ROTFL I can't stop laughing

[Towny]

I think you might be caught in the crossfire of these goat wars that happen everyday in here.

This thread isn’t about Federer, it’s about the fans in here and the arguments being put forward.

It’s become recently fashionable for the more vociferous Djokovic crowd to go after weakera, Lew being part of that crowd. I don’t think of Lew as a troll, but some others in here do.

In response to that the Federer crowd says well, can’t have it both ways. 30+ Fed would have been no competition for prime Djokovic, so this is a weakera of its own.

You need to follow the back and forth a bit to understand the context of the 2015 demarcation. Nobody is actually saying Federer was better in 2015 than during his prime.

The whole gist of it is he was still competitive, and here in this thread is definitive proof FedFans also believed it in 2015.

That’s the context.

Think of all this like a long drawn out white paper slowly making its way, like molasses, through congress. It may never ever get completed but people in here seem to wake up every day determined to advance it forward page by bloody page.

Yeah I know that GOAT debates have been at the forefront for a while, certainly since I started visiting the board in 2013. Understandable I guess given how popular the Big 3 are.

I think it's been a back and forth between some who say Federer was a washed up grandpa and others who say he was past prime but actually playing at a high level. But there are some on here, such as ABCD, who consistently espouse that Federer was better in 2015 than in his younger years, presumably in order to make Djokovic seem stronger. This is the point of view I'm arguing against. I know most Djokovic fans don't hold to it

 

[Druss]

@Lew, are you hired by the Djokovic family or do you have a real job?

He has a full-time job; that is sitting in a lab devising stats, graphs, formulas and what have you, in a manner that would make Federer look like a far lesser player than Djokovic.

 

[Chanwan]

Yeah but not by much. Around 60-40.

Still - the basic point of the thread is that TTW got it wrong. TTW will always get it wrong, cause people tend to vote with their hearts, not their heads. Trust the bookies, not the fans.
Wimbledon 2014 made sense, to some extent. Djoko had been in a bit of a slam final funk and Fed beat him 2 years prior. The match went down the wire in the 5th. 2015 W I can see with the semi-performance vs. Murray, but Djoko should still be the favorite, which he was with the bookies.

Fed fans deep inside their heart know Fed in the summer of 2015 was playing the best tennis of his life.

Djokovic was coming from 9 months winning Bejing, Bercy, YEC, AO, final at Dubai, IW, Miami, MC, Rome, final at RG, but they still mass voted for Federer as the favourite in Wimbledon/USO finals.

No, Fed fans - like most fans - just tend to vote with their heart in polls like these. If you could somehow prove that Fed fans bet actual money on Fed in unreasonably large numbers, you would have (somewhat) of a case.
Also, believing Fed can beat Novak at Wimbledon doesn't equal believing Fed is playing the best tennis of his life. It simply means believing that Fed is that much better on grass that his declined form can still match Djoko's peak. That belief turned out to be wrong.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

However entertaining it is to have you cite Nick Kyrgios as your sound of calm reason “...sorry to tell you mate!” is not helpful.

Clear examples of statistics not in support of any assertions would be helpful.

Weak trolling is weak.

Fail better next time.

 

[KineticChain]

rogerer is our lord. blasphemers will be blasted with 92 mph cross-court winners

 

[Ann]

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...tlemens-final-1-djokovic-vs-4-federer.505555/

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...l-1-novak-djokovic-vs-2-roger-federer.538102/

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/us-open-2015-final-djokovic-1-vs-federer-2.543613/

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/djokovic-1-vs-federer-3-wtf-2015-final.549106/

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...-open-2016-sf-1-djokovic-vs-3-federer.553732/


Look at the predictions:

Wimbedon 2014: Federer 72.4%, Djokovic 27.6%

Wimbledon 2015: Federer 72.2%, Djokovic 27.8%

US Open 2015: Federer 56.9%, Djokovic 43.1%

YEC 2015 final: Federer 41.9%, Djokovic 58.1%

AUS Open 2016: Federer 39.6%, Djokovic 60.4%


They always told me on TTW that Fed was a weaponless grandpa, a weak opponent

And I voted for Djokovic in the WTF final and look how that turned out.

 

[Standaa]

Definitely no.. Not for me anyway.

03,04,05,06,07,08,09,10,11,12 all higher peak level

The fact you need to point this out to someone is sad.

 

[Deleted member 742196]

Weak trolling is weak.

Fail better next time.

Is that a tennis ball in the distance behind you?

 

[Fabresque]

72.4%
72.2%
56.9%
41.9%
39.6%

Look at Fed fans gradually getting off their high horse

Last hope, Cincinnati 2018:

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...sters-final-federer-vs-djokovic.624528/page-6

Federer 52%, Djokovic 48%

can’t really blame them for that one. Feds consistently owned Joker at Cincinatti and his decline, while becoming obvious, wasn’t really in question since he just reached a final. ig fed fans assumed Roger would pull it out over Novak once again in his pet masters, guess not

 

[Ann]

He has a full-time job; that is sitting in a lab devising stats, graphs, formulas and what have you, in a manner that would make Federer look like a far lesser player than Djokovic.

And by 'lab' he means mom's basement where he subsists on generic peanut butter and ho-hos... it's all his paper route can afford.

 

[justasport]

Federer:
20 Slams
6 Masters Cups

Djokovic:
14 Slams
5 Masters Cups

 

[Deleted member 742196]

He's the living embodiment of the phrase "lies, damned lies and statistics".

And, along with the late and not-so-dearly departed 5555, is the most repetitive Novak Djokovic troll this forum has seen.

This may well be true, I think he just makes everyone work much harder and that’s why people have deep trouble with it.

Look at the original post of this thread:

1. Many people today say Fed is old, he ought to have lost anyway.
2. Many people yesterday said Fed would win the very same matches.

If people want to argue with it go ahead. But they need to argue with the numbers. Petty name calling or slick one liners has rarely been a good look, across someone like Lew it comes across like flailing.

I’m good friends with @FedFosterWallace and he often does in words not much different to what @Lew does in numbers, or perhaps @vive le beau jeu ! does in funny memes and gags.

They’re all a credit to this forum, making General Pro more interesting and colourful, whatever their intentions are.

 

[Deleted member 742196]

Yeah I know that GOAT debates have been at the forefront for a while, certainly since I started visiting the board in 2013. Understandable I guess given how popular the Big 3 are.

I think it's been a back and forth between some who say Federer was a washed up grandpa and others who say he was past prime but actually playing at a high level. But there are some on here, such as ABCD, who consistently espouse that Federer was better in 2015 than in his younger years, presumably in order to make Djokovic seem stronger. This is the point of view I'm arguing against. I know most Djokovic fans don't hold to it

Pffft ABCD. Give me Lew any day.

Lew would never clearly and concisely say Federer at 35 is better than his prime. What he’s doing in this thread is thwarting folk that depend on it in their reasoning, yesterday many of them/us were singing a different tune.

These things can get a bit confusing when everyone in a fan group gets clumped into the more outrageous opinions of a small subset.

GOAT arguments are stormy by nature, those that enjoy them I suppose must enjoy storms.

 

[vex]

Everyone crushing OP but to be fair, those Wimby/USO threads were nearly unmitigated trainwrecks for 95% of Fed fans. The decent Fed fans had some class and were realistic with match predictions but the vast majority were just eating spicy humble pie a couple days later.

 

[Djokodal Fan]

This thread is gonna hurt some butthurt fed fanatics.

But this thread was un-necessary imo

 

[Deleted member 757377]

This thread is gonna hurt some butthurt fed fanatics.

But this thread was un-necessary imo

Why?

 

[Towny]

Lew would never clearly and concisely say Federer at 35 is better than his prime. What he’s doing in this thread is thwarting folk that depend on it in their reasoning, yesterday many of them/us were singing a different tune.

I hate to be contrary, but he basically has said that (well, about 34 year old Fed anyway)

peak: Fed 2015, Djoko 2015, Nadal 2013

Fed fans deep inside their heart know Fed in the summer of 2015 was playing the best tennis of his life.

I personally think he doesn't actually believe it (as its so ridiculous), but he is trolling a bit. Unnecessarily so. He is nothing if not provocative.

But yeah, there's certainly hypocrisy on both sides. Fed fans are by no means exempt

 

[Deleted member 757377]

I hate to be contrary, but he basically has said that (well, about 34 year old Fed anyway)


I personally think he doesn't actually believe it (as its so ridiculous), but he is trolling a bit. Unnecessarily so. He is nothing if not provocative.

But yeah, there's certainly hypocrisy on both sides. Fed fans are by no means exempt

I think 2015-17 is one of his peak versions. He was a different player from his other peak versions (2007, 2012) but not worse.

This is valid for all players: for Djoko I would be undecided between 2011, 2015 and 2018 (hopefully 2019), and for Nadal I'm undecided between 2008-2010, 2013 and 2017-18.

 

[Towny]

I think 2015-17 is one of his peak versions. He was a different player from his other peak versions (2007, 2012) but not worse.

This is valid for all players: for Djoko I would be undecided between 2011, 2015 and 2018 (hopefully 2019), and for Nadal I'm undecided between 2008-2010, 2013 and 2017-18.

Why are you not including 2004-2006 for Federer?

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Why are you not including 2004-2006 for Federer?

In 2007 he beat better players.

 

[Towny]

In 2007 he beat better players.

McEnroe beat better players to win his slams in 81. He was still better in 84

 

[Deleted member 757377]

McEnroe beat better players to win his slams in 81. He was still better in 84

2007 was Fed's second best season: 3 slams, RG final, YEC, 2 masters, 3 masters finals.

Anyway, 1984 Mac met 6 times no.2 Connors, 7 times no.3 Lendl and 3 times no.4 Wilander. Hard to think of a better competition.

 

[Deleted member 742196]

I hate to be contrary, but he basically has said that (well, about 34 year old Fed anyway)


I personally think he doesn't actually believe it (as its so ridiculous), but he is trolling a bit. Unnecessarily so. He is nothing if not provocative.

But yeah, there's certainly hypocrisy on both sides. Fed fans are by no means exempt

Nothing contrary about it, you’re right to point out gaps in my reasoning. If that’s the working theory its easy enough to ignore.

Yip, “provocative” is a great word for him. He very carefully tip toes around terms like peak, prime, weakera and strongera all the while asking us not to mind his English.

But you can't judge stats based on a double standard. If your criterion to determine highest level is winning percentage, then 2017 Federer > 2015 Federer, since 2017 Federer had 91% of winning percentage while 2015 Federer had a 85% of winning percentage.

Ha! Nice one.

Seeing Lew attack and defend simultaneously two fan bases is fun. It’s no wonder he seems a great fan of Djokovic. Another thing I like about him is he began all this well before Djokovic’s resurgence, that’s got to be worth some bonus points.

 

[Towny]

2007 was Fed's second best season: 3 slams, RG final, YEC, 2 masters, 3 masters finals.

Anyway, 1984 Mac met 6 times no.2 Connors, 7 times no.3 Lendl and 3 times no.4 Wilander. Hard to think of a better competition.

2007 was one of Federer's best. I'd personally put it third but second isn't unreasonable. McEnroe beat Borg to win both his slams in 81. Borg is better than the above named players. But I agree, his 84 competition was no joke

 

[Tennis_Hands]

This may well be true, I think he just makes everyone work much harder and that’s why people have deep trouble with it.

Look at the original post of this thread:

1. Many people today say Fed is old, he ought to have lost anyway.
2. Many people yesterday said Fed would win the very same matches.

If people want to argue with it go ahead. But they need to argue with the numbers. Petty name calling or slick one liners has rarely been a good look, across someone like Lew it comes across like flailing.

I’m good friends with @FedFosterWallace and he often does in words not much different to what @Lew does in numbers, or perhaps @vive le beau jeu ! does in funny memes and gags.

They’re all a credit to this forum, making General Pro more interesting and colourful, whatever their intentions are.

Putting VLBJ and FFW in one sentence with the poster in question (or yourself) is a travesty.

Please, stick to posting pictures of lizards.

 

[Azure]

Putting VLBJ and FFW in one sentence with the poster in question (or yourself) is a travesty.

Please, stick to posting pictures of lizards.

I like it that you don't get touchy about these things.

@Hydrocella I was wrong yesterday. Apparently komodo dragons are lizards.

 

[Azure]

What is the intention of this thread by the way?

 

[TheGhostOfAgassi]

Irrelevant in this thread, butthurt friend.

So you wouldn’t take any advice from Fed fans when it comes to outcome of matches I suppose?

It just says a lot how they are in this forum and their tennis knowledge I suppose.

Hope they are into into betting

 

[Enga]

Fandumbs laughing at fandumps- apples and oranges

 

[Deleted member 742196]

Putting VLBJ and FFW in one sentence with the poster in question (or yourself) is a travesty.

Please, stick to posting pictures of lizards.

I can see you‘re feeling left out. How about something with just us?

Should I be nervous?

It looks like we’re resting peacefully there’s also a foreboding edge about it because we might also be dead, or more rather precisely I might be dead.

I like it that you don't get touchy about these things.

@Hydrocella I was wrong yesterday. Apparently komodo dragons are lizards.

Touchy, yes.
Touchy-feely, see above.

What is the intention of this thread by the way?

I surmise the intent is in the title: Lew maniacally ROLF’ing knowing he just splattered egg all over goat debates.

 

[Ann]

What is the intention of this thread by the way?

To start crap, to troll, to bait other posters, to be an arse.

It's all crap.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

I can see you‘re feeling left out.

How about something with just us?

Should I be nervous?

It looks like we’re resting peacefully there’s also a foreboding edge about it because we might also be dead, or more rather precisely I might also be dead.

Funny how you try to push your persona everywhere.

What I wrote was addressing just that, and now you confirm it again.

Are you in need of attention?

I thought that the host of buffoons you like to associate with, and the unlucky decent posters that you associate with despite of their total indifference towards your advances are enough?

 

[Deleted member 742196]

Funny how you try to push your persona everywhere.

What I wrote was addressing just that, and now you confirm it again.

Are you in need of attention?

I thought that the host of buffoons you like to associate with, and the unlucky decent posters that you associate with despite of their total indifference towards your advances are enough?

Hey, ignoring the above whatever happened to your convincing theory I am Rusty? Where are we with that? Is it still a thing between us? Should I plan around it? Birthdays? Anniversaries? Did you forget that tasty morsel you were dining on? Was the theory no good? Did you eventually get bored with it?

I’m still me, but am I Rusty?

 

[Subway Tennis]

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...tlemens-final-1-djokovic-vs-4-federer.505555/

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...l-1-novak-djokovic-vs-2-roger-federer.538102/

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/us-open-2015-final-djokovic-1-vs-federer-2.543613/

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/djokovic-1-vs-federer-3-wtf-2015-final.549106/

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...-open-2016-sf-1-djokovic-vs-3-federer.553732/


Look at the predictions:

Wimbedon 2014: Federer 72.4%, Djokovic 27.6%

Wimbledon 2015: Federer 72.2%, Djokovic 27.8%

US Open 2015: Federer 56.9%, Djokovic 43.1%

YEC 2015 final: Federer 41.9%, Djokovic 58.1%

AUS Open 2016: Federer 39.6%, Djokovic 60.4%


They always told me on TTW that Fed was a weaponless grandpa, a weak opponent

72.4%
72.2%
56.9%
41.9%
39.6%

Look at Fed fans gradually getting off their high horse

Last hope, Cincinnati 2018:

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...sters-final-federer-vs-djokovic.624528/page-6

Federer 52%, Djokovic 48%

On the surface, their behaviour is comical, but when you analyse the worst of Federer's supporter base, the vocal minority, you can see how the mania has come to be. Many of them are quite young, and have no concept of the game without Roger being involved. They came to watch Federer, not tennis, and gravitated to him specifically rather than to the game more broadly.

Not Roger's fault, and not tennis's fault: the game's marketeers promoted a player with charisma and crossover appeal who wins. But in the process, they created a monster: the small faction within this supporter group whose entire view of our game is via the filter of Roger's success. It's hard for them to envisage the game without Roger anointed as the greatest of all time, and the mere thought or suggestion of anything else creates a disconnect for them.

 

[TheGhostOfAgassi]

What is the intention of this thread by the way?

Don’t take Fed fan predictions serious maybe?


I never did though as it’s nuts in here when it comes to predictions

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Hey, ignoring the above whatever happened to your convincing theory I am Rusty? Where are we with that? Is it still a thing between us? Should I plan around it? Birthdays? Anniversaries? Did you forget that tasty morsel you were dining on? Was the theory no good? Did you eventually get bored with it?

I’m still me, but am I Rusty?

I don't think that you understand: I communicate with you, because you are pestering this forum with your nonsense.

There is no "us", never was, and never will be.

For all intents and purposes you are Rusty, regardless of which of the many similar profiles yours really are.

 

[Nadal_Django]

Don’t take Fed fan predictions serious maybe?


I never did though as it’s nuts in here when it comes to predictions

But don't you think is a little bit dishonest and hypocritical when you're so sure of the Federer level and form before the match and write something like this

Anyways scr*w all that.

Federer in 4 sets vs Djokovic in the final - doesn't matter whether it is indoors or outdoors IMO ...

but then after the match we don't hear the end of it, how Roger was old, past his prime, playing average, that in all other Wimbledon editions excluding 2013 he was playing much better, and Djokovic won only because of age difference etc etc, and all this written under the veil of self proclaimed supreme objectivity, while calling all the others who thinks differently clueless fellas, idiots and trolls.

 

[tennisaddict]

Lol . Can’t believe some are thinking Lew is bringing fresh insight with numbers

It is the same crap being rehashed

1. Fed won in a weak era by quoting the number of titles and slam finals of his slam finals opponent

2. Dismiss 2004-07 because players were not consistent

3. Hype Fed of 2014-16 by slicing his stats against field , not named Djokovic

4. Elevate Djoker based on top 10 wins and slam opponents , praising consistency of the field

If one cannot see this pattern , they seriously lack any comprehension

 

[TheAssassin]

Fed was expected to be a challenging opponent for the most part of all those matches if nothing else, except AO 2016, which he was. Drastically changing the tune after the disappointing losses happened has agenda written over it as much as Lew's stats.

 

[TheGhostOfAgassi]

But don't you think is a little bit dishonest and hypocritical when you're so sure of the Federer level and form before the match and write something like this

but then after the match we don't hear the end of it, how Roger was old, past his prime, playing average, that in all other Wimbledon editions excluding 2013 he was playing much better, and Djokovic won only because of age difference etc etc, and all this written under the veil of self proclaimed supreme objectivity, while calling all the others who thinks differently clueless fellas, idiots and trolls.

It’s called bias and when being biased we don’t think clear.
It’s a lot bias here though from all fanbases.

 

[Deleted member 742196]

I don't think that you understand: I communicate with you, because you are pestering this forum with your nonsense.

There is no "us", never was, and never will be.

For all intents and purposes you are Rusty, regardless of which of the many similar profiles yours really are.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Lol . Can’t believe some are thinking Lew is bringing fresh insight with numbers

It is the same crap being rehashed

1. Fed won in a weak era by quoting the number of titles and slam finals of his slam finals opponent

2. Dismiss 2004-07 because players were not consistent

3. Hype Fed of 2014-16 by slicing his stats against field , not named Djokovic

4. Elevate Djoker based on top 10 wins and slam opponents , praising consistency of the field

If one cannot see this pattern , they seriously lack any comprehension

You're one of those who voted for Fed to win LOL

 

[Azure]

Hahaha

 

[RF-18]

But don't you think is a little bit dishonest and hypocritical when you're so sure of the Federer level and form before the match and write something like this

but then after the match we don't hear the end of it, how Roger was old, past his prime, playing average, that in all other Wimbledon editions excluding 2013 he was playing much better, and Djokovic won only because of age difference etc etc, and all this written under the veil of self proclaimed supreme objectivity, while calling all the others who thinks differently clueless fellas, idiots and trolls.

Rofl. In Wimby 15 thread he predicted Fed in 4 aswell.

 

[junior74]

And I voted for Djokovic in the WTF final and look how that turned out.

ROTL I can't stop laughing

 

[Deleted member 742196]

Hahaha

I like postcards. Physical ones. Always sending them off to people.

Postcards are timeless in a way instant messages can never be.

 

[Azure]

I like postcards. Physical ones. Always sending off to people.

Postcards are timeless in a way instant messages can never be.

Absolutely. That was one gem of a postcard

Really, I am enjoying the two of you having this complex relationship. Both of you don't get angry. That's the best part.

 

[tennisaddict]

You're one of those who voted for Fed to win LOL

I don’t know what is ROTFL about it

You always believe your idol will win or have the chance to win ,right ? It is not that we were betting our house on it .

 

[Azure]

Really this thread is the proverbial stirring of a hornet's nest.

Yes people predicted Federer to win. Big deal. There is a lot of 'hope' associated with prediction. This place has a lot of Fed fans and plenty of nice ones at that. I am sure we all hope our favourite wins.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Hahaha

That is his therapy, so you shouldn't laugh at him.