doesn't seem odd at all... Sampras won 2002 USO after a period where he was way worse than Federer for a few years, did nothing, barely played.
What you lack is logic. In your opinion, singular episodes tell a story. So if at 38 Federer can beat Rafa and Djoker, then this is all we need to know, the story is told, by DarthFed and the story goes 'If he can do this at 38, imagine when he was in his prime'. But Darth's story is just that - legendary story telling, based on fantasies, dreams and wishes.
Where i come in is i remind you, you are just making up stories and we should pause and get real for a minute. Logic points to the fact that Federer, at 38, should win some matches vs Djokovic, even prime Djoker. Why? cause federer is considered GOAT and is too good to lose 100% of the time. He is 9-20 vs Djokovic since 2011 though, so this is what matters. If we just take matches in isolation and make up a story, then i can also be a good story teller, just like you. I can tell you 19 yr old Djokovic beat Federer in 07 so i will go on and write a book 'if that could happen, imagine 2011 Djokovic vs 07 Federer'. It's story telling Darth.
Wimbledon is Federer's house and he is healthy, motivated and whilst less consistent day in day out, he can, as a matter of fact, attain a very high level on any given match and even go on a stretch. Here's another story Darth. Federer has had more success against nadal in past few years than he ever had between 04-07, my story goes like this - 'He's better now than he was back then' but we are back to story telling.
So, we can continue to tell stories Darth but sometimes i will try and bring you down from that cloud, get you back to reality.
Where's Moxie? watch Moxie tell me what i bore i am and be the voice of reason.
