How much longer can Federer play at an elite level?

Ped or nah?

Dude, he's 34.

Relax.

US Open was won at 35 and Aussie at 37.

Fed isn't even in the top 10 of oldest people to win a slam...his last being 2012 Wimbledon at 30 years 11 months.

Connors won a major (US Open) far older than Fed when he won Wimbledon last.

Agassi won a major at 33...

Fed has not won a major since age 30.

He's not some superman. He's in fact, lagging behind to Connors, Agassi, Roswell, Ashe, etc. - they all won older than Fed.

quote:

---

mizzoubuckeyeiowa

---

Wait a second, are you trying to say that because he hasn't won a major what he is accomplishing at this age isn't incredible?

Let me guess, you are in the group the thinks Nadal is the greatest tennis player of all time?

Only 6 people have won a slam at an age > Fed when he won his last. Connors won his (1983 US Open) at 31 yrs 0 mos 9 days, and Fed his oldest (2012 Wimbledon) at 30 yrs 11 mos, so essentially one month difference. Pete won his last at 31 yrs 0 mos 27 days, and Agassi his at 32 yrs 8 mos 22 days.

He is capable, especially with the decline in Rafa's game. He is clearly behind Djoker, but ahead of everyone else, but his margin over some of the more elite players is much thinner than it was once was (obviously), especially against aggressive and powerful players that go for broke.

Honestly, I hope he wins another, but it won't kill me if he doesn't - I just hope he keeps playing near this level for a while longer because when he is playing well, he is an absolute pleasure to watch.


Tennis slam winners by age

quote:

---

Fed isn't even in the top 10 of oldest people to win a slam...his last being 2012 Wimbledon at 30 years 11 months.

Connors won a major (US Open) far older than Fed when he won Wimbledon last.

Agassi won a major at 33...

Fed has not won a major since age 30.

He's not some superman. He's in fact, lagging behind to Connors, Agassi, Roswell, Ashe, etc. - they all won older than Fed.

---

I think the field is much better now days. He's not superman but he's one of the most transcendent figures the sport has ever had.

His game is just built for the long haul. He seems to use half the energy anybody else does. It is effortless for him.

Too lazy to look it up, but I'm guessing Connors.

quote:

---

I think the field is much better now days.

---

If not better, faster and stronger. Meaning RF's days are coming to a close.

Bummed about that because he is my favorite of all time.

quote:

---

If he is taking ped it's definitely not hgh. The guy is a twig

---

HGH is used a lot for healing from injuries/wear and tear, not just for bulking up.

Thanks for the link. Really shows you how much Sampras dominated at the US and Wimbledon and how he struggled in the French. He never really even flirted with a French title. Whereas, without Nadal, Federer might have won four French Opens.