what if roger is the same age as nadal,djokovic,murray & gasquet.

S

stoneagle

Rookie
do you think if roger is the same age (21) as nadal,djokovic,
murray,gasquet and canas right now, do you think roger has
12 grand slams right now?. i see nadal, djokovic,murray
challenged and beat roger at the age of 25 and 26.
when roger was 20 yrs old nadal, djokovic, murray,gasquet
were only about 15 yrs old. about accumulating points first,
does people really think that roger was that great or goat,because
nadal,djokovic,murray,gasquet were still immature and inexperienced
and no where near to challenge roger then?
do you think roger 12 grand slams are luck?. who were his rivals then?
no question roger is great
tactical player, but right now his rivals nadal,djokovic,murray has caught up
& can beat roger. 21 yrs olds versus the more experienced 26 yr old
federer.

when pete was in his prime most of his rivals: agassi,courier,
chang,rafter were almost the same age as pete. pete was not
ahead in age nor points when he was in his prime, but he manage
to beat his rivals and earned 14 grand slams.
 
stoneagle -- your what-if is the equivalent of Sampras coming of age in the era of Safin, Hewitt, Roddick, and Federer. Or if Graf played her prime during the prime of the Williams sisters. Or if Borg's prime played during the prime of McEnroe.
 
Last edited:
stoneagle said:
do you think if roger is the same age (21) as nadal,djokovic,
murray,gasquet and canas right now, do you think roger has
12 grand slams right now?. i see nadal, djokovic,murray
challenged and beat roger at the age of 25 and 26.
when roger was 20 yrs old nadal, djokovic, murray,gasquet
were only about 15 yrs old. about accumulating points first,
does people really think that roger was that great or goat,because
nadal,djokovic,murray,gasquet were still immature and inexperienced
and no where near to challenge roger then?
do you think roger 12 grand slams are luck?. who were his rivals then?
no question roger is great
tactical player, but right now his rivals nadal,djokovic,murray has caught up
& can beat roger. 21 yrs olds versus the more experienced 26 yr old
federer.

when pete was in his prime most of his rivals: agassi,courier,
chang,rafter were almost the same age as pete. pete was not
ahead in age nor points when he was in his prime, but he manage
to beat his rivals and earned 14 grand slams.
Click to expand...

Wow your spot on.. it must have all been luck!
 
At one point - Roger was the same age as Nadal et. al. and he wasn't as good as that age - it took a while for his game to mature. So maybe he wouldn't have all those slams at 21.... but assuming that his game matured and the others dropped off - he could still have 12 slams.

No, winning 12 slams is not "luck." An logic would follow- that if you win a lot of slams, you earn a lot of points. You can;t say Fed's lead in point is unfair if the other players weren't playing at that point - it's not Fed's fault.

Nadal caught up to Fed? Hmmm..... maybe not. Nadal has gotten close, but it looks like Nadal is struggling with his game. He can't keep up the hyper-grind forever. If I was Nadal, I'm looking over my sholder at a hard charging Djokovic.

I'm not ready to call Murray a Fed rival either.

As for Pete not being ahead in points? That's B.S. If he wasn't ahead on points, how did he hold onto the #1 ranking for so long? Also, think about this, Pete had a lead in age and points when Fed came a long - was that unfair?
 
BeHappy;2191672[/QUOTE said:
the question located towards the latter area of the question asked of me by you, my ill informed interlocutor, is answered by the adjective used to describe my mental capacities contained in the preceding section.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

and why do you also, judged me,? you judged me first so i will judge
you also. you cast the first stone, and i will cast it back at you.

don't do to others what you don't want them, do unto you.
Click to expand...
 
stoneagle said:
do you think if roger is the same age (21) as nadal,djokovic,
murray,gasquet and canas right now, do you think roger has
12 grand slams right now?. i see nadal, djokovic,murray
challenged and beat roger at the age of 25 and 26.
when roger was 20 yrs old nadal, djokovic, murray,gasquet
were only about 15 yrs old. about accumulating points first,
does people really think that roger was that great or goat,because
nadal,djokovic,murray,gasquet were still immature and inexperienced
and no where near to challenge roger then?
do you think roger 12 grand slams are luck?. who were his rivals then?
no question roger is great
tactical player, but right now his rivals nadal,djokovic,murray has caught up
& can beat roger. 21 yrs olds versus the more experienced 26 yr old
federer.

when pete was in his prime most of his rivals: agassi,courier,
chang,rafter were almost the same age as pete. pete was not
ahead in age nor points when he was in his prime, but he manage
to beat his rivals and earned 14 grand slams.
Click to expand...

Doesn't make any sense. Are you asking would he have 12 slams by the time he was 21? Or if he was 21 now, would he have 12 slams over the course of the rest of his career?
 
WHAT IF ....My aunt had balls and I would have had one more uncle....
So goes the "What If" theory......
 
first of all this is a discussion board so there is nothing wrong with some what ifs, that's the whole point.

I'm assuming the OP doesn't speak english by nature so some points are confusing but I think some of what has been said is rather interesting, such as:

- who were Federer's rivals before Nadal emerged, and only recently have guys like Djoko and Murray emerged who could start challenging him regularly.
- if the young guns of today had been around when Roger was younger, how would he have faired against them?
- would Federer have 12 slams now if Djoko, Rafa and crew had been around since the beginning of his career?

Other than Roddick I'm not sure who used to give Federer a tough time (though he never really gave him a tough time, he just used to be his rival).

If Fed dealed with this crew when he was younger I think they would have got the better of him a lot, especially Nadal, he would have owned young Fed.

Of course, they are what ifs and the NOW is what's happening, but just some food for thought.
 
I don't really think age would make much of a difference if Federer was 21. Federer is only 26 so his age shouldn't be an issue yet. When Federer hits 29 or 30 then age may be a factor which could effect his game but he is still only 26.
 
I think the OP means if he was in the same group as the young guns now. clearly he's not too old and slowing down, but he's a lot more developed and experienced than most of the younger guys.

also, the "what if blah blah blah" are not funny.
none of them. sorry guys.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JennyS
Are Fed and Nadal really from the same generation? (5 year age difference)
Replies
31
Views
3K
grafrules
grafrules
uncooling
Djokovic is now same age as Nadal
Replies
30
Views
8K
nolefam_2024
N
F
If Federer, Nadal and Djokovic were the same age
8 9 10
Replies
467
Views
43K
Sunny014
Sunny014
The_Mental_Giant
IS nadal of the same generation as Djokovic/Murray?
Replies
39
Views
3K
ultradr
U
Indigo
Roger and Novak reverse their age - predict matches
2
Replies
58
Views
3K
gamelovergold
G
Back
Top