Red Rick
Bionic Poster
Federer was posting insane stats in 2015, I'd take that competition over a Baghdatis Open.2015 is probably the easiest year an ATG ever had. 0 competition anywhere for Djokovic Zzzz
Federer was posting insane stats in 2015, I'd take that competition over a Baghdatis Open.2015 is probably the easiest year an ATG ever had. 0 competition anywhere for Djokovic Zzzz
2006 is just as bad, same as most of 2010, 2016, 2017 after AO, 2018/2019 (apart from Wimbledon)Federer was posting insane stats in 2015, I'd take that competition over a Baghdatis Open.
Playing level: Djokovic 2011 > Federer 2006 > Djokovic 2015Plus he had a rising ATG and established clay GOD to deal with.. unlike declined mid30 atg or trash atg (fed and nadal 2015).
Don't tell me nadal was a baby. No freaking baby wins slam + 4 masters (2005) & slam + 2 masters + slam final (2006), wins 81 consecutive matches on clay and stays world no.2 throughout the span only due to the most dominant peak player ever to play tennis was keeping him at bay.
Fed's 2006 > Djok's 2015, level wise.
Federer beat him 3 times that year. Murray was having a great season too, and Wawrinka had his best season on record. Sure, it wasn't the toughest competition, but it was about even with Federer's competition as #12015 is probably the easiest year an ATG ever had. 0 competition anywhere for Djokovic Zzzz
Federer and Nadal are good enough to be winning Slams even when they’re old. It doesn’t mean they were better than when they were younger.Don't tell me Fedal were old in 2015, they won 8 slams years later, which could've been 11/12 without Djokovic.
Big Tournament matches won, 2015 vs 2006:
Djokovic 70 > Federer 66
Murray 50 > Nadal 42
Federer 38 > Nalbandian 30
Wawrinka 36 > Robredo 30
Berdych 36 > Ljubicic 29
Nadal 35 > Davydenko 27
Is winning slam a good way to prove that you're not too old/young?Federer and Nadal are good enough to be winning Slams even when they’re old. It doesn’t mean they were better than when they were younger.
The number you win compared to your younger self should serve as an indicator (if a bit simple).Is winning slam a good way to prove that you're not too old/young?
Playing level imo djok 2011 for the 1st half and fed 2006 for the 2nd half was highest.Playing level: Djokovic 2011 > Federer 2006 > Djokovic 2015
Stats: Djokovic 2015 > Federer 2006 > Djokovic 2011
Nadal was pretty good in 2006, but Djokovic had to deal with PEAK Nadal. Y'know, the one who won RG, W, and USO back to back and almost added a WTF to that. Djokovic had it harder in 2011 but easier in 2015.
They were good in BO3. The only top slam player was Stan at RG. Part of me kind of wishes Djokovic would have won, any sort of come down after RG would’ve opened door for Fed to win I think.Federer beat him 3 times that year. Murray was having a great season too, and Wawrinka had his best season on record. Sure, it wasn't the toughest competition, but it was about even with Federer's competition as #1
2006 fed would have eaten bagels from seppi.Yeah, he was peaking especially when he lost to Seppi, a kind of dude who would have been blown off the court back in the day.
I'm still finding reasons why @Yugram liked this sarcastic Post of mineIt was fed's peak.
In every department.
Names certainly don't always speak for quality or level the players brought to table.Finalists at 5 biggest events .
2015. 2006
Australia - Andy Murray > Bagdatis
RG. - Wawrinka < Nadal
Wimbledon. - Federer > Nadal
US Open. - Federer > Roddick
WTF. - Federer > James B
World wars won :- UK 2, china zero..2015 #3-5
Federer, Wawrinka, Nadal --> 62 slam finals
2006 #3-5
Davydenko, Blake, Ljubicic --> 0 slam finals
2015 top5 had more ATP points than 2006 top5.World wars won :- UK 2, china zero..
So statistically UK is much superior to china and will deliver a beatdown if the war takes place between the two nations
Same to determine if too young?The number you win compared to your younger self should serve as an indicator (if a bit simple).
Names certainly don't always speak for quality or level the players brought to table.
For example, nadal is a much bigger name to nalhandian on clay, but 2015 nadal didn't bring as much of a quality tennis as 2006 nalhandian did at RG
Nadal was still making every final in 2011 (until the indoor season when he fell apart as usual) and stayed head and shoulders above the rest. Without the walking God that was 2011ovic, Nadal would have won:Playing level imo djok 2011 for the 1st half and fed 2006 for the 2nd half was highest.
Djokovic absolutely murdered the strong top5 in 2011 for the first 5 months, there's no doubt about it
And nadal wasn't at his peak in 2011. Prime for sure, but not peak.
Nadal's peak was the insane stretch from 2008 rome to 2009 rome
I believe 2015 Djokovic was at least as good if not better.Nadal was still making every final in 2011 (until the indoor season when he fell apart as usual) and stayed head and shoulders above the rest. Without the walking God that was 2011ovic, Nadal would have won:
Indian Wells
Miami
Madrid
Rome
Wimbledon
US Open
Basically a repeat of 2010. Any other version of Djokovic would have lost pretty much all of these encounters except maybe IW or USO. Certainly none of the non-HC matches.
Djokovic's serve and net game were much better in 2015, but he was a beast at the baseline in 2011. He played better at Wimbledon as a pure baseliner in 2011 than he did with an all-court style/bigger serve in 2015.I believe 2015 Djokovic was at least as good if not better.
Outside of Nadal at RG they’re all lesser opponents.Finalists at 5 biggest events .
2015. 2006
Australia - Andy Murray > Bagdatis
RG. - Wawrinka < Nadal
Wimbledon. - Federer > Nadal
US Open. - Federer > Roddick
WTF. - Federer > James B
This is for those who are laughing at Novak's 2015 season and cribbing about weak competition
2015. 2006
Australia - Andy Murray > Bagdatis
RG. - Wawrinka < Nadal
Wimbledon. - Federer > Nadal
US Open. - Federer > Roddick
2006 Nadal would slaughter 2015 Wawrinka at RG.
2006 Nadal would beat 2015 Federer at Wimbledon.
2006 Roddick would beat 2015 Federer at US Open (as did many players in the 2010s).
2006 Baghdatis vs 2015 Murray is a toss-up...a battle of two dead tired finalists.
Well, just determining form overall (although you have to look at possible exceptions like 2005 Fed being better than 2007 Fed despite having less Slams). Good metric though.Same to determine if too young?
2015 Federer gets overrated to prop up Novak’s competition. In reality, his true level was exposed by a peak ATG. Just because he beat a lot of mugs who can’t handle a good serve and variety, doesn’t make him a top opponent.
2006 Nadal would slaughter 2015 Wawrinka at RG.
2006 Nadal would beat 2015 Federer at Wimbledon.
2006 Roddick would beat 2015 Federer at US Open (as did many players in the 2010s).
2006 Baghdatis vs 2015 Murray is a toss-up...a battle of two dead tired finalists.
2015 top5 had more ATP points than 2006 top5.
So they were not only more prestigious, but had also better results.
he posted plenty of 'stats' to prove that point...
Comparing 2011 Djokovic with his 2015 version it's like comparing 2005 Fed with 2006 Fed, not an easy task.Djokovic's serve and net game were much better in 2015, but he was a beast at the baseline in 2011. He played better at Wimbledon as a pure baseliner in 2011 than he did with an all-court style/bigger serve in 2015.
05erer and 06erer were pretty close in playing level, 2011ovic (IMO at least) had a much higher level than even 2015ovic.Comparing 2011 Djokovic with his 2015 version it's like comparing 2005 Fed with 2006 Fed, not an easy task.
You have to factor in the massive drop-off at the end of the season as well.05erer and 06erer were pretty close in playing level, 2011ovic (IMO at least) had a much higher level than even 2015ovic.
Much is a very big word.05erer and 06erer were pretty close in playing level, 2011ovic (IMO at least) had a much higher level than even 2015ovic.
**Clearly higherMuch is a very big word.
2015/16 were 2 of the weakest years ever man, you can try to inflate it as much as you want. I don't have a horse in the race but Fed's 06 will always be the most impressive year I've seen from someone since I started watching tennis. Literally if it wasn't for Epicdal the guy would have lost 1 match. It's unbelievable.
Names certainly don't always speak for quality or level the players brought to table.
For example, nadal is a much bigger name to nalhandian on clay, but 2015 nadal didn't bring as much of a quality tennis as 2006 nalhandian did at RG
That is better but imo i might go lower than that.**Clearly higher
I still think Fed would have won that match, but we'll never know.Yeah, good thing he retired the SF v Fed...
And if Federer could have pulled the win in that Rome final, his confidence against Nadal would have pushed him to do it even better.i think that 06 federer tennis season is so underrated , becasue novak djokovic 's 2015 season
sure djokovic win masters two time more
but federer started what really tennis 's perpect season
all four grand slam final record is
It's been 37 years since 1969 by Rod Laver.
and that the time every masters final is BO5
so federer is more disadvantage
and federer dosen't compete paris masters and hamburg masters in 2006
- federer won 12 title
- The Cincinnati loss to Murray was Federer's only straight-set loss of the year and the only tournament out of 17 in which he did not reach the final
- his win loss record is 92 -5 , better than djokovic 's 2015 season 82-6 record