Roger Federer is not the GOAT

LukeParkerno1

Make me an Admin!
Sep 23, 2005
98,430
36,334
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Sydney Swans
They both caught Fed on the way down. He's 5 years older than Nadal and what 7 older than Novak?

If you watch tennis. The eye test will tell you that Federer is clearly the superior tennis player.
In YOUR opinion. There is an argument for any one of those 3. Personally I hate splitting them, and rather wait till the end of Novak's career. His stats against Federer are phenomenal.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

jod23

TheBrownDog
Apr 2, 2000
62,035
18,267
Perth, Australia
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Liverpool, Chicago Bulls.
It's not really an opinion. Federer is a better tennis player. Novak and Nadal have their particular styles that serve them extremely well.

But Federer is a different beast. Can serve you out of a game. Great defensively. Has power, precision. Devastating at the net. Can serve and volley. Hyper intelligent and capable of pulling of shots the other two don't where you're just like... wtf!?

He's pure tennis ability in every facet of the game whereas Nadal your ground and pound and Novak your agility, defense and power. But Federer can do EVERYTHING.

Novak might catch his slams titles. Fed will be hard pressed to get another at his age and Novak has literally zero competition such is the weakness in men's tennis. So he will probably catch him.

But nobody could ever tell me Novak is a better all around tennis player than Roger Federer. No chance.
 

FreoRicci

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 22, 2011
11,413
9,806
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Liverpool FC, Washington Wizards
It's not really an opinion. Federer is a better tennis player. Novak and Nadal have their particular styles that serve them extremely well.

But Federer is a different beast. Can serve you out of a game. Great defensively. Has power, precision. Devastating at the net. Can serve and volley. Hyper intelligent and capable of pulling of shots the other two don't where you're just like... wtf!?

He's pure tennis ability in every facet of the game whereas Nadal your ground and pound and Novak your agility, defense and power. But Federer can do EVERYTHING.

Novak might catch his slams titles. Fed will be hard pressed to get another at his age and Novak has literally zero competition such is the weakness in men's tennis. So he will probably catch him.

But nobody could ever tell me Novak is a better all around tennis player than Roger Federer. No chance.
Novak has been in the midst of the best generation of professional tennis ever. Nadal won his first grand slam at 19, French Open 2005. Federer had already won 4. The argument that Federer is too old for Novak is nonsense.
Djokovic won his first at 20, like I said, in 2008. Federer at the time was 26. He’s in his prime. For the next 5-7 years he was in that prime age category, whereas Novak and Nadal started dominating at a younger age.
Sure Federer had all that ability, but still doesn’t dominate up against Novak and Nadal. They too have some impressive agility, ability and fitness to go the 5 setter. That’s the key thing- Federer couldn’t really go the distance. He’s often breaks up points quickly, and likes to volley whereas Nadal and Novak are baseline players. Federer haven’t really broken away from that. The longer the rally goes, the better it is for Novak and Nadal. He knows that, and unfortunately gets found out on it. In tie breakers against the duo, he tends to get overwhelmed and like on Sunday night, that was the case. Loss all three tiebreakers.

Novak is now 31. He’s hardly going to go on and dominate to win 5-10 more. Doubt he would go to 37. Weak competition? Nadal and Novak, like Federer, will probably go on for another 3-5 years trying to beat that magic 20 titles. So it’s a great competition.
It’s just the fact that Federer has gone on past the age in which the tennis greats often retire is the outlier. Exceptional athlete that has had the incredible fortune of nil major injuries. A bit of luck thrown in too
 

jod23

TheBrownDog
Apr 2, 2000
62,035
18,267
Perth, Australia
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Liverpool, Chicago Bulls.
I think also it's Novak behind Roger with Nadal much further back. The absolute king of clay and always will be but overall not as good as Roger or Novak. 90% of Nadals slams are just his yearly win at the FO.
 

bato

The Quarterly ⭐️ UBL_fp
Oct 7, 2011
7,323
7,399
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Denver Nuggets, Novak Djokovic
But Federer is a different beast. Can serve you out of a game. Great defensively. Has power, precision. Devastating at the net. Can serve and volley. Hyper intelligent and capable of pulling of shots the other two don't where you're just like... wtf!?
Nadal literally ticks five of those boxes. Great defensively, power, precision, impeccable net skills, intelligent, shot making....

Novak has better depth of shot, consistency of shot, less unforced errors, better court coverage and footwork and his tactics during matches are next level. How do you think he's won so many slams despite not having such an elegant and 'flawless' game like Roger does?
 

bato

The Quarterly ⭐️ UBL_fp
Oct 7, 2011
7,323
7,399
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Denver Nuggets, Novak Djokovic
Also...
They both caught Fed on the way down. He's 5 years older than Nadal and what 7 older than Novak?
Um. What was Federer doing at Novak's current age? Why couldn't a 32 year old Roger dominate like Novak is right now?

710470


Oh that's right. Behind Novak Djokovic - yet again.
 

Jack Gun Cyril Stun

Club Legend
Oct 5, 2012
1,062
1,198
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Nadal literally ticks five of those boxes. Great defensively, power, precision, impeccable net skills, intelligent, shot making....

Novak has better depth of shot, consistency of shot, less unforced errors, better court coverage and footwork and his tactics during matches are next level. How do you think he's won so many slams despite not having such an elegant and 'flawless' game like Roger does?
Wouldn’t describe Rafa as having impeccable net skills.
He and Novak are solid at the net but not top shelf...but that’s the way the game has been for the last 15 years or so.
I personally think Wimbledon went too far in slowing the game down, they’ve killed the attacking volleyor, a great athletic offensive skill of the game.

Again I’m not sure Rafa would have won any Wimbledon’s under the faster conditions.
 

bato

The Quarterly ⭐️ UBL_fp
Oct 7, 2011
7,323
7,399
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Denver Nuggets, Novak Djokovic
Wouldn’t describe Rafa as having impeccable net skills.
He and Novak are solid at the net but not top shelf...but that’s the way the game has been for the last 15 years or so.
I personally think Wimbledon went too far in slowing the game down, they’ve killed the attacking volleyor, a great athletic offensive skill of the game.

Again I’m not sure Rafa would have won any Wimbledon’s under the faster conditions.
I think his approaches and volley placement is elite. He doesn't approach the net as much as the others do, but when he does he actually wins at a higher rate than the other two guys. It's a very underrated part of his game.

710488


The chart above says a lot about his net skills.
 
Last edited:

imagifED

Draftee
Jun 22, 2019
8
13
AFL Club
Adelaide
Federer really only has the slam count padded from the 03-07 weak era and a "pwetty backhand" going for him at this stage.
Djokovic will soon take over most year end no.1's and most weeks at no.1.
Less masters titles than both of Djokodal
No golden masters
No olympic singles gold
Losing overall h2h vs both of Djokodal
Losing slam h2h vs both of Djokodal
Lower overall win % vs both of Djokodal
Lower elo rating vs both of Djokodal
 

Jack Gun Cyril Stun

Club Legend
Oct 5, 2012
1,062
1,198
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I think his approaches and volley placement is elite. He doesn't approach the net as much as the others do, but when he does he actually wins at a higher rate than the other two guys. It's a very underrated part of his game.

View attachment 710488

The chart above says a lot about his net skills.
Does it? Being more selective with your net approaches should give you a higher % of conversion, esp when you’re following in that forehand.
 

Thrawn

Hall of Famer
Jul 21, 2001
32,214
23,450
Melbourne, Australia.
AFL Club
Carlton
Federer really only has the slam count padded from the 03-07 weak era and a "pwetty backhand" going for him at this stage.
Djokovic will soon take over most year end no.1's and most weeks at no.1.
Less masters titles than both of Djokodal
No golden masters
No olympic singles gold
Losing overall h2h vs both of Djokodal
Losing slam h2h vs both of Djokodal
Lower overall win % vs both of Djokodal
Lower elo rating vs both of Djokodal
Who gives a fu** about masters titles? The only titles that matter are GS titles.

And H2H is irrelevant. Certainly no where near GS titles.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

pepsi

Brownlow Medallist
Feb 4, 2008
10,741
10,591
Maribyrnong
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Man Utd, Atlanta Hawks
- In grand slams total victories, on avg Djokovic's opponents' ranking has been 39, Nadal's is 50.7, and Federer's is 49.3.
In the FINALS of grand slams, the avg opponent ranking for Djokovic has been 5.7, for Nadal it's 7.1, while for Federer it's 14.9!
- Also, when Federer has LOST in GS finals, his avg opponent ranking was 10.7, while for Djokovic it's 4.6 and for Rafa it's 6.3.
 

eaglespremiers

BigFooty Forger
Jun 24, 2009
18,246
10,232
In your dreams
AFL Club
West Coast
Who gives a fu** about masters titles? The only titles that matter are GS titles.

And H2H is irrelevant. Certainly no where near GS titles.
I was going to suggest that your first sentence was complete nonsense but then I read your second sentence and I just honestly can't be bothered arguing with you. I think you will dismiss any position simply because it differs from your own.
 

Thrawn

Hall of Famer
Jul 21, 2001
32,214
23,450
Melbourne, Australia.
AFL Club
Carlton
I was going to suggest that your first sentence was complete nonsense but then I read your second sentence and I just honestly can't be bothered arguing with you. I think you will dismiss any position simply because it differs from your own.
That's because you have no argument. Because it's a stupid argument to put Masters and H2H on the same pegging as GS titles.
 

eaglespremiers

BigFooty Forger
Jun 24, 2009
18,246
10,232
In your dreams
AFL Club
West Coast
That's because you have no argument. Because it's a stupid argument to put Masters and H2H on the same pegging as GS titles.
Your bias is clouding your judgement.
Nobody is saying they are the same as Grand Slam achievements, simply that should two players be on similar Grand Slam tallies then secondary considerations (such as Masters, head-to-heads, weeks at no 1 etc) are relevant considerations.
Surely the discussion cannot be determined solely by the number of grand slams. Such a position is absolutely absurd.
 

imagifED

Draftee
Jun 22, 2019
8
13
AFL Club
Adelaide
Who gives a fu** about masters titles? The only titles that matter are GS titles.

And H2H is irrelevant. Certainly no where near GS titles.
Yes it can. The gap is four, that's still pretty big... should've been five if Federer wasn't a choker.

It is like GF wins - no one cares who finished #1 at the end of the H&A season.
I suppose Nadal will be co-GOAT if he ties Federer in slam titles (easily achievable) no matter how many times he has won Roland Garros?
 

Jack Gun Cyril Stun

Club Legend
Oct 5, 2012
1,062
1,198
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I suppose Nadal will be co-GOAT if he ties Federer in slam titles (easily achievable) no matter how many times he has won Roland Garros?
Nah they’re weighted, sort of like how swimming medals should be vs athletic medals.
Everyone knows 1 Wimbledon is worth at least 2 French, it’s grass v dirt fgs
 

HODGEYROAD

Brownlow Medallist
May 10, 2007
14,636
13,704
Bayswater
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Arsenal Fc Portland Trailblazers
A real shame for Federer he couldn't close out Wimbledon serving at 8-7 40-15 when he'd only been broken once for the match up until that point.
 

Top Bottom