Highest win percentage across all surfaces

[SonnyT]

Nadal in 2011 was better than the previous year, and was beaten in 6 straight finals, by just one player.

That year, he never lost a finals to a player other than Novak!

 

[JaoSousa]

This also explains why Fed's Slam opposition in his heyday was so much weaker than Nole's.

Roger's best opponent in '05 was teenager Nadal, who was, more often than not, upset in non-clay Slams. Rafa was raised on clay, and didn't have the needed experience on HC and grass.

Novak's opposition in '11 and '15 were fully grown Federer, Nadal and Murray (2 ATG's and a near great). The chances of one of them being upset at any Slam were small, much less 2 or 3!

What exactly were the "weak slams" that Federer had? He had Nadal in every single clay masters and RG.
2004 AO: #15, #8, #3 seeds.
2004 Wimbledon: Probably the best version of Roddick at Wimbledon, who was also ranked #2
2004 US Open: #6, #5, and #4 seeds, and Hewitt admittedly played poorly in the final, but Agassi is an ATG
2005 AO: Peak Safin
2005 RG: 11 tournaments in 2005 Nadal, Ranked #4
2005 Wimbledon : #3 and #2 seeds
2005 US Open: #11, #3, #7 seeds, ATG in Agassi
2006 AO: Okay, his draw opened up a LOT
2006 RG: 81 match win streak Nadal, Ranked #2
2006 Wimbledon: Nadal who was still coming up on grass, but won all of his matches from R3 to the SF in straight sets, ranked #2
2006 US Open: #5, #7, #9 seeds
2007 AO: #7, #6, #10 seeds
2007 RG: Nadal on Clay #2, #9 and #4 seeds
2007 W: Peak Nadal on grass, #2
2007 USO: #5, #4, and #3 seeds.

 

[NoleIsBoat]

Great stats, Nadal is never the overall tennis GOAT, just on clay. Far too many holes and not dominant enough over the whole tour.

 

[SonnyT]

You mean a 18 year old Nadal, in 2005? Nadal didn't win his first non-clay Slam until '08 at Wimby.

Precisely my point! Teenager Nadal was a Slam non-threat to Roger off-clay, but he was the 2nd best player, to Roger, during much of Federer's heyday!

 

[SonnyT]

Given the relative strength of the fields, Djokovic had the best two years in tennis history, clearly!

 

[Third Serve]

What exactly were the "weak slams" that Federer had? He had Nadal in every single clay masters and RG.
2004 AO: #15, #8, #3 seeds.
2004 Wimbledon: Probably the best version of Roddick at Wimbledon, who was also ranked #2
2004 US Open: #6, #5, and #4 seeds, and Hewitt admittedly played poorly in the final, but Agassi is an ATG
2005 AO: Peak Safin
2005 RG: 11 tournaments in 2005 Nadal, Ranked #4
2005 Wimbledon : #3 and #2 seeds
2006 AO: Okay, his draw opened up a LOT
2006 RG: 81 match win streak Nadal, Ranked #2
2006 Wimbledon: Nadal who was still coming up on grass, but won all of his matches from R3 to the SF in straight sets, ranked #2
2006 US Open: #5, #7, #9 seeds
2007 AO: #7, #6, #10 seeds
2007 RG: Nadal on Clay #2, #9 and #4 seeds
2007 W: Peak Nadal on grass, #2
2007 USO: #5, #4, and #3 seeds.

To be fair, ranking and seeding don't always indicate level. Roddick, for example, played a sub-par match in the 2005 Wimby final, but he was still seeded #2. The only Slams I'd consider outright weak are the bolded. btw you missed USO 2005.

 

[JaoSousa]

To be fair, ranking and seeding don't always indicate level. Roddick, for example, played a sub-par match in the 2005 Wimby final, but he was still seeded #2. The only Slams I'd consider outright weak are the bolded. btw you missed USO 2005.

Well I was trying to use the logic of people who diminish his draws as weak. Their argument is that ranking is the best numerical indicator that we have, so that's why I used it. I'll add in USO 2005.

 

[JaoSousa]

You mean a 18 year old Nadal, in 2005?

Yes. Just mentioning somebody's age doesn't mean anything. I could say "35 year old Federer" as well.

Nadal won 11 tournaments in 2005, and it was one of his best years on clay. So I don't know what your point is.

Lastly, if you press the reply button to the bottom right of my post, you can directly reply to me, which gives me a notification. If your intention was to reply to me anyway.

 

[Winner]

90+% of wins on all three surfaces (hard, clay, grass) in a season since 2000:

2011 Djokovic (hard 90.2, clay 94.4, grass 100.0)
2015 Djokovic (hard 92.2, clay 94.1, grass 100.0)

85+% of wins:

2004 Federer (hard 92.0, clay 88.9, grass 100.0)
2005 Federer (hard 98.0, clay 88.2, grass 100.0)
2011 Djokovic (hard 90.2, clay 94.4, grass 100.0)
2014 Djokovic (hard 87.0, clay 87.5, grass 100.0)
2015 Djokovic (hard 92.2, clay 94.1, grass 100.0)
2016 Murray (hard 88.9, clay 85.7, grass 100.0)

Highest average across the surfaces:

1) 2015 Djokovic 95.4
2) 2005 Federer 95.4
3) 2011 Djokovic 94.9
4) 2004 Federer / 2006 Federer 93.6
6) 2008 Nadal 92.7
7) 2016 Murray 91.5
8) 2014 Djokovic 91.5
9) 2007 Federer 90.7
10) 2010 Nadal 90.5

Highest average across the surfaces You just added all the averages up and divided them by 3. So according to your logic, a player who's 1-0 on grass in a season (winning 1st RD Wimby and then injured) and 0-20 on HC would have a 50% win percentage across all surfaces...

 

[Nuclear Warhead Sinner]

100% on 2 surfaces in 1 year... Nadal 2010

When your grandchildren will ask : "Hey grandpa, what's a genetic freak?" show them 2010 Nadal.
When they'll ask: "Hey grandpa, can robots cause harm to humans?" show them 2011 Djokovic.

 

[jussumman]

90+% of wins on all three surfaces (hard, clay, grass) in a season since 2000:

2011 Djokovic (hard 90.2, clay 94.4, grass 100.0)
2015 Djokovic (hard 92.2, clay 94.1, grass 100.0)

85+% of wins:

2004 Federer (hard 92.0, clay 88.9, grass 100.0)
2005 Federer (hard 98.0, clay 88.2, grass 100.0)
2011 Djokovic (hard 90.2, clay 94.4, grass 100.0)
2014 Djokovic (hard 87.0, clay 87.5, grass 100.0)
2015 Djokovic (hard 92.2, clay 94.1, grass 100.0)
2016 Murray (hard 88.9, clay 85.7, grass 100.0)

Highest average across the surfaces:

1) 2015 Djokovic 95.4
2) 2005 Federer 95.4
3) 2011 Djokovic 94.9
4) 2004 Federer / 2006 Federer 93.6
6) 2008 Nadal 92.7
7) 2016 Murray 91.5
8) 2014 Djokovic 91.5
9) 2007 Federer 90.7
10) 2010 Nadal 90.5

Is this in just the majors?

 

[metsman]

2005-2007 Federer wins all 4 slams in 2015 and more masters with no Nadal on clay and more other masters being taken more seriously in later years.

say it louder for the people in the back.

 

[Lew II]

Highest average across the surfaces You just added all the averages up and divided them by 3. So according to your logic, a player who's 1-0 on grass in a season (winning 1st RD Wimby and then injured) and 0-20 on HC would have a 50% win percentage across all surfaces...

Not the case of any of the seasons I listed. They all won Wimbledon.

 

[Winner]

Not the case of any of the seasons I listed. They all won Wimbledon.

You are missing my point just as Djokovic was missing the USO QF last year. Your "average across all surfaces" makes no sense if you weigh them all the same.

I wonder why you have to come up with cherry picked stats. Why not take the highest win percentage across your whole career. You sure know who has the best. It's not Djokovic.

 

[Lew II]

You are missing my point just as Djokovic was missing the USO QF last year. Your "average across all surfaces" makes no sense if you weigh them all the same.

I wonder why you have to come up with cherry picked stats. Why not take the highest win percentage across your whole career. You sure know who has the best. It's not Djokovic.

You should've not written that. It throws your objectivity out the window.

 

[Winner]

You should've not written that. It throws your objectivity out the window.

So my objectivity gets thrown out just like Djokovic did in the USO 4th Rd.

Your average across all surfaces still makes no sense.

 

[RS]

say it louder for the people in the back.

Not loud enough?. If I make it a thread I will get told off for baiting.

 

[SonnyT]

Nadal won 11 tournaments in 2005, and it was one of his best years on clay. So I don't know what your point is.

My point is that Federer's opposition in '05 was awful, since 18-year old Nadal was his best challenger, but who had not learned to play on anything but clay! Nadal wouldn't earn his first non-RG Slam until 3 years later at Wimby.

Essentially Federer got free rides on non-clay Slams & tournaments in those years, up to '08! No wonder he kept winning 3 majors a year with ease!

Whereas in Djokovic's greatest years of '11 and '15, he had to deal with Nadal and Murray, who are essentially his age; and a near-prime Federer. There was no free rides in Djokovic's era!

 

[Lew II]

My point is that Federer's opposition in '05 was awful, since 18-year old Nadal was his best challenger, but who had not learned to play on anything but clay! Nadal wouldn't earn his first non-RG Slam until 3 years later at Wimby.

Essentially Federer got free rides on non-clay Slams & tournaments in those years, up to '08! No wonder he kept winning 3 majors a year with ease!

Whereas in Djokovic's greatest years of '11 and '15, he had to deal with Nadal and Murray, who are essentially his age; and a near-prime Federer. There was no free rides in Djokovic's era!

Federer won 12 Slams before Djokovic won his first Slam and before Nadal won his first non-RG Slam...

 

[adil1972]

90+% of wins on all three surfaces (hard, clay, grass) in a season since 2000:

2011 Djokovic (hard 90.2, clay 94.4, grass 100.0)
2015 Djokovic (hard 92.2, clay 94.1, grass 100.0)

85+% of wins:

2004 Federer (hard 92.0, clay 88.9, grass 100.0)
2005 Federer (hard 98.0, clay 88.2, grass 100.0)
2011 Djokovic (hard 90.2, clay 94.4, grass 100.0)
2014 Djokovic (hard 87.0, clay 87.5, grass 100.0)
2015 Djokovic (hard 92.2, clay 94.1, grass 100.0)
2016 Murray (hard 88.9, clay 85.7, grass 100.0)

Highest average across the surfaces:

1) 2015 Djokovic 95.4
2) 2005 Federer 95.4
3) 2011 Djokovic 94.9
4) 2004 Federer / 2006 Federer 93.6
6) 2008 Nadal 92.7
7) 2016 Murray 91.5
8) 2014 Djokovic 91.5
9) 2007 Federer 90.7
10) 2010 Nadal 90.5

OP pls share your source, i am not saying that you made this up??????????

this is my 2700 post, more than 8 years passed since i join this forum

 

[SonnyT]

Fedfans say all the time that Murray was a pigeon to Djokovic. Yet Murray had more Slam success than Federer against Djokovic: post '11: he beat Nole twice in Slam finals, Federer also did it twice, but in semis. Off clay, he also had more success against Djokovic than Nadal, who only beat Nole once post '11 off-clay, at '13 USO.

Djokovic's top top Slam off clay nemesis were Wawrinka and Murray, not Federer and Nadal!

Since '11, only Murray and Wawrinka had multiple non-clay Slam victories over Djokovic (?), because one of Fed's victories over Djokovic came at RG!

 

[JaoSousa]

My point is that Federer's opposition in '05 was awful, since 18-year old Nadal was his best challenger, but who had not learned to play on anything but clay! Nadal wouldn't earn his first non-RG Slam until 3 years later at Wimby.

Essentially Federer got free rides on non-clay Slams & tournaments in those years, up to '08! No wonder he kept winning 3 majors a year with ease!

Whereas in Djokovic's greatest years of '11 and '15, he had to deal with Nadal and Murray, who are essentially his age; and a near-prime Federer. There was no free rides in Djokovic's era!

The first point is essentially the same point that I made. He was a beast on clay in 2005. I disagree about him "not learning" to play on HC, because he won Montreal and Paris at the end of the year. He didn't play great in Halle or Wimbledon.

The second point: Please refer to the first post. He had to go through top seeds in his non-clay slams every single time. Roddick's results from 2003 wimbledon to 2007 Wimbledon were: SF-F-F-3R-QF. So in those years, he was consistent enough to beat everyone except for Federer. He would have (probably) won 3 titles there if it wasn't for him. Again, many Djokovic fans use this argument when talking about opposition like Murray (without Djokovic, he would have done, XYZ) or the Next Gen.

In HC slams, he had to play Agassi in 2 of them, who is an ATG, especially on Hard Courts. Again, using the Djokovic fan argument, he would have won 2 USOs without Federer.

Nadal in 2007 Wimbledon, Safin in AO 2005 were both super-high quality opposition.

The third point: I will give you that Djokovic's 2011 was one of the most special years, because he took the tennis world by storm, and demolished Nadal and Federer, who had a grip on the top two spots since 2005. Murray played well that year too, going deep consistently in slams.

2015 wasn't nearly as impressive as 2011 for the following reasons: Nadal was playing extremely poorly that year, on all surfaces. A pretty hard fact to dispute. I will say that 2015 was Federer's best year outside of 2003-2007, 2009, 2012, and 2017. He played great, and ran into a Djokovic who was at a God-level.

Also, you keep using the age argument, so I could say that Federer was old in 2015 and therefore he sucked. See how an argument based on results is much better?

 

[mike danny]

The first point is essentially the same point that I made. He was a beast on clay in 2005. I disagree about him "not learning" to play on HC, because he won Montreal and Paris at the end of the year. He didn't play great in Halle or Wimbledon.

The second point: Please refer to the first post. He had to go through top seeds in his non-clay slams every single time. Roddick's results from 2003 wimbledon to 2007 Wimbledon were: SF-F-F-3R-QF. So in those years, he was consistent enough to beat everyone except for Federer. He would have (probably) won 3 titles there if it wasn't for him. Again, many Djokovic fans use this argument when talking about opposition like Murray (without Djokovic, he would have done, XYZ) or the Next Gen.

In HC slams, he had to play Agassi in 2 of them, who is an ATG, especially on Hard Courts. Again, using the Djokovic fan argument, he would have won 2 USOs without Federer.

Nadal in 2007 Wimbledon, Safin in AO 2005 were both super-high quality opposition.

The third point: I will give you that Djokovic's 2011 was one of the most special years, because he took the tennis world by storm, and demolished Nadal and Federer, who had a grip on the top two spots since 2005. Murray played well that year too, going deep consistently in slams.

2015 wasn't nearly as impressive as 2011 for the following reasons: Nadal was playing extremely poorly that year, on all surfaces. A pretty hard fact to dispute. I will say that 2015 was Federer's best year outside of 2003-2007, 2009, 2012, and 2017. He played great, and ran into a Djokovic who was at a God-level.

Also, you keep using the age argument, so I could say that Federer was old in 2015 and therefore he sucked. See how an argument based on results is much better?

2011 Fed was better than 2015 Fed too. So was 2008 in terms of level.

 

[NoleIsBoat]

say it louder for the people in the back.

Hypothetical. 2005-2007 Federer could lose to Wawrinka or Murray in Australia (lost to Safin who is worse than both and went 5 sets with Haas), and possibly 2015 Federer at Wimbledon or USO.

 

[NoleIsBoat]

2011 Fed was better than 2015 Fed too. So was 2008 in terms of level.

“I think I’m a better player now than when I was at 24 because I’ve practiced for another 10 years and I’ve got 10 years more experience,” Federer said. “Maybe I don’t have the confidence level that I had at 24 when I was winning 40 matches in a row, but I feel like I hit a bigger serve, my backhand is better, my forehand is still as good as it’s ever been, I volley better than I have in the past. I think I’ve had to adapt to a new generation of players again.” (August, 2015)


Question:

In 2003 you won your first title in Dubai. How much chances would the Federer of 2003 have against the Federer of today?

Answer from Federer:

Not many chances I believe. The game has extremely changed. It is more dynamic, faster and has become somewhat ruthless. The players are more athletic and the material makes the game faster. I myself have become better. In fact, I had to become better because I had new opponents and new challenges. Tennis on this level doesn’t allow you stagnancy. (March, 2019)

 

[JaoSousa]

2011 Fed was better than 2015 Fed too. So was 2008 in terms of level.

I disagree about 2008. 2015 was more consistent, except at the slam level, but Federer of the 2008 French Open wasn't exactly killing it. I'd say 2011 and 2015 are on the same level. Just my opinion.

 

[PETEhammer]

“I think I’m a better player now than when I was at 24 because I’ve practiced for another 10 years and I’ve got 10 years more experience,” Federer said. “Maybe I don’t have the confidence level that I had at 24 when I was winning 40 matches in a row, but I feel like I hit a bigger serve, my backhand is better, my forehand is still as good as it’s ever been, I volley better than I have in the past. I think I’ve had to adapt to a new generation of players again.” (August, 2015)


Question:

In 2003 you won your first title in Dubai. How much chances would the Federer of 2003 have against the Federer of today?

Answer from Federer:

Not many chances I believe. The game has extremely changed. It is more dynamic, faster and has become somewhat ruthless. The players are more athletic and the material makes the game faster. I myself have become better. In fact, I had to become better because I had new opponents and new challenges. Tennis on this level doesn’t allow you stagnancy. (March, 2019)

He was lying, arrogant, projecting, had a gun held to his head, blah blah...

 

[JaoSousa]

“I think I’m a better player now than when I was at 24 because I’ve practiced for another 10 years and I’ve got 10 years more experience,” Federer said. “Maybe I don’t have the confidence level that I had at 24 when I was winning 40 matches in a row, but I feel like I hit a bigger serve, my backhand is better, my forehand is still as good as it’s ever been, I volley better than I have in the past. I think I’ve had to adapt to a new generation of players again.” (August, 2015)


Question:

In 2003 you won your first title in Dubai. How much chances would the Federer of 2003 have against the Federer of today?

Answer from Federer:

Not many chances I believe. The game has extremely changed. It is more dynamic, faster and has become somewhat ruthless. The players are more athletic and the material makes the game faster. I myself have become better. In fact, I had to become better because I had new opponents and new challenges. Tennis on this level doesn’t allow you stagnancy. (March, 2019)

So you agree a peak Djokovic lost 6-1 6-2 to Sonego on HC. That Djokovic playing his best was bagelled at the FO by Nadal, and lost 6-3 6-3 to Medvedev and got beaten by Thiem on indoor HC?



Ok. Cool.

 

[NoleIsBoat]

So you agree a peak Djokovic lost 6-1 6-2 to Sonego on HC. That Djokovic playing his best was bagelled at the FO by Nadal, and lost 6-3 6-3 to Medvedev and got beaten by Thiem on indoor HC?



Ok. Cool.

I believe Djokovic prioritises slams now so I don’t read too much into the BO3 losses. He’s still the daddy when BO5 rolls around

Remember “peak” Fed had losses to Hrbaty,Henman, Gasquet, Canas.

 

[JaoSousa]

I believe Djokovic prioritises slams now so I don’t read too much into the BO3 losses. He’s still the daddy when BO5 rolls around

But he still got bagelled by Nadal at the French. Lost 2 sets to Tsitsipas at the FO. And lost 2 sets to Taylor Fritz at the AO. That was Djokovic at his peak?

 

[abmk]

I disagree about 2008. 2015 was more consistent, except at the slam level, but Federer of the 2008 French Open wasn't exactly killing it. I'd say 2011 and 2015 are on the same level. Just my opinion.

based on what?

11 AO >>>> 15 AO
11 RG >>>> 15 RG
11 Wim < 15 Wim
11 USO > 15 USO

11 YEC >> 15 YEC


2008 fed vs 2015 Fed

08 AO >>>> 15 AO
08 RG >> 15 RG
08 Wim > 15 Wim
08 USO >> 15 USO

08 YEC << 15 YEC (thanks to back injury in 08)

slow HC minus AO: 08 << 15 (thanks to mono in 08)
clay minus RG: 08 >> 15
Halle 08 >> Halle 15
USO series minus USO: 08 << 15 (played great in Cincy)
indoor season minus YEC: 08 >> 15 (semi in Madrid where he played well, won Basel playing great in 08)

so in events smaller than YEC, he was about even in 08 and 15, maybe a little better in 15 at best, significantly better in YEC 15 than in 08 thanks to back injury. But the difference in slams is huge.

 

[NoleIsBoat]

But he still got bagelled by Nadal at the French. Lost 2 sets to Tsitsipas at the FO. And lost 2 sets to Taylor Fritz at the AO. That was Djokovic at his peak?

The game has evolved, both Federer and Djokovic and various other analysts have confirmed this.

The Fritz one I put down to injury as well.

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

Mods, stop this.

 

[metsman]

Hypothetical. 2005-2007 Federer could lose to Wawrinka or Murray in Australia (lost to Safin who is worse than both and went 5 sets with Haas), and possibly 2015 Federer at Wimbledon or USO.

hypothetically, hell no.

 

[Justice Underworld]

This is why Djoker gets called the most complete player so often. 90% and above on all surfaces for a whole year is bananas. To do it once is one thing but twice? Is there anybody else that has done this? I checked McEnroe '84 and he was close with 88.9% on clay, but didn't quite make the cut.

 

[Justice Underworld]

100% on 2 surfaces in 1 year... Nadal 2010

90% on grass. He lost in Queens.

 

[abmk]

Hypothetical. 2005-2007 Federer could lose to Wawrinka or Murray in Australia (lost to Safin who is worse than both and went 5 sets with Haas), and possibly 2015 Federer at Wimbledon or USO.

2005 AO Safin >> 2015 AO Murray and 2015 AO Stan

Fed was inconsistent in AO 06, but still clearly better than 2015 AO Stan and Murray

2015 RG Stan is the one playing at a high level, but 05-07 fed at RG would beat him.

 

[Winner]

Federer won 12 Slams before Djokovic won his first Slam and before Nadal won his first non-RG Slam...

Djokovic could have stopped Fed from winning slams, he wasn't good enough.

 

[Winner]

I believe Djokovic prioritises slams now so I don’t read too much into the BO3 losses. He’s still the daddy when BO5 rolls around

Daddy won 5 games in his loss to Carreno Busta in USO and got bagelled in FO final as World No.1, where his coach said he would wreck the field.

 

[NoleIsBoat]

Daddy won 5 games in his loss to Carreno Busta in USO and got bagelled in FO final as World No.1, where his coach said he would wreck the field.

A freak accident DQ and reached RG final, losing to the god of clay.

Won previous 3 AO, 2 Wimbledon, 1/3 USO, injured in 2019 and 2020 the accident.

 

[Jason Swerve]

Djokovic in 2015 averaged only 92%? For some reason, I thought he had a closer average to approach '97 Hingis. Apparently didn't press hard enough on most important surface.

 

[JaoSousa]

90% on grass. He lost in Queens.

Darn