Defeated #1 Seed or Defending Champion - Djokovic, Federer, and Nadal

[McEnroeisanartist]

Defeated the #1 Seed at a Grand Slam
Djokovic - 2
Federer - 2
Nadal - 6 (the record) - 3 times (06 French, 07 French, 08 French), he defeated Federer, when Federer should not have been the #1 seed.

Defeated the Defending Champion at a Grand Slam
Djokovic - 4
Federer - 2
Nadal - 1

[Sabratha]

Nadal does well when he isn't the underdog is what that statistic says.

[woodrow1029]

Originally Posted by McEnroeisanartist

he defeated Federer, when Federer should not have been the #1 seed.

Why should he not have been the #1 seed?

[Sabratha]

Originally Posted by woodrow1029

Why should he not have been the #1 seed?

I think he's implying that the French Open should have a similar seeding equation as Wimbledon - in which the seeding is finalized by their total win(s) and results on grass.

[McEnroeisanartist]

Originally Posted by Sabratha

I think he's implying that the French Open should have a similar seeding equation as Wimbledon - in which the seeding is finalized by their total win(s) and results on grass.

Yes that is what I am implying. I mean I know the French love Federer, but did the tournament organizers, or anyone for that matter, think that Federer, and not Nadal would win the French Open, in 2006, 2007, and 2008.

[kOaMaster]

it's hard to win against the defending champion or the number one seed when you're both yourself.

although I like your threads, you had better.

[Blocker]

Originally Posted by kOaMaster

it's hard to win against the defending champion or the number one seed when you're both yourself.

although I like your threads, you had better.

This. Close thread.

[kalyan4fedever]

Originally Posted by kOaMaster

it's hard to win against the defending champion or the number one seed when you're both yourself.

although I like your threads, you had better.

Right considering that nadal should win both the records i guess.

[tennis_pro]

Originally Posted by kOaMaster

it's hard to win against the defending champion or the number one seed when you're both yourself.

although I like your threads, you had better.

lawl, good point

we should revaluate nadals french open wins, then, as he never beat the defending FO champ

[Dark Magician]

Originally Posted by McEnroeisanartist

Defeated the #1 Seed at a Grand Slam
Djokovic - 2
Federer - 2
Nadal - 6 (the record) - 3 times (06 French, 07 French, 08 French), he defeated Federer, when Federer should not have been the #1 seed.

Defeated the Defending Champion at a Grand Slam
Djokovic - 4
Federer - 2
Nadal - 1

Are Federer's 2 wins - RG2011 & Wimby 2012 - both against Nole?

[McEnroeisanartist]

Originally Posted by Dark Magician

Are Federer's 2 wins - RG2011 & Wimby 2012 - both against Nole?

Against Novak at Wimbledon 2012 and Sampras at 2001 Wimbledon.

[Hitman]

Originally Posted by kOaMaster

it's hard to win against the defending champion or the number one seed when you're both yourself.

although I like your threads, you had better.

Pretty much sums it up for me.

[joeri888]

Originally Posted by McEnroeisanartist

Against Novak at Wimbledon 2012 and Sampras at 2001 Wimbledon.

That's the defending champions. The no. 1 seeds are what Dark magician said.

[McEnroeisanartist]

Originally Posted by joeri888

That's the defending champions. The no. 1 seeds are what Dark magician said.

The opponents that Federer beat who were the defending champions were also the #1 seeds. Sampras was defending champion in 2001 and #1 seed. Djokovic was defending champion in 2011 and #1 seed.

[Sabratha]

Originally Posted by McEnroeisanartist

Yes that is what I am implying. I mean I know the French love Federer, but did the tournament organizers, or anyone for that matter, think that Federer, and not Nadal would win the French Open, in 2006, 2007, and 2008.

They didn't seed Djokovic #1 for the Australian Open in 2009, when he was the defending champion. Wimbledon is the odd one out.

[tacou]

Originally Posted by McEnroeisanartist

Yes that is what I am implying. I mean I know the French love Federer, but did the tournament organizers, or anyone for that matter, think that Federer, and not Nadal would win the French Open, in 2006, 2007, and 2008.

2006 was only his second FO ever...even as defending champion it would have been foolish and disrespectful to Fed to seed Nadal #1.

[woodrow1029]

Originally Posted by McEnroeisanartist

Yes that is what I am implying. I mean I know the French love Federer, but did the tournament organizers, or anyone for that matter, think that Federer, and not Nadal would win the French Open, in 2006, 2007, and 2008.

I'm pretty sure that during those years, even if they used the same formua as Wimbledon, Federer probably would have been the #1 seed anyway.

[6-1 6-3 6-0]

How embarrassing for a world number one to be utterly dominated at a slam by one player over such a long period of time.

[kishnabe]

Originally Posted by 6-1 6-3 6-0

How embarrassing for a world number one to be utterly dominated at a slam by one player over such a long period of time.

Not an embarrassing as going 0-7 against Djokovic across all surfaces. At least Federer domination by Nadal was on Clay alone.

[Razoredge]

Originally Posted by 6-1 6-3 6-0

How embarrassing for a world number one to be utterly dominated at a slam by one player over such a long period of time.

Don't worry, Djokovic will know how it feels soon.