MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Lol he had a bye till the final.
Another tough Slam for Novak
- Thread starter Lew II
- Start date
None of his slams in 2015-2016 were difficult at all. Same for 2018-2019 so far except 2018 Wimbledon SF.Djokovic waiting for easy Slams:
We are not in reality here, don't forget.
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
ghostofMecir
Hall of Fame
Since 1980, 30 year old+ ATGs have a 7W-31L record against younger ATGs in slam QFs/SFs/Fs (10-32 if you count Murray as an ATG, Federer with 6 of those wins). 30+ year olds don’t win slam matches vs. younger ATGs. Beating two back to back would be something unheard of since the early ‘70s era.
Tennisbg
Professional
Mostly the British media actually. Almost no one outside that country cares about Murray.
Not if this champion is old and he won those 8 versus weak opponents.
Sputnik Bulgorov
Professional
Federer faced Agassi from 2003-2005, amassing an 8-0 record, including 3 slam wins. It doesn't make any sense at all to consider Murray an ATG while Agassi isn't.
I think Fed already did that beating Wawrinka/Nadal at AO 17. I think Wawrinka can be counted as Murray and Wawrinka is actually a AO champion, and we can argue his peak is even higher than Murray's at majors.
Yeah, good point, why doesn't Agassi count as big 4? Anyone who puts Murray on ATG list and excludes Agassi has no credibility for me. And not to mention, Sampras saw Fed and ran away, protecting his h2h and also preventing Fed from getting the credit of beating him, so Pete should count too since Fed would destroy him.
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
Agassi didn't have ATG level results since Federer started winning Slams. He was no.7/8 in the world since the second half of 2003.
Murray was consistently top-4 in the Big3 era from 2008 to 2016.
Last edited:
Sputnik Bulgorov
Professional
Agassi was peak, he just had a difficult time because tennis evolved, and the young players at the time were capable of challenging old ATGs, unlike now.
wang07
Semi-Pro
So apparently Agassi wasn't an ATG anymore when he faced Fed 2003-2005 and in 2005 USO final, but a 37 years old Federer, the only valuable opponent for Djokovic in the final makes it a tough Slam? Weird double standards there, also I didn't know players can suddenly lose ATG status. Or more like an ATG becomes a part of the weak era when he faces Federer, right?
That's because of weak era, not Fed being good.He is on a 11 win streak and has the highest winning percentage of all ATP this year, without skipping clay.
Old my ass.
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
How convenient.
It is, isn't it?
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
Agassi's year end ranking since Federer reached no.1:
8, 7, 150, retired
Murray's year end ranking since Nadal / Djokovic reached no.1:
4, 4, 4 / 4, 3, 5, 4, 6, 2, 1, 16, 240
Ranking doesn't reflect current form. Wawrinka was never ranked nr.1 and he won 3 majors just like Murray.
14-19 was weaker competition, so we can't compare it.
Another double standard just like I exposed you last time, but naturally you stayed silent. From 2011 to 2016, when Nole amassed moat of his slams, Roger didn't have ATG level results. In fact, he had Roddick level results, who you consistently dismiss as a nobody.
Now answer this: was RF an ATG opponent from 2011 to 2016 or not, and why.
@Lew II this was the post I never got an answer
There was no Big 3 till 2011 - or is a 1 slam Nole considered Big? Because Hewitt was then double Big, if not more with his 2 year stretch at no. 1.
This means that until Roger was 30, there was no Big 3. And you'll have a very hard time proving 30 to 35 yo Rog was Big with his 1 slam and some 20 weeks at no. 1. That's Roddick's territory.
So, this means that all your ideas and theories are basically as dead as a dodo
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
How can these people be fans of Federer?
Comparing 2014-19 Fed to crippled Agassi is highly disrespectful. Federer would answer like this to these people:
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
Show me these Roddick level stats.
Strange you don't know it, but you can assess his playing level... Anyway, 1 slam win, 4 finals and some 10+ weeks at no. 1.
Quite Please
Rookie
Djokovic fans try to spin it that meeting a 8 time champ in the final is tough, because he hasn't faced any competition in this years Wimbledon at all.
It would be....it he wasn't as old as Father Time himself.
How many times have they not discredited "ancient 35 year old Agassi with his broken back" for being easy competition, but an almost 38 year-old Fed is tough. You cant have it both ways, Lew.
It would be....it he wasn't as old as Father Time himself.
How many times have they not discredited "ancient 35 year old Agassi with his broken back" for being easy competition, but an almost 38 year-old Fed is tough. You cant have it both ways, Lew.
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
I don't think Federer would disrespect Agassi like that. Even Federer and Nadal and Djokovic all said this era is weak, because young players aren't coming up. All experts say that.
How can these people be fans of Federer?
Comparing 2014-19 Fed to crippled Agassi is highly disrespectful. Federer would answer like this to these people:
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
I don't know if you just aren't smart enough to understand circular reasoning, or you are so biased to do this on purpose. You know that this logic is a fallacy, right?
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
Please explain.
??? What does this have to do with their results in the mentioned time period being exactly the same? Did Roddick win a slam, reach 4 finals and get to no. 1 or not?
Tennis is a zero sum game. So, in order for someone to win, the other guy loses. This means, the winner is either better, or the loser was worse, there is no objective way to determine that.
So, yes, it can be a weak era, or Federer is really that good, both is possible, but we will never know, that's the problem due to tennis being a zero sum game. It could be that Fed and his era was so great that they prevented Roddick and Safin to win more majors.
Get it? Same with Djokovic today wining a lot. It could be that younger players are worse, or it could be that Murray generation was so great that they are preventing players like Dimitrov to win.
MS_07
Semi-Pro
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
BringBackWood
Professional
So if Roddick had won a slam that Federer won in reality, the next time Federer beat Roddick in a GS final, his achievement would have been greater. Isn't that the crux of the fallacy here?
Born_to_slice
Legend
Nadal got wiped off the court in AO final by Novak in God mode. Everyone thought his level was insane beforehand. Not Novak's fault that Federer was beaten by Millman and Zverev sliced to pieces by Kohli in USO '18. Millman and Delpo played good matches against Novak too, despite not winning a single set. Reminds of how Tommy Haas played a good match against Federer in W'09 but got nothing for his effort.
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
No because Roddick would be Wawrinka level at best without Federer.
Murray on the other hand is an ATG, with 11 slam finals, 21 semis, etc.
junior74
Talk Tennis Guru
Roddick was stopped 8/8 times by Federer in slams. 4F, 3SF, 1QF.
Roddick could have won Wimbledon 2019, if he was in his 2009 form, I think.
Unfortunately, I do not possess powers to see things that never happened, unlike you. So I can't be sure. Unlike you.
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
Roddick isn't an ATG in any universe, he was lucky his only ATG opponent was Federer. He beat only 1 top-8 ranked player in slams until 2008.
junior74
Talk Tennis Guru
In what universe did I say he was an ATG?
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
In this thread I'm talking about the ATGs of the 2000s: the Big4.
Everyone else is very distant.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Heard it all now, Roddick lucky to have Federer as an opponent - arguably the best ever at his two best slams
Your nonsense about ranking has been address many times...
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
Lucky to have only Federer, otherwise he wouldn't even have reached slam finals.Heard it all now, Roddick lucky to have Federer as an opponent - arguably the best ever at his two best slams
Your nonsense about ranking has been address many times...
Ranking is used by ATP to compile draws.
NatF
Bionic Poster
lol sure thing
If the higher ranked players didn't make it far enough in the draw it means someone else was playing better than them. It's not enough to just look at ranking to determine how well someone was playing - there's a myriad of stat that we could look at.
Similar threads
- Deleted member 757377
- General Pro Player Discussion
