Djokovic resume too skewed on Hard courts.
- Thread starter Pantera
- Start date
mightyrick
Legend
I'd say that all of you are completely idiotic. It happens like clockwork every single year right before the French Open ends and continues right through Federer losing Wimbledon.
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
I'd say that you are just a miserable human being.
ChaelAZ
G.O.A.T.
I don't recall having drinx in Hawaii last week
I don’t either...they were that strong [emoji16]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Crisstti
Legend
So... Novak's lucky in that respect.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Lucky that he developed a game that was more adaptable to all surfaces?
mahesh69a
Semi-Pro
In general, anyone entering any field has to look at available options and try to pick what they want to focus on.
The distribution of events across surfaces is not new info - its almost unchanged since any of the big 3 started holding a racket.
The onus is on them to pick a style that gives maximum results and I think all 3 have adapted fairly well, but Nadal definitely has a grip on clay.
The distribution of events across surfaces is not new info - its almost unchanged since any of the big 3 started holding a racket.
The onus is on them to pick a style that gives maximum results and I think all 3 have adapted fairly well, but Nadal definitely has a grip on clay.
augustobt
Legend
You even saved his time doing the math.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Federer problem is he has never been YE!, wont the US Open or French Open (beating Nadal) in the Nadal era, hence Federer about 6th of all time.
You think Roddick and hewitt were better on clay than Thiem………..
Federer has done nothing at the biggest HC major since nadal and Djokovic peaked so your argument fails there.
Nadal and Federer. They may have been out of form at the time, that's not Djokovic's problem. They were still able to win Majors as was proven the next few years.
Your arguments make no sense..according to you every Federer defeat doesn't count as he had a bad day!!
I love both and AO is better run, but sponsor wise and prestige wise for players USO still bigger.
Nadal and Djokovic were there from 2005 and 2007. Not Federer’s problem if they weren’t as good as him across all surfaces from 05-09.
They were children!!
If you look at the facts and without bias, you will see the great Roger did indeed have to compete with ATG's all his career, as he first played the young phenomenon Rafa in 2004 and Novak from 2006, PLUS, in addition, ATG's like the formidable veteran 8 times Slam champion Andre Agassi, the fearsome multi Slam-winning champion Marat Safin, feisty Aussie battler and multi Slam-winning Lleyton Hewitt, the talented Grand Slam winning Andrew Roddick and Juan Martin Del Potro, the highly talented Scots wizard and multi Slam-winning champion Andrew Murray and not forgetting another Swiss maestro, multi Slam-winning winner, Stanislas Wawrinka.
There you have it!
Truly an incomparable field of world-class foes that Sir Roger has had to battle and defeat.
Case closed. Class dismissed! The facts have it. To date, Roger Federer is the greatest player of the Open Era!
There you have it!
Truly an incomparable field of world-class foes that Sir Roger has had to battle and defeat.
Case closed. Class dismissed! The facts have it. To date, Roger Federer is the greatest player of the Open Era!
Federer was a grandpa in 14-16 and Nadal was an invalid from 2014 Wimbledon.
VaporDude95
Banned
VaporDude95
Banned
Water is wet
VaporDude95
Banned
HAHAHA this is exactly what many of us feel like right now.
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
I said Roddick and Hewitt are as good on HC and Grass as Thiem is on clay. Thiem is good but lol at him being elevated to some sort of great, if he were playing back in 03-07 he'd be considered another weak era player.
Yep and Nadal never did anything at the biggest HC major when Fed was still peak
Anyway my point is, clay competition has been weaker than HC all of Fed and Nadal's career, that much is obvious
And Ned never beat Djokovic at AO or in multiple other events while Djokovic beat Ned literally every slam, wtf, masters they played and has a winning h2h and crushed him 7-0 7-0
Nadal has a winning h2h v Djokovic at the majors and multiple slams on all surfaces...….And Ned never beat Djokovic at AO or in multiple other events while Djokovic beat Ned literally every slam, wtf, masters they played and has a winning h2h and crushed him 7-0 7-0
clay competition has been far harder than what Federer had 2003-2006. For goodness sake....Phillipousis and Baghdatis lol.
Federer made the final of Wimbledon, there are no excuses. He lost to the better player.
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
No it hasn't been harder. Nadal won 2 slams in the time period you mention, who was so great on clay? Who did Nadal beat in the 2005 final again? Some drugs cheat who never achieved anything in his career. Who are these great clay players Nadal had to face?
Thiem, Wawrinka, Federer, Djokovic...….according to Federer fans that is otherwise if not then Federer and Djokovic cannot be complete players can they?
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
Lol, you talk about Federer having a weak era. Nadal won a slam in 2005 less than 2 years after Federer won his first slam. But you mention Wawrinka who didnt win a slam until nearly 9 years after Nadal first won RG hahah. Stan didnt even meet Nadal at RG until 2013. Thiem has been around for 5 minutes a d has still not won even a masters on clay. These 2 have not been clay competition for most of Nadal's career.
So who did Nadal have? Djokovic? Ok, but Fed had Djokovic as well and Djokovic is a far harder player on HC and grass than clay - hence he's harder HC competition than clay. Fed played him more times in hc slams and wombledon than Nadal played him at RG
Federer, well according to posters like you Fed is not even as good as Nadal on HC, so how can he be competition on clay?
Let's face it, draw up a list of all the best players fro 2003 to now and the vast majority are tougher players on hc or grass
So you accept Nadal is GOAT as nadal has won multiple times on all surfaces against every opponent who is an ATG.
you are comparing one of the 5 greatest players in the open era with one who has won a single masters.....simply put, that is what you are doing. it is quite a stretch
thiem would have won 2 RG obviously as he was playing in the finals.....but you are guaranteeing he would have beat stan. maybe, maybe no. what about all his masters titles on clay? just this year he lost to Lajovic and Verdasco.
comparing thiem with djokovic is an injustice to djokovic (and i like thiem)
Nadal made final of Wimbledon 2006. Djokovic made final of USO 2007. There are no excuses. They lost to the better player.
he never beat djokovic at AO
GOAT hahahaha and has a losing h2h vs his main rival!!! and wait for it was humilated 7-0 7-0 by his main rival while peak!!
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
Not true!
Nadal is the most specialized (= surface dependent) of the big 3.
% of tier 1 events (slams, WTF, masters) won on each surface:
Federer = 54 titles overall : 33 on outdoor hard (61.1%), 8 on grass (14.8%), 7 on clay (13%), 6 on indoor hard (11.1%)
Djokovic = 53 titles overall: 30 on outdoor hard (56.6%), 10 on clay (18.9%), 9 on indoor hard (17%), 4 on grass (7.5%)
Nadal = 52 titles overall: 37 on clay (71.2%), 12 on outdoor hard (23.1%), 2 on grass (3.8%), 1 on indoor hard (1.9%)
Djoko is the most neutral in terms of surface and Nadal the least. It's even more striking when you consider the % of tier 1 played on each surface/environment: 50% on outdoor hard, 28.6% on clay, 14.3% on indoor hard and 7.1% on grass. Djoko is the only one of the 3 whose % follows the % of events played on each surface. Fed has a strong slant toward grass (14.8% titles vs 7.1% events played on the surface) and Nadal an even bigger slant toward clay (71.2% titles vs 28.6% events played on clay).
Nadal is the most specialized (= surface dependent) of the big 3.
% of tier 1 events (slams, WTF, masters) won on each surface:
Federer = 54 titles overall : 33 on outdoor hard (61.1%), 8 on grass (14.8%), 7 on clay (13%), 6 on indoor hard (11.1%)
Djokovic = 53 titles overall: 30 on outdoor hard (56.6%), 10 on clay (18.9%), 9 on indoor hard (17%), 4 on grass (7.5%)
Nadal = 52 titles overall: 37 on clay (71.2%), 12 on outdoor hard (23.1%), 2 on grass (3.8%), 1 on indoor hard (1.9%)
Djoko is the most neutral in terms of surface and Nadal the least. It's even more striking when you consider the % of tier 1 played on each surface/environment: 50% on outdoor hard, 28.6% on clay, 14.3% on indoor hard and 7.1% on grass. Djoko is the only one of the 3 whose % follows the % of events played on each surface. Fed has a strong slant toward grass (14.8% titles vs 7.1% events played on the surface) and Nadal an even bigger slant toward clay (71.2% titles vs 28.6% events played on clay).
outside of Australia it is Nadal 9-4 Djokovic. Major count for 2 guys the same age is 18-15 Nadal...Nadal more Masters 1000...……..he never beat djokovic at AO
Nadal and Djokovic have exactly same proportion of Majors on their best surface..0.66666
They were teenagers and not even fully grown..Federer was peak when he got owned by nadal and Djokovic at Wimbledon. He is the third wheel of this era. sorry.
Lol 3rd wheel of 2003-2012 era when he won 17 slams most time at number 1, most consecutive weeks, 5 in a row Wimbledon USO etc LOL.
3rd of the 2011-2019 era definitely. Not bad for 30-37 year old.
“Peak” Fed in 2014 2015... hilarious. Keep up this trolling.
GOAT race started in 2008 when all three were peak at same time. Federer winning before Nadal and Djokovic were even fully mature is not relevant to a GOAT discussion. Wimbledon 2008 was defining. I loved Djokovic beating Federer in 2 Wimbledon finals as well as it does make it debatable if Djokovic wins Wimbledon again this year as to who is better on grass especially if he schools Federer again on the way.
There’s no way you’re posting this seriously. Not even worth responding to this trolling mess.
When the best are compared it is by how they fared when they were competing t same time at their best. Your argument is like comparing Senna to Shumacher.
Federer’s best was from 2004-2009. With some flashes of top play in 2010-2012.
are you serious lol. in 2009 he was 27!!!!!
outside of Australia
HAHAHA didnt know Australia wasn't a slam Its actually for many becoming the best slam and also ned sucks in in 1 title lol. How about outside RG which people think sucks Nah son, Ned has a losing h2h vs his main rival and was unable to EVER beat him at the first slam of the year and multiple masters and also 7-0 7-0 humilation
LMAO GOAT lol? He is 3rd wheel of his own generation, cant even beat his main rival!!
Luka888
Professional
Novak's distribution if you wish is very good at majors but it's also great at masters. Djokovic won many tournaments on clay even when he was very young.
Some Rafa fans, and I say 'some', are claiming that Rafa would be great without clay. I don't think so. Rafa is a clay GOAT. Yes, he did manage to win 6 majors outside RG but let's be honest and fair. Nadal won 12 RG and 6 other slams a long time ago. Does that make him 'less' great? Not really. I'm just not sure why 'some Rafa fans' are twisting things.
Some Rafa fans, and I say 'some', are claiming that Rafa would be great without clay. I don't think so. Rafa is a clay GOAT. Yes, he did manage to win 6 majors outside RG but let's be honest and fair. Nadal won 12 RG and 6 other slams a long time ago. Does that make him 'less' great? Not really. I'm just not sure why 'some Rafa fans' are twisting things.
No he has a losing h2h vs his main rival
When he loses the slam h2h too soon its gonna errr err well he at least has the record at like monte carlo and best butt picking on tour (and then mental breakdown proceeds). Losing h2h son. Losing h2h
maratha_warrior
Hall of Fame
Djokovic's resume too skewed on hard and grass = 80% of the tour.
That means Djoker is great at 80% of the tour
That means Djoker is great at 80% of the tour
Ned devotees hinking a guy who spent the majority of his career ranked number 2 be the Greatest of All Time? In what other sport has this ever occurred? And has less slams, less wtf, less masters, less olympics, inferior h2h than other peer players in his era
Humiliated 7-0 7-0 by main rival and probably will be again and is GOAT
Facts are what matter not probables lol. Nadal now out on his own as leader of Major count at his age and counting. Leader in h2hs where it matters...and the only all surface great this era.Ned devotees hinking a guy who spent the majority of his career ranked number 2 be the Greatest of All Time? In what other sport has this ever occurred? And has less slams, less wtf, less masters, less olympics, inferior h2h than other peer players in his era
Humiliated 7-0 7-0 by main rival and probably will be again and is GOAT
Similar threads
- Poll
