The problem with Novak Djokovic G. O. A. T. claims: Nadal and Federer rivalries

[Tornes]

Sounds silly, does it not? Djokovic leads both H2H. Actually right now the domination of his main rivals is probably the main argument why Djokovic should be the greatest, probably because he (right now, may change) does not have anything else (sheer numbers like Federer or surface domination like Nadal). So he probably have the best H2H in history, right?

Lets take a look and put his numbers in historical context, shall we?

For reference I use 10 GOATs as per UTS (Federer, Djokovic, Nadal, Sampras, Agassi, Becker, Lendl, Connors, McEnroe, Borg).

Between those 10 players were 22 rivalries where one player won more matches than the other. 19 cases out of 22 (86,4 %) it was the younger ATG who won the rivalry. Younger ATGs won 59 % of all matches, while the older one just 41 %. Djokovic has just older ATGs, however is not nearly as good as the other ATGs were in putting them down. His winning percentage is 52,5 %, 6,5 % percentage points worse than "average" ATG. Not too good for supposed "H2H king".

Unluckilly for Djokovic this is not all. There is one more historical truth - younger ATGs are even more dominant in the most important matches - in grand slam tournaments. While they won 59 % of all matches, they also won 65,5 % (and 71,1 % if counting all ATGs but Djokovic) of GS matches and again 19 out of 22 (86,4 %) rivalries. The lost rivalries from perspective of younger ATG are: Becker/McEnroe (1 match), Agassi/Lendl (2 matches where Agassi was 18, respective 19. Did not play GS match ever since) and Djokovic/Nadal (15 matches)...
Djokovic played 29 matches against older ATGs and won just 14 of them (48,3 %). That is 17,2 percentage points worse than is ATGs average and even 21,8 % percentage points worse if we discount Djokovic from average (therefore he is almost 50 % worse than others are). He is also the only ATG who has negative collective H2H against older ATGs.

For reference here is winning percentage in GS (first) and overall for each player against older ATGs:
Connors 0 (no older OE ATG)
Borg 61 %, 65,2 %
McEnroe 69,2 %, 56,3 %
Lendl 61,1 %, 57 %
Becker 75 %, 66 %
Agassi 70 %, 57,1 %
Sampras 80 %, 63,6 %
Federer 80 %, 75 %
Nadal 76,9 %, 62,5 %
Djokovic 48,3 %, 52,5 %

 

[tennis_pro]

H2h against Nadal is legit because they are the same age but beating a 50-year old Federer a million times isn't anything to brag about. It would be pretty sad if he didn't beat him more often than not.

Considering how often they played in 2011-2018 it should've been better than 25-22 for Djokovic, actually.

 

[HetTheGreaterer]

A true strong reply to cherrypickers djoko bois such as Lew....
Djoko didn't even have 1 single younger/blooming ATG talent after him...
This thread deserves appreciation from me, and most probably from @BeatlesFan @KINGROGER @Jackuar @TheMaestro1990

 

[HetTheGreaterer]

H2h against Nadal is legit because they are the same age but beating a 50-year old Federer a million times isn't anything to brag about. It would be pretty sad if he didn't beat him more often than not.

Considering how often they played in 2011-2018 it should've been better than 25-22 for Djokovic, actually.

7 of nadal wins coming from nadal's worst ever span
Most of fedovic matches in djoker's prime,
Still ahead of both of them by just a narrow distance
(Thankfully avoided fedr in jan.17 to march18)

 

[Nadal_Django]

Problem!? I don't see any problem? If any, his rivalries especially against Fed support his Goat claim.

 

[Tornes]

H2h against Nadal is legit because they are the same age but beating a 50-year old Federer a million times isn't anything to brag about. It would be pretty sad if he didn't beat him more often than not.

Considering how often they played in 2011-2018 it should've been better than 25-22 for Djokovic, actually.

Well definitely "more legit", that is true. However while they are just one year apart by the date of birth, in tennis terms it is at least 2-3 years (2005 to 2007/8).
Also, this is not just about age/physical decline. It is also that you know the other player and form yourself to do the best against him. Djokovic had clear role model he needed to be better than in both Nadal/Federer.

 

[KINGROGER]

Problem!? I don't see any problem? If any, his rivalries especially against Fed support his Goat claim.

Nole should be 31-16 by now. He has lost 6 times to grandpa Fed. This would be like peak Fed losing to old Agassi instead of going 8-0.

Djokovic simply isn’t on prime Fed’s level hence the multiple losses to lesser calibre of player.

 

[Tornes]

Problem!? I don't see any problem? If any, his rivalries especially against Fed support his Goat claim.

Not when you put it in historical context.

 

[ChaelAZ]

The biggest problem with anyone thinking Djo is GOAT is, he isn’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Nadal_Django]

Nole should be 31-16 by now. He has lost 6 times to grandpa Fed. This would be like peak Fed losing to old Agassi instead of going 8-0.

Djokovic simply isn’t on prime Fed’s level hence the multiple losses to lesser calibre of player.

Djokovic is 11-2 against Fed in important slam+WTF matches since he entered in his prime in 2011. If that isn't domination, then I don't know what really is!

 

[Tornes]

Djokovic is 11-2 against Fed in important slam+WTF matches since he entered in his prime in 2011. If that isn't domination, then I don't know what really is!

Well part of his problem is that he "entered his prime" way too late. Usually prime is entered by 21, not 23. Also, it is 10-2 (and 1-1 in WTF RR matches),

 

[KINGROGER]

Djokovic is 11-2 against Fed in important slam+WTF matches since he entered in his prime in 2011. If that isn't domination, then I don't know what really is!

Luckily for Nole he never had to face 04-09 Fed at Wimbledon/USO during 2011-2016 otherwise we’d be discussing whether he will ever win them!

 

[clayqueen]

Up to recently, Nadal had a very comfortable h2h against Fedr, Djoker and Murray and no one said he was the GOAT. And I'm not talking about the 2 match lead that Djoker has over Nadal.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Djokovic doesn't have especially good h2h against Fedal, this is not what you have to prove.

You have to prove Federer doesn't have terribile h2h.

Also, what happened years ago is not an eternal rule, just look at the age of recent slam winners.

 

[jm1980]

The problem with Djokovic's GOAT claims is that nobody aside from a handful of overly enthusiastic fans is even making those claims

I'm afraid you are tilting at windmills here

 

[KINGROGER]

Djokovic doesn't have especially good h2h against Fedal, this is not what you have to prove.

You have to prove Federer doesn't have terribile h2h.

Also, what happened years ago is not an eternal rule, just look at the age of recent slam winners.

It doesn’t matter if Fed does or not because he’s from the previous generation.

 

[jonnyhomeboy9851]

Problem!? I don't see any problem? If any, his rivalries especially against Fed support his Goat claim.

We have empirical data after the 7-0 7-0 humiliations that nadal is a literal pigeon to novaks greatness

Up to recently, Nadal had a very comfortable h2h against Fedr, Djoker and Murray and no one said he was the GOAT. And I'm not talking about the 2 match lead that Djoker has over Nadal.

Its not a 2 match lead its a 7-0 7-0 humiliation. Nadal lucked out facing baby djokovic

 

[jonnyhomeboy9851]

Slam final lossess suffered at hands of mugs, slam virgins and non ATGs

Federer 1/30 (3 percent - arguably 0/30)
Nadal 1/24 (4 percent again outstanding)
Djokovic 4/23 (SEVENTEEN PERCENT)

Mugovic/chokovic?

This alone puts chokovic at tier 3/4 ATG max

 

[Deleted member 757377]

It doesn’t matter if Fed does or not because he’s from the previous generation.

Young players tend to be better. It is normal Fed got owned by younger players.

Federer's main problem is in the first part of his career he didn't have to deal with any ATG from his generation or from the previous.

Among players born in the 15 years between Sampras and Nadal, only Federer could reach more than 5 slam finals.

That's why he had it so easy in 2004-07.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

@jonnyhomeboy9851 reported for spam

 

[Tornes]

Djokovic doesn't have especially good h2h against Fedal, this is not what you have to prove.

You have to prove Federer doesn't have terribile h2h.

Also, what happened years ago is not an eternal rule, just look at the age of recent slam winners.

No problem, I can prove that without problem.

Slam winning percentage of really older ATGs (ie at least 2 years different) against younger one: 30 %. Federer one: 33 %. Overall: 40 %. Federer: 44 %. As usual, unlike Djokovic Federer is very much better than average.

So far nothing that happened can disprove this.

 

[EloQuent]

Djokovic is 11-2 against Fed in important slam+WTF matches since he entered in his prime in 2011. If that isn't domination, then I don't know what really is!

I would submit that 8-0 is greater domination than a cherry picked 11-2.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

No problem, I can prove that without problem.

Slam winning percentage of really older ATGs (ie at least 2 years different) against younger one: 30 %. Federer one: 33 %. Overall: 40 %. Federer: 44 %. As usual, unlike Djokovic Federer is very much better than average.

So far nothing that happened can disprove this.

Tell me which ATGs Federer beat consistently.

Wake up, it's not about h2h, it's about why Federer could have it so easy in 2003-07.

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

First, if we pretend that Djokovic's two older ATG opponents are as typical as all before them, and that they haven't been more competitive and played better in the latter part of their career (compared to previous ATGs),

Then, if we also pretend that in 2010s those two wouldn't have won several extra Slams easily if it wasn't for Djokovic, basically if we pretend that similar outcomes to the 2017 season wouldn't have happened two or three more times,

After that, if we pretend that the age difference between Nadal and Djokovic is humongous, and more importantly that they haven't met at Roland Garros far more than at any other Major,

If we pretend that Federer is an average older ATG when he loses to Djokovic (for the sake of devaluing Djokovic's achievement) while he isn't average when he does something extraordinary,

If we pretend that these two haven't had a head start against someone who was a late bloomer (but still went deep in Majors quite a few times) just like he used the occasional slump they had later,

Also, if we pretend that Djokovic peaking later is irrelevant to the wins Fed and Nadal scored in the beginning, while impressive longevity of his rivals still makes his wins against them unimpressive or purely vultured,

Or to sum it up easily, if we pretend that the situation in the moment suited Djokovic in all of those NINETY-NINE meetings he had against them just because he is younger while they declined centuries ago,

Then and only then could we be so bold to hold Djokovic's narrow head to head lead against Federer and Nadal against him.

But none of those are the case, so it's not an issue.

Not that I think Djokovic has a claim to be the GOAT in the first place. Hardly anyone thinks that anyway, and no amount of complaining about the hype around him from a rare poster here and there when he does well (sinful behavior LOL) is going to change that fact. What holds him back is losing a couple of big matches to Murray and Wawrinka, especially being a combination of chicken and unlucky against the latter player. He's done a tremendous job against Federer and Nadal since he became a dominant force, which resulted in staggering 13 Majors among other achievements in this decade, and I don't even want to imagine the rioting here if he beat them even more often.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Slam finals and semifinals won against 6+ or 10+ slam finalists:

Nadal 22
Djokovic 20
Federer 13


This is what counts, not the h2h. Fed didn't have/beat ATG opponents as much as Djokovic and Nadal.

 

[tennisaddict]

One could argue Murray would have been the third wheel if Djokovic was part of the Fedal era.

Murray GOAT

 

[Otacon]

A true strong reply to cherrypickers djoko bois such as Lew....
Djoko didn't even have 1 single younger/blooming ATG talent after him...
This thread deserves appreciation from me, and most probably from @BeatlesFan @KINGROGER @Jackuar @TheMaestro1990

Great point.

 

[KINGROGER]

Young players tend to be better. It is normal Fed got owned by younger players.

Federer's main problem is in the first part of his career he didn't have to deal with any ATG from his generation or from the previous.

Among players born in the 15 years between Sampras and Nadal, only Federer could reach more than 5 slam finals.

That's why he had it so easy in 2004-07.

Good point but it evens out because Djokovic had no ATG competition between 2014-2016 apart from Nadal at 2014 RG.

 

[KINGROGER]

Slam finals and semifinals won against 6+ or 10+ slam finalists:

Nadal 22
Djokovic 20
Federer 13


This is what counts, not the h2h. Fed didn't have/beat ATG opponents as much as Djokovic and Nadal.

2014-2016 Fed
Murray

These guys are not ATG level.

 

[Nadal_Django]

I would submit that 8-0 is greater domination than a cherry picked 11-2.

11-2 in this decade. Let that sink in buddy.
Djokovic had more problems with Murray, not to mention Wawrinka than with Federer in the past decade.

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

2014-2016 Fed
Murray

These guys are not ATG level.

Nobody from Fed's generation is ATG level either, at any point in time. And again, no amount of glorifying them and rating Murray and old Fed poorly, even when presented as some objective agenda-free analysis, is going to change that.

You really can't criticize one guy's field anymore without opening a possibility for the same in the other direction. They were all bound to put themselves in some sort of less difficult position once in a while given how long they have played at the highest level.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Ok, let's not compare players of different generations.

Now the question is: which generation was better?

1980-83: Federer, Hewitt, Safin, Roddick

1985-88: Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Wawrinka

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Ok, let's not compare players of different generations.

Now the question is: which generation was better?

1980-83: Federer, Hewitt, Safin, Roddick

1985-88: Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Wawrinka

Federer, Hewitt, Safin, Roddick

25 slam titles
43 finals
68 semifinals
47 other big titles (yec, masters, olympics)


Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Wawrinka

37 slam titles
62 finals
92 semifinals
89 other big titles

 

[EloQuent]

11-2 in this decade. Let that sink in buddy.
Djokovic had more problems with Murray, not to mention Wawrinka than with Federer in the past decade.

Federer at 33 wasn't as good as Murray in peak. I'm shook.

 

[Nadal_Django]

Federer at 33 wasn't as good as Murray in peak. I'm shook.

But he routined the same Murray regularly. I'm shook also.

 

[Fedforever]

Nobody from Fed's generation is ATG level either, at any point in time. And again, no amount of glorifying them and rating Murray and old Fed poorly, even when presented as some objective agenda-free analysis, is going to change that.

You really can't criticize one guy's field anymore without opening a possibility for the same in the other direction. They were all bound to put themselves in some sort of less difficult position once in a while given how long they have played at the highest level.

I hold to my definition of strong era/weak era

Strong Era: When the player you like is winning
Weak Era: When the player you don't like is winning.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

10+ slam finalists per birth year:

1952 Connors
1953
1954
1955
1956 Borg
1957
1958
1959 McEnroe
1960 Lendl
1961
1962
1963
1964 Wilander
1965
1966 Edberg
1967 Becker
1968
1969
1970 Agassi
1971 Sampras
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981 Federer
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986 Nadal
1987 Djokovic, Murray

 

[Deleted member 757377]

10+ slam finalists per birth year:

1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981 Federer
1982
1983
1984
1985

Federer and his ATG same generation opponents.

 

[Sport]

H2h against Nadal is legit because they are the same age but beating a 50-year old Federer

What kind of double standard is this? Either H2H matters or it doesn't, you can't defend it when it favors your agenda and ignore it when it doesn't favor your agenda. Federer is only 5 years and a half older than Djokovic and still wasn't able to lead the H2H over him. Ken Rosewall was 4 years and a half older than Rod Laver. I have never read anyone saying "Ken Rosewall had a losing H2H against Laver because he was older". That is a ridiculous excuse. Rod Laver was just greater.

Also, if H2H does matters (for all cases, not only when it fits your agenda) then Djokovic has a problem. In effect, Nadal leads the H2H over Djokovic 9-5 in Grand Slams (including 2-1 at the US Open). Grand Slams achievements are universally considered to be more relevant than other tournaments. Analogously, H2H in Grand Slams should be considered more relevant than H2H outside Grand Slams. Othwerwise, we would be displaying a double standard logic. Grand Slam achievements >>> achievements outside Grand Slams.

 

[Federev]

Djokovic doesn't have especially good h2h against Fedal, this is not what you have to prove.

You have to prove Federer doesn't have terribile h2h.

Also, what happened years ago is not an eternal rule, just look at the age of recent slam winners.

When you isolate H2H from age and peak and surface specialty and surface weakness you create a fake world that you can make say anything.

In this world Novak and Rafa are greater than a Fed 5-6 years older who made and won finals in his peak (and even later) that the other two were simply not good enough to meet him for.

And in this world Davydenko is better than Rafa and peak Roddick is better than Novak.

It is a fake world.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

When you isolate H2H from age and peak you create a fake world that you can make say anything.

In this world Novak and Rafa are greater than Fed 5-6 years older.

And in this world Davydenko is better than Rafa and peak Roddick is better than Novak.

It is a fake world.

Slam finals/semis won against Djokovic and Nadal:

Davydenko 0
Roddick 0

Slam finals/semis won against Federer

Djokovic 9
Nadal 9


Anyway as I explained, this is not about h2h, it is about beating ATGs.

If Federer won 20 slams beating 20 ATGs, he could play until 2080 and be 20-10000 in the h2h, It wouldn't affect his greatness.

H2h, especially in the latter rounds of important tournaments, are relevant to determine the better player, not the greater.

 

[Djokodal Fan]

another GOAT thread and another round of bickering.

TTW is a yawn nowadays!

 

[Sport]

LeBron James is 34 years old (birthday in december), 4 years older than Kevin Durant. LeBron James is still the greatest NBA player, not Durant. Federer is only 5 years and a half older than Djokovic, that is, almost the same age difference than between Durant and James. The age excuse is not believable for the whole career.

32-34 years old Federer losing 4 GS matches in a row against Djokovic (WB 2014, WB 2015, USO 2015, AO 2016) can't be excused in age. LeBron is no longer at his peak, but he is still the greatest NBA player, undoubtedly greater than the younger Durant. Federer should have been greater than Djokovic in most of his GS matches during his career. But we get to see how Djokovic dominates Federer in Grand Slams since 2010 (when Federer was only 29).

 

[Federev]

Young players tend to be better. It is normal Fed got owned by younger players.

Federer's main problem is in the first part of his career he didn't have to deal with any ATG from his generation or from the previous.

Among players born in the 15 years between Sampras and Nadal, only Federer could reach more than 5 slam finals.

That's why he had it so easy in 2004-07.

You make Federer’s utter dominance turn on its head to say he had weak competition.

He made them weak. He demoralized them and sucked all hope from the field in his unparalleled level during his peak.

It took 2 ATGs from a whole generation 5-6 years later, who were able to develop according to the bar he set -to slow him down.

And they’ve still not caught him.

Clayal excepted, they are both very fortunate they did not have thier peak years interrupted by Federer at his peak.

 

[Federev]

Slam finals/semis won against Djokovic and Nadal:

Davydenko 0
Roddick 0

Slam finals/semis won against Federer

Djokovic 9
Nadal 9


Anyway as I explained, this is not about h2h, it is about beating ATGs.

If Federer won 20 slams beating 20 ATGs, he could play until 2080 and be 20-10000 in the h2h, It wouldn't affect his greatness.

H2h, especially in the latter rounds of important tournaments, are relevant to determine the better player, not the greater.

You’re just ignoring Fed’s peak and/or calling it weak era mugging.

 

[Sport]

Cristiano Ronaldo is 33 years old. He is not at his peak anymore. Yet, he finished as the top goalscorer of the UEFA Champions League (UCL) in 2017/2018 with 15 goals. Other younger goalscorers like Salah or Firmino were unable to reach Ronaldo's record, despite playing the same amount of matches (they both reached the UCL final):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017–18_UEFA_Champions_League#Top_goalscorers

Thus, the age excuse can't be used for Wimbledon 2014 when Federer was only 32.

 

[KINGROGER]

Nobody from Fed's generation is ATG level either, at any point in time. And again, no amount of glorifying them and rating Murray and old Fed poorly, even when presented as some objective agenda-free analysis, is going to change that.

You really can't criticize one guy's field anymore without opening a possibility for the same in the other direction. They were all bound to put themselves in some sort of less difficult position once in a while given how long they have played at the highest level.

I agree and if Nole had capitalised and surpassed Fed then the stronger competition between 2011-2013 would be a point in his favour.

It’s the losses to lesser players that has probably cost him. Fed’s unrivalled dominance during his prime is what got him most of his slams and time at number 1.

 

[KINGROGER]

Cristiano Ronaldo is 33 years old. He is not at his peak anymore. Yet, he finished as the top goalscorer of the UEFA Champions League (UCL) in 2017/2018 with 15 goals. Other younger goalscorers like Salah or Firmino were unable to reach Ronaldo's record, despite playing the same amount of matches (they both reached the UCL final):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017–18_UEFA_Champions_League#Top_goalscorers

Thus, the age excuse can't be used for Wimbledon 2014 when Federer was only 33.

Federer was nowhere near his peak or even prime in that final. He relied on a combination of great clutch play and Nole choking to take it to 5 sets. And he did all that with the weakest baseline game I’ve ever seen from him, coasting on his serve.

 

[Sport]

Nadal was 31 at RG 2017 and 32 at RG 2018. If Nadal had lost against Thiem at RG 2017 or RG 2018, people would laugh at the age excuse.

Yet, some Federer fans use the age excuse to justify Federer's loss against Djokovic at RG 2012 (when Federer was only 31).

 

[KINGROGER]

10+ slam finalists per birth year:

1952 Connors
1953
1954
1955
1956 Borg
1957
1958
1959 McEnroe
1960 Lendl
1961
1962
1963
1964 Wilander
1965
1966 Edberg
1967 Becker
1968
1969
1970 Agassi
1971 Sampras
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981 Federer
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986 Nadal
1987 Djokovic, Murray

Murray isn’t ATG competition. He’s an easy slam final opponent for Federer. Maybe not Djokovic because he lost twice in slam finals to him.

As for Nadal, Federer had to deal with him too. Nole has 5 slam wins Fed has 3. Not a huge difference when one of those 5 is the worst version of Nadal in 2015.

I agree Nole’s 2011-2013 competition is very strong, but apart from that it’s no tougher than what Fed had to face... and is evened out by Fed’s 29-35 years being wrecked by having to face peak ATG 5 years younger... Nole has had 0 upcoming ATG talent from 2014-2018... only Zverev just this year showing some promise.