Nadal is likely to beat both at the majors in the sun and heat quite easily. Indoors he will struggle. Neither Djokovic or Federer are anywhere near as strong outdoors when hot as they are indoors.
Can Nadal beat Djokovic and Federer in non-clay slams again?
- Thread starter UnderratedSlam
- Start date
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
Djokovic solved Nadal in 2012?
What, like that 2012 that Nadal beat him 3 times ? and 3 more times the year after?
Good theory.
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
I always found that really strange why Djokovic wanted the roof kept closed? He obviously wasn't that confident in the win.
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
Doesn't really matter. Hes arguably been the most consistent tennis player the last couple years.
No one else has been reaching latter stages of all the big events.
Its not just about playing the biggest rivals, as everyone knows.
Sputnik Bulgorov
Professional
I don't think you're taking into account Nadal's surgery. If he takes a while to find his range, he could be in for a few beatings, outdoor or not.
moonballs
Hall of Fame
2011 to 2012, 7:0 best/worst streak betwn two ATGs, all in big finals.
maratha_warrior
Hall of Fame
That is the same way Nadal requested Djokovic and umpire to postpone his RG match midway, after losing 8 games in a row to djokovic at Roland Garros 2012 final... Novak obliged then..
Rafa was not confident against joker then..
Jaitock1991
Hall of Fame
In Fed's current condition I don't think I'd even favour him to beat Nadal anywhere(given of course that Rafa himself is in decent form).
As for Djoker it's hard to tell. Things can change in an instant, and given Rafa's mental strength he can never be counted out. And given how close he came at Wimbledon I see no reason he couldn't beat him.
As for Djoker it's hard to tell. Things can change in an instant, and given Rafa's mental strength he can never be counted out. And given how close he came at Wimbledon I see no reason he couldn't beat him.
T
Tiki-Taka
Guest
He played 5 sets and had chances in the decider against both Federer and Djokovic at his last non-clay Slam meeting with them. Definitely possible to win next time they meet.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
No, but the lame trolling suggests some experience with that craft, and, well, I cannot imagine such behaviour being tolerated IRL, before you are sidelined for stupidities, so you amassed that experience somewhere.
Too bad for the 49 years.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Yes, but will he ever face either of them in the Australian sun? No, he won't. Those are night sessions.
Will he play either in the sun at USO? No, he won't. They are night sessions, AND NY is rarely very hot in September. This year was a weird exception.
Will he play either in London in hot conditions? Very unlikely.
So the cards have to really line up perfectly in his favour to give him a match against the two on any of those three slams in hot conditions - when Rafa isn't injured and so on. Very unlikely, especially given that he is 32 not 21.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
That user should not be punished for trolling. It's not his fault. He simply didn't have arguments, so he resorted to childish "insults".No, but the lame trolling suggests some experience with that craft, and, well, I cannot imagine such behaviour being tolerated IRL, before you are sidelined for stupidities, so you amassed that experience somewhere.
Too bad for the 49 years.
"Too bad for the 49 years"... Would you care to explain? That's very cryptic. Almost shy.
Was that a shy attempt to "insult" my age? Oh well, I didn't think that was allowed here, but judging from the number of your posts, you seem to be able to get away with it - for whatever obvious reason.
Last edited:
tennis_crazy
Semi-Pro
Nadal should try not to chicken out in non clay slams (AO & USO withdrawal). He thought could beat a weak Djokovic in Wimbledon when he should've been in great rhythm reaching semis after almost a decade. That backfired or else we could've seen a withdrawal there too.
Let the Bull man up and play non clay slams w/o withdrawing after going down 2 sets & a break further. We can talk then.
Let the Bull man up and play non clay slams w/o withdrawing after going down 2 sets & a break further. We can talk then.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Either you're trolling or you've never had a serious tennis injury.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
mike danny
Bionic Poster
The guy is not going to risk ending up in a wheelchair because of a tennis match. He has an entire life to look forward to that he doesn't want to jeopardize.
tennis_crazy
Semi-Pro
I have a torn ACL on my left knee playing tennis. I sure know about real injuries.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Well, you've also got a grinning Wilander as your avatar, so you can understand my trolling suspicion.
Suggesting that Nadal "chickens out" of slams in late stages sounds like 100% trolling, to me at least. But hey, whatever makes you happy.
Rosstour
G.O.A.T.
2014, then?
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
"Sorry but h2h matters"? You then go on to say Nadal is the best outdoors off clay currently, when he lost the last 4 matches to Fed. Erm head to head matters right? Nadal has won 1 title off clay this year which was a masters, Djokovic has won a slam and 2 masters. Epic fail of logic.
You've ignored the point about matchups, but will you concede that what you're saying is every time Nadal lost in an event and Federer went on to win, it proves that Federer would have beaten Nadal? This is the only conclusion to draw from your "logic"
Nadal has lost at the AO and USO this year.
Again epic failure of logic
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
If you weren't biased, you'd agree that he didn't lose the AO match.
BUT OK, Nadal's detractors discount injuries as a factor and consider H2H to be bogus, we all know that already.
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
It's got nothing to do with bias, a loss is a loss whether you get injured or not.
So according to your logic, Djokovic has never lost to Nadal at Wimbledon?
Nadal fans can't accept any loss to need to make excuses every time. Apparently all you have to do is retire from a match and it's not a loss. Brilliant logic.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
That's precisely true: Novak has never lost to Nadal at Wimby.
See? It's easy. Just be logical and unbiased and you will be rewarded with truth.
Nadal regularly plays through levels of pain that you - luckily for you - will never even know exists. To accuse one of the biggest ever fighters of tanking or "chickening out" in late stages of slams is ludicrous, to put it extremely diplomatically.
Last edited:
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
You just said Nadal has never lost to Djokovic at Wimbledon. He has twice. Djokovic has also lost to Nadal at Wimbledon, he retire but he still lost the match.
There are no draws in tennis, if one player wins, the other loses. Doesn't matter if you retire or not, it's a loss. Tennis is a physical sport - if you are not physically able to play, you lose! The TRUTH is, check the tennis records - it's a loss.
Talk about flat out lies, I never said anything about tanking or chickening out, but Nadal admitted himself he regretting retiring vs Murray in Australia and so the following year he played on vs Ferrer. Other times a player is injured enough to effect their play but can carry on til the end, so in these cases it's a loss?
Lastly how ridiculous, hilarious and pompous that you infalte Nadal's "suffering" and without knowing me, presume that he through playing sport has endured levels of pain I have not. How exactly do you know what i've been through? All part of the Nadal cult, warrior who has endured more pain than anyone on earth right? Cos he has some sports injuries. Lol, there is a real world out there where things are very much more serious than blisters or knee pain
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
I meant Novak never lost to Nadal!
My mistake. I've corrected my post.
Sorry about that. Your reply was in vain.
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
He has lost to him, retirements count as losses. If you are not physically able to compete, you lose.
Think about what it means in context... the original post I replied to stated Nadal was the best outdoor player currently because he hadn't lost on HC since 2017... Now he's played 3 HC tournaments and retired in 2 and won 1. So that makes him better than Djokovic who's lost several HC matches but won a slam and 2 masters? Say you retired from all 4 slams and all 9 masters and any other events you played. So you can say you were undefeated right? But why would that matter when you didn't WIN anything? how would that make you a better player than someone who won several titles but had a few losses where they didn't retire?
mike danny
Bionic Poster
LOL who is the simpleton who claimed that?
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
jonnyhomeboy9851
Rookie
My friend why you insulting rafa just because he humilated in head to head 7-0 7-0 in a humiliation and complete ownage that no other ATG has ever faced? It no right my friend. No need to diss his h2h like this. Also so what brown owns nadal or davedneko crushed nadal on hardcourts 5-0
jonnyhomeboy9851
Rookie
Has nadal won a match past 10 years versus djokovic? Serious question... must be like 5 max right and 20 losses? Even lost last meeting at RG no? Does nadal even have a losing record versus djokovic on clay this decade, i think he does
MeatTornado
Talk Tennis Guru
Obviously Rafa can beat Roger these days.
And the last time he met Novak, he very nearly beat him on indoor grass. He gets injured for the indoor season like he so often does, and now we're just writing him off? Gimme a break.
And the last time he met Novak, he very nearly beat him on indoor grass. He gets injured for the indoor season like he so often does, and now we're just writing him off? Gimme a break.
jonnyhomeboy9851
Rookie
But my friend nadal has a 1-5 loaing hard court losing h2h vs davedenko, has never beaten brown on grass, has a losing 1-2 wimbedlon h2h with mueller, has never beat djokovic at AO or wimbeldon (while djokovic has beaten nadal everywhere) and dont forget the 7-0 7-0 humiliations by djokovic. H2h is not a good factor for nadal
chjtennis
G.O.A.T.
There is always an odd chance, even though not a good one. Strangely, though, healthy Federer with no hand, knee or back issues will be tougher for Rafa than Novak now, I think. The change in dynamics in the matchup of games between Federer and Nadal is quite unbelievable. Nadal used to attack Fed's BH and that was all he had to do to win, but now that advantage has been taken away, it seems Nadal has no idea how to beat Roger. Nothing much has changed between Nadal and Djokovic, though, and since Djokovic has completed his upgrade, the Ultron has always seemed to have the upper hand v Nadal on any surfaces. I think Djokovic will most likely beat Nadal in most of their future matches in their current forms, but Nadal will still be able to beat Djok once in a while, maybe once in 3-4 times. I believe Nadal needs to catch Federer on a bad day to beat him on non-clay surfaces.
Last edited:
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
Since the start of 2009 (so 10 years) Djokovic leads Nadal 23-15, which is actually funny as this is currently the lead Nadal has over Federer in H2H
This decade, meaning since 2011 the head to head on clay is 7-7
jonnyhomeboy9851
Rookie
Thankyou.... Wait so nadal doesnt even lead h2h in the last decade on clay versus his main same age generational rival (and it is even djokovics worst surface!) and is supposed to be king of clay? Wow thank his lucky stars for the weak clay era and also not facing djokovic more often on clay @Pantera
Last edited:
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
I know you're trolling but the main thing is Nadal leads the amount of RG titles this decade 6-1...
Nadal's clay competition has been weaker than the hc competition yes, but he still beat Djokovic plenty of times prior to 2011 and you can say he's maybe not quite his best in recent years. Djokovic has managed to maintain a bigger advantage overall on HC than Nadal has managed on clay though
jonnyhomeboy9851
Rookie
That would be fine if nadal was king of RG yet @Pantera isnt saying that he is saying he is king of clay which he clearly isnt if he cant even have a leading h2h versus his only half decent and same age rival on clay this decade. King of clay... lol
Subway Tennis
Legend
He can definitely beat Roger. He would enter that matchup the favourite in any conditions bar fast indoor imo.
At the moment, not so sure about Djokovic. This rivalry has swung so many times with both players wrestling dominance from each other then maintaining that for long periods of time. It really is fascinating the way the pendulum swings back and forth. Djokovic has the upper hand at the moment and in most conditions would most likely win. Boy, would it be close, though, even on outlier conditions like slow grass.
At the moment, not so sure about Djokovic. This rivalry has swung so many times with both players wrestling dominance from each other then maintaining that for long periods of time. It really is fascinating the way the pendulum swings back and forth. Djokovic has the upper hand at the moment and in most conditions would most likely win. Boy, would it be close, though, even on outlier conditions like slow grass.
Last edited:
Angelito Tan
New User
only if he petition the tennis officials to slow the hard courts even more.
mightyjeditribble
Hall of Fame
Of course he can. Count a great champion out at your peril. But that doesn't mean that I think he necessarily will.
However, he may need them to be at less than their best form, at least against Djokovic. With Fed, it depends on how much longer he plays, and how his decline with age plays out against that of Nadal.
It depends somewhat on whether they continue to be highly ranked. If so, they can only meet at the latter stages, which means that they are all playing well. This could count against Nadal as his best non-clay level is probably below theirs. But, as we saw this week, as they get older even great form going into a final doesn't mean it's going to show up. So I'd say, if they play often enough again in the no-clay slams, then Nadal will still get some wins.
Specious argument. Did you actually watch the match? It kept raining for over a set. Once they were back on Monday, Djokovic lost the 4th set, and ultimately the entire match, despite being up a break.
Subway Tennis
Legend
You have your time spans a little muddled. Nadal does lead the head to head "in the last decade" by almost double.
What towser referred to is a different timespan - 7 years (2011-present) and he is correct about the 7-7 head to head during these years.
If you are just starting to delve deeper into tennis and the recent history of the pro game, dont let anyone mislead you in regard to Djokovic's abilities on clay
Djokovic is a hell of a clay player and Nadal's best rival on that surface.
maratha_warrior
Hall of Fame
You didn't get my point..
The officials didn't postpone the match, nor Djokovic cribbed about rain or wet conditions at all...
Only one guy had the problem, and it all depended on Djokovic's decision..
If djokovic decided to continue the march, Rafa had to continue the match.
Bcoz it was Nadals request.
If Nadal fans want to bring up Roof incident of Wimbledon, den Hello RG 2012
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
You have your time spans a little muddled. Nadal does lead the head to head "in the last decade" by almost double.
What towser referred to is a different timespan - 7 years (2011-present) and he is correct about the 7-7 head to head during these years.
If you are just starting to delve deeper into tennis and the recent history of the pro game, dont let anyone mislead you in regard to Djokovic's abilities on clay
Said poster likes to change arguments to make his point sound better. So he cuts off 3 years of the 'decade' h2h .
Subway Tennis
Legend
I was okay with @Towser83 comments. I think with the other poster they made an honest mistake. I do the same thing on here where I mention something and get the dates confused.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Rafa has a whopping 2-13 vs Djokovic and RF in the last 15 matches against them.
Wow. Even the likes of Isner and Anderson must have better H2Hs against them.
Wow. Even the likes of Isner and Anderson must have better H2Hs against them.
Pheasant
Legend
Since Fed switched rackets in 2014, the trio of Donskoy, 37-39 yesr old Tommy Haas, and Millman have combined for as many wins against Fed as Murray, Nadal, and Wawrinka have. The difference is that the Hall of Fame trio needed 21 matches to register their 3 wins against Fed whereas the nobodies needed only 5 matches for their 3 wins against Fed.
Similar threads
