In his so called best season, Federer lost 4 times against his rival Nadal. Even at his peak he was still Nadal's puppet.
Compare that to Novak's best season of 2011: All slams won against the top 4 players, with a winning record of 6-0 against Nadal and 4-1 against Federer. Novak wasn't dominated by a single man, he dominated everyone for his 3 slams and record breaking 5 masters.
Yes, Federer only lost to the top 2 players in his prime, such as Hrbarty and Volandri. lol
The facts are that Federer was dominating unseeded players whereas Novak/Nadal dominated top players in their best runs in 2010/2011.
Don't compare underachievers and mugs to Novak and Rafa. Also, it's amusing that you keep saying "Nadull". Dull as he may be he has been owning Federer and making him cry like a helpless bitch for years.
I'm not guessing what they could do, their records prove that they weren't threats to Federer and their performances in slams ranged from flukes to inconsistent.
A weak field, an old Agassi, and only a teenage Rafa to spank him on clay, that's why Federer got so many slams from 2003-2006.
Same old garbage u are saying. Fed didn't lose a slam to harbarty and volandri. Or any mug during his Prime. U are just throwing around names that fed faced that is not grounded in reality.
Tell me what happen on the ground facts , not hypothetical scenarios . Fact is nadull/ Novak/ Murray is having trouble beating Feds second tier rivals . He ! He!
Young nadull . Nadull was a multi- slam winner and finalist from 04-06.
He was a young bloomer. There is even players who won slams before nadull.
For a simplistic and physical game like nadull the younger the better for a clay courter.
That why he won so much on all surfaces in 2005 and since 2010 can only win on clay his body is breaking down and he can play his grinding game when injuries come.
Nadull hasnt won a title of clay in what will be in more than 2 years. In 2005/ 2006 he was winning on all surfaces.even though it was faster.If nadull is not of Feds generation then fed has no major rival because nadull is from a subsequent generation and thus will have the advantage in the rivalry .
U can't face the fact that nadull/ Novak routinely lose to mugs and fed don't especially in his Prime.
Novak and Murray are susceptible to big serves and power players. Back the his gluten free didn't would not be worth anything because grinding wasn't rewarding and pushing etc.
U fail to answer , just repeating the same thing over and over again.
Nadull face Soderling no GS. Birdshit. 1 final, 1 SF. Just like baghdatis.
Novak 1 slam , benefitted from a triocki choke and a fed choke. That year he was serving more double faults than aces.
In 2011 Novak face (revert) to clay courter nadull. He wasn't winning any off clay. And not only losing to Novak other mugs.he lost to olderer.
Nadull wasn't wining anything off clay and Novak lost to him at RG.
He beat no- slam Murray.
Fed has been more successful in his decline than Murray n Novak in their Prime.
Fed won 9 slams 03-06 and 8 slams from07-12. Pretty even whatever "era" or category u chose.
So u think nadull/ Murray / Novak stood a chance against Agassi in 2003.
Ok then at the AO at his favorite slam when they can't beat random mugs.
Get some tennis knowledge and come back mate.