Fedr 2009 vs. Djovak 2016

[Mazz Retic]

Why do we keep coming up with all these ad hoc statistics? The Channel Slam is a marketing gimmick, it has no extra value over any two slams.

And Nole has more than just one extra MS. He won two extra MS and reached one extra MS final.

Fed 2009/Nole 2016
Slam Finals: 4/3
Slams won: 2/2
YEC Finals: 0/1
MS Finals: 2/5
MS won: 2/4
Win %: 84/88
YE ranking: 1/2

And let's not forget that, by age, the comparable years are 2009 and 2015 (years the players turned 28) or 2010 and 2016 (years the players turned 29). Nole clearly much, much, much better in those years. Nole at 28 played much better than Fed at 28. Same at 29. Open question if that will be also true for 30.

I agree with you but I do think it is worth noting how early Nole was knocked out of Wimbledon, which I think goes against him a bit, and that for YEC Federer made it to SF. Still, I think Nole edges this though.

 

[mike danny]

I agree with you but I do think it is worth noting how early Nole was knocked out of Wimbledon, which I think goes against him a bit, and that for YEC Federer made it to SF. Still, I think Nole edges this though.

Fed met the eventual champion in the semis at the WTF 2009, while Djokovic met him in the final in 2016. So it was a matter of draw than anything else.

Fed gave the eventual champion a tougher battle than Djokovic did.

 

[uliks]

Fed met the eventual champion in the semis at the WTF 2009, while Djokovic met him in the final in 2016. So it was a matter of draw than anything else.

Fed gave the eventual champion a tougher battle than Djokovic did.

Fedr Goat!!!

 

[Steve0904]

It should be said that if Djokovic had won the WTF in 2016 I would give him the nod over Federer regardless of whether it coincided with him finishing #1 or not. But the fact that Federer finished #1 and Djokovic blew a huge points lead that no one saw coming leads me to vote for Federer here.

 

[underground]

genuine questions I have:
Do you think winning the Australian and French in the same year is less of an accomplishment than winning the French and Wimbledon? I.e is one slam better than another?
Do you think a major final trumps winning 2 masters?
I agree and acknowledged YE#1 is in Federer's favour.

Yes because of the difference in the surfaces. Reason why AO-RG combo has been scarce is partly due to Nadal's dominance over RG in the past decade (else Fed/Novak would have achieved that multiple times). You need 6 B05 matches for a slam final, 5 B03 to win a Masters. Points wise they agree too: 2400>2000

Major finals are more important, ask the Big 4, I bet you they'll choose slam finals without hesitation, they've won enough MS already to give a rats about another title (unless it's winning one where you haven't won it before).

Why do we keep coming up with all these ad hoc statistics? The Channel Slam is a marketing gimmick, it has no extra value over any two slams.

And Nole has more than just one extra MS. He won two extra MS and reached one extra MS final.

Fed 2009/Nole 2016
Slam Finals: 4/3
Slams won: 2/2
YEC Finals: 0/1
MS Finals: 2/5
MS won: 2/4
Win %: 84/88
YE ranking: 1/2

And let's not forget that, by age, the comparable years are 2009 and 2015 (years the players turned 28) or 2010 and 2016 (years the players turned 29). Nole clearly much, much, much better in those years. Nole at 28 played much better than Fed at 28. Same at 29. Open question if that will be also true for 30.

Djokovic lost in 3R at Wimbledon and the USO draw was really really weak. Also the Toronto field was depleted due to Olympics.

Level of play is (relatively) subjective. But if you asked me whether I'll take RG,W with AO,USO finals or AO,RG but bombing out of Wimbly I'll take the former in a heartbeat. To me the extra masters make no difference. Slams are slams.

 

[GabeT]

To me the extra masters make no difference. Slams are slams.

We are talking about comparing two full seasons and you want to focus only on eight weeks of each year.