Using your phone's internet browser
go to:  qna.rediff.com
Click and drag this link to
the Home icon in your browser.
Q.

Almost through out during the tennis career of Pete Sampras he had to encounter Andre Agassi, an equally tough opponent. Where as Roger Fedrer had a relatively easy passage until the recent emergence of Rafel Nadal, who is also in the injured list now. Is this a fair comparison? Your views?

Asked by Good Citizen, 04 Feb '10 11:55 am
  Invite a friend  |  
  Save  |  
 Earn 10 points for answering
Answer this question  Earn 10 points for answering    
4000 characters remaining  
  
    
Keep me signed inNew User? Sign up

Answers (3)

 
1.

I dont think it is Federer's fault that no one else can challenge him. On the other hand, one wouldnt consider Nadal and Roddick as bad players. Just that Federer has dominated them on most occasions. To compare Sampras and Federere would be difficult, but everyone knew that Sampras had a poor record on Clay Court. His best performance in French Open is a loss in the semis in 13 attempts, whereas Federere has one win, 3 runner-up, and one semifinalist in 11 attempts
Answered by RAJAN MHAMAI, 04 Feb '10 10:04 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
2.

Actually that's where Fedrer's greatness lies:-) Even without that much rivelry he still improves his game and create innovative shots match by match.
Answered by Palanivelu, 04 Feb '10 11:19 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
3.

Thts sheer luck.
Answered by madhavi, 04 Feb '10 11:59 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (0)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received

Ask a Question

Get answers from the community

600 characters remaining