2019 W Fed > 2025 W Djok?

alinefx

alinefx

Rookie
Federer’s longevity and performance at 38 years old (especially in 2019) were far more impressive than Djokovic’s current level at the same age.

1. Federer at 38 vs. Djokovic at 37-38

| Metric | Federer (2019, Age 37-38). | Djokovic (2024, Age 37) |
|---------------------|------------------------------------|----------------------------------|
| Wimbledon Result | Final (lost 7-6, 1-6, 7-6, 4-6, 13-12 to Djokovic) | Final (lost 1-6, 2-6, 6-7 to Alcaraz) |
| Path to Final | Beat Nadal (4 sets in SF) & other top players | Struggled vs. Musetti (5 sets in SF) |
| Final Performance | 101 winners, two championship points | 31 winners, never in contention |
| Opponent Quality | Lost to Peak Djokovic (World #1) | Lost to Young Alcaraz (still developing) |

- Federer was *far* more competitive—pushed Djokovic to the absolute limit in 2019.
- Djokovic in 2024 was dominated—didn’t win a set vs. Alcaraz, while Federer took *two* sets off peak Djokovic at an older age.

2. Federer’s 2019 Run Was Legendary
- Beat Nadal (33, still elite) in 4 sets in the semis.
- 100+ winners in the final, serving at 63% first serves.
- Had two championship points —closer to winning than Djokovic ever was in 2024.
- Played 4+ hour matches deep into his late 30s—Djokovic in 2024 looked fatigued much earlier.

3. Djokovic’s 2024 Decline Was Noticeable
- Struggled vs. Musetti (5 sets in SF)— Federer never went five before the final at 38.
- Got outplayed by Alcaraz (who is excellent, but not yet at 2019 Djokovic’s level).
- No real resistance in the final —Federer in 2019 was *inches* from the title.

4. What This Means for Their Wimbledon Legacies
- Federer’s longevity was more impressive—he was still beating top rivals at 38, while Djokovic is now clearly declining.
- Federer’s 2019 final was an all-time classic—Djokovic’s 2024 final was a one-sided loss.
- Djokovic’s peak was better vs. Federer, but Federer aged more gracefully on grass.

Final Verdict
- Peak vs. Peak? Djokovic leads H2H (4-1 at Wimbledon).
- Longevity & Late-Career Performance? Federer was far superior —his 2019 run at 38 was much stronger than Djokovic’s 2024 showing.
- Titles? Federer (8) > Djokovic (7).

If we consider entire careers, Federer’s sustained excellence (even at 38) gives him the edge. If we focus only on peak dominance, Djokovic’s wins over Federer matter. But Federer’s twilight greatness at Wimbledon remains unmatched.

Would you say Federer’s 2019 run alone proves he’s the greater Wimbledon player? Or does Djokovic’s H2H dominance still hold weight?
 
NoleFam said:
Was this necessary right now? And Federer’s 2019 age is comparable to Djokovic's 2025 age. So Federer's 2018 is comparable to Djokovic's 2024.
Click to expand...
Djokovic is worse in 2025, and he completed the tournament in 2024 losing just like Fed did in 2019, so was a more apt comparison. If nothing, he gets a leg up being *younger* last year than 2019 Fed, but being worse than Fed in metrics.
 
NoleFam said:
Was this necessary right now? And Federer’s 2019 age is comparable to Djokovic's 2025 age. So Federer's 2018 is comparable to Djokovic's 2024.
Click to expand...
And Djokovic's 2023 was comparable to Federer's 2017, without a healthy Djokovic, I might add! Would Federer triumph at AO & WB with a healthy Djokovic? I highly doubt it!
 
SonnyT said:
And Djokovic's 2023 was comparable to Federer's 2017, without a healthy Djokovic, I might add! Would Federer triumph at AO & WB with a healthy Djokovic? I highly doubt it!
Click to expand...
this is about their WB level and stats in the finals they played at around the same age. not everything is Fed *V* Djokovic.
 
alinefx said:
Djokovic is worse in 2025, and he completed the tournament in 2024 losing just like Fed did in 2019, so was a more apt comparison. If nothing, he gets a leg up being *younger* last year than 2019 Fed, but being worse than Fed in metrics.
Click to expand...
How is he worse in 2025 Wimbledon when he had limited movement in 2024 5 or 6 weeks after after the knee surgery, and got his movement exposed badly in the finals?
 
alinefx said:
Federer’s longevity and performance at 38 years old (especially in 2019) were far more impressive than Djokovic’s current level at the same age.

1. Federer at 38 vs. Djokovic at 37-38

| Metric | Federer (2019, Age 37-38). | Djokovic (2024, Age 37) |
|---------------------|------------------------------------|----------------------------------|
| Wimbledon Result | Final (lost 7-6, 1-6, 7-6, 4-6, 13-12 to Djokovic) | Final (lost 1-6, 2-6, 6-7 to Alcaraz) |
| Path to Final | Beat Nadal (4 sets in SF) & other top players | Struggled vs. Musetti (5 sets in SF) |
| Final Performance | 101 winners, two championship points | 31 winners, never in contention |
| Opponent Quality | Lost to Peak Djokovic (World #1) | Lost to Young Alcaraz (still developing) |

- Federer was *far* more competitive—pushed Djokovic to the absolute limit in 2019.
- Djokovic in 2024 was dominated—didn’t win a set vs. Alcaraz, while Federer took *two* sets off peak Djokovic at an older age.

2. Federer’s 2019 Run Was Legendary
- Beat Nadal (33, still elite) in 4 sets in the semis.
- 100+ winners in the final, serving at 63% first serves.
- Had two championship points —closer to winning than Djokovic ever was in 2024.
- Played 4+ hour matches deep into his late 30s—Djokovic in 2024 looked fatigued much earlier.

3. Djokovic’s 2024 Decline Was Noticeable
- Struggled vs. Musetti (5 sets in SF)— Federer never went five before the final at 38.
- Got outplayed by Alcaraz (who is excellent, but not yet at 2019 Djokovic’s level).
- No real resistance in the final —Federer in 2019 was *inches* from the title.

4. What This Means for Their Wimbledon Legacies
- Federer’s longevity was more impressive—he was still beating top rivals at 38, while Djokovic is now clearly declining.
- Federer’s 2019 final was an all-time classic—Djokovic’s 2024 final was a one-sided loss.
- Djokovic’s peak was better vs. Federer, but Federer aged more gracefully on grass.

Final Verdict
- Peak vs. Peak? Djokovic leads H2H (4-1 at Wimbledon).
- Longevity & Late-Career Performance? Federer was far superior —his 2019 run at 38 was much stronger than Djokovic’s 2024 showing.
- Titles? Federer (8) > Djokovic (7).

If we consider entire careers, Federer’s sustained excellence (even at 38) gives him the edge. If we focus only on peak dominance, Djokovic’s wins over Federer matter. But Federer’s twilight greatness at Wimbledon remains unmatched.

Would you say Federer’s 2019 run alone proves he’s the greater Wimbledon player? Or does Djokovic’s H2H dominance still hold weight?
Click to expand...
Nadal played a poor semifinal and Djokovic, for much of the final, was in "zombie" mode and still held his own against Federer.
In any case, Federer's level at that time was higher than that shown by Djokovic at this edition of Wimbledon.
But it should also be noted that Djokovic is two and a half months older than the 2019 Wimbledon version of Federer.
8-B
 
alinefx said:
Federer’s longevity and performance at 38 years old (especially in 2019) were far more impressive than Djokovic’s current level at the same age.

1. Federer at 38 vs. Djokovic at 37-38

| Metric | Federer (2019, Age 37-38). | Djokovic (2024, Age 37) |
|---------------------|------------------------------------|----------------------------------|
| Wimbledon Result | Final (lost 7-6, 1-6, 7-6, 4-6, 13-12 to Djokovic) | Final (lost 1-6, 2-6, 6-7 to Alcaraz) |
| Path to Final | Beat Nadal (4 sets in SF) & other top players | Struggled vs. Musetti (5 sets in SF) |
| Final Performance | 101 winners, two championship points | 31 winners, never in contention |
| Opponent Quality | Lost to Peak Djokovic (World #1) | Lost to Young Alcaraz (still developing) |

- Federer was *far* more competitive—pushed Djokovic to the absolute limit in 2019.
- Djokovic in 2024 was dominated—didn’t win a set vs. Alcaraz, while Federer took *two* sets off peak Djokovic at an older age.

2. Federer’s 2019 Run Was Legendary
- Beat Nadal (33, still elite) in 4 sets in the semis.
- 100+ winners in the final, serving at 63% first serves.
- Had two championship points —closer to winning than Djokovic ever was in 2024.
- Played 4+ hour matches deep into his late 30s—Djokovic in 2024 looked fatigued much earlier.

3. Djokovic’s 2024 Decline Was Noticeable
- Struggled vs. Musetti (5 sets in SF)— Federer never went five before the final at 38.
- Got outplayed by Alcaraz (who is excellent, but not yet at 2019 Djokovic’s level).
- No real resistance in the final —Federer in 2019 was *inches* from the title.

4. What This Means for Their Wimbledon Legacies
- Federer’s longevity was more impressive—he was still beating top rivals at 38, while Djokovic is now clearly declining.
- Federer’s 2019 final was an all-time classic—Djokovic’s 2024 final was a one-sided loss.
- Djokovic’s peak was better vs. Federer, but Federer aged more gracefully on grass.

Final Verdict
- Peak vs. Peak? Djokovic leads H2H (4-1 at Wimbledon).
- Longevity & Late-Career Performance? Federer was far superior —his 2019 run at 38 was much stronger than Djokovic’s 2024 showing.
- Titles? Federer (8) > Djokovic (7).

If we consider entire careers, Federer’s sustained excellence (even at 38) gives him the edge. If we focus only on peak dominance, Djokovic’s wins over Federer matter. But Federer’s twilight greatness at Wimbledon remains unmatched.

Would you say Federer’s 2019 run alone proves he’s the greater Wimbledon player? Or does Djokovic’s H2H dominance still hold weight?
Click to expand...

The only match you could really say both of them are close to their peak is 2012, in all the other matches Djokovic had an advantage as Fed was declining due to age, so peak for peak Djokovic is not better on grass than Fed, sorry. Even a 38 year old Fed almost won, that says alot.
 
Op has more likes than comments

This happens when you reaction farm.

You can farm reactions two ways. First is be the first and boldest by over praising the mugs like our @Hitman does

The second is by trolling and baiting. Like how op does.

Both are bad but the second is much worse.
 
nolefam_2024 said:
Op has more likes than comments

This happens when you reaction farm.

You can farm reactions two ways. First is be the first and boldest by over praising the mugs like our @Hitman does

The second is by trolling and baiting. Like how op does.

Both are bad but the second is much worse.
Click to expand...

I couldn't care less about reactions. I had 55K likes with my previous account and deleted it. Most of my time here, likes wasn't a thing, but that has never changed my posting style.
 
Federer is the B.O.A.T, so naturally at 38 his level was higher than Djokovic's at 38.

Nothing surprising.
 
Djokovic himself said that he wished he had Federer's serve and volleying abilities on Grass ... it could have helped him beat SInner and Alcaraz but in this situation he cannot.

That explains it, there is no debate over this, Federer is the best player at Wimbledon in this century and maybe second best all time behind Sampras.
 
Lol comparing a Novak who was playing at Wimbledon 2024 just 3 weeks after surgery and nowhere near his best, is biased to say the least.
 
Razer said:
Federer is the B.O.A.T, so naturally at 38 his level was higher than Djokovic's at 38.

Nothing surprising.
Click to expand...
That is to plain of a statement. For starters he is definitely not the BOAT on clay and also on grass it is very debatable with Pete. We could maybe argue, that among all kind of surfaces (if we also include the ones he never or rarely played on like 90s grass, carpet, wood) his average level would be the greatest in history (on the grounds of him being clearly the better fast-court player compared to Nadal and Djoko while still being close on slow ones) but this is also still speculation. Borg would be in contention here as well.
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
That is to plain of a statement. For starters he is definitely not the BOAT on clay and also on grass it is very debatable with Pete. We could maybe argue, that among all kind of surfaces (if we also include the ones he never or rarely played on like 90s grass, carpet, wood) his average level would be the greatest in history (on the grounds of him being clearly the better fast-court player compared to Nadal and Djoko while still being close on slow ones) but this is also still speculation. Borg would be in contention here as well.
Click to expand...

Yeah.
 
alinefx said:
"Was this necessary right now?". Yeah, it was. Looks like Djokovic couldn't match Fed's 2019.
Click to expand...

2019. Federer is actually a very dominant season for an old man something Djokovic hasn't come close to doing. We are comparing a player who should have won Wimbledon and outplayed two younger GOATs to a player who cannot even break or win a step against sinner.
 
Razer said:
Djokovic himself said that he wished he had Federer's serve and volleying abilities on Grass ... it could have helped him beat SInner and Alcaraz but in this situation he cannot.

That explains it, there is no debate over this, Federer is the best player at Wimbledon in this century and maybe second best all time behind Sampras.
Click to expand...
And what will you do if Alcaraz manages to win 9 Wimbledon titles?
Will you accept that he is the new best player in the history of Wimbledon?
:cool:
 
Probably 2025 Djoko slightly better. He is only getting exposed by Sinner (currently = 2011 Djokovic) and Alcaraz (currently = 2010 Nadal) - two ATGs in the making.
 
In grass..obviously 2019 fed is miles better. He actually would be able to take a set or 2 from Alcaraz or Sinner
 
DSH said:
And what will you do if Alcaraz manages to win 9 Wimbledon titles?
Will you accept that he is the new best player in the history of Wimbledon?
:cool:
Click to expand...

Alcaraz will have to win 10 to equal Sampras's 7 because great age shift comes into play. Sampras in this era would probably have 11 wimbledons.
 
Of the first 3 slams,
19 Fed (loser 4R to Tsitsipas) < 25 Djo (loser SF to Zverev) on AO
19 Fed (loser SF to Nadal) = 25 Djo (loser SF to Sinner) on RL
19 Fed (loser F to Djok) > 25 Djo (loser SF to Sinner) on WB

But 19 Fed was not as injury prone as 25 Djok!
 
Fed's game is better suited for grass especially when getting older. His serve is substantially better and the serve is the last thing to disappear in age. So on this alone it logically follows Fed 2019 > Djoko 2025 at Wimbledon.
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
Fed's game is better suited for grass especially when getting older. His serve is substantially better and the serve is the last thing to disappear in age. So on this alone it logically follows Fed 2019 > Djoko 2025 at Wimbledon.
Click to expand...
Even from ground Freddie 2019 was better than current choco tbh
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
Fed's game is better suited for grass especially when getting older. His serve is substantially better and the serve is the last thing to disappear in age. So on this alone it logically follows Fed 2019 > Djoko 2025 at Wimbledon.
Click to expand...

federer was clearly better off the ground at Wim 19 than djoko in Wim 25 also.
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
Fed's game is better suited for grass especially when getting older. His serve is substantially better and the serve is the last thing to disappear in age. So on this alone it logically follows Fed 2019 > Djoko 2025 at Wimbledon.
Click to expand...
He also made it to the SF of RG few weeks earlier, losing of course to Nadal.

Federer 2017-2019 played at a good level, certainly at Wimbledon.

Federer fell behind Djokovic and Nadal in the slam count because 1) they aged better than some expected given their styles of play; 2) he won no slams between 2012-2017. Almost five years looking for that 18th when he was still in the first half of his 30s.
 
Razer said:
Alcaraz will have to win 10 to equal Sampras's 7 because great age shift comes into play. Sampras in this era would probably have 11 wimbledons.
Click to expand...
What logic is this that to beat sampras 7 Alcaraz has to win 11 wimbeldons.
Was Sampras some ancient player that his 7 slams are antique piece and to be valued more.
By your logic If alcaraz has to beat rafa 14FO he needs 17 or more FO .
AND Sinner has to win 13 slams in AO to outclass NOVAK 10.
SIR dont go by your great logic and use rule of thumb . Roger did not won 10 then why push alcaraz for 10 or more.
One more than roger is enough .
 
gamelovergold said:
What logic is this that to beat sampras 7 Alcaraz has to win 11 wimbeldons.
Was Sampras some ancient player that his 7 slams are antique piece and to be valued more.
By your logic If alcaraz has to beat rafa 14FO he needs 17 or more FO .
AND Sinner has to win 13 slams in AO to outclass NOVAK 10.
SIR dont go by your great logic and use rule of thumb . Roger did not won 10 then why push alcaraz for 10 or more.
One more than roger is enough .
Click to expand...

Careers of players whose primes were fully in 20th century get a 40-50% boost if they played in the modern era due to Great Age Shift.

Today's 33 is Lendl's or Sampras's 27.

Sampras's 30 is Djokovic's or Nadal's 36-37.

Sampras in modern era would have got a second wind in his 30s to win more....so safe to say that he would be on 10-11 wimbledons minimum if he played in this era.
 
Razer said:
Careers of players whose primes were fully in 20th century get a 40-50% boost if they played in the modern era due to Great Age Shift.

Today's 33 is Lendl's or Sampras's 27.

Sampras's 30 is Djokovic's or Nadal's 36-37.

Sampras in modern era would have got a second wind in his 30s to win more....so safe to say that he would be on 10-11 wimbledons minimum if he played in this era.
Click to expand...
You are thinking in terms of big 3 like career for Sampras.
That is not how it works.
CAN YOU assume that Sampras could have won 11 slams while roger fedrer was still playing.
BRING back best version of Sampras and still i can not think he will win 11 Wimbeldon.
 
gamelovergold said:
You are thinking in terms of big 3 like career for Sampras.
That is not how it works.
CAN YOU assume that Sampras could have won 11 slams while roger fedrer was still playing.
BRING back best version of Sampras and still i can not think he will win 11 Wimbeldon.
Click to expand...

If the Grass is same as it was in the 90s and Sampras declined slower like Djokovic/Federer in their 30s then yes Sampras could have won 10-11 wimbledons, why not?
 
Last edited:
mike danny said:
That’s what happens when your toughest competition isn’t Thiem, Med, Tsits and Zed
Click to expand...
i personally really don‘t care who leads the slam race, there is no goat imo. but if someone/something is to blame that federer doesn‘t have the record, then it is only him.
 
Hansen said:
i personally really don‘t care who leads the slam race, there is no goat imo. but if someone/something is to blame that federer doesn‘t have the record, then it is only him.
Click to expand...
Fedrer did what was possible for him . For 5 years he won nothing but still was fighting it out and added 3 more to his tally.
I do not vote for Roger not trying . He gave his all
 
King of Wimbledon
GvmI81-W8AAjSzo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jl809
  • Poll Poll
Alcaraz vs Murray on grass
Replies
6
Views
333
3loudboys
3loudboys
Nappa
AI knows how the slam race would have ended had 18WB SF s roof not being closed and had Roger converted any of his MPs in the final the following year
2
Replies
68
Views
2K
Match_Point
Match_Point
Winner Sinner
  • Poll Poll
Sinner 2019 vs Alcaraz 2021 vs Fonseca 2024
Replies
5
Views
674
NaDjoFed
NaDjoFed
Fabresque
Does Federer beat Djokovic at Wimbledon 2018?
2
Replies
66
Views
4K
socallefty
socallefty
weakera
Federer vs. Djokovic (AGE... perspective?)
2 3 4
Replies
164
Views
6K
weakera
weakera
Back
Top