What if Federer was born in 1987, Nadal in 1981, and Djokovic in 1986?

D

Deleted member 757377

Guest
#13
Maybe if Djokovic didn't have the toughest opponents he wouldn't have been pushed to such improvements and we wouldn't have witnessed the best player ever.

So it's better this way.

Also, I think the improvements he made in the tough era will allow him to beat the easier opponents that seems to be coming.
 
D

Deleted member 757377

Guest
#17
CYGS for fedr in 2011, 2012, 2013, 2015 and 2017..
3 slams each in 2010, 2014 and 2016
Basically he would be dominating the tour as he ages way better than both of djokodal
Slams won per year after 28th birthday:

Federer 0.5
Nadal 1
Djokovic 1.5
 
#24
CYGS for fedr in 2011, 2012, 2013, 2015 and 2017..
3 slams each in 2010, 2014 and 2016
Basically he would be dominating the tour as he ages way better than both of djokodal
Can we let Djokodal continue to age before we make claims like that because at the moment they are ageing pretty well:

Age 31:
Fed 1 slam
Rafa 2 slams
Djoker 2 slams

Age 32:
Fed 0 slams
Rafa 1 slam
For Djoker this is next year but you can imagine he'll win at the very least 1 slam

So between age 30 and 32 Fed is 2 slams behind Rafa and 1 behind Djoker and Djoker hasn't even contested his 32nd year yet. I know Fed goes on to win 3 at 36 / 37 but that still only puts him 1 in front of Rafa and two in front of Djoker after the age of 30. You can bet that with Djoker and Rafa at # 1 and 2 in the world they are odds on to equal if not better Fed after the age of 30.
 
#26
First of all, it's a unrealistic scenario, because Djokovic became Ultron because of all the spankings from Fedal early career.

That being said, It would probably be a better scenario for all of them, because the early bloomer would be born first, and their careers would coincide less.

Nadals really last good season would be 2008 (2013 real life). Federer would peak in 2010 (2004 real life). The Fedal rivalry would never exist the way we know it. Djokovic would also peak in 2010 so peak-Fedovic would be a hel1uva rivalry. Federer would win less early career but more late career.

I think they all would win more, but Fed would still win most. If Djokovic shows Feds longevity he has the chance to win most slams, both in real life and in fiction.
 
#27
It means Nadal would have had more Grand Slam titles than Federer. Simple as that.

2006 Nadal probably wins 2001 Wimbledon
2007 Nadal wins 2002 Wimbledon
2008 Nadal wins 2003 US Open
2011 Nadal wins 2006 Wimbledon and 2006 US Open
2012 Nadal wins 2007 Australian Open
2015 Nadal probably wins 2010 French Open
 
#29
It means Nadal would have had more Grand Slam titles than Federer. Simple as that.

2006 Nadal probably wins 2001 Wimbledon
2007 Nadal wins 2002 Wimbledon
2008 Nadal wins 2003 US Open
2011 Nadal wins 2006 Wimbledon and 2006 US Open
2012 Nadal wins 2007 Australian Open
2015 Nadal probably wins 2010 French Open
I really doubt it. Nadal was stopped a lot more by the field than Federer. Roger was mostly stopped by Djokodal. In this scenario Federer and Djokovic would peak after Nadals prime was over. I think Nadal would win more, but so would Federer and Djokovic.
 
#30
Slams won per year after 28th birthday:

Federer 0.5
Nadal 1
Djokovic 1.5
Come on, this has zero relevance. Federer was mostly stopped by peak-Djokovic and peak-Nadal in his late career. In this scenario Nadal would not be a factor, and Federer wouldnt be playing 2011-2016 Djokovic in his early thirties.

How many slams would Fed win 2011-2016 without peak-Djokovic and Nadal?
 
#31
I really doubt it. Nadal was stopped a lot more by the field than Federer. Roger was mostly stopped by Djokodal. In this scenario Federer and Djokovic would peak after Nadals prime was over. I think Nadal would win more, but so would Federer and Djokovic.
That's why I mentioned the exact Slams Nadal would have won given his form at the events that took place 5 years later. As for Federer, a lot of his actual Slams would have been denied by prime Djokovic who is completely different animal compared to Roddick/Hewitt/Ferrero/35 y.o Agassi/Davydenko/etc.
 
#33
That's why I mentioned the exact Slams Nadal would have won given his form at the events that took place 5 years later. As for Federer, a lot of his actual Slams would have been denied by prime Djokovic who is completely different animal compared to Roddick/Hewitt/Ferrero/35 y.o Agassi/Davydenko/etc.
Sure Fed would win less early career, but how many slams would he win from 29/30-37 without Nadal and peak-Djokovic around?
 
#36
It means Nadal would have had more Grand Slam titles than Federer. Simple as that.

2006 Nadal probably wins 2001 Wimbledon
2007 Nadal wins 2002 Wimbledon
2008 Nadal wins 2003 US Open

2011 Nadal wins 2006 Wimbledon and 2006 US Open
2012 Nadal wins 2007 Australian Open
2015 Nadal probably wins 2010 French Open
I disagree, remember the courts were WAY faster back then, theres no way he would win both wimbledons and US Open back then, other 3 I can see.
 
#37
It would not fully compensate the amount of Slams he would have lost in his 20s. And we still don't know what 32+ Djokovic is like.
Well i dont agree to your first point. Federer career would mostly be Nadal free, and it's not like peak-Djokovic would stop peak-Fed every match. Federer gave peak-Djoker a hard time even in his thirties. And Fed could win a huge amount of slams from 29 and on with no Nadal and post-prime Djoko.

I agree we dont know what Djokovic 32+ is like. But if he has Feds longevity he will win more slams also in the real world, and we wont need these fiction scenarios:)
 
Last edited:
#38
Nadal would struggle in clay in late teens and early twenties with giants like Ferrero , guga and Coria in their peak.
+ Fast USO and pre 2005 era grass would stop nadal from winning slams in wimbly and new York.
Both Fed and djok went on winning multiple RG against older nadal.
Fed and djokovic going to torn themselves in grass and hard court and with their legendary consistency we could have 60+ djokerer encounter.
If court remain as slow as now then it would give djokovic advantage but that might nullify by peak federers FH and slices.

Biggest results would be nadal would have significantly poorer resume .
 
#41
Can we let Djokodal continue to age before we make claims like that because at the moment they are ageing pretty well:

Age 31:
Fed 1 slam
Rafa 2 slams
Djoker 2 slams

Age 32:
Fed 0 slams
Rafa 1 slam
For Djoker this is next year but you can imagine he'll win at the very least 1 slam

So between age 30 and 32 Fed is 2 slams behind Rafa and 1 behind Djoker and Djoker hasn't even contested his 32nd year yet. I know Fed goes on to win 3 at 36 / 37 but that still only puts him 1 in front of Rafa and two in front of Djoker after the age of 30. You can bet that with Djoker and Rafa at # 1 and 2 in the world they are odds on to equal if not better Fed after the age of 30.
Maybe, just maybe the stats are those cos Fed had to face prime Nadal and Djokovic in his 30s whilst Djokodal's current competition isn't strenuous for them at all (clay for Rafa and the last 2 slams for Novak).

Just because Djokodal have better stats after 30 atm doesn't mean they were better players than Roger at the same age - we can compare as all 3 have played each other over the last decade.
 
#44
It would not fully compensate the amount of Slams he would have lost in his 20s. And we still don't know what 32+ Djokovic is like.
Which slams is he losing in his 20s? His peak level on modern Wimbledon and USO courts is best ever so Djokodal wouldn’t take many there. AO? Yeah would lose a few but then completely dominate there in his 30s.
 
#45
Can we let Djokodal continue to age before we make claims like that because at the moment they are ageing pretty well:

Age 31:
Fed 1 slam
Rafa 2 slams
Djoker 2 slams

Age 32:
Fed 0 slams
Rafa 1 slam
For Djoker this is next year but you can imagine he'll win at the very least 1 slam

So between age 30 and 32 Fed is 2 slams behind Rafa and 1 behind Djoker and Djoker hasn't even contested his 32nd year yet. I know Fed goes on to win 3 at 36 / 37 but that still only puts him 1 in front of Rafa and two in front of Djoker after the age of 30. You can bet that with Djoker and Rafa at # 1 and 2 in the world they are odds on to equal if not better Fed after the age of 30.
If they age like Federer they will probably both end up with 20+ slams, and we wont need these made up scenarios. 5 more years of slam winning form should be enough to win 7 slams for Djoker. I dont think he will though.
 
#47
That's why I mentioned the exact Slams Nadal would have won given his form at the events that took place 5 years later. As for Federer, a lot of his actual Slams would have been denied by prime Djokovic who is completely different animal compared to Roddick/Hewitt/Ferrero/35 y.o Agassi/Davydenko/etc.
Peak Fedr is a completely different animal compared to 14-16 Fed. 14-16 Fed lost to mugs at AO, RG, Wimbledon (LOL) and USO to Cilic in straight sets.

It's not like Peakerer would lose every Slam match against Djokovic and especially not at Wimbledon and USO. AO yes, RG even IMO (nothing suggests Djokovic would own peak Fed on clay, H2H 3-3 and H2H at RG 1-1 with both RG matches being played when Djokovic was closer to his peak than Fedr).
 
Last edited:
#48
Can we let Djokodal continue to age before we make claims like that because at the moment they are ageing pretty well:

Age 31:
Fed 1 slam
Rafa 2 slams
Djoker 2 slams

Age 32:
Fed 0 slams
Rafa 1 slam
For Djoker this is next year but you can imagine he'll win at the very least 1 slam

So between age 30 and 32 Fed is 2 slams behind Rafa and 1 behind Djoker and Djoker hasn't even contested his 32nd year yet. I know Fed goes on to win 3 at 36 / 37 but that still only puts him 1 in front of Rafa and two in front of Djoker after the age of 30. You can bet that with Djoker and Rafa at # 1 and 2 in the world they are odds on to equal if not better Fed after the age of 30.
Bcz fed had 2 young atg plus one great player competing with him
Whom does djokodal have??
 
#50
What?
Yes, the GS records?
After sleeping on this overnight, and then consulting psychics, age progression and age regression experts, and then running boatloads of statistical analytics, I've arrived at the following suppositions:

If this were true, in 2019 (taking millions of scenarios into consideration), Nadal will turn 38, Djokovic will turn 33 and Federer will turn 32.
 
Top