PDA

View Full Version : Who do you consider the 2nd best on clay: Federer or Djokovic?


Zaragoza
06-11-2008, 12:03 PM
I have read about this subject on different threads so I wanted to start this thread and make a poll. Of course Federer has achieved much more on clay than Djokovic (he is 6 years older) but the question is just about this year and their current level on clay.
These are their performances in the big clay events this year:

Monte Carlo

Federer-finalist (lost to Nadal 7-5 7-5). He lost one set against Ramirez-Hidalgo and Nalbandian.

Djokovic-semifinalist (lost to Federer 6-3 3-2 ret.)

Rome

Federer-quarter finalist (lost to Stepanek 7-6 7-6).

Djokovic-winner. He lost one set against Andreev and Wawrinka.

Hamburg

Federer-finalist (lost to Nadal 5-7 7-6 3-6).

Djokovic-semifinalist (lost to Nadal 5-7 6-2 2-6).

I find hard to pick who made better results in the Masters Series, I think itīs pretty even.

Roland Garros

Federer-finalist (lost to Nadal 6-1 6-3 6-0). He lost one set against Montaņes, Gonzalez and Monfils.

Djokovic-semifinalist (lost to Nadal 6-4 6-2 7-6). He lost one set against Gremelmayr.

Federer made the better result but Djokovic had to play Nadal in the semifinals and was the toughest opponent for Nadal in the tournament.

So what do you think?

Satch
06-11-2008, 12:13 PM
It's easy, Nole...
He played much better against the King himself - Rafa at Hamburg and RG, and he won Rome it's masters compared to estoril that Fedex got because Davy retired.
but if Fedex showed just a little better game against Rafa (in final) i would go for Roger. Last year Roger was better on clay IMO.

Nadal_Freak
06-11-2008, 12:17 PM
Djokovic clearly. The only reason he lost to Federer is that he had Strep throat.

rocket
06-11-2008, 12:22 PM
II find hard to pick who made better results in the Masters Series, I think itīs pretty even.

The match results don't tell you that Fed very nearly beat the king of clay on two occasions this year. Has he done that, perhaps the FO final would have been the match of the decade.

Right now, Fed is the only guy who can beat Nadal on clay.

Nadal_Freak
06-11-2008, 12:29 PM
The match results don't tell you that Fed very nearly beat the king of clay on two occasions this year. Has he done that, perhaps the FO final would have been the match of the decade.

Right now, Fed is the only guy who can beat Nadal on clay.
Fed wasn't close in Monte Carlo and Nadal was injured against Federer in the Hamburg Final after his very exhausting match against Djokovic. Djokovic got Nadal's best while Fed didn't.

edmondsm
06-11-2008, 12:33 PM
Djokovic clearly. The only reason he lost to Federer is that he had Strep throat.

Yeah, but Federer has been playing bad because of that pimple.:wink::grin:

deme08
06-11-2008, 12:39 PM
Federer no doubt. FO finalist says it all. Yes he crumbled against Nadal but thats more to do with his "Nadal complex". Djokovic doesn't have that mental problem with Nadal, yet (hopefully won't).

Look at it this way, Federer would have beaten Djokovic had they met at Roland Garros, he'd have shown more motivation and play without the mental block that he has with Nadal. Anyway, Monte Carlo was a good example of how Federer matches up against Djokovic on clay.

Nadal_Freak
06-11-2008, 12:41 PM
Federer no doubt. FO finalist says it all. Yes he crumbled against Nadal but thats more to do with his "Nadal complex". Djokovic doesn't have that mental problem with Nadal, yet (hopefully won't).

Look at it this way, Federer would have beaten Djokovic had they met at Roland Garros, he'd have shown more motivation and play without the mental block that he has with Nadal. Anyway, Monte Carlo was a good example of how Federer matches up against Djokovic on clay.
No it doesn't because Djokovic wasn't feeling that well. Strep throat is a pain.

rocket
06-11-2008, 12:41 PM
Fed wasn't close in Monte Carlo and Nadal was injured against Federer in the Hamburg Final after his very exhausting match against Djokovic. Djokovic got Nadal's best while Fed didn't.

Fed wasn't close in Monte Carlo? 4-3 and 4-0, before he blew them all. How much closer should he be to beat Nadal?

In Hamburg, Nadal wasn't injured enough to come back from 1-5 down in the 1st, from 2-5 down in the 2nd to take it to tiebreak, and played and won the 3rd.

deme08
06-11-2008, 12:42 PM
No it doesn't because Djokovic wasn't feeling that well. Strep throat is a pain.

I take it you are joking/trolling as usual.

Telepatic
06-11-2008, 12:56 PM
I go for Novak since he showed better play everywhere on clay this year then Federer except MC where he had health problems,but even if he hadnt,its 3:1.Do I have to mention alot younger age and harder draw aswell?This statements like:"Fed reached FO/Hamburg finals,it says all".Actually,it says nothing but an easier draw.Federer was better then Novak all the time before,now Novak is improving and Fed..well,"losing it",and not just on clay btw.Hope Novak will get #2 position in next clay season,so Fed can might play with Nadal in semis,win over him to get to the finals and show that I'm wrong.

The balls in your court.
06-11-2008, 01:12 PM
I would have lost 6-0,6-0,6-0 to Nadal...hell Federer only beat me by four games!!!

deme08
06-11-2008, 01:16 PM
I would have lost 6-0,6-0,6-0 to Nadal...hell Federer only beat me by four games!!!

You'd have lost 6-0, 6-0, 6-0 to Federer.... hell you wouldn't even have a chance to lose 6-0, 6-0, 6-0 to Federer even if you wanted to. ;)

NamRanger
06-11-2008, 01:22 PM
Djokovic clearly. The only reason he lost to Federer is that he had Strep throat.


Then Federer is clearly the better HC player because he lost to Djokovic, Fish, and Roddick because of mono :rolleyes:

Telepatic
06-11-2008, 01:31 PM
^Fed said he feels fine after AO,so no mono excuses..

anointedone
06-11-2008, 01:35 PM
Federer beat Djokovic at Monte Carlo period. Djokovic's retirement is somewhat questionable, but without a too in depth dicussion on that Federer was the better player there. However Djokovic has been the better player at each clay court event since- Rome, Hamburg, and the French Open. Reaching the semis to Federer reaching the final is only because he played Nadal in the semis, but the caliber of tennis on clay he showed was higher.

So I say Djokovic. Federer was only better in one clay event, Monte Carlo.

edmondsm
06-11-2008, 01:51 PM
Federer beat Djokovic at Monte Carlo period. Djokovic's retirement is somewhat questionable, but without a too in depth dicussion on that Federer was the better player there. However Djokovic has been the better player at each clay court event since- Rome, Hamburg, and the French Open. Reaching the semis to Federer reaching the final is only because he played Nadal in the semis, but the caliber of tennis on clay he showed was higher.

So I say Djokovic. Federer was only better in one clay event, Monte Carlo.

You summed it up. There is no question in my mind that if things continue on the current trend, either Djokovic or Nadal will be #1, with Federer at 2 or even 3.

daddy
06-11-2008, 02:02 PM
I do believe we can not judge the head to head outcome of Djokovic - Federer match in the best of 5 based on Federer - Nadal and Djokovic - Nadal matches. That logic is falacious. For all we know Monfils took a set of Federer while Djokovic did not do the same, we could conclude that Monfils is better clay courter than Djokovic. Btw the clay court season is at least 10 months away right now, so this is not all that important. Grass is however. If myself as a Djokovic fan can accept this, so shoudl others.

Zaragoza
06-11-2008, 02:33 PM
Btw the clay court season is at least 10 months away right now, so this is not all that important. Grass is however. If myself as a Djokovic fan can accept this, so shoudl others.

Well, I think this is exactly the right moment to analyse the clay season. Not before the season starts. We already read enough fanatic predictions on this board that most of times donīt come true.

daddy
06-11-2008, 02:34 PM
Well, I think this is exactly the right moment to analyse the clay season. Not before the season starts. We already read enough fanatic predictions on this board that most of times donīt come true.

Its time to move on as we have the biggest event in tennis coming up in a couple of weeks. And its a whole world of difference complared to clay, although lately less so.

Zaragoza
06-11-2008, 02:39 PM
Its time to move on as we have the biggest event in tennis coming up in a couple of weeks. And its a whole world of difference complared to clay, although lately less so.

Roland Garros finished 3 days ago so I insist itīs the right moment to make analysis. If it doesnīt interest you just donīt post on this thread.

daddy
06-11-2008, 02:43 PM
Roland Garros finished 3 days ago so I insist itīs the right moment to make analysis. If it doesnīt interest you just donīt post on this thread.

I insist you bring back your carpet instead of clay into your living room and start playing rallies with no more than 4-5 shots, on grass. On a lighter note, are you always this serious ? You can not be ... ;)

Its time to move on, all analisys have been made and the real answer to he only question in the air - is Djokovic better or worse then Federer on clay is up in the air and will not be solved until the next clay court season comes around, which is in 10 months.

If you have anything against facts, you should post in vistual reality. ( joke again my spanish friend, life is as easy going as you make it .. ok ? )

Nadal_Freak
06-11-2008, 02:43 PM
Roland Garros finished 3 days ago so I insist itīs the right moment to make analysis. If it doesnīt interest you just donīt post on this thread.
Yep I don't blame Fed fans for not wanting to talk about that slaughter. :D

daddy
06-11-2008, 02:45 PM
Yep I don't blame Fed fans for not wanting to talk about that slaughter. :D

Im a Fed fun all of a sudden > Freak, you dissapointed me. Go back to the match thread and read my comments. I was very very much against him as I usually am whenever he pays Rafa. :)

I just dont think we can make a clear decision backed by facts about who is better Fed or Joke on clay, at this point.

ACE of Hearts
06-11-2008, 02:48 PM
Some Nadal fans are idiots.Nadal will be an after thought after wimbledon.King Roger will reign supreme and rise from all the ones that doubted him and the ones who wish he was washed up.

anointedone
06-11-2008, 02:50 PM
Yep I don't blame Fed fans for not wanting to talk about that slaughter. :D

Referring to daddy as a Federer fan is really clueless for someone who posts on this forum as much as you do. I agree with Zaragoza though. This is the perfect time to discuss something like this.

Nadal_Freak
06-11-2008, 02:51 PM
Some Nadal fans are idiots.Nadal will be an after thought after wimbledon.King Roger will reign supreme and rise from all the ones that doubted him and the ones who wish he was washed up.
Nadal outplayed Fed during the Spring hardcourt season as well. Not just clay.

anointedone
06-11-2008, 02:52 PM
Some Nadal fans are idiots.Nadal will be an after thought after wimbledon.King Roger will reign supreme and rise from all the ones that doubted him and the ones who wish he was washed up.

Yeah that is what you keep saying yet Nadal has been in the last 2 Wimbledon finals,and pushed Federer hard especialy in last years. I can go back in your posting history and show that you were sh%ting your pants during last years final since you were so scared. He may not have won Wimbledon but he was far from an afterthought you wished him to be.

justsomeecho
06-11-2008, 02:55 PM
obviously fed, he beat djokovic on clay so he is better than djokovic, which gives him the second best.

ACE of Hearts
06-11-2008, 02:56 PM
Plz, Nadal has won nothing, zero slams after the french.He pushed him and yet he loss.When Nadal wins something besides the french, then boast all u want.He is a non-factor at the U.S Open,so where u coming from with hardcourts?Nadal stood a chance because of all the tear on the grass.He would have gotten smoked if it was fast grass!!!

daddy
06-11-2008, 02:57 PM
Referring to daddy as a Federer fan is really clueless for someone who posts on this forum as much as you do. I agree with Zaragoza though. This is the perfect time to discuss something like this.


Ok lets hit the argument, who's better on clay in your opinion ? Id say Fed is still unsolvable for Djokovic on clay if I had to pick it - did not lose a set since their first meeting 3 years ago. Because he can run and gun with him on fast surfaces ( Djokovic ) where Fed lost the edge in speed and footwork but on clay Fed is still the experienced player and will use his tactics wisely to avoid jokers lethal backhand and serve him out wide and get a lot more cheaper points on serve and at the net. His net play is also somethig which enables him to have the edge over joker at this moment.

There you go. Any oposite opinions ?

edberg505
06-11-2008, 02:57 PM
"If you ain't first, you're last." That's what Ricky Bobby says and I'm inclined to agree with him.

Nadal_Freak
06-11-2008, 03:00 PM
Plz, Nadal has won nothing, zero slams after the french.He pushed him and yet he loss.When Nadal wins something besides the french, then boast all u want.He is a non-factor at the U.S Open,so where u coming from with hardcourts?Nadal stood a chance because of all the tear on the grass.He would have gotten smoked if it was fast grass!!!
Nadal has been close in his last 3 big tournaments. Semis at Aussie Open, Semis at Indian Wells, and Finals at Miami. Unfortunately, he couldn't play his best tennis and get through those matches. He did beat some big names on his way there including Blake twice, Youzhny, Tsonga in Indian Wells, and Berdych. He is due for his breakthrough on hardcourts and even moreso on grass based on how close he got last year.

daddy
06-11-2008, 03:01 PM
Nadal has been close in his last 3 big tournaments. Semis at Aussie Open, Semis at Indian Wells, and Finals at Miami. Unfortunately, he couldn't play his best tennis and get through those matches. I did beat some big names on his way there including Blake twice, Youzhny, Tsonga in Indian Wells, and Berdych. He is due for his breakthrough on hardcourts and even moreso on grass based on how close he got last year.

close is not enough. too many losses and quite heavy ones vs various oponents - still did not do enough to challange neither Fed nor Djoker at hard.

Nadal_Freak
06-11-2008, 03:10 PM
close is not enough. too many losses and quite heavy ones vs various oponents - still did not do enough to challange neither Fed nor Djoker at hard.
True but it shows that what Nadal is capable of and very likely going to win another slam other than just clay.

fer
06-11-2008, 03:10 PM
Obviously Federer, you cant forget what he has achieved on the past.

-Federer has beaten Nadal on Hamburg and held a match point on Rome 2006.
-Djokovic has never beaten either of them.

Djokovic isnt a better clay courter because he s won more games against Nadal on RG than Federer. If Djokovic beats Nadal on clay then we may say he s become better than Federer.

Lucky57
06-11-2008, 05:19 PM
federer.
- federer is one of only two people who have beat nadal on clay.
- just cause federer didn't do so hot against nadal in roland garros doesn't mean he's not good at clay. federer was having a very off day in that match and noone could have stopped nadal the way he was playing.

Lucky57
06-11-2008, 05:21 PM
correction to my previous post: federer is the only person to beat nadal at a clay final.

gj011
06-11-2008, 05:23 PM
This clay season Djokovic played better and more consistent than Federer. Also Djokovic has Rome Master title vs Federers Estoril.
So clearly Djokovic.

justsomeecho
06-11-2008, 05:27 PM
Plz, Nadal has won nothing, zero slams after the french.He pushed him and yet he loss.When Nadal wins something besides the french, then boast all u want.He is a non-factor at the U.S Open,so where u coming from with hardcourts?Nadal stood a chance because of all the tear on the grass.He would have gotten smoked if it was fast grass!!!

Yeah of course Nadal has done nothing outside the FO. Except for two Wimbledon Finals, a Dubai title, a title at Indian Wells, and semifinals at AO and UO. Moron.

edmondsm
06-11-2008, 07:49 PM
Nadal outplayed Fed during the Spring hardcourt season as well. Not just clay.

As he did last year.....and then disappeared after Wimbledon, just like the poster said.

Zaragoza
06-11-2008, 11:05 PM
Yeah of course Nadal has done nothing outside the FO. Except for two Wimbledon Finals, a Dubai title, a title at Indian Wells, and semifinals at AO and UO. Moron.

Not only he won Indian Wells but also Montreal and Madrid and made the final in Miami (2) and Paris-Bercy (besides 2 Wimbledon finals and SF in AO).
Dubai means little for someone of his caliber. 99% of players would make a great career with Nadalīs achievements outside clay. Itīs amusing what some people mean with "disappear" (isnīt it what they do when Nadal wins?)

daddy
06-11-2008, 11:12 PM
True but it shows that what Nadal is capable of and very likely going to win another slam other than just clay.

True. He has to have a breakthru or else he may end up being close but never really there. But granted he has a chance at every tournament he enters which first part of the hard court season proved without a slight doubt in my mind.

While before Nadal almost usually failed to reach latter stages of those, this year Federer is the guilty party for not being able to reach those latter stages and meet Rafa there.

dropserve
06-11-2008, 11:13 PM
Yeah of course Nadal has done nothing outside the FO. Except for two Wimbledon Finals, a Dubai title, a title at Indian Wells, and semifinals at AO and UO. Moron.

Nadal hasnt played US open semi yet.

carlos djackal
06-12-2008, 02:05 AM
If we are talking about this year it will be Djokovic no doubt as the 2nd best on clay but Nole still has a lot to prove in clay, Fed already has it in his resume ....at this point career wise it still is Federer the 2nd best on clay.....

Rhino
06-12-2008, 02:20 AM
It's a tough call but I say Federer.

I think in Rome, Djoko was lucky not to have to play Nadal or Fed, and the radek match could've gone either way,.

I give Fed points for overcoming Djoko and Nalbandian (in MC) and for having leads in so many sets against Nadal in MC and Hamburg.

Roland Garros? Well Fed played some great tennis, especially against Ancic and Gonzo. Djoko had an easy draw through to the semis but he was unlucky to be in Nadals half.

The final? I still don't get it, Fed gave up.

Let's face it though, it's all about match-ups.

shame we didn't get to see Fed play Djoko in the semifinal, that would be the best indication.

oy vey
06-12-2008, 07:13 AM
During RG, they were interviewing some tennis expert from Canadian press and he considered it like this: Rafa is number 1 and Fed and Djokovic are 2a and 2b. He may be right.

fednad
06-12-2008, 09:13 AM
I would say none of them is number 2.
It has to be Juan Carlos Ferrero.