View Single Post
Old 06-04-2012, 11:13 AM   #229
Flash O'Groove
Hall Of Fame
Flash O'Groove's Avatar
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,945

Federer not substantially declining since 2007 is demonstrated by him consistently being in contention to win slams, including now...
We will never know, because it could also mean that he was so good in his primer that he can still compete with the new generation even despite a mental and physical decline.

I think any semifinalist is a contender to win that slam, that year.
So as I suggested, a player able to go to the final of the slam at the moment is a treat, even if he is generally inconsistent or a non factor. Therefore, saying that Fed era is a weak era because he had to face Hewitt, Gonzo and Baghdatis is incoherent.

No. Because your basic premise is totally wrong, or at least heavily skewed by your perception of the situation (aka what you want the "truth" to be).

Here's another take at this situation:

1) Federer was so much better than the field in 2004-2006 that he made everyone (except Nadal on clay) look like journeymen.

2) He was so much better than the field then that, despite declining substantially since 2007, he is still in contention to win slams at 31.

Do 1 and 2 fit the facts? They sure do. So who's to say that this theory doesn't have at least as much merit as yours?
Well said, sir.

Obviously you and others realize there is at least some truth to the premise that 2004-07 consisted of relatively weak competition otherwise you would not be so utterly consumed by the discussion and so vigorously retort; let alone attack..
Obviously you realize that you faith the weak competition of 2004-07 isn't convincing, otherwise you would not be so utterly consumed by the discussion and so vigorously retort; let alone attack..

BTW, I'm not disparaging anyone; I simply making a comparison. I don't know how many times i have to say: that no era in a world class, competitive, established sport-- was, is, or will be weak. There is simply too much money and potential fame at stake. However there are certainly weaker or stronger eras or time periods as compared to others.
There may be stonger or weaker era, but we don't know to distinguish one from the other, because all argument car be used in one way or another (see above)
Flash O'Groove is offline   Reply With Quote