Mens Tennis Forums banner

Who wins?

  • Olderer in 3

    Votes: 7 24.1%
  • Olderer in 4

    Votes: 9 31.0%
  • Olderer in 5

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Prime Federer in 3

    Votes: 5 17.2%
  • Prime Federer in 4

    Votes: 6 20.7%
  • Prime Federer in 5

    Votes: 2 6.9%
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
External factor expert
Joined
·
4,173 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
2004: Federer breaks Coria's win streak in Hamburg, but loses in 2nd round in Rome. Federer lost in the 3rd round at the FO this year. The following year 2005 in wich Federer improved according to most fans loses to 18 year old Nadal at the FO.

2011: Mediocore Masters losing early vs Melzer in the quarter finals, followed by Nadal in the semis in Madrid. Federer breaks Djokovic perfect 2011 season, pushing Nadal to the limit in the finals at the FO.

2004 vs 2011 which Federer prevails?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,934 Posts
Can't you eggtard just take a break?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,038 Posts
Olderer in 3.

Green rep me now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OnTheRun

·
Administrator | Chaos Theory
Joined
·
53,570 Posts
2004: Federer breaks Coria's win streak in Hamburg, but loses in 2nd round in Rome. Federer lost in the 3rd round at the FO this year. The following year 2005 in wich Federer improved according to most fans loses to 18 year old Nadal at the FO.

2011: Mediocore Masters losing early vs Melzer in the quarter finals, followed by Nadal in the semis in Madrid. Federer breaks Djokovic perfect 2011 season, pushing Nadal to the limit in the finals at the FO.

2004 vs 2011 which Federer prevails?
Federer already to lost to Nadal in 2004 in their first meeting at Miami R3.
They would meet again in Miami F 2005 with Federer prevailing in a tight 5 sets 2-6, 6-7(4), 7-6(5), 6-3, 6-1 (after losing the first 2). So that set the tone for their first FO meeting (and Nadal's debut at that slam), and if you see the highlights, Federer had no idea how to play Nadal on clay. Normal shots that 'would be' winners kept coming back on the court.

Depending on context, Federer 2011 had a lot more experience by that time at being the best so I was not too suprised when he beat Djokovic. However, 2004 Federer wasn't bad by any stretch, winning the AO, W and USO titles handily. Just hadn't figured out his game on clay at that pt of time.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2014/03/13/Miami-Roger-Rafa-10-Years-Rivalry.aspx
 

·
External factor expert
Joined
·
4,173 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Federer already to lost to Nadal in 2004 in their first meeting at Miami R3.
They would meet again in Miami F 2005 with Federer prevailing in a tight 5 sets 2-6, 6-7(4), 7-6(5), 6-3, 6-1 (after losing the first 2). So that set the tone for their first FO meeting (and Nadal's debut at that slam), and if you see the highlights, Federer had no idea how to play Nadal on clay. Normal shots that 'would be' winners kept coming back on the court.

Depending on context, Federer 2011 had a lot more experience by that time at being the best so I was not too suprised when he beat Djokovic. However, 2004 Federer wasn't bad by any stretch, winning the AO, W and USO titles handily. Just hadn't figured out his game on clay at that pt of time.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2014/03/13/Miami-Roger-Rafa-10-Years-Rivalry.aspx
Are you telling me prime Federer lost to 17 year old Nadal on hard court?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,660 Posts
Federer 2004 would win everywhere except on clay where 2011 Fingerwagerer with his experience will prevail in 4.
 

·
External factor expert
Joined
·
4,173 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Federer 2004 would win everywhere except on clay where 2011 Fingerwagerer with his experience will prevail in 4.
I disagree but since we are talking about clay I will let this one slide for once. I doubt any of the voters can explain why prime Federer would win.

Olderer takes this one in 3 or 4 if prime gets hot, he might take a set away.
 

·
Administrator | Chaos Theory
Joined
·
53,570 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,779 Posts
Why are you asking such an obvious question? Obviously the one in 2011 is better, that's because Federer wasn't that good on clay yet, still didn't develop yet. He improved signficantly the next year on clay, and then 2006-2007 was his peak in that surface, and 08-12 overall he was very solid, and that RG 2011 you could argue was the best RG he ever played(only for RG). However he was miles better in grass/hard in 2004 than 2011.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,415 Posts
2011 was a different RG than the others because of the balls. He was able to servebot, and whenever Fed can servebot he does well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,325 Posts
Olderer 2006 cannot be overlooked here
 

·
External factor expert
Joined
·
4,173 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
yes he did. Federer did not anticipate Nadal to get so many shots back as he did in some rallies because he was used to playing the likes of Roddick for instance.

Here is the complete H2H for the 33 meetings. What is the first one on that list (earliest)?
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=F324&oId=N409

Nadal def. Federer 6-3 6-3 in 2004 Miami Open
I don't think you can find any excuse when prime Federer loses to 17 year old Nadal on hardcourts in straight sets. :shrug:

Why are you asking such an obvious question? Obviously the one in 2011 is better, that's because Federer wasn't that good on clay yet, still didn't develop yet. He improved signficantly the next year on clay, and then 2006-2007 was his peak in that surface, and 08-12 overall he was very solid, and that RG 2011 you could argue was the best RG he ever played(only for RG). However he was miles better in grass/hard in 2004 than 2011.
It's clearly not that obvious to fedbase apparently. 2011 Federer leads the poll only with one vote. :superlol: Fedbase forms the biggest fanbase on this forum, this proves why polls are never to be trusted.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,517 Posts
Federer was a target for Tio Toni from the very beginning. Rafa could lose to anyone but not to Federer . That is how get into Fed'head in 2004.
Fed could not get Nadal as his rival for two or three years because guys of his age were still there and they were young. If Federer took Nadal as his rival seriously at the very beginning then things could look different now. But he was too young as well.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
779 Posts
Federer in 2004 was for sure a weaker player. His forehand was all spin, and the only effective way for him to get flatness was against players like Ferrer, who fed him pace with almost every shot.

Ferrer is playing his best now, but Federer is still not as good as 2012. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,993 Posts
If I remember correctly there was something up with the balls during RG 2011. Big servers and big hitters played a lot better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,237 Posts
Noletards trying desperately to give weight to Novak's accomplishments in this lack of competition :haha: Pathetic.

No, Djokovic is not as good as prime Federer and never will be.
Federer in 2004 was for sure a weaker player. His forehand was all spin, and the only effective way for him to get flatness was against players like Ferrer, who fed him pace with almost every shot.

Ferrer is playing his best now, but Federer is still not as good as 2012. :D
Jesus Christ. I hope you're trolling.
 

·
External factor expert
Joined
·
4,173 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Noletards trying desperately to give weight to Novak's accomplishments in this lack of competition :haha: Pathetic.

No, Djokovic is not as good as prime Federer and never will be.
Jesus Christ. I hope you're trolling.
Doesnt really mean much in this thread since most are convinced olderer is indeed better than prime Federer. :shrug:
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top