Slam losses during prime for the big 3

[Tennisanity]

This thread is a corollary to this one:

"Out of Federers 17 GS.."

It is stated that Federer lost more times than won against Djokodal in slam finals. This stat hides the circumstances of peak level and post-prime, aging, different generations, age differences etc.

A reasonable alternative is to look at slam losses by the big 3 during their prime years (more or less contiguous).

ATG= all time great (minimum Becker/Edberg - Murray not part of this yet)

For Fed
2004 FO Kuerten
2005 AO Safin, FO Nadal (ATG)
2006 FO Nadal (ATG)
2007 FO Nadal (ATG)\
2008 AO Djokovic (ATG), FO Nadal (ATG), W Nadal (ATG)
2009 AO Nadal (ATG), USO Delpo

During Fed prime years only lost thrice to a non ATG


For Nadal (removed 2009 to be fair)
2007 AO Gonzalez (journeyman), W Federer (ATG), USO Ferrer (journeyman)
2008 AO Tsonga (journeyman), 2008 Murray
2010 AO Murray
2011 AO Ferrer (journeyman), W Djokovic (ATG), USO Djokovic (ATG)
2012 AO Djokovic (ATG), W Rosol (nobody), USO DNP (pussed out)
2013 AO DNP (pussed out), W Darcis (nobody)

During Nadal prime years losses to 10 non ATGs, 2 Murrays, 2 nobodies, 4 journeymen, 2 pussed out


For Djokovic
2011 FO Federer (ATG)
2012 FO Nadal (ATG), W Federer (ATG), USO Murray
2013 FO Nadal (ATG), W Murray, USO Nadal (ATG)
2014 AO Wawarinka, FO Nadal (ATG), USO Nishikori (journeyman)
2015 FO Wawarinka
2016 W Querrey (nobody)

During Djoko prime years 6 losses to non-ATGs (this could become 4 if Murray is promoted) including 1 journeyman and 1 nobody.

Damn!

 

[dr325i]

Safin ATG??? Greater/equal as Becket/Edberg? OK...
Murray ATG for Nadal but not for Djokovic??? OK...
Ferrer, Tsonga and Nishikori are just journeyman?

Sanity check

 

[Tennisanity]

I changed it. Sure Nishi, Tsonga, Ferrer etc are all journeyman, never won a slam.

 

[AceSalvo]

I changed it. Sure Nishi, Tsonga, Ferrer etc are all journeyman, never won a slam.

Delpo gets an upgrade then from "nobody, journeyman"!

He did beat the almighty Fed for the title when Fed was on a 5 straight USO streak. A little respect would do.

You were right to exclude Nadals 2009.

 

[Tennisanity]

Delpo gets an upgrade then from "nobody, journeyman"!

He did beat the almighty Fed for the title when Fed was on a 5 straight USO streak. A little respect would do.

You were right to exclude Nadals 2009.

Delpo is a non ATG, I am consistent. But he is no journeyman, he won a slam after all.

To clarify:
ATG = minimum Becker/Edberg level
non-ATG = at least one slam win eg, Murray, Wawa, Safin, etc.
journeyman = someone been around the block never won a slam (maybe came close)
nobody = never sniffed a slam, although Querrey isn't quite a Darcis or Rosol, he's still a nobody.

 

[AceSalvo]

Delpo is a non ATG, I am consistent. But he is no journeyman, he won a slam after all.

To clarify:
ATG = minimum Becker/Edberg level
non-ATG = at least one slam win eg, Murray, Wawa, Safin, etc.
journeyman = someone been around the block never won a slam (maybe came close)
nobody = never sniffed a slam, although Querrey isn't quite a Darcis or Rosol, he's still a nobody.

Agreed.

Its simpler if you did loses against 0 slam winners. Same story though!

 

[tennis_pro]

Funny how a 23,5 year old Djokovic is not in his prime.

 

[Tennisanity]

Funny how a 23,5 year old Djokovic is not in his prime.

Oh I agree, Djoko's prime began earlier, but I wanted to include the same number of top years.

 

[tennisaddict]

Oh I agree, Djoko's prime began earlier, but I wanted to include the same number of top years.

Would that include the tough loss to washed up Safin , a few months before his retirement or only the loss to clay behemoth Melzer or Kohlscreiber or to his master Roddick ?

 

[punterlad]

This thread is a corollary to this one:

"Out of Federers 17 GS.."

It is stated that Federer lost more times than won against Djokodal in slam finals. This stat hides the circumstances of peak level and post-prime, aging, different generations, age differences etc.

A reasonable alternative is to look at slam losses by the big 3 during their prime years (more or less contiguous).

ATG= all time great (minimum Becker/Edberg - Murray not part of this yet)

For Fed
2004 FO Kuerten
2005 AO Safin, FO Nadal (ATG)
2006 FO Nadal (ATG)
2007 FO Nadal (ATG)\
2008 AO Djokovic (ATG), FO Nadal (ATG), W Nadal (ATG)
2009 AO Nadal (ATG), USO Delpo

During Fed prime years only lost thrice to a non ATG


For Nadal (removed 2009 to be fair)
2007 AO Gonzalez (journeyman), W Federer (ATG), USO Ferrer (journeyman)
2008 AO Tsonga (journeyman), 2008 Murray
2010 AO Murray
2011 AO Ferrer (journeyman), W Djokovic (ATG), USO Djokovic (ATG)
2012 AO Djokovic (ATG), W Rosol (nobody), USO DNP (pussed out)
2013 AO DNP (pussed out), W Darcis (nobody)

During Nadal prime years losses to 10 non ATGs, 2 Murrays, 2 nobodies, 4 journeymen, 2 pussed out


For Djokovic
2011 FO Federer (ATG)
2012 FO Nadal (ATG), W Federer (ATG), USO Murray
2013 FO Nadal (ATG), W Murray, USO Nadal (ATG)
2014 AO Wawarinka, FO Nadal (ATG), USO Nishikori (journeyman)
2015 FO Wawarinka
2016 W Querrey (nobody)

During Djoko prime years 6 losses to non-ATGs (this could become 4 if Murray is promoted) including 1 journeyman and 1 nobody.

Damn!

This is too complex. Simplify it to say worse losses at majors when they were winning majors. For federer I can't remember a notable one.

For nadal it is soderling, and rosol (don't buy the injured stuff as he just won the FO)

For djokovic it would be querrey.

Shows how great all three are as that is a remarkable level of consistency

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

This is basically praising Federer's GOAT consistency, to wit, 36 consecutive major QFs and 23 consecutive instances of either winning or losing to the eventual winner.
The first record hints at Federer having no early round major losses in his prime - actually he did have one, to Kuerten at RG, who was however a triple RG winner still capable of rolling back the years on a good day (an opportunity to school the current dominator must have been very energizing), whereas Nadal and Djokovic have lost at Wimbledon during their primes to someone who's never been a top player.
The second record backs the first one up to be more impressive, reminding that Nadal could only string together two years of such consistency (RG '10 - RG '12, except for an injury (genuine, by all appearances) loss to Ferrer), while Djokovic almost matched it had not been for the Nishikori loss.
These records are now safe and will probably remain intact for decades to come.
And that's it, no extra conclusion drawn.

 

[AceSalvo]

Would that include the tough loss to washed up Safin , a few months before his retirement or only the loss to clay behemoth Melzer or Kohlscreiber or to his master Roddick ?

One would think that winning a Slam and YEC in the same year points to being in "prime" status.

Only TW geniuses can come up with "Fed was always in his prime even in his 34" but "Nadal and Djokovic had bursts of prime because they were not healthy enough".

 

[dr325i]

Funny how a 23,5 year old Djokovic is not in his prime.

The PRIME period is different for different players, not sure why he should be at his prime at the age of 23??
Is Thiem at his prime now?
Raonic deep into his prime now?
You are not "complaining" about Federer's 2010 being omitted at the age of 29. Should the OP remove Novak's 2016 (age of 29)?

 

[fps]

Delpo is a non ATG, I am consistent. But he is no journeyman, he won a slam after all.

journeyman = someone been around the block never won a slam (maybe came close)
nobody = never sniffed a slam, although Querrey isn't quite a Darcis or Rosol, he's still a nobody.

That's not what "journeyman" means. It implies someone who lives on the tour and earns enough to live by playing.

Calling pros like Querrey a nobody is ridiculous as well as being incredibly direspectful to many very fine players. Maybe class up your definitions a bit.

 

[Rafa the King]

How is 2007 part of Rafa's prime
2008: Tsonga and Murray
2009: Soderling and Delpo (both struggling with injury)
2010: Murray (again injured)
2011: Ferrer (injured), Djokovic (all-time great)
2012: Djokovic, Rosol (injured)
2013: Darcis

Djokovic: 3x
Murray: 2x (1 injured)
Soderling: 1x (injured)
Ferrer: 1x (injured)
Nobodies: 2x (allegedly also injured against Darcis)

So that is 3x Novak, 1x Murray but extremely fatigued and 5x allegedly injured also missing 3 slams

Btw a prime lasts shorter than these 5 year periods. Sometimes it's just a 12 month period (Rafa RG 08- Rome 09)

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

How is 2007 part of Rafa's prime
2008: Tsonga and Murray
2009: Soderling and Delpo (both struggling with injury)
2010: Murray (again injured)
2011: Ferrer (injured), Djokovic (all-time great)
2012: Djokovic, Rosol (injured)
2013: Darcis

I don't see a good basis for implying he wouldn't have lost those matches otherwise, except Söderling, Ferrer and Darcis. Del Potro was peaking and beat Nadal very decisively; it's not like he can't possibly outplay a healthy Nadal on hardcourt. Murray was outplaying Nadal in the AO match before Nadal's knee acted up. In the Rosol match Nadal didn't appear particularly injured to me, just had a big off-day like Federer in 2013 (in whose case it was only partially related to the back troubles he sustained earlier that year on clay) and Djokovic in 2016 (some minor shoulder issues, the likes of which players regularly play through; the primary reason for the loss was lack of preparation/mood, i.e. an off-day); contrary, in the Darcis match Nadal looks rather unusually clumsy to me, and I believe he wasn't fully fit.

 

[AceSalvo]

The PRIME period is different for different players, not sure why he should be at his prime at the age of 23??
Is Thiem at his prime now?
Raonic deep into his prime now?
You are not "complaining" about Federer's 2010 being omitted at the age of 29. Should the OP remove Novak's 2016 (age of 29)?

OP did a good job on the same point you are making "different players have different primes". If someone reaches multiple slam finals in the same year, its one way to say that player is in his prime.

Djokovic won 2 slams, many 1000's and is still #1. What is "not so prime" about 2016 Djoko?. Fed did nothing even remotely close to that in 2010.

Apparently TW folks get a phone call from their favorite saying if they are in their prime or not.

 

[Rafa the King]

I don't see a good basis for implying he wouldn't have lost those matches otherwise, except Söderling, Ferrer and Darcis. Del Potro was peaking and beat Nadal very decisively; it's not like he can't possibly outplay a healthy Nadal on hardcourt. Murray was outplaying Nadal in the AO match before Nadal's knee acted up. In the Rosol match Nadal didn't appear particularly injured to me, just had a big off-day like Federer in 2013 (in whose case it was only partially related to the back troubles he sustained earlier that year on clay) and Djokovic in 2016 (some minor shoulder issues, the likes of which players regularly play through; the primary reason for the loss was lack of preparation/mood, i.e. an off-day); contrary, in the Darcis match Nadal looks rather unusually clumsy to me, and I believe he wasn't fully fit.

Fair enough

 

[Mainad]

How is 2007 part of Rafa's prime
2008: Tsonga and Murray
2009: Soderling and Delpo (both struggling with injury)
2010: Murray (again injured)
2011: Ferrer (injured), Djokovic (all-time great)
2012: Djokovic, Rosol (injured)
2013: Darcis

Djokovic: 3x
Murray: 2x (1 injured)
Soderling: 1x (injured)
Ferrer: 1x (injured)
Nobodies: 2x (allegedly also injured against Darcis)

So that is 3x Novak, 1x Murray but extremely fatigued and 5x allegedly injured also missing 3 slams

Btw a prime lasts shorter than these 5 year periods. Sometimes it's just a 12 month period (Rafa RG 08- Rome 09)

Love how Rafa only loses when he is injured or tired!

 

[DreddyTennis45]

Love how Rafa only loses when he is injured or tired!

Fed loses: Mono
Rafa loses: Injured
Djokovic loses: court was too fast

 

[dr325i]

OP did a good job on the same point you are making "different players have different primes". If someone reaches multiple slam finals in the same year, its one way to say that player is in his prime.

Djokovic won 2 slams, many 1000's and is still #1. What is "not so prime" about 2016 Djoko?. Fed did nothing even remotely close to that in 2010.

Apparently TW folks get a phone call from their favorite saying if they are in their prime or not.

Read my reply again, maybe you will understand the second time before acting smart.
I replied to a guy who believes Novak's slam-less 2010 should be a part of the PRIME period while Roger's 2010 is ignored...

 

[dr325i]

Fed loses: Mono
Rafa loses: Injured
Djokovic loses: court was too fast

Right, Federer's mono lasted from 2004 through 2009, and Nadal does actually blame an "injury" for every loss.
Next, you are going to believe that Trump is going to fix it all for us, correct?

 

[DreddyTennis45]

Right, Federer's mono lasted from 2004 through 2009, and Nadal does actually blame an "injury" for every loss.
Next, you are going to believe that Trump is going to fix it all for us, correct?

Jeez it was just a joke, you fanboys really are insecure.

 

[dr325i]

Jeez it was just a joke, you fanboys really are insecure.

This forum has turned into a big joke. Used to make sense a few years ago...

 

[DreddyTennis45]

This forum has turned into a big joke. Used to make sense a few years ago...

Too many trolls who think they're funny and clever.

 

[Djokovic_is_the_best#1]

It proves fed dominated in a very weak era

 

[DreddyTennis45]

It proves fed dominated in a very weak era

Is that a fact or opinion?

 

[Djokovic_is_the_best#1]

Is that a fact or opinion?

Both

 

[DreddyTennis45]

Both

 

[Djokovic_is_the_best#1]

Just kidding haha, an opinion of course

 

[DreddyTennis45]

Just kidding haha, an opinion of course

 

[Noleberic123]

Too many trolls who think they're funny and clever.

@Blocker

 

[Noleberic123]

Fed loses: Mono
Rafa loses: Injured
Djokovic loses: court was too fast

This the perfect post

 

[Noleberic123]

Funny how a 23,5 year old Djokovic is not in his prime.

But not his peak

 

[tennis_pro]

But not his peak

no

 

[AceSalvo]

Read my reply again, maybe you will understand the second time before acting smart.

Nothing smart about this: "You are not "complaining" about Federer's 2010 being omitted at the age of 29. Should the OP remove Novak's 2016 (age of 29)? "
I think you understood this later and changed it to Djoko's 2010.

Novak's slam-less 2010 should be a part of the PRIME period while Roger's 2010 is ignored

Had you mentioned this this in your initial reply, I wouldn't have acted too smart!

 

[Tardigrade]

Too many trolls who think they're funny and clever.

Is this a fact or opinion?

 

[DreddyTennis45]

Is this a fact or opinion?

It's whatever you want it to be

 

[Tardigrade]

It's whatever you want it to be

I find it to be incorrect.

 

[DreddyTennis45]

I find it to be incorrect.

Sure, whatever makes you sleep at night.