last posgt i'm making cuz i see this debate becoming pointless but you just proved his point, you're taking fed to push nole more nut you didn't say you'vre taking him to win, even on hardcourt.

I know?

I never said in any of my posts I thought Federer WOULD win. I said it is closer than most people think and that he matches up better than Nadal on hard courts.

.

djoker's the most overrated tennis player of all time

he jus did beat murray and nadal while pretty clearly hurt

not to say he wasn't still at a high %, but i don't think how close those 2 matches were is an indication of how close djok is currently to nadal or murray. i think the gap is bigger than it appeared to be this week

how can you not realize that being 30 and still ultra-competitive with the best 2 players in the world who are in their prime(or in Nadal's case closer to it) is a massive net positive to Federer's claim

if Nadal or Djokovic have Fed's resume from 27-now I'd be amazing, but they are at least 50/1 against for that

LOL. You've gotta be the biggest Djoko nuthugger of all time. Yeah, really badly hurt he was, for sure.

lol yeah, that's the number one symptom of the delusional fan. When your boy loses or doesn't win quite as convincingly as he should in your fantasy, he must've been injured or hurt.

I'm assuming that you mean that I missed the conclusion that a guy with 5 majors is considered to be the greatest to ever live? I'm not ruling out the possibility that he could eventually get there but he is years from such consideration.

tilts me so hard that on the rock-paper-scissors aspect of it, fed gets screwed every tournament, it seems. but then, i guess it's his fault he's not ranked #1.

How old was Roger when he first started getting pwned by Nadal? 25 or 26?

Fed probably most talented player of all time but a bit weak mentally compared to Djoker/Nadal causing him to choke when those guys played close to his level.

The point is that you missed who beats Djokovic. You listed Nadal > Fed and Djoko> Nadal but not someone over Djokovic.

I don't know why you would think this is clear. He looked fine to me.

I know it's not directed at me, but the answer would depend on the surface.
I would take Djokovic on hard and grass and Nadal on clay.

Given recent results I don't think there's a lot to suggest Nadal would be a favorite even on clay. Didn't he lose two or three matches on clay to Djokovic last year?

I'm hoping this match signals a turnaround and that Nadal will start winning some of these matches again, but I'm going to need to see it before I believe it.

He lost two of three, but the ones he lost were on clay courts that are a bit faster. I think Nadal would be the favorite at Roland Garros.

If Djok wins the French by beating Nadal, he gets on a serious fast track to GOAT status, even with only six. He'll have a Djok-slam and 5 of 6 while dominating the 2nd best player of the time on every surface. Sick stuff.

it tilts me so hard that if fed just won a couple key points here and there, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

andy roddick tilting harder, tho.

Its not just variance though. Federer routinely comes up smaller in huge spots. Not even close who has the mental edge in the Fed/Nadal matches. Unfortunate because hes the most talented player ever.

i totally concede that fed is plagued by WIL on key points. been the story of his career. but srsly, so many key moments were decided by ONE POINT. it's a few inches here and there that cannot be entirely explained by WIM. if he gets one of those, he goes up 17 majors to whatever they currently have minus one. gaaahhhh, tilts me so hard.

The one glaring thing on Federer's resume is never beating Nadal at Roland Garros. I don't think it's necessarily fair to just count majors and assume that hard-court skill is equally as important as grass and clay-court skill combined. When Nadal is capable of beating prime Federer on hard-court, and Federer can't do the reverse, I think that gives the edge to Rafa.

Now, Djokovic has been playing absolutely amazing tennis the last year or so, and absolutely has the possibility to eventually become the GOAT, but I don't think you can say he's a favorite on that until he either wins a French Open, or gets a lot more majors on other surfaces. So for now, I'm still voting Nadal on both questions, but I think if Novak wins the French this year over a healthy Rafa, that would make me switch my answer on question #2, and if Federer somehow pulled it out, that would make me switch my answer on both questions.

Hi

I mean, there's a reason we stopped listing guys in the amateur and wooden racquet eras as potential GOAT candidates.

Fed raised the bar to a level of skill not seen before, Nadal passed him with defense, physicality and mental toughness, and now Djokovic have passed both and elevated the game to an unseen level with his blend of skill, aggression, defense, self-belief and athleticism. Djok is dominating the game like prime (ie., the era where Hewitt and Roddick were his major competition) Federer used to, only he's doing it to 2 of the GOATs and the strongest men's field OAT. Using past majors is super dumb, like Fed didn't need to win 17 majors to be considered >>> Sampras, you just had to have eyes and an uncluttered mind free of bias.

I don't think this is really fair. Federer had a stretch of 10 grand slams where he only lost a total of 2 matches, (both French Open Finals to Nadal obv) and of his 8 wins, he only got taken to 5 sets in the final once. Djokovic definitely isn't on that level of dominance yet just because he won 3 grand slams in a row after barely getting by Murray and Nadal in Melbourne and barely getting by a 30-year old Federer in New York. Federer not only was winning for a longer stretch, he was just flat out dominating his opponents on a level never seen before or since. Now if Djokovic can handle Nadal at Roland Garros, that's a totally different animal. That will take him from just being "one of the greatest" and give him a real, legitimate argument for GOAT status. Right now though, I think you have to be guilty of recency bias to put him #1 all-time.

I guess every time a guy misses a shot in a key situation, he's a choker. Or when he's the victim of an unlikely winner - I'm thinking of Djoko's miraculous service return against Fed on match point at the last US Open.

Nadal double faulted to lose the second set against Djoko yesterday, choker right? Oh wait, he's the "mentally toughest" of all time.

Djoko also double faulted at a key moment yesterday, so I guess he's a choker too right?

All this choke talk is stupid. That is all.