Score against Big4

Lew II

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
Big3's seasons:

2017 Federer 4-0 (100%)
2004 Nadal 1-0 / 2019 Djokovic* 1-0 (100)
2011 Djokovic 12-2 (85.7)
2015 Djokovic 16-4 (80)
2008 Nadal 11-3 (78.6)
2016 Djokovic 7-2 (77.8)
2018 Djokovic 3-1 (75)
2006 Nadal 5-2 (71.43)
2013 Nadal 7-3 (70)
2014 Djokovic 8-4 (66.7)
2007 Federer / 2014 Federer 6-3 (66.7)
2012 Nadal / 2014 Nadal 4-2 (66.7)
2005 Federer 2-1 (66.7)
2007 Nadal 9-5 (64.3)
2010 Federer 7-4 (63.6)
2010 Nadal 5-3 (62.5)
2013 Djokovic 6-4 (60)
2009 Nadal 7-5 (58.3)
2015 Federer 6-5 (54.5)
2012 Djokovic 8-8 (50)
2012 Federer 6-6 (50)
2005 Nadal / 2017 Djokovic / 2018 Nadal 1-1 (50)
2011 Nadal 7-8 (46.7)
2009 Djokovic 6-7 (46.2)
2009 Federer 5-6 (45.5)
2006 Federer 4-5 (44.4)
2007 Djokovic 5-8 (38.5)
2008 Djokovic 4-8 (33.3)
2008 Federer 3-8 (27.3)
2006 Djokovic 1-3 (25)
2011 Federer 2-7 (22.2)
2016 Nadal / 2017 Nadal 1-4 (20)
2010 Djokovic / 2015 Nadal 1-6 (14.3)
2004 Federer / 2016 Federer / 2019 Nadal* 0-1 (0)
2018 Federer 0-2 (0)
2013 Federer 0-7 (0)

*partial
 
Last edited:
Lew II said:
Of the 6 Federer's best seasons, 2 were from the peak years (2005, 2007) and 3 were from the geriatric years (2014, 2015, 2017).

1) 2017
2) 2007 / 2014
4) 2005
5) 2010
6) 2015
Click to expand...

Just goes to show that your "definition" of best is different from reality ;)

Also nice job running for the hills in the other threads when I actually presented stats to discuss with you.

Inb4 you post the same stuff again after I already offered a bunch of unanswered counter points :whistle:
 
NatF said:
Just goes to show that your "definition" of best is different from reality ;)

Also nice job running for the hills in the other threads when I actually presented stats to discuss with you.

Inb4 you post the same stuff again after I already offered a bunch of unanswered counter points :whistle:
Click to expand...

Cilic 25-1 against anyone except Djokovic from RG14 to UO15.

Never heard of Cilic as a great opponent.
 
Lew II said:
Cilic 25-1 against anyone except Djokovic from RG14 to UO15.

Never heard of Cilic as a great opponent.
Click to expand...

So, you are going to rehash the same points? As expected.

BTW you're basically illustrating that win/loss isn't the best barometer for level of play - thanks for backing me up.
 
NatF said:
So, you are going to rehash the same points? As expected.

BTW you're basically illustrating that win/loss isn't the best barometer for level of play - thanks for backing me up.
Click to expand...
Depends on the round and the players you meet.

The 46-2 in the last slams by Djokovic and Nadal is very different from Cilic's or Hewitt's stats, since they won many finals, semifinals, quarterfinals, not the early rounds.
 
Lew II said:
Depends on the round and the players you meet.

The 46-2 in the last slams by Djokovic and Nadal is very different from Cilic's or Hewitt's stats, since they won many finals, semifinals, quarterfinals, not the early rounds.
Click to expand...

Nope, double standards and mental gymnastics on full display here. On the one hand Nadal going 23-1 outside Djokovic is a peak GOAT, but other players doing similarly in terms of win/loss aren't great players let alone peaking ATG's :rolleyes:

That stat is basically just Djokovic on his own considering he's won 3/4 of those slams - Nadal is just a bystander like Hewitt was except he got Thiem (lol) in a slam final. You've also ignored time and time again that Hewitt was drawn with Federer in 4/7 slams including in his quarter twice.
 
Seasons with 5+ matches:

1) 2011 Djokovic 12-2 (85.7)
2) 2015 Djokovic 16-4 (80)
3) 2008 Nadal 11-3 (78.6)
4) 2016 Djokovic 7-2 (77.8)
5) 2006 Nadal 5-2 (71.43)
6) 2013 Nadal 7-3 (70)
7) 2014 Djokovic 8-4 (66.7)
8) 2007 Nadal 9-5 (64.3)
9) 2010 Federer 7-4 (63.6)
10) 2013 Djokovic 6-4 (60)
 
Last edited:
Lew II said:
Nah I'm just bored, and I enjoy debunking the myth of Federer GOAT.
Click to expand...

Yet I've noticed in one of your 100 other threads lately that you used Federer as the benchmark for GOAT status in order to try and disprove the notion. Brilliant detective work there, Sherlock!
 
NatF said:
Nope, double standards and mental gymnastics on full display here. On the one hand Nadal going 23-1 outside Djokovic is a peak GOAT, but other players doing similarly in terms of win/loss aren't great players let alone peaking ATG's :rolleyes:

That stat is basically just Djokovic on his own considering he's won 3/4 of those slams - Nadal is just a bystander like Hewitt was except he got Thiem (lol) in a slam final. You've also ignored time and time again that Hewitt was drawn with Federer in 4/7 slams including in his quarter twice.
Click to expand...
So a 10-0 score in challengers and a 10-0 score in Slams are the same?

Example:

Nadal in his 23-1 score beat 7 top10.
Hewitt in his 33-2 score beat 3 top10.
 
Last edited:
Lew II said:
Of Federer's 6 best seasons, 2 were from the peak years (2005, 2007) and 3 were from the geriatric years (2014, 2015, 2017).
Click to expand...

Are you counting wins vs Fed,Nadal,Djokovic and Murray regardless of their rank?

It's not that surprising that some of Fed's geriatric years are in there, since in 2004 (one of his best years) he had a single meeting vs Nadal and none vs Djokovic or Murray. In 2005 again Djokovic wasn't a factor and I think he played Murray once so I'm surprised that even makes it. 2006 has one meeting vs Djokovic and one vs Murray I think. It's not til 2007/2008 that he starts to have regular matches vs Djokovic and Murray. Then later on he started winning a lot more vs Murray for some reason. 2017 was that strange year when he totally turned the tables on Nadal.
 
What the stats do seem to back up is that Djokovic in 2010 was nowhere near playing his best tennis as he did in 2011. Although Nadal's stats do suffer in 2011 (mostly due to Djokovic) they're not amazing in 2010 either
 
Lew II said:
So a 10-0 score in challengers and a 10-0 score in Slams is the same?

Tell me the average ranking of opponents in

Nadal's 23-1 score in the last 4 slams.
Djokovic's 25-1 score in the last 4 slams.
Hewitt's 33-2 Slam score excluding Federer in 2004-05.
Roddick 32-0 grass score excluding Federer in 2003-05.
Cilic's 25-1 Slam score exclduing Djokovic from RG14 to UO15.
Click to expand...

Average ranking is a pants measure for one, can easily be skewed by a couple of lower ranked opponents and it doesn't always capture the difficulty of a draw.

The bolded is stupid as we're comparing slam matches for all but one of those examples, even then Roddick 17-0 at Wimbledon outside of Federer in that timeframe.
 
NatF said:
Average ranking is a pants measure for one, can easily be skewed by a couple of lower ranked opponents and it doesn't always capture the difficulty of a draw.

The bolded is stupid as we're comparing slam matches for all but one of those examples, even then Roddick 17-0 at Wimbledon outside of Federer in that timeframe.
Click to expand...

Nadal in his 23-1 score: 1 title, 1 final, 2 semi (4,640 points of 8,000 available).

Hewitt in his 33-2 score: 2 finals, 2 semi, 2 quarter, 1 fourth round, and 1 withdrawal (4,740 points of 16,000 available).

How are they comparable?
 
Last edited:
Lew II said:
Nadal in his 23-1 score: 1 title, 1 final, 2 semi (4,640 points of 8,000 available).

Hewitt in his 33-2 score: 2 finals, 2 semi, 2 quarter, 1 fourth round, and 1 withdrawal (4,740 points of 16,000 available).

How are they comparable?
Click to expand...

I'll keep repeating this seeing as you haven't addressed it;

"Hewitt was drawn in the Federer half in 4/7 slams, 2 of those in the same quarter."

Also that win is the difference between Thiem and Safin or better yet Thiem and Federer :laughing:
 
NatF said:
I'll keep repeating this seeing as you haven't addressed it;

"Hewitt was drawn in the Federer half in 4/7 slams, 2 of those in the same quarter."

Also that win is the difference between Thiem and Safin or better yet Thiem and Federer :laughing:
Click to expand...
But how can you compare 2R, 3R wins to F, SF wins?

If Hewitt drew Federer in 20 consecutive 2R, would his 20-0 made only of first round matches be great?
 
Lew II said:
But how can you compare 2R, 3R wins to F, SF wins?

If Hewitt had Federer in 20 consecutive 2R, would his 20-0 made only of first round matches be great?
Click to expand...

Hewitt lost to the eventual winner in every slam, he had multiple SF's and F's in that streak. Comparing it to 2R wins is just :rolleyes:

The guy won 88% of his HC + Grass matches in 04-05 excluding Federer, despite starting 2004 outside the top 10 and battling injuries at the end of 2005.

So again, this is nothing but another example of double standards from you - where win/loss record counts when trying to prove that Nadal is still peaking at 32 years old but for other players it's easily dismissed :cautious:
 
Lew II said:
F won:

Nadal 1 out of 4
Hewitt 0 out of 8

SF won:

Nadal 2 out of 4
Hewitt 2 out of 8

QF won:

Nadal 4 out of 4.
Hewitt 4 out of 8.

4R won:

Nadal 4 out of 4
Hewitt 6 out of 8

04-05 Hewitt and RG18-AO19 Nadal objectively have nothing in common. I'm sorry.
Click to expand...
Hard to argue with these data.
 
Last edited:
Lew II said:
F won:

Nadal 1 out of 4
Hewitt 0 out of 8

SF won:

Nadal 2 out of 4
Hewitt 2 out of 8

QF won:

Nadal 4 out of 4.
Hewitt 4 out of 8.

4R won:

Nadal 4 out of 4
Hewitt 6 out of 8

04-05 Hewitt and RG18-AO19 Nadal objectively have nothing in common. I'm sorry.
Click to expand...

Nadal: 96% in slams minus Djokovic
Hewitt: 94% in slams minus Federer

Objectively nothing in common?

:-D
 
NatF said:
Nadal: 96% in slams minus Djokovic
Hewitt: 94% in slams minus Federer

Objectively nothing in common?

:-D
Click to expand...

To be fair Nadal would have probably won both W2018 and AO2019 without Nole. OTOH take out Federer and Hewitt could have won 2 more GS at max IMO (W and US 2005).
 
Sabrina said:
To be honest Nadal would have probably won both W2018 and AO2019 without Nole. OTOH take out Federer and Hewitt could have won 2 more GS at max IMO (W and US 2005).
Click to expand...

My point is less about whether Hewitt was as good as Nadal is right now and more about how little Nadal's recent win/loss says about his current form compared to when he was actually peaking.

Regarding your comment I will say Roddick/Agassi/Safin are all much tougher opponents than who would have landed in Nadal's way if Djokovic wasn't there.
 
NatF said:
Unless Quito is a slam it's not similar no.

It's about as similar as 2018 FO Thiem and 2005 AO Safin as opponents.
Click to expand...
Thiem is equally strong on clay as Safin on hard. Only difference is that Nadal is far more dominant on clay than Federer/Sampras on hard. Thiem would have likely won RG 2017 and RG 2018 if not for Nadal.
 
Sport said:
Thiem is equally strong on clay as Safin on hard. Only difference is that Nadal is far more dominant ok clay than Federer/Sampras on hard. Thiem would have likely won RG 2017 and RG 2018 if not for Nadal.
Click to expand...

lol this doesn't even deserve a response. Safin on HC >>>> Thiem on clay, especially when looking at those respective performances.
 
Sport said:
Impossible to know, since Safin never faced any player as dominant as Nadal at RG.
Click to expand...

Well at least Safin managed to beat an absolute peak Federer at AO 2005 and a near-prime Sampras at US 2000. Thiem couldn't take a set from a 30s Nadal at RG. :p
 
NatF said:
He faced Federer/Sampras on HC, 2018 Nadal at the FO is certainly not on another level to those two.

It's definitely not impossible to know, you just need one good eye and two brain cells lol.
Click to expand...
Yes he is. Nadal only lost a set in the whole tournament to a clay specialist like Schwartzmann. In the final he raised his level and played at almost 2017 level. He ultra-destroyed Thiem in straight sets. And Thiem was playing Incredible that tournament (he beat Tsitsipas, Zverev and an in form Checcinatos).

Also, Sampras only won 2 AO in his career. 2000 Sampras at the AO is certainly incomparable with Nadal at RG.
 
Sabrina said:
Well at least Safin managed to beat an absolute peak Federer at AO 2005 and a near-prime Sampras at US 2000. Thiem couldn't take a set from a 30s Nadal at RG. :p
Click to expand...
No version of Fedefer at the AO or Sampras (only 2 AO) is comparable to Nadal at RG.
 
Sport said:
Yes he is. Nadal only lost a set in the whole tournament to a clay specialist like Schwartzmann. In the final he raised his level and played at almost 2017 level. He ultra-destroyed Thiem in straight sets. And Thiem was playing Incredible that tournament (he beat Tsitsipas, Zverev and an in form Checcinatos).

Also, Sampras only won 2 AO in his career. 2000 Sampras at the AO is certainly incomparable with Nadal at RG.
Click to expand...

Nope, he's not. Injured Zverev, Tsitsipas and Checcinatos are nothing compared to Federer at the AO in 2005. Hilarious that you're even arguing this.

Thiem was downright poor in the final and Nadal looked like he starting to get tired or something after less than three full sets.
 
NatF said:
He faced Federer/Sampras on HC, 2018 Nadal at the FO is certainly not on another level to those two.

It's definitely not impossible to know, you just need one good eye and two brain cells lol.
Click to expand...
Did Thiem ever lose a slam final to thomas johansson?
 
Lew II said:
And in Slams all rounds are equal?
Click to expand...

Hewitt had no shortage of late round matches at the slams and would have almost certainly had more if not for tough draws with Federer in early rounds.

It was your point that Nadal is peaking as evidenced by his win/loss record, my point here is that win/loss record isn't really that revealing. Keep tying yourself in knots trying to prove there's a big difference between 94% vs 96%.

Lew II said:
Did Thiem ever lose a slam final to thomas johansson?
Click to expand...

Did Thiem ever turn up to a slam final with this in his box?

Ir7NeOsiLI3_Ry2LOQVZawfUgOvdRQ90RX-f-hniOBU.jpg
 
NatF said:
Hewitt had no shortage of late round matches at the slams and would have almost certainly had more if not for tough draws with Federer in early rounds.

It was your point that Nadal is peaking as evidenced by his win/loss record, my point here is that win/loss record isn't really that revealing. Keep tying yourself in knots trying to prove there's a big difference between 94% vs 96%.
Click to expand...
I give up with you.
 
NatF said:
You give up with logic more like :oops:

It's cool, your double standards got exposed (again) and you're running for the hills to come up with your next Fed bashing thread. Just a day in the life of Lew.
Click to expand...
Insults as always.

I just think I can't convince you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Winning percentage in big4 matches by year
Replies
2
Views
574
Zhilady
Zhilady
mehdimike
Big Titles won by beating at least 2 top-10 seeded players (Djokovic Vs Nadal)
Replies
12
Views
1K
ADuck
ADuck
BVSlam
Big 3 Bagels
Replies
1
Views
445
Jonas78
J
D
Most GS wins by four players
2 3
Replies
127
Views
7K
Deleted member 307496
D
E
Big 3: percent of ATP matches lost against someone other than the eventual tournament champion
Replies
2
Views
665
Engelworks
E
Back
Top