Comparing Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic since 2008

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by McEnroeisanartist, Nov 13, 2012.

  1. McEnroeisanartist

    McEnroeisanartist Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    2,207
    Now that the 2012 Season is over, comparing Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic since 2012.

    In All Matches
    Federer 327-64 83.63%
    Nadal 330-56 85.49%
    Djokovic 348-72 82.86%

    In Grand Slam Matches
    Federer 109-15 87.90% (If you count a walkover as a win, he has two more match wins and his percentage goes up to 88.1%)
    Nadal 101-10 90.1%
    Djokovic 102-15 87.17%

    In finals
    Federer 23-17 57.5%
    Nadal 27-15 64.3%
    Djokovic 27-16 62.79%
     
    #1
  2. Sabratha

    Sabratha G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    12,485
    Location:
    Australia
    Federer would have done better in his "prime" period against the top four.
     
    #2
  3. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,786
    Past-prime Federer has done just as well, if not better, than 20.5-25.5 years-old Djokovic.
     
    #3
  4. Sabratha

    Sabratha G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    12,485
    Location:
    Australia
    Most their matches are close and can go either way on any surface these days.
     
    #4
  5. Agassifan

    Agassifan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,557
    Only 10 slams losses for Rafa. Impressive, although he would've lost two more had he showed up in W09 and US12.
     
    #5
  6. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,084
    Location:
    New York
    Comparing Nadal, Djokovic, Fed and Murray's titles until their 25th year (I update the stats every year). That is until the end of 2006 for Fed, 2011 for Rafa, 2012 for Murray/Djoko:

    Overall titles: 1- Nadal: 46
    2- Fed: 45
    3- Djoko: 34
    4- Murray: 24

    Slams: 1- Nadal: 10
    2- Fed: 9
    3- Djoko: 5
    4- Murray: 1

    WTF: 1- Fed: 3
    2- Djoko: 2
    3- Nadal/Murray: 0

    Masters: 1- Nadal: 19
    2- Djoko: 13
    3- Fed: 12
    4- Murray: 8

    Olympics: 1- Nadal/Murray: gold
    2- Djoko: Bronze
    3- Fed: 0


    500: 1- Nadal: 11
    2- Djoko: 8
    3- Fed: 7
    4- Murray: 3

    250: 1- Fed: 14
    2- Murray: 11
    3- Djoko: 6
    4- Nadal: 5

    Team event: DC: 1- Nadal: 4
    2- Djokovic: 1
    3- Fed/Murray: 0


    To be followed next year...
     
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2012
    #6
  7. joeri888

    joeri888 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    13,120
    Fed will look better next year, no doubt. He'll certainly be ahead of Rafa (Already is) and he can only lose his dominance over Djoko by 1 Slam, and that is if djoko wins them all.

    By the way, if you include DC, you might as well include weeks at number 1 and year end no. 1's.
     
    #7
  8. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,362
    Past prime Federer is doing better than a pre-prime Federer. During his early year, he was consistently losing to Hewitt, Nalbandian, Henman, Agassi, etc. I know he beat 4 times defending Sampras at Wimbledon in 01 but he wasn't a slam materials yet, and not in the top 5, let alone reaching #1. However, past prime Fed today who is facing Nadal/Nole/Murray is doing much better than teenage Fed.

    When you think about it, Hewitt/Safin/Agassi/Nalbandian and company get slighted when comparing to the top players today.
     
    #8
  9. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,084
    Location:
    New York
    In terms of winning titles, he isn't doing as well but he's close in some categories. Comparing his first 6 seasons of winning titles (20 to 25) to his last 6 seasons (26 to 31):

    Titles won: 45 vs 31.
    slams: 9 vs 8
    WTF: 3 vs 3 (only one that's equal right now)
    Masters: 12 vs 9
    500: 7 vs 5
    250: 14 vs 6


    Joeri: I'm working on the #1 stats. I'll post them in a little while.


    ETA: I forgot Olympics: the one stat where Fed did better. He got the silver medal in the latter stage of his career: 0 vs 1!
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2012
    #9
  10. joeri888

    joeri888 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    13,120
    Thanks vero! WIll be interesting to monitor too.

    Anyway, I don't think his first six of winning titles are pre-prime, and from 26 on is not post prime. I'd consider 2004-2007 prime. 1998-2003 = preprime. 2008-2012= post prime. 2013-2016 =grandpatime
     
    #10
  11. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,084
    Location:
    New York
    Here we go:

    Year ends at #1: 1- Fed: 3 (consecutive)
    2- Djoko: 2 (consecutive)
    3- Nadal: 2 (non consecutive)
    4- Murray: 0

    This is still until their 25th year of course.
     
    #11
  12. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,084
    Location:
    New York
    I agree. And I'm sure the results would confirm your timetable as well. (I'm wondering if 2003 shouldn't be part of the prime actually, 7 titles including a slam and WTF).
     
    #12
  13. zam88

    zam88 Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,341
    What's the farthest after someone's "prime" that they won a major in tennis history in the POST open era?


    I mean... I think we can agree Federer's prime ended in January of 2010 at the absolute latest..

    Obviously 2007 was his last "epic year" but in 2009 he made the finals of all four majors so if that isn't still pretty prime, I'm not sure what is.

    so he's won one major 2.5 years post prime...

    I'm not even sure with Agassi when his prime was.. i know he won majors at an advanced age though.
     
    #13
  14. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    31,084
    Location:
    New York
    Agassi's career was very atypical. He never had a dominant season (titles in the double digits, 3 slams, etc) and his entire career was the ultimate roller coaster but he hanged around much longer than anyone would have thought and surprisingly enough (for me at least), much longer than Sampras.
    Fed doesn't fit that profile at all. He definitely had a prime (titles in double digits, multiple slams, masters etc) and a post prime with fewer titles. 2009 was great but still, 4 titles total is visibly different from his prime years. 2012 has been the only post-prime season that showed similarities to his prime years. I wouldn't be surprised if 2012 turned out to be Fed's "swan song".
     
    #14

Share This Page