Entername
Professional
It was a QF match tho, I understand de-factos but it doesn't say it on the stat sheetsPlease, the Wawrinka match in 2014 was the de facto SF.
It was a QF match tho, I understand de-factos but it doesn't say it on the stat sheetsPlease, the Wawrinka match in 2014 was the de facto SF.
Nobody was beating Djokovic in 2014, so let's not pretend it was Djokovic being out of form because of not being a semi or a final match....It was a QF match tho, I understand de-factos but it doesn't say it on the stat sheets
Never said he was out of form Stan beat him fair and square but it a QF match and not a SF matchNobody was beating Djokovic in 2014, so let's not pretend it was Djokovic being out of form because of not being a semi or a final match....
But that's just a cherry picking stat to somehow make Djokovic more invincible.Never said he was out of form Stan beat him fair and square but it a QF match and not a SF match
Nadal beating Fed in 2008 was way different than the other two though. It was the finals, two best players on Earth, both cruised through the draw, third straight meeting, and it was most highly anticipated match in history...and the result delivered. No one really got the feeling that Nole/Pete were dethroned in those losses but with Fed it definitely felt that wayBut that's just a cherry picking stat to somehow make Djokovic more invincible.
Fact is, Stan beat him in 2014 and then won the title. No different to Nadal beating Fed in 2008 or Krajicek beating Sampras in 1996.
I know, but fact is Djokovic did lose at the AO when he was in championship winning form. This semi or final cherry picking won't change that. Djokovic lost to the eventual winner 9-7 in the 5th just like Fed in 2008.Nadal beating Fed in 2008 was way different than the other two though. It was the finals, two best players on Earth, both cruised through the draw, third straight meeting, and it was most highly anticipated match in history...and the result delivered. No one really got the feeling that Nole/Pete were dethroned in those losses but with Fed it definitely felt that way
Federer Wim 03/05 or Djokovic AO 08/11 levelwise?Federer is a bit better I think. Djokovic struggled quite a bit in his prime although he lost only once. Post-prime, let's call it even - not facing a younger version of himself helped.
Federer Wim 03/05 or Djokovic AO 08/11 levelwise?
True, but that's because of who Fed had to face post prime. I'm pretty certain he'd have 11 Wimb titles now if he faced guys like Thiem and Medvedev in those Wimb finals.Federer's Aura at Wimbledon has just gone off in past decade but for Rafa at Rg and Novak at Ao is still there
Not arguing about the Level of opponents here as I said before Federer had better opponents at Wimbledon.
But for Me Djokovic displayed a higher level in those finals. Which makes AO 19 tricky because Rafa wasnt playing near his best level doesnt take away from the fact that djokovic was amazing in that final.
2019 Djoko at AO clearly over 2014 Fed at WM in terms of Level.
2015 Fed However is equal 2020 nole at AO.
Comparing Djokovic Federer at same age(for fairness)
Federer 2003 WM> Djokovic 2008 AO
Federer 2004 WM> Djokovic 2009 AO
Federer 2005 WM> Djokovic 2010 AO
Djokovic 2011 AO> Federer 2006 WM
Federer 2007 WM>Djokovic 2012 AO(close)
Federer 2008 WM> Djokovic 2013 AO
Federer 2009 WM>Djokovic 2014 AO
Djokovic 2015 AO > Federer 2010 WM
Djokovic 2016 AO > Federer 2011 WM
Federer 2012 WM> Djokovic 2017 by default
Federer 2013 WM Djokovic 2018 AO Both Horrible
Djokovic 2019 AO> Federer 2014 WM
Djokovic 2020 AO= Federer 2015 WM
Djokovic 2021 AO> Federer 2016 WM
So basically After Wimbledon 2009 for Federer Djokovic clearly displays higher level at pet slam when both are same age apart from 2017/18 and 2020 debateably
Just about tied. The breakdown:
Djoker at AO
Pro - the only sole GOOE at any of the majors per my infallible ranking, the most important metric there is
Con - not as dominant as Fred on his home turf, though one could certainly argue cumpuhtishion on hard > on grass
Fraud at SW19
Pro - 5 straight Ws rivaled only by Ice-Borg
Con - peak to peak Pistol and SuperMac are arguably his superiors
And '03/95 Dre and '84 Mac still own the highest AO/Wimby GW%s of the OE, so that can't serve as a TB, either. Ergo a tie.
It wouldn’t be outlandish to say Federer beats Murray in Wim 16 if he wasn’t injured.Federer won Wim 12 beating Djoko and Murray back to back
made final in 14 and 15
federer Wim 15 would beat AO 20/21 Djoko, just that AO 20/21 Djoko didn't have an opponent within a galaxy of Wim 15 final Djoko
federer Wim 14 fed was in the same ballpark as AO 20/21 Djoko. I'd say better. I mean Djoko of Wim 14 final was a way better opponent than Thiem of AO 20 final.
Djoko wasn't injured in early 17. Had just won Doha beating Murray in a good match. These 2 were outright favorites for the AO.
At the AO, Djoko got upset by Istomin and Murray by Misca Zverev.
13/16 were injury affected years for fed, though he wasn't injured at Wim 13 per se. leg injury affected him at WIm 16. hand injury in Wim 18. don't see you mentioning that. Only applicable for Djoko eh?
It wouldn’t be outlandish to say Federer beats Murray in Wim 16 if he wasn’t injured.
I think Murray wins in 4 if you actually take it as it was but idk about the hypothetical it depends on factors.Murray takes him IMO. It'd require a significant choke/drop in level from Murray to lose to 16 Wim Fed.
Not so much different from AO 13 semi. Murray would take it in 4 or 5 depending on fed serving/couple of crucial moments in the match.
More value and harder than other slam wins?But Wimbledon is the most prestigious tennis tournament, bar none
That doesn't even compute to me. I could argue peak to peak (top 3 AOs) fed > Djoko at AO
Even though Djoko does get the edge over a longer prime period.
Murray takes him IMO. It'd require a significant choke/drop in level from Murray to lose to 16 Wim Fed.
Not so much different from AO 13 semi. Murray would take it in 4 or 5 depending on fed serving/couple of crucial moments in the match.
You could certainly make that argument, but Fed is really the only one who merits it if you, like moi, prefer at least 4-5 years of dominance for this (modern) AO comparison. OTOH Pistol, Borg and Mac definitely have enough runs to go up against Fred's at SW19 (I'm guessing you've seen that list of Mac's GW%s from 1980-83). To moi looking at the # of a candidate's historic rivals* makes ample sense for these comparisons, cuz you're not exactly comparing apples and oranges to begin with.
Of course you could name Dre as another AO candidate, but as expected he doesn't quite make the cut. Here are his (rounded) 65% runs Down Under:
1995 - 67.9% (129/190)
2001 - 64.6% (137/212 - Rafter did well to almost upset this Agassi before cramping)
2003 - 71.6% (121/169)
By contrast he won "only" 60.8% in '00. Of course he did face botting Pistol in the classic SF followed by that 1st-rate bashing contest vs. Kafelnikov, but you still expect the % to be a little higher. And let's not forget Dre entered as many AOs as Novak has won.
Now here are Djoker's own historic runs:
2008 - 65.4% (136/208)
2011 - 67.4% (124/184)
2012 - 65.4% (153/234)
2019 - 67.5% (129/191)
And he's got 9 Ws in total, which gives him the decisive advantage. That's also why Fred gets the nod over Dre even though he's got only 2 super-duper outings (statistically speaking):
2004 - 65.2% (137/210)
2007 - 64.7% (132/204)
Call it prime to prime or what you will but I do think 3 yrs ain't quite enough for a career comparison. It's quite reasonable to assume that Agassi would last longer or motivate himself more in today's environment, but when comparing resumes we must work with what we do have.
Woi!What is it about Federer at AO that makes you think his level should be ranked above Agassi's?
You once said that even tho Djoko had some nice consistency at USO, he hasn't played one match that would convince you he could beat anyone on AA. Has Fed on RLA? Agassi has '95 and' 00. Where is this Fed's signature mythical level win and over whom exactly? I don't see it honestly.
Fed has 1 top 3 win at the AO in his career.... 2004 v JC Ferrero...
Says it all really...
Still the trolls will "argue" that Fed's AO peak is > Novak's...![]()
![]()
Is Djokovic as unbeatable at AO as we think though? Remember Stan AO 13.Fed has 1 top 3 win at the AO in his career.... 2004 v JC Ferrero...
Says it all really...
Still the trolls will "argue" that Fed's AO peak is > Novak's...![]()
![]()
Is Djokovic as unbeatable at AO as we think though? Remember Stan AO 13.
AO 04 Safin - 5/10Propaganda! Truth is Fed's AO are weaker than Djokovic's Wimbledon titles.
Nadal RG >> Djokovic AO >~ Federer WimI don't think he's unbeatable there. He's a level below Rafa at RG and a level above Fed at WIM.
Stan played a freaking awesome match.
AO 04 Safin - 5/10
AO 06 Baggy - 6.5/10
AO 07 Gonzo - 7/10
AO 10 Murray - 7/10
AO 17 Nadal - 8.5/10
AO 18 Cyric - 7/10
Wim 11 Nadal - 7.5/10
Wim 13 Murray - 8.5/10
Wim 14 Federer - 8.5/10
Wim 15 Federer - 8/10
Wim 18 Ando - 4.5/10
Wim 19 Federer - 7.5/10
Wim 21 Berr - 5.5/10
You are correct![]()
This favoured Djokovic which supported your view did you not get itI am talking about the titles not finals .
Nadal 11 - tired Marat
2014 Federer -Bagdatis lol
2015 fed- Gonzalez lol
2018- Nadal + Anderson - Murray before Lendl
2019 - Federer - Nadal ( first signature win AT AO)
2021- Berettini - Cilic Fed takes the this one and 2017 AO . Rest? Go get your brain checked .
Agassi would have pushed Federer to the brink in AO 04 as well. Probably Federer in 5 though due to fitness.What is it about Federer at AO that makes you think his level should be ranked above Agassi's, questionable GW% aside?
You once said that even tho Djoko had some nice consistency at USO, he hasn't played one match that would convince you he could beat anyone on AA. Has Fed on RLA? Agassi has '95 and' 00. Where is this Fed's signature mythical level win and over whom exactly? I don't see it honestly.
This favoured Djokovic which supported your view did you not get it? I n
I was just breaking down the finalists![]()
Federer AO 07 > Nadal AO 09.No, i don't need twisted logic to support the objective fact. Djokovic had signature wins at Wimbledon , fed's AO is full of minnows![]()
>>> is definitely overstating the difference. AO Djokovic at his very best is a freak of nature.Nadal RG >>> Djokovic AO >~ Federer Wim
But I mean in terms of people not being able to make cases for Federer winning so AO matches or more. Yes Wawrinka was on fire true but I would if he would be a tougher matchup than Federer at AO? Possible I guess.
I was talking overall in that not peaks but for you I will go down to >>>>> is definitely overstating the difference. AO Djokovic at his very best is a freak of nature.
No not really. 60-40 Fed at AO/USO and 65-35 Fed at Wim in non-clay slams.Lol is this a satire ?![]()
![]()
No not really. 60-40 Fed at AO/USO and 65-35 Fed at Wim.
09 was close and Fed was better in 07.Lmao , you better take break to get your mind properly working.
Federer Wim 09 final or Djokovic AO 15 final?Too close to call for SF/F.
Federer Wim 09 final or Djokovic AO 15 final?
>>> is definitely overstating the difference. AO Djokovic at his very best is a freak of nature.
Who played at a higher level?
1. Wawrinka RG 15 final or Nadal RG 19 final
2. Agassi AO 04 SF or Roddick USO 07 QF
3. Roddick USO 03 final or Djokovic AO 14 QF
4. Del Potro RG 09 SF or Djokovic RG 15 SF
5. Murray Wim 09 SF or Murray Wim 15 SF
6. Roddick AO 03 QF or Djokovic USO 15 final
7. Murray AO 12 SF or Federer USO 09 final
You wanted to say Del Potro played better in the respective matches though?Both great but Nadal via matchup
Agassi for maintaining it longer
no vote
Djokovic (in 5)
09 lol
Djokovic
no vote (but Federer should win via BO5 factor)
Let's convert to win percentage.Federer at Wimbledon > Nadal at RG > Djokovic at AO.
09 was close and Fed was better in 07.
I think Murray wins in 4 if you actually take it as it was but idk about the hypothetical it depends on factors.
You don't think Federer could have brought his 2014/2015 level?
AO 04 Safin - 5/10
AO 06 Baggy - 6.5/10
AO 07 Gonzo - 7/10
AO 10 Murray - 7/10
AO 17 Nadal - 8.5/10
AO 18 Cyric - 7/10
Wim 11 Nadal - 7.5/10
Wim 14 Federer - 8.5/10
Wim 15 Federer - 8/10
Wim 18 Ando - 4.5/10
Wim 19 Federer - 7.5/10
Wim 21 Berr - 5.5/10
![]()