I Tracked EVERY Roger Federer Slam Final For A Decade 

Tie Break at 12/12 was cruel

yah that has to be Fed biggest regret. He had Djoker at 38 yrs old! age comes for us all...

@MrTomgNguyen Federer did not win 2019 Wimbledon final not because he was old, but because Novak was a better player that day.Of course, Roger had 3 chances vs.Djokovic in Wimbledon finals to win 1/3, and the whole picture would look completely differently right now, since Roger would still sit and smile in Swiss Alps, with 9 titles vs. ( Novak' s 6) it would have been impossible for Nole to tie Roger' s record.You could also say that Roger lost in their first Wimbledon final because Novak was " lucky" - fine.You could say Roger lost in the second Wimbledon final to Djokovic because he was not 100% - fine.But in the THIRD CONSECUTIVE WIMBLEDON FINAL LOSS to Djokovic, I cannot allow you to claim how Roger could not close out the match ( with TWO MATCH POINTS), just because the burden of " OLD AGE" was too much to handle, and all of a sudden tiredness overwhelmed him.

@@djordjelezajic8435 yes 5 yrs is huge in tennis. look at the deterioration of Nadal in only a few years. Fed has always been 5 yrs older playing a more agile Djoker. always remember that. but their H2H record is almost even. Prime Fed = GOAT. most consistent and talented player ever.

@MrTomNguyen If Roger lost to Djokovic in 2014 Wimbledon final, how come he beat Nadal in 2017 AO final, and won Wimbledon as well ( he played vs. Marin Cilic, who had blisters, and would rather have been somewhere else).Roger in his prime beat 19 top 10 players once in his entire career (2006,), Djokovic beat more than 19 top players half a dozen times.Federer' s top 2 seasons do not come close to Novak' s 2011+ 2015.When you look into their clay careers, No23VAK beat Nadal 8 times on clay, more than the next two clay specialists together( Dominic Them (4) Fabio Fognini(3)Poor Roger beat Nadal on clay two (2X) times in his entire life.Roger is, by the way 6-14 vs. Djokovic in finals, and he beat him only one (1X) time when Djokovic won the first set ( 2014 Dubai)Djokovic beat Federer SEVEN (7X) TIMES , when Roger won the first set.Roger has only one win vs. No23VAK in 3/4 GS tournaments, in NY they are 3-3.After Federer beat Djokovic three times in New York (2009 was his last win), he lost three (3) consecutive matches to Djokovic, same thing in Melbourne, (AO), Roger won the last match there against Djokovic in 2007, lost 3 after that.He beat Nole in 2011 RG, SF, and stopped No23VAK' s 42 match win streak, every Federer fan was smiling from ear to ear.Next year, ALSO RG, ALSO SF, ALSO FEDERER vs. DJOKOVIC , No 23VAK beats him in straight sets, no Federer fan under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES will ever mention that, as long as they live.😀 Fine.Do I have to tell you what happened to Roger in Wimbledon, after he beat Nole the first,last and only time in 2012 ?

Honestly if your a True tennis fan like me it was amazing , yes when you're a kid some matches make you cry like wimbledon 2008 but some other matches also give amazing emotions the whole 2017 Ao tourney , the french open 2009 , stopping peak djoker in rg 2011 , rewatching young fed stopping Sampras in 2001 . And let me tell you I would have by far prefered federer to stay healthy and sneak in 3 more years at the top even if that ment he lost at the end I am a tennis fan players like federer or stan wawrinka or Stefan edberg make me wanna pick up a raquet Split step and go down the line with that one hander. Thats why I play tennis to Hit the ball with a certain sensation with a will to create something to play the ball with passion

To me tennis is the best sport ever if it wasnt for federer i am not sure I would love tennis so much at least in this era where everyone kinda play grindy .

Its like football nowadays I dont like football that much , but before Barcelona 2011 it was magic poetry in motion , or before the stats zidane Ronaldinho R9 pure wizards I enjoyed a lot more football of 2000's when it was less about tactical defence and more about Totti scoring a screamer or pirlo making that cross for Rvp to make a superman lol

@@angerisdiscipline3913 great to hear stuff like this. May be a lot of the sport fans we see commenting on social media did not live through those days. They’re probably much younger. I’m not old enough to have seen the peak of Pete Sampras. But I first saw Roger in the 2004 Wimbledon. I saw the final against Roddick. The way Roger played made me love tennis. And he wasn’t even playing his best that day. Roddick was scary that day, at least until the rain break. Followed Federer since then, the next few years saw this monster of a player who would destroy anybody in his way. The feel, the precision, the technique....despite how fluid and easy he made it look, the way he plays is very difficult and technical and there’s no way to quantify it by numbers. The same goes for Ronaldo Nazario, Zidane, Ronaldinho, Beckham, Nesta, Maldini, and many more. It’s sad that new comers would probably end up saying Mbappé is the better player, only because of numbers. What those did on the pitch with the ball, is too great to be quantifiable by stats and number. No offense to players like cr7. He’s a beast and his numbers and records would be very difficult to be broken. But those who actually play or have played understand Ronaldinho was a much more technical and awe inspiring and no amount of numbers by Cr is going to top that. It’s sad that many sports fans of today don’t seem to under the technical side of the sport they follow and as a result turn to stats for that. Stats are great but they don’t present how the stats are achieved.

Being a real fed fan is the most exciting and easiest thing in the world because he was and still is the greatest for more than 51% of the population!isn't he?!nobody had his prime!did they?!nobody had his grace & beauty altogether,the only one who you never get tired of watching,you had to see him in action on center court to understand what it meant to witness an spiritual experience!

There are different styles of play, that can get the same achievements. But, Roger’s style is untouchably the most entertaining. And no one will change that.

@@sevaraalimova4706 So true. He was great.

go to watch some 19-21yrs old fed footage and see how much a player with potential can improve

I understand you like the way he plays but style of play is only subjective, though he didn’t look so stylish in his losses to Nadal and Djokovic lol

@@davidcabrera7448 Neither did those two when Roger would just overwhelm them. As for his playing style, nothing "subjective" about it. Just pure and unequaled everything you could ever want in a player. And with a one handed backhand that also became a weapon. I'd like to see another try it.

Possibly!

I agree although I don't think his opponents were weak mentally by any means. I think it has more to do with the fact that Federer was older, six years older too, which is a whole generation in tennis terms. So, Federer had to deal with the pressure that these new guys (Nadal and Djokovic) were coming up to challenge him while his time was running out due to his age. That creates a lot of doubt. So yeah had Federer been younger he would have not been known for his choking that much.

@@gauravmalltarlok5354 Rogers era had mentally bad players cuz they never won a slam or they won 1 slam only while Novak and Rafa played vs players that u cannot say they do not deserve more slams for example Berdych , Cilic , Nishikori , Tsonga , Murray , Wawrinka , Del potro , Ferrer , Monfils , all this players deserve like 1-2-3 slams each but they end up playing in an era where Nadal and Novak owning Rogers mentality all other players are less mental challenge then Roger While in Roger era all the players he beated had lower Elo ranking ever than the players during Novaks Rafas era Roger age is not factor because Roger 2018 2017 won because only 1 peace was missing witch one ??? NOVAK Rogwrs level of tennis was same as 2010 the only reason he was losing slams was because of NOVAK When King Novak came back Roger started losing again cause he had mental block vs him 2017 Roger broke the mental block vs Rafa its all mentally not age related Novak now is beated alll next gen like peace of cake witch shows how much mentally he was up against all of the players because he had to outplay the biggest mental challenge - Nadal and Roger

Obvious bias there as your Serbian. As a neutral from neither Switzerland or Serbia. Federer at his best in 2005,2006 and 2017 plays more exciting tennis and has a far larger range of shot making that's why I think he is preferred by fans. Djokovic may end up with more slams but it's quite robotic baseline tennis. Djokovic does have the best mental game ever though but in terms of tennis genius it's Federer and unless a more exciting player comes along and plays more exciting tennis with a larger viarety of shots and dominates for 15+ years and wins more than 20 slams Federer will remain the best to watch at his peak.

@@mattsavage9960 You hit the nail on the head. I'm a Rafa fan. But Federer was phenomenal I can't ignore that. I'm glad that Nadal and himself are great friends 👋. When Rafa retires I won't be watching anymore tennis 🎾. Vamos to them both. I'll surely miss them both.

Dragan Milosevic, In novak's own words..."There is no GOAT, One can't compare eras". That shows class from him unlike you or many of his fans. Novak has great records and is the most consistent in his generation for now, but he has not won 2 calendar grand slams (laver), the French Wimbledon double hat trick (borg), Olympics gold medal etc, six consecutive YE No.1 (Sampras). So grow up. Plus at his highest level Federer is better than both Nadal and Djokovic. They are all great players and each has set records the others won't break

Federers peak was against a way less talented field Hewitt, Roddick and Safin were Federers biggest competition in the 2000s, which was the weakest era in tennis I would take Murray and Wawrinka as better competitors in the 2010s, who may have won more if not for both Federer killers Nadal and Djokovic I say this as an American, no bias, total objectivity 👍

@@davidcabrera7448 subjective

You mean the greatet ever?

First greatest is laver, second greatest sampras, third greatest roger federer. All other players were lucky, weakest era players

@@mahalakshmid8613 lol federer was the one who play in the weakest era ever 😭 from 2003-2007 he luckily got 12 GS, then after nadal and djokovic appear, he was demolished by them

​@@tricker14u should listen to urself bro. U can win one or two slams with luck... Dominating an era and winning 12 in that time ain't easy bro.. If it was then more ppl would have done it.

​@@tricker141. You don't luckily win 12 slams. 2. Winning another 8 =/= demolished.

Very subjective your opinion