Yea.. Hes lost multiple Wimbledon finals and to Nadal/Nole in matches, he really had no business losing since hes superior to both on grass (For those saying he was "old" in 2014-2015/2019 he was good enough to get to the finals and beat Nadal en route and players don't age nearly as quickly in tennis now as they did 30 plus years ago) .. When he was the favorite indoors he generally won it. When he was (Or should have been) the favorite on grass, many times he lost it
Federer Blake WTF 2006 was the highest level of tennis I've ever seen in my existence. I still watch the highlights a few times a year and just shake my head at the brilliance.
Not even close, you are saying you never watched Becker Sampras yec finalFederer Blake WTF 2006 was the highest level of tennis I've ever seen in my existence. I still watch the highlights a few times a year and just shake my head at the brilliance.
The 2010 semi is the one I forgot to mention in my post, you are right about that. I wanted to say "since 2010" at that part, because that's when Djokovic really came into his own, but the tail end of 2010 was already a well-playing Djokovic. That was a great win and fantastic performance for Fed and he had played that well all tournament.
The RR loss he handed to Djoko in 2019 was a very nice and unexpected beating, so the satisfaction must have been high for Fed, but I don't agree that it mattered to him so much in terms of the tournament result. He already lost to Thiem and got straight-setted by Tsits in the semi's afterwards. The YE#1 I'd say was significant more for Nadal and Djokovic rather than himself. It did end in Djokovic losing that tournament, but that's it. It didn't win him the title and it wasn't a slam win either to compensate (see RG 2011 SF and Wimb 2019 SF).
Not even close, you are saying you never watched Becker Sampras yec final
Or Korda Sampras grand slam cup
I still don't think Fed is beating 96 Sampras final or Safin peak at Paris indoorsHe was talking about performance of one player, not the whole match. Its obvious.
I still don't think Fed is beating 96 Sampras final or Safin peak at Paris indoors
Were would you put the W 2007 final? I feel like beating Nadal in that form and being the toughest matchup for Federer has to gain some points.
Fair enough I wasn’t actually comparing it to 2015 SF just in general but certainly agree with the 2nd part.Probably on same level. But obviously would pick Fed of Wim 07 final any day to play for me, given he could sustain it for long.
Fair enough I wasn’t actually comparing it to 2015 SF just in general but certainly agree with the 2nd part.
Not even close, you are saying you never watched Becker Sampras yec final
Or Korda Sampras grand slam cup
I still don't think Fed is beating 96 Sampras final or Safin peak at Paris indoors
Sorry there was Blake on other side, he was not playing against other good indoor player, he would have won but not like this.I’m not talking match pal, I’m talking single performance. Federer was a god in that match. He would wipe the floor with Becker worse than Agassi did.
Why do you think he keep on loosing Paris indoor, granted he was injured in 2004, 05I'd say so. On medium paced indoor HC I'd comfortably pick peak Fed over any player I've ever seen honestly.
Why do you think he keep on loosing Paris indoor, granted he was injured in 2004, 05
Good answer, but still winning only Paris indoor will be going to count against him.Calendar positioning, injuries, different tour structure (no byes in some masters, some masters finals being BO5, top players playing more 250 tourneys back then) etc. Fed being great at scheduling and his playing style being "effortless" are some of the biggest myths I've seen in tennis.
Good answer, but still winning only Paris indoor will be going to count against him.
I mean what do say is true about Madrid also but he still have three title in Madrid/ Shanghai
This is why I said only 04,05 not 06.I don't have schedules of tourneys in my head but I remember Fed skipping 2006 Paris because he won Basel for example.
Here's from google:
Federer pulls out of Paris Masters, organizers call for rule changes | Taiwan News | 2006-10-31 06:06:02
Federer pulls out of Paris Masters, organizers call for rule changes | 2006-10-31 06:06:02www.taiwannews.com.tw
Roger Federer's withdrawal from the Paris Masters made tennis organizers consider greater sanctions against players who fail to honor their commitments.
Federer cited fatigue for withdrawing on Monday, a day after winning his fourth straight title of the year in his Basel hometown.
It meant the Paris Masters started on Monday without the world's top three players, and No. 6 Andy Roddick.
Rafael Nadal withdrew on Sunday because of an abdominal strain in training, and David Nalbandian had a stomach illness. Roddick decided to save himself for the Masters Cup in Shanghai starting on Nov. 12.
This is why I said only 04,05 not 06.
You want Basel, you got it but I will not give you any moral victory
If Fed don't belive himself that he will get injured or tired by playing Paris, I will not going to say that he has best peak for medium indoor surface.
I said the same thing this year also, when Novak decided to play Belgrade 2 before RG and same for Olympics double participation.
Man you do realised he participated in many Paris master and lost all but one.Fed cares more about Basel and YEC than he does for Paris and he played a boatload of matches in his peak years. In 2006 he played ~100 matches, if he played Paris he would likely gone over 100. Also even setting aside Fed's injuries in 2004 (muscle strain) and 2005 (ankle), for most of Fed's peak years Paris was played on an indoor carpet, they only switched to HC in 2007.
Man you do realised he participated in many Paris master and lost all but one.
If he is best or near to best on indoor claimed by his fans then he may have ended up second Paris title without trying.
His peak was grass and always will be.
There he won title and made finals without even playing great always
2010 was mighty impressive and it kinda came out of nowhere.Sure, 2011 when he beat Berdman and Tsonga. Participating however and giving full effort (or even close to it) are two different things.
He schedules his entire season around grass almost, Paris indoors on the other hand is an afterthought tourney for him (it's sandwiched between two tourneys he actually values). Also competition is easier on grass than on HC (even indoor HC). In general, indoor season in the 2000s and after doesn't hold the same weight as it did in the 90s.
Also, we're talking about peak level here, not consistency. In-form Fed firing on all cylinders is a monster on indoor HC, in some ways his 2010 and 2011 WTF runs were more impressive to me in terms of level of play than many of his (or others') slam titles.
If I am being honest, you were the one to inspire me to make this threadI'm glad 30% people agreed with me. Before I used to think I'm the only one who rates peak Indoorer above peak Grasserer.
Also, we're talking about peak level here, not consistency. In-form Fed firing on all cylinders is a monster on indoor HC, in some ways his 2010 and 2011 WTF runs were more impressive to me in terms of level of play than many of his (or others') slam titles.
Better on Grass isn't so clear 3-1 and 7th Wimbledon robbed by the pandemic.He should have been because he was a better grass court player than Djokovic And he was playing good enough tennis to get to the finals. He also played better during the 2019 Match overrall than Djoker did. . But Sure enough he sees Djokovic and lays an egg.. Fed is an egg layer
Take into account the age difference. Plus, Fed was a serve inch away from making it 2-2. Don't think such thin margins should turn Fed into a loser suddenly.Better on Grass isn't so clear 3-1 and 7th Wimbledon robbed by the pandemic.
Better on Grass isn't so clear 3-1 and 7th Wimbledon robbed by the pandemic.
Better on Grass isn't so clear 3-1 and 7th Wimbledon robbed by the pandemic.
Whenever Federer has been pushed to the limit he has choked.
2010 WTF, yes.
But 2011 WTF? Fed played great vs Nadal and maybe Ferrer to a lesser extent, but not great in the other matches, even if he was good.
Paris 11 was obviously great.
only a delusional fed hater like you can say that.
fed is way better than Djoko on grass.
best 5 years at Wimbledon each, federer has better serve AND return stats.
past his prime or at best prime-ish fed easily beat prime Djoko in Wim 12. Djoko ultra mega lucky with weaker competition on grass and with fed ageing.
I agree having lived through seeing both play on grass, but sadly in the future Djokovic will probably be seen as quite similar to Federer on grass. I am saying that as I am strongly guessing he winds up with 8 Wimbledons or more. And combine that with beating Federer in several Wimbledon finals (all their Wimbledon finals), and even it being "old Federer" won't matter much to people who can even be bothered to look things like that up, as it is an era most of the slams are won by guys from 30-40 anyway. Even if people like Zverev and Medvedev are majorly catching up to an old past his prime Djokovic finally, and hard court slams will be harder to come by. Those guys are just garbage on grass, particularly Medvedev, so I don't see them presenting much obstacle there, so even today I will be surprised if he doesn't win atleast a couple more Wimbledons. And as more time passes people mostly look at stats, and everything else fades into obscurity more. It has always been that way. That people evaluate people like Navratilova or Evert vs Graf or Serena based mainly on 18 slams vs 22 or 23, and seem oblivious to how many slams particularly Evert lost by not playing all the slams in the 70s, and only the biggest tennis geeks think on those lines, is just one example.
I do agree Djokovic has never reached that close to the levels of Federer at Wimbledon from 2003-2007. And probably is even less difficulty for him than say 2007 Nadal, given the match ups which typically favor Nadal > Federer, Djokovic > Nadal, Federer > Djokovic, in just the match up aspect of things. Over time that won't be recognized or even known much though, unless Djokovic somehow stays at 6 Wimbledons which is pretty unlikely.
nah, Djoko will be 35 by the time of next Wimbledno. He is not getting to 8 Wimbledons. 7 tops. And that itself is a massive massive travesty.
Who will stop him on grass. This is the worst grass court field of all time.nah, Djoko will be 35 by the time of next Wimbledno. He is not getting to 8 Wimbledons. 7 tops. And that itself is a massive massive travesty.
Who is going to stop him? Medvedev and Zverev both suck on grass. Thiem, even if he returns to form, is laughable on grass. Tsitsipas hasn't shown anything on grass of yet either. Federer is done, and Nadal is also done atleast on a surface like grass. Berrettini and Shapapalov are his only possible competition for the moment.
We will see, but I will be surprised if he doesn't reach 8. That is 100% how incompetent the field is on grass, and nothing else, since I get his age, and that he is already past his prime, and everything else but. I agree even 7 would be a travesty. I am not convinced at all he is better on grass than say Borg who has 5, especaly considering Borg had to play on far less baseline friendly grass and literally changed his entire game, serve and volleying on 1st and often 2nd serves, just for grass. Which was quite incredible, and something no player has done to such an extent, completely changing their basic game for a vastly different surface, and succeeding at that level. Something that is rarely appreciated nearly enough when discussing him today, since as I said those things rarely are recognized or realized over time. Djokovic just plays his basic game for grass, although to be fair the current grass conditions make it so he really never had to.
Who will stop him on grass. This is the worst grass court field of all time.
Fed won a title at almost 36 and should have won at almost 38.djoko's age. might win one more, but definitely not 2 more.
He should have been because he was a better grass court player than Djokovic And he was playing good enough tennis to get to the finals. He also played better during the 2019 Match overrall than Djoker did. . But Sure enough he sees Djokovic and lays an egg.. Fed is an egg layer
Fed won a title at almost 36 and should have won at almost 38.
Lets remove ATG rivals from Novak's timeline of 2011-2016, lets say he never has Fedal to worry about and he directly ascends to the top in 2011 like Federer did in 2004, now is focused solely on Andy, Stan and Potro like Fed was focused on Hewitt, Safin and Roddick.
What is to stop Nole from winning 15 slams from 11-16 (6 years) ?
This is why I feel Federer's peak was brilliant and yet overrated, it was a sweet spot created by no ATGs between Sampras-Federer for 10 long years and also with the absence of another ATG in Fed's own generation.
djoko's age. might win one more, but definitely not 2 more.
If you mean slams he won AO 2018 already as a 36yo, he was turning 37 later that year.
Fed won a title at almost 36 and should have won at almost 38.
Seeing how well Djokovic takes care of his body and that he won't have 2 younger ATGs by the time he's 38, I wouldn't put it past him.
We will see. You could wind up right, but I am not confident now. This era keeps breaking age rules, that I barely think of them anymore. I don't doubt his age being well against him though, and that he is way past his prime already just watching him play compared to 5-10 years ago. The whole reason I think what I do is the field on grass is truly that pathetic now. The field everywhere is pathetic, but grass is a whole other level than say hard courts, where the best up and comers all excel most, vs grass which most them despise.
I do hope he wins no more than 1 more Wimbledon as IMO he already has won too many as it is.
Not to mention it was a pretty deep field, aside from Hewitt, Safin and Roddick you still had Nalbandian, Ferrero, Haas, Davydenko, Berdych, etc. I can't think of a player that would have dominated that period to the same extent Federer did. Obviously, the likes of Sampras, Borg, Nadal, Djokovic, Lendl, etc would have been ranked #1 and the best player of that period as well, but I don't think they'd lose 9 matches between two years.
Because Djokovic at his peak wasn't as dominant as Federer was. He lost to Nishikori and Wawrinka (several times the latter) in that period you mentioned, it wasn't only Fedal. The advantage Djokovic has over Federer is he was better at his non-peak than Federer was at his.
Peak Federer > Peak Djokovic
Non Peak Djokovic > Non Peak Federer
Nobody dominated the way Federer did in 2004-2007 regardless of the competition. From USO 2004 to Dubai 2007 it was a huge shock every time he lost unless it was Nadal on clay.
Not to mention it was a pretty deep field, aside from Hewitt, Safin and Roddick you still had Nalbandian, Ferrero, Haas, Davydenko, Berdych, etc. I can't think of a player that would have dominated that period to the same extent Federer did. Obviously, the likes of Sampras, Borg, Nadal, Djokovic, Lendl, etc would have been ranked #1 and the best player of that period as well, but I don't think they'd lose 9 matches between two years.