Have I argued that Novak's W doesn't count because he didn't play X,Y,Z? Or did I rather suggest that some tournament Ws are more impressive than others based on the kind of opposition one faces?Who thinks like this? It's utter insanity.
I don't care if Novak Djokovic beat 60 year old Chris Evert in the 2016 French Open final, he won it and he has no control over who is on the other side of the net. This also reflects an embarrassing lack of tennis knowledge. Using this asinine "logic," let's toss out McEnroe's 1983 Wimbledon run since he faced not a single relevant grass court player and played hapless Chris Lewis in the final. While we're at it, let's toss out Agassi's 2001 AO run since he faced Clement in the final and "did not beat a single relevant HC player."
Get over it-- Djokovic won the FO, as did Federer. Both would have won 4 or more titles each had it not been for Rafa, but their lone title is still an awesome achievement.
You are creating a strawman, along with accusing me of saying something so far from what I said it's comical.
Get over what? If you think that I have a problem with Novak or Fed winning the FO you couldn't be more clueless.