Federer 2004 vs 2007

[Sport]

How do you know without a time machine?

That is the reason why I prefer to avoid untestable scenarios.

But sometimes I do discuss untestable scenarios to avoid being repetitive with my sempiternal "untestable, therefore irrelevant".

 

[NatF]

That is the reason why I prefer to avoid untestable scenarios.

But sometimes I do discuss untestable scenarios to avoid being repetitive with my sempiteranl "untestable, therefore irrelevant".

I figured you mostly avoided them because you have no ability to analyse matches and form coherent conclusions, and to try and do so would just reveal your biases

 

[Sport]

Well you b!tched out and ran away from my last reply to you there and I wasn't finished making you look like a fool

I am trying to have a discussion of tennis, but you are changing the topic (tennis) to make personal attacks on me by calling me "fool".

 

[Sport]

I figured you mostly avoided them because you have no ability to analyse matches and form coherent conclusions, and to try and do so would just reveal your biases

Untestable scenarios are just speculation, not "analyses".

 

[BeatlesFan]

You forgot 2006. Just watch the first point and it will show that Fed now is a pale, pale shadow of this version.

 

[Standaa]

Medvedev would have annhilated Ferrero in the USO 2003.

 

[NatF]

I am trying to have a logico-methodological discussion of tennis, but you are changing the topic (tennis) to make personal attacks on me by calling me "fool".

Untestable scenarios are just speculation, not "analyses".

Incorrect, speculation includes analysis. We can analyse games individually to compare and give educated opinions. I have no problem with differences of opinion I just ask that you defend your opinion with some semblance of logic. You avoid logic like the plague.

 

[Sport]

Incorrect, speculation includes analysis. We can analyse games individually to compare and give educated opinions. I have no problem with differences of opinion I just ask that you defend your opinion with some semblance of logic. You avoid logic like the plague.

Call it "analysis" all what you want. If it is untestable, it is unacceptable for serious tennis discussions just like science does not accept untestable theories.

 

[mike danny]

@NatF vs @Sport is becoming the new TTW rivalry.

@Federer and Del Potro

 

[RS]

@NatF vs @Sport is becoming the new TTW rivalry.

@Federer and Del Potro

abmk and Lew in 2018 was still a bigger rivalry.

 

[Breakpointerer]

This has become quite the entertaining thread. Keep it up, folks.

 

[NatF]

Call it "analysis" all what you want. If it is untestable, it is unacceptable for serious tennis discussions just like science does not accept untestable theories.

Says who? This is tennis not science

You've already broken your own rules anyway...

 

[MeatTornado]

You forgot 2006. Just watch the first point and it will show that Fed now is a pale, pale shadow of this version.

I'm pretty sure @Towny knows 06 was better than both. That's why it's not part of the debate.

 

[mike danny]

Still vote for 2004. More destructive and he dominated a pretty good field.

 

[BackhandDTL]

2008-09

 

[Red Rick]

No version of Roddick stands any chance against a well-playing Djokovic at the AO or Nadal at the USO. OK, at Wimbledon he could be dangerous but no one knows who would win hypothetical matchups because time machines do not exist.

Let us remember that Roddick won his one and only US Open title defeating the clay court specialist Juan Carlos Ferrero in the final.

Roddick's game was good, but not good enough to defeat a 2019 Djokovic or 2019 Nadal outside grass. Outside grass, once he loses his serve, set over for him. As the US Open is the second lowest Slam, he would stand no chance against Nadal, who is an excellent returner on slow hard courts (top 12 ATP return rating on hard courts). Nadal with 4 US Open is 4 times better than Roddick at the USO. And the level Djokovic played at the AO leave Roddick no chance.

To say "Roddick would have won Slams outside grass in 2019" is so speculative as saying "Carlos Moyá would have defeated Federer at the AO 2018". But of course, Federer wins all hypothetical scenarios and Nadal loses all hypothetical scenarios in TTW, so "of course" Federer would demolished Moyá at the AO 2018, while Roddick would have defeated Nadal at the USO 2019.

I swear Nadal was better in 2004 on clay vs Roddick surely than that Madrid semi in 2019.

 

[Pheasant]

2004. Federer beat all of the top players by going 18-0 vs the top 10.

Federer was better on clay in 2007, but better on hard courts and grass in 2004.

 

[toth]

I think Federer 2007 had beaten everybody at RG except Nadal.
The reason he not won all majors in 2007 was Nadal at RG.

 

[abmk]

AO: 2007 (small difference)
RG: 2007 (duh)
Wim: 2004
USO: 2004

YEC: 2004

IW: 2004
Miami: ehh
Rome: ehh
Monte Carlo: DNP in 04, but doubt he'd have done beter than in 07. So 07.
Hamburg: 2004
Canada: 2004
Cincy: 2007

Madrid/Paris: DNP in 04

 

[InsideOut900]

AO: 2007 (small difference)
RG: 2007 (duh)
Wim: 2004
USO: 2004

YEC: 2004

IW: 2004
Miami: ehh
Rome: ehh
Monte Carlo: DNP in 04, but doubt he'd have done beter than in 07. So 07.
Hamburg: 2004
Canada: 2004
Cincy: 2007

Madrid/Paris: DNP in 04

I would say AO and Wimbledon even out since he wasn't much better at Wimby 04.
It's on the USO 04 final performance counting more than the whole FO run from 07.

Really if not for the USO final, I would pick 2007 as a whole. He was quite complete that year in Slams and played super-nice in the QF + SF of the USO.

Only slightly better in Masters during 2004 and not exactly a significant difference at the YEC either.
The beatdowns of Ferrer and Nadal were quite convincing.

 

[Turning Pro]

2007 had better competition And since it's so close stats wise, it's 2007.

 

[abmk]

I would say AO and Wimbledon even out since he wasn't much better at Wimby 04.

more difference b/w the Wimbys than at the AOs

Really if not for the USO final, I would pick 2007 as a whole. He was quite complete that year in Slams and played super-nice in the QF + SF of the USO.

eh, USO 2004 semi vs Henman was clearly better than 2007 USO SF . fed did not serve that well in sets 1 and 3 in that 2007 semi. The rallies were fantastic though.

Only slightly better in Masters during 2004 and not exactly a significant difference at the YEC either.
The beatdowns of Ferrer and Nadal were quite convincing.

significant enough difference at YEC. He beat an in-form Safin at YEC semi in straights. Actually lost to Gonzo in YEC 07 RR.
beatdowns of ferrer/Nadal were excellent, but the final vs Hewitt in YEC 04? even better. Arguably his best match on HC.
and some of those shots vs Safin?

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

AO - 2007 slightly
RG - 2007 by far
WB - 2004 modestly
USO - 2004 modestly
YEC - 2004 slightly

IW: 2004 by far
Mugiami: 07 (but neither did well)
MC: 07
Rome: 04 (but neither did well)
Hamburg: 07 (04 markedly better pre-final but 07 better final against Nadal of all players, tips the scale enough)
Canada: 04 slightly
Cincinnati: 07 by far
Indoor double: 07 for playing and doing well only losing to zonebandian.

04 slightly higher peak but 07 much more consistent throughout the season and still peaked high, so 07 it is.

 

[abmk]

AO - 2007 slightly
RG - 2007 by far
WB - 2004 modestly
USO - 2004 modestly
YEC - 2004 slightly

IW: 2004 by far
Mugiami: 07 (but neither did well)
MC: 07
Rome: 04 (but neither did well)
Hamburg: 07 (04 markedly better pre-final but 07 better final against Nadal of all players, tips the scale enough)
Canada: 04 slightly
Cincinnati: 07 by far
Indoor double: 07 for playing and doing well only losing to zonebandian.

04 slightly higher peak but 07 much more consistent throughout the season and still peaked high, so 07 it is.

04 healthy fed (one who turned up for YEC for example) would've probably beaten Nalby at Madrid , lesser chance at Paris tho'

 

[Deleted member 777746]

Federer in 2004 lost in the 3R of RG to Kuerten (I repeat, Kuerten, not Nadal).

So I voted for 2007. 2007 was a more all-around year on all surfaces. If not for Nadal, Federer would have achieved the Grand Slam in 2007.

Recovering from hip surgery Kuerten. Can't forget that.

 

[RS]

Field in 2007 was way wayyy more impressive.

The difference at Wim is way overstated as well. Roddick would have beaten Federer if not the rain delay and Hewitt nearly got to a 5th.

 

[NatF]

Field in 2007 was way wayyy more impressive.

The difference at Wim is way overstated as well. Roddick would have beaten Federer if not the rain delay and Hewitt nearly got to a 5th.

Nah.

 

[RS]

Nah.

I see it that way.

 

[BackhandDTL]

Field in 2007 was way wayyy more impressive.

The difference at Wim is way overstated as well. Roddick would have beaten Federer if not the rain delay and Hewitt nearly got to a 5th.

he faced chumps at the HC slams.

both were crap.

 

[NatF]

I see it that way.

The wrong way

 

[RS]

The wrong way

 

[RS]

I think 2007 Federer wins all 4 slams in 2004 while 2004 Federer only wins 2 in 2007.

 

[NatF]

I think 2007 Federer wins all 4 slams in 2004 while 2004 Federer only wins 2 in 2007.

Which of AO, WIm and FO doesn't he win?

 

[RS]

Which of AO, WIm and FO doesn't he win?

Wim. Worst final in 03-07 imo and the slower grass and clay bounce as well.

 

[ForehandRF]

2004. Federer beat all of the top players by going 18-0 vs the top 10.

Federer was better on clay in 2007, but better on hard courts and grass in 2004.

In 2007 he had that AO run though.

 

[Ray Mercer]

The 2004/2005 version of Fed is my favourite. It was all out ruthless aggression. He was taking huge cuts and trying to blast winners everywhere with that forehand. By far the most entertaining player of all time.

 

[metsman]

04 Fed better at Dubai and Halle, 07 Fed better at Cincy and Basel, so it's tied there.

Then, if we go to the rest, 07 Fed slightly better at AO (but could easily argue a different way) and obviously better on clay but that's it.

 

[metsman]

AO - 2007 slightly
RG - 2007 by far
WB - 2004 modestly
USO - 2004 modestly
YEC - 2004 slightly

IW: 2004 by far
Mugiami: 07 (but neither did well)
MC: 07
Rome: 04 (but neither did well)
Hamburg: 07 (04 markedly better pre-final but 07 better final against Nadal of all players, tips the scale enough)
Canada: 04 slightly
Cincinnati: 07 by far
Indoor double: 07 for playing and doing well only losing to zonebandian.

04 slightly higher peak but 07 much more consistent throughout the season and still peaked high, so 07 it is.

Difference between 04 and 07 YEC is probably on par with the difference (levelwise clear, but on top of level, 04 of course didn't lose a RR) between 07 and 10 YEC.

 

[metsman]

The 2004/2005 version of Fed is my favourite. It was all out ruthless aggression. He was taking huge cuts and trying to blast winners everywhere with that forehand. By far the most entertaining player of all time.

The footwork and movement were so dynamic and magical too.

 

[wangs78]

Federer in 2004 was blowing opponents out of the water. If you want to watch the perfect example of precision, power, speed and explosiveness, Federer in 2004-2006 was it. Beginning in 2007, he either changed his game a little to be more patient/strategic, lost a bit of explosiveness with age, or started running into a small handful of opponents who could stay with him in rallies (likely a combination of all three).

 

[metsman]

Wim. Worst final in 03-07 imo and the slower grass and clay bounce as well.

07 Fed definitely serves better than 04, whereas 04 only started serving well after 2.5 sets. 04 clearly better at everything else but 07 Fed's serve should be enough to get him past Roddick, but it might very well take 5 given the 4th set collapse in the 07 final.

 

[Pheasant]

In 2007 he had that AO run though.

That 2007 AO tourney was the last of beast-mode Fed, IMHO.
2004 AO was very close. Federer had a much tougher draw in 2004. He smoked a red-hot Safin in straights and he destroyed #3 Ferraro in straights in the semis. He also beat Nalbandian and Hewitt, which includes bageling Hewitt. Then at the 2004 USO final, Federer, double-bageled Hewitt, who was on a red-hot 16 match winning streak.

Fed’s hard court play was incredible in 2004. Also, Federer in 2004 was in the middle of a mind-blowing 24 match winning streak against the top 10. The next longest winning streak against the top 10 is galaxy away at 17(Federer and Djoker).

 

[Krish0608]

2004 was supersonic missile at full force. 2007 was cruise control.

 

[abmk]

Wim. Worst final in 03-07 imo and the slower grass and clay bounce as well.

2007 Wim final was fed's worst final at Wim in 2003-07.
Oh and nadal was better in Wim 07 final than in Wim 08 final

 

[tennis_pro]

if every thread was like this the forum would be a much better place - which insane season from fed was more insane

 

[RS]

2007 Wim final was fed's worst final at Wim in 2003-07.
Oh and nadal was better in Wim 07 final than in Wim 08 final

Disagree in it was the Wim 04 final.

Disagree with the 2nd part as well.

 

[RS]

07 Fed definitely serves better than 04, whereas 04 only started serving well after 2.5 sets. 04 clearly better at everything else but 07 Fed's serve should be enough to get him past Roddick, but it might very well take 5 given the 4th set collapse in the 07 final.

Fed in 4 or even 3 tight sets. Roddick is a couple notches below 07 Nadal.

 

[abmk]

Fed in 4 or even 3 tight sets. Roddick is a couple notches below 07 Nadal.

Roddick Wim 04 final is only a tad below 07 WIm Nadal.

 

[RS]

2007 one of the best years ever. Can’t say the same about 04 as tennis improves.

 

[RS]

Roddick Wim 04 final is only a tad below 07 WIm Nadal.

Gets too much credit for that form.