Originally posted by Arrian
A true rival for him would be nice, yeah. It's hard to decide whether the lack of one is due to Federer's brilliance, the weakness of the field, or a bit of both.
A true rival for him would be nice, yeah. It's hard to decide whether the lack of one is due to Federer's brilliance, the weakness of the field, or a bit of both.
The matches that are the most fun to watch are often ones with lesser players that are more evenly matched (Roddick v. Safin in the fourth round, for instance, was a really good match).
This is a bit of pot luck and, as stated above, is very surface dependent. There are some very good players in the top 30, but they're all not as all-round as Federer. You need a bit of luck to catch a very good match in the final stages.
Watching Federer... I wouldn't necessarily say it's boring, per se. It's often an awesome display of near-perfection.
I'm not trying to suggest that Federer is boring. His shot-selection and shot-execution are excellent material for anyone who wants to learn the game, but nobody else is just as damn good as he is, which makes it so much less fun to watch in the latter stages of any tournament.
Comment