The „great“ Fedal rivalry wasn’t one

P

phl92

Hall of Fame
I mean the whole Laver cup is about Federer and his greatest rival and ofc friend Nadal. Ok I get it, they got along very well and they had some legendary matches … but checking all H2H rivalries between the Big 3 (cmon Murray cannot be mentioned with the other 3, if so why not also mention Wawrinka and call them Big 5), actually it is Djokovic who gave them both, Nadal and Federer, most fights.
Fed and Djokovic met 50 times!
Djokovic and Nadal met 59 times.
Fed and Nadal …. Met ‚only‘ 40 times.

I totally get it, 40 is a big number and its the quality not the quantity… but still I think some people could get it wrong when hearing and seeing this Laver cup.. and also you might think Nadal and Fed met much more often since they peaked only 2-3 years from each other
 
S

StrongRule

Talk Tennis Guru
Fabresque said:
Federer’s biggest rivalry was with Djokovic. He maintained a pretty close H2H over the years, 23-27 is relatively tight.

How can it be a rivalry with Nadal when he got destroyed almost every single time for 12 years till he started winning? Not a real “rivalry”.
Click to expand...
Yeah, he was indeed "destroyed" in Wimbledon 2008 and AO 2009, that were total blowouts. Seriously, people just like to say something without checking the facts. Acting like RG 2008 was a normal thing in their rivalry. Actually, during their primes it was the only time when Nadal has "destroyed" Federer. Other than that, their matches were very competitive with Nadal usually winning on clay, and Federer mostly winning on other surfaces. Yes, Nadal ended up being a bit more successful outside of clay and managed to beat Federer a few times in the other slams. Doesn't mean he was destroying him.

That rivalry is discussed so much because they had lots of matches during their primes, some of them really great matches. On the other hand, Federer and Djokovic barely had any important meetings when both were in their primes. A big part their rivalry was Djokovic taking advantage on Federer being long past prime.
 
MichaelNadal

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
phl92 said:
I mean the whole Laver cup is about Federer and his greatest rival and ofc friend Nadal. Ok I get it, they got along very well and they had some legendary matches … but checking all H2H rivalries between the Big 3 (cmon Murray cannot be mentioned with the other 3, if so why not also mention Wawrinka and call them Big 5), actually it is Djokovic who gave them both, Nadal and Federer, most fights.
Fed and Djokovic met 50 times!
Djokovic and Nadal met 59 times.
Fed and Nadal …. Met ‚only‘ 40 times.

I totally get it, 40 is a big number and its the quality not the quantity… but still I think some people could get it wrong when hearing and seeing this Laver cup.. and also you might think Nadal and Fed met much more often since they peaked only 2-3 years from each other
Click to expand...

aretha-lies.gif
 
S

Sampras-Bruguera 1993

Legend
Most of the Djoker/Fed matches were close and competitive. Most of the Fedal matches were completely one sided until Nadal start slowing down and losing explosion due to injuries/style of play
 
L

Lauren_Girl'

Hall of Fame
Fedal was a decent rivalry, obviously better than 99.9% of the other rivalries in tennis. But still nowhere near Fedovic and Djokodal.

Fedal had maybe 3, 4 epic matches... Wimbledon 2008, AO 2009 and AO 2017. Maybe Wimbledon 2007 and, Rome 2006 and Miami 2005, but only the 3 matchs in Bold had a high level of tennis IMO. Rome 2006 was dramatic but average quality of tennis.
The other matches were all too one-sided. All the RG matches were boring, too predictable. Not bad, but not unforgettable.
No match at the US Open.
No BO3 match worth remembering.

That pales, compared to Djokovic's history with Federer, Nadal and even Murray or Wawrinka. I would watch Djokovic-Wawrinka's trilogy at the Australian Open any day, if the other alternative was Fedal in RG.
 
juanparty

juanparty

Hall of Fame
StrongRule said:
Yeah, he was indeed "destroyed" in Wimbledon 2008 and AO 2009, that were total blowouts. Seriously, people just like to say something without checking the facts. Acting like RG 2008 was a normal thing in their rivalry. Actually, during their primes it was the only time when Nadal has "destroyed" Federer. Other than that, their matches were very competitive with Nadal usually winning on clay, and Federer mostly winning on other surfaces. Yes, Nadal ended up being a bit more successful outside of clay and managed to beat Federer a few times in the other slams. Doesn't mean he was destroying him.

That rivalry is discussed so much because they had lots of matches during their primes, some of them really great matches. On the other hand, Federer and Djokovic barely had any important meetings when both were in their primes. A big part their rivalry was Djokovic taking advantage on Federer being long past prime.
Click to expand...
Do you mean that Feddy reaches the Wimbledon finals without being in his prime, that is, in those 3 finals he was a mug?
 
D

DjokoLand

Hall of Fame
Fedal rivalry wasn’t great as young Nadal owned peak Fed and Fed then aged better than Nadal and started to get the upper hand in HC and grass. Clay was always a right off.

Djokoerer was better as young Djokovic could beat Fed and Old Fed could beat Djokovic. There matches were always close and exciting
 
S

StrongRule

Talk Tennis Guru
DjokoLand said:
Fedal rivalry wasn’t great as young Nadal owned peak Fed and Fed then aged better than Nadal and started to get the upper hand in HC and grass. Clay was always a right off.

Djokoerer was better as young Djokovic could beat Fed and Old Fed could beat Djokovic. There matches were always close and exciting
Click to expand...
No match in their rivalry is even close to Rome 2006, Wimbledon 2007, Wimbledon 2008, AO 2009. (all very close 5 set matches, when according to you Nadal somehow "owned" Federer)
 
D

DjokoLand

Hall of Fame
StrongRule said:
No match in their rivalry is even close to Rome 2006, Wimbledon 2007, Wimbledon 2008, AO 2009. (all very close 5 set matches, when according to you Nadal somehow "owned" Federer)
Click to expand...
Yeah I meant in the way that was a Peak Fed losing to a young Nadal. Look at Nadals record at AO and W since his early days and Fed should never be losing them.

Maybe I should of said the outcome was exciting more in Djokoerer as even 35 year old Fed could beat Djokovic and young Djokovic could beat Fed
 
S

StrongRule

Talk Tennis Guru
DjokoLand said:
Yeah I meant in the way that was a Peak Fed losing to a young Nadal. Look at Nadals record at AO and W since his early days and Fed should never be losing them.

Maybe I should of said the outcome was exciting more in Djokoerer as even 35 year old Fed could beat Djokovic and young Djokovic could beat Fed
Click to expand...
He couldn't do it in BO5 though, which is what matters most. His last win over Djokovic in a slam was in Wimbledon 2012.

Not sure what you mean by young Nadal. By 2008-2009 he already reached his prime everywhere, not just on clay.
 
D

DjokoLand

Hall of Fame
StrongRule said:
He couldn't do it in BO5 though, which is what matters most. His last win over Djokovic in a slam was in Wimbledon 2012.

Not sure what you mean by young Nadal. By 2008-2009 he already reached his prime everywhere, not just on clay.
Click to expand...
But on HC he didn’t reach his prime he got to his first SF on HC in 08 and while it was his best grass run in his career Fed should of not been losing to him.
By a point it became predictable Fed lashed everything at Nadal but Nadal grinds and attacks the BH and then Fed makes errors. It was then in Fed’s head and the rivalry became so one sided until later in their career.

Just remember that Fed who is the 2nd greatest AO champion gave Nadal his only AO until this year. Also Nadals peak was 2010-2013. If not for Djokovic in 2011 Nadals 2010- to RG 2012 would of been the best run in tennis as he was in every master final etc
 
Krish872007

Krish872007

Talk Tennis Guru
Yeah... clearly some people didn't watch the tennis properly
It may be slightly overly hyped in the media but it's definitely one of the most significant sporting rivalries

Firstly, in terms of tennis level any of the following matches featured competitive, high quality tennis:
Miami 2005, Dubai 2006, Monte Carlo 2006, Rome 2006, RG 2006, Wimbledon 2006, YEC 2006, Hamburg 2007, RG 2007, Wimbledon 2007, Hamburg 2008, Wimbledon 2008, AO 2009, WTF 2010, Madrid 2011, AO 2012, IW 2012, Cincy 2013, Basel 2015, AO 2017, Wimbledon 2019 - so at least 20 matches worth watching.

Secondly, yes Nadal has had the upper hand throughout the rivalry - although not to the extent that people are going on about here. If we break it down by season Nadal ended up with positive records in 2006, 2008, 2011, 2013, 2014; Federer with 2007, 2015, 2017. The remaining years were split pretty much evenly

That said, yes the Federer - Djokovic rivalry is insanely good
 
D

DjokoLand

Hall of Fame
Krish872007 said:
Yeah... clearly some people didn't watch the tennis properly
It may be slightly overly hyped in the media but it's definitely one of the most significant sporting rivalries

Firstly, in terms of tennis level any of the following matches featured competitive, high quality tennis:
Miami 2005, Dubai 2006, Monte Carlo 2006, Rome 2006, RG 2006, Wimbledon 2006, YEC 2006, Hamburg 2007, RG 2007, Wimbledon 2007, Hamburg 2008, Wimbledon 2008, AO 2009, WTF 2010, Madrid 2011, AO 2012, IW 2012, Cincy 2013, Basel 2015, AO 2017, Wimbledon 2019 - so at least 20 matches worth watching.

Secondly, yes Nadal has had the upper hand throughout the rivalry - although not to the extent that people are going on about here. If we break it down by season Nadal ended up with positive records in 2006, 2008, 2011, 2013, 2014; Federer with 2007, 2015, 2017. The remaining years were split pretty much evenly

That said, yes the Federer - Djokovic rivalry is insanely good
Click to expand...
Every match on clay post 2006 was pointless to watch. Federer no matter how good would get exposed by the high bounce to the 1HBH. Nadal could be bad and still beatFed on clay.
 
Rosstour

Rosstour

G.O.A.T.
It's not just the matches, it's WHEN they happened and the massive contrast in style

Nadal came along and took the world by storm with the clamdiggers and the hair and the BAMOS and the tics...total opposite of Fed

Having said that, the rivalry was one-sided for far less time than it wasn't, at the end of the day

Nadal's advantage over Federer was always clay-skewed, and the Pigeon Era at Slams only lasted ~5 years, which are essentially Nadal's prime (21-27)
 
BH40love

BH40love

Semi-Pro
I swear most people on this forum just chat sheet* when they don’t know the half of it. Federer played Nadal on clay more often than not because Federer was always going deep into tournaments on EVERY SURFACE.
Without clay which most took place earlier in there rivalry, Federer has the superior h2h. Either way the rivalry between Federer and Nadal was much greater than the others. Most tennis people understand this , these two have transcended the sport.
 
Tshooter

Tshooter

G.O.A.T.
I understood from US based commentators before each FEDR and Roddick match that it was a great rivalry maybe THE rivalry. :confused:
 
D

DjokoLand

Hall of Fame
topher said:
Let’s count the 5 set matches:

Fedal: 6 (4 GS final, 2 M1000 final)
Djokodal: 3 (1 GS final, 2 GS SF)
Fedovic: 4 (2 GS final, 2 GS SF)

The above alone tells you why Fedal is looked at differently. Then consider none of the Fedovic 5 setters were in Fed’s prime.
Click to expand...
How many of them 5 Setters where in Nadals prime ?
 
D

DjokoLand

Hall of Fame
Ok While Nadal was definitely better on grass early In his career W07 was peak/prime Fed vs a young Nadal. Also AO09 was Nadals first F at the AO09 and while Fed was lower than 04-07 he still should be beating Nadal
 
D

DjokoLand

Hall of Fame
Rosstour said:
It's not just the matches, it's WHEN they happened and the massive contrast in style

Nadal came along and took the world by storm with the clamdiggers and the hair and the BAMOS and the tics...total opposite of Fed

Having said that, the rivalry was one-sided for far less time than it wasn't, at the end of the day

Nadal's advantage over Federer was always clay-skewed, and the Pigeon Era at Slams only lasted ~5 years, which are essentially Nadal's prime (21-27)
Click to expand...
Nadal is clay skewed over everyone he is that good on clay.
Fedovic are great on clay and would be classed as ATG”s on that surface alone if no Nadal.
Don’t know why people punish Nadal for being so good on clay.
Ironically Djokovic has a better record on clay vs Nadal than Nadal has on Hard court vs Djokovic.

Yes it skews GS H2H when most are at RG but still he is insane to beat to the fact Djokovic beat him twice playing his best and Nadal average.
 
E

eldanger25

Hall of Fame
It's a great rivalry and has all the ingredients of a great rivalry, it's just been a dozen years since it was one.

1. They met almost exclusively in finals, a key factor in great rivalries, b/w 2006 and 2010.
2. Multiple GS title fights during that time frame, on all surfaces.
3. Both guys won big matches against each other, primarily during that time frame (ultimately punctuated years later by Fed winning the AO 2017 match)
4. Nadal was the first to beat Federer in a HC slam final. Federer snapped Nadal's absurd win streak on clay - all during this timeframe.
5. All the media stuff - contrasting styles etc.

I think Federer-Djokovic is a lot of fun to watch but not much of a "great" rivalry of tennis history because of the age gap and the fact that it never really crowded out the rest of the sport for long stretches of time like, say, Borg-Connors, Lendl-Mac, Fed-Nadal, etc. Paradoxically, for that rivalry to elevate in prominence, Novak would've had to lose one of those Wimbledon finals or the 2015 Open final etc. Nadal gets to be the Big 3 member with two great rivalries as the "middle" member of the 3, but he only really had 3/4ths of one season - RG to Open 2010 - to himself. Sometimes being part of a great rivalry has its downsides.
 
arvind13

arvind13

Professional
StrongRule said:
Yeah, he was indeed "destroyed" in Wimbledon 2008 and AO 2009, that were total blowouts. Seriously, people just like to say something without checking the facts. Acting like RG 2008 was a normal thing in their rivalry. Actually, during their primes it was the only time when Nadal has "destroyed" Federer. Other than that, their matches were very competitive with Nadal usually winning on clay, and Federer mostly winning on other surfaces. Yes, Nadal ended up being a bit more successful outside of clay and managed to beat Federer a few times in the other slams. Doesn't mean he was destroying him.

That rivalry is discussed so much because they had lots of matches during their primes, some of them really great matches. On the other hand, Federer and Djokovic barely had any important meetings when both were in their primes. A big part their rivalry was Djokovic taking advantage on Federer being long past prime.
Click to expand...

THIS
 
AnOctorokForDinner

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
Third Serve said:
I’ve just about had it with this place so I’ll not mince words this time: most of the comments in this thread (specifically the first reply) are utterly, completely moronic and the people making them should take one big step back and think critically about what they just posted.
Click to expand...

If they were capable of doing so they wouldn't allow for such dummy comments, you know.
 
joekapa

joekapa

Legend
It's like the much touted Borg vs McEnroe rivalry.

The real rivalry was McEnroe vs Lendl.

It's marketing.

I agree. Fedovic had many more epic matches than, and beatdowns from both ends than Fedal. And on surfaces that both were good at (hard, grass).
 
abmk

abmk

Bionic Poster
25 of the 50 matches between Federer/Djokovic were straight-set matches (50%)
19 of the 40 matches between Federer/Nadal were straight-set matches (47.5%)
36 of the 59 matches between Nadal/Djokovic were straight-set matches (61%)
 
Last edited:
abmk

abmk

Bionic Poster
joekapa said:
It's like the much touted Borg vs McEnroe rivalry.

The real rivalry was McEnroe vs Lendl.

It's marketing.

I agree. Fedovic had many more epic matches than, and beatdowns from both ends than Fedal. And on surfaces that both were good at (hard, grass).
Click to expand...

You can say fedovic more unpredictable, better quality of rallies etc. but Fedovic had way more epic matches?
LOLOLOL: the delusions

Rome 06, Wim 07, Wim 08, AO 09 blow away that fantasy.
Throw in Miami 05 and AO 17

Only matches that compare in Fedovic are RG 11, USO 11.

Wim 14/19 are dramatic, but quality doesn't come within a galaxy of the top 4 of Fedal.
Wim 19 definitely lesser than Miami 05/AO 17. Wim 14 might come somewhat close, that's it.
Djokovic just got super lucky at Wim with 33+ yo old Fed.
guy is 1-5 on grass vs < 31 yo old Murray/Nadal/Fed.

Mac/Lendl were born a year apart.
Fed-Djoko 6 years apart.
Fed was already at 15 slams by AO 2010 with Djoko at 1.
 
joekapa

joekapa

Legend
Julius Caesar said:
********* like djokovic to be the bride every single *** time, when hardly anyone cares about that player, lol
Click to expand...
On Gill Gross's podcast "Three", which discusses the careers of the Big 3.......a viewer asked the question "Which of the 3 will be more influential". Joel Drucker, who also appears on the podcast said "We are living in a Novak World"....... in the sense that coaches are teaching young tennis players to play like Djokovic, more than the other 2........and it shows even in contemperary players like Goffin, Nishikori and Alkaraz.

He said this saying that Federer's influence is more so in older players who try to emulate his game, and obviously fail miserably, and that Nadal's influence is hard to emulate as he is a lefty.
 
abmk

abmk

Bionic Poster
Lauren_Girl' said:
Fedal was a decent rivalry, obviously better than 99.9% of the other rivalries in tennis. But still nowhere near Fedovic and Djokodal.

Fedal had maybe 3, 4 epic matches... Wimbledon 2008, AO 2009 and AO 2017. Maybe Wimbledon 2007 and, Rome 2006 and Miami 2005, but only the 3 matchs in Bold had a high level of tennis IMO. Rome 2006 was dramatic but average quality of tennis.
The other matches were all too one-sided. All the RG matches were boring, too predictable. Not bad, but not unforgettable.
No match at the US Open.
No BO3 match worth remembering.

That pales, compared to Djokovic's history with Federer, Nadal and even Murray or Wawrinka. I would watch Djokovic-Wawrinka's trilogy at the Australian Open any day, if the other alternative was Fedal in RG.
Click to expand...

Rome 06 was fedal's best match quality wise.
Wim 07 was way better than AO 17.
RG 05/06/07/11 matches weren't boring or predictable in terms of results.

Fedovic simply didn't have those many epic matches as Fedal did.

The „great“ Fedal rivalry wasn’t one

I mean the whole Laver cup is about Federer and his greatest rival and ofc friend Nadal. Ok I get it, they got along very well and they had some legendary matches … but checking all H2H rivalries between the Big 3 (cmon Murray cannot be mentioned with the other 3, if so why not also mention...
tt.tennis-warehouse.com tt.tennis-warehouse.com

No Bo3 worth remembering? LOL. dubai 06, YEC 06, Hamburg 08, YEC 10, Basel 15 etc.
Some others were worth remembering for sheer mastery from one side.

Conclusion: Stupidity got stupified by the sheer stupidity of your post.

This part in particular is is just triple faceplam worthy.

Lauren_Girl' said:
That pales, compared to Djokovic's history with Federer, Nadal and even Murray or Wawrinka.
Click to expand...

--------------------

Lauren_Girl' said:
I would watch Djokovic-Wawrinka's trilogy at the Australian Open any day, if the other alternative was Fedal in RG.
Click to expand...

Fedal Wim 07/08 and AO 09 trilogy way better than Djoko-Wawa trilogy at AO and Wim 06-08 triology also significantly better.
But you chose to talk about RG only just to suit your agenda.
 
Last edited:
TearTheRoofOff

TearTheRoofOff

G.O.A.T.
Fabresque said:
Federer’s biggest rivalry was with Djokovic. He maintained a pretty close H2H over the years, 23-27 is relatively tight.

How can it be a rivalry with Nadal when he got destroyed almost every single time for 12 years till he started winning? Not a real “rivalry”.
Click to expand...
A lot of Nadal wins were hard fought, and just dismissing Fed's later wins just sounds stupid. 16-24 isn't exactly a landslide.
 
Last edited:
chjtennis

chjtennis

G.O.A.T.
Fabresque said:
Federer’s biggest rivalry was with Djokovic. He maintained a pretty close H2H over the years, 23-27 is relatively tight.

How can it be a rivalry with Nadal when he got destroyed almost every single time for 12 years till he started winning? Not a real “rivalry”.
Click to expand...

Not sure if you are trolling. That 'total destruction' was done on clay but not on other surfaces. And since 2015, Federer has actually been completely destroying Nadal on non-clay surfaces - 6-0.
 
abmk

abmk

Bionic Poster
Fabresque said:
Federer’s biggest rivalry was with Djokovic. He maintained a pretty close H2H over the years, 23-27 is relatively tight.

How can it be a rivalry with Nadal when he got destroyed almost every single time for 12 years till he started winning? Not a real “rivalry”.
Click to expand...

Federer was up 8-6 vs Nadal off clay till 2012 end.
Fed was 5-2 vs nadal in mid-2006 to 2007 end, including wins in Wim 06 and Wim 07, and on clay (Hamburg 07) and HC. (YEC 06/07)

Nadal got off with wins over less than good fed in 13-early 14, unlike in 15 where they met only once.
Fed is 14-10 off clay (3-1 on grass, 11-9 on HC)

Edit: you are on my ignore, but saw your incredibly loser post (even by your poor standards) being quoted by others. So I responded.
 
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Lauren_Girl' said:
Fedal was a decent rivalry, obviously better than 99.9% of the other rivalries in tennis. But still nowhere near Fedovic and Djokodal.

Fedal had maybe 3, 4 epic matches... Wimbledon 2008, AO 2009 and AO 2017. Maybe Wimbledon 2007 and, Rome 2006 and Miami 2005, but only the 3 matchs in Bold had a high level of tennis IMO. Rome 2006 was dramatic but average quality of tennis.
The other matches were all too one-sided. All the RG matches were boring, too predictable. Not bad, but not unforgettable.
No match at the US Open.
No BO3 match worth remembering.

That pales, compared to Djokovic's history with Federer, Nadal and even Murray or Wawrinka. I would watch Djokovic-Wawrinka's trilogy at the Australian Open any day, if the other alternative was Fedal in RG.
Click to expand...
Djokodal is a bit overrated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mike danny
Is Djokovic-Federer rivalry greater than Sampras-Agassi?
2 3
Replies
118
Views
12K
TennisEnvy
T
THE FIGHTER
  • Poll
Anyone Else Like The Idea Of A Gulbis/dimitrov Rivalry?
Replies
6
Views
624
monfed
M
clout
  • Poll
In your opinion's, now which is the greater rivalry: Fedal or Djokodal?
Replies
47
Views
1K
TJfederer16
TJfederer16
RF-18
Crushing the myth about 2014-16 being Djoko-murray matchup
2 3
Replies
109
Views
3K
mike danny
mike danny
P
Will Nadal/Djokovic become the best clay rivalry of all time?
Replies
1
Views
831
Mike Sams
Mike Sams
Top