Djokovic is the GOAT

[skin27]

Weak era by what standard? Pete's era was better? Who did he play? Andre. Yeah so what? Give me an example? Fed, Nadal and Novak are considered to be the top 3 all time players..

Did Jordan beat Larry and Magic to win his rings in their primes? No he beat Barkley and Gary Payton..

2004 to 2007 was weak era..that was the time fed won most of his slams..

[dbreiden83080]

2004 to 2007 was weak era..that was the time fed won most of his slams..

You have to do better than that.. Weak by what standard in history? Give me an example? Cite an era, a champ, and the compe ion faced..

[dbreiden83080]

why you put Pete in the argument when we are talking about about djokovic and federer..LoL

Because your argument is no argument at all with ZERO Context. You keep saying the same thing with no new info..

[skin27]

You have to do better than that.. Weak by what standard in history? Give me an example? Cite an era, a champ, and the compe ion faced..

federer has no compe ion from 2004-2007.. Rod ? Hewitt? Lol..

[dbreiden83080]

federer has no compe ion from 2004-2007.. Rod ? Hewitt? Lol..

Still waiting on that example? Both of those men are HOF players BTW.. BUT Still waiting?

[skin27]

Still waiting on that example? Both of those men are HOF players BTW.. BUT Still waiting?

lol..hall of fame? Hahaha..those to are scrubs.. the real compe ion for federer starts from 2009 upwards..

rod and hewitt aren’t in the same level of djokovic and nadal..haha

[dbreiden83080]

lol..hall of fame? Hahaha..those to are scrubs.. the real compe ion for federer starts from 2009 upwards..

rod and hewitt aren’t in the same level of djokovic and nadal..haha

Uh yeah no . Those are 2 of the top 3 of all time. So Jordan needed to play Bird, Magic and Wilt all in their primes I guess..

You got an example?

[skin27]

Uh yeah no . Those are 2 of the top 3 of all time. So Jordan needed to play Bird, Magic and Wilt all in their primes I guess..

You got an example?

why put Jordan in the argument? Lol

so just accept federer played inthe weak era with rod and Hewitt as his main rival..haha

[dbreiden83080]

why put Jordan in the argument? Lol

I accept your surrender..

[skin27]

I accept your surrender..

lol..your argument is idiotic..haha

just accept federer is a choker at usopen..haha

[dbreiden83080]

lol..your argument is idiotic..haha

just accept federer is a choker at usopen..haha

I gave you about 5 chances to provide some context, and you never did.. You are out of chances..

[skin27]

I gave you about 5 chances to provide some context, and you never did.. You are out of chances..

i already gave you..you just ignore it..

[dbreiden83080]

i already gave you..you just ignore it..

I asked you for examples of other era's and champs. You gave me nothing. Fed's era is weak compared to who and what? 1 more chance. Example?

[skin27]

I asked you for examples of other era's and champs. You gave me nothing. Fed's era is weak compared to who and what? 1 more chance. Example?

we are talking about federer not other champs..lol

see?
federer’s era is weak compared to nadal and djokovic..

djokovic and nadal faced federer all througout their career.. but federer doesn’t have a rival from 2004- 2007..gets?

thats why federer has 20 slams..

[dbreiden83080]

we are talking about federer not other champs..lol

see?

That is why you lose the argument. You have not made an argument. You keep saying "He choked" but provide no context or examples to prove that to be true. He won 5 US Opens and 20 GS les. So when you say "The era is weak", and I ask you for historical context to prove that point, which is how you evaluate all athletes historically in sports, You should have something to add if the point is valid.. You don't..

[skin27]

That is why you lose the argument. You have not made an argument. You keep saying "He choked" but provide no context or examples to prove that to be true. He won 5 US Opens and 20 GS les. So when you say "The era is weak", and I ask you for historical context to prove that point, which is how you evaluate all athletes historically in sports, You should have something to add if the point is valid.. You don't..

did federer won us open after 2008?whe he has great rival in djokovic and nadal? Now answer that..

[dbreiden83080]

did he won us open after 2008?whe he has great rival in djokovic and nadal? Now answer that..

Went over this like 9 posts ago? Just go back and re-read.. Saying he is not winning 20 with all of them in their prime is a no discussion. That is NOT insulting Fed.. Nobody could do that... Novak has won majors with Fed being older, and Nadal being injured. Same deal.. He ain't winning 16 with Fed and Nadal all at their best for a whole career.. Compare Fed's whole era to other all time greats players. And tell me where his was so weak in comparison? Pete has 14 majors. Would he have 14 with Roger, Nadal and Novak all in the same era with Pete? Context Son. I have been teaching class all night.

[skin27]

Went over this like 9 posts ago? Just go back and re-read.. Saying he is not winning 20 with all of them in their prime is a no discussion. That is NOT insulting Fed.. Nobody could do that... Novak has won majors with Fed being older, and Nadal being injured. Same deal.. He ain't winning 16 with Fed and Nadal all at their best for a whole career.. Compare Fed's whole era to other all time greats players. And tell me where his was so weak in comparison? Pete has 14 majors. Would he have 14 with Roger, Nadal and Novak all in the same era with Pete? Context Son. I have been teaching class all night.

you did not answer my question..you just spin your answer..that’swhyyoulose The argument boy..

the only answer is yes or no and you can’t even answer..lol

[skin27]

2004 to 2007 is a weak era in men’s tennis..haha

[dbreiden83080]

you did not answer my question..you just spin your answer..that’swhyyoulose The argument boy..

I answered it like 5 times. I concede Fed DID not win at the same level. Point is nobody could or would.. Not possible.. BTW Fed has a long list of HOF players he beat in finals.

Nadal
Novak
Hewitt
Rod
Agassi
Murray

But the era is weak right?

[skin27]

The real compe ion between federer djokovic and nadal is from 2009 to 2016

[skin27]

I answered it like 5 times. I concede Fed DID not win at the same level. Point is nobody could or would.. Not possible.. BTW Fed has a long list of HOF players he beat in finals.

Nadal
Novak
Hewitt
Rod
Agassi
Murray

But the era is weak right?

hewitt and rod doesn’t belong to the likes of sampras, Agassi, djokovic and nadal..haha

im just telling you how federer got his 20 slams..because you always brought up federer has 20 slams tothegoatcobversation..lol

[dbreiden83080]

hewitt and rod doesn’t belong to the likes of sampras, Agassi, djokovic and nadal..haha

Agreed. But Pete only played Agassi.. And Jim Courier a little before he fell off. Pat Rafter was pretty good.. None of them are Nadal and Novak..

Fed, Nadal and Novak play with Pete and Pete may not win 10 Majors. I like the matchup with Nadal on Grass and HC, but not with Fed or Novak.

[skin27]

The end of the day djokovic will pass federer as the goat..

that’s why federer didn’t want to retire yet because he scared that djokovic and nadal can surpass his slam tallies..


take note that Sampras only played until 31 years old

[skin27]

Agreed. But Pete only played Agassi.. And Jim Courier a little before he fell off. Pat Rafter was pretty good.. None of them are Nadal and Novak..

Fed, Nadal and Novak play with Pete and Pete may not win 10 Majors. I like the matchup with Nadal on Grass and HC, but not with Fed or Novak.

that’s why I said federer played inthe weak era because his only rival are rod and Hewitt..haha

that’s the reason why federer has 20 slams.. he won 10 of those from the weak era 2003 to 2007