-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Wimbledon 2019 - OT - London Goes Nuts for Coco
- Thread starter Mcfrank
- Start date
OP
OP
I was at his first round match at RG this year and the crowd was actively rooting against him from the start.
and nadal, djokovic and murray did not have to contend consistently with all-time greats 5-10 years younger than they are.
nadal won his first slam two years after federer, djokovic won his first slam three years after that. where is their younger competition now, eleven years later?
you can basically spin it anyway that suits your agenda. let's just all agree that federer is the greatest and never speak of this again.
Federer is like the Brady of Tennis, you always feel there's one more left.
But I agree, this might be it :(
If they were all the same age and came through at the same time Nadal and Djokovic would already have more Slams than him.
A good portion of Djokovic' wins came against a very weak Nadal and old Federer in 2015-2016. We can do this all day. If you want to claim Djokovic as undisputed GOAT, go ahead, but the suggestion that all three have equitable careers is not at all a controversial one.
Also, what John Dunbar said.
I think guys like Roddick, Nalbandian and Safin are all better than what.... Nishikori? Zverev? A bunch of mugs not even worth mentioning? The only truly great one to come after Djokovic was Del Potro and sadly he has been injured half his career.
There's no way to verify this and I highly doubt that would be the case, especially since the courts were much less homogenized early in Fed's career.
Right now he is. That may change in 5 years depending on how many more titles Nadal/Djokovic rack up, we'll see
But that's the French people. They initially hated Nadal, and look how they came around eventually... I think for a lot of fans, who either like Nadal or Federer, their dislike of Djokovic is primarily due to the fact that he came later on the scene (c. 2010), and is threatening their status as No. 1a/1b of tennis.
That doesn't really matter at all to the point. The younger players are irrelevant when for the past 20 years almost, the open era has been dominated by 4 players and not having to face against them in their peak makes a huge difference.
I mean Nadal beat Federer at his peak on grass in that legendary match so you can hardly say age was the is sole determining factor between them all.
OP
OP
So you are agreeing with me that people don't like him?
I don't know all he needs a break where he's not facing Nadal and Djoker back to back.
Two missed matchpoints on his own serve, three tie-breaks lost and two unused breakpoints at 11:11. :-(
Nevertheless I think that he played a great final. Probably even better than 2017 when he won against Cilic.
I think he's in great shape physically and could play his best US Open since 2015.
Nevertheless I think that he played a great final. Probably even better than 2017 when he won against Cilic.
I think he's in great shape physically and could play his best US Open since 2015.
Federer was better than Djokovic in all statistical areas EXCEPT unforced errors. That turned out to be the difference. Those shanks.
There are people that don't like Federer. There are always going to be people who aren't fans of someone.
Djokovic has some 16m followers on Instagram and twitter, I think it's safe to say he has lots and lots of fans.
That's irrelevant. Most of the time, they had to go through each other to make it to the final and win. Whereas Federer didn't have that obstacle in the 2000s (except Nadal at the FO). This literally is unarguable.
The two BPs at 11-11 weren't a huge loss. Djokovic hit a first serve on both and killed the point. Not that much he could have done. The 40-15 though will go down in history.
Federer was better than Djokovic in all statistical areas EXCEPT unforced errors. That turned out to be the difference. Those shanks.
Federer is the master of losing matches while winning more points.
This has happened before against Djokovic. 2011 US Open. Djokovic must haunt Federer's dreams.
When you see Nadal on court it's easy to dislike him, but in interviews he's a very humble and nice guy.
I'm only rooting for Djokovic when he's playing against Murray.
Old Federer? He was 32-33 in 2015-16. Same age Djokovic is now. Is Djokovic Old Djokovic now? I think Nadal and Djokovic proved you can still win titles in your early 30s (i.e., Federer isn't an outlier here).
Besides, Djokovic's most dominant seasons (two of which are amongst the most dominant of all time) occurred when Nadal, Murray were in the middle of their prime, and Federer was at the end of it (i.e., 2011, 2012 and 2015).
I dunno, was Jordan not great because Ewing, Barkley, Malone, Reggie Miller, etc. never won anything? Does that mean Jordan never had "meaningful" competition?
It's ironic to think that if the "big 3" were worse and actually let other players beat them, that some people would think they were better because they had more competition.
It's ironic to think that if the "big 3" were worse and actually let other players beat them, that some people would think they were better because they had more competition.
This dude dwarfs Ash in terms of Choking, couldn't believe he didn't win this. All he had to do was win one time or the match pointe on his serve. That was all.Federer was better than Djokovic in all statistical areas EXCEPT unforced errors. That turned out to be the difference. Those shanks.
dude, ash hasn't won a single title and he's been at it before federer was a junior.
In my mind, it's still debatable (as in you can make a case for others) even if they all retired today, though his case would be the strongest given his slam record. He has a losing record against Djokovic and Nadal, and his peak "Elo" rating is lower than that of Nadal and Federer. His consistency has been remarkable though (over nearly 2 decades) and he's still in decent physical shape at 38.
We all know djoker let roger win games so they could get to the historic 12-12 breaker. I mean everyone predicted this outcome heh
He wanted this to be in the conversation with the nadal and roddick matches as opposed to him beating an old man ;)
He wanted this to be in the conversation with the nadal and roddick matches as opposed to him beating an old man ;)
I don't know about not liking him... the crowds are rowdy and quite partisan at Roland Garros. They were relatively OK with him this year, as far as I remember. I guess it depends who he plays against. If it's like playing Roger, Nadal or a French player, then the crowd would typically turn on him.
This in terms of choking a sure thing. Ash plain sucks but plenty of people plain suck. He's only once even made it to the final and lost. We're talking about grabbing defeat from the claws of victory here.
Federer was one good serve away from beating Nadal and Djokovic consecutively. Pretty incredible... if it had happened I would have total peace with him retiring lol.
Happens all the time in sports. In the MLB or NFL, people see tighter races for first as better divisions when its more likely the teams in that division are all pretty bad equally. NL Central and East right now for example.
I certainly don't agree with some of those points (Federer was past his prime imo, Murray's prime still involved him being all over the place, etc...), but it doesn't necessarily matter since all we're both seemingly saying is that the GOAT debate is an arguable one. As is, there are data points that fans of each player can use to claim one of them the GOAT and currently there are a bit more for Federer, imo (Of course, that can change in the future).
Poor Fed being bilingual has to give 2 pressers. One to the English press and another to the Swiss-German press