Roger's stellar season (ESPN)

[the AntiPusher]

You say that Roger under-performed in those matches, though you give no value to Rafa's performance in those matches. Why do you think he under-performed, then, if it wasn't match-up advantage, or Rafa's particularly good performances?

That’s the part of his argument that doesnt have a lot of vitality..Rafa gets zero credit for coming up with a game plan and execution to perfection (French Open 08) or to a lesser degree SW19 2008. Darth gives zero credit to Rafa being the superior competitor, One thing I noticed, not a lot a credence given to Novak mastery over Roger at the past 5-6 grand slam encounters. If Carol, you and I said this about Roger, Front and the majority of the Federettes would have a calf. (not Federerberg because he doesnt want that classification as just another Fed fan which is cool)

 

[DarthFed]

That’s the part of his argument that doesnt have a lot of vitality..Rafa gets zero credit for coming up with a game plan and execution to perfection (French Open 08) or to a lesser degree SW19 2008. Darth gives zero credit to Rafa being the superior competitor, One thing I noticed, not a lot a credence given to Novak mastery over Roger at the past 5-6 grand slam encounters. If Carol, you and I said this about Roger, Front and the majority of the Federettes would have a calf. (not Federerberg because he doesnt want that classification as just another Fed fan which is cool)

You mean Novak beating Roger like a drum when the latter is a geriatric? He should be owning Roger and he has in best of 5.

Why the obsession with me giving Rafa credit? I don't ever give credit when I lose and I very rarely see the need to give credit to the opponent of my favorite players/teams. That shit isn't in my DNA. So if you do see me give one of the enemies credit then you know I was extremely impressed to the point I'm not pissed off about the loss.

 

[the AntiPusher]

You mean Novak beating Roger like a drum when the latter is a geriatric? He should be owning Roger and he has in best of 5.

Why the obsession with me giving Rafa credit? I don't ever give credit when I lose and I very rarely see the need to give credit to the opponent of my favorite players/teams. That shit isn't in my DNA. So if you do see me give one of the enemies credit then you know I was extremely impressed to the point I'm not pissed off about the loss.

Again my good friend, this is where the disconnect occurs.. True Roger has aged but in some parts for the better with the “j” up Bh where you are willing to bet the ranch on that has been the primary reason to level the playing field vs ole Ralph now but against Novak , your argument is early stage of “rigor mortis”.. That’s unfair but as u say, their is no compromise in your distain for your ememies (especially Nadal).

 

[El Dude]

You realize, AntiPusher, that Roger hasn't played Novak in a year and a half, since before his revival this year. Roger is a better player in 2017 than he was in 2013-16, when Novak was owning him (for the most part).

 

[the AntiPusher]

You realize, AntiPusher, that Roger hasn't played Novak in a year and a half, since before his revival this year. Roger is a better player in 2017 than he was in 2013-16, when Novak was owning him (for the most part).

Hitting that flat backhand down the line would probably be welcomed by Novak. Novak’s balls are flatter than Rafa so Roger doesn’t have all day and night to strike the ball like he does against Nadal. If you feel that 37 year old Roger is significantly better than 32-33 old Roger than its your perception. Let’s be honest making a grand slam final with facing Novak or Andy has benefitted Roger tremendously throughout 2017. I would take 2013-2016 Novak over Roger any day. (Novak played the clay tournaments and still won over 80% of his matches. Do you think Roger couple have maintain his 2017 level had he played the clay?

 

[El Dude]

Of course not, but he would still have been overall better in 2017 than he was in the last few years. Remember, he hasn't just improved against Rafa this year - he's better against the field as well.

As for how Roger would have fared against Novak this year, it is all conjecture - we just cannot know.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Of course not, but he would still have been overall better in 2017 than he was in the last few years. Remember, he hasn't just improved against Rafa this year - he's better against the field as well.

As for how Roger would have fared against Novak this year, it is all conjecture - we just cannot know.

JMDP brought Roger back down to earth at USO and should have had Roger at Basel.. Even Darth had written Roger off in that match after JMDP won the 2nd set.. You say its conjecture but if you livelihood depended on it.. You would take Invincible Novak over present day Rog

 

[El Dude]

JMDP brought Roger back down to earth at USO and should have had Roger at Basel.. Even Darth had written Roger off in that match after JMDP won the 2nd set.. You say its conjecture but if you livelihood depended on it.. You would take Invincible Novak over present day Rog

Sure, but "invincible Novak" was 2011 and 2015 to early 2016 - a span totally about 2.5 years. I'm not sure what your point is...that Novak at his very best would beat Roger in 2017? Probably, but I think it would be closer than it was in 2015-16, when Novak was 6-3 vs Roger. Maybe 5-4?

 

[the AntiPusher]

Sure, but "invincible Novak" was 2011 and 2015 to early 2016 - a span totally about 2.5 years. I'm not sure what your point is...that Novak at his very best would beat Roger in 2017? Probably, but I think it would be closer than it was in 2015-16, when Novak was 6-3 vs Roger. Maybe 5-4?

What was the h2h between the two at the grand slam s only

 

[DarthFed]

Again my good friend, this is where the disconnect occurs.. True Roger has aged but in some parts for the better with the “j” up Bh where you are willing to bet the ranch on that has been the primary reason to level the playing field vs ole Ralph now but against Novak , your argument is early stage of “rigor mortis”.. That’s unfair but as u say, their is no compromise in your distain for your ememies (especially Nadal).

Roger hadn't improved his backhand or return until this year. Aside from that maybe he serves better now compared to his prime and he is better at but that's it. Way worse movement, way worse forehand, way worse endurance, etc.

Very convenient that Nole was able to avoid Roger this year much like Nads did for 2015 aside from 1 match at Basel. Fed was handing out wins to Rafa and Nole like Halloween candy in 2013.

Fed is ancient and has been for awhile. Of course Novak should beat him, and so should Rafa. Not a good look for your boy that gramps swatted him away with his cane all year long.

 

[Moxie]

Roger hadn't improved his backhand or return until this year. Aside from that maybe he serves better now compared to his prime and he is better at but that's it. Way worse movement, way worse forehand, way worse endurance, etc.

Very convenient that Nole was able to avoid Roger this year much like Nads did for 2015 aside from 1 match at Basel. Fed was handing out wins to Rafa and Nole like Halloween candy in 2013.

Fed is ancient and has been for awhile. Of course Novak should beat him, and so should Rafa. Not a good look for your boy that gramps swatted him away with his cane all year long.

Given the AO final, I don't think you can say that endurance is his main problem. Certainly he'd found the fountain of youth at the beginning of the year. Perhaps it helped that he was well-rested, and maybe it fell off later in the year.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Apparently, Rafa opined today that "peak Novak > peak Federer".

 

[Moxie]

Apparently, Rafa opined today that "peak Novak > peak Federer".

Not finding a reliable source for that. Got one?

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Not finding a reliable source for that. Got one?

Try this one .

 

[britbox]

Hitting that flat backhand down the line would probably be welcomed by Novak. Novak’s balls are flatter than Rafa so Roger doesn’t have all day and night to strike the ball like he does against Nadal. If you feel that 37 year old Roger is significantly better than 32-33 old Roger than its your perception. Let’s be honest making a grand slam final with facing Novak or Andy has benefitted Roger tremendously throughout 2017. I would take 2013-2016 Novak over Roger any day. (Novak played the clay tournaments and still won over 80% of his matches. Do you think Roger couple have maintain his 2017 level had he played the clay?

You lost me with the bit about Federer not playing Murray benefiting Roger enormously... you're clutching at straws with that one AP... This is the same Murray who has beaten Federer once in the last five years I presume?

Roger wouldn't have maintained his 2017 level if he'd played the clay swing. He's cherry picking the season so he can be competitive when he needs to be. He's in a position to do it and still racks up enough points to finish in the Top 2. It's a smart way to manage his body.

 

[Front242]

JMDP brought Roger back down to earth at USO and should have had Roger at Basel.. Even Darth had written Roger off in that match after JMDP won the 2nd set.. You say its conjecture but if you livelihood depended on it.. You would take Invincible Novak over present day Rog

Yeah good on JMDP for barely beating 36 year old Federer with a bad back at the USO. What a feat. Fact is, even with a gammy back Roger had chances to win that match but made a ton of bad errors on the big points cos his movement and timing were well off. He quite possibly could have beaten him at Basel too as his back wasn't in good nick there either but gramps played the bigger points better that day. The margins are so small at the top and yet Del Potro can barely beat an ailing Roger these days. His form is being over exaggerated and he was playing better in 2016 tbh. Things just worked out well for him with the draw at the USO this year or he'd never had made the semis.

 

[Federberg]

Apparently, Rafa opined today that "peak Novak > peak Federer".

I'm no Spanish speaker, but I did read somewhere that Rafa said that Novak presented him with greater technical problems, and that the Novak he faced a few years back was virtually invincible. But he was careful to make no comparison between Novak and Roger, in fact he said that unquestionably Roger is the best player in tennis given his accomplishments. I think this is more match up than comparitive

 

[the AntiPusher]

Yes, but he's got an older Nadal who's a step slower. And he finally figured out how to work that bigger racquet head. If he could have done things differently before, what is to make us think he wouldn't have? It did take an equipment change, so you can't really say it was just attitude or aggression. I don't begrudge him the "new-ish" racquet. Just don't try to tell me it's all about his new attitude.

moxie, another factor that contributed to Roger's ability to flip the switch against Rafa on hardcourts was Rafa's reluctant to play more aggressively vs Roger's game by not coming forward. I am not saying Rafa needs to play first strike tennis but by not controlling the center of the court early in their rallies, Rafa has always been playing from behind vs Roger. This mindset has made Rafa vulnerable especially when Roger take a step towards the net. The lower percentage shot is to try to attempt a passing shot moving backwards as oppose to taking an attacking position by coming forward. There's no way in Hades that Andy and especially Novak would play that unaggressive style vs Roger.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Yeah good on JMDP for barely beating 36 year old Federer with a bad back at the USO. What a feat. Fact is, even with a gammy back Roger had chances to win that match but made a ton of bad errors on the big points cos his movement and timing were well off. He quite possibly could have beaten him at Basel too as his back wasn't in good nick there either but gramps played the bigger points better that day. The margins are so small at the top and yet Del Potro can barely beat an ailing Roger these days. His form is being over exaggerated and he was playing better in 2016 tbh. Things just worked out well for him with the draw at the USO this year or he'd never had made the semis.

If Roger back was injured why didn't he take the 5-10 min medical timeout in the U SO 17 like he did against Rafa at AO17..ROGER absolutely froze Stan in the semifinals and put Rafa on ice in the finals..Even Darth admits that and regards it as payback from previous encounters vs Nadal.

 

[Ricardo]

You mean Novak beating Roger like a drum when the latter is a geriatric? He should be owning Roger and he has in best of 5.

Why the obsession with me giving Rafa credit? I don't ever give credit when I lose and I very rarely see the need to give credit to the opponent of my favorite players/teams. That shit isn't in my DNA. So if you do see me give one of the enemies credit then you know I was extremely impressed to the point I'm not pissed off about the loss.

Rafa an enemy? it's only a game.....