Detailed comparison of Federer vs Djokovic at slams in their 30s - win %s, opponents faced, averages per slam etc

[jl809]

By the end of this year Djoker will have turned 36.5. So thought I'd see how he tracks vs Federer up to the same age for Federer (August 2011 - Spring 2018)

TL;DR

• Djokovic massively >>> Fed at the FO. Huge gap between them all things considered
• Fed lost to clearly better players, and probably beat better players, at Wimbledon than the equivalent for Djoker
• Neither guy beat anyone properly decent at the USO tbh
• Fed's hardest competition at the USO (peak Djokovic) was tougher than anyone Djoker has faced. But he had some bum losses too ofc
• Fed's hardest competition at the AO (Lendlray, prime Nadal, peak Djoker) was tougher than anyone Djoker has faced... but Djoker has been almost invincible at the AO in his 30s

Federer aged 30-36.5 in slams

• 85.2% win / loss ratio
• 128 matches played, 109 won

Slam by slam:

• Australian Open:
  • 87.5% W/L, 40 matches, 35 won
    • Losses to Nadal (2012), Murray (2013), Nadal (2014), Seppi (2015) and Djokovic (2016)
    • Best opponents beaten: Tsonga (2013), Murray (2014), Wawrinka (2017), Nadal (2017), Cilic (2018)
• French Open:
  • 80.0% W/L, 20 matches, 16 won
    • Losses to Djokovic (2012), Tsonga (2013), Gulbis (2014) and Wawrinka (2015)
    • Best opponents beaten: err..... Del Potro (2012)
• Wimbledon:
  • 88.9% W/L, 36 matches, 32 won
    • Losses to Stakhovsky (2013), Djokovic (2014), Djokovic (2015), Raonic (2016)
    • Best opponents beaten: Djokovic (2012), Murray (2012), Murray (2015) (Cilic (2016)??)
• US Open:
  • 81.3% W/L, 32 matches, 26 won
    • losses to Djokovic (2011), Berdych (2012), Robredo (2013), Cilic (2014), Djokovic (2015), Del Potro (2017)
    • Best opponents beaten: Tsonga (2011), Wawrinka (2015)

Djokovic aged 30-36.5 in slams

• 92.3% win / loss ratio
• 143 matches played, 132 won

Slam by slam:

• Australian Open:
  • 96.9% W/L, 32 matches, 31 won
    • losses to Chung (2018)
    • best opponents beaten: Nadal (2019), Thiem (2020), Medvedev (2021)
• French Open:
  • 88.1% W/L, 42 matches, 37 won
    • losses to Thiem (2017), Cecchinato (2018), Thiem (2019), Nadal (2020), Nadal (2022)
    • Best opponents beaten: Nadal (2021), Alcaraz (2023)
• Wimbledon:
  • 95.0% W/L, 40 matches, 38 won
    • losses to Berdych (2017), Alcaraz (2023)
    • best opponents beaten: Nadal (2018), Federer (2019)
• US Open:
  • 89.7% W/L, 29 matches, 26 won
    • losses to Wawrinka (2019), Busta (2020), Medvedev (2021)
    • Best opponents beaten: Del Potro (2018), Medvedev (2023)

 

[Federev]

FEDR

 

[Djokovic_is_the_best#1]

Djokovic longevity is incredible!

 

[daggerman]

Thinking Medvedev doesn't meet the threshold of "proper decency" at the 2023 US Open is a pretty big misread, imo. He beat Alcaraz the round before; of course he was in great form. That he lost the final rather soundly is more a reflection of the quality of his opponent than his being worse-than-decent.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Thinking Medvedev doesn't meet the threshold of "proper decency" at the 2023 US Open is a pretty big misread, imo. He beat Alcaraz the round before; of course he was in great form. That he lost the final rather soundly is more a reflection of the quality of his opponent than his being worse-than-decent.

Medvedev has won USO before and was in fifth set final vs Nadal in 2 grand slam finals. He can't be that bad.

 

[jl809]

Nadal aged 30-36.5 in slams

• 90.4% win / loss ratio
• 125 matches played, 113 won

Slam by slam:

• Australian Open:
  • 86.1% W/L, 36 matches, 31 won
    • losses to Cilic (2018), Djokovic (2019), Thiem (2020), Tsitsipas (2021)
    • best opponents beaten: Medvedev (2022)... err.. I guess maybe Dimitrov (2017)...
      
• French Open:
  • 97.6% W/L, 41 matches, 40 won
    • losses to Djokovic (2021)
    • Best opponents beaten: Wawrinka (2017), Federer (2019), Thiem (2019), Djokovic (2020), Djokovic (2022)
      
• Wimbledon:
  • 85.7% W/L, 21 matches, 18 won
    • losses to Muller (2017), Djokovic (2018), Federer (2019)
    • best opponents beaten: Del Potro (2018)
      
• US Open:
  • 88.9% W/L, 27 matches, 24 won
    • losses to Pouille (2016), Del Potro (2018), Tiafoe (2022)
    • Best opponents beaten: Medvedev (2019)

 

[RS]

Considering Nadal's body his is most impressive.

 

[jl809]

Thinking Medvedev doesn't meet the threshold of "proper decency" at the 2023 US Open is a pretty big misread, imo. He beat Alcaraz the round before; of course he was in great form. That he lost the final rather soundly is more a reflection of the quality of his opponent than his being worse-than-decent.

Hard disagree for me

 

[WeekendTennisHack]

Wow, Djokovic really took advantage of the weak era.

 

[daggerman]

Hard disagree for me

Fine, but I think the position that "anyone who beats Alcaraz two days prior must be playing at least decently" stands on much firmer ground than playing the dangerous game of trying to weight how much credit a player should get for making his opponent look worse than he is. We don't really have precise enough tools to say things like "Novak only gets, say, 20% of the credit for it; it was more that Medvedev just didn't play well." What we do have is the knowledge that Alcaraz is f*cking good and that Medvedev beat him in 4 sets, and that Djokovic is probably the best hard court player ever. Again, much firmer ground.

 

[helterskelter]

Hard disagree for me

Some important TTW principles at stake here, most notably ATG or bust. Medvedev is not an ATG, ergo he is a useless scrub and if you can't beat him with your eyes shut, you should retire from professional tennis and find any other career. Ideally, you'd go further and invent a Time Machine so that you can persuade your younger self not to waste time with such a failure of a tennis career.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Nadal aged 30-36.5 in slams

• 90.4% win / loss ratio
• 125 matches played, 113 won

Slam by slam:

• Australian Open:
  • 86.1% W/L, 36 matches, 31 won
    • losses to Cilic (2018), Djokovic (2019), Thiem (2020), Tsitsipas (2021)
    • best opponents beaten: Medvedev (2022)... err.. I guess maybe Dimitrov (2017)...
• French Open:
  • 97.6% W/L, 41 matches, 40 won
    • losses to Djokovic (2021)
    • Best opponents beaten: Wawrinka (2017), Federer (2019), Thiem (2019), Djokovic (2020), Djokovic (2022)
• Wimbledon:
  • 85.7% W/L, 21 matches, 18 won
    • losses to Muller (2017), Djokovic (2018), Federer (2019)
    • best opponents beaten: Del Potro (2018)
• US Open:
  • 88.9% W/L, 27 matches, 24 won
    • losses to Pouille (2016), Del Potro (2018), Tiafoe (2022)
    • Best opponents beaten: Medvedev (2019)

Epic af

 

[nolefam_2024]

Same Medvedev got beaten by Nadal in five sets twice but was straight setted by Nole.

In 2021, Nole was physically spent before reaching finals and Medvedev won the match. It was strange match.

 

[Matrix968]

Looks good, for all of them, great win percentages, BIG 3 for a multiple reasons...
If at least Novak and Rafa could give us couple more years of bloodbath, it'll be amazing

 

[helterskelter]

Fine, but I think the position that "anyone who beats Alcaraz two days prior must be playing at least decently" stands on much firmer ground than playing the dangerous game of trying to weight how much credit a player should get for making his opponent look worse than he is. We don't really have precise enough tools to say things like "Novak only gets, say, 20% of the credit for it; it was more that Medvedev just didn't play well." What we do have is the knowledge that Alcaraz is f*cking good and that Medvedev beat him in 4 sets, and that Djokovic is probably the best hard court player ever. Again, much firmer ground.

Hogwash. HOGWASH. You seem to be laboring under the dangerous misapprehension that tennis players compete for trophies, prize money, and perhaps love of the game. This is not true at all. All that they are doing - at least, all that is worthwhile - is attempting to beat ATGs and ideally younger ATGs. Medvedev is no ATG (ROTFLMAO!) and he's not even that young. Indeed, he's several years past his peak and prime. Beating him is absolutely not an achievement at all, let alone a significant one. Alcaraz losing to him was if anything even more embarrassing than when he cramped against an old man at Roland Garros, thus proving once and for all that he is, morally speaking, already retired.

 

[daggerman]

Hogwash. HOGWASH. You seem to be laboring under the dangerous misapprehension that tennis players compete for trophies, prize money, and perhaps love of the game. This is not true at all. All that they are doing - at least, all that is worthwhile - is attempting to beat ATGs and ideally younger ATGs. Medvedev is no ATG (ROTFLMAO!) and he's not even that young. Indeed, he's several years past his peak and prime. Beating him is absolutely not an achievement at all, let alone a significant one. Alcaraz losing to him was if anything even more embarrassing than when he cramped against an old man at Roland Garros, thus proving once and for all that he is, morally speaking, already retired.

What a delightfully subversive comment

 

[jl809]

Fine, but I think the position that "anyone who beats Alcaraz two days prior must be playing at least decently" stands on much firmer ground than playing the dangerous game of trying to weight how much credit a player should get for making his opponent look worse than he is. We don't really have precise enough tools to say things like "Novak only gets, say, 20% of the credit for it; it was more that Medvedev just didn't play well." What we do have is the knowledge that Alcaraz is f*cking good and that Medvedev beat him in 4 sets, and that Djokovic is probably the best hard court player ever. Again, much firmer ground.

Fair enough, I just think Djokovic had nothing to do with Medvedev making a disastrous start to the match, hitting his groundstrokes more slowly on the whole than against Alcaraz, and literally admitting after the match that he kinda lost belief and stuff in set 3.
And I think most people including Djokovic fans agree he did not reproduce his level from the SF across the final, I think even Djokovic fans were giving him a 6 or 7 out of 10 for his level in the final in that big TTW poll. He was not as good as in the 2021 final as well, although Djokovic was also much worse that day

Some important TTW principles at stake here, most notably ATG or bust. Medvedev is not an ATG, ergo he is a useless scrub and if you can't beat him with your eyes shut, you should retire from professional tennis and find any other career. Ideally, you'd go further and invent a Time Machine so that you can persuade your younger self not to waste time with such a failure of a tennis career.

 

[NatF]

Midvedev was medicore at best in the USO final lol. Irrespective of what Djokovic was doing, he didn't do the things he had control of very well.

 

[TheNachoMan]

Considering Nadal's body his is most impressive.

Considering Novak’s vaccine stance, his is is most impressive.

 

[jm1980]

Hard disagree for me

Hard disagree on the disagreement. Medvedev clearly came out with a different gameplay against Djokovic than he used against Alcaraz

He wanted to wear Djokovic down through attrition, and then pounce. It almost worked too. If not for some timely and well played S&V points from Djokovic, Med would have taken the second set, and then it would have been anyone's match

 

[NoleFam]

Thinking Medvedev doesn't meet the threshold of "proper decency" at the 2023 US Open is a pretty big misread, imo. He beat Alcaraz the round before; of course he was in great form. That he lost the final rather soundly is more a reflection of the quality of his opponent than his being worse-than-decent.

Fun fact: for all the talk of weak competition, everytime Djokovic won the USO he beat a former USO champ in the final.

 

[jl809]

I got the bots pressed again somehow smh

 

[nolefam_2024]

Fun fact: for all the talk of weak competition, everytime Djokovic won the USO he beat a former USO champ in the final.

First time Djokovic won Cincinnati, he beat 3 former Cincinnati champions.

 

[NoleFam]

First time Djokovic won Cincinnati, he beat 3 former Cincinnati champions.

Did he? Off the top of my head, Federer, Cilic and Dimitrov?

 

[3loudboys]

By the end of this year Djoker will have turned 36.5. So thought I'd see how he tracks vs Federer up to the same age for Federer (August 2011 - Spring 2018)

TL;DR

• Djokovic massively >>> Fed at the FO. Huge gap between them all things considered
• Fed lost to clearly better players, and probably beat better players, at Wimbledon than the equivalent for Djoker
• Neither guy beat anyone properly decent at the USO tbh
• Fed's hardest competition at the USO (peak Djokovic) was tougher than anyone Djoker has faced. But he had some bum losses too ofc
• Fed's hardest competition at the AO (Lendlray, prime Nadal, peak Djoker) was tougher than anyone Djoker has faced... but Djoker has been almost invincible at the AO in his 30s

Federer aged 30-36.5 in slams

• 85.2% win / loss ratio
• 128 matches played, 109 won

Slam by slam:

• Australian Open:
  • 87.5% W/L, 40 matches, 35 won
    • Losses to Nadal (2012), Murray (2013), Nadal (2014), Seppi (2015) and Djokovic (2016)
    • Best opponents beaten: Tsonga (2013), Murray (2014), Wawrinka (2017), Nadal (2017), Cilic (2018)
• French Open:
  • 80.0% W/L, 20 matches, 16 won
    • Losses to Djokovic (2012), Tsonga (2013), Gulbis (2014) and Wawrinka (2015)
    • Best opponents beaten: err..... Del Potro (2012)
• Wimbledon:
  • 88.9% W/L, 36 matches, 32 won
    • Losses to Stakhovsky (2013), Djokovic (2014), Djokovic (2015), Raonic (2016)
    • Best opponents beaten: Djokovic (2012), Murray (2012), Murray (2015) (Cilic (2016)??)
• US Open:
  • 81.3% W/L, 32 matches, 26 won
    • losses to Djokovic (2011), Berdych (2012), Robredo (2013), Cilic (2014), Djokovic (2015), Del Potro (2017)
    • Best opponents beaten: Tsonga (2011), Wawrinka (2015)

Djokovic aged 30-36.5 in slams

• 92.3% win / loss ratio
• 143 matches played, 132 won

Slam by slam:

• Australian Open:
  • 96.9% W/L, 32 matches, 31 won
    • losses to Chung (2018)
    • best opponents beaten: Nadal (2019), Thiem (2020), Medvedev (2021)
• French Open:
  • 88.1% W/L, 42 matches, 37 won
    • losses to Thiem (2017), Cecchinato (2018), Thiem (2019), Nadal (2020), Nadal (2022)
    • Best opponents beaten: Nadal (2021), Alcaraz (2023)
• Wimbledon:
  • 95.0% W/L, 40 matches, 38 won
    • losses to Berdych (2017), Alcaraz (2023)
    • best opponents beaten: Nadal (2018), Federer (2019)
• US Open:
  • 89.7% W/L, 29 matches, 26 won
    • losses to Wawrinka (2019), Busta (2020), Medvedev (2021)
    • Best opponents beaten: Del Potro (2018), Medvedev (2023)

Nice job

 

[Kralingen]

I don’t even rate Medvedev but the 2023 USO Medvedev final performance was the best Slam finalist performance Djokovic beat in the entire post-pandemic era (7 Slam wins). Depending on your view of that match, a pretty damning assessment.

 

[Breakpointerer]

I don’t even rate Medvedev but the 2023 USO Medvedev final performance was the best Slam finalist performance Djokovic beat in the entire post-pandemic era (7 Slam wins). Depending on your view of that match, a pretty damning assessment.

Surely Thiem at the AO was better?
Edit: Replied before seeing the edited post

 

[StrongRule]

I don’t even rate Medvedev but the 2023 USO Medvedev final performance was the best Slam finalist performance Djokovic beat in the entire post-pandemic era (7 Slam wins). Depending on your view of that match, a pretty damning assessment.

If so, this tells us everything we need to know about this era.

 

[NatF]

I don’t even rate Medvedev but the 2023 USO Medvedev final performance was the best Slam finalist performance Djokovic beat in the entire post-pandemic era (7 Slam wins). Depending on your view of that match, a pretty damning assessment.

Wouldn't go that far, most are shades of mediocre but Tsits 2021 FO and Kyrgios 2022 Wim were better.

 

[Kralingen]

Wouldn't go that far, most are shades of mediocre but Tsits 2021 FO and Kyrgios 2022 Wim were better.

I don’t think Tsits was ever really the better player in the match when Djokovic wasn’t making egregious mistakes, aside from that one nice return game in the 2nd set and the clutch BH to save set point in the 1st. And his collapse was pathetic.

Kyrgios I could see actually. Idk. Harder to compare because of how serve-dominant his game was

 

[NoleFam]

Wouldn't go that far, most are shades of mediocre but Tsits 2021 FO and Kyrgios 2022 Wim were better.

Shades of mediocre.......such doom and gloom....

 

[NoleFam]

I don’t think Tsits was ever really the better player in the match when Djokovic wasn’t making egregious mistakes, aside from that one nice return game in the 2nd set and the clutch BH to save set point in the 1st. And his collapse was pathetic.

Kyrgios I could see actually. Idk. Harder to compare because of how serve-dominant his game was

Tsistipas played exceptional. Your memory is failing you. Lol. The guy had like 61 winners and 44 unforced errors, on clay. His clay form has taken a nose dive since that year though, for the most part.

 

[RS]

Ah here we go again

 

[NatF]

Shades of mediocre.......such doom and gloom....

It's the truth sorry lol. I said most, if you're trying to argue that more than half Djokovic's slam opponents since the pandemic played well in those finals then there's no point discussing anything with you

 

[RF-18]

I got the bots pressed again somehow smh

Wasn't the purpose to show their stats through ages 30-36.5? Why do you then bring subjective thoughts in it. Obviously you will get some opponents when saying Med and Del Po was no decent opponents while Fed managed to lose to Millman and Dimitrov.

 

[Kralingen]

Tsistipas played exceptional. Your memory is failing you. Lol. The guy had like 61 winners and 44 unforced errors, on clay. His clay form has taken a nose dive since that year though, for the most part.

He was pretty average the first set and really should’ve gotten closed out when Djoker served for it, but as has become a worrying trend, Novak donated a break back with some pathetic errors. He did play a good TB and the set point save was impressive but sleepwalking Novak still had multiple chances to close that set.

As for the 2nd set - Djokovic played arguably the worst set at Slam level of the entirety of 2021.

And then after that the match was barely even competitive. Exceptional is a laughable take. His serve+1 is good enough to earn free points and he had some nice flashes I guess, not taking that away from him, he was better than Ruud, but he was below par in sets 3-5. yeah he had a nice winner/UE ratio because Djoko backed off once he got an early break in all of sets 3-5. Tsitsipas created ZERO break points across I think 15 return games. Shanked returns into the net don’t count as UEs lol.

However he was leagues better in that RG final than the AO final this year.

 

[NoleFam]

It's the truth sorry lol. I said most, if you're trying to argue that more than half Djokovic's slam opponents since the pandemic played well in those finals then there's no point discussing anything with you

It doesn't really matter that much to me. You beat who is in front of you. I just think it's all doom and gloom from you nowadays. It's just tennis man. Lighten up. Lol.

 

[jm1980]

Wasn't the purpose to show their stats through ages 35-36.5? Why do you then bring subjective thoughts in it. Obviously you will get some opponents when saying Med and Del Po was no decent opponents while Fed managed to lose to Millman and Dimitrov.

30-36.5 is an age difference adjusted comparison of the Big 3 in their 30s, so that's valid

But the subjective assessments are hit and miss

 

[VAPORHEAD]

Nadal vs redline Thiem 2018 US open, best quality match of 2018

 

[NatF]

It doesn't really matter that much to me. You beat who is in front of you. I just think it's all doom and gloom from you nowadays. It's just tennis man. Lighten up. Lol.

I thought shades of medicore was a little playful. Maybe you need to lighten up

 

[NoleFam]

He was pretty average the first set and really should’ve gotten closed out when Djoker served for it, but as has become a worrying trend, Novak donated a break back with some pathetic errors. He did play a good TB and the set point save was impressive but sleepwalking Novak still had multiple chances to close that set.

As for the 2nd set - Djokovic played arguably the worst set at Slam level of the entirety of 2021.

And then after that the match was barely even competitive. Exceptional is a laughable take. His serve+1 is good enough to earn free points and he had some nice flashes I guess, not taking that away from him, he was better than Ruud, but he was below par in sets 3-5. yeah he had a nice winner/UE ratio because Djoko backed off once he got an early break in all of sets 3-5. Tsitsipas created ZERO break points across I think 15 return games. Shanked returns into the net don’t count as UEs lol.

However he was leagues better in that RG final than the AO final this year.

Both players were good in the 1st set. Neither played average imo. Both hit a lot of winners and both had more winners than errors. Tsitsipas just edged him. Then Djokovic played a terrible 2nd set, which I will agree with, and Tsitsipas' level stayed about the same.

Then Djokovic took a 3 minute bathroom break and came back like a different player, and Tsitsipas started to mentally get tired when Djokovic started turning the screws like he had done many times before to guys when they had him on the ropes. Djokovic's level in sets 3 and 4 were very high and back to the top level he had shown in the tournament.

I think the 5th was more competitive because Djokovic cooled off a bit and Tsitsipas gave a final push to give himself a chance but Djokovic was already up a break at that point so a comeback was going to be hard, with Djokovic having the trophy within his grasp.

Overall, definitely not a bad performance from Tsitsipas and I would say it was indeed better than 2023 Medvedev. +17 in winners to errors on clay is worthy of an exceptional rating imo when you pushed Djokovic to 5, the guy who took down Nadal a couple of days prior.

 

[Third Serve]

Tsitsipas’s returning in that RG final is some of the worst I’ve ever seen in a big clay match. I believe even Andy Roddick on an average day would have done a better job at least getting Djokovic’s serve in play.

 

[GabeT]

is this another round of “hypothetical Fed always wins”? Don’t you all get tired of this?

 

[RS]

is this another round of “hypothetical Fed always wins”? Don’t you all get tired of this?

Peak Nadal vs Peak Roddick 10 matches at each slam?

 

[GabeT]

Peak Nadal vs Peak Roddick 10 matches at each slam?

lol, just stop. The slam race is over. Let’s focus on something else.

 

[RS]

lol, just stop. The slam race is over. Let’s focus on something else.

My question wasn't the slam race.

 

[Third Serve]

The condescending comments from Djokovic fans (or is it just the one Djokovic fan?) are very much appreciated of course.

 

[NoleFam]

I thought shades of medicore was a little playful. Maybe you need to lighten up

I don't get the sense that you're in playful mood these days...

 

[Kralingen]

Both players were good in the 1st set. Neither played average imo. Both hit a lot of winners and both had more winners than errors. Tsitsipas just edged him. Then Djokovic played a terrible 2nd set, which I will agree with, and Tsitsipas' level dropped.

Then Djokovic took a 3 minute bathroom break and came back like a different player, and Tsitsipas started to mentally get tired when Djokovic started turning the screws like he had done many times before to guys when they had him on the ropes. Djokovic's level in sets 3 and 4 were very high and back to the top level he had shown in the tournament.

I think the 5th was more competitive because Djokovic cooled off a bit and Tsitsipas gave a final push to give himself a chance but Djokovic was already up a break at that point so a comeback was going to be hard, with Djokovic having the trophy within his grasp.

Overall, definitely not a bad performance from Tsitsipas and I would say it was indeed better than 2023 Medvedev.

I guess there’s not much of a difference between them, perhaps Tsits could shade it to steal the phrase from Nat. I felt that Medvedev’s prior success over Novak on the court and his high level SF would set him up for a better performance than he produced, for sure. But generally felt that the 2nd set level brought the most out of Djok that I had seen in a big match for awhile.

Kyrgios may well have been the best the more I think about it just because he lowers the margin of victory so much with that amazing serve. but once rallies started he was mostly toast so it’s hard to point to that one as the BEST.

 

[RS]

lol, just stop. The slam race is over. Let’s focus on something else.

Slam race looks over for now most likely but that doesn't mean tennis debates end. No where near.