Towser83
G.O.A.T.
Ok a lot of people differ in opinions about a bad match up, recently we've seen two possible examples- Federer vs Nadal and Nadal vs Djokovic.
Personally for me what indicates the bad matchup element in the Federer vs nadal one is the contrast between the H2H and the overall playing level and achievements. Basically if you are much better against one player than you are generally in the game, or if you beat a guy regulary but fall short of that player generally, it's a sign of a bad match up.
To indicate this, Nadal was beating Federer on hardcourt right off the bat and never slipped more than a single match behind (Nadal fans will also point to a winning outdoor hard record although the sporadic nature of thse meetings and lack of any on courts like Cinci, Us Open make it still somewhat inconclusive for me) yet it took him a further 5 years to win a hardcourt slam while Federer was racking them up. Likewise Federer was winning many hardcourt masters and other titles while Nadal only picked up a few. So there is no question Federer was a much better HC player but struggled to beat Nadal. That is a match up issue.
Davydenko is a matchup issue for Nadal - he has a 6-1 winning record on hardcourt against him despite achieving far less than rafa on that surface. Equally, for a while Roddick seemed a bad matchup for Djokovic (Mardy Fish seems like a bad matchup for Murray) but I don't think Djokovic is a bad matchup for Nadal.
On hardcourt, Novak is superior in the H2H but also in overall titles and ability on the surface. The only place you could have a point is on clay where he beat Nadal twice last year despite not having performed as well as Nadal on clay over the years. BUT - he never beat him in those previous years. He only beat him last year when overall he WAS the best clay player in terms of performance, and only lost to an inspired Federer, not some journeyman. If he beat Nadal twice and then lost twice on clay to average players then I would think he might be a bad matchup for Nadal on clay, but in truth last year he was just better than everyone 90% of the time on any surface. It wasn't like the victories against Nadal were contrasted by losses all over the place to everyone else (not til post US Open anyway, and he didn't play Nadal post US Open)
Personally for me what indicates the bad matchup element in the Federer vs nadal one is the contrast between the H2H and the overall playing level and achievements. Basically if you are much better against one player than you are generally in the game, or if you beat a guy regulary but fall short of that player generally, it's a sign of a bad match up.
To indicate this, Nadal was beating Federer on hardcourt right off the bat and never slipped more than a single match behind (Nadal fans will also point to a winning outdoor hard record although the sporadic nature of thse meetings and lack of any on courts like Cinci, Us Open make it still somewhat inconclusive for me) yet it took him a further 5 years to win a hardcourt slam while Federer was racking them up. Likewise Federer was winning many hardcourt masters and other titles while Nadal only picked up a few. So there is no question Federer was a much better HC player but struggled to beat Nadal. That is a match up issue.
Davydenko is a matchup issue for Nadal - he has a 6-1 winning record on hardcourt against him despite achieving far less than rafa on that surface. Equally, for a while Roddick seemed a bad matchup for Djokovic (Mardy Fish seems like a bad matchup for Murray) but I don't think Djokovic is a bad matchup for Nadal.
On hardcourt, Novak is superior in the H2H but also in overall titles and ability on the surface. The only place you could have a point is on clay where he beat Nadal twice last year despite not having performed as well as Nadal on clay over the years. BUT - he never beat him in those previous years. He only beat him last year when overall he WAS the best clay player in terms of performance, and only lost to an inspired Federer, not some journeyman. If he beat Nadal twice and then lost twice on clay to average players then I would think he might be a bad matchup for Nadal on clay, but in truth last year he was just better than everyone 90% of the time on any surface. It wasn't like the victories against Nadal were contrasted by losses all over the place to everyone else (not til post US Open anyway, and he didn't play Nadal post US Open)