The Federer - Djokovic rivalry is underrated

Is the rivalry between Federer and Djokovic underrated?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 27 75.0%
  • No Nadal, no party for sure, no?

    Votes: 9 25.0%

  • Total voters
    36

Steve0904

Talk Tennis Guru
The biggest reason the Federer-Djokovic rivalry is underrated is because their primes didn't really coincide that much. Before 2011, Djokovic wasn't really good enough to challenge Federer at the majors, and after 2011 the reverse is largely true. They didn't even play at either one of RG or Wimbledon until 2011.

And their 1st and 2nd H2H major finals are almost 7 years apart. 2007 USO-2014 Wimbledon. Another reason I think the rivalry is underrated is no BO5 Masters finals anymore.

No Rome 2006's, or Miami 2005's for example.
 

Jackuar

Hall of Fame
The biggest reason the Federer-Djokovic rivalry is underrated is because their primes didn't really coincide that much. Before 2011, Djokovic wasn't really good enough to challenge Federer at the majors, and after 2011 the reverse is largely true. They didn't even play at either one of RG or Wimbledon until 2011.

And their 1st and 2nd H2H major finals are almost 7 years apart. 2007 USO-2014 Wimbledon. Another reason I think the rivalry is underrated is no BO5 Masters finals anymore.

No Rome 2006's, or Miami 2005's for example.

True. And also, its because of what was on the line. For the Fedal, every meeting was an opportunity for creating history of some kind, some record, some stat. By the time Djoko came, Fed's legend was well established and there wasn't anything that would've made a 'significant' difference to Fed's 'legacy' (not records, note that).

What did Fed lose in his rivalry with Djokovic? Nothing worse than the H2H and few slams.

What did Fed lose in his rivalry with Nadal - he lost a CYGS and whole lot more history (or chances to create history).

The significance of the meetings, at that particular point in their career, makes Fedal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fedkovic
 

Luka888

Professional
Of course Djokovic should be given credit for the wins, but to say that Federer is playing like he did during his prime is just plain stupid (not saying that you said it).
There is a little problem here. A young Djokovic was losing to a prime Fed ... then we have a period when things turned around. Saying that the prime Fed would beat Djokovic anywhere is simply false.

Djokovic beat the prime Fed back in Montreal 2007. Novak lost the USO final that year, he chocked being 2 breaks up in the first and the second set. Then, at the AO 2008 Federer was simply outplayed. Please don't give me that mono BS.

However, they played some amazing matches. I really enjoyed them. So kudos to both Federer and Djokovic. Will they meet again? I hope so. I'm just not sure it is going to happen.

I, personally, miss their rivalry. I just love watching good tennis, and both Novak and Roger can deliver.

By the way, it makes me sad that Fed is out of top 10. Novak will be 30 yo next year. They both cemented their respective places in tennis history no matter what happens from now on. Same with Rafa.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pc1

metsman

Talk Tennis Guru
The biggest reason the Federer-Djokovic rivalry is underrated is because their primes didn't really coincide that much. Before 2011, Djokovic wasn't really good enough to challenge Federer at the majors, and after 2011 the reverse is largely true. They didn't even play at either one of RG or Wimbledon until 2011.

And their 1st and 2nd H2H major finals are almost 7 years apart. 2007 USO-2014 Wimbledon. Another reason I think the rivalry is underrated is no BO5 Masters finals anymore.

No Rome 2006's, or Miami 2005's for example.
I think the Fed-Djokovic rivalry is rated fine...they just haven't produced as many epics as Fedal, and that may be because their prime/peaks never truly collided.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pc1

6august

Hall of Fame
I always put Fed-Djo over Fed-Nad because the contrast in their style and most of all, in their matches each of them let the other play his trade mark tennis. Meanwhile everything Nad does through all the match is moonball to Fed's BH.

Unfortunately they're to some extents from different generations. If not, it could be the greatest rivalry ever.

And spare me from the "Fed beats Djo everywhere" BS.
 

joekapa

Legend
I think the Fed-Djokovic rivalry is rated fine...they just haven't produced as many epics as Fedal, and that may be because their prime/peaks never truly collided.
I think they have provided better matches. USO 2010, 2011 come to mind. Sure Fedal had Wimby 2008. But that's about it in my book.

I have always said that the Fedal rivavlry is overrated. It was too one sided to ever be considered a great rivalry. The same reason why Djokovic-Murray is not a great rivalry.

The greatest rivalry of the modern era, has been Djokovic-Nadal. You'd have to be blind not to see it.
 

pc1

G.O.A.T.
I think a lot of it has to do with contrast of styles. Nadal/Federer and Djokovic/Federer are good contrasts which allows for more dynamic tennis imo. Nadal versus Djokovic often is a war of attrition. Another good matchup at times is a healthy del Potro against Djokovic or Murray with del Potro's forehand attack versus the great defense of either Djokovic or Murray. I could not believe some of the defense Murray displayed against del Potro in the Olympic final. Some of those del Potro forehands went like lightning and Murray somehow got them back and often won the point.
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
It's been a very long time since he has had a significant victory over Novak at an Important Tournament...

Last time he beat Djokovic at a Slam was in the semi-final of 2012 Wimbledon. Last time he beat him at a Masters was in the final of 2015 Cincinnati. Last time he beat him at the WTF was in a round robin match at 2015 London.
 

Rafa the King

Hall of Fame
That Nadal has the mental over edge of Federer is nothing new. But Djokovic over Federer when the H2H is 23-22 and many of those losses coming when Federer is way past 30... How is that "always a mental problem"?

Exactly, when we compare their recent H2H BO3 and BO5 record we see that the advantage is mainly physical (because Rog leads BO3), which comes down to Rog's age.
 

Bender

G.O.A.T.
I always put Fed-Djo over Fed-Nad because the contrast in their style and most of all, in their matches each of them let the other play his trade mark tennis. Meanwhile everything Nad does through all the match is moonball to Fed's BH.
Way to exaggerate. Both rivalries result in one side having to defend more than they would like to. Nadal puts Federer on the defence by attacking Federer's backhand (which is not 'moonballing', btw, because moonballing is passive play, while Nadal is actively trying to break Federer's BH side), and Federer puts Djokovic on the defence. Djokovic similarly puts Nadal on the defence.

If anything, Fed and Djokovic are more similar in style than Fedal, which is precisely why usually only one of them is able to play his preferred game. Before I elaborate, I will need to describe how I perceive their respective games, so here goes:

Federer
:
  • All-out attacker
  • Uses the whole court
  • Counter-punches if necessary
  • Makes full use of a wide range of weapons available (some of his weapons--eg forehand and slice--have declined dramatically recently, however)
Nadal:
  • Passive-aggressive counter-puncher: by 'passive-aggressive', I mean that each shot he makes is not necessarily meant to be an outright winner, but is supposed to put the opponent in a tough situation, forcing errors or tactically unsound decisions from the opponent. This is not the same as 'passive', which is merely to put the ball back into play, and waiting for the opponent to make an unforced error. You don't hit or need to hit 5K rpm on a FH in order to keep it in play; you hit that to actively torture your opponent's game, which is the polar opposite of pure retrieval, which is to give your opponent multiple chances to play their normal game until the percentages swing the defender's way. Rafa's game is actually an aggressive one that doesn't translate onto the screen--his game consists of sledgehammering tough ball after tough ball to his opponents in order to break them down, instead of stabbing holes into his opponent's game with shots that are impossible to retrieve.
  • Uses the back court
  • Attacks and approaches the net if the opportunity arises
  • Inefficient, very limited use of a wide range of weapons available (some of his weapons--eg serve and forehand--have declined dramatically recently, however)
Djokovic:
  • Conservative attacker
  • Uses the back court
  • Defends and approaches the net when the opportunity arises
  • Makes full use of a narrower range of weapons available (although under Boris, he has added the slice and second serve as decent weapons)
Unfortunately they're to some extents from different generations. If not, it could be the greatest rivalry ever.
Nadal may be Djokovic's generation age-wise, but as far as peaks and primes go, IMO he fits inbetween Federer and Djokovic--closer to Fed than Djokovic, however. So yes, you are right in that Djokovic and Federer are of different generations. It's also exactly why your next line is wrong:
And spare me from the "Fed beats Djo everywhere" BS.
As you've mentioned, Djokovic was not good enough during Federer's peak, and Federer is too old now that we're in Djokovic's prime. Their matches are only interesting because baby Djokovic had potential and nothing to lose, and Fed is god-tier despite being at the age where most other players would have retired three to four years ago. At least back in 2005-2009, both Federer and Nadal were at their actual peaks on at least one surface (which unfortunately for Fed was mostly just clay for Nadal until 2007), and their peaks coincided just long enough for us to watch them play on surfaces other than those that suited Rafa, ie Wimbledon 2007 & 2008, AO 2009, even Miami 2004 & 5.
 
Last edited:

Lord Anomander

Professional
Since Federer is out I'm enjoying watching Tennis much less. Well knowing that the two didn't battle during their primes, it was just a nice matchup that always has the potential of a great match to watch (unlike Murray - Djokovic). Their playing styles are very different and thus, you don't get to see baseline rallyes over and over again. And even if so, they were of such a high quality.

Yes, Djokovic won most of their important encounters the last years, but to me it's very impressive that Fed could keep up with him that well. I think during this period of withstanding Djokovic, he gained more respect from my side than he did by winning a lot of slams in the early stages of his career. I miss Federer and Nadal on the tour and I think Nole does too (in my opinion he was always motivated the most to play them and to be prepared for them - so now they are gone for a while and Nole won the FO, he is certainly struggling for motivation).

Edit: Also, I don't get the comparison of Fedal to this rivalry. Just because Fedal was awesome doesn't mean that this rivalry is nothing but a joke. ;)
 

joekapa

Legend
Way to exaggerate. Both rivalries result in one side having to defend more than they would like to. Nadal puts Federer on the defence by attacking Federer's backhand (which is not 'moonballing', btw, because moonballing is passive play, while Nadal is actively trying to break Federer's BH side), and Federer puts Djokovic on the defence. Djokovic similarly puts Nadal on the defence.

If anything, Fed and Djokovic are more similar in style than Fedal, which is precisely why usually only one of them is able to play his preferred game. Before I elaborate, I will need to describe how I perceive their respective games, so here goes:

Federer
:
  • All-out attacker
  • Uses the whole court
  • Counter-punches if necessary
  • Makes full use of a wide range of weapons available (some of his weapons--eg forehand and slice--have declined dramatically recently, however)
Nadal:
  • Passive-aggressive counter-puncher
  • Uses the back court
  • Attacks and approaches the net if the opportunity arises
  • Inefficient, very limited use of a wide range of weapons available (some of his weapons--eg serve and forehand--have declined dramatically recently, however)
Djokovic:
  • Conservative attacker
  • Uses the back court
  • Defends and approaches the net when the opportunity arises
  • Makes full use of a narrower range of weapons available (although under Boris, he has added the slice and second serve as decent weapons)

Nadal may be Djokovic's generation age-wise, but as far as peaks and primes go, IMO he fits inbetween Federer and Djokovic--closer to Fed than Djokovic, however. So yes, you are right in that Djokovic and Federer are of different generations. It's also exactly why your next line is wrong:

As you've mentioned, Djokovic was not good enough during Federer's peak, and Federer is too old now that we're in Djokovic's prime. Their matches are only interesting because baby Djokovic had potential and nothing to lose, and Fed is god-tier despite being at the age where most other players would have retired three to four years ago. At least back in 2005-2009, both Federer and Nadal were at their actual peaks on at least one surface (which unfortunately for Fed was mostly just clay for Nadal until 2007), and their peaks coincided just long enough for us to watch them play on surfaces other than those that suited Rafa, ie Wimbledon 2007 & 2008, AO 2009, even Miami 2004 & 5.

Federer's "weapons" are "full range" ? Really ? Djokovic has a "narrower range" of weapons ?

Let's see here. Who has a better backhand ? Who has a better return of service ? Who is quicker ? Who is more "precise" on their shots ?
 

Noelan

Legend
I hope they will met at AO14 R4 or QF, Novak to destroy him once again.To complete the story. Full cirkle;


Federer's "weapons" are "full range" ? Really ? Djokovic has a "narrower range" of weapons ?

Let's see here. Who has a better backhand ? Who has a better return of service ? Who is quicker ? Who is more "precise" on their shots ?
Federer:D
 

Bender

G.O.A.T.
Federer's "weapons" are "full range" ? Really ? Djokovic has a "narrower range" of weapons ?
Just because I said Djokovic has a narrower range of weapons compared to Federer (which is true) doesn't mean that I'm saying that Djokovic has a very limited selection of shots that he can use.
Let's see here. Who has a better backhand ? Who has a better return of service ? Who is quicker ? Who is more "precise" on their shots ?
Do you not understand what 'a wide range of weapons' means?
 
O

OhYes

Guest
As Steve0904 said - too much gap between their peaks. Then again, rarely you can find champions that dislike each other so much as in this rivalry.
 

Bender

G.O.A.T.
Which is not as laughable a reply as you may think when I'm talking about variety.

Unless of course, you're seriously suggesting that Djokovic has more shots in the book (and does them better) than Federer.

Even the magnanimous enigmatic variety titan that is Nadal had a slice from day 1, which Djokovic didn't even know how to hit without falling forwards until he got Boris to teach him.
 

joekapa

Legend
Which is not as laughable a reply as you may think when I'm talking about variety.

Unless of course, you're seriously suggesting that Djokovic has more shots in the book (and does them better) than Federer.

Even the magnanimous enigmatic variety titan that is Nadal had a slice from day 1, which Djokovic didn't even know how to hit without falling forwards until he got Boris to teach him.
Federer's gracefulness on court (which he has no doubt), provides a haze to the actual effectiveness of his shots.
 

Noelan

Legend
Which is not as laughable a reply as you may think when I'm talking about variety.

Unless of course, you're seriously suggesting that Djokovic has more shots in the book (and does them better) than Federer.

Even the magnanimous enigmatic variety titan that is Nadal had a slice from day 1, which Djokovic didn't even know how to hit without falling forwards until he got Boris to teach him.
I'm not suggesting, Federer is the most copmplete player ever:D

Srs , serve is the shot that I admire the most in his game.
 
Last edited:

Bender

G.O.A.T.
Federer's gracefulness on court (which he has no doubt), provides a haze to the actual effectiveness of his shots.
It would help if you were less ambiguous and actually indicated which shots exactly you are referring to--and I'm guessing that it has to be quite a list since most wouldn't count netplay as a whole as one of Djokovic's weapons.

Federer's high BH and sometimes erratic mental strength are his two standout weaknesses, and both of those are fairly niche weaknesses. Three, if you include his timid second serve return, but from casual observation, Djokovic's first serve returns (especially against big servers like Karlovic and Isner) are actually worse than Federer's.
 

Bender

G.O.A.T.
I'm not suggesting, Federer is the most copmplete player ever:D

Srs , serve is the shot that I admire the most in his game.
I prefer not to use words like 'ever' if possible, even though I'm 100% sure I've used it (amongst other words) in the past.

Federer is so far the most complete player we've seen so far, but there will eventually be someone more complete.

However, Djokovic is not that player--he's an undisputed ATG, but his claim to ATGness is definitely not based on his shot selection, but rather his competency in the shots that he does have, eg BH, ROS.
 

Rafa the King

Hall of Fame
I think they have provided better matches. USO 2010, 2011 come to mind. Sure Fedal had Wimby 2008. But that's about it in my book.

I have always said that the Fedal rivavlry is overrated. It was too one sided to ever be considered a great rivalry. The same reason why Djokovic-Murray is not a great rivalry.

The greatest rivalry of the modern era, has been Djokovic-Nadal. You'd have to be blind not to see it.

Miami 2005, Rome 2006, Wimbledon 2007, Wimbledon 2008, Australian Open 2009. All true classics of the game.
 

Bender

G.O.A.T.
Miami 2005, Rome 2006, Wimbledon 2007, Wimbledon 2008, Australian Open 2009. All true classics of the game.
Actually the RG 2005 and 2011 matches are up there as well (although RG 2011 won't go down well with many Fed fans for obvious reasons).

Miami 2004 and Wimbledon 2006 were fun matches too, even if a bit one sided because of one player overwhelming the other.

Cincinnati 2013, WTF 2010, WTF 2013, AO 2012, and Basel 2015 were all pretty memorable matches too, because they were fairly close.
 

Noelan

Legend
I prefer not to use words like 'ever' if possible, even though I'm 100% sure I've used it (amongst other words) in the past.

Federer is so far the most complete player we've seen so far, but there will eventually be someone more complete.

However, Djokovic is not that player--he's an undisputed ATG, but his claim to ATGness is definitely not based on his shot selection, but rather his competency in the shots that he does have, eg BH, ROS.
Absolutely:D


Yeah I know, ya'll wanted that player able to compete at high level and overcome one of the fedal in any way (as long as they play) wasn't even born .But ,guess what, life is not fair.


In any case I case I'm looking forward to another AO encounter between God Allmighy and Djokovic (since he declined too:oops:)
 

Bender

G.O.A.T.
Absolutely:D


Yeah I know, ya'll wanted that player able to compete at high level and overcome one of the fedal in any way (as long as they play) wasn't even born .But ,guess what, life is not fair.


In any case I case I'm looking forward to another AO encounter between God Allmighy and Djokovic (since he declined too:oops:)
I think Djokovic will be fine come AO.

Even if he isn't, he'll still win AO, since his game there is so much better than anyone else's.

The only two guys capable of beating him there are Wawrinka and Murray, and Wawrinka is probably going to be on vacation until Wimbledon, and Murray hasn't pushed Djokovic at the AO in four years.
 

Noelan

Legend
Of course he will win even though if he does not feel fine at time of AO, maybe he will win injured. Right?
Love the forum mantras.

Come on Fedole give us one more show down under:cool: It would be 10 years anniversary
 

ABCD

Hall of Fame
Djokovic leads the H2H in Wimbledon against Ancienterer, not Federer.

Rusty, good to see you here. As you are an expert in geopolitics (as well as tennis, biomedicine etc.), I would like to take this opportunity to ask you for your (expert) opinion. I heard that Russians are involed in USA election by conducting a "war" on Secretary Clinton. Is that true? Do you look forward to Mr Trump's presidency (if that is the outcome)?
 
Rusty, good to see you here. As you are an expert in geopolitics (as well as tennis, biomedicine etc.), I would like to take this opportunity to ask you for your (expert) opinion. I heard that Russians are involed in USA election by conducting a "war" on Secretary Clinton. Is that true? Do you look forward to Mr Trump's presidency (if that is the outcome)?
Yes, I do look forward to Trump being president. Hitlery might be indicted before the election, so it might have to be postponed.

And no, I don't think Russian hackers have the capability of tampering with the election. Plus, if we end up with a turd, at least we don't need to end up with a turd for life, like you guys do. How is King Putin doing these days?
 

ABCD

Hall of Fame
Yes, I do look forward to Trump being president. Hitlery might be indicted before the election, so it might have to be postponed.

And no, I don't think Russian hackers have the capability of tampering with the election. Plus, if we end up with a turd, at least we don't need to end up with a turd for life, like you guys do. How is King Putin doing these days?

Thank for the response. Regarding Putin, I have no idea. Never been to Russia. When I retire, I will go to see how it is. Ed Snowden was very complementary about Moscow, so I would like to see it. There is one poster from Moscow here, Federer fan. You could ask him about Putin; it would be interesting to see what a man who lives there would say. My experience tells me not to have a strong opinion about anything that I did not witness/experience first hand. Thus, Putin could be a stand up guy with bad PR in some parts of the world or could be a really bad guy. I don't know.
 
Last edited:
Thank for the response. Regarding Putin, I have no idea. Never been to Russia. When I retire, I will go to see how it is. Ed Snowden was very complementary about Moscow, so I would like to see it.
Snowden is complimentary because they helped him out. Not because Russia is specifically known for its freedom and transparency. Putin was KGB. Enough said.
 

ABCD

Hall of Fame
Snowden is complimentary because they helped him out. Not because Russia is specifically known for its freedom and transparency. Putin was KGB. Enough said.

I edited my post, to bring to your attention that there is a guy posting here living in Moscow. Every country has it's secret service. I wouldn't hold against USA President if he/she was a CIA operative in the past.
 
Nadal may be Djokovic's generation age-wise, but as far as peaks and primes go, IMO he fits inbetween Federer and Djokovic--closer to Fed than Djokovic, however. So yes, you are right in that Djokovic and Federer are of different generations. It's also exactly why your next line is wrong.

Are you saying that Nadal was a transitional weak era champion?

I can live with that.

:eek:
 
I edited my post, to bring to your attention that there is a guy posting here living in Moscow. Every country has it's secret service. I wouldn't hold against USA President if he/she was a CIA operative in the past.
That is very true. I am sure Putin is a democrat at heart. Actually, I know so many Americans that are moving to Russia that I have lost count (Mathematics is another area besides Geopolitics where I excel). I can't blame them. Russia is a beacon of democracy and freedom, and Putin seems very honest and tolerant, and I can't imagine how anyone would stop voting him for life.
 

ABCD

Hall of Fame
That is very true. I am sure Putin is a democrat at heart. Actually, I know so many Americans that are moving to Russia that I have lost count (Mathematics is another area besides Geopolitics where I excel). I can't blame them. Russia is a beacon of democracy and freedom, and Putin seems very honest and tolerant.

Maybe. I can't tell as I never been there.
 

xFedal

Legend
Last time he beat Djokovic at a Slam was in the semi-final of 2012 Wimbledon. Last time he beat him at a Masters was in the final of 2015 Cincinnati. Last time he beat him at the WTF was in a round robin match at 2015 London.
Federer said important tournament which means only slams... He said Novak is in crisis and that he thoutht Novak would win an important tournament after french open toronto aside USO... WHICH HE DID NOT... Last time was 2012 Wimby semi.... Long time ago.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
One of the all-time greatest rivalries. It's a shame they never played against each other when both were at their peaks.

Closest we got was FO and USO 2011. Post prime Federer outplayed Djokovic at both, closed out FO, choked USO. Then smashed him at Wimbledon 2012 while he still had some movement left.

Djokovic is very lucky his peak coincided with Federer's heavy decline. Otherwise he wouldn't have any Wimbledon or more than 1 USO title.

Yes he is a 'liar'! What do you expect him to say, "Oh I'm too old now, I'm not moving as fast, my FH is not as deadly....blah blah" The top players would eat him alive if he did. He needs to stay positive too, just like Nadal when he keeps saying that his level is getting back there. Does that mean Nadal is a liar? What do you expect Nadal to say, "hey guys I'm playing like s^*t, that's why Brown, Fognini, Pouille et al are whipping my ass no?"

Oh that's just something pathetic trolls say to rile people up. I don't believe people can be that dense and stupid to actually believe that.
 
Just like you are a transitional (weak era) German. ;)

Nice one Rusty............

giphy.gif
 
Closest we got was FO and USO 2011. Post prime Federer outplayed Djokovic at both, closed out FO, choked USO. Then smashed him at Wimbledon 2012 while he still had some movement left.

Djokovic is very lucky his peak coincided with Federer's heavy decline. Otherwise he wouldn't have any Wimbledon or more than 1 USO title.



Oh that's just something pathetic trolls say to rile people up. I don't believe people can be that dense and stupid to actually believe that.
I agree, but it also works the other way around. If Djokovic had peaked 5 years earlier, it might have caused some damage to Fed at the AO (and probably the USO, but definitely not Wimbledon, where Nole is vastly overrated due to his results).
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Federer said important tournament which means only slams... He said Novak is in crisis and that he thoutht Novak would win an important tournament after french open toronto aside USO... WHICH HE DID NOT... Last time was 2012 Wimby semi.... Long time ago.

Federer age in 2012 W, 30 going on 31... Djokovic age: 25 in his prime... are you being deliberately dense on this matter?

Post prime Federer played vs prime Djokovic 3 times. Destroyed him once, took him to 5 once then lost in thanks to choke. Peak Federer would have no trouble with Djokovic on grass, or USO, or RA AO. I'd give him the edge on plexicushion too. 2011 SF was very close,Fed likely would've won had he not choked the first set. Prime Fed would win that all day long.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
I agree, but it also works the other way around. If Djokovic had peaked 5 years earlier, it might have caused some damage to Fed at the AO (and probably the USO, but definitely not Wimbledon, where Nole is vastly overrated due to his results).

2011 post prime Fed outplayed peak Novak two years running at USO but choked both times. 2004-2008 big hitting version, hits him off the court 9/10 times.

RG2011 proved Federer has the higher clay peak.

Wimbledon doesn't need explaining.

On Rebound Ace I give Fed the major advantage. I also give Federer a slight advantage on plexicushion, based on his 09-10 form and choke in the 2011 SF.
 

BGod

G.O.A.T.
Not really. I mean, they were great matches but there aren't a lot of those epics:

2010 USO
2011 USO
2014 WMB

The 2011 French Semifinal was a good quality match also but not the level of the above.

Best of 3 set matches are just way off, but obviously 2012 WTF and 2007 Canadian would be the top.

So you have 6 matches of note. Then, if you want to be critical, only the 2007 Canadian Masters had Federer in his prime years. To that regard only the 2010 & 2011 USO Open contests were true classics as Federer was still in contention. So two matches.

How is it underrated again?
 

BGod

G.O.A.T.
Gonna chime in on Nalbandian-Federer rivalry for comparison:

2005 WTF is an epic on par with the two USO clashes. Three tiebreaks and an 0-2 comeback, Nalbandian victory. On carpet.
2003 Aussie Open 4th Round. A back and forth affair with included consecutive 6-1 sets for each guy. Nalbandian victory on rebound ace hard.
2006 Rome Masters Semifinal. A tight contest with 115-114 in total points which had swings but ended in a third set tiebreak 7-5. Federer on clay.
2002 Basel Semifinal on carpet. Nalbandian loses the first in tiebreak and wins the next two 7-5, 6-3.
 
Top