Why Novak Djokovic is greater than Roger Federer at Wimbledon

For two main reasons

The big one, Djokovic is 3-0 against Federer in Wimbledon finals. Federer to Djokovic in Wimbledon finals = what Roddick was to Federer in Wimbledon finals. Even when Djokovic played a bad match by his standards he emerged victorious, just like what happened with Federer against Roddick in 2009. That should tell you enough. Djokovic turned Federer into a freaking Roddick and it can't get any more embarrassing than that.






The next big point, there is one Wimbledon tournament cancelled in the middle of Djokovic dominance. Djokovic was even bigger favorite last year that this year but CoFed 19 denied him the title. Now, let 2020 Wimbledon be played and one of those Wimbledons which were in the middle of Federer dominance cancelled and you get 7 titles for both Djokovic and Federer. So Federer fans should never forget this fact, the only reason Federer has more titles at the event is luck and nothing but luck.
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
I don't think Novak is greater than Fed at Wimbledon...but if somebody beat Djokovic in the Wimbledon Final both this year and last year, then some other time in the future, clearly that player is pretty damn great.
This would be an equivalent of 2009 Fed beating Djokovic.
 

MasterZeb

Hall of Fame
you get 7 titles for both Djokovic and Federer. So Federer fans should never forget this fact, the only reason Federer has more titles at the event is luck and nothing but luck.
You’re not a very good analyst are you if in your extensive research and number crunching, you’ve failed to find out that fed has 8 Wimbledon titles.
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
He’s better player on the modern grass for sure.

I’ll put Novak ahead if and when he wins 7th. 2020 cancellation + 3-0 in finals is enough to outweight freebie title won against Crying Cilic.
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
8-6 is still too big of a gap to account for h2h advantages. At the end of the day, when you see stats it's the titles that will be shown, h2h and other stuff will be secondary.
 

Tennisfan339

Professional
I dont get the logic with 3-0. Actually Federer was 4-0 with Roddick in Wimbledon, and Djokovic wins 3-1 against Federer.
But if true then Murray is better than Djokovic in Wimbledon? He wins 2-0. Does that make sense?
Berdych is also better in Wimbledon Müller is better than Nadal and Robredo and Millman are better than Federer at USO and so on. It doesn't work that way.

Djokovic is already better than Federer on clay on hard court but he will need 9 Wimbledon if he wants to be considered a better grass player. Federer has won 10 ATP500 on grass, Djokovic has 1 ATP250. So if it ends with 8-8, Federer still wins.The h2h doesn't matter much here. If Federer faced young Djokovic on his way to the Wimbledon trophy in 2005-2006-2007 then what would be the h2h?
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
I dont get the logic with 3-0. Actually Federer was 4-0 with Roddick in Wimbledon, and Djokovic wins 3-1 against Federer.
But if true then Murray is better than Djokovic in Wimbledon? He wins 2-0. Does that make sense?
Berdych is also better in Wimbledon Müller is better than Nadal and Robredo and Millman are better than Federer at USO and so on. It doesn't work that way.

Djokovic is already better than Federer on clay on hard court but he will need 9 Wimbledon if he wants to be considered a better grass player. Federer has won 10 ATP500 on grass, Djokovic has 1 ATP250. So if it ends with 8-8, Federer still wins.The h2h doesn't matter much here. If Federer faced young Djokovic on his way to the Wimbledon trophy in 2005-2006-2007 then what would be the h2h?
I think if Murray had 5-6 titles then yes he would be better than Djokovic in Wimbledon.
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
I don't think Novak is greater than Fed at Wimbledon...but if somebody beat Djokovic in the Wimbledon Final both this year and last year, then some other time in the future, clearly that player is pretty damn great.
Only 1 player has ever beaten Djokovic in a Wimbledon final (and he did it without conceding a set). :cool:
 

tudwell

Legend
Murray is also greater than Nole at the US Open? He trails by just 2 titles (same as Novak trails Fed at Wimbledon) and is undefeated against Nole in finals there. Checkmate, atheists.
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
Thiem trails Djokovic at RG by 2 titles but ahead of the H2H there. So Thiem is greater than Djokovic at RG?
No because he has 0 titles and 0 wins over Nadal. If he wins a title, by defeating Djokovic or Nadal then he can enter that conversation.
 
Well much like the overall GOAT Debate, he is 2 off. As long as he gets within one he shall probably be considered WImbledon GOAT over Fed because of the slam dominance over him. Djokovic wasn't considered for GOAT Until he won that French and got within 1 of Fedal

One more Wimbledon and Djoker has it secured
 

Jonas78

Legend
Wimbledon record:

20s Federer ->
7 x F
2 x QF
1 x 1R

30s Federer ->
5 x F
1 x SF
2 X QF
1 x 2R

Was 30s Federer so much worse, or did he play stronger opponents? :unsure:
You mean Tsonga, Stakhovsky, Raonic, Andersson and Hurkacz? You can also add Berdych 2010...

What a mug Federer is, how could he win all those Wimbledon titles losing to these mugs??
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
You mean Tsonga, Stakhovsky, Raonic, Andersson and Hurkacz? You can also add Berdych 2010...
Healthy 20s Federer lost to Nadal, Ancic, Berdych, Tsonga.
Healthy 30s Federer lost to Djokovic x3, Anderson.

30s Federer won 2 rather than 6 titles because he had fitness issues in 2013/2016 and he had peak Djokovic in his way 3 times.
 

Jonas78

Legend
2010-2011 was in his 20s with the old racket. 2013 was a bad loss but that was his worst year. His form since 2014 has been stellar.
Stellar? Raonic and Andersson?

Federers prime lasted until early 2010. Sure he has had good to great periods later on, but he never again reached the same consistency. And if you look into the numbers, you will see it wasnt Nadal and Djokovic which ended his prime back in 2010. In 2010 he was 4-1 vs Djokovic, but he started losing a lot more to the field. So either Fed declined, or the whole field suddenly got a lot stronger in 2010. Choose whatever suits you.
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
Stellar? Raonic and Andersson?

Federers prime lasted until early 2010. Sure he has had good to great periods later on, but he never again reached the same consistency. And if you look into the numbers, you will see it wasnt Nadal and Djokovic which ended his prime back in 2010. In 2010 he was 4-1 vs Djokovic, but he started losing a lot more to the field. So either Fed declined, or the whole field suddenly got a lot stronger in 2010. Choose whatever suits you.
Federer pre racket change also lost to Ancic, Berdych, Tsonga, Stahkovsky. He was cleary hampered in 2016 with the knee. 2018 was a bad choke yes. He is the ultimate choker.

Field got stronger gradually from 2008-2011. No more freebie slams vs likes of Bagdhatis and Gonzalez.
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
Wimbledon 2015 Pre final->



Martina Navratilova: "I don't know if I have seen a better match from Roger. He served amazingly well, was so relaxed and mixed it up so well with the serve and from the baseline."



Tim Henman: "Roger was incredible. In the context of this match, playing Andy Murray in the semi-final at Wimbledon, I think that is as good as I have ever seen Roger play.



Pat Cash: "People are surprised when I say this but Federer is a better player now than when he was racking up the titles. It's another thing if his body can last over five sets. The way that he is playing he could win the final against Novak Djokovic in straight sets."


TTW pre final favourite with majority.


Post final
-> Old. Weak forehands. Slow.
 

Jonas78

Legend
Federer pre racket change also lost to Ancic, Berdych, Tsonga, Stahkovsky. He was cleary hampered in 2016 with the knee. 2018 was a bad choke yes. He is the ultimate choker.

Field got stronger gradually from 2008-2011. No more freebie slams vs likes of Bagdhatis and Gonzalez.
You seriously cant mean Federer started losing after AO10 because the whole field suddenly peaked?

He lost to Bagdhatis (funny you mention him) R3 Indian Wells. Then Berdych R4 Miami. Then Gulbis R2 in Rome. And so on and so on. You seriously saying this is peak Federer?

He became the ultimate choker, he used to be clutch. He was the tie break king. He still leads the most tie breaks won% according to Ultimate tennis stats
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
You seriously cant mean Federer started losing after AO10 because the whole field suddenly peaked?

He lost to Bagdhatis (funny you mention him) R3 Indian Wells. Then Berdych R4 Miami. Then Gulbis R2 in Rome. And so on and so on. You seriously saying this is peak Federer?

He became the ultimate choker, he used to be clutch. He was the tie break king. He still leads the most tie breaks won% according to Ultimate tennis stats
I was comparing Federer in 20s to 30s. Biggest difference in results was injuries and peak Djokovic, level was similar.
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
How so? Because he beat Federer? The guy that mostly won pretty weak titles?
Because he beat Federer, one of the top 10 greatest players of all time and Wimbledon co-GOAT with Pete.

Much more difficult and stronger than defeating Philippousis, Roddick, Hewitt, Kiefer, Baby, green Nadal.
 

SonnyT

Hall of Fame
Kicking around Roddick and Phillipousis 4 times in the finals really doesn't mean that much. Beating Federer and Nadal a total of 5 times means a lot more.
 
Top