Unexplainable Federer-Djokovic H2H findings. Please advise

[Kralingen]

Check this out:

2007-09 Federer-Djokovic in Bo3: Djokovic 4 wins, Federer 3 wins

2014-15 Federer-Djokovic in Bo3: Federer 5 wins, Djokovic 4 wins+W/O

Yes you heard that right. in BO3, Prime Federer had a losing H2H with baby Glutenvic who was retiring and getting owned by Andy Roddick, from '07-09.

And not to be outdone, in BO3 Prime/peak Djokovic had a losing H2H with old Retirederer who is claimed to be eligible for pension, from '14-15.

Someone please help. This makes literally zero sense whatsoever. I can't grasp it no matter how hard I try. How is it possible? These aren’t just Mickey Mouse losses either, mainly Masters.

Caveat is: Fed went 4-1 in Slams in ‘07-09 and Djokovic went 4-0 in Slams from ‘14-16. Of course, this is important. But how could the Bo3 head to head be BETTER for the player out of their prime than it is for the prime player?

Spoiler: Matches

2009	Basel Switzerland	Indoor Hard	F	Novak Djokovic	64 46 62
2009	ATP Masters 1000 Cincinnati OH, U.S.A.	Outdoor Hard	F	Roger Federer	61 75
2009	ATP Masters 1000 Rome Italy	Outdoor Clay	SF	Novak Djokovic	46 63 63
2009	ATP Masters 1000 Miami FL, U.S.A.	Outdoor Hard	SF	Novak Djokovic	36 62 63
2008	ATP Masters 1000 Monte Carlo Monaco	Outdoor Clay	SF	Roger Federer	63 32 RET
2007	ATP Masters 1000 Canada Canada	Outdoor Hard	F	Novak Djokovic	762 26 762
2007	Dubai U.A.E.	Outdoor Hard	QF	Roger Federer	63 676 63
			Djoko wins	4
			Federer wins	3

2015	ATP Finals Great Britain	Indoor Hard	F	Novak Djokovic	63 64
2015	ATP Finals Great Britain	Indoor Hard	RR	Roger Federer	75 62
2015	ATP Masters 1000 Cincinnati OH, U.S.A.	Outdoor Hard	F	Roger Federer	761 63
2015	ATP Masters 1000 Rome Italy	Outdoor Clay	F	Novak Djokovic	64 63
2015	ATP Masters 1000 Indian Wells CA, U.S.A.	Outdoor Hard	F	Novak Djokovic	63 675 62
2015	Dubai U.A.E.	Outdoor Hard	F	Roger Federer	63 75
2014	ATP Masters 1000 Shanghai China	Outdoor Hard	SF	Roger Federer	64 64
2014	ATP Masters 1000 Monte Carlo Monaco	Outdoor Clay	SF	Roger Federer	75 62
2014	ATP Masters 1000 Indian Wells CA, U.S.A.	Outdoor Hard	F	Novak Djokovic	36 63 763
2014	Dubai U.A.E.	Outdoor Hard	SF	Roger Federer	36 63 62
			Djoko wins	4
			Federer wins	5

 

[TripleATeam]

They probably just offset the anomaly with some hypothetical H2H matches.

 

[InsideOut900]

Some of Fed's M1000 losses in 2007-2009 are roflmao tier indeed, not just to Novak.

But well, since he was still rocking in Slams he could afford it.
Later on he started having random losses in BO5, so BO3 performance became more relevant again.

 

[MichaelNadal]

All I know is that Shanghai 2014 was beautiful. He was slicing and dicing Novak like a McDonald's onion

 

[NatF]

Majoring in minors.

 

[Sentinel]

Monofed losing to glutenvic ?
Not surprising.

What about the bo5 ?

AO 08 monofed lost. Can't remember the others. He was losing left right and centre.

 

[Russeljones]

Check this out:

2007-09 Federer-Djokovic in Bo3: Djokovic 4 wins, Federer 3 wins

2014-15 Federer-Djokovic in Bo3: Federer 5 wins, Djokovic 4 wins+W/O

Yes you heard that right. in BO3, Prime Federer had a losing H2H with baby Glutenvic who was retiring and getting owned by Andy Roddick, from '07-09.

And not to be outdone, in BO3 Prime/peak Djokovic had a losing H2H with old Retirederer who is claimed to be eligible for pension, from '14-15.

Someone please help. This makes literally zero sense whatsoever. I can't grasp it no matter how hard I try. How is it possible? These aren’t just Mickey Mouse losses either, mainly Masters.

Caveat is: Fed went 4-1 in Slams in ‘07-09 and Djokovic went 4-0 in Slams from ‘14-16. Of course, this is important. But how could the Bo3 head to head be BETTER for the player out of their prime than it is for the prime player?

Spoiler: Matches

2009	Basel Switzerland	Indoor Hard	F	Novak Djokovic	64 46 62
2009	ATP Masters 1000 Cincinnati OH, U.S.A.	Outdoor Hard	F	Roger Federer	61 75
2009	ATP Masters 1000 Rome Italy	Outdoor Clay	SF	Novak Djokovic	46 63 63
2009	ATP Masters 1000 Miami FL, U.S.A.	Outdoor Hard	SF	Novak Djokovic	36 62 63
2008	ATP Masters 1000 Monte Carlo Monaco	Outdoor Clay	SF	Roger Federer	63 32 RET
2007	ATP Masters 1000 Canada Canada	Outdoor Hard	F	Novak Djokovic	762 26 762
2007	Dubai U.A.E.	Outdoor Hard	QF	Roger Federer	63 676 63
			Djoko wins	4
			Federer wins	3

2015	ATP Finals Great Britain	Indoor Hard	F	Novak Djokovic	63 64
2015	ATP Finals Great Britain	Indoor Hard	RR	Roger Federer	75 62
2015	ATP Masters 1000 Cincinnati OH, U.S.A.	Outdoor Hard	F	Roger Federer	761 63
2015	ATP Masters 1000 Rome Italy	Outdoor Clay	F	Novak Djokovic	64 63
2015	ATP Masters 1000 Indian Wells CA, U.S.A.	Outdoor Hard	F	Novak Djokovic	63 675 62
2015	Dubai U.A.E.	Outdoor Hard	F	Roger Federer	63 75
2014	ATP Masters 1000 Shanghai China	Outdoor Hard	SF	Roger Federer	64 64
2014	ATP Masters 1000 Monte Carlo Monaco	Outdoor Clay	SF	Roger Federer	75 62
2014	ATP Masters 1000 Indian Wells CA, U.S.A.	Outdoor Hard	F	Novak Djokovic	36 63 763
2014	Dubai U.A.E.	Outdoor Hard	SF	Roger Federer	36 63 62
			Djoko wins	4
			Federer wins	5

I think Federer had already put his slam-chaser hat on. You can chalk some losses to Murray off to that along with others.

 

[Sentinel]

Majoring in minors.

Lol. That's what @AngieB used to say iirc.

 

[Nadal_Django]

Those findings are really unexplainable, sure.

 

[Beerus]

A wise man once said that Masters are completely irrelevant in the debate. Maybe Masters are just the better looking Mickey Mouse tournaments.

 

[ChrisRF]

Federer was horrible outside the Slams in 08/09. And that already started in 07 to some degree and was the first sign of going back from total dominance to kind of "normality".

In 14/15 on the other hand Best of 3 was Federer's bread and butter while he seemingly had some mental issues with Best of 5. However, his wins are all legit, because at least in 2015 Djokovic tried to dominate everywhere and to win every tournament he entered.

 

[spottishwood]

A wise man once said that Masters are completely irrelevant in the debate. Maybe Masters are just the better looking Mickey Mouse tournaments.

500s look better.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

 

[jl809]

This is the problem a lot of Fed fans in particular run into on this site when they treat matchups and level as being a linear thing. They’d argue that 07-09 Fed was a better player than 14-15 Fed and vice versa for Djokovic, but tennis hasn’t really worked like that irl. Just look at Murray’s record vs Federer too

 

[GabeT]

Fedovic has always been the closest of the Big 3 rivalries. Fed won the first 4 they played, and Novak has dominated Fed in later years. But in between it’s been very very close. After the first 4 losses they played 20 times between Canada 07 and 2011 USO and each won 10 of them

 

[RS]

A wise man once said that Masters are completely irrelevant in the debate. Maybe Masters are just the better looking Mickey Mouse tournaments.

TTW needs more masters threads.

 

[Kralingen]

Some of Fed's M1000 losses in 2007-2009 are roflmao tier indeed, not just to Novak.

But not these. Canada was in a final and went to two TBs, it’s not like Fed just mailed in a 3rd rounder like he did with Cañas. Mugiami was a mugfest for sure, but Rome a week before Fed’s first and only Roland Garros win? And don’t try to tell me that Djoko winning Basel was just an exho to Fraud. That’s the most important tournament on his entire schedule.

same with Novak. Dubai/Shanghai maybe not that important but the Monte Carlo, Cincy, and ATP finals RR losses were relevant.

But well, since he was still rocking in Slams he could afford it.
Later on he started having random losses in BO5, so BO3 performance became more relevant again.

This is what probably explains it. I mean the lopsided Slam H2H clearly favors the better player here.

the real question I’m asking here is how do we basically give a pass for guys in their prime not being motivated to play well in Bo3?

isn’t motivation and confidence a baseline requirement for success anywhere?

 

[NatF]

This is the problem a lot of Fed fans in particular run into on this site when they treat matchups and level as being a linear thing. They’d argue that 07-09 Fed was a better player than 14-15 Fed and vice versa for Djokovic, but tennis hasn’t really worked like that irl. Just look at Murray’s record vs Federer too

Top players tend to vary their intensity. The fact is Fed got his BO3 wins over Djokovic in 2014-2015 on the quicker courts as well which equalised some of the physical gap between them.

 

[Russeljones]

This is the problem a lot of Fed fans in particular run into on this site when they treat matchups and level as being a linear thing. They’d argue that 07-09 Fed was a better player than 14-15 Fed and vice versa for Djokovic, but tennis hasn’t really worked like that irl. Just look at Murray’s record vs Federer too

The problem is with people who only read about tennis matches years after they happened. They don't even read about the matches, they only see who the winner is in some obscure Wikipedia column. When you're a contemporary of it and you see the vast gulf in bo5 you know who is on top. I should have expected this. After #21, we will now have people telling us 2004-2007 was not only weak, it had an extremely strong Djokovic who tactically chose not to win majors just yet.

 

[InsideOut900]

the real question I’m asking here is how do we basically give a pass for guys in their prime not being motivated to play well in Bo3?

isn’t motivation and confidence a baseline requirement for success anywhere?

If you are a proper vulture like Fed you have to do it in BO5, not BO3.

Especially when your biggest rival is mostly injured or fatigued and you win 4 Slams between USO 08 and AO 10

 

[Russeljones]

Check this out:

2007-09 Federer-Djokovic in Bo3: Djokovic 4 wins, Federer 3 wins

2014-15 Federer-Djokovic in Bo3: Federer 5 wins, Djokovic 4 wins+W/O

Yes you heard that right. in BO3, Prime Federer had a losing H2H with baby Glutenvic who was retiring and getting owned by Andy Roddick, from '07-09.

And not to be outdone, in BO3 Prime/peak Djokovic had a losing H2H with old Retirederer who is claimed to be eligible for pension, from '14-15.

Someone please help. This makes literally zero sense whatsoever. I can't grasp it no matter how hard I try. How is it possible? These aren’t just Mickey Mouse losses either, mainly Masters.

Caveat is: Fed went 4-1 in Slams in ‘07-09 and Djokovic went 4-0 in Slams from ‘14-16. Of course, this is important. But how could the Bo3 head to head be BETTER for the player out of their prime than it is for the prime player?

Spoiler: Matches

2009	Basel Switzerland	Indoor Hard	F	Novak Djokovic	64 46 62
2009	ATP Masters 1000 Cincinnati OH, U.S.A.	Outdoor Hard	F	Roger Federer	61 75
2009	ATP Masters 1000 Rome Italy	Outdoor Clay	SF	Novak Djokovic	46 63 63
2009	ATP Masters 1000 Miami FL, U.S.A.	Outdoor Hard	SF	Novak Djokovic	36 62 63
2008	ATP Masters 1000 Monte Carlo Monaco	Outdoor Clay	SF	Roger Federer	63 32 RET
2007	ATP Masters 1000 Canada Canada	Outdoor Hard	F	Novak Djokovic	762 26 762
2007	Dubai U.A.E.	Outdoor Hard	QF	Roger Federer	63 676 63
			Djoko wins	4
			Federer wins	3

2015	ATP Finals Great Britain	Indoor Hard	F	Novak Djokovic	63 64
2015	ATP Finals Great Britain	Indoor Hard	RR	Roger Federer	75 62
2015	ATP Masters 1000 Cincinnati OH, U.S.A.	Outdoor Hard	F	Roger Federer	761 63
2015	ATP Masters 1000 Rome Italy	Outdoor Clay	F	Novak Djokovic	64 63
2015	ATP Masters 1000 Indian Wells CA, U.S.A.	Outdoor Hard	F	Novak Djokovic	63 675 62
2015	Dubai U.A.E.	Outdoor Hard	F	Roger Federer	63 75
2014	ATP Masters 1000 Shanghai China	Outdoor Hard	SF	Roger Federer	64 64
2014	ATP Masters 1000 Monte Carlo Monaco	Outdoor Clay	SF	Roger Federer	75 62
2014	ATP Masters 1000 Indian Wells CA, U.S.A.	Outdoor Hard	F	Novak Djokovic	36 63 763
2014	Dubai U.A.E.	Outdoor Hard	SF	Roger Federer	36 63 62
			Djoko wins	4
			Federer wins	5

PS: you can do the same with Pete Sampras. He was probably the first star tennis player who peaked and ebbed all around the majors. Some Olympians are like that too.

 

[Kralingen]

Top players tend to vary their intensity. The fact is Fed got his BO3 wins over Djokovic in 2014-2015 on the quicker courts as well which equalised some of the physical gap between them.

Rewatching those Shanghai and Cincy matches I’m starting to believe the conspiratorial Tennis_Hands “the ATP slowed down surfaces to make the Slam race competitive” argument. Although you could argue Djokovic maybe optimized his game for slower surfaces and would have adjusted if Slams played that fast.

 

[Kralingen]

PS: you can do the same with Pete Sampras. He was probably the first star tennis player who peaked and ebbed all around the majors. Some Olympians are like that too.

At least he had the thalassemia excuse, Fedovic are just lazy mugs

 

[Russeljones]

At least he had the thalassemia excuse, Fedovic are just lazy mugs

Well, imagine if someone else had that to worry about, or a Sjorgen's, we'd be hearing about that every press conference.

 

[aldeayeah]

After #21, we will now have people telling us 2004-2007 was not only weak, it had an extremely strong Djokovic who tactically chose not to win majors just yet.

2007 Djokovic was a extremely strong player, other than his occasional fitness issues.

hell if you unleash 2007 djokovic on the current field he probably wins a ton

 

[Russeljones]

hell if you unleash 2007 djokovic on the current field he probably wins a ton

We don't want to go down this path, do we?

 

[aldeayeah]

We don't want to go down this path, do we?

i mean hypothetical djokovic could use some help, it's always hypothetical fed getting the love

 

[Russeljones]

i mean hypothetical djokovic could use some help, it's always hypothetical fed getting the love

I was thinking about the morale of those upholding the current era as a not-so-weak-one.

 

[Garro]

In 2008-9 Roger was having all kinds of bad losses in Masters events, so that doesn't jump out so much.

Roger being ahead in 14-15 is more surprising, but to me says highlights that his slam problems against Novak have mostly been mental.
If I'm not mistaken I believe since 2010 they are tied 12-12 in best of 3 matches.

 

[Herald]

Another "unexplainable stat" is 11-6...

 

[Biotic]

In 2008-9 Roger was having all kinds of bad losses in Masters events, so that doesn't jump out so much.

Roger being ahead in 14-15 is more surprising, but to me says highlights that his slam problems against Novak have mostly been mental.
If I'm not mistaken I believe since 2010 they are tied 12-12 in best of 3 matches.

Yes, it had absolutely nothing to do with Novak being better at 15 USO than Cinci, or 14 Wimby than Shanghai...

 

[Garro]

Yes, it had absolutely nothing to do with Novak being better at 15 USO than Cinci, or 14 Wimby than Shanghai...

I just watched Shanghai 14 a few days ago and thought Novak played a very good match. That match is a strong contender for Roger's best of 2014.

2015 USO is a perfect example of Novak just being in Roger's head at that point. Roger won a higher % of return points than Novak did, and had a ton of missed breakpoint opportunities.
Very similar in that regard to Nadal at Wimbledon 7 years prior.

 

[Adv. Edberg]

Fedovic has always been the closest of the Big 3 rivalries. Fed won the first 4 they played, and Novak has dominated Fed in later years. But in between it’s been very very close. After the first 4 losses they played 20 times between Canada 07 and 2011 USO and each won 10 of them

you can’t really count the last 10 years though. Fed has been between old and semi retired during these years while Djoko has been in his prime mostly so not fair to count them

 

[Tennfan123]

Federer wouldn’t have been seen dead losing to Murray in a major final.

 

[I Am Finnish]

I think Eggerer rivalry is underrated

 

[TheNachoMan]

All I know is that Shanghai 2014 was beautiful. He was slicing and dicing Novak like a McDonald's onion

Cincinnati 2015 was a great performance too. Couldn’t turn it on when it mattered though

 

[TheNachoMan]

I think Eggerer rivalry is underrated

Djokodal >>> Fedovic >>> Fedal
Fedal is so overrated it’s unreal.

 

[Cabeza del Demonio]

All I know is that Shanghai 2014 was beautiful. He was slicing and dicing Novak like a McDonald's onion

That was an incredible performance. Cincinnati and Dubai 2015 were top quality from Federer as well. Just goes to show how evenly matched that rivalry was, where the winner was whoever could execute better on the day.

 

[Federev]

That was an incredible performance. Cincinnati and Dubai 2015 were top quality from Federer as well. Just goes to show how evenly matched that rivalry was, where the winner was whoever could execute better on the day.

Basic physiology.

Fed could not hang in slams w Novak after 2012 - not enough to win.

Too much physical demand for beating Novak once past his prime.

Post 30 reality hit Fed very hard against an ATG w the stamina Novak has at 6 years his Junior .

Pre 31 Fed was much better in slams v Novak.

It’s not rocket science.

Just science.

 

[Third Serve]

Djokodal >>> Fedovic >>> Fedal
Fedal is so overrated it’s unreal.

shame on you

 

[socallefty]

Maybe 3-setters are more of a crapshoot on who wins since the physicality is less.…

maybe Djokovic was very good early but his gluten problem made Slams too physical for him (except once when the stars aligned)…

maybe 2015 Federer was the best version of him as the man said himself…

maybe Federer won more on the fastest courts and their record varies depending on which courts they play on…

maybe players levels don’t fluctuate in a nice, gaussian way where they rise up to a peak and then decline…

maybe when you are dominating the Slams, you have less mental energy to be at the highest level and beat your main rivals in Bestof3 tournaments all year long…

maybe Federer’s BH had improved by 2015 to hang in more rallies against Novak, but by then his physicality had gone down too much to get it done against him in Bestof5…

maybe all of the above…or any combination of the above.

I don’t know much about what affects the level of pros - just speculating.

 

[Daniel Andrade]

Because people think that transitivity also applies to sports for some reason, but when level is similar nothing further from the truth

 

[TheNachoMan]

shame on you

Rome 06, WB 07, 08, AO 09 and RG 11 are the only great Fedal matches. AO 17 is quite overrated imo.

 

[Third Serve]

Rome 06, WB 07, 08, AO 09 and RG 11 are the only great Fedal matches. AO 17 is quite overrated imo.

You’ve got a statistically much higher probability of randomly drawing a good Fedal match out of their rivalry than the Djokovic-Nadal rivalry.

Like 63% of Djokovic-Nadal matches are straight-setters/retirements

 

[TheNachoMan]

You’ve got a statistically much higher probability of randomly drawing a good Fedal match out of their rivalry than the Djokovic-Nadal rivalry.

Like 63% of Djokovic-Nadal matches are straight-setters/retirements

Hamburg 08, Madrid 09, USO 10, IW 11, Miami 11, Rome 11, USO 11, AO 12, MC 13, RG 13, WB 18, RG 21, so many epics. Maybe I’m just biased though.

 

[GhostOfNKDM]

Since no one mentioned this yet - Roger played with two different racquets during the periods being compared.

Your guess is as good as mine but that had something to do with it don't you think?

 

[Subway Tennis]

I don’t think the results are too shocking given that Djo was already a very good player in that 2007-2009 time period. He was a major winner, a m1000 winner etc etc.

Djo played some of his best early career tennis against Federer and Federer played some of his best late career tennis against Djokovic.

They bring the best out in each other imo. It’s a matchup where the weaker guy (depending on the stage they were at in their career) still matched up well, was fired up to win because of the personality differences, and could also potentially get quite a big bump based on overall conditions / surface.

 

[abmk]

Rome 06, WB 07, 08, AO 09 and RG 11 are the only great Fedal matches. AO 17 is quite overrated imo.

firstly RG 07 better than RG 11.
AO 17 was also a great match
add in YEC 06 semi, Miami 05 final, MC 06 final (last 3 sets were excellent)

Hamburg 08, Madrid 09, USO 10, IW 11, Miami 11, Rome 11, USO 11, AO 12, MC 13, RG 13, WB 18, RG 21, so many epics. Maybe I’m just biased though.

this coming after your above one is just .......
MC 13? had one good set.
the only epics among the matches you mentioned are:
Hamburg 08, Madrid 09, Miami 11, AO 12, RG 13, WB 18
Rest are all good matches, nothing more.
Oly 08 should be there though.

 

[abmk]

@Third Serve @TheNachoMan

Close to good or better matches b/w Federer and Nadal:

Miami 05
RG 05
Dubai 06
MC 06
Rome 06
RG 06
Wim 06
TMC 06
RG 07
Wim 07
MC 08
Hamburg 08
Wim 08
AO 09
Madrid 09
YEC 10
Madrid 10
Madrid 11
RG 11
AO 12
Cincy 13
Basel 15
AO 17
Wim 19

that's 24/40 (the 2 in italics can be debated, but I included similar for Nadal/Djokovic) = 60%

Close to good or better matches b/w Nadal and Djokovic

Hamburg 08
RG 08
Queens 08
Beijing 08
MC 09
Rome 09
Madrid 09
USO 10
IW 11
Miami 11
Madrid 11
Rome 11
Wim 11
USO 11
AO 12
Rome 12
RG 12
RG 13
Canada 13
USO 13
RG 14
Rome 16
Wim 18
RG 21
RG 22

that's 25 (including 3 debatable ones in italics) out of 59 (42.37%)