Did Federer decline in 2011?

[@tacombustiona2663]

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

[@SHVideografie]

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.

[@lmmkv6737]

@@SHVideografie ok, where are the stats?

[@sawgames8623]

@@SHVideografie Do you actually think you can evaluate the relative quality of Federer's game better than Federer himself?

[@insanedegeneratemoron9794]

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

[@insanedegeneratemoron9794]

@@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"?

[@michelvoortman4725]

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.

[@TheTororist]

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

[@Ineddiblehulk]

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.

[@goranpilipovic2368]

Nobody have said he is not the great player my friend,big respekt to Roger,but he is not the GOAT

[@justchillin6314]

It is, and that’s why Fed is the second greatest.

[@HKashaf]

@@TheTororistagainst what competition?!?

[@nigelpop]

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!!

[@serbian_nationalist14]

True🙏 love Goatkovic

[@mw7517]

Appreciate what 😂😂😂 Just watch tennis what is this load of nonsense lol.

[@nigelpop]

@@mw7517 🤫

[@mw7517]

@@nigelpop Can't be a full shilling if you base who your best player is on nonsense stat tables 😂 Watch the game bro

[@nigelpop]

@@mw7517 Of course I watch ahaha 🤫🇷🇸❤️

[@cross1]

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.

[@worawatsr9803]

He only won slams in 2017 because Djokovic was injured.

[@AtmosphericAtmosphere]

We all know wawrinka is weak against Federer

[@harbilito4910]

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

[@SebastianKopacz]

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

[@CopR8r]

you're the best !!!!!! you deserve 100k subscribers. congrats, congrats huge and essential work for tennis history

[@guruk]

U make complex opinions sound logically simple and convincing.. Kudos to u m8 ! 👌💪

[@vegeta1729]

Absolutely brilliant research and analysis! Kudos

[@petersu4869]

under rated channel, u deserve more success

[@tristan3272]

your videos are incredible, so entertaining. spitting facts, respect to you

[@ashishverma3892]

🔥🔥🔥🔥although I'm afraid to share it with a fedfan😂😂

[@petarmicic4565]

Great quality, please keep making these

[@civotamuaz5781]

That thumbnail is probably RF's most unflattering picture ever.

[@sheedo1999]

First video I've commented on this Goatkovic guy. As a fed fan I have no issues with saying Djokovic is more complete player and a BETTER player. Based on titles he will he the goat. But I find it hilarious that hes trying to prove Federer was a better player after 2011 to make Djokovic wins against him more meaningful. What next? Federer 2019 Wimbledon version was the best version of him? From 2011 to his retirement he won 4 grand slams but this guy tryna make everyone believe he was getting better? No chance. If he was consistently winning at least 1 grand slam a season then I'd even say he was at a good level but thats not true.

[@goatkovic]

It's hilarious that Fed fans on one hand argue that the players in his era were not weak despite the fact that they didn't win much, and on the other hand claim that he declined in 2011 because he didn't win much anymore.

[@serbian_nationalist14]

Novak Djokovic is the only G.O.A.T and the fedal fans should just stop embarrassing themselves honestly.

[@Shiljamannn]

Djokovic won 12 slams after 30yo... So "got old" doesn't hold a candle....

[@fg92626]

some say Federer was born old

[@AC-wl7ve]

i dont disagree that novak is the goat but competition was pretty weak for a while there. its hard to say how fed would have fared if he was 6 years younger, but i also believe many facets of feds game got a lot stronger late in his career.

[@mlscott3831]

great video. well done in all aspects.

[@AC-wl7ve]

i also believe fed was better when he was older. he lost some of that athletecism of a younger man, but his ball striking and tennis iq was just unreal later on.

[@BennyStrikesBack]

I do believe Djokovic is the best tennis player of all time. But for different reasons. I think some arguments here don’t take their competition into account. I do believe that the competition in the early 2010s was weaker than in the mid 2000s. Therefore Nadal and Djokovic had it a little easier to win matches as they came into their prime. At this point Federer was just a little out of his prime. Therefore he was easily able to beat pretty much anybody but Djokovic and Nadal.

[@jockelocopajdoman]

Great analisys as always

[@meetvignesh3331]

Such a beautiful video

[@matijagospic4777]

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!

[@NICAsworld]

Nole is undoubtebly the GOAT. But cannot minimise Roger's impact to the game. He was the one who increased the level to what it is today. So dominant, so consistent. Weak era... so many tough players: Safin, Davidenko, Nalbandian, Ferrer, Berdych, Blake, even Nadal. And the list can continue. He could only beat whoever was in front of him. Nole was indeed proven better in the head to head matches. And Rafa had Roger's number until the last years of Federer's career, when he kinda figured it out. I do agree Roger did not decline after 2011, but actually improved. Most times he did not win finals due to Nole and Rafa. That does not make him a failure. I guess he was forced to improve mostly due to these 2 great rivalries. Overall, I still consider him the 2nd best, after Nole. When you look at weeks at no 1, wins againts top 10 players, overall performance on all surfaces, he is just behind Nole. Rafa is only leader on clay. Where Roger lacked was mental strength, who was inferior just to Nole and Rafa. But talent wise was above both.

[@fg92626]

Safin, Davidenko, Nalbandian, Ferrer, Berdych, Blake won 2GS combined

[@NICAsworld]

@@fg92626 Agassi had 8. I forgot him. Roger had quite a rivalry with him. 8-3 head to head for Roger. Murray and Wawrinka were around as well.

[@fg92626]

@@NICAsworld 33yo Agassi owned Fed still 3:0 the big 4 FED/NAD/MUR/WAW 48 GS combined that is a competition

[@NICAsworld]

@@fg92626 There is only the Big 3: Nole, Roger, Nadal. Indeed Murray was above the rest, besides these 3, and had the longevity. Stan had a few amazing years, but cannot compare it with Murray. Did not have the longevity in results. Those numbers are now, at the end of their careers. They pushed each other to become better and to reach those numbers. And Roger is older than both Nole and Rafa with 5 and 6 years. Most big champions retired around 30 or less. When Nole became great, Roger was almost 30. Rafa was around when Roger reached his peak as results. Rafa was maybe the greatest teenager. But just like Roger, Rafa had some years as well in which he did not win slams. But still performed well overall. Do not forget Roger suffered from mononucleosis around 2008, when he had a decline in his form. He got healed around 2014, when he started playing great again. Sampras retired due to mono and back problems, Soderling retired and could not recover fully from it. And other players as well.

[@fg92626]

@@NICAsworld The 🐐stands alone now. He is the cream on the finest crop ever (Big4 FED/NAD/MUR/WAW).

[@flashstar1234]

I don't even know whether you would see my comment, but i'll still write it anyways. First of all Djokovic, by career achievements is the greatest tennis player of all time. That's not a question, but i just wouldn't quite accept the idea that Federer didn't decline after 2011. Your argument is this: Federer maintained a high elo past 2011 Federer kept beating almost everybody on the tour past 2011 Federer kept going deep into slams The only thing that caused Federer's drought in slams is djokovic On a face value this seems fair, but I think you ignore one key component, and that's 1. How incredibly strong the big three are when compared to everybody else on the tour 2. The only players that can consistently beat the big three are the big three and 3. the age difference between Federer and Djokovic Let me explain. I'll start my saying that your argument doesn't have a problem. It's just a few factors you omitted. And also I don't actually think Federer declined in 2011, I think he declined in 2013. 2012 was an amazing season for Federer, 2011 wasn't all too bad, he beat Djokovic in the French open semifinal ending his longest winning streak as well as winning the ATP finals that year. But for the purposes of this comment, I'll treat Federer's decline as being at 2011. Think about it like this, Djokovic and Federer (ignoring nadal for purposes of this post) are so good that it doesn't even matter their age, they can consistently beat everybody else on the tour. This was largely the case, as you cited since Federer didn't struggle to beat most players apart from Djokovic past his physical prime. The same is true for Djokovic as he hasn't struggled against anybody really past the age of 30. So with that established, I will now establish that the only players that can beat Federer and Djokovic are... Djokovic and Federer. If we take the idea that these two are just so good that nobody else apart from them can beat them (like you have acknowledged), then we must acknowledge the only thing left that can have an effect, and that is the age difference between the two. This is something that you haven't once mentioned in the 3 videos in this series, that Djokovic is younger than Federer. Yes, Federer didn't win many slams past 30, but that's because of Djokovic. The counterargument is that Djokovic is still winning slams past 30, but, the thing with Djokovic's competition past 30 is that there's no more 24 year old Federer to cause him trouble To put things simply, if you take Federer's elo graph and overlap it with Djokovic's elo graph and make it chronological, you would find that initially Federer is much higher (he's older) but after 2011, Djokovic takes over Federer and more or less maintains a slightly higher elo than Federer right until the end of his career. And due to this age difference, Djokovic will have an advantage of Federer. To make it as simple as possible, the illusion of no decline on Federer's part is due to the fact that Federer and Djokovic are just too dominant, but in Djokovic's eyes, there is certainly a decline on Federer's part, because Djokovic and Federer can actually be compared to each other. This is what we saw actually, between Federer and Djokovic. Federer was consistently beating Djokovic in best of 5 set matches, in like 2007 Aus open 2007 US open, 2008 US open, 2009 US open, 2011 French open, 2012 Wimbledon and was still winning after 2011 (2012). And after 2011, Djokovic began beating Federer much more at best of 5 matches. In act, Federer was never able to defeat Djokovic past 2012 Wimbledon. However... if you remember what I said earlier about how dominant these 2 were when compared to the rest of the tour, Djokovic was able to reap the benefits of his younger age more than Federer was able to reap the benefits of his older age. Federer only had 2007 to 2010 to take advantage of his older age, when Djokovic got into his prime, Djokovic was able to take advantage of his younger age, but the thing is... Djokovic got to take advantage of it for a longer period of time, because of how dominant these two were and how Federer was still able to stay in the game against everybody else just not Djokovic. If we bring Lendl and Connors into this, the problem with them was that... they just weren't good enough. Federer still dominated through his 30s (except against Djokovic), that's not a signal that he didn't decline, that's a signal that he was just too good that nobody apart from Djokovic felt the decline The "worthy opponent" idea that you explained just wasn't... worthy enough. you had to raise the bar even higher. To sum up my argument, it's this: -Federer did decline in 2011 -The decline just wasn't noticeable for 99% of players on the tour because of how absolutely insane the Federer (and djokovic) was. -Only Djokovic was able to notice the decline (As evident from their best of 5 set H2H completely turning in favour of Djokovic) -Since Federer was just too good for the rest of the tour, Federer stayed in the game all the way to the ripe old age of 38 (2019), so Djokovic got a whole 8 years to exploit a declined (in terms of Djokovic's standards) Federer whilst Federer didn't get as big of a chance to exploit a not-yet-prime Djokovic If I were to sum up my case in one sentence, it would be: Federer did decline in 2011, it's just that he is too good for everybody that his decline wasn't noticeable, it was only Djokovic that noticed it, and took advantage of it. So in other words, Federer did decline, and Djokovic began winning because of that. To me, you case falters because it ignored the absolute glory of the big three and how dominant these three were in their era. We've just never seen any trio so dominant before, and when we have something like this, the oldest one will be at a disadvantage.

[@martinpakura5439]

Totally Agree with your points. Federer was still amazingly dominant in his 30s , and I think he would have had the edge on Djokovic if they both played each other when both in their 20s but Djokovic has proved he is the better player in his 30s. If only they were the same age then people wouldn't have to speculate about the age difference or about weak eras

[@VishalSingh-st5xd]

Just like every Novak fans this guy is very very insecure of Federer and Nadal. His stats are often very misleading. He really works very hard to reasearch but to find one sided stats present them in misleading way. Everyone are biased for someone which is fine, but he support his biasness in a very misleading way, which is problematic.

[@godwinmene8799]

I love you goatkovic you are a true fan of Nole

[@Coa_Kralj_Coa_The_King]

The only reason cause Federer scratch three more GS in 2017 is cause Novak was out, didn't play,was injured. He come back, Federer never won again!!! Novak Is to hard to beat for him!!!

[@rogersalllike9133]

Lets finally say it if it was all grass Roger makes 30-40 slams easy

[@hikoseijuro9291]

Savage channel!

[@Coa_Kralj_Coa_The_King]

Federer couldn't won 5 years one GS,from 2012-2017... Then miracle happens for him,Novak get injured,so he scratch three more. Otherwise he will stay with 17 GS. Novak come back and continue where he stopped, winning Slams. Federer 0, he never won again, only because of Novak!!! Simply,Novak is the Greatest tennis player ever!!!

[@4lugan]

#1 novak #2 Nadal #3 borg #4 laver #5 Sampras….

[@AC852HK]

Bro why are you so good , tell me why

[@goatkovic]

Wish I knew, bro.

[@AC852HK]

@@goatkovic hats off for the dedication and time spent on these videos. RESPECTTTTTTTTTT

[@AC852HK]

Btw would you make some videos to let Fed or Nadal fans happy that out of 1million excuses , there is one excuse is true? lmao

[@saurabhtripathi917]

Federer is the only player to bagel Djokovic(2 times),Nadal(3 times)& Murray(once)every member of the big four. None of the big 4 has done that. Not even Djokovic. Federer's God mode level is above Djokovic's god mode.

[@serbian_nationalist14]

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!!

[@asud2571]

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.

[@letrantrung1]

Should we kick this Goatkovic guy to become Chief of Communication of ATP? His knowledge is unbelievable!!!

[@nixiontm]

@@scottwarren4998 Too bad you didn't pay attention, because peak Federer was 2011+ in terms of match wins.

[@DungxxHen]

​@@scottwarren4998We will never truly knows. There are too many varieties like matchup, court speed, technology.

[@user-wz8zu7rw6o]

Die-hard Federer fan here... Your videos are awesome, mate

[@malhotraroger9106]

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 .

[@katerinadicamella]

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.

[@mantaishere]

I agree. Federer's best year was 2013, in my opinion.

[@flaviencrozier]

@@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).

[@mantaishere]

@@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.

[@flaviencrozier]

@@mantaishere yes you're right

[@VladaBB]

@@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.

[@djoleluk]

Let's dive in into another masterpiece from my favorite youtube channel about tennis.👌

[@Alex-rj8ns]

I found out about him just right now my friend, I feel so bad buddy 😂

[@djoleluk]

@@Alex-rj8ns Best channel bro.

[@madhukiranattivilli2321]

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 (?)

[@prestonvogel3529]

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.

[@leo99991]

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

[@theacestriker6240]

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.

[@fuckso2342]

@@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.

[@hailbane9633]

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.

[@ahmedisa3723]

@@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

[@Windows7x]

​@@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

[@novaklesic2013]

Goatkovic is the Goat!!!

[@endersaurpvps1586]

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

[@nikolamicunovic1966]

After all, Novak Djokovic. Mental mountain. *The greatest of all time* Nice vid sir. Thank you for all this information.

[@mezomoza7]

This is a treasure of a tennis channel. Thanks for the effort put in the videos. Keep it up!

[@mantaishere]

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.

[@VladaBB]

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.

[@mantaishere]

@@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.

[@jennysambrook3528]

Mantaishere this man is just obsessed in a vile way of hatred towards Federer and Nadal. He twists and exaggerates everything unfortunately.

[@CopR8r]

djoko was injured...

[@viksinha5410]

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

[@gumbol7678]

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..

[@advaitshub6156]

That is a good analysis! You just proved how good Federer was. He is like wine gets better with age!

[@88Ulloa]

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.

[@mantaishere]

[@88Ulloa]

@Víctor Manuel Bustamante Alvarez 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.

[@JustMe-er9ve]

The numbers are the only thing that matter. Anything else is just an opinion that holds no validation.

[@michaeltrumph121]

Numbers don't mean shit, since they are influenced by playing conditions, opposition level, equipment, etc

[@caym4nz109]

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

[@KaptainK59]

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.

[@Smileater]

Subscribe to the channel, I did

[@jack-gq9ik]

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.

[@Smileater]

@@jack-gq9ik Roger WAS the best, then Novak got the best of him.

[@davidtownsend3391]

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.

[@casey4664]

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.

[@slXD100]

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.

[@slXD100]

@@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.

[@davidtownsend3391]

@@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.

[@VladaBB]

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.

[@nicolaspalma9362]

Im a big Fed fan, but I appreciate your work in justifying your position with solid arguments.

[@enriquefloresmolestina4804]

This is genius! Thank you, for I will never undervalue a Fed match between ‘11 and ‘16

[@tvtotalforever]

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

[@cmc2110]

Exactly, Federer wasn’t playing the same he started to doubt his shots more and more against the other top 3 guys

[@zlatkostevanovic5891]

@@cmc2110 he didn’t doubt anything, Djokovic simply outplayed him.. you are so small minded

[@TheTororist]

mental is part of the game. @@zlatkostevanovic5891

[@Nani-du9ym]

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

[@JoeV03]

You are my favorite KZbinr! 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.

[@mw7517]

Why have you been making arguments 🤣🤣🤣 Just watch tennis lol.

[@JoeV03]

@@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.

[@matheks2709]

This guy?

[@mr.40-15]

Michael Trumph in the comment section is an absolute clown. 40-15 baby!

[@stevenreynolds4338]

Great video. 2011-2017 Federer would absolutely beat 2004-2007 Federer everywhere. I only wish that Federer would have switched to the larger racquet sooner.

[@lioneye108]

I've watched a few vids... but you just keep coming out with the golden goods - I had to press the bell button 🔔

[@OldSchoolBaptistInOslo]

You cannot argue against facts like this.

[@gordank6463]

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.

[@kevinb2844]

Federer finally embraced a bigger tennis racket like Nadal and Nadal’s ultra Hulk Hogan’s vitamin program😅

[@muhammadanas3398]

Really fantastic explanation great work😍😍😍🤩😘

[@Gornorudnik]

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

[@ashishverma3892]

Bullshit...no way laver isnt in the top 6

[@mw7517]

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

[@Gornorudnik]

@@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

[@ashishverma3892]

guy literally won two calendar slams on the pro circuit..but hey!

[@Gornorudnik]

@@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

[@OkwyUgonweze]

What an insight, kudos for a great work.

[@davenue3428]

Another possibility Federer still went deep in most of the tournaments after 2011 is because he got preferential draw treatment?

[@stefanvasilache5252]

Like Djokovic at ao 2023

[@alecmorariu6291]

No it’s because 2011 federer was an elite player who was still in his prime but just faced tougher competition.

[@SebastianKopacz]

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.

[@DejanDespotovićDespot]

Brilliant analysis. Congratulations!!!

[@jeffgachihi8225]

Novak in 2023 won the same amount of GS as Fed did in the last TEN years of his career....take that in.

[@omki2504]

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.

[@boomfaoce]

Roger literally lost 1 match to Nadal since 2017. That was Roland Garros 2019

[@johnrenehan7406]

This is one of the clearer fact based argument on the top s of pro tennis

[@gagulagagulic8467]

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?

[@goatkovic]

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.

[@rafailbaldal6062]

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.

[@markanthonycgranados]

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.

[@ricardodiazdeleon6133]

Lol, no doubt novak is te greatest but your work is so biased and calling Federer names and bashing his obsessed fans puts you at the same level as them. These 3 guys are all great, many things have to be taken into consideration in tennis, saying that some one won just because “the others” were not there is plainly stupid, specially since injuries are part of the game, it’s like saying that novak is the greatest just because courts have been slowed down.

[@mattkincaid1660]

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...

[@BriceBriceBabyy]

5 years older than nadal and 6 older than djokovic. huge differences in tennis.

[@fg92626]

To summarize your video Fed was a good tennis players simply not good enough to earn the GOAT status.

[@jdmrchem5]

Goatkovic, I have seen all over KZbin 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!

[@goatkovic]

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.

[@my8osprive]

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@stefanvasilache5252]

You don t realise how much Federer grew tennis and tennis level.

[@1978utreg]

Djokovic ruled on hardcourt, grass and indoor since 2011. Case closed.

[@sherjeelbedaar]

Great insights!! I’m just waiting for “mysterious nadal injuries” video 🙏

[@Saskobest]

On surface it looks like solid arguments but all can be broke down. First elo rating : if you know anything about elo you would know that you need to beat players of similair elo to gain a bit and in his prime 2004-2007 he was just so much stronger than any1 that he barely got any elo(Bobby Fischer 1970 elo compared to Spasky and others) Second : the argument about similair % of losses against non top3/major winners etc, most of those guys who you give credit as slam finalists reached their final after 2007(berdych,soderling,tsonga,delpotro,cilic etc etc). Until 2007 he had barely any losses against them(apart from berdych but not on slams), and also talking about his competition in 2017/18 its true it was lower but Murray and Wawrinka had nothing to do with it(Murray has 1 win against him on slams and Wawrinka has 0) And why you didnt mention his win% and overall number of losses and even matches played; fact is he played over the years less and less tournaments(usually skipping clay and 1-2 other masters), lost more(losses against players not named Nadal/Djokovic) and his win % reflects that

[@madhukiranattivilli2321]

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

[@arcadianluna2605]

lol

[@lazarcukovic4642]

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

[@madhukiranattivilli2321]

@@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.

[@fingersm]

I always thought Novak was playing better than Roger eaelyin his career. Just unfortunate he would "gas out" for some reason.

[@madhukiranattivilli2321]

@@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.

[@felixr6482]

the video we've been waiting for

[@oscardiaz9170]

Fedfans will find more excuses

[@michaeltrumph121]

This shit video is misleading

[@rogersalllike9133]

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

[@pablomiyara7697]

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)

[@rogersalllike9133]

@@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.

[@jimeagle1952]

Fed retired because he didn't want to get the experimental blood clotting shots and never did. He had contracts for millions and if he would have revealed that he didn't and wouldn't get the shots he would have lost millions as did Djokovic. Keep in mind that Feds last tournament coincided with the shot requirements. His reason for not playing was injury recovery. Question, did Fed get the shots?

[@Lecia-lithium]

Nadal got them and it looks like they broke his body

[@James_utd123]

What is wrong with you Djokovic fans accusing players of cheating all the time

[@haydenmenon8426]

Great Video

[@hernanbusso1609]

Obviously, he declined. Would 2005/2006 Federer lose to Tsonga at Wimbledon from 2-0 up? Would he go many months in a row without winning a title?

[@pablomiyara7697]

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)

[@soumyaagarwal7852]

Yes, he would lose

[@michaeltrumph121]

@@soumyaagarwal7852 Only in yoyr dreams

[@soumyaagarwal7852]

@@michaeltrumph121 not in dreams dear, saw him losing live on TV

[@michaeltrumph121]

@@soumyaagarwal7852 Cause he was past his best

[@themind5202]

This is why none of the big3 is the GOAT: Reached 14 consecutive Major finals 198 career titles 286 career finals 30 finals in a single season 15+ title in 6 seasons 7 consecutive 10+ title seasons 16 consecutive 5+ title seasons 147 match wins in a single season Won the Grand Slam twice His name ist Rod Laver.

[@durgaprasadsamantula699]

This video is more factual than Nadal’s entire career!

[@Hypocrisy.Allergic]

Only older player better than Federer is Djokovic. Respect for Federer.

[@arkankruger1956]

When Roger fans tell you he was old and over the hill at 29 you just have to laugh at them

[@fortitude1208]

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💪

[@SHVideografie]

Of course Federer declined. Every player past 30 declines in the physical department. After 2011 Federer had several extended periods of serious back and knee injuries. You can see how freely he moved in his prime, how well and deep he struck his forehand and how confident he constructed points. 30+ Federer was more easily to move around and he didn't hit the ball as consistently deep, especially om the fh side. I think it has mainly to do with his back and knees. He dominated a lot of players in his 30s because of his experience and skill alone but long story short: he was definitely better in his prime.

[@DavidGonzalez-kz5wp]

You could try and watch the video.

[@DungxxHen]

It's true. This video also showed that peak Federer is in 06-07. It also showed that his level in 04-07 is the highest overall. If he did decline, it's barely, and age is a factor, not an excuse.

[@marfu1119]

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

[@gokulvrindavan1858]

Novak literally ended his career and he made him suffer a lot. He can't make peace with his soul

[@EndoftheTownProductions]

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.

[@shaunbures7557]

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

[@jeremyneiderhoff]

@@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.

[@shaunbures7557]

@@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

[@jeremyneiderhoff]

@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

[@jeremyneiderhoff]

@@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

[@yiftachdayan5904]

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.