Djokovic vs Federer - hard court summary

HC GOAT?

  • Federer, and he will still be after both players retire

    Votes: 47 44.3%

  • Federer now, but Djokovic will surpass him

    Votes: 34 32.1%

  • Djokovic, and he will only keep cementing his spot

    Votes: 25 23.6%
  • Total voters
    106
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
NoleFam said:
Federer is the HC GOAT at this point, and I don't think anyone is disagreeing with that, but it is Federer who is playing catch up at the Masters level and not Djokovic. Before this year, Djokovic had a 4 Masters lead and frankly has shown that he is more versatile at the Masters level by his dominance at IW, Miami, Canada, Shanghai and Paris. Also, Shanghai has always been fast and was fast in the years Djokovic won it just like Federer, and Cincinnati and Canada are relatively the same speed. It's not the speed of the court that is the reason Djokovic hasn't won Cincinnati. It is the conditions there that aren't really to his liking at the apex of the summer months and just not his best tournament. There is only one hardcourt Masters tournament where Federer leads Djokovic and that is Cincinnati, and he only tied him at IW and Shanghai this year.
Click to expand...
Who do you think is better at IW between Fed and Nole? Do you think it's thread worthy?
 
InsideOut900

InsideOut900

Legend
mike danny said:
Who do you think is better at IW between Fed and Nole? Do you think it's thread worthy?
Click to expand...
Federer quite obviously I would say.
Has had 5 great runs altogether 04-06, 12 and 17. Djokovic had about as many good runs, but less brilliant outside of a few matches where he played his best.
 
NatF

NatF

Bionic Poster
NoleFam said:
Federer is the HC GOAT at this point, and I don't think anyone is disagreeing with that, but it is Federer who is playing catch up at the Masters level and not Djokovic. Before this year, Djokovic had a 4 Masters lead and frankly has shown that he is more versatile at the Masters level by his dominance at IW, Miami, Canada, Shanghai and Paris. Also, Shanghai has always been fast and was fast in the years Djokovic won it just like Federer, and Cincinnati and Canada are relatively the same speed. It's not the speed of the court that is the reason Djokovic hasn't won Cincinnati. It is the conditions there that aren't really to his liking at the apex of the summer months and just not his best tournament. There is only one hardcourt Masters tournament where Federer leads Djokovic and that is Cincinnati, and he only tied him at IW and Shanghai this year.
Click to expand...

Federer won more of his HC Masters when they had B05 finals and when you had to play 6 rounds to win them. That probably factors into him skipping a few of them during his peak years and thus winning slightly less.

Djokovic to his credit has been very consistent and dominant in HC Masters since he hit his peak but he had different conditions to Federer in a few significant ways.
 
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
NatF said:
Federer won more of his HC Masters when they had B05 finals and when you had to play 6 rounds to win them. That probably factors into him skipping a few of them during his peak years and thus winning slightly less.

Djokovic to his credit has been very consistent and dominant in HC Masters since he hit his peak but he had different conditions to Federer in a few significant ways.
Click to expand...
By the way, why wasn't the 2004 IW final played in BO5 format?
 
NoleFam

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
mike danny said:
Who do you think is better at IW between Fed and Nole? Do you think it's thread worthy?
Click to expand...

I think Djokovic is. He is 3-0 against Federer there, 3-1 against Nadal and 2-0 against Murray. That means he only lost one time to a member of the Big Four there and that was in 2007 to Nadal. That is dominant and the fact that he had won more even though he has played 6 less years also shows how dominant he has been at that tournament. I guess it could be thread worthy.
 
NoleFam

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
NatF said:
Federer won more of his HC Masters when they had B05 finals and when you had to play 6 rounds to win them. That probably factors into him skipping a few of them during his peak years and thus winning slightly less.

Djokovic to his credit has been very consistent and dominant in HC Masters since he hit his peak but he had different conditions to Federer in a few significant ways.
Click to expand...

Federer won 2 of his IWs when they were BO5, 2 of his Miamis and 1 Shanghai title so that is 5 Masters. Being that he has won 21 of them, 5 is only a 4th of that. It was pretty much Shanghai and Paris he skipped in 2004 and 2005 but I think he had an ankle injury one of those years. Also, you still play 6 matches to win Miami and IW, and the format is pretty much the same. You only play 5 matches to win the others.
 
T

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Federer is the HC goat but is he the only player that Nole is behind? Arguably, but Nole is not a clear cut the second greatest HC player.
 
NatF

NatF

Bionic Poster
NoleFam said:
Federer won 2 of his IWs when they were BO5, 2 of his Miamis and 1 Shanghai title so that is 5 Masters. Being that he has won 21 of them, 5 is only a 4th of that. It was pretty much Shanghai and Paris he skipped in 2004 and 2005 but I think he had an ankle injury one of those years. Also, you still play 6 matches to win Miami and IW, and the format is pretty much the same. You only play 5 matches to win the others.
Click to expand...

You had to play 6 matches to win all masters in those days, you're forgetting that there were no byes. That's significant for say Canada and Cincy where you'd have an extra two matches and less days off - Federer only went deep in one of those each year from 04-06, with some tanky looking losses. Don't forget his exertions in clay masters in 2006 may have impacted him later in the season as well. It's not just masters events which had BO5 finals in those days either, for example Gstaard in 2004 which was immediately after Wimbledon - also Basel in 2006. The commitment to winning masters in those years was bigger.
 
Last edited:
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
NatF said:
You had to play 6 matches to win all masters in those days, you're forgetting that there were no byes. That's significant for say Canada and Cincy where you'd have an extra two matches and less days off - Federer skipped one of those each year from 04-06. Don't forget his exertions in clay masters in 2006 may have impacted him later in the season as well. It's not just masters events which had BO5 finals in those days either, for example Gstaard in 2004 which was immediately after Wimbledon - also Basel in 2006. The commitment to winning masters in those years was bigger.
Click to expand...
IIRC Fed won 8 of his 12 finals in BO5 format. And he played a total of 11 BO5 finals that year, coupled with 97 matches in total. He played a lot of tennis that year, more than 2015 Djokovic who only had to play 4 BO5 finals an played 9 less matches.
 
NoleFam

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
NatF said:
You had to play 6 matches to win all masters in those days, you're forgetting that there were no byes. That's significant for say Canada and Cincy where you'd have an extra two matches and less days off - Federer skipped one of those each year from 04-06. Don't forget his exertions in clay masters in 2006 may have impacted him later in the season as well. It's not just masters events which had BO5 finals in those days either, for example Gstaard in 2004 which was immediately after Wimbledon - also Basel in 2006. The commitment to winning masters in those years was bigger.
Click to expand...

You had no byes in some of them like Canada and Cincinnati, but there were byes in IW, Miami, Shanghai and Paris. So you didn't play 6 matches in Shanghai and Paris even back then, and you played 6 matches in the USO hardcourt series but played BO3. He skipped one of Canada and Cincinnati in 2005 but played them both in 2004 and 2006. Whether you play both of them isn't all that important anyway because frankly it is too exhausting to win them both even now. It was skipping the fall Masters tournaments where he missed chances. Federer really shouldn't have been playing Gstaard right after Wimbledon and it wasn't mandatory, so he only wore himself for a 250 tournament.
 
NatF

NatF

Bionic Poster
mike danny said:
IIRC Fed won 8 of his 12 finals in BO5 format. And he played a total of 11 BO5 finals that year, coupled with 97 matches in total. He played a lot of tennis that year, more than 2015 Djokovic who only had to play 4 BO5 finals an played 9 less matches.
Click to expand...

Indeed, Novak won more big titles in 2015 but some of that was because he was able to do so while playing less tennis. Subjectively Federer's year in 2006 was more impressive to me.

NoleFam said:
You had no byes in some of them like Canada and Cincinnati, but there were byes in IW, Miami, Shanghai and Paris. So you didn't play 6 matches in Shanghai and Paris even back then, and you played 6 matches in the USO hardcourt series but played BO3. He skipped one of Canada and Cincinnati in 2005 but played them both in 2004 and 2006. Whether you play both of them isn't all that important anyway because frankly it is too exhausting to win them both even now. It was skipping the fall Masters tournaments where he missed chances. Federer really shouldn't have been playing Gstaard right after Wimbledon and it wasn't mandatory, so he only wore himself for a 250 tournament.
Click to expand...

You had byes in IW and Miami but those are 6 matches anyway. Well he tanked one each in 2004 and 2006, might as well have not played :p The point is Federer had to play more tennis in his era in order to win the same titles. Whether it's a BO5 final or an extra round it's not insignificant. Federer played 6 rounds at MC and Rome and a BO5 as well.
 
Djokovic2011

Djokovic2011

Bionic Poster
NoleFam said:
You had no byes in some of them like Canada and Cincinnati, but there were byes in IW, Miami, Shanghai and Paris. So you didn't play 6 matches in Shanghai and Paris even back then, and you played 6 matches in the USO hardcourt series but played BO3. He skipped one of Canada and Cincinnati in 2005 but played them both in 2004 and 2006. Whether you play both of them isn't all that important anyway because frankly it is too exhausting to win them both even now. It was skipping the fall Masters tournaments where he missed chances. Federer really shouldn't have been playing Gstaard right after Wimbledon and it wasn't mandatory, so he only wore himself for a 250 tournament.
Click to expand...
I had another look at Federer's best seasons recently and as great as he undeniably was, he did also do a fair bit of vulturing back then it has to be said. ;)
 
D

Deleted member 77403

Guest
TMF said:
Federer is the HC goat but is he the only player that Nole is behind? Arguably, but Nole is not a clear cut the second greatest HC player.
Click to expand...

He is in outright second place with 8 HC slams, if we using numbers game, only Federer is ahead of him. Before AO 2017 happened, a lot were talking about Djokovic possibly surpassing Federer this year, he was that close, now of course Federer has pulled ahead.
 
NoleFam

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
NatF said:
You had byes in IW and Miami but those are 6 matches anyway. Well he tanked one each in 2004 and 2006, might as well have not played :p The point is Federer had to play more tennis in his era in order to win the same titles. Whether it's a BO5 final or an extra round it's not insignificant. Federer played 6 rounds at MC and Rome and a BO5 as well.
Click to expand...

Federer did play more tennis, which included the extra match in Canada and Cincinnati or a BO5 final in IW, Miami, Shanghai and Paris, but he was skipping Shanghai and Paris in his most dominant years anyway. From 2004-2006 he only played Paris 2006 between them. So he skipped 5 of them in that time frame which is a lot. If Federer had arranged his year differently, he could have played more Masters and less of those minor tournaments like he was doing. In a year like 2005, he played three 250 tournaments and two 500 and he did the same in 2006. He was playing Thailand in the fall of 2004 and 2005, which is a 250, instead of Shanghai or Paris. You would never see Djokovic play minor tournaments like that and he wins more points by preserving himself and saving it for the bigger tournaments. So when you look at it, Federer could have actually played about 12 or 13 matches less at the 250 and 500 level and still ended up with more points by picking up Shanghai and Paris. So it may have been a bit tougher to win at the Masters level back then, but that still is not why he has less of them. Djokovic is just better at scheduling his year around those tournaments and wants to win every of them that he can.
 
NoleFam

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
Djokovic2011 said:
I had another look at Federer's best seasons recently and as great as he undeniably was, he did also do a fair bit of vulturing back then it has to be said. ;)
Click to expand...

LOL. I was putting it in a nicer, more acceptable way though. :D Yea he was definitely vulturing which is why he had to end up skipping more important tournaments.
 
Djokovic2011

Djokovic2011

Bionic Poster
NoleFam said:
LOL. I was putting it in a nicer, more acceptable way though. :D Yea he was definitely vulturing which is why he had to end up skipping more important tournaments.
Click to expand...
Did you see NatF's responses to my posts? :D I swear, Federer fans have gotta be the touchiest fanbase ever! :eek:
 
NatF

NatF

Bionic Poster
NoleFam said:
Federer did play more tennis, which included the extra match in Canada and Cincinnati or a BO5 final in IW, Miami, Shanghai and Paris, but he was skipping Shanghai and Paris in his most dominant years anyway. From 2004-2006 he only played Paris 2006 between them. So he skipped 5 of them in that time frame which is a lot. If Federer had arranged his year differently, he could have played more Masters and less of those minor tournaments like he was doing. In a year like 2005, he played three 250 tournaments and two 500 and he did the same in 2006. He was playing Thailand in the fall of 2004 and 2005, which is a 250, instead of Shanghai or Paris. You would never see Djokovic play minor tournaments like that and he wins more points by preserving himself and saving it for the bigger tournaments. So when you look at it, Federer could have actually played about 12 or 13 matches less at the 250 and 500 level and still ended up with more points by picking up Shanghai and Paris. So it may have been a bit tougher to win at the Masters level back then, but that still is not why he has less of them. Djokovic is just better at scheduling his year around those tournaments and wants to win every of them that he can.
Click to expand...

Federer as you said was injured at the back end of 2004 and 2005 which impacted his participation in those masters - but I don't think we discount the extra few tennis matches and BO5. Of course playing those other tournaments has an impact as well but if you look at the fields in those events often they were quite strong. I don't think you're looking at the context. Doha and Halle are hardly strange scheduling choices right? In 2004 Thailand had a good field with Safin and Roddick in the draw.

Djokovic puts more emphasis on masters than Federer did that's true but he didn't have near the strike rate in majors, so who scheduling was better ;)


Djokovic2011 said:
Haha, I honestly don't understand why you find what I'm saying so objectionable. It doesn't take anything away from his greatness, just explains why he won as many titles as he did in that period. ;)
Click to expand...

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

On a serious note Gstaad is an event in his home country. It's like Djokovic playing Belgrade in 2011. More likely that those guys were trying to raise the profile of the tournament. What tournaments did Federer vulture in 2006? He played Doha, Dubai, Halle, Tokyo and Basel, most of those have good fields and are at times of the year most top players are doing something. You could say Tokyo was an extra event he didn't need to play beyond that it's pretty standard scheduling e.g. a tune up before the AO, Dubai, Halle and Basel.

In 2004 he played in Bangkok as well but Roddick and Safin were there too - so hardly a vultured tournament. In 2005 the field was worse but he was defending his title...so which events did he vulture exactly? Rottadam in 2005? The final against Ljubicic was a high quality and the field included multiple top 10 players.
 
Last edited:
NoleFam

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
NatF said:
Federer as you said was injured at the back end of 2004 and 2005 which impacted his participation in those masters - but I don't think we discount the extra few tennis matches and BO5. Of course playing those other tournaments has an impact as well but if you look at the fields in those events often they were quite strong. I don't think you're looking at the context. Doha and Halle are hardly strange scheduling choices right? In 2004 Thailand had a good field with Safin and Roddick in the draw.

Djokovic puts more emphasis on masters than Federer did that's true but he didn't have near the strike rate in majors, so who scheduling was better ;)




:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

On a serious note Gstaad is an event in his home country. It's like Djokovic playing Belgrade in 2011. More likely that those guys were trying to raise the profile of the tournament. What tournaments did Federer vulture in 2006? He played Doha, Dubai, Halle, Tokyo and Basel, most of those have good fields and are at times of the year most top players are doing something. You could say Tokyo was an extra event he didn't need to play Beyond that it's pretty standard scheduling e.g. a tune up before the AO, Dubai, Halle and Basel.

In 2004 he played in Bangkok as well but Roddick and Safin were there as well - so hardly a vultured tournament. In 2005 the field was worse but he was defending his title...so which events did he vulture exactly? Rottadam in 2005? Hardly, the final against Ljubicic was a high quality and the field included multi top 10 players.
Click to expand...

Yea he was injured so that may have played in a role on one of those years but he still should have cancelled Thailand and played Shanghai instead. It is just no comparison between playing a 250 and a Masters and I don't understand the choice to play that tournament instead of the one that awards much more ranking points. I'm not talking about Doha or Halle. I'm talking about Thailand, Rotterdam and Gstaad. Those three could have been placed on the chopping block in place of more important tournaments.

It's not fair to say he didn't have Federer's strike rate in majors since no one has really, and the participation in the Masters is not hindering them from winning majors. Federer still played the same amount or more tennis than Djokovic, but he was doing it in mostly minor tournaments. He has much more 250 and 500 titles than Djokovic, but Djokovic has more Masters. That's the trade off.
 
Last edited:
NatF

NatF

Bionic Poster
NoleFam said:
Yea he was injured so that may have played in a role on one of those years but he still should have cancelled Thailand and played Shanghai instead. It is just no comparison between playing a 250 and a Masters and I understand the choice to play that tournament instead of the one that awards much more ranking points. I'm not talking about Doha or Halle. I'm talking about Thailand, Rotterdam and Gstaad. Those three could have been placed on the chopping block in place of more important tournaments.

It's not fair to say he didn't have Federer's strike rate in majors since no one has really, and the participation in the Masters is not hindering them from winning majors. Federer still played the same amount or more tennis than Djokovic, but he was doing it in mostly minor tournaments. He has much more 250 and 500 titles than Djokovic, but Djokovic has more Masters. That's the trade off.
Click to expand...

To be fair in 2004 Federer was still young and coachless, some of his scheduling choices look weird in hindsight but the tour has changed a bit over the years. In those days the mandatory status of masters was new and he grew up in the 90's where guys played a lot of tournaments seemingly on a whim if it was their preferred surface.

I think Gstaad is pretty obvious in terms of why he did it. The others are a bit odd but not super strange imo. Maybe the guy wanted an excuse to go to Thailand :p
 
Last edited:
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
NatF said:
To be fair in 2004 Federer was still young and coachless, some of his scheduling choices look weird in hindsight but the tour has changed a bit over the years. In those days the mandatory status of masters was new and he grew up in the 90's where guys played a lot of tournaments seemingly on a whim if it was their preferred surface.

I think Gstaad is pretty obvious in terms of why he did it. The others are a bit odd but super strange imo. Maybe the guy wanted an excuse to go to Thailand :p
Click to expand...
I found Tokyo to be the weirdest one in 2006. He really had no reason to participate in it.

Maybe the guys loved tennis too much :p
 
NoleFam

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
NatF said:
To be fair in 2004 Federer was still young and coachless, some of his scheduling choices look weird in hindsight but the tour has changed a bit over the years. In those days the mandatory status of masters was new and he grew up in the 90's where guys played a lot of tournaments seemingly on a whim if it was their preferred surface.

I think Gstaad is pretty obvious in terms of why he did it. The others are a bit odd but super strange imo. Maybe the guy wanted an excuse to go to Thailand :p
Click to expand...

True and fair enough.
 
metsman

metsman

G.O.A.T.
NoleFam said:
Federer won 2 of his IWs when they were BO5, 2 of his Miamis and 1 Shanghai title so that is 5 Masters. Being that he has won 21 of them, 5 is only a 4th of that. It was pretty much Shanghai and Paris he skipped in 2004 and 2005 but I think he had an ankle injury one of those years. Also, you still play 6 matches to win Miami and IW, and the format is pretty much the same. You only play 5 matches to win the others.
Click to expand...
04 he skipped Madrid/Paris due to foot problems, 05 due to the ankle.
 
NBP

NBP

Hall of Fame
People really out here debating this lmao. One has *TWO* US Open's at the age of 31 (will be by next year's tournament). And for one of them he had to literally come back from death. Let's not be comedic.
 
NatF

NatF

Bionic Poster
mike danny said:
I found Tokyo to be the weirdest one in 2006. He really had no reason to participate in it.

Maybe the guys loved tennis too much :p
Click to expand...

Maybe they offered him good money? Who knows. It's like playing Being, seems like a strange choice knowing how much Federer had already played that year but otherwise not so much. Guy was an iron man in terms of playing lots of matches in his peak periods.
 
D

Deleted member 743561

Guest
NBP said:
People really out here debating this lmao. One has *TWO* US Open's at the age of 31 (will be by next year's tournament). And for one of them he had to literally come back from death. Let's not be comedic.
Click to expand...
Looks to me like it's about two, um, devoted Djokovic enthusiasts beating the drum. Conversation's kind of gone away from debate on the OP. ;)
 
T

Tornes

Semi-Pro
NoleFam said:
Yea he was injured so that may have played in a role on one of those years but he still should have cancelled Thailand and played Shanghai instead. It is just no comparison between playing a 250 and a Masters and I don't understand the choice to play that tournament instead of the one that awards much more ranking points. I'm not talking about Doha or Halle. I'm talking about Thailand, Rotterdam and Gstaad. Those three could have been placed on the chopping block in place of more important tournaments.

It's not fair to say he didn't have Federer's strike rate in majors since no one has really, and the participation in the Masters is not hindering them from winning majors. Federer still played the same amount or more tennis than Djokovic, but he was doing it in mostly minor tournaments. He has much more 250 and 500 titles than Djokovic, but Djokovic has more Masters. That's the trade off.
Click to expand...

To me it seems you both guys forgot how the tour changed since 2004-6. At that time there was no obligatory Masters 1000 and differences between the categories were much more shallow then today. You are comparing Masters and 250 from today view, not from then point of view.

To put it into perspective, there are every players who reached #1 since 2000 to 2006 (and in case Federer is #1 I also use ye #2):
Sampras 2000 - 2 ATP 250 (played just 12 tournaments whole year)
Safin 2000 - 8 ATP 250, 7 ATP 500
Kuerten 2000 - 5 ATP 250, 3 ATP 500
Safin 2001 - 9 ATP 250, 3 ATP 500
Kuerten 2001 - 5 ATP 250, 3 ATP 500
Hewitt 2001 - 6 ATP 250, 2 ATP 500
Hewitt 2002 - 3 ATP 250, 3 ATP 500
Hewitt 2003 - 3 ATP 250 (played just 10 tournaments)
Agassi 2003 - 5 ATP 250
Ferrero 2003 - 4 ATP 250, 3 ATP 500
Roddick 2003 - 8 ATP 250, 1 ATP 500
Federer 2004 - 3 ATP 250, 2 ATP 500
Roddick 2004 - 7 ATP 250, 1 ATP 500
Federer 2005 - 3 ATP 250, 2 ATP 500
Nadal 2005 - 8 ATP 250, 3 ATP 500
Federer 2006 - 3 ATP 250, 2 ATP 500
Nadal 2006 - 5 ATP 250, 2 ATP 500

All of them played a lot of non-Masters/GS/WTF tournaments. Actually if we count only full seasons Federer is the one who played least of such tournaments. At that time it was normal and expected to play 6-10 such a tournaments a year.
 
Djokovic2011

Djokovic2011

Bionic Poster
NBP said:
People really out here debating this lmao. One has *TWO* US Open's at the age of 31 (will be by next year's tournament). And for one of them he had to literally come back from death. Let's not be comedic.
Click to expand...
Oh dear. Don't tell me you're one of the posters still living in the 80s who believes the Australian Open is a nothing tournament compared to the US Open(you do know Djokovic has won 6 of them, right?).
 
Prabhanjan

Prabhanjan

Professional
TMF said:
Federer is the HC goat but is he the only player that Nole is behind? Arguably, but Nole is not a clear cut the second greatest HC player.
Click to expand...
Who are the other contenders? Sampras with 7 HC slams, Agassi with 6, or Connors for defining how to play on the hards! All good choice, but Djokovic still remains the firm No.2 for me. Even if he gets 10 HC slams like Fed, he needs to win at least two at USO. Fed's AO consistency beats, easily and hands down, Nole's USO consistency, and his 5-5 split is as good as it comes.
 
Z

zep

Hall of Fame
Djokovic has one glaring weakness and that's a big one, not enough US open titles. Purely as a player from what I have seen I rank Djokovic slightly ahead of Federer but with only 2 US open titles you can't place him ahead of Federer. Djokovic is second.
 
NBP

NBP

Hall of Fame
Djokovic2011 said:
Oh dear. Don't tell me you're one of the posters still living in the 80s who believes the Australian Open is a nothing tournament compared to the US Open(you do know Djokovic has won 6 of them, right?).
Click to expand...
Lol. I didn't mention Australia anywhere...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Hard Court Statistics (Big Hard Court Titles)
Replies
31
Views
2K
Waspsting
W
Lozo1016
  • Poll
Novak Djokovic Now Has A Better Winning Percentage on Grass Than Hard Court
Replies
10
Views
831
Red Rick
Red Rick
Sport
  • Poll
POLL: Nadal on clay vs. Djokovic on hard
2 3
Replies
148
Views
5K
BauerAlmeida
BauerAlmeida
SpicyCurry1990
  • Poll
Will Djokovic end up as Open Era Hard court GOAT?
2
Replies
68
Views
4K
mattosgrant
M
G
Why is Novak Djokovic so much better at Australian Open's hard court than at US Open's hard court?
2
Replies
73
Views
10K
jackson vile
jackson vile
Top