Most surprising HTH records

Which is the most shocking HTH record

  • Davydenko over Nadal 6-5

    Votes: 8 14.8%
  • Blake over Davydenko 7-1

    Votes: 7 13.0%
  • Thiem over Federer 5-2

    Votes: 16 29.6%
  • Krajicek over Sampras 6-4

    Votes: 4 7.4%
  • Stich over Sampras 5-4

    Votes: 1 1.9%
  • Santoro over Safin 7-2

    Votes: 18 33.3%

  • Total voters
    54

Pheasant

Hall of Fame
Candidates:

Davydenko over Nadal 6-5. In this case, Nadal had the higher ranking in every single match. As a matter of fact, Davydenko was 4-0 vs Nadal on hard courts after Nadal had already become world #1 and after Nadal's first hard court title.

Blake over Davydenko 7-1. This one is shocking to me. Blake's career wasn't as good as Davydenko's. But he completely owned him in the HTH matchup.

Thiem over Federer 5-2. Federer outranked Thiem in nearly every match. But Thiem holds the advantage here

Krajicek over Sampras 6-4. Every one of these matches was played in a year that Sampras won a slam title. During the years Pete finished world #1, Krajicek was 5-2 vs Sampras. And none of their matches were on clay.

Stich over Sampras 5-4. Similarly, Stich was 3-2 against Pete during years he finished world #1. This is little less surprising, since 3 of their 9 matches were on clay(3-0 Stich).

And lastly, Santoro went 7-2 vs Safin. This one is a shocker to me.

Which one is the most surprising to you?
 
Voted Santoro-Safin as well. Most of the others are relatively close H2Hs involving top players. Santoro was a career journeyman who gave fits to a guy who often outplayed the very best.
 

NEW_BORN

Hall of Fame
Federer - Ferrer 17-0 (38-6 in sets)
Even though some will use the excuse of Ferrer being a weaponless pusher/grinder, if you dig a little deeper, it's just shocking that a former world no.3 is continually pummeled on every surface over a 14 year period (2003-2017). In fact, the sets count (38-6) is so lopsided it makes the Djokovic-Nadal H2H on hard look decent.
 

Shaolin

G.O.A.T.
Federer - Ferrer 17-0 (38-6 in sets)
Even though some will use the excuse of Ferrer being a weaponless pusher/grinder, if you dig a little deeper, it's just shocking that a former world no.3 is continually pummeled on every surface over a 14 year period (2003-2017). In fact, the sets count (38-6) is so lopsided it makes the Djokovic-Nadal H2H on hard look decent.
How's it suprising. Fed is literally better at every aspect of the game than Ferrer.
 

NEW_BORN

Hall of Fame
How's it suprising. Fed is literally better at every aspect of the game than Ferrer.
But the point is you can make this exact same argument for other players who have managed to score a win against Federer, for instance Albert Ramos Vinolas.
Can you honestly say that any of his strokes are better than Ferrer's?
My point was not that it's shocking for Federer to have scored 17 wins against Ferrer, but that Ferrer has never managed to score a single win against Federer.
 

Sport

G.O.A.T.
Santoro vs. Safin for sure. It proves the existence of matchup issues.
Wawrinka-Djokovic is better to discuss "matchup issues". Wawrinka is objectively a worse player than Federer or Nadal. Federer has won 6 AO, including 2 titles after 2011 and defeated Wawrinka at the AO 2017. Nadal has won 1 AO title and has made 5 AO finals, while Wawrinka has only made 1 AO final in his whole career.

Yet Wawrinka was able to play three consecutive 5 setters against Djokovic at the AO (2013, 2014, 2015), while Federer (2008, 2011) and Nadal (2019) have lost in 3 sets. Federer also lost 3 consecutive AO matches in a row against Djokovic in less than 5 sets (2008, 2011, 2016).
 

clout

Hall of Fame
Del Potro and Cilic are very similar in many ways but the Argentine flat out owns the Croat every time they play. Their h2h is something like 12-2 in favour of Delpo
 

Shaolin

G.O.A.T.
But the point is you can make this exact same argument for other players who have managed to score a win against Federer, for instance Albert Ramos Vinolas.
Can you honestly say that any of his strokes are better than Ferrer's?
My point was not that it's shocking for Federer to have scored 17 wins against Ferrer, but that Ferrer has never managed to score a single win against Federer.
ARV has a bit more firepower than Ferrer though. Ferrer with his lack of weapons cant hope to just get hot and hit through people. He has to grind and that isn't gonna make an impression on Fed. Same with Kohlschreiber, isn't he about 15-0 against the German? Kohl just doesnt have the weaponry despite being a solid and smart tour vet.
 

NEW_BORN

Hall of Fame
ARV has a bit more firepower than Ferrer though. Ferrer with his lack of weapons cant hope to just get hot and hit through people. He has to grind and that isn't gonna make an impression on Fed. Same with Kohlschreiber, isn't he about 15-0 against the German? Kohl just doesnt have the weaponry despite being a solid and smart tour vet.
ARV is just one example. The point is Ferrer is a former world no. 3, slam finalist, winner of 27 titles, not to mention tough as nails.
 

Shaolin

G.O.A.T.
ARV is just one example. The point is Ferrer is a former world no. 3, slam finalist, winner of 27 titles, not to mention tough as nails.
Yes he feasted on guys ranked below him. As soon as he encountered a top guy he rolled over on his back. There's a reason he's referred to as a lapdog and/or gatekeeper. Tons of respect for the guy but he didn't have the weapons to beat a guy like Fed, hence his 0-17.
 

buscemi

Hall of Fame
Santoro had a tricky hame. He had some pretty good H2Hs against some Major winners:

4-1 against Bruguera​
3-1 against Moya​
4-3 against Muster​
4-3 against Korda​
3-3 against Agassi​
3-4 against Sampras (Santoro lost their last match 7-5 in the 3rd set at Indian Wells)​
3-5 against Ivanisevic​
2-3 against Hewitt​
2-2 against Chang​
1-2 against Courier​
1-1 against Djokovic​
1-1 against Rafter​
1-1 against Kuerten​
1-1 against Becker​

So, I'm not too surprised he mostly got the better of Safin, who could be easily frustrated.
 

NEW_BORN

Hall of Fame
Yes he feasted on guys ranked below him. As soon as he encountered a top guy he rolled over on his back. There's a reason he's referred to as a lapdog and/or gatekeeper. Tons of respect for the guy but he didn't have the weapons to beat a guy like Fed, hence his 0-17.
As much as Ferrer is considered the gatekeeper, he has beaten Nadal 6 times, Djokovic 5 times and Murray 6 times, so it's not like he doesn't possess any weapons to contend with the big boys, which makes it all the more surprising that he was never able to score a single win against Federer, even though the likes of Kokkinakis, Donskoy, Phau, Sanguinetti, Millman, Delbonis, Stakhovsky and others have. That's my point.
 

Shaolin

G.O.A.T.
As much as Ferrer is considered the gatekeeper, he has beaten Nadal 6 times, Djokovic 5 times and Murray 6 times, so it's not like he doesn't possess any weapons to contend with the big boys, which makes it all the more surprising that he was never able to score a single win against Federer, even though the likes of Kokkinakis, Donskoy, Phau, Sanguinetti, Millman, Delbonis, Stakhovsky and others have. That's my point.
Maybe Fed always had enough respect for his game to come out focused and not get blindsided. Plus playing him so many times he knew his game inside and out, just making it worse for Ferrer.
 

NEW_BORN

Hall of Fame
Maybe Fed always had enough respect for his game to come out focused and not get blindsided. Plus playing him so many times he knew his game inside and out, just making it worse for Ferrer.
I know it could have been any number of reasons that prevented Ferrer from beating Federer, but that's exactly what makes it surprising that things just never fell into place for Ferrer, not even once.
 

Chadwix

Hall of Fame
Santoro had a tricky hame. He had some pretty good H2Hs against some Major winners:

4-1 against Bruguera​
3-1 against Moya​
4-3 against Muster​
4-3 against Korda​
3-3 against Agassi​
3-4 against Sampras (Santoro lost their last match 7-5 in the 3rd set at Indian Wells)​
3-5 against Ivanisevic​
2-3 against Hewitt​
2-2 against Chang​
1-2 against Courier​
1-1 against Djokovic​
1-1 against Rafter​
1-1 against Kuerten​
1-1 against Becker​

So, I'm not too surprised he mostly got the better of Safin, who could be easily frustrated.
He gave Safin time to think. Thats never good :)

Safin was a reactive basher, he did great when the other guy gave pace. But stuff low, short and on the decline he didnt like.
 

Shaolin

G.O.A.T.
He gave Safin time to think. Thats never good :)

Safin was a reactive basher, he did great when the other guy gave pace. But stuff low, short and on the decline he didnt like.
One after Safin got beat by him, he said ''I tried to play smart and that's not my game'' :D

Sums it up pretty well I think.
 
As much as Ferrer is considered the gatekeeper, he has beaten Nadal 6 times, Djokovic 5 times and Murray 6 times, so it's not like he doesn't possess any weapons to contend with the big boys, which makes it all the more surprising that he was never able to score a single win against Federer, even though the likes of Kokkinakis, Donskoy, Phau, Sanguinetti, Millman, Delbonis, Stakhovsky and others have. That's my point.
Ferrer beat young Djodal a couple times, obviously couldn't have done so against Fred since Ferrer is younger and a later bloomer, plus he got to beat them injured in 2011 (Nadal AO, Djokovic YEC). He does have two inpressive wins over Nadal (2013 Paris, 2014 MC), but none against Djokovic since Noel fully matured at last, besides the obvious injury tank.
 

NEW_BORN

Hall of Fame
Ferrer beat young Djodal a couple times, obviously couldn't have done so against Fred since Ferrer is younger and a later bloomer, plus he got to beat them injured in 2011 (Nadal AO, Djokovic YEC). He does have two inpressive wins over Nadal (2013 Paris, 2014 MC), but none against Djokovic since Noel fully matured at last, besides the obvious injury tank.
You make valid points, but a win is a win in my book. Besides, being injured and carrying an injury is not the same thing.
 
You make valid points, but a win is a win in my book. Besides, being injured and carrying an injury is not the same thing.
Point is that Ferrer got to play Djodal in subpar form a couple times, but didn't get to play a subpar Federer. I reckon he could've beaten Fed in 2013, especially on clay. He proved just as helpless against a decent Djokovic (one set won against a non-compromised Novak on HC in a dozen matches), though more competitive against Nadal.
 

NEW_BORN

Hall of Fame
Point is that Ferrer got to play Djodal in subpar form a couple times, but didn't get to play a subpar Federer. I reckon he could've beaten Fed in 2013, especially on clay. He proved just as helpless against a decent Djokovic (one set won against a non-compromised Novak on HC in a dozen matches), though more competitive against Nadal.
Ferrer certainly would have had a decent shot at Federer in 2013 Rome had he beat Nadal, but we'll never know.
The only encounter imo where Federer was perhaps vulnerable and low on confidence was 2007Monte Carlo, after having just suffered early losses in back2back masters events in IW and MI, but alas Ferrer was utterly destroyed that day (6-4,6-0).
 
Last edited:
Isnt this one much more evem in Gramd slams?
No, it's skewed the other way: Edberg leads 3-1 :love:

It's quite something else to consider: after Edberg won their first two matches over a very young Becker (before BB won Wimbledon, Edberg was a teen too but that 1.5 year age difference was big with Edberg being 18-19 while Becker was 17-18), Becker went 25-8 for the rest of their careers, even 25-7 in completed matches (discounting one where Becker had to retire at 3-3 in the first set), yet in their biggest encounters Edberg proved an exquisite troll with a 4-1 record in Slams+YEC F all within 1988-90: 1988 WB final, 1989 RG semi & YEC final, 1990 WB final, while Becker won 1989 WB final. Anything lesser, Becker led 24-3 LOL.
 

lud

Hall of Fame
Melzer vs Ljubicic 5-0
Berastegui vs Kafelnikov 6-0
Agassi vs Stich 7-0
Edberg vs Muster 10-0
Gasquet vs Nishikori 8-3
Haas vs Nalbandian 5-0
Cilic vs Simon 1-6
Haas vs Enqvist 7-2
Karlovic vs Hewitt 3-1
Berdych vs Anderson 12-0
Soderling vs Ferrer 10-4
Hewitt vs Kafelnikov 7-1
 

BorgTheGOAT

Professional
Melzer vs Ljubicic 5-0
Berastegui vs Kafelnikov 6-0
Agassi vs Stich 7-0
Edberg vs Muster 10-0
Gasquet vs Nishikori 8-3
Haas vs Nalbandian 5-0
Cilic vs Simon 1-6
Haas vs Enqvist 7-2
Karlovic vs Hewitt 3-1
Berdych vs Anderson 12-0
Soderling vs Ferrer 10-4
Hewitt vs Kafelnikov 7-1
Agassi vs Stich is 6-0. Edberg vs Muster I think the more surprising stat is that he even leads him 4-0 on clay. However, given Musters weakness against serve and volley and the fact that he is overrated in clay in general makes this maybe a little less surprising.For me the most surprising one is the Berasategui Kafelnikov one.
 

BorgTheGOAT

Professional
Nole's slam h2h against Wawrinka since 2014.

5-0 against Federer
3-1 against Nadal
5-0 against Murray
1-4 against Wawrinka :eek:
Definitely this one. While Stan was always Nadals hyper pigeon who struggled with even winning sets against him he has a 4–1 run against Djokovic and played additional tough five setters, while over the same period Nadal seems completely helpless against Novak.
 

The Green Mile

Bionic Poster
Melzer vs Ljubicic 5-0
Berastegui vs Kafelnikov 6-0
Agassi vs Stich 7-0
Edberg vs Muster 10-0
Gasquet vs Nishikori 8-3
Haas vs Nalbandian 5-0
Cilic vs Simon 1-6
Haas vs Enqvist 7-2
Karlovic vs Hewitt 3-1
Berdych vs Anderson 12-0
Soderling vs Ferrer 10-4
Hewitt vs Kafelnikov 7-1
Berdych vs Anderson is pretty amazing. I mean, he's not that bad, right? Not 12-0 bad. I would have expected Kevin to have clipped him at least once, sure, he was a bit of a perennial choker, but come on...
 
Berdych vs Anderson is pretty amazing. I mean, he's not that bad, right? Not 12-0 bad. I would have expected Kevin to have clipped him at least once, sure, he was a bit of a perennial choker, but come on...
A nice set of circumstances making it possible: first, all of their 12 meetings occurred in 2012-14 when Berdych was at his general peak and a level above Anderson; second, 5 of them occurred in Slams, so Berdych would give his best; third, 4 of the remaining 7 happened on clay, Anderson's weakest surface - lots of early round meetings between the two. That leaves three non-clay BO3 matches as Anderson's best chances for an upset, and indeed he was a set up in two of them but couldn't finish the job. Including Slam matches, Anderson actually led Berdych on four occasions (thrice a set up and once two sets to one up), but apparently could never maintain that level long enough.
 

Pheasant

Hall of Fame
Voted Santoro-Safin as well. Most of the others are relatively close H2Hs involving top players. Santoro was a career journeyman who gave fits to a guy who often outplayed the very best.
This is a great pick. This one is a head-scratcher.

Safin was:
4-3 vs Sampras
3-3 vs Agassi
2-0 vs Djokovic
Total: 9-6 vs 3 guys that have a combined 38 slam titles. That’s a .563 winning percentage against 3 legends, which is great.

But he’s at .222 vs Santoro(2-7).

You gotta love this odd sport. Matchups matter.
 

BorgTheGOAT

Professional
This is a great pick. This one is a head-scratcher.

Safin was:
4-3 vs Sampras
3-3 vs Agassi
2-0 vs Djokovic
Total: 9-6 vs 3 guys that have a combined 38 slam titles. That’s a .563 winning percentage against 3 legends, which is great.

But he’s at .222 vs Santoro(2-7).

You gotta love this odd sport. Matchups matter.
Well to be fair here he beat baby Djokovic and the post prime versions of Agassi and Sampras in most of these matches. Alex Corretja is 3-2 against Federer, 2-0 against Nadal and 2-1 against Becker. 70% winning rate against players with 45 slams between them. Context matters a lot here.
 

Fabresque

Professional
How's it suprising. Fed is literally better at every aspect of the game than Ferrer.
It’s surprising because Ferrer was still decent. Federer is also ‘literally better’ at every aspect of the game than someone like Stakhovsky or Donskoy, but they still beat him, right?

Ferrer has wins over Nadal on clay, yet couldn’t beat Federer, not even on clay. It’s surprising don’t you think?
 
It’s surprising because Ferrer was still decent. Federer is also ‘literally better’ at every aspect of the game than someone like Stakhovsky or Donskoy, but they still beat him, right?

Ferrer has wins over Nadal on clay, yet couldn’t beat Federer, not even on clay. It’s surprising don’t you think?
Ferrer didn't get to play a subpar Federer like those two, easy. Similar to Gerulaitis going 0-18 vs Borg, and Vitas was a better player than David.
 

Fabresque

Professional
Ferrer didn't get to play a subpar Federer like those two, easy. Similar to Gerulaitis going 0-18 vs Borg, and Vitas was a better player than David.
That point still doesn’t hold water. Federer was defeated by Berdych, Tsonga, Nalbandian, etc.. and you can’t consider those players to be better than Ferrer. You also can’t say Federer was subpar when losing to them either. It’s an anomaly that Ferrer didn’t get a single win, the same way it was an anomaly Vitas didn’t get a single win over Borg, or Monfils not getting a single win over Djokovic. They’re better, but it’s definitely strange.
 
That point still doesn’t hold water. Federer was defeated by Berdych, Tsonga, Nalbandian, etc.. and you can’t consider those players to be better than Ferrer. You also can’t say Federer was subpar when losing to them either. It’s an anomaly that Ferrer didn’t get a single win, the same way it was an anomaly Vitas didn’t get a single win over Borg, or Monfils not getting a single win over Djokovic. They’re better, but it’s definitely strange.
Berdych, Tsonga, Nalbandian all posted higher peaks than Ferrer, and happened to meet (less than peak obviously) Federer during a peak run of theirs. Ferrer didn't - the real anomaly is that a) he never played Federer in a slam (while playing Djokodal 4+ times each), and b) he only played Federer once on clay since 2011 (and that was Fed's last CC masters win, Madrid 2012). Somehow he was usually slated to play Djokodal in QF. Had Ferrer drawn Federer more on clay in 2011-14, chances are he'd have posted a victory along the way.
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
That point still doesn’t hold water. Federer was defeated by Berdych, Tsonga, Nalbandian, etc.. and you can’t consider those players to be better than Ferrer. You also can’t say Federer was subpar when losing to them either. It’s an anomaly that Ferrer didn’t get a single win, the same way it was an anomaly Vitas didn’t get a single win over Borg, or Monfils not getting a single win over Djokovic. They’re better, but it’s definitely strange.
Might possibly be as much a mental thing as anything else. I suspect Federer just got into Ferrer's head in a way none of the other top guys managed to, not even his compatriot Nadal.
 

BorgTheGOAT

Professional
That point still doesn’t hold water. Federer was defeated by Berdych, Tsonga, Nalbandian, etc.. and you can’t consider those players to be better than Ferrer. You also can’t say Federer was subpar when losing to them either. It’s an anomaly that Ferrer didn’t get a single win, the same way it was an anomaly Vitas didn’t get a single win over Borg, or Monfils not getting a single win over Djokovic. They’re better, but it’s definitely strange.
This is not completely the same. Almost all players are inferior to Federer or Borg but some of these inferior players at least have weapons, i.e. things they can do better than the big three at least on a great day. Hart hitter like Soderling or Berdych can run hot and be dangerous for everyone. However, with Vitas the problem is that literally everything he does good, Borg does better and everything he does bad, Borg still does good. If he had at least one destructive weapon like maybe a way better serve, things could turn out his way from time to time, as things stood however the best thing he could hope for was a complete off day for Borg.
 
Top