Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, and Sampras - Opponents Lost to in Finals

[McEnroeisanartist]

I thought it would be interesting to see how many different players that Federer, Sampras, Djokovic, and Sampras have lost to in finals. Djokovic has played in 88 finals. Sampras played in 88 finals for his career.

Through 88 finals....

Federer - 62-26 (2010 Halle) - lost to 13 different opponents, including Nadal (12), Djokovic (2), and Nalbandian (2)

Nadal - 62-26 (2014 Rio) - lost to 9 different opponents, including Djokovic (10), Federer (6), Davydenko (3), Murray (2),

Djokovic - 62-26 (2016 Indian Wells) - lost to 6 different opponents, including Nadal (10), Federer (6), Murray (6), Wawrinka (2)

Sampras - 64-24 (2002 US Open) - lost to 16 different opponents, including Agassi (7), Hewitt (2) Forget (2)

I am not sure what is more remarkable that Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic were all 62-26 after their 88th singles final, or how few opponents Djokovic has lost to in a tournament final.

 

[tennisaddict]

The fact that only 6 different players reached the finals in Novak's era seems to be indicative of something.

 

[Djokovic2011]

The fact that only 6 different players reached the finals in Novak's era seems to be indicative of something.

Not really because not all of those 88 finals were played in his era. IMO losing to only six different players when you've reached that amount of finals is a great achievement.

 

[tennisaddict]

Not really because not all of those 88 finals were played in his era. IMO losing to only six different players when you've reached that amount of finals is a great achievement.

I guess a whopping 18% was played before 2011 ?

 

[vladap]

The fact that only 6 different players reached the finals in Novak's era seems to be indicative of something.

you ain't gonna go far with that logic

 

[Djokovic2011]

I guess a whopping 18% was played before 2011 ?

Can't you ever give him credit for anything?

 

[NatF]

Not really because not all of those 88 finals were played in his era. IMO losing to only six different players when you've reached that amount of finals is a great achievement.

I thought he was trolling at first and found it a little amusing. But now I know he's serious just...

 

[tennisaddict]

you ain't gonna go far with that logic

The fact that greats like Berdych , Gasquet and Ferrer still holding the top 10 firmly seems contra to that logic .

 

[tennisaddict]

Can't you ever give him credit for anything?

His 11 slams speaks for itself, albeit 5 of them coming when his main rival was from the senior tour.

 

[vladap]

The fact that greats like Berdych , Gasquet and Ferrer still holding the top 10 firmly seems contra to that logic .

The fact that greats like Berdych , Gasquet and Ferrer still holding the top 10 firmly seems contra to that logic .

never heard of those...guess I'm stuck in Ljubicic, Blake, Davidenko era

 

[Djokovic2011]

His 11 slams speaks for itself, albeit 5 of them coming when his main rival was from the senior tour.

What a terrible poster you've become. Really sad to see how bitter you are just because Djokovic beat your favourite player in a few slam finals. Pathetic.

 

[Krish872007]

What a terrible poster you've become. Really sad to see how bitter you are just because Djokovic beat your favourite player in a few slam finals. Pathetic.

Lol, he's always been like this (in the past it just wasn't directed towards Novak) - not sure if he's being serious or if it's higher-order trolling designed to provoke reaction.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Lol, he's always been like this (in the past it just wasn't directed towards Novak) - not sure if he's being serious or if it's higher-order trolling designed to provoke reaction.

He only started being really anti Djokovic in the last 12 months or so, before that he reserved all his bitterness for Nadal. Go figure.

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

not sure if he's being serious or if it's higher-order trolling designed to provoke reaction.

Pretty much every bitter poster is in either one of those two groups, no?

 

[vladap]

maybe he's pro Federer

 

[Krish872007]

Monfils has played 23 finals (5-18 record).
Those 18 "losses" are to 16 different opponents. Scale this up to 26 losses (like Federer, Djokovic and Nadal) and he would hypothetically have lost to 23 different opponents.
And that is why he is The Guru. He has showed the Big 3 how important it is to have variety in your resume.

 

[MichaelNadal]

I thought it would be interesting to see how many different players that Federer, Sampras, Djokovic, and Sampras have lost to in finals. Djokovic has played in 88 finals. Sampras played in 88 finals for his career.

Through 88 finals....

I am not sure what is more remarkable that Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic were all 62-26 after their 88th singles final, or how few opponents Djokovic has lost to in a tournament final.

That is absolutely crazy.

 

[tennisaddict]

What a terrible poster you've become. Really sad to see how bitter you are just because Djokovic beat your favourite player in a few slam finals. Pathetic.

No reason to be upset. Novak showed his worth winning 6 majors during one of the strongest periods of tennis. There is nothing to say he would not have won 4-5 majors more even if that strong era had continued beyond 2013.

But the weak era of 2014 and after is what it is .

 

[MichaelNadal]

No reason to be upset. Novak showed his worth winning 6 majors during one of the strongest periods of tennis. There is nothing to say he would not have won 4-5 majors more even if that strong era had continued beyond 2013.

But the weak era of 2014 and after is what it is .

Preach my brother.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

Federer, Nadal and Djokovic had the same winning percentage after 88 finals. That is crazy!

 

[Djokovic2011]

No reason to be upset. Novak showed his worth winning 6 majors during one of the strongest periods of tennis. There is nothing to say he would not have won 4-5 majors more even if that strong era had continued beyond 2013.

But the weak era of 2014 and after is what it is .

Makes me laugh how you want to discount all of Djokovic's slams since 2014. I bet you still think all of Federer's slams between 2003-07 should still count though.

 

[tennisaddict]

Makes me laugh how you want to discount all of Djokovic's slams since 2014. I bet you still think all of Federer's slams between 2003-07 should still count though.

It is pointless arguing about the relative field strength since most Djokoboys think Rafa came to the tour in 2008, Berdych is better than Nalbandian , Wawrinka,Murray are better players than Safin/Hewitt/Ferrero/Roddick.

 

[NoleFam]

Wow that is a crazy stat for Djokovic, Federer and Nadal all being 62-26 after 88 finals. Should we call them the Crazy 88's? Weird and unbelievable stat.

 

[Djokovic2011]

It is pointless arguing about the relative field strength since most Djokoboys think Rafa came to the tour in 2008, Berdych is better than Nalbandian , Wawrinka,Murray are better players than Safin/Hewitt/Ferrero/Roddick.

Looooool, you're the one who keeps bringing it up!

 

[tennis_pro]

That is absolutely crazy.

and guuuuud meaning Djokovic is at the very end of his tether

the era won't get stronger, though, quite the opposite

 

[tennisaddict]

Looooool, you're the one who keeps bringing it up!

I said it is pointless to argue with Djokoboys about the field strength, does not mean current weakera will not be mentioned.

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

and guuuuud meaning Djokovic is at the very end of his tether

the era won't get stronger, though, quite the opposite

Shouldn't you cheer for Novak then if supposedly the era will become weaker with him declining?

 

[GabeT]

In the end the only thing you can measure with certainty is relative dominance. And no one seems to have ever dominated like Nole today.

 

[Djokovic2011]

I said it is pointless to argue with Djokoboys about the field strength, does not mean current weakera will not be mentioned.

If you find it so pointless then stop bringing up weak era discussions in the first place. Seems pretty simple to me.

 

[mikeeeee]

Pretty crazy that they all had the same record. Just shows you how ridiculous the arguments are on here. If only the three of them were within a year or two of each other, tennis would be on another level of exciting right now.

 

[tennis_pro]

Shouldn't you cheer for Novak then if supposedly the era will become weaker with him declining?

no, at least there will be more variety even if its at a lower level

 

[tennisaddict]

If you find it so pointless then stop bringing up weak era discussions in the first place. Seems pretty simple to me.

It is pointless because most of them did not follow the sport before 2011.

 

[tennis_pro]

In the end the only thing you can measure with certainty is relative dominance. And no one seems to have ever dominated like Nole today.

hahaha what a joke, the only thiing you can measure according to you is something that djokovic obviously has to have over federer

 

[tennisaddict]

Shouldn't you cheer for Novak then if supposedly the era will become weaker with him declining?

Good question. I would normally say that folks need to step up instead of hoping for the top one to decline. But given that we have to watch Raonic-Djokovic or Murray-Djokovic these days, any change is better.

 

[Djokovic2011]

It is pointless because most of them did not follow the sport before 2011.

So why engage with them in the first place? Just save your energy and move on.

 

[NoleFam]

The fact that only 6 different players reached the finals in Novak's era seems to be indicative of something.

It's not that 6 different players reached the finals but that he lost to 6 different players. Maybe someone can go find out just how many players he played in finals.

 

[Gaelle Caplier]

I thought it would be interesting to see how many different players that Federer, Sampras, Djokovic, and Sampras have lost to in finals. Djokovic has played in 88 finals. Sampras played in 88 finals for his career.

Through 88 finals....

Federer - 62-26 (2010 Halle) - lost to 13 different opponents, including Nadal (12), Djokovic (2), and Nalbandian (2)

Nadal - 62-26 (2014 Rio) - lost to 9 different opponents, including Djokovic (10), Federer (6), Davydenko (3), Murray (2),

Djokovic - 62-26 (2016 Indian Wells) - lost to 6 different opponents, including Nadal (10), Federer (6), Murray (6), Wawrinka (2)

Sampras - 64-24 (2002 US Open) - lost to 16 different opponents, including Agassi (7), Hewitt (2) Forget (2)

I am not sure what is more remarkable that Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic were all 62-26 after their 88th singles final, or how few opponents Djokovic has lost to in a tournament final.

 

[tennisaddict]

It's not that 6 different players reached the finals but that he lost to 6 different players. Maybe someone can go find out just how many players he played in finals.

Novak is bound to be the least . Most of his finals since 2011 were against claydal or oldFed.

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

no, at least there will be more variety even if its at a lower level

One day weak era is your problem, now suddenly you wouldn't mind it because Novak disappearing would bring more variety? ROFLMAO stop with the acting it is getting sad and you are awful at it.
Translation:"I am a Fed fanboy so I want Novak to disappear, whatever the cost"

 

[Djokovic2011]

Novak is bound to be the least . Most of his finals since 2011 were against claydal or oldFed.

Just goes to show how much more consistent Novak's opponents were.

 

[tennis_pro]

One day weak era is your problem, now suddenly you wouldn't mind it because Novak disappearing would bring more variety? ROFLMAO stop with the acting it is getting sad and you are awful at it.
Translation:"I am a Fed fanboy so I want Novak to disappear, whatever the cost"

yeah yeah yeah go watch your strong era champion hes on in a couple of minutes

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

yeah yeah yeah go watch your strong era champion hes on in a couple of minutes

LOL what a response, I know he is on. Go cry me a 100th river.

 

[Tiki-Taka]

Wow what a coincidence. Pity they cannot finish with the identical number of everything.

 

[GabeT]

If you find it so pointless then stop bringing up weak era discussions in the first place. Seems pretty simple to me.

weak era discussions are a sign of weak minds. there is no way to measure a weak era.

 

[metsman]

No reason to be upset. Novak showed his worth winning 6 majors during one of the strongest periods of tennis. There is nothing to say he would not have won 4-5 majors more even if that strong era had continued beyond 2013.

But the weak era of 2014 and after is what it is .

truth...Djokovic fans need to realize that Djokovic is given great credit for his accomplishments from 2011-2014 (I don't think 2014 was that weak, it was probably about as strong as 2006 and stronger than 15-16). And we have no problem with him winning say 10-11 slams which is what it seems he was headed for. But now he will likely win 14 ish if not more because of weaker competition and that sometimes annoys people (even me I'll admit). That's it, not Djoker's fault in any way.

 

[Mainad]

Deleted post.

 

[Krish872007]

Federer also lost 3 times to Murray: 2010 Toronto, 2010 Shanghai, 2012 Olympics.

True - though they were all played after 2010 Halle

 

[Mainad]

What is the significance of the dates enclosed against each player?

 

[Krish872007]

What is the significance of 2010 Halle?

I guess that was Federer's 88th Final. McEnroeisanartist has picked the first 88 finals each of Fedalovic played and found that they each had a 62-26 record at those given points in time

 

[Mainad]

I guess that was Federer's 88th Final. McEnroeisanartist has picked the first 88 finals each of Fedalovic played and found that they each had a 62-26 record at those given points in time

Ah, got it. The OP did mention their first 88 finals.