Why it's good to be Federer, not Djokovic

What have you done for me lately? It's one of the great truisms in sports. It's OK if you're the bigger loser, as long as you eventually win -- and win last.
Just ask Roger Federer. How much less does his Slam-less season mean now that he ended the year with the prestigious World Tour Finals title? Just ask Novak Djokovic. His three Slams suddenly seem like ages ago. Since completing the trifecta in Flushing, the world No. 1 has been beset by injuries, burnout, losses and a whole lot of disappointment.
Djokovic won more, a lot more, in 2011 than did Federer. In fact, Djokovic strung together more titles than Federer did all season by April. And, of course, there was the Serb's 43-match winning streak, the rare Indian Wells-Miami double, the Wimbledon title he so longed for and a host of other achievements most players can only dream of.
But there's one small detail the stat sheets don't share: It's Federer, not Djokovic, who will walk away from the 2011 season with a greater sense of satisfaction. Why? Federer ended this season at the sport's apex, looking way down at the poor souls who couldn't figure out how to stop his inexorable runs to the trophy ceremonies.
And if you're keeping track at home, that's three straight titles for Federer (none for Djokovic) to end the season.
What Djokovic accomplished is nothing short of mind-numbing. Not only the trio of majors, but the record five Masters Series shields he nabbed. It truly was a season of greatness, one that had him on a staggering pace to finish in historic fashion. His indomitable mindset and all-court resourcefulness redefined the sport's paradigm. He baffled Rafael Nadal over and over and over (and over), and he disheartened Federer. He made pundits look foolish and thrilled fans with his unwavering will to win.
But since his final act at the U.S. Open way, way back in mid-September, Djokovic's dominance has diminished, perhaps deteriorated. Now we've entered Federer's world of no-nonsense retribution. His titles at Basel, Paris and the World Tour Finals have again catapulted him to the top of the game, while his 17-match winning streak has spawned a renewed sense of hope.
If Federer can play like this for as long as he has recently, why not more Grand Slam titles? If he can display the mental fortitude and focus like he did in London, why can't he regularly thwart the likes of Nadal and Djokovic on a regular basis? Both of them showed long stretches of breakdowns and frustrations.
Sure, we get it: In his final three tournaments, Federer faced one of the big-four behemoths just once. But you saw the hammer he dropped on Nadal at the O2. The courts may better suit Federer during the indoor circuit, but a dismantling like that goes far deeper than these kinds of nuances. So many of these matches between the world's top players come down to belief and bravado. Now Federer is in an ideal position to carry his late-season surge into the Australian Open, where you can bet your bottom dollar he'll be just as much of a favorite as his nemeses.
Djokovic, conversely, has little to relish in right now but his laurels. And with so much unraveling lately, Djokovic's fragility, again, takes center stage. The season is a long, grueling crucible that takes incredible amounts of stamina and patience, and maintaining that level is nearly impossible. But the manner in which Djokovic foundered in the past couple of months leaves him with a lot of questions heading into 2012.
Someday, in hindsight, we'll marvel at Djokovic's grand accomplishments, but right here and right now, it's Slam-less Roger who exits the 2011 season as the major winner.