Razer
G.O.A.T.
Doesn't matter even if they were different eras, today they are all clubbed in the same era. 2003 to 2023 is seen as era nowadays by public, the larger picture is always taken into account.
Is Fed in a different Era than djoker? How do we define eras?
- Thread starter Lleytonstation
- Start date
Doesn't matter even if they were different eras, today they are all clubbed in the same era. 2003 to 2023 is seen as era nowadays by public, the larger picture is always taken into account.
True, casuals don’t really care about such nuances, even if us hardcore fans can see that they had different peak periods which barely overlapped. Big 3 are grouped together as one.
objection_
Rookie
Yep, Fed's muggery at the US open was super unexpected, especially after the 5-peat...
2009 - Blew a final he could have won in 3/4 sets, despite being up 5/4 30-0 in the 2nd for 2 sets to love lead, and being 2 points away + numerous bp's in the 4th from winning
2010 - Djoko saved the 2 Mp's, although credit to Djoke for his aggressive play here, Fed was streaky and probably would have gotten crushed in the final. Still, probably should have made another final.
2011 - No comment. The Return™. Could have made the final where I reckon he'd have a 50/50 shot against Nadal.
2012 - Flat and uninspired against Berdych, yet I thought he probably could have won the 1st set. Won cincy dominantly right before, probably would have favoured him against Murray at slams at that point, and Djoke was poor in the wind. Big missed chance.
2013 - Not winning anyways
2014 - Flat and streaky mixed in with some high level. Should have lost to Monfils, then Cilic blew him away with a crazy performance. Shame he couldn't bring better form to this one, the draw wasn't terrible.
2015 - 4/23 on BP's, enough said. Basically as even as a match can be, IIRC Djoke only won 2 more points than Fed the whole match
2016 - AWOL, which is a massive shame. Djoko was mediocre and had the ultimate collection of walkovers and withdrawals, unrivalled until FAA this year at Madrid. Wawa is Fed's pigeon off clay, if Fed had brought his 2015 form here he most likely takes it.
2017 - Starting off in poor form after recovering from the back injury at Montreal, starts to play his way into form and then returns to mug central. Watched part of the QF against Delpo yesterday and boy was I screaming at my screen, maybe even more than the 09 Final. 4 SP's blown in the 3rd set TB, one of them being a floater Delpo sitter short into the court that's an easy BHV into the open court. Instead, he lets it bounce at an awkward position, then misses a routine BH into the open court. UGH. Then in the 4th set with Delpo serving for the match, Fed's got a chance to break back, chip charges well with Delpo bunting it shoulder height, and FED SHANKS THE SITTER FH VOLLEY INTO THE STANDS.
2018 - Blows a bunch of SP's against milkman, although he probably would have lost the QF to Djoke anyways.
2019 - Back injury against Grigor, Madlad seemed like a good matchup for him, and he had Rafa's number on HC at the time.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
Yes, perceptions always change
First it was only Federer the Big Man, then it was Federer and Nadal, then it became BIg 4, then everyone threw out Murray and made it Big 3 .... public always keep on changing their perceptions. New fans have no patience to look into any era they've not followed...
If the public cant see that two players with completely different non-overlapping peaks isnt in the same era, then they arent very interested in tennis, but ok.
Rivals and era isnt the same.
Federer was hitting 30y with 16 slam titles before Djokovic won his second slam and hit his peak. Federer had a whole career behind him before Djokovic started his brilliant ride in 2011.
Same era?
zakopinjo
Professional
They played 19 matches before 2011. Of course they are the same era.
Sampras/Agassi vs Federer are different eras
Novak vs Sinner/Alcaraz are different eras
Djokovic vs Federer is one era
Well then we need a clearer definition of era. To many of Noles fans pre 2011 doesnt count because he wasnt prime.
zakopinjo
Professional
Novak, Nadal and Federer are of the same era and therefore it is very easy to compare them.
From 2007 to 2020, Novak and Federer only met in the semifinals or finals of the tournament, they never met in the quarterfinals or earlier rounds.
Fair point. To me, two players that won most of their slams in such different periods, with such different peak/primes, isnt in the exact same era
zakopinjo
Professional
Why do you only stick to slams? For slams, it is necessary to overcome a mental barrier, winning slams was not at all a measure of whether someone was playing in the same era.
Novak has 18 titles, 1 slam, 5 masters and 1 final masters in Federer's prime years
Novak has been at the very top of the world tour since 2007, when Federer was 26 years old.
13:6 is score (9:6 since Novak became a constant on the tour)
Of course they are the same era.
Seems odd to me that matches played is the only criteria for being in the same era.
So if Federer retired after the 2010 season, which was normal in earlier days, with 19 matches played, would they still be same era?
zakopinjo
Professional
Yeah I would say so. Nole was 31 when Tim reached his first slam final.
For me, to be in the same "era", the players prime must at least partly overlap.
Racquet_smash
Professional
Or Federer and Agassi you could say. They played their first few matches during Andre's late 20s then most of the remaining ones when he got old.
Obviously they played a lot more matches but that's because the age difference isn't as big.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Federer and Agassi are even less in the same era, because there's an 11-year age gap. Connors (born September 1952) and McEnroe (born February 1959) have a smaller age gap, similar to Federer (born August 1981) and Djokovic (born May 1987).
Alcaraz and Djokovic have met in some big matches, including 2 Wimbledon finals, yet there's a 16-year age gap.
Racquet_smash
Professional
Alcaraz and Djokovic are not even close to the same era, i don't think there's anyone insane enough to claim something like this.
They played the first time when Djokovic was 35 lol.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Some people would probably claim that in order to be in truly different eras, you can never actually play against that player in a professional match.
Racquet_smash
Professional
Connors and Rosewall are from the same era then lol.
CHillTennis
Hall of Fame
Federer overlaps with Nadal and Djokovic.
But he is not close to their age.
The idea of a generation, does not apply in the era of The Big 3.
They're simply the best players of the 2000s, 10s and 20s.
But he is not close to their age.
The idea of a generation, does not apply in the era of The Big 3.
They're simply the best players of the 2000s, 10s and 20s.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
Agassi Fed is not like Fed Novak
zakopinjo
Professional
Federer and Agassi are obviously not from the same era. Federer is an irrelevant factor on the tour until mid-2003.
A strange criterion, especially if two players meet from 2007 to 2020 exclusively in semi-finals and finals 40 times (without ATP finals).
Racquet_smash
Professional
It's similar. They first played when one of them was in his prime, then the majority of the games happened with the other one over 30.
zakopinjo
Professional
23 matches were played before Federer turned 30 years old. Score 14:9
Whats strange is to find a lot of other stats to try to even out the point that Federer was all-time slam leader with 16 slams before Djokovic peaked and won his second.
Federer had the greatest career in open era before Noles hardly started, which makes is strange to put them in the exact same era.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
Don't talk nonsense
When Agassi made his international debut, Federer was 4 years old, Rafael Nadal was a 5 months old embryo inside his mother's stomach and Novak Djokovic was yet to be conceived.
When Federer made his debut in 1998, Djokovic was 11 years old, Rafael Nadal was 12 years old.
They are not comparable in any way, Agassi is 11 years older to Federer, a full generation above Big 3 and from another era entirely.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Think about this.
Fed was the greatest ever and had the most slams of all time and was 1-0 in slam finals vs Djoker before Djoker got his second.
Fed could have retired as the greatest ever with the most slams and most weeks at number one TWO YEARS before Djoker won his first Wimbledon.
If that does not say they played in different eras, then I don't know what to tell you.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
Ohh guys... they played in the same era... Fed started as alpha and ended up 3rd in the stat sheet...... get over it .....
kids are gonna mock you and shame you if you tell all this outside like Fed-Nole diff gen... diff era,....and what not....the narrative has now changed, we need to fall in line.
kids are gonna mock you and shame you if you tell all this outside like Fed-Nole diff gen... diff era,....and what not....the narrative has now changed, we need to fall in line.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Exactly. Back in late 2010, many people considered Djokovic a one-slam-wonder. Federer was the GOAT.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
I look at it like this. If you believe Agassi and Fed shared an era (they did), then obviously Fed was in a different era, at least for a time.
If you don't believe they were in the same era, then Djoker and Fed were not in the same era. Agassi had 8 slams when he lost to Fed in a slam final.
Fed had 17 slams before he lost to Djoker in a slam final, lol.
zakopinjo
Professional
Federer before the middle of 2007 and Novak's arrival at the ATP top:
slams: 10 titles, 12 finals, 14 semi-finals
masters: 12 titles, 17 finals, 19 semi-finals
atp finals: 3 titles, 4 finals
48 titles
Federer after mid-2007 and Novak's arrival at the ATP top:
slams: 10 titles, 19 finals, 32 semi-finals
masters: 15 titles, 32 finals, 47 semi-finals
atp finals: 3 titles, 6 finals
55 titles
Like I said in my previous post, there's no fine line, and there's a huge grey erea between IN or NOT in the same era.
Federer/Djokovic fall in 20% in the same era, and 80% out.
The William sisters fall in the same era 100%
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Agree. I put way more weight on their peak/prime years than when they were in their rookie years and old, past prime years. When they are at their best, Federer won 15 slams between 2003-2009, Djokovic won 11 slams between 2011-2016. so 20% they fall in the same era
But peak/prime period hardly overlap. I put more weight on peak/prime, and not so much when they were a shadow of themselves
jackson vile
G.O.A.T.
You have to look at the primes
You got that right
2007-2020? You just erased about half of Federers slams...
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
zakopinjo
Professional
2007 Novak enters the tennis stage and since that year he has been one of the main favorites at every tournament.
Im not denying that, but the period 2007-2020 cuts out half of Federers slams, which is kind of my point. They arent peers, doesnt have an overlapping prime, but they are rivals.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
While we are on the subject of age.
Djoker won 12% of his slams while Fed was in his 20s.
Fed won 40% of his slams while Djoker was in his 20s.
Djoker won 12% of his slams while Fed was in his 20s.
Fed won 40% of his slams while Djoker was in his 20s.
zakopinjo
Professional
And my point is that Federer is the top player and favorite in every tournament from 2003 to 2020. Since 2007, Novak has been joining it as well.
So they are identical era. The era known as the Big 3 era (Federer 2003-2020, Nadal 2005-2022, Novak 2007-2024)
Similar threads
