Image Djokovic, Murray, Stan peaked during 2004-2007

[The_Order]

1. Do you think Rafa lacked confidence in the big points or elsewhere? Or are you just saying that argument could be made? Nadal played better in the first couple of sets in 2007 than Federer in 2008. We can agree to disagree but I think Federer's play freed up when his back was against the wall, Nadal tightened up at some critical junctures IIRC.

2. I remember them being quite different but I can't get onto matchstat to check right now.

3. Nadal's serve in general not just on grass has always been tough for Federer, Nadal handles the slice return better than anyone.

1. 07 set 3 TB was very average/nervy from him. He also looked shaky when he had his bp chances early in the 5th and after Fed saved them his level dipped noticeably while Fed's rose.

2. Matchstat don't even have the W from WIM08 final. Can't remeber where I got them from last time, but the same picture is painted, Fed played more aggressively in 08 F whereas Nadal played a cleaner game limiting his UEs.

3. Agreed.

 

[The_Order]

Yes you can, because his level did actually decline.

Nadal's level looked better because Federer declined. 06 was peakdal too but peak Fed WAY too good on both grass and HC.

06 final Nadal hadn't even played like 10 matches on grass but he was at peak? That was a quick rise to peak level on grass, it took Fed 5 years LOL.

 

[NatF]

1. 07 set 3 TB was very average/nervy from him. He also looked shaky when he had his bp chances early in the 5th and after Fed saved them his level dipped noticeably while Fed's rose.

2. Matchstat don't even have the W from WIM08 final. Can't remeber where I got them from last time, but the same picture is painted, Fed played more aggressively in 08 F whereas Nadal played a cleaner game limiting his UEs.

3. Agreed.

Federer served really well to save those BP's and gave Nadal nothing in the 5th. His level dipped only a small amount IMO. I can't remember the third set tiebreak off the top of my head. Regarding Federer in 2008, it's very rare for Federer in top form to go up a break and then lose a set 4-6. He through in a looser set in 2007 in the 4th but he was up 2-1 not down 1 set so it's a bit different IMO.

I've seen the winners to errors on http://web.archive.org/ for 2008 I think. Will have a check at some point.

 

[abmk]

1. Do you think Rafa lacked confidence in the big points or elsewhere? Or are you just saying that argument could be made? Nadal played better in the first couple of sets in 2007 than Federer in 2008. We can agree to disagree but I think Federer's play freed up when his back was against the wall, Nadal tightened up at some critical junctures IIRC.

2. I remember them being quite different but I can't get onto matchstat to check right now.

3. Nadal's serve in general not just on grass has always been tough for Federer, Nadal handles the slice return better than anyone.

In wimbledon 2008 final, Nadal hit a DF and BH UE in the 4th set tie-break when up 5-2. Now that was choking. Nothing like that in wimbledon 2007 final.

different from what ? tennisabstract ? the guys charting over there on tennisabstract don't even count winners correctly and get UEs horribly wrong.

Both the match stats are there on wiki itself :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Wimbledon_Championships_–_Men's_singles_final

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Wimbledon_Championships_–_Men's_singles_final

 

[KINGROGER]

06 final Nadal hadn't even played like 10 matches on grass but he was at peak? That was a quick rise to peak level on grass, it took Fed 5 years LOL.

Yeah Nadal was a prodigy he peaked starting in 05 son. Then Fed declined which allowed him to go close in 07 and win in 08.

 

[spirit95]

The peak versions of all three could have stopped him at RG 09

 

[TMF]

He would win less 2004-2010, but a lot more post 2010. He would probably end with a few more than 19...

Not to mention he would have ended with multiple FO.

 

[kishnabe]

Federer would be gobbling up Slam Titiles late age like Serena. If Murray, Djokovic and Wawrinka peaked during 03-07.

Federer peak levels would be too much for those 3. They would be like the Hewitt, Roddick and Safin of those times. Federer may lose 1-2 slams, but gain 6-8 during 13-16.

 

[The_Order]

Federer served really well to save those BP's and gave Nadal nothing in the 5th. His level dipped only a small amount IMO. I can't remember the third set tiebreak off the top of my head. Regarding Federer in 2008, it's very rare for Federer in top form to go up a break and then lose a set 4-6. He through in a looser set in 2007 in the 4th but he was up 2-1 not down 1 set so it's a bit different IMO.

I've seen the winners to errors on http://web.archive.org/ for 2008 I think. Will have a check at some point.

1st set TB was highly contested but the 3rd was pretty much one sided.

I've done an very in-depth analysis years ago when putting abmk away.

Generally, they played more aggressive in 08 than 07 with Nadal's improved serve being the key to staving Fed off. Fed had more chances in the first set than Nadal, with 3 BP opportunities compared to 1. Nadal took his chance while Fed didn't take his.

Second set, Fed went up a break but failed to hang onto it. From 4-1 Nadal won 5 consecutive games. For the first BP Nadal hit a pretty decent BH DTL in which Fed couldn't get his racket onto properly, sending a volley out. Second time he broke, Nadal hit some pretty damn good FHs to do it. It's not like Fed capitulated.

The 4th and 5th sets were a wash, split each way so the only really high quality tennis in 07 was in the first 3 sets when both of them were competitive.

In 08 the 1st set was very competitive, Fed was so close to breaking Nadal when he was serving at 5-4, it could've gone either way and definitely NO signs of mental scarring like abmk wants everyone to believe, that's absolute crap.

Second set, Fed took command and lead 4-1. That's not the sign on a mentally broken man. Nadal had to come up with some amazing play to turn it around which of course, abmk and other Fed trolls can't give him credit for.

If anything, it was the third set where Fed had BP about mid way through where he netted second serve returns and blew his opportunities, but as we all know, he was able to regroup after the rain delay and win it anyway.

Anyways, there's no point going around in circles, you'll never change your opinion and I'll never change mine. At the end of the day, the point I made still stands, the degree of difficulty in defeating Federer in a Wimbledon final (especially in that form and winning it 5 times consecutively prior) far outweighs the degree of difficulty of beating Nadal in a Wimbledon final who had never been a Wimbledon champion at that point and only played in his second final there. That's something you surely have to agree with, no?

 

[GabeT]

Not that complicated. In this scenario Fed would face much greater competition therefore he would win less. Only in an online forum would someone argue that playing against better players makes it easier to win slams.

The interesting thought experiment is, do we asume similar age-related developments? Because that could change a lot. Nadal peaked at a much earlier age. Had Nadal and Fed been of the same age, and had Nadal also peaked earlier, Fed would have been facing a multi slam winner of his own age just when he when he was about to win his first slam.

 

[abmk]

@NatF :

I've done this long before about Wim 07 and 08 finals , which is why I know what I'm saying when I say that that statistically (going by W, FEs and UEs) Nadal's performance was about the same in both the finals and federer's slightly higher in the 07 final.

Wim 07 final :

Total points in match = 323

Federer :
W+FEs = 141 ( rate = 43.65%)
UEs = 34 (rate = 10.52%)

Diff = 107/313 (33.13%)

Nadal :
W+FEs = 124 (rate = 38.39%)
UEs = 24 (7.43%)

Diff = 100/313 (30.96%)


-------------

Wim 08 final :

Total points in match = 413

Federer :
W+FEs = 177 (rate = 42.86%)
UEs = 52 (rate = 12.59%)

Diff = 125/413 (30.26%)

Nadal :
W+FEs = 157 (rate = 38.01%)
UEs = 27 (rate =6.54%)
Diff = 130/413 (31.5%)

Just a difference of ~0.55% in rafa's performance in favour of 2008
but a difference of ~2.8% in federer's performance in favour of 2007

Same opponents, no significant change in conditions, one year apart.
So a direct comparison.

 

[vex]

So many Nadal fans are babbling about Federer's complete dominance in 2004-2007 due to lack of competition as he only faced players Roddick, Hewitt, Safin etc. They claim Nadal face tougher competition mainly because of players such as Djokovic, Murray, Wawrinka.

However, if you put prime Djokovic, Murray, Wawrinka at Federer's peak time of 2004-2007, would Federer still achieve as many as 11 slams?

First of all, Murray might have a better resume than Roddick or Hewitt, but what is difference it would make if you pit Murray against peak Federer as post-prime Federer only lost to prime Murray ONE TIME in grand slams in his worst year of 2013? So I don't think Murray will affect Federer's majors number.

As for Stan, he never beat Federer in HC and grass. How was he even a tough opponent for Federer?

Now come to Djokovic, I honestly believe peak Djokovic might beat peak Federer in AO. However, in 2004-2007, AO is still Rebound Ace surface which was a litter faster than current Plexicushion, and I believe it favors Federer a little bit. So it is fairly assume Djokovic might take 1 AO from Federer. As for grass and USO, I don't think Djokovic stand a chance against a peak Federer.

So Federer might get 10 slams instead of 11 slams during 2004-2007.

In conclusion, Had Federer faced prime Nole, Murray, Stan during his peak of 2004-2007, he probably still destroyed all of them and ended up with more slams titles as Federer's longevity might help him grasp more titles in 2014-2015...

What is your thought?

Lol k.

Thread #82652839 hypothesizing that Fed magically forgot how to hit a FH starting in 2011...

2011 Djoker would trouble Fed everywhere including Wimy, he was a monster. The idea that Fed would just cruise past that guy, just lol.

 

[abmk]

as far as thread goes, I don't see Murray/Stan winning in a slam vs 04-07 fed.

Djoko/Fed would be close at AO/FO. But fed didn't win RG from 05-07 , so didn't really matter that much there tbh.

Fed's clear favorite at both Wimby/USO. I don't see djoko beating him at wimbledon.
a chance at USO, but I'd still back fed to prevail.

---

and of course federer would win more slams later on to more than make up for the couple of slams he's lost due to djoko in this time period.

 

[Dope Reign]

He would probably lose slams to all three. When you factor in the mental side. The knock on effect of losing big finals without the dazzling array of trophies to keep his little 'eart warm at night. The dramatic changes in confidence that would impact these matchups as a result of the changes in circumstances.

Stan wouldn't be facing his legendary godking compatriot who's been soaking up all the Swiss sun. It would just be the other Swiss dude.

And when I say 'lose slams', I mean all of them. I can see it now, Fed would probably quit tennis in 07 to become a perfume pirate. And from this industry he would learn of the horror and inequity prevalent in the world. As a result of this awakening he would resolve to traveling the world spreading love and joy, leaving a trail of happiness and smiling faces in his wake. blahblah messianic figure blahblah

And many years from now, as he's lying on his deathbed, would he trade it all in for one chance, just one chance.. to beat Nadal at Roland Rat catching.

And It's certainly not a given that Murray and Stan could take slams from Roland even though they did in the original timeline.

 

[True Fanerer]

Federer was a gazelle then.. Think about this

 

[vex]

And post prime 30 year old Federer owned peak Djokovic at both RG and Wimbledon.

When did this happen? You're basing this on ONE match at RG? That's ridiculous. Everyone has off days. And ONE match at WIMBY? But zero credit for WIMBY'14 and '15 for (reasons) I guess...

By this logic, Djoker OWNS Fed at AO and USO based on a couple matches from '08, '10 and '11. Instead of constantly trying to discredit a guy who will never challenge for GOAT status why don't you just acknowledge that Djoker is/was an elite ATG and worthy rival for Federer? There's no ignoring the match history, Federer does not own Djoker any more than Djoker owns him. At best you can argue one or the other would be favored on certain surfaces but even then, either is more than capable of an upset as has been proven repeatedly.

Constantly running down Fed's rivals doesn't do him any favors and comes off as super insecure.

As I said, everyone has off days (RG'11). The most impressive things about Fed are (1) that in his prime he had fewer off days than anyone else (almost nil) and (2) his talent kept him relevant all the way to age 35.

 

[KINGROGER]

When did this happen? You're basing this on ONE match at RG? That's ridiculous. Everyone has off days. And ONE match at WIMBY? But zero credit for WIMBY'14 and '15 for (reasons) I guess...

By this logic, Djoker OWNS Fed at AO and USO based on a couple matches from '08, '10 and '11. Instead of constantly trying to discredit a guy who will never challenge for GOAT status why don't you just acknowledge that Djoker is/was an elite ATG and worthy rival for Federer? There's no ignoring the match history, Federer does not own Djoker any more than Djoker owns him. At best you can argue one or the other would be favored on certain surfaces but even then, either is more than capable of an upset as has been proven repeatedly.

Constantly running down Fed's rivals doesn't do him any favors and comes off as super insecure.

As I said, everyone has off days (RG'11). The most impressive things about Fed are (1) that in his prime he had fewer off days than anyone else (almost nil) and (2) his talent kept him relevant all the way to age 35.

There's no doubt Nole owns Fed on plexicushion despite them not really playing when both were at their best.

Those 10-11 USO matches I don't feel are as important as 07-09 as Federer was past his prime and should've won 2011 anyway.

Overall I'd give the edge to Federer everywhere but plexicushion and Miami. Probably Rome to Nole too for consistency, Fed for peak level (just 1 year 2006) He led the H2H everywhere up until 2014 that's when Djokovic turned it around.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Wrong you tool. It won't be false no matter how much you whine about it. Your hero played as well as he could have the only difference was he had peak Rafa on the other side of the net and couldn't beat him. Anyone else in WIM08 and AO09 (well, except for peak Novak and only at AO) and he would've won COMFORTABLY. That's why he cried when he lost, he knew he couldn't have played better and still lost it was incredibly hard for him to accept that just like all of his fans keep crying and living in denial.

He played as well as he could, given his current level, which is different from peak level.

You have been called repeatedly on your BS and the only thing you do is to froth at the mouth.

Nothing will change the fact that Nadal never beat Federer in Majors outside of clay in Federer's peak years.

 

[The_Order]

He played as well ad he could, given his current level, which is different from peak level.

You have been called repeatedly on your BS and the only thing you do is to froth at

Nope, he played as well as he's ever played. Difference was peak Nadal was his opponent. Be told.

 

[The_Order]

When did this happen? You're basing this on ONE match at RG? That's ridiculous. Everyone has off days. And ONE match at WIMBY? But zero credit for WIMBY'14 and '15 for (reasons) I guess...

By this logic, Djoker OWNS Fed at AO and USO based on a couple matches from '08, '10 and '11. Instead of constantly trying to discredit a guy who will never challenge for GOAT status why don't you just acknowledge that Djoker is/was an elite ATG and worthy rival for Federer? There's no ignoring the match history, Federer does not own Djoker any more than Djoker owns him. At best you can argue one or the other would be favored on certain surfaces but even then, either is more than capable of an upset as has been proven repeatedly.

Constantly running down Fed's rivals doesn't do him any favors and comes off as super insecure.

As I said, everyone has off days (RG'11). The most impressive things about Fed are (1) that in his prime he had fewer off days than anyone else (almost nil) and (2) his talent kept him relevant all the way to age 35.

Fed fans have a rule:

No credit to Nadal or Novak under any circumstances.

 

[KINGROGER]

Better oppponents? Not really apart from Djokovic, who wouldn't be a problem for Fed at either Wimbledon or USO anyway. See 08 USO or 12 Wimbledon for reference.

AO definitely they'd probably split them. RG he may even help Fed if he can somehow take out Nadal for him.

He'd own Murray and Wawrinka everywhere. Even Stan at RG, see their 2011 match when Fed was still a force on clay.

 

[KINGROGER]

Nope, he played as well as he's ever played. Difference was peak Nadal was his opponent. Be told.

07 Fed would've won. Especially on Rebound Ace.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Nope, he played as well as he's ever played. Difference was peak Nadal was his opponent. Be told.

You are going against an already established opinion of when Federer played his peak level tennis, which is universally accepted to be 2004-2007.

The evidence backs this up. It is a fact that Nadal couldn’t beat Federer at the Majors outside of clay in Federer's peak.

Be strong.

 

[The_Order]

You are going against an already established opinion of when Federer played his peak level tennis, which is universally accepted to be 2004-2007.

The evidence backs this up. It is a fact that Nadal couldn’t beat Federer at the Majors outside of clay in Federer's peak.

Be strong.

There's a difference between peak years and playing at peak level. Fed didn't play peak level all year in 08 and 09 but at WIM and the AO he did.

Fed never beat peak Nadal in any major.

I am strong! Much stronger than you weak, insecure Fed worshipers.

 

[Noelan]

wow another cancer of a thread. What are you fanboys trying to prove????

 

[The_Order]

07 Fed would've won. Especially on Rebound Ace.

Hahaha keep dreaming 07 Fed struggled big time to beat Nadal at Wimbledon, he's not beating peak Rafa at the AO.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

There's a difference between peak years and playing at peak level. Fed didn't play peak level all year in 08 and 09 but at WIM and the AO he did.

Fed never beat peak Nadal in any major.

I am strong! Much stronger than you weak, insecure Fed worshipers.

Unfortunately the facts do not support your claims.

The fact that you liken Federer's serving in the AO 09 final to those in his peak performances is a testament to your "knowledge" and/or credibility.

Also, Agassi also didn't beat peak Federer at the Majors.

It is not strange when ATGs from different eras do not hold any wins in Majors against the other in his peak, so the reality is that the development of the dynamic of their rivalry is completely normal ( for Federer -Nadal rivalry outside of clay, obviously).

It is the "strong" minds like your that are trying to get to a different conclusion.

Alas, even if you literally post the same drivel a million times nothing will change.

You are wasting everybody's time for a lost cause.

It is important that you remember that Nadal never beat Federer in Majors outside of clay in Federer's peak years.

 

[KINGROGER]

Hahaha keep dreaming 07 Fed struggled big time to beat Nadal at Wimbledon, he's not beating peak Rafa at the AO.

07 FEd wasn't peak on grass but was at the AO so would've beat peak Rafa in 4.

Fed beat peak Rafa at 2 Wimbledon finals and also AO 17 final when way past his own prime and into grandpa years.

Peak Fed close to invincible on grass and HC, only Safin could beat him. Peak Rafa OTOH lost to Soderling.

 

[The_Order]

Unfortunately the facts do not support your claims.

The fact that you liken Federer's serving in the AO 09 final to those in his peak performances is a testament to your "knowledge" and/or credibility.

Fed AO04 final -> 53% 1st serves
Fed AO07 SF -> 51% 1st serves
Fed AO06 final -> 53% 1st serves

Fed AO09 final -> 52% 1st serves.

Also, Agassi also didn't beat peak Federer at the Majors.

It is not strange when ATGs from different eras do not hold any wins in Majors against the other in his peak, so the reality is that the development of the dynamic of their rivalry is completely normal ( for Federer -Nadal rivalry outside of clay, obviously).

It is the "strong" minds like your that are trying to get to a different conclusion.

Alas, even if you literally post the same drivel a million times nothing will change.

You are wasting everybody's time for a lost cause.

It is important that you remember that Nadal never beat Federer in Majors outside of clay in Federer's peak years.

You can keep posting the same crap over and over and nobody is going to listen or care. Fed never beat peak Rafa in a major. Agassi was 34-35 when Fed started playing peak tennis. Fed was 26 when Rafa started his peak. You have got nothing pal absolutely nothing. It's important that you understand that.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Fed AO04 final -> 53% 1st serves
Fed AO07 SF -> 51% 1st serves
Fed AO06 final -> 53% 1st serves

Fed AO09 final -> 52% 1st serves.



You can keep posting the same crap over and over and nobody is going to listen or care. Fed never beat peak Rafa in a major. Agassi was 34-35 when Fed started playing peak tennis. Fed was 26 when Rafa started his peak. You have got nothing pal absolutely nothing. It's important that you understand that.

From the same 2009 tournament.

Against Roddick: 66%
Against Del Potro: 70%
Against Berdych: 68%
Against Safin: 61%
Against Korolev: 60%
Against Seppi 66%

In the 2009 final Federer fired exactly the same number of aces as in the 2006 final.... In a match that was 1 set longer and featured a TB.

He fired only 3 aces less in the 2004 final.. In a match that was..... 2 sets shorter, and made only 2DF, compared to 6 in both other finals mentioned.

2) So, what is the average % for Federer in that department for all his matches at AO in the 2004-07 period?

3) By the time Federer was 26 he had dominated the game for 4 straight years. By the time Agassi was 31-32 he was living a life outside of tennis as much as inside and never had a consistent dominance for a prolonged periods.

Agassi was much younger in tennis age than his years suggest and Federer much older than his years suggest.

You writing things like "you have got absolutely nothing" only shows that you even need to write the BS you believe or want to believe to keep going.

But, don't worry, as long as you are aware that Nadal never beat Federer in Majors outside of clay in Federer's peak years everything is fine.

 

[The_Order]

From the same 2009 tournament.

Against Roddick: 66%
Against Del Potro: 70%
Against Berdych: 68%
Against Safin: 61%
Against Korolev: 60%
Against Seppi 66%

In the 2009 final Federer fired exactly the same number of aces as in the 2006 final.... In a match that was 1 set longer and featured a TB.

He fired only 3 aces less in the 2004 final.. In a match that was..... 2 sets shorter, and made only 2DF, compared to both other finals mentioned.

2) So, what is the average % for Federer in that department for all his matches with at AO in the 2004-07 period?

3) By the time Federer was 26 he had dominated the game for 4 straight years. By the time Agassi was 31-32 he was living a life outside of tennis as much as inside and never had a consistent dominance for a prolonged periods.

Agassi was much younger in tennis age than his years suggest and Federer much older than his years suggest.

You writing things like "you have got absolutely nothing" only shows that you even need to write the BS you believe or want to believe to keep going.

But, don't worry, as long as you are aware that Nadal never beat Federer in Majors outside of clay in Federer's peak years everything is fine.

LOL that's because those guys were all sh*t on their return game. Rafa's return game played a huge part in putting the pressure on Fed's serve. He didn't play anyone NEAR Rafa's level of returning prior to that final.

In 2012 Rogi had 64% 1st serves v Rafa and lost even quicker. That should give you a clear picture on how well Fed's baseline game was in that 09 final. Of course, you can't hack it that Fed playing at his best was still not good enough LOL

 

[Tennis_Hands]

LOL that's because those guys were all sh*t on their return game. Rafa's return game played a huge part in putting the pressure on Fed's serve. He didn't play anyone NEAR Rafa's level of returning prior to that final.

In 2012 Rogi had 64% 1st serves v Rafa and lost even quicker. That should give you a clear picture on how well Fed's baseline game was in that 09 final. Of course, you can't hack it that Fed playing at his best was still not good enough LOL

Federer's first serve in after this match in GS tournaments against Nadal:

RG 2011 F 63%
AO 2012 SF 64%
AO 2014 SF 66%
AO 2017 F 62%

It appears that you are wrong again.

And good luck with your claim that Federer's ground game in that final was as good as his peak years.

 

[The_Order]

Federer's first serve in after this match in GS tournaments against Nadal:

RG 2011 F 63%
AO 2012 SF 64%
AO 2014 SF 66%
AO 2017 F 62%

It appears that you are wrong again.

And good luck with your claim that Federer's ground game in that final was as good as his peak years.

Only an imbecile would think Fed's ground game wasn't as good as he ever played in that AO09 final until the 5th set.

Fed served better in later slam matches and only barely won 1 of them. How embarrassing that when he served better he got beat easier until this year's final.

Only strengthens the point I'm making, his ground game at AO09 was peak level.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Only an imbecile would think Fed's ground game wasn't as good as he ever played in that AO09 final until the 5th set.

Fed served better in later slam matches and only barely won 1 of them. How embarrassing that when he served better he got beat easier until this year's final.

Only strengthens the point I'm making, his ground game at AO09 was peak level.

A bunch of personal beliefs not supported by anything.

You already conceded your point of Federer playing at his peak, when at least one of his main weapons was way below what it usually is in similar circumstances (most certainly concerning this particular tournament).

It has already been demonstrated that it has nothing to do with Nadal.

Your efforts of biting are basically useless when talking with me, so your "until this year's final" is only accentuates how weak your argument is in the first place.

Also, it is a universally accepted truth that in general the further one moves from his peak the worse his ground game gets.

That is different from what you are saying, and, whether done on purpose or out of ignorance, you still are responsible for making false claims.

Whatever you believe Federer's ground game level was, go watch some matches between peak Federer and Agassi for a gold standard of hitting and movement.

 

[KINGROGER]

Rafa wasn't peak in 06 on grass LOL

So Rafa is peak at WIM06 but Fed isn't at AO09 and WIM08 what an absolute pile of horse dribble. Keep going clown you only make yourself look more and more stupid.

If Fed is peak in 08, Rafa is peak in 06 with a similar win %. Troll more, clown.

Fact remains, peak Fed is invincible on grass and close to invincible on HC GS except for Safin.

 

[vex]

There's no doubt Nole owns Fed on plexicushion despite them not really playing when both were at their best.

Those 10-11 USO matches I don't feel are as important as 07-09 as Federer was past his prime and should've won 2011 anyway.

Overall I'd give the edge to Federer everywhere but plexicushion and Miami. Probably Rome to Nole too for consistency, Fed for peak level (just 1 year 2006) He led the H2H everywhere up until 2014 that's when Djokovic turned it around.

Fed unquestionably deserves the edge outside slow HC. Clays prob more of a toss up. Either could upset the other tho, their levels at their best are phenomenal. That said, what separates Fed is he has maintained his level better than Djoker has throughout his career. Fed's peak years are hilarious to look at on his Wiki page. It's like a 3-4 year block of solid green Ws at the non-clay slams. Djoker didn't do enough in 2013 and 2014 to match that, he slipped from his 2011 level. Fed maintained his peak better. ALSO, Fed has set a groundbreaking standard for ATG late years with what he's done from age 33+. Yes, I include his fantastic runs to the finals of W'14,15 and USO'15. Those are as impressive as what he did this year. That's a high bar for Djoker and Rafa to match. It's not all about just 19. 19 doesn't tell the full story on Feds career. His 2015 was really something.

That's what separates him and Djoker to me. Even if Djoker got to 19 by some voodoo magic he'd need a swan song of relevancy like Fed '15 and '17. But Times pretty much up on all

 

[MS_07]

Apart from Rafa nobody stands a chance against peak Fed .. he had totally destroyed those chums in 04-07.. no doubt about that ..