Are Murray and Djockovic on something?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Tropikal_Knights, Jan 25, 2013.

  1. zagor

    zagor Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    25,781
    Location:
    Weak era
    I already conceded that the 1st myth is true to an extent

    I didn't bring up 2012, I was talking about his 2011, Novak outplaying everyone in sight doesn't automatically mean he just started doping, he always had the game to go toe to toe with Fedal and I actually always considered him to be a tough match-up for Nadal gamewise but Nadal was tougher mentally in big matches.

    With Fed declining in 2010-2011, Murray still having some problems between the ears and little to no depth outside top 4 Nadal was the main obstacle for Novak, he didn't play all that much better than at say beginning of 2008 but was just bringing that level more often.

    IMO Nadal was doing most of the running in their matches in 2011, not to the same degree as before but he was still the one expanding more energy.

    Regarding clay wins, Nadal had an off year on clay and was struggling more than usual, Murray took a 6-2 set from him at MC, Isner pushed him to five at FO etc. zoning Novak taking him out was not beyond the realm of possibility, Fed did the same in 2009 Madrid.

    Also, you seem to be presuming that Nadal's endurance in 2011 was the same as it was in say 2008 early 2009, while Nadal was playing overall great tennis on HC and grass in 2011 I wouldn't say he was a physical beast he was a before, I would say he was more of a complete player but he was already beaten up a little from the grind of the tour (remember, this is the guy who won 1st slam back in 2005).

    My point is that his change in fitness/endurance was not nearly as drastic as people make it up to be.

    The change in level of play was somewhat drastic but Novak was no pushover before, he didn't come out of nowhere, he was a top 3 player in the world for 4 straight years before 2011 and was already a slam winner and multiple slam finalist.

    BTW. I'm not dismissing possibility that he's doping, my personal opinion is that the majority of players are doping, especially stars of the game but I don't think he started doping right before 2011.
     
  2. Tony48

    Tony48 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    6,879
    How about the fact that Novak has 7 clay titles (out of 13 clay finals) and had already proved that he was no pushover against Nadal on clay?

    You make it appear as if Djokovic's clay prowess just came out of no where. That's just as bad as the people who suggest that Novak had fitness issues and couldn't sustain long, physical matches.
     
  3. mariecon

    mariecon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,961
    Location:
    the Great White North
    How about the fact that Djokovic was 7 for 23 in matches against Nadal before 2011 and then in 2011/12 he beat Nadal 7 times in a row, including twice on clay where he had never beaten him before? You don't find that suspicious?
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2013
  4. Gonzo_style

    Gonzo_style Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2012
    Messages:
    3,911
    Similar situation with Hewitt and Federer! You don't find that suspicious?

    Djokovic has destroyed nearly everyone in 2011, not just Nadal...
     
  5. Djokodal Fan

    Djokodal Fan Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,183

    so you solely go by rumours is it? How about Fed's wimbledon performance at the age of 31?

    And the so called angel can still play Australian open 2013 2 5 setters back to back.....how convenient to slander others based on rumours while yur idol can pull of 5 setters with ease.

    Oh wait that's because of the angeler's talunt!!
     
  6. Tony48

    Tony48 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    6,879
    Djokovic lead the hard court H2H before 2011. Acting all surprised that Novak continued that trend (IW, Miami & U.S. Open and Australian Open) is a bit ridiculous.

    Are you surprised when Federer beats Nadal at the WTF despite their lopsided H2H? Everything clicked for him in 2011 and he got better at what he was ALREADY doing.

    And I already addressed the clay situation. Did you even read what I posted?
     
  7. Djokodal Fan

    Djokodal Fan Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,183

    That was my point as well. If Novak was doping and if was doing wonders why would he stop?

    Pederers supporters cry foul of other players while they think their idol is god. If you give some heat be ready to take some heat dimwits!
     
  8. Tennis_Hands

    Tennis_Hands Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    3,704
    Location:
    Inside the service box - the business end
    He certainly didn't bring his level from 2011 against Nadal on clay prior or after that.

    And,let us not bring Djokovic's clay titles in the coversation.

    Outside of the two wins over Nadal, the only meaningful clay title for him was in Rome, winning the final against the clay giant Wawrinka, after arriving in the final fresh as a daisy.

    Djokovic has never been a mug on clay, but dominating the clay GOAT in two back to back clay tourneys is a performance, that has to be brought consistently, if it is to be believed, that it is a result from shift in the mentality. So far he was unable to do that, and, until it happes again, the doubt stays.
     
  9. mariecon

    mariecon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,961
    Location:
    the Great White North
    7 out of 12 matches before 2011 is just barely owning the H2H. What I said is hardly ridiculous.
    No because Nadal sucks indoors and everyone knows it.
    None of his clay titles were against Nadal until 2011 and 3 of the 4 were 250 events. The other was Rome in 2008 where (as mentioned by Tennis_Hands) the highest seed he faced was #24 in the world, Wawrinka, and 2 of his 5 opponents retired.:roll:
     
  10. mariecon

    mariecon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,961
    Location:
    the Great White North
    maybe he had to stop for health reasons (although I don't believe he stopped, but slowed down)
     
  11. Tony48

    Tony48 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    6,879
    Yeah, and Federer didn't bring his level from 2006 against the field in 1999.

    What are you even arguing? That Djokovic didn't fax you a memo about when he planned to start doing better?

    Why not? It lends credence to the fact that Djokovic is great on clay. If you don't like it then that's too bad.

    And why is that? Because he didn't beat Nadal in all of those clay titles? Do you hold the rest of the field to that same standard, or just Djokovic?

    This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read. Who anointed you with the power of telling people how they must play?
     
  12. Tony48

    Tony48 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    6,879
    So in other words, I'm not wrong? Thanks. I already knew that.

    Djokovic had already beaten Nadal THREE straight times on hard in 2009. For you to suggest that it's suspicious for him to do it four times in a row IS, indeed, ridiculous.

    Hard court in doors favors Federer against Nadal the same way hard courts favor Djokovic against Nadal. That's my point.

    His record at the French Open speaks highly of Djokovic's clay prowess....unless you think a final and 3 semis is something to scoff at as well.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2013
  13. Tennis_Hands

    Tennis_Hands Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    3,704
    Location:
    Inside the service box - the business end
    The "before" was to show, that his "clay prowess" was not that pronounced as you make it out to be. The emphasis was on "after".

    Oh, dear!

    Winning ATP250 shows, that a player is great on the level we are discussing? Really?

    Аre you sure, that you know what we are discussing?

    Are you saying, that Djokovic wouldn't want to repeat what he has done? Actually, IF the logic of the likes of you is correct, that should happen (barring the emergence of some supertalent out of nowhere, or Murray challenging Djokovic on clay).
     
  14. Tony48

    Tony48 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    6,879
    As for BEFORE: he held a match point on serve against Nadal in Madrid.

    As for AFTER: Nadal is the clay GOAT. What did you expect? For Djokovic to never lose against Nadal on clay or something? You think a couple of matches eliminates Nadal's unparalleled, record-shattering career on clay? Are you serious?

    You are not coming from a rational perspective.

    Spoiler alert: Djokovic may beat Nadal again on clay, and then Nadal may beat him again...and again, and again, and then Djokovic may win again.

    So how about Novak's record at the French? Care to explain how THAT somehow doesn't lend credence to Djokovic's exemplar ability on clay?

    Yes. You're trying to trivialize Djokovic's record on clay because he didn't defeat Nadal in all of his titles. And then I asked you whether you trivialize EVERYONE'S titles on clay that didn't beat Nadal en route. And I'm still waiting on my answer.

    Um, what?
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2013
  15. mariecon

    mariecon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,961
    Location:
    the Great White North
    One of those was indoors at the WTF - Nadal's worst surface and he didn't win one match that year.
    Not the same. Nadal has never beaten Federer on indoor hard court but he has beaten Djokovic 5 times. How is that the same?
    I believe we were discussing his record before 2011!! So, 2 semifinals at Roland Garros. What an outstanding record.
    Nice try but your arguments haven't convinced me.
     
  16. Tony48

    Tony48 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    6,879
    So what? It's still a hard court, and thus counts as 3 consecutive hard court match wins. Stop making excuses.

    I said FAVORS. Can you read? FAVORS doesn't preclude someone from winning or losing. Clay favors Nadal against Federer and yet Federer still has a couple of clay wins againt him. But clay still favors Nadal, doesn't it?.

    You're right. Only losing to 4 different people IS an outstanding record. Even better than Federer. I'm glad you agree.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2013
  17. mariecon

    mariecon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,961
    Location:
    the Great White North
    I thought we were discussing whether Djokovic's level increased remarkably in 2011? If so, then yes it does make a difference if he beat Nadal on Nadal's worst surface in a tournament where he didn't even win a set. It shows that Djoker's level didn't have to be that great to beat him. But spin it anyway you like.
    Yes I can read and you can't have a discussion without insulting people I see. And what does Federer & Nadal on clay have to do with what I just said? We were talking about hard courts and you were the one who brought up the comparison with Federer vs. Nadal on indoor hard courts.

    This makes absolutely zero sense and obviously you can't interpret sarcasm.
     
  18. Tennis_Hands

    Tennis_Hands Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    3,704
    Location:
    Inside the service box - the business end
    So,coming close to beating Nadal in the high altitude resembles in any way the two beatdowns?

    "to never lose against Nadal on clay or something" is one thing. What happened is something else, and it doesn't fare well with the theories, saying, that Djokovic has achieved those results on the basis of his improved mental edge and more "efficient" food regime.



    Who said, that Novak is incompetent on clay? The only thing I claimed is, that his competence on clay prior to 2011, wasn't suggesting THOSE results? Have you got a problem with RELATIVE values? In that light bringing Djokovic's ATP250 was totally comical.

    Um, he didn't beat anyone of significance(i.e.someone of roughly his caliber). Not only Nadal.

    Reading comprehension fail?

    I will break it down for you, as if you are 5 y.o.

    You and the likes of you claim, that this level was due to:

    1) sorted gluten alergie
    2) as a result - improved overall physical condition
    3) shift in the mental approach(more confidence, whatever)
    4) aging Federer and Nadal not on the levels from 2008/2010

    Now, all that was presented in 2012 and surely will be more pronounced in the future. Why are your reactions to an expectations for similar results like in 2011 so hysterical?
     
  19. Djokodal Fan

    Djokodal Fan Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,183
    so you are his doctor is it? to know when he starts and stops doping??

    Dude, my point is 'Don't speculate'. If you do, do it for all players including Fed. Clearly shows Bias of many *******s!
     
  20. mariecon

    mariecon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,961
    Location:
    the Great White North
    speculation is what people do here! It's a tennis forum. If the mods find it offensive they'll delete it.
     
  21. stoo

    stoo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2009
    Messages:
    485
    Location:
    Help, I'm steppin' into the twilight zone....
    This ^^^

    I couldn't be bothered reading through 9 pages to see if anyone else said this, but Lendl was my first thought as the cause of Murray's new physique and stamina.
     
  22. Tony48

    Tony48 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    6,879
    FAST hard courts are Nadal's worst surface, not indoor hard. And the tour finals are NOT considered a fast hard court.

    Nadal's best result at Cincinnati (a fast hard court): semi-final
    Nadal's best result at the tour finals/Rotterdam (both indoor hard): final

    My point was that it can be your favorite surface and you can still lose.

    Yes, Djokovic vs. Nadal on hard isn't EXACTLY the same as Federer vs. Nadal on indoor hard. I never said it was. I merely said that hard courts FAVOR Djokovic. That is a fact.

    Oh, the irony. I was responding to YOUR sarcasm with some of my own. So apparently it's YOU that can't sense it.

    But back to the topic at hand: if you don't think that Djokovic's record at the French is outstanding then you are in denial and probably need to stop watching tennis. How many other players can boast the kind of record that Djokovic has at the French?

    It IS outstanding.
     
  23. Tony48

    Tony48 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    6,879
    That wasn't my purpose. The purpose of my post was to demonstrate that Djokovic had the capabilities to beat Nadal on clay.

    NO ONE has to demonstrate to you that Djokovic can beat Nadal on clay in straight sets. Merely showing that Djokovic can win is sufficient, since a win in a win. Did Federer have to demonstrate to you that he could bagel Nadal on clay after NEVER being able to beat Nadal on clay?

    Of course not.

    It has only been a YEAR. What the hell are you talking about?

    Riding a wave of confidence by already winning 2 finals against him for the first time and already demonstrating that he could beat him on clay.

    Maybe it's your own fault for being so surprised.

    So who should Novak have to beat? I want names. If you don't list them, then don't bother responding.

    Then explain what happened then.

    Are you saying that performance from one year is a direct indicator of what should/will happen the next? I don't quite understand your post (because it is so poorly worded), but if that's the case, then that's insane.
     
  24. Djokodal Fan

    Djokodal Fan Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,183
    What a lovely post Vero...... you broke it down piece by piece dispelling all the myths that *******s have. Awesome!!
     
  25. Djokodal Fan

    Djokodal Fan Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,183
    Tony48, Please stop responding to someone like Tennis_hands. he is simply trolling. Just tell him that Fed is also doping and see how fiercely he comes to defence
     
  26. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    30,959
    Location:
    New York

    What do you mean "now"? Do you mean "since 2011"? Because if so, then it is not an accurate analysis. Djoko has only played (and won) 2 5 setters vs Fed in his career, both at USO and the first one was in 2010. I think we can all agree that 2010 was before 2011 and that Djoko wasn't even playing that well that year. At AO, he's never needed 5 sets to overcome Fed. After their very first encounter that he lost in 2007, he never even needed 4 sets, starting in 2008 which is also before 2011, isn't it?
    They're tie in Dubai, Canada, Basel, WTF: 1-1. In Canada and Basel, the one Djoko won happened way before 2011.
    They've played only once in IW and once in Miami. Djoko won both of them and the one in Miami dates back to 2009.
    They've played twice in Cincy and Fed won both of them (even the one after 2011). Djoko has also never beaten Murray at Cincy.
    They've only played once at W (also after 2011) and Fed won it.
    On clay, they're tie at RG: 1-1 (and the one Fed won was IN 2011)
    Fed won both their matches at M-C, Djoko won both their matches in Rome (and the 1st win was in 2009). They never met in 3rd clay master.

    Analysis: there is 0 pattern of "poor before 2011", "unbeatable from 2011". The win/loss stats depend on surface (grass and Cincy go to Fed), form, etc and there was no clear date turning point. (There was a clear turning point at USO but it happened in 2010).

    For Nadal, sure, 2011 was a watershed moment because he beat Nadal on clay and on grass for the first time that year. He did so because he managed to get into Rafa's head and maybe also because Rafa was struggling with issues of his own. However, in 2012, Djoko played Nadal 3 times on clay (including in the slam) and lost all 3. So it's not like what happened in 2011 was irreversible. At W, they played only twice anyway and the first match, he had to retire with back issues.
    On hard court, Djokovic has always dominated Nadal. He's 2-1 at IW (and the one loss happened in 2007 when Djoko was playing his 1st master final), 1-0 in Canada (the win was in 2007), 2-0 in Miami (1st win in 2007), 2-0 in Cincy (2008, 2009), 1-0 in Paris indoor (2009). They never played at AO before 2012 (and BTW the AO match is the only 5 setter Djoko has ever played vs Nadal). They're 1-1 at USO and the one loss happened when Nadal was serving like a demon. The only exceptions are WTF where Nadal leads 2-1 and of course the Olympics. (I would say the Olympics is the only match Djoko counterperfed against Nadal- given their overall record on the surface- and that's probably why he left the court in tears).
    On clay, Rafa won all the matches bar 2, exactly the same as Fed. But who beats Nadal regularly on clay anyway?
    There again, the records have a lot to do with surface and form, not any kind of magical transformation.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2013
  27. Djokodal Fan

    Djokodal Fan Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,183
    Feel free to speculate including your Idol.

    So I also speculate Fed has been doping since 2003 since he started winning all of a sudden...fair?
     
  28. Tony48

    Tony48 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    6,879
    LOL.

    I have a doctor's appointment I have to get to anyway. So Tennis_hands: I'm done.
     
  29. kragster

    kragster Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    1,678
    Murray and Djokovic have no doubt been feeding on a steady diet of butthurt fan (fans of the players murrovic are beating) tears.

    The good news is that the way this is going, they will have an endless supply :). Looking fwd to the next few years!
     
  30. mariecon

    mariecon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,961
    Location:
    the Great White North
    considering that what you said made no sense at all, how was I supposed to sense the sarcasm? I don't even know to whom you were referring when you said "Only losing to 4 different people IS an outstanding record." Maybe if you were clearer and used names I would have gotten your sarcasm.

    As to your last question, well what on earth does that even have to do with Djokovic doping to the point of becoming superman in 2011? Nothing. Before 2011 he made it to 2 SF's at RG. He wasn't exactly cementing his legacy in the clay record books.
     
  31. mariecon

    mariecon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,961
    Location:
    the Great White North
    Tony48 I now see why you are a "legend" here. You never give up. I'll let you have the last word. Go ahead.
     
  32. Tony48

    Tony48 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    6,879
    Nice attempt at trying to move the goal posts. His record at the French was being used to show how well Djokovic does on clay. But now you're not impressed because it doesn't prove that he isn't "cementing his legacy in the clay record books" (something that NO ONE even claimed or insinuated)?

    I'm done with you.

    EDIT:

    To reiterate: the point of me referencing Djokovic's clay record was to show that Djokovic is a very competent clay court player, NOT that he is one of the best clay courters ever. Your response shows me that you will change the argument whenever you like.

    And you went out of your way to ignore my entire argument about Nadal's worst surface, so there's THAT, too.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2013
  33. Tennis_Hands

    Tennis_Hands Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    3,704
    Location:
    Inside the service box - the business end
    Really? But, he didn't just beat him. That is the whole point. The point was to discuss how much of a leap in his form Djokovic had!


    He had 3 chances to show his changed ability. Failed in all three.

    But, that is what I said. We will see, if your theory works.


    Dude, the question is, who did he beat??

    As for the future, Nadal will suffice.


    No, I am saying, that, in order your claims to be true, there should be future reflection of them in the reality. If there isn't, then it might not be the truth about what happened.
     
  34. Tony48

    Tony48 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    6,879
    Djokovic has to demonstrate that he can beat down Nadal on clay (which wasn't even a beat down, btw), but Federer is left unchecked when he bagels Nadal on Nadal's BEST surface and Nadal's WORST surface?

    That is very interesting, to say the least.

    That only proves that Djokovic hasn't done something within the time frame that YOU prefer. Your personal schedule for Djokovic has no bearing on his ability to perform anywhere.

    Djokovic may not beat Nadal on clay again for another 2 years. The fact that you think that he must is silly. What's to stop you from suggesting that he must straight set Nadal at Roland Garros, too?

    You said he didn't beat anyone of any importance. Elaborate as to why that is.

    Ummmm....it WAS reflected in the future. That future was the year of 2011. Retrospectively, his years leading up to 2011 collectively demonstrated that he could put together season of 2011 that he did.
     
  35. Tennis_Hands

    Tennis_Hands Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    3,704
    Location:
    Inside the service box - the business end
    It is very interesting for someone, who doesn't know what else to say.

    Oh, I see that you have no intention whatsoever to stand behind your claims. Your argument, as it is, is, that Djokovic may never repeat anythig like that, but all the talk about his improvement would still apply. Laughable, but not unexpected.

    What is silly is, thatyou think, that a pattern can appear just like that and disappear just like that.

    You believe in Fairies and Capricorns, son?

    A single odd event can pass for coincidence. A pattern, like the one in 2011 cannot. It has to have foundations. Djokovic didn't straightset Nadal at RG twice, so I cannot relate your example to anythig real. My suggestions are based on what happened. Wrap your head around that (if you can).



    That is a fact.

    Oh, I didn't know, that he displayed that form before 2011. Sorry, you must live in another reality.

    They did?

    So, I will take your word, that you expected season like 2011.

    Oh, wait, you didn't.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2013
  36. mariecon

    mariecon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,961
    Location:
    the Great White North
    Why are you wasting your time? This will go on forever. Just let him have the last word and he'll be happy.
     
  37. Tennis_Hands

    Tennis_Hands Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    3,704
    Location:
    Inside the service box - the business end
    You are probably right.
     
  38. Tony48

    Tony48 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    6,879
    You have double standards and are merely surprised (and probably frustrated) that someone is calling you out on them. It's beyond the realm of possibilities for Djokovic to beat Nadal on clay but for Federer, bageling him on clay is just as normal as Sun rising.

    Double standards.

    I no longer feel compelled to defend Djokovic because you play by different rules when it comes to Federer.

    When Federer bagels Nadal on clay again, then Djokovic can beat Nadal on clay again :)

    What pattern? Two wins over Nadal, and it's a pattern? Your logic is not too sound.

    [​IMG]

    It appears as if you realized that you made a statement that you are unable to back up. Fair enough. Next time, check your facts before making such a declaration.

    Displayed that form? No. Showed promising signs of being able to put together an amazing season? Yes.

    Just like I'll take your word that you expected Federer to win as many slams as he did within the timeframe that he did. :)
     
  39. dafinch

    dafinch Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,831
    Excellent points, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that on all surfaces besides clay prior to 2011, the record between Nole and BP was dead even-his "dominance" consisted entirely of his edge on dirt. So, acting like Nole turned things around everywhere is silly. Btw, when's the last time that Nadal won a non dirt tournament? How about him successfully defending a non dirt tournament(Pretty sure the answer to the latter is, "never")?
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2013
  40. Tennis_Hands

    Tennis_Hands Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    3,704
    Location:
    Inside the service box - the business end
    Federer bageling Nadal on clay is a SINGLE occurence.Djokovic beating Nadal like a drum everywhere and straightsettig him twice on clay of all surfaces is a pattern. Do you understand the difference between the two? Apparently not.


    So weak, but its OK.

    7 wins in a row. On all surfaces. Are you going to tell me, that Djokovic is considered a better grasscourt player as well? Taking down 2 time Wimbledon champ and 4 time finalist(at the time) like it is nothing.

    Yeah, you sound like you know what you are talking about.

    It appears, that you cannot understand simple sentences.

    List all the great claycourters, that Djokovic defeated while winning his clay tourneys before 2011!


    The difference being, that I never said such a thing and you did.

    So you admit, that you didn't, despite claiming the opposite a few posts ago?
     
  41. Tony48

    Tony48 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    6,879
    I'm just going to use your logic and say that Federer gave absolutely ZERO indication that he could bagel Nadal on clay. 2005? No. 2004? No. 2003? And then it happened.

    What's up with that? I need an explanation! Otherwise, Federer was doing something fishy. What was he doing that was a "future reflection" of him being able to bagel Nadal on clay? I need answers. I'm surprised that the ATP hasn't looked into this.

    How can Federer bagel the greatest clay court player of all time? Taking down the reigning French Open champion like it was nothing. I need an explanation. There is absolutely no way that a legend like Nadal would lose like that to someone on their least favorite surface.

    Name all of the great clay courters Federer beat that prepared him for utterly destroying Nadal on clay like never before. How is that even possible? Something is fishy about that. I need an explanation.

    Did you expect it or not? If yes, please give me a detailed explanation of how he went from winning from 1 slam to winning 3 slams a year for 2 years. If no, then you believe that something is incredibly suspicious about Federer's sudden rise to being a super human.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2013
  42. Tennis_Hands

    Tennis_Hands Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    3,704
    Location:
    Inside the service box - the business end

    No, I did not.

    As opposed to you, saying that you did about Djokovic.

    Oh, and, by the way, Federer repeated his high level performance several consecutive years, winning the same tournaments again and again. The very thing I am expecting from Djokovic, if he is to prove, that 2011 was not "fuelled" season. So, in reality it is the same standart for both players (unlike what you claim).

    Apparently you do not have the capacity to realize that, and it should be told to you time and again.

    I thought, that this description from one of our fellow posters describes your ability in a coversation.

    Have a nice day!
     
  43. Tony48

    Tony48 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    6,879
    LOL, so now that Fed's bagel is being scrutinized, you avoid the questions altogether.

    Interesting

    [​IMG]
     
  44. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,706
    Location:
    U.S
    rome 2006 - fed had taken set 4 : 6-2
    RG 2006 - fed had taken set 1 : 6-1

    next ?
     
  45. Tennis_Hands

    Tennis_Hands Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    3,704
    Location:
    Inside the service box - the business end
    Don't bother. It isn't worth it.

    He refuses to recognize simple facts, like, for example, that there is a
    difference between single event (a set) and a pattern (consequence of matches, featurig the same play, opponents and results at completely different venues and conditions).

    Like I wrote, the description is tailormade for him.

    Oh, expect that he says, that 6-1 is not like 6-0.
     
  46. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,706
    Location:
    U.S
    Before 2011, h2h was 16-7 in favour of nadal

    all 7 of djokovic's wins were on HC and *all* were in *straights* ... he won all those by blowing nadal off court

    nadal outlasted him every other time, including on HC ....

    the pattern that changed in 2011 was that nole beat nadal at his own game ... even on HC, djoker didn't blow nadal off court, he grinded him down, outlasted him .... nole beating nadal on HC isn't a big surprise , but it was the pattern which he used that was a 'surprise'.

    So let's not kid ourselves by saying , oh, nole used to beat him before on HC, its not a big deal if he does it in 2011 and later ...

    After a tense 3 setter vs murray @ rome in 2011, he appeared as fresh as ever in the final and beat nadal in straights by grinding him down, not going for all out offense

    I'm not saying this is 'proof' of nole doping , but things did change in 2011 & later and it was a significant change
     
  47. robbo1970

    robbo1970 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,105
    Location:
    UK
    I would like to think that neither are juicing.

    These are both very young guys still, that have really just hit their physical peak in terms of strength and muscle development.

    The modern game is clearly very physical now and I think Nadal set the bar with being heavily muscled and perhaps at a new level of fitness. They have both had to get to a similar shape to compete. I think as well with Murray, to me he just looks as if he has developed from boy to man. Its actually quite common when men hit 24/25 that their muscle development changes.

    Tight clothing does play a part too.
     
  48. zagor

    zagor Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    25,781
    Location:
    Weak era
    Nadal did get Novak in matches that went to the distance before 2011 but how many of those wins were due to Nadal outlasting him instead of just being mentally tougher? Remember their brutal 2009 Madrid SF? Novak had 3 MPs but Nadal raised his level and saved them, he stepped it up a notch while Novak tightened up.

    Also as I said before in this thread, while Nadal played overall great tennis on HC and grass in 2011 I'm not convinced his endurance was on the same level as before, IMO his time on tour coupled with his playing style took a toll on him in that regard.
     
  49. Fiji

    Fiji Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    5,016
    Murray is not doping. He was pooped and useless in the AO final, which is perfectly understandable after the 5 setter SF with Federer. Murray is human.

    Cyborgs like Nadal at the 2009 AO and Djokovic at the 2012 AO are the ones to be suspicious of. Clearly PEDs were involved.
     
  50. mariecon

    mariecon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,961
    Location:
    the Great White North
    mwahahahahahhahahahahaha!!:twisted:
     

Share This Page