FEDERER v NADAL V DJOKOVIC (etc) - MOD NOTE 1ST POST

Alfred Borden · 30-01-2019 8:17pm

Found this interesting below:

Grand Slam Finals since Nadal's first (French Open - 2005)

Nadal - 25
Federer - 22

Grand Slam Finals since Djokovic's first (US Open - 2007)

Djokovic - 24
Federer - 17

Not bad for old man Federer, whose first grand slam final was Wimbledon 2003!

walshb · 30-01-2019 8:19pm

bada_bing wrote: »

ooops you're right, i must've had lazy eye and counted Ferrer as Federer!!!!!

Yeh

Lost ten in total. Delpo in U.S. ‘09

bada_bing · 30-01-2019 8:31pm

Some more interesting H2H stats between the Big 3 at all grand slam matches. This a head to head of all Federer's grand slam matches against Djokovic and Nadal

Federer VS Nadal 3 - 9

Federer VS Djokovic 6 - 9

Objectively speaking any outsider would think based on the above h2h stats that Federer is the less dominant player compared to Nadal & Djokovic.

walshb · 30-01-2019 8:39pm

Yeh, but you’re forgetting you know what.....

Glandular Fever!

artvanderlay · 30-01-2019 8:40pm

Okay, this is going to be a bit all over the place. I'm a bit woozy after the gym!

I don't think there can ever be a fair comparison between the three really. They peaked at different times.

Nadal is the greatest clay court player ever, that's a given, but he is not the greatest of all time. He's only got 6 non-clay grand slams: Feds has got 19, Djoko 14. Plus Federer is 5/6 years older than Nadal/Djokovic: of a different generation really. It's a testament to his skill and competitiveness that he is still going and winning grand slams as recently as last year. Federer at his peak had to face down the new generation of Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Wawrinka, even guys like Berdych/Soderling/Cilic/Del Potro could be great on their day, yet he kept coming back against them. Now a lot of these guys have fallen away, and Djokovic reigns supreme. I think it is a bad sign for tennis that there are no new guys coming through that are able to knock the old guys off their perch, and claim a grand slam. Djokovic will probably break Fed's grand slam record, but only because there is very little competition to stop him. Federer at 31 (in 2012) had 17 grand slams, and was runner up/semi-finalist is many others. After that he still stayed competitive against Nadal/Djokovic/Murray at their peak. Feds will always be the greatest to me because of this; he dug deep to compete against the greatest generation of tennis players.

There should always be a changing of the guard, to keep the sport interesting. When it looked like Feds was unstoppable, Nadal came along. When it looked like Nadal was unstoppable Djokovic came along...who has come along since then? Djokovic hit top form in 2011, nearly 8 years ago, and has a kept a phenomenal standard ever since. With the standard so high, you would expect the next generation to be even better, but I don't see a next generation. They are probably too busy on social media :pac: I am starting to lose interest in tennis a little bit, and the fact that Nadal was crushed by Djokovic in the AO makes me worry that his dominance will continue for a long time without any serious challenge. I don't even think Djokovic is playing at his best, it's just that his opponents are not that good anymore, and he does enough to beat them.

walshb · 30-01-2019 8:59pm

I think the post above is as fair, unbiased and objective as I have seen on this thread..

Fed for me is GOAT!

Chivito550 · 31-01-2019 12:42am

bada_bing wrote: »

i can see why there'd be an argument over who had it hardest in GS finals, but one thing is pretty clear that most of Federer's grand slam wins are definitely easier compared to those of Nadal & Djokovic. It's interesting to note that he's only beaten Djokovic just once in a grand slam final. The combined H2H against Nadal & Djokovic is 4 - 10. Couldn't be more clear cut than that!!

That's pretty flawed. It ignores victories in semi-finals against big names. It ignores the big rivals falling against lesser names in earlier rounds, who Federer routinely dispatched later in the tournament.

Chivito550 · 31-01-2019 12:49am

artvanderlay wrote: »

Okay, this is going to be a bit all over the place. I'm a bit woozy after the gym!

I don't think there can ever be a fair comparison between the three really. They peaked at different times.

Nadal is the greatest clay court player ever, that's a given, but he is not the greatest of all time. He's only got 6 non-clay grand slams: Feds has got 19, Djoko 14. Plus Federer is 5/6 years older than Nadal/Djokovic: of a different generation really. It's a testament to his skill and competitiveness that he is still going and winning grand slams as recently as last year. Federer at his peak had to face down the new generation of Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Wawrinka, even guys like Berdych/Soderling/Cilic/Del Potro could be great on their day, yet he kept coming back against them. Now a lot of these guys have fallen away, and Djokovic reigns supreme. I think it is a bad sign for tennis that there are no new guys coming through that are able to knock the old guys off their perch, and claim a grand slam. Djokovic will probably break Fed's grand slam record, but only because there is very little competition to stop him. Federer at 31 (in 2012) had 17 grand slams, and was runner up/semi-finalist is many others. After that he still stayed competitive against Nadal/Djokovic/Murray at their peak. Feds will always be the greatest to me because of this; he dug deep to compete against the greatest generation of tennis players.

There should always be a changing of the guard, to keep the sport interesting. When it looked like Feds was unstoppable, Nadal came along. When it looked like Nadal was unstoppable Djokovic came along...who has come along since then? Djokovic hit top form in 2011, nearly 8 years ago, and has a kept a phenomenal standard ever since. With the standard so high, you would expect the next generation to be even better, but I don't see a next generation. They are probably too busy on social media :pac: I am starting to lose interest in tennis a little bit, and the fact that Nadal was crushed by Djokovic in the AO makes me worry that his dominance will continue for a long time without any serious challenge. I don't even think Djokovic is playing at his best, it's just that his opponents are not that good anymore, and he does enough to beat them.

Very good post.

It is very disappointing that nobody has come through since Rafa/Novak/Murray. If you follow the pattern that a new star arises every 4 years or so, there should have been 2 new generations of superstars to have come through since. There should be somebody in their late 20s who has won 5-6 slams by now, and another aged 22 or so, who has started winning one or two and beginning to look dominant. That's the way tennis has always been, right up to Rafa/Novak/Murray. Since then, absolute dross!

It is very disappointing. The sport has become predictable and uninspiring.

Chivito550 · 31-01-2019 12:53am

Alfred Borden wrote: »

Found this interesting below:

Grand Slam Finals since Nadal's first (French Open - 2005)

Nadal - 25
Federer - 22

Grand Slam Finals since Djokovic's first (US Open - 2007)

Djokovic - 24
Federer - 17

Not bad for old man Federer, whose first grand slam final was Wimbledon 2003!

The above isn't true. Federer had only been in 4 grand slam finals by the time Nadal reached his first. So Federer has actually been in 26 slam finals since Nadal's first, not 22.

ballyargus · 31-01-2019 8:07am

Chivito550 wrote: »

Very good post.

It is very disappointing that nobody has come through since Rafa/Novak/Murray. If you follow the pattern that a new star arises every 4 years or so, there should have been 2 new generations of superstars to have come through since. There should be somebody in their late 20s who has won 5-6 slams by now, and another aged 22 or so, who has started winning one or two and beginning to look dominant. That's the way tennis has always been, right up to Rafa/Novak/Murray. Since then, absolute dross!

It is very disappointing. The sport has become predictable and uninspiring.

Injury robbed us of Del Potro. Him aside there has been noone of note. I've held hope for Thiem and Zverev but we really should have seen more from both by now. Djokovic is imperious again and more power to him. Something that's overlooked his how weak he was in his early years. He retired often and ended up blaming his fatigue on gluten intolerance (or a food intolerance). It was after the diet shift that he turned into a brick wall for even Nadal and Federer to play against.

bada_bing · 31-01-2019 9:08am

artvanderlay wrote: »

There should always be a changing of the guard, to keep the sport interesting. When it looked like Feds was unstoppable, Nadal came along. When it looked like Nadal was unstoppable Djokovic came along...who has come along since then? Djokovic hit top form in 2011, nearly 8 years ago, and has a kept a phenomenal standard ever since. With the standard so high, you would expect the next generation to be even better, but I don't see a next generation. They are probably too busy on social media :pac: I am starting to lose interest in tennis a little bit, and the fact that Nadal was crushed by Djokovic in the AO makes me worry that his dominance will continue for a long time without any serious challenge. I don't even think Djokovic is playing at his best, it's just that his opponents are not that good anymore, and he does enough to beat them.

This is the problem I have in general with the narrative that usually concerns Federer over Djokovic. You hear about people losing interest because of Djokovic's current dominance and how it must be a weak era right now if Djokovic is dominating the game. Funnily enough I didn't hear the same complaint when Federer was dominating the game and he was at 17 slams before Djokovic became a strong player. Alos does that mean Federer last 3 slams were particularly weak ones especially considering that Djokovic was injured at the time?? I didn't hear any Federer supporters hint at that, instead they just threw around things like GOAT, Maestro, sublime...…… I know everyone is entitled to their opinion and has their own preferences and are certainly inspired by other players but this selective narrative really irks me as it is very heavily biased in favour of Federer and cheapens Djokovic current achievements..

Chivito550 · 31-01-2019 9:42am

bada_bing wrote: »

This is the problem I have in general with the narrative that usually concerns Federer over Djokovic. You hear about people losing interest because of Djokovic's current dominance and how it must be a weak era right now if Djokovic is dominating the game. Funnily enough I didn't hear the same complaint when Federer was dominating the game and he was at 17 slams before Djokovic became a strong player. Alos does that mean Federer last 3 slams were particularly weak ones especially considering that Djokovic was injured at the time?? I didn't hear any Federer supporters hint at that, instead they just threw around things like GOAT, Maestro, sublime...…… I know everyone is entitled to their opinion and has their own preferences and are certainly inspired by other players but this selective narrative really irks me as it is very heavily biased in favour of Federer and cheapens Djokovic current achievements..

Federer was 22-25 when dominating. Novak is now approaching 32. Nobody should be dominating men’s tennis at that age. It says as much about the young crop as it does Novak. And yes, Federer shouldn’t have been getting near slams at 35-36.

artvanderlay · 31-01-2019 10:01am

bada_bing wrote: »

This is the problem I have in general with the narrative that usually concerns Federer over Djokovic. You hear about people losing interest because of Djokovic's current dominance and how it must be a weak era right now if Djokovic is dominating the game. Funnily enough I didn't hear the same complaint when Federer was dominating the game and he was at 17 slams before Djokovic became a strong player. Alos does that mean Federer last 3 slams were particularly weak ones especially considering that Djokovic was injured at the time?? I didn't hear any Federer supporters hint at that, instead they just threw around things like GOAT, Maestro, sublime...…… I know everyone is entitled to their opinion and has their own preferences and are certainly inspired by other players but this selective narrative really irks me as it is very heavily biased in favour of Federer and cheapens Djokovic current achievements..

That's my point. Feds had peaked well before Djokovic (he is 6 years older), and Djokovic found his top form from 2011 onwards. What I was trying to say was that at 31 (in 2012), Feds was past his peak and was facing younger players that had peaked or were peaking (Murray, Wawrinka, Djokovic, Nadal and others). He didn't win a grand slam for nearly 5 years as a result. Djokovic at 31 does not have to face the challenges Federer had to face at 31 to win a lot more grand slams. There is no emerging generation, that is a serious threat to him. Nadal is clinging on but I don't think he is playing anywhere near his top form, and others of his generation have faded away. Even when Federer beat Nadal in 2017, I was aware that Nadal was not as his best even then. It was a great achievement for Feds to win that and he played brilliantly, but Nadal hasn't been the competitor he was for many years now. The French Open should be interesting, although it wouldn't surprise me if Djoko spanked Nadal in that too (he did it 2015 in straight sets if I recall correctly, before losing to Wawrinka in the final). It's not Djoko's fault that there is no new challenge to his supremacy, but I don't think it's good for the game.

bada_bing · 31-01-2019 10:19am

Here's an interesting thing to consider, if Djokovic had never found his top form back in 2011 and just fizzled out, we probably would have seen Federer and Nadal win a lot more majors and dominate every other tournament. It would be reasonable for people to get tired of this unchallenged dominance from Federer/Nadal ( but then again I don't know why nobody complained about Fed's dominance with 17 slams before 2011 ) and people would have lost interest in tennis. But as it happens , Djokovic came along and changed the whole dynamic in men's tennis and made it more exciting and compelling to follow. So in a way people should thank Djokovic for that.

Chivito550 · 31-01-2019 10:58am

bada_bing wrote: »

Here's an interesting thing to consider, if Djokovic had never found his top form back in 2011 and just fizzled out, we probably would have seen Federer and Nadal win a lot more majors and dominate every other tournament. It would be reasonable for people to get tired of this unchallenged dominance from Federer/Nadal ( but then again I don't know why nobody complained about Fed's dominance with 17 slams before 2011 ) and people would have lost interest in tennis. But as it happens , Djokovic came along and changed the whole dynamic in men's tennis and made it more exciting and compelling to follow. So in a way people should thank Djokovic for that.

I don’t think having a dominant player is bad for the game. Having players in their 30s dominating is what is bad for the game. It highlights how poor the new crop are. This is the first era we’ve had where 30 year olds have dominated. Right now, there is no grand slam male champion younger than 30 years of age (Cilic and Delpo recently turned 30). That highlights the shocking state of men’s tennis right now.

The Golden Miller · 31-01-2019 7:30pm

artvanderlay wrote: »

Okay, this is going to be a bit all over the place. I'm a bit woozy after the gym!

I don't think there can ever be a fair comparison between the three really. They peaked at different times.

Nadal is the greatest clay court player ever, that's a given, but he is not the greatest of all time. He's only got 6 non-clay grand slams: Feds has got 19, Djoko 14. Plus Federer is 5/6 years older than Nadal/Djokovic: of a different generation really. It's a testament to his skill and competitiveness that he is still going and winning grand slams as recently as last year. Federer at his peak had to face down the new generation of Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Wawrinka, even guys like Berdych/Soderling/Cilic/Del Potro could be great on their day, yet he kept coming back against them. Now a lot of these guys have fallen away, and Djokovic reigns supreme. I think it is a bad sign for tennis that there are no new guys coming through that are able to knock the old guys off their perch, and claim a grand slam. Djokovic will probably break Fed's grand slam record, but only because there is very little competition to stop him. Federer at 31 (in 2012) had 17 grand slams, and was runner up/semi-finalist is many others. After that he still stayed competitive against Nadal/Djokovic/Murray at their peak. Feds will always be the greatest to me because of this; he dug deep to compete against the greatest generation of tennis players.

There should always be a changing of the guard, to keep the sport interesting. When it looked like Feds was unstoppable, Nadal came along. When it looked like Nadal was unstoppable Djokovic came along...who has come along since then? Djokovic hit top form in 2011, nearly 8 years ago, and has a kept a phenomenal standard ever since. With the standard so high, you would expect the next generation to be even better, but I don't see a next generation. They are probably too busy on social media :pac: I am starting to lose interest in tennis a little bit, and the fact that Nadal was crushed by Djokovic in the AO makes me worry that his dominance will continue for a long time without any serious challenge. I don't even think Djokovic is playing at his best, it's just that his opponents are not that good anymore, and he does enough to beat them.

Surely the greatest player of the greatest generation is the greatest?

artvanderlay · 01-02-2019 12:53am

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Surely the greatest player of the greatest generation is the greatest?

No.

The Golden Miller · 01-02-2019 1:40am

artvanderlay wrote: »

No.

Well your own reasoning makes even less sense

artvanderlay · 01-02-2019 2:04am

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Well your own reasoning makes even less sense

Yes

josip · 14-06-2021 5:31pm

Hey everybody, I rediscovered the GOAT debate thread that's lain idle since 2019!
It's like a time capsule, let's see what everyone was saying back then

Rikand · 14-06-2021 6:00pm

Fedalovic, the goat!

Responder XY · 14-06-2021 6:08pm

Fed for me is the GOAT, he's a class act. Novak is a great player, but just doesn't measure up to Fed in terms of how he carries himself, so for me even if he passes Fed on Grand Slams he won't in the GOAT debate.

Nadal is a great also, but not consistent enough outside of clay to be the GOAT.

Hoping Fed gets Olympic gold this year to seal the deal.

All opinion of course. There's a strong case to be put forward for all three.

14-06-2021 6:11pm

Nadal is my personal favourite but I think Federer is the greatest.

Rikand · 14-06-2021 9:05pm

Djoko undoubtedly the greatest after that French Open win now. The slams total which he will no doubt overtake in the coming 2 years is the last remaining hurdle to his dominance

Federer is my favourite player, but if Nadal hadn't been shocked by Soderling in the 4th round in 2009, he would never have won a french. If we are talking about playstyle purely, then Federer is the greatest. No one has made tennis look so good as Federer.

A lot to admire about Nadal, but I hate his playstyle. He can never be the goat for the way he plays for me plus that so many of his total slams comes from just the French. I'm happy for him to have greatest clay courter who ever lived title if he wants it from me

StevenToast · 14-06-2021 10:27pm

Just think... the brits tried to include murray in a "big 4"!!!

Like comparing paul lawrie to jack nicklaus!

BorneTobyWilde · 14-06-2021 10:37pm

Agassi beat Federer multiple times, and Sampras dominated Wimbledon , One Agassi and Sampras was off the scene Federer had a free ride to a lots of his Grand Slams

eagle eye · 14-06-2021 10:41pm

BorneTobyWilde wrote:

Agassi beat Federer multiple times, and Sampras dominated Wimbledon , One Agassi and Sampras was off the scene Federer had a free ride to a lots of his Grand Slams

What age was Federer then?

BorneTobyWilde · 14-06-2021 10:53pm

eagle eye wrote: »

What age was Federer then?

in 2005 us open final Federer was 23, beat Agassi in the final who was 35,
Agassi retired year later.

eagle eye · 14-06-2021 10:56pm

BorneTobyWilde wrote:

in 2005 us open final Federer was 23, beat Agassi in the final who was 35, Agassi retired year later.

No I'm talking to you about when Agassi and Sampras beat him multiple times, what age was he then?

BorneTobyWilde · 14-06-2021 11:17pm

eagle eye wrote: »

No I'm talking to you about when Agassi and Sampras beat him multiple times, what age was he then?

Agassi beat him in a 2002 final, Federer was 20

BorneTobyWilde · 14-06-2021 11:19pm

Ken Norton wrote: »

Agassi beat Federer in 1998, 2001 and 2002. Then Federer won the next 8 encounters in a row from 2003 to 2005.

That's my point, Agassi and Sampras were ending their careers, after dominating, then Federer had no one in his way and picked up a lot of titles

Rikand · 14-06-2021 11:45pm

StevenToast wrote: »

Just think... the brits tried to include murray in a "big 4"!!!

Like comparing paul lawrie to jack nicklaus!

Well not quite, but he did hold the number 1 ranking in the world at a time when the other 3 were well in the peak of their careers and he was well able to beat any of them for a few years. At that time, they definitely were the big 4.

It'd be more like Faldo to Nicklaus

14-06-2021 11:52pm

Ken Norton wrote: »

They're all capable of beating each other as is evident below with Djokovic being bageled by Federer at the Cinicinatti Open.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUrC8xr9b7E

Fed hasn't been capable of beating Djokovic for the last 9 years

(Wimbledon 2012 was the last time he managed any sort of result against him)

and in slams overall Djokovic has mangled him 11 to 6 - a pretty sorry tale.

close enough to 2 to 1 for most people!

Could get embarrassing if they are set to meet at Wimbledon this year

I couldn't see Djokovic taking pity on the big fake - might get messy and force Fed to tilt completely.

Maybe he will pull out a round in advance so he won't have to face him like he did in France?!

Adamocovic · 15-06-2021 2:59pm

Spotcurve wrote: »

You seem to have a chip on your shoulder about Federer, not sure why that is.

Federer had a winning head to head against Djokovic until he entered his thirties, when Djokovic began beating him regularly. That's the normal order of things, the next generation comes along and bests the aging and declining generation. Djokovic and Nadal have been fortunate that they haven't had a younger generation to contend with that was a credible threat.

There's nothing embarrassing about a 39 year old losing a grandslam tennis match, the fact he can still compete at that age is another feather in his cap. When Federer beat 29 year old Pete Sampras at Wimbledon in 2001, it wasn't embarrassing for Sampras, it's the normal order. He was old and well past his best and close to retirement. You can't conclude from that match that Federer is better than Sampras.

It’s kind of funny when we talk about the norm of players losing around 29.

When you think either Djokovic (34), Nadal (35) and Federer (39) have won all but 1 of the grand slams in the last 5 years.

Some ridiculous longevity.

whiterebel · 15-06-2021 6:19pm

Laver retired at 41, after a 23 year career.

josip · 17-06-2021 5:38pm

One of the other GOAT-related metrics that's less commonly used but nevertheless interesting, is the number of singles titles won.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Era_tennis_records_%E2%80%93_men%27s_singles#All_tournaments

I can't see where Federer is going to get another 6 titles to catch Jimmy Connors.
Nadal might catch Lendl, but won't catch Federer.
Djokovic could catch Federer, but having said he'll concentrate on the slams from now on, I can't see him taking part in enough tournaments.
Maybe if he gets to 21 GS titles, he'll change.

Very similar for matches won, although I can see Federer catching Connors here if he wanted to hang around long enough.
Nadal has a slightly better win percentage than Djokovic, but that could change in the next few weeks.

josip · 31-07-2021 1:01pm

When you're supposed to be the GOAT but everyone else has more Olympic medals than you do.

redlad12 · 31-07-2021 1:07pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117424252#Comment_117424252

Murray was quite clearly part of a big 4 for a few years, anyone who said he wasn't id assume has followed tennis much.

Hector Savage · 12-09-2021 10:50pm

Well, they are all on 20, next year I find it hard to believe Djokovic can win the AO - the new lads are really coming through ... Alcaraz, Brooksby, Sinner , as well as the current guys , Medvedev,Zverev etc..

Ironically Nadal now has the best chance of hitting 21 in the French !

mad stuff

13-09-2021 6:44pm

Wimbledon is the biggest gimme for Djokovic now, not Australia.

He might even overtake Woger there.

Probably will at least tie him on 8.

None of the younger guys are much good there yet and Covid took away almost 2 years of their grass court development with such a short season.

An AO is not out of the question tho!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Y4m05o4lbQ

Girly Gal · 13-09-2021 8:03pm

It's only a matter of time before Djokovic gets to 21 and probably more, Nadal of course could wiln a FO or two yet, depending on his fitness, he seems to have almost given up on the other slams in the hope of staying reasonably fit for the FO. It's doubtful if Federer will even return again, probably targeting a farewell at Wimbledon, but, realistically not a hope of winning it.

They could all yet finish on 20, which would actually be quite fitting, but, I think Federer stays on 20, Nadal might make it to 21 and Djokovic 22/23 depending how his fitness holds.

Right now Djokovic and Federer have the same record in slam finals 20/31 with Nadal 20/28. Nadal's ridiculous record at the FO kinda tilts things here.

Djokovic has now lost to 5 different players in slam finals- Nadal, Federer, Murray, Wawrinka and now Medvedev.

Nadal has lost to 3 different players- Djokovic, Federer and Wawrinka. Federer also lost to 3 different players- Djokovic, Nadal and Del Potro.

All 3 would probably have completed a calendar slam at some stage in their career had all three not come along at more or less the same time. The irony is an inferior player in the future could well do it simply because the level of opposition won't be as high.

They have given us a golden age of tennis by pushing each other. It's coming towards an end as their careers are ending / coming towards an end.

josip · 14-09-2021 10:02am

On the H2H point from the US Open thread.

Where there's enough of an overlap of playing years to be worth of consideration, does H2H usually favour the younger player?

My thinking is that players' rises to their peak years are steeper than their declines where they keep playing, hoping for the odd title here and there.

Eg. Djokovic vs Federer. Djokovic has had more years playing against non-peak, old man Federer, than Federer had playing against non-peak, kiddo Djokovic,

lostcat · 14-09-2021 10:27am

Not entirely sure how the ATP points will work for the rest of the year, but Djokovic will likely have to play a bit to hold onto No 1 till the end of the year.

It would be his 7th and would put him out on his own ahead of Sampras (Fedal have 5 each).

Medvedev is around 1k points behind at present but he won the last couple of tournaments of 2020 so might not be able to make up too much ground. Zverev isn't too far away either and if he has a good run he could possibly end up no 1.

josip · 14-09-2021 10:55am

From what I read, Djokovic is dropping 2170 points between now and the year end but Medvedev is dropping 3840.

Zverev is 4,370 points behind at the moment, don't know how many points he's dropping, but it seems like a big ask for him.

I think Federer and Nadal will slip down further with their 2019 points not being counted and it's unlikely Federer will finish a 19th year as a top 10 player.

14-09-2021 6:41pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117888769#Comment_117888769

It's easier just to to check the ATP race to Turin which shows current year points.

Player with most points at the end of the year will be world number 1 - simple.

Djokovic is currently down to play Indian Wells in October. He might play The Paris Masters and will surely play the ATP finals to ensure that he ends up No.1 to have the outright year-end number ones of 7.

Unless he decides to take the rest of the year off and sod the world number 1 accolade!

https://www.atptour.com/en/rankings/singles-race-to-turin

Slashermcguirk · 06-12-2021 5:38pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117684849#Comment_117684849

Only seeing this thread now. Djokovic level vs Federer in Australian open 2016 is the highest level of tennis I have ever witnessed. Federer was not even playing badly and he lost the first couple of sets 6-2 6-1 in about 50 minutes. I remember even the commentators that day were lost for words, just a stunned silence in the crowd at what was happening to Federer on Rod Laver arena. When Djokovic goes into his beast mode, he is literally unplayable. Nadal has said many times that Novaks top level is the highest level of tennis he has ever seen.

One other match that stands out for me was the Doha Final in 2016 (around the same time as the above match). In the final Djokovic beat Nadal 6-1 6-2. The amount of winners he was hitting was outrageous.

I actually think 2010 Nadal was next best for me and then Federer in 2006.

The Golden Miller · 23-01-2022 2:18am

I think the highest level of tennis we've seen, relatively, was McEnroe for a period.

Of the current 3 you'd have to say Djokovic became the best. Minus the serve though, I think Nadal was the better all round player. Serve killed Nadal.

Wimbledon 2018 was a good example. When the ball was inplay, Nadal was far superior. But his serve far too weak

From a purely technical point of view, and as laughable as it may sound, one of the best I've seen was a young Hewitt. Despite a complete lack of power in his game, any real weapons or presence, it took an incredible amount of nous and craft to get as far as he did, to counter all his weaknesses. People forget how good he was initially

The Golden Miller · 27-01-2022 3:39pm

Must be annoying for Djokovic. Was potentially his next tournament away from having the most Slams. Yet if Nadal could manage to win here, he'd be very strong for France too. Come summer, Djokovic could potentially be 3 Slams away from having the most, when he was almost there. Funny how things can change so quickly.

He's unfortunate not to be going for his 24th or 25th Slam. Missed a year or two with form and personal stuff, which held him back. In contrast, Federer is fortunate to have got more than 15. Won quite a few with little competition, and won quite a few opportunistic Slams when others were injured, where he wouldn't have been favoured otherwise.

Outside the modern professional era, who has the most Slams, when you include the Pro Slams the top players of the day deferred to? Roswell? He must have over 20 when you combine Grand and Pro Slams? Laver up there too I'm sure

Royale with Cheese · 27-01-2022 3:44pm

Nadal won the 2017 US Open facing nobody seeded higher than 24, and again in 2019 facing nobody seeded in the top 20 until meeting Medvedev in the final who was seeded 5 (and Djokovic retired injured). You can only beat what's in front of you but nothing opportunistic about those I guess.

Nadal hasn't beaten Djokovic in 5 sets on a non clay court since 2013 and Federer since 2014, I think he's incredibly fortunate to have those two recent US Open wins.

The Golden Miller · 27-01-2022 4:00pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118540895#Comment_118540895

Didn't mention Nadal because I think overall 20 Slams would be a fair reflection of his career. Djokovic should have had more by the point imo, Federer less

FEDERER v NADAL V DJOKOVIC (etc) - MOD NOTE 1ST POST

Comments