Saintandy666

Probably better than the alternatives I assume. I don't think the roof closing takes long at all, it's the readjusting the conditions.

It was a joke. Get over it.

Murray should have won that set with all the break points he had. And it's for light.

Baghdatis wont roll over though! I feel that Murray has another gear to move up into if necessary.

Murray on court against Baghdatis. Will be a tough match. Baghdatis is a former semi finalist at Wimbledon and finalist at the Australian Open. Murray should be able to come through though.

What absolute rubbish. Since when had ideology been consistent with intelligence? And yes, I have done very well so far even if I do say that myself and so have many of my friends. You have no idea what you are talking about. My mum is a teacher and she is against these reforms and so are most teachers.

Except that isn't what happens. You don't even live in this country and haven't experienced the education system this century. It got me and my friends through just fine and certainly didn't leave everyone 'terminally stupid'.

That makes absolutely no sense as a sentence.

I really don't see the issue with the defence secretary being present at the unveiling of a memorial.

Well, that isn't true at all. Federer was not past his best when Nadal won Wimbledon in 2008!

Maybe, everything is so unpredictable at the moment. I just don't know what will happen. It would have been incredible if Djokovic had held all 4 slams at once.

At the moment perhaps, but time will tell whether that is the case come 5 years time. It's certainly up in the air and could go either way dependent on what Nadal does next.

Nadal at his peak was best at all 4 slams. Federer was best on just 3. Though Federer in fairness has 'owned 3 slams'... whereas Nadal has only really owned 1. Needs to win Wimbledon again a couple of more times to own it.

Nadal has clearly been better then Federer on grass for a few years though.

So they are both all-rounders then?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Slam_(tennis)#Men.27s_singles_2 Only 3 men have done the career slam in the open era. Nadal was youngest and he still has a bit of time to go. I think the best time to have this debate may be in 5 years time once both Nadal and Federer are done.

I misunderstood you. But I would argue that Nadal has shown himself to be an all-rounder at his peak by completing the career slam!

Nadal is more than just a clay court player. He's won Wimbledon twice, and the US Open and the Australian Open once a piece. Federer is dominant at the other 3 slams at his peak, but lacks at Clay which he could only win when Nadal was not able to make it to the final due to an off year because of injury. I do think it is a gap in his CV. It's a tough call. Nadal still has another 4-5 years of slam winning to go whereas Federer's career will begin to wind down soon.

Federer is a more beautiful player, I'll give you that. He makes it look so effortless. But I think the fact he can't beat Nadal on clay, whereas Nadal could beat Federer on grass is a big difference. Nadal also has the lead 6-2 if I recall correctly when I looked at the stats the other day in slam finals.

Federer is a beautiful player to watch, but I think I'd argue Nadal is better. Both have done the Carreer slam, but Federer did his French open in a year that was a dogey year for Nadal at Roland Garros(injuries if I recall correctly, as he was absent from Wimbledon that year). Until Federer beats Nadal at the French Open Final as Nadal did to Federer on Grass at Wimbledon, it's tough. I do think either could claim best ever for different reasons though. It's just incredible to have them both around now.

Excellent win. Would have been a shame without him. Tournaments like this need players like him and Nadal getting far.

I wonder whether Nadal's loss has changed it up a bit, mentality wise. Because Federer and Djokovic both had scares today. Could have been bad for Federer if his opponent had not become injured.

You mean like you half the time

None of the top players play in challengers. And you have a point. Slams are what define greats. Murray is not a great, he is just an amazing tennis player.

Loser is a harsh term is what I am arguing. Meanwhile, Federer in BIG trouble here. What is happening this year?!