While the reverse is true for Fed
you must be kidding.
I could trash his silly arguments at about 10% of my capacity.
I prefer to make my posts closer to reality, but if I want, I could easily turn the tables on him with reverse cherry-picking . This without even having to look up 100s of stats like he has to (I can do it just from memory). See my last few posts for what I can do if I really wanted to do this.
Enough with the prime/non-prime excuses. Federer not only started to lose against Djokovic in 2015 at age 34.All it means is that Federer was good enough to reach important far more often, even when well past his prime.
Of course the weaker fields in 2015, early 2016 also helped.
oh and a YEC semi is just as important as a Masters final btw points-wise. Both give 400 points.
Hahaha peak 26 years old Djokovic of 2013 was not the same, yeah sure. 2013 would have been one of Djokovic's best years if not for Nadal. In effect, Djokovic would have won 3 Grand Slams plus the ATP finals in 2013, but Nadal stopped him both at Roland Garros and the US Open.
In some matches yes.
Either he was peak all the time or not at all. Double standards cannot apply.
So Djokovic wasn't at his best at the 2012 Australian Open then?
He was pushed several times that tournament by guys like Murray and old man waddling "midget" Hewitt.
Murray is good.So Djokovic wasn't at his best at the 2012 Australian Open then?
Why was he nearly beaten by weak era midget 5'4" Hewitt at the Olympics then?!?!?! He was ranked outside the top 200 at the time! No excuses.
He was peak in 1 slam. UO.
Going by the match I posted 2005 Hewitt would have won.
Why did Djokovic struggle with a barely walking Hewitt then? Is Djokovic not that great?!?!?!Hewitt is great, in 15 slam matches against top-20 ranked Big3 he never won more than 1 set.
If this is not a proof that peak Hewitt destroys them I don't know what it is.
I’d agree if it weren’t for the fact that Fed’s so called peak form in 2014-2016 was exposed everytime he met Djokovic over BO5.
Why did he struggle with Simon, Anderson, Bellucci, etc.?
He must not be that great then, huh? Going by your logic of course...
Hewitt is great, in 15 slam matches against top-20 ranked Big3 he never won more than 1 set.
If this is not a proof that peak Hewitt destroys them I don't know what it is.
Djokovic/Nadal/Murray and Hewitt never met at their peaks.
you must be kidding.
I could trash his silly arguments at about 10% of my capacity.
I prefer to make my posts closer to reality, but if I want, I could easily turn the tables on him with reverse cherry-picking . This without even having to look up 100s of stats like he has to (I can do it just from memory). See my last few posts for what I can do if I really wanted to do this.
Don't just look at one stat and ignore the rest.
People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones
Djokovic never struggled with Hewitt. In fact he owned Hewitt straight from the kindergarten. Maybe he struggled in the world of Dumbratha, but in the real world no he never did.
oh please, just because you are bitter at being proven wrong multiple times, you want to go the delusional route ?
Still smarting over the lesson of Del potro RG 09 vs Stan RG 15 ? Get over it.
Federer had never lost 4 straight slam matches to Djokovic before 2014-2016. so yeah, age has everything to do with it.
AO: Ferrer >HewittPrize money:
Ferrer $31,306,836
Hewitt $20,890,000
Ferrer is the better man because he earned more with the game.
First serve points won and hold percentage were higher in 2007 than in 2015. So much for 2015 Djokovic's mythical peak serve.
