Alcaraz 2024 Wimbledon vs Federer 2015 Wimbledon?

[btsjungkook]

Since I already put a poll on Djoker 2015 vs Alcaraz 2024, who do you think would take this battle? I think Alcaraz would beat Federer no doubt since he struggled against Djokovic who has less variety than him and he was pretty old at age 33 so he already declined.

 

[Sport]

Raz in 4, maybe 5.

A more interesting question would be 2017 Federer, who played much better than in the 2015 final.

 

[RS]

Federer 2015 in 3

 

[Sport]

Raz in 4, maybe 5.

A more interesting question would be 2017 Federer, who played much better than in the 2015 final.

Fed fans when they read my comment.

 

[Sport]

Federer 2015 in 3

No way. 2015derer beat Murray in 3, but we all know Raz is the real deal and a much better player than Murray.

 

[TheGoldenEra1990’s]

Carlos almost lost to tiafoe. LOL. Djoker played his worst final final due to knee surgery. Fed in 4.

 

[btsjungkook]

Carlos almost lost to tiafoe. LOL. Djoker played his worst final final due to knee surgery. Fed in 4.

Djokovic almost lost to Anderson.

 

[Sport]

Carlos almost lost to tiafoe. LOL. Djoker played his worst final final due to knee surgery. Fed in 4.

He played his C game during that match and raised his level in the final. No big deal.

 

[btsjungkook]

Looks like Alcaraz is winning this poll compared to the other one I put up before.

 

[Sport]

I rewatched the W 2014 final today. Wasn't impressed by the level of Federer (too many unforced errors, low tolerance to big rallies, etc.). Federer has always had one of the best serves ever, perfect for the surface, but he's NOT one of the greatest returners on grass ever (he's behing Novak, Raz and Murray in that regard, in fact he was listed outside the top 30 on the ATP return rating on grass). Also, Federer certainly has not the best baseline game on grass, as Novak has a substantially better shot tolerance and minor propensity to make unforced errors in long rallies than Roger, and when Raz reaches his A game (4th set. vs. Tommy Paul or the final vs. Novak), he displays a fairly superior shot tolerance combined with more power. I mean, Federer is the Wimbledon GOAT, and the most succesful player ever on grass, but some act as if he was a God-like on the surface, the forever undisputed King of grass, and his resume is quite close to Novak and Sampras to say so.

I'd say, as of now, Roger deserves to be considered the player with the best level ever on grass. BUT, Alcaraz is too young, he hasn't even reached his prime yet. We'll see what he can do, and depending on how many W titles he wins we can especulate. As of now, he only has 2 W titles, so the conversation is not yet to be taken seriously.

 

[Federev]

I rewatched the W 2014 final today. Wasn't impressed by the level of Federer (too many unforced errors, low tolerance to big rallies, etc.). Federer has always had one of the best serves ever, perfect for the surface, but he's NOT one of the greatest returners on grass ever (he's behing Novak, Raz and Murray in that regard, in fact he was listed outside the top 30 on the ATP return rating on grass). Also, Federer certainly has not the best baseline game on grass, as Novak has a substantially better shot tolerance and minor propensity to make unforced errors in long rallies than Roger, and when Raz reaches his A game (4th set. vs. Tommy Paul or the final vs. Novak), he displays a fairly superior shot tolerance combined with more power. I mean, Federer is the Wimbledon GOAT, and the most succesful player ever on grass, but some act as if he was a God-like on the surface, the forever undisputed King of grass, and his resume is quite close to Novak and Sampras to say so.

I'd say, as of now, Roger deserves to be considered the player with the best level ever on grass. BUT, Alcaraz is too young, he hasn't even reached his prime yet. We'll see what he can do, and depending on how many W titles he wins we can especulate. As of now, he only has 2 W titles, so the conversation is not yet to be taken seriously.

What’s your take on Fed of 2004-2007 vs Fed of ‘14-‘15?

 

[objection_]

Fed if he brings his semi level, Raz would probably outlast fed in final form though

 

[MeatTornado]

The Federer of that era relied heavily on his serve and playing quick points while planted on the baseline. Djokovic as the GOAT returner and king of depth was basically built in a lab to disrupt that game style. I think I'm higher on 2024 Wim Carlos than most here, but he simply doesn't have 2015 Djokovic levels of return or depth. It'll turn into a shot making contest that will probably have a lot of swings in momentum based on who is zoning from set to set. It's usually very hard to bet against Federer in a battle of offense.

I doubt Alcaraz has played anyone resembling Fedberg's willingness to charge the net at any moment. Certainly he's never played anyone with as much overall variety as Federer. It might fluster the kid having to deal with that all of a sudden. In turn, Fed never played anyone capable of spamming drop shots from anywhere on the court, so his declined 34 year old movement will definitely be tested.

The consistency of Fed's serve makes me want to pick him. But if this is actually 2015 Fed in a Wim final still in his head about winning #18, then I could see the young Alcaraz with nothing to lose winning the battle of nerves if it goes 5.

 

[MeatTornado]

No way. 2015derer beat Murray in 3, but we all know Raz is the real deal and a much better player than Murray.

Carlos will have the better career, but I'm not sure how much better we can say he is on grass right now compared to Murray. Do you really think 2015 Muzz wouldn't have also won the last 2 Wimbledons in Alcaraz's place?

 

[TheGoldenEra1990’s]

It wasn’t a peak Fed slam performance but sure as hell was 10x better than one legged Noles this year . And it’s grass. Fed is always gonna the favorite over Carlos on grass. At least until he’s 40. His game is just more wired for grass than Carlos. Carlos struggled too much at Wimbledon to make anyone believe he can beat that Fed

That 2015 Fed would have handed this Nole bagels on grass. Easy

 

[btsjungkook]

It wasn’t a peak Fed slam performance but sure as hell was 10x better than one legged Noles this year . And it’s grass. Fed is always gonna the favorite over Carlos on grass. At least until he’s 40. His game is just more wired for grass than Carlos. Carlos struggled too much at Wimbledon to make anyone believe he can beat that Fed

That 2015 Fed would have handed this Nole bagels on grass. Easy

Alcaraz has never lost a slam final yet while Federer had lost a lot already though he was past his prime. Alcaraz is crazy good in finals while Federer lost to tons of players in finals mostly to Nadal.

 

[ghostofMecir]

Raz in 4, maybe 5.

A more interesting question would be 2017 Federer, who played much better than in the 2015 final.

2004 Fed vs. 2024 Cam Norrie

Sport: This one might be Federer but Norrie is no slouch when he’s playing on his home turf. So, as one of the founding members of the Anybody But Federer Club, I’m not sure.

Looks like Alcaraz is winning this poll compared to the other one I put up before.

do you know how to read bar graphs?

 

[TheGoldenEra1990’s]

Alcaraz has never lost a slam final yet while Federer had lost a lot already though he was past his prime. Alcaraz is crazy good in finals while Federer lost to tons of players in finals mostly to Nadal.

Ehh Alcaraz is playing OLDovic in finals and guys like casper Ruud . Fed doesn’t lose a final either if he plays that.

 

[btsjungkook]

Ehh Alcaraz is playing OLDovic in finals and guys like casper Ruud . Fed doesn’t lose a final either if he plays that.

He can only play what he can, doesn't change the fact that he's 4-0 in grand slam finals and has only lost one big final in Cincinatti.

 

[TheGoldenEra1990’s]

He can only play what he can, doesn't change the fact that he's 4-0 in grand slam finals and has only lost one big final in Cincinatti.

Ok. I get that but it’s just based on circumstance too. you also have to look at who he’s playing. How many finals in a row does Fed win if there’s no Nadal around on clay? Dozens and dozens. Way more than Carlos can manage I promise you

 

[Rosstour]

Djokovic almost lost to Anderson.

That would have been awesome

 

[btsjungkook]

It seems a lot more people agree Federer would get spanked by Alcaraz than agree that Alcaraz could beat 2015 Djokovic. Interesting.

 

[KingCarlitos]

It would probably be 5 sets could go either way

 

[TheFifthSet]

I rewatched the W 2014 final today.

Well there's your first mistake, if you're looking to use one tournament to make some broader point about his top-end ability.

That was, what, his 9th best Wimbledon?

What was Djokovic's 9th best? How do they compare?

Wasn't impressed by the level of Federer (too many unforced errors,

34 groundstroke errors in 386 points bud. Alcaraz hit 55 last year in 334 points against a much worse Novak. Even if the charting is a bit off, you exaggerate to the nth degree.

Federer has always had one of the best serves ever, perfect for the surface, but he's NOT one of the greatest returners on grass ever (he's behing Novak, Raz and Murray in that regard, in fact he was listed outside the top 30 on the ATP return rating on grass).

break % on grass of some of the best grass returners (talking return game, not necessarily as a stand-alone shot) post-'91:

Federer - 23.7%
Nadal - 23.6%
Murray - 26.3%
Djokovic - 26.0%
Alcaraz - 26.1% (27 matches)
Agassi - 25.8%

Considering Federer has more grass matches than any of these guys by quite a lot (meaning, a lengthier decline phase which lowers career #’s) he seems to hold up pretty well. Especially given that, with his serve, he could afford to coast on the return.

From '03-'07 he had a 30% break rate on grass and 30% at Wimbledon. That's better than Raz's 29% over his last two Wimbledon wins. And Alcaraz needed to squeeze every bit of juice out of his return game while Federer had far more margin. Still broke more often.

Also, Federer certainly has not the best baseline game on grass, as Novak has a substantially better shot tolerance and minor propensity to make unforced errors in long rallies than Roger,

Djokovic has two Wimby wins where his break % was over 30, 2011 and 2018.

To reiterate, Federer had an entire uninterrupted five-year run where he broke more than that.

You drastically overstate the difference between their shot tolerance/returns on grass, at their best. Drastically.

and when Raz reaches his A game (4th set. vs. Tommy Paul or the final vs. Novak), he displays a fairly superior shot tolerance combined with more power.

What is "shot tolerance" to you? If it's just about walling from the back of the court then even there I don't think Raz is superior (Federer’s rally bh was a great shot when the bounce was low) but factoring in everything else I think we can safely say peak Federer has the superior shot tolerance on grass. He’s got more balance, better footwork, can't get rushed in the same way, doesn't overhit off either wing.

And power? As in, mph's? So? Federer never had upper-echelon MPH's off the ground or on serve, and it never mattered.

in fact he was listed outside the top 30 on the ATP return rating on grass).

28th, but we’ve been over this before: it’s not an era or competition-adjusted stat. Federer played in an era where breaks were harder to come by than most of the players ahead of him, against tougher competition.

This matters because return rating is derived from raw return game stats, nothing more than that.

Big reason why the likes of Black, Kucera, Steven, Volkov, Stafford, Stoltenberg, Kudla, Med, Escude, Malisse, RBA, Petchey (yeah, THAT one) are higher than him and Nadal. Do you think they have better baseline games/returns on grass?

Alcaraz, fwiw, is only 22nd; his rating is also blunted by playing in a more serve-dominated era. Djokovic is 15th, behind Kudla, Stolt, Stafford, Volkov, Steven, Chang, Black etc.

 

[legcramp]

Djokovic almost lost to Anderson.

Anderson made two slam finals, how many tiafoe made?

 

[TheFifthSet]

Dlt

 

[metsman]

And power? As in, mph's? So? Federer never had upper-echelon MPH's off the ground or on serve, and it never mattered.

Federer could generate 90-100+ mph off rally balls far more effectively than Alcaraz or most other players. Very few if any players can generate 100+ mph running around the return like Federer could (most returns like that come from FH side returns perfectly timed, i.e. the pace is provided and it's basically a slapshot). Basically no one has the ability to generate that much pace unless the ball is on a tee and they have extra time with their feet set, or it doesn't require any complex footwork pattern and it's about just pure timing of pace. I think many of Federer's fastest FHs are actually without his feet set and running around the FH which is remarkable (several 100+ inside out returns, and the 108 mph inside in bomb vs Gonzalez at monte carlo), no one else can come anywhere near that at least with any kind of consistency (Gonzalez could do it but of course he missed far more because his technique would break down in such cases). Delpo can line up huge CC and DTL FHs, but has very limited ability to crack triple digits while running around. Fed can easily do that as well (104 mph vs Haas CC 06 AO, 102 mph vs Roddick DTL 05 Cincy) but unlike Delpo doesn't need any exaggerated wind up, just normal technique with a bit more juice.

So Federer's ability to generate pace off the ground in the way he did it is basically unmatched. The reason people think he didn't have upper echelon mph off the ground is because the highlight reel shows a bunch of people winding up and slapping 110 mph FHs missing 4/10 on routine winners whereas Federer would finish those at 95 mph without compromising technique but hit the line while missing 1/10. Even still Federer had many more 100+ mph forehands at his peak than you can count at 2 hands, the only reason people don't think so is 1) they are 12 years old and 2) people didn't screengrab every huge FH with the mph flashing across the screen and turn it into some social media reel to share far and wide because people cared about more nuanced things than who slapped the biggest FH.

Federer's FH, considering all factors, is the single BIGGEST groundstroke in tennis history and it's not even close. This isn't even talking about spin and depth where Federer is even further ahead of the crowd and can force all kinds of errors off seemingly harmless balls (anyone who's ever hit with Federer can tell you this). He was very much considered one of the premier POWER players because he was. His FH overpowered people and robbed them of time.

Also, it's no 136 but dialing up to 128-132 when needed was routine for Federer at his peak, and he could place such serves too, which is something neither Alcaraz (or Nadal's famous 135 mph serve) could really do.

None of this is that relevant to 2015 Fed (not that it matters since even 2019 Fed would be setting up serve+1 shop against Alcaraz), but still it needs reminding.

 

[TheFifthSet]

Federer could generate 90-100+ mph off rally balls far more effectively than Alcaraz or most other players. Very few if any players can generate 100+ mph running around the return like Federer could (most returns like that come from FH side returns perfectly timed, i.e. the pace is provided and it's basically a slapshot).

Oh for sure, off run-around returns and especially passes, Federer could uncork some really hot ones (the pass against Henman in ‘01, how did he generate that much pace?!). Hell even off regular rally balls he had the capacity to have huge average MPH’s.

But the sort of “power” that I presume Sport was talking about (“muh high average MPH”) wasn’t really Fed’s default game and misses the forest for the trees.

It’s like complaining about Roy Halladay registering 93 on the radar (he could’ve easily averaged 95-96, but then his location goes from 10/10 to 8/10).

Fed had some of the best precision groundies ever and he hit consistently solid-paced balls off his shoetops while hugging the baseline half the time, no point adding on more power for power’s sake. He could’ve been Fernando Gonzales 8.0 if he wanted to. Instead he was probably out-averaged by many a player in many a match, but that’s not really a power deficit in any real sense of the term, not when you actually think about it for more than 8 seconds.

Basically no one has the ability to generate that much pace unless the ball is on a tee and they have extra time with their feet set, or it doesn't require any complex footwork pattern and it's about just pure timing of pace. I think many of Federer's fastest FHs are actually without his feet set and running around the FH which is remarkable (several 100+ inside out returns, and the 108 mph inside in bomb vs Gonzalez at monte carlo), no one else can come anywhere near that at least with any kind of consistency (Gonzalez could do it but of course he missed far more because his technique would break down in such cases). Delpo can line up huge CC and DTL FHs, but has very limited ability to crack triple digits while running around. Fed can easily do that as well (104 mph vs Haas CC 06 AO, 102 mph vs Roddick DTL 05 Cincy) but unlike Delpo doesn't need any exaggerated wind up, just normal technique with a bit more juice.

So Federer's ability to generate pace off the ground in the way he did it is basically unmatched. The reason people think he didn't have upper echelon mph off the ground is because the highlight reel shows a bunch of people winding up and slapping 110 mph FHs missing 4/10 on routine winners whereas Federer would finish those at 95 mph without compromising technique but hit the line while missing 1/10. Even still Federer had many more 100+ mph forehands at his peak than you can count at 2 hands, the only reason people don't think so is 1) they are 12 years old and 2) people didn't screengrab every huge FH with the mph flashing across the screen and turn it into some social media reel to share far and wide because people cared about more nuanced things than who slapped the biggest FH.

Federer's FH, considering all factors, is the single BIGGEST groundstroke in tennis history and it's not even close. This isn't even talking about spin and depth where Federer is even further ahead of the crowd and can force all kinds of errors off seemingly harmless balls (anyone who's ever hit with Federer can tell you this). He was very much considered one of the premier POWER players because he was. His FH overpowered people and robbed them of time.

Also, it's no 136 but dialing up to 128-132 when needed was routine for Federer at his peak, and he could place such serves too, which is something neither Alcaraz (or Nadal's famous 135 mph serve) could really do.

None of this is that relevant to 2015 Fed (not that it matters since even 2019 Fed would be setting up serve+1 shop against Alcaraz), but still it needs reminding.

Good examples and we more or less agree (I wouldn’t rate Federer’s forehand as quite the biggest ever, even with time-robbing and other factors, though it’s the best offensively—matter of semantics, probably). However, if someone wants to make the argument that he wasn’t a MPH metronome merchant (maybe I’m strawmanning but I can’t imagine Sport could’ve meant anything else)…sure, I can get on board with that. It’s the inverse of touting CA’s serve speeds though, and completely fails to understand what makes a forehand great and how big the trade-off such an approach would entail for a guy who lost about 5 nail-biters a year at his peak. If he blew his wad from the back of the court like Rublev (who has some of the highest average MPH’s I’ve ever seen, hitting from Iceland) he still would’ve been good enough to only lose 9 or 10, but it would’ve been suboptimal nonetheless.

 

[FeroBango]

Fed fans when they read my comment.

Hypothetical Fed wins against fellow Big 3 all the time. Raz is a silly kiddo against that man.

 

[zagor]

I rewatched the W 2014 final today. Wasn't impressed by the level of Federer (too many unforced errors, low tolerance to big rallies, etc.). Federer has always had one of the best serves ever, perfect for the surface, but he's NOT one of the greatest returners on grass ever (he's behing Novak, Raz and Murray in that regard, in fact he was listed outside the top 30 on the ATP return rating on grass). Also, Federer certainly has not the best baseline game on grass, as Novak has a substantially better shot tolerance and minor propensity to make unforced errors in long rallies than Roger, and when Raz reaches his A game (4th set. vs. Tommy Paul or the final vs. Novak), he displays a fairly superior shot tolerance combined with more power. I mean, Federer is the Wimbledon GOAT, and the most succesful player ever on grass, but some act as if he was a God-like on the surface, the forever undisputed King of grass, and his resume is quite close to Novak and Sampras to say so.

I'd say, as of now, Roger deserves to be considered the player with the best level ever on grass. BUT, Alcaraz is too young, he hasn't even reached his prime yet. We'll see what he can do, and depending on how many W titles he wins we can especulate. As of now, he only has 2 W titles, so the conversation is not yet to be taken seriously.

And why should the 2014 Wimbledon final be used as a barometer for Fed's top end level on grass instead of say the period when he won 5 Wimbledons in a row? Any reason?

 

[zagor]

Hypothetical Fed wins against fellow Big 3 all the time. Raz is a silly kiddo against that man.

That's a meme at this point, he may have used to but these days I'm not sure he'd win a poll against Nadal on grass. As time goes by Fed's gonna get more and more underrated, just the way it goes. It happened to Pete as well.

I'm not as sold on post 30 Fed on grass (2014, 2015, 2017, 2019) as most people here. Alcaraz with the level he showed in the final has a legit shot if he could return Fed's serve reasonably well. He has the combination of speed, passing shots, great dropshot to frustrate that Fed who was a step slower.

However Fed at his absolute peak on grass stats-wise from 2003-2006 was special, he was almost matching Nadal's numbers on clay. Of course Nadal did it for a much longer period.

 

[FeroBango]

That's a meme at this point, he may have used to but these days I'm not sure he'd win a poll against Nadal on grass. As time goes by Fed's gonna get more and more underrated, just the way it goes. It happened to Pete as well.

I'm not as sold on post 30 Fed on grass (2014, 2015, 2017, 2019) as most people here. Alcaraz with the level he showed in the final has a legit shot if he could return Fed's serve reasonably well. He has the combination of speed, passing shots, great dropshot to frustrate that Fed who was a step slower.

However Fed at his absolute peak on grass stats-wise from 2003-2006 was special, he was almost matching Nadal's numbers on clay. Of course Nadal did it for a much longer period.

Not gonna argue personally. Alcaraz imo is a serious challenge to any post-30s Big-3.

Peak Fed was a joke though but who knows with these hypotheticals?

 

[NeutralFan]

Federer 2015 in 3

Yep, man was playing best tennis of his career, him and the great tennis coach Nick Bollettieri said the same.

 

[btsjungkook]

So far the poll seems very equal with Alcaraz edging it by a bit. Hypothetical peak Alcaraz might just beat peak Fed as well.

 

[metsman]

Oh for sure, off run-around returns and especially passes, Federer could uncork some really hot ones (the pass against Henman in ‘01, how did he generate that much pace?!). Hell even off regular rally balls he had the capacity to have huge average MPH’s.

But the sort of “power” that I presume Sport was talking about (“muh high average MPH”) wasn’t really Fed’s default game and misses the forest for the trees.

It’s like complaining about Roy Halladay registering 93 on the radar (he could’ve easily averaged 95-96, but then his location goes from 10/10 to 8/10).

Fed had some of the best precision groundies ever and he hit consistently solid-paced balls off his shoetops while hugging the baseline half the time, no point adding on more power for power’s sake. He could’ve been Fernando Gonzales 8.0 if he wanted to. Instead he was probably out-averaged by many a player in many a match, but that’s not really a power deficit in any real sense of the term, not when you actually think about it for more than 8 seconds.




Good examples and we more or less agree (I wouldn’t rate Federer’s forehand as quite the biggest ever, even with time-robbing and other factors, though it’s the best offensively—matter of semantics, probably). However, if someone wants to make the argument that he wasn’t a MPH metronome merchant (maybe I’m strawmanning but I can’t imagine Sport could’ve meant anything else)…sure, I can get on board with that. It’s the inverse of touting CA’s serve speeds though, and completely fails to understand what makes a forehand great and how big the trade-off such an approach would entail for a guy who lost about 5 nail-biters a year at his peak. If he blew his wad from the back of the court like Rublev (who has some of the highest average MPH’s I’ve ever seen, hitting from Iceland) he still would’ve been good enough to only lose 9 or 10, but it would’ve been suboptimal nonetheless.

I would guess Fed's average FH in his peak were faster than the weak sauce 75 he would put up in like 2016 when everyone started getting their hands on those stats. He definitely sacrificed pace on his FH in those years to take the ball earlier and hug the baseline.

And I imagine if you adjust average speed for positioning and spin Fed's would probably be near or at the top of the list (what we mean by the heaviest FH). All the speed merchants either hit flatter balls or take the ball from the first row. Even when Federer would take balls a bit deeper he would actually use it to get even more depth and spin, and always able to move back up the court. With guys like Alcaraz their depth of shot is usually lacking when they try to hit bigger because they are relying on swing length to generate pace rather than racket head speed.

The 3 shot combo to end the point in the famous 06 USO SF point is a perfect example where he hits 2 bombs from well behind the baseline that land extremely deep and puts Davydenko on the defensive seemingly out of nowhere, and then moves up the court for the kill shot. The last ball is also another example of how Fed could generate pace from positions no one could. I don't think anyone else in history could reliably run around their FH and casually generate 90 mph+ on a hard slice below the knees. At the end of a 30 shot rally too. This is what actually defines an elite FH, not the trick shots and slappers and "stats" that people use to come up with garbage like putting Nadal's FH above Federer's or thinking Federer's FH wasn't that big.

Fed's FH is like the guy who sits 96, but can dial it up to 100 with elite action and a deep release point vs the guy that sits 98-100 but straight as a string with a shorter release point. Given the release point, even the raw gap in velocity basically ceases to matter before you even take into account the movement (assuming there's no big difference in arm action/deception which can also make velocity play up or down since the hitter picks up the ball later).

 

[TennisProphet2024]

What’s your take on Fed of 2004-2007 vs Fed of ‘14-‘15?

LOL that would be like asking, "What's your take on Djoker of 2011, 2015, 2021, 2023 vs Djoker of 2017/2024"

 

[ghostofMecir]

Still lol