The difference in success in proportion in the masters 1000 of the big three

[Daniel Andrade]

I think you can fault Fed for not winning even a few more clay Masters than he did but none of the above was exactly wrong was it?

If you cherry pick everything you say is 100% factual

 

[FlyingSaucer]

2010-retire, Federer won 5 of 59 (.08%).

As usual, Federer made his killing in '04-06, when Nadal and Djokovic were teenagers!

Are you talking about M1000 titles? If so, this is incorrect.

 

[SonnyT]

That Federer won 11 in 2004-07 is just product of his era. Just like Djokovic won 12 in 18-23.

But Federer won total of 15 Mickie mouse tournaments in these 4 years. Let's never forget that. Not slams/Masters/ATP finals.
But random 250s and 500s where he was getting huge appearance fees.


Djokovic won 8 MM in 6 years. Keep in mind. Difference is drastic.

Keep in mind that Federer's glory years were in '04-07, when his rivals, Nadal & Djokovic, were still teenagers. Federer's years of '08-retirement were less than satisfactory, with him winning one post-'11 slam with a healthy Djokovic!

Djokovic's glory years were in '11-18, when all of Djokovic were in their primes, and Djokovic had proven he was the best! Djokovic's '19-23 were in insignificant, because he had proven himself!

 

[RS]

Fed would have 40 if there 3 on grass. They make HC slower so Fed would stop winning also.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Fed would have 40 if there 3 on grass

Probably 37/38 yes. He and Djokovic are exactly equal talent on non clay but Djokovic is better on clay.

 

[TMF]

The biggest reason is there's no a single MS1000 on grass which is Roger's pet surface. Had Halle and Queen were a MS1000 scheduled at different time, Roger would have won many more titles.

Also Djokovic inflated many of his MS1000 during the weakest era of all time(CIE)

 

[RS]

Toronto and Cinci were in the middle and I think still are tons of history and good spot on calendar but not the cache of the true top dogs. I think Cinci had extra juice for being in America and America being a tennis powerhouse through the start of the Fed era so that's why I put it on that level. Agree Hamburg/Madrid/Paris were for sure elevated.

As you alluded to the true top dogs were maybe drug back to the pack a bit. Miami and Rome used to feel enormous. Miami kinda did it to themselves and IW overtook them as well but Rome definitely lost some of its swag even though I think most people would still rank it as at worst a top 3 master.

How is NBA this season?