Who would win? Federer 2006 v Djokovic 2011
- Thread starter Jezza94
- Start date
90's Clay
Banned
Nole's level started to slide after Wimbledon that year. So I wouldn't say Nole was at the peakest of peak. His peakest of peak was more January-June/July of that year.
He started getting burned out and his level CLEARLY Dropped by the end of 2011 compared to where it was early in the year. Peakest of Peak Nole was Australian-Clay season or grass season
Michael88
Banned
If 2011 wasn't Djokovic's US Open peak, what was? :lol:
90's Clay
Banned
Austrlian-Wimbledon of that year.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
In other words, Novak's never peaked at the US Open and his career peak latest for 6 months.
Got ya!
On second thought, what he said!
Michael88
Banned
So Djokovic has no US Open peak? Or are you saying Djokovic peaked at the US Open during Wimbledon? :lol:
SystemicAnomaly
Bionic Poster
The OP apparently left out the word, final. It should have read:
Grand Slam Final Appearances: 3
or
Grand Slam Finals: 3
SystemicAnomaly
Bionic Poster
Federer 2006:
W-L: 92-5 (95% win record)
Grand Slam Finals: 4 (27-1 slam record)
Grand Slam Victories: 3 (AO, Wimbledon and USO)
World Tour Finals: Winner
Masters 1000 series: 6 Finals w/ 4 Wins
Djokovic 2011:
W-L: 70-6 (92% win record)
Grand Slam Finals: 3 (25-1 slam record; lost to RF in French SF)
Grand Slam Victories: 3 (AO, Wimbledon and USO)
World Tour Finals: lost in RR play (RF = 2011 WTF champ)
Masters 1000 series: 6 Finals w/ 5 Wins
Novak was very dominant in 2011. However, by most metrics, Roger was more dominant in 2006. Both won 3 slam titles but Roger made it to the RG final in 2006 (losing to Rafa) whereas Novak was stopped in the SF of RG in 2011 by Roger. (Roger also reached 4 finals again the following year (2007); again, wining all except RG).
Roger won the WTF in 2006. He also won it in 2011, Novak's dominant year. Novak did not get past RR play -- was not eligible to play SF and Final rounds. Novak did fare a bit better in the World Tour Masters 1000 tournaments. Both reached 6 finals, however Novak won 5 of them whereas Roger won 4.
Roger played more total matches in 2006 than Novak in 2011, yet had fewer losses. Roger played 97 matches, losing only 5. Novak played 76 matches, losing 6. Novak's 92% W-L was impressive but does not quite compare to 95% for Roger in 2006.
Roger actually exceeded Novak's 92% for 3 successive years -- 93% in '04, 95% in '05, 95% in '06. Not only was Rog more dominant in 2006 than Novak in 2011, his dominance lasted for a greater length of time.
Even tho' Roger is probably 5+ years past his prime, he still maintains a 19-17 h2h edge over Novak. Given all these various factors, I cannot see 2011 Novak prevailing over 2006 Roger. Perhaps Novak might win once, more more than twice, in 5 hypothetical meetings.
W-L: 92-5 (95% win record)
Grand Slam Finals: 4 (27-1 slam record)
Grand Slam Victories: 3 (AO, Wimbledon and USO)
World Tour Finals: Winner
Masters 1000 series: 6 Finals w/ 4 Wins
Djokovic 2011:
W-L: 70-6 (92% win record)
Grand Slam Finals: 3 (25-1 slam record; lost to RF in French SF)
Grand Slam Victories: 3 (AO, Wimbledon and USO)
World Tour Finals: lost in RR play (RF = 2011 WTF champ)
Masters 1000 series: 6 Finals w/ 5 Wins
Novak was very dominant in 2011. However, by most metrics, Roger was more dominant in 2006. Both won 3 slam titles but Roger made it to the RG final in 2006 (losing to Rafa) whereas Novak was stopped in the SF of RG in 2011 by Roger. (Roger also reached 4 finals again the following year (2007); again, wining all except RG).
Roger won the WTF in 2006. He also won it in 2011, Novak's dominant year. Novak did not get past RR play -- was not eligible to play SF and Final rounds. Novak did fare a bit better in the World Tour Masters 1000 tournaments. Both reached 6 finals, however Novak won 5 of them whereas Roger won 4.
Roger played more total matches in 2006 than Novak in 2011, yet had fewer losses. Roger played 97 matches, losing only 5. Novak played 76 matches, losing 6. Novak's 92% W-L was impressive but does not quite compare to 95% for Roger in 2006.
Roger actually exceeded Novak's 92% for 3 successive years -- 93% in '04, 95% in '05, 95% in '06. Not only was Rog more dominant in 2006 than Novak in 2011, his dominance lasted for a greater length of time.
Even tho' Roger is probably 5+ years past his prime, he still maintains a 19-17 h2h edge over Novak. Given all these various factors, I cannot see 2011 Novak prevailing over 2006 Roger. Perhaps Novak might win once, more more than twice, in 5 hypothetical meetings.
So you mean Djokovic maintained his best level for only 6-7 months?? Still you believe he had troubled peak Federer consistently who maintained his level for 4 straight years if they belonged to same generation? :lol:
Actually in 2011 Djokovic peaked on Deco turf too, beating Federer and Nadal (In 4 sets) back to back. I haven't seen him playing that well on Decoturf so far.
Gary Duane
Talk Tennis Guru
I now know what it means to you. Year with most titles.
If that is your definition of peak, yes, that was his peak year.
But I would say that his performance in 2007 was so close that the competition was getting stiffer and made it tougher to win. He was still 25 for most of the year, and for most famous players that when they are still strongest and most dominant.
That was the year Nadal started to be a major factor off clay, and other players were improving.
It's not like Novak with three slams in 2011 and nothing close to that before or after. So far 2011 was his peak, in all ways. With Fed it's not so clear when two years in a row he won three slams was finalist in the other, FO.
Michael88
Banned
Yeah, I'm saying 2006 is his peak year in the sense that it was his best year, just like 2011 was for Djokovic, and 2010 was for Nadal (though I think Nadal might have been better from the 2008 French Open to the 2009 Australian Open).
Also, I don't see how anyone can say Federer was as good in 2007 as in 2006. Look at his records for the two years:
2006 - 2007
3 Slams - 3 Slams
4 Finals - 4 Finals
1 WTF - 1 WTF
4 Masters - 2 Masters
That's a difference of 2 Masters titles, which is substantial. But to see the real gulf in his performances, look at his win-loss records for the two years:
2006: 92-5
2007: 68-9
So in 2006, Federer won 24 matches more with 4 fewer losses than in 2007. That is a huge difference.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
I still felt in 2007 the competitionwas tougher than in 2006, which made his success even more impressive.
Gary Duane
Talk Tennis Guru
That was my point.
Michael88
Banned
Federer's 2012 Wimbledon win is more impressive than his 2006 win, but that doesn't mean Federer in 2012 was better than Federer in 2006. They're two completely different things.
Similar threads
- Poll
