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

[Razer]

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

Nothing moronic about it because this applies to almost everyone except some outliers than Wawrinka and rem Wawrinka himself did not maximise his potential in his mid 20s. If we don't fulfil out potential then we be at our best late in life but that doesn't mean it is our best ever self that we could have attained. Djokovic himself was at his best at 24 in 2011. On Grass Novak peaked in 2015 and this was because hsi game reached its apex very late under Becker, had he hired Becker by 2008-09 and diagnosed his his gluten allergy as well early in 07-08 then you would have seen a greater form from him in 2011 even on Grass. Djokovic failed to fulfil his absolute full potential on Grass IMO, on other surfaces he did in in the 23-25 range.

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.

Ok so you are saying that if you include best (Djokovic, Sampras, Agassi) also in the mix in 2006 then Bull gains advantage to end up as rank 1 ? Sadly this would also be fair IMO because you could include Borg and some else great on clay as well to nullify for the Bull and still he probably ends up as rank 1 ..... this is a feather in the cap of Bull ..... He is the only guy who is guaranteed 10+ french open even in the presence of others from history given how strong and super advanced on clay he was. If including Borg and gang does not bring down his tally to single digits then it speaks volumes of his greatness. Federer will have to play Sampras, can't cry foul because being GOAT includes "Of All Time" and you have to be better levelwise than the past if we are judging him on that, no ? Putting out Sampras from the list to protect some of Federer's wimbledons and US Open makes no sense. Also if you think Agassi can tackle Novak at AO or Safin or someone can then makes no sense to protect Djokovic either. If Bull ends up being 1 because he is guaranteed double digit french opens vs the entire field from 1800s till now combined then so be it, he is that damn good.

 

[TheFifthSet]

Nothing moronic about it because this applies to almost everyone except some outliers than Wawrinka and rem Wawrinka himself did not maximise his potential in his mid 20s. If we don't fulfil out potential then we be at our best late in life but that doesn't mean it is our best ever self that we could have attained. Djokovic himself was at his best at 24 in 2011. On Grass Novak peaked in 2015 and this was because hsi game reached its apex very late under Becker, had he hired Becker by 2008-09 and diagnosed his his gluten allergy as well early in 07-08 then you would have seen a greater form from him in 2011 even on Grass. Djokovic failed to fulfil his absolute full potential on Grass IMO, on other surfaces he did in in the 23-25 range.



Ok so you are saying that if you include best (Djokovic, Sampras, Agassi) also in the mix in 2006 then Bull gains advantage to end up as rank 1 ? Sadly this would also be fair IMO because you could include Borg and some else great on clay as well to nullify for the Bull and still he probably ends up as rank 1 ..... this is a feather in the cap of Bull ..... He is the only guy who is guaranteed 10+ french open even in the presence of others from history given how strong and super advanced on clay he was. If including Borg and gang does not bring down his tally to single digits then it speaks volumes of his greatness. Federer will have to play Sampras, can't cry foul because being GOAT includes "Of All Time" and you have to be better levelwise than the past if we are judging him on that, no ? Putting out Sampras from the list to protect some of Federer's wimbledons and US Open makes no sense. Also if you think Agassi can tackle Novak at AO or Safin or someone can then makes no sense to protect Djokovic either. If Bull ends up being 1 because he is guaranteed double digit french opens vs the entire field from 1800s till now combined then so be it, he is that damn good.

Liked for the bottom half lolol

 

[Djokovic2011]

Sounds strange to say but I think he'd be more likely to win RG than any of the others.

 

[Subway Tennis]

Extremely interesting thread. It’s pretty rare to see a fresh hypothetical take on Talk Tennis these days but this is it. A lot of interesting comments, too.

 

[RS]

I think people would argue anything between 0-3. Lol that's funny to say.

 

[RS]

He has a realistic shot at winning and losing all of them though I think he's a fairly significant favorite over Safin. If he has to go through three of Safin Fed and Hew/Rod that's a different story.

2-3? I would guess that it were you are at.

 

[TheAssassin]

Who knows. He wasn't going to win that many Slams in 2015 or many other years, until he did. But back then people were voting with their hearts. In hypotheticals they are being logical. Surely one can trust them and pat them on the back lol...

 

[The Blond Blur]

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...

He would have taken out RAFA…when he got rekt by *checks notes* Stan?

Wasn’t quite the beast that he became in a season or two? Lol, 05dal had a better CC season and overall results than he did in 06. He won MC, Barca, Rome, RG, and 4 other CC events that year.

 

[njhmusicman]

Novak wins AO, WI, and USO

 

[Clay lover]

I'd say AO. Roger was crazy in 2005 but if I had to choose a place where he'd lose it'd be the AO. It was slower, making it harder to hit through opponents and Djokovic is basically the slow hard God. Roger would kill him with the forehand but overall it balances out with the bh to be advantage and Djokovic's superior shot tolerance.

I don't think Djokovic has a chance vs Federer at Wimby or USO - he was just way too dominant there in 2005.

05 Nadal sure was raw, but he had the crazy defence going for him and could basically raise his level to match the opposition. Malisse, Gasquet, Grosjean, young Ferrer, then prime Federer and a roided up Puerta are no joke.

Safin's probably gonna be a non-factor - sure he beat Fed and also 08 Djoko on grass but I don't think he's beating prime Djokovic with his frustrating lockdown defence, when Safin is the last person to want to get frustrated.

 

[NYTennisfan]

The closest comparable to '05 Federer vs. '15 Djokovic in a head to head with both closest to top form is '11 Federer vs. '11 Djokovic so essentially post-peak but still prime Federer vs. the peakiest of Djokovics.
Well, Djokovic smoked him at AO (no surprise), lost to Federer at the French and Federer (lets be honest) choked it away at the USO had Djokovic on the ropes so it's hard to imagine Peak Djokovic beating Peak Federer in any slam outside of AO so...1 is my answer.

BabyDal wouldn't been a big factor outside of Clay and in form Federer and Djokovic beats Safin just about every time (AO '05 was a one-off) so this is really Peak Fed vs. Djokovic debate times 1000 and I take Peak Fed.

 

[Razer]

Safin's probably gonna be a non-factor - sure he beat Fed and also 08 Djoko on grass but I don't think he's beating prime Djokovic with his frustrating lockdown defence, when Safin is the last person to want to get frustrated.

Safin beat Djokovic at the 2005 Aus Open itself and he is 2-0 on Djokovic in Slams. Baby or not, it is not like Djokovic's lockdown modes will trouble Safin in a way that you are writing him off as a non factor. Safin will beat 2015 Djokovic in 4-5 sets, this is not Murray we are talking about.

 

[fedfan24]

Safin beat Djokovic in 2005 Aus Open itself and he is 2-0 on Djokovic in Slams. Baby or not, it is not like Djokovic's lockdown modes will trouble Safin in a way that you are writing him off as a non factor. Safin will beat 2015 Djokovic in 4-5 sets, this is not Murray we are talking about.

Safin has similar firepower to Wawrinka and better serve too. Not a good matchup for Djokovic, albeit would only be at the AO as he didn’t do much else that year.

 

[inflation_era]

LOL Djokovic 2015 is a product of extremely weak competition. He would have no chance at any slams in 2005. Might win a few sets at the AO.

 

[arvind13]

I'm shocked that @metsman hasn't commented on this thread

 

[fedfan24]

LOL Djokovic 2015 is a product of extremely weak competition. He would have no chance at any slams in 2005. Might win a few sets at the AO.

It’s weird that Djokovic best season statistically probably wins at best a single slam in each of 05-07. RG-W-USO locked down.

 

[metsman]

I'm shocked that @metsman hasn't commented on this thread

someone already said 0 so I didn't feel the need to pile on

 

[Tano]

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.

Please, don't crush him anymore with FACTS, I beg you.

 

[Martin J]

Would Djokovic have even dominated the Australian Open if it had stayed on Rebound Ace, like it was from 1988-2007? The irony is that Lleyton Hewitt detested Rebound Ace, and even accused Tennis Australia of sabotaging his attempts to win the Australian Open.

So did Sampras, he called it a "rubber" and complained about its inconsistent properties which were highly affected by the elements. On the other hand, Agassi and Seles owned the RA and really enjoyed playing there, so how knows how would Djoko perform.

 

[Feli18]

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 most garbage of all hypotheticals.

76% chance of beating 05 RG Rafa? Lmao.

70% chance of beating 05 Wimbledon Federer? The most laughable of all. 14-years-older Federer had two match points, he defeated Peak Djokovic in RG whilst being 30-years-old, and he has a 70% chance of losing?

That feature just lost all credibility. Garbage.

 

[Sport]

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.

In the Disneyland imagination of a few radical fanatics of the Swiss, it may be the case. But most tennis fans know Roger can't have the highest OE peak with less Slams than Djokodal and a losing H2H against his two main rivals (including a losing H2H against Nadal in 2004-2007 and 2004-2009 when he was young and at his peak).

 

[Turning Pro]

Safin 2005 beat Prime level Fed. Now Djoker from 2015 barely scraped by 2015 old man Fed who is 10 years older removed and way out of his prime at the Us and Wimbledon. Safin has. 2-0 h2h vs Djoker too and THAT version of Safin would match anyone.

Also Fo 2005 Nadal is Nadal at the French open. Besides 2015 Fo Djoker got routed by Wawrinka.

I don't think he wins a slam this year but let's give him the benefit of the doubt.

1 slam.

Maybe.

 

[Mustard]

In the Disneyland imagination of a few radical fanatics of the Swiss, it may be the case. But most tennis fans know Roger can't have the highest OE peak with less Slams than Djokodal and a losing H2H against his two main rivals (including a losing H2H against Nadal in 2004-2007 and 2004-2009 when he was young and at his peak).

Nadal was an unique matchup to the best Federer, basically Nadal was the only player who could exploit a tiny weakness in Federer's game (i.e. high topspin balls to the one-handed backhand of Federer). Federer was well into his 30s when Djokovic had a better record.

 

[fedfan24]

In the Disneyland imagination of a few radical fanatics of the Swiss, it may be the case. But most tennis fans know Roger can't have the highest OE peak with less Slams than Djokodal and a losing H2H against his two main rivals (including a losing H2H against Nadal in 2004-2007 and 2004-2009 when he was young and at his peak).

You can’t use H2H to compare peaks when players are 5 and 6 years apart in age. Tennis players and humans in general peak between ages 21-28.

Using slam count is even more absurd.

 

[Gonzo_style]

Close to CYGS, 3-slam season more realistic

 

[FRV4]

he wouldn’t lose to Safin that’s for sure

 

[Razer]

he wouldn’t lose to Safin that’s for sure

Safin would have a bigger kryptonite to Djokovic than what Wawrinka was as mentioned by @fedfan24 above. If Marat and Stan peaked in the same tournament and Djokovic has to beat them back to back then it would've been a bigger challenge than beating Federer and Nadal for him, at least on Hard Courts and possibly on a clay too on a good day.

 

[TheFifthSet]

In the Disneyland imagination of a few radical fanatics of the Swiss, it may be the case

Oh great, the resident “conclusion doesn’t even follow from the argument made” guy.

. But most tennis fans know Roger can't have the highest OE peak with less Slams than Djokodal and a losing H2H against his two main rivals

Lol, Exhibit A…not how most people would define a peak.

(including a losing H2H against Nadal in 2004-2007 and 2004-2009 when he was young and at his peak).

Never argued Federer had the highest clay peak (reminder that he lost on non-clay as many times to Canas from 2004-2007 as he did to Nadal).

 

[FRV4]

Safin would have a bigger kryptonite to Djokovic than what Wawrinka was as mentioned by @fedfan24 above. If Marat and Stan peaked in the same tournament and Djokovic has to beat them back to back then it would've been a bigger challenge than beating Federer and Nadal for him, at least on Hard Courts and possibly on a clay too on a good day.

I know the history between Djokovic and Safin that’s why I said that. Safin talked down on Djokovic a bit, I wanted to state Djokovic wouldn’t lose to him because he wouldn’t. Safin played Djokovic before he became GOAT level. It’s possible there would be a mismatch for Djokovic but I doubt it.

 

[Mustard]

he wouldn’t lose to Safin that’s for sure

Safin battered Djokovic at 2008 Wimbledon.

 

[soldat]

Djokovic would win all 4 slams,

 

[Razer]

Djokovic would win all 4 slams,

Number of Natural Surface Slams (Wimbledon+French Opens) on the 27th Birthday

Borg - 11
Nadal - 9
Sampras - 5
Federer - 5
Djokovic - 1 ( Novak has always been inferior on natural surfaces to Federer and Nadal on Grass and Clay respectively...,..)

 

[soldat]

Number of Natural Surface Slams (Wimbledon+French Opens) on the 27th Birthday

Borg - 11
Nadal - 9
Sampras - 5
Federer - 5
Djokovic - 1 ( Novak has always been inferior on natural surfaces to Federer and Nadal on Grass and Clay respectively...,..)

He would still win. Djokovic wins all hypothetical matches, especially since his hypothetical 30 year old self would dominate hypothetical younger players like Federer and Nadal and Safin, so severely that they would go on to be the mugs of this hypothetical era.

 

[Razer]

He would still win. Djokovic wins all hypothetical matches, especially since his hypothetical 30 year old self would dominate hypothetical younger players like Federer and Nadal and Safin, so severely that they would go on to be the mugs of this hypothetical era.

Sadly 46% people voted 0 slams for Nole in the poll and total 70% of the public think he wins between either 0 or 1

What could be the reason ?

 

[Neptune]

Some fanbases desperately cling to hypotheticals for coping, lol.

 

[soldat]

The fact that you want to make a thread like this may already answer your question

But in general bitter fedal fans.

I’m also not a big fan of alternate unprovable histories, but hey, it makes for good fiction writing, if you enjoy it then you enjoy it

 

[NoleFam]

Number of Natural Surface Slams (Wimbledon+French Opens) on the 27th Birthday

Borg - 11
Nadal - 9
Sampras - 5
Federer - 5
Djokovic - 1 ( Novak has always been inferior on natural surfaces to Federer and Nadal on Grass and Clay respectively...,..)

Natural surface Slams won after 27th birthday

Djokovic - 9
Nadal - 7
Federer - 4
Sampras - 2
Borg - 0

There might be something that exists where tennis doesn't end once you turn 27. For some strange reason, you think it does.

 

[Razer]

Natural surface Slams won after 27th birthday

Djokovic - 9
Nadal - 7
Federer - 4
Sampras - 2
Borg - 0

There might be something that exists where tennis doesn't end once you turn 27. For some strange reason, you think it does.

HC Slams before 27th Birthday = 5
HC Slams after 27th Birthday = 9

Novak's slams on HC are not skewed a lot with good balance in 20s and 30s unlike natural surfaces. Forget 27th.... look at the 31th birthday, Novak had like 4 natural surface slams till 31st birthday and then won 6 after that, don't you think winning 150% extra after turning 31 was because of some cushion from the 90s gen and lack of titles early on was before Fed and Nadal on their respective surfaces?

 

[NoleFam]

HC Slams before 27th Birthday = 5
HC Slams after 27th Birthday = 9

Novak's slams on HC are not skewed a lot with good balance in 20s and 30s unlike natural surfaces. Forget 27th.... look at the 31th birthday, Novak had like 4 natural surface slams till 31st birthday and then won 6 after that, don't you think winning 150% extra after turning 31 was because of some cushion from the 90s gen and lack of titles early on was before Fed and Nadal on their respective surfaces?

Like this matters any at all. Sorry your guys weren't good enough to run up the scales like he did after 31. Sampras was done and retired, and Federer only won 3, and those were because Djokovic was in a slump. Lol.

 

[Feli18]

In the Disneyland imagination of a few radical fanatics of the Swiss, it may be the case. But most tennis fans know Roger can't have the highest OE peak with less Slams than Djokodal and a losing H2H against his two main rivals (including a losing H2H against Nadal in 2004-2007 and 2004-2009 when he was young and at his peak).

You can’t use H2H to compare peaks when players are 5 and 6 years apart in age. Tennis players and humans in general peak between ages 21-28.

Using slam count is even more absurd.

Adding to that, Peak Fed only has a matchup problem on Clay versus Nadal.

He leads 5-2 on non-Clay and is 1-6 on Clay. He was never holding the H2H on clay, the matchup issue is too prominent on it.

He has a matchup issue everywhere, but it’s insurmountable on Clay. He would’ve lost in 2017 when he figured Nadal out.

Djokovic with a significant age advantage only turned the H2H around in 2015!!! When Federer was 34. Federer led 7-2 at first. When he aged, Djokovic took advantage. Before and after he retired, Djokovic farmed the weak gen.

 

[Neptune]

In the Disneyland imagination of a few radical fanatics of the Swiss, it may be the case. But most tennis fans know Roger can't have the highest OE peak with less Slams than Djokodal and a losing H2H against his two main rivals (including a losing H2H against Nadal in 2004-2007 and 2004-2009 when he was young and at his peak).

Reality check for 'The Mythical Dominator Of The Vacuum Era'

Prime​	vs Top5​	T5 Weight​	vs Top10​	T10 Weight​	vs T11+​	T11+ Weight​	vs All​
Nole 11-16​	91 (66-25) 72.53%​	19.08%​	174 (140-34) 80.46%​	36.48%​	303 (287-16) 94.72%​	63.52%​	477 (427-50) 89.52%​
Fed 04-09​	67 (44-23) 65.67%​	13.59%​	121 (91-30) 75.21%​	24.54%​	372 (351-21) 94.35%​	75.46%​	493 (442-51) 89.66%​
Nole 18-23​	54 (37-17) 68.52%​	15.25%​	102 (76-26) 74.51%​	28.81%​	252 (228-24) 90.48%​	71.19%​	354 (304-50) 85.88%​

 

[SonnyT]

I can't believe it, that got to be the greatest joke of all time! Half of the people think that 2015 Djokovic couldn't win a single slam in '05.

In 2015, Djokovic played 31 matches in Top 10, 7 more than any man in history. Well, if you lose a T10 match, you don't get to play another one in the same tournament. Djokovic had 5 of the top 10, while Federer none and Nadal one. What do you think 29-year-old Djokovic would do to 19-year-old Nadal, even at RG? What about the absent-minded Safin?

Let me remind you the T5 line-up for 2005 and 2015:

2005: Federer, Nadal, Roddick, Hewitt, Nalbandian,
2015: Djokovic, Murray, Federer, Wawrinka, Nadal

 

[SonnyT]

Top ten years for facing Top 10:

31 - Djokovic ('15)
24 - Djokovic ('13), Nadal ('13), Djokovic ('12), McEnroe ('84)
22 - Lendl ('85)
21 - Djokovic ('16), Djokovic ('11), Borg ('78)
20 - Borg ('79)

Incidentally, you can only see Borg/McEnroe/Lendl and Djokovic/Nadal generations up there! I guess those were the top generations for tennis!

 

[Racquet_smash]

2015 Novak played one of his worst AO tournament between those he won. I don't think he defeats either Federer or Safin, especially on Rebound Ace.

At RG Nadal definitely sweeps.

At Wimbledon Fred was better by every metric in 2005 so he should get it done in 4 given the 2015 final was a close match.

Same at the US.

This is mostly why i don't agree at all when people say 2015 was his best year. Statistically sure. But he played a lot better in 2011 at every event. He was just more consistent in a more depleted field.

 

[SonnyT]

Last table by Neptune shows clearly Djokovic was the best of the best!!!

 

[SonnyT]

Neptune, do you have enough data to do research on '10-11 Nadal but leave out Nadal vs Djokovic for those years? I want to see '10 and '11 Nadal without Djokovic!

 

[TMF]

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.

 

[TMF]

You can’t use H2H to compare peaks when players are 5 and 6 years apart in age. Tennis players and humans in general peak between ages 21-28.

Using slam count is even more absurd.

That is correct.

The age of peak athletic performance varies widely across different sports and between sexes/genders, typically ranging from 20 to 30 years old. While the peak performance age in men has remained remarkably stable since the first Olympic games in 1896...

Editorial: Growth, peaking, and aging of competitive athletes - PMC

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Lleytonstation]

Just no slams to be found. Surely not WC or FO. Likely no chance at uso. So maybe AO.

But once again, no data will tell you a real answer. Just opinions.

 

[SonnyT]

I don't rely on anecdote, but on data! As if Federer hadn't lost to anybody all year! And remember the field was much stronger in '15 than '05!

2005 top 5: Federer, Nadal (19 year old), Roddick, Hewitt, Nalbandian
2015 top 5: Djokovic, Murray, Federer, Wawrinka, Nadal