Federer will win AO 2020 or Wimb 2020

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
The butthurt is really strong with you. Too bad there's no more Baghdatis, Gonzo, Hewitt or Roddick these days huh?
Yeah cause they would actually be considered "impossible, no?" competition for Nadal at the US Open.

LMAO at Hewitt or Roddick, they'd love to play Nadal at the US Open now if they were in their primes.

Pretty funny bringing up Gonzalez too given what he did to Nadal at the 2007 AO.

Fed beat Gonzalez in a Slam final = LMAO loldraw. Nadal surpasses that and more = Slam no 19 baby, in your face. Don't seem to care now, yo?
 

AceSalvo

Legend
Youzhny, Gasquet, Berrettini, Verdasco, Lopez, Rublev, Anderson, Schwartzman - these are regulars for Nadal at the USO from the QF onwards. Pray to your blue collar king of mugs.
Lil Agut and Lil Diego.

Little people that are painted with tiger stripes. Oh the scariness. Some folks peed their pants.
 

Third Serve

Hall of Fame
Where was the vacuum?

Novak WON his 1st slam. He added himself into the picture. The Big 3 was born that year.

Oh... mono. Right?

Eventually it's all about the mono.

Because RF CANNOT lose when playing his best.

Coz RF is god. Right?

I know this song, heard it many times.
Massive strawman.

Let's go over this again:

Federer, the no 1 player in 2007, and the guy who held three slams at the end of the year was suddenly out of the picture.

Now do you understand?

You can't take a number 1 player out of the discussion and claim "all is well still".

You see, it's the same story. If you paid close attention, you'll notice that I used your own words to write this argument. You can just as easily make the case for Federer having a massive decline in 2008. Nadal benefited from this in 2008 just as Federer did when Nadal declined in 2009 (but the top 10 was stronger overall in 2009, which is where the difference lies).
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
Massive strawman.

Let's go over this again:

Federer, the no 1 player in 2007, and the guy who held three slams at the end of the year was suddenly out of the picture.

Now do you understand?

You can't take a number 1 player out of the discussion and claim "all is well still".

You see, it's the same story. If you paid close attention, you'll notice that I used your own words to write this argument. You can just as easily make the case for Federer having a massive decline in 2008. Nadal benefited from this in 2008 just as Federer did when Nadal declined in 2009 (but the top 10 was stronger overall in 2009, which is where the difference lies).
If it's not mono then it's "Fed was past his prime in 2008". Another Fedfan Disney song...

How convenient that he loses his prime JUST MONTHS AFTER A 3-SLAM SEASON then gets beaten over and over by a new ATG.

Just accept Rafa's and Novak's greatness. The only way to join the real world of pro tennis. Until then, keep spinning facts and keep cherry-picking stats to fool yourself that RF is invincible...
 

Sunny Ali

Hall of Fame
Because after the cakewalk slams Djokodal won between 18-19... Fed deserves one too. Also to avenge 2019 Wimbledon, that was a tragedy.
I've said this before ... players don't choose their opponents. I don't believe this weak draw or weak era c*rap. I have no problem with a 38 year old winning a slam.
 

Sunny Ali

Hall of Fame
Yeah cause they would actually be considered "impossible, no?" competition for Nadal at the US Open.

LMAO at Hewitt or Roddick, they'd love to play Nadal at the US Open now if they were in their primes.

Pretty funny bringing up Gonzalez too given what he did to Nadal at the 2007 AO.

Fed beat Gonzalez in a Slam final = LMAO loldraw. Nadal surpasses that and more = Slam no 19 baby, in your face. Don't seem to care now, yo?
Pro ... this is why you guys get a lot of flak. Just what is wrong with winning the FO multiple times? FO & Wimbledon winners get equal points so Wimbledon isn't in any way a superior slam. You folks have to got to stop with trying to belittle FO winners and then wonder why you're getting attacked. Every slam is just as important as the other.
 

THUNDERVOLLEY

G.O.A.T.
Really? I'm a massive Fed fan but I just can't see it anymore... Slam losses to Millman, Tsitsipas and a terrible Dimitrov and then a massive choke against Djokovic?

Think he might be finally done after all the years.

My god I hope i'm wrong.
Why hope that you're wrong? Players age and records are broken. It is going to happen to Federer sooner than later. That is the very nature of most sports records, particularly a recoed that is not a mountain to climb.
 

THUNDERVOLLEY

G.O.A.T.
Still 100x closer than Nadal will ever get to winning another Wimbledon. He can pile up all those FOs and USOs filled with Berrettinis and Youzhnys all he wants. Keep praying to your blue collar God.
"Blue collar?" Here it is, folks: a Federer fan believing his false idol represents some "higher class" when he's just another in a long line of tennis players. He had nothing over Nadal, no matter how many ads you buy into with Federer only representing the equally false idea of materialism.

Meanwhile, Federer's majors count is soon to be passed.
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
Pro ... this is why you guys get a lot of flak. Just what is wrong with winning the FO multiple times? FO & Wimbledon winners get equal points so Wimbledon isn't in any way a superior slam. You folks have to got to stop with trying to belittle FO winners and then wonder why you're getting attacked. Every slam is just as important as the other.
Some people understand tennis as little as they understand rocket science. It is very easy to lie to these people that clay is irrelevant, grass wonderful, Fed had mono and all the other nonsense that steers far from the facts.
 

Sunny Ali

Hall of Fame
Still 100x closer than Nadal will ever get to winning another Wimbledon. He can pile up all those FOs and USOs filled with Berrettinis and Youzhnys all he wants. Keep praying to your blue collar God.
Missed the last line until I read the post made by @THUNDERVOLLEY who quoted you. Man you sure do appear to have lost your marbles completely. Very poor remark, regardless of whose fan you are.
 

Third Serve

Hall of Fame
If it's not mono then it's "Fed was past his prime in 2008". Another Fedfan Disney song...

How convenient that he loses his prime JUST MONTHS AFTER A 3-SLAM SEASON then gets beaten over and over by a new ATG.

Just accept Rafa's and Novak's greatness. The only way to join the real world of pro tennis. Until then, keep spinning facts and keep cherry-picking stats to fool yourself that RF is invincible...
I said earlier that Fed was already showing signs of decline in 2007. It didn't take place in a couple of months.

But of course, keep on marking every one of my arguments as some sort of "excuse" and keep on embracing the strawman fallacy the way you do. In the meantime, I'm done with this conversation. It's not easy to keep going on if your opponent ignores your arguments instead of refuting them.
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
I said earlier that Fed was already showing signs of decline in 2007. It didn't take place in a couple of months.

But of course, keep on marking every one of my arguments as some sort of "excuse" and keep on embracing the strawman fallacy the way you do. In the meantime, I'm done with this conversation. It's not easy to keep going on if your opponent ignores your arguments instead of refuting them.
He won THREE SLAMS in a year when he was DECLINING?

Did I get that right?

Just checking...
 

Third Serve

Hall of Fame
I've heard bizarre theories, but this one is... awesome.
Show me the numbers if you think so. Show me the numbers that reflect Federer's losses in Masters 1000s to the likes of Canas, Volandri, and Nalbandian twice. The numbers that reflect his obvious decline in Bo3 (however slight they were; he was still very clearly in his prime).

I've thrown every piece of evidence at you and you continue to say things like this:

If it's not mono then it's "Fed was past his prime in 2008". Another Fedfan Disney song...

How convenient that he loses his prime JUST MONTHS AFTER A 3-SLAM SEASON then gets beaten over and over by a new ATG.

Just accept Rafa's and Novak's greatness. The only way to join the real world of pro tennis. Until then, keep spinning facts and keep cherry-picking stats to fool yourself that RF is invincible...
He won THREE SLAMS in a year when he was DECLINING?

Did I get that right?

Just checking...
I've heard bizarre theories, but this one is... awesome.
Show me some piece of evidence that actually supports your theory. Even just one will work; it'll still be an impressive improvement over what you've shown so far.
 
Yeah cause they would actually be considered "impossible, no?" competition for Nadal at the US Open.

LMAO at Hewitt or Roddick, they'd love to play Nadal at the US Open now if they were in their primes.

Pretty funny bringing up Gonzalez too given what he did to Nadal at the 2007 AO.

Fed beat Gonzalez in a Slam final = LMAO loldraw. Nadal surpasses that and more = Slam no 19 baby, in your face. Don't seem to care now, yo?
It shows that the poster you responded to was not a serious poster that they put those four in one sentence. Hewitt and Roddick are multi-Slam finalists, and not easy draws by any means. Gonzalez was on fire at that AO. He may never have matched that form again but he was definitely playing Slam-title-winning tennis that week. Baghdatis was admittedly weaker, so it's lucky for Federer that the AO2006 was one of his weakest events of that time period. Gonzo of AO2007 could probably have beaten Federer of AO2006, or at least pushed him all the way. Gonzo of AO2007 could also likely have beaten Medvedev of UO2019 on a neutral court.
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
Show me the numbers if you think so. Show me the numbers that reflect Federer's losses in Masters 1000s to the likes of Canas, Volandri, and Nalbandian twice. The numbers that reflect his obvious decline in Bo3 (however slight they were; he was still very clearly in his prime).

I've thrown every piece of evidence at you and you continue to say things like this:

Show me some piece of evidence that actually supports your theory. Even just one will work; it'll still be an impressive improvement over what you've shown so far.
You've thrown nonsense. I can't argue with nonsense. Because nonsense has its own weird anti-logic that refuses to have a dialog with common sense.

The guy is no 3 after TWELVE YEARS and you want to tell me he was DECLINING in 2007.

A joke.

Just because your God lost a few matches does not mean he was declining. This religious worship of RF is just way too much for me. I truly don't understand it.
 

Third Serve

Hall of Fame
There were chinks in the armour. Losing to guys like Canas twice and Nalbandian too (someone he had figured out)

Don’t forget the Rome debacle, after such a a great run the year before.
Yeah, chinks in the armor is a much better way of putting it. I probably wouldn't go as far as saying he declined, but let's just say that his invincibility aura from 2005-2006 was fading away. That Volandri match was something awful.
 

Karma Tennis

Hall of Fame
FO - 1 vs 12
Wimb - 8 vs 2

It’s a fact, no?
The extreme ends of Tennis are Red Clay (FO) and Natural Grass (Wimb).

Federer's ONLY FO Title did not involve him beating Nadal. (Every other FO Final that Federer played in was against Nadal who defeated him every time.)

Nadal's two Wimbledon Titles involved him beating Federer. (Federer beat him in two other Wimbledon Finals)

Nadal performs a lot better at the extreme ends of the spectrum than Federer. And Nadal has been significantly more successful on his favourite surface than Federer has been on his.

It's a fact, no?

Yes !!!
 

tudwell

Legend
"Blue collar?" Here it is, folks: a Federer fan believing his false idol represents some "higher class" when he's just another in a long line of tennis players. He had nothing over Nadal, no matter how many ads you buy into with Federer only representing the equally false idea of materialism.

Meanwhile, Federer's majors count is soon to be passed.
That comment stuck out to me as well. The worst part is him buying into the myth of Nadal being some blue-collar workhorse when in fact he's another rich, privileged European. But still a rather classist comment.
 

Rickenbacker4003

Hall of Fame
Yeah cause they would actually be considered "impossible, no?" competition for Nadal at the US Open.

LMAO at Hewitt or Roddick, they'd love to play Nadal at the US Open now if they were in their primes.

Pretty funny bringing up Gonzalez too given what he did to Nadal at the 2007 AO.

Fed beat Gonzalez in a Slam final = LMAO loldraw. Nadal surpasses that and more = Slam no 19 baby, in your face. Don't seem to care now, yo?
At least Nadal defeated the people he was supposed to defeat at the USO unlike your guy for 11 years.
 

kevaninho

Hall of Fame
I called it at the end of 2018, that Fed was done winning slams.
If he wins a couple Masters that will keep him happy.

I think he accepts losing to Djokovic, or to Nadal in Paris, but the mugs hes losing to elsewhere, just isn't good enough.
He has no consistency outside of Wimbledon.
 

zvelf

Semi-Pro
Fed wins AO and Wimby in 2020 only if Djokovic, Nadal, and Medvedev are all on the same side of the draw and then the one who comes out of that side of the draw is injured.
 

THUNDERVOLLEY

G.O.A.T.
Nyahahaha. Here cry some more, babygirl. 40-15 will haunt you down like crazy.

Let's toast for the 19th


Federer will do more of that by the end of 2021.


The extreme ends of Tennis are Red Clay (FO) and Natural Grass (Wimb).

Federer's ONLY FO Title did not involve him beating Nadal. (Every other FO Final that Federer played in was against Nadal who defeated him every time.)

Nadal's two Wimbledon Titles involved him beating Federer. (Federer beat him in two other Wimbledon Finals)

Nadal performs a lot better at the extreme ends of the spectrum than Federer. And Nadal has been significantly more successful on his favourite surface than Federer has been on his.

It's a fact, no?

Yes !!!
That's the unavoidable fact: there was no version of Federer that was going to defeat Nadal in a French Open final, so he could only win one when Nadal was not there to deliver the customary beatdown. On the other hand, Nadal walked into Wimbledon and beat Federer at "his" major in convincing fashion, and won another title there. By the criteria set by the worst of Federer's fans, Nadal is the superior player, as he won more titles on a surface that is his alleged "weakest" and against the so-called "best" player, while Federer could not do the same at the French.



That comment stuck out to me as well. The worst part is him buying into the myth of Nadal being some blue-collar workhorse when in fact he's another rich, privileged European. But still a rather classist comment.
tennis_pro buys into the materialistic myth of Federer being of some sort of "high breeding" (when anyone knowing about his family knows its the opposite of his advertising) while Nasal is not. Anyone born before yesterday knows where the Nadal family hails from, and its not the "sticks" by any stretch of the imagination. But tennis_pro is likely basing his opinion on visuals--thinking Nadal is some "lesser" human being than the so-called "Golden Eagle" (which was part of the iconography of Germany under the Third Reich, so that should tell you something about anyone ever referring to Federer as that). Again, look at Federer's background, and that "Golden Eagle" crap goes down the toilet as he would not fit into their world views about people.
 
Last edited:

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
I called it at the end of 2018, that Fed was done winning slams.
If he wins a couple Masters that will keep him happy.

I think he accepts losing to Djokovic, or to Nadal in Paris, but the mugs hes losing to elsewhere, just isn't good enough.
He has no consistency outside of Wimbledon.
He has probably the least losses on tour for this year and the third most in wins
 
I don't rule Fed out if he comes 100% in shape to those championships and things go for him. The odds are against him now, though, with each passing year.
There could be a new name breaking through as champ somwhere, especially if Novak's injury issues hamper him.
The game does need new champions breaking through.
We have been waiting quite a while now for that new name, they just do great once and then rest on it, maybe the smart phone generation has too many distractions :mad::mad:
 
Top