Grand Slam champions beaten en route to title wins - Nadal vs Fed vs Djokovic

[NadalFed]

Hola everyone. I've been a lurker for a while. Just thought it'd be interesting to see how these three fared on this measure. Let me state at the outset that this does not attempt to show or prove anything. As with most things, there are a few inherent flaws with this, no doubt.

Nadal

1)2008 Wimbledon (Federer)
2)2009 Australian Open (Federer)
3)2011 French Open (Federer)
4)2013 USO (Djokovic)

Djokovic

1)2008 AO (Federer)
2)2011 AO (Federer)
3)2011 Wimbledon (Nadal)
4)2011 USO(Nadal)
5)2012 AO(Nadal)
6)2014 Wimbledon (Federer)

Federer

1)2004 Wimbledon (Hewitt)
2)2004 USO (Agassi, Hewitt)
3)2005 Wimbledon (Hewitt)
4)2005 USO (Hewitt, Agassi)
5)2006 USO (Roddick)
6)2007 USO (Roddick)
7)2012 Wimbledon (Djokovic)

I did this in a hurry, there may well be things I've overlooked. Please do correct and edit it as necessary. Also, only champions at that particular slam have been considered (as is obvious!) and beating people who would later go on to win that slam doesn't count here (for ex. Fed vs Nadal Wimby 2006,2007; Nadal vs Djokovic USO 2010, Nadal's numerous French Open wins pre 2009 etc).

Look forward to your comments

 

[NadalFed]

Also, beating champions in slam they didn't win doesn't count (Fed vs Sampras at Wimbledon, Nadal vs Federer AO 2012, 2014 etc). Forgot to mention that.

 

[Cup8489]

Djokovic also did it in 2013 AO, Murray was defending USO champion at the time when he lost that final.

 

[The_Order]

Interesting. So Fed has never beat Nadal AFTER Nadal has won that particular major and only done it once with Djokovic...

 

[The_Order]

Djokovic also did it in 2013 AO, Murray was defending USO champion at the time when he lost that final.

No you didn't read properly. Murray never won the AO so AO13 win doesn't count. He's only counting if you beat a champion of that particular slam.

 

[The_Order]

Also with Nadal, you're missing Carlos Moya. Moya won 98 RG and lost to Nadal in 07.

 

[NadalFed]

Also with Nadal, you're missing Carlos Moya. Moya won 98 RG and lost to Nadal in 07.

Cheers, missed that.
Nadal

1)2007 French Open (Moya)
2)2008 Wimbledon (Federer)
3)2009 Australian Open (Federer)
4)2011 French Open (Federer)
5)2013 USO (Djokovic)

 

[tennisaddict]

Interesting. Fed has done twice what Nadal has accomplished. Never knew there was so much difference.

 

[The_Order]

Interesting. Fed has done twice what Nadal has accomplished. Never knew there was so much difference.

9-5 = 4 which does not equal twice the amount of times Rafa has done it.

However, notice how Nadal has defeated Federer after Federer has won 3/4 majors whereas Federer has never done it to Nadal...

Nadal has also defeated a champion of every major whereas Federer has only done it at Wimbledon and the US Open...

 

[mike danny]

Well it doesn't tell the whole story.

Federer for example never had another crack at Djokovic after he won the USO in 2011.

Also obviously Djokovic will look better since Fed and Nadal won those slams so many times.

 

[NadalFed]

9-5 = 4 which does not equal twice the amount of times Rafa has done it.

However, notice how Nadal has defeated Federer after Federer has won 3/4 majors whereas Federer has never done it to Nadal...

Nadal has also defeated a champion of every major whereas Federer has only done it at Wimbledon and the US Open...

On the flip side, Federer has gone through former champions and won the whole thing twice, something neither of the other two have managed. It isn't one way traffic at all.

 

[NadalFed]

Well it doesn't tell the whole story.

Federer for example never had another crack at Djokovic after he won the USO in 2011.

Also obviously Djokovic will look better since Fed and Nadal won those slams so many times.

If anything it shows Federer in a better light. He has 9 wins to 5 and 6.

 

[Mustard]

Ignore post.

 

[NadalFed]

Nadal also beat Moya (1998 French Open champion) at the 2007 French Open. Federer beat Moya at the 2005 French Open.

Federer didn't win 2005 FO though. Made the Nadal correction.

 

[Mustard]

Federer didn't win 2005 FO though. Made the Nadal correction.

Yeah, sorry. Post deleted.

 

[tennisaddict]

9-5 = 4 which does not equal twice the amount of times Rafa has done it.

However, notice how Nadal has defeated Federer after Federer has won 3/4 majors whereas Federer has never done it to Nadal...

Nadal has also defeated a champion of every major whereas Federer has only done it at Wimbledon and the US Open...

The thread is about Grand slam champions beaten enroute.. Are you saying the majors won by Hewitt / Roddick / Djokovic /Agassi be ignored ?

 

[NadalFed]

You are right. It is not twice. More than twice .

The thread is about Grand slam champions beaten enroute.. Are you saying the majors won by Hewitt / Roddick / Djokovic /Agassi be ignored ?

Federer has 9, Nadal 5... Which is not twice the number....pedantry meh but there you go.

 

[Chico]

It is clear that Novak had the most difficult competition to win slams, while Nadal had constant cakewalks.

 

[NadalFed]

It is clear that Novak had the most difficult competition to win slams, while Nadal had constant cakewalks.

Lol wut. Nadal had peak Federer to contend with. Djokovic has had grandfatherer and succeeded in becoming the only man to lose slam finals to Anday freaking Murray.

 

[TMF]

It is clear that Novak had the most difficult competition to win slams, while Nadal had constant cakewalks.

Nope. Federer has the most difficult competition of the three.

 

[NatF]

Interesting. So Fed has never beat Nadal AFTER Nadal has won that particular major and only done it once with Djokovic...

You're such a clown, they haven't met at Wimbledon since 2008, they haven't met at the USO ever and Federer was 30 and 32 years old when he met Nadal at the AO. The French is the only one he's had repeated cracks at in his best years. In fact since the AO 2009 he's only had 3 slam meetings with Rafa and he was nearly 30 or over 30 for all them. The issue is Federer not overcoming Nadal enough when he was in his best years - not the fact he hasn't beaten him once he's past them.

Second point, this is mostly due to age and the fact he hasn't been in slam winning form very often since Djokovic especially started winning slams. I mean you do realize that apart from at the AO in 2011 and the 2 Wimbledon matches Federer has had no other chances for a crack at Djokovic at slams he's won before...

 

[Gary Duane]

Federer

1)2004 Wimbledon (Hewitt)
2)2004 USO (Agassi, Hewitt)
3)2005 Wimbledon (Hewitt)
4)2005 USO (Hewitt, Agassi)
5)2006 USO (Roddick)
6)2007 USO (Roddick)
7)2012 Wimbledon (Djokovic)

This kind of reasoning should be valid only for players roughly the same age.

It should be obvious why, for instance, Fed should have been unlikely to win over Djokovic after Djokovic had won the same slam. The fact that he did so in 2012 (Wimbleton) should stick out as highly unusual, since Fed was 31, way past his prime, while Djokovic at 25 was in the middle of his prime.

 

[Gary Duane]

No edit function?

Yikes, can't delete a post or edit it. Why?

 

[Djokovic2011]

Yikes, can't delete a post or edit it. Why?

You need to have at least 50 posts before you can do that.

 

[Gary Duane]

You need to have at least 50 posts before you can do that.

OK. I figured. It's to keep trolls in line, no doubt.

Thanks for the answer...

 

[Dead Mosquito]

OK. I figured. It's to keep trolls in line, no doubt.

Thanks for the answer...

Wow you were a new user, Your fame is GOAT now, Im wondering how many more posts do I need to get that fame, sir?

 

[Gary Duane]

Wow you were a new user, Your fame is GOAT now, Im wondering how many more posts do I need to get that fame, sir?

Yes. Way back then I was still a tennis forum virgin.

 

[The_Mental_Giant]

Wow you were a new user, Your fame is GOAT now, Im wondering how many more posts do I need to get that fame, sir?

Without a picture in your Avatar you will be hard to remember, that is an information for starters, now a cool picture of your real person gives many extra points..