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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 3771
  • Start date Start date
TheNatural said:
I didn't write the article kids, so not sure why people are refering to me as the writer, but the write made some good points and collected a lot of very interesting statistics to support his opinion, so it's an interesting piece.
Click to expand...
It's OK. Lleyton Hewitt >>>>>>>>>>> Pete Sampras. He was gifting him bagels as a baby and beat him across all surfaces when Pete had the age advantage.

I'd argue Andy Murray is a better player than Pete Sampras, even peak for peak. How would he deal with his variety and baseline prowess? And don't bring up Chang, he was little more than a pusher with no serve.

image_400x400.jpg
 
Lew said:
Winning percentage against no.1 in Slams:

Nadal 61.5
Wawrinka 50
Djokovic 37.5
Cilic 25
Del Potro 22.2
Ferrer 20
Nishikori 20
Murray 14.3
Berdych 12.5
Federer 11.1


Most consecutive wins in Slams against Big 4:

Djokovic 11 (active)
Nadal 6
Murray 2
Wawrinka 2
Del Potro 2
Berdych 2
Safin 2
Nalbandian 2
Tsonga 2
Federer 2
Click to expand...

Its funny how federer fans completely ignore all other metrics and only look at age
 
This was Sampras' draw at the 1993 US Open. Just LOL. Sampras fanboys should run back to their caves, their favorite player is a mug by today's standards.

R1: Santoro.
R2: Vacek.
R3: Boetsch.
R4: Enqvist.
QF: Chang.
SF: Volkov.
F: Pioline.

Some real strong era competition there. :laughing:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You answered your own question. Nadal and Djokovic were not good enough in Feds early career. They didn't get to the finals. They are not really same generation. Pros always fall off in waning years of career. These comparison posts are waste of time.
 
It's not about h2h, it's about never beating peak ATGs.

Some may not agree he was peak after 2008, but what ATG did he beat until AO07?

1 time Nadal who had just reached his first grass semifinal and 3 times Agassi who was having mediocre results, ranked no.7/8. That's it.

This is what affects his legacy, not the h2h alone.
 
Lew said:
It's not about h2h, it's about never beating peak ATGs.

Some may not agree he was peak after 2008, but what ATG did he beat until AO07?

Nadal who just had his first grass semifinal and Agassi who was having mediocre results. That's it.

This is what affects his legacy, not the h2h alone.
Click to expand...
Exactly
Its not like he didn't get enough chances he faced Nadal 8 times in slams in 2004-2009 and only won twice
You can't brush that under the carpet
 
Objective observer said:
How is age an excuse against Nadal??
What was Federer's record against Nadal in 2004-2009 when he was peak/prime and Nadal was baby? Lol
Click to expand...
Baby with multiple slam titles, Wimbledon finalist from 2006, HC masters winner in 2005...

Nadal peaked early and maintained prime level until 2014 RG. Most of their meetings were on clay too.
 
Objective observer said:
Exactly
Its not like he didn't get enough chances he faced Nadal 8 times in slams in 2004-2009 and only won twice
You can't brush that under the carpet
Click to expand...
I'm not saying he had chances.

I'm just saying he didn't beat them. Reasons can me multiple, but that affects his legacy because great opponents make you great too.
 
Objective observer said:
Exactly
Its not like he didn't get enough chances he faced Nadal 8 times in slams in 2004-2009 and only won twice
You can't brush that under the carpet
Click to expand...

He beat Djokovic 4 times during that period and it’s a shame Nadal sucked so badly when Fed was making 6 USO finals in a row otherwise we’d be looking at a healthier slam H2H if they met on the only quick slam surface that was left at the time.
 
Objective observer said:
Point is Nadal beat peak Fed at Wimbledon and AO and RG obviously
Click to expand...

Peak Fed is unbeaten at Wimbledon and Safin is the only guy to beat him at a HC slam.

2008 Wimbledon Fed was low on confidence and played like crap for 2 sets so I wouldn’t describe that as a peak performance.

As for 2009 AO, on a slow as hell surface no shame losing to a slow court grinder like Nadal and even then he should’ve won in 4.
 
KINGROGER said:
He beat Djokovic 4 times during that period and it’s a shame Nadal sucked so badly when Fed was making 6 USO finals in a row otherwise we’d be looking at a healthier slam H2H if they met on the only quick slam surface that was left at the time.
Click to expand...
Federer lost dubai 2006 to baby Nadal so I wouldn't be so sure of his win at USO
 
KINGROGER said:
Peak Fed is unbeaten at Wimbledon and Safin is the only guy to beat him at a HC slam.

2008 Wimbledon Fed was low on confidence and played like crap for 2 sets so I wouldn’t describe that as a peak performance.

As for 2009 AO, on a slow as hell surface no shame losing to a slow court grinder like Nadal and even then he should’ve won in 4.
Click to expand...
He was at his peak in Wimbledon 2008
Not a peak performance is a lame excuse
Also AO 2009 he lost in 5 so he should he have won in 4 is hilarious lol
 
Objective observer said:
Federer lost dubai 2006 to baby Nadal so I wouldn't be so sure of his win at USO
Click to expand...
Micky mouse tournament... over BO5 at USO Fed would destroy any version of 04-09 Nadal that was losing to Blake, Murray, Youzhny, Del Potro, Ferrer lmao.

Heck, he’d even destroy him with his 2015 form which was like his 8th best level, shame Nadal was yet again losing to some mug in round 4.

“Baby” LOL. Oh yeah Fed had mono in 2008 which is the only reason Nadal won along with darkness affecting Fed’s precision based game.
 
Lew said:
It's not about h2h, it's about never beating peak ATGs.

Some may not agree he was peak after 2008, but what ATG did he beat until AO07?

1 time Nadal who had just reached his first grass semifinal and 3 times Agassi who was having mediocre results, ranked no.7/8. That's it.

This is what affects his legacy, not the h2h alone.
Click to expand...

Well he's beaten peak Djokovic many times as an old man so that pretty much negates that argument to the point that even if he didn't face any peak ATG's in his peak, if he had he would have still won plenty.
 
KINGROGER said:
Micky mouse tournament... over BO5 at USO Fed would destroy any version of 04-09 Nadal that was losing to Blake, Murray, Youzhny, Del Potro, Ferrer lmao.

Heck, he’d even destroy him with his 2015 form which was like his 8th best level, shame Nadal was yet again losing to some mug in round 4.

“Baby” LOL. Oh yeah Fed had mono in 2008 which is the only reason Nadal won along with darkness affecting Fed’s precision based game.
Click to expand...
He definitely didn't have mono and you know it lol
Also federer barely beat worst ever Nadal in basel 2015 despite being in great form
Just because Federer played well against mugs doesn't mean he will play the same level against Nadal lol
 
Objective observer said:
He was at his peak in Wimbledon 2008
Not a peak performance is a lame excuse
Also AO 2009 he lost in 5 so he should he have won in 4 is hilarious lol
Click to expand...

He was worse in every stat in 2008 from 2007 so he factually wasn’t at his peak. Unless you think Karlovic, Simon, Stepanek, Roddick, Fish all happened to peak in 08? LMAO.

And he would’ve won 2009 AO had they not slowed it down to clay court speed LOL. Even then thanks to massive choking and terrible serving he allowed Nadal to steal first and 3rd sets.
 
KINGROGER said:
He was worse in every stat in 2008 from 2007 so he factually wasn’t at his peak. Unless you think Karlovic, Simon, Stepanek, Roddick, Fish all happened to peak in 08? LMAO.

And he would’ve won 2009 AO had they not slowed it down to clay court speed LOL. Even then thanks to massive choking and terrible serving he allowed Nadal to steal first and 3rd sets.
Click to expand...
He was peak on grass as he reached won Halle and reached Wimbledon final without dropping a set
Also I can also say Nadal choked 2nd set in AO and choked 4th set after breaking back LOL
 
Objective observer said:
He definitely didn't have mono and you know it lol
Also federer barely beat worst ever Nadal in basel 2015 despite being in great form
Just because Federer played well against mugs doesn't mean he will play the same level against Nadal lol
Click to expand...

Their only relevant decoturf matches (06/07 YEC) Fed destroyed Nadal which would translate to 2006/2007 USO if Nadal didn’t chicken out and lose to Mugs! Nadal is the king of losing to pigeons and mugs at slams.

And he did have mono which explains his huge drop in level which he only partly recovered by USO.
 
Slam wins over top-3 ranked ATGs:

Djokovic 16
Nadal 14
Federer 9
 
Lew said:
It's not about h2h, it's about never beating peak ATGs.

Some may not agree he was peak after 2008, but what ATG did he beat until AO07?

1 time Nadal who had just reached his first grass semifinal and 3 times Agassi who was having mediocre results, ranked no.7/8. That's it.

This is what affects his legacy, not the h2h alone.
Click to expand...

ZjsMZv.gif


8-)
 
Federer massively improved ion last few years as reflected by H2H with Nadal and Murray. For GS in the presence of Nadal, Djokovic and Murray I use CC (correction factor) 1. Thus these are 8GS. For GS the absence of Nadal, Djokovic and Murray my CC is 0.3. 12x0.3=4. Thus, I have calculated that Federer have Nadal, Djokovic and Murray-present 12GS equivalents.
 
Objective observer said:
Age was why Federer won the last 5 matches against Nadal and improved his record significantly?
Click to expand...

Just because he beat Nadal doesn't take away the fact he's nearly 40. When Roger's hitting freely and does not allow for long rallies he can still beat anyone at his age like he did in 2017. The difference is at that age when the going gets tough and the confidence isn't there and he has to work for his points more, thats when age plays the biggest role, ala 2018. In 2017 he didn't allow his body to come into play as much as he was playing ultra aggressive all the time, believing in his shots, that hasn't been the case this year. So although he had an incredible year last year, it does not negate the fact that he is at a significant disadvantage at nearly 40 years old, any sane person would admit that.
 
BeatlesFan said:
Stopped reading right there.

Fed is overwhelmingly the greatest player of his generation. These are men of Fed's generation:

Safin, Hewitt, Roddick, Philippoussis, Davydenko, Ljubicic (his current coach!) and Nalbandian.

Nadal is five years younger than Roger and Novak is SIX years younger. Neither are his generational rivals, since all those guys are long since retired.
Click to expand...
Not only that, because even if Nadal and Djokovic would be from his generation, how can anyone argue that they are better than Federer when Roger holds all important records like Slam titles, overall titles, weeks at #1 etc. over them? Yes, maybe the other 2 have a bit more time from now on, but still at first they have to beat these records, or there is not even need for debating.
 
TJfederer16 said:
Just because he beat Nadal doesn't take away the fact he's nearly 40. When Roger's hitting freely and does not allow for long rallies he can still beat anyone at his age like he did in 2017. The difference is at that age when the going gets tough and the confidence isn't there and he has to work for his points more, thats when age plays the biggest role, ala 2018. In 2017 he didn't allow his body to come into play as much as he was playing ultra aggressive all the time, believing in his shots, that hasn't been the case this year. So although he had an incredible year last year, it does not negate the fact that he is at a significant disadvantage at nearly 40 years old, any sane person would admit that.
Click to expand...
That is now
But he was losing to Nadal from the beginning
 
After 50 years, Noone will have time to remember players Head to head..
People will confer the title of GOAT on the player who have maximum achievements.

Rite now Federer is number One, in terms of achievements.
So Head to head doesn't even come into picture..
There is nothing called GOAT,
But if ATP decides to have a GOAT trophy, Federer wins it today as per his achievements.
No arguments.
 
The author mounts a solid case against Federer being the greatest, but there is nothing offered in terms of counterpoint to indicate he understands the context of Federer's career or both sides of Federer's case for and against.

And the arguments here, while valid, are not the author's unique thoughts. It's a rehashing of everything we already know.

The author reminds me of someone who doesn't know much about tennis, but has been "worded up" on the classic H2H argument against Federer, and has just cribbed it into an essay.

This happens on both sides and there was a particularly poor article attacking Nadal in a similarly one dimensional way not too long ago which I will post for comparison if I can find it.
 
BeatlesFan said:
Stopped reading right there.

Fed is overwhelmingly the greatest player of his generation. These are men of Fed's generation:

Safin, Hewitt, Roddick, Philippoussis, Davydenko, Ljubicic (his current coach!) and Nalbandian.

Nadal is five years younger than Roger and Novak is SIX years younger. Neither are his generational rivals, since all those guys are long since retired.
Click to expand...

Was going to post something similar before I saw your comment. He has clearly been the best player of his generation.

Regardless, he’s held his own against Novak and Rafa given they are so much younger than him. It just really isn’t easy to judge all time greats against each other when their careers overlap like that.

All that said, the Nadal argument I could understand more...Fed has always found it tough against him. But Djokovic only overtook Fed on h2h in the last few years, there’s nothing in that rivalry at all.
 
Lew said:
Slam wins over top-3 ranked ATGs:

Djokovic 16
Nadal 14
Federer 9
Click to expand...

Murray isn’t an ATG. Neither is 2014-2016 Fed. If you wanna include them you should add in wins over Roddick, Hewitt and Old Agassi.
Objective observer said:
There is literally no difference between 2008 and 2007 Wimbledon federer except he was scared of nadal in 2008

Stop making up BS excuses
Click to expand...

Nah. 2007 was a much higher level. More confident. Better return. More clutch. Nadal lucked out on facing mono Fed and Berdych LOL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Carsomyr
Djoko-coach channels Djoko-fans, claims 2017 is Peak Fedr
2
Replies
63
Views
4K
Gary Duane
Gary Duane
RF-18
30-30: Federer the best
Replies
4
Views
748
Surion
S
Krish872007
Lost the First Set? Not to Worry, Say Sampras / Djokovic / Federer
Replies
17
Views
859
Deleted member 768841
D
tennisaddict
ATP Beyond The Numbers for 2015: Back From The Brink
Replies
0
Views
259
tennisaddict
tennisaddict
M
Rivalries - Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, and Murray
Replies
0
Views
628
McEnroeisanartist
M
Back
Top