Fed's past his prime

andyroddick1 · Mar 6, 2008

Two losses in a row. He's going down now. Forget about the French. I doubt that he'll win Wimby. You may not agree but Fed's really going down. Losing a set to Ferrero at Wimby. Playing horrible against Djoker in the final. Going down in straights in the semis. He's past his prime. I bet that he'll finish with 13 career grand slams.

Tecnifibre_Rackets · Mar 6, 2008

^ Have u ever watched tennis in ur life. I doubt you r ever going to wn wimbledon. He's lost two matches in a row. SO WHAT. Everyone loses now, and then. He's going to surpass Sampras' record, u r just in denial tht Federer is the best tennis player ever.

Josherer · Mar 6, 2008

WOW!

Your pathetic!

Get real buddy!

Katlion · Mar 6, 2008

OMFG!!! Two matches. Can you believe it?! Yeah, he is sooooo terrible. Andy Roddick loses like 10 matches in a row, and I don't see anyone saying that he is past his prime.

drakulie · Mar 6, 2008

I agree with everything the OP stated.

Now that you have nothing else to contribute to the boards, don't you think it's time you actually start playing tennis??

superman1 · Mar 6, 2008

Yes, he is past his prime, there is no argument about that.

The question is, how far past his prime? I don't think that far. He's still good enough to win pretty much everything, but I doubt we'll see the same ridiculous dominance we've seen for the past few years. He had to slow down at some point, it was inevitable (obviously), and it's happening now.

emerckx53 · Mar 6, 2008

At least he had a prime...unlike Mr. Roddick who maybe is the biggest waste of talent to come out of the US in a decade....

daddy · Mar 6, 2008

Many threads with similar contents. I would eager people to look if thre is a similar thread before they create their own lookalike thread. This is at least 10th same with these contents.

fastdunn · Mar 6, 2008

Yeah this is real test for Roger. So far he's been beating up guys who are at similar ages(roddick,hewitt) or older(agassi).

Now, the emerging main competitions are 4-6 year younger than him(Djokovic,Murray,Tsonga,Nadal,maybe Baghdatis?). Well some are not quite fully-emerged but we all can sense they are coming.

This is when we going to see what Federer is really made of.

Sampras lost his high dominance when some young players came along (like 5 years younger) but he somehow cling to #1 a few more years with Wimbledon and indoor carpet.
Then he eventually knocked down by players who are 10 years younger than him (Hewitt, Federer).

All of top 5 all time greats dominated about 10 years. No one seems to be able to overcome 10 year difference.

Federer now about 5 year dominance and 5 year younger competition emerging.

gj011 · Mar 6, 2008

Roddick is past his prime. There you go.

Federer is definitely past his prime, it is getting tougher for him, but "Federer past his prime" is still best player in the world who will win several more GSs. However, he will never dominate like he used to.
Some funboys here, obviously have a big problem with that.

leon505 · Mar 6, 2008

On what basis do u make these comments? what stats r u basing these one? two losses in a row? OMG the world has ended! Roger Federer lost two matches in a row?!?!?!??!?!?!? OMG he lost a set to Ferrero?!?!?!?!? (top ten) OMG he played horrible in one final of a grand slam?!?!?!?!?!?!

:shock: what ever shall we do?

saram · Mar 6, 2008

Hey troll: shut up.

coloskier · Mar 6, 2008

He lost twice in a row to Canas last year and still won 3 Grand Slams. His demise is definitely premature.

bluetrain4 · Mar 6, 2008

I don't understand how so many people can't fathom that all players hit a peak and then have a slow fade after that peak. Many top players had won their LAST slam at Fed's age or earlier, so the fact that Fed may be past his peak is no surprise.

But, what does that mean? Being past his peak doesn't mean that he can't win another Slam, just that he won't win as many and they will be harder to come by.

The standard Fed set in 2005-2007 is really unfathomable. Not only did he win 3 slams in each of those years (and went deep at the FO), he was in the final of nearly every tournament. There's no way that could continue.

I don't know if this is just a hiccup or really the downside of his career. No matter, I think Fed will still be competitive, even if he does lose more, even if he does win 1 Slam per year rather than 3.

Vision84 · Mar 6, 2008

I think there should be an entire sub-forum devoted to threads moaning about Federer. It would probably fill up pretty quick.

Mad iX · Mar 6, 2008

Past his prime is possible and a legitimate argument.
However, only 1 more slam? Give the guy more credit.

downthewall · Mar 6, 2008

All you fed-bed buddies get so mad when someone says anything about federer. wahhahhahaa...whahahahaha... crying and crying.. who cares! the guy is good but he aint god. prob a bunch of fed wannabees who dreams they play like him. pathetic

quicken · Mar 6, 2008

He is past his prime, his GS record per year would be around 2, which is still crazy.

racquet_jedi · Mar 6, 2008

Nothing is set in stone, other than life and death, Federer could surpass Sampras's record -and win the French and a lot of other stuff- and everyone's expectations to prove himself as the undisputed G.O.A.T...

But, he could flunk and drop to nothing as well...

tHotGates · Mar 6, 2008

Deep down inside many of you love these "softball" posts.

Let the flames in your posts flow. :twisted:

Tempest344 · Mar 7, 2008

yep for sure

meanwhile Sampras...10 years or so his senior
still has enough in the tank to have a 1 in 50 chance to win wimby

andyroddick1 · Mar 7, 2008

The scary thing is the straight sets. I mean you lose fine. But losing the way he did to Djoker was pathetic. Yeah you might say others lose a lot but Fed isn't others. He is special. Nobody has ever achieved what he has so I guess I though too fast. But still. He is past his prime. Even Roddick has won more tourny's this year. That's not right.

Morrissey · Mar 7, 2008

I wouldn't go there yet. I need to see how he does in the rest of the slams this year to even begin to think about him being past his prime.

Djokovicfan4life · Mar 7, 2008

Originality of topic=F

Strength of argument=F

Final grade=F

fantom · Mar 7, 2008

You can be sure he's training hard for deep runs in Miami and Indian Wells. He can pick up tons of points if he does so.

There's no doubt that he's on the downward slope of his career, but I'd still pick him out of anybody else in the world to win the biggest matches.

danb · Mar 7, 2008

Wrong - he is at his peak. Others are rising their game. That simple.

superman1 · Mar 7, 2008

Go watch some matches. Federer used to move better and hit winners out of nowhere. You really think he spent 4 years with no one really going at it from the baseline against him, and it was just on the 5th year that some guys happened to say, "hey, maybe if I play better from the baseline, I'll win!!" He's just not hitting those scorchers like he used to, and his movement isn't as impressive.

Federer at his peak wouldn't lose to anyone, except Nadal on clay. You just couldn't get past him.

leon505 · Mar 7, 2008

There nothing wrong with these guys getting mad when someone "claims" (and on no real basis) that a great player is past his prime and in a downturn. We're not crying, we're merely telling andyroddick1 that his accusations are unjustified. Lots of us really respect federer's game, his ability, and his charisma. If you dont at least acknowledge his genius, you've really got to rethink your view of tennis.

FYI everybody dreams of one day playing like or on par with their favourite pros. If you didnt, then you wouldnt be a true tennis fan. Its not pathetic, its just respect.

tintin · Mar 7, 2008

if only Roddick's past prime was filled with 12 grand slam titles,really some idiots will come up with anything instead of keeping their dumbarses shut! :roll: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Prod · Mar 7, 2008

and you have a prime? Seriously, what is with these ridiculously impulsive threads? Fed past his prime? Roddick washed up? Nadal and Djoker are horrible? Grow up, folks. They're still top 10 and top 5. They're still winning. They're still competing, but it seems to be much tighter. So, before you criticize, bash, and emphatically make a statement, use your noggin.

zagor · Mar 7, 2008

You don't know anything about tennis if you think Federer in 2008 so far played on the level of 2005 and 2006,it's that simple.

Fed's past his prime

Rookie

New User

Professional

Semi-Pro

Talk Tennis Guru

Legend

Semi-Pro

Legend

Legend

Banned

Rookie

Legend

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

Rookie

Professional

Professional

Rookie

Professional

Rookie

Morrissey

Guest

Legend

Hall of Fame

Professional

Legend

Rookie

Professional

New User

Bionic Poster

Similar threads