Why did it take until late 2014 for Federer to overtake Murray in their H2H?

Spencer Gore

Hall of Fame
Remarkably, after Federer won their very first meeting back in 2005, against an 18 year old Murray, it took another 9 years before Federer finally had a lead in their H2H. He only went ahead in late 2014.

Indeed, during the "peak Federer" years, Murray had a 6-2 lead at one point. What was it about Murray's game that gave Roger such trouble (at least over three sets)?
 

ForehandRF

Hall of Fame
According to some people here i was under the impresion that Murray is like 0:20 vs Federer...

Hmmm...How can hypothetical Federer be a thing when Murray was the proven superior player lol...
At least check your facts if you want to troll because Murray beat Federer only one time in slams.Can't say the same thing about the times he beat Djokovic in slams and that in slam finals no less lol
 
Last edited:

ForehandRF

Hall of Fame
Murray is like 2-9 against Federer in Slams and WTF. All he did is to beat inconsistent Federer in masters.
For whatever reason Fed struggled with him in 2008-2009 especially, but he did the same thing in the past against the likes of Nalbandian and Hewitt :D
 

D.Nalby12

G.O.A.T.
For whatever reason Fed struggled with him in 2008-2009 especially, but he did the same thing in the past against the likes of Nalbandian and Hewitt :D

IIRC both Nalby and Hewitt had leading h2h against pre 2004 Fed. But once Federer hit his prime - he turned table around. Nalby defeated peak Fed indoors in Bo5. I don't see Murray taking even set off that Federer.
 

ForehandRF

Hall of Fame
IIRC both Nalby and Hewitt had leading h2h against pre 2004 Fed. But once Federer hit his prime - he turned table around. Nalby defeated peak Fed indoors in Bo5. I don't see Murray taking even set off that Federer.
Yeah, especially Nalbandian was a pain for Fed early on, their H2H being 11-8 in the end, with David winning the first 5 matches :)
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
Murray is like 2-9 against Federer in Slams and WTF. All he did is to beat inconsistent Federer in masters.
The only time Murray beat Fed in a slam was in one of the worst seasons of Fed's career. To put it in terms a Nadal fanboy like the OP would understand, it's like holding Nadal's slam losses in 2015 against him.

Other than that, Murray went down to Fed in slams in pretty routine fashion (half of the losses were straight set blowouts IIRC).
 

Strale

Semi-Pro
At least check your facts if you want to troll because Murray beat Federer only one time in slams.Can't say the same thing about the times he beat Djokovic in slams and that in slam finals no less lol
Who said anything about slams?
 

Strale

Semi-Pro
You called Murray superior player, so don't pretend now :D
He was overall ahead,i didn't cherry picked stats...I guess being Novak fan kinda eliminates the need to put things out of context or doing mental gymnastics...

He spoiled me that much...:D
 

bjsnider

Hall of Fame
Murray had back surgery just as he was about to overtake the field and assume the world number one position in 2013. It set him back years. Murray had much worse luck with injuries in his prime than Federer.
 

D.Nalby12

G.O.A.T.
Murray had back surgery just as he was about to overtake the field and assume the world number one position in 2013. It set him back years. Murray had much worse luck with injuries in his prime than Federer.
No way Murray was getting #1 position overtaking prime Djokovic and prime Nadal in 2013. Even in 2012 (his best season) he finished third. In 2013 both #1 and #2 were very strong compared to 2012.
 

Sysyphus

Talk Tennis Guru
The only time Murray beat Fed in a slam was in one of the worst seasons of Fed's career. To put it in terms a Nadal fanboy like the OP would understand, it's like holding Nadal's slam losses in 2015 against him.
A tad misleading.

Federer's 2013 was a trainwreck after he tweaked his back in Indian Wells, after the Australian Open.

The 2013 AO came at the tail end of what was actually a very good run in Fed's career, from late 2011 through most of 2012, though his form was obviously starting to depreciate in the latter part of 2012. So not an illegitimate loss, other than in the obvious sense that all of Federer's losses are in some part illegitimate and Nadal is always injured and so on.
 

NoleFam

Talk Tennis Guru
Fed was 12-5 against Murray after the latter first won 4 consecutive matches vs him. So the figuring out started way earlier.
The Federer/Murray head to head was a tale of 3 periods:

2005-2009 -- 6-4 Murray (Federer won their won only Slam meeting)

2010-2013 -- 5-5 tied (2-1 in Slams for Federer with Murray winning the Olympic final)

2014-2015 -- 5-0 Federer (2-0 in Slams for Federer)

This head is head is closer than a lot of Federer fans want to admit. It was only after Murray's drop in form after surgery and when Federer was 33 did he turn it around and take the lead in the head to head. From 2005-2013, it was close.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
The Federer/Murray head to head was a tale of 3 periods:

2005-2009 -- 6-4 Murray (Federer won their won only Slam meeting)

2010-2013 -- 5-5 tied (2-1 in Slams for Federer with Murray winning the Olympic final)

2014-2015 -- 5-0 Federer (2-0 in Slams for Federer)

This head is head is closer than a lot of Federer fans want to admit. It was only after Murray's drop in form after surgery and when Federer was 33 did he turn it around and take the lead in the head to head. From 2005-2013, it was close.
It was close indeed, but the damage in Fed's favor was already done beforehand. Murray's 2014 just sped up the process.
 
A tad misleading.

Federer's 2013 was a trainwreck after he tweaked his back in Indian Wells, after the Australian Open.

The 2013 AO came at the tail end of what was actually a very good run in Fed's career, from late 2011 through most of 2012, though his form was obviously starting to depreciate in the latter part of 2012. So not an illegitimate loss, other than in the obvious sense that all of Federer's losses are in some part illegitimate and Nadal is always injured and so on.
He was already wearing a back brace by the AO 8-B
 

BorgTheGOAT

Hall of Fame
It is somehow a strange anomaly that Murray had a better overall H2H against peak Fed (and as his pre prime version to boot) than he had in his own peak against older Fed, however all in all it doesn’t really matter because there wasn’t any point in their respective careers where Murray wasn’t completely useless against Fed when it mattered most, i.e. in slams.
 

Kralingen

Legend
But then, if Federer was never good and Murray was good enough to lead the h2h for so long, it simply means Novak Djokovic is actually a Djoke for taking soooooo long to even take the lead in h2h.

Really @Spencer Gore just proved Djokovic isn't anything special.
In all seriousness lol
Murray 1-5 Federer in Slams
Djokovic 11-6 Federer in Slams

these are the only numbers that should really matter in terms of assessing their level.
The Federer/Murray head to head was a tale of 3 periods:

2005-2009 -- 6-4 Murray (Federer won their won only Slam meeting)

2010-2013 -- 5-5 tied (2-1 in Slams for Federer with Murray winning the Olympic final)

2014-2015 -- 5-0 Federer (2-0 in Slams for Federer)

This head is head is closer than a lot of Federer fans want to admit. It was only after Murray's drop in form after surgery and when Federer was 33 did he turn it around and take the lead in the head to head. From 2005-2013, it was close.
I wish @NoleIsBoat was still around so he could use this stat 100 times trying to prove Federer evolved and played better tennis in 2015 than in the late 2000s lol
 

nachiket nolefam

Hall of Fame
Murray has won 17% of his slam meetings with Federer.

Federer has won 28% of his slam meetings with Nadal

Not a massively huge improvement.
Federer has won 3 slams beating Nadal. Murray has won 0 slams beating either Federer or Nadal. It's really really really bad. Can't be compared with The great Roger Federer.
 

Spencer Gore

Hall of Fame
Federer has won 3 slams beating Nadal. Murray has won 0 slams beating either Federer or Nadal. It's really really really bad. Can't be compared with The great Roger Federer.
But Federer's performance against Nadal at slams isn't massively better than Murray's against Federer -and you called that "really really bad". So Federer against Nadal must be at least "really bad", right?
 

nachiket nolefam

Hall of Fame
But Federer's performance against Nadal at slams isn't massively better than Murray's against Federer -and you called that "really really bad". So Federer against Nadal must be at least "really bad", right?
It's really bad and everyone knows it. But his performance vs Federer is really really bad.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
A tad misleading.

Federer's 2013 was a trainwreck after he tweaked his back in Indian Wells, after the Australian Open.

The 2013 AO came at the tail end of what was actually a very good run in Fed's career, from late 2011 through most of 2012, though his form was obviously starting to depreciate in the latter part of 2012.
He was wearing a compression shirt already at AO and had a very low ace count in a 5 setter against Tsonga in the previous round (and Jo is a poor returner). Fed's back already flared up in 2012 several times and he quite simply overplayed that season (around 90 matches). It's not something that suddenly started at 2013 IW, it was already an on-going problem for Fed.

Fed is usually tight-lipped regarding his injuries/physical woes so just because he wasn't whining about it earlier, doesn't mean much.


So not an illegitimate loss, other than in the obvious sense that all of Federer's losses are in some part illegitimate and Nadal is always injured and so on.
No loss is illegitimate, unless the other guy cheated or something. Do I consider it a win against an in-form Fed in a slam however? Nope, I certainly don't.

Nor do I think it proves that Murray (if they were the same age) would have been this great rival to Fed in his pomp and would take away slams from him in the most prolific period of his career (unlike those weak era clowns Fed faced in 2004-2007). For my money, in-form Fed in slams is always gonna be too much for a reactive played with a pedestrian 2nd serve and suspect mentality like Murray. I'd give Fed's "pigeons" like Roddick or Stan more of a shot, simply because they'd have periods where they would take the racquet out of Fed's hands, they'd have a puncher's chance. Unlike Murray, who's gonna wait for those BH errors that would never come in sufficient capacity.

I am allowed to believe that, right? Or is everyone on TTW require to kiss Murray's behind and act like he's this extremely unfortunate 10 slam winner in another era whose A game is on another level compared to guys like Hewitt and Roddick (or old Agassi).
 

killerboss

Semi-Pro
Lendl's Murray better than both Federer and Djokovic. Beat Djokovic in 2012 USO and trounced him in 2013 Wimbledon final, took both out back to back in Olympics played at Wimbledon, bean Fed at AO 2013 etc. If it weren't for their pet slams it would have basically been humilating. Then when he stopped clowning around with Mauresmo and got Lendl back, he trumped Djokovic for number 1 in 2016 lmao, defeating the man himself yet again in the year end championship.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Federer has won 3 slams beating Nadal. Murray has won 0 slams beating either Federer or Nadal. It's really really really bad. Can't be compared with The great Roger Federer.
More slam wins over Nadal and more than twice the amount of wins overall over the Spaniard compared to Murray. Most wins after Djokovic.

It's not even close.
 

PrinceMoron

Legend
Olympics saw a very long Delpo match at nearly 4 1/2 hours leaving Federer disadvantaged in the final.

I saw all of Murray’s matches live and he was hitting smoother than anyone, it just looked better somehow.not something you can see from a tv.
Still not sure he would have beaten a rested Federer though

And don’t forget the pros set where Federer let Murray have a game to save his embarrassment
 

nachiket nolefam

Hall of Fame
Lendl's Murray better than both Federer and Djokovic. Beat Djokovic in 2012 USO and trounced him in 2013 Wimbledon final, took both out back to back in Olympics played at Wimbledon, bean Fed at AO 2013 etc. If it weren't for their pet slams it would have basically been humilating. Then when he stopped clowning around with Mauresmo and got Lendl back, he trumped Djokovic for number 1 in 2016 lmao, defeating the man himself yet again in the year end championship.
In between he got a ton of losses lol. Novak has beat him in 5 slam finals. 4 at AO, freaking 4. And another one at RG. Novak crushed his dream to ever win a single Australian Open. He reached 5 finals, another few semis and so many times he was outclassed by Nole. Few bagels in finals to put more shame as well.
 
Top