Is Nadal-Djokovic the greatest rivalry in world history?

[Sabratha]

Originally Posted by amx13

For a great rivarly to develop, you would need contrasting styles and personalitys, a la Agassi-Sampras...you will never find that with Nadal and Djokovic

Which is why Nadal-Federer is such a good rivalry.

[kOaMaster]

Originally Posted by 6-1 6-3 6-0

Does anyone else see this rivalry as being the most riveting in world history?

at least I don't. a rivalry between the n2&3 or n1&n3 is just not as interesting as n1 vs n2.

[MindoverMatter]

To put it simply, no I don't think it is.

All of the great, 'historic' matches between Nadal and Djokovic weren't all that great. The 2012 RO final, while admittedly having some significance for both players, was a pretty average slam final and was even a little boring - minus the little internal tennis politics that happened concerning the rain.

The super long AO final was another bore for me at times as well. Just because a final is really long doesn't make it good.

If you want a good rivalry with two players with conflicting styles who meet and clash and trade blows, then you don't have to go back very far. Federer-Nadal is a much better rivalry, spanning many more years, than any nadal-djokovic rivalry.

[sunof tennis]

Originally Posted by 6-1 6-3 6-0

At the Australian Open this year, we witnessed one of the greatest grand slam finals in world history (with Nadal losing a CLOSE 7-5 fifth set after being up 4-2 30-15), producing 6 hours of exhilarating tennis. It also indicated a turning point in the Nadal-Djokovic rivalry; Nadal had regained the mental edge. At this point, the H2H was a close 16-14 (in favour of Nadal).

Nadal then went on to beat Nadal THREE consecutive times, all in finals, including the most historic grand slam final of all time, the Roland Garros 2012 final. If Nadal won (and he did), he'd become the official greatest clay-court player ever with a record SEVEN Roland Garros titles, including an incredible 52 of 53 matches won at Roland Garros in just 8 years of playing there. If Djokovic won, he'd win four majors in a row, matching Laver (almost, since it's not in a calendar year). But it wasn't to be; Nadal ripped his heart out and was the record-breaker that night. They were also the only two players in world history to play in four consecutive grand slam finals against each other.

By doing this, Nadal extended the H2H to 19-14, just one match away from matching the Sampras-Agassi H2H. When Nadal wins their next encounter, the rivalry will surely be better than Sampras-Agassi.

Does anyone else see this rivalry as being the most riveting in world history?

No. No contrast in styles. Borg v. McEnroe, Chrissie v. Martina and Pete v. Andre were all more exciting to watch.

[timnz]

Originally Posted by 6-1 6-3 6-0

But did Federer-Djokovic ever contest a grand slam final as historic as Roland Garros 2012?

I thought the Nadal/Federer 2011 Roland Garros final was of better quality than the 2012 final.

Having said that yes - Nadal/Djokovic is a great rivalry....but not the greatest...it doesn't approach Nadal Federer yet. Actually I think the big rivalry to come is actually going to be Djokovic/Murray.

[Headshotterer]

no. Nadal-federer.

[Golden]

Lol no. There are a lot that are greater than the Djokodal rivalry.
1. Evert - Navratilova
2. Lendl - McEnroe
3. Agassi - Sampras
4. Borg - McEnroe
5. Clijsters - Henin
6. Venus - Serena
That's just tennis rivalries. I'm sure there's wayyyy more interesting rivalries in sports worldwide.

[Cup8489]

No. Boring rivalry. Same patterns of play, defense defense defense, Nadal trying to break down the Djokovic forehand, Djokovic breaking down the Nadal backhand, 10 minute service games.

Also, UHHHHH!! over and over and over.

I'll take anyone else.

And RG 2012 final had larger implications, but wasn't any more historic than USO 2007. Sorry ***.

[3fees]

No. Novak D. had to prove himself with everyone in the ATP ,now that he's a top the ATP again he's more concerned with staying there. I dont think being preoccupied with a certain player gets you to the top of the heap so as to speak, beating them all does,many more times than you get beat, IMO.

[World Beater]

Rivalry. LOL.

Nadal beat up novak when nole was still maturing.

Once novak became the "MAN", nadal had no answer on any surface. Nadal lost like a gazillion finals in a row to the same guy on multiple surfaces. LOL . TOTAL DOMINATION.

This rivalry is only heading one way, and its in novak's direction...

[Ico]

Not that great of a rivalry considering Nadal hasn't beaten Djokovic off of clay since 2010.

[tennisaddict]

I agree that match had lot of historical significance but how did you manage to club that with greatest rivalry ?

The AO final and the FO final were probably the 2 most boring matches ever in the last decade or so for a major final.

[Paul Murphy]

I'll take Lendl v McEnroe any day.
Contrast of styles.
Some intense dislike.
It's all there.

[Mustard]

Originally Posted by World Beater

Rivalry. LOL.

Nadal beat up novak when nole was still maturing.

Once novak became the "MAN", nadal had no answer on any surface. Nadal lost like a gazillion finals in a row to the same guy on multiple surfaces. LOL . TOTAL DOMINATION.

This rivalry is only heading one way, and its in novak's direction...

LOL. Nadal is currently on a 3-match winning streak against Djokovic.

[martini1]

Originally Posted by World Beater

Rivalry. LOL.

Nadal beat up novak when nole was still maturing.

Once novak became the "MAN", nadal had no answer on any surface. Nadal lost like a gazillion finals in a row to the same guy on multiple surfaces. LOL . TOTAL DOMINATION.

This rivalry is only heading one way, and its in novak's direction...

Originally Posted by Mustard

LOL. Nadal is currently on a 3-match winning streak against Djokovic.

Nadal had a super yr in 2010, then Djoker had a similar run in 2011. 2013 would be a different scenario.

[veroniquem]

It's been one of the greatest rivalries in tennis recently, that's for sure. For the trivia, Djoko has played Nadal 14 times on clay and he is 2-12 on that surface vs Rafa, exactly like Fed who has also played 14 matches vs Rafa on clay and won only 2. Fed/Nadal have played 5 times at RG and 3 times at M-C while Djoko/Nadal have played 4 times at RG and 4 times in Rome. Given how much younger Djoko is than Fed, I expect in the end it will be the bigger rivalry of the 2 on clay.
On hard court, the main rivalry has been Fed/Djoko. They've played 22 times of which a whooping 5 times at USO and 3 times at AO. By contrast, Nadal/Fed have played only 11 times on hard. I would say Djoko/Nadal is the second best rivalry on hard with 16 encounters in slams, Olympics, WTF and every master on hard except for Shanghai. (Murray/Fed have played 17 matches but a number of them happened in minor events like Bangkok or Doha, so I would still put Djoko/Nadal ahead at this point. )
Overall Djoko/Nadal have played the most matches: 33 (vs 29 for Djoko/Fed and 28 for Nadal/Fed).
On grass, Fed has played Murray and Djoko only once.
The player he's met the most at Wimbledon is Roddick (4 times) although it's hard to call that 4-0 score a gripping rivalry ... He's met both Hewitt and Nadal 3 times but Nadal is the only one who beat him there. Nadal also beat Murray 3 times at W. Djoko and Murray have never met at W.
Regardless of stats, the Djoko/Nadal matches are often spectacular and intense (AO 2012 and Madrid 2009 come to mind).

[Colin]

No, it's boring.

[veroniquem]

The definition of boring was Fed/Roddick. By comparison, the Nadal/Djoko rivalry is a hitchcockian thriller (gamewise and resultwise).

[Colin]

Originally Posted by veroniquem

The definition of boring was Fed/Roddick. By comparison, the Nadal/Djoko rivalry is a hitchcockian thriller (gamewise and resultwise).

You seem to equate unpredictable intrinsically with exciting, and you can certainly make that case. Most Fed-Roddick matches were as predictable as a Lifetime movie (spoiler: the husband was a murderous cad!) They really had only one wildly unpredictable match — that Wimbledon 2009 final — but it made it that more thrilling when Roddick got one. Fed is my favorite, but you still had to root for Andy because of how much of an underdog he was. A few of their closer matches (a couple of the Wimbledons, the U.S. Open final, the Montreal match) were very good quality-wise. Heck, I thought Andy played well in that one AO semifinal that might go down as his worst loss because Fed played at a level unseen before or after. Andy brought out the best in Roger, even if the opposite didn't prove true.

By contrast, Nadal and Djokovic bring out the worst in each other. Though you weren't sure who was going to win in a Nadal-Djokovic match (and I use past tense because I'm not sure Nadal will ever win again), you knew who was going to lose: the TV viewer. Six hours is a European workday, not an entertainment event. Time-wasting and passive rallies do not alone make an epic, even with the flashes of brilliance buried in the mire.

This is not to say I don't enjoy watching Nadal or Djokovic, and I'll add Murray in there. But they all have very similar styles of play. So their best matches are invariably against Fed, because I do like contrast. (Which is why Fed can be boring against a great server.) The problem is Roger is the only one with a more aggressive mentality who is consistently able to mix it up with the other top players. Tsonga, Berdych and Del Po would be fine counterpoints if they could be a little more consistent. You just don't feel they're going to beat Nole, Rafa and Andy on a regular basis.

So, I'd have to go with Djokovic-Federer as the best hard-court rivalry of recent years and Nadal-Federer as the best grass- and clay-court rivalry; even though Roger lost so many on clay, at least he could bring some excitement like few others. That 2008 French Open is probably Roger's worst match ever, but that epic Rome final is probably my favorite clay-court match, and their last Roland Garros matchup wasn't too bad.

[Rjtennis]

Originally Posted by 6-1 6-3 6-0

Playing the 2007 USO Final, Federer was aiming to gain a 4th consecutive US Open title and a 12th grand slam. Hardly historic. Djokovic was hoping to gain his first grand slam, not historic, only a personal feat (and something for Serbian tennis fans to feel happy about).

Whereas in Roland Garros 2012, there was far much on the line for BOTH players. The 2007 US Open final pales in comparison.

Nole was far from playing his best tennis at the 2012 FO. He finally came awake for a set, then fell back asleep at the wheel. Hardly a great match.