Novak Domination: is he so good or is it the fedal decline?

[jg153040]

Oh, trust me, I wish I had both the answer and the solution :twisted:

But, look even if you claim competition is weaker, it doesn't mean anything.

Let's say gravity increased in 2015, so everyone is heavier. Yes, technically they all play worse, but since everybody is battling the same force, it's not weak era at all, since this invisible force making everyone weaker affects all of them.

So, your weak era argument even if true is meaningless, so why bring it up at all?

 

[NatF]

But, look even if you claim competition is weaker, it doesn't mean anything.

Let's say gravity increased in 2015, so everyone is heavier. Yes, technically they all play worse, but since everybody is battling the same force, it's not weak era at all, since this invisible force making everyone weaker affects all of them.

So, your weak era argument even if true is meaningless, so why bring it up at all?

This post :lol:

 

[Earnest One]

We're saying the same thing.

We're saying the same thing. [!]

 

[Earnest One]

But, look even if you claim competition is weaker, it doesn't mean anything.

Let's say gravity increased in 2015, so everyone is heavier. Yes, technically they all play worse, but since everybody is battling the same force, it's not weak era at all, since this invisible force making everyone weaker affects all of them.

So, your weak era argument even if true is meaningless, so why bring it up at all?

What about "Moonballs"?

 

[MichaelNadal]

But, look even if you claim competition is weaker, it doesn't mean anything.

Let's say gravity increased in 2015, so everyone is heavier. Yes, technically they all play worse, but since everybody is battling the same force, it's not weak era at all, since this invisible force making everyone weaker affects all of them.

So, your weak era argument even if true is meaningless, so why bring it up at all?

 

[jg153040]

What about "Moonballs"?

Haha, nice. Well, that would mean gravity is really low, so it would be much easier to moonball.

 

[Earnest One]

Haha, nice. Well, that would mean gravity is really low, so it would be much easier to moonball.

I'm wondering about the sliding deal. That would be incredible! Blue Clay taken to another level...

 

[RF-18]

This post :lol:

Hahahahahaha

Jg and his science

 

[GabeT]

But, look even if you claim competition is weaker, it doesn't mean anything.

Let's say gravity increased in 2015, so everyone is heavier. Yes, technically they all play worse, but since everybody is battling the same force, it's not weak era at all, since this invisible force making everyone weaker affects all of them.

So, your weak era argument even if true is meaningless, so why bring it up at all?

The Force is strong with this one.

 

[5555]

The only reason Nadal couldn't make HC Slam Finals was because the joke of a competition routinely beat him, even though he had HC Masters Titles to his name during the time period.

How many tennis experts say that Nadal played his best tennis on hard courts2004-2007?

No excuse for Nole's losses to Federer who was 6 years older than him.

Is it reasonable to say that Nole was out of rhythm against Federer at 2011 French Open because of 5 days of rest due to Fognini's walkover? Yes or no?

You sound very bitter.

You are very bitter than Nole dominates now. Federer Era is long gone.

Federer > Nole, deal with it !

Peak Nole is better than Peak Federer. Deal with it!

Chico and 5555. but one got banned thank god.
every idiot whose posts scream for attention by constant use of hashtags, underscores, parentheses, colors, should be banned for life.

This is a personal attack. I've reported you.

 

[Wynter]

How many tennis experts say that Nadal played his best tennis on hard courts2004-2007?



Is it reasonable to say that Nole was out of rhythm against Federer at 2011 French Open because of 5 days of rest due to Fognini's walkover? Yes or no?



You are very bitter than Nole dominates now. Federer Era is long gone.



Peak Nole is better than Peak Federer. Deal with it!



This is a personal attack. I've reported you.

How many have claimed he was incompetent on the surface, a frequent claim perpetuated by fans in order to demean Federer's accomplishments on Hard Court during those years.

 

[5555]

How many have claimed he was incompetent on the surface, a frequent claim perpetuated by fans in order to demean Federer's accomplishments on Hard Court during those years.

Do you admit that Nadal played his best tennis on hard courts after 2008?

 

[MichaelNadal]

Do you admit that Nadal played his best tennis on hard courts after 2008?

08 should be included in that imo.

 

[Feather]

Peak Nole is better than Peak Federer. Deal with it!

On Wimbledon also? :lol: :lol:

 

[NatF]

On Wimbledon also? :lol: :lol:

Did you not see Wimbledon 2014 F :lol:

 

[Feather]

Did you not see Wimbledon 2014 F :lol:

Yeah, the where-is-my-forehand Federer taking peak Djokovic to five sets :lol:

 

[tennis_commentator]

Peak Nole is better than Peak Federer. Deal with it!

Old man Federer beat 2011 Djokovic at Roland Garros (and almost at US Open too), and Federer's peak year was many, many, many years before that.
So its not even close.
Not even remotely close.

 

[Dedans Penthouse]

No excuse for Nole's losses to Federer who was 6 years older than him. You sound very bitter.

Federer > Nole, deal with it !

He's just like you, a fanboy subject to wild mood swings when it comes to 'his fav tennis idol' so you (being a Fed jock-sniffer yourself) should understand this.

 

[Wynter]

Do you admit that Nadal played his best tennis on hard courts after 2008?

His level was similar, the difference was there was a greater depth of field capable of challenging him, after that field died out Nadal started succeeding on a greater level.

 

[beast of mallorca]

Not sure about the Nishi vs Djokovic match up on clay. But he's shown he can beat Federer, that goes without saying. Federer isn't a favorite at this point.

Federer may not be The Favorite, but he's definitely one of the favorites. With Rafa's steep decline, an early round loss for Djoker will definitely make a HUGE opening for Fed. 2009 repeat, here I come. Possible , no ?

 

[6-3 6-0]

Federer may not be The Favorite, but he's definitely one of the favorites. With Rafa's steep decline, an early round loss for Djoker will definitely make a HUGE opening for Fed. 2009 repeat, here I come. Possible , no ?

The difference is that Fed was the heavy favourite after Nadal got out at RG in 2009. All the pressure and expectation was on him to finally win RG. He was easily the 2nd best claycourter but now he isn't even 3rd best - He can easily be taken out by a hot player on a particular day.

 

[tennisaddict]

Federer may not be The Favorite, but he's definitely one of the favorites. With Rafa's steep decline, an early round loss for Djoker will definitely make a HUGE opening for Fed. 2009 repeat, here I come. Possible , no ?

Sorry amigo. Not happening. Fed can only win RG in seniors or Over 45.

 

[Steve0904]

The difference is that Fed was the heavy favourite after Nadal got out at RG in 2009. All the pressure and expectation was on him to finally win RG. He was easily the 2nd best claycourter but now he isn't even 3rd best - He can easily be taken out by a hot player on a particular day.

Yes. That is the difference. A big one too, but I also understand where boM is coming from. Federer will always be one of the favourites so his chances will be there. They'll be small to be sure, but they are still better than guys like Monfils, Gulbis, or Chardy for example.

I used those guys because they've all beaten Federer on clay recently. Monfils more than once, but Federer's chances at RG are still going to be higher than those guys. He's still 3rd favourite after Djokovic and Nadal, IMO. The difference is that the claim stands on shakier ground now that he's older.

 

[5555]

His level was similar, the difference was there was a greater depth of field capable of challenging him, after that field died out Nadal started succeeding on a greater level.

How many tennis experts agree with you?

 

[NatF]

How many tennis experts agree with you?

How many tennis experts don't have a vested interest in selling the sport?

 

[5555]

How many tennis experts don't have a vested interest in selling the sport?

Can you prove they say what they do not believe?

 

[NatF]

Can you prove they say what they do not believe?

Can you answer the question?

 

[TMF]

Is it reasonable to say that Nole was out of rhythm against Federer at 2011 French Open because of 5 days of rest due to Fognini's walkover? Yes or no?



You are very bitter than Nole dominates now. Federer Era is long gone.



Peak Nole is better than Peak Federer. Deal with it!

Lame excuse. Nole was at his peak in 2011 and was beaten soundly by past prime Federer.

Peak Nole in 2011 was lower than peak Federer 2005 and 2006. Deal with it!

 

[ultradr]

I am not yet fully convinced that Nadal has declined significantly.

Federer between 2004-2007 must have had easier time than now.
The modern baseline tennis, which standard Federer defined, was still new and field was not mature enough for this new type of tennis.

Now it is full generation of modern baseline tennis. Anybody can do this, so to speak.

 

[5555]

Can you answer the question?

Can you prove they say what they do not believe?

Lame excuse. Nole was at his peak in 2011 and was beaten soundly by past prime Federer.

Is it reasonable to say that at 2011 French Open Nole was out of rhythm by the time he played Federer due to Fognini's walkover?

Yes or no?

Peak Nole in 2011 was lower than peak Federer 2005 and 2006.

Nadal said Nole's level in 2011 was higher than Federer's in 2005 and 2006
https://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/19112011/2/tennis-nadal-returns-unfamiliar-role-underdog.html

Deal with it!

Peak Nole is better than Peak Federer. Deal with it!

 

[NatF]

Can you prove they say what they do not believe?
/QUOTE]

I asked a simple question. If you continue to avoid it I will assume you cannot and are therefore forfeiting the argument.

If you go first I will answer yours

 

[Chanwan]

Federer may not be The Favorite, but he's definitely one of the favorites. With Rafa's steep decline, an early round loss for Djoker will definitely make a HUGE opening for Fed. 2009 repeat, here I come. Possible , no ?

I like your thinking BoM.

Yes. That is the difference. A big one too, but I also understand where boM is coming from. Federer will always be one of the favourites so his chances will be there. They'll be small to be sure, but they are still better than guys like Monfils, Gulbis, or Chardy for example.

I used those guys because they've all beaten Federer on clay recently. Monfils more than once, but Federer's chances at RG are still going to be higher than those guys. He's still 3rd favourite after Djokovic and Nadal, IMO. The difference is that the claim stands on shakier ground now that he's older.

I get what both of you are saying, but I think putting Fed as an outright 3rd favorite is too much right now. He's simply been too vulnerable on clay for 4? consecutive years.

That said, he obviously has a better chance than Chardy, Isner, Monfils.
But better than Nishi? I don't think so tbh. Better than Murray? I'm not sure. Better than Ferrer, Berdych, Milos etc. Slightly, I guess.

All in all, I would be thrilled to see him win it, but I really have a hard time seeing it happen. Djoko takes his first, Rafa takes his 10th or Nishi takes his first slam imo.

 

[TMF]

Is it reasonable to say that at 2011 French Open Nole was out of rhythm by the time he played Federer due to Fognini's walkover?

Yes or no?

No he was not out of rhythm. It's your lame excuse because you can't handle the fact that a peak Nole was beaten soundly by a past prime Federer.

Nadal said Nole's level in 2011 was higher than Federer's in 2005 and 2006
https://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/19112011/2/tennis-nadal-returns-unfamiliar-role-underdog.html

Who cares. Nadal is only one person while there are over 7 billions people on the face of this planet.

Peak Nole is better than Peak Federer. Deal with it!

Keep saying that to yourself if it helps you sleep well at night.

 

[5555]

I asked a simple question. If you continue to avoid it I will assume you cannot and are therefore forfeiting the argument.

If you go first I will answer yours

During an argument it's quite OK to answer a question with a question if the question has a point which attacks the reasoning of other opponent.

You will lose the argument if you do not come up with a counterpoint.

No he was not out of rhythm.

Is it a fact or an opinion?

It's your lame excuse because you can't handle the fact that a peak Nole was beaten soundly by a past prime Federer.

Wishful thinking

Who cares. Nadal is only one person while there are over 7 billions people on the face of this planet.

How many of these 7 billions people actually played tennis against Nole and Federer?

Keep saying that to yourself if it helps you sleep well at night.

Peak Nole is better than Peak Federer. Deal with it.

 

[ultradr]

Large part of recent domination of Djokovic has been due to unfortunate timings of injuries on Nadal, Murray, Del Potro and Tsonga (in 2013/2014).

There was sudden weakness in the top 10 2013-2014. Result was: Federer rose to #2 and rises of new generations like Raonic and Nishikori.

So OP's question is very timely one IMHO. Soon we will find out within this year, I think.

 

[NatF]

During an argument it's quite OK to answer a question with a question if the question has a point which attacks the reasoning of other opponent.

You will lose the argument if you do not come up with a counterpoint.

But you did not come up with a counter point to my question...you simply resorted to your fact or opinion default.

Again, is it not possible that some so called tennis experts might be attempting to sell the sport?

Yes or no.

 

[jg153040]

Peak Nole is better than Peak Federer. Deal with it.

Even if true, who cares when Fed's peak was 4 years, but Nole's was only for 8 months.

I would rather have 9.8 point peak for 4 years than 10 point peak for 8 months.

Also, Nole at his peak can only win 2 W and 1 USO, while Fed won 12 of those?

That doesn't sound right .

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Even if true, who cares when Fed's peak was 4 years, but Nole's was only for 8 months.

I would rather have 9.8 point peak for 4 years than 10 point peak for 8 months.

Also, Nole at his peak can only win 2 W and 1 USO, while Fed won 12 of those?

That doesn't sound right .

Guess What?

I agree with you here

 

[jg153040]

Guess What?

I agree with you here

Well, even I get it right from time to time. Even the broken clock says the correct time twice a day.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Well, even I get it right from time to time. Even the broken clock says the correct time twice a day.

Even #KingRafa has more USO titles and he's skipped it twice.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Even #KingRafa has more USO titles and he's skipped it twice.

Novak's lack of US titles is pretty alarming for such a great HCer, I hope he gets 2 more before he hangs it up.

 

[jg153040]

Novak's lack of US titles is pretty alarming for such a great HCer, I hope he gets 2 more before he hangs it up.

Rafa's lack of AO titles is also pretty alarming for such a great USO player.

Rafa has twice as many USOs than Nole, so Rafa should have 10 AO titles.

Pretty alarming.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Rafa's lack of AO titles is also pretty alarming for such a great USO player.

Rafa has twice as many USOs than Nole, so Rafa should have 10 AO titles.

Pretty alarming.

Not really, Rafa is supposed to be great on clay, not hard

 

[MichaelNadal]

Not really, Rafa is supposed to be great on clay, not hard

What is this? 2007? Nadal is great on any surface. He's just a BEAST on clay.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Rafa's lack of AO titles is also pretty alarming for such a great USO player.

Rafa has twice as many USOs than Nole, so Rafa should have 10 AO titles.

Pretty alarming.

How do you figure?

 

[Deleted member 716271]

How do you figure?

he's trying to be funny

 

[jg153040]

Not really, Rafa is supposed to be great on clay, not hard

But HC is 2 slams. Why is Djokovic supposed to be great at 2 slams, while Rafa only at 1 slam?

Double standards?

Besides, we compare the greats here, everyone is supposed to be great on any surface.

Plus, Djokovic has 4 USO finals and 4 WTF wins. And yet, your argument is based only on what Djokovic doesn't have.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

But HC is 2 slams. Why is Djokovic supposed to be great at 2 slams, while Rafa only at 1 slam?

Double standards?

Besides, we compare the greats here, everyone is supposed to be great on any surface.

Plus, Djokovic has 4 USO finals and 4 WTF wins. And yet, your argument is based only on what Djokovic doesn't have.

You're all over the place.

I prefer Djokovic over Rafa btw.

It's not about 1 or 2 slams or double standards, it's just the simple fact that Novak has only 1 US Open. You're adding in inferences that aren't there...Anyway Rafa has more clay slams than Djoko's hard at 2 venues (so you can look at it both ways, on 1 hand Novak has more opportunities)

Also I don't expect Novak to get 9 HC slams much less 9 at 1 slam. But 1 US open is poor for him. It's not a competition with Rafa.

 

[jg153040]

You're all over the place.

I prefer Djokovic over Rafa btw.

It's not about 1 or 2 slams or double standards, it's just the simple fact that Novak has only 1 US Open. You're adding in inferences that aren't there...Anyway Rafa has more clay slams than Djoko's hard at 2 venues (so you can look at it both ways, on 1 hand Novak has more opportunities)

Also I don't expect Novak to get 9 HC slams much less 9 at 1 slam. But 1 US open is poor for him. It's not a competition with Rafa.

Djokovic has 6 HC slams and 3 extra USO finals. Plus tons of masters and 4 WTF titles.

That is in no way bad for an all-time great on HC. Is he supposed to be HC goat or something, that he has to have more than that?

Plus Djokovic has the highest win % on HC in history. Aren't you a fan of win %?

I don't see how lack of USO matters. Sampras has only 2 AO titles too, but so what, as long as you have the rest to compensate.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Djokovic has 6 HC slams and 3 extra USO finals. Plus tons of masters and 4 WTF titles.

That is in no way bad for an all-time great on HC. Is he supposed to be HC goat or something, that he has to have more than that?

Plus Djokovic has the highest win % on HC in history. Aren't you a fan of win %?

I don't see how lack of USO matters. Sampras has only 2 AO titles too, but so what, as long as you have the rest to compensate.

In the other thread you actually used "Wimbledons and USOs" as a metric for Federer in a Fed vs Novak argument. 1 USO is very weak for someone of Novak's caliber on HC. You're just arguing to argue.