how many slams would fed have won if he faced 03-06 opponents his whole career?

[abmk]

Originally Posted by The_Order

I said he was moving quite well, didn't say he was moving like when he was in his peak.

by normal standards, he was just moving decent ... compared to his prime, he was moving downright terrible ...

Originally Posted by The_Order

What thinking are you talking about? Rafa gave Fed hardly any free points but he certainly dished out the punishment. Nothing Fed could do.

the thinking that the stats on the RG 2008 site are downright wrong ...

of course fed wouldn't win, but if playing decent, he could certainly make it much more competitive ...

Originally Posted by The_Order

No he didn't, peak Nadal was 08 WIM. In case you don't know peak = highest point. His level was higher in 08.

lol, so only one year for wafa's peak ? LOL ....

Originally Posted by The_Order

No, he is 1W - 6L.

3-1 in 5 best 5 AOs ... I'm sure a feverish nadal or nadal @ his 6th best AO or nadal at 29+ would love to play someone like a younger , fitter, better version of himself or djoker in absolute top form or murray in absolute top form, bwahaha

oh wait, he couldn't even handle murray @ AO 2010 , when playing well ....
not to forget getting absolutely demolished by tsonga in AO 2008, two and half years after he won his first slam ...getting demolished by gonzo in AO 2007 a year and half after he won his first slam ...

your boy nadal is 4-5 vs top 10 opponents at the AO

federer is 13-7 vs top 10 opponents

oops !

Originally Posted by The_Order

Yeah and before 2003 we have Fed blowouts at majors in the first round consecutively

none since he hit his prime ....and he lost in hard fought matches vs nalby and haas in the years previous to winning it ...

and given his injuries and style of play, nadal's not going to stay at a high level close to how fed is now ...

Originally Posted by The_Order

bwhaha, desperate for what?

desperation to having to retort to trying to incite me because you were getting owned big time ...

[The_Order]

Originally Posted by abmk

by normal standards, he was just moving decent ... compared to his prime, he was moving downright terrible ...

Funny, Hewitt said he couldn't find any real decline in Fed's game. He said the FH became suspect but only against defenders like Rafa, Novak and Murray and Courier agreed. You'd think if the difference was down right terrible they'd have noticed...

Originally Posted by abmk

the thinking that the stats on the RG 2008 site are downright wrong ...

of course fed wouldn't win, but if playing decent, he could certainly make it much more competitive ...

But Nadal didn't allow him to play decent, he was just far too good.

Originally Posted by abmk

lol, so only one year for wafa's peak ? LOL ....

It was enough to beat woger's peak. Tell me when in Fed's wildest dreams would he knock Nadal off at RG? Nadal knocked him off his high horse at WIM.

Originally Posted by abmk

3-1 in 5 best 5 AOs ... I'm sure a feverish nadal or nadal @ his 6th best AO or nadal at 29+ would love to play someone like a younger , fitter, better version of himself or djoker in absolute top form or murray in absolute top form, bwahaha

Still got that crystal ball huh? We'll just wait and see how Rafa plays when he's 29...

Originally Posted by abmk

oh wait, he couldn't even handle murray @ AO 2010 , when playing well ....
not to forget getting absolutely demolished by tsonga in AO 2008, two and half years after he won his first slam ...getting demolished by gonzo in AO 2007 a year and half after he won his first slam ...

your boy nadal is 4-5 vs top 10 opponents at the AO

federer is 13-7 vs top 10 opponents

oops !

Yet somehow this crap player is UNDEFEATED against your hero at AO LOL! Most of Fed's wins against top 10 are from that piss weak era anyway. Rafa is 2-1 vs top 4 at AO. Almost 3-0.

Originally Posted by abmk

none since he hit his prime ....and he lost in hard fought matches vs nalby and haas in the years previous to winning it ...

Yet he has lost in the first round of his favorite major three times!

Originally Posted by abmk

and given his injuries and style of play, nadal's not going to stay at a high level close to how fed is now ...

You keep telling yourself that.

Originally Posted by abmk

desperation to having to retort to trying to incite me because you were getting owned big time ...

LOL what? I've absolutely destroyed ALL of your piss weak arguments. Nobody apart from rabid *******s thinks the era from 04-07 was as tough as 08-present.

[abmk]

Originally Posted by The_Order

Funny, Hewitt said he couldn't find any real decline in Fed's game. He said the FH became suspect but only against defenders like Rafa, Novak and Murray and Courier agreed. You'd think if the difference was down right terrible they'd have noticed...

lol, wut ? at his prime, rarely did his FH break down, even vs rafa ... it was only after his movement to the right declined by quite a bit that players started going to his FH wing more ....

again, it wasn't just the errors he was making off that side, that can happen when slightly off or being pressed by any player ; it was the fact that he was getting over-powered by murray off that wing ... it had wayyy too less power/pop than at his prime .... part of the problem was that his movement has gone down too much, especially to the right ...

I didn't hear hewitt's/courier's comments, so I'm not going to comment on them right now ...

Originally Posted by The_Order

But Nadal didn't allow him to play decent, he was just far too good.

lol, how thick are you ? nadal was playing brilliant, doesn't mean it was the only reason why federer didn't play well ... on his own, he played terrible ... that was made worse by rafa's brilliant play ...

he was fairly inconsistent @ that RG and played his worst match in the final

Originally Posted by The_Order

It was enough to beat woger's peak. Tell me when in Fed's wildest dreams would he knock Nadal off at RG? Nadal knocked him off his high horse at WIM.

lol, wut ? fed was better at 6 other Wimbledons (2003-07 and 2009 ) ..so how exactly is 2008 his peak going by your "logic" ? ha ha ha .....

Originally Posted by The_Order

Still got that crystal ball huh? We'll just wait and see how Rafa plays when he's 29...

we've already seen plenty of indications - injuries, missing slams etc etc ...AO 2006, AO 2013, wimbledon 2009, USO 2012 (&AO 2011)

Originally Posted by The_Order

Yet somehow this crap player is UNDEFEATED against your hero at AO LOL! Most of Fed's wins against top 10 are from that piss weak era anyway. Rafa is 2-1 vs top 4 at AO. Almost 3-0.

yeah, all with fed not close to his best, not at 5 of his best AOs .... I never said that rafa was anywhere near cr*p ...just that fed at his peak is quite a bit better there and overall his record there is significantly better than rafa's

rafa is 2-2 vs top 4 at the AO and all of them in his best 3 years there ( 2009,10,12)

4-5 vs top 10 compared to 13-7 for fed ... deal with it ...

Originally Posted by The_Order

Yet he has lost in the first round of his favorite major three times!

none of them at his prime, your boy lost in 2R to rosol at his prime on his 2nd best surface ...

Originally Posted by The_Order

LOL what? I've absolutely destroyed ALL of your piss weak arguments. Nobody apart from rabid *******s thinks the era from 04-07 was as tough as 08-present.

lol, ha ha ha ....

2004-2007 & 2008-10 aren't that different, fields are similar, only fed's decline being compensated by rafa getting better ...

only you have your own delusions thinking ferrero wasn't playing well in AO 2004, hewitt was only competitive for a set in AO 2004 , muzza wasn't well below par in AO 2011 (he was struggling vs dolgopolov and ferrer - ferrer played 2 terrible TBs which was significant part of why murray won that match and was awful in the final ) ... ferrer of AO 2013 was close to roddick of AO 2007 .... agassi was anywhere near being affected by 'injury' @ USO 2004 (or even AO 2005 ),( whereas in reality, he was playing pretty well at both) ( even more so at the USO ) )

LOL, ha ha ha ..........

murray didn't do much after 2 sets and a bit in the final vs djoker in 2012 just like baghdatis in AO 2006 ...same for safin in AO 2004

2011 onwards is a bit diferent 'mainly' because of djoker ...(esp 2011 ) but then after top 4, the field is quite a bit weaker than it was before and surfaces being slower than before is part of reason for more consistency of the top 4 ...

also past his prime fed dealt better with novak than your boy nadal did in 2011 - beat him @ RG and had MPs vs at the USO ...your boy rafa couldn't touch djoker @ wimbledon or USO ...got beat twice in straights on clay ....

he had to wait for djoker's level to come down at the AO in 2012 and still could've lost to him in 4 sets had djoker not missed that FH sitter at the net at 5-3 in the breaker , he'd have had 3 MPs & that was an easier shot to make than the much talked about missed rafa BH passing attempt in the 5th set ...

[THE FIGHTER]

federer would have 25 slams minimum.

[SLD76]

When I see Order and ABMK go back and forth all I think of is this, rofl:

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/war...m/duelists.htm

[Anaconda]

Originally Posted by The_Order

Funny, Hewitt said he couldn't find any real decline in Fed's game. He said the FH became suspect but only against defenders like Rafa, Novak and Murray and Courier agreed. You'd think if the difference was down right terrible they'd have noticed...

No. Federer's decline on the forehand wing was simultaneous with his movement declining. Many times Federer was out of position, off balance, going for shots that weren't on. On any shot, be it the serve, the forehand, the backhand, volleys etc, everything starts with the footwork, if your footwork and prep are off then you're bound to make shanks - and let's not forget Federer hits with a lot of spin (which also increases the chances of mishitting/framing).



At times his forehand was just plain crap in 2008, missing shots he'd make in his sleep.

Originally Posted by The_Order

LOL what? I've absolutely destroyed ALL of your piss weak arguments. Nobody apart from rabid *******s thinks the era from 04-07 was as tough as 08-present.

Actually, I'm not a rabid '*******', yet I actually believe 04-07 to be slightly tougher. Firstly, Federer' level was higher then than it is now. The fact that Federer can take Murray to 5 sets, win Wimbledon and occasionally Bagel Djokovic at Cincinnati, make olympic finals playing good tennis at best is enough proof that when he was in his prime he would be able to destroy anoyone if he wanted to (except for Nadal who was/is just a tough match up)





Secondly, has no one actually seen the field outside of Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Murray. Tipsarevic? Ferrer? Berdych? Tsonga? Isner? Didn't Karlovic nearly make the top 10 in 2008? Simon? Monfils made the top 10 winning a grand total of 1 title in 2009. The only other guy was JMDP who was a non fixture since winning his only slam title - even then, what has he won outside his US Open?


You had more champions and proven players in 05 ish; Federer, Nadal, Agassi, Roddick, Safin, Hewitt, Ferrero (although he was more 2002/03) and the others consisted of Blake, Nalbandian, Coria, Gaudio (his career does look like JMDP's), Pim-pim.



I'm going to keep Federer and Nadal out of this beause they've been #1 and #2 in both era's, the only guy who is a better match player to every other player from that last list is Djokovic - and even then I hold Safin more technically gifted than Djokovic and any other player in general (although mentally he was often almost retarded).