- Joined
- Mar 28, 2011
- Messages
- 10,852
- Reaction score
- 4,038
In terms of accumulating majors Djokovic had the massive advantage of no good players coming after him, whereas Federer had Djokovic, Murray, Nadal, Wawrinika etc.
Basically men's tennis didn't produce any new, really top players for 15 years so Djokovic has had an easy run of it these last few years. Like if Andy Murray was 10 years younger he'd probably have gotten 10 slams himself.
Prime vs prime I'm taking Federer on grass 75/25, and Djoko on hard courts 60/40.
By the same token Federer had a major advantage in the early years during his prime of utter dominance. No one in that time rose up or was already there to challenge Federer. Both Nadal and Djokovic were teenagers growing into their adult bodies and needed years of seasoning to mature into their prime build. Once there Federer was the consistent 3rd out of the three in terms of results. As a huge Federer fan I should know. He'd steamroll through everybody else but lose to either Djokovic or Nadal generally speaking.
Federer retired last year and Nadal is going to retire next year. Meaning for Djokovic's entire career up until last year he had to deal with both/either Federer or Nadal. Djokovic had no massive advantage IMO.