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

NatF

Bionic Poster
bad, ok (can maybe upgrade this to good, got broken twice, but also forced Federer to take it unlike even the other good sets I mentioned who made several key errors at the end), great, mediocre in order.
Second set was borderline great, he had many set points saved by great play from Federer. Tiebreak wasn't good, the only blemish on that set although Tiebreakerer made an appearance. Can't remember the exact play by play of the first set, it was 6-3 so again probably more mediocre than flat out bad.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Second set was borderline great, he had many set points saved by great play from Federer. Tiebreak wasn't good, the only blemish on that set although Tiebreakerer made an appearance. Can't remember the exact play by play of the first set, it was 6-3 so again probably more mediocre than flat out bad.
TB was fine honestly, good even. Federer hit 5 winners or forced errors in the first 6 points and they weren't cheap or easy either (tough angled FH, BH winner after 20+ shot rally, unbelievable big D BH winner, and then 2 on his own serve). Not much to do about that besides try to rack up free points on serve.

Mostly concerned with the 2 casual trading of breaks in that set, 1 trade is fine, but 2 is maybe a bit much. From 4-4 to the end of that set was very good though.

I thought the first was quite sloppy from both although Fed's FH was great. The fourth Hewitt was fine for most of it, but can't overlook getting broken with 2 DFs.
 

RS

Legend
Similar. Maybe lower end of your range for Nadal's form.
Think Djoko and Fed in the USO 15 final could be at 8 and 7.5 as well which is a half a rating lower than i had it for both tbh so editing that in.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
USO 10 - Nadal 9 to 9.5 and Djokovic 7 to 7.5
USO 13 - Nadal 8.5 to 9 and Djokovic 6.5 to 7
USO 15 - Djokovic 8 to 8.5 and Federer 7.5 and 8

Probably something like that but my bias for Rafa might be showing a bit here a bit tbh.
Pretty fair really.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
... I don't even know how to respond to that. Yes I believe a good Fed beats 05 Agassi in comfortable straights.
As a point of reference, look what this same Federer did to Nalbandian in the QF. He absolutely crushed him.

Why? Because Nalbandian was horrible and this shows that if an opponent actually plays bad against this Federer, he gets beaten soundly.

Are you really going to suggest that Agassi was as bad as Nalbandian in that same tournament?
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
TB was fine honestly, good even. Federer hit 5 winners or forced errors in the first 6 points and they weren't cheap or easy either (tough angled FH, BH winner after 20+ shot rally, unbelievable big D BH winner, and then 2 on his own serve). Not much to do about that besides try to rack up free points on serve.

Mostly concerned with the 2 casual trading of breaks in that set, 1 trade is fine, but 2 is maybe a bit much. From 4-4 to the end of that set was very good though.

I thought the first was quite sloppy from both although Fed's FH was great. The fourth Hewitt was fine for most of it, but can't overlook getting broken with 2 DFs.
Hewitt's intensity dipped in the TB imo, not terrible from him mostly Federer raising his level but the imputus in his shots tappered off a bit. The second set was definitely better than ok.. Whole set went on serve aside from the pair of breaks early on with Hewitt threatening to break in multiple games late in the set. Don't think a couple of breaks early on should be a big factor IMO. Hewitt only hit one UE in that game to get broken at the start of the second. The break back was a poor game from Federer more than great from Hewitt but the rest of the set made up for it.

Set 1, if we're being a little harsh with everyone can be bad - poor game to give away the break and the range generally not yet found. Only one break though so I do think bad is a little harsh.

Sets 2 & 3, definitely great IMO, both of them. Hewitt came forward lots, positive winner to error ratio etc...

Set 4, similar to the first IMO. Mediocre and a come down from sets 2 &3, not surprising to have a let up after two high quality sets.

Think Djoko and Fed in the USO 15 final could be at 8 and 7.5 as well which is a half a rating lower than i had it for both tbh so editing that in.
Maybe 0.5 of a point isn't huge either way.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Hewitt's intensity dipped in the TB imo, not terrible from him mostly Federer raising his level but the imputus in his shots tappered off a bit. The second set was definitely better than ok.. Whole set went on serve aside from the pair of breaks early on with Hewitt threatening to break in multiple games late in the set. Don't think a couple of breaks early on should be a big factor IMO. Hewitt only hit one UE in that game to get broken at the start of the second. The break back was a poor game from Federer more than great from Hewitt but the rest of the set made up for it.

Set 1, if we're being a little harsh with everyone can be bad - poor game to give away the break and the range generally not yet found. Only one break though so I do think bad is a little harsh.

Sets 2 & 3, definitely great IMO, both of them. Hewitt came forward lots, positive winner to error ratio etc...

Set 4, similar to the first IMO. Mediocre and a come down from sets 2 &3, not surprising to have a let up after two high quality sets.



Maybe 0.5 of a point isn't huge either way.
Hewitt hit 39 winners past peak Fed. Not bad for a guy with no weapons (according to some).
 

Druss

Hall of Fame
Strongest era imo was 2008-2016 which had the most in form big 4 at one time. Djokovic - Nadal tied for 11 slams each but Djokovic destroys him H2H and all other stats in the same time :whistle:
It's 2007-2013. 2015-16 Nadal was abysmal, makes 2007/08 Djoko look like the absolute GOAT. Not to mention Fed was just as bad in 2013 and out for most of 2016.
 

The Guru

Hall of Fame
As a point of reference, look what this same Federer did to Nalbandian in the QF. He absolutely crushed him.

Why? Because Nalbandian was horrible and this shows that if an opponent actually plays bad against this Federer, he gets beaten soundly.

Are you really going to suggest that Agassi was as bad as Nalbandian in that same tournament?
Don't remember that match can't say.
 

RS

Legend
It's 2007-2013. 2015-16 Nadal was abysmal, makes 2007/08 Djoko look like the absolute GOAT. Not to mention Fed was just as bad in 2013 and out for most of 2016.
2015-16 makes 2004-05 look like 2008-09 and 2011-12.
 

Druss

Hall of Fame
Hewitt hit 45 winners past Federer in the USO 2005 semi as per official count:

How on earth did Hewitt hit 45 winners past peak Fed and have a higher winning % on first serve? According to Lew, Hewitt is just another Ferrer.
I really have to see this match again.
 
Top