2020 Predictions and Speculations

[Nadalfan2013]

No idea how you come to this conclusion other than stupidity as only Djokovic and Nadal are of the same era. Federer is way older than both and from a different era.

Sorry but when players play against each others over 40-50 times they are from the same era. Lol

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Pete didn't have someone of the calibre in his era, and in any case Djoker is 4 slams away and Rafa still needs 2 more to surpass. Most likely is a prediction only, not a fact.

Pete didn’t have players beating him 10 times each in slams... he wasn’t 0-3 in Wimbledon finals on his favorite surface against the same player... Federer may have bigger numbers but Pete retired as the best of his era. I doubt Federer ever felt as the best with Nadal and Djokovic around.

 

[mrzz]

so far you get no likes for your post, which unfortunately contains some truth the tennis nobodies don't like to see. If the non-big 3s are nothing, then Fedalvic can't be that great since those 'bozos' have actually beaten them or played them tough.

We are exactly on the same page regarding top players outside Federer, Djokovic and Nadal. But you really seem to take offense on the word "bozo". For me not only is clear that it is relative, but it seems just a word to say that they lose to F, D and N most of the time. Maybe as a non-native English speaker I don't get the weight of the word completely.

I am not counting the likes, but I guess most will read that post you refer to as just too damn obvious. Again, we are on the same page here, as for me it seems the kind of obvious stuff that needs to be stated once in a while.

And, by the way, not necessarily results reflect perfectly talent and effort, because the (playing) conditions matter. People instantly assume that there's been a huge drop in American talent from the 90's to now. But... what if it is all about the change in playing conditions associated with the "culture" of American tennis? People will look at a player like, say, Steve Johnson, and not even call him a "bozo". Well, what this guy would achieve in the 90's or 80's? Can we be 100% sure that the difference in results would be negligible? Obviously no.

Or -- different scenario -- let us assume at some point in the 80's someone decided that all professional tennis would be on hard courts. What kind of career Nadal would have had? Maybe winning just one major or two, maybe zero (yes, because if you take out your favorite surface, you take out your major confidence builder, and then your career can be completely different). Would that mean Nadal would be less talented in this alternate world? Obviously no, only that the sport itself was less fitted to his talents. All this to say that this immediate connection between results and "talent" or even "effort" is obviously limited (even if it is still the best measurement of talent by itself).

But, man, chill out. Only about one month to the next tournament to watch (fuck, that's a lot).

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Or -- different scenario -- let us assume at some point in the 80's someone decided that all professional tennis would be on hard courts. What kind of career Nadal would have had? Maybe winning just one major or two, maybe zero (yes, because if you take out your favorite surface, you take out your major confidence builder, and then your career can be completely different). Would that mean Nadal would be less talented in this alternate world? Obviously no, only that the sport itself was less fitted to his talents. All this to say that this immediate connection between results and "talent" or even "effort" is obviously limited (even if it is still the best measurement of talent by itself).

.

I fully agree with this. I know what you mean. Most of the time, my groundstrokes are about 2 inches long. If only, the lines were draw two inches further, they all would have gone in. Also, the other times, the ball hits the net about two inches below the top of the net. If only, the net height was less by two inches, all these shots would also have gone to the other side of the court. I can go on and on, but you got the point.

I am genuinely a victim of this sport not fitting to my talents.

 

[Front242]

Sorry but when players play against each others over 40-50 times they are from the same era. Lol

Actually, no, dumbass. The only reason they've played so often is because the old man continues to keep on playing for so long. The fact that he's beaten them both soundly at such an advanced age says more about his ability than theirs also but you're not clever enough to cop that and have to succumb to slagging him for being old and converting actual facts (his age) into lies. They are not of the same era and never were. Look to some of El Dude's stats to see who was of Federer's era or shock, horror, just use your damn head. Most are long since retired. They should of course be beating him more often than not given his age but they're not. Usually Djokovic beats him by a mere few points and is 6 years younger than him and the mighty god level tennis playing Nadal has beaten him once since 2014.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Actually, no, dumbass. The only reason they've played so often is because the old man continues to keep on playing for so long. The fact that he's beaten them both soundly at such an advanced age says more about his ability than theirs also but you're not clever enough to cop that and have to succumb to slagging him for being old and converting actual facts (his age) into lies. They are not of the same era and never were. Look to some of El Dude's stats to see who was of Federer's era or shock, horror, just use your damn head. Most are long since retired. They should of course be beating him more often than not given his age but they're not. Usually Djokovic beats him by a mere few points and is 6 years younger than him and the mighty god level tennis playing Nadal has beaten him once since 2014.

Sorry I stopped reading after your first offensive sentence, so you just wasted your time writing all of that.

 

[Front242]

Sorry I stopped reading after your first offensive sentence, so you just wasted your time writing all of that.

Not at all. Everyone else here can read your stupid posts if they so choose and the few replies people actually bother to type.

 

[Fiero425]

I fully agree with this. I know what you mean. Most of the time, my groundstrokes are about 2 inches long. If only, the lines were draw two inches further, they all would have gone in. Also, the other times, the ball hits the net about two inches below the top of the net. If only, the net height was less by two inches, all these shots would also have gone to the other side of the court. I can go on and on, but you got the point.

I am genuinely a victim of this sport not fitting to my talents.

Been there; done that! I was known for having a fairly good serve; getting all kinds of aces & free pts off of it! Going to a tournament, playing on regulation nets threw me off more than I ever thought! I had to take pace off & elevate/arch the ball over which was not good to the psyche! That was the 1st and last time I did anything like that; sticking to local and club tournaments where I thrived! :whistle:

 

[Andy22]

Actually, no, dumbass. The only reason they've played so often is because the old man continues to keep on playing for so long. The fact that he's beaten them both soundly at such an advanced age says more about his ability than theirs also but you're not clever enough to cop that and have to succumb to slagging him for being old and converting actual facts (his age) into lies. They are not of the same era and never were. Look to some of El Dude's stats to see who was of Federer's era or shock, horror, just use your damn head. Most are long since retired. They should of course be beating him more often than not given his age but they're not. Usually Djokovic beats him by a mere few points and is 6 years younger than him and the mighty god level tennis playing Nadal has beaten him once since 2014.

you can use the age excurses as much you like I said you would in one of my posts cazy nutters always say the something anyway Federer still going to end 3rd best of all time meanwhile pete was the best of his era, the point your trying to make is weak seeing as Federer won AO at 35 years of age. age has noting to do with tennis level even a silly man like you deep down know this so someone should beat the other player because their younger? lol if that was true next gen never lost to the big 3 sound like a little cry babymust be hard seeing all Federer records get past by Djokovic-nadal the two better halfs.

 

[Front242]

you can use the age excurses as much you like I said you would in one of my posts cazy nutters always say the something anyway Federer still going to end 3rd best of all time meanwhile pete was the best of his era, the point your trying to make is weak seeing as Federer won AO at 35 years of age. age has noting to do with tennis level even a silly man like you deep down know this so someone should beat the other player because their younger? lol if that was true next gen never lost to the big 3 sound like a little cry babymust be hard seeing all Federer records get past by Djokovic-nadal the two better halfs.

WTF is the point to further reply to this nonsense. Go back jerking off to your god level ass picker ffs.

 

[Andy22]

WTF is the point to further reply to this nonsense. Go back jerking off to your god level ass picker ffs.

weak cant even come up with a good relpy by the way Djokovic-nadal way out of their prime already won as many slams as Federer whole 8 years lol, so take your cry baby age thing and watch Federer weak era slams win over Roddick,hewitt ect…. by the way even ex players disagree with you they always say its great to have the big 3 playing in the some era their opinion matters way more than some fedhead like you.

 

[El Dude]

WTF is the point to further reply to this nonsense. Go back jerking off to your god level ass picker ffs.

Front242, it is actually kind of funny because on my screen it looks like you are arguing with yourself. But I can imagine the rest.

 

[Fiero425]

Front242, it is actually kind of funny because on my screen it looks like you are arguing with yourself. But I can imagine the rest.

If ignoring certain a-holes, the page can look a little one-sided with some literally looking as if they're arguing with themselves! I've taken most off the block list as long as they keep a civil tongue in their empty heads! I'll be the lone arbiter of course! :whistle: :cuckoo:

 

[Front242]

Front242, it is actually kind of funny because on my screen it looks like you are arguing with yourself. But I can imagine the rest.

The 2 Nadal fuck tards were trying to convince people that (A) Federer was from the same era as Nadal and Djokovic despite the respective 5/6 year age difference and that (B) age has nothing to do with tennis level. Go figure. The mind boggles.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

If ignoring certain a-holes, the page can look a little one-sided with some literally looking as if they're arguing with themselves! I've taken most off the block list as long as they keep a civil tongue in their empty heads! I'll be the lone arbiter of course! :whistle: :cuckoo:

Civil tongue? You and your buddy @Front242 are the ones using words like a-holes, fuck tards and dumbass. We Nadal fans just like Nadal manage to stay civilized and polite even when in disagreement.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

The 2 Nadal fuck tards were trying to convince people that (A) Federer was from the same era as Nadal and Djokovic despite the respective 5/6 year age difference and that (B) age has nothing to do with tennis level. Go figure. The mind boggles.

So Graf wasn’t from the same era as Seles because they are 5 years apart... I understand, you are so smart.

 

[Front242]

So Graf wasn’t from the same era as Seles because they are 5 years apart... I understand, you are so smart.

Correct. That's how it works. Seles was stabbed also which had a massive bearing on Graf reaching 22 slams. To make things easier for you and the other clueless Nadal nut job, when one is 38 and could retire any day now (as many tennis players retire before 32), how in the utter name of fuck can you say age has nothing to do with anything? Federer played guys the other 2 never did because he's been around 5-6 years longer. Hence, he played in a different era. Duh! He's still on tour so he's playing at the same time as them for many years but that does not negate the fact that he's from a different era and much older. 5-6 years for a professional athlete is absolutely MASSIVE.

If they were all say 25 years old and all their peaks occurred at the same time then you and the other clown could say age is not an issue but it most certainly is when the oldest guy of the big 3 is almost retired. It's actually fucking embarrassing that this needs to be explained. I'm off to bed anyway. This shit is boring me to death.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Correct. That's how it works. Seles was stabbed also which had a massive bearing on Graf reaching 22 slams. To make things easier for you and the other clueless Nadal nut job, when one is 38 and could retire any day now (as many tennis players retire before 32), how in the utter name of fuck can you say age has nothing to do with anything? Federer played guys the other 2 never did because he's been around 5-6 years longer. Hence, he played in a different era. Duh! He's still on tour so he's playing at the same time as them for many years but that does not negate the fact that he's from a different era and much older. 5-6 years for a professional athlete is absolutely MASSIVE.

If they were all say 25 years old and all their peaks occurred at the same time then you and the other clown could say age is not an issue but it most certainly is when the oldest guy of the big 3 is almost retired. It's actually fucking embarrassing that this needs to be explained. I'm off to bed anyway. This shit is boring me to death.

You Federer fans are hilarious. You've been saying that Federer is past his prime ever since 2008 when Nadal started beating him everywhere and Federer was merely 26-27. Then when Djokovic started beating Federer left and right then it didn't count cause Federer was a grandpa at 32 years old. Yet Nadal and Djokovic and many other players are showing that no Federer was not a grandpa at 32 years old since today at 32+ they are doing even better than him. Things have changed because training, nutrition and everything else has changed.

Right now it's becoming almost the norm that many players in their 30's are having some of their best results. Don't be surprised when Nadal and Djokovic at 36-38 are still on top, and then what excuse will you make for Federer? Didn't you guys already say when he was in his early 30's on how unbelievable his results were despite being "old" and how Nadal would never manage to do that? But here is Nadal as strong as ever and he is doing even better after 30 than Federer did.

Back in 1990 when Navratilova won Wimbledon at 33, it was "Wow she's a dinosaur how did she do it". But Serena showed that she could do much better well after 33. It's human evolution. Nadal and Djokovic and I'm sure other female tennis players are going to show how Serena & Federer's success at 35+ is nothing special but just a result of how times have changed. And btw Seles and Graf were considered rivals despite the 5 year difference, for you to say that they were from a different era is ridiculous... Federer won his first slam at 2003, Nadal at 2005. They have played in finals for trophies about a zillion times. They are rivals and from the same era. Get over it.

 

[Andy22]

Correct. That's how it works. Seles was stabbed also which had a massive bearing on Graf reaching 22 slams. To make things easier for you and the other clueless Nadal nut job, when one is 38 and could retire any day now (as many tennis players retire before 32), how in the utter name of fuck can you say age has nothing to do with anything? Federer played guys the other 2 never did because he's been around 5-6 years longer. Hence, he played in a different era. Duh! He's still on tour so he's playing at the same time as them for many years but that does not negate the fact that he's from a different era and much older. 5-6 years for a professional athlete is absolutely MASSIVE.

If they were all say 25 years old and all their peaks occurred at the same time then you and the other clown could say age is not an issue but it most certainly is when the oldest guy of the big 3 is almost retired. It's actually fucking embarrassing that this needs to be explained. I'm off to bed anyway. This shit is boring me to death.

everything nadalfan2013 said is right he's got a high IQ unlike you and stop the name calling that are you a kid? I would also add a era is not 5 or 6 years in tennis much longer at least 9-10 years so 80 percent of the time Federer been in the same era as Djokovic-nadal, also nadal owning next gen and are really not from his era so Federer age excurse is just sad fedhead cry babys noting more. its just Federer returns trash nowdays while nadal the best returner in the world

 

[El Dude]

As the saying goes, Front, don't feed the trolls.

All that said, while I agree with your point, I do think that with Nadal at least, the gap isn't as large as the age difference would imply, and that while the age difference is real, it is somewhat softened--at least with Rafa--due to the different trajectories of their careers. Roger was a tad of a late bloomer and Rafa an early bloomer. Roger was an elite player by 2003 at age 21-22, while Rafa reached elite form just two years later in 2005 (age 18-19). On the other hand, Roger's rise from elite to his very best was short and furious, while Rafa simmered for awhile. Meaning, the gap between them reaching their best forms is a bit larger: Roger starting in 2004, Rafa in 2008 (Novak didn't reach his peak until 2011, so the gap is even larger than the age difference between him and Roger at 7 years).

Meaning, "prime" gap for Roger and Rafa was 2 years, but the "peak" gap was 4...maybe we split the difference and say they are roughly 3 years apart in terms of development, so a half generation or so. Roger and Novak are easily a full generation.

I don't think this tarnishes Roger's legacy, nor does it prop it up further. One of the reasons I dislike the Fedal Wars is that, in the end, I think it is an apples and oranges thing. Unless one of them completely runs away with all the records, there's always going to be arguments for one over the other, and none of them really satisfy me to crown one the singular GOAT. And even if one of them has all the big records, it doesn't take away from the greatness of the other two during their primes. Each of the three has their own unique qualities that will never be surpassed. For our Roger, no matter how many Slams or weeks at #1 or titles that Novak and Rafa accrue, no one is going to "out-Federer" him, or take away from the grace and diversity of his game, which is in unparalleled in tennis history. Similar statements can be made about Novak and Rafa.