[theseth1119]

I'd say 5 of them were for sure: 2005 AO SF, 2010 USO SF, 2011 USO SF, 2013 AO SF, and the 2016 W SF...
Honorable Mention: 2012 AO SF...

As for, would Rogie have won any of those finals, well... 2005 AO over Hewitt for sure, 2010 USO would've lost to Rafa, 2011 USO might've beaten Rafa (50/50), 2013 AO would've lost to Djokovic, and 2016 W would've beaten Andy M!! That's 2-3 more grand slams for Rogie (2014 would've beaten Stanimal in the AO)!!

Your thoughts??

 

[Terrible--one]

20 < 21 < 22

 

[monfed]

2005 AO SF, 2011 USO SF, 2016 W SF was in the ascendancy in these matches and still lost

2010 USO SF was winnable but he was never in control of that match

2013 AO SF, peak Murray should've beaten backerer in 4 sets if anything

 

[Lukasgigler]

Of the 15 he lost 9 at the AO alone. That’s so fucking embarrassing…

 

[VamosRafa123]

USO11 for sure
He outplayed Djokovic and was the better player overall
IDK how he lost the match

 

[monfed]

Of the 15 he lost 9 at the AO alone. That’s so fucking embarrassing…

Which other SF besides AO 05 should he have won?

AO 08 Fed was down with mono, he should've lost to Tipsy in the previous Rd but as we alll know Roger always gets punished by haters and sometimes Fed fans like you for outperforming instead of getting credit for it.

AO 11,12 SF was stopped by absolute peak dullovic.

AO 14 SF again got stomped by dull.

No it's not embarassing, it's Federer outperforming his age.

 

[Lukasgigler]

Which other SF besides AO 05 should he have won?

AO 08 Fed was down with mono, he should've lost to Tipsy in the previous Rd but as we alll know Roger always gets punished by haters and sometimes Fed fans like you for outperforming instead of getting credit for it.

AO 11,12 SF was stopped by absolute peak dullovic.

AO 14 SF again got stomped by dull.

No it's not embarassing, it's Federer outperforming his age. But your post is embarrassing specially for a Federer fan. Don't keep soiling Fed fans please.

Stopped by peak dullovic Blabla. He beat nadal less than 2 months later at Indian wells. He was just in his head in slams. Federer could’ve also won in 2011 but his serving that match was so fucking horrible that he was under pressure in almost every game.

 

[monfed]

Stopped by peak dullovic Blabla. He beat nadal less than 2 months later at Indian wells. He was just in his head in slams. Federer could’ve also won in 2011 but his serving that match was so fucking horrible that he was under pressure in almost every game.

You gotta be seriously delusional to claim that Federer had any chance in the AO 11 SF against peak fakovic. Fed's serving was under pressure by a GOAT level returner. Look I know you're hurting but try not let that cloud your judgement. It's embarassing to read.

Ofcourse dull was in his head so Fed didn't have a realistic chance of winning AO 12. Fed was post prime and dull was at his peak on HC. The topic is whether these were winnable, they weren't plain and simple.

 

[VyRa | esq.]

USO11 for sure
He outplayed Djokovic and was the better player overall
IDK how he lost the match

Close scoreline in the first two sets. He did not outplay Djokovic. He was more clutch than Djokovic, Djokovic threw the first two sets away. He was the better player in this match. Look how much better and easier he has won set 3 and 4.

 

[monfed]

Close scoreline in the first two sets. He did not outplay Djokovic. He was more clutch than Djokovic, Djokovic threw the first two sets away. He was the better player in this match. Look how much better and easier he has won set 3 and 4.

Fed tanked set 4 because faker was physically superior. That's why I say Fed was post prime after AO 10 as he had never tanked sets prior and including AO 10.

Whatever claims you want to make about the first 4 sets, Fed was clearly winning set 5 and should've served out the 40-15 game.

 

[VyRa | esq.]

Fed tanked set 4 because faker was physically superior. That's why I say Fed was post prime after AO 10 as he had never tanked sets prior and including AO 10.

Whatever claims you want to make about the first 4 sets, Fed was clearly winning set 5 and should've served out the 40-15 game.

Of course Fed should have won the 40-15.

But what I am saying is that Djokovic was the better player in this match. Federer was the better server, with the better forehand and he was smarter and more experienced. That were his advantages.
Djokovic was bad or dumb for nearly losing it with his great game, it would have been such a wasted opportunity once again at the US Open. As it happened often with him there.

 

[monfed]

Of course Fed should have won the 40-15.

But what I am saying is that Djokovic was the better player in this match. Federer was the better server, with the better forehand and he was smarter and more experienced. That were his advantages.
Djokovic was bad or dumb for nearly losing it with his great game, it would have been such a wasted opportunity once again at the US Open. As it happened often with him there.

No he wasn't. Fed outplayed him in the first 2 sets just like he did at RG 11. It was following the same script as RG 11 and would have with an extra set if Fed had closed set 5 as he should have.

You're the kindof delusional tard who'll claim faker threw away the first 2 sets at RG 11 too.

Faker had already beaten Roger at USO 10 so no excuse for going down 2 sets. If that was Prime Federer, he would've smashed him in straights like he did in 08 and 09 and also 07.

Cut the crap and accept the facts, croctard.

 

[VyRa | esq.]

No he wasn't. Fed outplayed him in the first 2 sets just like he did at RG 11. It was following the same script as RG 11 and would have with an extra set if Fed had closed set 5 as he should have.

You're the kindof delusional tard who'll claim faker threw away the first 2 sets at RG 11 too.

Faker had already beaten Roger at USO 10 so no excuse for going down 2 sets. If that was Prime Federer, he would've smashed him in straights like he did in 08 and 09 and also 07.

Cut the crap and accept the facts, croctard.

I will rewatch these matches at some point. So I will accept your different take and opinion and will give an update if I saw the same as you did here.
But dont mix RG 11 into this. Two separated matches. There is no script that has to be followed.

I am not delusional, I wont continue, maybe I am wrong, I will have to rewatch it. That match is not as fresh in my memory as others. But that's what I remembered. Djokovic being overall better and the more deserving winner. We all know that Fed wins a lot with his serve and plus one shots or his slicing to Djokovics backhand.

 

[monfed]

I will rewatch these matches at some point. So I will accept your different take and opinion and will give an update if I saw the same as you did here.
But dont mix RG 11 into this. Two separated matches. There is no script that has to be followed.

I am not delusional, I wont continue, maybe I am wrong, I will have to rewatch it. That match is not as fresh in my memory as others. But that's what I remembered. Djokovic being overall better and the more deserving winner. We all know that Fed wins a lot with his serve and plus one shots or his slicing to Djokovics backhand.

Thanks for considering my opinion and sorry if I came off as rude.

 

[cmchelsea]

2005 AO, USO 2010 and 11 he had MPs so they were all winnable as he was 1 point away from winning the match

Hard disagree about AO 2013 though. I remember that match like it was last week, if anything Andy should've won that match in straight sets and he served for the match in the 4th set as well.

 

[Waz]

You gotta be seriously delusional to claim that Federer had any chance in the AO 11 SF against peak fakovic. Fed's serving was under pressure by a GOAT level returner. Look I know you're hurting but try not let that cloud your judgement. It's embarassing to read.

AO 2011 was just the start of peak Faker. Nobody at that time thought this was absolute peak Faker.

Federer lost the first set in their 2011 AO sf on a tiebreak and the second set 7-5, which he led 5-3 and had a chance to serve for it. Had Federer been a bit more clutch (something he was very rarely against Dullovic in slams), he could have beat Faker at AO 2011 and peak Faker would have been over because he had even started.

 

[monfed]

AO 2011 was just the start of peak Faker. Nobody at that time thought this was absolute peak Faker.

Federer lost the first set in their 2011 AO sf on a tiebreak and the second set 7-5, which he led 5-3 and had a chance to serve for it. Had Federer been a bit more clutch (something he was very rarely against Dullovic in slams), he could have beat Faker at AO 2011 and peak Faker would have been over because he had even started.

True but Fed never looked like winning or wasn't in control of the match unlike say USO or RG 11.

 

[Idemo]

all of them, because according to fedcult he is the superior player all of the time and only loses matches because he chokes (which means he is technically better) and because he is mentally inferior to his opponents, but he is the more talented player. especially at the USO10 and 11 when he outplayed Novak (cof,cof) 🥱

 

[n00b]

Hard disagree about AO 2013 though. I remember that match like it was last week, if anything Andy should've won that match in straight sets and he served for the match in the 4th set as well.

This. For the whole duration of the match, Andy had the control, I remember Roger had to produce some iconic magic to force the 4th into the TB i.e. that DTL BH winner.

 

[I Can’t See My Forehead]

All of them