Red Rick
Bionic Poster
H2H matters, but only in Fedal>Roddick>Djokovic and not Djokovic>FedalTo sum up, certain Fedal's wins over Novak are far more telling than any of the 53 Novak has registered.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
The way I see it in terms of their timelines.
Fed : 2003-12
Nadal : 2004-13
Djokovic : 2011-19
2017 again overlapped for Fedal. Before 2011, Novak was not a real "ultimate" threat for Fedal , even though he was a phenomenal player
TripleATeam
G.O.A.T.
Still, it's hard to include 2017 in his "prime." He did better in 2010 and 2009 than in 2017, and certainly did better in 2007 and 2008. I can't say Djokovic's prime can extend beyond 2016, but I suppose we could make a smaller prime of only 6 years.
Djokovic: 2011-2016.
Federer: 2004-2009.
Nadal 2011-2016: 5 slams.
Nadal 2004-2009: 6 slams.
Again, including 2015 and 2016 which were terrible years for Nadal (and even more significant now that we've reduced the window of years). And even so, the difference between these two periods is not massive.
Now with Nadal/Novak is 2018 and what seems to be a strong duopoly in 2019, I think the case could certainly be made that Nadal has had more success during Novak's period than Federer's.
That being said, again, there's not much of a difference. I'm glad you can see it this way too.
Djokodalerer31
Hall of Fame
Or maybe...its actually, because of both? LMAO Why can't anyone see it?! You people so stuck up with your anti-Djokovic bias, that you fail to project a situation, that the same player could have had the same results if competition was tougher, but maybe with tighter and closer matches?! Why the logic is always like that - "He has weak competition - so that is why its easy for him to destroy everyone, cuz nobody resists", why not this - "He has weak comeptition and thats why he destroyed everyone, but even with tougher comeptition he would still be winning" ??!
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
I don't see how 2017 and half of 2018 can be included in Djokovic's timeline. Djokovic was a non-factor in 2017 and he only played half of the year, which is mostly why this was a solely Fedal season. I also don't see how Nadal was relevant in 2004.
Last edited:
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
What I really love about Djokovic's career and resume is that unlike every other ATG throughout history there's really nothing you can pick holes in anywhere. Nadal has a mediocre record indoors and relative lack of dominance, certainly compared to Fedovic, and Federer had a poor H2H at the very peak of his powers with his greatest rival against whom it took 10 years to beat again in a major tournament whereas with Novak I honestly can't think of anything. He's just wonderful. 
Jamie_Lannister
New User
The usual age ignorers on duty here.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
I think we are not in the same page and let me clarify.
In terms of their best, I provided the time lines : Fed : 2003-12, Nadal -2004-13, Novak - 2011-19
Nadal's majority success (9 majors) came before Novak got his second and when Fed was the other major contender.
Nadal won 3 more during 2017 to mid 2018 , when Novak was out of the picture and Federer was the other main guy.
What do the above imply ?
Nadal's 12 /17 majors was won when Federer was also winning. Their success were intertwined with each other.
Nadal won 5/17 majors from 2011-14 that overlapped with Djokovic's successful period.
So, isn't it clear that Nadal and Fed overlapped their peak periods than Novak and Nadal ?
(Nadal was stopped by Fed 3 times in finals. Nadal was stopped by Novak 4 times in finals . Not much to differentiate there and we cannot say Nadal got bested by Novak more often. )
The summary is that Novak got Nadal when he was softened up for the most part (leaving aside the initial period from 2011)
MeatTornado
Talk Tennis Guru
He fell to 17th when he wasn't playing due to injury. He's falling down the rankings now because he's playing like garbage (by his standards). So it's not really comparable.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Federer wasn't a contender for Nadal in 2010 though when Nadal had his only 3 Slam season. Federer was not a factor at RG or Wimbledon that year and lost to Djokovic in a close match at the USO, who played Nadal for the title. From 2005-2009, their careers definitely overlapped where they met 8 times in Slams and 7 Slam finals, and Nadal won 6 Slams. From 2010-2014, they didn't overlap nearly as much where they met 3 times in Slams but no finals. During this time though, Nadal met Djokovic 8 times in Slams and 7 Slam finals, and won 6 Slams between 2010 USO through 2014 RG. So both 5 year periods look about even to me. The only difference is Nadal won 2 more Slams in 2010.
Now in Fedal's older years in 2017 to half of 2018 while Djokovic was not a factor, they won 6 Slams but only met one time to contend for them. The fact that they were winning Slams at the same time is mainly of circumstance and certainly is not like they had to contend with each other to win them like they did back in the old days. Federer wasn't even playing clay then. Nadal has met Djokovic more times in the last 3 Slams, which is twice, than he met Federer for 6 Slams in 2017 and 2018.
I also don't see how Djokovic got Nadal when he was softened up when he met him 8 times in Slams and in 7 Slam finals when Nadal was between the ages of 24-28, and in all these years Nadal won at least one Slam.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Obviously Nadal and Djokovic have faced more often. That is not the point here.
The main point is Nadal's best and Djokovic's best have not overlapped except for 2011-13.
Whenever Federer faced Nadal, albeit a fewer times lesser, Nadal was winning more. Federer got the best versions of Nadal, including 2013.
Federer got the younger and peaker versions of Nadal.
Djokovic got peak versions of Nadal during 2011-13, but it was a relatively shorter period in comparison, though with lot of matches.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
And I disagree with this. It's basically even but for some reason you are trying to narrow the scope and create a different narrative. The Djokodal rivalry had already begun in 2010 USO and their best overlapped even into 2014. Federer barely faced Nadal in Slams in 2017 and early 2018 when they were winning Slams which is the point. Nadal is facing Djokovic more now than he faced Federer in Slams during that time. Also, Federer didn't play Nadal in Slams in 2013.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
A slam winning chance Fed faced peak Nadal at majors 10 times ( excluding AO 14, AO17)
A slam winning chance Novak faced peak Nadal 7 times at majors ( AO-12, Wimb- 11, RG-12,13,14 USO- 11/13 )
So they are far from even. I excluded 2017-19 Nadal, as Nadal is obviously not the same player he was when young. Their Wimb 18 was only competitive because Novak was facing a big 3 after a long time.
Novak was not winning USO 10 or any other prior encounter with Nadal at majors.
3lite
Professional
Endearingly cute.
January 2011
8 Slams less than Nadal
15 Slams less than Federer.
June 2016
2 Slams less than Nadal
5 Slams less than Federer
June 2018
5 Slams less than Nadal
8 Slams less than Federer
February 2019
2 Slams less than Nadal
5 Slams less than Federer
Obviously, right now Djokovic is where he already was in June 2016.
And another funny trivia - during that period January 2011 - February 2019, Nadal and Federer (Fedal) won 12 Slams, while Djokovic won 14 Slams.
.
Fiero425
Legend
Same thing w/ the Masters' & YEC events they semi-own '11-18; YEC - Fedal = (1)/Nole (4) Others = (3) Masters - Fedal/Nole -(24/29) Others (19)
Last edited:
tennisfan2015
Hall of Fame
USOPEN1991
Rookie
The entire Federer era has no historical significance. The world was attached to his successes and then the disillusionment was great, when people like Nadal, Djokovic and also Del Potro showed up. They were not fooled and took on the glove. Of course Federer was not easy to deal with. Very often it was made by skillful draws that he not Djokovic and Nadal got the same tournament. That's why there is so many matches between these two. You should get tired play, so that the so-called master had it a little easier. First of all happiness by birth and then a good deal. A great career. I'll take my hat off.
USOPEN1991
Rookie
The whole Federer fans are ridiculous. It starts with the fact that there are no Federer fans. After the resignation of Sampras began the weakest era in tennis. Even football fans know that. Between 1971 and 1986 there was only one birth of a good one Tennis player and that was the birth of Federer. That's 15 years. He was able to outdo people like Hewitt and Roddick. He set incredible hurdles in 5 years, because some are too old and others were still too young. Then Nadal came. And Djokovic. The rest is history.
USOPEN1991
Rookie
Novak is king.What I really love about Djokovic's career and resume is that unlike every other ATG throughout history there's really nothing you can pick holes in anywhere. Nadal has a mediocre record indoors and relative lack of dominance, certainly compared to Fedovic, and Federer had a poor H2H at the very peak of his powers with his greatest rival against whom it took 10 years to beat again in a major tournament whereas with Novak I honestly can't think of anything. He's just wonderful.
USOPEN1991
Rookie
Remember THE ELBOW
