Federer 2015 vs Djokovic 2021

abmk

Bionic Poster
Federer 2015 is not attempting a Grand Slam if you replace him with Djokovic this year. So that should settle things. You are underrating Djokos ability and qualites to adapt on all surfaces no matter if he is 34 or 27.

probably not. But if Fed gets away with 1 off day like Djoko did at the AO 21 vs Fritz, he could win AO. He wins Wim and USO.
I'm not under-rating sh*t. You OTOH are under-rating how bad the tour is in 2021.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
So first of all, I just checked Tennis Abstract and it shows 1994 Pete with the higher Elo over 2009 Murray. Second, as already stated by Third Serve, Elo isn't intended to compare players when their competition doesn't overlap. That said, I'm sure you will object that Elo rates 2016 Murray higher than 1994 Sampras anyway, but Elo takes into account level of difficulty of opposition, and Pete just didn't have the same level of opposition in Courier and an Agassi who had dropped out of the top 10 in 1993 and was working his way back from injury. Murray had to contend with a GOATing Djokovic for much of the year (Djokovic's own peak Elo is in early 2016, the highest Elo of anyone ever). 1994 Sampras went 77-12. 2016 Murray went a better 78-9. Sampras won 2 majors, 3 Masters and the YEC. Murray won 1 major, reached 2 major finals (both times losing to Djokovic), won 3 Masters, the YEC, and Olympic Gold. They both had great years.

Djokovic's ELO being highest in early 2016 is understandable obviously given his 2015 and then winning Doha+AO
Djokovic was significantly below par in 2nd half of 2016. ELO takes time to catch up on that front.
and yes, Murray 16 doesn't become better than Sampras 94.
An earlier version of ELO I'd seen had Murray 09 over Sampras 94.

Well, if you look at the relative difficulty numbers, we are talking about a less than 2% difference among all three tournaments in level of competition. You can have your opinion, but to me, if you look at the entire draw of all 7 players, the competition is pretty comparable. 2012 had the hardest QF, SF, and F opponents, but Djokovic didn't have to play a seed in R32 or R16 in 2012 like he did in 2013 and 2016.

yeah, nobody gives one flying f*** about one extra seed in AO 2016 given what Djoko had to face in AO 2012 SF/F.
It'd be an absolute JOKE to put AO 2016 as even remotely close to AO 12 difficulty wise, let alone above it and you know it if you have some sanity left.
The question is how much are you willing to make a joke out of yourself to defend your nonsense position of strength of 2016.

I must have really gotten to you. Only the truth hurts this much.

Actually no, the dumber your arguments get, the more I point them out. Its as simple as that
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
This is a really big reach tho

Its not really. I'd rate seppi AO 2015 3R as clearly better than Fritz of AO 21.
If fed got Fritz of AO 21, I daresay he has a higher chance of escape than not.

Fed had done well in Brsibane winning it. Won Dubai after the AO. Made IW final.
AO that day vs Seppi was an outlier. Seppi was solid enough to make him pay, unlike Fritz vs Djoko
 

Third Serve

Talk Tennis Guru
Its not really. I'd rate seppi AO 2015 3R as better than Fritz of AO 21.
If fed got Fritz of AO 21, I daresay he has a higher chance of escape than not.
yeah but you basically have to not only give Fed the Fritz match (which itself is debatable) but also the ones against Raonic and Zverev as well as the final two rounds of the tournament. It's too much.

Could he do it? Possibly. But what are his chances? I'd put them well below 50%, that's for sure.
 

Kralingen

Bionic Poster
Its not really. I'd rate seppi AO 2015 3R as better than Fritz of AO 21.
If fed got Fritz of AO 21, I daresay he has a higher chance of escape than not.
I recently rewatched 2015 Fed-Seppi (well a 45-min compilation video) and Fed was really quite bad. Lost in 4 sets, DF’d in the TBs and looked really out of it. Seppi passed him like 5 times in a row at one point.

Maybe Fritz doesn’t do it but that was an uncharacteristic dud from Federer. Not exactly something that inspires an AO win, it was probably the worst Fed played on HC all year.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
I recently rewatched 2015 Fed-Seppi (well a 45-min compilation video) and Fed was really quite bad. Lost in 4 sets, DF’d in the TBs and looked really out of it. Seppi passed him like 5 times in a row at one point.

Maybe Fritz doesn’t do it but that was an uncharacteristic dud from Federer. Not exactly something that inspires an AO win, it was probably the worst Fed played on HC all year.
I mean, that match should have put all the 2015 Fed peak nonsense to bed.
 
Last edited:

abmk

Bionic Poster
yeah but you basically have to not only give Fed the Fritz match (which itself is debatable) but also the ones against Raonic and Zverev as well as the final two rounds of the tournament. It's too much.

Could he do it? Possibly. But what are his chances? I'd put them well below 50%, that's for sure.

I get your point. But there's this to consider:

Fed had done well in Brisbane winning it. Won Dubai after the AO (beating Djoko). Made IW final(beating Raonic+Berdych)
AO that day vs Seppi was an outlier. Seppi was solid enough to make him pay, unlike Fritz vs Djoko

Keep in mind Fed beat Raonic in straights at IW 15.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Federer doesn't win in either editions, so my point still stands. He doesn't attempt CYGS like Novak did, so how can we give 15 Fed over Novak the nod overall in terms of "level" of play? It settles it.
That's fair.

I do think Fed displayed a higher level at Wimb/USO though abd would have won the 2021 editions relatively comfortably.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
yeah but you basically have to not only give Fed the Fritz match (which itself is debatable) but also the ones against Raonic and Zverev as well as the final two rounds of the tournament. It's too much.

Could he do it? Possibly. But what are his chances? I'd put them well below 50%, that's for sure.
Not worried about a Raonic match. The Zverev match would be the only question.
 

ForehandRF

Legend
I recently rewatched 2015 Fed-Seppi (well a 45-min compilation video) and Fed was really quite bad. Lost in 4 sets, DF’d in the TBs and looked really out of it. Seppi passed him like 5 times in a row at one point.

Maybe Fritz doesn’t do it but that was an uncharacteristic dud from Federer. Not exactly something that inspires an AO win, it was probably the worst Fed played on HC all year.
To think that was the first time since 2004 when he failed to reach the SF at the AO.Definitely the worst AO of his career at the top level( not counting pre 2004 as he wasn't a contender back then); even in 2020 he reached the SF and that injured, no less :D
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I recently rewatched 2015 Fed-Seppi (well a 45-min compilation video) and Fed was really quite bad. Lost in 4 sets, DF’d in the TBs and looked really out of it. Seppi passed him like 5 times in a row at one point.

Maybe Fritz doesn’t do it but that was an uncharacteristic dud from Federer. Not exactly something that inspires an AO win, it was probably the worst Fed played on HC all year.

still a one-off day considering what Fed did in Brisbane, Dubai, IW (around AO).
Again, I used word could win AO, not would win AO anyways.
 

zvelf

Hall of Fame
ELO only takes into account relative difficulty.

So if say the top 10 players are consistent at beating lower ranked players like Rublev for instance, then beating Rublev yields you good ELO points, when in reality, it's a really easy task to beat him as Tsitsipas/Zverev/Medvedev/Djokovic.

Conversely, if the tour is inconsistent ala Wawrinka or Roddick, you gain relatively low ELO points by beating them compared to the actual difficulty of the task.

This doesn't really make much sense. The actual difficulty of beating an inconsistent player whose highs and lows vary a lot isn't any more difficult than beating a consistent player whose average is the same as the inconsistent player's average, at least not over time. For any given match, yes, but over time, you will face the inconsistent player's highs and their lows evenly (and if you didn't, then they aren't actually that inconsistent by definition).

So if the tour is consistent, but useless at beating those above them in rankings, you get inflated ELOs.

It doesn't matter if Rublev is a #5 player who always beats those below him and always loses to #1-4 and ELO reflects that. You should get credit for consistently beating those ranked below you. Of course Rublev did just beat Medvedev in their last match.

One think I do not know, does ELO account for closeness of matches or just win/loss? Because beating someone is straights should yield more points compared to beating same player in 5 sets.

Statisticians have applied Elo separately to matches, sets, and games, and it actually makes very little statistical difference to your Elo. You would think that would matter, but it actually doesn't. Winning or losing matches, regardless of the margins, apparently evens out over time.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Not worried about a Raonic match. The Zverev match would be the only question.

Still no top 10 win for Z in slams. So I wouldn't be sure that Z is that much a bigger threat than Raonic (their AO 21 versions anyways). Z played a little better, but not so much.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Still no top 10 win for Z in slams. So I wouldn't be sure that Z is that much a bigger threat than Raonic (their AO 21 versions anyways). Z played a little better, but not so much.
I'd say Z was significantly better since Djokovic was more recovered from his injury than in the Raonic match.

Raonic is a colossal loser. Tge only time he finally managed to take a set off Djoko in BO5 was when Djoko was slightly injured.
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
probably not. But if Fed gets away with 1 off day like Djoko did at the AO 21 vs Fritz, he could win AO. He wins Wim and USO.
I'm not under-rating sh*t. You OTOH are under-rating how bad the tour is in 2021.

gets away with one off day? Is this a trading center here? Federer lost in 3R. We are not looking at what could have happened. He lost to Seppi, end of story.

FO? He doesn't win FO either. So no cygs on the cards either way even if we do everything we can to give him the AO win.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
gets away with one off day? Is this a trading center here? Federer lost in 3R. We are not looking at what could have happened. He lost to Seppi, end of story.

FO? He doesn't win FO either. So no cygs on the cards either way even if we do everything we can to give him the AO win.

Well, you are putting fed of 15 in 21. So he gets to face Fritz , right?
So yeah, fed gets away with an off-day, I'd say (higher chance than not)
I already agreed on the CYGS part. fed 15 doesn't win FO in 21.
But fed 15 does win Wim and USO in 21 and could win AO.
You want to say Djoko 21 was better level wise in slams? Yeah, go ahead. Absolutely no problem with that.

But nowhere enough for a 3 slam gap, all factors equal. Maybe a 1 slam gap at worst.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I'd say Z was significantly better since Djokovic was more recovered from his injury than in the Raonic match.

Raonic is a colossal loser. Tge only time he finally managed to take a set off Djoko in BO5 was when Djoko was slightly injured.

Z is a better as a player overall, but no top 10 win in slams is a question mark. Though he is getting better in slams obviously. Don't forget Raonic destroyed Z in AO 20189.
Beat Tsitsipas in AO 20 before facing Djokovic.
Raonic has 5 top 10 wins in slams.
 
Last edited:

Kralingen

Bionic Poster
To think that was the first time since 2004 when he failed to reach the SF at the AO.Definitely the worst AO of his career at the top level( not counting pre 2004 as he wasn't a contender back then); even in 2020 he reached the SF and that injured, no less :D
still a one-off day considering what Fed did in Brisbane, Dubai, IW (around AO).
Again, I used word could win AO, not would win AO anyways.
an extenuating factor is the extreme heat in that match. It was played during the daytime and both players were sweating a ton. Similar to Tiafoe-Djokovic this year which was also a struggle for Novak.

But idk, his level at the other tournaments can't excuse that dud. Was shocked at how off he looked, he had double digit DFs and a ton of bad net approaches. His movement improved a lot after that match. I'm mainly saying this bc of how fresh it was in my mind.

Either way I'm not going to give Fed a 'could win' AO, unless we want to say something like 2017 Djokovic 'could win' AO if not for one off day vs. Istomin lol
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
Well, you are putting fed of 15 in 21. So he gets to face Fritz , right?
I already agreed on the CYGS part.
But fed 15 does win Wim and USO in 21 and could win AO.
You want to say Djoko 21 was better level wise in slams? Yeah, go ahead. Absolutely no problem with that.

But nowhere enough for a 3 slam gap, all factors equal. Maybe a 1 slam gap at worst.

In a new scenario with a different draw sure Fed could have won AO, if he came in better form. But FO is the dealbreaker here for me, I don't see him winning that one like Djokovic was able to.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
In a new scenario with a different draw sure Fed could have won AO, if he came in better form. But FO is the dealbreaker here for me, I don't see him winning that one.

Yeah, I don't think RG 15 Fed wins RG in 21 either.
Fed did come into AO in form - having won Brisbane. It was a one-off day vs Seppi in that 3R
he also won Dubai beating Djokovic and made IW final beating Berdych+Raonic.

And like I said:

But fed 15 does win Wim and USO in 21

You want to say Djoko 21 was better level wise in slams? Yeah, go ahead. Absolutely no problem with that.

But nowhere enough for a 3 slam gap, all factors equal. Maybe a 1 slam gap at worst.
 

zvelf

Hall of Fame
Djokovic's ELO being highest in early 2016 is understandable obviously given his 2015 and then winning Doha+AO
Djokovic was significantly below par in 2nd half of 2016. ELO takes time to catch up on that front.

Djokovic did decline but still wasn't so bad that he reached the USO final.

yeah, nobody gives one flying f*** about one extra seed in AO 2016 given what Djoko had to face in AO 2012 SF/F.
It'd be an absolute JOKE to put AO 2016 as even remotely close to AO 12 difficulty wise, let alone above it and you know it if you have some sanity left.
The question is how much are you willing to make a joke out of yourself to defend your nonsense position of strength of 2016.

So, while defending Elo, I'm not saying it is always right. No system is perfect. 2012 AO probably is more difficult than 2016 AO, but I disagree it's an open and shut case. Adding a seeded Seppi and Simon to your run matters. Just ask 2015 AO Federer.

Actually no, the dumber your arguments get, the more I point them out. Its as simple as that

I'll take Nadal Django's advice and not take you too seriously here.

The guy is a resident village idiot here on this board. Whatever he says, whatever the insults he strikes, just don't take him too much seriously. 8-B
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Djokovic did decline but still wasn't so bad that he reached the USO final.

compared to 2015-mid16, it was a significant decline.
Yes, he did reach the USO 16 final courtesy one of the softest draws ever. retirements, walkovers, below par opponents.


So, while defending Elo, I'm not saying it is always right. No system is perfect. 2012 AO probably is more difficult than 2016 AO, but I disagree it's an open and shut case. Adding a seeded Seppi and Simon to your run matters. Just ask 2015 AO Federer.

AO 2012 >> AO 2016, not even close.
AO 2015 fed was not prime fed.
Both AO 2012, 2016 prime Djokovic.


I'll take Nadal Django's advice and not take you too seriously here.

Django is a deranged fed-hater. Spends like half of his time on TTW finding new ways to diss fed. But go ahead. Take his advice. :)
 

zvelf

Hall of Fame
Well, you are putting fed of 15 in 21. So he gets to face Fritz , right?
So yeah, fed gets away with an off-day, I'd say (higher chance than not)
I already agreed on the CYGS part. fed 15 doesn't win FO in 21.
But fed 15 does win Wim and USO in 21 and could win AO.
You want to say Djoko 21 was better level wise in slams? Yeah, go ahead. Absolutely no problem with that.

What good is all of this speculation anyway? Absolutely none of it is provable. The conditions, weather, time of day, opponents faced were all different between 2015 and 2021. Acting like you can put 2015 Fed in a time machine and he would have played at exactly the same levels at every tournament against different opponents doesn't make a lick of sense.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
an extenuating factor is the extreme heat in that match. It was played during the daytime and both players were sweating a ton. Similar to Tiafoe-Djokovic this year which was also a struggle for Novak.

But idk, his level at the other tournaments can't excuse that dud. Was shocked at how off he looked, he had double digit DFs and a ton of bad net approaches. His movement improved a lot after that match. I'm mainly saying this bc of how fresh it was in my mind.

Either way I'm not going to give Fed a 'could win' AO, unless we want to say something like 2017 Djokovic 'could win' AO if not for one off day vs. Istomin lol

not excusing fed's level that day. It was bad.
2017 Djoko analogy would work if:
a) Djoko was playing like fed did in 15 Dubai/15 IW in 2017 after the AO. He wasn't.
b) he was facing Raonic+Z+Karatsev+below par Med instead of well what would his draw be in 17?
Busta, Dimitrov, Goffin, Nadal, Fed.

that's 3 opponents in significantly better form than playing level what Djoko faced in AO 21 - Dimi, Nadal, Fed.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
What good is all of this speculation anyway? Absolutely none of it is provable. The conditions, weather, time of day, opponents faced were all different between 2015 and 2021. Acting like you can put 2015 Fed in a time machine and he would have played at exactly the same levels at every tournament against different opponents doesn't make a lick of sense.

helps in comparing 2015 and 2021 as years and levels of djokovc/fed in those respective years.
didn't say it is provable.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
Comparing the years in which they both turned 34.

Slams:

AO: Federer lost in 3R to Seppi. Djokovic won it. Obviously, Djokovic was better. But if Fritz had held his head/was as solid as Seppi, he could've taken out Djokovic who was hampered in that match.

RG: Federer made it to QF, losing one set, but lost to peak Wawa in straights. Djokovic won it. Obviously, Djokovic was better. But 2015 RG Djokovic > 2021 RG Djokovic and given 15 Wawa beat 15 Djoko convincingly, he'd have beaten 21 Djoko convincingly as well.

Wim: Federer demolished Murray in the SF. Djoko had to rely on Shapo choking big time in the 1st 2 sets. Fed was also more dominant/impressive in the rounds prior.
Yeah, Djoko won his final vs a meh Berretini in 4 sets and fed lost to peak Djoko in 4 sets, but I don't think fed was any worse level wise in Wim 15 final compared to Djoko in Wim 21 final.

Their stats at respective Wimbledons are about the same overall despite Fed facing 15 Djok and 15 Murray, both of whom are significantly better than anyone Djoko faced in Wim 21.
Fed's serving stats a little better than Djoko's and Djoko's return stats a little better than Fed's

Serve: fed at 95.5% hold, Djoko at 93.8% hold. fed winning 75.7% service points, djoko winning 73.7% service points
Return: fed at 26.4% breaks, djoko at 28.3% breaks. fed winning 38.3% return points, djoko winning 41.3% return points


If we take stats before the final (Wim 15 final Djoko and Wim 21 final Berretini are like gigantic miles apart)

Serve: fed at 98.9% hold, Djoko at 94.6% hold. fed winning 78.6% service points, djoko winning 74.9% service points
Return: fed at 31.5% breaks, djoko at 28.6% breaks. fed winning 40.2% return points, djoko winning 41.7% return points


The service stats difference widens obviously. Fed also surges ahead on break%, even with a little less % of return points won.

Keep in mind that fed's competition before the final was significantly better: Murray, Groth, Querrey, Simon, RBA, Dzhumur
Djokovic: Shapo, Fucsovic, Kudla, Anderson,Draper, Garin

Conclusion? Fed in Wim 15 > Djoko in Wim 21, clearly

USO: Fed came into the final without losing a set, including dismantling Wawa in the semi. Lost to peak djokovic in a tight 4-setter in the final. Djokovic struggled on his way to the final and lost in straights to Med. Obviously fed was better.

Other tournaments till USO:

Federer in 15 won Cincy and Brisbane/Dubai/Istanbul/Halle, made the final of IW/Rome
Djokovic in 21 Won Belgrade, made final of Rome

So fed obviously better here.

Win loss record:

Fed was 51-8 till USO
Djokovic 44-6 till USO

Summary:

15 as a year was a relatively weak one, similar to 06,10.
fed made 2 slam finals and a QF in 15 as opposed to djoko in 21 winning 3 slams and making a slam final.

so how much worse was 21 compared to 15? Quite a bit, I'd say.


How would you compare Wim 15-AO 16 Fed to Wim 18-AO 19 Djokovic?
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
How would you compare Wim 15-AO 16 Fed to Wim 18-AO 19 Djokovic?

obviously Wim 18-AO 19 djoko is better than Wim 15-AO 16 fed, esp at AO.

Wim 18-AO 19 djoko is more comparable to USO 11-Wim 12 fed (leave aside RG 12 - so USO 11, AO 12, Wim 12).
Wim 12 fed > Wim 18 djoko, USO 11 fed > USO 18 djoko, AO 19 djoko > AO 12 fed.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
I figured you would choose Djokovic thanks to AO. But wondered how close you viewed Wim and USO.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I figured you would choose Djokovic thanks to AO. But wondered how close you viewed Wim and USO.
close enough between Wim 15-Wim 18 and USO 15-USO 18.
fed's best chance is to close it out in 4 sets. If it goes to a 5th, djoko has the advantage.
but he'd be under less pressure than against 15 djoko obviously.
Also USO 15 was clearly faster than USO 18 - so that could make a difference as well.
 
Top