I think that boat sailed after the Wimbledon game. In all honesty he really should be out of the picture given his age and experience, the fact that he's still there going deep in Slams says a lot about him (and the depth of the field as well, but that's a story for another time)Time to accept that there are no more Slams in Federer's future.
NoBTW, Murray in any other period of tennis history wins at least 5-6 Slams. He's been the hardest done by competing with these 3 guys.
yeah he really surprised me at wimbledon 2012 (and even that was more about murray choking under pressure after a set and a half of outstanding tennis and federer taking advantage) but that was his last hurrah...if someone else takes out novak (and rafa) before he meets him and if his path to the final is not too strenuous, he may be able to win another one but those are huge ifs right now, the odds are significantly against him...Time to accept that there are no more Slams in Federer's future.
Yeah, I'm thinking back to the late 90s, early 2000s and can easily see him taking down Agassi and Sampras............................BTW, Murray in any other period of tennis history wins at least 5-6 Slams. He's been the hardest done by competing with these 3 guys.
No he shouldn't, this isn't true at all. Look at the quality he is playing at, he'd be top 4 in most eras. Just because he's 34, its irrelevant. Watch his actual match quality, and tell me he's not a top 4 player 10 years ago. I mean he took a set against Novak, a player who hit a level last night that many tennis commentators said they had simply not seen before.I think that boat sailed after the Wimbledon game. In all honesty he really should be out of the picture given his age and experience, the fact that he's still there going deep in Slams says a lot about him (and the depth of the field as well, but that's a story for another time)
It's also 100% objectively false. So weird.Holy **** at someone in the press conference implying that Novak has faced a lower quality of opponent to get to number 1 compared to Federer. Good on Fed for shutting that down, saying its disrespectful and calling it stupid.
Never said he'd walk all over them. I think he would create enough opportunities to win around 5 Majors though, in most eras. He'd have a similar resume to Becker/Edberg and be considered on roughly that level, had the top 3 been slightly less dominant. He's lost 6 Slam finals to Federer/Djokovic FFS. Don't know how many semifinals he's lost to them two and Nadal as well, must be close to double figures.Yeah, I'm thinking back to the late 90s, early 2000s and can easily see him taking down Agassi and Sampras............................
Not to mention walking all over Borg, McEnroe and Connors.
Rod Laver, Ken Rosewall, Lew Hoad - mere speed humps for Murray.
Please.