Revenant
Banned
Well, he certainly did better against Peak Federer than this part-time fisherman did against Old Federer at the 2011 World Tour Finals.
Most overrated player in recent times
- Thread starter Bukmeikara
- Start date
Well, he certainly did better against Peak Federer than this part-time fisherman did against Old Federer at the 2011 World Tour Finals.
objectivity
Banned
agreed. as well as that slaughterfest i witnessed in 2008 FO final. oh and that 2009 AO. saw this full grown man reduced to girly tears.
not pretty at all. rather difficult to watch.
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
He is the definition of delusional :lol:
At least mayo was funny, this guy is boooring
Revenant
Banned
D
Deleted member 733170
Guest
Sorry I can't agree with you that Laconte (sic) is underrated. He maybe full of Gallic charm but he is really a Depardieu type figure yet with a tennis racket. Monfils carries on this tradition of loveable French fools.
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
ROger Federer, Not saying he isnt tier 1, unlike some trolls here try to degrade Nadal or Sampras all the time.
But roger federer is overrated because he depended of a 4 years span to dominate the field and win 11/17 slams, which means he could succeed with very specific conditions. Once the tour changed a little he stopped winning 2-3 slams per year. (bar 2009 where he depended of injuried rafa to win 2 slams per season again)
Prior first slam win 1998-2002
Federer.. 2003-2007 = 12 slams
Federer... 2008-2012 = 5 slams
Federer.. 2013-2014..... = 0 Slams
Prior first slam win: 2003/2004
Nadal... 2005-2009 = 6 slams
Nadal ... 2010- 2014 = 8 slams
Nadal ... 2015+ = ???
Federer was highly dependand on his early-mid career years to catch 12/17 slams... and dont tell me Federer declined in early 2008 with only 26 years.....
Djokovic is the opposite of federer... he won 6/7 after playing slams for more than 6 years....
But roger federer is overrated because he depended of a 4 years span to dominate the field and win 11/17 slams, which means he could succeed with very specific conditions. Once the tour changed a little he stopped winning 2-3 slams per year. (bar 2009 where he depended of injuried rafa to win 2 slams per season again)
Prior first slam win 1998-2002
Federer.. 2003-2007 = 12 slams
Federer... 2008-2012 = 5 slams
Federer.. 2013-2014..... = 0 Slams
Prior first slam win: 2003/2004
Nadal... 2005-2009 = 6 slams
Nadal ... 2010- 2014 = 8 slams
Nadal ... 2015+ = ???
Federer was highly dependand on his early-mid career years to catch 12/17 slams... and dont tell me Federer declined in early 2008 with only 26 years.....
Djokovic is the opposite of federer... he won 6/7 after playing slams for more than 6 years....
D
Deleted member 733170
Guest
Revenant
Banned
What about Nadal that depended on 1 surface to dominate the field and win 9/14 Slams? Doesn't that mean he could succeed with very specific conditions as well?
Once the surface changes from clay, Nadal can't win (except for USO 2010/2013 and Wimbledon 2010 where he got lucky with easy draws).
Nadal on Clay - 9 Slams
Nadal off Clay - 5 Slams (3 of them with very easy draws)
Federer on Grass - 7 Slams
Federer off Grass - 10 Slams
Nadal is highly dependent on clay to win 9/14 Slams.
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
Talking about easy draws? LOl, look at the draws he got in the last 2 grand slams this year.. a complete joke.... HE didnt have big competition outside clay 2003-2007... he way toying with ferrero, hewitt, roddick, safin, nalbandian..and semi-retired agassi.
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
Still rafa has 3+ finals on every grand slam, which shows his versatility... of course fed has more, I'm not trying to put down fed, I just said he tends to be a little overrated, he is a tier 1 player, but he doesnt stand on his own tier unlike some people believe on this board.
AssaultJoker
Banned
All-time:Roddick, Federer, Hewitt.
Current: Dimitrov.
Current: Dimitrov.
Revenant
Banned
He is 33. 2 years past the retirement age of Sampras. Everything he does now is icing on an overlarge cake.
Why couldn't Nadal get through to the hardcourt Slam finals against this field? Could it be that the field in 2004-2007 was actually stronger than 2010? No, of course not. Nadal, the Slam-winner, was still a baby.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
And Nadal didn't have big competition on clay.
About this year's draws, Federer is 33, so give him a break. He doesn't have to prove at his age that he can go through a tough draw
Revenant
Banned
So if a player that has more is overrated, what does that make a player who has less?
Don't you see the contradiction? You're calling him overrated but not putting him down?
What about the people that think Nadal is undefeated when he is healthy? No, you're only talking about Federer fans. Got it.
D
Deleted member 733170
Guest
I am glad you have the humility to concede that Federer is a tier 1 player !!
But how can any tier 1 player be overrated, even if you now concede that he is a "little overrated"?
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
Still .. the atp is trying to gift him a new slam, as if 17 wasnt enough lol.
Just take a look at the draws of Wimbledon and US open 2014, a complete joke.
Lorenzi-muller-giraldo-robredo in the first 4 rounds lol
Matosevic-Groth-Granollers-Bautista Agut-Monfils-Cilic....
I think federer is getting completly cakewalks on the first 4 rounds of every GS he enters.
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
He is not overrated to be tier 1 or some might think even the greast of all the time. But he is being overrated when some people in the boards or tv commentators act as if Federer stands in his own pedestal alone.
I dont think any top tier 1 is overrated, its just a minority part of the blind fans who want to put the things more extreme than they really are.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
And Nadal had a joke draw at his year's RG. His first 4 rounds were embarrasing
Revenant
Banned
He does stand on his own pedestal, and that pedestal is 17 kilometers, 600 meters, 5 centimeters, and 302 millimeters high.
ibbi
G.O.A.T.
More recently in this thread you've taken a shot at people who think that Nadal is undefeated when healthy, and you make excuses like this? You also seem keen to point out how many easy draws that Nadal has had, well I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that Roger's 'resurgence' this year has been based around two absurdly easy draws at Wimbledon and the US Open, and having the good fortune of being drawn in the same section as Tsonga and Murray both on the comeback trail from injury in Australia.
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
Yes figurally he does, but not on his own tier... If Federer would have 20 slams ( or even 19).. I concede you the honor.
At this moments he is standing in the same ladder as Sampras, Nadal and Laver.
objectivity
Banned
Are you sure you're not talking about the 2014 Australian Open?
well at least he wasn't bawling.
Revenant
Banned
That was not an excuse. It was a response to this post of yours which suggests Federer is only doing well because other players are unhealthy.
You made the excuse first. I'm simply refuting it.
Revenant
Banned
So you concede Federer is the greatest and then proceed to call him the most overrated player? Brilliant!
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
You really do not understand what I'm trying to say.
I said you can make an strong argument for wether if Federer or Laver are the greatest players of all time. But their achievements arent enough superior to other top tier players to make them stand in their own tier. I see Federer(or laver) as barely higher than the likes of Sampras or Nadal, but not in a different category... that was my point.
And I didnt say he was the most overrated player ever.. I said he is sometimes overrated, because he could be considered the best ever (you could do the same with Rod Laver) at this point, and yet you should concede he is slighty above the other big players.. not a whole different breed, or whatever the deluded fans might like to believe..
D
Deleted member 733170
Guest
At least we are now getting to the truth Mental Giant!
You accept that Federer is a tier 1 player. You also accept that no tier 1 player is overrated.
That rest is, how shall we say, hyperbole!?
Of course, you have a right to feel resentful that Federer gets a disproportionate amount of 'love' and press time, but please in the interests of what Federer has given to the game, don't infer that he is overrated. Capiche?
ibbi
G.O.A.T.
I was making reference to Tsonga and Murray in Australia, who both were coming back from injury and woefully short on match time, and Wawrinka at Wimbledon playing his third match in as many days. Those are inarguable facts. Federer's 2013 back problems didn't keep him out of the quarters of Cincy or the semis of Paris, or the finals of Basel, or from winning Halle, thus blaming losses on them doesn't seem like something even worth mentioning.
Revenant
Banned
No, you really do not see your own contradictions. You say you're not putting Federer down while at the same time calling him overrated. You say Federer has achieved more than anyone else in history while again calling him overrated.
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
I said some of his fans in the internet boards tend to overrate him.
I didnt say its overrated saying he is tier 1 or even being the best ever (in terms of accomplishments) but the different he makes with the rest of the tier 1 isnt as big as someone else makes it to be.
Federer might be the best in tier 1 but still belongs to tier 1, he is not in a tier Zero unlike some people thinks.
Its like saying LEndl is better than Mcenroe or Agassi, however they all belong to the same tier of players..
on topic:
Most overrated player of the current era?
Grigor Dimitrov... no doubts about it.
Most overrated players of past eras? Tim Henman, Tommy haas (on his early career)
Last edited:
Revenant
Banned
Just like Federer had back issues and racquet issues in 2013.
Djokovic lost to a fragile Nishikori who was coming off back-to-back 5-setters. Better to win against a tired opponent than to lose, right?
And Murray's injury problems didn't keep him out of the quarterfinal at the Australian Open, the semifinal of the French Open, the quarterfinal at Wimbledon, and the quarterfinal at the US Open. That isn't stopping you from discrediting Federer's wins against him.
Revenant
Banned
Some of the fans of any player tend to overrate their favorite player. What's your point?
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
well but Tv commentators are jumping the bandwagon, and all this ***-licking stuff is absolutely disgusting.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Well aren't you in the mood for a good old fashioned internet argument today! :lol:
ibbi
G.O.A.T.
Damn, RACQUET issues now too?! The excuses just keep on coming! 
He had racquet issues because things were going horribly wrong for him.
He had racquet issues because things were going horribly wrong for him.Umm... Those things all happened months after he had come back... Hardly the same thing.
Revenant
Banned
Just like Nadal has injury issues when he loses?Damn, RACQUET issues now too?! The excuses just keep on coming!
You just discredited Federer's win against Murray at the Australian Open. And now you're saying it happened months after he had come back. Which is it? Was Murray okay at the Australian Open or not? If he wasn't okay, how did he make it to the quarterfinal?
Revenant
Banned
Probably because you dislike Federer.
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
He doesnt... only time nadal lost and was injured was the Aussie open 2014 final, at least from the big matches...
Nobody is claiming rafa was injured in the 2 wimbledon finals he lost against Federer,or the 3 gs finals in a row against djokovic.
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
I dont dislike it. I just find it a bit over the top. people calling him "your majesty" and stuff like that is just a little too much .
D
Deleted member 733170
Guest
MG, the arbiter of morality! Is picking your nose while driving the car equally as disgusting?
Revenant
Banned
What about the 2009 French Open? Or the 2011 Australian Open? Or the 2009 US Open? Or the 2012 Wimbledon?
Revenant
Banned
People call Nadal the "Clay God". Does that disgust you too?
D
Deleted member 733170
Guest
That may be the case and sycophancy is cringeworthy to witness. But please, the fellow is not overrated.
A suitable thread to vent your frustrations might be: 'Are tennis journalists sycophants, and why do they have an inferiority complex'? I believe you would have much to contribute on this topic.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
That's the point of the 32-seeding system.
ibbi
G.O.A.T.
Who's talking about Nadal, man? I'm not making any excuses for Rafa. You're just proving that there are Federer fans every bit as willing to use the excuses as the people they like to have a good laugh at.
Huh? I said the Roland Garros, Wimbledon and US Open runs that Murray had took place months after he came back, not the Australian Open one. Look closer at which bit was highlighted maybe...
Well, I'd say playing the 112th, 119th, and 267th ranked players in the world helped.
Revenant
Banned
No. You said Federer is only doing well because of other players' injuries. I was asking you if Federer's back is to blame for everybody else's success in 2013. It was a question. Which you didn't answer. Very telling.
Federer did beat Murray at Cincinnati. Did you miss it? And I like how you ignored the bit about Djokovic losing to a tired Nishikori.
That's also exactly why Federer could do what he did in 2013 during the period he had a bad back. Did you forget his loss to Delbonis? My point is, if you're going to discredit Federer's 2014 season because other players were injured, you'll need to the same to Nadal's 2013 season because Federer was injured. Me? I don't discredit anyone. Injuries are part of the game.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Oh and The_Mental_Giant is a huge Sampras fanboy (he even said Sampras would simply play Hewitt how he played Chang and beat him 99% of the time prime for prime LOL; even though Hewitt would just lob him for the point or direct the ball away from him like he did during the 2001 USO) and now he's coming along and trying to underrate Federer. Please.
ibbi
G.O.A.T.
No, is the answer to your question. From where I'm sitting Federer's back is not to blame for everyones success in 2013.
My very first post in this thread mentioned 5 set matches. Cincinnati was not a 5 set match. I'm well aware that Roger can still be a boss on the little boys circuit.
I ignored the bit about Djokovic and Nishikori because I don't really see how it's remotely relevant. Did you watch the two matches? Kei played lights out against Novak whether he was tired or not. Stan was blowing Roger away for a set and a half, and then the rest of the match he just looked like he wanted to throw up, curl up in a ball and cry himself to sleep. Playing back to back 5 setters and then getting a 2 day rest before playing your third match is not the same as playing 3 days in a row without a break.
See, I'm not exactly sure when throughout the course of the whole year where he didn't play very well this back injury was supposed to have been troubling him, but I do know that in Halle he beat 2 top 30 players en route to the title, that his loss at Wimbledon to a guy outside the top 100 was preceded by a victory over a guy inside the top 50, that before losing to Delbonis he had a couple of victories over a couple of guys inside the top 50/60, that before he lost to Rafa in Cincy (giving him as good a match as he has since probably 2011) he beat the number 13 and 29 players in the world, that he comfortably swept aside 3 guys ranked between 48 and 63 before his loss to Robredo in New York, and that between Shanghai, Basel and Bercy he accumulated 8 victories, and the lowest of those 8 opponents was ranked number 62. He had enough in the tank to play Doubles in Shanghai too.
Wait a minute... I should discredit Nadal's season because one guy was not fully healthy, because I'm discrediting Federer's season for numerous players he happened to come up against not being so? Yeah, that's the same thing.
Revenant
Banned
Why not? After all, you're blaming Murray's back for Federer's relative success.
Federer outperformed Nadal at 2 of the 4 Slams. Nadal is licking his wounds and not playing the big boys' circuit.
Considering the fragility of Nishikori, and the number of walkovers he's given in the past, two back-to-back 5-setters is a big deal. And Djokovic lost to that tired, fragile Nishikori. Federer beat tired Wawrinka. Beating a tired opponent is better than losing to a tired opponent, right?
And I'm not sure when Murray was so afflicted with injury that he couldn't even beat a 32 year-old player. Are you basing your whole, "Federer had success because of injuries," on the Australian Open alone? Why ignore his relative success at Dubai, Indian Wells, Monte Carlo, Canada, Cincinnati, and Halle? Was Murray injured at Cincinnati, too? Was Djokovic injured at Dubai?
Who are these "numerous players"? Murray and Tsonga at the Australian Open? That's one tournament, where Federer only made the semifinal. Why are you ignoring his performances at Dubai, Indian Wells, Monte Carlo, Canada, Cincinnati, Halle, Wimbledon and the US Open? If you're gonna blame all these on the health concerns of other players, then yes, Nadal's success has Federer's back to blame.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Tsonga is so overrated here sometimes. Sure, he wins a big tournament now and then but these days he pretty much never shows up for the slams.
ibbi
G.O.A.T.
Man, you don't get it, do you? I'm 'blaming' Murray's back for one loss just after he's come back from months out of the game. That's not comparable to an extended run of time in which Federer achieved plenty where he was supposedly walking wounded.
Sure it is a big deal, it's also a big deal to get 2 days off before you have to play your next match. I really don't understand what you're trying to prove by making this comparison. Between the two of the victories Federer's win over Stan is obviously more 'impressive' than Djokovic losing to Nishikori. So what?
No, not just the Australian Open. Also the victory over Stan at Wimbledon. I single those two out because ultimately when it's all said and done tennis is about the 4 majors. Achieving success at Masters 1000 level and below is fine, but if your results at the biggest tournaments tend to be all smoke and mirrors and you're ranked that high, and still thought of as a major threat at slams then to me that certainly qualifies a guy to be as overrated a player as there is in the game at the present time, yes.
I'm not IGNORING them, but Federer is currently ranked number 2 in the world, so having good runs at those tournaments means a whole lot less than having good runs at slams does. His good runs at slams have not been as impressive to me watching them as they look on paper, so hey presto... overrated! It's that simple really.
I don't think Federer is a terrible player, I don't think he's the devil, I'm not making comparisons to Djokovic, Nadal or anybody else. I'm just saying that based on what I've seen, and based on his standing, he's the answer to this thread.
Similar threads
