Was Federer lucky to have won 16 Grand slam ?

[adi B]

i hope op continues to make such threads :hatsoff: i must say the op must be congratulated for this nd i hope rooney bcomes the top scorer this year nd leads united to ucl nd pl this season..i will double thanxs him

[Yoda-esque]

i hope op continues to make such threads :hatsoff: i must say the op must be congratulated for this nd i hope rooney bcomes the top scorer this year nd leads united to ucl nd pl this season..i will double thanxs him

:hysterical::hysterical: Lets give him some credit..was probably born in 2010 and never got to see Jesus Fed play:winky:

[adi B]

i thought he was a paedo, but u might be spot on regarding his age :omg:

[vvvslaxman]

Change the title .. now 17

[vvvslaxman]

Nadal clay court bully..

[cowboysfan]

All the surfaces of grand slams have slowed down over the years(they have slowed drastically in melbourne),there is no way Nadal would have won in Wimbledon and Australia had they not changed the courts to encourage more rallies.

[Yoda-esque]

Federer=Ali Nadal=Smoking Joe Frazier Djokovic = George Foreman

[b555]

BTW' date='If a 31 year old wins and becomes #1, what does it say about this era???[/quote'] :hatsoff::hatsoff::hatsoff:

[Sooda]

All the surfaces of grand slams have slowed down over the years(they have slowed drastically in melbourne)' date='there is no way Nadal would have won in Wimbledon and Australia had they not changed the courts to encourage more rallies.[/quote'] +987654321

[Raghav_12]

I don't think if this win for Federer's proves anything related to the question OP asked. OP didn't ask if Federer deserves to win a GS or not. OP's question was did he deserve to win 16 (now 17), answer to which is - Clear No. Just have a look at Head to Head records. Current generation Rivals Nadal - 18-10 (Grandslam 8-2. Last win coming in 07, against a 20 yr old Nadal) Andy Murry -8-8 Djoko 12-15 Old era rivaals Roddick - 2- Infinity Hewitt - 8-18 Nalbandian - 8-11 This H2H record clearly shows that if Federer had same quality opponents in 2003 to 07, his record would have been far less impressive. You may be enchanted by his style of play, but facts are facts.

[Raghav_12]

According to me ' date=' [b']Federer is best equipped to defeat both and coming to the other two, it will go either way depending on the surface

That's why he could defeat Nadal only two times in 10 attempts in Grand slams..:hysterical::hysterical: (That too when Nadal was in teens or just about that) Disillusionment sees no limits..

[Sachin=GOD]

OP :hatsoff: :hatsoff: :rofl:

[vamos_rafa]

BTW' date='If a 31 year old wins and becomes #1, what does it say about this era???[/quote'] I don't think that should be much of a problem. He has beaten the #1 player en route.

[Sidhoni]

Op is nowhere to be seen.. :phehehe:

[adi B]

I don't think if this win for Federer's proves anything related to the question OP asked. OP didn't ask if Federer deserves to win a GS or not. OP's question was did he deserve to win 16 (now 17), answer to which is - Clear No. Just have a look at Head to Head records. Current generation Rivals Nadal - 18-10 (Grandslam 8-2. Last win coming in 07, against a 20 yr old Nadal) Andy Murry -8-8 Djoko 12-15 Old era rivaals Roddick - 2- Infinity Hewitt - 8-18 Nalbandian - 8-11 This H2H record clearly shows that if Federer had same quality opponents in 2003 to 07, his record would have been far less impressive. You may be enchanted by his style of play, but facts are facts.

u know what, i say had djokovic,rafa had played against roddick,heywitt,davydenko,safin at their prime, the 2 would have lost badly, yes i say that, any proof to make me wrong? if u have one? regarding rafa`s superior h2h vs fedex, he has a 12-3 or something like that record vs fed at clay, so most of their macthes were played at the surface where nadal is by far the greatest of all time..if they had played 15 matches on hard court or grass court instead of clay, fed would have had a superior h2h vs nadal...but oh wait, nadal gets out in earlier rounds in these courts, oh no, he only has 4 GS outside clay, he didnt have balls to reach finals in these GS earlier.... and u know what,talking about h2h, davydenko leads nadal 6-5 in h2h nd nalbandian has a 4-4 h2h vs nadal, both of them were the players u consider as weak from fed era...glad to know this h2h eh? :hatsoff:

[Guest]

Op is nowhere to be seen.. :phehehe:

no idea whether OP does this intentionally... he opened thread during IPL saying Gayle need to play like Sehwag after few matches GAyle still hitiing 50s while Sehwag getting out in Single digit scores he open this thread Fed win a Grandslam he writes something against England team they are on the verge of a 4-0 series win against OZ

[Raghav_12]

u know what, i say had djokovic,rafa had played against roddick,heywitt,davydenko,safin at their prime, the 2 would have lost badly, yes i say that, any proof to make me wrong? if u have one? regarding rafa`s superior h2h vs fedex, he has a 12-3 or something like that record vs fed at clay, so most of their macthes were played at the surface where nadal is by far the greatest of all time..if they had played 15 matches on hard court or grass court instead of clay, fed would have had a superior h2h vs nadal...but oh wait, nadal gets out in earlier rounds in these courts, oh no, he only has 4 GS outside clay, he didnt have balls to reach finals in these GS earlier.... and u know what,talking about h2h, davydenko leads nadal 6-5 in h2h nd nalbandian has a 4-4 h2h vs nadal, both of them were the players u consider as weak from fed era...glad to know this h2h eh? :hatsoff:

Don't resort to represent wrong facts. Nadal - Nalbandian H2H is 4-2 in favour of Nadal, which is better than Federer's H2H against Nalbandian 11-8. http://tennis.wettpoint.com/en/h2h/14654-22080.html Nadal has beaten both no 1 (Federer himself) and No 2 (Nalbandian) of Federer era comprehensively. You still have doubt who is better? You had to come down to blatant lying shows how much conviction you have in your own argument of Federer being superior.

[Yoda-esque]

u know what, i say had djokovic,rafa had played against roddick,heywitt,davydenko,safin at their prime, the 2 would have lost badly, yes i say that, any proof to make me wrong? if u have one? regarding rafa`s superior h2h vs fedex, he has a 12-3 or something like that record vs fed at clay, so most of their macthes were played at the surface where nadal is by far the greatest of all time..if they had played 15 matches on hard court or grass court instead of clay, fed would have had a superior h2h vs nadal...but oh wait, nadal gets out in earlier rounds in these courts, oh no, he only has 4 GS outside clay, he didnt have balls to reach finals in these GS earlier.... and u know what,talking about h2h, davydenko leads nadal 6-5 in h2h nd nalbandian has a 4-4 h2h vs nadal, both of them were the players u consider as weak from fed era...glad to know this h2h eh? :hatsoff:

Dont feed the troll:) Theres no point trying to argue with them

[adi B]

Don't resort to represent wrong facts. Nadal - Nalbandian H2H is 4-2 in favour of Nadal, which is better than Federer's H2H against Nalbandian 11-8. http://tennis.wettpoint.com/en/h2h/14654-22080.html Nadal has beaten both no 1 (Federer himself) and No 2 (Nalbandian) of Federer era comprehensively. You still have doubt who is better? You had to come down to blatant lying shows how much conviction you have in your own argument of Federer being superior.

ahh sorry it was 4-2 , i stand corrected, but what the rest of my post, u only stuck to one minor point...what about 5-6 vs davydenko, what about 14 or 15 matches nadal played vs federer in clay only out of their 28..had these many matches been played on other courts, the h2h would have been different...i for one am no one who looks to h2h to prove who is better or not... it was u who brought it into the debate so i also pursued with it... and u know what fedex has a .82 match winning index on clay, nadal has .76 on other surface barring clay...and please read the other part of my earler post nd not just stick with the njalbandian part, which i was wrong :hatsoff:

[Raghav_12]

Dont feed the troll:) Theres no point trying to argue with them

howcome this is trolling? Just because I don't agree with Federer's greatest-ness (i agree with greatness) I became troll? I am talking everything with facts and i am troll. Your friend is giving wrong number to mislead forum, he is serious poster ::hatsoff: to you.