FEDAL-Try to be Objective

Z

Zara

Guest
Asking Fedal fans to be objective is like telling a monkey to behave.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Djokovic played fine tennis in both those matches, he was just outclassed by different peaking forms of Nadal on a HC.
playing fine tennis in 2010 is different from it being anywhere near his 2011 version.

As far as 2013 final goes, Djokovic was rubbish in sets 1 and 4. Couldn't even keep the ball in play and was hitting UEs ( in short rallies, not even long ones). He played pretty well in sets 2 and 3, but you cannot ignore how he played in sets 1 and 4.

You cry like hell over Wimbledon 11 final and USO 11 final for instance, saying Nadal was not at his peak, but can't even recognize the above ? truly biased.
 
Last edited:

NatF

Bionic Poster
Djokovic played fine tennis in both those matches, he was just outclassed by different peaking forms of Nadal on a HC.

those 2 USO finals show how adaptable Nadal is and why many consider him the most complete tennis player ever, particularly from the baseline.
Djokovic was spraying errors in the first and fourth set of the USO 2013 final. He was great in the middle 2 and poor in the outer too. He made a lot of errors in rallies between 1-3 shots. Not the sign of someone playing well. Guys like Roddick/Hewitt etc...took Federer just as close in the scoreboard but without leaking so many errors and you call them weak...
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
The first set of that QF was the best. Hewitt was actually pretty good throughout the match, Federer just raised him game to crazy heights in set 1 and 3 - those are 2 of the best sets of tennis I've seen from Federer on grass (that first set one of his best ever), he was just crazy good IMO.
Hewitt played bad in the 3rd set. The stats show that as well :

0 winners, 6 UEs and forced 9 errors from federer ...so 9 winners+FEs to 6 UEs (+3), which is not good on grass, well below par
Contrast to 1 set : 4 winners, 2 UEs and forced 9 winners from federer. So 13 winners+forced errors to 2 UEs(+11)


https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/federer-vs-hewitt-wimbledon-2004-qf-stats.569813/

Scroll down towards the end.


Federer was 24 W+FEs to 3 UEs in the 1st set (+21)
He was 23W+FEs to 4 UEs in the 3rd set(+19)

---
But I do remember now that he played a fantastic 2nd set breaker. So definitely should be in the honorable list.
 

DRII

G.O.A.T.
No you absolutely, definitely don't.

2013 djokovic in the USO final was rubbish in the 1st and 4th set.
You need eyes and non-idiotic judgement to recognize that.

2011 djokovic > 2015 djokovic are the top 2 for him.

djoko of 07-09 was as good or a tad better than djoko in USO 10 and USO 13.
please :rolleyes:

only thing 2015 Djokovic had was a Nadal in horrible form and a Federer w/o the stamina to go hard for 5 sets...
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
please :rolleyes:

only thing 2015 Djokovic had was a Nadal in horrible form and a Federer w/o the stamina to go hard for 5 sets...
Djokovic played pretty solid tennis in the 2015 USO final and was very clutch saving 19/23 BPs .
You need unbiased eyes to recognize that.

Mind you, he was up against a hostile crowd as well.

Hilarious how you have no problem pointing out 2015 being weak for Djokovic, but cry like a baby when someone does the same with 10 for Nadal.
 

DRII

G.O.A.T.
playing fine tennis in 2010 is different from it being anywhere near his 2011 version.

As far as 2013 final goes, Djokovic was rubbish in sets 1 and 4. Couldn't even keep the ball in play and was hitting UEs ( in short rallies, not even long ones). He played pretty well in sets 2 and 3, but you cannot ignore how he played in sets 1 and 4.

You cry like hell over Wimbledon 11 final and USO 11 final for instance, saying Nadal was not at his peak, but can't even recognize the above ? truly biased.
not being at peak is completely different from playing rubbish tennis!

of course Nadal was not peak in 2011, but I never said he played horribly et al like you and Nat are doing in regards to Djokovic.

plus, you two discount how an opponent came make another play.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Hewitt played bad in the 3rd set. The stats show that as well :

0 winners, 6 UEs and forced 9 errors from federer ...so 9 winners+FEs to 6 UEs (+3), which is not good on grass, well below par
Contrast to 1 set : 4 winners, 2 UEs and forced 9 winners from federer. So 13 winners+forced errors to 2 UEs(+11)


https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/federer-vs-hewitt-wimbledon-2004-qf-stats.569813/

Scroll down towards the end.


Federer was 24 W+FEs to 3 UEs in the 1st set (+21)
He was 23W+FEs to 4 UEs in the 3rd set(+19)

---
But I do remember now that he played a fantastic 2nd set breaker. So definitely should be in the honorable list.
Well I didn't say he was good in the 3rd set, it was the only dip from him in the match though. He made a few more errors, I think he lost concentration and decided to focus on the 4th where he went up a break.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
not being at peak is completely different from playing rubbish tennis!

of course Nadal was not peak in 2011, but I never said he played horribly et al like you and Nat are doing in regards to Djokovic.

plus, you two discount how an opponent came make another play.
if you are spraying UEs in rallies of 3-5 shots, it is crappy tennis -- regardless of opponent.

Djokovic played really well in the middle 2 sets which compensates for his 1st and 4th sets being crappy -- so overall a decent match. But still lesser than other versions of djokovic from 2007-15, except for when he lost to Nishi in 4 sets in 2014.

---------

And 2010, neither me nor NatF said Djokovic played horribly. He played good tennis , but nothing more than what he played in 07-09 (arguably lesser) and not comparable to how he played in 11.

@ last part : jeez, how does that not apply for djoko making nadal look bad in 11 ?
He actually outlasted him in long rallies to make him look worse.

Unlike in USO 13 final, in the 1st and 4th sets, where it was djoko's own doing.
 
D

Deleted member 716271

Guest
Wait a minute if the argument is Djokovic was close in level in 2010 and 2011 finals (lol). then why couldn't the argument be made in reverse for Nadal in 2011? You could use the same logic to say Nadal was near his best thruout 2011, but Novak was just better.
 

DRII

G.O.A.T.
Djokovic played pretty solid tennis in the 2015 USO final and was very clutch saving 19/23 BPs .
You need unbiased eyes to recognize that.

Mind you, he was up against a hostile crowd as well.

Hilarious how you have no problem pointing out 2015 being weak for Djokovic, but cry like a baby when someone does the same with 10 for Nadal.
2010 was one of Nadal's top forms, that's the difference.

2015 was not a Djokovic top form or at least it was not that different from previous years when he was winning slams. the difference was his competition.

Nadal's level ungulates far more than Federer's or Djokovic's!

and trust me, as a Nadal fan I would rather that not have been the case! it might be beneficial in winning arguments like these against posters like you, but if Nadal could have held his high level w/o dropping noticeably so many times or becoming injured he would definitely have the most slams currently IMO.
 

Tennisgods

Hall of Fame
Spencer, why is this argument ALWAYS about the finals? Some of Feds best performances in slams he won arguably came in the semis. And he didn't just win; he often used to destroy his closest rivals.

To win you've gotta win 7 matches per slam. Anyone (yes, even 2017's USO champ) deserves credit for doing it and they all count as the same: one!
 

DRII

G.O.A.T.
Djokovic was spraying errors in the first and fourth set of the USO 2013 final. He was great in the middle 2 and poor in the outer too. He made a lot of errors in rallies between 1-3 shots. Not the sign of someone playing well. Guys like Roddick/Hewitt etc...took Federer just as close in the scoreboard but without leaking so many errors and you call them weak...
I never called them weak, perhaps relatively weak, point is they were not ATGs either by accomplishments or subjective extrapolation of their qualities as a tennis player.

both had gaping holes that were not mitigated enough by their strengths - Roddick 1 dimensional tennis and Hewitt lack of offensive power.
 

DRII

G.O.A.T.
Wait a minute if the argument is Djokovic was close in level in 2010 and 2011 finals (lol). then why couldn't the argument be made in reverse for Nadal in 2011? You could use the same logic to say Nadal was near his best thruout 2011, but Novak was just better.
not if you actually saw Nadal's play both years.

perhaps you did not.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
2010 was one of Nadal's top forms, that's the difference.

2015 was not a Djokovic top form or at least it was not that different from previous years when he was winning slams. the difference was his competition.

Nadal's level ungulates far more than Federer's or Djokovic's!

and trust me, as a Nadal fan I would rather that not have been the case! it might be beneficial in winning arguments like these against posters like you, but if Nadal could have held his high level w/o dropping noticeably so many times or becoming injured he would definitely have the most slams currently IMO.
of course 2015 was Djokovic was one of Djokovic's top forms. what rubbish. (just because it was lesser than 11 doesn't make it not top level tennis from djoko)

it was his best Wimbledon match - wim 15 final. QF vs Cilic about the same level.
Indoor season was arguably his best as well ( along with 14).

clay and slow HC was not as good as 2011, but level was still pretty good.

It was better than Nadal in 10. The win loss % difference is big and Djokovic faced a LOT more top 10 opponents.


---

If you are talking about just USO..

I'd put USO 10 of nadal with USO 11 of djoko (their best forms at the USO)
USO 13 of nadal with USO 15 of djoko (not their very best tennis , but still very good and very clutch)
 
D

Deleted member 716271

Guest
not if you actually saw Nadal's play both years.

perhaps you did not.
Again I could say the same about Djokovic. Not if you actually saw Djokovic play both years. Perhaps you did not.

That's not a logical based argument.

Nadal made the same amount of finals in 2010 as 2011 for example and had a great year besides losing to 1 guy repeatedly over and over in those finals. The reverse is not true, Djoko was trash all year in 2010, perhaps his worst year on tour since he ascended in 2007 until this year.
 

DRII

G.O.A.T.
interesting how this thread brought out some of the oldies but goodies regarding posters participating in the Fedalovic wars :D

not the normal current lot of phants, VBs, and whatever Djokovic's clan are called...
 

DRII

G.O.A.T.
Again I could say the same about Djokovic. Not if you actually saw Djokovic play both years. Perhaps you did not.

That's not a logical based argument.

Nadal made the same amount of finals in 2010 as 2011 for example and had a great year besides losing to 1 guy repeatedly over and over in those finals. The reverse is not true, Djoko was trash all year in 2010, perhaps his worst year on tour since he ascended in 2007 until this year.
I never compared Djokovic's entire 2010, just his performance at the USO that year which was very high.

and everything can not be explained through stats or results, sometimes it takes the eye test.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
My version for your pleasure...

Federer:

WIM03 -> 6.5/10
AO04 -> 3.5/10
WIM04 -> 8.5/10
US04 -> 4/10
WIM05 -> 5/10
US05 -> 7.5/10
AO06 -> 6/10
WIM06 -> 7/10
US06 ->6.5/10
AO07-> 6/10
WIM07 -> 9.5/10
US07 -> 6.5/10
US08 -> 4/10
RG09 -> 5/10
WIM09 -> 9.5/10
AO10 -> 5/10
Man, there's no way Gonzo of AO 07 final should be rated that low. You might want to re-watch that.

He was 74 winners+forced errors to 28 UEs (+46)

Djokovic was 69 winners+forced errors to 40 UEs in the 07 final (+29)

Of course djokovic's superior defense accounts for some of those UEs from Federer, but we both know Federer played considerably better in the 07 AO final than in the 07 USO final.

In USO 06, Roddick played very well in the middle 2 sets, but was crappy in the 1st set and not so great in the 4th set either.
Gonzo did not have any letdowns in the match at all and obviously had 2 SPs in the 1st set --- both of which federer saved.

And it was better than Baggy's in 06 AO (you agreed Gonzo was the tougher opponent as well ), yet you have them both at 6.

Gonzo's SF perf vs Haas was a 10 tbh (9.5 at the very least) and it didn't dip so far to become a 6 in the final.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 716271

Guest
I never compared Djokovic's entire 2010, just his performance at the USO that year which was very high.

and everything can not be explained through stats or results, sometimes it takes the eye test.
So do you think 2011 Novak loses to 2010 Rafa at USO?

I agree Rafa's career has been better at USO because 3>2. But peak for peak I think Djoko would win.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I never compared Djokovic's entire 2010, just his performance at the USO that year which was very high.

and everything can not be explained through stats or results, sometimes it takes the eye test.
yeah, eye test shows Djokovic was nowhere near his 2011 form in 2010 USO.

you just want to pump up Nadal's competition in USO 10, so you are pumping up Djokovic's form, that's it.
 
D

Deleted member 716271

Guest
Man, there's no way Gonzo of AO 07 final should be rated that low. You might want to re-watch that.

He was 74 winners+forced errors to 28 UEs (+46)

Djokovic was 69 winners+forced errors to 40 UEs in the 07 final (+29)

Of course djokovic's superior defense accounts for some of those UEs from Federer, but we both know Federer played considerably better in the 07 AO final than in the 07 USO final.

In USO 06, Roddick played very well in the middle 2 sets, but was crappy in the 1st set and not so great in the 4th set either.
Gonzo did not have any letdowns in the match at all and obviously had 2 SPs in the 1st set --- both of which federer saved.
is that opponents level in finals hes rating or the entire draw? There is no way Roddick was a 9.5 in 2009 wimbledon lmao
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
is that opponents level in finals hes rating or the entire draw? There is no way Roddick was a 9.5 in 2009 wimbledon lmao
final.

And yeah, I think Roddick in wim 09 final was a 9.5 as well.
His only -ve game wise his returning. His FH was working well -- not as good as his peak, but not pusher-like either, was moving well, played well at the net, was approaching well for a change, his BH was firing really well and was obviously serving crazy well.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
what I have are my eyes and discernible judgment, which you often lack.

and your premise, in cosigning Nat's post, is destroyed since Nadal dismantled both pre and post 2011 Djokovic in a USO final!
Djokovic post 2011 wasn't always at the same level. 2015 Djokovic would beat any Nadal at the open. 2013/2014 sucked.
 
D

Deleted member 716271

Guest
That's your opinion keep in mind though us open 2011 wasn't even particularly close. The 1 set Rafa won was 7-6 before 6-1 final seat beatdown. And despite that people said what a great effort from Rafa and how amazing the points are because he was absolutely emptying the bucket to try to win especially in the 3rd but it just wasn't enough overall. No one said or felt the same from Novak in 2010.
 
D

Deleted member 716271

Guest
final.

And yeah, I think Roddick in wim 09 final was a 9.5 as well.
His only -ve game wise his returning. His FH was working well -- not as good as his peak, but not pusher-like either, was moving well, played well at the net, was approaching well for a change, his BH was firing really well and was obviously serving crazy well.
If he was 9.5 then what did fed play To win, 10? Yet no one says that was his best Wimbledon performance. Why is that?
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
For Djokovic :

AO 08 : tsonga - 7.5
AO 11 : murray - 3.5
Wim 11 : nadal - 6.5
USO 11 : nadal - 7.5
AO 12 : nadal - 9.0*
AO 13 : murray - 6
Wim 14 : federer - 8**
AO 15 : murray - 6.5
Wim 15 : federer - 6.5
USO 15 : federer - 7
AO 16 : murray - 4.5
RG 16 : murray - 4.5


* due to scoreline and being up a break in the 5th, not necessarily due to level
** for that comeback in the 4th set

total = 77, avg of 6.41

will update for opponents before the final later.

Edit : Maybe, I'm under-rating fed of wim 15 final, placing it at 6.5 ...will have to think about it.
 
Last edited:

DRII

G.O.A.T.
yeah, eye test shows Djokovic was nowhere near his 2011 form in 2010 USO.

you just want to pump up Nadal's competition in USO 10, so you are pumping up Djokovic's form, that's it.
again, as have been explained to you: Djokovic had very similar semis with Federer in both 2010 and 2011 USO. thus showing his level was similar both years.

or are you going to argue that somehow both of their levels just happened to correspond with each others' at the same time at each USO semito somehow make your argument credible :rolleyes:
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
again, as have been explained to you: Djokovic had very similar semis with Federer in both 2010 and 2011 USO. thus showing his level was similar both years.

or are you going to argue that somehow both of their levels just happened to correspond with each others' at the same time at each USO semito somehow make your argument credible :rolleyes:
I already demolished your argument showing that Federer was clearly better in the USO 11 semi than in the USO 10 semi.

Federer had one bad set in USO 11 semi - the 4th one. He had 2 in USO 10 semi - 2nd and 4th.

he also had to face a superior version of Djokovic in the USO 11 SF.

I clearly showed that the stats were better in the USO 11 SF for both inspite of surface being slower than in USO 10 SF. If they were of similar speed, the difference would be even bigger.

But all of that won't get into your head because your so set in your agenda and are utterly blinded by it.

Is it so tough to understand that Djokovic in his 11 form in general could be significantly better than his USO 10 form in USO 11 ?

Also, federer had a below par match out of nowhere in USO 10 SF just like in USO 12 QF vs Berdych. He didn't in USO 11.

How tough is that to understand/accept ?
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 716271

Guest
I already demolished your argument showing that Federer was clearly better in the USO 11 semi than in the USO 10 semi.
But then that won't get into your head because your so set in your agenda and are utterly blinded by it.
It's obvious I mean in 2010 he barely won 2 sets And Novak won the other 2 in relative beatdown before the 5th. In 2011 fed was kicikin Novak ass the 1st 2 sets. Federer level was significantly better in 2011.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I don't know I rate fed Wimbledon sf 2003 and even one of the finals against Roddick 05 I think higher than 09 final easily
yeah, those are definite 10s.

Maybe 9.25 would be a better rating for wim 09 final for both.

But in my rating, I'm considering a bit of the closeness of the match as well, not just this one, but in general.
So 9.5.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
I never called them weak, perhaps relatively weak, point is they were not ATGs either by accomplishments or subjective extrapolation of their qualities as a tennis player.

both had gaping holes that were not mitigated enough by their strengths - Roddick 1 dimensional tennis and Hewitt lack of offensive power.
Holes which hindered them when looking at their careers perhaps but not in individual matches. Hewitt's lack of offensive power is overstated as well, he could hit winners. His 2005 SF USO performance against Federer saw him hit as many winners as Djokovic did in the 2013 F - with less errors. A lot of those came at the net but that's still an offensive weapon.

Man, there's no way Gonzo of AO 07 final should be rated that low. You might want to re-watch that.

He was 74 winners+forced errors to 28 UEs (+46)

Djokovic was 69 winners+forced errors to 40 UEs in the 07 final (+29)

Of course djokovic's superior defense accounts for some of those UEs from Federer, but we both know Federer played considerably better in the 07 AO final than in the 07 USO final.

In USO 06, Roddick played very well in the middle 2 sets, but was crappy in the 1st set and not so great in the 4th set either.
Gonzo did not have any letdowns in the match at all and obviously had 2 SPs in the 1st set --- both of which federer saved.

And it was better than Baggy's in 06 AO (you agreed Gonzo was the tougher opponent as well ), yet you have them both at 6.

Gonzo's SF perf vs Haas was a 10 tbh (9.5 at the very least) and it didn't dip so far to become a 6 in the final.
I should probably bump Gonzalez up to about a 7 or 6.5. It has been a little while since I watched the match, he definitely played a very solid match.

Roddick wasn't that bad in the first set of the 2006 final, he didn't make much of an impression with his game and was tactically off but he wasn't hitting too many errors either. The 4th set was a little bit of a let down. The middle 2 sets were clearly better than what Gonzo produced though. I think he was definitely tougher overall.

On another note I'd probably push Roddick in 2009 down to a 9, I think it was about equal to his 2004 match.
 

The_Order

G.O.A.T.
I don't know if I've ever full on disagreed about Nadal having the overall tougher finals opponents man. I think across the entire draws they were virtually even and still do.

Federer hasn't been on 14 slams since 2009. We've been arguing this stuff for years so including the average up to 14 slams for both doesn't make much sense to me - I'm sure you've not just been considering their draws up until the FO 2009 when we've spoken about this stuff before. It probably won't make much difference in terms of overall numbers but to put our previous arguments into better context I suggest looking at the average of Federer's 17 and Nadal's 14.

Sorry if I'm being dense how did you get those averages? Tried to work it out myself but then realised I had no idea what you did :D
To get averages: added your score for Rafa (after 14 majors) with mine then divided by 2. Same with Fed after 14 majors.

The point I'm trying to make is that for years I was accused of trolling and being a blind fanboi for saying Rafa had it harder than Fed all these years.

So, by comparing totals we can clearly see that before this year Rafa did have it harder.

Also, I think its fair to say Fed at WIM08 final was a tougher opponent than Roddick in WIM09 final. Yet they both have 9.5. Fed had way more of a mental edge over Roddick in 09 than Nadal would have had against Fed in 08.
 

The_Order

G.O.A.T.
LOL ****ing hilarious. Fantastic comedy/trolling here.

Murray 08 USO same level as Fed 08 RG hahahahahaha. 2010/2013 Djokovic above 07 Djokovic. 07,11 RG Fed a whole point above 06 Wimbledon Nadal. Anderson 2017 above Murray 08 USO LOL. Puerta 6/10 LOL

LOL.

Also, do you not realise that by underrating Gonzalez, you put Nadal down since in his prime Gonzo destroyed him.
What a load of crap. Muzza in 08 US final was as bad as Fed in RG08 only difference is Rafa at RG08 was playing a LOT better than Fed at US08. If Fed played that match with his US04 form, Muzza would've won about 4 games as well.

As for Gonzo v Rafa, you do realise level of play changes from match to match right? Not only that but Nadal was clearly gassed after playing a brutal 5 setter with Murray the round before.

Of course, you're a blind fanboi who doesn't have a clue how to put things into perspective.

It's like saying this year US Open Delpo took care of Fed but Nadal smashed Delpo. Obviously Delpo played better against Fed than he did v Nadal unless you want to disagree?
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
To get averages: added your score for Rafa (after 14 majors) with mine then divided by 2. Same with Fed after 14 majors.

The point I'm trying to make is that for years I was accused of trolling and being a blind fanboi for saying Rafa had it harder than Fed all these years.

So, by comparing totals we can clearly see that before this year Rafa did have it harder.

Also, I think its fair to say Fed at WIM08 final was a tougher opponent than Roddick in WIM09 final. Yet they both have 9.5. Fed had way more of a mental edge over Roddick in 09 than Nadal would have had against Fed in 08.
Oh right, the average between our 2 scores :D Obvious now...

I never called you a blind fanboy, at times you've been waaaay too aggressive. Like I said Nadal having the tougher finals opponents doesn't mean he had the harder draws overall. I think it's relatively even. Besides that I've often said that these things even out, on his way to 16 majors Federer had some easier draws. Now Nadal has made it there he's had a couple more. The distribution of when those draws happened doesn't matter to me. The more you win and the more you put yourself in the contention the more likely it is that you'll take advantage when things open up - both guys have rarely won majors while looking particularly beatable anyway. Since Federer's 14th he had a tough final opponent in Roddick (who you rate fairly highly in that match) a soft win with Murray and then a much tougher Murray for #17. So no I don't think the weak era and disparaging of Federer's wins in recent years and earlier is justified.

Also I'd probably put Roddick in 09 as a 9 on review. I think the level is sometimes underrated but it was a bit below the previous 2 years which I consider a wash essentially. But some will think I'm underrating other matches so I think it evens out overall.
 

The_Order

G.O.A.T.
Well I didn't say he was good in the 3rd set, it was the only dip from him in the match though. He made a few more errors, I think he lost concentration and decided to focus on the 4th where he went up a break.
Hewitt wasn't as much of a threat to Fed as Djoker was to Nadal.

Had Novak taken that 3rd set he most likely would've gone on to win the title. It was Nadal's incredible play from 0-40 down at 4 all that won him that set.

Hewitt otoh, even if he would've won the 4th set, still felt like Fed would be too much for him. Hewitt has never defeated Fed in a major unless there's one early encounter that ive forgotten but only bo5 victory I can recall is Davis Cup 03.

Novak had heaps of bo5 victories over Nadal. You need to consider Novak playing well is a different beast to Hewitt playing well and so the difficulty to contain Novak in that US Open final was a lot tougher than what Fed had to produce to finish Hewitt off.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Roddick wasn't that bad in the first set of the 2006 final, he didn't make much of an impression with his game and was tactically off but he wasn't hitting too many errors either. The 4th set was a little bit of a let down. The middle 2 sets were clearly better than what Gonzo produced though. I think he was definitely tougher overall.
Roddick was broken 3 times in the 1st set and got his tactics way wrong. Definitely a well below par set.

Its the case of djokovic 10 ( substitute Gonzo AO 07 final here) vs djokovic 13 (substitute Roddick USO 06 final ) here again.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
What a load of crap. Muzza in 08 US final was as bad as Fed in RG08 only difference is Rafa at RG08 was playing a LOT better than Fed at US08. If Fed played that match with his US04 form, Muzza would've won about 4 games as well.

As for Gonzo v Rafa, you do realise level of play changes from match to match right? Not only that but Nadal was clearly gassed after playing a brutal 5 setter with Murray the round before.

Of course, you're a blind fanboi who doesn't have a clue how to put things into perspective.

It's like saying this year US Open Delpo took care of Fed but Nadal smashed Delpo. Obviously Delpo played better against Fed than he did v Nadal unless you want to disagree?
At least Murray put up a bit of a fight. Fed basically stopped trying once he surrendered that break 2nd set.
 

The_Order

G.O.A.T.
At least Murray put up a bit of a fight. Fed basically stopped trying once he surrendered that break 2nd set.
The only reason he was able to put up a fight was because Fed allowed him. US04 final he's winning about 4 games so I was right to give them the same rating. In fact I'll even go as far as saying Nadal in RG08 > Fed in US04. Rafa was killing it all tournament.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Hewitt wasn't as much of a threat to Fed as Djoker was to Nadal.

Had Novak taken that 3rd set he most likely would've gone on to win the title. It was Nadal's incredible play from 0-40 down at 4 all that won him that set.

Hewitt otoh, even if he would've won the 4th set, still felt like Fed would be too much for him. Hewitt has never defeated Fed in a major unless there's one early encounter that ive forgotten but only bo5 victory I can recall is Davis Cup 03.

Novak had heaps of bo5 victories over Nadal. You need to consider Novak playing well is a different beast to Hewitt playing well and so the difficulty to contain Novak in that US Open final was a lot tougher than what Fed had to produce to finish Hewitt off.
Nadal at the USO is no Federer at Wimbledon man. Federer shutting down Hewitt on grass has no barring on Nadal have difficulties with Djokovic. Now Djokovic at his best is obviously better than Hewitt but he wasnt at his best at the USO in 2013.

Djokovic's play in those 2 middle sets was unsustainable, he was basically going for broke. I don't know if he could have kept that up for another couple of sets. If hadn't of played such a poor first set maybe he wouldn't have capitulated after losing the 3rd. The likes of Hewitt and Agassi similarly took it to Federer for a couple of sets at the USO in 2005. I just don't think that 2013 final was specially difficult. Hewitt at Wimbledon in 2004 was in really good form he was at his best but Federer was in the midst of 65 straight wins on the surface.

Roddick was broken 3 times in the 1st set and got his tactics way wrong. Definitely a well below par set.

Its the case of djokovic 10 ( substitute Gonzo AO 07 final here) vs djokovic 13 (substitute Roddick USO 06 final ) here again.
Well below par sure in the first but I still think better than Gonzo overall.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Well below par sure in the first but I still think better than Gonzo overall.
Agree to disagree on that. I'd say Gonzo's was a tad better. At worst equal. Lets see if you change your opinion when you re-watch the AO 07 final.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
The only reason he was able to put up a fight was because Fed allowed him. US04 final he's winning about 4 games so I was right to give them the same rating. In fact I'll even go as far as saying Nadal in RG08 > Fed in US04. Rafa was killing it all tournament.
Not sure about that. 08 USO was hitting the ball harder than ever.
 

killerboi2

Hall of Fame
Still not as easy as Nadal's US Open. And I am talking about the whole tournament, not the final alone.
Fed played a bunch of slamless no marks that couldn't challenge him and a slam winning guy capable of catching fire on his day. Nadal played a bunch of slamless no marks that couldn't challenge him and a slam winning guy capable of catching fire on his day. There's little to no difference. Man, Fed's damn opponent in the final was CRYING mid match, Lmao.

Where there is a difference is Fed's blatently easier competition throughout his career, especially 2004-2007. It's so damn obvious that Fed has had easier competition and the OP shouldn't have even needed to break it down like he did. People with common sense would just acknowledge it.
 

thrust

Hall of Fame
This clearly shows that Nadal won most of his slams against prime Federer and prime Djokovic. Federer just accumulated a lot of slams before his 2 main rivals were in their prime and against weaker opposition. Federer may be more successful in terms of quantity but Nadal is clearly the goat in terms of quality and quantity combined.
Mostly true, but Novak also beat peak Nadal and Federer in slams, semis and finals.
 

TennisATP

Professional
Mostly true, but Novak also beat peak Nadal and Federer in slams, semis and finals.
Federer is 3-9 and 6-9 for a total of 9-18 (very bad)

Djokovic is 4-9 and 9-6 for a total of 13-15 (average)

Nadal is 9-3 and 9-4 for a total of 18-7 (goat-like)
 
Top