If Djokovic had gotten to the RG2011 final, would he have beaten Nadal??
- Thread starter -RF-
- Start date
M
monfed
Guest
Oh absolutely. Djokovic in straights or Djokovic in 4.
6-1 6-3 6-0
Banned
"Do you hate Rafael Nadal?
Yes
No
Extremley close, could go either way."
Yes
No
Extremley close, could go either way."
PrinceMoron
Legend
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RF20Lennon
Legend
Only if that stupid dropshot had gone in at 5-2 
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Probably but you never know. Nadal was defending like a backboard in that final.
M
monfed
Guest
Probably? :lol:
Perra,por favor!
Fed-Djokovic match was a rare occassion where you and your fellow Ralph brethren were praying for Fed, so please drop the BS,we've seen the mad celebration from the Nadal fans after the match was over in the match thread.
Oh and how Ralph plays Federer(especially on clay) is no indication of how he'd have played against Nole(especially given how Nole straight setted the bull in his own den in the previous two consecutive encounters especially Rome,where Ralph couldn't even beat a half-dead Nole). They are two completely different matchups for him.
Hood_Man
G.O.A.T.
Nadal's confidence was in tatters already, and coming up against the guy responsible for that, and dealing with the quicker than usual conditions... I think Novak would have pulled it off.
Obviously with "what-ifs" being what they are we'll never know, but Nadals level was shocking by his usual standards in that tournament.
I still can't believe Andujar didn't win that 3rd set :shock:
Obviously with "what-ifs" being what they are we'll never know, but Nadals level was shocking by his usual standards in that tournament.
I still can't believe Andujar didn't win that 3rd set :shock:
M
monfed
Guest
Yea, that was a dumb move by Fed. On the bright side though,Fed-Djoko was the greatest claycourt match in history.
M
monfed
Guest
You wish. :lol:
tennisMVP
Banned
The proof is all there on videotape. On top of that, Djokovic was playing flawlessly at 2012 Roland Garros, until he ran into Nadal.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
No, but I believe it would have been very close.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
I can sense that it pains you to know that the thread question doesn't matter since Djokovic didn't get to the final and Nadal won the title :lol:
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Djokovic was brilliant in beating Federer in the semi final, but in the Round of 16 he had to come back from 2 sets down to beat Seppi, and also had to save 4 match points in the fourth set against Tsonga in the quarter finals. That isn't flawless at all.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
It would have been a bloodbath.
But it makes no difference. It's all Fognini's fault anyway
All hail Fognini
N
NadalDramaQueen
Guest
It was the lesser of two evils. If Djokovic won that match versus Fed he might have been sitting on a CYGS at the end of 2011. That would damage Federer's legacy worse than an extra slam for Rafa.
It's time for Fed fans to face facts. At least Djokovic had the cojones to stand up to Rafa at the slams. Fed fails to put away sitter after sitter and he deserves all that he gets from Rafa fans.
Last edited by a moderator:
Prisoner of Birth
Banned
Match-up issue. Prime Federer would dogwalk prime Djokovic across all surfaces. 30 year-old Federer, on his worst surface, beat in-the-form-of-his-life-Djokovic.
So I suppose prime Agassi would school prime Federer since an "over the hill" 34-year-old Agassi took him to 5 sets at the U.S. Open in 2004 when Federer was in HIS prime?
Prisoner of Birth
Banned
Not really, because Agassi, one of the greatest players of all time, was playing on his best surface and he's renowned for playing great Tennis way into his 30s. But Federer should've probably got the job done in 4.
ETA : Also, I never said Djokovic should be embarassed. Federer's got the match-up advantage. Djokovic has done really well, considering.
Last edited:
Murrayfan31
Hall of Fame
Yep Djokovic would've won. Bad luck with having too many days off before facing Federer.
tennisMVP
Banned
Australian Open hardcourt is FAR AND AWAY Agassi's best surface. Not even close.
Federer got the job done in 4 sets a year later in the US Open final vs Agassi. After Agassi had played THREE five-setters prior to the final!
Oh, so when a MUCH OLDER Agassi is playing Federer, you refer to Agassi as "one of the greatest players of all time" but when Federer is playing Djokovic, you refer to him as a 30-year-old.
What a double standard
Prisoner of Birth
Banned
I was talking about Hard Courts. Anyway, Federer beat Agassi rather comfortably in 3 sets at the AO the same year.
tennisMVP
Banned
Obviously Djokovic would never have been able to beat prime Nadal. The question is, could he beat 2011 Nadal at Roland Garros? Too bad we'll never know. But we know he couldn't beat 2012 Nadal, that is for sure.
Prisoner of Birth
Banned
Agassi was on his best surface (Hard), Federer on his worst (Clay). Federer was in his prime, yes, but not at his peak (which was late 2005 and 2006). Djokovic was coming off of straight-setting the Clay GOAT Nadal, who is way, way, way better than Federer on Clay, but lost to Federer. I'm not necessarily saying Federer is better than Djokovic. This is actually a defense of Djokovic if you read it right. I'm talking match-ups.
Federer's W/L record at the French was just as good as Agassi's W/L record at the U.S. Open. Besides, has Agassi ever made 4-straight U.S. Open finals? No. Federer was more consistent at the French than Agassi ever was at the U.S. Open. Yet Federer gets a pass for being pushed by a well-past prime Agassi and but Djokovic doesn't.
So to suggest that Federer was some chump at the French (simply because he lost all the time to the greatest claycourter of all-time) is extremely disingenuous. Clay is Federer's "worst" surface by the tiniest of margins. Remove 1 man and Federer has 6 French Opens.
Ummm...a lot of people lose to Federer. Soderling beat Nadal at RG (the only man to do so, btw) then lost to Federer. Was THAT shocking? But somehow it's shocking that Federer beat Djokovic?
Last edited:
PSNELKE
Legend
Woulda, coulda, shoulda...
Cause beating Nadal at RG on his best surface is the same pair of shoes as beating him in 2 masters series events.
How the hell can you be 100% sure that he would have beaten Nadal?
N
NadalDramaQueen
Guest
I agree that a prime Fed wouldn't have much trouble with any form of Djokovic, but the same can't be said with regards to Nadal.
People like to bring up the "match up issue," but I can't believe it is that simple. Fed has had his chances in many of his losses to Nadal and has failed to capitalize. It gets old after awhile.
The thing that bothers me is that in many of their matches (even when Federer was older) is that Federer is capable of making Nadal look like any old chump for a given period. Then, one missed shot on a big point and you know that the match is over. It is a little pathetic.
Back to the issue of Djokovic vs. Nadal in the 2011 RG final, it was probably the best shot anyone ever had of taking down Nadal in a final there. Obviously, no one knows for sure how it would have gone down, but I would think even the *******s were worried.
tennisMVP
Banned
Yep because Agassi showed his age. Agassi after age 33 wasn't very consistent at the slams, to say the least. I mean, he lost to all kinds of players that he would have hammered in his prime.
Given the way the rest of 2011 turned out, it is as close to certain that Djoker would have beaten Nadal at the French. Take Wimbledon 2011 for example: Djoker's worst surface, Nadal's 2nd best. The result: Djoker put away Nadal, and demolished him especially in the 2nd set.
tennisMVP
Banned
Also, the NadalFederer h2h in non-slams is 10-8. Doesn't look like a "matchup" issue to me.
kishnabe
Talk Tennis Guru
If Djokovic had gotten to the 2006,07,08 RG final, how many RGs would Federer have?
To the Question....I have never seen Djokovic play like he did in 2011 in 2012. Nadal was very vulnerable that year on clay.....showed by how a old Federer was almost beating Nadal.
Djokovic would have won confortably.
To the Question....I have never seen Djokovic play like he did in 2011 in 2012. Nadal was very vulnerable that year on clay.....showed by how a old Federer was almost beating Nadal.
Djokovic would have won confortably.
N
NadalDramaQueen
Guest
I don't want to take anything away from how good Nadal is on clay, where a majority of their matches have been played. The fact is, the only way Federer has been able to beat Nadal is when he was playing better tennis by a large margin. Even then, Nadal is usually able to make the matches closer than they should be.
Any time their levels are similar, Nadal is always able to pull out the win. It gets old for Fed fans.
4-0 in sets won against Nadal on clay
2-0 in slams (both were finals)
6-0 in overall matches against Nadal in 2011
It's not exactly a stretch to suggest that Djokovic would have won. It took the greatest player of all-time to take down Djokovic. Other than that, from January to September, Djokovic was pretty much unbeatable.
Last edited:
tennisMVP
Banned
Well, they shouldn't worry. Everyone else in the top 10 has experienced the same thing. They all have a poor record vs Nadal. Even Tsonga, has only won 3 matches vs Nadal in 10 meetings. Tsonga lost 4 hardcourt matches in a row to Nadal, before Tsonga beat Nadal at the 2011 World Tour Finals in a close 3-setter (but then Nadal won their most recent hardcourt match - Miami 2012). Federer should be happy he didn't lose 4 hardcourt matches in a row to Nadal. Although I guess losing 2 straight hardcourt slam matches is just as bad or worse. But nothing is worse than Berdych - 11 straight losses (and only 3 of those meetings were on clay).
Bottom line, Federer is not alone. Federer is just another statistic.
Last edited:
kishnabe
Talk Tennis Guru
Obviously....that year Federer played his best clay court tennis of his life so far....and still came short. It annoying to see....rather Novak beat Federer and go on to beat Nadal.
tennisMVP
Banned
And also the 2012 Australian Open, when Federer was playing his best hardcourt tennis - 26 straight wins before he lost to Nadal.
M
monfed
Guest
Because a half dead Djokovic beat Nadal in Rome in straights which is slow clay.Nadal looked all at sea and was actually hitting lobs in that match to try something different but it wasn't working. It seemed at the time that he didn't have the answers(he himself admitted that). At RG, he was taken to 5 by Isner, could've easily gone to 4 against Andujar(had he not choked from 5-0 40-0 up), Fed was outplaying him for a lengthy period in the final and really should've won the first set.
We were robbed of a great final showdown where Djokovic could've become the undisputed king of clay(though he was the king of clay in 2011 in my book),damn you Fed!
N
NadalDramaQueen
Guest
The difference is that Federer is sitting on 17 slams and is possibly one of the most talented players of all time. He has it in him to beat Nadal without playing beyond his ordinary level, but is unable to do so. Maybe the statistics are skewed because of the clay and because they hardly met in slams that weren't played on clay when Federer was at his best. It is still terrible either way.
tennisMVP
Banned
Coulda woulda shoulda. Failed.
M
monfed
Guest
I was with you until this
I meant in 2011,not of all time. Hope that helps!
N
NadalDramaQueen
Guest
It depends on who you ask. According to Johnny Mac, Djokovic would have become the best clay courter of all time immediately after beating Nadal.
Similar threads
- Poll
