Some Peak Fed Gems

NatF

Bionic Poster
Fed celebration thread (with beautiful tennis I admit) but nothing to commemorate PETE from a Sampras fan?
Sad.
The Fed thread got hijacked, the Pete thread would never even get off the ground. I think there was a Pete thread around somewhere, probably got moved to former pro and then buried.
If you start one in the former pro section it will probably be alright. Just tag some Sampras fans.
 

ABCD

Hall of Fame
Unprovable, therefore untestable, therefore irrelevant.
I agree, it is indeed untestable and (consequently) irrelevant. The same apply to statement "2019 Fed lost to Tsitsipas at the AO, so he would lose probably in straights to Safin." So, why did you like that statement, but not mine? Would you agree that you are a hypocrite?
 
Last edited:

Krish0608

Hall of Fame
Why is it that the peak Federer always plays against some tier-2 players? Gainst Nadal and Djokovic fails to deliver, no?
Arnaud Clement has beaten the "giants" Djokovic and Nadal too lol. He has beaten Murray too. That too when he was way past his prime. He has beaten Agassi at the USO and is an AO finalist losing to Agassi. Sorry to burst your bubble, but many of these people you call "some tier 2 player" actually had decent careers with some impressive highlights.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Don't forget that Djokovic was a baby here and he matured a year later because he beat Fed.Had Fed won, it would have been another weak era win because you know the story told by the obvious detractors with amazing tennis knowledge :D
Not to fall into any weak era narrative but Djokovic was 19 here so he was not even a man yet, although he was good the second half of the year. Federer destroyed Del Potro there in 2009 but lost to him in the 2009 USO final. Are we going to assume Del Potro was the same player at AO that he was at the USO? I'm not.
 

ForehandRF

Professional
Not to fall into any weak era narrative but Djokovic was 19 here so he was not even a man yet, although he was good the second half of the year. Federer destroyed Del Potro there in 2009 but lost to him in the 2009 USO final. Are we going to assume Del Potro was the same player at AO that he was at the USO? I'm not.
I understand, but many use the baby argument when Djokovic lost in that period, but when Djokovic won ( eg AO 2008) they suddenly say that is because Fed has been exposed or things like that.Fedfans can't use the age argument for post 2012 matches, but at the same time rival fanbases refer to Novak or Rafa as "babies" when talking about early matches.

Delpo obviously is much better at the USO than at the AO.
 
Last edited:

Third Serve

Hall of Fame
Really? :D Djokovic was the baby djokovic back then. Federer played the same quality of tennis in 2016 Australian Open semifinal, extremely clean hitting, but Djokovic demolished him 6-1 6-2 in the first two sets. And that coming from a Federer fan
Huh, it’s funny. I think Djokovic played about as good in this match as he did in 2016.
 

Krish0608

Hall of Fame
Don't forget that Djokovic was a baby here and he matured a year later because he beat Fed.Had Fed won, it would have been another weak era win because you know the story told by the obvious detractors with amazing tennis knowledge :D
But to be fair, Djokovic was much better a year later. 2007 was a breakout year for Nole. 2008 was when he played some of his best tennis in his early years. Federer also declined from 2007 version, sure. As much as people wanna play it down, the Mono had quite an impact on Roger and his confidence.
 

ForehandRF

Professional
Fed still peaked in BO3 from time to time even post 2012 on the faster courts.This match vs Djokovic is a masterclass from Fed.
 
Last edited:

Lew II

Hall of Fame
Don't forget that Djokovic was a baby here and he matured a year later because he beat Fed.Had Fed won, it would have been another weak era win because you know the story told by the obvious detractors with amazing tennis knowledge :D
Federer in 2017-18 won 3 slams.
Djokovic in 2004-05 reached zero Slam 4th Rounds.

This is why I think Federer was not old in 2011-15 while Djokovic was young in 2007-10.

Check this:

 

Lew II

Hall of Fame
What does 2004-2005 have to do with 2007-2010? I don’t think Fed even played him in that first period.
What I mean is Djokovic was in his first steps into the tour in 2007-10, as he was a nobody in the previous years, while Federer in 2011-15 was a player with a lot more to give, as he proved in 2017-18.
 

Third Serve

Hall of Fame
If we talk about ''too young'' or ''too old'' I think what they did when they were even younger/older is relevant.
Never mind, I’ll do the work for you.

Since 2007-2010 is a four-year period and 2017-2018 only a two-year period, I’ll add 2016 and 2019 to the latter. I’ll name them “young Djokovic” and “old Federer”, respectively, just for the sake of this analysis.

Slam wins: Old Federer (3) > Young Djokovic (1)
Extra Slam finals: Young Djokovic (2) > Old Federer (1)
Extra Slam semifinals: Young Djokovic (6) > Old Federer (4)
YEC: Young Djokovic (1) > Old Federer (0)
Masters: Young Djokovic (5) > Old Federer (4)
Extra Masters finals: Young Djokovic (6) > Old Federer (4)
“Small” titles (that is, ATP 500 and below): Old Federer (9) > Young Djokovic (8)

It’s actually extremely close. The Slam count gives Federer a convincing resume but Djokovic is ahead in every other relevant statistic. Also, when you factor in his greater competition — prime Federer (and even peak Federer in 2007) and prime (and even peak Nadal in 2008 and 2010), both of whom eliminated him many times in the Slams, though he drew Nadal more— I think there is an excellent case for “young” Djokovic having achieved a higher level than “old Federer”.
 
Top