Cumulative stats - Djokovic [1] vs. Federer [2] - WIM 2019 F

[falstaff78]

Hello,

This post is very special for me. After years of trying, I have finally procured a Wimbledon final ticket. After Sunday I can die in peace having seen Federer play a Wimbledon final. Even if he loses.

Below are cumulative stats from R3 to SF, for Federer, Djokovic, & Federer-2017. I usually do all 6 matches, but the last 4 matches tell a very interesting story. And R1 & R2 matches vs. outsiders add little insight for a final anyway. For those who are interested, I'll post the complete stats below.

The main findings are:

1. Federer has put up near identical numbers to Djokovic
2. Federer's opposition has been substantially stronger
3. Once you correct for opposition, Federer has been noticeably better

• Opposition. Unambiguously stronger for Federer. Average rank 13 vs. 39, average grass ELO 22 vs. 70. Played 3 top 20 players vs. 0

• Points, games, sets. Identical in points (56.1% each) and sets (12-2 each). However Djokovic with a lead in games (66% vs. 60%). This stems from a lead in return games (34% vs. 25% - see more below).

• Serve. Federer won more service points (73% vs. 70%), driven by stronger second serve (won 61% vs. 55%). However, Djokovic was broken less (2 vs. 4). This is because of break point clutchness. Djokovic saved 86% of BP, and won 70% of other service points. i.e. +16 points of clutchness. vs. Federer's clutchness of +6 points. Compared to the field, Federer was +7 percentage points better, vs. +5 points for Djokovic.

• Return. Nominally Djokovic was better on return. Won more points (42% vs. 41%). Further, was more clutch (+6 points vs. -1 points), which meant he broke far more often (34% vs. 25%). But Federer's opponents were better servers than Djokovic's opponents (winning 68% of points, vs. 66%). Compared to the field, both Federer and Djokovic were +9 points. This is a shockingly strong outcome for Federer - it means his return has been as good as Djokovic from R3 through the SFs!

• Outperformance vs. the Field. When you add up serve and return, Federer was +17 points better than the field. And Djokovic was +14 points better. Over the years I have found that +3 points indicates a non-ignorable difference in level.

• Aggression. Interestingly enough, Djokovic came to the net more often than Federer (17% vs. 15%) with more success (77% vs. 75%). (Although Federer did play Nadal.) In terms of winner / UE differential, Federer is way better than Djokovic (+91 vs. +37) on a very similiar number of points played (814 vs. 798).

• Fatigue. Across all 6 matches, Federer has been on court for less long (12 v. 13 hours), played basically the same number of points (1,150 vs. 1,123), and run less (12 km vs. 13 km) as well as less per point (11 meters / point vs. 14 meters / point)

Thus, for the 3rd time in a row, I'm calling a Federer-Djokovic Wimbledon final in favour of Federer! (And we all know how the last two turned out).

@Sysyphus @Red Rick @Meles
@Gary Duane

 

[falstaff78]

Cumulative stats from all 6 matches.

 

[Silence]

Hello,

This post is very special for me. After years of trying, I have finally procured a Wimbledon final ticket. After Sunday I can die in peace having seen Federer play a Wimbledon final. Even if he loses.

Below are cumulative stats from R3 to SF, for Federer, Djokovic, & Federer-2017. I usually do all 6 matches, but the last 4 matches tell a very interesting story. And R1 & R2 matches vs. outsiders add little insight for a final anyway. For those who are interested, I'll post the complete stats below.

The main findings are:

1. Federer has put up near identical numbers to Djokovic
2. Federer's opposition has been substantially stronger
3. Once you correct for opposition, Federer has been noticeably better

• Opposition. Unambiguously stronger for Federer. Average rank 13 vs. 39, average grass ELO 22 vs. 70. Played 3 top 20 players vs. 0

• Points, games, sets. Identical in points (56.1% each) and sets (12-2 each). However Djokovic with a lead in games (66% vs. 60%). This stems from a lead in return games (34% vs. 25% - see more below).

• Serve. Federer won more service points (73% vs. 70%), driven by stronger second serve (won 61% vs. 55%). However, Djokovic was broken less (2 vs. 4). This is because of break point clutchness. Djokovic saved 86% of BP, and won 70% of other service points. i.e. +16 points of clutchness. vs. Federer's clutchness of +6 points. Compared to the field, Federer was +7 percentage points better, vs. +5 points for Djokovic.

• Return. Nominally Djokovic was better on return. Won more points (42% vs. 41%). Further, was more clutch (+6 points vs. -1 points), which meant he broke far more often (34% vs. 25%). But Federer's opponents were better servers than Djokovic's opponents (winning 68% of points, vs. 66%). Compared to the field, both Federer and Djokovic were +9 points. This is a shockingly strong outcome for Federer - it means his return has been as good as Djokovic from R3 through the SFs!

• Outperformance vs. the Field. When you add up serve and return, Federer was +17 points better than the field. And Djokovic was +14 points better. Over the years I have found that +3 points indicates a non-ignorable difference in level.

• Aggression. Interestingly enough, Djokovic came to the net more often than Federer (17% vs. 15%) with more success (77% vs. 75%). (Although Federer did play Nadal.) In terms of winner / UE differential, Federer is way better than Djokovic (+91 vs. +37) on a very similiar number of points played (814 vs. 798).

• Fatigue. Across all 6 matches, Federer has been on court for less long (12 v. 13 hours), played basically the same number of points (1,150 vs. 1,123), and run less (12 km vs. 13 km) as well as less per point (11 meters / point vs. 14 meters / point)

Thus, for the 3rd time in a row, I'm calling a Federer-Djokovic Wimbledon final in favour of Federer! (And we all know how the last two turned out).

@Sysyphus @Red Rick @Meles

I love you doing this, thanks again. And so happy for you going to the finals, I’ll be rooting extra for Fed just because of that!

Just one more demon to exorcise eh?

 

[GabeT]

Very cool you got tickets. How did that happen?

Also, if you remember, how do 2019’s cumulative stats compare to 2015 and 2014? you expected Fed to win those matches. Was his stat advantage over Novak similar to today’s?

 

[falstaff78]

here's an interesting comparison.....R1-R3 and R4-SF...wow Federer has really turned it on in the last 3 games....

Comparison of R4-SF

Comparison of R1-R3

 

[falstaff78]

Very cool you got tickets. How did that happen?

Also, if you remember, how do 2019’s cumulative stats compare to 2015 and 2014? you expected Fed to win those matches. Was his stat advantage over Novak similar to today’s?

to be honest I hadn't started looking at stats so robustly back then. those were more on gut feel. this year there has been a clear trend that Djokovic was stronger in the first 3 rounds, but Federer has been stronger in the last 3 rounds.

besides, what the hell do I know? If I were such a hot shot I would be rolling in dough on the betting markets!

also, tickets from ticketmaster. return ticket resale. got lucky

 

[icedevil0289]

Third time is the charm? Congrats OP on getting a ticket and may you bring luck to fed

 

[tudwell]

Fed seems to be doing better on regular points but less good on break points (both for and against). Not sure that bodes well for the final. He’ll have to be much better than Djokovic overall to make up for this clutchness disparity, or else bring his clutchness numbers up (or Djokovic’s down). On the other hand, Djokovic saving break points 16% more often than regular serve points doesn’t seem sustainable. Maybe he’s due for a correction.

I’m also curious how significant some of these stats are. Fed dominated round 4, but that was more due to his opponent playing so badly, in my opinion. Conversely, he basically tanked the second set against Nadal, which throws his numbers off the other direction. I think ultimately it’s just a small sample size and unless the numbers are wildly different, it’s hard to draw a solid conclusion.

 

[Tenez!]

Hello,

This post is very special for me.

• Opposition. Unambiguously stronger for Federer. Average rank 13 vs. 39, average grass ELO 22 vs. 70. Played 3 top 20 players vs. 0

@Sysyphus @Red Rick @Meles

Good work on the numbers, but you should really use the median instead of the average to cancel out outliers in early rounds.

Example:
Opponent ranks of 679, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 Average 100 / Median 4
Opponent rank of 60, 50, 40, 30, 20, 2, 1 Average 29 / Median 30

The average deceives us into thinking that the first run is easier, but the median shows the real picture.

 

[upchuck]

What skews the numbers is the fact that Djokovic is quite content to be well below his best in the first three or so rounds of tournaments like this, just as he was at the Australian Open this year, raising his level beginning with Medvedev. He doesn't start playing well until the fourth round, it seems. Cumulative stats of the fourth round, quarter-final and semi-final might give a better representation of where Djokovic particularly is going into the final.

 

[Gazelle]

Thx for the stats OP but I remember from Wimbledon 2015 that these stats mean little. It's the match-up that counts and Djok's return will probably be too much for Federer unfortunately.

 

[Tshooter]

Enjoy the match.

 

[xFedal]

I expect Federer to serve huge on Sunday.

 

[Robert Baratheon]

I am really happy for the OP.
If I had a chance to watch Djokovic and Fed, my two favourite players in a Wimbledon final I would probably die out of the excitement.
Make the most of it.
In which row are you sitting and on what side of the court?

 

[Gary Duane]

• Points, games, sets. Identical in points (56.1% each) and sets (12-2 each). However Djokovic with a lead in games (66% vs. 60%). This stems from a lead in return games (34% vs. 25% - see more below).

I don't have this data, and I don't know where you found it. But this, if true, is REALLY bizarre. The ATP will post points after W is over, but what you are saying is that with 56% of points Novak is at 66% of games and Fed is at 60%. Let's keep those round numbers.

This means that Novak, if this is correct, has a ratio of 2.67:

(66-50)/(56-50)

While Fed is (60-50)/(56-50) or 1.67.

The common ratio on grass is something like 1.9. So this data is just weird. Are you sure you have the right numbers?

I don't have points. But I have games, and I can tell you it is about 61% of games for Fed and Rafa for all of W, about 66% for Novak.

Unlike others I just assume it "is what it is" and take the numbers. I don't worry about ranking or seeding or other ratings, just assume the "luck of the draw" evens out over a career and assume anyone who is mowing down opponents is at a high level.

So this, together with the fact that Novak has been in Fed's head for years, makes me think he will win again on Sunday, and maybe in straights.

I will be very happy to be wrong!

 

[Robert Baratheon]

I don't have this data, and I don't know where you found it. But this, if true, is REALLY bizarre. The ATP will post points after W is over, but what you are saying is that with 56% of points Novak is at 66% of games and Fed is at 60%. Let's keep those round numbers.

This means that Novak, if this is correct, has a ratio of 2.67:

(66-50)/(56-50)

While Fed is (60-50)/(56-50) or 1.67.

The common ratio on grass is something like 1.9. So this data is just weird. Are you sure you have the right numbers?

I don't have points. But I have games, and I can tell you it is about 61% of games for Fed and Rafa for all of W, about 66% for Novak.

Unlike others I just assume it "is what it is" and take the numbers. I don't worry about ranking or seeding or other ratings, just assume the "luck of the draw" evens out over a career and assume anyone who is mowing down opponents is at a high level.

So this, together with the fact that Novak has been in Fed's head for years, makes me think he will win again on Sunday, and maybe in straights.

I will be very happy to be wrong!

If yesterday's match is anything to go by I think Roger can prove to be a challenge for Novak.
His returning yesterday was very good.
I don't have the stats. I am talking about the nature of his returns. It was almost Djoker-like. They landed at Rafa's toes a lot of time and took time away from him.
Also can you tell me where to get stats for yesterday's matches?

 

[Gary Duane]

If yesterday's match is anything to go by I think Roger can prove to be a challenge for Novak.
His returning yesterday was very good.
I don't have the stats. I am talking about the nature of his returns. It was almost Djoker-like. They landed at Rafa's toes a lot of time and took time away from him.
Also can you tell me where to get stats for yesterday's matches?

Other people can tell you where to get all the details. They exist. I just always forget where because I'm looking at different things.

Fed's main problem against Joker is belief. He needs Novak to drop his level a bit to have a chance, because these days, with 6 years age advantage, Novak has a slight edge, and a slight edge between two ATGs is huge.

Two things will be key. He needs to return great, and he needs to have a good BP%. Novak has been almost breaking at will. That needs to change.

 

[Robert Baratheon]

Passing shots is where Novak will be putting in his work today.
Roger will come to the net obviously and if Novak's forehand is passive like it has been at times this year then Roger will be a real threat at the net.
Roger should play the Djokovic forehand instead of the Backhand.
And Novak should practice his forehand and keep it ready at it's penetrating best.

 

[helterskelter]

@falstaff78 I hope you have a great time on Sunday. I went to the final in 1995.

By the way, I thought Hurkacz and Bautista Agut both played pretty well v Djokovic. I agree that they also showed him to be vulnerable.

 

[Rosstour]

The post was great enough, then I get to the signature and find one of the best lines from a classic movie...Can I like twice?

 

[Robert Baratheon]

@falstaff78 I hope you have a great time on Sunday. I went to the final in 1995.

By the way, I thought Hurkacz and Bautista Agut both played pretty well v Djokovic. I agree that they also showed him to be vulnerable.

What vulnerabilities do you think Novak has this tournament? And what are the ones that Roger can exploit?

 

[Robert Baratheon]

@falstaff78 can you tell me where to find stats for yesterday's match?

 

[falstaff78]

What skews the numbers is the fact that Djokovic is quite content to be well below his best in the first three or so rounds of tournaments like this, just as he was at the Australian Open this year, raising his level beginning with Medvedev. He doesn't start playing well until the fourth round, it seems. Cumulative stats of the fourth round, quarter-final and semi-final might give a better representation of where Djokovic particularly is going into the final.

Pls see post #5

 

[falstaff78]

I am really happy for the OP.
If I had a chance to watch Djokovic and Fed, my two favourite players in a Wimbledon final I would probably die out of the excitement.
Make the most of it.
In which row are you sitting and on what side of the court?

I bought returns from Wimbledon. So I don't find out where I'm sitting until I see the tickets on Sunday!

 

[falstaff78]

@falstaff78 can you tell me where to find stats for yesterday's match?

Google "flashscores Federer" - go to his page and you'll see nice stats for the semi

 

[Robert Baratheon]

Google "flashscores Federer" - go to his page and you'll see nice stats for the semi

Thanks mate.

 

[Breakpointerer]

Congrats OP on getting tickets to the final!! Must be unreal to watch a wimbledon final from the stands, hope you have a great time.

 

[gameovais]

I expect Federer to serve huge on Sunday.

Most people expect Djokovic to return just as well.

 

[FatFedererFanTurnsSlim]

Hello,

This post is very special for me. After years of trying, I have finally procured a Wimbledon final ticket. After Sunday I can die in peace having seen Federer play a Wimbledon final. Even if he loses.

Below are cumulative stats from R3 to SF, for Federer, Djokovic, & Federer-2017. I usually do all 6 matches, but the last 4 matches tell a very interesting story. And R1 & R2 matches vs. outsiders add little insight for a final anyway. For those who are interested, I'll post the complete stats below.

The main findings are:

1. Federer has put up near identical numbers to Djokovic
2. Federer's opposition has been substantially stronger
3. Once you correct for opposition, Federer has been noticeably better

• Opposition. Unambiguously stronger for Federer. Average rank 13 vs. 39, average grass ELO 22 vs. 70. Played 3 top 20 players vs. 0

• Points, games, sets. Identical in points (56.1% each) and sets (12-2 each). However Djokovic with a lead in games (66% vs. 60%). This stems from a lead in return games (34% vs. 25% - see more below).

• Serve. Federer won more service points (73% vs. 70%), driven by stronger second serve (won 61% vs. 55%). However, Djokovic was broken less (2 vs. 4). This is because of break point clutchness. Djokovic saved 86% of BP, and won 70% of other service points. i.e. +16 points of clutchness. vs. Federer's clutchness of +6 points. Compared to the field, Federer was +7 percentage points better, vs. +5 points for Djokovic.

• Return. Nominally Djokovic was better on return. Won more points (42% vs. 41%). Further, was more clutch (+6 points vs. -1 points), which meant he broke far more often (34% vs. 25%). But Federer's opponents were better servers than Djokovic's opponents (winning 68% of points, vs. 66%). Compared to the field, both Federer and Djokovic were +9 points. This is a shockingly strong outcome for Federer - it means his return has been as good as Djokovic from R3 through the SFs!

• Outperformance vs. the Field. When you add up serve and return, Federer was +17 points better than the field. And Djokovic was +14 points better. Over the years I have found that +3 points indicates a non-ignorable difference in level.

• Aggression. Interestingly enough, Djokovic came to the net more often than Federer (17% vs. 15%) with more success (77% vs. 75%). (Although Federer did play Nadal.) In terms of winner / UE differential, Federer is way better than Djokovic (+91 vs. +37) on a very similiar number of points played (814 vs. 798).

• Fatigue. Across all 6 matches, Federer has been on court for less long (12 v. 13 hours), played basically the same number of points (1,150 vs. 1,123), and run less (12 km vs. 13 km) as well as less per point (11 meters / point vs. 14 meters / point)

Thus, for the 3rd time in a row, I'm calling a Federer-Djokovic Wimbledon final in favour of Federer! (And we all know how the last two turned out).

@Sysyphus @Red Rick @Meles
@Gary Duane

Congratulations man! You are one lucky person! I don't think I'll ever experience Feddy in WIM match let alone a final. Hope you are a good luck charm for the Old man!

 

[Tennisgods]

Thanks for the stats Falstaff. And great news about your ticket, enjoy the match, hope it’s a good one!

 

[GabeT]

I don't have this data, and I don't know where you found it. But this, if true, is REALLY bizarre. The ATP will post points after W is over, but what you are saying is that with 56% of points Novak is at 66% of games and Fed is at 60%. Let's keep those round numbers.

This means that Novak, if this is correct, has a ratio of 2.67:

(66-50)/(56-50)

While Fed is (60-50)/(56-50) or 1.67.

The common ratio on grass is something like 1.9. So this data is just weird. Are you sure you have the right numbers?

I don't have points. But I have games, and I can tell you it is about 61% of games for Fed and Rafa for all of W, about 66% for Novak.

Unlike others I just assume it "is what it is" and take the numbers. I don't worry about ranking or seeding or other ratings, just assume the "luck of the draw" evens out over a career and assume anyone who is mowing down opponents is at a high level.

So this, together with the fact that Novak has been in Fed's head for years, makes me think he will win again on Sunday, and maybe in straights.

I will be very happy to be wrong!

Do you think there is any predictive value in return or service points won % that is not captured in return or service games won %?

When I look at overall stats I see that Nole won slightly more return points than Fed in the first 6 games (44% vs 42%). But Nole won much more return games, which is the real goal (38% vs 28%). That seems to tell me that Nole is winning much more of the key points.

In service games there is a somewhat similar story. There Fed has won more service games and points but his efficiency is lower. He won 4 pp more service points than Nole but only 2 pp more service games.

it seems Novak is the better returner and Fed the better server but Novak’s return is better than Fed’s serving so far.

 

[upchuck]

Pls see post #5

Thanks. In that post you said Federer has really turned it up in the last 3 rounds. Looking at the numbers, you must've meant Djokovic, no?

 

[Soul_Evisceration]

Do you think there is any predictive value in return or service points won % that is not captured in return or service games won %?

When I look at overall stats I see that Nole won slightly more return points than Fed in the first 6 games (44% vs 42%). But Nole won much more return games, which is the real goal (38% vs 28%). That seems to tell me that Nole is winning much more of the key points.

In service games there is a somewhat similar story. There Fed has won more service games and points but his efficiency is lower. He won 4 pp more service points than Nole but only 2 pp more service games.

it seems Novak is the better returner and Fed the better server but Novak’s return is better than Fed’s serving so far.

And that will be the biggest determinating factor IMO.

If Federer serves at 70% or more and Djokovic can win less than 38% of Return of Serves whether they're first or second serves, Federer will win but not easily.

If the serve% is lower for Federer and Return of Serve is higher for Djokovic, Djokovic will win and it will not be a pretty sight.

All the data points to a Djokovic victory unless things go unexpected for him.

 

[GabeT]

And that will be the biggest determinating factor IMO.

If Federer serves at 70% or more and Djokovic can win less than 38% of Return of Serves whether they're first or second serves, Federer will win but not easily.

If the serve% is lower for Federer and Return of Serve is higher for Djokovic, Djokovic will win and it will not be a pretty sight.

All the data points to a Djokovic victory unless things go unexpected for him.

Nole’s 38% of return games wons is very high for Wimbledon. It’s higher than Fed’s 2006 run. Maybe it’s a result of the surface or balls but the point is that so far Nole has been returning better than any other Wimbledon he’s won. hard to beat him if he keeps that up.

 

[moonballs]

@falstaff78 congratulations! It should be an enjoyment of a lifetime for a tennis fan. I almost skipped this thread knowing stats against the field often don’t tell story of the ATG match’s as they always bring something extra to the table when playing each other.

 

[Gary Duane]

Do you think there is any predictive value in return or service points won % that is not captured in return or service games won %?

When I look at overall stats I see that Nole won slightly more return points than Fed in the first 6 games (44% vs 42%). But Nole won much more return games, which is the real goal (38% vs 28%). That seems to tell me that Nole is winning much more of the key points.

As I said, this is very bizarre. There is a link between points and games, and normally it is pretty predictable. But from what I've been told here Fed is very low, and Novak is very high. This is not normal, and it doesn't stay this way over a long period. Grass is unpredictable because there are so few matches. If Novak wins, he's win with a total of 7 matches.

With 44% of points, around 35% of games is about right. Novak is very high right now.

For 42% of points 32% is typical. 28% if very low.

I would only look at games at the moment. They tell the real story. So if points are that off both ways, it means that Novak has been clutch at things like BPs, and Fed has been poor. Fed and Novak are virtually the same for career return on grass, with Novak slightly higher on both return points and return games.

So Novak is currently zoned on return. But remember, that could change at any moment.

In service games there is a somewhat similar story. There Fed has won more service games and points but his efficiency is lower. He won 4 pp more service points than Nole but only 2 pp more service games.

it seems Novak is the better returner and Fed the better server but Novak’s return is better than Fed’s serving so far.

The same principle would apply. If two guys have the same% of points but one is clearly winning more games, it will come down to BPs but also long games. For instance, Fed's points against Nadal would be a bit weird because he was into so many return games but go so few BPs and then horribly at converting them. I think he was 2/10. Again, that can flip at any moment. It doesn't stay that way over a long period.

 

[Russeljones]

@falstaff78 stellar work once again. Enjoy the match!

 

[Meles]

Hello,

This post is very special for me. After years of trying, I have finally procured a Wimbledon final ticket. After Sunday I can die in peace having seen Federer play a Wimbledon final. Even if he loses.

Below are cumulative stats from R3 to SF, for Federer, Djokovic, & Federer-2017. I usually do all 6 matches, but the last 4 matches tell a very interesting story. And R1 & R2 matches vs. outsiders add little insight for a final anyway. For those who are interested, I'll post the complete stats below.

The main findings are:

1. Federer has put up near identical numbers to Djokovic
2. Federer's opposition has been substantially stronger
3. Once you correct for opposition, Federer has been noticeably better

• Opposition. Unambiguously stronger for Federer. Average rank 13 vs. 39, average grass ELO 22 vs. 70. Played 3 top 20 players vs. 0

• Points, games, sets. Identical in points (56.1% each) and sets (12-2 each). However Djokovic with a lead in games (66% vs. 60%). This stems from a lead in return games (34% vs. 25% - see more below).

• Serve. Federer won more service points (73% vs. 70%), driven by stronger second serve (won 61% vs. 55%). However, Djokovic was broken less (2 vs. 4). This is because of break point clutchness. Djokovic saved 86% of BP, and won 70% of other service points. i.e. +16 points of clutchness. vs. Federer's clutchness of +6 points. Compared to the field, Federer was +7 percentage points better, vs. +5 points for Djokovic.

• Return. Nominally Djokovic was better on return. Won more points (42% vs. 41%). Further, was more clutch (+6 points vs. -1 points), which meant he broke far more often (34% vs. 25%). But Federer's opponents were better servers than Djokovic's opponents (winning 68% of points, vs. 66%). Compared to the field, both Federer and Djokovic were +9 points. This is a shockingly strong outcome for Federer - it means his return has been as good as Djokovic from R3 through the SFs!

• Outperformance vs. the Field. When you add up serve and return, Federer was +17 points better than the field. And Djokovic was +14 points better. Over the years I have found that +3 points indicates a non-ignorable difference in level.

• Aggression. Interestingly enough, Djokovic came to the net more often than Federer (17% vs. 15%) with more success (77% vs. 75%). (Although Federer did play Nadal.) In terms of winner / UE differential, Federer is way better than Djokovic (+91 vs. +37) on a very similiar number of points played (814 vs. 798).

• Fatigue. Across all 6 matches, Federer has been on court for less long (12 v. 13 hours), played basically the same number of points (1,150 vs. 1,123), and run less (12 km vs. 13 km) as well as less per point (11 meters / point vs. 14 meters / point)

Thus, for the 3rd time in a row, I'm calling a Federer-Djokovic Wimbledon final in favour of Federer! (And we all know how the last two turned out).

@Sysyphus @Red Rick @Meles
@Gary Duane

For me it just confirms the possibility that Federer would find his excellent Miami form on grass. The way he dealt with a resurgent Nadal in the SF was amazing and probably his best tennis at Wimbledon maybe even since his peak period of 2004-2007. Betterer than 2009 to my eyes.

With Djoko this is not the old Fed from 2014/2015. That was a formidable version, but Djoko 2.0 has not felt the new might of backhanderer. If Fed can hit the backhand like against Nadal (and his forehand amazing as well), this match is very much on even terms.

Djoko has his best first serve game and quite excellent form going for him so this will be a match for the ages. This could be one of the greatest moments in tennis where Federe undeniably lays claim to permanent goat status by beating the other two Big 3 for the first time at a major all at the ripe old age of nearly 38. Nadal has been exposed as a fraudulent Wimbledon champion. A loss for Nole puts him squarely behind Fed on grass, but a win has him at 5 in counting. You are blessed to have a ticket to the peak TTW GOAT match of all time. Great job on the stats as always, perhaps you should apply for the job at Wimbledumb.
https://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/scores/extrastats/index.html (They have Federe the better returner with 136 points won on 2nd return to 133 for Nole for the event.)

 

[GabeT]

@falstaff78 can you scream in the middle of a point “TTW loves you guys!”

 

[zvelf]

Congrats on the final tickets, OP. Interesting stats, but 4 matches is a very small sample size. If one is going to look at 4 matches that are probably more indicative, those should probably be the last 4 major matches between the two over the last 7 years, and all of those were won by Djokovic.