How many Slams does 2015 Djokovic win in the presence of 05 Federer, 05 Nadal & 05 Safin?

[TheFifthSet]

Wouldn’t it be fairer to swap Federer and Djokovic?

In that scenario, I see Djokovic winning 2-3 slams, like Federer did.

In this one, 0-2 is the range for me. Federer probably ends up with a better slam year. He’s got the highest OE peak for a reason.

 

[Tano]

On a serious note, it wouldn’t be easy for him at all. At the AO he didn’t play as well as in 2011 or 2016 and Safin was better than Wawrinka, who pushed Djokovic to 5 anyway.

At the French there’s the Nadal factor. Djokovic couldn’t win even without Nadal in 2015.

At Wimb his best level would coincide with Fed’s so tough luck.

At the USO he’d be 50/50 with Fed. Both 2005 Fed and 2015 Djoko were relatively vulnerable, but still great, but since neither played their absolute best, it’s 50/50.

Nadal of 2005 would tear "peak" Djokovic of 2015 to shreds at Roland Garros.

 

[Djokodalerer31]

He would have taken out Nadal in 2005, because it was Nadal's maiden slam and the beast 2015 version of Djokovic would surely beat inexperienced version of Nadal, that wasn't quite the beast ,that he became in a season or two...ironically though, that would probably be the only grand slam tournament he would have won as i can't see him beating Safin in that beast form at Rebound Ace fast AO surface or Federer at the Wimbledon and the USO when he was on top of his game already...maybe he could challenge Fed at the USO maybe...but only if he plays the way he played Wimbledon a couple of months prior in 2015 and not the way he played his final against Fed at the USO in 2015...and even THAT is a stretch...

 

[BauerAlmeida]

I think RG is the one where he has less chance of winning. I think he would play Nadal close in the SF but lose. Nadal was better in 2005 than 2006 imo.

It's debatable, in 2005 he almost goes to a 5th with Puerta but in 2006 PHM Mathieu pushed him pretty close. Nonetheless, peak Djokovic would have a chance even if Nadal is for sure the favorite, in 2007 he was almost unbeatable already and in 2008 pretty much as unbeatable as you can get.

 

[Third Serve]

It feels wrong to say Djokovic would go Slamless in this situation, but it’s hard to build a case for him at each individual Slam.

The AO was far from his best—I can name six better performances of his at that tournament (2008, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2016, 2019). His matches don’t really touch the quality that Fed and Safin displayed in that tournament during the latter rounds. In fact, the Stan match was pretty ugly at times.

At RG he’d of course be the underdog against Nadal on clay, considering he got taken to five by an average Murray and lost to Wawrinka. Whatever fault you can find with “inexperienced” Nadal in 2005, 2015 Djokovic was hardly a more impressive showing at the French, unless we want to count the QF where Nadal stopped having a pulse after the first set.

Definite underdog at Wimbledon too, unless you have peak Djokovic > peak Federer at Wimbledon.

US Open is his best case, but even then he was a bit sloppy at times in that final. 2011 was a stronger performance. Now 2005 Fed also had issues with his backhand in that final, but on balance I think it was a more impressive display. Dealing with that Fed’s forehand is going to make it a much tougher baseline contest.

So basically 0-1 depending on how the US Open goes. But that’s what happens when you pit him against peak Federer as well as Nadal on clay and a massive wildcard like Safin.

 

[Djokodalerer31]

Nadal of 2005 would tear "peak" Djokovic of 2015 to shreds at Roland Garros.

Nadal of 2005 played his first ever grand slam tournament and we are talknig about best version of Djokovic ever outside of maybe 2011...he would have more than plenty of chances against inexperienced Nadal of 2005...

 

[Tano]

Nadal of 2005 played his first ever grand slam tournament and we are talknig about best version of Djokovic ever outside of maybe 2011...he would have more than plenty of chances against inexperienced Nadal of 2005...

Nadal of RG 2015 was not even 20% of the 2005 version that won his first title at Roland Garros.

 

[NoleFam]

It's debatable, in 2005 he almost goes to a 5th with Puerta but in 2006 PHM Mathieu pushed him pretty close. Nonetheless, peak Djokovic would have a chance even if Nadal is for sure the favorite, in 2007 he was almost unbeatable already and in 2008 pretty much as unbeatable as you can get.

Nadal in the 2006 final was quite nervous and at times sloppy, and he was less solid that tournament overall than 2005, who I thought played brilliant in the SF against Federer. I think the match would be close but based on how Nadal played in that SF, I think he wins. Now at the other Slams, Djokovic has a chance in all 3 imo.

 

[TheFifthSet]

Nadal of 2005 played his first ever grand slam tournament and we are talknig about best version of Djokovic ever outside of maybe 2011...he would have more than plenty of chances against inexperienced Nadal of 2005...

Didn’t stop him from beating ‘05 Fedr. In fairness I think some of the best versions of Djokerer could’ve challenged and perhaps even beaten ‘05 Ned (some of the time) if they had time to adjust to the wunderkind…if they didn’t, then bewilderment would’ve probably ensued lol (just like it did IRL, with ‘05 Fed).

 

[jackson vile]

4 slams​	24.20%​
3 slams​	42.98%​
2 slams​	25.90%​
1 slam​	6.38%​
0 slam​	0.55%​

If you really want to engage in having 2005 slam winners time-travel to face Nole in the finals, just look at the results above.

If 2015 Nole played 2006 Fed in every slam final, the outcome would be:

​	Nole​	Fed​
4 slams​	11.61%​	2.80%​
3 slams​	33.54%​	16.46%​
2 slams​	35.59%​	35.59%​
1 slam​	16.46%​	33.54%​
0 slam​	2.80%​	11.61%​

Well played, sticking to facts instead of fantasy

 

[TearTheRoofOff]

4 slams​	24.20%​
3 slams​	42.98%​
2 slams​	25.90%​
1 slam​	6.38%​
0 slam​	0.55%​

If you really want to engage in having 2005 slam winners time-travel to face Nole in the finals, just look at the results above.

If 2015 Nole played 2006 Fed in every slam final, the outcome would be:

​	Nole​	Fed​
4 slams​	11.61%​	2.80%​
3 slams​	33.54%​	16.46%​
2 slams​	35.59%​	35.59%​
1 slam​	16.46%​	33.54%​
0 slam​	2.80%​	11.61%​

This is the funniest sh1t.

 

[Mustard]

05 Rafa with 1-2 record against top5 to win 5 big titles, vacuum era title is really impressive, lol.

Everyone should go check how many big titles Rafa won in 2005, and how many matches against top5.

Nadal beat Coria to win Monte Carlo and Rome in 2005 (i.e. Coria was the best clay-court player of 2004), and the 2005 Rome final is an all-time classic. Nadal won 2005 Barcelona by beating Ferrero in the final (i.e. Ferrero was the best clay-court player of 2003).

Nadal won the 2005 French Open by beating Federer and Puerta. Nadal vs. Federer in the 2005 French Open semi final was a huge matchup, as Federer had won 11 matches in a row (and 28 sets in a row) and Nadal had won 22 matches in a row, so something had to give.

Nadal was dominant at the 2005 Canadian Open in Montreal, only losing serve twice all tournament, and beating Agassi pretty well in the final, the same Agassi who would go on to reach the 2005 US Open final a few weeks later.

The attempts to downplay Nadal's 2005 (and Federer's 2005, for that matter) are really amusing.

 

[BlueB]

All of them.

 

[Mustard]

4 slams​	24.20%​
3 slams​	42.98%​
2 slams​	25.90%​
1 slam​	6.38%​
0 slam​	0.55%​

If you really want to engage in having 2005 slam winners time-travel to face Nole in the finals, just look at the results above.

If 2015 Nole played 2006 Fed in every slam final, the outcome would be:

​	Nole​	Fed​
4 slams​	11.61%​	2.80%​
3 slams​	33.54%​	16.46%​
2 slams​	35.59%​	35.59%​
1 slam​	16.46%​	33.54%​
0 slam​	2.80%​	11.61%​

Do you run that algorithm?

 

[Mustard]

Nadal of 2005 played his first ever grand slam tournament and we are talknig about best version of Djokovic ever outside of maybe 2011...he would have more than plenty of chances against inexperienced Nadal of 2005...

Nadal beat Federer in the 2005 French Open semi final, 6-3, 4-6, 6-4, 6-3. Going into that match, Federer had won his previous 28 sets played (11 match wins in a row). In other words, Federer was probably in the best clay-court run of form in his life.

2015 Djokovic couldn't beat 2015 Wawrinka in the French Open final. 2011 Djokovic couldn't beat 2011 Federer in a French Open semi final.

 

[La_Para]

Tough question, I think adding Djokovic to that mix is going to cause everyone to win less...

As to how much Djokovic would win? I'd guess somewhere between 0-2 slams with a lot (naturally) depending on the draw.
At the Australian open I don't see him going through both Federer and Safin in a row. But if he'd be placed at the other side of the draw and face just one of them in the final his chances would be a lot better.

Roland Garros I could also see him having a shot depending on how the draw turns out. Again, I don't see him beating both Federer and Nadal in a row. But would he be able to beat Nadal in the final if he'd be placed on the opposite side of the draw? What he has going for him is that he's 'from the future' and has the experience of playing Nadal, developing strategies for playing Nadal (which Nadal had to take time to counter again) and the confidence of knowing that his game can hold up against him. This is also a young Nadal who is relatively inexperienced, hasn't faced a player like Djokovic before and doesn't have the aura/belief yet that he would later grow to have. But he was arguably in better form than 2015 Djokovic and a lot more athletic. A lot would depend on the matchup and draw.

Wimbledon Federer was quite clearly the favourite so the draw would matter less. I think Federer would be favoured over Djokovic there (think he's the better grass player peak for peak).

At the US open the draw would again matter less. This is a faster court (which favors younger Federer more), but both weren't in absolute top form. Would favor Federer again over Djokovic but a lot would depend on the matchup and form on the day.

So at worst he gets terrible draws and then it's possible that he ends up with 0 slams. Best case scenario he gets the best draws, literally everything falls his way and he finds ways to elevate/goat his level on important moments, giving him the opportunity to win three. Realistically this doesn't happen tho (lol) and I could see him falling somewhere in the middle with 1-2 (with again a lot depending on the circumstances ).

On the flip side I think it's also gonna be a lot harder for the other guys to have a dominant year by adding 2015 Djokovic to the mix. But the tennis would be finger licking good

 

[mike danny]

Wouldn’t it be fairer to swap Federer and Djokovic?

In that scenario, I see Djokovic winning 2-3 slams, like Federer did.

In this one, 0-2 is the range for me. Federer probably ends up with a better slam year. He’s got the highest OE peak for a reason.

Yeah, not particularly fair to give him the toughest competition. Like how some Djokovic fans transported old Fed in this era against Oldovic himself besides the others

 

[Razer]

Wouldn’t it be fairer to swap Federer and Djokovic?

In that scenario, I see Djokovic winning 2-3 slams, like Federer did.

In this one, 0-2 is the range for me. Federer probably ends up with a better slam year. He’s got the highest OE peak for a reason.

Naa, it is 100% fair.

When you are pitting 2005 vs 2015, then the entire fields of the 2 years are clubbed and the champion has to emerge from that with the best 2 players seeded in the opposite halfs to meet in the final. Somebody will emerge victorious, that is how it should always be.

 

[TheFifthSet]

Yeah, not particularly fair to give him the toughest competition. Like how some Djokovic fans transported old Fed in this era against Oldovic himself besides the others

My favourite one is when @The_Order was speculating about how Peak Nadal would do from 2004-2007 in Fed’s place, only he removed both Peak Fed and ‘04-‘07 Nadal (that Fed’s toughest rival) from the picture.

 

[TheFifthSet]

Naa, it is 100% fair.

Depends on what point you’re trying to make.

In any event, I do agree Fed has the higher slam peak, so litigating it further seems counterproductive.

 

[Razer]

Depends on what point you’re trying to make.

In any event, I do agree Fed has the higher slam peak, so litigating it further seems counterproductive.

My point is it would be an incomplete comparison if we replace players. Field should always be complete to check how a player does vs another year's field, if 2015 Novak has to play Safin and Nadal in 2005 then he should play Federer too if needed, that's the only fair way because Federer was very much a part of 2005 season like Nadal/Safin were. Vice versa too, if 2005 Federer plays the 2015 field then he should have the top players of that year in the draw, that means Murray and Stan include with Novak (though we all know Federer will probably beat Murray and Stan back to back with 1 tied behind his back... figuratively speaking)

Another example.... if we are pitting 2005 Federer in 2010 then Federer will have to beat Nadal at the US Open, replacing him with Nadal makes the comparison moot. Whats so special? Fed is gonna win 3 slams again in 2010 without Nadal or maybe all 4, but if you include him then things get interesting, Fed lose his US open maybe. See thats why best players just have to clash, otherwise pointless to just compare by replacing players you know.

 

[TheFifthSet]

My point is it would be an incomplete comparison if we replace players.

That depends on the hypothetical. 2015 Djokovic probably dominates 2005 to an equal, possibly greater extent than ‘05 Fed did IRL, if they’re swapped. Partially because he stayed healthy all year.

But yes, with both versions in the same field I do agree Fed shades him a bit.

 

[SonnyT]

I got news for you: Djokovic was a much better Top 10 player than Federer and Nada, who were no slouches by any means!

Name**M***%**Mt**%t**%10
Feder 1526 82.0 347 64.6 22.7
Nadal 1307 82.6 290 63.9 22.2
Djoko 1340 83.5 373 69.2 27.8

M=total matches, %=winning percentage, Mt=total matches within top 10, %t=winning % of Mt, %10=Mt/M
All data taken from Wikipedia. Djokovic accounted for 4/10 for facing Top 10, including 1st and tied for 2nd; Federer none and Nadal (2013) one. All of Djokovic's four years were between 2011 and 2016. BTW, Federer's top years 2004-07 appeared nowhere in the top 10, for some reason.

All of Federer and Nadal's data were within .7% of each other, even though one specialized on grass and HC, and the other on clay. They won 82-83% of normal matches, and 64-65% of matches within T10, which accounted for 22-23% within T10.

But look at their divergence with Djokovic, especially with the last two percentages. Djokovic won 69% within T10, an increase of 5%, which accounted for 28% of his normal matches, an increase of another 5%. It makes sense that those two percentages go up and down together. The more a player beats the elite, the more elite he gets to meet!

Borg, Djokovic, Federer and Nadal ranked 1st, 2nd, 4th and 6th in winning percentages within the elite.

 

[Neptune]

@SonnyT if separated by main/specialized surfaces for the Big3, even more interesting.

Career​	vs Top5​	T5 Weight​	vs Top10​	T10 Weight​	vs T11+​	T11+ Weight​	vs All​
Nole​	202 (123-79) 60.89%​	15.09%​	373 (258-115) 69.17%​	27.86%​	966 (860-106) 89.03%​	72.14%​	1339 (1118-221) 83.50%​
Fed​	179 (104-75) 58.10%​	11.73%​	347 (224-123) 64.55%​	22.74%​	1179 (1027-152) 87.11%​	77.26%​	1526 (1251-275) 81.98%​
Rafa​	156 (93-63) 59.62%​	11.94%​	291 (186-105) 63.92%​	22.26%​	1016 (894-122) 87.99%​	77.74%​	1307 (1080-227) 82.63%​
Lendl​	158 (95-63) 60.13%​	12.05%​	257 (164-93) 63.81%​	19.60%​	1054 (905-149) 85.86%​	80.40%​	1311 (1069-242) 81.54%​

 

[CHillTennis]

If 2015 is the GOAT Season for Djokovic then how good was Djokovic when compared to the champions of 2005 ?

Maybe 2. The US Open and the Australian Open.

 

[RoddickAce]

A 70% probability to beat 2005 Fed at Wimbledon? MOUHAHAHAHAHA

He had an almighty struggle against a 10 year older Fed, how on earth was he gonna beat peak Fed?

What's even better is a 76% chance to beat Rafa Nadal at RG. Whoever developed that model should really try to validate the results first instead of just relying on hypothetical numbers.

Sure, maybe Djoko can beat Rafa in his first RG...but 76% chance??

 

[SonnyT]

@SonnyT if separated by main/specialized surfaces for the Big3, even more interesting.

Career​	vs Top5​	T5 Weight​	vs Top10​	T10 Weight​	vs T11+​	T11+ Weight​	vs All​
Nole​	202 (123-79) 60.89%​	15.09%​	373 (258-115) 69.17%​	27.86%​	966 (860-106) 89.03%​	72.14%​	1339 (1118-221) 83.50%​
Fed​	179 (104-75) 58.10%​	11.73%​	347 (224-123) 64.55%​	22.74%​	1179 (1027-152) 87.11%​	77.26%​	1526 (1251-275) 81.98%​
Rafa​	156 (93-63) 59.62%​	11.94%​	291 (186-105) 63.92%​	22.26%​	1016 (894-122) 87.99%​	77.74%​	1307 (1080-227) 82.63%​
Lendl​	158 (95-63) 60.13%​	12.05%​	257 (164-93) 63.81%​	19.60%​	1054 (905-149) 85.86%​	80.40%​	1311 (1069-242) 81.54%​

Your data and mine agree!!!

 

[Razer]

That depends on the hypothetical. 2015 Djokovic probably dominates 2005 to an equal, possibly greater extent than ‘05 Fed did IRL, if they’re swapped. Partially because he stayed healthy all year.

But yes, with both versions in the same field I do agree Fed shades him a bit.

My favourite one is when @The_Order was speculating about how Peak Nadal would do from 2004-2007 in Fed’s place, only he removed both Peak Fed and ‘04-‘07 Nadal (that Fed’s toughest rival) from the picture.

That was my point too.... You made it easier for Novak in 05 by remove 05Fed and the order made it far more easier for Nadal by removing younger Nadal too with Fed. .. in both cases it should not be, if Nadal goes to 04-07 then he will have to beat Federer, thats the right way.

Anyway, we both are in agreement that Djokovic 2015 is a bit of a disadv there, much better to send Djokovic 2011 to 2005, he will take 2 or maybe even 3 slams there ?? What do you think ? I feel except the Wimbledon which Novak 2011 loses, he has a great shot at all 3 slams, especially AO and FO, Baby Nadal ain't stopping him there.

 

[TheFifthSet]

That was my point too.... You made it easier for Novak in 05 by remove 05Fed and the order made it far more easier for Nadal by removing younger Nadal too with Fed. .. in both cases it should not be, if Nadal goes to 04-07 then he will have to beat Federer, thats the right way.

It’s not the same thing, this hypothetical is a straight swap, in Order’s he swapped two strong players for one, which just doesn’t make sense (none of these exercises really do, but you get what I mean).

But ye, I hear you otherwise.

And I think ‘05 Fed has a slightly higher slam peak than any version of Djokovic. 2011 Djoko is closer than 2015 Djokovic though, imo.

 

[Razer]

It’s not the same thing, this hypothetical is a straight swap, in Order’s he swapped two strong players for one, which just doesn’t make sense.

But ye, I hear you otherwise.

Swapping 1 or 2 doesn't make sense at all, you know why ? Djokovic played old Federer in 2015 and won 2 of his slams, so he should be forced to play young Federer too in that another timeline, otherwise how would we tell Roger in 2015 that " hey you think you were better 10 years ago but you are stupid, see your younger self is destroying Nole at W and USO, something which you could not do in 15.. so 10 years of experience is useless without your youth.... "

Sameway, if Nadal goes to 04-07 then he has to play Fed, otherwise whats the use in going there ? He should also playing his younger version, otherwise how will he know whether youth triumphs over experience or not ? ... It is very important IMO.

So you see, we should not swap like that, the Fed vs Novak clash is the Main Event of the Year, that has to happen.

 

[TheFifthSet]

Swapping 1 or 2 doesn't make sense at all, you know why ? Djokovic played old Federer in 2015 and won 2 of his slams, so he should be forced to play young Federer too in that another timeline, otherwise how would we tell Roger in 2015 that " hey you think you were better 10 years ago but you are stupid, see your younger self is destroying Nole at W and USO, something which you could not do in 15.. so 10 years of experience is useless without your youth.... "

Sameway, if Nadal goes to 04-07 then he has to play Fed, otherwise whats the use in going there ? He should also playing his younger version, otherwise how will he know whether youth triumphs over experience or not ? ... It is very important IMO.

So you see, we should not swap like that, the Fed vs Novak clash is the Main Event of the Year, that has to happen.

My point is that my version of a fair swap is different from TO’s. TO’s also differs from yours, though, in that he’s removing great players and you’re adding them.

 

[SonnyT]

2005 final rankings for T5: Federer, Nadal, Roddick, Hewitt, Nalbandian; career slams won by T2-5: 25

2015 final rankings for T5: Djokovic, Murray, Federer, Wawrinka, Nadal; career slams won by T2-5: 48

In 2015, Djokovic had a much, much tougher road to navigate than Federer in 2005.

None of Federer's 2005 rivals would win a non-clay slam until 2008.

 

[buscemi]

2005 final rankings for T5: Federer, Nadal, Roddick, Hewitt, Nalbandian; career slams won by T2-5: 25

2015 final rankings for T5: Djokovic, Murray, Federer, Wawrinka, Nadal; career slams won by T2-5: 48

In 2015, Djokovic had a much, much tougher road to navigate than Federer in 2005.

Yes, the version of Nadal that Djokovic played at the 2015 French Open was much tougher than the version of Nadal that Fed faced at the 2005 French Open

 

[Subway Tennis]

I think if it’s 2015 conditions against a loaded 2005 field Novak’s best chance is the slower, higher bouncing grass of Wimbledon. But even that is pretty treacherous in the first week when it is still slick. Further to that, he is going to be facing 2005 Federer and depending on this hyperthetical a 2005 field with a lot more people who knew how to play grass.

Safin or 2005erer split AO/USO and Nadal takes RG in a canter.

 

[safin2hbh]

Depends on how Safin is feeling that year

 

[Razer]

My point is that my version of a fair swap is different from TO’s. TO’s also differs from yours, though, in that he’s removing great players and you’re adding them.

Alright, so you think a swap is fair, but it is really not fair.

If old Federer in 15 did not have the option to dodge young Djokovic then why should young Djokovic sent to 05 be given the option to dodge young Federer, especially when Agassi/Hewitt could not dodge young Fed in 05 ? Similar if young Federer is sent to 15 then why would he be given the option of dodging young Djokovic when old Federer never had the option to dodge him in 15 ?

See, you either play a full field in the new timeline or else you are no different from TO, he removed 2 players, you removed 1, I am not removing anyone, I am just making the new guy play the entire field in the timeline he is entering, no pick and choose, just the existing field.

 

[SonnyT]

2015 Djokovic (10 slams up to & including that year) wouldn't have trouble with Nadal (19 yrs, 2 clay slams) and Safin (2 slams all career) at all!!! That's my honest opinion!

28-year-old Djokovic should be favorite over 19-year-old Nadal even at RG! Everywhere else, Djokovic should be heavy favorite! Ditto versus any kind of Safin anywhere!

So 28-year-old Djokovic against 24-year-old Federer! I think Djokovic had too much experience! How about 2005 Federer vs 2011 Djokovic? That would be a fantastic match!

 

[TheFifthSet]

Alright, so you think a swap is fair, but it is really not fair.

Really depends on what hypothetical we’re trying to answer.

If we put ‘08 Nadal in the same year as, say, ‘06 Federer…most would favour Federer to have the better season. Or if it’s between ‘08 Nadal and ‘11 or ‘15 Djokovic…in most simulations Djokovic probably finishes #1.

But what if it’s a field featuring ‘08 Nadal and five legendary HC/grass players (say, ‘11 Djokovic, ‘06 Federer, ‘84 McEnroe, ‘94 Sampras, ‘95 Agassi) who will jockey for non-clay titles but likely fail to make any extended part of the season their own, while Nadal sweeps clay?

Well, in that one, ‘08 Nadal probably ends the year #1.

So, like I said, depends on the specific hypothetical and the specific parameters placed. Since we agree Federer has the slightly better peak, though, there’s really no point going on about what constitutes a “fair” make-believee lol.

 

[RaulRamirez]

Probably 0, no cap.

And if he wore a cap?

 

[The_Order]

My favourite one is when @The_Order was speculating about how Peak Nadal would do from 2004-2007 in Fed’s place, only he removed both Peak Fed and ‘04-‘07 Nadal (that Fed’s toughest rival) from the picture.

Yeah... because it makes sense for peak Nadal to face younger version of himself... this isn't a video game lol

The point is to replace... you don't insert peak Nadal in 04-07 whilst leaving peak Federer there... how does that become a fair comparison to peak Fed's 04-07 competition?

Even if we play devil's advocate and retain youngdal whilst replacing peak Fed with peak Nadal in 04-07

AO04 - peak Nadal - (Nalbandian ain't beating him and neither is a gassed Safin)
RG04 - peak Nadal
WIM04 - Roddick
US04 - peak Nadal - (who's stopping him? geriatric Agassi )

AO05 - Safin
RG05 - peak Nadal
WIM05 - peak Nadal - (who's stopping him? Roddick was rubbish)
US05 - peak Nadal - (who's stopping him? broken spine geriatric Agassi )

AO06 - peak Nadal - (Fed won this with sub par play...)
RG06 - peak Nadal - youngdal (2006) a chance
WIM06 - peak Nadal - (who's stopping him? Ancic )
US06 - peak Nadal- (who's stopping him? Roddick was rubbish - only 1 top 10 win in TWO YEARS prior to that final )

AO07 - peak Nadal - (no, he's not losing to Gonzo)
RG07 - youngdal
WIM07 - youngdal
US07 - peak Nadal - (lol prime Djok couldn't beat him, baby Djok in his first slam isn't either...)

 

[TheFifthSet]

Yeah... because it makes sense for peak Nadal to face younger version of himself... this isn't a video game lol

Every hypothetical that involves teleporting players to-and-from different years is equally likely to happen lol…it’s all just fantasy.

My point is, in your hypo, you're inserting Nadal into a field that's easier than the one Federer played in (the one you rag on)...then applaud him for having similar results.

Do you see where that breaks down? Doesn’t rly make sense to trade two great players for one and then treat the fields like they’re identical. That’s, in reality, a much less challenging field than 04-07 Fed’s. So the comparison is off from the jump imo.

The point is to replace... you don't insert peak Nadal in 04-07 whilst leaving peak Federer there... how does that become a fair comparison to peak Fed's 04-07 competition?

Yeah, that wouldn’t be fair either but that’s not the argument you made.

In your hypothetical from the time I referenced, 04-07 Fed and 04-07 Nadal are out, leaving 08-11 Nadal (or whichever four years you’d like) on his lonesome.

I suggested that the fairer scenario is to trade Peak Fed for Peak Ned and leave the other one in there.

Even if we play devil's advocate and retain youngdal whilst replacing peak Fed with peak Nadal in 04-07

What the heck, guess I'll indulge

AO04 - peak Nadal - (Nalbandian ain't beating him and neither is a gassed Safin)

Which year we starting from? I don’t see 07, 08, 10, 11, 13 and 14 Nadal winning that tournament, all else staying the same. I'll treat the following tournaments with the same uncertainty, since I dunno which stretch of years are being used.

RG04 - peak Nadal

Agreed.

WIM04 - Roddick

Agreed for most versions of Nadal.

US04 - peak Nadal - (who's stopping him? geriatric Agassi )

Which year corresponds to this one?

10 and 13 - yup.

Any other year, Hewitt would be a tough out and Windgassi over two days (fitness plays less of a role) with a partisan crowd is favoured.

(Edit: come to think of it, ‘04 Windgassi probably gives ‘13 Nadal a hard time too.)

AO05 - Safin

Agreed, although 09 Nadal at least has a punchers chance (if that’s the one you’re referring you).

RG05 - peak Nadal

Agreed.

WIM05 - peak Nadal - (who's stopping him? Roddick was rubbish)

07, 08, 10 and 11 Ned in 05 = favoured.

09, 12, 13 = obvs not.

US05 - peak Nadal - (who's stopping him? broken spine geriatric Agassi )

US06 - peak Nadal- (who's stopping him? Roddick was rubbish - only 1 top 10 win in TWO YEARS prior to that final )

US07 - peak Nadal - (lol prime Djok couldn't beat him, baby Djok in his first slam isn't either...)

I'll address these as one: wait, so you think Nadal is winning 4 USO's in a row? Are we just matching the four best versions of Nadal with each year? Nadal got sent packing in an anticlimactic fashion or was injured in 08, 09 and 12. I don't see where these four wins come from when he could barely string together consecutive good USO's.

AO06 - peak Nadal - (Fed won this with sub par play...)

Fed was fine. It was the worst win from 2004-2007 but certainly not "subpar." Only 09 and 12 Nadal are shoo-ins.

RG06 - peak Nadal - youngdal (2006) a chance

I got 06 over 09, 11 and 13. Every other year, sure.

WIM06 - peak Nadal - (who's stopping him? Ancic )

In roughly half the years, anyone with a pulse. In one of them ('11) perhaps Baydal, though I'm skeptical. If it's ‘10 Nadal, a big fat no one.

AO07 - peak Nadal - (no, he's not losing to Gonzo)

See above. Clearly Ned has to meet a minimum standard of good-ness since '07 Nadal wasn't enough to psych Fernando out with his imposing name, and 08/10/11/13 Nadal were no better and/or injured (equally injured? 07 Nadal wasn't 100% fit, granted).

RG07 - youngdal

Agreed

WIM07 - youngdal

Agreed.

Personally, if I were to plant 08-11 Nadal in there and somehow nothing else changed, I have him winning 6-7 slams: ‘08 Nadal at RG/Wimby ‘04, ‘10 Nadal at RG/Wimby/USO ‘06, ‘11 Nadal at USO ‘07…up for grabs is ‘05 AO.

If it’s ‘09-‘12 Ned from ‘04-‘07 then: ‘09 Ned wins ‘04 AO, ‘10 wins RG/Wimby/USO, ‘11 wins Wimby and one of RG/USO, ‘12 wins one AO and possibly (though unlikely) ‘07 RG. Total = 6-8

‘10-‘13 Ned: ‘10 wins 2-3 in ‘04 (Wimby in question with Roddick’s form, but I’ll favour Rafa), 2 in ‘05, 2 in ‘06, 1 in ‘07. Total = 7-8

‘11-‘14 Ned: ‘11 wins ‘04 RG and one of Wimby/USO, ‘12 wins ‘05 RG, ‘13 wins one of RG and USO but perhaps both, ‘14 wins nothin’ in ‘07. Total = 4-6

 

[GoatNo1]

Players are at their absolute peak at age 23-25 somewhere in between, Fish mentioned 2005 and 2011 seasons for a reason. Safin was 24-25 during the AO, Federer was like 24 in 2005, Djokovic was 23-24 in 2011, Nadal also produced his best performances at all 4 slams between 2008-2010 when he was 22-24, it is not a coincidence at all. Next year Sinner will be 24 and we will see him perform better than ever, it will be his peak year levelwise.

Djokovic 2015 was truly great but he could end up with 0-1 slam if put up against the slam winners of 2005, chances of 2011 Djokovic is much better in tackling Safin/Nadal, not the 2015 version who was creamed by Stanimal. If Stanimal can hurt him then Safin will hurt him much more.



Not Wiki, they are UTS warriors who have weaponized UTS .... Post number 19 in this thread even deals with hypotheticals via UTS ... I donno how they got that 83%, 70 % etc for Novak in that....

to state that ALL players is in their absolute peak at 23-25 is moronic

 

[GoatNo1]

once again:

fed - hypothetical GOAT
rafa - when healthy GOAT
no1e - the real life Golden GOAT

as usual

 

[Angrybirdstar]

there’s really no point going on about what constitutes a “fair” make-believee lol.

i think the reason one generally wants to swap with a comparable player (e.g. prime Federer with prime Nadal/Djokovic) is to make a point about whether a certain level of tennis is sufficient for comparable domination against non-GOAT competition. i would argue that's the basic idea behind being recognized as a GOAT level player, which is why Djokovic dominating in the past decade is still meaningful and isn't just "vulturing," and why individual head to heads don't matter

 

[TheFifthSet]

i think the reason one generally wants to swap with a comparable player (e.g. prime Federer with prime Nadal/Djokovic) is to make a point about whether a certain level of tennis is sufficient for comparable domination against non-GOAT competition. i would argue that's the basic idea behind being recognized as a GOAT level player, which is why Djokovic dominating in the past decade is still meaningful and isn't just "vulturing," and why individual head to heads don't matter.

I agree with this, too many people seem to wholesale dismiss his run which, while coming against notably diminished competition, still required a very high base level and was preceded by a GOATy peak against very tough competition.

As I keep saying, if you press pause at the consensus CIE “starting point”...Djokovic was pretty much even with Nadal in career accomplishments:

12 < 14 Slems
29 > 28 Masters
5 > 0 YEC’s
4 > 3 YE#1’s
0 < 1 Oly Golds…

…and that’s despite being a year younger. That’s w/o getting into him having a higher season peak.

 

[TheFifthSet]

once again:

fed - hypothetical GOAT
rafa - when healthy GOAT
no1e - the real life Golden GOAT

as usual

Damn right!

 

[fedfan24]

0-1. Good chance at USO as Federer wasn’t convincing in the F which I’d put below 04,06,08. AO, slim chance Safin, Federer, Roddick, Hewitt. Field too strong.

RG can’t see it. Nadal, Puerta, Federer.

W Federer in 4.

 

[GoatNo1]

I agree with this, too many people seem to wholesale dismiss his run which, while coming against notably diminished competition, still required a very high base level and was preceded by a GOATy peak against very tough competition.

As I keep saying, if you press pause at the consensus CIE “starting point”...Djokovic was pretty much even with Nadal in career accomplishments:

12 < 14 Slems
29 > 28 Masters
5 > 0 YEC’s
4 > 3 YE#1’s
0 > 1 Oly Golds…

…and that’s despite being a year younger. That’s w/o getting into him having a higher season peak.

and when exactly did this supposed CIE started? when nole wins vs rafa at PC and win RG it is CIE despite rafa won RG many times before and a very next season. when nole wins vs raz and sinner it is CIE too. BUT when rafa wins RG when nole and muzza are injured, fed does even not playing clay season and wawa is out of picture and raz and sinner was they are now it is not CIE?

 

[TheFifthSet]

and when exactly did this supposed CIE started?

Most seem to think mid-end of 2016.

Djokovic, of course, was on a GOATy trajectory regardless. He was already even with Nadal in achievements despite being a year younger yet he gets almost all of the flak, comparatively.

when nole wins vs rafa at PC and win RG it is CIE despite rafa won RG many times before and a very next season. when nole wins vs raz and sinner it is CIE too. BUT when rafa wins RG when nole and muzza are injured, fed does even not playing clay season and wawa is out of picture and raz and sinner was they are now it is not CIE?

Yes they both vultured in comparable amounts after 2016, Djokovic a bit more, but even with that I rank him as the greater player.

 

[jl809]

0, none. I was going to make an argument for 1, which would ironically be the USO, but I don’t think so.

2013 Djokovic would have a better shot at winning 2 than him