mike danny
Bionic Poster
Still what does that have to do with the thread? Djokovic was harsly an issue for Fed back when Fed was making 18/19 slam finals?
INSANE GOAT STAT: 18/19 SLAM FINALS IN A ROW - AND WINNING SIXTEEN
- Thread starter Federev
- Start date
The relevance to the thread is that Federer established the record because of what a tremendous front runner he was. He's by far the best player against the field but (IMO) not commensurately as strong when the heat is on. It's something that can never be tested but if he'd come through a few years later he probably wouldn't have set that record...he'd have lost more in the semis.
D
Deleted member 757377
Guest
In that exact period, that goes from Wimbledon 2005 to the Australian Open 2010, he had 20 wins and 23 losses against the other big4. Who were 18-23 years old.
D
Deleted member 757377
Guest
Djokovic's 17finals-4semifinals-1quarterfinal streak is more impressive, considering the opponents. Maybe he should have won more finals, but he lost 4 to Nadal, 2 to Murray and 1 to Wawrinka (the semis 2 to Federer, 1 to Nadal and 1 to Nishikori, the quarterfinal to Wawrinka). Plus he did much better than Federer in the other tournaments (wtf and 1000 titles: 28 to 11).
Last edited by a moderator:
metsman
G.O.A.T.
Yes the heat isn't on when you're winning 8/10 slams or playing 18/19 finals. Slam finals are a walk in the park.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Ok and if Djokovic had entered his 2015 form before 2015 he would not have won 4 in a row. It's easy to downgrade someone's achievements.
There's some truth to your sarcasm in that while establishing Federer's record is no walk in the park the heat wasn't on from '04-07 to the extent it was later. I'm not saying anything Federer doesn't himself acknowledge. For example Federer has said that in part his Wimbledon loss in '08 had its genesis in the beatdown at Roland Garros. Why was he resentful of Djokovic's perfectly legitimate "slap shot" off his serve when match point down at the 2011 USO other than he was struggling with the reality of having genuine competitors? His lay off in 2016 was so beneficial because it freed his mind from the anxiety of competition. He had established a pattern of losing many big matches that he broke in 2017.In the period '08-'15 it's unlikely he'd have come from a break down in the 5th against Djokovic or Nadal because he loved free wheeling against inferiors (and why wouldn't you) rather than battling with equals.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
The problem is that it's wrong to consider every Fed from that period as the same Fed. No way was 2015 Fed equal to 2008-2009 Fed. Even Nadal/Djoker started declining at 29, but you still expected Federer to battle younger Nadal/Djoker as equals starting from around that same age. Your expectations of Fed were really too high. Why was Fed supposed to battle the 2 of them as equals at ages when Nadal/Djoker couldn't even beat the Fognini's and the Istomin's of this world? It's ridiculous really.
Fed came back from a break down against Djokovic In the FO semis right when Djokovic was serving to stay in the 5th.
What's with this nonsense that he didn't battle against equals? Nadal 2007 Wimb, Djoker 2008 USO, Delpo 2009 RG, Roddick 2009 Wimb, Djoker 2011 FO and 2012 Wimb, Roddick 2004 Wimb and others. I don't care if some of them weren't Nadal/Djoker. They were very much Fed's equals at those very moments, otherwise they wouldn't have pushed him as much as they did.
Djoker would not have come back in 2011 USO if 2006 Fed had been on the other side of the net, but to you 2011 Fed was the same as 2006 Fed
You're starting to sound like those annoying Fed haters who believe Fed has been at his peak every year of his career and never once has he declined.
The problem is that it's wrong to consider every Fed from that period as the same Fed. No way was 2015 Fed equal to 2008-2009 Fed. Even Nadal/Djoker started declining at 29, but you still expected Federer to battle younger Nadal/Djoker as equals starting from around that same age. Your expectations of Fed were really too high. Why was Fed supposed to battle the 2 of them as equals at ages when Nadal/Djoker couldn't even beat the Fognini's and the Istomin's of this world? It's ridiculous really.
Fed came back from a break down against Djokovic In the FO semis right when Djokovic was serving to stay in the 5th.
What's with this nonsense that he didn't battle against equals? Nadal 2007 Wimb, Djoker 2008 USO, Delpo 2009 RG, Roddick 2009 Wimb, Djoker 2011 FO and 2012 Wimb, Roddick 2004 Wimb and others. I don't care if some of them weren't Nadal/Djoker. They were very much Fed's equals at those very moments, otherwise they wouldn't have pushed him as much as they did.
Djoker would not have come back in 2011 USO if 2006 Fed had been on the other side of the net, but to you 2011 Fed was the same as 2006 Fed
You're starting to sound like those annoying Fed haters who believe Fed has been at his peak every year of his career and never once has he declined.
I agree they all mix their form, so it varies from year to year, and day to day within a year. I'm not so sure 2015 Fed was inferior to the '08/09 versions, particularly at the USO. He was in sparkling form in '15 having from memory demolished Djokovic at Cincinnati and made it to the final of the USO without dropping a set, and having been taken to only two tie breakers in the run to the final, both against Isner who's a very tough guy to break. Most of his matches were against pretty strong opponents too, so with results like that it's hard to say he wasn't in vintage form.
I'm not a Fed hater, I'm anything but...the first time I saw him play was the Wimbledon semi in 2003. After that match and the final against Philipousis I declared him to be not only the greatest tennis player I'd ever seen, but the finest exponent of any sport I'd ever seen. The only sting in the tail was that I'd placed an inordinately large amount of money on Roddick to win Wimbledon at 8/1 a few weeks before the tournament, the proceeds of which were due to finance a trip to Europe the cost of which was prohibitive because the Australian dollar at the time was worth only 35 cents to the Euro. Despite the fact he partially curtailed my European sojourn I loved the way Federer's artistry all but made a mockery of the brash American's inelegant scrambling.
2008/2009 Fed would that 2015 final probably in 4 sets.
Even if he looked dominant beating up mugs like Gasquet and his HC pigeon Wawrinka. Does not excuse him frequently dumping sitter FHs into the net vs Djokovic. In fact he actually dominated and beat Djokovic in 08-09 so we know how 08-09 version would do.
Even if he looked dominant beating up mugs like Gasquet and his HC pigeon Wawrinka. Does not excuse him frequently dumping sitter FHs into the net vs Djokovic. In fact he actually dominated and beat Djokovic in 08-09 so we know how 08-09 version would do.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
It's because he had to deal with younger rivals while himself declining and physically not quite able to hang on ever slowing courts in B05. Something Nadal and Djokovic don't have the slightest clue about because when they decline they lose to some beer belly at the local club before making it to anyone important and the generation below them largely comprises of special needs kids. Not to mention conditions are perfectly tailored to their baseline spamming needs. When the playing field was somewhat leveled in 2017 with Nadal declined but still good enough to make it to Federer unlike previous years, you saw what happened despite the fact that Nadal was still much closer to his physical prime than Federer was. Djokovic needed Federer to go through two major stretches of declining (one from his peak, and one after 2012) to start consistently beating him in slams LOL, and still when stamina isn't as big a issue Federer was still Djoker's daddy in B03 on quicker courts, and when Djokovic himself goes through one period of decline he's of course nowhere to be found. Not to mention Djokovic beat Murray in how many slam finals 15-16? Talk about free wheeling against inferiors.
Basically any criticism of Federer establishes him as the far superior player to either, because the situations you are criticizing for are ones Nadal and Djokovic weren't good enough to create (reaching elite opponents and late rounds when not being close to their best form).
I'm not really sure why any Federer fan speaks derisively of Nadal or Djokovic when to do so diminishes him given that he lost so many big matches to them. Why not simply put the perfectly reasonable argument that Federer was the greatest of the 3 because of his superior overall record and that there were circumstances favourable to Nadal and Djokovic which flattered them in many of their matches?
metsman
G.O.A.T.
because that's not a reasonable response to nonsense like "he's not as strong when the heat is on" and saying he couldn't handle Nadal and Djokovic peak for peak, and wouldn't have the record despite the fact that any minor losses in his peak would be made up tenfold when Nadal and Djokovic declined and a still decent 30-31 year old Federer would be cleaning up every slam under the sun.
I find that difficult to decipher. Regarding the part I can understand virtually nobody would have thought Federer would fight back from a break down in the 5th against Nadal in the 2017 AO final because it appeared to be following a pattern we'd seen before. A tremendous battle between two great players, but ultimately Nadal grinds to the point where Federer becomes dispirited, gains the ascendancy and wins the match. To Federer's enormous credit he was able to nullify that script. That steel when the heat was on wasn't there in the period '08-15, but Federer in his time off freed himself mentally to the point where he was able to exorcise the defeatist thoughts that had previously inhibited him principally against Nadal, but also at times against Djokovic. Tennis appeared to come naturally to Federer but that strength under siege less so, and it's perhaps his greatest achievement in his mid 30's to have climbed that mountain.
Similar threads
