Jump to content

Was Federer lucky to have won 16 Grand slam ?


Sehwag1830

Was Federer lucky to have won 16 Grand slam ?  

  1. 1.



Recommended Posts

Are you serious? The guy is still making semis and finals of every damn tournament and you still question his class. He was class apart. Yes Nadal and others did beat him, but they weren't good enough to stop him from winning. Also, he's very old now from Nadal and Djokovic, and yet he continues his dominance over most players. Let me see how Nadal or someone else is when they are of Federer's age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you serious? The guy is still making semis and finals of every damn tournament and you still question his class. He was class apart. Yes Nadal and others did beat him, but they weren't good enough to stop him from winning. Also, he's very old now from Nadal and Djokovic, and yet he continues his dominance over most players. Let me see how Nadal or someone else is when they are of Federer's age.
this...what a crap question..i say had djokovik of this form played federer at his prime, he would not even had won these 3 recent slams..federer was soo dominant in his prime, he literally killed other players to win slams..he was madly winning slams.and what is prime of nadal? he has accounted his tally of 11 GS mailnly bcoz of FO. he is the best in clay no doubt..but after nadal won his first GS in 2005, since then federer has won 12 nd rafa 10... in his prime naal vs federer was the greatest nd only rivalry..just wait nd see after 5 years, how nadal nd joker would get out in 3rd or 4th rounds of GS..federer was just of a different league..class apart :hatsoff:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there is hardly any doubt about that. When Nadal really arrived (in 2008 when he was 21 only) on the scene Federer was at peak of his career, aged 26 (Nadal's current age) And since start of 2008, Federer has won only 4 grand slam. Out of these 4, 3 came in duration of 2009-10 when Nadal was struggling with his injuries. I admit that he has this amazing consistency to reach SF's and QF's and doesn't suffer upset defeats very often, but that makes you number 2 or 3 only. His overall numbers are hugely inflated because of depleted field he enjoyed between 2003-2007.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this...what a crap question..i say had djokovik of this form played federer at his prime' date=' he would not even had won these 3 recent slams..federer was soo dominant in his prime, he literally killed other players to win slams..he was madly winning slams.and what is prime of nadal? he has accounted his tally of 11 GS mailnly bcoz of FO. he is the best in clay no doubt..[b']but after nadal won his first GS in 2005, since then federer has won 12 nd rafa 10... in his prime naal vs federer was the greatest nd only rivalry..just wait nd see after 5 years, how nadal nd joker would get out in 3rd or 4th rounds of GS..federer was just of a different league..class apart :hatsoff:
Man, in 2005, Nadal was 18 year old kid. To compare him with Federer from that point is so unfair. Remember Federer had not won his first grand slam until he was 22.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there is hardly any doubt about that. When Nadal really arrived (in 2008 when he was 21 only) on the scene Federer was at peak of his career, aged 26 (Nadal's current age) And since start of 2008, Federer has won only 4 grand slam. Out of these 4, 3 came in duration of 2009-10 when Nadal was struggling with his injuries. I admit that he has this amazing consistency to reach SF's and QF's and doesn't suffer upset defeats very often, but that makes you number 2 or 3 only. His overall numbers are hugely inflated because of depleted field he enjoyed between 2003-2007.
federer had mono in 2008, it was a poor year by his standards, then he turned 28 next year, which is noway his prime year..wtf u say depleted field from 2003-07? i again say fdederer would have thrashed djokovik of now at his prime.. only naal has given him competition,bocz federer`s style of single backhand tennis suites him, he targets it relentlessly...and we`ll see how nadal nd djokovic play 4 years later when they`ll turn 30
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Djovic was cr@p earlier, only how has he gotten better. Nadal is a different story, yes he has had Federrer's numbers, but Nadal has been hit by Injuries also and hence couldn't compete in a few slams which Fed won with ease. Regarding competition, Federrer made them all look silly, barring Nadal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May be may not be... but one thing is sure Federer started when Sampras and Agassi fading , the trinity of Hewitt,Roddick and Safin all are average at grandslams most of the times guess his record against these players is awsome lie 10:1 ratio

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man' date=' in 2005, Nadal was 18 year old kid. To compare him with Federer from that point is so unfair. Remember Federer had not won his first grand slam until he was 22.[/quote'] one thing u have to give into Fed is he reached in grandslam atleast semis in most tourneys from last 7/8 years :hatsoff:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is a great player no doubt but yes, Fed didn't have the same kind of competition in the draws as it is now. There was a time when the only reason the 2nd draw played was to decide who would lose to Federer in the finals(barring french Open). He would have still won many GS but maybe,I feel maybe not as many as 16.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was lucky in that he was lucky to have been blessed with that incredible talent. Yes. Agree with Tics and Adi. Rafa and Novak will not have this kind of consistency when their late 20's and past 30- well Ill be surprised if they do. Unlike many I do not see myself in a Rafa or Fed camp- it is likely that Rafa will cross Feds GS mark- in fact given that Rafa has won a Davis cup and Olympic gold he has a strong case for being GOAT. I accept to a degree that Feds opponents at his peak were not in the class as they are today-Regardless, Federer at his best would have beaten Novak of today heck he ran him pretty close when they met last year and that was Novak at his peak. Anyone who watched Fed at his greatest in 03-07 and compares him to the player he has been over the last 2 or 3 years knows the difference. He is a genius, and the reason why Rafa and Novak have had to take their games to the Nth level. Let me put something else out there- had Rafa been about 15 years older do you think he would have won Wimbledon? No. The pace of the grass courts in the 90's was such that his game would not have stood a chance against the serve and volleyers of that era. So this hypothetical scenario game can be worked to not paint him in good light too...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you serious? The guy is still making semis and finals of every damn tournament and you still question his class. He was class apart. Yes Nadal and others did beat him, but they weren't good enough to stop him from winning. Also, he's very old now from Nadal and Djokovic, and yet he continues his dominance over most players. Let me see how Nadal or someone else is when they are of Federer's age.
++q7wJ1.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The irony is, you are estimating (relatively more) competitiveness of today - based on the reputation Federer brings, and he is still competing. If Fedex had retired already - with no Nadal vs Federer records to refer to - would you have said same?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...