D
For me 9-1 10-0 8-2 8-2 or 35-58-2
10-0
8-2
8-2
So most of the slams won by Djokovic and Nadal are post peak?
Very good, so the goat will come when a junior wins the Juniors GSAll of them are, actually. As we know, younger is always better. It follows that players are in decline from the moment that they are born. Ergo, every tennis match ever played is contested between two post-peak, post-prime, post-retirement, and in fact post-death players.
Very good, so the goat will come when a junior wins the Juniors GS
It's not that simple. If you give 2012 USO Fed Sandgren in the quarters instead of Berdych, then he survives his bad day and could win the tournament. Similarly, if you give 2013 Fed a physically diminished Nishikori and Pouille instead of Tsonga and Murray, his chances of winning the tournament, again, increase.I feel like it's right there for you to see that the sky is blue but you are still arguing that it's green. Lol. It doesn't matter what the reason is. Federer was losing to guys that Djokovic in his 30s wouldn't be losing to, which is the main reason why Djokovic won more Slams in his 30s.
Federer in his 20's would not lose to the guys Djokovic lost, but I'm sure you will not concede to that.Well Djokovic won Slams at the age when he was terrible. That's the point.
A discussion can be dead and buried and then you resurrect it after a week when everyone has moved on. Lol. You weren't talking about Djokovic/Federer in their 20s though were you? You were talking about Djokovic winning more in his 30s and somehow is refusing to accept the main reason why.Federer in his 20's would not lose to the guys Djokovic lost, but I'm sure you will not concede to that.
Federer having some bad losses doesn't mean he still wouldn't have won a dozen majors in his 30's.A discussion can be dead and buried and then you resurrect it after a week when everyone has moved on. Lol. You weren't talking about Djokovic/Federer in their 20s though were you? You were talking about Djokovic winning more in his 30s and somehow is refusing to accept the main reason why.
He obviously wouldn't have when he's losing to Seppi, Stakhovsky, Millman, Robredo, Gulbis, etc.Federer having some bad losses doesn't mean he still wouldn't have won a dozen majors in his 30's.
And besides, might as well use Djoko's 2017-mid 2018 poor losses as well if you'll ignore 2013/2016.
USO 2011, AO 2012, Wimb 2012, Wimb 2014, Wimb 2015, USO 2015, AO 2016, AO 2017, Wimb 2017, AO 2018 and Wimb 2019. Exactly 12.He obviously wouldn't have when he's losing to Seppi, Stakhovsky, Millman, Robredo, Gulbis, etc.
Why can't you accept 30+ Djokovic is better than Federer and stop these mental gymnastics? Lol.USO 2011, AO 2012, Wimb 2012, Wimb 2014, Wimb 2015, USO 2015, AO 2016, AO 2017, Wimb 2017, AO 2018 and Wimb 2019. Exactly 12.
Then there are others like AO 2013, AO 2014 and even one FO with a 2023 type draw.
Why can't you accept that Fed would've still won lots of slams even with these bad losses? I just listed them. He doesn't have to be as consistent as Djokovic for that to happen.Why can't you accept 30+ Djokovic is better than Federer and stop these mental gymnastics? Lol.
You're transporting Federer into the future for Slams that haven't even happened yet. Wimbledon 2014 ~ Wimbledon 2020 was canceled so that one is completely off the table. Then you're putting sure Slams win like Wimbledon 2012 in jeopardy when he most likely has to play some combination of Anderson/Nadal/Djokovic in 2018. AO 2013 ~ AO 2019, he's obviously not beating Djokovic; AO 2014 ~ AO 2020, I don't see him beating the combination of Thiem/Djokovic. So no, there is no 12 Slams here.Why can't you accept that Fed would've still won lots of slams even with these bad losses? I just listed them. He doesn't have to be as consistent as Djokovic for that to happen.
It’s a travesty how 30s fed only won 2 Wimbledon out of 5 finals yet djokovic won 4 in a row.
And?Then you're putting sure Slams win like Wimbledon 2012 in jeopardy when he most likely has to play some combination of Anderson/Nadal/Djokovic in 2018.
And....he might not survive. Lol. Especially if pulls Anderson in the 3rd round, where he scraped past Benneteau.And?
Lol. Fed is not drawing a defending Slam finalist and the number 8 seed in the third round, cmon man. Full stop. Anderson would have to be seeded in the 20’s at the very highest for that to happen.And....he might not survive. Lol. Especially if pulls Anderson in the 3rd round, where he scraped past Benneteau.
Obviously I meant if he had to face Djokovic's competition without Djokovic himself.You're transporting Federer into the future for Slams that haven't even happened yet. Wimbledon 2014 ~ Wimbledon 2020 was canceled so that one is completely off the table. Then you're putting sure Slams win like Wimbledon 2012 in jeopardy when he most likely has to play some combination of Anderson/Nadal/Djokovic in 2018. AO 2013 ~ AO 2019, he's obviously not beating Djokovic; AO 2014 ~ AO 2020, I don't see him beating the combination of Thiem/Djokovic. So no, there is no 12 Slams here.