2021 RG was the greatest tournament win in tennis history

NonP

Hall of Fame
I was telling you jokers that Bull was vulnerable this season and Tsits had a real shot at RG, but you didn't listen. And shortly before the final I said it'd be a lot more competitive than was expected and called a 5-setter, but you still didn't listen.

When will you clowns realize I'm right about everything I pay attention to and you should be honored that I share my genius and wisdom free of charge? In that generous spirit I'll set y'all straight for good: this Rafa was nothing special, winning just over 60% of his games this CC season which usually ain't enough vs. another elite dirtballer. Of course Nadal is Nadal and you still can't slack off against him at RG, but anyone who saw the 2nd half of the SF should know he can no longer keep it up 100% for the whole duration of a match himself. This may strike you as far-fetched but even peak Pistol and Murray would've had a good chance of beating him that day.

What Novak does deserve credit for: 1) keeping himself ready for his worst Slam almost every year and 2) being the first FO champ since '93 Bruguera to down not one but two fellow members of the 60% Club in Rafa and Tsits who didn't quite build on his strong start to the season but still ended up with 60.3% (2nd only to Novak's 61.5%).

One more thing:

Nadal clay game %:
2021 60.15%
2020 68.70%
2019 65.77%
2018 67.72%
2017 67.63%
2016 61.38%
2015 60.68%
2014 63.78%
2013 63.44%
2012 68.00%
2011 64.59%
2010 66.39%
2009 65.04%
2008 67.15%
2007 66.02%
2006 62.17%
2005 65.22%

Only worse year clay performance in the Roland Garros-winning era was 2015, below 2021 because Nadal's game % is lower in both Masters and Slams, being inflated to a higher level by success at minor tournaments in Rio, Buenos Aires and Hamburg.
You clearly lifted this from one of those mostly useless "analytics" sites (I'm guessing UTS) because these #s are just combined carbon copies of the ATP's SG/RG%s with no TBs. Also '15 Rafa won an extra 64.6% outside the regular CC season, which if separated does bring his seasonal GW% down to 58.3%, but the difference between this and his actual 60.7% is almost negligible because, as i noted earlier, neither provides enough cushion against another strong FO contender. The fact of the matter is that either '15 or '21 Rafa would be vulnerable to select former runners-up having their best season(s), let alone actual champs.

Guess I still should be pleased that more of you are paying attention to GW%s on clay, but not so much about the motivations.
 

Milehigh5280

Professional
I wouldn't call it the greatest slam run ever, but it's really impressive. The people trying to downplay it are simply hating
 

Biotic

Hall of Fame
I was telling you jokers that Bull was vulnerable this season and Tsits had a real shot at RG, but you didn't listen. And shortly before the final I said it'd be a lot more competitive than was expected and called a 5-setter, but you still didn't listen.

When will you clowns realize I'm right about everything I pay attention to and you should be honored that I share my genius and wisdom free of charge? In that generous spirit I'll set y'all straight for good: this Rafa was nothing special, winning just over 60% of his games this CC season which usually ain't enough vs. another elite dirtballer. Of course Nadal is Nadal and you still can't slack off against him at RG, but anyone who saw the 2nd half of the SF should know he can no longer keep it up 100% for the whole duration of a match himself. This may strike you as far-fetched but even peak Pistol and Murray would've had a good chance of beating him that day.

What Novak does deserve credit for: 1) keeping himself ready for his worst Slam almost every year and 2) being the first FO champ since '93 Bruguera to down not one but two fellow members of the 60% Club in Rafa and Tsits who didn't quite build on his strong start to the season but still ended up with 60.3% (2nd only to Novak's 61.5%).

One more thing:



You clearly lifted this from one of those mostly useless "analytics" sites (I'm guessing UTS) because these #s are just combined carbon copies of the ATP's SG/RG%s with no TBs. Also '15 Rafa won an extra 64.6% outside the regular CC season, which if separated does bring his seasonal GW% down to 58.3%, but the difference between this and his actual 60.7% is almost negligible because, as i noted earlier, neither provides enough cushion against another strong FO contender. The fact of the matter is that either '15 or '21 Rafa would be vulnerable to select former runners-up having their best season(s), let alone actual champs.

Guess I still should be pleased that more of you are paying attention to GW%s on clay, but not so much about the motivations.
Yes, you were right all along. But, you weren't the only one.

As you often say, clay rewards patience. Only this time it wasn't about a single match or two, rather a whole career.

I would add #3. Winning in the manner that he did at 34.

To put things into perspective, one should look at Mr. Longevity's results on clay post 2011. Apart from the blue clay farce, not even "2014-2016 Crapdal" and "weak era" were enough to win a single meaningful title, let alone RG.
 

Hamnavoe

Hall of Fame
You clearly lifted this from one of those mostly useless "analytics" sites (I'm guessing UTS) because these #s are just combined carbon copies of the ATP's SG/RG%s with no TBs. Also '15 Rafa won an extra 64.6% outside the regular CC season, which if separated does bring his seasonal GW% down to 58.3%, but the difference between this and his actual 60.7% is almost negligible because, as i noted earlier, neither provides enough cushion against another strong FO contender. The fact of the matter is that either '15 or '21 Rafa would be vulnerable to select former runners-up having their best season(s), let alone actual champs.

Guess I still should be pleased that more of you are paying attention to GW%s on clay, but not so much about the motivations.
Where do you get your numbers from that isn't a mostly useless "analytics" site?
 

NonP

Hall of Fame
Yes, you were right all along. But, you weren't the only one.

As you often say, clay rewards patience. Only this time it wasn't about a single match or two, rather a whole career.

I would add #3. Winning in the manner that he did at 34.

To put things into perspective, one should look at Mr. Longevity's results on clay post 2011. Apart from the blue clay farce, not even "2014-2016 Crapdal" and "weak era" were enough to win a single meaningful title, let alone RG.
That's kinda the gist of #1, don't ya think? Novak's longevity is really something, hence my Rosewall analogy though I suspect even Nole won't quite match Muscles in this respect.

Where do you get your numbers from that isn't a mostly useless "analytics" site?
The source aka the ATP (or the WTA, if you prefer), and preferably the tournament (read: GS) sites as well since there are occasional discrepancies. The traditional stats have their use, otherwise they wouldn't have been with us for so long. OTOH fancy stats like Elo and dominance/difficulty ratings are if anything worse than useless as they give the hack(er)s the illusion of understanding the game better than they actually do. As a general rule (if in admittedly crude terms), anything that takes more than simple arithmetic is crap.

In fact the whole analytics business is crap (if rather lucrative for journos). Real experts ain't statheads and there's a good reason (or several) for that.
 
Top