Federer needs Monte Carlo and Rome for his resume

BackhandDTL

BackhandDTL

Hall of Fame
Fred doesn’t have Monte Carlo or Rome, slow extra bounce clay court titles. Fred only has Madrid of the modern M1000 clay swing, which is fast clay court.

If Nadal needs WTF, slow indoor HC, Fred also needs MC and Rome. If Nadal needs to win on a subset of HC than Fred needs to win on a subset of clay. It’s a two way street.

I credit Djokovic for winning all the MS but he trails in slams so he is not in a discussion for tiebreaker metrics yet.

discuss
 
USO

USO

Banned
BackhandDTL said:
Fred doesn’t have Monte Carlo or Rome, slow extra bounce clay court titles. Fred only has Madrid of the modern M1000 clay swing, which is fast clay court.

If Nadal needs WTF, slow indoor HC, Fred also needs MC and Rome. If Nadal needs to win on a subset of HC than Fred needs to win on a subset of clay. It’s a two way street.

I credit Djokovic for winning all the MS but he trails in slams so he is not in a discussion for tiebreaker metrics yet.

discuss
Click to expand...

Fedal fans should be united, please don’t fight. Both of them love and respect each others.
 
BackhandDTL

BackhandDTL

Hall of Fame
Third Serve said:
I'm pretty sure RG is slow and high-bouncing. Fed has won that, if I'm not mistaken.

Fed also won Hamburg, which was slow but low-bouncing.
Click to expand...
Nadal won Madrid when it was fast indoor HC ages ago.

The French is way faster than MC. It’s also noticeably faster than Rome.

I’m talking about the modern clay swing. Nadal and Fred have both failed to perform on their worst respective surface subset.
 
Last edited:
BackhandDTL

BackhandDTL

Hall of Fame
FrontHeadlock said:
Fed doesn't need either of those two tournaments for his legacy; they are not must-win events.

That said, his lack of Rome titles (the 2nd most prestigious clay court tournament) as compared to Djokovic really hampers him when you compare the two by surface.
Click to expand...
They are must win events if Nadals must win event is WTF. Both are tournaments under specific conditions where they have failed to produce.
 
demrle

demrle

Professional
BackhandDTL said:
Fred doesn’t have Monte Carlo or Rome, slow extra bounce clay court titles. Fred only has Madrid of the modern M1000 clay swing, which is fast clay court.

If Nadal needs WTF, slow indoor HC, Fred also needs MC and Rome. If Nadal needs to win on a subset of HC than Fred needs to win on a subset of clay. It’s a two way street.

I credit Djokovic for winning all the MS but he trails in slams so he is not in a discussion for tiebreaker metrics yet.

discuss
Click to expand...
Moot point I'm afraid, as Federer has better chances of winning two more slams, than winning those two. And even those chances stand at zero.

Not to mention that Nadal and/or Djokovic will end up with multiple slams ahead of him. No tiebreaks required there.
 
BackhandDTL

BackhandDTL

Hall of Fame
FrontHeadlock said:
I don't think WTF is a must-win event either.

And "tournaments under specific conditions" is a wayyy too neurotic way to view tennis.
Click to expand...
Well then I wonder why WTF is a must win event for Nadal for most Fred fans. It plays like a glorified exho, with guys like Dimitrov, Tsitsipas, Zverev winning it, but it is under conditions where he has not performed.
 
TripleATeam

TripleATeam

G.O.A.T.
I mean obviously the grand slams are first and foremost, but the WTF has a certain something about it because it's the top 8 players all getting to play against one another. You must win at least 4 top-10 matches to get anywhere, so it's not a small deal.

It's a step above masters but below slams. It's isn't fair to exactly equate ATP finals with the missing M1000s, but Nadal doesn't need it necessarily, Federer just comes out ahead because he does have it. 21-22 slams will be more than enough to prove that he's ahead of Federer.
 
demrle

demrle

Professional
USO said:
I didn’t say that. Fedal fans should unite together but not with Djokovic fans who are not very modest.
Click to expand...
Federer fans were beaten into submission=>modesty by Nadal. And to lesser extent by Djokovic.
 
ForehandRF

ForehandRF

Legend
Rome would have been good for his legacy, but Monte Carlo it's not important, it's not even a mandatory masters.
Fed was unlucky in Rome, peak Nadal( in BO5 format even), then he meet peak Djokovic in 2015.
 
S

StrongRule

Talk Tennis Guru
FrontHeadlock said:
Fed doesn't need either of those two tournaments for his legacy; they are not must-win events.

That said, his lack of Rome titles (the 2nd most prestigious clay court tournament) as compared to Djokovic really hampers him when you compare the two by surface.
Click to expand...
There is no difference between Monte Carlo and Rome. This "most prestigious" stuff is just another crazy thing invented by Djokovic fans, because he has 5 Rome titles.
 
fundrazer

fundrazer

G.O.A.T.
BackhandDTL said:
Well then I wonder why WTF is a must win event for Nadal for most Fred fans. It plays like a glorified exho, with guys like Dimitrov, Tsitsipas, Zverev winning it, but it is under conditions where he has not performed.
Click to expand...
We could call RG a "glorified exho" with some of the one time winners there in the past, if that's the argument you want to go with.
 
F

FrontHeadlock

Hall of Fame
StrongRule said:
There is no difference between Monte Carlo and Rome. This "most prestigious" stuff is just another crazy thing invented by Djokovic fans, because he has 5 Rome titles.
Click to expand...

First time I've ever been called a Djokovic fan...

Are you saying there are no relative prestige levels among the Masters events?
 
F

FrontHeadlock

Hall of Fame
BackhandDTL said:
A masters is a masters. Maybe Indian Wells and Rome but the other masters are masters.
Click to expand...

"They're all the same except for these two" haha

Seriously though I view the current Masters in tiers. Not that my list is dispositive, but this is how I see it.

Tier 1
  • Indian Wells
  • Rome
  • Cincy
Tier 2
  • Miami
  • Monte Carlo
  • Canada
Tier 3
  • Shanghai
  • Madrid
Tier 4
  • Paris
 
A

Arzivu

Semi-Pro
He had his chances to conquer these tournaments, especially in 2006 versus Rafa (Rome) and 2014 against Stan (Monte Carlo). It is too late now mon amies...
 
TennisProExpert

TennisProExpert

Semi-Pro
Madrid and Hamburg clay is slow

Federer underperformed at Rome though. 2004, 2005 (injured),2007-2011 are years that stand out badly. Djokovic is simply a more consistent clay courter which is why he reached so many finals there. I prefer Fed’s absolute peak level but Djokovic week in week out
 
D

Deleted member 771911

Guest
I think they can have pieces missing.
Federer didn't get those titles because Rafa was too good and Federer did not sort himself out young enough. really, he could have been winning those titles in early 2000s but he was too busy tantruming. Rafa didn't get WTF because its his worst surface. He should have won Miami, though.
Djokovic has won them all because some of his prime patches have been without a peak rival.
 
Mainad

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Devtennis01 said:
I think they can have pieces missing.
Federer didn't get those titles because Rafa was too good and Federer did not sort himself out young enough. really, he could have been winning those titles in early 2000s but he was too busy tantruming. Rafa didn't get WTF because its his worst surface. He should have won Miami, though.
Djokovic has won them all because some of his prime patches have been without a peak rival.
Click to expand...

Federer really should have won Rome in his maiden final there in 2003 when there was only Mantilla to face in the final. After screwing that one up he was then forced to play Nadal and Djokovic.
 
skaj

skaj

Legend
BackhandDTL said:
Fred doesn’t have Monte Carlo or Rome, slow extra bounce clay court titles. Fred only has Madrid of the modern M1000 clay swing, which is fast clay court.

If Nadal needs WTF, slow indoor HC, Fred also needs MC and Rome. If Nadal needs to win on a subset of HC than Fred needs to win on a subset of clay. It’s a two way street.

I credit Djokovic for winning all the MS but he trails in slams so he is not in a discussion for tiebreaker metrics yet.

discuss
Click to expand...

Not to mention the Olympic gold.
 
skaj

skaj

Legend
Oceans said:
Definitely needs it to be even considered a better claycourter than Djokovic. How can Federer be superior when he hasn't even won Monte Carlo/Rome once while Djokovic has multiple times defeating Nadal many times as well? Beggars belief. o_O Don't give me hypothetical peak Federer. ;)
Click to expand...

There is no hypothetical peak Federer, factual peak Federer faced Nadal there and lost.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Roger needs to change his clay court schedule next year he should skip Rome
Replies
45
Views
2K
plain jane
plain jane
VolleyHelena
  • Poll
Have we seen the last of Federer on Clay courts?
2
Replies
59
Views
4K
Centre Court
Centre Court
Meles
Federer Should Wildcard Monte Carlo
2 3 4
Replies
151
Views
7K
oldmanfan
oldmanfan
ForehandCross
Hypothetical TTW War : Peak Federer vs Peak Djokovic throughout a season
2 3
Replies
105
Views
3K
abmk
abmk
jack_kramer
  • Poll
Djokovic vs. Spanish Armada + Federer on Clay
Replies
5
Views
999
The-Champ
The-Champ
Top