Fed has a chance to secure his legacy Sunday

[Pantera]

That's sort of true. W is tennis, so W record is what matters. Even today Becker is still considered one of the greats just based on Wimbledon. Pete is still considered the goat by some, just based on 7-0 in W finals on fast grass.

Wimbledon is not even the biggest slam to half the tour..FO is in latin america and southern europe!!

 

[Xavier G]

Fed's legacy is secure right now.
First to 20 Slams, 8 times Wimbledon champion, won all the Slams.
If he makes it 9 Wimbledons tomorrow and 21 Slams, it's only boosted even more.

 

[MichaelNadal]

You dont think that Nadal has also lost a fair bit as well? Fed probably served better than in 2008 and he had way more confidence but game wise I dont think either player was better, but then again I didnt see the whole match. Was impressed by fed hanging in rallies bug that is partly down to the new backhand but also i feel like Nadal is definitely a touch slower

Idk it''s scary how much determination Fed had
My boy is too nice these days. Pirate Rafa would have slayed.

 

[Towser83]

Idk it''s scary how much determination Fed had
My boy is too nice these days. Pirate Rafa would have slayed.

Fed got fed up (see what I did there?) With being nice so they swapped

Still a good run by Nadal, after the early loss years and at 33 you could forgive him for not bothering but hes still out there trying to find his best game for his current age

 

[KINGROGER]

That's why I think it was a means to an end. He couldn't beat Djok even playing the best version of his 2003-2009 tennis, so he had to just try whatever he could.

SABR gave him the confidence to get inside the court and really dictate the points, instead of just waiting to pounce. If not for these guys he would have won 30+ Slams being a lazy bum with a magic touch.

He beat Djokovic in 2012 playing his 2003-2007 style to a lesser level.

 

[Rosstour]

I don't think Fed avenges 2008 Wimbly simply due to the fact that he hasn't won it with last nights win.

Furthermore , you cannot triple dip. Expunging Fed's Wimbly 08/14/15 losses by winning '19 Wimbly? 3 for 1 deal?

He doesn't avenge the loss of a Wimbledon Final, but he avenged losing to Rafa last time they met at Wimbledon.

Obviously it's only a complete redemption if he wins it all, but solely for the purposes of gaining the mental advantage over Rafa...he has his revenge.

Now Fed has beaten Rafa at 2 of their last 3 meetings at Slams, on 2 different surfaces, both sites of his most humiliating defeats to Nadal. He now has the clear advantage in their matchup and should rightfully be the favorite in any match not played on clay.

 

[Day_Tripper]

Statistics only get you so far. Even were Djokovic and/or Nadal to pass the slam record I doubt either would be considered greater than Federer by the majority of tennis pundits. Djokovic and Nadal are truely great tennis players but they lack that undefinable magic that marks true genius. The majority of tennis fans recognise it even if they cant define it. This is in no small part why Federer always has the crowd on his side when playing Nadal or Djokovic. The difference between Federer vs Nadal/Djokovic for me is ultimately best summed up by the Arthur Schopenhauer quote....

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." ​

 

[beard]

If he does, he does. Ancient Man has made two GS SF and one F so far this year. We don't need to worry, just to enjoy and hope.

As usual, facts and Ann are not best friends...

 

[Third Serve]

Ah come on, you know that the GOAT debate will be settled at Basel.

It was already settled back when Federer won the inaugural Real Slam over Djokovic in 2009.

 

[weakera]

An awful lost of "what if's" and false premises here.

1. If "Rafa is coming," he must not have gotten that memo yesterday. Anyone besides ardent VB'ers can see that a 38 year old pretty blatantly exposed Nadal's age and his drastic decline in movement. Rafa (like Agassi and Fed) cannot defend balls his hard to his FH corner anymore. Fed's footwork and anticipation is better than Nadal, so he masks that deficiency better.

2. "had Rafa proceeded to upset Djoker in the Wimbh final, Rafa would have almost certainly surpassed Fed’s 20 slams."

But he didn't. And the manner in which he lost to Fed will leave a bitter taste in his mouth and ditch his confidence. His chances at the USO are slim, especially since he invariably gets "injured" that time of year.

3. Reaching 22 is unlikely for Rafa.

That's a massive understatement. His chances of reaching 22 are extremely remote. And in your treatise, you don't address that Fed could add to his slam count. Possibly as early as tomorrow.

When even someone as shy and polite as Stefan Edberg addresses Nadal's decline in movement, you know it's bad. He told the BBC, "I retired at 30 and Nadal is 33. He still plays amazing tennis, but he's a lot slower now than even 2017. Today Roger, I think, really exploited this, which is interesting since he's 5 years older than Rafa."

Finally, Fed doesn't have to do anything to "secure" his legacy. You act as if by some miracle he's passed in the slam race, his "legacy" becomes an afterthought. If Nadal retires with 18 total slams, is his legacy a poor one? Borg has 11 slams, he's a legend of the game.

Ironically there are a lot of false premises in here as well. This is another post overreacting to the Rafa loss because it was Federer on the other end of it. He's made 6 slam semis in a row and just ended a 17-match win streak. The list of players proven capable of exposing any flaws in Rafas game in a meaningful way with any regularity is two names long. He'll undoubtedly have more than a slim chance in bouncy NY and is at worst a top-three favorite, although in my opinion an easy top-two favorite.

This forum loves drama and overreaction. I am convinced that people would think more of Rafas outlook had he lost to Kyrgios/Querrey as opposed to yesterday, as little sense as that may make. Yesterday's result doesn't change the fact that Rafa has been "in" every slam for nearly 3 years. It says something special about Rafa when losing in the semis of Wimbledon can inspire this much pessimism regarding his future - why is losing yesterday so damning? He would have killed for b2b semi appearances on grass not long ago and no one would have believed it possible!

 

[icedevil0289]

I swear this happens every time fed makes a final also someone above said the public thought Ao 2017 was a fluke, how when he went on to beat nadal everytime they met that year?

 

[icedevil0289]

Wimbledon is not even the biggest slam to half the tour..FO is in latin america and southern europe!!

Omg please stop making stuff up.

 

[weakera]

Fed's legacy is secure right now.
First to 20 Slams, 8 times Wimbledon champion, won all the Slams.
If he makes it 9 Wimbledons tomorrow and 21 Slams, it's only boosted even more.

Everyones legacy is always in some state of fluidity. If a nextgen wins 30 slams it will impact everyone else's legacy in a sense.

 

[Pantera]

Omg please stop making stuff up.

That is fact actually. Ask any italian or spanish or argentinian or brazilian

 

[George Turner]

It's the match for GOAT until USO 2019, then Auz 2020, then FO 2020.

You catch my drift.

The field is THAT bad we will likely still be making threads like this in 2023.

AO 2017 was the match to secure the GOAT status. The final one before Dimitrov and the next gen took over.

Two and a half years later, with the big three having won all the majors since, we are indeed still making these threads.

 

[SamprasisGOAT]

I wasn't referring to you specifically but to a set of Sampras fans who hate Fed simply because he passed Sampras and for no other reason. As a Sampras fan myself, I think it's a stupid thing because the way I look at it, at least there was Fed to carry forward Sampras' legacy of grass GOAT-ing.

The way I look at it my friend is Sampras was the best of his era. Federer and Djokovic were the best of there eras. Borg and Lendl were the best of there eras. That’s basically the indisputable truth. Nadal is shady and has given many reasons to think he’s cheated in the past 15 years. I don’t think Djokovic or Federer have ever cheated. It’s just nadal. It’s there for everyone to see.

 

[Benjamin Rio]

I swear this happens every time fed makes a final also someone above said the public thought Ao 2017 was a fluke, how when he went on to beat nadal everytime they met that year?

The only fluke at the AO 17 was an out of form Novak.

 

[Benjamin Rio]

Ironically there are a lot of false premises in here as well. This is another post overreacting to the Rafa loss because it was Federer on the other end of it. He's made 6 slam semis in a row and just ended a 17-match win streak. The list of players proven capable of exposing any flaws in Rafas game in a meaningful way with any regularity is two names long. He'll undoubtedly have more than a slim chance in bouncy NY and is at worst a top-three favorite, although in my opinion an easy top-two favorite.

This forum loves drama and overreaction. I am convinced that people would think more of Rafas outlook had he lost to Kyrgios/Querrey as opposed to yesterday, as little sense as that may make. Yesterday's result doesn't change the fact that Rafa has been "in" every slam for nearly 3 years. It says something special about Rafa when losing in the semis of Wimbledon can inspire this much pessimism regarding his future - why is losing yesterday so damning? He would have killed for b2b semi appearances on grass not long ago and no one would have believed it possible!

It's not awful to lose in SF. But i don't think he would have killed to be in the SF to be fair.

The thing that's terrible for Fed. Nadal beat him at the FO and won the tournament. Fed won yesterday and will probably not win the tournamenent

 

[weakera]

It's not awful to lose in SF. But i don't think he would have killed to be in the SF to be fair.

The thing that's terrible for Fed. Nadal beat him at the FO and won the tournament. Fed won yesterday and will probably not win the tournamenent

Roger can still win. And I only mean Bull would have killed for b2b semis in the Darcis-Rosol days. In the grand scheme of things, he's playing well everywhere.

 

[SeeItHitIt]

With 20 big ones, I’d say his legacy is kind of OK. Does Laver ave a legacy? How about Borg, Connors, JMac?

I hope Fed wins tomorrow but his legacy was cemented long ago.

 

[vex]

Nadal's loss to Djoko and Fed shows that his chances to add off-clay slams are non-existent.

He could beat Fed off grass and Djoker could take a dip/injury

 

[vex]

Oh please. Did you watch the match?

He was cool as a cucumber the entire time and so aggressive and clean.

Rafa, 4-5 years his junior, looked like the old guy out there.

Ok

 

[AceSalvo]

He could beat Fed off grass and Djoker could take a dip/injury

Nadal could slip on a fish in the fishing boat he is currently at and bang that knee.

See, its all possible.

 

[-NN-]

His legacy is legendary as it is, especially if looking beyond mere numbers and stats. How much he adapted his game over the years to stay competitive in conditions quite different than the ones that formed him as a player for example.

If you're talking about the slam count, Djokodal will suprass that regardless of whether he wins on Sunday or not. Young players are terrible beyond any imagination.

This is huge and perhaps should be discussed more. The game moved away gradually from Fed's wheelhouse year after year after year whilst being far older than his ATG rivals for whom the conditions were becoming more and more suitable. It's massive. In a crude and scathing way one could say Federer adapted to conditions and the conditions adapted to his two great rivals.

 

[Djokovic_is_the_best#1]

These legacy threads are all a bit of hyperbole really. Federer's legacy is secure and always will be, but even more than that we talk about these things like there's a finality associated with them when there really isn't. A sort of recency bias if you will. Because even if Federer did win tomorrow there will likely be more huge matches upcoming (assuming he keeps playing for the purposes of this argument) after Nadal wins a 19th slam or Djokovic wins a 16th,17th 18th.... and Fedalovic go H2H again, and everyone says the exact same things about how Federer "needs" to win a match in 2023 at the age of 41 or 42 to secure his legacy.

It won't stop until they all retire, but it really shouldn't be on a 37 year old to have to keep winning these matches. I don't care if you think he's the GOAT or not. It's downright embarrassing of the younger generations not to mention extremely unfair to Federer to keep expecting him to win these matches where he's the obvious underdog, and then take his "crown" away just because a bunch of young gen mugs can't stop Djoker and Nadal from winning more slams than him.

That is true. However, it’s the reality. It appears the only way Federer can protect his legacy is by doing it himself. He can’t rely on the next generation as they not up to it! Djokovic has a great chance to maybe catch feds record, and fed himself at nearly 38 maybe his biggest obstacle to doing it! Nadal himself is closer to fed but he struggles to win off clay, unlike Djokovic. Djoko is favourite at 3 of the 4 slams and if he keeps winning them, he’ll catch both. It appears only Nadal and Federer can have a chance to stop him.

It’s the way it is. It maybe tough on fed! However, let’s not forget that Federer capitalised in his early career by racking the slams up before Nadal and djoko got out there teenage years and started to become a real force off clay. So it evens out in a way!

 

[mr tonyz]

t’s the way it is. It maybe tough on fed! However, let’s not forget that Federer capitalised in his early career by racking the slams up before Nadal and djoko got out there teenage years and started to become a real force off clay. So it evens out in a way!

Again Fed gets blamed for winning slams , yeah it goes both ways alright. Blame DjokerDal that they weren't born 5/6 years earlier respectively just as you blame Fed for being the one to win by besting whomever was in his way prior to the arrival of DjokerDal.

I'm glad DjokerDal exist as if they didn't , Fed's entire career would have just been a fluke. DjokerDal coming in after Fed retired would've been so much worse. I doubt Fed would have been granted any hypothetical slams over them if this was the case.

The thing with this WeakEra nonsense is that Fed was in his peak without DjokerDal being in their peak. So Fed was never @ full strength vs his main rivals whereas his main rivals were. There's pros & cons to both sides of the argument whichever way you look @ it.

Fed has Djokerdal from 08-11 in his 04-07 years . Of course he wouldn't win 11 slams as he did. But then 08-11 (in this reality) DjokerDal would have same age Fed in their way. All those Wimbly's in 14/15 & USO 15 & AO 16 will be in question also.

Plus with Fed's longevity Nadal would be toast if Fed can beat him in slams @ this stage of his career with a 5 year age gap in their 30's. Nadal would have an even more slim chance . Djoker , we'll have to see if he can still be a slam contender into his late 30s. If he does , then Fed would have truly found his equal , with Nadal a distant third.

 

[undecided]

I think his team needed a better game plan but who I am to say. haha. he never came to net and never hit drop shots. stood back like he was facing kyrgios on return of serve. he didn't pull the trigger on any of the long rallies like he normally does. I really think a lot of it was nerves and he didn't rise to the occasion and fed did.

At 3-4 1st set Rafa painted the lines for 5-6 consecutive times, each one of those shots should have created an error or been a straight winner. Yet, Fed chipped/half volleyed them back and eventually won the point. Rafa knew at that point he was not going to win the match.

 

[AceSalvo]

Again Fed gets blamed for winning slams

Anti-FedHeads dont want to count Fed's earlier slams but are perfectly ok to include slams post 2014. 5 years of a no-nothing Next Gens.

Obviously hypocritical.

 

[VacationTennis]

The odds were against him with Rafa, but he's bringing a new level to Wimbledon this year. Why wouldn't he be able to take that confident win and bring that level to joker?

 

[James695]

You're talking about the media and general perception, that's one thing. Personal opinion is quite another, tennis isn't exact science where numbers and stats are the only thing that matters.

I was never a fan of Sampras but nobody really surpassed him in my eyes. In terms of stats sure but those depend on a variety of factors. The guy was the most deadly grasscourt player and the best all-court player I've ever seen, not to mention a pioneer of the "peaking for slams" approach upon which the big 3 built their legacies.

Or to take Borg for example, you can't measure in mere numbers a guy who won 5 Wimbledons in a row amidst a Nadal-like CC dominance in an era when glass and clay were far more different and the break between FO and Wimbledon was shorter. Or say Lendl's valiant attempts at coveted Wimbledon crown where he even morphed into a serve and volleyer because it was simply how you had to play to have a shot (unless you were a freak like Agassi).

Sampras is the best “all court player” ever yet couldn’t get to a french open final even without a clay GOAT to stop him.

LOL!

 

[James695]

Pretty much all these points were implied in my analysis and unnecessary to even say. Except for Rafa’s loss affecting his confidence. I doubt that. He won’t give up. Time and time again he bounces back. Also, even with reduced movement he can beat anyone but Djokovic and Fed (off clay). If Djoker gets injured Rafa will bag some AOs/USOs just like that cakewalk USO’17

Over the last five years how many times has it been Novak knocking Nadal out of the US and Australian Opens. Once at AO19! Novak has not been the one stopping Nadal winning all these hardcourt titles. The field have been stopping him.

 

[zagor]

Sampras is the best “all court player” ever yet couldn’t get to a french open final even without a clay GOAT to stop him.

LOL!

I said best all-court player, not best all-surface player.

Oh and while 90s CC field didn't have a Nadal-like figure it was quite deep.

 

[mr tonyz]

At 3-4 1st set Rafa painted the lines for 5-6 consecutive times, each one of those shots should have created an error or been a straight winner. Yet, Fed chipped/half volleyed them back and eventually won the point. Rafa knew at that point he was not going to win the match.

For me it was how easy Fed was breaking out of the lefty cc fh/1hbh pattern + the ease @ which Fed was hanging in those 10+ shot baseline rallies. Not only was Fed winning most of the longer rallies , but it was the way in which he was winning them. It wasn't as though they were killing him , he was winning them in a way you'd think DjokerDal would. Winning a long baseline rally & ready to go 4-5 sets of it. This would've gotten into Nadal's head , losing those types of points.

Credit to Nad's , he did end up with 10 aces to Fed's 14 , which was another funny thing.

Fed , i can hang with you from the baseline!

Nad's , yeah? Well you won't out-ace me by much , my serve has become a weapon no?

 

[James695]

Omg please stop making stuff up.

He is talking nonsense lol.

Nadal has repeatedly said Wimbledon was the tournament he dreamed of winning as a child. Not the french.

 

[Benben245]

I want to see Federer throw a lot of junk at Djoker, slices to bring him in, flat down the line backhands and more frequent drop shots than against Nadal. I don't recall federer coming over the top of his backhand in 2014 against Djoker, thoughts on this?

 

[yokied]

AO2017 was great for his fans, but for commentators and the general public, it might have been seen as a fluke, with Rafa's straight-sets win at RG being the regression to the norm. With this win against Rafa on the biggest stage, the site of his worst-ever loss to Nadal, or anyone...that's out the window ... If he wins this title, it was all worth it. All the lean years, the retooling, the SABR, the time away...if he wins one more match, he will re-write the history of the Big 3 ... And if we think he has no chance, we're fooling ourselves. He is arguably a stronger player than the one who lost 3 Slam Finals to Djok in 2014-15. And Novak has slipped a bit from that unstoppable level. Roger took Novak to 5 in 2014, and the 4-setters in 2015 were all close. I think Djokovic is anything but comfortable right now.

Good posting ITT and I want to believe Roger can pull it off but I think you're under appreciating Novak a little. He has a lot of winning experience dealing with hostile crowds. He finds another level usually, and if the crowd is not helping to motivate him, he can find a way to lift by getting angry with himself. No doubt Novak is uncomfortable and it may go 5 but Novak's level over the last year+, especially in slams, puts him clear favourite IMHO.

I also think AO17 is under appreciated. That match is the only reason why Federer is even in the final and still considered a legitimate contender. If he hadn't addressed the Nadal situation, starting at AO17, there is just no way he would be in this final Vs Djokovic.

 

[TennisFan3]

If you're talking about the slam count, Djokodal will suprass that regardless of whether he wins on Sunday or not. Young players are terrible beyond any imagination.

I'd say Djoko and not Nadal. Nadal isn't the favorite anywhere except on RG. And in 2020 and beyond, I don't believe he will win more RGs because of the physicality required.

Rafa will likely end up with 18-19 slams and retire. Djokovic will almost certainly surpass that barring a career ending unfortunate injury.

 

[GabeT]

That's sort of true. W is tennis, so W record is what matters. Even today Becker is still considered one of the greats just based on Wimbledon. Pete is still considered the goat by some, just based on 7-0 in W finals on fast grass.

Wimbledon is the most prestigious slam but that extra prestige has little practical value. No one would trade 5 slams without Wimbledon for four slams with it. And no one thinks Nole is greater than Nadal just because he has more W titles. At the end of the day Wimbledon is worth the same as every other slam.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

I'd say Djoko and not Nadal. Nadal isn't the favorite anywhere except on RG. And in 2020 and beyond, I don't believe he will win more RGs because of the physicality required.

Rafa will likely end up with 18-19 slams and retire. Djokovic will almost certainly surpass that barring a career ending unfortunate injury.

I wouldn't even mind that honestly from a completeness POV in the sense that Djoko too GOATs on HC, to a lesser extent on grass but already one of its great champions while also being good on clay. He has also won WTF many times, been year ending no.1 etc. His resume resembles Fed much more than Nadal. For sort of the same reasons, he is already my second favourite after Fed so I'd prefer to see him rather than Nadal pass Fed though it's not up to me anyway.

 

[vex]

Over the last five years how many times has it been Novak knocking Nadal out of the US and Australian Opens. Once at AO19! Novak has not been the one stopping Nadal winning all these hardcourt titles. The field have been stopping him.

He won USO'17. Fed stopped him at AO'17. Djoker denied him at AO'19. Made the SF of USO'18 before having to retire. He would win 1-2 without Djoker.

 

[Krish0608]

No. Federer loses tomorrow its very likely Nadal wins USO and FO and gets to 20 by this time next year. Or Djokovic is on 19 by this time next year with Nadal.

Federer legacy is on the line tomorrow as OP says

Bro, quit or with your insane threads and posts. You're staying to sound ridiculous now.

 

[Sentinel]

- Djokovic remains a dark horse threat. But 5 slams is a lot. Heck, 4 slams is asking a lot at Djoker’s age even considering his present dominance. If Fed pushes it to 21 on Sunday I think it’s over.

IMO Both Nadal and Djoko will surpass Fed's 20. However, i think that before Nadal can do so, Djokovic will. So Nadal will really be trying for #2 position again.

I doubt that he will ever have the #1 position as far as slam count goes. By 2020, Nole should be crossing 20.

 

[Sentinel]

Bro, quit or with your insane threads and posts. You're starting to sound ridiculous now.

Has always sounding ridiculous from Day 1.

 

[Sentinel]

“Djokodal” is one person now then?

He means both will surpass it.

 

[vex]

IMO Both Nadal and Djoko will surpass Fed's 20. However, i think that before Nadal can do so, Djokovic will. So Nadal will really be trying for #2 position again.

I doubt that he will ever have the #1 position as far as slam count goes. By 2020, Nole should be crossing 20.

Personally, I don't think Novak gets to 20 unless he wins tomorrow. Can't let opportunities slide by

 

[Sentinel]

Personally, I don't think Novak gets to 20 unless he wins tomorrow. Can't let opportunities slide by

Novak has WO 19 then USO and then AO 20.
So that's three slams.
Next FO goes to Nadal most likely.
Then again Nole can have USO 2020.
Cannot be sure of WO 2020, though.

 

[James695]

He won USO'17. Fed stopped him at AO'17. Djoker denied him at AO'19. Made the SF of USO'18 before having to retire. He would win 1-2 without Djoker.

So as I said Novak has stopped him ONCE in hardcourt slams in the last five and a half years lol.

Not sure how without Novak he would have won all these slams.

 

[Biggest3]

So as I said Novak has stopped him ONCE in hardcourt slams in the last five and a half years lol.

Not sure how without Novak he would have won all these slams.

I mean who in the WB18 and AO19 tournaments would have beaten Nadal if you exclude Djokovic?That's 2 Slams right there.For Nadal things are pretty simple from now on.As long as he makes deep runs there is a slight chance that Djokovic can slip at least once in the next 2 years and then he can ''steal'' 1 or 2 more slams.

 

[Pantera]

Bro, quit or with your insane threads and posts. You're staying to sound ridiculous now.

Not so ridiculous now eh

 

[vex]

Welp, it was a good thread while it lasted, thanks for coming out


Shoutout to Fed, he played fantastic