Federer's comments on GS Race following Novak's 19th

[thrust]

Genius is Genius, accumulating stats won't compensate for memories of sheer brutal domination.

Federer's domination of Tennis at his peak will always be remembered, Novak is remembered more for grinding and he will be remembered for chasing these records, but not for sheer crushing opponents without mercy at his peak.

If think people don't care for who Tyson thinks is the GOAT then why is Federer the biggest brand in Tennis even now? Novak should become the highest paid star and have most endorsements too, when will he become more popular than Federer ?G

Next year when he crosses 20?

Sheer brutal domination of who? Hewitt, Roddick, Gonzales, and a bunch of one or no slam wonders. Young Nadal dominated Federer till 17. Federer's domination ended in 08. Djokovic is worth hundreds of millions of dollars, Federer is worth more but there is a good chance that, tennis wise, Novak's overall accomplishments will be and already is richer in several respects.

 

[joohan]

Even I like his badass attitude of passing comments like he wont pass on the mantle to the next gen yet, he can overpower the next gen types...... As long as he can back those comments great to do it.....

He can never be as nice as Federer/Nadal and gain the love of those crowd that worship these guys as clean athletes who are good ambassadors types, it won't work.

So better to be ruthless, if public thinks that you are a savage who wants to bring down Federer's empire then so be it, build on that and keep on dominating, it will add to aura.

If you don't have love then create dominance with words to back your performance

Completely agree. I like him much better when he just is as he is, no unnecessary PR in the way. Sort of "get used to me cuz I ain't going nowhere anytime soon" flow.

 

[Omega_7000]

Sheer brutal domination of who? Hewitt, Roddick, Gonzales, and a bunch of one or no slam wonders. Young Nadal dominated Federer till 17. Federer's domination ended in 08. Djokovic is worth hundreds of millions of dollars, Federer is worth more but there is a good chance that, tennis wise, Novak's overall accomplishments will be and already is richer in several respects.

Hewitt, Roddick, Gonzales >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Raonic, Dimitrov, Nishikori

 

[Nole_The_Champion]

Fedal as opponents >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
...

Hewitt, Roddick, Gonzales

 

[mike danny]

Sheer brutal domination of who? Hewitt, Roddick, Gonzales, and a bunch of one or no slam wonders. Young Nadal dominated Federer till 17. Federer's domination ended in 08. Djokovic is worth hundreds of millions of dollars, Federer is worth more but there is a good chance that, tennis wise, Novak's overall accomplishments will be and already is richer in several respects.

Dude, you're such a salty moron. Move on, already.

Fed's competition still better than Thiem + Next Gen.

Nasal didn't dominate squat. Fed has been neck and neck with him since AO 2009.

 

[Sunny014]

So much Fed hating again, grow up, people.

"Fan Favorite" for 18 years. That's a lot of hate which the fans of the other 2 can only dream.

Any publicity is good publicity, if not love then let it be hate. Would you guys prefer Fed having retired in 2012 after his wimbledon with 17 slams and then watching Djokodal cross that mark now? Even Federer didn't want that, so he competed hard and added 3 slams more to his kitty after 35
He also did not retire until 2021 which means he not only guarded his record this far, he also remained in the limelight, as long as he is an active player he will be in the new as the alpha because he is the most popular and he is also leading in slams so the narrative is that he still is the biggest tennis player on earth !

So Fed by not retiring in 2012 and playing 9 more years has ensured that he remains the GOAT for some more years and not forgotten like Sampras!

Yes fans (hardcore ones) of Djokodal would have wanted him to go many years ago so that their own heroes could enjoy the limelight as the alpha but Fed did not allow them that .....

Now when Fed will be retiring even Nadal will be retiring 1-2 years later or with Federer, only Djokovic has the extra mileage of being 6 years younger, Nadal doesn't, this matters.

What the future holds for Djokovic on how audience perceive him after he crosses 21 is yet to be seen.

 

[mike danny]

Fedal as opponents >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
...

Hewitt, Roddick, Gonzales >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Raonic, Dimitrov, Nishikori

You mean old Fed who hasn't beaten Novak in a single slam in 9 years? Nadal who hasn't taken a set off Novak on HC's in 8 years?

 

[Omega_7000]

Fedal as opponents >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
...

Hewitt, Roddick, Gonzales >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Raonic, Dimitrov, Nishikori

Djokodal were 5 to 6 years younger than him......If you look at the same transition era, Djokodal are to Fed how Raonic, Dimitrov and Nishikori were to Djokovic.

Djokodal, Murray, Wawrinka >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Raonic, Dimitrov, Nishikori era

Also,
Hewitt, Roddick, Gonzales >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Raonic, Dimitrov, Nishikori era

Basically any era of tennis players in the history of tennis >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Raonic, Dimitrov, Nishikori era

 

[Sunny014]

Sheer brutal domination of who? Hewitt, Roddick, Gonzales, and a bunch of one or no slam wonders. Young Nadal dominated Federer till 17. Federer's domination ended in 08. Djokovic is worth hundreds of millions of dollars, Federer is worth more but there is a good chance that, tennis wise, Novak's overall accomplishments will be and already is richer in several respects.

Yes Sheer domination of Roddick/Gonzales/Hewitt is worth more than losing to Stan at the AO or Murray on Grass.

It took superhuman effort from Safin to beat Fed in 05 and we are proud of that, because the level was that high.

Guys like Murray or Stan would never have beaten Federer from 04-08/09 in Slams.

 

[DRII]

Interesting take from Federer during his press conference after yesterday's R32 Halle win. Translation from German:

Q: The 3 of you have won practically every grand slam lately. When you hear the numbers 19, 20, 20 what thoughts come to your mind? Does this record still matter to you or you don’t care?

RF: I think that as long as the three of us still play, everything is possible and we’ll see at the end what happens. But it’s spectacular that we have so many grand slams simultaneously whereas the others have so little. Earlier there used to be more players with 2, 4, 6, 8 GS. They were more spread. Now the 3 of us have won so many. I believe that many more different players will win slams in the future and I hope that the present situation changes because it shouldn’t be written and spoken only about GS. Otherwise we come to the old saying: what am I doing here (in Halle) at all? I play more ATP tournaments on the tour than GS. I know that the GS have given me a lot and I’m incredibly grateful. They are the big stage, I get it. But when I’ve been on the tour it hasn’t only been about GS. It was Sampras who started this “I care only about the GS”. After he said that everything changed. At some point I set this goal that it would be nice if I equalized or broke Pete’s record. So for me everything else above this number was a bonus. For Rafa it was different and for Novak it was different. I put the bar even higher and thus the two of them set much different goals than I did. My goal was never to win 14. Then all of a sudden I got close and I thought once the record is broken, it’s broken and it doesn’t matter if I win 15, 16 or 17. That’s why it was a completely different situation but it’s fantastic to see how many times Rafa can win Paris, Novak Australia or I Wimbledon. It’s nice that we could win so many slams side by side and it shows how many highlights our tour has.

LOL!

Is it possible for one's nose to grow even faster when lies are mixed with arrogance too?

 

[Omega_7000]

LOL!

Is it possible for one's nose to grow even faster when lies are mixed with arrogance too?

You should ask Srdjan Djokovic

 

[Sunny014]

But one thing is for sure, Federer's superiority complex that he had in the mid-late 00s has changed 10-12 years later.

I guess Djokovic winning so much in the 2010s has forced Federer to be kinder now

In Nadal's case he never had any aura of superiority outside clay because he was second to Federer overall in 00s and then second to Novak in 2010s

 

[Strale]

Yes Sheer domination of Roddick/Gonzales/Hewitt is worth more than losing to Stan at the AO or Murray on Grass.

It took superhuman effort from Safin to beat Fed in 05 and we are proud of that, because the level was that high.

Guys like Murray or Stan would never have beaten Federer from 04-08/09 in Slams.

That is your seubjective opinion...If Novak for example havent played latest FO no one would ever considered him to defeat Nadal including me so all of you "IF" lovers should stop with the imaginary...


Peak Murray would definitely take one or two slams each year from Fed that is what i think and Fed would be a lock only on Grass while rest is 50:50...

Stan could also in my opinion win few FO in that era.He does have a quality.

 

[DRII]

Yes Sheer domination of Roddick/Gonzales/Hewitt is worth more than losing to Stan at the AO or Murray on Grass.

It took superhuman effort from Safin to beat Fed in 05 and we are proud of that, because the level was that high.

Guys like Murray or Stan would never have beaten Federer from 04-08/09 in Slams.

Please!

Nadal had it the hardest, being sandwiched in between Federer and Djokovic!

Federer had an easier beginning with no coGOATs to contend with, and Djokovic had it easier towards the end with the other coGOATs aging quicker than him or simply older and with no upcoming coGOAT to bother him! Murray could have been a coGOAT but he had premature back surgery that resulted in a bad hip.

And even with having it the most difficult, Nadal still has 20 slams!

 

[Sunny014]

That is your seubjective opinion...If Novak for example havent played latest FO no one would ever considered him to defeat Nadal including me so all of you "IF" lovers should stop with the imaginary...


Peak Murray would definitely take one or two slams each year from Fed that is what i think and Fed would be a lock only on Grass while rest is 50:50...

Stan could also in my opinion win few FO in that era.He does have a quality.

LOL

Peak Moorey was spanked hard by old Federer on Grass in 2012 and in 2015.

You expect peak Moorey to beat Federer of 03-09 who was like 77-1 on Grass??? ( Check his records from 2003 till his defeat to hewitt in 2010 - It is actually a mind boggling 77-1)

You expect clown Murray to take 1-2 slams ??

Do you have any common sense ???

 

[DRII]

But one thing is for sure, Federer's superiority complex that he had in the mid-late 00s has changed 10-12 years later.

I guess Djokovic winning so much in the 2010s has forced Federer to be kinder now

In Nadal's case he never had any aura of superiority outside clay because he was second to Federer overall in 00s and then second to Novak in 2010s

Clay is forever, muchacho!

How old are you, 12?

 

[DRII]

LOL

Peak Moorey was spanked hard by old Federer on Grass in 2012 and in 2015.

You expect peak Moorey to beat Federer of 03-09 who was like 77-1 on Grass??? ( Check his records from 2003 till his defeat to hewitt in 2010 - It is actually a mind boggling 77-1)

You expect clown Murray to take 1-2 slams ??

Do you have any common sense ???

He's right, you're wrong!

Murray actually had a winning record vs Federer before Djokovic did!

Wake the he11 up

 

[Strale]

LOL

Peak Moorey was spanked hard by old Federer on Grass in 2012 and in 2015.

You expect peak Moorey to beat Federer of 03-09 who was like 77-1 on Grass??? ( Check his records from 2003 till his defeat to hewitt in 2010 - It is actually a mind boggling 77-1)

You expect clown Murray to take 1-2 slams ??

Do you have any common sense ???

Do you have any common sense? Peak Federer against WHO?

And i said outside of grass it is 50:50

It is one thing to peak against Nadal,Djokovic,Federer etc and completely different to peak against Hewit etc...

I expect clown Murray to win 7 If Federer is going to win 10 across 5 years time period...

I would gladly stake my life on circumstances where all 4 of them start at the same age and Federer not being at the top when all is over...

That is how much confidence i have in other 3 and their quality...

 

[Sunny014]

Please!

Nadal had it the hardest, being sandwiched in between Federer and Djokovic!

Federer had an easier beginning with no coGOATs to contend with, and Djokovic had it easier towards the end with the other coGOATs aging quicker than him or simply older and with no upcoming coGOAT to bother him! Murray could have been a coGOAT but he had premature back surgery that resulted in a bad hip.

And even with having it the most difficult, Nadal still has 20 slams!

Nadal had it toughest because he was not good enough as Fed/Djokovic. ..... Obviously the most intelligent student in the class will find the exam paper easiest and the worst student will find it tough

Why did Djokovic win his 1st HC slam 1 year before Nadal despite being 1 year younger and despite Nadal being a more established player than Novak on tour ???

Any answer ?

Secondly Federer did not allow Roddick/Hewitt/Safin to be co-goats. Thats how strong he was, thats why he has even survived in the 2010s till now when 2 young ATGs arrived, most players would have retired by now.

Reverse the scenario and Djokovic if born in 1981 would have retired in 2010s after being unable to defeat 1986 Nadal and 1987 Federer, 2 young guns at their peak. ..... How difficult is it to face such competition ? Nobody would even continue but Fed continued for 11 years and also won in between

 

[Deleted member 629564]

But one thing is for sure, Federer's superiority complex that he had in the mid-late 00s has changed 10-12 years later.

I guess Djokovic winning so much in the 2010s has forced Federer to be kinder now

In Nadal's case he never had any aura of superiority outside clay because he was second to Federer overall in 00s and then second to Novak in 2010s

After 2010 AO it was even 16-6-1.

Must be truly devastating 11 years later.

 

[Sunny014]

He's right, you're wrong!

Murray actually had a winning record vs Federer before Djokovic did!

Wake the he11 up

Do you have any common sense? Peak Federer against WHO?

And i said outside of grass it is 50:50

It is one thing to peak against Nadal,Djokovic,Federer etc and completely different to peak against Hewit etc...

I expect clown Murray to win 7 If Federer is going to win 10 across 5 years time period...

I would gladly stake my life on circumstances where all 4 of them start at the same age and Federer not being at the top when all is over...

That is how much confidence i have in other 3 and their quality...

Why Murray never won a slam in 2000s if he was better than Djokovic ?

Your hero Murray grovels in 2013 at the AO to beat a 31-32 year old Federer in 5 long sets to have his 1st and only BO5 win over Roger in slams and you have the audacity to post nonsense like Murray in 00s would be taking slams off FEDERER ??

Dude, if Murray win slams in 2000s born in Fed's year then he would not be losing to Djokodal in 2010s, he too would be having 10-12 slams now

Don't be silly to give logics like Murray would win slams in 00s

A clown who cannot beat Old fed cannot beat a younger Fed even more.

BEST OF 3 WINS OF MURRAY IN 00s have no value, even Kyrgios has 2 wins over Novak in BO3, nobody gives a shiz

 

[Sunny014]

These Murray fanboys are so delusional.

A Murray in his 20s could never beat 28-30s Federer in Slams except that 2013 AO which was Fed's back injury plagued year and they are bringing in worthless BO3 wins to show that Murray can beat Peak federer of 04-07?

What next ? Stan to beat Federer at the AO or at wimbledon if he was born in 81 ? LOL

Accept reality - Murray is just a 4 inches taller version of Hewitt who had a bit more success, thats it.

 

[Strale]

Why Murray never won a slam in 2000s if he was better than Djokovic ?

Your hero Murray grovels in 2013 at the AO to beat a 31-32 year old Federer in 5 long sets to have his 1st and only BO5 win over Roger in slams and you have the audacity to post nonsense like Murray in 00s would be taking slams off FEDERER ??

Dude, if Murray win slams in 2000s born in Fed's year then he would not be losing to Djokodal in 2010s, he too would be having 10-12 slams now

Don't be silly to give logics like Murray would win slams in 00s

A clown who cannot beat Old fed cannot beat a younger Fed even more.

BEST OF 3 WINS OF MURRAY IN 00S have no value, even Kyrgios has 2 wins over Novak in BO3, nobody gives a shiz

This is wrong on so many levels...I am not arguing that Federer is a weaker player than Murray.I am arguing that Federer wouldn't dominate even 40% if he faced this guys in his 00s era at their peak like Federer...

Murray had it way tougher than Federer and that is a fact.He also managed to be the best but injury prevented him to further strengthen his legacy.

I am a Djokovic fan and i gladly stay behind my claim that era of 00 were Federer dominated is much much weaker than era of 2010.

 

[Strale]

Lmao at your analogies and comparisons...

These Murray fanboys are so delusional.

A Murray in his 20s could never beat 28-30s Federer in Slams except that 2013 AO which was Fed's back injury plagued year and they are bringing in worthless BO3 wins to show that Murray can beat Peak federer of 04-07?

What next ? Stan to beat Federer at the AO or at wimbledon if he was born in 81 ? LOL

Accept reality - Murray is just a 4 inches taller version of Hewitt who had a bit more success, thats it.

 

[DRII]

Nadal had it toughest because he was not good enough as Fed/Djokovic. ..... Obviously the most intelligent student in the class will find the exam paper easiest and the worst student will find it tough

Why did Djokovic win his 1st HC slam 1 year before Nadal despite being 1 year younger and despite Nadal being a more established player than Novak on tour ???

Any answer ?

Secondly Federer did not allow Roddick/Hewitt/Safin to be co-goats. Thats how strong he was, thats why he has even survived in the 2010s till now when 2 young ATGs arrived, most players would have retired by now.

Reverse the scenario and Djokovic if born in 1981 would have retired in 2010s after being unable to defeat 1986 Nadal and 1987 Federer, 2 young guns at their peak. ..... How difficult is it to face such competition ? Nobody would even continue but Fed continued for 11 years and also won in between

If there were 2 slams on clay, like there are 2 slams on hardcourt, Nadal would have pulverized both Federer and Djokovic's slam records!

Peroid, point, blank!

Djokovic, supposedly the hardcourt goat, should already have the slam title record because his favorite surface represents 2x as many slams as Nadal's favorite or Federer's favorite!

You lose

 

[Strale]

If there were 2 slams on clay, like there are 2 slams on hardcourt, Nadal would have pulverized both Federer and Djokovic's slam records!

Peroid, point, blank!

Djokovic, supposedly the hardcourt goat, should already have the slam title record because his favorite surface represents 2x as many slams as Nadal's favorite or Federer's favorite!

You lose

This is just misleading...90 percent of tennis players play their best at hard court in comparison to grass or clay...

Medvedev,Del potro,Federer,Nadal,Murray etc all had impressive game on hard court while from that lot only Djokovic and Nadal play strong clay tennis...


My argument is that Nadal did not faced a natural clay talent like him unlike Djokovic who has hell a lot more competition on hard court.

 

[DRII]

These Murray fanboys are so delusional.

A Murray in his 20s could never beat 28-30s Federer in Slams except that 2013 AO which was Fed's back injury plagued year and they are bringing in worthless BO3 wins to show that Murray can beat Peak federer of 04-07?

What next ? Stan to beat Federer at the AO or at wimbledon if he was born in 81 ? LOL

Accept reality - Murray is just a 4 inches taller version of Hewitt who had a bit more success, thats it.

A 4 inch taller, more successful Hewitt is basically a coGOAT! A Hewitt with actual weapons!

Djokovic is lucky as he11 that Murray was dragged out of the game due to injury!

 

[Strale]

If there were 2 slams on clay, like there are 2 slams on hardcourt, Nadal would have pulverized both Federer and Djokovic's slam records!

Peroid, point, blank!

Djokovic, supposedly the hardcourt goat, should already have the slam title record because his favorite surface represents 2x as many slams as Nadal's favorite or Federer's favorite!

You lose

Also one important aspect that is amplified on hard court and nullified on clay is the serve which means even serve bots have a greater chance to harm Djokovic than Nadal on clay

 

[TheNachoMan]

He's right, you're wrong!

Murray actually had a winning record vs Federer before Djokovic did!

Wake the he11 up

Murray got owned by Fed at the slams.

 

[DRII]

This is just misleading...90 percent of tennis players play their best at hard court in comparison to grass or clay...

Medvedev,Del potro,Federer,Nadal,Murray etc all had impressive game on hard court while from that lot only Djokovic and Nadal play strong clay tennis...


My argument is that Nadal did not faced a natural clay talent like him unlike Djokovic who has hell a lot more competition on hard court.

None of that competition Djokovic has faced on hardcourts has come anywhere close to coGOAT status!
Nadal has 5 hardcourt slams! Djokovic only has 2 clay slams!

Don't try it

 

[MichaelNadal]

None of that competition Djokovic has faced on hardcourts has come anywhere close to coGOAT status!
Nadal has 5 hardcourt slams! Djokovic only has 2 clay slams!

Don't try it

You better get em together this morning lol

 

[Ganstaz003]

If there were 2 slams on clay, like there are 2 slams on hardcourt, Nadal would have pulverized both Federer and Djokovic's slam records!

Peroid, point, blank!

Djokovic, supposedly the hardcourt goat, should already have the slam title record because his favorite surface represents 2x as many slams as Nadal's favorite or Federer's favorite!

You lose

Australian Open is as different to US Open as Wimbledon is to both. Just because they're both called 'hard-courts', doesn't mean they are in anyway shape or form the 'SAME'.

If there were two Australian Open instead of a US Open, Djokovic would probably be on 25 grand-slams by now at the very least.

DJokovic has never been the 'HARD COURT' GOAT, merely Australian Open GOAT. Massive difference!

If there was another clay-court Grand-Slam other than Roland Garros which had only night matches and totally different conditions than Roland Garros, Nadal would be nowhere near as successful in that tournament as in Roland Garros.

 

[DRII]

Murray got owned by Fed at the slams.

Do you like coming into debates with vapid or immaterial posts?

Point is, a mature Murray represents far more difficult competition for Federer than what he actually faced pre 2008!

 

[Ganstaz003]

None of that competition Djokovic has faced on hardcourts has come anywhere close to coGOAT status!
Nadal has 5 hardcourt slams! Djokovic only has 2 clay slams!

Don't try it

Nadal has only 1 Australian Open. Djokovic has two Roland Garros. Don't try it!

 

[Strale]

None of that competition Djokovic has faced on hardcourts has come anywhere close to coGOAT status!
Nadal has 5 hardcourt slams! Djokovic only has 2 clay slams!

Don't try it

What are tou talking about lol? How many grass slams does both of them have?...

It is harder for Djokovic to dominate hard court than it is for Nadal to dominate clay because of reasons i listed above...Greater competition and serving

 

[TheNachoMan]

Do you like coming into debates with vapid or immaterial posts?

Point is, a mature Murray represents far more difficult competition for Federer than what he actually faced pre 2008!

Yeah…no

 

[Tennisbg]

In my experience there are only 2 ways to rule in life (assuming we are not cheating).

01. By Love
02. By Brute Force

Federer ruled by Brute Force in the 00s and had a bit of love too from the public due to his classy game and polished attitude + he being Swiss also helped.

Novak doesn't have the brute domination in the 2010s (he has it cumulatively but doesn't have the stretch of 4-5 years when he won everything types), so that would be a minus, good for him is that he is dominating since 2018 and can now continue to win so much that he catches the eyeballs.

Plus like you said, being from Serbia the fans on social media are so aggressive and bash Fed with such impunity that it looks as if they are hating him for existing, I have seen so many comments on facebook where people from those countries come and write hateful stuffs vs Fed and talk of weak eras, you can literally not have a conversation with those people, they have made up their mind that Novak is firmly 1 and other players are inferior

So thats also a problem, Novak has to work on his PR too.

 

[Strale]

Australian Open is as different to US Open as Wimbledon is to both. Just because they're both called 'hard-courts', doesn't mean they are in anyway shape or form the 'SAME'.

If there were two Australian Open instead of a US Open, Djokovic would probably be on 25 grand-slams by now at the very least.

DJokovic has never been the 'HARD COURT' GOAT, merely Australian Open GOAT. Massive difference!

If there was another clay-court Grand-Slam other than Roland Garros which had only night matches and totally different conditions than Roland Garros, Nadal would be nowhere near as successful in that tournament as in Roland Garros.

Good explanation...Who is the hard court goat though?

 

[sureshs]

Interesting take from Federer during his press conference after yesterday's R32 Halle win. Translation from German:

Q: The 3 of you have won practically every grand slam lately. When you hear the numbers 19, 20, 20 what thoughts come to your mind? Does this record still matter to you or you don’t care?

RF: I think that as long as the three of us still play, everything is possible and we’ll see at the end what happens. But it’s spectacular that we have so many grand slams simultaneously whereas the others have so little. Earlier there used to be more players with 2, 4, 6, 8 GS. They were more spread. Now the 3 of us have won so many. I believe that many more different players will win slams in the future and I hope that the present situation changes because it shouldn’t be written and spoken only about GS. Otherwise we come to the old saying: what am I doing here (in Halle) at all? I play more ATP tournaments on the tour than GS. I know that the GS have given me a lot and I’m incredibly grateful. They are the big stage, I get it. But when I’ve been on the tour it hasn’t only been about GS. It was Sampras who started this “I care only about the GS”. After he said that everything changed. At some point I set this goal that it would be nice if I equalized or broke Pete’s record. So for me everything else above this number was a bonus. For Rafa it was different and for Novak it was different. I put the bar even higher and thus the two of them set much different goals than I did. My goal was never to win 14. Then all of a sudden I got close and I thought once the record is broken, it’s broken and it doesn’t matter if I win 15, 16 or 17. That’s why it was a completely different situation but it’s fantastic to see how many times Rafa can win Paris, Novak Australia or I Wimbledon. It’s nice that we could win so many slams side by side and it shows how many highlights our tour has.

Federer is:

1. Downplaying Slams.
2. Making it appear that he was the one who inspired Rafa and Novak to get more Slams.
3. Hinting that his Slam count is low because he had set the bar low at 14 because he was the first after Sampras.

Typical humble brag as usual.

 

[DRII]

Australian Open is as different to US Open as Wimbledon is to both. Just because they're both called 'hard-courts', doesn't mean they are in anyway shape or form the 'SAME'.

If there were two Australian Open instead of a US Open, Djokovic would probably be on 25 grand-slams by now at the very least.

DJokovic has never been the 'HARD COURT' GOAT, merely Australian Open GOAT. Massive difference!

If there was another clay-court Grand-Slam other than Roland Garros which had only night matches and totally different conditions than Roland Garros, Nadal would be nowhere near as successful in that tournament as in Roland Garros.

You wish!

Even if the hypothetical 2nd clay slam was in Madrid, Nadal's worst clay tournament, he still would have added at least 6 or 7 slams to his name!

Just admit that Djokovic's has an inherent advantage when it comes to slam surfaces since he prefers hardcourt vs Federer preferring grass and Nadal clay!

 

[Strale]

You wish!

Even if the hypothetical 2nd clay slam was in Madrid, Nadal's worst clay tournament, he still would have added at least 6 or 7 slams to his name!

Just admit that Djokovic's has an inherent advantage when it comes to slam surfaces since he prefers hardcourt vs Federer preferring grass and Nadal clay!

I completely disagree with this but ok i respect your opinion...

 

[DRII]

Good explanation...Who is the hard court goat though?

If you, a Djokovic fan, has to ask that, then you need to realize what you are really asking.

 

[Strale]

If you, a Djokovic fan, has to ask that, then you need to realize what you are really asking.

I dont need to ask that,i asked him about his opinion lol...

 

[Ganstaz003]

You wish!

Even if the hypothetical 2nd clay slam was in Madrid, Nadal's worst clay tournament, he still would have added at least 6 or 7 slams to his name!

Just admit that Djokovic's has an inherent advantage when it comes to slam surfaces since he prefers hardcourt vs Federer preferring grass and Nadal clay!

False! Djokovic prefers Wimbledon more than US Open and prefers Australian Open more than either = fact. Has nothing to do with 'name of surface' but actual conditions. If Nadal had to regularly play in current conditions when he was younger, such at night and when conditions don't favor him, he'd be only slightly better than Djokovic at US Open at best.

 

[Ganstaz003]

Good explanation...Who is the hard court goat though?

Undecided ATM. But Federer has the strongest case for being hard-court currently though.

 

[Strale]

Undecided ATM. But Federer has the strongest case for being hard-court currently though.

How is it undecided lol? Who has the most titles at HC?

 

[TheNachoMan]

I think Fed can forget about 250s now too..

 

[Ganstaz003]

Undecided ATM. But Federer has the strongest case for being hard-court currently though.

You can't be the hard-court GOAT unless you at least lead equally on every single hard-court slam there is. Fact is, Djokovic is not even the second must successful player at US Open and that hurts his hard-court legacy massively.

Federer is joint most successful player ever at US Open, and only player there to win 5 in a row, whilst second most successful player ever at Australian Open and at one point, was joint most successful player.

So either undecided or Federer unless someone is most successful player in both hard-court tournaments.

 

[Sunny014]

This is wrong on so many levels...I am not arguing that Federer is a weaker player than Murray.I am arguing that Federer wouldn't dominate even 40% if he faced this guys in his 00s era at their peak like Federer...

Murray had it way tougher than Federer and that is a fact.He also managed to be the best but injury prevented him to further strengthen his legacy.

I am a Djokovic fan and i gladly stay behind my claim that era of 00 were Federer dominated is much much weaker than era of 2010.

Murray's peak levels as only good enough as Hewitt's or Roddick's and nothing more.
Safin at his best would stomp Murray!

Murray would win 0 slams from 2003-07 and later younger Djokodal-Novak would have buried him even more, he would have retired by 2009 if he was born in 1980/81.

Lol @ 40% .... he is lucky that he won 2 wimbledons in Djokovic's era, Djokovic needed becker to improve his grass game, Federer would have been superior to Murray on grass from day 1, there is no way Murray can ever beat him on grass if aged same

 

[Ganstaz003]

Murray's peak levels as only good enough as Hewitt's or Roddick's and nothing more.
Safin at his best would stomp Murray!

Murray would win 0 slams from 2003-07 and later younger Djokodal-Novak would have buried him even more, he would have retired by 2009 if he was born in 1980/81.

Lol @ 40% .... he is lucky that he won 2 wimbledons in Djokovic's era, Djokovic needed becker to improve his grass game, Federer would have been superior to Murray on grass from day 1, there is no way Murray can ever beat him on grass if aged same

But Murray annihilated Federer on grass in the 2012 Olympic final. And don't tell me the Olympics doesn't matter as it clearly does.