Big 3 (GS titles) first 10 slams opponents in the final

Lleytonstation

Lleytonstation

Talk Tennis Guru
Nice. Looks like Djokers was the hardest. Makes sense why he lost many early on.

But the argument can be made in many ways. I see many former number ones in Feds group and many different opponents.

Some will say weak era and others will say stronger era as more overall competition.

Either way, interesting to see the difference in all of them.
 
Lew II

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
Djokovic's final or semifinal opponent until 2012 Wimbledon:

Federer x10
Nadal x8
Murray x2
Tsonga x2
Berdych
Ferrer
 
Lew II

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
Out of the first 24 finals/semis:

Federer played 3 against Nadal/Djokovic
Nadal played 11 against Federer/Djokovic
Djokovic played 18 against Federer/Nadal
 
Nadal_Django

Nadal_Django

Legend
Lew II said:
Out of the first 24 finals/semis:

Federer played 3 against Nadal/Djokovic
Nadal played 11 against Federer/Djokovic
Djokovic played 18 against Federer/Nadal
Click to expand...
With the competition he had is amazing how Fed is leading Nadal and Djokovic only by 1/3 in the Slam race.
 
R

Robert F

Hall of Fame
When I try to compare era and time frames, my feeling is that over the years the quality of the top 100 players continues to go up, but it seems the top 20 are way better than the top 100, the top 10 are a clear step above the top 20 and then the big 3 are a big step above. Whereas in previous generations, the top 100 had a lot of variability in skill and then there was a top 20 that was pretty close going all the way to the number one player.

So maybe less tiers/differential between players in the past.

I felt in the 90s's, the top guys were better than the top 100 but with much less disparity. You just wouldn't expect the number one guy to be in the final of everything like we do now. Sometimes you see a top 20 guy up against one of the big three, and we hope and hype they can beat them, but usually it doesn't happen. I don't think it was as big of a deal if a top 20 guy beat the number one in the past. If Dmitrov beat Djokovic it would be a big deal.
 
PeoplesChamp

PeoplesChamp

Legend
Hitman said:
Actually the OP is showing us who the first 10 slam wins were against in the final. So it is correct.
Click to expand...
The ( ) got me.

giphy.gif


Just another weak era thread
 
BeatlesFan

BeatlesFan

Bionic Poster
Nole Slam said:
What it tells us?
Click to expand...
That Fed had to play 5 players ranked #1 in their careers (Safin, Roddick, Hewitt, Agassi and Nadal), as well as two ATG's in Andre and Rafa. Of course the thread was made with the intention of denigrating Fed, in which case it seems the OP is too limited to realize nobody controls who he faces in a final. In any case, this identical thread has been posted here with regularity for years.
 
uscwang

uscwang

Hall of Fame
Lew II said:
Out of the first 24 finals/semis:

Federer played 3 against Nadal/Djokovic
Nadal played 11 against Federer/Djokovic
Djokovic played 18 against Federer/Nadal
Click to expand...

He single-handedly (must be FH) put an end to the so-called Fedal duopoly.

And he did it again in 2018 in the greatest comeback in the history of this sport.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ultra2HolyGrail
I'm convinced Federer tanked 2010!!
Replies
46
Views
4K
ksbh
ksbh
L
Just amazing how many Roger has been in
Replies
23
Views
2K
defrule
D
Razer
In a Bizarro world without the Big 3, Sir Andy Murray would probably have more Grand Slams than Pete Sampras
2
Replies
58
Views
2K
DSH
DSH
F
If these gs finalists played in Sampras-Agassi Era
Replies
7
Views
1K
Mainad
Mainad
Meles
Ranking Wimby QFs during the Weak Era
Replies
0
Views
197
Meles
Meles
Top