The Fedal era seems to be completely over or will be by the end of this year [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

The Fedal era seems to be completely over or will be by the end of this year

SetSampras
01-07-2012, 06:26 PM
This may be Nadal's last year in terms of high enough play to be a top contender anymore. Hes clearly on the way down at this point and this could be his last shot at getting any slams this year. . Roger may have lingering back problems and its only time now he begins losing earlier then normal due to decline and age. Both have too much mileage on them at this point.

This could be the last year they are reasonably top guys and contenders to the slam crowns. More mileage then anyone else on tour and its clearly showing. By the end of the season a new era may have begun..

If neither get a slam by the end of the year, they may never see another one again.. Unless Nadal can miracle a French Open at the very end

jcempire
01-07-2012, 06:33 PM
of course not

Nadal still very young and I believe four or five more years on him at least

Looner
01-07-2012, 06:41 PM
^^^
Yeah, right. Even 15-20. Why not 30. Fed at 29 could barely win a slam. Nadal is 26 this year and will have been playing 2 years less than Fed on tour. So in terms of 'Fed age' he'll be 28. So, I'd say next year would be his last, maybe 2014 if the new guns keep underperforming.

Jimnik
01-07-2012, 06:43 PM
I hope so. The endless Federer-Nadal debates.

Kind of doubt it though.

Poirot123
01-07-2012, 06:47 PM
Well I don't think you can base that on just one ATP250 event, when one player is on a 20 match unbeaten streak (note not winning streak) and the other made 3 slam finals last year, winning one.

However, Federer has looked vulnerable against guys in the top 10 now for 18 months, and that is probably extended to the top 16 now as he's been troubled by Simon and Monfils recently. However, still on his day, when he's 100% focussed and committed, he is as good as the world number 1 Djokovic. His injured back, at a cruicial time just before the AO doesn't bode well for his chances though as he'll need to be 100% to beat any guy in the top 10.

Nadal has looked to be in decline after the way Djokovic dismantled him last year and I think other players are learning how to beat him. Nadal continually cites injuries (bad knee and shoulder) which prevent him training effectively and the need for him to alter his game (Nadal said he wants to step into the court more and take the ball earlier and flatter) may mean he struggles against the top guys until the clay season starts.

I think with their problems (injuries for Fed, injuries and form (and confidence?) for Nadal) consign them down the list of favourites for the AO. Djokovic is the stand out favourite and looks all but unstoppable in my opinion, and I'm 75% confident Djokovic will win his 5 GS title in a few weeks time. It's come to the point where I consider Tsonga the second favourite, with Muzzer third, and then Fedal. Berdych, Del Potro, Monfils, and Ferrer are wildcards who could cause ONE upset, but cannot win the tournament unless it completely opens up for them.

GSMnadal
01-07-2012, 06:50 PM
At least wait until after the AO... I though Nadal looked pretty decent in Doha, and a lot of forehands were missing by just a few inches. And we all know that those usually land in when it's a slam, so don't write him off just yet. And at Roland Garros and Wimbledon he'll still be the favourite.

As for Federer, AO looks like his best chance to me (very slim chance though), but he's been off for quite some time now, not having won a slam for 2 years.

syc23
01-07-2012, 06:51 PM
I would think Fed will still be a contender until end of 2013. For Nadal, it really depends if he can defend FO as winning at least 1 slam a year gives him the confidence and the belief that he can still compete with the best.

If Clay Warrior fails to win any slams in 2012 then his confidence will plummet and we might see the beginning of the end. We are potentially entering a Djokovic/Murray era but that would only happen if the Scot can bag a slam within the next 12-18 months. Djokovic can have a big say in how things go. If he picks up the French Open then Nadal's clay domination will be over aswell.

LuCC
01-07-2012, 06:57 PM
of course not

Nadal still very young and I believe four or five more years on him at least

He is young, but his play style will get him down sooner than later ( same djoker) so I don't believe they will be able to compete with such high level of intensity. Ofcourse they may use some aids or COSMIC EGGS, but you won't cheat your own body. The best example of that is nadal's 2009.
Just imagine more finals like uso 2011, they will ruin themselves. I think in 2-3 years time their organisms will be so exhausted that they're not gonna fight for the biggest scalps.

MuzzahLovah
01-07-2012, 07:16 PM
I'm readying my grave dancing boots as we speak.

viruzzz
01-07-2012, 07:23 PM
It's a setsampras thread, men... What would you expect?
Let's talk that at the end of the year. Because, what I know is Fed is in a 20 match winning streak (MS Paris and WTF included) and Rafa won a masters and a slam last year, also reaching 2 other slam finals.

So, better shut the fuck up and wait.

Ash86
01-07-2012, 07:42 PM
It's not over yet - though now it's more Fedalovic/Big 4 rather than just Fedal as it was in the past - but clearly this season & possibly next might be the last. I wouldn't be totally surprised if Fed hangs up his racquets this year if he gets his fairytale ending - slam and/or Olympics... Can't see him going beyond 2013. As for Nadal I also think 2013/2014 might be the end if he thinks he won't win slams anymore. So either way we're certainly getting towards the end.

What I don't understand is why people are so keen for it to end or act as if it was the worst thing that ever happened to tennis. :shrug: I think once those 2 guys are gone people will realise how important they were to tennis and just what they brought to the game. When we have Raonic vs Tomic finals (or more likely some other transitional players who ala Baghdatis or Gonzo have one good run...) we'll look back at WTF 10; Wimby 08; Wimby 07; Rome 06; Miami 05 etc. as a golden era when you had 2 of the best of all time slugging it out & showing some outrageous tennis. The same is true for Djokovic/Nadal too - sure it was one sided last year but overall they've had great matches - the level of tennis in both Madrid 09 & US Open 10 & 11 was insane at times. Enjoy it while it lasts. Tennis needs big personalities - people here seem to want it to be like the WTA is now - a new no.1 all the time, top players losing early in slams all the time, no big names bringing the game to the masses.

Even the most anti-Fedal posters will be all nostalgic at Wimby 2018 when they have Fedal in the Royal Box watching the final a decade on from their classic. :dance:

Sunset of Age
01-07-2012, 07:49 PM
It's not over yet - though now it's more Fedalovic/Big 4 rather than just Fedal as it was in the past - but clearly this season & possibly next might be the last. I wouldn't be totally surprised if Fed hangs up his racquets this year if he gets his fairytale ending - slam and/or Olympics... Can't see him going beyond 2013. As for Nadal I also think 2013/2014 might be the end if he thinks he won't win slams anymore. So either way we're certainly getting towards the end.

What I don't understand is why people are so keen for it to end or act as if it was the worst thing that ever happened to tennis. :shrug: I think once those 2 guys are gone people will realise how important they were to tennis and just what they brought to the game. When we have Raonic vs Tomic finals (or more likely some other transitional players who ala Baghdatis or Gonzo have one good run...) we'll look back at WTF 10; Wimby 08; Wimby 07; Rome 06; Miami 05 etc. as a golden era when you had 2 of the best of all time slugging it out & showing some outrageous tennis. The same is true for Djokovic/Nadal too - sure it was one sided last year but overall they've had great matches - the level of tennis in both Madrid 09 & US Open 10 & 11 was insane at times. Enjoy it while it lasts. Tennis needs big personalities - people here seem to want it to be like the WTA is now - a new no.1 all the time, top players losing early in slams all the time, no big names bringing the game to the masses.

Even the most anti-Fedal posters will be all nostalgic at Wimby 2018 when they have Fedal in the Royal Box watching the final a decade on from their classic. :dance:

:worship: :worship: :worship:

Naudio Spanlatine
01-07-2012, 07:54 PM
Its all Nole's fault:sobbing: :rolleyes: :o

HKz
01-07-2012, 08:01 PM
What a visionary this SetSampras. Where is his extra account GameSampras?

bouncer7
01-07-2012, 08:09 PM
11-1 and someone is still talking about Fedalovic

Saberq
01-07-2012, 08:29 PM
tennis would suck if Fed and Nadal were not here.......we would have mugs in the SF and F

Johnny Groove
01-07-2012, 08:52 PM
Either you have a mug era with no depth and a few players racking up the titles.

Or you have an even muggier era with even less depth and mugs winning slams left and right.

MTF :yeah:

Nole fan
01-08-2012, 09:47 AM
It's not over yet - though now it's more Fedalovic/Big 4 rather than just Fedal as it was in the past - but clearly this season & possibly next might be the last. I wouldn't be totally surprised if Fed hangs up his racquets this year if he gets his fairytale ending - slam and/or Olympics... Can't see him going beyond 2013. As for Nadal I also think 2013/2014 might be the end if he thinks he won't win slams anymore. So either way we're certainly getting towards the end.

What I don't understand is why people are so keen for it to end or act as if it was the worst thing that ever happened to tennis. :shrug: I think once those 2 guys are gone people will realise how important they were to tennis and just what they brought to the game. When we have Raonic vs Tomic finals (or more likely some other transitional players who ala Baghdatis or Gonzo have one good run...) we'll look back at WTF 10; Wimby 08; Wimby 07; Rome 06; Miami 05 etc. as a golden era when you had 2 of the best of all time slugging it out & showing some outrageous tennis. The same is true for Djokovic/Nadal too - sure it was one sided last year but overall they've had great matches - the level of tennis in both Madrid 09 & US Open 10 & 11 was insane at times. Enjoy it while it lasts. Tennis needs big personalities - people here seem to want it to be like the WTA is now - a new no.1 all the time, top players losing early in slams all the time, no big names bringing the game to the masses.

Even the most anti-Fedal posters will be all nostalgic at Wimby 2018 when they have Fedal in the Royal Box watching the final a decade on from their classic. :dance:

I know you're a nostalgic fedal tard and all, but to insinuate that after Fedal the men's tennis game will transform into WTA with no strong contenders to be number 1 for a long time is rubbish. Nole and Muzza and probably Delpo/Tsonga are the guys who are going to snatch all the slams in the future years. And both Djoker and Murray have proved to be very consistent in their careers. I think these two will dominate the tour very strongly for the next 5 years.
I don't want the end of Fedal yet though i don't have the longing for them at all, never had it, but I'll be happy if the Top 4 remain like this for a few more years.

GSMnadal
01-08-2012, 09:54 AM
I know you're a nostalgic fedal tard and all, but to insinuate that after Fedal the men's tennis game will transform into WTA with no strong contenders to be number 1 for a long time is rubbish. Nole and Muzza and probably Delpo/Tsonga are the guys who are going to snatch all the slams in the future years. And both Djoker and Murray have proved to be very consistent in their careers. I think these two will dominate the tour very strongly for the next 5 years.
I don't want the end of Fedal yet though i don't have the longing for them at all, never had it, but I'll be happy if the Top 4 remain like this for a few more years.

Federer and Nadal had about 6-7 years on top. Murray and Djokovic have been around now for about 4-5 years, and you think they'll dominate the next 5 years? :worship:

ossie
01-08-2012, 09:55 AM
fedal is done, you heard it here first.

Ash86
01-08-2012, 10:18 AM
I know you're a nostalgic fedal tard and all, but to insinuate that after Fedal the men's tennis game will transform into WTA with no strong contenders to be number 1 for a long time is rubbish. Nole and Muzza and probably Delpo/Tsonga are the guys who are going to snatch all the slams in the future years. And both Djoker and Murray have proved to be very consistent in their careers. I think these two will dominate the tour very strongly for the next 5 years.
I don't want the end of Fedal yet though i don't have the longing for them at all, never had it, but I'll be happy if the Top 4 remain like this for a few more years.

Did I or did I not say that Djokovic & Murray had had a part to play in this era? Certainly the last 2-3 years it's been the Big 4, not just Fedal. But really - when Fedal retire i.e. 2 seasons from now at the earliest for Rafa you think Tsonga (who is already 26!) will still be playing a part in the slams?! :rolleyes: Same for Novak - he & Murray will be dominating in 2014, 2015, 2016?! Novak will be 25 this year, same for Andy. They are not going to be dominating till they're 30 - look at their style of game. Only the most delusional fan would think that. Novak can have 3 more "dominant" seasons and even that is a stretch.

As GSMnadal said - Fedal had a period of at least 6-7 years; they've both won a slam a year for at least 7 years - is the Novak & Andy era going to come close to that? I doubt it. Novak & Andy can't be separated from Fedal anyway - Novak came to prominence 2 years after Rafa & is of the same generation. It is when these 2 decline too & we're left with the Tomic, Raonic, Berankis contingent that I think people will really realise what they had.

Nole fan
01-08-2012, 10:54 AM
Did I or did I not say that Djokovic & Murray had had a part to play in this era? Certainly the last 2-3 years it's been the Big 4, not just Fedal. But really - when Fedal retire i.e. 2 seasons from now at the earliest for Rafa you think Tsonga (who is already 26!) will still be playing a part in the slams?! :rolleyes: Same for Novak - he & Murray will be dominating in 2014, 2015, 2016?! Novak will be 25 this year, same for Andy. They are not going to be dominating till they're 30 - look at their style of game. Only the most delusional fan would think that. Novak can have 3 more "dominant" seasons and even that is a stretch.

As GSMnadal said - Fedal had a period of at least 6-7 years; they've both won a slam a year for at least 7 years - is the Novak & Andy era going to come close to that? I doubt it. Novak & Andy can't be separated from Fedal anyway - Novak came to prominence 2 years after Rafa & is of the same generation. It is when these 2 decline too & we're left with the Tomic, Raonic, Berankis contingent that I think people will really realise what they had.

What are you talking about?
Nole and Muzza are the same era than Federer and Nadal? sure they're just one year younger than Rafa but Rafa's dominance has been short-lived because of Federer, same as everyone else. Federer is what, 5 years older than Nole? Hardly the same era!
Nole and Andy can dominate until they're 30 for sure. Look at the top 10 now. Nole is the youngest of all them!!! Fish, Tsonga, Sod, Berdych, Ferrer are having their best years after they hit 25. So I'm very confident when I say Nole and Andy are going to dominate in the next 3-4 years. They're just entering their primes and they will last until they're at least 29-30. Don't give me shit about their playing styles, for all we know Nadal can still play at his best for the next three years. Neither Nole nor Andy have had any important injury in their careers. Back pains, sore shoulders, yeah sure but everyone has them! Even federer but he doesn't like to talk about it.

atennisfan
01-08-2012, 11:01 AM
Last year Nadal was so lucky in his GS draws. When his ranking falls to #3 this year, he may have to meet Tsonga and Djokovic before final, and those two can definitely beat him in Wimby and USO

Ash86
01-08-2012, 11:03 AM
Nole and Andy can dominate until they're 30 for sure. Look at the top 10 now. Nole is the youngest of all them!!! Fish, Tsonga, Sod, Berdych, Ferrer are having their best years after they hit 25. So I'm very confident when I say Nole and Andy are going to dominate in the next 3-4 years. They're just entering their primes and they will last until they're at least 29-30.

Great - good luck with that. Get back to me in 2017 when Nole is still dominating. :wavey:

To me it doesn't even sound like Nole wants to play till he's 30 - he's clearly got other interests like acting etc. and I wouldn't be surprised if he plays till 28, does what he can and then moves on. He's been at the top since 2007 (i.e. in the top 3!) - he won't stay there for more than a decade which is what you're suggesting.

As for Murray & Andy being in the same era as Fedal - there's overlap for sure - when did Nole get to his first slam final? 2007. Murray? 2008. Nadal? 2005. Nole only 2 years after Nadal; Nadal won his first slam outside the French (where he was clearly a freak) the same year Novak won his first slam. We can't pretend their careers only started last year. Novak will be known as being part of the same era as Nadal, rather than the younger guns like Tomic etc. Nadal only had 2 years when Novak wasn't a factor - 2005 & 2006 - I think similarly Novak may stay on tour 2 more years after Nadal retires but not much more. Soderling etc. did not have success early on like Andy & Novak have done so we can't compare them. This also assumes no as yet unknown player will rise and challenge them to stop them dominating - that does happen.

Ash86
01-08-2012, 11:06 AM
Last year Nadal was so lucky in his GS draws. When his ranking falls to #3 this year, he may have to meet Tsonga and Djokovic before final, and those two can definitely beat him in Wimby and USO

Yup - lucky. Who'd he play in the quarters at the French? Oh yeah, the only guy who's ever beaten him there. What about Wimbledon? Just Del Po & Murray - not tough matches for him at all really - it's not like either of those guys have beaten him in slams before. And what about US Open? Oh Murray again - just a guy who'd won a HC masters again & had beaten him at the same slam at the same stage before & Nalbandian - well that's never been tough for Nadal has it. :rolleyes:

The revisionism at MTF is beyond belief. Nadal could get Murray or Federer in the semis - he got Murray every single time. Are we really saying Federer in a slam is the tougher option for Nadal?!

coonster14
01-08-2012, 11:08 AM
I'm going to wait until the end of 2012, one thing I have learned watching tennis for the last 6-7 years is to never ever write off the two legends Roger and Rafa.

Waiting to see if Rafa can get his mental block against Nole out of his mind in 2012, and win another match against Nole, hoping we have a Nole vs. Rafa French Open final, I think if Nole beats Rafa there, then Rafa will really be scarred.

GSMnadal
01-08-2012, 11:10 AM
I'm going to wait until the end of 2012, one thing I have learned watching tennis for the last 6-7 years is to never ever write off the two legends Roger and Rafa.

Waiting to see if Rafa can get his mental block against Nole out of his mind in 2012, and win another match against Nole, hoping we have a Nole vs. Rafa French Open final, I think if Nole beats Rafa there, then Rafa will really be scarred.

Yes, the French is the last thing that Rafa still has left, along with the olympics. If he loses both, it could be bye bye :awww:

Nole fan
01-08-2012, 11:13 AM
Nadal is not finished and won't be for a long time. People act here like he's out of the Top 10 and hardly a challenge to win more slams. :facepalm:
He won a slam and made the finals to the other 3 losing only to Nole. Hardly a scenario to cry about. Fans are so overdramatic. Rafa is far from over, he's still the same contender, it will only be more difficult for him now that Nole and Andy are entering their peaks. :shrug:

FEDERERBEAUTY
01-08-2012, 11:29 AM
What I don't understand is why people are so keen for it to end or act as if it was the worst thing that ever happened to tennis. :shrug: I think once those 2 guys are gone people will realise how important they were to tennis and just what they brought to the game. When we have Raonic vs Tomic finals (or more likely some other transitional players who ala Baghdatis or Gonzo have one good run...) we'll look back at WTF 10; Wimby 08; Wimby 07; Rome 06; Miami 05 etc. as a golden era when you had 2 of the best of all time slugging it out & showing some outrageous tennis. The same is true for Djokovic/Nadal too - sure it was one sided last year but overall they've had great matches - the level of tennis in both Madrid 09 & US Open 10 & 11 was insane at times. Enjoy it while it lasts. Tennis needs big personalities - people here seem to want it to be like the WTA is now - a new no.1 all the time, top players losing early in slams all the time, no big names bringing the game to the masses.
:dance:

Thank you! I too have never understood why some supposed tennis fans are so keen for the game to move on to a time when few will know or care about the 'top' players and the men's tour becomes as lack-lustre as the women's.
Unless someone amazing comes along after Djokovic's streak ends, the thought of charisma free zone Murray and other nonentities clogging up the sport depresses me enormously.

Topspindoctor
01-08-2012, 11:55 AM
I'm readying my grave dancing boots as we speak.

It's not like Nadal's or Fed's decline will make Mugray a multi slam winner. He'll still choke in finals to Dimitrov or Tomic :superlol:

Egreen
01-08-2012, 12:03 PM
What are you talking about?
Nole and Muzza are the same era than Federer and Nadal? sure they're just one year younger than Rafa but Rafa's dominance has been short-lived because of Federer, same as everyone else. Federer is what, 5 years older than Nole? Hardly the same era!
Nole and Andy can dominate until they're 30 for sure. Look at the top 10 now. Nole is the youngest of all them!!! Fish, Tsonga, Sod, Berdych, Ferrer are having their best years after they hit 25. So I'm very confident when I say Nole and Andy are going to dominate in the next 3-4 years. They're just entering their primes and they will last until they're at least 29-30. Don't give me shit about their playing styles, for all we know Nadal can still play at his best for the next three years. Neither Nole nor Andy have had any important injury in their careers. Back pains, sore shoulders, yeah sure but everyone has them! Even federer but he doesn't like to talk about it.

Federer has not won a slam since he was 28(January 2010) but somehow the less talented Djokovic and Murray will do what Federer has not been able to do in this physical era, win a slam after 28. :cuckoo:

bokehlicious
01-08-2012, 12:27 PM
:lol: Nole fan believing Nole will still dominate in 2025 :hug:

EddieNero
01-08-2012, 12:33 PM
:lol: Nole fan believing Nole will still dominate in 2025 :hug:

Let her stay in the Noleland.

Looner
01-08-2012, 12:45 PM
She is a special tard, isn't she?

Saberq
01-08-2012, 12:51 PM
Nole will dominate until 2020 when he retires and then tennis will be canceled due to lack of talent

Just like heaven
01-08-2012, 01:05 PM
Federer has not won a slam since he was 28(January 2010) but somehow the less talented Djokovic and Murray will do what Federer has not been able to do in this physical era, win a slam after 28. :cuckoo:

You never know. It could happen. Just because Federer hasn't managed to do it, doesn't mean no one else can. Didn't he play a Slam final last year? If he would have met someone not named Nadal in the final, he would have probably won RG. Winning a Slam depends on many factors, not just talent (which Djokovic and Murray already have).

Mystique
01-08-2012, 01:05 PM
If the Fedal Era has indeed completely ended, then alls good. It has been a great experience watching these Federer and Nadal rule tennis and it has perhaps been put to stop by a freak athlete with one of the GOAT seasons. Its fine, its been a wonderful era for the sport anyway :)

Nonetheless, even if the duopoly has ended, both Federer and Nadal will see slam success for another year or two, likely more than that for Rafa.

EddieNero
01-08-2012, 01:16 PM
If we define Fedal era as a period of time where ONLY two of them collect slams then yes, it's probably over.
However, both Federer and Nadal are still top slam contenders and If Djokovic loses early one of them will almost certainly take the title- Roger is the second pick at AO/USO and Nadal is the second one(or maybe the first) at RG, while both have approximately the same chances to win Wimbledon.

stebs
01-08-2012, 01:29 PM
We've been here before after Nadal losing inconsequential matches in warm up events. When he stops making slam finals at a better rate than 50% we can talk. For now he has been in 6 of the last 7 slam finals, dominating everyone but Djokovic on the biggest stages, having world class results on every surface. He even lost to Monfils in Doha the year he won the Australian, how short is your memory? Sure, he might be on the way down, but it's too early to tell. There certainly hasn't been compelling evidence yet. His results against the field other than Djokovic were his best ever last year, if the Serb had been injured all year he would've completely dominated. On the way out indeed.

Nole fan
01-08-2012, 02:19 PM
You never know. It could happen. Just because Federer hasn't managed to do it, doesn't mean no one else can. Didn't he play a Slam final last year? If he would have met someone not named Nadal in the final, he would have probably won RG. Winning a Slam depends on many factors, not just talent (which Djokovic and Murray already have).

Exactly. Just because Federer couldn't do it (and we still don't know, he may snatch one or two slams yet) it doesn't mean anyone else won't. Look at Agassi, he did it, right?

And anyway, the sweet spot for Federer was between the ages of 24-27, when he won 10 Grand Slam titles. I think and believe that Nole can do that himself.

Egreen
01-08-2012, 02:24 PM
You never know. It could happen. Just because Federer hasn't managed to do it, doesn't mean no one else can. Didn't he play a Slam final last year? If he would have met someone not named Nadal in the final, he would have probably won RG. Winning a Slam depends on many factors, not just talent (which Djokovic and Murray already have).

Of course. But to think it is a foregone conclusion that they will be dominating at 30 is delusional.

Exactly. Just because Federer couldn't do it (and we still don't know, he may snatch one or two slams yet) it doesn't mean anyone else won't. Look at Agassi, he did it, right?

And anyway, the sweet spot for Federer was between the ages of 24-27, when he won 10 Grand Slam titles. I think and believe that Nole can do that himself.

Yes. Nole is as great as Federer that is why he crowned his season where he won 3 slams with the YEC win like Federer did in 2004, 2006 and 2007.:worship:

Ash86
01-08-2012, 02:49 PM
Yes. Nole is as great as Federer that is why he crowned his season where he won 3 slams with the YEC win like Federer did in 2004, 2006 and 2007.:worship:

Exactly! Novak is not Federer! Look at Federer's record in 2006 - he lost only to Nadal & Murray. Djokovic lost to Tipsarevic, Nishikori, Ferrer, Murray, Federer, Del Potro. Plus you can't ignore style of play. Djokovic's is more of a strain to his body than Federer's & Djokovic does not have as good a serve as Federer - Federer could fire down a lot of aces to get on a roll - Novak wins mainly with his baseline game.

2012, 2013 may be his seasons but beyond that is unlikely. Plus Murray probably won't go awol at the HC masters like he did last year. Federer was by far the best on HCs and grass so he had 3 slams which he was the overwhelming favourite for. Novak has the Aus Open. He's favourite for US Open too but others like Murray have chances. He's not the favourite for the French or Wimbledon (or certainly won't be for an extended number of years) - far harder for him to get 10+ slams for that reason.

The Fedal era of only them winning slams is gone (but really given that Federer is over 30 this is not a big shock...) but they're still big contenders. Winning 3 sets in a best of 5 is still not easy - last year in slams Federer lost to Djokovic, Tsonga & Nadal; Nadal to Djokovic & Ferrer i.e. no one outside the top 6.

Nole fan
01-08-2012, 04:29 PM
You all watch this year and remember what I said here. :wavey:

Ash86
01-08-2012, 04:55 PM
You all watch this year and remember what I said here. :wavey:

This year is not Novak at 28! I've said he can dominate this year and next but that's about it. Will he win 3 this year? Potentially but 2 more likely... 3 next year? Very unlikely. Murray, Del Potro etc. are going to be fighting it out too.

Plus pretty sure Rafa will kill himself for the French & Wimby - same goes for Fed at the Olympics - it's a long long road to 6+ more grand slams. :cool: Here's hoping all the top guys stay injury free too - you just never know what will happen.

Saberq
01-08-2012, 05:52 PM
This year is not Novak at 28! I've said he can dominate this year and next but that's about it. Will he win 3 this year? Potentially but 2 more likely... 3 next year? Very unlikely. Murray, Del Potro etc. are going to be fighting it out too.

Plus pretty sure Rafa will kill himself for the French & Wimby - same goes for Fed at the Olympics - it's a long long road to 6+ more grand slams. :cool: Here's hoping all the top guys stay injury free too - you just never know what will happen.

Say Novak dominates 2 more years like you said .....Del Potro and Murray will be non factors in 3 years .....

Saberq
01-08-2012, 05:53 PM
Exactly! Novak is not Federer! Look at Federer's record in 2006 - he lost only to Nadal & Murray. Djokovic lost to Tipsarevic, Nishikori, Ferrer, Murray, Federer, Del Potro. Plus you can't ignore style of play. Djokovic's is more of a strain to his body than Federer's & Djokovic does not have as good a serve as Federer - Federer could fire down a lot of aces to get on a roll - Novak wins mainly with his baseline game.

2012, 2013 may be his seasons but beyond that is unlikely. Plus Murray probably won't go awol at the HC masters like he did last year. Federer was by far the best on HCs and grass so he had 3 slams which he was the overwhelming favourite for. Novak has the Aus Open. He's favourite for US Open too but others like Murray have chances. He's not the favourite for the French or Wimbledon (or certainly won't be for an extended number of years) - far harder for him to get 10+ slams for that reason.

The Fedal era of only them winning slams is gone (but really given that Federer is over 30 this is not a big shock...) but they're still big contenders. Winning 3 sets in a best of 5 is still not easy - last year in slams Federer lost to Djokovic, Tsonga & Nadal; Nadal to Djokovic & Ferrer i.e. no one outside the top 6.


Djokovic only lost to Federer ...all other loses while valid were caused by other factors .....

Johnny Groove
01-08-2012, 06:42 PM
I can see Nina is still delusional after Nole's 2011 season culminating in the 5th slam Abu Dhabi. :hug:

Logical
01-08-2012, 06:50 PM
El Matador is 25.Djokovic and Murray are 24.Fedull is 30.So only Fedull is finished.

superslam77
01-08-2012, 06:57 PM
time for iron mike dominance :)

Ash86
01-08-2012, 07:35 PM
Djokovic only lost to Federer ...all other loses while valid were caused by other factors .....

Ok - keep telling yourself that. At the end of the day when people look back at the records they will see 5 losses for Federer in 2006, 4 to an all time great and 1 to another great player (I presume Murray will win a slam and even if not his many Masters gives him some part in the history of the sport...). They'll look at who Novak lost to and say "Who was Tipsarevic? And who's this Nishikori that bagelled him?" (Unless Nishikori turns out to be a future GOAT!). Federer played at/near his best all of 2006 - Novak could only keep going till the US Open being AWOL for over 2 months of the season. I understand why and I don't blame him for getting tired but it still counts.

I'm not saying those guys beat the best Novak, clearly not - but if you have injuries or you're fatigued that doesn't show up on the record. I would put Nadal's Mayer & Dodig losses down to mental fatigue but ultimately he lost & it's on his record too... So Djokovic lost to all of those players, no matter what factors were involved.

Punky
01-08-2012, 10:30 PM
Ok - keep telling yourself that. At the end of the day when people look back at the records they will see 5 losses for Federer in 2006, 4 to an all time great and 1 to another great player (I presume Murray will win a slam and even if not his many Masters gives him some part in the history of the sport...). They'll look at who Novak lost to and say "Who was Tipsarevic? And who's this Nishikori that bagelled him?" (Unless Nishikori turns out to be a future GOAT!). Federer played at/near his best all of 2006 - Novak could only keep going till the US Open being AWOL for over 2 months of the season. I understand why and I don't blame him for getting tired but it still counts.


I totally agree with u

Sunset of Age
01-09-2012, 12:50 AM
El Matador is 25.Djokovic and Murray are 24.Fedull is 30.So only Fedull is finished.

Sure. Your username explains it all.
'Logical' in combination with insulting Nadal calling him 'El Matador', a reminiscence of a horrific 'sport' (in fact, pure animal cruelty), that even a vast majority of educated Spanish people disapprove on. Bull Fighting has been declared illegal in Catalonia just a few weeks ago, haven't you heard of that yet?

Good trolling job, mate! :bowdown:

Ok - keep telling yourself that. At the end of the day when people look back at the records they will see 5 losses for Federer in 2006, 4 to an all time great and 1 to another great player (I presume Murray will win a slam and even if not his many Masters gives him some part in the history of the sport...). They'll look at who Novak lost to and say "Who was Tipsarevic? And who's this Nishikori that bagelled him?" (Unless Nishikori turns out to be a future GOAT!). Federer played at/near his best all of 2006 - Novak could only keep going till the US Open being AWOL for over 2 months of the season. I understand why and I don't blame him for getting tired but it still counts.

I'm not saying those guys beat the best Novak, clearly not - but if you have injuries or you're fatigued that doesn't show up on the record. I would put Nadal's Mayer & Dodig losses down to mental fatigue but ultimately he lost & it's on his record too... So Djokovic lost to all of those players, no matter what factors were involved.

You are being too sensible for this forum. ;)

Kat_YYZ
01-09-2012, 04:25 AM
El Matador is 25.Djokovic and Murray are 24.Fedull is 30.So only Fedull is finished.

I had been wondering for the longest time where Mungo went. Now I know :D

rickcastle
01-09-2012, 05:29 AM
Djokovic only lost to Federer ...all other loses while valid were caused by other factors .....

:rolleyes: Whatever these factors are, he lost. How is this any better than Federer fans saying Djokovic only beat him at AO 2008 because he had mono? And you Djokovic fans get peeved when Federer fans bring that up. He lost, plain and simple. Any loss is valid and is reflected on public record. Stop with this bullshit.

MuzzahLovah
01-09-2012, 07:50 AM
Yeah, it does depend on how you define the era. If the Fedal era continues as long as either of them plays at a high level/near the top, I guess it's not over and might not be for a while. But Djokovic ended their dominance last year- so if an era is where they dominate by winning most of the major titles between them, then Fedal is already over. Djokovic won 3 slams an 5 masters, more Fedal combined. Considering Murray snatched two masters and Fedal split the remaining two masters, with Fed winning the WTF and Nadal winning the FO, it's pretty clear Fedal didn't dominate 2011.

Even if they win the majority of the major titles this year, I don't think we could call it part of the same era that was a string of consecutive years where they split the majority of the big titles between them, from 2004 to 2010.

Shinoj
01-09-2012, 10:28 AM
Its over and its already one Australian Open past it.

Saberq
01-09-2012, 10:53 AM
:rolleyes: Whatever these factors are, he lost. How is this any better than Federer fans saying Djokovic only beat him at AO 2008 because he had mono? And you Djokovic fans get peeved when Federer fans bring that up. He lost, plain and simple. Any loss is valid and is reflected on public record. Stop with this bullshit.

because Nole got beat by mugs and Fed reached the SF of a GS ? and that mono is a lie

Shinoj
01-09-2012, 11:01 AM
It has to be said that Djokovic all other losses in 2011 were unfortunate and would not have happened but for injury. Also i do think if that Match at RG went on to the 5th Set, Djokovic would have won against Federer.

atennisfan
01-09-2012, 11:12 AM
Ok - keep telling yourself that. At the end of the day when people look back at the records they will see 5 losses for Federer in 2006, 4 to an all time great and 1 to another great player (I presume Murray will win a slam and even if not his many Masters gives him some part in the history of the sport...). They'll look at who Novak lost to and say "Who was Tipsarevic? And who's this Nishikori that bagelled him?" (Unless Nishikori turns out to be a future GOAT!). Federer played at/near his best all of 2006 - Novak could only keep going till the US Open being AWOL for over 2 months of the season. I understand why and I don't blame him for getting tired but it still counts.

I'm not saying those guys beat the best Novak, clearly not - but if you have injuries or you're fatigued that doesn't show up on the record. I would put Nadal's Mayer & Dodig losses down to mental fatigue but ultimately he lost & it's on his record too... So Djokovic lost to all of those players, no matter what factors were involved.

THIS

Saberq
01-09-2012, 11:16 AM
It has to be said that Djokovic all other losses in 2011 were unfortunate and would not have happened but for injury. Also i do think if that Match at RG went on to the 5th Set, Djokovic would have won against Federer.

no he probably would have lost another few matches but those loses were because of injury

arm
01-09-2012, 12:30 PM
Wake up people, Rafa is not done yet. :wavey:

Ok - keep telling yourself that. At the end of the day when people look back at the records they will see 5 losses for Federer in 2006, 4 to an all time great and 1 to another great player (I presume Murray will win a slam and even if not his many Masters gives him some part in the history of the sport...). They'll look at who Novak lost to and say "Who was Tipsarevic? And who's this Nishikori that bagelled him?" (Unless Nishikori turns out to be a future GOAT!). Federer played at/near his best all of 2006 - Novak could only keep going till the US Open being AWOL for over 2 months of the season. I understand why and I don't blame him for getting tired but it still counts.

I'm not saying those guys beat the best Novak, clearly not - but if you have injuries or you're fatigued that doesn't show up on the record. I would put Nadal's Mayer & Dodig losses down to mental fatigue but ultimately he lost & it's on his record too... So Djokovic lost to all of those players, no matter what factors were involved.

:lol: so you prove your point by diminishing Nole's opponents. Nice one. Just one thing, don't forget that when people look back they might also remember a 10-1 h2h against FEDAL aka the tennis greatest, ;)

I also think that Fed 2006 season was better than Nole's, but you're perspective is more than biased and I believe you don't see the big picture here.

You can obviously say that I am also biased, I am. But The difference is that I do know that my player's season was not the best, yet it had moments and statistics that were far more impressive than Roger's 2006.

Ash86
01-09-2012, 12:39 PM
I also think that Fed 2006 season was better than Nole's, but you're perspective is more than biased and I believe you don't see the big picture here.

You can obviously say that I am also biased, I am. But The difference is that I do know that my player's season was not the best, yet it had moments and statistics that were far more impressive than Roger's 2006.

I don't see how I haven't seen the big picture. Did I say Novak's 2011 wasn't impressive? Or the 10-1 vs Fedal wasn't even more impressive? Of course it was. I was simply responding to the suggestion that the only real loss Novak had was to Federer - I'm saying all losses count. Of course there were moments that were better than Roger's 2006 (the streak for one...) but that wasn't the issue. The issue was can we say Novak only had one real loss? No.

I've actually always been more a Novak fan than a Federer fan, so Federer is not 'my player' - I just think on paper it's clear that his 2006 is a pretty untouchable season.

GSMnadal
01-09-2012, 03:19 PM
Maybe outside of clay he is.:wavey:

He made the Wimbledon and US Open final :wavey:

Federer has gone out in the semi's or quarters for two years now, and yet he's still talked about like he's the big favourite to win them? Nadal makes the final, after winning them the year before, and he's 'done'? :facepalm:

Egreen
01-09-2012, 03:20 PM
Wake up people, Rafa is not done yet. :wavey:


Maybe outside of clay he is.

The only slam he might win is RG.

He has not won a title off clay in ages(not even a mm title) and it's not just been Djokovic stopping him off clay in the past year but other players like: Davydenko, Ferrer, Tsonga(twice), Dodig, Fish, Murray, Mayer, Federer, Monfils.

:wavey:

I edited my post.

Mystique
01-09-2012, 03:23 PM
He made the Wimbledon and US Open final :wavey:

Federer has gone out in the semi's or quarters for two years now, and yet he's still talked about like he's the big favourite to win them? Nadal makes the final, after winning them the year before, and he's 'done'? :facepalm:

Federer is always overrated by the pundits and forums:D Nadal always underrated. Its a bit like the way both the guys like it too in a way..

Mountaindewslave
01-09-2012, 07:43 PM
silly jumping the gun thread......

of all the players last season, Nadal had the second most successful! It's funny how you all jump on board throwing a player under the bus as soon as they do not preform exactly at perfection.

Nadal has good 2011 season in general just not one up to his regular standards. his level of play was not THAT low, despite being not as high as regular, and it is an illusion that players 'other' than NOvak Djokovic can beat him and are figuring him out. Nadal always loses in the asian and indoor season so his recent losses have not been unusual whatsoever.

and if you're basing it off of Doha then that is just silly, he's never won Doha despite all of his successful seasons and falls in the QF or SF over and over.

it is really really jumping the gun to say this about Nadal as his form was actually pretty good in Doha and you are in for a surprise if you think someone as determined as him will not win more.

Federer I still believe will be on top of the game for multiple years too. for gods sake he won the world tour finals handedly just a month ago and was on a big win streak. he is not done either.

the fedal era is over in that they are not dominating every single big tournament like they once did, but do not mistake that for meaning they are not going to remain on top of the game.



don't jump the gun

Ash86
01-09-2012, 08:53 PM
the fedal era is over in that they are not dominating every single big tournament like they once did, but do not mistake that for meaning they are not going to remain on top of the game.

don't jump the gun

Some sanity at last. To be honest to me it says a lot that despite Nadal being mentally pretty scarred by those Djokovic losses from about Madrid onwards, and also having his worst clay form since he joined the tour, he still managed to win RG & then get to the finals of Wimbledon & the US Open. Even after the US Open he was able to find reserves to help Spain win another Davis Cup & got to the final of Tokyo. Similar to 2009 where in the final half of the year his form wasn't there but still good enough to get to the final of Shanghai 09; semis of US Open; have a very consistent year in all the Masters Series & finish no.2.

Even his 'diminished' level is usually enough to get by average competition most of the time. To get past the top 4-6 though he needs to be in a better mental state - just like he got to in 2010 after 2009 and he sounds motivated to get to this year. Doesn't mean he won't end up falling behind Djokovic or Murray for example - that's not only in his control - but a freefall where he's losing to everyone in sight is difficult to see as yet. 2005-2010 level dominance (where Fedal won 3 or 4 slams a year) is over but their days as top players don't look to be done - just look at the top 20. Who's a real threat outside the usual Murray, Djokovic, Del Potro? Tsonga has still to show consistency over a whole season...

Looner
01-09-2012, 09:02 PM
Because he's been getting ridiculous draws at Slams. Mugs were never able to beat him and he keeps getting said mugs in Slams. Of course he'll get far as possible because the ATP needs $$$ from finals where he gets spanked by the new boy at No.1, Djoko. It does not say anything about his said mental toughness.

I'd love to have seen him play Tsonga at Wimbledon or the USO. I bet he would have showed a lot of mental toughness in getting his arse kicked out of the (formerly) sacred grass of Wimbledon. Or did I misunderstand you and you meant mental toughness of the kind he showed against DelPo where he called for the trainer when the Argentinian was on a roll?

Ash86
01-09-2012, 09:16 PM
Because he's been getting ridiculous draws at Slams. Mugs were never able to beat him and he keeps getting said mugs in Slams. Of course he'll get far as possible because the ATP needs $$$ from finals where he gets spanked by the new boy at No.1, Djoko. It does not say anything about his said mental toughness.

I'd love to have seen him play Tsonga at Wimbledon or the USO. I bet he would have showed a lot of mental toughness in getting his arse kicked out of the (formerly) sacred grass of Wimbledon. Or did I misunderstand you and you meant mental toughness of the kind he showed against DelPo where he called for the trainer when the Argentinian was on a roll?

Why don't you come up with a list of "non-mugs" that would have thrashed him in slams? Tsonga is one though he lost for the first time to Tsonga this year since 2008 so I hardly think Tsonga on grass means an annihilation.

In this year alone he played 3 "non-mugs" (for the strength they've shown against Nadal in the past of course!) in the slams - Soderling; Del Potro; Nalbandian. Who in the top 20 should he have got that would have been a better test? (Oh and he played Isner too - one of those big servers he doesn't like). Not many seeds fell early in his draws either - he faced Murray in 3 semis - a much worse match up for him than Federer (despite the more one sided H2H). So please do enlighten us about all the players that should have been stopping him from getting far but were thwarted by the ATP and their rigged draws...:rolleyes:

The simple facts are the top 4 are at a different level to the rest of the tour (I will add Del Potro & Tsonga as matching them at their best, but the consistency is an issue...) - they rarely lose in slams without having a bad day themselves too - the match is very very rarely on the racquet of the opponent in a best of 5 match when Fed/Djoko/Nadal/Murray are involved. Even Fed's loss to Tsonga involved some real poor play from Fed - basically being unable to return for 3 sets....

Looner
01-09-2012, 09:20 PM
You should place a tl;dr on your posts as I don't have time to read the same repetitive stuff every single time. The simple fact is Nadal is getting lucky (or deliberately lucky) with draws. Citing an old veteran as his nemesis is also hilarious. I gather Nalbandian is a GS contender in your eyes. You're just hilarious. As for DelPo, he cheated him out of a win so thanks for helping my case.

General Suburbia
01-10-2012, 04:03 AM
If it truly is over then I feel bad for Nadal. And even worse for the rest of tennis once Federer is gone (although not Federer himself, he's proven enough). And I feel EVEN WORSE now that Djokovic is number one. He's a beast for sure, great respect, but has one of the most boring games to come out in years.

Mountaindewslave
01-10-2012, 05:26 AM
If it truly is over then I feel bad for Nadal. And even worse for the rest of tennis once Federer is gone (although not Federer himself, he's proven enough). And I feel EVEN WORSE now that Djokovic is number one. He's a beast for sure, great respect, but has one of the most boring games to come out in years.

that is one of my distastes about Djokovic. it's one thing to have such a boring game style but even his personality is SO stale on the court. besides a rawr here and there, nothing! like a robot!

he's hilarious off the court and has great class but wish he would not be so robotic 'in match'. maybe too focused?

definitely will be sad when "Fedal" both are gone as the tennis field will lack some flare but maybe (unlikely??) someone will make up for that in the near future

Ash86
01-10-2012, 05:48 AM
that is one of my distastes about Djokovic. it's one thing to have such a boring game style but even his personality is SO stale on the court. besides a rawr here and there, nothing! like a robot!

he's hilarious off the court and has great class but wish he would not be so robotic 'in match'. maybe too focused?

definitely will be sad when "Fedal" both are gone as the tennis field will lack some flare but maybe (unlikely??) someone will make up for that in the near future

Agreed. Federer & Nadal have very distinct, unique styles. Djokovic on the other hand basically has all the textbook shots and pulls them all off insanely well very much like a tennis robot. That's one reason I find it laughable to suggest that Djokovic is the better shotmaker than Nadal - Djokovic is more aggressive but rarely does he hit the unbelievable shots that Nadal does (or Federer does) i.e. ones that wow the crowd and no one else seems to have in their locker.

The excitement Fedal brought had a lot to do with people who weren't normally tennis fans being to appreciate their game and also the real contrast in styles. I am in awe of Djokovic's consistency & retrieval skills but his style of play is not unique at all...

Shinoj
01-10-2012, 07:15 AM
that is one of my distastes about Djokovic. it's one thing to have such a boring game style but even his personality is SO stale on the court. besides a rawr here and there, nothing! like a robot!

he's hilarious off the court and has great class but wish he would not be so robotic 'in match'. maybe too focused?

definitely will be sad when "Fedal" both are gone as the tennis field will lack some flare but maybe (unlikely??) someone will make up for that in the near future


Boring game style :tape:

His game was one of the most electrifying last year in whole of sports.

FedvsNole
01-10-2012, 08:51 AM
Federer even at 30 still has the game to beat prime novak but his mental choking is what he has to overcome in 2012. Novak relies physically more on his game than federer did and he started slowing down a few months after turning 25 going into 2007 granted he won 3 slams but he had movement wise declined.


If this decline happens to nole, it will be more pronounced and debilitating since his game will be far more affected by decline in speed, movement, reflexes which are usually visible around 25. He'll win more slams but his physical peak is at this only going downwards.

Saberq
01-10-2012, 11:01 AM
that is one of my distastes about Djokovic. it's one thing to have such a boring game style but even his personality is SO stale on the court. besides a rawr here and there, nothing! like a robot!

he's hilarious off the court and has great class but wish he would not be so robotic 'in match'. maybe too focused?

definitely will be sad when "Fedal" both are gone as the tennis field will lack some flare but maybe (unlikely??) someone will make up for that in the near future


Says the Nadal fan....his game and personality are the most boring in the history of tennis :haha:

Agreed. Federer & Nadal have very distinct, unique styles. Djokovic on the other hand basically has all the textbook shots and pulls them all off insanely well very much like a tennis robot. That's one reason I find it laughable to suggest that Djokovic is the better shotmaker than Nadal - Djokovic is more aggressive but rarely does he hit the unbelievable shots that Nadal does (or Federer does) i.e. ones that wow the crowd and no one else seems to have in their locker.

The excitement Fedal brought had a lot to do with people who weren't normally tennis fans being to appreciate their game and also the real contrast in styles. I am in awe of Djokovic's consistency & retrieval skills but his style of play is not unique at all...

Unlike Nadal Novak has two elite wings,elite return,much better serve...all shots ....his passing shots are better at this point,lobs,and he paints lines with every shot......drop the keyboard man go outside take a walk it's a nice day

Mystique
01-10-2012, 11:10 AM
I myself am not a big fan of Djokovic v.2011. I used to like the more attacking Djokovic more. Glimpses of which he showed in Abu Dhabi this year.
But anyone who says that Djokovic doesnt pull off spectacular WOW shots like Nadal or Federer is just in bitter denial. He has a more technically perfect game than Nadal, and he has been consistent to the point of being irritating last year, but there is a reason he featured in some of the best matches of the year. He pulled off some of the shots of the year easily.
Some of Nadal's shots look more impressive because he is a lefty and Federer is perhaps the best pure shotmaker in tennis. But that doesnt mean Djokovic is robotic in comparison. If he is, so is Nadal on clay.

I agree Djokovic's game isnt perhaps "unique", but basically its just because he is very good off both wings - together more solid than both Nadal and Federer really, so one wing doesnt stand out as prominently as is the case with Rafa and Roger.

Shinoj
01-10-2012, 11:11 AM
Federer even at 30 still has the game to beat prime novak but his mental choking is what he has to overcome in 2012. Novak relies physically more on his game than federer did and he started slowing down a few months after turning 25 going into 2007 granted he won 3 slams but he had movement wise declined.


If this decline happens to nole, it will be more pronounced and debilitating since his game will be far more affected by decline in speed, movement, reflexes which are usually visible around 25. He'll win more slams but his physical peak is at this only going downwards.

To be honest, Federer never Really Declined, it was Nadal who emerged.

Mystique
01-10-2012, 11:16 AM
To be honest, Federer never Really Declined, it was Nadal who emerged.

Not this crap again:o

Shinoj
01-10-2012, 11:31 AM
I myself am not a big fan of Djokovic v.2011. I used to like the more attacking Djokovic more. Glimpses of which he showed in Abu Dhabi this year.
But anyone who says that Djokovic doesnt pull off spectacular WOW shots like Nadal or Federer is just in bitter denial. He has a more technically perfect game than Nadal, and he has been consistent to the point of being irritating last year, but there is a reason he featured in some of the best matches of the year. He pulled off some of the shots of the year easily.
Some of Nadal's shots look more impressive because he is a lefty and Federer is perhaps the best pure shotmaker in tennis. But that doesnt mean Djokovic is robotic in comparison. If he is, so is Nadal on clay.

I agree Djokovic's game isnt perhaps "unique", but basically its just because he is very good off both wings - together more solid than both Nadal and Federer really, so one wing doesnt stand out as prominently as is the case with Rafa and Roger.

Well Djokovic was indeed attacking for most of the year. But as it is for all of the matches Djokovic is not standing alone in the court. The other Guy is also going to attack him. So he has to defend them.

I would say that in most of his matches against Nadal he was attacking and in the Federer matches Federer was just super motivated so he attacked him more. And against players like tsonga you do not attack them because most of the times they self destruct themselves so there is no point in attacking them.

atennisfan
01-10-2012, 11:34 AM
Federer even at 30 still has the game to beat prime novak but his mental choking is what he has to overcome in 2012. Novak relies physically more on his game than federer did and he started slowing down a few months after turning 25 going into 2007 granted he won 3 slams but he had movement wise declined.


If this decline happens to nole, it will be more pronounced and debilitating since his game will be far more affected by decline in speed, movement, reflexes which are usually visible around 25. He'll win more slams but his physical peak is at this only going downwards.

When Fed started to decline, he had to deal with Nadal, one of all time greats, at his peak, as well as rising Djokovic and Murray.

Who will Djokovic had to face when he starts to decline? the current rest are mostly mugs and the youngsters are pathetic.

Shinoj
01-10-2012, 11:39 AM
Its a Big Myth that Federer declined.

paseo
01-10-2012, 11:57 AM
Its a Big Myth that Federer declined.

Of course. He's peaking this year to grab the golden CYGS. Heard this first from me, folks!

Shinoj
01-10-2012, 12:18 PM
Of course. He's peaking this year to grab the golden CYGS. Heard this first from me, folks!

He might have declined like 5 degree out of 100 but not much to be honest. At first Nadal came and he had a stranglehold over Federer and then Djokovic peaked.

Federer never really declined only better others have emerged.

atennisfan
01-10-2012, 01:07 PM
To be honest, Federer never Really Declined, it was Nadal who emerged.

So every human being on earth must decline, but Federer is not allowed to decline?

Sometimes I wonder if people really use what they have upstairs.

Shinoj
01-10-2012, 01:09 PM
So every human being on earth must decline, but Federer is not allowed to decline?

Sometimes I wonder if people really use what they have upstairs.


i never said he is not allowed to decline :rolleyes:

arm
01-10-2012, 01:55 PM
that is one of my distastes about Djokovic. it's one thing to have such a boring game style but even his personality is SO stale on the court. besides a rawr here and there, nothing! like a robot!

he's hilarious off the court and has great class but wish he would not be so robotic 'in match'. maybe too focused?

definitely will be sad when "Fedal" both are gone as the tennis field will lack some flare but maybe (unlikely??) someone will make up for that in the near future

Robotic, are you kidding me? This is the guy that in a Grand Slam semi final, 2 match points is still communicating with the crowd, asking of support and smiling. Smiling when he is one match point down. Very robotic of him.

People see what they want to see. :shrug:

Shinoj
01-10-2012, 02:00 PM
I will ask a question If Federer had declined so much how come he beat Djokovic at RG and how he was almost in the Final at the US Open? And how he won three tournaments in a Row at the Season end?

Mystique
01-10-2012, 02:07 PM
I will ask a question If Federer had declined so much how come he beat Djokovic at RG and how he was almost in the Final at the US Open? And how he won three tournaments in a Row at the Season end?

Because that is how a guy who wins 10+ titles every season for 3-4 consecutive years declines? By winning 4 titles. A guy who used to lose 4 or 5 matches? By losing 10+ matches. A guy who used to make all slam finals? By making one slam final.

But, duh, why am I trying to make sense to you? Have it your way. Federer hasnt declined, in fact watch him peak in 2012 and sweep the slams :o

Shinoj
01-10-2012, 02:23 PM
Because that is how a guy who wins 10+ titles every season for 3-4 consecutive years declines? By winning 4 titles. A guy who used to lose 4 or 5 matches? By losing 10+ matches. A guy who used to make all slam finals? By making one slam final.

But, duh, why am I trying to make sense to you? Have it your way. Federer hasnt declined, in fact watch him peak in 2012 and sweep the slams :o

That thing happens. Nadal and Djokovic in retrospect were better adpated than him.

Sophocles
01-10-2012, 02:26 PM
That thing happens. Nadal and Djokovic in retrospect were better adpated than him.

That doesn't even make sense.

Shinoj
01-10-2012, 02:30 PM
That doesn't even make sense.

Nadal and Djokovic are better than him. Does that?

Mystique
01-10-2012, 02:32 PM
That doesn't even make sense.

Course trolls will not make sense:o

Sophocles
01-10-2012, 02:32 PM
Nadal and Djokovic are better than him. Does that?

Completely.

In the same way that saying the earth is flat does.

Looner
01-10-2012, 02:32 PM
Nadal and Djokovic are better than him. Does that?

You must be trolling. Tell me you are. Otherwise I am worried about your mental health.

Saberq
01-10-2012, 03:20 PM
I think that the part of Fed's decline is the fact that the surfaces are slowed down ....

Mystique
01-10-2012, 03:33 PM
Federer was an excellent player on slow surfaces, still is though not to the same extend:o
But really only Nadal is a hard matchup for him on slow-ass surfaces.
People just think Federer doesnt like slow surfaces because he is also exceptional on fast surfaces too.

Saberq
01-10-2012, 03:38 PM
Federer was an excellent player on slow surfaces, still is though not to the same extend:o
But really only Nadal is a hard matchup for him on slow-ass surfaces.
People just think Federer doesnt like slow surfaces because he is also exceptional on fast surfaces too.

doesnt matter....on slow hardcourt and grass he is more beatable

Mystique
01-10-2012, 03:41 PM
doesnt matter....on slow hardcourt and grass he is more beatable

Yes, now he is very beatable. And not just on slow HC and grass. I dont contest that.

My point was only that slowing down of HCs is not a reason per se of his decline. These surfaces became harder for him once he started declining.

Saberq
01-10-2012, 03:47 PM
I agree completely ......If everything was the same as in 2006 he would still win Slams

Shinoj
01-10-2012, 04:08 PM
Your Agreeing that Federer has not declined that much would only hurt your Federer is GOAT in normal circumstances ego.:wavey:

Mystique
01-10-2012, 04:11 PM
Your Agreeing that Federer has not declined that much would only hurt your Federer is GOAT in normal circumstances ego.:wavey:

I take it you are referring to me.
Well, dont you worry about me and my ego. At least I CAN have that ego unlike you.

Shinoj
01-10-2012, 06:43 PM
I take it you are referring to me.
Well, dont you worry about me and my ego. At least I CAN have that ego unlike you.


I am as humble as they come. :angel:.. Humble like bald Agassi

http://www.baldcelebrity.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/agassi1.jpg


But seriously on the Topic, i do think Federer had one last Grand Slam left in him. And he may not be consistent as before but given a day he still can conjure up "that" federer. Thats why i am saying in terms of getting that peak game he is still the same.

Looner
01-10-2012, 07:08 PM
I am as humble as they come. :angel:.. Humble like bald Agassi

But seriously on the Topic, i do think Federer had one last Grand Slam left in him. And he may not be consistent as before but given a day he still can conjure up "that" federer. Thats why i am saying in terms of getting that peak game he is still the same.

:smash::facepalm: That is the meaning of declining for Fed. As one of the all-time greats he is not going to lose his game overnight. His decline is expressed in the fact he cannot stomp other top tenners like he used to. You basically overturned your own point. Way to go! Maybe next time do not start a discussion where you yourself know you're wrong.

Logical
01-10-2012, 07:34 PM
Sure. Your username explains it all.
'Logical' in combination with insulting Nadal calling him 'El Matador', a reminiscence of a horrific 'sport' (in fact, pure animal cruelty), that even a vast majority of educated Spanish people disapprove on. Bull Fighting has been declared illegal in Catalonia just a few weeks ago, haven't you heard of that yet?

Good trolling job, mate! :bowdown:

Why you so serious?:confused:El Matador is good name for fighting player.

EL MATADOR!:devil:

tampie
01-10-2012, 08:01 PM
Well, depending of the definition of the Fedal Era. The Fedal era ended in 2008 or 2010, if you ask me (for both of these you could bring up some arguments). I'd opt for:

(2)Rafael Nadal (ESP) d. (1)Roger Federer (SUI) 6-1 6-3 6-0

After that, one can have succes, but according to me this one ended the Fedal Era.

My second guess would be (after regaining no. 1 thanks to Rafa injury) the combined losses against Soderling/Berdych in 2010 RG / Wimby.

tampie
01-10-2012, 08:06 PM
And as for Nadal; he's not finished yet. He's got 5 more slams at least in him. This will depend for a great deal to the consistency of Djoko and Murray and new contender over the next years. I don't see Rafa get more than 1 occasional HC slam, for RG / Wimby he'll be a contestant for the next 3-4 years. I don't think he'll be able to get any slams after his 29th birthday.

tjohansson
01-10-2012, 09:21 PM
Fed is the number 2 in the world in my opinion based on recent form and the only player stopping him of a grand slam is Djokovic if he plays anyone else then I think he'll add another trophy to his cabinet. He's always had the wood over Murray and I think this day and age he'll slap Nadal silly because he is in much better shaoe then Rafa and form complies.

Although I wouldn't rub Nadal out of the picture yet. He is a champion player

MuzzahLovah
01-10-2012, 09:30 PM
Fed is the number 2 in the world in my opinion based on recent form and the only player stopping him of a grand slam is Djokovic if he plays anyone else then I think he'll add another trophy to his cabinet. He's always had the wood over Murray and I think this day and age he'll slap Nadal silly because he is in much better shaoe then Rafa and form complies.

Although I wouldn't rub Nadal out of the picture yet. He is a champion player

:o

atennisfan
01-10-2012, 10:55 PM
But seriously on the Topic, i do think Federer had one last Grand Slam left in him. And he may not be consistent as before but given a day he still can conjure up "that" federer. Thats why i am saying in terms of getting that peak game he is still the same.

With this, you have completely destroyed your previous argument that Fed has not declined.

But why am I even responding to a troll?

Shinoj
01-11-2012, 04:29 AM
With this, you have completely destroyed your previous argument that Fed has not declined.

But why am I even responding to a troll?

Now as much as you like yourself to believe but there is not just one aspect to it.

Consistency on a Tour and having the peak game for certain matches. Federer would have lost the consistency but he still has the peak game which he plays at certain stages.

There were a lot of players who declined consistently on the Tour and lost their peak game as well. McEnroe,Edberg,Becker were all of those kind.

Then there was Sampras who declined somewhat on the Tour but he still had his peak game intact.

MatchFederer
01-11-2012, 05:43 AM
Certainly some amusing stuff cropping up in this thread and some black and white viewpoints with Shinoj shining particularly brightly -- he's certainly headed for great things.

But what I REALLY want is... an explanation of your username please, Logical?

Shinoj
01-11-2012, 09:39 AM
As much as you want everybody to believe but Federer, in reality, has not declined much. One Grand Slam Final and one Grand Slam Semis and winning the Year End is not that much of a decline to be honest.

But it hurts badly to accept Nadal and Djokovic are just better doesnt it? :D

And Match Federer, what do you mumble most of the times i have no idea.

Sophocles
01-11-2012, 11:53 AM
As much as you want everybody to believe but Federer, in reality, has not declined much. One Grand Slam Final and one Grand Slam Semis and winning the Year End is not that much of a decline to be honest.

Not for most players, no. But for a player who at his peak was regularly a handful of matches away from the Calendar Slam, it is a significant decline.

Sophocles
01-11-2012, 11:53 AM
And as for Nadal; he's not finished yet. He's got 5 more slams at least in him.

:haha:

Shinoj
01-11-2012, 12:00 PM
Not for most players, no. But for a player who at his peak was regularly a handful of matches away from the Calendar Slam, it is a significant decline.

That was when Nadal and Djokovic didnt peak.

tampie
01-11-2012, 12:05 PM
:haha:

I didn't say they'll come out :)

Seriously, look at his age and you can give him 2-3 RG titles; combine that with 1-2 wimby's plus 1 HC slam and you got 5. I don't think we're finished yet with the raging bull.

Nole fan
01-11-2012, 12:20 PM
Certainly some amusing stuff cropping up in this thread and some black and white viewpoints with Shinoj shining particularly brightly -- he's certainly headed for great things.

But what I REALLY want is... an explanation of your username please, Logical?

I actually think what Shinoj says makes a lot of sense. :shrug:

tripwires
01-11-2012, 12:47 PM
As much as you want everybody to believe but Federer, in reality, has not declined much. One Grand Slam Final and one Grand Slam Semis and winning the Year End is not that much of a decline to be honest.

But it hurts badly to accept Nadal and Djokovic are just better doesnt it? :D

And Match Federer, what do you mumble most of the times i have no idea.

:superlol: I guess that explains why he hasn't won a slam since AO 2010. You sound like a MIMIC double account.

tripwires
01-11-2012, 12:49 PM
That was when Nadal and Djokovic didnt peak.

Nice trolling attempt. :yeah:

Sophocles
01-11-2012, 12:51 PM
That was when Nadal and Djokovic didnt peak.

So? He was 2 matches away from the calendar slam in 2009 as well.

It is depressing to have to go over the same ground over & over again. In the same period when Federer's results against Nadal & Djoker worsened - let's say 2008 onwards - his results against the rest of the field also worsened. So either everybody suddenly got better in 2008, or Federer declined against the rest of the field excluding Djokedal, who simply improved, or Federer simply declined, or Federer declined while Djokedal got better. Which hypothesis makes most sense?

Sophocles
01-11-2012, 12:52 PM
I actually think what Shinoj says makes a lot of sense. :shrug:

Take off your Djokovic-coloured spectacles then.

Shinoj
01-11-2012, 01:15 PM
So? He was 2 matches away from the calendar slam in 2009 as well.

It is depressing to have to go over the same ground over & over again. In the same period when Federer's results against Nadal & Djoker worsened - let's say 2008 onwards - his results against the rest of the field also worsened. So either everybody suddenly got better in 2008, or Federer declined against the rest of the field excluding Djokedal, who simply improved, or Federer simply declined, or Federer declined while Djokedal got better. Which hypothesis makes most sense?

Even you know and even i know After Nadal and Djokovic peaked they over shadowed Federer.

And why should it feel depressing, he had his moment of glory. Sitting at 16 Grand Slams. Honestly wtf you want more as a fan?

Mystique
01-11-2012, 01:28 PM
So? He was 2 matches away from the calendar slam in 2009 as well.

It is depressing to have to go over the same ground over & over again. In the same period when Federer's results against Nadal & Djoker worsened - let's say 2008 onwards - his results against the rest of the field also worsened. So either everybody suddenly got better in 2008, or Federer declined against the rest of the field excluding Djokedal, who simply improved, or Federer simply declined, or Federer declined while Djokedal got better. Which hypothesis makes most sense?


:facepalm:
Whats depressing is watching people trying to reason with pathetically obvious trolls:confused:
Give it up pal, I think you should be able to recognise a lost case when you see one.

bokehlicious
01-11-2012, 01:33 PM
Nice trolling shinoj :yeah: lots of people taking the bait :lol:

Shinoj
01-11-2012, 01:55 PM
Hey Mystique,I am in too good a mood to start a random fight on internet. So could you stop your agenda of calling me a troll. You guys have no argument against Federer having a really good 2011.

MIMIC
01-11-2012, 02:02 PM
What exactly IS the "Fedal Era"? Is it when they both win at least 1 slam a year? When they play slam finals (how many)? If it's the former than it definitely looks like the Fedal Era is on its way out.

MatchFederer
01-11-2012, 02:10 PM
I actually think what Shinoj says makes a lot of sense. :shrug:

Ahahahaha, of course you do.


Anyway to answer the actual thread question, I think by 2013 the Fedal era will basically be over and they'd have to almost fluke another Slam victory. I don't think there's so much winning left in Federer, and slightly more in Nadal.

To address a couple of other things:

Wodger had a clear decline starting from 2008 due to mono probably and it coincided with a increased emergence of Nadal, and then Nadal and Fed ruled the roost jointly from rg 2008 - AO 2010 in roughly equal proportions but by this point (2009) as a tennis player Fed was certainly aging. I reckon Fed's prime was 2004 - 2009 but he was setback in 2008 due to mono, and from 2010 onward clearly demonstrated both a physical and mental decline compared to his best years, the signs of which I started seeing in a more permanent sense around US Open 2009 AO 2010 period -- Well he has an awful lot of matches under his legs so it's certainly understandable.

Also, to suggest that Nadal and Djokovic are better adapted to the current conditions is reasonable, certainly in the context of an aging Federer, but I think even if he was prime-time then he still might not be better equipped than Nadal and Djokovic to deal with the current conditions in tennis.

tripwires
01-11-2012, 02:24 PM
Hey Mystique,I am in too good a mood to start a random fight on internet. So could you stop your agenda of calling me a troll. You guys have no argument against Federer having a really good 2011.

You are hilarious. Here's an emoticon to express how funny I think you are: :haha:

His 2011 wasn't awful, but it wasn't "really good" compared to his previous seasons. When you have 16 slams it's hard to call a slam-less season a "really good" one.

Sophocles
01-11-2012, 02:43 PM
Even you know and even i know After Nadal and Djokovic peaked they over shadowed Federer.

I'm sorry but this doesn't answer the question. It's consistent with the proposition that Federer declined.

Sophocles
01-11-2012, 02:45 PM
:facepalm:
Whats depressing is watching people trying to reason with pathetically obvious trolls:confused:
Give it up pal, I think you should be able to recognise a lost case when you see one.

Yeah all right. It's just hard to face doing work when I'm back in the office after the Christmas break.

Commander Data
01-11-2012, 02:47 PM
Nothing is over, Federer is just preparing the next wave of attack.

Johnny Groove
01-11-2012, 02:54 PM
Everybody is in decline, clearly. Whoever of the top 3 wins the AO will be the GOAT, and whoever loses is finished. Until the next tournament.

Oh, MTF, will you ever learn?

Mystique
01-11-2012, 03:38 PM
Yeah all right. It's just hard to face doing work when I'm back in the office after the Christmas break.

:D I can relate ;)

Shinoj
01-11-2012, 04:03 PM
You are hilarious. Here's an emoticon to express how funny I think you are: :haha:

His 2011 wasn't awful, but it wasn't "really good" compared to his previous seasons. When you have 16 slams it's hard to call a slam-less season a "really good" one.


The main reason that it wasnt as good as compared to his previous seasons is pretty Obvious. Djokovic emerged in 2011 and Nadal always had the better of Federer. Remove those two he would dominate in more or less the same way. And thats what happened in the end of 2011. Nadal and Djokovic both got exhausted and Federer started dominating.

Its a Big myth that federer has declined. Nadal and Djokovic have been better than Federer. Fuckin Deal with it. :wavey:

finishingmove
01-11-2012, 04:12 PM
I actually think what Shinoj says makes a lot of sense. :shrug:

Let the haters be.

They hate Nole for his success and his class.

Gagsquet
01-11-2012, 04:23 PM
Let the haters be.

They hate Nole for his success and his class.


http://www.smiley-lol.com/smiley/humour-blague/moqueur/panach11.gif

Shinoj
01-11-2012, 05:20 PM
http://www.smiley-lol.com/smiley/humour-blague/moqueur/panach11.gif

Are you snorting something?

mark73
01-11-2012, 05:37 PM
The main reason that it wasnt as good as compared to his previous seasons is pretty Obvious. Djokovic emerged in 2011 and Nadal always had the better of Federer. Remove those two he would dominate in more or less the same way. And thats what happened in the end of 2011. Nadal and Djokovic both got exhausted and Federer started dominating.

Its a Big myth that federer has declined. Nadal and Djokovic have been better than Federer. Fuckin Deal with it. :wavey:

Ok so at 31 he has not declined. Perhaps Aggassi and Sampras never declined either. You can't seriously believe that at 31 you are at the same level as at 24.

Everko
01-11-2012, 06:38 PM
Let the haters be.

They hate Nole for his success and his class.

exactly. There is nothing to hate Djokovic about. He is the best option to win if Nadal is not winning

Gagsquet
01-11-2012, 07:13 PM
Are you snorting something?

cocaine most of the time.

silverwhite
01-11-2012, 07:48 PM
Like your favourite http://www.tennisforum.com/images/smilies/oh.gif

Macbrother
01-11-2012, 08:19 PM
The main reason that it wasnt as good as compared to his previous seasons is pretty Obvious. Djokovic emerged in 2011 and Nadal always had the better of Federer. Remove those two he would dominate in more or less the same way. And thats what happened in the end of 2011. Nadal and Djokovic both got exhausted and Federer started dominating.

Its a Big myth that federer has declined. Nadal and Djokovic have been better than Federer. Fuckin Deal with it. :wavey:

Right, it's perfectly natural that someone who's half way to 31 is able to maintain the same level he was in his early 20's. Sampras wasn't a worse player when he lost in the 2nd round of Wimbledon -- George Bastl was just that good.

Federer isn't the player he was in 2005 and as such Djokovic and others are able to take advantage of it -- that's fact. You deal with it.

Sunset of Age
01-11-2012, 08:36 PM
Sampras wasn't a worse player when he lost in the 2nd round of Wimbledon -- George Bastl was just that good.

:worship: ;)

Saberq
01-11-2012, 08:44 PM
Right, it's perfectly natural that someone who's half way to 31 is able to maintain the same level he was in his early 20's. Sampras wasn't a worse player when he lost in the 2nd round of Wimbledon -- George Bastl was just that good.

Federer isn't the player he was in 2005 and as such Djokovic and others are able to take advantage of it -- that's fact. You deal with it.

and Roger took advantage that in his prime his main opponents were nowhere near his level .....shit happens

Macbrother
01-11-2012, 08:59 PM
and Roger took advantage that in his prime his main opponents were nowhere near his level .....shit happens
Well I don't exactly blame them, it's kinda hard to be near Federer's peak level, you know.

Saberq
01-11-2012, 09:14 PM
Well I don't exactly blame them, it's kinda hard to be near Federer's peak level, you know.

you dont understand .....take Roger out for example from 2004-2007 and put Novak this Novak of 2011-2012 instead of him and he dominates more than in 2011....superior talent around weak talent ....

Macbrother
01-11-2012, 09:35 PM
you dont understand .....take Roger out for example from 2004-2007 and put Novak this Novak of 2011-2012 instead of him and he dominates more than in 2011....superior talent around weak talent ....

Just like Novak was able to dominate "weak talent" Roddick, right? First and foremost see how long "this" Djokovic lasts before making any sweeping generalizations, speculation, and conjecture about what Novak would or wouldn't do in any other era.

HKz
01-11-2012, 10:15 PM
you dont understand .....take Roger out for example from 2004-2007 and put Novak this Novak of 2011-2012 instead of him and he dominates more than in 2011....superior talent around weak talent ....

2012? Abu Dhabi counts?

Saberq
01-11-2012, 10:22 PM
2012? Abu Dhabi counts?

let's say for the sake of argument that he has the same 2012 ....

HKz
01-11-2012, 10:24 PM
let's say for the sake of argument that he has the same 2012 ....

Wow you are one cocky fan.

Saberq
01-11-2012, 10:47 PM
I said for a sake of argument ...and I am cocky in every area of life.....you get like that when you have things I have

Matt01
01-11-2012, 10:53 PM
To address a couple of other things:

Wodger had a clear decline starting from 2008 due to mono probably and it coincided with a increased emergence of Nadal, and then Nadal and Fed ruled the roost jointly from rg 2008 - AO 2010 in roughly equal proportions but by this point (2009) as a tennis player Fed was certainly aging. I reckon Fed's prime was 2004 - 2009 but he was setback in 2008 due to mono, and from 2010 onward clearly demonstrated both a physical and mental decline compared to his best years, the signs of which I started seeing in a more permanent sense around US Open 2009 AO 2010 period -- Well he has an awful lot of matches under his legs so it's certainly understandable.

Also, to suggest that Nadal and Djokovic are better adapted to the current conditions is reasonable, certainly in the context of an aging Federer, but I think even if he was prime-time then he still might not be better equipped than Nadal and Djokovic to deal with the current conditions in tennis.


No the mono crap is back again :facepalm:

mark73
01-11-2012, 11:02 PM
I said for a sake of argument ...and I am cocky in every area of life.....you get like that when you have things I have

What things? A cock?

HKz
01-11-2012, 11:04 PM
I said for a sake of argument ...and I am cocky in every area of life.....you get like that when you have things I have

What a giant poster of Djokovic in your room? I think your parents will be displeased when they step in your room tonight.

atennisfan
01-11-2012, 11:05 PM
So when Djokovic turns 30 and he will get owned by Tomic, it just means that Djokovic does not decline, he will just have met a greater player.

Saberq
01-11-2012, 11:19 PM
What things? A cock?

no man money

What a giant poster of Djokovic in your room? I think your parents will be displeased when they step in your room tonight.

Actually I do.....again my parents are not living with me for 6 years

So when Djokovic turns 30 and he will get owned by Tomic, it just means that Djokovic does not decline, he will just have met a greater player.


Tomic will never beat Novak

Sunset of Age
01-12-2012, 12:31 AM
No the mono crap is back again :facepalm:

Fed's mono problem, however much of a factor the past, is a fact. :shrug:
That said, I think it was just a relative minor factor in his unevitable decline.

It's kind of hilarious to think that a player having reached 30+ of age, 1000+ matches played on ATP level, a ridiculous mileage of some complete DECADE within the top-3-4 of the ATP records, wouldn't have declined by now. :silly:

Some folks over here indeed seem to believe in 'eternal life'.
Wow to you, folks. :worship:

Drugs Ruin Lives
01-12-2012, 12:49 AM
Good riddance.

Matt01
01-12-2012, 01:20 AM
Fed's mono problem, however much of a factor the past, is a fact. :shrug:
That said, I think it was just a relative minor factor in his unevitable decline.


I didn't mean to say that the mono didn't exist but yeah, let's say it was a ver minor fatcor in his decline. And to imply that it all started with his mono in 2008 is a bit :silly:

Sunset of Age
01-12-2012, 01:27 AM
I didn't mean to say that the mono didn't exist but yeah, let's say it was a ver minor fatcor in his decline. And to imply that it all started with his mono in 2008 is a bit :silly:

I agree with you - Rog was already a mite in decline in 2008, his mono infection might have been an additional factor, but surely not the 'main cause of it all', as some seem to claim.

Nothing 'lasts forever', I just wonder why so many seem to believe that, I'd understand if all of said claimers are 15-year olds. :angel:

Topspindoctor
01-12-2012, 01:29 AM
Fed's mono problem, however much of a factor the past, is a fact. :shrug:
That said, I think it was just a relative minor factor in his unevitable decline.



Olderer's mono was a myth. When people have mono, they pull out of events (see Soderling. Olderer made AO semi, RG final and W final with "mono". Obviously an excuse, because despite being a media darling and seemingly gracious champion, Olderer is a sore loser.

Sunset of Age
01-12-2012, 01:31 AM
Olderer's mono was a myth. When people have mono, they pull out of events (see Soderling. Olderer made AO semi, RG final and W final with "mono". Obviously an excuse, because despite being a media darling and seemingly gracious champion, Olderer is a sore loser.

You are my fav MTF troll. :smooch:
Your current siggie is an additional compliment, only further emphasizing my point(s). Thank you! :D :worship:

paseo
01-12-2012, 01:38 AM
Fed is a tennis demi-god. He doesn't decline, he hibernates. When he's in hibernation mode, like the last 2-3 years, he's somewhat vulnerable. But after he shed his old skin and come out of hibernation, he'll dominate again. You'll see.

This is fact, because I said it. Just accept this as your reality.

Topspindoctor
01-12-2012, 01:40 AM
You are my fav MTF troll. :smooch:
Your current siggie is an additional compliment, only further emphasizing my point(s). Thank you! :D :worship:

I am not a troll.

Sunset of Age
01-12-2012, 01:46 AM
I am not a troll.

Yes you are.
At least I hope so. :tape:

Arakasi
01-12-2012, 01:46 AM
Olderer's mono was a myth. When people have mono, they pull out of events (see Soderling. Olderer made AO semi, RG final and W final with "mono". Obviously an excuse, because despite being a media darling and seemingly gracious champion, Olderer is a sore loser.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/tennis/2008-01-07-federer-illness_N.htm

Federer's a tactical genius. Clearly, he anticipated he was going to lose to Djokovic in Australia so he faked an illness right before the tournament. That way he could claim he had mono later on! Such cunning and foresight!

I imagine he orchestrated that 5 set match with Tipsarevic as well just to he could make himself look vulnerable and make the mono story look more convincing.

It takes a keen mind like yours to see through this guy. Well done :worship:

Shinoj
01-12-2012, 01:48 AM
cocaine most of the time.

Thought so.

Topspindoctor
01-12-2012, 01:55 AM
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/tennis/2008-01-07-federer-illness_N.htm

Federer's a tactical genius. Clearly, he anticipated he was going to lose to Djokovic in Australia so he faked an illness right before the tournament. That way he could claim he had mono later on! Such cunning and foresight!

I imagine he orchestrated that 5 set match with Tipsarevic as well just to he could make himself look vulnerable and make the mono story look more convincing.

It takes a keen mind like yours to see through this guy. Well done :worship:

Olderer was in a win-win situation when it came to faking life crippling illness (or so his fangirls would have us believe). You see it started in USO 2007 final where he had to rely on a horrendous choke from Novak to win. He realized then, he wasn't an invincible ballerina and a tennis god. So he was fearful that once he's exposed by young, strong and hungry players, his legacy will be questioned. (after all beating clowns like Roddick, and Mugzalez in slams doesn't take much effort).

The mono was perfect: it gave him an excuse in case he lost AND it elevated him to a status of a warrior who never gives up even when he's on his death bed. It all went according to plan. Despite Djokovic and later Nadal who started dominating him in slams, his previous achievements were never under question. After all, Goderer would easily win 3 slams in 2008 if he weren't "sick". Olderer played gullible media and tennis fans like a bunch of pawns on a chess board. Only the perceptive saw through the charade of a tennis player who feared that he was starting to lose his grip on tennis dominance because actual competition had emerged.

Arakasi
01-12-2012, 02:10 AM
Olderer was in a win-win situation when it came to faking life crippling illness (or so his fangirls would have us believe). You see it started in USO 2007 final where he had to rely on a horrendous choke from Novak to win. He realized then, he wasn't an invincible ballerina and a tennis god. So he was fearful that once he's exposed by young, strong and hungry players, his legacy will be questioned. (after all beating clowns like Roddick, and Mugzalez in slams doesn't take much effort).

The mono was perfect: it gave him an excuse in case he lost AND it elevated him to a status of a warrior who never gives up even when he's on his death bed. It all went according to plan. Despite Djokovic and later Nadal who started dominating him in slams, his previous achievements were never under question. After all, Goderer would easily win 3 slams in 2008 if he weren't "sick". Olderer played gullible media and tennis fans like a bunch of pawns on a chess board. Only the perceptive saw through the charade of a tennis player who feared that he was starting to lose his grip on tennis dominance because actual competition had emerged.

Wow. I had never considered it like that.

That '07 US Open final must have really scared him. Do you think he started planning the mono story then? Maybe after the trophy ceremony?

What do you think about this latest back "injury"? I mean it does have a lot in common with the whole mono thing. An injury right before Australia... could he be doing it again! Although, to be fair he has had back injuries his whole career. Unless of course he's been faking this whole time in anticipation of this day? That seems a little far-fetched though. Then again, no one would suspect his chronic back issues were just an elaborate ploy set up years ago so it could actually be the perfect cover.

I really need your view on this man. You understand this thing so well.

juan27
01-12-2012, 02:50 AM
Olderer was in a win-win situation when it came to faking life crippling illness (or so his fangirls would have us believe). You see it started in USO 2007 final where he had to rely on a horrendous choke from Novak to win. He realized then, he wasn't an invincible ballerina and a tennis god. So he was fearful that once he's exposed by young, strong and hungry players, his legacy will be questioned. (after all beating clowns like Roddick, and Mugzalez in slams doesn't take much effort).

The mono was perfect: it gave him an excuse in case he lost AND it elevated him to a status of a warrior who never gives up even when he's on his death bed. It all went according to plan. Despite Djokovic and later Nadal who started dominating him in slams, his previous achievements were never under question. After all, Goderer would easily win 3 slams in 2008 if he weren't "sick". Olderer played gullible media and tennis fans like a bunch of pawns on a chess board. Only the perceptive saw through the charade of a tennis player who feared that he was starting to lose his grip on tennis dominance because actual competition had emerged.

stupid post.

the really myth were nadal`s injuries specially in 2009.

federer in 2008 was horrible , losing with many mugs but even with that patetic performasnce he owns nole in us open 2008 and your nadull needs 5 sets to defeat that bad federer in grass.

by the way , mugnzalez humilliated your nadull in australian open , was a really massacre

tripwires
01-12-2012, 03:47 AM
I am not a troll.

:superlol:

Macbrother
01-12-2012, 03:50 AM
Olderer was in a win-win situation when it came to faking life crippling illness (or so his fangirls would have us believe). You see it started in USO 2007 final where he had to rely on a horrendous choke from Novak to win. He realized then, he wasn't an invincible ballerina and a tennis god. So he was fearful that once he's exposed by young, strong and hungry players, his legacy will be questioned. (after all beating clowns like Roddick, and Mugzalez in slams doesn't take much effort).

Right. Federer was perfectly fine and healthy in '08, in fact his level of play hadn't dropped one bit. That's why he:

A) Lost to Roddick for the first time in 5 years.
B) Lost to Radek Stepanek for the first time in 6 years.
C, D, E) Lost to Mardy Fish, James Blake and Ivo Karlovic for the first time ever (two of these in straights, no less)
F) Didn't win a Masters series event for the first time in 5 years.
G) Lost as many matches in '08 as he lost in '04-06 combined.
etc etc etc.

Fed perfectly fine. All these guys just decided to just step it up, almost all of them well past their physical peak. Next you'll be telling us man didn't walk on the moon and that you are in fact, not a troll.

luvly1
01-12-2012, 04:35 AM
Olderer was in a win-win situation when it came to faking life crippling illness (or so his fangirls would have us believe). You see it started in USO 2007 final where he had to rely on a horrendous choke from Novak to win. He realized then, he wasn't an invincible ballerina and a tennis god. So he was fearful that once he's exposed by young, strong and hungry players, his legacy will be questioned. (after all beating clowns like Roddick, and Mugzalez in slams doesn't take much effort).

The mono was perfect: it gave him an excuse in case he lost AND it elevated him to a status of a warrior who never gives up even when he's on his death bed. It all went according to plan. Despite Djokovic and later Nadal who started dominating him in slams, his previous achievements were never under question. After all, Goderer would easily win 3 slams in 2008 if he weren't "sick". Olderer played gullible media and tennis fans like a bunch of pawns on a chess board. Only the perceptive saw through the charade of a tennis player who feared that he was starting to lose his grip on tennis dominance because actual competition had emerged.

you can try to change history all you want but at the start of the AO 2008 there was talk of roger being sick with food poisoning. He never said anything about mono until dubai or so when he went back to the doctor after he hadn't gotten better. That's when he started talking about missing his usual training block.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/federer-brushes-aside-food-poisoning/story-e6frf9if-1111115327468

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/08/sports/tennis/08tennis.html?pagewanted=all

Sunset of Age
01-12-2012, 04:59 AM
http://legacy-cdn.smosh.com/smosh-pit/112010/no-troll-feeding.jpg

http://legacy-cdn.smosh.com/smosh-pit/112010/self-feeding.jpg

The immaculate troll masters duo named Topspintroll and SetSampy (aka "Broken Record") have been gathering themselves a lot of vCash lately. :bowdown: :lol:

Shinoj
01-12-2012, 06:40 AM
Ok so at 31 he has not declined. Perhaps Aggassi and Sampras never declined either. You can't seriously believe that at 31 you are at the same level as at 24.


I said already he has declined but to a very less degree. And those who are saying that his movement was quite elaborate in 2004-07, also bear in mind that with experience he realized he doesn't need to move that a lot. he has become quite smart as well. So as much as his movement is restricted it is also by choice that he did.

And apart from Nadal and Djokovic, other players are also not playing him in awe as it used to happen like Roddick or Gonzales or Hewitt did, Like Tsonga who takes attack to him. The Tour has moved on.

MatchFederer
01-12-2012, 08:01 AM
No the mono crap is back again :facepalm:

Again, mono is the clear factor that snowballed his decline which started in a rapid way in 2008 given that the illness impeded his performances in a way that we could all see visually in a number of matches especially throughout the first half of 2008. However this was a fake decline almost as he was able to get to his more or less old level of stamina and consistency by the middle and latter stages of 2008 and went on to be quite successful in 2009 -- though helped somewhat maybe by some problems for Nadal.

His mono was an obvious sudden jarring bump in the road which had instantaneous ramifications, but his true decline for my money where you could look at him visually while playing without him suffering from any illness or whatever and say, nah he's *definitely* slower physically and/or *less fresh* mentally, was sort of US 2009 AO 2010 time, where especially his recovery time side to side seemed to be augmenting in a noticeable way.