Who would win? Federer 2006 v Djokovic 2011

Jezza94

Jezza94

Semi-Pro
It's a simple question but who would win out of Federer 2006 v Djokovic 2011 when both players were peaking and practically unstoppable in their respective calendar year.

Federer 2006:
W-L: 92-5 (94.84% winning record)
Grand Slam Appearances: 4
Grand Slam Victories: 3 (Australian Open, Wimbledon and US Open

Djokovic 2011:
W-L: 70-6 (92.10% winning record)
Grand Slam Appearances: 3
Grand Slam Victories: 3 (Australian Open, Wimbledon and US Open)

The likes of Pete Sampras and Boris Becker regard Djokovic's 2011 season as the greatest ever. Federer's season in 2006 is regarded as being one of the greatest ever with only Rod Laver's 1969 season surpassing him.

Therefore if a Federer of 2006 played Djokovic of 2011 who would win and why?
 
Djokovic played the French Open. Not sure what you mean when you say he had 3 Grand Slam appearances in 2011.

As for your question, let's look at it this way:

2011 Federer beat 2011 Djokovic at the French Open. In 4 sets. 2006 Federer, who is peak Federer, would definitely take him there. He also has the better record at the French Open anyway.

2011 Federer had two match points, on serve, against 2011 Djokovic. 2006 Federer would take him in 4. He also has he better US Open record, anyway.

31/33 year-old Federer is 1-1 against 25/27 year-old Djokovic at Wimbledon. Not to mention, Federer's win was comfortable and Djokovic's win was very close. 2006 Federer would probably beat 2011 Djokovic in 3 or 4. Not to mention their records there.

Australian Open is the only Slam where it'd be close. I give Federer the edge on Rebound Ace, and Djokovic the edge on Plexicushion.
 
But baby Nole also beat peak Federer in Canada and played a close match at the US open, not to mention beat him in straight sets in Australia. I think both would be equally matched on hard courts and clay. On grass Federer would be the clear favorite.
 
zep said:
But baby Nole also beat peak Federer in Canada and played a close match at the US open, not to mention beat him in straight sets in Australia. I think both are equally matched on hard courts and clay. On grass Federer would be the clear favorite.
Click to expand...

Old Federer bageled peak Djokovic at Cincinnati. Also, performance at the Masters has no bearing on Slams, as we've seen with Djokovic the last two years. He dominates Masters only to lose to Wawrinka and Nishikori at the Slams.

And I'm not sure how a straight sets defeat at the US Open was "close".

It's funny how anyone can say they're equally matched on hardcourts and clay when Federer's record is so much better. Are Roddick and Djokovic equally matched on Hardcourts and grass?
 
zep said:
But baby Nole also beat peak Federer in Canada and played a close match at the US open, not to mention beat him in straight sets in Australia. I think both would be equally matched on hard courts and clay. On grass Federer would be the clear favorite.
Click to expand...

Yeah, on paper I agree. But I feel Fed is a bad matchup for Nole. So, this works in Fed's favor.

Like on paper peak Fed would own peak Rafa. But due to the matchup issue, Rafa would have slight edge at AO and FO. Fed probably gets Rafa at W and indoor even with that issue.

USO is strange. They didn't play one single match there. Peak Fed was scary at USO, but Rafa is a tough matchup.

So, yeah, matchups matter, we can't only use achievements. Plus peak Fed was 4 years, Nole only one year.
 
Michael88 said:
And I'm not sure how a straight sets defeat at the US Open was "close".
Click to expand...

You probably did not watch the match. Djokovic was serving for the first set and was 4-2 ahead in the second set. the third set was also close till the end. He could not manage his nerves which is understandable for a 20 year old playing his first slam final. He learned from that experience and a few months later beat Federer in straight sets in Australia. (no mono excuses please!)
 
zep said:
You probably did not watch the match. Djokovic was serving for the first set and was 4-2 ahead in the second set. the third set was also close till the end. He could not manage his nerves which is understandable for a 20 year old playing his first slam final. He learned from that experience and a few months later beat Federer in straight sets in Australia. (no mono excuses please!)
Click to expand...

But then Fed beat him easily at USO 2009.

By the way a little off topic, but it's funny to me. Fed only lost 3 sets at W 2008. Too bad those were in the same match :).
 
jg153040 said:
But then Fed beat him easily at USO 2009.

By the way a little off topic, but it's funny to me. Fed only lost 3 sets at W 2008. Too bad those were in the same match :).
Click to expand...

Federer was playing extremely well at Wimbledon and Halle in 2008. He did not lose a single set from Halle till Wimbledon final and only lost serve once or twice if I remember correctly. He was actually playing better than 2007.
 
zep said:
You probably did not watch the match. Djokovic was serving for the first set and was 4-2 ahead in the second set. the third set was also close till the end. He could not manage his nerves which is understandable for a 20 year old playing his first slam final. He learned from that experience and a few months latter beat Federer in straight sets in Australia. (no mono excuses please!)
Click to expand...

It was straight sets. That is not a close match. Djokovic never looked like he was gonna win the match. He was never within 48 points of winning the match. How is that close? A close match is US Open 2010/2011, where Federer was within 1 point of winning the matches. Or Wimbledon 2014, where Federer was within less than 8 points of winning the match. That is close. How was a match close when Djokovic was never even within 48 points of winning the match?

No mono excuses? Okay. No wrist excuses for Djokovic at Monte Carlo, then. Even still, that was on Plexicushion, where I gave Djokovic the edge. On Rebound Ace, Federer won every set they played.
 
zep said:
Federer was playing extremely well at Wimbledon and Halle in 2008. He did not lose a single set from Halle till Wimbledon final and only lost serve once or twice if I remember correctly. He was actually playing better than 2007.
Click to expand...

A player suffering from mono can play better than when he's 100% healthy?:confused:

Please, enough with the crap.
 
zep said:
Federer was playing extremely well at Wimbledon and Halle in 2008. He did not lose a single set from Halle till Wimbledon final and only lost serve once or twice if I remember correctly. He was actually playing better than 2007.
Click to expand...

How is this possible? When he played worse he won vs Rafa, but when he played better he lost vs Rafa?

Doesn't make sense to me.
 
Michael88 said:
It was straight sets. That is not a close match. Djokovic never looked like he was gonna win the match. He was never within 48 points of winning the match. How is that close? A close match is US Open 2010/2011, where Federer was within 1 point of winning the matches. Or Wimbledon 2014, where Federer was within less than 8 points of winning the match. That is close. How was a match close when Djokovic was never even within 48 points of winning the match?
Click to expand...

It was close because he was close in all three sets and was leading with breaks in two of them. As an example: 7-6 7-6 7-6 and 6-1 6-1 6-1, both of those are straight sets but only one of them is "close". Djokovic matched Federer in all three sets although ended up losing all three.
 
jg153040 said:
How is this possible? When he played worse he won vs Rafa, but when he played better he lost vs Rafa?

Doesn't make sense to me.
Click to expand...

Didn't you know? Federer defies natural laws. He plays better at 30 than at 24. At this rate, he'll be peaking at 49.
 
jg153040 said:
How is this possible? When he played worse he won vs Rafa, but when he played better he lost vs Rafa?

Doesn't make sense to me.
Click to expand...

I was not talking about the final specifically. Also Rafa also got better in 2008 compared to 2007.
 
zep said:
Federer was playing extremely well at Wimbledon and Halle in 2008. He did not lose a single set from Halle till Wimbledon final and only lost serve once or twice if I remember correctly. He was actually playing better than 2007.
Click to expand...

Since Federer reached the top, only in 2013 did he perform worse against Top 10s than in 2008.
 
zep said:
It was close because he was close in all three sets and was leading with breaks in two of them. As an example: 7-6 7-6 7-6 and 6-1 6-1 6-1, both of those are straight sets but only one of them is "close". Djokovic matched Federer in all three sets although ended up losing all three.
Click to expand...

Djokovic didn't win a single set. He was never closer than 48 points from winning the match. Maybe the sets were close, but the match wasn't. How could it be when Federer won every set? :confused:
 
zep said:
I was not talking about the final specifically. Also Rafa also got better in 2008 compared to 2007.
Click to expand...

But if Rafa got better and Fed got better, Fed should have won in 2008, since he won in 2007.

Unless you are saying Rafa improved more than Federer in one year.

In that case, this proves Fed is declining. Since Fed is improving at a lower rate than the field, this is actually a decline.

Actually all players continue to improve. When one players stops to improve that is also a decline.
 
Michael88 said:
Didn't you know? Federer defies natural laws. He plays better at 30 than at 24. At this rate, he'll be peaking at 49.
Click to expand...

Fed can play better than at his peak past his prime. So, that would make him goat.

Goat = defining natural laws. That is not only goat, that is actually God :).
 
Michael88 said:
Djokovic didn't win a single set. He was never closer than 48 points from winning the match. Maybe the sets were close, but the match wasn't. How could it be when Federer won every set? :confused:
Click to expand...

Yeah lol. This reminds me of FO 13 semi. When Rafa won in close five setter, it was Rafa dominating Djokovic.

But when Djokovic loses in straight sets vs Federer, this is close.

Seriously, you can't make this stuff up :).
 
zep said:
By that logic Federer in 2011 was better than Federer in 2006? :)
Click to expand...

Yes, and 2014 Djokovic > 2011 Djokovic. Meaning Peak Wawrinka > Peak Djokovic, and Peak Nishikori > Peak Djokovic. Not to mention, old Federer > Peak Djokovic.
 
zep said:
By that logic Federer in 2011 was better than Federer in 2006? :)

Who would win 2011 Federer vs 2006 Federer? :D
Click to expand...

Not really. Eventually players stop improving.

Besides matchups matter a lot. Fed 2011 even declined could be a bad matchup to Fed 2006 and still won even by being worse player on paper vs the field.

That's why it's flawed to compare it like that, because matchups matter.

We can put Fed's 4 AO titles and Nole 4 AO titles and say they would be even. Yeah, on paper. But that is how they did vs the field. It doesn't say anything how they match up peak vs peak. Because they aren't the same age, so they never did play peak vs peak.
 
zep said:
Federer was playing extremely well at Wimbledon and Halle in 2008. He did not lose a single set from Halle till Wimbledon final and only lost serve once or twice if I remember correctly. He was actually playing better than 2007.
Click to expand...
No he was not. :lol:
 
zep said:
And when did I say that he was not?
Click to expand...
Here:
zep said:
But baby Nole also beat peak Federer in Canada and played a close match at the US open, not to mention beat him in straight sets in Australia. I think both would be equally matched on hard courts and clay. On grass Federer would be the clear favorite.
Click to expand...



Take a chill pill man. You seem to riled up for no reason.
Click to expand...
Are you joking? I am perfectly calm :lol: Thank you for your concern.
 
zep said:
One match is not a big enough sample size, especially when you consider the fact that the other guy also improved. Overall he was playing better.
Click to expand...

Well, if one match is not enough of a sample size, then how do you know how good Nadal was playing in W 2008 final?
 
jg153040 said:
Well, if one match is not enough of a sample size, then how do you know how good Nadal was playing in W 2008 final?
Click to expand...

Nadal won Queens and had a better Wimbledon in general. So overall it was clear that he was a better grass court player in 2008 than 2007.
 
zep said:
Yes when they play each other they are evenly matched, but career wise Federer is obviously better.
Click to expand...

On what basis are they equally matched? Old Federer beat peak Djokovic at 2 Slams, and had match points at 1 more. When did Djokovic ever beat peak Federer at any Slam?
 
Why did you write in the OP that Djokovic had 3 Grand Slam appearances in 2011? What do you mean by that? He obviously entered all 4 of them
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Zarfot Z
  • Poll Poll
Best season for an individual in the past decade?
Replies
29
Views
4K
Povl Carstensen
P
M
Most Conseuctive Grand Slam Sets Won - Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic
Replies
0
Views
296
McEnroeisanartist
M
Madinolf
Longest win streaks in Grand Slams from Big3
Replies
32
Views
1K
pj80
P
Lew II
  • Poll Poll
Who faced the strongest opposition in 3 slam winning years?
2 3 4
Replies
195
Views
5K
Jason Swerve
Jason Swerve
M
Federer - Entering a Grand Slam Semifinal Without Dropping a Set - History
Replies
8
Views
1K
Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil
Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil
Back
Top