Federer's last chance to remain relevant

Switzerland's Roger Federer was given a fright yesterday. He is about to be giving more fright should he dare cross the boarder to Serbian territory. As a knowledgeable observer, impartial and a firm critic of the Basel Super star, it pains me to admit but with 16 slams, Federer risks the chance of being a mear footnote in the history of tennis.
With Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal, Federer would go down as the 3rd best player in the current generation. Sure i could go to one of his matches and raise a "Federer is GOAT" barner to the cameras but once it moves onto the next spectator, such assertion is committed to distance memory forgotten as a sensible measure to how laughable a notion it is.
Make no mistake, i've grown to admire Roger Federer. Why instead of being ranked 7th on my All time greatest list, he is now ranked 6th.

As great as Federer is, his weakness has always been the inability to dominate his greatest rivals. At Wimbledon, he risk a very crucial record- Having a negative record in slams against his other great rival Djokovic. Against Nadal, it can be forgiven, he has been second best to the Mallorcan but against Djokovic, this weakness becomes more of a sympathy. Should they meet Federer cannot afford to lose but if his performance against Benneteau is to judge by, he should pack his bags and take the next train out of London. No, he shouldn't risk any flight delays at Heathrow.

With all his heroics at Wimbledon, Federer has never been a dominant champion on grass. He is a much better player on hard courts. He has a chance here. To rise into the echelons of the sport worthy to mentioned among the ranks of Pete Sampras, Rafael Nadal, Bjorn Borg, Novak Djokovic. Federer needs a signiture slam, one he can call his own. Nadal is one player who makes him look like a deer in a headlight, he is out at the hands of his new nemesis Rasol. Federer has no excuse this time. This is a make or break chance to be relevant in the history books.

Hi, nice to see you back.

Too long and boring, by the way. Your way out of practise.

Oh, and they're pretty strict on 606-style wumming here, you'll get warned & barred really quickly.

What would be the case if Djokovic and Nadal stop making Slam semi's before 30?

Flash in the pan greatness perhaps?

Vaguely amusing. B-
Must try harder

My forum record has been deciplined, i don't plan to get banned.
As shown by the lack of bias, i'm a more fair critic.

Wow dude

This is like Pat Butcher attempting to laugh at Megan Fox's looks.

It isn't working

Jewell_Of_East wrote:My forum record has been deciplined, i don't plan to get banned.
As shown by the lack of bias, i'm a more fair critic.

The place has changed though. Honestly, even I don't stir it up anymore.

You've never know for sure if this is the real Jewell of East. I suppose it is..but who knows..

Jeee, we really have entered the silly season haven't we? I thought the silly season was when people had too much time on their hands in the holidays, not mid way through Wimbledon!

I'm not sure if you really understand that all tennis players are usually judged by their records and from the sounds of it, you seem to have difficulty accepting that Fed has most the records out of the greats, not Borg, Sampras, or Nadal or anyone else you choose to bring up. Is bringing up the H2H in the slams the new thing to bash Fed with?

Let's be honest, it's not Fed's fault Nadal isn't in the draw anymore. Just because he isn't doesn't mean he must win Wimbledon to remain relevant. So many ridiculous points I won't go through all of them however I'll go through some. Apart from Nadal, very few players troubled Fed until 2010 on grass from when Fed established himself. That's a fact. He didn't drop a set apart from to Nadal in 2006, 2007 & 2008. He's usually only dropped sets @ Wimbledon in tie breakers (unless it's been to Nadal) until the last few years. But anyway, obviously you're not here to evaluate if Fed is really dominant on grass or Wimbledon. You just appear to want to dismiss Fed if he doesn't win Wimbledon.

Greats are judged by the number of slams they amass and Fed has the most. Nadal is 5 behind and so is Borg and Laver. Sampras is behind too. I do agree this is a great opportunity for Fed however, beating Djoko isn't easy and you conveniently forget age as if it isn't a factor. There's a big correlation between age and the number of slams you win, the fact Fed is 6 years older than Nole suggests that Fed will struggle and he has. However, in his peak years Fed dominated the entire field bar Nadal and had a better record during those peak years than Nadal or Djokovic. Fed won 3 slams in 3 different years, not just for one year like Djokovic and Nadal. Fed's career will finish soon but when it does, you can be pretty sure Nadal nor Djokovic will catch his slam record, although maybe Nadal will come close but unlikely he will overtake and that's what he and Djokovic will be judged on.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Wow dude

This is like Pat Butcher attempting to laugh at Megan Fox's looks.

It isn't working

Expect 3 million threads on how Megan Fox was only hot in a weak era for hotness and how Pat has a lovely personality...

I once thought Nadal would catch him, but not now. He's just not doing enough away from RG - only 4 career slams elsewhere.

Djokovic started winning far too late, he'll do well to get to 10.

It'll be a name we haven't heard yet to depose Fed.

....To rise into the echelons of the sport worthy to mentioned among the ranks of Pete Sampras, Rafael Nadal, Bjorn Borg, Novak Djokovic.

The statement of the century. Where have you been living dude?

lucius, JoE is a well-known WUM from the old 606 days - I think you fell for it

bogbrush wrote:I once thought Nadal would catch him, but not now. He's just not doing enough away from RG - only 4 career slams elsewhere.

Djokovic started winning far too late, he'll do well to get to 10.

It'll be a name we haven't heard yet to depose Fed.

I share most of your view too: in 2010, it all looked so possible for Nadal, 3 slams in a year for the first time, matching Fed's first haul of 3 slams in a year at just a year older than when Fed did it but crucially 3 slams ahead in total of Fed at the same age.

Then things didn't go quite as planned: he missed out on holding all 4 slams concurrently, then he was beaten by Djokovic 4 times in a row, but winning the French despite the difficulties he had during that campaign masked things. Then he lost 3 consecutive slams in a row to Djokovic. Had he won all of them he'd definitely have overtaken Fed, if he'd taken 1 or 2, I'd probably say he would have equaled Fed but he lost all of them.

The net result? Easiest way to look at it is by indicating how many slams he was ahead of Fed by (whey they were the same age): - 2008 +4 - 2009 +2 - 2010 +3 - 2011 +1 - 2012 -1 or 0.

Theoretically he can keep up if he wins the USO this year and then wins RG and another slam next year and that would then give him a net advantage (of one) over Fed at the same age again. That would reduce the pressure to win more slams when he gets older too in order to match Fed. However, the only real way I see him catching Fed or overtaking Fed would be to win 3 in a year again. That's would then mean his dominance @ RG would give him the potential edge. However with Djokovic around it seems unlikely he will get a chance to win 3 in a year again.

JuliusHMarx wrote:lucius, JoE is a well-known WUM from the old 606 days - I think you fell for it

Ah, I didn't really use the old 606 so didn't know that!

I wasn't sure if he was being serious or not but now I know...!

Hmmm good effort from JOE.
Not at his best form, seen better in the old 606.

In the old 606 which was a heavenly place for WUMs this sort of nonsense was, dare I say it, relevant and quite funny. But on a site such as this it is not. This is like so old and so out of fashion now. It is you not Federer who is struggling to "remain relevant"

Jewell_Of_East wrote:Switzerland's Roger Federer was given a fright yesterday. He is about to be giving more fright should he dare cross the boarder to Serbian territory. As a knowledgeable observer, impartial and a firm critic of the Basel Super star, it pains me to admit but with 16 slams, Federer risks the chance of being a mear footnote in the history of tennis.
With Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal, Federer would go down as the 3rd best player in the current generation. Sure i could go to one of his matches and raise a "Federer is GOAT" barner to the cameras but once it moves onto the next spectator, such assertion is committed to distance memory forgotten as a sensible measure to how laughable a notion it is.
Make no mistake, i've grown to admire Roger Federer. Why instead of being ranked 7th on my All time greatest list, he is now ranked 6th.

As great as Federer is, his weakness has always been the inability to dominate his greatest rivals. At Wimbledon, he risk a very crucial record- Having a negative record in slams against his other great rival Djokovic. Against Nadal, it can be forgiven, he has been second best to the Mallorcan but against Djokovic, this weakness becomes more of a sympathy. Should they meet Federer cannot afford to lose but if his performance against Benneteau is to judge by, he should pack his bags and take the next train out of London. No, he shouldn't risk any flight delays at Heathrow.

With all his heroics at Wimbledon, Federer has never been a dominant champion on grass. He is a much better player on hard courts. He has a chance here. To rise into the echelons of the sport worthy to mentioned among the ranks of Pete Sampras, Rafael Nadal, Bjorn Borg, Novak Djokovic. Federer needs a signiture slam, one he can call his own. Nadal is one player who makes him look like a deer in a headlight, he is out at the hands of his new nemesis Rasol. Federer has no excuse this time. This is a make or break chance to be relevant in the history books.

Unbelievable article written by what seems to be a very knowledgeable member. This is my first time on the board and I'm glad to see we have some people who know what their taking about on here. Congratulations good Sir I have to disagree on your rating of 6th of all time though for me personally that seems more then a bit far-fetched to have him so far up your rating system But everyone is entitled to their opinion and I would be interested and look forward to reading your views on many matters.

With the Swissman's comical 5 set record an injured Benneteau is the only way he could have won. But how long can that kind of luck favour the Swiss in the tournament we will see.

Boromir now here too...
Are you the chap who used to write in really big writing?

IP check would probably be more relevant.

boromir7 wrote:... This is my first time on the board ...

Well JOE has posted 12 comments, so I make it 12+1 = 13.

So the paranoid nonsense starts? Yes this is my first time on the board and I'm happy to see at least one article raising an intellectual debate already. The rest tbh leave a bit to be desired thus far.

Well I am not going to be entirely negative on the article. I think it is pretty well written and of course written with the intent of being controversial and sparking discussion. I will say that Roger as much as I don't enjoy his winning is the greatest player that I have seen. I can't really rate the 70s guys because I am not that old. But of the players i have seen only Sampras is close, Nadal is close as well, and Djoko although a late bloomer is closing fast. Lendl also deserves special mention in that group.

That being said I think the gap between fed and the rest of the greats is not as big as some of the statistics that he has compiled. People know my feelings to a certain extent early in his career Rog did have a nice draw of contemporary rivals. Later after the rise of Nadal/Djoko generation he dominated the newer tougher talent for periods as well although not as easily as the period in which he padded his numbers early on. Also Agassi to some extent benefitted from the same drying up of top ranked Grandslam opposition in that doldrums period before the rise of fed.

Truth to be told mine and the Jewell's paths have never crossed before. When i joined the 606 board I only heard mention of the Jewell in folklore and his name was held in great esteem by the knowledgeable members of the board and Wums alike.

In my era Unbiased_Educator for me was a stand out brilliant poster educating the ignorant and those eager to learn countless times on the world of tennis. His analytical brilliance is a marvel to behold. Catalan Power also was one of astonishing tennis insight, a mighty fine poster.

If you do have any word of these posters please let me know, otherwise i'd seek help for your paranoia.

boromir7 wrote:So the paranoid nonsense starts? Yes this is my first time on the board and I'm happy to see at least one article raising an intellectual debate already. The rest tbh leave a bit to be desired thus far.

Comedy gold! Are you trying to imitate in the style of Simple Analyst (or as I prefer, Simply Ana*)?

You're putting in a decent effort but you're not quite as good as he was. Shame he's gone, he used to really give us so many laughs on the forum! He's not been seen since the Aussie Open, or at least I think that was the last time. I think Fed's win @ IW over Nadal pushed him into retirement, Fed finally got into double digit wins over Nadal. Maybe we'll never know why he's gone!

boromir7 wrote:Truth to be told mine and the Jewell's paths have never crossed before...

Tweedle dee and tweedle dum
Which is which it matters none
Filled with Fed opprobrium
All they do is wum wum wum

He is always gonna be relevant. He is 16 times GS champ.

After reading the shameful interpretations of the article by the less knowledgeable members of the board, i lost all hope and prayed for a bright light in the form of an excellent intellectual reasoning to shine through the article and behold, prayers answered! Boromir7, a glorious welcome. With a debut post, you have summed up what the less knowledgeable members would have taken years to come up with. Of course, silly me! The Swiss couldn't possibly be ranked 6th. When you have the likes of Matts Wilander, McEnroe, Edberg, Agassi, Connors to consider, the Swiss will rightly be ranked outside the top 10.

Mind you Boromir7, i've seen people talk of him as a potential winner at Wimbledon. I hope you don't fall over laughing by now, i just did. What is your take on such a
hysterical notion?

boromir7 wrote:Truth to be told mine and the Jewell's paths have never crossed before. When i joined the 606 board I only heard mention of the Jewell in folklore and his name was held in great esteem by the knowledgeable members of the board and Wums alike.

In my era Unbiased_Educator for me was a stand out brilliant poster educating the ignorant and those eager to learn countless times on the world of tennis. His analytical brilliance is a marvel to behold. Catalan Power also was one of astonishing tennis insight, a mighty fine poster.

.

This is crazy to core somebody appreciating his own pseudo ID, can't believe how silly people can become when their ego gets hurt. UE is the silliest poster in 606, he was nothing but a senseless joker.

I told you the place had changed. You'll snag a few not familiar but the spirit of old 606 is dead and they'll pick up from the many posters who are wise to the game. Hell, you're not even trying hard to write 'boromir' differently than 'Jewell'.

It was fun sometimes. Remember Dr_Sinceres 'Premature Speulation' at the 2007 USO? Maybe you even are him! I go back to arguments with Wise_Analyst, Mediter and chetanpv though fun as they could be it made 606 a wasteland for genuine discussion. The ownership and moderation here is aware of the risks and interpret wumming very strictly, and so it's an infinitely better place for it.

Invisiblecooler and Bogbrush, if there is much to judge by, mine and Boromir's recent presence on the board has suddenly transformed it from lacking in tennis knowledge and depth to the best tennis forum in the world. While i cannot speak much for Boromir as he rightly said we have never crossed paths, he strikes me as an instant credible and richly knowledgeable poster. The well mannered structure of our arguments calls for equal well mannered responses so the less fortunate members of the board, tennis-wise benefits. I sincerely hope this is the case.

Just don't mess it up, eh?

Invisiblecooler and Bogbrush, if there is much to judge by, mine and Boromir's recent presence on the board has suddenly transformed it from lacking in tennis knowledge and depth to the best tennis forum in the world

I nearly chocked on my toast reading that.

I hope to expect much more comedy gold, because that gag takes some beating.

Bogbrush, again as mentioned, quality is my aim here. I have little to no interest spoiling anything but to rather engage and debate in a well mannered way.

Cool, but let's see the end of multiple ids ok?

I can assure you none of that is happening.

Federer needs a signiture slam, one he can call his own

Ermmmm. How about US Open? 5 time champion and a win percentage of 90%.

No-one comes close to touching that.

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Federer needs a signiture slam, one he can call his own

Ermmmm. How about US Open? 5 time champion and a win percentage of 90%.

No-one comes close to touching that.

Don't, it's just messing about.

I thought it was feeding time

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Federer needs a signiture slam, one he can call his own

Ermmmm. How about US Open? 5 time champion and a win percentage of 90%.

No-one comes close to touching that.

JOE is hurt Sampras fan, he is anti-Fed who can't take Fed the GOAT coz his idol Sampras no more holds the title.

Sampras himself have moved on but some of his fans can't digest it.

The funniest part is how he self proclaims himself as knowledgeable one , Edison doesn't have to say he is Edison the World recognized him as a knowledgeable one, on the other hand some people KEEP SHOUTING I AM INTELLIGENT IAM INTELLIGENT THINKING PEOPLE WILL ACCEPT IT SOMEDAY but what they forget to realize is that people actually laugh at their ignorance. May be some day they get mature to understand how much time they wasted on hatred.

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Federer needs a signiture slam, one he can call his own

Ermmmm. How about US Open? 5 time champion and a win percentage of 90%.

No-one comes close to touching that.

How about FO as Sampras signature slam , JOE will even buy that but not Wimbledon or USO for Fed.

Fed doesn't need a signature slam to represent himself coz he excelled in everything including FO unlike some legends with incomplete CV.

IC, the impression you give is i proclaim myself a knowledgeable member. Far from it. Such a title has rightly been bestowed upon me through years of uncompromise tennis research, knowledge enrichment and informative journalism of World Class standards.

Jewell_Of_East wrote:IC, the impression you give is i proclaim myself a knowledgeable member. Far from it. Such a title has rightly been bestowed upon me...

By your mum?

I see where you are going, a mothers love but no! By other knowledgeable members.

Jewell_Of_East wrote:I see where you are going, a mothers love but no! By other knowledgeable members.

I didn't realise members could be knowledgeable as well as functional.

Jewell_Of_East wrote:IC, the impression you give is i proclaim myself a knowledgeable member. Far from it. Such a title has rightly been bestowed upon me through years of uncompromise tennis research, knowledge enrichment and informative journalism of World Class standards.

Everybody knows that a special player of Federer's caliber will be relevant as long as he plays, REGARDLESS. Why force a non-issue? It makes you sound like a bluff and an ignoramus.

He isn't, he's just messing you around.

Commonsense, did i not praise Federer for his greatness in the article? I just questioned the extent of it and what he could do to solidify it. Starting from not having a slam meeting deficit to yet another great rival.

Sampras has a Slam deficit to Federer, but I don't hold that against him.