Originally Posted by jokinla
Past his prime Fed, beat God mode Djoker on clay, much slower than any hard court.
Djokovic was in no God mode that day, and that also means nothing. First off clay has nothing to do with slow hard courts, otherwise Nadal would dominate slow hard courts which he doesnt. They are totally different surfaces.
Second off that is only one match. ****s dispute that 3 time Roland Garros winner is a better clay courter than 1 time Roland Garros winner Federer despite that crippled semi retired Kuerten crushed prime Federer at the 2004 French, so they more than anything already set the standard 1 match alone proves nothing conclusively (despite their inconsistencies trying to use 1 match examples favoring Federer while any that go against him).
Third off both prime and pre prime Djokovic has generally dominated post prime Federer on clay or any slower court. Federer has what, only one win over Djokovic in about 7 matches on slow courts (slower hard courts and clay) since 2009 now. Even in 2008-2010 Djokovic was winning most of their slow court meetings.
Lastly by your logic if post prime Federer had beaten prime Nadal at the 2011 French, which he actually had chances to do, and it was probably their most competitive match there, it would prove prime Federer is obviously better than prime Nadal at the French and on clay, which of course we all know and was proven numerous times over is far from the case.