Yes. Not all matches are the same. Does it sound strange to you?
Here is Federer vs Djokovic rivalry weighing importance of matches (and surface):
![]()
No, I just showed that at even in bad form Novak gave most chances to his rivals.@beard Thanks for proving everyone’s point. No one is arguing that Nole hasn’t been dominant when in form, but the point is his 5 year steak wouldn’t have held up if he didn’t fail to reach these guys 7 times from W16 - R18.
What a sore GOAT candidate.
He doged serious competions for two years and prefered to lose against players like Istomin, Cappucino and SQLuerrey.
Afraid of a strong Fedal? But no, they call it guru phase or Jelena-cheated-so-much-on-my-mind-break.
Seen again in Miami: lost to RBA -> immediate return of Excusovic lmao
Fed reached Djokovic twice in 2013 and Nadal 4 times. 0 times did Djokovic reach the others in 2017.He didn't ''prefer to lose'', he was just in bad form, as Federer was in 2013 or Nadal was in 2015. As soon as he regained consistency, his score against Fedal was 4-0.
Nonsense, invented fantasy stat.Yes. Not all matches are the same. Does it sound strange to you?
Here is Federer vs Djokovic rivalry weighing importance of matches (and surface):
![]()
Not if you are distracted by a hot actree from Bollywood. Lew I knows all about it. That’s probably where he is now.Isn't 'slump' simply an excuse for getting beat at your peak and not being good enough?
Djokovic and Nadal win all the fantasy slams.Yeah I know, Fed wins all fantasy matches.
Fwiw, I'm pretty sure Novak did play Rafa once in 2017 and got steamrolled. It was on clay, either Madrid or Rome.Fed reached Djokovic twice in 2013 and Nadal 4 times. 0 times did Djokovic reach the others in 2017.
Fwiw, I'm pretty sure Novak did play Rafa once in 2017 and got steamrolled. It was on clay, either Madrid or Rome.
Yes. Not all matches are the same. Does it sound strange to you?
Here is Federer vs Djokovic rivalry weighing importance of matches (and surface):
![]()
I looked it up, you're thinking of 2018.It was in Rome, but Djokovic was not even near to being steamrolled. He made a really close first set
Good trolling attempt with stats and importance of "matches" taken from who know where. ROFLMAO. Saltiness at its best
You are comparing Feds 14/15 when he was in best form since his best year (some including him think best ever) with Noles worst period in carrier? Crazy stuffFederer reached Nole how many times in 2014-2016?
Compared to 2 meetings in 2004-2006. 0 meetings in 2017. 1 slam meeting in 2009-2010AO
Fed reached Djokovic twice in 2013 and Nadal 4 times. 0 times did Djokovic reach the others in 2017.
The point being, they only met from 2006-2009 of Fed’s best years.You are comparing Feds 14/15 when he was in best form since his best year (some including him think best ever) with Noles worst period in carrier? Crazy stuff
And you are mentioning 2004-06 and crying about 17-19 yo Novak reaching Fed "only two times". Where the **** was Federer in that age? This is insane logic
Sorry, but who is guilty that Fed had that short "peak" ? *******s would like all h2hs to happened in few Feds best years. Sorry its not possible...
Impressive I admit but somehow he lost 3 times against Wawrinka in the last 5 years.
Takes some shining away. Would be like Fed beating big four for 5 years, but losing 3 times to Roddick.
I looked it up, you're thinking of 2018.
They played in Madrid 2017. Rafa won 6-2, 6-4.
It’s also 1 slam less for him to decrease the gap.The fact that Djokovic admitted publicly only at the end of last year that his goal is to surpass Nadal and esp Federer at Slam record does not mean it was not his goal since years ago, maybe as early as he first started wining against top players.
Therefore, any finals he lost to Wawrinka or Murray is one slam Nadal or Federer did NOT win. Surely, any slam Djokovic wins diminish the gap to Nadal/Federer, but if he does not win by losing finals to Wawrinka/Murray that prevents the gap from increasing.
Again you put in same bag one Hewitt and RodDick, and one Murray who is more accomplished than those two together.It’s also 1 slam less for him to decrease the gap.
Fed owned his pigeons Hewitt and Roddick. Djokovic lost 2 slam finals to Murray and 3 matches to Wawrinka, 1 to Nishikori. Only comparable losses for Fed at his prime would be Safin, Kuerten and Del Potro.
Yes, and I forgot... Safin, Kuerten, DelPo... Great players, but Murray and Wawa are better... Really hilarious....It’s also 1 slam less for him to decrease the gap.
Fed owned his pigeons Hewitt and Roddick. Djokovic lost 2 slam finals to Murray and 3 matches to Wawrinka, 1 to Nishikori. Only comparable losses for Fed at his prime would be Safin, Kuerten and Del Potro.
Again you put in same bag one Hewitt and RodDick, and one Murray who is more accomplished than those two together.
Not to mention Wawrinka who played those matches and tournaments at arguably best level ever seen in tennis.
I will remind you that Stan dismantled Federer on RG 2015 in 3 set before beating Novak in final in 4. He was monster.
I will remind you too that Wawa defeated Djokovic and Nadal (who defeated Fed) in great manner in AO 2014.He never lost to Nadal before...
And on USO 2016 he beats Novak and Delpo.
So to resume, Wawa beated Novak in 3 finals, but he beated his daddy Federer in one of those slams, in great manner. He beated Nadal too. So his peak at those tournaments was astonish, and he would beat Federer on USO 16 if he was there. I was never too sad because of this losses, because Wawa was just great.
And now some fed fanatic deminish his accomplishments and level in "he was feds pigeon, he was not supposed to beat Novak" manner... Shame on you. He was great, in the way all Hewitts and RodDicks never was, he just rocked the slams.
And yes Murray and Wawa at slams wasn't Novak pigeons, they were good rivals.
Apples and oranges, literally.
I love Wawrinka, but come on, Kuerten won the same number of slams, way more Masters, and the WTF, with a higher career win percentage – despite having only, like, four seasons that weren't significantly derailed by injury. It's like comparing Cilic to Del Potro – similar achievements, but one is clearly the superior player.Yes, and I forgot... Safin, Kuerten, DelPo... Great players, but Murray and Wawa are better... Really hilarious....
Kuerten was clay specialist. Do you know when he won those RGs and where was Federer at Kuerten best years? Wawa won different slams, on clay and hard, against biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigger opposition.
And mentioning Kuerten as comparable oponent for Federer, as Wawa was for Novak is so funny and sad at the same time, pathetic is the best word. In 2004 RG Kuerten was shadow of his best and still won against Federer... One of his rare wins that year...
It's interesting that the "clay specialist" has a hard court Masters, while Wawrinka doesn't (and if you're interested, this was his draw: Roddick, Haas, Ivanisevic, Kafelnikov, Henman, Rafter... so it's not like it just fell in his lap). Also interesting that he has a WTF crown, while Wawrinka doesn't, beating Sampras and Agassi back-to-back. Obviously Wawrinka is the better hard court player overall by far, but that doesn't mean Kuerten was a specialist.Kuerten was clay specialist. Do you know when he won those RGs and where was Federer at Kuerten best years? Wawa won different slams, on clay and hard, against biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigger opposition.
And mentioning Kuerten as comparable oponent for Federer, as Wawa was for Novak is so funny and sad at the same time, pathetic is the best word. In 2004 RG Kuerten was shadow of his best and still won against Federer... One of his rare wins that year...
Bolded, than we don't have anything to argue about. I writed about Kuerten in contest of his rivarly with Fed, as answer to KingRoger...It's interesting that the "clay specialist" has a hard court Masters, while Wawrinka doesn't (and if you're interested, this was his draw: Roddick, Haas, Ivanisevic, Kafelnikov, Henman, Rafter... so it's not like it just fell in his lap). Also interesting that he has a WTF crown, while Wawrinka doesn't, beating Sampras and Agassi back-to-back. Obviously Wawrinka is the better hard court player overall by far, but that doesn't mean Kuerten was a specialist.
And I'm not saying Kuerten was a similar rival against Fed as Wawrinka was against Djokovic – that would be ridiculous. I'm just contesting your claim that Wawrinka is a better player than Kuerten – and Safin, for that matter. He's not a lesser player, but he's not strikingly superior, either. The margins are thin, whoever you have on top out of those three guys.
Hey, time line is important... Was Kuerten Feds rival in way Wawa was to Novak? We are talking about 2004 when Kuerten was extremely bad... Dont care about overal success...You are as pathetic as your English. Gustavo was no. 1 - how about Wawa? Gustavo won the WTF, on hard court - how about Wawa? He won 5 Masters titles against 3 no. 1’s - how about Wawa? And he did all that during an injury ravaged career - you know what I am going to ask, right?
Like I said before, stop embarrassing yourself.
Hey, time line is important... Was Kuerten Feds rival in way Wawa was to Novak? We are talking about 2004 when Kuerten was extremely bad... Dont care about overal success...
Please keep track how this conversation started, with my reply to KingRogers rubish about old Kuerten.
And sorry for bad English, I am aware its lousy...
9 slam semifinals to 3.I love Wawrinka, but come on, Kuerten won the same number of slams, way more Masters, and the WTF, with a higher career win percentage – despite having only, like, four seasons that weren't significantly derailed by injury. It's like comparing Cilic to Del Potro – similar achievements, but one is clearly the superior player.
Yes, and its not comparable, that is what I am saying, and explained why you can't compare 2004 Kuerten and monster Wawa...
How the hell he compare Fed's loss to Kuerten and Novaks to Wawrinka....!!!
Must you finish every post in that ugly manner, even if you think I am not right?
9 slam semifinals to 3.
No I'm not, it's just one of the many criterias.Aren’t you all about the rankings? No.1 vs. no. 3 - no chance for Wawa![]()
He kicked Feds too, and many more other too... You can't be seriousYou simply don’t get it - and this “monster Wawa” is just a paper monster, you know? He got his ass kicked any time he didn’t play Nole...
Aren’t you all about the rankings? No.1 vs. no. 3 - no chance for Wawa![]()
Safin has a much higher peak at AO than Murray and comparable to Wawrinka.Yes, and I forgot... Safin, Kuerten, DelPo... Great players, but Murray and Wawa are better... Really hilarious....
Bolded, than we don't have anything to argue about. I writed about Kuerten in contest of his rivarly with Fed, as answer to KingRoger...
If he was overly greater than Wawa, I don't care...
I never said Kuerten was superior to anyone and he rolled back the years with that one off performance in 2004... his overall form that year isn’t really relevant.Hey, time line is important... Was Kuerten Feds rival in way Wawa was to Novak? We are talking about 2004 when Kuerten was extremely bad... Dont care about overal success...
Please keep track how this conversation started, with my reply to KingRogers rubish about old Kuerten.
And sorry for bad English, I am aware its lousy...
Again you put in same bag one Hewitt and RodDick, and one Murray who is more accomplished than those two together.
Not to mention Wawrinka who played those matches and tournaments at arguably best level ever seen in tennis.
I will remind you that Stan dismantled Federer on RG 2015 in 3 set before beating Novak in final in 4. He was monster.
I will remind you too that Wawa defeated Djokovic and Nadal (who defeated Fed) in great manner in AO 2014.He never lost to Nadal before...
And on USO 2016 he beats Novak and Delpo.
So to resume, Wawa beated Novak in 3 finals, but he beated his daddy Federer in one of those slams, in great manner. He beated Nadal too. So his peak at those tournaments was astonish, and he would beat Federer on USO 16 if he was there. I was never too sad because of this losses, because Wawa was just great.
And now some fed fanatic deminish his accomplishments and level in "he was feds pigeon, he was not supposed to beat Novak" manner... Shame on you. He was great, in the way all Hewitts and RodDicks never was, he just rocked the slams.
And yes Murray and Wawa at slams wasn't Novak pigeons, they were good rivals.
Apples and oranges, literally.
No I'm not, it's just one of the many criterias.
Like 10 different players were no.1 in that period, it's not a special achievement.
He kicked Feds too, and many more other too... You can't be serious![]()
Yes, and its not comparable, that is what I am saying, and explained why you can't compare 2004 Kuerten and monster Wawa...
How the hell he compare Fed's loss to Kuerten and Novaks to Wawrinka....!!!
Are you really comparing a final to a 3R?Yes it is. You are intentionally trying to shift the focus from the matches in question, but even your feeble attempt at comparing careers failed.
In particular we are comparing Kuerten's win over Federer at RG 2004 vs any win of Wawa vs Novak on a Major level (but obviously more so at RG, which came as a complete surprise). Both happened in a period where presumably Novak or Federer were "supposed" to win, both were in tournaments where Nadal wasn't standing in their way.
Also I am sure that that is yet another example of you not having watched the match. Kuerten was working the angles and then flattening his BH like only he can.
![]()
They are so stubborn that won't except simple facts... Let them lie themselves![]()
this stat is a reflection of two things:
a) in the last 5 years, Novak's best level is better than the rest.
b) the numerous slam losses that he did have in this period were to players worse than the big 4, which certainly isn't better than losing to the big 4 themselves. Which puts a dent in how meaningful this little trivia factoid is. Put in other words, it would be more impressive if Novak had lost to Fed and Nadal instead of Istomin and Cecchinato, even if that'd render this particular streak null and void, which means that the corollary is that the streak in itself doesn't mean so much as having scored a lot of wins against Fedal, whether the wins came in streak or not.
The stat is meaningful for meetings between in form players, since Big4 meet only in the last rounds of Slams due to their high ranking. Djokovic in 2017 and early 2018 was not in good form.
form isn't a binary quality, and there's no denying that there's a lot of contingency to the fact that Djokovic met Nadal at the 2015 RG or Fed at the 2016 AO but lost one or two matches short of meeting them in 2017–2018.
But to repeat, in the last 5 years, top-form Djokovic stands above anyone (except maybe on clay), and there's no escaping that fact whether he has a (largely contingent) streak or not.
With finals and semifinals only, the streak is 10-0.
From WI14 to RG16 only (6 titles, 1 final, 1 semi), the streak is 10-0.
However you put it, it's amazing.
Are you really comparing a final to a 3R?