There no doubt Nole is the best ever in Australia now

[abmk]

Originally Posted by The_Order

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.

yeah, pushover in the final, fed was about to go two sets down

yes, baggy went 'away' after that, but so did murray in this year's final ... after 2 sets and a bit ...

the less said about murray's pathetic performance in AO 2011 final, the better

Originally Posted by The_Order

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

novak is the greatest defender along with nadal ? LOL, forced to state that with novak pummeling him left right in 2011 ?

borg, murray, coria, hewitt, chang are up there .....federer,wilander among others aren't far behind either ....

again, you have this major problem of selective reading >> I mentioned this in that post of mine ...

ferrer wasn't in good form even before that novak match , almagro should've got him in straights
roddick was in good form coming into the SF

also here's something your brain perhaps hasn't realized till now :

the no of winners vs novak will usually be more than vs federer playing at similar levels given the opponent is playing on a similar level

this is because difference in fed & novak's attacking capabilities is quite a bit more than the difference in novak's & fed's defensive capabilities

fed takes away more of the chances to hit winners from the opponents ...that has more of an effect in the opponents winners column than the edge novak has via defending a bit better ...

oh and you don't realise that fed was an absolute brick wall as well in that AO SF vs roddick as well ? roddick kept on hitting shots, but they kept coming back time and again or got blasted for winners

roddick in AO 2007 SF was much better than ferrer in AO 2013 SF, its a no contest

I just posted those 'incomplete' stats to see what your reaction would be ... to get another bunch of laughs ...

only FYI, to actually 'complete' the stats; roddick forced 22 errors from federer, ferrer only 14 errors from novak ...

fed forced 20 errors from roddick and djoker forced 23 errors from ferrer ...

so roddick won clearly more points by going for it (winners+errors forced from opponent) and committed clearly less UEs than ferrer did .....djokovic at best defended a little better, if at all ....

a little bit of decent observation skills and knowing their form before the respective matches also help !

Originally Posted by The_Order

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.

are you just thick or do you just pretend to be so ? My position was this, his game has declined clearly .....

I said 'game-wise', he was better in 2011 SF , but mentally he was stronger and more determined this time around ...

In fact, I don't think I've seen federer being as determined when he was being outplayed to this extent , without playing anywhere close to very good tennis
...

again, you had absolutely no reply to that post of mine then ..because you realized you had got completely owned ...

Originally Posted by The_Order

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.

get these points into thick head of yours :


1. losing to inferior players (roddick, tsonga ) is worse than losing to top players

2. players from #1 to #4 are not necessarily the best players in that tournament

stan from 4R or tsonga from the QF for example would have blasted the #4 seed ferrer to smithereens this time around ....

3. if fed had faced #1 to #4 seeds from AO in his best years, he'd have beaten all of them .....

roddick,agassi in 2004 AO
roddick,hewitt in 2005 AO
roddick, hewitt,nalbandian in 2006 AO
nadal, davydenko, ljubicic in 2007 AO
djokovic,JMDP,nadal in 2010 AO

he did beat most of these players there on other occasions when they were still quite clearly in the top 10 ; agassi in AO 2005, roddick in AO 2007(ranked 4), & AO 2009, davydenko in AO 2006,2010, nalbandian in AO 2004, JMDP in 2009 & 2012

safin played at his highest level and barely won ...

in his best 5 years there, fed was 3-1 vs opponents ranked 1 to 4 ..... (won vs ferrero, roddick, muray and lost to safin )

4. most of those losses to the #1-4 players were for post-peak fed ;your boy nadal doesn't making semis when not playing that well, he just gets blasted off court by the likes of gonzo/tsonga etc ...

Originally Posted by The_Order

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.

Like I said, leave Kiefer, he played 3 better players in other rounds ... haas/baggy would've taken a set off djoker as well ..

davydenko vs djoker would be a big fight ...

Originally Posted by The_Order

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.

anyone with a bit of common sense and actual observation wouldn't have put ferrer of AO 2013 or murray of AO 2011 as tough competition ...

fed of 2004,2005,2007,2010 AOs would've beaten nadal of 2012 AO .....

[Gonzo_style]

Originally Posted by abmk

fed of 2004,2005,2007,2010 AOs would've beaten nadal of 2012 AO

Have you seen Santa Claus?

[abmk]

Originally Posted by Gonzo_style

Have you seen Santa Claus?

you need to ask The_Order as well if he has ....

see, he says : "any version of Fed at AO would've lost to Nadal in 2012 AO form, especially on plexicushion." ....

[Federer20042006]

Well, I dunno if any version of Federer would be a good bet to beat Nadal anywhere, unless it's indoors. I mean, he got him in 06 and 07 at Wimbledon, but even then, those matches were tougher than they should have been.

But let's not forget that Nadal was steamrolled by Gonzo, Tsonga, Murray, and Ferrer at the AO. Not beating Nadal at the AO doesn't exactly hurt the legitimacy of Federer's wins there, and Nadal was always seeded in the Top 4 there. So this "wins vs. Top 4" thing is meaningless to me.

That said, I think we need to get this idea that prime Federer would steamroll Djokovic at the AO out of our heads. Those matches would be a dog fight. Just like prime Federer vs. prime Sampras on grass. It would come down to who had better form that day, and/or who was more clutch.

[abmk]

Originally Posted by Federer20042006

Well, I dunno if any version of Federer would be a good bet to beat Nadal anywhere, unless it's indoors. I mean, he got him in 06 and 07 at Wimbledon, but even then, those matches were tougher than they should have been.

But let's not forget that Nadal was steamrolled by Gonzo, Tsonga, Murray, and Ferrer at the AO. Not beating Nadal at the AO doesn't exactly hurt the legitimacy of Federer's wins there, and Nadal was always seeded in the Top 4 there. So this "wins vs. Top 4" thing is meaningless to me.

yes, @ his prime, he would ...even more so at the USO than at wimbledon ...

Originally Posted by Federer20042006

That said, I think we need to get this idea that prime Federer would steamroll Djokovic at the AO out of our heads. Those matches would be a dog fight. Just like prime Federer vs. prime Sampras on grass. It would come down to who had better form that day, and/or who was more clutch.

yeah, no one is saying prime fed would streamroll prime djoker at the AO ... might be somewhat of a massive fight like the RG 2011 SF ...

[Towser83]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

Federers 5 U.S Open wins I concede is amazing, especialy as these days the mens field mostly focuses on hard courts. His 5 Wimbledons also is but here I am more impressed with Borg the clay courter winning 5 in a row there vs a deeper grass field on true grass, and Sampras winning 7 of 8 there vs a much deeper grass field on true grass.



Nice try but I dont say Sampras is the best ever at the U.S Open. I have said IMO his pure level of play is the best ever on any medium to fast court, but that is different than saying he is the greatest. One could say Safins best tennis is the best ever on slow Australian hard courts (already proved it was better than Federers by beating Federers very best at the 2005 Aussie) but that doesnt mean he is close to the best ever there. I picked Connors as the Open Era best ever at the U.S Open since he won it on grass, clay, and hard courts, an incredible feat, and winning it once and reaching 3 straight finals in its only three years on clay, by far his worst surface, was a particularly amazing feat. However all time best ever at the U.S Open is probably Bill Tilden, with his 7 titles.

so NA thinks 5 USO titles in a row don't make Fed the USO open era GOAT because Connors won on multiple surfaces, but the fact Federer won on 2 different HC surfaces don't give him the edge on Djokovic? ok..

Basically as far as the AO goes for me it's now a tie between Federer and Djokovic, Djokovic has 3 in a row and better competition, Federer has an extra final, 2 different HC surfaces and winning the event without dropping a set which Djokovic has never done (and should have really done in both 2008 and 2011 considering who he lost the one set he did to)

As far as slam GOATs I would say in the open era

AO
1 - Federer and Djokovic
2 - Agassi

RG
1 Nadal
2 Borg

Wimb
1 - Federer
2 - Sampras

USO
1 - Connors
2 - Sampras
3 - Federer

[TMF]

There's always a double standard going against Federer. And if not, there's a catch-22.

[kragster]

Originally Posted by Federer20042006

Well, I dunno if any version of Federer would be a good bet to beat Nadal anywhere, unless it's indoors. I mean, he got him in 06 and 07 at Wimbledon, but even then, those matches were tougher than they should have been.

But let's not forget that Nadal was steamrolled by Gonzo, Tsonga, Murray, and Ferrer at the AO. Not beating Nadal at the AO doesn't exactly hurt the legitimacy of Federer's wins there, and Nadal was always seeded in the Top 4 there. So this "wins vs. Top 4" thing is meaningless to me.

That said, I think we need to get this idea that prime Federer would steamroll Djokovic at the AO out of our heads. Those matches would be a dog fight. Just like prime Federer vs. prime Sampras on grass. It would come down to who had better form that day, and/or who was more clutch.

Well said. I think it's important to understand the distinction being being a better player on a surface (performance vs field) and head to head on the surface. Fed was/is a much better player than Nadal even on slow hard courts, but that does not translate into beating Nadal in their matchup. To suggest that because Nadal lost to Gonzo, hence he would lose to Fed is not accurate.

So to make a strong case than player A in prime would easily beat player B In prime, you need to have one of the following:

1) We have actually had multiple matches between the 2 in primes on that surface and 1 guy consistently won
OR
2) We had multiple matches between the 2 where 1 guy was not in his prime, but consistently beat the other guy in his prime.

OR
3) We have not had multiple matches between the two but one guys's overall record at that tournament is hugely superior to the others.

Nole has the same number of AO's as Federer. The overall AO H2H is 2-1 for Nole but Prime Nole and Prime Fed have never met. So there is no data to back the fact that prime Fed would school prime Nole or the other way around.

[veroniquem]

he's the best of open era, absolutely. 4 titles of which 3 consecutive at the age of 25, that has not been either equalled nor surpassed by anyone.

[Hodgey20]

Scary thing is he most likely has at least three more tries at winning in his "Prime". then still hopefully and probably a threat after that as well

[veroniquem]

I hope he wins at least 5. He deserves to get that record. Those 2 5 setters back to back in 2012 were just off the chart!

[The_Order]

Originally Posted by abmk

yeah, pushover in the final, fed was about to go two sets down

yes, baggy went 'away' after that, but so did murray in this year's final ... after 2 sets and a bit ...

the less said about murray's pathetic performance in AO 2011 final, the better

LOL as if Baggy would've beat prime Rafa or Novak, or even Murray in the final.

2011 Murray would've beat him. Just because he played crap against Novak, it would've been a completely different mindset against a one final wonder like Baggy. Murray would've been extremely confident he could beat Baggy. Not the case with guys like Rafa, Fed and Novak.

Fact is Murray is capable of FAR greater tennis than anyone Fed faced in 2006 and 2007 except for possibly Roddick.

Originally Posted by abmk

novak is the greatest defender along with nadal ? LOL, forced to state that with novak pummeling him left right in 2011 ?

borg, murray, coria, hewitt, chang are up there .....federer,wilander among others aren't far behind either ....

Novak and Rafa are better defenders than all those players.

Oh and I wouldn't be laughing at Nadal ******* because Nadal has OWNED your boy. It wasn't just one season where Fed got pummeled by Rafa it was his whole career apart from one surface that doesn't even matter - indoor HC

Originally Posted by abmk

again, you have this major problem of selective reading >> I mentioned this in that post of mine ...

ferrer wasn't in good form even before that novak match , almagro should've got him in straights
roddick was in good form coming into the SF

But previous match form doesn't matter for WIM 07 and 08 finals so why should it matter here? This is according to your own dumb logic btw.

Originally Posted by abmk

also here's something your brain perhaps hasn't realized till now :

the no of winners vs novak will usually be more than vs federer playing at similar levels given the opponent is playing on a similar level

this is because difference in fed & novak's attacking capabilities is quite a bit more than the difference in novak's & fed's defensive capabilities

fed takes away more of the chances to hit winners from the opponents ...that has more of an effect in the opponents winners column than the edge novak has via defending a bit better ...

oh and you don't realise that fed was an absolute brick wall as well in that AO SF vs roddick as well ? roddick kept on hitting shots, but they kept coming back time and again or got blasted for winners

roddick in AO 2007 SF was much better than ferrer in AO 2013 SF, its a no contest

I just posted those 'incomplete' stats to see what your reaction would be ... to get another bunch of laughs ...

only FYI, to actually 'complete' the stats; roddick forced 22 errors from federer, ferrer only 14 errors from novak ...

fed forced 20 errors from roddick and djoker forced 23 errors from ferrer ...

so roddick won clearly more points by going for it (winners+errors forced from opponent) and committed clearly less UEs than ferrer did .....djokovic at best defended a little better, if at all ....

a little bit of decent observation skills and knowing their form before the respective matches also help !

LOL don't get cut because I destroyed your stupid comments. Roddick was nowhere near wayyyyy better than Ferrer.

Novak's defensive ability is FAR above Federer's and this is why Ferrer had more UE than Roddick. Roddick got 4 winners from aces. he had 7 ground winners for the whole match LOL. And he's "supposed" to be more of a power hitter than Ferrer. Ferrer at least had 10 against a guy with better defense and on a slightly slower surface.

They were similarly bad and comparing them is no point since they both got thumped anyway. Trying to prove that your boy had a "tougher" pushover than Novak does NOTHING to help your already lost cause.

Face it, you're clutching at straws. Fed had a bunch of walkover opponents on his way to winning his 4 AO titles whereas Novak had to face and beat players like Federer, Murray and Rafa. His top 4 counterparts for the past 4-5 years. Fed had his chance to beat prime Rafa and Novak at AO and he just wasn't good enough.

Originally Posted by abmk

are you just thick or do you just pretend to be so ? My position was this, his game has declined clearly .....

I said 'game-wise', he was better in 2011 SF , but mentally he was stronger and more determined this time around ...

In fact, I don't think I've seen federer being as determined when he was being outplayed to this extent , without playing anywhere close to very good tennis
...

again, you had absolutely no reply to that post of mine then ..because you realized you had got completely owned ...

I did have a reply to that post, go and check. It basically backed up my point LOL. I said Fed had as much determination against Novak and Rafa as he did Murray this year. But they're just too good for him that his determination doesn't matter

Murray is not as good as Novak and Rafa any idiot knows that especially in the mentality part of the game. It's no wonder Fed was able to push him to 5 but couldn't do it to Rafa and Novak in 2011 and 2012.

Originally Posted by abmk

get these points into thick head of yours :


1. losing to inferior players (roddick, tsonga ) is worse than losing to top players

And losing to top players is worse than beating them. Novak CLEARLY outshines Fed in this category

What a fool you are making of yourself.

Originally Posted by abmk

2. players from #1 to #4 are not necessarily the best players in that tournament

stan from 4R or tsonga from the QF for example would have blasted the #4 seed ferrer to smithereens this time around ....

But Novak also beat Stan anyway...

And he would've thumped Fed in the final. Fed wouldn't have even got a set.

Originally Posted by abmk

3. if fed had faced #1 to #4 seeds from AO in his best years, he'd have beaten all of them .....

roddick,agassi in 2004 AO
roddick,hewitt in 2005 AO
roddick, hewitt,nalbandian in 2006 AO
nadal, davydenko, ljubicic in 2007 AO
djokovic,JMDP,nadal in 2010 AO

That's because the 04-07 era had weaker players.

In 2005 he had his chance against a top 4 and he LOST. Suck it up princess.

2006 Nadal pulled out with injury.

And saying he'd beat Nadal in BOTH 07 and 2010 is ludicrous. Nadal OWNS Fed in outdoor HC meetings in case you've forgotten all the beatings...

2010 Fed for example, would've lost to Rafa, just because Murray played the best he possibly could to take 2 sets off him, doesn't mean Fed would've also beat him. And trust me, if Rafa and Fed did meet in AO10 and Rafa beat Fed, the same lame *** excuse would be made >> Fed past his prime.

Originally Posted by abmk

he did beat most of these players there on other occasions when they were still quite clearly in the top 10 ; agassi in AO 2005, roddick in AO 2007(ranked 4), & AO 2009, davydenko in AO 2006,2010, nalbandian in AO 2004, JMDP in 2009 & 2012

Top 10 and top 4 are a different beast. Not to mention those players don't hold a candle to Rafa and Novak.

Originally Posted by abmk

safin played at his highest level and barely won ...

Fed was at his highest level too and still lost. Still butthurt over it are you

Originally Posted by abmk

in his best 5 years there, fed was 3-1 vs opponents ranked 1 to 4 ..... (won vs ferrero, roddick, muray and lost to safin )

LOL. I see Ferrero, Roddick and Mugray in there but I don't see victories vs Rafa and Novak....

Funny how he has never had a "best year" there when he had to face them...

Fed had a better AO09 than 06 by FAR. I'd also argue that his 09 form was better than 04 as well.

Originally Posted by abmk

4. most of those losses to the #1-4 players were for post-peak fed ;your boy nadal doesn't making semis when not playing that well, he just gets blasted off court by the likes of gonzo/tsonga etc ...

Wow you're talking about Nadal getting blasted by tsonga and gonzo again. Yawn. How many times do I need to remind you that when Fed was 20 and 21 he was getting blasted in FIRST rounds at majors. Even as a top 10 player LOL.

"My boy" Nadal has NEVER EVER lost in the first round of a major. Go look it up. Never happened. Sorry he was more competitive than Fed at an early age who was almost a complete push over.

Originally Posted by abmk

Like I said, leave Kiefer, he played 3 better players in other rounds ... haas/baggy would've taken a set off djoker as well ..

davydenko vs djoker would be a big fight ...

No, you don't just leave Kiefer to suit you, he was his SEMI FINAL opponent. LAWL.

And no chance in hell does Haas take a set off Novak in the form he won his 4 titles. Same with Baggy. You just would like to believe that to make yourself feel better about your lover.

Originally Posted by abmk

anyone with a bit of common sense and actual observation wouldn't have put ferrer of AO 2013 or murray of AO 2011 as tough competition ...

fed of 2004,2005,2007,2010 AOs would've beaten nadal of 2012 AO .....

And anyone with a bit of common sense and actual observation would't have put Arod07 & 09, JMDP09 & 12, Agassi 05, Haas 06, baggy 06, Hewitt 04AO, Ferrero 04AO, exhausted Safin 04A0, exhausted Tsonga AO10 as tough competition either.

As for your Nadal remark, even your fellow Fed fans agree that it is foolish to suggest that Fed would beat him.

[Federer20042006]

Originally Posted by The_Order

And no chance in hell does Haas take a set off Novak in the form he won his 4 titles. Same with Baggy. You just would like to believe that to make yourself feel better about your lover.

Eh...crippled Lleyton Hewitt got a set off Djokovic last year at the AO. It's entirely possible Haas or Baghdatis could have taken a set off him, especially the last 2 AOs.

[abmk]

Originally Posted by The_Order

LOL as if Baggy would've beat prime Rafa or Novak, or even Murray in the final.

2011 Murray would've beat him. Just because he played crap against Novak, it would've been a completely different mindset against a one final wonder like Baggy. Murray would've been extremely confident he could beat Baggy. Not the case with guys like Rafa, Fed and Novak.

Fact is Murray is capable of FAR greater tennis than anyone Fed faced in 2006 and 2007 except for possibly Roddick.

eh, what a bunch of cr*p , murray struggled on his way to the final in 2011 as well....... he had his bunch of problems with dolgo in the QF and then like I said before, he was a lucky that ferrer played 2 terrible breakers , that's why he managed to take it in 4 ...

baggy in 2006 would definitely beat murray of AO 2011

gonzo of AO 2007 would've absolutely massacred him ......

Originally Posted by The_Order

Novak and Rafa are better defenders than all those players.

better than borg, murray ; you really sure about that ?

Originally Posted by The_Order

But previous match form doesn't matter for WIM 07 and 08 finals so why should it matter here? This is according to your own dumb logic btw.

I didn't say it didn't matter at all, its one thing to be kept in mind ....

Originally Posted by The_Order

LOL don't get cut because I destroyed your stupid comments. Roddick was nowhere near wayyyyy better than Ferrer.

Novak's defensive ability is FAR above Federer's and this is why Ferrer had more UE than Roddick. Roddick got 4 winners from aces. he had 7 ground winners for the whole match LOL. And he's "supposed" to be more of a power hitter than Ferrer. Ferrer at least had 10 against a guy with better defense and on a slightly slower surface.

They were similarly bad and comparing them is no point since they both got thumped anyway. Trying to prove that your boy had a "tougher" pushover than Novak does NOTHING to help your already lost cause.

Face it, you're clutching at straws. Fed had a bunch of walkover opponents on his way to winning his 4 AO titles whereas Novak had to face and beat players like Federer, Murray and Rafa. His top 4 counterparts for the past 4-5 years. Fed had his chance to beat prime Rafa and Novak at AO and he just wasn't good enough.

lol, face it you have no effin' clue .. fed's defensive abilities aren't far behind novak's and when he is in the zone, his anticipation is downright scary and defensive abilities close to that of novak/nadal ...just that he doesn't go on and on retrieving like them, he takes his chances faster to hit winner or force an error ...

you have absolutely no clue how many shots of roddick fed retrieved that would've been winners against an opponent having slightly lesser defensive capabilities

its one of the main reasons why fed was considered a nightmare for big hitters ... he'd throttle their free points on the serve, had brilliant defensive capabilities and would of course force his way to hit winners vs them .....

Originally Posted by The_Order

I did have a reply to that post, go and check. It basically backed up my point LOL. I said Fed had as much determination against Novak and Rafa as he did Murray this year. But they're just too good for him that his determination doesn't matter

Murray is not as good as Novak and Rafa any idiot knows that especially in the mentality part of the game. It's no wonder Fed was able to push him to 5 but couldn't do it to Rafa and Novak in 2011 and 2012.

lol, what exactly do you see matches with , clueless ? in 2011 , fed played a terrible breaker the 1st set , let back novak big time in the 2nd set after being up 5-2 .... in the 3rd set , after breaking back at 4 all, he should've raised his game, but he didn't ...

in AO 2012 vs rafa, he started off terribly vs rafa in the 3rd set breaker, rafa had 5 SPs IIRC, then fed fought back, but the gap was already too big and rafa closed it ...

in the 4th set, with fed having a breakpoint, rafa's downright ridiculous lob landed just on the line and he managed to save it ... still don't believe that lob, just like that downright ridiculous passing shot in the breaker in wimbledon 2008 final !

in AO 2013 SF, both murray and fed played a nervous 2nd set TB, but fed hit a darn good passing shot @ 5 all and then took it ..

when murray was serving for it in the 4th set, fed got back huge serves from him and held his nerve to break .... fed got a massive boost because of that and its very tough to recover from something like that and hence fed ran away with the breaker ...........

yes, murray isn't as tough as rafa/djoker mentally , but yet he outplayed fed game wise by a considerably margin in sets 1,3 and 5 ...

djoker/rafa did that in only one set in those 2 matches, rafa at set 2 at the AO 2012

unless you want to say that murray's level in AO 2013 SF was considerably better than that of novak/murray in their respective AO mathches ...

hell, murray had more winners off the ground than fed did ... do you expect that to happen really if fed was on game-wise ?

Originally Posted by The_Order

And losing to top players is worse than beating them. Novak CLEARLY outshines Fed in this category

What a fool you are making of yourself.

yes, but fed's record in best 5 years there is 3-1 vs players ranked 1-4

Originally Posted by The_Order

2006 Nadal pulled out with injury.

And saying he'd beat Nadal in BOTH 07 and 2010 is ludicrous. Nadal OWNS Fed in outdoor HC meetings in case you've forgotten all the beatings...

yeah, mainly due to the circumstances ... the h2h is 5-2 .... miami 2004 fed was sick, miami 2011 fed played cr*p ...dubai was a choke from fed ...

he actually outplayed rafa from sets 1 to 4 as a whole in AO 2009 ...

in AO 2012, even with fed past his best ; sets 1, 3 and 4 very highly competitive ...

Originally Posted by The_Order

2010 Fed for example, would've lost to Rafa, just because Murray played the best he possibly could to take 2 sets off him, doesn't mean Fed would've also beat him. And trust me, if Rafa and Fed did meet in AO10 and Rafa beat Fed, the same lame *** excuse would be made >> Fed past his prime.

no, he wouldn't have, in the semis and finals, he was playing just as well as he was off the ground in AO 2009 final, but he was serving much better ...rafa's form was also slightly lower than his form in AO 2009

Originally Posted by The_Order

Top 10 and top 4 are a different beast. Not to mention those players don't hold a candle to Rafa and Novak.

lol, like davydenko being #6 in AO 2010, but in brilliant form having taken the YEC beating all top players and beat fed/rafa back to back in doha was worse than davydenko in AO 2007 .....

like davydenko being #5 in AO 2006 really mattered that much .....

fed would've rather faced #1 roddick than #8 nalbandian in AO 2004 ..

your main argument was about fed's record was the top players there and top players doesn't only mean nadal or novak ....

[abmk]

Originally Posted by The_Order

Fed was at his highest level too and still lost. Still butthurt over it are you

hurt ? LOL, hell no ...... I've watched that match plenty of times, as a whole, more times than any other match ... that's in my view the best match of all time ....

I've watched rome 2006 multiple times as well and wouldn't mind watching it again; it was absolute top notch tennis ....

given a choice to rewatch, I'd rather watch RG 2008 final, because rafa put up an absolute clinic (even if fed was cr*p) rather than a mug-fest like fed-novak in miami 2009 ....

you see , I actually care about brilliant tennis ....

Originally Posted by The_Order

LOL. I see Ferrero, Roddick and Mugray in there but I don't see victories vs Rafa and Novak....

Funny how he has never had a "best year" there when he had to face them...

Fed had a better AO09 than 06 by FAR. I'd also argue that his 09 form was better than 04 as well.

his 09 form wasn't better than his 04 form for sure ... berd wouldn't have got more than a set off him if he was ... he was serving badly in the tourney and had his worst serving perf in the finals ...

06 fed was on and off , when he was on, he was absolutely brilliant ....

10 murray was far better than murray in 11, including in the final, its a no contest ... he actually played a decent match in the final ( again, I have no problem saying he didn't play well in the USO 2008 final )

Originally Posted by The_Order

Wow you're talking about Nadal getting blasted by tsonga and gonzo again. Yawn. How many times do I need to remind you that when Fed was 20 and 21 he was getting blasted in FIRST rounds at majors. Even as a top 10 player LOL.

"My boy" Nadal has NEVER EVER lost in the first round of a major. Go look it up. Never happened. Sorry he was more competitive than Fed at an early age who was almost a complete push over.

fed in AO 2002 barely lost to haas, in AO 2003 he was in slugfest vs nalby ...

Originally Posted by The_Order

No, you don't just leave Kiefer to suit you, he was his SEMI FINAL opponent. LAWL.

And no chance in hell does Haas take a set off Novak in the form he won his 4 titles. Same with Baggy. You just would like to believe that to make yourself feel better about your lover.

why should I bother with kiefer when fed actually faced 3 better opponents ?

how does haas take a set off novak at the AO ? well first off, AO is where haas has played his best tennis, if dodig & well past his best hewitt could take a set off djoker, so could haas

Originally Posted by The_Order

And anyone with a bit of common sense and actual observation would't have put Arod07 & 09, JMDP09 & 12, Agassi 05, Haas 06, baggy 06, Hewitt 04AO, Ferrero 04AO, exhausted Safin 04A0, exhausted Tsonga AO10 as tough competition either.

As for your Nadal remark, even your fellow Fed fans agree that it is foolish to suggest that Fed would beat him.

if safin 04 AO , tsonga AO 10, baggy AO 2006 aren't that tough,then neither should murray 2013 AO final, because he was nowhere near his best after 2 sets and a bit ...

I never said JMDP in AO 2009 or 2012 was tough , LOL ...to suggest JMDP of AO 2009 especially was tough would be downright hilarious ... fed thoroughly cleaned up his clock for a set and half and then delpo gave up ....

again, you have no clue about ferrero ....... how good he was becoming on HC at that time ...yes,he was still inconsistent, but when playing well, he was darn good

you actually 'believed' agassi when he said he was playing better at 33 in 2003 ranked 1 than at 25, right ? I don't agree with that, but well ferrero thoroughly outplayed him in the USO SF in 2003

he had 51 winners to 32 UEs ; agassi had 47 winners to 37 UEs

agassi didn't play a bad match at all, ferrero just plain outplayed him ... and this was vs agassi @ his home slam .... many of those BH DTLs from ferrero were downright brutal ....

he had beaten hewitt in the QF as well

in the match vs fed @ AO 2004 SF, sets 1 and 3 were fiercely competitive ....in fact fed was being outplayed till 4 all in the first .... just that fed was better on the big points ...even the second set where ferrero had a dip was way closer than the score of 6-1 suggests

yeah, again, you'll bring up his loss to guccione at sydney, but fact is ferrero beat 5 players better than guccione to reach the semi vs fed @ the AO ...

again, I didn't watch that match, but I can only speculate that a first round match vs a huge server in the zone was the fact that undid ferrero ...

he faced a big server in joachim johansson at the AO as well and beat him in 4 sets

agassi at AO 2005 was also playing well ... fed was just brilliant in that match, serving and defending ridiculously well .... agassi of AO 2005 have absolutely destroyed the murray of AO 2011 ...

[The_Order]

Originally Posted by Federer20042006

Eh...crippled Lleyton Hewitt got a set off Djokovic last year at the AO. It's entirely possible Haas or Baghdatis could have taken a set off him, especially the last 2 AOs.

As fate would have it Djokovic just happened to play Haas at the very next major, 2006 RG. Novak won in straights. That was 2006 Novak, Novak that won AO titles would not lose a set to Haas. In fact Haas has only ever won one set against Novak on HC and let's face it Haas wasn't in great form in that AO match against Fed he got bageled in the second set.

As for Baghdatis, Novak played him at the AO in 2009 when he was in **** form and Baggy still struggled to get a set, so I don't see him getting a set against Novak in title winning form.

[kalyan4fedever]

rafa ***** are highlighting this as their beloved only won 1 slam in this court which is pathetic lol

[abmk]

Originally Posted by The_Order

As fate would have it Djokovic just happened to play Haas at the very next major, 2006 RG. Novak won in straights. That was 2006 Novak, Novak that won AO titles would not lose a set to Haas. In fact Haas has only ever won one set against Novak on HC and let's face it Haas wasn't in great form in that AO match against Fed he got bageled in the second set.

As for Baghdatis, Novak played him at the AO in 2009 when he was in **** form and Baggy still struggled to get a set, so I don't see him getting a set against Novak in title winning form.

if you are bringing up haas' performance vs novak in RG 2006, I can very well bring up his performance vs novak in wimbledon 2009 when he dominated novak .......

oh wait, I had forgotten, the very last year, in 2012, haas challenged djoker and it went to 3 sets at toronto , 6-3,3-6,6-3

novak thumped everyone else ... tomic, querrey, tipsy and gasquet all in straights ...and didn't even lose more than 4 games in a set vs them ...

baggy in AO 2009 was nowhere near his AO 2006 form, funny how conveniently you skip that part ....

he took a set off novak there, in dubai, in basel ......

he had novak in more trouble in wim 11 than your boy nadal did !

if dodig and well well past his best hewitt can get sets off novak, so can baggy and haas (provided they are in decent form atleast )

[Clarky21]

Originally Posted by kalyan4fedever

rafa ***** are highlighting this as their beloved only won 1 slam in this court which is pathetic lol

Well, the same thing could be said about *******s who crow about Fed's lone RG title.

[MTF07]

Originally Posted by The_Order

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.

ROFL

07 Federer was in god mode.

He would have crushed that Nadal and Djokovic too.

That single tournament was tennis perfection... Federer at the very peak of his powers.