http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYhYISFv-HI
Bjorn's logic;
Last year he came close, this year even coser so next year he will win...
:doh:

You must listen and respect the Borg.

Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!

Perhaps he's making comparisons between himself and McEnroe at Wimbledon.

Perhaps 2008 will be 1981 for Nadal.

It could happen. I'm not sure I agree with Borg's logic, but Nadal did have a tougher draw this year and proved that '06 was no fluke. I'm not sure he'll make the final for a third straight year, though.

Don't forget, he had a couple close five-setters in early rounds this year and, perhaps, was a bit lucky that Djokovic was injured for the SF.

Theres a lot of similarities between the Borg/McEnroe rivalries of 1980/81
and Federer/Nadal, but one big difference is that Federer has now beaten Nadal in consecutive Wimbledon finals. It was a huge psychological blow for Roger to win the way he did this year. Im sticking my neck out, but I dont think Nadal will win more than one set if they meet next year , thats assuming he will even reach the semis or final.

I agree that Roger just had to win Wimbledon this year.Eventually maybe in the next Couple of years he will lose a big final at Wimbledon or the USopen and like Borg he may slide and quit.

I'm not sure what to make of Federer,I think he is maybe the type when he realizes that he is no longer the best,he will walk away.

Rafa is closer to winning Wimbledon outside of RG than the other two.Wimbledon is Roger's favourite tournament,and he might never recover from losing that if it were to happen.

I don't buy that. He's had a few losses over the last couple years (most noteably at RG) where certain people wanted to declare that he would be crushed an go on a slide because of it. Hasn't happened, and I don't think it will happen after he loses at Wimbledon, either. And he almost surely will eventually lose at Wimbledon.

Rafa is one of the hot favourites every tourney he enters, no doubt about that. In fact; this year at the start of Wimbledon i predicted he would make it to the final (and also that he would lose to Roger by the way) but I would be more cautious when it comes down to long term forecasting in Rafa’s case. Although I can see him dominate the clay season for a few more years, his career on other courts is fairly uncertain. The problems with his left knee started on grass after all..

Borg’s statement makes no sense to me, it is a bit Brad Gilbertesque, remember that one? (“I say it right here and right now…..”) :crazy1:

I think Rafa was lucky Youzhny had a back problem. He lost the first 2 sets convincingly.

I must say that Wimbledon plays pretty much like clay because due to the slazengers balls being slightly oversized. I somehow can see Fed winning next year more convincingly than this year. The Fed we normally know would have never given up a set to Ferrero. Next year he might find a patch like in 06 and then everybody else can forget about winning it. In my view it all depends on his form.

Don't get me started about Brad Guilbert. :argh:

Borgs comments before this years final were not the most insightful either IMHO .When asked if Nadal could win he said something like 'Well, he's going to have to play very well to beat Roger.'
The thing to remember is next year could be a completely different scenario .Just because Nadal came close this year doesnt mean he wont go out in the 4th round next. Or as Tenez says Roger could simply blow him away in the final .Who knows .He could win it of course but I cant see how Borg can be so confident in his prediction .

Nobody in the last 2 years has beaten Nadal at Wimbledon except Fed. All we ever hear about Nadals achievements there are excuses about why his opponents lost, rather than his own prowess and progress on the green stuff. I hope Borg is right just to silence a few critics

I see what you mean and you are right about the facts. But some top 20 and even lower down players really got close to beating Nadal over the last 2 years. next year, I can see guys like Isner, Querry, Porto, Djoko, Roddick, Gasquet, and a few others getting the better of the Spaniard, not that they will but certainly could. Federer remains a much safer bet.

Regarding Borg's comment, my feelingis that he does not really care and was probably trying to be friendly to Nadal, after having been friendly to Fed. Nothing more, nothing less.

That's a pretty astute conclusion Tenez.I'm not sure Rafa will win next year as there's plenty of competition in the men's game,Djokovic for a start.Also Rafa's injuries are also rather worrying.A good friend of Fed(Yves Allegro) said felt Rog may begin to concentrate more on the things he's yet to achieve in tennis so perhaps he may sacrifice Wimbers in 2008 to go for the RG title?

Which I find odd because if he sacrifices Wimbledon and doesnt win RG does he then focus again on winning Wimbledon? :shrug:

Yes Fedrules, I personnally cannot see Fed sacrifying Wimby in a million years either (well at leat till 2010 ;) ). I am however convinced that he will use the TMS as a way to keep his ranking points but he will be even more focus on the slams from now on.

I wish we were at the beginning of the clay season already, Fed at the French is what I really want to see now again. This is his only challenge worth fighting in my view, the other slams are great but bar accident he should win them.

I also think he may relax a bit more soon and enjoy his tennis again once he will have reached the 14th slam. At the moment he plays like a banker but it will come a time where he will be the challenger again and some great tennis may be on the horizon again.

Its looking likely we'll see Fed going for the 4 Slams in a row again at the French .Will it be third time 'lucky ' ? If he does win , he'll be the best player ever , equalling Sampras's 14 .
How would that affect his motivation for Wimbledon if he did ? ;)
Of course, Im assuming here he wins the AO . ;)

Winning the AO is going to be difficult enough. The pressure isn't getting any less.

I certainly am of the opinion that Rafa will ave a better chance of winning the wimbey next year...remember what he said during the wimbey 2006? He said" I want to see if I can reach atleast the second week, no?" and of course he has gone on to reach the finals twice...the first time around, we could see that he was happy to come out second best...but this year he certainly felt that he could have won the match..but of course all depends on the RG 2008, if Fed wins it...well he's going to be more relaxed by the wimbey...but in no way is it going to affect Rafa mentally.If Fed once again loses to Rafa in the RG then Fed would look all prepared to retain his Wimbey...probably will be disheartened on losing on an other RG...But mostly it depends on whether he's fit for the battle.

I too believe there are too many "lucky" jibes being thrown at Nadal for being runner up at Wimbledon for two years in a row. Once can be a fluke....but twice? Sorry folks. Not only did he reach the final, he took Roger to 5 sets. I'd like to see Rafa win Wimbledon next year, but I'd like to see Roger win RG next year as well.

Would be interesting if Fed beat Rafa in the RG final, and Rafa beat Fed in the Wimbledon final!

It would be great to see Federer capture the one GS he hasn't yet got in his trophy cabinet and great to see Rafa get the SW19 trophy to show he can win a GS outside of Roland Garros. That's my ideal scenario for those slams next year.

Would Federer winning RG be less of a victory if he doesn't beat Nadal in the final?

Nadal could either be injured or have a really bad day and could lose before meeting Fed in the final. Obviously the same could happen to Fed himself.

I don't think it should matter whoever Fed beats in the final (if he does), as all he can do is beat the players that are put in front of him.

In my eyes, Fed has to EITHER win RG once or win 15 or more slams in total to become the goat.

I would agree with you that it doesn't matter who Fed beats in the RG Final, it would not degrade the win at all.

That's my opinion as well. I think he will get to about 18-20 slams before he packs up.

I think getting another 4 in the next 2 years will be a huge achievement. I don't think he will be in a slam winning form 3 years from now. But like Sampras he might find one left in him when nobody expects it and the men in form may have a synchronised dip. Those circumstances always happen, this is why we saw Connors, Agassi and Sampras doing very well at an unexpected time late in theirr career.

We need to remember that it is very very premature to be talking about these things. For all we know, it may be a Roddick v Djokovic final next year ...

I agree that I would still see Roger as the favorite over Nadal, simply because there are fewer players who might be dangerous for him, but Nadal also has a good chance to make the final. But even so, how many GS finals in a row do we expect Roger to reach? He's already got a record ...

I prefer thinking about the AO first, which in itself is still quite a while away. It will be a tough ask for Roger to repeat his performance from this year there. Part of me actually doesn't want him to win it, because it might increase the motivation of taking the French, and taking the pressure of that at that time (it wouldn't be a non-calendar year GS then, after all). But another part of me thinks there might be a small chance that he could take the Grand Slam next year and wants him to set himself up for this at the AO ...

Anyway, let's wait and see. If Roger wins "only" two slams next year, I'll be happy anyway.

You mean at the FO of course.... ;)

If those 2 don't include the French, I will be disappointed. I expect a lot from our champion. :pray:

And this is the updated comparison that fits pretty well on this thread:

http://www.tennis28.com/studies/Federer_Sampras.html

I always find it almost impossible to imagine Fed NOT winning a slam outside RG, let alone Nadal beating him at wimbledon. But barring injury, i still see Nadal as the player most likely to beat him at next years wimbledon, despite Djokovic's recent form. However, as sad as it is for me to admit, i reckon Roddick has as much chance as winning it now as Mirka has of getting on the front page of Vogue magazine. His 1/4 final at USO was an awesome display, yet he still lost in straights. His only shot at Wimbledon has been and gone i feel :(

After Wimbledon, I would have definitely agreed with you in this respect. Nadal is still vulnerable on grass imo, but his chances of coming through are better than those of the other guys, not to mention that he has a better chance of beating Roger in the final than them.

However, the way that Djokovic has come on the scene really impressed me. He made three successive GS semifinals (including one final), which is no mean feat. I don't think Sampras ever made three successive semifinals, or did he?

So --- remembering that it's early days, and just based on what I've seen this year --- I would probably put Novak about at the same level as Rafa. And I'm (sadly) not so sure that Roger will be heads and shoulders above them at next year's Wimbledon --- it might very much be a three-way race, and a lot may depend on whose side of the draw Djoko falls (assuming, of course, that he'll still be #3, which like so many other things isn't a given).

I hope Roger will prove me wrong and produce a stunning display as he did in 2006. :pray: But right now there are so many uncertainties that I find looking forward to Wimby 2008 almost impossible. :shrug:

Re: Roddick - yes, his chances of winning another slam may well have passed. However, you never know - all it takes might be him having a good run one year and someone else taking out Roger.

Yes Sampras reached 3 Semis in a row. In fact he won 3 slams in a row (the same as Fed's).

Oh yes, of course. Not sure how I could forget about that. :doh: 1993/94, wasn't it?

Anyway, it's still an impressive achievement ...

You cant deny Rafa credit for his Wimbledon achievements .Rafa is a great player and competitor who will get through a lot of difficult matches anyway even when luck is going against him.
But Federer apart, he still hasnt faced the best of the opposition yet on grass which makes his wins less convincing. Youhzny, Djoko are two examples who were injured . Has he played Roddick, Gasquet or Ancic?
Just remembered, he did get beat by an in-form Mahut at Queens

Very much agree with this Biggy. Like I would not say that Ferrer is better than Nadal on hard despite having won their last encounter at teh USO. We could see he was injured like Youshny and Djoko were at Wimby. Until I see Nadal beating convincingly a grass court player, I'll have my reserve...and this despite grass being quite slow nowadays. Soderling, Youshny and Djoko did trouble him. Berdych's match was a non-event.

I don't see that many Nadal critics on this board. Maybe you were thinking of my post as being a "jibe" at Nadal, but far from it. I did mention that Nadal was perhaps a bit lucky to get an injured Djokovic in the semifinal, but that overall he faced a tougher draw at Wimbledon this year and proved that his run to the final the year before was no fluke.

I wasn't referring to your post Nick, just a general observation of the opinion of some of the Fed fans. Everyone is entitled to their view and opinion of course and I didn't convey that well in my message. My opinion is that Nadal has proven to me he is number 2 on grass at the moment with two runners up spots at Wimbledon the past 2 years and pushing Fed harder than anyone in recent times at SW19.