HES the best, soo he can, naturally, be more at mercy of the weaker human emotions. Nothing he does cancels out anything, it all counts as part of his whole.

falzy21 wrote:Well thats hardly a fair comment is it bb. People have their opinions on Federer, in fact most people do, very few of them are black or white. Just because someone thinks hes not comepletely perfect does not mean they think every good thing he does can be disregarded, and importantly the other way around works too.
But to insult peoples intelligence, and quite patronisingly to fellow forum members for beign opinionated isnt nice.
Just in case you think im a "bit thick" for my opinion, Federers a human. Hes a nice man but in TENNIS hes a man who loves to win, whos been the best and still thinks HES the best, soo he can, naturally, be more at mercy of the weaker human emotions. Nothing he does cancels out anything, it all counts as part of his whole.

 

falzy21 wrote:Well thats hardly a fair comment is it bb. People have their opinions on Federer, in fact most people do, very few of them are black or white. Just because someone thinks hes not comepletely perfect does not mean they think every good thing he does can be disregarded, and importantly the other way around works too.
But to insult peoples intelligence, and quite patronisingly to fellow forum members for beign opinionated isnt nice.
Just in case you think im a "bit thick" for my opinion, Federers a human. Hes a nice man but in TENNIS hes a man who loves to win, whos been the best and still thinks HES the best, soo he can, naturally, be more at mercy of the weaker human emotions. Nothing he does cancels out anything, it all counts as part of his whole.

No, I think it's very fair.

It's quite wrong to equate the idiocy being paraded with the comment that he isn't completely perfect, which is not even really worth saying, it being self-evident. Nor does it really advance anything to mention that he's human. That's Los pretty much understood. However, I understand the point you're making and agree, of course he's flawed, nobody has ever suggested otherwise.

However that isn't the point some have been making. Some of those other ideas are to equate or even elevate a jibe at a shot with giving up extensive time to a desperately ill girl he never knew, and for that I think 'stupid' is quite a restrained description.

Well if thats someone specific youre aiming that at, and not just some people, say soo, else it might offend someone you didn't direct it to. I still think its better to say they're out of order, rather than just a direct insult, which tends to just make things worse but hey thats just an opinion.

falzy21 wrote:Well if thats someone specific youre aiming that at, and not just some people, say soo, else it might offend someone you didn't direct it to. I still think its better to say they're out of order, rather than just a direct insult, which tends to just make things worse but hey thats just an opinion.

Falzy the problem you need to understand is simple, an ill girl was mad happy by Fed, he has done several things like this to make world happy, and to compare all these saint full acts with a pitfull argument with an umpire is very stupid to say the least, I am yet to get an answer on the list of war crimes he committed that he doesn't deserve a saint status?

Yes he is no GOD, yes he is a human, but a very humble human given his status. He has done more than million times of good work to charity than some spine less posters who take a dig at him. 

invisiblecoolers wrote:

falzy21 wrote:Well if thats someone specific youre aiming that at, and not just some people, say soo, else it might offend someone you didn't direct it to. I still think its better to say they're out of order, rather than just a direct insult, which tends to just make things worse but hey thats just an opinion.

Falzy the problem you need to understand is simple, an ill girl was mad happy by Fed, he has done several things like this to make world happy, and to compare all these saint full acts with a pitfull argument with an umpire is very stupid to say the least, I am yet to get an answer on the list of war crimes he committed that he doesn't deserve a saint status?

Yes he is no GOD, yes he is a human, but a very humble human given his status. He has done more than million times of good work to charity than some spine less posters who take a dig at him. 

I think what I'm trying to get across by continuing to post what others say about him is that Federer does go the extra mile in terms of time and generosity many others don't.. some on here say- hey, so what- Nadal and Djokovic or whoever do charity too, Federer is so rich he should do it,etc... but what they refuse to see is Federer goes the "extra mile". As many pointed out on twitter that this girl has been recounting her story-- Make a Wish surprises usually go like this (and people are recounting personal stories): you wish is to see Miley Cyrus and they take you to her concert, you get to go backstage, stand in line with other people getting a photo.. she greets you, puts an arm around you, smiles.. maybe chats for less than a minute and you are whisked away to some cool seats.... great stuff- but compare to how in depth and invested Federer is with this girl. It also reminds me of a story I read by a reporter at the Estoril tournament a few years ago-- Federer was doing a kids clinic with another player and the writer was talking about how engaged and focused Federer was with the kids and how he was giving them 100% attention while the other player was hitting balls to kids while talking on his cellphone to his girlfriend...just completely disengaged.. this is a tiny tournament off the beaten path. Federer could easily get away with being less engaged and no one would know the wiser- but that's not who he is... IT's what Roddick described in New York, and what I witnessed as well.

I've been around some of the great athletes of all time.. worked with Ali for 12 years who is lauded as one of the great humanitarian athletes of modern times-- and I know the difference between those who do their fair share of charity, get their tax write offs from it, treat fans well but more as part of the job, compared to what Federer does-- and Federer deserves credit for that. Yes, he can get snippy as all of us do when tired, frustrated, yes he goes to the bathroom just like all of us do, yes he bleeds... but the guy is blazing a pretty rare path amongst the Sport GOATs in terms of athletic accomplishments, improving his sport, and improving the world through good works and example.

A great testament to Fed is how he redefined World #1 to be such an ambassadorial role. It no longer simply means you are the most successful player. It is now viewed as a representative of that sport.

Did we see the greats of yesteryear acting in such a way? Even going back just one 'generation', I don't recall Sampras and Agassi doing that much, let alone going further back through Lendl, McEnroe, Edberg etc.

And yet, subsequent to Federer, both Nadal and Djokovic have followed his standard. Both are active in charity work and both see the #1 spot as a responsibility.

I think this is a very significant part of Roger's legacy.

No doubt he does do his bit and more for charity. He is applauded for this and rightly so. All the other big three do an incredible amount as well. All currently at the top happily put themselves out in the name of a good cause because they are all good people.

None are perfect by any means and we shouldn't expect them to be. As long as we treat them based on actual actions rather than reputation we will be fine.....

falzy21 wrote:Well thats hardly a fair comment is it bb. People have their opinions on Federer, in fact most people do, very few of them are black or white. Just because someone thinks hes not comepletely perfect does not mean they think every good thing he does can be disregarded, and importantly the other way around works too.
But to insult peoples intelligence, and quite patronisingly to fellow forum members for beign opinionated isnt nice.
Just in case you think im a "bit thick" for my opinion, Federers a human. Hes a nice man but in TENNIS hes a man who loves to win, whos been the best and still thinks HES the best, soo he can, naturally, be more at mercy of the weaker human emotions. Nothing he does cancels out anything, it all counts as part of his whole.

Post of the week right there Falzy. Unfortunately, calling people who criticize Federer for lapses of sportsmanship or ungracious comments stupid in a condescending manner is not the right approach. BB, some of your ideas that you interject about politics and economics I think are extremely dumb and bizarre and you chose to throw them out from time to time on the tennis section, not to mention your views on tennis. Still it might be a more appropriate tack if you don't call people who put through an opinion as stupid. I find a great many things you say disagreeable and strange, I don't and others don't call you stupid for holding what I would call extremely stupid opinions try to extend that courtesy to other posters. As for Federer I am not making a judgement of him as a person, a humanitarian he is, a good sport he is not from what I have seen with my own eyes. Not in regards to his close competitors.

I'm bored with the garbage, so I call it as I see it. Stupid is as stupid does, as Forrest's mother said.
If someone wants to say an umpire argument is bigger than spending a big lump of time making an ill girl very, very happy then go right ahead.

"Post of the week": what a stupid comment that is. Schoolyard antics.

Getting a bit personal on here for me........

All the top players deserve respect. All do charity work and are great ambassadors for the game.

I really don't see what the controversy is here. Roger is seen as the greatest player of all-time, does charity work and players have commended him for acting as a role model which is all fair enough. It is also fair to say he has been a sore loser on more than one occasion and has sworn on court on more than one occasion as well so he is human and has his failings so lets just leave it at that. As I said all the top players came across as great blokes away from the goldfish bowl of tennis on the recent BBC Murray documentary.

I think the issue (for me) is that the OP is simply a story about Fed helping some poor girl out.
But instead of either not commenting or simply saying that's nice and leaving it as a positive thread, some posters are compelled to then post negative things about Federer and Fed fans.
Obviously everyone's entitled to their opinion, but I find it a bit sad that it's not possible to post something good about anyone on the internet without someone else desperately pointing out the bad, which everyone knows about anyway - as if turning the whole thing negative is somehow a good thing to do.

CaledonianCraig wrote:I really don't see what the controversy is here. Roger is seen as the greatest player of all-time, does charity work and players have commended him for acting as a role model which is all fair enough. It is also fair to say he has been a sore loser on more than one occasion and has sworn on court on more than one occasion as well so he is human and has his failings so lets just leave it at that. As I said all the top players came across as great blokes away from the goldfish bowl of tennis on the recent BBC Murray documentary.

"Has sworn" - F's sake, really?
"Is human" - shock revelation
"has failings" - more breaking news

Yes, lets make sure we bring the Murray "documentary" into it. We could also check out someone's Vanity Fair photoshoot to see if they have cellulite.

So BB if you agree with those points you have pointed out then backs up what I am saying - he isn't perfect....nobody is. However, because some posters wish to point out some of those failings you don't need to spit the dummy out you know. These same sort of nit pickings have been done ad nauseum with all of the other top players on the tour after all - Djoko and shirt-ripping, Nadal and butt-picking an Murray and swearing.

CaledonianCraig wrote:So BB if you agree with those points you have pointed out then backs up what I am saying - he isn't perfect....nobody is. However, because some posters wish to point out some of those failings you don't need to spit the dummy out you know. These same sort of nit pickings have been done ad nauseum with all of the other top players on the tour after all - Djoko and shirt-ripping, Nadal and butt-picking an Murray and swearing.

Abysmal.

Read the OP and reflect on how absurd this post is. Clue: it's a really nice story about a non-perfect, incredibly rich man who goes miles out of his way to make a desperately ill girl very happy. And your response is to remind us he's human, not perfect, and suggest it makes sense to whine on about other players or any of his errors.

It's beyond parody.

JuliusHMarx wrote:I think the issue (for me) is that the OP is simply a story about Fed helping some poor girl out.
But instead of either not commenting or simply saying that's nice and leaving it as a positive thread, some posters are compelled to then post negative things about Federer and Fed fans.
Obviously everyone's entitled to their opinion, but I find it a bit sad that it's not possible to post something good about anyone on the internet without someone else desperately pointing out the bad, which everyone knows about anyway - as if turning the whole thing negative is somehow a good thing to do.

I agree Julius and I wish I hadn't put the sentence in acknowledging what Fed's detractors were saying on this thread about 'the shot'.  I did it to appease really and so any opinion I wrote wouldn't be shot down like truffin's because it was wholly positive.

There was much discussion about 'the shot' and no doubt there will be again, but this is not the thread for it.  I started the thread about Murray's charitable giving and was only positive despite the fact that while I like Murray as a player, I'm a much bigger admirer of all things Fed.

So apologies from me truffin at being a bit cowardly in my previous post.

Craig - you have made your point now on every page of this thread and while it is valid - couldn't you keep it for another thread?  I didn't see Fed fans spoiling the thread about Murray in this way, and it just makes you all look a bit mean spirited.  I am not asking because I care, but truffin posts very infrequently and has brought a great thread to the forum, and it just seems a little unwelcoming and rude to be honest.

Yes but do read the whole thread. I am merely responding to later posts in this thread. Anyway I have made my point and if you find it abysmal then I presume you disagree with the points I made? Your perogative of course.

time please wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:I think the issue (for me) is that the OP is simply a story about Fed helping some poor girl out.
But instead of either not commenting or simply saying that's nice and leaving it as a positive thread, some posters are compelled to then post negative things about Federer and Fed fans.
Obviously everyone's entitled to their opinion, but I find it a bit sad that it's not possible to post something good about anyone on the internet without someone else desperately pointing out the bad, which everyone knows about anyway - as if turning the whole thing negative is somehow a good thing to do.

I agree Julius and I wish I hadn't put the sentence in acknowledging what Fed's detractors were saying on this thread about 'the shot'.  I did it to appease really and so any opinion I wrote wouldn't be shot down like truffin's because it was wholly positive.

There was much discussion about 'the shot' and no doubt there will be again, but this is not the thread for it.  I started the thread about Murray's charitable giving and was only positive despite the fact that while I like Murray as a player, I'm a much bigger admirer of all things Fed.

So apologies from me truffin at being a bit cowardly in my previous post.

Craig - you have made your point now on every page of this thread and while it is valid - couldn't you keep it for another thread?  I didn't see Fed fans spoiling the thread about Murray in this way, and it just makes you all look a bit mean spirited.  I am not asking because I care, but truffin posts very infrequently and has brought a great thread to the forum, and it just seems a little unwelcoming and rude to be honest.

Fair enough time please but I suggest you take a look at the Be Quiet thread as posters took that thread and moved to discredit Djokovic's family in defence of Roger so that somewhat smacks of double standards does it not?

I have said my piece here. Apologies to you Truffin.

No it doesn't imo Craig.  The article Be Quiet is about Djokovic Snr talking to the press in a negative way about Federer and Nadal.  Posters are criticising Novak's father for behaving badly and in a way that can only embarrass his son.  The comments are entirely pertinent to the OP.

This however is a thread, as BB eloquently put it, that is about an extremely rich man spending a lot of time ensuring that a very sick girl had a wonderful few days.  He didn't just sign a hat and give her ticket, he gave a little bit more than that.  Why can't that just be applauded as Murray was for giving up his Queen's winnings?

It is not that either of them is perfect (no sh*t sherlock!) or above criticism, but this was not the thread to do it unless you want to look a little small and mean because it is not pertinent to the OP.

deleted because managed to duplicate above while editing!

bogbrush wrote:I'm bored with the garbage, so I call it as I see it. Stupid is as stupid does, as Forrest's mother said.
If someone wants to say an umpire argument is bigger than spending a big lump of time making an ill girl very, very happy then go right ahead.

"Post of the week": what a stupid comment that is. Schoolyard antics.

What I would deem thick is not realizing that people are not claiming that his catty behavior outweighs spending time with this little girl, your continually making up arguments that nobody has made and then attacking them. Good on Federer for his charity work he is a really positive influence over all. But he is not a good loser or that good of a sport in my opinion. How this statement purports that one thing outweighs or is bigger than the other is beyond me? It simply telling the whole story and not ignoring facts.

bogbrush wrote:I'm bored with the garbage, so I call it as I see it. Stupid is as stupid does, as Forrest's mother said.
If someone wants to say an umpire argument is bigger than spending a big lump of time making an ill girl very, very happy then go right ahead.

"Post of the week": what a stupid comment that is. Schoolyard antics.

PS if it bores you don't post, by the way the only reason any negatives were posted on this thread was because the thread has a direct run at djokovic's father. Negative stories in relation to Federer and Djokovic were posted to give context to maybe why Djokovic's dad doesn't like Roger. The backstory of where these comments come from of course is part of the story despite the moderator not being able to see it and others being angered by it.

socal, you're saying that if the title of the thread had been simply "Fed shows his class", you would somehow have refrained from any negative comments about Fed and his fans? That would be very unlike you! I don't think you can resist

How very stressy of you, socal, to feel the need to take a dump on TRuffins thread all so you can stick up for Djokovic's father.

All in the interest of balance, no doubt.

time please wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:I think the issue (for me) is that the OP is simply a story about Fed helping some poor girl out.
But instead of either not commenting or simply saying that's nice and leaving it as a positive thread, some posters are compelled to then post negative things about Federer and Fed fans.
Obviously everyone's entitled to their opinion, but I find it a bit sad that it's not possible to post something good about anyone on the internet without someone else desperately pointing out the bad, which everyone knows about anyway - as if turning the whole thing negative is somehow a good thing to do.

I agree Julius and I wish I hadn't put the sentence in acknowledging what Fed's detractors were saying on this thread about 'the shot'.  I did it to appease really and so any opinion I wrote wouldn't be shot down like truffin's because it was wholly positive.

There was much discussion about 'the shot' and no doubt there will be again, but this is not the thread for it.  I started the thread about Murray's charitable giving and was only positive despite the fact that while I like Murray as a player, I'm a much bigger admirer of all things Fed.

So apologies from me truffin at being a bit cowardly in my previous post.

Craig - you have made your point now on every page of this thread and while it is valid - couldn't you keep it for another thread?  I didn't see Fed fans spoiling the thread about Murray in this way, and it just makes you all look a bit mean spirited.  I am not asking because I care, but truffin posts very infrequently and has brought a great thread to the forum, and it just seems a little unwelcoming and rude to be honest.

No problems Time Please.

I'm just going to keep posting positive stories, comments,etc... IF others want to go negative that's on them..

I'm fascinated by the hints you've given, TRuffin, of your personal experience with famous sportsmen. I mean, Muhammed Ali! Roger Federer! who else??

Are you able, within the bounds of preserving confidentiality, to tell us a little more about this experience, where it comes from, and why it is you feel Federer is so different?

JuliusHMarx wrote:socal, you're saying that if the title of the thread had been simply "Fed shows his class", you would somehow have refrained from any negative comments about Fed and his fans? That would be very unlike you! I don't think you can resist

Yes that is precisely what I am saying as BB did some stroking thread a few weeks ago about Federer practically deifying him front of the people and senate of Rome and I vomited quietly into my keyboard and said nothing. You are acting like this is the first textual handy j.. anyone has ever given Federer on here.

PS I didn't dump on his thread I invigorated it like Korean chili sauce without counterpoint to this thread what the hell would we have to talk about other than congratulating Federer on how wonderful he is for the 1000th time. If anything I bumped this thing up to triple digits, I turned his tea party into vegas bachelor party and at no charge.

So people write threads (Christ knows which one you're going on about now) so that means its fine for you to dump your issues all over another?

You're just a noise. Turn yourself down would you?

[quote="bogbrush"]I'm fascinated by the hints you've given, TRuffin,  of your personal experience with famous sportsmen. I mean, Muhammed Ali! Roger Federer! who else??

Are you able, within the bounds of preserving confidentiality, to tell us a little more about this experience, where it comes from, and why it is you feel Federer is so different?[/quote

:-) I metioned when I first started posting a couple years ago but you wouldn't remember...  I worked in advertising which morphed into early form of sports marketing in the 1960's and 1970's when I hooked up with a new firm.  Back then- it was fairly innovative to market an athlete beyond the sporting world- now you would prob call me a publicist..  I specialized in the fight game most of the 1970's and my main, really sole client for awhile was Ali-- or the backers who sponsored him...  this was off and on as he fell in and out of various webs of the Nation of Islam and then Don King--- though we eventually worked with King.. Ali and I became fairly close and I helped him with his sale of his image/likeness to CKG in the early 2000's...  Anyway- I worked with lots of great boxing champions.. Cervantes, a young Duran, Foreman briefly.........  After Ali retired, I worked with some NBA clients briefly, then retired.....though I still was a partner and consulted with athletes..  my company was eventually bought by IMG......... and I still know a lot of  executives there.. Frankly- through different contacts- I do know a good deal of behind the scenes behavior, contract terms etc.. .but that type stuff I do try and keep between me and my friends/source.

To clarify I've only met Federer once at MSG last year as a special surprise for my grandson who is also a big fan.  I have contacts at Rolex who I used to represent some of their early sportsman who were kind enough to arrange for my grandson and I to meet and spend a bit of time with Federer.

Federer I feel has really trailblazed a path for a guy at the top of his sport (another poster mentioned this as well here) I can tell you of some behind the scenes things I do know from his time represented with IMG that Federer will not enter into a sponsorship contract unless that company agrees to match or help him in his charitable foundation in a long term way..  For example his deal with Rolex extends prob 15 to 20 years out and during that time it's already spelled out that they will work with Federer with his foundation. Credit Suisse is another.. I know some details of other stars deals and I can tell you- none have these type clauses spelled out like this..  I can pretty confidently tell from the inner plans of some of these deals put together that Federer plans a long term career as philanthropist long after he is retired from the sport. It's going to be a significant endeavor, and I'm not sure I can point to any other athletes right now that are going to come even close, maybe never in the past... Ali used his world wide fame to bring people together, but it was never quite about personally changing things.    One thing people need to undertand about foundations..  every athlete now sets up a charitable foundation- every top football player, baseball, you name it... by and large it's a tax shelter and image booster... heck- it was top of our playbook even back in my day in marketing an athlete.   Federer is doing so many things behind the scenes and the way he's setting things up that he's just on a different level.. He gets no tax benefits, no really glory from using his clout to have Rolex donate millions of dollars to his African schools and other initiatives..  Rolex does so through their charitable trust and will not even mention it.....so it's really no business benefit to them either..

His foundation size and endeavors frankly dwarfs anything Nadal, Djokovic or Murray are doing..  Now Federer also makes much more than them, but again- it's not about that...   Nadal publicaly gave Federer credit for inspiring him to ramp up his own foundation which was basically dormant and clearly a tax shelter type entity.  Djokovic I feel has followed these guys as he ascended to #1 and learned how to become more of an ambassador.

Now another factor from my experiences is I know many an athlete and private people who while extremely giving to the public,fans are complete aholes in private to family and people that work for them.  It's so publicly known and he has talked about it so I don't mind saying it.. Ali had a girl in every town while presenting himself (with our help) as a pious pure living religious married man .  I know from friends, colleagues that Federer is an absolute gentleman in all aspects of his life and I think we can even see through the smokescreen of public image that this guy is genuine..  that says something about a persons true complete character.

I've seen the pressures champions are under, the pull of so many different things you need to focus on, I've seen how hard it is to push ones self once all your dreams have been achieved.. it's literly hard to breathe at the top of the mountain........ and I truly feel Federer is doing about as good as job as I've ever seen from a Sports Goat. I really do.... as a fan, but also as someone who's been close enough to see what others have had to deal with..
anyway.. memories..........lol

What a fascinating career you have had Truffin.  I do remember you posting about the Roddick/Federer exhibition match at MSG at the time.

Thanks for a very interesting thread, and for sharing some of your memories with us.

I was going to ignore because it is a fairly pointless argument, but, while I often enjoy your impassioned and off the wall posting socal, I think you have misjudged or mistimed your reaction on here badly.

Quite frankly I feel a little sickened in a different way than you claim to be.

I think I need some fresh air!

TRuffin - marvellous post, thank you for that.

There is often discussion about how long Federer will play on for once his chances at the big events diminish. The information you've given us makes me think he may stick around for quite a while.

He's clearly passionate about his charitable work and I can imagine him playing on just to provide profile and impetus to those efforts. I've always taken his comments about playing in 2016 with a pinch of salt but I think I believe it now!

First off, I think it's a bit unfair to imply that anyone who posted the slightest negative thing about Fed on this thread is a jerk - the title of the thread certainly made me think it would be valid to debate whether this story meant Djokovic's father was wrong in his comments - and of course, the story in the OP is only one piece of evidence in that debate and there will be other evidence to backup his comments.

Overall, I don't think anyone is really disagreeing with TRuffin that Fed does an awful lot. It is interesting the focus for him between training, competing and all this philanthropic work. Must be very hard for him to get a balance that he's happy with right now.

A little off topic, but the child of a friend of mine was recently in hospital being treated for cancer (thankfully, she is recovering well now). They had quite a few "celeb" visitors including many footballers, comedians etc. Professional footballers got a bit of a bad press last year around the olympics (lots of comments on how olympic athletes were heroes while footballers were just overpaid primadonnas), however my friend's experience was that more or less every single one of these visitors genuinely spent time with the kids in that hospital and their families to cheer them up and did so with no publicity. Given that these are just young guys with a particular skill, it impressed me how well they deal with all this. Obviously, this is not of the Fed scale of demands on their time (nowhere near!), but nevertheless I thought it worth mentioning that we are often willing to judge people without really knowing what they give in life.

TRuffin - really enjoyed reading of your experiences with Ali and other boxing champs.

Not too many people can use the phrase "Ali and I became fairly close" !!   (I imagine you're habitually reluctant to make mention of this, given its potential to come across as  'bragging' ; but equally, when fellow posters have asked you to expand, then you should not feel uncomfortable in telling it how it is ......)                

From the insights you have given into Federer's foundation work  - and specifically his insistence that sponsors commit to long-term support for the charities in a way they might not otherwise have done -  it's clear that he is taking a very innovative approach, hence your view that he has trailblazed a path.  

None of what Federer is doing (and seemingly intends to continue doing well beyond retirement) on the charity front could have happened were it not for his achievements and global status as a tennis player. And yet, paradoxically, it could be that his philanthropic efforts turns into something bigger and more meaningful than any of his on-court achievements. Holding up trophies always makes for good TV / media coverage and sport is an important and rewarding part of our lives ;  but sometimes the stuff that goes on behind the scenes has greater and more lasting value.

As for socal's inherent scepticism and his claim that he somehow "invigorated" the thread  ....... well, I feel it's all rather sad really and tells us a lot about socal but nothing about Federer. If anything, it makes Fed look bigger but socal a lot smaller. Of course everyone has every right to express his/her views, however divergent they may be, but I can only endorse comments by time please : socal's "off the wall posting" can be very welcome and often amusing (and we know what an enthusiastic and active tennis fan he is) but on this occasion his reaction was wholly misjudged.

YvonneT wrote:First off, I think it's a bit unfair to imply that anyone who posted the slightest negative thing about Fed on this thread is a jerk - the title of the thread certainly made me think it would be valid to debate whether this story meant Djokovic's father was wrong in his comments - and of course, the story in the OP is only one piece of evidence in that debate and there will be other evidence to backup his comments.

Overall, I don't think anyone is really disagreeing with TRuffin that Fed does an awful lot. It is interesting the focus for him between training, competing and all this philanthropic work. Must be very hard for him to get a balance that he's happy with right now.

A little off topic, but the child of a friend of mine was recently in hospital being treated for cancer (thankfully, she is recovering well now). They had quite a few "celeb" visitors including many footballers, comedians etc. Professional footballers got a bit of a bad press last year around the olympics (lots of comments on how olympic athletes were heroes while footballers were just overpaid primadonnas), however my friend's experience was that more or less every single one of these visitors genuinely spent time with the kids in that hospital and their families to cheer them up and did so with no publicity. Given that these are just young guys with a particular skill, it impressed me how well they deal with all this. Obviously, this is not of the Fed scale of demands on their time (nowhere near!), but nevertheless I thought it worth mentioning that we are often willing to judge people without really knowing what they give in life.

I remember reading somewhere that when Teddy Sherringham was in Manchester with United he quietly and conscientiously earned himself a big local reputation for just that sort of action.

Interested to hear about the long-term nature of what Federer is doing. Perhaps the fact that one of his parents (mother?) is South African has given him an insight into the extremes of rich and poor that prevail in so many parts of the world. You get the impression that from a very early time he managed to organise himself with a good team for the tennis and non-tennis playing side of his life - his schedule organiser must be one super-efficient person.

Really pleased to hear your friend's child is doing well Yvonne - it is a terrible disease and even worse when it strikes at someone before they have really had a chance to live.  

Absolutely applaud everyone who gives their time and support in any way, whether it is in a professional capacity, or as a 'celebrity' bringing a lot of pleasure to someone who is much in need of a boost, to friends and relatives who are the mainstay of support.  It costs very little to give a bit of ourselves, yet we are often too busy or distracted by other things.

Well done to all those busy people who give back.

B'star - slightly off topic, I admit. But your mention of Teddy Sheringham reminds of the time that I saw Teddy signing autographs before a match at Tottenham for dozens of youngsters.
It was a cold day and he was not wearing an overcoat. In the normal way he could have excused himself and said he had to go to get changed. But he was injured and not playing. He stayed out in the cold for around 30 minutes until no one was left in the autograph queue. Very classy.

Well to repsond to Julius comment

Whats the point of the thread then?
The point of a forum and a thread is to encourage debate and conversation. In this particular one its not easy to see. On one hand its a thread about a nice story about Federer, fair enough. However on the other hand, thats it... theres no question or point of discussion asked, or anythign that anyone can converse with, its just a story. On that point I would ask whether the article needed redoing soo that the OP asks what he wants people to talk about over it.

Of course... its not that simple. The title of the thread gives away that this was a direct counter to the "quiet please" thread of which was asking questions about Federer due to Novaks fathers thoughts. My first post on this topic was to reassure Truffin that it didnt need countering. I didnt realise I would start bloody WWIII doing soo. As a result of this being a repsonse to a previous thread, it isnt abysmal or anything to expect some of that conversation to leak over here.

I dont beleive that anything ive said is negative about Federer. To give what I felt was a balanced view is NOT a negative thing, I didnt expect this sort of massively defensive reaction over that.

For future reference Julius, if we are onyl allowed to say good things about a player on an article, please inform us ahead of time soo I can construct accordingly, or just ignore the thread. Usually its obvious, but because of the context of the previous thread, it wasnt soo obvious this time, especially when the OP isnt giving direction.