RS
Bionic Poster
10 matches each slam 2009 Fed vs 2011 Djokovic?
How would you rank 2008-2012 Federer?
- Thread starter BauerAlmeida
- Start date
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
Lol 2009 Federer lost against 2009 Djokovic, but he wouldn't against 2011 Djokovic?
2009 might be slightly ahead of 2011 but that's it, not an important difference in level. If Nadal loses early in 2011 RG like he did in 2009 and Djokovic plays at the USO 2011 at the same level he did in 2009 Federer wins those two slams. The only weak spot in 2011 was Wimbledon but Tsonga played the match of his life, not crazy at all to suggest he can beat 2009 Wimbledon Federer that almost goes 2-0 down vs Roddick.
Also, in 2011 he won the WTF and went on a great winning streak post USO.
Kralingen
Bionic Poster
Not a very rosy situation for the peaking Peakovic against 6th best Federer. Imagine peak for peak…
jl809
Legend
I will not do the Wimbledon rant again. But fair to say, for peak level across the slams, Fed is undeniably clear at Wimbledon and the US Open, it’s debatable at the French Open, and tbh even at the AO it’s debatable as Djoker never faced anyone like the 2004, 2005 and 2007 versions of Feddy. So a clear win to Uncle Fedster overall
RS
Bionic Poster
What if it's not clear at any of the 4 slams including Wim and USO because in our 10 matches and 20 match series in the H2H tour is essentially different to a single match?
Kralingen
Bionic Poster
The question is not whether peak Fed is better everywhere except AO plexi and daytime miami
the question is why the mugs still claim otherwise with such aplomb
abmk
Bionic Poster
11 djoko has the edge over 09 fed at AO, among the 4 slams. RG and USO are close. Fed clearly favored at Wim.
But 2009 Fed is significantly ahead of 2011 in terms of level
AO 09 significantly better than AO 11
RG 09 ~ RG 11 (last 3 rounds better in 09, Haas and Acusaso matches earlier on pull it down to about same as 11)
your evaluation of Wm 09 is just plain wrong. Already addressed that in another post. Wim 09 fed significantly better than Wim 11 fed.
USO 11 a little better than USO 09
How on earth is only WIm a weak spot in 11? AO is also a weak spot. not even taking 1 set of Djoko (already gone 5 vs Simon, played meh vs Robredo). AO 11 was significantly worse than Wim 11 for Fed.
Federer won like 31 of 32 matches from Madrid 09 to USO 09 semi (won Madrid, RG, Wim, lost Canada QF, won Cincy, made USO final)
RS
Bionic Poster
It like a debate if a arguable higher peak vs Djokovic being a slightly better overall player and how each one balances the other one out.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
It is actually crazy to suggest that.
RS
Bionic Poster
Has a shot. Probably underdog though.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
RS
Bionic Poster
Probably Fed as he had more confidence then. Wouldn't call it a wild take though.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
Yeah, but Tsonga won 3 straight sets with ease. Roddick didn't.
2009 Federer maybe doesn't lose from 2-0 up but he maybe doesn't go 2-0 up in the first place. And in 2009 we are talking about Roddick who was always a favorable matchup for Federer, maybe against another player he doesn't win that match. Roddick is a better player than Tsonga overall and in terms of achievements, but peak vs peak it can go either way. Tsonga had a killer serve and forehand and when he was on he could put on devastating performances, like against Nadal in the AO 2008 and he does have wins in slams against the whole Big 5. In the last 3 sets, Tsonga was playing as well as ever. IIRC he didn't even face a single BP and broke Federer in each set. I think that Tsonga can win 3 sets against Federer 2009 for sure.
RS
Bionic Poster
Do you see Tsonga Wim 11 QF beating Nadal Wim 11 and Roddick himself in Wim 09?
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
Simon was 2-0 against Federer before that match and also gave him some tough matches after that. And he also took Djokovic to 5 at the AO later, I don't think that means much. Other than that Federer only lost a set before facing Djokovic during that tournament. And although Federer lost in straights one was a tie-break and the other 7-5. IIRC he served for one of the sets (or I'm getting confused with the 2008 match). He was playing pretty well and he had won Doha right before without dropping a set. I think without Djokovic he definitely wins that event. In 2009 he went to five against Berdych, in 2008 against Tipsarevic, in 2006 against Haas, in 2004 he had a close four-setter with Nalbandian and in 2010 with Davydenko, in 2005 he lost. He was not untouchable at the AO except for 2007.
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
tennislove00
Rookie
09
08
10
11
12
08
10
11
12
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Maybe because Fed was better in 2009? Djokovic and Nadal also never won 3 straight sets with ease vs Fed at Wimb. It doesn't mean much.
He did it in 2011 itself so why not?
Agree to disagree. Your last part is precisely the problem why I don't think 2011 Fed = 2009 Fed at Wimb. 2009 Fed was able to hold serve much better and it's not like Tsonga is some world class returner either. Plus, Roddick himself got broken only once in a much longer match. It really can't get any more devastating that that so don't see how Tsonga could improve on that.
The problem with the 2011 loss isn't the loss itself, but how it happened. Inexcusable to lose from 2-0 up.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Why is 2012 below 2011?
Hitman
Bionic Poster
From a level of play, 2011 was higher for me. His level at RG alone that year says it all. But he was also the only one who could really go toe to toe with the strongest possible version of Djokovic. His end of the season was very solid also.
2012 is very close to it, we are talking very small fractions.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Fair enough, but if we're talking overall seasons, there is no way 2012 is below 2011. We're talking about a season in which he won a slam, 3 masters and returned to no.1.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
I'm talking level of play here, otherwise why would I put 2010 at the bottom of the list, knowing he won AO that year?
abmk
Bionic Poster
fed dominated Simon for first 1.5 sets. a continuation of YEC 10+doha 11 form. It was after that his form fell ...for AO 11 and later till finding a wind in RG 11.
you want Fed to lose more than 3 sets before semi?
fed played a meh match vs Robredo as well.
His only real good match in AO 11 after Simon match vs the Wawa match. that's it.
see above re: form from set3 onwards of the Simon match.
the match vs djoko was just good level by top 10 standards. bleh by prime Fed standards.
yes and 2016 fed wins AO without djokovic. so what?
his level wasn't that great in 11 AO and worse in 16 AO.
how is all this relevant man? fed's overall and peak level in those years was significantly better than in 11.
04/05/07 were his best 3 levels - similar tier
06/09/10 next best 3 - next tier.
in 04 AO , fed went through a draw of Nalby/Hewitt/Ferrero/Safin losing a grand total of 2 sets. Commendable by any standards. nalby played at a level similar to AO 12 Murray, only fed AO 04 played better than djoko AO 12 to close it down in 4 sets. Also Fed was up 2 sets to love vs Nalby.
in 05 AO, fed came into the semi losing no sets - including vs Agassi in the QF. The semi was an all time classic and IMO, the best match ever
in 06 AO, fed had 10 sets of 6-0,6-1 IIRC. granted he did have some lows, like the 3rd/4th sets vs Haas and couple of others sets, but peak level was very high.
in 09 AO, fed did go 5 vs birdman, but he absolute crushed the hell out of delpo in the QF and beat Roddick convincingly in the SF. played a pretty good final as well (except serving), much better than AO 11 semi
in 10 AO, fed was maybe the only one who could've stopped Davy at that point in time and he did. davy was hot off YEC win (def. fed/nadal/sod/delpo) and doha (def fed/nadal). granted a below par 1st set from Fed, but had to play very well to come back from middle of 2nd set onwards. dominated in the SF vs tsonga, F vs Murray. Fed's last slam at prime.
djoko in 08,11-16 AO not untouchable except in 11 (08 - tsonga, 12 murray/nadal, 13-15 wawa and 16 simon). so that mean his level in AO 09 and AO 10 was good by his prime standards? (Roddick/Tsonga losses).
similarly AO 08/11 from fed though good by top 10 standards weren't good by prime level standards. 08 thanks to mono. 11 thanks to being past prime.
please do some better analysis than trying to equate 11 AO fed with prime fed or even suggesting they are anywhere near or that AO 11 was not a weak spot by fed standards or it was better than Wim 11 formwise.
abmk
Bionic Poster
fed in Wim 09 was well above fed in Wim 11.
what he said ->
also
that tsonga didn't face a single BP after being broken in the 1st set shows fed's returning/return game had declined by some distance in Wim 11 compared to Wim 09. As good as Tsonga is, his hold game isn't that good.
serve, fh, bh, return, movement, net game, confidence - everything was better in Wim 09 final than Wim 11 QF for Fed.
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
I mean, saying Federer was not that great in 2011 because Tsonga won from 2-0 down is just circular reasoning. You can say as well that he only broke in the last game in 2009 against Roddick because he wasn't playing that well. I think Tsonga was unplayable in the last 3 sets, not that Federer level dropped that much. If not he could have easily won the title. In 2012 he almost loses against Benneteau and he ended up winning the event beating Murray and Djokovic back to back. If he had lost that match (he was two points away) people would say how awful his level was that tournament, even worse than in 2010 but it evidently wasn't because he ended up winning against Murray and Djokovic. Levels obviously fluctuate between matches and during the same match. I think there was no significant level between 2009 and 2011 Federer at Wimbledon, even in 2009 has a slight edge. I think he can lose to Tsonga in 2009 and beat Roddick in 2011. Different is we compare to his 2005 level who simply wins against basically anyone.
Again, why does it show that and not that Tsonga was playing incredibly? Tsonga destroyed Nadal at a slam in arguably his best year ever, right before he had his most dominant Roland Garros run and dethroned Federer at Wimbledon (+ won the Olympics beating Djokovic on HC). He also has wins against Djokovic, Murray and Wawrinka in slams. I don't think many players beat Federer in 2011 Wimbledon, even Djokovic would have struggled if they had played in the SF. Granted not many players beat Federer at 2009 Wimbledon as well. Only in 2010, he was bad from 2003 to 2012.
And at AO 2011 obviously, he was not anywhere near his prime version like 2004, 2005, or 2007. I'm saying he always had tough matches at the AO and it used to be his 3rd best slam at the time. That going to 5 against Simon doesn't mean much in terms of level as he always had some tough matches there. He destroyed Wawrinka and he didn't do great against Djokovic but did somewhat the same as in 2008 and better than in 2016 (despite winning a set there). That Djokovic was unplayable, he had his best slam performance ever and would have beaten anyone.
abmk
Bionic Poster
because even with any player playing great (this case Tsonga - no question he played great), Roger Federer gets a BP in over 4.5 sets of tennis if he is returning anywhere near good.
what you are doing is like saying little difference b/w 2012 djoko and 2007 Djoko.
serve, fh, bh, return, movement, net game, confidence - everything was better in Wim 09 final than Wim 11 QF for Fed.
Djoko of Wim 11 couldn't have taken the racquet away from Fed/put his returning under pressure like Tsonga did. A different case.
or AO 2006/09/10 for that matter.
its not just that Fed went 5 vs Simon in AO 11, its that he had only one match worth talking about where he played well in AO 11. unlike in AO 06/AO 09/AO 10 (where he had many great stretches of play vs different opponents)
Hence me saying AO 11 worse than Wim 11 and definitely a weak spot more so than Wim 11.
Last edited:
abmk
Bionic Poster
1. Federer went close with Benn in Wim 12 solely because of back issues. 1R-2R, QF-F where back didn't flare up anywhere as much, he played well.
2. Federer's level did dip in the last 3 sets. of Wim 11 QF - its why he got broken early in each of the 3 sets + why Tsonga held without facing a BP for 4.5 sets.
This is some really sorely lacking analysis. Please do better.
Last edited:
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Not really, considering Fed couldn't hold serve to save his life and couldn't muster a single BP after set 1. We have enough data to dissipate the existence of any doubt.
Don't think Tsonga was more unplayable than Roddick was. Roddck wasn't broken for 4 hours+. Fed's return was just not up to par against Tsonga. Nor his serve. I can maybe understand Tsonga goating on serve, but why wasn't Federer able to keep his end of the deal on serve to at least push those sets to tiebreakers?
In 2009, Fed at least survived well against a couple of big servers like Soderling and Karlovic and didn't drop a set.
Well, duh, if Fed loses to Benneteau in the 3rd round of course his level would be scrutinized and deservedly so. What happened afterwards was just hindsight.
Disagree that he'd lose to Tsonga in 2009. You're overrating the Frenchman's level. And there is a difference in level. Return and serve were lacking in 2011 big time.
Similar threads
