The last 9 slams - Fed 3 - Rafa 3 - Novak 3 - Who was the most hurt during this period in regards to the slam race?

[Tennis_Hands]

As I said, you don't have issues with me, but with Federer, and it is not a theoretical discussion. I find it disrespectful to question self-assessment of a player. You, yourself said it that your best time was when you were 22. I would consider inappropriate to question that as I consider inappropriate to question Federer's statement. Regarding my personal circumstances, I am not going to go into details, but what could be relevant is that I have published >100 scientific peer-reviewed articles in well-established scientific journals and a good portion of them were related to ageing (research for which I have been awarded millions that yielded some pretty significant findings). And it is not about whether you agree with me or not, it is about politeness. I did not know you and your account of interaction with Millman was so nice that I thought about you "what a nice human being". You just surprised me; if that was written by some other TTW posters I wouldn't be surprised. Have a good life.

LOL

A Professor (correct?) who has published peer-reviewed articles in Statistics AND in the "field of Ageing", and is still clueless about any of those.



P.S. The bolded is GOLD.

 

[ABCD]

LOL

A Professor (correct?) who has published peer-reviewed articles in Statistics AND in the "field of Ageing", and is still clueless about any of those.



P.S. The bolded is GOLD.

Correct, I am an University Professor and also some other things. As an example, I am also an Editor of a well known Scientific Journal. I got millions from mainstream funding bodies. I often think how life is not fair. You are so clever and I am so stupid and yet it is possible that you didn't do that well. Maybe you did. I don't know.

 

[Shank Volley]

LOL

A Professor (correct?) who has published peer-reviewed articles in Statistics AND in the "field of Ageing", and is still clueless about any of those.



P.S. The bolded is GOLD.

What a genuinely pathetic individual he is. I'm screencapturing both of those posts, it's got to be one of the most blatantly falsified life stories I've ever read, and I once spoke to someone who claimed to be Matt Damon.

He is 'an university professor'. Not only that, but also some other things! Remarkable.

 

[aman92]

Read the question again you blind Nadal follower. Question is not who is hurt most by not winning. Question is who is hurt most given the 3 won and equal number of slams.

Rafa was hurt the most because he won 3 and could have won more.... What part of this simple statement your mind can't comprehend?

 

[maratha_warrior]

During this period , 2017-19
Federer reached 3 slam finals - won all 3 .

Djokovic reached 3 slam finals - won all 3.

Rafa reached 5 slam finals ,1 semi WB 2018 ( defacto final ) -. Won only 3 and lost 3 ..

Definitely here, Rafa lost the most...

 

[Tennis_Hands]

I offer the same bet to you. If I am lying it would be the easiest money in your life.

Contacting crazies on the Internet is not something I am interested in, but if you want, you can reveal your identity, just to prove your claims here.

I don't know how you reached the exact figure, since ever since you started making those claims it has always been the same ($20 K).

There must be a solid statistical analysis behind it, I am sure.

Now, back to the expectation of 37 year old Djokovic being better than ever.

Maybe you can explain that also "scientifically".

 

[ABCD]

Contacting crazies on the Internet is not something I am interested in, but if you want, you can reveal your identity, just to prove your claims here.

I don't know how you reached the exact figure, since ever since you started making those claims it has always been the same ($20 K).

There must be a solid statistical analysis behind it, I am sure.

Now, back to the expectation of 37 year old Djokovic being better than ever.

Maybe you can explain that also "scientifically".

It is not about me proving anything (I don't care about you), it is about being responsible for what one says. 20K USD is not huge amount of money, but yet it is a decent sum that would most likely hurt you losing and teach you a lesson of being responsible for what you say. If you would like to test my claims, this bet it is always open to you and anyone else. Imagine if I am lying, what a good opportunity is to get 20K USD. If you like to go forward, we would do it properly with solicitors etc., so that wouldn't be possible to retreat.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

It is not about me proving anything (I don't care about you), it is about being responsible for what one says. 20K USD is not huge amount of money, but yet it is a decent sum that would most likely hurt you losing and teach you a lesson of being responsible for what you say. If you would like to test my claims, this bet it is always open to you and anyone else. Imagine if I am lying, what a good opportunity is to get 20K USD. If you like to go forward, we would do it properly with solicitors etc., so that wouldn't be possible to retreat.

You don't seem to understand that noone is interested to find out anything about you.

Your participation here is the only thing that speaks about yourself, and it is one constant sequence of failures.

So, back to the topic of this thread.

 

[ABCD]

You don't seem to understand that noone is interested to find out anything about you.

Your participation here is the only thing that speaks about yourself, and it is one constant sequence of failures.

So, back to the topic of this thread.

I know that you don't have guts.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

I know that you don't have guts.

I have never seen a Professor to behave like a 7 years old.

Now back to the theory about the ever improving tennis players.

 

[Nole_King]

Rafa was hurt the most because he won 3 and could have won more.... What part of this simple statement your mind can't comprehend?

You know what. Rafa should thank his stars that Federer got injured @ Montreal, else that 3 would have become 2. I think Rafa already overachieved by winning outside FO and hence should not have any regrets. Same for his fans

 

[ABCD]

I have never seen a Professor to behave like a 7 years old.

Now back to the theory about the ever improving tennis players.

If you would ever like to walk the walk, let me know. Otherwise, your words are nothing.

 

[DSH]

Count him out at your own peril.

after wimbledon 2019 he is done.

 

[DSH]

Really is unprecedented. When has this happened before where there’s no new generation to push out the old?

nadal and djokovic are not that old.
federer, on contrary...

 

[Tennis_Hands]

If you would ever like to walk the walk, let me know. Otherwise, your words are nothing.

I already informed you that I am not interested.

As for the rest, I judge by "do", not by "say". I have seen how you work with data, and now have heard about your theories about aging in tennis.

 

[RF-18]

You don't seem to understand that noone is interested to find out anything about you.

Your participation here is the only thing that speaks about yourself, and it is one constant sequence of failures.

So, back to the topic of this thread.

If you are not interested about him, then why are you claiming that he is lying about himself and what he does? You are insulting his integrity. He gave you a proposition to show that you are wrong.

Next time don't insult someone like that if you can't back it up.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

If you are not interested about him, then why are you claiming that he is lying about himself and what he does? You are insulting his integrity. He gave you a proposition to show that you are wrong.

Next time don't insult someone like that if you can't back it up.

I am not claiming anything. I just consider the probability of Statistics Professor to present such a horrendous data analysis as close to zero.

And now after I saw his claims in other fields, I remain thoroughly unconvinced by anything he says.

Anyway, I couldn't care less about his fantasies. The only thing that is of any concern here are the presented opinions. His are basically disposable.

 

[DSH]

You know what. Rafa should thank his stars that Federer got injured @ Montreal, else that 3 would have become 2. I think Rafa already overachieved by winning outside FO and hence should not have any regrets. Same for his fans

hilarious stuff, nadal has been the most regular by far since 2017, he was 9 points off the title at the Australian Open 2 years ago.
he could calmly beat the Serbian last year in wimbledon, unlike this year'smatch in Australia (which could have repercussions for how he played scared the Spanish), a highlight in the 2018 season.
if nadal won the game, he won the title and if he won the title, he would have been the player of the year and the number 1 at the end of the season.
if he won wimbledon, he could have played much better in the us open and he would have played the final against djokovic, which by the way, had an incredibly easy draw to be the sixth seed.
and as I said before, if I had won that match to the Serbian, nadal would have played much better final a few days ago.
It is curious what can affect a moment and the consequences and changes in the course of history.

 

[mike danny]

What a genuinely pathetic individual he is. I'm screencapturing both of those posts, it's got to be one of the most blatantly falsified life stories I've ever read, and I once spoke to someone who claimed to be Matt Damon.

He is 'an university professor'. Not only that, but also some other things! Remarkable.

The fact that he spends his time on a tennis forum and is trolling an entire fanbase is telling enough.

 

[mike danny]

nadal and djokovic are not that old.
federer, on contrary...

They are old enough to at least be challenged by the younger folks. It's not happening.

 

[Benjamin Rio]

hilarious stuff, nadal has been the most regular by far since 2017, he was 9 points off the title at the Australian Open 2 years ago.
he could calmly beat the Serbian last year in wimbledon, unlike this year'smatch in Australia (which could have repercussions for how he played scared the Spanish), a highlight in the 2018 season.
if nadal won the game, he won the title and if he won the title, he would have been the player of the year and the number 1 at the end of the season.
if he won wimbledon, he could have played much better in the us open and he would have played the final against djokovic, which by the way, had an incredibly easy draw to be the sixth seed.
and as I said before, if I had won that match to the Serbian, nadal would have played much better final a few days ago.
It is curious what can affect a moment and the consequences and changes in the course of history.

True but still Novak is a better player than Nadal.

Last set Nadal won against the djoker on hardcourts is from 2013 US open final.

The djoker was not playing his best at wimbledon and got his confidence back by beating nadal at wimbledon.

 

[mike danny]

If you are not interested about him, then why are you claiming that he is lying about himself and what he does? You are insulting his integrity. He gave you a proposition to show that you are wrong.

Next time don't insult someone like that if you can't back it up.

People can claim to be anything they want on the internet simply because it's the internet. Nobody should be naive enough to buy what he says.

 

[Jonas78]

They are old enough to at least be challenged by the younger folks. It's not happening.

Big3 are just toooo good

 

[Tennis_Hands]

People can claim to be anything they want on the internet simply because it's the internet. Nobody should be naive enough to buy what he says.

$20K.

 

[ABCD]

I am not claiming anything. I just consider the probability of Statistics Professor to present such a horrendous data analysis as close to zero.

And now after I saw his claims in other fields, I remain thoroughly unconvinced by anything he says.

Anyway, I couldn't care less about his fantasies. The only thing that is of any concern here are the presented opinions. His are basically disposable.

You don't need to explain your reasoning. No words can get you out of this, only actions. You are either a man or a chicken? See how your friend "Shank Volleys" disappeared; he is not exactly up to it.

 

[DSH]

They are old enough to at least be challenged by the younger folks. It's not happening.

do you know a great player can win majors in his early 30s?

 

[Jonas78]

do you know a great player can win majors in his early 30s?

So could a player in his early 20s... at least they used to...

 

[mike danny]

do you know a great player can win majors in his early 30s?

Do you know that the younger ones can at least offer resistance instead of being fodder in slam semis?

 

[DSH]

True but still Novak is a better player than Nadal.

Last set Nadal won against the djoker on hardcourts is from 2013 US open final.

The djoker was not playing his best at wimbledon and got his confidence back by beating nadal at wimbledon.

i disagree he was not playing his best at wimbledon last year, compare his level the year before when he did retire against berdych.
a completely different player!
i agree about the bolded part but as i said countless time, Nadal allowed the resurgence of the Serbian in that match.
it is a pity that he always falters against the Serbian at important moments.
that's why I think that if nadal does not win the French event this year it is very possible that the Serbian will surpass him in quantity of grand slams.

 

[Dilexson]

I miss the days when it was just trollBCD. Dont think many would take you seriously with your history dude, lol.

 

[DSH]

So could a player in his early 20s... at least they used to...

YOU MEAN 20 OR 21 YEARS OLD?
BECAUSE I THINK SOME PLAYERS CAN BE BETTER IN THEIR EARLY 30S
EXAMPLES: LAVER, WHO 3 MAJORS OF THE GRAND SLAM IN 1969
CONNORS WHO WON A COUPLE US OPEN AGAINST PRIME LENDL
AGASSI WHO WON A COUPLE OF AUSTRALIAN OPEN.
SAMPRAS WAS NOT BETTER BUT WON HIS US OPEN AT 31+, WHEN 10 YEARS AGO HE LOST WITH EDBERG.
IF YOU COMPARE THE LEVEL OF FEDERER FROM THE US OPEN 2011 UNTIL THE AUSTRALIA OPEN 2013, ITS LEVEL IS CLEARLY SUPERIOR TO THE SAME PERIOD OF 10 YEARS AGO.
AND THE MOST CLEAR EXAMPLE IS DJOKOVIC, THAT ITS LEVEL IS VERY HIGHER THAN 10 YEARS AGO.

THE PRIME OF A TENIS PLAYER IS AMONG THEIR 22 TO THE 28 OR 29 YEARS.
THAT DOES NOT WANT TO SAY THAT ITS LEVEL IN THE BEGINNINGS OF ITS 30S PREVENTS THEM FROM STILL WINNING MORE GRAND SLAM IN THEIR CAREERS.

 

[Jonas78]

YOU MEAN 20 OR 21 YEARS OLD?
BECAUSE I THINK SOME PLAYERS CAN BE BETTER IN THEIR EARLY 30S
EXAMPLES: LAVER, WHO 3 MAJORS OF THE GRAND SLAM IN 1969
CONNORS WHO WON A COUPLE US OPEN AGAINST PRIME LENDL
AGASSI WHO WON A COUPLE OF AUSTRALIAN OPEN.
SAMPRAS WAS NOT BETTER BUT WON HIS US OPEN AT 31+, WHEN 10 YEARS AGO HE LOST WITH EDBERG.
IF YOU COMPARE THE LEVEL OF FEDERER FROM THE US OPEN 2011 UNTIL THE AUSTRALIA OPEN 2013, ITS LEVEL IS CLEARLY SUPERIOR TO THE SAME PERIOD OF 10 YEARS AGO.
AND THE MOST CLEAR EXAMPLE IS DJOKOVIC, THAT ITS LEVEL IS VERY HIGHER THAN 10 YEARS AGO.

THE PRIME OF A TENIS PLAYER IS AMONG THEIR 22 TO THE 28 OR 29 YEARS.
THAT DOES NOT WANT TO SAY THAT ITS LEVEL IN THE BEGINNINGS OF ITS 30S PREVENTS THEM FROM STILL WINNING MORE GRAND SLAM IN THEIR CAREERS.

What im saying is: If this years AO is an indication of the rest of the season, it means:

Djokovic (layer 1) >> Half-injurdal (layer 2) >>>>> (layer 3)

I understand Djokovic fans are enjoying the moment, and im not criticizing him winning, he could obviously have won with tougher competition. But unless you think Djokovic19 >> Djokovic11/16, the strength of the the top10/top20 is disturbing. Im critizising the players in their 20s for being unable to at least provide some excitement.

The same goes to Federers 3 slams 2017-2018 which was only possible because he played a field with no ATGs in their 20s.

 

[DSH]

Im critizising the players in their 20s for being unable to at least provide some excitement.

well is obvious that nishikori, raonic, dimitrov, goffin, carreño busta generation are to said politely not good enough.

 

[Jonas78]

Im critizising the players in their 20s for being unable to at least provide some excitement.

well is obvious that nishikori, raonic, dimitrov, goffin, carreño busta generation are to said politely not good enough.

Agreed.

As an example, i would say a player like Ferrer in his prime, would be the strongest player among todays 20y-30y players.

 

[DSH]

Agreed.

As an example, i would say a player like Ferrer in his prime, would be the strongest player among todays 20y-30y players.

The level of Ferrer, from ao 2011 to rg 2013, would emulate at least one career as Murray or Wawrinka: 3 majors for the one born in Javea if we move it to the period of today.

 

[CentreCourt]

I disagree that nothing has changed. They're closer now in percentages.

For example after RG16 Djokovic had won 70.6% of Federer's slams, and 85.7% of Nadal's slams.

Now Djokovic has won 75% of Federer's slams and 88.2% of Nadal's slams.

It doesn't require an example to show that logic is flawed, but I'll give you one anyway.

Player A: 1 slam
Player B: 2 slams

50% of player B

Player A1: 12 slams
Player B2: 20 slams

60% of player B2

Percentages are irrelevant.

 

[DSH]

Federer has at least 70% of having the record alone. (most grand slam titles).

 

[MichaelNadal]

Nadal. Should have converted a SP in Wimby 18, and stayed ahead in the 5th in AO17.

 

[True Fanerer]

after wimbledon 2019 he is done.

Maybe. Maybe not.

 

[DSH]

Maybe. Maybe not.

Let's leave the bias behind.
¿ do you think federer with 38+ is a lock to even reach the qf in a major?

 

[True Fanerer]

Let's leave the bias behind.
¿ do you think federer with 38+ is a lock to even reach the qf in a major?

No bias when I say that. I don't write off ATG. He's not a lock for anything anymore at the same time.

 

[DSH]

No bias when I say that. I don't write off ATG. He's not a lock for anything anymore at the same time.

but deep down you wish otherwise.

 

[True Fanerer]

but deep down you wish otherwise.

I knew it was coming at some point.

 

[Sudacafan]

Advantage Federer, but it will probably not be enough.

 

[Djokovic2011]

i disagree he was not playing his best at wimbledon last year, compare his level the year before when he did retire against berdych.
a completely different player!
i agree about the bolded part but as i said countless time, Nadal allowed the resurgence of the Serbian in that match.
it is a pity that he always falters against the Serbian at important moments.
that's why I think that if nadal does not win the French event this year it is very possible that the Serbian will surpass him in quantity of grand slams.

Well if anyone on this forum didn't know Djokovic's nationality before reading this post they sure do now!

 

[DSH]

I knew it was coming at some point.

do you know that bill tilden was a semifinalist of grand slam for the last time in his career at the age of 37 and seven months in the us open 1930?
Which tennis players of the 20th century were semifinalists or did they reach the final of a Grand Slam being older than Federer?
pancho gonzales at the french open 1968 on clay (more than 40 years old): semifinalist.
ken rosewall multiple times on grass only :us open 1973 (sf), wimbledon 1974 (f), us open 1974(f), ao 1976 (sf) and ao 1977 (sf) but the last two with weak draws)
and of course jimmy connors in the us open 1991 on hardcourt at age of 39 years: semifinalist.


What are the chances that federer can reach the semifinal of a grand slam after Wimbledon 2019?

 

[DSH]

Well if anyone on this forum didn't know Djokovic's nationality before reading this post they sure do now!

no disrespect, but does it bother you that instead of mentioning djokovic i say he is Serbian?
If you read my posts, I mix nadal with spanish, federer with swiss and etc.

 

[Djokovic2011]

no disrespect, but does it bother you that instead of mentioning djokovic i say he is Serbian?
If you read my posts, I mix nadal with spanish, federer with swiss and etc.

Doesn't bother me, I just find it a bit strange.

 

[True Fanerer]

do you know that bill tilden was a semifinalist of grand slam for the last time in his career at the age of 37 and seven months in the us open 1930?
Which tennis players of the 20th century were semifinalists or did they reach the final of a Grand Slam being older than Federer?
pancho gonzales at the french open 1968 on clay (more than 40 years old): semifinalist.
ken rosewall multiple times on grass only :us open 1973 (sf), wimbledon 1974 (f), us open 1974(f), ao 1976 (sf) and ao 1977 (sf) but the last two with weak draws)
and of course jimmy connors in the us open 1991 on hardcourt at age of 39 years: semifinalist.


What are the chances that federer can reach the semifinal of a grand slam after Wimbledon 2019?

A SF? Probably better than any other 38 yr old chances have been. He barely missed at Wimbledon and barely missed it at AO when you think about it. It's not that far fetched considering the field.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Doesn't bother me, I just find it a bit strange.

You and poisoned slice look alike