PDA

View Full Version : Could Novak's U.S. Open loss launch another run?


Tony48
09-22-2012, 05:12 PM
Of all the top guys, I think Federer and Djokovic hate losing the most....especially to each other :)

Djokovic lost to Federer for 3 consecutive years at the U.S. Open (2007-2009) and was staring down the barrel of yet another loss when he found himself down match point. I think one factor that made him go for broke back in 2010 was that he was just sick of losing. He's talented and he knows it so he hit the ball harder, closer to the lines, and ended the rally with piercing swinging volley. He then fended off a 2nd match point just as offensively as he did the previous one.

As for last year, I think he was just angry at the crowd decided to vent by whacking the return ("Take that, U.S. Open crowd!...oh s**t, it went in!")

Same with Federer: after that U.S. Open loss in 2011, Fed went on an absolute tear and didn't lose another match until the Australian Open SF.

I think losing is a great motivator for a lot of people, especially for guys like Djokovic and Federer. And perhaps losing a close U.S. Open final could be the catalyst for another stellar year.

tennisMVP
09-22-2012, 05:13 PM
Losing to Nadal at Roland Garros was too soul-destroying. No recovery for Djokovic and his family.

Clarky21
09-22-2012, 05:14 PM
Hopefully not.

slowfox
09-22-2012, 06:13 PM
Sometimes I wonder if Djoker's 2011 will end up being like Wilander's 1988... their peak.

NadalAgassi
09-22-2012, 06:43 PM
Sometimes I wonder if Djoker's 2011 will end up being like Wilander's 1988... their peak.

A 3 slam peak year with numerous other years as a slam winner or spending time at #1. Hardly anything to despair over.

RF20Lennon
09-22-2012, 08:01 PM
Possible but with Murray around and with fed with still a little left i doubt it!

tennisMVP
09-22-2012, 08:25 PM
Possible but with Murray around and with fed with still a little left i doubt it!

And with Nadal winning the last 3 meetings with Djokovic. Momentum halted.

RF20Lennon
09-22-2012, 08:39 PM
And with Nadal winning the last 3 meetings with Djokovic. Momentum halted.

that too but we dont know how nadal will be after he comes back

Sentinel
09-22-2012, 08:46 PM
Short answer: No.

Slightly longer answer: http://i.imgur.com/c9TqT.gif

Really long answer: http://i.imgur.com/qpT3m.gif

RF20Lennon
09-22-2012, 10:11 PM
Short answer: No.

Slightly longer answer: http://i.imgur.com/c9TqT.gif

Really long answer: http://i.imgur.com/qpT3m.gif

This here is exactly why Senti is the GOAT poster!! LOL!!!

OverratedIvanovic
09-22-2012, 10:53 PM
Hopefully not, don't wanna watch a human backboard who just brings the ball back with no variety at all and looks clumsy at net and not to forget his newly developed slice which looks atrocious.

tennisMVP
09-22-2012, 10:56 PM
that too but we dont know how nadal will be after he comes back

Well, we know he's only going to play when he's 100% fit. No more bandaid solutions according to Uncle Toni. And we know he is skipping some hardcourt events (Indian Wells, Miami maybe?) to make sure he's fresh. So he'll be better than the 2012 clay season when he apparently played in pain.

RF20Lennon
09-23-2012, 12:54 AM
Well, we know he's only going to play when he's 100% fit. No more bandaid solutuons according to Uncle Toni. And we know his skipping some hardcourt events (Indian Wells, Miami maybe?) to make sure he's fresh. So he'll be better than the 2012 clay season when he apparently played in pain.

Oh ok I see did not know that but he exerts his body more on clay so you never know he could be in pain but he should be fresh most likely

batz
09-23-2012, 12:59 AM
Of all the top guys, I think Federer and Djokovic hate losing the most....especially to each other :)

Djokovic lost to Federer for 3 consecutive years at the U.S. Open (2007-2009) and was staring down the barrel of yet another loss when he found himself down match point. I think one factor that made him go for broke back in 2010 was that he was just sick of losing. He's talented and he knows it so he hit the ball harder, closer to the lines, and ended the rally with piercing swinging volley. He then fended off a 2nd match point just as offensively as he did the previous one.

As for last year, I think he was just angry at the crowd decided to vent by whacking the return ("Take that, U.S. Open crowd!...oh s**t, it went in!")

Same with Federer: after that U.S. Open loss in 2011, Fed went on an absolute tear and didn't lose another match until the Australian Open SF.

I think losing is a great motivator for a lot of people, especially for guys like Djokovic and Federer. And perhaps losing a close U.S. Open final could be the catalyst for another stellar year.


Wasn't Novak's previous streak triggered by a great high rather than a low?

RF20Lennon
09-23-2012, 01:04 AM
Wasn't Novak's previous streak triggered by a great high rather than a low?

Winning DC! 😀

Sid_Vicious
09-23-2012, 01:07 AM
Wasn't Novak's previous streak triggered by a great high rather than a low?

Batz, the problem with these types of arguments is that Point A can be moved to many places along a time line. One can say that Federer's good streak started because he picked up more and more confidence during the indoor season rather than the bitter loss to Novak

batz
09-23-2012, 02:42 AM
Batz, the problem with these types of arguments is that Point A can be moved to many places along a time line. One can say that Federer's good streak started because he picked up more and more confidence during the indoor season rather than the bitter loss to Novak

Of course you can Sid - I'm just playing back what Novak himself said. Also, Nole had plenty of tough losses before The Streak, none of which seemed to spur him on like his DC win supposedly did.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that there isn't much data to support Tony's idea that a bad loss has the effect of spurring Novak on to great things. That doesn't of course mean that Novak is incapable of starting another streak.

6-1 6-3 6-0
09-23-2012, 02:51 AM
Nope. Nadal rightly predicted that Djokovic wouldn't EVER be able to repeat his 2011 season, especially since Djokovic's season was only really successful because he started showing balls against Nadal in finals, but since Djokovic can no longer beat Nadal, there's nothing that can give him the recurring confidence to win titles again and again. The mental gap has vanished, and Nadal has finally figured him out.

Advantage Nadal.

I wouldn't be surprised if, after winning Davis Cup 2012, Nadal went on a similar run to Djokovic (winning AO 2013 and then going on to win lots of other tournaments), then started beating Djokovic in lots of finals as repayment for 2011.

5555
09-23-2012, 03:28 AM
Sometimes I wonder if Djoker's 2011 will end up being like Wilander's 1988... their peak.

Schulz and Curnow in their study of super athletes have placed the peak of a tennis player at age 24. If you are interested, you can read their study here http://www.ucsur.pitt.edu/files/schulz/JofGeronSchulzCarnow1988.pdf

Sentinel
09-23-2012, 04:49 AM
that too but we dont know how nadal will be after he comes back

Of course, we do. the Rosol loss will result in Nadal launching another run, alongside Nole. Nadal and Noel will both be "on the run".

tennisMVP
09-23-2012, 08:42 AM
Of course, we do. the Rosol loss will result in Nadal launching another run, alongside Nole. Nadal and Noel will both be "on the run".

I don't think the Rosol loss was legit. Considering Nadal hasn't played since Wimbledon, clearly the loss to Rosol was injury related (Hoffa's syndrome). The only reason why he didn't lose on clay is because he's so comfortable on clay that his knees can be in awful condition and he'll still beat everyone. Grass comes less naturally to him, requires a bit more work, and requires the knees to be decent therefore. Bottom line, I don't think the Rosol loss was a big deal.

Mainad
09-23-2012, 08:49 AM
Nope. Nadal rightly predicted that Djokovic wouldn't EVER be able to repeat his 2011 season, especially since Djokovic's season was only really successful because he started showing balls against Nadal in finals, but since Djokovic can no longer beat Nadal, there's nothing that can give him the recurring confidence to win titles again and again. The mental gap has vanished, and Nadal has finally figured him out.

This all depends on what kind of shape Nadal is going to come back in!


I wouldn't be surprised if, after winning Davis Cup 2012, Nadal went on a similar run to Djokovic (winning AO 2013 and then going on to win lots of other tournaments), then started beating Djokovic in lots of finals as repayment for 2011.

Nadal is already 3-1 v Djokovic in finals this year; 1-1 in Slams.

Prisoner of Birth
09-23-2012, 09:13 AM
I don't think the Rosol loss was legit. Considering Nadal hasn't played since Wimbledon, clearly the loss to Rosol was injury related (Hoffa's syndrome). The only reason why he didn't lose on clay is because he's so comfortable on clay that his knees can be in awful condition and he'll still beat everyone. Grass comes less naturally to him, requires a bit more work, and requires the knees to be decent therefore. Bottom line, I don't think the Rosol loss was a big deal.

That's a ridiculous claim. Rosol, on that day, would've beaten most any player. It was just like Nadal said. He didn't play as well as he could have in the first 3 sets. Rosol went into God-mode in the 5th set, where the best Tennis Nadal could produce still came up short.

Tony48
09-23-2012, 09:48 AM
Wasn't Novak's previous streak triggered by a great high rather than a low?

That's true, but I don't think Davis Cup was the sole contributor. I'm basing it partly on the fact that Novak has done (at least) the U.S. Open final-Australian Open final combo since 2007 (whenever he made the U.S. Open final, of course).

In 2010, Novak won neither a slam nor a masters so I think that could have been enough of a motivator to get his 2011 going. The Davis Cup victory magnified his motivation of course. So I'm not saying that he's going to "repeat" his 2011 year.....just considering whether the loss could trigger a year better than 2012.

tennisMVP
09-23-2012, 09:51 AM
That's a ridiculous claim. Rosol, on that day, would've beaten most any player. It was just like Nadal said. He didn't play as well as he could have in the first 3 sets. Rosol went into God-mode in the 5th set, where the best Tennis Nadal could produce still came up short.

I agree Rosol played great, and he would have beaten many players on that day. But Nadal was falling over an awful lot. I bet Hoffa's syndrome was the reason for that. The only time Nadal looked balanced was when he served (which he did great, 19 aces and 120mph 1st serve average). Apart from that, Nadal was far below par (from the baseline).

6-1 6-3 6-0
09-23-2012, 10:04 AM
That's a ridiculous claim. Rosol, on that day, would've beaten most any player. It was just like Nadal said. He didn't play as well as he could have in the first 3 sets. Rosol went into God-mode in the 5th set, where the best Tennis Nadal could produce still came up short.

And right after that match, Nadal skipped 4 tournaments. Yep, injury couldn't have been the reason for that loss... :-?

Prisoner of Birth
09-23-2012, 10:05 AM
I agree Rosol played great, and he would have beaten many players on that day. But Nadal was falling over an awful lot. I bet Hoffa's syndrome was the reason for that. The only time Nadal looked balanced was when he served (which he did great, 19 aces and 120mph 1st serve average). Apart from that, Nadal was far below par (from the baseline).

I'm not saying Nadal played his best Tennis. But everybody has their less-than-stellar days, even when they're injury-free. Given the quality of Tennis Nadal was playing up until that day, I don't think his injury really hurt his play. I'm sure it hurt him, but he's played through pain before.

Prisoner of Birth
09-23-2012, 10:06 AM
And right after that match, Nadal skipped 4 tournaments. Yep, injury couldn't have been the reason for that loss... :-?

I'm not even gonna argue with you.

6-1 6-3 6-0
09-23-2012, 10:11 AM
I'm not saying Nadal played his best Tennis. But everybody has their less-than-stellar days, even when they're injury-free. Given the quality of Tennis Nadal was playing up until that day, I don't think his injury really hurt his play. I'm sure it hurt him, but he's played through pain before.

Nadal didn't play too well against Thomaz Bellucci (trailed 0-4 in the first set) in the first round, so clearly Nadal wasn't at his best in the tournament. And Nadal made 5 finals in 5 consecutive attempts (2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011), so since he didn't make the final in 2012, it's obvious that something was wrong.

SQA333
09-23-2012, 10:13 AM
Nadal didn't play too well against Thomaz Bellucci (trailed 0-4 in the first set) in the first round, so clearly Nadal wasn't at his best in the tournament. And Nadal made 5 finals in 5 consecutive attempts (2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011), so since he didn't make the final in 2012, it's obvious that something was wrong.

NaDaL SuX. hee was to weeek in the wimpelton.

RF20Lennon
09-23-2012, 10:14 AM
Nadal didn't play too well against Thomaz Bellucci (trailed 0-4 in the first set) in the first round, so clearly Nadal wasn't at his best in the tournament. And Nadal made 5 finals in 5 consecutive attempts (2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011), so since he didn't make the final in 2012, it's obvious that something was wrong.

So since Federer won wimby 5 consecutive times he loss to nadal in 2008 means something was wrong, he was injured.

Tony48
09-23-2012, 10:14 AM
And right after that match, Nadal skipped 4 tournaments. Yep, injury couldn't have been the reason for that loss... :-?

I've called in sick before. Doesn't mean I was actually sick.

Nope. Nadal rightly predicted that Djokovic wouldn't EVER be able to repeat his 2011 season, especially since Djokovic's season was only really successful because he started showing balls against Nadal in finals, but since Djokovic can no longer beat Nadal, there's nothing that can give him the recurring confidence to win titles again and again. The mental gap has vanished, and Nadal has finally figured him out.

Advantage Nadal.

You credit Nadal specifically with that prediction? I don't think ANYONE said Djokovic would repeat his 2011 season.

And as far as Djokovic no longer being able to beat Nadal....where did you get that from? Djokovic is not Federer. He has no trouble beating Nadal outside of clay.

6-1 6-3 6-0
09-23-2012, 10:18 AM
So since Federer won wimby 5 consecutive times he loss to nadal in 2008 means something was wrong, he was injured.

Nadal's results (since 2006, excluding 2009) were F F W W F 2R. Clearly the 2R is an outlier. Whereas for Federer (from 2003), it was W W W W W F. The F isn't really an outlier, since he was only one match away from the title (which Nadal won in the longest Wimbledon final of all time, 6-4 6-4 6-7 6-7 9-7, to win his first Wimbledon title and completed the channel slam, the first man to do so since Bjorn Borg in 1980).

RF20Lennon
09-23-2012, 10:21 AM
Nadal's results (since 2006, excluding 2009) were F F W W F 2R. Clearly the 2R is an outlier. Whereas for Federer (from 2003), it was W W W W W F. The F isn't really an outlier, since he was only one match away from the title (which Nadal won in the longest Wimbledon final of all time, 6-4 6-4 6-7 6-7 9-7, to win his first Wimbledon title and completed the channel slam, the first man to do so since Bjorn Borg in 1980).

unnecessary its common knowledge but yes i agree with you on this I see your point But Fed lost at the QF's two years in a row and even though he had mild back issues it was Berdych and Tsonga that were on fire!! So credit to Rosol!

Prisoner of Birth
09-23-2012, 10:23 AM
Nadal's results (since 2006, excluding 2009) were F F W W F 2R. Clearly the 2R is an outlier. Whereas for Federer (from 2003), it was W W W W W F. The F isn't really an outlier, since he was only one match away from the title (which Nadal won in the longest Wimbledon final of all time, 6-4 6-4 6-7 6-7 9-7, to win his first Wimbledon title and completed the channel slam, the first man to do so since Bjorn Borg in 1980).

Rosol outplayed Nadal in that match
http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lmj8w1pM2T1qe4zhy.gif

merlinpinpin
09-23-2012, 11:50 AM
And with Nadal winning the last 3 meetings with Djokovic. Momentum halted.

I'm pretty sure you won't get the irony of a Nadal fan talking about momentum halted, but hey, that's fine...

6-1 6-3 6-0
09-23-2012, 11:59 AM
Rosol outplayed Nadal in that match

Never said he didn't. Rosol played perfect tennis, whilst Nadal didn't play his best tennis. When that happens, Nadal appears to not win.

RF20Lennon
09-23-2012, 12:07 PM
Rosol outplayed Nadal in that match
http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lmj8w1pM2T1qe4zhy.gif

IN NOLAN WE TRUST! :D

dr325i
09-23-2012, 12:22 PM
Possible but with Murray around and with fed with still a little left i doubt it!

Murray has a lot to prove.
He really had no competition till the finals, a bit of luck on his side and he handled the wind better than Novak did.
He needs to add one or two more to his collection to really be there. So far, I value Delpo's single slam more than Murray's, however, the time will tell...

Mainad
09-23-2012, 12:43 PM
Murray has a lot to prove.

Sigh...Murray ALWAYS has a lot to prove, hasn't he! No matter what he does, what he achieves, people will NEVER be satisfied. I have never come across ANY player on here who is consistently given so little credit for what he does as Murray. He is always lucky, or it's always a fluke, or his opponents were tired or sick or the conditions favoured him. Never that he did it on his own ability. His tennis apparently never has anything to do with what he achieves! If he were ever to end up with 17 Slams like Federer, I'm convinced people will say he did it the 'easy way' and was 'lucky' unlike Fed who did it, of course, out of pure genius!


He really had no competition till the finals

I think Lopez, Cilic and especially Berdych gave him some competition. He certainly had far more competition than either Federer or Djokovic had to face prior to the semi-finals!


a bit of luck on his side and he handled the wind better than Novak did.

Yep. That's all it takes to win a Slam. A bit of luck and a bit of wind! Unless you're not named Murray in which, of course, it's just your sheer playing ability that got you through! :rolleyes:


He needs to add one or two more to his collection to really be there. So far, I value Delpo's single slam more than Murray's, however, the time will tell...

It doesn't matter how many Slams Murray wins. You would never be satisfied. Until recently, the consensus round here was that Murray would never 'prove himself' until he won a Slam. Now that he's managed to do that, the goal-posts are promptly moved to ' Murray will never prove himself until he wins ANOTHER Slam'. And so it goes on, endlessly.

It's quite clear that you are not a Murray fan and certainly haven't followed or understood his career. It's perfectly within your rights to dislike him as a player, but just because you dislike his playing style should not translate into disrespect for his abilities and recourse to glib and facile assumptions about his 'luck' etc. etc. It's high time you credited some of his supposed 'luck' to actual abilities along with those of every other player talked about on here!

Crisstti
09-23-2012, 03:50 PM
I'm not saying Nadal played his best Tennis. But everybody has their less-than-stellar days, even when they're injury-free. Given the quality of Tennis Nadal was playing up until that day, I don't think his injury really hurt his play. I'm sure it hurt him, but he's played through pain before.

Rafa had not being playing too well in any of the grass matches from this year.

Rosol wouldn't have beaten any player. Nadal almost beat him, and he played relatively subpar.

So since Federer won wimby 5 consecutive times he loss to nadal in 2008 means something was wrong, he was injured.

There's a pretty big difference between getting to the final and the second round. I would have no problem believing Fed was injured were he to lose to a 100th ranked player in the second round of a slam...

dr325i
09-23-2012, 05:03 PM
Sigh...Murray ALWAYS has a lot to prove, hasn't he! No matter what he does, what he achieves, people will NEVER be satisfied. I have never come across ANY player on here who is consistently given so little credit for what he does as Murray. He is always lucky, or it's always a fluke, or his opponents were tired or sick or the conditions favoured him. Never that he did it on his own ability. His tennis apparently never has anything to do with what he achieves! If he were ever to end up with 17 Slams like Federer, I'm convinced people will say he did it the 'easy way' and was 'lucky' unlike Fed who did it, of course, out of pure genius!



I think Lopez, Cilic and especially Berdych gave him some competition. He certainly had far more competition than either Federer or Djokovic had to face prior to the semi-finals!



Yep. That's all it takes to win a Slam. A bit of luck and a bit of wind! Unless you're not named Murray in which, of course, it's just your sheer playing ability that got you through! :rolleyes:



It doesn't matter how many Slams Murray wins. You would never be satisfied. Until recently, the consensus round here was that Murray would never 'prove himself' until he won a Slam. Now that he's managed to do that, the goal-posts are promptly moved to ' Murray will never prove himself until he wins ANOTHER Slam'. And so it goes on, endlessly.

It's quite clear that you are not a Murray fan and certainly haven't followed or understood his career. It's perfectly within your rights to dislike him as a player, but just because you dislike his playing style should not translate into disrespect for his abilities and recourse to glib and facile assumptions about his 'luck' etc. etc. It's high time you credited some of his supposed 'luck' to actual abilities along with those of every other player talked about on here!

I would suggest you to stay away from trying to "read" others and to stay away from the predictions what others like or dislike.
There are two players on the Tour I really like and have followed from their junior years -- Djokovic and Murray. I have a respect for the other greats, too.
Yes, Murray has done a lot, but GREATLY over exaggerated since his USO win. Lopez, Cilic -- give me a break, please. Berdych -- he has been playing the worst tennis of his last two years, finally got something positive after the quarters at the USO. It was obvious he cannot pull two in a row...

I am glad Andy has done it, I just want to see him do it again...

3fees
09-23-2012, 05:13 PM
With the ATP Point system the way it is,,it favors the repeat winners,,once a tournament is won,,the winner then defends the points next time around, he gains nothing by winning it again, he simply does not lose any points,that being said,, it seems a player must pick where he wants to win, for if he does not repeat points go down,,if he get bumped early,,points going down is huge in the major tournaments.

One can say with certainty Nole,federer,nadal,and now murray is on the hook, if they dont repeat slam wins they lose points, if they get bumped early, they drop huge points in rating,,,

:)

smoledman
09-23-2012, 05:52 PM
This obsession with #1 is the destroyer of careers.

Mainad
09-23-2012, 10:14 PM
I would suggest you to stay away from trying to "read" others and to stay away from the predictions what others like or dislike.

I merely infer from what I have read and from what I have read I think my reply was justified. This 'Murray is always lucky whenever he achieves something' routine is getting really irksome and tedious and needs to be put into context.


There are two players on the Tour I really like and have followed from their junior years -- Djokovic and Murray. I have a respect for the other greats, too.

So you like Murray then? That's nice to hear. But from your remarks it is not at all clear that you have much respect for him at all!


Yes, Murray has done a lot, but GREATLY over exaggerated since his USO win.

How and in what way has it been 'GREATLY over exaggerated' as you claim?
The guy just won his first Slam for Pete's sake and his fans on here are pleased for him and don't think it was all down to luck and chance as you appear to do.


Lopez, Cilic -- give me a break, please. Berdych -- he has been playing the worst tennis of his last two years, finally got something positive after the quarters at the USO. It was obvious he cannot pull two in a row...

Dodig, Lopez and Cilic can all be pretty dangerous when they play well as indeed can Raonic on hard courts. None of them however are as potentially dangerous as Berdych who, I will remind you, beat Djokovic and Federer back to back on his way to the 2010 Wimbledon final and who took out Federer, the #1 seed, yet again at this year's USO. So Murray had to beat the guy who beat Fed and someone who, in addition, still has a winning H2H against him. I can only repeat that all 5 were infinitely tougher draws than anybody Federer and Djokovic had to face prior to the semi-finals so, if Murray was lucky to draw those guys, then the top 2 seeds pretty much had byes all the way to the semis!


I am glad Andy has done it, I just want to see him do it again...

Nice to see we can agree on something. Just try to have a little more faith in him in the future.

Fedex
09-24-2012, 01:32 AM
Can we just copy and paste Mainad's last two posts for anyone that says Murray was lucky, hasn't proved himself and had an easy draw?

PhrygianDominant
09-24-2012, 02:50 AM
People seem to forget that Murray can make his opponents play worse. He stayed number 4 in the world for years just by playing defense and varying pace and spin. He still reverts to these tricks against heavy hitters and in wind, where it's difficult to set up and let fly; it's a legitimate strategy. Now that he has a forehand it's not his only one, but it served him well in the USO.

6-1 6-3 6-0
09-24-2012, 04:07 AM
This obsession with #1 is the destroyer of careers.

Yep, just the reason why Djokovic can't beat Nadal when he becomes obsessed with getting the #1 ranking, whereas Nadal doesn't care about the #1 ranking, so he can continue to rack up the slams whilst Djokovic will fall back to his 2010 level. That's why Nadal's mentality is so great. He doesn't obsess over simple things like rankings. He just plays his best tennis, and it just so happens that when Nadal plays his best tennis, he wins everything.

Sabratha
09-24-2012, 11:59 PM
It could happen, but I doubt it will.

Mike Sams
09-25-2012, 06:34 AM
Yep, just the reason why Djokovic can't beat Nadal when he becomes obsessed with getting the #1 ranking, whereas Nadal doesn't care about the #1 ranking, so he can continue to rack up the slams whilst Djokovic will fall back to his 2010 level. That's why Nadal's mentality is so great. He doesn't obsess over simple things like rankings. He just plays his best tennis, and it just so happens that when Nadal plays his best tennis, he wins everything.

Uhm...this isn't 2010 anymore you know? :? Remember 2010? The final year that Nadal won an actual tournament OFF of clay? The final year that Nadal managed to beat Djokovic off of clay?
Nadal has only won 2 Slams in 2 years and both were on clay. He has NEVER defended a non clay title in his life.
Djokovic even despite not playing his best tennis can STILL make the finals of Roland Garros and US Open. Nadal can't even make it past the 2nd round on one of his best surfaces at Wimbledon against a #100 ranked qualifier.:lol:
Nadal can't win anything except clay titles anymore.
Take clay away from Rafa and he has 4 Slams. Take clay away from Federer and he has 16 Slams.
So if Nadal plays his best tennis, how is he winning everything considering he only has 4 Slams OFF clay over the past 11 years on the pro tour? Apparently he must be losing some matches somewhere...:lol:

tennisMVP
09-25-2012, 07:53 AM
Uhm...this isn't 2010 anymore you know? :? Remember 2010? The final year that Nadal won an actual tournament OFF of clay? The final year that Nadal managed to beat Djokovic off of clay?
Nadal has only won 2 Slams in 2 years and both were on clay. He has NEVER defended a non clay title in his life.
Djokovic even despite not playing his best tennis can STILL make the finals of Roland Garros and US Open. Nadal can't even make it past the 2nd round on one of his best surfaces at Wimbledon against a #100 ranked qualifier.:lol:
Nadal can't win anything except clay titles anymore.
Take clay away from Rafa and he has 4 Slams. Take clay away from Federer and he has 16 Slams.
So if Nadal plays his best tennis, how is he winning everything considering he only has 4 Slams OFF clay over the past 11 years on the pro tour? Apparently he must be losing some matches somewhere...:lol:

Very true, Djokovic is extremely consistent all-year round. The most consistent all-surface player in the world.

NDFM
09-25-2012, 08:02 AM
Uhm...this isn't 2010 anymore you know? :? Remember 2010? The final year that Nadal won an actual tournament OFF of clay? The final year that Nadal managed to beat Djokovic off of clay?
Nadal has only won 2 Slams in 2 years and both were on clay. He has NEVER defended a non clay title in his life.
Djokovic even despite not playing his best tennis can STILL make the finals of Roland Garros and US Open. Nadal can't even make it past the 2nd round on one of his best surfaces at Wimbledon against a #100 ranked qualifier.:lol:
Nadal can't win anything except clay titles anymore.
Take clay away from Rafa and he has 4 Slams. Take clay away from Federer and he has 16 Slams.
So if Nadal plays his best tennis, how is he winning everything considering he only has 4 Slams OFF clay over the past 11 years on the pro tour? Apparently he must be losing some matches somewhere...:lol:

What I'm about to say probably doesn't help the cause but you have to take away Fed's best surface to compare here, its only fair ;-). Anyway it leaves Federer with 8 Slams seeing as hard is his best surface. We shouldn't even compare their slams we all know federer is the best tennis play of all time just like nadal is best clay courter of all time, just ignore him, he is such a nadal troll as a fan of nadal I cringe whenever I read any of his posts.

RF20Lennon
09-25-2012, 08:06 AM
What I'm about to say probably doesn't help the cause but you have to take away Fed's best surface to compare here, its only fair ;-). Anyway it leaves Federer with 8 Slams seeing as hard is his best surface. We shouldn't even compare their slams we all know federer is the best tennis play of all time just like nadal is best clay courter of all time, just ignore him, he is such a nadal troll as a fan of nadal I cringe whenever I read any of his posts.

I doubt he's never a nadal fan he has just figured that most people here are fed fans and wants to rifle them up

Tony48
10-14-2012, 12:11 PM
Mini-run in the making :) 10-0 since U.S. Open

veroniquem
10-14-2012, 12:31 PM
10-0 since USO, 10 finals in 2012 and 10Th master title on hard court. "happy 10" season for Djoko :)

Cesc Fabregas
10-14-2012, 12:35 PM
The point of the season nobody cares about, who cares

Tony48
11-12-2012, 02:21 PM
He just won his 2nd WTF title!

Tony48
01-27-2013, 05:27 AM
Won the Australian Open! w00t

Gonzo_style
01-27-2013, 05:33 AM
Won the Australian Open! w00t

Why Djokovic played in Paris :(

Could have 22:0 winning streak...

TheF1Bob
01-27-2013, 05:36 AM
Why Djokovic played in Paris :(

Could have 22:0 winning streak...

Being No.1 in the world gives you responsibility, one of them being pleasing your sponsors.

If he had a chance, he would of skipped it no doubt.

Tony48
03-02-2013, 10:53 AM
Since U.S. Open loss:

-won 28 of last 29 matches
-5 titles (Beijing, Shangai, World Tour Finals, Australian Open & Dubai)
-18-match win streak (active)
-12-0 against top 10 opponents
-Regained No. 1 ranking