Djokovic Trailed Federer by 15 slams and Nadal by 8 slams in 2010

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
It is also interesting to do a tally for all tier 1 titles, not just slams, for the big 3.
I did it per season for convenience of comparison, meaning when I say 20 years old, I mean the end of the season when they turned 20: 2006 for Nadal, 2007 for Novak and 2001 for Fed.
I've defined tier 1 events as events giving 1,000 points or more, ie Masters, WTF and Slams. Special events like DC or Olympics are not included.

19: Nad 5 - Djo 2 - Fed 0
20: Nad 8 - Djo 2 - Fed 0
21: Nad 12 - Djo 6 - Fed 1
22: Nad 17 - Djo 7 - Fed 3
23: Nad 21 - Fed 10 - Djo 7
24: Nad 27 - Fed 16 - Djo 15
25: Nad 29 - Fed 24 - Djo 20
26: Nad 32 - Fed 30 - Djo 25
27: Nad 39 - Djo/Fed 31
28: Djo/Nad 41 - Fed 35
29: Djo 47 - Nad 41 - Fed 38
30: Djo 47 - Nad 42 - Fed 40
31: Djo 51 - Nad 46 - Fed 44
32: Djo 55 - Nad 50 - Fed 44
33: Djo 58 - Nad 54 - Fed 46

I'll stop here because Djoko turned 34 this year and the season is not over. Now this tally is extremely interesting because you can see that Fed has never led the tier 1 tally.
It's been all Nadal until 27 and then all Djoko from 29 onwards.
Even more interesting is the fact that Fed comes last in almost every year except for the middle ones (23 to 26)
Another argument toward Fed actually being the least impressive of the big 3.
 
Last edited:

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
Just Slam titles per age, same system:

19: Nad 1 - Djo/Fed 0
20: Nad 2 - Djo/Fed 0
21: Nad 3 - Djo 1 - Fed 0
22: Nad 5 - Djo/Fed 1
23: Nad 6 - Fed 4 - Djo 1
24: Nad 9 - Fed 6 - Djo 4
25: Nad 10 - Fed 9 - Djo 5
26: Fed 12 - Nad 11 - Djo 6
27: Fed/Nad 13 - Djo 7
28: Fed 15 - Nad 14 - Djo 10
29: Fed 16 - Nad 14 - Djo 12
30: Fed 16 - Nad 14 - Djo 12
31: Fed 17 - Nad 16 - Djo 14
32: Fed/Nad 17 - Djo 16
33: Nad 19 - Djo/Fed 17
34: Djo 20 or 21 - Nad 20 - Fed 17

There again, even in the slam category which is Fed's strong point, you can see that Nadal has been more dominant than Fed. He has led the tally in 10 out of the 15 seasons from 19 to 33 vs only 7 for Fed.
That's where Djoko was the proverbial turtle for most of his career but we all know now that the turtle wins the race in the end ;).
Turtle Djoko caught up with Hare Fed at 33 and caught up with Hare Nadal at 34. All the more admirable as he's dealing with 2 hares, not just one :)
Stunningly, Slam specialist Fed (he's won a lot less masters than Djokodal by contrast) suddenly started dragging behind like a steam engine struggling to cope with 2 state of the art high speed trains. :D

ETA: fun fact: none of the big 3 added any slam title at the age of 30. Is there such a thing as a 30 year old curse? ;)
 
Last edited:
Fed rose, started winning, peaked, won a ton, tailed off slightly as the next generation of greats rose up and began to start winning, then began to win sporadically as he declined further and the next generation peaked. Djokovic rose, started winning, peaked, won a ton, tailed of slightly as the next generahahahahahahAHHAHAHAHAHAHA.
 

MS_07

Rookie
At the end of 2010:

Federer: 16
Nadal: 9
Djokovic:1

10.5 years later:

Federer: 20
Nadal: 20
Djokovic:20

How much has Novak won from 2010-2021 -- 19 slams and counting! Unbelievable.

He had 11 years / 44 slams (-11 RG) = 33 slams served in his plate. No competition outside Ned @ RG.
He won 19 and blew up 13 :p
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
you can troll better than this pal

check your history of posts where you abused the word 'vulture'
and if you want to have a meaningful discussion, make an effort to be a reasonable poster
I won’t apologise for being accurate. Fed won slams in 09 and 17 that he previously lost to Nadal, then Djokovic. Opportunisterer
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
I won’t apologise for being accurate. Fed won slams in 09 and 17 that he previously lost to Nadal, then Djokovic. Opportunisterer
it doesn't matter whether you will apologize or not
fact is that you are disrespectful towards Fed and Nadal, but expect others to be 100% respectful towards the player you are so much invested emotionally

doesn't work that way

P.S.
It's as well an accurate assessment that Djokovic thrives based on one of the weakest era in tennis
nothing to apologize for
just facts
 

JackGates

Legend
I won’t apologise for being accurate. Fed won slams in 09 and 17 that he previously lost to Nadal, then Djokovic. Opportunisterer
But you aren't accurate, you are stating your opinion. We can't check who had it tougher in different eras.
We simply don't know. You need to learn the difference between opinions or facts.
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
But you aren't accurate, you are stating your opinion. We can't check who had it tougher in different eras.
We simply don't know. You need to learn the difference between opinions or facts.
- Federer lost 08RG, 08W, 09AO final to Nadal, reduced to tears
- Federer won 09RG, 09W and 10AO without facing Nadal.

What’s inaccurate about any of that? The guy is the master opportunist I will give him that
 

JackGates

Legend
- Federer lost 08RG, 08W, 09AO final to Nadal, reduced to tears
- Federer won 09RG, 09W and 10AO without facing Nadal.

What’s inaccurate about any of that? The guy is the master opportunist I will give him that
Nadal lost to Soderling, so why are you so sure Fed would still lose to him?
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
P.S.
It's as well an accurate assessment that Djokovic thrives based on one of the weakest era in tennis
nothing to apologize for
just facts
So since 2021 Djokovic has a weak era? About time he had some weak draws. For most of his slams he defeated some of the top 3 ranked players and big 4 members.

fed padded his stats with 11-12ish freebie slams between 03-07. Now it Novak’s turn :whistle:
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
So since 2021 Djokovic has a weak era? About time he had some weak draws. For most of his slams he defeated some of the top 3 ranked players and big 4 members.
except that it is not 2021, it is 2016 - and still counting
so make your math who had it easier
 

Mustard

Talk Tennis Guru
Makes the 2018 Wimbledon semi final all the more annoying. If Nadal wins that, he probably keeps the Djokovic genie in the bottle for good. Damn Anderson and Isner.
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
except that it is not 2021, it is 2016 - and still counting
so make your math who had it easier
Since 2016 slams won without facing a well playing big 4 ->
Nadal - 6
Djokovic - 5
Federer - 2

2003-2007 slams won without facing a well playing big 4 ->
Federer - 10
Nadal - 0
Djokovic - 0
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
right pal, cause pro tennis started in 2011, before that a typical main draw for a GS event would consist of Fed and 127 talk tennis amateurs
Federer won something like 7-8 slams without facing an ATG. His usual SF/F included Roddick, Hewitt, Bagdhatis, Philippousis, Kiefer…

Djokovic has a few weak slams to go before he reaches Federer levels of inflation.
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
Federer won something like 7-8 slams without facing an ATG. His usual SF/F included Roddick, Hewitt, Bagdhatis, Philippousis, Kiefer…

Djokovic has a few weak slams to go before he reaches Federer levels of inflation.
lololol

1. Baghdatis belongs to the Djokodal generation, so if you want to call Baghdatis weak competition, then you are essentially calling Djokodal a weak generation, and that's end of any attempt to have a reasonable discussion with you
2. Roddick and Hewitt both reached #1 in ranking and actually won GS titles. So, this alone makes them stronger competition than all the players born after Djokodal that keep folding already in the locked room at the mere possibility to play Djokodal
3. if you think that 36-37 years old Fed is a stronker opposition than a young Hewitt and Roddick, well, you might consider seeking some professional services
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
lololol

1. Baghdatis belongs to the Djokodal generation, so if you want to call Baghdatis weak competition, then you are essentially calling Djokodal a weak generation, and that's end of any attempt to have a reasonable discussion with you
2. Roddick and Hewitt both reached #1 in ranking and actually won GS titles. So, this alone makes them stronger competition than all the players born after Djokodal that keep folding already in the locked room at the mere possibility to play Djokodal
3. if you think that 36-37 years old Fed is a stronker opposition than a young Hewitt and Roddick, well, you might consider seeking some professional services
1. Fed is the one who had Bagdhatis in a slam final. Weak opponent.

2. Yes at the present moment in time they’re weaker than Roddick/Hewitt. However if they reach number 1 and win slams later in career they become level and /or stronger. Reminder - they didn’t beat Federer for any of their slams.

3. If you think any version of Roddick/Hewitt is better than 2015-2019 Federer, I suggest seek help for your delusion o_O :-D
 
Last edited:

JackGates

Legend
1. Fed is the one who had Bagdhatis in a slam final. Weak opponent.

2. Yes at the present moment in time they’re weaker than Roddick/Hewitt. However if they reach number 1 and win slams later in career they become level and /or stronger. Reminder - they didn’t beat Federer for any of their slams.

3. If you think any version of Roddick/Hewitt is better than 2015-2019 Federer, I suggest seek help for your delusion o_O :-D
So, are you saying Federer is not the same generation as Djokodal? This is what you are saying. How can Federer be the same generation as Djokodal but Fed's opponents are the same generation as Federer but not the same generation as Djokodal?

Makes no sense to me.
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
So, are you saying Federer is not the same generation as Djokodal? This is what you are saying. How can Federer be the same generation as Djokodal but Fed's opponents are the same generation as Federer but not the same generation as Djokodal?

Makes no sense to me.
Yes and no. Federer accumulated majority of his stats in the vacuum 2003-2007 period, post Sampras and pre Nadal/Djokovic. He only won 7 slams going through a fellow big 3 player o_O
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
So, what’s your point? Fed had him in a slam final. The others didn’t :whistle:
again irrelevant
Nole faced Berrettini in the Wim final
Nole faced Thiem in AO final
Nole faced Tsitsipas in RG final

all 3 opponents defeated themselves ;)

P.S.
shall I mention Anderson, post-injury Del-Po, etc.?
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
Yes and no. Federer accumulated majority of his stats in the vacuum 2003-2007 period, post Sampras and pre Nadal/Djokovic. He only won 7 slams going through a fellow big 3 player o_O
Nole accumulated inflated stats in the weakest era, starting with 2018, having to face Berrettini, Thiem, Tsitsipas, Anderson, post-injury Del Po in the finals, which defeat themselves as soon as they see Nole on the other side of the net
and that period is still going o_O
 

boredone3456

G.O.A.T.
I think when all is said and done Novak may well be the arguable best of the 3. Even if the major counts remain relatively close, his achievements at the Masters especially would probably tip things in his favor.

That being said...all 3 are top 10 GOAT easily, arguably higher.
 

alexio

Hall of Fame
again irrelevant
Nole faced Berrettini in the Wim final
Nole faced Thiem in AO final
Nole faced Tsitsipas in RG final

all 3 opponents defeated themselves ;)
that's some tasty food for thought for some who think that form over name mantra always works
 

JackGates

Legend
Yes and no. Federer accumulated majority of his stats in the vacuum 2003-2007 period, post Sampras and pre Nadal/Djokovic. He only won 7 slams going through a fellow big 3 player o_O
Doesn't matter since they aren't the same generation and wasn't in his peak. I can argue that post 2010 was a vaccuum without peak Federer. And let's face it Nadal was very inconsistent, he was away half of Nole's prime too.

So, the same logic can be used for Nole as well. Can't have it both ways no matter how much you want it.
Wawrinka actually was Nole's toughest opponent in majors and he was also gone majority of the time too.

How is this not a vaccuum when Wawrinka was the only one who posed Nole any problems? Are you saying Wawrinka is better than Fed?
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
Nole accumulated inflated stats in the weakest era, starting with 2018, having to face Berrettini, Thiem, Tsitsipas, Anderson, post-injury Del Po in the finals, which defeat themselves as soon as they see Nole on the other side of the net
and that period is still going o_O
Anderson followed Nadal in SF which was de facto final. Only ignorants would ignore this.
2018 USO was kinda weak
Thiem played awesome. Much better than some of Roddick’s efforts.
Berrerini was ok. Definitely better than anyone Fed faced in 2005 there at least.

Djokovic has a looooooong way to go before he reaches Federer level of stat padding.
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
Doesn't matter since they aren't the same generation and wasn't in his peak. I can argue that post 2010 was a vaccuum without peak Federer. And let's face it Nadal was very inconsistent, he was away half of Nole's prime too.

So, the same logic can be used for Nole as well. Can't have it both ways no matter how much you want it.
You could, but any respected tennis fan, historian or analyst would laugh at you.

No era where the 3 best modern players ever are competing for slams, can be called a “vacuum” or weak era.
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
Anderson followed Nadal in SF which was de facto final. Only ignorants would ignore this.
2018 USO was kinda weak
Thiem played awesome. Much better than some of Roddick’s efforts.
Berrerini was ok. Definitely better than anyone Fed faced in 2005 there at least.

Djokovic has a looooooong way to go before he reaches Federer level of stat padding.
I didn't know that Fed opponents in 2005 weren't able to drop shot or hit a FH down the line
 

boredone3456

G.O.A.T.
Nole accumulated inflated stats in the weakest era, starting with 2018, having to face Berrettini, Thiem, Tsitsipas, Anderson, post-injury Del Po in the finals, which defeat themselves as soon as they see Nole on the other side of the net
and that period is still going o_O
Whereas Nadal has major final wins over the likes of: Berdych, Anderson, Thiem, Puerta, Ferrer, Medvedev (who probably should have won that USO and he choked up a break in the 5th)

And Federer has had: Baghdatis, Phillipoussis, Fernando Gonzalez, and almost retired Agassi...

playing that game I could easily make Rafa and Fed sound pretty weak as well you see....when we know overall thats not the case.
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
I didn't know that Fed opponents in 2005 weren't able to drop shot or hit a FH down the line
I do recall Roddick stumbling to the net like a buffoon and being passed at will. Berretini at least on a set and gave a fight. Hewitt or Roddick couldn’t even do that.
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
You could, but any respected tennis fan, historian or analyst would laugh at you.

No era where the 3 best modern players ever are competing for slams, can be called a “vacuum” or weak era.
@alexio what were you saying about form over name?

I can see that some 30-35 years down the line, when 66 years old Nole will be defeating 67 years old Nadal, some will call it Golden Era of tennis, cause two of the greatest players are still playing and defeating all the younger players 16 - 66 years old
:-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
Whereas Nadal has major final wins over the likes of: Berdych, Anderson, Thiem, Puerta, Ferrer, Medvedev (who probably should have won that USO and he choked up a break in the 5th)

And Federer has had: Baghdatis, Phillipoussis, Fernando Gonzalez, and almost retired Agassi...

playing that game I could easily make Rafa and Fed sound pretty weak as well you see....when we know overall thats not the case.
Baghdatis belongs to the Djokodal generation

unless you are saying that Djokodal generation is weak, then you need to edit your statement
 

boredone3456

G.O.A.T.
Baghdatis belongs to the Djokodal generation

unless you are saying that Djokodal generation is weak, then you need to edit your statement
I need to do no such thing, my statement was made directly to point out how narrow minded your statement is, sorry you didn't pick up on that
 
It is also interesting to do a tally for all tier 1 titles, not just slams, for the big 3.
I did it per season for convenience of comparison, meaning when I say 20 years old, I mean the end of the season when they turned 20: 2006 for Nadal, 2007 for Novak and 2001 for Fed.
I've defined tier 1 events as events giving 1,000 points or more, ie Masters, WTF and Slams. Special events like DC or Olympics are not included.

19: Nad 5 - Djo 2 - Fed 0
20: Nad 8 - Djo 2 - Fed 0
21: Nad 12 - Djo 6 - Fed 1
22: Nad 17 - Djo 7 - Fed 3
23: Nad 21 - Fed 10 - Djo 7
24: Nad 27 - Fed 16 - Djo 15
25: Nad 29 - Fed 24 - Djo 20
26: Nad 32 - Fed 30 - Djo 25
27: Nad 39 - Djo/Fed 31
28: Djo/Nad 41 - Fed 35
29: Djo 47 - Nad 41 - Fed 38
30: Djo 47 - Nad 42 - Fed 40
31: Djo 51 - Nad 46 - Fed 44
32: Djo 55 - Nad 50 - Fed 44
33: Djo 58 - Nad 54 - Fed 46

I'll stop here because Djoko turned 34 this year and the season is not over. Now this tally is extremely interesting because you can see that Fed has never led the tier 1 tally.
It's been all Nadal until 27 and then all Djoko from 29 onwards.
Even more interesting is the fact that Fed comes last in almost every year except for the middle ones (23 to 26)
Another argument toward Fed actually being the least impressive of the big 3.

On the other hand (& this has been said before, so I take zero credit for this other than mentioning it now), in Federer’s defense he played and won so many Halle’s and maybe some Queen’s Clubs (not sure about QC), which are not at Masters level, that these so called “big titles” are not inclusive and can bely Federer’s grass dominance.

By the same token, Federer should not be lagging in Masters like he to Nadal and Djokovic.

In all objectivity Nadal should 100% be behind on Masters titles, given that 6 outta 9 are on hard court. But Nadal and Djokovic are tied iirc at 36.
 
Top