the hate for fed is merely because idiots like cashy refuse to believe that there is even the slightest chance he isn't the best.

that's really odd bc like 5 posts before yours

also, saying holding the fact that nadal exploited a weakness of federers against him is absolutely insane. none of roddick vs feds matches count either bc its difficult for roddick to play vs someone who returns is serve in.

see you think if you keep saying he's old that it will stick, but it won't. federer is an elite player for a reason and part of that reason is he hasn't aged like other people. i get 30 in tennis is old, federer does not look old on the court. in fact the us open all the way up until the 3rd set of the semi's was some of the best tennis i'd seen him play in quite some time. just because he can't get up for the non-majors doesn't mean he can't still play his A-game in the majors

i mean fffs if djok and nadal somehow got hurt this year hed be a favorite to win every grand slam, and the fields would STILL be tougher than they were on 05.

Geoff, you are still missing the point that you are just pointing out how awesome Fed is.

I dont consider 28 old in sports.


27-28 is your prime in basketball. at least for many of the GOATS and basketball is much more demanding on your overall abilities than tennis.

did you even watch the match? and the losses vs nadal and djok were super close most of the time... Those could have easily gone the other way.
Even with that said, H2H is only one of the indicators for goat anyways..

Its pretty clear that 27-28 is not your prime in Tennis.

Federer is 30.

I think 27 is pretty prime-ish in tennis

Rod Laver is ticked about the new title.

Rod Laver? LOL, he had no competition and played over 40 years ago so clearly isn't even relevant.

It's funny, you keep making points in favor of Fed being the GOAT without even realizing it.

reposting from earlier. Just no way the prime is 27.

Said prime-ish. 27 is still a super competitive age.

Also, this is pretty variance heavy

This really, really makes you mad, huh?

Bjorn Borg, too (especially with Johnny Mac on there).

Personally can't speak for Lavers/Bjorgs being GOATish (in my GOAT standard) even if they were. Never saw them play.

Same reason Jordan would be my GOAT basketball, Bonds baseball, etc

Huh?

Means that a few points here and there separate which ages look the best on that chart

Think that's obvious? Chart clearly displays a peak range, but 25 could easily be >24 and so forth

I get what he's saying with regard to variance ... 174 majors is not that many ... but on the other hand, tennis is one sport where the better man wins the vast majority of the time. There's far less variance game to game than, say, baseball.

I think you can look at that chart and say 21-26 is the typical "peak" tennis years, with players who are able to maintain fitness and stay injury-free having the ability to still compete at a high level until 31.

You know the mad stuff got old about 12 months ago? 1 out of every 3 of your posts seem to indicate that someone might be mad, in which case, makes you, pretty sad.

Carry on though if it makes you feel good about yourself.

what huh, of course it must be variance heavy.

no, i'm not i am fully aware that fed is awesome and could well be the GOAT. the main point i'm trying to make is that its absolutely possible that his "peak" (03-07 with 05-06 being his absolute peak) is overrated simply due to weak competition.

the fact that fed fanboys get so god damn defensive about fed GOAT that they completely close off any argument to the contrary is way worse than anything anyone else does itt.

kaz, yes i watched the match, yes i know tsonga played ridiculous those last 3 sets.

For the record, I still take Federer as GOAT.

16 major titles.
23 straight major semifinals.
30 straight major quarterfinals.

Really, that semifinal streak was insane (second-best is 10 straight I think).

Not trolling in this case. All your posts in this thread are meant to condescend a certain group of posters, so I think it applies here. That's all I'm saying.

People aren't just trolling when they say they think the 2011 Novak is the version of a tennis player to date

i mean seriously if nadal/federer/djok all played their 18-26 years at the same time is there NO possibility that nadal would have won the most majors?

Sure there's a possibility. We just don't know.

I personally would take Nadal just because his biggest strength plays right into Federer's biggest weakness, and matchups matter.

I think Federer (at his peak) is slightly more ahead of the entire tennis field than Nadal (at his peak) is, and peak Nadal is just a bad matchup for Federer. It happens.

so, you think that nadal is a favorite h2h, and if they played in the same years nadal would win more majors but fed is the GOAT bc u think his peak is better...ok thats fine

but why is it not fine for cvigg to think that djok is the GOAT bc he thinks novaks peak is the best he's ever seen and thats what he values the most