Toni said yesterday, "Fed is the best ever, but it's more difficult to play against Djokovic"

[SonnyT]

In his last 5 major triumphs, Nadal won only one Big 3 confrontation, at '19 RG. (There, whether he needed it or not, he received a lot of help from Guy Forget's dreadful botched scheduling!) In other major tournaments that he had to face Big 3 opposition, Nadal was defeated, and he had 4 such defeats!

In contrast, in his last 5 major triumphs, only once did he not have to face Big 3 competition ('18 USO). Every time he met a Big 3 opponent, he came through.

So Fedfans' argument of weak era is only partially right. Nadal needs a kind draw and to avoid Big 3 competition, to win majors. Whereas Djokovic thrives on strong competition!

Stan's most famous win over Djokovic, at '15 RG. That came after Novak's only RG win over Nadal. My guess is Novak still couldn't come off Cloud 9, and didn't put in the proper preparation for the final.

Djokovic already had elbow problems at '16 Wim. During that tournament, Brad Gilbert did an ESPN segment where he wondered why Novak's serve speeds came down so drastically from 2015, and specifically mentioned the elbow. Novak lost that tournament to one Sam Querrey! Novak also lost to Chung and Istomin at majors during that 2-year slump!

Djokovic was also physically hampered last year at USO! So now Fedfans and Nadalfans resort to championing one Stanimal! HAHAHA!

 

[mike danny]

But Djokovic could have figured Nadal out over the years...

What I'm saying is that there was no clear techincal issue with them from the start like with Fedal.

 

[chjtennis]

Uncle Toni must have forgotten that Rafa hasn't been able to beat Roger on non-clay surface since 2015.

2019	Wimbledon Great Britain	Outdoor Grass	SF	Roger Federer	763 16 63 64
2019	Roland Garros France	Outdoor Clay	SF	Rafael Nadal	63 64 62
2019	ATP Masters 1000 Indian Wells CA, U.S.A.	Outdoor Hard	SF	Roger Federer	W/O
2017	ATP Masters 1000 Shanghai China	Outdoor Hard	F	Roger Federer	64 63
2017	ATP Masters 1000 Miami FL, U.S.A.	Outdoor Hard	F	Roger Federer	63 64
2017	ATP Masters 1000 Indian Wells CA, U.S.A.	Outdoor Hard	R16	Roger Federer	62 63
2017	Australian Open Australia	Outdoor Hard	F	Roger Federer	64 36 61 36 63
2015	Basel Switzerland	Indoor Hard	F	Roger Federer	63 57 63

 

[Djokodalerer31]

Toni pretty much lays out the value of match-ups. Nadal is simply a more difficult match-up for Federer than he is for Djokovic. No shame in admitting that. If Djokovic was raised to play with a one-hander, this discussion wouldn't even take place.

Fed was simply unlucky to have his worst match-up turn out to be an ATG himself, which is unique in tennis history. Djokovic's worst match-up, Stan, did not turn out to be an ATG.

So Nadal would tell you it is easier to play Federer, while someone like Stan would tell you it is easier to play Djokovic.

I forgot, that its Stan, who beat him 19 times out of 25, but what do i know...its more important, that Wawrinka got him when he was either injured or in his brainfart mode...

 

[mike danny]

Wawa is 6-19 against Novak. 3-19 against Nadal. We are reading way too much on a few matches, however important they were.

nadal has had a winning h2h against Fed from the very beginning. That was never the case for Wawa against Novak.

there is simply no comparison, Nadal was much, much, much more of a challenge to Fed than Wawa was to Novak.

Sure, but Wawa is still a bad match-up for Novak.

 

[mike danny]

I forgot, that its Stan, who beat him 19 times out of 25, but what do i know...its more important, that Wawrinka got him when he was either injured or in his brainfart mode...

Excuses...

 

[Alfred Chicken]

I forgot, that its Stan, who beat him 19 times out of 25, but what do i know...its more important, that Wawrinka got him when he was either injured or in his brainfart mode...

88. winning percentage against Stan outside of the 4 Big Tournaments - 50 % vs Stan at the Slams; go figure.

 

[MasterZeb]

More like Rafa is the most consistent out of the Big 3 Slam wise nowadays. Novak and Roger losing to lesser players does not make Rafa's wins any less valuable. They just weren't good enough during those Slams to reach Rafa.

It's the same example i use for Rafa not reaching Federer on Hard Court slams from 2005-2008, he wasn't good enough. It's just as simple as that.

Since 2017 ;

Djokovic :

AO : 2nd Round - 4th Round - Champion - Champion
FO : Quarterfinal - Quarterfinal - Semifinal
WB : Quarterfinal - Champion - Champion
USO : DNP - Champion - 4th Round


Nadal :

AO : Final / Quarterfinal / Final / Quarterfinal
FO : Champion / Champion / Champion
WB : 4th Round / Semifinal / Semifinal
USO : Champion / Semifinal / Champion

Federer :

AO : Champion / Champion / 4th Round / Semifinal
FO : DNP / DNP / Semifinal
WB : Champion / Quarterfinal / Semifinal
USO : Quarterfinal / 4th Round / Quarterfinal

Why 2017? Why not 2016? Or 2015?

 

[RF-18]

Toni pretty much lays out the value of match-ups. Nadal is simply a more difficult match-up for Federer than he is for Djokovic. No shame in admitting that. If Djokovic was raised to play with a one-hander, this discussion wouldn't even take place.

Fed was simply unlucky to have his worst match-up turn out to be an ATG himself, which is unique in tennis history. Djokovic's worst match-up, Stan, did not turn out to be an ATG.

So Nadal would tell you it is easier to play Federer, while someone like Stan would tell you it is easier to play Djokovic.

No wtf, Stan is not Djokovics worst match up. Both Nadal and Federer are tougher opponents for him, and has been for a big chunk of his career.

What is this Stan overrating here. He caught a great Djokovic in FO 2015, rest of his wins where against a struggling Djokovic having all sort of issues.

 

[Steve0904]

Sure, but Wawa is still a bad match-up for Novak.

Or we could just do what the Djokovic fans do. Only count the H2H since 2013+ in the Stan-Novak case (like Djokovic fans do with everything post 2010).

And if we really cut it down we could count majors only since that time since Wawa tanks everything else.

 

[maratha_warrior]

No wtf, Stan is not Djokovics worst match up. Both Nadal and Federer are tougher opponents for him, and has been for a big chunk of his career.

What is this Stan overrating here. He caught a great Djokovic in FO 2015, rest of his wins where against a struggling Djokovic having all sort of issues.

US Open 2016 , Djokovic was sick throughout tournament and didn't deserve to reach finals .Similar to Fed in 2008 AO .
Any average version of Fed Murray Nadal would have easily beaten 2016 version of Djokovic .
That's leaves us with two Djoker's losses AO 2014 and 2015 RG.

AO 2014 - it was a tight match and Stan won it in close contest In 5th set . Also Djoker was mentally a chokovic back then . He also almost lost WB 2014 to Fed . Stan played great and deserved to win .

RG 15 - It was a monumental task to beat 3 slam champions in a row Nadal, Murray , Stan playing 4 out of 5 days In a row ,on his worst surface .
Fed himself never defeated 3 slam champions in a row ever ,but somehow fed fans expect Djoker should do it lol .hahahah .
Even if Rafa was in poor form , He was 5 time defending champ and winning against him took mental effort from Djokovic in 2015 .
Stan did exactly to Djokovic at RG ,what Soderling did to Federer at RG 2010 . But somehow Djoker's loss was bad lol hahaha .

Now let's talk about GrassGoat Fed's loss to Berdych and Tsonga on Grass before age 30 ??
Fed's loss to Safin , Delpo and Cilic snatching away 3 Hardcourt slams ??

Infact , Delpo beaten Fed at USO 2 times and Delpo never able to win a set against Djokovic in 3 times .

So , Stan is a match up issue for Djoker , but Delpo is not a match up issue for Fed ? ??? lol hahaha

 

[beard]

That's because Novak has a spectacular BH and his FH is the weaker shot by a significant margin. We never saw Edberg running around to hit FH's either, for the same reason. Fed and Nadal have arguably the greatest FH's in the history of tennis, so of course they will do anything to do a FH, especially Rafa.

I disagree...


Novak - goat bh, great fh (precision, constancy, deepness)... No vulnerability

Nadal - goat fh (because of being left-handed and unique topspin), good enough backhand... No vulnerability

Federer - really great fh, good bh... Vulnerable on bh side... One will ask, then why is he so good player, and my answer is serve which is great/goat, and his variability in game... Bottom line is that Fed's fh is not that goaty as it's often showed...

Off course this is just my opinion...

 

[RelentlessAttack]

I disagree...


Novak - goat bh, great fh (precision, constancy, deepness)... No vulnerability

Nadal - goat fh (because of being left-handed and unique topspin), good enough backhand... No vulnerability

Federer - really great fh, good bh... Vulnerable on bh side... One will ask, then why is he so good player, and my answer is serve which is great/goat, and his variability in game... Bottom line is that Fed's fh is not that goaty as it's often showed...

Off course this is just my opinion...

Who successfully exploited prime Federer’s BH to any significant extent other than Nadal who was designed in a lab to destroy right handed 1HBHs? The losses he took to Djokovic, Murray, Delpo, et al during his prime period weren’t really dependent on that strategy

 

[blablavla]

Who successfully exploited prime Federer’s BH to any significant extent other than Nadal who was designed in a lab to destroy right handed 1HBHs? The losses he took to Djokovic, Murray, Delpo, et al during his prime period weren’t really dependent on that strategy

that is without pointing to the fact that empirical evidence suggests that Nadal is more vulnerable than Federer and Djokovic.

 

[beard]

Who successfully exploited prime Federer’s BH to any significant extent other than Nadal who was designed in a lab to destroy right handed 1HBHs? The losses he took to Djokovic, Murray, Delpo, et al during his prime period weren’t really dependent on that strategy

Why we should consider only his "prime"? His backhand is exploited quite long time from many players, more or less successfully, and by exploiting I mean going considerably more to his backhand because it's his obviously weaker side (more because of weak bh, than
because of "goat" fh).

About his prime, except Nadal, there weren't players capable of constantly exploiting his weaker side... Other great players were "babies"...

 

[blablavla]

Why we should consider only his "prime"? His backhand is exploited quite long time from many players, more or less successfully, and by exploiting I mean going considerably more to his backhand because it's his obviously weaker side (more because of weak bh, than
because of "goat" fh).

About his prime, except Nadal, there weren't players capable of constantly exploiting his weaker side... Other great players were "babies"...

I don't recall if it was Roger himself, or someone from his team commenting on the "weak" BH and why he didn't do more changes there.
The answer was: with that "weak" BH he won 17 GS, weeks at #1, etc.,
so, it's all relative.

There are players that are more or less successful vs Novak in BO3 format.
Roger and Novak are more or less successful vs Rafael, who according to you doesn't have weaknesses.

that weak BH isn't that weak, and it's not that easy to exploit.

 

[mike danny]

No wtf, Stan is not Djokovics worst match up. Both Nadal and Federer are tougher opponents for him, and has been for a big chunk of his career.

What is this Stan overrating here. He caught a great Djokovic in FO 2015, rest of his wins where against a struggling Djokovic having all sort of issues.

Novak played well at the AO 2014 too.

At 2016 USO he was subpar, but he would have won withiut Wawa anyway.

 

[flutzingitaway]

Wawa is 6-19 against Novak. 3-19 against Nadal. We are reading way too much on a few matches, however important they were.

nadal has had a winning h2h against Fed from the very beginning. That was never the case for Wawa against Novak.

there is simply no comparison, Nadal was much, much, much more of a challenge to Fed than Wawa was to Novak.

It is not really an accurate comparision though since Nadal is a far greater player than Wawrinka. So of course Nadal being a difficult match up for Federer will have a lot more success vs Federer than Wawrinka being a difficult match up for Djokovic will have vs Djokovic.

 

[RelentlessAttack]

Why we should consider only his "prime"? His backhand is exploited quite long time from many players, more or less successfully, and by exploiting I mean going considerably more to his backhand because it's his obviously weaker side (more because of weak bh, than
because of "goat" fh).

About his prime, except Nadal, there weren't players capable of constantly exploiting his weaker side... Other great players were "babies"...

We should only consider prime because you expect players to lose more outside of their prime, and have more weaknesses. Post 2015 Nadal has a number of weaknesses for example, but before that he was vulnerable mainly to players with 2HBHs capable of taking the ball early (Djokovic, Davydenko, Nalbandian) or tall power hitters who have a similar effect of neutralizing his FH topspin ( Del Potro or Soderling). Non prime versions of Djokovic have variously had issues with fitness, serve, forecourt game, handling variety, mentality, whereas prime Djokovic has minimal weaknesses in modern game conditions.

I would argue that except for against Nadal, prime Federer’s BH wasn’t really a significant weakness but it still made sense to go there because the FH was such a weapon, similar to players other than Stan wanting to avoid BH-BH exchanges with Djokovic.

 

[RF-18]

Novak played well at the AO 2014 too.

At 2016 USO he was subpar, but he would have won withiut Wawa anyway.

He wasn't just subpar, he had shoulder issues. Otherwise he wouldn't have given up or played as **** as he did.

 

[ForehandCross]

Why we should consider only his "prime"? His backhand is exploited quite long time from many players, more or less successfully, and by exploiting I mean going considerably more to his backhand because it's his obviously weaker side (more because of weak bh, than
because of "goat" fh).

About his prime, except Nadal, there weren't players capable of constantly exploiting his weaker side... Other great players were "babies"...

Ehh even Djokovic could not do that in RG 2011. Murray tried it a lot in AO 2010 F.Both specifically targeted that side. I think Agassi in their USO F did do it.

There's a reason except Nadal not many players go after Federer BH, they might hit to it as like any player it is safer to hit to his BH,but rarely anyone exploits it as well as Nadal did.

 

[BeatlesFan]

Nadal needs a kind draw and to avoid Big 3 competition, to win majors. Whereas Djokovic thrives on strong competition!

Slight correction: Nadal needs a cushy draw in his old age to win majors, unless it's RG.

And there's no question Djokovic beats anyone in the draw if he's playing his best tennis. But his only real competition are a guy 38 and someone soon to be 34. He has no young challengers whatsoever, which has never been the case for any previous ATG. Had Lendl never had to deal with Becker, Edberg, Wilander or Pete, he would have won 15 slams on cruise control.

 

[beard]

We should only consider prime because you expect players to lose more outside of their prime, and have more weaknesses. Post 2015 Nadal has a number of weaknesses for example, but before that he was vulnerable mainly to players with 2HBHs capable of taking the ball early (Djokovic, Davydenko, Nalbandian) or tall power hitters who have a similar effect of neutralizing his FH topspin ( Del Potro or Soderling). Non prime versions of Djokovic have variously had issues with fitness, serve, forecourt game, handling variety, mentality, whereas prime Djokovic has minimal weaknesses in modern game conditions.

I would argue that except for against Nadal, prime Federer’s BH wasn’t really a significant weakness but it still made sense to go there because the FH was such a weapon, similar to players other than Stan wanting to avoid BH-BH exchanges with Djokovic.

I hate term "prime", " peak" and similar... It's too abstract... In "prime" one can play bad tournament and out of prime one can play great tournament... Prime is often connected with success, and success is often connected with opponent... Too abstract and dependable for me, I prefer looking at whole careers...

 

[beard]

Ehh even Djokovic could not do that in RG 2011. Murray tried it a lot in AO 2010 F.Both specifically targeted that side. I think Agassi in their USO F did do it.

There's a reason except Nadal not many players go after Federer BH, they might hit to it as like any player it is safer to hit to his BH,but rarely anyone exploits it as well as Nadal did.

No doubt Nadal is best in exploiting his bh... Look at Novak's matches, he do it too, specially on biggest points and it works great...

 

[RelentlessAttack]

I hate term "prime", " peak" and similar... It's too abstract... In "prime" one can play bad tournament and out of prime one can play great tournament... Prime is often connected with success, and success is often connected with opponent... Too abstract for me, I prefer looking at whole careers...

They’re imprecise of course but necessary for meaningful conversation about level. Otherwise it’s like, ok you say Djokovic is the most complete player ever, but what about pre 2011? Nadal is the fastest top player ever with the best defense but wait what about 2014-present? Federer has the best FH ever but what about 2013-present? Was Roddick and an explosive first strike player or was he a pusher with a big serve? Given that players aren’t static over their careers, dividing up the disparate periods when making comparisons is necessary

 

[beard]

They’re imprecise of course but necessary for meaningful conversation about level. Otherwise it’s like, ok you say Djokovic is the most complete player ever, but what about pre 2011? Nadal is the fastest top player ever with the best defense but wait what about 2014-present? Federer has the best FH ever but what about 2013-present? Was Roddick and an explosive first strike player or was he a pusher with a big serve? Given that players aren’t static over their careers, dividing up the disparate periods when making comparisons is necessary

We went too wide in this conversations. Yes, Novak was complete player even before 2011, but something was missing... But, again, overall looking he is most complete player... IMO, off course... No obvious weakness, no obvious game play against him which will work longer time... When someone finds good tactics against him (Fed short returns and short dead balls to backhand for example) Novak is already ready for it next tournament or two...

 

[Leandro2045]

Why 2017? Why not 2016? Or 2015?

I was replying to his comment that was referring to the current Big 3 Slam streak.

Wawrinka won the very last slam before the Big 3 back in the 2016 USO

 

[flutzingitaway]

Omigod at crazy Djokovic fans getting all defensive and going nuts over people saying Wawrinka is a bad match up for Djokovic as if it were an insult. Especialy when even with the bad match up he leads 19-6 overall as has been crowed over numerous times in this thread already.

And yes an in form Del Potro is a somewhat bad match up for Federer, he is probably a worse match up for Nadal than anyone else of the top guys if I had to pick though. He would rather player either than Djokovic or Murray I believe.

 

[Knovax]

Omigod at crazy Djokovic fans getting all defensive and going nuts over people saying Wawrinka is a bad match up for Djokovic as if it were an insult. Especialy when even with the bad match up he leads 19-6 overall as has been crowed over numerous times in this thread already.

And yes an in form Del Potro is a somewhat bad match up for Federer, he is probably a worse match up for Nadal than anyone else of the top guys if I had to pick though. He would rather player either than Djokovic or Murray I believe.

I've read some comments here and felt a notion to like some of the Federer fan's post on this subject. My devotion to Nolefam kept me from doing so. There is no shame in having a bad matchup no matter who or how great you are. Unfortunately, Djokovic has not been able to handle Wawrinka at the Grand Slams in the past few years. He is the only player I truly fear as a devout Djokovic fan. There is always someone better as my father used to day.

 

[King No1e]

Wawa is 6-19 against Novak. 3-19 against Nadal. We are reading way too much on a few matches, however important they were.

nadal has had a winning h2h against Fed from the very beginning. That was never the case for Wawa against Novak.

there is simply no comparison, Nadal was much, much, much more of a challenge to Fed than Wawa was to Novak.

This. Heck, Nadal was much much much more of a challenge to Novak than Wawa was.

 

[mike danny]

This. Heck, Nadal was much much much more of a challenge to Novak than Wawa was.

We are not comparing who was tougher. Wawa is still a bad match-up for Djoker even if Nadal as an opponent is tougher.

 

[King No1e]

We are not comparing who was tougher. Wawa is still a bad match-up for Djoker even if Nadal as an opponent is tougher.

Peak (pre-2014) Nadal is a bad matchup for everyone

 

[mike danny]

Peak (pre-2014) Nadal is a bad matchup for everyone

Apparently not for Davydenko on HC.

 

[King No1e]

Apparently not for Davydenko on HC.

Arguably the only exception. Davydenko was a terrible matchup for Nadal in his prime. Similar dynamic to his matchup with Djokovic post-2014.

 

[mike danny]

Arguably the only exception. Davydenko was a terrible matchup for Nadal in his prime. Similar dynamic to his matchup with Djokovic post-2014.

Davydenko somehow even outclutched Nadal at 2010 Doha after getting bagelled.

What's surprising is that Nadal's only win on HC over Davydenko was in 2006. All of Davy's wins have come since 2008.

 

[flutzingitaway]

We are not comparing who was tougher. Wawa is still a bad match-up for Djoker even if Nadal as an opponent is tougher.

Just curious though what is their comparative non clay head to heads. Would not be surprised if Wawrinka compares decently there (even with his tanking virtually all non slam matches and not becoming a top player until 2013, and Nadal being generally a better player than Djokovic on all surfaces until 2011).

 

[mike danny]

Just curious though what is their comparative non clay head to heads. Would not be surprised if Wawrinka compares decently there (even with his tanking virtually all non slam matches and not becoming a top player until 2013, and Nadal being generally a better player than Djokovic on all surfaces until 2011).

Well, Wawrinka has taken 2 HC slams away from Djokovic, just like Nadal.

 

[flutzingitaway]

Well, Wawrinka has taken 2 HC slams away from Djokovic, just like Nadal.

Just looked it up. Djokovic leads Wawrinka 14-5 off clay. Djokovic leads Nadal 23-9 off clay. So not a huge difference. Especialy considering the factors I mentioned. And no I am not saying clay does not count, but keep in mind Nadal is a far better player than Wawrinka on all surfaces.