Fedalovic Wars

[Bonaca]

Once Novak achieved career grand slam (also Noleslam), he immediately lost motivation, and goofed off with Bollywood actress for about an year.
For all you know, once he achieves the weeks at #1 record in a few weeks, another let down might happen (perhaps a south american actress could
help out this time) and he might lose another year without winning a single slam.

Stranger things have happened. There is a reason all finanical companies use the disclaimer "past performance is no guarantee of future results".

He referred to your point, and said after winning the weeks at no 1 record, he will more focus on the slams.
It will be the opposite of your wishful thinking.
Sorry.


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

 

[Ricardo]

Butthurt bonana got back, after Rafa kicked the shit out of faker at RG. Of course he is very alive after seeing the young chocking next gen giving it to faker.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

SLAM TITLES:

Nadal 20 - Federer 20
Nadal 20 - Djokovic 18

SLAM H2H:

Nadal 10 - Federer 4
Nadal 10 - Djokovic 6

Nadal is GOATDAL.

 

[Jelenafan]

There is a near 6 year age gap between Federer and Djokovic so their primes never coincided. Both won more when one was in their prime and the other wasn't. That's an unavoidable issue but it's also a fact and all things being equal, it's fully expected that the younger player should end up with better results. We'd have to have them all the same age to see the true picture and, even then, primes aren't always at the same time but Federer's clearly well past his fo

just out of curiosity what would you select as a “ prime “ Federer for a 4 Major span? And what would you consider “prime” Djokovic ?

 

[Ricardo]

just out of curiosity what would you select as a “ prime “ Federer for a 4 Major span? And what would you consider “prime” Djokovic ?

Easy, Feds slam dominance started in 2004 and ended in 2007 (peak level 05/06) so those would be his prime, while Djoker peaked in years 2011 and 2015 so his prime years are between those. They are 4 yrs apart in primes while age is 6 years apart, reasonable.

 

[Sabratha]

SLAM TITLES:

Nadal 20 - Federer 20
Nadal 20 - Djokovic 18

SLAM H2H:

Nadal 10 - Federer 4
Nadal 10 - Djokovic 6

Nadal is GOATDAL.

Number of Masters Cup trophies - 0.

Number of Wimbledon trophies - 2.

Appalling for the so called "GOAT".

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Number of Masters Cup trophies - 0.

Number of Wimbledon trophies - 2.

Appalling for the so called "GOAT".

Olympics Gold Medal > Masters Cup

Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, Murray have all compared the Olympics to the slams. They never did the same for the Masters Cup because it's at a lower level.

2 Wimbledon grass trophies. That's great because it makes GOATdal the only player out of the Big 3 to have won at last 2 slams on each surface.

 

[Front242]

just out of curiosity what would you select as a “ prime “ Federer for a 4 Major span? And what would you consider “prime” Djokovic ?

2004-2007 were clearly Federer's prime years (number 1 for 4 consecutive years and 5 straight Wimbledons) and I'd go with 2011 for Djokovic. Some Djokovic fans point to his 2015 being better but the opposition was much weaker so I'd go with 2011 in view of that.

 

[Front242]

Olympics Gold Medal > Masters Cup

Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, Murray have all compared the Olympics to the slams. They never did the same for the Masters Cup because it's at a lower level.

2 Wimbledon grass trophies. That's great because it makes GOATdal the only player out of the Big 3 to have won at last 2 slams on each surface.

In no way whatsoever are the Olympics comparable to the slams. Mickey mouse best of 3 and only best of 5 final. Give it a rest with the silliness please. Tennis Masters cup and now WTF feature the best 8 players on tour meaning every match is a tough match. The Olympics has players ranked anywhere at all. Nice to have, but in no way comparable to a slam and to say otherwise is just plain fantasy/delusional.

Also...

Olympics = 64 player draw. Slams 128.
Indian Wells has 128 players in the draw and has been referred to as the 5th slam
Miami has a 96 player draw.
The Olympics as you can see are not even close. It's harder to win as it's every 4 years and nice to have as I already mentioned and that's about it. Only thing harder about winning it is the only every 4 years part. The draw is half the slams, less than Miami and Indian Wells and full of low ranked players. In fact, from the very first match, despite having only the top 8 players, the ATP finals is a harder event to win given the quality of the opponents. I'd actually like to see the finals there still best of 5 and then it would much harder than the Olympics to win.

The masters 1000 events up to Hamburg 2007 were also much harder to win, best of 5 finals, tougher draws....

 

[Nadalfan2013]

In no way whatsoever are the Olympics comparable to the slams. Mickey mouse best of 3 and only best of 5 final. Give it a rest with the silliness please. Tennis Masters cup and now WTF feature the best 8 players on tour meaning every match is a tough match. The Olympics has players ranked anywhere at all. Nice to have, but in no way comparable to a slam and to say otherwise is just plain fantasy/delusional.

Also...

Olympics = 64 player draw. Slams 128.
Indian Wells has 128 players in the draw and has been referred to as the 5th slam
Miami has a 96 player draw.
The Olympics as you can see are not even close. It's harder to win as it's every 4 years and nice to have as I already mentioned and that's about it. Only thing harder about winning it is the only every 4 years part. The draw is half the slams, less than Miami and Indian Wells and full of low ranked players. In fact, from the very first match, despite having only the top 8 players, the ATP finals is a harder event to win given the quality of the opponents. I'd actually like to see the finals there still best of 5 and then it would much harder than the Olympics to win.

The masters 1000 events up to Hamburg 2007 were also much harder to win, best of 5 finals, tougher draws....

My reply was not about hardest to win (according to you) but what is more important to players. The Olympics has been compared by the Big 3 to the slams many times, but they would never compare a Masters 1000 or a WTF to the slams.

But if you want to talk about hardest to win then The French Open is by far the hardest tournament to win with 5 set matches on clay, full of long points, a lot of physical effort, not able to rely only on 1 shot like Ivanisevic, just absolutely grueling tennis with long construction of points and long rallies with every shot in the book. Nadal therefore is the GOAT according to your logic, and by far!

I can't wait to read your denial butthurt answer about that. But this is definitely a Check Mate, you have fell in your own trap. Indeed the most difficult is the French Open and therefore the GOAT is Nadal. That's why he is known as GOATdal.

 

[Moxie]

just out of curiosity what would you select as a “ prime “ Federer for a 4 Major span? And what would you consider “prime” Djokovic ?

Two Fed fans have answered you with 2004-2007. Djokovic with 2011, or a range. Given your post about Brady, and the relevance of older players continuing to win, I'm curious as to how you react to that.

 

[Moxie]

In no way whatsoever are the Olympics comparable to the slams. Mickey mouse best of 3 and only best of 5 final. Give it a rest with the silliness please. Tennis Masters cup and now WTF feature the best 8 players on tour meaning every match is a tough match. The Olympics has players ranked anywhere at all. Nice to have, but in no way comparable to a slam and to say otherwise is just plain fantasy/delusional.

Also...

Olympics = 64 player draw. Slams 128.
Indian Wells has 128 players in the draw and has been referred to as the 5th slam
Miami has a 96 player draw.
The Olympics as you can see are not even close. It's harder to win as it's every 4 years and nice to have as I already mentioned and that's about it. Only thing harder about winning it is the only every 4 years part. The draw is half the slams, less than Miami and Indian Wells and full of low ranked players. In fact, from the very first match, despite having only the top 8 players, the ATP finals is a harder event to win given the quality of the opponents. I'd actually like to see the finals there still best of 5 and then it would much harder than the Olympics to win.

The masters 1000 events up to Hamburg 2007 were also much harder to win, best of 5 finals, tougher draws....

You can say what you like about the Olympics, but Roger and Novak have both listed them as a goal, for many years now. Complain about the field, etc., but if it was so soft, how come Roger has failed to win a gold in 4 tries? And Rafa won his (on hards) beating Novak. The Olympics only comes around every 4 years, so the opportunity is rare, which might be said to compensate for the particulars of the event. I certainly don't think it compares to a Major, but it's not a thing to be dismissed. Not only because the elite players have stated it as a goal and obviously would prize it, but also because of the rarity of the opportunity. You really can't completely dismiss it.

 

[Ricardo]

Two Fed fans have answered you with 2004-2007. Djokovic with 2011, or a range. Given your post about Brady, and the relevance of older players continuing to win, I'm curious as to how you react to that.

Don’t include me as Fed fan, like his attacking game that’s about it.

 

[Front242]

You can say what you like about the Olympics, but Roger and Novak have both listed them as a goal, for many years now. Complain about the field, etc., but if it was so soft, how come Roger has failed to win a gold in 4 tries? And Rafa won his (on hards) beating Novak. The Olympics only comes around every 4 years, so the opportunity is rare, which might be said to compensate for the particulars of the event. I certainly don't think it compares to a Major, but it's not a thing to be dismissed. Not only because the elite players have stated it as a goal and obviously would prize it, but also because of the rarity of the opportunity. You really can't completely dismiss it.

Of course they'd like to win it, everyone who hasn't won an event would like to win it but the rest of my post still stands. Think of it this way, back before Djokovic won Cincinnati, this was the only Masters 1000 he had left to complete the list of all Masters 1000s titles. Does anyone think for one second that he wouldn't prefer this record of having won all Masters titles on tour over an Olympic gold medal ?! Nah, don't think so. Pretty sure most people know which is the far more impressive record here and it's not even close

Roger was beaten fair and square in the ones he lost and that's it. Obviously the biggest shocker and disappointment for him was the 2012 final 'cos the crazy long semi left him legless in the final but that's life.

 

[Front242]

My reply was not about hardest to win (according to you) but what is more important to players. The Olympics has been compared by the Big 3 to the slams many times, but they would never compare a Masters 1000 or a WTF to the slams.

But if you want to talk about hardest to win then The French Open is by far the hardest tournament to win with 5 set matches on clay, full of long points, a lot of physical effort, not able to rely only on 1 shot like Ivanisevic, just absolutely grueling tennis with long construction of points and long rallies with every shot in the book. Nadal therefore is the GOAT according to your logic, and by far!

I can't wait to read your denial butthurt answer about that. But this is definitely a Check Mate, you have fell in your own trap. Indeed the most difficult is the French Open and therefore the GOAT is Nadal. That's why he is known as GOATdal.

No it's not a check mate and it's nowhere near as hard to get back on level terms on clay having lost serve so this is another bs post. If you face a big server and have dropped your serve, often a mere single break is enough to lose that set on grass. Your logic is flawed. You're basically slagging Ivanisevic for being able to win points on grass with one shot but you need to read the above. Drop serve on clay and it's not hard to get that break back as serves are easier to return and you then just need to win the rally to win the point. This is much, much harder to do on grass as you know. Rosol and Brown say hi. Lose the butt references please and from reading your posts, yours hurts a lot more than mine.

 

[Sabratha]

Olympics Gold Medal > Masters Cup

Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, Murray have all compared the Olympics to the slams. They never did the same for the Masters Cup because it's at a lower level.

2 Wimbledon grass trophies. That's great because it makes GOATdal the only player out of the Big 3 to have won at last 2 slams on each surface.

Masters Cup >>>>> Olympics.

Among the winners were Agassi (while he was smoking meth), Kafelnikov and Massu.

The fact Nadal couldn't win more than 2 Wimbledon trophies and struggled to get past the first week for years says a lot about his overall legacy. The only thing Nadal can be sure of is he's the clay GOAT.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

I bet if some of you Nadal haters are walking on the street and see a pile of clay you would run away screaming and terrified.

You guys keep bringing up clay but the bottom line is Nadal has the slam record of 20 slams and he ALSO has a slam h2h record of 10-4 and 10-6 against Fedovic.

The next best thing is Federer also having 20 slams but being down an embarrassing 4-10 and 6-11 in slam h2h against his big rivals. Wow he is so great.

Nadal has 13 RG with a 100-2 record and this makes Djokovic on hardcourt or Federer on grass look AVERAGE. Repeat after me, Fedovic are AVERAGE on any surface when they are compared to Nadal on clay.

Add this to having at least 2 slams on each surface and the conclusion is that on his best surface Nadal > Fedovic and on his worst surface Nadal > Fedovic.

Now take your silver and bronze medals and go cry somewhere.

 

[Front242]

First time I've ever witnessed the stupidity of someone calling 5 straight Wimbledons (8 titles there in total), 6 Australian Opens and 5 straight US Opens AVERAGE but ok. Seriously, seek help.

^See this above also, clearly a much less top heavy distribution of titles than 13 at one slam. You've ridiculed yourself again and hilariously think you made an amazing point. Sorry, you didn't. 2 slams on each surface but yet only 1 AO. Same as Federer's 1 French Open at the end of the day but his spread of titles is WAY more impressive.

Obviously 13 at one event is unreal and not disputing that, but that leaves 7 other slams in total and clearly he's nowhere near as good at them as he is at the the French Open. It's obvious going by the numbers and you can't hide that no matter how much you try and sugar coat it with silliness.

 

[Moxie]

Of course they'd like to win it, everyone who hasn't won an event would like to win it but the rest of my post still stands. Think of it this way, back before Djokovic won Cincinnati, this was the only Masters 1000 he had left to complete the list of all Masters 1000s titles. Does anyone think for one second that he wouldn't prefer this record of having won all Masters titles on tour over an Olympic gold medal ?! Nah, don't think so. Pretty sure most people know which is the far more impressive record here and it's not even close

Roger was beaten fair and square in the ones he lost and that's it. Obviously the biggest shocker and disappointment for him was the 2012 final 'cos the crazy long semi left him legless in the final but that's life.

I'm unclear as to if you're saying that he'd prefer the Olympic Gold medal, or the MS boxed set via having won Cincinnati. If you say the boxed set, I'm going to be surprised.

As to the 2012 final, you have never once mentioned it without excusing Roger's performance due to being spent from the SF. Never one mention of a very fine Murray, who was also buoyed by the crowd who were rooting for GB over Switzerland. If Olympics doesn't matter, why does that match bother you so much.

 

[Front242]

I'm unclear as to if you're saying that he'd prefer the Olympic Gold medal, or the MS boxed set via having won Cincinnati. If you say the boxed set, I'm going to be surprised.

As to the 2012 final, you have never once mentioned it without excusing Roger's performance due to being spent from the SF. Never one mention of a very fine Murray, who was also buoyed by the crowd who were rooting for GB over Switzerland. If Olympics doesn't matter, why does that match bother you so much.

Hands down the set of all masters is a FAR more impressive record. It's beyond silly to claim otherwise. Djokovic has won all the masters twice, no other player has even done that ONCE!

"He is the only male player to have won all nine of the ATP Tour Masters 1000 tournaments, not only once but twice (no other male player has won all nine ATP 1000 events even once)."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novak_Djokovic_career_statistics

Re the 2012 Olympics, maybe this might refresh people's memory around here:

"Federer clinched the first singles medal of his career Friday, rallying past Juan Martin del Potro of Argentina 3-6, 7-6 (5), 19-17. At 4 hours, 26 minutes, it was the longest three-set men's match of the Open era" <---- Longest 3 set match of the open era and you don't think that affected the outcome. Please. It doesn't bother me one bit that Federer lost that match, he has plenty of far more important records, I merely replied to yet another dense post by Nadalfan2013 that the Olympics are apparently more important the the Tennis Masters Cup/WTF.

Also, the WTF/Tennis masters cup have been referred to as the 5th slam along with Indian Wells. Federer holds the record with 6 there, Djokovic 5. If Federer happened to win another 1 to make that 7 then that record may last a very long time. While he may prefer a gold medal, I can undoubtedly say winning another WTF against the top 8 players on tour would be a FAR better career title/achievement. Nadalfan2013 made yet another silly comment that apparently the players compared to the Olympics to a slam. Which would be better for Federer or Djokovic to win I wonder....another slam or the freakin' Olympics, LOL. That settles that then

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATP_Finals