Hard court winning streak
Federer - 56,36
Djokovic - 35
who cares about such streaks. about players who cannot dominate the whole tour and all surfaces. the biggest winings streak of the two has nole, 43! and GS matches streak, nole 30, 27 vs fed 27, 27!
Grass winning streak
Federer - 65, 20
Djokovic - 16
Look up!
Consecutive weeks at #1
Federer - 237
Djokovic - 122
without big4. nole still has the best year and season as well as points record.
Consecutive slam finals
Federer - 10, 8
Djokovic - 6
who cares about finals. only wins are counted!
nole 4, 3, 3? vs fed 3, 3, 2
Consecutive slam semifinals
Federer - 23
Djokovic - 14
look up +little bonus:
tournaments streaks
nole 7 + dc finals, 7 vs fed 7
Winning streak vs. top ten
Federer - 24
Djokovic - 17
it was before big4 but:
W-L % vs top10:
nole 68,8% vs fed 65,2%, quite a big difference!!
he can just dream about 4 in a row and 16,950 points! such dominance!Nonsense.
Your post is full of excuses and weak to say the least.
Fact is Federer is greater than Nole at peak dominant.
I don't think there is though. For one there's different eras so could never really say if Laver played today or Fed played in the 60s who would have done what. Then it depends on who you play, due to matchups the draw makes a big difference. Then there's changing surfaces, Laver played on mainly grass, courts have sped up and slowed down.
So maybe one player would be best in certain conditions and another in other conditions. Maybe no one else could have done the calendar slam when Laver did but he wouldn't be able to win 4 in a row on current conditions like Djokovic did
"At peak dominant"?! 25,000+ posts later and still can't write a sentence in proper EnglishNonsense.
Your post is full of excuses and weak to say the least.
Fact is Federer is greater than Nole at peak dominant.
And he can just dream MANY records that Federer held.he can just dream about 4 in a row
Ranking has changed. The points distribution of all tournaments was different in 2015 than in the past when Federer was at his peak. You need to adjust and use the same system for comparison.and 16,950 points! such dominance!
Yeah, I can't write. Sorry if I hurt your feelings..."At peak dominant"?! 25,000+ posts later and still can't write a sentence in proper English
PS: "Fräulein" is considered offensive.
And he can just dream MANY records that Federer held.
Ranking has changed. The points distribution of all tournaments was different in 2015 than in the past when Federer was at his peak. You need to adjust and use the same system for comparison.
And even if Nole is ahead in point, that's dwarf in comparison to Federer streaks like 10 consecutive slam finals.
PS: "Fräulein" is considered offensive.
Even if you would convert back and forth fed would be far behind 16,950 points. and 10 consecutive finals are **** compared to 4 slams in a row!
Well, I'm talking about a hypothetical fantasy world where all the greats had grown up in the same era and played on the same surfaces, with the access to the same training/nutrition etc, and all played against each other regularly, year after year.
One man is bound to come out as GOAT in this scenario.
"At peak dominant"?! 25,000+ posts later and still can't write a sentence in proper English
PS: "Fräulein" is considered offensive.
Djokovic is the most charismatic guy, most complete player.
Forehand 10/10
Backhand 11/10
Movement 10/10
Speed 9/10
Flexibility 11/10
Defense 11/10
Offense 10/10
Mentality 11/10
Fitness 10/10
Serve 9/10
Return 11/10
And that little extra that he basically invented sliding whilst hitting winners on any court out there..
What did Federer invent? a good looking forehand (Subjective)
Get a grip guys.
Besides one can argue that the best tennis ever played is Nadal in RG.
From what I have read, the French (aside from the baby boomer generation) have largely abandoned the use of mademoiselle to address adult women. The French government has also banned it from official forms:Don't tell me you side with that idiotic, brainwash-happy rhetoric. The day the French catch on this and declare 'mademoiselle' offensive is the way we are doomed. There are always schitheads looking to be offended at whatever, when this breeds into nationwide culture though, urgh.
It says right there to address women as Frau instead of Fräulein unless the woman herself wants it. The nickname was given to Graf by Bud Collins, a distinctively non-German (but more importantly, non-Graf) broadcaster.Worttrennung: Fräu|lein
Als Anrede für eine erwachsene weibliche Person sollte, unabhängig von Alter, Familienstand und Beruf, immer Frau statt Fräulein gewählt werden. Die Anrede Fräulein ist nur noch üblich, wenn die angesprochene Frau diese Bezeichnung selbst wünscht.
Know your statements.
- (veraltet) kinderlose, ledige [junge] Frau. Abkürzung: Frl.
- (umgangssprachlich veraltet) weibliche Angestellte in einem Dienstleistungsberuf oder im Lehramt (meist als Anrede)
![]()
Djokovic is the most charismatic guy, most complete player.
Forehand 10/10
Backhand 11/10
Movement 10/10
Speed 9/10
Flexibility 11/10
Defense 11/10
Offense 10/10
Mentality 11/10
Fitness 10/10
Serve 9/10
Return 11/10
And that little extra that he basically invented sliding whilst hitting winners on any court out there..
What did Federer invent? a good looking forehand (Subjective)
Get a grip guys.
Besides one can argue that the best tennis ever played is Nadal in RG.
From what I have read, the French (aside from the baby boomer generation) have largely abandoned the use of mademoiselle to address adult women. The French government has also banned it from official forms:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...moiselle-banned-on-official-French-forms.html
It says right there to address women as Frau instead of Fräulein unless the woman herself wants it. The nickname was given to Graf by Bud Collins, a distinctively non-German broadcaster.
Anyway, I was told by a German woman that the term has fallen out of use in Germany due to a push in the '70s and '80s declaring it discriminatory. Perhaps one of the German members here can shed some light on this? I think either @tennis_pro or @tennisaddict is German.
From what I have read, the French (aside from the baby boomer generation) have largely abandoned the use of mademoiselle to address adult women. The French government has also banned it from official forms:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...moiselle-banned-on-official-French-forms.html
Languages evolve, don't they? There are many words in the English language that are considered offensive now, but weren't always this way.Distinguishing by marriage status officially isn't necessary, but erasing the words from generic discourse is language manipulation, how enraging.
It's fallen out of use because it was considered discriminatory; to me that is nearly synonymous with it being considered offensive.Fallen out of use is different from being offensive. It is moving to a word that says less about the person, but the word itself hasn't lost its meaning, obviously hasn't lost its application as a "decent" word (as exemplified by the possibility of someone to allow for its usage) as hasn't lost its usage in its other applications (like using it in a playful manner to address little girls in particular situations).
Your contention was that it is offensive, which it isn't, unless you are siding with a particular views aligned with different feminists movements. It is less neutral than "Frau", but that has nothing to do with your contention.
At least that is what the practice shows, and Duden, which is an institution on everything concerning the German language, says.
![]()
Languages evolve, don't they? There are many words in the English language that are considered offensive now, but weren't always this way.
Languages evolve, don't they? There are many words in the English language that are considered offensive now, but weren't always this way.
There's also been a similar movement to use Ms. instead of Mrs./Miss in English
It's fallen out of use because it was considered discriminatory; to me that is nearly synonymous with it being considered offensive.
Duden's recommendation to steer clear from the word unless explicitly told otherwise also tells me it can be considered offensive
That's fair. I'm just relaying the impression I got that using the word may offend a seemingly large number of people. This isn't really the place to debate this. But for everyone else I'd suggest reading up on it and making your own choices.Duden explicitly states when a word is considered offensive/pejortive, so you trying to fit such claim in your original position doesn't work as there is no such reference.
As far as it is known, the moving towards the neutral Frau is more related to the word not be misused based on lack of information (as for example, if a woman looks too young to be married, or too inexperienced to be of certain older age), than that someone feeling offended just based on its original meaning.
Of course, the influence of the modern trends cannot be underestimated, and in the future the word might be classified as offensive, but it isn't now.
You also missed the comment about its myriad of other uses, which are alive and well today, and don't even have much in common with the distinction that is now being made by some feminists (but I admit that that might also change, judging by the rampant madness in certain areas of life).
As for the French, the Mademioselle is also alive in some areas, but it is quickly retreating to make place for the more neutral variant Madame, although it is amusing to me that Madame actually carries more bourgeois meaning than Mademoiselle, yet is officially considered more appropriate.
Am I to understand that you will be the person to write to the company Chanel a protest letter to remove the shameful name Mademoiselle from their perfume line? That would be most appropriate.
![]()
He can only dream of facing Andy Murray in a RG final during his peak.he can just dream about 4 in a row and 16,950 points! such dominance!
Borg?Well, I'm talking about a hypothetical fantasy world where all the greats had grown up in the same era and played on the same surfaces, with the access to the same training/nutrition etc, and all played against each other regularly, year after year.
One man is bound to come out as GOAT in this scenario.
He can only dream of facing Andy Murray in a RG final during his peak.
I think in society it has become such that women rights needs be defended so much, that it is actually counterproductive and actually making them appear weaker. Whereas, if there was not this constant need to be feminist, it would actually make them stronger in true womanhood, which by the way is not a bad thing but a great thing.Duden explicitly states when a word is considered offensive/pejorative, so you trying to fit such claim in your original position doesn't work as there is no such reference.
As far as it is known, the moving towards the neutral Frau is more related to the word not be misused based on lack of information (as for example, if a woman looks too young to be married, or too inexperienced to be of certain older age), than that someone feeling offended just based on its original meaning.
Of course, the influence of the modern trends cannot be underestimated, and in the future the word might be classified as offensive, but it isn't now.
You also missed the comment about its myriad of other uses, which are alive and well today, and don't even have much in common with the distinction that is now being made by some feminists (but I admit that that might also change, judging by the rampant madness in certain areas of life).
As for the French, the Mademioselle is also alive in some areas, but it is quickly retreating to make place for the more neutral variant Madame, although it is amusing to me that Madame actually carries more bourgeois meaning than Mademoiselle, yet is officially considered more appropriate.
Am I to understand that you will be the person to write to the company Chanel a protest letter to remove the shameful name Mademoiselle from their perfume line? That would be most appropriate.
![]()
Don't you think its a coincidence that 3 greats magically are in the same era?I’m very tired of the 3 camps talking about the Goat. I’ve been watching tennis since the 80s. From what I’ve seen, these are the best 3 of all time. The fact that they’ve had the opportunity to play each other in the same era is pretty incredible. When they are all retired, I don’t think there will ever be anything to rival what we are witnessing.
If just going by slam counts:
Fed+Nadal+Djokovic = 52 and counting
The next 4
Sampras+Emerson+Laver+Borg = 48
This is a trick question. Federer is not a current GOAT. Djokovic is due to 9+4+1.
Nole won all masters once, and 8 of them twice. Federer misses two.
I am surprised the WTF titles seem not to weight much in the debate between Nadal-Federer-Djokovic being the GOAT. I mean, every year, you take the 8 best tennis player and Nadal couldn't beat them all once whereas Djokovic did 5 times and Federer 6.
Sure the fact it has always been played on HC is somehow debatable but these figures clearly puts the debate in some perspective imo
Don't you think its a coincidence that 3 greats magically are in the same era?
Or could it possibly be that they are for example the same level (that was possible for that time) that Borg was, except that the big 3 just had an easier field?
To me they are like 3 sole lions at the water hole chasing all weak animals away. They are still lions, but in the past there were many more hyenas and stronger animals competing for water.
I'm sorry. But there really is a reason that only 3 men share so many titles between them. And its not just because they are lions.
Don't you think its a coincidence that 3 greats magically are in the same era?
Or could it possibly be that they are for example the same level (that was possible for that time) that Borg was, except that the big 3 just had an easier field?
To me they are like 3 sole lions at the water hole chasing all weak animals away. They are still lions, but in the past there were many more hyenas and stronger animals competing for water.
I'm sorry. But there really is a reason that only 3 men share so many titles between them. And its not just because they are lions.
Novak is nowhere near being the GOAT yet. He needs closer to 20 to be in the conversation.Nadal and his fans don't want to take into account WTF because he's never been able to win it. It is as simple as that. On the other hand Monte Carlo is fully taken into account as a masters 1000 even though it's the only event not mandatory for top players.
Of course winning 6 and 5 (4 in a row) WTF is a great achievement. That's why in my opinion Nadal is nowhere near Fed and Novak has already overtaken him as being the GOAT.
And now it's coming back to bite them.I think you will find that Federer is considered GOAT by the vast majority including his peers/ fellow professionals and former players etc.
He did in maybe not on his level, but many just below him, like Agassi and Becker.If you think about soccer, both Ronaldo and Messi can be considered the best players of all time ahead of Maradonna, Pelé, Beckenbauer, etc. For sure their rivalry has helped them to improve and continue to seek greatness in order to stay ahead of the other, Sampras didn't have that.
I disagree. And I have watched the same players you have (also not Borg). I believe the slams etc. will be distributed much more with everyone having less slams. Sampras would edge head to heads against Federer with Federer edging ye ranking and consistency.I’m a bit too young to have watched Borg live, but I did watch McEnroe, Wilander, Lendl, Edberg, Becker, Agassi, and Sampras throughout their careers. I think Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic are all better than any of those players. I’m not saying that if all of them were to play in their primes at the same time that there wouldn’t be a distribution of wins, but I think relative number of slams would still be about the same.
I disagree. And I have watched the same players you have (also not Borg). I believe the slams etc. will be distributed much more with everyone having less slams. Sampras would edge head to heads against Federer with Federer edging ye ranking and consistency.
Yes, Lendl too is extremely underrated. I saw highlights of an indoor match between him and Chang and it was as if the quality was another level.Maybe you’re right, but it’s pretty hard to truly compare eras. I think Lendl and Sampras would have the most success today.
Yeah because beating Murray at RG is even remotely comparable to 05-07 Nadalhe beat a crap version of Nadal then lost to Fed’s pigeon Wawrinka LOL
Nole is the weak era king. Majority of slams won vs old Fed, washed up Nadal and Mauresmo Murray. Weakest era of all time.
14 of 15 GS titles (93,33 %) Djoker won when defeating another Big 4 member - Federer, Nadal or Murray on his way to the title. And these were victories over competitive versions of rivals, not over weak versions like Fed 2013 or Nadal 2015.
6 of 15 slams won over Old Fed and “djokolite” Murray... most recent 3 won vs likes of Anderson and Del possum.
14 of 15 GS titles (93,33 %) Djoker won when defeating another Big 4 member - Federer, Nadal or Murray on his way to the title. And these were victories over competitive versions of rivals, not over weak versions like Fed 2013 or Nadal 2015.
Again old Fed.6 of 15 slams won over Old Fed and “djokolite” Murray...
I'm not surprised that at Wimbledon 2018, you concealed Djoker's hard win over Nadal in the SF.most recent 3 won vs likes of Anderson and Del possum.