Federer in his prime was just unbelievable. There always were better servers, players who had a better forehand, but at the end nobody was as good as he was. He played with confidence and his skillset was unmatched. To me he is the GOAT!!!
@@redwoodtrees7068 He had one of the best forehands. It declined noticeably from 2007 onwards when his technical changes to the shot became very apparent. His forehand from 2003 to 2006 was probably the best forehand ever. He definitely doesn't have the best serve of all time either.
@@Monaleenian While his 2006 forehand is probably the best, all other forms of his forehand were only really surpassed by Rafa during his whole career. And I don't think there was anyone at his height during his career who served better, only players who were 6'5+. So in most matches he played he had a better forehand AND serve than his opponent, and in every match at least his forehand or serve was better than his opponent because there is no one who has both a better serve and forehand than Roger.
What declined in Federer’s game was his lateral movement out wide to this forehand side. In order to compensate for that, he had to leave more room open on the backhand side. Having a single handed backhand, it opened the door for players like Nadal and Djokovic to exploit that weakness. Before that decline in his lateral movement,prime Federer was the best ever.
Djokovic has the greatest overall career and Nadal is the god of clay, but if I had to watch highlights of just one of the Big 3 forever, it would be Federer. The movement, the attack, the grace -- there's nothing new to be said about his game, but it's just as marvelous now as it was at the time.
His topspin backhand was not reliable under real scrutiny and while a very good frontrunner his mentality under pressure was exposed brutally by Djokovic in particular. Deciding 5th set win rate in the biggest career-defining matches of just over 1/2 vs more than 3/4 for Djokovic. Federer played 10 tournament finals over his career with a deciding set tiebreak - he won .... 1 out of the 10.
@@huzcer I disagree. His topspin backhand really was only a liability against Nadal's high lefty spinner. Djokovic turned the tables after Fed turned 30, but if you've played competitively you'd be surprised what a difference that six year age gap makes.
@@danmeadowsmusic federer was still winning slams and beating the younger Nadal at 36 who is less than a year older than Djokovic when Djokovic was not in the picture with his elbow. Djokovic had him in his pocket in the top 3 inches. They played 19 tournament finals and Federer couldn't even win 1/3 of them.
It's why Federer is the only individual sportsperson in history to create TWO eras. The 'Fed era' and the (mythological) 'Weak era'. Sometimes you're so good, you transcend people's understanding. Fed did that with his peak+prime tennis. And proved it with his "post-prime" tennis.
@@thesoccergodExacto! De hecho era tan bueno y había tanta diferencia con el resto que los hacía parecer "débiles", cuando en realidad es justamente la prueba de su genialidad. La era weak es la de Nole, que empezó a ganar todo cuando Roger y Nadal ya estaban en las últimas (les dió vuelta el historial en sus etapas de viejo y lesionado respectivamente) y sumado a una next gen que nunca supo hacer pie contra los 3 históricos. Un dato crucial que la gente no toma en cuenta porque analiza todo linealmente, pero sin tomar en cuenta rivales, solo a modo de referencia para que se tenga pauta de la poca confrontacion que tuvo Nole o al menos uno sospecha sobre la misma, es que a partir de los 31 años (lejos de su prime 2011) en 5 años ganó 12 GS, más de los que ganó de los 20 a 31. Es decir, ganó más GS en la mitad del tiempo que le tomó llegar a los otros 11 (10 años), y encima siendo mucho más grande y en menor nivel. Por ende, a groso modo, ya se da cuenta quien tuvo verdaderamente la era "weak". Pero bueno, como la gente a fin de cuenta ve que 23 es más que 20, dice que el primero es mejor que el segundo y punto. Así de sencillo y estúpido. Gran comentario. Abrazo!
@@RealisticAndTrue is tennis and chill RF´s fanboy channel? It does not look like from the channel´s name. Even the creator of the video did not dare to call Federer GOAT, because he is not. Poor Roger always got bullied like a little boy once Djokovic and Nadal hit their prime. hihi :)))) Beating pathetic Blake, Phillipu.s.s.ys and Gasquet was much easier for Mr. Lindor.
Faster courts were so much suitable for roger. He was a different player on fast courts . After few years courts started playing slow and i think that did a damage to federer
exactly ... if for e.g the wimbledon kept the old grass, I dont think Rafa 2008 would have beaten him neither would have Nole in 2014 or 2019 and 2015 at the US open. Federer was always 1 generation older than Rafa and Nole which many people tend to forget - so when he was young and rising, courts, rackets and style of play was much more different to when Rafa and Nole started. His aggressive skillset, court coverage and volleys would have been near unplayable on faster courts - although I know Rafa and Nole being legends themselves, would have adapted accordingly too.
Roger played on medium to medium-slow courts. Pete played on fast and medium courts, and he was hurt when they started to slow Wimbledon down, which is the reason Fed was able to squeak out a win on him there.
@@farid1406 Go look at the 2009 Wimbledon Final, Federer over Roddick. 3 service breaks in the entire match; Federer only broke Roddick once - in the 34th game of the 5th set. Roddick had 27 aces; Federer had 50. And then tell me that the court was medium to medium-slow.
@@williamzame3708 The court was medium-slow, or possibly medium. The reason for the dominance of serving was that that final was played during a very sunny, dry day which made topspin much more effective, and that helped both guys get more kick and pace on their serves. Federer was also very clearly shaky during that final, slicing his backhand all the time and relying on serve to keep him in the match. That wasn't Roddick, that was Federer having anxiety over the fact he was playing to break Pete's slam record. A medium court is like what Sampras and Rafter played on during the 2000 Wimbledon final, which had been slowed down over a period of a decade from the extremely fast conditions of the early 90s. Up until 2000, the grass was of a type that wore down quickly and caused an uneven surface which resulted in extremely unpredictable bounces. That made returning serve, and crushing groundstrokes hard because your timing was always going to get messed up. A player like Pete who had an epic serve, was extremely fast and had great reflexes, and was able to read key points in a match dominated that setup because he could cruise on serve, then play one great return game and get the break and that would get him the set. He didn't need a consistent bounce because he of his speed and reflexes which allowed him to handle a bad bounce, and because he was only looking for one opportunity to break. Over the 90s they gradually padded up the courts which is why in the late 90s, there were more and more rallies. It's probably why Agassi made the final in 1999, and only failed to do so again in 2000 because he lost an epic semifinal to Rafter. In 2001 a new type of grass was installed that made the bounce consistent and that had the effect of slowing down the court, since the ball wasn't going to shoot away from you anymore so you could predict where it was going much more easily, and because the ball bounced up higher which gave you more time. That's why there were far more baseline rallies from that point on: you finally had enough time and stability to load and explode with your groundstrokes consistently enough to threaten a serve and volleyer on both the serve and the volley.
@@wanzacharywanisa5762 They are from a different generation and Federer is one of Alcaraz's idol. At the end of the day, Alcaraz and other younger players would study what made the greats so good and LEARN from them. So give some respect rather than make an immature comment.
The comment below is the most comprehensive, when RF is in top form he makes his opponent look like an amateur. I remember the time-period of this video, RF created as much fear as Tyson in his first years as a professional. if you think i am joking than you just do not know.
Look how fast the courts were in the 2000s. They slowed down the courts too much in 2010s. Really hurt Federer, he would've won few more Slams with faster court speed.
He was incredible. He would toy with oponents for a few hits or games , making them think they had chance, and then dispose of them when ever he pleased. He will always be in a category all to himself !
È sempre un gran piacere rivedere i punti fantastici di un campione meraviglioso quale è stato. Oggi è tutto molto potente, ma non vediamo più le magie di Roger! Bisogna esser capaci a farle, comunque! Buonasera
Courts back then played so so so much faster than anything today. By 2008 all Courts were slowed down majorly to allow longer rallies. Wish they kept the courts the same. For us who grew up watching Federer through his career and the players he played. We know how good he was. One word untouchable. Only one other player that was like this and it was Sampras. Players preyed they didn’t play well and even then you knew it was gonna be along night.
Had there been more grass events in the calendar, incl how it was with Slams on grass, and had the hard surfaces remained quicker, Roger would be on 25 Slams. Novak's best attribute is getting the ball back in play. Something he could consistently deliver on the slowed down/equalised surfaces of the modern game. Rafa had clay. But if grass, clay, hard & indoor, were evenly spread, and the non-clay surfaces had remained quick, there would be No one even close to Roger.
@@naveenbalineni235 Yes Djokovick benefitted from the slowing down of courts and balls. But he was very close to Roger on hard courts already. But in my opinion a slowed court definitely gives Novak an extra 5 points in a 5 hour match that he otherwise could absolutely NOT run down. Well Fed would've won another 4 or 5 majors from Novak if he had 5 more points in all those close matches. But one could also argue the courts should've always been slow in which case they are still close but now Novak takes the lead, and Rafa and Federer come in 2nd
16 Slams in his 20's, the greatest decade in any players career, followed by 4 more Slams in his 30's. Nadal got 8 Slams in his 30's but Djokovic got 12 (and counting) in his 30's that's where the GOAT race was won and lost but Prime Federer was unstoppable that's my take.
I remember the last one the most : as it was the version of Djokovic with his trademark white+blue/red lines that had beaten Federer in Montreal. What a glorious match that was also. Roger surely remembered and made enough adjustments to squeeze by in this one :: but clearly the rivalry was on. The overal winner : Novak - but mostly, us - the fans.
The backhand is just monsterous and it is insane the degree of flexibilty he could use it too. I honestly cannot understand it and i use a 1h myself its so mind boggling like hes bending the ball what a master lol
Here is something I always said, at that tennis was played differently, a more forward to net game, and quite more flat shots. "Old school tennis". Federer is the ultimate version of that tennis. I like to see Nadal as the prototype and Novak as the advance version of today's tennis. More spin, more focus on counterattack rather than serve and volley and flat shots. I believe that if you watch tennis for many years, you have already noticed the change.
Whether you put him 1, 2, or 3, it must be said that he was the man who ushered in this fantastic era. Federer raised the bar so high and Nadal and Djokovic answered the call.
I don't buy into the GOAT wars like a lot of fans seem to enjoy. To me he's the best ever. Have you seen that meme video with a montage of Messi doing Messi things and the voice over is a british commentator, overwhelmed with excitement screaming "IT'S NOT THE STATISTICS! IT'S NOT THE STATISTICS! You can't measure in numbers a person who can balance a balloon in a wind tunnel with a needle!" Lol, and to me that's what being the GOAT is about.
Beaten in his prime by Nadal. Fed never ever had a winning H2H vs. Nadal. Nadal ended Fed's prime in 3 steps: 1) Total humiliation at the 2008 RG final; 2) Outplayed him in the most memorable match in recent times: the 2008 Wimbledon final; 3) Reduced him to tears at the 2009 AO final.
I remember the Us open final 2004 against Hewitt: Fed won 60 76 60, but in the second set , it was only Fed who made some more mistakes, Hewitt played not better, so I want to say that Fed was completely overwhelming and could easily won higher.....
Imagine if they kept the AO court with the fast green surface? Federer would probably have 10 AOs under his belt while Fakesurgeryovic would probably have 2 😂😂
Federer was amazing ,but to be double bageled in a slam final That only confirms what i have always been saying Hewitt was lucky to play at the end of Sampras era and before Fed ,otherwise he would have had 0 slams
they are both retired but id still pay the price of a grand slam final to watch Lopez vs Federer. Especially if its on a grass court. especially if its Wimbledon. Modern tennis especially the monotone surface and bad scheduling of masters 1000 and murder of davis cup its not so nice to watch
joker will be considered GOAT, but it doesn't matter if he wins 30 slams - Fed will always be the most loved player. too bad he made the same mistake that Sampras and Connors did - stuck with his original racquet for too many years. if he had upgraded to a larger head earlier, he would have framed less backhands and won more slams.
Bro you did a segment on footwork yet you fast-forwarded the clip to skip over the footwork? Are you insane?? We can handle the extra second of a video, our attention isn't so vacuous
Prime Federer was undoubtedly one of the greatest, but he never faced a player like Alcaraz. Even a young Rafa gave peak Federer plenty of trouble on hard courts, and if they had met in their primes, Carlitos would’ve undoubtedly pushed Fed to his limits and given him a real challenge.
@@JameSongMaker It's not nonsense though, is it? It's true. The winners from the 2007 US Open onwards are: Backhand volley Smash Backhand Backhand Backhand Forehand Backhand Ace Backhand lob Backhand Backhand return (forces the error. Not a winner) Serve that forces an error (Not a winner) Forehand volley (with some good forehands in the buildup) Forehand Backhand Backhand smash (some good forehands in the buildup again) Backhand slice return that draws an error Everyone can see that his forehand was far less potent at that point than it was in 2005. He shouldn't have made such drastic technical changes to the shot.
Unchallenged until challenged by unflinching steel mentality Djokovic… Fed 1st 12 Grand slams was in weakest era by inconsistent grand slammers like Roddick, Hewitt & old wear n tear Agassi. He would have stopped at 17 had it not been for Djokovic injury between mid 2016 & early 2018!
yes federer is the goat . He was robbed by atp with the slowing of tennis courts in the las 20 years by his primary favorite surface to play, 3 grand slams taken by djokovic only by pure LUCK after saving match point from federer so the real gs score will be 23-23, not to mention that 65% of all tennis courts were medium paced during djokovic peaks.Thats the facts but also there are subjective reasons : its federer most talented elegant and fluid player ever existed? yes its federer most complete player ever existed yes! does federer have best shot selection from any player in history yes. So why djokovic ? because in atp 65% of tenis courts are not fast hard courts or grass like this us open or not clay in this case nadal would have had most gs in history.. It was just luck for him made by atp.
Fedsqaush had lots of success with B players but when it came to nadal/djoki he only won 33% of their GS matches that includes only winning 33% GS finals too! Fed never beat nadal once at french and lossed 3 times in a row to Djoki wimbledon finals on his supposed best surface!! Fed was weak mentally, weak backhand and never evolved his sqaush game ..He will be remembered with selling the most running shoes bcause that is the only STAT he has left
Your opinion is bunk. Federer was playing Big-3 level tennis his entire career, and only looked like he was playing bad players in 2003-2008 because he was just that good. Djokovic conveniently started winning when Federer turned 30. Nadal is honestly the most impressive of the 3, doing the most at the youngest age. Fed's been retired for 2 years now and we're still make new videos about him lmao. This will last for decades. Do you really think that will be the case for Djokovic?
@@AstroPatel so desperate no one cares about ur videos in the end the stats and most Slams is all that counts and fed has nothing left except most running shoe sales...U sound like a typical armchair tennis player who drank the marketing koolaid.. make more videos so fed can sell more running shoes!! ..Next u will say not fair tom brady u were too old..
@@canski5646 "in the end the stats and most Slams is all that counts" Lmao, bet you don't even play tennis. Casual opinion is meaningless "U sound like a typical armchair tennis player" you sound like someone who is blind. Federer's played the best tennis ever at his peak, Nadal had the most impressive statistics at a young age, Djokovic won the battle of time. Someone like you cannot comprehend a more nuanced argument than "hurr durr big number go up". All 3 are amazing, but it's obvious that you can't see that PS I don't even know how much shoes he sells. Most people care about Federer's tennis and what he did for the sport.
No,. What he left is a legend and a generation of people who only watched tennis because of him. I never knew of anyone who watched tennis just because of Novak ( except sSerbes, of course). The love for Fed is unmatched. Nadal did not try to compete with that love, because he is an intelligent and humble man. He knew he did not have that kind of appeal. Djokovic on the other hand is not humble and never got over the fact that no matter how big his advantage in wins, he will never be as loved and admired as Fed.
Bro you did a segment on footwork yet you fast-forwarded the clip to skip over the footwork? Are you insane?? We can handle the extra second of a video, our attention isn't so vacuous
Federer in his prime was just unbelievable. There always were better servers, players who had a better forehand, but at the end nobody was as good as he was.
He played with confidence and his skillset was unmatched.
To me he is the GOAT!!!
er? he has the best forehand and one of the best serves generally.
@@redwoodtrees7068 He had one of the best forehands. It declined noticeably from 2007 onwards when his technical changes to the shot became very apparent. His forehand from 2003 to 2006 was probably the best forehand ever. He definitely doesn't have the best serve of all time either.
@@Monaleenian While his 2006 forehand is probably the best, all other forms of his forehand were only really surpassed by Rafa during his whole career.
And I don't think there was anyone at his height during his career who served better, only players who were 6'5+.
So in most matches he played he had a better forehand AND serve than his opponent, and in every match at least his forehand or serve was better than his opponent because there is no one who has both a better serve and forehand than Roger.
No one had a better forehand
What declined in Federer’s game was his lateral movement out wide to this forehand side. In order to compensate for that, he had to leave more room open on the backhand side. Having a single handed backhand, it opened the door for players like Nadal and Djokovic to exploit that weakness.
Before that decline in his lateral movement,prime Federer was the best ever.
Djokovic has the greatest overall career and Nadal is the god of clay, but if I had to watch highlights of just one of the Big 3 forever, it would be Federer. The movement, the attack, the grace -- there's nothing new to be said about his game, but it's just as marvelous now as it was at the time.
100% agree. 👍
Yup!
yeah, Joko's game is boring
@@raulescobar7433 If you think Madrid SF 2009, Wimbledon F 2023 or Cincy 2023 F were boring, not sure what to tell you.
Peak Federer was just unmatched. He made me fall in love with tennis as a kid. You had to be there
Most elegant, creative and complete player to ever hold a tennis raquet. To me he's n.1 all time by far
His topspin backhand was not reliable under real scrutiny and while a very good frontrunner his mentality under pressure was exposed brutally by Djokovic in particular. Deciding 5th set win rate in the biggest career-defining matches of just over 1/2 vs more than 3/4 for Djokovic. Federer played 10 tournament finals over his career with a deciding set tiebreak - he won .... 1 out of the 10.
@@huzcer Still n.1 tennis player I liked most to watch. Ever.
@@huzcer I disagree. His topspin backhand really was only a liability against Nadal's high lefty spinner. Djokovic turned the tables after Fed turned 30, but if you've played competitively you'd be surprised what a difference that six year age gap makes.
@@danmeadowsmusic federer was still winning slams and beating the younger Nadal at 36 who is less than a year older than Djokovic when Djokovic was not in the picture with his elbow. Djokovic had him in his pocket in the top 3 inches. They played 19 tournament finals and Federer couldn't even win 1/3 of them.
15- 24 vs Nadal, including 6-8 on outdoor hardcourt.😄
Peak Federer dismantled most of his top opponents like nothing, top 10 players, multiple Major title's winners.. made them look like amateurs.
It's why Federer is the only individual sportsperson in history to create TWO eras.
The 'Fed era' and the (mythological) 'Weak era'.
Sometimes you're so good, you transcend people's understanding. Fed did that with his peak+prime tennis. And proved it with his "post-prime" tennis.
Weak era
Everybody but Nadal who could beat him on any surface in his prime.
@@TheFalx No.
Federer leads both hard court h2h and on grass.
@@thesoccergodExacto! De hecho era tan bueno y había tanta diferencia con el resto que los hacía parecer "débiles", cuando en realidad es justamente la prueba de su genialidad. La era weak es la de Nole, que empezó a ganar todo cuando Roger y Nadal ya estaban en las últimas (les dió vuelta el historial en sus etapas de viejo y lesionado respectivamente) y sumado a una next gen que nunca supo hacer pie contra los 3 históricos. Un dato crucial que la gente no toma en cuenta porque analiza todo linealmente, pero sin tomar en cuenta rivales, solo a modo de referencia para que se tenga pauta de la poca confrontacion que tuvo Nole o al menos uno sospecha sobre la misma, es que a partir de los 31 años (lejos de su prime 2011) en 5 años ganó 12 GS, más de los que ganó de los 20 a 31. Es decir, ganó más GS en la mitad del tiempo que le tomó llegar a los otros 11 (10 años), y encima siendo mucho más grande y en menor nivel. Por ende, a groso modo, ya se da cuenta quien tuvo verdaderamente la era "weak". Pero bueno, como la gente a fin de cuenta ve que 23 es más que 20, dice que el primero es mejor que el segundo y punto. Así de sencillo y estúpido. Gran comentario. Abrazo!
Crazy how the skills shown made Mcenroe say he will probably be the GOAT with just 3 GS under his belt
Good observation. No one like that today.
Greatest player of ALL TIME... by far
is Novak GOATkovic. :)) Cope.
@KrakenKraken-j5i Well since you are here on Roger Federer video, whining... we see who is coping 😎
@@RealisticAndTrue is tennis and chill RF´s fanboy channel? It does not look like from the channel´s name. Even the creator of the video did not dare to call Federer GOAT, because he is not. Poor Roger always got bullied like a little boy once Djokovic and Nadal hit their prime. hihi :)))) Beating pathetic Blake, Phillipu.s.s.ys and Gasquet was much easier for Mr. Lindor.
@@KrakenKraken-j5i Go watch Cinncinatti final 2012, prime djokovic, while you are busy coping with reality 😎. That will give you something to whine 🤣
@@KrakenKraken-j5i Djok isn't even among the candidates for that title, suck it
We were lucky to see him play. Pristine tennis!
The swagger and poise on the court is insane. The man was born to play this sport.
Federer 4 Tennis, Bo Jackson 4 Football, Jack 4 Golf.
Faster courts were so much suitable for roger. He was a different player on fast courts . After few years courts started playing slow and i think that did a damage to federer
exactly ... if for e.g the wimbledon kept the old grass, I dont think Rafa 2008 would have beaten him neither would have Nole in 2014 or 2019 and 2015 at the US open. Federer was always 1 generation older than Rafa and Nole which many people tend to forget - so when he was young and rising, courts, rackets and style of play was much more different to when Rafa and Nole started. His aggressive skillset, court coverage and volleys would have been near unplayable on faster courts - although I know Rafa and Nole being legends themselves, would have adapted accordingly too.
Roger played on medium to medium-slow courts. Pete played on fast and medium courts, and he was hurt when they started to slow Wimbledon down, which is the reason Fed was able to squeak out a win on him there.
@@farid1406 Go look at the 2009 Wimbledon Final, Federer over Roddick. 3 service breaks in the entire match; Federer only broke Roddick once - in the 34th game of the 5th set. Roddick had 27 aces; Federer had 50. And then tell me that the court was medium to medium-slow.
@@williamzame3708 The court was medium-slow, or possibly medium. The reason for the dominance of serving was that that final was played during a very sunny, dry day which made topspin much more effective, and that helped both guys get more kick and pace on their serves. Federer was also very clearly shaky during that final, slicing his backhand all the time and relying on serve to keep him in the match. That wasn't Roddick, that was Federer having anxiety over the fact he was playing to break Pete's slam record.
A medium court is like what Sampras and Rafter played on during the 2000 Wimbledon final, which had been slowed down over a period of a decade from the extremely fast conditions of the early 90s. Up until 2000, the grass was of a type that wore down quickly and caused an uneven surface which resulted in extremely unpredictable bounces. That made returning serve, and crushing groundstrokes hard because your timing was always going to get messed up. A player like Pete who had an epic serve, was extremely fast and had great reflexes, and was able to read key points in a match dominated that setup because he could cruise on serve, then play one great return game and get the break and that would get him the set. He didn't need a consistent bounce because he of his speed and reflexes which allowed him to handle a bad bounce, and because he was only looking for one opportunity to break. Over the 90s they gradually padded up the courts which is why in the late 90s, there were more and more rallies. It's probably why Agassi made the final in 1999, and only failed to do so again in 2000 because he lost an epic semifinal to Rafter. In 2001 a new type of grass was installed that made the bounce consistent and that had the effect of slowing down the court, since the ball wasn't going to shoot away from you anymore so you could predict where it was going much more easily, and because the ball bounced up higher which gave you more time. That's why there were far more baseline rallies from that point on: you finally had enough time and stability to load and explode with your groundstrokes consistently enough to threaten a serve and volleyer on both the serve and the volley.
@@farid1406how do you learn😊 all this
You're looking at the greatest shot-maker the game has ever seen!
Alcaraz or sinner would have destroyed “peak” Federer 😂😂😂😂
@@wanzacharywanisa5762biggest copium ever😂
@@wanzacharywanisa5762 shot making capability of fed is too far from them
@@wanzacharywanisa5762 They are from a different generation and Federer is one of Alcaraz's idol. At the end of the day, Alcaraz and other younger players would study what made the greats so good and LEARN from them. So give some respect rather than make an immature comment.
And will ever see. Federer's game was tennis's fulfillment.
I only smile and shake my head when I hear young people say Federer peaked in 2017....😂😂😂
The comment below is the most comprehensive, when RF is in top form he makes his opponent look like an amateur. I remember the time-period of this video, RF created as much fear as Tyson in his first years as a professional. if you think i am joking than you just do not know.
I get teary eyed whenever i see these old videos of the great Fed play. What a joy!!
Always a joy to watch Federer game.
Look how fast the courts were in the 2000s.
They slowed down the courts too much in 2010s. Really hurt Federer, he would've won few more Slams with faster court speed.
this federer is the best tennis player the world has ever seen
He was incredible. He would toy with oponents for a few hits or games , making them think they had chance, and then dispose of them when ever he pleased. He will always be in a category all to himself !
È sempre un gran piacere rivedere i punti fantastici di un campione meraviglioso quale è stato. Oggi è tutto molto potente, ma non vediamo più le magie di Roger! Bisogna esser capaci a farle, comunque! Buonasera
Courts back then played so so so much faster than anything today. By 2008 all
Courts were slowed down majorly to allow longer rallies. Wish they kept the courts the same. For us who grew up watching Federer through his career and the players he played. We know how good he was. One word untouchable. Only one other player that was like this and it was Sampras. Players preyed they didn’t play well and even then you knew it was gonna be along night.
This style of tennis is pure domination. Never have we seen anyone else play like this and win everything.
Had there been more grass events in the calendar, incl how it was with Slams on grass, and had the hard surfaces remained quicker, Roger would be on 25 Slams. Novak's best attribute is getting the ball back in play. Something he could consistently deliver on the slowed down/equalised surfaces of the modern game. Rafa had clay. But if grass, clay, hard & indoor, were evenly spread, and the non-clay surfaces had remained quick, there would be No one even close to Roger.
Djokovic wud still remain scary close given his record on Grass and Fast courts. Just look at his resume!
@@naveenbalineni235 Yes Djokovick benefitted from the slowing down of courts and balls. But he was very close to Roger on hard courts already. But in my opinion a slowed court definitely gives Novak an extra 5 points in a 5 hour match that he otherwise could absolutely NOT run down. Well Fed would've won another 4 or 5 majors from Novak if he had 5 more points in all those close matches.
But one could also argue the courts should've always been slow in which case they are still close but now Novak takes the lead, and Rafa and Federer come in 2nd
You look at the court speed here and compare that to the ATP finals 2023-24. Its apalling how slow they have made the courts over the years.
People said the same thing about the mid 2000s when they compared it to the 90s.
Prime Fed won the match in the locker room before the match clock even started ticking!
I love seeing Roger pass the grunters.
Roger GOAT King of the court, entire court, not just the baseline!
16 Slams in his 20's, the greatest decade in any players career, followed by 4 more Slams in his 30's. Nadal got 8 Slams in his 30's but Djokovic got 12 (and counting) in his 30's that's where the GOAT race was won and lost but Prime Federer was unstoppable that's my take.
easily the most talented and skillful tennis player ever
Fed’s peak out shines anyone elses.
Goat to me.
Yes, absolutely! But I like the 2017 Fed even more! With the neo backhand, even Rafa had no chance.
2:02 Respect to Federer celebrating respectfully after Nalbandian missed the volley.
Double bageled his opponent in a grand slam final!!!!
Great clips & editing
Nalbandian got his revenge twice back to back against Federer in late 2007 in the masters series.
He was also incredible in 2017
I remember the last one the most : as it was the version of Djokovic with his trademark white+blue/red lines that had beaten Federer in Montreal. What a glorious match that was also.
Roger surely remembered and made enough adjustments to squeeze by in this one :: but clearly the rivalry was on. The overal winner : Novak - but mostly, us - the fans.
Win or loose federer is the most beautiful tennis player ever. Period
The backhand is just monsterous and it is insane the degree of flexibilty he could use it too. I honestly cannot understand it and i use a 1h myself its so mind boggling like hes bending the ball what a master lol
Here is something I always said, at that tennis was played differently, a more forward to net game, and quite more flat shots. "Old school tennis". Federer is the ultimate version of that tennis. I like to see Nadal as the prototype and Novak as the advance version of today's tennis. More spin, more focus on counterattack rather than serve and volley and flat shots.
I believe that if you watch tennis for many years, you have already noticed the change.
Can you believe 2007 US Open was the last time Federer ever beat Djokovic in a GS final?...Insane to think about it
His best remains the best....
{ L E G E N D A R Y A U R A }
Whether you put him 1, 2, or 3, it must be said that he was the man who ushered in this fantastic era. Federer raised the bar so high and Nadal and Djokovic answered the call.
The first two commentators wanted to take Federer home 😂
He didn't play power Tennis or grinder tennis....When Federer was playing it was just Great Tennis.
7:50 now that's cold
"Ohh, Federer" LOL BRUH the glazing by the female commentator is crazy in the 2005 us open clip 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
I don't buy into the GOAT wars like a lot of fans seem to enjoy. To me he's the best ever. Have you seen that meme video with a montage of Messi doing Messi things and the voice over is a british commentator, overwhelmed with excitement screaming "IT'S NOT THE STATISTICS! IT'S NOT THE STATISTICS! You can't measure in numbers a person who can balance a balloon in a wind tunnel with a needle!" Lol, and to me that's what being the GOAT is about.
Beaten in his prime by Nadal.
Fed never ever had a winning H2H vs. Nadal.
Nadal ended Fed's prime in 3 steps: 1) Total humiliation at the 2008 RG final; 2) Outplayed him in the most memorable match in recent times: the 2008 Wimbledon final; 3) Reduced him to tears at the 2009 AO final.
I remember the Us open final 2004 against Hewitt: Fed won 60 76 60, but in the second set , it was only Fed who made some more mistakes, Hewitt played not better, so I want to say that Fed was completely overwhelming and could easily won higher.....
Poor Roddick lol
Fed kept pulling crazy shots one after the other playing against him
Roddick was hopeless.
Poor Roddick, basically spent his whole career having his ass handed to him by Federer.
Without Federer, tennis has become so boring.
Why does the video start with "spit on it" 💀
oh please consider going through the rest of the GS that are missing! such a good compilation
Imagine if they kept the AO court with the fast green surface? Federer would probably have 10 AOs under his belt while Fakesurgeryovic would probably have 2 😂😂
Bruh where is Wimbledon haaa you’re showing prime fed and not including him on grass…..?
Goat
0:02 hawk tuah
Federer was amazing ,but to be double bageled in a slam final
That only confirms what i have always been saying
Hewitt was lucky to play at the end of Sampras era and before Fed ,otherwise he would have had 0 slams
they are both retired but id still pay the price of a grand slam final to watch Lopez vs Federer. Especially if its on a grass court. especially if its Wimbledon.
Modern tennis especially the monotone surface and bad scheduling of masters 1000 and murder of davis cup its not so nice to watch
Didn't have recollection of the double bagel to Hewitt.... I mean it's Lleyton for fucks sake, not the 500 ranked in the atp!!!
joker will be considered GOAT, but it doesn't matter if he wins 30 slams - Fed will always be the most loved player. too bad he made the same mistake that Sampras and Connors did - stuck with his original racquet for too many years. if he had upgraded to a larger head earlier, he would have framed less backhands and won more slams.
Bro you did a segment on footwork yet you fast-forwarded the clip to skip over the footwork? Are you insane?? We can handle the extra second of a video, our attention isn't so vacuous
"Someone who may go down as the greatest player to ever play the game..."
Then along came Novak.
Fed still is the greatest. Novak is the winniest.
@@anetadygon3478 If stats are out the window, then it's Pete who is the Goatiest.
He’s playing scrubs. Cmon lol
Prime?
Federer's prime was 2017.
Prime Federer was undoubtedly one of the greatest, but he never faced a player like Alcaraz. Even a young Rafa gave peak Federer plenty of trouble on hard courts, and if they had met in their primes, Carlitos would’ve undoubtedly pushed Fed to his limits and given him a real challenge.
It's nearly all backhand highlights by the US Open of 2007. The forehand had lost a lot of its potency by then due to his technical changes.
That's nonsensical. 😂
@@JameSongMaker It's not nonsense though, is it? It's true. The winners from the 2007 US Open onwards are:
Backhand volley
Smash
Backhand
Backhand
Backhand
Forehand
Backhand
Ace
Backhand lob
Backhand
Backhand return (forces the error. Not a winner)
Serve that forces an error (Not a winner)
Forehand volley (with some good forehands in the buildup)
Forehand
Backhand
Backhand smash (some good forehands in the buildup again)
Backhand slice return that draws an error
Everyone can see that his forehand was far less potent at that point than it was in 2005. He shouldn't have made such drastic technical changes to the shot.
there was a stat that in 2004, 2005 and 2007, excluding Nadal, the only player Federer lost to was Murray (once)
and that´s the reason why Federer got humiliated by mentally unstable Safin in semifinal of AO 2005? xD What a great shi.t. stats you have got. :DDD
@@KrakenKraken-j5i yes it is, thank u bro
just weak era, his prime is an illusion
Unchallenged until challenged by unflinching steel mentality Djokovic…
Fed 1st 12 Grand slams was in weakest era by inconsistent grand slammers like Roddick, Hewitt & old wear n tear Agassi. He would have stopped at 17 had it not been for Djokovic injury between mid 2016 & early 2018!
yes federer is the goat . He was robbed by atp with the slowing of tennis courts in the las 20 years by his primary favorite surface to play, 3 grand slams taken by djokovic only by pure LUCK after saving match point from federer so the real gs score will be 23-23, not to mention that 65% of all tennis courts were medium paced during djokovic peaks.Thats the facts but also there are subjective reasons :
its federer most talented elegant and fluid player ever existed? yes
its federer most complete player ever existed yes!
does federer have best shot selection from any player in history yes.
So why djokovic ? because in atp 65% of tenis courts are not fast hard courts or grass like this us open or not clay in this case nadal would have had most gs in history.. It was just luck for him made by atp.
cope and cry more loser.... meanwhile poor Roger got bullied by Prime Djokovic and Nadal. Like a little swiss boy. hihi :))
Weak era
Yeah novax chokovid is weak era goat
Ur Dad Roger is the true goat. So suck it up
Novak played the likes of Kyrgios, Anderson, Tstitsipas, Berretini, and Ruud in 6 of his finals
@@uhhmmm-g8c you cant reason with novak fans theyre babies
@@MistahhMingus yeah
Fedsqaush had lots of success with B players but when it came to nadal/djoki he only won 33% of their GS matches that includes only winning 33% GS finals too! Fed never beat nadal once at french and lossed 3 times in a row to Djoki wimbledon finals on his supposed best surface!! Fed was weak mentally, weak backhand and never evolved his sqaush game ..He will be remembered with selling the most running shoes bcause that is the only STAT he has left
Your opinion is bunk. Federer was playing Big-3 level tennis his entire career, and only looked like he was playing bad players in 2003-2008 because he was just that good. Djokovic conveniently started winning when Federer turned 30. Nadal is honestly the most impressive of the 3, doing the most at the youngest age.
Fed's been retired for 2 years now and we're still make new videos about him lmao. This will last for decades. Do you really think that will be the case for Djokovic?
@@AstroPatel so desperate no one cares about ur videos in the end the stats and most Slams is all that counts and fed has nothing left except most running shoe sales...U sound like a typical armchair tennis player who drank the marketing koolaid.. make more videos so fed can sell more running shoes!! ..Next u will say not fair tom brady u were too old..
@@canski5646 "in the end the stats and most Slams is all that counts"
Lmao, bet you don't even play tennis. Casual opinion is meaningless
"U sound like a typical armchair tennis player"
you sound like someone who is blind. Federer's played the best tennis ever at his peak, Nadal had the most impressive statistics at a young age, Djokovic won the battle of time. Someone like you cannot comprehend a more nuanced argument than "hurr durr big number go up". All 3 are amazing, but it's obvious that you can't see that
PS I don't even know how much shoes he sells. Most people care about Federer's tennis and what he did for the sport.
No,. What he left is a legend and a generation of people who only watched tennis because of him. I never knew of anyone who watched tennis just because of Novak ( except sSerbes, of course). The love for Fed is unmatched. Nadal did not try to compete with that love, because he is an intelligent and humble man. He knew he did not have that kind of appeal. Djokovic on the other hand is not humble and never got over the fact that no matter how big his advantage in wins, he will never be as loved and admired as Fed.
At his prime he was the best ever
beating teeanagers and pathetic Blake, Phillipu.s.sy.s or Gasquet? vauuuuu :DDDDDDDDDD Can I laugh at you? :))
Bro you did a segment on footwork yet you fast-forwarded the clip to skip over the footwork? Are you insane?? We can handle the extra second of a video, our attention isn't so vacuous