Federer vs Djokovic . Who is greater?

Who is greater?

  • Federer

    Votes: 72 39.1%
  • Djokovic

    Votes: 97 52.7%
  • Even

    Votes: 15 8.2%

  • Total voters
    184

Third Serve

G.O.A.T.
Time travel matches part 4.

1. Djokovic Wim 11 final vs Federer Wim 15 final - probably four sets like 2015... assuming set level translates perfectly, I'm thinking 7-6 6-3 2-6 6-4
2. Hewitt USO 04 final vs Med USO 21 final - somewhat close because I don't think Hewitt would have played as badly as he did if it wasn't Federer on the other side of the net, but I would still give Med an advantage here
3. Agassi AO 04 QF vs Djokovic AO 14 QF - did you mean the SF for Agassi? If so, I'd have to give it to him. Djokovic played a pretty good match in 2014 but Agassi pretty much had his last prime-level performance at the AO and Safin had to play very well at the right moments to win
4. Hewitt USO 01 final vs Cllic USO 14 final - close, but would give it to Hewitt
5. Federer USO 15 final vs Nadal AO 17 final - just about even I think
6. Tsonga AO 08 final vs Murray AO 12 SF - slightly
7. Sampras RG 94 vs Murray RG 15 - don't know much about Sampras 94 RG
8. Sampras Wim 00 final vs Federer Wim 09 final - slightly
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS

Strale

Semi-Pro
10 consecutive grand slam finals
23 consecutive grand slam semifinals
18 out of 19 grand slam finals
237 consecutive weeks at #1
5 consecutive Wimbledon and USO
56 consecutive wins on hc, 65 on grass(much worth mentioning Nadal has 91 on clay)
The list goes on....

Let that sink in
10 consecutive grand slam finals
23 consecutive grand slam semifinals
18 out of 19 grand slam finals
237 consecutive weeks at #1
5 consecutive Wimbledon and USO
56 consecutive wins on hc, 65 on grass(much worth mentioning Nadal has 91 on clay)
The list goes on....

Let that sink in
Now lets compare those consolation achievements with actual achievements...

1. Weeks at number 1
2. Year end number 1
3. Double career grand slam
4. Nole slam
5.Peak elo rating
6.Most points won in a single season
7. Double golden masters.
8. More overall big titles.
9.Crushed Federer at his pet slam
10. Crushed Nadal at his pet slam
11. Better h2h with both Federer and Nadal.
12. Arguably the strongest individual seasons (2011,2016)
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Now lets compare those consolation achievements with actual achievements...

1. Weeks at number 1
2. Year end number 1(2020 was a short season-lockdown, players skipped tournaments)
3. Double career grand slam(trivial)
4. Nole slam(trivial)
5.Peak elo rating(elo is garbage and it has been debunked so many times)
6.Most points won in a single season(trivial)
7. Double golden masters.(trivial)
8. More overall big titles.(103>85, :oops:)
9.Crushed Federer at his pet slam(8>5, :oops:)
10. Crushed Nadal at his pet slam(13>2, :oops:)
11. Better h2h with both Federer and Nadal.(strawman)
12. Arguably the strongest individual seasons (2011,2016)(LOL!)
 

Kralingen

Legend
Well I know it's super easy to troll Nadal, but what Slams has he really won with "sub-par" play? I think only the 2017 and 2019 US Opens would qualify, right? Because even his 2017-2020 RG titles, while below his best (ok perhaps not 2017), would still be considered perfectly respectable wins in any era. I mean, while he faced uber-weak competition, he only really needed to dig somewhat deep against Schwartzman in 2018 so it's not like he was dropping pointless sets or going AWOL for whole stretches of matches like Djokovic has been doing (and largely getting away with) for the last three years. That just leaves Nadal's other Slams where he either cruised through the draw in stellar fashion or struggled against opponents he actually should struggle with like AO 2009 Verdasco.

I think he's either really close to Federer or just ahead of him in this regard (but Fred has better losing efforts, I don't think that's debatable). Both definitely above Djokovic I think
Hm quoted for truth because I hadn’t really considered it this way before. I guess if we want to apply a “vulture index” to his Slams his RGs are mainly of such high quality that they become irreproachable, and post prime Slams like RG ‘17 or RG ‘20 are likely better than either of Djoko/Fed’s wins at RG as well.

then again I do think the Djokovic playstyle and approach is very much a bend not break don’t lose style especially post-2018. even though he was listless in long stretches of post-AO ‘19 Slams he still won them and delivered the goods when it mattered. So, eh, tomato tomato. It’s not really a defense of Djoko just that he plays to win the match in front of him at any cost, not to put on a splendid performance to win a hypothetical match, which I feel hurts him in these debates.

if you expand the scope to Slam runs in total, not just their Slam Winning runs, this is where Nadal is a clear 3rd though. Far more duds than the other two.

Fed has produced the highest level on aggregate Slam runs of any player ever and at this point I don’t see how Djokovic can surpass him unless he plays until age 40, which he almost certainly wouldn’t, and I doubt his 37-yr old self would be as good as Fed’s anyway.
 

GabeT

G.O.A.T.
Gotte love posters that claim that consecutive slam finals is a great accomplishment but actual consecutive slam wins is trivial!

LOL, how does TTW do this? :laughing: :laughing: :eek:
 

Jonas78

Legend
Yeah this is false lol. Lots of people were calling out 2017-2018 as a weak era, the Career Inflation Era term was coined in early 2018 when Fed was #1 IIRC. Don't think 2017 Fed beating 2015 Djokovic was a common opinion either. I think the difference is that the majority of fans were just happier with the results so weren't complaining - don't think anyone was saying 2017 was strong.
I dont think any decent Fed-fan would say Federer beating over-the-top error-machine Cilic in straights W18 final was strong lol. Its as you say, Fedal-fans were happy the drought was over, but i dont think anyone would claim it was a strong field.
 

goldengate14

Professional
I am pretty sure at the very least, almost nobody, especialy "experts", sees Nadal above Djokovic at this point. Federer atleast is more debateable.
Well going off what they said before the Uso where they said if Djokovic won he would surpass nadal and federer i assume they consider him either behind or at best equal with both.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
I dont think any decent Fed-fan would say Federer beating over-the-top error-machine Cilic in straights W18 final was strong lol. Its as you say, Fedal-fans were happy the drought was over, but i dont think anyone would claim it was a strong field.
I was mainly impressed by Fed's AO + Sunshine Double stretch. That was the most memorable aspect of his 2017 before things became really weak.
 
WTF is a very valid argument

Olympics Gold medals have no value in Tennis since those events don't have any connection with peak levels of athleticism, I told you 1000 times that Olympics is known for Athletics, Swimming and other events where athletes raise the bar for athleticism and hence their medals have great prestige, the same does not apply for Zverev or Murray or Nadal's gold medals
You make no sense, as usual. In Olympic tennis the top players of each country compete. Djokovic was devastated when he lost the SF to Nadal in 2008, in fast HC.
 

Frenchy-Player

Professional
11 Reasons why Roger Federer is still greater....

01. Billionaire (Biggest brand ever and made his money from tennis due to his skills)
02. Greatest Peak (04-07 BOAT)
03. Slams leader for 13th year in running, this means Novak's 1st year and Rafa's 2nd year as slams leader has begun, Federer already has been at the top for 13 long years, so 12 more years to go for Novak.
04. Most records in Tennis as said by @TMF
05. Most tour final wins
06. Biggest Fanbase, if every fan considers their fav player as GOAT then Fed has most votes for GOAT, this matters.
07. Has at least 5 slams on 3 different slams out of 4, his performance is so balanced that even on HCs he has at least 3 slams on 3 different type of surface (Rebound, Plexi, Deco).
08. Had 237 weeks at 1, unparalleled dominance, had Mono not ruined his 2008 year then this streak would have extended till 300 weeks...
09. Still the GOAT on Grass and Co-GOAT on HCs.

10. Has a 70+ win% on Carpets as well, this guy is tried and tested for all eras
11. Tremendous streaks at Semi Finals, 5 straight slams won in 5 years at 2 slams at his peak, 5Ws and 5USOs

All this he did using an inferior racquet from the 1990s.
And Jelena is beautiful.
 

goldengate14

Professional
As expected further proof how hopeless these polls are on here. On any other tennis platform Federer is unanimously ahead of Djokovic yet again what is seen here isa suspicious flurry of Djokovic votes at the same time. The OP played a corker here.
 

InsideOut900

Hall of Fame
You make no sense, as usual. In Olympic tennis the top players of each country compete. Djokovic was devastated when he lost the SF to Nadal in 2008, in fast HC.
Tennis at Oly has no prestige or history, that's about the short version. It's only modern players (since 2008) making a big fuss out of it.

It doesn't award ranking points, so it's justified to even call it an exo.

Now I am not against considering it a somewhat great achievement, it still takes great timing and form to win it, but it's by no mean more revelant than other metrics.

Now talking YEC, it awards 1500 points and has lots of prestige and history (50 years old tournament played by every single past great). You can't argue against that.
 
Last edited:

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Tennis at Oly has no prestige or history, that's about the short version. It's only modern players (since 2008) making a big fuss out of it.

It doesn't award ranking points, so it's justified to even call it an exo.

Now I am not against considering it a somewhat great achievement, it still takes great timing and form to win it, but it's by no mean more revelant than other metrics.
Olympics was great only in 2008 and 2012. Those were great wins.

The rest? Forgettable.
 

initialize

Rookie
Federer. Fed has played in roughly 5 different tennis eras and has been a top player in all. Djokovic has only played in 2 eras so far
 

Sunny014

Legend
Olympics is famous because of these 2 sports that have been dominated by these 2 guys in this millenium.

You could add Gymnastic and some other events as well but mainly these 2 guys have been the center of attraction

Compared to them Nadal and Murray are inferiors with no value ......


 

DjokoLand

Hall of Fame
federer was better than djoko when djoko was young,
and now djoko is better now that federer is old..

if you take their last 10 matches djoko leads 7-3 (fedr old)
if you take their first 10 matches fedr leads 7-3 (djoko young)
soo i think theyre about even
Also add in that a young Djokovic could beat peak Fed and a old Fed could beat Djokovic.

Both have matchup well during the course of their career. For me if peak vs peak met 20 times Fed might outplay Djokovic most times but I always feel peak mental Djokovic grinds out wins 2019 W style
 

big ted

Hall of Fame
Also add in that a young Djokovic could beat peak Fed and a old Fed could beat Djokovic.

Both have matchup well during the course of their career. For me if peak vs peak met 20 times Fed might outplay Djokovic most times but I always feel peak mental Djokovic grinds out wins 2019 W style
it makes sense that they would be about the same since they both pushed each other to get better imo..
 

DjokoLand

Hall of Fame
it makes sense that they would be about the same since they both pushed each other to get better imo..
Definitely. Both always could beat each other bar the rare situations. Djokovic always beat Fed at the AO bar 18 year old Djokovic and Fed always beat Djokovic at Cinci bar old Fed.
 

goldengate14

Professional
Olympics was great only in 2008 and 2012. Those were great wins.

The rest? Forgettable.
Players consider them as big as slams. Murray Djokovic Nadal Federer Zverev PCB have openly said so. On that basis i will judge players across Slams and Olympics first and foremost as millions seems to on social media channels
 

DjokoLand

Hall of Fame
This is a endless thread for me.
At their best it’s depending on the surface.
Records they hold it’s so close
Dominate #1’s and pure all rounders.

For me the best 2 too play the game
 

Kralingen

Legend
federer was better than djoko when djoko was young,
and now djoko is better now that federer is old..

if you take their last 10 matches djoko leads 7-3 (fedr old)
if you take their first 10 matches fedr leads 7-3 (djoko young)
soo i think theyre about even
This simplistic analysis has honestly spoken to me more than any other post in the thread. well done.
 

goldengate14

Professional
This is a endless thread for me.
At their best it’s depending on the surface.
Records they hold it’s so close
Dominate #1’s and pure all rounders.

For me the best 2 too play the game
Thread says greater. To me there is a big distinction between best and greatest. best way i can explain is perhaps football last season. Chelsea won the champions league so were the greatest club in europe last year. Manchester City won the English Premier League and were the best team in England as they were no.1 over the course lf a season. Chelsea had the greater season.
 

DjokoLand

Hall of Fame
Thread says greater. To me there is a big distinction between best and greatest. best way i can explain is perhaps football last season. Chelsea won the champions league so were the greatest club in europe last year. Manchester City won the English Premier League and were the best team in England as they were no.1 over the course lf a season. Chelsea had the greater season.
So who do you consider greater then ?
 

goldengate14

Professional
So who do you consider greater then ?
Out of Federer and Djokovic as that is what this thread is about id have to say Federer just. I think his Olympic Gold in doubles cannot be ignored and he has over 100 titles and has more than 10 titles on every surface. That is not in anyway disrespecting Djokovic and i do think these threads are largely pointless as i am certain one of the Big 3 will get 21 next season and to me whoever wins the slam race will be the greatest. I know Federer is some way behind in m1000s but he neer had even one grass court event at that level.
 

DjokoLand

Hall of Fame
Out of Federer and Djokovic as that is what this thread is about id have to say Federer just. I think his Olympic Gold in doubles cannot be ignored and he has over 100 titles and has more than 10 titles on every surface. That is not in anyway disrespecting Djokovic and i do think these threads are largely pointless as i am certain one of the Big 3 will get 21 next season and to me whoever wins the slam race will be the greatest. I know Federer is some way behind in m1000s but he neer had even one grass court event at that level.
We’ll see that is a opinion that is rightfully debatable for me. Between Djokovic and Federer who ever picks one I don’t have a problem as they are so close that it’s a pick that is backed up by stats which I feel Nadal falls short of both.

Also while having no grass masters does certainly affect Fed him playing Halle which the likes of Djokovic doesn’t and winning it 10 times helps his overall titles so it at least balances a bit.

Id ease towards Djokovic but I would never say anyone that says Fed is wrong. They are so close in all numbers
 

Start da Game

Hall of Fame
Okay, I have to stop you. I like Rafa, but in no way does he statistically have the advantage over Fed. Not even close actually.
it is at least close imo, like i said not winning multiple slams on clay, grass and hardcourts is a considerable minus in this era.......djokovic improved his game on clay and achieved two clay slams.......federer refused to do so.......now this is the price he has to price, sorry.......if you are talking about all that other stats like rankings, exhibition titles, masters titles, GOAT stuff was always centered around slam contests.......don't you think that tennis was always about slams? i do........should nadal win just one more slam, game over for both djoko and fed.......unfortunately for their fans, that's how it works........nadal is also a clear leader in grandslam battles against both of them.......without all those injuries and missed slams, he would be sitting at 22 or 23 slams by now very easily.......
 

RS

G.O.A.T.
Who wins these matchups?

1. Djokovic RG 08 SF vs Tsonga RG 12 SF
2. Agassi AO 03 final vs Murray AO 13 SF
3. Roddick Wim 09 final vs Djokovic Wim 11 final
4. Roddick Wim 03 SF vs Hewitt Wim 05 SF
5. Roddick Wim 04 final vs Federer Wim 14 final
6. Nadal Wim 07 final vs Federer Wim 12 final ( both with and without the roof)
7. Sampras Wim 99 final vs Federer Wim 08 final
8. Gonzo AO 07 SF vs Nadal AO 12 final
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Who wins these matchups?

1. Djokovic RG 08 SF vs Tsonga RG 12 SF
2. Agassi AO 03 final vs Murray AO 13 SF
3. Roddick Wim 09 final vs Djokovic Wim 11 final
4. Roddick Wim 03 SF vs Hewitt Wim 05 SF
5. Roddick Wim 04 final vs Federer Wim 14 final
6. Nadal Wim 07 final vs Federer Wim 12 final ( both with and without the roof)
7. Sampras Wim 99 final vs Federer Wim 08 final
8. Gonzo AO 07 SF vs Nadal AO 12 final
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS

goldengate14

Professional
We’ll see that is a opinion that is rightfully debatable for me. Between Djokovic and Federer who ever picks one I don’t have a problem as they are so close that it’s a pick that is backed up by stats which I feel Nadal falls short of both.

Also while having no grass masters does certainly affect Fed him playing Halle which the likes of Djokovic doesn’t and winning it 10 times helps his overall titles so it at least balances a bit.

Id ease towards Djokovic but I would never say anyone that says Fed is wrong. They are so close in all numbers
See for me Nadal is the greatest. Most majors feom least amount playes and he has the big 5 events i.e majors and olympic gold, when i think about whose career i would want it is Nadals. Also the 13 FOs from an ego point of view is a huge deal as that probably will be the most remembered singke achievement.
I do not think Rafa is a better player. In fact Rafa himself has said Roger and Novak are better players which is another reason why i think he is greater as to achieve the same amount of slams with less tools is amazing.
However i also think we are all splitting hairs and being premature. In reality i can guarantee if it stayed as it is theyvwould all be regarded as equals. No question about it. If they are desperate to be goat, hen an outright lead in slam race will be needed to be undisputed Goat.
 
Tennis at Oly has no prestige or history, that's about the short version. It's only modern players (since 2008) making a big fuss out of it.

It doesn't award ranking points, so it's justified to even call it an exo.

Now I am not against considering it a somewhat great achievement, it still takes great timing and form to win it, but it's by no mean more revelant than other metrics.

Now talking YEC, it awards 1500 points and has lots of prestige and history (50 years old tournament played by every single past great). You can't argue against that.
Just like the USO has a much more prestigious history than the AO, who many players deemed not important enough to play just a few years ago.

As far as the YEC, look at the list of winners and the format. Definitely not close to a slam in terms of importance.
 
I make no sense to you because your thinking capacity is poor, I suggest you change your avatar from donkey to something more intelligent, that would help upgrade your IQ.

In Athletics, Swimming world records are often broken at the Olympics by the athletes. The ultimate test of athletic extreme happens at the Olympics, thats why it is the biggest stage for those events and those athletes.

In Tennis pinnacle of athleticism is seen at the Slams, not at some second grade best of 3 event. The US open or Wimbledon or even the Aus open & French Open test the limits of players, since they are best of 5 sets, thats why Olympics has no value
Do you have a job, or is your job to post worthless threads all day long?
 
Top