Ranking analysis in Big3 H2H

Come on, do you count 2006 Davis Cup playoff as an important match?
Not my fault they played in the DC 2006 match. Btw, Nadal also played Djokovic on clay in BO5 in the DC when Djoke was pre-prime.

Tbh, I think, USO 07 - WTF '12 is the range where there primes kind of intersected. All the rest is not too relevant. That's what you get with the 6 year age gap.
 
I used geometric mean because low rankings would skew the stat. Ultimate Tennis Statisttcs uses geometric mean too.

Arithmetic average would make look Djokovic look even better, because Federer and Nadal beat Djokovic twice when he was no.67/63, plus 5 other times when he was outside top10.
Yeah I know in this particular analysis Djokovic would look even better. As a guy above said, the median might work well. I get that you use the geometric mean though and if UTS also uses it then it's fine I suppose.
 

Lew II

Hall of Fame
Not my fault they played in the DC 2006 match. Btw, Nadal also played Djokovic on clay in BO5 in the DC when Djoke was pre-prime.

Tbh, I think, USO 07 - WTF '12 is the range where there primes kind of intersected. All the rest is not too relevant. That's what you get with the 6 year age gap.
Why should 2014-17 Federer be less prime than 2007-10 Djokovic?
 
I am disappointed by Lew's inability to support his claims by providing comparable stats for the rest of the top 5 for 2015 and not explaining why full seasons and partial seasons are not distinguished.

Oh well!

:cool:
 
Why should 2014-17 Federer be less prime than 2007-10 Djokovic?
In 07 Djokovic had a 100% winning record in Slams against non-Fedal. If Federer has that record in 14 15 16 17 against non Djokodal in Slams then I'll concede that he was kind of prime (50% of the time he lost to someone else than Djokodal, we're talking about Gulbis, Seppi, Cilic, Raonic lol). 2. I said UO 07 not the whole 07.

Also, since Djokovic was injured in 17 even though he won against world no.1 Murray in Doha, that is not prime Djokovic according to Djokovic fans. How is a guy prime if he was so bothered by injuries that he took off half the year in 16.

Fed had the advantage from uso 07 -uso 09. Djoke from uo 10 till wtf 12.

No one says Sampras was prime in UO 2000-2002 despite making it to 3 straight finals there and dude was a hell lot younger than 14-17 Federer.
 

Lew II

Hall of Fame
h2h vs Big3 in years they ended as no.1:

Djokovic 30-14 (68.2%)
Nadal 20-10 (66.7)
Federer 14-13 (51.9)
vs Big4:

Djokovic 47-19 (71.2%)
Nadal 25-13 (65.8%)
Federer 17-16 (51.5)

Also look at the number of meetings respectively with Big3 and Big4 per season:

Djokovic 8.8 and 13.2.
Nadal 7.5 and 9.5.
Federer 5.4 and 6.6.
 

Lew II

Hall of Fame
In 07 Djokovic had a 100% winning record in Slams against non-Fedal. If Federer has that record in 14 15 16 17 against non Djokodal in Slams then I'll concede that he was kind of prime (50% of the time he lost to someone else than Djokodal, we're talking about Gulbis, Seppi, Cilic, Raonic lol). 2. I said UO 07 not the whole 07.

Also, since Djokovic was injured in 17 even though he won against world no.1 Murray in Doha, that is not prime Djokovic according to Djokovic fans. How is a guy prime if he was so bothered by injuries that he took off half the year in 16.

Fed had the advantage from uso 07 -uso 09. Djoke from uo 10 till wtf 12.

No one says Sampras was prime in UO 2000-2002 despite making it to 3 straight finals there and dude was a hell lot younger than 14-17 Federer.
https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/playerProfile?playerId=3819
https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/playerProfile?playerId=4920

GOAT points (similar to ranking points):

2007 Djokovic 23
2008 Djokovic 30
2009 Djokovic 27
2010 Djokovic 20

average: 25

2014 Federer 32
2015 Federer 29
2017 Federer 38
2018 Federer 23

average: 30.5
 

Lew II

Hall of Fame
@Eren

winning percentage against top-10 (interesting stat about peak IMO):

2007 Djokovic: 37.5
2008 Djokovic: 50
2009 Djokovic: 55.56
2010 Djokovic: 33.33

2014 Federer 77.27
2015 Federer 71.43
2017 Federer 87.5
2018 Federer 40
 
Last edited:
In nole’s “best year ever” he lost 3 times to old Fed, once to karlovic, once to Murray and once to Wawrinka.
but he had positiv h2h against all main rivals (big4). 5-3 to fed. 4-0 vs rafa and 6-1 vs muzza, (and 3-1 vs stan). 1 of 3 federers w was not important in RR on WTF! Nole won final in the same tournament comfortable 6-3, 6-4. (Karlovic is not relevant player and doha is not relevant tournament).
Fed has loosing records against 2 of the big 4 even in his best season ever!

edit
In slams nole was 2-0 vs fed (+ WTF F), 1-0 vs rafa and 2-0 vs muzza, (and 1-1 vs stan). And won on every surface (incl. 2-0 vs rafa on clay, and vs fed in W and USO and indoor WTF). Fed had no wins vs rafa on clay and no clay titles in his best year! nole won most points and titles on every surface in 2015.
 
Last edited:
https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/playerProfile?playerId=3819
https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/playerProfile?playerId=4920

GOAT points (similar to ranking points):

2007 Djokovic 23
2008 Djokovic 30
2009 Djokovic 27
2010 Djokovic 20

average: 25

2014 Federer 32
2015 Federer 29
2017 Federer 38
2018 Federer 23

average: 30.5
Not sure how these points are constructed, I'll look into that later. But in 2008/2009 Djokovic was similar to 2014/2015 Federer. I wonder how often they met in Slam finals in 08/09 and how often in 14/15. Seems to me Federer was more consistent (which he almost always has been) than Djokovic and is punished for that.

The reason I include 07-10 Djokovic is because it would be ludicrous to judge Federer based on 2011-present only. It's discounting Fed's 16 Slams lol.

@Eren

winning percentage against top-10 (interesting stat about peak IMO):

2007 Djokovic: 37.5
2008 Djokovic: 50
2009 Djokovic: 55.56
2010 Djokovic: 33.33

2014 Federer 77.27
2015 Federer 71.43
2017 Federer 87.5
2018 Federer 40
What was Fed's non-top 10 record (good measure to see how variable his playing level was in that year). What would happen if we would dissect this to BO3 and BO5? Too many variables.

But one thing is for sure. Federer 14-15 was definitely a good player. He still is even now.
 
In nole’s “best year ever” he lost 3 times to old Fed, once to karlovic, once to Murray and once to Wawrinka.
Despite what I already wrote. 2015 is not noles best year! Just noles best season. His best year is W2015-RG2016 (4 slams, WTF, 5 masters and 16950 points)!
 
Last edited:
but he had positiv h2h against all main rivals (big4). 5-3 to fed. 4-0 vs rafa and 6-1 vs muzza, (and 3-1 vs stan). 1 of 3 federers w was not important in RR on WTF! Nole won final in the same tournament comfortable 6-3, 6-4. (Karlovic is not relevant player and doha is not relevant tournament).
Fed has loosing records against 2 of the big 4 even in his best season ever!

edit
In slams nole was 2-0 vs fed (+ WTF F), 1-0 vs rafa and 2-0 vs muzza, (and 1-1 vs stan). And won on every surface (incl. 2-0 vs rafa on clay, and vs fed in W and USO and indoor WTF). Fed had no wins vs rafa on clay and no clay titles in his best year! nole won most points and titles on every surface in 2015.
The point being Nole didn’t have any worthy rivals in 2015 :laughing: old Fed, washed up Nadal, pigeon Murray. All Roddick, Hewitt, old Agassi level guys.

At least Fed had a prime ATG on one surface
 
It basically shows what we already know. Federer is never going to be on the good end of these stats because:

1. He's 5-6 years older
2. He spent a lot of time at #1
3. Nadal had his number/met a lot on clay
4. His longetivity coupled with consistency
5. Weak field after 2013 that he was better than, but a rung below Djokovic.
6. A new racket and strategy that helped him do #4 & #5
Weakest ever period in tennis was 2003-2006, no peak Nadal, Djokovic Murray or Del Potro, and this co-incided with the vast majority of Federer's titles so to say post 2013 was weak does not really hold any water.

Nadal and Federer have met more times off clay than on it. Outdoor hard Nadal leads 8-5.

Federer was at no disadvantage at ages 26-30 v Nadal and djokovic yet barely beat either
 
The point being Nole didn’t have any worthy rivals in 2015 :laughing: old Fed, washed up Nadal, pigeon Murray. All Roddick, Hewitt, old Agassi level guys.

At least Fed had a prime ATG on one surface
From aged 26 onwards Federer has less grass court majors than Nole, and the same as Nadal, and 0 US opens compared to 3 for Nadal and Djokovic. Federer's peak years were barren on all surfaces once he had peak Nadal and Djokovic around.
 
Weakest ever period in tennis was 2003-2006, no peak Nadal, Djokovic Murray or Del Potro, and this co-incided with the vast majority of Federer's titles so to say post 2013 was weak does not really hold any water.
I totally disagree, but that's beside the point. The thread is about their h2h and clearly the younger two have an advantage. Tell me, why is it that you can say weak era and I cant? Federer was old and Nadal was past his best after 2013. Murray couldn't really do anything with Djokovic and Wawrinka was practically created by him.

Nadal and Federer have met more times off clay than on it. Outdoor hard Nadal leads 8-5.
Federer led the H2h on HC through 2012. Nadal avoided him at his peak on HC and everyone knows that. Nadal stole some easy wins in 2013 during Fed's worst year on tour. Fed ultimately gained the advantage again in the h2h over the last few meetings. Nice cherry picking with outdoor HC btw. Again, I said he had a match up problem with Nadal anyways. Also half the matches they played were on clay during Fed's peak. Another fact you are ignoring like most of you do.
Federer was at no disadvantage at ages 26-30 v Nadal and djokovic yet barely beat either
Federer led the h2h with Djokovic until 2015. He's simply a victim of his own success and longetivy. How everyone ignores age is insane. You won't if another ATG suddenly emerges. Doesn't look like that will be a problem though does it? :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Funny how some of you are trying to find all other explanations than age for when players win slams, when age is clearly the most convincing stat. This is a textbook example of a normal distribution:



Now lets see if Big4 are exceptions:

Federer won 75% of his slams 2004-2010 (age23-29)
Djokovic won 73% of his slams 2011-2016 (age24-29)
Nadal won 65% of his slams 2008-1014 (age22-28). Let me also add that outside these years Nadal won just as many slams before 22y as after 28y.
Murray won all his slams in his 20s.

If varying competition was/is the relevant factor, and age is irrelevant, we shouldnt see a normal distribution for slams won/age.
 
Last edited:

ABCD

Hall of Fame
Funny how some of you are trying to find all other explanations than age for when players win slams, when age is clearly the most convincing stat. This is a textbook example of a normal distribution:



Now lets see if Big4 are exceptions:

Federer won 75% of his slams 2004-2010 (age23-29)
Djokovic won 73% of his slams 2011-2016 (age24-29)
Nadal won 65% of his slams 2008-1014 (age22-28). Let me also add that outside this years Nadal won just as many slams before 22y as after 28y.
Murray won all his slams in his 20s.

If varying competition was/is the relevant factor, and age is irrelevant, we shouldnt see a normal distribution for slams won/age.
This is no good. You have to calculate based on proportion of each age group entering tournaments.
 
This is no good. You have to calculate based on proportion of each age group entering tournaments.
Why? We are talking about when players win slams or reach slam finals, and the numbers sinse 1968 are pretty large. And as i just showed, Big4 are no exception.

Of course Big3 also win slams in their 30s, because they are exceptional players, but they were better and won more earlier. This reminds me of people saying runners are better in their 30s because Usain Bolt won in his 30s, when he ran fastest at 24y. He also won in his thirties because he could win even declined.
 

ABCD

Hall of Fame
Why? We are talking about when players win slams or reach slam finals, and the numbers sinse 1968 are pretty large. And as i just showed, Big4 are no exception.
Probabilities are different with different number of people in different age groups. Also, with big 4 you did not pick up the same age period for each, but their most successful period. Based on your graph, 5 years period (22-26) players should make ~50% of their finals. Check for each of big 4 whether that is the case. You have to do precisely what is in your graph. No of major and YEC finals.
 
Last edited:
Probabilities are different with different number of people in different age groups. Also, with big 4 you did not pick up the same age period for each, but their most successful period. Based on your graph, 5 years period (22-26) players should make ~50% of their finals. Check for each of big 4 whether that is the case.
We know for Djokovic that will not be the case as he has completely different levels of competition before 27 and after 27
 
Probabilities are different with different number of people in different age groups. Also, with big 4 you did not pick up the same age period for each, but their most successful period. Based on your graph, 5 years period (22-26) players should make ~50% of their finals. Check for each of big 4 whether that is the case.
Each player doesnt peak at the exact same year, and of course there are differences in level of competition. Thats why you need large numbers to even out the confounding factors. I think Big4 fits pretty well into the normal distribution.
 

ABCD

Hall of Fame
Each player doesnt peak at the exact same year, and of course there are differences in level of competition. Thats why you need large numbers to even out the confounding factors. I think Big4 fits pretty well into the normal distribution.
Your approach is not scientific. If you believe that there are confounding factors you have to take them into account. Before you do that you can't conclude anything. Lew II tries to do things properly. Find an objective way to measure level of competition. How would you measure level of competition? Lew II takes ELO ratings. If you think that is no good, find a way that you believe is appropriate. The only rule is that it can't be subjective; it has to be described by numbers.
 
Since Federer was often said to be in bad form when he lost to Djokovic or Nadal, I wanted to check the ranking position in their meetings.

DJOKOVIC
beat Nadal 28 times, and Nadal had an average ranking (geometric mean) of 2.14.
beat Federer 25 times, and Federer had an average ranking of 2.42.

NADAL
beat Djokovic 25 times, and Djokovic had an average ranking of 3.03.
beat Federer 23 times, and Federer had an average ranking of 1.70.

FEDERER
beat Djokovic 22 times, and Djokovic had an average ranking of 3.12.
beat Nadal 15 times, and Nadal had an average ranking of 2.94.

Looking at this, does it seem to you that in the h2h between Big3, Federer on average was the one in the worst form?
This shows that Federer was in great form when he played the others...but that doesn't mean he was at his peak.

Not defending him, because I am a Novak fan, but that's just what I see.
 
From aged 26 onwards Federer has less grass court majors than Nole, and the same as Nadal, and 0 US opens compared to 3 for Nadal and Djokovic. Federer's peak years were barren on all surfaces once he had peak Nadal and Djokovic around.
Federer prime years: 6 Wimbledon titles 5 USO 4 AO 1 RG
 
Your approach is not scientific. If you believe that there are confounding factors you have to take them into account. Before you do that you can't conclude anything. Lew II tries to do things properly. Find an objective way to measure level of competition. How would you measure level of competition? Lew II takes ELO ratings. If you think that is no good, find a way that you believe is appropriate. The only rule is that it can't be subjective; it has to be described by numbers.
Its you guys who refuse to consider age as a relevant factor when the proof is overwhelming, that have an unscientific approach.
 
Weakest ever period in tennis was 2003-2006, no peak Nadal, Djokovic Murray or Del Potro, and this co-incided with the vast majority of Federer's titles so to say post 2013 was weak does not really hold any water.

Nadal and Federer have met more times off clay than on it. Outdoor hard Nadal leads 8-5.

Federer was at no disadvantage at ages 26-30 v Nadal and djokovic yet barely beat either
2015-2018 says hi.
 
Was it 8-2 before 2017? :eek:
I think it was indeed. Do you see what can happen if the Nadal shows up consistently off of clay in a short period of time and Federer ducks the Nadal on clay?

With that I mean, in the period of 06-08 Fedal played freaking 9 matches on clay with three back to back matches in every year in 06-08 (MC Rome Hamburg RG). There wasn't just one match and a whole year to improve with the momentum on Nadal's side because of the clay season. If Nadal in 06-07 reached Federer at AO or USO, the dynamic of the H2H would have been different. At least, Nadal would not have been in his head THAT much.
 
Different times. When was the last time that 7 of YE top10 players were 30+? And when was the last time that no one active player younger than 30 is a slam winner? And this is not only in tennis that top players getting older!
 
I think it was indeed. Do you see what can happen if the Nadal shows up consistently off of clay in a short period of time and Federer ducks the Nadal on clay?

With that I mean, in the period of 06-08 Fedal played freaking 9 matches on clay with three back to back matches in every year in 06-08 (MC Rome Hamburg RG). There wasn't just one match and a whole year to improve with the momentum on Nadal's side because of the clay season. If Nadal in 06-07 reached Federer at AO or USO, the dynamic of the H2H would have been different. At least, Nadal would not have been in his head THAT much.
Great post. Shame Nadal couldn’t return the favour and meet Fed at Wimbledon but then Cincy, USO, Madrid indoors.
 
https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/playerProfile?playerId=3819
https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/playerProfile?playerId=4920

GOAT points (similar to ranking points):

2007 Djokovic 23
2008 Djokovic 30
2009 Djokovic 27
2010 Djokovic 20

average: 25

2014 Federer 32
2015 Federer 29
2017 Federer 38
2018 Federer 23

average: 30.5
2007-2010 was a strong era for the most part so prime Djokovic couldn't win as much. 2015-2018 was a weak era so old Federer took advantage and accumulated GOAT points.
 
Top