Agreed. Same reason why Federer underachieved, because Djokodal are much stronger than old Fed, they are tougher competition for Fed, than Fed is to them, because of age difference.
Are you implying that Novak woukd still have 5 Wimb titles and would be 3-0 in finals if he had prime/peak Fed instead of old Fed?Are you really implying that Fed on grass is the same as Nadal on clay?
No, but neither would Federer have 8 W titles.
Why not? With his longevity, he'd have lots of time to do it.
Not on today's grass, maybe in 2003-2009 grass.
What you think/should have its different than actual situation. You just trying to represent what would you want to be but reality its quite different.
Why not? Djokovic had a difficult time winning 2 of his grass matches with Fed and Fed in 2003-2009 was much better.
But you look at fed wins vs young djokovic right?
See you have your answer.Fed had difficult time winning versus old Pete, so I guess this proves Pete would win 7 W titles if both were in the same era?
Djokovic is 3-0 versus Fed in W finals, but somehow both at their peak, Djokovic wouldn't win a single match, sure makes senseBut you look at fed wins vs young djokovic right?
.
Over30 Nadal is unbeaten at Roland Garros LOL
Like i said. You guessing what could happen, but in reality Djokovic is most complete player, beat Fed H2h, W finals and prob will win 8 or more Wimbledons, thats facts.Djokovic is 3-0 versus Fed in W finals, but somehow both at their peak, Djokovic wouldn't win a single match, sure makes sense
Was Fed prime/peak in that match? No.
Now you're just making stuff up.Djokovic is 3-0 versus Fed in W finals, but somehow both at their peak, Djokovic wouldn't win a single match, sure makes sense
Mythical peak Fed who lost once to Rafa and was pushed to five in 2007 and 2009. But somehow he would totally dominate Djokovic all the time. Makes sense.
Well when i say most complete player, i take the facts that hes playing very good tennis on all surfaces and wining most big tournaments on all surfaces, except RG where Nadal his biggest rival based all his game on clay surface and dominating that surface pretty good.
I'm not making anything up, I'm just disagreeing with the premise that Federer is a sure thing versus Djokovic on grass. If anything you guys are making stuff up, that Fed is a sure thing.
To be fair, this is not what most complete means. You described what most versatile means. Most complete means that you don't have a weakness in your game, top serve, top forehand, top return, top footwork, not any weaknesses.
I'm not saying Fed is a sure thing, but he wouldn't have a losing record on grass vs Djokovic and Novak wouldn't stop Fed from winning 8 titles.
It's a fallacy anyway, Djokovic wouldn't even be the same player if both were born in 81.
Exactly. As ive said a 100 times, if Rog lost only to Djoko but dominated the field, there might have been something to it. But Fed lost to Berdych in 2010, Tsonga 2011 and Stakhovsky in 2013. Even if you dont watch tennis you should understand that its more likely that one player declines than 20 players suddenly peaking at the same time. Fed started losing to practically everyone after that AO10.
Neither would Fed if he was born in 87, he might even have a 2 handed backhand
.Also, the problem is that skill isn't the only thing. Federer wasn't mentally and physically as tough and that makes a difference too, so I'm not sure Federer would just beat Djokovic. Fed plays a lot worse versus Djokovic than versus Roddick, mentality and fitness make a huge difference.Neither would Fed if he was born in 87, he might even have a 2 handed backhand
Only since 2014. Let's not generalize and say Fed always played worse vs Djokovic.
Exactly, which proves things aren't black and white. Both guys play at a high level, who knows how things would go both at their peaks, nobody knows.
Even then, with time travel you don't actually go to the past, you create parallel different timeline in which Fed and Laver exist. But the original reality where Laver is playing without Federer is still existing as a separate timeline.Nah... The real question is how peak Roger Federer would fare against peak Rod Laver, both using aluminum racquets (so it's neither woodie nor graphite), full bed gut strings, leather shoes, a cotton outfit with long socks and traditional white-felt balls (instead of these ugly "TV-friendly" radioactive yellow balls). Of course, serving would require at least one foot to remain on the ground.
With further advances in quantum physics and progress towards time travel, this important question will be answered one day
No but you were implying that Fed on grass=Nadal on clay. When did you become so extreme?
I said it was easier for Djokovic to break through old Fed than prime/peak Nadal.
Put them all in the Wimbledon draw in their prime and Federer wins 1 or 2 titles. If he's lucky and one of the others gets injured.
lol
