Fed Fans – Roger Federer Talk

[Ricardo]

all of a sudden you Fed fans get on a high, yeah i know it is an amazing win but it is unlikely he can reproduce such form for sustained period like this AO, which is well above what it should've been.

If he was smart, he'd retire quickly so he can avoid getting worse H-H records which many have used to degrade his legacy. He'd still have winning H-H over Novak and Murray if he quit at 34, but from now on he may well end up being the worst of the 4.

 

[britbox]

all of a sudden you Fed fans get on a high, yeah i know it is an amazing win but it is unlikely he can reproduce such form for sustained period like this AO, which is well above what it should've been.

If he was smart, he'd retire quickly so he can avoid getting worse H-H records which many have used to degrade his legacy. He'd still have winning H-H over Novak and Murray if he quit at 34, but from now on he may well end up being the worst of the 4.

18 is the best of the 4. I think Federer would prefer the 18th rather than worrying about a H2H with Novak Djokovic... and he's won 5 straight against Murray to turn that head to head to a positive one.

 

[Ricardo]

well as you know, '18' has been argued by many to be a product of 'weak era' and plenty of people who argued against his greatness status have used the H-H as key reason. I doubt that Fed loses over it, but i also doubt that Fed completely doesn't care.

 

[Federberg]

18 is the best of the 4. I think Federer would prefer the 18th rather than worrying about a H2H with Novak Djokovic... and he's won 5 straight against Murray to turn that head to head to a positive one.

Yup agreed. Murray isn't really a factor. Besides, as I've said countless times, these guys don't start playing pro tennis dreaming about H2H. They come to win titles, that's what Roger has done better than anyone else. And by the way... now that we know he'll be here for at least another 3 years, do you think Connors titles record is in play?

 

[britbox]

well as you know, '18' has been argued by many to be a product of 'weak era' and plenty of people who argued against his greatness status have used the H-H as key reason. I doubt that Fed loses over it, but i also doubt that Fed completely doesn't care.

He clearly doesn't care enough to retire over it. Winning a major trumps any H2H IMO and he's actually improved his H2H with Murray and Nadal over the last couple of years. He turned his H2H with Murray from a losing one to a winning one... as Murray came into his prime. The Djokovic H2H is too close to really matter in the great scheme of things and the Nadal one... is well, the only real thorn in his side... but he's even improved that by 2 in the last year or so.

 

[britbox]

Yup agreed. Murray isn't really a factor. Besides, as I've said countless times, these guys don't start playing pro tennis dreaming about H2H. They come to win titles, that's what Roger has done better than anyone else. And by the way... now that we know he'll be here for at least another 3 years, do you think Connors titles record is in play?

20 titles in 3 years is too much of an ask. I think he'll be pretty careful with his schedule. I like Federer's 89 titles in the modern tour format over Connors 109 in any event. I think he'll get Lendl's 94 though.

 

[Federberg]

20 titles in 3 years is too much of an ask. I think he'll be pretty careful with his schedule. I like Federer's 89 titles in the modern tour format over Connors 109 in any event. I think he'll get Lendl's 94 though.

Yup it seems like 20 is too far away. I'm hoping for him to get to 100 though!

 

[Ricardo]

Yup it seems like 20 is too far away. I'm hoping for him to get to 100 though!

no you are hoping for yourself to get to 100....in terms of IQ

 

[Ricardo]

He clearly doesn't care enough to retire over it. Winning a major trumps any H2H IMO and he's actually improved his H2H with Murray and Nadal over the last couple of years. He turned his H2H with Murray from a losing one to a winning one... as Murray came into his prime. The Djokovic H2H is too close to really matter in the great scheme of things and the Nadal one... is well, the only real thorn in his side... but he's even improved that by 2 in the last year or so.

yeah the fact that Novak had to wait for Fed to turn 35 when he finally caught up in the H-H and Murray currently has a losing one, but none of that matters when it comes to biased opinions. And for sure Nadal is the thorn, and i am sure that they don't care Fed is pretty even with Rafa outside of clay. It's all about perspective...

 

[DarthFed]

I wrote him off after the Raonic loss at Wimbledon last year. Up until then I thought he had another in the tank. I never gave him a chance at the Australian... least of all after a 6 month layoff.

Yeah I think we all did though I always think he will have a realistic chance at Wimbledon even 2-3 years down the road if he is healthy. Last year kind of shows that; he was rusty and clearly not 100% yet he was a couple points away from making the final. Fed's serve and all around attacking game can get him through a lot of rounds there even if movement and other parts of his game are off.

 

[mrzz]

I surely believe slam count matters more than H2H, even if H2H do have it´s importance. However, the H2H thing is boasted by the Nadal loopsided H2H. A few more, a few less, like in Djokovic´s case, is almost irrelevant.

 

[DarthFed]

all of a sudden you Fed fans get on a high, yeah i know it is an amazing win but it is unlikely he can reproduce such form for sustained period like this AO, which is well above what it should've been.

If he was smart, he'd retire quickly so he can avoid getting worse H-H records which many have used to degrade his legacy. He'd still have winning H-H over Novak and Murray if he quit at 34, but from now on he may well end up being the worst of the 4.

Well I don't think anyone would blame him if he had decided to retire now. Talk about going out on a major high...But he badly wants another Wimbledon to break the tie with Sampras. And truthfully he doesn't need to play as well as he did at this AO in order to win another Wimbledon. If Fed has decent results from now until Wimbledon he will likely have a top 4 seed there due to their ranking system and obviously he won't have to go through 4 top 10 players to win the event if that's the case. So he will almost certainly have an easier draw and he will be playing on a surface even more suited to his game than this Australian Open was.

I don't think anyone aside from extremely biased Fed haters hold the Novak H2H against him. The vast majority of their matches have come from 2011 on with Novak in the center of his prime and Fed at ages 29.5 - 34.5. If Fed plays another 3-4 years he may end up with a lot of bad records vs. guys like Zverev, Thiem, and others if they step up as he declines more. It's all about context. Obviously the Nadal H2H is a different story, that has always been a bad H2H for Roger even when he was in his prime.

 

[Federberg]

^I've never cared a jot about the H2H. I mean.. imagine if Federer's H2H with Nadal was more equal, but he was flaking out against no names, and therefore got fewer slams, that I would worry about! Players care far far more about trophies than H2H. This is manufactured by fandom.

 

[DarthFed]

I don't totally dismiss H2H when it comes to overall greatness but I do think it gets greatly overrated in the grand scheme of things. Rafa fans like MikeOne, Kieran, and Huntingyou on the old board acted like it made up for a 10 slam difference when I don't even think it makes up for a 1 slam difference. In the end I see it as a tiebreak of sorts when comparing two players. If Roger and Rafa finished tied in slam count and the rest of their resumes were fairly equal (which it isn't but that's a different discussion) there'd be a strong argument that Rafa was the greater player.

Where I see H2H mattering is that it is a great feat to not have any players get the better of you. To me that's one thing Sampras had, aside from a small bad H2H with Krajicek he really got the better of everyone especially when it counted most (of course it helped that he stunk on clay and rarely played the same good players there more than a few times). Despite Rafa now having a losing H2H with Novak part of his greatness is that he too has usually gotten the better of everyone of significance when it has mattered most. Going across sports...no player or team got the better of Jordan once he started winning and that certainly adds to his mystique as easily the greatest Bball player ever.

 

[Federberg]

I don't totally dismiss H2H when it comes to overall greatness but I do think it gets greatly overrated in the grand scheme of things. Rafa fans like MikeOne, Kieran, and Huntingyou on the old board acted like it made up for a 10 slam difference when I don't even think it makes up for a 1 slam difference. In the end I see it as a tiebreak of sorts when comparing two players. If Roger and Rafa finished tied in slam count and the rest of their resumes were fairly equal (which it isn't but that's a different discussion) there'd be a strong argument that Rafa was the greater player.

Where I see H2H mattering is that it is a great feat to not have any players get the better of you. To me that's one thing Sampras had, aside from a small bad H2H with Krajicek he really got the better of everyone especially when it counted most (of course it helped that he stunk on clay and rarely played the same good players there more than a few times). Despite Rafa now having a losing H2H with Novak part of his greatness is that he too has usually gotten the better of everyone of significance when it has mattered most. Going across sports...no player or team got the better of Jordan once he started winning and that certainly adds to his mystique as easily the greatest Bball player ever.

I see where you're going, but you've raised the very issue which diminishes H2H for me. It is the very fact that Federer is an absolutely unique player that makes his H2H worse than it could be. The case in point is Sampras. He simply wasn't a good clay courter, so his H2H gets padded up. The fact that it's a logical inconsistency that Federer would probably have a better H2H or Sampras a worse one if Roger was a bit worse, and Sampras a bit better tells the story

 

[DarthFed]

And that's an excellent point. When it comes to Roger-Rafa I've long argued that Fed's problem is that he didn't do well enough off of clay. It is now actually dead even off clay; 10-10. And that to me is where Roger failed against Nadal. Shouldn't have lost 1 out of 10 grass matches vs. him IMO let alone 1 out of 3, and Roger has also lost to Rafa at Dubai, Cincy, and YEC (the latter 2 were 2013 which is more understandable but still). If he won a few more of those fast court matches the H2H would actually be fairly close.

 

[Federberg]

And that's an excellent point. When it comes to Roger-Rafa I've long argued that Fed's problem is that he didn't do well enough off of clay. It is now actually dead even off clay; 10-10. And that to me is where Roger failed against Nadal. Shouldn't have lost 1 out of 10 grass matches vs. him IMO let alone 1 out of 3, and Roger has also lost to Rafa at Dubai, Cincy, and YEC (the latter 2 were 2013 which is more understandable but still). If he won a few more of those fast court matches the H2H would actually be fairly close.

Yes there's no doubting that it was more than a clay thing. I'm more bothered by people like Sampras even daring to talk about H2H (which he did for a bit, when he thought there might be a debate about him and Roger). My attitude would be... "mate if you were any good on clay your own sh1t would have looked much worse, so back in your box!"

 

[DarthFed]

Lol, yep. Though I don't remember Sampras ever really trying to slag Roger about H2H or anything, he's usually admitted Roger is better than he was.

 

[Federberg]

Lol, yep. Though I don't remember Sampras ever really trying to slag Roger about H2H or anything, he's usually admitted Roger is better than he was.

He made a few comments at first, but after he and Roger did the exhibition stuff, he realised that he was one of the good guys and came to terms with what looked nailed on anyway

 

[Ricardo]

actually he made comments about 'weak era too', saying his era was 'top heavy' while Roger's being cruisy.