FEDERER v NADAL V DJOKOVIC (etc) - MOD NOTE 1ST POST

dominatinMC

WicklowBrave wrote: »

If you are forced to pick any player in history at their best to win a match but you don't know who their oppenent is or what surface they will play on and your life depends on it, you are picking Djokovic.

I'd take my chances, and pick Nadal in the hope that the surface turns out to be clay

WicklowBrave

dominatinMC wrote: »

I'd take my chances, and pick Nadal in the hope that the surface turns out to be clay

Would take my chances with Nole even if the worst possible scenario of Nadal on clay came up. Nole has shown to be more than a match for him on that surface.

walshb

SophieLockhart wrote: »

Federer is obviously more liable to produce a brilliant performance on a given day than anyone else. But in general, his overall performances had dropped considerably from his peak, and quite a few mediocre players were improving their results against him.

Yeh, just like his 2012 semi win over Nole at SW19...

Overall performances dropped considerably? That’s nonsense...

The comp level in 2011 onwards was just better..compared to say, 2004/2005...

WicklowBrave

Hector Savage wrote: »

Federer 20
Nadal 17
Djokovic 15
.
.
.
.
.
.
Let's talk in May ...

Will finish something like imo:

ND 22
Fed 20
Nadal 19

Chivito550

WicklowBrave wrote: »

If you are forced to pick any player in history at their best to win a match but you don't know who their oppenent is or what surface they will play on and your life depends on it, you are picking Djokovic.

Always facinated me that peak Djokovic, who wiped the floor with Federer and Nadal had such problems in grand slams with Wawrinka. 3 losses, and 3 5 set wins.

Wawrinka on his day surely one of the most ridiculous players we’ve ever seen.

bada_bing

it's so easy to cherry pick facts that point to federer as the GOAT but i can easily just disprove that with a few other stats:

Federer has never been the year end number 1 in his 30's , whereas Nadal and Djokovic have accomplished this in their 30's

Federer never managed to achieve back to back grand slam wins in his 30's, djokovic has already won the the last 3 grand slams at the age of 31.

Federer trails behind in terms of masters tournaments compared to Nadal and Djokovic.

Djokovic's current form and fitness in his 30's seem to indicate that he will shatter more records currently held by Federer.

SophieLockhart

bada_bing wrote: »

it's so easy to cherry pick facts that point to federer as the GOAT but i can easily just disprove that with a few other stats:

Federer has never been the year end number 1 in his 30's , whereas Nadal and Djokovic have accomplished this in their 30's

Federer never managed to achieve back to back grand slam wins in his 30's, djokovic has already won the the last 3 grand slams at the age of 31.

Federer trails behind in terms of masters tournaments compared to Nadal and Djokovic.

Djokovic's current form and fitness in his 30's seem to indicate that he will shatter more records currently held by Federer.

Which only goes to prove that Federer had to deal with two rivals in their twenties whereas Djokovic has a free ride. He also shamefully lost two Slam finals to the very limited Andy Murray, which rules him out of GOAT contention straightaway.

Hector Savage

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1089571469938647040

Rob2D

WicklowBrave wrote: »

If you are forced to pick any player in history at their best to win a match but you don't know who their oppenent is or what surface they will play on and your life depends on it, you are picking Djokovic.

"If earth was on the line in a tennis match, the man you want serving to save humankind would be Ricardo Alonso Gonzales."

walshb

SophieLockhart wrote: »

Which only goes to prove that Federer had to deal with two rivals in their twenties whereas Djokovic has a free ride. He also shamefully lost two Slam finals to the very limited Andy Murray, which rules him out of GOAT contention straightaway.

This is at best, nonsense!

dominatinMC

walshb wrote: »

This is at best, nonsense!

Don't feed the troll! She presented the same sort of argument yesterday in the AO thread. It was along the lines of now that Nadal has been beaten in straight sets in a slam final, he shouldn't even be considered in the GOAT conversation. I guess that conveniently just leaves Fed in contention for the title so...who has probably suffered the most humiliating, one-sided beatdown in a slam final in recent memory (FO 2008). Intersting logic by Sophie...

bada_bing

Yes Federer had the worst beatdown in a grand slam final at FO 2008. The scoreline was 6-1 6-3 6-0 , he fared worse than Nadal did yesterday. Also it should be noted that Federer has a negative H2H against both Djokovic and Nadal. Puts him out of the GOAT debate, doesn't it??

SophieLockhart

bada_bing wrote: »

Yes Federer had the worst beatdown in a grand slam final at FO 2008. The scoreline was 6-1 6-3 6-0 , he fared worse than Nadal did yesterday. Also it should be noted that Federer has a negative H2H against both Djokovic and Nadal. Puts him out of the GOAT debate, doesn't it??

Everyone except you knows he had mono that year and it was a miracle he even got to the Final. Try and troll better next time.

walshb

SophieLockhart wrote: »

Everyone except you knows he had mono that year and it was a miracle he even got to the Final. Try and troll better next time.

Read up on his illness..

He was fully recovered before RG. FFS, the way some of his fans use the GF illness you’d swear he had his legs amputated or something...

bada_bing

SophieLockhart wrote: »

Everyone except you knows he had mono that year and it was a miracle he even got to the Final. Try and troll better next time.

Oh I had a good laugh there, thanks for that. You seem to have picked up a similar habit from Federer himself, always having an excuse as to why he loses each match.

The Golden Miller

bada_bing wrote: »

Oh I had a good laugh there, thanks for that. You seem to have picked up a similar habit from Federer himself, always having an excuse as to why he loses each match.

He's never ever lost a match when he's been fully fit. Always a mitigating factor

Chivito550

walshb wrote: »

Read up on his illness..

He was fully recovered before RG. FFS, the way some of his fans use the GF illness you’d swear he had his legs amputated or something...

There's bound to be effects to having an illness like that. Even if you are over the illness, it is going to take some time to fully get back to 100% after your body goes through something like that.

Never for a second would I suggest he would beat Nadal at Roland Garros, but have a look at his other results against him at the French Open in other years: 2005 SF, 2006 F, 2007 F and 2011 F. All 4 of those matches went to 4 sets and were competitive. It is obvious something was amiss in 2008.

You can choose to accept that or not. Makes no difference to me really.

The Golden Miller

Chivito550 wrote: »

There's bound to be effects to having an illness like that. Even if you are over the illness, it is going to take some time to fully get back to 100% after your body goes through something like that.

Never for a second would I suggest he would beat Nadal at Roland Garros, but have a look at his other results against him at the French Open in other years: 2005 SF, 2006 F, 2007 F and 2011 F. All 4 of those matches went to 4 sets and were competitive. It is obvious something was amiss in 2008.

You can choose to accept that or not. Makes no difference to me really.

Why enter if he wasn't fully fit? We're talking about having several months recovery. What other athlete needs that length of time to recover? Only precious Federer seemingly.

I remember 2008 very well in tennis. These excuses only started being floated about a year or two after Nadal ascended to the top of the game, and Federer fans hang to them for dear life. There was little to nothing made of it by Federer himself or the press at the time. Non-issue's and excuses

Beasty

Number of posts by re-reg troll and replies deleted. Guys, if you engage with him, it just encourages him more. Best just to report then ignore (as he very quickly outs himself - you all know the signs:))

He'll be bored with Tennis shortly and return to trolling AH - until the French Open I guess

walshb

Chivito550 wrote: »

There's bound to be effects to having an illness like that. Even if you are over the illness, it is going to take some time to fully get back to 100% after your body goes through something like that.

Never for a second would I suggest he would beat Nadal at Roland Garros, but have a look at his other results against him at the French Open in other years: 2005 SF, 2006 F, 2007 F and 2011 F. All 4 of those matches went to 4 sets and were competitive. It is obvious something was amiss in 2008.

You can choose to accept that or not. Makes no difference to me really.

So his losses in other FO finals where he grabbed a set is where you’re clinging to to show that the 2008 loss had to have something to do with GF...

In the Hamburg Masters just before RG, Roger ran Nadal close. Took a set off him.

His bout of GF is being ridiculously overplayed. But no surprise..

Something was amiss. He just got hammered. It’s obvious you won’t accept that..

Oh, and Rafa in 2005 and 2006 was not as good as he was 2008..he was a baby in 2005

walshb

Pete_Sampras wrote: »

Rafa in 2006 was arguably at his peak clay court level. His clay court peak began at 18 or 19.

His peak clay performances for me were from several seasons.

This is just it. Nit picking here and there on all three and their peaks is silly. We cannot batten down when they were at their absolute best

What actually makes RF the GOAT for me is the fact that he was playing some of his best ever tennis through a mix of 12-13 seasons. There were matches and performances through 12/13 years that one could look at and visually see RF playing as good as ever...

This also applies to Rafa and Nole.....through 10-12 seasons one could pick out performances where both were playing their best ever tennis...

One poster arguing that because of GF, RFs was in decline from 2008 onwards, yet uses the 2011 FO final against Nadala (where he took a set) to show this 2008 decline???

Surely in 2011 he was then even farther into decline if we are to believe that the decline began in 2008?

I can pick matches and moments in RFs whole career where he was as good as he was in any season from 2003-2018....

SW19 2012........the man was unstoppable....a supposed 4 years into his decline........

It's actually these things that cement his "greatness argument" vs the other two.......not lessen it...

walshb

Pete_Sampras wrote: »

A decline isn't always perfectly linear. His form deteriorated substantially in in 2008, he lifted his form in 2009 but was still well off 2005-2007. In 2010 his level dropped again. Occasionally between 2010-2012 he was able to lift his level quite high, but never consistently. For example the French 2011 semi final. Then 2013 came around and his level dropped to a new plateau.

He decided to switch to a bigger Racquet which was a great move, it allowed him to compete once again in baseline rallies with Novak and Rafa. His level raised between 2014-2017. I attribute that primarily to the new Racquet. It helped his serve in 2015 and then the backhand in 2017. And now he is declining further even with the new Racquet.

Yes, and the same type of scenario presents for Nole and Rafa...peaks and troughs...It's a sily exercise, albeit one that we can discuss...

You also need to factor in the comp level in 2005 - 2007. He was meeting better players after this....and his win percentages then suffered. It wasn't ONLY because he suddenly was not as good a tennis player. I don't buy that.

walshb

Pete_Sampras wrote: »

I'm not just looking at his winning percentage, I'm actually looking at his matches and how he performs. Look how fast he was around that court in the 2006 clip, Nadal too.

And I did say a while back that yes, in 2004-2007 he seemed that bit faster on the court....but it's not all that much faster.

Plus, later years he developed more as a player and improved in other areas....

Again, far too difficult to batten down his absolute tennis best...

All three of them had periods of brilliance and slightly less thasn brilliance in the 12-14 years that they have been playing, and playing against each other...

This ridiculous Fed fan angle of latching on like a pit bull to the years 2004-2007 and using this as some measure as to why he was the GOAT, and to why he lost a fair few slams and matches to the other two after these years is what makes no real sense to me.

I have him the GOAT, but at least I can be objective, and at least I can accept the real challenge to the GOAT status.

dominatinMC

I understand the arguments being put forth above and agree with a lot of the points. I also think recency bias is playing a huge role in this debate at the moment. A lot of hyperbole online about Djokovic being the GOAT etc. after his victory, but people only have to remember his form this time last year to know tennis is about peaks and troughs. People also forget how good Fed (and Nadal) were in the early noughties, different level to all players on tour now (including Djokovic).

In my opinion, they have all had periods of domination or "peak". Fed was probably 04-07, Nadal maybe years 08, 10 (an often underappreciated year), and 13 (Nadal never a whole period per se, mainly due to injury interruptions) and Djokovic has had 2011 (probably the best ever year I've seen on the tour), 2015-2016, and also now (late 18 - current). Obviously, there have been moments of greatness for all in between those years, but that's the way I see it at the moment

TomSweeney

Saw this over on talk tennis and really is an interesting way of looking at it .

Setting aside bias and favouritism, which of the following would you say have been the tougher collection of slam final victories:

Player A)
Tsonga, Murray, Nadal, Nadal,
Nadal, Murray, Federer, Murray, Federer, Federer, Murray, Murray, Anderson, Del Potro, Nadal

Player
Puerta, Federer, Federer, Federer, Federer, Federer, Soderling, Berdych, Djokovic, Federer, Djokovic, Ferrer, Djokovic, Djokovic, Wawrinka, Anderson, Thiem

Player C)
Philippoussis, Safin, Roddick, Hewitt, Roddick, Agassi, Baghdatis, Nadal, Roddick, Gonzalez, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Soderling, Roddick, Murray, Murray, Nadal, Cilic, Cilic

Player D)
Agassi, Courier, Pioline, Martin, Ivanisevic, Becker, Agassi, Chang, Moyà, Pioline, Ivanisevic, Agassi, Rafter, Agassi

Clearly A (Djokovic) had it the toughest.

dominatinMC

TomSweeney wrote: »

Saw this over on talk tennis and really is an interesting way of looking at it .



Clearly A (Djokovic) had it the toughest.

Very interesting. I would argue that Player B (Nadal) has had the toughest run, facing Federer so many times. Of course, most of those wins were on the clay of RG, but that list doesn't state that fact.

walshb

TomSweeney wrote: »

Saw this over on talk tennis and really is an interesting way of looking at it .



Clearly A (Djokovic) had it the toughest.

Not seeing how this is clear at all.

Nadal and Nole both had to meet and beat each other several times...

bada_bing

i can see why there'd be an argument over who had it hardest in GS finals, but one thing is pretty clear that most of Federer's grand slam wins are definitely easier compared to those of Nadal & Djokovic. It's interesting to note that he's only beaten Djokovic just once in a grand slam final. The combined H2H against Nadal & Djokovic is 4 - 10. Couldn't be more clear cut than that!!

walshb

He lost 3 GS finals v Nole...

6 v Nadal...

That’s 9.........

Am I missing one?

bada_bing

ooops you're right, i must've had lazy eye and counted Ferrer as Federer!!!!!