Top 10 of This Era Head-to-Head...Interesting?

[RaulRamirez]

With too much time on my hands, I compiled the head-2-head records of the players who are likely considered the Top 10 of the Fed-Rafa-Novak era.

Here are the results, assuming my stats and math are accurate:

Djokovic: 173-82 (67.8%)
Nadal: 152-74 (67.4%)
Federer: 156-88 (63.9%)
Murray: 87-81 (51.8%)
DelPotro: 43-69 (38.4%)

Wawrinka: 47-89 (34.6%)
Ferrer: 50-85 (34.5%)
Tsonga: 33-70 (32%)
Berdych 45-104 (30.2%)
Hewitt 20-46 (30%)

Any surprises? Any conclusions to be drawn?

 

[Deleted member 716271]

With too much time on my hands, I compiled the head-2-head records of the players who are likely considered the Top 10 of the Fed-Rafa-Novak era.

Here are the results, assuming my stats and math are accurate:

Djokovic: 173-82 (67.8%)
Nadal: 152-74 (67.4%)
Federer: 156-88 (63.9%)
Murray: 87-81 (51.8%)
DelPotro: 43-69 (38.4%)

Wawrinka: 47-89 (34.6%)
Ferrer: 50-85 (34.5%)
Tsonga: 33-70 (32%)
Berdych 45-104 (30.2%)
Hewitt 20-46 (30%)

Any surprises? Any conclusions to be drawn?

Excellent work, my friend.

Surprised that Djokovic is above Nadal

 

[RaulRamirez]

Excellent work, my friend.

Surprised that Djokovic is above Nadal

Thanks - and it is very close between them.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Thanks - and it is very close between them.

The reason I intuitively would have thought Nadal would lead is because I figured among the top 3 guys Fedovic, I know Djokovic edges both Nadal and Fed slightly but Nadal edges Fed by quite a few, so it's close but Nadal would edge Djokovic there. The difference wouldn't be that much thought in the context of all 10 players, so it is the other 7 "lesser guys" really where I figured there would be a difference. Without analyzing each guy 1 by 1, I figured Nadal would have had a somewhat skewed meetings with the other guys--more on clay than usual. Wawinka and Ferrer also jumped off the page at me as guys Nadal has dominated (despite AO 14 loss). No one jumped off the page for me for Djokovic, although in retrospect Tsonga and Berdych should have, and Ferrer too really.

If you included Roddick, maybe Nadal and Djokovic would be dead even.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Nadl

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Very close between the top two - that Wimby loss might have cost Rafa the top spot.

 

[RaulRamirez]

The reason I intuitively would have thought Nadal would lead is because I figured among the top 3 guys Fedovic, I know Djokovic edges both Nadal and Fed slightly but Nadal edges Fed by quite a few, so it's close but Nadal would edge Djokovic there. The difference wouldn't be that much thought in the context of all 10 players, so it is the other 7 "lesser guys" really where I figured there would be a difference. Without analyzing each guy 1 by 1, I figured Nadal would have had a somewhat skewed meetings with the other guys--more on clay than usual. Wawinka and Ferrer also jumped off the page at me as guys Nadal has dominated (despite AO 14 loss). No one jumped off the page for me for Djokovic, although in retrospect Tsonga and Berdych should have, and Ferrer too really.

If you included Roddick, maybe Nadal and Djokovic would be dead even.

Let's see: If I added Roddick (at least per The Big 3), Djokovic was only 4-5 against him, Rafa was 7-3 and Roger was 21-3.

So, that would bring them to:
Rafa: 159-77 (67.4%)
Novak: 177-87 (67.0)
Fed: 177-91 (66.0)

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Let's see: If I added Roddick (at least per The Big 3), Djokovic was only 4-5 against him, Rafa was 7-3 and Roger was 21-3.

So, that would bring them to:
Rafa: 159-77 (67.4%)
Novak: 177-87 (67.0)
Fed: 177-91 (66.0)

Wow that really highlights how close Djokovic and Nadal are that adding Roddick could swing it.

I do think Djokovic will probably end up ahead when all is said and done, because he keeps beating Rafa. Even going back thru the last 7 years or so, the pattern has been that even if Rafa gets Djokovic at the slams sometimes, Novak leads the overall h2h thruout the year by quite a bit. I think he's won 8 of the last 10.

And I don't see a reason why Djokovic would do less well than Nadal against the other guys going forward across all surfaes.

 

[RaulRamirez]

Wow that really highlights how close Djokovic and Nadal are that adding Roddick could swing it.

I do think Djokovic will probably end up ahead when all is said and done, because he keeps beating Rafa. Even going back thru the last 7 years or so, the pattern has been that even if Rafa gets Djokovic at the slams sometimes, Novak leads the overall h2h thruout the year by quite a bit. I think he's won 8 of the last 10.

And I don't see a reason why Djokovic would do less well than Nadal against the other guys going forward across all surfaes.

I admit that the whole list is a bit arbitrary, but it does show the big gap between any of The Big 3 and Andy, and then still a sizable gap between Andy and #5, Delpo.
Some one-sided match-ups include: Fed 17-0 versus Ferrer; Novak 25-3 versus Berdych, and Murray 14-2 versus Tsonga.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

I admit that the whole list is a bit arbitrary, but it does show the big gap between any of The Big 3 and Andy, and then still a sizable gap between Andy and #5, Delpo.
Some one-sided match-ups include: Fed 17-0 versus Ferrer; Novak 25-3 versus Berdych, and Murray 14-2 versus Tsonga.

Wow didn't realitze it was that bad. Wonder why it's such a bad matchup for Tomas

 

[Russeljones]

Nothing on your methodology? Where are Roddick and Davydenko? Nalbandian? Blake? Gonzalez?

 

[RaulRamirez]

Nothing on your methodology? Where are Roddick and Davydenko? Nalbandian? Blake? Gonzalez?

No particular methodology. Most of us know - without looking - how The Big 3 have fared versus one another head-to-head, so I thought I would play it out to see how they have done versus who I consider the Top 10 of the last 10-12 years (but for the full run of their careers). And then, I calculated all of their records. The guys you mentioned played/peaked a little before the emergence of The Big 3, although I did recalculate The Big 3's records with Roddick's inclusion. Perhaps, Hewitt was also on the early side.

I don't' draw any big conclusions from this data, other than what I mentioned above in one of my replies.

 

[CYGS]

With too much time on my hands, I compiled the head-2-head records of the players who are likely considered the Top 10 of the Fed-Rafa-Novak era.

Here are the results, assuming my stats and math are accurate:

Djokovic: 173-82 (67.8%)
Nadal: 152-74 (67.4%)
Federer: 156-88 (63.9%)
Murray: 87-81 (51.8%)
DelPotro: 43-69 (38.4%)

Wawrinka: 47-89 (34.6%)
Ferrer: 50-85 (34.5%)
Tsonga: 33-70 (32%)
Berdych 45-104 (30.2%)
Hewitt 20-46 (30%)

Any surprises? Any conclusions to be drawn?

Fedr is GOAT*

 

[ABCD]

No particular methodology. Most of us know - without looking - how The Big 3 have fared versus one another head-to-head, so I thought I would play it out to see how they have done versus who I consider the Top 10 of the last 10-12 years (but for the full run of their careers). And then, I calculated all of their records. The guys you mentioned played/peaked a little before the emergence of The Big 3, although I did recalculate The Big 3's records with Roddick's inclusion. Perhaps, Hewitt was also on the early side.

I don't' draw any big conclusions from this data, other than what I mentioned above in one of my replies.

Great work.

 

[ABCD]

Nothing on your methodology? Where are Roddick and Davydenko? Nalbandian? Blake? Gonzalez?

Not to mention where are Laver, Borg, Lendl, Sampras etc.

 

[CYGS]

With too much time on my hands, I compiled the head-2-head records of the players who are likely considered the Top 10 of the Fed-Rafa-Novak era.

Here are the results, assuming my stats and math are accurate:

Djokovic: 173-82 (67.8%)
Nadal: 152-74 (67.4%)
Federer: 156-88 (63.9%)
Murray: 87-81 (51.8%)
DelPotro: 43-69 (38.4%)

Wawrinka: 47-89 (34.6%)
Ferrer: 50-85 (34.5%)
Tsonga: 33-70 (32%)
Berdych 45-104 (30.2%)
Hewitt 20-46 (30%)

Any surprises? Any conclusions to be drawn?

Where is Cilic?

 

[RaulRamirez]

Not to mention where are Laver, Borg, Lendl, Sampras etc.

I thought of including Tilden, but once I saw that both Fed and Rafa were 0-0 versus Big Bill, I sensed a pattern.

 

[Russeljones]

No particular methodology. Most of us know - without looking - how The Big 3 have fared versus one another head-to-head, so I thought I would play it out to see how they have done versus who I consider the Top 10 of the last 10-12 years (but for the full run of their careers). And then, I calculated all of their records. The guys you mentioned played/peaked a little before the emergence of The Big 3, although I did recalculate The Big 3's records with Roddick's inclusion. Perhaps, Hewitt was also on the early side.

I don't' draw any big conclusions from this data, other than what I mentioned above in one of my replies.

Most of you arbitrarily cherry-pick years for quasi-analysis and make no effort to conceal it, agreed.

 

[ABCD]

With too much time on my hands, I compiled the head-2-head records of the players who are likely considered the Top 10 of the Fed-Rafa-Novak era.

Here are the results, assuming my stats and math are accurate:

Djokovic: 173-82 (67.8%)
Nadal: 152-74 (67.4%)
Federer: 156-88 (63.9%)
Murray: 87-81 (51.8%)
DelPotro: 43-69 (38.4%)

Wawrinka: 47-89 (34.6%)
Ferrer: 50-85 (34.5%)
Tsonga: 33-70 (32%)
Berdych 45-104 (30.2%)
Hewitt 20-46 (30%)

Any surprises? Any conclusions to be drawn?

You can just establish top 10 more scientifically. Take it from last 12 years average year rankings and find out who were 10 highest ranking players.

 

[ABCD]

Most of you arbitrarily cherry-pick years for quasi-analysis and make no effort to conceal it, agreed.

Feel free to do your own analysis and post it here. You criticise someone who made an effort.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Cilic and Roddick should be on the list, not Hewitt.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Most of you arbitrarily cherry-pick years for quasi-analysis and make no effort to conceal it, agreed.

I think your typically grouchy tone is (as usual) unwarranted. There are some areas where Djokovic would lead Federer believe it or not and it is not an agenda if that happens to be the case here. It is an interesting stat. I mean did you not create a thread that was a "hypothetical H2H" between Nadal and Federer counting wins for Federer if "Nadal didn't make it to face him"? That is a far greater instance of "cherry picking" with no effort to conceal it lol. Even so, I thought that thread was interesting.

I agree Roddick should be included, however as pointed out perhaps Cilic should have as well. Also, some of the earlier players that Federer dominated may not have had enough meetings against Nadal and especially Djokovic for a meaningful comparison.

 

[RaulRamirez]

Where is Cilic?

I thought of him. My second thought was that Ferrer, Berdych and Tsonga were factors for more years during the last 10-12 years or so. The Big 3 have owned Cilic to different degrees: Fed 9-1, Rafa 602 and Novak 15-2.

 

[Sudacafan]

With too much time on my hands, I compiled the head-2-head records of the players who are likely considered the Top 10 of the Fed-Rafa-Novak era.

Here are the results, assuming my stats and math are accurate:

Djokovic: 173-82 (67.8%)
Nadal: 152-74 (67.4%)
Federer: 156-88 (63.9%)
Murray: 87-81 (51.8%)
DelPotro: 43-69 (38.4%)

Wawrinka: 47-89 (34.6%)
Ferrer: 50-85 (34.5%)
Tsonga: 33-70 (32%)
Berdych 45-104 (30.2%)
Hewitt 20-46 (30%)

Any surprises? Any conclusions to be drawn?

No surprises.

 

[RaulRamirez]

You can just establish top 10 more scientifically. Take it from last 12 years average year rankings and find out who were 10 highest ranking players.

True, but there's no ideal way, and if I did a 12-year range, why not 14 or 15, or maybe 8 or 9?
There are readily attainable stats as to how players have fared versus the Top 10 (at time of meeting), but that would kill less time (said partially in jest).

Again - one easy conclusion: Fed, Rafa and Novak have been well above the rest, including Murray, who still has been much more consistent than the rest.

 

[CYGS]

I thought of him. My second thought was that Ferrer, Berdych and Tsonga were factors for more years during the last 10-12 years or so. The Big 3 have owned Cilic to different degrees: Fed 9-1, Rafa 602 and Novak 15-2.

How about H2H against active slam winners?

 

[ABCD]

True, but there's no ideal way, and if I did a 12-year range, why not 14 or 15, or maybe 8 or 9?
There are readily attainable stats as to how players have fared versus the Top 10 (at time of meeting), but that would kill less time (said partially in jest).

Again - one easy conclusion: Fed, Rafa and Novak have been well above the rest, including Murray, who still has been much more consistent than the rest.

Fair enough. You have done a great job.

 

[RaulRamirez]

I thought of him. My second thought was that Ferrer, Berdych and Tsonga were factors for more years during the last 10-12 years or so. The Big 3 have owned Cilic to different degrees: Fed 9-1, Rafa 602 and Novak 15-2.

er...Rafa 6-2 versus Marin.

 

[RaulRamirez]

Fair enough. You have done a great job.

Thanks (and I hope my math has been accurate after all this.)

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Another criteria:

Who are the 7 players who met the big3 most times?

 

[True Fanerer]

With Roddick, Davydenko,Nalbandian, Blake, and Gonzalez added

Federer 229-103 69%
Djokovic 192-92 68%
Nadal 181-90 67%

Feel free to correct my math. Mistakes can be made.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

With Roddick, Davydenko,Nalbandian, Blake, and Gonzalez added

Federer 229-103 69%
Djokovic 192-92 68%
Nadal 181-90 67%

Feel free to correct my math. Mistakes can be made.

at least add Cilic too

 

[CYGS]

With Roddick, Davydenko,Nalbandian, Blake, and Gonzalez added

Federer 229-103 69%
Djokovic 192-92 68%
Nadal 181-90 67%

Feel free to correct my math. Mistakes can be made.

How about adding everyone? DJOKODAL still ahead.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Another criteria:

Who are the 7 players who met the big3 most times?

Murray 85
Berdych 77
Ferrer 69
Wawrinka 68
Del Potro 61
Tsonga 51
Gasquet 49
Hewitt 45
Monfils 44
Youzhny 44
Roddick 43
Verdasco 40
Cilic 35

 

[True Fanerer]

at least add Cilic too

H2h vs Cilic

9-1 Federer
15-2 Djokovic
6-2 Nadal

Federer 238-104 69.6%
Djokovic 207-94 68.8%
Nadal 187-92 67.02%

 

[True Fanerer]

How about adding everyone? DJOKODAL still ahead.

This is true yet they are all within 1% of each other and Federer has played around 400 more matches than Djokovic and around 300 more than Nadal give or take.

 

[NoleFam]

Good job OP but Hewitt doesn't really belong there. I would put Cilic there over him.

 

[Nadal_Django]

Why I'm not surprised that the Federer fanboys have their "own" stats. Lol

 

[CYGS]

Why I'm not surprised that the Federer fanboys have their "own" stats. Lol

That's when you know the h2h still gets under their skin, despite what they claim.

 

[KINGROGER]

Why I'm not surprised that the Federer fanboys have their "own" stats. Lol

No different to these cherry picked stats, no?

 

[mike danny]

With too much time on my hands, I compiled the head-2-head records of the players who are likely considered the Top 10 of the Fed-Rafa-Novak era.

Here are the results, assuming my stats and math are accurate:

Djokovic: 173-82 (67.8%)
Nadal: 152-74 (67.4%)
Federer: 156-88 (63.9%)
Murray: 87-81 (51.8%)
DelPotro: 43-69 (38.4%)

Wawrinka: 47-89 (34.6%)
Ferrer: 50-85 (34.5%)
Tsonga: 33-70 (32%)
Berdych 45-104 (30.2%)
Hewitt 20-46 (30%)

Any surprises? Any conclusions to be drawn?

Curious why Roddick wasn't added, while Tsonga, Berdych, Ferrer and Delpo were.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

It's easy:

Big3 own anyone.

Murray owns anyone except big3.

Djokovic and Nadal have an edge in big3/4 h2h.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

I'll be more clear:

Big4 own anyone.

h2h between big4:

djokovic 77-58
nadal 65-50
federer 51-59
murray 30-56

 

[CYGS]

I'll be more clear:

Big4 own anyone.

h2h between big4:

djokovic 77-58
nadal 65-50
federer 51-59
murray 30-56

Fedr is GOAT*

 

[Deleted member 307496]

No particular methodology. Most of us know - without looking - how The Big 3 have fared versus one another head-to-head, so I thought I would play it out to see how they have done versus who I consider the Top 10 of the last 10-12 years (but for the full run of their careers). And then, I calculated all of their records. The guys you mentioned played/peaked a little before the emergence of The Big 3, although I did recalculate The Big 3's records with Roddick's inclusion. Perhaps, Hewitt was also on the early side.

I don't' draw any big conclusions from this data, other than what I mentioned above in one of my replies.

Hewitt's top 10 winning percentage isn't far off Murray, I think it's 47% or something there other. Lew posted it before. So slightly below Murray.

But certainly in his ballpark.

 

[NatF]

With too much time on my hands, I compiled the head-2-head records of the players who are likely considered the Top 10 of the Fed-Rafa-Novak era.

Here are the results, assuming my stats and math are accurate:

Djokovic: 173-82 (67.8%)
Nadal: 152-74 (67.4%)
Federer: 156-88 (63.9%)
Murray: 87-81 (51.8%)
DelPotro: 43-69 (38.4%)

Wawrinka: 47-89 (34.6%)
Ferrer: 50-85 (34.5%)
Tsonga: 33-70 (32%)
Berdych 45-104 (30.2%)
Hewitt 20-46 (30%)

Any surprises? Any conclusions to be drawn?

Hewitt was done as a top player after 2005, Roddick might be a good option but he doesn't really fall into the Djokovic era - so maybe Cilic.

 

[Russeljones]

I think your typically grouchy tone is (as usual) unwarranted. There are some areas where Djokovic would lead Federer believe it or not and it is not an agenda if that happens to be the case here. It is an interesting stat. I mean did you not create a thread that was a "hypothetical H2H" between Nadal and Federer counting wins for Federer if "Nadal didn't make it to face him"? That is a far greater instance of "cherry picking" with no effort to conceal it lol. Even so, I thought that thread was interesting.

I agree Roddick should be included, however as pointed out perhaps Cilic should have as well. Also, some of the earlier players that Federer dominated may not have had enough meetings against Nadal and especially Djokovic for a meaningful comparison.

Nadal and Federer's rivalry has that aspect, rarely discussed as it may be. Your inferral that this "comparison" is in any way similar is intellectually dishonest. What was blatantly missing in the OP (and thus spurring me to remark) was any type of disclaimer referencing the exclusion of numbers from some of Federer's best years. This, too, is intellectually dishonest. On the whole of it, nothing new, but even stylistically this latest attempt to prop up Novak's ATG credentials is a disappointment.

Happy to read your lamentations on the forever unjust pro-Fed posse.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Nadal and Federer's rivalry has that aspect, rarely discussed as it may be. Your inferral that this "comparison" is in any way similar is intellectually dishonest. What was blatantly missing in the OP (and thus spurring me to remark) was any type of disclaimer referencing the exclusion of numbers from some of Federer's best years. This, too, is intellectually dishonest. On the whole of it, nothing new, but even stylistically this latest attempt to prop up Novak's ATG credentials is a disappointment.

Happy to read your lamentations on the forever unjust pro-Fed posse.

Sort of unreal irony considering how you came in this thread.

Have a nice day.

 

[Ann]

Any conclusions to be drawn?

 

[RaulRamirez]

Curious why Roddick wasn't added, while Tsonga, Berdych, Ferrer and Delpo were.

I updated for Roddick, but keep in mind he last met with any of them in early 2012.