Top 10 of the Open Era now on clay (and where Novak fits)
- Thread starter mattosgrant
- Start date
user
Professional
G.O.A.T.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Why do you still rank Federer above Djokovic abmk?
mattosgrant
Banned
Not to mention Vilas at only 10th is incredibly ridiculous.
To each their own though.
Djokovic2015
Semi-Pro
The most prestigious clay court titles with tons of history after the FO are Rome and Monte Carlo. Djokovic has 6 titles at those 2 events and Fed has 0.
Courier, Muster, Brugera, Laver (Open only), Rosewall (Open only) all won titles at those events unlike Fed, but less than Djoker's 6.
duaneeo
Legend
There's no reason to be butthurt, uh, "Homie". Yes, Fed got bageled in a final (the only time in his career) at the 08 FO, but it was at the hands of clay GOAT Nadal, on Federer's worst surface, in what was Roger's then worst-ever season. Anyway, Federer had first bageled Nadal on clay the year before when he beat him in the Masters Hamburg final.
Since being bageled in a final is so important to you when it comes to top-lists, surely you agree that Djokovic don't belong on a, say, top-5 list on hard, considering he was bageled on hard in a final (2012 Cincinnati) by past-his-prime Federer. No double-standard, right? And before you say slam vs Masters, this thread is about a player's total record on a surface (clay)--not just at the slams.
duaneeo
Legend
LOL! When people say Nole's Australian Open record doesn't compare with Nadal's or Federer/Sampras' Roland Garros or Wimbledon record because the AO isn't as prestigious as those slams, you Djokovic fans get all hostile.
abmk
Bionic Poster
level of play and that federer faced a clearly tougher nadal than djokovic did ...
mattosgrant
Banned
Hmmm, well I am a Djokovic fan though and I already conceded even if Djokovic wins his 3rd U.S Open and 6th WTF title this year he wont neccessarily be over Federer on hard courts (it would be debateable still) yet despite the same # of slams, WTFs, and many more Masters due to both the better balance of 4/5 to 6/3 and the slightly higher prestige of the U.S Open vs the Australian Open. If you search my posting history you can find I said that atleast 6 times.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
But I thought the list was based on achievements only?
And the Nadal that Djokovic had to face was pretty tough as well, otherwise he would've won RG much sooner!
Service Ace
Hall of Fame
Post prime Federer beat PEAK Djokovic at Roland Garros during the year Djokovic was playing his peakest of peak tennis lol. How is this troll not banned yet?
swordtennis
G.O.A.T.
Courier is also overly rated on clay and in general.
Had two great runs.
Once the tour figured him out, Big forehand and more big forehand, he was done.
Had two great runs.
Once the tour figured him out, Big forehand and more big forehand, he was done.
duaneeo
Legend
The 'prestige' factor means nothing to me. Winning 7 best-of-five matches (baring a withdrawal) is required to win the title regardless of the slam tournament. At the Masters, I guess an argument can be made that winning Miami or Indian Wells is more impressive than the others because there are 4 rounds before the QF compared to 3.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Lol, if only I had a pound for every time a Fed fan came out with this tired old line.Post prime Federer beat PEAK Djokovic at Roland Garros during the year Djokovic was playing his peakest of peak tennis lol.
Djokovic2015
Semi-Pro
What? Nole's AO record doesn't compare to Nadal's RG because 9>6. Fed's doesn't compare to Nadal's either and it isn't even a record as he shares it with Sampras. What does that have to do with anything?
We are evaluating clay court play right now and RG is the biggest title on the surface. Both have won 1. The next biggest title is Rome where DJokovic has 4 and Fed 0. The next biggest title is MC where Novak has 2 and Fed 0.
But I thought the list was based on achievements only?
And the Nadal that Djokovic had to face was pretty tough as well, otherwise he would've won RG much sooner!
You shouldn't acknowledge (trash tier) abmk.
According to him:
18-19 year old Nadal without his kill shot FH fully developed yet and lacking a serve at 05/06 RG is peak Nadal
24-26 year old Nadal with his full arsenal developed on all strokes and reaching 18 tier 1 finals in 11-13 is declined Nadal
Service Ace
Hall of Fame
When you can't argue the facts, argue the character
Especially ironic coming from a teenaged clown named Djokovic2011 LOL
C
Chadillac
Guest
Anyone know feds winning % against players not named nadal on clay? Id think it would be skewed and very high, but could be a nice troll point
Krish872007
Talk Tennis Guru
Anyone know feds winning % against players not named nadal on clay? Id think it would be skewed and very high, but could be a nice troll point
79.4% excluding Nadal - so not that high anyway unfortunately
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Using such a small sample size makes so little sense there's not really much for me to argue. Does it really bother you that much that there's one surface where you hero might be considered less accomplished than Djokovic boo boo?When you can't argue the facts, argue the character
C
Chadillac
Guest
Damn, that was fast, thanks
duaneeo
Legend
Clearly you missed the point.
Krish872007
Talk Tennis Guru
W/L % on clay: Federer 75.9 - Djokovic 80.4
W/L % Excluding Nadal: Federer 79.4 - Djokovic 85.4
Total Clay Titles won: Federer 11 - Djokovic 13
RG Titles: Federer 1 - Djokovic 1
Masters: Federer 6 - Djokovic 8
H2H on clay: 4-4
H2H at RG: 1-1
So the stats are close but favour Djokovic overall. If you want to argue "level of play", then Federer's 2011 RG SF victory is a starting point I guess.
As for the version of Nadal each one faced - I think it's not particularly relevant. Nadal had two great years in 2008 and 2012 (his best two on clay).
Federer was 0-3 on clay against him in 2008
Djokovic was 0-3 against him in 2012.
W/L % Excluding Nadal: Federer 79.4 - Djokovic 85.4
Total Clay Titles won: Federer 11 - Djokovic 13
RG Titles: Federer 1 - Djokovic 1
Masters: Federer 6 - Djokovic 8
H2H on clay: 4-4
H2H at RG: 1-1
So the stats are close but favour Djokovic overall. If you want to argue "level of play", then Federer's 2011 RG SF victory is a starting point I guess.
As for the version of Nadal each one faced - I think it's not particularly relevant. Nadal had two great years in 2008 and 2012 (his best two on clay).
Federer was 0-3 on clay against him in 2008
Djokovic was 0-3 against him in 2012.
abmk
Bionic Poster
But I thought the list was based on achievements only?
not mentioned anywhere ...
when did I say otherwise ? I said it was tougher for federer ...its relative ...
Djokovic2015
Semi-Pro
Clearly you did. You were shocked at the idea of Fed being out of the top 10 with Djokovic being #7 on OP's list. The Rome/MC titles give a perfectly reasonable explanation for that to which you decided to come out of left field with unrelated hogwosh
Service Ace
Hall of Fame
When you can't argue the facts, attack their character. Oh wait, you've done that twice now you transparent simpleton lol
The Fedfather
Legend
Maybe we should wait until Djokovic is 34, and then see how his W/L% holds up against Federer's 75.9? Or you could dig up Federer's W/L% on clay when he was 29.
Krish872007
Talk Tennis Guru
Ok, I'll do that for a fairer comparison - will edit this post with the figure shortly
Edit: so he was 29 in August 2010, by which point he compiled a 151-46 record (76.6% roughly)
Last edited:
mattosgrant
Banned
Fair enough. However many people do rate for instance Wimbledon and the U.S Open slightly higher than say the Australian Open, and likewise when comparing Rome to Hamburg or Madrid, or when comparing Miami and Indian Wells to other hard court Masters (as you already mentioned). I totally get if you dont though. I was just pointing out I am consistent with my views in that regard.
duaneeo
Legend
If I had known you were 12 years old, I wouldn't have initially responded. This conversation is over for me.
Service Ace
Hall of Fame
Most Djokovic fans on here are teenagers and there are more than a couple 12 and below so it's best to take all their opinions with a grain of salt. Join date is usually the best indicator.
D
Deleted member 743561
Guest
Solid list, but Vilas has gotta be way higher than 10, no?
Djokodal Fan
Hall of Fame
Post prime Federer beat PEAK Djokovic at Roland Garros during the year Djokovic was playing his peakest of peak tennis lol. How is this troll not banned yet?
What happened to beloved Federer next year at FO2012 right before he won wimbledon and claimed World#1? Did he suddenly age and revert back to young self the next month on Grass?
Djokovic2015
Semi-Pro
Fed turned 29 in August of 2010.
http://www.tennisabstract.com/cgi-bin/player.cgi?p=RogerFederer&f=Acx1998012420100830qqB1C2
Clay record to that point (ATP matches only so no futures, challengers, juniors) is 151-46 = 76.6%
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Ooh Novak's win yesterday has stung you so badly I can feel your pain from here haha. Phuckin' love it!!!
Krish872007
Talk Tennis Guru
I calculate that above - so it's slightly better, but still not that close to 80%.
Service Ace
Hall of Fame
Yeah, just like Prime Pete did at the US Open 2002 right before retiring at the age of 31. Ever heard of a swan song little boy?
mattosgrant
Banned
Yeah Vilas at #10 I could never see personally. The guy is still tied with Nadal for most clay titles in history as we speak. That says something (even if he vultured some weaker events). Alot of people unfairly judge him by his performance vs Borg but Borg was truly the nightmare match up and opponent for him. Think Nadal for Federer and multiple it by 3. Add to that Borg obviously being the significantly better player and clay courter both, and you get what you get. His abilities should not be judged solely by that as I suspect abmk is doing, and some others have done, but on his overall excellent clay performance and abilities.
While his one blemish is only 1 RG title (highly dissapointing for such a great clay courter), he did win 2 clay slams in essentialy only 1.2 clay slams per year (U.S was on clay when he won it, but only played on clay for a few years). Which puts him above Federer and Djokovic's 1 titles, and almost on par with Bruguera and Courier's 2, while crushing Bruguera and Courier imparticular in anything else clay related. He also has 7 clay Masters amongst his many clay titles, so it is not like he wasnt winning big clay events, as many or more as Fed, and many more than Bruguera or Courier overall apart from their RG excellence.
I couldnt see Vilas any lower than 6th as the only ones I would even consider putting above him are Nadal, Borg, Wiilander, Kuerten, and Lendl. Djokovic maybe in the future, but not quite yet. He also has decent arguments to be over Wilander and/or Kuerten so I could see rating him as high as 4th, despite that I did in fact rate him only 6th.
Last edited:
Service Ace
Hall of Fame
Ooh Novak's win yesterday has stung you so badly I can feel your pain from here haha. Phuckin' love it!!!
lol tell yourself whatever you need to in order to feel better about being a mental midget. You make it about me, I'll stick to owning your dumb ass with the facts
I make a living out of outsmarting limited thinkers like you lol
Djokovic2015
Semi-Pro
For ****s and giggles decided to do his hard court up to Novak's age Novak is at 84.3%:
http://www.tennisabstract.com/cgi-bin/player.cgi?p=RogerFederer&f=Acx1998012420100830qqB0C2
425-93 for 82.04%
Funny because Fed's career hard win % is 82.8%
supposedly declined ******* has increased his hard court win % in the time since he turned Novak's age from 2010-2016.
Djokovic2015
Semi-Pro
Pete got to world #1 after the win and ended the season at #2, a perch he would hold 2-3 years later? Swan Song would be if he wins a major in 16-17 at age 35 like Agassi almost did in 05. Like Agassi was denied his swan by Fed though Fed will be denied by Novak.
Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil
Talk Tennis Guru
Service Ace accusing other posters of attacking character. LOL this place always has something new to deliver.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Keep crying sweetie, I want to taste every single one of those tears.lol tell yourself whatever you need to in order to feel better about being a mental midget. You make it about me, I'll stick to owning your dumb ass with the facts
In the meantime I'm gonna go and watch the highlights of yesterday's historic achievement and enjoy every single moment. Laters.
Djokodal Fan
Hall of Fame
LOL, Federer was always playing his very best and at a very high level(that includes his performance at USopen 2011 when he had Novak on the ropes). This was the intention of my post. His level has always been higher. This was evidenced by his performance next year and his continuing presence in top3. It's not like Old Federer beat a prime Novak 2011.
Novak beat same high level playing in straight sets next year right before wimbledon. That Makes Novak even greater than Fed at Clay. How is this for an argument kid?
D
Deleted member 743561
Guest
Yeah. I haven't personally watched much of his play (I've seen the clips of some of the insanely long rallies with Borg), but I'm familiar with his preposterous clay statistics. 659 wins on clay is astonishing when you consider that Nadal only has 363... even if many of them were lower level, that is prolific. That kind of gap seems deserving of something more than footnote status...
mattosgrant
Banned
Not to mention there are many Federer fans who rank Federer above Kuerten on clay (already hilarious enough in itself) despite that he has 1 RG title to 3 for Kuerten, despite that Kuerten has won the 3 biggest clay titles vs 1 of 3 for Federer, and despite that an eons past his prime hip wrecked Kuerten destroyed and mutiliated peak Federer at RG 2004. It is just passed off as "it was only one match", Federer is awarded phantom titles he never earned for all the RGs he lost to Nadal, and voila. Yet Federer playing one of his best clay matches ever, and his best ever RG match, scoring one win over Djokovic in one of his several peak years, automatically means he is better forever on clay, haha.
mattosgrant
Banned
Also worth noting you do know Bruguera was absolutely owned by Muster? While it isnt only about head to heads, I dont see how you can think Bruguera was the better clay courter, let alone a minimum of 4 places better apparently. That is how I decided the order of Courier, Muster, Bruguera on my list, I was conflicted in all 3 directions at first but then I remembered how hopeless Muster was against Courier, how hopeless Bruguera was against Muster, and concluded since there was no way I could put Muster over Courier, or Bruguera over Muster, the answer was obvious. Bruguera did well against Courier but hardly owned him, and was playing a post prime Courier mostly anyway.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
This is probably the most accurate list except I would switch Lendl and Kuerten. I would put Guga at #3. I could see why you put Djokovic at #7. His overall clay record (8 Masters, 1 RG) is up there with the greats so I can't really argue against it.
mattosgrant
Banned
I think Kuerten's level of play on clay is higher than Lendl's but it was hard for me to completely overlook some glaring things about his record to place him ahead. I was shocked to learn how far his clay winning % is behind Lendl. It is even significantly behind guys like Djokovic and Federer.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
That's true but his peak level at RG was scary. He lived and relished that tournament so I just have to rank him 3rd. Lendl does have a valid argument for 3rd though.
PeterHo
Hall of Fame
And peak safin beats peak fed. Hell, even peak monfils is better. And peak nadal has kicked peak fed on hard courts, grass and clay lol.
What's the point?
Noles average day to day level is higher, that's why his overall clay stats is so much better.
If u wanna talk peak to peak play, nadal is the best of out the big 3. Federers not even close.
Similar threads
