Was Federer lucky to have won 16 Grand slam ?

[adi B]

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...

+1. the racquets have been changed, courts have become slower, in 90`s the wimbledon grass court was very fast, the quality of balls used have been changed...gone are those fast courts :(( anyway sooda, vote on the no option :--D

[CG]

Nadal Game is physical oriented so he will struggle when he injured or gets in to 30s ,But both are class players .

[Stuge]

:wall:

[Raghav_12]

This is not even debatable. Even Federer would agree that he benefitted from this lack of competition. Answer two questions - 1. Identify second best player of Federe Era (2003-07) and compare him with second best player of any era. You'll see where second best player of Federer's era stand. 2. What is the reason behind Federer stopped winning Grand Slams at the yound age of 26. (He won grand slams after that only when Nadal was injured). I can understand at 30 you can excuse him for not being competitive to Rafa and Djoker, but not at 26. Nadal is already 26 and Djoker is going to be there in few months. If they also go down that suddenly, I would agree. Sampras too won good number of Grand Slams after turning 26. I agree that his game is more stylish than either of two and more consistent. But fact that he benefitted from lack of good opponents can not be denied.

[adi B]

This is not even debatable. Even Federer would agree that he benefitted from this lack of competition. Answer two questions - 1. Identify second best player of Federe Era (2003-07) and compare him with second best player of any era. You'll see where second best player of Federer's era stand. 2. What is the reason behind Federer stopped winning Grand Slams at the yound age of 26. (He won grand slams after that only when Nadal was injured). I can understand at 30 you can excuse him for not being competitive to Rafa and Djoker, but not at 26. Nadal is already 26 and Djoker is going to be there in few months. If they also go down that suddenly, I would agree. Sampras too won good number of Grand Slams after turning 26. I agree that his game is more stylish than either of two and more consistent. But fact that he benefitted from lack of good opponents can not be denied.

wtf? federer was 26 in year 2007...he won wimbledon,us open,aus open that year..next year in 2008 he had mono but still reached 3 GS finals that year winning the us open.. in 2009, nadal lost to soderling in fo round 4, federr won that tournament, fedex won the wimbledon( nadal was injured only here), then in 2010 he won aus open.. so all in all he won 6 GS after 26 ...whats ur point?nadal was injured only for wimbledon 2009, yes he struggled a bit in a couple of GS but other than that what else u wanted to say by referring to injury?

[The Dark Horse]

Is there anyone else who plays this well with a one-handed backand today? just asking since im not a keen tennis follower.

[Sachin=GOD]

@OP Its comical even to suggest something like this.

[Sooda]

Is there anyone else who plays this well with a one-handed backand today? just asking since im not a keen tennis follower.

Gasquet and Warinka have superb one handed backhands, great to watch, but not in that class of course. Almagro too Henin in the womens game used to

[Crookbond]

This is not even debatable. Even Federer would agree that he benefitted from this lack of competition. Answer two questions - 1. Identify second best player of Federe Era (2003-07) and compare him with second best player of any era. You'll see where second best player of Federer's era stand. 2. What is the reason behind Federer stopped winning Grand Slams at the yound age of 26. (He won grand slams after that only when Nadal was injured). I can understand at 30 you can excuse him for not being competitive to Rafa and Djoker, but not at 26. Nadal is already 26 and Djoker is going to be there in few months. If they also go down that suddenly, I would agree. Sampras too won good number of Grand Slams after turning 26. I agree that his game is more stylish than either of two and more consistent. But fact that he benefitted from lack of good opponents can not be denied.

THIS is the deal-breaker. You just compare the No. 2s for other players and that to Federer and there's some considerable difference.

[Crookbond]

Gasquet and Warinka have superb one handed backhands, great to watch, but not in that class of course. Almagro too Henin in the womens game used to

It was sometimes said that Federer is the Henin of tennis. #TrueStroy

[Yoda-esque]

Federer between 04-07 was playing at a ridiculous level. Djoker wouldnt have been able to touch him. As far as Nadal goes,its a matchup problem.but even then Federer leads him on non clay surfaces. The pertinent question would be whether Nadal would have won so much if Djoker hit his form earlier.

[adi B]

would have been very nice to see federer,nadal,nole all in their prime for a same particular period...nobody could even have touched them

[Alchemist]

16 gs cannot be lucky. Its class.

[Yoda-esque]

Whats laughable is that the comparison is being made between a 31 year old Federer and two players in their prime. Roger is a full 5& 6 years older than both Rafa and Djoker respectively.Roger's counterparts were Hewitt,Safin ,Nalbandian,Roddick.That Federer still figures in the top three is a testament to his greatness. Also ,Federer won slams even after 26 . 07-Wimby,USO 08-USO 09-Wimby,FO 10-AO So hes won almost 6 slams even after 26:) And consider this..when Nadal won his first slam,Roger had 4.So the difference was 3 slams. Whats the difference now ? 5 slams..so the difference has only increased even after Rafa came onto his own. When you talk about greatness Federer ticks all boxes: -Maximum slams -Maximum Year end Tennis Masters cups (the most difficult in my opinion since only the top 8 are playing) -Record for maximum weeks at number one (consecutive) - A uniform distribution of titles on all surfaces Roger is a full step slower than his 2004-2006 avatar,a father of two and almost 31 years old. Yet hes still the most elegant and graceful player to ever pick up the tennis racquet. For now, I'll take this...Anymore would be expecting too much from the Greatest Ever.

[Raghav_12]

Whats laughable is that the comparison is being made between a 31 year old Federer and two players in their prime. Roger is a full 5& 6 years older than both Rafa and Djoker respectively.Roger's counterparts were Hewitt,Safin ,Nalbandian,Roddick.That Federer still figures in the top three is a testament to his greatness. Also ,Federer won slams even after 26 . 07-Wimby,USO 08-USO 09-Wimby,FO 10-AO So hes won almost 6 slams even after 26:) And consider this..when Nadal won his first slam,Roger had 4.So the difference was 3 slams. Whats the difference now ? 5 slams..so the difference has only increased even after Rafa came onto his own. When you talk about greatness Federer ticks all boxes: -Maximum slams -Maximum Year end Tennis Masters cups (the most difficult in my opinion since only the top 8 are playing) -Record for maximum weeks at number one (consecutive) - A uniform distribution of titles on all surfaces Roger is a full step slower than his 2004-2006 avatar,a father of two and almost 31 years old. Yet hes still the most elegant and graceful player to ever pick up the tennis racquet. For now, I'll take this...Anymore would be expecting too much from the Greatest Ever.

Federer didn't win Wimby 2007 after 26. He won when he was 26. "09-Wimby,FO 10-AO" He won these three when Nadal was injured or injured out. Only thing he won of not after 26 is, US 07 and US 08. I am not comparing Federer of 31 (though he is not 31 yet) with today's Nadal or Djokovoc. I am talking about Federer of 27 or 28 or 29. And an age of 27 can not be age which is very far away from prime. It's laughable even to suggest that Federer's numbers have nothing to do with the lack of depth on ATP circuit. Only thing debatable is, exact extent upto which Federer benefitted.

[panesarv]

You don't get 'lucky' at such a big stage.

[adi B]

anothr thing, apart from his 16 GS, federer has won 6 atp world tour final titles which is the maximum by anybody...djokovic has 1 ,nadal 0

[Sehwag1830]

anothr thing' date=' apart from his 16 GS, federer has won 6 atp world tour final titles which is the maximum by anybody...djokovic has 1 ,nadal 0[/quote'] Nadal has on olympic Gold medal .federer has 0.

[Sooda]

Yes but Olypics are every 4 years, ATP tour finals- the 5th slam as considered by many- is an annual event...

[adi B]

Nadal has on olympic Gold medal .federer has 0.

federer has a doubles gold medal, nadal has 0...anyway i think an olympic gold is gold regardless if federer wins it in shooting,100 metre sprint or single tennis or double tennis... nadal is always routed in the atp finals bcoz it happens in hard court where his **** is whooped out even by tsonga.....i mean common at least win a single atp final title, even davydenko nd nalbandian have one each...all the tennis greats have won this title numerous times including sampras nd lendl 5 times each