legcramp
Professional
Gotta cling onto the GOAT's name to make a thread here, otherwise this should be in the former pro player section.
Greater YEC player: Djokovic vs Federer
- Thread starter Enceladus
- Start date
Gotta cling onto the GOAT's name to make a thread here, otherwise this should be in the former pro player section.
Fiero425
Legend
Possibly, but we'll never know as they come from different eras! We need to get over it! Djokovic will still own all the records b/c he's "The Man" now!
abmk
Bionic Poster
abmk
Bionic Poster
Possibly, but we'll never know as they come from different eras! We need to get over it! Djokovic will still own all the records b/c he's "The Man" now!
Actually subjectively I do know they are better, based on the levels.
Djokovic winning more with nothing special level in inflation era isn't going to change things level wise.
legcramp
Professional
Thread was made by a Djokovic fan, but go on .
The OP needs to find a hobby then like go out and play tennis or something instead of being a basement dwelling troll.
Fiero425
Legend
Well when it comes to Roger, I'm not so sure! Nole proved himself early & often defeating Fed at the USO, AO, & Wimbedon; often saving MP's! He wasn't over the hill!
metsman
G.O.A.T.
2010 YEC Federer is probably a match for any version of Djokovic indoors and that's Fraud's third tier and 5th best iteration (really a 3.5 tier since 08/09 should have been the third tier but Fed didn't really bring it in either tournament, i.e. the gap between 2007 and 2010 is more than a typical tier in level). It's not as big a gap as grass where a 4th tier and 8th best Federer could be a match for any Djokovic, which makes sense.
It's not a slight on Djokovic, Federer is just extremely good on low bouncing conditions with PETE's serve the only real equalizer anyone can boast.
It's not a slight on Djokovic, Federer is just extremely good on low bouncing conditions with PETE's serve the only real equalizer anyone can boast.
RS
Bionic Poster
Only a match? Why not 7-3 Fed min?
Fiero425
Legend
Hon, did you even look at the tournament record? We know Novak was able to beat Fed on one of his favorite surfaces because he did it in 2012, '13, '15 & '14 Walkover! He did it in straight sets as well! I must be missing someone's point! Hilarious regardless as Djokovic takes, breaks, and owns tons of records Fedal used to hold!
I Am Finnish
Bionic Poster
Fedr
metsman
G.O.A.T.
That's true, the 14 walkover is really the straw that breaks the camel's back here dahlin'.Hon, did you even look at the tournament record? We know Novak was able to beat Fed on one of his favorite surfaces because he did it in 2012, '13, '15 & '14 Walkover! He did it in straight sets as well! I must be missing someone's point! Hilarious regardless as Djokovic takes, breaks, and owns tons of records Fedal used to hold!
Fiero425
Legend
Besides Rafa not winning a YEC, he was destroyed in straight sets by Novak in Nadal's super-season of 2013!
The Fedfather
Legend
Federer with a clear advantage. Every stat other than the number of titles goes Federer's way as it is. Another thing is that one of his titles Djokovic won with a WO in the final. No tea, no shade, Novak had no choice in the matter, but in a practical sense it still means he won 5 finals for his 6 titles, Federer won 6 for 6.
dr325i
G.O.A.T.
3 wins in the final over federer mean nothing…
Zero wins by Federer in the finals
Ok…
dr325i
G.O.A.T.
LOL, that walkover was Mr Sweater that ran away from the embarrassment just to play Davis cup like nothing ever happened…4 days later
3:0 H2H in the finals…easy peasy
The Fedfather
Legend
Whatever you say, lol. I only noted this small fact. Don't stress about it, it wasn't the main point.
dr325i
G.O.A.T.
You said every stat??? What is the “every stat”?? They are tied in titles and 4:3 H2H with 3:0 H2H in the finals. What other stats federer has in his favor??
again, Federer fought Stan in that SF like there is no tomorrow. Then he realized he had no chance in the final and did not show up. Just to recover from this “bad injury” a few days later.
The Fedfather
Legend
Omg, did I say every stat??? I only meant finals made, SFs made (16 to 11), titles won without losing a match, matches won, percentages of matches/sets/points won, point/game dominance. No way I forgot about Djokovic's 4:3 H2H!!! With a WO too!! Sorry, this changes everything.
Say no more. I've already scrapped Federer's name from #1 in my YEC champions rankings. Djokovic rightfully takes his place.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Top 10 win percentage indoors
1. Djokovic - 75.9%
2. Becker - 72.6%
3. Borg - 71.4%
4. Laver - 70.4%
5. Sampras - 69.8%
6. Lendl - 69.4%
7. Federer - 68.2%
8. McEnroe - 67%
Good luck with that argument.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Devilito
Hall of Fame
tennis is not baseball that stuck to wood bats, it changes constantly. Comparing stats in tennis to determine GOAT status in any metric is idiotic. Tennis is about the worse sport of all time to judge excellence based on comparative statistics that span over 100 years. There are eras in tennis where prize money mattered more than points and some exos paid more than some slams and top players took those exos more seriously than the slams. How can you factor that into the statistics?
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but the greatest in sports are determined by championships (numbers) and stats, not nostalgic memories or because we prefer one player over another. These are Open Era numbers also, not taking into account players from 100 years ago. So to say Djokovic is not top 5 indoors when he has the most Paris Masters and ATP Finals, both tournaments that have been played since the 70s, has no basis in reality when he has the 2nd most big titles indoors and one of the highest win rates against top 10 and top 5 players.
Devilito
Hall of Fame
Stats mean nothing if variables are no equivalent.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
Actually a good point.
Unfortunately for the bean-counters, tennis statistics accumulated within a set of different parameters are not directly comparable and require some adjusting.
Pure statistics are a convenient and popular way to argue (especially if they already agree with your predetermined conclusions) because they don’t require much work. Simply type them out from Wiki and you’re done.
But the thing is that not all matches are created equal, so when you use super general stats like number of top 10 matches won, there will inevitably be discrepancies—in the first place, there are very different kinds of top 10 players (Casper Ruud is not quite on the level of Roger Federer, for instance), and in the second place, those players don’t all play at the same level because of the flexible nature of form. If they did, upsets would never happen.
There’s an argument that the greater the sample sizes for these statistics (i.e. stats based on 1000 matches rather than 100), the more they average out in the end and reflect the truth. This would be a good argument to make if the distinctive eras in tennis weren’t so different from each other. 1000 matches collected from the 2000’s decade are just not going to be the same as 1000 matches collected from the 2010’s decade, even though there may be a small degree of overlap between them.
Now, getting closer to the truth involves actually making an attempt to understand where these stats are coming from in the first place, and as far as I know the best method of doing so in a sport like tennis would be to be consciously aware of the different eras (e.g. watching matches, getting a feel for the players unique to each era, considering circumstances like courts and racket tech). This is of course a lot more laborious than plugging in numbers from a stat sheet, so casual viewers are typically spared from such discourse.
But if you consider yourself more dedicated to analyzing the sport than a casual viewer, I see no reason why you should limit yourself to bean-counting.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Well, you seem to know Fed's mind better than me.
initialize
Hall of Fame
C’mon man… Federer is literally the least worst out of the Big 3 when it comes to faking injuries and pulling buffoonery
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
You call it bean counting but I don't think much of this has to do with why Djokovic is #1 in top 10 win percentage indoor.
Indoors, Djokovic is 6-4 versus Federer, 4-2 versus Nadal, 4-1 versus Murray, 6-1 versus Wawrinka, 3-0 versus Del Potro, 5-1 versus Cilic, 7-0 versus Berdych, 3-1 versus Medvedev, 2-2 versus Zverev, and 4-0 versus Tsitsipas.
The only head to heads he lost against one of his real rivals is 1-4 against Tsonga (where most of the matches happened in 2008 and 2009 before he turned around the head to head with no matches after 2012) and 1-2 versus Thiem. So his higher percentage is not coming from the Casper Ruud's out there. He pretty much dominated the heads to heads against his generation and the next generation of players. So again, saying he's not among the best indoors is just incorrect.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
While this thread is indeed about Djokovic’s level indoors, the comment I replied to was a more general statement about statistics.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Fair enough.
The Guru
Legend
Indoors is different than WTF and indoor hard is different than indoors. Kinda a BS statement because it's techinically defensible but what you are saying is very different than what most people will think you mean.
abmk
Bionic Poster
Djoko is 6-5 vs Fed indoors with majority of those matches happening with Djokovic having the physical advantage (from 11 onwards). Wim 12 is the match missed. Not indoor tournament, but match was fully indoors.
Also both of Djokovic's wins vs Zverev at YEC were in RR (Zverev qualified anyways in 2018, don't remember 2020). Both of Zverev's wins were in knockout matches. final in 18 and SF in 21.
Djokovic is among the best indoors, just less so than Fed, Sampras, Becker, Lendl, Mac.
Last edited:
abmk
Bionic Poster
Well when it comes to Roger, I'm not so sure! Nole proved himself early & often defeating Fed at the USO, AO, & Wimbedon; often saving MP's! He wasn't over the hill!
Fed was definitely over the hill at Wimbledon in 14.
even past prime fed beat prime Djoko easily in Wim 12.
needed djoko for fed to be nearly 33 to beat him first at WIm in 14.
And fed beat djoko thrice in a row at USO in 07-09, losing 1 set combined
Djoko's wins in 10/11 were massive struggles. having to save MPs.
past prime fed (7th best fed at USO) had MPs vs the best version of djoko at the USO in 11.
abmk
Bionic Poster
I think 2010 YEC fed was better than good 2012 fed. atleast by a bit.
Conditions probably made the gap wider.
Kralingen
Talk Tennis Guru
You should really look into the indoor careers of Ivan Lendl, John McEnroe, and Boris Becker
Becker is the questionable one
but I think you’d be surprised just how crazy elite those guys were indoors.
Anyways point was not that Djokovic is unequivocally outside the top 5, point was that there is at least arguments to be made for those guys over him.
however there is nothing and I mean nothing to suggest Djokovic is better than Fed indoors, it’s a totally illogical indefensible statement. Everything Djokovic has done Fed has done better.
The Guru
Legend
I mean the 4 years Djokovic was healthy for the indoor season during his peak he won 4 WTFs and 3 Paris masters. 34-2 against very good competition and avenged one of the two losses in the same tournament and he's the all time leader in titles at the two biggest indoor tournaments so yeah there's definitely a case.
Edit: And oh yeah no sets dropped in finals even though he faced each of the big 4 in them
Last edited:
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Wimbledon is an outdoor tournament. Should we also count Wimbledon 2018 as a win for Djokovic? It's 6-4 Djokovic in indoor hardcourt tournaments and should be 7-4 since Federer had about a 15% chance of beating Djokovic in 2014 WTF if he hadn't withdrew from the match.
And 2 of Federer's 3 wins against Djokovic at the ATP finals were in RR while 2 of Djokovic's 3 wins were in the finals.
That's your opinion and I would say an incorrect one.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
Lendl and Mac have legitimate arguments over Federer indoors, never mind Djokovic.
I wouldn’t go as far as to include Becker though.
I wouldn’t go as far as to include Becker though.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Not sure why you think there is nothing to suggest Djokovic is the better indoor hardcourt player over Federer. He definitely has an argument to be ranked over him and in my opinion, Federer isn't even in the top 3 overall. It's Mac and Becker that would be hard to say Djokovic is better than, not Federer.
abmk
Bionic Poster
Umm, the actual conditions of the match matter. not what the tournament is labelled as.
Wimbledon 12 semi was an indoor match - from start to finish.
Yes, so was Wim 18 semi.
Djokovic would be getting his a** kicked had he faced federer in YEC 07, 09 or if Shanghai were indoors (conditions close enough to indoors anyways). h2h would be significantly in favour of fed had physical conditions been anywhere near even instead of djokovic having the physical advantage in like 8 out of their 11 indoor matches.
You must have some immense amount of shamelessness to bring about YEC 2014 when fed got injured and wasn't in a state to play. hell, guy even played AO 2020 semi vs djoko hampered.
except 2019 RR resulted in elimination of Djokovic from the tournament and stopped him from becoming year end #1. So that was in essence a knockout match and an important one.
both beat each other twice in knockout matches and once in RR where the other qualified (fed qualified in 13 while losing to djoko and djoko qualified in 15 while losing to fed)
nope. Djokovic is worse for those who can properly evaluate and realise he's benefitted significantly from slowdown and clearly worse competition than everyone else there in that list.
abmk
Bionic Poster
The only year in which djoko had good competition at the YEC was in 12. weak (14) or meh competition in the others (13, 15).
Lets not forget Djokovic benefitting significantly from slowdown at YEC and Paris.
abmk
Bionic Poster
I'm talking based on Fed's track record.
Kralingen
Talk Tennis Guru
Federer was ailing in 05 which is the only reason he hasn’t got 5 straight YECs (though two were obviously outdoors). Paris and Madrid were weird ones in his prime due to health… but 04/06 he was undefeated during indoor season and suffered severe injuries in 05/08 causing him to miss those Masters. But he made up for it in 10/11 with near flawless indoor season. Djokovic does deserve credit of course but Federer wins in all areas of the game indoors
Mac Lendl and even Connors played way more indoors than Fedovic did and effectively had two YECs bc of the WCT tour so it’s tougher to compare 1:1.
I will say all 3 of those guys had way tougher competition than Fedovic did. Pete at least had Becker. Fedovic had no prime indoor ATG to play against
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Well even with the Wimbledon match, Djokovic still leads.
If, if, if. If he faced Federer in 2009 YEC he would be getting his ass kicked yet he did the asskicking at 2009 Basel. Lol. If Shangai were indoors yet it's an outdoor tournament. Why not talk about the actual indoor Masters tournament, Paris Masters, where Federer won once out of 13 tries? Federer wasn't in a state to play 2014 WTF final yet played the DC final 5 days later.
Point is, a win is a win. Doesn't matter if it's in RR or not, but since you brought it up, Djokovic won the more important matches against Federer at the ATP Finals.
Like I said, that's your opinion.
Similar threads
