Federer > Djokovic > Nadal - average # of top 10 opponents faced in slams in which they made final

abmk

Bionic Poster
Dare you to do it for their slam wins
I had you under ignore, but couldn't resist replying to this :-D :-D
I already had.

Federer = 42 matches in 20 slams won = 2.1
Djokovic = 35 matches in 17 slams won = 2.059
Nadal = 37 matches in 20 slams won = 1.85

Edit: Thanks to @AnOctorokForDinner for the stat. I knew it was close like an year and half ago w/Djokovic. Hadn't realized gap w/ Nadal would widen so much.
 

RS

Legend
Beating Tsonga of the AO 08 Final was better than beating Hewitt if the USO 04 final.
Beating Scud of the Wim 03 Final was better than beating Roddick of the Wim 05 final.
Wawrinka of the RG 15 Final was tougher in any final in a slam than Federer or Murray were in 2014-2016

Don’t look at names the form on the day matters.
 

Krish0608

Hall of Fame
Beating Tsonga of the AO 08 Final is better than better Hewitt if the USO 04 final.
Beating Scud of the Wim 03 Final is better than beating Roddick of the Wim 05 final.
Wawrinka of the RG 15 Final was tougher in any final than Federer or Murray were in 2014-2016

Don’t look at names the form on the day matters.
:-D :-D :-D
 

CYGS

Legend
Beating Tsonga of the AO 08 Final was better than beating Hewitt if the USO 04 final.
Beating Scud of the Wim 03 Final was better than beating Roddick of the Wim 05 final.
Wawrinka of the RG 15 Final was tougher in any final in a slam than Federer or Murray were in 2014-2016

Don’t look at names the form on the day matters.
Form is an excuse for weak era Fed as there’s no way to validate. At least name has consistency of their quality attached to it.
 

Krish0608

Hall of Fame
You don’t think Tsonga was better?
Definitely no. Tsonga lacked the experience Hewitt had in these big moments. Hewitt had not dropped a set heading into the final of USO 04. He was in impressive form and was still leading Federer in H2H if I remember correctly. As for Tsonga, his run was no different from Baghdatis in 2006. He was red hot, but lacked the experience that Hewitt had. Hewitt was easily a tougher opponent than Tsonga.
 

RS

Legend
Definitely no. Tsonga lacked the experience Hewitt had in these big moments. Hewitt had not dropped a set heading into the final of USO 04. He was in impressive form and was still leading Federer in H2H if I remember correctly. As for Tsonga, his run was no different from Baghdatis in 2006. He was red hot, but lacked the experience that Hewitt had. Hewitt was easily a tougher opponent than Tsonga.
Talking about the match in the final not in general.

I disagree though if you say Hewitt was better in the final than Tsonga.
 

CYGS

Legend
Definitely no. Tsonga lacked the experience Hewitt had in these big moments. Hewitt had not dropped a set heading into the final of USO 04. He was in impressive form and was still leading Federer in H2H if I remember correctly. As for Tsonga, his run was no different from Baghdatis in 2006. He was red hot, but lacked the experience that Hewitt had. Hewitt was easily a tougher opponent than Tsonga.
Ironic that lack of experience is a flaw but super experienced Fed was considered weak competition for Djokovic at 2014-2016. The hypocrisy is crazy.
 

aditya123

Hall of Fame
Same repetitive stuff ! Btw top 10 can be a misleading stat on grass & clay!! Beating Schwartzman, Thiem on grass will be quantified as a top 10 win but is it that difficult really for a Djokovic to beat them on grass when compared to beating them on clay????? Same applies to beating 2017-2018 Cilic , Dimitrov &Anderson on clay. Out of retirement Almagro & Ferrer will perform well than these guys for sure on clay.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Definitely no. Tsonga lacked the experience Hewitt had in these big moments. Hewitt had not dropped a set heading into the final of USO 04. He was in impressive form and was still leading Federer in H2H if I remember correctly. As for Tsonga, his run was no different from Baghdatis in 2006. He was red hot, but lacked the experience that Hewitt had. Hewitt was easily a tougher opponent than Tsonga.
Tsonga played better than Hewitt man, he served much better for a start (at around 70% IIRC). Djokovic played well in the final, it was no Federer USO 2004, but even so have to clearly give the nod to Tsonga for competing much more closely - Fed doesn't double bagel that Tsonga. Also his demolition job on Nadal in the SF is maybe the highest non-Big 3 level match of this era IMO.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Same repetitive stuff ! Btw top 10 can be a misleading stat on grass & clay!! Beating Schwartzman, Thiem on grass will be quantified as a top 10 win but is it that difficult really for a Djokovic to beat them on grass when compared to beating them on clay????? Same applies to beating 2017-2018 Cilic , Dimitrov &Anderson on clay. Out of retirement Almagro & Ferrer will perform well than these guys for sure on clay.
Like I said:

it tell us those who say federer faced weak competition in comparision to Nadal/Djokovic are ignorant or full of sh*t
All matches have to be taken in context. I never deviated from that.
 

RS

Legend
Tsonga played better than Hewitt man, he served much better for a start (at around 70% IIRC). Djokovic played well in the final, it was no Federer USO 2004, but even so have to clearly give the nod to Tsonga for competing much more closely - Fed doesn't double bagel that Tsonga. Also his demolition job on Nadal in the SF is maybe the highest non-Big 3 level match of this era IMO.
Murray AO 12 SF just behind Oly 12 SF/F for the top 3 bar the big 3 in this era.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Dint get this part
you have to take the full context of the match, not just name or ranking - Surface, form etc as well - if you want an accurate analysis

The stats in this thread that I mentioned are only to rain on the parade of fed haters or those BSing that fed faced so much weaker competition compared to djoko/nadal
 

CYGS

Legend
you have to take the full context of the match, not just name or ranking - Surface, form etc as well - if you want an accurate analysis

The stats in this thread that I mentioned are only to rain on the parade of fed haters or those BSing that fed faced so much weaker competition compared to djoko/nadal
Cherrypicked data rains on no one but yourself
 

StrongRule

G.O.A.T.
Definitely no. Tsonga lacked the experience Hewitt had in these big moments. Hewitt had not dropped a set heading into the final of USO 04. He was in impressive form and was still leading Federer in H2H if I remember correctly. As for Tsonga, his run was no different from Baghdatis in 2006. He was red hot, but lacked the experience that Hewitt had. Hewitt was easily a tougher opponent than Tsonga.
Your argument makes zero sense. Who cares about "experience"? Nadal won RG on his first attempt, beating prime Federer in the semifinals. I guess according to you Nadal was a very weak player due to "lack of experience" back then, and that has to be the worst loss of Federer's career. Just because it is your first slam final it doesn't mean you can't play well in it.
 

aditya123

Hall of Fame
you have to take the full context of the match, not just name or ranking - Surface, form etc as well - if you want an accurate analysis

The stats in this thread that I mentioned are only to rain on the parade of fed haters or those BSing that fed faced so much weaker competition compared to djoko/nadal
Gotcha.. you would have made a very good secrer agent I guess. "one mission and no deviations from that mission,(special advantage: taking on multiple opponents at once) . Sad that you are wasting your time here. :laughing: :D
 

Krish0608

Hall of Fame
Your argument makes zero sense. Who cares about "experience"? Nadal won RG on his first attempt, beating prime Federer in the semifinals. I guess according to you Nadal was a very weak player due to "lack of experience" back then, and that has to be the worst loss of Federer's career. Just because it is your first slam final it doesn't mean you can't play well in it.
It matters when your opponent has prior experience winning slams/being a finalist several times. The occasion can easily get to you. Nadal is usually an anomaly in most cases. But in this case, Nadal played Puerta who had no prior experience himself. What I am getting at is, you need a bit of a luck with your first slam breakthrough. Djokovic lost his first slam final against Federer not because he was worse, but because Federer managed the conditions better despite playing quite mediocre. Djokovic lacked the experience at that stage. Against Tsonga, Djokovic had prior experience while Tsonga had none. This is not a rule obviously. But experience matters a LOT, when it comes to GS finals and it's quite understated.
 
Top