Federer(2004-2007) v Federer(2013-2016) Stats

[JacksonColt]

Djokovic had a losing H2H record against Federer in Slams, Slam finals and overall. He started to beat an almost 33 year old Federer LMAO in for the first time in a Slam final.

Are you senile? You're using the age excuse when it suits your agenda and disregard it otherwise lol.

Federer=Nadal > Djokovic. FACT and TRUTH and I know it hurts.

Dry those tears my friend. Jajaja! Be happy. ROFL! You know Djokovic has been beating Federer in majors since he was 26. Stop the nonsense and come into the light. Jajaja!

Djokovic > Fedal my friend. One has 6 majors outside of clay and the other won his majors with no other all time great present for 4 years. This is the truth and fact.

 

[JacksonColt]

Slow Hard Djokovic and Fed!? Why so generous towards Djokovic Maybe you should learn a thing or two from your cult colleague and also self proclaimed expert in tennis level @NatF when AO topic is at hand...

This guy is hilarious. Is he acting or for real? Somebody please give him a xanax. ROFL!

 

[tennisaddict]

Your text has nothing to do with my comment. If a player, any player, says "that was my best", this is the end of the discussion.

Did you all go to the same school in Serbia ?

Kyrgios? Jajajaja! So much desperation. 0-2 at your low point against a nobody who won't even be remembered is better than 6-9 in majors and 6-12 in finals over your whole career when you're the supposed GOAT.

0-1 against Zverev, 5-2 against Thiem, 1-1 against Chung and 0-1 against Tsitsi is ownage? Jajaja-ROFL! The desperation is dripping from your screen right now.

I know Djokovic won only 1 major till Fed turned 29 and that too when Fed had mono

If Federer’s losses to Djokovic holding MP at 29/30 are questioned why cannot we bring in the straight set losses to part timer Kyrgios ?

 

[Eren]

Djokovic > Fedal my friend. One has 6 majors outside of clay and the other won his majors with no other all time great present for 4 years. This is the truth and fact.

LMAO, how many majors does Djokovic has outside of HC? Only 5 LOL.

If you're excluding Nadal's best surface do the same to Djokovic.

Dry those tears my friend. Jajaja! Be happy. ROFL! You know Djokovic has been beating Federer in majors since he was 26. Stop the nonsense and come into the light. Jajaja!

Federer had Nadal. Or is Nadal an amateur on clay/grass despite making it to three consecutive grass finals at Wimbledon in 06-08. ROFLMAO.

Btw, you're acting ********. As if I have anything against Djokovic. As I said many times, he can definitely become the best and we'll see. But now he isn't better than Nadal and Federer and you'll never convince me of the opposite unless Djokovic wins close to 20 Slams.

 

[Nadal_Django]

This guy is hilarious. Is he acting or for real? Somebody please give him a xanax. ROFL!

Yep, complete brainwashing...The lost cause... When you live in the Federer a.ss for more than 10 years, it can happen...

 

[JacksonColt]

Yep, complete brainwashing...The lost cause... When you live in the Federer a.ss for more than 10 years, it can happen...

I'm telling you my friend. He is out there and like those Fed fans on Twitter and Youtube. Completely brainwashed, fanatical and delusional. Sad.

 

[JacksonColt]

LMAO, how many majors does Djokovic has outside of HC? Only 5 LOL.

If you're excluding Nadal's best surface do the same to Djokovic.



Federer had Nadal. Or is Nadal an amateur on clay/grass despite making it to three consecutive grass finals at Wimbledon in 06-08. ROFLMAO.

Btw, you're acting ********. As if I have anything against Djokovic. As I said many times, he can definitely become the best and we'll see. But now he isn't better than Nadal and Federer and you'll never convince me of the opposite unless Djokovic wins close to 20 Slams.

But there are two hardcourt majors not one like clay. That's not the same comparison. Nadal has 11 at one major alone.

More deflecting. I was talking about hard not grass.

I'm mostly having fun and not taking any of this seriously but it is hilarious to see how sensitive Fed fans really are and defensive you guys get over something so meaningless as someone's opinion on who is the greatest. Insult me if you like but I don't care enough about any of you to give you that much energy. Jajaja! Godspeed.

 

[Eren]

But there are two hardcourt majors not one like clay. That's not the same comparison. Nadal has 11 at one major alone.

More deflecting. I was talking about hard not grass.

I'm mostly having fun and not taking any of this seriously but it is hilarious to see how sensitive Fed fans really are and defensive you guys get over something so meaningless as someone's opinion on who is the greatest. Insult me if you like but I don't care enough about any of you to give you that much energy. Jajaja! Godspeed.

So Djokovic has two cracks at his favourite surface and Fed and Nadal only one and Djokovic is still behind in the Slam race?

Btw, IMO Fed isn't the GOAT (I don't believe in the concept of one GOAT in tennis due to the history of the sport). I am just saying Djokovic isn;t better than the two of them.

 

[ABCD]

Did you all go to the same school in Serbia ?



I know Djokovic won only 1 major till Fed turned 29 and that too when Fed had mono

If Federer’s losses to Djokovic holding MP at 29/30 are questioned why cannot we bring in the straight set losses to part timer Kyrgios ?

When a player establish when his peak was it is the end of the discussion.

 

[Bender]

2004-2007: peak Federer
2013-2016: peak federr0r
2017-2018: peak fedr

Lies, damned lies, and statistics; the real story here is that 2017-2018 was best because fedr > Federer

Tide goes in, tide goes out. fedr peaked from 2017, you can't explain that.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

I don't care about your opinion either. You should just understand the meaning of the stats.

But there's nothing to back up your opinion. I "understand" what your stats aren't meant to represent. However, I have watched matches from the players you are putting down and I know how good they are.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Roddick and Hewitt on the level of Wawrinka and Murray. Jaja! Did Murray ever get double bageled in a Slam final in embarrassing fashion? I'm going with no. Roddick's ceiling was not as high as Wawrinka's. A better comparison is Safin or Del Potro who Federer did let sniff Slams didn't he?

Nah, but he nearly did at the WTF lmao. Federer was also like 34 years old, but he learned his lesson from the match with Hewitt. He let him gave a game to end it.

 

[tennisaddict]

When a player establish when his peak was it is the end of the discussion.

Have you heard active top players say ‘back in the days I played at my peak . I have declined now and not good enough like in the past ‘ ?

Fed has dropped enough hints over the years that he has had to reinvent his game to make up for deficiencies that come with age

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Djokovic actually had to beat Federer, and also Murray majority of times to win the slams from 2014-16. Federer on grass, who has 8 Wimbledon titles and was playing sublime tennis. Also on HCs. Murray Aswell who reached #1 for the first time. This is tough. Beating up guys like Roddick and Hewitt + Baghdatis, Gonzalez during a three year stretch is not even close of the same toughness to what Djokovic had to overcome.

Djokovic's USO draw was pretty weak, but that's a rare occurrence for him.

Playing Andy Murray isn't any different to playing Lleyton Hewitt. Let's continue this test though of showing just how similar they were as players so the overrating of Murray can stop.

 

[Nadal_Django]

Lots of players, ex players, pundits, experts thought at the time 2015 Wimbledon-USO, that Federer was playing the best tennis of his life.
Iirc, Cash, Laver, Henman, McEnroe, Borg, Ivanisevic, Wilander, Federer himself, even Roger's father Robert Federer was saying the same thing.
And is difficult to blame them as Federer was playing some magnificent tennis. Did Fed lose a set or was broken in those 2 tournaments prior to the finals against Djokovic!?
Also he won Cincinnati without losing a set iirc. So it was spectacular level back then by Federer.
Funny in some recent interview Djokovic said that 2015 USO was the best version of Fed he ever played against on HC, so there you go...

 

[Eren]

Lots of players, ex players, pundits, experts thought at the time 2015 Wimbledon-USO, that Federer was playing the best tennis of his life.
Iirc, Cash, Laver, Henman, McEnroe, Borg, Ivanisevic, Wilander, Federer himself, even Roger's father Robert Federer was saying the same thing.
And is difficult to blame them as Federer was playing some magnificent tennis. Did Fed lose a set or was broken in those 2 tournaments prior to the finals against Djokovic!?
Also he won Cincinnati without losing a set iirc. So it was spectacular level back then by Federer.
Funny in some recent interview Djokovic said that 2015 USO was the best version of Fed he ever played against on HC, so there you go...

Link to the interview please?

 

[Nadal_Django]

Link to the interview please?

It was one of the post match PCs at this year USO...

 

[Deleted member 757377]

But there's nothing to back up your opinion. I "understand" what your stats aren't meant to represent. However, I have watched matches from the players you are putting down and I know how good they are.

they can look better than they are with slightly slower and worse shots/movement.

 

[abmk]

But there are two hardcourt majors not one like clay. That's not the same comparison. Nadal has 11 at one major alone.

More deflecting. I was talking about hard not grass.

I'm mostly having fun and not taking any of this seriously but it is hilarious to see how sensitive Fed fans really are and defensive you guys get over something so meaningless as someone's opinion on who is the greatest. Insult me if you like but I don't care enough about any of you to give you that much energy. Jajaja! Godspeed.

ha ha ha ...more delusional stuff from a kid who wouldn't even know if Borg walked right past him and yet brings up Borg as the "only" guy close to Djokovic peak level wise. All because he heard his name and points on an ELO list which favours his boy Djokovic.

"you are mostly having fun and not takingit seriously" ? nice try at trying to self-delude and defend yourself after your ignorance and cr*p has been exposed by many people over here.

maybe when you get a clue, you'll realise people aren't dumb to believe in your sh*t.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

they can look better than they are with slightly slower and worse shots/movement.

Hewitt wasn't slower than Murray lol. If anything he was quicker. Roddick was slower but he was also more powerful than Murray.

 

[Zhilady]

slams won at 27-35:

federer 5
nadal 6 (three more years left)
djokovic 8 (four more years left)

Slams won at 0-50:

Federer: 20
Nadal: 17
Djokovic: 14

 

[tennisaddict]

Which previous banned user is this jajaja guy ?

 

[RF-18]

Playing Andy Murray isn't any different to playing Lleyton Hewitt. Let's continue this test though of showing just how similar they were as players so the overrating of Murray can stop.

Um I disagree strongly. I think Murray is the better player quite clearly and playing them is not the same. Maybe they have similar styles but I can't find any part of the game where Hewitt is possibly better? This isn't a close call IMO.

 

[KINGROGER]

Tsonga, Raonic, Berdych, Del Potro and Cilic are similar players to Roddick (powerful serve/forehand), they have a leading h2h against him (12-11), a similar grand slam winning percentage... and they are 9-65 against Djokovic since 2011.

Roddick is above all those guys in every stat... only Del Potro is remotely close. None of them have multiple Wimbledon finals.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Roddick is above all those guys in every stat... only Del Potro is remotely close. None of them have multiple Wimbledon finals.

roddick beat 1 top10 at wimbledon LOL

 

[NatF]

roddick beat 1 top10 at wimbledon LOL

Yup and it was your pet Murray

 

[KINGROGER]

roddick beat 1 top10 at wimbledon LOL

Just to give you an example; Roddick took out a well playing Hewitt in 2009 who had no seed. Then took out your “ATG” Murray in the SF.

Hewitt is a lesser win because he wasn’t ranked top 10 at that time?

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Djokovic had a losing H2H record against Federer in Slams, Slam finals and overall. He started to beat an almost 33 year old Federer LMAO in for the first time in a Slam final.

Are you senile? You're using the age excuse when it suits your agenda and disregard it otherwise lol.

Federer=Nadal > Djokovic. FACT and TRUTH and I know it hurts.

Wow what a post.

Surprised the "objective" @abmk liked this. He usually at least tries to pretend to be more fair-minded.

How about beating Federer in 2010 and 2011 at the USO, when Fed was 29 and 30? Doesn't count due to draw chance because it was a semi? Please.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Just to give you an example; Roddick took out a well playing Hewitt in 2009 who had no seed. Then took out your “ATG” Murray in the SF.

Hewitt is a lesser win because he wasn’t ranked top 10 at that time?

On average top10s play better, so that stat is important. Some exceptions won't change this.

 

[KINGROGER]

On average top10s play better, so that stat is important. Some exceptions won't change this.

Murray beat pretty much the same amount of top players as Roddick on route to winning Wimbledon. The only real difference is Roddick had prime Federer 4 times. Murray had exhausted, flat Djokovic and Raonic in the final.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

seasons with 18+ of wins in 2004-09 slams beside Federer:

2008 Nadal 24
2007 Nadal 20
2007 Djokovic 19
2008 Djokovic 18

seasons with 18+ of wins in 2011-16 slams beside Djokovic:

2011 Nadal 23
2016 Murray 23
2012 Murray 22
2015 Wawrinka 21
2011 Murray 21
2011 Federer 20
2012 Federer 19
2014 Federer 19
2015 Murray 19
2013 Ferrer 19
2015 Federer 18
2012 Ferrer 18

This was a BOMB and no one commented it

 

[ABCD]

Link to the interview please?

Eren, what is your take on Federer's self-assessment. Do you accept that?

 

[ABCD]

This was a BOMB and no one commented it

You discuss with people that are not interested in the truth.

 

[KINGROGER]

This was a BOMB and no one commented it

According to that post a mug like Ferrer is tougher than guys like Roddick, Hewitt, Nalbandian, Old Agassi (on HC)

 

[RS]

The amount of hate on both sides is unreal. Both Djokovic and Federer are so great and don’t deserve this.

 

[RS]

Lots of players, ex players, pundits, experts thought at the time 2015 Wimbledon-USO, that Federer was playing the best tennis of his life.
Iirc, Cash, Laver, Henman, McEnroe, Borg, Ivanisevic, Wilander, Federer himself, even Roger's father Robert Federer was saying the same thing.
And is difficult to blame them as Federer was playing some magnificent tennis. Did Fed lose a set or was broken in those 2 tournaments prior to the finals against Djokovic!?
Also he won Cincinnati without losing a set iirc. So it was spectacular level back then by Federer.
Funny in some recent interview Djokovic said that 2015 USO was the best version of Fed he ever played against on HC, so there you go...

Shows how high a level Fed plays at even when we say he is past his best.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

According to that post a mug like Ferrer is tougher than guys like Roddick, Hewitt, Nalbandian, Old Agassi (on HC)

Ferrer has 20 wins and 10 losses against those players. Criminally underrated, just because he doesn't have a pretty game or powerful shots.

Anyway we could say he is an exception to the rule, or we can lift the cut off at 21 wins (5 players in 2011-16 to 1 in 2004-09).

 

[Jonas78]

On average top10s play better, so that stat is important. Some exceptions won't change this.

I still really dont get this.

I can to a certain degree agree top10 win percentage has some relevance (as part of a bigger picture). But number of top10 wins?!? I mean, thats not even up to you! You can't choose which rank the player on the other side has! And If for example the other finalist is #17 and took out nr #2 In the SF, well then #17 was better than #2 that tourney.

 

[abmk]

Wow what a post.

Surprised the "objective" @abmk liked this. He usually at least tries to pretend to be more fair-minded.

How about beating Federer in 2010 and 2011 at the USO, when Fed was 29 and 30? Doesn't count due to draw chance because it was a semi? Please.

I only liked it because it was an apt response to a troll post from the ja ja ja guy.
not because it was an enlightining post or anything like that.

 

[KINGROGER]

Ferrer has 20 wins and 10 losses against those players. Criminally underrated, just because he doesn't have a pretty game or powerful shots.

Anyway we could say he is an exception to the rule, or we can lift the cut off at 21 wins (5 players in 2011-16 to 1 in 2004-09).

Consistent guy but never in a billion years was he ever going to beat Fed or Nole at a slam (he did actually beat Rafa twice lol). Also Murray at his very best is a similar level to Roddick, Hewitt, Old agassi, Nalbandian etc just way more consistent which is why he has more wins.

 

[abmk]

Um I disagree strongly. I think Murray is the better player quite clearly and playing them is not the same. Maybe they have similar styles but I can't find any part of the game where Hewitt is possibly better? This isn't a close call IMO.

yeah, maybe you need to open your eyes for that.
Hewitt's FH is clearly better than Murray's. 2nd serve is better. passing shots are better. net play is better.

Also mentally clearly tougher than Murray.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

I still really dont get this.

I can to a certain degree agree top10 win percentage has some relevance (as part of a bigger picture). But number of top10 wins?!? I mean, thats not even up to you! You can't choose which rank the player on the other side has! And If for example the other finalist is #17 and took out nr #2 In the SF, well then #17 was better than #2 that tourney.

the problem is a no.2 who loses to no.17 is not that good, so there's no big champion in the tournament and the competition is weak.

 

[tennisaddict]

yeah, maybe you need to open your eyes for that.
Hewitt's FH is clearly better than Murray's. 2nd serve is better. passing shots are better. net play is better.

Also mentally clearly tougher than Murray.

Murray's 2nd serve is as good as Dementieva . @RF-18 agenda is to hype Fed and Murray to prop up 2014-16 period.

Facts bear out that 2014-18 is the worst period of tennis for last 30 years (barring the brief period at the turn of the century).

 

[Deleted member 716271]

I only liked it because it was an apt response to a troll post from the ja ja ja guy.
not because it was an enlightining post or anything like that.

ok fair enough

 

[Fedforever]

The amount of hate on both sides is unreal. Both Djokovic and Federer are so great and don’t deserve this.

Neither of them deserve their worst fans, that's for sure.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Consistent guy but never in a billion years was he ever going to beat Fed or Nole at a slam (he did actually beat Rafa twice lol). Also Murray at his very best is a similar level to Roddick, Hewitt, Old agassi, Nalbandian etc just way more consistent which is why he has more wins.

I can prove consistency, which requires tennis skills in case you didn't know, while you can't prove this level thing.

That's the difference.

Ferrer's 3-14 in slams against big4 is not even that bad anyway.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

yeah, maybe you need to open your eyes for that.
Hewitt's FH is clearly better than Murray's. 2nd serve is better. passing shots are better. net play is better.

Also mentally clearly tougher than Murray.

No other under 5'11" tall player has ever won a slam since 1983.

Hewitt had a clear limit in his height.

Plus, Murray won much more (81.1% of wins in slams to Hewitt's 69.8%).

 

[KINGROGER]

I can prove consistency, which requires tennis skills in case you didn't know, while you can't prove this level thing.

That's the difference.

Ferrer's 3-14 in slams against big4 is not even that bad anyway.

Consistency =/= level of competition.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Consistency =/= level of competition.

Then why non big4 won only 15% of slam finals against big4, for example?

Weren't they super good just because they reached the final?

 

[KINGROGER]

Then why non big4 won only 15% of slam finals against big4, for example?

Weren't they super good just because they reached the final?

Because big 3 are among the best players ever to play the game?