King No1e
G.O.A.T.
Slam Titles 2-02005-06 Nadal vs 2014-15 Federer:
Slam finals 3-3
Slam semi 0-2
YEC finals 0-2
Masters finals 7-8
Slam Titles 2-02005-06 Nadal vs 2014-15 Federer:
Slam finals 3-3
Slam semi 0-2
YEC finals 0-2
Masters finals 7-8
Boy we're discussing them as opponents for Federer/Djokovic.Slam Titles 2-0
But the difference is just in their results against Federer/Djokovic in the matches I mentioned:
2005-06 Nadal vs Federer 6-4
2014-15 Federer vs Djokovic 1-8
You can't say 14-15 Djokovic had an easier opponent than 05-06 Federer just because he dealt better with it. In fact 14-15 Federer's results against the rest of the field were better than 05-06 Nadal's results against the rest of the field.
Yes, but I'm talking about number of wins here.Djokovic has beaten Nadal at all slams.
Yes, but I'm talking about number of wins here.
And Fedal hace sinply never played at the USO, so not really Fed's problem here.
And he never faced 2015 Nadal at RG either.
Unprovable.Not Djokovic problem either. He beat a player who would have beat every other player and won the title. Win is a win.
ROFL.Not Djokovic problem either. He beat a player who would have beat every other player and won the title. Win is a win.
The logic of RF-18. Nadal in 2015 lost to any player who could keep the ball in play for more than 3 shots, didn't reach a slam semifinal, didn't win anything above 500 level tournaments (and even there he struggled against nobodies), was getting physically tired after an hour and a half of play, hit double faults on break points all the time, couldn't hit a forehand behind the service line...But he was going to win a slam without Djokovic. LMAO. This is why Djokovic trolls are so much disliked here. For example, I can't imagine a Nadal troll writing that Djokovic was going to win RG 2006 without Nadal.Unprovable.
Why was he getting more physically tired at the age of 29 than he is at 33?The logic of RF-18. Nadal in 2015 lost to any player who could keep the ball in play for more than 3 shots, didn't reach a slam semifinal, didn't win anything above 500 level tournaments (and even there he struggled against nobodies), was getting physically tired after an hour and a half of play, hit double faults on break points all the time, couldn't hit a forehand behind the service line...But he was going to win a slam without Djokovic. LMAO. This is why Djokovic trolls are so much disliked here. For example, I can't imagine a Nadal troll writing that Djokovic was going to win RG 2006 without Nadal.
Because he was at his worst form that year? It's a fact Nadal had big physical problems in 2014-2016 for whatever reason. Djokovic also had periods when he had physical problems, while now he hardly gets tired. And Federer in 2013 was physically weaker than in 2019.Why was he getting more physically tired at the age of 29 than he is at 33?
Are you sure you are using the word "significantly" properly?I never said he was the GOAT, so there goes that. I don't care about him being the GOAT. I am a fan of his regardless.
My point is simple. 32-present year old Federer is significantly worse than 20s Federer. That's it. Just like 20s Nadal is significantly better than 30s Nadal.
We'll see though.
20s Federer: 16 Slams
20s Nadal: 14 Slams
20s Djokovic: 12 Slams
Now let's see if the 30s versions of these players can beat these records.
USO 13 does not count. Erase it. Excuses far outweigh nadals win. Illegitimate win.Because he was at his worst form that year? It's a fact Nadal had big physical problems in 2014-2016 for whatever reason. Djokovic also had periods when he had physical problems, while now he hardly gets tired. And Federer in 2013 was physically weaker than in 2019.
But the difference is just in their results against Federer/Djokovic in the matches I mentioned:
2005-06 Nadal vs Federer 6-4
2014-15 Federer vs Djokovic 1-8
You can't say 14-15 Djokovic had an easier opponent than 05-06 Federer just because he dealt better with it. In fact 14-15 Federer's results against the rest of the field were better than 05-06 Nadal's results against the rest of the field.
2014/2015 Federer on grass/HC is nowhere near 2005/2006 Nadal on clay.Boy we're discussing them as opponents for Federer/Djokovic.
2005-06 Nadal had more slam titles just because Federer allowed him more than Djokovic allowed 2014-15 Federer.
Are you sure you are using the word "significantly" properly?
The difference isn't big at all.
The logic of RF-18. Nadal in 2015 lost to any player who could keep the ball in play for more than 3 shots, didn't reach a slam semifinal, didn't win anything above 500 level tournaments (and even there he struggled against nobodies), was getting physically tired after an hour and a half of play, hit double faults on break points all the time, couldn't hit a forehand behind the service line...But he was going to win a slam without Djokovic. LMAO. This is why Djokovic trolls are so much disliked here. For example, I can't imagine a Nadal troll writing that Djokovic was going to win RG 2006 without Nadal.
Who would have beaten him? Wawrinka? LOL! Murray would be the best bet but even there I doubt he'd do it in bo5 vs Nadal at Chatrier. I can't see it. I'm gonna go with the most probable bet and that is the guy who held a 66-1 record at the time of that tournament and 70-1 before that QF. It's really a joke that you throw a hissy fit because I think a guy with such dominance was gonna win the tournament.
and lol at mentioning Djokovic at RG 2006. What a garbage comparison.
LOL. What?USO 13 does not count. Erase it. Excuses far outweigh nadals win. Illegitimate win.
It wouldn't have been a gimme for Nadal even without Djokovic. He lost a set to Jack Sock.Who would have beaten him? Wawrinka? LOL! Murray would be the best bet but even there I doubt he'd do it in bo5 vs Nadal at Chatrier. I can't see it. I'm gonna go with the most probable bet and that is the guy who held a 66-1 record at the time of that tournament and 70-1 before that QF. It's really a joke that you throw a hissy fit because I think a guy with such dominance was gonna win the tournament.
and lol at mentioning Djokovic at RG 2006. What a garbage comparison.
LOL. What?
I hope you're trolling. Nadal won that match fair and square. Sure Djokovic choked in the 4th but that doesn't take anything away from Nadal's win.
The Fed fans let the Safin AO05 loss go, I think we can let this one go too.
Actually if you read TTW every major title djokovic has is erased on here. 2008 AO was a fluke. All of 2011 2012 AO. It was not 2010 Nadal and old fed. The schtick is a bit stale at this point as the kid keeps winning.He is being sarcastic cause StrongRule does Everything he can to erase Djokovic win vs Nadal at RG every time you mention that encounter.
I'm sure back in 2009 many people had the same reaction as you at the thought of Soderling beating Nadal at RG and yet it happened. The same guy who had got trashed 1 and 0 at Rome that same year by Nadal.Who would have beaten him? Wawrinka? LOL! Murray would be the best bet but even there I doubt he'd do it in bo5 vs Nadal at Chatrier. I can't see it. I'm gonna go with the most probable bet and that is the guy who held a 66-1 record at the time of that tournament and 70-1 before that QF. It's really a joke that you throw a hissy fit because I think a guy with such dominance was gonna win the tournament.
and lol at mentioning Djokovic at RG 2006. What a garbage comparison.
I'm sure back in 2009 many people had the same reaction as you at the thought of Soderling beating Nadal at RG and yet it happened. The same guy who had got trashed 1 and 0 at Rome that same year by Nadal.
In 2015, Nadal's previous record at RG meant diddly squat. You may have a point if the loss to Djokovic was close, but Novak annihilated him. Such a result doesn't indicate a title win against anyone else, especially not against Wawrinka.
2015 was the year Stan defeated Nadal in straights twice, one of them on clay. Outside of the AO 2014 injury win, at no other time has Nadal lost even a set to Stan. It really was an anomaly of a year for Nadal, so RG was not going to happen for him that year. He is a horrible match-up for Stan, but given how deplotable his form was, it wouldn't have mattered. Nadal in that crappy form wouldn't be able to beat a GOATING Stan since his poor form would nullify the bad match-up situation.
I LOL'd at Murray having the best chance and not Stan. Keep up your comedian skills
You're just making more of that win than it is. It was simply a perfect timing kind of win and it would have been embarrassing for Novak to still not win in those circumstances
Novak himself didn't even win RG that year LOL. So it was more Nadal sucking than Djokovic actually GOATING.
Look, Soderling is a perfect example since literally no one expected him to beat Nadal at RG. And yet he did. So I don't see why Wawrinka wouldn't do it too. If it happened once, I don't see why it would be damn impossible to happen a second time, especially since Nadal suckedThe Soderling example is quite weak. That was Nadals only loss at RG.
What Nadal does before RG has been established to have little to no relevance at all and you know that. When RG arrives it doesn't matter if he lost matches Before that, RG is something different and Nadal turns up for it. Djokovic has many times beaten Nadal Before meeting at RG and everytime there was a sense of a Djokovic victory there but everytime Nadal put the hammer down until 2015.
Nadal was struggling in 2015 and I'm not denying that, even on clay that year he did look more vurnable than he has ever before but he still made the QF with loss of just a set. He was not good enough to take on a vengeful and hungry Djokovic but excluding him I still wouldn't bet my money on Wawrinka and Murray taking him down in bo5. There is no chance I'd put hope on Wawrinka and Murray on clay against Nadal in bo5. Nadal it is. It's easy for you to say all this now like the afterwise guy you are. I bet at the time of that QF you put all of your hope on Djokovic to beat him cause there wasn't any other you would have believed in to do the job. But sure you probably were thinking at the time that even if Djokovic lost Wawrinka would take him down anyway so you weren't too worried
Different sample size. Or I could say that Fed was unbeaten on grass.2014/2015 Federer on grass/HC is nowhere near 2005/2006 Nadal on clay.
2005/2006 nadal was invincible on clay. He only lost in a 250 event in 2005 I believe?
2014/2015 Federer lost on HCs to Nishikori, Tsonga, Cilic, Raonic, Seppi, Ramos-Vinolas and Isner.
They are not even in the same league. Nadal was way better vs the field on clay than Fed on HC/grass.
Nadal at 2015 RG was out of form.It wouldn't have been a gimme for Nadal even without Djokovic. He lost a set to Jack Sock.
Big enough sample to size to confirm 2005/2006 Nadal on clay was MUCH tougher than Federer was in 2014-2016.Different sample size. Or I could say that Fed was unbeaten on grass.
2005-06 Nadal against top10 other than Federer --> 10-3Big enough sample to size to confirm 2005/2006 Nadal on clay was MUCH tougher than Federer was in 2014-2016.
Just curious when he can lost to Djokovic despite having 70-1, why he can't lose to Murray or wawrinka after having 70-1? while we know Murray and Waw both played very close or may be even better to the level of Djokovic.Who would have beaten him? Wawrinka? LOL! Murray would be the best bet but even there I doubt he'd do it in bo5 vs Nadal at Chatrier. I can't see it. I'm gonna go with the most probable bet and that is the guy who held a 66-1 record at the time of that tournament and 70-1 before that QF. It's really a joke that you throw a hissy fit because I think a guy with such dominance was gonna win the tournament.
and lol at mentioning Djokovic at RG 2006. What a garbage comparison.
So 00s Federer never lost to anyone? Gulbis sucks? Winning 5 slams means the player is garbage?No you're right. Losing to seppi gulbis, getting thrashed by cilic tsitsipas. Avoiding clay to preserve the body.
Almost peak for sure.
Well Stan even beat Djoker. Sure the Nadal Wawrinka matchup is completely different to Nadal Djokovic, but as others have said, the fact that Djokovic annihilated Nadal and Stan beat him before the French on clay (which he never could in any other year) makes me believe, that even with his tremendous match up advantage he was simply not good enough in 2015. I also favor Murray over Rafa, since while not exactly on the level of Stan that year, he does not have this matchup issue with Rafa and could have very well beaten him.Just curious when he can lost to Djokovic despite having 70-1, why he can't lose to Murray or wawrinka after having 70-1? while we know Murray and Waw both played very close or may be even better to the level of Djokovic.
Your point being? Nadal on clay was still much better than 14/15 Fed on grass/HC, hence 2 slams > 0 and near invincible win rate.2005-06 Nadal against top10 other than Federer --> 10-3
2014-15 Federer against top10 other than Djokovic ---> 26-4
So 00s Federer never lost to anyone? Gulbis sucks? Winning 5 slams means the player is garbage?
Interesting...
2005-06 Nadal vs 2014-15 Federer:
Slam finals 3-3
Slam semi 0-2
YEC finals 0-2
Masters finals 7-8
Oh yes, the classic 'leave out the stats that don't suit me' tactic.
Just curious when he can lost to Djokovic despite having 70-1, why he can't lose to Murray or wawrinka after having 70-1? while we know Murray and Waw both played very close or may be even better to the level of Djokovic.
And what are the stats that don't suit me?Oh yes, the classic 'leave out the stats that don't suit me' tactic.
He won 5 slams in this decade.Interesting indeed. so 04-09 Federer lost in straight sets to mugs in Slams the way he did against Cilic. He also lost to Gulbis, Raonic (come on lol) and Wawrinka (weak era mug from Fed's weak era)
So Federer winning 4 Slams in his 30 means he won 5. Interesting indeed.
But no need to do the talking, let the players do that.
20s Federer: 16 Slams
20s Nadal: 14 Slams
20s Djokovic: 12 Slams
Now let's see if the 30s versions of these players can beat these records. Since the difference isn't big at all, they'll show us right?