When Fanfic meets Reality: If Federer has gotten worse, why are his stats better?

SaintPetros

Professional
To me, it's impossible to figure out who the GOAT is. Too many variables and it's too hard to compare different eras.
A post that makes me deplore the loss of the like button.
I still think Laver is overall GOAT. Best accomplishment in the sport's history, and most complete game that was way ahead of it's time. Of course there are weaknesses we can all point out in his resume (as can be done with other GOATs like Borg, Pistol, RF, Serbinator etc.) but I think the fact that everyone has lived in his shadow is proof enough that he's GOAT.
 

AceSalvo

Legend
To me, it's impossible to figure out who the GOAT is. Too many variables and it's too hard to compare different eras.
Fully agree it is tough to compare era to determine GOAT. Thats why I rely on Laver, Borg, McEnroe, et al to help us with this discussion. And we do have a verdict. Let them say "its difficult to compare eras and determine the GOAT".
 
Last edited:

moonballs

Hall of Fame
We often hear that Federer's form has declined, that he's half the player he was during his "peak"playing against Roddick, Hewitt, Baghdatis etc. so I decided to compare the stats measuring Fed's performance at his best slam, Wimbledon, in the last year of his "peak" (2007) to this year's final. Against a superior grass court player, just about every single one of Fed's statistics improved: higher percentage of first serve points won, more winners, aces, better break point conversion, more total points won, better Winners to UFE differential, you name it. So my question is: If Federer has gotten noticeably worse as his Fans claim, why is he doing so many things better than ever before?


2007 Stats:

CategoryFedererNadal
1st Serve %71%70%
Aces241
Double Faults32
Winners6550
Unforced Errors3424
Winner-UFE+31+26
Winning % on 1st Serve71%68%
Winning % on 2nd Serve62%57%
Receiving Points Won35%31%
Break Point Conversions3/8 (37%)4/11 (36%)
Net Approaches Won30/51 (59%)18/26 (69%)
Total Points Won165158


2019 Final Stats:

CategoryDjokovicFederer
1st serve %136 of 219 = 62%127 of 203 = 63%
1st serve points won101 of 136 = 74%100 of 127 = 79%
2nd serve points won39 of 83 = 47%39 of 76 = 51%
Aces1025
Double faults96
Winners5494
Unforced errors5262
Winners-UFE+2+32
Break point conversions3 of 8 = 38%7 of 13 = 54%
Receiving points won64 of 203 = 32%79 of 219 = 36%
Total points won204218
I am not a fan of the weak era vs string era theory when they are used as excuses for lack of results, but I must say this stats sheet pretty much tells you the 2007 field is so much stronger than the current field. Back in the days there were actual slam winners and big hitters in the field. What do we have now in the field? Just washed up Stanimal and the mental disaster in slams Zverev?
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
I am not a fan of the weak era vs string era theory when they are used as excuses for lack of results, but I must say this stats sheet pretty much tells you the 2007 field is so much stronger than the current field. Back in the days there were actual slam winners and big hitters in the field. What do we have not in the field? Just washed up stanimal and the mental disaster in slams Zverev?
We tend to all forget the GOATs Gonzales, Hewie, Roddy, Baghdatis, Philly's Poussies, 39 year-old Agassi, post-retirement non-playing Sampras, Ferrero the overachiever who completely made an effort after 2003 not to fall in rankings, Kuerten who was peaking and priming since 2003, Haas who was never injured and always waiting in slam finales, and many others.

That era was special. All GOATs.
 

SaintPetros

Professional
We tend to all forget the GOATs Gonzales, Hewie, Roddy, Baghdatis, Philly's Poussies, 39 year-old Agassi, post-retirement non-playing Sampras, Ferrero the overachiever who completely made an effort after 2003 not to fall in rankings, Kuerten who was peaking and priming since 2003, Haas who was never injured and always waiting in slam finales, and many others.

That era was special. All GOATs.
He was talking about this world, not a parallel one (and was serious). You're going to confuse him.
 

USO19

Rookie
Just opening the statement with an opinion and following up with no stats is how your opinion becomes quickly trivial.

Here are the stats that show 2015 was nothing in front of 2007 Peak Fed.

Wimbledon Final stats:

You're comparing exactly two matches. I'm talking about over the course of the year.

Federer served better vs. Nadal in the 07 final than he did vs. Djokovic in the 15 final. Oh well.
 

Meles

Bionic Poster
We often hear that Federer's form has declined, that he's half the player he was during his "peak"playing against Roddick, Hewitt, Baghdatis etc. so I decided to compare the stats measuring Fed's performance at his best slam, Wimbledon, in the last year of his "peak" (2007) to this year's final. Against a superior grass court player, just about every single one of Fed's statistics improved: higher percentage of first serve points won, more winners, aces, better break point conversion, more total points won, better Winners to UFE differential, you name it. So my question is: If Federer has gotten noticeably worse as his Fans claim, why is he doing so many things better than ever before?


2007 Stats:

CategoryFedererNadal
1st Serve %71%70%
Aces241
Double Faults32
Winners6550
Unforced Errors3424
Winner-UFE+31+26
Winning % on 1st Serve71%68%
Winning % on 2nd Serve62%57%
Receiving Points Won35%31%
Break Point Conversions3/8 (37%)4/11 (36%)
Net Approaches Won30/51 (59%)18/26 (69%)
Total Points Won165158


2019 Final Stats:

CategoryDjokovicFederer
1st serve %136 of 219 = 62%127 of 203 = 63%
1st serve points won101 of 136 = 74%100 of 127 = 79%
2nd serve points won39 of 83 = 47%39 of 76 = 51%
Aces1025
Double faults96
Winners5494
Unforced errors5262
Winners-UFE+2+32
Break point conversions3 of 8 = 38%7 of 13 = 54%
Receiving points won64 of 203 = 32%79 of 219 = 36%
Total points won204218
Speed decline is undeniable. But stats lay it out pretty well and Fed has been like a cat with nine lives reinventing himself late in his career. The Frauderista set of course have brainwashed themselves so much with Vacuum Era denials that they can't see the forest for the trees and refuse to respect his amazing adaptions diminishing his hold on goat status all the while.:sneaky: For me despite blowing Wimby final this year his sheer level in that final was utterly amazing.o_O

Fed's first serve has declined just in the last few years from peak perhaps as late as 2017, so another area of declining to add to the slow speed decline at this point.

Oh you need to look at just hard court stats and then clay court stats. Mixing it all together is a big, big mistake.;)
 

Meles

Bionic Poster
Very very very simple.

RF fans (just the fanatical ones) force themselves to denigrate RF's 30s career to prove that this is the weak era. That's all it is.

They are so hung up on everyone declaring 2002-2006 Weak Era that they desperately try to fight fire with fire. Trying hard to boomerang these facts right back. Or at the two players who have de-GOATed the GOAT in the last decade.

Instead of ENJOYING RF's great improvements and applauding them, they keep putting him down.

Yes, it's ironic and plain silly. They put down their own hero - for his own benefit!

Comedy gold.
(y)
 

SaintPetros

Professional
Speed decline is undeniable. But stats lay it out pretty well and Fed has been like a cat with nine lives reinventing himself late in his career. The Frauderista set of course have brainwashed themselves so much with Vacuum Era denials that they can't see the forest for the trees and refuse to respect his amazing adaptions diminishing his hold on goat status all the while.:sneaky: For me despite blowing Wimby final this year his sheer level in that final was utterly amazing.o_O

Fed's first serve has declined just in the last few years from peak perhaps as late as 2017, so another area of declining to add to the slow speed decline at this point.

Oh you need to look at just hard court stats and then clay court stats. Mixing it all together is a big, big mistake.;)
Just when I begin to give up on this place, along comes a Meles post to restore my faith.
 

moonballs

Hall of Fame
We tend to all forget the GOATs Gonzales, Hewie, Roddy, Baghdatis, Philly's Poussies, 39 year-old Agassi, post-retirement non-playing Sampras, Ferrero the overachiever who completely made an effort after 2003 not to fall in rankings, Kuerten who was peaking and priming since 2003, Haas who was never injured and always waiting in slam finales, and many others.

That era was special. All GOATs.
You left out Safin, Roddick, D Nalbandian. Only reason they are about to be forgotten by folks like yourself is Fed didn’t left them to win. Compare with today’s filed they are so much stronger.
 

AceSalvo

Legend
You left out Safin, Roddick, D Nalbandian, Davy. Only reason they are about to be forgotten by folks like yourself is Fed didn’t left them to win. Compare with today’s filed they are so much stronger.
Preach.

I have not seen a player since 2013 of their caliber.
 

SaintPetros

Professional
You left out Safin, Roddick, D Nalbandian. Only reason they are about to be forgotten by folks like yourself is Fed didn’t left them to win. Compare with today’s filed they are so much stronger.
We also forgot about his Slam struggles against Elderly Agassi...
 

sliceroni

Professional
All about matchups. Young Nole got smoked by an injury ridden struggling Safin at Wimbledon in 2008. Safin's ranking was 75 when he beat Nole, he would then retire in 2009.
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
You left out Safin, Roddick, D Nalbandian. Only reason they are about to be forgotten by folks like yourself is Fed didn’t left them to win. Compare with today’s filed they are so much stronger.
If you actually took a sneak peak at Safin's ranking throughout the past decade, you'd realize RF had little to do with it. He was rarely in the top 10, very often losing early rounds, he had his first major slumps BEFORE RF even stepped up, which was in 2002, Safin even lost a slam finale to Johansson despite being very heavy favourite. In fact, from 2005 AO when Safin miraculously beat RF after defending a MP to when he retired in 2009 he didn't win ONE title. And during this low-rankings time his losses to RF were only a tiny fraction of all of his losses, which were often to journeymen. Safin's successes at slams very very rare. 4 slam finales, 2-3 semis, that's pretty much it in the entire decade. Compare that to Berdych or Tsonga or Ferrer who were far more consistent in all higher tier events. THEY are the ones who were true victims of the Big 3, for example. THEY had their careers destroyed by the big 3, but to argue that Safin's was, or Ferrero's was crushed by RF... is nuts. You got no case.

Poor Nalbandian had so many injury struggles, like Delpo he never had the chance to have a full career like RF or Djokovic, or even Nadal.

Roddick? I mentioned the Dikk. Again, you're not really reading.
 

Enga

Hall of Fame
Djokovic won despite having worse stats in the final. It doesn't come down to stats at all, stats are really a huge lie. Don't pay much attention to them. They're indicators of performance sure, but like I have said and people still refuse to believe, the "Worse" player can still win, and that's because tennis is a game that doesn't care who has better stats. What matters is who won the last point.

Some might say that if they won the match, they were the better player, but then it's a double standard if you look at stats and think that determines who is better, when stats clearly show Federer was better in the match. The statistically "better" player didn't win.

What does this all mean? I don't have a damn clue. That's why I just go with my gut instinct, and look at the players while they play tennis. Federer was better when he was more confident and powerful.
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
Djokovic won despite having worse stats in the final. It doesn't come down to stats at all, stats are really a huge lie. Don't pay much attention to them. They're indicators of performance sure, but like I have said and people still refuse to believe, the "Worse" player can still win, and that's because tennis is a game that doesn't care who has better stats. What matters is who won the last point.

Some might say that if they won the match, they were the better player, but then it's a double standard if you look at stats and think that determines who is better, when stats clearly show Federer was better in the match. The statistically "better" player didn't win.

What does this all mean? I don't have a damn clue. That's why I just go with my gut instinct, and look at the players while they play tennis. Federer was better when he was more confident and powerful.
The stats favour the winner in the majority of the cases. Whether that's 80% or 90%, no idea. Have to ask the ATP for that.

Obviously, in a 76 67 76 match stats can go either way, or in a 76 16 76 the loser will have better stats.
 

sliceroni

Professional
Nah. Having a serious sickness like Celiac disease undermines you physically and mentally. I'd say Safin's health smoked Novak's, and given the outcome of the match, I'd say I'm right.
I respect your opinion. He won the AO with no issues and was one of the favorites going into Wimbledon, so we don't know the extent of his sickness that year. Also conditions were supposedly quicker at Wimbledon so that did not help Nole's cause.
 

TheFifthSet

Legend
We often hear that Federer's form has declined, that he's half the player he was during his "peak"playing against Roddick, Hewitt, Baghdatis etc. so I decided to compare the stats measuring Fed's performance at his best slam, Wimbledon, in the last year of his "peak" (2007) to this year's final. Against a superior grass court player, just about every single one of Fed's statistics improved: higher percentage of first serve points won, more winners, aces, better break point conversion, more total points won, better Winners to UFE differential, you name it. So my question is: If Federer has gotten noticeably worse as his Fans claim, why is he doing so many things better than ever before?


2007 Stats:

CategoryFedererNadal
1st Serve %71%70%
Aces241
Double Faults32
Winners6550
Unforced Errors3424
Winner-UFE+31+26
Winning % on 1st Serve71%68%
Winning % on 2nd Serve62%57%
Receiving Points Won35%31%
Break Point Conversions3/8 (37%)4/11 (36%)
Net Approaches Won30/51 (59%)18/26 (69%)
Total Points Won165158


2019 Final Stats:

CategoryDjokovicFederer
1st serve %136 of 219 = 62%127 of 203 = 63%
1st serve points won101 of 136 = 74%100 of 127 = 79%
2nd serve points won39 of 83 = 47%39 of 76 = 51%
Aces1025
Double faults96
Winners5494
Unforced errors5262
Winners-UFE+2+32
Break point conversions3 of 8 = 38%7 of 13 = 54%
Receiving points won64 of 203 = 32%79 of 219 = 36%
Total points won204218
Extrapolating this much from two matches lol
 

USO19

Rookie
Nah. Having a serious sickness like Celiac disease undermines you physically and mentally. I'd say Safin's health smoked Novak's, and given the outcome of the match, I'd say I'm right.
Djokovic doesn't have celiac disease. He uses quackery to cover for...well...you know. All the others are doing it too, so it's not really an indictment of him.
 

SaintPetros

Professional
I respect your opinion. He won the AO with no issues and was one of the favorites going into Wimbledon, so we don't know the extent of his sickness that year. Also conditions were supposedly quicker at Wimbledon so that did not help Nole's cause.
Thank you, I respect yours as well. I see Fed as a top 5 Open-Era ATG but homogenization, among other factors, makes me reluctant to put the crown on his cap.
 

jstr

Rookie
Still, a great performance by a guy who is in his upper 30s. We'll see how Djok and Nadal do when they're that age. I would suspect that Djok will be in reasonable shape .
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
Still, a great performance by a guy who is in his upper 30s. We'll see how Djok and Nadal do when they're that age. I would suspect that Djok will be in reasonable shape .
Nadal doesn't have to be as great at 38, he has more mileage than RF. He started dominating at 18, RF at 21. So if Rafa can be as good at age 35, that should be enough to keep the age nonsense out of the "debate".
 
Nadal had 2 matches more played when they turned 33...
Exactly, barely more mileage for Nadal age to age by their 30s. Or measure top level longevity as weeks in top 10, Fred has about 2.5 years on Nadal atm chronologically, so Nadal needs to stay there for 2.5 more years after Federer slips for good.
 

SaintPetros

Professional
Still, a great performance by a guy who is in his upper 30s. We'll see how Djok and Nadal do when they're that age. I would suspect that Djok will be in reasonable shape .
We've heard similar sentiments since Fed graced the tricenarians with his membership, yet both Joe and Ned's careers have held up (Ned has 1 more major than Fred did at the same age).
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
We've heard similar sentiments since Fed graced the tricenarians with his membership, yet both Joe and Ned's careers have held up (Ned has 1 more major than Fred did at the same age).
The age "argument" that some people use has been crushed over and over again. They need to learn to accept defeat of their idol with grace rather than devise new "cunning" ways of spinning fact into silly theories that produce lame excuses.
 
Top