What do you think?
By shreed_14
@shreed_14 (460)
India
July 6, 2009 10:14am CST
Yesterday all of us got to see some wonderful tennis as the Wimbledon final commenced.Finally,after more than 4 hours of mind-blowing tennis Roger Federer emerged as the winner and now is the most successful singles player having surpassed Pete Sampras' record of 14 grand slams.
Now,do you think Federer would have made it had it been Nadal in place of Roddick?
2 responses
@shreed_14 (460)
• India
10 Jul 09
Yes,I agree Roddick played really very well.I never thought the match will go on till the 5th set.
But I feel Federer would have emerged as the winner anyway.
Thanks a lot for your response.
@gunagohan (3414)
• India
6 Jul 09
even if nadal have played instead of roddick, federer would have won the match..he deserve the victory of the wimbledon..the last set in yesterdays match 16-14 a mind blowing set...they did not play tennis, they were playing services, each player is getting a game by his service..no one in the last set broke a service and won a game..finally federer broke roddick' service and won the match..
he is the greatest player always..he deserves to be the n0 1 player again..i hope he will win the U.S. open...
1 person likes this
@shreed_14 (460)
• India
10 Jul 09
Thanks a lot for your response.
Even I am very happy Federer won.I was supporting him from the very beginning.But I feel Roddick gave a tough competition though.Towards the end I was almost on the edge of my seat.