I know I actually have ptsd whenever I see clips

Fed was the better player the entire match, but Djokovic was all time clutch when he needed to be.

Us open 2021 final for djokovic fans😂😂😂😂😂😂

@@stefanvasilache5252 i feel you mate, Djokovic was about to completely destroy history and win 4 slams in one calendar year which might have been his only chance but he will still win many slams in the next upcoming years and i actually hope he will have another chance to win the 4 slams in one calender year, his only obstacle would be the french open but other than that he can do it.

@@samehalaa1348 i am a Federer fan. Djokovic will win another gs but he won t get the calendar Grand slam

Exactly, I'm a Rafa fan and nobody handled Roger better then him, but doesn't make Roger soft, Novak is probably the GOAT when it comes to results and Roger had the highest peak imo and Rafa is the greatest fighter in the Game and the best role model. Roger took this game to another level and everyone has to be grateful to him for thag

@@ismetcehic5581 I think it is debatable that Roger had the highest peak. Compared to the others around him in 2006, yes. But that is subjective. But if you use a more objective statistic such as highest ATP points, that would be Novak. Think of how dominant you have to be to attain 16,950 points. 4 slams = 8000 9 masters = 9000 ATP final = 1500 If you max out all of those, you will have 18,500. Novak had almost 17,000 of those in 2016. Besides, Rafa himself seems to think Novak's peak is higher than Roger's peak.

People are also forgetting they're 5 years part. Federer's mental game at its best is superior to the other two's mental best.

@@yourlarkivist uhm no. OBJECTIVELY he is the 3rd best out of the Big 3.

@@catspaw7366 he is the goat

It hurts 🥺😭

Me too!

I have had a few and they haunt me to this day 😂 can’t imagine how much they must hurt in the grand slams

@@noahkhimasia6437 Were they on your serve or your opponent’s?

@@viksinha5410 well I had loads, I think I had about 7 in total and it was a tie break so it was both on the serve and the return, also I had one where I missed an extremely easy shot which was super frustrating. But overall it helped me because next time I was at match point I knew not to get complacent and instead go for it.

Undisputable goat... in choking😂

didn't know about this statistics, are u sure?

@@SergeRWYes, it’s true

That does say something for sure.

Wow, that’s wild. Federer is the weakest mentally by far.

Also cemented him as definitely not the Goat. Goats don't choke under pressure. Also opened the way for Djokovic to chase down every single one of his records. He might even get 9 Wimbledons at this rate as there is no competition on grass...

@@marcob2250 yeah but goats don't smash racquets at the Olympics either

Perhaps these statistics will serve as balm? 🙂 What is interesting about the Federer-Djokovic rivalry (and, in fact, every Federer H2H rivalry) are the finer "in-match" stats and their comparison to the grosser "results" stats. For example, the Djoker-Fed rivalry is 27-23 in the Djoker's favour (11-6 in slams) ... but (and here's the rub), *_several important in-match statistics tilt in Federer's favour_* . For example, Federer's points dominance (PD) ratio is 1.02, his game dominance (GD) ratio is 1.01, his total points won is 50.2%, his total games won is 50.4%, and his total sets won is 50%. In other words, *_Federer is better than or equal to the Djoker in 5 of tennis's most important in-match categories_* . Now these might seem to be trivial in the larger scheme of things (after all, only the result matters, right?) or like hair-splitting on the part of a Federer fan, but they become important considerations when one is discussing if Djokovic is really a greater tennis _player_ ( as opposed to _winner_ ) than Federer. Because - *_to have a healthy lead in such a large H2H set (50 matches!) and still trail in these in-match statistics is so rare as to be almost singular_* . [Take into consideration Djokovic's 6-years (!) age-advantage and how he only began to lead the H2H in early 2016 (and to pull away in 2018) and it makes perfect sense to say that the Fed is the greater _player_ and the (slightly) lesser _winner_ .] This rarity of Federer's is made more apparent by a look at these very statistics in the case of the Djokovic-Nadal H2H. In this case, the leader of the H2H category (again, the Djoker) also leads the in-match stats: with a PD ratio of 1.04, a GD ratio of 1.09, a total points won of 50.7%, a total games won of 51%, and a total sets won of 52.3%. This sort of correspondence in "leads" is what is expected - what Federer has done against Djokovic goes completely against most people's assumptions about the performance of the player who leads the H2H. And this is not a one-off! Just as interesting are the in-match stats of a couple of Federer's other negative H2Hs against current players, namely, Thiem and Zverev. Despite the H2H match count being low (just seven each) and despite trailing Thiem 2-5 and Zverev 3-4, his in-match stats (PD, GD, percent points won) is still greater than or equal to that of both players! Indeed, the only (relevant) player Federer trails in these in-match stats is Rafa - and even there, the skew is much less than the 16-24 H2H skew. For instance, Federer's PD ratio is 0.97 and his total points won is 49.4%! The point of all of this? That H2Hs can be "deceptive"; that Federer is almost indisputably the greatest in-match player in tennis history (as well as the most profligate with BPs and MPs); and that the player who wins the match is not necessarily the greater or the better tennis player. To conclude: 1) The Djoker is the best, most consistent player at the moment ; 2) His lead in the H2H against Federer simply indicates that he is the better closer; _not_ that he is the better tennis _player_ ; 3) Given Rafa's (extra)-skewed dominance on clay, his lopsided H2H against the Djoker on HC, and Federer's resurgence against him since 2017, Djokovic's real rival (in overall statistics and records) is a six-years-older Fed rather than Rafa ; 4) Fed's better "in-match" performance over 50 matches against Djokovic makes a very strong case for his status as the greater *tennis **_player_* ( and the slightly lesser *tennis **_winner_* ) of the two. P.S: My fascination with these in-match statistics kind of began after Wimbledon 2019 - a match which, as far as I'm concerned, Fed "won", just not _officially_ . Watching Fed (officially) lose a match he "won" got me looking into the finer match stats. What I found therein confirmed my impression of Federer - *_as Novak's greatest rival over the past decade (despite being 6 years older) and as the finest in-match player in tennis history_* . I'm not saying this makes him the GOAT (which is mostly a futile, emotion-driven argument) - but it most certainly lends factual heft to the popular belief that Federer is the greatest player (in the "tennising" sense) to have played the game (so far). That he plays with a such a sui generis flair and artistry is the icing on the cake. Trivia: 1. The Djoker and the Fed have met four times on grass. The Djoker leads the H2H 3-1, but here are Fed's in-match statistics: PD = 1.04, GD = 1.19, Total points won = 50.4%, Games won = 51%. 2. In Bof3 matches, the Fed-Djoker H2H is 16-16 (with matches played between 2006-2019). For these 33 matches, the in-match statistics for the Fed are: PD = 1.05; GD = 1.15; BP ratio = 1.05 (he even leads this against possibly the game's greatest returner...confirming my opinion that Fed's return is highly underrated); total points won = 50.6%; games won = 51.5%; sets won = 52.6%. In short, *_the Fed leads the Djoker in every one of these categories_* , an astonishing feat. 3. For all Djokovic's acclaimed brilliance on hard courts (he leads Nadal 20-7!), the Fed is basically his equal on the surface, with their H2H being 20-18 in the Djoker's favour (7-4 in Bof5 and 13-14 in Bof3). As for the in-match stats ... it's "deja vu all over again" with Fed having a PD = 1.02, GD = 1.02, (BP ratio = 0.98), total points won = 50.2%, games won = 50.7%, sets won = 51.9%. Truly - if Fed had the remarkable "nervelessness" of Djokovic (or perhaps even that of Rafa), god knows how many of the important matches would have gone his way! So yes, a statement talking about Fed's propensity to waste MPs (and, therefore, lose) would be reductive ... if there wasn't so much hard evidence that the Fed has shown himself to be the _superior in-match player_ (across 50 matches!) with a marked tendency of getting nervous at crucial moments. I mean, if Fed had had the "nerve(lessness)" to convert those MPs from the three slam matches against the Djoker - he would lead the Djoker 26-24 in their overall H2H; lead him 9-8 in their Grand Slam H2H; and lead him 21-19 in the slam count ... but he didn't convert them, that's that, and here we are. However, this long write-up is to emphasiz that you shouldn't ever let the H2H or slam titles fool you into believing anything _except_ the fact that Djokovic is the "mentally stronger" (a term I don't care for) and "more nerveless " (I prefer this term) tennis player of the two. Not the "greater". Indeed, *_I will reiterate my opinion that Federer is the greater tennis player of the two_* - not simply because of his aesthetics and "flair" but because he has achieved his records while playing an attacking all-court game that offers much less margin for error (than Djokovic's) _and_ being six years older than Djokovic. Stats courtesy: www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/headToHead?playerId1=3819&playerId2=4920

​@@marcob2250 Uh, not quite. It simply confirmed that the Fed is more prone to nerves than the Djoker is (and Nadal too, pre-2017) - something Fed fans always knew. Yes, it _did_ allow the Djoker to close the GS gap and continue to dominate, but, as my post with the stats below show, that was about all it did. The Djoker is closer to the Fed than Nadal (in terms of being an all-surface player), but his attritional style and glaring lack of an all-court game - he may be getting better now but 90% of his winning has been based on attrition - mean that he will never reach Federer's height as a tennis _player_ ... and he knows it. In any case, I'm sure he prefers the titles. However, what's made the Fed stand out all these long years is his *_utterly unique_* combination of winning ability and aesthetic attractiveness.

honestly I'll never forget this momnent... he had 2 match points for a GS title

E-X-A-C-T-L-Y.

Tbf Vs Djokovic he had an opportunity and he took it, but it didn't end as it should have. Then Djokovic didn't give him the same chance again.

Yup. Better player, all stats on his side. Just missed the crucial points

@@unowen7591better player LOOOOOOL I can’t tell if you’re trolling or not. The better player won the matches

@@schwozluv8364 he was the better player. More aggressive, more opportunities. He had set points in every set I believe, and was ahead of Novak in every stat. Djokovic won the match only because he hung on and made Roger break himself. Of course Roger was the better player throughout the match.

Thats one of the reasons he never won in Rome in his life...

to be fair, Nadal wasn't gifting anything either. if fed wasn't going for broke, he never would have had that lead in the first place.

Going for broke gave him the Aussie Open title in '17. If he had figured out taking the ball early to disrupt Nadal's rhythm sooner, he may have multiple French Open titiels.

@@ConstantDistraction Lol. Australian Open 2017 was not a rout. It was an extremely close match, which Nadal also almost won. So it's completely untrue to extrapolate that to winning French Open.

and to make matters worse, he never won that tournament. Reached four finals, and 2006 was of course when he came closest

he'd probably lose Nadal to us opens but he coulda stopped Djokovic's rebirth in 2018

@@seytannavukat9205 yes true. he's weak mentally comparing to rafa and nole but he's damn skillful you can't say he's not as great as they are

@@slytlion He's definitely more talented. Both Djoko and Nadal play efficient defensive tennis, but Federer is an attacking, artistic player.

@@ha-qg2ug yeah of course if he got rafa or nole's mental strength and will, he would be the greatest in stats by far

@@ha-qg2ugmental strength is a talent. Fed’s backhand was inconsistent and his baseline game had a few holes in it. There isn’t inherently more “talent” in one style or the other.

Agreed. A gift

@@PiotrWolski-eo7wq well he had match point to won that match 3 sets to 0 and lost 2 sets to 3, pretty incredible, then the wb 2019 it was more competed

It's not mental fragility. It's the crowd expectations that get in your head, which is arguably more unnerving than if the crowd was against you. You can't imagine the amount of pressure he has in these moments when the world wants and expects you to seal it, and in your head you start to fear disappointing them. With great success comes great failures, that's all legends.

One doesn't win 20 majors with mental fragility

@@yourlarkivistcrowd for you >>> crowd against you😊

Mental fragility?!

@@yourlarkivist yeah it's more easy to play with crowd against like Djokovic he thinks ain't got nothing to lose without expectatives

God I wonder how the big 3 don't hate their fans

@@luc7054 Djokovic fans as arrogant as their idol. Nothing new

That’s good

lol, at least fed choked in a 5 setter match and didn't let madvedev wipe the court with his arse in straight sets.

In a few months he’ll have reached 21 in Melbourne, meaning he’ll have more slams, masters and weeks at number 1 than the weak era champ. So save your tears till then :)

NEMESIS 👽👽👽

Very nice, but he's the GOAT only in your heart. Statistics say otherwise.

@@AntaresHighlander statistics still saying Federer is the GOAT

@@rodriguerra3639 he is tied

@@AntaresHighlander You can pick your own GOAT by stats, that's cool. There's no right metric by now with someone's who transcended tennis like Roger.

Funny thing is 5 years ago when Roger was leading the race the parameters of being the Greatest were numbers, stats and facts. Fast forward to 2021 Novak surpassed him in almost every RELEVANT categories. Now all of a sudden the sport became tennis/ dancing/ ballet/ beauty contest/ Miss Universe. Even rolex made a fool out of themselves by advocating it is beyond facts and stats now, numbers don't matter anymore. I mean really rolex? 🥴😂

Yeah, he should have been on a high after the AO that year. I think he caught some illness when he visted africa for foundation work.

@@Masterdoctorgenius14 Yup, he had some rare disease called 40:15

Yes and i would count the Anderson match as the worst offender of their MP losses

No, I wont say that. I think he's mentally fragile for an All Time Great, and for a very precise reason: too much talent. He was the most talented player to ever play, and that's how he mainly won. Pure talent (and obviously crucial factors like dedication, hunger, and fitness). But when you are so talented, and so worshiped, your mental strength is almost never challenged. We must consider that Fed was treated as a true GOD in his peak, by anyone. Not easy to be humble and focused in those circumstances. Especially against Djokovic, everytime he truly felt the "fear" of losing (again), and that led him to basically self destructing many times.

Why don't you count tiebreaks and then lose match? tiebreaks matter too.

@Douglas Mortimer nadal did get to him, and roger lost his grand slam matches against him nearly everytime 😂

@Douglas Mortimer in 2004 when Nadal's a kid at 18? What's the point of your comment?

Rafa was waiting in 2013 and 2017 at the US Open as well to play Fed but Roger lost to Robredo and Del Potro respectively.

The „opponent“ is the greatest have some respect

@@ashleythomas4112 Nadal lost in 2008 to Murray - would have played Roger in US Open final. Nadal lost to Del Potro in 2009, would have played Federer in US Open Final - what's your point.

Trilogy 🤣🤣🤣

Never in the clutch

Laver cup doesn't count😂

@@mattiaarseni4684literally in clutch

@@projectx5154ok 23-24 still incredible

Sad compilation

Just a beautiful sight of Fedophiles crying in comments 🥰

@@projectx5154well he accomplished a lot and people hate him and mock him for it that’s rent free

Fed was a poor problem solver, and could never grind like the other 2. As you say, he relied on talent more than anything. As far as the comment about his level dropping, I strongly disagree. There’s piles of evidence to show that Fed’s level didn’t suddenly drop, it was more because Djokovic and Nadal (particularly Djokovic) started to dominate him mentally. He won 4 slams after 2010, and 3 of those came when Djokovic was injured in 2017-2018. He could’ve won 10-12 slams in this era had Djokovic not existed. He was consistently going far in slams and was ranked highly.

I agree. If I look at his wins, 2004-2005 were insane. Those are not numbers of a mentally fragile player, however for someone of his caliber he lost too many matches like this, and since Nadal and especially Djokovic happened he definitely de-evolved mentally, got scared or, even better, the other two stood up as even stronger than him. There's no doubt mentally he was the weaker of the three.

The loss to Delpo at the US Open 2009 final was where Federer started to fade.

​@@mikemoggerson6651I totally disagree. Watch Fed Djok 2015 Wimbledon The commentator mentions that Federer's recent Grand Slam issues had been that he couldn't sustain his level later in the matches anymore and errors would pile up.

@@jeremiahh.3383 Djokovic hasn’t had that problem 😂 he’s 2 years older than Fed was in 2016, yet Fed in 2016 was blowing a 2-0 lead to Raonic at Wimbledon 😂😂

Plus the fact that a great majority of his career, the crowd is supporting him. Imagine if he was not treated like that, maybe he wont have half of the GS he has now

@@acdp61what if being underdog helps his mental and wins more slams? Can go both ways too

@@acdp61Federer had more pressure because of crowd maybe that hurt him more

It really shows the mental strength of Anderson, fighting so long from 1:58 (Fed’s MP) to 4:13 (Kevin’s MP) to recover from that huge deficit

Djokovic was way too consistent trough his career to not be the goat, federer after 2009 was extremely inconstant, and rafa with the injuries, 2014-2016 period, etc. Nole just never has an off period like the other two

Part 3 of greatest 40 - 15 trilogy

Well we just watched him choke horribly in 2021 US Open. Federer choked match points but I don't think he ever choked for an entire match.

@@JL-fh4qw best comment I support u

madrid 09?

@@JL-fh4qw cry

@@JL-fh4qw how was 2021 us open a choke? There were no tiebreaks and it was over in three sets

The nail in the coffin for his confidence was 2009, losing to nadal in australia and del potro in US changed his career, he was never the dominant player he once was

łzy i żal... a

Nole has 23 going for 24 know

lol ,that’s the Complete opposite my friend, when u are losing or ur down then the crowd support helps But when u are winning the crowd support makes u nervous and tight ..Roger has been having the highest crowd following than anyone and when he is winning (at big titles) he often gets nervous and right. You can look his speech of 2018 AO final ..he just said “U are the guys who make me nervous”.

He was litalary won againts agassi in 2005 in a close match soo bulshit

@@theaustrianart-teacher8787 so 1 match is enough for a proof?

@@thebigmonstaandy6644 hewiit? Roddick? Nadal?

@@thebigmonstaandy6644 Prime roddick is as good as murray and nadal is nadal and agassi was still very solid in 2004-2005 not a Bad Player at all

He already did

Djokovic will never be the GOAT

@@adityasharma-ps6hl Numbers don't care about your feelings.

@@adityasharma-ps6hl that's your opinion which doesn't matter

Federer looks for Djokovic under his bed.

I am guessing with his 1 billion dollars in net worth - the losses don't bother him too badly. He loved to compete - with competition comes both winning and losing. If Djokovic plays 3 or 4 more years he will experience a lot more defeats.

He reset after Wimbledon 2019, though. Almost broke the Djoker at 11-11 to give himself another chance to serve for the match...but got nervous _yet_ again. The tiebreak that followed was a foregone conclusion. That said, his inability to reset at deuce (after he'd missed the two MPs) was very unfortunate. He did in the semis against Rafa (because Rafa no longer "intimidated him mentally") but he couldn't against the Djoker. Still, what a match he played! One for the ages. All the Djoker did was _hang on_ , all match long. That gave him the "win" but it was an almost-38 y.o Fed who gave us the tennis...like he almost always does. The greatest tennis _player_ (though not winner) and a revealer of a whole new dimension of tennis's aesthetics, the Fed is sui generis.

@@thesoccergod He's not the GOAT and djoker just didn't hang in there, he was far more clutch than roger and not to mention he was actually a break up in that final set but he also choked it except he quickly reset. Fed was playing some of the best tennis but still couldn't beat novak who in all honesty was just playing quite averge but extremely clutch.

@@udaygadge6064 Sure, if that's how you'd rather look at it. I, on the other hand, was being objective. Also - the Djoker wasn't "clutch" on the MPs; rather the Fed got nervous. There's a (subtle) difference between the two. I do agree, though, that he played the 3rd and 5th set TBs very well indeed. It would be fair to call it "clutch" if it wasn't for the fact that it's much easier to be cool when you're playing defence rather than offence. As for whether one of the two was playing below-average or above-average or just average on _that day_ , it doesn't matter. (Why? Because saying so means offering no credit to either player, a rather unfair thing to do.) Instead, what any objective observer would (and the stats do) attest to is that *_the match was on Fed's racquet all evening long_* . Which basically amounts to saying that the Djoker "hung in there". Good for him for doing so - but don't let's pretend that wasn't what he did (when he himself admitted it was in his post-match interview).

@@thesoccergod he was clutch, I can’t think of any other player who’d have made those returns match points down or the FH pass. Yes roger choked but still.. and yes it doesn’t matter if he was playing average, he won same goes for fed he was playing well but he lost. At the end of the day all you can say is Novak was better that day.

@@udaygadge6064 Hahah. Well, that's kind of my point - that "at the end of the day", you _can_ say the Fed was the better player overall...who just wasn't "destined" to win. Sure, "closing" is the most important part of any non-zero-sum game, but all it does is determine who the _winner_ is. It doesn't (and isn't meant to) determine who the better _player_ is. Usually they're the same person, but occasionally, the person who _played_ better _does_ lose. Wimby 2019 was one such occasion.

А чего не 20?

no

And still able to win 20 slams and breaking so many records. What are you talking about?

@@jeroenvermunt862 what record? How don't have shit

Novak has more masters, every masters twice, better h2h, weeks in no1, and in a matter of time, he will have most slams

bro, shut up

Agreed with everything except for Fed playing sublime tennis. I wouldn't call it sublime; it was definitely worse than his performance against Nadal in the SF. I would say that both players played a high level except for Novak in the second set and Fed in the tiebreaks.

@@viksinha5410 Is that right? I don't fully remember the match, but I do know that he hit 94 winners (including 27 aces), a remarkable number against tennis's top returner-of-serve and it's most attritional baseline-returner. And some of those winners _were_ sublime. But perhaps I'm remembering his play as better than it was...on account of the numbers. I mean - 67 in-point winners against the Djoker!

@@thesoccergod A lot of those winners came in the second set which Novak completely tanked. And winners aren't the only criteria for a player playing well. There is also forced errors, which I believe Djokovic had more of. And yes, Federer did have some sublime winners, as did Novak. It is just that Novak's came at more crucial times.

@@viksinha5410 Ah. Well, the Djoker's ability to force an error is well known. The problem is that a lot of the Fed's errors (against whoever) are unforced. As for Novak's winners - the only one I remember is the backhand DTL he hit at 12-12, 5-3 in the tiebreak. Unsurprisingly, it was possibly his most important one. That said, the Djoker's play - winners or not - is so metronomic that there's little that stands out (besides some of his wonderful short-angle forehand crosscourts). Indeed, the _only_ shot of Novak's I can remember being properly "wowed" by was a backhand DTL in the third set against Rafa at RG 2021, hit from about a metre or so behind the baseline as he stretched out into an almost-split. I can't remember the score exactly, but it may be one of the most remarkable shots I've ever seen hit.

​@@thesoccergod Agreed Novak's play is a bit metronomic. Nevertheless, he is a great champion and we have been blessed to witness an era with him, Federer, and Nadal

Crown opposition can be much more motivating. You play as if you have nothing to lose anyways, while with the crowd support it takes you to a level of nervousness you and I cannot imagine.

And ur english will destroy ur career

Just rent free

He has a 30% win rate against Nole and Rafa in slams. He was expected to lose lol. He won 4 slams after Djokovic turned 22. 3 of those came when Djokovic was injured and mostly absent from 2017-2018. The debate is over. 23>20, and pretty much everything else in Nole’s favour too. Federer has lost 24 matches with match points. Djokovic has lost 3, 2 of which were prior to 2011. There’s just no debate anymore so don’t force it

@@mikemoggerson6651Djokovic won 4 slams before Federer turned 30 while Djokovic entered his peak. You can’t say one side of the story that Djokovic was too young before age 22 in 2000s decade

Then he is definitely a narcissist

On the bright side he's won 22 matches saving match points against him

No, it's beautiful

@@projectx5154since you’re a Federer hater

Spot on, Rafa & Nole are mental beasts & it's what makes them better players in my opinion. Just take a look at the last two days. 🤣 Federer is a goat & probably the most influential Tennis player of all time but Rafa & Nole are better.

Wow a weak mentality that helped him set records and win a lot of titles and slams lol 😆