Since you guys get to beat on dead horses; Rod Laver declares Novak Djokovic equal to Federer in the GOAT sweepstakes

by socal1976 Sun 08 May 2016, 5:21 am

In an interview with ESPN.com, Rod Laver already puts Novak Djokovic on equal footing to Roger Federer in the GOAT debate.

“I don’t think you put one of those two above the other when you look at their performances,” Laver said. “You know what Roger’s record is. But the way that Djokovic has been playing over the last year or so, I would say that Djokovic and Federer are equals.

“When you look at Djokovic’s performances and his results, you just have to say, ‘Hey, this guy’s unbelievable, and how can you look past him when discussing who is the best ever?’”

Djokovic is still missing the French Open and he’s also six behind Federer’s all-time mark of 17 Grand Slam titles, but the Australian great is swayed by how dominant Djokovic has been in recent years.

Laver did add that he thought Federer could still add to his Slam title count. “If he’s going to win another Grand Slam, his best chance is at Wimbledon,” Laver said. “The tournament inspires him a tremendous amount. He can also play well at the US Open. It’s definitely possible he can win another one.”

http://www.tennis-x.com/xblog/2016-05-05/22749.php

by socal1976 Sun 08 May 2016, 5:34 am

Ok, personally I don't really care if Novak gets recognized as GOAT or not, I would like him to upset Roger fans by being number 1 for longer and if he does win more slams than Fed of course I would be happy. But he has so far exceeded my initial projection that he would be a 3-6 slam candidate, back in 07/08 (I think after AO actually against Tsonga, immediately after). Well, I undersold him so far. The weeks at number 1 records and year end number ones as long as Novak stays healthy are very much in play. I think the 17 slams number looks safe but if Novak can replicate a 3 slam year like 2015 in 2016 he is in with a shout. Djokovic has almost double Murray's points.

People may not believe it but I am very comfortable with Novak's place in the game and his legacy, don't care to elevate him anything above his current CV because I can't see anything but the number of major honors increasing. So to those who do have their favorite's GOAT status so entwined with their happiness as to care, well I say more power to you.

However, I am a bit interested in the reaction to the great one's comments. That is what I do hope the thread will be about and not GOAT discussions. It is interesting though that in Rog's heyday the Fed fans were so quick to run out statements like these from Laver and other greats in elevating Fed's status from GOAT to something akin to the swoosh wearing Yahweh. Do you all believe Laver's comments now when you believed them about Federer?

by Guest Sun 08 May 2016, 5:47 am

The yardsticks being used to compare Novak Djokovic are great. We are considering Djokovic at the level of best players ever to play the sport. With such comparisons one has to take into account the advances in the sport both in terms of the technology and in terms of the professionalism and sports science. The nice thing about Federer is that he has been around for so long that he himself can be used as a yardstick but it is also important to factor in Federer aged 34 is not the same as Federer aged 23. Same for Nadal - but Nadal's decline has been more rapid at the edges of his game resulting in sharp performance level differences between clay, grass, hard courts ...

Anyway at the moment it is Djokovic that is now the major hurdle preventing Nadal and Federer from winning any further slams. Hopefully Murray can find a "second wind" to his career and start challenging again Djokovic (and Federer). But both Murray and Djokovic are getting to the age when we expect to see their natural absolute level abilities decline quite noticeably. But as yet the "next generation" are not making an impact.

When Wawrinka won his two slams - this was done at an age where we knew he wouldn't be able to sustain it for long - 30 and 31 I think. And that has what has happened.

When we get a player aged 21 to 25 winning a slam then we might expect the era of the Djokovic, Federer, Nadal ... Murray to be properly over.

by sportslover Sun 08 May 2016, 8:52 am

I don't think for a moment that Novak will not eventually overtake Roger as "The GOAT"' all things being equal regarding keeping his health & fitness.

I cannot see Roger winning another slam, apart from possibly Wimbledon this year, maybe his last chance but who knows.

As for Rafa I think there may be a few slams left for him to win (RG?) but unless he can get back his previous (best) form I cannot see him competing for this title.

by Guest Sun 08 May 2016, 9:32 am

Djokovic will never be the Goat of Clay nor the Goat of Grass, nor do I suspect he is / will be the GOAT of the US Open (hard court + variable wind conditions).

Goats of Clay: Nadal. Borg (wooden racket days).
Goats of Grass: Federer. Sampras. Borg.
Goats of US Open: Federer. Sampras.

That leaves Djokovic with the Australian Open.

by lags72 Sun 08 May 2016, 1:03 pm

sportslover wrote:I don't think for a moment that Novak will not eventually overtake Roger as "The GOAT"' all things being equal regarding keeping his health & fitness.

...................................................

It's an understandable viewpoint ; one which some would share with you.

When Tiger was at his peak, most observers were convinced it was just a matter of time before his achievements surpassed those of the great maestro Nicklaus.

But - long after he packed away his clubs - Jack can still look down from the very top of the mountain ........

Stuff happens. Let's see how it all pans out.

by TRuffin Sun 08 May 2016, 3:00 pm

socal1976 wrote:Ok, personally I don't really care if Novak gets recognized as GOAT or not, I would like him to upset Roger fans by being number 1 for longer and if he does win more slams than Fed of course I would be happy. But he has so far exceeded my initial projection that he would be a 3-6 slam candidate, back in 07/08 (I think after AO actually against Tsonga, immediately after). Well, I undersold him so far. The weeks at number 1 records and year end number ones as long as Novak stays healthy are very much in play. I think the 17 slams number looks safe but if Novak can replicate a 3 slam year like 2015 in 2016 he is in with a shout. Djokovic has almost double Murray's points.

People may not believe it but I am very comfortable with Novak's place in the game and his legacy, don't care to elevate him anything above his current CV because I can't see anything but the number of major honors increasing. So to those who do have their favorite's GOAT status so entwined with their happiness as to care, well I say more power to you.

However, I am a bit interested in the reaction to the great one's comments. That is what I do hope the thread will be about and not GOAT discussions. It is interesting though that in Rog's heyday the Fed fans were so quick to run out statements like these from Laver and other greats in elevating Fed's status from GOAT to something akin to the swoosh wearing Yahweh. Do you all believe Laver's comments now when you believed them about Federer?

What's wrong with believing what he says now? He still has Fed as the goat and now thinks djoko Is on par with fed- that's hardly an insult to Federers greatness. I'll take it all day long if Laver, a fellow Goat, thinks my guy is tied as the greatest ever and is still the benchmark he uses to compare others too.

It's pretty clear djokovic is or on his way to be the greatest of his Age group:era and that he and federer are the two greatest all around players of the recent and current players. Great for djokovic and his fans and great for federer and his fans. I don't see where anyone can think such status for fed is a bad thing.

What's odd to me is why you want fed fans to be upset and sad. It's just a sport. If your guy continues to pile up stats- be happy for him. Federer legacy is pretty damn amazing so I think fed fans will be just fine even if it ended today.

Anyone who understands sports knows there is always another greatest coming. Federer himslef had repeatedly talked about that. all greats know that.

Poor us- laver still thinks fed is a goat, but someone is on par with him. Oh the horror

by socal1976 Sun 08 May 2016, 5:05 pm

Ruffin, you are a normal emotionally balanced Federer fan, and frankly I wouldn't care if Novak was seen as second fiddle to Roger or Nadal or Laver or Sampras. But you can not deny that certain segments of the fan base on both sides lost some perspective and objectivity in the GOAT debate, at least the ones we had on this site and its predecessor.

I do think that when you look at consistency, longevity, and bringing it match in and match out regardless of other factors Fed and Djoko do set themselves apart in the last ten or twelve years. Nadal has consistently brought the effort and the results as well but you just look at all the time he has missed and how he can't hold onto the number 1 once he gets it because frankly his body has never cooperated.

At this stage Djokovic is around 190 weeks at number 1, the gap he has would take Murray about 6-7 months of the next guy Murray winning everything. Even if Murray goes beast mode and is unbeatable or any of Novak's close rivals I think the another 30 or so weeks is pretty much guaranteed at the top. That already puts him within striking range of Connors, Lendl etc. in terms of total weeks at number 1.

And of course I agree with you that all these records are made to broken. I can tell you right now though if Novak gets close to 17 we will see a second wave of the nastiness from fed's online shock troopers who many are not be as well adjusted as you are. There are people that are very personally invested in Federer as GOAT. At that stage you will here how a talentless grinder/lung merchant like Djokovic is killing tennis and the interest in the game.

by socal1976 Sun 08 May 2016, 5:10 pm

Nore Staat wrote:Djokovic will never be the Goat of Clay nor the Goat of Grass, nor do I suspect he is / will be the GOAT of the US Open (hard court + variable wind conditions).

Goats of Clay: Nadal. Borg (wooden racket days).
Goats of Grass: Federer. Sampras. Borg.
Goats of US Open: Federer. Sampras.

That leaves Djokovic with the Australian Open.

He does have 3 wimby titles that no one seems to give him that much credit for in terms of his grass court play Nore. There is one thing that favors Novak's current dominance as being even more dominant than the players you listed. Of all the players you listed above Novak Djokovic goes into every match against any opponent as the clear favorite on ANY SURFACE. Even in Fed's heyday he was always second fiddle to Novak. Even in Nadal's heyday there were players that on indoor court you would favor over him. Novak right now goes against even the trickiest and toughest opponent as a heavy favorite regardless of the surface.

by socal1976 Sun 08 May 2016, 5:14 pm

sportslover wrote:I don't think for a moment that Novak will not eventually overtake Roger as "The GOAT"' all things being equal regarding keeping his health & fitness.

I cannot see Roger winning another slam, apart from possibly Wimbledon this year, maybe his last chance but who knows.

As for Rafa I think there may be a few slams left for him to win (RG?) but unless he can get back his previous (best) form I cannot see him competing for this title.

Yeah, of the two I think Rafa is more likely to win another slam because of his dominance on clay and how many of the other guys at the top are generally more comfortable on hardcourt. I think Rafa has another French in him, and Fed has maybe 40/60 or 30/70 chance of winning one more slam, I think he is probably more unlikely to win a slam at this stage than to win a slam so I agree with you there.

In regards to GOAT I don't know, I don't think its a shoe in like lags says for Novak to get GOAT status I mean 6 or 7 more slams is still a crapload of slams in a rather narrow window for Novak to win. All that is needed is for one injury, or one semi-bad run of form and he could very well not get there. I do think he stands a very good chance of breaking the weeks at #1 and year end #1 record or functionally tying those marks.

by Jahu Sun 08 May 2016, 5:35 pm

Bit of a self-pleasure thread this, would be ok coming from a 15y fan girl, but from 40y socal, a little silly really.
Like any one cares what Laver says, let alone that he has to be diplomatic and balanced on his statements.

by socal1976 Sun 08 May 2016, 5:42 pm

Jahu wrote:Bit of a self-pleasure thread this, would be ok coming from a 15y fan girl, but from 40y socal, a little silly really.
Like any one cares what Laver says, let alone that he has to be diplomatic and balanced on his statements.

I agree when he was telling everyone Fed was GOAT from ie from like 2005-2015 he was also being diplomatic then?

Actually, it is more childish my motivation than a 15 year old girl, think more like a 8 year old in the playground. I just want to get even with the modern tennis=boring crowd and start doing endless GOAT and weak era debates from here on out. You know in the words of our future president, "he started it".

by Jahu Sun 08 May 2016, 6:04 pm

Hihihih, well honestly what weight does Laver's words have to say Fed or Djoko is goat?

We all know in what era he played, so even when more up to date Becker says Fed is GOAT, its just dust in the wind.

No one with under 10 GS to their name should ever mention who is GOAT, but sure gives you a nice weekend I guess Wink

by socal1976 Sun 08 May 2016, 6:22 pm

Yeah it is nice compliment to hear Jahu for Novak from Laver. I never said that Laver's opinion or Mac's or anyone else's opinion determines who is GOAT. But its nice to hear from Laver because he is a very gracious guy and has huge respect for not just the player he was but his character. It doesn't determine or really weight that much on the debate one way or the other.

by Jahu Sun 08 May 2016, 6:31 pm

But sure makes us fans a little salivate when our fav star is GOAT'ed Dog

by Guest Sun 08 May 2016, 7:40 pm

In the GOAT stakes I think one should focus on their results during their peak physical years which are 18 to 27. Winning at 28 and over is on the margins of importance and indicative of a weak era. This is just an opinion but I think it cannot be entirely discounted when assessing goat level ability: comparing all players throughout time at their peak level, also consider all surfaces including the faster surfaces of yore, as well as playing with wooden rackets and playing with modern day rackets.

by socal1976 Sun 08 May 2016, 7:58 pm

Nore Staat wrote:In the GOAT stakes I think one should focus on their results during their peak physical years which are 18 to 27. Winning at 28 and over is on the margins of importance and indicative of a weak era. This is just an opinion but I think it cannot be entirely discounted when assessing goat level ability: comparing all players throughout time at their peak level, also consider all surfaces including the faster surfaces of yore, as well as playing with wooden rackets and playing with modern day rackets.

Sorry Nore not everyone's career takes the same trajectory. At the end of the day if anything Djokovic has had away harder degree of competition and so has Nadal frankly than Roger.

Avg. ranking of grandsam opponents

Novak: 6.3 avg opponent ranking
Roger: 16.5 avg ranking of slam opponents

If anyone benefitted from a weak era its Roger who played his version of the Washington Generals Andy Roddick in a lot of fast court finals, not comparable to the hurdles faced by Nadal or Djokovic.

by lydian Sun 08 May 2016, 10:08 pm

I don't agree with Laver on this...Roger's records still place him out in front, and lets not forget Nadal has achieved a fair amount too (and currently on 3 more slams) but Laver doesn't mention him. I tend to take these former greats comments with a pinch of salt...like Borg for example. They were great players but their opinion on who is GOAT barely holds any more water than the rest of us tbh.

by **JuliusHMarx** Sun 08 May 2016, 10:16 pm

Just when I think I'm winning
When my chance came to be king
The GOATS of my life
Blow wilder than the wind.

by socal1976 Sun 08 May 2016, 10:46 pm

I have to concur in that it really doesn't mean that just because someone was a playing legend that they will be right in all of their opinions about the game. But from one perspective I see where laver is coming from. He probably is viewing the fact that Fed and Djokovic in this difficult period of competition have been the two guys that have spent the vast majority of the time at number 1. Maybe why he didn't mention Rafa and did mention these two is because Rafa has not been able to string together lengthy runs at number 1 due to injury.

by lydian Sun 08 May 2016, 11:15 pm

Maybe socal although a few years back he was saying Nadal was on to that label also. It's going to be interesting to see if Novak can maintain this level...if he can for next 18 months then the whole picture of history changes. But it won't be easy as he's a year away from 30 and then things start to slide a bit generally. All depends on his desire, his foot speed and injury status.

by socal1976 Sun 08 May 2016, 11:28 pm

What he basically has to do Lydian is maintain the form he has had for 1.25 seasons since the start of 2015, he will have to keep up for another 1.75 seasons. If he can for three years maintain the pace he started in 2015, and he has maintained his form already for almost a year and half, if he can maintain for that period he will have 15-16 slams by the end of 2017. Still it is an unbelievable pace he would have to maintain. It would be like sprinting the entire last 5 miles of a marathon.

by lydian Sun 08 May 2016, 11:36 pm

He has a fair chance socal...his game doesn't actually tax him as much as others and he's got to a level where 60% is enough to get to SFs then he had turn it on in SF and Fs. I also don't see anyone coming through who's a serious threat at slam level. It's really going to be down to him. I would expect him to start cutting back on events soon though...which would help his longevity but make #1 weeks tougher.

by socal1976 Sun 08 May 2016, 11:44 pm

He has a chance I agree, I don't think though either one of us think it is very like to reach or exceed 17. I do think he has a better chance at #of YE number 1 finishes and total weeks at number. He has at 190 now and could take a vacation for six months and still come back as number 1.

by Guest Mon 09 May 2016, 7:54 am

Today's rankings:
1 Novak Djokovic 16,550
2 Roger Federer    7,525
3 Andy Murray    7,525
4 Stan Wawrinka    6,380
5 Rafael Nadal 5,675
6 Kei Nishikori 4,290

So something in Djokovic's favour is the extent of his points dominance.
It should also be added Djokovic has won five end of year championships.
Roger Federer won six end of year championships.
Rafael Nadal & Andy Murray won zero end of year championships.

by lydian Mon 09 May 2016, 9:28 am

Another question is who has dominated more - Djokovic or Federer? Novak has a strong argument with this sustained points gap between him and #2, did Federer sustain such a gap?
There is no doubt that Djokovic's recent march has been impressive and he's now only a fortnight from achieving 200 weeks at #1. These numbers are only going to continue racking up...if achieves GS this year then his claim will receive a massive boost...

by HM Murdock Mon 09 May 2016, 10:30 am

I interpreted Laver's comments as being about their best level.

In the hard currency of winning tennis matches, there's not a lot between their peak levels.

By career achievements though, Federer is still well ahead.

by HM Murdock Mon 09 May 2016, 10:39 am

lydian wrote:Another question is who has dominated more - Djokovic or Federer? Novak has a strong argument with this sustained points gap between him and #2, did Federer sustain such a gap?
There is no doubt that Djokovic's recent march has been impressive and he's now only a fortnight from achieving 200 weeks at #1. These numbers are only going to continue racking up...if achieves GS this year then his claim will receive a massive boost...

The scale of Djokovic's dominance over his peers is maybe greater than Federer's but that perhaps says more about which version of Nadal each had to face!

Plus Federer held his level for about 4 years.

But Novak is achieving incredible things, no doubt.

by barrystar Mon 09 May 2016, 12:40 pm

Djoko is certainly one of the greatest players to pick up a racqet - a status he shares with the likes of Borg/Laver/Federer/Nadal/Sampras/Gonzalez and so-on. I'd love to see him get RG to rack up an achievement which matches anything those guys have done.

What surprises me is how little some people remember about the difficulty of winning slams, let along winning them consistently; 8 years ago it was common to say that Federer would clearly win 20 slams, 3 years ago Nadal was for certain going to overhaul the 17 slams, and now according to some Djoko will for certain overhaul the 17 slams. Djoko or Nadal might well do that, but people underestimate what it would involve. For Djoko to end up with 17 or more slams he has from now on to match the career slam tallies of Becker or Edberg, an big ask for someone who is turning 29 on 22nd May 2016. I think he'll fall short, and there's any number of things which might contribute towards him losing his current edge over his rivals. Just one example of an assumption which may prove wrong, if he eventually wins his RG next month to achieve a "Djoko slam" can we assume that his intensity of motivation, even his equanimity, would remain rock solid to overcome his current main rivals on their best surface at Wimbledon?

by Guest Mon 09 May 2016, 1:00 pm

The piece reads more that he is comparing their highest levels of dominance rather than achievements. Might not be to everyone's taste, but it's a good case and one which was discussed here.

Think it's fair comment.

by Guest82 Mon 09 May 2016, 1:28 pm

barrystar wrote:Djoko is certainly one of the greatest players to pick up a racqet - a status he shares with the likes of Borg/Laver/Federer/Nadal/Sampras/Gonzalez and so-on. I'd love to see him get RG to rack up an achievement which matches anything those guys have done.

What surprises me is how little some people remember about the difficulty of winning slams, let along winning them consistently; 8 years ago it was common to say that Federer would clearly win 20 slams, 3 years ago Nadal was for certain going to overhaul the 17 slams, and now according to some Djoko will for certain overhaul the 17 slams. Djoko or Nadal might well do that, but people underestimate what it would involve. For Djoko to end up with 17 or more slams he has from now on to match the career slam tallies of Becker or Edberg, an big ask for someone who is turning 29 on 22nd May 2016. I think he'll fall short, and there's any number of things which might contribute towards him losing his current edge over his rivals. Just one example of an assumption which may prove wrong, if he eventually wins his RG next month to achieve a "Djoko slam" can we assume that his intensity of motivation, even his equanimity, would remain rock solid to overcome his current main rivals on their best surface at Wimbledon?

If he wins RG it will be something that his current GOAT rivals (Federer and Nadal) haven't achieved and held all four at once. I'd like him to do that...think he deserves a bit of history for himself.

I seriously doubt he will catch Federer. If Rafa stays on 14 he may catch or pass him. I'd guess he will end up on 14 or 15 slams.

by bogbrush Mon 09 May 2016, 1:38 pm

Odd stuff.

I have gained enormous pleasure from watching Federer plays, and I've opined that he is probably the GOAT....... but I've never gained a moments pleasure from anyone judging him to be the GOAT. I mean, what the Hell has it got to do with me which tennis players is higher in someone else's opinion?

When this sort of thing matters it's probably an alarm call that there's not enough real stuff happening.

by Haddie-nuff Mon 09 May 2016, 2:23 pm

I cant help but agree with that.. Ive watched some pretty incredible tennis over the years played by some pretty incredible and special players. There are those I could mention that were great for their era..how its possible to decide which is the all time greatest I don't know there are too many factors to consider.. and I agree what does it matter anyway

by temporary21 Mon 09 May 2016, 2:32 pm

Oh my god... Are we all in agreement that you can't objectively pick a GOAT? Just that you have a round table of greatness? It must be the Leicester effect! The goat debate may be coming to an end

by Haddie-nuff Mon 09 May 2016, 2:37 pm

temporary21 wrote:Oh my god... Are we all in agreement that you can't objectively pick a GOAT? Just that you have a round table of greatness? It must be the Leicester effect! The goat debate may be coming to an end

by Guest Mon 09 May 2016, 2:39 pm

I think that was said from the off that comparing like for like from past and present was fruitless because of not being able to compare like for like. Often in debates like that across the sporting world, usually the person/team who win the most important trophies is usually pencilled in as the Greatest and the debate runs wild after that when considering other forms of metric.

One of my favourites is the question of seeing how a player in today's conditions couldn't play with an 85in racquet of yesteryear forgetting the argument stretches the other way!

by lydian Mon 09 May 2016, 2:41 pm

Yep...wrote to the same effect back on old 606 in 2008.
These discussions go round and round...and Laver was probably asked the question so he obliged. It is a little of the Cantona and trawlers comment...the media feeds off the scraps the boats throw them.

by lydian Mon 09 May 2016, 2:47 pm

Yes LK...but I'm more of the feeling that skill based talent and movement based talent go somewhat hand in hand so if you took Laver and Nadal and swapped them they would have been adept players in either era by learning to play the way of the times. Clearly you can't really swap them as finished products because the conditions are different. But once you have the raw genetic material which has a hunger to succeed stronger than most then they're going to do in any era by and large.

by socal1976 Mon 09 May 2016, 5:22 pm

bogbrush wrote:Odd stuff.

I have gained enormous pleasure from watching Federer plays, and I've opined that he is probably the GOAT....... but I've never gained a moments pleasure from anyone judging him to be the GOAT. I mean, what the Hell has it got to do with me which tennis players is higher in someone else's opinion?

When this sort of thing matters it's probably an alarm call that there's not enough real stuff happening.

Please, I used to remember lots of Federer fans posting GOAT proclamations from other legends in his heyday as if they were quite significant. You could almost predict a thread or two a month about Sampras, or Agassi, or Mac, or Laver, or plugin legend; declaring Fed as GOAT. Somehow I don't think you would take as much exception with it, if the compliment was directed at Federer.

And then the second part of your post is really bizarre, what "stuff happening" would you like? I mean in tennis we have had gambling, doping, crazed Australian teenagers, a rise of a new generation, a player who could break all the records and hold all 4 slams at once, the most popular player in the sport still playing good tennis, the British GOAT, the clay court GOAT making a comeback, the Japanese GOAT and many more I could list.

If we applied BB standards then nothing has ever happened in the history of tennis. You were probably one of those that watched wimby 08 and spent the whole time complaining about Mono, rain delays, surface changes, too much fitness, green clay, big fluffy balls etc. Would you like to go camping BB, is this what it is all about?

by socal1976 Mon 09 May 2016, 5:33 pm

lydian wrote:Yes LK...but I'm more of the feeling that skill based talent and movement based talent go somewhat hand in hand so if you took Laver and Nadal and swapped them they would have been adept players in either era by learning to play the way of the times. Clearly you can't really swap them as finished products because the conditions are different. But once you have the raw genetic material which has a hunger to succeed stronger than most then they're going to do in any era by and large.

I totally agree with this I always hear the retort that I'd like to see Djokovic or Nadal hit those shots with a wooden racquet. Well if they grew up in the wooden racquet period do they think that Nadal and Djokovic would grow up with the same technique, training, and skill set? I tend to think that the athletic and tennis cream rises to the top. Nadal and Djokovic are not just great athletes but incredible workers and competitors and at the end of the day these factors outweigh changes in coaching or the game or tech.

by Guest Mon 09 May 2016, 5:59 pm

When I have kids I am going to name them Billy and Nanny. Then I will spend my life savings training them to become elite level tennis players. Ok!

by lydian Mon 09 May 2016, 8:38 pm

Good plan NS lol.
Yep, it's not cheap training them - you'll need deep pockets, SatNav and free weekends for years and years and years...

by **JuliusHMarx** Mon 09 May 2016, 9:42 pm

lydian wrote:Good plan NS lol.
Yep, it's not cheap training them - you'll need deep pockets, SatNav and free weekends for years and years and years...

That would leave him feeling gruff.

by **laverfan** Wed 11 May 2016, 1:06 pm

For reading pleasure of many - http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/news/federer-big-titles-2016 .

by Sponsored content