Full Spectrum domination of the alleged GOAT

What we witnessed today as a one handed Nadal dismantled Federer is that Rafa was winning basically every pattern of play. His passing shots are better than Roger's volleys. FH to FH Nadal had the edge, BH to BH big edge for Nadal, fed FH to Rafa BH surprisingly the edge goes to Rafa. And of course Nadal FH to fed backhand was so lopsided as possible. Rafa serve overwhelms Fed's return while Rafa can break federer. In short we are seeing the most lopsided rivalry between two all time greats that I can remember. The final will be coronation and how fitting that Pete and Laver each first tier GOAT candidates could watch this dismantling of one Goathood in favor of the true Goat. Can we stop calling this matchup a rivalry it has not been one for 5 years now. This was like watching the Marines invade Grenada it was over before it began and by the afternoon the boys had busted out the beach towels and sun tan lotion.

I like Roger - given the lack of South Africans doing anything worth mentioning on the tennis front - the fact that he has a S.A. passport, and would have spent a not insignificant portion of his childhood around where I grew up (quick note: if you ever do spend time in Kempton Park... a lot of Rogers mannerisms when he speaks English will be explained) means I generally don't want to see him duffed up like he was today. I''ll always prefer a Rafa win, but I generally hope he competes... Fact is, Nadal is a match up made in hell for him. He could just about live with a 20-year old Rafa, who was still quite raw, but as Rafa has chiseled the superfluous elements of his game, and got tactically smarter... well, it's become a very one-sided match-up. Cant dismiss Roger's place amongst the GOATS, because he had a bad match up. The one criticism, or relevant negative for me, has been his complete inability to come up with an effective plan to stop the rout, and it hasnt been because of a lack of effort... He's served and volleyed, stayed back, Played "naturally", attacked the net, Complained about the time wasting, complained about the grunting, Asked for Hawkeye to be switched off, everything short of kicking the magical Water bottles... and with a few flickering exceptions... it simply hasn't come off.

KR, I agree the matchup is bad for him. But it is bad for him because Nadal is just the better player period. It is not just the CC FH to BH that gives Roger trouble. Today Nadal's backhand was better than Roger's FH in those cross court exchanges. And Roger has never been able to return Nadal's second serve kick serve. In short, there are very few areas on the court that peak Fed 04-07 is better than peak Nadal 2010-now.

socal1976 wrote:What we witnessed today as a one handed Nadal dismantled Federer is that Rafa was winning basically every pattern of play. His passing shots are better than Roger's volleys. FH to FH Nadal had the edge, BH to BH big edge for Nadal, fed FH to Rafa BH surprisingly the edge goes to Rafa. And of course Nadal FH to fed backhand was so lopsided as possible. Rafa serve overwhelms Fed's return while Rafa can break federer. In short we are seeing the most lopsided rivalry between two all time greats that I can remember. The final will be coronation and how fitting that Pete and Laver each first tier GOAT candidates could watch this dismantling of one Goathood in favor of the true Goat. Can we stop calling this matchup a rivalry it has not been one for 5 years now. This was like watching the Marines invade Grenada it was over before it began and by the afternoon the boys had busted out the beach towels and sun tan lotion.

"This was like watching the Marines invade Grenada it was over before it began and by the afternoon the boys  busted out the beach towels and sun tan lotion"

lol - A bit unkind to old Roger but no question about the Goat status", if Rafa knees hold out out he will for sure become the real goat.

As for Roger winning another slam dream on, with a fit Rafa, Novak & Andy around he has no chance!

sportslover wrote:

socal1976 wrote:What we witnessed today as a one handed Nadal dismantled Federer is that Rafa was winning basically every pattern of play. His passing shots are better than Roger's volleys. FH to FH Nadal had the edge, BH to BH big edge for Nadal, fed FH to Rafa BH surprisingly the edge goes to Rafa. And of course Nadal FH to fed backhand was so lopsided as possible. Rafa serve overwhelms Fed's return while Rafa can break federer. In short we are seeing the most lopsided rivalry between two all time greats that I can remember. The final will be coronation and how fitting that Pete and Laver each first tier GOAT candidates could watch this dismantling of one Goathood in favor of the true Goat. Can we stop calling this matchup a rivalry it has not been one for 5 years now. This was like watching the Marines invade Grenada it was over before it began and by the afternoon the boys had busted out the beach towels and sun tan lotion.

"This was like watching the Marines invade Grenada it was over before it began and by the afternoon the boys  busted out the beach towels and sun tan lotion"

lol - A bit unkind to old Roger but no question about the Goat status", if Rafa knees hold out out he will for sure become the real goat.

As for Roger winning another slam dream on, with a fit Rafa, Novak & Andy around he has no chance!

SL, we have to objectively analyze the facts. It is a bit tongue and cheek my goosing of the Fed fans but honestly after the murray win they were get slightly delusional. And it was a bit surreal that Laver and Sampras were watching this. I mean all 4 first tier goats in the same arena to witness the ceremonial handing of the torch from the caretaker GOAT to the real GOAT.

It will be great to watch Novak take on Rafa in the final on Sunday after dispatching Wawrinka, a player whom Roger normally has no problem beating.

Oh wait.....

I've often said socal's main interest in tennis is having a go at Fed and his fans. Supporting Djoko is just a side-interest when Djoko is doing well. I'm only judging this based on the number of Fed-based posts vs the number of Djoko-based posts.

It's a side interest with rapidly decreasing value.

kemet wrote:It will be great to watch Novak take on Rafa in the final on Sunday after dispatching Wawrinka, a player who Roger normally has no problem beating.

Oh wait.....

Nice banter kemet, way to get your shots in.

socal1976 wrote:

kemet wrote:It will be great to watch Novak take on Rafa in the final on Sunday after dispatching Wawrinka, a player who Roger normally has no problem beating.

Oh wait.....

Nice banter kemet, way to get your shots in.

Doesn't require much more.

I would admit that Rafa has a bulldog-type mentality and a chanpion's mindset and loves scrapping, whereas I think Roger is not up to the attritional-type tennis anymore.

Instead of provocative articles aimed towards Federer, perhaps you should focus your attention on your favorite player, who was eliminated from the AO by a player that Roger seems to have no problem beating.

Your infantile article (notice I did not call you infantile per se) deserves an infantile response from yours truly, since it constitutes borderline wumming.

JuliusHMarx wrote:I've often said socal's main interest in tennis is having a go at Fed and his fans. Supporting Djoko is just a side-interest when Djoko is doing well. I'm only judging this based on the number of Fed-based posts vs the number of Djoko-based posts.

No i am fan of the sport in general. I like Djokovic as my favorite player and I do not like Federer. I thought Novak would be 3-6 slam player early in his career so he has already surpassed my expectations and if he wins more or doesn't I support him the same. The fact is that we just had a semi today between the caretaker GOAT and the real GOAT so what am I supposed to talk about, Novak and Jelena's upcoming wedding? I spent many posts after Novak's loss talking about him and that was after a painful loss.

kemet wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

kemet wrote:It will be great to watch Novak take on Rafa in the final on Sunday after dispatching Wawrinka, a player who Roger normally has no problem beating.

Oh wait.....

Nice banter kemet, way to get your shots in.

Doesn't require much more.

I would admit that Rafa has a bulldog-type mentality and a chanpion's mindset and loves scrapping, whereas I think Roger is not up to the attritional-type tennis anymore.

Instead of provocative articles aimed towards Federer, perhaps you should focus your attention on your favorite player, who was eliminated from the AO by a player that Roger seems to have no problem beating.

Your infantile article (notice I did not call you infantile per se) deserves an infantile response from yours truly, since it constitutes borderline wumming.

I am happy to talking about Novak, he lost a tight 5 setter great he is like 28-1 and the second rated player in the world, its hardly a disaster or a crisis or any such thing.

1 Slam in 8 and you get to be #2?

They used to call that kind of thing weak rollover era material. But it can't be, not with a David Ferrer riding high......

bogbrush wrote:1 Slam in 8 and you get to be #2?

They used to call that kind of thing weak rollover era material. But it can't be, not with a David Ferrer riding high......

Funny the rollover boys managed one slam in 16 combined during the period of 04-07. So Novak is not doing that bad. We just have to accept the fact that fed benefited from soft competition and Nadal's injuries or he would have already been surpassed by Nadal. And when Nadal wins tomorrow he will be the only man since Laver to win every slam at least twice.

socal1976 wrote:

kemet wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

kemet wrote:It will be great to watch Novak take on Rafa in the final on Sunday after dispatching Wawrinka, a player who Roger normally has no problem beating.

Oh wait.....

Nice banter kemet, way to get your shots in.

Doesn't require much more.

I would admit that Rafa has a bulldog-type mentality and a chanpion's mindset and loves scrapping, whereas I think Roger is not up to the attritional-type tennis anymore.

Instead of provocative articles aimed towards Federer, perhaps you should focus your attention on your favorite player, who was eliminated from the AO by a player that Roger seems to have no problem beating.

Your infantile article (notice I did not call you infantile per se) deserves an infantile response from yours truly, since it constitutes borderline wumming.

I am happy to talking about Novak, he lost a tight 5 setter great he is like 28-1 and the second rated player in the world, its hardly a disaster or a crisis or any such thing.

And consider that Federer lost to Tommy Robredo of all people at the US Open last year amongst other disasters, I can accept him losing to a Rafael Nadal at the peak of his powers, who is the number one player in the world.

Actually, considering the train wreck that 2013 was as a whole, this is an encouraging start to 2014 for the weak era Swiss who, incidentally normally does not have problems dispatching of Wawrinka (a player who Novak seems to love getting into 5-set scraps with, must be that blooming matchup thing).

You know there is a reason that Federer is number 6 right, losing to the likes of Tommy Robredo.

I am sorry I cannot sit back and read this fallacious garbage.

you seem to miss the point of the thread, Novak is not playing Roger. We have to analyze the results of Nadal v. Federer and what it means in the larger context. I am not worried about Novak he has overcome bigger obstacles than this. He lost a tough 5 set match to a in form opponent happens to all of them. And by the way a huge number of anti-djoko wums had a field day a couple of days ago and I didn't get my panties in a twist neither should you.

socal1976 wrote:

bogbrush wrote:1 Slam in 8 and you get to be #2?

They used to call that kind of thing weak rollover era material. But it can't be, not with a David Ferrer riding high......

Funny the rollover boys managed one slam in 16 combined during the period of 04-07. So Novak is not doing that bad. We just have to accept the fact that fed benefited from soft competition and Nadal's injuries or he would have already been surpassed by Nadal. And when Nadal wins tomorrow he will be the only man since Laver to win every slam at least twice.

Nobody could live with Federer back then. He played tennis from the Gods, not this clunky string-dependent double handed retrieval nonsense we've been subjected to for a few years.

Djokovic snuck in, on the back of Feds decline and Nadals complacency but the door has been slammed in his face, and now the rank & file are taking him out. I think it's Murray getting on top that's wrecked his belief; he was only too happy to share the court with Federer & Nadal but getting his head handed to him by Andy when it matters most must be crippling.

The panic is showing with the selection of Becker as mentor. I'm still trying to make sense of that.

socal1976 wrote:you seem to miss the point of the thread, Novak is not playing Roger. We have to analyze the results of Nadal v. Federer and what it means in the larger context. I am not worried about Novak he has overcome bigger obstacles than this. He lost a tough 5 set match to a in form opponent happens to all of them. And by the way a huge number of anti-djoko wums had a field day a couple of days ago and I didn't get my panties in a twist neither should you.

I have not been on the forum to read the anti-djoko wumming because I had other stuff to do (work, bills, etc.).

As for my, erm, "panties", that is a pretty crass, classless remark (again I am not calling you crass or classless, but this particular remark constitutes such), which adds nothing to your argument.

Sure, Rafa had the beating of Roger from 2005 forward, but notice he had no problems adding to his slam tally, and by the time Rafa won his US Open in 2010, Roger had already won five US Opens, during which time Rafa was getting beaten by random players, so I am failing to see your point here.

In your haste to type this structurally weak argument (i.e. it wades into circular territory), you have four many important points:

1) Ranking: Roger is below David Ferrer of all people in the rankings, and has to contend with tougher draws now. It would have been miraculous for him to beat Tsonga, Murray (who beat him in last year's semi), Nadal, and potentially Djokovic.

2) Court Conditions: I felt as if I was watching any number of French Open matches today. Contrast this with the WTF of a few years ago where Roger dismantled Rafael Nadal 6-0 in a set (A feat, incidentally, which he has managed three times, i.e. 2006 Wimbledon, 2007 Hamburg Masters on clay and 2011 WTF).

3) Matchup: That backhand is simply a liability against Nadal and Roger has never figured out how to counter it. The fact that he has a single-handed backhand may have something to do with it.

4) Deterioration of Return Game: Roger's return game is atrocious. This is bad for him regardless of who he plays. Look at how many break points he missed versus Murray and other players.

Seriously, wumming does not become you.

But wum away and behave immaturely if you must.

Just do not expect any serious responses from me.

bogbrush wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

bogbrush wrote:1 Slam in 8 and you get to be #2?

They used to call that kind of thing weak rollover era material. But it can't be, not with a David Ferrer riding high......

Funny the rollover boys managed one slam in 16 combined during the period of 04-07. So Novak is not doing that bad. We just have to accept the fact that fed benefited from soft competition and Nadal's injuries or he would have already been surpassed by Nadal. And when Nadal wins tomorrow he will be the only man since Laver to win every slam at least twice.

Nobody could live with Federer back then. He played tennis from the Gods, not this clunky string-dependent double handed retrieval nonsense we've been subjected to for a few years.

Djokovic snuck in, on the back of Feds decline and Nadals complacency but the door has been slammed in his face, and now the rank & file are taking him out. I think it's Murray getting on top that's wrecked his belief; he was only too happy to share the court with Federer & Nadal but getting his head handed to him by Andy when it matters most must be crippling.

The panic is showing with the selection of Becker as mentor. I'm still trying to make sense of that.

Yes he snuck in and got 6 lucky slams. Yes the rank and file are taking him out so effectively that this is first loss to a non-big 4 opponent since Berdych beat him at wimbeldon in 2010. Murray is a great player, so is Djokovic, and so is Nadal; that is what you should have real resistance among a group of great players and sadly that was what was missing in the weak era. I am not too shocked by your dismissals of Novak I remember long ago on old 606 you calling him a fluke who won his lone slam because of fed's mono. Well you were wrong then and you are wrong now. As I said you claim Djoko is soft for 1 slam in 8. THEN HOW SHOULD WE CLASSIFY SAFIN, RODDICK, HEWITT, AND NALBY FOR WINNING 1-16 SLAMS COMBINED!

Fighting "proxy" wars behind the player(s) a poster supports is rather cowardly.

Federer has the cojones to get up and get beaten yet again, and he will continue to do so.

SoCal… caretaker GOAT

kemet wrote:

socal1976 wrote:you seem to miss the point of the thread, Novak is not playing Roger. We have to analyze the results of Nadal v. Federer and what it means in the larger context. I am not worried about Novak he has overcome bigger obstacles than this. He lost a tough 5 set match to a in form opponent happens to all of them. And by the way a huge number of anti-djoko wums had a field day a couple of days ago and I didn't get my panties in a twist neither should you.

I have not been on the forum to read the anti-djoko wumming because I had other stuff to do (work, bills, etc.).

As for my, erm, "panties", that is a pretty crass, classless remark (again I am not calling you crass or classless, but this particular remark constitutes such), which adds nothing to your argument.

Sure, Rafa had the beating of Roger from 2005 forward, but notice he had no problems adding to his slam tally, and by the time Rafa won his US Open in 2010, Roger had already won five US Opens, during which time Rafa was getting beaten by random players, so I am failing to see your point here.

In your haste to type this structurally weak argument (i.e. it wades into circular territory), you have four many important points:

1) Ranking: Roger is below David Ferrer of all people in the rankings, and has to contend with tougher draws now. It would have been miraculous for him to beat Tsonga, Murray (who beat him in last year's semi), Nadal, and potentially Djokovic.

2) Court Conditions: I felt as if I was watching any number of French Open matches today. Contrast this with the WTF of a few years ago where Roger dismantled Rafael Nadal 6-0 in a set (A feat, incidentally, which he has managed three times, i.e. 2006 Wimbledon, 2007 Hamburg Masters on clay and 2011 WTF).

3) Matchup: That backhand is simply a liability against Nadal and Roger has never figured out how to counter it. The fact that he has a single-handed backhand may have something to do with it.

4) Deterioration of Return Game: Roger's return game is atrocious. This is bad for him regardless of who he plays. Look at how many break points he missed versus Murray and other players.

Seriously, wumming does not become you.

But wum away and behave immaturely if you must.

Just do not expect any serious responses from me.

The problem with age and deterioration excuses or mutual friend BB's argument that no one could live with federer in his peak is that it does not coincide with reality. Yes someone could live with federer as a teenager, far from his peak especially on faster surfaces and that person was Nadal. I don't want to change this into weak era argument because I have stated my belief about this many times. But even in 2007 and 2008 wimby Fed returned Nadal attrociously and he always has, he does not have a good backhand topspin or drive return whether you talk about Fed 07 or Fed 2014 the same issue is there.

As for the court conditions these was the same court that Berdych and Wawrinka were playing a match with hardly any breaks and a plethora of quick points. Every commentator had been mentioning how the courts in fact have been playing quicker than in recent AOs.

As to wumming, maybe, I would consider it more like a little comedic banter and you should not take it so seriously. But Fed fans have to slowly start to realize that he is not the GOAT, and if I can aid them in this painful process I am here to help. That is the charitable kind of guy I am.

kemet wrote:since it constitutes borderline wumming.

It is full-on wumming, not borderline.  But it is not bad and it would be sad to lose it.  socal knows (and freely admits) that his articles are way OTT, but he does not take himself too seriously and - let's face it - a lot of it is genuinely funny.

Those poor guys got the shortest of straws; Fed in his pomp. Who can blame them?

I don't blame Novak for taking advantage of Federer having Glandular Fever; he grasped the opportunity well, as he did when it all fell tidy in 2011, but that's all gone now. His greatest regret is probably when the rain fell just too hard at RG. Had it stayed at the light drizzle I think he'd have beaten Nadal, but once it got heavy they had to get off and that was that.

socal1976 wrote:
THEN HOW SHOULD WE CLASSIFY SAFIN, RODDICK, HEWITT, AND NALBY FOR WINNING 1-16 SLAMS COMBINED!

 
In lower case.

socal1976 wrote:... he does not have a good backhand topspin or drive return whether you talk about Fed 07 or Fed 2014 the same issue is there…

Be careful… https://imgur.com/3NSgsIh

On a more serious note its worth saying Nadal is a complete one-off. Up until 2010 (6 slams in) he was using a kind of string you wouldn't use to tie logs together with...horrible rough heavy gauge Duralast...in a racquet no other pro would ever consider using.

He's no modern product of uber strings and racquets...Toni taught him to play on rough beaten up old courts with old racquets and dead strings so he had to overcome challenging conditions and rely on/develop his own skills, not the racquet's, to hit the ball properly. The strings never did the work for him, he was generating 5000rpm from his unique stroke & timing, not his horrible racquet set up. His double-hander is weird too...it's basically his natural right-handed FH...so it's dominant, not the usual non-dominant arm driving the DHBH shot. Like I say, a complete one off the game won't see the like of again.

Many may lump Nadal and Djokovic together as modern power DHBHers but under the bonnet their games couldn't be technically much more different. Djokovic is the prototype modern drilled textbook stroke ralleyer. In contrast every shot Nadal hits is anything but text book, even his slice and volleys are hit with an Eastern grip. It's what makes him so unusual for other guys to play against.

BTW, Federer started using Luxilon Alu Banger a few months before he went on to win Wimb 2003...the same string guys like Raonic and Murray now use.

socal1976 wrote:

kemet wrote:

socal1976 wrote:you seem to miss the point of the thread, Novak is not playing Roger. We have to analyze the results of Nadal v. Federer and what it means in the larger context. I am not worried about Novak he has overcome bigger obstacles than this. He lost a tough 5 set match to a in form opponent happens to all of them. And by the way a huge number of anti-djoko wums had a field day a couple of days ago and I didn't get my panties in a twist neither should you.

I have not been on the forum to read the anti-djoko wumming because I had other stuff to do (work, bills, etc.).

As for my, erm, "panties", that is a pretty crass, classless remark (again I am not calling you crass or classless, but this particular remark constitutes such), which adds nothing to your argument.

Sure, Rafa had the beating of Roger from 2005 forward, but notice he had no problems adding to his slam tally, and by the time Rafa won his US Open in 2010, Roger had already won five US Opens, during which time Rafa was getting beaten by random players, so I am failing to see your point here.

In your haste to type this structurally weak argument (i.e. it wades into circular territory), you have four many important points:

1) Ranking: Roger is below David Ferrer of all people in the rankings, and has to contend with tougher draws now. It would have been miraculous for him to beat Tsonga, Murray (who beat him in last year's semi), Nadal, and potentially Djokovic.

2) Court Conditions: I felt as if I was watching any number of French Open matches today. Contrast this with the WTF of a few years ago where Roger dismantled Rafael Nadal 6-0 in a set (A feat, incidentally, which he has managed three times, i.e. 2006 Wimbledon, 2007 Hamburg Masters on clay and 2011 WTF).

3) Matchup: That backhand is simply a liability against Nadal and Roger has never figured out how to counter it. The fact that he has a single-handed backhand may have something to do with it.

4) Deterioration of Return Game: Roger's return game is atrocious. This is bad for him regardless of who he plays. Look at how many break points he missed versus Murray and other players.

Seriously, wumming does not become you.

But wum away and behave immaturely if you must.

Just do not expect any serious responses from me.

The problem with age and deterioration excuses or mutual friend BB's argument that no one could live with federer in his peak is that it does not coincide with reality. Yes someone could live with federer as a teenager, far from his peak especially on faster surfaces and that person was Nadal. I don't want to change this into weak era argument because I have stated my belief about this many times. But even in 2007 and 2008 wimby Fed returned Nadal attrociously and he always has, he does not have a good backhand topspin or drive return whether you talk about Fed 07 or Fed 2014 the same issue is there.

As for the court conditions these was the same court that Berdych and Wawrinka were playing a match with hardly any breaks and a plethora of quick points. Every commentator had been mentioning how the courts in fact have been playing quicker than in recent AOs.

As to wumming, maybe, I would consider it more like a little comedic banter and you should not take it so seriously. But Fed fans have to slowly start to realize that he is not the GOAT, and if I can aid them in this painful process I am here to help. That is the charitable kind of guy I am.

Erm, I never said he was the GOAT, as there are too many other variables to take into account across eras: court speed, genetic ability, etc.

As for the backhand, erm, he is a single-hander. How many  single handers would be able to deal with Rafa's top spin?

Also, you ignore racket technology which enables players to hit winners from impossible angles. I would include Roger as having benefitted from this as well. Which is why GOAT arguments are pointless and do not merit a "comedic bantering" (semantics, semantics) thread, especially when the intent is to wind folks on here up.

The intent is clearly mean-spirited.

summerblues wrote:

kemet wrote:since it constitutes borderline wumming.

It is full-on wumming, not borderline.  But it is not bad and it would be sad to lose it.  socal knows (and freely admits) that his articles are way OTT, but he does not take himself too seriously and - let's face it - a lot of it is genuinely funny.

Thanks for the vote of confidence SB, I don't know what it is about Federer. Every time he loses I do a satanic little jig like Rumplestilskin getting his baby. I am going to be so sad when he retires.

there is not anything much more tiresome in tennis than fans who believe wins by their favourites players elevates *them*

kemet wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

kemet wrote:

socal1976 wrote:you seem to miss the point of the thread, Novak is not playing Roger. We have to analyze the results of Nadal v. Federer and what it means in the larger context. I am not worried about Novak he has overcome bigger obstacles than this. He lost a tough 5 set match to a in form opponent happens to all of them. And by the way a huge number of anti-djoko wums had a field day a couple of days ago and I didn't get my panties in a twist neither should you.

I have not been on the forum to read the anti-djoko wumming because I had other stuff to do (work, bills, etc.).

As for my, erm, "panties", that is a pretty crass, classless remark (again I am not calling you crass or classless, but this particular remark constitutes such), which adds nothing to your argument.

Sure, Rafa had the beating of Roger from 2005 forward, but notice he had no problems adding to his slam tally, and by the time Rafa won his US Open in 2010, Roger had already won five US Opens, during which time Rafa was getting beaten by random players, so I am failing to see your point here.

In your haste to type this structurally weak argument (i.e. it wades into circular territory), you have four many important points:

1) Ranking: Roger is below David Ferrer of all people in the rankings, and has to contend with tougher draws now. It would have been miraculous for him to beat Tsonga, Murray (who beat him in last year's semi), Nadal, and potentially Djokovic.

2) Court Conditions: I felt as if I was watching any number of French Open matches today. Contrast this with the WTF of a few years ago where Roger dismantled Rafael Nadal 6-0 in a set (A feat, incidentally, which he has managed three times, i.e. 2006 Wimbledon, 2007 Hamburg Masters on clay and 2011 WTF).

3) Matchup: That backhand is simply a liability against Nadal and Roger has never figured out how to counter it. The fact that he has a single-handed backhand may have something to do with it.

4) Deterioration of Return Game: Roger's return game is atrocious. This is bad for him regardless of who he plays. Look at how many break points he missed versus Murray and other players.

Seriously, wumming does not become you.

But wum away and behave immaturely if you must.

Just do not expect any serious responses from me.

The problem with age and deterioration excuses or mutual friend BB's argument that no one could live with federer in his peak is that it does not coincide with reality. Yes someone could live with federer as a teenager, far from his peak especially on faster surfaces and that person was Nadal. I don't want to change this into weak era argument because I have stated my belief about this many times. But even in 2007 and 2008 wimby Fed returned Nadal attrociously and he always has, he does not have a good backhand topspin or drive return whether you talk about Fed 07 or Fed 2014 the same issue is there.

As for the court conditions these was the same court that Berdych and Wawrinka were playing a match with hardly any breaks and a plethora of quick points. Every commentator had been mentioning how the courts in fact have been playing quicker than in recent AOs.

As to wumming, maybe, I would consider it more like a little comedic banter and you should not take it so seriously. But Fed fans have to slowly start to realize that he is not the GOAT, and if I can aid them in this painful process I am here to help. That is the charitable kind of guy I am.

Erm, I never said he was the GOAT, as there are too many other variables to take into account across eras: court speed, genetic ability, etc.

As for the backhand, erm, he is a single-hander. How many  single handers would be able to deal with Rafa's top spin?

Also, you ignore racket technology which enables players to hit winners from impossible angles. I would include Roger as having benefitted from this as well. Which is why GOAT arguments are pointless and do not merit a "comedic bantering" (semantics, semantics) thread, especially when the intent is to wind folks on here up.

The intent is clearly mean-spirited.

I don't ignore technology or any such thing like that. Players play on the conditions provided. Doing hypotheticals on how good today's players would be with fast courts, wood racquets, and gut strings is as silly as wondering how good Laver would be playing today's conditions. Ok lets just say Nadal is the greatest player of this generation which leaves Fed in second place again. I do admit a mild case of wummery but I would not go as far as saying it was mean spirited. Fed's single hander is a big disadvantage but the single hander was losing its dominance on tour really since the advent of the composite racquet, the slower conditions and luxis speed up an already existing trend.

Talking about era's socal

With regards to the current era (as of 27/1/14) - Del Potro at No. 3 has one Slam title (2009) and no Masters, Ferrer at No.4 has made 1 Slam final and has one Masters title & Warwrenka at No.5 has made one Slam final (2014) & no Masters titles.


So how strong or weak do you reckon the current era is in relation to the past ?!!

JuliusHMarx wrote:I've often said socal's main interest in tennis is having a go at Fed and his fans. Supporting Djoko is just a side-interest when Djoko is doing well. I'm only judging this based on the number of Fed-based posts vs the number of Djoko-based posts.

The post above your original one, perhaps tells you why Socal feels this way. But mocking of Nole, is strangely acceptable isn't it?

Why is it that when someone questions Fed's GOAT status, they are seen as having a go at him or his fans.

As a poster of six plus years, the most patronising mocking posters, so far, and by a country mile are Roger and his legion of fans. Just go back to July 2012 - for examples and that's mild

Whislt Roger comes out with ludrious statements like "my best tennis is only ahead of me" - then he's fair game in my eyes.

Right,
Socal stop arguing,
Kernet stop acting high and mighty, it annoys people and garners further response.

Everyone else... enjoy the article but stop taking the bait, seriously...

sportslover wrote:Talking about era's socal

With regards to the current era (as of 27/1/14) - Del Potro at No. 3 has one Slam title (2009) and no Masters, Ferrer at No.4 has made 1 Slam final and has one Masters title & Warwrenka at No.5 has made one Slam final (2014) & no Masters titles.


So how strong or weak do you reckon the current era is in relation to the past ?!!

Very strong, because by definition, it must contain a player at No.6 who's a current Slam and Masters holder

sportslover wrote:Talking about era's socal

With regards to the current era (as of 27/1/14) - Del Potro at No. 3 has one Slam title (2009) and no Masters, Ferrer at No.4 has made 1 Slam final and has one Masters title & Warwrenka at No.5 has made one Slam final (2014) & no Masters titles.


So how strong or weak do you reckon the current era is in relation to the past ?!!

Fed was strong till 2012, and Murray is the real #3 he just missed months to injury. When I look at Nadal at or near his prime, Djoko at or near his prime, murray at or near his prime and a still viable Fed up till the end of 2012 I think it is a good era. I would not rate it as strong as the 80s to early 90s because we had a steady stream of talent moving in and out. I will say this if the young guys don't make a splash in a couple of years it will change into another transitional period.

Roger fans mock Rafa fans, Roger fans mock Novak Fans, Rafa fans mock Roger fans, and everyone starts calling the other immature etc etc.
But none of you have ever even met, soo stop presuming things about eachother and get back to some kind of topic, ie what does ths win mean, if anything about which one might be the best

banbrotam wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:I've often said socal's main interest in tennis is having a go at Fed and his fans. Supporting Djoko is just a side-interest when Djoko is doing well. I'm only judging this based on the number of Fed-based posts vs the number of Djoko-based posts.

The post above your original one, perhaps tells you why Socal feels this way. But mocking of Nole, is strangely acceptable isn't it?

Why is it that when someone questions Fed's GOAT status, they are seen as having a go at him or his fans.

As a poster of six plus years, the most patronising mocking posters, so far, and by a country mile are Roger and his legion of fans. Just go back to July 2012 - for examples and that's mild

Whislt Roger comes out with ludrious statements like "my best tennis is only ahead of me" - then he's fair game in my eyes.

Agreed banbro, we have had years of the fed fans lording it over us with salute threads to fed that were as dull and nauseating as a 12 hour flight in economy class. Now that the peasants have stormed the gates we need to stop being negative and nasty. The fact is that as Novak fan in light of Roger's nasty commentary towards Novak for years I am more than entitled to dislike him. And the reason I do dislike fed, the principal reason is because of MC 2008, roger calling Novak a joke in 06 or was it 07, and other incidents. It is funny that I am accused of not really liking Djoko and just being a fed hater, the main reason I dislike fed is because of his conduct towards Novak.

Quite agree banbrotam. Nadal and his fans have been open season on here for years. Many of the Fed fans have tempered somewhat in recent years, their vitriol declining in proportion to Fed's success. Many couldn't stand L'enfant Terrible Nadal blunting the possessor of the beautiful game, they always sought to assume the higher ground of tennis perfection & purity. Each to their own, but Federer always left me cold...even though he's the perfect textbook for technique he was always just Too perfect for me.

lydian wrote:Quite agree banbrotam. Nadal and his fans have been open season on here for years. Many of the Fed fans have tempered somewhat in recent years, their vitriol declining in proportion to Fed's success. Many couldn't stand L'enfant Terrible Nadal blunting the possessor of the beautiful game, they always sought to assume the higher ground of tennis perfection & purity. Each to their own, but Federer always left me cold...even though he's the perfect textbook for technique he was always just Too perfect for me.

Remember how gleeful many holier than though types were following Steve Darcis or Lukas Rosol. Nadal is a very unique talent that has been derided by a large segment of fans for many years. I hope Novak beats him everytime they play but that does not diminish my respect for the man or cause me to try to discredit him as a cheat, doper, or moonballer.

I think it's the sheet "Roger is back to his best", that amuses me the most. In fairness, posters like BB aren't fooled - but there really is too much knicker whetting for someone who beat a serial underachiever in the last 16 and a player who I argued shouldn't even have entered (happily I'm glad to see that Andy has no lasting affects)

I of course, wait for the inevitable 'fed hater' comments - even though he's still in my five favourite of all time. Mind you, I will at some time have to find room for Andy!!

Oh I used to have very heated debates with BB back in the old 606. I was called a Fed hater, just never warmed to the guy...always far far too narcissistic for my liking even though his tennis could be godlike (...vs anyone not called Nadal).

Banbro, it was rather delusional when Fed beat Tsonga and Murray all of sudden reading the posts on this site people were actually giving him a chance against Nadal. That ship sailed years ago when Fed was decrepit and elderly 26.

I guess you mean the media "Roger is back to his best" stuff - did anyone here say that?
The people giving Fed a chance against Rafa were nearly all not Fed fans. The Fed fans were telling them he didn't stand much of a chance, if any.

banbrotam wrote:I think it's the sheet "Roger is back to his best", that amuses me the most. In fairness, posters like BB aren't fooled -  but there really is too much knicker whetting for someone who beat a serial underachiever in the last 16 and a player who I argued shouldn't even have entered (happily I'm glad to see that Andy has no lasting affects)

I of course, wait for the inevitable 'fed hater' comments - even though he's still in my five favourite of all time. Mind you, I will at some time have to find room for Andy!!

Once again it gets confusing: someFed supporters are criticised for saying he's past it and others criticised for becoming optimistic.

Craig was going off on one yesterday because I dared mention he was 32 and #8. His problem is that he's hardwired that if Fed beats Murray he must be at peak. That was the line in 2012 but it was nonsense then too.

lydian wrote:Oh I used to have very heated debates with BB back in the old 606. I was called a Fed hater, just never warmed to the guy...always far far too narcissistic for my liking even though his tennis could be godlike (...vs anyone not called Nadal).

I admit I've never warmed to Nadal (though I always enjoy his clay court matches and have even rooted for him to win on occasion). Guess what I've been called?

JuliusHMarx wrote:

lydian wrote:Oh I used to have very heated debates with BB back in the old 606. I was called a Fed hater, just never warmed to the guy...always far far too narcissistic for my liking even though his tennis could be godlike (...vs anyone not called Nadal).

I admit I've never warmed to Nadal (though I always enjoy his clay court matches and have even rooted for him to win on occasion). Guess what I've been called?

naughty naughty boy?

????!!!

Is there auto edit software on this forum or did JHM just do a superhumanly quick edit?  

HM Murdoch wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

lydian wrote:Oh I used to have very heated debates with BB back in the old 606. I was called a Fed hater, just never warmed to the guy...always far far too narcissistic for my liking even though his tennis could be godlike (...vs anyone not called Nadal).

I admit I've never warmed to Nadal (though I always enjoy his clay court matches and have even rooted for him to win on occasion). Guess what I've been called?

naughty naughty boy?

Worse than that - people think I'm a Fed fan!

This place is soft compared to the old 606...

JHM - "naughty naughty boy" is not what typed. How was it changed?

I'm not bothered, just amazed! It must have happened within a couple of seconds!