Is Djokovic better than Federer on every surface?
- Thread starter Madinolf
- Start date
Even his own coach Boris Becker have said Nole wouldn't be successful in an serve/volley era, but Federer would flourish.
Spencer Gore
Legend
People really need to stop spreading the fake information that the Wimbledon grass of 2001 was the old fast grass. It wasn't. It was the first year of the new slower grass. Of course, it wasn't really the "speed" of the grass that changed, it was the bounce. It was pretty clear on the ground that the bounce was completely different. This contributed to the terrible problems Sampras had throughout the tournament, including being stretched to five sets by Britain's Barry Cowan in the second round.
CCPass
Semi-Pro
True - he’s surprised Novak three times at 40-15 in the biggest matches.
fundrazer
G.O.A.T.
Is Santoro better than Safin on every surface?
Yugram
Legend
Small sample size. Safin sucked to Santoro for 7 matches. Federer sucked to Djokovic half of his life.
D
Deleted member 743561
Guest
How are you back?
CCPass
Semi-Pro
Results on each court surface
- Hard courts: Djokovic, 20–18
- Outdoor: Djokovic, 14–13
- Indoor: Djokovic, 6–5
- Grass courts: Djokovic, 3–1
- Clay courts: Tied, 4–4
NoleIsBoat
Hall of Fame
The data is clear. Djokovic owns Federer everywhere.
fundrazer
G.O.A.T.
And I can also say that the different in head to head results per surface is not significant enough to determine who is better.
Also if you're going to continue acting like a tool I'm sure you'll be earning a second vacation from talktennis very soon.
CCPass
Semi-Pro
And 2 RG titles and beating Nadal at RG twice break the only tie on clay. No excuses really.
CCPass
Semi-Pro
Because numbers don’t matter. Elegance does. We all saw Rolex ad.
fundrazer
G.O.A.T.
I'm saying the difference in head to head right now is not significant enough to clearly say who is better. It's also not the best indicator of who is better period.
A dumber argument would be like my saying who is better in grand slam finals, Novak or Stan? What's the head to head in their slam finals?
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
He got banned but magically rose from the dead somehow.
Madinolf
Rookie
@Third Serve you believe Fed is better on all surfaces? 
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
He's not better on grass. HC it depends on which ones. On clay Djokovic has the edge.
Rago
Hall of Fame
Thanks for the laugh; not buying what you're selling.
CCPass
Semi-Pro
Sample size. You will be smarter learning some statistics.
He will need 3 more Wimbledon titles to beat Federer. I agree that 2020 being cancelled is a factor and he would have been the favourite, but we cannot just give him the title for tournament that wasn’t played. Who knows, maybe even Nadal would have won or Djokovic would have his disqualification already there or whatever.
And with 8-8 titles Federer would clearly be on top with 3 additional finals and 9 more grasscourt titles overall.
And with 8-8 titles Federer would clearly be on top with 3 additional finals and 9 more grasscourt titles overall.
Last edited:
BGod
G.O.A.T.
Grass still goes for Fed as we're talking an entire surface not just Wimbledon so those 10 Halle titles cannot be ignored. For hard court the question is "better" and I'd say they're about equal. Novak finally won a Cincy title after like 7 final losses mostly to Fed. The 9 AOs I get look great but he also only has 3 USOs. I don't entirely look at it as just 12-11 hard court Slams, Fed had more competitive draws, streaks and still longevity, as well as the Masters circuit and indoor. So Novak is even on hard and better on clay.
D
Deleted member 770948
Guest
AO is the only slam Djokovic ever beat prime Federer at (2008).
While Federer beat prime Djokovic at Roland Garros (2011), Wimbledon (2012) and had match points at 2010 and 2011 US Opens.
While Federer beat prime Djokovic at Roland Garros (2011), Wimbledon (2012) and had match points at 2010 and 2011 US Opens.
D
Deleted member 771911
Guest
I'm not sure. I don 't know if he's won five times in a row at any slam. Can't be bothered to check, tbh.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
If anything I'd say he's slightly ahead on hard and clearly ahead on clay.
Madinolf
Rookie
abmk
Bionic Poster
I see the nutjob delusional Djoko fanwhackos are in full flight
fed > djokovic everywhere at slams except on slow plexi, Deal with it Djoko whackoboy
fed won their prime to prime match at RG in 11. won vs delpo in RG 09, but djoko lost to Stan in RG 15. Similar level opponents.
on grass, federer ROFLSTOMPS on djokovic , absolutely ROFLSTOMPS
at USO, fed lost only 1 set at his prime in 3 matches. 7th best USO fed had MPs vs best version of Djoker there. Of course, prime to prime, Fed ROFLSTOMPs Djokovic there as well.
Djokovic is the biggest beneficiary of worst era EVER. 2015-2021.
SecondToNone
Semi-Pro
Yet can't convert match points.
abmk
Bionic Poster
past his prime fed beat prime Djoko in 4 sets in Wim 12 semi.
Nadal_Django
Legend
Yet Djokovic dominates Federer in real matches. Go figure
Nadal_Django
Legend
Grass Slam H2H 3-1
HC Slam H2H 7-4
Clay Slam H2H 1-1
Most of Federers 6 Slam wins came against the puppy version of Djokovic. Federer last Slam win against Nole was in 2012, almost a decade ago. Tells you everything you need to know about that "rivalry" really.
HC Slam H2H 7-4
Clay Slam H2H 1-1
Most of Federers 6 Slam wins came against the puppy version of Djokovic. Federer last Slam win against Nole was in 2012, almost a decade ago. Tells you everything you need to know about that "rivalry" really.
I doubt that the two-handed strokes of Djokovic and Nadal would have worked using the old wood racquets. Not enough reach and range, angled shots like they depend on would not come off those older smaller racquet heads. Difficult to approach the net with a two-handed stroke, Segura would use one hand near the net. The new racquets have a jumbo-sized head and are much lighter than the wood.
Enceladus
Legend
RelentlessAttack
Hall of Fame
The reality is when you look at absolute peak for peak, are any of these guys really that far apart on any surface?
Let’s look at the clear weakest of the 3 on 2/3 surfaces, Nadal. Is Wimbledon 07/08 really that far from peak Federer/Djokovic at Wimbledon? Obviously not.
Nadal has beaten Federer a few times on HC including occasionally during Fed’s prime. Nadal managed to play Djokovic down to the wire at AO12, and beat Djokovic in the middle of his prime at US13. AO09 is better than either version, again, is he really that far off either of them on HC at their best?
On the flip side, let’s look at clay, where Nadal’s overall resume is clearly better than the other 2. Federer came within an inch of beating Nadal in maybe their highest quality match ever at Rome 06. Djokovic 2009 stretched the best ever Nadal (MC08-Madrid 09) to the absolute limit in the 09 clay trilogy and then took a nearly as good Nadal to the limit again in 2013 at RG. Yes, Nadal is clearly better than the other two on this surface by a margin that allows him to win most of the time, but peak for peak they came very close.
Federer and Djokovic fans have already argued ad nauseam about these two, so not much to add except to comment on the obvious to complete the point. Baby Djokovic was able to take it to peak/prime Federer in MTL 07, and mostly bottled the USO due to nerves, before beating monoFed convincingly en route to his maiden slam. On the flip side, an older Federer has played peak and prime Djokovic too close on too many occasions and beaten him badly in some important BO3 matches. At the end of his prime he decisively beat a peak Djokovic at 2012 Wimbledon. And split RG with him when they overlapped as late prime Fed vs peak Djokovic.
Some could argue that Djokovic’s grass peak must come in this stretch from 2014-21 where he’s won 5/7 of the editions played. But when you look at those, he scraped through an older Federer in 2014, barely scraped through a heavily declined Nadal in 2018 who had already played a marathon against Del Potro while getting favorable conditions (roof). And then in 2019 we all know about 40-15 and coming within less than 1cm of losing that match to a 38-9 yo Federer.
Some other interesting notes:
- Djokovic AO08 is the only interruption in Federer’s slam final streak from W05-AO10
- Federer broke Nadal’s historic clay winning streak and fed him a bagel in that same match
- Djokovic broke peak 2008 Nadal’s winning streak in Cincinnati
- Federer broke peak Djokovic 2011s winning streak at RG
- Nadal broke Federer’s Wimbledon streak
- Nadal dealt several important losses to Peakovic in 2012-13
Clearly, it’s not coincidence that at their very best, they were pretty much only stopped by each other
They’ve all peaked at slightly different times and dealt with slightly different circumstances. Federer had time to build confidence against a somewhat weaker field before Nadal and Djokovic arrived.
Nadal got sandwiched between two other ATGs and never got his own era but could always fall back on his clay supremacy.
Djokovic had to battle his way in against two prime ATGs but then has gotten to enjoy one of the softest eras ever the past few years.
I’m not really sure how anyone could look at the course of their careers and come to any conclusion other than that at their very best, these guys are basically equal. All trolling aside, there’s no way to honestly pick a “BOAT” between these 3. There’s also been 3 other guys in the past 20 years that have managed to achieve a peak level close to their highest quality for very brief moments (Wawrinka, Safin, Del Potro). I wouldn’t put Murray in that group due to lack of weapons. There were favorable circumstances in most of his big wins - Del Potro softening up Djokovic at W13 and Federer at Olympics 12, crazy wind at US12.
Djokovic and Federer clearly exceed Nadal in consistency and management of their health. All three showed adaptability over time in different ways. They’ll wind up with different resumes for a variety of reasons. But peak vs peak vs peak, there’s pretty much no daylight between these guys
Let’s look at the clear weakest of the 3 on 2/3 surfaces, Nadal. Is Wimbledon 07/08 really that far from peak Federer/Djokovic at Wimbledon? Obviously not.
Nadal has beaten Federer a few times on HC including occasionally during Fed’s prime. Nadal managed to play Djokovic down to the wire at AO12, and beat Djokovic in the middle of his prime at US13. AO09 is better than either version, again, is he really that far off either of them on HC at their best?
On the flip side, let’s look at clay, where Nadal’s overall resume is clearly better than the other 2. Federer came within an inch of beating Nadal in maybe their highest quality match ever at Rome 06. Djokovic 2009 stretched the best ever Nadal (MC08-Madrid 09) to the absolute limit in the 09 clay trilogy and then took a nearly as good Nadal to the limit again in 2013 at RG. Yes, Nadal is clearly better than the other two on this surface by a margin that allows him to win most of the time, but peak for peak they came very close.
Federer and Djokovic fans have already argued ad nauseam about these two, so not much to add except to comment on the obvious to complete the point. Baby Djokovic was able to take it to peak/prime Federer in MTL 07, and mostly bottled the USO due to nerves, before beating monoFed convincingly en route to his maiden slam. On the flip side, an older Federer has played peak and prime Djokovic too close on too many occasions and beaten him badly in some important BO3 matches. At the end of his prime he decisively beat a peak Djokovic at 2012 Wimbledon. And split RG with him when they overlapped as late prime Fed vs peak Djokovic.
Some could argue that Djokovic’s grass peak must come in this stretch from 2014-21 where he’s won 5/7 of the editions played. But when you look at those, he scraped through an older Federer in 2014, barely scraped through a heavily declined Nadal in 2018 who had already played a marathon against Del Potro while getting favorable conditions (roof). And then in 2019 we all know about 40-15 and coming within less than 1cm of losing that match to a 38-9 yo Federer.
Some other interesting notes:
- Djokovic AO08 is the only interruption in Federer’s slam final streak from W05-AO10
- Federer broke Nadal’s historic clay winning streak and fed him a bagel in that same match
- Djokovic broke peak 2008 Nadal’s winning streak in Cincinnati
- Federer broke peak Djokovic 2011s winning streak at RG
- Nadal broke Federer’s Wimbledon streak
- Nadal dealt several important losses to Peakovic in 2012-13
Clearly, it’s not coincidence that at their very best, they were pretty much only stopped by each other
They’ve all peaked at slightly different times and dealt with slightly different circumstances. Federer had time to build confidence against a somewhat weaker field before Nadal and Djokovic arrived.
Nadal got sandwiched between two other ATGs and never got his own era but could always fall back on his clay supremacy.
Djokovic had to battle his way in against two prime ATGs but then has gotten to enjoy one of the softest eras ever the past few years.
I’m not really sure how anyone could look at the course of their careers and come to any conclusion other than that at their very best, these guys are basically equal. All trolling aside, there’s no way to honestly pick a “BOAT” between these 3. There’s also been 3 other guys in the past 20 years that have managed to achieve a peak level close to their highest quality for very brief moments (Wawrinka, Safin, Del Potro). I wouldn’t put Murray in that group due to lack of weapons. There were favorable circumstances in most of his big wins - Del Potro softening up Djokovic at W13 and Federer at Olympics 12, crazy wind at US12.
Djokovic and Federer clearly exceed Nadal in consistency and management of their health. All three showed adaptability over time in different ways. They’ll wind up with different resumes for a variety of reasons. But peak vs peak vs peak, there’s pretty much no daylight between these guys
Last edited:
FEDERERNADAL13
Legend
This. 100000 times this. I couldn’t have put it better if I tried. Great post.
BGod
G.O.A.T.
Dude, he was #1 or #2 in most of his finals so you're talking about literally one other guy in the draw if he makes it that far.
In 07USO for example he beat #5, #4 & #3 being himself seeded #1. Other USOs were #4, #7, #9 & #6 but in 08 he beat #3 in SF seeded #2 and #7/9 were Roddick & Agassi in shortened schedules not exactly Rublev playing 500s ranking.
AO: #5(Murray), #6(Cilic) and then #9 Nadal who finished YE#1, Unseeded Safin who finished YE#4.
Irrelevant.
McEnroe never coached Nadal.
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
Last edited:
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
While it's ridiculous to use Federer's defeats at Wimbledon finals in his mid and late 30s against him, it's ridiculous to suggest 2010 Us Open was anywhere near prime Djokovic. Nonetheless, it wasn't a defeat. Djokovic had multiple set points in Sets 1 and 2 at the USO against peak Federer in 2007, but it wasn't a victory.
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
You're right about the grass thing, but both had to play a peak Nadal on clay. Djokovic lost against a peak Nadal in 2008, 2013 and 2012. But he took the chance when he had a not-that-unbeatable Nadal in front of him. Federer had that opportunity in 2005 and 2011 and didn't take advantage.
Nadal post 2013 was never the same on clay, even in 2014 he was clearly weaker although he won FO. Titles speak, so Djokovic will be considered the best clay player of the two. Im just saying its a very special case, because its only Nadal standing in their way. Federer only lost to Nadal at FO from 2005 to 2011, except in 2010 when he lost to everyone. Peak for peak, i dont consider Djokovic the better player on clay, i think its about even.
beard
Legend
Sorry, but 3 finals, plus legendary 40:15, are kings of tie breakers... Imagine using Basels and Barselonas as tie breakers... And extra finals are there to remind us how fragile Fed is when play against real deal...
beard
Legend
Definition of word Biased... Lol...
beard
Legend
Just lol...
Come on, this only shows that it usually takes the other GOAT candidate to beat Federer on grass. And 40-15 shows that Federer was as close as it gets. How this can be a tiebreaker AGAINST Federer is beyond me. I mean, the result already gave Djokovic one title more and Federer one title less. You want a double count for the CLOSEST possible result?
So yes, IF it’s even on titles, then of course additional finals (currently 4-1 for Federer) and additional other grasscourt titles (currently 10-1 for Federer) are the better tiebreaker.
If both their careers are over, then Djokovic must have done something wrong against the rest of the field if he always beats Federer and yet hasn’t more titles. And tennis is about beating fields. So let’s see what happens. I wouldn’t say 3 more titles is impossible.
Similar threads
- Poll
