Talk Tennis

Talk Tennis (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php)
-   General Pro Player Discussion (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/forumdisplay.php?f=13)
-   -   Which period was most similar to Fed's 2006 dominance: Novak@2011 or Nadal@2010? (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=442639)

PCXL-Fan 10-10-2012 06:09 PM

Which period was most similar to Fed's 2006 dominance: Novak@2011 or Nadal@2010?
 


As we know, Federer has a 95-5 record at year 2006, winning 12 titles and accumulating 15250 pts (a record). And Federer had reached each GS final that year, winning them in 3 out of 4 attempts as well as 4 Masters 1000 titles and the World Tour Finals.

2011 Djokovic won 3 out of 3 GS finals and 1 GS semifinal, finishing with a 70-6 record, and won 41 consecutive matches (Jan-May). He also won 10 tournaments including a record breaking 5 ATP Masters 1000 titles in 1 year.

2010 Nadal on the other hand had won 3 out of 3 GS finals and 1 GS qtrfinal, finishing with a 71-10 record. He also won 3 Master 1000 titles by winning all 3 clay court masters titles.

Whose 'dominance' during a single season was most similar to Federer's 2006?

NadalDramaQueen 10-10-2012 06:21 PM

Definitely Djoker. He had a great season and I was happy that he was able to make such a big break through. He started unbelievably well and had a real shot at the CYGS had Fed not stopped him at RG.

PCXL-Fan 10-10-2012 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NadalDramaQueen (Post 6946866)
Definitely Djoker. He had a great season and I was happy that he was able to make such a big break through. He started unbelievably well and had a real shot at the CYGS had Fed not stopped him at RG.

I think so too, and the higher win percentage and 5 master series 1000 titles is almost as good as 4+1 the WTF.

90's Clay 10-10-2012 06:48 PM

Djoker's is superior. Took out Fed or Nadal to get his 3 slams for the year and multiple titles.

I'm not even going to comment on Fed's 2006 opposition. It was freakin HORRID.

TheFifthSet 10-10-2012 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 90's Clay (Post 6946912)
I'm not even going to comment on Fed's 2006 opposition. It was freakin HORRID.

You just commented on it. ;)

NadalAgassi 10-10-2012 07:03 PM

Djokovic's since like Federer he was unable to win the years biggest event on a certain surface. Nadal was able to win the years biggest event on all surfaces, making him superior to both. Djokovic was atleast able to win tournaments on clay and beat Nadal on it though, which puts him above Federer in 2006 however. As "no clay slam to go with his grass and hard court slam for the year" Djokovic is closer to being down with "0 clay titles and 1-4 finals record for year vs Nadal" Federer I voted him.

Hood_Man 10-10-2012 07:08 PM

I guess it has to be Novak's. 10 titles > 7 titles, 3 majors and a semi > 3 majors and a quarter, his run of dominance lasted from January to September, whereas Nadal's lasted from April to October (although Nadal did win 4 matches at the WTF).

Mustard 10-10-2012 07:40 PM

Nadal's 2008 would be a better option than Nadal's 2010, at least the period from April to August 2008 when he won 8 tournaments and 48 out of 50 matches.

RAFA2005RG 10-10-2012 07:40 PM

Obviously there is no year in history similar to Nadal 2010. Nadal 2010 won slams on clay, grass and hardcourt. Nothing like it.

MTF07 10-10-2012 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi (Post 6946939)
Djokovic's since like Federer he was unable to win the years biggest event on a certain surface. Nadal was able to win the years biggest event on all surfaces, making him superior to both. Djokovic was atleast able to win tournaments on clay and beat Nadal on it though, which puts him above Federer in 2006 however. As "no clay slam to go with his grass and hard court slam for the year" Djokovic is closer to being down with "0 clay titles and 1-4 finals record for year vs Nadal" Federer I voted him.

lmao

Neither year is even that close to Federer's 06. Especially Nadal's 2010. Nadal lost as more matches in 2010 alone than Fed lost in 05 and 06 COMBINED.

sonicare 10-10-2012 08:52 PM

Novaks 2011 is better than rogers 2006.

lets call a spade a spade..ok folks..as much as i am a *******, cant argue with djokers 2011.

jokinla 10-10-2012 08:58 PM

Djoker of course, started amazingly but faded, still was more impressive than Nads 10, but not as impressive as Feds.

dangalak 10-10-2012 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 90's Clay (Post 6946912)
Djoker's is superior. Took out Fed or Nadal to get his 3 slams for the year and multiple titles.

I'm not even going to comment on Fed's 2006 opposition. It was freakin HORRID.

I'm sure if Sampras had such easy opposition, he'd own 22 slams.

NadalAgassi 10-10-2012 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTF07 (Post 6947037)
lmao

Neither year is even that close to Federer's 06. Especially Nadal's 2010. Nadal lost as more matches in 2010 alone than Fed lost in 05 and 06 COMBINED.

He did not lose a match at the biggest clay, biggest grass, or biggest hard court event of the year however. No surface, nor any opponent, was an issue for him. For Federer both clay (0 clay titles in 2006) and Nadal (1-4 vs Nadal in finals, including a final on lightning greased courts) were a major issue. As for Federer in 2005 he may have lost only 4 matches, too bad despite that he managed to win only 2 of the years 5 biggest events and make only 2 of 4 slam finals on the year somehow, LOL!

cork_screw 10-10-2012 09:09 PM

Honestly, nobody. What fed did in 2006 was insane. I was pretty shocked when nobody really mentioned it that much after that amazing year up until around these past 2 years people started to refer back to it.

Fed finished the year 92-5.

When your win/loss record looks more like Julio Cesar Chavez's career win loss record, you know you got something special. I really can't get over that number.

Just to put in perspective how talented federer truly is, he is 31 years old and still on the upper 2 percentile of all active tennis professionals. He has done better in accumulating tournament points beating out 98 percent of the active professional men's field. Look at hewitt, roddick, safin, ferrero, blake and all the rest of his graduating class, see where they are. Federer is really something special. People need to realize that.

NadalAgassi 10-10-2012 09:19 PM

Just to put in perspective how talented federer truly is, he is 31 years old and still on the upper 2 percentile of all active tennis professionals

Laver won yet another Grand Slam at age 31. For Federer winning Wimbledon and briefly returning to #1 at 30 seems amazing, but for Laver winning all the slams at 31 was just ho hum, yet another day at the office.

Agassi was ranked #1 in the World and a Slam Champion at 33.

Serena has owned the last 3 major tournaments and made a mockery of the Worlds so called top 2 ranked players at 31.

How is what you said such an amazing feat.

Evan77 10-10-2012 09:25 PM

what Fed's 2006? hm. remind me one more time of his field? who did he have to beat? did I hear 'a bunch of nobodies', yeah, I thought so.

Prisoner of Birth 10-10-2012 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi (Post 6947143)
Just to put in perspective how talented federer truly is, he is 31 years old and still on the upper 2 percentile of all active tennis professionals

Laver won yet another Grand Slam at age 31. For Federer winning Wimbledon and briefly returning to #1 at 30 seems amazing, but for Laver winning all the slams at 31 was just ho hum, yet another day at the office.

Agassi was ranked #1 in the World and a Slam Champion at 33.

Serena has owned the last 3 major tournaments and made a mockery of the Worlds so called top 2 ranked players at 31.

How is what you said such an amazing feat.

Because you could only come up with 3 other instances, one from decades ago and one from the WTA? :lol:

NadalAgassi 10-10-2012 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evan77 (Post 6947153)
what Fed's 2006? hm. remind me one more time of his field? who did he have to beat? did I hear 'a bunch of nobodies', yeah, I thought so.

well except for Nadal who he went 1-4 against in finals. Otherwise it was the incredible year end #3 and #4s Davydenko and Blake.

Year end #2, #3, and #4 in Nadal and Djokovic's 2010 and 2011 years were Nadal/Djokovic, Federer, and Murray.

ledwix 10-10-2012 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi (Post 6946939)
Djokovic's since like Federer he was unable to win the years biggest event on a certain surface. Nadal was able to win the years biggest event on all surfaces, making him superior to both. Djokovic was atleast able to win tournaments on clay and beat Nadal on it though, which puts him above Federer in 2006 however. As "no clay slam to go with his grass and hard court slam for the year" Djokovic is closer to being down with "0 clay titles and 1-4 finals record for year vs Nadal" Federer I voted him.

Lol..are you claiming Nadal's 2010 was the greatest year since Laver? Federer in 2006 made all four slam finals, won WTF, accumulated the most points in a season since ATP started, and only lost to two people. Nadal lost to more people more often and was less consistent. Nobody in 2010 felt the buzz of dominance that was felt in 2006 (or 2011) As for fields, that's pretty subjective. Might as well say Laver sucked in 1969, he just benefited from a pre-modern playstyle. But his season was still the best.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:40 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2006 - Tennis Warehouse