| |
BGonline.org Forums
Potential OT Posts
Posted By: Stick In Response To: Potential OT Posts (Christian munk-christensen)
Date: Thursday, 27 March 2025, at 11:53 a.m.
How long do you think a player needs to sustain his superior A-game in order for that to be relevant?
For me it would be a season. If you wanted it to be longer that's fine, nobody touches Fed from '04-'07 where he won 11 out of 16 Grand Slams.
As for Federer having a superior A-game, I guess that is subjective, and having negative head-2-head against his 2 main rivals doesn't really indicate he had a superior A-game. Or at least if he really did have the highest peak, then he couldn't sustain it for long enough for that to show in the data.
If you search that internet thing almost any article you click on will have Fed's 2006 as the best/one of the best in men's tennis history. (always above Djokovic but sometimes behind like Laver's '69 season when the Open Era began) He was 92-5 that season with four of those losses being to Rafa, three of those being on clay. Any time a similar discussion comes up there will be the asterisk of 'Rafa on clay' because he was just too good. (Nadal leads Novak 20-9 on clay in case you need that stat) Fed's other loss that year was to Murray.
Even on the surface that's a sick stat when you lose to only two people all season and those two would be grand slam winners. I don't know if you're ignoring the 5-6 year age gap between the players or what for some of your argument but those 5-6 years mean a lot. Novak didn't start racking up wins against Federer until 2011, way past Fed's prime.
Stick
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.