Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Backspin1183, Oct 30, 2013.
What do you think?
Please explain why :lol:
Djokovic in 4 or 5.
Federer wasn't really playing that well at AO06, he basically beat a bunch of mugs to win that title whereas Djokovic had to go through Murray and Nadal back to back in 2012.
Oh crap, got some AO finals mixed up. This was the year Federer injured his ankle and was wearing a brace in the final, right? Yeah, Djokovic would have killed him.
He was wearing a brace but his ankle was fine. He injured it months prior. He stopped wearing it after Dubai.
As for Djokovic killing him...give me a break. He may have won, but nobody was going to kill prime-Federer. Ever.
please remember that in 24 grand slams final, federer only lost to nadal 6 times and del potro 1 time. beside these two players nobody has defeated federer in a slam final
Djokovic. He would have stayed out there all day to win.
We're talking about the Federer who dropped a set to Baghdatis, right?
Why not compare Djokovic 2012 to Federer 2007 at the aussie open?!
Obviously didn't see how well Baghdatis played...
this. 2006 fed didn't play well at all.
2007 Fed dominated everyone
Depends on surface. If its rebound ace, RFederer has an edge, if its plexicushion NDjokovic has a bigger edge, BUT if you compare to '07 RFederer, I think its 50-50 on plexicushion.
You mean Federer was lucky to win in 2006? Or was the field very weak to allow out of form Fed to win the AO?
This is a paradox. Yes, if we could send Nole back in time, maybe he wins. Since tennis evolves and new generation plays better.
But, Fed was so above others that time. He had buffer. He could raise his game playing Nole. Also, he would not play the same.
And if he knew there exists such a player like Nole, he would train more moths before 2006 final, so his level would be higher.
Those kind of comparisons just don't work. Because Nole in 2012 is the product of evolution. In 2006 he doesn't have the benefit of evolution (accumulated knowledge), so his level won't be the same.
This is like sending me back in time 100 years. I would be seen as a genius with the science back then, lol.
I know what you're getting at, but maybe because RFederer was THAT much better than the field? There's a reason why MBaghdatis reached the final. He was not given an auto entry to the final to face RFederer.
the field in AO 2006 was very weak. no one is denying that. so in a way fed was fortunate to win that one. If haas and davydenko managed to push him than djokovic would have killed him in 4 sets.
this thread is not appropiate. why take one of fed's worst forms at the AO vs one of nole's very good forms at the AO. i think you should compare his other years like 2004,2005 and 2007. in all these years he was in much better form and could have won all 3 had he converted that MP vs Safin.
Djokovic is AO GOAT. So Djokovic.
But you are forgetting one thing. If Baghdadis won that match he would now be praised as a GS champion and people would say how tough he was.
But Fed would only have 16 majors. We can add Jouzny and Gonzo to the list.
So, the only reason they are not champions is cuz they lost to peak Fed.
Otherwise Fed would have 14 majors and people would say how great Baggy, Gonzo and Jouzny are.
But if that were the case people would say. But Fed won only 14, He is not that good.
I mean, don't you see that?
So, what, Fed now has to lose more to make competition look better???
The field at the AO 06 was stronger than the USO 10...
is it a fact or opinion? Explain.
I would say equal. Let's say an era has 10 years that is 40 majors.
In any era, the entire field wins 40 majors. So, the field is the same in any era
my question was to your NatF account, I believe.
Haha. I often respond to others responding others.
But I know how this looks, yeah .
no worries, mate. It's all cool
Federer faced more tough opponents than Nadal did. Plus you had guys like Nalbandian playing well enough to beat anyone from the USO 2010 bar Nadal.
We post nothing alike fool...
2006 Fed?? 2006 Fed was wearing an ankle brace because he broke a bone I think couple months ago and he was on crutches about a month before the Shanghai YEC (If I remember correctly I might be wrong so don't quote me on this). So Djokovic would win that won pretty easily.
But 2007 Aussie Open Fed was PRIME. I think Fed would win that one in 4!
09 version of Fed or Nadal would both crust 2012 Nole
That is all that needs to be said.
These are strange options. Like many people have already said, in 2006 at the AO Fed wasn't that good. And also, Djokovic did not play that well through the 2012 AO and in the final. He played a sluggish first set in the final, and could've lost it altogether. He also could've closed it out in 4. Djokovic wasn't all that fantastic at that AO.
If you want a comparison take 2011 Djokovic against 2007 Federer. You could even take Federer from 2005 or even better 2010.
Of course there's also 2 totally different court surfaces to take into account, but I think the answer is relatively simple. If it's rebound ace I'm taking Federer, if it's plexicushion Djokovic wins.
^^ OP is a RFederer hater, so don't expect that from him/her.
The 2006 Australian Open Federer wasn't even that good, so of course Djokovic 2012, but this isn't a fair comparision. Djokovic was at his best in 2012, on par with his other 2 peak performances there in 2008 and 2010. Federer was better in 2005, 2007, 2009, and probably even 2004 than 2006. So you are comparing a top 3 performance by Djokovic there to Federer's 5th best.
Still as the thread title asks, then Djokovic easily. The Federer of the 2006 Australian Open would never beat the Nadal of the 2012 one for instance.
Not sure about AO06 but AO07 Federer would have butchered anyone on court, Djokovic, Rafita, Murray, anyone, any form. That was the best tennis I've ever seen.
Unbelievable stupidity in this thread. "Federer wasn't that good in the AO 2006." Why, because he lost sets?
Yeah, tell Tommy Haas Federer wasn't that good in the 2006 AO:
And to those who think Djokovic wins it easily - Federer in TMC 2005, when he hadn't had a chance to get back into match shape yet coming off the injury, wasn't even beaten by in-form Nalbandian easily. And Nalbandian was more talented than Djokovic.
it's scary how marcos is underrated, especially when he's on as he was in this AO, before collapsing in the end of the final.
This is not necessarily true whatsoever.
Of all the years Federer won the AO, 2006 was definitely his worst form. It's more relative than anything. When someone says Federer wasn't that good it still doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't good. It just means that relative to some of Fed's best play it "wasn't that good." That match against Haas had no business going 5 sets. Federer almost dropped a 2 set lead there. He just didn't do that in those days regardless who he played. Federer also played better in 2005 than he did in 2006.
Duh, Federer 2006 wins on all surfaces convincingly against any djokovic.
So much hate that even Djokovic's name is written with a lowercase first letter.
And it happens regularly. :roll:
Let me try again: FEDERER 2006 would crush any version of djokovic!
yeah, agree with this ..
In AO 2006, federer was fluctuating between being absolutely brilliant and being pedestrian.
djokovic of AO 12 would probably edge out federer of AO 2006 .
But I'd take federer of AO 2004, 05, 07, 10 (esp semi and finals ) over any version of djokovic at the AO.
no way, I disagree. djokovic struggled against a clay courter, how the hell is he gonna beat a hardcourt GOAT at his peak with peak movement, peak fh etc. djokovic has nothing to hurt 2006 federer with.
Federer at AO 2007 was better. He won it in straight sets and dominated everyone. Hands down Fed's best tournament. That said, between 2006 Fed and 2012 Djokovic, I'd say Federer. Now if it were 2011 Djokovic it'd be another story.
If we're talking about general form of 2006 federer , I'd easily take him above djokovic of AO 12. But AO 06 in particular wasn't exactly the best of federer, though he was still playing pretty well. Like I said, he was better in AO 04,05,07,10 ....
Poor comparison, as others have pointed out Federer was not at his best at AO '06, whereas Djokovic was superhuman at AO '12
Again, Djokovic may win, but it would be a close match. Federer in those days didn't go down easily to anyone.
Federer lost some sets in the 2006 AO, but "superhuman" Djokovic lost a set to broken down Hewitt in last year's AO too...and quite frankly, shouldn't have won the tournament to begin with (Nadal blew the final with the missed BH down the line).
Not to mention, Murray looked the stronger of the two for most of their match as well.
Federer of 2006 would obliterate any version of Djokovic on any surface. Even the diet wouldn't save the Serbian pusher
Federer of 2006 LOST A SET TO DJOKOVIC OF 2006 (Monte Carlo). Yet he would obliterate Djokovic of 2012?
Wimbledon 2012, Cinci 2012.
Montreal 2007, AO 2008
Just to repeat once more. Graf is no GOAT. With that nickname no post of yours will be taken seriously, like it should not.
Separate names with a comma.