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

EloQuent

Legend
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).
I don't know who those people are, but I certainly would not have held it against Nadal to have lost to Thiem. Everything post 30 is bonus.
 

Federev

G.O.A.T.
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).
Are you really trying to argue that age is not a factor athletic performance?
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
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).

Firstly, Thiem was considerably below par in the RG 17 semi. So yeah, if Nadal would've lost to Thiem in that form, that'd be sad.
Secondly , no one would have laughed at age excuse if Nadal had to lost to Thiem in RG 18.

Also you are comparing Nadal's best slam (RG) to federer's worst slam (Wim).
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
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.
Let's not compare team sports like basketball and football to individual sports like tennis.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
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).
The problem with your statement is that Thiem as not an ATG so the age difference is irrelevant. Fed can still beat the guys who are much younger than him, but his age is exposed by other younger ATG, which is something Djokovic and Nadal currently don't have.
 

maratha_warrior

Hall of Fame
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



I will agree with your logic fully,, but Then using your same logic, One can say Federer already won 16 slams before Djokovic entered his Prime (2011).
And no 2008 Australian Open doesn't count and its not Prime Novak, bcoz Federer had mono, that's what Federer fans believe isn't it?

If Djokovic goes down, he takes fed down along with him ;)
 

maratha_warrior

Hall of Fame
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.

33-34 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).


But Nadal was a freak..
He started beating Federer in slams since age 18..
Without Nadal, Federer would have made mockery of the sport..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ann

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
I will agree with your logic fully,, but Then using your same logic, One can say Federer already won 16 slams before Djokovic entered his Prime (2011).
And no 2008 Australian Open doesn't count and its not Prime Novak, bcoz Federer had mono, that's what Federer fans believe isn't it?

If Djokovic goes down, he takes fed down along with him ;)
Post prime Fed beat peak Novak at RG/W and held double MP at USO so wouldn’t be a problem for peak Fed ;)
 

Tornes

Semi-Pro
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.

Federer and Nadal are not typical ATGs - however neither should be/is Djokovic. Previous ATGs were on similar level between themselfs (Connors, Borg, McEnroe, Lendl, Becker, Agassi) and just as well are on similar level Djokovic/Nadal/Federer. Similar, not same. And as Djokovic already showed, his longevity is pretty similar to the one of Nadal/Federer.

To the bolded: basically, the data I provided say he was supposed to win about 60 % of all matches and 65-70 % of slam matches. Therefore he should be hold as favourit (or, in your words, the situation in the moment should suit him) in about 2/3 of their meetings. 2/3, not all of them. So please don't put in my mouth something I did not say.

And most importantly - many of your fellow fan use the H2H argument as their main weapon against Federer and for Djokovic. I just showed that based on history Djokovic is the one who did worse than historically expected and Federer did actually a little bit better. Therefore while in general I agree that it is not weapon primarily against Djokovic it actually neither is one for him. And because this is the main argument of the part of his fans who call him GOAT if this argument does not hold he cannot be GOAT and therefore actually H2H, with combination to other stats, works against such a claim.
 
Last edited:

Jackuar

Hall of Fame
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
Thanks mate! I saw this thread but chose to ignore without reading coz I thought just another GOAT thread beating a dead horse.

OP, great point of view. And just like your stat here....
and 71,1 % if counting all ATGs but Djokovic
... I think the better way of comparing the numbers would be to calculate all your reference-stats excluding Djokovic himself. That would be the right way to have a reference without Novak vs Novak's one to compare. If you could calculate up until 2002 (Before Fed's year started).... And then calculate Fed, Nadal and Novak's numbers separately (where they met someone other than Big 3) and another separate percentage set involving the Big 3 among themselves. The reason I say this, because it skews the statistics as they've played together in the same era, so one person's win is another person's loss in numbers. So just to rule out that margin of obviously-unavoidable-error and to have better clarity, if you can calculate as said please.
But great point of view again. And I'm sure even with the revised calculations, Novak's number will only turn out as bad as you've shown or may be even worse.

What people who still argue against Fed can't accept is his longevity is his gain in the GOAT claim, and he deserves it for the way he's maintained his body. That gives him brownie points and one can't disregard it saying it's not the main course but just a brownie.

And may I add... Just like how we call the last two gen as "MugGen", Djokovic is just an incredibly-better-MugGen. (I know I'm gonna get raided for that statement :) )
 

Jackuar

Hall of Fame
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.
For once, I support a Nadal fan here. Even after his H2H domination, the best Nadal got outside his own fan base was merely "Greatest No.2". Claiming something better than that for someone who only did as good as him is not fair or right.
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
What was the purpose of this thread? To come up with a counter argument to why Djokovic has leading head to heads against basically all his rivals? Djokovic and Nadal are pure rivals and only one year apart in age. Nadal does not qualify an "older ATG" in comparison to Djokovic. Nice try though.
 

Fedforever

Hall of Fame
What was the purpose of this thread? To come up with a counter argument to why Djokovic has leading head to heads against basically all his rivals?

Probably.

No idea why people get so worked up about this. If Federer had kept his winning H to H with Djoko it would have meant him not having three more slam titles. I'm sure he'd prefer having those to the HtoH and I certainly would!!

I think we Fed fans should accept that's the sacrifice he made and not worry about it.
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
Probably.

No idea why people get so worked up about this. If Federer had kept his winning H to H with Djoko it would have meant him not having three more slam titles. I'm sure he'd prefer having those to the HtoH and I certainly would!!

I think we Fed fans should accept that's the sacrifice he made and not worry about it.

A difference of 3 in a head to head is really not that big of a deal and I agree with you. Slam titles are more important.
 

maratha_warrior

Hall of Fame
OK so maybe just 5 Djokovic fanatics who believe Novak as GOAT, and TTW is offended ;)
Maximum of Djokovic fans would never be his fans, if they cared for GOAT bullshiit..
He was always chasing the ATG players and most fans like him for fights with Fedal..
Without djokovic, Fedal had no competition and would have won 10 more slams combined..
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
OK so maybe just 5 Djokovic fanatics who believe Novak as GOAT, and TTW is offended ;)
Maximum of Djokovic fans would never be his fans, if they cared for GOAT bullshiit..
He was always chasing the ATG players and most fans like him for fights with Fedal..
Without djokovic, Fedal had no competition and would have won 10 more slams combined..

Agreed. The GOAT argument is overrated and so is the Slam record. TTW is consumed with these two things like nothing else matters and just repeats the same crap over and over. Sampras had the Slam record once but his clay career was non existent. I never became a fan of Djokovic because I thought he would be GOAT or have the most Slams. There is a lot more to tennis than that.
 

maratha_warrior

Hall of Fame
Agreed. The GOAT argument is overrated and so is the Slam record. TTW is consumed with these two things like nothing else matters and just repeats the same crap over and over. Sampras had the Slam record once but his clay career was non existent. I never became a fan of Djokovic because I thought he would be GOAT or have the most Slams. There is a lot more to tennis than that.


Most of the people became fans of Djokovic when he had freaking 1 slam and Federer had 16 slams.. Including me..
Maybe it Makes them upset that Djokovic has been a major thorn in their way to winning more slams..

Even if djokovic doesn't become GOAT, he has made sure Nadal and Federer Slam record will be overcome by Future player..
One day someone else will hold the record for maximum slams, forsure. :)
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
Most of the people became fans of Djokovic when he had freaking 1 slam and Federer had 16 slams.. Including me..
Maybe it Makes them upset that Djokovic has been a major thorn in their way to winning more slams..

Even if djokovic doesn't become GOAT, he has made sure Nadal and Federer Slam record will be overcome by Future player..
One day someone else will hold the record for maximum slams, forsure. :)

I also became a fan of Djokovic when he had one Slam so I never hopped on the bandwagon because he was the most successful or one of the most successful. I became a fan of his because of his style and his fight, and anything else he has achieved in his career has been a major bonus as far as I'm concerned. He exceeded my wildest expectations. The main gist of it is, all records are made to be broken and none of these guys are exempt from that so I have no idea why so many fans get so worked up over this GOAT stuff.
 

Eren

Professional
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.

Except for Djoko fanboys, no one really thinks he is GOAT lol.

Nadal is closer to being GOAT than Djoko.
 

Plamen1234

Hall of Fame
Except for Djoko fanboys, no one really thinks he is GOAT lol.

Nadal is closer to being GOAT than Djoko.

Djokovic doesnt have the GS record,the Masters 1000 record,the WTF record.At weeks at Number one he is behind Federer and he have less titles than Federer and Nadal.His case for GOAT is on a very weak ground.
 

Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil

Talk Tennis Guru
Federer and Nadal are not typical ATGs - however neither should be/is Djokovic. Previous ATGs were on similar level between themselfs (Connors, Borg, McEnroe, Lendl, Becker, Agassi) and just as well are on similar level Djokovic/Nadal/Federer. Similar, not same. And as Djokovic already showed, his longevity is pretty similar to the one of Nadal/Federer.

To the bolded: basically, the data I provided say he was supposed to win about 60 % of all matches and 65-70 % of slam matches. Therefore he should be hold as favourit (or, in your words, the situation in the moment should suit him) in about 2/3 of their meetings. 2/3, not all of them. So please don't put in my mouth something I did not say.

And most importantly - many of your fellow fan use the H2H argument as their main weapon against Federer and for Djokovic. I just showed that based on history Djokovic is the one who did worse than historically expected and Federer did actually a little bit better. Therefore while in general I agree that it is not weapon primarily against Djokovic it actually neither is one for him. And because this is the main argument of the part of his fans who call him GOAT if this argument does not hold he cannot be GOAT and therefore actually H2H, with combination to other stats, works against such a claim.
Well I don't really think past rivalries should be a guidance on how present ones will go, after all not all age differences between two rivals are the same. Djokodal shouldn't even be treated the same way that a lot of other match-ups in your data are to begin with. One way or another some new trends will start at some point. I was exaggerating and directing it at the entire forum when I said Djokovic was the favorite in all matches, sorry if it came across like I was putting words into your mouth. However, I think it's even less than 66% since Djokovic wasn't the favorite in every single meeting since 2011 against Fed, while it's obviously much closer to being balanced against Nadal given that the age is hardly a factor in that rivalry and the fact they played many times on clay. The number of fans using the H2H argument isn't that big, I'm afraid you are exaggerating there yourself (though obviously not as much as I previously did :p). It's an interesting, cool stat, but there are far more significant ones. Personally I don't think any analyzing of H2Hs is necessary as further proof or attempt to disproof the fact that Federer is a better player than Djokovic at the end of the day. He did remarkably well to keep the lead as long as he did, but Djokovic also did well to turn that around since Federer, unlike anyone before him, refused to back down or bend over even years after he stopped producing his very best tennis. He was hardly ever a pushover.
 
I will agree with your logic fully,, but Then using your same logic, One can say Federer already won 16 slams before Djokovic entered his Prime (2011).
And no 2008 Australian Open doesn't count and its not Prime Novak, bcoz Federer had mono, that's what Federer fans believe isn't it?

If Djokovic goes down, he takes fed down along with him ;)

Well fed had 2 younger ATGs chasing him down since 2005(nadal) and 2008(djoker)
Who took away a grand total of 12-13 slams & 9-10 masters, 2-3 Wtf from him combiningly (not counting AO08 like circumstances where fed was clearly vulnerable)

Which younger or blooming ATG does djokovic have after him who have taken this level of massive amount of titles from him?


And also if we consider only till 2012 fed anf 2018 djok, (same age), then still the argument remains as it is. Because djoker does not even have any one chasing him down
 

Plamen1234

Hall of Fame
Djokovic leads the H2H with Federer because most of their meetings happened post 2011.Another thing is that when Djokovic is in bad form he doesnt meet Federer (2017) while when Federer is in bad form he meets Djokovic (2013).If Djokovic met Federer at AO 2017,IW 2017 and Wimbledon 2018 - the H2H today would be 25-25.
 
Djokovic leads the H2H with Federer because most of their meetings happened post 2011.Another thing is that when Djokovic is in bad form he doesnt meet Federer (2017) while when Federer is in bad form he meets Djokovic (2013).If Djokovic met Federer at AO 2017,IW 2017 and Wimbledon 2018 - the H2H today would be 25-25.

You forgot to mention about 2018 2nd half season (cincy and paris 2018)
2014 WTF walkover *win*
2016 kneerer *win* (still took a set lmao)
 

Plamen1234

Hall of Fame
You forgot to mention about 2018 2nd half season (cincy and paris 2018)
2014 WTF walkover *win*
2016 kneerer *win* (still took a set lmao)

Yeah 2018 is another good example.Djokovic failed to reach Federer at AO and IW.Federer was in good form in this tournaments.Of course his first meeting with Federer in 2 years happened when Fed form was not good.
 

maratha_warrior

Hall of Fame
Well fed had 2 younger ATGs chasing him down since 2005(nadal) and 2008(djoker)
Who took away a grand total of 12-13 slams & 9-10 masters, 2-3 Wtf from him combiningly (not counting AO08 like circumstances where fed was clearly vulnerable)

Which younger or blooming ATG does djokovic have after him who have taken this level of massive amount of titles from him?


And also if we consider only till 2012 fed anf 2018 djok, (same age), then still the argument remains as it is. Because djoker does not even have any one chasing him down


Ya so when All of Big 3 ended their Prime run.. Slam distribution was 17-14-12 at the end of 2016 ...
New Slam winner and ATG should have already started winning since Australian Open 2017, but that never happened and Older Federer and Nadal hijacked the ATP tour and won next freaking 6 slams, its not a joke...

It was only World number 22, who had to come back from injury to stop the Fedal honeymoon. So it not not djokovic but Fedal who benefitted more from the absence of New ATG..
And 2019 is yet to Start maybe Djokovic will win 1 slam and Zverev Thiem Khachnov will dominate other slams, we never know..
So obviously we never know if Djokovic benefits from absence of ATG or not..
Also Djokovic and Nadal are same age ATG, where is ATG same as around Federer age?? There is certainly no ATG 4 years elder or 4 years younger to Roger federer...

So your analogy that it is Djokovic who benefits from Absence of ATG is false..
 

kevaninho

Hall of Fame
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)

Truth. People forget he toasted Nadal 7 times between 2015-16 when Nadal was hopeless.
had he tanked before meeting Djokovic, he would still have a healthy H2H lead over him.
Would be interesting what everyone would say about their rivalry then.

For the record Nadal feasted on Djokovic in 2017 and 18 , but only 2 times.
Im sure there probably was other times each wasn't at their best, but 2015-16 was Nadals worst ever period in his career, versus Djokovic's most dominant.
 
Ya so when All of Big 3 ended their Prime run.. Slam distribution was 17-14-12 at the end of 2016 ...
New Slam winner and ATG should have already started winning since Australian Open 2017, but that never happened and Older Federer and Nadal hijacked the ATP tour and won next freaking 6 slams, its not a joke...

It was only World number 22, who had to come back from injury to stop the Fedal honeymoon. So it not not djokovic but Fedal who benefitted more from the absence of New ATG..
And 2019 is yet to Start maybe Djokovic will win 1 slam and Zverev Thiem Khachnov will dominate other slams, we never know..
So obviously we never know if Djokovic benefits from absence of ATG or not..
Also Djokovic and Nadal are same age ATG, where is ATG same as around Federer age?? There is certainly no ATG 4 years elder or 4 years younger to Roger federer...

So your analogy that it is Djokovic who benefits from Absence of ATG is false..

Extremely happy to get acknowledgement that fed (ye#17) and nadal (ye#9, skipped RG omg)'s primes ended in 2016...
Wow....
Amazing....
Guys @kevaninho @KINGROGER A big thumbs up for another lew under way
 

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
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.

Even if what you say is true, how exactly was Federer meant to do anything about this?

You can't prove that Federer wouldn't have beaten ATGs in slams in those years, had he faced them (like he beat Sampras at Wimbledon in 2001).

Also, part of the reason why no other player from that generation reached more than 5 slam finals is because Federer himself stopped them from doing so - i.e. Roddick reached 5 slam finals, but lost the semi-finals of Wimbledon 2003 and AO 2007 to Federer; Hewitt reached 4 slam finals, but lost the semi-finals of Wimbledon 2005 and USO 2005 to Federer. So you're punishing Federer for making a mockery of the rest of his generation.
 
Even if what you say is true, how exactly was Federer meant to do anything about this?

You can't prove that Federer wouldn't have beaten ATGs in slams in those years, had he faced them (like he beat Sampras at Wimbledon in 2001).

Also, part of the reason why no other player from that generation reached more than 5 slam finals is because Federer himself stopped them from doing so - i.e. Roddick reached 5 slam finals, but lost the semi-finals of Wimbledon 2003 and AO 2007 to Federer; Hewitt reached 4 slam finals, but lost the semi-finals of Wimbledon 2005 and USO 2005 to Federer. So you're punishing Federer for making a mockery of the rest of his generation.

True....
And hewitt + old agassi + safin + roddick + nalbandian >> old fedal + mury + stan combined
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
True....
And hewitt + old agassi + safin + roddick + nalbandian >> old fedal + mury + stan combined
Apart from Old Agassi, all contemporaries of Fed. All same age and he owned them all.

Djokovic in his 2nd peak run of slams had Old Fed who was a shadow of his former self and Murray who is at best a superior version of Hewitt but no problem for a peak atg in slams.
 

MasterZeb

Hall of Fame
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).
Your comparison of LeBron to KD is like me comparing Federer to Ferrer. They’re just not in the same league
 
Apart from Old Agassi, all contemporaries of Fed. All same age and he owned them all.

Djokovic in his 2nd peak run of slams had Old Fed who was a shadow of his former self and Murray who is at best a superior version of Hewitt but no problem for a peak atg in slams.

Exactly what I was trying to say(y)(y)
 

Plamen1234

Hall of Fame
Ya so when All of Big 3 ended their Prime run.. Slam distribution was 17-14-12 at the end of 2016 ...
New Slam winner and ATG should have already started winning since Australian Open 2017, but that never happened and Older Federer and Nadal hijacked the ATP tour and won next freaking 6 slams, its not a joke...

It was only World number 22, who had to come back from injury to stop the Fedal honeymoon. So it not not djokovic but Fedal who benefitted more from the absence of New ATG..
And 2019 is yet to Start maybe Djokovic will win 1 slam and Zverev Thiem Khachnov will dominate other slams, we never know..
So obviously we never know if Djokovic benefits from absence of ATG or not..
Also Djokovic and Nadal are same age ATG, where is ATG same as around Federer age?? There is certainly no ATG 4 years elder or 4 years younger to Roger federer...

So your analogy that it is Djokovic who benefits from Absence of ATG is false..

You know the main competition of Djokovic in 2015-2016 period was Federer,Stan and Murray.None of these players is younger than Djokovic.So of course he profited from the lack of great young players.But keep deluding yourself that Djokovic havent profited from weak era.
 

maratha_warrior

Hall of Fame
You know the main competition of Djokovic in 2015-2016 period was Federer,Stan and Murray.None of these players is younger than Djokovic.So of course he profited from the lack of great young players.But keep deluding yourself that Djokovic havent profited from weak era.

I never said Federer or Djokovic won in a weak era.
If you compare 2003-2009 and 2011-2016 both of them reached almost maximum Slam finals/ semis Masters finals WTF finals ..
If fed fans accuse djokovic of playing in a weak era, they are going to get strong reply..

Both of them are alike in beating 99% of the field and reaching Slam and masters finals, so in such a case the opposition doesn't even matter when One player is that good...

A player should be not be blamed but appreciated for generating fear in the heart of 99% of the players and make them submit even before the start of the fight.
 

Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil

Talk Tennis Guru
We are comparing Peaking ATGs Fed and Djoker here..
And yes, fed would have surely loved to play his declined version, murraygoat, a much much declined nadal everywhere.....
Just like Djoker wouldn't have complained if his peers were guys who are CLEARLY not as good as Murray (you know, the guy who is part of Novak's weak field).
 
Lol at safin, roddick, hewitt and nalbandian being inferior to murray....
No they're not
On their heyday, they are much much powerful and way better than murray (no insult to mury and not denying these guys' decline post 2008)
Just like Djoker wouldn't have complained if his peers were guys who are CLEARLY inferior to Murray.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Ya so when All of Big 3 ended their Prime run.. Slam distribution was 17-14-12 at the end of 2016 ...
New Slam winner and ATG should have already started winning since Australian Open 2017, but that never happened and Older Federer and Nadal hijacked the ATP tour and won next freaking 6 slams, its not a joke...

It was only World number 22, who had to come back from injury to stop the Fedal honeymoon. So it not not djokovic but Fedal who benefitted more from the absence of New ATG..
And 2019 is yet to Start maybe Djokovic will win 1 slam and Zverev Thiem Khachnov will dominate other slams, we never know..
So obviously we never know if Djokovic benefits from absence of ATG or not..
Also Djokovic and Nadal are same age ATG, where is ATG same as around Federer age?? There is certainly no ATG 4 years elder or 4 years younger to Roger federer...

So your analogy that it is Djokovic who benefits from Absence of ATG is false..
Nadal and Djokovic being the same age actually helps Djokovic, it doesn't hinder him.

And all the Big 3 have benefited from the lack of younger ATG. Djokovic included.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ann
Top