Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
That image show something i've always said: novak and Rafa are better than Roger. They got much tougher competition to reach their slam totals. Fed won the majority against weaker competition. Great picture.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
258 Posts
This stat is useful, but also leaves out some context. For instance, it counts Rafa's RG 2019, but not Rafa's RG 2017 or 2018, when Rafa beat Thiem, who is clearly a bigger challenge on clay than Olderer. It's still a good stat as far as providing a general picture goes.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,383 Posts
Feds losses to Nadal at the AO and Wimby don't help either. Both surfaces where he has no excuse.

On the one hand the other 2 members have the upper hand h2h on Fed, but Fed has the edge in overall achievements. It's hard to determine just how everything should be scored.

It should also be considered that like 10 of those 14 for Nadal are at RG alone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
502 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
And that is the main reason the Federer cannot be the GOAT.
The losses against Novak in Wimbledon 2014 and 2019 were huge.
Also if you look at how they fare against each other in the final, Federer has the worst record of the 3.

Federer - 4/10
Nadal - 11/6
Djokovic - 8/6
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
It's between Novak and Rafa now. The next 20 majors played probably will decide who is the best.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,935 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
971 Posts
Fed with good health, had a shit 5 set record against journeymen too. Robredo. Millman. He almost lost to Roddick and Monfils. Del Po (after a miserable line call at the French) match was so luck-filled.
Fred and Bulldal didn’t play much on grass and US Open. Bulldal was smashed by tall dudes on grass 😆. Fedal are not GOATS, even with good health. Djoker didn’t play some tourneys or was a muggish 🤡 in the last 13 years as a result of poor health and injury but he’s top notch 95% of the time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
Federer in his prime would wipe the floor with Novak and Rafa. This is known and not even a question. He was unfortunate to enter his twilight years as these two guys were coming into their primes.

His greatness was revealed when he came back to win 3 slams as an elderly man. Just goes to show, if he made that racquet change sooner he would have beaten these guys a lot more between 2010—2015.

The devil is in the details.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,383 Posts
Federer in his prime would wipe the floor with Novak and Rafa. This is known and not even a question. He was unfortunate to enter his twilight years as these two guys were coming into their primes.

His greatness was revealed when he came back to win 3 slams as an elderly man. Just goes to show, if he made that racquet change sooner he would have beaten these guys a lot more between 2010—2015.

The devil is in the details.
When he climbed out of obscurity the moment Djokovic wasn't around to stop him? Or the fact that before even turning 30 he started to routinely lose to the younger generation as they neared their prime? Federer was lucky to rack up something like 16 slams before Nadal, Djokovic and Murray entered their primes (could even throw Tsonga and Del Potro in there since he was losing to those guys as well from 28-30 years old).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,413 Posts
Fred is much older than both of them. Many Djokofans do not like to bring this out. The younger players most likely have a winning H2H against older. Like how Tsitsipas, Zverev, Thiem will be racking up wins against 3 of them very soon.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,383 Posts
Fred is much older than both of them. Many Djokofans do not like to bring this out. The younger players most likely have a winning H2H against older. Like how Tsitsipas, Zverev, Thiem will be racking up wins against 3 of them very soon.
The younger generation started beating him as early as 2007 when he was just 26-27 years old, Nadal started beating him everywhere by 2008 and Djokovic started beating him pretty regularly when he was about 29 years old in 2010. Seeing how things have gone since then his age of 26-30 was not a good excuse whatsoever and saying he was just an old player being beaten by young guys doesn't track. Nadal and Djokovic are both approaching their mid 30s and have yet to be taken over by a younger player.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
The younger generation started beating him as early as 2007 when he was just 26-27 years old, Nadal started beating him everywhere by 2008 and Djokovic started beating him pretty regularly when he was about 29 years old in 2010. Seeing how things have gone since then his age of 26-30 was not a good excuse whatsoever and saying he was just an old player being beaten by young guys doesn't track. Nadal and Djokovic are both approaching their mid 30s and have yet to be taken over by a younger player.
Roger, acording to fedfans, was old in 2008. Go figure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
The younger generation started beating him as early as 2007 when he was just 26-27 years old, Nadal started beating him everywhere by 2008 and Djokovic started beating him pretty regularly when he was about 29 years old in 2010. Seeing how things have gone since then his age of 26-30 was not a good excuse whatsoever and saying he was just an old player being beaten by young guys doesn't track. Nadal and Djokovic are both approaching their mid 30s and have yet to be taken over by a younger player.
Federer is my favourite player but I was being purposefully obtuse in my initial post about Federer definitely being better, just being silly. You make good points. I think the fact Federer got to match point against Novak last year (which honestly still hurts to think about) is pretty indicative of the fact either of those two could have won on a given day assuming they matched up in their primes. It's equally hard for me to see a 2005/6 Federer losing to 2011\5 Novak as it is a 2011/5 Novak losing to a 2005\6 Federer .

Nadal deserves a lot of credit to get two Wimbledon's, I don't think he would consistently beat the other two on HC and grass assuming they matched up in their primes but he would surely nab a few. And he is obviously the Goat on clay and always will be. If Novak gets the gold next year and walks away with 20 plus slams which I have no doubt he will, it will be hard to argue that he isn't the greatest. He likely already is in terms of shear time spent dominating the circuit. Feels bad man but it is what it is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
971 Posts
Djoker sometimes lowers himself to opponents’ level to test how far he rises back to his high level. He’s a cuckoo. He gets bored and takes too many risks. He didn’t win by only pushing WTA shots. He hits angles and corner shots. His fault is being unwilling to win at all costs, despite dominating every thing except in a few matches.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
All i know is that the next years will be very tough for fedfans. In march the number 1 record will fall. On the slam race, he will be third. Buckle up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,840 Posts
At least Roger lose against vs the Big 3 in the slams, if you take into account the best 25 consecutive slams of them:

Federer AO 2004 - AO 2010
Wins: 15
Loss vs Big 3: 6x Rafa, 1x Djokovic
Loss vs rest of field: 1x Safin, 1x Kuerten, 1x Del Potro


Djokovic US 2010 - US 2016
Wins: 11
Loss vs Big 3: 2x Federer, 5x Nadal
Loss vs rest of field: 3x Wawrinka, 2x Murray, 1x Nishikori, 1xQuerrey


Nadal RG: 2008 - 2014 (Won't be unfair if I count Wimbledon 2008 until 2013, for best intentions of the stat I'd count W06-W11
Wins: 11
W/D: 3
Loss vs Big 3: 2x Federer, 3x Djokovic
Loss vs rest of field: 2x Murray, 1x Del Potro, 1x Ferrer, 1x Wawrinka, 1x Soderling


The Big 3 won their slams in different way.

Federer (Was dominant for a longer period)
Before peak years: 1 slams
Peak time: 15 slams
Older years: 4 slams

Nadal (Highy consistent)
14 years winning at least 1 slam (Just in 2009 wasn't RG)

Djokovic (streaky guy)
Before 2011 - 1 Slam
Since AO 2011 to AO 2012: 4 of 5 slams
Since RG 2012 to US 2014: 2 of 11 slams
Since AO 2015 to RG 2016: 5 of 6 slams
Since W 2016 to RG 2018: 0 of 8 slams
Since W 2018 to AO 2020: 5 of 7 slams
Since US 2020 to ?????: 0 of 2 slams

3 different ways of winning slams, all of them are greats.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
At least Roger lose against vs the Big 3 in the slams, if you take into account the best 25 consecutive slams of them:

Federer AO 2004 - AO 2010
Wins: 15
Loss vs Big 3: 6x Rafa, 1x Djokovic
Loss vs rest of field: 1x Safin, 1x Kuerten, 1x Del Potro


Djokovic US 2010 - US 2016
Wins: 11
Loss vs Big 3: 2x Federer, 5x Nadal
Loss vs rest of field: 3x Wawrinka, 2x Murray, 1x Nishikori, 1xQuerrey


Nadal RG: 2008 - 2014 (Won't be unfair if I count Wimbledon 2008 until 2013, for best intentions of the stat I'd count W06-W11
Wins: 11
W/D: 3
Loss vs Big 3: 2x Federer, 3x Djokovic
Loss vs rest of field: 2x Murray, 1x Del Potro, 1x Ferrer, 1x Wawrinka, 1x Soderling


The Big 3 won their slams in different way.

Federer (Was dominant for a longer period)
Before peak years: 1 slams
Peak time: 15 slams
Older years: 4 slams

Nadal (Highy consistent)
14 years winning at least 1 slam (Just in 2009 wasn't RG)

Djokovic (streaky guy)
Before 2011 - 1 Slam
Since AO 2011 to AO 2012: 4 of 5 slams
Since RG 2012 to US 2014: 2 of 11 slams
Since AO 2015 to RG 2016: 5 of 6 slams
Since W 2016 to RG 2018: 0 of 8 slams
Since W 2018 to AO 2020: 5 of 7 slams
Since US 2020 to ?????: 0 of 2 slams

3 different ways of winning slams, all of them are greats.
That is a really interesting breakdown. Always interesting to see how Nole just falls into crazy form and becomes virtually unbeatable. I remember the 2018 Wimbledon seeing him in the first week and knew right away he was about to "fall" into some scary form. I like the fall analogy because when he is in form his shots come off as so effortless, deep and accurate, especially his backhand which he 'falls' into, great economy of motion using his body to generate the power.
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top