2003 Roger Federer
2004 Roger Federer (2)
2005 Roger Federer (3)
2006 Roger Federer (4)
2007 Roger Federer (5)
2008 Roger Federer (6)
2009 Roger Federer (7)
2010 Roger Federer (8)
2011 Roger Federer (9)
2012 Roger Federer (10)
2013 Roger Federer (11)
2014 Roger Federer(12)
2015 Roger Federer(13）
2016 Roger Federer(14)
2017 Roger Federer（15）
Edberg Sportsmanship Award Voted for by the players of the ATP.
2004 Roger Federer
2005 Roger Federer (2)
2006 Roger Federer (3)
2007 Roger Federer (4)
2008 Roger Federer (5)
2009 Roger Federer (6)
2011 Roger Federer (7)
2012 Roger Federer (8)
2013 Roger Federer (9)
2014 Roger Federer(10)
2015 Roger Federer(11)
2016 Roger Federer(12)
2017 Roger Federer (13)
Roger Federer suggests he’s not actually the GOAT after all.
“But you know, it’s hard to judge who is the best of all time, you see Bjorn Borg, John McEnroe, Rod Laver, Rafael Nadal, Ivan Lendl, Jimmy Connors and Pete Sampras.”
“Sampras versus Ivanisevic match, or one between those kind of players, is not enjoyable. It’s not really tennis, it is a few swings of the racquet. For me, in the past it was just serve, serve, serve.”
Fed after being asked if he can win a Slam next year, “The French is a different story, but everywhere else it’s more on my racket than anybody else’s”
nadal’s arrogant excuse loser fan. It is ATP players to vote for sportsmanship prizes. You go to complain to an ATP players.
Edberg Sportsmanship Award Voted for by the players of the ATP.
2004 Roger Federer
2005 Roger Federer (2)
2006 Roger Federer (3)
2007 Roger Federer (4)
2008 Roger Federer (5)
2009 Roger Federer (6)
2011 Roger Federer (7)
2012 Roger Federer (8)
2013 Roger Federer (9)
2014 Roger Federer(10)
2015 Roger Federer(11)
2016 Roger Federer(12)
2017 Roger Federer（13）
“Great, we’re positive,” he said sarcastically. “It was great to win two sets off Novak, and losing four. Losing a match, it’s really exciting. But I don’t know what to tell you. The season’s not done yet. Let’s talk about this stuff in hopefully four matches.”
^^Juan Jose disagrees, and I agree with Juan Jose’s take:
RT @juanjo_sports: “People are confusing two different things: Nadal, Djokovic and Murray are NOT Federer’s generation…but they do belong in his era. #details”
No-one ever came out and said Djokovic and Fed aren’t the same era when Fed was beating up on Djoker during Djoker’s formative years……….it was just Fed demonstrating his greatness.
An era, by definition, is a period of time characterized by particular circumstances, events, or personages. Assigning specific dates to an era renders the definition subjective. For me, therefore, the period during which Djoko and Fed played/still play is characterized by exactly that: they played or are playing in the same period.
If you want to “excuse” Fed’s current losses to that fact that he is not of the same era as Djoker i.e. old, you have to also excuse Djoko’s early losses to Fed to the fact that he was not of Fed’s era i.e young.
what it proves is that you can’t attribute their head-to-head record to an age difference, since they have played the same amount of matches in Federer’s era as they have in Djokovic’s.
So what you are saying is Fed’s era was when he was younger, and Djokovic’s era is when he is older?
What I am saying is there are no 2 different eras with these 2, they are playing in the same era, today and yesterday. They are 2 players of different generations playing in the same era.
Good example Ricky! No, what I am saying is Michael Russel and Ricardas Berankas are different generation players playing in the same era. Just as Djoko and Fed are different generation players playing in the same era.
Wow, that’s pretty digital thinking there Ricky. Like the fed fans comparing Davydenko’s 6-5 h2h vs Rafa to Rafa’ 21-10 over Fed. Very defensive of you.
‘Era’ is a time span with certain characteristics, and everybody, who plays now, plays in the same era. Doesn’t matter, how old they are. When Rafa and Andre met inthe final of Montreal 2005, they played in Fed’s era, even if Andre was 35 and Rafa was 19. But they were from different generations. JuanJose nailed it. If you compare two players with each other, their generation matters. ‘Era’ is only a word for pinpointing the time, like ‘fin de siecle’.
To the comment on age advantage we have to add one more observation, to make the comparison more meaningful. It used to be that Roger almost always beat Novak for many years in a row. As we often have written about… until Novak was a couple of months into his nearly-unbeatable mode in 2011, Roger and Novak were in the same draw at major tournaments 13 consecutive times… which we know means statistically that quite a few of those draws could not have been random. The preferential treatment Roger received with regard to playing Novak rather than Andy (or Rafa) means that Novak and him met even more often than they would have if all those draws had been random. Thus their H2H would have been more in favor of Novak if every one of those 13 consecutive draws had been random.
these ‘better’ ones are… some of these are really priceless. And the lot of them put together, all from mostly the same early humbler years are… well…. priceless.
Haha, so quiet in this room. I have it all to myself.
#First!!!
Surely you can hear me ? ? ? ? ?
ATP WorldTour.com Fans’ Favorite.
2003 Roger Federer
2004 Roger Federer (2)
2005 Roger Federer (3)
2006 Roger Federer (4)
2007 Roger Federer (5)
2008 Roger Federer (6)
2009 Roger Federer (7)
2010 Roger Federer (8)
2011 Roger Federer (9)
2012 Roger Federer (10)
2013 Roger Federer (11)
2014 Roger Federer(12)
2015 Roger Federer(13）
2016 Roger Federer(14)
2017 Roger Federer（15）
Edberg Sportsmanship Award Voted for by the players of the ATP.
2004 Roger Federer
2005 Roger Federer (2)
2006 Roger Federer (3)
2007 Roger Federer (4)
2008 Roger Federer (5)
2009 Roger Federer (6)
2011 Roger Federer (7)
2012 Roger Federer (8)
2013 Roger Federer (9)
2014 Roger Federer(10)
2015 Roger Federer(11)
2016 Roger Federer(12)
2017 Roger Federer (13)
Open Era GOAT List.
http://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/goatList
1, Roger Federer. 2, Novak Djokovic. 3, Rafael Nadal. 4, Ivan Lendl. 5, Pete Sampras.
Roger Federer suggests he’s not actually the GOAT after all.
“But you know, it’s hard to judge who is the best of all time, you see Bjorn Borg, John McEnroe, Rod Laver, Rafael Nadal, Ivan Lendl, Jimmy Connors and Pete Sampras.”
http://metro.co.uk/2017/10/18/roger-federer-suggests-hes-not-actually-the-goat-after-all-7010791/
Roger Federer is a pure tennis fan. CLASS. smart. greatest. humble. He got 20 GS. But he will still say the same thing.
Pete Sampras wasn’t fun, says Rafael Nadal
https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/tennis/pete-sampras-wasnt-fun-says-rafael-nadal-6415131.html.
“Sampras versus Ivanisevic match, or one between those kind of players, is not enjoyable. It’s not really tennis, it is a few swings of the racquet. For me, in the past it was just serve, serve, serve.”
arrogant excuse
Nadal : Playing the Masters Cup every year on indoor hard is not fair
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/nadal-playing-the-masters-cup-every-year-on-indoor-hard-is-not-fair.476907/
unfair = Grass MS never exist
stop selfish excuse.
Open Era GOAT List.
http://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/goatList
1, Roger Federer. 2, Novak Djokovic. 3, Rafael Nadal. 4, Ivan Lendl. 5, Jimmy Connors. 6, Pete Sampras.
Ha, ha, deerslayer63! But I think, the Rafa thread is a joint venture at the moment. Most of today’s comments could have been posted here, too. 🙂
Fed after being asked if he can win a Slam next year, “The French is a different story, but everywhere else it’s more on my racket than anybody else’s”
#BowToTheMightyRafa
#FortressRG
Seriously, he said that, now? On his racket?
#BeatsEmperorHasNoClothes
Fed wins sportsmanship award again.
Who counted the votes? Was it Moët or Chandon?
Too many “hanging chads” methinks.
#Florida
nadal’s arrogant excuse loser fan. It is ATP players to vote for sportsmanship prizes. You go to complain to an ATP players.
Edberg Sportsmanship Award Voted for by the players of the ATP.
2004 Roger Federer
2005 Roger Federer (2)
2006 Roger Federer (3)
2007 Roger Federer (4)
2008 Roger Federer (5)
2009 Roger Federer (6)
2011 Roger Federer (7)
2012 Roger Federer (8)
2013 Roger Federer (9)
2014 Roger Federer(10)
2015 Roger Federer(11)
2016 Roger Federer(12)
2017 Roger Federer（13）
NID that he’d win it again.
#sympathy votes
#compensation
#miss congeniality award
#DivAward
And here’s your 2013 to infnity winner of the Stephan Edberg trophy, snark and all:
http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2013/11/federer-im-just-rattled-times/49708/#.UnorXhBRCDc
“Great, we’re positive,” he said sarcastically. “It was great to win two sets off Novak, and losing four. Losing a match, it’s really exciting. But I don’t know what to tell you. The season’s not done yet. Let’s talk about this stuff in hopefully four matches.”
What a louse…………..
RT @juanjo_sports: “Roger Federer is one more loss to Djokovic away from not having a winning record against either of the 2 best players of his era.”
#BleatingGOAT
Federer and Djokovic aren’t the same era
^^Juan Jose disagrees, and I agree with Juan Jose’s take:
RT @juanjo_sports: “People are confusing two different things: Nadal, Djokovic and Murray are NOT Federer’s generation…but they do belong in his era. #details”
no they aren’t. the notion that they are is certifiably insane.
to be in the same era you have to be in your prime at the same time for AT LEAST five years and probably more. Five years is the MINIMUM.
Djokovic and Federer were in their primes at the same time for 2 years at most.
Don’t 4get losing H2H against Andy.
No-one ever came out and said Djokovic and Fed aren’t the same era when Fed was beating up on Djoker during Djoker’s formative years……….it was just Fed demonstrating his greatness.
no. Federer’s greatness had nothing to do with a few wins over a 20-year-old Djokovic. Nor did anyone attribute said wins to Federer’s greatness.
Agree, Fed’s greatness had nothing to do with wins over a young Djoker but the Federazzi disagree. And they were not a few wins, they were many.
“to be in the same era you have to be in your prime at the same time for AT LEAST five years and probably more. Five years is the MINIMUM.”
According to who?
#Dimonpedia
#MovingGoalPosts
ok what are your rules? you can’t just claim they are the same era and not tell us what your definition of “era” is.
i can’t wait to see what your definition is. this is gonna be good.
An era, by definition, is a period of time characterized by particular circumstances, events, or personages. Assigning specific dates to an era renders the definition subjective. For me, therefore, the period during which Djoko and Fed played/still play is characterized by exactly that: they played or are playing in the same period.
If you want to “excuse” Fed’s current losses to that fact that he is not of the same era as Djoker i.e. old, you have to also excuse Djoko’s early losses to Fed to the fact that he was not of Fed’s era i.e young.
i already did that
Djokovic has had the age advantage in 11
10 have been approximately even
Federer had the age advantage in 9
so overall: basically exactly even
So your maths proves my point: they are of the same era! Their wins/losses over each other should not be “explained” by their relative ages.
Different generations but the same era………………
it doesn’t prove that at all.
what it proves is that you can’t attribute their head-to-head record to an age difference, since they have played the same amount of matches in Federer’s era as they have in Djokovic’s.
So what you are saying is Fed’s era was when he was younger, and Djokovic’s era is when he is older?
What I am saying is there are no 2 different eras with these 2, they are playing in the same era, today and yesterday. They are 2 players of different generations playing in the same era.
so by your definition, Michael Russell and Ricardas Berankis are the same generation because they played each other last month in Basel
#GoodOne
Just a minute, I have to look up Michael Russell and Ricardas Berankis………..
#WhoAreThey
Good example Ricky! No, what I am saying is Michael Russel and Ricardas Berankas are different generation players playing in the same era. Just as Djoko and Fed are different generation players playing in the same era.
Thank you!
so yes, you just said they are the same era
Wow, that’s pretty digital thinking there Ricky. Like the fed fans comparing Davydenko’s 6-5 h2h vs Rafa to Rafa’ 21-10 over Fed. Very defensive of you.
I was referring to the comment “because they played each other last month in Basel”
Era is a subjective term. That said…
Nole turned professional in 2003 (10 years ago) and Roger in 1998 (15 years ago).
Nole was 18 and Fed 24 in their first meeting and Nole is 26 and Fed is 32 today.
They have met h2h over an eight year span meeting THIRTY-ONE TIMES!!!
They’re part of the same era obviously.
#HOWMANYTIMES????
Exactly; ‘era’ is a very subjective term, ‘generation’ is not.
‘Era’ is a time span with certain characteristics, and everybody, who plays now, plays in the same era. Doesn’t matter, how old they are. When Rafa and Andre met inthe final of Montreal 2005, they played in Fed’s era, even if Andre was 35 and Rafa was 19. But they were from different generations. JuanJose nailed it. If you compare two players with each other, their generation matters. ‘Era’ is only a word for pinpointing the time, like ‘fin de siecle’.
Fed arrived at his personal ‘fin de siecle’ this year.
To the comment on age advantage we have to add one more observation, to make the comparison more meaningful. It used to be that Roger almost always beat Novak for many years in a row. As we often have written about… until Novak was a couple of months into his nearly-unbeatable mode in 2011, Roger and Novak were in the same draw at major tournaments 13 consecutive times… which we know means statistically that quite a few of those draws could not have been random. The preferential treatment Roger received with regard to playing Novak rather than Andy (or Rafa) means that Novak and him met even more often than they would have if all those draws had been random. Thus their H2H would have been more in favor of Novak if every one of those 13 consecutive draws had been random.
Top 10 Fed quotes:
http://www.thetennisspace.com/top-10-roger-federer-quotes/
Some of these quotes are even better: http://www.tennis-x.com/playerquotes/Roger-Federer.php
these ‘better’ ones are… some of these are really priceless. And the lot of them put together, all from mostly the same early humbler years are… well…. priceless.
where is my master class? I mean card.
Federer won three of his majors against unseeded players.
Comparing two six-year periods of time:
2003-2007: eight unseeded players and seven players seeded outside top eight made the finals of a major.
2008-2013: one unseeded player and two players seeded outside top eight made the finals of a major.
There are 24 majors over six years.
Therefore, in the first period, 62.5% of players in the finals were outside the Top 8. 33% were unseeded.
In the second period, only 12.5% of players in the finals were outside the Top 8. Just 4% were unseeded.
^^^ Correction: 2002-2007