Two takeaways. Djokovic's triumph at the Olympics has been further enhanced. Alcaraz has surpassed and is clearly better than Federer on clay.

Oceans II

Oceans II

Professional
Alcaraz 2x reigning RG champion, reigning Rome champion and reigning MC champion + Musetti (arguably the 4th/5th best player on natural surfaces) + Nadal + Tsitsipas.
Titles clearly in Alcaraz's favour. Plus has now defeated Sinner multiple times, Djokodal b2b + Zverev, etc.

Discuss.
 
Alcaraz played two flat tiebreakers in the OF final, there was none of the big moment magic that we have become accustomed to. Djoker was in lockdown mode in both. Perhaps the OG bring a different level of pressure to slams.

As for Federer comparisons, who knows. If he didn’t have the clay goat with a perfectly built game for the surface in his way, he would almost certainly won a bunch of FOs
 
Must be nice for this to not be on the other side of the net:

170515144204-rafa-nadal-french-open-2007.jpg
 
Carlos by 23 will have maybe 3 rg and fed was just making his first semi final at 24. No nadal excuse in that as well.

Some players are built different. Carlos is born for clay, his speed , agility (fast twich backhand and forehand in corner).

Fed even in his peak looks uncomfortable in corners and his best strokes are serve and forehand when his feet are planted, inside out for sure a big weapon , on backhand? Fed is not even close to carlos. on return ? nope again not close.
 
Carlos is better than Federer on clay when comparing ages, absolutely.

Federer was a few months shy of turning 24 when he reached his first semi final at the French Open Carlos is already a 2 time defending champion and only 22.

I do believe without Nadal in the way Federer would have 6-7 French Open titles (if we assume history continued as it did), and a whole bunch of clay masters titles outside of Hamburg/Madrid.

To be honest I don't have the energy to argue the point any further than that though.
 
what federer has is the perfect excuse of facing nadal in the same era. But just like djokovic in 2015, when nadal was out in 2009, fed went on 2 five set benders in 2009 and barely won that title.

i think djokovic is also worse than carlos on clay and no nadal excuse works there as well. he has lost to nadal but was barely competitive by age 24 on clay vs nadal. raz is dominating clay for 2 years now despite being absent in 3 masters in 2024/2025
 
When we are talking about Sinneraz being better than Rafa at clay, how does Fedovix even enter the conversation??

BTW OP, Federer is retired for 4 years now and he seems to haunt you to this day.
 
TennisTurkey said:
Alcaraz played two flat tiebreakers in the OF final, there was none of the big moment magic that we have become accustomed to. Djoker was in lockdown mode in both. Perhaps the OG bring a different level of pressure to slams.

As for Federer comparisons, who knows. If he didn’t have the clay goat with a perfectly built game for the surface in his way, he would almost certainly won a bunch of FOs
Click to expand...

No to mention it was best of 3. Make that OG final best of 5 and who knows. After all, he was 2 sets down yesterday as well and more handedly too.
 
Fed in corners looked just as awkward if not MORE as sinner yesterday. sure sinner is specimen and can hit any shot in corners today and if i factor in the game improvements since mid 2000s to mid 2020s , fed was that guy in 2000s.

he was fast but not fast enough compared to someone like nadal. he was able to grind but not as well as someone like nadal. even if nadal was gone and some OTHER low tier clay great was born, he would take at least a couple slams away from fed in this time.

what people do is take the greatest clay courter nadal out and then give fed all the titles while not understanding, taking nadal out , the field would spew out someone else.
 
sinner yesterday was playing at his a+ level to keep with raz a level i think
in tiebreak raz showed this 10-2

same thing fed did in 2006/2007 where he was playing at his a+ level , which actually very error prone , go back and check his forehand is trash going UE after UE

so fed went a+ to stay with nadal then , i am not sure if that is even nadal a level , definitely not 2005 nadal, but yes by 2007 nadal was reaching the unbeatable level on clay .
 
Oceans II said:
Alcaraz 2x reigning RG champion, reigning Rome champion and reigning MC champion + Musetti (arguably the 4th/5th best player on natural surfaces) + Nadal + Tsitsipas.
Titles clearly in Alcaraz's favour. Plus has now defeated Sinner multiple times, Djokodal b2b + Zverev, etc.

Discuss.
Click to expand...
No question Djokovic was the greatest best of 3 sets player ever. However yesterday showed had the Olympic final been best of 5 As it should be, Alcaraz would have won. I did say that at the time
 
you guys have everything at your disposal today , go back and check how many forehand errors our dear ROGIE made in those matches.
 
Kralingen said:
Amazing match is played, the best Slam final of the decade and one of the best RG matches ever.

TTW: how can I use this to support my agenda?
Click to expand...
But even that agenda fails as surely it goes to show Alcaraz would have won the Olympic final had it been best of five sets and surely there is getting the point where There will have to be a separation of goat chat between best of 3 and best of 5 set formats.
 
nolefam_2024 said:
what federer has is the perfect excuse of facing nadal in the same era. But just like djokovic in 2015, when nadal was out in 2009, fed went on 2 five set benders in 2009 and barely won that title.

i think djokovic is also worse than carlos on clay and no nadal excuse works there as well. he has lost to nadal but was barely competitive by age 24 on clay vs nadal. raz is dominating clay for 2 years now despite being absent in 3 masters in 2024/2025
Click to expand...
Federer is underrated as a 1x RG champ, but Djokovic is also underrated as a 3x RG champ. Djokovic met the clay god 10 times in RG, and he has been beating Alcaraz on the biggest clay stages. Djokovic is not worse than Alcaraz on clay, accounting for competition. I think he would have beaten Alcaraz in the final.
 
zagor said:
My main takeaway is that it seems Fed had a bigger impact on tennis than I realized.

Dude has been retired since 2022 yet he's still the main focus of comparison even for 2000 genners for some reason.
Click to expand...
That means we have been very wronged with Federer fans and the claims that he was such a great clay courter.

It means a chink in his armour.

To compare and surpass is point of sports. This doesn't mean we can't live without the olds or they are somehow greater just for being compared. We also compare thiem zverev for the worse slam finals choke and coria

That doesn't mean coria is great , but there is an apt comparison to be made .

Hope this clears things up. In the end , we are not all going to see things similar but we should have at least common minimum outlook
 
Oceans II said:
Alcaraz 2x reigning RG champion, reigning Rome champion and reigning MC champion + Musetti (arguably the 4th/5th best player on natural surfaces) + Nadal + Tsitsipas.
Titles clearly in Alcaraz's favour. Plus has now defeated Sinner multiple times, Djokodal b2b + Zverev, etc.

Discuss.
Click to expand...
Get the opportunity to see a match like one we saw and immediate reaction: Djokovic Djokovic Djokovic dump on Federer dump on Federer.

Sad.
 
Let's face it.

At last myself will keep bringing the big 3 deification down as much as possible.

I think raz is better than Djokovic on clay who is better than Federer on clay.

Raz might become third best undoubtedly on clay soon. Soon how soon? In 4 years by the time he is 26 only.

You know where Federer was at 26? 2008 rg was just finished. No way that fed with 0 rg and what 6 clay titles ? Would be anywhere near raz by 2029.

Where Djokovic was at 26? Rg 2013 had just finished. Djokovic was in single final and was not even close to where he is today.

Raz will simply eliminate the discussion by the time he is 26 (rg 2029).
 
Keep pushing the ledger more and more into red.

I think the same guys who make fun of big 3 comparison to raz would have made fun of big 3 comparison to pete when they didn't have big numbers.

It's the law of the land. You see naked truth but think past was definitely better.

Was past better ? In some cases. But if stats are clearly indicating to something then stop lying to yourself.
 
ppma said:
30 yo fed vs peaking djo be like:
99016f70c57a9abfcbb314782e272b67fbe70f6b.gifv
Click to expand...
29* years old. You can't apply the age excuse to someone in his 20s.

It was the best ever performance of Federer at RG along with 2007. Thus, he was at his best in that tournament.
 
zagor said:
It is strange, isn't it.
Click to expand...
For some it's not enough that Novak beat his totals - they want to change the way people "feel" about Federer and alter his legacy.

But we know what his legacy is.

When people look for an adjective to describe something amazing in tennis they reach for "Federesque." He's the marker.

It doesn't mean he's the greatest. It doesn't mean there weren't faults in his game. It doesn't mean there weren't matches he should have won but didn't. It doesn't mean Alcaraz won't turn out to be better on clay, even if you think he isn't already.

But all the shouting about 40/15 and the endless attempts to denigrate everything he ever achieved mean nothing to your normal non-agenda tennis fan or even your casual sports watcher. It's not what they see in their minds when they hear the word "Federer".
 
Retrospective enhancing of titles doesn't make any sense, so let's not even start with that. Or else we could go back in history and upgrade/downgrade loads of titles based on what happened later on.

Yeah I guess Alcaraz has surpassed Federer in terms of clay results, but we all know that it's because of a Spaniard whose name isn't Carlos. Federer on clay should not be underestimated. I mean, beating Novak in 2011 and taking the opening set 6-1 against 2006 Rafa demonstrates that he could definitely play at a high level on RG. Just too bad none of those finals against Nadal went his way, or at least to a fifth set.
 
Comparing eras... Why bother? Carlos has little clay competition. Nadal had little clay competition. Nadal was a far better clay courter than Alcaraz. He was Federer's gatekeeper. Who is Alcaraz' gatekeeper? Sinner? Musetti? Ziraffe? Oldovic? I don't think the comparison works.
 
merwy said:
Retrospective enhancing of titles doesn't make any sense, so let's not even start with that. Or else we could go back in history and upgrade/downgrade loads of titles based on what happened later on.

Yeah I guess Alcaraz has surpassed Federer in terms of clay results, but we all know that it's because of a Spaniard whose name isn't Carlos. Federer on clay should not be underestimated. I mean, beating Novak in 2011 and taking the opening set 6-1 against 2006 Rafa demonstrates that he could definitely play at a high level on RG. Just too bad none of those finals against Nadal went his way, or at least to a fifth set.
Click to expand...
Federer is near rock bottom of top 10 clay players in open era. We are estimating him. Neither under or over estimating.

Raz might be near top 2 with nadal or top 3 with Borg and Nadal. So that is the estimation. Again neither under or over estimating.
 
Let's put numbers to this game.

Only 4th guy in open era to win all big clay titles
Only 7th? guy in open era to defend the titles
12th title on clay
6th big title on clay
Third best clay win % of all time right beneath Nadal and Borg
Third youngest to win 20 matches at rg. Ahead of guga and wilander.

Two of the last 3 years winning 61% games on clay.
Federer btw has only 1 such year in 2005. Where he barely played his rival Nadal who was turning 19. So best of fed on clay met Nadal as a 18/19 year old.


N

Post in thread 'ATGs and 60% years , including streaks'

Looking at clay, there are 51 player's seasons who had 60+ game win % on clay since 1990. This is 18 more than on HC.
Coincidentally there are 17 player's seasons with game % between 60 and 60.99. So removing those we get 34 almost like on HC.

Taking minimum of 10 matches as even Nadal has had only 10 matches in COVID 20.

PlayerYearGame Won %Matches played
Courier199262.2619
Courier199364.3113
Bruguera199361.2353
...
  • Like


Pure numbers push raz ahead of fed even today. What we are left with is the oh he didn't beat Nadal thing. Well Federer base level was not high enough in the first place. It's great to reach top 10 in open era for sure.
 
Djokovic makes the list just 5 times but that is more than anyone else.

Courier, Bruguera, Muster, Coria, Ferrer and Alcaraz all made the list multiple times.

Agassi, Federer, Berdych made the list 1 time

So Federer is definitely above Agassi level but his stats say otherwise. It's not all Nadal centric as well. He was just worse on this surface than a true clay genius like raz and you shouldn't feel bad about it .
 
I am sorry Carlos failed to hit 61% this year and ended at 60.4%.

This means till now both he and fed have just 1 season with over 61% games won. Hopefully next year he will have the second.
 
Hitman said:
OP, let it go.
Click to expand...
But why should we let it go..this is a logical post.

Raz is better than fed on clay so just because you want peace , we should say nothing?

If we can prove the pts with fact then we should definitely. But if not then maybe this makes less sense like the sinner cygs crowd..
 
messiahrobins said:
No question Djokovic was the greatest best of 3 sets player ever. However yesterday showed had the Olympic final been best of 5 As it should be, Alcaraz would have won. I did say that at the time
Click to expand...
no,

it was the dumbest analysis i ever saw!

1. that raz won over sinner after 0-2 can not mean that he would do it over nole. sinner lost to nole at W after 2-0. nole is mental toughest player in history. sinner is not.

2. nole won best of 5 seter vs raz at AO this season!

3. nole won vs raz at RG23

4. about mental toughness, nole saved MP vs raz to win IW final (and he won 17 times saving MPs while he lost only 4 times wasting MPs and never at slams)

5. raz is 8-4 vs sinner but only 3-5 vs nole!

6. raz lost just 2 big finals in his career, both to nole!
 
The problem is that there are no "facts".

Their respective statistics/numbers were against different field of players.
 
mattennis said:
The problem is that there are no "facts".

Their respective statistics/numbers were against different field of players.
Click to expand...
Exactly. So use your arguments as well

Instead of saying if not Nadal fed wins 5 rg. Why are we removing Nadal completely. If not Nadal then between 2003 to 2011 there are barely Djokovic 2008/berdych 2010/delpo 2008/coria 2003/2004 who are at top most level on clay.

Do any of them look to you as tough as sinner in 2025?

Remove Nadal ok but then replace him with at least 2/3 tough guys like sinner and Carlos at the same time. Will we do that?

How many clay titles did Federer win beating Djokovic and wawrinka back to back on clay? These are the names I got off the top of my head.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top