Year-by-year comparison of the Big 3’s level in their 30s at each slam

jl809

Legend
This topic comes up a lot across GPPD so I’m dealing with it properly here.

I’ll go age-by-age like this:
30 years old
Federer: 2012 AO, 2012 FO, 2012 W, 2011 USO
Nadal: 2017 AO, 2016 FO, 2016 W, 2016 USO
Djokovic: 2018 AO, 2017 FO, 2017 W, 2017 USO

Federer’s level is clearly highest in all of the slams, with Nadal’s body breaking on clay

Fed 4, Ned 0, Djok 0

31 years old
Federer: 2013 AO, 2013 FO, 2013 W, 2012 USO
Nadal: 2018 AO, 2017 FO, 2017 W, 2017 USO
Djokovic: 2019 AO, 2018 FO, 2018 W, 2018 USO

Clear win for Rafa at the FO, clear win for Djokovic at the AO and Wimbledon, debatable at the USO so I’m not going to give it to anyone. Fanboys will just say their guy.

Fed 4, Ned 1, Djok 2; up for debate: USO

32 years old
Federer: 2014 AO, 2014 FO, 2014 W, 2013 USO
Nadal: 2019 AO, 2018 FO, 2018 W, 2018 USO
Djokovic: 2020 AO, 2019 FO, 2019 W, 2019 USO

Clear for Rafa at the FO, then it gets tough. I will just about give Wimb to Federer over Nadal because of level vs the field, even though in that matchup I still think Federer might lose due to confidence and bad BH. USO, no-one wins. I can’t pick the AO because it’s all round awfulness, which would depend on surface speed a bit.

Fed 5, Ned 2, Djok 2. Up for debate: AO, Wimbledon

33 years old
Federer: 2015 AO, 2015 FO, 2015 W, 2014 USO
Nadal: 2020 AO, 2019 FO, 2019 W, 2019 USO
Djokovic: 2021 AO, 2020 FO, 2020 W, 2020 USO

I’ll give Rafa the FO for sure and Federer Wimby for sure. Then Djokovic sneaks the AO in a super low quality competition. I’ll give Rafa the USO too as Fed was already creaking before the Cilic match, and Rafa imo does better against that Monfils and Cilic.

Fed 6, Ned 4, Djok 3.

34 years old
Federer: 2016 AO, 2016 FO, 2016 W, 2015 USO
Nadal: 2021 AO, 2020 FO, 2020 W, 2020 USO
Djokovic: 2022 AO, 2021 FO, 2021 W, 2021 USO

This is hard because of the pandemic; Nadal went AWOL for 2 slams and Djokovic was banned from the AO. FO goes to Nadal again, USO would definitely go to Fed, Wimby and the AO are all over the place. Wimby to Djokovic, as he is the least injured? And Fed probably gets the AO because of the ban, although I think this is a bit ridiculous for an across-year “level” discussion, so won’t count it

Fed 7, Ned 5, Djok 4

35 years old
Federer: 2017 AO, 2017 FO, 2017 W, 2016 USO
Nadal: 2022 AO, 2021 FO, 2021 W, 2021 USO
Djokovic: 2023 AO, 2022 FO, 2022 W, 2022 USO

Here we’re basically at the end of the road because we’ve reached the present and have to guess if Djokovic will play the HC slams / what level he’d produce if he could, etc. Atm no 35 year old is playing the US Open.
Wimbledon to Federer for sure (unless Djokovic does something amazing in a few weeks), and FO to Nadal again. Probably AO to Fed too.

Fed 8 or 9, Ned 6, Djok 4

Looking further ahead, we can forecast where Federer would definitely win more: 36 year old (AO 2018), 37 year old (Wimb 2019). Nadal would probably win the next few FO matchups unless he retires rn. Djokovic’s bans make speculating a nightmare.

what it tells us??? :unsure:Federer, unsurprisingly, has displayed the highest level at slams overall in his 30s, although not by as much as his fans would have you believe. Most of his lead here comes from that atrocious 30 year old year for Djokodal. But his mid/late 30s level (particularly age 35) is not to be messed with for sure.

There is one other thing to think about: how many times Djokovic and Nadal actually benefited from the age gap. I.e., how many times they actually won a slam whilst being at a a lower level than the one Federer had been at years earlier

Djokovic won Wimbledon 2019 whilst playing at a lower level than Federer did in 2014. Nadal won the 2022 Australian Open whilst playing at a lower level than Federer did at the AO in 2017.

Other than that, it can be argued that Djokovic won the AO 2020 whilst at a comparably **** level to 2014 Federer, and won the US Open in 2018 against a draw which 2012 Federer would also have (probably) got through. Nadal also won the 2017 US Open against a draw which 2012 Federer would also have (probably) got through. But there are far more debatable

What does this mean? Even though Federer played at a higher level across more slams than Djokodal in his 30s, Nadal and Djokovic actually barely gained slams in the slam race as a result.
Most of the slams where Federer was at a higher level than Djokodal (e.g. at the US Open, aged 34), Djokodal didn’t end up winning those slams anyway. And most of the slams Djokodal won were the ones where they were at the highest level of the 3 anyway.

I’m sure there are a few slams which people here would debate (especially that early US Open), so go ahead.
 
Last edited:

movies99

Rookie
This topic comes up a lot across GPPD so I’m dealing with it properly here.

I’ll go age-by-age like this:
30 years old
Federer: 2012 AO, 2012 FO, 2012 W, 2011 USO
Nadal: 2017 AO, 2016 FO, 2016 W, 2016 USO
Djokovic: 2018 AO, 2017 FO, 2017 W, 2017 USO

Federer’s level is clearly highest in all of the slams, with Nadal’s body breaking on clay

Fed 4, Ned 0, Djok 0

31 years old
Federer: 2013 AO, 2013 FO, 2013 W, 2012 USO
Nadal: 2018 AO, 2017 FO, 2017 W, 2017 USO
Djokovic: 2019 AO, 2018 FO, 2018 W, 2018 USO

Clear win for Rafa at the FO, clear win for Djokovic at the AO and Wimbledon, debatable at the USO so I’m not going to give it to anyone. Fanboys will just say their guy.

Fed 4, Ned 1, Djok 2; up for debate: USO

32 years old
Federer: 2014 AO, 2014 FO, 2014 W, 2013 USO
Nadal: 2019 AO, 2018 FO, 2018 W, 2018 USO
Djokovic: 2020 AO, 2019 FO, 2019 W, 2019 USO

Clear for Rafa at the FO, then it gets tough. I will just about give Wimb to Federer over Nadal because of level vs the field, even though in that matchup I still think Federer might lose due to confidence and bad BH. USO, no-one wins. I can’t pick the AO because it’s all round awfulness, which would depend on surface speed a bit.

Fed 5, Ned 2, Djok 2. Up for debate: AO, Wimbledon

33 years old
Federer: 2015 AO, 2015 FO, 2015 W, 2014 USO
Nadal: 2020 AO, 2019 FO, 2019 W, 2019 USO
Djokovic: 2021 AO, 2020 FO, 2020 W, 2020 USO

I’ll give Rafa the FO for sure and Federer Wimby for sure. Then Djokovic sneaks the AO in a super low quality competition. I’ll give Rafa the USO too as Fed was already creaking before the Cilic match, and Rafa imo does better against that Monfils and Cilic.

Fed 6, Ned 4, Djok 3.

34 years old
Federer: 2016 AO, 2016 FO, 2016 W, 2015 USO
Nadal: 2021 AO, 2020 FO, 2020 W, 2020 USO
Djokovic: 2022 AO, 2021 FO, 2021 W, 2021 USO

This is hard because of the pandemic; Nadal went AWOL for 2 slams and Djokovic was banned from the AO. FO goes to Nadal again, USO would definitely go to Fed, Wimby and the AO are all over the place. Wimby to Djokovic, as he is the least injured? And Fed probably gets the AO because of the ban, although I think this is a bit ridiculous for an across-year “level” discussion, so won’t count it

Fed 7, Ned 5, Djok 4

35 years old
Federer: 2017 AO, 2017 FO, 2017 W, 2016 USO
Nadal: 2022 AO, 2021 FO, 2021 W, 2021 USO
Djokovic: 2023 AO, 2022 FO, 2022 W, 2022 USO

Here we’re basically at the end of the road because we’ve reached the present and have to guess if Djokovic will play the HC slams / what level he’d produce if he could, etc. Atm no 35 year old is playing the US Open.
Wimbledon to Federer for sure (unless Djokovic does something amazing in a few weeks), and FO to Nadal again. Probably AO to Fed too.

Fed 8 or 9, Ned 6, Djok 4

Looking further ahead, we can forecast where Federer would definitely win more: 36 year old (AO 2018), 37 year old (Wimb 2019). Nadal would probably win the next few FO matchups unless he retires rn. Djokovic’s bans make speculating a nightmare.

what it tells us??? :unsure:Federer, unsurprisingly, has displayed the highest level at slams overall in his 30s, although not by as much as his fans would have you believe. Most of his lead here comes from that atrocious 30 year old year for Djokodal. But his mid/late 30s level (particularly age 35) is not to be messed with for sure.

I’m sure there are a few slams which people here would debate (especially that early US Open), so go ahead.
What's is 5, 4,2 etc? What are the results?
 

GabeT

G.O.A.T.
Now the question is when was the last time Rafa won for real on non-clay surfaces against Fedovic?
giphy.gif
 

jl809

Legend
What's is 5, 4,2 etc? What are the results?

It’s the growing count year after year to show the progression over time. The final results are Federer clearly had the highest level at 8 or 9 slams in his 30s, Nadal at 6, and Djokovic at 4
 

movies99

Rookie
It’s the growing count year after year to show the progression over time. The final results are Federer clearly had the highest level at 8 or 9 slams in his 30s, Nadal at 6, and Djokovic at 4
What is growing? Titles ? You just mentioned respective tournaments, where are the results, what is he metric ?
 

Third Serve

Talk Tennis Guru
I think the big problem with this is that the Slams aren’t necessarily in order. You can’t really do Fed’s 2017 AO, RG, and W and then go back to 2016 for the US Open. Better to just take the season in which those players turned a certain age rather than just looking at results from that age only because then timelines get shifted around.

Like, the season in which Fed turned 36 was 2017 so I’d have all of the Slams in 2017. Or if I’m looking at the season in which Nadal turned 33 I’d just look at 2019 as a whole.

Now, with that in mind, here’s how this looks for me:

Fed's 2011, Ned's 2016, Djokovic's 2017. All three turned 30 during these years.

AO: Obviously Fed
RG: Obviously Fed
W: Obviously Fed
US Open: Obviously Fed

I mean, not like we were expecting anything else given these were Djokovic and Nadal's injury-ridden years. Don't worry though, Fed's 2013 is still on the horizon.

Fed's 2012, Ned's 2017, Djokovic's 2018. 31.

AO: Probably Fed. I don't think Nadal has it in him to beat 2012 Fed who was actually pretty good, but I'm willing to say he's got a shot. Djokovic isn't in the conversation.
RG: Obviously Nadal.
W: There's some debate to be had with Djokovic as he was genuinely good at Wimbledon, but I'm most certainly not taking him over 2012 Fed who was basically prime or at least near prime level at Wimbledon. Nadal was better than the Muller loss suggests, but he wasn't near the two.
US Open: Personally giving this to Djokovic but a very convincing argument can be made for Nadal. Fed wasn't shabby either despite the loss to Berdych but I don't think he beats these two here.

Fed's 2013, Ned's 2018, Djokovic's 2019. 32.

AO: Clearly Djokovic. Federer was still pretty good, though, as the injury problems in 2013 didn't really settle in until after this tournament. Nadal well behind the other two as he did struggle with injury.
RG: Ned gets this obviously. Djokovic a good bit behind but not bad either. Fed not close to the other two.
W: Could argue Ned 2018 or Djokovic 2019 honestly as there's not a clear winner. I think I might give it to Nadal since he nearly beat a better Djokovic in 2018. Back-erer is again far behind.
US Open: Real battle of the injuries over here as all three players were struggling with injury to various extents. I'll give this to Nadal, though, because he played some inspired tennis before burning out.

Fed's 2014, Ned's 2019, Djokovic's 2020. 33.

AO: Djokovic gets this. While he wasn't super impressive that tournament, he was still better than these other versions of Nadal and Federer. Nadal and Federer themselves are actually quite close but I might lean Fed because I don't think he was as poor as Nadal was in the 2019 final.
RG: Nadal obviously. Djokovic a good bit behind, Fed clearly behind although he was a little better than the Gulbis loss suggests.
W: This was not held in 2020 so we don't have anything from Novak but from Djokovic's grass matches the year before and after, I think we'd be very safe giving this to Fed as he played really well across the whole tournament for his age. Djokovic would have had to put in a mighty performance to match him and I think 2018 was the last time he showed that kind of level. Fed obviously clear of Nadal.
US Open: Giving this to Nadal. I don't want to get into ThroatGate that much but I might also put Federer ahead of Djokovic based on what little we saw of Djokovic in 2020.

Fed's 2015, Ned's 2020, Djokovic's 2021. 34.

AO: Novak, similar story to 2020.
RG: Obviously Ned although 2021 Djokovic might make things slightly more interesting than his 2020 counterpart. Fed isn't in the conversation.
W: Fed gets this. I always thought he was more impressive than Djokovic was in 2021, and while it's true that we don't know what 2020 Nadal looks like, I feel very safe giving this one to Fed like in the preceding year.
US Open: Fed pretty clearly.

Fed's 2016, Ned's 2021, Djokovic's 2022--so far! 35.

AO: Probably Fed over 2021 Nadal but things might look a little different without the deportation saga.
RG: Neither Djokovic nor Nadal was particularly spectacular at the tournament and Fed didn't play but if pressed I'll go with 2021 Nadal.

The other tournaments are yet to be held, but my personal prediction is 2016 Fed taking Wimbledon and 2022 Djokovic the US Open (only because Nadal and Federer didn't play it).

In summation:

2011/2016/2017: Fed wins out by an absolutely massive margin. Not sure between Djokovic and Nadal.
2012/2017/2018: Fed wins again, but by a lesser margin as Nadal gains control of RG and Djokovic threatens at Wimbledon and the US Open. The result US Open is debatable between Djokovic and Nadal.
2013/2018/2019: Nadal takes most of the spoils though you can quibble with Wimbledon. Fed far behind the other two.
2014/2019/2020: Nadal ekes out the win here but Djokovic and Federer gain important victories at the AO and Wimbledon.
2015/2020/2021: Fed is the best at Wimbledon and the US Open but Djokovic makes it deep at all four Slams and wins the AO. Nadal claims RG but doesn't do much damage elsewhere.

Fed gets the massive advantage early on with 2011 and 2012, then Djokovic and Nadal generally overpower his 2013 and 2014 versions with the noteworthy exception of Wimbledon 2014, and then Fed has a mini-resurgence in 2015 although Novak makes it deep into all of the Slams. Novak is the most consistent of the three but his relatively lower peak at the Slams hurts him here while Fed basically locks down Wimbledon and Nadal RG with relatively little trouble. Nadal and Fed are just about neck and neck I'd say.

This kind of study is really making me appreciate Fed's 2011 and 2012 versions a lot more. He was either good to very good at every single one of the Slams in those two years except for 2012 RG.
 

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
Nice comparison. Certainly not 8 to 1 in favour of Fred but the important tidbit is Fed's winning levels themselves being generally higher than Djokodal's winning levels except Nadal at RG. Your own analysis makes it quite clear: Djokovic gets his last great stretch of level in slams at the age of 31 (getting 2 relative wins in your estimation) and then drops with just 2 more and both at a relatively feeble level by virtue of Fedal doing yet feebler in comparison. Nadal gets RG every year (except 2016 when he withdrew injured) and 2019 USO as a feeble win by default (Federer being arguably feebler at 2014 USO is his fault of course, Djokovic was probably playing better in 2020 but took himself out in legendary fashion). Fedr supremacy confirmed once again, xoxoxo.
 

Topspin_80

Hall of Fame
Since the big 3 turned 30 yo they have won:

Federer played 8 slams finals, winning 4, and losing 4.

Nadal played 10 slams finals, winning 8, and losing 2.

Novak played 10 slams finals, winning 8, and losing 2.

Advantage Nadal and Djokovic.

Apparently somebody thinks than winning 4 is better than winning 8.

and that losing 4 is better than losing 2.

Federer is a great player, fantastic, memorable, but he's not better than Nadal or Djokovic throughout his career, let alone after 30.

P.S. Federer is out of the race, Nadal and Djokovic, still playing on.
 

chicagodude

Hall of Fame
In the real world, Nadal and Djokovic have won 8 slams in their 30s while Federer has 4. 8-B

Indeed.

OP's premise and the conclusions he draws seems to be a setup to then argue that, looking at the real results, the competition therefore must've been stronger for Federer than it was for Djokodal.
 

T007

Hall of Fame
Indeed.

OP's premise and the conclusions he draws seems to be a setup to then argue that, looking at the real results, the competition therefore must've been stronger for Federer than it was for Djokodal.
Dumb look at the field from 2011-17 and from 17-22.

Federer faced peak Djoker,rafa,murray,stan,cillic in his entire 30s and made 9 slam finals winning 4 and losing 5.

He would have won all 3 finals he lost to peak djokovic in 2014-15 if there were next Gen mug like zverev,medvedev or tsitsipas
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Dumb look at the field from 2011-17 and from 17-22.

Federer faced peak Djoker,rafa,murray,stan,cillic in his entire 30s and made 9 slam finals winning 4 and losing 5.

He would have won all 3 finals he lost to peak djokovic in 2014-15 if there were next Gen mug like zverev,medvedev or tsitsipas
Exactly, it's like some people are dense on purpose.
 

Ray Mercer

Hall of Fame
Of course Federer was the best. The only reason he won less is because he had to face all time great level players in their prime while Djokovic/Nadal are playing bums like Anderson, Medvedev, Berretinni, Ruud, Tsitsipas etc. These guys are clowns. Medvedev just got breadsticked by a challenger level player. There’s no comparison.
 

jl809

Legend
All good, fans of Nadal and Djokovic: I’ve updated this analysis to reflect on the “real” number of slams won in this period. I think it has some interesting conclusions tbh.

Ultimately the age gap isn’t really impactful to Djokodal’s slam tallies at all. Nadal won 6 / 8 slams playing at the highest level of any of the 3 at that age (all his FOs, plus USO 19), and of the other 2, he was also debatably at the highest level in 1 of them (2012 USO Fed vs 2018 USO Djoker vs 2017 USO Nadal). So he barely “lucked out” as a result of the age gap
 
Last edited:

GabeT

G.O.A.T.
Not at all. We've seen Fed handle Nadal his ass on a silver platter regularly. That's not hypothetical. We've also seen what his 38 year old self can do to them. Again, not a hypothetical.
Yes, but don’t think that’s the point being argued. The OP is arguing that Fed Played better post 30 than Nadalovic. Yet he won less. So that’s where we enter the hypothetical vs real.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Yes, but don’t think that’s the point being argued. The OP is arguing that Fed Played better post 30 than Nadalovic. Yet he won less. So that’s where we enter the hypothetical vs real.
Well, the reason why he won less is pretty obvious.

Who played better? Nadal at 2022 AO or Fed at 2015 Wimb?
 

GabeT

G.O.A.T.
Well, the reason why he won less is pretty obvious.

Who played better? Nadal at 2022 AO or Fed at 2015 Wimb?
You can make that argument in other ways. Novak in 2021 won 27 slam matches in a row. The equivalent year for Fed was 2015 and he lost in the early rounds at the AO. That’s why I don‘t like hypothetical match arguments. And if Fed would have won more post 30 without Novak so too would Djokovic without Nadal (possibly 2-3 more RGs).
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
You can make that argument in other ways. Novak in 2021 won 27 slam matches in a row. The equivalent year for Fed was 2015 and he lost in the early rounds at the AO. That’s why I don‘t like hypothetical match arguments. And if Fed would have won more post 30 without Novak so too would Djokovic without Nadal (possibly 2-3 more RGs).

and?
fed in USO 15 > djoko in USO 21
fed in Wim 15 > djoko in Wim 21
djoko's margins at AO and RG for 21 vs fed 15 are higher. so djoko's 21 is better level wise in slams compared to fed 15, but not by a big margin.
Yet Djoko won 3 slams, fed won 0 slams. why? significant difference in level of competition.

this is not hypothetical matches one vs other
this is actual evaluation of levels. subjective, yes, but actual evaluation of levels.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
You can make that argument in other ways. Novak in 2021 won 27 slam matches in a row. The equivalent year for Fed was 2015 and he lost in the early rounds at the AO.
Sure, but 2015 Fed would still win 2 slams in 2021 instead of the 0 he actually won in real life. So it's still a huge difference even if he doesn't come close to the CYGS like Novak did.

That’s why I don‘t like hypothetical match arguments. And if Fed would have won more post 30 without Novak so too would Djokovic without Nadal (possibly 2-3 more RGs).
Nadal is not a younger ATG in relation to Djokovic first of all. Hence him beating Nadal in 2021.

But Fed's problem was that every slam was covered by Novak. Sure, Rafa is an obstacle at RG, but Djokovic had a free ride at the other slams. Federer lost 3 straight slams to Djokovic in 2015-2016, never once did he catch a break. And he was playing well in all of them as opposed to Djokovic in RG 2021 F and Wimb 2021.
 

GabeT

G.O.A.T.
Sure, but 2015 Fed would still win 2 slams in 2021 instead of the 0 he actually won in real life. So it's still a huge difference even if he doesn't come close to the CYGS like Novak did.


Nadal is not a younger ATG in relation to Djokovic first of all. Hence him beating Nadal in 2021.

But Fed's problem was that every slam was covered by Novak. Sure, Rafa is an obstacle at RG, but Djokovic had a free ride at the other slams. Federer lost 3 straight slams to Djokovic in 2015-2016, never once did he catch a break. And he was playing well in all of them as opposed to Djokovic in RG 2021 F and Wimb 2021.
Fed lost Wim 14 to Novak when he was roughly the same age as Novak at AO19. Maybe Novak was simply better at AO than Fed at Wimby? Yes, absent Novak Fed would have won more. but absent Fed Novak would have won more when he was younger. I don’t know that this “evens it out’ but in the end a player can only deal with what they have in front of them
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Fed lost Wim 14 to Novak when he was roughly the same age as Novak at AO19.
He was older actually. Was one month shy of turning 33 while Novak was 4 months shy of turning 32. It's a year difference here. A closer comparison would be AO 2020 Djokovic and he was lucky to get Thiem while he was playing pretty poorly for his standards and hence a title for Djokovic while no such luck for Federer.

Maybe Novak was simply better at AO than Fed at Wimby?
I don't even think Nadal at RG in his 30's has been better than Fed at Wimb in his 30's. Novak even less so. He won in 2020 and 2021 due to getting Thiem and Medvedev while Fed got Djokovic in both 2014 and 2015 Wimb's.

Yes, absent Novak Fed would have won more. but absent Fed Novak would have won more when he was younger. I don’t know that this “evens it out’ but in the end a player can only deal with what they have in front of them
Fed has lost more to Djokovic past his prime than Djokovic to Fed when he was young.

IMO, it doesn't even out because Djokovic didn't play Fed in 3 of the latter's best years in 2004-2006, while Fed dealt with every version of Djokovic.
 

GabeT

G.O.A.T.
He was older actually. Was one month shy of turning 33 while Novak was 4 months shy of turning 32. It's a year difference here. A closer comparison would be AO 2020 Djokovic and he was lucky to get Thiem while he was playing pretty poorly for his standards and hence a title for Djokovic while no such luck for Federer.


I don't even think Nadal at RG in his 30's has been better than Fed at Wimb in his 30's. Novak even less so. He won in 2020 and 2021 due to getting Thiem and Medvedev while Fed got Djokovic in both 2014 and 2015 Wimb's.


Fed has lost more to Djokovic past his prime than Djokovic to Fed when he was young.

IMO, it doesn't even out because Djokovic didn't play Fed in 3 of the latter's best years in 2004-2006, while Fed dealt with every version of Djokovic.
I don’t think a year difference is such a big deal. It’s the age difference between Nadal and Novak. And I still think the only reason Novak didn’t win AO in straight sets was because he got dehydrated. Once Novak gets better at the end of the 3rd set Thiem doesn’t even get to sniff a BP.


on the broader point of Fed vs Novak post 30: I think Novak played better and was better against the whole field. he was more dominant. Novak in AO19/20/21 is more dominant to me than Fed in Wimby 2014/15. It’s not just that Fed faced a greater challnege in young Novak.

And if we “add” the 3 slams Fed lost to Novak post 30 to his total he still remains below what Novak has won so far (and Novak may still win more slams). And Novak could have had another 2-3 RGs without Nadal. So the 4 slam difference today in their post 30 careers captures well IMHO the differences between the 2 at those ages. Novak simply aged better. We could see that difference showing up in their late 20s results. Novak in 2015/16 was playing better and was more dominant than Fed in 2009/10 (ages 28-29)
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I don’t think a year difference is such a big deal. It’s the age difference between Nadal and Novak. And I still think the only reason Novak didn’t win AO in straight sets was because he got dehydrated. Once Novak gets better at the end of the 3rd set Thiem doesn’t even get to sniff a BP.

lol @ ignoring 1 year difference just because its convenient for you.
Djokovic faced BP early in the 4th set of the AO 2020 final.
got an injured/hampered fed in the semi. hence why didn't lose a set before the final.

Thiem would have taken atleast a set anyways

dehyration for Djoko important, but not fed barely limping through to the semi while being hampered (having to save MPs vs Sandgren). gotcha.

on the broader point of Fed vs Novak post 30: I think Novak played better and was better against the whole field. he was more dominant. Novak in AO19/20/21 is more dominant to me than Fed in Wimby 2014/15. It’s not just that Fed faced a greater challnege in young Novak.

AO 21 dominant when he could've lost to Fritz - struggling physically. struggled vs Rao and Z?
See AO 20 above.
and why are you ignoring Wim 12 for fed. that was after 30 too.
fed breezed through to the final in Wim 14/15.

Wim 12/14/15 vs AO 19/20/21.

if you just want to keep it at 14/15 vs 20/21

Wim 14 for fed > AO 20 for djoko
Wim 15 for fed > AO 21 for djoko

And if we “add” the 3 slams Fed lost to Novak post 30 to his total he still remains below what Novak has won so far (and Novak may still win more slams). And Novak could have had another 2-3 RGs without Nadal. So the 4 slam difference today in their post 30 careers captures well IMHO the differences between the 2 at those ages. Novak simply aged better. We could see that difference showing up in their late 20s results. Novak in 2015/16 was playing better and was more dominant than Fed in 2009/10 (ages 28-29)

another 2-3 RGs in 30s sans Nadal?
he only lost to nadal twice in his 30s at RG.(20/22). its not like he was dominant vs the rest of the field in RG 20 (5-setter vs tsitspas), and it was only QF in 2022.
had lost to cecch in 18, thiem in 19.

and err, that'd be 4 slams for fed without djoko (Wim 14 and Wim 15, USO 15, AO 16)
fed on each of these occasions never went 5 before meeting djoko, was dominant vs rest of the field, made atleast the semi (1 semi and 3 finals actually)

so its like 4 more for fed and maybe 1 more RG for djoko (out of 2), which would make the difference just 1 slam (just with 1 player swaps). (8 for fed to 9 for djoko)

now add on stuff that fed lost in late 11-12 due to the strong field (USO 11 - djoko, AO 12- nadal and yes, possibly even USO 12 - berdych. one slight off day, which he could've very well managed in the inflation era, possibly AO 13).

you add a RG extra for Novak, miss one slam for fed and ignore 1 year difference. convenient,eh?

As far as bold part goes, true, but Fed was also playing better in USO 10 to Wim 12 than Djoko from USO 16 to Wim 18 (that's the next nearly 2 years each)
 
Last edited:
Now the question is when was the last time Rafa won for real on non-clay surfaces against Fedovic?
Does the last time matter when you've beaten the Grass GOAT in a Wimbledon final and he's never returned the favour at RG?
Does it matter when you've beaten the hard court GOAT in two US Open finals and he's never returned the favour in a RG final?
Does it matter when you lead Federer in the H2H at two of the three slams they've met at?
Does it matter when you lead Djokovic in the H2H at two of the four slams?
Does it matter when you are the outright slam leader at the end of the strongest era in tennis history?
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
No, I’ve said numerous times that Federer is disrespected here, but he wasn’t better in his 30s than Djokodal are. It’s almost impossible to argue that.
Now maybe 40s can be a different story :D
Who said he was better in his 30's? The fact is Djokodal aren't better.
 

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
No, I’ve said numerous times that Federer is disrespected here, but he wasn’t better in his 30s than Djokodal are. It’s almost impossible to argue that.
Now maybe 40s can be a different story :D

Well we can surely say post-prime Fred has been better level-wise than post-prime Ned and Joe, no? Setting the last prime slam for either as AO 10, RG 14 and RG 16 respectively (close enough in age, too: Fred 28.5, Ned barely 28, Joe barely 29). Of course they won more but when you have slams like AO 22, it happens.
 
lol @ ignoring 1 year difference just because its convenient for you.
Djokovic faced BP early in the 4th set of the AO 2020 final.
got an injured/hampered fed in the semi. hence why didn't lose a set before the final.

Djokovic lost a set against Struff in round 1. If I recall correctly, AO 2008 is the only time he has made the final of a slam without dropping a set. (Lost a set against Dodig en route at AO 2011).
 
Well we can surely say post-prime Fred has been better level-wise than post-prime Ned and Joe, no? Setting the last prime slam for either as AO 10, RG 14 and RG 16 respectively (close enough in age, too: Fred 28.5, Ned barely 28, Joe barely 29). Of course they won more but when you have slams like AO 22, it happens.

Is it usually only obvious in retrospect that a player is no longer in his prime? Don't think it would have been obvious for any of those three until afterwards. By contrast, I think many did expect that Becker's win at AO 1996 - also at 28, by the way - would be the end of the line for him, even though he probably would in the end have managed a very good run at Wimbledon 1996 if it weren't for his wrist injury. Might not have won the title but probably would have made the final and had a close match against Krajicek.

Last prime slam for Murray and Wawrinka was probably Roland Garros 2017. (Wikipedia even says as much in almost those words: "The hard-fought semifinal between Wawrinka and Andy Murray marked the end for both players at the top of the sport, as both suffered injuries that took them out of the game for months from which they did not reclaim their prior preeminence. As of February 2022 neither Murray nor Wawrinka have reached a semifinal or final of a Grand Slam tournament since their 2017 French Open semifinal.")
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Is it usually only obvious in retrospect that a player is no longer in his prime? Don't think it would have been obvious for any of those three until afterwards. By contrast, I think many did expect that Becker's win at AO 1996 - also at 28, by the way - would be the end of the line for him, even though he probably would in the end have managed a very good run at Wimbledon 1996 if it weren't for his wrist injury. Might not have won the title but probably would have made the final and had a close match against Krajicek.

Last prime slam for Murray and Wawrinka was probably Roland Garros 2017. (Wikipedia even says as much in almost those words: "The hard-fought semifinal between Wawrinka and Andy Murray marked the end for both players at the top of the sport, as both suffered injuries that took them out of the game for months from which they did not reclaim their prior preeminence. As of February 2022 neither Murray nor Wawrinka have reached a semifinal or final of a Grand Slam tournament since their 2017 French Open semifinal.")
I mean, obviously it takes hindsight to assess the end of one's prime. Who saw Federer lose in back to back slam QFs to Soderling and Berdych in early 2010?
 
Top