Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by sureshs, Sep 6, 2012.
Federer has a gold and silver medal while Nadal has a gold.
Fed at 31 > Sampras at 29.
He will also get the brass and tin medals in Rio in singles and doubles.
slow surface skew/10. Nadal only has a couple real wins over Fed. Wimby '08 being one of them.
The amusing thing about the discussion of Federer's 2012 level are his results are the norm historically for a number one player... He won a major, was a semi-finalist at two others, he racked up a stack of Master's 1000 level tournaments.
In fact, in three - or half - of Sampras's years where he was the year end #1 he did worse than 2012 Federer in the majors.
1990: Edberg won 1 and had 1 final but bombed out otherwise (2 x first round losses) Fed wins
1991: Becker by a nose > 1 win, 1 final but a 3rd round at USO close call
1992: Courier did better, winning 2 majors
1993: Pete won 2, Courier won 1 and runner up at 2 <good year for both > > Pete was year end #1
1994: Pete won 2, no-one else came close to Federer's 2012 results > > Pete was year end #1
1995: Pete won 2, no-one else came close to Federer's 2012 results > > Pete was year end #1
1996: no-one else came close to Federer's 2012 results Fed wins > > Pete was year end #1
1997: no-one else came close to Federer's 2012 results Fed wins > > Pete was year end #1
1998: Moya and Pete > 1 win, 1 semi each.. Federer still way ahead Fed wins > > Pete was year end #1
1999: Agassi > 2 wins.. clear ahead of 2012 Fed
2000: Pete > 1 win, 1 final... close call
2001: No-one close to 2012 Federer Fed wins
2002: Hewitt > 1 win, 1 semi. 2012 Federer still ahead Fed wins
2003: Agassi > 1 win, 1 semi 2012 Federer ahead (behind 2003 version of himself) win
Not sure if this indicated anything by way of strong/weak competition/era but it shows how much the tennis world has come to expect a sole player to be the clear owner of the year.
Personally, I think you have to expect more out of the top player in the world these days because of how homogenized conditions have become along with play..
Its not nearly as the task IMO to win 3 slams in a single year now.. We have already had 3 guys do it in just the last 5 years where as before that, we didn't have it for nearly two decades
Different times.. Different eras
All GOAT talk aside, this is what really matters. I find that I don't watch that much tennis unless Fed's on court. The sport is on the verge of becoming painfully one dimensional. Without Fed, only PEDs or an infusion of NFL cornerbacks and NBA point guards can save tennis.
One can also be banned and join under a new name, that would increase how long they've been here too. And with your comment before this one, am going to take a guess that you're probably one of them.
I took one semester of Psychology and never studied this. It was all about Freud and personality types. But that was a long time ago.
*reads the OP*
Just watch his matches through a kaleidoscope.
I agree totally. People thought Federer's 3 major years were amazing.. I doubt many would have predicted that it would be followed so closely by two other people
It makes you realise how special an effort it was for Wilander back in '88. He doesn't get nearly enough kudos for it imo.
This is actually a very reasonable posting by yours - you finally grew up concerning federer!
I partly agree with you
Friendly thread bump ..
is he still the current GOAT ?
I agree with Rod Laver: Federer is greatest player in his generation
And I'm not sure we can call him greatest of all time.
I'm not sure if we can include Nadal in "his generation" though...
Nadal is lucky he never faced this Cilic. Nadal needs to be "looked at" differently, too.
Ah, it's this thread...
Separate names with a comma.