If we take out 2017, has Fed truly helped his legacy si…

Would Fed’s legacy be stronger today if he had retired after Wimbledon 2012?

  • Hell no. 3 slams and lots of great tennis would have been lost!

    Votes: 56 77.8%
  • Yes. He has harmed the aura, especially at Wimbledon

    Votes: 16 22.2%

  • Total voters
    72

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
I remember posting a thread here in 2012 after Fed won Wimbledon.

I asked if he should retire on top of tennis.


What has he gained in the last 9 years?
3 slams, two of them won against non Big 3
Some nice wins against Nadal and a more respectable H2H

What has he lost?
Numerous slam finals to the guy poised to take over his spot as GOAT. The three Wimbledon finals losses to Nole really hurt his legacy. We’ve seen ugly beat downs at AO and USO and losses to scrubs.
Had Roger called it quits after 2012 Wimbledon, people would give him benefit of doubt. Now the “King of Grass” has won just one Wimbledon in the last nine years.
Has Federer actually hurt his legacy by staying in the game??
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
I remember posting a thread here in 2012 after Fed won Wimbledon.

I asked if he should retire on top of tennis.


What has he gained in the last 9 years?
3 slams, two of them won against non Big 3
Some nice wins against Nadal and a more respectable H2H

What has he lost?
Numerous slam finals to the guy poised to take over his spot as GOAT. The three Wimbledon finals losses to Nole really hurt his legacy. We’ve seen ugly beat downs at AO and USO and losses to scrubs.
Had Roger called it quits after 2012 Wimbledon, people would give him benefit of doubt. Now the “King of Grass” has won just one Wimbledon in the last nine years.
Has Federer actually hurt his legacy by staying in the game??
Been saying the same for years! Dropping that '12 OG to Murray probably encouraged him to stay for another cycle! Federer truly lost a lot of luster IMO by hanging on and taking 5+ years to add 3 Majors which only delays the inevitable! All kinds of myths could have been formulated if he had retired in 2012, but his ego wouldn't have it! He's believing his own LEGEND, but the numbers are falling out of his favor with only longevity records his only redeeming legacy! Sounds crazy, but I believe it! He can't be the GOAT in any context with 2 rivals having winning records over him! :rolleyes:
 
"Too bad you missed out on YE1 by a measly 200 points. Just think if you had won the USO semi..."

"Yeah, but I would have been destroyed in the final anyway. Losing was net-plus."

:rolleyes:
 

bnjkn

Semi-Pro
There was pain for sure, but it was worth it. At some fleeting points he played some really good stuff like IW 17, Cincy 15, and, you know, we got to watch more of his sublime tennis. I could watch that forever.

As for the legacy, I don't really care if it hurt. I'm sitting on a ball of dirt that spins around a star in the middle of nothing, I will eventually die and everything else will die, including legacies, so what really matters is experiencing things that have meaning for me.

I don't enjoy losses like the one today, when he is not competitive, but when he's playing well it's always worth it for me even when he loses.
 

nachiket nolefam

Hall of Fame
Had Federer retired, chances are there that Djokovic would win 7/8 Wimbledons (2012). Even if he didn't people would say Novak has more SF or more final.

Federer's legacy in Wimbledon isn't bad.
12 F
14/15 SF.

Novak is second at 7F and 10 SF and he won't ever reach the consistency of Roger in Wimby. He has 200 wins in grass vs Novak's 100. Every tennis purist knows Roger at his best can beat Djokovic even at 37 years of age now.
 

Azure

G.O.A.T.
Tennis won by his hanging around. He infact enhanced his status by trying and never giving up. He was extraordinarily close to winning in 2019. Just imagine the narrative had he won that. 2017 was also a phenomenal year for him.

I don't think he played for hypothetical narratives (which sadly abound this forum). He played for himself - just like any champion with an ego. To win more, to enjoy the atmosphere further and if he could push it for another decade or so, hey, why not?
 

NoleFam

Talk Tennis Guru
Had Federer retired, chances are there that Djokovic would win 7/8 Wimbledons (2012). Even if he didn't people would say Novak has more SF or more final.

Federer's legacy in Wimbledon isn't bad.
12 F
14/15 SF.

Novak is second at 6F and 10 SF and he won't ever reach the consistency of Roger in Wimby. He has 200 wins in grass vs Novak's 100. Every tennis purist knows Roger at his best can beat Djokovic even at 37 years of age now.
fify
 

Kralingen

Legend
If he retired he would be a distant 3rd in the slam race and would be behind Djokovic in basically all meaningful statistics and records. Additionally without Roger from ‘12-20 I’m sure Nadal would have at least 3 more majors and a dominant H2H so he would be likely viewed as the better player, statistically at least.

Ridiculous question.
 

nachiket nolefam

Hall of Fame
Just imagine history of this guy at Wimbledon.

2003 to 2009 6 wins and 1 F

2012 to 2019 2 wins and 3 F.

People are saying take these 5 great years out. Even with a leg, Federer was almost in 6/7 Finals after 2011. And he beat Andy and Novak back to back and came close to beating Rafa and Novak back to back.
 

PilotPete

Hall of Fame
Nope, but 40-15 sure hurt his legacy. That was just inexcusable especially after how relatively easily he beat Nadal.
 

Mustard

Talk Tennis Guru
What a ridiculous question. Federer's run around 2019 French Open - 2019 Wimbledon was very impressive for a 37-year-old.
 

Kuclas

New User
Nah. Some people are too young to remember Jimmy Connors being beat down by Ivan Lendl numerous times later in his career. Connors was 7 years older than Lendl. Connors beat Lendl the first 8 times. Than Lendl beat him down the last 17 times. Does that make Connors legacy worst being beat by another all time great player 7 years younger? Nope. People remember Jimmy Connors run to us open semis at age 39. They don’t care about the Lendl losses.

fed is 6 years older than Novak. It’s still an amazement he can compete with Novak.

and 2017 Australian open title will probably be the fed best title run in his late stages of his career.
 

Antonio Puente

Hall of Fame
Fed is 6-6 vs. Nadal since W 2012. That's an improvement, and yes, 2017 saved it from being a laughingstock. Had he retired, things would be worse with Nadal, better with Djoker.
 

Mustard

Talk Tennis Guru
Fed is 6-6 vs. Nadal since W 2012. That's an improvement, and yes, 2017 saved it from being a laughingstock.
Federer has won 6 of the last 7 against Nadal. I think this is mostly because of changes Nadal has made to become more aggressive, which works well against the field as Nadal ages, but I think it's hurt him against Federer. Nadal controlled the head-to-head against Federer by grinding him down.
 

Antonio Puente

Hall of Fame
Federer has won 6 of the last 7 against Nadal.
It was really only one year though, 2017. He did certainly have Nadal's number that year. Outside of that, it's one random 2015 Basel match and a split in 2019.

You might be right pointing to a change in style, but I think it was mostly mental. If Nadal finishes out AO 2017, it's probably more of the same - still in Fed's head. Fed, however, got the win and some confidence.
 

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
So, in other words….

17>20
If he retired he would be a distant 3rd in the slam race and would be behind Djokovic in basically all meaningful statistics and records. Additionally without Roger from ‘12-20 I’m sure Nadal would have at least 3 more majors and a dominant H2H so he would be likely viewed as the better player, statistically at least.

Ridiculous question.
What was his H2H vs. Nole in 2012? I'm pretty sure he had a positive H2H at slams and overall but I could be mistaken.

At the very least, he'd have the Borg argument in his favor. People would give him the benefit of the doubt and say he could have gone well past 20 had he wanted to play on past 2012. Now all we have are memories of heartbreak losses to mainly Nole since 2014.

Also, we would have been spared the abomination of 2013!
 

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
What a ridiculous question. Federer's run around 2019 French Open - 2019 Wimbledon was very impressive for a 37-year-old.
Not ridiculous. He lost to his two biggest rivals at both of those tournaments.
Yes, he SHOULD have won 2019 Wimbledon, but the fact that he didn't and lost the mental battle will never be forgotten.
 

Kralingen

Legend
At the very least, he'd have the Borg argument in his favor. People would give him the benefit of the doubt and say he could have gone well past 20 had he wanted to play on past 2012.
Ah yes, instead of playing professional tennis after 2012 and making hundreds of millions of dollars and breaking numerous records in the process, he should have retired… so that some nerds on the Internet would make hypothetical arguments for him in the GOAT debate.

Please stop trolling
 

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
Ah yes, instead of playing professional tennis after 2012 and making hundreds of millions of dollars and breaking numerous records in the process, he should have retired… so that some nerds on the Internet would make hypothetical arguments for him in the GOAT debate.

Please stop trolling
TTW glory>>300 million dollar deals with UniKlo
 

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
Let me underscore a key point here.

Between 2003-2012, Fed was a truly dominant grass court player, losing only to Nadal in 2008 and then to Berdych and Tsonga in 2010-11 (both of which really sucked).
Post 2012 we saw the Stankhovsky debacle in 2013, the consecutive losses to Nole in finals 2014-2015, the loss to Raomug in 2016, the victory over non Big-3 crybaby in 2017 (though I truly think 2017 Fed was very, very good), the 2018 loss to Anderson, the 2019 GOAT heartbreak match, and then this abomination in 2021.

It's been painful to see this.
 

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
He should have 21st at Wimbledon - that's only regret. Still he would get surpassed anyway.
Hard to say. He'd be at 21>20>18 now and more importantly he would have dealt a psychological blow to his biggest rival. Just the opposite happened really. Fed hasn't been the same since that match.
 

Madinolf

Rookie
Maybe, but he couldn't know that.

He might have taken 2014 Wimbledon, 2015 US Open and 2019 Wimbledon from Djokovic and now it would be 23-16.
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
Maybe, but he couldn't know that.

He might have taken 2014 Wimbledon, 2015 US Open and 2019 Wimbledon from Djokovic and now it would be 23-16.
Fed might've, but he didn't win any of those matches! I give you Nole STOLE Wimbledon 2019; so 21-18! :-D
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
What, no credit for reaching the final, putting himself in that position in the first place? Of course not. Par for the course. :cool:
That's satisfaction when going out; sorta like when Martina got to the Wimbledon final in '94! It was enough and she left the stage until later doing doubles! :unsure:
 

gjm127

Professional
What was his H2H vs. Nole in 2012? I'm pretty sure he had a positive H2H at slams and overall but I could be mistaken.

At the very least, he'd have the Borg argument in his favor. People would give him the benefit of the doubt and say he could have gone well past 20 had he wanted to play on past 2012. Now all we have are memories of heartbreak losses to mainly Nole since 2014.

Also, we would have been spared the abomination of 2013!
I don't think any of his fans would prefer to take the hypothetical safehaven with the Borg argument instead of witnessing what actually transpired from 2012 onwards, even if that means losing many matches to them. His legacy is not tarnished, he's the one who's always pushing the "old" limit for the other 2 to feed on. It's not an easy position to be in because of all the unknowns that go with it.
 

beard

Legend
He helped his legacy in one way (winning more slams, titles, being great in late tennis age, finally beating Nadal few times), but harmed it in another (losing from the first row goat race to Novak and possibly Rafa, losing multiple slams to Novak, including 40-15)... So, more titles but losing goat aura from a first row...

I know it sounds crazy, but for his overall legacy it would be better he retired as champion with goat aura and less titles. This way he won more titles but was dethroned in live action in every possible way by Djokovic and possibly Nadal...

By staying on tour he mostly helped Novak legacy and I thank him a lot... W14, W15, W19 and 40:15, USO15, AOs... Crazy hostile atmospheres, crazy wins... Great memories... Thank you Roger... :love:
 

itrium84

Hall of Fame
It was really only one year though, 2017. He did certainly have Nadal's number that year. Outside of that, it's one random 2015 Basel match and a split in 2019.

You might be right pointing to a change in style, but I think it was mostly mental. If Nadal finishes out AO 2017, it's probably more of the same - still in Fed's head. Fed, however, got the win and some confidence.
Fed successfully prevented Nadal from becoming GOAT during 2012-2019. That has to count for something.
 

Tennisgods

Hall of Fame
All this legacy ********. Hilarious when you consider that Djokovic ruins his week after week just by being a bit of a *****.
Federer‘s legacy as a beloved ATG is one of the more solid things in tennis history. His late career has actually only strengthened that.
 

ledwix

Hall of Fame
Was it worth it to play for so much longer in order to win 3 more slams? I think not. He's been playing all this time to prevent this very moment from happening. But instead he may have brought it about himself.

Considering we are purely discussing legacy, let's remove considerations of playing due to fan appreciation, money, or the enjoyment of the game itself.

Yes, in isolation, it's impossible to "harm a legacy" in terms of subtracting from it. And we will always appreciate the Federer matches as long as he still plays.

But nothing that Federer does is in isolation. Being that untouchable, dominant player is what he was proud of in his early career. Hence the fact that he will end his career around the time his records are broken paints an ironic picture. He fought to put a large distance between him and his rivals by playing for as long as possible, but he also showed how much longer it was possible to play. They could keep making adjustments in strategy and pace themselves rather than rush to reach his records by age 30. Plus, there will be no redemption over the events of 2019, it seems. The mental edge that Djokovic has over him will remain in our memories.

All of a sudden, the best time to retire seems to have been 2012 after all.
 

FHtennisman

Professional
Federer has won 6 of the last 7 against Nadal. I think this is mostly because of changes Nadal has made to become more aggressive, which works well against the field as Nadal ages, but I think it's hurt him against Federer. Nadal controlled the head-to-head against Federer by grinding him down.
Really disagree on this, at least for the 2017 matches, when Roger is on against Rafa now, he literally takes the racquet out of his hands and that's mainly because he started taking the ball even earlier than he did before and his ROS against Rafa.
 

Patogen

Rookie
Some people... :oops:

Feds turned pro in 98, it took him 6 years of toiling to get on top. It was never an overnight success. There were dozens of bad losses, hard losses, matches he should have won but lost. He doesn't owe anything to any of his gloryhunter fans. He has every right, the age and love for the game to enjoy a fade-out phase of the career arch.

He's a great ambassador for the game, and again, the fact that sycophant media and gloryhunter fans put him on a pedestal they now fear is threatened or to be exposed as faux shouldn't really influence his decisions at all.

Not only it's great he stayed on through all those years. Especially after two surgeries, he should stick around even longer, relax and enjoy this part of his career as much as he enjoyed the rest. (If he feels like it.)

To hell with "legacy".
 

MadariKatu

Professional
I will never understand the need some people have for others to retire. It's like with Murray. If he wants to play challengers, let him. The important thing is that they enjoy what they're doing. If along the way, we get to enjoy watching it, better. Sometimes it's not about the numbers, but about what one feels. Feeling you COULD HAVE done more but didn't, is a bad feeling. 40-15 wasn't bad. It was hurtful because of how close it was. It is probably way worse for the fans than it is for him.
 

ACE of Hearts

Bionic Poster
I will never understand the need some people have for others to retire. It's like with Murray. If he wants to play challengers, let him. The important thing is that they enjoy what they're doing. If along the way, we get to enjoy watching it, better. Sometimes it's not about the numbers, but about what one feels. Feeling you COULD HAVE done more but didn't, is a bad feeling. 40-15 wasn't bad. It was hurtful because of how close it was. It is probably way worse for the fans than it is for him.
He has a lot of choking moments against djokovic going back to 2010 and he has had good moments.
 
Top