Age by age comparision of the Federer Nadal forehands

abmk

abmk

Bionic Poster
Doing an age by age comparision of the Federer Nadal forehands.

2005 nadal > 2000 fed
2006 nadal > 2001 fed
2007 nadal > 2002 fed
2008 nadal > 2003 fed
2004 fed > 2009 nadal
2005 fed > 2010 nadal
2006 fed > 2011 nadal
2007 fed > 2012 nadal
2013 nadal > 2008 fed
2009 fed > 2014 nadal
2010 fed > 2015 nadal
2011 fed > 2016 nadal
2012 fed > 2017 nadal
2018 nadal > 2013 fed
2019 nadal > 2014 fed
2020 nadal > 2015 fed
2021 nadal vs 2016 fed - lets say same ballpark
2017 fed > 2022 nadal

I'm frankly a bit tired of hearing from some that nadal's longevity with FH is so much better than fed's. Its not true.
You can of course argue that nadal's longevity with it is a little better.
But to try to make it look like its so much better, ignoring fed's 17-early 18, and even good enough chunks of 19 (incl Wim 19 where he clearly outplayed Nadal with it) etc is just not backed up by what actually happened.
Of course fed's FH in 14-early 16 would've looked significantly better in the inflation era field of 2019+ (esp 2020+) with no peak Djokovic around.
 
abmk said:
Doing an age by age comparision of the Federer Nadal forehands.

2005 nadal > 2000 fed
2006 nadal > 2001 fed
2007 nadal > 2002 fed
2008 nadal > 2003 fed
2004 fed > 2009 nadal
2005 fed > 2010 nadal
2006 fed > 2011 nadal
2007 fed > 2012 nadal
2013 nadal > 2008 fed
2009 fed > 2014 nadal
2010 fed > 2015 nadal
2011 fed > 2016 nadal
2012 fed > 2017 nadal
2018 nadal > 2013 fed
2019 nadal > 2014 fed
2020 nadal > 2015 fed
2021 nadal vs 2016 fed - lets say same ballpark
2017 fed > 2022 nadal

I'm frankly a bit tired of hearing from some that nadal's longevity with FH is so much better than fed's. Its not true.
You can of course argue that nadal's longevity with it is a little better.
But to try to make it look like its so much better, ignoring fed's 17-early 18, and even good enough chunks of 19 (incl Wim 19 where he clearly outplayed Nadal with it) etc is just not backed up by what actually happened.
Of course fed's FH in 14-early 16 would've looked significantly better in the inflation era field of 2019+ (esp 2020+) with no peak Djokovic around.
Click to expand...
You have a point though I think the reason most people believe Rafa's FH to have much better longevity than Fed's is because of its effectiveness against the field.

FH to FH I think Fed has been about at par with Rafa even in his 30s. Though most players got used to the Fed style righty FH and dealt with it much better whereas Rafa's Lefty top spin bouncy FH along with the angles it creates has just been more troublesome in general because of the uniqueness of it.
 
Completely subjective (i.e.: non-reliable) list.

There is no official ATP or ITF stat for "the best forehand by year".
 
Last edited:
Federer forehand declined sharply after racket switch. Still in patches of 2017-18 and 19 it was better than Nadal' at same age. Without racket switch Fed forehand would have defeated Nadal' in 2014-15 period as well. It's not like Nadal forehand post 2017 is kind of spectacular weapon on consistent basis. It turns up few times a season when his down the line shots go well.
 
Anyway peak to peak Federer forehand is far better than Nadal' on fast hard court, indoor and on grass. It was one strike and the rally was over kind of shot. Nadal forehand was never that good any surface. Even Federer forehand DTL is underrated shot. They talk about inside out forehand only. But Espacially DTL forehand while running forward was his trademark shot which used to cut many rallies short.
 
Nadal - GOAT said:
You have a point though I think the reason most people believe Rafa's FH to have much better longevity than Fed's is because of its effectiveness against the field.

FH to FH I think Fed has been about at par with Rafa even in his 30s. Though most players got used to the Fed style righty FH and dealt with it much better whereas Rafa's Lefty top spin bouncy FH along with the angles it creates has just been more troublesome in general because of the uniqueness of it.
Click to expand...

I mean if we look at it:

For the 30s:

Aug 11-Aug 12 fed > June 16-June 17 Nadal
Aug 12 fed - Aug 12 fed < June 17 Nadal - June 18 Nadal
Aug 13 fed - Aug 14 fed < June 18-June 19 Nadal
Aug 14 fed-Aug 15 fed > June 19 - June 20 Nadal
Aug 15 fed - Aug 16 fed < June 20-June 21 Nadal (purely for RG 20)
Aug 16 fed - Aug 17 fed > June 21-June 22 Nadal

I agree with the part in bold, but not the rest. I think the reasons go like this:

1. People miss or under-estimate Aug 11 to 12 end part for fed. Better than corresponding for nadal (June 16 - some part towards end of 17)

2. People are ignoring the FH for fed in 17-early 18. Going ga ga over the bh, but not realizing a fully practiced FH was the bigger reason for success.

3. fed's FH power did go down in 14-15 except for some tournaments or matches because he was not fully practiced with the new racquet. Also peak Djokovic being there in 14-15 to expose the decrease in power unlike in 19-20 for nadal. (well well except AO 19)

4. people seem to be like ignore nadal's FH going down significantly in 15 and 16 like it is nothing. I mean WTF. They do say 15-16 were bad years for nadal, but curiously act like FH is immune from that or that it hadn't gone down in that period. Why!?

5. Regarding effectiveness vs the field, I don't think that's necessarily true. fed's FH was damn good vs the field including vs djoko/nadal in USO 11 to Cincy 12. Even in 17, guy was going hammer tongs vs delpo FH in Shanghai 17 and Basel 17. came out easily on top in Shanghai 17. guy was also hitting it very well in matches like Berdych/Nishi AO 17, IW 17, Tiafoe/Goffin in Basel 17, at Wim 17 etc.
I mean fed in 19 was exposing the med-tpas-Z gen with his FH already. I do agree nadal's FH poses more problems for that gen that anything djokovic does, but that's not necessarily true wrt to fed's FH. Thiem might be the only one among 90+ born who dealt well enough with both FHs actually.
 
Last edited:
Lets also look at this from Wim 19 semi between Fed and Nadal.

16 winners, 16 errors forced to 14 UEs for fed (+18)
8 winners, 9 winners forced to 13 UEs for nadal (+4)


Yes, I know UEs are subjective.
But that's a significant difference, even if the UE counts are a little off.

Yes, and I do know nadal's FH was clearly better on clay in their RG 19 match. It'd be atleast a bit shocking if otherwise.
 
D.Nalby12 said:
Federer forehand declined sharply after racket switch. Still in patches of 2017-18 and 19 it was better than Nadal' at same age. Without racket switch Fed forehand would have defeated Nadal' in 2014-15 period as well. It's not like Nadal forehand post 2017 is kind of spectacular weapon on consistent basis. It turns up few times a season when his down the line shots go well.
Click to expand...

Well, fed's FH was better in 17 than nadal's itself in 17 (not just same age aka 22). It was good or better for most of 17, not just patches anyways.
even in 19, not far off from nadal's FH in 19 - though it had become less fluid.

what fed needed was to spend post-Wim or atleast post USO in 13 hammering away FHs and BHs consistently with new racquet to get fully practiced with it.
 
Fed fans confirmed it by bringing down his post AO 10 and post even more post 12 versions and picking several 2003-07 players over him in hypotheticals :whistle:
 
FH's are of course close. I just sometimes bait Fed fans when they go over board.

The closest one on the list is 2005 vs 2010. Could that be argued the other way?
 
RS said:
Fed fans confirmed it by bringing down his post AO 10 and post even more post 12 versions and picking several 2003-07 players over him in hypotheticals :whistle:
Click to expand...

AO 10-12 thingy almost never happened. How did the guy go 2-3 (nearly 3-2) in slams vs Djoko in 11-12. after the serve, it was the FH that did the most damage no?
beat nadal convincingly in IW 12 thanks in most major part due to fh I think. FH was also good in AO 12, but surface was slow and nadal obviously quicker.
of course we had that YEC 11 destruction. convincing enough win in YEC 10. both those major part due to fh, fh was also good in Madrid 11 vs nadal.

14-15, focus on matches vs peak djokovic when talking about weaker fh. nadal didn't have face that sorta djokovic much did he - except oh wait AO 19.
as far as 2003-07 players thing goes, same is done vs nadal at those ages - prime Hewitt/Roddick beating/outlasting Nadal outside of clay obviously from after AO 2014.
 
RS said:
FH's are of course close. I just sometimes bait Fed fans when they go over board.

The closest one on the list is 2005 vs 2010. Could that be argued the other way?
Click to expand...

2005 fed fh vs 2010 nadal fh

grass - fed FH
clay - nadal FH
HC - fed FH by a big margin. Except for USO 10, its not that close. Nadal made 0 HC finals in Masters that year. zero. and lost convincingly to Murray in AO 10.
federer's FH was obviously better in YEC 10 itself than nadal's.
 
I think that as Fed got older, he increasingly relied on his serve (which arguably became even better than his prime serve). This is just my eye test, but I think he got many more easy put away shots than Rafa did and so it made his forehand look better than it was. IMO, Roger had the best forehand ever but it declined heavily after 2007
 
President said:
I think that as Fed got older, he increasingly relied on his serve (which arguably became even better than his prime serve). This is just my eye test, but I think he got many more easy put away shots than Rafa did and so it made his forehand look better than it was. IMO, Roger had the best forehand ever but it declined heavily after 2007
Click to expand...

if anything, from what I've seen nadal sets up a little higher% of points for controlling with fh than federer (who will go more for outright ace/unreturnable)

fed had so many great fh performances in 08-12.
whose fh do you think djokovic feared more in 11. it was fed's.
made nadal look silly in 17 with his FH (even more so than BH). I remember fed literally half-volleying/swatting away with his FH on one instance in Shanghai 17.

even in 19 Wim semi for that matter. see stats above:

Age by age comparision of the Federer Nadal forehands

Doing an age by age comparision of the Federer Nadal forehands. 2005 nadal > 2000 fed 2006 nadal > 2001 fed 2007 nadal > 2002 fed 2008 nadal > 2003 fed 2004 fed > 2009 nadal 2005 fed > 2010 nadal 2006 fed > 2011 nadal 2007 fed > 2012 nadal 2013 nadal > 2008 fed 2009 fed > 2014 nadal 2010 fed >...
tt.tennis-warehouse.com tt.tennis-warehouse.com

some matches in 14-15, but not many - Shanghai 14 vs djoko, 15 Cincy.
 
Thing about this analysis is first of all it doesn't take into account the extent of edge one has over the other each year and instead just simply ranks one over the other in a simplistic manner. Let's say Rafa's forehand was only the 10th best against his peers in 2015 while at the same age Roger's forehand was 1st. The previous year, 2014 Rafa had the 1st forehand and Roger the second at the same age, but on paper their h2h for these two ages would just be a 1-1 despite Roger having a much greater extent of dominance.

Another thing is the comparison by age instead of the comparison by season. With a comparison by age you are comparing the two guys playing against completely different fields despite being at the same age which would be hard to generate a meaningful comparison. But I agree it's hard to find a fair approach because a comparison by season would disadvantage Rog who's five years Rafa's senior, so any comment who wants to build on my remark which strikes a balance is welcome.
 
Clay lover said:
Thing about this analysis is first of all it doesn't take into account the extent of edge one has over the other each year and instead just simply ranks one over the other in a simplistic manner. Let's say Rafa's forehand was only the 10th best against his peers in 2015 while at the same age Roger's forehand was 1st. The previous year, 2014 Rafa had the 1st forehand and Roger the second at the same age, but on paper their h2h for these two ages would just be a 1-1 despite Roger having a much greater extent of dominance.
Click to expand...

I know. But I thought that would take more effort to make the same point. might also complicate some stuff.

Clay lover said:
Another thing is the comparison by age instead of the comparison by season. With a comparison by age you are comparing the two guys playing against completely different fields despite being at the same age which would be hard to generate a meaningful comparison. But I agree it's hard to find a fair approach because a comparison by season would disadvantage Rog who's five years Rafa's senior, so any comment who wants to build on my remark which strikes a balance is welcome.
Click to expand...

2005: fed
2006: fed
2007: fed (getting closer here)
2008: nadal
2009: fed
2010: nadal
2011: even
2012: fed (could've been nadal had he played full season keeping up some level)
2013: nadal
2014: nadal (AO 14/RG 14 enough to push nadal ahead)
2015: fed
2016: ehh
2017: fed
2018: nadal
2019: nadal

don't see much difference here
 
Better longevity simply means Ned's forehand was better when he was younger and when he was older, which even you agree with apart from the outlier 2017 for Fred. The correct idea is that Ned's longevity doesn't really cover for Fed's better peak/prime much. Comparisons involving mug years for either are of course irrelevant.
 
AnOctorokForDinner said:
Better longevity simply means Ned's forehand was better when he was younger and when he was older, which even you agree with apart from the outlier 2017 for Fred. The correct idea is that Ned's longevity doesn't really cover for Fed's better peak/prime much. Comparisons involving mug years for either are of course irrelevant.
Click to expand...

I'll answer this because this is the counter I expected in this thread.
Well yes and no.

nadal's was better when younger obviously. (05-08)

nadal also had those mug years in 15-16 with fh unlike fed in 10-11 at the same age. fed's prime in 09 obviously overshadowing nadal's mostly past prime in 14.
last 3 pre-30 years go to fed clearly so.

older in the 30s?
already compared here: https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...-federer-nadal-forehands.734805/post-16742858
similar till now.

19 fed also tends to get under-rated in this regard. a little better than nadal's this year so far IMO. (lone exception against Djok at FO not enough IMO)
 
Last edited:
abmk said:
I'll answer this because this is the counter I expected in this thread.
Well yes and no.

nadal's was better when younger obviously. (05-08)

nadal also had those mug years in 15-16 with fh unlike fed in 10-11 at the same age. fed's prime in 09 obviously overshadowing nadal's mostly past prime in 14.
last 3 pre-30 years go to fed clearly so.

older in the 30s?
already compared here: https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...-federer-nadal-forehands.734805/post-16742858
similar till now.

19 fed also tends to get under-rated in this regard. a little better than nadal's this year so far IMO. (lone exception against Djok at FO not enough IMO)
Click to expand...

You yourself have Nadal winning the first four years of meaningful comparison and 3 of the last 5 with 1 being tie/irrelevant. That's the thing.

Squabbling on this stuff doesn't really matter since Nadal has already won in the department of slam longevity by being a viable contender further apart in time (Federer 2003-19, Nadal 2005-22), sad but true. Even if he breaks down from now on, his longevityas a top player is slightly superior as it is.
 
AnOctorokForDinner said:
You yourself have Nadal winning the first four years of meaningful comparison and 3 of the last 5 with 1 being tie/irrelevant. That's the thing.

Squabbling on this stuff doesn't really matter since Nadal has already won in the department of slam longevity by being a viable contender further apart in time (Federer 2003-19, Nadal 2005-22), sad but true. Even if he breaks down from now on, his longevityas a top player is slightly superior as it is.
Click to expand...
It's actually hilarious considering body breakdown is what primarily derailed Fed at a similar age to current Ned. Nadal? Greater longevity? WTF even is that lol.
 
AnOctorokForDinner said:
You yourself have Nadal winning the first four years of meaningful comparison and 3 of the last 5 with 1 being tie/irrelevant. That's the thing.

Squabbling on this stuff doesn't really matter since Nadal has already won in the department of slam longevity by being a viable contender further apart in time (Federer 2003-19, Nadal 2005-22), sad but true. Even if he breaks down from now on, his longevity as a top player is slightly superior as it is.
Click to expand...

I'd rate 19 fed fh slightly better than nadal's this year.

Also why are we ignoring this:

nadal also had those mug years in 15-16 with fh unlike fed in 10-11 at the same age. fed's prime in 09 obviously overshadowing nadal's mostly past prime in 14.
last 3 pre-30 years go to fed clearly so.

its not only about the edges, but serious dips in b/w also matter (with some consideration for injury).

early years: nadal (4x)
3 pre-30 years: federer (3x)
30 years till 35: about even
I'd say fed 19 is little better than current nadal.

so its in same ballpark IMO.

I have no problem in someone saying nadal has little longer longevity with fh. its when people say it is so much better.
 
StrongRule said:
6-1, and most of these matches were in 2017 on hardcourt. Anyway, Nadal has a big lead in the overall head to head.
Click to expand...
Yeah yeah we can easily play the clay card too, no one cares. It still amuses me that 16-24 isn't seen as a competitive H2H, too. Of course the next robot inspired refinement is going to be about slam h2h, then we can all doze off for the day.
 
abmk said:
I'd rate 19 fed fh slightly better than nadal's this year.

Also why are we ignoring this:

nadal also had those mug years in 15-16 with fh unlike fed in 10-11 at the same age. fed's prime in 09 obviously overshadowing nadal's mostly past prime in 14.
last 3 pre-30 years go to fed clearly so.

its not only about the edges, but serious dips in b/w also matter (with some consideration for injury).

I have no problem in someone saying nadal has little longer longevity with fh. its when people say it is so much better.
Click to expand...

You're mixing longevity and quality comparison (deliberately?). The same as slam longevity, it's about the gap between top-level stints. I certainly don't think Nadal has had the better forehand overall but he has kept for a bit longer as of now. Not by a lot, true.
 
StrongRule said:
6-1, and most of these matches were in 2017 on hardcourt. Anyway, Nadal has a big lead in the overall head to head.
Click to expand...

2017 being nadal's best year post 2013 correct? and on all kinds of HCs, correct?
Federer leads on grass 3-1
Federer leads on HC 11-9 - which woud've been 11-6 had they played only once on HC in 2013 like they did in 2015.
 
abmk said:
2017 being nadal's best year post 2013 correct? and on all kinds of HCs, correct?
Federer leads on grass 3-1
Federer leads on HC 11-9 - which woud've been 11-6 had they played only once on HC in 2013 like they did in 2015.
Click to expand...
It doesn't mean he was anywhere near his prime, for sure not all the time. He was pretty bad in IW (actually, he never played well in this tournament since the 2013 win) and terrible in Miami final.
 
AnOctorokForDinner said:
You're mixing longevity and quality comparison (deliberately?). The same as slam longevity, it's about the gap between top-level stints. I certainly don't think Nadal has had the better forehand overall but he has kept for a bit longer as of now. Not by a lot, true.
Click to expand...

if you are defining it as strictly the gap, then nadal gets it by a small margin. But I'm including this:

"its not only about the edges, but serious dips in b/w also matter (with some consideration for injury)."

So we agree on the final conclusions, just maybe not on the use of the terms
 
StrongRule said:
It doesn't mean he was anywhere near his prime, for sure not all the time. He was pretty bad in IW (actually, he never played well in this tournament since the 2013 win) and terrible in Miami final.
Click to expand...

neither was Fed.

IW 17 wasn't a bad nadal per se, just a subdued one who couldn't do much against the masterclass fed put in that day.
I was there at IW that day. Nadal was hitting the sh*t out of the ball in practice off both wings. fed was playing at mid-pace in practice, lol.
Once the match started, fed hit it much harder off the BH wing than in practice and his better natural talent on HC shone through.


Miami 17 was a little amusing considering nadal hit so much more to the fed FH. Anyways that match came down to important points in the first set. fed edged that one out. If nadal was terrible, what would that make fed in that final?
 
abmk said:
neither was Fed.

IW 17 wasn't a bad nadal per se, just a subdued one who couldn't do much against the masterclass fed put in that day.
I was there at IW that day. Nadal was hitting the sh*t out of the ball in practice off both wings. fed was playing at mid-pace in practice, lol.
Once the match started, fed hit it much harder off the BH wing than in practice and his better natural talent on HC shone through.


Miami 17 was a little amusing considering nadal hit so much more to the fed FH. Anyways that match came down to important points.fed converted 2/2 BPs, nadal went 0/4. If nadal was terrible, what would that make fed in that final?
Click to expand...
Federer was also bad, that was probably his worst match from the beginning of 2017. That's why I'm so disappointed by Nadal's performance.

As for IW, I didn't see Nadal play well there since 2013, which is sad considering that it used to be his best hardcourt masters before. Even this year Nadal should have never reached the final there. (and of course he ended up losing to Fritz)
 
abmk said:
AO 10-12 thingy almost never happened. How did the guy go 2-3 (nearly 3-2) in slams vs Djoko in 11-12. after the serve, it was the FH that did the most damage no?
beat nadal convincingly in IW 12 thanks in most major part due to fh I think. FH was also good in AO 12, but surface was slow and nadal obviously quicker.
of course we had that YEC 11 destruction. convincing enough win in YEC 10. both those major part due to fh, fh was also good in Madrid 11 vs nadal.

14-15, focus on matches vs peak djokovic when talking about weaker fh. nadal didn't have face that sorta djokovic much did he - except oh wait AO 19.
as far as 2003-07 players thing goes, same is done vs nadal at those ages - prime Hewitt/Roddick beating/outlasting Nadal outside of clay obviously from after AO 2014.
Click to expand...
It's usually just post 12. The post AO 10 is just some posters about prime and stuff.

The focus was largely on Djokovic but it also extended to other players. Federer fans do say the same for 2003-07 players for Nadal as well post AO 14 but other Nadal fans don't comply most the time :unsure:
 
StrongRule said:
Federer was also bad, that was his worst match from the beginning of 2017. That's why I'm so disappointed by Nadal's performance.
Click to expand...

1. Donskoy loss in Dubai 17
2. Agut to whom fed had not lost 5 games in a set till then, took him to a double tie-break including breaking him twice in Miami 17
3. Berdych had 2 MPs vs fed in Miami 17 QF.

All 3 worse matches for sure.
Considering the Miami conditions and Fed's age, he couldn't have played a better match vs Nadal.
 
The only reason Nadal won 2 slams this year was because of that FH. It’s basically the only thing keeping his career going. His Backhand is still good but decline and that serve…. Pathetic women stuff. Nadal has the GOAT FH. It may still enable him to for another few years. Even though he has no business winning physically.
 
RS said:
It's usually just post 12. The post AO 10 is just some posters about prime and stuff.

The focus was largely on Djokovic but it also extended to other players. Federer fans do say the same for 2003-07 players for Nadal as well post AO 14 but other Nadal fans don't comply most the time :unsure:
Click to expand...

yeah, so big chunk of fed fans are consistent in this regard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS
Sampras-Bruguera 1993 said:
The only reason Nadal won 2 slams this year was because of that FH. It’s basically the only thing keeping his career going. His Backhand is still good but decline and that serve…. Pathetic women stuff. Nadal has the GOAT FH. It may still enable him to for another few years. Even though he has no business winning physically.
Click to expand...

the serve was arguably nadal's biggest factor in reaching AO 22 final
was below par in the final, but fh wasn't good in the final either, even if better than serve
 
abmk said:
1. Donskoy loss in Dubai 17
2. Agut to whom fed had not lost 5 games in a set till then, took him to a double tie-break including breaking him twice in Miami 17
3. Berdych had 2 MPs vs fed in Miami 17 QF.

All 3 worse matches for sure.
Considering the Miami conditions and Fed's age, he couldn't have played a better match vs Nadal.
Click to expand...
Against Donskoy it was an epic choke, other than that his game didn't look that bad.
 
abmk said:
if you are defining it as strictly the gap, then nadal gets it by a small margin. But I'm including this:

"its not only about the edges, but serious dips in b/w also matter (with some consideration for injury)."

So we agree on the final conclusions, just maybe not on the use of the terms
Click to expand...

You may consider choosing a different word/collocation to avoid confusion on this front. Yeah, for total quality Fed's FH is still better for me.

ps. we can still talk just fine so long as there's no condescension going around :o feeling good today I guess?
 
junior74 said:
7-1 H2H since AO14 with serve as the only better shot. Ombeleebel.
Click to expand...

6-1, walkovers don't count. But the point is actually one of my favourite ones: quite a few mugs want to make it as if Nadal has had the better forehand, backhand, return, volley, slice, movement, basically everything bar the serve. If so, how could Federer have possibly done nearly as well against him as he actually did? Servebotting & junkballing like the true Santoro-with-a-serve, the meme becoming reality in their minds? That's so absurd on its face you have to chuckle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Druss
The Big 3 - who was better age for age?
3 4 5
Replies
227
Views
12K
xFedal
xFedal
SABRvolley
Ranking big 3 results by age
Replies
27
Views
3K
rixiang
R
Lew II
33-34 years old Big3 had some of their highest win percentages
Replies
13
Views
834
tennis_pro
tennis_pro
Lew II
Win rate in the year by Big3's Slam final opponents
2
Replies
74
Views
4K
Gazelle
Gazelle
hipolymer
From 2006 to 2019, Djokovic has been drawn into the worst possible quarter/semi every single time.
Replies
14
Views
933
StrongRule
S
Back
Top