Tennis needs a real rivalry in either the mens or womens game

[thalivest]

Right now the biggest problem of all with tennis is their is no rivalry at the top. The womens game is in total disarray. It is hard to pinpoint a reasonably worthy #1, or a solid top 5 or 6, let alone a great 2 player rivalry at or near the top.

On the mens side someone needs to step it up and challenge Nadal, as right now he has no real rival.

The mens and womens game both badly needs a rivalry. The men needing someone to step it up and challenge Nadal, and the womens needing anyone of the so called top guns to step it up period.

 

[BlahDow]

So there's no Federer-Nadal rivalry? o_o

 

[hmwmai]

Yeah no fed-nadal rivalry wow i wonder when it ended....

womens game... agreed

 

[Murray_Maniac]

Wow. Because he defeats Fed in 3 sets at wimbledon and always defeats Djokovic on hc, he has no rivalry. Oh wait, thats wrong. Looks like theres some rivalries.

 

[saram]

Right now the biggest problem of all with tennis is their is no rivalry at the top. The womens game is in total disarray. It is hard to pinpoint a reasonably worthy #1, or a solid top 5 or 6, let alone a great 2 player rivalry at or near the top.

On the mens side someone needs to step it up and challenge Nadal, as right now he has no real rival.

The mens and womens game both badly needs a rivalry. The men needing someone to step it up and challenge Nadal, and the womens needing anyone of the so called top guns to step it up period.

Yeah, to say that Rafa, Roger and Novak have YET to challenge one another this year is absolutely correct....:???:

 

[thalivest]

So there's no Federer-Nadal rivalry? o_o

I laugh at the concept some have of there being a big Federer-Nadal rivalry. A rivalry between a guy who has won 3 of the 4 biggest titles this year and some has been who has won two rinky dinky baby tournaments. Get real. No Federer-Nadal is not a real rivalry other then dumb hype. When Federer starts to beat Nadal again, and win titles bigger then Estoril maybe you can start talk about him getting close to being any sort of rival for Nadal again.

Djokovic-Nadal is much closer to being a rivalry then Federer-Nadal, but it isnt quite there yet as Djokovic still has to step it up more and close the gap for that to happen. He is much closer to being a true rival to Nadal then Federer is right now though.

 

[flying24]

The mens game just has to wait for Djokovic to improve a bit more and Gulbis to start to become a mature player in 2 or 3 years and it should have a good rivalry again. Murray could even be a rival to Nadal in a year or two although he has nearly as much improvement as Gulbis for that to happen IMO. Nadal has no rival right now but that should be changing pretty soon, atleast hopefully it does.

The womens needs to hope Ivanovic, Safina, and Sharapova all are able to fulfill their potential in the coming years and stay healthy. If that happens there should be a good rivalry at the top. The Williams are too old to be part of a long standing rivalry at the top in the future, Jankovic is not good enough, and the other Russians are too enigmatic.

 

[saram]

I laugh at the concept some have of there being a big Federer-Nadal rivalry. A rivalry between a guy who has won 3 of the 4 biggest titles this year and some has been who has won two rinky dinky baby tournaments. Get real. No Federer-Nadal is not a real rivalry other then dumb hype. When Federer starts to beat Nadal again, and win titles bigger then Estoril maybe you can start talk about him getting close to being any sort of rival for Nadal again.

Djokovic-Nadal is much closer to being a rivalry then Federer-Nadal, but it isnt quite there yet as Djokovic still has to step it up more and close the gap for that to happen. He is much closer to being a true rival to Nadal then Federer is right now though.

I'll just assume you didn't see Wimbledon this year...or last year, either.

 

[Marty502]

I'd actually enjoy a nastier rivalry more. You know, one that could draw a bigger crowd, get more attention, you know what I mean.

For the older petrolhead folks, something akin to what Ayrton Senna and Alain Prost were in Formula 1 in the 80s; two phenomenal drivers, talking crap about each other, constantly getting in incidents on and off the track, but that in the deep, felt enourmous respect for the other. They were more enemies than rivals.

Nadal and Federer... they're just too polite. And no, I don't like WWF or Nascar. But that would be better.

 

[tennis-hero]

of course Nadal has no rival... except in the Australian open of course i want to sing a tsonga about how nadal got ****d

or how james blake is a worthy rival

or how outside of their clay court matches, fed totally owns him in the h2h's

but no, thats not what the nadal ****s want to hear

 

[Love Game]

I'll just assume you didn't see Wimbledon this year...or last year, either.

Exactly.
I missed it last year, but I really believe everything Rafa did between his loss to Roger at wimby in 2007 and his triumph over Roger this year at wimby was geared toward that triumph.

Plus, counting Fed out is a big mistake by those who are doing it. Besides.........

......... this is a rivalry, no? :lol:

 

[anointedone]

of course Nadal has no rival... except in the Australian open of course i want to sing a tsonga about how nadal got ****d

Until proven otherwise Tsonga = total one hit wonder.

or how james blake is a worthy rival

Yeah the 28 year old with 0 slam semis.

or how outside of their clay court matches, fed totally owns him in the h2h's

You are right. 5-3 is a total head to head ownership. Very comparable to Rafa's 9-1 with Federer on clay.

 

[zagor]

Well you never know what the future brings,Fed may regain some of his old form,Djokovic may improve or Nadal's level might drop off or some young gun might step in.This year has been all Nadal dominating but that doesn't mean that this will be the pattern in the years to come(or we may see Nadal establish a Fed like dominance which I don't think we'll happen but is a possibility).

 

[Love Game]

of course Nadal has no rival... except in the Australian open of course i want to sing a tsonga about how nadal got ****d

or how james blake is a worthy rival

or how outside of their clay court matches, fed totally owns him in the h2h's

but no, thats not what the nadal ****s want to hear

Life goes on and all that.
Changing of the guard and all that.

Why so bitter? __________

_____

 

[flying24]

Well you never know what the future brings,Fed may regain some of his old form,Djokovic may improve or Nadal's level might drop off or some young gun might step in.This year has been all Nadal dominating but that doesn't mean that this will be the pattern in the years to come(or we may see Nadal establish a Fed like dominance which I don't think we'll happen but is a possibility).

Exactly. Just because Nadal has absolutely no rival this year does not mean that will always be the case.

 

[Love Game]

You are right. 5-3 is a total head to head ownership. Very comparable to Rafa's 9-1 with Federer on clay.

~~~~~

~~~~~

 

[gj011]

There is a Nadal - Djokovic rivalry at the moment. This year their score is 4-2 in Nadals favor, but 3 of 4 Nadal's wins (Hamburg, Queens, Olympics) were very close and highly entertaining matches that could have gone either way.

 

[shell]

The men....there is a well fought rivalry currently and a number 3 in the waiting. The men are fine.

The women...well, this is going to be a transition year. The big winners over the last couple of years are fading, the new players are not mature enough yet, and the unknowns are going to pop up and claim a few titles while all of this plays out. Justine, Serena and Venus are not going to dominate over the next year (Justine for obvious reasons). It will be a mess for another year I think, who is capable and wants it will come out of this mess on top.

 

[edmondsm]

I laugh at the concept some have of there being a big Federer-Nadal rivalry. A rivalry between a guy who has won 3 of the 4 biggest titles this year and some has been who has won two rinky dinky baby tournaments. Get real. No Federer-Nadal is not a real rivalry other then dumb hype. When Federer starts to beat Nadal again, and win titles bigger then Estoril maybe you can start talk about him getting close to being any sort of rival for Nadal again.

Djokovic-Nadal is much closer to being a rivalry then Federer-Nadal, but it isnt quite there yet as Djokovic still has to step it up more and close the gap for that to happen. He is much closer to being a true rival to Nadal then Federer is right now though.

You are either trolling or really embarrasing yourself. No Federer/Nadal rivalry???:shock: Guess you haven't been watching tennis the last few years. I'll fill you in, it's probably the best rivalry the sport has ever seen.

 

[edmondsm]

You are right. 5-3 is a total head to head ownership. Very comparable to Rafa's 9-1 with Federer on clay.

You know that the Fed/Nadal h2h is not a good representation of their rivalry. Where has Nadal been when Federer gets to an Aussie or USO final? On his couch in Malllorca, that's where, because he got tooled by some run of the mill pro earlier in the tournament. Yet, how many big clay court finals has Rafa gotten against Fed? Well, alot.

 

[edberg505]

You know that the Fed/Nadal h2h is not a good representation of their rivalry. Where has Nadal been when Federer gets to an Aussie or USO final? On his couch in Malllorca, that's where, because he got tooled by some run of the mill pro earlier in the tournament. Yet, how many big clay court finals has Rafa gotten against Fed? Well, alot.

That was way too funny.

 

[thalivest]

You are either trolling or really embarrasing yourself. No Federer/Nadal rivalry???:shock: Guess you haven't been watching tennis the last few years. I'll fill you in, it's probably the best rivalry the sport has ever seen.

I am not talking about the last few years clown, I am talking about right now which means this year. Nadal has won 3 of the 4 biggest tournaments this year. Federer hasnt even won a Masters, he has only won 2 rinky dink tournaments. Nadal has won more of the biggest events in tennis then Federer has tiny tournaments this year. Nadal is 4-0 vs Federer this year too. Nadal is around 450 race points, the equivalent of around 2250 ranking points for this year alone, ahead of Federer. Rivalry my ass, the Federer worshipping on this forum is beyond ridiculous at times.

Some earlier mentioned Djokovic. Djokovic is indeed clearly the 2nd best player in the world right now, and much closer to being a rival to Nadal then Federer. Unlike Federer he has also won some big titles this year. Unlike Federer he can beat Nadal on one surface atleast. However Nadal is still a whopping near 400 race points, the equivalent of about 1950 ranking points for the year alone, ahead of Djokovic. Djokovic has only shown he can beat Nadal on one surface, while Nadal has shown he can beat Djokovic on any surface. So this one has promise and it is getting there, but Djokovic still has to step it up some more to be considered a true Nadal rival.

 

[thalivest]

You know that the Fed/Nadal h2h is not a good representation of their rivalry. Where has Nadal been when Federer gets to an Aussie or USO final? On his couch in Malllorca, that's where, because he got tooled by some run of the mill pro earlier in the tournament. Yet, how many big clay court finals has Rafa gotten against Fed? Well, alot.

Federer, not Nadal, is the one getting tooled by any johnny-come-lately this year. A slumping Roddick, Blake who used to be his pigeon even more then Roddick, Mardy Fish for crying out loud, serve/volleyer Radek Stepanek on clay, some french guy early in Canada, Ivo nothing but a serve Karlovic in Cincinnati.
It is like come up and get it everyone. The only times he is in any finals if it some tournament that most people dont know is even going on (eg-Estoril) or if he is there to get his ass whooped by Nadal yet again.

 

[S H O W S T O P P E R !]

Nadal and Federer already has a good rivalry. But I think the rest of the Top Ten need to play more Slams so we don't see only 2 or 3 guys win every year. Mix it up! You know who needs a rival? Tiger Woods.

 

[TheTruth]

You guys do realize that there is a five year age difference? Why would Nadal have as much experience as Fed, and have played all the people Fed has played in his years on the tour? Don't Nadal, Djokovic, Murray and Gulbis get time to acclimate themselves to the tour, like Fed did? At their ages Fed was doing zilch. You all's logic is very strange.

When Fed beat Sampras that one time, you are saying that he automatically became his peer. Had Federer maintained his momentum, it still wouldn't have been a fair assessment as Pete had more time on the tour, more experience, and more savvy. That would be an illogical argument for Sampras and Fed, ergo it is an illogical argument for Nadal and Fed. Just because Nadal beats Fed regularly

 

[SempreSami]

Now that Murray's managed to beat Djokovic recently I'd like to see a rivalry between those two.

 

[saram]

Now that Murray's managed to beat Djokovic recently I'd like to see a rivalry between those two.

I would too. And they have tough battles in and out every time. I like that match-up.

 

[saram]

The mere fact that there are so many even debating this shows a true rivalry.

 

[Love Game]

The mere fact that there are so many even debating this shows a true rivalry.

Interesting point.

Also a few days ago I re-watched the Wimbledon Final. Wow! If that didn't show a deep down rivalry, then I don't know the meaning of the word.

Both players were fully engaged and coming up with spectacular plays throughout. And when Rafa fell out after the final point, that was true joy and triumph (and yes relief) at a goal pursued relentlessly for years and achieved after overcoming a rival who stood in the way.

"Just before 9.20 last night, with the court festooned in semi-darkness after almost five hours of epic, see-saw tennis, Rafael Nadal finally prevailed in one of the sport's all-time classics, vanquishing Roger Federer in his attempt to become the first man since the 1880s to win six consecutive Wimbledon championships."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2008/jul/07/wimbledon.tennis3

I've heard of "what have you done for me lately,"
but that wimby final just occurred on Sun., July 6th.

 

[flying24]

There is a Nadal - Djokovic rivalry at the moment. This year their score is 4-2 in Nadals favor, but 3 of 4 Nadal's wins (Hamburg, Queens, Olympics) were very close and highly entertaining matches that could have gone either way.

I agree with you. Roddick, Federer, Murray, Gasquet are all not rivals to Nadal at this point, but I do agree Djokovic is a pretty good rival for Nadal. He needs to play more consistently to have any shot of the #1 ranking but as far as competitive matches always on each surface (and on the fact the few spankings are ones Djokovic inflicts on Nadal on hard courts) and competing with each other for big titles Djokovic is the closest thing to a rival Nadal has right now.

 

[tata]

Who said there is no rivalry between fed and nadal?Just because nadal is ontop of fed doesnt mean the rivalry is over.Rivalry is the actual competition between those 2 and what they play for.If you say there is no rivalry because nadal is better than fed then technically speaking there was no nadal-fed rivalry from the start because fed was ontop of nadal in terms of rankings for god knows how long.Get the definition right guys...im sure fed will try make a charge in the future,its not over until he says it is.

 

[superman1]

The Fed-Nadal rivalry on clay is nonexistent, but on the other surfaces it is VERY real. Federer was starting to turn the rivalry around in 2007, he won 3 out of 5 of the matches, lost 2 on clay. Clay is over for the year, we had an epic on grass, hopefully we'll see some great matches on hard and indoor.

Djokovic-Nadal is also a very real rivalry, and it's more consistently of a higher quality than Fed-Nadal (no backhand shanks). They always have close matches and you never know which way it's going to go.

 

[zagor]

You guys do realize that there is a five year age difference? Why would Nadal have as much experience as Fed, and have played all the people Fed has played in his years on the tour? Don't Nadal, Djokovic, Murray and Gulbis get time to acclimate themselves to the tour, like Fed did? At their ages Fed was doing zilch. You all's logic is very strange.

When Fed beat Sampras that one time, you are saying that he automatically became his peer. Had Federer maintained his momentum, it still wouldn't have been a fair assessment as Pete had more time on the tour, more experience, and more savvy. That would be an illogical argument for Sampras and Fed, ergo it is an illogical argument for Nadal and Fed. Just because Nadal beats Fed regularly

I see you bring this same stuff time and again.If you don't mind me asking,when did you start watching tennis? You do realize that there's no one absolite rule for when players mature? For example Courier had his best years at the age of 21-23,Chang won his only slam at 17 years old,Becker also won his first slam at 17(wow the field must have been tremendously weak then according to your biased logic)and had his best overall year in his career at 21(even though he didn't finish number one cause he had the consistant machine Lendl ahead of him),Borg won his first slam at 18 and was burned out by the age of 26(that was 8 years of very high level of tennis,people here wrongly say he didn't have longevity,he definitely had,it's just that he matured very early),Seles was crazy good already at the age of 17,18.Then you have complete oposites like Lendl,Navratilova,Rafter etc.
Fed won his first slam in 2003,Nadal who is an earlier bloomer than Fed won his first slam in 2005,that's only 2 years difference.Sure Nadal is Fed's contemporary just as Becker was Sampras's contemporary(similar age difference).Look you can say Sampras is much better than Fed and similar stuff(I couldn't care less about all this GOAT stuff between Fed and Sampras,as far as I'm concerned neither one of them is GOAT)but I will always strongly disagree with you about Nadal not being Fed's peer(and I'm positive a lot of neutral,objective tennis fans will as well).

Also for experience factor,in tennis much more often than not young age will prevail over experience(Fed over Sampras at Wimbledon,Safin and Hewitt over Sampras at USO,Sampras over Lendl and Mcenroe at USO,Fed over Agassi at 2003 TMC).

One last thing,between Sampras and Fed there is a 10 age difference while between Nadal and Fed is half that number.that alone makes it a much different situation so it's not comparable IMO.

 

[Deleted member 21996]

I see you bring this same stuff time and again.If you don't mind me asking,when did you start watching tennis? You do realize that there's no one absolite rule for when players mature? For example Courier had his best years at .....

comparable IMO.

this is vey well put but you should also ad the best example of what tennis is as far as impredictability goes:

Mats Wilander.

winning is first major at 17 years, 9 months, going erractically around wining majoras and losing first round and finishing 1988 with almost a grand slam. then completely disapear winning only 2 or 3 events in the next few years....

 

[zagor]

this is vey well put but you should also ad the best example of what tennis is as far as impredictability goes:

Mats Wilander.

winning is first major at 17 years, 9 months, going erractically around wining majoras and losing first round and finishing 1988 with almost a grand slam. then completely disapear winning only 2 or 3 events in the next few years....

Yeah I forgot to add Wilander and his amazing turbulent career.You never know what tomorrow brings in tennis.I think Wilander just completely lost motivation after having one of the best tennis years ever,he probably felt that there's nothing left for him to achieve or prove.My point is that in tennis it's futile to compare what certain players did at the same age and expect every single player to mature at the same time and hold everyone to the same standard,players peak differently and mature differently,that's just the way it is.If Nadal accomplished more by the age of 22 then both Sampras and Federer it doesn't automatically mean he'll end up having a better career in the end.

 

[edberg505]

Question to the OP: Where was this thread for the past 2 years? I'll be sure to remind people when mighty Nadal slips up and starts tumbling so someone can post this same thread in the future.

 

[grafrules]

I so miss those days of great rivalries. Graf-Seles, Connors- McEnroe, Becker-Edberg, Borg-Mcenroe. It is sad for the game one simply isnt being produced now.

I agree with posters that say Nadal-Djokovic has the potential to evolve into a great rivalry, the one the mens game sorely needs. What about the womens game though? I dont even see any potential rivalry coming soon there. I thought it might be Sharapova-Henin for awhile but obviously that wont happen, in fact Maria might be joining Justine on the retirement sidelines soon.

 

[marpiw]

There's no sport if there isnnt rivalry...........

I agree...........theres no sport without rivalry (which is the heart of it)...sport is no acquiescense............

Right now the biggest problem of all with tennis is their is no rivalry at the top. The womens game is in total disarray. It is hard to pinpoint a reasonably worthy #1, or a solid top 5 or 6, let alone a great 2 player rivalry at or near the top.

On the mens side someone needs to step it up and challenge Nadal, as right now he has no real rival.

The mens and womens game both badly needs a rivalry. The men needing someone to step it up and challenge Nadal, and the womens needing anyone of the so called top guns to step it up period.

-----------------------
Allez Alize!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[ogruskie]

Safin versus Safin seems to be a good rivalry, IMO.

 

[babbette]

Fed is in love with Rafa and Rafa is in love with Fed. We need a rivalry where both hate each other's guts on and off court.

I don't know what i'm talking about, i'm watching Nadal kick Phau's arse and i'm high on it. :mrgreen:

 

[SirBlend12]

Safin versus Safin seems to be a good rivalry, IMO.

Best one anywhere, at that.

And as for those saying there is a Nadal-Djokovic rivalry brewing, well, where have you been? I know some people only like watching the Slams, but any masters or atp comp in the last 2 years has had them at each others throats in the semis and so on. It's nothing new. If anything it's almost calming down now that Nadal is on top and Fed is bloodthirsty for a comeback.

 

[thalivest]

Best one anywhere, at that.

And as for those saying there is a Nadal-Djokovic rivalry brewing, well, where have you been? I know some people only like watching the Slams, but any masters or atp comp in the last 2 years has had them at each others throats in the semis and so on. It's nothing new. If anything it's almost calming down now that Nadal is on top and Fed is bloodthirsty for a comeback.

Nadal-Djokovic is getting even better and closer to a real rivalry this year though. They played a complete match on grass, not an aborted one like Wimbledon last year, and even though Nadal won it two sets it was exceptional quality and either player could have won it in 2 sets. They played on clay and had an amazing match in Hamburg, then a pretty good match at the French (unlike the embarassment of the Federer-Nadal laugher in the final). Djokovic is starting to beat Nadal badly a few times on hard courts, yet Nadal turns around and fights back to beat Djokovic in their biggest hard court match of the year of all. So while it isnt a great rivalry quite yet, it is getting closer to being that rivalry the mens game needs. Yes they have played before this year, but they are playing more often then ever this year and their matches becoming better and better. It is good to see the two best players in the world coming closer to a great rivalry, and as both are so young it could keep going in this direction and getting even closer and better with time.

 

[hewittboy]

Nadal has a rival. His name is Novak Djokovic. Ok maybe the ranking points arent that close but that is because Nadal is so much better on clay and the rankings are f-ed up so Djokovic has to play Nadal in semis too often instead of finals. Really though Djokovic is Nadal's rival right now on every surface except clay, and even on clay he is Nadal's toughest opponent by far.

 

[DarthFed]

Djokovic rivals Nadal on Grass? i thought Federer (you know the five time wimbledon champ, the only player to take sets of Nadal besides Gulbis, AND the one one that beat the gy who took out Novak in straights in straights) was Nadals only rival on grass:???:

 

[thalivest]

Grass it he only surface Federer at all rivals Nadal at the moment. On hard courts he hasnt even won a tournament this year. On clay he is an embarassment on court vs Nadal. Djokovic though can give Nadal just as good of matches on grass as their Queens finals, and of course much better competition for Nadal on every surface outside of grass.

The only reason Federer can hang with Nadal on grass at all is his serve. Without the serve he would be mincemeat. Even with the serve and the performance of his life he still couldnt beat Nadal on his beloved grass which says all you need to know about their "rivalry" (LOL).

 

[veroniquem]

Nadal-Djokovic is getting even better and closer to a real rivalry this year though. They played a complete match on grass, not an aborted one like Wimbledon last year, and even though Nadal won it two sets it was exceptional quality and either player could have won it in 2 sets. They played on clay and had an amazing match in Hamburg, then a pretty good match at the French (unlike the embarassment of the Federer-Nadal laugher in the final). Djokovic is starting to beat Nadal badly a few times on hard courts, yet Nadal turns around and fights back to beat Djokovic in their biggest hard court match of the year of all. So while it isnt a great rivalry quite yet, it is getting closer to being that rivalry the mens game needs. Yes they have played before this year, but they are playing more often then ever this year and their matches becoming better and better. It is good to see the two best players in the world coming closer to a great rivalry, and as both are so young it could keep going in this direction and getting even closer and better with time.

I agree with everything. Nadal-Djokovic has all the ingredients for a spectacular rivalry.