Fed explains why he skipped the clay court season

[Pheasant]

I think it’s because cherry-picked stats, when they are misrepresented on top of that, tell us so.

Aha! I get it now. I think that I can provide an example of what you are talking about. In 2006, Federer suffered a straight-set loss to #21 Andy Murray. However, in 2015, Nadal was 1-1 against Murray, who was ranked inside the top 3 both times that they played. I.e, 2015 Nadal was 1-1 vs peak Murray whereas 2006 Federer was 0-1 against a far crummier version of Murray. Ergo, 2015 Nadal absolutely destroys 2006 Federer. It isn’t even close.

The gist of it I get is, he played at an identical level but didn’t win slams thanks to peak Djokovic. Nowhere is the 2 set choke vs Tsonga mentioned at all.

Fed’s age 30 season is somehow near his peak. What an insane claim by these people(not you of course). Speaking of age-30 seasons, how did they go for Nadal, Sampras, Djokovic, Lendl, McEnroe, Wilander, Becker,Edberg, and Murray? Those all time greats combined for 0 slams during their age 30 seasons. And lastly, from 2010-2012, Berdych was 4-3 vs Federer, which includes 2-0 in slam play. 2011 was the worst of that 3 year span, yet Fed gets taken down by Berdych. The next thing we will hear is how peak Berdych destroys peak Federer. After all, Berdych beat peak Fed from 2010-2012. And he did it on Fed’s best surface with relative ease. And since Nadal beat Berdych, who beat peak Fed in the same tournament(2010 Wimby), we can deduce that Nadal’s career on grass destroys Fed’s. This isn’t anymore far-fetched than 2011 Fed being on par with 2007 Fed.

 

[mike danny]

Aha! I get it now. I think that I can provide an example of what you are talking about. In 2006, Federer suffered a straight-set loss to #21 Andy Murray. However, in 2015, Nadal was 1-1 against Murray, who was ranked inside the top 3 both times that they played. I.e, 2015 Nadal was 1-1 vs peak Murray whereas 2006 Federer was 0-1 against a far crummier version of Murray. Ergo, 2015 Nadal absolutely destroys 2006 Federer. It isn’t even close.




Fed’s age 30 season is somehow near his peak. What an insane claim by these people(not you of course). Speaking of age-30 seasons, how did they go for Nadal, Sampras, Djokovic, Lendl, McEnroe, Wilander, Becker,Edberg, and Murray? Those all time greats combined for 0 slams during their age 30 seasons. And lastly, from 2010-2012, Berdych was 4-3 vs Federer, which includes 2-0 in slam play. 2011 was the worst of that 3 year span, yet Fed gets taken down by Berdych. The next thing we will hear is how peak Berdych destroys peak Federer. After all, Berdych beat peak Fed from 2010-2012. And he did it on Fed’s best surface with relative ease. And since Nadal beat Berdych, who beat peak Fed in the same tournament(2010 Wimby), we can deduce that Nadal’s career on grass destroys Fed’s. This isn’t anymore far-fetched than 2011 Fed being on par with 2007 Fed.

None of the Big 3 won slams in the season they turned 30, which is no coincidence.

What's interesting though is that the weak era king, Federer, had the best 30 season among the Big 3.

 

[Pheasant]

None of the Big 3 won slams in the season they turned 30, which is no coincidence.

What's interesting though is that the weak era king, Federer, had the best 30 season among the Big 3.

I guess I never thought of that last statement. But it is spot-on.

What is going to be interesting is to see how Djokovic from his age 30 season and later will do against these other guys in their 20s. If some of the crazy Djoker fans are correct in that being age 30+ is no disadvantage, then 30+ year old Djoker should absolutely destroy these younger players. After all, guys like Kyrgios, Thiem, and Zverev aren’t even all-time greats. They should expect peak 30+ year old Djoker to go undefeated against this group.

 

[RS]

None of the Big 3 won slams in the season they turned 30, which is no coincidence.

What's interesting though is that the weak era king, Federer, had the best 30 season among the Big 3.

But he was worse at a younger age.
Nadal was better at 16-22
Federer will be better for most of the post 27 career.
Nadal has won slams and is number 1 and his feat is maybe more impressive due to rising to accent at a younger age 18 and hitting his Prime in 2007 aged 20. Federer didn’t rise to his big accent till 2003 aged 21 and didn’t hit his Prime until 2004 aged 22.
Roddick,Hewitt and co were not weak.
Just weaker than the Big 4 in terms of whole career achievements
It is relative