Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 87 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I have been visiting this site since 2010. Never thought of becoming a user until about the start of this years french open. When peak djokovic vs peak federer discussion(which are pointless and hypothetical) became the dominant topic. I wanted to be heard on this. I am not a fan of either and think the fanbase of federer shows double standards a lot. But what actually prompted me to join was flawed logic of djokovic fans.I will try to bring out some holes in their arguements in chronological order.
REMEMBER I AM TRYING TO FIND FLAWS IN THIER LOGIC NOT STATING FACTS.I AM NOT QUESTIONING DJOKOVICS ACHIEVEMNTS BUT ARGUEMENTS GIVEN IN HIS FAVOUR BY SOME FANS.
I will apply same statemens made for djokovic in federer'scase.Same counterarguments can be made against federer as well but let us see djokovic first.

1 According to some to say that federer was not in his peak after 2008 is criminally wrong.However while discussing djokovic's peak ,periods ranging from 2008 Ao(he had won a slam and was no longer baby novak) till 2011 AO and from 2012 AO till 2015 is not at all considered. This is period is aprrox 5-6 years of the time when (because of age) by default djokovic should have been at his best.
All of federer's shortcomings post 2008 are attributed to the rise of Novak,Murray and rafa.So why should we ignore the fact that djokovic lost so many matches during this period.If fedrerer's loss against berdych,tsonga and the top4 are brought up why shouldn't we remember that novak lost to hass,berdych tsonga roddick etc too?
His losses to Nadal, federer, murray and some random guys during this period is completely ignored during discussions about his prime and these years as a whole are not discussed.So djokovic's prime lasted about 1.5 years in total.Usually people say that during the above mentioned years djokovic did not display his best level.But to say federer after dominaing tennis for about 4-5 yearscould not show the same level is considered wrong.Some djokovic fans even count 09-15 as a part of federer's best years and take all of his losses into account .If federer's losses to djokovic in 2011 can be used then why should we forget after reaching peak a year later novak was beaten by Rafa, Roger and andy in slams?Andy got him on hard and later on grass which is his second best surface now.And what about all those losses to rafa in 2013?Shouldn't we say prime djokovic was baggeled by federer on hard?If roger's loss in 2008 WB is brought up often, then what about Novak's loss to stan in 2014 Ao and 2015 RG?And that's afterall neglecting all his random losses in 08,09,10.


2 .The 2007 us open final is called a choke. As djokovic lost several set points. This is sometimes used to say that novak could beat peak federer easily.
However what about us open 2011 semifnal then?Actually taking two sets and having two match point on his serve, federer lost.If 07 was choke then this was severely bigger one.The fact that a return which even if intentional was lucky to land in saved djokovic shows that federer had almost beaten djokovic but he choked after taking first two sets. Thus a proof that fedrerer could have beaten peak djokovic on a hardcourt in a slam by above logic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #2 (Edited)
2.Djokovic was defeated on hard his favourite surface in new york by Nishikori in 2014.Nishikori also defeated him in 2011 in basel baggeling him.Of course it was because djokovic was mentally and physically exhausted in those matches.In 2014 ,WB by beating federer djokovic finallymade up for his poor performances of previous slams.WB was quite emotional for him and thus he might have been exhausted for US.Similarly in 2011 he had had a monster of a season and was bound to feel depleted.
However the same logic is not applied for Federer when djokovic defeated him in Montreal.When it was immediately after WB which was even more emotional for fed. He had the pressure of winning 5 in a row and nadal ,who was now ready to overtake him, almost took it away. Wasn't federer supposed to feel at least mentally exhausted after such a high stress tournament and final by above logic?As i said montreal was immediately afterwards.
Similarly fed had 3 seasons on his back which were almost like djokovics 2011 and his 2007 was already a multislam one .
if djokovic is Considered to be exhausted in above said matches(which are only two cases from a few more) by above logic shouldn't we factor in extreme mental fatigue for federer in the match?doesnt djokovic every year shows us how much toll a strong season takes on you?This may also explain why federer was having dips in level by 2007


3.In 2008 AO semifinal djokovic defeated federer in straights.Djokovic was on fire in that match.He deserves and gets full credit for beating fed.
However when federer defeated djokovic in french open sf the loss was attributed to the walkover novak had gotten. But somehow the fact that federer himself admitted being ill in an interview during the AO with the visible proof that he was sweating profusely in the match isnot brought up. They say djokovic did not play well in the SF of RG but wasn't federer playing monstrous five sets against the likes of tipsarvic in Ao 2008?


4. Recently djokovic defeated federer in a convincing fashion to win in london.They say djokovic didn't allow peak federer to play his game.By the same logic should not we conclude that in RG 2011 federer didn't allow novak to play at his level and that's why novak played badly ?If the walkover excuse is given what about NY then? Novak showed he was in god mode just a match later by defeating Rafa.But edged federer by a hair.So wouldn't it be right to say that a past it federer was able to not only contain but also defeat novak in his prime?


5.If federer is a weak era champion,Rafa just a claycourter ,Murray is overrated and stan is a ballbasher then why Novak's victory against them should be considered his achievements?By this logic winning against them is a step backward for Novak.Actually if this is the case then his losses against the trio should hurt his legacy.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
15,396 Posts
I have been visiting this site since 2010.Never thought of becoming a user until about the start of this years french open when peak djokovic vs peak federer discussion(which are pointless and hypothetical) became the dominant topic.I wanted to be heard on this.I am not a fan of either and think the fanbase of federer shows double standards a lot.But what actually prompted me to join was flawed logic of djokovic fans.I will try to bring out some holes in their arguements in chronological order.REMEMBER I AM TRYING TO FIND FLAWS IN THIER LOGIC NOT STATING FACTS.I AM NOT QUESTIONING DJOKOVICS ACHIEVEMNTS BUT ARGUEMENTS GIVEN IN HIS FAVOUR BY SOME FANS.I will apply same statemens made for djokovic in federer'scase.Same counterarguments can be made against federer as well but let us see djokovic first.
1 According to some to say that federer was not in his peak after 2008 is criminally wrong.However while discussing djokovic's peak periods ranging from 2008 Ao(he had won a slam and was no longer baby novak) till 2011 AO and from 2012 AO till 2015 is not at all consideredThis is period is aprrox 5-6 years of the time when because of age by default djokovic should have been at his best. All of federer's shortcomings post 2008 are attributed to the rise of Novak,Murray and rafa.So why should we ignore the fact that djokovic lost so many matches during this period.If fedrerer's loss against berdych,tsonga and the top4 are brought up why shouldn't we remember that novak lost to hass,berdych tsonga roddick etc too? His losses to Nadal, federer, murray and some random guys during this period is completely ignored during discussions about his prime and these years as a whole are not discussed.So djokovic's prime lasted about 1.5 years in total.Usually people say that during the above mentioned years djokovic did not display his best level.But to say federer after dominaing tennis for about 4-5 yearscould not show the same level is considered wrong.Some djokovic fans even count 09-15 as a part of federer's best years and take all of his losses into account .If federer's losses to djokovic in 2011 can be used then why should we forget after reaching peak a year later novak was beaten by Rafa, Roger and andy in slams?Andy got him on hard and later on grass which is his second best surface now.And what about all those losses to rafa in 2013?Shouldn't we say prime djokovic was baggeled by federer on hard?If roger's loss in 2008 WB is brought up often then what about Novak's loss to stan in 2014 Ao and 2015 RG?And that's afterall neglecting all his random losses in 08,09,10.
1.The 2007 us open final is called a choke.As djokovic lost several set points.This is sometimes used to say that novak could beat peak federer easily.However what about us open 2011 semifnal then?Actually taking two sets and having two match point on his serve, federer lost.If 07 was choke then this was severely bigger one.The fact that a return which even if intentional was lucky to land in saved djokovic shows that federer had almost beaten djokovic but he choked after taking first two sets.Thus a proof that fedrerer could have beaten peak djokovic on a hardcourt in a slam by above logic

A huge stinking pile of junk. Another double account hater. Go back to your cave troll.

Would these butthurt fedaltard trolls ever stop. :facepalm:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
15,396 Posts
and 2015 RG?And that's afterall neglecting all his random losses in 08,09,10.
1.The 2007 us open final is called a choke.As djokovic lost several set points.This is sometimes used to say that novak could beat peak federer easily.However what about us open 2011 semifnal then?Actually taking two sets and having two match point on his serve, federer lost.If 07 was choke then this was severely bigger one.The fact that a return which even if intentional was lucky to land in saved djokovic shows that federer had almost beaten djokovic but he choked after taking first two sets.Thus a proof that fedrerer could have beaten peak djokovic on a hardcourt in a slam by above logic
2.Djokovic was defeated on hard his favourite surface in new york by Nishikori in 2014.Nishikori also defeated him in 2011 in basel baggeling him.Of course it was because djokovic was mentally and physically exhausted in those matches.In 2014 ,WB by beating federer djokovic finallymade up for his poor performances of previous slams.WB was quite emotional for him and thus he might have been exhausted for US.Similarly in 2011 he had had a monster of a season and was bound to feel depleted.
However the same logic is not applied for Federer when djokovic defeated him in Montreal.Even when it was immediately after WB which was even more emotional for fed.He had the pressure of winning 5 in a row and nadal ,who was now ready to overtake him, almost took it away.Wasn't federer supposed to feel at least mentally exhausted after such a high stress tournament and final by above logic?As i said montreal was immediately afterwards.
Similarly fed had 3 seasons on his back which were almost like djokovics 2011 and his 2007 was already a multislam one if djokovic is Considered to be exhausted in above said matches(which are only two cases from a few more) by above logic shouldn't we factor in extreme mental fatigue for federer in the match?doesnt djokovic every year shows us how much toll a strong season takes on you?This may also explain why federer was starting to have dips in level(loss to canas etc) by 2007.
3.In 2008 AO semifinal djokovic defeated federer in straights.Djokovic was on fire in that match.He deserves and gets full credit for beating fed.
However when federer defeated djokovic in french open sf the loss was attributed to the walkover novak had gotten. But somehow the fact that federer himself admitted being ill in an interview during the AO with the visible proof that he was sweating profusely in the match isnot brought up.They say djokovic did not play well in the SF of RG but wasn't federer playing monstrous five sets against the likes of tipsarvic in Ao 2008?
4. Recently djokovic defeated federer in a convincing fashion to win in london.They say djokovic didn't allow peak federer to play his game.By the same logic should not we conclude that in RG 2011 federer didn't allow novak to play at his level and that's why novak played badly ?If the walkover excuse is given what about NY then? Novak showed he was in god mode just a match later by defeating Rafa.But edged federer by a hair.So wouldn't it be right to say that a past it federer was able to not only contain but also defeat novak in his prime?
5.If federer is a weak era champion,Rafa just a claycourter ,Murray is overrated and stan is a ballbasher then why Novak's victory against them should be considered his achievements?By this logic winning against them is a step backward for Novak.Actually if this is the case then his losses against the trio should hurt his legacy.
Stop with this nonsense already. No one cares about another hateful anti Novak troll with double account.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RocketMan70

·
Banned
Joined
·
15,396 Posts
Sorry.But I don't hate djokovic or federer.But ah it did get too too long.
Yes you do hate Djokovic and you are double account. That much is clear.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
454 Posts
I have been visiting this site since 2010.Never thought of becoming a user until about the start of this years french open when peak djokovic vs peak federer discussion(which are pointless and hypothetical) became the dominant topic.I wanted to be heard on this.I am not a fan of either and think the fanbase of federer shows double standards a lot.But what actually prompted me to join was flawed logic of djokovic fans.I will try to bring out some holes in their arguements in chronological order.REMEMBER I AM TRYING TO FIND FLAWS IN THIER LOGIC NOT STATING FACTS.I AM NOT QUESTIONING DJOKOVICS ACHIEVEMNTS BUT ARGUEMENTS GIVEN IN HIS FAVOUR BY SOME FANS.I will apply same statemens made for djokovic in federer'scase.Same counterarguments can be made against federer as well but let us see djokovic first.
1 According to some to say that federer was not in his peak after 2008 is criminally wrong.However while discussing djokovic's peak periods ranging from 2008 Ao(he had won a slam and was no longer baby novak) till 2011 AO and from 2012 AO till 2015 is not at all consideredThis is period is aprrox 5-6 years of the time when because of age by default djokovic should have been at his best. All of federer's shortcomings post 2008 are attributed to the rise of Novak,Murray and rafa.So why should we ignore the fact that djokovic lost so many matches during this period.If fedrerer's loss against berdych,tsonga and the top4 are brought up why shouldn't we remember that novak lost to hass,berdych tsonga roddick etc too? His losses to Nadal, federer, murray and some random guys during this period is completely ignored during discussions about his prime and these years as a whole are not discussed.So djokovic's prime lasted about 1.5 years in total.Usually people say that during the above mentioned years djokovic did not display his best level.But to say federer after dominaing tennis for about 4-5 yearscould not show the same level is considered wrong.Some djokovic fans even count 09-15 as a part of federer's best years and take all of his losses into account .If federer's losses to djokovic in 2011 can be used then why should we forget after reaching peak a year later novak was beaten by Rafa, Roger and andy in slams?Andy got him on hard and later on grass which is his second best surface now.And what about all those losses to rafa in 2013?Shouldn't we say prime djokovic was baggeled by federer on hard?If roger's loss in 2008 WB is brought up often then what about Novak's loss to stan in 2014 Ao and 2015 RG?And that's afterall neglecting all his random losses in 08,09,10.
1.The 2007 us open final is called a choke.As djokovic lost several set points.This is sometimes used to say that novak could beat peak federer easily.However what about us open 2011 semifnal then?Actually taking two sets and having two match point on his serve, federer lost.If 07 was choke then this was severely bigger one.The fact that a return which even if intentional was lucky to land in saved djokovic shows that federer had almost beaten djokovic but he choked after taking first two sets.Thus a proof that fedrerer could have beaten peak djokovic on a hardcourt in a slam by above logic
Did not read all of this (maybe you should write this with more clarity -- break it into points, use paragraphs, use spaces, etc)...

But from the little I read I will say Novak reached his prime level of play in 2011. I am only interested in comparing Novak's level of 2011 onwards, not the level of 2008-2010, where he was clearly inferior. Note that he also had a gluten allergy which affected his stamina and performance during that time. Also Todd Martin was a wrong choice of his coach, who made his serve inferior.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RocketMan70

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,437 Posts
Another Indian hates djokovic. File this under who cares.
:lol:
I love it how they all start by saying "I'm not a fan of either", pretending to be above it all. Just love for the game and an appreciation of correct argumentation. :haha:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #10 (Edited)
Please read before you judge.And yes my grammar is a mess.Trying my best to make my post cleaner.Doesn't help that i am using my phone.No i support no tennis player and tennis has become my favorite sport only this year after 5yrs of watching.

Edit : Made it a bit better.Please read and then judge.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,437 Posts
Please read before you judge.And yes my grammar is a mess.Trying my best to make my post cleaner.Doesn't help that i am using my phone.No i support no tennis player and tennis has become my favorite sport only this year after 5yrs of watching.
It's too messy.

You need paragraphs and shorter points.

Why don't you start by pointing out flawed arguments used by Federer's fans? That should be a short post. :p
 

·
.
Joined
·
29,637 Posts
I don't like all this criticism of people for whom English is not their first language.

Anyone who attempts to use a 2nd language on a regular basis deserves some kudos.

Focus on the opinions, not the spelling/grammar.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,606 Posts
Unfortunately you've realized by now that a lot of Djokovic's "fans" on this forums are nationalists who will use any form of warped inconsistent logic (as well as ad homs/racism, lies, etc.) to elevate No1e as the best ever to play instead of holding him to consistent high standards.

Ex: Federer is a weak era mug when he wins, but he is the GOAT when No1e beats him.

Then there are real No1e fans like myself and few others who objectively give No1e praise and criticism when necessary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RedHotRafa49

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,606 Posts
2.Djokovic was defeated on hard his favourite surface in new york by Nishikori in 2014.Nishikori also defeated him in 2011 in basel baggeling him.Of course it was because djokovic was mentally and physically exhausted in those matches.In 2014 ,WB by beating federer djokovic finallymade up for his poor performances of previous slams.WB was quite emotional for him and thus he might have been exhausted for US.Similarly in 2011 he had had a monster of a season and was bound to feel depleted.
However the same logic is not applied for Federer when djokovic defeated him in Montreal.Even when it was immediately after WB which was even more emotional for fed.He had the pressure of winning 5 in a row and nadal ,who was now ready to overtake him, almost took it away.Wasn't federer supposed to feel at least mentally exhausted after such a high stress tournament and final by above logic?As i said montreal was immediately afterwards.
Similarly fed had 3 seasons on his back which were almost like djokovics 2011 and his 2007 was already a multislam one if djokovic is Considered to be exhausted in above said matches(which are only two cases from a few more) by above logic shouldn't we factor in extreme mental fatigue for federer in the match?doesnt djokovic every year shows us how much toll a strong season takes on you?This may also explain why federer was having dips in level by 2007
3.In 2008 AO semifinal djokovic defeated federer in straights.Djokovic was on fire in that match.He deserves and gets full credit for beating fed.
However when federer defeated djokovic in french open sf the loss was attributed to the walkover novak had gotten. But somehow the fact that federer himself admitted being ill in an interview during the AO with the visible proof that he was sweating profusely in the match isnot brought up.They say djokovic did not play well in the SF of RG but wasn't federer playing monstrous five sets against the likes of tipsarvic in Ao 2008?


4. Recently djokovic defeated federer in a convincing fashion to win in london.They say djokovic didn't allow peak federer to play his game.By the same logic should not we conclude that in RG 2011 federer didn't allow novak to play at his level and that's why novak played badly ?If the walkover excuse is given what about NY then? Novak showed he was in god mode just a match later by defeating Rafa.But edged federer by a hair.So wouldn't it be right to say that a past it federer was able to not only contain but also defeat novak in his prime?


5.If federer is a weak era champion,Rafa just a claycourter ,Murray is overrated and stan is a ballbasher then why Novak's victory against them should be considered his achievements?By this logic winning against them is a step backward for Novak.Actually if this is the case then his losses against the trio should hurt his legacy.
No that was just the opinion of one moron.
But unfortunately I guess he did succeed in making us real No1e fans look bad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,989 Posts
It's too messy.

You need paragraphs and shorter points.

Why don't you start by pointing out flawed arguments used by Federer's fans? That should be a short post. :p
Didn't let me goodrep you again, so please accept this positive shout-out instead. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #17 (Edited)
I don't like all this criticism of people for whom English is not their first language.

Anyone who attempts to use a 2nd language on a regular basis deserves some kudos.

Focus on the opinions, not the spelling/grammar.
English is not even my second language.

@yolita
I am planning to make a thread like this for Rafa,Roger and Murray too.
 

·
External factor expert
Joined
·
4,173 Posts
ifyoudontcarethenwhyshouldi?myenglishisfarfromperfectbutatleastigooglemostofmywords.doyouhaveanyideahowlongittakesmetowriteonesentence?onesentenceislikeancomepletessayforme.thistextisverydifficulttodecipher,butwhatifididntpayattentiontomygrammar?allhellwouldbreaklose.letsgivethatatry.2dayitcookiesihaveverydeliciousitwas,desyferthissentencedoubtsome1wil.thereisnolimittoamountofbullshiticanwrite.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,010 Posts
I don't like all this criticism of people for whom English is not their first language.

Anyone who attempts to use a 2nd language on a regular basis deserves some kudos.

Focus on the opinions, not the spelling/grammar.
Are you kidding me? It's not about spelling/grammar, it's about absolutely horrifying monoblock of text that's completely scary to dig in.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,060 Posts
To make a long story short, all great players lose to other great players of their era. They also, every now and then, lose to lesser players or their era too. Federer had no great competition till Rafa became a serious threat on hard and grass about 06-07.Then, in 08, Novak became a winner and strong competition to Federer as well which made it more difficult for Roger to win slams like he did before 08. Then, to a lesser extent Murray made Roger's life more difficult. Since 11 Novak has been the most consistent, if not dominate, player on tour. It is impossible to be dominate, when there are two or three other great players to compete agsinst.
 
1 - 20 of 87 Posts
Top