Ranking Federer's 12 Wimbledon finals

[Druss]

In my opinion Federer's 2006 Wimby run was his best in terms of peak level of play. This is what this thread is about. He was just majestic, flawless for the whole tournament. Pity he dropped that tiebreak to Nadal, otherwise it would have been perfect. Separating 2003-05 is like splitting hairs, with 2007 not far behind.
So here's my list:
1) 2006
2) 2005
3) 2003
4) 2004
5) 2007
6) 2008
7) 2009
8) 2012
8) 2017
10) 2014
11) 2015
12) 2019

What say you? Do you agree...or not? How do you rate his 12 finals in terms of level of play?

 

[Lew II]

1) 2019
2) 2017
3) 2015
4) 2014
5) 2012
6) 2009
7) 2008
8) 2007
9) 2006
10) 2005
11) 2004
12) 2003

 

[RF-18]

Biased list

 

[Jonesy]

2019 was the best one for me. For Fed not so much, but i have feeling Fed is starting to like it.

 

[merwy]

2019 would be around the top of your list if one point went differently

 

[TearTheRoofOff]

1) 2019
2) 2017
3) 2015
4) 2014
5) 2012
6) 2009
7) 2008
8) 2007
9) 2006
10) 2005
11) 2004
12) 2003

At least you have a sense of humour.

 

[Terenigma]

Seems like a legit idea for a thread.

*See's OP has put 2019 at the bottom of the list*

Never mind.

 

[junior74]

1) 2019
2) 2017
3) 2015
4) 2014
5) 2012
6) 2009
7) 2008
8) 2007
9) 2006
10) 2005
11) 2004
12) 2003

Good one!

100% troll

0% interested in tennis

 

[NatF]

Seems like a legit idea for a thread.

*See's OP has put 2019 at the bottom of the list*

Never mind.

Where else should it go? Only 2015 might be below it...

 

[Breakpointerer]

Seems like a legit idea for a thread.

*See's OP has put 2019 at the bottom of the list*

Never mind.

Which ones would you put above it?

 

[PeoplesChamp]

1) 2019
2) 2017
3) 2015
4) 2014
5) 2012
6) 2009
7) 2008
8) 2007
9) 2006
10) 2005
11) 2004
12) 2003

 

[Druss]

Biased list

Ok....how would you rate them?

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

top 3: 03/05/06
next 3: 04/07/08
next 2: 09/12
last 4: 14/15/17/19

 

[Terenigma]

Where else should it go? Only 2015 might be below it...

Off the top of my head? 2012 and 2015 but I don't know without serious run research because i don't remember all his oppoents but it's definitely not last. Losing it doesn't change his performance there given his opponents. Also as someone else pointed out, how would the list change if he won that point? Would it still be last? Does winning the tournament change what level a player played at?

 

[Im(moral) Winner]

In my opinion

Biased list

You don't say

 

[RF-18]

Ok....how would you rate them?

Not interested in ranking like this but putting 19 final at the bottom... ok.

For example, 19 final > 09 final.

 

[MeatTornado]

I think the OP's list is pretty spot on.

 

[RS]

2004 very high. Federer did not raise his level until the end of the 2 set.

 

[MichaelNadal]

I think the OP's list is pretty spot on.

So Federer in his worst form beat Rafa in 4 sets and was inches from beating Novak too

 

[MeatTornado]

So Federer in his worst form beat Rafa in 4 sets and was inches from beating Novak too

Considering those were also far from the best versions of Rafa and Novak at SW19, I don't see a problem with that.

 

[MeatTornado]

2004 very high. Federer did not raise his level until the end of the 2 set.

Because Andy was playing arguably the best tennis of his life at the beginning of that match.

 

[tonylg]

I turned 2019 off at the end of the second set and have never bothered to watch the rest. Even though he won the second 6-1, it was rubbish baseline botting tennis.

 

[RF-18]

Off the top of my head? 2012 and 2015 but I don't know without serious run research because i don't remember all his oppoents but it's definitely not last. Losing it doesn't change his performance there given his opponents. Also as someone else pointed out, how would the list change if he won that point? Would it still be last? Does winning the tournament change what level a player played at?

Yes, if Federer wins that one point the whole agenda changes. It would have been one of his best performances. They can say that cause he won. It changes everything for them, trust me.

 

[RS]

Because Andy was playing arguably the best tennis of his life at the beginning of that match.

I agree. But still Federer was quite passive.

 

[Druss]

So Federer in his worst form beat Rafa in 4 sets and was inches from beating Novak too

Rafa in that 2019 SF was miles away from his 2007-11 form. Djoker wasn’t that impressive either.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Considering those were also far from the best versions of Rafa and Novak at SW19, I don't see a problem with that.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Rafa in that 2019 SF was miles away from his 2007-11 form. Djoker wasn’t that impressive either.

That was nowhere close to the worst form Fed has shown at Wimby man outta here with that.

 

[ChrisRF]

What say you? Do you agree...or not? How do you rate his 12 finals in terms of level of play?

Do you mean his own level of play or the level of the match including the other player?

Because if it’s only about his own level there is no reason why 2017 should be so far down. It wasn’t Federer’s fault that Cilic got injured. He would have crushed him either way and was flawless for the whole tournament.

 

[RS]

Not sure about 15 and 19.

 

[beard]

In my opinion Federer's 2006 Wimby run was his best in terms of peak level of play. This is what this thread is about. He was just majestic, flawless for the whole tournament. Pity he dropped that tiebreak to Nadal, otherwise it would have been perfect. Separating 2003-05 is like splitting hairs, with 2007 not far behind.
So here's my list:
1) 2006
2) 2005
3) 2003
4) 2004
5) 2007
6) 2008
7) 2009
8) 2012
8) 2017
10) 2014
11) 2015
12) 2019

What say you? Do you agree...or not? How do you rate his 12 finals in terms of level of play?

So, winning against Grassdal and bunch of nobodies is always better than losing to one of best grass players ever?

Definition of biasness...

 

[NatF]

Yes, if Federer wins that one point the whole agenda changes. It would have been one of his best performances. They can say that cause he won. It changes everything for them, trust me.

You live in your own world, it would have been one his greatest performances considering his age but beating one of the poorest versions of Djokovic in five sets wouldn't place it high up on an all time list.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Also as someone else pointed out, how would the list change if he won that point? Would it still be last?

Sure it would, folks may be tempted to put it above 2014/15 then but that's it.

 

[MichaelNadal]

You live in your own world, it would have been one his greatest performances considering his age but beating one of the poorest versions of Djokovic in five sets wouldn't place it high up on an all time list.

I really don't think Djokovic was poor at Wimby at all.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

That was nowhere close to the worst form Fed has shown at Wimby man outta here with that.

Worst among the 12 times he's made the final, lawl. There were also 9 times when he didn't, those were worse.

 

[StrongRule]

Not interested in ranking like this but putting 19 final at the bottom... ok.

For example, 19 final > 09 final.

LOL, what???

Oh ok, this comes from the person who thinks 2019 Nadal on clay was better than 2006 Nadal. Nevermind then.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

I really don't think Djokovic was poor at Wimby at all.

He basically gave away two sets in a slam final, gave away a break lead in the fifth if not for federry, couldn't do jack squat on fred's serve till late fourth set... really.

 

[NatF]

I really don't think Djokovic was poor at Wimby at all.

He wasn't good in the final...that breadstick set oof. Fed at Wimbledon is still Fed so he was still great, and the match against Nadal was really epic ( ) but it doesn't rank with his better performances there no way.

 

[Lew II]

Average ranking of the opponents:

2019 - 14.2
2015 - 15.2
2014 - 16.7
2005 - 19.0
2012 - 19.1
2007 - 19.7
2017 - 20.2
2006 - 23.6
2009 - 25.8
2003 - 31.6
2004 - 36.2
2008 - 37.4

Average Elo of the opponents:

2015 - 2106.0
2012 - 2091.1
2014 - 2090.4
2008 - 2072.9
2017 - 2068.4
2005 - 2068.3
2019 - 2065.9
2006 - 2060.3
2009 - 2045.4
2007 - 2034.2
2003 - 1985.7
2004 - 1978.0

 

[StrongRule]

Lol at all the fanboys crying about 2019 being at the bottom of the list. Alright, so which finals were worse? Only 2015, that's it. Maybe 2014 too, though I'm not sure about that one. But saying 2009 was worse is peak level trolling.

 

[MichaelNadal]

He wasn't good in the final...that breadstick set oof. Fed at Wimbledon is still Fed so he was still great, and the match against Nadal was really epic ( ) but it doesn't rank with his better performances there no way.

He basically gave away two sets in a slam final, gave away a break lead in the fifth if not for federry, couldn't do jack squat on fred's serve till late fourth set... really.

 

[KINGROGER]

1. 2003
2. 2004
3. 2006
4. 2005
5. 2007
6. 2012
7. 2009
8. 2008
9. 2017
10. 2019
11. 2014
12. 2015

 

[MichaelNadal]

1. 2003
2. 2004
3. 2006
4. 2005
5. 2007
6. 2012
7. 2009
8. 2008
9. 2017
10. 2019
11. 2014
12. 2015

A good list finally.

 

[Lew II]

Earnings (£), adjusted for inflation:

2017 - 2,331,808
2012 - 1,368,207
2019 - 1,175,000
2009 - 1,148,760
2015 - 1,049,943
2014 - 992,65
2007 - 978,540
2006 - 954,884
2005 - 947,787
2004 - 932,014
2003 - 915,964
2008 - 504,115

 

[Breakpointerer]

14/15/19 are last three for sure. Rank those however you want.

 

[Lew II]

Here is one of the great opponents in Wimbledon finals:

 

[NatF]

Here is one of the great opponents in Wimbledon finals:

Good Djoke.

 

[Lew II]

14/15/19 are last three for sure. Rank those however you want.

2017 0lderer is not in there just because Djokovic wasn't there to deny him? The bias alert is ringing.

 

[Lew II]

Good Djoke.

Can you name a pro who is that fat in the current tour?

 

[NatF]

1. 2003
2. 2005
3. 2006
4. 2004
5. 2007
6. 2008
7. 2009
8. 2012
9. 2017
10. 2014
11. 2015
12. 2019

Something like this, 2017 hard to rank because of Cryic.

 

[NatF]

Can you name a pro who is that fat in the current tour?

Can't even see an image, perhaps the bandwidth allocation can't stretch to his waistline.