Why are certain Fed fans obsessed with dismissing Medvedev?

nolefam_2024

Bionic Poster
Baby steps, at least he’s no longer pushing the (now thoroughly debunked) “Fed-as-servevbot” theory. Only took about 10 copy-pastes of the same response to the same points lmaoooo
Everyone can change and Sport has changed a lot. He is more neutral than almost everyone on the board.

Just plugging my thread, Fed can't be servebot. Fed can't be bot as his brk % is above ace %

 

TheFifthSet

Legend
Everyone can change and Sport has changed a lot. He is more neutral than almost everyone on the board.

Just plugging my thread, Fed can't be servebot. Fed can't be bot as his brk % is above ace %


It’s not the neutrality or lack thereof, he’s just wrong a lot. :p
 
I am a HUGE Fed fan and I absolutely love Meddy. I feel he is refreshing in the sense that we shouldnt be trying to look pretty when hitting the ball but just hitting the ball. If that makes sense.
 

Razer

G.O.A.T.
During wawrinkas era (2013-2017), wawrinka had a:
3-8 h2h vs Nadal.
2-8 h2h vs Federer
3-8 h2h vs Djokovic.

Meanwhile, safin had during 2000-2005 a:
2-7 h2h vs Federer
Because I saw tennis in the 2000s I know how weak it was. And unfortunately I’m not in my 20s.

Don't you have any shame in citing Safin's H2H vs Federer when Safin took 1 slam from Fed in Fed's peak while Wawrinka could not take any slam from Fed or beat him ever outside clay even in 2010s ??? ..... If you tell Fed about 2-8 Stan and 2-7 Safin then Fed would laugh at you.

Now I am sure you have not seen any tennis in 2000s, you are probably a 25 year old who is a fanatic of Djokovic and hence pumping up Wawrinka+Murray here, now I am seriously not gonna reply anything to you because you are wasting my time.... So this time Bye for sure.
 

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
I mean, anyone with two brain cells can comprehend why. It's not like Medvedev is some absolute titan of the sport who is beyond criticism anyway.

What's really funny is their championing of those absolute losers from 20 years ago who were absolutely no better. Watching Agassi in his 30s in far worse shape than these old guys are now going toe to toe with every one of those mental midgets was as hilarious and pathetic in equal measure to anything happening now. It is the reason I became a Nadal fan despite him playing tennis antithetical to what I most prefer to watch.

Watching the equivalents of the people I was arguing with 20 years ago now making the argument I was making then is spectacular comedy to me. I can acknowledge that to some degree we are witnessing the same thing.

They, seemingly, cannot. Nor that a decade+ age difference is quite clearly nothing like what it was 10/15/20 years ago as guys in their 30s, as proven across all sports, can stay healthier stronger longer than ever before.

Rose-tinted, fave-pandering garbage.

Agassi vs. Roddick (ignoring their first two matches - 2/0 to Andre - when Roddick was a baby) - 3-1

Agassi vs. Hewitt (ignoring their first two matches - 1/1 - when Roddick was a baby) - 3-3

Agassi vs. Safin (ignoring their first 3 matches - 2/1 to Andre - when Safin was a baby) - 1-2

Agassi vs. Nalbandian - 1-0

Agassi vs. Davydenko (ignoring their first match - 1/0 to Andre - when Davydenko was even more unremarkable than he would later be, and ignoring that he won two titles that year) - 1-1

Agassi vs. Blake (ignoring their first match - 1/0 to Andre - when Blake was a baby) - 3-1

Agassi vs. Gonzalez - 0-2

Agassi vs. Ferrero - 2-3

Agassi vs. Robredo - 2-0

16-13

Aside from Blake, where it's just a 9 year difference, every single one of those people is at least a decade younger than him.

This ignores people like Keifer, Ancic, Karlovic, Haas, all of whom Federer beat up on at the majors through his prime years (Kiefer was one of the most consistently challenging slam rivals of Federer's best period!) that Andre had winning records against, and was a combined 14-4.

But man, those days were so strong, and these days are so weak.

LOL c'mon bro. Not-too-young Safin+Hewitt+Roddick+Ferrero+Nalbandian were a combined 9-9 against Agassi and 3-1 in slams. Not-too-young Medvedev+Zverev+Tsitsipas combine for a 11-28 record vs Djokovic and 1-9 in slams. There's absolutely no comparison here. Only Thiem was highly competitive with the aging Big 3 though would still flop against RGdal.
 

Third Serve

Talk Tennis Guru
We also shouldn’t ignore that by the time Hewitt and Safin declined, Nadal had already become world no 2.
Exactly.
Counting beans, 2 slams + 5 other SF or better vs 3 slams + 6 other SF or better isn't that big a gap when you consider Stan played for longer and Stan's extra slam is 16 USO which probably wasn't even as good as Safin's 01 USO, PETE would have made minced meat of 16 Stan. And of course Stan's extra SF or better includes non-competitive performances like 15 USO, 17 RG, etc. Outside the slams Safin had much better runs at both masters, sub-masters, and the YEC. Time at #1 can be chalked up to era sure, but when looking at the beans, there's a pretty easy case for Safin. If Safin hadn't mugged up to Johansson there would be zero grounds for debate but unfortunately (or fortunately) Safin is Safin.

Probably an easier case for Safin than Hewitt when you look at the whole picture and player quality, given Safin was a true ATG talent on HC who would have won slams in any era whereas it's doubtful whether Stan has any slams at all if Djokovic isn't his main ATG opponent. Hewitt would have also needed transitional slams or Djokovic as his main ATG opponent to win majors. Hmmm, sensing a theme here.
Fair but Stan playing longer isn’t really an asterisk. Maintaining a good level for a longer period of time is a quality to be praised, not ignored.
 

FeroBango

Legend
Ultimately, this is yet another thread that features discussions that have been repeated ad-nausem. No one's gonna convince the other camp but we're Tsitspas and up the hill we roll the rock.
 

ActualTennisPlayer

Professional
Don't you have any shame in citing Safin's H2H vs Federer when Safin took 1 slam from Fed in Fed's peak while Wawrinka could not take any slam from Fed or beat him ever outside clay even in 2010s ??? ..... If you tell Fed about 2-8 Stan and 2-7 Safin then Fed would laugh at you.

Now I am sure you have not seen any tennis in 2000s, you are probably a 25 year old who is a fanatic of Djokovic and hence pumping up Wawrinka+Murray here, now I am seriously not gonna reply anything to you because you are wasting my time.... So this time Bye for sure.
No I just showed you the complete stats on how they played against the big 3 in their primes.

you in contrast selectively exclude stats:
- Wawrinka beating Djokovic should be excluded due to match up advantage. But Wawrinka losing against Federer shouldn’t be excluded - despite Fed having a match up advantage.
- clay should be excluded because fed isn’t the best on it. Of course you forget that slow courts are stans best surface.
 

Sputnik Bulgorov

Professional
Not really. The debate is not whether Feds generation is weak but whether feds era was.

During Feds era of 2003WC-2006, safin was not good. Look at his slam performance: absent, absent; F, 4R, 1R, 1R; W, 4R, 3R, A; A, 1R, 2R, 4R.

That safin was worse than Roddick or medvedev.

Now safin might be better than Roddick or medvedev before Feds era, but the safin of Feds era wasn’t better.
The person I replied to spoke of era, but really talked about it like a generation. He said Roddick was the best player in that era minus Fed, but if we’re talking eras, then it would be Nadal.

So I spoke of it in terms of generations to keep things clean. Hewitt, Safin and Roddick, regardless of what you think of them, are still better than Medvedev, Zverev and Tsitsipas. If the former are weak, then the latter are even weaker.

If you want to focus on eras, then young Nadal is a better than any player who was Djokovic’s competition from 2020-2023 by a massive margin, Alcaraz and Sinner included. So again, if Feds era was weak, then the old Djokovic period of domination from 2020-2023 was even weaker. We have to stay consistent.
 

chjtennis

G.O.A.T.
Probably, most of you have noticed a universal pattern on this forum.

Whenever Medvedev loses a Grand Slam match, a forum member (surprisingly, always a Federer supporter) starts a thread to dismiss the Russian, calling him "mug", comparing him negatively with Roddick (despite the fact that the latter possesses a slightly less succesful resume), making hyperbolic assertions such as "this is the weakest era of all time", etc.

Why does the Russian player infuriate so much certain members of this fanbase? When did they become haters of the Russian and what did motivate it?

I don't think it's got anything to do with them being Fed fans. ;)
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Everyone can change and Sport has changed a lot. He is more neutral than almost everyone on the board.

Just plugging my thread, Fed can't be servebot. Fed can't be bot as his brk % is above ace %

What a joke lol.
 

Third Serve

Talk Tennis Guru
Everyone can change and Sport has changed a lot. He is more neutral than almost everyone on the board.

Just plugging my thread, Fed can't be servebot. Fed can't be bot as his brk % is above ace %

Neutrality isn’t as much an issue as his frankly terrible analyses. I respect him for maintaining at least a sense of neutrality and for keeping discussions cordial but he gets a lot of stuff wrong imo.
 

nolefam_2024

Bionic Poster
Neutrality isn’t as much an issue as his frankly terrible analyses. I respect him for maintaining at least a sense of neutrality and for keeping discussions cordial but he gets a lot of stuff wrong imo.
Maybe, to each their own.

20/30% of super spreaders on this site probably makes this place worse. Sport is not among them.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
Also, Hewitt was better in 2004-2005 than 2001-2002 when he won his Slams (for the most part).
I think Hewitt fans would choose USO 01 and Wim 02 as his 2 best slams performances though. I know they are also big on AO 2005 though.

Maybe NatF can chime in here.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
I think Hewitt fans would choose USO 01 and Wim 02 as his 2 best slams performances though. I know they are also big on AO 2005 though.

Maybe NatF can chime in here.
Those are his two best slam runs, he was more consistent in 2004-2005 though and obviously 2005 is his best AO run.
 

pirhaksar

Professional
There aren't any (except in OP's head). If Anything, the OP made more threads about Fed (who's a retired player) and his fans than any single Fed fan made about Medvedev.

I really like listening to Med's interviews, he's a thoughtful guy compared to your average sports jock and he's very at expressing himself in a language that is not his first (don't think a number TTWers realize that's not exactly easy). I also have respect for his USO title run where I thought he did play outstanding tennis, and I respect that he's a unique and unorthodox player, has his own style that isn't suitable for his height but he makes it work.

I wish I enjoyed his on-court game more. He usually needs to be paired with someone with a contrasting style for me to really enjoy his matches.
The funny part is some of these clown fans fans owe it hiuugeee to Mad lad. If he didn’t show up in 21 finals and emphatically outperform instead of being the mug they pretend he is, Novak would have a calendar slam…imagine the misery and the hypothetical asinine crap they would need to pull out of their behinds for the goat arguments with Novak having the calendar slam… lol.
 

jackson vile

G.O.A.T.
The funny part is some of these clown fans fans owe it hiuugeee to Mad lad. If he didn’t show up in 21 finals and emphatically outperform instead of being the mug they pretend he is, Novak would have a calendar slam…imagine the misery and the hypothetical asinine crap they would need to pull out of their behinds for the goat arguments with Novak having the calendar slam… lol.
BINGO!
 

ActualTennisPlayer

Professional
The person I replied to spoke of era, but really talked about it like a generation. He said Roddick was the best player in that era minus Fed, but if we’re talking eras, then it would be Nadal.

So I spoke of it in terms of generations to keep things clean. Hewitt, Safin and Roddick, regardless of what you think of them, are still better than Medvedev, Zverev and Tsitsipas. If the former are weak, then the latter are even weaker.

If you want to focus on eras, then young Nadal is a better than any player who was Djokovic’s competition from 2020-2023 by a massive margin, Alcaraz and Sinner included. So again, if Feds era was weak, then the old Djokovic period of domination from 2020-2023 was even weaker. We have to stay consistent.
So how I understood it is the following.

Djokovic fans complain that Federer had a “weak era” where he “vultured” slams. For most djokovic fans this era is between 2003 and 2006. The era might have been weak before that but that’s irrelevant as Fed was mostly stopped by mugs in early rounds.

Between 2003 and 2006, Roddick was Feds biggest rival. At late stages (SF or Final) at slams, Fed met Roddick 4 times, while he met Nadal and Hewitt 3 times each and Safin twice. Federer also took the number 1 ranking from Roddick. Roddick also had the second best year end ranking on average over that period after Fed.

bonus: for some Djokovic fans, Fed could also “vulture” in 2009 when Nadal was injured (and Novak in a weird slump). Who did he face at wimbledon to have the most grand slams ever? Andy Roddick.
 
Last edited:

metsman

Talk Tennis Guru
Exactly.

Fair but Stan playing longer isn’t really an asterisk. Maintaining a good level for a longer period of time is a quality to be praised, not ignored.
yeah but how many extra points is Safin getting for 08 Wimby, vs Stan padding a slam semi and final in 2017, and I'd argue Safin's run was more impressive. Take away 08 and 17 and it's 1 extra SF+ run for Wawrinka (that 1 extra run is 15 USO which is a joke of a run - are we really going to give that more credit than Safin beating Kuerten and Agassi on clay as an 18 year old?), with Stan's extra slam (16 USO) equal or worse than 2 non-slam winning runs by Safin (01 USO, 04 AO, the latter of which I'd argue is better than Stan's actual AO win) and Safin with a huge edge outside slams as well as the qualitative edge, etc.

So there's no real convincing argument for Stan because the quantity argument is pretty thin if you look into it, although you could really squint your eyes and make one.
 

platypus50

Semi-Pro
In the eyes of obsessed Fed fans, Med is a mug who failed to stop both Djoker and Nadal from eventually overtaking Fed on 20 majors.

Med thwarted the first attempt of 'Project 21' at the 2021 USO when he stopped Djoker in the final and denied him the CYGS, pretty sure Fed fans were all praising him as a hero then.

Fast forward 4 months to the 2022 AO final when he led 2 sets to 0 against Nadal, proceeds to get too cocky when he was up 3-2 40-0 in the 3rd set, starts missing routine shots which all add up against a mental juggernaut like Nadal, Med pretty much donated the trophy over to Nadal saying 'Take it Rafa'.
 
Top