Confessions of a Fed Fan

[demrle]

I like the idea what if he changed racquet earlier. It was as he brought a stick to a sword fight with the 90. Just further proof of his greatness that he could sometimes beat them even when he was crippled by the racquet.

Sure, Federer didn't change racquet earlier so he would be able to win the should've, would've, could've game. Or maybe he actually tried all options and stuck with the one that suited him best at the time?

 

[demrle]

Doesn't matter how you move the goalposts, Federer 2012 is still way better than Djokovic 2018 in basically every area, besides challenges.

Talk about moving the posts, ROFL. Why would we consider 2018, when 2019 was the last complete "normal" season? Djokovic in 2019 would be the equivalent of Federer in what - 2013? Oh wait...

 

[demrle]

He does much every shot better than Djokovic except topspin Bh. Nadal has a comparable FH and a good match up with Fed pre 2017.

Unfortunately for you and Fed, tennis is not just about forehands and backhands, but about guts and smarts as well.

 

[mike danny]

Your logic is completely off. Firstly, nowadays, players are entering their prime, and consequently their decline, much later than in the years past. Being 27, 28 as opposed to 33 represents no significant advantage if any, as evidenced by Djokovic and Nadal still completely dominating the field at 33 and 34 respectively. And secondly, as the decline happens exponentially, the difference between 36 and 31 is much greater than between, say, 33 and 28, not the other way round. The reason why Federer made some ground in the H2H against Nadal is that he somewhat improved his BH, thus not allowing Nadal to obliterate it the way he used to before. If your logic were true, Federer would be making ground on Djokovic as well, which is the opposite of what we are observing. v

Ok, who exactly are Djokovic and Nadal dealing with today? Where are their Djokodal's aged 27 or 28?

Failed argument from the start.

Not much difference, yeah right. At 27-28 Fed was reaching all 4 slam finals, while at 34 he was losing to Seppi in slams.

 

[mike danny]

Well, the OP obviously didn't know that he needed to be licensed by you in order to be recognized as a Federer fan. He wrongfully believed that he can be one despite being knowledgeable and respectful.

So, Federer's peak ended at 26 years of age? That - is truly remarkable. And it even coincided with the emergence of Djokovic and Nadal. Delusional much?

Federer had a consistent 4 year dominant period, something Djokodal haven't touched to this day. He was bound to suffer a drop-off eventually.

Why can't Djokodal dominate consecutive seasons, but Fed is supposed to dominate 6 straight?

Biased much?

Nadal's peak ended at 27, big difference.

 

[mike danny]

Unfortunately for you and Fed, tennis is not just about forehands and backhands, but about guts and smarts as well.

Yeah, Fed truly lacks them...

You're embarrassing yourself.

 

[mike danny]

Exactly. Kind of comical, the tenets of Federer fanclub do not allow worship of “false gods” apparently. It’s like I have been excommunicated from the Church of Rogi for worshipping Baal (or NaBaal).

Dude, stop playing the victim card. Just admit you're not a Fed fan anymore and move on.

The moment I read a previous post of yours that said "Fed wasn't dealing with Roddick anymore. 2008 Djokovic was the real deal", you pretty much took your mask off. That's how guys with an agenda speak.

 

[TennisProExpert]

Unfortunately for you and Fed, tennis is not just about forehands and backhands, but about guts and smarts as well.

True. If tennis was simply about the better player winning then Fed would’ve put the slam race to bed and be on 25 by now.

 

[demrle]

Yeah, Fed truly lacks them...

I never said he lacks them. But they're not GOAT worthy, as there are at least two contemporaries better than him in that department. Reading comprehension.

 

[demrle]

Ok, who exactly are Djokovic and Nadal dealing with today? Where are their Djokodal's aged 27 or 28?

Failed argument from the start.

They're dealing with Hewitts, Safins, Rodicks, you know, those same guys Federer was dealing with back in his 3-4 year long prime. That's why they're making grounds on his uncomparable achievements as we speak.

Not much difference, yeah right. At 27-28 Fed was reaching all 4 slam finals, while at 34 he was losing to Seppi in slams.

Why would Federer be the reference point? But even if he is - at 34 he was losing to Seppi in slams, and yet at 36 he was winning two slams in a year - you know, more/just as many as he was winning at 27-28. Nadal won 3 slams at 27-28 and just as many at 33-34 (with one slam cancelled). Djokovic won 4 at 27-28 and three at 33-34 (again, with one less chance).

So who's proving a point? Maybe if you get even louder and more offensive you will compensate for the lack of facts in your posts.

 

[Alfred Chicken]

They're dealing with Hewitts, Safins, Rodicks, you know, those same guys Federer was dealing with back in his 3-4 year long prime.

 

[mike danny]

They're dealing with Hewitts, Safins, Rodicks, you know, those same guys Federer was dealing with back in his 3-4 year long prime. That's why they're making grounds on his uncomparable achievements as we speak.

Yeah, we're done here, welcome to my ignore list.

 

[demrle]

True. If tennis was simply about the better player winning then Fed would’ve put the slam race to bed and be on 25 by now.

Again, being a better TENNIS player is not determined exclusively by who slams the ball more graciously, but also by grit, smarts, stamina. You can prioritize whichever way you like, of course, I'm sure it will help you win the should've-would've-could've competition.

 

[demrle]

Yeah, we're done here, welcome to my ignore list.

Butt-hurt much? I'd go see a proctologist, it's only gonna get worse in the next five years or so.

Thank you very much!

 

[TennisProExpert]

They're dealing with Hewitts, Safins, Rodicks, you know, those same guys Federer was dealing with back in his 3-4 year long prime. That's why they're making grounds on his uncomparable achievements as we speak.


Why would Federer be the reference point? But even if he is - at 34 he was losing to Seppi in slams, and yet at 36 he was winning two slams in a year - you know, more/just as many as he was winning at 27-28. Nadal won 3 slams at 27-28 and just as many at 33-34 (with one slam cancelled). Djokovic won 4 at 27-28 and three at 33-34 (again, with one less chance).

So who's proving a point? Maybe if you get even louder and more offensive you will compensate for the lack of facts in your posts.

Nextgen are nowhere near Roddick, Hewitt, Safin.

 

[demrle]

I came into tennis through Fed in 2007. Had never picked up a racket before age 30, explaining why I still suck at 43.

Why did I come to Fed? He was THE man, unrivaled! I remember sitting in my living room absorbed in the amazing Wimbledon match against Nadal. I was in awe of Fed.

Then, a few months later, I saw him lose his AO crown to that Djokovic kid. I knew that Djokovic had something very special then. I felt then that the kid could challenge Fed’s greatness.

Then I saw FO 2008. Ugh. But that was “just” clay.
Then W 2008. Maybe it was mono?
Then AO 2009. Losing to a guy that wasn’t supposed to win HC slams. Falling apart in 5th set. Crying through the trophy presentation.
Yes, he passed Sampras (thank you Soderling and Roddick)...
But when you take a sober look at 2011-2017, you see a pattern—impressive success against the field but Fed getting bullied by Djokodal with just a few happy exceptions...

Fed was never really able to dominate tennis with Nadal and Djokovic healthy and at their best. And they are better in their early 30s now than he was...

Don’t get me wrong...I ALWAYS root for Fed against those two. I want him to keep his record.

But when I am completely honest, he’s just not as good as Djokovic and probably not Nadal either...

I am sure that the “true” Fed fans will trash me but I don’t see why being a fan means you have to ignore the facts. Thiem is my favorite player but I don’t go around saying he’s an ATG when the facts show he is only a very good player, not a great one (I’d love for Thiem to prove me wrong).

I haven’t abandoned Fed as a player, just given up hope of him as GOAT. Fed’s record in big matches against Djokodal since 2008 is just not good enough. Yes, there were some awesome wins. FO 2011 SF. W 2012 SF. 2017 AOF. But these great wins have been offset by many, many losses.

I just no longer can believe that he is as great as Djokovic. With Nadal he gets a slight edge but Nadal May win 3-4 more slams yet.

Here's respect for having an educated and balanced opinion, as well as courage to express it and face the butt-hurt McCarthyists.

 

[demrle]

Nextgen are nowhere near Roddick, Hewitt, Safin.

Just to be sure, as it's a fluid term, I consider Nextgen to be Medvedev and players younger then him. But not Thiem. So sure, I agree, Nextgen are nowhere near Roddick, Hewitt, Safin. But in my book Thiem, Wawrinka and Delpo (when healthy, of course) are. Honorable mention - Andy Murray.

 

[Nadalgaenger]

Your logic is completely off. Firstly, nowadays, players are entering their prime, and consequently their decline, much later than in the years past. Being 27, 28 as opposed to 33 represents no significant advantage if any, as evidenced by Djokovic and Nadal still completely dominating the field at 33 and 34 respectively. And secondly, as the decline happens exponentially, the difference between 36 and 31 is much greater than between, say, 33 and 28, not the other way round. The reason why Federer made some ground in the H2H against Nadal is that he somewhat improved his BH, thus not allowing Nadal to obliterate it the way he used to before. If your logic were true, Federer would be making ground on Djokovic as well, which is the opposite of what we are observing. v

Djokovic and FED serving better than ever.
Fed‘s service holds in 2015 as good or better than anything before. Djokovic has beefed up his second serve considerably and developed amazing feel. Not just a ball machine but an all-court guy like Fed.

Nadal‘s BH is better than ever and his FH pace also superior. Stats demonstrate this.

Age not nearly the hindrance it once was.

 

[mike danny]

Djokovic and FED serving better than ever.
Fed‘s service holds in 2015 as good or better than anything before. Djokovic has beefed up his second serve considerably and developed amazing feel. Not just a ball machine but an all-court guy like Fed.

Nadal‘s BH is better than ever and his FH pace also superior. Stats demonstrate this.

Age not nearly the hindrance it once was.

Depends who they are facing.

Nadal is easier prey for Fedovic off clay today than in the past, so I'm not sure what his improvements serve.

Beating the Thiems and the Zverevs of this world is easy since they are no threats.

 

[demrle]

Djokovic and FED serving better than ever.
Fed‘s service holds in 2015 as good or better than anything before. Djokovic has beefed up his second serve considerably and developed amazing feel. Not just a ball machine but an all-court guy like Fed.

Nadal‘s BH is better than ever and his FH pace also superior. Stats demonstrate this.

Age not nearly the hindrance it once was.

My name is Tom Brady and I approve this message.

 

[BeatlesFan]

Unfortunately for you and Fed, tennis is not just about forehands and backhands, but about guts and smarts as well.

Amazing Fed won 20 slams and 103 tournaments with no "guts and smarts." Such insightful analysis!

 

[demrle]

Amazing Fed won 20 slams and 103 tournaments with no "guts and smarts." Such insightful analysis!

And who exactly said that he had "no guts and smarts"? Such honesty on your part! The question was whether his guts and smarts (we're talking tennis smarts of course) are GOAT worthy. And no, they're not.

 

[Nadalgaenger]

My name is Tom Brady and I approve this message.

Exactly. Lebron as well. I’m not sure if it’s sports science or dare I say sports pharmaceuticals, but the primes (or near-primes) of top athletes keep getting longer.

Here's respect for having an educated and balanced opinion, as well as courage to express it and face the butt-hurt McCarthyists.

Thank you!

 

[Nadalgaenger]

Depends who they are facing.

Nadal is easier prey for Fedovic off clay today than in the past, so I'm not sure what his improvements serve.

Beating the Thiems and the Zverevs of this world is easy since they are no threats.

If Fed‘s serving stats against the entire field are as good or better than his legendary prime then four conclusions possible:
1) His serve is same but his ground game better (dubious, we‘d likely agree)
2) His ground game similar or not as good But serve better.
3) Field simply inept. (This argument appeals to some but doesn’t make sense. More money than ever in tennis. This promotes global competition for very limited resources available to those with highest ranking. I have never bought the “weak field” argument, even though I do believe
meaningful differences exist at the very top).
4) Court speeds faster and favor servers. (Haven’t seen evidence of this)

 

[demrle]

If Fed‘s serving stats against the entire field are as good or better than his legendary prime then four conclusions possible:
1) His serve is same but his ground game better (dubious, we‘d likely agree)
2) His ground game similar or not as good But serve better.
3) Field simply inept. (This argument appeals to some but doesn’t make sense. More money than ever in tennis. This promotes global competition for very limited resources available to those with highest ranking. I have never bought the “weak field” argument, even though I do believe
meaningful differences exist at the very top).
4) Court speeds faster and favor servers. (Haven’t seen evidence of this)

It is actually perfectly logical that you would keep improving all technical as well as mental aspects of your game, as long as you can retain your physical abilities or at least as long as they are not significantly diminished. It's that last part that's been problematic in the past.

 

[Nadalgaenger]

I am a Fed fan because of his tennis style and on court demeanor. He can’t win everything and certainly can’t beat everyone forever, especially against his younger competitors.

Can’t really root for Novak, just not my type of player. Rafa is ok, but not my type of tennis. However the records pan out in the coming years, I am still a Fed fan!

I definitely respect these sentiments.

I love Fed’s artistry on court and also prefer his first strike style to the more grinding style of his rivals. But I am in awe of their greatness too.

 

[demrle]

Exactly. Lebron as well. I’m not sure if it’s sports science or dare I say sports pharmaceuticals, but the primes (or near-primes) of top athletes keep getting longer.

Sure, sports science, pharmaceuticals, medicine in general, nutrition, a little bit of everything. And equally important - the ability of the pro-athletes to afford all that, time and money wise, thanks to the absolute professionalization and vast increase in their incomes.

As you said, the primes (or near-primes) of top athletes keep getting longer, but additionally, they are entering their primes later than they used to, hence additionally delaying their decline and eventual retirement. Just think of the good ol' days when teenagers used to be able to win grand slams on regular basis. Long gone are those times, Rafa's first RG title notwithstanding, as it still happened 15 years ago.

So I don't think that Roger will be an outlier, at least not a big one. In my eyes he is just the first one, it won't be much different for Novak and Rafa. And yeah, I know, Roger's style of play is less physical than that of Rafa and Novak, blablabla. On the other hand, as great an athlete as he's always been, I never looked at him as an ABSOLUTE fitness freak, the likes of Rafa and Novak. These two facts will offset in my opinion, allowing Rafa and Novak to play just as long as Roger. In which case they will absolutely obliterate all of his records.