[tampie]

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]

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]

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]

Originally Posted by tjohansson

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

[atennisfan]

Originally Posted by Shinoj

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]

Originally Posted by atennisfan

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]

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]

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?

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

[Sophocles]

Originally Posted by Shinoj

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]

Originally Posted by tampie

And as for Nadal; he's not finished yet. He's got 5 more slams at least in him.

[Shinoj]

Originally Posted by Sophocles

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]

Originally Posted by Sophocles

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]

Originally Posted by MatchFederer

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.

[tripwires]

Originally Posted by Shinoj

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?

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

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

[tripwires]

Originally Posted by Shinoj

That was when Nadal and Djokovic didnt peak.

Nice trolling attempt.