Greater Hardcourt player - Federer or Djokovic?

Z

Zain786

Semi-Pro
Universally regarded as two of the greatest hard court players in the open era, who is the greatest out of the two. Here are the stats to back up this debate.

Federer -

1) 60 titles overall
2) 9 majors on hard
3) 18 masters
4) 86.81 win percentage
5) 5 WTF on hard

Djokovic -

1) 47 titles overall
2) 8 majors on hard
3) 19 masters
4) 88.37 win percentage
5) 5 WTF on hard
 
It is definitely Fed for the moment. I think if Djokovic ends the year with a U.S Open title and another WTF title he would have a decent case though. However I would like to see Djokovic win 4 U.S Opens to really cement it. IMO that is still the slightly more prestigious of the two- Australian and U.S Open, nowhere near the difference of days past, but still a small one. More importantly the balance of hard court wins is important.
 
cockneyDjoker said:
Djokovic for sure. People say Federer is the GOAT but at the end of the day he won't even go down as the GOAT on any surface.

Grass GOAT- Sampras
Clay GOAT- Nadal
Hard court GOAT -Djokovic
Click to expand...

I think you can definitely make a case for grass GOAT but Wimbledon credentials favors Federer heavily now. 7 titles + 3 runner ups > 7 titles. I think in terms of level of play on grass Sampras is superior personally, but in terms of achievements you would now almost have to side with Federer. There are also others you can consider who are harder to compare as directly like Laver, Gonzales, and Tilden.

Similarily I think you could argue Borg as clay GOAT over Nadal in level of play, but in terms of achievements that is so much a blowout now it would be hard to deny Nadal clay GOAT.
 
Zain786 said:
Universally regarded as two of the greatest hard court players in the open era, who is the greatest out of the two. Here are the stats to back up this debate.

Federer -

1) 60 titles overall
2) 9 majors on hard
3) 18 masters
4) 86.81 win percentage
5) 5 WTF on hard

Djokovic -

1) 47 titles overall
2) 8 majors on hard
3) 19 masters
4) 88.37 win percentage
5) 5 WTF on hard
Click to expand...
Fed has 6 WTF's on hard
 
Zain786 said:
Universally regarded as two of the greatest hard court players in the open era, who is the greatest out of the two. Here are the stats to back up this debate.

Federer -

1) 60 titles overall
2) 9 majors on hard
3) 18 masters
4) 86.81 win percentage
5) 5 WTF on hard

Djokovic -

1) 47 titles overall
2) 8 majors on hard
3) 19 masters
4) 88.37 win percentage
5) 5 WTF on hard
Click to expand...
Where's your poll ?
 
mattosgrant said:
It is definitely Fed for the moment. I think if Djokovic ends the year with a U.S Open title and another WTF title he would have a decent case though. However I would like to see Djokovic win 4 U.S Opens to really cement it. IMO that is still the slightly more prestigious of the two- Australian and U.S Open, nowhere near the difference of days past, but still a small one. More importantly the balance of hard court wins is important.
Click to expand...
I think fed has the record for now but I don't think that the us open is more prestigious or important than the oz. Even french. Wimbledon is clearly the pinnacle but the other three are more or less the same these days. The tennis is usually better at oz because everyone is fresh and there are no big lead up events
 
xFedal said:
Novak has almost caught up, he is breathing on Feds back, soon Novak will take the hard court crown from Federer, another poster pointed out that Fed won't be GOAT on any surface indisputably .
Click to expand...
No player can be forever. Fed has been the undisputed HC GOAT since 2008.
 
Right now Fed is ahead because of better distribution of slam and more tour finals
 
xFedal said:
Novak has almost caught up, he is breathing on Feds back, soon Novak will take the hard court crown from Federer, another poster pointed out that Fed won't be GOAT on any surface indisputably .
Click to expand...
Actually this make Fed dominance more better as it shows that he was a good on every surface and don't have to dominate or rely on one surface for slam or wtf.
 
mika1979 said:
I think fed has the record for now but I don't think that the us open is more prestigious or important than the oz. Even french. Wimbledon is clearly the pinnacle but the other three are more or less the same these days. The tennis is usually better at oz because everyone is fresh and there are no big lead up events
Click to expand...

Yeah come to think you are right. Only Wimbledon gets a bit more hype than the others these days.
 
Federer is the GOAT on two surfaces at the moment, if we look at achievments only which one should when comparing through eras. The only thing that can change is Djokovic passing Federer as hard court GOAT, but he will need atleast two more majors on the surface (preferably minimum one US Open) as well as another WTF title.
 
Oh I guess it's back to business now that the doping scandal is calming down. Let's get back to the endless Federer vs. Djokovic threads. o_O To the answer the question, right now it's Federer but Djokovic will more than pass him. I think he will end his career as the greatest hardcourt player ever.
 
Last edited:
TheMaestro1990 said:
Federer is the GOAT on two surfaces at the moment, if we look at achievments only which one should when comparing through eras. The only thing that can change is Djokovic passing Federer as hard court GOAT, but he will need atleast two more majors on the surface (preferably minimum one US Open) as well as another WTF title.
Click to expand...

I agree achievements are what should come first. On that note though wouldnt Djokovic with only 9 hard court majors (aka only 1 more) have a high likelihood of being ahead in achievements. After all he already has as many hard court slam finals (could well have more at that point), more Masters on hard (will likely increase), could soon have as many WTF titles. Why would he neccessarily need 10.
 
Federer right now is the greatest on HC, but this could be very different this time next year, if Djokovic does USO-AO back to back again.
 
mattosgrant said:
I agree achievements are what should come first. On that note though wouldnt Djokovic with only 9 hard court majors (aka only 1 more) have a high likelihood of being ahead in achievements. After all he already has as many hard court slam finals (could well have more at that point), more Masters on hard (will likely increase), could soon have as many WTF titles. Why would he neccessarily need 10.
Click to expand...
If he gets to 9 HC Slams, I guess we can move to comparing WTFs and Masters. I am not going to give extra points for the US Open or less points for the Australian Open, this is the 21st century. So IMO Djokovic will be the greatest HC player if he wins one more HC Slam and WTF or two more HC Slams.
 
Fed has 5 straight USO's, so he's clearly ahead of Novak. No player who has only two USO's is above Fed on HC. For that matter, Sampras and Connors are also clearly ahead stats-wise over Djokovic.
 
BeatlesFan said:
Fed has 5 straight USO's, so he's clearly ahead of Novak. No player who has only two USO's is above Fed on HC. For that matter, Sampras and Connors are also clearly ahead stats-wise over Djokovic.
Click to expand...

I can't agree with that. Sampras played in an era where Australia was very important and only won 2 of them. Djokovic has 6 of them. Sampras has 5 US Opens and Djokovic has 2. Djokovic has 8 hardcourt Slams and Sampras has 7. They both have 5 WTFs (Sampras played his mostly on carpet though) but Djokovic has 19 harcdourt Masters and Sampras has 10 (I added Paris in there but it was on carpet). Djokovic has indeed passed Sampras on that surface. You cannot compare Connors to any of them because he never really played Australia, which was on grass, and he won the US Open on clay, grass and hard if I'm not mistaken. That is incomparable to any of them.
 
Last edited:
BeatlesFan said:
Fed has 5 straight USO's, so he's clearly ahead of Novak. No player who has only two USO's is above Fed on HC. For that matter, Sampras and Connors are also clearly ahead stats-wise over Djokovic.
Click to expand...
Hard court is not just about USO.
You cannot put Connors there since 2 of his 5 USO titles were not won on HC and his AO title wasn't on HC either.
Sampras? 7 HC Slams, that is inferior to Djokovic.
 
Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil said:
Hard court is not just about USO.
You cannot put Connors there since 2 of his 5 USO titles were not won on HC and his AO title wasn't on HC either.
Sampras? 7 HC Slams, that is inferior to Djokovic.
Click to expand...
Sampras is inferior to Djoko on hard court in every possible way: fewer slam titles, fewer masters, lower winning %, fewer titles overall and part of his WTF titles were on carpet. Djoko's only rival for hard court supremacy at this point is Fed.
 
veroniquem said:
Sampras is inferior to Djoko on hard court in every possible way: fewer slam titles, fewer masters, lower winning %, fewer titles overall and part of his WTF titles were on carpet. Djoko's only rival for hard court supremacy at this point is Fed.
Click to expand...
I totally forgot how courts changed at WTF so often. 3 of his 5 WTF titles were on carpet.
Yes, he has cemented 2nd spot now, Slam + WTF or 2 Slams will put him on 1st I think.
 
Federer, but the gap is quite small now. Djokovic could even grab the crown this year if he defends both USO and WTF. Very hard to do that, but it is probably now only a matter of time when will he become the greatest hard court player.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tiki-Taka said:
Federer, but the gap is quite small now. Djokovic could even grab the crown this year if he defends both USO and WTF. Very hard to do that, but it is probably now only a matter of time when will he become the greatest hard court player.
Click to expand...
It's already clear Djokovic is a greater player on slow hardcourts while Federer is second to none on fast. To decide who's better overall we have to consider who did better on the opponent's territory. Federer is a better player on slow hardcourt than Djokovic is on fast so why do you think Djokovic is a better hardcourt player overall if Slam and the WTF titles count is equal?
 
The Fedfather said:
It's already clear Djokovic is a greater player on slow hardcourts while Federer is second to none on fast. To decide who's better overall we have to consider who did better on the opponent's territory. Federer is a better player on slow hardcourt than Djokovic is on fast so why do you think Djokovic is a better hardcourt player overall if Slam and the WTF titles count is equal?
Click to expand...

Federer is not clearly the best ever on fast hard courts though. Sampras has the same # of U.S Open titles and more U.S Open finals. I dont know how they compare at all events, but Sampras is definitely comparable on any faster court. Connors won 5 U.S Opens and would probably have 7 had it not been on clay for 3 years at his peak.

Federer is not clearly the GOAT on faster hard courts the same way Djokovic is on slower.
 
The Fedfather said:
It's already clear Djokovic is a greater player on slow hardcourts while Federer is second to none on fast. To decide who's better overall we have to consider who did better on the opponent's territory. Federer is a better player on slow hardcourt than Djokovic is on fast so why do you think Djokovic is a better hardcourt player overall if Slam and the WTF titles count is equal?
Click to expand...
Because of him having more hard court Masters titles. Determining the speed of hard court surfaces at every tournament and comparing them is hard to do, but the numbers are easy to compare and one cannot be subjective there.
 
As the numbers get closer, you look more into the details. At the hard court slams, Federer (along with Sampras) is 1st with the most US Open titles, and (along with Agassi) 2nd with the most AO titles. Federer is the only player to win the AO on both rebound ace and plexicushion.

At the WTFs, Federer's won multiple titles at 3 hard court venues (Houston, Shanghai, London), and won 3 titles in best-of-five finals. At the Masters, he's won titles at 7 tournaments (Indian Wells, Miami, Canada, Cincinnati, Paris, Shanghai, Madrid), and 5 titles in best-of-five finals.
 
I am not sure whats all the fuss about Fed not being the current HC GOAT. Fed leads, not by much though.

Fed 9-3
Djoker 8-4
Sampras 7-4
Agassi 6-4
 
Last edited:
I honestly think that Sampras is the greatest fast court player of all time. Federer is greater than Sampras overall on hardcourt because he's better on a slower hardcourt and the gap between them on a fast hardcourt is not that big, but I think Sampras edges everybody on a fast surface. 7 Wimbledons [never lost a Final], 5 US Opens, 2 Paris titles [carpet], 5 WTFs [3 of them them were on carpet in a best of 5] and 5 Miami and Indian Wells combined when the surface was much faster than today. Based on the level they both played in their prime, I have to go with Sampras on that one.
 
NoleFam said:
I honestly think that Sampras is the greatest fast court player of all time. Federer is greater than Sampras overall on hardcourt because he's better on a slower hardcourt and the gap between them on a fast hardcourt is not that big, but I think Sampras edges everybody on a fast surface. 7 Wimbledons [never lost a Final], 5 US Opens, 2 Paris titles [carpet], 5 WTFs [3 of them them were on carpet in a best of 5] and 5 Miami and Indian Wells combined when the surface was much faster than today. Based on the level they both played in their prime, I have to go with Sampras on that one.
Click to expand...

In achievements Federer is equal or slightly ahead of Sampras overall on faster courts, but I agree in level of play nobody is better than prime Sampras on faster courts. In fairness to Federer he doesnt get to play on as true of faster conditions as often so maybe it isnt a fair comparision. It is hard even comparing them at all in WTF titles since one is on true carpet and the other is on slowish indoor hard courts.
 
mattosgrant said:
In achievements Federer is equal or slightly ahead of Sampras overall on faster courts, but I agree in level of play nobody is better than prime Sampras on faster courts. In fairness to Federer he doesnt get to play on as true of faster conditions as often so maybe it isnt a fair comparision. It is hard even comparing them at all in WTF titles since one is on true carpet and the other is on slowish indoor hard courts.
Click to expand...

Yea achievements wise, it's a close call. They both have 7 Wimbledons and 5 US Opens, but you have may have to go with Federer because of his 7 Cincinnatis. The conditions were faster in Sampras' era, however, so he had more faster tournaments than Federer, including tournaments played on carpet. You do have a point there. Based on level of play, I've never seen anyone play like Sampras on a fast court.
 
Fedr has 7 Real Slam titles, so that blows anything Djokovic has accomplished out of the water. ;)
 
Aside from all the stats that people have put out there, you have to also look at the fact that 30s Fed has pinned numerous HC losses on prime Djok. And many times when he didn't win outright, he made him work his tail off to get the win. That's kind of unprecedented for an old head to trouble a prime ATG so consistently. Fed leads anyway, but even if Djok were to bring it to a statistical tie, you'd have to take his failures against a player way beyond prime into account.
 
FedFosterWallace said:
Aside from all the stats that people have put out there, you have to also look at the fact that 30s Fed has pinned numerous HC losses on prime Djok. And many times when he didn't win outright, he made him work his tail off to get the win. That's kind of unprecedented for an old head to trouble a prime ATG so consistently. Fed leads anyway, but even if Djok were to bring it to a statistical tie, you'd have to take his failures against a player way beyond prime into account.
Click to expand...

Which failures are we talking about here? Dubai, Cincinnati and Shanghai? I don't think your argument holds much weight when Djokovic is winning the US Open, Australian Open, WTF, Indian Wells, etc. meetings. Federer is challenging him because he is playing at a very high level regardless of his age, not because Djokovic is failing, but Djokovic is still winning the most important meetings.
 
FedFosterWallace said:
Aside from all the stats that people have put out there, you have to also look at the fact that 30s Fed has pinned numerous HC losses on prime Djok. And many times when he didn't win outright, he made him work his tail off to get the win. That's kind of unprecedented for an old head to trouble a prime ATG so consistently. Fed leads anyway, but even if Djok were to bring it to a statistical tie, you'd have to take his failures against a player way beyond prime into account.
Click to expand...
If Federer is the GOAT then why should it surprise anyone that he's still capable of scoring several wins over prime Djokovic? It would be more strange to me if he wasn't.
 
NoleFam said:
Which failures are we talking about here? Dubai, Cincinnati and Shanghai? I don't think your argument holds much weight when Djokovic is winning the US Open, Australian Open, WTF, Indian Wells, etc. meetings. Federer is challenging him because he is playing at a very high level regardless of his age, not because Djokovic is failing, but Djokovic is still winning the most important meetings.
Click to expand...
It's the same principle that hurts Djok in any overall GOAT comparisons (and in comparing his '15 with Fed's '06). The thorn in his side was/is a tennis geezer. If prime Fed had an Achilles heel that was someone playing at an age when most had long-since retired, I'd be questioning his greatness.
 
FedFosterWallace said:
Does GOAT to you mean destroying fellow ATGs at the pro tennis equivalent of age 48? Some of the stuff that he's managed to accomplish on tour in his mid-30s is beyond rational thinking.
Click to expand...
Except he's not 48, he's 34 and a generally very fit 34 at that. In fact 34 is the new 29 these days so even if Roger's still defeating Novak in five years time it would be perfectly acceptable as in theory he'll still be 34 in 2021! :p
 
FedFosterWallace said:
It's the same principle that hurts Djok in any overall GOAT comparisons (and in comparing his '15 with Fed's '06). The thorn in his side was/is a tennis geezer. If prime Fed had an Achilles heel that was someone playing at an age when most had long-since retired, I'd be questioning his greatness.
Click to expand...

Who is really still comparing '15 versus '06 though? I don't see how Federer winning a few times against him can hurt Djokovic's legacy when he still won 3 Slams and virtually everything else barring a couple of Masters and the French. Did you question Federer's greatness when he was taken to 5 sets in the 2004 US Open QF at 24 years old while Agassi was 34, or when he was pushed by 35 year old Agassi the next year in the US Open final?
 
FedFosterWallace said:
It's the same principle that hurts Djok in any overall GOAT comparisons (and in comparing his '15 with Fed's '06). The thorn in his side was/is a tennis geezer. If prime Fed had an Achilles heel that was someone playing at an age when most had long-since retired, I'd be questioning his greatness.
Click to expand...
Federer isn't your average 34 year old though!!! :oops: What you're saying would make more sense if Novak had lost to someone like Haas or Lopez three times last year but he lost to arguably the greatest player of all time FGS!
 
NoleFam said:
Who is really still comparing '15 versus '06 though? I don't see how Federer winning a few times against him can hurt Djokovic's legacy when he still won 3 Slams and virtually everything else barring a couple of Masters and the French. Did you question Federer's greatness when he was taken to 5 sets in the 2004 US Open QF at 24 years old while Agassi was 34, or when he was pushed by 35 year old Agassi the next year in the US Open final?
Click to expand...
If Djok had not beaten 34-y-o Fed in the past few major finals, how would you have felt about him at that point? Come on, he absolutely needed to win those. Those examples you cited are one-offs... that's why I used the word "consistently" in my original comment. Djok never owns him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Z
Is/was Rafa Nadal a clay court specialist or an all surface player?
Replies
26
Views
2K
metsman
metsman
NoleFam
  • Poll Poll
Nadal on hardcourt vs Djokovic on clay
2 3
Replies
132
Views
3K
Sport
Sport
Semi-Pro
  • Poll Poll
Who is better, Nadal on hardcourt or Federer on clay?
2 3
Replies
100
Views
10K
aphex
aphex
T
  • Poll Poll
Greater Hard Court Player: Sampras or Nole ?
2 3
Replies
116
Views
4K
user
user
Z
Greater Hardcourt Player - Fed vs Nole?
2 3
Replies
135
Views
7K
Neptune
Neptune
Back
Top