How many slams would Federer have if he had been born in 1986?

[Backspin1183]

FoD got banned??? What happened? A run-in with some Fed fans?

 

[merlinpinpin]

I am being serious. Lets take a look at this again slam by slam assuming Fed was born 5 years later with same talent plus obviously better racket because nobody born 1986+ is stupid enough to use small frame:

AO: Prime Federer owned Djokovic who won most of AO lately so Fed win win those instead. 4+ titles. (Side effect 0 AOs for Nadal)
FO: Federer is playing with larger frame and competing with slower Nadal. 2+ titles.
Wimbledon: Competition since 2008 at Wimbledon is pathetic to the point that even old man Fed was able to win it in 2012. 7+ straight for Fed starting with 2008 title. Funny thing is that Nadal probably would have won 2006 and 2007 titles before Fed got his first one in 2008.
USO: Here competition is much worse than during Fed's prime so most likely 6+ straight titles for Fed. Prime Fed had no problems with Murray, Djokovic and Nadal at non clay slams. So definitely no problems at USO. Not to mention if he had draws like Nadal lately he would be getting to those USO finals in straight sets year after year. (Side effect 0 USOs for Nadal)

Conclusion: 19+ slams.

Spot on. Plus the fact that he would win much more than the others in his 30's, so we'd be looking at 20+ (with the focus on "+") at the end of his career, probably Court-like numbers.

Always knew the OP as a Fed fanatic at heart. You have to be to start such a thread disparaging the so-called 'super-strong era'.

 

[dudeski]

Personally 100% agree with you.
Djoker, Murray aren't the players capable of challenging peak fed, as 30 yr. post prime Fed bt peak Djokovic on clay. Federer still owns Murray in slams.

main problem is nadal in RG, but IMO Federer would have beaten Nadal at RG in 2011 and 2013 considering his peak level.

At other slams Federer can beat them.

Lack of young guns is favourable for Nadal, Djoko.

Plus I want to stress it again that Fed would be using better racquet all of his career which would help him at FO. Also, given that Nadal would be the number 1 player in 2005-2007 Fed would focus his training in early years to compete with him instead of guys like Nalbandian, Hewitt, Roddick, Aggasi, Henman etc. I expect starting from 2008 Wimbledon Federer would have emerged as the new number 1 and owned everyone (except maybe Nadal on clay) for the next 5 years straight.

 

[NadalDramaQueen]

Plus I want to stress it again that Fed would be using better racquet all of his career which would help him at FO. Also, given that Nadal would be the number 1 player in 2005-2007 Fed would focus his training in early years to compete with him instead of guys like Nalbandian, Hewitt, Roddick, Aggasi, Henman etc. I expect starting from 2008 Wimbledon Federer would have emerged as the new number 1 and owned everyone (except maybe Nadal on clay) for the next 5 years straight.

As soon as Fed was done dominating in your scenario, hundreds of trolls on this forum would claim that Federer was lucky to avoid Dimitrov and Janowicz during his prime.

FoD got banned??? What happened? A run-in with some Fed fans?

You cannot be serious.

 

[Federer20042006]

Anyways.. .My Fed slam tally would be

0 AO titles (maybe 1 if but he would have to AVOID Nole-Nadal)
0 French Titles
5 Wimbledons
3 USO's

2010 AO, dude.

 

[britbox]

2010 AO, dude.

Don't worry about his/her intellect. Fast food establishments always require staff.

 

[mike danny]

The people who are giving USO to Djokovic over 2006 Fed should think again. Nole had to pull a Houdini to even win a USO title. He misses that return and it is bye bye USO title.

Had 2006 Fed had to compete with 2011 Djoker he would not win W and USO

 

[SLD76]

The people who are giving USO to Djokovic over 2006 Fed should think again. Nole had to pull a Houdini to even win a USO title. He misses that return and it is bye bye USO title.

Had 2006 Fed had to compete with 2011 Djoker he would not win W and USO

precisely, old fed had match points against peak Djoker in 2011.

I dont think 04-07 Fed would be too botherd by current Djoker or Murray.

 

[NatF]

precisely, old fed had match points against peak Djoker in 2011.

I dont think 04-07 Fed would be too botherd by current Djoker or Murray.

Federer had some weaker showings in slam finals like AO 06, USO 05 and USO 07 where if Djokovic was in top form I could see him taking one or a couple of those (almost definately the AO 06 IMO).

But in general aside from Djokovic in AO I don't think either would fare very well against him.

 

[Steve0904]

LOL at the "over 19" fanboy votes.

We only did that because of the agenda of the tool who started this thread.

 

[Steve0904]

<insert over 9000! joke>

:lol: Just seeing this now.

 

[Willi62]

How would have Federer fared if he were the same age as Nadal/Djokovic/Murray?

I think he would have had:

3 AO
0 RG
5 W
4 USO

Djoker would have taken a large share of the Australian Open titles. Nadal would have still been far superior in RG, and in the USO he would have had much tougher competition from either of the Top 4.

I think he would have still fared extremely well in Wimbledon.

I would say he would have achieved around 12 slams.

I don't think he would have won a lot more. 20 maybe?