Todd Woodbridge: "Federer isn't the GOAT: but he's the best all-court player"

terribleIVAN

terribleIVAN

Hall of Fame
"Roger Federer is the greatest all-court player. I find it hard to suggest he is the greatest of all time when he doesn't have a winning record over Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic. Rafa spoiled Roger's numbers by winning the 13th Roland Garros title in dominant style.

If Roger Federer could have won three of them and Rafa just ten - in that case, the Swiss would have been the greatest of all time," Todd Woodbridge said.

https://www.te*nisworldusa.org/tennis/news/Rafael_Nadal/93578/todd-woodbridge-roger-federer-has-negative-record-vs-rafael-nadal-novak-djokovic-/
 
terribleIVAN said:
"Roger Federer is the greatest all-court player. I find it hard to suggest he is the greatest of all time when he doesn't have a winning record over Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic. Rafa spoiled Roger's numbers by winning the 13th Roland Garros title in dominant style.

If Roger Federer could have won three of them and Rafa just ten - in that case, the Swiss would have been the greatest of all time," Todd Woodbridge said.

https://www.te*nisworldusa.org/tennis/news/Rafael_Nadal/93578/todd-woodbridge-roger-federer-has-negative-record-vs-rafael-nadal-novak-djokovic-/
Click to expand...

dbaf885cc132b315fee4465c994d3512b367e2e6.jpg


#GetEm :D
 
Also Nadal is very close to tying Federer at the US Open, only needs to win ONE more. And he loves playing at the US Open he's won 4 of them despite not even playing in 2012, 2014 and 2020, so a great chance at winning more.
 
NADALalot said:
Also Nadal is very close to tying Federer at the US Open, only needs to win ONE more. And he loves playing at the US Open he's won 4 of them despite not even playing in 2012, 2014 and 2020, so a great chance at winning more.
Click to expand...

Not.

Unless Novak, Thiem and Medvedev are already out.
 
What I think he is saying:

He means to say that Federer is the best all courter i.e the GOAT of that style of play (or is he calling him the GOAT in terms of overall tennis ability?)

But Nadalovic have positive head to head against him so it's hard to call him as GOAT.

I believe he now thinks Nadal should be called GOAT.
 
SPOT on, this guy is the tennis analyst we need.

How can you claim that the Fed guy is goat if he gets PISTOL whipped at his pet slam by a guy without a decent volley? I mean Djokovic makes RAFA look like STEFAN EDBERG. Djokovic wasn’t even in his prime in 2019, he played a dogcrap match.

He can’t beat these guys ANYWHERE and he inflated his slam tally against weaponless Hewitt and headless chicken Roddick. GOAT my ass.
 
I think ever since 2015, Federer lost his claim to outright GOAThood.

He has two men who beat him in most important matches, out did most of his records and probably going to leave him only with few insignificant records intact


There's no way he is the GOAT now. Earlier I would have called him first among three equals , Now he is just a part of equally talented and similarly accomplished Trio.

He will be fortunate if it all remains like that.
Else he will be overtaken most likely by both.
 
and yet had to face prime Federer and peak Djokovic in the semifinals.......

if peaking HC Medvedev is crap then I wonder what 2015-16 Murray is, who would bend down at the sight of his big 3 daddies in slams.


ND-13 said:
He faced Puerta, Ferrer, Anderson and Medvedev in major finals... LOL.
Click to expand...
 
Apart from his rather flimsy argument why Federer isn't the GOAT (not that there is such a thing), he actually acknowledges that Federer's ability as a tennis player is second to none.

Considering that the GOAT debate is one over inexistent title that is actually pretty close to actually giving it to him.

8-)
 
NoleFam said:
If Federer could have won 3 of what? RG? I don't see how this makes sense it that's what he's saying.
Click to expand...

Essentially what he's saying is that Federer winning more would make him the greatest of all time. Thanks a lot Todd, I was really confused there for a minute. :rolleyes:

And yes it doesn't make sense, but it's not because Federer would (or wouldn't) have 3 of each. It's because even if Federer did win 3 RG for a total of 22 slams none of it would matter if Nadal caught up to him and passed him anyway. Sure it would be better for Federer if he had 22 and Nadal 18, but what Woodbridge is saying assumes that Nadal wouldn't catch him in that scenario anyway which still isn't a sure thing because of Nadal's iron grip at RG. At the end of the day the the tennis watching masses only care about who leads the title count. Whether Nadal does that by winning 18 RG titles or in some other way doesn't really matter to 99% of the population. It sounds like Woodbridge is saying 3 RG would've made Federer the greatest as it stands, but that's painfully obvious anyway.

And tennisworld is a garbage source anyway. If Woodbridge wasn't misquoted then he's even dumber than I thought. You don't "spoil" the numbers of a guy who has 20 GS. Really strange wording. And if he was misquoted for clickbait purposes then tennisworld is just as useless as I thought.
 
junior74 said:
Pete is a ballerina with girly arms and chest hair, just like Fraud.

And he won ZERO Roland Garros, so he is below Wawrinka now.

The plot thickens quicker more than Rafa's hairline is receding.
Click to expand...
ROFLMAO.

Pete scalped Bruguera and Courier at RG, and also beat Agassi and MUSTER on clay in a tough era.

Also won the prestigious ROME.
 
Last edited:
Steve0904 said:
Essentially what he's saying is that Federer winning more would make him the greatest of all time. Thanks a lot Todd, I was really confused there for a minute. :rolleyes:

And yes it doesn't make sense, but it's not because Federer would (or wouldn't) have 3 of each. It's because even if Federer did win 3 RG for a total of 22 slams none of it would matter if Nadal caught up to him and passed him anyway. Sure it would be better for Federer if he had 22 and Nadal 18, but what Woodbridge is saying assumes that Nadal wouldn't catch him in that scenario anyway which still isn't a sure thing because of Nadal's iron grip at RG. At the end of the day the the tennis watching masses only care about who leads the title count. Whether Nadal does that by winning 18 RG titles or in some other way doesn't really matter to 99% of the population. It sounds like Woodbridge is saying 3 RG would've made Federer the greatest as it stands, but that's painfully obvious anyway.

And tennisworld is a garbage source anyway. If Woodbridge wasn't misquoted then he's even dumber than I thought. You don't "spoil" the numbers of a guy who has 20 GS. Really strange wording. And if he was misquoted for clickbait purposes then tennisworld is just as useless as I thought.
Click to expand...

Maybe that's what he meant and I am just interpreting it differently. I guess maybe he is thinking take 3 Slams away from Nadal and give 3 to Federer and Federer is the greatest, but why pick RG of all places where Federer is at his weakest? That's why it seems like he is saying that Federer needs more RGs to be GOAT. In that case, then Nadal needs more Wimbledons and AOs, and Djokovic needs more RGs. Nobody would be GOAT.

I don't like or agree with a lot of what Woodbridge says so I'd be surprised if this was misquoted, and it is strange wording.
 
BackhandDTL said:
SPOT on, this guy is the tennis analyst we need.

How can you claim that the Fed guy is goat if he gets PISTOL whipped at his pet slam by a guy without a decent volley? I mean Djokovic makes RAFA look like STEFAN EDBERG. Djokovic wasn’t even in his prime in 2019, he played a dogcrap match.

He can’t beat these guys ANYWHERE and he inflated his slam tally against weaponless Hewitt and headless chicken Roddick. GOAT my ass.
Click to expand...
I love it. That’s the DTL we know and love.

“He can’t beat these guys ANYWHERE”

...Except AO, RG, WB, USO in 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2017, 2019

And masters everywhere else.

But other than that “He can’t beat these guys ANYWHERE”

LOL. Mid to late 30s Fed is now the only Fed there ever was for Novak. And Fed 2008-20013 is the only Fed there is for Nadal.

And 2003-2007 Fed never played against multiple world number 1’s and slam winners.

He had the luxury of never having to be chased by titans like Dimitrov, Thiem, Berdych, and Tsitsipas!

Oh yeah, and holding match points and pushing your opponent - who has a six year age advantage - to marathon 5 setters is “pistol whipped”!

You go DTL! You go man!!

LOL.
 
Last edited:
NoleFam said:
Maybe that's what he meant and I am just interpreting it differently. I guess maybe he is thinking take 3 Slams away from Nadal and give 3 to Federer and Federer is the greatest, but why pick RG of all places where Federer is at his weakest? That's why it seems like he is saying that Federer needs more RGs to be GOAT. In that case, then Nadal needs more Wimbledons and AOs and Djokovic needs more RGs. Nobody would be GOAT.

I don't like or agree with a lot of what Woodbridge says so I'd be surprised if this was misquoted, and it is strange wording.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's really weird. If he wanted to make a case for Federer he doesn't even need to start at RG. Just looking at the slams Federer "could've" won would be enough. Start with AO 2005 probably. Throw in AO or USO 2009. Complete it with Wimbledon 2019. That's at least 3-4 more slams that most people think Federer choked away.
 
RelentlessAttack said:
Prime PETE would triple bagel RAFA and Djokovic on proper fast grass, fast indoor HC, or carpet. Djokovic can’t even volley or hit an overhead ROFLMAO.
Click to expand...

I think it's kind of amazing how some things posted on TTW take on a new life and get repeated as fact when they are kind of not based on any evidence. Lol. Djokovic isn't even among the worst overheads in tennis over his career but it get repeated so often on here. Maybe because he is so good, his slight flaws are highlighted. This is fact though and no subjectivty in sight.

smashes.jpg


 
Steve0904 said:
Yeah, it's really weird. If he wanted to make a case for Federer he doesn't even need to start at RG. Just looking at the slams Federer "could've" won would be enough. Start with AO 2005 probably. Throw in AO or USO 2009. Complete it with Wimbledon 2019. That's at least 3-4 more slams that most people think Federer choked away.
Click to expand...

Yea he was closer to winning those Slams than any at RG anyway, especially AO 2005, W 2019 and USO 2009.
 
Last edited:
NoleFam said:
I think it's kind of amazing how some things posted on TTW take on a new life and get repeated as fact when they are kind of not based on any evidence. Lol. Djokovic isn't even among the worst overheads in tennis over his career but it get repeated so often on here. Maybe because he is so good, his slight flaws are highlighted. This is fact though and no subjectivty in sight.

smashes.jpg


Click to expand...

I’m just missing our friendly, local perpetually banned PETE fan
 
junior74 said:
ROFLMAO - losing a final is worse than losing in R1. You must study harder :)
Click to expand...

You have to be in good form to reach a final. Fed got his CLOCK cleaned in 4 of them at Wimbledon.

Pete was unbeatable in good form 7/7 in W finals and 7/8 in his prime stretch. And yeah he lost to a GOATing Krajicek, but Fed himself wouldn’t get a SNIFF of that match. Only ‘99 Sampras scalps that Krajicek
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Hewitt misunderstood, Woodbridge tells all...
Replies
19
Views
2K
!Tym
T
Backspin1183
Todd Martin: Djokovic more talented than Federer and Nadal
2 3
Replies
103
Views
6K
West Coast Ace
West Coast Ace
C
Nadal GOAT links
Replies
27
Views
4K
chandu612
C
M
The Fear Factor has Disappeared.
Replies
28
Views
2K
G A S
G A S
T
is Nadal the second greatest grass court player of all time?
2 3
Replies
116
Views
7K
GoatNo1
GoatNo1
Back
Top