2003 Federer vs 2005 Nadal vs 2008 Djokovic [POLL]

[Rafa4LifeEver]

All 3 won their first slams in the given years
Roger - Wimbledon 2003
Rafa - Roland Garros 2005
Nole - Australian Open 2008

Who was the best in their respective maiden slam winning years and who was the worst??


Ladies and gentlemen, please Discuss with love


Edit :-

Due to suggestion from @Hitman and many other fellow posters, I'll clarify the thing here.

"Maiden Slam win years"

As in the years in which they won their first slams.

So basically who was better in their respective breakthrough seasons??

 

[gjm127]

Fedr

 

[NatF]

Fed best, Nadal worst IMO.

 

[Hitman]

Nadal won 11 freaking titles in his maiden slam year.

How is this even a discussion?

 

[StrongRule]

Nadal won 11 freaking titles in his maiden slam year.

How is this even a discussion?

Djokovic was better in the slams. He was a few years older though.

 

[Hitman]

Djokovic was better in the slams. He was a few years older though.

Yes, but tennis is more than just the slams, this is about the whole year, and 11 titles is too hard to deny.

 

[InsideOut900]

Whole year? Djokovic.
He was playing prime level or close to it everywhere but Wimbledon.
Had by far the best results in Slams, including a very high level run at AO.

Nadal was the most impressive because of age. And Fed reached the greatest heights.

It's Djokovic, then Nadal and Fed, depending if Nadal's Masters 1000 are more valuable than Fed's YEC title.

 

[Deleted member 748597]

I can't even spell the name of the guy Federer beat in the Wimbledon 2003 final.

 

[NatF]

Nadal won 11 freaking titles in his maiden slam year.

How is this even a discussion?

Question is slam they won only.

 

[Hitman]

I can't even spell the name of the guy Federer beat in the Wimbledon 2003 final.

Lol, just call him Scud.

 

[NatF]

Whole year? Djokovic.
He was playing prime level or close to it everywhere but Wimbledon.
Had by far the best results in Slams, including a very high level run at AO.

Nadal was the most impressive because of age. And Fed reached the greatest heights.

It's Djokovic, then Nadal and Fed, depending if Nadal's Masters 1000 are more valuable than Fed's YEC title.

OP is only talking about the Wim, FO and AO they won.

 

[Druss]

I'm going with 2008 Djoko for best, and Federer for worst. Couldn't give worst to Nadal due to his amazing performances at the Masters level.

 

[NatF]

Lol at no one reading the OP.

 

[Deleted member 779124]

OP is only talking about the Wim, FO and AO they won.

Yes people not reading the 2nd comment.

 

[Hitman]

Question is slam they won only.

Maiden slam win years, not maiden slam win.

That looks like who was the best during the whole year in which they won their first slam to me.

 

[InsideOut900]

.

 

[Rafa4LifeEver]

Nadal won 11 freaking titles in his maiden slam year.

How is this even a discussion?

Love you too, bro.

 

[NatF]

Maiden slam win years, not maiden slam win.

That looks like who was the best during the whole year in which they won their first slam to me.

Looks like you're right, will show myself out.

 

[Hitman]

Love you too, bro.

Can you clear up if it is just slam winning run or the performance for the full year in which they won their first slam?

 

[MichaelNadal]

Fed best, Nadal worst IMO.

Lolwut? Nadal GOATED the whole year

 

[Rafa4LifeEver]

Question is slam they won only.

OP is only talking about the Wim, FO and AO they won.

Lol at no one reading the OP.

Yes people not reading the 2nd comment.

Maiden slam win years, not maiden slam win.

That looks like who was the best during the whole year in which they won their first slam to me.

Did I really miss something which I didn't write??
I'm really confused, gentlemen.

 

[Rafa4LifeEver]

Can you clear up if it is just slam winning run or the performance for the full year in which they won their first slam?

"Maiden Slam win years"
As in the years in which they won their first slams.
So basically who was better in their respective breakthrough seasons??

 

[NatF]

Lolwut? Nadal GOATED the whole year

Misread the OP. Thought it was maiden slam only. Fedr worst

 

[Hitman]

"Maiden Slam win years"
As in the years in which they won their first slams.
So basically who was better in their respective breakthrough seasons??

OK.

Nothing touches Rafa 2005. He freaking wrecked that season.

 

[Rafa4LifeEver]

OK.

Nothing touches Rafa 2005. He freaking wrecked that season.

Did he hit even a single beautiful one handed Backhand though??
@ForehandRF..

 

[Hitman]

Did he hit even a single beautiful one handed Backhand though??
@ForehandRF..

They may not have been beautiful, but they were devastating.

Djokovic second, Federer third.

 

[Rafa4LifeEver]

They may not have been beautiful, but they were devastating.

Djokovic second, Federer third.

That's not what I meant to say when I tagged that poster, sir.

 

[Druss]

OK.

Nothing touches Rafa 2005. He freaking wrecked that season.

If we're talking about slams, Djokovic outperformed Nadal. I'm mean, the guy was second best at RG, and lost at the USO SF to prime Fed. On top of that he also won the WTF. Rafa OTOH smashed it at the Masters, but overall, slams and WTF speaks louder than Masters.

 

[Third Serve]

Looks like you're right, will show myself out.

 

[ForehandRF]

Did he hit even a single beautiful one handed Backhand though??
@ForehandRF..

No but he hit some vicious forehands to Fed's backhand, especially in the 2005 RG SF.

 

[Sport]

2008 Nole was undoubtedly the best, and 2003 Federer the worst.

 

[Sunny014]

1 Trick Pony the best and the HC Specialist the worst.

GOAT somewhere in between.

 

[MeatTornado]

Roger has an argument in peak level discussions due to Wimbledon & YEC, but on the whole he'd have to be last due to his 1st half of the year, right?

 

[Third Serve]

Sadly, Rogi loses this hypothetical.

Ned 2005 won RG and took home 4 Masters (two on clay, one on outdoor hard, and one indoors). He came very close to bagging a fifth one as well.

Djoker 2008 won AO in dominant fashion and bagged the Masters Cup as well as two Masters (one of them was basically a vulture win, though). Had a few other deep Slam runs too.

Fed 2003 won W in even more dominant fashion and took home the Masters Cup in a similar manner. However, he doesn't have much outside of those two events.

It goes Nadal > Djokovic >> Federer here. Fed might have hit the highest level with his Wimbledon win, though.

 

[Gazelle]

I can't even spell

Common with Djokovic fans

 

[Deleted member 780630]

Nadal was best throughout his year. But I don't see how people can say Djokovic 2008 was better than Federer 2003. Federer had a higher level in his slam run and YEC, won more titles, had more wins, had better win-loss %, and a better record against the top 10. Djokovic was a bit better in slams and had two BO3 M1000s, but that's not enough to put him over.

 

[StrongRule]

It's really amazing that by achievements Nadal's 2005 season was not that much worse than Federer's, even though Federer dominated the game back then. Just one slam less, same number of masters. (could have been more masters if he didn't choke that Miami final)

 

[NatF]

I would have also accepted a gif where my foot was in my mouth.

 

[BauerAlmeida]

It's Nadal or Djokovic. Nadal has the number of titles on his side and his clay dominance. Djokovic the performance at the slams and the TMC title.

Federer didn't have a great performance at non-Wimbledon slams or a big amount of titles. He has the TMC on his side, but so did Djokovic and was superior elsewhere.

For Nadal or Djokovic it can go either way, Nadal was more consistent and Djokovic had the higher peak.

 

[BauerAlmeida]

It's really amazing that by achievements Nadal's 2005 season was not that much worse than Federer's, even though Federer dominated the game back then. Just one slam less, same number of masters. (could have been more masters if he didn't choke that Miami final)

Yep, at the time it looked like it could be a battle for #1 the following year since Nadal would be a top player since the beginning, unlike 2005. But Nadal remained at 1 slam per year in 2006 and 2007 and Federer won 3 slams again those years instead of 2. Until 2008 where he really clicked outside clay, Nadal seemed to actually regress a bit on hard courts in 2006 and 2007 compared to 2005. He improved clearly on grass though, but his HC results were a bit disappointing in 2006 and 2007 compared to 2005 (Won Madrid from 0-2, won Montreal beating Agassi and made the F at Miami, being 2-0 and a break up against Federer himself).

 

[mike danny]

I can't even spell the name of the guy Federer beat in the Wimbledon 2003 final.

Think of him as the guy who beat peak Sampras in a slam as a teenager.

 

[mike danny]

It's really amazing that by achievements Nadal's 2005 season was not that much worse than Federer's, even though Federer dominated the game back then. Just one slam less, same number of masters. (could have been more masters if he didn't choke that Miami final)

He didn't reach the QF at any of the other 3 slams though.

 

[mike danny]

Yep, at the time it looked like it could be a battle for #1 the following year since Nadal would be a top player since the beginning, unlike 2005. But Nadal remained at 1 slam per year in 2006 and 2007 and Federer won 3 slams again those years instead of 2. Until 2008 where he really clicked outside clay, Nadal seemed to actually regress a bit on hard courts in 2006 and 2007 compared to 2005. He improved clearly on grass though, but his HC results were a bit disappointing in 2006 and 2007 compared to 2005 (Won Madrid from 0-2, won Montreal beating Agassi and made the F at Miami, being 2-0 and a break up against Federer himself).

Nadal had one of his best HC tournaments at IW in 2007.

 

[duaneeo]

Nadal best. Eleven titles (6 BO5 finals won) and YE#2.
Federer worst.