Bruce McAvaney on who is the best out of the Big 3

jl809

Hall of Fame
Nice headcanon. Back in the real world:
AO: Novak v Fed: 4 (1 against injured Fed)>1(against 19 year old Nole) Novak
RG: Novak v Fed: 1=1 Equal
Wimbledon: Novak v Fed: 3>1 Novak
USO: Novak v Fed 3=3 (1 against 20 year old 1st time slam finalist Novak) Equal

Novak>
Fed

Simple
Ofc it’s hypothetical lol, the original post is about their peaks, not about beating some 19 or 37 year old versions of each other, and their peaks didn’t overlap IRL
Just quoting real world stats like Nadal is 2-1 vs Djokovic at the US Open doesn’t really make for much of a debate lol, we don’t need threads for that
 

fedfan24

Hall of Fame
people still claiming djokovic is better than fed on grass because he beat the 33+ year old guy 3 times saving match points?

Can only assume they started watching tennis in 2014. Not even 2011, they would’ve seen 2012 late prime fed smoke peak djokovic there with his old racket and playstyle
 

Holmes

Hall of Fame
Ofc it’s hypothetical lol, the original post is about their peaks, not about beating some 19 or 37 year old versions of each other, and their peaks didn’t overlap IRL
Just quoting real world stats like Nadal is 2-1 vs Djokovic at the US Open doesn’t really make for much of a debate lol, we don’t need threads for that
The problem with this is Roger stated he played his best ever in 2 of the years Novak beat him in a Wimbledon final, and defended the notion he was playing some of his best ever tennis in his 30s when in 2020 he had a really hard time putting his 2006 form over his 2017 form.
 

reaper

Legend
Bruce is a fantastic sports broadcaster but has a very limited knowledge of tennis. He did produce one great line when commentating a Sharapova match. "If you didn't know there was a tennis match going on you'd swear she was having the time of her life."
 

WeekendTennisHack

Hall of Fame
Eh, you are a special one, cherry picking one of thousand matches and taking stuff out of context.

You could be a good politican.

With your stupid logic, Fed lost to 0 slam Juan Martin Del Potro after winning 5 USOs in a row. He also lost to bunch of nobodies, eg. Sergiy Stakhovsky on Wimbledon.

But good for you though, go pick another of 200 and more matches Novak lost, out of 1200 and more matches Novak played, for your grand argument.

Istomin says hello. Fed lost to Stack past his prime, Djokovic was peak losing to Istomin. What nobody did peak Fed lose to in a slam? Safin? LOL. So we have Safin vs Istomin. Nice.
 

Razer

Legend
RankCountryNameATP PointsDate
1
rs.png
SRB
Novak Djokovic
active.png
1695006-06-2016
2
ch.png
SUI
Roger Federer1590320-11-2006
3
es.png
ESP
Rafael Nadal
active.png
1539020-04-2009


Federer (20/11/05-20/11/06) vs Nadal (20/04/08-20/04/09) vs Djokovic (06/06/15-06/06/16) vs Djokovic (2011AO-2012AO)

Federer 15903 - 12 Finals won, 4 lost, held 3 slams together - 94.85% won - 19 top 10 wins - Overall 55.55% points won (vs top 10 opponents 53.63%) - GW% = 61.5
Nadal 15390 - 12 finals won, 1 lost, held 3 slams together - 92.08% won - 23 top 10 wins - Overall 55.43% points won (vs top 10 opponents 52.32%) - GW% = 62.39
Djokovic 16950- 12 finals won, 3 lost, held all 4 slams together - 93.41% won - 31 top 10 wins - Overall 55.85% points won (vs top 10 opponents 54.7%) - GW% = 62.21%
Djokovic 2011/12 - 11 finals won, 1 lost, held 3 slams together - 92.77% won - 24 top 10 wins - Overall 56% points won (vs top 10 opponents 53%) - GW% = 63.27%

Which of these do you like best ? @Holmes / @NoleFam / @BorgTheGOAT
 

SonnyT

Legend
Fedfans, Connors and Mac were considered bitter enemies, and separated by 7 years.

Djokovic/Nadal are separated from Alcaraz by 16/17 years.

And Federer was only considered old and ancient by Fedfans when facing Djokovic! He wasn't when facing Nadal or anyone else!
 
Top