Peak Djokovic (2011) is NOT better than peak Federer

[axlrose]

1) Federer beat Djokovic at French Open
2) He almost beat him at US Open (had a few match points, was leading 5-3, 40-15 in the fifth set), not an excuse but it obviously means he had the ability to beat peak Djokovic. (If Federer won this match, he would've led 2-1 in their 3 slam meetings).
3) Don't forget that 2011 Federer is not peak Federer. If it was peak Federer, the result of their last match would very likely have been different.


The gap between 2011 Federer and 2011 Djokovic is not that big.
So stop saying peak Djokovic would destroy peak Federer, aight?


2011 French Open:

2011 US Open where Federer blew his chance to win the match (go to 21:46)

Nobody says Peak Djokovic would Destroy Peak Federer in that hypothetical match-up.

People (except Federer fans) just say that Peak Djokovic (1 year time) looks more Impressive than Peak Federer.

Perhaps Federer was just too unlucky that he didn't have such competition as Djokovic in 2011 to prove how great his peak was. Not his fault. Anyway he's still luckier than Laver, the man who was absent in Slams for half a decade during his prime but still called it a career with 11 Slams and 2 CYGS.

Wait, are you a Nadal fan trying to provoke violence between Fedr and Djoker fanbase? : D

 

[metsman]

Nobody says Peak Djokovic would Destroy Peak Federer in that hypothetical match-up.

People (except Federer fans) just say that Peak Djokovic (1 year time) looks more Impressive than Peak Federer.

Perhaps Federer was just too unlucky that he didn't have such competition as Djokovic in 2011 to prove how great his peak was. Not his fault. Anyway he's still luckier than Laver, the man who was absent in Slams for half a decade during his prime but still called it a career with 11 Slams and 2 CYGS.

Wait, are you a Nadal fan trying to provoke violence between Fedr and Djoker fanbase? : D

Federer went through a tougher road to win both AO and Wimby than Djokovic did in 2011 at those tournaments. Agassi of 04 USO was about as good as Federer of 11 USO. Not seeing much difference here besides Djokovic beating a mediocre Nadal in the USO final. I'm sure Fed of the 04 USO final would be shaking in his boots facing that Nadal.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Like someone said earlier, Federer lost to a teenager on more than one occasion in his prime. I'd give the edge to Djokovic prime for prime. Better competition generally in 2011 than in Fed's prime as well (come on now, even Fed fans can't attempt to deny that, lmao)

Sampras went on a 5 match losing streak to a teenage Hewitt lmao...

 

[Shank Volley]

Nobody says Peak Djokovic would Destroy Peak Federer in that hypothetical match-up.

People (Djokovic fans) just say that Peak Djokovic (1 year time) looks more Impressive than Peak Federer.

Perhaps Federer was just too unlucky that he didn't have such competition as Djokovic in 2011 to prove how great his peak was. Not his fault. Anyway he's still luckier than Laver, the man who was absent in Slams for half a decade during his prime but still called it a career with 11 Slams and 2 CYGS.

Wait, are you a Nadal fan trying to provoke violence between Fedr and Djoker fanbase? : D

Fixed that for you.

 

[chjtennis]

The best picture will only emerge after both of them call it a career.

 

[killerboi2]

Sampras went on a 5 match losing streak to a teenage Hewitt lmao...

Pete on your mind constantly lmao this isn't the first time you've brought him up in threads that have nothing to do with him. Anyway it was 4 matches, with 3 of them coming in Pete's worst year on tour (2001) and Pete's last year on tour. This is PRIME Federer losing to a teenager.

 

[tennisaddict]

Pete on your mind constantly lmao this isn't the first time you've brought him up in threads that have nothing to do with him. Anyway it was 4 matches, with 3 of them coming in Pete's worst year on tour (2001) and Pete's last year on tour. This is PRIME Federer losing to a teenager.

Pete Sampras lost to the who's who of tennis (unknowns) at RG.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Pete on your mind constantly lmao this isn't the first time you've brought him up in threads that have nothing to do with him. Anyway it was 4 matches, with 3 of them coming in Pete's worst year on tour (2001) and Pete's last year on tour. This is PRIME Federer losing to a teenager.

What about him losing to a teenage Scud in a major? Rofl.

I bring up Pete because he's your boy and you're bitter about him getting usurped by Fed.

I think Laver is the GOAT anyway but the bitterness from you is insane.

 

[killerboi2]

What about him losing to a teenage Scud in a major? Rofl.

Federer lost to young man Murray at Cincy 2006 and 20 year old Del Potro at USO. The main losses were against Nadal though. Those are what hurt his legacy the most and why I give prime Djokovic the edge.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Federer lost to young man Murray at Cincy 2006 and 20 year old Del Potro at USO. The main losses were against Nadal though. Those are what hurt his legacy the most and why I give prime Djokovic the edge.

Teenage Murray and Del Potro >>>>>> teenage Scud.

Sometimes teenagers can really bring it and play at high levels for certain matches.

 

[BeatlesFan]

Federer lost to young man Murray at Cincy 2006 and 20 year old Del Potro at USO. The main losses were against Nadal though. Those are what hurt his legacy the most and why I give prime Djokovic the edge.

There is nothing that "harms" his legacy. His legacy is deservedly the most secure of any man who ever picked up a racket. Let's just take one match you mention: 2009 USO. Even had Fed not choked that, he'd still have 18 slams, two more than the next guy in line. His legacy is one that it's impossible to attack, it's rock solid.

 

[metsman]

Teenage Murray and Del Potro >>>>>> teenage Scud.

Sometimes teenagers can really bring it and play at high levels for certain matches.

96 AO Scud played way better to beat Pete than 06 CIncy Murray did to beat Fed.

 

[ForumMember]

Pete on your mind constantly lmao this isn't the first time you've brought him up in threads that have nothing to do with him. Anyway it was 4 matches, with 3 of them coming in Pete's worst year on tour (2001) and Pete's last year on tour. This is PRIME Federer losing to a teenager.

Why you are using logic in this thread? That is forbidden.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Why you are using logic in this thread? That is forbidden.

You never do, so...

 

[Deleted member 307496]

96 AO Scud played way better to beat Pete than 06 CIncy Murray did to beat Fed.

Yeah but I can't use that logic with killerboi2. He gets the sh1ts whenever you talk about Murray beating a subpar Fed.

 

[justasport]

Roger at his peak is the best ever

 

[Vady_Vamos]

Well, Federer actually had to play his 2nd best clay court match to beat Djokovic with the 7-6(5) 6-3 3-6 7-6(5) scoreline. Roger hasn't made more breaks than Novak and won both tiebreaks with one minibreak handicap. So, it's not old Federer beating peak Djokovic, but peak Clayerer winning lottery against the Djokovic who was kicked off the rhytm after Fognini's withdrawal.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Well, Federer actually had to play his 2nd best clay court match to beat Djokovic with the 7-6(5) 6-3 3-6 7-6(5) scoreline. Roger hasn't made more breaks than Novak and won both tiebreaks with one minibreak handicap. So, it's not old Federer beating peak Djokovic, but peak Clayerer winning lottery against the Djokovic who was kicked off the rhytm after Fognini's withdrawal.

Nadal had to play his best HC match to win the 2017 US Open.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

The 2014 WTF field was Federer, Djokovic, Stan and a bunch of paraplegics. Biggest joke of a year ender I've ever seen especially since Fed had to withdraw. Please. Federer was handing out beatdowns at will too and he was 33 with no juice off the baseline as we would see the minute he faced someone decent. Would have been nice to see how the final would have unfolded. Saying any version of Djokovic has a clear edge on peak Fed at the YEC is rather rich. Federer routined Djokovic in Shanghai and in the 15 WTF RR (before getting routined in the final himself) and somehow 14 Djokovic is a clear class above a far better version of Federer because he played a bunch of guys who couldn't keep 3 balls in the court?

That's just the way I see it, and I trust my instincts. You don't have to agree, but I simply don't see anyone beating that lockdown version of Djokovic in 02 arena. That's all I have to say about it. 2014 version of Djokovic trumps any version of Fed that played at arena. And please don't put words in my mouth...I didn't say anything about peak Fed, I speak about the versions of Fed that played 02 area. Federer was past his peak when he started played 02, no version of post peak Federer 09 onwards is beating the peakiest version of Djokovic 2014 version, at the 02 imo- That is my point.

 

[mike danny]

Here are the facts, without any excuses or fantasies:

1) Federer won most of his slams against mugs and non-greats (Baghdatis, Gonzalez, Philipoussis, Hewitt, Cilic, Roddick, Agassi, Safin, Soderling, etc. while playing players like Blake, Bjorkman, Kiefer, etc. before the finals).
There is an enormous difference between the players Nole played and won against compared to the players Federer played and won against.
2) Federer failed most of the time against his biggest rivals, especially at slams. When people from 100 years from now want to watch some of Federer's matches against Nole and Nadal, they'll watch mostly losses by Federer.
3) Federer won a lot against Nole before Nole entered the top-10 and was ranked as low as 50.
4) Federer couldn't even dominate gluten Nole once he entered the top-10. Gluten Nole entered the top-10 on March 2007. The H2H was 6-6 from March 2007-September 2010, with gluten top-10 Nole winning at 2 slams, 3 masters, and Basel.
5) Gluten-free Nole made Federer his turkey. He is also leading 8-2 in slams since 2009.
6) Federer stopped winning almost entirely once tennis became physical, the competition got better, and better players than him emerged.
Fact: Federer only won 1 AO from 2008-2016
Fact: Federer has 0 USO since 2008
Fact: Federer had 2 Wimby from 2008-2016
Fact: Federer had 1 slam in almost 7 years before 2017
7) Federer said that he was at his peak and was playing the best tennis of his life in 2015. His coach said that also. Many others did too. And if you remove Nole, he was having some of his most dominant slams ever.
See? I have facts on my side. I don't need to come up with delusions, fantasies, or make a million excuses. I have absolute facts. That's something you don't have and never will



P.S.
Federer VS BIG 4 in 2006
2-4 Nadal
o-1 Murray
2-0 Djokovic
Total 4-5


Djokovic VS BIG 4 in 2011
6-0 Nadal
4-1 Federer
2-1Murray(ret)
Total 12-2

 

[mike danny]

All he does is copy and paste the same stats into every thread. My advice would be for everyone to put him on ignore.

And I will copy paste my typical response to him every time. You'll see what the response is on page 5 of this thread.

 

[mike danny]

Well, Federer actually had to play his 2nd best clay court match to beat Djokovic with the 7-6(5) 6-3 3-6 7-6(5) scoreline. Roger hasn't made more breaks than Novak and won both tiebreaks with one minibreak handicap. So, it's not old Federer beating peak Djokovic, but peak Clayerer winning lottery against the Djokovic who was kicked off the rhytm after Fognini's withdrawal.

What about USO then? Fed at 30 still lead 2 sets to love and had 2 MP's against peak Djokovic.

 

[KINGROGER]

Federer lost to young man Murray at Cincy 2006 and 20 year old Del Potro at USO. The main losses were against Nadal though. Those are what hurt his legacy the most and why I give prime Djokovic the edge.

You can’t have watched much actual tennis between the two then.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

What about USO then? Fed at 30 still lead 2 sets to love and had 2 MP's against peak Djokovic.

USO - Federer's peak is greater than Djokovic's. They have played six times, good sample size.

 

[mike danny]

USO - Federer's peak is greater than Djokovic's. They have played six times, good sample size.

Quite incredible that their peaks never coincided at the USO despite playing 6 times there

But it's the fairest slam for both as they have played each other when one was in his prime/peak and the other wasn't an equal number of times.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

Quite incredible that their peaks never coincided at the USO despite playing 6 times there

But it's the fairest slam for both as they have played each other when one was in his prime/peak and the other wasn't an equal number of times.

Yes. Primes have overlapped, but not peaks.

 

[killerboi2]

What about USO then? Fed at 30 still lead 2 sets to love and had 2 MP's against peak Djokovic.

There were 3 matches (2010,2011,2015) he could/should have won according to his own fans and he lost all of them. I don't do moral victories. He breezed through his competition every single occasion so i'm not buying his fans excuses (old man when he loses, god when he wins) The man seems to regain and lose his form at a lightswitch, depending on who he's playing.

 

[KINGROGER]

There were 3 matches (2010,2011,2015) he could/should have won according to his own fans and he lost all of them. I don't do moral victories. He breezed through his competition every single occasion so i'm not buying his fans excuses (old man when he loses, god when he wins) The man seems to regain and lose his form at a lightswitch, depending on who he's playing.

Yeah but the point is, if Federer can hang with/ have 2 MP vs peak Djokovic when past his prkme, how would peak Federer get on with his superior FH, movement, defence etc?

 

[Deleted member 307496]

There were 3 matches (2010,2011,2015) he could/should have won according to his own fans and he lost all of them. I don't do moral victories. He breezed through his competition every single occasion so i'm not buying his fans excuses (old man when he loses, god when he wins) The man seems to regain and lose his form at a lightswitch, depending on who he's playing.

How do you think Pete would do if he had a rival the caliber of Djokovic in his prime? He'd probably only finish with about 8 slams lmao.

 

[Noleberic123]

How do you think Pete would do if he had a rival the caliber of Djokovic in his prime? He'd probably only finish with about 8 slams lmao.

But Sampras is better at two of the slams while Djokovic is better at the other two. Imagine how tough is would be for Sampras to win the AO with prime Djokovic around. They would both finish with 10-14 slams had they played against each other. Djokovic would have been a multiple time FO champion in the 90s.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

But Sampras is better at two of the slams while Djokovic is better at the other two. Imagine how tough is would be for Sampras to win the AO with prime Djokovic around. They would both finish with 10-14 slams had they played against each other. Djokovic would have been a multiple time FO champion in the 90s.

Fed is better at the other two slams too and Djokovic has cut into his potential count. Pete wouldn't always beat him at the USO if he loses to guys like Rafter there.

In one final he beat Cedric Pioline. Peak Novak Djokovic would be a much bigger challenge.

Another final he beat Michael Chang. Once again Djokovic is a much bigger challenge.

 

[citybert]

The video quality of that match is so terrible compared to today. very sad about that. even 2008 rafa/rog was better quality

 

[killerboi2]

In one final he beat Cedric Pioline. Peak Novak Djokovic would be a much bigger challenge.

Another final he beat Michael Chang. Once again Djokovic is a much bigger challenge.

Prime Djokovic lost Lendl's Murray, Nadal, Nishikori (lmao). Also lost to Wawrinka, though he might have been past it at this point. Pete would be able to beat Djokovic there for sure.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Prime Djokovic lost Lendl's Murray, Nadal, Nishikori (lmao). Also lost to Wawrinka, though he might have been past it at this point. Pete would be able to beat Djokovic there for sure.

Pete nearly lost to Alex Corretja (lmao) and lost to Patrick Rafter there. Not much difference, actually those guys are worse than all those guys you mentioned bar Nishikori.

Djokovic would definitely cut into his USO count.

And stop trying to pump up Murray by saying "Lendl's Murray". He's still freaking Murray rofl..

 

[KINGROGER]

Prime Djokovic lost Lendl's Murray, Nadal, Nishikori (lmao). Also lost to Wawrinka, though he might have been past it at this point. Pete would be able to beat Djokovic there for sure.

If it was fast as 90s I don’t give Djokovic much hope vs Federer. Vs Pete he could grab a win seeing who he actually lost to.

 

[killerboi2]

If it was fast as 90s I don’t give Djokovic much hope vs Federer. Vs Pete he could grab a win seeing who he actually lost to.

Prime Pete with homogenized fast court surfaces year round and a bazooka would roast any big 3 member at USO.

 

[Chanwan]

Again, this is where you and I disagree. I think he was the better player in USO 15 final, and should have won it. He choked. It had nothing to do with not having the physical ability on that night, he cracked, while Djokovic was solid mentally as a rock in that cauldron. W 2014, I agree, he wasn't at his full best, and it was to his credit he took it to five sets, however, Djokovic also had his own slam final demons in that match to deal with. W 2015 and AO 2016, Djokovic was at his absolute peak, and that is where Federer being past his peak showed more.

Feel free to disagree, but the age disadvantage for Fed and age advantage for Djokovic is, imo, precisely the reason why Fed cracked and Djoko was cool as a cucumber.
1. Both had W 2014-15 in the back of their head
2. Both knew that the longer the match went, the bigger the advantage to Djokovic - that's a massive advantage regardless of whether or not the match turns into a slugfest.
3. That leads to a sense of urgency on Fed's behalf, causing him to 'choke' and 'err' and feel he needs to win it in 4.
4. Fed must have felt this could be his last chance of adding to his slam tally. Novak was in the business of winning slams left and right. Again that gives another sense of urgency and pressure on Fed and relieves Novak of some of it (i.e. he expects to be in every slam final at this stage of his career).

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Prime Pete with homogenized fast court surfaces year round and a bazooka would roast any big 3 member at USO.

I'll give you the years he defeated Andre though just because I'm being nice. He also better not be drinking Coca Cola during the changeovers like it's the 90s either if he wants any hope at beating those guys, especially Djokovic during his beast-mode runs at the USO.

 

[KINGROGER]

Prime Pete with homogenized fast court surfaces year round and a bazooka would roast any big 3 member at USO.

Even Fed? I think it’d be an epic match between 2 all court big serving players.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

Feel free to disagree, but the age disadvantage for Fed and age advantage for Djokovic is, imo, precisely the reason why Fed cracked and Djoko was cool as a cucumber.
1. Both had W 2014-15 in the back of their head
2. Both knew that the longer the match went, the bigger the advantage to Djokovic - that's a massive advantage regardless of whether or not the match turns into a slugfest.
3. That leads to a sense of urgency on Fed's behalf, causing him to 'choke' and 'err' and feel he needs to win it in 4.
4. Fed must have felt this could be his last chance of adding to his slam tally. Novak was in the business of winning slams left and right. Again that gives another sense of urgency and pressure on Fed and relieves Novak of some of it (i.e. he expects to be in every slam final at this stage of his career).

You make valid points. I agree Federer has shown urgency to win that 18th slam and caused him to feel pressure.

But to add to it. Everyone outside of Djokovic's box were solidly behind Federer, and Djokovic having to deal which such wretched behavior is a testament to him as a man, nothing to do with how young or old he is. 23 thousand fans cheering on your every fault, doesn't matter what the age, any man would have been overwhelmed by it.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

How do you think Pete would do if he had a rival the caliber of Djokovic in his prime? He'd probably only finish with about 8 slams lmao.

 

[Chanwan]

You make valid points. I agree Federer has shown urgency to win that 18th slam and caused him to feel pressure.

But to add to it. Everyone outside of Djokovic's box were solidly behind Federer, and Djokovic having to deal which such wretched behavior is a testament to him as a man, nothing to do with how young or old he is. 23 thousand fans cheering on your every fault, doesn't matter what the age, any man would have been overwhelmed by it.

True as well, he's come to embrace it by now

 

[tennisaddict]

Feel free to disagree, but the age disadvantage for Fed and age advantage for Djokovic is, imo, precisely the reason why Fed cracked and Djoko was cool as a cucumber.
1. Both had W 2014-15 in the back of their head
2. Both knew that the longer the match went, the bigger the advantage to Djokovic - that's a massive advantage regardless of whether or not the match turns into a slugfest.
3. That leads to a sense of urgency on Fed's behalf, causing him to 'choke' and 'err' and feel he needs to win it in 4.
4. Fed must have felt this could be his last chance of adding to his slam tally. Novak was in the business of winning slams left and right. Again that gives another sense of urgency and pressure on Fed and relieves Novak of some of it (i.e. he expects to be in every slam final at this stage of his career).

Djok knew if he resisted enough he would end up winning eventually. 2014 WImb, 2015 Wimb, 2015 USO, 2016 AO . The scorelines kept getting better and better for Djok as Fed felt he had to get off to a good start early enough and when that would not happen , Fed would hit a panic button

 

[mike danny]

Feel free to disagree, but the age disadvantage for Fed and age advantage for Djokovic is, imo, precisely the reason why Fed cracked and Djoko was cool as a cucumber.
1. Both had W 2014-15 in the back of their head
2. Both knew that the longer the match went, the bigger the advantage to Djokovic - that's a massive advantage regardless of whether or not the match turns into a slugfest.
3. That leads to a sense of urgency on Fed's behalf, causing him to 'choke' and 'err' and feel he needs to win it in 4.
4. Fed must have felt this could be his last chance of adding to his slam tally. Novak was in the business of winning slams left and right. Again that gives another sense of urgency and pressure on Fed and relieves Novak of some of it (i.e. he expects to be in every slam final at this stage of his career).

I wonder if that sense of urgency is gone now for Federer after 2017 when he claimed 2 majors.

 

[Chanwan]

I wonder if that sense of urgency is gone now for Federer after 2017 when he claimed 2 majors.

I think it could be yes. The 5 years not winning and coming up short def. played a part. I think part of him getting over the Rafa hurdle was accepting defeat/accepting come what may. And accepting that he needed to play freely to win. Doesn't mean he can't freeze up again, but I do think he's more aware of the benefits of having a free head so to speak

 

[vex]

Well two matches, and that's half the slams, and even the biggest fanboy isn't taking Djokovic at Wimby prime for prime, I hope although I'm sure @RF-18 has plenty of wisdom as to why he would. Unless of course you want to argue that 2011 RG and 2011 USO weren't among Djokovic's best forms at those events. RG you can write off with the usual servebot/quicker conditions/djokovic too much rest etc. But Federer just a couple months later having two match points on serve, and Djokovic needing him to choke with 3 UFE in a 5 point span to avoid losing 6-3 in the fifth, in Djokovic's absolute best USO year, is a little harder to do.

Federer never lost to anyone at slams in his peak besides Nadal on clay, everyone knows he is better there, and Safin once (extremely close match and Federer might have won anyways had a line call gone differently), and besides that no one ever came close to having match points. Regardless, most Fed fans will acknowledge that a peak Safin on HC can given anyone, including Federer, a run for their money especially at AO.

The incongruity here is that Djokovic was millimeters from losing twice to the 29/30 year old version of the guy who apparently isn't supposed to be as good peak for peak because their slam meetings when Fed was 33/34 say so. No one wins every match, but you'd hope that the greatest peak player of all time at his peak wouldn't come within random chance of losing at two slams to the same guy, not at his peak. If Djokovic fans want to claim their guy is the best, they are better off bringing up 15-16 and doing some mental gymnastics because at least there isn't obvious counter evidence.

But think about that. Freaking Federer,the GOAT upset him. Ok, I think he can live with that. Isn't it fair to say that if Fed 04-07 Fed had to face the lesser version of Djokovic (say 2014-16) he'd have a loss or two in his peak? I think so. And Djoker had the mental toughness to just say No to Fed's USO upset bid.

 

[vex]

please do

Zev
Shap
Rub

I'm sure you'll naysay but they unquestionably have the potential.

 

[vex]

Please do.

One dimensional 6'6 Zverev?

"Don't give a f*ck about tennis" Kyrgios?

"Can't reach semifinals in big events outside clay" Thiem?

Which one is the best prospect?

Zev for sure. How is he one-dimensional? He hasn't even maxed his serve yet and hits a BH like Djokovic. Top 3 at this age? k
Shap
Rub

 

[vex]

I know it's difficult to understand posts that aren't just affirmations for Djokovic, but do try, for our sakes. If somebody is arguing that player A at his best is better than player B at his best, and player B won one of their biggest matches for the year and had two points for another five years removed from his best years on the tour, what in the world makes you think that player B would have had more trouble back when he was a better player?

Logic isn't your strong suit I guess. People get upset. Peoples forms are different match to match. ATGs will always pull of upsets over other ATGs. Thats just reality. By your half-baked logic when Fed got upset by Safin during his peak that means Safin is better than peak Fed I guess.

Safin's your GOAT I guess.

 

[KINGROGER]

Logic isn't your strong suit I guess. People get upset. Peoples forms are different match to match. ATGs will always pull of upsets over other ATGs. Thats just reality. By your half-baked logic when Fed got upset by Safin during his peak that means Safin is better than peak Fed I guess.

Safin's your GOAT I guess.

Federer did it twice though. RG and USO (the latter being a choke). He then beat him at Wimbledon the following year.