Federer's slam h2h vs the other big 3 members

The_Order

G.O.A.T.
6 - 11 Djokovic

4 - 10 Nadal

10 - 21 Overall

To put that into perspective, overall Djokovic is 17 - 16 and Nadal is 20 - 10
  • Of his 10 victories, he went on to win the title 8 times highlighting the significance of being able to beat them at majors
  • 4 of his 10 total wins have come at WIM (his best slam), so only 6 wins against both of them in the other 3 majors combined
  • Has not beat Djokovic in a major since 2012 WIM
  • Went nearly 10 years without beating Nadal in major (WIM07 - AO17)
  • At WIM (his most successful major) his h2h against them is 4 - 4
  • At AO (his 2nd most successful major) his h2h against them is 2 - 7
  • At USO (his 2nd least successful major) his h2h against them is 3 - 3 (never played Nadal there)
  • At RG (his least successful major) his h2h against them is 1 - 8
Like it or not Fed fans, given how close the slam race is, this is a MASSIVE dent to your claims that he is greater
 
D

Deleted member 775898

Guest
Ignore me, I'm just here to see the show.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS
original
 
Usually when people have no coherent arguments they resort to some trite, run-of the mill gifs.
16 straight losses to Fedovic off clay. 17 if we count him running from Fed at last minute at IW with a WO. Zero YEC and the main reason that OP makes thread after thread putting down Federer. Even made a thread about 2017 USO that got axed. I stand for truth. You stand for BS.
 

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
Sooooo many reasons why Federer couldn't possibly be the GOAT. It's a propaganda that's be spread by his fans.
 

BackhandDTL

Hall of Fame
16 straight losses to Fedovic off clay. 17 if we count him running from Fed at last minute at IW with a WO. Zero YEC and the main reason that OP makes thread after thread putting down Federer. Even made a thread about 2017 USO that got axed. I stand for truth. You stand for BS.
Anyone can come up with a timeframe like that.

And yet what’s Nadals slam H2H v. Djokodal over the course of their careers? 20-10 the last time I checked.

Don’t forget Nadal leads 3-1 at Fed’s second best major in H2H and leads Djokovic 2-1 at USO.

but yeah, somehow it’s “BS”
 

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
Why Roger Federer isn’t the GOAT
By haydnliam96 / Tennis / 14th October 2020

Roger Federer is not the GOAT. He wasn’t the Greatest Men’s player of all time before Rafael Nadal tied him on 20 Grand Slams this past Sunday and he isn’t now. Nor has he been for a long time. I realise this opening will upset a lot of people who have already angrily closed down this link, but for the rest of you willing to stick around, I will explore in this blog why that is.

Read the whole article here:

 

Sport

G.O.A.T.
16 straight losses to Fedovic off clay. 17 if we count him running from Fed at last minute at IW with a WO. Zero YEC and the main reason that OP makes thread after thread putting down Federer. Even made a thread about 2017 USO that got axed. I stand for truth. You stand for BS.
Nadal leads the H2H over Federer both in outdoor hard (8-5) and at the Australian Open (3-1), so it's not like he only leads the H2H over Federer on clay.
 

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
Ah yes, because throughout tennis history, the greatness of players has been determined by their H2H records, rather than the trophies that they won.

@thrust and other people who don't get sarcasm. This post is sarcasm.
 

BackhandDTL

Hall of Fame
Ah yes, because throughout tennis history, the greatness of players has been determined by their H2H records, rather than the trophies that they won.

@thrust and other people who don't get sarcasm. This post is sarcasm.
Surely other metrics start to matter when it’s 20-20.

weeks number one pretty distorting when you look at Fed’s overall non-clay competition from 04-07. Slam H2H ain’t perfect either but looks like a less biased indicator.
 

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
Again. Just throwing out it there without any sort of explanation is a joke.

No explanation needed. These are the historical measuring sticks.

No one talked about H2H's before this era. I bet you don't know the H2H's between previous eras' greats (of course you could Google them now and "prove me wrong", but you get my point...)
 

BackhandDTL

Hall of Fame
No explanation needed. These are the historical measuring sticks.

No one talked about H2H's before this era. I bet you don't know the H2H's between previous eras' greats (of course you could Google them now and "prove me wrong", but you get my point...)
Yes the greatest measuring sticks should be heavily biased by standard of competition and they should include cheap marketing gimmicks used to inflate interest.

nice strawman too by the way.
 

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
Yes the greatest measuring sticks should be heavily biased by standard of competition and they should include cheap marketing gimmicks used to inflate interest.

nice strawman too by the way.

Not sure what you mean by cheap marketing gimmicks?

I don't see a strawman in my post. The point is that if H2Hs are so important (as you claim), I'd expect you and other tennis fans to know them, for historical greats. Yet very few do.
 
No explanation needed. These are the historical measuring sticks.

No one talked about H2H's before this era. I bet you don't know the H2H's between previous eras' greats (of course you could Google them now and "prove me wrong", but you get my point...)
Even if you went into detail and explained everything from top to bottom with a thousand word essay it wouldn't stop him from posting Fed hater propaganda. The whole fanbase should put him on ignore.
 

BackhandDTL

Hall of Fame
Not sure what you mean by cheap marketing gimmicks?

I don't see a strawman in my post. The point is that if H2Hs are so important (as you claim), I'd expect you and other tennis fans to know them, for historical greats. Yet very few do.
The YEC? Come on. Exorbitant amounts of points/prize money used to inflate interest after the slam winners have already been determined? Round robin gimmick format where you can lose two matches and still “win” the tournament? Tournament that has lately enabled the year’s losers to take advantage of the season’s best, yet most fatigued players?

not saying it doesn’t matter at all but it’s hard to objectively consider it the 3rd most important metric.
 

BeatlesFan

Bionic Poster
Like it or not Fed fans, given how close the slam race is, this is a MASSIVE dent to your claims that he is greater
Conveniently left unmentioned is the fact Fed played four slam finals against Novak when he was older than Djokovic is right now: Wimbledon 2014-2015 and 2019 and the USO in 2015. You have an old man playing a dominant #1 player who was between the ages of 27-31 during these matches. I don't expect mindless haters to recognize this fact, but a fact it is.
 

Backspin1183

Talk Tennis Guru
Argument goes out the window when prime Fed was still losing everywhere to Nadal.

10-21 is anything but competitive

Prime Fed (2004-2012, some people would argue 2004-2010) was 2-8 against Nadal (a bad match up and arguably the best left handed player of all time) but 6-5 vs Djokovic in Slams.
 

BackhandDTL

Hall of Fame
Prime Fed (2004-2012, some people would argue 2004-2010) was 2-8 against Nadal (a bad match up and arguably the best left handed player of all time) but 6-5 vs Djokovic in Slams.
Ehh that’s fair. But that’s still 8-13.

if you are only using prime v prime then Nadal leads both in slams 17-5.
 

ibbi

G.O.A.T.
6 - 11 Djokovic

4 - 10 Nadal

10 - 21 Overall

To put that into perspective, overall Djokovic is 17 - 16 and Nadal is 20 - 10
  • Of his 10 victories, he went on to win the title 8 times highlighting the significance of being able to beat them at majors
  • 4 of his 10 total wins have come at WIM (his best slam), so only 6 wins against both of them in the other 3 majors combined
  • Has not beat Djokovic in a major since 2012 WIM
  • Went nearly 10 years without beating Nadal in major (WIM07 - AO17)
  • At WIM (his most successful major) his h2h against them is 4 - 4
  • At AO (his 2nd most successful major) his h2h against them is 2 - 7
  • At USO (his 2nd least successful major) his h2h against them is 3 - 3 (never played Nadal there)
  • At RG (his least successful major) his h2h against them is 1 - 8
Like it or not Fed fans, given how close the slam race is, this is a MASSIVE dent to your claims that he is greater
Is this lame bait, or do you actually believe this based on the things you've posted? :-D If so... Is this one of your other accounts, Lew? You calculator you. Also... Did you just have this epiphany today? I'm wondering what inspired the timing?
 

xFedal

Legend
6 - 11 Djokovic

4 - 10 Nadal

10 - 21 Overall

To put that into perspective, overall Djokovic is 17 - 16 and Nadal is 20 - 10
  • Of his 10 victories, he went on to win the title 8 times highlighting the significance of being able to beat them at majors
  • 4 of his 10 total wins have come at WIM (his best slam), so only 6 wins against both of them in the other 3 majors combined
  • Has not beat Djokovic in a major since 2012 WIM
  • Went nearly 10 years without beating Nadal in major (WIM07 - AO17)
  • At WIM (his most successful major) his h2h against them is 4 - 4
  • At AO (his 2nd most successful major) his h2h against them is 2 - 7
  • At USO (his 2nd least successful major) his h2h against them is 3 - 3 (never played Nadal there)
  • At RG (his least successful major) his h2h against them is 1 - 8
Like it or not Fed fans, given how close the slam race is, this is a MASSIVE dent to your claims that he is greater
Onus was on Fed to beat Laver YE#1 Record from 1964-1971 but he didn't.
 
Argument goes out the window when prime Fed was still losing everywhere to Nadal.

10-21 is anything but competitive
Just to give an example:

Federer has 6 titles at AO and his best 3 versions (2004, 2005, 2007) were better than Nadal 2009.

Yet somehow the 3-1 H2H Nadal has holds any relevance. That's why I can never understand arguments like this.

If someone is so good and so dominant against his rivals H2H, he should have 5-10 Slams more.

There was absolutely nothing stopping Nadal from getting to 30 Slams already since Federer is really not a challenge for him.

And it's not Novak either. Let's remember, he denied Fed more than he did Nadal on aggregate.

The other achievements(weeks at no1, YEC and YE#1) are a sustained effort of topping everyone, consistently.

Dominant H2H between players with similar achievements means you can beat your rivals, but not the field(which is weird in itself)

Or at the very least, you mostly met your rivals under favourable circumstaces.
 

BackhandDTL

Hall of Fame
Just to give an example:

Federer has 6 titles at AO and his best 3 versions (2004, 2005, 2007) were better than Nadal 2009.

Yet somehow the 3-1 H2H Nadal has holds any relevance. That's why I can never understand arguments like this.

If someone is so good and so dominant against his rivals H2H, he should have 5-10 Slams more.

There was absolutely nothing stopping Nadal from getting to 30 Slams already since Federer is really not a challenge for him.

And it's not Novak either. Let's remember, he denied Fed more than he did Nadal on aggregate.

The other achievements(weeks at no1, YEC and YE#1) are a sustained effort of topping everyone, consistently.

Dominant H2H between players with similar achievements means you can beat your rivals, but not the field(which is weird in itself)

Or at the very least, you mostly met your rivals under favourable circumstaces.
Where did you prove this?


The rest.....well the rest sounds like you vomited on your plate.

Yes who cares how you perform against the best at the pinnacle of tennis? Lets just look at slams won against Baghdatis/Roddick/Philippousis and the number of Christmas exho tourneys won.
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
Conveniently left unmentioned is the fact Fed played four slam finals against Novak when he was older than Djokovic is right now: Wimbledon 2014-2015 and 2019 and the USO in 2015. You have an old man playing a dominant #1 player who was between the ages of 27-31 during these matches. I don't expect mindless haters to recognize this fact, but a fact it is.

3. Wimbledon 2015, USO 2015 and Wimbledon 2019. Federer was 32 and 11 months in 2014 Wimbledon. Djokovic is 33 and 7 months right now.
 

ND-13

Hall of Fame
I know this thread is click bait and inflammatory. If we want a single greatest, it still is just Federer or Djokovic

Nadal winning only 7 majors outside RG dents his claims. Add his complete failure at indoor HC/ YEC

Will take Djokovic all round resume any day.
 

BackhandDTL

Hall of Fame
who has the best resume between 3 as of now?
Depends on whom you ask. Ask the Fed fans, and they will say that how you fare against the best at the pinnacle of tennis doesn't matter, but the number of year end exhos, and weeks #1 accumulated against Hewitt, declining Roddick, old Agassi matter the most.

While the other guy who has 20 slams, leads the best players in the world 20-10 at the pinnacle of the sport and is indisputable GOAT of one surface, which cannot be said for his other rivals.

So overall, hmm I don't know.
 
Last edited:

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
The YEC? Come on. Exorbitant amounts of points/prize money used to inflate interest after the slam winners have already been determined? Round robin gimmick format where you can lose two matches and still “win” the tournament? Tournament that has lately enabled the year’s losers to take advantage of the season’s best, yet most fatigued players?

not saying it doesn’t matter at all but it’s hard to objectively consider it the 3rd most important metric.

The YEC features the top 8 players in the world. It's the only tournament where it's impossible to win with a weak draw. Clearly the greats of the game take it very seriously, as is evidenced by the list of winners.
 

BackhandDTL

Hall of Fame
The YEC features the top 8 players in the world. It's the only tournament where it's impossible to win with a weak draw. Clearly the greats of the game take it very seriously, as is evidenced by the list of winners.
And players like Djokovic and Nadal take the Olympics very seriously, but you don't see me propping it up as the 3rd most important metric, because clearly that would be ludicrous.

If we are using draw quality then warmups like Queens should be on par with slams and YEC would be more important than slams.

None of these arguments disprove the fact that the setup and motives behind the tournament degrade its prestige.
 
Last edited:

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
16 straight losses to Fedovic off clay. 17 if we count him running from Fed at last minute at IW with a WO. Zero YEC and the main reason that OP makes thread after thread putting down Federer. Even made a thread about 2017 USO that got axed. I stand for truth. You stand for BS.
Would you say the same for the 2014 YEC final?
 

Federev

Legend
Argument goes out the window when prime Fed was still losing everywhere to Nadal.

10-21 is anything but competitive
Losing everywhere?

Where was Nadal at the AO or the USO when Fed was in his peak years? Fed showed up. Nadal was either absent or too young.

The one place Nads was always showing up - young or old - was on clay. Fed was there, even to lose. Novak has done no better.

The other place was grass and Fed was 2-1 v Nada during his peak. Of course, Rafa's comparatively short run on grass compared to Fed.

Now it's 3-1 for Fed of course - inc both of their primes. It should be noted Fed has no business beating Rafa on any surface since 2012 really.

To you and the OP the answer is there for anyone really looking.

Fed is in a different generation to Djokdal and that's been his disadvantage for most of his career against them, esp Dokjdal.

Of course, this argument is so old and tired it has more rings than a redwood.

So I'm out. For any rebuttals, just rinse and repeat the thread i started here:

From 9/13/17 ...
I don't think people give enough credit to the reality that Federer has - for several years now - been competing very well with the generation below him - aka - the Big Four - even though he is clearly not their peer.

No one thinks Grigor is Rafa's generation. But the age difference is the same as between Rafa and Grigor as between Rog and Rafa.

And so the truth is Fed is not Rafa's peer. He is not Novak's or Andy's. He's not in their generation.

He crushed his generation so bad they're now called "the weak era" by many Rafalites and many Novakiples who seek to demean him. But he made them look weak. Now his peers are all gone in terms of threats for any titles while Rog has for years been setting a new standard for keeping up with the greats below him.

Folks talk of his Big 4 H2H loss as if that's some crucial liability. But given his age at this point That should be expected and it's a ridiculous argument against him. He should be getting regularly and consistently DESTROYED by these guys by now. And he's not. He's still very competitive.

While Rafa's greatness at such an early age was clear in that he was beating Fed on clay often in Fed's prime - the rest of the field can't claim such awesomeness as the Bull can.

But Rafa not withstanding, It's one of the special aspects of his GOATNESS that Fed has to deal with the strength and youth of the rest of the big 4 - and their peers - while also being so much older.

And today - that at 35-36!!!! - the GOAT subdues his cheif nemesis with consistency over 2017 and now chases YE#1 just testifies to his greatness.

Once again he's in uncharted territory. Rafa and Nole may follow the way he's paved - or they may not - but once again: he does what no one's really done in recent history.

VAMOS THE FED!!!
 

Federev

Legend
6 - 11 Djokovic

4 - 10 Nadal

10 - 21 Overall

To put that into perspective, overall Djokovic is 17 - 16 and Nadal is 20 - 10
  • Of his 10 victories, he went on to win the title 8 times highlighting the significance of being able to beat them at majors
  • 4 of his 10 total wins have come at WIM (his best slam), so only 6 wins against both of them in the other 3 majors combined
  • Has not beat Djokovic in a major since 2012 WIM
  • Went nearly 10 years without beating Nadal in major (WIM07 - AO17)
  • At WIM (his most successful major) his h2h against them is 4 - 4
  • At AO (his 2nd most successful major) his h2h against them is 2 - 7
  • At USO (his 2nd least successful major) his h2h against them is 3 - 3 (never played Nadal there)
  • At RG (his least successful major) his h2h against them is 1 - 8
Like it or not Fed fans, given how close the slam race is, this is a MASSIVE dent to your claims that he is greater
YOU ARE NOT ANSWERING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS...
 
Top