Sampras-Bruguera 1993
Legend
And have easy GOAT status with no one in sight. Anytime I think of Fed and all the blown opportunities in situations he placed himself in and benefit of a weak/vaccuum era, he actually underachieved
Fed: A 20 time slam winner that should have won 30
- Thread starter Sampras-Bruguera 1993
- Start date
Underachiever ? I started watching tennis when Fed was a teen and let me tell you something he was only in the top 10 for 3 weeks when he turned 21 and then fell back out.
He was a insanely talented young player that some had doubts whether he would put all his tools together. Even for most that seen his talent before him being 21 didn’t expect the level he got too.
Also the reason Djokovic is joined with him is Djokovic is better mentality. If he wasn’t he wouldn’t be equal. It made up for Fed having a better serve and FH.
If Fed had Djokovic mental strength he would have 30 but if Djokovic had Fed serve and FH so would he.
No player is perfect but stop making out that talent or game is all tennis. It’s 50% level and 50% mental
He was a insanely talented young player that some had doubts whether he would put all his tools together. Even for most that seen his talent before him being 21 didn’t expect the level he got too.
Also the reason Djokovic is joined with him is Djokovic is better mentality. If he wasn’t he wouldn’t be equal. It made up for Fed having a better serve and FH.
If Fed had Djokovic mental strength he would have 30 but if Djokovic had Fed serve and FH so would he.
No player is perfect but stop making out that talent or game is all tennis. It’s 50% level and 50% mental
Sampras-Bruguera 1993
Legend
Yes. Djoker didn't put himself into even half the positions to win 30 slams like Fed and blew those opportunities under his optimal conditions where he was the favorite and blew it. . Djokovic maximixed his talents/results and then some. No one thought Djokovic was going to be GOAT. No one back in 2010. Most though Fed had it easy and maybe Nadal overtaking it due to his Clay domination. Fed hasn't won a USO since 2008 despite dominating it for years prior. .. All those Wimbledon's blown to Nadal/Djokovic who weren't the favorites. Blown AO's to Nadal who wasn't as good on Hards at a Wimbledon etc.
Djokovic was the favourite in all them grass meetings. Also the reason he put himself in them positions is because of his talented game but was stopped by say Djokovic who was mentally stronger.
Tennis is 50% game 50% mental and you are basing this thread on the fact that Fed’s game is better than Djokodal or he was in positions to win others but didn’t yet that is due to mental strength which the other 2 are better at.
Say what you want about 04-07 competiton or even when comparing peak Fed and Peak Djokovic. I think peak Djokovic is every bit as good as Peak Fed but even peak Djokovic would of messed up a slam or 2 04-07. Fed cleaned up and credit too him but he shouldn’t have 30 slams no way. If you are saying because of his mental strength then that is his weakness.
It’s like saying Djokovic should have 30 but his serve wasn’t as good as Isner. Mental is apart of a players overall game and Fed is the worst of the big 3 but then has the best serve and FH
RaulRamirez
Legend
1/2 of 30 = 15
Djokovic 20 Slams + 11 Slam finals = 31
...
So, because you -- and many others, hypothetically - didn't foresee this back in 2010...then what?
It doesn't count because it upset your worldview of tennis?
C'mon, man...
ghostofMecir
Legend
first post of yours I agree with. The handicap of playing with a one-handed BH in this era as well as an antiquated racket also held him back.
Daniel Andrade
Hall of Fame
BOLD
Tennisfan339
Professional
Not 30, but more than 20 I agree.
USO 2010 and 2011 he was NOT going to beat Nadal in final. 2010 100% sure he wasn't. 2011 maybe but unlinely.
AO2009 and Wimbledon 2008.. Honestly think he was outplayed even if it went to 5. Wimbledon08 would've been a holdup if he had the last word.
Wimbledon 2011 and 2018 were unfortunate but I doubt he was beating Djokovic in those 2 slams.
AO 2005, USO 2009 and Wimbledon 2019 were 3 big blown opportunities I agree. He would've handled Hewitt easily in 2005 and in the other 2 I mentionned, he was the better player but choked. Maybe also USO 2014 but it isn't like he was close, he lost in straight.
At the same time, there are a few counterexamples.
AO 2017... He could've lost to Nishikori or Wawrinka numerous times... And came back from 1-3 in the 5th set against Nadal.
RG 2009.... 2 sets down, 3-4 with 2 break points to save. If Haas broke it was over and he wouldn't even be in the goat discussion right now.
Wimbledon 2009... This looked exactly like Wimbledon 2019. In 2019 Federer was better... 2009 Roddick was better but choked.
And, the same case could be made for Nadal and Djokovic as well. They have both blown huge opportunities to win slams.
Djokovic... RG 2013, USO 2012, AO 2014, USO 2014, USO 2020
Nadal... AO 2017, AO 2012, AO 2014, RG 2021, Wimbledon 2018.
And they both won slams they probably shouldn't have won too...
USO 2010 and 2011 he was NOT going to beat Nadal in final. 2010 100% sure he wasn't. 2011 maybe but unlinely.
AO2009 and Wimbledon 2008.. Honestly think he was outplayed even if it went to 5. Wimbledon08 would've been a holdup if he had the last word.
Wimbledon 2011 and 2018 were unfortunate but I doubt he was beating Djokovic in those 2 slams.
AO 2005, USO 2009 and Wimbledon 2019 were 3 big blown opportunities I agree. He would've handled Hewitt easily in 2005 and in the other 2 I mentionned, he was the better player but choked. Maybe also USO 2014 but it isn't like he was close, he lost in straight.
At the same time, there are a few counterexamples.
AO 2017... He could've lost to Nishikori or Wawrinka numerous times... And came back from 1-3 in the 5th set against Nadal.
RG 2009.... 2 sets down, 3-4 with 2 break points to save. If Haas broke it was over and he wouldn't even be in the goat discussion right now.
Wimbledon 2009... This looked exactly like Wimbledon 2019. In 2019 Federer was better... 2009 Roddick was better but choked.
And, the same case could be made for Nadal and Djokovic as well. They have both blown huge opportunities to win slams.
Djokovic... RG 2013, USO 2012, AO 2014, USO 2014, USO 2020
Nadal... AO 2017, AO 2012, AO 2014, RG 2021, Wimbledon 2018.
And they both won slams they probably shouldn't have won too...
It also is pushing on him not winning due to being mentally weaker. Yet that is one if not the most important attribute.
People just see the style and game then think Fed should of won more but Djokovic being mentally stronger is apart of his game like Fed’s serve been better.
If Djokovic had Fed serve he’d win 30 slams
Fedinkum
Legend
A lazy one liner thinking it is a clever reply.
Drob
Hall of Fame
When did Roger change rackets?
arvind13
Professional
AO 2005 safin beat him fair and square. ppl say fed played that matchpoint at tiebreak badly. no he didn't. safin came up with an absolutely brilliant lob. federer was completely caught off guard. he didn't have time to run around that ball and hit a forehand. so he went for a tweener.
Roddickulous1
Semi-Pro
He should've won WIM 19 for sure. Should've definitely won AO 05 too.
USO 11, I'd rate it as 50/50, maybe a very slight edge to Fed. Ned wasn't nearly as good as the previous year and Feddy was in better form than 2010.
I'd have to give Wim 08, AO 09 and USO 09 a rewatch but all 3 were winnable from what I remember. I think Fed lost the former 2 mentally and was too stubborn in the JMDP match.
USO 11, I'd rate it as 50/50, maybe a very slight edge to Fed. Ned wasn't nearly as good as the previous year and Feddy was in better form than 2010.
I'd have to give Wim 08, AO 09 and USO 09 a rewatch but all 3 were winnable from what I remember. I think Fed lost the former 2 mentally and was too stubborn in the JMDP match.
ForehandRF
Legend
Fed's problem is that he lost more matches that he should have won than he won matches he should have lost 
The Fedfather
Legend
Underachieved sounds kind of ridiculous considering Federer's resume, but looking at some of the opportunities he let slip away, it would seem Roger's results don't fully reflect his potential. 10 moral Slams is a stretch though.
fluffyyelloballz
Rookie
I thought he himself said he overachieved due to career inflation era. Of course, he should not be a primary source in this assessment. I don’t see how he could have won 30. One of his rivals would have worked out the high topspin play to his backhand. He’d also have had the same issues with the very strong athletic base liners and his own mentality. Plus he proved to be quite stubborn at times with working on his backhand to deal with his issues there and his racket change. So maybe I agree with Mr. Federer actually.
Oval_Solid
Hall of Fame
he started as a serve and volley player his first few years as a pro once he played mostly backcourt tennis is when he started to dominate the tour
also the first few french finals he played against rafa he could have won if he pressed harder its like he gave up because it was too hard
also the first few french finals he played against rafa he could have won if he pressed harder its like he gave up because it was too hard
mike danny
Bionic Poster
And that would have only worked if that rival had been Nadal.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
The 2011 USO final would have been a 50/50 match. Not anywhere near unlikely
Djoks was clear favourite for all four of their Wimbledon matches
Picmun
Hall of Fame
Sense of humour failure...
Graf1stClass
Professional
We can say the same for Sampras, can we not? I will never comprehend how he could not capture at least one French Open major.
Sunny014
Legend
A trash clay courter like Sampras would never have won a French open in the modern era .... he failed in the 90s, he would do worse in the presence of Nadal who would run circles around him
Kralingen
Talk Tennis Guru
Graf1stClass
Professional
I don't want to upvote this but it is entirely right, because he never came close and it was way easier then..
How better is djoker at USO...lost 6 finals.
Yeah he was playing in his prime against a 6 year old federer. So obviously he will be favourite. But federer was in a great position to win 2014 and 19
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
Djokovic blew quite a few chances in 2012-2014. Not to mention underachieving between his first and second slam.
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
Not so much 2014, he was in a good position because Djokovic previously choked. 2019 obviously yes. And he probably would have won had they faced in 2011. But 2014 Federer's chances are overrated.
Nope 2014 he was playing great after reeling off 5 straight games. Djokovic took an MTO in 5th set and Federer rythm was lost post that.
csmoove899
Semi-Pro
Federer blew these matches:
2005 Australian Open SF vs Safin
2008 Wimbledon F vs Nadal
2009 Australian Open F vs Nadal
2009 US Open F vs Del Potro
2010 US Open SF vs Djokovic
2011 Wimbledon QF vs Tsonga
2011 US Open SF vs Djokovic
2014 Wimbledon F vs Djokovic
2018 Wimbledon QF vs Anderson
2019 Wimbledon F vs Djokovic
Could be at ~25 if he were more clutch.
2005 Australian Open SF vs Safin
2008 Wimbledon F vs Nadal
2009 Australian Open F vs Nadal
2009 US Open F vs Del Potro
2010 US Open SF vs Djokovic
2011 Wimbledon QF vs Tsonga
2011 US Open SF vs Djokovic
2014 Wimbledon F vs Djokovic
2018 Wimbledon QF vs Anderson
2019 Wimbledon F vs Djokovic
Could be at ~25 if he were more clutch.
TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
Then two more win 30 and it becomes trivial again.
TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
Unfortunately, we're at a point where a miss is quite obviously only as good as a mile, as the adage goes. In fact, quite bizarrely, it's actually worse. I recommend the Nadalian ethos of giving things the swerve when the outlook ain't so fresh. The 'what if's' become a little more subject to the id in that case, and the balance of emphatic wins to shameful brain-farts a little more acceptable. Otherwise your TWENTY triumphs might just get flushed down the proverbial sh;tter with a cistern full of failures.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Federer shouldn't have had to be immaculate though if the 90's dudes had been any good.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
martinezownsclay
Hall of Fame
You named the Australian Open 2005 twice, LOL!
martinezownsclay
Hall of Fame
2005 Australian Open- He did not blow that. He had a match point on serve and Safin played an excellent point to save it. It was a super high quality match that could have gone either way and he happened to come out the loser. He in no way choked.
2008 Wimbledon- No it was Nadal who blew that match in the 4th set for it to even go into an epic 5th. Nadal was in control of more of that match and the deserving winner.
2009 Australian- Again no. Nadal was in control more of the match.
2009 U.S Open- OK yes.
2010 U.S Open- He was never beating Nadal in the final that year anyway, so it is moot.
2011 Wimbledon QF- He wasn't winning the title this year by beating Djokovic and Nadal back to back regardless, so it is moot.
2011 U.S Open- Yes a possible chance, since he had a chance vs Nadal in the final this year.
2014 Wimbledon- No, again like the 2008 Wimbledon final vs Nadal, it is Djokovic who should have closed it out in 4 in fact.
2018 Wimbledon- He wasn't beating Djokovic in the final, especialy not in the form he was in here, so moot.
2019 Wimbledon- Yes.
So basically only 2009 U.S Open, 2019 Wimbledon, and maybe 2011 U.S Open, and the latter is iffy, are even that valid.
Similar threads
- Poll
