Another incredible achievement from Federer.
I'll just leave this one here. Always enjoyable to be proven right
I'll just leave this one here. Always enjoyable to be proven right
Last edited:
Federer - a return to #1?
- Thread starter Pedantic
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Demosthenes
Premiership Player
- Jun 9, 2015
- 3,364
- 3,074
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Haha. Context:
I am pleased you tagged me though pepsi, it's nice to know that your life is bereft enough that you're still butthurt about being schooled a year ago.
I am pleased you tagged me though pepsi, it's nice to know that your life is bereft enough that you're still butthurt about being schooled a year ago.
Last edited:
Yep I was schooled. Got to within 2 match wins of number 1 last year. Let's ignore allathe rest of the points you made.
Ignorance is bliss hey? Must be nice not being able to accept you are wrong sometimes.
Demosthenes
Premiership Player
- Jun 9, 2015
- 3,364
- 3,074
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
"Sorry, you were right" would have been shorter to type.
You could well be right though his 20 slams will probably stand a long time. Djokovic is probably finished and certainly does not have 8 in him and Rafa really shouldn't be winning grass or hard slams as he moves through his thirties. I think that 20 is secure enough as his number of weeks at 1. Novak is not going to catch that and almost certainly will never again be number 1. Rafa has too much ground to make up.
- Banned
- #159
Yeah that's exactly what I was wondering today, I think it's more likely that he skips it than plays it.
- Banned
- #161
Never write of a champion. The fact he's number one at his age with a reduced schedule is phenomenal. Nadal won something like 4600 rankings points on clay alone last year while Fed missed entire clay season. Even more remarkable he's now numero uno.
Forward Press
Hall of Famer
lmao
Forward Press
Hall of Famer
lmao
- Banned
- #164
Demon supporter say no more
- Banned
- #165
You never mentioned the year you stated he had zero chance remember.
"Fed won't go close to number one, the trajectory is utterly unsustainable for him at this stage of his career"
Demosthenes
Premiership Player
- Jun 9, 2015
- 3,364
- 3,074
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Why would I need to? It was quite clearly specified in the question that framed the discussion.
If you chaps have trouble with your reading comprehension, it's regrettable that public schools are underfunded but hardly my problem.
And the reasons the demon supporter said he would never get the #1 spot back are also hilarious. Egg all over their face and cant admit they were wrong.
Demosthenes
Premiership Player
- Jun 9, 2015
- 3,364
- 3,074
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
I'm pretty comfortable with the reasons for my accurate prediction. Your tears are delicious.
Happy tears yes. Federer has reached #1 again and you were wrong.
Demosthenes
Premiership Player
- Jun 9, 2015
- 3,364
- 3,074
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
If you want to pretend I made a prediction about what would happen beyond 2017 because you are so butthurt about being shown up last year, I guess that is your prerogative. It's a little sad though.
We'll just remind you of this post that you made hey?
- Aug 11, 2008
- 3,589
- 1,411
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Liverpool
You said Federer wouldn't reach number 1 due to his age and the nature of the ranking system. Well, the ranking system didn't change and Federer didn't reverse the ageing process. It's logically inconsistent to claim you were open to him reaching number 1 this year given the reasons you gave for your prediction last year.
Forward Press
Hall of Famer
Stop contaminating this thread with logic and reason.
Demosthenes was simply wrong.
If he had said that the road to Number 1 was paved with difficulty and unlikely he would have been right but in stating his view so baldly and self confidently he was simply wrong.
EG I don't believe Djokovic will ever be number one again. Past his prime and with ongoing injury issues it is a 100 to 1 shot I think it so unlikely as to be improbable. However it is possible. It is not a zero chance and it would be foolish to say it was.
