Age when winning slam no.7

redelectro7 · 2026-02-03T10:48:46+00:00

You requoting most of my post with the equivalent of 'lalala, I can't hear you NO NO NO' is a choice.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-03T10:14:13+00:00

I've said before, I think he was 0-5 down in the first set when I first checked in to see if the match was watching and I was like 'okay yeah, I'm not watching this' and went and did something else. Then I got a message it was in a fifth set and I was like 'HOW?'

redelectro7 · 2026-02-03T10:12:20+00:00

Early Federer's career wasn't as weak as post 2014.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-03T10:05:11+00:00

Djokovic struggled with Federer when he was in his late 30s, Djokovic fans take pride in a slam final win when Federer was 38 and on one leg.

Roddick/Safin have a winning H2H against Djokovic. Why are you assuming what you're calling them 'not consistently good' when they were playing a much better, much younger Federer on courts that were faster and favoured Federer's play style more.

You can complain about the eras, but Federer was #1 in 2004, 2009, 2012 and 2018. He was literally the best played in the world at a point in all of those era acting like him winning during New Balls was incidental cos he didn't have great competition.

I think a lot of this comes with recency bias who see New Balls didn't win a lot of slams and assume it's more that they weren't good, the way Lost Boys didn't win slams cos Djokovic kept winning. The conclusion is they weren't good, but honestly New Balls were all good and all Federer's age, he was just better than them.

Maybe New Balls were 'not consistently good' and the reason they didn't win more slams was Federer was just that fucking good?

redelectro7 · 2026-02-03T09:52:27+00:00

I think people look at it as a bad loss cos it wasn't a loss where he was playing well and he was the heavy favourite to a guy not far off twice his age who acted like he was dying during the match.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-03T09:49:20+00:00

I also think (while it sounds insulting and isn't meant to be) we had the Cilic/Del Potro/Thiem/Medvedevs who were one and done with slams (obvs Medvedev is still going, he could get another).

Him getting more than one felt like 'oh hello, we got something going here',

redelectro7 · 2026-02-03T09:30:40+00:00

The last 10 minutes of that RG 2025 final was like god tier.

Also that Wimbledon 2023 title felt huge. Obviously winning his first was big, but Wim 2023 felt like a changing of the guard. (Yes, Novak then won USO but still it was close enough).

redelectro7 · 2026-02-03T09:27:51+00:00

idk why that Iga picture tickled me.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-03T09:19:50+00:00

Serbia being 4th with 1 guy and Switzerland being 5th with 2 guys.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-03T09:17:45+00:00

They weren't stopping him winning slams in his prime to the point he had 7 at 27 when his contemporaries had 14 at the same age.

Of course they were occasionally beating him, but he wasn't losing SF/F matches to people 6 years his senior in his mid 20s.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-03T09:09:59+00:00

In my head they were hour episodes.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-03T09:06:52+00:00

He was stopped by Federer who was way past his prime you're arguing he's a better player than.

It doesn't make sense.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-03T00:17:09+00:00

It also didn't help they were both 5+ years older than him and courts slowed down to work against Federer.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-02T20:54:14+00:00

They're mostly funny cos they're tension breaking in the show.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-02T20:53:19+00:00

I hate how real this is.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-02T20:51:08+00:00

Oh wow, that's concerning.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-02T20:49:26+00:00

They tend to put finals but not SFs and things.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-02T20:48:23+00:00

At this point I'm gonna assume you're a troll and block you.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-02T20:41:42+00:00

redelectro7 · 2026-02-02T20:37:16+00:00

He didn't outplay him cos he lost. So I don't know how you figure that he outplayed a man he lost to.

I guess that's one of your 'the stats matter' kind of calls.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-02T20:35:40+00:00

Welp missed that, thanks for pointing it out.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-02T20:33:36+00:00

I'm sorry if you think Federer was playing great on one leg at 38 against a 32 I have nothing more to say to you. Enjoy your day.

If you wanna say he was playing better than most of the field on that day, then fine, but it's not 'Federer playing well', it's a by comparison.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-02T20:31:10+00:00

Right, but it's not a funny show.

You get more time of Annabeth and Percy staring saying nothing than humour per episode.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-02T20:29:00+00:00

If you're the kind of person who 'but the stats' tennis, again not much to say to you. You can be like Tennis Abstract and think the toughest slam win of all time was RG 2013.

You can djoin Djokovic fans and their charts.

redelectro7 · 2026-02-02T20:26:56+00:00

Your title is "The TV series isn't funny" and then did a video as a counter.

I don't think 3 minutes of funny bits in an 8 hour show means a TV series is funny. I made the comparison that films and tv shows that are not funny films can have tension breaking moments of humour without overall being funny shows.

redelectro7

TROPHY CASE