Federer's Records Against the Big 4 Since 2008

joeri888

G.O.A.T.
Seems decent. Only 2008 was pretty bad. It's obvious how 2011 was a poor year for him, and only his final indoor run managed to keep him in top 4. However, 2008 is somewhat surprising. I guess the four or five losses to Nadal don't help, but only three wins? 1 against Djokovic in MC, one against Murray at USO and one against Djokovic at USO.

What you see though is that Fed is not necessarily better than Murray or Djokovic in their matches against each other, but he IS way better in winning the matches he should win. He doesn't lose to Kohlschreiber (FO 09), Cilic (USO09), Rosol (W12) or Wawrinka (USO10) in a Slam. He just doesnt. Not even talking about losing to clowns like Verdasco, Young, Bogomolov, Chardy or Querrey.
 

Spider

Hall of Fame
I think Federer cannot beat Djokovic, Murray or Nadal (if he comes back ever). Those days of beating them are in the past.

For Federer to win a tournament, someone will have to beat these three guys.
 

joeri888

G.O.A.T.
I think Federer cannot beat Djokovic, Murray or Nadal (if he comes back ever). Those days of beating them are in the past.
For Federer to win a tournament, someone will have to beat these three guys.

You mean in the past, as in 2 days ago???!!!
 

BHud

Hall of Fame
...and yet somehow he became #1 again at age 30 and won another Wimby...must be a weak era?
 

joeri888

G.O.A.T.
That was a one off. Have you forgotten how badly Murray beat Federer at Olympics or just a few weeks ago?

That was a two off..:oops::confused:

Dude, he proved he can beat one of the best two days ago and came mighty close to beating THE best 1 day ago. A few months ago, he beat both Murray and Djokovic at Wimbledon. In March, he beat Nadal on a slow slow windy windy hardcourt. What you say has been said a million times. He'd never beat Djoko after AO08! He'd never beat Nadal after W08, he'd never be world no. 1 again after Cincy 08. Next thing? he won USO. And went on to complete career slam. In 2010 after losing to Soderling and berdych in slams, same thing. In 2011, after losing 2 set leads against djokovic and Tsonga. Same thing. Yet he keeps coming back. Eventually, you will be right, eventually he will NEVER beat one of the big 4 again. But there's no reason why that point has already come. You said never, which means, never ever. Zero times, from now on. A 'one off' already proves you wrong. You sure there won't be any more 'one off's?'
 

batz

G.O.A.T.
I think Federer cannot beat Djokovic, Murray or Nadal (if he comes back ever). Those days of beating them are in the past.

For Federer to win a tournament, someone will have to beat these three guys.

Yep - two whole days in the past.

What a load of old bollocks.
 
Federer Against Big 4 (Djokovic, Nadal, and Murray)

2008 - 3-8
2009 - 5-6
2010 - 7-4
2011 - 2-7
2012 - 6-6
Total 23-31

Going by that stat, he should have a dominant (in terms of H2H) year in 2013. :)

However, I would prefer, that he wins another Major title, and have abysmal record against the others from the top 4, than have a positive H2H with them, and doesn't win anything significant.
 

Brian72

Rookie
What you see though is that Fed is not necessarily better than Murray or Djokovic in their matches against each other, but he IS way better in winning the matches he should win. He doesn't lose to Kohlschreiber (FO 09), Cilic (USO09), Rosol (W12) or Wawrinka (USO10) in a Slam. He just doesnt. Not even talking about losing to clowns like Verdasco, Young, Bogomolov, Chardy or Querrey.

To say that he is way better winning matches he should win compared to the others is just a bit of an overstatement.

Not saying he isn't good. In 2012, Djokovic lost to 2 players outside the top 10. Federer lost to 3 players outside the top 10 in 2012. Obviously Federer has had a great career and has gotten to at least the Semi's of the Majors a record number of times. But If you are comparing current Roger to Current top 4 making that he is way better doesn't hold water.
 

joeri888

G.O.A.T.
To say that he is way better winning matches he should win compared to the others is just a bit of an overstatement.

Not saying he isn't good. In 2012, Djokovic lost to 2 players outside the top 10. Federer lost to 3 players outside the top 10 in 2012. Obviously Federer has had a great career and has gotten to at least the Semi's of the Majors a record number of times. But If you are comparing current Roger to Current top 4 making that he is way better doesn't hold water.

No. But that's why Djokovic is number 1 and Federer only number 2 no? I am talking since 2008, and since 2008. The two are equal, but Djokovic maybe does better than Rog against top opposition like Nadal and Murray, but he doesn't do better since then against the rest of the field. That's why Fed has remained so close for all these years.

Anyways, no reason to defend old Roger too much. It's all obvious that what he's still doing is incredible and can not in any way put a dent in his legacy.
 

Snaab

Semi-Pro
Just out of curiousity, what would those yearly breakouts look like if you pull matches on clay with Nadal out (ONLY Nadal mind you)? Considering he is lifetime 2-12 on clay with the Bull, it would be an interesting look. For that matter, what are Djokovic and Murray H2H with Nadal on clay?
 

McEnroeisanartist

Hall of Fame
Yes, how impressive of Federer to lose the majority of his matches against them.

I wouldn't say impressive. And I didn't offer any commentary. Although, post-prime, it is not bad. Impressive that Federer is able to play an entire year at 30/31, unlike crippled Nadal.

Obviously, Nadal has the best record of the big 4 against the big 4, so it is remarkable that he obviously loses to so many lesser ranked players. This is evidenced by him not being able to have one season with a winning percentage above 90%. Quite tragic really.
 

batz

G.O.A.T.
I wouldn't say impressive. And I didn't offer any commentary. Although, post-prime, it is not bad. Impressive that Federer is able to play an entire year at 30/31, unlike crippled Nadal.

Obviously, Nadal has the best record of the big 4 against the big 4, so it is remarkable that he obviously loses to so many lesser ranked players. This is evidenced by him not being able to have one season with a winning percentage above 90%. Quite tragic really.

What are the records of the other 3 members of the Big 4?
 

DRII

G.O.A.T.
I wouldn't say impressive. And I didn't offer any commentary. Although, post-prime, it is not bad. Impressive that Federer is able to play an entire year at 30/31, unlike crippled Nadal.

Obviously, Nadal has the best record of the big 4 against the big 4, so it is remarkable that he obviously loses to so many lesser ranked players. This is evidenced by him not being able to have one season with a winning percentage above 90%. Quite tragic really.

Tragic?

Your world must really be upside down to consider any aspect of Nadal's sterling career - tragic!

Wake up!
 

tudwell

Legend
That was a one off. Have you forgotten how badly Murray beat Federer at Olympics or just a few weeks ago?

Murray led Federer 6-2 in 2009. Since then, they've gone 7-4 in Federer's favor. Their rivalry is closer now than it ever has been. Not a one-off at all.
 

wangs78

Legend
Also - we should all remember that the age factor is against Roger for all of these years. I would say in 2008 or 2009 the odds were still perhaps neutral, but by 2010 and later, Rafa, Nole and Murray were all coming into their physical prime while Roger was moving past that. The fact that he still remains competitive is incredibly impressive just by itself. Let's not forget how Sampras lost in the USO final in 2000 and 2001 in straight sets when he was still only 28 and 29 versus a couple of teenagers (Hewitt and Safin) who had a fraction of the talent or consistency of Rafa, Nole and Murray. Roger is well past his physical prime - yet he still takes these younger challengers to 5 grueling sets (think USO SF 2010 and 2011 against Djokovic). But yes it's clear that today his rivals have a significant edge in sustaining long rallies and Roger is resorting more and more to his shotmaking/offensive talent and, to his credit, remains competitive (but increasingly coming up short in the big moments).
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
I think Federer cannot beat Djokovic, Murray or Nadal (if he comes back ever). Those days of beating them are in the past.

For Federer to win a tournament, someone will have to beat these three guys.
No. Wimbledon 2012.
 
This is exactly why I don't think Federer is the GOAT. I realize a lot of that is Nadal, but it's not like Federer has decisively owned Djokovic since his emergence, and Murray used to own Federer until the supposed crippled Federer started to even it out over the past 3 years.
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
Federer Against Big 4 (Djokovic, Nadal, and Murray)

2008 - 3-8
2009 - 5-6
2010 - 7-4
2011 - 2-7
2012 - 6-6
Total 23-31

Nadal's:

2008: 11-3 (4-0 vs. Federer, 4-2 vs. Djokovic, 3-1 vs. Murray)
2009: 7-5 (1-1 vs. Federer, 4-3 vs. Djokovic, 2-1 vs. Murray)
2010: 5-3 (1-1 vs. Federer, 2-0 vs. Djokovic, 2-2 vs. Murray)
2011: 7-8 (3-1 vs. Federer, 0-6 vs. Djokovic, 4-1 vs. Murray)
2012: 4-2 (1-1 vs. Federer, 3-1 vs. Djokovic, 0-0 vs. Murray)

Total: 34-21
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
This is exactly why I don't think Federer is the GOAT.

I don't consider anyone to be GOAT really (though if pushed I'd probably go with Laver), I think having different tiers is the way to go.

I realize a lot of that is Nadal

Nadal always was trouble for Fed.

but it's not like Federer has decisively owned Djokovic since his emergence...

Why is Fed supposed to "decisively" own Novak exactly? Novak is a terrific player.

...and Murray used to own Federer until the supposed crippled Federer started to even it out over the past 3 years.

Well Fed did get the better of Murray in their slam meetings "decisively" (lost one set overall in 3 meetings) so you could say he won their most important meetings but again why is this particular H2H so important? Would Fed be a greater player if he retired now, instead of soldering on against 5-6 younger players and still giving us a good show?

Seriously, H2H isn't everything.
 
Yes, how impressive of Federer to lose the majority of his matches against them.

ROSOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

With a name like that, you should be use to this. I'd rather lose to one of the top 4, then some lower ranked player. I mean, wouldn't any logical person want to lose to a better player rather than an inferior one?
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
This is exactly why I don't think Federer is the GOAT. I realize a lot of that is Nadal, but it's not like Federer has decisively owned Djokovic since his emergence, and Murray used to own Federer until the supposed crippled Federer started to even it out over the past 3 years.

Please remember his career is spread over 3 eras. 99-03,04-08, 09-12. The players you are comparing are a full 5-6 years younger. This thread is meaningless without the context. It should be viewed that Fed has a decent record inspite of the age difference. GOAT does not mean he will have positive H2H till he dies.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
These players are in their prime and 6 years younger than Federer so give him some slack. Laver lost to a near 42 years old Gonazles. Sampras lost to a young Hewitt and Federer.
 

Flash O'Groove

Hall of Fame
What are the records of the other 3 members of the Big 4?

Nadal is 33-22, Nole, 31-31, Murray 22-25 and Federer 21-31.

Other interesting statistics since 2008:

Nadal won 8 slams, 12 master 1000, 6 other tournament, including one olympics, for a total of 27 victories.
Nole won 5 slams, 11 master 1000, 2 masters, and 8 other tournaments for a total of 26 victories.
Murray won 1 slam, 8 master 1000, 11 other tournaments including one olympics for a total of 21 victories.
Federer won 5 slams, 7 master 1000, 2 masters ans 8 other tournaments for a total of 22 victories.
 

McEnroeisanartist

Hall of Fame
Nadal is 33-22, Nole, 31-31, Murray 22-25 and Federer 21-31.

Other interesting statistics since 2008:

Nadal won 8 slams, 12 master 1000, 6 other tournament, including one olympics, for a total of 27 victories.
Nole won 5 slams, 11 master 1000, 2 masters, and 8 other tournaments for a total of 26 victories.
Murray won 1 slam, 8 master 1000, 11 other tournaments including one olympics for a total of 21 victories.
Federer won 5 slams, 7 master 1000, 2 masters ans 8 other tournaments for a total of 22 victories.

Yes, I would say the old man has held his own in the last five years. Really thought Nadal would have won a lot more than 8 slams in 5 years.
 

kOaMaster

Hall of Fame
Yes, I would say the old man has held his own in the last five years. Really thought Nadal would have won a lot more than 8 slams in 5 years.

really? I think 8 slams is a lot, I didn't expect that at the beginning of 2008, not even after 2008. I think nadal did quiet good. It's not like he's over now and it was obvious he will never be the hardcourt threat djokovic or federer is/was
 

McEnroeisanartist

Hall of Fame
really? I think 8 slams is a lot, I didn't expect that at the beginning of 2008, not even after 2008. I think nadal did quiet good. It's not like he's over now and it was obvious he will never be the hardcourt threat djokovic or federer is/was

I guess I was thinking of Sampras who did 9 slams in 5 years, and Nadal is a more dominant player than Sampras. or Federer who did 12 slams in 5 years.
 

batz

G.O.A.T.
Nadal is 33-22, Nole, 31-31, Murray 22-25 and Federer 21-31.

Other interesting statistics since 2008:

Nadal won 8 slams, 12 master 1000, 6 other tournament, including one olympics, for a total of 27 victories.
Nole won 5 slams, 11 master 1000, 2 masters, and 8 other tournaments for a total of 26 victories.
Murray won 1 slam, 8 master 1000, 11 other tournaments including one olympics for a total of 21 victories.
Federer won 5 slams, 7 master 1000, 2 masters ans 8 other tournaments for a total of 22 victories.

Thanks.

Interesting to se Rafa 'out in front' as it were. That said, a lot of that will be down to his ownage of Murray on the H2H.
 

joeri888

G.O.A.T.
Thanks.

Interesting to se Rafa 'out in front' as it were. That said, a lot of that will be down to his ownage of Murray on the H2H.

He's 10-4 against Fed since 2008. Now if this was since 2009, we'd talk different.

Btw, what's the HC h2h's?
 

batz

G.O.A.T.
He's 10-4 against Fed since 2008. Now if this was since 2009, we'd talk different.

Btw, what's the HC h2h's?[/QUOTE]

I'd needto check mate but I think Murray is close to Nadal on hards from 2008 - might even be ahead.

Just checked - Murray is 5-4 on hards v Rafa since 2008
 
Last edited:
Top