Djokovic in his best season (2011) nearly went 1-2 with Fed in slams.

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Djokovic 2011 can't even lick the shoes of 2006 Federer (Outside of Clay and Cincy tiredness)

That's rude.
AO & Miami say hi at least...

 

[NoleFam]

@NatF.
@NoleFam

 

[vex]

And AO 11 was a close straight setter was well

But he didn’t...

 

[Zetty]

He did lose RG 11 though. In his best clay year.

Hadn't he won 40 something in a row? Law of averages, you're bound to lose at that point, why not to the GOAT.

 

[McEnborg]

In my opinion, Novak has gotten very lucky in several of his very close wins against Federer.

 

[ghostofMecir]

And AO 11 was a close straight setter was well

Against a 30 year old Federer. Djokovic is also fortunate Federer lost to Tsonga at Wimbledon as Djokovic would have lost that match as well.

 

[Nole_King]

He played better on clay in 12 and 13, despite the worse results.

LOL ... No

 

[Nole_King]

Err because Federer hated losing to Djokovic in those days and threw every bit of his will power to beat him.

2011 Djokovic was better than any Djokovic, but he was not as mature as 2015.

His specific problems with Federer were born out of Federer's knack for not giving anyone any rhythm, Fed's slices were silent killers in FO.

And Fed had to really really throw all he had got to make those matches close, it took him three beatdowns to realize Djokovic wasn't messing around that season.


I remember Federer looked utterly helpless against Djokovic in Dubai. He was physically outmatched, as in Djokovic was literally muscling points away from him in even FH-FH rallies. Fed usually has so many trucks up his sleeve, but Djokovic was too fast and too strong for him.

I think it was IW that shook him. Till that match, Federer probably though of AO and Dubai losses as only a consequence of a golden patch from Djokovic.

But in IW with #2 on the line, I think it became clear that the losses weren't the exception, they were almost the rule now.



Make no mistake about it, it took exceptional focus, will power, extremely patient strategy and great serving to get the job done in RG and you can look at USO for what happened when Federer showed just a hint of a lapse.

Well said. In fourth set of FO SF Novak had broken Federer and was serving for the set. Federer played an absolutely wonderful 10th game to break back. It would have been an interesting fifth set if the match had gone the distance.

 

[Nole_King]

It happens. 10 wins in other 10 matches against Fedal in 2011 though. He was scary good.

It does look scary when you put it this way

 

[Nole_King]

Wawrinka was one set away from 2-0 at Slams against Djokovic in 2015. So?

2011 Djokovic >> 2015 Djokovic

 

[Nole_King]

Djokovic 2011 can't even lick the shoes of 2006 Federer (Outside of Clay and Cincy tiredness)

But why does he need to?

 

[roysid]

Federer messed up twice against Djokovic being 40-15 up which ultimately gave Novak 2 slams. Now that's huge. A difference of atleast 15 to 17.

USO 2011 : Fed thought the match was in his pocket. It was a freak shot and then Feds mistake that did him in. Fed was just stunned by what happened.
At that time, I wasn't disappointed by what happened. Had he made the finals, he wouldve surely lost to Nadal.


Wim 2019 : Here I sense that Fed was nervous. He still didn't believe that he would win the match and it showed. Rushed through both the points. Was praying for a ace because else it was clear fed would lose in a rally. Both serves to Djokovic forehand was a big big blunder.



USO 2010 : That match has no impact in slam champion as Nadal was going to win it anyways.

 

[roysid]

In my opinion, Novak has gotten very lucky in several of his very close wins against Federer.

No. It's just being clutch on big points vs being nervous on big points.

 

[Lew II]

Meetings in Federer's 5 best seasons(2004-2007, 2017): 6
Meetings in Djokovic's 5 best seasons(2011, 2015, 2016, 2018, 2019: 18.

Makes sense.

Matches before Djokovic won his 2nd slam --> 19
Matches after Federer won his 2nd last slam --> 5

The form excuse is weak. As stats show and as both players stated.

 

[metsman]

Lulzworth.
Neither was the level that great nor the collapse that big, Djokovic just stopped mugging up and look at that, 0lderer exposed. That he still nearly won is laughable.

It was a combo of both. Fed's level was tragic in the 3rd and 4th. More like Djokovic exposed Federer's lack of base game when the serve+1 combo stopped working as well. But when it returned in the 5th Fed was fine again. The dynamic you're describing is post 2014 where Federer really shouldn't be making things that close unless Djokovic is mugging or unless Fed is serving insanely well. 2011 USO was pretty different, Fed was a bit stretched laterally from the baseline and just had less physicality, but still could do enough in those situations to be respectable and still had the strong serve+1 to carry him through the rest. You combine that with movement and physicality being the biggest things to decline from prime and the undeniable fact that Federer returned much better back then and also had a more reliable serve+1, if not a more potent one, and that's the argument for Fed peak for peak. Djokovic, unlike Nadal, just fundamentally couldn't disrupt Fed's serve+1 or sufficiently deny him chances on return until Fed himself basically got too old.

 

[RS]

But it happened and is not fantasy matchup...... And even you know 2011 was Djokovic best or 2nd best year.

 

[RS]

Djokovic 2011 can't even lick the shoes of 2006 Federer (Outside of Clay and Cincy tiredness)

You could make a good case he was better at RG and he was certainly better at AO. Better Canada/Cincy and Miami and Dubai. Worse at IW (slightly) and then at Wim/USO and the whole fall season off course. Clay masters about equal or slightly in favour of Novak.

 

[RS]

 

[alexio]

Так-то нувачева менталка - те ещё качели в разрезе истории, удивительно он колеблется от твердости к надрыву и обратно. Всё-таки Панчо лучший - восемь лет доминаторства в стеснённых условиях профессионального тура дорогого стоят, при том что жадина Крамер ему недоплачивал.

интересная у него биография.. 8 детей (как и 8 лет первый), женился на сестре агасси, промышлял квартирными кражами будучи подростком, за что и отсидел в колонии, люто спорил с судьями, выводил соперников из себя, сложный характер .. очень сложно судить о игроке когда вообще не видел даже одной игры как он играет, но не кажется тебе что та идея что гонсалес и сампрас по сути своей очень похожи (равноценны) (ну или сампрас точно не хуже его это как минимум) правдива, посмотрел щас кое-какие хроники где он с лейвером играет на уэмбли чемпионате, и ощущение такое что как раз таки как будто сампрас там играет, и по подаче и по выходу к сетке,..да и сампрас тоже 6 раз подряд брал первую строчку в рейтинге, недалеко ушел, если это так тогда и сампраса нужно рассматривать как достойного кандидата,

 

[NoleFam]

But it happened and is not fantasy matchup...... And even you know 2011 was Djokovic best or 2nd best year.

Yea it did happen but keyword here is nearly...

 

[Hitman]

This shows us that Djokovic won his three slams and dominated the toughest field of anyone in recent history. This is kudos to Djokovic that he took on such great competition and still managed to walk away with three slams and five masters titles.

I mean, wasn't Nadal also close to beating him in Miami, and Murray close to beating him in Rome...they didn't do it, and that is what makes Novak's 2011 so freaking good, he took their best shots and kept on coming at them.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

интересная у него биография.. 8 детей (как и 8 лет первый), женился на сестре агасси, промышлял квартирными кражами будучи подростком, за что и отсидел в колонии, люто спорил с судьями, выводил соперников из себя, сложный характер .. очень сложно судить о игроке когда вообще не видел даже одной игры как он играет, но не кажется тебе что та идея что гонсалес и сампрас по сути своей очень похожи (равноценны) (ну или сампрас точно не хуже его это как минимум) правдива, посмотрел щас кое-какие хроники где он с лейвером играет на уэмбли чемпионате, и ощущение такое что как раз таки как будто сампрас там играет, и по подаче и по выходу к сетке,..да и сампрас тоже 6 раз подряд брал первую строчку в рейтинге, недалеко ушел, если это так тогда и сампраса нужно рассматривать как достойного кандидата,

Конечно, игроки явно одного типа, но Гонсалес не только дольше держал первенство, но и отметился великолепным спортивным долголетием. Если бы он ушёл в 33 и не вернулся, я бы не поставил его впереди Лэйвера или Федерера, но он вернулся, и хотя до намбаванства при более молодых австралийцах ему уже было далеко, топ-игроком Панчо оставался до сорока и время от времени давал обоим по щам в отдельных матчах, а последний титул взял вовсе в 43.

 

[RS]

Yea it did happen but keyword here is nearly...

Nearly is a big word.

 

[RS]

This shows us that Djokovic won his three slams and dominated the toughest field of anyone in recent history. This is kudos to Djokovic that he took on such great competition and still managed to walk away with three slams and five masters titles.

I mean, wasn't Nadal also close to beating him in Miami, and Murray close to beating him in Rome...they didn't do it, and that is what makes Novak's 2011 so freaking good, he took their best shots and kept on coming at them.

This is a bit away from the topic though this is about Fed more than Murray and Nadal and the field that year......

 

[Hitman]

This is a bit away from the premise though this is about Fed more than Murray and Nadal also Fed was closer than both of them......

Is it really? Because the way I see it, in all those matches, they tried to impose their will onto him and he refused to succumb, whether one player was one point away, or two points away, they were all hell bent on beating him and more than likely anyone else standing there, they might have done so, just couldn't take Novak 2011 down.

 

[Mivic]

Just like pre-prime Djokovic (who was clearly further removed from his peak level than Federer was in 2011, in my opinion anyway, and didn’t have the know-how at the tail end of slams to boot) beat peak Federer in Montreal and followed it up with a very close three setter at the US Open shortly afterwards (and beat him in Australia a few months later). It’s not a surprise to me that Federer, an ATG who still had the mental advantage over Djokovic at that point in terms of savvy in latter stages of slams, on top of the fact he had limited pressure on his shoulders going into said matches, was able to push Djokovic. Even then I would say Djokovic was clearly the superior player both in Australia (obviously) and New York overall. Also kinda ridiculous to pretend that the 2011 French Open match wasn’t a near peak level performance from Federer just because it happened in 2011. He had to serve at a ridiculous level (one which he wasn’t capable of during his peak years) and reach unusual levels of clutchness to win there. When you realise that the version of Djokovic that held all four slams and the YEC was the same age as 2011 AO Fed (3 months difference), it does render these type of threads slightly ridiculous tbh lol. Then you have to take into account that it’s mainly Djokovic’s performances vs Nadal that defined his 2011 season. We can’t know for sure obviously but if I had to pick a version of Djokovic to face off against a peak Federer (outside of clay at least) I would peak his 2015/early 2016 version, while I think 2011 Djokovic would fare better against a peak Nadal (with the possible exception of grass).

 

[Hitman]

Just like pre-prime Djokovic (who was clearly further removed from his peak level than Federer was in 2011, and didn’t have the know-how at the tail end of slams to boot) beat peak Federer in Montreal and followed it up with a very close three setter at the US Open shorty afterwards. It’s not a surprise to me that Federer, an ATG who still had the mental advantage over Djokovic at that point in terms of savvy in latter stages of slams, on top of the fact he had very little pressure on his shoulders going into said matches, was able to push Djokovic. Even then I would say Djokovic was clearly the superior player both in Australia (obviously) and New York overall. Also kinda ridiculous to pretend that the 2011 French Open match wasn’t a near peak level performance from Federer just because it happened in 2011. He had to serve at a ridiculous level (which he wasn’t capable of during his peak years) and reach unusual levels of clutch to win there. When you realise that the version of Djokovic that held all four slams and the YEC was the same age as 2011 AO Fed (3 months difference), it does render these type of threads slightly ridiculous tbh lol.

Many Federer fans consider RG 2011 semi Federer's second greatest ever performance and level on clay, after Rome 2006...that is saying something of what it took to beat Djokovic.

 

[Zebrev]

If Djokovic struggled in 2011, imagine 2006...

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Just like pre-prime Djokovic (who was clearly further removed from his peak level than Federer was in 2011

not on outdoor HC

and didn’t have the know-how at the tail end of slams to boot)

Been 1.5 year since Fed won a slam by then, such know

beat peak Federer in Montreal

"peak"

Federer, an ATG who still had the mental advantage over Djokovic at that point in terms of savvy in latter stages of slams

what mental advantage when Djokovic was peak, umadbro?

on top of the fact he had very little pressure on his shoulders going into said matches, was able to push Djokovic

0lderer little pressure against peak ATG, lawl

Even then I would say Djokovic was clearly the superior player both in Australia (obviously) and New York overall

yeah, peakest of peak BOATov1c was slightly better then like sixth best oldеrer

Also kinda ridiculous to pretend that the 2011 French Open match wasn’t a near peak level performance from Federer just because it happened in 2011

yeah it was, so was Djokovic and he lost lol

(one which he wasn’t capable of during his peak years)

plain bs

and reach unusual levels of clutchness to win there

consider yourself and your idols lucky Federer is such a choker normally allowing them to inflate their counts

When you realise that the version of Djokovic that held all four slams and the YEC was the same age as 2011 AO Fed (3 months difference), it does render these type of threads slightly ridiculous tbh lol.

and look what happened then, sudden decline huh? oh right, unbelievably extremely injured, only fred is healthy and exposed. Federer was a year+ past his prime in 2011 (AO 2010 being the ending), he went down half a year younger than Djoel but started motoring a year younger too (2004 vs 2011).

Then you have to take into account that it’s mainly Djokovic’s performances vs Nadal that defined his 2011 season. We can’t know for sure obviously but if I had to pick a version of Djokovic to face off against a peak Federer (outside of clay at least) I would peak his 2015 version, while I think 2011 Djokovic would fare better against a peak Nadal.

non-peak Nadal except Miami, overrated

 

[alexio]

Конечно, игроки явно одного типа, но Гонсалес не только дольше держал первенство, но и отметился великолепным спортивным долголетием. Если бы он ушёл в 33 и не вернулся, я бы не поставил его впереди Лэйвера или Федерера, но он вернулся, и хотя до намбаванства при более молодых австралийцах ему уже было далеко, топ-игроком Панчо оставался до сорока и время от времени давал обоим по щам в отдельных матчах, а последний титул взял вовсе в 43.

да. может ты и прав, а каковы его результаты на грунте были? сампрас не отличался особой силой на этом покрытии, что и является жирным минусом против него, (глубокое убеждение что лучший в истории просто обязан очень прилично играть на всех покрытиях) ..но самое печальное это то что мало кто знает о нем здесь, думаю не более 5-10 процентов, да и я признаюсь ничего не знал, до того как ты не рассказал...еще жаль очень что борг так рано закончил, и селеш тоже было бы оч интересно понаблюдать что произошло бы с ней дальше в карьере не случись тот эпизод,

 

[Mivic]

not on outdoor HC



Been 1.5 year since Fed won a slam by then, such know



"peak"



what mental advantage when Djokovic was peak, umadbro?



0lderer little pressure against peak ATG, lawl



yeah, peakest of peak BOATov1c was slightly better then like sixth best oldеrer



yeah it was, so was Djokovic and he lost lol



plain bs



consider yourself and your idols lucky Federer is such a choker normally allowing them to inflate their counts



and look what happened then, sudden decline huh? oh right, unbelievably extremely injured, only fred is healthy and exposed. Federer was a year+ past his prime in 2011 (AO 2010 being the ending), he went down half a year younger than Djoel but started motoring a year younger too (2004 vs 2011).



non-peak Nadal except Miami, overrated

Lol I remember you calling Djokovic’s 42 match winning streak one of the peakest and most impressive stretches of tennis you’ve ever seen in the past. Now apparently it’s massively overrated. Shame your fanaticism has become more and more difficult to hide since then. I’d love to see how ‘peak’ Federer would have fared against those versions of Nadal, all I’m gonna say.

 

[JaoSousa]

Matches before Djokovic won his 2nd slam --> 19
Matches after Federer won his 2nd last slam --> 5

The form excuse is weak. As stats show and as both players stated.

Yeah, nice try. The form excuse is way more valid than an arbitrary 2nd slam, which you just put in there to include Djokovic's 2009-2010 period. The fact remains: Federer played Djokovic way more when Djokovic was winning many big tournaments and in good form than vice versa. It is natural that in those periods Djokovic would have a positive head to head.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Lol I remember you calling Djokovic’s 42 match winning streak one of the peakest and most impressive stretches of tennis you’ve ever seen in the past. Now apparently it’s massively overrated. Shame your fanaticism has become more and more difficult to hide since then. I’d love to see how ‘peak’ Federer would have fared against those versions of Nadal, all I’m gonna say.

It's not mutually exclusive, you know.

Actual peak Federer certainly beats 2011 Nadal at IW/Wimbledon/USO. Wimbledon see 07-08 against a clearly better Nadal, IW/USO see Nadal's serve. Nadal served a lot better when he beat Federer in close matches. Miami Nadal beats peak Fed. Madrid Federer should win but choking is an option. Rome is a mystery.

 

[JaoSousa]

Many Federer fans consider RG 2011 semi Federer's second greatest ever performance and level on clay, after Rome 2006...that is saying something of what it took to beat Djokovic.

I think this might be for Federer fans who don't watch much of his tennis. I would put this performace his top 5 best clay matches. Better ones include Federer v Safin Hamburg 2002, Federer vs Nadal Hamburg 2007, Fedal Rome 2006. I might even throw Hamburg 2008 in the mix because it was a really good version of Nadal, but I'll let you decide that for yourself.

 

[Hitman]

I think this might be for Federer fans who don't watch much of his tennis. I would put this performace his top 5 best clay matches. Better ones include Federer v Safin Hamburg 2002, Federer vs Nadal Hamburg 2007, Fedal Rome 2006. I might even throw Hamburg 2008 in the mix because it was a really good version of Nadal, but I'll let you decide that for yourself.

Some of those are good ones, I wouldn't put Hamburg 2008 in there though considering just how much choking Federer did in that match, IMO.

Now the interesting thing is that Hamburg 2002 match against Safin, which I do think was a great performance from him, but, it was pre-prime Federer. I guess that shows Federer could put in his some of his best performances outside of his generally agreed upon prime and peak period, which is the case for Hamburg 2002 and also the case for RG 2011.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

да. может ты и прав, а каковы его результаты на грунте были? сампрас не отличался особой силой на этом покрытии, что и является жирным минусом против него, (глубокое убеждение что лучший в истории просто обязан очень прилично играть на всех покрытиях) ..но самое печальное это то что мало кто знает о нем здесь, думаю не более 5-10 процентов, да и я признаюсь ничего не знал, до того как ты не рассказал...еще жаль очень что борг так рано закончил, и селеш тоже было бы оч интересно понаблюдать что произошло бы с ней дальше в карьере не случись тот эпизод,

Для профессионалов грунт был нишевым покрытием, почти как сейчас трава, так что возможностей проявить себя на грунте было меньше - надо сказать, однако, что Панчо и сам лишний раз на грунте не играл, коли была возможность. Тем не менее, факт таков, что French Pro в годы расцвета Гонсалеса не игрался: первый раз в 1956 и далее с 1958, когда Горгоне было уже за тридцать. Финал 1956, где Гонсалес едва уступил в пяти сетах недавно перешедшему из любителей топ-грунтовику Траберту, активно намекает, что, играйся турнир и раньше, Панчо не остался бы без титула. Сампрас тут не ровня, во всех проигрышах топ-соперникам на РГ только сет брал.

 

[JaoSousa]

Some of those are good ones, I wouldn't put Hamburg 2008 in there though considering just how much choking Federer did in that match, IMO.

Now the interesting thing is that Hamburg 2002 match against Safin, which I do think was a great performance from him, but, it was pre-prime Federer. I guess that shows Federer could put in his some of his best performances outside of his generally agreed upon prime and peak period, which is the case for Hamburg 2002 and also the case for RG 2011.

The special thing about RG 2011 for most Federer fans is the baseline tennis that he was able to produce in that match. It was like seeing 2006 or 2007 Federer playing on clay again, because his shots penetrated the court so much, and he was moving and serving very well. Even though 2011 Djokovic was fast, he was nothing compared to 2007 or 2006 Nadal in terms of raw foot speed, which is why Federer won in 4.

 

[King No1e]

Operative word "nearly."

 

[RS]

It's not mutually exclusive, you know.

Actual peak Federer certainly beats 2011 Nadal at IW/Wimbledon/USO. Wimbledon see 07-08 against a clearly better Nadal, IW/USO see Nadal's serve. Nadal served a lot better when he beat Federer in close matches. Miami Nadal beats peak Fed. Madrid Federer should win but choking is an option. Rome is a mystery.

Nadal in Wim 11/USO 11 likely plays better vs Federer than Djokovic though not saying he wins vs a peak Federr but still. Nadal served very well in Wim 11 the final was one of most serve dominated Djokovic matches i think. Nadal form in Wim 11 was probably his 2nd best leading up to a final and he had a good draw as well. USO 11 he was spectular in the QF + SF as well but served poor in the final.

 

[Hitman]

The special thing about RG 2011 for most Federer fans is the baseline tennis that he was able to produce in that match. It was like seeing 2006 or 2007 Federer playing on clay again, because his shots penetrated the court so much, and he was moving and serving very well. Even though 2011 Djokovic was fast, he was nothing compared to 2007 or 2006 Nadal in terms of raw foot speed, which is why Federer won in 4.

The lighter balls helped the attacking game a lot that year, they were perfect for Federer's first strike tennis, he was able to do more with those balls than the standard heavier ones. The faster the game, the better and more destructive Federer is. Honestly, it was frustrating for me to watch live at the time, because Federer was coming out of no where to change the narrative of what everyone was thinking we were heading towards over the clay season. But, he deserved it, one of his greatest wins IMO.

 

[King No1e]

The special thing about RG 2011 for most Federer fans is the baseline tennis that he was able to produce in that match. It was like seeing 2006 or 2007 Federer playing on clay again, because his shots penetrated the court so much, and he was moving and serving very well. Even though 2011 Djokovic was fast, he was nothing compared to 2007 or 2006 Nadal in terms of raw foot speed, which is why Federer won in 4.

I wouldn't go that far. He might've been a step slower on pure speed, but prime Djoker was more flexible and athletic than Nadal, and covered the court just about as well as El Matador. Physically, Nadal only has a major advantage in stamina and power.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Nadal in Wim 11/USO 11 likely plays better vs Federer than Djokovic though not saying he wins vs a peak Federr but still. Nadal served very well in Wim 11 the final was one of most serve dominated Djokovic matches i think. Nadal form in Wim 11 was probably his 2nd best leading up to a final and he had a good draw as well. USO 11 he was spectular in the QF + SF as well but served poor in the final.

just like AO 19, no?

 

[RS]

just like AO 19, no?

Fair enough a bit but he put up a better fight in the final though even though Djokovic had beaten him 5 times before that year. I would say Djokovic was not too much worse really as well.

 

[JaoSousa]

I wouldn't go that far. He might've been a step slower on pure speed, but prime Djoker was more flexible and athletic than Nadal, and covered the court just about as well as El Matador. Physically, Nadal only has a major advantage in stamina and power.

We must agree to disagree then. Nadal 2005-2008 was a physical beast and was faster, stronger, and had more endurance that Djokovic at his prime. Djokovic was more flexible, but there is a reason that nobody, and I mean NOBODY could hit through prime Nadal on clay or even a slow hardcourt(excluding maybe Federer on a slow hardcourt or in Hamburg 2007.

That said, I think Federer could hit through Djokovic in the 2010-2012 period, but not after that, because Djokovic himself got fitter and Federer lost some of his footspeed. In 2015, for example, Federer didn't beat Novak by just hitting groundstrokes. He tried to come to the net more.

In terms of raw footspeed in the last 15ish years, here is my list:

1. Monfils
2. 2005-2008 Nadal
3. Murray
4. Djokovic
5. Hewitt
Rest are the usual suspects, De Minaur, Nishikori, Simon, Ferrer.

 

[mike danny]

Just like pre-prime Djokovic (who was clearly further removed from his peak level than Federer was in 2011, in my opinion anyway, and didn’t have the know-how at the tail end of slams to boot) beat peak Federer in Montreal and followed it up with a very close three setter at the US Open shortly afterwards (and beat him in Australia a few months later). It’s not a surprise to me that Federer, an ATG who still had the mental advantage over Djokovic at that point in terms of savvy in latter stages of slams, on top of the fact he had limited pressure on his shoulders going into said matches, was able to push Djokovic. Even then I would say Djokovic was clearly the superior player both in Australia (obviously) and New York overall. Also kinda ridiculous to pretend that the 2011 French Open match wasn’t a near peak level performance from Federer just because it happened in 2011. He had to serve at a ridiculous level (one which he wasn’t capable of during his peak years) and reach unusual levels of clutchness to win there. When you realise that the version of Djokovic that held all four slams and the YEC was the same age as 2011 AO Fed (3 months difference), it does render these type of threads slightly ridiculous tbh lol. Then you have to take into account that it’s mainly Djokovic’s performances vs Nadal that defined his 2011 season. We can’t know for sure obviously but if I had to pick a version of Djokovic to face off against a peak Federer (outside of clay at least) I would peak his 2015/early 2016 version, while I think 2011 Djokovic would fare better against a peak Nadal (with the possible exception of grass).

I understand what you are trying to do, but why do you use early 2016 Djokovic as a point of reference to 2011 Fed and not post 2016 FO Djokovic?

 

[mike danny]

Just like pre-prime Djokovic (who was clearly further removed from his peak level than Federer was in 2011, in my opinion anyway, and didn’t have the know-how at the tail end of slams to boot) beat peak Federer in Montreal and followed it up with a very close three setter at the US Open shortly afterwards (and beat him in Australia a few months later). It’s not a surprise to me that Federer, an ATG who still had the mental advantage over Djokovic at that point in terms of savvy in latter stages of slams, on top of the fact he had limited pressure on his shoulders going into said matches, was able to push Djokovic. Even then I would say Djokovic was clearly the superior player both in Australia (obviously) and New York overall. Also kinda ridiculous to pretend that the 2011 French Open match wasn’t a near peak level performance from Federer just because it happened in 2011. He had to serve at a ridiculous level (one which he wasn’t capable of during his peak years) and reach unusual levels of clutchness to win there. When you realise that the version of Djokovic that held all four slams and the YEC was the same age as 2011 AO Fed (3 months difference), it does render these type of threads slightly ridiculous tbh lol. Then you have to take into account that it’s mainly Djokovic’s performances vs Nadal that defined his 2011 season. We can’t know for sure obviously but if I had to pick a version of Djokovic to face off against a peak Federer (outside of clay at least) I would peak his 2015/early 2016 version, while I think 2011 Djokovic would fare better against a peak Nadal (with the possible exception of grass).

He didn't have to serve out of his mind at his peak because he didn't need to. The rest of his game took care of him.

But speaking of serving great, how about Wimb 2007 final?

 

[mike danny]

Lol I remember you calling Djokovic’s 42 match winning streak one of the peakest and most impressive stretches of tennis you’ve ever seen in the past. Now apparently it’s massively overrated. Shame your fanaticism has become more and more difficult to hide since then. I’d love to see how ‘peak’ Federer would have fared against those versions of Nadal, all I’m gonna say.

Well, 2011 Nadal at Wimb and USO wasn't that special. Peak Fed would fare just fine. Especially against the former.

 

[Mivic]

Well, 2011 Nadal at Wimb and USO wasn't that special. Peak Fed would fare just fine. Especially against the former.

Djokovic has to get some credit for compromising Nadal from a mental standpoint during that period in 2011. I think Nadal would have put up a stronger level against Federer, due to a combination of the match-up and Nadal’s mental approach. Whether that would have been enough to beat Federer in those two instances is another matter entirely. He definitely doesn’t go 7-0 vs Nadal over the given stretch though.

 

[Mivic]

.

 

[mike danny]

Djokovic has to get some credit for compromising Nadal from a mental standpoint during that period in 2011. I think Nadal would have put up a stronger level against Federer, due to a combination of the match-up and Nadal’s mental approach. Whether that would have been enough to beat Federer in those two instances is another matter entirely. He definitely doesn’t go 7-0 vs Nadal over the given stretch though.

Federer wouldn't go 7-0 against him since he isn't winning in Miami and Rome anyway.

But I see Fed winning one of the GS finals against Rafa.

Djoker deserves credit for creating a mental stronghold over Rafa, but when Rafa had a mental stronghold over Fed, Fed still kept fighting like crazy. Rafa kinda gave up easily in 2011.