Djokovic 5 AO v Federer 5 USO - Do you think one is greater than the other?

[tennisaddict]

You need to compare situations with same number of titles. if Borg and Rafa are tied at 9 FO and Fed had 9 wimbys, then Fed would have an advantage since he would' be soLe record holder.

But we are beginnig to slice and dice this too much.

You are starting off with a wrong premise.

It just does not make any sense to elevate a solo holder. Two men climbed mountain x and one man climbed mountain y. Both mountains Are the same height. In that situation it does not matter if someone was alone to climb mountain y. The fact that a person previously climbed mountain x does not make it easy for the second person

 

[DerekNoleFam1]

This is similar to comparing Federer with Sampras at Wimbledon, and depends on whether absolute dominance is better than a few more finals.
At the end of the day they are both great results, and will stand the test of time.
The 2016 AO though, as others have alluded to, will likely lay this argument to bed.

 

[HewittAlwaysDisappoints]

Two finals cannot replace one title. The extra finals are brought into discussion when two players have an equal number of titles. A 6-0 is better than 5-2. It could be a similar case when comparing Novak's and Roger's WTF resume. If Djokovic gets to 6-0 Federer will still have a strong case because of additional 4 finals. A 7-0 would beat 6-4 any day though.

That's the problem - you're speaking on your own purely subjective scale, I'm actually using numbers to back up which is more important.

 

[GabeT]

You are starting off with a wrong premise.

It just does not make any sense to elevate a solo holder. Two men climbed mountain x and one man climbed mountain y. Both mountains Are the same height. In that situation it does not matter if someone was alone to climb mountain y. The fact that a person previously climbed mountain x does not make it easy for the second person

It does matter. How much, each can have a different opinion. If three people climbed mountain X but only one climbed mountain Y maybe mountain Y is more difficult.

 

[NatF]

It does matter. How much, each can have a different opinion. If three people climbed mountain X but only one climbed mountain Y maybe mountain Y is more difficult.

Or maybe a lot of great players in the past used to skip the AO or give greater priority to the other slams? Even Agassi skipped the AO many times.

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

That's the problem - you're speaking on your own purely subjective scale, I'm actually using numbers to back up which is more important.

You are saying that Murray is a greater Australian Open player than Nadal by that logic.
Also, if you are going to value it by points, then you should also take results like semis or lower into consideration. According to that, Federer is probably by far the greatest AO player due to his big semifinal streak there.
However, the number of titles is always the way to judge. At AO, Djokovic is the one with most titles, and if he wins a 6th, that is the end of the comparisons with Federer at USO.
If Sampras had an 8-0 record in Wimbledon finals, Federer would still need one more title despite his 7-3 record.

 

[Tony48]

No man, don't you understand the Djoker fanatic logic? Fed keeps getting better as he ages because he has more experience. 2011 was his peak according to these guys.

LMAO Federer was TWENTY-SIX at the 2008 Australian Open. Yes, he was in his peak.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

LMAO Federer was TWENTY-SIX at the 2008 Australian Open. Yes, he was in his peak.

No, he wasn't at his peak. He was IN HIS PRIME.

You don't know the difference between prime and peak? Doesn't surprise me, given you're a Super Buu fanboy.

 

[Tony48]

No, he wasn't at his peak. He was IN HIS PRIME.

You don't know the difference between prime and peak? Doesn't surprise me, given you're a Super Buu fanboy.

Prime, peak, whatever. Everyone reading that sentence knows exactly what I mean. Those words have been interchangeable since forever.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Prime, peak, whatever. Everyone reading that sentence knows exactly what I mean. Those words have been interchangeable since forever.

They know you're a biased fanboy who paints a perfect picture for Stretch.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

And how does age = peak?

That's like saying Chang was at his peak at 26. LMAO.

 

[Djokovic2011]

No, he wasn't at his peak. He was IN HIS PRIME.

You tell him Saby! Any self respecting tennis fan should know by now that Fed's peak ended on the 31st of December 2007. Honestly, these kids eh?

 

[Deleted member 307496]

You tell him Saby! Any self respecting tennis fan should know by now that Fed's peak ended on the 31st of December 2007. Honestly, these kids eh?

Your opinion regarding Stretch is irrelevant. We all know you're going to make an asinine argument for him beating peak Fed.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Your opinion regarding Stretch is irrelevant. We all know you're going to make an asinine argument for him beating peak Fed.

I like Stretch as a nickname Saby - at least you're acknowledging Novak's great athleticism!

 

[nowhereman]

LMAO Federer was TWENTY-SIX at the 2008 Australian Open. Yes, he was in his peak.

No, as Sabratha said he was in his PRIME not PEAK. A player's peak is when they're at their absolute best. 2008, although good, was by no means Federer at his best.

 

[Djokovic2011]

No, as Sabratha said he was in his PRIME not PEAK. A player's peak is when they're at their absolute best. 2008, although good, was by no means Federer at his best.

Fed's peak ended as soon as the strong era commenced.

 

[nowhereman]

Fed's peak ended as soon as the strong era commenced.

Yup. We all know that REAL tennis didn't exist until 2008. In fact, it wasn't officially established until 2011 when Djokodal officially took over.
Man, all these delusional fed fans thinking that tennis before 08 actually mattered or can be compared to the modern game. What are they thinking right?

 

[Djokovic2011]

Yup. We all know that REAL tennis didn't exist until 2008. In fact, it wasn't officially established until 2011 when Djokodal officially took over.
Man, all these delusional fed fans thinking that tennis before 08 actually mattered or can be compared to the modern game. What are they thinking right?

I wish all Fed fans were as clear-minded as you nowhereman.

 

[nowhereman]

I wish all Fed fans were as clear-minded as you nowhereman.

Yeah I know right? So many of these fed fans thinking that he's the goat just because he has the most grand slams, wtfs, and weeks at #1. Absolutely RIDICULOUS arguments.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Yeah I know right? So many of these fed fans thinking that he's the goat just because he has the most grand slams, wtfs, and weeks at #1. Absolutely RIDICULOUS arguments.

I'm just yanking your chain mate!

 

[nowhereman]

I'm just yanking your chain mate!

I'm aware. I was just playing along man, you obviously need to check your sarcasm detector.

 

[Djokovic2011]

I'm aware. I was just playing along man, you obviously need to check your sarcasm detector.

It's very late chez moi and I'm more than a little weary. That's my excuse and I'm sticking to it!

 

[nowhereman]

It's very late chez moi and I'm more than a little weary. That's my excuse and I'm sticking to it! [emoji14]

No problem, that's a valid excuse. I mean, isn't it like 4 am in the UK? Surprised you're still up. Aren't you tired?

 

[NatF]

Federer had mono in early 2008...

 

[SpinToWin]

Federer had mono in early 2008...

Indeed, I even recall reading somewhere that he was in the hospital in early 2008 too(?).

Anyways, to the rest of the "peak" whiners, take a look at Fed's yearly stats year for year and you'll see that only one year aside from 2013 shows a sudden big drop… Namely 2008. 2008 was not a great year from Fed by any stretch of the meaning and using terms such as "peak and prime" just makes what you're depicting inaccurate. Fed couldn't perform his best at the AO that year and for long stretches throughout the year.

 

[NatF]

Indeed, I even recall reading somewhere that he was in the hospital in early 2008 too(?).

Anyways, to the rest of the "peak" whiners, take a look at Fed's yearly stats year for year and you'll see that only one year aside from 2013 shows a sudden big drop… Namely 2008. 2008 was not a great year from Fed by any stretch of the meaning and using terms such as "peak and prime" just makes what you're depicting inaccurate. Fed couldn't perform his best at the AO that year and for long stretches throughout the year.

Federer won only 40% of his matches with the top 10 in 2008. Which is a huge drop off compared to 2007 and 2009 either side of it. He only lost 4 times to Nadal in 2008, the same as in 2006. It was his many losses to players who he was on long win streaks against all in the same year which was the problem. He actually led Djokovic 2-1 for the year.

 

[uliks]

There is no need for explanations guys. I think that we already safely established on this forum that Peak healthy Federer doesn't lose nor matches nor sets to any version of Djokovic. So just relax...

 

[NatF]

There is no need for explanations guys. I think that we already safely established on this forum that Peak healthy Federer doesn't lose nor matches nor sets to any version of Djokovic. So just relax...

Not sure anyone is saying that. I don't care to weigh in on whether Federer 100% fit would have beaten Djokovic at the AO in 2008. I would only say he doesn't gone down in straight sets.

 

[user]

Federer had mono in early 2008...

 

[Noelan]

There is no need for explanations guys. I think that we already safely established on this forum that Peak healthy Federer doesn't lose nor matches nor sets to any version of Djokovic. So just relax...

Actually Novak struggles to win a point against such mythical creature.
Federer was even in hospital due mono right before AO08Federerfans dare to call others fanboys

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Yes, because everyone who gets a medical condition gets it to the exact same degree of severity.
Shallow thinking I'm afraid, although I see a lot of that from Fed detractors.

Newsflash - He has said himself that he had mono at AO 2008, and it was clearly visible in his matches against Tipsarevic and Djokovic.

Are you guys calling Fed a liar?
If so, then who should we believe on this? You?
:lol:

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Yup. We all know that REAL tennis didn't exist until 2008. In fact, it wasn't officially established until 2011 when Djokodal officially took over.
Man, all these delusional fed fans thinking that tennis before 08 actually mattered or can be compared to the modern game. What are they thinking right?

Laver, Borg, Mac weren't even real tennis players.

They were playing hockey or something apparently.

 

[ABCD]

Are you guys calling Fed a liar? If so, then who should we believe on this? You?
:lol:

Spot on. This is what I say all along. If Federer says that he had mono, he had mono, no questions asked. If he says that 2015 was his best year, it was, no questions asked. Who are we to argue with him about him?

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Spot on. This is what I say all along. If Federer says that he had mono, he had mono, no questions asked. If he says that 2015 was his best year, it was, no questions asked. Who are we to argue with him about him?

Nicely done.

I'm off to bed for now though.

 

[talicnitom]

Federer had mono in early 2008...

Does Fed get stereo first after OZI 2008?

 

[user]

federer :

5 consecutive titles
higher peak
tougher, more varied competition
more dominant
more finals, SFs, consistency etc.
USO more prestigious than AO

only thing Nole has is that he's the sole owner of the record at the AO ...

...

The "sole owner" thing is meaningless. Does it mean if Borg and Rafa are tied at 9 FO, then Novak is better than them because he leads exclusively at 5 AO ?

It is up to Novak to get a 6th AO and steer himself ahead of Fed in this comparison.

He just did.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Djokovic has the greater record due to winning one more title but I wouldn't say his AO resume is necessarily better than Federer's at the USO. One could argue that 5 titles(all in successive years no less), 2 RU, 3 semifinals + 1 quarterfinal is just as impressive as 6 titles + 3 quarterfinals. Just trying to remain objective guys.

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

A 6th AO would end the discussion though, no doubt.

Or a 6th USO

Nah, 6th AO.

 

[beast of mallorca]

I don't think I have seen a thread on this, if so, you can put the link in here.

Both of these HC legends have achieved ATG on the surface. The question is, who do you think has the accomplished the greater feat between two at their respective kingdoms, or is it split right down the middle and both are just as good as each other?

Federer has won 5 in row, produced a GOAT performance in the USO 04 final, beat three top five players in a row in 07, beat Djokovic twice on route to the titles including a slam final win. He has beaten five different USO champions either future or former in all five slam finals - Hewitt, Agassi, Roddick, Djokovic, Murray.

Djokovic has won 5, but not in a row. He has produced extremely high level at both AO 08 and AO 11. He is undefeated against all of Federer, Nadal and Murray on plexicushion 7-0, which is the surface he has won all five of his titles. AO2012 semi and final combo was one of the greatest feats in tennis history. Regained his title from the man who dethroned him a year earlier. Most AO in open era history.

Where is your poll ?

 

[nowhereman]

Djokovic has won 6 AO's but did not win them all in a row like Federer's 5 successive USO's. What it tells us?

 

[Deleted member 716271]

I just want ND to get a 3rd USO, at that point , regardless of supposed prestige of USO vs AO, regardless of imbalance, his 9 HC slams will be equal to Fed's, because 3 is certainly enough imo to have where you can't say he's all AO or whatever. That's really the only knock on Novak on hard, I guess Cincy would help as well

I really think ND will end up as the best HC player ever.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

Where is your poll ?

Well, Djokovic has six now, so it kind of renders it obsolete.

 

[The Fedfather]

I just want ND to get a 3rd USO, at that point , regardless of supposed prestige of USO vs AO, regardless of imbalance, his 9 HC slams will be equal to Fed's, because 3 is certainly enough imo to have where you can't say he's all AO or whatever. That's really the only knock on Novak on hard, I guess Cincy would help as well

I really think ND will end up as the best HC player ever.

He is the best on slow HC. When it comes to fast surfaces, including HC, Federer is the best. Even now when they play on fast HC Roger defeats Novak quite comfortably.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

He is the best on slow HC. When it comes to fast surfaces, including HC, Federer is the best. Even now when they play on fast HC Roger defeats Novak quite comfortably.

Yeah but my point is we should group them together and just say hard and then 3 USO's will be enough, and ND just beat Fed at the USO, so what do you mean. If you count USO as slow or whatever, then they're only a very few fast hard courts in your view, but take that up with ATP, because at least relatively USO is considered a medium/fast slam surface.

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

He is the best on slow HC. When it comes to fast surfaces, including HC, Federer is the best. Even now when they play on fast HC Roger defeats Novak quite comfortably.

Are you thinking about grass there too? Then there is really no debate, Federer is well ahead there. HC only is close though.

 

[Noelan]

He is the best on slow HC. When it comes to fast surfaces, including HC, Federer is the best. Even now when they play on fast HC Roger defeats Novak quite comfortably.

Quite comfortably lost USO15 or USO is now slow HC? Oh forgot age of Methuselah age of his. Sorry
Since when HC as surface is officialy divided into slow and fast

 

[Djokovic2011]

Djokovic has won 6 AO's but did not win them all in a row like Federer's 5 successive USO's. What it tells us?

Novak had tougher competition.

 

[nowhereman]

Novak had tougher competition.

I'm sure 5555 would agree with you.

 

[uliks]

Djokovic has won 6 AO's but did not win them all in a row like Federer's 5 successive USO's. What it tells us?

Weak era?!

 

[Noelan]

I just want ND to get a 3rd USO, at that point , regardless of supposed prestige of USO vs AO, regardless of imbalance, his 9 HC slams will be equal to Fed's, because 3 is certainly enough imo to have where you can't say he's all AO or whatever. That's really the only knock on Novak on hard, I guess Cincy would help as well

I really think ND will end up as the best HC player ever.

With roof over his head at USO his chances are higher than before 2015