A 24 year old Nadal entered 2011 firmly ranked No.1, holding the Wimbledon, FO and USO titles - a clear No.1 having won multiple grand slams on various surfaces. He relinquished his no.1 ranking to Djokovic in June 2011. All year he won 3 titles - Monte Carlo, Barcelona and the French Open. This may seem like a good year with one GS title, but consider this - he only won titles on clay (his best surface), losing his grip on everything else. In MC and Barcelona, where Djokovic did not enter, he won against buddy Ferrer. When he played a clay tournament where Djokovic was entered, DjoIkovic cleaned out his clock. Its anyone's guess if Nadal would have even had the lone FO slam if Roger had not stopped a rampaging Djokovic. So in summary, a seemingly all-conquering Nadal entered 2011 as No.1 and did not even manage to win on his best surface against Djokovic, the guy who truly became the top guy on tour this year. A very lucky break at the FO gave Nadal a GS title as an early Christmas gift. Nadal fans keep telling me he was a great number 1 because he's won 10 gs titles etc etc. What does it say about a guy in his prime, who could not defend even his own turf as No.1? True, Djokovic came up with the goods but what does it say about Nadal? How truly was he the top dog in the game if he was kicked off the throne this easy?