The problem with Federer, he had so much success on extremely fast courts between 2000-2008 and then everything slowed up. They even slowed Wimbledon up to give baseliners a chance.. Roger had to adapt his game.. using a smaller racquet size to a larger one, to help with longer rally’s. people forget his style was never based on playing 30 shot rally’s because of the era he started playing.. yet he adapted and won more slams.
The ATP tour had a bunch of soup can players during Fed's prime era of the mid 2000's. Yeah, Fed was whipping up on a bunch of easy opponents(of course his forehands Looked blazing fast).. Then Nadal and Djokovic came into their prime and exposed Feds physical and mental weaknesses, impatience and Lack of intestinal fortitude.
Roger Federer was a once in a century player. He had almost no weakness. And was hands down one of the greatest sportsmen to ever grace sport, yes sport, sport across all categories.
@@Oliffin Note that i said: "Almost no weakness." So wats the point of the comment? Yes, he struggled with his backhand earlier in his career and then he re-learned and developed a new way of playing his backhand. Anyone with half a brain realize there is no such thing as a perfect player.
@@bojnebojnebojne He was the perfect player until Nadal broke him at Wimbledon 2008. Up until then he was winning just about everything except the clay court tournaments. He looked like the ultimate complete player then with no weaknesses and hitting winners from any part of the court at will. His backhand is the weakest part of the game and really only 2 of his biggest rivals could expose that consistently, but it wasn't a weak shot.
@@kweizi5712 Yeah, Roger Federer probably was as close to a perfect player you could get when he was at his peak. No other player in history or currently playing is like that, even though they are all phenomenal players in their own rights. Just looking at Federer play at his peak was like watching the universe dance to his will.
I think playing against Federer would be one of only times Nick would feel he is not the more talented player on the court. That’s why it was more hard felt.
@@KolyaUrtz Novak has the mental strength and discipline but in terms of pure talent he is not at the level. There are many exceptionally talented players like Kyrgios who had their potential hindered by other aspects like mentality, etc
Some haters sayd that Federer's prime was a weak era... I start on tennis during Sampras era... The truth is simple... I follow tennis almost 25 years now. Nadal and Djokovic looks like super humans because the way they play. Federer to the otherside... He makes the opponent looks easy, and plus the fact that his face looks like he doesn't care makes things worst. I remember Gaudio saying: "To me Federer was not the big deal, at that time I dont understand way he wins because he looks beatable. Once we face eachother. And he came with that face that seem he has no interest in playing, I broke his service, he makes some mistake, and when I realized... I lose the game"
I remember Nadal's fans stared to talk Fed is weak era champ. Bcz Rafa leaded h2h but all people said that Roger is class. It's all no truth. Federer was a champ since 2002 to 2019. He played at the same time with many stars, GS champions and former N 1 players. Federer is just universal greatest player ever. He's like Ali or Ray Robinson in boxing, they competed with strongest, had win or lose but they are the Greatest bcz of this.
@@Riri-oj1zs I dont believe that... the problem that we used to see 3 guys winning everything. And that happens... I dont know each 60 years. Now the normal era beggins
@@Riri-oj1zs forget Rafa, he is trying his best to overcome his injuries, but as far I understand will retire next year. Fed, already retired, Djokovic maybe have 2 or 3 more years at this level, then will eventually retire. The Normal era is coming. 3 or 4 GS champions by year, number 1 changing constanly. Winning 3 of the same slam will be a great thing. Again, not a weak era, its a normal one, like it use to be 25 or 30 years ago before the big 3.
We’ve all got our own take on this but my view is as follows, Federer best tennis player/ball Striker/skilled. Nadal and djokovic stronger and a bit more athletic.
Most of the records say Djokovic is best tennis player.... so yeah... What I will say is that Federers greatest contribution was making Nadal and Djokovic such monsters
@@bilbobaggins601 Fed owned both Nadal and Joker in his prime. 4-1/2 *CONSECUTIVE* years ranked number one in the world. No one else is even close to that record.
Roger was/is the most fluid player ever. Saying someone is more athletic than him is silly. Nadal, more power, sure. Novak quicker sure, but Roger was quicker than Nadal and more powerful than Novak.
Roger is goat in my book. He has this aura of great athletes like mj, kobe, pacman, lebj, ali . You know he’s gonna do something great that will amaze even his opponents. The perfect balance of entertainment and talent. I like rafa and novak too but roger for me is like watching ang art
Agreed 100% watching Federer is like watching ali box ... Or Ronnie play snooker .... Novak is pretty forgettable in both in the way he plays .... Years will pass but Federers game will be spoken of and remembered
Larry Bird is the goat not Jordan, and Fed is the goat not Djoker, and stats do prove this when you dig deeper. Federer IS tennis personafied. Djoker and Nadal are amazing, bt they are 2001 era clay baseline players like Ferrero.
If kyrigos didn't play so casual and had a bit more of a competitive effect, rather than looking and playing his shot casually at crucial moments he would have beaten everyone easily. Like Gora said at wimbledon final 2022, Nick is a genius and he is very hard to beat when his game is on.
So, what you're saying is, if Kyrgios was able to do something extremely DIFFICULT, he would of beaten everyone EASILY. Right, got it. 🤦♂. If my auntie was a man, she'd be my uncle.
The reality here is that Nick is a top 20-50 type ATP journeyman pro (look at his annual year end rankings by year). He's one of the best players on earth; yes, full credit, but by elite ATP standards he's a journeyman. Not to be mentioned in the same breath great champions like Fed, Nadal, Joker, etc. Nick is a 6-4 dude with a Tier 1 Elite serve, perhaps the best on the tour. That wins him a lot of matches. But his athleticism, movement, strokes, endurance, competitiveness, etc. are not very special, which is why his record is what it is. As for the flashy shots... Most pros can make all of those shots. They just save them for practice because the risk/return is dumb for a professional match.
I would say that Roger ushered in a new era in men's tennis with his natural abilities, grace, and skill on court, even more so than Rafael or Novak, career stats aside. He was doing in his early days (2003~2010, thereafter here & there) what Novak is doing on tour now; mowing down all competition, because there wasn't (isn't - Nadal injured lately) anyone playing at his level. By the time prime Nadal (and Nadal's playing style had always given Roger trouble) and Djokovic arrived, Fed had already achieved so much, and was still winning a good number of titles, and was so far ahead of these two with deference to records and accolades, that I think complacence, and not necessarily old age and/or lack of ability got in his way to keep pace with the Spaniard and the Serb. It is plain to see how he was able to re-tool his game to best Rafa in about 5/6 of their last meetings (Roland Garros red clay was the lone loss mentioned here), although he never quite turned the corner against Nole - not that it was as big a shift as it was against Nadal; Roger did notch 22 match wins over Novak throughout his time on the tour. I would have liked their careers to have overlapped more evenly, so that they produced more of their own collective "best" against one another, although it was said here that none of them would exist in the way that they do without the challenges that the other two posed. I would also note that Roger's biggest nemesis throughout his playing years was himself; if he had just a bit more gumption to win a key few more matches/titles in his career, finals in which he was in control to take, then the "Greatest" debate is far more complicated. So many of Roger's fans called him "G.O.A.T." for so long, and for so many good reasons, that is is hard to let that coronation go, and even though I don't think that Nadal or Novak are as absolutely deserving as Federer was to this moniker, there is a lot of room for discussion of the other two player's claims to the "greatest" as things are now, given what they've achieved for so long, and continue to do.
Greatest debate aside, it is interesting to ponder the question if Federer level dropped or if Rafa and Novak level just surpassed his, it is a very tough call, maybe we will never have a definitive answer
“Out of all three, Federer can make u feel real bad…” Kyrgios said what high level players all know. Djokovich may be the goat but Federer made shots that embarrassed Nadal and Nole.
Lol Nadal owned Federer all his career. He led 23-10 before 2017, good for Federer getting a few wins that season to make it look a bit less one sided.... even tho it's so one sided lol
I missed him so so much. You can't find the player like him any more. His game his foot work beautiful to watch. His elegant his sportmanship the gentleman he is and his smiles. Tennis is the not the same without him. Thank you Nick for your explanations how Roger is greatest.
Can anyone play with his elegance and win 20 slams? You just enjoy the shot diversity, the elegance and how smooth and effortless he used to play and win. There are things that stats don’t measure and it happens in any sport. It was just beautiful to watch and it is something you can’t say about Nadal or Djokovic.
@idrisahmed2659 i dont speak brainless sry. Love both Federer and Novak, enjoyed watching them playing their immense lvl for 2 decades, if Federer ended with the best record i would have been pleased to call him thé best, but he didn't, Novak did. Grow up and accept the facts
The reason why fededer had the most success in the early 2000s was because back then he was the only all-around player. All of his biggest competition like aggassi/sampras/roddick/ safin/fish/ nalbandian/Hewitt/blake/henman/Juan-carlos-furrero/ coria/moya ect. Even the generation right after nikiishori/berdych/Gonzalez/del Porto/Tsonga/isner/andy murray/monfils/kyrios/roanic/cilic were all one-demensional players with 1-2 extra skills but overall not even to stop federer. The only players that gave fed trouble in the early 2000s were roddick/agassi/safin and naldbandian. Roddicks lack of defensive and tennis IQ and solely relying on his serve and powerful forehands is why he couldn't stop federder. Safin had all the tools beat fed just wasnt consistent and wasnt as fast with groustrokes and running. Same with naldbandian who was abit of an allround player but lacked the power that fed had with groundstrokes. Same with aggasi. Aggasis best weapon was his return and groundstrokes but fed had him beat in all other areas. The reasons why nadal beat fed was because of his defensive style and novak was always an all-around player but wasnt at the peak of his skills til the 2010s. Nowadays most players train to be all-round players which another reason u would see fed get beat more in the laters compared to previous years
Federer was old in his mid to late 30s his peak form beats anyone (Novak and Nadal only competition maybe peak Murray outside of slams) in this era lol
This is a misconception. Courts were more varied and balls faster. Djoker and Nadal are more like 2001 Ferrero, 2001 era baseline clay players. They turned everything into 01 clay play basically and variation is lost. So what youre admitting to is that Fed is indeed the greatest player of all time, as he is the only one who did what others couldnt do, win on lightning 01 grass, win on the more modern feeling 01 clay, and win on 01 hard court.
Interesting video, its kinda strange, i always thought if you have to lose to someone at least you lost to the greatest player ever, add to that that he is the most respectfull and fairplay guy who ever played tennis. I remember what Andy Roddick said when he lost against Federer in epic Wimbledon final 2009, how he was broken but Federer was very reserved with he's celebration knowing how bad Roddick felt. Also good example is Del Potro when he lost against Federer at the semifinal Olympic games 2012. he was completely devastated started crying and Federer again proved why everyone respects him so much.
Wasn’t convinced of the Alcaraz craze till Carlos victory over Novak today at Wimbledon on this Sunday 7/16/23. He’s the real deal. 🎾 I waited to see if Carlos was the warrior they have said of him, and not media hype? He did everything a new champion does to an old established legend like Novak. 🎾🎾🎾There were opportunities for Novak to get over on Carlos in this crucial championship game. Carlos did not allow Novak to gain confidence in getting over critical points. 🎾🎾🎾Carlos stopped Novak like a real champ. Carlos has earned my respect and support. He displayed resolve under pressure against a seasoned wily veteran in one Novak Djokovic, statistically the best ever. 🎾🎾And the funny part: We haven’t seen the best Carlos yet. He’s only recently turned 20 years of age!!! Let that sink in! 🎾🎾Carlos is only gonna become stronger in the next few years. And if he stays on the path of discipline and health……..? ……..we’ll see the best Carlos at 24 years of age till 28 years of age …….🎾🎾Carlos still has masculinity developmental potential to become a much stronger player! This is scary. We witnessed a great Carlos defeating a great Novak right here today. And many of us not realizing this is not a complete Carlos yet. This is a 94% developed Carlos. 🎾🎾Carlos has got a little more room to become sharper in the next 6 years! That’s scary. I truly believe that if Novak hopes to get 27 grand slams he’ll need another player to oust Carlos in a grand slam before potentially meeting Carlos? Novak is gonna need someone to eliminate Carlos in future grand slams and do the dirty work for him. Because I don’t see Novak beating Carlos again in a grand slam? I’m sorry Novak, but Carlos is only gonna be filling out more into a full fledged stronger player which isn’t gonna help your cause. And Novak is slowly declining…….he’s still great with a lot left in him, no doubt, but still on the downswing of life’s currents nonetheless. If Novak beats Carlos again in a grand slam, it wouldn’t be a surprise, because it’s Novak Djokovic. But all I’m saying is don’t be surprised if Novak doesn’t win Carlos again in a grand slam? 🎾🎾I’d say Novak has has two more times to beat Carlos in a grand slam at most? I wouldn’t bet Novak to beat Carlos over two times in all future grand slam championships. Carlos may be the very reason Novak decides retirement soon?
That is very late to join the bandwagon. I've been on it since he beat Stef in 2021 in the US. I think it's crazy how anyone could watch him and take until this month to realise he's the real deal
@@ZPSBestProfileName I’m not jumping on any bandwagon. This Carlos kid is a special talent. The big “but” is this: But what if another talented player arises that we know not of? A player who has Carlos’s number? A player that will hamper his quest to reach 20 grand slams? Food for thought.
@@ZPSBestProfileName A lot of people just judge solely by the most unquestionable results (like winning Wimbledon against Djoko) because they don’t really have an eye for the game.
Plus to be that young and did what he did after nerves caused him to cramp up in The French Open finals. Then he lost the first set at Wimbledon to Djokovic 6-0. To comeback from that, Alcaraz is gonna beat him again at the US Open
Tennis slowed the courts in 2008 to give others a chance. Federer was so dominant, they had no choice. Baseline grinding wouldn't have saved Djokovic from a very different future had he not been helped by the sport itself with ever slowing courts.
Tennis used to be exciting to watch, because the playing whizzed and inspired. Witnessing Federer play during the mid- 2000s through 2014, was a marvel-- it was like witnessing an incredibly technical magician at work. Now, watching tennis is a slog and, truth be told, often very boooooooring. I'm holding out hope that Alcaraz's body holds up, because watching him play is fun. He has passion and often makes truly jaw-dropping plays.
@@badmanskill1112the current era of tennis is the weakest. Murray, Wawrinka, Cilic are way past their prime and the new contenders, Sinner, Zverev, Medvedev, Tsitsipas, etc. are too inconsistent or too specialised on one surface. Thiem has been non-existent for three years and Alcaraz has only been around for a year or two. This has allowed Djokovic and Nadal to keep scooping up titles even in their late thirties. Djokovic, especially, has done an exceptional job at maintaining his body and his longevity but ,in all fairness, his current competition sucks.
look, the " big three " have all earned their place in the tennis hall-of-fame for different reasons. Nadal in particular for his never-say-die attitude. There will be a statue of FR in Switzerland and a statue of Nadal in Spain and Djokovic in Serbia and all will be completely and rightfully proud of their " sons. " Nadal is special for me because i see him as a very kind and humble person. Djokovic gained my support when he stood up against the vaccine - before that i had no use for him.
Krygios is perhaps the only player outside of the big three whose own demons stopped him entering the GOAT debate in his own right. By some margin the most naturally gifted player I’ve ever seen, up there with Federer and prime Sampras. Drinking and mental health problems hit him hard and it will always be a question as to what might have been had he settled down earlier. He often played obviously hungover and still managed to take the games greats right to the edge of their abilities.
Roger's tennis was from the old world to the new world with a one handed back hand to die for... Personally to me watching Roger live at Wimbledon will be the greatest sporting moment, you canny believe what your eyes see, just very weird, he brought the masses to tennis... Your own country follows there fellow tennis player but Continents follow Roger... He is a one man religion that is hero worshipped like no other... IF YOU'RE A ROGER FAN NO EXPLANATION IS NEEDED IF YOU'RE NOT A ROGER FAN NO EXPLANATION IS POSSIBLE... The greatest Sportsman who ever walked 💯
It’s all to do with type and match up just like in Heavyweight Boxing, some easily defeated Foreman but would have struggled against Ali & Frazier whereas some other Boxers might have easily defeated Ali or Frazier and got destroyed by Foreman. For Kyrgios it is Federer.
That shot against Agassi was disgusting. Early Federer was a bull. Nobody could tame him. Which makes the 3-0 Kuerten inflicted on him in 2004 after 3 surgeries and far from his prime even more impressive. Djokovic and Nadal would've drawn against Sampras, Agassi and Kuerten. Tennis was so different back then. Yet, we only count titles is easy to say that Djokovic is the GOAT. And although my personal GOAT will always be Borg, nobody can argue that Federer changed the face of Tennis forever.
06 fed only nadal beat him 4 times, mrray 1 time, he served over 800 aces, i think he went like 92-5 that year. What this means is, not counting Murray, NO ONE BUT NADAL BEAT HIM
If you play and know about tennis, the statistics don’t tell you who the most talented is and anyone who thinks otherwise has a double-digit IQ. Roger was the most talented.
Most talented in what aspect and out of which generation? There have been numerous players with enormous raw talent - moreso than Federer if we're talking shotmaking skills and ability to learn the game effortlessly. Fed himself said he wasn't the most talented and that it required hard work both mentally and physically before he started finding success on the court. Nadal by comparison was more advanced at the very beginning of his career. Federer was the most CONSISTENT of the top players to utilize his talent with shotmaking, improvisaton skills etc. though - and now Alcaraz seems to be surpassing him at that.
And how did you just managed to measure talent? I guess that you must the first human to do it...all of those professional tennis players put enormous amounts of energy and time into perfecting their game, so you want to say that RF put less time and energy than Novak or Nadal? Cause if you do, than thats bs...in the end the only thing thats matters and counts are things that someone accomplish, not the things that might have happened if...
This is a super talented player who failed to live up to his full potential, recognizing another player who had even more talent and fully realized his potential. Kind of how Zlatan used to describe Messi. Federer will always be the GOAT in my mind, even if he won a few less slams than the other two. He did things on the tennis court that had never been seen before, and haven't been seen since.
thank God Kyrgios has some class and he is also accurately describing what it meant to play FR. Nadal and Djokovic are gonna play a pretty conventional game and at least you get hitting practice. FR when he was on short-circuited any rythm the opponent would want and left his opponent feeling genuinely hopeless. when Nadal astonished everyone by beating FR from the beginning, FR was honestly at that time equivalent to Mike Tyson in his first years - people were afraid to play him. As the years went on players got better, but still FR could cause a feeling of utter helplessness. the saving Grace was you could lose to FR, but no one really expected too much more and behind him was a road of dead bodies that meant you were just another victim of a foregone condition.
This video cracks me up because Kyrgios's comments mirrors quite a bit of what Agassi said in 2007 about playing Roger - "He can squeeze you from any part of the court at any time and you never know when it's coming." Djokovic may be the winningest player - but Roger is the GOAT for his impact on the game both on and off the court.
@@nCode1there is no goat. Same in all sports. Depending on perspectives there are different goats. Sampras may also be goat. There are inflations in years played, tournaments, played, recoveries and records chased anyway, as are the speed of the game etc wtc. But players are judged for the conditions of the game at the time they play. Sampras may be goat. Borg may be goat. Agassi may be goat (only player to have all 4 slams before homogenisation of surfaces and to dictate baseline game in fast era, plus player to overacome troubles and get back to no1), Connors may be goat, any of the big3 may be goat.
I was at the Miami tournament for the Federer vs Kyrgios match it was awesome! Then Federer beat Nadal in the final. If I remember correctly Nadal never won Miami
Djok: Most Titles. Nadal: Resilience, Hard Work and Dedication. Federer: Most Skillful & Certainly the people's GOAT Fact is, Nadal and Federer both ate up at least 7-8 Grand Slam Titles off each other's table during their prime 2004/5-2013/14. Otherwise no one would come up close with them.
for clay - Nadal, for anything else - Federer. Nadal couldn't beat either Djoko or Federer in the last years and even avoided matches between them (aside from clay) on multiple occasions. Nadal did not win a set on hard courts against Djokovic since 2013 (!) and against Federer the only match he won in the last 4 years of their rivalry was on clay with 5 losses on hard/grass and 1 match avoided by Nadal. They figured him out!
GOAT DEBATE IS A WASTE OF TIME BECAUSE NO ONE HAS DOMINATED ALL THREE SURFACES OF TENNIS YET! Maybe you can say, this guy is or was the best during his era, not of all time because none of the Big 3 ever played the likes of Rod Laver and other oldies in their prime.
If one's only criteria for greatness is the final score, then, yes, you're right. For many of us, though, it's not the only criteria. "sprezzatura" is Italian that translates roughly into "effortless grace". It's why, for example, gilded age mansions had hidden passages for the servants so they could do their job running the household without being seen. To the eye of a guest, things happened effertlessly. It was considered beautiful for the mundane chores of life to happen as if by magic. In a similar vein, art is highly valued, not for practical reasons, but for the beauty and creativity of the artist provoking a sort of awe and appreciation of the seemingly impossible being realized. Think about the prices that a Van Gogh or Rembrandt fetch and the size and number of museums that house them and other artworks. That's how much society values art. Now, consider that Federer's game is often referred to as beautiful or graceful or a work of art while almost no other player's game is talked about in that way. People will say that he makes tennis look like ballet. That it's beautiful. That they've never seen anything like it. That's part of his greatness. To take a "sport" which is often thought of as a metaphor for war, and change it to art. Yes, Novak and Rafa have won a little more but it's not like Roger won only one grand slam title. He did win twenty. And he did it with creativity, effortless grace, and beauty that none of the others have ever approached. And so, if all you're talking about is the scoreboard, then, sure, the debate is over, but I think that's an impoverished point of view that misses an important aspect of his game and his influence on the game. An aspect that many of us value just like the art that we travel thousands of miles to see. We do it because we can't see it anywhere else.
This is crap. Sampras has claim for goat it was not among the big3. I consider him better than all 3. But if shots are in the mix, fed is most capable in shots. Djokovic and Nasal have better stamina and legs and fitness.
Stop arguing. Fed is the indisputable king of the game. The best player there ever was and most likely will be (since he hit all the boxes and then some), skill, style and talent wise, artistically, biomechanically, in any imaginable way pertaining to the very definition of the beautiful game as it should be played and enjoyed, skillfully, effortlessly, with stunning versatility, beauty, playfulness, surprise, drama and poetry translated to acts of tennis; it is a no-brainer. He gave too much advantage to his worst rivals playing with an undersized racquet for the modern dynamic demands of the sport for years for the sake of it, add the one-handed backhand to that mix of artistic choices and you get the math. Others are but low-minded grinders compared to him and his grace, and always will be, except maybe guys like Nick but then again those talented artful rascals cannot replicate Roger's feat by any means since they just lack in some crucial department or in everyone of them for some critical measure. Hail, Roger! The one and only. King of tennis.
@@fg92626most of Novaks slams now are against very easy opponets, there is literally no prime Murray or Wawrinka or Nadal who are all injured and Fed career was cut short from Surgeries during covid, the players of recent are all cry babies who get big money and press in social media easily and then Alcaraz is not filly mature. So there is gap. Still Fed and Djok are both goats. But comparing their numbers when Djok collects easy era trophies, even easier era than Feds, is not warranted comparison. So is more accurate to not focus on details which are relative. Agassi is also goat with 8 who played in era when 8 equaled 16 of todays nunbers, and were in non homogenized era when players were not good in all four when now they are same courts more or less do same players play them well.. and who had to drop to 120 or lower due to some raeasons ans made comeback to No1 let alone the back issues, and is the only player with all 4 slams in non homogenized courts era. Sampras may be goat. Many may be goat depending on the factors at analysis used. There is no single goat in any sport for all periods, only for a period and for certain weightings of factors of the game. What is important to you. Senna is one of goats of formula1, for many the best driver, who drove risky, best on wet roads, best on empty roads etc etc. with 3 champioonships in an era when players were getting killed and harder to risk when driving. For others is different. In NBA the same others favor championships others longevity others impact to team where others clutchness or critical plays and is same for all sports. In fhess for some is Fischer with one championship for the way it was developed to play and overcome Soviet knowledge surplus and way of play and ratint gap to competition for others longevity of Kapsarov for others completeness of play of Magnus for others insane level gap of play of Morphy. Same in all sports no single goat it is immature claim to have this notion if oversimplification of reality.
@@innosanto lol you don’t have to write a long essay but ask yourself this simply question what did the 34 yo 🐐do lierally won 27 GS match in a row and what did 34 yo Federer do? Witnessed the 🐐won 28 GS in a row 😂 this is called Grand Slam
Federer has beaten djokovic many times before fed hits age 30 from 2006-2010 federer easily beats novak 13-6 h2h and 10 slams to 1 slam easy dominant win by federer even in 2011 30 age federer beats so called high level tennis of djoko in 2011 rolland garros semi finals in federers worst surface then the following year in 2012 31 age federer beats prime peak djoko easily in wimbledon 2012 semi finals along with prime peak murray in the finals to win the title, federer has nothing left to prove, it was actually djoko who only started winning in 2011 when fed was 30 old out of prime and in fact his 21 slams that he achieved starting in 2011 when fed got older 30 out of prime, notice how murray wawrinka and djokovic only had their success when federer got older, when federer was still younger he dominated them all, thats why the myth era was a lie, federer made his era look weak because he was so dominant that he made his opponent look weak, the only opponent that can challenge federer was prime peak lightning fast nadal from 2005-2010 nadals best version but federer still dominated and win slams over him from 2005-2010 federer 12 slams nadal 9 slams, everything i've said was facts not opinion, federer was still the true tennis goat
@@truthtruth9056 Useless comment. Djokovic beat Federer many times when Roger when in his prime, such as Montreal, Miami, AO, USO, Basel when Novak was still below prime. He was also beating Federer when Roger was playing his best tennis in his 30's. Roger's smooth style allowed him to play even better in his early-mid 30's. Look how well Novak is playing at 35. Novak has a winning record against Federer, he is more all-around player than Federer, winning more clay titles and so far two RG titles (Federer only one), and he has been the most weeks at No.1. He embarrased Federer at least three times at Slams when Roger had match points. He had a big winning record against him in Slams and overall finals. Djokovic is the GOAT. You know nothing about tennis. Blocked.
@@truthtruth9056 all true but djokovic was still kinda young. Their matchups didn’t really Pan out correctly because of age. I’d like to see which one did better when age was in their favor if that makes sense
@Will Hopson djokovic was 20 21 22 23 prime age for tennis from 2007-2010 this too young excuse was only made by djoko casual fans to escape the embarassment that federer gave to djokovic, we are talking about tennis here non physical contact sport not basketball football or anything Notice how these great players got their achievements at the age of 20-24 So thats why bjon borg's 11 grand slam achievements was when he was 20-25 age So thats why Naomi osaka's 4 grand slam achievement was when she was 20-24 age So thats why iga swiatek 3 grand slam achievements was when she was 19-21 age So thats why nadal from age 19-24 he already have 9 grand slam title So thats why federer from 21-24 age already have 6 grand slam title So thats why john mcenroe's 7 grand slam achievement was when he was 20-25 age So thats why martina hingis's 5 grand slam achievement was when she was 16-19 age These is just a proof that even at 19 age you can be in your prime , as you can see the facts that i presented many players alrrady dominated even in their teenage years, because in tennis youthness is important as you need speed quickness stamina fast reflexes which you can get at a younger age because tennis is a non physical contact sport
Federer might not hold the record for more GS and other things but he still holds other. However he achieved all of these by playing all his rivals and not doing it after they aren’t playing or retiring. Not to mention he even made Novak and Nadal look easy. Federer had all the shots and can do it all and his all around game he takes the game to you.
It is completely unacceptable to call him the greatest of all time when Novak has more Slams and more weeks at number 1, by which metrics the greatest of all time is decided. Unless, of course, for some reason you need to invent other, more subjective reasons, like how aesthetically pleasing one's playstyle is, in which case your opinion should be disregarded
Titles don't tell the whole story. In 2050, when a guy beats Djokovic's records with GS in 2 sets, you will be the first to cry that Novak is the goat. Records are made to be broken. Except for Laver's who made the grand slam in 1968. That makes him the goat of tennis.
Had Nadal popped up in 2012 instead of 2004, Federer would have won more Grand Slams and Djokovic less. Djokovic only started winning when Federer was in retirement age and Nadal was already full of injuries. Had Djokovic had an injured body like most, and retired in his early thirties, there would have been no debate
This guy loves Federer way too much. Listen to the whole story with Kyrgios not liking Federer. He talks about him being in the atp 250 at would no1-3 while being ranked at 100 playing against that seems unfair and then while beating you acting like he’s just won a grand slam. Federer was a great player but people tend to forget he won most his records while having no competition. Then 2 other players came along and while competing with each other beat his records. He still holds the atp250 most wins but it’s a comp made for people new to the pro circuit so why was Federer always there?
Do they refer to "matches" as "games" in other parts of the world? I always believed a game was a part of a match but never use the words interchangeably in tennis. Thanks.
Federer is still the GOAT: -Most Wimbledons ever (8) -Most US Opens ever alongside Sampras (5) -Leads H2H against Nadal on hard courts 11-9 and on grass 3-1. Djokovic and Nadal: both had an age advantage. Federer was over 37yo in 2018 when Djokovic outlasted him in the H2H. No one can seriously say that Federer was on his prime. The other one is the King of clay best ever no doubt. But prime Roger Federer would destroy Djokovic, as he did three years in a row at the US Open in 2007, 2008 and 2009. Also, Federer holds the record for most consecutive weeks at No. 1. 237 weeks (Djoker only 120), which shows how insanely dominant he was. People are so biased to see only the present and not the past. Prime Roger > prime anyone.
and when you talk about goat, you talk about ALL TIMES. So you can you put your goat anywhere, he should perform well. It's not the case for Novak and Rafa in 1980 and 1990. They would be destroyed on fast courts.
Sampras is the greatesr of all time fast courts. But best tennis shots on hard courts with baseline play as focus is Federer. It is not Novak or Nadal or other.
first of all, i can't super take anyone seriously who keeps calling matches "games." but there's a lotta unnecessary hyperbole in here, which goes with the chickbait title. you sound about as honest as your speaking voice. just relax and be real. although i am glad you've got roger goated.
I wonder if The Joker, Fed or Nadal were all the same age, who would come out on top with the most GS's. Fed is 5 years older than Nadal and 6 older than The joker. That age separation makes a difference. Considering the age difference Joker is only up by 4 and Nadal by 2 and obviously I can't see Nadal winning anymore slams and he is retiring, but Joker might...he looks weaker for sure now, but he might pull through to win another. Fed will always be my favorite player of all time. There's no like him, never will be. His shot making and his talent is above all others in tennis history. He just blew my mind.
John, what issues do you have with MSNBC. I think they have been the most well known voice countering fox. Was it that Keith had to go in the buy out? ;-)
It’s crazy, when Federer was dominating prior to 2008 when th courts were faster, no one could stop him, now it’s rally’s, Novak strength against Federer and Federer weakness
ha, lesson for Kyrgios is if that you are born with such talent, when everyone is working you should not be playing pokemon go... seriously, Nadal had good reason to not like Kyrgios, only luck that guy had was his immense talent, without it, he'd be bagging groceries at some convenience store
The problem with Federer, he had so much success on extremely fast courts between 2000-2008 and then everything slowed up. They even slowed Wimbledon up to give baseliners a chance.. Roger had to adapt his game.. using a smaller racquet size to a larger one, to help with longer rally’s. people forget his style was never based on playing 30 shot rally’s because of the era he started playing.. yet he adapted and won more slams.
I think he won 5 more within 10 years. Federer got nerfed so hard.
@@napoleonbonaparte1260 he has almost the same career winnings as nadal and djokovic even though the court and ball changes favored them.
That is an oversimplification, courts were already slowing down before Roger's dominion
This is actually very true (to the OG comment)
The ATP tour had a bunch of soup can players during Fed's prime era of the mid 2000's. Yeah, Fed was whipping up on a bunch of easy opponents(of course his forehands Looked blazing fast).. Then Nadal and Djokovic came into their prime and exposed Feds physical and mental weaknesses, impatience and Lack of intestinal fortitude.
Rafa made you look weak, Nole made you look slow, Fed made you look silly.
Best way I've heard it
Roger Federer was a once in a century player.
He had almost no weakness.
And was hands down one of the greatest sportsmen to ever grace sport, yes sport, sport across all categories.
His weakness was 40 : 15 😂
His backhand was his weakness, Djokovic overexploited it
@@Oliffin Note that i said: "Almost no weakness."
So wats the point of the comment?
Yes, he struggled with his backhand earlier in his career and then he re-learned and developed a new way of playing his backhand.
Anyone with half a brain realize there is no such thing as a perfect player.
@@bojnebojnebojne He was the perfect player until Nadal broke him at Wimbledon 2008. Up until then he was winning just about everything except the clay court tournaments. He looked like the ultimate complete player then with no weaknesses and hitting winners from any part of the court at will. His backhand is the weakest part of the game and really only 2 of his biggest rivals could expose that consistently, but it wasn't a weak shot.
@@kweizi5712 Yeah, Roger Federer probably was as close to a perfect player you could get when he was at his peak.
No other player in history or currently playing is like that, even though they are all phenomenal players in their own rights.
Just looking at Federer play at his peak was like watching the universe dance to his will.
I think playing against Federer would be one of only times Nick would feel he is not the more talented player on the court. That’s why it was more hard felt.
Then he's delusional.
novak is more talented than roger
better? yes. more talented? keep dreaming 🤣@@KolyaUrtz
@@KolyaUrtz Novak has the mental strength and discipline but in terms of pure talent he is not at the level. There are many exceptionally talented players like Kyrgios who had their potential hindered by other aspects like mentality, etc
@@Poekuli mental strength won't get anyone anywhere alone. His skill is above anyone today and talent is impossible to calculate.
Federer may not be the goat on paper but in what he did for the sport hes unmatched
Fed didn't do anything for the sport. One thing that Fed did do was take a backseat to Nadal and Djokovic(the best two players of their era).
@@gmailcgs omg, such nonsense. one tip for you: stop commenting (seriously, I mean it in a way to help you)
@@jamesnoh1999 he just brought beautiful style of tennis? What is that doing for the sport? Do you even know the meaning of that?
What did he do, enlighten us all please?
@@Israel_estine_EDU what did he do? 🤣
Some haters sayd that Federer's prime was a weak era... I start on tennis during Sampras era... The truth is simple... I follow tennis almost 25 years now. Nadal and Djokovic looks like super humans because the way they play.
Federer to the otherside... He makes the opponent looks easy, and plus the fact that his face looks like he doesn't care makes things worst.
I remember Gaudio saying:
"To me Federer was not the big deal, at that time I dont understand way he wins because he looks beatable. Once we face eachother. And he came with that face that seem he has no interest in playing, I broke his service, he makes some mistake, and when I realized... I lose the game"
I remember Nadal's fans stared to talk Fed is weak era champ. Bcz Rafa leaded h2h but all people said that Roger is class. It's all no truth. Federer was a champ since 2002 to 2019. He played at the same time with many stars, GS champions and former N 1 players. Federer is just universal greatest player ever. He's like Ali or Ray Robinson in boxing, they competed with strongest, had win or lose but they are the Greatest bcz of this.
This is the weakest era ever.
@@Riri-oj1zs I dont believe that... the problem that we used to see 3 guys winning everything. And that happens... I dont know each 60 years. Now the normal era beggins
@@Darrihen
There are no young guns to even challenge Novak and Rafa. That's just weaker than weak.
@@Riri-oj1zs forget Rafa, he is trying his best to overcome his injuries, but as far I understand will retire next year. Fed, already retired, Djokovic maybe have 2 or 3 more years at this level, then will eventually retire. The Normal era is coming. 3 or 4 GS champions by year, number 1 changing constanly. Winning 3 of the same slam will be a great thing.
Again, not a weak era, its a normal one, like it use to be 25 or 30 years ago before the big 3.
We’ve all got our own take on this but my view is as follows, Federer best tennis player/ball Striker/skilled. Nadal and djokovic stronger and a bit more athletic.
Most of the records say Djokovic is best tennis player.... so yeah...
What I will say is that Federers greatest contribution was making Nadal and Djokovic such monsters
@@bilbobaggins601 Fed owned both Nadal and Joker in his prime. 4-1/2 *CONSECUTIVE* years ranked number one in the world. No one else is even close to that record.
Will Hopton I agree that Roger F was the best tennis player and the most entertaining.
@@bilbobaggins601 He didn't say otherwise. He's just saying which facet of the game Federer is better and worse at.
Roger was/is the most fluid player ever. Saying someone is more athletic than him is silly. Nadal, more power, sure. Novak quicker sure, but Roger was quicker than Nadal and more powerful than Novak.
Roger is goat in my book. He has this aura of great athletes like mj, kobe, pacman, lebj, ali . You know he’s gonna do something great that will amaze even his opponents. The perfect balance of entertainment and talent. I like rafa and novak too but roger for me is like watching ang art
good thing you book isn't being sold...
@@dorian763 that’s just my opinion. Im did not post that to change what you believe in :)
Agreed 100% watching Federer is like watching ali box ... Or Ronnie play snooker .... Novak is pretty forgettable in both in the way he plays .... Years will pass but Federers game will be spoken of and remembered
Fed is a real artist...
Larry Bird is the goat not Jordan, and Fed is the goat not Djoker, and stats do prove this when you dig deeper. Federer IS tennis personafied. Djoker and Nadal are amazing, bt they are 2001 era clay baseline players like Ferrero.
Nick= wild talent
Fed= talent and eligence
Fed was wild as well
elegance
@@sugs1191 ☠️😵
@@sugs1191 They are 2 different words, dude.
Nick has a great serve but that’s about it.
If kyrigos didn't play so casual and had a bit more of a competitive effect, rather than looking and playing his shot casually at crucial moments he would have beaten everyone easily. Like Gora said at wimbledon final 2022, Nick is a genius and he is very hard to beat when his game is on.
Nah, that's the story he spins so people say that.
I've seen a clip when he shouts out loud to 'himself' that he shouldn't have stayed up all night.
False
So, what you're saying is, if Kyrgios was able to do something extremely DIFFICULT, he would of beaten everyone EASILY. Right, got it. 🤦♂.
If my auntie was a man, she'd be my uncle.
The reality here is that Nick is a top 20-50 type ATP journeyman pro (look at his annual year end rankings by year). He's one of the best players on earth; yes, full credit, but by elite ATP standards he's a journeyman. Not to be mentioned in the same breath great champions like Fed, Nadal, Joker, etc. Nick is a 6-4 dude with a Tier 1 Elite serve, perhaps the best on the tour. That wins him a lot of matches. But his athleticism, movement, strokes, endurance, competitiveness, etc. are not very special, which is why his record is what it is.
As for the flashy shots... Most pros can make all of those shots. They just save them for practice because the risk/return is dumb for a professional match.
I would say that Roger ushered in a new era in men's tennis with his natural abilities, grace, and skill on court, even more so than Rafael or Novak, career stats aside. He was doing in his early days (2003~2010, thereafter here & there) what Novak is doing on tour now; mowing down all competition, because there wasn't (isn't - Nadal injured lately) anyone playing at his level. By the time prime Nadal (and Nadal's playing style had always given Roger trouble) and Djokovic arrived, Fed had already achieved so much, and was still winning a good number of titles, and was so far ahead of these two with deference to records and accolades, that I think complacence, and not necessarily old age and/or lack of ability got in his way to keep pace with the Spaniard and the Serb. It is plain to see how he was able to re-tool his game to best Rafa in about 5/6 of their last meetings (Roland Garros red clay was the lone loss mentioned here), although he never quite turned the corner against Nole - not that it was as big a shift as it was against Nadal; Roger did notch 22 match wins over Novak throughout his time on the tour. I would have liked their careers to have overlapped more evenly, so that they produced more of their own collective "best" against one another, although it was said here that none of them would exist in the way that they do without the challenges that the other two posed. I would also note that Roger's biggest nemesis throughout his playing years was himself; if he had just a bit more gumption to win a key few more matches/titles in his career, finals in which he was in control to take, then the "Greatest" debate is far more complicated. So many of Roger's fans called him "G.O.A.T." for so long, and for so many good reasons, that is is hard to let that coronation go, and even though I don't think that Nadal or Novak are as absolutely deserving as Federer was to this moniker, there is a lot of room for discussion of the other two player's claims to the "greatest" as things are now, given what they've achieved for so long, and continue to do.
Greatest debate aside, it is interesting to ponder the question if Federer level dropped or if Rafa and Novak level just surpassed his, it is a very tough call, maybe we will never have a definitive answer
Man someone always has to make tennis discourse about the big 3…incredible honesty
@@GiacomoArturinah Rafa and Novak r just better
@@tennisplayer5490 nah you're just wrong 🤣
Best summary about this topic that I've seen, ever.
Roger is the only tennis player other than Bjorn Borg to transcend tennis. But more so than Borg. The GOAT is the guy who transcends his sport.
“Out of all three, Federer can make u feel real bad…” Kyrgios said what high level players all know. Djokovich may be the goat but Federer made shots that embarrassed Nadal and Nole.
And the matches result of Nadal and Novak embarrassed Federer.
@@hander205 All three are playing at the same time--you can only see one match. Whos it going to be? I guarantee you 7-9/10 people will pick Federer.
Lol Nadal owned Federer all his career. He led 23-10 before 2017, good for Federer getting a few wins that season to make it look a bit less one sided.... even tho it's so one sided lol
@@grokker99 9/10 people are Federer fans? Lol 0,2 Nadal fans, 0,1 Djokovic fans, 0,7 rest of players 🤣🤣
@@grokker99 how is that relevant? Entertainment and winning are different
I missed him so so much. You can't find the player like him any more. His game his foot work beautiful to watch. His elegant his sportmanship the gentleman he is and his smiles. Tennis is the not the same without him. Thank you Nick for your explanations how Roger is greatest.
Coolest not greatest
@@vitord1 In my book he is.
yeah, Nick added another layer of " class " - and correct observations. we never never can have too much class. I am an " old " guy !
Can anyone play with his elegance and win 20 slams? You just enjoy the shot diversity, the elegance and how smooth and effortless he used to play and win. There are things that stats don’t measure and it happens in any sport. It was just beautiful to watch and it is something you can’t say about Nadal or Djokovic.
It's funny how all of a sudden "it's not about the numbers".
Shut the fuck up.
Always tuff to lose when one gives there all. Goran Evanisovch, back in the 90s had some tuff losses as well.
Ok Djokovic has more Grand slam victories but in my book no one has played this game like Federer, with such a beauty.
mfer what is this? miss universe pageant?
cope machine 3000
Of course, the famous "beauty tennis tournament", thé most important title of all !
@@groscaramelmou2583 lol i bet u really love watching novak play bad for u u can never appreciate federers game ..... unlucky u
@idrisahmed2659 i dont speak brainless sry.
Love both Federer and Novak, enjoyed watching them playing their immense lvl for 2 decades, if Federer ended with the best record i would have been pleased to call him thé best, but he didn't, Novak did.
Grow up and accept the facts
The reason why fededer had the most success in the early 2000s was because back then he was the only all-around player. All of his biggest competition like aggassi/sampras/roddick/ safin/fish/ nalbandian/Hewitt/blake/henman/Juan-carlos-furrero/ coria/moya ect. Even the generation right after nikiishori/berdych/Gonzalez/del Porto/Tsonga/isner/andy murray/monfils/kyrios/roanic/cilic were all one-demensional players with 1-2 extra skills but overall not even to stop federer. The only players that gave fed trouble in the early 2000s were roddick/agassi/safin and naldbandian. Roddicks lack of defensive and tennis IQ and solely relying on his serve and powerful forehands is why he couldn't stop federder. Safin had all the tools beat fed just wasnt consistent and wasnt as fast with groustrokes and running. Same with naldbandian who was abit of an allround player but lacked the power that fed had with groundstrokes. Same with aggasi. Aggasis best weapon was his return and groundstrokes but fed had him beat in all other areas. The reasons why nadal beat fed was because of his defensive style and novak was always an all-around player but wasnt at the peak of his skills til the 2010s. Nowadays most players train to be all-round players which another reason u would see fed get beat more in the laters compared to previous years
Federer was old in his mid to late 30s his peak form beats anyone (Novak and Nadal only competition maybe peak Murray outside of slams) in this era lol
This is a misconception. Courts were more varied and balls faster.
Djoker and Nadal are more like 2001 Ferrero, 2001 era baseline clay players. They turned everything into 01 clay play basically and variation is lost.
So what youre admitting to is that Fed is indeed the greatest player of all time, as he is the only one who did what others couldnt do, win on lightning 01 grass, win on the more modern feeling 01 clay, and win on 01 hard court.
That basically sums up why Federer is the greatest in my eyes👍
Interesting video, its kinda strange, i always thought if you have to lose to someone at least you lost to the greatest player ever, add to that that he is the most respectfull and fairplay guy who ever played tennis. I remember what Andy Roddick said when he lost against Federer in epic Wimbledon final 2009, how he was broken but Federer was very reserved with he's celebration knowing how bad Roddick felt. Also good example is Del Potro when he lost against Federer at the semifinal Olympic games 2012. he was completely devastated started crying and Federer again proved why everyone respects him so much.
Wasn’t convinced of the Alcaraz craze till Carlos victory over Novak today at Wimbledon on this Sunday 7/16/23. He’s the real deal. 🎾 I waited to see if Carlos was the warrior they have said of him, and not media hype? He did everything a new champion does to an old established legend like Novak. 🎾🎾🎾There were opportunities for Novak to get over on Carlos in this crucial championship game. Carlos did not allow Novak to gain confidence in getting over critical points. 🎾🎾🎾Carlos stopped Novak like a real champ. Carlos has earned my respect and support. He displayed resolve under pressure against a seasoned wily veteran in one Novak Djokovic, statistically the best ever. 🎾🎾And the funny part: We haven’t seen the best Carlos yet. He’s only recently turned 20 years of age!!! Let that sink in! 🎾🎾Carlos is only gonna become stronger in the next few years. And if he stays on the path of discipline and health……..? ……..we’ll see the best Carlos at 24 years of age till 28 years of age …….🎾🎾Carlos still has masculinity developmental potential to become a much stronger player! This is scary. We witnessed a great Carlos defeating a great Novak right here today. And many of us not realizing this is not a complete Carlos yet. This is a 94% developed Carlos. 🎾🎾Carlos has got a little more room to become sharper in the next 6 years! That’s scary. I truly believe that if Novak hopes to get 27 grand slams he’ll need another player to oust Carlos in a grand slam before potentially meeting Carlos? Novak is gonna need someone to eliminate Carlos in future grand slams and do the dirty work for him. Because I don’t see Novak beating Carlos again in a grand slam? I’m sorry Novak, but Carlos is only gonna be filling out more into a full fledged stronger player which isn’t gonna help your cause. And Novak is slowly declining…….he’s still great with a lot left in him, no doubt, but still on the downswing of life’s currents nonetheless. If Novak beats Carlos again in a grand slam, it wouldn’t be a surprise, because it’s Novak Djokovic. But all I’m saying is don’t be surprised if Novak doesn’t win Carlos again in a grand slam? 🎾🎾I’d say Novak has has two more times to beat Carlos in a grand slam at most? I wouldn’t bet Novak to beat Carlos over two times in all future grand slam championships. Carlos may be the very reason Novak decides retirement soon?
That is very late to join the bandwagon. I've been on it since he beat Stef in 2021 in the US. I think it's crazy how anyone could watch him and take until this month to realise he's the real deal
@@ZPSBestProfileName I’m not jumping on any bandwagon. This Carlos kid is a special talent. The big “but” is this: But what if another talented player arises that we know not of? A player who has Carlos’s number? A player that will hamper his quest to reach 20 grand slams? Food for thought.
@@ZPSBestProfileName A lot of people just judge solely by the most unquestionable results (like winning Wimbledon against Djoko) because they don’t really have an eye for the game.
Plus to be that young and did what he did after nerves caused him to cramp up in The French Open finals. Then he lost the first set at Wimbledon to Djokovic 6-0. To comeback from that, Alcaraz is gonna beat him again at the US Open
And Carlos had to give way to the a better player at the US open yesterday, Danii
Tennis slowed the courts in 2008 to give others a chance. Federer was so dominant, they had no choice. Baseline grinding wouldn't have saved Djokovic from a very different future had he not been helped by the sport itself with ever slowing courts.
Cool story, bro.
Tennis used to be exciting to watch, because the playing whizzed and inspired. Witnessing Federer play during the mid- 2000s through 2014, was a marvel-- it was like witnessing an incredibly technical magician at work. Now, watching tennis is a slog and, truth be told, often very boooooooring. I'm holding out hope that Alcaraz's body holds up, because watching him play is fun. He has passion and often makes truly jaw-dropping plays.
Excuses
@@eme.261 Its all clay now basically the variation is lost. Djoker in his best year hit 260 aces and Fed over 800.
Federer is the GOAT. He went up against a pool of major talent we don’t see today
In the later years yes. But when he won most of his Slams early on, it was one of the weakest eras in tennis.
@@badmanskill1112the current era of tennis is the weakest. Murray, Wawrinka, Cilic are way past their prime and the new contenders, Sinner, Zverev, Medvedev, Tsitsipas, etc. are too inconsistent or too specialised on one surface. Thiem has been non-existent for three years and Alcaraz has only been around for a year or two. This has allowed Djokovic and Nadal to keep scooping up titles even in their late thirties. Djokovic, especially, has done an exceptional job at maintaining his body and his longevity but ,in all fairness, his current competition sucks.
Roddick? Nalbodian?
@@georgestavrinides5082 learn what weak era is and then talk. ua-cam.com/video/jdqrOqvKVhY/v-deo.htmlsi=vbm9W4qCgPsPjBSS
@@ittaloceara i was going to ask him that before i saw your comment 😂. Guy is clueless...
I am a Rafa Fan. But believe me whenever I watch Federer game he is out of this world. Roger is a true gem ❤
look, the " big three " have all earned their place in the tennis hall-of-fame for different reasons. Nadal in particular for his never-say-die attitude. There will be a statue of FR in Switzerland and a statue of Nadal in Spain and Djokovic in Serbia and all will be completely and rightfully proud of their " sons. " Nadal is special for me because i see him as a very kind and humble person. Djokovic gained my support when he stood up against the vaccine - before that i had no use for him.
Krygios is perhaps the only player outside of the big three whose own demons stopped him entering the GOAT debate in his own right. By some margin the most naturally gifted player I’ve ever seen, up there with Federer and prime Sampras. Drinking and mental health problems hit him hard and it will always be a question as to what might have been had he settled down earlier. He often played obviously hungover and still managed to take the games greats right to the edge of their abilities.
What?
There are a thousand reasons that good players don’t win major championships… this guy’s got most of them covered.
It’s about winning not whining.
Nah
Kyrgios is hella talented, but he's a human.
The Big 3, Borg, Sampras, Agassi... they were aliens.
Roger's tennis was from the old world to the new world with a one handed back hand to die for...
Personally to me watching Roger live at Wimbledon will be the greatest sporting moment, you canny believe what your eyes see, just very weird, he brought the masses to tennis...
Your own country follows there fellow tennis player but Continents follow Roger...
He is a one man religion that is hero worshipped like no other...
IF YOU'RE A ROGER FAN NO EXPLANATION IS NEEDED IF YOU'RE NOT A ROGER FAN NO EXPLANATION IS POSSIBLE...
The greatest Sportsman who ever walked 💯
It’s all to do with type and match up just like in Heavyweight Boxing, some easily defeated Foreman but would have struggled against Ali & Frazier whereas some other Boxers might have easily defeated Ali or Frazier and got destroyed by Foreman.
For Kyrgios it is Federer.
A Nadal fan here since 2005. Roger is just ❤
Federer saved the single handed backhand.
and wawrinka and now tsitsipas
That shot against Agassi was disgusting. Early Federer was a bull. Nobody could tame him.
Which makes the 3-0 Kuerten inflicted on him in 2004 after 3 surgeries and far from his prime even more impressive.
Djokovic and Nadal would've drawn against Sampras, Agassi and Kuerten. Tennis was so different back then. Yet, we only count titles is easy to say that Djokovic is the GOAT. And although my personal GOAT will always be Borg, nobody can argue that Federer changed the face of Tennis forever.
That makes no sense, players like nadal and Nole counter those players styles
U clearly know 0 about tennis
06 fed only nadal beat him 4 times, mrray 1 time, he served over 800 aces, i think he went like 92-5 that year. What this means is, not counting Murray, NO ONE BUT NADAL BEAT HIM
Most intuitive player. In a deeper level of consciousness
If you play and know about tennis, the statistics don’t tell you who the most talented is and anyone who thinks otherwise has a double-digit IQ. Roger was the most talented.
Most talented in what aspect and out of which generation? There have been numerous players with enormous raw talent - moreso than Federer if we're talking shotmaking skills and ability to learn the game effortlessly. Fed himself said he wasn't the most talented and that it required hard work both mentally and physically before he started finding success on the court. Nadal by comparison was more advanced at the very beginning of his career.
Federer was the most CONSISTENT of the top players to utilize his talent with shotmaking, improvisaton skills etc. though - and now Alcaraz seems to be surpassing him at that.
And how did you just managed to measure talent? I guess that you must the first human to do it...all of those professional tennis players put enormous amounts of energy and time into perfecting their game, so you want to say that RF put less time and energy than Novak or Nadal? Cause if you do, than thats bs...in the end the only thing thats matters and counts are things that someone accomplish, not the things that might have happened if...
When the obnoxious AI-generated voice keeps saying “game” instead of “match” 🙄
Roger's game was guile, precision and endurance, Novak and Rafa have a more attritional style of game.
This is a super talented player who failed to live up to his full potential, recognizing another player who had even more talent and fully realized his potential. Kind of how Zlatan used to describe Messi.
Federer will always be the GOAT in my mind, even if he won a few less slams than the other two. He did things on the tennis court that had never been seen before, and haven't been seen since.
thank God Kyrgios has some class and he is also accurately describing what it meant to play FR. Nadal and Djokovic are gonna play a pretty conventional game and at least you get hitting practice. FR when he was on short-circuited any rythm the opponent would want and left his opponent feeling genuinely hopeless. when Nadal astonished everyone by beating FR from the beginning, FR was honestly at that time equivalent to Mike Tyson in his first years - people were afraid to play him. As the years went on players got better, but still FR could cause a feeling of utter helplessness. the saving Grace was you could lose to FR, but no one really expected too much more and behind him was a road of dead bodies that meant you were just another victim of a foregone condition.
This video cracks me up because Kyrgios's comments mirrors quite a bit of what Agassi said in 2007 about playing Roger - "He can squeeze you from any part of the court at any time and you never know when it's coming." Djokovic may be the winningest player - but Roger is the GOAT for his impact on the game both on and off the court.
It's going to be really interesting when all the Big 3 have finished, how history will remember them all...
"It's going to be really -interesting- boring when all the Big 3 have finished..."
Fixed it for you.
@@strollic5162 lol - yeah, that as well... ;o)
Numbers-wise, Federer is not the GOAT but to many including pro players who have played everyone, he is. Please end the debate.
The debate is ended when we recognize that said debate is boring, repetitive, subjective, and that all three of them are, in fact, the GOAT.
@@akiratheastronaut there can only be one GOAT but people have different opinions about what makes one the GOAT.
@@nCode1there is no goat. Same in all sports. Depending on perspectives there are different goats. Sampras may also be goat.
There are inflations in years played, tournaments, played, recoveries and records chased anyway, as are the speed of the game etc wtc. But players are judged for the conditions of the game at the time they play.
Sampras may be goat. Borg may be goat. Agassi may be goat (only player to have all 4 slams before homogenisation of surfaces and to dictate baseline game in fast era, plus player to overacome troubles and get back to no1), Connors may be goat, any of the big3 may be goat.
Kirgios hasn't really done anything other than get 1 win vs the top 3
I was at the Miami tournament for the Federer vs Kyrgios match it was awesome! Then Federer beat Nadal in the final. If I remember correctly Nadal never won Miami
He is my goat and no matter how many more Novak wins it doesn't feel like prime federer to me and I love novak
They are MATCHES not games
Fed think he is better than everyone, which is true
Federer is far fron being the best player of all time. Just for the record.
Djok: Most Titles.
Nadal: Resilience, Hard Work and Dedication.
Federer: Most Skillful & Certainly the people's GOAT
Fact is, Nadal and Federer both ate up at least 7-8 Grand Slam Titles off each other's table during their prime 2004/5-2013/14. Otherwise no one would come up close with them.
Kyrgios biggest tosser
Reality is that the debate for the GOAT is now over, the debate is only between Roger and Rafa for 2nd and 3rd.
On clay nadal is goat
for clay - Nadal, for anything else - Federer. Nadal couldn't beat either Djoko or Federer in the last years and even avoided matches between them (aside from clay) on multiple occasions. Nadal did not win a set on hard courts against Djokovic since 2013 (!) and against Federer the only match he won in the last 4 years of their rivalry was on clay with 5 losses on hard/grass and 1 match avoided by Nadal. They figured him out!
GOAT DEBATE IS A WASTE OF TIME BECAUSE NO ONE HAS DOMINATED ALL THREE SURFACES OF TENNIS YET!
Maybe you can say, this guy is or was the best during his era, not of all time because none of the Big 3 ever played the likes of Rod Laver and other oldies in their prime.
If one's only criteria for greatness is the final score, then, yes, you're right. For many of us, though, it's not the only criteria.
"sprezzatura" is Italian that translates roughly into "effortless grace". It's why, for example, gilded age mansions had hidden passages for the servants so they could do their job running the household without being seen. To the eye of a guest, things happened effertlessly. It was considered beautiful for the mundane chores of life to happen as if by magic.
In a similar vein, art is highly valued, not for practical reasons, but for the beauty and creativity of the artist provoking a sort of awe and appreciation of the seemingly impossible being realized. Think about the prices that a Van Gogh or Rembrandt fetch and the size and number of museums that house them and other artworks. That's how much society values art.
Now, consider that Federer's game is often referred to as beautiful or graceful or a work of art while almost no other player's game is talked about in that way. People will say that he makes tennis look like ballet. That it's beautiful. That they've never seen anything like it. That's part of his greatness. To take a "sport" which is often thought of as a metaphor for war, and change it to art.
Yes, Novak and Rafa have won a little more but it's not like Roger won only one grand slam title. He did win twenty. And he did it with creativity, effortless grace, and beauty that none of the others have ever approached.
And so, if all you're talking about is the scoreboard, then, sure, the debate is over, but I think that's an impoverished point of view that misses an important aspect of his game and his influence on the game. An aspect that many of us value just like the art that we travel thousands of miles to see. We do it because we can't see it anywhere else.
This is crap.
Sampras has claim for goat it was not among the big3. I consider him better than all 3.
But if shots are in the mix, fed is most capable in shots.
Djokovic and Nasal have better stamina and legs and fitness.
Stop arguing. Fed is the indisputable king of the game. The best player there ever was and most likely will be (since he hit all the boxes and then some), skill, style and talent wise, artistically, biomechanically, in any imaginable way pertaining to the very definition of the beautiful game as it should be played and enjoyed, skillfully, effortlessly, with stunning versatility, beauty, playfulness, surprise, drama and poetry translated to acts of tennis; it is a no-brainer. He gave too much advantage to his worst rivals playing with an undersized racquet for the modern dynamic demands of the sport for years for the sake of it, add the one-handed backhand to that mix of artistic choices and you get the math. Others are but low-minded grinders compared to him and his grace, and always will be, except maybe guys like Nick but then again those talented artful rascals cannot replicate Roger's feat by any means since they just lack in some crucial department or in everyone of them for some critical measure. Hail, Roger! The one and only. King of tennis.
time to see your psychologist😂
Are you a Federer fan? It seems a bit unclear from your post.
@@fg92626most of Novaks slams now are against very easy opponets, there is literally no prime Murray or Wawrinka or Nadal who are all injured and Fed career was cut short from
Surgeries during covid, the players of recent are all cry babies who get big money and press in social media easily and then Alcaraz is not filly mature. So there is gap. Still Fed and Djok are both goats. But comparing their numbers when Djok collects easy era trophies, even easier era than Feds, is not warranted comparison. So is more accurate to not focus on details which are relative. Agassi is also goat with 8 who played in era when 8 equaled 16 of todays nunbers, and were in non homogenized era when players were not good in all four when now they are same courts more or less do same players play them well.. and who had to drop to 120 or lower due to some raeasons ans made comeback to
No1 let alone the back issues, and is the only player with all 4 slams in non homogenized courts era. Sampras may be goat. Many may be goat depending on the factors at analysis used. There is no single goat in any sport for all periods, only for a period and for certain weightings of factors of the game. What is important to you.
Senna is one of goats of formula1, for many the best driver, who drove risky, best on wet roads, best on empty roads etc etc. with 3 champioonships in an era when players were getting killed and harder to risk when driving. For others is different. In NBA the same others favor championships others longevity others impact to team where others clutchness or critical plays and is same for all sports. In fhess for some is Fischer with one championship for the way it was developed to play and overcome Soviet knowledge surplus and way of play and ratint gap to competition for others longevity of Kapsarov for others completeness of play of Magnus for others insane level gap of play of Morphy. Same in all sports no single goat it is immature claim to have this notion if oversimplification of reality.
@@innosanto lol you don’t have to write a long essay but ask yourself this simply question what did the 34 yo 🐐do lierally won 27 GS match in a row and what did 34 yo Federer do? Witnessed the 🐐won 28 GS in a row 😂 this is called Grand Slam
I will say "How can he do that ?" for everytimes I watch Federer's match .
Stuttgart 2018. If you want to see a real grass open, watch it. It is far more interesting that what Wimbledon has become.
This is the warm and loving confession of FED=GOAT! But how can you "Wimbledon slow down"? Grass is Grass ...
Look at Stuttgart, you will see the difference. On this ground, Djokovic never wins a title.
There is several layers underneath the grass. And each grass have their differences as well
Federer was certainly a shotmaker! Unless he was up 40-15 against Djokovic at a major. Then, he just couldn’t cut it.
Federer has beaten djokovic many times before fed hits age 30 from 2006-2010 federer easily beats novak 13-6 h2h and 10 slams to 1 slam easy dominant win by federer even in 2011 30 age federer beats so called high level tennis of djoko in 2011 rolland garros semi finals in federers worst surface then the following year in 2012 31 age federer beats prime peak djoko easily in wimbledon 2012 semi finals along with prime peak murray in the finals to win the title, federer has nothing left to prove, it was actually djoko who only started winning in 2011 when fed was 30 old out of prime and in fact his 21 slams that he achieved starting in 2011 when fed got older 30 out of prime, notice how murray wawrinka and djokovic only had their success when federer got older, when federer was still younger he dominated them all, thats why the myth era was a lie, federer made his era look weak because he was so dominant that he made his opponent look weak, the only opponent that can challenge federer was prime peak lightning fast nadal from 2005-2010 nadals best version but federer still dominated and win slams over him from 2005-2010 federer 12 slams nadal 9 slams, everything i've said was facts not opinion, federer was still the true tennis goat
@@truthtruth9056 Useless comment. Djokovic beat Federer many times when Roger when in his prime, such as Montreal, Miami, AO, USO, Basel when Novak was still below prime. He was also beating Federer when Roger was playing his best tennis in his 30's. Roger's smooth style allowed him to play even better in his early-mid 30's. Look how well Novak is playing at 35. Novak has a winning record against Federer, he is more all-around player than Federer, winning more clay titles and so far two RG titles (Federer only one), and he has been the most weeks at No.1. He embarrased Federer at least three times at Slams when Roger had match points. He had a big winning record against him in Slams and overall finals. Djokovic is the GOAT. You know nothing about tennis. Blocked.
@@truthtruth9056 all true but djokovic was still kinda young. Their matchups didn’t really Pan out correctly because of age. I’d like to see which one did better when age was in their favor if that makes sense
Federer fans started calling Federer "old" when he was 28, lol. I remember it well.
@Will Hopson djokovic was 20 21 22 23 prime age for tennis from 2007-2010 this too young excuse was only made by djoko casual fans to escape the embarassment that federer gave to djokovic, we are talking about tennis here non physical contact sport not basketball football or anything
Notice how these great players got their achievements at the age of 20-24
So thats why bjon borg's 11 grand slam achievements was when he was 20-25 age
So thats why Naomi osaka's 4 grand slam achievement was when she was 20-24 age
So thats why iga swiatek 3 grand slam achievements was when she was 19-21 age
So thats why nadal from age 19-24 he already have 9 grand slam title
So thats why federer from 21-24 age already have 6 grand slam title
So thats why john mcenroe's 7 grand slam achievement was when he was 20-25 age
So thats why martina hingis's 5 grand slam achievement was when she was 16-19 age
These is just a proof that even at 19 age you can be in your prime , as you can see the facts that i presented many players alrrady dominated even in their teenage years, because in tennis youthness is important as you need speed quickness stamina fast reflexes which you can get at a younger age because tennis is a non physical contact sport
Federer might not hold the record for more GS and other things but he still holds other. However he achieved all of these by playing all his rivals and not doing it after they aren’t playing or retiring. Not to mention he even made Novak and Nadal look easy. Federer had all the shots and can do it all and his all around game he takes the game to you.
Federer will always be the goat and best tennis player for me. I don't care how many grand slam djoko is winning.
How many times are you going to quote the same kygrios quote 😂
4 more times :)
Great video.. miss Roger ❤
Federer is the past done. The third best. Got some tricks but in the future the greatest to be remembered is the one who achieved the most.
Fed easily has the best hands and shot selection in tennis history. Nobody else is even close (although the new generation is getting there).
This GOAT is too much hype and unreal. It could be more like GOTT - Great Of This Time! to be fair to all players.😊
One of the GOHT (grt of his time) wld be more appropriate…But (GROAT) GRACEFUL OF ALL TIME ….
People can mistakingly come to think too much about someone's opinion on somebody else... these things are not important...
Kyrgios cried for the first time when Roger beat him in the Laver Cup.
It is completely unacceptable to call him the greatest of all time when Novak has more Slams and more weeks at number 1, by which metrics the greatest of all time is decided. Unless, of course, for some reason you need to invent other, more subjective reasons, like how aesthetically pleasing one's playstyle is, in which case your opinion should be disregarded
Titles don't tell the whole story. In 2050, when a guy beats Djokovic's records with GS in 2 sets, you will be the first to cry that Novak is the goat.
Records are made to be broken.
Except for Laver's who made the grand slam in 1968. That makes him the goat of tennis.
Getting bullied by a man wearing pink must have been humiliating.
Had Nadal popped up in 2012 instead of 2004, Federer would have won more Grand Slams and Djokovic less.
Djokovic only started winning when Federer was in retirement age and Nadal was already full of injuries.
Had Djokovic had an injured body like most, and retired in his early thirties, there would have been no debate
This guy loves Federer way too much. Listen to the whole story with Kyrgios not liking Federer. He talks about him being in the atp 250 at would no1-3 while being ranked at 100 playing against that seems unfair and then while beating you acting like he’s just won a grand slam. Federer was a great player but people tend to forget he won most his records while having no competition. Then 2 other players came along and while competing with each other beat his records. He still holds the atp250 most wins but it’s a comp made for people new to the pro circuit so why was Federer always there?
Do they refer to "matches" as "games" in other parts of the world? I always believed a game was a part of a match but never use the words interchangeably in tennis. Thanks.
Federer is still the GOAT:
-Most Wimbledons ever (8)
-Most US Opens ever alongside Sampras (5)
-Leads H2H against Nadal on hard courts 11-9 and on grass 3-1.
Djokovic and Nadal: both had an age advantage. Federer was over 37yo in 2018 when Djokovic outlasted him in the H2H. No one can seriously say that Federer was on his prime. The other one is the King of clay best ever no doubt.
But prime Roger Federer would destroy Djokovic, as he did three years in a row at the US Open in 2007, 2008 and 2009.
Also, Federer holds the record for most consecutive weeks at No. 1. 237 weeks (Djoker only 120), which shows how insanely dominant he was.
People are so biased to see only the present and not the past. Prime Roger > prime anyone.
most consecutive weeks is insane
Fantastic argumentation. Unf, NoleFans still won't accept. "Nole Nole Nole" without any brain.
Don't forget that he leads the World Tour Finals (second most important tournament) along with Novak as well.
and when you talk about goat, you talk about ALL TIMES. So you can you put your goat anywhere, he should perform well. It's not the case for Novak and Rafa in 1980 and 1990. They would be destroyed on fast courts.
Kyrgios loosing 2 games in 3rd set tie break is a stomp to this guy xD
LOL.. The greatest player of all times.🤣
Sampras is the greatesr of all time fast courts.
But best tennis shots on hard courts with baseline play as focus is Federer.
It is not Novak or Nadal or other.
I had to pause and see the release on this vid when I heard that 'greatest' line.. figured it'd be no newer than 2019. LOL
@@innosanto how to spot a Djoker fan in a second 😂 fragile ego just like the man himself.
Federer is the 🐐.
2014 was a long time ago.
@@mambi74They live in past dude
I don’t care how K feels about anything.
Federer just like messi he is one of kind he is the man that make me love the game and i dont even play it and after he retaird i didnt watch any game
first of all, i can't super take anyone seriously who keeps calling matches "games." but there's a lotta unnecessary hyperbole in here, which goes with the chickbait title. you sound about as honest as your speaking voice. just relax and be real. although i am glad you've got roger goated.
The KING of tennis is NOVAK!!! Goat in every way!
Always drop some money on Nick
That’s true Federer is the greatest
......." Against Djokovic or Nadal you often feel you have a chance , but against Federer no "
Federer is the Messi of tennis
No. He is far more talented than this pittyful overrated Argentinian
Djokovic beat the “unbeatable Roger” 2 times facing match point and championship point 😅
Nice comments here.
I'd like to see a statistic which shows the IQ of FedFans against NoleFans. The outcome would be staggering, I believe.
Good point
What about tennis fans
Federer inst the best player of all times. All i have to say.
If by your typo you mean instantly. Then yes.
He may be.
Tennis contests are called "matches", not "games"
Clickbait!! How about hearing from Krygois himself vs your paraphrasing . The opening image is him talking. Clickbait!!!
That clip from Stuttgart could've been a village championship from the 18th C. Did they play tennis back then? 😂
The reason why is because he hits you with alot of actual winners
I wonder if The Joker, Fed or Nadal were all the same age, who would come out on top with the most GS's. Fed is 5 years older than Nadal and 6 older than The joker. That age separation makes a difference. Considering the age difference Joker is only up by 4 and Nadal by 2 and obviously I can't see Nadal winning anymore slams and he is retiring, but Joker might...he looks weaker for sure now, but he might pull through to win another.
Fed will always be my favorite player of all time. There's no like him, never will be. His shot making and his talent is above all others in tennis history. He just blew my mind.
My god how can you say the same thing over and over and over without saying anything at all
After watching Alcaraz yesterday winning Wimbledon this guy Kyrios is now just enough to be a ball boy.
lmao. I concur 🤣
John, what issues do you have with MSNBC. I think they have been the most well known voice countering fox. Was it that Keith had to go in the buy out? ;-)
It’s crazy, when Federer was dominating prior to 2008 when th courts were faster, no one could stop him, now it’s rally’s, Novak strength against Federer and Federer weakness
ha, lesson for Kyrgios is if that you are born with such talent, when everyone is working you should not be playing pokemon go... seriously, Nadal had good reason to not like Kyrgios, only luck that guy had was his immense talent, without it, he'd be bagging groceries at some convenience store
Roger Federers Game Was so Aesthetically Pleasing...He Had More Natural Talent and Variety Than Any Player in History of Tennis
6:48 That half volley...
admit it 40-15 were the most haunting memories of all...until now..
Djoković is greatest player of all time
Amazing how someone can create a 10min video based a single sentence. In addition to be a huge click bait 😢
is this video generated by AI?
I found federer really boring. Always was too polite and nice and family friendly. There are dozens of more interesting players....
You can't be serios
@@davidharris1249 100% I don't like boring personalities.
Annoying clickbait.