Slam final losses to non ATG players.
- Thread starter D.Nalby12
- Start date
S
Slicehand
Guest
Age between the 3 would be an important factor, also at first, djoko wasnt making a lot of slam finals
TimHenmanATG
Hall of Fame
Amen786
Semi-Pro
Federer's age combined with his inability to close out important games & sets
ghostofMecir
Legend
It’s strange to say, but Federer underachieved knowing how many titles he should have won. Then again, he played with outdated technology and for the most part and outdated game born in a different era and difficult to adapt to this one
Amen786
Semi-Pro
Outdated equipment yes, outdated game no.
His game is the best and most efficient in this era.
If his nerves can be replaced with those of sampras, you're looking at a guy with 8 Australia opens, 3 french opens, 11 Wimbledons, 8 usa opens, 8 season ending championships, 8 year end #1 & 450+ weeks at no1.
Looks like Allah does not give everyone everything, you gain some you lose some.
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
I'll explain it in two succinct sentences. You neglected to mention that 5 of the losses Fed experienced against Djokovic in slam finals were when Fed was older than Novak is now. There's a 6 year difference between them.
maratha_warrior
Hall of Fame
Currently Djokovic is aged 34.4
After Federer was 34.4 , Fed and Djokovic met " Three" times in slams - AO 16 , Wimbledon 2019 & Australian Open 2020 .
Federer clearly had age disadvantage .
But , let's write Factual numbers !
UnforcedTerror
Hall of Fame
Med is an ATG, Murray too.
D
Deleted member 762343
Guest
ATG status is a fanmade thing which attribution is based on completely subjective criterias. So your stat isn’t actually one and it doesn’t say much.
kevin qmto
Hall of Fame
Should have a little screen in the middle with the Muller loss.Big brain Nadal has it all figured out - if you lose early to mugs, you don't lose in finals.
goldengate14
Professional
He likes being underdog as less pressure.
goldengate14
Professional
I may be wrong but i think Federer best Djokovic at RG in 2011 and W2012. Djokovic was about Medvedev age then. Federer in his 30s?
Federer started to lose alot v Djokovic from 2014. He was around 33 at that point. I.e way past his best. Against Nadal save for 2011 he only had prologes success against a much physically weaker Nadal post 2014.
I am not seeing this supreme mentally tough player some media guys present. Perhaps the most naturally gifted and complete player but of the three mentally he seems by far the most vulnerable. I just cannot imagine even current nadal and federer in a major final being beat like that by a guy who hss never won a slam and is cramping. Medvedev was literally on one leg last three games. But instead of spotting it Djokovic was crying during those games. It is scarcely believable and not befittig of someone the media paint as mentally really strong.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Nah, don't see Pete as mentally tougher at all.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
LOL.
TennisLurker
Professional
murray and wawrinka will end up in the hall of fame, and medvedev could very possibly have a better career than kafelnikov or safin, especially because he has a better head than them.
Amen786
Semi-Pro
Why do you think so?
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Pete never had the competition Fed faced at any point in his career.
Thats because his peak doesn't coincided with theirs. Djokovic was younger and less prone to injuries.
And 2011 Djokovic was at higher peak level than all of the current Next Gen combined
duaneeo
Legend
It tells us that Djokovic's mentality isn't as tough as considered.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
But does anything need to truly be explained?
he was outplayed i 4 of these 5 finals, had not much to do with mental toughness.
Kralingen
Talk Tennis Guru
Federer - dominated his peak but has some very questionable 00-03 losses (at which age Djokodal were making Slam finals) and then had issues post 2009 dealing with younger ATGs. Then again, Berdych knocked him out of 2 slams in 2010-12…
Overall I think Fed is a victim of playing too long for stuff like H2H. He was great even at an old age.
Djokovic - not as mentally strong as advertised but let’s give some context. WB 2013 - dead after DelPo match, USO ‘12 - wind and just overall awful conditions, USO ‘16 he played the easiest draw maybe ever and was semi hurt/out of it.
I think Djokovic got to a fair amount of finals where his form/fitness wasn’t really at a slam winning level and then just hit a wall. Aka last weekend. But overall Wawrinka really hurt him in his prime which is something the other two don’t have.
Nadal - if Nadal is not fit or fully firing, he will either skip the tournament or lose before the quarters, pretty much always. If he is fit and on form he’s always a contender. As a result he has a better Slam H2H, finals/SF record etc. but in all actuality those numbers are a bit inflated, as he loses early or simply skips tournaments which the other two would play through.
Overall I think Murray/Stan’s level were underrated and I feel for Djokovic a little, as Stan got Nadal and Federer in 13-15 in Slams as well. But yeah, this (and especially the Nishikori loss) is why I can never say Djokovic is unquestionably GOAT. Too many weird losses in his prime.
Overall I think Fed is a victim of playing too long for stuff like H2H. He was great even at an old age.
Djokovic - not as mentally strong as advertised but let’s give some context. WB 2013 - dead after DelPo match, USO ‘12 - wind and just overall awful conditions, USO ‘16 he played the easiest draw maybe ever and was semi hurt/out of it.
I think Djokovic got to a fair amount of finals where his form/fitness wasn’t really at a slam winning level and then just hit a wall. Aka last weekend. But overall Wawrinka really hurt him in his prime which is something the other two don’t have.
Nadal - if Nadal is not fit or fully firing, he will either skip the tournament or lose before the quarters, pretty much always. If he is fit and on form he’s always a contender. As a result he has a better Slam H2H, finals/SF record etc. but in all actuality those numbers are a bit inflated, as he loses early or simply skips tournaments which the other two would play through.
Overall I think Murray/Stan’s level were underrated and I feel for Djokovic a little, as Stan got Nadal and Federer in 13-15 in Slams as well. But yeah, this (and especially the Nishikori loss) is why I can never say Djokovic is unquestionably GOAT. Too many weird losses in his prime.
duaneeo
Legend
You rather say he lost physically, that's fine. Regardless, peak Djokovic losing 4 slams finals to Murray and Wawrinka isn't a good look.
One Handed Dynasty
Semi-Pro
Love Sampras, but I can’t even begin to imagine the havoc Nadal’s forehand would have wrought on his backhand.
TennisLurker
Professional
I never watched the Robredo Federer match. How did Federer lose? Injury? Feeling ill?
I hated watching Robredo, I saw him as a very boring player that could beat people ranked lower than him, but who never gave any problem to the real top players.
their h2h ended up 11-1 with the only loss being the US Open match
I hated watching Robredo, I saw him as a very boring player that could beat people ranked lower than him, but who never gave any problem to the real top players.
their h2h ended up 11-1 with the only loss being the US Open match
he tanked to avoid Rafa
duaneeo
Legend
2013 woes? Federer suffered his only-ever slam loss to Murray at the AO, lost in straights to Tsonga at Roland Garros, and lost in the 2nd round to Stakhovsky at Wimbledon.
Tank? Federer had lost to Nadal at Indian Wells, Rome, and (most shocking) Cincinnati. A win over Robredo at the USO meant a first-ever matchup with Rafa.
def tank...he didn't sound too disappointed with the outcome
Q. What about the anticipation, maybe the disappointment of not getting into the quarterfinals against Rafa?
ROGER FEDERER: Yeah, I mean, it would have been a quarters, not a final. Not that much of a disappointment at the end of the day. If I'm playing like this, I'm not going to beat Rafa
Amen786
Semi-Pro
Fed didn't just blow away opportunities against Djokovic and Nadal you know.
From manitlla in rome to safin at Australia to del potro at usa, there are countless moments.
MeatTornado
Talk Tennis Guru
I think the mental toughness of Pete gets quite exaggerated at times, but to say he's not better mentally at all....
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
Rebel-I.N.S
Hall of Fame
Levels.
the loss to nishikori in 2014 us open is worse than all losses to murray and wawrinka combined.
Great Post...
ghostofMecir
Legend
Overall, I do think he has the best overall game and that is why even when he loses, it’s almost always a fight and he has lost so many times while being technically the better player (i.e., dominance ratio leads in many losses).
But this is due to his once in a lifetime talent taking the ball off the baseline, even with his one-handed BH after the racket switch, which is other-worldly ridiculous as people who have played know. The one-handed BH, though, is an overall liability in today’s game, especially on return. The advantages of a one-hander in today’s baseline game are outweighed by the negatives. Comsidering the two greatest baseliners ever in Djokovic and Nadal emerged in 2005 and 2006/2007 put him at a massive disadvantage in a game he learned to play emulating the attacking games of Sampras, Edberg, and Federer in which a one-hander had strong advantages, i.e., net transition.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Hard to say. He never had the competition Fed had at any point in his career. Don't see what makes him clearly mentally tougher.I think the mental toughness of Pete gets quite exaggerated at times, but to say he's not better mentally at all....
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Like Sampras didn't also lose to lesser players at his best....
MeatTornado
Talk Tennis Guru
Not from match point up he didn't
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Yeah, he lost in straights. Much better. Great mentality...
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
Vomiting on court and still winning after your coach is diagnosed with cancer? If that's not mental toughness I don't know what is....
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
He beat Nadal once (and it is questionable whether Nadal was fully fit here) after not having even won one single set in 13 matches and also afterwards was pretty useless against Nadal. He beat Federer once at 34 on Federer’s worst surface. With Djokovic he beat the peak version at least twice with some additional tough five setter. Stan fares way better against Djokovic than against Fedal whether that is due to matchup or other reasons.
