Majors won after age 28

tennisaddict

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
Player Majors won after 28

Borg 0
Sampras 2
Laver 5
Federer 5
Nadal 5
Emerson 5
Djokovic 8

How is Djokovic able to achieve more majors than anyone at age 28 ?

How is Djokovic able to win as many majors after age 28 as he did before ?
 
er4claw

er4claw

Rookie
Why not post revised inflation adjusted slams won after 28 since this is very relevant given the anomaly we are in.

It should look this

Federer 5 (Every slam is legit given his advanced age and handicap of facing younger ATGs)

Djokovic -3 ( For missing unlosable weak era slams he should be penalized for that and his legacy diminished)

Nadal 0 (roughly par, if taking away what he should have won and moral slams)

Well well, looks like Maestro comes out on top if it gets looked at objectively and deeper than just surface level.
 
Milehigh5280

Milehigh5280

Professional
er4claw said:
Why not post revised inflation adjusted slams won after 28 since this is very relevant given the anomaly we are in.

It should look this

Federer 5 (Every slam is legit given his advanced age and handicap of facing younger ATGs)

Djokovic -3 ( For missing unlosable weak era slams he should be penalized for that and his legacy diminished)

Nadal 0 (roughly par, if taking away what he should have won and moral slams)

Well well, looks like Maestro comes out on top if it gets looked at objectively and deeper than just surface level.
Click to expand...

Non-biased fact based analysis like this is what makes ttw great.
 
Tennis Analyst

Tennis Analyst

Rookie
Sorry what? What do you how he was able to win more majors than anyone after 28??

This is just like asking how was Borg able to win more majors than anyone before 25...

Oh right, I've just remembered. According to Fredfans, none should be winning at 28+ yo because as a human being you become OLD once you hit the ripe old age of TWENTY-SEVEN haha. You can even see it in mighty Fed himself who has been playing with a walking stick since 2007 lol.
 
powerangle

powerangle

Legend
Some players are prodigies that do more winning than anyone else at a young age.
Some players hit their stride and perform better at a later age.
Different strokes for different folks and everyone is different.
 
Lleytonstation

Lleytonstation

Talk Tennis Guru
True Fanerer said:
Even Fedovic side is crap with the draw opening up.
Click to expand...
Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't believe a single masters have had all 3 of the bigs enter the draw? Maybe IW and Rome where both retired before playing their next match.

Finals with Fognini, Medvedev, Isner, and Thiem (on hard)? These are considered important wins?

Nah.
 
True Fanerer

True Fanerer

G.O.A.T.
Lleytonstation said:
Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't believe a single masters have had all 3 of the bigs enter the draw? Maybe IW and Rome where both retired before playing their next match.

Finals with Fognini, Medvedev, Isner, and Thiem (on hard)? These are considered important wins?

Nah.
Click to expand...
And Djokovic losing to Kohlschreiber. None of it means anything at all. Medvedev has been the most consistent and look at what Rafa did to him. Tsits and Zverev please. The rest aren't worth mentioning except for Nick who doesn't give a damn. It's a joke.
 
Lleytonstation

Lleytonstation

Talk Tennis Guru
True Fanerer said:
And Djokovic losing to Kohlschreiber. None of it means anything at all. Medvedev has been the most consistent and look at what Rafa did to him. Tsits and Zverev please. The rest aren't worth mentioning except for Nick who doesn't give a damn. It's a joke.
Click to expand...
Honestly, it is sad, I guess we will have to wait for my son and Feds sons to take the tour by storm and restore order.
 
robthai

robthai

Hall of Fame
It helps when nobody under the age of 30 can reach a final. I remember the time when Djokovic won his first grand slam at age 20 and it was considered a breakthrough moment for him. Nowadays, a player like Tsitsipas age 20 makes a slam semifinal, only to get destroyed, and its considered his breakthrough moment. Years of mediocrity from the new generational players have caused pundits and fans to lower their standards.
 
O

OhYes

Guest
Easily explained - Djokovic matured and realized what he needs to do. Fed was spoiled at the beginning and chickened out from good rivals.
 
P

Pantera

Banned
CYGS said:
Fed's first 12 is unmatched.
Click to expand...
Federer has 7 legitimate majors, first 13 were in weakest era of all time.

Nadal is GOAT from a nadal perspective as the facts prove that to be the case...Djokovic the GOAT from a Djokovic fan perspective as the facts can be presented to show that to be the case. No amount of spinning can present Federer as GOAT.
 
P

Pantera

Banned
Tennis_Hands said:
As exemplified by

1) flattening out everyone outside of clay in his peak and meeting Nadal on clay the overwhelming majority of times in the same period

and

2) meeting Djokovic in Djokovic's best period on HC and grass more than anyone


:-D :-D :-D
Click to expand...
Sorry..but Nadal 8-5 Federer on HC, in Nadal's peak its Nadal 8-3 Federer HC outdoors.
 
P

Pantera

Banned
Tennis_Hands said:
I don't know why you are sorry. You made a statement and I flattened it with a pair of one liners. Flaming here is as useful as t**s on a boar.

:cool:
Click to expand...
You posted opinion, not fact. I post facts backed up by statistics. Sorry dude, facts trump opinions. 24-16...26-22.
 
Yugram

Yugram

Legend
Lleytonstation said:
Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't believe a single masters have had all 3 of the bigs enter the draw? Maybe IW and Rome where both retired before playing their next match.

Finals with Fognini, Medvedev, Isner, and Thiem (on hard)? These are considered important wins?

Nah.
Click to expand...
Finals with Roddick, Hewitt, Baghdatis, Philippoussis? These are considered important wins?

Nah.

Oh, and btw Federer didn’t beat Thiem (on hard) so there is no win to start with.
 
AceSalvo

AceSalvo

Legend
CYGS said:
Fed's first 12 is unmatched.
Click to expand...

Keep crying is ok. But try to make an attempt to read that this thread is about 28+

28- Fed is matched by Nadal. Its 12 vs 13. Nadal beat Berdych and Ferrer. Nothing much to talk about.

28- Djoko was 8. Tsonga, Murray and Old-ever. Nothing much there too.
 
Yugram

Yugram

Legend
AceSalvo said:
Keep crying is ok. But try to make an attempt to read that this thread is about 28+

28- Fed is matched by Nadal. Its 12 vs 13. Nadal beat Berdych and Ferrer. Nothing much to talk about.

28- Djoko was 8. Tsonga, Murray and Old-ever. Nothing much there too.
Click to expand...
How about Roddick, Hewitt, Baghdatis, Philippoussis? Is there much to talk about?
 
Lleytonstation

Lleytonstation

Talk Tennis Guru
Yugram said:
Finals with Roddick, Hewitt, Baghdatis, Philippoussis? These are considered important wins?

Nah.

Oh, and btw Federer didn’t beat Thiem (on hard) so there is no win to start with.
Click to expand...
Did I said he did? Nope. Reread, I said important wins either way, hence why Fognini is in there as well.
 
NoleFam

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
Lleytonstation said:
Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't believe a single masters have had all 3 of the bigs enter the draw? Maybe IW and Rome where both retired before playing their next match.

Finals with Fognini, Medvedev, Isner, and Thiem (on hard)? These are considered important wins?

Nah.
Click to expand...

IW, Madrid and Rome had all the Big 3. Federer withdrew in Rome and Nadal withdrew in IW. When these players weren't doing anything in these events and the big 3 and Murray were winning 90% of them, people complained that no one can break their hold on those events. Now they don't mean anything? The only one this year that was barely contested and pretty lackluster was Canada. Federer had a cushy draw in Miami but Canada easily takes the cake. IW, Madrid and Rome were excellent events. MC was also great with Fognini stepping up and taking that one.
 
UnderratedSlam

UnderratedSlam

G.O.A.T.
tennisaddict said:
Player Majors won after 28

Borg 0
Sampras 2
Laver 5
Federer 5
Nadal 5
Emerson 5
Djokovic 8

How is Djokovic able to achieve more majors than anyone at age 28 ?

How is Djokovic able to win as many majors after age 28 as he did before ?
Click to expand...
Because there has been an UPWARDS AGE SHIFT in men's tennis in the past decade.

Players are doing better in their 30s and around 30 than at 25 or 21 - as used to be the case for decades. In the 70s/80s/90s teens could sometimes even win slams, but that is impossible now.

We don't yet know why that is, but fact is that nearly all bigger titles in recent years are won by guys aged 30 or more. The only exceptions are 6-7 M1000s and 2 WTFs won by 20somethings.

And no, this is NOT down to the dominance and age of the Big 3, because many other 30somethings are doing great, even peaking, at that age.
 
K

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Pretty much down to his level of opposition. If he had 24-26 year old Fedal coming up he wouldn’t have won anywhere near that amount.

He’s maintained a good level into his 30s too because he plays the same low margin style so hasn’t had to make many adjustments. Unlike Fed for example who played with a 90 inch racket and had to retool literally.
 
UnderratedSlam

UnderratedSlam

G.O.A.T.
KINGROGER said:
Pretty much down to his level of opposition. If he had 24-26 year old Fedal coming up he wouldn’t have won anywhere near that amount.

He’s maintained a good level into his 30s too because he plays the same low margin style so hasn’t had to make many adjustments. Unlike Fed for example who played with a 90 inch racket and had to retool literally.
Click to expand...
You need to start giving Novak some credit for being a master player, otherwise all your posts will continue sounding like meaningless RF-biased attacks on the "opposition".

A bit more objective appraisal might help. There are quite a few RF fans here that are objective.
 
NoleFam

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
KINGROGER said:
Pretty much down to his level of opposition. If he had 24-26 year old Fedal coming up he wouldn’t have won anywhere near that amount.

He’s maintained a good level into his 30s too because he plays the same low margin style so hasn’t had to make many adjustments. Unlike Fed for example who played with a 90 inch racket and had to retool literally.
Click to expand...

He had 24/25 year old Nadal in 2011 and 29 year old Federer. Federer was 30 in one match, the USO. 3 Slams and 5 Masters. Everyone seems to have a theory on how much he would have won in this/that situation with no reliable proof of it.
 
NoleFam

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
UnderratedSlam said:
You need to start giving Novak some credit for being a master player, otherwise all your posts will continue sounding like meaningless RF-biased attacks on the "opposition".

A bit more objective appraisal might help. There are quite a few RF fans here that are objective.
Click to expand...

This.
 
K

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
UnderratedSlam said:
You need to start giving Novak some credit for being a master player, otherwise all your posts will continue sounding like meaningless RF-biased attacks on the "opposition".

A bit more objective appraisal might help. There are quite a few RF fans here that are objective.
Click to expand...

He’s an ATG of course, top 5 of all time.

Fedal are better across all surfaces though. Most of his late career success is down to timing and lack of rivals. As well as maintaining the same level due to his playing style.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JennyS
Players who won multiple Slams after the age of 25
Replies
21
Views
2K
JennyS
JennyS
Fiero425
  • Poll
The GOAT; from Sampras To Federer
Replies
5
Views
1K
SinjinCooper
S
Lew II
  • Poll
Djokodal better longevity than Fed?
Replies
36
Views
1K
MeatTornado
MeatTornado
C
  • Poll
Djokovic might overtake Federer
2 3
Replies
119
Views
6K
Rusty Shackleford
Rusty Shackleford
tennisaddict
What changed for Djokovic from July 2014 to change career trajectory ?
2 3
Replies
110
Views
4K
ABCD
A
Top