Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
His points are mostly reasonable, though. Not a fan of his presentation tho
Peak Djokovic vs Peak Federer...... splitting hairs?
- Thread starter MichaelNadal
- Start date
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Surely people typically view their opinions, at least on theoretically settleable matters (even if it's impossible in practice since time travel isn't available) as truthful, otherwise why hold them? Some are just more bold than others, sometimes much more unyielding and intolerant.
Peak Federer would have a better chance against a great but somewhat vulnerable 2011/13 RG Nadal than the earlier indefatigable beastie, but pronouncing him favourite is deliciously arrogant lol. 2018-20, maybe.
BackhandDTL
Hall of Fame
“Not even remotely close”
How’s that reasonable. Obviously Djokovic is close. I.e Fed is the better grass player but Djokovic is mentally tougher by a mile. Fed edges most Djokovic’s but 2011/15 is probably as close as you get to a tossup. We also know that Novak is usually below par in the earlier rounds of slams and is a different player when it matters. So I’m not entirely convinced that his argument is valid.
RaulRamirez
Legend
I won't say delusional (you were talking about him (not me), right) but a bit too Fed-centric. Of course, some Novak fans are too dismissive of Fed...
RaulRamirez
Legend
Thank you...although I'm not sure it deserved that much praise, the writer in me is soaking it up for now!Superb post and worded in such a lovely way, if those words were a girl, you'd want to marry herGreat post!
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
BackhandDTL
Hall of Fame
He said that Djokovic wouldn’t even be “remotely close” to Fed on grass prime v prime. 2011/15 Djokovic would be pretty close even if he doesn’t beat Fed.
That’s obviously delusion. Id want to see the return stats of prime Fed vs prime Novak in QF-F stages, because comparatively Novak paces himself and doesn’t really hit next level till these rounds.
Beckerserve
Legend
Let us see what happens. We can predict all we like. As of today it is 20 20 17. I am liking life in Club 20cana.
Beckerserve
Legend
They are not that good but seem to trouble Djokovic way more than Nadal and federer. Why i have no idea.
abmk
Bionic Poster
given both of fed's serve&return stats are better than djokovic peak to peak, how does djokovic become 50-50 vs him?
You have no answer to the points, so resort to BS.
He's not going to be 50-50 with Fed on grass lol.
abmk
Bionic Poster
At Wimbledon:
Fed 2003-07 QF, SF, F:
Return points won (RPW): 39.3%, Return games won = 26.1%
Djokovic 2011-15 QF,SF,F:
RPW 37.2%, Return games won = 21.5%
Overall :
Federer 2003-07:
RPW 41%, Return games won = 30.3%
Djokovic 2011-15:
RPW 39.8%, Return games won = 26.6%
Gap actually widens if you consider just QF-F
Sample size is clearly smaller, but you asked for it. So ...
Last edited:
Federev
Legend
2007 - pre-peak Novak loses to peak Fed at USOThe 7 best version of Djokovic having on the ropes the absolute Peak Federer...
Yeah, I know who I'm betting on in this matchup, alright.
2011- peak Novak loses to post prime Fed at. FO
2012 - peak Novak loses to post prime Fed at WB
He's a troll.
abmk
Bionic Poster
My statement was "it's delusional to say novak would be remotely close to 50-50 peak to peak or prime to prime vs fed on grass"
stop misquoting/twisting if you have any scruples.
And nope. The closest you get to a tossup in this century is: Wim 07/08 Nadal due to matchup.
Next Djokovic in Wim 15.
Djoko Wim 11 was pretty good, but serve not good enough to beat peak Federer
Your QF-F argument for Fed v Novak at Wimbledon at their peaks is also invalid. Proven above.
abmk
Bionic Poster
I talk nicely with posters who are open-minded, actually open to learning/checking stuff and not BSing/spreading deliberate propaganda
When it comes to people with a BS agenda or something utterly ludicrous or rude to me, I'm not so nice.
RS
Bionic Poster
He is not a good poster nor do I generally agree with him but I agreed with him partly here sorry nothing personal.
abmk
Bionic Poster
on what exactly?
I'm delusional because I stated facts about return stats of fed/djoko on grass from 03-07 and 11-15 ?
Not my problem if many people have short memories, I don't. But atleast you could look at the stats, hmm?
RS
Bionic Poster
No because he had his opinion and you made it look rubbish and he wrote it peacefully. Maybe I shouldn’t have liked the statement considering he isn’t my cup of tea as a poster.
Also you said prime not just peak. Fed was scrapping vs Roddick in 09 and so nearly lost as well . I don’t agree with many of the selected forms of Novak peak on grass anyway but I never said Novak was equal so I don’t really need to go here about the stats of both.
abmk
Bionic Poster
Only 18 has an argument for being included instead of any of 11-15 for Djokovic. Surely you don't want to say 19 Novak was better, do you?
My quote:
He may have written his post "peacefully", but its full of BS agenda. I'm aware of his previous posting history. His agenda is to put down Fed and prop up nadal/Djokovic and he does so blatantly to a significant extent.
If you are taking lower end of fed's prime like 08/09, its fair to take Wim 12 for Novak, yeah? 12 Fed fed beat him in 4 sets.
RS
Bionic Poster
Well I haven’t see that attacking against Fed from that poster so maybe I missed something . Fed did beat Djoko in 12 but to me Fed was closer to best than Djoko was. And imo you prop up Federer and his gen as well as much as anyone.
Yes. I was thinking of 18 more than 19. But like I said I didn’t Nole a better returner so.....
abmk
Bionic Poster
@ bold part : A lot of things, I say are based on things many (including you) are unaware of. That's why it seems to that way to you. Tell me honestly, were you aware of the difference b/w those return stats for fed-djoko in those 5 years sets?
I'm biased towards Fed. Not denying that. But my observations are grounded in reality even if I favour Fed when things are close. I don't make up sh*t like Djoko would be close 50-50 vs Fed at his peak on grass. There's a difference.
Fed plain&well stifled Djokovic in that Wim 12 semi. That's sorta what I expect if they play at an equal %of their prime capacities - only it'd be closer - somewhere b/w that match and RG 11 semi.
abmk
Bionic Poster
@RS (and even @BackhandDTL )
At Wimbledon:
lets remove 2013 and add 2018.
It becomes for djokovic (11-12,14-15 and 18)
37.7% Return points won (RPW) and 22.7% return games won from QF-F
Fed 2003-07 QF, SF, F:
Return points won (RPW): 39.3%, Return games won = 26.1%
Tennis Abstract: Roger Federer ATP Match Results, Splits, and Analysis
Still some gap, eh?
Overall 11-12,14-15 and 18 for Djokovic at Wimbledon
Return points won (RPW): 40.4%, Return games won = 28.3%
Federer 2003-07:
RPW 41%, Return games won = 30.3%
Tennis Abstract: Roger Federer ATP Match Results, Splits, and Analysis
Still favors Fed, yeah?
At Wimbledon:
lets remove 2013 and add 2018.
It becomes for djokovic (11-12,14-15 and 18)
37.7% Return points won (RPW) and 22.7% return games won from QF-F
Fed 2003-07 QF, SF, F:
Return points won (RPW): 39.3%, Return games won = 26.1%
Tennis Abstract: Roger Federer ATP Match Results, Splits, and Analysis
Still some gap, eh?
Overall 11-12,14-15 and 18 for Djokovic at Wimbledon
Return points won (RPW): 40.4%, Return games won = 28.3%
Federer 2003-07:
RPW 41%, Return games won = 30.3%
Tennis Abstract: Roger Federer ATP Match Results, Splits, and Analysis
Still favors Fed, yeah?
RS
Bionic Poster
Fair enough if you think Fed would win or had a higher peak or would in a tight 4 setter it was just the way you wrote it that caught me by surprised. I don’t think everything you say is reality but that’s just my view.
I was aware of the differences stats of the return tag you showed but was avoiding that topic but since you want addressing . Fed peaks way more often on grass than Djoko as Djoko always struggles early on.
I do think Federer returns the big servers as well as anyone though on grass. He made Roddick serve look at nothing in the 03-05 matches......
Last edited:
abmk
Bionic Poster
no, I'm saying what I write is grounded in reality. Not that everything I say is reality. Speculations from my side is of course not reality and I have my share of bias.
I reduced the data set from whole of Wimbledon to from QF-F onwards. (not as per you, but @BackhandDTL ). reducing it to finals at peak would be reducing the sample size too much
yeah, Fed returns big servers as well as anyone everywhere. But not just them on grass at his peak, but any sort of servers at his peak on grass. It did start tailing off after his peak.
RS
Bionic Poster
Alright. Fair enough. I only made the cutoff because Nadal serve often caused Fed problems. Fed dealt with it well in 06 but struggled a bit in 07.
Who would you take Nadal or Djokovic then? So say 07/08/10 finals for Rafa vs 11/14/15/18 final for Nole?
abmk
Bionic Poster
Federer unret serve% vs Nadal in Wim 2006 final: 29/124 = 23.34% (http://www.tennisabstract.com/charting/20060709-M-Wimbledon-F-Roger_Federer-Rafael_Nadal.html)
Federer unret serve% vs Nadal in Wim 2007 final: 33/165 = 20% (http://www.tennisabstract.com/charting/20070708-M-Wimbledon-F-Roger_Federer-Rafael_Nadal.html)
Federer unret serve% vs Nadal in Wim 2008 final: 57/215 = 26.51% (http://www.tennisabstract.com/charting/20080706-M-Wimbledon-F-Roger_Federer-Rafael_Nadal.html)
that doesn't mean Fed returned better in 07 than in 06. He had more% of weaker returns in 2007 than in 2006. Just pointing to show that Fed struggling to break Nadal in 07 had quite a bit to do with Nadal's ground game and fed's ground game being lesser than in 06. Fed did struggle with returning in 08 and dumping of 2nd serve returns into the net on BPs/shanking them was inexcusable. But not comparable to Wim 07 final. Just saying (not that you said that)
vs the field: Djoko 15 final by a smidgen (its very close, we'd probably get a better read if Fed had not tapered off since rain delay in the 3rd set)
then nadal of 07/08 finals
the rest I'd put roughly the same, can't really be bothered right now (maybe djoko 18 the lowest)
but vs fed, I'd go, nadal 07/08 and then djoko 15
nadal 07/08 loses to djoko 15 Wim IMO in a tight 5-setter , but wins vs the other versions.
RS
Bionic Poster
Oh yes agree 08 Fed was worse than 07 Fed in the final (only slightly and no more) and the same with Nadal vise-versa.
Rest is fair as we know Rafa was a tougher matchup for Fed. Djoko in 07/08 when he had not matured on grass gave Rafa problems but Rafa of 18 nearly beat him indoors so it is very close as we know betwen the two.
Mivic
Hall of Fame
At the end of the day, all of metsman’s hugely overblown assertions regarding Nadal’s physical inferiority in the 2010s and the massive decline in his clay form which supposedly resulted are simply attempts to deflect from Djokovic’s success against him and to downplay the (IMO) damning fact that what he calls peak Federer was unable to take either of the 05/06 encounters against Nadal at RG to 5 sets.
I personally see peak Djokovic taking one of those matches to 5 at the very least. Given the way the two naturally match up, I can’t see anything but Nadal having an incredibly tough time if you throw him in there with minimal head to head experience (unlike later versions of Nadal who had games specifically developed to counter Novak’s strengths and were still beasts from a physical standpoint) against a zoning Djokovic.
Granted, it’s not really a fair comparison because Djokovic’s game at peak was a direct result of facing Nadal multiple times. Who knows if he would have peaked as high in another era, and even if so, whether his game would have developed in such a way that was so well suited to taking on Nadal.
Regardless, as much as you want to call Nadal of 2013 the easier opponent from a Federer perspective, which may or may not be true, I don’t see 05/06 Nadal peaking as high as he did in the final set of the 2013 semi.
The mental aspect also shouldn’t be underestimated. Djokovic never got the opportunity to face Nadal on an even mental playing field at RG the way Federer did, when he was in peak form and had the benefit of taking Nadal on in his first ever RG semi final appearance before he had established his dominance on clay, and in the absence of any other mental hindrances, unlike Djokovic who had taken several pre-prime/peak beatings at the hands of Nadal at RG by the time he reached his peak.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 744633
Guest
RaulRamirez
Legend
There's no hill I wish to die on here - on any of this.
I posted that Fed is the better grass player than Novak, and better than him at Wimbledon.
When phrases are tossed out like "delusional" to suggest that Novak would be close to 50/50 versus Fed" (close, if not an exact quote) or (not you) blasphemous, it suggests to me that posters are getting really carried away, and taking things to a bizarre extreme.
To state the obvious, Novak has won 5 of the last 9 Wimbledon titles, and his overall W-L % is 88%.
Roger has won 8 titles - of course, 5 in a row at one point - with an overall W-L % of 89%.
Novak has won 3 of their 4 matches head-to-head, and (while I don't like hypotheticals), my educated guess is that Fed would have won the majority, if not all of the matches had they met between 2007-2011, although some may argue 2011 for Novak.
I didn't raise the ROS stats, so while you did your research there, there's nothing I need to be convinced of here.
Have a great day - enjoy the ATP Finals, if you're watching them.
BackhandDTL
Hall of Fame
Fair enough.
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
abmk
Bionic Poster
Please tell the same stuff to this guy who wrote the stuff in bold, oh wait.
Please I've been long enough on this board to know your sly agenda.
Your post was written in Feb 2019 btw, when Federer had 20 slams&6 YECs, Nadal had 17 slams, Djokovic had 15 slams&5 YECs.
So someone who doesn't accept they were essentially equal at that point is either kidding, trolling or delusional? That has no basis in reality.
fed's serve stats are clearly better at Wimbledon
given his return stats at peak are better as well, how on earth is it reasonable to say it would be 50-50?
abmk
Bionic Poster
So next time, ask for why I say what I do instead of calling me delusional. Deal?
BackhandDTL
Hall of Fame
It’s still delusional to say “not remotely close.” So I still think you are delusional, yes.
If Fed is losing sets to Hewitt, Ferrero, Roddick then peak Djokovic will be atleast close.
abmk
Bionic Poster
I said
"it's delusional to say novak would be remotely close to 50-50 peak to peak or prime to prime vs fed on grass"
not the same thing at all.
To make it clear, in a series of 20 matches, it would be delusional to say Novak would be 9-11 or 10-10 peak to peak vs fed on grass.
BackhandDTL
Hall of Fame
If 2011/2015 Djokovic played prime Fed I’m sure he’d get his fair share of matches. Fed’s the favorite but it’s pretty close. Like 65-35 for Fed. “Not remotely close” would be Fed vs Baghdatis, Philippousis, Gonzalez, etc.
abmk
Bionic Poster
fair share is not the same as close to 50-50.
I see it more like 75-25 peak to peak
and maybe 70-30 prime to prime.
you have 4/12 matches for Novak peak to peak
I have 3/12
so what's the big deal?
Last edited:
NatF
Bionic Poster
lol this is like the reverse of what I was saying to you and you rejected it. TTW in a nutshell.
RaulRamirez
Legend
How does what you bolded - from one post of thousands I've wasted, er, spent my time on here - put me in a bad light? I don't know the exact context of that thread, but not too much is needed. So, I'm guessing that you're still one of those hyper-partisan fans that don't consider their overall abilities and careers to be roughly equal? And, shouldn't Fed have enjoyed a lead in the slam race, being on tour about 5 and 6 years longer than the other two? I appreciate them all, and at times, I am critical of posters from all fan bases who seem to be mentally and emotionally imbalanced about all this.
It's tennis, for Pete's sake...hate that expression, but you know...
Yes, my "sly agenda" is to appreciate tennis. I'm an unabashed fan of The Big 3, as well as someone who loves the game, and appreciates many players (on the WTA, as well, but mostly an ATP fan) - both current and of the past - for decades. For several years now, I've considered The Big 3 to be the best of the all-Open Era, with little to distinguish them - although they've each had their own unique styles, personalities and career trajectories. I praise all of them and others, and have also been critical (many times) of posters of all "sides" (if you will) who overreach and denigrate.
I don't pretend to be the foremost authority on tennis - and don't have the photographic recall of some - but I know the game, and respect it. My "agenda" is trying to enjoy my time here, and I do get a little perturbed by those that either try to bully others, prosecute others' opinions (usually with no degree of self-awareness) or those who generally lessen the overall experience. Any reasonable poster here knows this, and if they don't, it's their loss - as I know who I am both here and in real life.
Do I root for both Rafa and Djokovic more than Fed? Yes.
Would I like to see them surpass some of Fed's achievements? Yes, but for their sake, not to demean Roger. And I laugh at those who say that once surpassed (if he is) that this threatens Fed's legacy. No, Fed's legacy is plenty secure - and I respect him to the utmost. I also respect other posters, unless provoked.
Am I still capable of being objective? Yes.
BackhandDTL
Hall of Fame
I disagreed with you up until the end until you mentioned this. Close as in tight 4 sets, sure.
I was simply arguing that if Nadal in his prime had chances to play Roddick/Hewitt in slam finals instead of peak Djokovic he’d have more non-clay slams. I’m not denying it wouldn’t be “close.” I was denying that either Roddick or Hewitt would be able to beat him in a BO5 match.
Maybe Roddick 04 against Nadal 11 at W but even then Nadal doesn’t have a mental block like he did against Djokovic and the forehand backhand CC matchup realllly favors Nadal. Nadal also passes Roddick at net at will, considering he approached net on dolly sitters in the big points in 04 W final.
Last edited:
NatF
Bionic Poster
Not getting into this again lol. I was just pointing out something I found funny.
BackhandDTL
Hall of Fame
Where’s the humor in it? You thought I was arguing that it wasn’t “close” when I never argued that.
