Fedovic was a better rivalry than Djokodal/Fedal

[mike danny]

Agree, Djokerer was my favourite Big 3 rivalry for the reasons OP and others have already mentioned.

Never cared for Fedal - overrated and overhyped by the media, unfortunately Federer was too useless/mentally weak and soiled his pants whenever he saw Nadal on the other side of the net up until 2014 AO when Nadal led 23-10 in their H2H. I am glad that Federer won 6 of their last 7 matches but that was when Nadal had lost one of his biggest assets in his lightning quick court speed which enabled him to retrieve back so many shots that Federer would have registered as either unreturnables or winners against lesser players. Federer also finally changed to a bigger racquet which allowed him to hit backhands with depth and confidence - pity he didn't do this during 2008-09, too little too late in 2015-19.

As for Djokodal - way too predictable on HC after 2013 US Open (9 consecutive matches and 19 consecutive sets lost for Nadal - lol that's just pathetic), Nadal dominates on clay but at least Djoker has shown up to play against Nadal 10 times at RG whilst Nadal won't return the favour at either AO or Wimbledon. Too much gamesmanship in their matches (ridiculous ball bouncing, excessive time taken between 1st and 2nd serves along with in between points). I like Djoker and dislike Nadal but I'm calling it for what it is - their matches take way too long. 2012 AO final took almost 6 hours yet I am guessing that there were only 2 hours of actual play.

Federer himself declined during that 23-10 stretch that you don’t factor in.

 

[mike danny]

In BO5 it was very much predictable after the USO 2011 choke. Federer had a surprise win in Wimbledon 2012, other than that you almost always knew who will win. There were 2-3 minutes during the Wimbledon 2019 final when there was hope that Federer might win it, but that ended quickly.

And while Federer did have wins in BO3, it mostly happened on fast hardcourt. On slower surfaces old Federer was usually losing.

Nah, what you speak of started happening after 2014.

 

[DSH]

Unfortunately Federer couldn't beat Djokovic in slams post 2012. It became predictable thing in slams at least. Still Federer gave him tough fight everytime he lost. In Bo3 it was very unpredictable till the end. In fact Fed won their last Bo3 match at age of 38 ! Otoh Nadovic rivalry became too much surface dependent post 2013.

Wimbledon 2018 semi-finals is one of the five best matches of that decade.

 

[MichaelNadal]

LOL. Nadal vs. Federer is far superior.

I really, truly don’t think they were watching then, it becomes more evident by the day.

 

[mike danny]

Unfortunately the age difference deprived us of its absolute potential

 

[Sport]

The closest of the big 3 rivalries

Not at the Slam level. Djokovic leads Federer 11-6 in Slams meetings, while Nadal leads Novak 11-7 in Slams meetings (including 2-1 at the US Open). And in the overall H2H Nadal-Djokovic is slightly closer, with Djokovic having a 51% win over Nadal (30-29), as opposed to his 54% win over Federer (27-23).

And while Nadal could not beat Novak on hard since the USO 2013, Federer could not beat Novak on clay since Montecarlo 2014 (against an injured Novak). So the Federer-Djokovic rivalry on clay was as dead as the Nadal-Djokovic one on hard.

 

[Fabresque]

Federer - Djokovic is the most entertaining rivalry in history of tennis, for me there is no doubt. Because they are more similar as players than most people realize - most people presume that Federer is a constantly aggressive, offensive machine/maestro and Djokovic a defensive, counterpunching wall.

But, they are actually similar in some ways. Both of them try to stay close to the baseline, hit the ball on the rise with incredible timing(both are very talented in that regard). With their court positions and ability to take time away, it often felt like watching a table tennis(ping pong) match with two incredibly skilled, precise ball strikers. Federer's serve(the best spot server of all time, probably with Pete Sampras) against Djokovic's return was the most interesting part of it, at least for me. Also, Federer taking pace off the ball with the slice, inviting Djokovic to be more offensive, dragging him sometimes with the shorter slice to a no man's land where Novak doesn't feel the most comfortable etc. Matchup full of tactical nuances.

In general, they both liked lower bouncing, indoor(if possible), faster surfaces(especially Federer, Djokovic is a bit more adaptable/complete - surface independent). For those who don't understand why Djokovic prefers faster instead of slower conditions - his offense works way better on slicker, faster, low bouncing courts where his pace generation "averageness" is not exposed at all and his defense(because of incredible pace absorption, compactness of strokes and speed) is relatively uncompromised, even on fastest of courts - his effortless sliding/movement on grass is another evidence to that.

Rivalries with Nadal that they had were mostly surface dependent, and makes it a little bit boring/predictable. For example, I knew that Nadal is going to trash Djokovic in RG 2020 final where conditions were so, so slow and heavy(held in October, colder time - autumn) that Djokovic can't hit through them and Nadal obviously could because he's the greatest pace generator of all time, built like a bodybuilder. Also, I knew that Nadal had no chance against Djokovic in AO 2019 final on a faster, low bouncing hard court where Djokovic's technical brilliance, compactness, precision would outmatch Nadal's physicality, muscle(strength, pace generation), constantly rushing him and taking time away. Novak was mostly dominating that rivalry post 2011, even seriously challenging Nadal on clay(beating him twice at RG).

On the other hand, Nadal was mostly dominating the Fedal rivalry, by relentlessly exploiting Roger's one hander with that lefty, heavy topspin forehand over and over and over again. Using one same pattern to win most of the matches. That's not very interesting from a tactical standpoint, we all must admit. Federer figured him out(outside of clay) in 2017 when he learned to step in and take that backhand on the rise(thing Djokovic does, another example was Davydenko) instead of waiting to bounce at or above his shoulders(thus bothering/compromising Federer's contact point) and slicing it, but it was too late.

I enjoyed reading this.

Fedovic matches always seemed like chess matches to me, every ball has the intent of trying to outdo the guy on the other side of the net, the ball-striking was pure and unblemished. It’s always a joy watching people analyze the matches they’ve had, there’s always so much to talk about.

And yes, Fedal matches were pretty monotonous at the beginning when Nadal continuously used the same tactic constantly to beat Federer. And then when Fed figured it out, Rafa didn’t really try to re-engineer his game around it. Let-down.

 

[Fabresque]

Not at the Slam level. Djokovic leads Federer 11-6 in Slams meetings, while Nadal leads Novak 11-7 in Slams meetings (including 2-1 at the US Open). And in the overall H2H Nadal-Djokovic is slightly closer, with Djokovic having a 51% win over Nadal (30-29), as opposed to his 54% win over Federer (27-23).

And while Nadal could not beat Novak on hard since the USO 2013, Federer could not beat Novak on clay since Montecarlo 2014 (against an injured Novak). So the Federer-Djokovic rivalry on clay was as dead as the Nadal-Djokovic one on hard.

Incorrect. Since 2014 they played once on clay. Djokovic beat in the Rome final in 2015. That seems a bit harsh to say that Federer failed to beat him since 2014 when he only had one attempt. Their encounters on clay were always interesting.

But I think their clay encounters were always underrated, since it was never usually an end all be all clash against two GOATS like it was on hard/grass courts normally, it was just a roadblock for them going into the real test against Nadal.

 

[Fabresque]

The same as in clay, then.
Only once, then the word dominate is meaningless.
And if you like to give hypothetical victories, it is obvious who would have won in the 2018 edition.

Yeah you’re probably right.

 

[nevermind]

Unfortunately the age difference deprived us from its absolute potential

True, but still the most entertaining rivalry ever for me.

 

[Federev]

The Djokovic-Federer rivalry was a much better/interesting rivalry than the other Big 3 rivalries.

It finished 27-23. Federer won their first match in 2006. Djokovic won their final encounter in 2020.

Hard court: Both players best surfaces are hard courts (Fed debatable w/ grass but has stated he prefers hard court), both players have held record #’s of HC slams either before or currently. Both players have claims to be the greatest hard court player of all time. H2H is 20-18. Incredibly close. Fed won the first encounter. Djokovic won the last. Both had stretches where they dominated the other. Neither were able to pull away, very back and forth.

Clay court: 4-4. Total deadlock. Nobody had an advantage on this surface. Went back and forth at the masters tournaments and both beat each other once at Roland-Garros.

Grass Court: 3-1 Djokovic. All at Wimbledon. Fed won first encounter in 2012 semi’s. Was defeated in 2014, 15, and 19 finals. 14 and 19 are considered some of the greatest/dramatic Wimbledon finals ever. Both extended five setters.

For most of their careers, it was a total dead heat between the two. Now compare it with other rivalries…

Djokodal: 30-29 for Djokovic. Until 2013 was an ATG rivalry, since then has lost its prestige. Became way too surface dependent. Nadal would win on clay. Djokovic would win on everything else. Clay was 20-8 for Nadal. Hard was 20-7 for Djokovic. Grass was 2-2.

Nadal since 2013 has failed to register a single win on hard courts or grass courts vs Novak Djokovic.

Djokovic since 2013 has registered 5 wins over Nadal in 10 attempts on clay, which doesn’t seem bad, but factor in that 3/5 of these wins came in 2015/16, Nadal’s worst years, it doesn’t look as good.

Nadal from 2012-2017 struggled to get past the first week at Wimbledon, which prevented many potential meetings between the two.

Fedal: 24-16 for Nadal. This was never really a “rivalry”. Was too surface dependent yet again, the only difference being that Nadal was good enough on hard/grass courts to keep up a bit, and was way too good on clay, which enabled him to completely dominate Roger for an extended period until 2015.

2015 onward, Federer figured the matchup out and went 7-1 in their final 8 matches, completely dominating Rafa on hard courts and grass courts. Nadal won the lone clay meeting. No back and forth tussles, surface dependent, this was a rivalry that had either one guy or another guy completely dominate.

Once again, from 2012-2017, Nadal struggled at the first week of Wimbledon which prevented any additional potential meetings.

Federer-Djokovic never had a surface based outcome. It was never totally dominant on one side or another. And whilst Fedal/Djokodal did have very memorable matches (W 2007/2008, AO 2012/2017), Fedovic also provided some of the best matches ever (RG 2012, W 2014/2019, US Open series from 2007-2011).

Good analysis.

Very well supported hypothesis.

Troll-free and inflammatory-demagoguery-free.

Well done.

 

[Backspin1183]

It's up there with Murrovic for sure.

 

[AgassiSuperSlam11]

Half of the Fedovic were straight-set matches and YES plenty of the other rivalries also had a fair share of straight-set matches. Nonetheless, all of the Big 3 rivalries had their fair share of classic matches. Styles make matches and many of the Fedovic points were shorter with only 1 of their matches going over 4 hours (2019 Wimbledon). When it comes to Djokodal they had 7 matches going over 4 hours since they had many long rallies. Nadal and Federer had 3 matches go over 4 hours. Federer lost 3 matches in which he had a MP on Djokovic and 1 against Nadal, Djokovic lost 1 match in which he had a MP against Nadal and 0 against Fed, and Nadal didn't lose any match to either Fed or Djokovic in which he had a MP. All things considered there was compelling drama to watch in these rivalries.

 

[StrongRule]

Nah, what you speak of started happening after 2014.

I don't think Federer ever was the favorite in their matches after 2011.

 

[ChaelAZ]

Fedal defined an era.
/thread

 

[TheNachoMan]

I really, truly don’t think they were watching then, it becomes more evident by the day.

AO 2009 is one of my favorite matches of all time. Most Fedal matches are quite meh though. Topspin to backhand, no?

 

[Rjtennis]

Fed and Novak were more fun to watch for me. More shotmaking and variety.

 

[MichaelNadal]

AO 2009 is one of my favorite matches of all time. Most Fedal matches are quite meh though. Topspin to backhand, no?

No. As much as yall want to act like that's the only shot that was hit. They were straight up battling most of the time with some of the best rallies I've ever seen.

 

[Third Serve]

AO 2009 is one of my favorite matches of all time. Most Fedal matches are quite meh though. Topspin to backhand, no?

That describes about 50% of the clay rivalry but not much else

 

[MichaelNadal]

 

[mike danny]

I don't think Federer ever was the favorite in their matches after 2011.

He won convincingly at 2012 Wimb.

 

[Nole_King]

If you ask me which was a better matched rivalry, it was definitely Federer vs Djokovic.

Federer Nadal rivalry was clearly plagued by match up issues where Federer constantly struggled against the top spin forehand to his backhand. So much so that ultimately the mental aspect began playing a major role. But this very reason made Fedal rivalry more appealing to people. Nadal winning, even if it was a routine, created a buzz because Federer was the king. This also created two strong partisan fan bases which again in general added spice to the matches, even if they were one sided. And when in the latter half Federer turned around the rivalry against a much more experienced Nadal, it created another fairy tale.

So in this particular case a better matched rivalry, i.e. Fedovic loses out in epicness to Fedal.

 

[nolefam_2024]

I loved fedkovic rivalry because it didn't have matchup issues. At least to a huge extent unlike nadal's rivalries.

Just 2 greats going at it.

Great serve vs great return. Great forehand vs great backhand. They had shoemaking. While fedal also had shotmaking, it usually rested on Federer making incredible shots in order to avoid Rafa reaching Federer's weaker forehand. It was kind of pathetic between fedal matches to be perfectly honest.

Great match between this rivalry seems to be YEC2012. Federer took 3-0 lead and looked like on track like another Cincy 2012 first set. But Nole fought back incredible onslaught to go 3-3 and then win the set in TB. Both could stop the other at almost any place. This made things interesting.

Slam wise age was a big factor in making H2H one sided. Otherwise until late in their career, it was a very balanced rivalry. The 5 straight USOpen matches was a highlight.

 

[Deleted member 779124]

Not at the Slam level. Djokovic leads Federer 11-6 in Slams meetings, while Nadal leads Novak 11-7 in Slams meetings (including 2-1 at the US Open). And in the overall H2H Nadal-Djokovic is slightly closer, with Djokovic having a 51% win over Nadal (30-29), as opposed to his 54% win over Federer (27-23).

And while Nadal could not beat Novak on hard since the USO 2013, Federer could not beat Novak on clay since Montecarlo 2014 (against an injured Novak). So the Federer-Djokovic rivalry on clay was as dead as the Nadal-Djokovic one on hard.

3 of Djokovic's wins Fed was swing away in slam matches. It's still a loss but context is important.

 

[Fabresque]

For iconic-ness, I’d say Fedal and Nadalovic were both more iconic and had more iconic/well known matches, but outside those few bursts of inhuman tennis, they remained relatively lame for the most part.

But in overall quality you can’t deny Fedovic was a much better, cleaner rivalry all across the board that wasn’t affected by the surface.

 

[RaulRamirez]

At the risk of a boring reply, all three rivalries have a case for being the best, as befits the three greatest players of the OE and the high stakes riding on their matches.

Fed-Djoker, as the OP did a good job making the case, was the least surface-dependent rivalry. While the 6-year age gap may have taken something away from the rivalry on both ends, Roger and Novak had a lot of matches through the years when they both played great tennis. It also had, probably, the most "edge" between the competitors.

Nadal-Djokovic was a fierce match up of two gladiators, with tons of tennis talent as well. While it had some surface dependency, looking not only at the slams, Rafa has won some big ones on HC, and Novak has won big ones on clay. And their two-day Wimby 18 epic may have been their best of all, and it was somewhat unexpected, as it was Rafa's first great Wimby run in 7 years, and Novak's first great tennis in a year and a half. It joins their RG 13 (also a de facto final) and A012 in a trilogy of great slam matches.

In the end, though, I think there was something transcendent about Roger v Rafa. It was the first great male rivalry since Pete-Andre, and one that also brought in non-tennis fans. It offered the greatest, and easily accessible, contrasts in styles, and it produced court coverage and shot making that was, arguably, the best the sport had ever seen. The Wimbledon trilogy through AO09 was great tennis and great theater, and of course, the rivalry didn't stop there as they both continued to fight and Fed proved to be quite resilient and driven to stay at the top.

I guess it depends on what people are looking for. Perhaps, Fedovic and Djokodal (I still dislike these abbreviations) had a higher level of tennis (hard to measure) but for great tennis, great contrasts in styles and great theater, Fedal still held that extra level for me.

 

[FeroBango]

Federer himself declined during that 23-10 stretch that you don’t factor in.

All those 2013 matches were tragic ala 2015dal vs Djokovic.

 

[Tennfan123]

Prime/post prime Djokovic beating past prime Federer in slam finals and past prime schooling past prime Djokovic in straights?
Nah, bruh.
Look to Fedal - prime vs prime.

 

[Pablo1989]

LOL. No way, it was incredible but the "least good" of the three by far.