no, because consistency and top level went down for most part after 82. he turned 31 FFS.
9 year prime period isn't enough for you? that's same as Sampras at Wim (92-00). Unlike you, I won't call Sampras prime in Wim 01 to pump up my fav Fed though Sampras did play well in 4R match and would've ramped up form atleast a little if he got through.
what next? prime extends for 15-20 years? in which land?
especially calling Connors prime in 85 and even more so 87 (you mentioned loss to Cash) is just beyond LOLworthy.
prediction is different from analysis of what actually happened. you don't even know that basic difference?
I had Djokovic as 3rd fav for Wim 18 pre-tournament anyways seeing Queens 18 (after Fed and Cilic). So wasn't under-rating Djoko there.
and no one sane could predict such a big extension of worthlessness of hyper-inflation era. even worse from 2020 onwards. So yeah, I was wrong not to foresee that sort of utter worthlessness extending so much. I don't have a problem admitting when I am actually wrong.
You still don't have the guts to talk about Borg's epic win over Mac in Wim 80 or Gerualitis/Connors b2b in 1977, do you?
of course you don't have much idea about Amritraj, Amaya, Edmondson taking Borg to 5 in earlier rounds at Wim either.