How many Slams Federer wins if Big3 were all born in 1981?
- Thread starter Lew II
- Start date
Atennisone
Hall of Fame
Myth and legends
Last edited:
TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
Don't know but 2005 Fed vs 2011 Djoker would have been fire.
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
Slightly less fire, but indeed.
TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
God dammit stop ninja-editing your posts. I guess my consideration stands. The 2006 scenario would probs be more favourable to Fed than 2005 but who knows.
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
Fed wins less in his 20s but smokes them when they are all 30+. At 35+ Fed would go to prison for murder.
Nadal only really bothered Fed on clay and for a few years when it was peak Nadal vs past his peak/prime Fed and Djokovic only started to bother Fed when it was peak Djokovic vs 30+ year old Fed.
Nadal only really bothered Fed on clay and for a few years when it was peak Nadal vs past his peak/prime Fed and Djokovic only started to bother Fed when it was peak Djokovic vs 30+ year old Fed.
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
Djokodal are doing fine in their 30s.
RaulRamirez
Legend
Let's have more fun: Have Laver, Borg and Sampras all born on 8/8/81 as well, and guesstimate how many slams for each.
TimHenmanATG
Hall of Fame
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
Because their competition are a bunch of nobodies and Fed who's 38.
Put 2012 Fed in today's era and watch what happens. He dealt with peak Nadal/Djokovic just fine at the time. He actually tortured Djokovic in the Slams in 2010-2012.
Breakpointerer
Legend
Untestable, unprovable, irrelevant.
But he wins less than he has, obviously. All of them would.
But he wins less than he has, obviously. All of them would.
ForehandCross
G.O.A.T.
Then none of the three actually end up being dominant. The landscape will be completely different.
Fedovic will kill each other on HC ,Grass, Clay.
Nadal due to his superiority on clay and being a good early bloomer , will end up with most slams.
Nadal from age 18-19 will murder the tour at WB,FO as Fedovic won't be ready to do anything about it as they didn't do as well as Nadal at such a young age.
Fed will lead them at WB and USO but then his total there will decrease. Djokovic will lead at AO with good scalps at WB and USO.
Till 2012 when they will be around 30 (A representative indication of their position relative to each other, not number and form base like accounting for how many slams they played and perfectly distributing them, that will be tedious.)
Federer
AO :2
FO :1 or 0
WB : 4
USO : 3(10)
Djokovic
AO : 5
FO : 1 or 0
WB :3
USO:2 (10)
Rafael Nadal:
WB : 3
FO : 10
AO : 0 or 1
USO: 1 (14)
Nadal leads because of his early start.
If we don't consider that , they will be around 10-12 slams each at age 30 or so having eaten each other's career.
Fedovic will kill each other on HC ,Grass, Clay.
Nadal due to his superiority on clay and being a good early bloomer , will end up with most slams.
Nadal from age 18-19 will murder the tour at WB,FO as Fedovic won't be ready to do anything about it as they didn't do as well as Nadal at such a young age.
Fed will lead them at WB and USO but then his total there will decrease. Djokovic will lead at AO with good scalps at WB and USO.
Till 2012 when they will be around 30 (A representative indication of their position relative to each other, not number and form base like accounting for how many slams they played and perfectly distributing them, that will be tedious.)
Federer
AO :2
FO :1 or 0
WB : 4
USO : 3(10)
Djokovic
AO : 5
FO : 1 or 0
WB :3
USO:2 (10)
Rafael Nadal:
WB : 3
FO : 10
AO : 0 or 1
USO: 1 (14)
Nadal leads because of his early start.
If we don't consider that , they will be around 10-12 slams each at age 30 or so having eaten each other's career.
RS
Bionic Poster
Problem is if Nadal and Djokovic were born in 1981 they would play differently. Federer started off playing in a different era. How would they adapt to each other. Would Fed have switched to the bigger head earlier? I am copping out. I think at least double figures for all 3 though.
ForehandRF
Legend
Had Djokodal been born in 1981, they would have evolved their games, in the first part of their careers, in the serve and volley era and their styles would have been different.Things would have looked way different compared with what actually happened, but for sure none of them (the BIG3) would have won as many slams.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
These guys haven't hit 35 yet so you have to wait until that happens to be so sure.
Nadal beat Federer on his first try when he was 17 and pushed him to 5 when he was 18, and that was peak Federer. Never bothered him?
RaulRamirez
Legend
Your guess is as good as mine, but I don't see how/why they would go from winning 56 to winning 34. That's a big collective reduction! So, the rest of the field would take an additional 22 slams?
ForehandCross
G.O.A.T.
Where exactly? He wins AO of both years like he did,wins WB 2017 like he did. He will clean up the masters but also won't be winning clay masters in 2017 , 2018 maybe.
Djokovic at WB 2018 Will be quite tough. Toss up.
He won't win USO.
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
Federer won their 5 most important meetings outside of clay until July 2008. He lost a R32 in a Masters and a 500 final, both times when he had health issues.
There is exactly zero chance that Nadal's level in 2021+ will be anything close to 2017+ Fed. Maybe even Berrettini will beat him.
ForehandCross
G.O.A.T.
This was upto 2012 and as I said it was
"Representative indication of their position relative to each other, not number and form base like accounting for how many slams they played and perfectly distributing them, that will be tedious."
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
And what about Djokovic? It's best to wait until they cross that bridge.
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
Legit point but I already see signs that he's declining and decline will hit Nadal/Djokovic more than Fed because they rely on physical aspects of the game way more than Fed. They just havent been exposed enough because the younger players suck. But the time that they will decline enough for the youngsters to take them down will come.
zagor
Bionic Poster
It has some logic to it, if they were all the same age they probably wouldn't have had those crazy dominant periods. Maybe the rest of the field would have had more confidence against them as a consequence.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
I think Nadal takes over clay and grass early, and Djokovic wins a few hardcourt Slams early, and this is the ages from 19-22. At 22, then Federer makes his ascension but Djokodal would have the jump on him in Slam count. Nadal would have the lead though, that I agree with and I think it would be a solid lead.
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
Not everyone was serve and volleyer in 90s and early 2000s. There were many strong baseliners like Agassi, Courier, Hewitt, Kuerten, Kafelnikov, Safin...
RaulRamirez
Legend
Okay, I missed "Till 2012." My bad.
RaulRamirez
Legend
Possibly, don't know....I did miss his "Till 2012".
ForehandRF
Legend
I don't necessarily mean that they would have been serve and volleyers but for sure thing would have been different.Fastersurfaces,lighter balls, a different kind of game would have been in front of their eyes.
ForehandCross
G.O.A.T.
Djokovic definitely takes some HC slams early , that's why I kinda gave him more USO than Rafa thinking of 2007-09 USO. However he did disappoint in AO after 2008 for 2009 and 2010. Yes, however he will be ahead of Fed(Even in that post of mine he is ahead, I didn't count right)
And again the numbers are just representation, trying to get to exact numbers will be pretty tedious for we will have to go year by year comparing their form and thinking of the field .
Too much work for hypotheticals.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
People have been saying this for at least 7 years and that has turned out to not be true. If anything, Djokovic has lost the least of his physical strengths of the 3.
Last edited:
Tsongerer
Rookie
He would lose a few titles, but not much as he's simply better than Nole and Rafa on rebound ace, grass and USO fast hard. Nadal would still win most of his RGs and maybe lose out on a few non RG slams. Nole would lose by far most titles, he has a favourable match up with Rafa off clay and struggled hard against Fed until Fed turned like 29 or 30. Made up for that by accumulating most GSs after Fed got old.
Rafa 15
Fed 10-15
Nole <10
Rafa 15
Fed 10-15
Nole <10
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
True but I think he wins multiple USO titles before he wins his 2nd AO title, but eventually ends up with more AO titles. I think they win more than 3, 2 and 1 USO titles though.
RS
Bionic Poster
How many would Djokovic have?
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
All Djokovic has to do is make it close with Federer and the pendulum swings in his favor the majority of the time. Djokovic with less than 10 Slams is fantasy talk. Federer gets hurt the most if they are all the same age.
Tsongerer
Rookie
Well yeah Nole is mentally stronger than Fed. I just doubt he could make it close with 05-07 Fed most of the time. Without the topspin lefhanded forehand there's no one that outralies peak Fed. I mean there have been matches where Fed had good days and not just beat, but outralied peak Nole at age 30+ with more 10+ shots points going his way. I can't imagine Federer not dominating Nole from the baseline with his peak forehand, backhand, footwork and serve. Probably a similar scenario to how Wawrinka outralies Nole most of the time in Grand Slams. Fed had a lot more power in his peak, moved faster and made less mistakes.
Also Nole would have to wait till the age of 26 to get to play at slow hard (blue AO). His timeframe to dominate that tournament as much as he has done would be shortened. Rafa doesn't lose out on his most favourable surface in this hypothetical scenario, nor Fed ofc.
TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
inb4 'players peak in their 30s now' followed by statistics of performance against the field from 2015.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
Just for reference, Fed's 2003-2007 would coincide with Djokovic's 2009-2013 seasons and Nadal's 2008-2012 seasons.
Also, keep in mind that this is my opinion, though you probably already knew that when you entered this thread. The spoiler is really long:
Also, keep in mind that this is my opinion, though you probably already knew that when you entered this thread. The spoiler is really long:
RG 2000 - Not that Fed was winning this anyway, but I'll give this one to Nadal since I also want to record his Slam progress.
RG 2001 - Ditto
RG 2002 - Ditto
W 2002 - I say Nadal wins this one. Wimbledon 2002 seemed like a pretty slow tournament and the serve-and-volleyers all went out within the first few rounds. This combined with his 2007 form...
RG 2003 - Ditto
W 2003 - Fed still wins this one. His opponent would be 2008 Nadal who was certainly no slouch on the grass, but 2003 Fed delivered some of his absolute best grass court tennis here. I feel pretty confident saying that he could beat Nadal in about four sets. I do think the grass was slightly faster in 2003 (not quite at pre-2001 levels, but it definitely favors serving and volleying) which could help contribute to this result.
AO 2004 - He still wins this one. Obviously, 2009 Nadal would be one heck of a tough opponent, but I also rate Fed's AO 2004 form very highly; it's nearly up there with his 2007 form. Peak for peak, I think Fed is the better player at the AO so I'll give him the win here. The match up issue might be a problem but I think Fed would have the advantage on a faster court.
RG 2004 - He wasn't winning this anyway, but I'll speculate on whether 2009 Nadal still wins 2004 RG. I'm not too sure if he would, given that it's hard to determine RG 2009 Nadal's form. It could have been that he was playing really well and just happened to lose to a GOATing opponent or his level dropped and Soderling took advantage of it. I say Nadal loses to Coria at some point during the tournament.
W 2004 - Fed wins this pretty easily. I think 2004 Roddick would still have been a tougher opponent than anything 2009 Nadal or 2010 Djokovic could bring to the table.
USO 2004 - Same here.
AO 2005 - Fed still loses, but 2011 Djokovic ends up winning the title. And then you'd have people here praising Safin's run to the final as legendary (which it would be).
RG 2005 - It's 2010 Nadal.
W 2005 - I'll give this one to Fed, though he'll face Djokovic in the final. I did feel that the grass was slower in 2005 than in 2003-2004, but I don't think it would be an issue given that Fed's level was still about as high as in 2003-2004. Against anybody else but Sampras, I would comfortably give Fed the win. As it's 2011 Djokovic, however, Fed should drop a set.
USO 2005 - On one hand, Fed was godly throughout most of this tournament. On the other hand, 2011 Djokovic was also great at the US Open. And so was 2010 Nadal! I suppose this tournament depends on what the semifinals are. If Fed gets Nadal in the semis, I think Djokovic will win the whole thing. If it's the opposite, I would hand the trophy to Federer. I do think Nadal also has an outside shot at the title, but if I were him I would like to face Federer (match ups, again). You'd also have to consider the court speed, since USO 2005-2010 was still pretty fast.
AO 2006 - 2012 Djokovic takes it.
RG 2006 - 2011 Nadal takes it, I think, but 2006 Federer and 2012 Djokovic are tough opponents.
W 2006 - Fed will take it again. I don't think there's much to stop him, given that 2012 Djokovic and 2011 Nadal were both weaker than in their previous years.
USO 2006 - Again, there's not much to stop him. 2011 Nadal wasn't too spectacular (apart from one set in the final) and neither was 2012 Djokovic. On the other hand, Federer was still in great form.
AO 2007 - 2007 Fed vs. 2013 Djoker. What a battle. Given Fed's exceptionally high level of play at AO 2007, I would lean towards him when determining the winner. 2013 Djokovic could win, though.
RG 2007 - Nadal again.
W 2007 - Really, who is stopping Federer? Djokovic was miserable in the 2013 final and 2012 Nadal was busy losing to Rosol in the second round.
USO 2007 - I have Fed taking it, though his USO 2007 form was definitely worse than in previous years. Nadal was injured at the 2012 edition and Djokovic played a decent final but blew away a few crucial points. Not too dissimilar to the 2007 final.
I have Fed still winning most of the Slams he won in 2003-2007 due to how consistently he managed a high peak throughout those years (remember that after 2011, Djokovic had noticeably weaker seasons in 2012-2014 before peaking again in 2015-2016. Also note how it's hard to define Nadal's prime since he had great years in 2008, 2010, and 2013 but less dominant seasons are sandwiched between). While Nadal would thrive in his younger years, Fed would dominate in his early to mid 20's and Djokovic would dominate in his mid to late-20's (not shown). While it seems like I'm biased against Djokovic, it appears this way because this period crops off his 2014-2016 form. I genuinely believe that 2015 Djokovic has a really good chance at scoring the CYGS in 2009.
It also seems that I am being a bit unfair to Nadal here. You may have a point since I've favored Federer in most encounters against him. The match up issue (plus, Fed's 2003-2004 BH was nothing too special) would pose some problems, but I think that they may be balanced out by the slightly faster surfaces at 2003 Wimby and 2004 AO. Nadal's lefty topspin advantage seems to be at least partially negated when the two play on a faster surface.
I imagine a lot of people will disagree with this list, but it's just my opinion.
RG 2001 - Ditto
RG 2002 - Ditto
W 2002 - I say Nadal wins this one. Wimbledon 2002 seemed like a pretty slow tournament and the serve-and-volleyers all went out within the first few rounds. This combined with his 2007 form...
RG 2003 - Ditto
W 2003 - Fed still wins this one. His opponent would be 2008 Nadal who was certainly no slouch on the grass, but 2003 Fed delivered some of his absolute best grass court tennis here. I feel pretty confident saying that he could beat Nadal in about four sets. I do think the grass was slightly faster in 2003 (not quite at pre-2001 levels, but it definitely favors serving and volleying) which could help contribute to this result.
AO 2004 - He still wins this one. Obviously, 2009 Nadal would be one heck of a tough opponent, but I also rate Fed's AO 2004 form very highly; it's nearly up there with his 2007 form. Peak for peak, I think Fed is the better player at the AO so I'll give him the win here. The match up issue might be a problem but I think Fed would have the advantage on a faster court.
RG 2004 - He wasn't winning this anyway, but I'll speculate on whether 2009 Nadal still wins 2004 RG. I'm not too sure if he would, given that it's hard to determine RG 2009 Nadal's form. It could have been that he was playing really well and just happened to lose to a GOATing opponent or his level dropped and Soderling took advantage of it. I say Nadal loses to Coria at some point during the tournament.
W 2004 - Fed wins this pretty easily. I think 2004 Roddick would still have been a tougher opponent than anything 2009 Nadal or 2010 Djokovic could bring to the table.
USO 2004 - Same here.
AO 2005 - Fed still loses, but 2011 Djokovic ends up winning the title. And then you'd have people here praising Safin's run to the final as legendary (which it would be).
RG 2005 - It's 2010 Nadal.
W 2005 - I'll give this one to Fed, though he'll face Djokovic in the final. I did feel that the grass was slower in 2005 than in 2003-2004, but I don't think it would be an issue given that Fed's level was still about as high as in 2003-2004. Against anybody else but Sampras, I would comfortably give Fed the win. As it's 2011 Djokovic, however, Fed should drop a set.
USO 2005 - On one hand, Fed was godly throughout most of this tournament. On the other hand, 2011 Djokovic was also great at the US Open. And so was 2010 Nadal! I suppose this tournament depends on what the semifinals are. If Fed gets Nadal in the semis, I think Djokovic will win the whole thing. If it's the opposite, I would hand the trophy to Federer. I do think Nadal also has an outside shot at the title, but if I were him I would like to face Federer (match ups, again). You'd also have to consider the court speed, since USO 2005-2010 was still pretty fast.
AO 2006 - 2012 Djokovic takes it.
RG 2006 - 2011 Nadal takes it, I think, but 2006 Federer and 2012 Djokovic are tough opponents.
W 2006 - Fed will take it again. I don't think there's much to stop him, given that 2012 Djokovic and 2011 Nadal were both weaker than in their previous years.
USO 2006 - Again, there's not much to stop him. 2011 Nadal wasn't too spectacular (apart from one set in the final) and neither was 2012 Djokovic. On the other hand, Federer was still in great form.
AO 2007 - 2007 Fed vs. 2013 Djoker. What a battle. Given Fed's exceptionally high level of play at AO 2007, I would lean towards him when determining the winner. 2013 Djokovic could win, though.
RG 2007 - Nadal again.
W 2007 - Really, who is stopping Federer? Djokovic was miserable in the 2013 final and 2012 Nadal was busy losing to Rosol in the second round.
USO 2007 - I have Fed taking it, though his USO 2007 form was definitely worse than in previous years. Nadal was injured at the 2012 edition and Djokovic played a decent final but blew away a few crucial points. Not too dissimilar to the 2007 final.
I have Fed still winning most of the Slams he won in 2003-2007 due to how consistently he managed a high peak throughout those years (remember that after 2011, Djokovic had noticeably weaker seasons in 2012-2014 before peaking again in 2015-2016. Also note how it's hard to define Nadal's prime since he had great years in 2008, 2010, and 2013 but less dominant seasons are sandwiched between). While Nadal would thrive in his younger years, Fed would dominate in his early to mid 20's and Djokovic would dominate in his mid to late-20's (not shown). While it seems like I'm biased against Djokovic, it appears this way because this period crops off his 2014-2016 form. I genuinely believe that 2015 Djokovic has a really good chance at scoring the CYGS in 2009.
It also seems that I am being a bit unfair to Nadal here. You may have a point since I've favored Federer in most encounters against him. The match up issue (plus, Fed's 2003-2004 BH was nothing too special) would pose some problems, but I think that they may be balanced out by the slightly faster surfaces at 2003 Wimby and 2004 AO. Nadal's lefty topspin advantage seems to be at least partially negated when the two play on a faster surface.
I imagine a lot of people will disagree with this list, but it's just my opinion.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
Obviously, this leaves out the Masters where I think Djokovic and Nadal would enjoy much more success.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
It doesn't quite work that way. If Federer, Nadal and Djokovic were all born in 1981, then the courts they start their junior and senior pro careers would have much polarized surfaces. If Federer came onto the senior tour in 1998, then assume Nadal and Djokovic also come onto the tour then. The game is very different, racket technology also isn't quite what it is now, and the conditions of the 90s are the most polarized in history according to many. This means, Nadal and Djokovic will have different playing styles to what they had when they started to come onto the tour in the 00s. You also then cannot say without a shadow of a doubt that the development of Nadal and Djokovic would have followed the exact same path, you cannot say Nadal would be at peak in 2003 and Djokovic in 2005, since we don't know how them building their games for the 90s style of play would influence their maturation as players.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
People who believe Djokovic would be dominating peak Federer in slams like he is dominating old Federer are living in a fantasy world. AO is the only slam where Djokovic would have the clear advantage.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
He made it close with 2007 Federer when he was 20 years old, years before his peak. Wawrinka and Federer are totally different gamestyles and give a totally different ball. He hasn't dominated Djokovic on the baseline since the very beginning of their rivalry. The stats on rallies show this. At age 23 Federer will be better than him but 24 they go neck and neck. Federer also hit his peak at 22 and a half, the same age as Nadal, so that will be his main challenege and then at 24 they all are peak and go at it.
Rebound Ace was slow/medium hardcourt. There was nothing fast about it. Why do you think Sampras couldn't beat Agassi there?
Bottom line is Djokodal matured earlier so they win Slams earlier and then Federer hits his peak at the same age Nadal hits his, someone who he had a matchup problem with. Then he has to deal with them both at the time at their peaks. That would be a nightmare scenario. Then at 27-29, Djokovic hit a second peak at the ages both Fedal were slowing down. It's Federer who would get the short end of the stick here.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Suspect that a lot less than he did. The biggest impact would likely be that both Nadal and Novak would be established multi slam winners before Fed began reaching finals. And that changes a lot. Nadal-Djokovic would be the rivalry of the decade. In his first years Fed would face two similarly aged ATGs that start winning before he does. we don’t know if hypothetical Fed adapts to this new reality. Then again hypothetical Fed always wins!
Noleberic123
G.O.A.T.
My guess is that all three of them would have 14-16.
2007-2010 Djokovic would win more slams in 2001-2004 than he did in the period that he actually played IMO. Federer would be the best player from 2006-2007 most likely Due to Djokovic being a wimp mentally in those years. Nadal would have a hard time winning Wimbledon IMO. I'll give him 1 Wimbledon instead of two. He would still win a ridiculous number of FO's though. But at the other three geez would he have a hard time. Nadal would be the third best IMO.
2007-2010 Djokovic would win more slams in 2001-2004 than he did in the period that he actually played IMO. Federer would be the best player from 2006-2007 most likely Due to Djokovic being a wimp mentally in those years. Nadal would have a hard time winning Wimbledon IMO. I'll give him 1 Wimbledon instead of two. He would still win a ridiculous number of FO's though. But at the other three geez would he have a hard time. Nadal would be the third best IMO.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
And it leaves out some of Djokovic's early years. I have Djoker winning AO 2002 and could win USO 2002 (Sampras/Agassi is an interesting call). USO 2001 is also a great chance for him.
Similar threads
- Poll
