Jaitock1991
Hall of Fame
You are wrong. What you showed is yet to be developed player, much worse than today. This is peak Federer:
Then going by this theory of yours(which I actually agree with to some extent), would it not make sense to say that the same actually applies for oldman Agassi in 2005?
His game had really matured by 2005, and from a technical standpoint it was likely up there with the best of his capabilities during this time, especially towards the end of the USO that year, when winning one last major before retiring after all he'd been through actually became a realistic opportunity for him.
What stopped Andre from really challenging Fed to the end here imo was not being able to physically hang with him for five sets, much like what we've seen with Fedovic during the last years of their rivalry. So even though his actual game may be better than ever, his body has declined too much physically for him to be able to execute it well enough to beat a younger and therefore physically stronger opponent(who in these cases also happen to be GOATs of the game).
We can't have it both ways. If we're going to diminish Fed's win(s) over Agassi for the reasons listed in this thread(not saying you are, but a lot of people are) we also have to do the same with Djoker's win(s) over Fed.
Last edited: