Why Djokovic has bogeyman but not Fedal ?

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster

ibbi

Hall of Fame
A fringe player with 3 majors? I mean there aren't many other guys in that fringe that he's in, so it's tough to compare. Sir Andy used to be a bogeyman for Roger outside of the slams, if that counts. Roger picked that bogey and flicked it away though. It's a good match up for Stan, isn't it? Certainly without all Rafa's topspin, and without Roger being his big Swiss brother who'll always have him in an emotional headlock, the same way Rafa used to have all those good Spanish players in one even when they were in and around the top 10, and the way Janko could never get close to Novak even when he was established in the top 10 either.
 

BeatlesFan

Talk Tennis Guru
2015Roland Garros
France
Outdoor ClayFStan Wawrinka46 64 63 64

2016US Open
NY, U.S.A.
Outdoor HardFStan Wawrinka671 64 75 63

2019US Open
NY, U.S.A.
Outdoor HardR16Stan Wawrinka64 75 21
RET

2014Australian Open
Australia
Outdoor HardQFStan Wawrinka26 64 62 36 97


Even the two matches below, Djokovic could/should have lost.

2013US Open
NY, U.S.A.
Outdoor HardSFNovak Djokovic26 764 36 63 64
2013Australian Open
Australia
Outdoor HardR16Novak Djokovic16 75 64 675 1210
You forgot about 2014 USO when Novak inexplicably lost to Kei, and he's currently 16-2 against him. That was a significant upset and weird loss.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
You forgot about 2014 USO when Novak inexplicably lost to Kei, and he's currently 16-2 against him. That was a significant upset and weird loss.
But Kei has been beaten black and blue by Novak at majors.

The weird thing is ATG having a regular fringe player bogeyman, time and time again.
 

Robert Baratheon

Professional
Fed lost just one match at majors at normal age.

I discard USO 17 loss, as Fed was 36 then ?
Fed devotee did you forget the great battles of Basel where Jon Martin beat the maestro in back to back finals? Also the IW18 where maestro mugged and the fairy tale ended.

In seriousness though just like Stan is a matchup issue for Novak on the slower courts Delpo is a matchup issue for Fraud on faster courts.
Even in the matches where Rog wins against Delpo he has a difficultly facing him.
Delpo's game vs Roger works at its best especially indoors(Basel 12, 13.. WTF 10, 12) coz they are fast courts and Delpo blows off Fraud with his FH. Stubbornerer keeps hitting into the giant FH over and over again.
 

clayqueen

G.O.A.T.
2015Roland Garros
France
Outdoor ClayFStan Wawrinka46 64 63 64

2016US Open
NY, U.S.A.
Outdoor HardFStan Wawrinka671 64 75 63

2019US Open
NY, U.S.A.
Outdoor HardR16Stan Wawrinka64 75 21
RET

2014Australian Open
Australia
Outdoor HardQFStan Wawrinka26 64 62 36 97


Even the two matches below, Djokovic could/should have lost.

2013US Open
NY, U.S.A.
Outdoor HardSFNovak Djokovic26 764 36 63 64
2013Australian Open
Australia
Outdoor HardR16Novak Djokovic16 75 64 675 1210
All on hard court that Djokovic is supposed to reign over. Lol
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
Delpo can't be compared to Wawrinka on this. Fed is 5-2 in majors vs Delpo while Djokovic is 4-4 vs Wawrinka.

Wawrinka has won 4/5 of their GS slam meetings since 2014 AO. Delpo isn't in the same league of boogeyman.
Exactly.

Federer and Nadal already have a bogeyman.

His name is Djokovic.
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
Stay on topic.

OP specifically states NON ATG.

So Wawrinka is a nobody, huh?...

Great logic...

We can include a 3-slam champ but not double-digit champs? Amazing logic.

The thread is a troll Fedfan thread, otherwise the rule would have been NO SLAM CHAMPS ALLOWED.

But OP conveniently chose to admit multi-slam champs who are just a tiny bit below ATG level.

This is Spin-Doctoring 101.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Yea and both Federer and Nadal have lost 3 times to Del Potro/Cilic in Slams to Djokovic's 0. You win some, you lose some. Another pointless thread from the addict.

Big 3's head to head in Slams against other Slam winners and non ATGs from this era (Murray, Wawrinka, Del Potro, Cilic)
Federer -- 21-5
Nadal -- 17-6
Djokovic -- 22-6
 
Last edited:

Enga

Hall of Fame
Not an ATG? I guess that depends on what you define that as.... I know Im gonna remember him as one of the greats from this era. There arent many slam winners during the last 10 years, let alone multi slam winners.
 
So Wawrinka is a nobody, huh?...

Great logic...

We can include a 3-slam champ but not double-digit champs? Amazing logic.

The thread is a troll Fedfan thread, otherwise the rule would have been NO SLAM CHAMPS ALLOWED.

But OP conveniently chose to admit multi-slam champs who are just a tiny bit below ATG level.

This is Spin-Doctoring 101.
He found success through beating Djokovic at majors repeatedly, so I'd say no.

Besides that, I'm just following the rules laid out by OP.
 

La_Para

Rookie
True.Fed had a bad matchup with Nadal, Nadal with Davydenko and so on.
It makes me wonder though, what constitutes 'a bad matchup'? For example, people say Nadal's a bad matchup against Federer, but not nearly as many people say that Federer's a bad match up for Murray or Nadal for Dimitrov or Djokovic for Del Potro. Just what/when is something a bad match up?
 

Zetty

Professional
Simon was a boogeyman for Federer, as well as Berdman and Tsonga. Djokovic has lost a total of like 5 matches against Stan out of 20 lol.
 

Meles

Bionic Poster
2015Roland Garros
France
Outdoor ClayFStan Wawrinka46 64 63 64

2016US Open
NY, U.S.A.
Outdoor HardFStan Wawrinka671 64 75 63

2019US Open
NY, U.S.A.
Outdoor HardR16Stan Wawrinka64 75 21
RET

2014Australian Open
Australia
Outdoor HardQFStan Wawrinka26 64 62 36 97


Even the two matches below, Djokovic could/should have lost.

2013US Open
NY, U.S.A.
Outdoor HardSFNovak Djokovic26 764 36 63 64
2013Australian Open
Australia
Outdoor HardR16Novak Djokovic16 75 64 675 1210
And Wawrinka's slams all through Nole, so a somewhat lesser player who owns a top player.

Djoko 2.0 prancing around today developing a similar issue with Tsitsipas.:D And to boot I'd swear Stan is still getting better in his comeback even this weekend. Troubling times for the World #1.:-D
 

ChrisRF

Hall of Fame
Not really so amazing no Meles?
It's 2 tournaments lol.
One of which Nadal hasn't even been playing all that much.
I agree. And also don’t forget that all those guys (including Rafa himself for some years on grass ;)) normally only play a few rounds. So it’s obvious how unlikely many encounters are. However, he actually lost to Muller TWICE at Wimbledon (also in 2005) and had a rematch with Rosol (2014 I guess). And he had another loss to Brown in Halle.
 

GabeT

Legend
Yea and both Federer and Nadal have lost 3 times to Del Potro/Cilic in Slams to Djokovic's 0. You win some, you lose some. Another pointless thread from the addict.

Big 3's head to head in Slams against other Slam winners and non ATGs from this era (Murray, Wawrinka, Del Potro, Cilic)
Federer -- 21-5
Nadal -- 17-6
Djokovic -- 22-6
end thread
 

Flash O'Groove

Hall of Fame
It makes me wonder though, what constitutes 'a bad matchup'? For example, people say Nadal's a bad matchup against Federer, but not nearly as many people say that Federer's a bad match up for Murray or Nadal for Dimitrov or Djokovic for Del Potro. Just what/when is something a bad match up?
A bad match-up is the situation were the interaction of playing styles of two players doesn't allow the superior player to win as would be expected. The court conditions have a huge effect on match-ups.

For me, players have roughly the same level than some players, are inferior to some players, and are superior to some players. E.g., Federer, Djokovic and Nadal are roughly equal, they are superior to everyone else. Tsonga is inferior to them, roughly equal to other top 10-20 players, superior to everyone else.

Now the result of a match between two players depends primarily about the comparison of their level AND of how their game styles match-up with each others AND how their game styles interact with the court conditions.

So generally when a superior player beat an inferior player, you don't go to far into match-up because the result was expected (Nadal vs Dimitrov).

If two roughly equal players have a balanced H2H, you don't go to far into the match-up because it is expected than equal players will split results. If the H2H is unbalanced (Nadal-Federer), then you need to look at match-up to understand why a player can consistently dominate someone who is roughly his equal.

If an inferior player beat a superior player several times, this is an unexpected result and you need to look at the match-up: how does the game style of the inferior player allows him to defeat a superior player?

For me there is no doubt that Wawrinka is an inferior player to Djokovic, and his success at slams against him is a surprise, including his close 5 sets defeats in Australia or New York, because if I consider only their playing level, Wawrinka should not regularly push Djokovic to five sets, nor win!

Great exemples of match-up are thus Wawrinka-Djokovic, Davydenko-Nadal, Nadal-Federer (now reversed). You could also argue that Federer-Roddick is an exemple of bad match-up, because the H2H gap is larger than the level gap between them.
 
Top