If Fed wins he is the 9th wonder of the world, if he looses he is too old!!

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
This is the problem with internet and social media. Only small minority of loud extreme fans are counting that, I don't think majority of fans would count that.

And this creates perception that we are all not on the same page.
If you ask majority of casual fans, they’d say Federer is the best at Wimbledon.
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
Ok, then why did Djokovic lose to thiem twice at RG then, if Djokovic is supposed to be greater than Thiem?
Not sure what you are on about. All I said was no one gave Novak the age excuse after you thought people complained about it.
 

OhYes

Legend
Yes, they make this excuses for his poor form all the time, especially for 2017. They say he was a baby till 2011.

So, they make the same spiel as all other fans.
2017 - elbow injury confirmed
2006-2009 too young confirmed
Did we made something up here?
 

JackGates

Legend
Not sure what you are on about. All I said was no one gave Novak the age excuse after you thought people complained about it.
Really, so you never heard Djokovic was a baby and elbow injury excuses? Maybe your biased brain tuned it out from your memory.
 

Firstservingman

Talk Tennis Guru
Lmao! I would love to see the excuses if fed looses!
How's this for an "excuse"?

Fed's nearly 38, Djokovic is much closer to his prime, the World #1 by a huge margin, and just better at the moment?

If Fed loses, excuse or not, that will be the truth. It wouldn't invalidate Djoker's victory or nullify Fed's loss, but it's not some hilarious acrobatic excuse, like, oh I don't know, "the roof was closed for the whole match!!1"
 

James695

Rookie
Sucks to be a fan of Djoko or the Nadal these days:

If they win it's obvious. If they loose they suck big time.

I can see why their fanbase is so pissed right now.
I’m sure Novak and Rafa fans would prefer this to having an ATG like Sampras at age 26 who they had to deal with right now.

I’m sure they would accept less slams for them just so they could see them compete against an ATG who had that advantage.

Or maybe not!
 

JackGates

Legend
I’m sure Novak and Rafa fans would prefer this to having an ATG like Sampras at age 26 who they had to deal with right now.

I’m sure they would accept less slams for them just so they could see them compete against an ATG who had that advantage.

Or maybe not!
So true lol, their guys are winning and they are still complaining.
 

James695

Rookie
Not even one person brought up Novaks age after his loss to Thiem. Not even one.
I don’t think anyone considers Thiem an ATG tho. Or even a great player.

No player younger than Novak is playing that is close to being great. Well over a decade. Has any player not had to deal with a great player at least a year or two younger than them in their career. Novak is the first ever to never have to deal with that test.
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
Really, so you never heard Djokovic was a baby and elbow injury excuses? Maybe your biased brain tuned it out from your memory.
I thought we were talking about the age excuse? Why are you suddenly talking about something else?

And no, the amount of excuses that has piled up for Fed ever since he was about 26, 27 is outrageous. He probably has eclipsed Nadal with the amount of moral losses. It's a big joke.
 

JackGates

Legend
I don’t think anyone considers Thiem an ATG tho. Or even a great player.

No player younger than Novak is playing that is close to being great. Well over a decade. Has any player not had to deal with a great player at least a year or two younger than them in their career. Novak is the first ever to never have to deal with that test.
Which is a bit strange, since Thiem not being great should make this loss even worse. People don't get that there is no shame if Fed is losing to ATGs lol, they are so stupid.
 

James695

Rookie
So true lol, their guys are winning and they are still complaining.
Imagine they had to deal with what Federer had. Imagine Agassi and Sampras were 26 and 27 now. Imagine the damage to their grand slam count.

You think they would be grateful to have avoided that but it’s moan, moan, moan. It’s not fair that nadal and novak hasn’t had one great younger player to deal with. How they must weep!
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
I don’t think anyone considers Thiem an ATG tho. Or even a great player.

No player younger than Novak is playing that is close to being great. Well over a decade. Has any player not had to deal with a great player at least a year or two younger than them in their career. Novak is the first ever to never have to deal with that test.
Djokovic hasn't been an ATG his whole career, you know. He also had to fight and work hard to reach that claim.
 

JackGates

Legend
I thought we were talking about the age excuse? Why are you suddenly talking about something else?

And no, the amount of excuses that has piled up for Fed ever since he was about 26, 27 is outrageous. He probably has eclipsed Nadal with the amount of moral losses. It's a big joke.
Ok, baby means younger, it means age, hello? The only reason why excuses are less is, Djokovic is younger, so he is losing less, plus weak era means no younger ATG players to make him lose more.

Did I just use age and weak era excuses as to why Fed fans are making more excuses than Djokovic fans?
 

James695

Rookie
Djokovic hasn't been an ATG his whole career, you know. He also had to fight and work hard to reach that claim.
Every ATG can say that dummy. They all started as a junior and then moved onto the tour as a nobody.

Novak is the only ATG though that hasn’t had to cope with a younger great player. Novak fans should count their blessings the weakest period in tennis history followed Novak’s birth.
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
Every ATG can say that dummy. They all started as a junior and then moved onto the tour as a nobody.

Novak is the only ATG though that hasn’t had to cope with a younger great player. Novak fans should count their the weakest period in tennis history followed Novak’s birth.
Roddick, Hewitt, Safin, Mark, Baghdatis, Gonzalez, Nalbandian. 11 slam finals to these guys.
 

JackGates

Legend
Roddick, Hewitt, Safin, Mark, Baghdatis, Gonzalez, Nalbandian. 11 slam finals to these guys.
But they were in finals, so doesn't that prove they were playing at a high level, isn't current form what matters? I mean can't lower guys for one tournament play on the level of all time greats and make a final?

I mean Delpo beating peak Fed at USO, Delpo on paper has 1 majors, but he was playing like an all time great. So, isn't what I say logical and fair?
 

Ann

Hall of Fame
Yea Fed was called the youngling back when he was 32 :-D
Actually half-wit, people have discussed Novak's age, in fact YESTERDAY I made several posts about the top 3 all being past their peaks. Why do you know-nothings continue to post with such arrogance and get your azz handed to you? You're on ignore, I deserve better banter.
 

EasyGoing

Professional
Ask the poster I responded to. He was the one who started the weakest era talk.
Actually, he claimed Nole doesn't have a younger ATG to challenge him, which is 100% correct. Then you started posting names from an era that you don't really know much about as a complete change of subject. I am quite sure both him and me know the answer to my question, which is why I am asking you.

Again, when Roger beat those guys, how many times were neither of the Big 4 playing that tournament?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ann

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
Actually half-wit, people have discussed Novak's age, in fact YESTERDAY I made several posts about the top 3 all being past their peaks. Why do you know-nothings continue to post with such arrogance and get your azz handed to you? You're on ignore, I deserve better banter.
You don't even know what this subject is about or how it started, you just read one post and then got your pms, so go inform yourself better. Thanks.
 

Xavier G

Hall of Fame
How's this for an "excuse"?

Fed's nearly 38, Djokovic is much closer to his prime, the World #1 by a huge margin, and just better at the moment?

If Fed loses, excuse or not, that will be the truth. It wouldn't invalidate Djoker's victory or nullify Fed's loss, but it's not some hilarious acrobatic excuse, like, oh I don't know, "the roof was closed for the whole match!!1"
That's just the truth, yes and decent Fed fans won't make excuses if he loses. Novak is favorite for those reasons, as well as being an ATG himself.
 

JackGates

Legend
Actually, he claimed Nole doesn't have a younger ATG to challenge him, which is 100% correct. Then you started posting names from an era that you don't really know much about as a complete change of subject. I am quite sure both him and me know the answer to my question, which is why I am asking you.

Again, when Roger beat those guys, how many times were neither of the Big 4 playing that tournament?
The arrogance of them thinking they can manipulate stats like that, and we won't notice.
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
Actually, he claimed Nole doesn't have a younger ATG to challenge him, which is 100% correct. Then you started posting names from an era that you don't really know much about as a complete change of subject. I am quite sure both him and me know the answer to my question, which is why I am asking you.

Again, when Roger beat those guys, how many times were neither of the Big 4 playing that tournament?
There is no younger ATG at the moment. But He is still having to beat two of the greatest to win his slams. He said Novak is lucky he is winning cause of the weakest era.

And wich is the younger ATG player Nadal has had to deal with? He said only Novak. I guess he is 100% correct.
 

JackGates

Legend
There is no younger ATG at the moment. But He is still having to beat two of the greatest to win his slams. He said Novak is lucky he is winning cause of the weakest era.
No, I'm just using it as a parody to make fun of Novak fans who say Fed is only winning because of a weak era. Just to make them show how crazy this reasoning is.

It's an inside joke I have and it's fun. Trust me, I'm five steps ahead of you, I know how things work here.
 
If Roger deserves extra credit for winning at 38, Bull deserves extra credit for winning at such a young age and Djokodal deserve credit for playing historically unbelievable age 32-33 tennis. Why is winning at a nearly unprecedented older age more meaningful than winning at a nearly unprecedented younger age? Why is beating a 33 year old at age 37 so impressive but beating a 27 year old at age 22-23 meaningless? Because historically the former is more rare of an event?

All of the big three are in uncharted territories anyway in terms of age - Nole is poised to have the most successful age 30-40 decade ever, Bull is the oldest man in history to reach 6 consecutive slam semi finals and Roger is on the cusp of the oldest slam win ever. To only give Roger credit for his exploits is just subjective picking and choosing.

You want to know a secret? History will remember and weigh the numbers and forget most of the rest. If Roger wins today but Novak collects another 7 grand slams and retires with the most slams and the most weeks at #1, he will go down in history as the GOAT according to most and very few will try to dispute it with the memory of today's Roger win. And what's true further is that in 30-50 years as the sport evolves and recency bias wins out, all of the big three will be marginalized by the newer generations who did not get to see these guys compete in real time.
This is a load of gibberish.
Exaggerative nonsense. Who said beating a 27 year old is meaningless? WHO? You’re making arguments up in your mind and pretending other people said them. Just because someone said one thing doesn’t mean they believe the opposite of another. Jesus.

CLEARLY beating top ATG players at 38 is a bigger achievement than beating anyone at 22-23. Those are the start of most players peak years. Read the history books.

Federer could easily be laying in bed in the Bahamas watching the final today and that would be only natural. Instead he is competing in the final having beating the world number 2 on the way. By some people’s logic it would seem not playing in uncharted territory is better than reaching finals and semis.

You’re also contradicting yourself as you said Fed was beating them as babies, yet giving Djok immense credit for stacking up majors against a weak field in his 30s. I’m just using your own logic here.

Enjoy the match.
 
Last edited:

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
No, I'm just using it as a parody to make fun of Novak fans who say Fed is only winning because of a weak era. Just to make them show how crazy this reasoning is.

It's an inside joke I have and it's fun. Trust me, I'm five steps ahead of you, I know how things work here.
I wasn't even referring to you. Are you @James695 ?
 

Jaitock1991

Hall of Fame
I just think it's funny that to some, Roger only gets credit for winning as an older player and never discredited for losing while there's no talk of the fact that Djokodal had to face (and often beat) prime maestro as tennis babies.

Most people see through this but many maestronians want to have their cake and eat it, too. You just can't have it both ways.
You're right. Djokodal both deserve more credit for doing what they did vs prime Fed than most Fed devotees are willing to give them.

But. The fact that Fed is as old as he is now and is still competing the way he is simply can't be seen in a bad way imo. He has EVERYTHING to win at this stage. This is the privilege you get from still playing despite being old and well past your prime, a privilege that both of Djokodal will soon have as well if they are still playing in 4-5 years.
 
I just think it's funny that to some, Roger only gets credit for winning as an older player and never discredited for losing while there's no talk of the fact that Djokodal had to face (and often beat) prime maestro as tennis babies.

Most people see through this but many maestronians want to have their cake and eat it, too. You just can't have it both ways.
That doesn;t make sense. Of the big 4 Federer is the only player to play through the entire peak and primes of the other three. Nadal, Djokovic and mugray skipped at least part of Fed's peak.

Havenet looked it up but i'd guess that Fed has probably played the others combined either the most or right up there
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ann

zagor

Bionic Poster
Sucks to be a fan of Djoko or the Nadal these days:

If they win it's obvious. If they loose they suck big time.

I can see why their fanbase is so pissed right now.
Not really, considering theyre 5-6 younger and thus have much more time to exploit this field of mugs with two failed gens in a row.

They just have to deal with Fed fans saying he's old on the internet, whoop de-do.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
You're right. Djokodal both deserve more credit for doing what they did vs prime Fed than most Fed devotees are willing to give them.

But. The fact that Fed is as old as he is now and is still competing the way he is simply can't be seen in a bad way imo. He has EVERYTHING to win at this stage. This is the privilege you get from still playing despite being old and well past your prime, a privilege that both of Djokodal will soon have as well if they are still playing in 4-5 years.
With the difference that even a 40 year old Nadal on one leg would still be a favourite over the princess of clay at RG.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
I mean that's the summer that Federer's true reign is widely acknowledged to have ended and when Bull/Nole began to come into their own. In 2007 Nole and Rafa were younger than Stefanos is now. Roger lost his #1 then too.
What did Nole have to do with it? In that period Federer les 4-1 at slams. 2-1 in 2008/2009 with Djokovic losing early a few times before a potential Federer meeting.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
Not even one person brought up Novaks age after his loss to Thiem. Not even one.
And yet also, not even one person claimed that those two RG wins make Thiem a better CC player than Novak.

Yet when Fed loses, it invalidates his entire career and his legacy is destroyed etc. etc

Two sides to every coin.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
Haha, that is the essence...
Have you heard any Novak's fan to say Novak lost because he is older than Thiem who is in best tennis age?
That is difference between Fed and Novak fans...
Have you heard any Fed fan say that Thiem's wins over Novak at RG makes Thiem a better CC player?
 
D

Deleted member 77403

Guest
Lmao! I would love to see the excuses if fed looses!
Heavens sake OP, it is lose, not loose.

If you made the mistake once, it's OK, it happens, we all do. But the fact you said loose in the thread title and then again in the OP tells me you don't know how to spell it. Loose has a completely different meaning to lose.
 
Lmao! I would love to see the excuses if fed looses!
No excuses. Peak Nadal on grass/best ever version of nadal on grass just got crushed at Wimbledon, AO 19, AO 17, IW, Shanghai. Peak Nadal is 0-14 against Djokovic and Fed off clay since 2014 (im only giving off clay stat as thats the one I know without looking it up as someone posted it, you should add clay back in but sadly peak Nadal is still badly losing around 3-14 now:cry:)

Peak Nadal exposed. Give him Anderson in a final watch him add slams. Give him Fed or Novak and watch him go 0-14 lol
 
Last edited:

zagor

Bionic Poster
No excuses. Peak Nadal on grass.best ever version of nadal on grass just got crushed at Wimbeldon, AO 19, AO 17, IW, Shanghai. Peak Nadal is 0-14 against Djokovic and Fed off clay since 2014 (im only giving off clay stat as thats the one I know without looking it up as someone posted it, you should add clay back in but sadly peak Nadal is still badly losing around 3-14 now)

Peak Nadal exposed. Give him Anderson in a final watch him add slams. Give him Fed or Novak and watch him go 0-14 lol
Didn't you get the memo? Nadal lost to Fed because he's too old now, way past his prime with severely declined movement.

While Fed is a spring chicken I guess, eternally young.
 

Jaitock1991

Hall of Fame
With the difference that even a 40 year old Nadal on one leg would still be a favourite over the princess of clay at RG.
Let's hope that new blood will rise, that we will not have to refer to a then 33-year-old as the princess of clay :-D But who knows. The way things are going these days nothing would surprise me anymore.
 
Top