Federer is 0-7 against top-2 in hardcourt Slams

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Let’s agree to disagree on that one. Roddick dropped a set to scrubs in each of the first 3 rounds of Wimbledon. He needed 5 sets to get by a very washed up version of Hewitt.

Fed’s return of serve had slipped several levels by the time that he played Roddick in that final.

Roddick’s 2003-2004 level was much higher. Roddick in an interview in 2007 said that he noticed that his serves had dropped a few mph each year during the last couple of years . Roddick said that he often looked at the radar gun during matches.

2003-2004 Roddick beats 2009 Federer at Wimbledon pretty easily, IMHO. By 2010, Fed’s return of serve started costing him matches to much weaker players.
Agreed that 03-04 Roddick's overall level was better. It's possible that 09 Fed bots well enough and puts together some returns in TBs against 03-04 Roddick. Worth noting that Roddick didn't serve nearly as well as 09 in either 03 or 04 in the matches against Federer. Fed circa 03-04 had the best 1st return ever so that's part of it. But yeah 03-04 Roddick would definitely be a handful for 09 Fed whose first return had declined by a good amount along with the mild decline in footwork against the much bigger Roddick FH.
 

Lew II

Legend
Let’s agree to disagree on that one. Roddick dropped a set to scrubs in each of the first 3 rounds of Wimbledon. He needed 5 sets to get by a very washed up version of Hewitt.

Fed’s return of serve had slipped several levels by the time that he played Roddick in that final.

Roddick’s 2003-2004 level was much higher. Roddick in an interview in 2007 said that he noticed that his serves had dropped a few mph each year during the last couple of years . Roddick said that he often looked at the radar gun during matches.

2003-2004 Roddick beats 2009 Federer at Wimbledon pretty easily, IMHO. By 2010, Fed’s return of serve started costing him matches to much weaker players.
Why did everyone from 2003-07 declined in the following years, even if still in his 20s? :unsure:
 

ReeceSachs

Hall of Fame
Agreed that 03-04 Roddick's overall level was better. It's possible that 09 Fed bots well enough and puts together some returns in TBs against 03-04 Roddick. Worth noting that Roddick didn't serve nearly as well as 09 in either 03 or 04 in the matches against Federer. Fed circa 03-04 had the best 1st return ever so that's part of it. But yeah 03-04 Roddick would definitely be a handful for 09 Fed whose first return had declined by a good amount along with the mild decline in footwork against the much bigger Roddick FH.
Roddick BH was better in 2009 as well than 2003 or 2004 and he was more steady as well. In 2004 he returned better but he wasn’t as smart and tried to below you out of rallies. That’s how he beat Murray in the SF in 2009.
 

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
Why did everyone from 2003-07 declined in the following years, even if still in his 20s? :unsure:
Lew, are you aware that for many years the average peak of tennis players was right around age 24?

If you take the age of each slam winner from 68 through to the end of 2007, you'll find out the average age is pretty close to 24.5. That average has jumped up to around 27 years old from 2008 to today, mostly because no one under 31 has won a slam since Murray at Wimbledon in 2016. Even with changes in tennis, what is going on right now is just not normal or expected.
 

Lew II

Legend
Lew, are you aware that for many years the average peak of tennis players was right around age 24?

If you take the age of each slam winner from 68 through to the end of 2007, you'll find out the average age is pretty close to 24.5. That average has jumped up to around 27 years old from 2008 to today, mostly because no one under 31 has won a slam since Murray at Wimbledon in 2016. Even with changes in tennis, what is going on right now is just not normal or expected.
But 2008-12 is just few years ago, I'm not comparing recent years to the '80s.
 

Lew II

Legend
Most of those players declined due to injuries before the Djokodal gen even appeared. Your attempts to force a link have been refuted before...
I know, I know, that was the injury gen while the following was the injury-free gen.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
I know, I know, that was the injury gen while the following was the injury-free gen.
Comments like these illuminate your agenda better than most. What are you saying here? Are you saying they weren't injured? Hopefully not that as that would be stupid considering those injuries and surgeries are well documented...Might as well ask why Murray and Wawrinka haven't been able to recover from their injuries.

It's quite possible external factors caused by the changing tour conditions at the time helped precipiate the injuries in the mid 00's as well.
 

Mike Sams

Legend
You insult people who did not say a bad word about you while you tolerated a barrage of insults from tennis_hands with subservience I have never witnessed in my life.
I barely remember anyone's name on here or what happened as far back as 2 days ago. I'm sure if I cross paths with whoever this tennis hands guy is again, I'll handle that business while leaving "subservience" at the door. :cool:
 

Subway Tennis

Hall of Fame
Federer never beat a top-2 in the hardcourt Slams. His score is 0-7.

vs #2 Agassi UO 2001
vs #1 Nadal AO 2009
vs #1 Djokovic UO 2011
vs #2 Nadal AO 2012
vs #1 Nadal AO 2014
vs #1 Djokovic UO 2015
vs #1 Djokovic AO 2016

Yet he is the title record holder. Crazy stuff. o_O
:oops:
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Nadal was number 2 between 2005-2008 and didn’t make a single HC slam final. Fed lost when he was underdog and expected to. He won all the matches with him as favourite apart from AO09.
 
For OP going out against 5th seed thiem at 33 (0 slams) looks far better then going out against 16 time slam winner djokovic at 38 just because it will add another loss vs main rival and nr 1 or 2 in the world. This really makes sence doesn't it? People like him used to ridicule and diminish a win in the final over a 35 year old Agassi way back. Now putting asside a 38 year old is suddenly the stuff of genius and a very big feat somehow. So funny these facts/stats without context.
 

Lew II

Legend
DJOKOVIC

AO 5-1
RG 1-5
WI 3-2
UO 3-5

total 12-13

NADAL

AO 1-2
RG 7-1
WI 1-3
UO 1-2

total 10-8

FEDERER

AO 0-5
RG 1-6
WI 6-4
UO 0-3

total 7-18
 
Wins over the highest ranked opponent (#1, or #2 if you're the #1):

AO: Djokovic 4, Nadal 1, Federer 0
RG: Nadal 7, Djokovic 1, Federer 0
WI: Federer 5, Djokovic 3, Nadal 1
UO: Djokovic 2, Nadal 1, Federer 0
interesting claim that Roger never defeated a no 1 or 2 at RG
what was Djokovic ranked when Roger defeated him at 2011 FO? He was ranked no 1. but OP cherry picked the facts to suit his claim
 

aditya123

Professional
Superb timing to hurt Fed fans!!!!! Atleast,updates in this thread could have come a day or 2 later. But no. Hmmmm
 

BH40love

Rookie
That was a crazy first set. Once Fed lost the tiebreak it was all over tbh even tho he wasn’t 100% I think if he wins that first set 6-3 like it looked it’s a different match but credit to Djokovic he is immense on this court. Interesting match if he plays Zverev
 

Bianca007

Rookie
Federer never beat a top-2 in the hardcourt Slams. His score is 0-7.

vs #2 Agassi UO 2001
vs #1 Nadal AO 2009
vs #1 Djokovic UO 2011
vs #2 Nadal AO 2012
vs #1 Nadal AO 2014
vs #1 Djokovic UO 2015
vs #1 Djokovic AO 2016
Update: vs #2 Djokovic AO 2020

Yet he is the title record holder. Crazy stuff. o_O
Its is blatantly nonsense to put Federer ahead of Djokovic nadal or Sampras on hard court.

Those statistics are a damning indictment really for someone who the media try to proclaim as the greatest ever.
 

Bianca007

Rookie
Wow..that's damning stuff. No way anyone can call him the hard court GOAT with that record
I said today would damage federer legacy. Its just impossible to ignore the fact that from age 26 onwards he has been totally eclipsed by Nadal and Djokovic.

Today was just actually sad to see. Djokovic was toying with him at times like a ball on string.
 

Jaitock1991

Hall of Fame
I said today would damage federer legacy. Its just impossible to ignore the fact that from age 26 onwards he has been totally eclipsed by Nadal and Djokovic.

Today was just actually sad to see. Djokovic was toying with him at times like a ball on string.
Guess he should have withdrawn then, instead of respecting the game and his opponent too much to do so. His legacy would have been better off.
 
Top