Fed should have signed a petition to the ITF to get in every damn final Nadal or Djokovic
and Nadal should have refused to play the USO 2019 final
while Djokovic should have refused to play the USO 2018 final
Federer - only player to lose three or more slam finals on clay, grass and hardcourts
- Thread starter Start da Game
- Start date
and Nadal should have refused to play the USO 2019 final
while Djokovic should have refused to play the USO 2018 final
beard
Legend
Really? Do your job, count matches your self and make real argument...
Cup8489
G.O.A.T.
Really? Do your job, count matches your self and make real argument...
Here's my bit:
Federer: 20 wins from 31 finals.
Djokovic: 17 wins from 26 finals
Nadal: 19 wins from 27 finals
Here is my question: who is the most successful at the majors?
125downthemiddle
Banned
Wins is all that matter of course.
beard
Legend
Yes, that are facts... but, who he played when he won? That is what I put in context...
When Nadal beat Medvedev or Anderson it's a problem, when Novak beats Thiem it's a problem, but when Fed beats RodDick and a company about 15 times in slam finals its all good...
Nadal_Django
Legend
Jaitock1991
Hall of Fame
And this somehow makes him inferior to what he would have been had he lost all those tournaments in round 1 instead.
125downthemiddle
Banned
DSH
Bionic Poster
In addition to the achievement itself, reaching the last instance goes hand in hand in more points in the ATP ranking and also more money in the player's bank account.
There is no point of comparison, really.
In addition to the achievement itself, reaching the last instance goes hand in hand in more points in the ATP ranking and also more money in the player's bank account.
There is no point of comparison, really.
good luck in explaining this to ttw parrots that live in an imaginary world, thinking that if they worship a person, it will bring some meaning to their life
I'll help you with some facts here:
AO 2018: Nadal - QF; Djokovic - R4
W 2017: Nadal - R4; Djokovic - QF
W 2012: Nadal - R2; Djokovic - SF
AO 2010: Nadal - QF; Djokovic - QF
W 2009: Nadal - Absent; Djokovic - QF
FO 2009: Nadal - R4; Djokovic - R3
USO 2008: Nadal - SF; Djokovic - SF
AO 2007: Nadal - QF; Djokovic - R4
USO 2006: Nadal - QF; Djokovic - R3
AO 2006: Nadal - Absent; Djokovic - R1
USO 2005: Nadal - R3; Djokovic - R3
W 2005: Nadal - R2; Djokovic - R3
USO 2004: Nadal - R2; Djokovic - Absent
W 2004: Nadal - Absent; Djokovic - Absent
AO 2004: Nadal - R3; Djokovic - Absent
W 2003: Nadal - R3; Djokovic - Absent
only 1 major where neither Nadal nor Djokovic participated.
so what do you expect, that after your god loses to the field, Federer should withdraw from the final?
wake up kido, the world doesn't work like that.
beard
Legend
First... you expect 16 yo Novak or 17 yo Nadal to reach and play Fed at slam? Fed who won first slam himse at 22 yo?
Second...after Rafole are at decent age Federer played twice more slams which he haven't win, and he losed enormous number of times against them, or he failed to reach Rafole in all those slams...
It's 10/21 this way or another, and that is a problem...
If someone is 16/17 in finals against lesser players and only 4/14 against main rivals in slam finals, that is a big, big, big problem....
Do you think Federer record would be better if he lost in the semi-finals of those slam tournaments? If he did lose at that stage then he wouldn’t have had those final losses to stain his record. In fact people would be saying how strong he is in finals. If that is the case, then being a losing semi finalist is a better performance than making the finals and being runner-up
Justice Underworld
Rookie
Well you have to get to the final to lose them in the first place.
tell me Alice, at what age did Nadal win his first GS?
perhaps Becker or Chang?
some other great players?
If someone is 16/17 in finals against lesser players and only 4/14 against main rivals in slam finals, that is a big, big, big problem....
Right Alice, it's better to lose against the field, that is such a superior performance.
Like at AO 2018, W 2017, W 2012, AO 2010, or are you saying Alice that Djokovic was 16 years old between 2010 - 2018?
you know, those main rivals missed together only 1 tournament, so it turns out that the main rivals are 0/15 against the field in those 16 tournaments.
great performance!
It's 10/21 this way or another, and that is a problem...
If someone is 16/17 in finals against lesser players and only 4/14 against main rivals in slam finals, that is a big, big, big problem....
Alice, you know that unlike you, Novak and Rafael live in real life, where winning the USO 2019 or 2018, without facing anyone from Big 3 is an achievement.
But I understand that you live in your wonderland and I see that you like to be spanked and humiliated.
So, whenever you want to be spanked, just let me know.
I'll do as you please.
And as you live in wonderland, I'll call you Alice, OK Alice?
How pathetic is to expect that Roger, or all other pro tennis players would stop playing, waiting till Novak is ready to win GS, and only then play the ATP tour.
With this logic you can start bashing Sampras and Borg for winning titles in an era without Djokovic and Nadal.
Oh, Alice, if only I knew what kind of sh** you are taking to reach that wonderland.
Start da Game
Hall of Fame
well i answered it in my previous post somewhat but some crybaby fedclowns got it deleted by mods........you have to see a bit differently than what you stated........losing in semifinal is of course worse but do you think he would have had the confidence to make finals in which he won, if he lost in semifinals all the time?
they all add up, your present results are a factor of a lot of things like results from the past, confidence, being there having done that blah blah........you don't win 20 slams just showing up in finals which you could win and save the record........you will lose some, in this case it is 11 across all 3 surfaces........i don't get what is there to be offended........i drew a comparison to lendl his close second in this aspect........
Start da Game
Hall of Fame
quite a revealing graph........
dude, only in 1 of those 16 tournaments neither Nadal nor Djokovic didn't show up.
So what is more revealing, losing to the field or winning the title?
there is no offence. I just have the view that slams are 7 matches not 1. that winning 6 is still a great achievement.
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
Who's Alice!?
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
Alice is the person living in wonderland, where GS title is not being counted if Roger didn't defeat Novak or Rafael en route.
hint, I was answering to the message written by Alice.
@Lew II so what is your suggestion, that Federer should NOT have played in the tour before 2005? waiting for Djokovic to mature?
perhaps Sampras and Borg as well should have not been playing before Djokovic is not fit enough to compete?
welcome to the Alice in Wonderland brigade
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
I'm just saying that Federer had it easier.
Slam titles between the first and last years all Big3 were top3 / reached slam semis (2007-20):
Nadal and Djokovic 17
Federer 12
seriously?
before 2005 GS main draw consisted of 16 players? or 32 players?
or perhaps pro tennis players were mixed up with TTW amateurs and juniors?
top 100 ranked pro players get access to the main draw.
16 spots are granted to qualies winners
12 WC
in which universe Federer had it easier?
Similar threads
