Is Federer overrated?

smoledman

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
I mean most of his reputation rests on a 4-year stretch from 2004-2007 when he won 11 slams. If you factor that out, he's won a measly 6 slams.
 
Yeah but in this decade(2010-2015) only 2 slams won. Why is he even relevant in the current discussion? Stan Wawrinka is more relevant having won 2 slams in 2 years.
 
The general performance of Federer and his likelihood of winning Grand Slams in recent years has been very over-rated by 90%+ of tennis fans, that's one thing I'm absolutely certain of. In terms of his overall career accomplishments and historical legacy, I'm not so sure.
 
brilliant thread

QQGdpWH.gif
 
Because he is still the best player, except Djokovic,after all this years.Wawrinka spent a decade for 2 GS,so guess who is irrelevant.
 
I would love to see Roger win this Aussie open.
What a great final way to close out the greatest player of all time !!

Too bad Djoker is his next foe. I am nervous !!!
 
Yea overrated quite a bit (Im sure alot of has to do with his aesthetically pleasing tennis and marketing hype) . An all time great but not this "hands down GOAT" that people claim. A highly inflated resume due to coming along at the right time during a transitional period when past all time greats were on their last leg or retired and no other greats would come along for quite a few years.. It was an extremely weak period for a good 4-5 year stretch there. When greats came along to challenge him he had all kinds of issues and his breaking the record had more to do with Nadal's injury issues and Nole not coming into his own until 2011. His slam count is so high because he had a 5 year period there where he could do whatever he wanted. Because there are was no pressure put on him but another great player.

Extremely questionable on the big stage against the big dogs when the biggest pressure is on.

Definitely one of the greatest players ever and always will be.. Hands down greatest ever? Absolutely not. Top 4-5 ever for sure.. Hes not this tennis messiah that the nuts claim he is however.

I will say hes definitely the greatest ever at beating the guys hes supposed to beat. But that doesn't mean hes the greatest to ever play. You're greatest is put to the test though on the big stage against other all time greats.. And Fed did NOT deliver there.


If the guy was the true GOAT, when you factor in how many times he put himself in positions to win ( all those semis and finals appearances at all these tournaments), he would have far more than 17 slams and his masters count. But hes been stopped by 2 other all time greats so many times I lost count.

Federer was a cyclops at a time when the rest of the tour was blind.. But then 2 guys came along and really put Federer's greatness into question where, maybe he was NEVER as great as advertised.

People need to remember, Fed wouldn't even have the slam record right now if not for injuries to Nadal during the prime of his career (especially at his peak in 2009)

But theres absolutely nothing wrong with being among the top 4-5 players to ever play the game when you consider how many people have played tennis over the last 100 years
 
Last edited:
He is an ATG and 2nd candidate in the GOAT debate (after Rod Laver), but he is totally overrated by some of his (more extreme) fans that claim he is the best in everything. Hate excuses from his fans to justify his poor H2H against Nadal and recent losses against anyone younger than him and crappy peak-to-peak, prime-to-prime comparisons.
 
Last edited:
Your looking at this the wrong way. How many players have been in a position to win not only >20 GS titles (combined from all 3 surfaces), more than 6 YE#1 and multiple CYGS..?

Not many if any at all except one player thats in question.

So no I don't think hes overrated if we take the OPs topic seriously. Regardless of the competition (this is arguable for any era) he managed to put himself in such a position and is still competing today as the worlds no.3 and a GS contender. Surely he has expectations that far exceed the realm of reality (its natural) but given the circumstances hes managed to break records and set ones that are already inhuman to begin with. 17 majors is nothing to sniff at.

If he happens to win one more GS (or a OG or both etc), that simply cements the fact that he is the GOAT (for now since time continues to roll and a new superior player might emerge).

Remember that hes went through 3 generations of players and still going strong. Its unbelievable.
 
90's Clay said:
Yea overrated quite a bit (Im sure alot of has to do with his aesthetically pleasing tennis and marketing hype) . An all time great but not this "hands down GOAT" that people claim. A highly inflated resume due to coming along at the right time during a transitional period when past all time greats were on their last leg or retired and no other greats would come along for quite a few years.. It was an extremely weak period for a good 4-5 year stretch there. When greats came along to challenge him he had all kinds of issues and his breaking the record had more to do with Nadal's injury issues and Nole not coming into his own until 2011. His slam count is so high because he had a 5 year period there where he could do whatever he wanted. Because there are was no pressure put on him but another great player.

Extremely questionable on the big stage against the big dogs when the biggest pressure is on.

Definitely one of the greatest players ever and always will be.. Hands down greatest ever? Absolutely not. Top 4-5 ever for sure.. Hes not this tennis messiah that the nuts claim he is however.

I will say hes definitely the greatest ever at beating the guys hes supposed to beat. But that doesn't mean hes the greatest to ever play. You're greatest is put to the test though on the big stage against other all time greats.. And Fed did NOT deliver there.


If the guy was the true GOAT, when you factor in how many times he put himself in positions to win ( all those semis and finals appearances at all these tournaments), he would have far more than 17 slams and his masters count. But hes been stopped by 2 other all time greats so many times I lost count.

Federer was a cyclops at a time when the rest of the tour was blind.. But then 2 guys came along and really put Federer's greatness into question where, maybe he was NEVER as great as advertised.

People need to remember, Fed wouldn't even have the slam record right now if not for injuries to Nadal during the prime of his career (especially at his peak in 2009)

But theres absolutely nothing wrong with being among the top 4-5 players to ever play the game when you consider how many people have played tennis over the last 100 years
Click to expand...
you could have just said MUGerer and left it at that....
 
I'm just saying that Stan is a bigger threat to win slams in 2016 than Fed. Everyone is getting SO excited about this semi when we all know it's gonna be another beatdown!
 
smoledman said:
Yeah but in this decade(2010-2015) only 2 slams won. Why is he even relevant in the current discussion? Stan Wawrinka is more relevant having won 2 slams in 2 years.
Click to expand...

For that matter, why should the guy in your avatar be relevant either, he's not even in the top 5. I recommend you replace his photo with one of Tomic, a true Top 5 player.
 
smoledman said:
I'm just saying that Stan is a bigger threat to win slams in 2016 than Fed. Everyone is getting SO excited about this semi when we all know it's gonna be another beatdown!
Click to expand...

While I get your notion, I still think the rankings don't lie. Fed is a bigger threat to win slams as he is putting himself out for the SF and Finals consistently. Only Murray could be said as a bigger threat currently.
 
I mean most of his reputation rests on a 4-year stretch from 2004-2007 when he won 11 slams.

Such a pathetic comment it doesn't warrant response, but who can resist?

Succinct answer: Have you ever heard of Borg? His entire (brilliant) career resulted in 11 total slams. Rod Laver is considered by many to be the GOAT and he has 11 slams.

Only on this Forum would 11 slams in ANY stretch of time be denigrated and dismissed.
 
Serena is overrated too. If you remove a stretch of 15 years where she managed to win a few (in a weak era, no less) she's pretty average.
 
smoledman said:
I mean most of his reputation rests on a 4-year stretch from 2004-2007 when he won 11 slams. If you factor that out, he's won a measly 6 slams.
Click to expand...
What are you saying exactly? Are you saying that a player should be judged only on their non-peak years, and their achievements in their peak years should be discounted? So you would put Djokovic on 1 slam only (2008 Australian open) and Nadal on zero slams?
 
Of course he is overrated.
That "meager" 4 year stretch is something that has been done multiple times.
And, what other than that - "meager" 6 slams.
Duh ! Darned overrated fellow!
 
he is overrated because of marketing and his beautiful game,people don't realize that fred didnt win slam since 2012 wimbledon!! thats 3,5 years..
 
90's Clay said:
Yea overrated quite a bit (Im sure alot of has to do with his aesthetically pleasing tennis and marketing hype) . An all time great but not this "hands down GOAT" that people claim. A highly inflated resume due to coming along at the right time during a transitional period when past all time greats were on their last leg or retired and no other greats would come along for quite a few years.. It was an extremely weak period for a good 4-5 year stretch there. When greats came along to challenge him he had all kinds of issues and his breaking the record had more to do with Nadal's injury issues and Nole not coming into his own until 2011. His slam count is so high because he had a 5 year period there where he could do whatever he wanted. Because there are was no pressure put on him but another great player.

Extremely questionable on the big stage against the big dogs when the biggest pressure is on.

Definitely one of the greatest players ever and always will be.. Hands down greatest ever? Absolutely not. Top 4-5 ever for sure.. Hes not this tennis messiah that the nuts claim he is however.

I will say hes definitely the greatest ever at beating the guys hes supposed to beat. But that doesn't mean hes the greatest to ever play. You're greatest is put to the test though on the big stage against other all time greats.. And Fed did NOT deliver there.


If the guy was the true GOAT, when you factor in how many times he put himself in positions to win ( all those semis and finals appearances at all these tournaments), he would have far more than 17 slams and his masters count. But hes been stopped by 2 other all time greats so many times I lost count.

Federer was a cyclops at a time when the rest of the tour was blind.. But then 2 guys came along and really put Federer's greatness into question where, maybe he was NEVER as great as advertised.

People need to remember, Fed wouldn't even have the slam record right now if not for injuries to Nadal during the prime of his career (especially at his peak in 2009)

But theres absolutely nothing wrong with being among the top 4-5 players to ever play the game when you consider how many people have played tennis over the last 100 years
Click to expand...
metsman said:
you could have just said MUGerer and left it at that....
Click to expand...
102514913_tp.jpg
 
Yes he is. The problem with Federer, and the black mark on his resume, is that he hasn't got a all time great match, where he was pushed to 5 sets, against a peak player, and was able to push through and win it in the end. Case in point, versus Djokovic US Open 2010, 2011. He could have won those matches, but when the going got tough, he simply collapsed.

Djokovic and Nadal have had a number of classic matches, where they were able to push through at crucial point. This has been the REAL rivalry of this generation (something that Nadal himself admitted, indirectly, a few months back in an interview).

Federer, unfortunatley was stuck between 2 eras of tennis. A weak era, and a new "golden age" brought on by Djokovic, Nadal, Murray etc. He shined through in the weak era (not taking anything away from him), but struggled once really good opponents started to come around.

Anybody who doesn't see this, is simply fooling themselves.
 
Is Michael Jordan overrated or Lionel Messi? I think it's save to say that the man who accomplished the most in the history of his sport could never be overrated.
 
Fedr is unbelievably overrated.
In nominal terms, he has 17 Slams, 302 weeks at no. 1, 6 YECs, a lot of winning streaks, 24 Masters, etc.
But this is all actually a hoax - the product of several computer errors and inflation (of eras).

First. Adjusting for inflation, in real terms Fedr has: 0 Slams, 0 Masters, 1 week at no.1
The other issue is his 11-23 record against RAFA. In real terms this is actually a 1-123 record. Someone just put the dash in the wrong place.
 
2004-07 Fed is overrated. Current 34 year old constantly improving phenom is a much better player and would bagel and breadstick that Fed
 
90's Clay said:
Yea overrated quite a bit (Im sure alot of has to do with his aesthetically pleasing tennis and marketing hype) . An all time great but not this "hands down GOAT" that people claim. A highly inflated resume due to coming along at the right time during a transitional period when past all time greats were on their last leg or retired and no other greats would come along for quite a few years.. It was an extremely weak period for a good 4-5 year stretch there. When greats came along to challenge him he had all kinds of issues and his breaking the record had more to do with Nadal's injury issues and Nole not coming into his own until 2011. His slam count is so high because he had a 5 year period there where he could do whatever he wanted. Because there are was no pressure put on him but another great player.

Extremely questionable on the big stage against the big dogs when the biggest pressure is on.

Definitely one of the greatest players ever and always will be.. Hands down greatest ever? Absolutely not. Top 4-5 ever for sure.. Hes not this tennis messiah that the nuts claim he is however.

I will say hes definitely the greatest ever at beating the guys hes supposed to beat. But that doesn't mean hes the greatest to ever play. You're greatest is put to the test though on the big stage against other all time greats.. And Fed did NOT deliver there.


If the guy was the true GOAT, when you factor in how many times he put himself in positions to win ( all those semis and finals appearances at all these tournaments), he would have far more than 17 slams and his masters count. But hes been stopped by 2 other all time greats so many times I lost count.

Federer was a cyclops at a time when the rest of the tour was blind.. But then 2 guys came along and really put Federer's greatness into question where, maybe he was NEVER as great as advertised.

People need to remember, Fed wouldn't even have the slam record right now if not for injuries to Nadal during the prime of his career (especially at his peak in 2009)

But theres absolutely nothing wrong with being among the top 4-5 players to ever play the game when you consider how many people have played tennis over the last 100 years
Click to expand...


yes....so overrated that the weak era guy or transitional champ is playing semis of australia 2016, final of us open and wimbledon 2015 with 34 years old!!!!!!!

and is the only guy who real put some fight to djokovic.

the only stone of roger was NADAL AND ONLY NADAL.

djokovic could did something when federer was in his 30s........AND EVEN IN HIS 34 YEARS OLD HE IS STILL BEATING HIM IN THE BEST OF 3 SETS.

sampras at 30s was a disaster, and federer in his 34 is fighting back to back with djokovic
 
18 year old Nadal > 34 year old Federer

In other words, LOL at Federer playing in a weak era.

Also look at Nadal, who is 5 years younger than Federer. Nadal was finished after 2014 compared to Federer being finished (but even then not so much) after 2009.

If anything, I'd ask how Murray, wawrinka, cilic, were able to be slam winners after being shut out during the fedal era. Also look at nishikori: a worse and more injury prone davydenko. Ferrer has the best days of his career after 2010. Etc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Fabresque
Nadal is overrated.
Replies
26
Views
4K
dr325i
dr325i
roysid
Best 4 year period in tennis history
Replies
2
Views
950
roysid
roysid
JennyS
Amazing Federer Grand Slam Achievements that get overlooked
Replies
12
Views
3K
Tennfan123
T
C
  • Poll Poll
Federer's Greatest Year?
2
Replies
64
Views
6K
clayman2000
clayman2000
YodaKnowsBest
  • Poll Poll
How many slams for Federer?
2
Replies
51
Views
4K
YodaKnowsBest
YodaKnowsBest
Back
Top