Question to Fed fans - Is there anything Fed can do to get back his legacy?

[DarthFed]

Fed's legacy is secure as one of the greatest to play the game. He is not the GOAT and maybe no one really is, except Laver.

The problem for Federer is that his record against Novak keeps getting worse. Overall Fed is:

6-10 vs Novak in all slam meetings
1-4 vs Novak in slam finals.

Overall Federer is 20-11 in slam finals (so he's lost a lot of slam finals to his rivals)

If we include the time after 2011 or Novak 2.0 - the stats look a LOT worse for Federer.

Anyway if Novak gets more slams than Fed (and it looks really likely at this point), case closed, and Djokovic would definitely be the best of this era over Fed and Nadal.

But even if Djokovic ends up with 1-2 slams less than Fed, the picture is murkier. I think Djokovic has done more damage to Fed's legacy than Nadal has. In fact, Djokovic has dominated Fed and Nadal very comprehensively after he entered his prime. He definitely has a SOLID claim to the best of this era, if he keeps his winning ways.

I think we all know I hate Rafa and actually like Djoker. So by "agenda" I'd be more inclined to say Djoker caused more problems and brush aside Nadal's impact but...that's completely false. I mean at what point do we acknowledge that Federer is fucking old here? Is it the day he officially retires?? Bottom line is Djoker owned old past his prime Fed and Fed returned the favor before Djoker's prime. Nadal is a whole different animal in this discussion when it comes to Roger.

I think the narrative to group Djoker owning Federer as the same as Djoker owning Nadal is a bit ridiculous. I've seen that with other Nadal fans and that must be part of the agenda. It looks A LOT worse for Rafa's career to be owned in 2011-2019 than it does for Federer...common sense.

 

[Shivashish Sarkar]

Djokovic has pretty much owned everyone in the sport. Let's give the guy credit where it's due.

 

[atttomole]

Djokovic has pretty much owned everyone in the sport. Let's give the guy credit where it's due.

This is a bit simplistic, especially with respect to Federer. They have an age difference of almost 6 years, and Federer almost beat him at Wimbledon this year. I think Djokovic started dominating Federer around 2011, when Federer was beginning to age.

The narrative would have been very different if Federer had beaten Djokovic at Wimbledon.

 

[Front242]

This is a bit simplistic, especially with respect to Federer. They have an age difference of almost 6 years, and Federer almost beat him at Wimbledon this year. I think Djokovic started dominating Federer around 2011, when Federer was beginning to age.

I think the narrative would have been very different if Federer had beaten Djokovic at Wimbledon.

He barely beat a guy almost 38. He's not anywhere near the god some people make him out to be and only won 'cos the old man brain farted yet again.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

He barely beat a guy almost 38. He's not anywhere near the god some people make him out to be and only won 'cos the old man brain farted yet again.

Lol Federer is on a special juice, he is not the regular “almost 38” guy. I bet he will still reaching slam finals at 60 years old. At 12:12 in the 5th set he didn’t even look like he’s breaking a sweat or even taking a breath after points. And he’s ready for the next one after 10 seconds. Even the younger Nadal sometimes looks a little winded, not to mention that he has to take a lot of time between points to recuperate. My point is stop giving the age excuse to Federer, he played like in his prime if not better. Your hero was ”Superman” out there.

 

[Front242]

Lol Federer is on a special juice, he is not the regular “almost 38” guy. I bet he will still reaching slam finals at 60 years old. At 12:12 in the 5th set he didn’t even look like he’s breaking a sweat or even taking a breath after points. And he’s ready for the next one after 10 seconds. Even the younger Nadal sometimes looks a little winded, not to mention that he has to take a lot of time between points to recuperate. My point is stop giving the age excuse to Federer, he played like in his prime if not better. Your hero was ”Superman” out there.

Takes a real idiot to accuse Federer of doping more than Nadal when the former plays a way more attacking style resulting in much much shorter points along with his superior serve. Of course you expend less energy when you play shorter points, genius. After he fell behind at the start of set 2 against Nadal he clearly tanked the rest of the set to conserve energy which he wouldn't need to do if he was "Superman".

Please stop making yourself look even more stupid 'cos it's the guy you support who is running down every ball like a gazelle and grinding down opponents playing extremely long matches.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Takes a real idiot to excuse Federer of doping more than Nadal when the former plays a way more attacking style resulting in much much shorter points along with his superior serve. Of course you expend less energy when you play shorter points, genius. After he fell behind at the start of set 2 against Nadal he clearly tanked the rest of the set to conserve energy which he wouldn't need to do if he was "Superman".

Please stop making yourself look even more stupid 'cos it's the guy you support who is running down every ball like a gazelle and grinding down opponents playing extremely long matches.

If Nadal doped like Federer he would be sitting on 50 slam titles by now. Nadal at least looks like an athlete and works very hard at the gym. Federer looks like an accountant yet plays like Superman. Open your eyes.

 

[DarthFed]

If Nadal doped like Federer he would be sitting on 50 slam titles by now. Nadal at least looks like an athlete and works very hard at the gym. Federer looks like an accountant yet plays like Superman. Open your eyes.

How the hell is he playing like Superman, just because he beat the mighty grass court legend Nadal?

 

[Nadalfan2013]

How the hell is he playing like Superman, just because he beat the mighty grass court legend Nadal?

12-12 in the 5th set and he still was running like a gazelle and not sweating or breathing and spending only 10 seconds between points. The only reason why Djokovic won is because he was able to somehow reach tiebreaks and mentally was stronger there. Otherwise Federer was superman.

 

[DarthFed]

12-12 in the 5th set and he still was running like a gazelle and not sweating or breathing and spending only 10 seconds between points. The only reason why Djokovic won is because he was able to somehow reach tiebreaks and mentally was stronger there. Otherwise Federer was superman.

He spends 10 seconds between points because he can end them quickly unlike 99.9% of the tour these days. Roger doesn't run like a gazelle, not anymore. His court coverage is no longer elite that's why he was easily outplayed from the baseline anytime it went neutral. I am surprised he was able to hang in there physically but then his tennis life is kind of on the line. It brings a different type of fight, unfortunately it also brought a shitload of mental frailty. Anyways Roger's level is being highly overstated, he managed to lose to a sub par Djokovic in pretty pathetic fashion at the end.

 

[Moxie]

Takes a real idiot to excuse Federer of doping more than Nadal when the former plays a way more attacking style resulting in much much shorter points along with his superior serve. Of course you expend less energy when you play shorter points, genius. After he fell behind at the start of set 2 against Nadal he clearly tanked the rest of the set to conserve energy which he wouldn't need to do if he was "Superman".

Please stop making yourself look even more stupid 'cos it's the guy you support who is running down every ball like a gazelle and grinding down opponents playing extremely long matches.

Freudian slip on your part, I guess, but let's be honest....you, of all people, don't really have room for so much outrage, just because you're completely sure that one always has, the other never. Playing style of a young player vs. still-high level play and stamina from the old guy? Are they really that different?

 

[Front242]

If Nadal doped like Federer he would be sitting on 50 slam titles by now. Nadal at least looks like an athlete and works very hard at the gym. Federer looks like an accountant yet plays like Superman. Open your eyes.

Have you seen Nadal with his top off in the last 9 -10 years? No, he does not have a physique that looks like he works hard apart from his legs. He has good quads and 1 biggish bicep (when flexed and for a tennis player only). To the normal guy who isn't an athlete and lifts weights that is not what you would aspire to be and I'd be ashamed to have a flat chest like that and bad proportions and thankfully I don't. The average gym going male who eats well and lifts weights looks way better than Nadal and Federer but Nadal has decent quads as I said. I'll give him that. The rest no. You need glasses. Or telescopes.

 

[Front242]

Freudian slip on your part, I guess, but let's be honest....you, of all people, don't really have room for so much outrage, just because you're completely sure that one always has, the other never. Playing style of a young player vs. still-high level play and stamina from the old guy? Are they really that different?

Yeah I spotted that before reading your message and edited it on the original post. Autospell on phone. Ducking annoying See! Neither guy is young btw. Point construction and ability to win points faster has a lot to do with it. Let's call a spade a spade, Federer has better attacking skills and therefore wins points quicker which results in less energy expended and much faster matches.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Sampras had an attacking style, even more than Federer. Yet he was always exhausted in matches at the end of his career at a much younger age than Federer. Open your eyes and stop making excuses.

 

[Front242]

Sampras had an attacking style, even more than Federer. Yet he was always exhausted in matches at the end of his career at a much younger age than Federer. Open your eyes.

Philip Petzschner famously said he thought it was that strange Nadal took 2 medical timeouts against him at Wimbledon 2010 (didn't most of us who aren't clueless) as it looked like he could play for another 3 sets. Somehow though only Federer is a doper to your blind eyes lol. Newsflash but Federer has way, way better baseline skills than Sampras

 

[Bonaca]

It hurts like hell, but it is far from over. He really played a brilliant tournament up until 8-7 40-15. Then he got back to break point at 11-11 with the horror of blowing it in the air. I believe that he is far from done. The Nadal win should be a clear confidence booster as well. He is now the favorite against anyone besides Djokovic (except Nadal on clay of course). I feel that he is not losing the US Open to anyone besides Djokovic. I know that this loss makes Djokovic feel invincible, but I believe that Federer is really strong at not letting it get to him. What he needs to do next time is not let it get to the fifth set. He was the far better player in every moment except the crucial ones. If he could have won the third I don't think he would have had the same problem closing. I believe Federer can still win 1-2 more majors. Also it is no less a major if he doesn't go through the others. 1 major equals 1 major no matter what. Also, even if Federer get no more majors it is far from guaranteed he will lose the record. Djokovic is 32 and if we are being honest he did not play that well in Wimbledon. He got out broken 7-3 against a 37 year old. Federer played well, but if he wants to win four more slams he has to step it up big time. I don't believe Nadal can beat Federer or Djokovic off clay anymore. I really don't see him getting to fifteen. Maybe he can break it with two more Frenchs and one big win or good draw, but he could also easily lose one match to Thiem and finish on only 19. He could also have another period like 15-16 and have no way to recover at 36. Also maybe the 90's will actually get one slam before Auger-Aliassime takes over. All in all I think the odds are as follows.
Federer 40%
Nadal 25%
Djokovic 15%
Federer-Nadal tie 10%
Federer-Djokovic tie 4%
Djokovic-Nadal tie 3%
3 way tie 3%

Yes man you are absolutely right, maestro played a brilliant tournament and final! But Novak didn’t , that’s the problem about your post. If Novak plays this level in NY he could lose to Roger .
If he plays better, it will not go that far for Roger.
And HC is the better surface for Novak.

 

[Bonaca]

He barely beat a guy almost 38. He's not anywhere near the god some people make him out to be and only won 'cos the old man brain farted yet again.

He beat him despite his B Game. That’s the reason they played 5 sets. Roger would have lost in 4 or maybe 3 sets against his A Game. Just think about his ROS?
Age isn’t the mean factor, look he played Nadal and Novak and shows no signs of tiredness.
What surly is fucking disappointing for him, the fact he didn’t took this huge chance against a not well playing Novak in the final of his best Slam.
How could he have bigger chances anywhere else???

 

[Front242]

He beat him despite his B Game. That’s the reason they played 5 sets. Roger would have lost in 4 or maybe 3 sets against his A Game. Just think about his ROS?
Age isn’t the mean factor, look he played Nadal and Novak and shows no signs of tiredness.
What surly is fucking disappointing for him, the fact he didn’t took this huge chance against a not well playing Novak in the final of his best Slam.
How could he have bigger chances anywhere else???

They played 5 sets in 2014 also and both guys played extremely high level tennis that day so I don't agree that the reason it went to 5 sets is 'cos of Novak's supposed lower level. As anyone who watched the match could see, Federer was the better player every set and in the ones he lost he was the better player till he sucked in the tiebreaks. He was lucky Federer's level dropped dramatically in every tiebreak because I doubt anyone would've expected him to lose 3 tiebreaks against Djokovic. Federer should have won set 1 and set 2 was a blowout so, if that had happened, it would've been 2-0 Federer in a short space of time. Instead of 5 sets, it could then have been 3-0 to Federer.

Completely agree though that he probably won't get a better chance at winning a slam at this stage and it was a major opportunity missed.

 

[Bonaca]

They played 5 sets in 2014 also and both guys played extremely high level tennis that day so I don't agree that the reason it went to 5 sets is 'cos of Novak's supposed lower level. As anyone who watched the match could see, Federer was the better player every set and in the ones he lost he was the better player till he sucked in the tiebreaks. He was lucky Federer's level dropped dramatically in every tiebreak because I doubt anyone would've expected him to lose 3 tiebreaks against Djokovic. Federer should have won set 1 and set 2 was a blowout so, if that had happened, it would've been 2-0 Federer in a short space of time. Instead of 5 sets, it could then have been 3-0 to Federer.

Completely agree though that he probably won't get a better chance at winning at slam at this stage and it was a major opportunity missed.

Agree with your statement about 2014, I was talking about 2019. I think Roger couldn’t play much better, but Novak can play much better.
That was my point.
I really hope he will get another chance, but not against Novak.
I would love to see him beating disgusting bull in a slam final. I can watch the AO 17 final over and over again.

 

[Front242]

Agree with your statement about 2014, I was talking about 2019. I think Roger couldn’t play much better, but Novak can play much better.
That was my point.
I really hope he will get another chance, but not against Novak.
I would love to see him beating disgusting bull in a slam final. I can watch the AO 17 final over and over again.

Novak could play better for sure but I don't think Novak playing better would've made the scoreline much different tbh as Federer played great except the tiebreaks.