Except for the times when he didn’t. Such as in those three slam finals, 14 Masters finals, two Olympic finals, the Davis Cup final, an ATP Finals final, and in achieving the World No. 1 spot. And all during the Big 3 era, which no one has done other than Murray (and no, Wawrinka isn’t nearly there). I’d point out that 3 slam titles shouldn’t be sniffed at. Most professional players would give anything to achieve one, let alone three. If we start discounting players who don’t win 20 slams, do we end up saying that Sampras, Borg, Lendl, Connors, McEnroe, Agassi, Becker etc, weren’t greats?
Is overtired from Scotland? In England when Murray won, they called him British, when he lost, Scottish. I'm guessing the Scots may do the opposite - or at least always refer to Murray as Scots.
Federer has earned $131m in prize money, whereas Djoković has earned $160m. Nasty question, should exclude endorsements since everyone knows Federer is the most marketable.
That's not what I said. Anyway, I bet a good chunk of people who got the answer right did so because they thought Federer won the most prize money... But time is on my side I think because Djoković will overtake him on the cumulative.
The only reason Djokovic has earned more is because the prize money has been increased over the last decade when he won most of his trophies as opposed to Federer.
It's the same reason greats like Laver and Borg lag so far behind in the least, they would earn peanuts compared to today's players for their achievements.
Djokovic is a robot Slav, like something produced out of Soviet training camp. Doesn't flinch, mentally tough as hell, grinds on the baseline returning shots until the opponent gets tired or makes an unforced error.
Federer is the polar opposite of that. Plays the most attacking tennis ever, has the most diverse skillset, makes it look so easy it barely looks like a sport and more often loses due to his emotions than his game quality.
That being said, if we want to look at the person who redefined the sport and became its living embodiment, it is unquestionably Federer, a man with class, charisma, style and pure talent.
I don't know much about tennis and guessed on all but the 1st and 7th questions. Given that, I'm pleased to have gotten 11 out of 15 correct; good for 3 points at the moment, much better than I usually do on sports quizzes.
Wasn’t suggesting that he should be included in the quiz. Just putting him where he belongs (and waving a little flag for Scotland!)
Great quiz btw!
It's the same reason greats like Laver and Borg lag so far behind in the least, they would earn peanuts compared to today's players for their achievements.
But despite that, I think peak Djoković beats peak Federer.
Federer is the polar opposite of that. Plays the most attacking tennis ever, has the most diverse skillset, makes it look so easy it barely looks like a sport and more often loses due to his emotions than his game quality.
That being said, if we want to look at the person who redefined the sport and became its living embodiment, it is unquestionably Federer, a man with class, charisma, style and pure talent.