Lol you're just going to throw that out there as a lone statement. I think it's pretty clear that this has always been my stance so I'm not sure what's so mysterious or difficult to understand about my statements there. As far as being a nutcase well I'm gonna have to disagree with that one lol.
This is the Fed fan argument that appeals to me the most and it's rarely made. Instead it's the constant eye test says inferior players that Fed faced are way better than the superior players that Djokodal faced nonsense. I'm happy you took this route instead because I think you can make a strong case for it.
Faced nearly every peak version of Djokovic and Nadal well.
And lost the majority of slam matches against them - what a GOAT (joke).
Still doesn’t change my opinion.
Which nobody cares.
Bitter as always.
And Federer had it easy in 2004-2005? His paths to his major titles were also as tough if not even tougher than Djokovic's in some respects. You can't have it both ways.
Sure, but he'd still have trouble winning on HC and only Wimb 2002 would be open. And I think Kuerten would be fairly difficult at RG in 2000 and 2001. But yeah, he'd do very well overall.
Obviously, transition gen was bad, but not worse than the Lost Gen on HC/grass, which is the point I was trying to make. So Federer still didn't have a generation as weak as the Lost Gen.
I did acknowledge it.
Well, Fed's win at AO 2017 also wasn't weak, so it's only really 2 slams for him, not 3. And if people excuse Nadal by choosing particular slams from that era that they view as strong, well, same thing can be done for Fed, but people never do it. All of his slams are thrown in the weak era dumpster by default.
Well, compare how many slams Federer won at 30-34 vs how many Djokodal have won.
In my book, they are tied in this department. This ain't 2013 anymore when it made more sense to make a case for them.
When Federer fans use that eye test they still admit that Djokovic and Nadal had it tougher in earlier years like say 2011-13.
This is exactly the type of one dimensional view I am talking about.
Of course it does, I've said many times that was probably the best win of Federer's career. But its one major. Out of 20.
I'll add that Federer at 27 was up against much tougher competition than Nadal at 27. Facing 2008 Nadal is tougher than facing 2013 Djokovic. Give 2008 Fed 2013 Djokovic and he wins 2 slams and finishes YE#1.
Scud and Baghdatis and Gonzalez were not the main rivals of Federer and nor was Safin.
Good point.
Another argument that isn't made:
Sure I would, but do you want me to engage in essay format argumentation with you on a forum? We're not there yet bud.
Federer is obviously greater than Roddick overall.
I was talking about who they beat. Federer of 2015>Roddick 2004, Federer of 2014>Roddick of 2005, Federer of 2019>Roddick of 2009 and it ain't even close. Nadal of 11 is greater than or equal to Nadal of 2007. Philippousis is on Anderson's level...
So much wrong with this I have to assume you’re trolling... especially the bolded.
Nope Scud was better than Anderson took 2003 Fed 2 breakers.
See...the truth can set you free. Now let more of it enter your mind.
need tl;dr version
Because Federer is a much better player than Roddick, and was better than ever in 2015.
Thank you for making my point.
Could say that.
For a so called Sampras fan, he actually says Phillippoussis is on the same level as Anderson.
Even if you don't think 2015erer was peakerer, I think he was a much better player than any version of Roddick. Dude zoned in the semis that year. He would have made mythical 2004 Finals Roddick look helpless with same display. Only reason he didn't look as good in finals was because of Novak.
Old Philippousis was nowhere near the player he was in his 20s man, c'mon everyone knows that. Its not like he had the advantage of modern medicine to preserve his prime years, or have a rebirth like Fed.For a so called Sampras fan, he actually says Phillippoussis is on the same level as Anderson.
Busted LMAO
2004 Federer struggled with Roddick so I have no idea how 2015 Federer destroys him but okay.
2015 Federer did many things better than 2004 Fed. His backhand was indisputably better, and even many Fedfans acknowledge how much better his serve was. Tennis is about match-ups, and if Federer's greatest weapon is greater, and his biggest weakness is now no longer a weakness, there's just no way for Roddick to get into the match.
I guess movement and FH and return and passing shots and defending and endurance don’t exist then. Federer BH was only exposed back then by Nadal too.
Because he's better than ever in 2015 LMAO.
They all exist, but even if we grant Federer of 2015 was diminished in those respects compared to Federer of 2004 (a big IF but lets not go there) Federer of 2015 still is significantly better in all those departments than Roddick. Plus endurance is a non-factor, Roddick's stamina was never much to consider.
we've done this before Mikey. Rodgi had access to juices, nutritions, trainings, and recoveries Andre didn't. As well as a lack of spondylolisthesis as well. That's a big one.
Nobody forced him to give a shot by shot breakdown of how he was better tho
Still better than the Lost Gen and, so far, the Next Gen.
Federer GOAT then?
I said the same thing about peak versions Federer had to face pretty much. Only I have the gap a bit smaller it terms of overall competition than you.
