Novak did not have near peak Roger post 2009. He only looked like that against the field. He was not the same player after mono and had a natural trajectory as he neared and passed 30 that all athletes usually do.
Feds early era was weak. Pigeon Roddick, old Agassi, declined Hewitt, Gonzales, baggy, James Blake, nalbandian, davydenko, henman, etc were not ATGs just decent players. Only agassi was but Fed caught him at the tail end.
I am happy for you Gabe.
No it's not. We(Fed and Nadal fans) have provided you amble of facts about Djokovic competed in a very weak CIE
So did Federer at the start from 03-07. Nadal has had very little competition on clay as Fedovic were hardly clay specialists. They played great on it but not their most natural surface.
Fed made then weak? Just like Djokovic is making the field look weak now? Irrespective of age they are basically doing the same thing in dominating the field.
The question becomes, how no other player over 6 year period was able to achieve these resultsIf we're honest, Djokovic has kind of cleaned up in the Weakest Era in the History of Professional Tennis.
So not much of a discussion!
What makes you think that people are hyperventilating? This thread is a mere comparison. Not everyone is thinking about the slam race
Fair enough in his 20s he is. However, careers are measured from start to finish.
No, Federer 2003-2009 was at his very best so of course no one is beating him anywhere except early bloomer Nadal on clay. If an OLD 35 years old Federer dominating in 2003-2009, yeah, the competition would look just as bad as the current CIE
All 3 have benefitted from weak competition, but everyone who has witness the sport can tell you that Djokovic has grossly benefited the most. Old past prime Nole in the CIE has better stats than he had in his peak/prime years(in his 20s). It's clear that the NextGen are too weak to fend of Djokovic who inflated 12 slams.
Well, it does matter if we have such discussion about evaluating the player's placement in ATG list. Djoker fans can ignore all they want, but tennis enthusiasts will look deeper than just numbers for better understanding and have better discernment.
I wonder how 2018-2023 djokovic does in 04-09 if you insert him in place of federer?
Sampras still arguably greater unless Djokovic got like 35 slams adjusted for era though?
feels like 04-09 was stronger comp than 18-23 and 20s fed was better than 30s djokovic. It’s a fair point but not a like for like comparison imo.
Well Sampras didn't have a pathological need to be accepted/loved/whatever. And also is a more closed off kind of guy who probably didn't like traveling that much. He wanted to win, and he wanted to be the best, and when he thought he had put the slam record out of reach, he retired.
I think 99% of Fed fans figured that out when Rafa passed him in the slam race. The rival fan bases project their agenda onto Fed fans when it doesn't exist. They desperately want Roger fans to be crying, tearing their hair out or in clinical depression because he "only" has 20 slams. Who even thinks like that? In actual fact, nobody cares and life goes on. It would be the same if Fed won the slam race - ultimately, it's trivial compared to real life issues.
Sounds bad but Sampras will always be in debates somewhere. I doubt that will change even if somebody did reach 35.
There is this line too. And the idea past ATG's set the bar.
Djokovic 2011-16 is the best.
Great post. Completely agree with everything.
Spat my Moet & Chandon out at this one.
you again insisting on that matter
we already discussed that plus even had a thread, we can create again and will see the poll results a bit later
you again insisting on that matter
Wimbledon is different. It's the only one for which this is true.
Your turns of phrase are just marvellous
