Federer > Djokovic prime to prime at slams except on plexi AO

abmk

Bionic Poster
Prime to prime:

1. Federer obviously better at Wimbledon. Won 5 in a row and 6 out of 7 Wimbledons, only losing 7th final in 5 sets.
Best 5 years (2003-07) has better service AND return stats than Djokovic in his best 5 year stretch (11-15) or even best 5 years(11-12,14-15,18)

Federer from 2003-07:

Hold% = 94%, Service points won: 72.5%, Break% = 30.3%,return points won = 41%


Djokovic from 11-12,14-15 and 18:

Hold% = 92.1%, Service points won: 71.7%, Break% = 28.3%,return points won = 40.5%


past his prime Fed beat prime Djokovic comfortably in 4 sets in Wim 12 semi. Even if you consider that Wim 12 as late prime Fed, he still beat Djokovic comfortably in 4 sets.
Djokovic had to wait for Federer to be 32.5+ years to get a win over him at Wimbledon.


2. Federer obviously better at USO: Won 5 USOs in a row, made a 6th USO final. Djokovic OTOH hasn't defended a US Open. Best/Peakiest of peak version of Djokovic in 11 USO was down 2 sets to love and had to save 2 MPs vs Fed at his 7th best USO (after 04-09)

3. At French Open:

Again, Federer is better here.

a. Won their prime level to prime level encounter in RG 11.
b. Djokovic doesn't have a single win that comes close to fed's 09 RG win vs delpo or fed's win over Djokovic himself at RG 11.
Djokovic crumbled when faced with a similar opponent as delpo of RG 09 in stan RG 15.
c. Fed's RG 09 win was hard earned, in contrast to Nole's easy draw at RG 16.
d. Only advantage Djoko has is taking Nadal to 5 sets at RG 13.
 
Last edited:

abmk

Bionic Poster
Real h2h:

Slam finals: 4-1
Slam semis: 7-4
YEC finals: 2-0
Masters finals: 5-3
We're talking prime to prime, Djoko propagandist. not djoko getting uber lucky with federer being older. (past his prime fed in 11-12 was a point away from going 3-2 vs peak djokovic in 11-12, LULZ)
Also djokovic getting mega lucky to play worstgen from 14-16.
 
Last edited:

Lew II

Legend
We're talking prime to prime, Djoko propagandist. not djoko getting uber lucky with federer being older. (past his prime fed in 11-12 was a point away from going 3-2 vs peak djokovic in 11-12, LULZ)
Also djokovic having to play worstgen and then newgen who really can't do that well in Bo5 yet. (most of them atleast)

Also, if we are talking career wise:
7 Wimbledons > 5 Wimbledons
5 USOs > 3 USOs
1 hard earned RG , prime to prime win over Djoko& 2 wins like delpo RG 09 and Djoko RG 11 > 1 easy RG+no such win+one 5-setter vs Djoko vs Nadal
Keep fantasizing. Those matches are real.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Oh good grief . You could make a case for any of them having a higher peak this is just gonna cause more fire :D
no, you couldn't at Wim or USO for Djoko unless you've got a case of Djoko fanboyism or cluelessitis or fed hateritis.
RG you could have an argument/debate.
AO rebound, djoko didn't play at his prime.AO plexi, I already said Djoko prime to prime.
 

RS

Legend
no, you couldn't at Wim or USO for Djoko unless you've got a severe case of Djoko fanboyism or cluelessitis or fed hateritis.
RG you could have an argument/debate.
AO rebound, djoko didn't play at his prime.AO plexi, I already said Djoko.
As usual favouring Federer with as much as bias as Djoko fans. Everybody is really a fanboy here even though you do have a degree.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
As usual favouring Federer with as much as bias as Djoko fans. Everybody is really a fanboy here even though you do have a degree.
You are just trying to troll.
Just stop before I decide your good posts are worth less than the amount of trolling you've been doing.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
This post is a real post. Can’t really attack Djoko fans for fanboying when you are hardly among the least bias posters here.
then have the guts to point out what is exactly is so biased in the opening post let alone "Everybody is really a fanboy here even though you do have a degree."
Not one person in this thread has made a point yet being able to contradict what I said in the opening post.
 

RS

Legend
then have the guts to point out what is exactly is so biased let alone "Everybody is really a fanboy here even though you do have a degree."
Not one person in this thread has made a point yet contradicting what I said in the opening post.
Biased is showing too much favouritism to you favourite which is what most here do and is normal.

When we get into debates into these long 10/20 page threads we are behaving in a overexcited way which could be looked at as fanboying.

Point is Federer fans are doing it as well as Djokovic fans.
 

mahesh69a

Semi-Pro
Federer has defended titles at 3 of the 4 slams
Djokovic has defended titles at 2 of the 4 slams
Nadal has defended titles at 1 of the 4 slams

Federer - 5 in a row at W(2003-2007), 5 in a row at USO (2004-2008) and 2 in a row twice at AO (2006-2007) and (2017-2018)
Djokovic - 3 in a row at AO (2011-2013), 2 in a row an additional 2 times at AO (2015-2016) and (2019-2020), 2 in a row twice at W (2014-2015) and (2019-2020)
Nadal - all at RG, 4 in a row (2005-2008), 5 in a row (2010-2014), ongoing 4 in a row (2017-2020)

In fact, Nadal has defended only one title off clay - Rogers Cup 2018-2019 with no Federer in the 2018 event and no Federer and Djokovic in the 2019 event
 
Last edited:

abmk

Bionic Poster
Biased is showing too much favouritism to you favourite which is what most here do and is normal.

When we get into debates into these long 10/20 page threads we are behaving in a overexcited way which could be looked at as fanboying.

Point is Federer fans are doing it as well as Djokovic fans.
So basically you got nothing to point out about the opening post in this thread, right?

When I replying in a seriously biased banner in a serious conversation get back.
not if I am showing mirror to seriously biased people.

I never pretended to be the paragon of unbiasedness. I do have some bias, but keep it to a minimum when in a serious conversation. Unlike clueless/rubbishly biased stuff peddled by some djoko fanboys these days. If you are going to compare me to them and say its not trolling, you got a serious problem.

I've given credit and praised Djoko/Nadal when its due, including creating threads regarding those and doing match stats.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
The argument for RG based on a few specific matches is flimsy at best, gotta say. No obvious difference between the two against the field at prime. Djokovic could do better against Nadal due to matchup but Federer would do better against Djokovic directly given their matchup.
Like I said, you could argue b/w them at RG.
But the whole set of things taken in totality doesn't make it flimsy:

a. Won their prime level to prime level encounter in RG 11.
b. Djokovic doesn't have a single win that comes close to fed's 09 RG win vs delpo or fed's win over Djokovic himself at RG 11.
Djokovic crumbled when faced with a similar opponent as delpo of RG 09 in stan RG 15.
c. Fed's RG 09 win was hard earned, in contrast to Nole's easy draw at RG 16.
d. Only advantage Djoko has is taking Nadal to 5 sets at RG 13.

Even Agassi who is a worse claycourter & worse than Djokovic at RG (career-wise) has a win in Medvedev 99 that's better than any win of Djokovic at RG vs a very good opponent in atleast good form
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
Real h2h:

Slam finals: 4-1
Slam semis: 7-4
YEC finals: 2-0
Masters finals: 5-3
Slam meetings until 2010 USO - Federer 4-1 (one loss as monoFed)
Slam meetigns from 2010 USO - Djokovic 9-2 (one loss to Fed who redlined at the FO and another at Wimbledon to primeish Fed)

Age never mattered here, totally....

As much as Federer effed up some of these meetings you need to be blind to not see the patterns.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Slam meetings until 2010 USO - Federer 4-1 (one loss as monoFed)
Slam meetigns from 2010 USO - Djokovic 9-2 (one loss to Fed who redlined at the FO and another at Wimbledon to primeish Fed)

Age never mattered here, totally....

As much as Federer effed up some of these meetings you need to be blind to not see the patterns.
no slam meetings in federer's 3 best years - 2004, 2005, 2006. (obviously as djoko was young)
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
no slam meetings in federer's 3 best years - 2004, 2005, 2006.
then they play at the 2007AO and Federer smoked him and Djokovic wasn't even that bad

but of course that was "baby Djokovic" - who cares that right after he pushed Fed to a decider in Dubai, reached the final of IW and won Miami - that's baby Djokovic. But Federer in 2019 at 38 - now that's a really mature AppleFed
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
then they play at the 2007AO and Federer smoked him and Djokovic wasn't even that bad

but of course that was "baby Djokovic" - who cares that right after he pushed Fed to a decider in Dubai, reached the final of IW and won Miami - that's baby Djokovic. But Federer in 2019 at 38 - now that's a really mature AppleFed
Forget Wim 19 for a second. Take AO 2020 - with federer being bothered by injury. That counts so much apparently - because it was a semi with federer having limped to it (roll eyes)
 

blablavla

Legend
a. Won their prime level to prime level encounter in RG 11.
according to Lew clay has to be ignored

b. Djokovic doesn't have a single win that comes close to fed's 09 RG win vs delpo or fed's win over Djokovic himself at RG 11.
Djokovic crumbled when faced with a similar opponent as delpo of RG 09 in stan RG 15.
c. Fed's RG 09 win was hard earned, in contrast to Nole's easy draw at RG 16.
d. Only advantage Djoko has is taking Nadal to 5 sets at RG 13.
but but but but but Novak defeated the semi-retired old man a few times in GS
so you are obviously lying
 
Like I said, you could argue b/w them at RG.
But the whole set of things taken in totality doesn't make it flimsy:

a. Won their prime level to prime level encounter in RG 11.
b. Djokovic doesn't have a single win that comes close to fed's 09 RG win vs delpo or fed's win over Djokovic himself at RG 11.
Djokovic crumbled when faced with a similar opponent as delpo of RG 09 in stan RG 15.
c. Fed's RG 09 win was hard earned, in contrast to Nole's easy draw at RG 16.
d. Only advantage Djoko has is taking Nadal to 5 sets at RG 13.

Even Agassi who is a worse claycourter & worse than Djokovic at RG (career-wise) has a win in Medvedev 99 that's better than any win of Djokovic at RG vs a very good opponent in atleast good form
Nah I'm not equating del Potro to Wawrinka, the clutch difference is strong here.
Medvedev choked palpably, no need to rate him that high.
I would say Djokovic failing to show better mental strength than Federer at RG holds him back in this comparison, his natural game is better suited to clay so he was supposed to outpeak Federer but only did barely at best if at all (and as I said I do believe he loses to Federer peak to peak directly a la 2011 so the point is moot).
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Nah I'm not equating del Potro to Wawrinka, the clutch difference is strong here.
it really isn't considering 2009 delpo at RG or USO.
In 2009 RG semi specifically, delpo's only major weak point regarding clutchness was the 2nd set TB. (&Federer was really good in that TB as well). Keep in mind Stan got broken at the start of the 4th set with a UE game (3 UEs out of 4 points IIRC).

Edit: If you bring up the 5th set DF after delpo had saved 3 BPs in that game, I'm going to mention that Stan DFed on BP in the 1st after 3 UEs in the points before in that game. (which is clearly worse)

Delpo didn't even get broken till start of 4th set. (saved 2 BPs in the 1st set - 1 each in 2 different games).
He played set 1 & set 3 and set 2 (before the TB) at the level of Stan's 3rd set/4th set after being down a break. delpo even broke back in the 5th set. Would Djokovic of 2015 RG final even get to a TB with delpo's level in the 2nd set? I highly doubt it. (and yes, this is a hypothetical).


Delpo's level was higher IMO and clutch difference not much, if at all - I'd say not at all tbh.
Delpo was 5/13 on BPs vs fed and fed was 4/12 vs delpo (over 5 sets)
Stan was 4/15 on BPs vs djoko and djoko was 2/10 vs Stan (over 4 sets)

Remember delpo was up against a clearly better opponent in federer than stan vs djoko.

I rate delpo's RG 09 perf. higher in reality. I just equated them putting them on similar level. But if you are saying delpo was was not on a similar level, all I can say is smh and strongly disagree.

Medvedev choked palpably, no need to rate him that high.
nah, his level dipped from that amazingly high level in the 1st 2 sets, but it wasn't a choke. No more a choke than Mac v Lendl in RG 1984 final

I would say Djokovic failing to show better mental strength than Federer at RG holds him back in this comparison, his natural game is better suited to clay so he was supposed to outpeak Federer but only did barely at best if at all (and as I said I do believe he loses to Federer peak to peak directly a la 2011 so the point is moot).
I don't even agree Djokovic's nautral game is better suited to clay per se, but even assuming what you said is true, prime to prime level includes mental strength, right?
 
Last edited:

ADuck

Hall of Fame
his natural game is better suited to clay so he was supposed to outpeak Federer but only did barely at best if at all
Federer's natural game is better suited to clay imo. You need to be able to generate power with high accuracy to be good on clay nowadays and Federer did that better than Djokovic did in his prime. Nadal, Thiem, Soderling, Wawrinka, Federer all have that in common.
 
it really isn't considering 2009 delpo at RG or USO.
In 2009 RG semi specifically, delpo's only weak point regarding clutchness was the 2nd set TB. Delpo didn't even get broken till start of 4th set. (saved 2 BPs in the 1st set)
He played set 1 & set 3 and set 2 (before the TB) at the level of Stan's 3rd set/4th set after being down a break. delpo even broke back in the 5th set. level was higher IMO and clutch difference not much, if at all. Would Djokovic of 2015 RG final even get to a TB with delpo's level in the 2nd set? I highly doubt it. (and yes, this is a hypothetical).
You fancy Djokovic to lose in straight sets? That's an ultra burn if any. What is he worth at all.

I rate delpo's RG 09 perf. higher in reality. I just equated them. But if you are saying delpo was worse than stan or not on similar level, all I can say is smh and strongly disagree.
Del Potro would be nominally slightly better but as the match progresses I'm sure taking Wawrinka because he got better and better after a slow start while del Potro got worse after an amazing start (which did last for three sets but no I'm not penciling any serious opponent to lose in straights). That said, matchup does it in individual matches, I expect prime Federer to beat Wawrinka and prime Djokovic to beat del Potro though their matchup hasn't really been tested enough on clay, interesting.

nah, his level dipped from that amazingly high level in the 1st 2 sets, but it wasn't a choke. No more a choke than Mac v Lendl in RG 1984 final
Dipped at the precipice of victory, had BPs mid-3rd set didn't he. Mac-Lendl is generally elevated above a classic choke by its strong standard of play that persisted to the end, particularly in the fourth set which was definitely no choke even though McEnroe was up a break but Lendl kept going at it. Can't say this about Agassi-Medvedev.

I don't even agree Djokovic's nautral game is better suited to clay per se, but even assuming what you said is true, prime to prime level includes mental strength, right?
Surely better suited to the high bounce. Neither is a natural claycourter anyway despite some early clay success. Yes, clutch factor is why I won't give RG to Djokovic, whose mental warrior image has been propped up immensely by aulderer sophisticated chokes lol.
 
Federer's natural game is better suited to clay imo. You need to be able to generate power with high accuracy to be good on clay nowadays and Federer did that better than Djokovic did in his prime. Nadal, Thiem, Soderling, Wawrinka, Federer all have that in common.
Federer has the power advantage at peak obviously, not sure it's enough to give him a better affinity to the surface than Djokovic but sure it's a possible argument.
 

Lew II

Legend
Those aren't fantasies, SpewBoy. Those are facts and some subjective stuff based on what actually happened.
None of it is a hypothetical.

Also djokovic getting mega lucky to play worstgen from 14-16.
You have problems distinguishing between facts and opinions.

Djokovic winning 18 of the 26 biggest matches against Federer --> fact
Federer being old in these matches --> opinion
 

Druss

Hall of Fame
it really isn't considering 2009 delpo at RG or USO.
In 2009 RG semi specifically, delpo's only major weak point regarding clutchness was the 2nd set TB. (&Federer was really good in that TB as well). Keep in mind Stan got broken at the start of the 4th set with a UE game (3 UEs out of 4 points IIRC).

Edit: If you bring up the 5th set DF after delpo had saved 3 BPs in that game, I'm going to mention that Stan DFed on BP in the 1st after 3 UEs in the points before in that game. (which is clearly worse)

Delpo didn't even get broken till start of 4th set. (saved 2 BPs in the 1st set - 1 each in 2 different games).
He played set 1 & set 3 and set 2 (before the TB) at the level of Stan's 3rd set/4th set after being down a break. delpo even broke back in the 5th set. Would Djokovic of 2015 RG final even get to a TB with delpo's level in the 2nd set? I highly doubt it. (and yes, this is a hypothetical).


Delpo's level was higher IMO and clutch difference not much, if at all - I'd say not at all tbh.
Delpo was 5/13 on BPs vs fed and fed was 4/12 vs delpo (over 5 sets)
Stan was 4/15 on BPs vs djoko and djoko was 2/10 vs Stan (over 4 sets)

Remember delpo was up against a clearly better opponent in federer than stan vs djoko.

I rate delpo's RG 09 perf. higher in reality. I just equated them putting them on similar level. But if you are saying delpo was was not on a similar level, all I can say is smh and strongly disagree.



nah, his level dipped from that amazingly high level in the 1st 2 sets, but it wasn't a choke. No more a choke than Mac v Lendl in RG 1984 final



I don't even agree Djokovic's nautral game is better suited to clay per se, but even assuming what you said is true, prime to prime level includes mental strength, right?
Re the bold, do you have more stats to back that up? I mean Delpo played excellent in that RG SF, but to rate it equal or above Wawa's 2015 Final...dunno about that.
 

blablavla

Legend
You have problems distinguishing between facts and opinions.

Djokovic winning 18 of the 26 biggest matches against Federer --> fact
Federer being old in these matches --> opinion
okay, okay Lewie.
Why then in a neighboring thread you are comparing Djokovic to Nadal since 2011? but in case of Djokovic and Fed you take the career H2H?

Real h2h:

Slam finals: 4-1
Slam semis: 7-4
YEC finals: 2-0
Masters finals: 5-3
Since both became Slam winning machines in 2011 (16 and 11 slams won):

AO: Djokovic 2-0
RG: Nadal 4-1
WI: Djokovic 2-0
UO: 1-1

YEC: Djokovic 2-0

Indian Wells: Djokovic 2-0
Miami: Djokovic 2-0
MonteCarlo: Djokovic 2-1
Madrid: 1-1
Rome: 3-3
Canada: Nadal 1-0
Bejing: Djokovic 2-0
Doha: Djokovic 1-0
ATP Cup: Djokovic 1-0

Djokovic leads in 9 tournaments they met in (AO, WI, YEC, Indian Wells, Miami, MonteCarlo, Bejing, Doha, ATP Cup), Nadal only in 2 (RG, Canada).
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
You fancy Djokovic to lose in straight sets? That's an ultra burn if any. What is he worth at all.
I was taking that set alone in a vaccum. RL, things would probably turn out differently. But the fact that fed was a TB away from losing in straight sets is scary, a significant reason why I rate delpo that high.

Del Potro would be nominally slightly better but as the match progresses I'm sure taking Wawrinka because he got better and better after a slow start while del Potro got worse after an amazing start (which did last for three sets but no I'm not penciling any serious opponent to lose in straights). That said, matchup does it in individual matches, I expect prime Federer to beat Wawrinka and prime Djokovic to beat del Potro though their matchup hasn't really been tested enough on clay, interesting.
if delpo would be nominally better, why would you not put them on a similar level while comparing?
2nd set - wawr played some better than good tennis, but not at the level of delpo in sets 1-3 (minus 2nd set TB) or wawr himself in 3rd set and 4th set after being down a break.
wawr also lost a break in the 4th set with a loose game - which was probably worse than the 5th set 2nd break from delpo.
Also Wawr got himself into a jam with 3 UEs at 3-4 in the 4th set to go down 3 BPs - was clutch enough to save them, but still got himself into a jam with it.

delpo played a fairly good 5th set. I think that's what you are under-rating.
broken first with an excellent game by fed. then broke back with some excellent play. only 2nd break was somewhat of a downer, saved 3 BPs, then federer forced an error and then BP.

15 winners, 14 errors forced to 8 UEs = 29 winners+errors forced to 8 UEs (+21) (even with a 45% first serve)

Wawrinka in the 2nd set of RG 2015 final was :
16 winners, 7 errors forced to 11 UEs = 23 winners+errors forced to 11 UEs.(+12)
Granted conditions were clearly faster in 2009, but delpo was up a significantly better 5th set fed than djoko in the 2nd set of RG 15

Fed in 5th set of RG 09:
14 winners, 16 errors forced to just 4 UEs = 30 winners+errors forced to 4 UEs(+26)

Djokovic in 2nd set of RG 15:
6 winners, 14 errors forced to 14 UEs = 20 winners+errors forced to 14 UEs(+6)

@ bold part: prime djoko over prime delpo in general is obviously fine, but I wouldn't trust 2015 RG semi/final djoko vs 2009 RG semi delpo. Would you?
He went 5 vs murray and went down in 4 vs Stan. I don't think that Djokovic is beating delpo of RG 2009 semi.
 
Last edited:

RS

Legend
So basically you got nothing to point out about the opening post in this thread, right?

When I replying in a seriously biased banner in a serious conversation get back.
not if I am showing mirror to seriously biased people.

I never pretended to be the paragon of unbiasedness. I do have some bias, but keep it to a minimum when in a serious conversation. Unlike clueless/rubbishly biased stuff peddled by some djoko fanboys these days. If you are going to compare me to them and say its not trolling, you got a serious problem.

I've given credit and praised Djoko/Nadal when its due, including creating threads regarding those and doing match stats.
That was my point. It is many Djokovic and Nadal fans but also yourself. Clearly posters on here are far worse than me or you in that regard (which is why said it varies to a degree) but it was a response to your post.

I said my thing about the peak for peak stuff anyway i am not trying to prove Djokovic was better overall or at Wimbeldon or USO I said overall you are splitting hairs.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
You have problems distinguishing between facts and opinions.

Djokovic winning 18 of the 26 biggest matches against Federer --> fact
Federer being old in these matches --> opinion
No, Spew.
I myself said there are some things which are subjective (opinion, but based on what happened) and some which are facts.
None of what I said in the opening post was a hypothetical though.
 
Last edited:

StrongRule

G.O.A.T.
The argument for RG based on a few specific matches is flimsy at best, gotta say. No obvious difference between the two against the field at prime. Djokovic could do better against Nadal due to matchup but Federer would do better against Djokovic directly given their matchup.
Ironically, 2019 Federer did better against Nadal in RG than 2020 Djokovic.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Re the bold, do you have more stats to back that up? I mean Delpo played excellent in that RG SF, but to rate it equal or above Wawa's 2015 Final...dunno about that.
oh yeah, I do. Full stats are there in the links.

Delpo in RG 2009 semi vs fed: 55 winners, 67 errors forced to 40 UEs, i.e 122 winners+errors forced to 40 UEs(+82)
Total # of points in match = 310, Delpo's AM = (82/310) = 26.45%

Fed in RG 2009 vs Delpo : 50 winners, 69 errors forced to 29 UEs, i.e 119 winners+forced to 29 UEs(+90),
Total # of points in match = 310, Fed's AM = (90/310) = 29.03%


Wawr in RG 2015 final vs djoko: 60 winners, 36 errors forced to 45 UEs, i.e 96 winners+errors forced to 45 UEs(+51)
Total # of points in match = 254, Wawr's AM = (51/254) = 20.07%

Djoko in RG 2015 final vs Wawr: 30 winners, 42 errors forced to 41 UEs, i.e 72 winners+errors forced to 41 UEs(+31)
Total # of points in match = 254, Djoko's AM = (31/254) = 12.2%


Now keep in mind, conditions in RG 2009 semi were faster than in RG 2015 final, but also consider Fed was significantly better than Djokovic as an opponent.
Delpo's level was higher given all this IMO, no question.
 
Last edited:

Druss

Hall of Fame
oh yeah, I do. Full stats are there in the links.

Delpo in RG 2009 semi vs fed: 55 winners, 67 errors forced to 40 UEs, i.e 122 winners+errors forced to 40 UEs(+82)
Total # of points in match = 310, Delpo's AM = (82/310) = 26.45%

Fed in RG 2009 vs Delpo : 50 winners, 69 errors forced to 29 UEs, i.e 119 winners+forced to 29 UEs(+90),
Total # of points in match = 310, Fed's AM = (90/310) = 29.03%


Wawr in RG 2015 final vs djoko: 60 winners, 36 errors forced to 45 UEs, i.e 96 winners+errors forced to 45 UEs(+51)
Total # of points in match = 254, Wawr's AM = (51/254) = 20.07%

Djoko in RG 2015 final vs Wawr: 30 winners, 42 errors forced to 41 UEs, i.e 72 winners+errors forced to 41 UEs(+31)
Total # of points in match = 254, Wawr's AM = (31/254) = 12.2%


Now keep in mind, conditions in RG 2009 semi were faster than in RG 2015 final, but also consider Fed was significantly better than Djokovic as an opponent.
Delpo's level was higher given all this IMO, no question.
Interesting...the stats do tell a slightly different story from what I saw in both matches. I guess it's hard to argue it. Fed did play better than Djoko, which makes Stan's performance look that much more impressive. Delpo's level dipped in the 5th though.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Interesting...the stats do tell a slightly different story from what I saw in both matches. I guess it's hard to argue it. Fed did play better than Djoko, which makes Stan's performance look that much more impressive. Delpo's level dipped in the 5th though.
Yeah, Stan's win over a clearly worse opponent colors people's views IMO. Maybe also the fact of delpo's 2009 BH getting under-rated due to what happened after the operations. People forget how good it was.
I'd suggest you rewatch the RG 2009 match when you have some free time.

Delpo's level did dip in the 5th set when compared to the amazing levels he reached in sets 1-3 (minus 2nd set TB), but it was a still fairly good set from him. (4th set is the one which wasn't good)
29 winners+errors forced to 8 UEs (even with 45% first serves). Broken by an excellent game by fed, broke back with an excellent game. 2nd break was somewhat of a downer, saved 3 BPs, then federer forced an error and then BP.

I already compared the 2nd set of Stan with 5th set of Delpo here.

delpo played a fairly good 5th set. I think that's what you are under-rating.
broken first with an excellent game by fed. then broke back with some excellent play. only 2nd break was somewhat of a downer, saved 3 BPs, then federer forced an error and then BP.

15 winners, 14 errors forced to 8 UEs = 29 winners+errors forced to 8 UEs (+21) (even with a 45% first serve)

Wawrinka in the 2nd set of RG 2015 final was :
16 winners, 7 errors forced to 11 UEs = 23 winners+errors forced to 11 UEs.(+12)
Granted conditions were clearly faster in 2009, but delpo was up a significantly better 5th set fed than djoko in the 2nd set of RG 15

Fed in 5th set of RG 09:
14 winners, 16 errors forced to just 4 UEs = 30 winners+errors forced to 4 UEs(+26)

Djokovic in 2nd set of RG 15:
6 winners, 14 errors forced to 14 UEs = 20 winners+errors forced to 14 UEs(+6)
 

Nadal_Django

Hall of Fame
You have problems distinguishing between facts and opinions.

Djokovic winning 18 of the 26 biggest matches against Federer --> fact
Federer being old in these matches --> opinion
Actually he thinks that his whole opinion is an one giant absolute fact. LOL The delusion grandeur... :( That's why is completely pointless to argue with that cyber Fedbot in the first place. It's a complete waste of time. ;)
 
Top