Razer
G.O.A.T.
Peak Djokovic reduced to the status of an inferior peasant by Federer at Cinci in 2012 ..... Damn...... look at the 6-0 scoreline
How many Slams does 2015 Djokovic win in the presence of 05 Federer, 05 Nadal & 05 Safin?
- Thread starter Razer
- Start date
Peak Djokovic reduced to the status of an inferior peasant by Federer at Cinci in 2012 ..... Damn...... look at the 6-0 scoreline
Stop embarrassing yourself. Djokovic lost to Federer at Cincy every single time until Federer was 37.
He needed Federer to show up in his post-post-post-post-post peak form to defeat him.
If Peak Djokovic lost to 2015 Fed, he isn’t touching 2005 Federer there.
If Cincy were a slam, it'd be a different story!! We all knew Federer underperformed in GS's.
2015 was right near Federer's peak! Did you see pre-14 vs post-14? Pre-14, Fed was 27-40 against Nadal, Murray & Berdych; post-14, he was 23-1! 2014 was when he used different racquet & BH!
Razer
G.O.A.T.
A donkey will not become a tiger just because you convert BO3 to a slam
Djokovic was a failure at Cinci in fast conditions because he is a inferior tennis player in outdoor fast conditions, the man is so pathetic that even Murray beats him in the windy quick conditions, Federer is way beyond his caliber.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
Being 6 years younger to Federer helped Djokovic win slams race, otherwise he would be on half the slams today.
Federer is a vastly superior player to Djokovic.,.... you are a 2015 born fan of Djokovic, what do you know about Fed or Novak to even judge them ? Go back to your UTS page and mug up the stats.
Federer is a vastly superior player to Djokovic.,.... you are a 2015 born fan of Djokovic, what do you know about Fed or Novak to even judge them ? Go back to your UTS page and mug up the stats.
Imagine if their ages matched...
Age-parity Federer would’ve lost before age 23, would’ve won afterwards, and in his 30 would’ve schooled both Djokovic and the mugs he defeated for almost half his Slams.
FlyingSaucer
Semi-Pro
I love how Berdych has made his way into these arguments. Wawrinka still suspiciously missing, mind.
What about Donskoy, eh?
What about Donskoy, eh?
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Berdych won a Masters in 2005 (Paris Indoor), beat Nadal in Cincinnati in an epic, and had beaten Federer at the 2004 Athens Olympics. Wawrinka became more of a factor later on.
FlyingSaucer
Semi-Pro
My comment is in relation to post #255.
Holmes
Hall of Fame
Novak losing to peak Federer is no shame, right? Losing against his more reckless, incomplete 20s incarnation is a far different proposition.
Holmes
Hall of Fame
It was a perfect example - 34 year old Federer was his most complete, highest level self. I don't think we can shame Novak too much for losing to a skilled rival at his best on a favorable surface, can we?
zakopinjo
Rookie
On what basis do you think that Federer05 was at a higher level than Federer in Cincinnati 2012 or 2015?
zakopinjo
Rookie
The difference of 6 years only helped Federer, today he would have around 10 slams if he was born in 1986/7.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
People with low intelligence think Federer would have 10 slams.
Sensible people know that Novak is an inferior player at W and USO compared to Federer and of course inferior on clay to Nadal.
If all 3 were of the same then Novak would have been the true 3rd wheel ... his lone hunting ground would be Aus open.
Again, stop (further) embarrassing yourself. Since Djokovic fans have no leg to stand on, they’ve shifted to claiming 2015 Federer is better than peak Federer?
On the basis of both results and watching them play?
What do they think 2012 Federer would’ve done to 2018-2019 Novak and his competition! What do they think 2017 Federer would’ve done to him and his 2023 competition?
zakopinjo
Rookie
You think that Federer was unable to show a modified level of prime tennis during a few weeks in 2012 or 2015?
zakopinjo
Rookie
How is Novak inferior on grass when he beat Federer 3 times in the Wimbledon final?
How is Novak inferior at the USO when it is a tournament where he has never lost to Federer since he entered his so-called prime in 2011.
I wrote earlier, when a tennis player enters his prime, he is capable of maintaining that level of tennis until the end of his career, only that his lifespan will decrease (at the age of 25 he will be able to play the entire season at the prime level, while at the age of 35 he will maybe a few months). Novak and Federer talked about it, Federer once said (I think in 2017) that he plays the best tennis of his life.
And yes, Federer would have about 10 slams if he was born in 1986/7, that's obvious.
zakopinjo
Rookie
Technically, he would not have done anything, he would have lost to Novak in most matches. Novak owns Federer since 2011.
It's good that you mentioned Novak from 2018, he is an excellent example of how to unlock a forgotten prime. He is not on the tennis map until Wimbledon 18 and then suddenly he returns his prime motor and starts to unstoppably trample everything in front of him.
Martin J
Rookie
Similar to Petros in the 2001 USO final, I agree.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
They are not of the same age, Federer at 33-38 losing to a Djokovic in his 20s does not mean anything, anyone who studied Biology in school (I hope you did) know that testosterone levels drop in athletes from late 20s onwards. There is a reason why 20s is said to be the prime for athletes and 30s past the prime. Alcaraz defeated Djokovic 2 times and now will beat him 3rd time next year at W, do you think we should consider that ??? Use your brain. Federer is a superior player to Djokvoic on Grass, beat peak Novak in 2012 in Semis in a classic match and then held MP even in old age at almost 38. Roger is the boss.
At USO Novak is not even second best in his era, he is the 3rd best in this era.... Nadal is the second best. 2-1
Your idea of a player playing in his prime till the end of his career is very lame, makes no sense. You don't understand biology.
zakopinjo
Rookie
What kind of biology are you talking about?
If Federer goes public and says that in 2017 he played the best tennis of his life, then it is pointless for you to write here that it is not true.
If Novak 2023 feels like he's playing the tennis of his life, then it's pointless for you to claim here that it's not true.
The class is eternal, Federer 2005 can play from January to December at a high level, Federer 2015-2019 can play at a high level for a certain period.
Who would win, Federer05 or Federer17?
Razer
G.O.A.T.
The same type of biology which is taught in schools, did you attend schools,in Serbia ? I don't care what Federer or Novak said, they can say whatever they want to motivate themselves, only dumb people trust their words on biology. Did you study Biology in school ? YES OR NO ????
This is why 27-28 onwards Athletes started to show dip and after 28 they are no longer at their peak. They even get a big injury due to all the wear and tear at this point because their bodies are no longer to take the grind and intensity. Testosterone is everything, this is why people take steroids to compensate for this drop in T Levels.
zakopinjo
Rookie
Essence, you don't believe the words of top athletes.The same type of biology which is taught in schools, did you attend schools,in Serbia ? I don't care what Federer or Novak said, they can say whatever they want to motivate themselves, only dumb people trust their words on biology. Did you study Biology in school ? YES OR NO ????
If Federer says that he is playing the best tennis of his life in 2017, who are you to contradict him? Will you pick up a biology book and go to Federer in the Alps to explain to him that he is wrong?
Razer
G.O.A.T.
Yes I don't believe anything and everything which comes out of their mouths. Federer said he has worked hard on his game to improved parts of it compared to his youth but he never factored the loss of athletics, reflexes, speed etc compared to his youth. Federer as long as he was not getting smoked by the tour was calling himself better but thats not how it works. Damn right if I Federer says on Tv that he is better and I am in the studio sitting with them I can run videos on youtube from his previous matches and show him side by side his slow he has become, how he fails to run around the backhand like he used to do in his peak years. Taking Federer's words or Djokovic's words on 35 being new 25 is pretty dumb.
Biology is Biology, these athletes can say many things for PR or to motivate themselves but that does not matter.
He has lost many matches because of age disadvantage. So, what @Razer said.
“Technically he would have lost to Novak...” no lmao, he wouldn’t have.
38 Fed had match points and was a better player. 2012-2014 Fed or thereabouts obliterates 2018-2019 Djokovic like Peak Fed did at the 2007 Australian Open.
“He returns his prime motor” lmao. Just like he did against Alcaraz in the 2024 Wimbledon final, right? Right?
Why couldn’t he do it? Because he’s old. You can’t fight against biology.
Sure, he played well at the olympics, probably the best he’s played in a while, and barely defeated a not-Wimbledon Alcaraz. He’s not winning a BO5.
Federer won many BO3 against Djokovic and lost many BO5 because at that age it’s harder to have the speed and physicality required for a BO5.
Djokovic himself is tearing your arguments apart.
Like I have repeatedly told you, you started watching tennis in 2019. That’s why you can’t see the speed and reaction difference. Watch some 2006 Federer and you’ll understand.
He definitely wins another 2+ USO if it was played on a quicker HC like Cincy in the 2010s. 2011, 2012, 2015 being prime candidates.
Djokovic is slightly better than 32-37 year old “lost a step” Federer on Wimbledon grass, yes.
Pro players words are absolutely irrelevant when it comes to human biology. Humans peak in their 20s, indisputable fact. They might be able to play the occasional tournament as close to prime level (Cincy 12/15 for example) but overall physicality, explosiveness, speed all drop in your 30s.
If Federer was born in 1986, it’s likely he wins 12 or so slams in his 20s then absolutely cleans up his 30s, just as Djokovic did in his. Djokovic would be reduced to a 1-2 slam wonder at W/USO with prime Federer around.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
Athletic decline of players happen in 6 different areas :
01. Agility and Flexibility - This is the first to decline in athletes after your early 20s, that's why in Gymnastics you don't find many people dominating after their mid 20s.
02. Acceleration and Reflexes - This declines between 25-27.
03. Top Speed - This declines between 27-28.
04. Recovery - This starts to be longer around after mid 20s gradually, this decline become very rapid after 30.
05. Raw Power & Strength - This starts to decline into your 30s and that's when athletes put on weight to maintain muscle mass, becomes very tough to be elite.
06. Endurance - This decline the last for elite athletes, they can have it until 35-37...once this is gone then you are at risk of being whooped by every jabroni out there.
Athletes need steroids to compensate for all this from late 20s onwards, some even take steroids in their peak years to maximize performance. It is all about TESTOSTERONE. So you illiterate people talking of players peaking in 30s need to go back to school and learn biology, then you need to consult sportsmen and fitness professionals to understand how decline happens, plus watching matches also show you how in each of these areas players declined. Nadal started to decline in 2 & 3 very early from 23 onwards and his game started to being affected, he lost a lot after 27. Federer's game also declined a lot but less than Nadal relatively, the least Djokovic declined because endurance goes at last and Djokovic's game is based on endurance, as @NeutralFan often says Novak's speed is not declined a lot and so he can be competitive.
01. Agility and Flexibility - This is the first to decline in athletes after your early 20s, that's why in Gymnastics you don't find many people dominating after their mid 20s.
02. Acceleration and Reflexes - This declines between 25-27.
03. Top Speed - This declines between 27-28.
04. Recovery - This starts to be longer around after mid 20s gradually, this decline become very rapid after 30.
05. Raw Power & Strength - This starts to decline into your 30s and that's when athletes put on weight to maintain muscle mass, becomes very tough to be elite.
06. Endurance - This decline the last for elite athletes, they can have it until 35-37...once this is gone then you are at risk of being whooped by every jabroni out there.
Athletes need steroids to compensate for all this from late 20s onwards, some even take steroids in their peak years to maximize performance. It is all about TESTOSTERONE. So you illiterate people talking of players peaking in 30s need to go back to school and learn biology, then you need to consult sportsmen and fitness professionals to understand how decline happens, plus watching matches also show you how in each of these areas players declined. Nadal started to decline in 2 & 3 very early from 23 onwards and his game started to being affected, he lost a lot after 27. Federer's game also declined a lot but less than Nadal relatively, the least Djokovic declined because endurance goes at last and Djokovic's game is based on endurance, as @NeutralFan often says Novak's speed is not declined a lot and so he can be competitive.
Last edited:
Djokovic was better than Federer at any age and at any surface. Throughout his career, Djokovic faced lots more highly ranked opponents, because he has advanced more often than Federer!
Federer was very good, but Djokovic was better by some margin!
Razer
G.O.A.T.
Djokovic will win many Aus opens and a few outside ... definitely 1-2 slam wonder at W+USO.
His count would be something like this
8 AO
1 FO
1 W
2 USO
Total 12 Slams maybe
Razer
G.O.A.T.
Djokovic was a loser who won only 4 Natural Surface (W+FO) Slams in his 20s ..... What a mug !!!
Razer
G.O.A.T.
Natural Surface Slams [W+FO) won before 30th birthday
Borg - 11
Nadal - 11
Sampras - 7
Federer - 7
Djokovic - 4 (This inferior man would have suffered more if Federer was of his same age with a direct overlap of peaks..... )
Djokovic's 60% of his resume on natural surfaces was made after his 31st birthday against untalented loser 1990s generation, if Federer is aged same then those losers won't be the one Novak faces in the end, it will be Federer, no chance for Novak who struggled so much in his 20s against an old Federer & same aged Nadal.
Borg - 11
Nadal - 11
Sampras - 7
Federer - 7
Djokovic - 4 (This inferior man would have suffered more if Federer was of his same age with a direct overlap of peaks..... )
Djokovic's 60% of his resume on natural surfaces was made after his 31st birthday against untalented loser 1990s generation, if Federer is aged same then those losers won't be the one Novak faces in the end, it will be Federer, no chance for Novak who struggled so much in his 20s against an old Federer & same aged Nadal.
I agree. I think Federer would struggle in Australia but would make up for it by inflating in his 30s. 2012, 2014, 2016, 2017, 2018 forms will win a few vs 2018-2023 field.
Yeah… right. Federer is clear at W/USO and RG is debatable.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
I think Djokovic and Federer would have made AO and W their pet Slams. 8 or maybe even 10 slams each for them in these 2 slams is possible
FO the bull takes 14
USO could be divided, Djokovic could win 2 but 1 of those would come late and 1 early, in between lot of final losses.
Slam counts could be like
Nadal - 0 + 14 + 2 + 1 or 2 = 17-18
Federer - 2 + 0 + 10 + 4 or 5 = 16-17
Djokovic - 10+1+1+2 or 3 = 14-15
Until all of them are like 33-34 this is how it could be, after that perhaps Djokovic and Federer level with Nadal or move ahead by milking Thiem/Zverev/Med/Tsitsipas but it won't be that easy, if Djokovic and Nadal are both born in lets say 1981 then the 1990s gen will find it a bit easier to somehow win something. Perhaps Murray also wins more if he is still born in 1987 6 years clear of all 3.
Last edited:
I think if we’re saying they’re all born in 1986/87 then Federer would win an AO in his peak years then he can add in his 30s. Forms like 2012,2016,2017,2018 should win at least 2 between 2018-2023.
RG 2008/2009 can win one of 2015-2016. He wasn’t as good in his 30s there as Djokovic so will be a push for him to grab a 21 or 23. Maybe if 2017 fed sees there’s no Nadal he will go for 2023.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
Aus open - Federer wins only 1 AO in his peak years, Djokovic is a beast in Aus, won his 1st slam at 20 and then at 23 went on a tear in 2011 which would coincide with Federer's 2005 when Fed actually lost to Safin. Nadal however was yet to turn 23 in 2009, so Fed gets his 2004 AO which he was 22 but if you look past that then Djokovic wins almost all of the titles. Federer's 2007 form would also be cut by Djokovic's 2013 form. Djokovic was a beast in AO, roger would remain on 1 slam until hsi 30s when he again gets chance to add a second title but when he adds I donno... probably he gets his number 2.... Nadal never wins AO in this scenario because Djokovic would be too strong to beat if they are all aged same and Federer would also be there to cut into it.
French Open .... Federer never wins .... .... Like Novak on Grass, Fed on Clay was slow to mature, by the time he gets better on the slow dirt he remains always below Djokodal. Can hsi 2009 form win over Novak 2015 ? Maybe but whats the guarantee that Nadal will not be on Federer's side of the draw ? So this could be 0 for Fed and maybe 1 for Novak. This becomes very ugly for both and they would have to collect frenchs after age 33-34 and mind you there is Thiem, he ain't letting these fellows win ... he is not that big a loser to not use his 10-12 years age advantage over them
Wimbledon - Novak suffers on Grass bigtime, he probably struggles very hard to win 1 wimbledon somehow, that too in his 30s or maybe his 2015 form could win him that lone wimbledon. Nadal would be the winner over Novak on Grass in this unique scenario because he picks up 2 quick wimbledons until 2003 Federer arrives, Djoker would be slowest to mature and so he would win only 1. Federer wins 10+ ... too good on Grass
US open - The most open slam but remember this is the last slam of the year, the field will not allow you to win in your 30s a lot. I am expecting Federer to dominate this slam more than other 2 but Nadal will also have his 2 titles, Novak will also cut into Nadal's tally and so he too somehow takes 2 because he is too consistent every year. I am giving 4-5 for Federer given how good he was in his peak....
I think Federer narrows goes past Nadal in the slams tally in his mid 30s while Novak and Rafa remain in close vicinity, this is how the GOAT race would be in this parallel universe i they are all aged same..... Nadal start in lead and Federer ends the race as the winner !!
Federer might win his 20th slam or maybe get stuck on 19 .... Djokodal on 17-18 each, somewhere there.
Last edited:
AO - Federer’s 2011/2012 would likely win years like 2017/2018 and then 2017/2018 runs would clash with 2022/2023 bagging another 1 there.Aus open - Federer wins only 1 AO in his peak years, Djokovic is a beast in Aus, won his 1st slam at 20 and then at 23 went on a tear in 2011 which would coincide with Federer's 2005 when Fed actually lost to Safin. Nadal however was yet to turn 23 in 2009, so Fed gets his 2004 AO which he was 22 but if you look past that then Djokovic wins almost all of the titles. Federer's 2007 form would also be cut by Djokovic's 2013 form. Djokovic was a beast in AO, roger would remain on 1 slam until hsi 30s when he again gets chance to add a second title but when he adds I donno... probably he gets his number 2.... Nadal never wins AO in this scenario because Djokovic would be too strong to beat if they are all aged same and Federer would also be there to cut into it.
French Open .... Federer never wins .... .... Like Novak on Grass, Fed on Clay was slow to mature, by the time he gets better on the slow dirt he remains always below Djokodal. Can hsi 2009 form win over Novak 2015 ? Maybe but whats the guarantee that Nadal will not be on Federer's side of the draw ? So this could be 0 for Fed and maybe 1 for Novak. This becomes very ugly for both and they would have to collect frenchs after age 33-34 and mind you there is Thiem, he ain't letting these fellows win ... he is not that big a loser to not use his 10-12 years age advantage over them
Wimbledon - Novak suffers on Grass bigtime, he probably struggles very hard to win 1 wimbledon somehow, that too in his 30s or maybe his 2015 form could win him that lone wimbledon. Nadal would be the winner over Novak on Grass in this unique scenario because he picks up 2 quick wimbledons until 2003 Federer arrives, Djoker would be slowest to mature and so he would win only 1. Federer wins 10+ ... too good on Grass
US open - The most open slam but remember this is the last slam of the year, the field will not allow you to win in your 30s a lot. I am expecting Federer to dominate this slam more than other 2 but Nadal will also have his 2 titles, Novak will also cut into Nadal's tally and so he too somehow takes 2 because he is too consistent every year. I am giving 4-5 for Federer given how good he was in his peak....
RG - you’d have 2010/2011 Federer in 2015/2016 vs Djokovic. I think he wins one. Outside shot in 2011 (2006 Federer’s form with the quicker balls). Djokovic can still vulture 21/23 in this scenario? Although 2017 fed might show up to play in 2023 and battle him.
W - absolutely. Djokovic can win 2015 over 2010 fed but then 2012, 2015, 2017, 2019 are higher level than anything Djokovic showed in his 30s. 2 at the very most for Djoker I think.
USO - 04-09 Federer should win a few between 09-14, then 10/11/15 forms would be up against 2016, 2017 and 2021. He should win all 3 but let’s say he wins 2. 5+ still for Federer here.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
Ohh yeah, I forgot that stretch when Novak would be in bad form for 2 years, he cannot be in form all the time. Yes Federer will take those 2 AO titles too. Roger is just too consistent, his base level was so great, in his 20s it always needed a great performance to beat him..... and to think of these fellows judging his prime years by ATP Points, T10, T5 and such things.... laughable.... They have no idea that it always took someone great to take down Roger when he was fit and boy he was like always fit. Odds of someone not great beating him in his 20s was much lower than Djokovic's or Nadal's.
So Federer wins 20 Slams somehow in his hypothetical while Djokovic and Nadal end up below 20, Novak probably below Nadal or at best on par with Nadal in tally.
This sounds like a fair estimate.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
Nolefams are a very annoying lot. Many of them are 2011 or 2015 born fans, some of them 2018 as well. They say Federer was at his peak in 2015 or players are in their prime till retirement. Such things can boil your blood when you read it because it is against biology and insulting to all the people who went down in their late 20s never to rise again.
