This whole 40-15 thing is a bit out of control lol....

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
So now someone who used to be considered the GOAT can’t be expected to win the most important rally of his career because he’s 5 years older (and in spite of the fact he had been doing it all match)? Lol the level of mental gymnastics some Fed fans have resorted to in an attempt to excuse that inexcusable choke is just sad.
Ouch. :unsure::oops:

 
So now someone who used to be considered the GOAT can’t be expected to win the most important rally of his career because he’s 5 years older (and in spite of the fact he had been doing it all match)? Lol the level of mental gymnastics some Fed fans have resorted to in an attempt to excuse that inexcusable choke is just sad.
Said by someone who professes T-rena as GOAT despite the far more pathetic choke to Vinci.
 

mr tonyz

Professional
So now someone who used to be considered the GOAT can’t be expected to win the most important rally of his career because he’s 5 years older (and in spite of the fact he had been doing it all match)? Lol the level of mental gymnastics some Fed fans have resorted to in an attempt to excuse that inexcusable choke is just sad.
"Most important rally of his career"

Says who?

You?

Fed already had 8 Wimblys in his bag , with the All-Time record to go with it. Winning a 9th would be the most important because???

A case can be made for Fed's '03(first time)/'07(just because)/'08(had he won it)/'17 (breaking Pete's record outright)
Wimbly '19 however , for what reason? Beating DjokerDal back-to-back for the first time in a slam??

Furthermore that rally was lost against Djoker , a brick wall from the back of the court. A 4-time Wimbly champion himself @ the time. I'm pretty sure it was a big deal for him not to lose also!

A guy who beat Federer in back-to-back Wimbly finals in 14-15. But yeah it's all about Fed & how he should've won ...

Why was Djoker down Championship Points to begin with?

Why did it take 3 Tie-Breakers to win?

Why did Djoker cough up 2 breaks of serve after being up a break in the 5th to almost throw it all away?

Why couldn't Djoker hold for 3 more serves after being up 3-2 in the 5th with a break?

I guess he almost choked too right?

Was this all just mental gymnastics too? Did all this evidence just come from my imagination?

Against the same guy down 40-15 in the same position @ 2011 U.S Open + Fed nailing a first serve & Djoker still managed to win the point?

Against a guy that doubles down & loves sticking it to Fed & all of the crowds faces during the biggest moments?
 
Last edited:

JackGates

Legend
I love how Djokovic fans are salty that even old grandpa outplayed him. They act cocky now, but they were scared little babies on those matchpoints praying and being deflated.

They are so spoiled and priviliged, they just take all Nole's wins for granted, like Nole wasn't at all in danger or that he is a lock to win over 20 majors.
 
I can show you clips at RG where the commentator states it right out the bat: "there's an air of arrogance about him".
Against Rafter RG '99, eh?;)

Anyway, let me provide you with some context regarding the insinuated statement by Paul Dorechenko:

[...]He (Federer, A/N) was hyperactive and had a very extroverted personality. He kept joking.

His good mood and energy infected us all. But above all, he was a good guy. He was friends with everyone at the national center in Biel.

He was something of a son to me, we had a special relationship. Sometimes he came to eat with us. He even vacationed at my house in Biarritz. But working with him wasn't always easy.

Working with Federer wasn't easy because he wasn't very punctual, showed up late for training, and you had to keep nudging him so that he could get to work.

He was not very diligent and quickly got bored because he could do the exercises too easily. Nevertheless he worked very hard for his success.

Federer had to learn to fight against himself in order to get better mental control. The association hired a sports psychologist to supplement the technical staff.

Another key to his success lies in his emotional stability, which he has always had. Not much has changed over the years. He benefited from a stable family environment[...]

Source: https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/-arbeit-mit-federer-war-kein-sonntagsspaziergang-/565206
 

terribleIVAN

Hall of Fame
Against Rafter RG '99, eh?;)

Anyway, let me provide you with some context regarding the insinuated statement by Paul Dorechenko:

[...]He (Federer, A/N) was hyperactive and had a very extroverted personality. He kept joking.

His good mood and energy infected us all. But above all, he was a good guy. He was friends with everyone at the national center in Biel.

He was something of a son to me, we had a special relationship. Sometimes he came to eat with us. He even vacationed at my house in Biarritz. But working with him wasn't always easy.

Working with Federer wasn't easy because he wasn't very punctual, showed up late for training, and you had to keep nudging him so that he could get to work.

He was not very diligent and quickly got bored because he could do the exercises too easily. Nevertheless he worked very hard for his success.

Federer had to learn to fight against himself in order to get better mental control. The association hired a sports psychologist to supplement the technical staff.

Another key to his success lies in his emotional stability, which he has always had. Not much has changed over the years. He benefited from a stable family environment[...]

Source: https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/-arbeit-mit-federer-war-kein-sonntagsspaziergang-/565206
Ok.

But let's include ALL context, shall we ?

Basically, the guy needs money in order to behave better: in private, he's still half crazy, and people get tired of him.

"- I came from boxing, I was an amateur boxer in France, and Federer kept jokingly hitting me, and one day I told him: "I'm going to shove you against a wall, and your nose is fat, but you will be even fatter" . I ended up tired of it. We had a good relationship, but he was complicated. He was not aware of his limits, of when to stop. He had something, I don't know ... One day he said to me about his nose: "I don't have it very pretty, but when I'm number one in the world they won't look at it."

"When he was 20 we were talking to Peter Lundgren to start traveling, and the same week I had an offer from Sergi Bruguera who had just returned after an operation. His offer was much better, more money, living in Barcelona ... And I was so tired of Federer that I decided to leave. "


"The truth is that he was a very complicated boy, with character, hyperactive, he was half crazy and he is still in private. He was a good person, but really very complicated: he threw games, broke his rackets, misbehaved. Federer's personality has been fabricated, it is not his personality.

Federer changed for three reasons: by a sports psychologist who worked with him from 18 to 21 or 22, then he had little experience with girls, had a little girlfriend, and immediately found his wife, who is an ambitious person, who comes from Czechoslovakia, likes money, power, and in the end she has protected Federer a lot, made a bubble for him; and the third was Nike, it was with a lot of money and the marketing department told him: "We want you to be a gentleman".

Nike's money helped him behave better.

In private life, he's a good person, but he's not the figure you see on the tennis court.
"
 
Last edited:

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
Ok.

But let's include ALL context, shall we ?

Basically, the guy needs money in order to behave better: in private, he's still half crazy, and people get tired of him.

"- I came from boxing, I was an amateur boxer in France, and Federer kept jokingly hitting me, and one day I told him: "I'm going to shove you against a wall, and your nose is fat, but you will be even fatter" . I ended up tired of it. We had a good relationship, but he was complicated. He was not aware of his limits, of when to stop. He had something, I don't know ... One day he said to me about his nose: "I don't have it very pretty, but when I'm number one in the world they won't look at it."

"When he was 20 we were talking to Peter Lundgren to start traveling, and the same week I had an offer from Sergi Bruguera who had just returned after an operation. His offer was much better, more money, living in Barcelona ... And I was so tired of Federer that I decided to leave. "


"The truth is that he was a very complicated boy, with character, hyperactive, he was half crazy and he is still in private. He was a good person, but really very complicated: he threw games, broke his rackets, misbehaved. Federer's personality has been fabricated, it is not his personality.

Federer changed for three reasons: by a sports psychologist who worked with him from 18 to 21 or 22, then he had little experience with girls, had a little girlfriend, and immediately found his wife, who is an ambitious person, who comes from Czechoslovakia, likes money, power, and in the end she has protected Federer a lot, made a bubble for him; and the third was Nike, it was with a lot of money and the marketing department told him: "We want you to be a gentleman".

Nike's money helped him behave better.

In private life, he's a good person, but he's not the figure you see on the tennis court.
"
:unsure:
 

Pete Prime

Semi-Pro
If PETE were still around, he would PISTOL WHIP these FRAUDS. Imagine how badly No-serve NaduII and No-smash Novak would get EXPOSED on REAL 90's grass against the GOAT Sampras himself. ROFLMAO
He would tho...but that's no knock on Djododal. Pete is Grass GOAT, Nole is Plexicushion GOAT, and Rafa is CLAY GOAT. Hard GOAT is up for grabs with Pete, Nole, Fed and a few others in the mix
 

terribleIVAN

Hall of Fame
I guess when Fed and Mirka read his statements, they aren't going to send him flowers anytime soon. :-D

One thing that no Fedfan can deny is he's constantly projecting a false image:

"When you've worked with Federer, you've really met Federer, he's changed so much that you say, "This guy can't be Federer."
 
Last edited:

blablavla

Legend
So, just because i criticize Fed, i'm a troll ?

You Fed fans simply have to admit Fed's an entitled and insecure individual, who never really knew how to lose, and i'll just move along.

I'll give you he's a damn fine player, though.
just to let you know that I'll skip answering this, as not worthy any answer
 

socallefty

Hall of Fame
Never mind that every legit Federer fan here admits on a daily basis what a pathetic choke Wimbledon 2019 was to Djokovic. It's not rocket science to see it was a choke and admit it.
Actually this is an excuse made by Federer fans to make Federer seem better than he is at his current age. They want to make it seem like the match was on his racquet and he had a moment of weakness to blow it. The reality is that he was a lower-ranked player trying to beat the top seed and he had been behind 0-1 and 1-2 in sets for most of the match. So, when the opportunity came to unexpectedly win the match by winning one more point, he did not execute well which is very tyoical of lower-ranked players on the threshold of victory. In contrast, the higher-ranked player who expects to win swings out freely even on match point and wins the match more often than not. This is why Federer saves multiple match points and wins against Sandgren but struggled to convert MPs against Djokovic.

Federer used to be the best player in the world more than ten years ago. Since then, he has been the third-best player in the world. He is going to lose more often than not against the player who had been best for most of the last decade and that’s what happened at Wimbledon 2019. Those who trash Federer for losing this match should be lauding him for winning what looked like a sure loss against Sandgren at the AO or how he outlasted Roddick in the Wimbledon final a decade ago. He is not always mentally weak when he is expected to win.
 
Actually this is an excuse made by Federer fans to make Federer seem better than he is at his current age. They want to make it seem like the match was on his racquet and he had a moment of weakness to blow it. The reality is that he was a lower-ranked player trying to beat the top seed and he had been behind 0-1 and 1-2 in sets for most of the match. So, when the opportunity came to unexpectedly win the match by winning one more point, he did not execute well which is very tyoical of lower-ranked players on the threshold of victory. In contrast, the higher-ranked player who expects to win swings out freely even on match point and wins the match more often than not. This is why Federer saves multiple match points and wins against Sandgren but struggled to convert MPs against Djokovic.

Federer used to be the best player in the world more than ten years ago. Since then, he has been the third-best player in the world. He is going to lose more often than not against the player who had been best for most of the last decade and that’s what happened at Wimbledon 2019. Those who trash Federer for losing this match should be lauding him for winning what looked like a sure loss against Sandgren at the AO or how he outlasted Roddick in the Wimbledon final a decade ago. He is not always mentally weak when he is expected to win.
More stale propagandising lmao. Federer was in a winning position at some point in every set, and the better player by basic metrics such as points won, DR and # of breaks made and breakpoints had, yet managed to lose. Complete chokery.

No applauding anyone for focusing on cutting down errors and waiting for the opponent to screw up. Neither Federer vs Sandgren nor Djokovic vs Federer. It's not great to give the other player initiative and win by getting them to bury themselves.
 

Pete Prime

Semi-Pro
I guess when Fed and Mirka read his statements, they aren't going to send him flowers anytime soon. :-D

One thing that no Fedfan can deny is he's constantly projecting a false image:

"When you've worked with Federer, you've really met Federer, he's changed so much that you say, "This guy can't be Federer."
yes. I don't think Fed is sinister in any way btw, I just think he's a bit manufactured. I miss the authenticity of Andre and simplicity of Pete before corporatization consumed tennis. Yes it was there in the 90s, and yes Andre was a big face for it, but he was still a real person to the public.
 

Pete Prime

Semi-Pro
Actually this is an excuse made by Federer fans to make Federer seem better than he is at his current age. They want to make it seem like the match was on his racquet and he had a moment of weakness to blow it. The reality is that he was a lower-ranked player trying to beat the top seed and he had been behind 0-1 and 1-2 in sets for most of the match. So, when the opportunity came to unexpectedly win the match by winning one more point, he did not execute well which is very tyoical of lower-ranked players on the threshold of victory. In contrast, the higher-ranked player who expects to win swings out freely even on match point and wins the match more often than not. This is why Federer saves multiple match points and wins against Sandgren but struggled to convert MPs against Djokovic.

Federer used to be the best player in the world more than ten years ago. Since then, he has been the third-best player in the world. He is going to lose more often than not against the player who had been best for most of the last decade and that’s what happened at Wimbledon 2019. Those who trash Federer for losing this match should be lauding him for winning what looked like a sure loss against Sandgren at the AO or how he outlasted Roddick in the Wimbledon final a decade ago. He is not always mentally weak when he is expected to win.
I agree with the spirit of your post, but remember how both Nadal and Nole broke through him, when he was perceived as deity in the flesh 9-10 years ago? If he were truly the god-man of tennis he's revered as, he'd be able to break through Djokodal the way they did him, and certainly would have converted two match points against the "inferior" Djokovic as his fans like to perceive him on his own serve
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
Actually this is an excuse made by Federer fans to make Federer seem better than he is at his current age. They want to make it seem like the match was on his racquet and he had a moment of weakness to blow it. The reality is that he was a lower-ranked player trying to beat the top seed and he had been behind 0-1 and 1-2 in sets for most of the match. So, when the opportunity came to unexpectedly win the match by winning one more point, he did not execute well which is very tyoical of lower-ranked players on the threshold of victory. In contrast, the higher-ranked player who expects to win swings out freely even on match point and wins the match more often than not. This is why Federer saves multiple match points and wins against Sandgren but struggled to convert MPs against Djokovic.

Federer used to be the best player in the world more than ten years ago. Since then, he has been the third-best player in the world. He is going to lose more often than not against the player who had been best for most of the last decade and that’s what happened at Wimbledon 2019. Those who trash Federer for losing this match should be lauding him for winning what looked like a sure loss against Sandgren at the AO or how he outlasted Roddick in the Wimbledon final a decade ago. He is not always mentally weak when he is expected to win.
I agree with the spirit of your post, but remember how both Nadal and Nole broke through him, when he was perceived as deity in the flesh 9-10 years ago? If he were truly the god-man of tennis he's revered as, he'd be able to break through Djokodal the way they did him, and certainly would have converted two match points against the "inferior" Djokovic as his fans like to perceive him on his own serve
 

aditya123

Hall of Fame
Well this is completely true!!!! Fed fans harassed Nadal fans after his win over Anderson untill Wimbledon 18.... Glad that Anderson beat Fed there otherwise the torture of *******s would have continued
 

Sunny Ali

Hall of Fame
I agree with the spirit of your post, but remember how both Nadal and Nole broke through him, when he was perceived as deity in the flesh 9-10 years ago? If he were truly the god-man of tennis he's revered as, he'd be able to break through Djokodal the way they did him, and certainly would have converted two match points against the "inferior" Djokovic as his fans like to perceive him on his own serve
Superb post. It was folks like John McEnroe that very prematurely started promoting Federer as the undisputed GOAT and most of his fans and Federer himself brought into that hype. When Nadal & Djokovic started beating him in the most important matches, that facade came crumbling down leaving his fans looking for answers. The fact is that Federer is simply one of the greats of the game and not GOAT as his fans have come to realize.
 

Pete Prime

Semi-Pro
Superb post. It was folks like John McEnroe that very prematurely started promoting Federer as the undisputed GOAT and most of his fans and Federer himself brought into that hype. When Nadal & Djokovic started beating him in the most important matches, that facade came crumbling down leaving his fans looking for answers. The fact is that Federer is simply one of the greats of the game and not GOAT as his fans have come to realize.
'greed
IMHO you can't have a true "GOAT" because of how different the game is between generations. Hell you could split the Open Era itself into two smaller eras, "Pre-2000" and "Post-2000" just because of how much tech, nutrition, conditions etc. changed the game. IMHO the value of the Career, hell even Calendar Slam has diminished quite a bit.

Anywho, I'd say top contenders are Laver, Djokodal/Pete, Bjorn and Roger, but no "one" GOAT
 

Sunny Ali

Hall of Fame
'greed
IMHO you can't have a true "GOAT" because of how different the game is between generations. Hell you could split the Open Era itself into two smaller eras, "Pre-2000" and "Post-2000" just because of how much tech, nutrition, conditions etc. changed the game. IMHO the value of the Career, hell even Calendar Slam has diminished quite a bit.

Anywho, I'd say top contenders are Laver, Djokodal/Pete, Bjorn and Roger, but no "one" GOAT
Agreed but we can definitely agree on top dog within each era and it's clear that the King of Swing, Pete Sampras, was top dog of his era while Federer is at best 2nd but likely will finish 3rd of his.
 

Pete Prime

Semi-Pro
Agreed but we can definitely agree on top dog within each era and it's clear that the King of Swing, Pete Sampras, was top dog of his era while Federer is at best 2nd but likely will finish 3rd of his.
Agreed but we can definitely agree on top dog within each era and it's clear that the King of Swing, Pete Sampras, was top dog of his era while Federer is at best 2nd but likely will finish 3rd of his.
Agreed. Brutal for Fed, but then that's life. He'll be fine with his $1billion and military grade fortress in the Swiss mountains
 

Sunny Ali

Hall of Fame
Agreed. Brutal for Fed, but then that's life. He'll be fine with his $1billion and military grade fortress in the Swiss mountains
I don't know about being fine. More like resigned to his fate. Spent all his career chasing & finally achieving the 2 most important records in Tennis and being anointed the GOAT only to see them being broken so quickly. Not easy to live that one down.

Remember when Sampras' record was broken by Federer, he was asked about it and he said it was very tough to swallow. Why would it be any different for Federer, especially considering that he raised the bar so high many people thought he would never be caught and yet Nadal & Djokovic made short work of his 2 most important records! LOL!
 

socallefty

Hall of Fame
We all know has it been the other way around and Djoko choked the wimby final we would have never heard the end of it...
I think Djokovic played very poorly for large chunks of the match and particularly in the two sets he lost. He seemed to come out with a very passive gameplan to just out-last Federer and it almost cost him the title. Also, in the second set he lost, it seemed like he semi-tanked near the end when he was well behind. He got broken after being up 4-2 in the fifth set including a double-fault. Just because he won we don’t say that he choked, but if he had lost, a sizable portion of fans might justifiably say that he choked. Tennis history changes based on him winning those two MPs against him and then raising his level in the tiebreakers.

He used fo lose Slam finals and semifinals in 2012-2104 by being passive and he almost repeated that mistake in this match.
 
Last edited:

aditya123

Hall of Fame
I don't know about being fine. More like resigned to his fate. Spent all his career chasing & finally achieving the 2 most important records in Tennis and being anointed the GOAT only to see them being broken so quickly. Not easy to live that one down.

Remember when Sampras' record was broken by Federer, he was asked about it and he said it was very tough to swallow. Why would it be any different for Federer, especially considering that he raised the bar so high many people thought he would never be caught and yet Nadal & Djokovic made short work of his 2 most important records! LOL!
Yeah, of the current big 3 no one is a saint here however Nadal is the one who can handle it better than Djokovic and Fed. Feds case was quite evident when he wept at Ao 09.
 

Sunny Ali

Hall of Fame
Yeah, of the current big 3 no one is a saint here however Nadal is the one who can handle it better than Djokovic and Fed. Feds case was quite evident when he wept at Ao 09.
Agreed. GOAT is as follows-

1. Nadal
2. Federer
3. Djokovic
4. Sampras

By next year, Djokovic will move ahead of Federer. Beautiful days ahead :-D (y)
 

King No1e

G.O.A.T.
Actually this is an excuse made by Federer fans to make Federer seem better than he is at his current age. They want to make it seem like the match was on his racquet and he had a moment of weakness to blow it. The reality is that he was a lower-ranked player trying to beat the top seed and he had been behind 0-1 and 1-2 in sets for most of the match. So, when the opportunity came to unexpectedly win the match by winning one more point, he did not execute well which is very tyoical of lower-ranked players on the threshold of victory. In contrast, the higher-ranked player who expects to win swings out freely even on match point and wins the match more often than not. This is why Federer saves multiple match points and wins against Sandgren but struggled to convert MPs against Djokovic.

Federer used to be the best player in the world more than ten years ago. Since then, he has been the third-best player in the world. He is going to lose more often than not against the player who had been best for most of the last decade and that’s what happened at Wimbledon 2019. Those who trash Federer for losing this match should be lauding him for winning what looked like a sure loss against Sandgren at the AO or how he outlasted Roddick in the Wimbledon final a decade ago. He is not always mentally weak when he is expected to win.
Federer is not just any "lower ranked player," he's Roger Federer. For all of Djokovic's heroics, it was still undeniably a bad moment of weakness from Fed when he got broken back. Usually ATGs get mentally stronger over the years but with Federer it's been the reverse.
 

socallefty

Hall of Fame
Federer is not just any "lower ranked player," he's Roger Federer. For all of Djokovic's heroics, it was still undeniably a bad moment of weakness from Fed when he got broken back. Usually ATGs get mentally stronger over the years but with Federer it's been the reverse.
He becomes ‘Thirdwheelerer’ when he plays Djokovic at Slams in the last decade. Break backs happen all the time when the top players play each other. Djokovic was up 4-2 earlier in the fifth set and got broken back - he even had a crucial double fault, but no one is saying he choked because he won the match. Federer had two set points in the third set to go up 2-1 in sets and he didn’t capitalize then either. The match had many swings.
 

King No1e

G.O.A.T.
He becomes ‘Thirdwheelerer’ when he plays Djokovic at Slams in the last decade. Break backs happen all the time when the top players play each other. Djokovic was up 4-2 earlier in the fifth set and got broken back - he even had a crucial double fault, but no one is saying he choked because he won the match. Federer had two set points in the third set to go up 2-1 in sets and he didn’t capitalize then either. The match had many swings.
Agreed. It was a very scratchy match from both of them both in terms of playing level and mentality. I do think Fed's choke at 40-15 is massively overrated since it was just 1 bad game (not to mention one of the MP's being saved by The Passing Shot), but by Federer's standards it was still a really bad game.
 

Pete Prime

Semi-Pro
He becomes ‘Thirdwheelerer’ when he plays Djokovic at Slams in the last decade. Break backs happen all the time when the top players play each other. Djokovic was up 4-2 earlier in the fifth set and got broken back - he even had a crucial double fault, but no one is saying he choked because he won the match. Federer had two set points in the third set to go up 2-1 in sets and he didn’t capitalize then either. The match had many swings.
He was always "Bronzemedalerer" once the big 3 became a thing
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
He was expected to win 5-10 slams... Huge hype on him and he would have done it far better if not for Fec
Fed really destroyed Roddick and Hewitt's career. Smh. As soon as Andy was about to start dominating, along comes peak Fed. Reminds me of Venus reaching a million slam finals RIGHT when the best ever version of Serena exploded.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Agreed but we can definitely agree on top dog within each era and it's clear that the King of Swing, Pete Sampras, was top dog of his era while Federer is at best 2nd but likely will finish 3rd of his.
Federer > Nadal on grass
Federer > Nadal on fast HC
Federer > nadal on slow HC
Federer > Nadal indoors
Nadal > Federer clay

That's not going to change. So fed will remain better than Nadal even if Nadal gets ahead in slam count and achieves more.

Edit: Better is not the same as greater. So even if Nadal goes ahead in slam count, he can be called greater, but not necessarily better.
 
Last edited:
Top