FEDAL-Try to be Objective

B

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
Lew II said:
Says the person who has Federer in his profile pic and swears to people who don't rate Fed's opponents highly :-D
Click to expand...

says the person who is cherry picking numbers and creates random metrics that would promote the results of one player and demote the results of another 2 players
 
abmk

abmk

Bionic Poster
Lew II said:
Says the person who has Federer in his profile pic and swears to people who don't rate Fed's opponents highly :-D
Click to expand...

LOL, so trollLew has nothing on this part. :-D :-D :-D :-D
Why do you come back again and again to be schooled?

abmk said:
Fed played cr*p in RG 08 final. And so did Nadal in AO 19 final.
Roddick played great in Wim 04 and Wim 09 final

I also put Thiem of RG 2019 as 6.5/10 - above Fed of RG 08 final and Nadal of AO 19 final
Similarly for Thiem of AO 2020 final - 7/10 - above Fed of RG 08 final and Nadal of AO 19 final

I also put Roddick of Wim 05 final as 5/10.

It has nothing specific to do with Roddick.
Click to expand...

To address your point, I have the profile pic of my favorite player. So? Burns you? Too bad, apply some burnol.

I only criticize badly when someone is spewing BS propaganda or so wrong that its so far out of the zone of reality.
I don't criticize someone for saying Roddick did not play well in WIm 05 or Hewitt in USO 04 final - because they didn't.

This applies not only to fed, but in general. If someone says djokovic played well in RG 2020 final, I'll call that out too.

Considering you don't watch sh*t and only sit&cherrypick stats that favor your agenda, its rich coming a hack like you.
 
TearTheRoofOff

TearTheRoofOff

G.O.A.T.
Lew II said:
LOL you seriously gave Roddick a 9.5 and a 9 rating, and to Federer and Nadal a 3.5 and a 4.5 rating...
Click to expand...
I assume they based it on their interpretation of the respective players' performances and not their names. You should try it sometime.

Oh and thanks @abmk for digging up this turd of a thread... Just LOL at Gore passive-aggressively pretending to be impartial and 'objective', whilst emphasizing in brackets exclusively <22yo and >29yo opponent ages for Fed and exclusively >22yo and <30yo opponent ages for Nadal. Absolutely shagged effort.
 
BackhandDTL

BackhandDTL

Hall of Fame
If prime Fed is that weak of an opponent for Nadal at RG then that undermines his “versatility.”

if people are giving RG 08 a 1/2 out of 10 then Fed is merely a 2 surface player and is nowhere near GOAT status.

Whereas in W 06-08 he was a tough opponent and obviously prime v prime on HC slams Nadal wipes the floor with Fed.
 
RS

RS

Bionic Poster
BackhandDTL said:
If prime Fed is that weak of an opponent for Nadal at RG then that undermines his “versatility.”

if people are giving RG 08 a 1/2 out of 10 then Fed is merely a 2 surface player and is nowhere near GOAT status.

Whereas in W 06-08 he was a tough opponent and obviously prime v prime on HC slams Nadal wipes the floor with Fed.
Click to expand...
What do you think ?
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 779124

Guest
abmk said:
Just for the finals, on a 1-10 rating scale:

Taking into consideration the level of Fed/Nadal/Djokovic.
To be specific: This includes stuff like winning one of the 1st 2 sets is more imp than winning a set after being 2 sets to love down.
previous rating had: probability of winning had they been able to grab close sets based on Fed/Nadal/Djokovic level, am removing that factor here

Sticking to diff of 0.5 minimum for now, else could've gone with 0.25 to differentiate further. (Rounding up the 0.25 cases)

I'd go something like this.

First, the slam finals won:

Federer ->

Scud Wim 03: 6.5/10
Safin AO 04 : 5/10
Roddick Wim 04 : 9/10
Hewitt USO 04 : 4/10
Roddick Wim 05 : 5/10
Agassi USO 05 : 7/10
Baghdatis AO 06 : 6/10
Nadal Wim 06 : 7/10
Roddick USO 06 : 7/10
Gonzalez AO 07 : 7.5/10
Nadal Wim 07 : 9.5/10
Djokovic USO 07 : 7/10
Murray USO 08 : 4/10
Soderling RG 09 : 5.5/10
Roddick Wim 09 : 9.5/10
Murray AO 10 : 5.5/10
Murray Wim 12: 7.5/10
Nadal AO 17: 8/10
Cilic Wim 17 : 3.5/10
Cilic AO 18 : 7/10

Total = 131/200, Average = 6.55

Nadal ->

Puerta RG 05 : 7.5/10
Federer RG 06 : 7.5/10
Federer RG 07 : 7.5/10
Federer RG 08 : 3.5/10
Federer Wimbledon 08 : 9.5/10
Federer AO 09 : 9/10
Soderling RG 10 : 5/10
Berdych Wim 10 : 5/10
Djokovic USO 10 : 7/10
Federer RG 11 : 7.5/10
Djokovic RG 12 : 7.5/10
Ferrer RG 13 : 5/10
Djokovic USO 13 : 7/10
Djokovic RG 2014 : 6.5/10
Wawrinka RG 17 : 4/10
Anderson USO 17 : 4/10
Thiem RG 18: 5/10
Thiem RG 19: 6.5/10
Med USO 19: 7/10
Djoko RG 20: 4/10

Total = 125.5/200, Average = 6.275

Djokovic ->

AO 08 : tsonga - 7.5/10
AO 11 : murray - 4/10
Wim 11 : nadal - 6.5/10
USO 11 : nadal - 7/10
AO 12 : nadal - 9/10
AO 13 : murray - 6/10
Wim 14 : federer - 8/10
AO 15 : murray - 6.5/10
Wim 15 : federer - 7/10
USO 15 : federer - 7.5/10
AO 16 : murray - 4.5/10
RG 16 : murray - 4.5/10
Wim 18 : anderson - 4/10
USO 18 : delpo - 5.5/10
AO 19 : nadal - 4.5/10
Wim 19 : federer - 8/10
AO 20 : thiem - 7/10

Total = 107/170, Average = 6.294


Slam finals lost :

Federer ->

Nadal RG 06 : 9.5/10
Nadal RG 07 : 10/10
Nadal RG 08 : 10/10
Nadal Wim 08 : 9.5/10
Nadal AO 09 : 9.5/10
Delpo USO 09 : 8.5/10
Nadal RG 11 : 9/10
Djokovic Wim 14 : 9/10
Djokovic Wim 15 : 9.5/10
Djokovic USO 15 : 8/10
Djokovic Wim 19 : 7.5/10

Total in finals lost= 100/110 = 9.09 on an average

Nadal ->

Federer Wim 06 - 10/10
Federer Wim 07- 9.5/10
Djokovic Wim 11 - 9/10
Djokovic USO 11 - 9/10
Djokovic AO 12 - 9/10
Stan AO 14 - 8.5/10
Fed AO 17 - 8.5/10
Djokovic AO 19 - 10/10

Total in finals lost= 73.5/80 = 9.19 on an average

Djokovic->

USO 07 : federer - 8.5/10
USO 10 : nadal - 9/10
RG 12 : nadal - 10/10
USO 12 : murray - 7.5/10
Wim 13 : murray - 7.5/10
USO 13 : nadal - 8.5/10
RG 14 : nadal - 9/10
RG 15 : stan - 9/10
USO 16 : stan - 7/10
RG 20: nadal - 9.5/10

Total in finals lost= 85.5 /100 = 8.555 on an average
Click to expand...
Great stuff enjoyed reading your posts on here for years I have been reading on this forum you always analyse well (y)
 
D

Deleted member 779124

Guest
BackhandDTL said:
If prime Fed is that weak of an opponent for Nadal at RG then that undermines his “versatility.”

if people are giving RG 08 a 1/2 out of 10 then Fed is merely a 2 surface player and is nowhere near GOAT status.

Whereas in W 06-08 he was a tough opponent and obviously prime v prime on HC slams Nadal wipes the floor with Fed.p
Click to expand...
By what objective metric does Nadal wipe the floor with Federer on HC in slams if both are playing at the best they can?
 
D

Deleted member 778933

Guest
Spencer Gore said:
If posters could try and put their tribal loyalty to one side and just try and discuss this just as tennis fans it would be great. What do we think is the more impressive record in slam finals, and why?

FEDERER
Philippoussis
Safin
Roddick
Hewitt
Roddick
Agassi (age 35)
Baghdatis
Nadal (age 20)
Roddick
Gonzalez
Nadal (age 21)
Djokovic (age 20)
Murray
Soderling
Roddick
Murray
Murray
Nadal (age30)
Cilic

NADAL
Puerta
Federer (age 25)
Federer (age 26)
Federer (age 27)
Federer (age27)
Federer (age 28)
Soderling
Berdych
Djokovic (age 23)
Federer (age 29)
Djokovic (age 25)
Ferrer
Djokovic (age 26)
Djokovic (age 26)
Wawrinka
Anderson
Click to expand...
Idk man, Philippousis and Cilic were beasts...Scud even more impressive since he made it through the entire final without collapsing into tears.
 
D

Deleted member 778933

Guest
clout said:
Isn’t it sort of a consensus that Djokodal had tougher rivals than Fed

The 85-89 gen is at least a tier better than 80-84
Click to expand...
"They didn't have any younger ATG to test them like Fed did"
So short answer, no. All the proof in the world staring them straight and silly in the face and still...no.
 
D

Deleted member 778933

Guest
Lew II said:
so the ATP ranking for example is a ''random metric'' that is on par with rating players on a personal scale? :unsure:
Click to expand...
Yes, Lew. And in case you needed some more enlightenment, Gonzalez is as tough a matchup in Australia as Federer is in the finals of RG. Oh and Wimbledon 09 Roddick is as good as AO 09 Fed. Really, this stuff can't be made up.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

Deleted member 779124

Guest
clout said:
Isn’t it sort of a consensus that Djokodal had tougher rivals than Fed

The 85-89 gen is at least a tier better than 80-84
Click to expand...
They did in some stages but not in others.

In this thread it was shots at Federer for no good reason.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

Deleted member 779124

Guest
Rolland Petros said:
Yes, Lew. And in case you needed some more enlightenment, Gonzalez is as tough a matchup in Australia as Federer is in the finals of RG. Oh and Wimbledon 09 Roddick is as good as AO 09 Fed. Really, this stuff can't be made up.
Click to expand...
Gonzalez and Roddick were playing great in those events.

And others think Federer and his opponents were mugs so?
 
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
clout said:
Isn’t it sort of a consensus that Djokodal had tougher rivals than Fed

The 85-89 gen is at least a tier better than 80-84
Click to expand...
It really depends on the tournament, forms, etc. It's not as clear cut as people think.

For a while Djokodal did have tougher rivals than Fed, but that hasn't been anywhere near the case since 2014 or 2015. The 90's guys so far are far worse than the 80-84 guys.

And then also consider the fact that Fed himself has dealt with the 85-89 gen as often as Djokodal.

And, just a side note, the 85-89 gen is a tier better thanks to Djokovic more than anything else. He inflated the careers of Murray and Stan. :p
 
P

PETEhammer

Guest
Spencer Gore said:
If posters could try and put their tribal loyalty to one side and just try and discuss this just as tennis fans it would be great. What do we think is the more impressive record in slam finals, and why?

FEDERER
Philippoussis
Safin
Roddick
Hewitt
Roddick
Agassi (age 35)
Baghdatis
Nadal (age 20)
Roddick
Gonzalez
Nadal (age 21)
Djokovic (age 20)
Murray
Soderling
Roddick
Murray
Murray
Nadal (age30)
Cilic

NADAL
Puerta
Federer (age 25)
Federer (age 26)
Federer (age 27)
Federer (age27)
Federer (age 28)
Soderling
Berdych
Djokovic (age 23)
Federer (age 29)
Djokovic (age 25)
Ferrer
Djokovic (age 26)
Djokovic (age 26)
Wawrinka
Anderson
Click to expand...
Obviously Federer's because Roddick, Gonzalez, babydal, baby nole and Cilic are better than Federer, Federer, Federer, Federer, and Federer.
 
terribleIVAN

terribleIVAN

Hall of Fame
Surion said:
I think if both Fed and Nadal play their absolute very best, Federer wins on grass and very fast hard court/indoor and loses on slow HC and clay.
Click to expand...

I've never seen prime Federer able to maintain his level over the distance vs young Rafa. He always ran out of gas.

He should definitely have lost that W 2007 final as he was totally done during the fourth set, but got super lucky.

And prime Rafa on grass might be 2010, where Fed bombed out before the final so we'll never know what prime Fed vs prime Rafa on grass looks like.

Prime Rafa probably beats prime Fed 8 times out of 10 on ANY surface.
 
P

PETEhammer

Guest
terribleIVAN said:
I've never seen prime Federer able to maintain his level over the distance vs young Rafa. He always ran out of gas.

He should definitely have lost that W 2007 final as he was totally done during the fourth set, but got super lucky.

And prime Rafa on grass might be 2010, where Fed bombed out before the final so we'll never know what prime Fed vs prime Rafa on grass looks like.

Prime Rafa probably beats prime Fed 8 times out of 10 on ANY surface.
Click to expand...
The hard truth no Fedfan wants to hear
 
Third Serve

Third Serve

Talk Tennis Guru
terribleIVAN said:
I've never seen prime Federer able to maintain his level over the distance vs young Rafa. He always ran out of gas.

He should definitely have lost that W 2007 final as he was totally done during the fourth set, but got super lucky.

And prime Rafa on grass might be 2010, where Fed bombed out before the final so we'll never know what prime Fed vs prime Rafa on grass looks like.

Prime Rafa probably beats prime Fed 8 times out of 10 on ANY surface.
Click to expand...
sure jan
 
D

Deleted member 779124

Guest
PETEhammer said:
How did it even out? Federer had won 12 majors and then got 2 freebies in '09 with Rafa's absence. He coasted his way to 14 majors before things got hard for him.
Click to expand...
Did you see the RG 17-18/20 finals for example? And yes both RG 09 and Wimbledon 09 were tough or at least good major wins even with no Nadal to play.
 
P

PETEhammer

Guest
mike danny said:
It certainly evened out with 2010 year, USO 2013 and 2017-present. Easier slams than Fed's 2004-2007 ones easily.
Click to expand...
2010 went through near-prime Djokovic to win the Open, destroyed Federer's conqueror Berdych in the finals of Wimbledon, and RF should thank JC that he didn't make the finals of RG to see Rafa.

Again, opponent is irrelevant at RG. 2013 went through prime Djokovic to win the Open, much harder than any of Fed's wins at the Open (2007 v Baby Joe included). Feddy ran away from his Master in the most obvious display of tanking a match by a top 5 player in the last 10-15 years the round prior to facing Rafa in New York. Oh sorry, that's not it...RobredoGOAT is the explanation.

2017 Rafa lost out in Australia to resurgent Roger, cleaned up at RG as expected, and again, Roger ran away from him prior to them having a face-down in NY.

Slams since then have been won v Djokovic or Medvedev, easily as difficult as anyone Fed faced at RG or New York during his Skittle years...
 
D

Deleted member 779124

Guest
PETEhammer said:
2010 went through near-prime Djokovic to win the Open, destroyed Federer's conqueror Berdych in the finals of Wimbledon, and RF should thank JC that he didn't make the finals of RG to see Rafa.

Again, opponent is irrelevant at RG. 2013 went through prime Djokovic to win the Open, much harder than any of Fed's wins at the Open (2007 v Baby Joe included). Feddy ran away from his Master in the most obvious display of tanking a match by a top 5 player in the last 10-15 years the round prior to facing Rafa in New York. Oh sorry, that's not it...RobredoGOAT is the explanation.

2017 Rafa lost out in Australia to resurgent Roger, cleaned up at RG as expected, and again, Roger ran away from him prior to them having a face-down in NY.

Slams since then have been won v Djokovic or Medvedev, easily as difficult as anyone Fed faced at RG or New York during his Skittle years...
Click to expand...
You might as well just say 2015 Murray was better 2008 Nadal at RG the way you write this stuff so confidently :D
 
RS

RS

Bionic Poster
NatF said:
My version for your pleasure...

Federer:

WIM03 -> 6.5/10
AO04 -> 3.5/10
WIM04 -> 8.5/10
US04 -> 4/10
WIM05 -> 5/10
US05 -> 7.5/10
AO06 -> 6/10
WIM06 -> 7/10
US06 ->6.5/10
AO07-> 6/10
WIM07 -> 9.5/10
US07 -> 6.5/10
US08 -> 4/10
RG09 -> 5/10
WIM09 -> 9.5/10
AO10 -> 5/10

Total: 100/160

Nadal:

RG05 -> 7/10
RG06 -> 7/10
RG07 -> 7.5/10
RG08 -> 3/10
WIM08 -> 9.5/10
AO09 -> 9/10
RG10 -> 5/10
WIM10 -> 5/10
US10 -> 7.5/10
RG11 -> 8/10
RG12 -> 7/10
RG13 -> 4/10
US13 -> 6.5/10
RG14 -> 7/10
RG17 -> 4/10
US17 -> 4/10

Total: 101/160

So virtually the same. Obviously including the entire draws might change this up a bit. Maybe I'll do that at some point.

Some rough comments about the scores;

10 = Opponent GOATs from start to finish
9 = Opponent plays near GOAT tennis from start to finish or GOAT's for most of the match
8 = Opponent plays very high level tennis for most of the match, maybe include a GOAT'ing set (especially for an 8.5 score)
7 = Opponent plays well consistently in the match but nothing crazy, more dips in play than an 8. Could still have a GOAT'ing set but counter balanced by other poorer play
6 = Opponent plays a decent match but offers nothing special, no consistent errors but no flurry of winners either. Could force tiebreaks or close sets
5 = Opponent plays average, nothing special at all, very little resistance but not total capitulation. Could be wrong tactics but executed fine . Not a mine field of errors
4 = Opponent plays badly, clearly more errors than winners. Probably completely wrong tactics to cap it off
3 = Opponent stinks, could be tired or injured. An itinerary of errors or simply outplayed in every department
2 = Opponent stinks worse than stink, total capitulation or even tanking. No impact on the match at all or tons of errors
1 = Opponent is Tomic



The first set of that QF was the best. Hewitt was actually pretty good throughout the match, Federer just raised him game to crazy heights in set 1 and 3 - those are 2 of the best sets of tennis I've seen from Federer on grass (that first set one of his best ever), he was just crazy good IMO.
Click to expand...
Good job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Spencer Gore
The 50 Big 3 Slams by year and age
Replies
10
Views
530
TennisProExpert
TennisProExpert
titoelcolombiano
Grand Slam Titles by Age - ATG 3
2 3 4
Replies
164
Views
9K
Bud
Bud
ghostofMecir
20 Longest Win Streaks Past the age of 30
Replies
3
Views
452
smoledman
smoledman
Lew II
The 11 best Slam performers in the last 3 years after Big3 were not Next Gen
Replies
8
Views
528
augustobt
augustobt
clout
ATP Rankings: 2010 vs 2019/2020
Replies
13
Views
483
duaneeo
duaneeo
Top