Federer 2004 His Greatest Form Year? Ridiculous

REKX

Rookie
I see some people here say 2004 Federer was his greatest form. That is a ridiculous statement to make.

He won 3 grand slams against either older players or his generation players who were simply not upto scratch in terms of greatest. Beating Roddick in a grand slam final for example. Of course there was no Prime Nadal or Prime Djokovic. Losing to Keurton in the 3rd round at French? No competition all year round? How?

You can see it in his groundstrokes, serve and general play - no where near to his 2006-2008 form. 2007 Federer for me is the most perfect version of Federer, the perfect game and he was at the peak of his physical fitness and prime. If you watch 2007 Federer on youtube and compare it to 2017, it's like watching two different players.

Consider Federer in 2004 was world number 1, Nadal was 30th or 40th, aged 17 and they played each other on a hard court. There is no way, no possible way at all, that a greatest form Federer could lose to an under developed Nadal especially on a hard court which was Nadal's weakest surface then. But Federer did lose - it's scary to think what would have happened if there was a 2009-2010 Nadal present at the time.

2007 Federer had to beat strong players, worthy players who were grand slam champions and will go down in history as some of the greatest - Nadal and Djokovic.
 

ingvar

Rookie
Fed turned multi slam winning world no 1s and crushed them into oblivion. Nads or djokovic for example directly allowed wawrinka to be a 3 time slam champion and murray. Nads also allowed a 36 year old to a AO champion he also allowed mugs like mueller, fognini, pouille to be playeds who beat grandslan champions at their slam. Nads also piled up slams against genuine mugs like anderson, peurta, ferrer, soderling who are 0 slam mugs and never no1 let alone top 10 stuff
 
D

Deleted member 77403

Guest
You don't have to take it word, you can press ctrl + f directly on your browser.

Why mention Wimbledon 2008? Federer and Nadal both played absolutely amazing that match.
Yes, it was a great match, I agree.
 

REKX

Rookie
Fed turned multi slam winning world no 1s and crushed them into oblivion. Nads or djokovic for example directly allowed wawrinka to be a 3 time slam champion and murray. Nads also allowed a 36 year old to a AO champion.
Federer and Nadal are both way off their greatest form right now? Are you silly? Compare 2009 vs 2017 Australian Open Final. The quality of the 2009 was of much higher level - that is common sense because they were both at their prime then. But common sense seems to go missing here.
 

ingvar

Rookie
Federer and Nadal are both way off their greatest form right now? Are you silly? Compare 2009 vs 2017 Australian Open Final. The quality of the 2009 was of much higher level - that is common sense because they were both at their prime then. But common sense seems to go missing here.
Federer peak and prime is 2004-2008 which is far longer than nads or djokoivc could manage. Nads has never even dominated a 12 month season. The closest he got to was 2010 and 2017 and surpirse surprise what 2010 and 2017 have in common both candidtaes for weakest eras of all time
 

Krish872007

G.O.A.T.
So apparently no one is allowed to call 2004 Federer's best year because of "competition". Ridiculous. The two concepts aren't mutually exclusive, you can still be playing your absolute best without having to face ATGs. And the quoted example is not a valid one, as unusual losses can occur in any year.
My view - his forehand was at its most powerful in 2004.
Overall game was very high in 2005-6, far less weaknesses on clay compared to 2004.
2007, while a brilliant year, showed consistency issues with marginal loss of explosiveness off the ground and in the forehand. Prone to more off-days. Could still reproduce that level but not as frequently. In 2017, he showed us that level again for a few matches here and there via a retooled game, which was quite remarkable.
 

ingvar

Rookie
But common sense seems to go missing here.
Why are you disrespecting nads mug competition for slams? Anderson in particular ur disrespecting

Anderson 0 slam
Peurta 0 slam
Ferrer 0 slam
Berdych 0 slam
Soderling 0 slam
All of nads RG titles - 0 or 1 RG slam holders
 

REKX

Rookie
Why are you disrespecting nads mug competition for slams? Anderson in particular ur disrespecting

Anderson 0 slam
Peurta 0 slam
Ferrer 0 slam
Berdych 0 slam
Soderling 0 slam
All of nads RG titles - 0 or 1 RG slam holders
Nadal dominated the greatest player of all time during his prime not only on Clay but other surfaces
So apparently no one is allowed to call 2004 Federer's best year because of "competition". Ridiculous. The two concepts aren't mutually exclusive, you can still be playing your absolute best without having to face ATGs. And the quoted example is not a valid one, as unusual losses can occur in any year.
My view - his forehand was at its most powerful in 2004.
Overall game was very high in 2005-6, far less weaknesses on clay compared to 2004.
2007, while a brilliant year, showed consistency issues with marginal loss of explosiveness off the ground and in the forehand. Prone to more off-days. Could still reproduce that level but not as frequently. In 2017, he showed us that level again for a few matches here and there via a retooled game, which was quite remarkable.
This is the sort of thing I'm talking about. Where do people come up with so much rubbish?

Weak Federer in 2007?

Watch 2004 and watch 2007. His first and second serve is much much more accomplished. His forehand he had to work hard on because he couldn't hit clean winners against Nadal Djokovic Muray all day like he did during 2004 field.
 

ingvar

Rookie
Nadal dominated the greatest player of all time during his prime not only on Clay but other surfaces
.
Nadal never dominated a peak federer. Fail. The only thing nads dominated was he was very dominant in being crushed by djokovic 7-0 and then 7-0 again. You know the 7 straight matches nads never won a single set. He hasnt BROKEN federer now for a year so hes approaching getting schooled now too
 

Krish872007

G.O.A.T.
This is the sort of thing I'm talking about. Where do people come up with so much rubbish?

Weak Federer in 2007?

Watch 2004 and watch 2007. His first and second serve is much much more accomplished. His forehand he had to work hard on because he couldn't hit clean winners against Nadal Djokovic Muray all day like he did during 2004 field.
The rubbish is coming from you I'm afraid :) Nowhere did I say 2007 Federer was "weak", in fact he was still incredible. Also -nowhere in my post did I compare 2004 and 2007 directly, though as someone who has been present at a lot of Federer matches back in the day (including at Wimbledon in 2005 and for the 2006-7 finals) I have a good enough perspective of how things went.
It is true that the serve was better in 2007, but then again that is even better now (2015 & 2017 in particular).
 

Bukmeikara

Legend
2004 was that good for Federer which in the next few years resulted in opponents losing against him before even going on court. Do You know how much beating takes in order to make such an impact over the rest of the tour? By 2007 that aura was gone, he was beaten more and you can easily see that guys like Djokovic, Nadal and Murray would challenge him very soon. And that is not in any sence something bad, 2008 was a season which helped him to become better and find new motivation. I mean he is still improving to this very day...
 

Mr Feeny

Hall of Fame
2004 and 2006 were insane. It's a shame that he lost a step and never quite got back to that God-mode level after mono, but he still recovered to be great again. We can't be sad, with 19 slams, 302 weeks at #1, and 6 YECs.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I see some people here say 2004 Federer was his greatest form. That is a ridiculous statement to make.

He won 3 grand slams against either older players or his generation players who were simply not upto scratch in terms of greatest. Beating Roddick in a grand slam final for example. Of course there was no Prime Nadal or Prime Djokovic. Losing to Keurton in the 3rd round at French? No competition all year round? How?

You can see it in his groundstrokes, serve and general play - no where near to his 2006-2008 form. 2007 Federer for me is the most perfect version of Federer, the perfect game and he was at the peak of his physical fitness and prime. If you watch 2007 Federer on youtube and compare it to 2017, it's like watching two different players.

Consider Federer in 2004 was world number 1, Nadal was 30th or 40th, aged 17 and they played each other on a hard court. There is no way, no possible way at all, that a greatest form Federer could lose to an under developed Nada"l especially on a hard court which was Nadal's weakest surface then. But Federer did lose - it's scary to think what would have happened if there was a 2009-2010 Nadal present at the time.

2007 Federer had to beat strong players, worthy players who were grand slam champions and will go down in history as some of the greatest - Nadal and Djokovic.
Federer was sick at around the time of the Miami match :
"ROGER FEDERER: My fatigue right now has got nothing to do with all the matches I've played this year. I've been sick, and this was my problem for the imperfect preparation for this tournament.

http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=21455

2004 was a pretty strong year.

Roddick in Wim 04 final for example was a clearly stronger opponent than Djokovic in USO 07 final.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
As for 04 vs 07, I’d only take 07 at AO and clay. 04 was much better at Wimbledon and USO.

I’d rather he kept his fearhand instead of trying to spin it too much. He could’ve ball bashed Nadal off the court, like he came close to doing at 05 RG and 06 Rome.
 

REKX

Rookie
As for 04 vs 07, I’d only take 07 at AO and clay. 04 was much better at Wimbledon and USO.

I’d rather he kept his fearhand instead of trying to spin it too much. He could’ve ball bashed Nadal off the court, like he came close to doing at 05 RG and 06 Rome.
Are you serious? Do you know tennis?

Nadal Djokovic Murray would have eaten that play up, were not talking Roddick level, were talking Nadal Djokovic level. He would have got eaten alive if he hadn't changed and gone better, that is the whole point he changed it. He tried what you suggested against Nadal in the early days, and he got beaten.

Seriously.
 

ingvar

Rookie
Are you serious? Do you know tennis?

Nadal Djokovic Murray would have eaten that play up, were not talking Roddick level, were talking Nadal Djokovic level. He would have got eaten alive if he hadn't changed and gone better, that is the whole point he changed it. He tried what you suggested against Nadal in the early days, and he got beaten.

Seriously.
Wawrinka is only a slam champion as nads ket him be. Him and novak are reaponsible for letting murray be a 3 time slam champ. Its a diagrace. OLD MAN FED DESTROYS WAWTINKA AND MURRAY AT SLAMS you better believe he would never let murray or wawrinka win slams

Thats the difference betwee fed and nads. Fed kept genuine multi slam winning no1s in their places and completly crushed them

Nads on the other hand didnt. He faced ZERO SLAM MUGS NON NO 1 MUGS NADS DIDNT MAKE THEM LOOK LIKE MUGS THEY ARE MUGS. anderson, peurta etc. They will never be slam champs or world no 1. Ferrer, soderling etc. Credit to djoker from stopping murray being multi ao champ. Fed faced genuine world no 1 multi slam winners and made them win not a shred more

NADS also made.mueller fognini pouille into grandslam hereos. He simy cant dominate

Nads doesnt have an era he doesnt even have a full year like djoker 2011. He cant domimate bar in bursts. If he didnt tank all year for clay he would also lose to.mugs on clay as he still does
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Are you serious? Do you know tennis?

Nadal Djokovic Murray would have eaten that play up, were not talking Roddick level, were talking Nadal Djokovic level. He would have got eaten alive if he hadn't changed and gone better, that is the whole point he changed it. He tried what you suggested against Nadal in the early days, and he got beaten.

Seriously.

Yeah, look at Nadal eating that play up.
 
Top