Was Federer better against the field in 2015 than 2017?

[zagor]

Well, I argue Fed's higher level makes them seem weaker. Remember, Rafa would have his best year if Fed didn't beat him, 3 slams and 3 more masters. That's insane.
Wawrinka could also win another AO, if Fed wasn't goating.
Birdman was goating owned Delpo, Fed really had to raise his level. How about Chung, people were so impressed that they said Fed will have problems, Fed destroyed the guy, it was no injury lol what at age 21, he was mentally destroyed, he didn't know what to do.

I'm not saying it has to do anything with Nole, but Fed's level in 17 is higher vs top guys than in 2015. I'm saying Nole is not the reason Fed is winning so much, but he raised his level.

That's my point it has nothing to do with Nole, Fed is just better vs top guys than in 2015. You can see it in his game, his backhand and fitness were very poor in 2015.

Yeah but Fed was mostly trouncing those same top guys in 2015-2016 (at AO, before injury). Berdych, Stan, Murray etc. they were mostly cannon fodder for him on HC/grass, he absolutely smoked Stan in 2015 USO and Murray in 2015 Wimbledon. As impressive as Nadal was in 2017 I just can't see him as a fitting supstitute for 2015 Novak.

Please don't bring up players like Chung until they actually do something to warrant the hype. You might as well say Kyle Edmund, he had that one SF run too.

 

[JackGates]

What we can accept is right now Novak is fukt so good luck to the chap. Thought he'd flop after winning RG, though with a final push for a potential Grand Slam but that was on relative fumes it seems (didn't think he'd succeed in the task neither). Never saw Federer's rise coming though. Three of the last five - you're kidding me, right? What Nole might have done to Fed or Nadal etc. is irrelevant due to his current relative irrelevancy. Will he rise again?

What we are trying to find out is if Fed is only winning because Novak is gone. It's a legitimate question. But, I think Fed raised his level vs top guys and changed his game, so he might still win.

It's not a given that 2015 Novak beats 17 Fed, that's all what I'm saying.

 

[-NN-]

What we are trying to find out is if Fed is only winning because Novak is gone. It's a legitimate question. But, I think Fed raised his level vs top guys and changed his game, so he might still win.

It's not a given that 2015 Novak beats 17 Fed, that's all what I'm saying.

I mean sure of course it's not a given especially as it can't happen, and that matches between top players don't tend to be set in stone.


Fed is winning because he's always there.

He's always there, roadblocked or not.

 

[RF-18]

We are not nok disagreement. Try RF-18

Well, of course his physical ability such as recovery, grinding matches (although he grinded out AO 17 pretty much, three bo5 matches the last four rounds, that's why his physical ability is still so underrated) is not the same as it was but thanks to his schedule the last couple of years he can recover well and use that energy for the important moments, such as the majors. We can't act like Federer needs to finish a match in one hour.

It's pretty obvious he can't play 80-90 matches a season anymore but that has been cut down so he can put his energy where it matters. That compensation in his schedule allows him to play as good as he is playing and has been doing for the last couple of years.

 

[mike danny]

Your first sentence reinforces that point. Novak's ability to return the ball, putting Federer on the back foot, prevented Federer from coming in and being the aggressor, and ending more points early. Djokovic would make him work for it that much more than anyone else, and over best of five, that would eventually take its toll.

I still feel 2015 USO was a winnable match. Even against 2015 Djokovic, the USO court was allowing Fed to hit through Djokovic.

 

[JackGates]

I mean sure of course it's not a given especially as it can't happen, and that matches between top players don't tend to be set in stone.


Fed is winning because he's always there.

He's always there, roadblocked or not.

I disagree that Fed is winning just because of his consistency. I think that 2017 is different and he didn't just take advantage of weak draws, but he actually decided to work on his main weaknesses and actually now solved his competition.

Last four years, yes, he had to rely on top guys to be taken out, but I think now he is just better than the rest, he is nr.1.

 

[-NN-]

I disagree that Fed is winning just because of his consistency. I think that 2017 is different and he didn't just take advantage of weak draws, but he actually decided to work on his main weaknesses and actually now solved his competition.

He's always there. He's always in with a shot. That's why there's no real luck with Fed in Nole falling away or whatever (like he was supposed to maintain that level anyway ROFLMAO).

Fed's always there giving himself a shot and even turns up to lose against his rivals. Where's Novak? Not even facing Fred right now. Meanwhile Fred takes his hammerings to Nadal in 2013.

Novak is obviously protecting his H2H, ready to comeback as Fed starts to ail and extend his H2H lead over Fed substantially. Very clever from Djoker.

 

[fedtennisphan]

Well, of course his physical ability such as recovery, grinding matches (although he grinded out AO 17 pretty much, three bo5 matches the last four rounds, that's why his physical ability is still so underrated) is not the same as it was but thanks to his schedule the last couple of years he can recover well and use that energy for the important moments, such as the majors. We can't act like Federer needs to finish a match in one hour.

It's pretty obvious he can't play 80-90 matches a season anymore but that has been cut down so he can put his energy where it matters. That compensation in his schedule allows him to play as good as he is playing and has been doing for the last couple of years.

Even when with the reduced schedule, no one was going to believe Federer will play good enough to reach 20 GS or get back to the top of the rankings. Nice hindsight. What some were really hoping for was Federer to grow old and go away.

 

[JackGates]

He's always there. He's always in with a shot. That's why there's no real luck with Fed in Nole falling away or whatever (like he was supposed to maintain that level anyway ROFLMAO).

Fed's always there giving himself a shot and even turns up to lose against his rivals. Where's Novak? Not even facing Fred right now. Meanwhile Fred takes his hammerings to Nadal in 2013.

Novak is obviously protecting his H2H, ready to comeback as Fed starts to ail and extend his H2H lead over Fed substantially. Very clever from Djoker.

I see your point. My point is that it was enough for Fed to just be there in the past. But after 2010, it wasn't enough. Fed had to take matters into his own hands and just being there wasn't good enough. He had to go trough Rafa to win four tournaments in 2017. Plus Cilic was goating like Delpo in 2009. I think Fed just being there wasn't enough even for Cilic, he had to raise his level and take matters into his own hands rather than to rely on free path.

Berdych and Cilic were always problems for Federer, he can't just rely on his talent. He improved his fitness and skills.

 

[JackGates]

Even when with the reduced schedule, no one was going to believe Federer will play good enough to reach 20 GS or get back to the top of the rankings. Nice hindsight. What some were really hoping for was Federer to grow old and go away.

It's also clear that Fed raised his level in 2017. Just waiting for others to be gone wasn't good enough. If he didn't find a way to beat Rafa, he would lose AO and probably wouldn't be mentally and physically good enough to win other slams.

 

[FHtennisman]

My question to you is this...

Is Wawarinka as lethal for Federer as Djokovic is? Rememeber Wawrinka has not beaten Federer on a hard court ever, and what happened when Federer met Wawrinka at USO 2015? Federer straight set him. Now, if Wawrinka could take advantage of Federer's sloppy play at AO 2017 and push it to five, on a faster surface which robs him of time on his shots, and despite historically never really being a big threat to Federer on a HC, imagine what a Djokovic in his absolute peak form would do.

I simply cannot accept that a 35 year old Federer is beating the peakiest version of Djokovic at AO, even if the courts sped up. Federer would need to be in his peak form to beat him. We just see it differently.

I agree absolutely that Novak is indeed a league above Wawrinka and that's obvious - however as mentioned before I consider Federer a better player than he was in 2014-16 and I think his go for broke attitude and the quicker surface would help him more than it would help Novak. He also wouldn't hesitate on the big points like he did in the all the major finals back in 2014-2015 and at least go for the lines.

I also don't think 2016 Nole was his best version at the AO, 2011 was better since he beat a much better Federer there and a younger Murray who wasn't distracted by personal issues. He also never had a completely off form match like he did vs Simon in 2016 committing 100 UEs in the match, 2011 was his best version at the AO and maybe even peak Fed doesn't take him down there.

Yes we see it differently - I think it's appropriate to end it here.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

I still feel 2015 USO was a winnable match. Even against 2015 Djokovic, the USO court was allowing Fed to hit through Djokovic.

Yes it was. But lets not also forget that 23,000 people packed in that stadium wanted Djokovic's blood that night. Both Federer and Djokovic were rattled by the behavior of the crowd, you can see it in both their expressions after the match ended.

 

[FHtennisman]

Well and I countered that too. Each match is its own universe. On paper Fed has an edge, but Novak would not play the same, he might play better and still beat Fed.

Also, you are the product of your own era, it doesn't matter that Fed's 17 version can beat Novak, his 15 version couldn't and that is what matters.

This destroys the weak era argument too. If you have more competition, they push you to raise your level and you can still win. Trust me, if Fed was playing in WTA tour for years, he would get owned if he joins ATP. The field also makes you better.

I agree of course who you beat is what matters after all and not whether you would have beaten another player from another year in their favourite tournament. However, these forums are for discussing such potential match ups and although pointless in conclusion as hardly anyone shifts from their initial viewpoint, it always makes for interesting debate going forward.

 

[FHtennisman]

What we can accept is right now Novak is fukt so good luck to the chap. Thought he'd flop after winning RG, though with a final push for a potential Grand Slam but that was on relative fumes it seems (didn't think he'd succeed in the task neither). Never saw Federer's rise coming though. Three of the last five - you're kidding me, right? What Nole might have done to Fed or Nadal etc. is irrelevant due to his current relative irrelevancy. Will he rise again?

Will he rise again?

 

[-NN-]

Will he rise again?

Yes.

 

[JackGates]

Yeah but Fed was mostly trouncing those same top guys in 2015-2016 (at AO, before injury). Berdych, Stan, Murray etc. they were mostly cannon fodder for him on HC/grass, he absolutely smoked Stan in 2015 USO and Murray in 2015 Wimbledon. As impressive as Nadal was in 2017 I just can't see him as a fitting supstitute for 2015 Novak.

Please don't bring up players like Chung until they actually do something to warrant the hype. You might as well say Kyle Edmund, he had that one SF run too.

No, it's obvious that now when Fed got used to the racket he improved his game.

His h2h vs Cilic, Berdych, Rafa and Murray is a lot better since the racket change than before 2014. Not even close.

Fed now matches better vs top guys, he play more percentage tennis. Sure, it hurts him a bit vs lower guys, but he is so much better that he will win anyway.

 

[FHtennisman]

Yes.

I sure hope so - but to what level? I reckon he can get 1-2 slams realistically but his base level needs to relatively similar to what Fed has maintained his level at since 2014 onwards but obviously he won't be playing the same type of game as Roger, so plenty of questions waiting to be answered.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

I agree absolutely that Novak is indeed a league above Wawrinka and that's obvious - however as mentioned before I consider Federer a better player than he was in 2014-16 and I think his go for broke attitude and the quicker surface would help him more than it would help Novak. He also wouldn't hesitate on the big points like he did in the all the major finals back in 2014-2015 and at , go for the lines.

I also don't think 2016 Nole was his best version at the AO, 2011 was better since he beat a much better Federer there and a younger Murray who wasn't distracted by personal issues. He also never had a completely off form match like he did vs Simon in 2016 committing 100 UEs in the match, 2011 was his best version at the AO and maybe even peak Fed doesn't take him down there.

Yes we see it differently - I think it's appropriate to end it here.

Djokovic absolutely crushed Federer in the first two sets of their AO semi 16, the commentators were flabbergasted by what they were seeing. They said they have never seen Federer manhandled on a HC like that ever before. That month, Djokovic was a wrecking machine against his big four family, he crushed Nadal in Doha despite actually playing poorly leading into the final, and Nadal looking the better player. Then AO, he overall did not play that sharp heading into the semi, but once he got there and saw one of his big four family member, he just switched it on. Federer did not know what hit him. Likewise with Murray in the final, as soon as he saw him, he went on a tear against him in the final also. That semi final - final version of Djokovic will not lose to a 35 year Federer who was injured, had a bunch of MTOs, lost his concentration and allowing Wawrinka and Nadal to take those sets from him. Djokovic 2016 was switched on from the start in that semi, he was seeing the ball like a football.

There is reason why some here used to say Djokovic goes in E-Mode when he saw Federer, Nadal or Murray across the other side of the net. You simply cannot compare the Djokovic in Simon match to Earth' Mightiest Warrior form that he unleashed first on Nadal in Doha, and then on Federer and Murray in AO. A 35 year old Federer coming off of six months, would not in my opinion take down that version of Djokovic...you would need to bring peak Federer from 04-07 to stop him. The surface would not help a severely past his peak mid 30s Federer against the greatest Plexicushion player of all time, in his absolute peak

So, happy to disagree and leave it at that.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

I still feel 2015 USO was a winnable match. Even against 2015 Djokovic, the USO court was allowing Fed to hit through Djokovic.

I think it was more that Djoko didn't bring his best that day. It was an underwhelming final and Djoko was clutch enough to beat breakpointerror. 2017 Fed would have a better shot against THAT Djokovic but Wimbledon would still be tough and Fed lost the AO matchup to Djoko a long time back. IF he played 5th set level throughout, maybe, but he can't and he couldn't in the actual match against Nadal either.

 

[JackGates]

I agree absolutely that Novak is indeed a league above Wawrinka and that's obvious - however as mentioned before I consider Federer a better player than he was in 2014-16 and I think his go for broke attitude and the quicker surface would help him more than it would help Novak. He also wouldn't hesitate on the big points like he did in the all the major finals back in 2014-2015 and at least go for the lines.

I also don't think 2016 Nole was his best version at the AO, 2011 was better since he beat a much better Federer there and a younger Murray who wasn't distracted by personal issues. He also never had a completely off form match like he did vs Simon in 2016 committing 100 UEs in the match, 2011 was his best version at the AO and maybe even peak Fed doesn't take him down there.

Yes we see it differently - I think it's appropriate to end it here.

Yeah, y

I think it was more that Djoko didn't bring his best that day. It was an underwhelming final and Djoko was clutch enough to beat breakpointerror. 2017 Fed would have a better shot against THAT Djokovic but Wimbledon would still be tough and Fed lost the AO matchup to Djoko a long time back. IF he played 5th set level throughout, maybe, but he can't and he couldn't in the actual match against Nadal either.

Well, Fed lost AO matchup to Nadal too and yet in 2017 he changed it around, so never say never. Fed has better fitness in 17 and better backhand, even peak Nole would have tons of extra problems. Also, Fed is staying like 1m more inside the baseline, that might even rush the great Djokovic. Plus, Fed probably won't be overusing slice vs Nole. Fed now crushes the ball on the backhand and backhand return.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Yeah, y

Well, Fed lost AO matchup to Nadal too and yet in 2017 he changed it around, so never say never. Fed has better fitness in 17 and better backhand, even peak Nole would have tons of extra problems. Also, Fed is staying like 1m more inside the baseline, that might even rush the great Djokovic. Plus, Fed probably won't be overusing slice vs Nole. Fed now crushes the ball on the backhand and backhand return.

I don't think he ever overused the slice against Djokovic and FWIW I would want him to use it as much as possible against Djokovic because the latter, unlike Nadal, isn't comfortable against it. That's the point @Hitman has been making, the factors that apply to the Fedal match up flip aren't highly relevant to the Fedole match up. What is though is his improved mentality and I can see him flipping USO 2015 and certainly Wimbledon 2014. Not W 2015, Djokovic was beastly there. Consider that Fed was playing a very aggressive strategy on serve in 2015, serving incredibly well and coming in a lot. So going back to a baseline oriented approach with less serve botting works in Djokovic's favour because he gets more of a look in Fed's service games. Djokovic will force a long staring match down the middle, testing Fed's patience. If anything, Fed is even more impatient now than in 2015. That's what Djokovic did and Fed himself said at one point that it had become more about physicality than shotmaking, thereby conceding he couldn't outlast Djokovic. If Fed was fitter in 2017 than 2015, why did he play a more curtailed schedule in 2017? Guess you need to go back and check just how bruising the Fedovic battles from that period were.

 

[mike danny]

Yeah but Fed was mostly trouncing those same top guys in 2015-2016 (at AO, before injury). Berdych, Stan, Murray etc. they were mostly cannon fodder for him on HC/grass, he absolutely smoked Stan in 2015 USO and Murray in 2015 Wimbledon. As impressive as Nadal was in 2017 I just can't see him as a fitting supstitute for 2015 Novak.

Please don't bring up players like Chung until they actually do something to warrant the hype. You might as well say Kyle Edmund, he had that one SF run too.

If you don't mind me asking, because I saw some skeptisism on your part, how do you think Fed got injured in 2016?

 

[mike danny]

Well, of course his physical ability such as recovery, grinding matches (although he grinded out AO 17 pretty much, three bo5 matches the last four rounds, that's why his physical ability is still so underrated) is not the same as it was but thanks to his schedule the last couple of years he can recover well and use that energy for the important moments, such as the majors. We can't act like Federer needs to finish a match in one hour.

It's pretty obvious he can't play 80-90 matches a season anymore but that has been cut down so he can put his energy where it matters. That compensation in his schedule allows him to play as good as he is playing and has been doing for the last couple of years.

He hardly grinded at AO 2017. All his 5 setters were relatively short. He was ending points quickly in all of them, even in the 5th set against Nadal.

Djokovic grinded down Nadal in 2012 AO. Federer simply outhit Nadal at 2017 AO. Lots of winners by Fed in that 5th set.

 

[zagor]

If you don't mind me asking, because I saw some skeptisism on your part, how do you think Fed got injured in 2016?

My best guess is he injured himself in training after Novak match, he must have been royally pissed after that one (not even Nadal stopped him in 3 slams in a row).

Can't know for sure obviously but yeah, I don't buy the official story.

 

[zagor]

He hardly grinded at AO 2017. All his 5 setters were relatively short. He was ending points quickly in all of them, even in the 5th set against Nadal.

Djokovic grinded down Nadal in 2012 AO. Federer simply outhit Nadal at 2017 AO. Lots of winners by Fed in that 5th set.

Yeah, all of Fed's recent 5 setters have been woefully short. Mentally taxing sure but physically they certainly weren't.

He didn't improve his stamina, he got more aggressive off the BH side so he can dictate and put pressure the off both wings. Days were you'd just hit to Fed's BH until he coughs up a short ball are largely over.

 

[mike danny]

Djokovic absolutely crushed Federer in the first two sets of their AO semi 16, the commentators were flabbergasted by what they were seeing. They said they have never seen Federer manhandled on a HC like that ever before. That month, Djokovic was a wrecking machine against his big four family, he crushed Nadal in Doha despite actually playing poorly leading into the final, and Nadal looking the better player. Then AO, he overall did not play that sharp heading into the semi, but once he got there and saw one of his big four family member, he just switched it on. Federer did not know what hit him. Likewise with Murray in the final, as soon as he saw him, he went on a tear against him in the final also. That semi final - final version of Djokovic will not lose to a 35 year Federer who was injured, had a bunch of MTOs, lost his concentration and allowing Wawrinka and Nadal to take those sets from him. Djokovic 2016 was switched on from the start in that semi, he was seeing the ball like a football.

There is reason why some here used to say Djokovic goes in E-Mode when he saw Federer, Nadal or Murray across the other side of the net. You simply cannot compare the Djokovic in Simon match to Earth' Mightiest Warrior form that he unleashed first on Nadal in Doha, and then on Federer and Murray in AO. A 35 year old Federer coming off of six months, would not in my opinion take down that version of Djokovic...you would need to bring peak Federer from 04-07 to stop him. The surface would not help a severely past his peak mid 30s Federer against the greatest Plexicushion player of all time, in his absolute peak

So, happy to disagree and leave it at that.

I believed for a while that Fed would have won a slam or two during 2014-2016 if Djokovic had been less than Ultron.

 

[NatF]

I don't think he ever overused the slice against Djokovic and FWIW I would want him to use it as much as possible against Djokovic because the latter, unlike Nadal, isn't comfortable against it. That's the point @Hitman has been making, the factors that apply to the Fedal match up flip aren't highly relevant to the Fedole match up. What is though is his improved mentality and I can see him flipping USO 2015 and certainly Wimbledon 2014. Not W 2015, Djokovic was beastly there. Consider that Fed was playing a very aggressive strategy on serve in 2015, serving incredibly well and coming in a lot. So going back to a baseline oriented approach with less serve botting works in Djokovic's favour because he gets more of a look in Fed's service games. Djokovic will force a long staring match down the middle, testing Fed's patience. If anything, Fed is even more impatient now than in 2015. That's what Djokovic did and Fed himself said at one point that it had become more about physicality than shotmaking, thereby conceding he couldn't outlast Djokovic. If Fed was fitter in 2017 than 2015, why did he play a more curtailed schedule in 2017? Guess you need to go back and check just how bruising the Fedovic battles from that period were.

I don't think Federer played that well on serve in 2015, he served clearly better in 2014. He came in relatively more in 2014 IIRC as well. I think Federer wasn't aggressive enough off the ground in 2015, he needed go closer to the lines on his approach shots - he gave Djokovic too much time to hit his passing shots (which were obviously dialled in).

 

[-NN-]

My best guess is he injured himself in training after Novak match, he must have been royally pissed after that one (not even Nadal stopped him in 3 slams in a row).

Can't know for sure obviously but yeah, I don't buy the official story.

It didn't quite ring true for me neither. What about Novak's current slew of stories?

(Also, opinions on Nadal's knees and career threatening injuries...)

 

[zagor]

It didn't quite ring true for me neither. What about Novak's current slew of stories?

He didn't look right to me against Chung. Pros don't tinker with their serving motion to such a degree unless the situation is serious.

Other than that, I don't know. Minor surgical procedure could mean anything, the only obvious thing is that he's trying out other alternatives given that wait and rest option didn't yield satisfactory results. We'll see when he gets back on court.

(Also, opinions on Nadal's knees and career threatening injuries...)

My opinion is that a guy that wins a slam 10 years straight and can play 80 matches at 31 didn't face a lot of career threatening injuries.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

I don't think Federer played that well on serve in 2015, he served clearly better in 2014. He came in relatively more in 2014 IIRC as well. I think Federer wasn't aggressive enough off the ground in 2015, he needed go closer to the lines on his approach shots - he gave Djokovic too much time to hit his passing shots (which were obviously dialled in).

No disagreement there .But I don't think he serves better in 2017 than 15. Yeah, 2014 W was a higher level of serving. Don't remember the numbers but there was a game where he came in behind every serve.

 

[NatF]

No disagreement there .But I don't think he serves better in 2017 than 15. Yeah, 2014 W was a higher level of serving. Don't remember the numbers but there was a game where he came in behind every serve.

Serving level is probably similar in 2015 and 2017 sure, forehand was better in 2017 and his approach to return games was better as well IMO. Movement was possibly better in 2015. Overall his level was similar, the match with Murray in 2015 was clearly better than any match he played in 2017 on grass though.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Serving level is probably similar in 2015 and 2017 sure, forehand was better in 2017 and his approach to return games was better as well IMO. Movement was possibly better in 2015. Overall his level was similar, the match with Murray in 2015 was clearly better than any match he played in 2017 on grass though.

Murray match was GOAT level serving. For the rest, nobody in 2017 put Fed under as much return pressure as Djokovic so finding it hard to judge.

 

[EloQuent]

I just don't see how anyone can think 36 year old Roger is a better player than peak Djokovic. Better than post-peak Nole? Without a doubt. And I think peak Roger beats peak Nole easily.

 

[NatF]

Murray match was GOAT level serving. For the rest, nobody in 2017 put Fed under as much return pressure as Djokovic so finding it hard to judge.

Fair enough, Federer's ground game looked better to me in 2017 in general - he also served really well in the 2017 final (up at 76%). Maybe the pressure of Djokovic's return would bring 2017 Federer's servee percentage down 10 points and cause him to play tentatively off the forehand, but I think he'd probably play more freely and go down swinging.

 

[cc0509]

About long points, somebody has uploaded top 10 Fed destroying Djokovic points and they are mostly very long rallies. Now he's forcing opponents to play on his terms. But would that work against peak Nole? Not sure and we have no way of knowing.

I don't know if it would work on peak Novak but I'd sure like to see Federer try it on the Novak we see these days or the Novak upon his return from whatever is going on with him. It will be interesting to see how post prime Novak holds up and what he will do to retool his game as he ages.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

I just don't see how anyone can think 36 year old Roger is a better player than peak Djokovic. Better than post-peak Nole? Without a doubt. And I think peak Roger beats peak Nole easily.

I wouldn't go that far. Djokovic in 2007 did something which was very rare, he beat peak Federer in a HC final of a big event. Federer during his peak simply did not lose big finals off of clay anywhere, I think the last big one he lost was back in 2005 to Nalbandian, and he was carrying an ankle injury in that match. Djokovic beat inform peak Federer in Canada, the very same Federer who then went onto win Cincy and USO. And their USO final was a lot tighter than the three set scoreline suggests, Djokovic blinked when he had numerous set points in the first set, along with Federer going clutch at the same time. That Djokovic was great, but nowhere near the true peak Djokovic we got to see in 2011. Peak Federer would have his hands full going toe to toe with Peak Djokovic, even if you put Fed as the more likelier winner...These two are pretty much the two HC GOATs, Federer at one, and Djokovic at two as it stands.

 

[RF-18]

I wouldn't go that far. Djokovic in 2007 did something which was very rare, he beat peak Federer in a HC final of a big event. Federer during his peak simply did not lose big finals off of clay anywhere, I think the last big one he lost was back in 2005 to Nalbandian, and he was carrying an ankle injury in that match. Djokovic beat inform peak Federer in Canada, the very same Federer who then went onto win Cincy and USO. And their USO final was a lot tighter than the three set scoreline suggests, Djokovic blinked when he had numerous set points in the first set, along with Federer going clutch at the same time. That Djokovic was great, but nowhere near the true peak Djokovic we got to see in 2011. Peak Federer would have his hands full going toe to toe with Peak Djokovic, even if you put Fed as the more likelier winner...These two are pretty much the two HC GOATs, Federer at one, and Djokovic at two as it stands.

Well, you'll hear Federer of 2007 was exhausted in Montreal (very weird, since he a week later wins Cincy and then USO as you mentioned), had mono in AO 08 and the rest of Djokovic wins was against past prime Federer and old erer. I don't think Djokovic has legimitate win against Federer in his career. All has an asterisk to it.

But it is what it is.

 

[mike danny]

I just don't see how anyone can think 36 year old Roger is a better player than peak Djokovic. Better than post-peak Nole? Without a doubt. And I think peak Roger beats peak Nole easily.

These 2 guys would never beat each other easily at their peaks. All their mathes on every surface would be tight affairs.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

Well, you'll hear Federer of 2007 was exhausted in Montreal (very weird, since he a week later wins Cincy and then USO as you mentioned), had mono in AO 08 and the rest of Djokovic wins was against past prime Federer and old erer. I don't think Djokovic has legimitate win against Federer in his career. All has an asterisk to it.

But it is what it is.

He wasn't exhausted, and it was Djokovic who had just gone through the world number 3 and world number 2 back to back to get to the final.

 

[RF-18]

These 2 guys would never beat each other easily at their peaks. All their mathes on every surface would be tight affairs.

Agreed.

 

[EloQuent]

I wouldn't go that far. Djokovic in 2007 did something which was very rare, he beat peak Federer in a HC final of a big event. Federer during his peak simply did not lose big finals off of clay anywhere, I think the last big one he lost was back in 2005 to Nalbandian, and he was carrying an ankle injury in that match. Djokovic beat inform peak Federer in Canada, the very same Federer who then went onto win Cincy and USO. And their USO final was a lot tighter than the three set scoreline suggests, Djokovic blinked when he had numerous set points in the first set, along with Federer going clutch at the same time. That Djokovic was great, but nowhere near the true peak Djokovic we got to see in 2011. Peak Federer would have his hands full going toe to toe with Peak Djokovic, even if you put Fed as the more likelier winner...These two are pretty much the two HC GOATs, Federer at one, and Djokovic at two as it stands.

These 2 guys would never beat each other easily at their peaks. All their mathes on every surface would be tight affairs.

Yeah good points. Still think Federer has the edge but it's unprovable opinions.

And interesting thought experiment is to overlay their career- say if Djokovic was 6 years older, map out who wins each slam.

 

[metsman]

Well, you'll hear Federer of 2007 was exhausted in Montreal (very weird, since he a week later wins Cincy and then USO as you mentioned), had mono in AO 08 and the rest of Djokovic wins was against past prime Federer and old erer. I don't think Djokovic has legimitate win against Federer in his career. All has an asterisk to it.

But it is what it is.

Who said he was exhausted in Montreal? He hit a good number of errors though (50 or so in 3 sets) and choked the first set up 6-5 40-0, so he wasn't at his best, and Djokovic hit some massive shots at the end of the first and third to pull it out, a well deserved win.

Exhaustion was a factor at 04/06 Cincy, wanting to preserve himself for the Olympics/USO in 04 and USO in 06. But then the first round bye at masters was introduced in 07 so it made playing Canada/Cincy/USO much more manageable.

 

[RF-18]

Who said he was exhausted in Montreal? He hit a good number of errors though (50 or so in 3 sets) and choked the first set up 6-5 40-0, so he wasn't at his best, and Djokovic hit some massive shots at the end of the first and third to pull it out, a well deserved win.

Exhaustion was a factor at 04/06 Cincy, wanting to preserve himself for the Olympics/USO in 04 and USO in 06. But then the first round bye at masters was introduced in 07 so it made playing Canada/Cincy/USO much more manageable.

A well known member of this forum said he was tired/exhausted for that final when I mentioned this win for djoko, I'm not gonna mention any names but you can all probably figure it out. If he sees this post he should answer it.

 

[zagor]

A well known member of this forum said he was tired/exhausted for that final when I mentioned this win for djoko, I'm not gonna mention any names but you can all probably figure it out. If he sees this post he should answer it.

That's strange. No way was Fed exhausted, he won Cincy afterwards and even had a few tough ones there (I remember the Hewitt match atleast was a 3 set thriller).

 

[mike danny]

That's strange. No way was Fed exhausted, he won Cincy afterwards and even had a few tough ones there (I remember the Hewitt match atleast was a 3 set thriller).

2007 was the closest Fed has ever come to winning Canada, Cincy and USO in the same year. One tiebreak away.

Also the only time he reached all 3 finals.

When old Fed tried something like that, his USO campaign got screwed.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

These 2 guys would never beat each other easily at their peaks. All their mathes on every surface would be tight affairs.

Except Miami and Cincinnati, of course. Peak Miamovic defence is really too much, and peak Cincerer's serving and aggression perhaps even more so. Elsewhere it would be fairly close - certainly should've been the most exciting peak-to-peak rivalry among the Big 3, shame their primes barely coincided (but even then we've got some nice thrillers).

 

[mike danny]

Except Miami and Cincinnati, of course. Peak Miamovic defence is really too much, and peak Cincerer's serving and aggression perhaps even more so. Elsewhere it would be fairly close - certainly should've been the most exciting peak-to-peak rivalry among the Big 3, shame their primes barely coincided (but even then we've got some nice thrillers).

Yeah. Both of them are really too good at their pet masters. Those tournaments suit their games like few of them do.

 

[Druss]

Federer was destroying the field in 2015 aswell, even more dominant than in 2017 if we take a look at these numbers.

If Gramperer can destroy the field bar an ATG of Nadal and Djokovic's caliber, one can only imagine what Peakerer could do.

 

[tarutani]

If Gramperer can destroy the field bar an ATG of Nadal and Djokovic's caliber, one can only imagine what Peakerer could do.

Peak Federer couldn't even beat baby Nadal and baby Murray on HC.

 

[NEW_BORN]

Yes it was. But lets not also forget that 23,000 people packed in that stadium wanted Djokovic's blood that night. Both Federer and Djokovic were rattled by the behavior of the crowd, you can see it in both their expressions after the match ended.

Electric atmosphere though, especially with the roof closed and having the match start after dark - feel of a heavyweight bout.