Greater YEC player: Djokovic vs Federer

[abmk]

Well even with the Wimbledon match, Djokovic still leads.

yes, by one match, even though 8 of the 11 matches were with Djokovic having physical advantage (from 11 onwards).
If it was about even, fed would have the clear advantage.

If, if, if. If he faced Federer in 2009 YEC he would be getting his ass kicked yet he did the asskicking at 2009 Basel. Lol. If Shangai were indoors yet it's an outdoor tournament. Why not talk about the actual indoor Masters tournament, Paris Masters, where Federer won once out of 13 tries? Federer wasn't in a state to play 2014 WTF final yet played the DC final 5 days later.

because fed prioritized Basel over Paris and didn't play Madrid/Paris in 04/05 - two of his peak years due to injuries. Didn't play Paris in 06 either. Guy has 10 Basel tournaments because he prioritized it over Paris and is great indoors.
Shanghai is post USO and should be indoors (unfortunately isn't). But it is as close to indoors as an outdoor tournament gets. Fed beat djoko convincingly in both 10 and 14 there.
Oh and Djokovic didn't make the semi of the YEC 09, Fed did - just in case you forgot that.

Yes, fed wasn't in a state to play 2014 WTF final.
Fed wasn't even fully recovered 5 days later in DC, let alone the day of the YEC final. Its why he lost so badly to Monfils in DC 1st match.

Point is, a win is a win. Doesn't matter if it's in RR or not, but since you brought it up, Djokovic won the more important matches against Federer at the ATP Finals.

it does matter whether it results in elimination from tournament or not. 2 matches each which resulted in elimination.
It is 3-3 (or 2-2 in elimination) at YEC with 5 of the 6 matches of physical advantage for Djokovic and 6th one (10) being neutral.
Djokovic can barely equalize with so much of advantage.

Like I said, that's your opinion.

a very informed one.

 

[pj80]

Looking at the list of players defeated, easily Federer.

Finals alone we have:
Djokovic:
2008: Davydenko
2012: Federer
2013: Nadal
2014: Walkover
2015: Federer
2022: Ruud

Federer:
2003: Agassi
2004: Hewitt
2006: Blake
2007: Ferrer
2010: Nadal
2011: Tsonga

Federer went 5-0 in 5 of his 6 WTF titles. (2007) Loss to Gonzales
Djokovic went 5-0 in 4 of his 6 WTF titles. (2008 & 2015). Losses to Tsonga & Federer)

Players defeated in their most recent WTF Title:

Djokovic 2022:
Rublev, Medvedev, Tsitsipas, Fritz, Ruud

Federer 2011:
Nadal (bagelled), Tsonga, Fish, Ferrer, Tsonga

Just Federer all the way.

So, Djokovic beat Federer x3 and Nadal

Federer beat Hewitt, Blake and Ferrer.

And from this we can conclude that it's Federer easily?

 

[abhi_trip]

@abmk , I think you're fighting a losing battle and wasting your energy. A lot of "objective" people here have recency bias, ignore the environment variables(for example "age", "injury", etc.), all believe that their favourite is the "GOAT" etc. .
We can agree that Federer was the best at the YEC in his generation, and Djokovic was the best at the YEC in his generation.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

So, Djokovic beat Federer x3 and Nadal

Federer beat Hewitt, Blake and Ferrer.

And from this we can conclude that it's Federer easily?

Babe you’re so cute. A walkover doesn’t count as a win for your H2H so he didn’t defeat Federer 3x. Also so cute you fail to include Agassi and Nadal and instead say Hewitt, Blake and Ferrer. Your cherry-picking is embarrassing, do better next time.

that’s like if I say Djokovic beat Ruud and Davydenko but didn’t mention Federer but unlike you, I did post the facts and history because I don’t cherry-pick. Xx

 

[NoleFam]

yes, by one match, even though 8 of the 11 matches were with Djokovic having physical advantage (from 11 onwards)



because fed prioritized Basel over Paris and didn't play Madrid/Paris in 04/05 - two of his peak years due to injuries.
Yes, fed wasn't in a state to play 2014 WTF final.
Fed wasn't even fully recovered 5 days later in DC, let alone the day of the YEC final. Its why he lost so badly to Monfils.



it does matter whether it results in elimination or not. 2 matches each



a very informed one.

Whether he prioritized Basel or not, he still entered Paris Masters 13 times and he played it in 2007-2010. Lost to Monfils and thrashed Gasquet to clinch the DC title.

I don't see how you think a RR knockout match is on the same level as a final because it clearly isn't.

 

[abmk]

@abmk , I think you're fighting a losing battle and wasting your energy. A lot of "objective" people here have recency bias, ignore the environment variables(for example "age", "injury", etc.), all believe that their favourite is the "GOAT" etc. .
We can agree that Federer was the best at the YEC in his generation, and Djokovic was the best at the YEC in his generation.

well, they aren't anywhere near 100 miles of objective.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

3 wins in the final over federer mean nothing…
Zero wins by Federer in the finals
Ok…

How do you Djokovic fans not know by now that a walkover doesn’t count as a victory in the H2H? If Djokovic gave a walkover to Tomic or Ruud that doesn’t count as a victory for that player. He didn’t win 3 times in finals against Federer. Educate yourself, please.

 

[abhi_trip]

well, they aren't anywhere near 100 miles of objective.

Hence the inverted commas
Let them have fun and stop wasting energy

 

[abmk]

Whether he prioritized Basel or not, he still entered Paris Masters 13 times and he played it in 2007-2010.

got injured and gave walkover in Paris 2008.
so only effectively Fed only played with chance to win in 2 of the 6 prime years (2004-09).
if Djoko had missed 12-14 at Paris in his best years, he'd be at far less Paris masters than he is now.

Anyways Djoko is better at Paris.
But fed's better at the YEC, Madrid indoors/Shanghai (as close to indoors as it gets), Basel etc.

Lost to Monfils and thrashed Gasquet to clinch the DC title.

Fed got beat badly by Monfils because he wasn't 100% even 5 days later after YEC. but he's supposed to be in a position to play in the YEC 14 final?
in which world?
the guy who hasn't retired in a single match ever, given so few walkovers, even played matches like IW 13 (shouldn't have) and AO 20 (vs djoko himself) hampered.
I mean, be better man. Stop with such stuff.

I don't see how you think a RR knockout match is on the same level as a final because it clearly isn't.

if both result in elimination, both matter more than a non-elimination one.
Also like I said the 2019 RR match resulted in Djoko not getting YE#1. So that is significant.

It is 3-3 (or 2-2 in elimination) at YEC with 5 of the 6 matches of physical advantage for Djokovic and 6th one (10) being neutral.
Djokovic can barely equalize with so much of advantage.
I mean they didn't even play a match at YEC in 03-04, 06/07, 4 of federer's best years at the YEC. whereas they played 4 matches in 4 of djokovic's best years (12-15).
Not blaming Djokovic for 03-04 or 06 of course, but just saying Djokovic had the massive circumstantial advantage at the YEC and its still equal at 3-3 (or 2-2 in elimination matches)

 

[abmk]

Hence the inverted commas
Let them have fun and stop wasting energy

only writing for some of those who have some rationality and to counter atleast some of the propaganda.

 

[pj80]

How do you Djokovic fans not know by now that a walkover doesn’t count as a victory in the H2H? If Djokovic gave a walkover to Tomic or Ruud that doesn’t count as a victory for that player. He didn’t win 3 times in finals against Federer. Educate yourself, please.

Fed let a lot of people down...by choosing not to play

 

[abmk]

Federer got to the semi 16 out of 17 times at the YEC. Only time he didn't in 08, he was hampered by injury (back injury)
Djokovic got to the semi 11 out of 15 times at the YEC. eliminated in RR in 2007, 09, 11, 19 (ok, hampered/done physically in 11).

 

[ImmorTAL Big 3]

For me it's hard to choose because you can make a case for both.Roger is more consistent 16 out of 17 SF or better is insane/2008 is the only exception when he was ill and still barely lost to Murray/.He also has more F and SF.On the other hand i think Novak peak was higher 12-15 and he met stronger opponents.Still 6=6 so it's anyone choise.I ll go with Novak just because i am his fan but it can be made case for Roger also.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

Fed let a lot of people down...by choosing not to play

A walkover. Does not count. As a win. Hope you’ve learnt that.

 

[abmk]

For me it's hard to choose because you can make a case for both.Roger is more consistent 16 out of 17 SF or better is insane/2008 is the only exception when he was ill and still barely lost to Murray/.He also has more F and SF.On the other hand i think Novak peak was higher 12-15 and he met stronger opponents.Still 6=6 so it's anyone choise.I ll go with Novak just because i am his fan but it can be made case for Roger also.

Federer had higher peak in 03-04,06-07.
Heck Fed's 2010 YEC level is on par with anything Djokovic has done at the YEC, if not little better.

Also djoko had weak competition at YEC in 14, meh at best in 13/15. Only good competition YEC was in 12.

Federer had clearly better competition in 03-07 with Agassi, Nalby, Hewitt, Safin and even Nadal/Blake in 06, Gonzo/Ferrer in 07, Roddick in 03/06.

 

[ImmorTAL Big 3]

Federer had higher peak in 03-04,06-07.
Heck Fed's 2010 YEC level is on par with anything Djokovic has done at the YEC, if not little better.

Also djoko had weak competition at YEC in 14, meh at best in 13/15. Only good competition YEC was in 12.

Federer had clearly better competition in 03-07 with Agassi, Nalby, Hewitt, Safin and even Nadal/Blake in 06, Gonzo/Ferrer in 07, Roddick in 03/06.

In the period 12-15 Novak faced Fed,Nadal,Murray at his top,Del Po,2014 Stan,2014 Cilic and decent Berdych.No way that's weaker competition than 2003-07 Fed.I agree that in 12-15 Fed was past his prime but all other players were.Still from 2012 to 2016 Final vs Murray Novak lost just 1 match with little importance 2015 RR match vs Fed

 

[Halba]

Federer still. only indoors and grass and USO federer superior, Djokovic career is unfinished though, and we have to wait.

 

[abmk]

In the period 12-15 Novak faced Fed,Nadal,Murray at his top,Del Po,2014 Stan,2014 Cilic and decent Berdych.No way that's weaker competition than 2003-07 Fed.I agree that in 12-15 Fed was past his prime but all other players were.Still from 2012 to 2016 Final vs Murray Novak lost just 1 match with little importance 2015 RR match vs Fed

Murray at his top? wut?
Murray's best YECs were 2008, 2010 and 2016 in chronological order. not 2013-15. Murray was decent enough in 12, but only 4th best year there for him. Murray was absent in 13, bad in 14 (got smashed), well below par in 15.

berdych, cilic, wawa were sh*te in YEC 14 RR. as was the RR on the other side (for fed fed). both fed and djoko broke records of least # of games lost in RR.
Nishi played well for about one set in the semi, but got absolutely smashed in the other 2. that's about it. no final played. That's as weak a YEC as it gets competition-wise. Only thing that saved that YEC was the fed-wawa semi where wawa actually played well and fed was below his best to make it a thriller.

berdych was below par in YEC 12/15 as well.
berdych has never made semi of the YEC after 11.
Cilic has never made semi of the YEC.
they are not even half-decent competition at YEC from 12-15.

nadal of YEC 06 > nadal of YEC 13 (especially the respective matches vs fed/djoko)
nadal of YEC 07 > nadal of YEC 15

(and this is not even counting Nadal of YEC 10 when fed won)

decent enough opponents faced for the 4 years each:

Agassi 03 RR
Roddick 03
Agassi 03 final
Hewitt 04 RR
Moya 04
Safin 04
Hewitt 04 F
Nalby 06
Roddick 06
Nadal 06
Blake 06
Gonzo 07
Nadal 07
Ferrer 07

(arguably Ljubicic of 06, davy of 07 as well)

djoko:

Murray 12
delpo 12
fed 12
delpo 13
fed 13
nadal 13
fed 15 RR
fed 15 final
(ok, maybe Gasquet in 13, but I didn't watch that match and you could argue Nishi YEC 14 semi and Wawa of YEC 13 semi)

2005 fed of course had nalby/ljubicic in RR and nalby in the final.

fed's competition beats djoko's handily. its not even close.


As far level goes:

fed YEC 03-04/06-07 > fed YEC 10 >~ djoko YEC 14/YEC 15 > djoko YEC 12/13.
djoko's best 2 is at best equal to fed's 5th best at the YEC. fed's top 4 clearly above (esp considering peak level - SF/F).

Fed won 19/19 sets in the YEC 03-04/06-07 SF/F including vs Agassi, Safin, Hewitt, Nadal, Roddick
Djoko won 14/16 sets in YEC 12-15 SF/F. Excellent, but still not at fed's level

 

[TMF]

For me it's hard to choose because you can make a case for both.Roger is more consistent 16 out of 17 SF or better is insane/2008 is the only exception when he was ill and still barely lost to Murray/.He also has more F and SF.On the other hand i think Novak peak was higher 12-15 and he met stronger opponents.Still 6=6 so it's anyone choise.I ll go with Novak just because i am his fan but it can be made case for Roger also.

Federer set the record. He's the first guy to get 6 and Djokovic just tied him. The former player is greater, not the latter who's the hunter

 

[ImmorTAL Big 3]

Federer set the record. He's the first guy to get 6 and Djokovic just tied him. The former player is greater, not the latter who's the hunter

By the same logic Sampras should be GOAT because he 1st settle the record or probably Emerson before him.That is one of the most absurd logics

 

[RS]

Federer fans scrape a lot this days lol.

 

[abmk]

Federer fans scrape a lot this days lol.

yes, calling 5+2 = 7 is scraping while many Djokodal fans posting away with 2+2 = 5 all over the forum is perfectly normal.

By the same logic Sampras should be GOAT because he 1st settle the record or probably Emerson before him.That is one of the most absurd logics

might want to read properly. He said setter would be greater than the hunter if they remained tied. Did Sampras remain tied at 12 with Emerson or Fed remain tied with Sampras at 14?

 

[TMF]

By the same logic Sampras should be GOAT because he 1st settle the record or probably Emerson before him.That is one of the most absurd logics

When Federer has 5 YEC, Sampras was still a greater player at the WTF. Djokovic was always the hunter since the first day he step on the ATP tour. He was chasing slams, weeks #1, YE #1 and YEC. He never set any benchmark because the past legends have done it all. Being a chaser is much easier to reach your goal. Djokovic owe his success to Federer because he's the pioneer on/off the court in the 21st century.

Emerson's achievements were in the pre-open era so it's not applicable to compare players in the open era.

 

[Garro]

Federer got to the semi 16 out of 17 times at the YEC. Only time he didn't in 08, he was hampered by injury (back injury)
Djokovic got to the semi 11 out of 15 times at the YEC. eliminated in RR in 2007, 09, 11, 19 (ok, hampered/done physically in 11).

Yes this is a good point. Fed also finished first in his group 14 out of those 17 times compared to 8/15 for Djoker.
Not to mention he was more dominant in his wins and has made more finals as well.

Fed still definitely has the edge as long as they are tied in total titles.

 

[beast of mallorca]

Both have 6 titles, sharing the YEC record. Both have won the YEC at three different venues, both players gained YEC titles in Shanghai and London, Fed in Houston and Nole in Turin. Who is the bigger player in this event now? Djoker can boast a streak of 4 titles from 2012-2015, which no one else in YEC history could do, Fed couldn't even complete a hat trick. Fed, on the other hand, has more final appearances - 10, Djoker 8, and with one exception (2008) he advanced from the group in all of his appearances. Their mutual H2H on YEC is tied 3-3.

Obviously, it's Djokovic. He makes mincemeat out of Feddyphants

 

[Oceans II]

Djokovic because he won 4 in a row, therefore higher peak, domination according to Federer fans who use the consecutive argument.

 

[Oceans II]

So going by arguments from a few certain posters in this thread, I assume they would admit that Djokovic is clearly superior to Federer on Clay/RG. You can't take them seriously with their inconsistency.

 

[Fiero425]

Djokovic because he won 4 in a row, therefore higher peak, domination according to Federer fans who use the consecutive argument.

What made it more impressive on the end of that 4 streak, 2015 had Novak playing 8 Masters, won 6, & was in the final of the other 2 besides ending season winning YEC!

 

[RS]

yes, calling 5+2 = 7 is scraping while many Djokodal fans posting away with 2+2 = 5 all over the forum is perfectly normal.



might want to read properly. He said setter would be greater than the hunter if they remained tied. Did Sampras remain tied at 12 with Emerson or Fed remain tied with Sampras at 14?

Come on admit price money and consecutive streaks making for extra slams and hunter is scraping a bit

I agree Federer wins this by small margin for now though.

 

[abmk]

Come on admit price money and consecutive streaks making for extra slams and hunter is scraping a bit

I agree Federer wins this by small margin for now though.

prize money is scraping
not consecutive streaks
the hunter logic though I may not necessarily agree 100% isn't invalid

 

[pj80]

A walkover. Does not count. As a win. Hope you’ve learnt that.

He beat Fed x2 in finals...when it counted the most. Both in straight sets....

 

[The Fedfather]

He beat Fed x2 in finals...when it counted the most. Both in straight sets....

Federer eliminated Djokovic twice from contention for the YEC, and with the RR loss in 2015 there also was no guarantees for Djokovic's qualification. In the end, Novak was out of YEC twice because Federer beat him - both times in straight sets too. And factually that doesn't count less than Roger being eliminated twice in the finals.

 

[thrust]

It was technically one final. You're not qualified to talk about competition sadly

Novak did beat Roger in TWO finals, Roger defaulted their third final. Do you honestly believe Roger had strong competition, indoors, 04-08?

 

[thrust]

As a Novak fan, its probably Fed. He has more finals and much more wins in the tournament. If Novak had won one of those he should have, it would have been a no brainer.

Both have 6 wins, therefore, equal IMO.

 

[NatF]

Novak did beat Roger in TWO finals, Roger defaulted their third final. Do you honestly believe Roger had strong competition, indoors, 04-08?

The 2015 RR was the real final.

The YEC was outdoors in 03-04. I don't think Fed had tough competition indoors no, certainly not by historical standards however neither did Djokovic...

 

[The Fedfather]

Both have 6 wins, therefore, equal IMO.

Both have 6 titles. Federer has 59 wins, Djokovic 46. Both have 17 losses. It's not equal at all.

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

Come on admit price money and consecutive streaks making for extra slams and hunter is scraping a bit

I agree Federer wins this by small margin for now though.

The hunter vs setter logic, while not necessarily 100% cogent, is also not completely absurd. If you have a clearly defined target you are chasing it gives you more motivation than trying to increase a record you already hold anyways. Pete, once he had 14, lost a little motivation as he considered his record safe for some time to come (ofc he turned out to be wrong). Had he had a target of 16 to beat, who knows if he had hung around a little longer. This is also a counter argument for those who try to discredit Court’s 24 slam record which she set without chasing any particular goal and without the slam record being the be all end all during her time.

 

[FRV4]

Federer is better than Djokovic at this tournament. Djokovic is the superior player overall, with less shotmaking skills though. No one will ever make people want to pick up a racket more than Federer.

 

[TMF]

Both have 6 wins, therefore, equal IMO.

setter > hunter

 

[Fiero425]

Federer is better than Djokovic at this tournament. Djokovic is the superior player overall, with less shotmaking skills though. No one will ever make people want to pick up a racket more than Federer.

Roger's probably the superior player at Wimbledon, but it won't stop Novak from attempting to tie him at 8 Chp. next season! What will you do then when we have the same scenerio; Fed defeating Novak a couple times early in his career, but succumbing 3 finals to his arch rival; 1 w/ 2 MP's on serve in hand?

 

[FRV4]

Roger's probably the superior player at Wimbledon, but it won't stop Novak from attempting to tie him at 8 Chp. next season! What will you do then when we have the same scenerio; Fed defeating Novak a couple times early in his career, but succumbing 3 finals to his arch rival; 1 w/ 2 MP's on serve in hand?

what are you talking about? I said Djokovic is the superior player.

Edit: Oh, I see now after reading all of it. Sorry I have a bad attention span. I would probably say peak Federer is the best Wimbledon player, but Djokovic is better player overall, he's already passed that point, so I don't think my opinion will change. It gets muddy trying to decipher who's the best when it's so close. I could very well be wrong with all my opinions because there are many variables I can't take into account because I don't know about them.

 

[initialize]

Federer is better than Djokovic at this tournament. Djokovic is the superior player overall, with less shotmaking skills though. No one will ever make people want to pick up a racket more than Federer.

Superior player in what sense? Just because of numbers in the inflation era?

 

[FRV4]

Superior player in what sense? Just because of numbers in the inflation era?

idk

 

[ImmorTAL Big 3]

Superior player in what sense? Just because of numbers in the inflation era?

They both have quite equal chance.2017 Goffin Dimitrov combo is at very best equal to Fritz Ruud.And not to mention Novak group in 2022 was miles more stronger than Roger 2017 group

 

[thrust]

Both have 6 titles. Federer has 59 wins, Djokovic 46. Both have 17 losses. It's not equal at all.

Federer probably has played the WTF more times than Novak, so naturally would have more wins, especially against weaker competition 04-08. WINNING tournaments is what counts, not how many matches won without winning the tournament.

 

[initialize]

Federer probably has played the WTF more times than Novak, so naturally would have more wins, especially against weaker competition 04-08. WINNING tournaments is what counts, not how many matches won without winning the tournament.

... literally everyone is starting to acknowledge we're currently in the weakest era of all time, not 04-08, years of which we had versions of Nadal and Djokovic who would mop the floor with the current versions of themselves. Get with the times

 

[Biotic]

... literally everyone is starting to acknowledge we're currently in the weakest era of all time, not 04-08, years of which we had versions of Nadal and Djokovic who would mop the floor with the current versions of themselves. Get with the times

This recent 03-07 era revisionism effort spearheaded by prominent Fed fan boys is like polishing a turd.

 

[The Fedfather]

Federer probably has played the WTF more times than Novak, so naturally would have more wins, especially against weaker competition 04-08. WINNING tournaments is what counts, not how many matches won without winning the tournament.

Naturally Federer was the better player at the YEC. Roger played 2 more editions of YEC than Djokovic, yes. But if Djokovic were to win 2 more YECs without losing a match, he would be still trailing Federer in wins.

They won the same amount of YEC tournaments. What in the tunnel-vision argument is it that nothing beyond titles matters? I mean, you did put 'IMO' in your reply, so whatever makes sense to you. I'm not explaining in detail how more wins is better than fewer wins in this comparison.

As for the weak 04-08 competition argument (Djokovic won the 2008 YEC btw), it would've been better to wait a bit after the 2022 edition. Djokovic won the title while looking in need of urgent medical help in some matches. No comment on Ruud's performance in the final. No comment on what Federer from 2004-2007 would do to this level of competition.

 

[initialize]

This recent 03-07 era revisionism effort spearheaded by prominent Fed fan boys is like polishing a turd.

LOL we are in the Career Inflation Era, get over it already. Even some of your fellow Nole friends and Nadal fans have admitted it too because it’s clear as day to see. The competition back then was 100% stronger than it is today, but maybe a few more Ruud or Tsitsipas finals might convince you?

 

[Biotic]

LOL we are in the Career Inflation Era, get over it already. Even some of your fellow Nole friends and Nadal fans have admitted it too because it’s clear as day to see. The competition back then was 100% stronger than it is today, but maybe a few more Ruud or Tsitsipas finals might convince you?

You completely missed the point. Whatever era we're in today and whatever era may come in the future, 03-07 will always remain weak af.