Wimbledon QF preview and prediction: Federer vs. Raonic

It will be a rematch of last year’s semifinals when Roger Federer gets another shot at Milos Raonic during the second week of Wimbledon on Wednesday, this time in the quarters.

Federer leads the head-to-head series 9-3, but Raonic prevailed 6-3, 6-7(3), 4-6, 7-5, 6-3 at the All-England Club 12 months ago. Thus the Canadian takes a two-match winning streak against Federer into this one, as he also got the job done 6-4, 6-4 in last season’s Brisbane final.

This, however, is obviously a different Federer than the one who was on display in 2016. The 35-year-old Swiss is armed with a clean bill of health and boasts a 28-2 record in 2017 that includes an 18th Grand Slam title at the Australian Open. He has not dropped a set this fortnight while ousting Alexandr Dolgopolov, Dusan Lajovic, Mischa Zverev, and Grigor Dimitrov.

“Roger’s been the best player I think this year, hands down, when he’s been on court,” Raonic commented. “But it’s not about six months or whatnot; it comes down to Wednesday–one day. So I just [have] to try to find a way to try to be better on that day.”

The world No. 7 was second best much of the way on Monday against Alexander Zverev, but he managed to turn things around en route to a 4-6, 7-5, 4-6, 7-5, 6-1 victory. That was preceded by more routine defeats of Jan-Lennard Struff, Mikhail Youzhny, and Albert Ramos-Vinolas. Raonic is hoping to make a return trip to the Wimbledon final, but he has not been the same player this season as he was when he surged to No. 3 in the world in 2016. The 26-year-old had been a disappointing 8-6 in his last 14 matches prior to arriving in London and he came in at just 16th in the race to the World Tour Finals.

Last summer it was Federer who was dealing with a knee injury and Raonic who was playing the best tennis of his career. To an extent, the roles are now reversed. Raonic has struggled with physical problems in 2017, while Federer–aside from skipping the entire clay-court swing–has been the tour’s best player.

Wednesday’s result should reflect that current state of affairs.

Pick: Federer in 4

88 Comments on Wimbledon QF preview and prediction: Federer vs. Raonic

  1. Fed in four was my pick at start of event. Right now it looks like it could be straights based off his form and not dropping a set and Raonic losing quite a few sets to get here but I’ll stick with Fed in four because of Raonic’s serve.

  2. I actually didn’t think Fed played great against Dimi, but an improvement on his previous match. If reports of him having a bad cold are true, he may be coming out of it and able to play at his best. If so, he should be able to handle Raonic fairly easily this time around. Fed in 3.

  3. Raonic in 5. Federer’s return of serve isn’t as good as it used to be, so Milos should get lots of free points. I can see 2 or 3 tie-break sets, split by the players, before Raonic gets it done in the 5th.

    • I would agree with you, except for Raonic has been serving poorly by his standards. He got broken too many times to count against Zverev, and the only reason he stayed in that match was because Zverev also served so poorly. If Federer serves as brilliantly as he has been, and Raonic serves as poorly as he has been, it will be a Federer win in 3 or 4. If Raonic ups his level, especially on serve, we could have us a match!

  4. Fed hasnt dropped a set so one needs to take extra notice of that. Does he know how to drop a set? He’s only lost 2 match this year, to Raonic in Brisbane and Haas in Stuttgart which were both warm up matches after being off the scene for months.

    Fed in 4

    • Didn’t lose to Raonic in Brisbane. That was 2015 or 2016. His two losses are to Donskoy in Dubai and Haas in Stuttgart. And he had match points in both. Basically Fed hasn’t played a match this year where he didn’t at least have a match point.

  5. My main concern for Raonic is that he has been serving horribly by his standards. He got broken what seemed like a million times against Zverev. Zverev also serves poorly, allowing Raonic to break back a million times himself. If Federer serves as well as he has been, and Raonic serves as poorly as he has been, it will be goodbye for Raonic. I am hoping that Raonic serves better so that we get a solid match!

    • Completely agree with you, Kevin.

      That was a bad match and I was particularly interested in watching it because I’m a Sascha fan. Sascha served poorly and Milos did as well. It wasn’t a high quality 5 sets. Lucky for Milos, Sascha couldn’t last that fifth set, the stronger man, Milos, won easily in the 5th set. But I thought, from what I watched of Roger v Grigor that Grigor played terrible. So I don’t know, I can’t tell who is the better player Milos or Roger, right now. I don’t think Roger has been challenged enough to really see him.

      • Yeah, you never really know what you might get on grass with someone like Milos… Alrhough Fed has not truly been challenged yet, I don’t think there is any question that between he and Milos, Fed has definitely shown better form thus far. Just look at how well Federer has served compared to Milos. If he continues to serve as well as he has, he is going to be difficult for Milos to beat. A guy like Raonic MUST serve well for him to have a shot at beating a top guy at a major. If he doesn’t serve well, he’s pretty much screwed. I’d like to think that he will up his service level for a big match like tomorrow, but he just hasn’t given us any reason to believe that he can just suddenly up his game. But like I said- anything can happen! I think one thing is for sure- Raonic needs to serve MUCH better, as well as have Fed’s level drop, in order for him to beat Fed. If I had to bet $, I would absolutely bet on Fed to win, but given that Raonic did beat him last year (despite Fed’s health at the time), I’m not ready to assume anything in that match-up… I personally hope that Fed and Djokovic both win because I really want to see another Fedole slam match. I think it would be a massive result for each of them to come through that match. I’m also pretty sure that Fed would love to be able to beat both Djokovic and Nadal in slams in the same season again, since he hasn’t done that since 2007. And obviously Novak would love to get back to Wimbledon glory, so I hope we get Fedole semi!

        • Kevin, even less than full power, Fed should have beat Raonic last year (though he should have lost to Cilic in the previous round). If Roger can get his game back to where it was in the Halle final, he will roll. He’s close, but not quite there yet, imo.

  6. Could possibly lose a set but quite unlikely. Raonic not playing like last year.

    Roger in three.

  7. Roger in 4 … although 3 wouldn’t surprise me as roger won’t be phased by raonic strengths, especially not serve. Roger will probably bring his clinical best service game to court, with raonic nit having the tools to break him, meaning raonic’s best hope will be tie-breaks which, after his 5-setter against Zverev, are not what he’ll be wanting.

  8. Yeah I should’ve gone with first hunch of Roger in straights. Total mismatch right now. Fed is completely cruising.

  9. Fed hasnt dropped a set and breaks everyone so easily. I think we’ll be seeing a Fed v Cilic final. Cilic had natch points against Fed last year.

  10. Federer is in the semifinals! He is the only man not to drop a set at Wimbledon that is left in the draw.

    • He’ll drop a few sets soon! The Raonic generation, they couldn’t even get a set off this old Fed, I mean, what hope do they have of winning a slam?

      I’ll wait and see if Berdych or probably Cilic could get a set or even beat Fed here. Berdych will be thinking of his 2010, Cilic will feel he should beat Fed here, after getting so close last year. We’ll see…

      • It’s a different roger than last year
        He wasn’t healthy last year & wasn’t enjoying playing but he’s feeling it this year he was the favorite to win Wimbledon before the tournament it’s looking even better for him now that the rest of the big 4 are out of the tournament

        • Two sides to a coin, player like Cilic will fancy his chances, with three of the big four gone. Sam and Berdych each has taken out one big four member, Cilic has beaten the guy who took out another big four member, they may combine their efforts to take out the last big four member left in the draw!

          • It’s certainly possible, Lucky! Fed still has to go through AT LEAST two guys who have beaten him at slams, including one who beat him at this tournament. Berdych hasn’t even come close to Roger in years now, but anything can happen at Wimbledon with big hitters like those remaining in the draw.

          • I’m not saying it’s a done deal
            Certainly everyone who made the semifinals deserve their spot and have a shot at the title but federrer is the heavy favorite right now
            He still has to earn it because those guys will give him everything they have but it’s roger’s to loose now

        • But flash, Raonic is in poor form, not Berdych and Cilic. Raonic lost in first round at Queens; he struggled to beat A Zverev in five sets and that might have taken much out of him. He did look slow ( perhaps lethargic) in the QF match.

          Both Berdych and Cilic had beaten Fed at the slam (Berdych at Wimbledon 2010 and USO2013; Cilic at USO2014), so they may draw on those experiences instead of feeling lost out there when facing Fed. We’ll see how things turn out, nothing is for sure.

          • There is never a sure thing at a slam. Fed has to earn the title. I am not awarding it to him now. He’s obviously the man to beat. It remains to be seen if the other guys have it in them to do it.

            • Berdych and Cilic have both done it to Fed before at slams, so who knows? I would think that Fed knows better than to underestimate those guys after losing to them before, though…

          • Lucky, I think you’re doing what I did with Rafa on clay, and not seeing how dominant Fed is. The way he played the first two sets against Raonic was like the Halle final, and no one other than top form Nole would have a chance. In the third set, Roger’s form dropped noticeably, Raonic’s went up (he hit some incredible shots in that third set) – and Fed still won the set.

            • Joe, you have to factor in Raonic’s poor movement in the match. My goodness, he was up 3-0 or 3-1 in the TB but ended up losing. Even when Fed played poorly in one game in third set, and Raonic had several BP chances, he just couldn’t do it (but that’s credit to Fed for runnning like crazy to get to every ball to save all those BPs). Raonic was no where near his best and Fed could capitalize even with a lapse in the third set; Fed has to up his level if he wants to win the title here.

            • After falling behind 3-0 in that tie-break, Fed played virtually every point brilliantly. Go back and watch if you don’t believe me. He just hit a bunch of winners except for netting one service return, I believe.

              There is no question that Fed’s current level is very likely to win Wimby. It’s possible that a very top level Cilic could beat him, but Cilic hasn’t yet showed that level at this Wimby. He’s not, for instance, playing like he did at USO 2014. I”m not saying he can’t, but I think it’s unlikely. And Fed is playing better now than he did in 2014.

            • Joe, as I said, Raonic was slow! He’s also not serving well the whole match, hence he couldn’t even take a set! Do you think if he served a bit better, moved a bit better, he won’t at least get a set??

              Cilic at least had beaten a tougher opponent who served really well ( and don’t tell me Raonic was serving better than Muller!).

  11. Hey Kevin,Joe,Eugene,Benny…congrats your man is in the semis once again!…Very likely he will win his 19th now….I certainly will give my proper congrats come sunday…Best of luck to u all and Rog guys!!

    • Not so soon Mira, I’m liking Cilic’s chances here. After crossing that psychological barrier ( of going beyond the QF at Wimbledon)for the first time, I think Cilic won’t be as edgy or nervous, in his next match and I think he will reach the final.

      I think he’s tough to beat even if he’s nervous in the final (if he gets there); having beaten the big serving S&V Muller, I think he can handle the net rushing Fed, though Fed is much quicker than Muller around the court.

      Of course Querrey and Berdych may have something to say in the SFs. I do hope for Cilic and Berdych to be in the final, Berdych isn’t getting any younger and his window of opportunities is about to be shut very soon. I wish them both good luck ( sorry Querrey, I want to see Cilic in the final as I feel he’s the only one who’s likely to beat Fed).

      • I pick Muller over Nadal and you assume I’m hoping as a Fed fan that Rafa loses and don’t actually believe it. Do you really think Cilic is likely to beat Fed? I think he has a chance but I feel you may be hoping as a Rafan. Because Fed hasn’t dropped a set and has won the event seven times. I don’t think anyone can stop him at this point.

        • Nope Benny, if you’re here long enough, before Wimbledon started, I had discussion with Hawkeye about who’s likely to beat Fed at Wimbledon. I told him Cilic! And I said I see Cilic as the most likely one ( perhaps the only one) to beat Fed at Wimbledon.

          You may ask why Cilic? I can tell you why, that’s because he’s looking very determined to do well and to challenge the big four plus Stan to be a top five player ( he said that’s his goal this season). He did poorly at the slow HC season but he’s building up his momentum starting with clay – he reached QF at MC and Rome, won a 250 on clay and came to FO doing well to reach the QF for the first time. It’s after the FO that I finally see him to be a real contender for Wimbledon ( because if he could do well on slow clay, what would stop him from doing even better on quicker surfaces like grass; and Cilic loves to play on grass). It’s just like Rafa, having done so well on HCs, why won’t he do even better on clay his fave surface, and true enough Rafa proved that I was right.

          Cilic reached the SF at a 250 grass event, before beating Muller in three sets at Queen’s SF, and narrowly lost to Feli in the final after having a MP in the third set TB. So, to me that was evidence that he would do well to reach the later stages at Wimbledon.

          I was disappointed that he’s drawn into Rafa’s quarter and only one of them would survive to reach the SF, but I didn’t expect Rafa to lose to Muller in a 4+ hours match. After that match, I believed Muller was going to lose to Cilic and true enough Cilic beat him to reach the SF.

          I expect Cilic to beat Querrey because Cilic moves better, has better ground strokes and he’s simply in great form, and he may beat Fed in the final should they meet and if he producing tennis of his USO2014 SF standard.

        • Also Benny, Fed didn’t drop a set but seriously who did he beat? Certainly not the in form players like Muller! Raonic and Dimi were in poor form this Wimbledon, even though Dimi looked determined but once he faced Fed, he lost his way (sad).

          • I know. I mean because he will be so fresh. Cilic will probably have another tough match with Querrey as history has them playing epics here. I just think a fresh and motivated will be too tough to beat. Marin can snatch a set but I don’t think much more. First these two have to get past their respectable semis though. Querrey and Berdych are in really good form here.

          • Please, lucky. You’re being such a homer! Dimitrov didn’t play well, but Raonic played just fine; in the 3rd set he played great. He just got beat by the better player (one whom you thought couldn’t play much better than he did in beating Khachanov in Halle).

            I think you’re being worse than me in being unable to see just how well Fed is playing; you think all of his opposition is weak, which is just not true. Much of the time it’s that he’s playing so well.

            • Nope Joe, just think, if he got Muller instead of Dimi, do you think he’ll not drop a set?

              Fed just played well to win, against not so great opponents, he certainly didn’t play lights out tennis! Raonic was poor by his own standard, whichever way you cut it!

            • Well, again, if you can’t see how well Fed played in those first two sets against Raonic, I’m not sure what to say other than that you’re missing something.

              Fed is a better server and a better returner than Nadal, certainly on grass. Muller is not a better server than Raonic, and Fed was able to break the latter a few times. I think he would have done the same against Muller, who you said yourself is not a great returner. So, if Fed is playing like he did against Raonic, he might break Muller a few times and not get broken himself. If so, it wouldn’t be too surprising if he won in straight sets against Muller.

            • Joe, Muller’s lefty serve would cause Fed some headaches. You’re kidding if you think Raonic in the match served better than Muller, how biased you’re once again! Muller even had better ground strokes than Raonic at the baseline, and he was so much quicker than Raonic around the court!

              I would say Muller might get a set or two against Fed and Fed would most likely barely scrapped past Muller in some TB sets, in four or five.

            • If Fed and Muller would have been on the same side instead of Dimi, I certainly believe that Fed would have been accused of having an opponent who doesn’t know to play a rally properly and instead only do S&V and got beaten.
              If they would have really met I think Muller can’t break Fed’s serve and the reverse is also true but in the entire match at least Fed would have broken twice and in tiebreakers Fed record in Wimbledon is very good so it could have still ended in straights. By the way did they ever met in grass before, I don’t have an idea about their previous match ups.

            • Lucky, the bottom line is that you’re not giving Federer the credit he deserves, imo because of your bias. He hasn’t lost a set this tournament and has played brilliantly for a good part of it. He also did in the Halle final, but you didn’t give him credit there either, in contrast with virtually every other commentator one could find.

              I can almost predict that if Fed wins wimby, you will say he only won because he didn’t face any tough opposition, or that otherwise strong opponents weren’t in form. That’s pretty much what you’ve said about him so far this grass season.

            • @Vijay, you are contradicting yourself. You say Muller can’t break Fed’s serve and the reverse is true but then you go on to say Fed would have broken Muller twice! Which is which?

              I know these are hypotheticals also you being a Fedfans you see more positives in Fed than Muller, just interested on your take given both are good servers.

            • @RITB, Fed has a great serve not to the extent of Muller but still great enough plus his baseline game is also good. I can say Fed is not the best in any of the category like serve, baseline game, volley, ROS, backhand, forehand, and other skills but he is in top 5 in most of the category. So all combined together he is a complete player and when you take Muller he is good in only S&V therefore he will find it very difficult to break Fed’s serve as even if he returns Fed’s serve mostly he will lose the point in the rally but on the other side if Fed can return some serves he could very well win the rally as well which I think in an entire match he could break at least 2 times and Muller may or may not break even once. And then if it goes to tiebreaker then usually Fed has upper hand.

            • Nah Joe, as usual, please do not make any assumption about me! If Fed beats Cilic in the final, then I’ll say he’s playing well! Because in my opinion, Cilic is the player who’s really playing well this grass season, having beaten some tough opponents. Too bad, Fed didn’t get to meet Muller, another form player this grass season.

            • Thanks @Vijay. This was my take on Muller’s game as well, that he is a strong S &V baller but I was surprised how well he read Rafa’s serve and returned. I guess this was more a function of Rafa’s weaker serve rather than Muller being an excellent returner.

            • Lucky: why is Muller a form player? Because he beat Rafa? The fact is that Rafa didn’t play that well in that match. If he had played to his ability, he would have won. So good on Muller for winning a tough match, but that’s no reason to think that Fed wouldn’t have handled him pretty easily.

              Federer hit 46 winners to 9 UE in that match against Raonic. Most of those UE came in the last set, when his form dropped but he was brilliant in the tie-break. The first two he was utterly dominant. Of course he hasn’t won the tournament yet, and certainly Cilic could beat him. But for you to withhold praise for his play to this point, I find a bit unbelievable.

            • Joe, did you watch the grass warm up events or not? Or, you’re just watching Stuggart and Halle?

              Muller won a 250 event (at Holland I think), reached the SF of Queen’s and lost narrowly in three sets to non other than Cilic. He was serving fantastic all match and frustrated Cilic but Cilic managed to stay focused in the end to win the match. FYI, Raonic lost in R1 at Queen’s!

              As for Cilic, he reached the SF in a 250 grass event and then reached the final at Queen’s and lost narrowly to Feli after having MP in the third set TB.

              Rafa had 77 winners and only 15 or 17 UEs, won 80% of his first serve points and hit 23 aces but he still lost! And it’s against Muller, not Raonic! I doubt Fed could beat Muller in straight sets especially with Fed’s lapses; Muller unlike Dimi or Raonic would capitalize on that.

          • @Vijay

            I think you’ve overestimated Fed’s ROS ability esp vs a lefty. Don’t forget, the lefty who troubled Fed the most even on grass, i.e. Rafa Nadal, could break Fed’s serves but Fed had to resort to TBs to win his sets against that lefty. Rafa didn’t even have a big serve like Muller’s!

            Muller has evolved into a true grass court player playing more than a S&V game! Watch him, his rallies were really something, fully aware of the whole dimensions of the grass court and where to place his shots. Rafa lost to him not because of his S&V only, but also how well he was placing the balls in the rallies, something that caught Rafa by surprise I feel.

            I had underestimated Muller before his match with Rafa; even if Rafa wasn’t that tense in the first two sets, I do feel Rafa would at best win one of the first two sets and Muller would still win at least one.

            If you’re expecting Fed to beat Muller in straight sets, then I’ll say fat hope. Fed has his lapses in his matches, it’s only that Dimi and Raonic were being poor that they let the opportunities slipped away from them. Muller was cool as a cucumber, esp during the first one or two sets of his matches (vs Rafa and Cilic), his lefty big serve was a big weapon; both Rafa and Cilic had problems returning those serves, I doubt Fed could return everyone of those and so Muller would have his chances. Moreover Fed has his usual lapses and Muller will most likely be able to take advantage of them, unlike Dimi and Raonic who were obviously not playing their best tennis vs Fed.

            Mullet may not beat Fed on grass but winning a set off Fed is very possible and imo very likely.

            • Actually speaking taking a set off shouldn’t be discussed at all particularly on grass. It’s like one small mistake and you could be in trouble. I will not say that Muller can’t win a set against Fed when even Lajovic(2nd round opponent), Zeverev and Raonic all had the opportunity to take a set. So Muller can also take a set off Fed, what I’m trying to say is more possibility that he may not take a set off but it may happen that if they really play against each other Muller may take even two sets but it is just a feeling that he may not win.
              And lucky I remember you were giving too much hype to A. Zverev as well in Halle but it turned out the other way, and now you are pinning your hope on Cilic and will see what happens.

            • Vijay: Lucky focused entirely on Zverev’s play, claiming (correctly) that Alex did not play very well. What he didn’t see is that Fed had something to do with that, and played brilliantly in any case. It’s entirely possible for one player to play badly and the other to play brilliantly, but I’m not sure Lucky sees that, at least when Federer is involved.

            • Yeah I agree that on grass it’s easy to lose set(s), so Muller would most likely get a set or two against Fed; but if I’m not wrong we are not saying that Muller would beat Fed on grass at Wimbledon right?

              It’s strange that you people are saying that I’m pinning my hope on Cilic to beat Fed! Why am I pinning hope on anyone to beat Fed? Please get this clear, and I’ve said it many times, that Cilic is my second fave player after Rafa, of course I’ll want him to beat Fed to win his second slam, esp when he doesn’t need to face and beat Rafa here! Do you Fed worshippers not hope that Fed beat anyone to win his slam???

              You Fed worshippers are a strange breed, tennis is not always about Fed and Nadal, there are other players that we can support. Many regular posters here know that I like and support Cilic for a long time now, but I’ll always want Rafa to beat anyone, including Cilic.

              It’s not about beating Fed, it’s about beating anyone in the final to win the title, but it’s likely that Fed will be in the final, so I wish for Cilic to beat Fed, simple as that.

              What’s the point of arguing till no end whether Fed is playing well, or lights out or not?? I don’t have to agree with you Fed worshippers at all, for Ive my point of view. You’re easily satisfied about Fed’s level but Im not, just like Im not particularly impressed with Rafa’s level on clay at times.

              Does it matter whether I agree with you people or not? Does that make any difference whether Fed would win the title or not???

              Regarding A Zverev, after he won the Rome title, I thought he should be playing better on grass, as, if I’m not wrong he said clay wasn’t/isn’t his best surface. Well he managed to reach the final but played poorly in the final, not unlike he playing poorly against Rafa at MC.

              I don’t deny Fed was playing better in the final than in the SF vs Khachanov, but, that’s also due to Zverev’s poor play. It’s not like Zverev was another Khachanov in the final! As I said then, if Fed could play like that (in the final) when beating a tougher opponent like Khachanov, then I would be impressed. I don’t see anything wrong with that, when I expected much more from Fed, more than his worshippers. I would also expect high level of play from Rafa on clay, when they both are supposed to be having a revival on their comebacks and are the top two guys leading the race!

              I would also compare various players who are playing well on the different surfaces to the two of them, and see or speculate whether Fed and Rafa are able to beat them, whether they are threats to them; and also Fedal against each other to see where they stand on each surface ( clay excluded as Fed didn’t play on them this year).

      • Oh!Okay Lucky!!Not so soon!Heh heh!…Of coz Cilic may pose a threat to Rog but i think Rog really really serious in getting no 19th…he skipped all clay season for this!…i don’t think he will let this opportunity slip away easily from him…But,let see all of them in semis first…I don’t mind who’s going to win…i will be happy for them all….

    • Roger is not “my man”. That would be Andre Agassi. 🙂 But I am certainly happy for Fed to have come through that match so well, since Raonic beat him last year. I was hoping all along for a Fedal final, so I am very disappointed for Rafa. I would also be happy for the other guys if they won it all. As for Fed, I always thought he would end his career having the men’s title record at either Wimbledon or US Open (not tied with Sampras/Connors), and he may never get a better chance than this to get the Wimbledon record, so I wish him the best. Rafa and Novak each individually own the record at one of the slams, so it would only be fitting if Fed could do the same. Of the other three guys left, I would most love to see Querrey win it all, although the chances of that are obviously pretty low…

    • Thanks, Mira. Of course he has to win two matches yet, but I like his chances at this point (I did at the beginning too)!

      • You’re welcome Joe!!…U know i dedicated 1 Bracket[Tourneytopia] for Rog and ironically it’s not because of Rog winning wimby that will make me a champion but Cilic!…If Cilic manage to go to the final…maybe i will be a champion regardless whether Rog win wimby or not!..hehehe…But,best of luck for Rog and all Rog fans here for his semis tomorrow Joe!!

        • Thanks, Mira. And I’m sorry, but I’m thankful to Rafa for letting me win $100! I bet against him to win Wimby before the start of the tournament. I’m just glad I didn’t bet against him at RG!

          p.s. to be honest, I won’t be too upset if Cilic wins. I’ve always liked him ever since watching him play 2009 USO against del Potro.

          • hahaha!…Don’t be sorry joe!..it’s okay to bet against Rafa if u feel he can’t win in any tournament…like Wimby…i myself when i filled some of the Brackets..his history at Wimby for the last 5 years weigh heavily on my mind..that’s why i filled many Brackets because i feel other Big 3 also have a high chance to win Wimby…especially Rog..but,you’re very wise not to do that at RG Joe!!..hahaha!…

            Yeah Joe..me too will be very happy no matter who will win Wimby…they’re all certainly deserve it!

      • Flash, it would appear that you haven’t been around this site very long… 98% of the people who regularly comment on this site would rather die than call Federer the “GOAT”. 🙂

          • Very true, Vmk! Both sides feel very strongly about it. I was just making a joke about someone suggesting that Fed could be the GOAT on such a heavily pro-Rafa site. 🙂

        • I am fortunate in not believing in the GOAT concept. So I don’t have to get involved in any arguments. I agree with Rod Laver, who said that a player can only be the greatest if his era. Both Rafa and Fed are the greatest in their era. Why must there be one?

          Of course Rafa should be included in any discussion of one of the greatest players. I think that Rod Laver was the greatest in his era. Sampras was the greatest of his era.

          It is a travesty to leave out past great champions in this pursuit of one arbitrarily anointed so-called GOAT. The Fed fans were the ones who started this nonsense. Because they wanted to be fans of the GOAT and bask in his reflected glory.

          I am not about to buy into this insanity. I prefer to celebrate all of the greatest players throughout the decades. They all have earned it.

          • nny, all the discussion about who is the GOAT is so delusional and immature. People need to grow up and improve themselves. They are just projecting their weaknesses in these kind of debates. It’s almost impossible to find a yt video without any stupid comments about a Nadal & Federer and who is better. People are weak. It’s time to evolve and grow not only muscle mass. GOAT is just an illusion invented because people have nothing better to do.

            • Eugene,

              You will get no argument from me! I was trying to be polite about it. But I think you summed it up perfectly!

            • As I’ve said here before, many will agree that Nadal is the clay GOAT; Roger is the GOAT off-clay. Short of that, I think everyone should be able to agree that Nadal is better than Roger on clay; Roger is better that Rafa on all other surfaces.

              At least, that is so if we go by overall performance in the biggest tournaments.

  12. I predict Cilic will red-line in the final. He was a bit tight against Muller but in the final he’ll play with nothing to lose and his peak is good enough to beat Fed. Should be a classic Wimbledon final between the 2 best players in the world right now on this surface.

  13. I know that it’s easy to assume Fed will have his way with Berdych, but we should keep in mind that he had match point against Fed in Miami this year, and really kinda choked that one away. I know that was only best-of-three, but I get the feeling Berdych is going to just let it fly, really take his chances and pull the trigger quickly. I really wouldn’t be surprised if Berdych surprises everyone… That being said, I also wouldn’t be surprised if the match goes exactly the way their match went in Australia this year- a Fed steamrolling. We shall see. Assuming Cilic makes the final, Berdych followed by Cilic, at Wimbledon, is no walk in the park for anyone…

      • True, Benny, he didn’t play as well as he did in Indian Wells or most AO matches. But just from a mental standpoint, that Miami match combined with winning their last Wimbledon match could give Berdych some confidence. If Fed plays nearly as flawlessly as he did for most of the Raonic match today, then Berdych will have his hands full…

        • Raonic and Berdych are different types of players, Raonic rushes the net for he knows he can’t win from the baseline. Berdych otoh is a hard hitting baseliner.

          Berdych has to serve well and hit his ground strokes well to keep Fed at the baseline if he wants to win this one; if Fed gets to the net, Berdych will be rushed and will make more errors.

          I hope Berdych does better than his Miami match this year.

  14. I had no idea about this until I just looked at their head2head, but Cilic and Querrey have played twice at Wimbledon (2009 and 2012), and both times were epic 5-setters! The 2012 was apparently extra-epic because it’s was 17-15 in the fifth! So if history has any say, we could be in for a battle on Friday. Yes, Cilic is a better player than he was in 2012, but so is Sam Querrey…

  15. Querreys confidence must be high. To beat the defending champion two years running, not to mention Acapulco this year.But, if I was a betting man, Id go for Cilic because he’s the more experience in Slams.

Comments are closed.

in the same Rolex Cellini Replica style as the team replica watches. I find the engraving far more satisfying, but would have liked to see a bit more depth to it. There is a little more branding on the PRC200. Firstly, Burberry handbags the 6 oclock sub-dial sports a basketball image in grey. Additionally, the pushers are edged with red (top) and blue (bottom), Breitling Replica Watches UK which is, to me, the coolest thing.
Skip to toolbar