Was Federer at a age/form disadvantage in his H2H vs Djokovic overall?

Was Federer at disadvantage in his H2H vs Djokovic?


  • Total voters
    137

Badasaplayer

New User
There's lot of age disadvantage in this h2h mainly because Djokovic is as good as federer and on top of it he had age advantage for 30 of their matches.
 

duaneeo

Legend
I wrote the below to a previous thread:

From 2006 - 2010, Federer and 'cub' Djokovic met 18 times. 12-6 Federer.

Keeping the timespan equal at 5 years (it's all about fairness, right?):

From 2011 - 2015, Djokovic and 'old' Federer met 26 times. 16-10 Djokovic.

The Federer-Djokovic h2h over 10 years from 2006 - 2015: 22-22

Since 2016, a disadvantage to Federer at a moderate amount.
 

vex

Legend
Not even a little. People wanna act like Prime Fed didn't get to run up the score on pre-prime Djokovic.
 

toth

Hall of Fame
I think usually the more than 5 years younger has advantage on the h2h...
The more matches after the oldest player peak years the worse h2h of course...
 

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
BeatleFan's comparison is completely legit. We are talking about another player that played deep into his career. Also, his crummy ranking at 38 years old only solidifies Beatlefan's point that it's tough to be great when you are old.

But Lendl started owning Connors well before he fell outside the top 100.
Here's the winning streak that Lendl had over Connors while Connors was highly ranked in chronological order(started with the earliest dates first):

#3 Lendl beat #2 Connors
#3 Lendl beat #2 Connors
#3 Lendl beat #2 Connors
#2 Lendl beat #3 Connors
#2 Lendl beat #3 Connors
#2 Lendl beat #4 Connors
#2 Lendl beat #4 Connors
#1 Lendl beat #4 Connors
#1 Lendl beat #4 Connors
#1 Lendl beat #5 Connors
#1 Lendl beat #4 Connors

During that 17 match winning streak, Connors was ranked in the top 5 11 times and the top 4 10 times.

There were times when Lendl completely destroyed Connors.
I didn't say that Connors was outside the top50 in all their matches. It was to show that Connors' career arch is competely different from Federer's.

Over32 Federer was much better than over32 Connors, it's like night and day difference:

Slam titles: Federer 3, Connors 0
Slam finals: Federer 7, Connors 0
Big titles: Federer 10, Connors 0
Big finals: Federer 21, Connors 2

H2H against 3+ slam winners:

Federer 28-15
Connors 7-39
 
Last edited:
Djokovic with massive age advantage. It has been well documented in the history of the sport not only between these two that the younger player has the advantage over the older player, if they follow similar curve of peak and prime forms. The deeper the older player plays in his career the greater the disadvantage becomes, and Federer is one of the oldest players in the history of the sport to play at such a level.

Federer is (get this) 12 full years past his peak.

smiley_emoticons_santagrin.gif
 

Wilsonpro

Rookie
except they haven’t have they? Nadal hasn’t beat Djokovic in of his recent inflation era slams... Djokovic didn’t beat Nadal for any of his 14-16 slams. Both have had a free ride for years now.
Overall Fed has had it tougher. 3 and a half so called “easy” years is nothing compared to 2015-present
What? Nadal and Djokovic are one year apart in age and have been playing since 2006 against each other.
except they haven’t have they? Nadal hasn’t beat Djokovic in of his recent inflation era slams... Djokovic didn’t beat Nadal for any of his 14-16 slams. Both have had a free ride for years now.
Overall Fed has had it tougher. 3 and a half so called “easy” years is nothing compared to 2015-present
what? Nadal and Djokovic played each other in finals as far back as 2006. They have never had the luxury Federer had 2003-2005. I get you like federer but please at least post with accuracy when you comment as to say Federer had it tougher is clearly incorrect.
 

Hitman

Bionic Poster
What? Nadal and Djokovic are one year apart in age and have been playing since 2006 against each other.

what? Nadal and Djokovic played each other in finals as far back as 2006. They have never had the luxury Federer had 2003-2005. I get you like federer but please at least post with accuracy when you comment as to say Federer had it tougher is clearly incorrect.

Their first final was in 2007 IW. They only played once in 2006, at RG quarters.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
What? Nadal and Djokovic are one year apart in age and have been playing since 2006 against each other.

what? Nadal and Djokovic played each other in finals as far back as 2006. They have never had the luxury Federer had 2003-2005. I get you like federer but please at least post with accuracy when you comment as to say Federer had it tougher is clearly incorrect.
Djokovic didn’t beat Nadal for a single slam in 2014-2016 so this is clearly inaccurate. 2015- present is weaker than what Fed had.

2019 AO nadal is no tougher than any opponent Fed had during his so called easy years.
 

Wilsonpro

Rookie
Djokovic didn’t beat Nadal for a single slam in 2014-2016 so this is clearly inaccurate. 2015- present is weaker than what Fed had.

2019 AO nadal is no tougher than any opponent Fed had during his so called easy years.
Djokovic beat Federer and Murray. Both far better than what Federer beat 2003-2005. So your point is invalid.
 

Wilsonpro

Rookie
Wow Nadal won Ca
Canada 2006 was won by Federer, Nadal was the defending champion but was beaten early on by Berdych. Their first final was IW 2007.
Didnt realise Nadal won in 2005 on hard court. His stock just went up a notch for me. Thanks for update.
 

Hitman

Bionic Poster
Wow Nadal won Ca

Didnt realise Nadal won in 2005 on hard court. His stock just went up a notch for me. Thanks for update.

Nadal beat Agassi in Canada in 2005, it was his first HC masters win. He also won Beijing and another HC masters indoors in Madrid.
 

TearTheRoofOff

G.O.A.T.
Not at all. Federer had a higher average ranking than Djokovic in their h2h.

Just think about the fact that Federer's first 4 wins over Djokovic were when Djokovic was yet to enter the top10 for the first time, while Federer is still #3 in the world now.


About their Slam h2h:

Federer beat Djokovic 1 time after Djokovic won his first 3 slams

Djokovic beat Federer 9 times before Federer won his last 3 slams (and he's not even retired yet)
Relative to the field, which is fully transient and implicit.
 

Hitman

Bionic Poster
At that time probably more a sign of Agassi health issues as Nadal 2005 was a novice off clay.

Nadal wasn't that bad on HC in 2005. He pushed a very in form Hewitt to five sets in AO, a classic match. He then took Federer to the brink in Miami, was only two points away from winning in straight sets. He won Montreal playing an Agassi who was having his last golden patch, this was the same Agassi who made the final of USO a few weeks later playing some crazy ball along the way, Agassi played back to back five set matches there, something he wouldn't be able to do with health issues. Nadal then won Beijing with a field that had Moya and Ferrero who was having his best year, and then went the distance against Luby in Madrid winning it in five. Nadal was good on HC in 2005, he started to become clay centric in 2006 though.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
it's important to understand that the GAS (great age shift) was in process in 2010/2011.
today Feder would have had the physical edge over DJ at that age, but back then that was not the case.
There is no such thing as a GAS. No 30 year old will ever have an advantage over a 24 year old if both are ATG.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Usually, one would expect age... when you're looking at almost a 6-year age difference ...will balance out over time. Fed had the advantage when Novak first met him, and for x number of years, they then met on roughly equal terms in the middle, and from a few years ago and into the future, Novak figures to have the age advantage. But, there are no hard lines to make total sense of this, and Fed, to his credit (don't take this the wrong way; it's a compliment) is still a great player.

To boil it down in general terms, Novak has probably had a bit of a H2H advantage overall due to Fed's almost freakish longevity. And (as I think, Sport alluded to) Fed had a slight advantage when it came to accumulating a large amount of his slams and weeks at #1.

The problem comes when either of these factors gets blown way out of proportion by overzealous fans and detractors. Fed still had to earn those 12 or so majors and five YE#1s, as Novak has still had to earn his achievements and H2H wins.
Novak also accumulated a lot of his slams and weeks at no.1 in a weaker period that still hasn't ended.
 

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
There is no such thing as a GAS. No 30 year old will ever have an advantage over a 24 year old if both are ATG.
33 yo Nadal is dealing fine with 23 yo Medvedev and 26 yo Thiem on clay. Medvedev may become an ATG, and Thiem may become a clay ATG. We don't know who's gonna become an ATG.
 

Third Serve

Talk Tennis Guru
Pretty big advantage to Djokovic. Way more meetings in his peak years than Federer's, way more when Federer was past 30 etc...it all adds up.
That’s true, 11 matches (with a potential twelfth if not for the walkover) is certainly enough to back this statement up.
 

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
Pretty big advantage to Djokovic. Way more meetings in his peak years than Federer's, way more when Federer was past 30 etc...it all adds up.
Why did Federer have a higher ranking in their meetings if Djokovic was closer to his peak?
 

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
Federer and Nadal win 11 of the last 12 Slams without Djokovic. This definitely puts to sleep every argument that they got old in 2011. It was Djokovic raising the bar, not Federer and Nadal declining.

It suggests that the young generation is awful - which we know. It doesn't suggest that Federer and Nadal are immune to the aging process.

Oh yes - we know that you think Novak Djokovic is the perfect man. Doesn't make it true to anyone with half a non-fanboyish brain cell in their head.
 
There is no such thing as a GAS. No 30 year old will ever have an advantage over a 24 year old if both are ATG.
Yep this. It's a simple math, really. No matter how talented you are, no matter how hard you train, If you're born even just slightly earlier than your competition, you're toast. :( But if you're born 6 years earlier, then lol, just forget about it. :D But what can you do... You can't go against the law of physics. Life is not fair sometimes. Roger is way the better player, way the more talented, more handsome, more smarter... But those 6 years. :cry: Jeez, why oh why he had to be born earlier than Djokovic. Damnit...:mad:
 

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
It suggests that the young generation is awful - which we know. It doesn't suggest that Federer and Nadal are immune to the aging process.

Oh yes - we know that you think Novak Djokovic is the perfect man. Doesn't make it true to anyone with half a non-fanboyish brain cell in their head.
The field behind Big3 is weaker than years ago, it's true. There aren't many subistutes to Murray, Wawrinka, Delpo, Tsonga... But it's still impressive from Big3 to win all Slams, the field doesn't just becomes sheit with hundreds of millions of dollars involved... Or otherwise I'm throwing off the window anything Fedal did in 2004-06, with the Ljubicic and the Blake being the main threats to them...
 

Tenez!

Professional
You ordered your list curiously.

"How much do you agree with this statement from 1 to 5?
1. 4
2. 5
3. ?
4. 1
5. 2
6. 3"
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Why did Federer have a higher ranking in their meetings if Djokovic was closer to his peak?

19 meetings before 2011, 30 meetings afterwards.

11 times in Federer multi slam years, 18 times in Djokovic multi slam years.

Etc...

Carry on talking about average ranking if you like, Fed has been there to face Djokovic in every one of his big years - not so the other way around. They met 8 times in Djokovic's best statisical year (2015), only twice in Federer's (2006). You can argue that Djokovic being way worse in 2006 compared to Fed in 2015 mitigates that to a degree but it's still a sizeable advantage to Djokovic.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
The field behind Big3 is weaker than years ago, it's true. There aren't many subistutes to Murray, Wawrinka, Delpo, Tsonga... But it's still impressive from Big3 to win all Slams, the field doesn't just becomes sheit with hundreds of millions of dollars involved... Or otherwise I'm throwing off the window anything Fedal did in 2004-06, with the Ljubicic and the Blake being the main threats to them...
They weren’t the main threats you troll.

Your mask of objectivity is slipping.
 

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
19 meetings before 2011, 30 meetings afterwards.

11 times in Federer multi slam years, 18 times in Djokovic multi slam years.

Etc...

Carry on talking about average ranking if you like, Fed has been there to face Djokovic in every one of his big years - not so the other way around. They met 8 times in Djokovic's best statisical year (2015), only twice in Federer's (2006). You can argue that Djokovic being way worse in 2006 compared to Fed in 2015 mitigates that to a degree but it's still a sizeable advantage to Djokovic.
Federer average win percentage in years he met Djokovic: 84.37%
Djokovic average win percentage in years he met Federer: 84.72%

They played more in Djokovic's best years, true, but you omit that pre-2011 Djokovic was nowhere near Federer since 2011 (it's like 75% of wins Djokovic pre-2011 and 84% of wins Federer since 2011).
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Federer average win percentage in years he met Djokovic: 84.37%
Djokovic average win percentage in years he met Federer: 84.72%

They played more in Djokovic's best years but you forget that pre-2011 Djokovic was nowhere near Federer since 2011.
2007-2008 Djokovic is as good as 2011-2012 Fed and definitely better than the 2014-2015 version.

Meetings in any of Fed’s 90%+ win rate seasons:

0 in 2004
0 in 2005
2 in 2006
0 in 2017

meetings in Djokovic 90%+ win rate seasons:

5 in 2011
8 in 2015
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
07-08 Djokovic vs 11-12 Fed:

1 slam each
1 additional slam final each
4 additional SF for Fed 3 for Djokovic
1 YEC each
4 masters titles each
9 titles for Djokovic 10 for Fed

Similar calibre of player, clearly.

I won’t do the comparison with 2014-2016 Fed as 07-09 Djokovic is the better player in every key statistic.
 

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
2007-2008 Djokovic is as good as 2011-2012 Fed and definitely better than the 2014-2015 version.

Meetings in any of Fed’s 90%+ win rate seasons:

0 in 2004
0 in 2005
2 in 2006
0 in 2017

meetings in Djokovic 90%+ win rate seasons:

5 in 2011
8 in 2015
Meetings in Fed’s <80% win rate seasons:

2 in 2013
1 in 2016

meetings in Djoker's <80% win rate seasons:

2 in 2006
4 in 2007
3 in 2008
5 in 2010

So the 13-2 in the best seasons is balanced by the 3-14 in the worst seasons.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Federer average win percentage in years he met Djokovic: 84.37%
Djokovic average win percentage in years he met Federer: 84.72%

They played more in Djokovic's best years, true, but you omit that pre-2011 Djokovic was nowhere near Federer since 2011 (it's like 75% of wins Djokovic pre-2011 and 84% of wins Federer since 2011).

Well I alluded to that when talking about 2015 vs 2006, I don't think it's enough.

For one, I consider 2008 Djokovic a very good version, he was nearly even with Fed in 2008 rankings wise as it is. Historically 23 is a much better age for reaching slam finals than 28 as well, so I don't think 2010 can be any less than even either...Form wise obviously Djokovic was quite poor that year for other reasons.
 

Sysyphus

Talk Tennis Guru
The played far more often in, say, Novak's 3-4 most successful seasons than in Fed's.

They've played far more since 2011 than before.

Overall, the timing of their matches has been somewhat more favorable to Djokovic, that seems clear.

Doesn't matter much. They are clearly quite evenly matched.
 

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
Let's focus on the main thing:

3-1 in slam finals
6-4 in slam semis
2-0 in yec finals
5-3 in masters finals

When Fed was in good enough form to reach these matches, Djokovic dominated him.

You can't find many excuses when you're in good enough form to win 4-6 matches in a row in that tournament.
 
Top