abmk
Bionic Poster
Already addressed in a post above ->
Nadal's TB stats only started taking a dive from 2014 onwards (when prime ended)
He was at 65.7% TBs won (157 /239 ) from 2005 to 2013 - which is pretty high
58.5% (96/164) from 2014-current
How many times has Nadal choked a match?
- Thread starter ADuck
- Start date
Already addressed in a post above ->
Nadal's TB stats only started taking a dive from 2014 onwards (when prime ended)
He was at 65.7% TBs won (157 /239 ) from 2005 to 2013 - which is pretty high
58.5% (96/164) from 2014-current
Underdog
Professional
Refreshing unpopular opinion. I thought I was the only one to think like this. Agreed, mate
Rafa4LifeEver
G.O.A.T.
Uso19 & Ao22 finals are good examples of it, yes.
Sampras-Bruguera 1993
Legend
He really hasn't choked a whole lot. The only real notable ones I remember was AO 2012 and AO 2017. Other times he was injured and not playing well, or just completely out of form or just blown off the court by an aggressive in form/zoned player but thats not a "choke". Generally in form and healthy and he usually gets the W
Rafa4LifeEver
G.O.A.T.
It was almost as big of a gap in form as it was in RG2020 final between Nadal &DDjokovic.
The difference being mental strength of Nadal who 6-0 6-2 7-5 ed Nole & Roger who lost 6-7 6-1 6-7 6-4 12-13
Rafa4LifeEver
G.O.A.T.
Roger doesn't rely on athleticism on grass for being able to attack.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
RG 2013 is the most known example.
Rafa4LifeEver
G.O.A.T.
I don't think so, his legs were already gone by the middle of 3rd set & he was hanging in purely by hand skills; whereas Novak looked like he could go for 3-4 more hours.
Even if he won the 3rd set, it would have just delayed the inevitable & Novak would have won in 5. Not really a good scenario because Nadal's foot injury would have beem flared and aggrevated even more so than it did.
Rafa4LifeEver
G.O.A.T.
Oh yes, it skipped out of my mind.
Nadal was ahead in all of the first 4 sets & especially the 4th when he served at 6-5, had 30-0.
ADuck
Legend
What do you mean? Aside from the serve, all players rely on their athleticism to attack. It may look easy what Federer was doing out there but it's anything but. We saw what happened in 2021.
abmk
Bionic Poster
Disagree. If that were the case, fed wouldn't have broken Djoko 5 times in the first 4 sets while only facing BP towards end of 4th set when up double break.
In the semi, fed didn't break Nadal even once in first 2 sets and broke him twice in the match while getting broken twice himself in the 2nd set, losing it 1-6.
While Nadal did win most of the important points in RG 20 final, he was the better player as well in general. Sets 1 and 2 would have been closer if he hadn't won most of the important points, but he still would have won those, IMO
abmk
Bionic Poster
Yes, fed does rely on athleticism on grass to attack.
Its why his decline tends to get under-rated/noticed less. The loss in explosiveness is not as easily noticed as say loss in speed of Nadal.
Rafa4LifeEver
G.O.A.T.
Gentleman, You've misunderstood what I said. I can understand though, my choice of wording was not exactly a clear one.
Let me simplify this for you.
The gap of level between Djokovic and Federer at 2019 Wimbledon final (Fed had higher level) was almost as big as the gap of level between Djokovic & Nadal at RG2020 final (Nadal had higher level); but Nadal is mentally tougher and clutch which made all the difference.
Rafa4LifeEver
G.O.A.T.
Bud
Bionic Poster
In both he was a break up in the 5th set.
abmk
Bionic Poster
Its true.
I have seen people saying Nadal had declined more in 17 than fed in 17. Wut?
I mean saying Nadal had declined more in 17 than fed in 12 (same ages) is fine and understandable, but both in 17? that's just under-rating fed's decline.
Rafa4LifeEver
G.O.A.T.
Those people are insane, what more can I say?
abmk
Bionic Poster
Heh, a little harsh.
But point is it is easier to notice decline in footspeed than decline in explosiveness.
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
AO 2019 he was nervous as hell . He was blitzing everyone else in that tournament, then seen Djokovic across the net and was fluffing shots constantly.
Martin J
Hall of Fame
You've always "defended" Muller and rejected the idea that Nadal choked, nice to see from a Nadal fan. It is true, Muller's type of aggression is different to anything that Nadal's faced at Wimbledon (bar Kendrick and Brown - though he was quite awful in 2015). It's a formidable match-up for Rafa due to Muller's serve and a relentless net attacks.
I think their trilogy at Wimbledon is quite entertaining due to contrast in playing styles (Nadal's demonic defense and athleticism and Muller's efficient S&V) that produced a nice grass court tennis. Kinda reminds me of the Agassi vs Rafter (1999-2001) encounters at SW19.
Martin J
Hall of Fame
Nadal made 3 (arguably 4) FH errors in that game, which was quite bad for his standards, especially if you look at it as an isolated case. Still, don't forget that he'd saved a bunch of break points before got broken, 3 in his first service game, 1 in the 2nd, another one in the third (a game where he got broken) and then four more in the next service game until finally lost his serve.
That's a clutch performance and far from choking, Fed's level was simply higher during the majority of the fifth so he prevailed in the end.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Probably hard to call it a choke, as Nadal was never ahead in the match. Muller was the better player overall. However, he missed some great chances at 9-9 in the fifth set. Rushed the net from the baseline on one BP (the same mistake he repeated next year against Djokovic), made a baseline error on another one.
Martin J
Hall of Fame
But you can't just focus on one point and draw such conclusion, a player cannot use every single chance he has and let's face it, Muller had more chances in the fifth than Nadal regarding break points.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Nadal should be a much better returner and better baseline player than Muller, so it's pretty clear why are his missed chances discussed more. When he returned Muller's serve he was supposed to find a way to win the point and break him. I don't call it a choke though, just a big missed chance. (not that it matters much, he wasn't beating Federer to win the title anyway)
Underdog
Professional
I felt so too.
Martin J
Hall of Fame
Nadal is a better returner than Muller overall, but his return (on grass) has been the weakest part of his game by far, and is the main reason for his fiasco during 2012-2015 at Wimbledon, so dealing with an unorthodox serve like Muller's (lefty, incredible placement, nasty slice serve and great angles) is a huge challenge for Nadal and puts him under constant pressure and out of his comfort zone all the time.
The other problem for Nadal is that, unlike against other players with huge serves he's faced there, he cannot afford staying 5 meters behind the baseline vs Gilles while returning serve as he is a competent S&V player and doesn't give him much time to chase down the volleys. Against someone like Rosol, Nadal still has enough time to run from side to side and deal with the powerful groundstrokes, but Muller robs him of time by attacking the net relentlessly.
And yes, Nadal is a much better baseliner, but when you play (again, a competent) serve & volleyer on grass, your superiority off the ground doesn't necessarily guarantee you success.
Roubaixcomp
Rookie
I noticed it I think first or 2nd point when he sliced a FH return. Don't think I have seen him do that his whole career. Djokovic was insanely good that day.
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
Yeh my memory of every point is sketchy, as ive never re-watched it. But i remember watching it, thinking ive never seen him play so poorly. Id need to look up the unforced error count, but he was shanking and hitting the net plenty, from memory.
Djokovic sure played good stuff also, i may add. But Nadal was beaten easier than ever from Djokovic, apart from Doha 2016.
Roubaixcomp
Rookie
If I recall Rafa turned up at the complex about 8 hours before the match which was unusual for him. Usually he turns up about 3 hours before the match. Apparently Djokovic when he heard how early Nadal had turned up knew he would win the match. Rafa at the time was not as confident in his game despite his on paper excellent run to the final. One wonders whether he would have beat Federer had he beat Tsitsipas.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
If Federer had been playing even remotely well, then no. A definite no.
Roubaixcomp
Rookie
That Federer loss to Tsitsipas was one of his most inexplicable of his career .
abmk
Bionic Poster
Only if you don't have an idea that 37.5 is very old in tennis and can lead to inconsistency
Roubaixcomp
Rookie
Tsitispas was very young though
abmk
Bionic Poster
Not really. He was on younger side, but not very young. You would expect top youngsters of an era to be able to beat a 37.5 yo ATG when he's playing inconsistent a chunk of the times atleast.
Maybe its the general weakness of 89-99 born that makes one think otherwise.
Roubaixcomp
Rookie
I take the point regarding inconsistency. Just the way Federer was playing I had him down to win the event that's why I said it was an inexplicable loss as just didn't see it coming at all at the time
mike danny
Bionic Poster
A guy aged 20.5 should be expected to beat a guy in his late 30's though.
Roubaixcomp
Rookie
Yes I tend to agree but at the time I felt Federer was winning the tournament. But yes you are correct.
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
Didn't you see the 2019 Wimbledon final where your idol outlasted his rival, six years younger than him, despite being almost 38 years old?
mike danny
Bionic Poster
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
Otacon
Hall of Fame
The most glaring example is the 1st set of the 2006 FO final.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
Fifth set tiebreak (which is what I assume the bolded is referring to) wasn't much of a choke or a mental collapse. Fed had simply given out physically by then and the errors he made in that tiebreak were ones that he was making all set anyway. I would give more credit to Djokovic for grabbing that last tiebreak.
Really, I think the extent of Federer's choking in the fifth set is often exaggerated. He choked much worse in the first and third set tiebreaks.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
pedro94
Semi-Pro
In the 3rd set he has not lost a single point on his serve until the tiebreak.
Mike Sams
G.O.A.T.
Why do you love the word "choke" so much? Have you ever played a sport?
Mike Sams
G.O.A.T.
Nadal didn't choke anything. He simply was defeated by a player who played better than he did in those moments. Thiem wasn't gifted anything by Nadal in their 2020 AO match.AO2012 was a mini-choke. It was one point, so maybe a bit overblown, it could have been the difference but he got broken back twice after that point so how much difference did that really make. It would have been a nerve-wracking affair till the last service game even if Nadal held then.
Holy sh*t I forgot about the Thiem 2020 match. That was horrible. The tiebreaks oh my god, complete choking fest, but Thiem did play really well from behind too. That was like the 3rd set vs Kyrgios in 2019 Acapulco but worse and repeated 3x in a row
Agree with WB2019. The only thing is I wouldn't call it a choke if it happened the entire match, he just played bad and tentative the whole time. The only time he let loose was in the last game of the match when Fed was serving for it, but it was too little too late. If he had won that game though, I think it really possible he could have turned the entire match around and won it.
Similar threads
