Was Federer a more consistent player across surfaces than Djokovic????? (and Nadal ofc). STATS say so??


Hall of Fame
Shout out to this interesting analysis from Reddit. Thought it would be worth getting The TTW Treatment.

Notice the beautiful flatness of Frederick's line compared to Djokovic's humpy hill and Nadal's "things can only get better" slope. GOAT material?


(am accepting submissions for what "The TTW Treatment" means)


Hall of Fame
Until I hear a decent counterargument to this graphic, I'm taking it as proof that Federer is in fact Earth's Mightiest Warrior. No joke.


Hall of Fame
i find it incredibly hard to believe Federer has a higher slow court win % than Djokovic. What is considered a slow court?


Bionic Poster
LOL. What is decided to be at those speeds, exactly? Wouldn't you say that Hamburg was the slowest clay-court, being damper and heavier in its conditions?
It was pointed out that the extremes of the graphic were based on small sample sizes so obviously the skew might be exaggerrated for Djoko there.

I think the points brought up in the article were much more interesting than the graphic. Djokovic tuning his game in for control and having bigger margins compared to Fedal, but that puts him at a match-up disadvantage against a certain type of players. Whenever we'd talk here about how complete a player is, Federer's one-hander would be brought up without fail as a stroke that made him vulnerable, even if 99% of that vulnerability was against Nadal on clay. Very rarely was anything along the lines of "With his more extreme grips and board-like frame, what Djokovic can struggle with at times is generating pace or being dynamic off low and slow balls, and this is exactly the kind of player he sometimes struggles with" mentioned. Apparently that can also at least in part explain why he has a worse record on very slow courts.

To my mind, from a visual non-technical angle, Federer's game always seemed the most balanced and versatile, suitable for different conditions and different opponents (with the single major exception). This article kind of enforces that view for me.


Talk Tennis Guru
What's considered very slow? Monte Carlo? Djokovic has a higher winning percentage there. We know the difference in Rome. Looks incomplete or inaccurate.


Hall of Fame
okay so there are only 2 type of courts where he is better than Djokovic out of 7 court types. You can tell me now - who is more consistent.
okay so there are only 2 type of courts where he is better than Djokovic out of 7 court types. You can tell me now - who is more consistent.
A better word would be balanced or versatile. The graph shows that Federer's results didn't vary as significantly as Djokovic's across different court speeds. If the data was accurate and based on adequate sample sizes, it could point to Federer's success being the least dependent on particular surface speeds. The problem is that there's probably not enough data for a couple speed categories there so the graph will be skewed.
Unfortunately the graph still does not look great for Federer. Djokovic's ankles and head flop beneath Federer, but he looks like he is lying almost entirely on top of him otherwise, like he is f*cking him up the ass or something, which just his head and ankles falling beneath at either end while doing it.

Nadal is funny how he diagonally crosses both from far below to far above at an acute angle though.


Worse in what regard? Fed has better overall strokes than Djokovic and is better on a majority of slams
Look at Mahatma post I referred to... Novak is better in 5/7 categories, so fed is consistently worst...

Lol, no...

No, and I mean, must I explain why that not true? Simple facts everyone knows here...