View Single Post
Old 01-28-2013, 05:04 AM   #97
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 7,011

Originally Posted by abmk View Post
quite a bit better than haas/baghdatis, but davydenko's performance wasn't far off ...
But the rest of 06 AO was **** easy. Novak had to beat Berdych and Murray as well.

Fed had a tough qtr against Davy but then had total pushovers in the semi and final. Haas 4th round wasn't because Haas was playing well he was getting killed until Fed lost concentration and Haas got back into the match, but once it got down to fifth set Fed thumped him again.

Originally Posted by abmk View Post
eh,no , not even close ... ferrer wasn't anywhere close to good form, having struggled vs almagro and almagro should have put him away in straights ;

roddick OTOH was , he had even taken fed to the brink at the YEC 2 months or so ago ...

fed hit 45 winners to 12 UEs vs roddick, roddick was 11 winners to 18 UEs
djok hit 30 winners to 16 UEs vs ferrer, ferrer was 11 winners to 32 UEs

no denying that djok was in the zone, but ferrer was wayyyyy worse than roddick
This is an incredibly weak argument on your behalf yet again. Novak and Federer play completely different brand of tennis. Novak is the greatest defender ever along with Nadal. When a player like that is in the zone there is no way Ferrer would do anything to win rallies. Ferrer's shots just kept coming back like a brick wall and this caused him to make more errors.

Fed v Roddick is a completely different match up with much shorter points. Federer plays attacking style and therefore he won more rally's by hitting winners.

I thought you would at least have known that instead of googling a stat sheet...

Oh and Ferrer is a known pusher so t have equal W with Roddick just goes to show how aweful Roddick played when his W stats are equal to a guy like Ferrer and Ferrer was playing the better defender. Factor in that 4 of Roddick's winners were aces and that leaves him with 7 winners in ground play

Originally Posted by abmk View Post
well, then AO 2011 and AO 2008 were fed's worst AOs ; you are also 'nitpicking' by pointing out his losses to a peaking Novak there ...

fed would have beaten novak at 2009/2010 AO had they faced off and you know it ...
Didn't you say Federer played better in 2011 AO than 2013? Didn't you create a massive post about it from another googled stat sheet? Now all of a sudden 2011 was worse than 2013? You keep changing stations to suit yourself and it only makes you look weaker and weaker in terms of your tennis knowledge which was very small to begin with.

As for Fed beating Novak in 09, it wouldn't matter because he lost anyway. If Fed reached Novak in 2012 and 2013 he would've lost to him and you know it.

Face it Novak is without a doubt the AO GOAT. He is undefeated against top 4 since he himself became a top 4 player. Now you can argue all you want that his record against top 4 wouldn't be as good if he didn't lose in qtrs in 09 and 10 all you want, the fact is he is:

6W 0L vs top 4 opponents and adding an extra 2 losses to that doesn't really prove he can't beat top 4 opponents at AO. Fed otoh has had 7 opportunities and only won 1 of them. When he was in his peak in 2005 he had a great chance to prove himself there, but he blew it, trying a tweener on match point. The truth is, as soon as a top 4 player plays to their ranking against Fed at AO, they beat him.

Originally Posted by abmk View Post
whatever, but the performance he put was atleast better than what ferrer or murray put up on those occasions; anyways it doesn't matter that much as fed faced better players in the previous rounds- davydenko, haas & then later in the final - baghdatis
What difference does it make? Fed smashed Kiefer in the remaining sets and in the end both got through VERY comfortably and were under no threat of losing whatsoever.

As for Fed facing better players in other rounds, you really shouldn't be mentioning Haas. In that form no way would he pull 2 sets against Novak in the form he was in when he won the AO titles. Fed was pretty poor by his standards in 2006 and the **** weak draw saved him from another defeat down under.

If Novak had that draw he would only potentially lose 1 set to Davydenko.

Originally Posted by abmk View Post
2006 fed may not have beaten 2008/2011 novak but 2004/2005,2007,2010 fed definitely could ....

truth is the difficulty level was around the same, only fed has been a bit more consistent ....
Absolutely not in any way, shape or form except for ******* logic which you specialise in.

For one, Novak had to beat Nadal to win 2012 AO, any version of Fed at AO would've lost to Nadal in 2012 AO form, especially on plexicushion.

And he beat Federer to win 2 of his other AO titles.

Fed hasn't beaten any top 4 except JC Ferrero.

Anyone with any brain cells would agree that Novak had it much tougher and despite that still has won it 4 times and won 3 in a row. He is AO GOAT. Not Federer.
"Nadal is a good example of an counter puncher" - RF-18
"Cilic has huge serve too, so that gave Karlovic extra confidence" - jg153040

Last edited by The_Order; 01-28-2013 at 05:09 AM.
The_Order is offline   Reply With Quote