Peak Djoker>Peak Fed?

Rafa24

Hall of Fame
#1
Fed never challenged Rafa seriously at RG and lets not forget feds bagel and breadstick final. Djoker beat him once(granted Nadal was off form in 2015 when he did it) and was close in 14.
 
#6
No, but on clay.

People will say well what about RG 2011 though or Rome 2006 or that younger Nadal was more fearsome on clay (don't think you can argue Djok would have handled Rafa of any version better on clay though even if due to matchup)

Still believe peak Djoker on clay edges Fed but whatever he's definitely more accomplished on clay with all those masters in addition to the 1 RG both have

Fed's peak overall probably higher, Djok's had the better stretches points and domination wise in particularly masters as well as slams in 2011 and especially 2015. But masters finals were B05 back in Fed's heyday. Also Fed's peak at W and USO were higher in the years both won them.
 
#10
Feds peak was before he had any real competition. He is the false goat imo. Losing h2h record to nadal and djoker.
What does:

Movement,explosiveness,Forehand that hits winner from out of position,With second highest RPM,more aggressive and flamboyant gameplan.A backhand with pace variance that could throw you off from even a good shot or just reset the rally Defense approaching Murrdalovic levels at times has to do with opponent?
 

Lew

Hall of Fame
#11
Yes.

in 2009 and 2011-15, the years with the best top5/10 results, Federer won 3 slams, 1 yec and 9 masters, while Djokovic won 9 slams, 4 yec and 22 masters.

If we exclude 2013, which was not a competitive year for Federer, it is 8 slams, 3 yec and 19 masters for Djokovic.
 

Lew

Hall of Fame
#12
What does:

Movement,explosiveness,Forehand that hits winner from out of position,With second highest RPM,more aggressive and flamboyant gameplan.A backhand with pace variance that could throw you off from even a good shot or just reset the rally Defense approaching Murrdalovic levels at times has to do with opponent?
22-27 yo Federer against 17-22 yo N/D/M: 15 wins and 23 losses. Outside clay: 12 wins and 13 losses.

Maybe having as one of his main opponents a guy like Davydenko, who closed 2005-07 at no.3-5 with 66.4% of wins, helped him look good a little bit.
 
#13
More seriously, Djoker is definitely better than Federer against Nadal specifically due to their respective match-ups.
Djoker is better than Nadal at BO3 tennis, I'll give you that (ironically Nadal has the Masters record) - but Djoker has not dominated Rafa at slam level:

AO: Djoker 1 - 0
RG: Rafa 5 - 1
Wimby: 1 - 1
USO: Rafa 2 - 1

Total: 8 - 4 to Rafa (not that it matters but it is 3 - 3 off clay)
 

Rafa24

Hall of Fame
#17
22-27 yo Federer against 17-22 yo N/D/M: 15 wins and 23 losses. Outside clay: 12 wins and 13 losses.

Maybe having as one of his main opponents a guy like Davydenko, who closed 2005-07 at no.3-5 with 66.4% of wins, helped him look good a little bit.
This is my point exactly. Fed is the false goat. it's an illusion.
 
#18
22-27 yo Federer against 17-22 yo N/D/M: 15 wins and 23 losses. Outside clay: 12 wins and 13 losses.

Maybe having as one of his main opponents a guy like Davydenko, who closed 2005-07 at no.3-5 with 66.4% of wins, helped him look good a little bit.
He was too busy racking up slams at that time to bother about h2h vs some youngsters in smaller tournaments. Nadal in Paris was the exception.

Between 2004 and 2007, Federer played 11 out of 12 GS finals on hard and grass and won all of them. That is his peak and is unmatched.
 

Rafa24

Hall of Fame
#20
Peak Federer

He was too busy racking up slams at that time to bother about h2h vs some youngsters in smaller tournaments. Nadal in Paris was the exception.

Between 2004 and 2007, Federer played 11 out of 12 GS finals on hard and grass and won all of them. That is his peak and is unmatched.
He vultured hard core back then I will give him that.
 
#22
Djoker is better than Nadal at BO3 tennis, I'll give you that (ironically Nadal has the Masters record) - but Djoker has not dominated Rafa at slam level:

AO: Djoker 1 - 0
RG: Rafa 5 - 1
Wimby: 1 - 1
USO: Rafa 2 - 1

Total: 8 - 4 to Rafa (not that it matters but it is 3 - 3 off clay)
True. I only meant he's done better than Federer has against Nadal - largely due to the match up.
 

Lew

Hall of Fame
#26
2009, 2011, 2012, 2014 were maybe the years with all the big3 near their best plus other good players behind them (murray, delpo, wawrinka, roddick, davydenko, tsonga, berdych, ferrer, cilic, nishikori*...)

*very underrated, an in form Nishikori is a great player, in 2014 he beat 8 top-6, which is a similar season record to Murray's 9, Delpo's 8 and Wawrinka's 7. And he was about to beat Nadal at Madrid before the injury.

in those years federer won 3 slams (1 yec, 8 masters), djokovic 5 slams (2 yec, 13 masters), nadal 4 slams (7 masters).
 
Last edited:
#27
I think in this day and age with the court homogenization, i could understand the argument. But older Fed still took him out on the fast courts which used to be a lot more prominent.
 
#29
22-27 yo Federer against 17-22 yo N/D/M: 15 wins and 23 losses. Outside clay: 12 wins and 13 losses.

Maybe having as one of his main opponents a guy like Davydenko, who closed 2005-07 at no.3-5 with 66.4% of wins, helped him look good a little bit.
@Lew

Let us understand "Peak"means absolute best level of players.

Disclaimer: Absolutely Nothing against Nadal,I respect him as Fred and Novak's equal,sometimes inferior and sometimes superior in different Tennis aspects.Just using him for contrast.


As per your proposal we consider three assumption:

1)Every player improves as he ages and therefore peaks ideally later in his career

2)That competition after 2007 led By Nadalovic is much stronger than 2004-07

3) That one must have good stats in that match and must be against an ATG to unable the display of high level(your own criterion)

Well, if we restrict ourselves only and only peak discussions then consider this


1) Statistically Nadal 's 2017 HC results is actually only slightly worse against 2013 (better than 2010) He has never made two HC slam finals in same year.As per your proposal (from previous thread)that Equal result in different years means that the player is actually better in the later year:
We conclude 2017 Nadal is peak Nadal on HC


Now in 2017

On Fast Hard courts according to CPI
Fred 2-0 Nadal

On slower hard court According to CPI
Fred 2-0 Nadal

Conclusion: Peak Fred is better than Peak Nadal on HC.

2)Now Fred in 2012 beat peak Murray and Djokovic back to back,has beaten peak Roddick in 2004, 2009,has beaten a similar to 2008 Rafa in 2007F(Stats proves this,you can search for it) and stretched the real version to the edge has beaten Sampras,is 2-1 against Nadal.Demolished Murray in 2015.By simple logic Peak Fred in Grass matches > anyone else. Only Djokovic has a claim but we may ignore it as apart from Fred and Nadal once , he doesn't have high quality scalps on grass.And has lost to Murray in F.

Let us just assume Peak Fred means post 2008
Above two leads us to have the

A)Conclusion Peak Fred on grass>all except Djokovic where it is debatable

B)Conclusion Peak Fred on HC > Peak Nadal

C)Conclusion Peak Fred on faster HC as evidenced by Cincinnati, Shanghai,Dubai,Us open somewhere near Djokovic if actually below him





Relative to Djokovic:

A)In 2011 Fred was the only one to beat Djokovic in Slams and probably the only one to win fairly against him .he also had match points against him.Nadal couldn't do it on clay in Bo3 ,on grass in Bo5 on hard in both Bo3 and Bo5.Murray couldn't do it either.

B) In 2012 Fred and Djoker were 1-1 in slams and Djokovic took 3-2 lead only edging the classic WTF.He also bagelled the HC great on HC

C) An injured Fred 2013( worst season statistically since 2003) pushed the best (statically) indoor version of Djokovic to three sets each time they played.Rafa lost in straight in the same tournament (WTF).

D)2014 just a year before the Monstrous 2015, Fred had a record 3-2 against Djokovic.

E)In 2015 when Nadal was busy trying to win games off peak Djokovic,Fred had 5-3 record and a 3-3 record in BO3.

Conclusion Peak Fred is much closer to peak Djokovic as evidenced by 2011 and 2015 results than Peak Rafa.




Conclusion Peak Fred is around the sams stratosphere as peak Nadal if less than Peak Djokovic.


Conclusion that adding longevity,Overall results (slam totals,WTF,Weeks at no.1 e.t.c)considering consistency and level of play as a combined whole

Fred is as much a G.O.A.T candidate as. Nadal and Djokovic at worst

And at most optimistic evaluation of overall facts he trumps both.

Conclusion: The end result that Fred is a fake G.O.A.T doesn't lie in the range of fact based assumption drawn from above.
 
Last edited:
#30
On clay and slow hardcourt? Yes. On grass and fast hardcourt? No. Djokovic won 5/6 Australian Opens from 2011-2016, 4 Sunshine Doubles overall (a record) and 3 in a row from 2014-2016, and has a 14-2 career head to head against Fedal at the Australian Open, Indian Wells and Miami. He is very dominant on that surface and I think he should get even more credit than he does for that as well as how high his peak level was in some of those runs. Then you have to look at years where he just took it to Nadal on clay and has beaten him in every major clay tournament, once at RG, 3 times in Rome, 2 times in MC and once in Madrid. He also has all the major clay tournaments and won all the clay Masters titles more than once, and I think he has proved that he would have been more competitive against any version of Nadal on clay.

Federer is clearly ahead on fast hardcourt and grass though winning Wimbledon and USO 5 times in a row each in quite a dominant run, and displayed higher peak levels overall as well as winning all the fast hardcourt Masters. I think grass is Federer's best surface overall and he's unmatched by his rivals in his peak level and dominance. Personally, I think Federer has the average highest peak level and I agree with ELO in that I believe Djokovic had the overall highest peak though it was shorter than Federer's.
 
Last edited:
#31
On clay and slow hardcourt? Yes. On grass and fast hardcourt? No. Djokovic won 5/6 Australian Opens from 2011-2016, 4 Sunshine Doubles overall (a record) and 3 in a row from 2014-2016, and has a 14-2 career head to head against Fedal at the Australian Open, Indian Wells and Miami. He is very dominant on that surface and I think he should get even more credit than he does for that as well as high his peak level was in some of those runs. Then you have to look at years where he just took it to Nadal on clay and has beaten him in every major clay tournament, once at RG, 3 times in Rome, 2 times in MC and once in Madrid. He also has all the major clay tournaments and won all the clay Masters titles more than once, and I think he has proved that he would have been more competitive against any version of Nadal on clay.

Federer is clearly ahead on fast hardcourt and grass though winning Wimbledon and USO 5 times in a row each in quite a dominant run, and displayed higher peak levels overall as well as winning all the fast hardcourt Masters. I think grass is Federer's best surface overall and he's unmatched by his rivals in his peak level and dominance. Personally, I think Federer has the average highest peak level and I agree with ELO in that I believe Djokovic had the overall highest peak though it was shorter than Federer's.

I actually believe the reverse of the last line. I think Djokovic was the one who could sustain his peak better than Fred not only over a match,or stretch of the season but also across surfaces.Only that Fred could reach greater stratospheric levels in short bursts that on rare occasion would last the match or the remaining stretch of the tourament.
 
#32
I actually believe the reverse of the last line. I think Djokovic was the one who could sustain his peak better than Fred not only over a match,or stretch of the season but also across surfaces.Only that Fred could reach greater stratospheric levels in short bursts that on rare occasion would last the match or the remaining stretch of the tourament.
I actually go with Federer with the higher average overall and he has the more dominant consecutive runs in majors like 10 GS finals in a row or the consecutive SF in a row record. I go with Djokovic with the short bursts because of what he did at his peaks in 2011 and 2015-2016, amassing the points record, winning 4 slams in a row and the WTF, etc.
 
#34
Federer would dominate Nadal and Djokovic on super fast courts. Nadal and Djokovic thrived on slowed down courts which helped their defensive baseline game so they could run down every ball. And it's obvious that AO, Wimby and especially USO are very slow these days. All because the organizers want long rallies which I guess helps bring in a wider audience.
 
#36
He vultured hard core back then I will give him that.
And Nadal hasn't vultured 3 slams since last year?

And is # of wins against top 10 opponents even relevant when we've got guys like Busta or Anderson making top 10?

And why am I wasting time responding to a troll thread?
 
#39
I actually go with Federer with the higher average overall and he has the more dominant consecutive runs in majors like 10 GS finals in a row or the consecutive SF in a row record. I go with Djokovic with the short bursts because of what he did at his peaks in 2011 and 2015-2016, amassing the points record, winning 4 slams in a row and the WTF, etc.

Of course for that longer period of time Federer is better I was talking of much smaller spans like from a single match to a tournament to 3-4 month like situation.In the sense that Fred had the habit of looking unspectacular and then for a period of time playing unbelievable tennis.I remember him not looking unbeatable in 2004 US Open and then going as close to invincible a player can go HC.In 2006 AO he was as horrible as he could be during those days. But then played he also played as well he could at times in almost each of the last 3-4 matches.
 
Last edited:
#40
Fed never challenged Rafa seriously at RG and lets not forget feds bagel and breadstick final. Djoker beat him once(granted Nadal was off form in 2015 when he did it) and was close in 14.
How they challenge Rafa on clay, doesn't decide who's the better player...

Please, climb down from that way too high horse :oops:

No, but on clay.

People will say well what about RG 2011 though or Rome 2006 or that younger Nadal was more fearsome on clay (don't think you can argue Djok would have handled Rafa of any version better on clay though even if due to matchup)

Still believe peak Djoker on clay edges Fed but whatever he's definitely more accomplished on clay with all those masters in addition to the 1 RG both have

Fed's peak overall probably higher, Djok's had the better stretches points and domination wise in particularly masters as well as slams in 2011 and especially 2015. But masters finals were B05 back in Fed's heyday. Also Fed's peak at W and USO were higher in the years both won them.
Good post :)

If anything, Novak has underachieved in RG.
One could also say Fed met an even better version of the clayBull than Novak did?

AO - even
RG - Novak
W - Roger
US - Roger
 
Last edited:
#41
Djokovic beat 10 top-3s in two 8-10 months runs: AO-UO11 and IW15-AO16.

Was an alien there.
But Fred had 2-3 record in BO3 in the latter period (Nice of you to remove dubai.) And the only man to beat him and take 2 sets off of him in the first.

stats prove that Fred is at least better than the rest !

also would have been nice if you actually replied to the long post I made with proper counterpoints relevant to the ones I made
 
#43
Of course for that longer period of time Federer is better I was talking of much smaller spans like from a single match to a tournament to 3-4 month like situation.In the sense that Fred had the habit of looking unspectacular and then for a period of time playing unbelievable tennis.I remember him not looking unbeatable in 2004 US Open and then going as close to invincible a player can go HC.In 2006 AO as horrible as he could be at times in almost each of the last 3-4 matches.
Oh I see. Well I think they both had that ability. Like Djokovic not looking that great in the earlier rounds of Wimby 2015, having to come back from 2 sets down to love to Anderson and not looking spectacular against Gasquet and then giving the best grass performance of his career in the final. Or being taken to 5 sets against Simon in the AO 2016 and making 100 unforced errors and then playing one of the best matches of his career in the SF. Federer has done this as well so it could go either way in my opinion.
 
#44
@Lew

Let us understand "Peak"means absolute best level of players.

Disclaimer: Absolutely Nothing against Nadal,I respect him as Fred and Novak's equal,sometimes inferior and sometimes superior in different Tennis aspects.Just using him for contrast.


As per your proposal we consider three assumption:

1)Every player improves as he ages and therefore peaks ideally later in his career

2)That competition after 2007 led By Nadalovic is much stronger than 2004-07

3) That one must have good stats in that match and must be against an ATG to unable the display of high level(your own criterion)

Well, if we restrict ourselves only and only peak discussions then consider this


1) Statistically Nadal 's 2017 HC results is actually only slightly worse against 2013 (better than 2010) He has never made two HC slam finals in same year.As per your proposal (from previous thread)that Equal result in different years means that the player is actually better in the later year:
We conclude 2017 Nadal is peak Nadal on HC


Now in 2017

On Fast Hard courts according to CPI
Fred 2-0 Nadal

On slower hard court According to CPI
Fred 2-0 Nadal

Conclusion: Peak Fred is better than Peak Nadal on HC.

2)Now Fred in 2012 beat peak Murray and Djokovic back to back,has beaten peak Roddick in 2004, 2009,has beaten a similar to 2008 Rafa in 2007F(Stats proves this,you can search for it) and stretched the real version to the edge has beaten Sampras,is 2-1 against Nadal.Demolished Murray in 2015.By simple logic Peak Fred in Grass matches > anyone else. Only Djokovic has a claim but we may ignore it as apart from Fred and Nadal once , he doesn't have high quality scalps on grass.And has lost to Murray in F.

Let us just assume Peak Fred means post 2008
Above two leads us to have the

A)Conclusion Peak Fred on grass>all except Djokovic where it is debatable

B)Conclusion Peak Fred on HC > Peak Nadal

C)Conclusion Peak Fred on faster HC as evidenced by Cincinnati, Shanghai,Dubai,Us open somewhere near Djokovic if actually below him





Relative to Djokovic:

A)In 2011 Fred was the only one to beat Djokovic in Slams and probably the only one to win fairly against him .he also had match points against him.Nadal couldn't do it on clay in Bo3 ,on grass in Bo5 on hard in both Bo3 and Bo5.Murray couldn't do it either.

B) In 2012 Fred and Djoker were 1-1 in slams and Djokovic took 3-2 lead only edging the classic WTF.He also bagelled the HC great on HC

C) An injured Fred 2013( worst season statistically since 2003) pushed the best (statically) indoor version of Djokovic to three sets each time they played.Rafa lost in straight in the same tournament (WTF).

D)2014 just a year before the Monstrous 2015, Fred had a record 3-2 against Djokovic.

E)In 2015 when Nadal was busy trying to win games off peak Djokovic,Fred had 5-3 record and a 3-3 record in BO3.

Conclusion Peak Fred is much closer to peak Djokovic as evidenced by 2011 and 2015 results than Peak Rafa.




Conclusion Peak Fred is around the sams stratosphere as peak Nadal if less than Peak Djokovic.


Conclusion that adding longevity,Overall results (slam totals,WTF,Weeks at no.1 e.t.c)considering consistency and level of play as a combined whole

Fred is as much a G.O.A.T candidate as. Nadal and Djokovic at worst

And at most optimistic evaluation of overall facts he trumps both.

Conclusion: The end result that Fred is a fake G.O.A.T doesn't lie in the range of fact based assumption drawn from above.
Just adding some of my opinions here. Nadals peak on HC was 2013. Ya he dint play Australia but that doesn't mean 2017 was his peak on HC. And 2017 isn't peak Federer on HC . I would say peak fed on HC was something from 06 to 07. Peak Federer on hard never beat peak Nadal on HC.. may be he beat the next best version of Nadal on HC in 17 but that wasn't Nadals peak and the Fed that beat him wasn't peak Fed too.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
#46
No, but on clay.

People will say well what about RG 2011 though or Rome 2006 or that younger Nadal was more fearsome on clay (don't think you can argue Djok would have handled Rafa of any version better on clay though even if due to matchup)

Still believe peak Djoker on clay edges Fed but whatever he's definitely more accomplished on clay with all those masters in addition to the 1 RG both have

Fed's peak overall probably higher, Djok's had the better stretches points and domination wise in particularly masters as well as slams in 2011 and especially 2015. But masters finals were B05 back in Fed's heyday. Also Fed's peak at W and USO were higher in the years both won them.
Problem is that for some reason Novak rarely (if ever) brought his level from CC masters into the FO. Novak is a much better Rome player than a FO one for example and I wouldn't put that down to just Nadal (which people around here too often tend to do no matter the player or the stage of Nadal's career).

If you include the whole CC season (as one should) Novak is the better player/has a higher peak on clay for me but at the FO it's close to 50-50.
 
#48
Just adding some of my opinions here. Nadals peak on HC was 2013. Ya he dint play Australia but that doesn't mean 2017 was his peak on HC. And 2017 isn't peak Federer on HC . I would say peak fed on HC was something from 06 to 07. Peak Federer on hard never beat peak Nadal on HC.. may be he beat the next best version of Nadal on HC in 17 but that wasn't Nadals peak and the Fed that beat him wasn't peak Fed too.
Well I thought it was clear from the get go,the post was aimed @Lew and with intention of trapping him in his own logic,Not at all what I actually think.That doesn't mean that each conclusion I made was different from the structure of logical analysis Lew follows.Of course after all that hard work he has not replied.
 
#50
Problem is that for some reason Novak rarely (if ever) brought his level from CC masters into the FO. Novak is a much better Rome player than a FO one for example and I wouldn't put that down to just Nadal (which people around here too often tend to do no matter the player or the stage of Nadal's career).

If you include the whole CC season (as one should) Novak is the better player/has a higher peak on clay for me but at the FO it's close to 50-50.
Yes I agree, I think he has flaws in B05 on clay as compared to B03 and I don't think it's just due to Nadal or the court at RG which is pretty comparable to Rome, if slightly faster perhaps.

What it comes down to I think is he lacks patience for the ebbs, flow and inevitable struggle of a B05 clay match. I think he can tend to be too passive and then lose patience and start walloping wildly if things don't go his way. (Seen this vs. Wawrinka for example) . Part of being a great B05 clay court player is really a patience of spirit and a steady temperament; that's an area where Nadal soundly has Djok beat.
 
Top