Fed Kennedy
Legend
It proves his ability to thrive on slow courts
All-Surface Novak: Learn Why Djokovic Is In A Class Of His Own
- Thread starter Lozo1016
- Start date
Adv. Edberg
Legend
And also if they were the same age. Fed is a lot older...
Also interesting to see what would've happened in the 80s and 90s if all surfaces played pretty much the same as it does now, along with a weak field and 32 seeds instead 16. And roofs on centre courts etc etc
Antonio Puente
Hall of Fame
If he loses to Carlos, All Surface Novak will be holding slams on zero surfaces.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
This time last year, when Nadal was the same age Novak is today, Rafa also was holding zero slams
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Well Federer is a older (I wouldn't say a lot older) but Djokovic played him more in Slams that weren't RG: 5 times at the AO, 4 times at Wimbledon and 6 times at the USO. That's 15 times. That shows he was his true rival for most of his career on the medium and faster courts in Slams. For Nadal, he only played Federer 8 times in those Slams and played Djokovic 8 times as well.
What would have happened as far as what? Whether someone else would have gotten the stats the OP is talking about?
Adv. Edberg
Legend
Cause all the surfaces now play the same bass ally. There isn't much variation. It was almost impossible to be dominant on multiple surfaces back in the golden age of tennis.
Sport
G.O.A.T.
Which "crap" performances are those on hard? Nadal is greater on hard than Novak on clay. While at WB Nadal has had many early losses, both at the AO and the USO Nadal has been extremely consistent reaching late rounds (excluding 2015/2016, it's very rare for post-2008 Nadal to lose before the QF of a Slam on hard).
D
Deleted member 758560
Guest
funny but i'm watching atm the karate kid movie (original) and exactly coming that moment when they training on a boat, and mr miyagi telling him balance is key, good balance good karate, bad balance better pack up and go home
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
I think this is mostly a myth honestly. There is variation. It's just not as extreme as the 90s. You can see it because of players still being extremely good on one surface and not great on another. You will see future generations in these conditions not be as successful as Djokovic across all surfaces, except players like Alcaraz. It's clear to see it and it was clear to see when Djokovic was young as well, because of the mechanics of their ballstriking and how they can translate that to other surfaces.
Sport
G.O.A.T.
Yeah, that explains why Isner and Anderson reached the Wimbledon 2018 SF but never made a Roland-Garros SF. It also gives an idea as of why Nadal has 14 RG and "only" 2 WB titles. Not much variation, sure.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
funny but i'm watching atm the karate kid movie (original) and exactly coming that moment when they training on a boat, and mr miyagi telling him balance is key, good balance good karate, bad balance better pack up and go home
LOL. This is so random yet funny at the same time. I just read that in Mr Myagi's voice.
Cmon guy. At least try to have a little nuance?
My thesis - Djokovic is the best consistent year-round week-in, week-out player. I.e. across every tournament and surface from January to December.
Read my sentence again. I said 'Nadal has been injured too often' - this contributes to a lot of his poor results - I mean losing to Ferrer twice at HC Slams, AO 10, 11, 14, 18, 21 were all times when he had an injury-affected dud loss. I would say the injuries are the real reason why he hasn't been as dominant year round.
But if we really wanna go there with crap performances. How about basically every September-December fall season except 2010, 2013, and 2007? lol
And I know your comeback is going to be 'well that indoor season isn't Slams so it doesn't matter' which is sort of the exact point I'm making.
Weighting year round performance, NOT just focusing on Slams, is the exact measure I'm going for.
Obviously Nadal is not a crap player and I do have major respect for his peak and prime levels on HC. The issue is he brought them nowhere near as often as Djoko or Federer did on HC or grass.
killerboss
Professional
A class of his own in consistency perhaps but at slam level, Fed has as much slams as him and a greater slam count in 2/4 slams. Nadal has more slams in total, more slams at 2/4 slams and a winning slam head to head in 2/4 slams. This is an ongoing situation of course and can still change.
Marco Rotim
Semi-Pro
Djokovic is greater on Clay than Nadal in on HCs
However
Nadal is far greater on Clay than Djokovic is on HCs
Thats why P2P, Novak could never touch Nadal on Clay while Nadal could touch Novak on HCs.
If you compared Nadal on HC vs Djokovic on Clay then
Djokovic on Clay - Win% is 80+
Nadal on HC - Win% is 78%
Djokovic on Clay vs top 10 - 57%
Nadal on HC vs top 10 - 50%
Djokovic on Clay vs top 5 - 43%
Nadal on HC vs top 5 - 40%
Number of Slams finals
Nadal on HC - 11
Djokovic on Clay - 6
Number of overall Finals
Nadal on HC - 52
Djokovic on Clay - 32
vamos22
Rookie
[
Djokovic slams on clay - 2
There are 2 slams on HC and 1 on clay. Therefore, Nadal averages 3 slams per HC slam, Djokovic 2. 3>2, Nadal on HC > Djokovic on clay. Slams > all other tournaments.
Nadal slams on HC - 6
Djokovic slams on clay - 2
There are 2 slams on HC and 1 on clay. Therefore, Nadal averages 3 slams per HC slam, Djokovic 2. 3>2, Nadal on HC > Djokovic on clay. Slams > all other tournaments.
Rafa4LifeEver
G.O.A.T.
100%
Bud
Bionic Poster
No
No, there wasn't. In part of the 1970's and before, they were all on grass. Then 2 clay and 2 grass then 1HC, 1 clay and 2 grass. Then 2 HC, 1 grass and 1 clay. In 2001, they changed the grass mixture at WB and firmed up the base for truer bounces. There is no surface homogenization. The two HC majors are the closest to one another all things considered. Grass and clay play nothing alike and the movement and shot selection to succeed on either is completely different.
The Fedfather
Legend
He is amazing in this regard. I do feel that the 54% stat specifically is helped quite bit by less challenging competition in the last few seasons, however there's no doubt that accounting for surface longevity, Novak is the most well-rounded out of the Big 3.
Dead Mosquito
Rookie
Novak Djokovic :all-court specialist
People say this, but do you see players making deep runs on all surfaces? Very few players nowadays are good on all the surfaces.
vex
Legend
This is a great way of putting it. He really is just so, so solid EVERYWHERE. And aside from the injury period of 16-18, he’s been captain consistency.
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
What about immigration court in Australia? Not too good there, eh?
He is 1-1 in immigration courts so far. 50% there too
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
Not close to the 80% match winning record on other surfacesHe is 1-1 in immigration courts so far. 50% there too
Ya statistically less appearances so farNot close to the 80% match winning record on other surfaces
But okay with this % in immigration courts.
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
Maybe he will get to ‘play’ more on these courts next year as he is facing a 3-year ban from the land of Oz.Ya statistically less appearances so far
But okay with this % in immigration courts.
Sport
G.O.A.T.
Wrong. Nadal is greater on hard than Novak is on clay
6 Slams on hard >>>>> 2 Slams on clay. Even if we consider that there are 2 Slam events on hard, 6 ÷ 2 = 3. Nadal averages 3 titles per Slam on hard, while Novak averages 2 tirles per Slam on clay.
He confirmed a few days back he isn't visiting any countries any more which don't allow unvaxxed people to enter. No controversies is the way forward it seems.
I am sure tournaments will want him to be there, but local laws can be deterministic for any such adventures in future.
Grass court Nadal is 1/3rd of Djokovic confirmed. Hard court Nadal is 1/2 of Djokovic. Confirmed, Nadal isn't an all court GOAT. Thanks for guiding to think like this.
Sport
G.O.A.T.
You are right.
Marco Rotim
Semi-Pro
Anyone can say 6 > 2 or 6/2 > 2. I am not into who achieved what on what surface.
I am talking about the level of their games with respect to the field and with respect to the best player.
Nadal could never beat Novak on HCs, so thank Novak was for being crazy that he cannot take a jab or for not being at his best in 2009 AO, otherwise Nadal would be on AOs.
Novak is also horrible in USA, the whole field has beaten him, stan, fed, murray, nadal, medvedev, nishikoiri .
This shows that Novak is not as strong on HCs as Nadal is on Clay, this is why Nadal can afford to have an avg of 3 slams on HC while Novak can only have an average of 2 on clay because Rafael Nadal would not let him pick more than that.
Plus Nadal struggles more vs the field on HCs thna Novak, the top 10 percentages say that, it is the strength of the top champion on that surface who determines what you win.
We have three Gods of tennis and gentlemen and then you have Kyrgios and Tsitsipas. The Big 3 Fan wars should stop as there are others to target who are becoming a stain on the game
There was a problem with it but it wasnt the actual clay it was just they got ynluckybwith very wet weather when it was put down. So even if it was normal red clay same problems would have happened. Personally I just prefer the optics of red clay
Similar threads
