"Watching Federer play has moved me more than Djokovic"

nolefam_2024

G.O.A.T.
i am talking about who is more entertaining to the majority, not abt player's strength and weakness
djoker is the most successful player but it does not mean he is more attractive than others
just like mourinho at his peak at inter milan, real Madrid and Chelsea, his team were not be the most enjoyable team to soccer fans
So a player with very exploitable weakness is more entertaining? He did lose to the kid Nadal again and again. It took almost a decade and coaching change to finally counter Rafa. And then he was another ballbasher.
 

darthrafa

Hall of Fame
So a player with very exploitable weakness is more entertaining? He did lose to the kid Nadal again and again. It took almost a decade and coaching change to finally counter Rafa. And then he was another ballbasher.

i got your point
from a different perspective view, djoker has no exploitable weakness but does it mean his style is more entertaining? i don't think so
in addition, to me, if a player can win with more different types of shots (rather than not losing easily), he should be more entertaining.
it is why i think fed is better in this aspect
 

nolefam_2024

G.O.A.T.
i got your point
from a different perspective view, djoker has no exploitable weakness but does it mean his style is more entertaining? i don't think so
in addition, to me, if a player can win with more different types of shots (rather than not losing easily), he should be more entertaining.
it is why i think fed is better in this aspect
So its subjective right? I assessed Fed's 2008 2009 matches and the problem was he was not allowed to play his best for most of the match. I am not saying you have to be bulletproof but the Fedkovic rivalry is amazing because they can play the matches without any matchup issue. Sadly both were 5.9 years apart or we would have seen many more epic matches.
 

darthrafa

Hall of Fame
So its subjective right? I assessed Fed's 2008 2009 matches and the problem was he was not allowed to play his best for most of the match. I am not saying you have to be bulletproof but the Fedkovic rivalry is amazing because they can play the matches without any matchup issue. Sadly both were 5.9 years apart or we would have seen many more epic matches.

of course it is subjective, greatness and entertaining
thus if u think djoker is more entertaining, it is fine with me but djoker's is just not my cup of team though i fully appreciate how good his game is in fact from the perspective of playing tennis
i just hardly agree with the statement that the majority of tennis watchers will rate djoker higher than fed in terms of entertainment
 

DSH

Talk Tennis Guru
It is not because of all the reasons we talked many times.

Coming later than big 2
Coming from Serbia
Fedal having better media companies to sell them

And now he is fighting fire with fire. He is recognized as the GOAT in tennis and possibly greatest athlete of all time. We can talk about Nole without Nadal pretty soon if Nole reaches something like 28 slams and Nadal stays at 22.
Not even the "magic potions" and the low level of the tour will make your idol reach that number.
Soon he will suffer a decline and it will be final.
:D
 

Apun94

Hall of Fame
It can be interesting but at this point I’d prefer a more gloves-off approach instead of this cringey 48 Laws of Power stuff. Of course harmony would be best, but that doesn’t seem terribly realistic in the near future LOL.
AH HELLL NO! i need some excitement in tennis man. This PG stuff that Fedal popularised has got to go. Enough of that.
 

ChaelAZ

G.O.A.T.
Fedal started and defined this last era of tennis, and new players are coming to build on it. Of course Raf and Rog have a healthy respect for each other in each other and what they accomplished for tennis and history.
 

Djokodal Fan

Hall of Fame
The ‘always second best’ takes a dig at ‘the best’ while consoling himself and his followers about him having emotional connect with the ‘third best’ who he always shadowed and overtook

Novak is silencing people with his success, not with his style.
 
Last edited:

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Everyday I see Djoker fans get all upset because their idol is not the center of attention. Tennis legend Nadal see Federer proved sporting greatness is more than just winning.

Djokovic is great but no matter how hard he try to fill these shoes, he will never be the phenomenon that Federer had become
 

cortadew

Rookie
Everyday I see Djoker fans get all upset because their idol is not the center of attention. Tennis legend Nadal see Federer proved sporting greatness is more than just winning.

Djokovic is great but no matter how hard he try to fill these shoes, he will never be the phenomenon that Federer had become
Nole is still the best between the 3
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
the stats say otherwise
So Court is the best player because of her 192 single titles and 24 slams? Or Russell is better basketball player than Wilt because of 11 championship rings?

Stats alone without context doesn't necessary means you are the better player, nor the greater player
 

Sipho

Rookie
He lasted longest out of the 3, not sure that means he’s the best. When they were all playing, Fed was better at 2/4 slams and even at RG, Nadal better at 2/4.
Yeah, it's sort of like Roy Emerson. He held the grand slam record from 1967 to 2000.

He had the most grand slams, but he was just an all-time great player. He was never considered, to my knowledge, as the greatest player ever.

Novak Djokovic will hold the grand slam record, but he's just going to be like Roy Emerson.

The order is Federer, Nadal, and then Djokovic.

And I'm not even much of a Federer fan, I'm more of a Grigor Dimitrov fan (and Arthur Ashe is my favorite player). But obviously Roger Federer is the greatest tennis player ever. And then comes Nadal, and then Djokovic.

Although, you could probably still put Rod Laver in the top three. And Pete Sampras.

So the real order may be: Federer, Laver, Sampras. Or Sampras, Federer, Laver... and then Nadal, and then Djokovic.

Anyway, Djokovic will have the most grand slams, but that's it.

And Nadal's opinion on Federer seems perfectly reasonable.
 

cortadew

Rookie
So Court is the best player because of her 192 single titles and 24 slams? Or Russell is better basketball player than Wilt because of 11 championship rings?

Stats alone without context doesn't necessary means you are the better player, nor the greater player
that's a different case but Nole played in Nadal and Roger's era and has a positive h2h between the 2, and started dominating when they were still young so the peak level argument is dubious at best.
 

cortadew

Rookie
So Court is the best player because of her 192 single titles and 24 slams? Or Russell is better basketball player than Wilt because of 11 championship rings?

Stats alone without context doesn't necessary means you are the better player, nor the greater player
the peak argument has little weight I think because I could say Nalbandian had a better peak than Roger because he won most of the matches between them two in his prime and only when Nalby was fat and old Fed could reverse the h2h
 

fedfan24

Hall of Fame
that's a different case but Nole played in Nadal and Roger's era and has a positive h2h between the 2, and started dominating when they were still young so the peak level argument is dubious at best.
Djokovic only started racking up huge numbers after Fed had left his prime and Nadal followed in 2014. 2011 was a bit of an anomaly, everything went right to win 3/4 slams that year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TMF

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
that's a different case but Nole played in Nadal and Roger's era and has a positive h2h between the 2, and started dominating when they were still young so the peak level argument is dubious at best.
No. There is a 6 years gap between Federer and Djokovic. Federer dominated the sport like no other player when he won 16 slams between 2003 Wimbledon and 2010 AO. Djokovic had to waited until Federer past his prime. Prime Djokovic met so many times against old Fed but the wins were a struggled(see Wimbledon 2019).

Djokovic has longevity over Nadal, and he also inflated more slam than Nadal in the CIE. Past prime Djokovic benefitted a lot against the helpless 90's born players. But when Djokodal were at the best(in their 20s), Nadal peak level was higher
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
the peak argument has little weight I think because I could say Nalbandian had a better peak than Roger because he won most of the matches between them two in his prime and only when Nalby was fat and old Fed could reverse the h2h
Why, because it doesn't suit your argument? If you actually watch a full tennis matches live(youtube highlight doesn't count), one can observe and differentiate the quality of the match.

I've watched and followed the big 3 throughout their entire career, and I must say Fedal displayed the higher quality than Djokovic when they are at their best.
 
Djokovic only started racking up huge numbers after Fed had left his prime and Nadal followed in 2014. 2011 was a bit of an anomaly, everything went right to win 3/4 slams that year.
Yeah sure. As long as you admit Fed racked the majority of his slams before djokodal arrived or were old enough to mature on all surfaces. Stop being bias one way. You Fed fans are so up his backside it’s embarrassing.
 
My dad is stronger than your dad!

TT never stops to deliver.
The problem I see is Fed fans can’t come to terms with the situation. Weak era this weak era that is their only answer. If you want to play that game then Fed was the biggest beneficiary at the start of his career. The hypocrisy is embarrassing.

Personally we can easy just say there are no weak eras and you play what’s there. That is true and Djokovic won the battle and war. That’s it.
 
Why, because it doesn't suit your argument? If you actually watch a full tennis matches live(youtube highlight doesn't count), one can observe and differentiate the quality of the match.

I've watched and followed the big 3 throughout their entire career, and I must say Fedal displayed the higher quality than Djokovic when they are at their best.
Not on slow HC or clay Fed didn’t. Nadal is not as good as Djokovic on grass or hard court.

Djokovic was far more consistent than Fedal at his best too over the calendar year as well. The only player to win all slams, ATP finals and all masters multiple times!

I know it hurts you but it’s over.
 
Last edited:

junior74

Talk Tennis Guru
The problem I see is Fed fans can’t come to terms with the situation. Weak era this weak era that is their only answer. If you want to play that game then Fed was the biggest beneficiary at the start of his career. The hypocrisy is embarrassing.

Personally we can easy just say there are no weak eras and you play what’s there. That is true and Djokovic won the battle and war. That’s it.

What impresses me, is some fans' demand that their favourite is best at everything; most successful, best person, best looking game.

Some fans can interpret any comment as a brutal attack.
 

Eureka

Professional
Roger GOATerer has always been great to watch. Didn’t matter which arc of his career you were in it was interesting. Even early on before he “figured it all out” it was tremendously entertaining and you had the “what if?” of whether he was going to deliver on his talent. Turns out he answered that question fairly convincingly.
Superb comment this. I cannot remember any other player referred to (by so many that have seen Roger play) in the effusive terms expressed for Roger and his artistry. Does this diminish Rafa or Novak or any other great player? No - it highlights a gift that Roger had when he played.

As for the quoted article, Rafa is giving his opinion. And he bases it on this reason:
"Watching Federer play has moved me more than Djokovic, and in the end, tennis is about emotion; it’s the emotion that draws you to it”"

He's giving his view, not speaking for the world. But his view is born out - the evidence of how Roger has moved fans worldwide is legion. Box office, par excellence. The eye of the beholder gone viral!
 
What impresses me, is some fans' demand that their favourite is best at everything; most successful, best person, best looking game.

Some fans can interpret any comment as a brutal attack.
I agree. This is the one thing I won’t do. As Djokovic is not the best at everything. I don’t like to say Djokovic is perfect and he can do no wrong. There have been times I disagree with his tennis decisions to play certain events, tactics in some matches, off courts issues and I accept when’s he’s been well beat by a player or don’t make excuses, etc

He has the most of the records but there were periods where he struggled against tougher players and Fedal have higher levels over him in previous years and surfaces or some records he doesn’t have.

At the end of day I don’t mind them saying Djokovic has benefited from a weak era last few years. I agree and he’s taken advantage of it and a few of the younger guys have struggled to step up.

What I don’t agree with is where they constantly defend everything against Fed, say he’s unlucky, born at wrong time or he never had a weak era.

They paint it out as if Fed had an impossible task and everything conspired against him and Djokovic is the luckiest player ever. Rafa fans tend to use the injuries to defend why Rafa didn’t win as much. It could be true but excuses aren’t good. When Djokovic got deported, banned, or missed tournaments with injuries it happened and you move on. It sucks but excuses can be used by anyone.

What Djokovic has won, levels he produced and the consistency is off the charts. Almost impossible to do or win a fraction of it for normal human beings.

The same for Fed and Nadal and what they did for sport is godly and insanely hard to repeat. It is just that Novak has raised the bar just a notch or 2 higher than even them and that’s it. All 3 are legends of the game but Djokovic has the best CV.

If it subjective we can all have our opinion on who better but with what Djokovic has achieved and levels he’s produced it just makes me laugh when some Fedal fans try knock him down. It’s nearly impossible for like 99% of tour and previous era players to win a fraction of what he has! Haha
 
Last edited:

SonicNirvana

Hall of Fame
We just have different tastes. I respect it. In my mind I can’t understand why people find Novak boring. Just my view though.

I love his matches and his passion on court. The fact he’s a winning machine on top makes it even better. Still for me I love slides Djokovic does, his movement and epic celebrations ars great to watch.
He’s definitely more and more impressive as he ages. Because you keep wondering when the body is going to stop giving but he’s still moving pretty good.
 

cortadew

Rookie
No. There is a 6 years gap between Federer and Djokovic. Federer dominated the sport like no other player when he won 16 slams between 2003 Wimbledon and 2010 AO. Djokovic had to waited until Federer past his prime. Prime Djokovic met so many times against old Fed but the wins were a struggled(see Wimbledon 2019).

Djokovic has longevity over Nadal, and he also inflated more slam than Nadal in the CIE. Past prime Djokovic benefitted a lot against the helpless 90's born players. But when Djokodal were at the best(in their 20s), Nadal peak level was higher
he dominated the sport until Nole and Rafa became good enough and he could not dominate again. The vulture argument can be used for Roger too or are you going to tell me Bagdhatis and Hewitt are better than Nole and Rafa?
 

Federev

Legend
iu
I love this response so much.

It’s like the best thing that’s ever happened on TTW.
 
Top