why people think peak djokovic would beat peak federer on hard court major ?

skypadq

Professional
I'm afraid this assumption is annoying, so why the hell do you do that when Djokovic fans say this while bringing logic?

us open h2h is 3 vs 3

aus open h2h is 4 vs 1 for novak djokovic

but if match played on rebound ace , fed have good shot beating djokovic also

and i think that safin and hewitt are also strong players


i think weak era logic is fed made looks like that 2004 ~ 2007 era is so weak
because federer is that dominant
 

ABCD

Hall of Fame
I'm afraid this assumption is annoying, so why the hell do you do that when Djokovic fans say this while bringing logic?

us open h2h is 3 vs 3

aus open h2h is 4 vs 1 for novak djokovic

but if match played on rebound ace , fed have good shot beating djokovic also

and i think that safin and hewitt are also strong players


i think weak era logic is fed made looks like that 2004 ~ 2007 era is so weak
because federer is that dominant
This match was played in real life; USO2015.
 

ABCD

Hall of Fame
fed was not 6 years older than djokovic ??? :confused:
“I think I’m a better player now than when I was at 24 because I’ve practiced for another 10 years and I’ve got 10 years more experience,” Federer said. “Maybe I don’t have the confidence level that I had at 24 when I was winning 40 matches in a row, but I feel like I hit a bigger serve, my backhand is better, my forehand is still as good as it’s ever been, I volley better than I have in the past. I think I’ve had to adapt to a new generation of players again.” (August 17th, 2015)
 

junior74

G.O.A.T.
“I think I’m a better player now than when I was at 24 because I’ve practiced for another 10 years and I’ve got 10 years more experience,” Federer said. “Maybe I don’t have the confidence level that I had at 24 when I was winning 40 matches in a row, but I feel like I hit a bigger serve, my backhand is better, my forehand is still as good as it’s ever been, I volley better than I have in the past. I think I’ve had to adapt to a new generation of players again.” (August, 2015)
 

junior74

G.O.A.T.
If Federer says his forehand in 2015 is as good as it was in 2005 then it must be try, right? Surely he is the best judge and would definitely be correct and truthful.

We're only watching and studying all his forehands, what do we know?
When for instance Trump says no one knows more about anything than he does, it is true. If anyone knows it, it's him!

All men are like that. Unbiased, unfiltered, truthful, pure.
 
Last edited:
Because it is very possible he would, then again we can't know that. The problem with peak is that in a match people will always say that the player who lost wasn't peak. You know, you can play at your peak and still lose a match because you got outplayed.
 

Djokodalerer31

Hall of Fame
I can flip switch this logic and say why do people assume, that the way Federer played at AO before 2008 would help him beat PEAK Djokovic, which didn't happen until 2011?? Until 2008 Djokovic was only improving, while Federer already playing in his peak and close to drop in form! Don't you think it's only natural for a top-form player at the time like Federer to be able to beat only improving like Djokovic? If you want any indication on how majority of matches at AO would conclude between the two, then look no further than 2011 season, aka Djokovic's peak form season and Federer's close to peak-form! Two of their particular grand slam semis encounters that year is a clear evidence of that! Close to peak form Federer defeated close to peak Djokovic (i think he still could play better in that semis, just missed the mark...) in RG semis, then peak Djokovic defeated close to peak Federer in semi-final epic later at the US Open! There is no reason to suggest Djokovic couldn't have done the same at AO on old surface playing in his peak form...this is just silly assumtpion...Plus don't forget it's not just court speed, that makes Djokovic play so well there! There are other factors, like overall conditions (which include everything outside and inside factors - from weather and climate to organization efforts and small moments like that..., local fan group support giving huge boost in confidence and so on...) It's not just about court speed! Borg dominated Wimbledon, because he liked atmosphere, his tennis was most defensive with attacks from both wings gaining great angular momentum! What made him 5 consecutive WImbledon champion is well...because he loved Wimbledon and everything about it! For that same reason, he was quite poor grass courter outside of it...
 

ForehandCross

Hall of Fame
This match was played in real life; USO2015.
Which then implies peak Federer is a better player in terms of skill and ability while Djokovic is only better in terms of mental ability. That's what "factual" stats told me.





To OP
The real answer is peak Djokovic on AO HC is 2016 SF, And no one beats him there in that mood.Not Federer Not Nadal Not Sampras. So there's that.
 

uscwang

Hall of Fame
I'm afraid this assumption is annoying, so why the hell do you do that when Djokovic fans say this while bringing logic?

us open h2h is 3 vs 3

aus open h2h is 4 vs 1 for novak djokovic

but if match played on rebound ace , fed have good shot beating djokovic also

and i think that safin and hewitt are also strong players


i think weak era logic is fed made looks like that 2004 ~ 2007 era is so weak
because federer is that dominant
2010 USO Novak 3-2 Federer
2011 AO Novak 3-0
2011 USO Novak 3-2
2015 USO Novak 3-1
2016 AO Novak 3-1
2020 AO Novak 3-0
There were some close matches at USO. But Novak handled Federer and the audience well on Federer's home court.
 

GabeT

Legend
I'm afraid this assumption is annoying, so why the hell do you do that when Djokovic fans say this while bringing logic?

us open h2h is 3 vs 3

aus open h2h is 4 vs 1 for novak djokovic

but if match played on rebound ace , fed have good shot beating djokovic also

and i think that safin and hewitt are also strong players


i think weak era logic is fed made looks like that 2004 ~ 2007 era is so weak
because federer is that dominant
Your false bad English is getting annoying. Can we discuss that?
 

6august

Hall of Fame
Whut's wroong with that? People do not saying Djokovic will dominate Federer on hardcout. Thye just sayes Djokovic would beat a number of matches out of 10 matches they play and there have a clue. Peak Djokovic may not be as dominant as peak Federer, but peakiest Djokovic is a good as any hardcoret player in the tennis history.

Pardon me but I will but money on Djokvic in that hyphothetical march.

Merry Xmas anf happy new eve.
 

SonnyT

Hall of Fame
The separation in physical prowess is insignificant compared to the gaping hole in mental prowess! Djokovic is so mentally strong and smart, he'd find a way to make up for physical gap, even if it were bigger!

Why do you think double matchpoints happened 3 times? The first 2 times when Federer was at or under 30!
 
Last edited:

Gazelle

Legend
Good luck on your next English exam. Maybe your teacher will give you high grades just to end his misery.
 

Beckerserve

Hall of Fame
I'm afraid this assumption is annoying, so why the hell do you do that when Djokovic fans say this while bringing logic?

us open h2h is 3 vs 3

aus open h2h is 4 vs 1 for novak djokovic

but if match played on rebound ace , fed have good shot beating djokovic also

and i think that safin and hewitt are also strong players


i think weak era logic is fed made looks like that 2004 ~ 2007 era is so weak
because federer is that dominant
Djokovic has never beaten peak Federer on hard court. I have been watching old matches and Djokovics game has not changed that much over the years. He has always been a counter puncher. Federer 2003-2007 was a world apart from the player he has been the last decade or so. Cannot see peak federer losing to Djokovic on hard court, clay or grass. Wawrinka has troubled peak Djokovic. No offence to Stan but peak Federer is 5 leagues ahead of peak Wawrinka. Peak Federer would be the nightmare match up for Novak.
 

SonnyT

Hall of Fame
Djokovic has never beaten peak Federer on hard court. I have been watching old matches and Djokovics game has not changed that much over the years. He has always been a counter puncher. Federer 2003-2007 was a world apart from the player he has been the last decade or so. Cannot see peak federer losing to Djokovic on hard court, clay or grass. Wawrinka has troubled peak Djokovic. No offence to Stan but peak Federer is 5 leagues ahead of peak Wawrinka. Peak Federer would be the nightmare match up for Novak.
Djokovic always loses hypothetical matches! Give me a break, Djokovic started beating Federer before the latter was 30 years old!

At the top of any sports, mentality plays a big part, and no one has a bigger mentality in tennis than Djokovic, probably ever. Federer was dominated by Nadal when Federer was in his prime, and Nadal in his teens. You know why? Because Federer allowed himself to be dominated mentally!

And in 2011, Djokovic totally dominated the Nadal that Federer couldn't beat!
 

King No1e

G.O.A.T.
I'm afraid this assumption is annoying, so why the hell do you do that when Djokovic fans say this while bringing logic?

us open h2h is 3 vs 3

aus open h2h is 4 vs 1 for novak djokovic

but if match played on rebound ace , fed have good shot beating djokovic also

and i think that safin and hewitt are also strong players


i think weak era logic is fed made looks like that 2004 ~ 2007 era is so weak
because federer is that dominant
Because Plexi is just as much of a hard court as Rebound Ace was. We don't use RA anymore. Djokovic wins 10 out of 10 times on Plexi, but Federer would not win 10 out of 10 on fast HC. Therefore Djokovic > Federer in the HC matchup.

Agreed on Safin and Hewitt though. While I think Roddick is overrated by many on this forum, Hewitt and Safin were exceptional players and had the game to be ATG's if not for one Swiss man.
 

Milanez82

Rookie
Because Plexi is just as much of a hard court as Rebound Ace was. We don't use RA anymore. Djokovic wins 10 out of 10 times on Plexi, but Federer would not win 10 out of 10 on fast HC. Therefore Djokovic > Federer in the HC matchup.

Agreed on Safin and Hewitt though. While I think Roddick is overrated by many on this forum, Hewitt and Safin were exceptional players and had the game to be ATG's if not for one Swiss man.
Safin lost 2004 AO final to Federer.
He also lost to Fed in W07, W08 and AO9 in earlier rounds. He wasnt going to win any of those even without Federer. In all other slam exits he didnt face Fed.
Don't see how Federer prevented him from anything except that 1 slam run.

As for Hewitt, Agassi pushed Federer to 5 sets in UO04 qf while Hew got a double bagel and Agassi won their only slam duel(UO2002 none the less), so not a sure win for Hew
In 2005 UO again Agassi, not a given but should be a heavy favorite due to age difference
2005 Wimbledon, he would face Roddick in the final, no favorite there though Roddick was 3-0 on grass vs Hew

Here we see at best 3 more slams for him and its clear Federer didn't stop him from becoming an atg.
 

JoelSandwich

Hall of Fame
Djokovic has never beaten peak Federer on hard court. I have been watching old matches and Djokovics game has not changed that much over the years. He has always been a counter puncher. Federer 2003-2007 was a world apart from the player he has been the last decade or so. Cannot see peak federer losing to Djokovic on hard court, clay or grass. Wawrinka has troubled peak Djokovic. No offence to Stan but peak Federer is 5 leagues ahead of peak Wawrinka. Peak Federer would be the nightmare match up for Novak.
07 Montreal final
 

Beckerserve

Hall of Fame
Djokovic always loses hypothetical matches! Give me a break, Djokovic started beating Federer before the latter was 30 years old!

At the top of any sports, mentality plays a big part, and no one has a bigger mentality in tennis than Djokovic, probably ever. Federer was dominated by Nadal when Federer was in his prime, and Nadal in his teens. You know why? Because Federer allowed himself to be dominated mentally!

And in 2011, Djokovic totally dominated the Nadal that Federer couldn't beat!
Federer was way past his best in 2011. Djokovic is arguably the least strong mentally of the big 3 btw, how else do you explain is Major finals won lost ratio? His acid test will come closer he gets to Federer. Lets see if he actually gets over 19, it wont be easy mentally. Nadal virtually threw it away getting to 19 last year he was that tight in numerous matches. Federer is a different era to Nadal and Djokovic. During lockdown i watched Federer matches 2003-2006. Guy was just on another level to what he was 2008 onwards.
 

Djokodalerer31

Hall of Fame
Djokovic has never beaten peak Federer on hard court. I have been watching old matches and Djokovics game has not changed that much over the years. He has always been a counter puncher. Federer 2003-2007 was a world apart from the player he has been the last decade or so. Cannot see peak federer losing to Djokovic on hard court, clay or grass. Wawrinka has troubled peak Djokovic. No offence to Stan but peak Federer is 5 leagues ahead of peak Wawrinka. Peak Federer would be the nightmare match up for Novak.
Yeah no kidding...that is because the only way for PEAK Djokovic to play PEAK Federer is for Djokovic to teleport from 2011 by using time machine...it works the same way other way around buddy! Djokovic wasn't as much of a peak player BEFORE 2011, as Federer wasn't past 2010! Here i just flip switched your own logic...
 

RS

Legend
Because Plexi is just as much of a hard court as Rebound Ace was. We don't use RA anymore. Djokovic wins 10 out of 10 times on Plexi, but Federer would not win 10 out of 10 on fast HC. Therefore Djokovic > Federer in the HC matchup.

Agreed on Safin and Hewitt though. While I think Roddick is overrated by many on this forum, Hewitt and Safin were exceptional players and had the game to be ATG's if not for one Swiss man.
Who do you think wins at RG/Wim/USO then? In before Djokovic is better at 3 of the 4 slams.
 

SonnyT

Hall of Fame
Djokovic is definitely the strongest mentally of B3, no question. Federer crumbled 3 times while holding double match points on Djokovic. Federer is nowhere near Djokovic on the mental toughness department. He lost all 4 five setters the two played, and amazingly enough, in 3 of them, he held double match points (2 at USO, 1 last year at Wimbledon).

Peak Federer couldn't beat Nadal hardly at all from '04 to '15. Right after Nadal's best year in 2010, Djokovic began to dominate him in 2011, BTW the first gluten-free year of his career.
 
Last edited:

King No1e

G.O.A.T.
Who do you think wins at RG/Wim/USO then? In before Djokovic is better at 3 of the 4 slams.
If they played each other 10 out of 10 times, average prime for prime level
AO (plexi): 10-0 Djokovic (9-1 at best)
RG: 6-4 Djokovic
Wimbledon: 7-3 Federer
USO: 6-4 Federer
 

RS

Legend
If they played each other 10 out of 10 times, average prime for prime level
AO (plexi): 10-0 Djokovic (9-1 at best)
RG: 6-4 Djokovic
Wimbledon: 7-3 Federer
USO: 6-4 Federer
90-100% odds for Djokovic at Plexi is far far too much to me but okay. It means you think Djokovic at AO was way better than Fed anywhere.
 
Last edited:

Bender

G.O.A.T.
Because they like Djokovic

I still think Fed-Nadal-Djokovic peak to peak have a stone paper scissors matchup that has now broken down due to age differences, but your opinion(s) may differ.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS

SonnyT

Hall of Fame
Tennis, at the top level, is much more than just stroke production. It's about human drama, digging deep, producing your best at the most crucial times!

Federer is good at it, but Djokovic is better! I believe that's the small margin that separates the two at their peaks, the intangibles! At the moment of highest tension, Djokovic is comfortable and able to produce his best, whereas Federer is uncomfortable and unable to. You saw what happened at 40-15 in Wimbledon '19: his discomfort was so pervasive, his wife Mirka felt and visibly showed it.
 
Last edited:

Lew II

Legend
Federer in the last decade lost all the 8 biggest matches against Djokovic on hardcourts:

0-6 in Slams
0-2 in YEC finals
 

FedeRadi

Rookie
Destroying is too much. I think peak Dokovic would had have a slight but clear advantage against peak Federer. Let's say, if they would had played 100 matches, I'm pretty sure Djokovic would have won more than 50.

I consider prime Djokovic 2011-16(Maybe USO 2010-RG 2016, with peak in 2011 and 2015) and prime Federer 2004-09(Maybe Wimbledon 2004-AO 2010, with peak in 2006-07).
In 2004-09 Prime Federer was 7-4 against Djokovic. After 3-0 start against baby Nole in 2006 and early 2007(Nole not a top 10). So he didn't destroyed him. Nole beat prime Federer at AO08.
Djokovic in 2011-16 was 11-6 against Federer. And, out of 6, Federer had 3 wins in minor tournaments plus a useless win in WTF Round Robin(The other two where in Cinci, worst Master 1000 for Nole). He never beat Nole in an HC Slam. This is way more impressive than Federer leads in 2004-09 in my opinion.
 
Top