Red Rick
Bionic Poster
Well now you're just cherry picking
Winning percentage minus opponent's ranking
- Thread starter Lew II
- Start date
Fed also never beat a 20 GS champion on his way to his titles, what a newb. Even Wawrinka beat 20 GS champion in one of his majors. Lew's logic, Fed can't be the best because he never beat himself. Of course if you are nr.1 you can't face nr.1 player lol.
Pheasant
Legend
Well-played. I like it.
MS_07
Semi-Pro
yesterday u said before 2015 joker is a pre prime joker . and here u say otherwise . what a joker u r all by urself !
MS_07
Semi-Pro
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
I was just using the fed fan logic. Of course Djokovic was peak since 2011, and Fed didn't end his peak in 2007.
Djokovic has negative h2h versus Wawrinka in Grand slam finals, 0-2. How can you be the goat if lower tier player owns you in Grand slam finals? Imagine if Ali lost two times vs lower tier boxer in his peak? That's worse, at least Fed has negative h2h versus great players in GS finals.
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
It's one of my greatest thread. I'm very proud of it.
It's much harder to have a high win percentage against high ranked opponent. This method measures it.
MasterZeb
Hall of Fame
BringBackWood
Professional
In before 'no measure is perfect but all converge to the same truth' Lew spiel
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
Nope. I didn't use the arithmetic average. I already explained it.
Ok,but that's not true at all. In MMA Jon Jones had much more trouble versus lower ranked opponents, this is what happens in all sports. Conor had the most trouble with Nate Diaz who is ranked lower. So your premise is just wrong. And Djokovic having most trouble with Wawrinka destroys your argument that it's always easier to beat lower ranked players.
Breakpointerer
Legend
December 1st 2018
Remember the date
Remember the date
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
The norm is that higher ranked players are tougher to beat. To be objective we have to follow the norm.
Conor had trouble with Nate Diaz because he is in a different weight class, btw. Don't know about Jon Jones, he's unbeaten.
Also, how the hell do rankings in his mind prove your level of play? Roddick had higher level of play than Laver, but Laver was ranked higher. And also highest level of play also doesn't prove you are greater, again Roddick vs Laver.
I think it's a great idea, it could result in @Lew II being busy for a while, so there will be less of his posts proving Djokovic is GOAT on this forum.
But Federer wasn't ranked nr.1 after 2010, that's the thing, so was he easier to beat? So, was Federer harder to beat in 2006? You said it, higher ranked players are harder to beat.
@Lew II if I go to the supermarket today, buy 2kg of potatoes, and drive the car back through the city at an average speed to 30km/h, do you think Djokovic would be the GOAT by this metric?
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
Still can't believe how good is Djokovic
Djokovic needs more energy to win mathces. Which car more efficient? The one with less gas mileage. So, Federer is more efficient, means better.Still can't believe how good is Djokovic
it depends,
if you like red cars -> there will be a different answer
if you like electric cars -> there will be a different answer
if you like Djokovic, then no matter of the question the answer will always be Djokovic is GOAT
Not the case, majority of Djokovic fans don't actually think he is the goat, so does this mean some people can use logic over emotions? Who knew?
Similar threads
