Peak Federer vs Peak Djokovic vs Peak Sampras vs Peak Nadal ..... Who will end up as year end 1 ?

Peak Federer vs Peak Djokovic vs Peak Sampras vs Peak Nadal .....Who would end up as year end 1 ?

  • Peak Federer

  • Peak Sampras

  • Peak Djokovic

  • Peak Nadal

Results are only viewable after voting.
Even Nadal did not win more than 4 clay tourneys in 2008 but Muster made 12 finals on clay in 1995 and won like 11 of them vs all different clay court greats......
 
Madinolf said:
There's age difference between Roddick and Djokovic too. Most of their matches happened when Nole was 20 and Roddick was 25.

Anyway keep thinking Roddick is a great opponent LOL
Click to expand...
Why did Murray and Hewitt deal with Roddick better than Djokovic?
 
AlwaystennisUSO said:
No i think at AO Nadal would make the final. Only Djokovic troubled peak Nadal there.
Also Nadal would make USO final. I might be wrong here but i dont think Federer has beaten Djokovic at a HC Major since 2007 and only beat Nadal once in 2017 which was not peak Nadal and the thread is about peak v peak.
Federer v Nadal for no.1 would be very close if there were 3 m1000s on grass . In fact it probably would swap each year. It is no coincidence that during Fedal peak years they were always 1 and 2. By 2011 Federer was in decline and Nadal injury prone.
Click to expand...
Nadal would tower of Federer if we had 2 clay slams but in the grass M1000s senario he loses out but hardly matters because 70-30 of the tour is already in favour of Federer.
 
King No1e said:
AO:
Djokovic beats Agassi in the final, Fed & Safin semifinalists
RG: Nadal beats Kuerten in the final, Muster and Bruguera semifinalists
W: Sampras beats Federer in the final, Djokovic & Ivanisevic semifinalists
USO: Federer beats Sampras in the final, Nadal & Djokovic semifinalists
Click to expand...
Agassi ao? Should be younger Nadal 2nd best ao peak.
 
Madinolf said:
There's age difference between Roddick and Djokovic too. Most of their matches happened when Nole was 20 and Roddick was 25.

Anyway keep thinking Roddick is a great opponent LOL
Click to expand...

Djokovic was ~22 and 23 when Roddick went 4-0 vs him from IW 09 to Cincy 10.
But keep going if you want to embarass yourself, mad ********.
 
AlwaystennisUSO said:
This thread backfired if it was aimed to discredit Nadal as by any objective measure Nadal would end no.1 when at his peak without injuries. He has 4 YE1s despite not playing a full calendar since 2011.
Click to expand...

"objective" says the nadal sycophant who doesn't know sh*t about what happened in USO in 08/09 and names himself alwaystennisUSO,.
Nadal played a full year in 2017 btw - which is why he ended it #1 - Federer was the better player that year. without fed's injury in summer HC season , fed ends that year #1. This without playing a single tournament on clay that year
 
Madinolf said:
Yes, the competition improved.

The H2H between Roddick and Novak argument was ridiculed by Roddick himself. That says it all.
Click to expand...
Could it have been a combo of competition and Roddick getting worse?

Also did Djokovic not do better than Roddick in 2009?
 
pj80 said:
the mythical hypothetical Federer would go unbeaten...
Click to expand...
That's because the mythical Federer is mentally tough.

Djokovic's H2H against Roddick, Federer and Nadal
pre '11 - Roddick 3-5; Federer 6-13; Nadal 7-16
post 11 - Roddick 1-0; Federer 21-10; Nadal 23-12

If Roddick had continued post '11, Djokovic would've whipped him, mercilessly!
 
Last edited:
if djok do not win this US Open

whom do you want to win it

will nadal show up for both Toronto & Cincinnati
 
Last edited:
RS said:
Could it have been a combo of competition and Roddick getting worse?

Also did Djokovic not do better than Roddick in 2009?
Click to expand...
Wasn't Federer better than Thiem, Zverev and Tsitsipas in 2016-19?

What was the h2h against them?
 
Peak Pete. He'd probably not win RG but he'd win some Masters on Clay like Rome. Peak Federer could never win RG either, or even Rome. Peak Nadal, hmmmm he would Pete close. But he's still questionable at AO and Wim.
 
Madinolf said:
Wasn't Federer better than Thiem, Zverev and Tsitsipas in 2016-19?

What was the h2h against them?
Click to expand...

Your hero has been losing to Murray+Stan at slams, has losing H2H to Roddick and according to you Roddick was weak, then what does that make Novak who has a losing H2H to Roddick ? A loser who loses to weaklings is also a weakling, so DJOKOVIC is also a weakling ?
 
AlwaystennisUSO said:
Federer was not injured in 2017. Nadal was best player that year. YE1 proves who was best for the season.
Click to expand...

Federer was the best player in 2017, he beat Nadal that year multiples times and also bagged the prestigious laureus awards (2 of them), even NADAL knows Fed was the best that year, only delusional fanboys like you feel Nadal was ahead in 2017
 
AlwaystennisUSO said:
Federer was not injured in 2017. Nadal was best player that year. YE1 proves who was best for the season.
Click to expand...

Federer skips Cincinnati tournament, meaning Nadal will regain No. 1 ranking

By The Associated Press

Mon., Aug. 14, 2017

Wimbledon champion Roger Federer withdrew Monday from the Western & Southern Open, which he has won seven times, citing a back injury.

Tournament officials announced Federer’s withdrawal on the first full day of matches at the event in Cincinnati.

The 19-time major champion said in a statement that he “tweaked” his back last week at the Rogers Cup in Montreal, where he lost Sunday to Alexander Zverev in the final.

www.thestar.com

Federer skips Cincinnati tournament, meaning Nadal will regain No. 1 ranking

Federer says he “tweaked” back during Rogers Cup, joining the legion of 30-somethings who are taking a break in hope of being ready for the U.S. Open.
www.thestar.com www.thestar.com

The back injury in Montreal final is why Federer skipped Cincy 17, struggled at the USO (1st 2 rounds vs Tiafoe&old Youzhny and lost to delpo).
Federer won more titles, including more masters in 17 (he won 3 Masters to 2 for nadal), had a higher winning% and went 4-0 vs nadal, including that AO win and then straight-setting him next 3 times without being broken. Obviously federer was better in 17.

You are such an amateur troll. I only need one little finger to destroy your nonsense. Just go back and drill some sense into yourself.
 
Last edited:
Devtennis01 said:
Peak Pete. He'd probably not win RG but he'd win some Masters on Clay like Rome. Peak Federer could never win RG either, or even Rome. Peak Nadal, hmmmm he would Pete close. But he's still questionable at AO and Wim.
Click to expand...

Peak Pete winning masters of rome ? Bro Peak Pete is no match for anyone on clay, Nadal would bagel Peak Pete on clay, even Djokovic and Thomas Muster would beat Peak Pete on clay, Fed would too, everyone would be toying around with peak Pete on clay.

Peak Pete is known for his USO and W stunts, even at the AO peak Pete lost to Andre Agassi in 1995 at AO after serving 28 aces ....
 
Peak Pete can win slams in this scenario but he will be far behind in the YE1 Race to Federer and Djokovic.
Both have more endurance than Peak Pete to play a lot of tournaments throughout the year and end up 1.

Federer + Djokovic are better built than Pete + Nadal to win year round and not get injured......FACT...... It is a fight between Federer and Djokovic's supreme fitness to be honest ..... Pete and Nadal have no chance to end up 1.
 
Madinolf said:
Yes, the competition improved.

The H2H between Roddick and Novak argument was ridiculed by Roddick himself. That says it all.
Click to expand...

the competition being better in 2009 compared to 03/04 doesn't mean that 09 Roddick was peak Roddick.
But then a hopelessly sycophantic ******** like you who probably started watching tennis from 11 onwards and doesn't even know Djoko wasn't 20 in IW 09-Cincy 10 wouldn't know/can't state that, can you?
 
abmk said:
the competition being better in 2009 compared to 03/04 doesn't mean that 09 Roddick was peak Roddick.
But then a hopelessly sycophantic ******** like you who probably started watching tennis from 11 onwards and doesn't even know Djoko wasn't 20 in IW 09-Cincy 10 wouldn't know/can't state that, can you?
Click to expand...

These guys (novak fanatics) think that if someone works hard and puts up a peak level performance in post peak period then they are at their peak. These same guys consider 2015 Wimbledon Federer to be peak Federer :D .... No wonder for them 2009 wimbledon Roddick is also peak Roddick.... :D
 
Sunny014 said:
These guys (novak fanatics) think that if someone works hard and puts up a peak level performance in post peak period then they are at their peak. These same guys consider 2015 Wimbledon Federer to be peak Federer :D .... No wonder for them 2009 wimbledon Roddick is also peak Roddick.... :D
Click to expand...
Roddick was at peak level in the W 2009 final to be fair.
 
Sunny014 said:
These guys (novak fanatics) think that if someone works hard and puts up a peak level performance in post peak period then they are at their peak. These same guys consider 2015 Wimbledon Federer to be peak Federer :D .... No wonder for them 2009 wimbledon Roddick is also peak Roddick.... :D
Click to expand...

You can say that was his 2nd best Wimbledon final and 2nd best Wimbledon (after 04)
But overall 2009 was not a peak year for Roddick.
 
ElisRF said:
Roddick was at peak level in the W 2009 final to be fair.
Click to expand...

Even Nadal was at peak level in 2020 FO but that does not mean that he was at his peak that year, everyone knows his peak was like a decade before 2020, so calling 2020 peak nadal would be insulting 2008-2010 nadal's feats..... same logic for Roddick too, of course his wimbledon performance in 09 was peak level but calling him peak Roddick is silly....
 
Sunny014 said:
Even Nadal was at peak level in 2020 FO but that does not mean that he was at his peak that year, everyone knows his peak was like a decade before 2020, so calling 2020 peak nadal would be insulting 2008-2010 nadal's feats..... same logic for Roddick too, of course his wimbledon performance in 09 was peak level but calling him peak Roddick is silly....
Click to expand...
That was the only part i questioned I agree about 2009 Roddick.
 
AlwaystennisUSO said:
Nadal was YE1. Therefore he ended the year that seasons best player. Your argument is like saying the team who finishes 2nd in the league in soccer is better than the league champions because they got the double over the champions.
I do not know how much sport you follow but 2017 was obviously Nadals year.
Click to expand...

Year 2017

Most slams won 2 (Roger-Rafa tied)
Most Titles won 7 (Federer)
H2H between the guy who won 7 titles (Fed) vs the guy who won 6 titles (Nadal) that year 4-0 for Federer vs Nadal
Laureus Award for best sportsman of the year - Federer
Laureus Award for best comeback of the year - Federer
Highest Paid Tennis player in the world and 4th in the ranking worldwide among all athletes - Federer
Federer extended his 17 slams record to 19 that year.

The year belonged to Federer
 
AlwaystennisUSO said:
Oh the injury card. Well Nadal has suffered from more injuries like this year FO for instance so by your own criteria Nadal has had a better career than Federer.
You also are destroying the value of YE1 and weeks at no.1 with such contradictions.
2017 was Nadals year. Kind of how YE1 works. And cincinatti is not the clay court swing btw.
Click to expand...

You said:

AlwaystennisUSO said:
Federer was not injured in 2017. Nadal was best player that year. YE1 proves who was best for the season.
Click to expand...

I just showed you fed did have injury in 2017.

I said federer was better in 2017 because he won 1 more master, more titles, had a clearly higher winning% than Nadal. to top it all off, he dominated Nadal thoroughly.

I only talked about who was the best player in 2017, not about YE#1 or weeks at #1.

I said fed had injury issue in summer HC season - that includes Cincy. Not clay season.

You are a 2 cent amateur troll. Get well soon, mamu. :)
 
Madinolf said:
Wasn't Federer better than Thiem, Zverev and Tsitsipas in 2016-19?

What was the h2h against them?
Click to expand...
Federer was better and was negative in H2H but that is a different topic :D

Does anything suggest Djokovic was at a form disadvantage?
 
AlwaystennisUSO said:
Ye1 was Nadal. Case closed. Year was Nadals.
Click to expand...

YE1 because of some extra points scored here and there, but significant wins Fed more. That matters.
You can cling on to such stats, in real world everyone know who is the real alpha and that is federer

Your nadal remains a beta
 
AlwaystennisUSO said:
Nadal is GOAT as of now according to the pros. And 2017 was his year. Ye1. Stats are actually relevant. So yes i shall stick to YE1 meaning best that season.
Click to expand...

The pros consider Fed the GOAT and in future Novak will take over.

Nadal remains the 3rd best, a 1 trick 1 dimensional clay pony

Anyway, you seem like a new user, god know whose new avatar you are....U seem like a troll
 
Sunny014 said:
Fed/Novak, just 1 of them were at their peak when Nadal beat them, if they are both aged same as him then he would have to beat them back to back to lift the title on HCs or Grass, on top of that Pete as well would be a nightmare for him, already the dustin browns and kyrgios have troubled Nadal on grass, imagine what Sampras's serve can do, would be tougher to face all 3, Nadal cannot beat 2 of them back to back to win.

Federer, Djokovic and Sampras have the power to beat back to back ATGs outside clay, Nadal doesn't, on clay Nadal would be facing Sampras's generation of clay courters too since this is a package deal, with Pete comes his whole gen, so Nadal isn't winning those barcelonas and monte carlos with cakewalk draws, this time there will be up against a big group of hunters waiting for him Qf onwards even on clay. Except the FO nothing is certain for Nadal, not even his pet clay tournaments. Hence he won't be ending year end 1 in any scenario.
Click to expand...

In reality, it’s draw dependent. On medium fast surfaces, Fed/Pete and Novak can kill each other in one semi while peak Nadal just goes topspin to the backhand all day on the other. Pete’s more old school BH would get destroyed even worse than Federer by the Nadal we saw from MC08-Madrid 09

Only way this scenario becomes a disproportionately bigger problem for him than the others is if they play in 90s conditions without poly and faster grass, carpet, HCs, in which case Novak would have a problem too
 
Last edited:
RelentlessAttack said:
In reality, it’s draw dependent. On medium fast surfaces, Fed/Pete and Novak can kill each other in one semi while peak Nadal just goes topspin to the backhand all day on the other. Pete’s more old school BH would get destroyed even worse than Federer by the Nadal we saw from MC08-Madrid 09

Only way this scenario becomes a disproportionately bigger problem for him than the others is if they play in 90s conditions without poly and faster grass, carpet, HCs, in which case Novak would have a problem too
Click to expand...

Federer/Pete/Novak will no doubt clash in 1 semi final but somebody will win that clash, whoever wins will reach the final and crush Nadal (assuming Nadal reaches the final).

Normally when 2 best guys in a tourney at their peak clash in semis then whoever wins crushes the inferior player in the final as we saw in the AO 2005, FO2021 and many other instances.

In Game of Thrones Terminology ............. Nadal is like Cercei Lannister waiting for Daenerys Targaryen to beat the Night King so that she can beat a tired Daenerys Targaryen, but like her brother Jamie Lannister told her ..... " Someone will win the war in the north, whoever wins will march south and crush us " .... Now that is a realistic assessment ..... In this scenario Federer is Daenerys Targaryen, Pete Sampras is Jon Snow and Novak Djokovic is the Night King. Whoever wins will march to the final and crush Nadal :D
 
There is no escape

If Pete reaches the final then it means his serve is unbreakable for Djokovic/Federer, if superior players against servebotting could not neutralize Pete's serve then Nadal 100% loses.
If Federer reaches the final then it means he has beaten Novak/Pete and is at the peak of his powers, Nadal most probably loses again
If Djokovic reaches the final then Nadal 100% loses
 
Sunny014 said:
Dude Nadal would look like the 90s clay courters - As simple as that

A force during the clay season and then losing everything everywhere else, look at his HC % vs top 10 and top 5 .... U think that 50% and 40% type numbers won't become 0 in the presence of 3 GOATs?
Click to expand...
Nadal has already beaten Federer and Djokovic in HC slam finals!

So please stop being stupid.
 
Third Serve said:
As far as peak level goes, Djokovic takes the AO with some resistance by Fed, Ned sweeps RG, and Fed and Sampras trade off at W/USO. PETE has a better chance than people think.
Click to expand...
Hypothetical 'peak' favors the most aggressive player, therefore Sampras actually has the advantage in this scenario.
 
DRII said:
Nadal has already beaten Federer and Djokovic in HC slam finals!

So please stop being stupid.
Click to expand...

It is you who is being stupid by thinking Nadal has beaten peakiest versions of Fedovic.
Nadal never faced peak Fed at the USO in the 00s when courters were faster and also he hasn't beaten peak Djokovic (2011 and 2015 were the versions that were absolute peaks) at the USO, remember how Novak beat Nadal there in 2011 ?
Also Nadal has never beaten Djokvoic at the AO.

The key here is that when 2 or 3 GOAT level guys at their peak he will have to beat them back to back to win the title, not like this weak draws where he won the title.
 
If we are going "peak" then Sampras. Wimbledon/USO/YEC along with the North America HC swing steals. The other 3 can't make up for that. Pete's peak was better the complete 2nd half of the year than the other 3. So that means the other 3 are fighting for table scraps the first half of the year. Djoker or Fed will get their AO and Nadal will get his clay grabs.. But it isn't enough. Peak for Peak for Peak for Peak to duel out Sampras.

Once Wimbledon hits, Peak Sampras turns it on. Too much power. Too much clutchness and attack. And the main thing, is the serve. Something other 3 don't have nearly to Pete's ability. I have witnessed all their peaks firsthand. None of them had a better peak than Sampras. They Big 3 have better overall resumes but definitely not peaks. I dont think anyone in history was better when they hit that "zone" than Sampras was.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Winner Sinner
  • Poll Poll
[POLL) Sinner 2024 vs Djokovic 2023
2
Replies
51
Views
2K
Winner Sinner
Winner Sinner
Razer
  • Poll Poll
What are the time periods for the so called Weak Era, Strong Era & Career Inflation Era respectively ? Did they exist ?
2
Replies
90
Views
5K
Neptune
Neptune
Druss
  • Poll Poll
'Young' Djokovic vs 'old' Federer....higher level of play
2
Replies
68
Views
6K
Noelan
Noelan
D
  • Poll Poll
Peak Djokovic vs Peak Nadal
4 5 6
Replies
262
Views
22K
nolefam_2024
N
F
  • Poll Poll
Federer vs Djokovic, who would win at their peak?
2 3
Replies
115
Views
8K
Neptune
Neptune
Back
Top