Federer losses in slams at prime vs Djokovic losses in slams at prime - against non ATGs

[abmk]

Federer (2004-2009)

AO 2005 - to Safin
USO 09 - to delpo

(Kuerten was an ATG on clay and turned back the years, so excluding that)

Djokovic (2011-2016)

USO 12 - to Murray
Wim 13 - to Murray
AO 14 - to Stan
USO 14 - to Nishikori
RG 15 - to Stan
Wim 16 - to Querrey
USO 16 - to Stan

2 vs 7

Just thought some arrogant Djokovic fanboys on this forum need some puncturing. You know who they are.

 

[RS]

Ratings out of 10 thread for all top oppenents Fed and Novak faced before final runs in that span abmk

 

[Deleted member 748597]

In many of those matches Djokovic's form wasn't really prime.

 

[TMF]

Djokovic was lucky he didn't lose to Stan in 2013 AO because the umpire made a bad call during the crucial moment.

 

[Deleted member 748597]

Djokovic was lucky he didn't lose to Stan in 2013 AO because the umpire made a bad call during the crucial moment.

I always enjoy your objective analysis.

 

[PilotPete]

In many of those matches Djokovic's form wasn't really prime.

you mean to say Djokovic only wins when he doesn't lose?

 

[Deleted member 748597]

you mean to say Djokovic only wins when he doesn't lose?

I mean to say that Federer was simply better at sustaining his peak/prime level longer.

 

[TMF]

In many of those matches Djokovic's form wasn't really prime.

Because he can't maintain the same level of consistent as Federer during their prime years. It's one of the important criteria in evaluating player's placement in ATG.

 

[abmk]

In many of those matches Djokovic's form wasn't really prime.

that's his problem, in it?

 

[Deleted member 748597]

that's his problem, in it?

Yes, it is his problem.

 

[TMF]

I always enjoy your objective analysis.

Thank you.

 

[abmk]

I mean to say that Federer was simply better at sustaining his peak/prime level longer.

even leaving Wim 16 and USO 16, its still 2-5.
not matter of longevity of prime.

Federer's just better prime to prime.

 

[TMF]

I mean to say that Federer was simply better at sustaining his peak/prime level longer.

I always enjoy your objective analysis.

 

[PeoplesChamp]

 

[Deleted member 748597]

even leaving Wim 16 and USO 16, its still 2-5.
not matter of longevity of prime.

Federer's just better prime to prime.

Djokovic simply failed to properly dominate tougher competition in 2012-13 like he did in 2011.

 

[RS]

@Lew II

 

[abmk]

Djokovic simply failed to properly dominate tougher competition in 2012-13 like he did in 2011.

3 of those 7 losses are in 14-15 - not that tough of a competition
2 of them in 16

Only 2 in 12-13.

 

[Deleted member 748597]

I do admit that Federer sustained his peak/prime level longer. Therefore, I admit that he was a more dominant #1 than Djokovic.

Now let's wait for Lew and others.

 

[RS]

Who had better slam competition in that timeframe?

 

[Deleted member 748597]

Who had better slam competition in that timeframe?

That is a better question, yes.

 

[Deleted member 758560]

That is a better question, yes.

not even a question but a rhetorical question

 

[Deleted member 748597]

That is only one draw buddy.

They were generally the same.

 

[RS]

They were generally the same.

Cool.

 

[Lew II]

Except Murray is an ATG and Kuerten is not.

 

[Deleted member 758560]

Except Murray is an ATG and Kuerten is not.

anyway 5>3

 

[Deleted member 748597]

Murray is arguably an ATG on grass so let's exclude that Wimb 2013 final.

 

[tudwell]

Except Murray is an ATG and Kuerten is not.

Is that fact or opinion?

 

[Deleted member 758560]

Is that fact or opinion?

guga is too clay skewed to be an atg

 

[NoleFam]

Federer's prime conveniently ends at 28 while Djokovic's continues 3 Slams after he's 29...lol.

 

[abmk]

Ratings out of 10 thread for all top oppenents Fed and Novak faced before final runs in that span abmk

For Federer :

2004-2009:

AO 2004 : Nalby: 8/10 (Edit: Hewitt 7.25/10)
RG 2004 : Kuerten 8.75/10
Wim 2004 : Roddick 9.25/10, Hewitt 7.5/10
USO 04 : Agassi 8.75/10

AO 2005 : Safin 10/10
RG 2005 : Nadal 9.5/10
Wim 05 : Hewitt 7.5/10
USO 05 : Hewitt 8/10, Agassi 8/10

AO 06 : Davydenko 7.25/10, Haas 7/10
RG 2006: Nadal 9.25/10
Wim 06: Ancic 7.5/10, Nadal 7.25/10 (debatable I know, Nadal had the higher peak in set3, but set1 was him nervous and his set 4 was worse than any of Ancic's sets)
USO 06: Blake 7.25/10, Roddick 7/10

AO 07: Gonzo 7.5/10
RG 2007: Davy 7/10, Nadal 10/10
Wim 2007: Nadal 9.5/10
USO 07: Lopez 7.5/10, Roddick 9/10, Davy 7/10, Djokovic 7.25/10

AO 08: Tipsy 7.25/10, Djokovic 9.5/10
RG 08: Nadal 10/10
Wim 08: Nadal 9.5/10
USO 08: Andreev: 7.75/10, Djokovic 7.75/10

AO 09: Berdych 7/10, Nadal 9.25/10
RG 09: Delpo 9.25/10
Wim 09: Roddick 9.25/10
USO 09: Soderling 7.25/10, Djokovic 7.5/10, Delpo 8.25/10


For Djokovic:

AO 11: Federer 7.25/10
RG 11: Federer 9.5/10
Wim 11: Nadal 7/10, Tsonga 7/10
USO 11: Federer 8.5/10, Nadal 7.25/10

AO 12: Murray 8/10, Nadal 9/10
RG 12: Tsonga 7/10, Nadal 10/10
Wim 12: Federer 9/10
USO 12: Murray: 7.75/10

AO 13: Wawrinka 9/10, Murray 6.75/10
RG 13: Nadal 9.25/10
Wim 13: delpo: 7.5/10, murray: 7.75/10
USO 13: stan: 6.75/10, nadal 9/10

AO 14: stan 8.75/10
RG 14: Nadal 9/10
Wim 14: Fed 8/10
USO 14: Nishi 7.5/10

AO 15: Murray 7/10
RG 15 : Stan 9/10
Wim 15: Anderson 7.5/10, Fed 7/10
USO 15: Fed 7.5/10

AO 16: Simon 7/10
RG 16: no one at 6.75 or above
Wim 16: Querrey 7.5/10
USO 16: Wawrinka 7/10


Something along these lines.

 

[BeatlesFan]

They didn't even play best of five in Fed's wool pants era!

Few here are even aware Federer was an active player in the 19th century.

 

[PilotPete]

What a joke, Murray is not an All-time great. If he is then so are Safin, Roddick and Hewitt.

 

[abmk]

Federer's prime conveniently ends at 28 while Djokovic's continues 3 Slams after he's 29...lol.

excuse me? I took 6 prime years each.
Would you like me to take 2010-2015 for Djokovic?

 

[RS]

For Federer :

2004-2009:

AO 2004 : Nalby: 8/10
RG 2004 : Kuerten 8.75/10
Wim 2004 : Roddick 9.25/10, Hewitt 7.5/10
USO 04 : Agassi 8.75/10

AO 2005 : Safin 10/10
RG 2005 : Nadal 9.5/10
Wim 05 : Hewitt 7.5/10
USO 05 : Hewitt 8/10, Agassi 8/10

AO 06 : Davydenko 7.25/10, Haas 7/10
RG 2006: Nadal 9.25/10
Wim 06: Ancic 7.5/10, Nadal 7.25/10 (debatable I know, Nadal had the higher peak in set3, but set1 was him nervous and his set 4 was worse than any of Ancic's sets)
USO 06: Blake 7.25/10, Roddick 7/10

AO 07: Gonzo 7.5/10
RG 2007: Davy 7/10, Nadal 10/10
Wim 2007: Nadal 9.5/10
USO 07: Lopez 7.5/10, Roddick 9/10, Davy 7/10, Djokovic 7.25/10

AO 08: Tipsy 7.25/10, Djokovic 9.5/10
RG 08: Nadal 10/10
Wim 08: Nadal 9.5/10
USO 08: Andreev: 7.75/10, Djokovic 7.75/10

AO 09: Berdych 7/10, Nadal 9.25/10
RG 09: Delpo 9.25/10
Wim 09: Roddick 9.25/10
USO 09: Soderling 7.25/10, Djokovic 7.5/10, Delpo 8.25/10


For Djokovic:

AO 11: Federer 7.25/10
RG 11: Federer 9.5/10
Wim 11: Nadal 7/10, Tsonga 7/10
USO 11: Federer 8.25/10, Nadal 7.25/10

AO 12: Murray 8/10, Nadal 9/10
RG 12: Tsonga 7/10, Nadal 10/10
Wim 12: Federer 9/10
USO 12: Murray: 7.75/10

AO 13: Wawrinka 9/10, Murray 6.75/10
RG 13: Nadal 9.25/10
Wim 13: delpo: 7.5/10, murray: 7.75/10
USO 13: stan: 6.75/10, nadal 9/10

AO 14: stan 8.75/10
RG 14: Nadal 9/10
Wim 14: Fed 8/10
USO 14: Nishi 7.5/10

AO 15: Murray 7/10
RG 15 : Stan 9/10
Wim 15: Anderson 7.5/10, Fed 7/10
USO 15: Fed 7.5/10

AO 16: Simon 7/10
RG 16: no one at 6.75 or above
Wim 16: Querrey 7.5/10
USO 16: Wawrinka 7/10


Something along these lines.

I was kidding lol but nice work.

 

[abmk]

Murray is arguably an ATG on grass so let's exclude that Wimb 2013 final.

No.
# of players better than Kuerten on clay in open era (considering prime form): Nadal, Borg ..maybe Lendl (debatable)
# of players better than Murray on grass (considering prime form): Federer, Sampras, Borg, Djokovic, Mac, Becker, Edberg, Connors, Newk, Nadal. That's atleast 10, you could push Ivanisevic, Krajicek, Stich and Roddick as well if considering prime form.

 

[RS]

For Federer :

2004-2009:

AO 2004 : Nalby: 8/10 (Edit: Hewitt 7.25/10)
RG 2004 : Kuerten 8.75/10
Wim 2004 : Roddick 9.25/10, Hewitt 7.5/10
USO 04 : Agassi 8.75/10

AO 2005 : Safin 10/10
RG 2005 : Nadal 9.5/10
Wim 05 : Hewitt 7.5/10
USO 05 : Hewitt 8/10, Agassi 8/10

AO 06 : Davydenko 7.25/10, Haas 7/10
RG 2006: Nadal 9.25/10
Wim 06: Ancic 7.5/10, Nadal 7.25/10 (debatable I know, Nadal had the higher peak in set3, but set1 was him nervous and his set 4 was worse than any of Ancic's sets)
USO 06: Blake 7.25/10, Roddick 7/10

AO 07: Gonzo 7.5/10
RG 2007: Davy 7/10, Nadal 10/10
Wim 2007: Nadal 9.5/10
USO 07: Lopez 7.5/10, Roddick 9/10, Davy 7/10, Djokovic 7.25/10

AO 08: Tipsy 7.25/10, Djokovic 9.5/10
RG 08: Nadal 10/10
Wim 08: Nadal 9.5/10
USO 08: Andreev: 7.75/10, Djokovic 7.75/10

AO 09: Berdych 7/10, Nadal 9.25/10
RG 09: Delpo 9.25/10
Wim 09: Roddick 9.25/10
USO 09: Soderling 7.25/10, Djokovic 7.5/10, Delpo 8.25/10


For Djokovic:

AO 11: Federer 7.25/10
RG 11: Federer 9.5/10
Wim 11: Nadal 7/10, Tsonga 7/10
USO 11: Federer 8.25/10, Nadal 7.25/10

AO 12: Murray 8/10, Nadal 9/10
RG 12: Tsonga 7/10, Nadal 10/10
Wim 12: Federer 9/10
USO 12: Murray: 7.75/10

AO 13: Wawrinka 9/10, Murray 6.75/10
RG 13: Nadal 9.25/10
Wim 13: delpo: 7.5/10, murray: 7.75/10
USO 13: stan: 6.75/10, nadal 9/10

AO 14: stan 8.75/10
RG 14: Nadal 9/10
Wim 14: Fed 8/10
USO 14: Nishi 7.5/10

AO 15: Murray 7/10
RG 15 : Stan 9/10
Wim 15: Anderson 7.5/10, Fed 7/10
USO 15: Fed 7.5/10

AO 16: Simon 7/10
RG 16: no one at 6.75 or above
Wim 16: Querrey 7.5/10
USO 16: Wawrinka 7/10


Something along these lines.

I thought the Simon match was really bad quality for a 5th setter but i see you give points for the 5th setter. Djoko hit like 100 errors in that IIRC.

 

[abmk]

I thought the Simon match was really bad quality for a 5th setter but i see you give points for the 5th setter. Djoko hit like 100 errors in that IIRC.

Yeah, it was 100 UEs exact I think. Some props has to be given to Simon for frustrating Djokovic at the AO that much.

 

[NoleFam]

excuse me? I took 6 prime years each.
Would you like me to take 2010-2015 for Djokovic?

Everybody knows Djokovic wasn't playing prime tennis in the 2nd half of 2016. He didn't play prime tennis after 2016 RG for 2 years. Now Kuerten is an ATG? Lol. If Kuerten is an ATG on clay then so is Murray on grass.

 

[abmk]

Everybody knows Djokovic wasn't playing prime tennis in the 2nd half of 2016. He didn't play prime tennis after 2016 RG for 2 years.

Ok, then lets take 5.5 years each.
1 loss for federer (AO 05), 5 for Djokovic (USO 12, Wim 13, AO 14, USO 14, RG 15).

Now Kuerten is an ATG? Lol. If Kuerten is an ATG on clay then so is Murray on grass.

on clay, yeah. I already addressed Kuerten on clay vs Murray on grass.

No.
# of players better than Kuerten on clay in open era (considering prime form): Nadal, Borg ..maybe Lendl (debatable)
# of players better than Murray on grass (considering prime form): Federer, Sampras, Borg, Djokovic, Mac, Becker, Edberg, Connors, Newk, Nadal. That's atleast 10, you could push Ivanisevic, Krajicek, Stich and Roddick as well if considering prime form.

 

[RS]

Yeah, it was 100 UEs exact I think. Some props has to be given to Simon for frustrating Djokovic at the AO that much.

Hard to rate a match like that really. I doubt he would have done any better than Fed or Murray in the SF/F but you can only take it match by match.

 

[Lew II]

Slam win percentage vs non-Big3:

Djokovic 90.6%
Federer 90.3%

It's a myth that Djokovic struggled more than Federer against non-ATGs.

 

[NoleFam]

Ok, then lets take 5.5 years each.
1 loss for federer (AO 05), 5 for Djokovic (USO 12, Wim 13, AO 14, USO 14, RG 15).




on clay, yeah. I already addressed Kuerten on clay vs Murray on grass.

Ok and if so, does any of this matter? Djokovic still ended up right where Federer was at the same age in Slam total and comparable in weeks at #1. Both had poor losses over their careers in Slams.

Well your theory most likely is biased and incorrect. If Kuerten is an ATG on clay then Murray absolutely is on grass. Kuerten: 3 Slams and 4 Masters. Murray: 2 Slams, 1 Olympic gold and 5 Queens titles, with a much higher winning percentage, 69.9% versus 83.6%.

 

[Lew II]

In the real world where Federer and Djokovic played more than 6 years:

Slam win percentage vs non-Big3:

Djokovic 90.6%
Federer 90.3%

 

[PeoplesChamp]

Win percentage vs non-Big3:

Djokovic 90.6%
Federer 90.3%

It's a myth that Djokovic struggled more than Federer against non-ATGs.

Thought it was all about the slams Lew.

 

[Deleted member 748597]

No.
# of players better than Kuerten on clay in open era (considering prime form): Nadal, Borg ..maybe Lendl (debatable)
# of players better than Murray on grass (considering prime form): Federer, Sampras, Borg, Djokovic, Mac, Becker, Edberg, Connors, Newk, Nadal. That's atleast 10, you could push Ivanisevic, Krajicek, Stich and Roddick as well if considering prime form.

Nah, if you want to exclude Kuerten on clay, then exclude Murray on grass.

 

[PeoplesChamp]

Everybody knows Djokovic wasn't playing prime tennis in the 2nd half of 2016. He didn't play prime tennis after 2016 RG for 2 years. Now Kuerten is an ATG? Lol. If Kuerten is an ATG on clay then so is Murray on grass.

Well, Federer didn't contribute to Kuerten's ATG status on clay like Djokovic did for Murray.

 

[abmk]

Ok and if so, does any of this matter? Djokovic still ended up right where Federer was at the same age in Slam total and comparable in weeks at #1. Both had poor losses over their careers in Slams.

matters for a prime to prime comparision.

Well your theory most likely is biased and incorrect. If Kuerten is an ATG on grass then Murray absolutely is too. Kuerten: 3 Slams and 4 Masters. Murray: 2 Slams, 1 Olympic gold and 5 Queens titles, with a much higher winning percentage, 69.9% versus 83.6%.

%s on surface don't matter as much as prime form when it comes to slams and you know it. That % for Kuerten is seriously misleading and you should know that.

prime years : 99-2001, Kuerten's win-loss on clay = 85.3%
Of course he won RG 97 with a ridiculously tough draw

His prime was cut short by injuries. He turned the clock back(mostly) vs fed in that match in RG 04.

Also like I said:

# of players better than Kuerten on clay in open era (considering prime form): Nadal, Borg ..maybe Lendl (debatable)
# of players better than Murray on grass (considering prime form): Federer, Sampras, Borg, Djokovic, Mac, Becker, Edberg, Connors, Newk, Nadal. That's atleast 10, you could push Ivanisevic, Krajicek, Stich and Roddick as well if considering prime form.

you know this is true, just don't want to admit it.

 

[NoleFam]

Well, Federer didn't contribute to Kuerten's ATG status on clay like Djokovic did for Murray.

He didn't have a chance to since their prime levels didn't overlap. Based on that 2004 match, that's probably a good thing...lol

 

[abmk]

Nah, if you want to exclude Kuerten on clay, then exclude Murray on grass.

Nope. The reasoning I have given is clear cut and fair.

 

[TMF]

Thought it was all about the slams Lew.

Only when it suits his argument to support his agenda-driven.