Which Gap Is Wider?

[Neptune]

Nole over Fed, vs Fed over Lendl.
Most Nolefams are still in disbelief, even after someone pointed out 'The Emperor's New Clothes' on Fed.
When will people realize that tennis careers can be inflated, and understand how and why?

Career​	vs Top5​	T5 Weight​	vs Top10​	T10 Weight​	vs T11+​	T11+ Weight​	vs All​
Nole​	202 (123-79) 60.89%​	15.09%​	373 (258-115) 69.17%​	27.86%​	966 (860-106) 89.03%​	72.14%​	1339 (1118-221) 83.50%​
Fed​	179 (104-75) 58.10%​	11.73%​	347 (224-123) 64.55%​	22.74%​	1179 (1027-152) 87.11%​	77.26%​	1526 (1251-275) 81.98%​
Lendl​	158 (95-63) 60.13%​	12.05%​	257 (164-93) 63.81%​	19.60%​	1054 (905-149) 85.86%​	80.40%​	1311 (1069-242) 81.54%​

Peak​	vs Top5​	T5 Weight​	vs Top10​	T10 Weight​	vs T11+​	T11+ Weight​	vs All​	Opp Rank​	Opp Elo​
Nole 11-16​	91 (66-25) 72.53%​	19.08%​	174 (140-34) 80.46%​	36.48%​	303 (287-16) 94.72%​	63.52%​	477 (427-50) 89.52%​	18​	2086​
Fed 04-09​	67 (44-23) 65.67%​	13.59%​	121 (91-30) 75.21%​	24.54%​	372 (351-21) 94.35%​	75.46%​	493 (442-51) 89.66%​	26​	2017​
Lendl 84-89​	74 (52-22) 70.27%​	15.81%​	116 (83-33) 71.55%​	24.79%​	352 (333-19) 94.60%​	75.21%​	468 (416-52) 88.89%​	27​	2014​

 

[nolefam_2024]

Nole over Fed is definitely wider gap. He was simply in with the sharks during his best 6 years and still won 40 big titles (More than Sampras's whole career).
This period helped him in late period where he was absolutely clutch vs lesser opponents.

 

[FedForGOAT]

Which gap is wider:
An average TTW thread over this one, vs. this thread over the dithering of a lunatic?
I have my answer.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Which gap is wider:
An average TTW thread over this one, vs. this thread over the dithering of a lunatic?
I have my answer.

Your answer would be wrong
Average ttw thread is nonsense this is good one.
Fed can't be GOAT at all now.

 

[FedForGOAT]

Your answer would be wrong
Average ttw thread is nonsense this is good one.
Fed can't be GOAT at all now.

Oh wow, my answer “would be wrong”. Why? Because you say so. How enlightening.
Funny how you call this thread “a good one”, while responses like yours are actively disproving that point.

If you really think the gap between Lindell and Federer is comparable to the one between Federer and Djokovic, well… I have some great beachside property in Arizona to sell you.
Just remember, “there are three types of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics”

 

[Third Serve]

Fed over Nole is wider I'd say

 

[grandefrankie]

There are still many people who rank Federer over Djokovic, or atleast make a case for it. There is absolutely nobody who ranks Lendl over Federer, or tries to make a case for it.

I guess that answers your question.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Fed over Nole is wider I'd say

That's negative

 

[nolefam_2024]

Nolefams don't need to yield to fedfans or rafans at all a this pt

 

[Third Serve]

Nolefams don't need to yield to fedfans or rafans at all a this pt

nolefams hold the line

 

[nolefam_2024]

nolefams hold the line

Yes

However one sided it may felt to fedal fans you can't claim at all they are better than Nole now.

 

[Neptune]

Nolefams don't need to yield to fedfans or rafans at all a this pt

Most Nolefams are still in disbelief, even after someone pointed out 'The Emperor's New Clothes' on Fed.

 

[tennis3]

Nole over Fed, vs Fed over Lendl.

Federer is lucky he played in the Mug era. If prime Fed were playing today, he wouldn't win a single Slam in his entire career.

 

[NYTennisfan]

Djokovic has had a more accomplished career mainly because he's a much better 30+ year old player but I will not let this Fed disrespect stand. Not only did he revolutionize the way the game was played but nobody will ever touch Peak Fed.
I don't care about competition, 23 out of 24 semi appearances, 20 out of 24 Finals appearances and 15 slams in 24 appearances from 2004-2009 with 3 of those losses to ClayGOAT is absurd levels of success. Even post-Peak Fed was pushing Peak Djokovic to the limit in 2011. Put some respect to this mans' name.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Fed will not be more respected than Nole

Nothing allowed. Nole is highly successful in 30s but in 20s he had far tougher periods than Federer's

 

[MeatTornado]

Bait thread is bait.

More at 11.

 

[Lleytonstation]

This is really sad at this point.

But if you wanna play games like this, Fed is more popular, richer, and more liked.

 

[nolefam_2024]

This is really sad at this point.

But if you wanna play games like this, Fed is more popular, richer, and more liked.

Yes he is

But nole is better tennis player

 

[Third Serve]

Bait thread is bait.

More at 11.

OP is just a worse Lew

 

[BauerAlmeida]

Djokovic > Federer >>>>Lendl

If Lend's record in slam finals weren't so bad (relatively) it would be more debatable.

 

[Neptune]

But if you wanna play games like this, Fed is more popular, richer, and more liked.

When will people realize that tennis careers can be inflated, and understand how and why?

 

[Lleytonstation]

Yes he is

But nole is better tennis player

Yep, more accomplished tennis player and considered the best ever.

 

[Lleytonstation]

When will people realize that tennis careers can be inflated, and understand how and why?

Feds was not inflated. Winning gold at 37 and most slams after 30 is inflated.

You clearly are just jealous. You really cant even accept Fed as the 2/3 best player ever since he is so much more liked.

But if Fed was as bad as you say, then Djoker is not as good as you say.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Feds was not inflated. Winning gold at 37 and most slams after 30 is inflated.

You clearly are just jealous. You really cant even accept Fed as the 2/3 best player ever since he is so much more liked.

But if Fed was as bad as you say, then Djoker is not as good as you say.

Fed is top 3 open era easily and probably top 4 all time. His consistency is maybe even better than Djokovic and far more than Nadal. Only rod laver could match his consistent

 

[Sport]

Is this a troll thread?

Novak only has 4 more Slams than Federer, while Federer has 12 more Slams than Lendl.

Slams are the msot relevant criterion, with other criteria being mere tie-breakers in case two players are tied in the Slam count. No amounts of less relevant achievements outside Slams will ever change that.

Federer's gap with Lendl is 3 times as big (12 Slams vs. 4 Slams) as Novak's gap with Roger.

Novak is still in the Big 3 tier, would need 30 Slams to have his own tier. Lendl is not on the 20+ Slams tier.

This thread is MASSIVELY disrespectful to Federer. Or simply funny, considering its trollistic nature.

 

[Razer]

Is this a troll thread?

This thread is MASSIVELY disrespectful to Federer. Or simply funny, considering its trollistic nature.

Maybe it is not a troll thread, the poster who started it actually believes what he posted to be true because he is too young in age to know about Federer and stats are his last refuge. A thread cannot be troll if the poster actually believes it.

 

[Sport]

nobody will ever touch Peak Fed.

OK. So in my previous post I defended Federer, only to read things like this. To defend Federer you don't need to unrealistically overrate him, you know?

Federer has a losing H2H against Nadovic and less Slams than both, including a losing H2H vs. Nadal when he was at his peak in 2004-2007 and 2004-2009.

That ship has sailed. Federer is the third greatest tennis player of all time. To insist in the notion that he possesses the best peak in the history of the game when all evidence points out to the contrary is the epitome of unobjecticity.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Is this a troll thread?

Novak only has 4 more Slams than Federer, while Federer has 12 more Slams than Lendl.

Slams are the msot relevant criterion, with other criteria being mere tie-breakers in case two players are tied in the Slam count. No amounts of less relevant achievements outside Slams will ever change that.

Federer's gap with Lendl is 3 times as big (12 Slams vs. 4 Slams) as Novak's gap with Roger.

Novak is still in the Big 3 tier, would need 30 Slams to have his own tier. Lendl is not on the 20+ Slams tier.

This thread is MASSIVELY disrespectful to Federer. Or simply funny, considering its trollistic nature.

What are you even talking about

This is just for the 6 years. Everyone will agree Djokovic had toughest time in 2011 to 16 similar to Lendl in 80s..

Op has only compared the three at their best years.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Lendl won 26 big titles during his best 6
Fed 31
Nole 40

They are all comparable, in fact Lendl is very much close to Fed if you see how much big titles start mattering in 2000s

 

[Justshort]

There are still many people who rank Federer over Djokovic, or atleast make a case for it. There is absolutely nobody who ranks Lendl over Federer, or tries to make a case for it.

I guess that answers your question.

Are Lendl fans alive at all ?
Those who rank Fed over Djokovic are having brain farts. It's like still calling Sampras over Fed.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Are Lendl fans alive at all ?
Those who rank Fed over Djokovic are having brain farts. It's like still calling Sampras over Fed.

There are many lendl fans still on this board, do not behave like he was playing 100 years ago

OP only compared the best 6 years and competition at their peak. Its true that Lendl had far tougher competition in an era where even surface homogeneity existed making it harder to dominate. Fed's best competition in this era where surfaces were getting similar is just slightly above.

That should tell you everything. Fed won 15 of his 20 slams during this time.

 

[Lleytonstation]

Fed won 15 of his 20 slams during this time.

And Djoker won all of his during this time.

Djoker won half is slams after 2018 lol

 

[nolefam_2024]

And Djoker won all of his during this time.

Djoker won half is slams after 2018 lol

Yes they count much less than his previous 12 which were in tougher era than Federer's

Makes sense

Adjusted for difficulty Djokovic would be 5 to 6 slams ahead of Fed overall. And that without 2 bans and 1 cancellation.

 

[Holmes]

Nole over Fed is definitely wider gap. He was simply in with the sharks during his best 6 years and still won 40 big titles (More than Sampras's whole career).
This period helped him in late period where he was absolutely clutch vs lesser opponents.

Big titles were 5 sets in Pete's time, with the level of power and athleticism of this time minus the modern treatments. Not comparable.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Big titles were 5 sets in Pete's time, with the level of power and athleticism of this time minus the modern treatments. Not comparable.

Its completely comparable

5 sets in Pete's time takes less time than 4 sets today. If all you want to do is serve and net charge, it won't matter if you play 10 sets.

 

[Holmes]

Think we all know the big 3 have been inflated bigger than a child bounce house which is why they dwarf Pete and past players accomplishment-wise. Nole legitimately stands alone for separating himself from Fedal though.

 

[nolefam_2024]

And what a rubbish only finals were 5 sets and that too for just half of them.
This is misinformation and should be fact checked instantly. Game is far too physical today.

 

[Holmes]

Its completely comparable

5 sets in Pete's time takes less time than 4 sets today. If all you want to do is serve and net charge, it won't matter if you play 10 sets.

Don't be silly, Pete himself didn't simply "serve and net charge" let alone his era which was far more varied than this one. Besides, charging the net takes significantly more athleticism than standing like a statue at the baseline for 50 droning shots.

 

[Holmes]

And what a rubbish only finals were 5 sets and that too for just half of them.
This is misinformation and should be fact checked instantly. Game is far too physical today.

Misinformation? Like calling Pete's era just "net chargers" and downplaying their athleticism?

Do your homework, young man, or you'll fail as badly in school as you have here.

 

[Lleytonstation]

Yes they count much less than his previous 12 which were in tougher era than Federer's

Makes sense

Adjusted for difficulty Djokovic would be 5 to 6 slams ahead of Fed overall. And that without 2 bans and 1 cancellation.

Well that is not how sports works.

Djoker was more accomplished then Fed. In fact, Djoker has a small argument if he wins another slam to say he is in his own Tier.

But to say Lendl is closer to Fed than Djoker is laughable, disrespectful, unintelligent, and clearly wants a fight.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Well that is not how sports works.

Djoker was more accomplished then Fed. In fact, Djoker has a small argument if he wins another slam to say he is in his own Tier.

But to say Lendl is closer to Fed than Djoker is laughable, disrespectful, unintelligent, and clearly wants a fight.

Did OP say Lendl is closer to Fed?

Show me.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Misinformation? Like calling Pete's era just "net chargers" and downplaying their athleticism?

Do your homework, young man, or you'll fail as badly in school as you have here.

Pete's era far less athletic than today

Its frankly disappointing someone say otherwise.

 

[Lleytonstation]

Did OP say Lendl is closer to Fed?

Show me.

So you are going to play dumb. Cool.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Don't be silly, Pete himself didn't simply "serve and net charge" let alone his era which was far more varied than this one. Besides, charging the net takes significantly more athleticism than standing like a statue at the baseline for 50 droning shots.

Again another rubbish statement

Pete Sampras S&V frequency 60 %

Tennis Abstract: Match Charting Project: Men's Tactics Leaders: Career

Rally length just 3 per stroke even when rally started like Dustin Brown and John Isner today

Tennis Abstract: Match Charting Project: Men's Rally Leaders: Career

Charging net takes some different skills than baseline but its far far too easier on the body which is why older players like Djokovic and Nadal do that and do it quite successfully.

 

[nolefam_2024]

The thing is, everything is quantified today so you can't make false claims anymore.

Like calling 90s era as more athletic is pretty much a lie now. Those guys had different skills due to faster courts but better athlete they were not.

Pete , no.
Becker, no

S&V takes far less physical energy and is easier on the body.

 

[Lleytonstation]

The thing is, everything is quantified today so you can't make false claims anymore.

Like calling 90s era as more athletic is pretty much a lie now. Those guys had different skills due to faster courts but better athlete they were not.

Pete , no.
Becker, no

S&V takes far less physical energy and is easier on the body.

More talented though. You can also quantify racket technology.

 

[nolefam_2024]

More talented though. You can also quantify racket technology.

That is not 100% proven

Players today serve far better than in the past. Still don't attack the net. They are not idiots, its far too difficult to attack net today.

Put them back in 90s and then we can talk.

 

[Holmes]

Again another rubbish statement

Pete Sampras S&V frequency 60 %

Tennis Abstract: Match Charting Project: Men's Tactics Leaders: Career

Rally length just 3 per stroke even when rally started like Dustin Brown and John Isner today

Tennis Abstract: Match Charting Project: Men's Rally Leaders: Career

Charging net takes some different skills than baseline but its far far too easier on the body which is why older players like Djokovic and Nadal do that and do it quite successfully.

Your statement is confusing and makes multiple conflicting points. The first stat confirms Pete spent a significant amount of time at the baseline in contrast to your prior point that all he did was play the net, the second suggests his rallies were just 3 shots despite him staying back 40% of the time on his serve (?) and the third comment makes no sense.

You receive an "incomplete" on your assignment. Please review and correct.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Your statement is confusing and makes multiple conflicting points. The first stat confirms Pete spent a significant amount of time at the baseline, the second suggests his rallies were just 3 shots (?) and the third comment makes no sense.

You receive an "incomplete" on your assignment. Please review and correct.

You think you are cute but its not.
Majority nothing. With 60% of points S&V and many of those 40 are when he is forced back, he was basically hanging around at the net.

In tennis even 1% can make huge difference but just for your understanding, Fed played less than 10% of points at as S&V and even he rarely had 4+ hr matches. His game was far too physical to someone like Pete or Boris who charged the net without huge worry. Very successfully.

 

[NYTennisfan]

OK. So in my previous post I defended Federer, only to read things like this. To defend Federer you don't need to unrealistically overrate him, you know?

Federer has a losing H2H against Nadovic and less Slams than both, including a losing H2H vs. Nadal when he was at his peak in 2004-2007 and 2004-2009.

That ship has sailed. Federer is the third greatest tennis player of all time. To insist in the notion that he possesses the best peak in the history of the game when all evidence points out to the contrary is the epitome of unobjecticity.

Unrealistically? I stated literally facts of his accomplishments at his peak, which were unprecedented in that 6 year timeframe. He got knocked out before a Semi once in 6 years, that's ridiculous, and only got knocked out before a Finals 4 times in 6 YEARS!!!
Young Nadal was an all time great player so of course those matches were going to be tough, still doesn't take away from the fact that he had a 6 year run that rivals anybody in history. The stuff about him having less slams than the other two has no relevance when discussing PEAK years.

What "evidence" is there to the contrary that his peak wasn't the best? Whose peak was better and for that long? One can argue Borg, anybody else?