Djokovic at AO vs Federer at Wimbledon

Who was Better?

  • Djokovic as the Wizard of Oz

    Votes: 52 61.9%

  • Federer as the Master of Grass

    Votes: 32 38.1%
  • Total voters
    84
Djokovic won his first AO title in 2008, yet didn't face a NextGen in an AO final until 2020. That would be like Federer not facing a NextGen in a WB final until 2015. And when Nole finally started facing NextGens in AO finals, he faced the likes of Thiem, Medvedev, and Tsitsipas.

That's the only reason he has +2 AO titles, and that surely doesn't make him better than Federer at Wimbledon.
 
fedfan24 said:
Federer has
01, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19 for high level or deep Wimbledon runs (15)
Djokovic has
08, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24 at AO (12)

Federer has him beat for longevity + peak level.
Click to expand...
Federer was at prime level in 01 beating Sampras in an ATG Wimbledon match. At which point he lost to prime Tim Henman in 4 who had also dealt with a draining 5 setter the round before just like Fed

So it is reasonable to say that prime Henman ~ prime Fed on fast S&V courts. Come on Tim
 
duaneeo said:
Djokovic won his first AO title in 2008, yet didn't face a NextGen in an AO final until 2020. That would be like Federer not facing a NextGen in a WB final until 2015. And when Nole finally started facing NextGens in AO finals, he faced the likes of Thiem, Medvedev, and Tsitsipas.

That's the only reason he has +2 AO titles, and that surely doesn't make him better than Federer at Wimbledon.
Click to expand...
Why would Djokovic face a next gen in the AO final when he himself was 20 years old? What were they going to do? Go down to the local primary school and find a "worthy opponent"?

4-1 versus Federer
2-0 versus Nadal
5-0 versus Murray
2-1 versus Wawrinka
2-0 versus Berdych
2-1 versus Tsonga
3-0 versus Raonic

Yea that's the only reason. Last time I checked Thiem and Medvedev are Slam champs, and 2020 Thiem was one of the toughest opponents he's faced there. Now that's supposedly weak competition? Dude please.
 
Last edited:
Pheasant said:
It’s a very small difference here. Had Fed pulled out that 5th set vs Nadal in 2008, then I’d give this to Fed. But unfortunately, he lost 9-7 in the 5th. As I said before, that was my most painful Fed loss by far(only Mac’s 1984 FO loss tops this one for pain). That sucked badly.

Anyway, had Fed won, Djoker would still lead 10-9. But Fed could boast of a kick arse 7-year winning streak. However, that didn’t happen. So at the end of the day, the peaks are close, but 10>8. I unfortunately have to give the to Djoker. It’s close, but definitely Djoker’s.
Click to expand...
Great point. And 1 slam difference I can stomach but not 2 which is when I conceded Nadal to be better than fed (when adding other stuff as well).

Let's not play innocent as well, Djokovic was coming off 3 slams year in 2021 and was outright banned for political agenda. When he was fit, only guy who beat him was wawrinka.
 
jl809 said:
idk what Djoker was supposed to do in his late career (2019-now) to convince folks here. Beat people like 2021vedev even more convincingly than he did? Ultimately he just kept winning every final. Yes he had the L to Stan in his prime but Fed had the L in his prime to his own matchup nightmare too

I think Fed fans can reasonably argue that Fed would be on 10 Wimbledons or maybe even more tbh if he’d enjoyed the competition that Djoker did at the AO, but with how things played out IRL, it’s hard to argue that the 10 time winner of one slam was worse, let alone equal

Djoker at the AO doesn’t have those losses like he does at Wimbledon to make you speculate about how good he actually was, and he had a ridiculously high ceiling on multiple occasions
Click to expand...
Well he struggled with the only good opponent he had those years e.g. Thiem. It should be unquestionable that Fed had tougher post prime competition at Wimbledon compared to Djokovic at the AO. That's why Djokovic has those extra titles.

You mention Medvedev, well the age for age equivalent would be if 2021 Djokovic was facing an opponent on the level of 2015 Wimbledon Djokovic. Like I said, 2015 Murray at Wimbly was a tougher opponent than anyone 2021 Djokovic faced. But only one run resulted in a title.

If you or someone else doesn't think their relative competition matters in the debate and total wins is all that matters then that's fine. But if we're setting the bar for a slam competent run at 2020, 2021 and 2023 Djoker level then Federer easily has as many of those as Djokovic - possibly even a slender advantage.

Fed: 2003-2009, 2012, 2014-15, 2017 and 2019/12

Djo: 2008, 2011-16, 2020-2021, 2023/11

Probably without the deportation they'd be dead even. I do imagine the likes or 2011 Fed could get through many of those later draws of Djokovic but I chose to ignore that one.

Very easy to make the case they're even, or that Fed is ahead based on a superior peak.
 
I went back 35 years and in the entire history, number of players who won over 59% of games on grass is negligible.

It was same issue in Federer's time as it was on Djokovic's time.

So actual real comparison should be fed at wimby vs Djokovic at wimby instead of at AO.

Yes Djokovic has a bad spot with Alcaraz and Murray beating him 4-0. Fed didn't have any such match issue on grass but went 1-3 vs Djokovic.

I would give close nudge to fed but not by a lot. And that's where the **** hits the fan. Djokovic has closed gap vs fed on even Wimby. 7 wins 10 finals, 1 time heavy favorite to win but COVID swallowed that slam , only slam cancelled since end of WW2. Had Djokovic beaten Murray and Federer in Olympics, I would have him equal to fed. But there is still time, djokovic isn't retired yet.
 
lol what world are we living in now AO 11 is overrated too Djokovic building absolute mansions inside people's heads
 
It’s hard to debate this when we lack a clear definition of what we mean by “better”. Everyone will have a different interpretation.

But if you play regularly at a club or with a group of friends and someone asks who is the better player I think most would agree that means who won the most
 
The Guru said:
Lmfao in what world is 2013 not a tough title run. You've absolutely lost your marbles.
Click to expand...
I am just using the same arguments the Fed detractors use. You know, Djokovic didn't face a prime ATG after 2012 which is always used against Fed.
 
Last edited:
roysid said:
But he maximized his chances when playing well. He is 2-1 vs Wawrinka the biggest challenge at AO.
Click to expand...
And Fed is 3-1 vs Nadal at Wimb.
roysid said:
Finals which could have gone either way i.e 2012 and 2020 he turned around.
Click to expand...
Fed did the same in 2004, 2007 and 2009.
roysid said:
Roger won 5 in a row, 40 straight matches but not 7 straight finals. He had the 2008 loss in between. But no.of tournament wins is the ultimate prize.
Click to expand...
I meant that he reached 7 straight finals.
roysid said:
All said and done, winning 8 titles and that too from 12 finals is lesser achievement than winning 10 titles and that too from 10 finals.
Click to expand...
Better to lose to Wawrinka in the quarters and Sinner in the semis, I guess.
 
Third Serve said:
2013 was a tough win. Stan was an excellent opponent and Murray played a decent match too.

After that it's a lot more mixed...

2015: Murray was decent if not particularly great. Maybe slightly worse than in 2013, but Djokovic didn't have to deal with a red-hot Stan to beef up the draw. Instead we got that ugly SF.

2016: Not a hard draw at all. Fed was below par except for the last set and a half, and Murray's final performance was a downgrade from 2015.

2019: Certainly one of the weakest. QF/SFs were a joke and Nadal was deeply underwhelming in the final.

2020: A step up from 2019 because Thiem played a decent match, but Djokovic didn't really face anyone in good form aside from that. I'd say worse than 2015 but above 2019.

2021: The final was a meme but early rounds were a bit more stacked than usual, though Djokovic's injury probably inflated the worth of his opponents. Zverev showed hints of a good performance but he choked in a disgusting manner. Probably right below 2020.

2023: Down there with 2019. Not much to add, really.
Click to expand...
I was mostly speaking in jest since according to that poster, Fed didn't have to earn his first 7 titles.
 
Berrettini_Fan said:
So the difference ultimately is that Federer lost a close 5-setter to Nadal in 2008 but Djokovic managed to prevail in a close 5-setter vs Nadal in 2012. Reverse the fortunes of those matches and we are dead even!
Click to expand...
Fed finally lost the 3rd straight match vs Nadal. Djokovic didn't play Nadal in 3 straight finals.
 
jl809 said:
idk what Djoker was supposed to do in his late career (2019-now) to convince folks here. Beat people like 2021vedev even more convincingly than he did? Ultimately he just kept winning every final.
Click to expand...
There wasn't anything he could do, but that doesn't mean his opponents shouldn't be acknowledged. Fed himself would've beaten the likes of Thiem, Med and Tpas in Wimb finals.
jl809 said:
I think Fed fans can reasonably argue that Fed would be on 10 Wimbledons or maybe even more tbh if he’d enjoyed the competition that Djoker did at the AO, but with how things played out IRL, it’s hard to argue that the 10 time winner of one slam was worse, let alone equal
Click to expand...
Djoker is more accomplished, but the difference is made up by facing Thiem, Med and Tpas. He was injured in his last 2 wins and yet still won easily which would not have happened against better competition.
jl809 said:
Djoker at the AO doesn’t have those losses like he does at Wimbledon to make you speculate about how good he actually was, and he had a ridiculously high ceiling on multiple occasions
Click to expand...
Fed also had a ridiculously high ceiling in 2014, 2015 and 2019 and yet won neither.
 
NatF said:
Well he struggled with the only good opponent he had those years e.g. Thiem. It should be unquestionable that Fed had tougher post prime competition at Wimbledon compared to Djokovic at the AO. That's why Djokovic has those extra titles.

You mention Medvedev, well the age for age equivalent would be if 2021 Djokovic was facing an opponent on the level of 2015 Wimbledon Djokovic. Like I said, 2015 Murray at Wimbly was a tougher opponent than anyone 2021 Djokovic faced. But only one run resulted in a title.

If you or someone else doesn't think their relative competition matters in the debate and total wins is all that matters then that's fine. But if we're setting the bar for a slam competent run at 2020, 2021 and 2023 Djoker level then Federer easily has as many of those as Djokovic - possibly even a slender advantage.

Fed: 2003-2009, 2012, 2014-15, 2017 and 2019/12

Djo: 2008, 2011-16, 2020-2021, 2023/11

Probably without the deportation they'd be dead even. I do imagine the likes or 2011 Fed could get through many of those later draws of Djokovic but I chose to ignore that one.

Very easy to make the case they're even, or that Fed is ahead based on a superior peak.
Click to expand...
Undoubtably Federer has a longevity edge imo. 2011 counts for sure in my opinion. And even 2010/16/18 might be better than Djokovic's next best effort that you didn't include which is what 2024? Is 2024 even definitely above 2007?

The case for Djokovic is basically whenever he showed up he was unbelievably dominant beating lots of strong competition only losing once when in respectable form and even the he had to choke hard on big points to lose that one.

To me the argument is do you take Fed's longevity with some additional vulnerability to the field or do you take a couple less years of Novak with less vulnerability to the field.
 
The Guru said:
Undoubtably Federer has a longevity edge imo. 2011 counts for sure in my opinion. And even 2010/16/18 might be better than Djokovic's next best effort that you didn't include which is what 2024? Is 2024 even definitely above 2007?

The case for Djokovic is basically whenever he showed up he was unbelievably dominant beating lots of strong competition only losing once when in respectable form and even the he had to choke hard on big points to lose that one.

To me the argument is do you take Fed's longevity with some additional vulnerability to the field or do you take a couple less years of Novak with less vulnerability to the field.
Click to expand...
It's the nature of grass that you're more vulnerable to the field tbf. Fed does have more losses but a lot of then weren't to the field as much as they were strong rivals in Nadal and mostly Djokovic. I wouldn't class that as the field.

But fair enough.
 
NatF said:
It's the nature of grass that you're more vulnerable to the field tbf. Fed does have more losses but a lot of then weren't to the field as much as they were strong rivals in Nadal and mostly Djokovic. I wouldn't class that as the field.

But fair enough.
Click to expand...
Definitely. Comparing across surfaces is hard I think it's easier to achieve higher level on clay/hard/grass in that order. I think we've had that discussion before. But that doesn't necessarily mean you should get more credit for higher level on hard because it also means dominating grass is harder so not sure how one should weigh that in the context of this conversation.

That second parts definitely true and I'm not really talking about the losses to Nadal/Novak as much as Berdych/Tsonga and to a lesser extent the ones he had later in his career. Every time Djokovic showed up to Melbourne even resembling himself he was the best player at the event even in 2014 when he lost he lost bringing the best overall level to the tournament imo. Djokovic basically has Nadal esque results in years you wouldn't hand waive for obvious reasons. Federer doesn't quite have that. Even with the easier post prime competition Djokovic didn't really show much weakness to make you think he'd be in serious threat of that kind of wobble he dominated 19/23 he dominated the latter stage of 21 when he was back to close to full health and then he had a small wobble vs Thiem but he looked dominant in the leadup and Federer has similar wobbles against similar competition outside of his peak.

I still think the case for Fed is actually quite strong but that's the point that favors Djokovic imo.
 
fedfan24 said:
Perfect analogy actually. Djokovic has the numbers and sheer dominance, but lower quality wins and level of play. Federer is like an exclusive gourmet restaurant.
Click to expand...
Djokovic beat Federer thrice & Nadal twice at WB; Federer beat Nadal twice and Djokovic once! Djokovic on top in terms of quality wins!
 
SonnyT said:
Djokovic beat Federer thrice & Nadal twice at WB; Federer beat Nadal twice and Djokovic once! Djokovic on top in terms of quality wins!
Click to expand...
Some of those Fedal wins include 2016, 2019 and 2020 Federer who was running on one leg. 08, 11 and 12 impressive though but I’d put 06/07 Nadal, 03/04/09 Roddick and 12 Djokovic ahead. I won’t include Stan 2013 as he cheated to save BP.
 
Hitman said:
Nice to see you agree on basically saying that Djokovic has the objectively factual things on his side, and the eye test subjective stuff is with Federer according to some. (y)
Click to expand...
Yeah without any context, an alien would look at Djokovic stats and say he’s the best. Luckily we are human so can analyse things in great detail. :cool: :whistle:
 
fedfan24 said:
Yeah without any context, an alien would look at Djokovic stats and say he’s the best. Luckily we are human so can analyse things in great detail. :cool: :whistle:
Click to expand...
Fortunately, there are all the recordings of Novak and Federer playing each other, 50 of them, so we know who is the better tennis player based on that.;)
 
The Guru said:
Definitely. Comparing across surfaces is hard I think it's easier to achieve higher level on clay/hard/grass in that order. I think we've had that discussion before. But that doesn't necessarily mean you should get more credit for higher level on hard because it also means dominating grass is harder so not sure how one should weigh that in the context of this conversation.

That second parts definitely true and I'm not really talking about the losses to Nadal/Novak as much as Berdych/Tsonga and to a lesser extent the ones he had later in his career. Every time Djokovic showed up to Melbourne even resembling himself he was the best player at the event even in 2014 when he lost he lost bringing the best overall level to the tournament imo. Djokovic basically has Nadal esque results in years you wouldn't hand waive for obvious reasons. Federer doesn't quite have that. Even with the easier post prime competition Djokovic didn't really show much weakness to make you think he'd be in serious threat of that kind of wobble he dominated 19/23 he dominated the latter stage of 21 when he was back to close to full health and then he had a small wobble vs Thiem but he looked dominant in the leadup and Federer has similar wobbles against similar competition outside of his peak.

I still think the case for Fed is actually quite strong but that's the point that favors Djokovic imo.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Don't want to make excuses but I wonder if some of those field losses would have gone away if you switched the AO and Wimbledon's place in the calendar. I'm thinking of years like 2010, 2013, 2016 and 2018 where Fed had niggling physical issues at Wimbledon that weren't there at the AO.

But you do make fair points. Obviously some of my replies in this thread are baiting, but Djokovic's record at the AO is ofcourse insane.
 
RF-18 said:
Djokovic met Federer 5 times at AO. Only lost in 2007, after that Fed couldn't really touch him, just like Nadal. So why you only using finals opponents in this context I don't know.
Click to expand...
Because it makes Fedal look better. The finals are not the only competition in a slam or any tournament.
 
mike danny said:
16-14 in the 5th never happened, I guess.
Click to expand...

They just put on a good show, same ending as always ;)

But truthfully, while Roddick was incredibly hard to break on grass, Roger had the better ground game, so it was more likely he was going to break than the other way around.
 
Hitman said:
It actually is. 10 is greater than 8, the guy who won 10 dominated more. It's a numbers game and Djokovic had more trophies.
Click to expand...

No, it's not. Only Djokovic fans would boil it down to numbers. For example, Delpo's sole major is more impressive than Roddick's.

A better argument would be that hard court is harder to dominate because more players are competitive on the surface. Although one could also say that big servers can cause a lot more trouble on grass courts or that Fed never had the chance to play a Tsitsipas-level player at Wimbledon.
 
NatF said:
Fair enough. Don't want to make excuses but I wonder if some of those field losses would have gone away if you switched the AO and Wimbledon's place in the calendar. I'm thinking of years like 2010, 2013, 2016 and 2018 where Fed had niggling physical issues at Wimbledon that weren't there at the AO.

But you do make fair points. Obviously some of my replies in this thread are baiting, but Djokovic's record at the AO is ofcourse insane.
Click to expand...
2013 is an easy hand waive for me. 16/18 less so because there were points he was the favorite to win the tournament but obviously the fact that was even true is impressive given his age.
 
roysid said:
At AO, Djokovic beat whoever is in other side of the net. That includes Federer, Nadal, Murray, Wawrinka, Thiem. He literally pulled out a win even when facing problems like 2020 and 2021. 10 - 0 final record is super impressive.

In contrast, Fed couldn't beat everyone at Wimbledon. While 2008 final loss was to an ATG Nadal, the 2010-11 and 2013 loss are bad. Then the two double fault in 2016 semi. The Kevin Anderson loss in 2018.
And then the 40-15 loss in 2019.
Click to expand...

Sorry but this is misleading.

Djoko lost to Dennis Istomin in 2017 R64, Hyeon Chung in 2018 R16.

Fed losing to Berdych was painful but Berd at least ran to the Final that year--and he has beaten Djoko twice at Wimbledon. And Anderson made two Slam Finals in his career.

Djoko's loss to Istomin was worse than any Fed loss at Wimbledon aside from Stakhovsky.
 
NatF said:
Question is who was better not who was more dominant.
Click to expand...
And also since when did dominance become a proxy for bean counting? Does anyone think Connors was more dominant at USO than Fed? Djokovic never even won 4 in a row at the AO.
 
mike danny said:
Is this really your best retort? Using their records against a 12 and 17 year older Fed?
Click to expand...
Federer was old as dirt in a lot of their matches but if they were as trash as you are letting on, even gramps Federer should have pasted them like he did to Medvedev before he turned into a different player in summer of 2019.
 
Rosstour said:
Sorry but this is misleading.

Djoko lost to Dennis Istomin in 2017 R64, Hyeon Chung in 2018 R16.

Fed losing to Berdych was painful but Berd at least ran to the Final that year--and he has beaten Djoko twice at Wimbledon. And Anderson made two Slam Finals in his career.

Djoko's loss to Istomin was worse than any Fed loss at Wimbledon aside from Stakhovsky.
Click to expand...
Correct. I later put a post in this same thread highlighting Djokers two bad losses.

Djokovic at AO vs Federer at Wimbledon

Djokovic beat just past Peak Federer at the AO, although I believe that was Year Mono for Fed, also beat Federer in 2011, 2016 and 2020. And Fed beat peak Djokovic in 2012 at Wimb. Didn't get other good chances to beat him due to obvious reasons. Djokovic beat Nadal in the 2012 AO classic and...
tt.tennis-warehouse.com tt.tennis-warehouse.com

So both had their share of bad losses against easy opponents
At the end 10 finals won vs 8 finals won and 4 finals lost make the difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Fabresque
A huge big 3 streak was just snapped tonight
Replies
43
Views
851
Aabye5
Aabye5
wang07
  • Poll Poll
Big3 post-prime/ in their early 30s - Federer had it the toughest?
2 3
Replies
105
Views
3K
PilotPete
P
BULLZ1LLA
Does anyone give Djokovic a chance of beating Federer at Wimbledon?
Replies
26
Views
1K
BreakPoint
BreakPoint
M
Why do some rank Djokovic ahead of Federer at Australian Open
2
Replies
62
Views
8K
ripitup
R
weakera
Djokovic vs. Federer: A decade at Wimbledon
Replies
47
Views
2K
MichaelNadal
MichaelNadal
Back
Top