WeekendTennisHack
Hall of Fame
You don't think Djokovic became prime after winning AO08? Or are you admitting it was a fluke because Fed was sick?
'Djokovic playing the best tennis of his life' - analysis
- Thread starter ABCD
- Start date
You don't think Djokovic became prime after winning AO08? Or are you admitting it was a fluke because Fed was sick?
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
When did djoker start dominating fed? How old was he then?
Holmes
Hall of Fame
At his peak, per his analysis.
Holmes
Hall of Fame
Was PETE in his prime when he won the USO in 1990?
Eren
Professional
Eren
Professional
Okay, maybe this helps. He lost to a dude who only played his 4th tournament on grass. How about that?
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Never take a players analysis. It always biased.
Holmes
Hall of Fame
Clearly Roger is more biased than the hard working posters of Talktennis who have no other interest than the simple desire to desperately cling to the last, dying vestiges of status they once held when he was at the top of the mountain. One wonders what were the rest of us thinking.
Yea this. Lets say you had 2 x Alcaraz level guys since 2020, mid 30s djokovic still probably wins a couple slams at AO/W but no way does he bag 2 RG and 7 slams in total, most of them with very little resistance.
0/10 troll, the whole fed peaked in 2015 shtick was tired 4-5 years ago and you’re still carrying on
Holmes
Hall of Fame
In 2021 he said he was more powerful, more complete, more experienced in 2017 than 20060/10 troll, the whole fed peaked in 2015 shtick was tired 4-5 years ago and you’re still carrying on
WeekendTennisHack
Hall of Fame
Not peak, but prime sure. Djokovic had just made the final of USO07, then goes on to win the next slam beating the GOAT along the way. Clear indicator of prime.
Holmes
Hall of Fame
Don't be silly, Sampras was not in his prime in 1990, nor was Novak in 2008. He clearly struggled with motivation and the basics of technique on strokes as fundamental as his serve (remember the Todd Martin phase?). He didn't hit his prime until 2011.
yet chose 2006 to winIn 2021 he said he was more powerful, more complete, more experienced in 2017 than 2006
Holmes
Hall of Fame
Which given he said the game was slower in 2006, makes sense.yet chose 2006 to win
WeekendTennisHack
Hall of Fame
When you make two consecutive slam finals you are in your prime. In any case, even if you say he hit his prime in 2011, from 2012-2014 he could only win 1 slam per year because the competition was too strong. Then when the competition got weak, he was able to begin the vulture phase of his career.
Holmes
Hall of Fame
"Only" winning 1 slam per year against prime big 3 is less impressive than something else that someone else did presumably. What would that be?
WeekendTennisHack
Hall of Fame
He could only start winning more when competition weakened. At his best, the best of post-prime Federer got match points on him in 2/3 slams. Peak Fed with no mono would annihilate him.
Holmes
Hall of Fame
So you believe that 3 slams per year won during the prestigious 03-10 years when Roddick and Hewitt tore through opposition like knives through jelly in their ruthless quests to collect high titles such as Houston and Vegas is more impressive than 1 per year in the watered down 2011-19 era when "all-time greats" Djokovic, Federer, and Nadal and "triple slam champions" Murray and Wawrinka cat fought for some measly Slam titles. While I disagree, I admit to the difficulties latent in the discussion.
Last edited:
WeekendTennisHack
Hall of Fame
Roddick owns Djokovic 5-4.
Holmes
Hall of Fame
My only possible response to the legions of brilliant posters arrayed against me.
Similar threads
