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

[GoatNo1]

Calling Nadal a baby in 04-09 but Fed still prime in 11-16 is a big big possible stretch.

rafa 04-09 (18-23 year), fed 11-16 (30-35)

 

[RS]

rafa 04-09 (18-23 year), fed 11-16 (30-35)

ummmm.....

 

[GoatNo1]

ummmm.....

18-23 is very young. besides, I wrote about nole, muzza and rafa. rafa was an early bloomer but even he didn't win 2 slams in a season before 2008. nole won his second slam as late as 2011 and muzza his first in 2012. fed, in turn, had a 2 slam season as late as 2017! and won his last slam in 2018.

 

[RS]

18-23 is very young. besides, I wrote about nole, muzza and rafa. rafa was an early bloomer but even he didn't win 2 slams in a season before 2008. nole won his second slam as late as 2011 and muzza his first in 2012. fed, in turn, had a 2 slam season as late as 2017! and won his last slam in 2018.

Djokovic fans age don't matter and it's mainly numbers. Nadal won 5 more slams in those periods than Fed but you think he was a lot worse.

I was actually agreeing with a decent chunk of the rest.

 

[thrust]

Needs a poll.

I would have it:

AO: Djokovic
RG: Federer
WB: Federer
USO: Federer

AO- Djokovic
RG- Djokovic
WB- Djokovic, having beat Roger in 3 finals and Rafa in 1. Roger in his thirties was better on grass, than Roddick was in his twenties.
USO-Federer, barely.

 

[GoatNo1]

in his entire ERA, fed only had a single season with positive h2h vs his main rival. and even then barely.

04: 0-1
05: 1-1
06 (his best season): 2-4
07: 3-2
08: 0-4
09: 1-1

HC: 3-3
CC: 2-9
GC: 2-1

 

[martinezownsclay]

I do think Fed being better than Djokovic H2H at RG peak for peak is a good argument. The extra spin of the 1HBH and his excellent pace generation compared to Novak’s gives him a more real advantage than it may seem. Djok better against Nadal and more consistent on clay but at their absolute best at RG I lean Federer

Yes that is how I see the comparision at RG going too.

Peak Djokovic vs peak Federer- peak Federer wins more often in a series of 10 matches for sure.

Peak Djokovic vs peak Federer vs Nadal- Djokovic is better, but considering even the recent/current relic version of Nadal, who is way further past his prime than Djokovic (well according to Djokovic fans he is still at his peak today, LMFAO) is usually beating Djokovic when they play on clay or at RG, both Federer and Djokovic would do almost nothing so it is still a negligible advantage.

Peak Djokovic vs peak Federer vs the field (minus Nadal)- the same really.

 

[The Sinner]

It’s really hard to argue now that Fed > Djoko on clay and/or RG. The way I see it now, prime for prime:
Fed > Djoko at Wimby & USO
Djoko > Fed at AO & RG
The margins are very slim either way.

 

[thrust]

It’s really hard to argue now that Fed > Djoko on clay and/or RG. The way I see it now, prime for prime:
Fed > Djoko at Wimby & USO
Djoko > Fed at AO & RG
The margins are very slim either way

Novak has won considerably more slam plus clay masters than Federer. No way was Roger better on clay than Novak. Also, Novak did much better on clay vs Nadal than Roger has.

 

[Holmes]

Feddy>Novak at USO
Novak>Feddy at RG and AO
= at Wimbledon

It is what it is.

 

[SonnyT]

Who did Fed defeat during his prime? Knocked baby Djok and knocked off by Nadal

 

[Deleted member 779124]

in his entire ERA, fed only had a single season with positive h2h vs his main rival. and even then barely.

04: 0-1
05: 1-1
06 (his brdt season): 2-4
07: 3-2
08: 0-4
09: 1-1

HC: 3-3
CC: 2-9
GC: 2-1

We all know Fed's flaw in 2004-2009 was Nadal. Should have won one of W 2008 or AO 2009 and maybe taken one of RG 05/06 5 sets too.

 

[GoatNo1]

noles highest ELO peaks:
HC: 2670
CC: 2538
GC: 2540

feds highest ELO peaks:
HC: 2637 (-33)
CC: 2452 (-86)
GC: 2547 (+7)

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

He has gone. Liked the posters posts.

Who has gone?

 

[RS]

Who has gone?

The poster who I quoted.

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

The poster who I quoted.

Not sure, says last seen today.

 

[RS]

Not sure, says last seen today.

When it's says profile not available means the poster isn't around anymore I think. The around yesterday might mean he attempted to log in or something idk.

 

[Neptune]

Prime to prime:

1. Federer obviously better at Wimbledon.

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%

Poor assessment, isn't it like 2019 final (Fed won more games and points, but lost the match to Nole)?

 

[Federev]

wimbledon 2012, closest prime to prime match up, easy 4 sets win for federer vs peak djokovic
rg 2011, fed edges it out
uso 07-11. easy-ish 3 sets wins for prime fed but peak djokovic needs to save MPs to take down 2011 federer

AO goes to djokovic

Yup yup yup yup

 

[Djokovic_is_the_best#1]

2 each. Djoko > Fed at AO and RG and Fed > Wimbledon and Us open

However, it’s very close overall. Peak for peak or prime for prime there’s hardly much in it. It’s hard to do time travel tennis but all we know is they both exceptional at their very best. Djokovic better longevity and consistency separated them in end.

 

[jl809]

RG is a tie for me.

Prime Djoker has the edge because he matches up better Vs Nadal than Fed does. But Prime Fed then cancels this out because there’s no way he loses to Stan the way Peak Djoker did.

So both have one guy they do better against than the other, and the actual matchup is debatable, as RG 11-12 shows. Not enough to push me one way or the other

 

[Djokovic_is_the_best#1]

RG is a tie for me.

Prime Djoker has the edge because he matches up better Vs Nadal than Fed does. But Prime Fed then cancels this out because there’s no way he loses to Stan the way Peak Djoker did.

So both have one guy they do better against than the other, and the actual matchup is debatable, as RG 11-12 shows. Not enough to push me one way or the other

I think prime Federer would struggle with peak wawrinka RG 2015 as well. Only a prime/peak Nadal or any competent version of Nadal would be trusted to deal with that version of 2015 Stan well. We saw what Stan did to 2015 Fed on clay. Granted that’s not peak/prime Fed but Fed wasn’t an unbeatable force on clay at any point like Rafa so he’d still have a hard time.

Fed handled Stan pretty well everywhere but I think on clay he’d find him the toughest as Stan beat him at Monte Carlo too. Clay would be close between them if Stan had his 2015 form.

We have to respect 2015 RG Wawrinka level and only Nadal at his best or even at a decent level for him would defo stop it.

 

[abmk]

Poor assessment, isn't it like 2019 final (Fed won more games and points, but lost the match to Nole)?

Nope, nowhere near analogous. watching both of them at their primes, its obvious fed is clearly better on grass.
its a very good assessment and backed up by proper data - obviously not for those who haven't watched tennis before 2011 or too much into Djokovic fandom.

 

[Third Serve]

RG is a tie for me.

Prime Djoker has the edge because he matches up better Vs Nadal than Fed does. But Prime Fed then cancels this out because there’s no way he loses to Stan the way Peak Djoker did.

So both have one guy they do better against than the other, and the actual matchup is debatable, as RG 11-12 shows. Not enough to push me one way or the other

Peak Djoker didn't lose to Stan. Novak was well below par in that final as he was in the SF. QF was his best match and it went downhill from there.

 

[InsideOut900]

Peak Djoker didn't lose to Stan. Novak was well below par in that final as he was in the SF. QF was his best match and it went downhill from there.

He was unsharp with the ballstriking, but not "well below par".

 

[SonnyT]

Fed never beat Djoker, post 31, at slams was untenable. At age 36, Djoker still contends at majors with Carlos.

It was as if Fed decided to fold against #1, post '07. 1st Nadal, then Djoker.

 

[Third Serve]

He was unsharp with the ballstriking, but not "well below par".

It’s only as much of an exaggeration as claiming that was peak Djokovic.

 

[jl809]

Peak Djoker didn't lose to Stan. Novak was well below par in that final as he was in the SF. QF was his best match and it went downhill from there.

???

Peak Djokovic is 2011 and 2015-mid 2016 Djokovic. Sure they may not have played incredibly in every match in those years, and we can debate how much Djoker was below par or whatever in the match itself, but either way he was unbeaten for the clay season with a 16-0 record on the surface at the time, so he was at his peak on clay coming into the match, and in the middle of one of his 2 universally acknowledged peak years

This is like saying that Nadal didn’t beat Peak Fed in Dubai in 2006 (or Murray in Cincy vs Fed) because Fed kinda underperformed by his standards in those matches. Even if we take that debatable stuff to be true, it’s a case of ok, sure, doesn’t change the fact he won literally every single other hard court match that year and went 92-5

Djoker also undeniably had a Stan problem in slams in comparison to Fed, so it’s not at all inconsistent that he struggle with him on clay after losing (and nearly losing) to him at his pet HC slam. And we have no sample size to say he would have done any better against that 2015 level of Stan in other years

 

[Third Serve]

???

Peak Djokovic is 2011 and 2015-mid 2016 Djokovic. Sure they may not have played incredibly in every match in those years, and we can debate how much Djoker was below par or whatever in the match itself, but either way he was unbeaten for the clay season with a 16-0 record on the surface at the time, so he was at his peak on clay coming into the match, and in the middle of one of his 2 universally acknowledged peak years

This is like saying that Nadal didn’t beat Peak Fed in Dubai in 2006 (or Murray in Cincy vs Fed) because Fed kinda underperformed by his standards in those matches. Even if we take that debatable stuff to be true, it’s a case of ok, sure, doesn’t change the fact he won literally every single other hard court match that year and went 92-5

Djoker also undeniably had a Stan problem in slams in comparison to Fed, so it’s not at all inconsistent that he struggle with him on clay after losing (and nearly losing) to him at his pet HC slam. And we have no sample size to say he would have done any better against that 2015 level of Stan in other years

Peak is at the top of the mountain. It involves a very high standard of play, so if I can’t seriously look at a match and call it one of the best performances from that player, it ain’t peak.

Prime is the word I often use for a general sustained period of high level. In that sense, yes Stan did beat prime Djokovic.

 

[RS]

How is this still going tbh

 

[King_ Zeglan12]

Peak is at the top of the mountain. It involves a very high standard of play, so if I can’t seriously look at a match and call it one of the best performances from that player, it ain’t peak.

Prime is the word I often use for a general sustained period of high level. In that sense, yes Stan did beat prime Djokovic.

If that's the case I don't think we can solidly claim anyone can beat peak Djokovic or any player for that matter because once the mentioned player losses he ceases to be in peak...

I would still claim 2015 Djokovic as peak though

 

[RS]

Djokovic RG 15 SF/F out of 10?

 

[Kralingen]

Djokovic RG 15 SF/F out of 10?

My response:

 

[RS]

My response:

Murray whishes it was him in the hypotheical

 

[RS]

???

Peak Djokovic is 2011 and 2015-mid 2016 Djokovic. Sure they may not have played incredibly in every match in those years, and we can debate how much Djoker was below par or whatever in the match itself, but either way he was unbeaten for the clay season with a 16-0 record on the surface at the time, so he was at his peak on clay coming into the match, and in the middle of one of his 2 universally acknowledged peak years

This is like saying that Nadal didn’t beat Peak Fed in Dubai in 2006 (or Murray in Cincy vs Fed) because Fed kinda underperformed by his standards in those matches. Even if we take that debatable stuff to be true, it’s a case of ok, sure, doesn’t change the fact he won literally every single other hard court match that year and went 92-5

Djoker also undeniably had a Stan problem in slams in comparison to Fed, so it’s not at all inconsistent that he struggle with him on clay after losing (and nearly losing) to him at his pet HC slam. And we have no sample size to say he would have done any better against that 2015 level of Stan in other years

Murray's Cincy win the forgetten gem

 

[RS]

In terms or relevance, not all runs are made equal, obviously.
2012 and 2015 Fed are not contenders, so making it far wouldn't amount to anything.

Most relevant rundown for me would be:

6 runs where Federer was a contender : 2005-2009, 2011

7 runs where Djokovic was a contender: 2008, 2011-2016

Giving Federer a bit of an edge here by including 2008 since I think he would have done decent in the final if not for Nadal and also because I included 2008 Djoko as a 50-50 match-up if they met.

Not including 2019-2020 Djoko because he became more prone to playing bad finals recently, though 2008 Federer and 2020 Djoko played at the exact level if you take it round by round.

Comparing runs:

• 2005/2007 Federer = 2013/2014 Djokovic

*2005 SF is similar to 2014 F levelwise; Djoko played more even, with Federer being straight-up bad in sets 1 and 4 (lots of easy/uncharacteristic errors), but reaching greater heights in sets 2 and 3,
*2007 F and 2013 SF, both their best performances against Nadal, don't really have much to go by for the other rounds

• 2006 Fed = 2015 Djoko. Fed bit better against Nalbandian than Djoko against Murray (assuming), rest of the tournament equal, both underperformed in the F against their worst match-up
• 2011:

* Fed won the match-up in a semifinal decided by a few points, Novak was up 5-4 in the 1st set TB and hit 3 easy errors in a row, Federer was very clutch in the 4th;
* Djokovic would arguably do better against Nadal
* similar against the field, so call it even as a whole

• 2009 Fed > 2016 Djoko: Similar level in the 4R and QF, Novak better in the SF, Fed better in the final (though Novak was excellent too). Federer by a bit since performing in the F is bigger
• 2008 Fed vs 2008 Djoko, covered above
• Djoko also has a full run in 2012 over Fed; I refrained from comparing 2012 directly with 2005 since 2005 was better in the earlier rounds

*instead, 2014 is closer to 2005 as a whole, though Djoko may have played a bit better against Nadal in 2012

Long story short:
Why Federer: a bit better in his winning run, a hair better in their 1 vs 1 match-up from 2011, mostly due to *stuff* happening
Why Djoko: a full extra run.

Assuming now Djokovic has 3 more RG runs including 2 wins that this changes a decent amount now?