2005-2007 Nadal or 2022-2024 Alcaraz?

2005-2007 Nadal or 2022-2024 Alcaraz?

  • Total voters
    88
ForehandCross said:
What amazes me is that Posters vehemently arguing for Alcaraz were not even aware that Federer played Nadal at YEC 2006-07 yet they keep calling others fanboys.

On topic, I would put Rafael only inches ahead , but Carlos being better at HC slams does make his case strong enough. And to be fair I would not hold it against anybody putting him above Ralph.

Rafael, although was better on Clay and Grass. As far as Federer vs Alcaraz goes, Fraud would probably beat Alcaraz simply on the basis of matchups.

For Alcaraz, he played against Djokovic's style of Grass court or Clay court tennis. Shotmakers look great against consistent patterns of play until they meet another shot maker.

On grass, Fraud would be a bit too secure on his serve. He will be getting more free points on the serve, there would not be enough rally length for Alcaraz to turn it around. And unlike Djokovic's half baked aggression that he tried to wriggle out of WB 2024 F, Federer would be going with full FH , net attack and serve security. Add to that Alcaraz has a tendency to misfire when pressed Fred will be out of Alcaraz's reach on Grass comfortably

On clay, there will be no lefty FH to BH stuff but if Alcaraz can keep the court closed he will win at least 50% of the matches. Maybe not ones where Fraud played like a god, 2006 rome or even 2007 RG F but there would be victories for Alky boi easily.
Click to expand...
Don't you worry about me. Every stat is not in my mind.

Alcaraz four slams USO wimby rg wimby
Nadal three slams rg rg rg

No need to worry.
 
Aabye5 said:
No, I said it was unlikely that Roddick would have won even if he had reached the final when Fed wasn't there, e.g., it was unlikely that he would have beaten Rafa at Wimbledon during those 3 years where he made the final.
Click to expand...
Depends on form, probably 2007-2008 Nadal edges any Roddick but I'd strongly favour Roddick at his best over 2006'dal. I think Fed himself would agree there, I believe Bud Collins asked Fed after the 2006 final if that was his toughest encounter and he said no Roddick in 2004 was. Obvious Roddick in 2006-2008 wasn't near his best on grass and wouldn't win. Just like Nadal who DNP in 2009 due to tendinitis is unlikely to beat the Roddick who went 16-14 in the fifth with Fed.

Really not sure what your point even is tbh. That Roddick was never a legit player on grass? Seems like an odd hill to die on.
 
Aabye5 said:
No, I said it was unlikely that Roddick would have won even if he had reached the final when Fed wasn't there, e.g., it was unlikely that he would have beaten Rafa at Wimbledon during those 3 years where he made the final.
Click to expand...
Yeah even at Wimbledon it's not happening for Roddick against Nadal.
 
ForehandCross said:
What amazes me is that Posters vehemently arguing for Alcaraz were not even aware that Federer played Nadal at YEC 2006-07 yet they keep calling others fanboys.

On topic, I would put Rafael only inches ahead , but Carlos being better at HC slams does make his case strong enough. And to be fair I would not hold it against anybody putting him above Ralph.

Rafael, although was better on Clay and Grass. As far as Federer vs Alcaraz goes, Fraud would probably beat Alcaraz simply on the basis of matchups.

For Alcaraz, he played against Djokovic's style of Grass court or Clay court tennis. Shotmakers look great against consistent patterns of play until they meet another shot maker.

On grass, Fraud would be a bit too secure on his serve. He will be getting more free points on the serve, there would not be enough rally length for Alcaraz to turn it around. And unlike Djokovic's half baked aggression that he tried to wriggle out of WB 2024 F, Federer would be going with full FH , net attack and serve security. Add to that Alcaraz has a tendency to misfire when pressed Fred will be out of Alcaraz's reach on Grass comfortably

On clay, there will be no lefty FH to BH stuff but if Alcaraz can keep the court closed he will win at least 50% of the matches. Maybe not ones where Fraud played like a god, 2006 rome or even 2007 RG F but there would be victories for Alky boi easily.
Click to expand...
Djokovic's style of grasscourt tennis at his best was too much for everybody that he played for quite a while. Alcaraz didn't really play against that version. He played Djokovic when his grasscourt return numbers drastically declined from just the year prior (2023) and against a further declined version fresh off knee surgery (2024). I think 2022 Djokovic would have beaten 2023 Alcaraz, but at some point when you're entering your late 30s, your form is going to drop. I would bank on 31-35 year Federer and Djokovic being good enough to beat Alcaraz, especially his 2023 version.
 
Nadal was actually a very competent indoors players in his earlier years. He had strong showings in all 3 years there.

Toni here was pretty much detrimental much like he would be in his later years on grass. His development on the surface stopped. He was only able to reach 2010 and 2013 finals but that pretty much down to brute forcing rather than adapting to the surface which surely would have happened with Moya.
 
NatF said:
Roddick is certainly no Muller, Darcis, Rosol, Kyrgios, Brown etc...:-D
Click to expand...
Yeah if it was not in a grand slam final and he got Nadal under good circumstances Roddick could definitely get him like they did.
 
NoleFam said:
Djokovic's style of grasscourt tennis at his best was too much for everybody that he played for quite a while. Alcaraz didn't really play against that version. He played Djokovic when his grasscourt return numbers drastically declined from just the year prior (2023) and against a further declined version fresh off knee surgery (2024). I think 2022 Djokovic would have beaten 2023 Alcaraz, but at some point when you're entering your late 30s, your form is going to drop. I would bank on 31-35 year Federer and Djokovic being good enough to beat Alcaraz, especially his 2023 version.
Click to expand...

I concur I was talking more of the style he played with in 2023-24.
 
clout said:
Nah I think other than Fedal, Alcaraz is clearly miles better than everyone else from 2005-2007. He's already winning regularly against guys today who have a direct analogue to that era (Medvedev=Roddick, Zverev=Nalbandian/Safin, Rublev=Davydenko/Blake, Stefanos=Ferrero, Ruud=Coria, etc.)
Click to expand...

Ehh. Roddick would beat him on grass (at least 2005 Roddick would easy before he turned into a dumb pusher ) . Safin would blister him on hards. Davydenko would blister him on hards. Ferrer beats him on clay probably. Hewitt beats him on hards. 2007 Djoker whips him on hards. Maybe even beats him at Wimbledon.
 
nadal on clay by a big margin
nadal on grass clearly so
alcaraz on outdoor HC (but not at AO) clearly so
nadal might actually be better on indoor HC funnily.

overall, definitely nadal by a significant margin

alcaraz is the better all court player, but doesn't have the firm base of insane defense+brilliant+solid groundstrokes that nadal did.
 
clout said:
Nah I think other than Fedal, Alcaraz is clearly miles better than everyone else from 2005-2007. He's already winning regularly against guys today who have a direct analogue to that era (Medvedev=Roddick, Zverev=Nalbandian/Safin, Rublev=Davydenko/Blake, Stefanos=Ferrero, Ruud=Coria, etc.)
Click to expand...

roddick >> medvedev
safin >> zverev
and of course there was hewitt too

Coria >> Ruud

Alcaraz is at best hewitt/safin/roddick level
 
Id go with Rafa.

In some ways they are alike, early bloomers, best on clay/grass,very inconsistent on HC.

I often talk about the Rafa-factor, but here we have the Federer-factor. Nadal was a very good grass player back then, but he was up against absolutely peak Federer W 2006/2007, which made it nearly impossible to win. I dont believe for a second Alcaraz would beat 2006/2007 Federer on grass.

I have never really understood Rafas little success in HC slams pre 2009. Some people say he didnt peak on HC before 2009, but it doesnt make sense. He beat Roger in 2004, and he won 2 HC masters and reached Miami final already in 2005.
 
Last edited:
It took the basically greatest grasscourter ever to stop Nadal from having 5 majors and 2 channel slams by the age of 21 :-D

Such a freak of nature. Alcaraz has some similar freaky qualities but he is not quite the same single-minded freight train that Nadal was at the same age.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSH
Subway Tennis said:
It took the basically greatest grasscourter ever to stop Nadal from having 5 majors and 2 channel slams by the age of 21 :-D

Such a freak of nature. Alcaraz has some similar freaky qualities but he is not quite the same single-minded freight train that Nadal was at the same age.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Federer-factor. Alcaraz would also be without W titles if he played the Roger of 2003-2007.
 
Jonas78 said:
Id go with Rafa.

In some ways they are alike, early bloomers, best on clay/grass,very inconsistent on HC.

I often talk about the Rafa-factor, but here we have the Federer-factor. Nadal was a very good grass player back then, but he was up against absolutely peak Federer W 2006/2007, which made it nearly impossible to win. I dont believe for a second Alcaraz would beat 2006/2007 Federer on grass.

I have never really understood Rafas little success in HC slams pre 2009. Some people say he didnt peak on HC before 2009, but it doesnt make sense. He beat Roger in 2004, and he won 2 HC masters and reached Miami final already in 2005.
Click to expand...
Again wrong.

Alcaraz won queens in 2023 and was beating everyone save Djokovic in 3 or 4 sets. In 2024, he had 1 match loss and went to five with tiafoe.

Nadal went to fifth twice in 2007 and lost set 1 in semis to Djokovic who withdrew in the third.

You might want to add Roger excuse but I would not allow this logically. Raz has shown greater success than rafail Nadal on fast surfaces because he is not one surface pony.
 
The wins are not discounted because of some freak luck of avoiding x player. This is same thing fed fan did in hypothetical removing Nadal at rg and giving them all the wins.
 
Nadal's first title itself should come in 2008 in queens. Didn't even make a final of queens until 2008.

Raz just shows up and wins

Some things are in the blood.
 
Carlos Alcaraz is very good on grass, especially when considering his relatively short career on the surface. His strong serve, aggressive playing style, and ability to dominate shorter rallies make him a force to be reckoned with, as evidenced by his two consecutive Wimbledon titles in 2023 and 2024.

Here's a more detailed look at Alcaraz's grass court prowess:

Serve Performance:
Alcaraz excels at serving on grass, winning a high percentage of first-serve points and demonstrating a strong ability to save break points. His serve is a significant weapon, particularly on the shorter rallies that are common on grass.

Dominance in Shorter Rallies:
Alcaraz's game style, which emphasizes aggression and a first-strike approach, is well-suited for the shorter rallies often seen on grass. He's particularly strong in the 0-4 shot range, where he wins a large percentage of points.

First-Serve Strategy:
Alcaraz utilizes a strategy of hitting his first serve to the deuce court wide and body, which helps to open up the court for his aggressive style.

Aggressive Playstyle:
His aggressive, first-strike approach, combined with his strong serve, gives him a distinct advantage on grass, where shorter rallies and a fast pace are common.

Variety:
Alcaraz's ability to play a variety of shots, including drop shots, is also advantageous on grass, where the slick surface makes it harder to track down quick, deceptive shots.

High Success Rate:
Alcaraz's win-loss record on grass is impressive, especially considering the relative youth of his career on the surface. He has already demonstrated the ability to win on grass in multiple Grand Slam events.

Alcaraz's success on grass is not just about his physical attributes, but also his tactical awareness and his ability to adapt his game to the specific conditions of the surface. His ability to dominate shorter rallies, along with his strong serve and aggressive style, makes him a formidable player on grass.
 
nolefam_2024 said:
Again wrong.

Alcaraz won queens in 2023 and was beating everyone save Djokovic in 3 or 4 sets. In 2024, he had 1 match loss and went to five with tiafoe.

Nadal went to fifth twice in 2007 and lost set 1 in semis to Djokovic who withdrew in the third.

You might want to add Roger excuse but I would not allow this logically. Raz has shown greater success than rafail Nadal on fast surfaces because he is not one surface pony.
Click to expand...
Well not sure i agree.

Rafa never won WTF (neither has Carlo), and didnt win HC slam before 2009, but again, he reached Miami final at 18y, and won 2 HC masters at 19.

The only one to stop him from winning 2xW aged 20/21 was peakiest peak Federer.

I definetly wont define that as a one surface pony.
 
Jonas78 said:
Well not sure i agree.

Rafa never won WTF (neither has Carlo), and didnt win HC slam before 2009, but again, he reached Miami final at 18y, and won 2 HC masters at 19.

The only one to stop him from winning 2xW aged 20/21 was peakiest peak Federer.

I definetly wont define that as a one surface pony.
Click to expand...
Makes zero sense to me that only Federer stopped him. Peskiest and all are empty hollow words to me. Federer's best year on grass was 2004. Not 2007.

Federer on grass is nowhere as unbeatable as Nadal on clay. He is still great and if Nadal has beaten fed then it would be huge deal but just because Nadal failed , taking raz wins away is of no sense .

I have not commented on indoors yet. On hc slams , raz was able to reach semis and finals far earlier than Nadal can hope for and unlucky for many, there is no Federer excuse here. I will say no excuse for hard courts at all.

Nadal simply enjoyed a favorable match up vs Federer than any other player. But that means nothing when he is not even reaching to fed.
 
Nadal for most of his career is one surface pony. Between 2008 to 2013 he was genuinely a threat for all surfaces. Even when I ignore his grass failures in 2012/2013.

Question doesn't include 2008 to 2013 time frame.
 
I like the year 2013 when Nadal goes 3 masters and usopen on hard courts. Not sure raz will have such year any time soon. Apart from that , Nadal has never gone 2 masters and 1 slam on non clay surfaces any other year.

Yes anyone can throw the same argument in fedkovic fans faces saying fedkovic didn't do same on clay.

2013 is far away right now. Nadal was 26 full then.
 
nolefam_2024 said:
Makes zero sense to me that only Federer stopped him. Peskiest and all are empty hollow words to me. Federer's best year on grass was 2004. Not 2007.

Federer on grass is nowhere as unbeatable as Nadal on clay. He is still great and if Nadal has beaten fed then it would be huge deal but just because Nadal failed , taking raz wins away is of no sense .

I have not commented on indoors yet. On hc slams , raz was able to reach semis and finals far earlier than Nadal can hope for and unlucky for many, there is no Federer excuse here. I will say no excuse for hard courts at all.

Nadal simply enjoyed a favorable match up vs Federer than any other player. But that means nothing when he is not even reaching to fed.
Click to expand...
As ive said earlier its a mystery to me that he didnt win a HC slam before 2009. He obviously had peaked, winning 4 HC masters and reaching another 3 finals and 5 SFs before he won AO in 2009. So i agree with you on this. But i think winning 4 HC masters in 4 years doesn't qualify as a won surface pony.

On grass Federer simply was mainly untouchable from 2003-2012. Huge slump in 2010 and semi slump in 2008 (season stats support this, losing to lots of players he usually didnt lose to). 2011 loss i guess was simply Federers "Rafa-Soderling 2009" blunder (Noles is maybe the Nishikori loss?). Even Nole couldnt beat Federer on grass before he was well past 30.
 
Jonas78 said:
As ive said earlier its a mystery to me that he didnt win a HC slam before 2009. He obviously had peaked, winning 4 HC masters and reaching another 3 finals and 5 SFs before he won AO in 2009. So i agree with you on this. But i think winning 4 HC masters in 4 years doesn't qualify as a won surface pony.

On grass Federer simply was mainly untouchable from 2003-2012. Huge slump in 2010 and semi slump in 2008 (season stats support this, losing to players he usually didnt lose to). 2011 loss i guess was simply Federers "Rafa-Soderling 2009" blunder. Even Nole couldnt beat Federer on grass before he was well past 30.
Click to expand...
What you are doing is changing the argument. The question is about their ages till 2007 and 2024. So go one year back and he has 3 hc masters only and zero slams sf.

Federer being untouchable to rest makes no difference because there are very few times two or three players are at near 60% games win rate. No one else was close to fed. Who was going to stop him ? Roddick or Hewitt?

And let's also not make big deal about Djokovic couldn't beat fed..they played literally 1 match till 2012. Djokovic beat him 3 times afterwards.

In short , alcaraz has already reached better level than Federer opponents had reached between 2004 to 2007. All we have left is Federer vs raz hypothetical and I have maintained raz can beat fed on grass during this time. No one else like Roddicks of this the world have return of serve to challenge fed.

Raz went 59 and 58% games won on grass in 2023 and 2024 respectively. Roddicks and Hewitt's were in 55 to 57 range. Fed himself in 2006/07 was at 61 and 59 very close to raz range.


I would say NO one is unbeatable save Nadal on clay for few years .
 
Federer era was pretty weak and very comparable to Djokovic second peak era.

To say no one was able to beat fed then just shows his era weakness..
 
nolefam_2024 said:
What you are doing is changing the argument. The question is about their ages till 2007 and 2024. So go one year back and he has 3 hc masters only and zero slams sf.

Federer being untouchable to rest makes no difference because there are very few times two or three players are at near 60% games win rate. No one else was close to fed. Who was going to stop him ? Roddick or Hewitt?

And let's also not make big deal about Djokovic couldn't beat fed..they played literally 1 match till 2012. Djokovic beat him 3 times afterwards.

In short , alcaraz has already reached better level than Federer opponents had reached between 2004 to 2007. All we have left is Federer vs raz hypothetical and I have maintained raz can beat fed on grass during this time. No one else like Roddicks of this the world have return of serve to challenge fed.

Raz went 59 and 58% games won on grass in 2023 and 2024 respectively. Roddicks and Hewitt's were in 55 to 57 range. Fed himself in 2006/07 was at 61 and 59 very close to raz range.


I would say NO one is unbeatable save Nadal on clay for few years .
Click to expand...
Not changing the argument. I stand by my point that Nadal losing to peak Fed in W finals 06/07, and Rafa winning 2 HC masters at 19, reaching a final at 18, dont make Rafa a one surface pony.

Except the USO title vs Ruud in 2022, Alcaraz has also struggled at HC slams, failing to reach a final the last 4 slams.

Edit: HC masters ofc
 
Jonas78 said:
Not changing the argument. I stand by my point that Nadal losing to peak Fed in W finals 06/07, and Rafa winning 2 HC slams at 19, reaching a final at 18, dont make Rafa a one surface pony.

Except the USO title vs Ruud in 2022, Alcaraz has also struggled at HC slams.
Click to expand...
You mean 2 hc masters for sure. It's Freudian slip and I will allow it.

I agree Nadal is not one surface pony. If he had not dared to get in goat conversation, we would be very fair to him. But he bullied his way via clay. And now every comparison is with fedkovic. And compared to THEM he is one surface pony for most years..
 
nolefam_2024 said:
You mean 2 hc masters for sure. It's Freudian slip and I will allow it.

I agree Nadal is not one surface pony. If he had not dared to get in goat conversation, we would be very fair to him. But he bullied his way via clay. And now every comparison is with fedkovic. And compared to THEM he is one surface pony for most years..
Click to expand...
Ofc masters, trying to satisfy my 4y old son at the same time lol.

Sure its clay skewed, been in thousands of arguments with Rafa fans on this. Especially that Rafa often didnt go deep enough to face Fed in Feds playground, while Fed more often reached Rafa and lost in Rafas playground. The 3-0 at AOn pre 2017 is what it is though, Rafa got into his head. I would say Sincaraz rivalry so far has similarities.
 
nolefam_2024 said:
Nadal's first title itself should come in 2008 in queens. Didn't even make a final of queens until 2008.

Raz just shows up and wins

Some things are in the blood.
Click to expand...
The difference between the Queen's club tournaments held in 2006 - 2007 and 2023 is that there weren’t a week gap between the French Open final and the start of the Queen’s before 2015. Rafa won FO in 2006 and 2007, he was tired for the Queen’s held the next week.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSH
octobrina10 said:
The difference between the Queen's club tournaments held in 2006 - 2007 and 2023 is that there weren’t a week gap between the French Open final and the start of the Queen’s before 2015. Rafa won FO in 2006 and 2007, he was tired for the Queen’s held the next week.
Click to expand...
Ok that is not on alcaraz at all. These things will keep changing. Masters have become 2 weeks long and that is draining as well. You play what if I will play what if.

2 weeks long masters give no time to current players anymore. It's actually worse for them.
 
nolefam_2024 said:
Ok that is not on alcaraz at all. These things will keep changing. Masters have become 2 weeks long and that is draining as well. You play what if I will play what if.

2 weeks long masters give no time to current players anymore. It's actually worse for them.
Click to expand...
You declared that “[Rafa] Didn't even make a final of queens until 2008”, but “Raz just shows up and wins.”
I just explained you that Rafa was in a different situation 15+ years ago than Alcaraz was in 2023.
...
 
nolefam_2024 said:
Nadal's first title itself should come in 2008 in queens. ...
Click to expand...
I just now noticed your sentence I quoted. The Queen's title came in 2008!

london-rafael-nadal-of-spain-celebrates-with-the-trophy-after-he-won-the-mens-singles-final.jpg

...
 
octobrina10 said:
The Queen's has just been a Wimbledon warm-up tournament. (It was an ATP 250 tournament before 2015.)
...
Click to expand...
Now again changing the argument.

We are talking about Nadal FAILURE on grass, where he didn't win wimbledon and then next best was queens. Now saying its worthless compared to wimby, of course it is worth less but not worthless. Its another pt in alcaraz favor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hitman
Young Nadal v Young Alcaraz - The story so far
2
Replies
68
Views
4K
DSH
DSH
beard
  • Poll Poll
New or old master of the masters?
2 3 4
Replies
187
Views
9K
mr tonyz
M
AnOctorokForDinner
  • Poll Poll
2022-23 Alcaraz vs 2001-02 Hewitt
Replies
15
Views
1K
Jav
Jav
G
Alcaraz vs. Big 3: Season-by-season breakdown !
5 6 7
Replies
303
Views
4K
Angrybirdstar
A
Spencer Gore
Alcaraz vs Big 3 Season at Age 21
2
Replies
76
Views
3K
KingCarlitos
KingCarlitos
Back
Top