N
nowhereman
Guest
Who has the better resume at the FO? The comparison with Federer was more obvious, but what about a guy like Ferrero? Ferrero has won it after all. Discuss.
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
Here they are, for ease of access. I list only quarter-finals or further.
Ferrero
Won: 1 (2003)
Runner-Up: 1 (2002)
Semi-Finalist: 2 (2000 and 2001)
Quarter-Finalist: -
Djokovic
Won: -
Runner-Up: 3 (2012, 2014, 2015)
Semi-Finalist: 4 (2007, 2008, 2011, 2013)
Quarter-Finalist: 2 (2006, 2010)
Ferrero
Won: 1 (2003)
Runner-Up: 1 (2002)
Semi-Finalist: 2 (2000 and 2001)
Quarter-Finalist: -
Djokovic
Won: -
Runner-Up: 3 (2012, 2014, 2015)
Semi-Finalist: 4 (2007, 2008, 2011, 2013)
Quarter-Finalist: 2 (2006, 2010)
N
nowhereman
Guest
You mean if he wins it.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
Lowering expectations--->Less disappointment. Took me a while to learn this in tennis as I had following other sports because of the success Fed had but I have come to terms with it.You mean if he wins it.
AngryBirds
Semi-Pro
The one with an FO trophy has greater resume.
mattosgrant
Banned
Ferrero definitely. He not only won the title, but reached another final, and lost twice to Kuerten in the semis (once after being up a break in the 5th set). No way a non RG winner, unless they have atleast 8 finals or something, could rank above. Despite that Djokovic has some edges on Ferrero at the French (basically everything except winning the title) which he doesn't really have on Federer, it is still a pretty easy answer IMO. Of course Ferrero is probably lucky to not face Nadal, but he was super unlucky to have his prime and career cut well short by injuries, so it evens out IMO. Anyway he did beat Nadal a couple times (once on clay) way past his prime and in Nadal's prime, so we shouldn't overspeculate on something we can never know for certain (eg that Ferrero could never beat Nadal at RG).
A better question would be Wawrinka vs Djokovic at RG at this point. This one I would have a harder time choosing. Had Wawrinka not won his title by directly beating Djokovic in the final I think I would probably actually go with Djokovic here, that he won the title in this manner really makes it a hard call.
A better question would be Wawrinka vs Djokovic at RG at this point. This one I would have a harder time choosing. Had Wawrinka not won his title by directly beating Djokovic in the final I think I would probably actually go with Djokovic here, that he won the title in this manner really makes it a hard call.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
He perhaps got a little lucky to play unseeded Verkerk in his only Slam final appearance but he crushed Coria, one of the best ever clay courters, in the final of Monte Carlo and beat him en route to the RG title also.
mattosgrant
Banned
Actually Verkerk took out Coria in the semis (Ferrero likely would have beaten him anyway).
Mainad
Bionic Poster
I guess titles speak for themselves. Nonetheless, 2015 was the only year Wawrinka ever got past the quarter-finals at RG. So while his peak there has obviously been higher, Djokovic has definitely got the much better overall record.
Last edited:
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Stand corrected, thanks and given that he had crushed Coria in the final of MC that year, it sounds a very likely proposition.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Ferrero, hands down. He's won the trophy before which automatically puts him above Novak Djokovic at the French Open.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
I think you gotta put Djoker over Wawrinka at the French.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
Don't think it's that simple. I'd say they are about equal and Djokovic likely moves ahead this year
metsman
G.O.A.T.
Ferrero was scary good on clay in 03. That's what made me so hopeful about 03...you had guys like Roddick/Nalbandian looking good on hard, Federer and Ferrero seemed to have grass and clay locked down for years. Of course it quite didn't work out quite that way but still.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
This isn't a comparison between all of clay, just the French Open. You can't really say they are equal when Ferrero's won it and Novak hasn't -- even when he beat Rafa en route to the final.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
that's a good point. At just the FO I would probably still go Ferrero because Djoker I feel has never brought his best game to RG like he has at some of the masters.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
He still has a couple of chances at winning it. This year and depending on how everything goes next year.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
I'll be pretty shocked if he doesn't. Thiem looks promising but I don't actually expect him to contend for RG until next year at the earliest.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
I think Rafa out of all people could win it again. He is losing to everyone right now, but I feel he has one last great run in him and we all know where it's going to come at.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
hope so...would be too bad if he goes out with a whimper. Of course if Djoker beats him in the final we will never hear the end of it....
Ferrero's straight sets demolition of Mantilla (the recently crowned Rome champion and one of the biggest fighters in tennis history) in R4 on his way to his RG title in 2003, is one of the most stunning and flawless clay court performances I've ever seen. Mantilla actually thanked him for his free tennis lesson at the net after the match.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
Ferrero had some serious game...he really did and unlike most other clay court specialists he was really coming into his own on hard before the illness. Finals of USO beating Hewitt and Agassi along the way and Semis of AO is no mean feat. Won Madrid too in 03. Even after his illness when he was clearly not the same he still managed to get to the quarters of wimbledon twice. He clearly had the game to be an all surface threat and a 2-3 time RG champ possibly. Should have been a top 3-4 mainstay in Fed's era imo. He will always be one of the bigger what ifs to me.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
also got to the finals of 2002 YEC taking Hewitt 5 and the quarters of the 03 AO.
Is that a fact or opinion?
Let just say he's one of the best player without a FO. Let's not ignore player like Soderling who was unlucky to have peak Nadal and Federer prevented him.
N
Navdeep Srivastava
Guest
If only at RG then Ferrero.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
I think Nadal has a mental edge in the final. It'd be enough to carry him over the line and if it doesn't, we would never hear the end of it. "30 year old Rafa is prime Rafa" ect.
N
nowhereman
Guest
So it seems most people rank Ferrero above the Djoker, as do I. But what about someone like Gaudio? Total out-of-the-blue victory and never had any other significant results there before or after. Do you guys think he is above Djokovic with his lone miracle run in 2004?
nolefam_2024
Talk Tennis Guru
This is pretty pointless thread. Djoker career is not done. Ferrero's is.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
No. I will take Gaudio's RG over all of Novak's masters.
Probably you can compare Roddick at Wimbledon vs Novak at FO.
N
nowhereman
Guest
Well I'm talking as of now. Obviously Djoker isn't done playing, but I thought this would be an interesting topic.
nolefam_2024
Talk Tennis Guru
Nope it won't be because its clear as daylight Novak's achievements except RG are far far better than Ferrero. So, only 1 RG would put this matter to rest and Novak is not done winning and is firm fav for RG this year.
N
nowhereman
Guest
So you agree that Ferrero is currently greater than Djokovic at RG?
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Greater but not necessarily better.
nolefam_2024
Talk Tennis Guru
ABSOLUTELY NOT.
nolefam_2024
Talk Tennis Guru
And I don't think the question is making sense given Djokovic will most likely win at RG.
N
nowhereman
Guest
May I hear your reasons?
nolefam_2024
Talk Tennis Guru
That is point of this thread, which I don't want to be involved in. I don't need to give fantasy where Novak is retired with no RG, maybe then we can discuss who was better, I think anyone following both careers should see it directly.
There's no doubt Djokovic has proven himself as a great Clay court player however asking "Who has a better resume?" is somewhat pointless.
If you've consistently made it to QF's and beyond, unless you actually win the damn thing you're inevitably always going to have regret and therefore Winning the title is everything and will always be considered a greater achievement than consistently making the latter stages of the tournament.
Sure, as soon as Djokovic is able to with the FO then I'd be inclined to say he leap frogs the likes of many other one time and possibly even 2 time winners - except maybe Federer due to their similar record of high achievement there.
If you've consistently made it to QF's and beyond, unless you actually win the damn thing you're inevitably always going to have regret and therefore Winning the title is everything and will always be considered a greater achievement than consistently making the latter stages of the tournament.
Sure, as soon as Djokovic is able to with the FO then I'd be inclined to say he leap frogs the likes of many other one time and possibly even 2 time winners - except maybe Federer due to their similar record of high achievement there.
I am the Greatest!
Professional
I remember that period. Kuerten was still very good, and you indeed have Roddick, Nalby, Hewitt, Safin on hard courts. I didn't consider Hewitt on grass because I find it baffling that a baseline hugger won at SW19. But then, Federer happened.
I am the Greatest!
Professional
It's sad, really. He has the touch to be good even on fast grass. Since the grass slowed down, he would have been a steady contender there, as evidenced by his performance in 2007 and 2009. He has a hard court game! He could have been a multi-slam and multi-surface slam holder had he been healthy.
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
It would be a hard-fought match peak-to-peak. Ferrero was one hell of a player.
Similar threads
