How would you rank 2008-2012 Federer?

2009
2008
2011
2012
2010

2011 Fed vs 2008 Fed:

2008 Fed better: clay M1000s, Wimbledon, US Open
2011 Fed better: sunshine double (just about), RG, entire indoor season (incl Paris M1000 and WTF)
2008 == 2011 - AO, summer HCs
 
Mike Sams said:
He played great tennis in 2008 and 2009 as well. Just because he lost to Nadal across multiple majors doesn't mean Federer wasn't playing his best. It was more so a tactical issue and a difficult style for him to deal with at the time. Meanwhile he was blowing through everyone else on the tour with ease for the most part.
Click to expand...
True, but the Delpo loss at the USO sours it a bit. Don't see 2004-2007 Fed losing to Delpo in a major final.
 
RS said:
Who wins these matchups?

1. Djokovic RG 08 SF vs Soderling RG 10 SF
2. Djokovic RG 08 SF vs Wawrinka RG 13 4R
3. Roddick Wim 07 vs Nadal Wim 19
4. Federer Wim 08 final vs Federer Wim 09 final
5. Ancic Wim 06 QF vs Djokovic Wim 13 final
Click to expand...
I'd rather pick Soderling RG 2010 QF vs Djokovic RG 2008 SF. Soderling could actually win this one.
 
RS said:
Who wins these matchups?

1. Djokovic RG 08 SF vs Soderling RG 10 SF
2. Djokovic RG 08 SF vs Wawrinka RG 13 4R
3. Roddick Wim 07 vs Nadal Wim 19
4. Federer Wim 08 final vs Federer Wim 09 final
5. Ancic Wim 06 QF vs Djokovic Wim 13 final
Click to expand...

Djokovic
Djokovic
Nadal
Federer ‘08
Djokovic

4 of the 5 were too e z.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS
Mike Sams said:
Meanwhile he was blowing through everyone else on the tour with ease for the most part.
Click to expand...
That is not true. He was losing in those years against players he would never have lost to in 2004-2007, like Blake, Simon, Karlovic, and even Roddick. Granted, many of these losses occurred outside the Slams, but it still shows that he did lose something moving into 2008.
 
Federev said:
How do you put 2012 behind 2011?
Click to expand...

It is I think possible to argue 2011 was better in the biggest tournaments: AO 12>11, RG 11>12, WB 12>11, USO 11>12, YEC 11>12, 2011 was perhaps better overall in the topmost events. 2012 was clearly way better in masters though hence better overall across the season. (Lesser tournaments, Fed won 2 titles in either season, 2012 he just played and lost more of them: 1 loss in 2011 vs 2 losses + 1 w/o in 2012.)
 
Federev said:
How do you put 2012 behind 2011?
Click to expand...

2011 Fed was better at RG and USO by quite a lot IMO, same ballpark at the AO.

Tsonga played a brilliant match against Fed in ‘11, I don’t think that version was much worse than ‘12 Fed, if at all.


‘11 was better at WTF and the rest of the indoor season, ‘12 was better at the spring HC season (really just IW) and the clay masters.

I’d favour ‘11 Fed to win two slams in ‘12 (all else remaining the same, of course) whereas I’m not sure ‘12 Fed would even be odds-on to win one in ‘11.

Results-wise, ‘12 was clearly better of course.
 
Last edited:
AnOctorokForDinner said:
It is I think possible to argue 2011 was better in the biggest tournaments: AO 12>11, RG 11>12, WB 12>11, USO 11>12, YEC 11>12, 2011 was perhaps better overall in the topmost events. 2012 was clearly way better in masters though hence better overall across the season. (Lesser tournaments, Fed won 2 titles in either season, 2012 he just played and lost more of them: 1 loss in 2011 vs 2 losses + 1 w/o in 2012.)
Click to expand...

‘12 Fed was better at Wimby based on results, form is inconclusive considering he was two points away from getting bounced by Benneteau in R3 and none of his other opponents in either year played as well as Tsonga did from sets 3-5.
 
AnOctorokForDinner said:
It is I think possible to argue 2011 was better in the biggest tournaments: AO 12>11, RG 11>12, WB 12>11, USO 11>12, YEC 11>12, 2011 was perhaps better overall in the topmost events. 2012 was clearly way better in masters though hence better overall across the season. (Lesser tournaments, Fed won 2 titles in either season, 2012 he just played and lost more of them: 1 loss in 2011 vs 2 losses + 1 w/o in 2012.)
Click to expand...


TheFifthSet said:
2011 Fed was better at RG and USO by quite a lot IMO, same ballpark at the AO.

Tsonga played a brilliant match against Fed in ‘11, I don’t think that version was much worse than ‘12 Fed, if at all.


‘11 was better at WTF and indoor season, ‘12 was better at spring HC season (really just IW) and the clay masters

I’d favour ‘11 Fed to win two slams in ‘12 (all else remaining the same, of course) whereas I’m not sure ‘12 Fed would even be odds-on to win one.

Results-wise, ‘12 was clearly better of course.
Click to expand...

Good point fellas.

And truth is ‘12 was my first year watching Fed consistently.

Growing up w Mac and Connors as a little kid, I was bored by tennis from Sampras on w the serve dominated game and then Fed winning everything till 2010.

But 2012 enticed me w the question of wether a former older champion could ever get back to the top when 2 younger guys had pushed him to the side.

I’m a sucker for the underdog story

Turns out he could.

So 2012 was special for me as a fan and after that I was hooked.
 
TheFifthSet said:
‘12 Fed was better at Wimby based on results, form is inconclusive considering he was two points away from getting bounced by Benneteau in R3 and none of his other opponents in either year played as well as Tsonga did from sets 3-5.
Click to expand...

Eh, Tsonga maintained a good level but no BPs in 24 consecutive return games is peak roflmao awful stat. Federer obviously struggled in 3R-4R 2012 with a back spasm but his QF+ level was properly high (besides the first set of the final).
 
Federev said:
How do you put 2012 behind 2011?
Click to expand...

I believe stopping Novak's streak at RG11 and having MPs against him in the USO11 SF makes it hard for me to pick 2012 over 2011. It's like almost being Nadal in '06 against prime Fed and being the only one to beat him in multiple matches that year (with the exception of Murray in Cincy). He could have been his dark horse.
 
AnOctorokForDinner said:
Eh, Tsonga maintained a good level but no BPs in 24 consecutive return games is peak roflmao awful stat. Federer obviously struggled in 3R-4R 2012 with a back spasm but his QF+ level was properly high (besides the first set of the final).
Click to expand...

25 points played at 0/15/30-30 or Deuce in service games after that one…Tsonga hit a W or forced an error in 20 of them.

He also got 21 out of 25 (84%) first serves in for those selected points…hard to top that GOAT-tier clustering.

Fed should’ve done better still, but Tsonga was torturously consistent any time Fed got close to BP.
 
Last edited:
TheFifthSet said:
25 points where Fed got to 30 or Deuce in service games after that one…Tsonga hit a W or forced an error in 20 of them.

He also got 21 out of 25 (84%) first serves in for those selected points…hard to top that GOAT-like clustering.

Fed could’ve done better but that was torturous consistency from Tsonga any time Fed got close to a whiff.
Click to expand...

My recollect is Federer lacking the inspiration/spark/extra intensity in tough moments that he had in 2012 - though granted perhaps credit should go mostly to Tsonga for his serving and play.
 
Last edited:
NatF said:
My recollect is Federer larking the inspiration/spark/extra intensity in tough moments that he had in 2012 - though granted perhaps credit should go mostly to Tsonga for his serving and play.
Click to expand...

Fair, and that could be it, but I lean more towards it being a mix of ridiculous play from Tsonga and surreal clustering/dare I say a bit of luck. I distinctly remember FUMING watching the match in real time and expecting Tsonga to crap out a winner or unreturned serve whenever Fed got a look by the end of the fourth…but with the gift of hindsight thought maybe youthful me was StrongRuling…then I scanned the point-by-point recently and couldn’t believe my eyes lol. I mean 21/25 first serves in (let’s remove all 40-30’s from the equation if we wanna limit it to the high-stakes points: 14/15 first serves in from a position where losing the next point brings up BP) from a big server like Jo speaks for itself.

I still of course think Fed should’ve done better than 1 BP in 5 sets, but that was a once-in-blue-moon convergence of things.
 
Last edited:
TheFifthSet said:
Fair, and that could be it, but I lean more towards it being a mix of ridiculous play from Tsonga and surreal clustering/dare I say a bit of luck. I distinctly remember FUMING watching the match in real time and expecting Tsonga to crap out a winner or unreturned serve whenever Fed got a look by the end of the fourth…but with the gift of hindsight thought maybe youthful me was StrongRuling…then I scanned the point-by-point recently and couldn’t believe my eyes lol. I mean 21/25 first serves in (let’s remove all 40-30’s from the equation if we wanna limit it to the high-stakes points: 14/15 first serves in from a position where losing the next point brings up BP) from a big server like Jo speaks for itself.

I still of course think Fed should’ve done better than 1 BP in 5 sets, but that was a once-in-blue-moon convergence of things.
Click to expand...
Fraud just needed to hold serve all the way through in the 3rd or 4th and then dared Tsonga to clutch a TB or keep up his level at the end of sets. That's the biggest flaw with that match. Giving Tsonga early breaks in all 3 sets allowed him to get in a crazy groove and didn't test him in pressure situations.

But yes a good point about serving clustering. Always the point I harp on with Roddick 2009, who of course did it for much longer in higher pressure situations (both in the match and it being a final, obviously 0 chance Tsonga could have reproduced that in a final) against a better Fed than Tsonga did.
 
BauerAlmeida said:
2009 he made all four finals, so there's a case for being first. But looking more closely at it:


- Narrowly escapes Haas and del Potro in RG. Especially Haas, he was one point away from virtually losing.
- Is outplayed by Roddick in Wimbledon, should have been 2-0 down and couldn't break serve until the last game. Roddick outplaying him from the baseline is not something that happens often, if ever.

And at Bo3 he wasn't very impressive.

In 2011 he didn't win any slams, but lost to Djokovic at the AO when he was playing like crazy. Lost to Nadal at RG, I think he played better RG 2011 than 2009 for sure. Lost at the USO to Djokovic playing great again, probably better than 2009. The weak spot was Wimbledon but Tsonga played like crazy, his Wimbledon 2009 self probably loses that match too. Main difference is Nadal and Djokovic being stronger that year, especially Djokovic.

2008 he could have won Wimbledon if he converts that BP in the fifth. He definitely can win Wimbledon in 2008 and lose in 2009, both matches can go either way but Nadal is better than Roddick. At the USO he was brilliant vs Djokovic and Murray in the SF and F.

You really can make a case for either. Results-wise 2009 is the best, level of tennis not sure.
Click to expand...

The Haas match at the FO was mostly mental. Rafa had gone out and there was a lot of pressure, suddenly, on Fed. I think he handled it well when push came to shove.
 
Third Serve said:
That is not true. He was losing in those years against players he would never have lost to in 2004-2007, like Blake, Simon, Karlovic, and even Roddick. Granted, many of these losses occurred outside the Slams, but it still shows that he did lose something moving into 2008.
Click to expand...
In 07 he lost to Volandri and Canas (twice) and Nalbandian (twice).
 
mike danny said:
True, but the Delpo loss at the USO sours it a bit. Don't see 2004-2007 Fed losing to Delpo in a major final.
Click to expand...
Federer almost lost to Delpo in 2009 RG and 2012 RG.
And Federer had all sorts of trouble against Delpo at Olympics 2012, winning 3-6, 7-6 (5), 19-17. At 4 hours, 26 minutes.
Del Potro was no joke at his best. I could see him having a great chance against young Federer.
 
Mike Sams said:
In 07 he lost to Volandri and Canas (twice) and Nalbandian (twice).
Click to expand...

Nalbandian is not comparable to the other players AT ALL. Cañas were the "strangest" losses but he was on a 41-match winning streak, he had to lose at some point.

Volandri was odd, but on clay not that surprising as he was prone to the odd loss. Gasquet in 2005, Costa in 2004. One match it can happen, even in 2005 and 2006 he had to save MPs against Rochus and (past it) Ferrero on grass and hard.

There was a clear decline between 2007 and 2008 in terms of matches won and loss:

68-9
66-15
 
BauerAlmeida said:
Nalbandian is not comparable to the other players AT ALL. Cañas were the "strangest" losses but he was on a 41-match winning streak, he had to lose at some point.

Volandri was odd, but on clay not that surprising as he was prone to the odd loss. Gasquet in 2005, Costa in 2004. One match it can happen, even in 2005 and 2006 he had to save MPs against Rochus and (past it) Ferrero on grass and hard.

There was a clear decline between 2007 and 2008 in terms of matches won and loss:

68-9
66-15
Click to expand...
Well a decline from one season to the next is quite common. It's happened to the big 3 many times.
 
Mike Sams said:
Federer almost lost to Delpo in 2009 RG and 2012 RG.
And Federer had all sorts of trouble against Delpo at Olympics 2012, winning 3-6, 7-6 (5), 19-17. At 4 hours, 26 minutes.
Del Potro was no joke at his best. I could see him having a great chance against young Federer.
Click to expand...
2012 Fed is no 2004-2007 Fed.
 
BauerAlmeida said:
2009 he made all four finals, so there's a case for being first. But looking more closely at it:


- Narrowly escapes Haas and del Potro in RG. Especially Haas, he was one point away from virtually losing.
- Is outplayed by Roddick in Wimbledon, should have been 2-0 down and couldn't break serve until the last game. Roddick outplaying him from the baseline is not something that happens often, if ever.

And at Bo3 he wasn't very impressive.

In 2011 he didn't win any slams, but lost to Djokovic at the AO when he was playing like crazy. Lost to Nadal at RG, I think he played better RG 2011 than 2009 for sure. Lost at the USO to Djokovic playing great again, probably better than 2009. The weak spot was Wimbledon but Tsonga played like crazy, his Wimbledon 2009 self probably loses that match too. Main difference is Nadal and Djokovic being stronger that year, especially Djokovic.

2008 he could have won Wimbledon if he converts that BP in the fifth. He definitely can win Wimbledon in 2008 and lose in 2009, both matches can go either way but Nadal is better than Roddick. At the USO he was brilliant vs Djokovic and Murray in the SF and F.

You really can make a case for either. Results-wise 2009 is the best, level of tennis not sure.
Click to expand...

08 vs 09:

Fed was way better in AO 09 than in AO 08
ditto RG 09 than in RG 08 (especially last 3 rounds)
Wim 09 fed was a little more confident than in Wim 08. See more below


09 vs 11

similarly fed was way better in AO 09 than in AO 11

clearly better in Wim 09 than in Wim 11. takes that match vs tsonga. to think fed who was in his prime and broke Karlovic twice clean in first 2 sets would probably loses to 11 Wim tsonga is just sad analysis of 2009 Wim fed.

federer should've won set1 vs Roddick and lost set2. He won 4+ shot rallies in Wim 09 133 to 113, thus comfortably outplaying Roddick from the outline. Only people who've never re-watched the match/expecting fed to beat Roddick convincingly everytime can think Roddick outplayed him from the baseline.

2009 USO also better than 2011 USO even though 2009 final is similar to 2011 semi

2009 RG last 3 rounds > last 3 rounds of 2011 RG. granted the Haas/Acusaso matches in 4R/2R were below par in 2009.

2009 is easily level wise the best, not even close.
 
Last edited:
TheFifthSet said:
2011 Fed was better at RG and USO by quite a lot IMO, same ballpark at the AO.

Tsonga played a brilliant match against Fed in ‘11, I don’t think that version was much worse than ‘12 Fed, if at all.


‘11 was better at WTF and the rest of the indoor season, ‘12 was better at the spring HC season (really just IW) and the clay masters.

I’d favour ‘11 Fed to win two slams in ‘12 (all else remaining the same, of course) whereas I’m not sure ‘12 Fed would even be odds-on to win one in ‘11.

Results-wise, ‘12 was clearly better of course.
Click to expand...

AO 12 vs AO 11 - not really. Fed cruised through to the semi without losing a set in AO 12 with no real dips in form. AO 11 had that 5-setter vs Simon and played a meh match at best vs Robredo. A little better in the Nadal 12 semi than the Djoko 11 semi. Overall AO 12 is better than AO 11 from Fed by significant enough distance.

Wim 12 fed just clustered the points better vs Djoko+murray than he did vs Tsonga. Goes to Wim 12 IMO. (The Benn/Malisse matches dips were due to back pain of course)
 
abmk said:
AO 12 vs AO 11 - not really. Fed cruised through to the semi without losing a set in AO 12 with no real dips in form. AO 11 had that 5-setter vs Simon and played a meh match at best vs Robredo. A little better in the Nadal 12 semi than the Djoko 11 semi. Overall AO 12 is better than AO 11 from Fed by significant enough distance.

Wim 12 fed just clustered the points better vs Djoko+murray than he did vs Tsonga. Goes to Wim 12 IMO. (The Benn/Malisse matches dips were due to back pain of course)
Click to expand...

Agree but FO and USO advantages for 2011 are probably bigger. Bit more consistent and better in non slams in 2012 but lacking the YEC of course.
 
Last edited:
2009 top IMHO.

The rest are below even if it's not by a lot it's tough to choose. Funny enough the highest level of the rest may be 2011 which Federer went unrewarded despite a pretty high level at every slam.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ChrisRF said:
2017 was clearly the best year after 2007 (with 2 Slams and 3 Masters). It was a combination of 2 factors:
1) Great new coach Ljubicic bringing back his all-court game (after the one-sided net-rushing approach by Edberg and especially Annacone), so that he finally used the new racquet to his full advantage.
2) Being fully motivated in every tournament after half a year off.

In 2008 he had mono, and this essentially ended his "winning everything" approach. Then in 2009 he was great again at the Slams, but seemingly didn't care much for everything else. Really, all the time from 2008-2013 he won very few tournaments by his standards, especially outside the Slams (only exception was 2012).

2011 was actually a horrible season. Between Doha right at the beginning and the late indoor season he won exactly NOTHING, not even a 250 tournament. A great showing at RG doesn't change too much here to be honest.

In 2014 he had the new racquet and seemed to care for smaller tournaments again. Likely he was happy being back to win anything after 2013 at first. Then in 2015 he was in great form and was mainly only stopped by peak Djokovic.
Click to expand...
By numbers but the competition was better for Federer in 2008-12 and even 2014-15 so many great runs kept getting denied.
 
By overall winning percentage, it's 2012 > 2011 > 2009 > 2010 > 2008

By winning percentage in Slams, it's 2009 > 2008 > 2010 > 2012 > 2011

I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. He did great in Slams in 2008 but he got walloped by the field in other events (didn't win a Masters title). His level dropped and the field's overall level increased in 2008. That was the combination that pretty much put a halt to his domination. He was better in 2009, all things considered, although the field was still tough. To me, that means he played a higher level than 2008. In 2010, he was either hot or cold and in this year, the level of the field wasn't as high as 2008 and 2009; 2012 is being underrated in here imo. He was very good that year and in 2011, although we know why he didn't win a Slam in 2011. This is my ranking on level alone after considering all this:

2009
2012
2011
2010
2008
 
NoleFam said:
By overall winning percentage, it's 2012 > 2011 > 2009 > 2010 > 2008

By winning percentage in Slams, it's 2009 > 2008 > 2010 > 2012 > 2011

I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. He did great in Slams in 2008 but he got walloped by the field in other events (didn't win a Masters title). His level dropped and the field's overall level increased in 2008. That was the combination that pretty much put a halt to his domination. He was better in 2009, all things considered, although the field was still tough. To me, that means he played a higher level than 2008. In 2010, he was either hot or cold and in this year, the level of the field wasn't as high as 2008 and 2009; 2012 is being underrated in here imo. He was very good that year and in 2011, although we know why he didn't win a Slam in 2011. This is my ranking on level alone after considering all this:

2009
2012
2011
2010
2008
Click to expand...
Winning percebtage or not, he was far better in the slams in 2011 as a whole.

And would definitely not place 2008 below 2010.
 
Another way of putting it:

  1. Grass: 09=08 > 12 > 11 > 10. No way does 09 grasserer look as impressive if he faces 08 Ned in the final instead of 09 ARod
  2. Clay: 09=08 (08 would be clear except for the RG final) > 11 > 12 > 10
  3. HC: 09 > 08 = 10 = 11 = 12

Splitting them on HC is very hard because Fed had 2 slam-winning years where he was crap outside of that slam on outdoor HC (08 and 10). 10 and 11 had a much higher level on indoor HC than 08 and 12, but 12 despite being slamless was better outdoors overall than 08 and 10. So I’m calling a tie.

09 clearly top with 08 just behind, then 11 and 12 pretty close, then 10 clearly last, which isn’t too bad for a year where he won the AO and WTF
 
mike danny said:
Winning percebtage or not, he was far better in the slams in 2011 as a whole.

And would definitely not place 2008 below 2010.
Click to expand...
That's why I said the truth is somewhere in the middle.

He was better in AO and RG in 2010, and better in W and USO in 2008. Then onto the other events. Won WTF and a Masters in 2010 (beat Murray, Djokovic, Soderling and Nadal at WTF) and won no Masters in 2008 and lost in the RR at WTF. This is why it goes to 2010 for me.
 
abmk said:
AO 12 vs AO 11 - not really. Fed cruised through to the semi without losing a set in AO 12 with no real dips in form. AO 11 had that 5-setter vs Simon and played a meh match at best vs Robredo. A little better in the Nadal 12 semi than the Djoko 11 semi. Overall AO 12 is better than AO 11 from Fed by significant enough distance.

Wim 12 fed just clustered the points better vs Djoko+murray than he did vs Tsonga. Goes to Wim 12 IMO. (The Benn/Malisse matches dips were due to back pain of course)
Click to expand...


Well I’d definitely say AO 12 is better but Fed was miles better at RG and USO in ‘11, whereas I don’t think ‘11 AO Fed does much better/worse in ‘12 — hence same ballpark, from a bigger picture perspective rather than parsing through each match. Same with Wimby, I’ll give Wimby ‘12 the edge but I could absolutely see ‘11 Fed beating ‘12 Djokorray.
 
Lets look at it this way by year - for slams, YEC and other non-slam events:

slams:

AO: 2010 > 2009 > 2012 > 2008~2011

RG: 2009 ~ 2011 > 2010 ~ 2008 > 2012
emphasis on last 3 rounds mean 2009 > 2011 for last 3 rounds, but Haas/Acusaso matches bring down 2009 to make it about even. 2008 higher potential level/peak level, but lesser inconsistency in 2010.

Wim: 2009 > 2008 > 2012 > 2011 > 2010

USO: 2008 > 2009 > 2011 > 2010 > 2012

so in slams:

2009 > 2008 > 2010 ~ 2011 > 2012

YEC:

2010 > 2011 > 2009 > 2012 > 2008 (The Davy match in 2009 YEC semi was a nailbiting 3rd setter. while level was close enough in final in YEC 12, fed choked big time in both sets to not get even a set)

others:

2008: Hamburg final+Monte carlo final+Madrid semi+basel+halle the ones worth mentioning
2009: Rome semi just about worth mentioning. Madrid+Cincy wins of course were great.
2010: madrid final+Canada final+Cincy win worth mentioning. Shanghai - dominating Sod+djoko before the final shocker. Stockholm and Basel wins worth mentioning. Paris semi too. Monfils just about got the better off him saving Mps.
2011: doha win, IW semi, madrid semi worth mentioning. Paris and Basel were great.
2012: dominant at Rotterdam, Dubai, Indian Wells for most part. madrid was both dominance+couple of close matches. cincy was great. London Oly pre-final worth a mention.

2012 > 2009 > 2010 > 2008 > 2011


Summary:

slams: 2009 > 2008 > 2010 ~ 2011 > 2012
YEC: 2010 > 2011 > 2009 > 2012 > 2008
others: 2012 > 2009 > 2010 > 2008 > 2011
 
TheFifthSet said:
Well I’d definitely say AO 12 is better but Fed was miles better at RG and USO in ‘11, whereas I don’t think ‘11 AO Fed does much better/worse in ‘12 — hence same ballpark, from a bigger picture perspective rather than parsing through each match. Same with Wimby, I’ll give Wimby ‘12 the edge but I could absolutely see ‘11 Fed beating ‘12 Djokorray.
Click to expand...

fair enough for AO, but I see Wim 12 fed edging Tsonga of Wim 11 that he didn't in Wim 11.
 
Who wins these matchups?

1. Agassi AO 04 SF vs Djokovic AO 19 final
2. Agassi AO 04 SF vs Federer AO 06 final
3. Federer AO 13 QF vs Nadal AO 17 QF
4. Del Potro RG 09 SF vs Nadal RG 11 SF
5. Tsonga AO 08 SF vs Djokovic AO 15 final
6. Djokovic RG 14 final vs Nadal RG 18 final
7. Del Potro Wim 11 4R vs Nadal Wim 18 QF
8. Wawrinka AO 13 vs Djokovic AO 19
 
People putting 2011 Fed above 2009 Fed are hilarious.


If 2009 Fed faced 2011 Djokovic, Djokovic wouldn’t be winning any slams, that’s for sure
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
What order would you rank the 15 seasons of the Big 4 - 2004-2018>?
Replies
40
Views
2K
UnderratedSlam
UnderratedSlam
Hitman
Fedovic - Rank the slam H2H matches
Replies
25
Views
615
Hitman
Hitman
M
How did Federer maintain consistency from 2012-2015 as 2008-2011?
Replies
5
Views
318
helterskelter
H
SABRvolley
Ranking Nadal’s seasons on all surfaces (and overall)
Replies
44
Views
2K
messiahrobins
M
T
Hypothetical Peak Federer vs Hypothetical Peak Djokovic slam count
Replies
22
Views
1K
Mazz Retic
Mazz Retic
Back
Top