2008 Wimbledon final Nadal vs 2011 Wimbledon final Djokovic on grass, who wins?

[Backspin1183]

Novak Djokovic, riding high on confidence, defeated Rafael Nadal in two closely fought matches on HCs, then straight setted the Spaniard twice on clay in 2011 before beating him for the first time in a slam in the final of Wimbledon 2011, in 4 sets. That was peak Djokovic on grass (although he said he played better in 2013).

What if that peak Djokovic on grass takes on the 2008 Nadal?

Nadal battled peak Federer on grass in 3 straight Wimbledon finals, in 2006, 2007 and 2008. This younger version of Nadal was hell bent on proving himself on surfaces other than clay. He also moved faster than his 2013 version and had better stamina.

So, who wins if the Djokovic of 2011 Wimbledon final takes on the Nadal that won the greatest match ever played on grass against in form prime Federer, the 2008 Wimbledon final?

Who's your pick, and why?

 

[Kenshin]

For Nadal even on grass, I feel Djokovic will be a tough matchup. However. Nadal was mentally defeated before the final in 2011 due to his consecutive losses to him. If we think about the peak performances on grass, 2008 Nadal will beat 2011 Djokovic. I think 2007 version will defeat him too.

 

[The Dark Knight]

Nadal has since figured out Joker.

Nole will never win again. Nole can now join Roger.

 

[Backspin1183]

Nadal has since figured out Joker.

Nole will never win again. Nole can now join Roger.

What are you talking about, Batman??????

This hypothetical BO5 match on grass is between the Djokovic of 2011 Wimbledon and the 2008 Wimbledon version of Nadal. Nothing to do with their 2012, 2013 versions.

 

[The Dark Knight]

What are you talking about, Batman??????

This hypothetical BO5 match on grass is between the Djokovic of 2011 Wimbledon and the 2008 Wimbledon version of Nadal. Nothing to do with their 2012, 2013 versions.

Can't really do it.....because the difference is Nadals mental game he has since figured Joker out.....how can you create a fictional match but not bring up the mental aspect.....the better question is why would you want to? Who cares? What's the point?

 

[Tenez101]

Lol, the guy who was able to take down grass-god Federer in the final. No question.

 

[Tenez101]

Nadal has since figured out Joker.

Nole will never win again. Nole can now join Roger.

Good luck with that prediction.

 

[6-3 6-0]

I think NDjokovic 2011 will take 2008 RNadal out since he had that mental edge which RNadal had over RFederer during 2008, yet he was pushed to 9-7 in the fifth.

So, in a hypothetical match like this, it all depends on who is mentally tougher on the particular day.

 

[Backspin1183]

Can't really do it.....because the difference is Nadals mental game he has since figured Joker out.....how can you create a fictional match but not bring up the mental aspect.....the better question is why would you want to? Who cares? What's the point?

What's the point? Simple, who is better on grass, peak Djokovic or peak Nadal. The 2008 Nadal didn't have a mental block against Djokovic and looked far more motivated than in 2011.

I created this thread to know the opinion of TW posters on this match-up.

 

[Backspin1183]

Good luck with that prediction.

I know LOL Djokovic and Nadal are so gonna beat each other in their future matches too.

 

[The Dark Knight]

What's the point? Simple, who is better on grass, peak Djokovic or peak Nadal. The 2008 Nadal didn't have a mental block against Djokovic and looked far more motivated than in 2011.

I created this thread to know the opinion of TW posters on this match-up.

Nadals "peak" is when he figures a certain player out.

Against Joker Nadals "peak" is right now because Nadals Mental game is every bit as important as his physical game.

In any event it would not prove who is better on grass anyway.

 

[NatF]

Nadal of 07 and 08 beats Djokovic of 2011 in 4 sets.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

Nadal was in peak form in 08, while still in his prime in 11.

Nadal defeated prime Federer, not peak Federer at W 08.

Djokovic defeated prime Nadal, not peak Nadal at W 11.

Peak for peak, I will give it to Nadal in four tightly contested sets. He is the better grass court player between the two overall if you look at their careers.

 

[Chico]

Djokovic of course.

I don't think it is even a question worth debating.

The poll results just confirm how much is Djokovic underrated and Nadal overrated here.

BTW another sneaky attempt from the same Nadal fan to stir flame war between Federer and Djokovic fans. Please don't fall for it.

 

[Who Am I?]

You guys have to realise that Novak at his absolute best is a terrible matchup for any version of Nadal on any surface, so taking that into consideration I would think Novak would win in 5 sets.

However, if we are talking about Federer of 2008 vs Novak of 2011, then Roger would win in 4 sets.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Djokovic of course.

I don't think it is even a question worth debating.

The poll results just confirm how much is Djokovic underrated and Nadal overrated here.

BTW another sneaky attempt from the same Nadal fan to stir flame war between Federer and Djokovic fans. Please don't fall for it.

Seriously dude. It's old now. Maybe people actually know what they're talking about. Peak Nadal is better than Djokovic on grass, it's not even really a discussion, which the poll confirms.

 

[Wim]

Without Novaks cheating shoes he will never win Wimbledon.
But Rafa would have beaten him the way Rafa played in 2008 anyway.

 

[Steve0904]

Nadal of 2008 wins IMO. He is a better grass court player IMO, and while Djokovic is a tough matchup for Nadal, I think Nadal was kind of defeated before the final in 2011. If we take away the mental edge that Novak built up and just pit them against each other without any other factors, I believe Nadal wins. He might even win in 2007 form as well.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

I'd guess Nadal but naturally it's hard to know.

Would elaborate but lazy peace out yo and thanks for all the shoes BRAP BRAP

 

[Incognito]

Nadal of 2008 wins IMO. He is a better grass court player IMO, and while Djokovic is a tough matchup for Nadal, I think Nadal was kind of defeated before the final in 2011. If we take away the mental edge that Novak built up and just pit them against each other without any other factors, I believe Nadal wins. He might even win in 2007 form as well.

I don't know, maybe it's just me, but 2007 Rafa actually played better from the baseline compared to the 2008 version. After winning the 4th set, I though Nadal was on his way to win his first wimbledon but Roger served like a madman in that 5th set and that's what made the difference.

Anyway 2007-2008 Nadal will beat any djokovic at wimbledon.

 

[NatF]

I don't know, maybe it's just me, but 2007 Rafa actually played better from the baseline compared to the 2008 version. After winning the 4th set, I though Nadal was on his way to win his first wimbledon but Roger served like a madman in that 5th set and that's what made the difference.

Anyway 2007-2008 Nadal will beat any djokovic at wimbledon.

This. 2007 Rafa was better from the baseline but 2008 served better.

 

[tipsa...don'tlikehim!]

Djokovic of course.

I don't think it is even a question worth debating.

The poll results just confirm how much is Djokovic underrated and Nadal overrated here.

BTW another sneaky attempt from the same Nadal fan to stir flame war between Federer and Djokovic fans. Please don't fall for it.

i can't see Federer in the poll

 

[RF20Lennon]

Oooh this is a good one! I really don't know but if I was a betting man maybe Rafa in 5 because of the sheer will he had.

 

[10is]

LOL! Federer's was hardly even in his prime let alone at his peak in 2008. Had he played his best tennis in the Final he would have beaten Nadal in straights (or perhaps 4 sets). He was way off that whole summer, playing dismally. His BH was horrible and he was constantly was hitting his FH long.

Nadal himself was only marginally better than a subpar Federer -- both of them played at a higher level during their '07 encounter (and Federer even higher in their '06 match).

In the '08 Final, both Federer and Nadal faced 13 break points each. Based on the YTD averages they should have saved 67% of them. That’s exactly what Federer did. He saved 9 breakpoints and got broken 4 times. Whereas, Nadal managed to escape an unsual 13 breakpoints and got broken only once. Imagine how many times he would be this lucky when faced with 14 breakpoints?

What if Nadal was broken about 67% of the time. Clearly even a subpar Federer would have won in straight sets.

Secondly, Federer made 52 errors to Nadal's 27 (almost twice). Granted Roger makes more errors, but this is still way too many for him (especially on account of the large majority of them being egregiously "unforced" and quite a few being on Break Points) countervening the "Federer was in his grass prime in '08" myth that Nadal fans like to tout. What if he only made, say even a nominal 40 or so errors? Chances are he would have won the match.

The untold story of the match is this. Roger enters Wimbledon with several uncharacteristically poor performances (mono comprised fitness notwithstanding), makes twice the unforced errors, Nadal escapes out of all but one of his 14 breakpoints, and still Federer only very narrowly looses the longest match in Wimbledon history, 9-7 in the fifth set.

Nadal played a less error strewn and more competent match in '11 surpassing his '08 effort, which if not for Federer's sub-par display buoying Nadal's perceived competitiveness would have been a 3 or 4 set rout against any peak/prime version of Federer or Djokovic.

 

[tipsa...don'tlikehim!]

LOL! Federer's was hardly even in his prime let alone at his peak in 2008. Had he played his best tennis in the Final he would have beaten Nadal in straights (or perhaps 4 sets). He was way off that whole summer, playing dismally. His BH was horrible and he was constantly was hitting his FH long.

Nadal himself was only marginally better than a subpar Federer -- both of them played at a higher level during their '07 encounter (and Federer even higher in their '06 match).

In the '08 Final, both Federer and Nadal faced 13 break points each. Based on the YTD averages they should have saved 67% of them. That’s exactly what Federer did. He saved 9 breakpoints and got broken 4 times. Whereas, Nadal managed to escape an unsual 13 breakpoints and got broken only once. Imagine how many times he would be this lucky when faced with 14 breakpoints?

What if Nadal was broken about 67% of the time. Clearly even a subpar Federer would have won in straight sets.

Secondly, Federer made 52 errors to Nadal's 27 (almost twice). Granted Roger makes more errors, but this is still way too many for him (especially on account of the large majority of them being egregiously "unforced" and quite a few being on Break Points) countervening the "Federer was in his grass prime in '08" myth that Nadal fans like to tout. What if he only made, say even a nominal 40 or so errors? Chances are he would have won the match.

The untold story of the match is this. Roger enters Wimbledon with several uncharacteristically poor performances (mono comprised fitness notwithstanding), makes twice the unforced errors, Nadal escapes out of all but one of his 14 breakpoints, and still Federer only very narrowly looses the longest match in Wimbledon history, 9-7 in the fifth set.

Nadal played a less error strewn and more competent match in '11 surpassing his '08 effort, which if not for Federer's sub-par display buoying Nadal's perceived competitiveness would have been a 3 or 4 set rout against any peak/prime version of Federer or Djokovic.

if if if if if if bullsh*t again ? :lol:
if Nadal never existed you would be the happiest woman on Earth everyone knows that :lol:
But he existed, won 13 grand slams so far, beat your idol 21 times, deal with it will you ?

 

[Backspin1183]

LOL! Federer's was hardly even in his prime let alone at his peak in 2008. Had he played his best tennis in the Final he would have beaten Nadal in straights (or perhaps 4 sets). He was way off that whole summer, playing dismally. His BH was horrible and he was constantly was hitting his FH long.

Nadal himself was only marginally better than a subpar Federer -- both of them played at a higher level during their '07 encounter (and Federer even higher in their '06 match).

In the '08 Final, both Federer and Nadal faced 13 break points each. Based on the YTD averages they should have saved 67% of them. That’s exactly what Federer did. He saved 9 breakpoints and got broken 4 times. Whereas, Nadal managed to escape an unsual 13 breakpoints and got broken only once. Imagine how many times he would be this lucky when faced with 14 breakpoints?

What if Nadal was broken about 67% of the time. Clearly even a subpar Federer would have won in straight sets.

Secondly, Federer made 52 errors to Nadal's 27 (almost twice). Granted Roger makes more errors, but this is still way too many for him (especially on account of the large majority of them being egregiously "unforced" and quite a few being on Break Points) countervening the "Federer was in his grass prime in '08" myth that Nadal fans like to tout. What if he only made, say even a nominal 40 or so errors? Chances are he would have won the match.

The untold story of the match is this. Roger enters Wimbledon with several uncharacteristically poor performances (mono comprised fitness notwithstanding), makes twice the unforced errors, Nadal escapes out of all but one of his 14 breakpoints, and still Federer only very narrowly looses the longest match in Wimbledon history, 9-7 in the fifth set.

Nadal played a less error strewn and more competent match in '11 surpassing his '08 effort, which if not for Federer's sub-par display buoying Nadal's perceived competitiveness would have been a 3 or 4 set rout against any peak/prime version of Federer or Djokovic.

Thanks for your assesment of the 2008 Wimby final, Nadal fangirl (your avatar lol)

Your tennis IQ must be much higher than Bjorn Borg's. The Swede legend was there in person to the watch the Fedal '08 final and said it was the best final he'd ever seen. And then of course, many tennis experts and critics agreed with Borg that it indeed was the greatest match ever played on a tennis court.

Federer made 52 errors? Wow! and guess what? he hit 90 winners too! I repeat, 90 winners! This was against Nadal who was moving very fast and very difficult to hit through.

The difference between the Nadal of 2007 and 2008 was the serve! In 2008 when this match came on TV and I saw Nadal serve, I knew he was going to win this time.

Well, thanks anyways for your expert contribution to the thread.

Good day!

 

[HoyaPride]

if if if if if if bullsh*t again ? :lol:
if Nadal never existed you would be the happiest woman on Earth everyone knows that :lol:
But he existed, won 13 grand slams so far, beat your idol 21 times, deal with it will you ?

"The word 'if' should not even be in the Dictionary."

-Michael Jordan

 

[tipsa...don'tlikehim!]

"The word 'if' should not even be in the Dictionary."

-Michael Jordan

Agree with Jordan.

 

[HoyaPride]

LOL! Federer's was hardly even in his prime let alone at his peak in 2008. Had he played his best tennis in the Final he would have beaten Nadal in straights (or perhaps 4 sets). He was way off that whole summer, playing dismally. His BH was horrible and he was constantly was hitting his FH long.

Nadal himself was only marginally better than a subpar Federer -- both of them played at a higher level during their '07 encounter (and Federer even higher in their '06 match).

In the '08 Final, both Federer and Nadal faced 13 break points each. Based on the YTD averages they should have saved 67% of them. That’s exactly what Federer did. He saved 9 breakpoints and got broken 4 times. Whereas, Nadal managed to escape an unsual 13 breakpoints and got broken only once. Imagine how many times he would be this lucky when faced with 14 breakpoints?

What if Nadal was broken about 67% of the time. Clearly even a subpar Federer would have won in straight sets.

Secondly, Federer made 52 errors to Nadal's 27 (almost twice). Granted Roger makes more errors, but this is still way too many for him (especially on account of the large majority of them being egregiously "unforced" and quite a few being on Break Points) countervening the "Federer was in his grass prime in '08" myth that Nadal fans like to tout. What if he only made, say even a nominal 40 or so errors? Chances are he would have won the match.

The untold story of the match is this. Roger enters Wimbledon with several uncharacteristically poor performances (mono comprised fitness notwithstanding), makes twice the unforced errors, Nadal escapes out of all but one of his 14 breakpoints, and still Federer only very narrowly looses the longest match in Wimbledon history, 9-7 in the fifth set.

Nadal played a less error strewn and more competent match in '11 surpassing his '08 effort, which if not for Federer's sub-par display buoying Nadal's perceived competitiveness would have been a 3 or 4 set rout against any peak/prime version of Federer or Djokovic.

The best analysis of the 2007 and 2008 Finals is here.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=2508203&postcount=1

Federer actually entered Wimbledon on a hot streak. If you listen to the BBC's commentary during the warmup (with Becker and Henman), they talk about Federer breezing through Halle and destroying a rejuvenated Safin in the semis, and even say he was "in tip top form."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4vdWxZvx-I

 

[Morj]

Who is better on grass? Nadal of course.

Who would win the hypothetical matchup? Djokovic... I mean come on, its not like the Nadal at the '11 final was some washed up guy long past his grass court peak.

He was the defending champion coming off the best year of his life, and he made it to the final so he clearly was in high-grass court form. It's just that Novak was a bad matchup for him.

If you're using the '08 version to take out the mental edge that Djokovic had at the '11 final I would argue that Djokovic would still win.

This is because while Nadal certainly felt pressure having lost 4 straight matches to him, thats not exactly an excuse considering Djokovic was in his first Wimbledon final, playing a 2-time champion/defending champion, who he had never beaten in a grand slam up till this point. So they both had mental pressure in that situation.

 

[NatF]

The best analysis of the 2007 and 2008 Finals is here.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=2508203&postcount=1

Federer actually entered Wimbledon on a hot streak. If you listen to the BBC's commentary during the warmup (with Becker and Henman), they talk about Federer breezing through Halle and destroying a rejuvenated Safin in the semis, and even say he was "in tip top form."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4vdWxZvx-I

So essentially, the level of play in both matches was the same.

 

[10is]

Federer actually entered Wimbledon on a hot streak. If you listen to the BBC's commentary during the warmup (with Becker and Henman), they talk about Federer breezing through Halle and destroying a rejuvenated Safin in the semis, and even say he was "in tip top form."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4vdWxZvx-I

"Rejuvenated" (LOL!) "grass is for cows" & "I would like to thank the AELTC for slowing courts down" Safin. Hilarious! As I have oft stated, merely looking at individual opponents and judging their form in isolation on a particular day and a particular surface, merely on the basis of their precedent performance on the surface or their heralded exploits prior to their sell-by-date is a fallacy, especially if you consider their (i.e. Ancic, Soderling, Hewitt and Safin) overall level of play in 2008 which which was utterly atrocious. Barring Nadal, Federer's reduced post-mono-afflicted level was enough for him to contend with the rest of the "grass" field despite being less than 100%.

 

[tipsa...don'tlikehim!]

6/4 6/4 6/7 6/7 9/7

Deal with it

 

[NatF]

Mental scars held Federer back in that 2008 match not mono, he still played very well. His overall level in 2008 was affected by mono.

 

[Crisstti]

You guys have to realise that Novak at his absolute best is a terrible matchup for any version of Nadal on any surface, so taking that into consideration I would think Novak would win in 5 sets.

However, if we are talking about Federer of 2008 vs Novak of 2011, then Roger would win in 4 sets.

Despite Rafa beating Djokovic this year on a hc slam (Djokovic's best surface)?.

I'm glad you admit he's a bad match-up for Nadal though

 

[TMF]

if if if if if if bullsh*t again ? :lol:
if Nadal never existed you would be the happiest woman on Earth everyone knows that :lol:
But he existed, won 13 grand slams so far, beat your idol 21 times, deal with it will you ?

Speaking of if if if if if if if ....., Nadal fans use it more often than any fan base on this forum, so I wouldn't bother to complain if I was you.

 

[monfed]

Nole in 5.

 

[Who Am I?]

Despite Rafa beating Djokovic this year on a hc slam (Djokovic's best surface)?.

I'm glad you admit he's a bad match-up for Nadal though

Because Novak wasn't exactly at his best for the whole duration of the match. he was brilliant for set 2 and a bit of set 3, where he had Nadal on the ropes. Then his level dipped, which allowed Nadal to gain a foothold in the match again.

And Novak is a bad match up for Nadal.

 

[90's Clay]

2008 Nadal wins in straight sets.

 

[HoyaPride]

Mental scars held Federer back in that 2008 match not mono, he still played very well. His overall level in 2008 was affected by mono.

That sounds like an excuse. Here's a simpler explanation...

He lost fair and square.

 

[HoyaPride]

Speaking of if if if if if if if ....., Nadal fans use it more often than any fan base on this forum, so I wouldn't bother to complain if I was you.

You mean, like, if Nadal lead the H2H 21-10...

Oh, I forgot. That's reality.

 

[HoyaPride]

Fed fans were very busted up by Wimby 2008. No wonder they keep revising history. One fan was so devastated he decided to write a poem about it.

wimbledon 2008

enduring in dull, fading light as the sun finally sinks away…
pain flickers…
surfacing momentarily in shimmering eyes,
in a steely-set jaw
trying to smile,

regret trumps satisfaction after an epic struggle;
victory was close enough that
he feels its phantom embrace
and longs to draw it inside
where it belongs…

the distant dance mocks his sorrow
as he follows the familiar rhythm of triumph
so long his leading lady…now in the arms of another;
the vision haunts…as sorrow rips a corner
of his soul and the shudder of loss is almost overwhelming…

in the fading glow, he bows to his opponent
praising his ability and his will,
stepping aside, bending his light, as the roar of the crowd
honors the winner…

millions watch his nobility with wretched understanding….
familiar with devastation and defeat,
sensing the invisible scars and the silent tears
of the inestimable champion…

as we weep for him, we cry for ourselves;
for all of us who suffer defeat
daily in lethal doses,
we, who will never soar nor embrace perfection…

for he has carried us all in his graceful dance along baselines;
where we dig, dip, chip and slice,
creating implausible angles and breathtaking shots
with agility, dignity and spell-binding ability…

we who lead paltry lives devoid of fame and glory
cling to this champion,
shamelessly sharing his glory and fortifying our self-worth
as he lifts each trophy and gently kisses it…

the noble spaniard who
bludgeoned his way through center court…
purloined the trophy; but he never quite captured our hearts
for he does not elevate aesthetics or skirt the surface of lawns…
he grinds and pounds and bullies until there is nothing left
but red dust and the decay of artistry….

 

[TMF]

You mean, like, if Nadal lead the H2H 21-10...

Oh, I forgot. That's reality.

That is equivalent to you guys make excuses for losing to Davydenko.

But that's only scratch the surface, Nadal and his fans make every single "IF" after a loss. It outnumbers every single players on the tour combined.

 

[HoyaPride]

That is equivalent to you guys make excuses for losing to Davydenko.

What do losses against Davydenko have to do with Federer and Nadal?

That's like losing a fight and saying, "Oh yeah! You may have kicked my *ss but I know somebody who can kick your *ss!"

 

[HoyaPride]

Did any of you guys cry like our nobel poet after the 2008 loss?

Thanks, once again! Actually - I was so upset after the loss I went to bed and cried! Foolish, I know. The poem settled my nerves!! It was my first time to write about a sporting event! I know poetry is a bit much for this site and I promise to publish it rarely here!

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/201055-roger-federers-defeat-wimbledon-2008

 

[Gonzo_style]

This one is tough.
Djokovic played vs Nadal on grass in 2008 and lost in two tight sets.
Obviously Djokovic 2011>Djokovic 2008 on grass .
Nadal was in good form in 2011, he beat Del Potro (he's really underrated on grass here) Fish and Murray.

Djokovic in 5

 

[TMF]

What do losses against Davydenko have to do with Federer and Nadal?

That's like losing a fight and saying, "Oh yeah! You may have kicked my *ss but I know somebody who can kick your *ss!"

It's about H2H.

It's like saying "Oh yeah! Davy you may kicked my *ss but I know somebody who can kick your *ss!"

 

[TheF1Bob]

I say Novak but I would.

 

[NatF]

Did any of you guys cry like our nobel poet after the 2008 loss?



http://bleacherreport.com/articles/201055-roger-federers-defeat-wimbledon-2008

I find it odd how Rafa fans are so hateful. Very little reason to be so.

 

[HoyaPride]

It's about H2H.

It's like saying "Oh yeah! Davy you may kicked my *ss but I know somebody who can kick your *ss!"

Actually, it's more like saying, "Hey Fed, I've been kicking your *ss." Apparently Nadal doesn't need to beat his rivals vicariously through other players.

Then the Nadal-Fed rivalry is way more lopsided on top of it all. A 21-10 H2H amounts to straight up pwnership.