Did Federer decline in 2011?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 чер 2024
- Why did Federer stop winning in 2011? And how did he win three more slams in 2017 and 2018?
Chapters:
00:00 - Federer becomes the goat
00:32 - But then 2011 happened
01:11 - Did Federer decline in 2011?
01:40 - Decline compared to Djokovic
02:12 - Jimmy Connors and Ivan Lendl
03:05 - ELO ratings analysis
05:25 - Grand Slam match win percentage
06:28 - Consistency in the grand slams
08:19 - Beating lower ranked players
09:37 - Federer losses analysis
10:18 - Big 3 comparison
12:14 - 3 slams in 2017 & 2018
14:46 - The answer
15:45 - Is Federer the goat?
16:17 - Upcoming videos
Music:
"Video Magic (Daniel Solar Remix)" by Sorcerer
"Crazy" by Patrick Patrikios
"Know Myself" by Patrick Patrikios
Get Video Magic(Daniel Solar Remix) by Sorcerer here t.lickd.co/936488d3ec3b4f4880...
License ID: A7e5bg2pw0y
Get this and other songs for your next UA-cam video at lickd.co - Спорт
I remember listening to an interview in 2017, Federer mentioned he could probably beat himself in 2005 and believes hes a better player than before
Do you actually think Federer in 2017 would say to the media that he can't beat his 2005 version? Of course not. He needs his motivation and moral high. 2005 would stomp his 30+ ass.
@@SHVideografie ok, where are the stats?
@@SHVideografie Do you actually think you can evaluate the relative quality of Federer's game better than Federer himself?
Who cares what he said in an interview lol, just basic eye test would show you 2005 Roger is better than 2017, even just foot speed and movement alone (CLEARLY better in 2005) would give prime Roger a huge advantage
@@lmmkv6737 What "stats" lol, there are no stats. There's no relevant "stats" here because there's no alternate dimension outside of space-time where we can see 2005 Roger play against 2017 Roger. If I told you 2011 or 2015 Novak would beat 2007 Novak would you also say you don't believe me and ask for "stats"?
The fact that Federer could still win those slams so late in his career, at an old age shows what great of a player he was. And very consistent. Two decades at the top. Unbelievable.
great achievement for an over 30 player. but still even in old age, nole is doing it better. bro winning multiple slams a year at 36
Totally - but Djokovic is also not having to face a player like Djoker who is slightly his better and nearly 6 years younger and a Nadal who is also slightly better and 5 years younger.
Nobody have said he is not the great player my friend,big respekt to Roger,but he is not the GOAT
It is, and that’s why Fed is the second greatest.
@@TheTororistagainst what competition?!?
Can't imagine how long these videos take to research and make, I just want to say how much we appreciate you man for just speaking the truth. Well done man you are amazing at these analytical video keep it up!!
True🙏 love Goatkovic
Appreciate what 😂😂😂 Just watch tennis what is this load of nonsense lol.
@@mw7517 🤫
@@nigelpop Can't be a full shilling if you base who your best player is on nonsense stat tables 😂 Watch the game bro
@@mw7517 Of course I watch ahaha 🤫🇷🇸❤️
Bro Goatkovic you deserve WAYYYY more subs than ONLY 1k. Your videos are so high quality, informative and educational. I hope you reach 1mil soon!!
Fed fans don't like facts especially if those facts are in favor of Djokovic...so of course they will not subscribe to a channel like this.
Should we kick this Goatkovic guy to become Chief of Communication of ATP? His knowledge is unbelievable!!!
This video doesnt really say anything.
Seeing peak Federer face peak Djokovic is the only way to know who is better.. .
@@scottwarren4998 Too bad you didn't pay attention, because peak Federer was 2011+ in terms of match wins.
@@nixiontm i watched every match in 2011 my friend. but the serbs here say that the 2015 version of djokovic would defeat peak federer in most matches. What do you think? Would he?
Brilliant analysis as usual . Watching these videos confirms what I always felt deep inside . Thank you for making it clear . The three are incredible and unique tennis players, but the man from Belgrade stands alone .
Die-hard Federer fan here...
Your videos are awesome, mate
Thank you for making this video analysis.
When watching Federer's matches I thought Federer actually got better and better after 2011, especially in 2015.
I agree. Federer's best year was 2013, in my opinion.
@@mantaishere 😂😂. But it's true in fact : Federer was dominating the 2015 season if Djokovic doesn't exist. Roger was finalist in Wimbledon, US Open, ATP Finals, Indian Wells (M1000), Rome (M1000), but lost to Djokovic every single time. The only big tournament he won was Cincinnati (after beating Djokovic in the final, he also beat him in Dubai and ATP Finals).
@@flaviencrozier You can make this case for other players too. How many finals did Nadal lose in 2011 to Djokovic? I don't see think I have ever seen y'all claim Nadal was playing better than ever in 2011.
Y'all conveniently ignore that Federer lost to Seppi at the AO in the THIRD ROUND, lost in straights to Wawrinka at RG, lost to AR-V in bloody Shanghai of all places, and whatever other losses he incurred that season.
@@mantaishere yes you're right
@@mantaishere lost to Wawrinka that was unbeatable at the time. Even prime Novak lost to like Karlovic, in 2014 he lost to Wawrinka in like QFs? Shit happens man.
The absolute irony of suggesting that Federer only won slams in part due to Murray and Wawrinka being injured, when it was DJOKOVIC who lost slam finals to these two. DJOKOVIC was the beneficiary of their injuries, actually.
Shows how strong those players are mate, he beat Murray more in Slam finals then murray him. Wawrinka has performance of all time in 2015 literally untouchable, deserved win. In US open 2016 Djokovic wasnt full power, he was under pain killers cuz he didnt want to take surgery(There is a video of some1 talking how it was clear he needed surgery in late 2015 but didnt want to and his mother said he was scared of surgeries in an Serbian Interview), so take it how u want it. Also lets not forget that Murray beat Roger in 2006 and actually had positive H2h vs him till like 2015 if i remember.
@@VladaBB Hah. Like I said in a different comment... this argument to a T. As for Murray beating in Fed in 2006 and whatever else, we are talking about slams.
Mantaishere this man is just obsessed in a vile way of hatred towards Federer and Nadal. He twists and exaggerates everything unfortunately.
djoko was injured...
The other inaccurate thing about that is that Federer beat 5 of the GS finalists listed in that part of the video (Wawrinka, Raonic, Berdych, Cilic, Nadal) in his last 3 majors
I think what best describes it was a drop in confidence for fed. Djoko and nadal were only improving. They showed that they could be match point down and still beat him. I think the lack in confidence translates over to the big matches against djoko the most.
Roger was really good in 2011 his performance in rg 2011 and us open 2011 was really good. And he won world tour finals in 2011. Which lead to no 1 ranking in 2012
Ik but he didn't play like in his very prime 2005, 2006. Fed is 5-6 years older than Nadal and Djoko, which is why Fed beat Nadal and Djoko the most when they were staring. Nadal and Djoko obviously were improving a lot and at the same time Fed was aging. Which is why he didn't win much against them. He played for a long time in those years were didn't win anything and needed a break, which he took in 2016. (6 months). He came back strong again because he was rested and fresh, which is why he managed to win 3 more slams. After mid 2018 he was even older and couldn't keep that level for that long anymore. Then he tried once again in 2021 but as we all know the knee became a problem and well, he had to retire.
@@theacestriker6240 Young Nadal and Djokovic already starting winning huge matches against Federer during this peak years from 2004 to 2009. Djokovic beat him in 2008 Aus open semi final and Nadals first none clay grandslam match victory on Federer was the famous 2008 Wimbledon final. I am also ignoring the countless master 1000 or other tournament wins both Nadal and Djokovic got on Federer during his peak years. So this notion that they both only started to beat Federer when he got older is wrong.
Its honestly insane how some people are retroactively trying to make it seem like Fed from 2010 to 2012 was a hobbling old man. He was only 29 to 31 and was still very much in his prime though admittedly the tail end of his physical peak prime. I never see anyone claim Michael Jordan was out of his prime during his first three peat rings with the Chicago Bulls. He was 28 to 30 close to identical age as Federer in those years and was playing some of his best basketball of his career. Anyways Novaks big wins against him during that period are the closest we will get to seeing both at their physical primes(one entering it and one near the end of it). The age argument is only valid after 2012 but even than Federer had great longevity and was still insanely good well into 30s.
@@theacestriker6240 No, he was able to win 3 Grand Slams in 2017- 2018 because this coincided with Novak's level decline for a season and a half. Roger did not face Novak during that period, nor did he beat him
@@theacestriker6240Prime Federer had a better footwork, more powerful shots and was a magician but for the rest 2017 Federer is better.
Federer pushed Djokovic and Nadal to be better while this 2 pushed Federer to be technically better
This is a treasure of a tennis channel. Thanks for the effort put in the videos. Keep it up!
Let's dive in into another masterpiece from my favorite youtube channel about tennis.👌
I found out about him just right now my friend, I feel so bad buddy 😂
@@Alex-rj8ns Best channel bro.
I love Roger so much, so obsessed with him, so in love with the beauty of his tennis playing style... I enjoy watching negative content about him too... it makes no difference... just someone talking about Roger is great feed to my Roger-crazy mind... I appreciate ur analysis... I guess u r the #1 tennis analyzer I came across online till now... (obviously subscribed and request for all notifications) :)
I am so obsessed with Roger... while everyone is mad and sad at Roger losing to Novak in Wim19F... I watched replay of that on youtube already 5-6 times till now... and everytime I tremendously enjoyed the quality of tennis Roger had produced that day... and forced Novak to raise his level by many notches... it's unfortunate that Roger lost the match inspite of being the dominant player... but it makes absolutely no difference to me... I got to watch 5+ hours of Roger Federer on wimbledon grass... playing spectacular level of tennis at age 38 (?)
I've watched a few vids... but you just keep coming out with the golden goods - I had to press the bell button 🔔
Federer went into a slump because Nadal and Djokovic became stronger - there is no denying that. He did struggle with injury through that time and did a lot to adjust his game as well. I mean he still beat everybody else exept these two and exept from a couple of bad day performances against lower ranked players. Through that period he also visibly decreased in speed and recovering ability - that cost him im some tight moments
Exactly, Federer wasn’t playing the same he started to doubt his shots more and more against the other top 3 guys
@@cmc2110 he didn’t doubt anything, Djokovic simply outplayed him.. you are so small minded
mental is part of the game. @@zlatkostevanovic5891
Man!!U r a genius!!!Such analysis can't be seen anywhere...Loving ur content at the fullest level...Keep it up!!U deserve more recognition..
Absolutely brilliant research and analysis! Kudos
U make complex opinions sound logically simple and convincing.. Kudos to u m8 ! 👌💪
What an insight, kudos for a great work.
A little correction...
In 2017, when federer won 2 of the 3 grand slams that he won those two years, Wawrinka was not injured. In fact, he reached the semifinals on the Australian Open, the final on indian wells and the final on roland garros.
He was playing at a very competitive level that year.
So I'm not sure if you should consider him in that list.
Anyways... thanks for your video. Nice work.
He only won slams in 2017 because Djokovic was injured.
We all know wawrinka is weak against Federer
we all know wawrinka is willing to lose against federer to keep their nation as "THE GOAT" of tennis, its a win win for him
also DelPo was on fire during that time, their rivalry had a revival durin 17-18, they met 5 times and Federer lost twice, this plus Wawrinka being on a top level are two things Goatkovic got wrong in this video. Federer was beating tough opponents, just not as tough as peak Djokovic
you're the best !!!!!!
you deserve 100k subscribers.
congrats, congrats
huge and essential work for tennis history
One of the most well researched work...couldn't stop myself from subscribing
Great content! Thanks for posting!
2011 was the year Federer could have made his GOAT case a lock. In 3 of the 4 grandslams, he would have faced Djokovic in the semis and then Nadal in the finals. He desperately needed to win that 2011 French Open, it would have been his greatest tournament by far, making up for his loss to Nadal in the Wimby 2008. The confidence he would have gained from that tournament would have definitely trickled down to Wimbledon and Us Open, both of which he had a solid chance of winning. Too bad he wasn't strong enough mentally to do so.
You are my favorite UA-camr! I cannot wait for your next video. I have been making these arguments for years, I can't imagine how long you spend on looking up all of these stats, truly amazing! Please keep them coming. Love the nod to Nadals "mysterious" injuries lol. He's always "injured" every time he loses.
Why have you been making arguments 🤣🤣🤣 Just watch tennis lol.
@@mw7517 When dumb people like you make stupid comments, I like to speak up. Especially when it comes to defending my favorite tennis player, the GOAT.
This guy?
Great quality, please keep making these
under rated channel, u deserve more success
Brilliant analysis. Congratulations!!!
Really fantastic explanation great work😍😍😍🤩😘
great video. well done in all aspects.
your videos are incredible, so entertaining. spitting facts, respect to you
This is genius! Thank you, for I will never undervalue a Fed match between ‘11 and ‘16
I am Nadal fan
And my top 10 GOAT list as for March 2022 is the following
1. Djokovic
2. Nadal
3. Federer
4. Sampras
5. Borg
6. Agassi
7. Lendl
8. McEnroe
9. Connors
10. Becker
Honorable mentions: Laver, Murray, Edberg, Wilander
Bullshit...no way laver isnt in the top 6
Federer has more slams than Nadal at the aussie open, wimbledon and the us open lol Nadal only has more titles at the French on clay. Federer leads h2h against Nadal on both hard courts and grass courts lol Nadal only leads on clay. Nadal's the king of clay but Federer is the better player overall
@@ashishverma3892 The reason why i didn't put him in the top 10 is because he played mostly in amateur era before the foundation of a Grand Prix circuit in 1970
guy literally won two calendar slams on the pro circuit..but hey!
@@ashishverma3892 The first one was in 1962
Before the Open Era
The second one in 1969
Just the 2nd year of an Open Era
The level of tennis was pretty low at that time even compared to 80's
Wow. It's so solid. Well done dude
Really interesting analysis! Well done.
I watched tons of Roger matches. I clearly know why he has losing record vs Rafa and Novak. I know why he lost so many matches vs Novak from match point positions. All this due to a single defect in Roger, obviously in comparison to Rafa and Novak (and not the rest)
Roger is not mentally as strong as the other 2.
I watched a BBC documentary on youtube of Roger vs Rafa 2008 match. In that Roger's physio commented that Roger is an INSTINCTIVE player. He feels himself during the initial moments of a match, and if the feeling is good, his strokes peak, else they might not. And this feeling amplifies vs exceptional talents like Rafa and Novak
Roger himself said once that he is an instinctive player. He doesn't like to think while playing (obviously, we shudn't take it literally, he means that as a wish, not as a method), he loves to play free flowing tennis. Free flowing tennis works only vs lesser players, but when peak talents like Rafa Novak oppose Roger's game, the free flowing patterns will be punctured with doubts, and that's sufficient to spoil Roger's game
Anyway, now coming to my own analysis from watching zillion Roger matches due to being his hard-core fan...
Roger is so immensely talented, definitely more than Novak and Rafa, he has more OPTIONS for any shot than any other player. But all this is in the mind. Execution involves physical strength, mental strength, luck factor, etc -- especially mental.
When Roger is pushed into a long rally by Rafa or Novak... 99% of times Roger loses the point... for multiple reasons
(1) He is so creative... he can't patiently wait for opponent to make the mistake... he tries some variety shot... and the pressure from Rafa Novak doesn't necessarily allow Roger's mind to succeed in making that shot a winner
(2) Roger doesn't have patience to stay as long as it takes in longer rallies. So, as a rally becomes longer, Roger starts to hit his shots with more acceleration, more power, with more court coverage, etc. On the other hand, Rafa Novak are contented to stay at baseline and just continue the rally with minor twists to speed direction tactics etc. So, when RF makes impatient changes to rally, inevitably he hits an UFE, and loses the point
(3) Roger is not mentally as strong as Rafa and Novak. After losing X # of points, the other 2 recover to their best performance relatively quicker than Roger. I guess Roger's ego has been solidified due to being declared the unanimous GOAT for more than a decade (2000s, early 2010s), and due to public becoming crazy upon seeing him on court, public places, online, restaurants, parties, etc. So, the ego hurts a lot when he is dominated for an extended period. All his grand slam losses to Novak -- like USO10SF USO11SF Wim14F Wim15F Wim19F AO16SF AO11SF etc all follow a similar pattern -- especially USO10 USO11 Wim19, where Roger lost inspite of having more than 1 match points
To sum up into 1 line -- Rafa Novak are psychologically strong... Roger is creatively strong... that's why they win more... but majority crowd loves to watch Roger more... as he gives more watching satisfaction
Roger is a Nick Kyrgios type player with more discipline, much better technique, more creative -- but psychological aspects of both are almost similar -- even though they display them differently into the universe
However, I believe... if big3 debuted at the same time and were of the same age... all would've won almost equal # of grand slams... with a little more domination by Roger... my only logic for this being -- the speed, acceleration, creativity, intimidation, etc with which Roger used to play until 2007 was at an altogether different level... I don't think Novak ever touched that level... not even in 2011... infact Roger had beaten Novak in FO11SF -- the year of peak Novak
lol
Look at the competition in this years from Djokovic and from Federer . You clearly see that Nole had harder and better opponents. without disrespecting Federer peac
@@lazarcukovic4642 Yes -- If we consider from their debuts till 2019 (the year till which all 3 actively player), Novak and Rafa had more tougher opponents than Roger. Agree here.
I also agree that Roger lesser matches by playing better at super critical stages like converting break points, saving break points, final set tie breaks, etc -- Rafa Novak definitely had upper hand over RF in this category. This comes down to mental strength
But after listening/reading to 2-3 Ivan Ljubicic interviews after RF announced retirement, looks like Roger played too many matches in recent past (I mean on or before 2019) with some nagging injury or the other. That's really unfortunate
And, in recent past, Novak has clearly dominated Rafa. Slowly slowly Novak has been pushing deep into Rafa at FO too.
So, my final 2 points -- to sum up :
(1) If Roger's mental strength was of same level as the other 2, he wud've won more grand slams than them
(2) Purely looking at peak performances, I seriously believe (having watched all matches of big3 across their careers), peak Roger is a devil. If they debut together, and at same age, it wud've been tough to stop Roger. However, since the other 2 are also rock stars, the 3 would've more or less equally won grand slams, all 3 learned quicker to tolerate the competition, and we wud've had even better quality matches between them. But nature decided to send Roger 5-6 years earlier than Novak and 3-4 years before Rafa.
I always thought Novak was playing better than Roger eaelyin his career. Just unfortunate he would "gas out" for some reason.
@@fingersm Well! Both are gr8 players
But 3 points
(1) History: Until 2012, Roger lost few n won more vs Novak. After 2012, Roger lost more n won lesser. Roger peak dropped (age cud be prime factor) and Novak peak raised, and this had a big impact on the results. Roger lost many vs Rafa early, but after both went past their primes, Roger had clear upper hand over Rafa. But Novak is continuing at good level even after coming down his peak. Otherwise, Roger shud've won Wim19F. So, stats can tell us that Novak had better performance vs Roger.
(2) Novak, according to me, has very good chance to end career with 30 majors, coz I don't see any to stop him in grand slams (BO5 matches), except Rafa. Alcaraz is doing gr8, but I don't think he is capable enough at this moment to stop Novak in majors.
(3) Above are about the players. Talking from spectator perspective, i.e. me -- I don't get their money or trophies or fame or playing satisfaction. I just get the watching satisfaction, and I get immensely from Roger than the rest. The gap is huge. The way Roger plays -- with a mix of aggression, speed, acceleration, creativity, beauty, grace, style -- it is so attractive to watch. That's why, people who have no interest in tennis, who don't know tennis game rules, just stop and wonder whenever they see Roger on the screen. This level of beauty and attractiveness doesn't exist in Novak and Rafa game. Many times, I watch even Roger lost matches, just to enjoy his playing style. Unfortunate that he is gone now and there is none else to play like him. We've to adjust with the existing field.
Great video. I am a Nole fan but I still find the outcome of your analysis stunning. Federer actually got better but it just was no longer good enough. He kept qualifying for semis and finals but lost there. Probably the most emblematic were the 3 finals lost to Nole in Wimbledon. He was still so good but Nole was just better. This gives so much weight to the 2019 final.
Subscribe to the channel, I did
I believe that on grass roger is the strongest of all time actually, in Wimbledon he beat sampras he beat Roddick who you can say anything you want but on grass he would beat 3/4 of the players there are today, nadal , murray and also djokovic. then in the second part of his career or from 2013 onwards he physically declined and had to change his game to stay at the top, and made another 4 finals, winning one and losing three of which 2 only for details. despite Djokovic being at the top of his career physically. I who have watched tennis for the past 20 years can tell you that the level Federer has reached on grass in his 5 consecutive Wimbledons djokovic I have never reached on grass. it's not a matter of opponents. you can say that Federer has improved even if it's a bizarre theory, I wouldn't say improved, but rather changed. which is different, but I should be here talking about tennis tactics and that would be too broad a discussion. however the fact is that for ultimate tennis statistics federer is the strongest in history on grass. I'm not saying it but the numbers.
@@jack-gq9ik Roger WAS the best, then Novak got the best of him.
Very detailed and well done your analysis... I enjoyed watching. Thank you
Pokidao si brate jos jednom, odlicno istrazivanje i analiza! Jedva cekam taj novi video o Nadalu i o brzini podloga.
Interesuje me samo ko je po tebi drugi najbolji teniser svih vremena, Fedja ili Nadal? I sta mislis o Alkarazu, zbog cega je onoliko dobar?
Hvala brate. Ko je drugi je dobro pitanje. Mogao bi se napraviti i video o tome :) Po meni Federer, ali moracu to malo da istrazim.
Sto se tice Alkaraza, ne znam jer nisam gledao ni minutu tenisa ove sezone. Bojkotujem.
Another possibility Federer still went deep in most of the tournaments after 2011 is because he got preferential draw treatment?
Like Djokovic at ao 2023
No it’s because 2011 federer was an elite player who was still in his prime but just faced tougher competition.
Im a big Fed fan, but I appreciate your work in justifying your position with solid arguments.
Great video, keep going 👏🤯
Shit video, he only chose stats that suit his propaganda
Perfect analysis. Well done 👏👏👏
Thank you for doing great job man. I watch your videos before 3 days for the first time and I cant stop watching. Keep going bro. Godbless
Btw your narration is so cool and professional great job💪
They are going to hate this! Buts the truth needs to be heard. Well done my friend
the video we've been waiting for
Great analisys as always
Amazing video. Finally putting nails on the old man’s coffing
How can you calculate some different era players' level with statistics ? Stats showing the difference between them, not how strong they are actually. You can get this stats number between amateur players also. To formalize this is an example: the first pro player got 10 points, second pro player 5, so the first stronger 2 times. Amaturer case: first got 10 points, second 5, so first stronger 2 times. So If your stats investigation working that means pro and amateurs skill of playing are the same, that nonsense. Sorry for bad english
🔥🔥🔥🔥although I'm afraid to share it with a fedfan😂😂
Great video !!!! :)
Great Video
Great insights!! I’m just waiting for “mysterious nadal injuries” video 🙏
Amazing logical explanation
Your intellectual standards are quite low if you take this propaganda by logic
@@robertorequena6866
Where is the evidence that suggests Federer had declined in 2011? How do you know that he was worse than say, 2009? Or 2007?
Great job mate, your fan since video #1
Can we see surface specific Elo with number of matches played on each maybe? Or is there any place you could point me to that information?
I appreciate a lot of time and effort has gone into this video and it certainly raises some interesting points. But I substantially disagree with its analysis. For what it’s worth, I think Nadal and Djokovic are both greater than Federer. I think Djokovic is probably the GOAT, although there’s a decent argument for Nadal. But we don’t need to pretend that Federer was playing at his best level in the 2010s in order to show this.
First, Elo honestly isn’t particularly useful in tennis discussions IMO as it has numerous flaws due to its slow ability to change and react as well as a general inflation over time. This is readily apparent from the video where Federer’s 2004 season where he went 74-6 and won 3 slams is rated lower than his 2013 season where he went 45-17 and made no slam finals. Note he had ZERO slam losses to Djokodal that season. 2016 also ranks higher with him going 21-7 and not even winning a title. Djokovic’s Elo is virtually the same following his 2011 year when he won 3 slams and dominated everyone (2446) compared to after Roland Garros in 2017, when he was injured and held zero slams (2434).
As for inflation, consider Sampras’ highest ever Elo was 2407, lower than every single one of Federer’s years from 2004-2018. Even if we use the video’s data, Federer’s Elo from 2011 onwards never matches 2005-2008. So the decline is still there; it just happens earlier than 2011.
Next we have Grand Slam match winning percentage. We’re told that it’s 88% before 2011 and 84% after. Even here, there is still a decline, but the numbers don’t tell the full story. If we look from 2004-2010, his match winning percentage is 93% (169/182). From 2011-2019, it’s 84% (149/177). A much more substantial difference. Even if we take away one of the 2011-2019 years to make it 8 years for both periods, he has nearly double the losses (13 vs 24). And it’s not as if Djokodal are entirely to blame. He has 8 losses to them in 2004-2010, 12 in 2011-2019. Not enough to explain the difference.
Next we have consistency. Federer lost before the QF only ONCE from 2004-2010. In fact, he only lost 3 times before the SF and 7 times before the Final. From 2011-2019, he lost 6 times before the QF, 13 times before the SF and 23 times before the Final. Clearly a HUGE difference. The pre-2011 numbers in the video are dragged down significantly by the pre Wimbledon 2003 slams, which no one would consider Federer’s prime.
There’s more that can be said but I’ll leave it there for now. Federer was obviously great post 2010 and played at a high level. But it’s clear that there was a decline following his victory at the Australian Open 2010 due to a combination of factors including age, motivation and injuries.
True. You can clearly see that even though he maintained a consistent ELO 2011 onwards, it was still considerably less than his younger years in the video. Prime Djokovic still struggled against Federer in 2011, barely eking out a win at the US Open and losing at the French. I'd take Roger over Novak if they both met when they were 24.
I think performance wise Djokovic and Federer are close at their best. for me, Federer played some of his best tennis post 2010, and it showed, he has beaten Nadal and Djokovic on a few occasions where both Nadal and Djokovic were in superb form, so yea, Federer isn't just a side character.
@@casey4664 While that is true, Djokovic' greatest and most dominant form was early to mid- 2011. Federer really did an outstanding job at the French, he basically made sure that Rafa will win the French and deny Djokovic the Grand Slam. I think Djokovic confidence was hurt losing to Fed at the French, especially on that surface, knowing how much Novak dominated the clay season in 2011, no one thought Federer would win, not even himself.
@@slXD100 To be fair, while Federer played some great matches post 2010, he wasn't on average as good as his 2004-2007 period. In 2011 alone, he was medicore on clay, with RG being the standout. He also lost to Tsonga at Wimbledon, which was somewhat understandable given the superb match Tsonga played, but realistically wouldn't have happened at the height of Federer's prime.
idk man, he literally said that he was loosing cuz competition was stronger and witch he proved. What your numbers say like 2004-2010 he has 8 losses to Nadal and DJokovic but u didnt say that none of them were at their peak at the time. Just admit that players were much well prepared and better than in 2000s( Lets not forget that Roger had negative h2h vs Muray even before 2011). If u watched video clearly u would understand that "combination of factors including age, motivation and injuries" is bullshit, he was too old in 2011 but not in 2017, cmon now. Yes he did "decline" but he wants to prove that he was still at lvl so high he was still most of the time getting deep in tournaments, and when everyone was injured in 2017 he was the one dominating and when Novak came back he stopped winning again in 2018, for me its very clear that if we take his prime to be his 100% after 2011 he was able to play at 95% especially at slams.
The numbers are the only thing that matter. Anything else is just an opinion that holds no validation.
Numbers don't mean shit, since they are influenced by playing conditions, opposition level, equipment, etc
Such a beautiful video
amazing research works
After all, Novak Djokovic.
Mental mountain.
*The greatest of all time*
Nice vid sir. Thank you for all this information.
this is one of the best videos I've seen... I've been telling this to Fedex fans for years, finally explained... Great video, sir.
Another thing to add to the comparison to Connors and Lendl is ranking. As a Federer fan who has followed his career for many years, I know that he was in the top 3 for the majority of the 2011-2019 time period. I don’t think that was the case with Connors and Lendl after they turned 30.
Brutal.
I love this channel. No matter what anyone says, facts and data don't lie.
You're clearly a massive Djokovic fan. Federer didn't declined after 2011 so what you're saying is right. Federer game did improve after 2011, hence the reason his results was better than 2004-2007 despite only winning 4 Slams 2012-2017. The difference in Federer game after 2011 was his speed. I think he lost some of his speed. During the 2004-2007 era he was very quick and was hard for players to hit winners past him. Djokovic was a top 3 player in 2007, and it took him 3 years to win another Grand Slam after 2008 in 2011. Players just don't have the believe that they can beat Djokovic in Grand Slam and that's why he continue to win in this era the current players are a joke
I didn't fully agree with your analysis, but I respected your opinion and your video until the last minute or two, when you're unnecessarily disrespectful and honestly, very very biased.
Firstly I have to say, I'm a Federer fan, and I think Djokovic is the GOAT now. So, no. I'm not writing anything here, to argue Federer is the GOAT, or anything like that. IMO, there are reasonable arguments in favor and against each one of the Big 3, in the GOAT discussion, so anyone of them can be reasonably considered the GOAT. I personally consider Djokovic the GOAT today, despite being a Federer fan.
For starters, I think you cherry picked some very biased information. You analysed some numbers to conclude Federer didn't decline from 2011 on, and that's fine. I respect that, and partially agree with some of your analysis there. But they obviously don't tell the full story. You shouldn't choose some arbitrary statistics and nail the whole discussion around them. Things are complex, you know.
For example... the line you draw for "worthy" players there, is at the very least, super arbitrary and makes you reach a very questionable conclusion. This line of "GS finalists" makes you consider players like Raonic, Tsonga, Berdych and Ferrer as worthy players. Well... all of these guys reached a GS final exactly once. And still... on your analysis, you group them with some great champions as Nadal, Djokovic and Murray. And... sorry... but they're very obviously from a totally different league.
So... if we analyse Federer's results on Grand Slams from 2004 to 2010, the only "non-GS champions" that defeated Federer were Del Potro in the US Open 2009 (he than became a GS champion, since he defeated Federer on the final) and Djokovic that proceeded to win 19 more Slams on the following years. So... if we use your exact method, but drawing the line of "Grand Slam champions" as being the worthy players instead of Grand Slam finalists, we could very easily demonstrate that Federer did in fact decline from 2010 on, since he started losing to the likes of Tsonga, Berdych, Soderling, Raonic, Cilic, etc. Guys that never scratched Federer until 2010.
Also... your analysis of Federer's performance in 2017 and 2018 is really narrow sighted. You chose some "great players" that were supposedly non-present, and pin pointed that as the sole reason Federer had a better performance. Firstly, there were a lot of other players that had good seasons in 2017 and 2018 that you didn't point there, such as Dimitrov, Zverev, Thiem and Kirgios. Some of them, would be considered as "worthy players" by your own definition, btw. Also... you can't really claim the players you pointed out were all just "out of the circuit" during these entire seasons. Wawrinka and Berdych were pretty healthy during the start of the season 2017, and only got injured later, for example. Stan was a real contender for Roger on his AO and IW titles, btw. And that's not to mention the fact that as you pointed out yourself, not only Nadal and Cilic were there, but also, 2017 was one of Nadal's best seasons. Definitely Nadal's best season since 2013.
And more importantly... you're also ignoring a lot of facts that made a huge difference in Roger's game in those seasons. You ignored the fact that Roger hired a new coach. You ignored the fact that Federer improved his backhand and developed a new strategy to fight Nadal. You ignored the fact that Roger made a much shorter season, meaning he played less tournaments, and ended up playing substantially better on the ones he played. The difference is blatant. In 2015, Federer could play at a super high level for 2 sets. From 3rd sets on, his game declined considerably. In 2017, playing less tournaments, Federer could play 5 sets at a high level.
Federer is a human. Like most players, he peaked from around 23 to 28. From 29 to 32 he still had a great performance, but a little less consistent than before overall. And from 33 on he declined harder. He still had great performances, because he's a genius (the same way, Nadal and Djokovic still overperform these days). But is he still on the same level he was when he was 25... 27? Of course not. So... I'd like to offer a much simpler explanation to Federer's decline. He stopped winning from 2011 on, because he had the other two GOATS at his toes, peaking when he was aging. While Federer had Djokovic and Nadal (and maybe we should also consider Murray) peaking behind him, the generation that was supposed to peak while Djokovic and Nadal started aging was the generation of Dimitrov, Nishikori, Raonic, Del Potro, Goffin, etc. These were the guys that were supposed to be challenging Djokovic and Nadal since 2013. They're good, but nowhere near comparable to Djokovic, Nadal and Murray. Most of them suffered from injuries. Only now, about two generations later, we apparently have a generation that might give Djokovic and Nadal a hard time with Medvedev, Rublev, Zverev, Tsitsipas and Thiem.
I find it hilarious that you claim Federer's a canary, for "showing" how strong is the tennis era, after demonstrating some of his numbers actually had risen during Djokovic's dominance era. So... by your own definitiion, Federer's performance proves Djokovic's reign is the weak era, right?
There's no need to cheat on Federer's legacy to argue Djokovic is the GOAT. In fact, Federer's greatness only makes Djokovic even greater.
@@victormanuelbustamantealva6803 That's not my argument at all. I don't think Nadal and Djokovic are better than Federer. I'd actually argue the 3 of them are about the same level, and Federer stopped winning because the other two GOATs peaked when he started declining. As I wrote earlier, IMO the 3 of them are GOATs, and there are reasonable arguments in favor of anyone of them in the GOAT discussion.
Great Research
Great Videos indeed. I can imagine how many works you have done here. Thank you very much. Tennis is totally personal, head to head games. The more the big wins, the more likely the GOAT! As simple as that, Novak is the big winner, and he is always my favourite and the GOAT. Just one more suggestion, I am aware that you mention the term "ELO rating" of the players. In some videos, you show the ELO ratings of the big players. I wonder, given the slams are likely played by all the top 128 players / seeds (except those WCs and low ranks for the replacement of the top absentees), is it possible to obtain all the ELO ratings of all the players in each slam since the start of the weak era as suggested up to the retirement of Fed (or now), and get the average of the ELOs in each slam and compare them. Perhaps this may show something? or more evidence? I don't know the result but I just think, is this helpful? Anyway, thank you very much for your afford. I think people should appreciate your works here.
He didn't get old, but he was still older than djokovic and nadal. When you are playing those two even w/ just a few years disadvantage...
5 years older than nadal and 6 older than djokovic. huge differences in tennis.
Ok to be honest and fair federer may have declined after 2011 because of his consistent back and knee problems. In my eyes federer is just so darn talented that to beat players other than nadal and djokovic he doesnt need to be at 100%. But for nadal and djokovic he absolutely does. But yes no doubt djokovic breakout year 2011 made him an insane player after 2011.
But you cant discredit federer’s 2017 seoson as he did takeout nadal in the finals of australia after not competing for 6 months because of his knee surgery.
But yes no doubt djokovic is higher than federer in the goat race bcs of number of slams but to say federer era was weak is false. Federer had to deal with prime del potro, fernando gonzales, a guy named andy roddick that probably would have 5-6 slams if federer didnt exist who also has a winning record on djokovic, prime davydenko who has nadals number, nalbandian who took out the big 3 all in one tournament one time, and prime gasquet and tommy haas, and lets not forget safin who took out djokovic at australia only losing 3 games, and fed still had to deal with agassi who was getting old but still a top ten player. Federers era had the same top 10 players every single year
Now djokovic aparent strong era is beating players that are not consistent at all. Rankings are all over the place for the top ten atp. Djokovic had to play berretini in the finals of one of the wimbledons and respectfully berretini is not consistent enough to be grandslam contender. Federer beat berretini in the 2019 wimbledon only losing 5 games.
But yes djokovic is one of the greatest of all time but for me federer will always be that guy that everyone know. The things fed is able to do with the ball and have a such beautiful attacking game is the type of player we will probably never see again. The way he covers the court so gracefully while never even as to much grunting while playing is amazing. There will always be players like novak and nadal who will just grind and play it safe. Im not saying thats bad but federer changed the game to his style and we can only strive to be a fed like player someday
Look at total points winning %, probably instead of elo rating it has numerous flaws due to its slow ability to change and react as well as a general inflation over time.
That is a good analysis! You just proved how good Federer was. He is like wine gets better with age!
I think Rafa broke his confidence a little bit because Rafa just keeps on beating him. Although Roger keeps beating everone else. Then Novak started to get really good. Eventually, age and injuries started to catch up.
I think it's best to just accept reality and be happy with the matches we got to experience...
Yes Djokovic is more successful, therefore you can call him the GOAT.
Yes there was a time Federer was GOAT, too, but not anymore.
Yes Djokovic would usually beat Federer in their later stage of rivalry, but their matches were often close (something that's hard to show in statistics), with Federer not falling much behind Djokovic. Tennis-wise, Federer was able to beat Djokovic up until 2019 (he actually did, once), but Djokovic is tougher mentally which resulted in more wins. Wimbledon 2019 showed that - statistically, Federer played better tennis and even won more points. But he lost, because Djoko destroyed him mentally.
So, as a Fed fan, I like that fact that Djokovic, even though outcome-wise the better tennis player, had usually a tough time beating Federer up until the end of their rivalry, even failing to do so once in a while.
Also, the 2018 Paris SF is one of their best matches ever IMO, and it was during the time when Djokovic was hitting his prime again with Federer slowly declining compared to 2017. 7-6, 5-7, 7-6...So close!
BTW Great content, Goatkovic! Appreciate the time and effort you put into those videos, they are very informative and well put together.
When Roger fans tell you he was old and over the hill at 29 you just have to laugh at them
Very interesting channel
Goatkovic, I have seen all over UA-cam about Federer's retirement and their relentless coverage of this guy. I heard from Tennis TV that he reinvented tennis. I am not a tennis expert, so can you provide any rebuttals on this Federer phenomenon especially his SABR tactics? I have a hunch that this tactic existed long before SABR was invented. It was coined in 2015, which explains why he stopped losing and had more consistent results, which pretty much explained in your video. I think Federer is overrated like Michael Jordan in basketball and Tom Brady in gridiron American football since they are treated as perfect beings rather than actual tennis legends that have strengths and flaws. Do you get the vibes that they are treated like gods or mythical beings instead of actual players? I am aware that Djokovic didn't really reinvented tennis, but rather mastered it to win consistently and win many grand slams. He brought in the mental aspect of winning matches against the player, the crowd, the media, and the tennis establishment all at the same time. I am a Djokovic fan and he's my second favorite player (Andre Agassi will always be my No.1 favorite player), but I don't overrate Djokovic since I try to treat tennis as an athletic competition, and I know his worst aspect of the game (overhead smash) and he had histories of meltdowns and fitness problems before 2011. I see that Roger Federer is treated like a perfect player and the media have the balls to say that he reinvented tennis. If I have to pick the guy that changed the game forever, that would be Ivan Lendl for his power baseline game that transformed to today's modern tennis. That's how to reinvent tennis, plus the racket that changed over the years. I want you to make more videos exposing the tennis establishment and it's becoming more annoying when I want to watch some tennis with the other players. By my conclusion of observing what's covered in the media, Federer and Nadal are the media establishment. Your content is awesome and I would love to see more of your videos. I am not sure if this is a good place for me to make comments here since there are an army of forces that try to diminish Djokovic's greatness and they happened to be Federer fans and those who are from the media and the tennis establishment. Seeing Djokovic lost 7970 points from the ATP rankings of the first week of 2022 to today is so frustrating to see thanks to politics. And sir, you earned a sub. Great work!
The reason why I started this channel is to bust the myths that you're talking about. The mainstream media has portrayed Federer and Nadal as better players and people than they really are, and has done the opposite with Novak. Most of Federer and Nadal fans, as well as casual viewers, have been indoctrinated so badly that they have a fit when presented with facts.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
You don t realise how much Federer grew tennis and tennis level.
Massive Federer fan here and I love your videos. I just want to point out the fact that I'm a huge Djokovic fan also and I do agree with you video that Federer didn't decline in his ability in fact he improved a lot of aspects to his game, but I just think it's a little bit unfair to compare lendl and Connors win percentage going down with Federer's. I just think that Federer and Djokovic and Nadal were such amazing talented players that they were aleague above everyone else they were playing against, so it was almost as though they were just competing with each other, that's why I think it's unfair to not point out the fact that Djokovic beening younger in his peak would give him an advantage over Federer, don't get me wrong I think Djokovic is the best out of the three but the only way to truly know who is better than the other is by having them both play at the same age during their peak which is obviously impossible in my humble opinion. I just think Djokovic being a little bit younger than Federer during his peak gave him enough of an advantage to get the better of Federer, but don't get me wrong I still think Djokovic is the best out of the three, with his career as a whole and everything you pointed out in any of your other videos, I just think Federer is incredibly naturally gifted and he has a lot of amazing shots in his arsenal. I think Federer has a lot of things that Nadal & Djokovic can't do on the tennis court. I really hope this is making sense and it doesn't seem like I'm contradicting myself but again I love your videos keep them up buddy :-)
100% accurate analysis.
So Federer's baseline game didn't decline from 2013 and on?Oh ok so i was watching a different sport back then thanks for the information
Warwrinka was NOT injured during Federer’s renaissance in 2017, he had to play an amazing match to beat him in AO 17’. Same is true for Berdych in AO 18’ - tough opponent in an amazing shape that Fed had to be brilliant to beat, and which he was.
When you have such a clear agenda, you’re bound to make “mistakes” that enhance your argument, and this case is no different.
Even tho I can agree with the overall point of the video that Roger did become a more complete player after 2011, thanks to Novak and Rafa, I don't agree with some convenient reads of the stats, i.e: the fact that it's tried to explain the late success as a result of people injuries/absence where in AO 17 wasn't the case; also the ELO metric which I find it at least weird considering 2013 was overall a very bad year for him by big3 standards and somehow he has more ELO than 04 and 14 which was clearly better; then the concept of declining which the only thing that I would argue made his decline not even seem like a decline was him wanting to beat Novak and Rafa but that I'd say speaks more about the level of the rest of players because at least physichally I would argue he was in decline, being more susceptible to minor injuries or physical issues in general, playing less and less tournaments, not recovering as well after 5 setters (which tbf were never his strong point). Then mentally (which wasn't also his strongest but was very good) also began to decline but I'd say that's more a merit of Novak and Rafa. Tennistically I'd say I mostly agree, he became a "better" tennis player even tho one can clearly see his forehand became a lot more incosistent, his backhand improved and most importantly and what I think is the BIGGEST reason of his consistency after 2011 his SERVE improved massively (and his net play too) which covered his physical lackings.
In summary, I agree that Federer Decline didn't start at 2011 but at 2013, and the only thing that kept him at the highest level was how strong his serve became combined with his natural technique which I don't think is something that goes away with age.
Also, I'd make a case about how being 5 years older in the 2000s was an advantage for Federer, being 5 years older was a disadvantage for him the more they got into the 2010s.
Michael Trumph in the comment section is an absolute clown. 40-15 baby!
This channel is gonna be dead in a year
Loved the edits and research, I wish this was just a tennis-loving neutral channel overall, good potential but you’re wasting all this talent for spreading this stupid “GoatKovic” propaganda. I wish this channel loved the sport tennis and didn’t stan Nole! Well ig this channel is gonna pull out another kyrgios
Well he did get older. He turned 30 and was past his peak. He wasn’t as good as 2003-7. But he still held his own and reached quarters and semis and some finals too, unlike 99% of players. But he simply wasn’t the dominant force anymore. Novak took over in a spectacular way. He was 23/24 years old and undeniably the new force to be reckoned with. The weird thing was how Roger beat Novak at Roland Garos. I never saw that coming. It did take Novak a long time to level the h2h and go past: by the time Federer was mid 30s. I think while Novak became super consistent, Roger only dominated occasionally and often his game would fall apart unlike his dominant period 2003-7. A good example was Cincinnati 2012 which was a glimpse of his old younger self.
It took Novak a long time to level the h2h because Federer ran up the score early on. But after 7-2 in 2008, the distance remained basically the same until it started shrinking.
@@VT_92 Anybody with an average IQ can understand what I wrote. But let me try to dumb it down for you:
2006: 2-0 Fed
2007: 3-1Fed
2008: 2-1Fed
2009: 3-2 Novak (Novak already has a positive h2h season)
2010: 4-1Fed
2011: 4-1 Novak
2012: 3-2 Novak
2013: 2-0 Novak
2014: 3-3
2015: 5-3 Novak (overall h2h tied)
2016: 1-0 Novak takes the lead
In the 8 seasons after 2008 (when Novak was 20/21), Novak has 6 winning seasons, Federer 1, and 1 is tied.
@@VT_92I won't tolerate such childish name-calling 🤷♂
Make a video about who are the best 10 players of all time ?
He was 30 years old in 2011. By winning 4 slams, 1 ATP Tour Final, and 11 ATP 1000 titles from 2011 onwards just proves how great a player Roger was while Stan, Andy, Rafa, and Novak were all in the primes.
Exactly 💯 so Djokvic fans can make excuses all day long with ( being too young getting off gluten diet injury losing to unbeatable Stan W Blah blah) but if Fed fans point out the facts then all we hear is excuses.. so hypocritical
@@shaunbures7557 The facts are the Novak has crushed and will only continue crushing every tennis record known to man. I agree that Roger's tennis was the most elegant, but "He stroked it so good 😩💦 No one will ever stroke it as good as Roger" is not a goat argument.
@@jeremyneiderhoff Federer prime wasn't as long and prolonged as Novaks but Federer prime was just as good as Novaks .. and this era is weak expect for Alcraraz and mybr Meddy but that's all.. thats the facts. . Unless Djokvic wins this Wimbledon then this coming US Open to make in all 4 in 1 year.. thens hes ultimate Goat and undisputed.. but until then I can't totally think that .because last 3 years have been very weak competition and mybe past 5
@shaunbures7557 Zverev, Meddy, Theim, Carlos all peaked higher than Hewitt and Safin by every measurable metric. If this era is weak I don't know what to call 2001-2007
@@shaunbures7557 btw Roger and Rafa could never sniff a calendar slam. If Novak does it'd be a cherry on top. He's already leagues above
federers ability and performances did improve from 2011 onwards. He may not have won much but he played good tennis and made many finals
I agree that playing good and making finals is an improvement when compared with actually winning.
@@mantaishere level of competition in 2015 was alot higher in the 2000s. Beating someone like berdych is alot harder than baghdatis
@@Tsangass I think Djokovic's best year was 2013. Pushed to 5 by an inspired Wawrinka at the AO, who would prove himself a match for Djoker there just 12 months later; pushed Nadal to 5 at RG for the 1st time; went for his 2nd Wimbledon after failing to defend the previous year but Murray just too good and a better grasscourter than Djoker, and pushed Nadal as best he could at the USO but Djoker just no match for Nadal's USO HC peak.
@@mantaishere lmao ur high. 2015 warwinka> 2013 warwinka, 2015 murray> 2013 murray.
The top 10 and competition in 2013-16 is levels over the top 10 in 2004-07 just like its levels above the level right now.
You're saying roddick, nabadian, davydenko and early djokovic & nadal are comparable to 2014-16 djokovic, Murray, warwinka, nadal?? All 4 have won multiple grandslams and 3 were at their peak while nadal was injured. From 2005-07 only roddick and nadal on clay won majors.
Educate yourself before u speak please
@@Tsangass Who said anything about Roddick, Nalbandian, or 2004-2007?
I repeat: Djokovic was better in 2013 than he was in 2015. Murray and Nadal just too good.
Murray and Nadal did not win multiple slams in the 2014-2016 period, as you claim.
These videos are great for us tennis geeks, very interesting
I’m angry at the narrator and the stats but that doesn’t matter lol excellent video automatic sub
actually at the highest level of tennis the important thing is mentality. For sure Novak has best mental game of all time thats why Federer struggles with Novak and Rafa. 2017 Federer broke the mental block vs Nadal thats why he shows how he own Rafa so good. To be honest if Roger could break the mental block vs Novak 2019 the next win vs Novak in Nitto finals is not a surprise Roger just owns them in tennis talk but in mentality he is not so good as them . Roger is the goat cause in practise he will own Novak and Rafa 6-1 6-1 but in pressure moments he falls down. And it is normal without pressure they will never break his serve Roger is GOAT server so ye he actually is the GOAT of tennis but he is not the GOAT mentally
Tata why he wins in weaker era = weaker mentality in pressure moments. You can see how in Wimbledon 2019 before serving for the match 40-15 Federer dropped the ball out of pressure and Novak saw it. Federer raised his head to see if Novak saw it and he realized Novak was watching his every move thats why his hand got wooden stick and missed the next shot so easy
i was thinking just the same! another one commented how he lost to Tsonga after 2-0, and how he wouldn't have lost in such a case in his prime, to which i replied: my thought is your case is just an example of Federer's worst decline in the 2010's: not the physical, nor playing decline, nor a decline consistency in getting to later rounds at slams, but a mental decline; he lost that champion mindset, began losing to 2nd-tier players from 2-0 up a couple times, began feeling somehow inferior to Djoko... he wouldn't have even lost to him after being two match points up, at his "mental prime" (not to descredit Djoko; i dislike him as a person but he is the goat so far i think; the best at least i have seen since i began watching tennis back in like 2005; but Federer with his former mentality shouldnt have lost even to him/let him into his head with such a score advantage)
@@pablomiyara7697 it is normal to lose Mentally if you are Roger Federer that broke the record for slams and being with so many slams. There is a moment where you feel guilty for winning do much cause it feels not real. Its normal he decline mentally cause the hunger is not the same like the hunger that Novak had because Novak had 1 slam when Roger had 16.
What do you think about the fact that Djokovic and Nadal did not have any all time great players in the younger generation? Federer had Nadal and Djokovic 5/6 years younger than him, but Nadal and Djokovic have had no one for 15+ years.
dude i am not recieving notifications of ur videos, i subscribed and even turned on notifications, great quality videos though
Maybe I'm shadow banned 🙂
I am a recent subscriber, and I am to check this as well. Anything that counters the official narrative gets shadow banned, and that also include things beyond sports too.
As a federer fan I really enjoyed this video. I do mostly agree with it. I do dislike the whole weak era debate, but I admit there are some merit to it. Calling everything pre 2011 a weak era is pretty weak itself. Traditionally analysts split it at 2008 which makes more sense as that is when novak and murray had their breakout and nadal was number 1. Using elo is not really an effective measure of a players form as admittedly any given season the quality of play can dip due to injuries or other circumstances. Roger did not have a major dip in his level post 2011. I would argue the change takes place in 2012 when his backhand started to faulter a bit more. I think the observation many fans would make is that Roger's ability to rally and defend began to steadily decline from 2013. He recognized this and began to be a bit more aggressive but his backhand was still an issue along with his return. He needed to improve these elements earlier if he wanted to win. Particularly I think he would have won more slams had he really put in a lot more agression in his game and possibly take more upset losses. But he chose to be consistently attacking and still had great success. Yeah rafa and novak owned him in those years but they were simply better. Not much to say there, but calling the player who made the mens game a spectacle after the boring early 2000s a canary is a low blow. He is still an alltime player and an icon. He had his flaws and some he overcame too late, but he will always be the Maestro.
This video is more factual than Nadal’s entire career!
Yes, his decline was precipitous from 2011 coinciding with the meteoric rise of Novak on the tennis horizon. Prior to 2011, he was just spanked by Nadal in every match they played irrespective of surface. Nadal was on Federer's head literally and the latter lost the match even before he entered the court. For instance in 2009 Australia open final, Federer had a very easy straight set win against Roddick while Nadal had to slog out for over 5 hours on the court against Verdasco. Nadal had less recovery time too and yet beat Federer in five sets despite playing well below his usual form.The devastating defeat made Federer cry at the prize distribution ceremony muttering "God, it is killing me" and was drenched with tears and unable to continue his speech. This was after he had already won 13 slams and also won Australian open thrice vis-a-vis his opponent who had just won his first Australian open title. This sordid episode shatters the media manufactured myth of Federer being a sportsman and a role model. Infact he was a very bad role model who not only hated losing but despised his opponent who beat him. His post match interviews and on-court behaviour reflected this.
Since Nadal was only his nemesis till 2011, Federer took good advantage whenever he was not at the other side of net and won many grand slams. But once Novak came to the scene with such a meteoric rise thrashing both Federer and Nadal, the former's decline was more swift. After turning 30, Federer won just 4 grand slams compared to Novak who has won 10 now and likely to improve and even Nadal who has won 8. His master series title count is unimpressive in comparison to Novak and he was never able to win Monte Carlo, Rome etc., all through his career.
Federer who was hailed till 2018 as the GOAT by his stupid fans citing his accomplishment of hauling up the highest grand slam tally, are now reduced to citing the style of his game and so-called personality etc., to bolster his status which is increasingly in doldrums.
@@dewman7477 More excuses when the fact is that he should have retired if not fit. That said, Federer won 3 of his slams post 2016 when Novak was not fit That is not an excuse but to state the obvious.
@@dewman7477 I am aware as to why despite Federer and Sampras playing just once, you bring the latter time and again to lend some vigour and moral legitimacy to the purportedly tough competition during Roger's era, when facts contest otherwise. Roger beat Sampras the only time they played and it was a freak win as Federer then 19 yrs old was outside even top 50 or perhaps even lower ranke. It was not an intense to rivalry by any means applying common sense, but an upset that is common place in Tennis.
Again correlating Federer's rivalry with Agassi to Novak and Nadal is also looking very odd given that Agaasi is 11 years older than Federer whereas Nadal and Novak are younger to Federer only by 5 and 6 years respectively. Also, all the three times they played till 2002, Agassi won and Federer was between 21 and 22 then. It was by no means teen years.
Nadal on the other hand got the better of Federer even in his teen years and the less said about the lop sidedness of this rivalry, better it would be for Federer's legacy because it is such an embarrassment as I have already iterated. The irony is that Federer turned around this embarassment to an extent only past 36 yrs.
@@dewman7477 Nadal ???
I have already cited that Agassi is 11 years older than Federer and the analogy just doesn't work. But you seem to be always in a denial.
@@dewman7477 When Federer was 32 or 33 or 34, Novak was 26, 27 or 28. Whereas when Agassi was 34 Federer was 23. Simple. Age difference dude. That makes a lot of difference and Agassi wasn't the main rival to Federer either. He retired in 2005 itself.
And give up this prime business for once. It sucks 😭😭🤣 It has been rebutted by me so many times and am tired dealing with it.
@@dewman7477 11 is greater than 6. A gap of 5 is a lot in Tennis if age is to become the criterion.
Best channel exposing Nadal's doped up career.
In a few years down the line, Nadal's doping will be hopefully exposed and people will flock back to this channel and appreciate the bluntness and facts.
I agree with with your argument but have few things to say. You cannot say that tennis player is better in his 30s than in his 20s. You cannot say that not for Djokovic not for Federer. They are just so good that they maintain high quality play later in their career. Federer in 2017 won two grand slams because of bad quality of opponents agreed but also it mindboggling that player with almost 37 was number 1 in the world. From my point of view the age difference between the big three is the main reason for dominance in head to head which later resulted i psychological fear of Djokovic because of many tough defeats in big tournaments. I am gratefull that Federer was able to go head to head with Djokovic so late in his career which resulted with epic battles between the 2. Great analysis!
Convincing %100 .... great video, accurate analysis... thanks 👍 .
I think most Federer fans themselves know deep inside that Federer is not the GOAT .... but they don't admit it ... they live in denial .
..... same thing apply on Nadal .
Fed's the best player ever to play the game and his peak tennis has never been matched he was pretty much unbeatable and a magician on court. Whichever stats and silly tables you want to throw in the mix unfortunately won't change that fact.
@@mw7517 Look who it is again!!! The crying Federer fan. The guy that has no facts to back up Federer, just emotions 😥😥😥
@@JoeV03 in time he will accept the truth
Novak Djokovic is the only G.O.A.T and the fedal fans should just stop embarrassing themselves honestly.
Savage channel!
I like how someone else mentioned Nadal’s ‘mysterious’ injuries.