Does FO 2011 Indicate how Djokovic and Federer will match up in their primes on clay?

Does FO 2011 really Indicate Federer vs Djokovic on clay in their primes?

  • Yes, you are exaggerating the effect of conditions.

    Votes: 9 30.0%

  • No.

    Votes: 19 63.3%

  • Nadal deserves more credit for beating in form Federer in this conditions.

    Votes: 3 10.0%

  • Nadal doesn't deserve any more credit for beating Federer at RG

    Votes: 1 3.3%
  • Total voters
    30
Phenomenal

Phenomenal

Professional
I know this match talked and discussed so much as great as it is let me share few thoughts and i had questions to all of you. I do believe that RG in 2011 was much different than other years as you clearly can see. Conditions was not the usual RG conditions.

Firstly no matter the conditions, surface, beating Djokovic, who was on a 43 match win streak, is incredible and impressive win by Federer. I read many comments about due to this win Federer is better than Djokovic at their peak on clay. While i know not everyone thinks like this certainly not Djokovic fans:) I consider Federer on 2011 and 2012 quite good despite he pass his prime. While 2012 match nowhere near as epic as their FO 2011. I feel that match ignored by mostly Federer fans while claiming 2011 win as he beat peak Djokovic for the arguments of he is better...

Does Federer fans think Federer was much worse on 2012 than 2011 on clay hence he lost convincingly? I do feel the difference was more about conditions than one of them being better at 2011 or 2012.

For the record I favour Federer against Djokovic in their primes on clay(RG specially) like 06-07 Fed vs 11-13 Djokovic. But overall Djokovic is obviously much better.

2011 FO in a way it was like Federer Open. Since some of us claim RG turned to DO last few years after night sessions.
 
Phenomenal

Phenomenal

Professional
Federer's win probably helped Nadal since Nadal won the final. Could have been his toughest final. But I think Nadal should get more praises for his win 2011. Beating Federer was not easy for Nadal.

It probably explains bit why Nadal's form was below his standarts at RG 2011. While his form was not as good as 2007-2008 2010/2012. He still struggled much more than usual.

Also in 2011 Federers stats prior to RG is not good. In 2012 he won Madrid blue clay. I do think last few years conditions changed. I don't call DO but it helps Djokovic imo.
 
Last edited:
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Phenomenal said:
Federer's win probably helped Nadal since Nadal won the final. Could have been his toughest final. But I think Nadal should get more praises for his win 2011. Beating Federer was not easy for Nadal.
It probably explains bit why Nadal's form was below his standarts at RG 2011. While his form was not as good as 2007-2008 2010/2012. he still struggled much more than usual.
Click to expand...
That Nadal win was very much mental. Fed was carrying too much mental baggage by then.

Would've liked to see this match in these conditions take place in, say, 2005.
 
Cortana

Cortana

Legend
I would say if they played 10 RG matches, both would win 5. Prime to prime. Sample size too small to judge from the actual numbers.

RG 2013 was cleary the better clay version of Djokovic.
 
Kralingen

Kralingen

Talk Tennis Guru
I do think 2011 was an atypical conditions boon for Federer in that the Babolat balls were faster than ever before, and this allowed him to produce an outlier level of serving excellence in the match and tournament. Such a high unreturned rate on serve against Novak Djokovic on clay is a big time departure from the norm.

I do think it was on a knife’s edge, could easily gone 5 and with just two balls going the other way, maybe Djokovic comes out on top. It was an extremely tight match.

There isn’t a ton of evidence for Fedovic prime for prime on clay - Djoko did beat Federer in Rome 09 right before Fed’s 1 RG, while Federer is 2-1 in Monte Carlo.

To me, it’s clear that prime Fed matches up better with prime Djokovic than vice versa. The slice, amazing serve+1, and extra spin granted by the one hander are all things that uniquely trouble Nole. But with two amazing players like this, no match will be lopsided and I expect a close H2H prime for prime.
 
Phenomenal

Phenomenal

Professional
I didn't turn this into the prime to prime wars since there are many of them. I agree 1 match doesn't indicate + with different conditions than usual.
 
L

Lauren_Girl'

Hall of Fame
H2H is 4-4 on clay but we have to look at the context.

Monaco 2006 was one of Djokovic's first M1000. He was a rookie, ranked #67.
Monaco 2008 was a walkover.
Monaco 2014 Djokovic had a wrist injury and tanked the match.

Djokovic won FO 2012, Rome 2012, Rome 2015 and Rome 2009 fair and square.
He straight-setted Nadal in every single clay events, Monaco Madrid Rome and RG.
The only time Federer straight-setted Nadal on clay was after the 4h10 match in the Semifinal of Madrid in 2009. He could thank Djokovic for that.

FO 2011 was a great match but that's all it was... One match. Overall, Djokovic is just a better clay player. Federer never winning Monaco or Rome is a glaring hole.
 
nolefam_2024

nolefam_2024

Talk Tennis Guru
I think both are solid players but just look at their game styles. Novak is born for defense and Roger isn't. If they play 10 times Novak may win 7 times but that doesn't mean he is strong favorite. All the matches will go down the wire like how they do between these two.

Roger is incredible shoemaker but he doesn't have the focus to trade with Novak on every rally. And the serve effect is diminished on clay. Which is huge disadvantage for Roger. Basically we are asking Roger to best Novak from the groundstrokes. That's very hard especially backhand to backhand where Novak is going to force Roger.
 
S

StrongRule

Talk Tennis Guru
Lauren_Girl' said:
H2H is 4-4 on clay but we have to look at the context.

Monaco 2006 was one of Djokovic's first M1000. He was a rookie, ranked #67.
Monaco 2008 was a walkover.
Monaco 2014 Djokovic had a wrist injury and tanked the match.

Djokovic won FO 2012, Rome 2012, Rome 2015 and Rome 2009 fair and square.
He straight-setted Nadal in every single clay events, Monaco Madrid Rome and RG.
The only time Federer straight-setted Nadal on clay was after the 4h10 match in the Semifinal of Madrid in 2009. He could thank Djokovic for that.

FO 2011 was a great match but that's all it was... One match. Overall, Djokovic is just a better clay player. Federer never winning Monaco or Rome is a glaring hole.
Click to expand...
This is some really pathetic cherry picking. Monte Carlo 2008 wasn't a walkover, and Federer was winning it anyway. In MC 2014 he had to save setpoints in the first set, he stayed clutch for once. Djokovic in these matches surely wasn't worse than Federer in RG 2012 or Rome 2015, matches you hype for some reason. Yeah, beating a 34 years old Federer definitely indicates how they would play in their primes. :rolleyes:

Oh, and Djokovic fans favorite topic: beating 2015 Nadal who was being dominated even by Fognini. Even in Madrid 2009 final, Nadal was a million times better than in any match during the 2015 clay season.
 
Phenomenal

Phenomenal

Professional
Kralingen said:
I do think 2011 was an atypical conditions boon for Federer in that the Babolat balls were faster than ever before, and this allowed him to produce an outlier level of serving excellence in the match and tournament. Such a high unreturned rate on serve against Novak Djokovic on clay is a big time departure from the norm.

I do think it was on a knife’s edge, could easily gone 5 and with just two balls going the other way, maybe Djokovic comes out on top. It was an extremely tight match.

There isn’t a ton of evidence for Fedovic prime for prime on clay - Djoko did beat Federer in Rome 09 right before Fed’s 1 RG, while Federer is 2-1 in Monte Carlo.

To me, it’s clear that prime Fed matches up better with prime Djokovic than vice versa. The slice, amazing serve+1, and extra spin granted by the one hander are all things that uniquely trouble Nole. But with two amazing players like this, no match will be lopsided and I expect a close H2H prime for prime.
Click to expand...
That's pretty much how i think. I would favour Djokovic in Rome still. Federer in MC. RG slightly to Federer for me(prime to prime) Based on the matches i watched them against Nadal lol and some of their matches.
 
Last edited:
Mivic

Mivic

Hall of Fame
If you go through Waspsting's entire catalogue of match reports (consisting of something like 700 write-ups) you'll find only a handful of matches where the discrepancy in unreturned serve percentages was larger than it was in this particular match (42% for Federer vs 19% for Djokovic) and the vast majority of those were in pre-2000 S&V vs baseliner match-ups in quicker conditions where the baseliner is forced to adopt a lower margin return strategy than the serve-volleyer, making the discrepancy in unreturned serves at least somewhat logical in those cases.

The fact that this 23% discrepancy occured on a clay court over BO5 between two baseliners however is basically unheard of and therefore not at all an accurate representation of the kind of match that would typically unfold in a true peak for peak RG encounter between the two players. Even if you're of the belief that the players rather than the unusual playing conditions were the primary factor in creating such a lopsided serve-return imbalance, it doesn't change the fact that this is hardly a repeatable outcome.

Given the serve-return dynamics it's actually almost a credit to Djokovic that he was on the verge of pushing it to a 5th (at which point you'd probably have to favour him to finish the job), since Federer was also very solid off the ground and moved exceptionally well in this match too. Novak's advantage from the baseline would have had to be monumental in order for him to pull out the win, which simply isn't a realistic thing to expect from anybody against that version of Federer.
 
Last edited:
aldeayeah

aldeayeah

G.O.A.T.
Mivic said:
If you go through Waspsting's entire catalogue of match reports you'll find only a handful of matches where the discrepancy in unreturned serve percentages is bigger than it was in this particular match (42% for Federer vs 19% for Djokovic) and the vast majority of those were in S&V vs baseliner match-ups where the baseliner is forced to adopt a lower margin return strategy than the serve volleyer, making the discrepancy in unreturned serves logical.

The fact that this 23% discrepancy occured on a clay court over BO5 between two baseliners is an absolute anomaly and not an accurate statistical representation of a true peak for peak encounter between the two players. Even if you're of the belief that the players rather than the unusual playing conditions were the primary factor in creating such a lopsided serve-return imbalance, it doesn't change the fact that this is hardly a repeatable outcome.

Given the serve-return dynamics it's almost a credit to Djokovic that he was on the verge of pushing it to a 5th, since Federer was also very solid from the baseline and moving exceptionally well in this match too.
Click to expand...
I think there's little discussion to the fact that 2011 Djokovic was a better all-around claycourter than 2011 Fed, even when pitted against each other.

But then there's the question of exactly how much worse 2011 Fed was than his 2006 self.
 
Mivic

Mivic

Hall of Fame
aldeayeah said:
I think there's little discussion to the fact that 2011 Djokovic was a better all-around claycourter than 2011 Fed, even when pitted against each other.

But then there's the question of exactly how much worse 2011 Fed was than his 2006 self.
Click to expand...
That is indeed a separate matter and I'm not saying that you can't put forth a compelling case for Federer in a direct head to head at RG with both players at their best, but their FO11 match wouldn't be my go to piece of evidence if I'm trying to make that argument for the reasons I mentioned. It was a very unusual match.
 
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Kralingen said:
I do think 2011 was an atypical conditions boon for Federer in that the Babolat balls were faster than ever before, and this allowed him to produce an outlier level of serving excellence in the match and tournament. Such a high unreturned rate on serve against Novak Djokovic on clay is a big time departure from the norm.

I do think it was on a knife’s edge, could easily gone 5 and with just two balls going the other way, maybe Djokovic comes out on top. It was an extremely tight match.

There isn’t a ton of evidence for Fedovic prime for prime on clay - Djoko did beat Federer in Rome 09 right before Fed’s 1 RG, while Federer is 2-1 in Monte Carlo.

To me, it’s clear that prime Fed matches up better with prime Djokovic than vice versa. The slice, amazing serve+1, and extra spin granted by the one hander are all things that uniquely trouble Nole. But with two amazing players like this, no match will be lopsided and I expect a close H2H prime for prime.
Click to expand...
Fed is actually 3-0 at MC.
 
ffw2

ffw2

Hall of Fame
WeekendTennisHack said:
Djokovic was never better than in 2011, incredible streak, got taken down by the old guy.
Click to expand...
fgrg11-1.jpg

mc-drrg11.jpg
 
Pheasant

Pheasant

Legend
Peak for peak, I call it a draw on clay. Djoker’s peak was much longer, so overall, he gets the nod on clay.

It’s always possible for a peak guy to still lose a match. So although that 2011 FO semi was awesome to see; I still don’t see that as evidence that Federer peaked higher than Djoker on clay. It’s too close to call for me.
 
nolefam_2024

nolefam_2024

Talk Tennis Guru
True. The Rome 2009 semis I saw only yesterday. Federer and Nole always go down the wire. But Federer loses patience. Federer tries to finish points more creatively or more variedly. But the problem for him is he struggles with patience. Nole found his backhand on important points. That's how the match will go I think. Nole is not going to bulldoze Fed but just edge out when important points come. Especially on clay.
 
AnOctorokForDinner

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
It doesn't indicate Fedr is objectively better just because he won a razor-close match but it sure as hell shows the margin is too thin to call with authority. I think Federer would have a slight advantage prime to prime via matchup, but Djokovic does better against Nadal also due to matchup, so that cancels it out. (If Djokovic scored a win over Primedal at RG I'd acknowledge him as better, but he didn't thought he got close once, so considering the aforesaid it's a tie, prime to prime that is. Overall Djokovic is of course better at RG due to superior longevity.)
 
metsman

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Not necessarily, but it also is the only clay match they played that remotely matters. Noelfam trying to predict 12 RG absolves it is high high comedy.

And serving aside, that match still showed that Federer is a more comfortable mover on clay and can get through the court easier with his heavier ball, and these things would only be more in his favor prime for prime, even if the serving level wouldn't quite be the same. And the light balls weren't the reason that Djokovic played a bad second set after lacking clutch in the first set, the exact same thing happened at the USO. What does that say about mentality when the going gets tough?
 
nolefam_2024

nolefam_2024

Talk Tennis Guru
Cortana said:
How did Federer fare at his peak against Nadal at RG? What was his best result?
Click to expand...
Multiple ways to look at it.

RG his best was either 2011 or 2006. Both times he was good vs Rafa but far from victory.

Outside RG in BO5 his best was Rome where he lost match points down. So he could come close to beating Rafa once in BO5 clay.

Overall his best was probably Hamburg 2007 where be beat Rafa bagelling him. Hamburg like Madrid is on elevation. But I won't take that win away from him.
His only other win was at Madrid but that is totally asterisked as Nadal played 4 hr match 20 hrs before.

He doesn't matchup well with Rafa though. The record is very bad like 14-2 or something. Anyone thinking he had chances to beat Rafa is probably on pipe.
 
metsman

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Also quicker clay conditions also help Djokovic off the ground, he would seriously struggle to hit through the court on truly slow clay. It just doesn't give him a turbo boost on serve like it did Federer that day.

Peak Federer is still going to have an advantage on serve/return, just not as big, and he would still be able to outplay Djokovic off the ground on big points like he did in 2011, even moreso. On top of that, he's more mentally stable and never went down 2 sets in any kind of big match before suffering the 08 decline, including to Nadal in B05 clay (5 matches). So he should still have the advantage.

11 RG, 11 USO, 12 RG, 12 USO, 13 AO, 13 RG, 13 Wimby Djokovic either went down or was on the brink of going down 2 sets. 7 times in a span of 10 majors in what was supposed to be his peak. Remarkable stuff from the mental warrior.
 
Last edited:
DSH

DSH

Talk Tennis Guru
That 2011 match could have had another winner or at least had a fifth set.
It was a match with very small margins and it was decided by details.
:D
 
Kralingen

Kralingen

Talk Tennis Guru
Federer’s defense is consistently discounted here

Djokovic could barely hit through him in 2011. The slice defense at times was like a brick wall, an unsolvable puzzle for Djokovic. It definitely contributed to his high error rates, frustration and inability to break down the BH like he thought

Peak Fed was like 98% of the sliding mover and defender Djokovic was plus an absolute maniac in terms of forward movement and attacking footwork.
 
metsman

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Kralingen said:
Federer’s defense is consistently discounted here

Djokovic could barely hit through him in 2011. The slice defense at times was like a brick wall, an unsolvable puzzle for Djokovic. It definitely contributed to his high error rates, frustration and inability to break down the BH like he thought

Peak Fed was like 98% of the sliding mover and defender Djokovic was plus an absolute maniac in terms of forward movement and attacking footwork.
Click to expand...
Federer is a much better slider on clay. He proved it time and time and time again in that match. Djokovic is better at on the run type defense, and defending the BH with the open stance (pretty much any two hander has this advantage over a one hander, fortunately in real tennis it's irrelevant).

Djokovic can barely hit through 30+ year old Federer on fast clay, wonder what would happen in 95 degree heat on slow clay against energizer bunny....
 
abmk

abmk

Bionic Poster
Phenomenal said:
I know this match talked and discussed so much as great as it is let me share few thoughts and i had questions to all of you. I do believe that RG in 2011 was much different than other years as you clearly can see. Conditions was not the usual RG conditions.

Firstly no matter the conditions, surface, beating Djokovic, who was on a 43 match win streak, is incredible and impressive win by Federer. I read many comments about due to this win Federer is better than Djokovic at their peak on clay. While i know not everyone thinks like this certainly not Djokovic fans:) I consider Federer on 2011 and 2012 quite good despite he pass his prime. While 2012 match nowhere near as epic as their FO 2011. I feel that match ignored by mostly Federer fans while claiming 2011 win as he beat peak Djokovic for the arguments of he is better...

Does Federer fans think Federer was much worse on 2012 than 2011 on clay hence he lost convincingly? I do feel the difference was more about conditions than one of them being better at 2011 or 2012.

For the record I favour Federer against Djokovic in their primes on clay(RG specially) like 06-07 Fed vs 11-13 Djokovic. But overall Djokovic is obviously much better.

2011 FO in a way it was like Federer Open. Since some of us claim RG turned to DO last few years after night sessions.
Click to expand...

Federer beat Djoko in Monte Carlo 08. also got the 1st set vs him in Monte Carlo 14 before djoko had some issues.
they are 4-4 on clay total.

RG 2012 - fed was just bad on red clay by his standards, even more so in the semi, lost 3 sets in first 4 matches, then down 0-2 vs delpo.
had back issues. won only 56% of first serve points vs djoko. every other match on clay vs djoko, he's been above 70% first serve points won.

overall, Djoko career wise is a little better than fed on clay, that's due to longevity. that's it.
 
N

ND-13

Hall of Fame
Lauren_Girl' said:
H2H is 4-4 on clay but we have to look at the context.

Monaco 2006 was one of Djokovic's first M1000. He was a rookie, ranked #67.
Monaco 2008 was a walkover.
Monaco 2014 Djokovic had a wrist injury and tanked the match.

Djokovic won FO 2012, Rome 2012, Rome 2015 and Rome 2009 fair and square.
He straight-setted Nadal in every single clay events, Monaco Madrid Rome and RG.
The only time Federer straight-setted Nadal on clay was after the 4h10 match in the Semifinal of Madrid in 2009. He could thank Djokovic for that.

FO 2011 was a great match but that's all it was... One match. Overall, Djokovic is just a better clay player. Federer never winning Monaco or Rome is a glaring hole.
Click to expand...

Looks like Djokovic caught the ‘when he is healthy he always wins’ fever
 
nolefam_2024

nolefam_2024

Talk Tennis Guru
When Djokovic is healthy he is favorite over Federer. That's what the stats show. Doesn't matter if it hurts someone's feelings.
 
WeekendTennisHack

WeekendTennisHack

Hall of Fame
I think you guys forgot that Djokovic was feeling out of sorts because he got extra rest from walkover at RG11. Too little rest and he loses. Too much rest and he loses. Our little Djokovic needs just the right amount of rest to win (and a non-peak Fed of course).
 
nolefam_2024

nolefam_2024

Talk Tennis Guru
StrongRule said:
How exactly he wasn't healthy in RG 2011? That was his absolute peak.
Click to expand...
You need to read first rafan. We don't take any winnings away like Rafans. I said he is favorite when healthy. He can lose which he did in 2011 by smallest margins. He took revenge in 2012 for it.
For you, if Rafa is healthy he never loses. We don't work with same rules.
 
WeekendTennisHack

WeekendTennisHack

Hall of Fame
nachiket nolefam said:
You need to read first rafan. We don't take any winnings away like Rafans. I said he is favorite when healthy. He can lose which he did in 2011 by smallest margins. He took revenge in 2012 for it.
For you, if Rafa is healthy he never loses. We don't work with same rules.
Click to expand...

Sorry but if both Djokovic and Federer are healthy and peak, Djokovic is not the favourite except maybe at AO.
 
RS

RS

Bionic Poster
metsman said:
Also quicker clay conditions also help Djokovic off the ground, he would seriously struggle to hit through the court on truly slow clay. It just doesn't give him a turbo boost on serve like it did Federer that day.

Peak Federer is still going to have an advantage on serve/return, just not as big, and he would still be able to outplay Djokovic off the ground on big points like he did in 2011, even moreso. On top of that, he's more mentally stable and never went down 2 sets in any kind of big match before suffering the 08 decline, including to Nadal in B05 clay (5 matches). So he should still have the advantage.

11 RG, 11 USO, 12 RG, 12 USO, 13 AO, 13 RG, 13 Wimby Djokovic either went down or was on the brink of going down 2 sets. 7 times in a span of 10 majors in what was supposed to be his peak. Remarkable stuff from the mental warrior.
Click to expand...
Would you be ok to how many slams you think Fed 03-19 wins in Djokovic's place in 07-23?
 
RS

RS

Bionic Poster
Kralingen said:
Federer’s defense is consistently discounted here

Djokovic could barely hit through him in 2011. The slice defense at times was like a brick wall, an unsolvable puzzle for Djokovic. It definitely contributed to his high error rates, frustration and inability to break down the BH like he thought

Peak Fed was like 98% of the sliding mover and defender Djokovic was plus an absolute maniac in terms of forward movement and attacking footwork.
Click to expand...
Fed's game was still very physical. I rarely see this mentioned.

"Effortless" was the word but many times it wasn't. lol
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

RF-18
How close is peak Djokovic on clay vs Nadals peak?
2
Replies
67
Views
4K
Rusty Shackleford
Rusty Shackleford
R
Peak Djokovic (2011) is NOT better than peak Federer
7 8 9
Replies
413
Views
17K
BenBen
BenBen
jl809
2011 (30 year old) Federer > 2011 (25 year old) Nadal
2 3
Replies
107
Views
2K
aman92
aman92
F
  • Poll
Federer vs Djokovic, who would win at their peak?
2 3
Replies
115
Views
2K
Neptune
Neptune
T
Had AO 2011-2016 sped up like AO 2017, Would Federer stand a chance against Djokovic/Nadal
Replies
17
Views
855
TennisCJC
T
Top