Clay battle : Nadal 2011 vs Nadal 2005

[TMF]

Nadal 2011 looked positively bored out there against many opponents in the lower rounds, almost jaded and just kind of went through the motions, not to mention his many second set dips. There was rarely lack of focus from 2005 Nadal.

Of course you get bored after winning so much. The same with Fed. 2005 Nadal was young and ambitious. The mature nadal today is less energetic, but still he's more of a complete player than in 2005.

BTW, Nadal on clay in 2005 < 2011. And I'm a Fed fan.

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

nadal vs. nadal ? :?
i've got to admit i don't know whom to root against...

 

[Double_Fault]

It would easily be longer than Mahut-Isner. Each would just moonball and buttpick for eternity.

 

[namelessone]

this "old man" Fed was playing out of his mind to break him in the first set. It had nothing to do with Nadal's supposed decline. The fact is when Fed is playing well, he's unstoppable. But with a minor line dispute/braincramp, Federer's brittle momentum was shattered.

Ever since Djokovic finally beat Nadal in a final, a metaphoric wall was taken down, i.e. Nadal's aura of invincibility against Djoko in finals. With that gone, Nadal no longer has that "anything-you-can-do-I-can-do-better" mindset. And now, he knows what it feels like when Roger faces him. Right now, Rafa's gotta forget the fact that he had once owned Djoker and go into his next encounters the same way he went into the matches against say, Berdych or Blake, who had previously "owned" him. He needs to humbly accept that he is now the underdog and study Djokovic's weaknesses religiously.

Unfortunately Djoker is no longer his b*tch and Nadal could have prevented that had he played more intensely in the Indian Wells final.

No he's not.

Nadal proved this on clay over and over again during Fed's prime.

In Madrid 2011 Nadal was a break up, Fed got hot for a while and did the unthinkable at the end of that set: save a 0-40 love game at 6-5 against Nadal.

But my argument still stands: If Nadal is IN HIS PRIME on clay, how come he is losing sets on clay(and after leading) to Roger 2011, who is like 2 levels below his past iterations(hell, 2009 Federer who beat Nadal was way better than this fed, who also lost to melzer and gasquet this year) and still has a shaky BH? Sure, Madrid court favours Federer somewhat but still.

Both Nadal and Federer are past their prime. Fed fans have learned this long ago, Nadal fans need to get to grips with it.

 

[namelessone]

Of course you get bored after winning so much. The same with Fed. 2005 Nadal was young and ambitious. The mature nadal today is less energetic, but still he's more of a complete player than in 2005.

BTW, Nadal on clay in 2005 < 2011. And I'm a Fed fan.

Well that was what me,Clay lover and others were saying, not that Nadal's level OVERALL or his versatility was better in 2005 than 2011.

Put Nadal 2011 on a court with Nadal 2005 and it could get ugly for 2011 self.

Put Nadal 2011 with Nadal 2008/2010 and it's a slaughter in favour of the latter.

 

[KillSwitch Engage]

2005. Much more aggressive off both wings and moved better. I liked Nadal in 2005 and enjoyed watching his matches. Nowadays he bores me. Quite sad.

 

[TMF]

Put Nadal 2011 on a court with Nadal 2005 and it could get ugly for 2011 self.

Nope, disagree. 2005 Rafa with lots of looping fh and bh, and played far behind the baseline. Nadal today would handle those rally much better than what he’s facing against Nole.

Put Nadal 2011 with Nadal 2008/2010 and it's a slaughter in favour of the latter.

That’s debatable. Funny how you omit 2009 just b/c he lost to an on fire Robin. Nadal was playing great that year too, and winning the AO even more confirmed it.

 

[KillSwitch Engage]

Nope, disagree. 2005 Rafa with lots of looping fh and bh, and played far behind the baseline. Nadal today would handle those rally much better than what he’s facing against Nole.



That’s debatable. Funny how you omit 2009 just b/c he lost to an on fire Robin. Nadal was playing great that year too, and winning the AO even more confirmed it.

You quite clearly never watched Nadal in 2005 as his forehand and his backhand were far more penetrating and 'flatter' than it is today. he moved a lot better in 2005 also. Also had better depth which is the most important thing in tennis.

Nadal 2005 > Nadal 2011.


2009 was just Soderling. No excuses. As much as I dislike both players I do believe it was a worthy enough to call Soderling's performance 'one-of-a-kind'. No one, Borg/Guga/Muster/ no one no one beats Soderling that day. The guy was cracking 90-105mph groundstrokes on the line and volleyed brilliantly that day.

 

[zagor]

It's not about age but MILEAGE.

Nadal is 25 in a month or so and has dominated one surface for SIX SEASONS. This is the seventh year. Who, among the great players to dominate a surface(borg-clay, sampras-grass, fed-grass, fed-hc), was still IN THEIR PRIME in their seventh year on that surface?
This is not about still being good/great on the surface, but about PRIMING, as in being near unstoppable with an amazing execution of their game.

Nadal won his first slam 7 YEARS AGO.

If you think a guy that started winning titles at 19 is still IN HIS PRIME at 25, then I don't know what to tell you.

I mean Fed is his 9th season since his domination started(2003) and since 2008 he has been losing steam, with a couple of exceptions(great runs).

Also, it's not what version of Nadal is better, but which is better ON CLAY.

If you put Nadal 2005 and Nadal 2011 on a claycourt, who wins. That's all.

This ain't about Djokovic as much as people want to make it so.

Eh,I'm asking Jackson Vile.I already know your opinion but I'd like to hear an opinion of a poster who goes around constantly calling people who consider Fed to be past his best at the age 29-30 "****s" so I'm quite curious if he considers Nadal to be past his prime at the age of 24-25.

 

[TMF]

You quite clearly never watched Nadal in 2005 as his forehand and his backhand were far more penetrating and 'flatter' than it is today. he moved a lot better in 2005 also. Also had better depth which is the most important thing in tennis.

Nadal 2005 > Nadal 2011.

2009 was just Soderling. No excuses. As much as I dislike both players I do believe it was a worthy enough to call Soderling's performance 'one-of-a-kind'. No one, Borg/Guga/Muster/ no one no one beats Soderling that day. The guy was cracking 90-105mph groundstrokes on the line and volleyed brilliantly that day.

Nope, I disagree. 2005 Nadal did ran more, retrieve more ball than today, but no way he was hitting more flatter. He's playing closer to the baseline, more aggessive, take the ball to the rise. Playing closer allow him to hit fast, flat ball. No way he's going to hit flat, aggressive shot by standing 15 ft behind the baseline. It would take a super human being !

 

[MichaelNadal]

Rafa is a better player overall now than in 2005 for sure. But on a clay court, I would give the edge to 2005 Rafa. He would beat this moonballing, passive clay Rafa from this year. 2010 or 2008 Rafa would smoke 2005 Rafa like a cheap cigar though.

 

[TennisFan3]

Nadal 2005/2006 vs Nadal 2011 : Nadal 2005/2006 grinds the Nadal 2011 in dust over 4 sets.

Nadal 2007 vs Nadal 2011: Nadal 2007 wins in 3 tight sets.

Nadal 2008 vs Nadal 2011: Nadal 2008 obliterates Nadal 2011 with bagels thrown in under 1 hr 30 mins.

Nadal 2010 vs Nadal 2011: Nadal 2010 embarasses Nadal 2011 in straight sets.

 

[The-Champ]

Of course you get bored after winning so much. The same with Fed. 2005 Nadal was young and ambitious. The mature nadal today is less energetic, but still he's more of a complete player than in 2005.

BTW, Nadal on clay in 2005 < 2011. And I'm a Fed fan.

so you think 2005 federer would lose to this 2011 version of Nadal? LOL. I don't like federer but I would admit, he would've slaughtered this version of Nadal, probably even 2010.

 

[NamRanger]

so you think 2005 federer would lose to this 2011 version of Nadal? LOL. I don't like federer but I would admit, he would've slaughtered this version of Nadal, probably even 2010.

Federer in 2005 was crap on clay. He was beaten by a baby Nadal and lost to baby Gasquet. He even nearly lost to Gonzalez, who by no means is a great claycourt player (good, but not anywhere NEAR great). In Hamburg he also struggled greatly against Gasquet again, despite playing on arguably Gasquet's worst clay type, while also on Federer's best.



If the clay court competition in 2005 wasn't so horrible neither Nadal or Federer would have made it through to the final likely. When your top tier clay court players consist of headcase Gaudio, serve yips Coria, Davydenko, Nalbandian, and oldman Moya, your clay field ****ing sucks. No sane and logical Nadal fan would ever agree that 2005 had a strong field. 2004-2005 had one of the worst/weakest fields in clay court history. In fact, 2005 is only overshadowed by 2004 when Tim Henman made it to the semis, and nearly beat Coria (and would have beaten him if he wasn't such a choke artist).



It is beyond ridiculous to ever assume that 2005 Nadal could ever fathom of beating 2011 Nadal. 2011 Nadal on clay has lost to NO ONE but Djokovic on clay. 2005 Nadal was busy dropping sets to guys like past prime Grosjean, Federer (before he was actually good on clay), and Puerta. Puerta in fact could have won that match if he held his nerve, but he simply didn't.

 

[callmethedoctor]

I voted 2005 without having to think about it. Nadal doesn't run down anything anymore (compared to his earlier years), and his gameplan is less focused.

 

[fgzhu88]

So Djokovic beats Nadal twice on clay and suddenly the 2005 Nadal looks much more attractive?

Remember, 2005 Nadal was one who
- hit borderline moonballs off both wings consistently
- stood 10 ft behind the baseline almost always
- had a first serve 10-15 mph slower than today

When you factor out Djokovic, Nadal has been dominant over the rest of the field. Lorenzi caught Nadal while he was adjusting (perhaps emotionally) to the quick shift from Madrid to Rome. And he lost two sets to Murray and Federer while they were on fire. Those are just asterisks. Keep in mind 2011 Nadal destroyed Ferrer [twice] who was one of the few players to take a set off Djokovic. It's not as if 2005 or 2008 Nadal didn't lose any sets.

Today's Nadal would kill his teeny counterpart along with 2005 Federer. He has more pace off the forehand/serve/backhand and transitions to net better. Of course, he plays shorter balls against the new and improved Djokovic.

Can you guys honestly say that coming from his Barcelona win this year, Nadal didn't look invincible on clay?
Just keep things in perspective.

 

[Mick]

i think 2005 nadal was more fearless than 2011 nadal. at that age, you don't fear anything.

 

[namelessone]

So Djokovic beats Nadal twice on clay and suddenly the 2005 Nadal looks much more attractive?

Remember, 2005 Nadal was one who
- hit borderline moonballs off both wings consistently
- stood 10 ft behind the baseline almost always
- had a first serve 10-15 mph slower than today

When you factor out Djokovic, Nadal has been dominant over the rest of the field. Lorenzi caught Nadal while he was adjusting (perhaps emotionally) to the quick shift from Madrid to Rome. And he lost two sets to Murray and Federer while they were on fire. Those are just asterisks. Keep in mind 2011 Nadal destroyed Ferrer [twice] who was one of the few players to take a set off Djokovic. It's not as if 2005 or 2008 Nadal didn't lose any sets.

Today's Nadal would kill his teeny counterpart along with 2005 Federer. He has more pace off the forehand/serve/backhand and transitions to net better. Of course, he plays shorter balls against the new and improved Djokovic.

Can you guys honestly say that coming from his Barcelona win this year, Nadal didn't look invincible on clay?
Just keep things in perspective.

It's incredible how many times Nadal fans explained this and people STILL don't get it.

It's not about being more complete or how much more accomplished Nadal 2011 is.

Why is the Djoker thing being brought up time and time again? We are talking about GAME, not results

Before Madrid(so before any djokovic encounter) started, many Nadal fans were not satisfied with Nadal's game and how he executed it, even against journeymen. And Nadal had won two tournaments.

In 2008 and 2010 Nadal executed journeymen. Executed, not just beat. To give an example, in MC 2010 he spent six hours on court in five matches and lost only 14 games.

2005 Nadal had far more hunger and fire in his belly, even while being less complete. He would even go for it more. Anything he did moonball off one side he would chase down the other.

Nadal was doing points like this with stunning regularity:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=px3avcicJYE

Nadal of 2011 way have a better BH overall but does it matter if he does not use it? When he hits 85% forehand in one match? Not to mention the fact that he is slower than Nadal 2005 and seems more jaded on court(doing just enough).

Nadal of 2005 would ran like a madman when the other guy had 40-0 on his serve. Rafa of now conceedes the game at that point.

Trust me, put these two on a clay court and Nadal 2005 wins out most times.

 

[vllaznia]

It's incredible how many times Nadal fans explained this and people STILL don't get it.

Its more incredible that Rafatards still dont get that if it wasn't for Djokovic Rafa now should have won İndian Wells, Miami,Madrid and Rome and this would be considered even better than last year.

 

[ViscaB]

i think 2005 nadal was more fearless than 2011 nadal. at that age, you don't fear anything.

You hit the nail on the head. Everybody knows that once you get older you lose that fearlessness. An example is Lewis Hamilton who had this as well when he was younger. Another example is Michael Schumacher who now gets beaten by his teammate a lot because he's missing that edge that he used to have.

 

[JohnnyCracker]

It's amusing seeing *******s reaching so hard, clutching at straws. All this craps about 2005 Nadal would smoke 2011 Nadal...who are you kidding? You're trying to say that 2005 Nadal would beat 2011 Djokovic.

According to nards, the further you go back, the better Nadal was.
In other words, Nadal has been declining steadily since 2005.
:mrgreen:

Relax. Djokovic has gotten better. There's no reason to panic and think Nadal can't do the same. There's still lots of time and room for improvement. He's still very young. Have some faith in the guy.

 

[zagor]

It's amusing seeing *******s reaching so hard, clutching at straws. All this craps about 2005 Nadal would smoke 2011 Nadal...who are you kidding? You're trying to say that 2005 Nadal would beat 2011 Djokovic.

According to nards, the further you go back, the better Nadal was.
In other words, Nadal has been declining steadily since 2005.
:mrgreen:

Relax. Djokovic has gotten better. There's no reason to panic and think Nadal can't do the same. There's still lots of time and room for improvement. He's still very young. Have some faith in the guy.

Actually that's what they're saying now,after Novak beat Nadal 2 times in a row on clay.Before that I remember them singing a very different tune,heck you could have almost gotten the impression that Nadal couldn't hold a racquet straight prior to 2008(you know,the year the strong era started).

 

[namelessone]

Its more incredible that Rafatards still dont get that if it wasn't for Djokovic Rafa now should have won İndian Wells, Miami,Madrid and Rome and this would be considered even better than last year.

Talk about beating about the mother****ing bush.

We are talking about Nadal's GAME, not results. What is so freaking hard to get?

Nadal in 2005 won 11 tournies, Nadal of 2010 won 7 yet no one in their right mind would say that overall 2005 Nadal was better than 2010 Nadal.

Nadal 2011 played average CC tennis(when compared to past years) and still won 2 clay tournies this year. Go check out some comments from Nadal fans after Barcelona to see how "delighted" they were with Rafa's game. This was before any Djokovic on clay encounter, since you seem to be obsessed with Djokovic.

Yes, on HC Nadal 2011 is somewhat close to his 2010 self, no doubt about it. Sure, his serve could use some work and BH is still iffy but now HC Nadal plays better than clay Nadal and this is very weird to see.

In 2010 Nadal bageled Davydenko on a hardcourt and had 2 MP against him,beat Novak Djokovic in a HC Slam and even got a set off a JesusFed in WTF, on his worst surface. As much as I like 2005-2008 Nadal no way could be do these things on HC back then.

 

[namelessone]

It's amusing seeing *******s reaching so hard, clutching at straws. All this craps about 2005 Nadal would smoke 2011 Nadal...who are you kidding? You're trying to say that 2005 Nadal would beat 2011 Djokovic.

According to nards, the further you go back, the better Nadal was.
In other words, Nadal has been declining steadily since 2005.
:mrgreen:

Relax. Djokovic has gotten better. There's no reason to panic and think Nadal can't do the same. There's still lots of time and room for improvement. He's still very young. Have some faith in the guy.

No, 2011 is the first year of Nadal's decline on clay and it will continue this way in the years to come. It's logical. You don't dominate a surface for SIX YEARS and still be in your prime on the seventh year on it. No one was in their PRIME on their seventh year dominating a surface.

Fed wasn't in his prime on grass since 2008 according to his fans. That's five years of priming,2003-2007(with peak being 2005-2006 probably). Yet somehow Nadal, with a tougher style on the body, is still in his prime in his seventh year on clay.

On clay, Nadal 2005-2010> Nadal 2011-until he retires

On HC, Nadal 2010-2011>Nadal 2005-2009. Nadal has more weapons for HC now. No way could Nadal 2005-2009 serve bombs(from time to time), win a fast HC slam against a great HC'er like Djoker.

 

[JohnnyCracker]

Wait...after Nadal lost to Djokovic in Madrid you wrote this whole dissertation on how Nadal has been declining on clay since 2008. Guaranteeing that's it's true.

And now...2011 is the first year of his decline? hahahahahahah

wait....hahahahahahahahahaha
goal post shifting again for the 1 millionth time? :mrgreen:

Give it up, man.

 

[vllaznia]

Talk about beating about the mother****ing bush.

We are talking about Nadal's GAME, not results. What is so freaking hard to get?

Man you are increadible i am just saying that if it was not for Djokovic you would be saying what a great year Rafa is having again. Look at your post before Wimby 2010:

Rafa making QF will do for me at this tourney. Let's be honest about this: his movement does not seem that good to me, his depth is not great, he is avoiding his BH yet again and is putting up that lame slice of his and worst of all his ROS has been absolutely horrendeous up until now, thought that has to do at least in part with the big servers he has faced so far.

Oddly enough, I felt that his serve was quite decent in this tourney, at least for his standards anyway.

He needs a mammoth effort to get past Soderling and I am having a hard time seeing him win over Murray. A final would be a near miracle the way he is playing at this point.

 

[namelessone]

It's amusing seeing *******s reaching so hard, clutching at straws. All this craps about 2005 Nadal would smoke 2011 Nadal...who are you kidding? You're trying to say that 2005 Nadal would beat 2011 Djokovic.

According to nards, the further you go back, the better Nadal was.
In other words, Nadal has been declining steadily since 2005.
:mrgreen:

Relax. Djokovic has gotten better. There's no reason to panic and think Nadal can't do the same. There's still lots of time and room for improvement. He's still very young. Have some faith in the guy.

First of all, no way does NAdal 2005 beat Djokovic 2011.

Second, Nadal is not young. Tennis is about mileage, not actual age.

Nadal won his first slam 7 YEARS AGO.

To put this into perspective, Fed won his first 9 YEARS AGO and people think is one-two years away from retirement.

Starting with this year(he will be 25 in a month), Nadal's decline as a player starts. You can't turn back the clock. Some of the best prodigies/grinders around couldn't win anything of note after 25.

Just one example:

Johnny Mac won GS from 20-25(six seasons, 1979-1984) and made his last singles slam final when he was 26 in 1985. His peak was in 1984 but did not win anything of note after 1986. He was still a very good player after 1985 but peak McEnroe he was not.

Or forget this example and look at the careers of most greats. They usually have 4-6 prime years, not necesarily consecutive,( and depending on how much of a legend they were) and then they slowly but surely decline, winning the odd title or even grabbing a GS/MS on their way out(sampras is probably the best example for this).

It baffles me that people expect Nadal to be in his PRIME(no one is saying Nadal is a bad player now but prime? no way) after SIX STRAIGHT YEARS of being at the top of the game.

 

[aphex]

First of all, no way does NAdal 2005 beat Djokovic 2011.

Second, Nadal is not young. Tennis is about mileage, not actual age.

Nadal won his first slam 7 YEARS AGO.

To put this into perspective, Fed won his first 9 YEARS AGO and people think is one-two years away from retirement.

Starting with this year(he will be 25 in a month), Nadal's decline as a player starts. You can't turn back the clock. Some of the best prodigies/grinders around couldn't win anything of note after 25.

Just one example:

Johnny Mac won GS from 20-25(six seasons, 1979-1984) and made his last singles slam final when he was 26 in 1985. His peak was in 1984 but did not win anything of note after 1986. He was still a very good player after 1985 but peak McEnroe he was not.

Or forget this example and look at the careers of most greats. They usually have 4-6 prime years, not necesarily consecutive,( and depending on how much of a legend they were) and then they slowly but surely decline, winning the odd title or even grabbing a GS/MS on their way out(sampras is probably the best example for this).

It baffles me that people expect Nadal to be in his PRIME(no one is saying Nadal is a bad player now but prime? no way) after SIX STRAIGHT YEARS of being at the top of the game.

Cool story.

Noel 2011 beats ANY Ralph.

 

[TheTruth]

These guys have no aim other than to beat down Nadal and his fans. Even if they get *******s to concede that Djokovic's peak on clay is better than Nadal's, it will not change that fact that Nadal is by far the more accomplished player on clay now and possibly for the rest of their lives. These peak to peak arguments are getting ridiculous.

This is very true.

 

[namelessone]

Man you are increadible i am just saying that if it was not for Djokovic you would be saying what a great year Rafa is having again. Look at your post before Wimby 2010:

On HC Nadal of 2011 is not that far off from his 2010 self. 2011 Nadal is playing almost as well.

2011 Clay Nadal is miles away from his 2010 clay self and this is evident just by looking at MC 2011/Barcelona 2011(so we don't get skewed by djoker remarks) and MC 2010/Rome 2010. Look at Nadal's level in those first two tournies and compare them to those 2011 tournaments. 2010 is far,far better.

And was I not right at the time in WB 2010?

Nadal's slice was lame in early WB 2010(and it only got marginally better afterwards) and he was slicing instead of hitting the BH.

Remember, Nadal had two five setters in the early rounds and while he sliced against Sod he was within a couple of points of getting BAGELED in the first set.What changed was that a bad line call riled him up early in the second set and from the middle of the first set he started slicing a lot less.

I also talked about some really lame Nadal matches in RG 2010, against Mina and Zeballos.

 

[JohnnyCracker]

First of all, no way does NAdal 2005 beat Djokovic 2011.

Second, Nadal is not young. Tennis is about mileage, not actual age.

Nadal won his first slam 7 YEARS AGO.

To put this into perspective, Fed won his first 9 YEARS AGO and people think is one-two years away from retirement.

Starting with this year(he will be 25 in a month), Nadal's decline as a player starts. You can't turn back the clock. Some of the best prodigies/grinders around couldn't win anything of note after 25.

Just one example:

Johnny Mac won GS from 20-25(six seasons, 1979-1984) and made his last singles slam final when he was 26 in 1985. His peak was in 1984 but did not win anything of note after 1986. He was still a very good player after 1985 but peak McEnroe he was not.

Or forget this example and look at the careers of most greats. They usually have 4-6 prime years, not necesarily consecutive,( and depending on how much of a legend they were) and then they slowly but surely decline, winning the odd title or even grabbing a GS/MS on their way out(sampras is probably the best example for this).

It baffles me that people expect Nadal to be in his PRIME(no one is saying Nadal is a bad player now but prime? no way) after SIX STRAIGHT YEARS of being at the top of the game.

:mrgreen: butt still hurt I see (ignoring my other post...how convienient) :mrgreen:so 25 is the definite first year of Nadal decline, then. Are you sure? Is it a MATHEMATICAL CERTAINTY? :mrgreen:

 

[vllaznia]

And was I not right at the time in WB 2010?

You said it will be a miracle if Nadal would reach the final, tell me were you right or indeed a miracle happened but we did not notice it!

 

[namelessone]

And was I not right at the time in WB 2010?

You said it will be a miracle if Nadal would reach the final, tell me were you right or indeed a miracle happened but we did not notice it!

Maybe the wording is exaggerated but Nadal upped his game massively after those two scares.

Nadal lost four sets to two relative no-names and was withing 2 points of being bageled in the first set of the QF. From the second set of the QF, he went on to win 9 sets without losing one, in front of a tough customer(soderling), andy murray at home(murray beating him in AO 2010 in straights) and berdych(the guy that took fed and djoker out).

I wasn't expecting it.

 

[namelessone]

:mrgreen: butt still hurt I see (ignoring my other post...how convienient) :mrgreen:so 25 is the definite first year of Nadal decline, then. Are you sure? Is it a MATHEMATICAL CERTAINTY? :mrgreen:

What is so different in your other post than the one I quoted?

 

[JohnnyCracker]

are you blind? This one.

Wait...after Nadal lost to Djokovic in Madrid you wrote this whole dissertation on how Nadal has been declining on clay since 2008. Guaranteeing that's it's true.

And now...2011 is the first year of his decline? hahahahahahah

wait....hahahahahahahahahaha
goal post shifting again for the 1 millionth time?

Give it up, man.

At what point did the beginning of Nadal's decline shift from 2008 to 2011?

BTW, just so it's clear to everybody. Since 2005 and 2011 Nadal would not/cannot beat 2011 Djokovic. Which Nadal would beat 2011 Djokovic? 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010? 2004?:mrgreen:

 

[vllaznia]

And was I not right at the time in WB 2010?



Maybe the wording is exaggerated but Nadal upped his game massively after those two scares.

Nadal lost four sets to two relative no-names and was withing 2 points of being bageled in the first set of the QF. From the second set of the QF, he went on to win 9 sets without losing one, in front of a tough customer(soderling), andy murray at home(murray beating him in AO 2010 in straights) and berdych(the guy that took fed and djoker out).

I wasn't expecting it.

I posted that quote from you because your evaluation of Nadal's form was not the best and you are wrong also now the only reason that Nadal is playing "bad" is Djokovic same as it was for Federer during his prime it was Nadal that made Federer play bad.

 

[namelessone]

are you blind? This one.

"Wait...after Nadal lost to Djokovic in Madrid you wrote this whole dissertation on how Nadal has been declining on clay since 2008. Guaranteeing that's it's true.

And now...2011 is the first year of his decline? hahahahahahah

wait....hahahahahahahahahaha
goal post shifting again for the 1 millionth time?

Give it up, man. "

At what point did the beginning of Nadal's decline shift from 2008 to 2011?

BTW, just so it's clear to everybody. Since 2005 and 2011 Nadal would not/cannot beat 2011 Djokovic. Which Nadal would beat 2011 Djokovic? 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010? 2004?:mrgreen:

Nadal 2008 and 2010 would have the best shot on clay against Djoker 2011 and Nadal 2010 could dent Djoker 2011 on HC IMO(Nadal 2011 took Djoker 2011 to three sets on HC so I don't see why HC Nadal 2010 can't)

You can't say player A would DEFINITELY beat player B cause there are a gazzilion factors at play, just make and educated guess(giving your arguments as to why you think that)

 

[JohnnyCracker]

you can't say DEFINITELY? oh really?
who said "NO WAY 2005 Nadal beat 2011 Djokovic? :mrgreen:
come on, who said it? :mrgreen:

 

[namelessone]

you can't say DEFINITELY? oh really?
who said "NO WAY 2005 Nadal beat 2011 Djokovic? :mrgreen:
come on, who said it? :mrgreen:

Yes, the same way I can say that NO WAY does Fish beat Nadal on clay(even Nadal in 2013) to give a random example.

Some matchups, based on peak/prime form and preffered surface can be pretty accurately predicted.

It's the close ones that are near impossible to predict.

We are talking about a hungry player(Nadal 2005), somewhat limited technically, in his FIRST year dominating a surface versus

Novak Djokovic 2011, who is probably at the peak of his career and who has greater experience on clay(about 3-4 years more) than him.

 

[JohnnyCracker]

Oh, so we go from 2005 Nadal, who would smoke 2011 Nadal, to Mardy Fish beating Nadal on clay?
BRAVO! Excellent example. :lol: :mrgreen:

 

[aphex]

you can't say DEFINITELY? oh really?
who said "NO WAY 2005 Nadal beat 2011 Djokovic? :mrgreen:
come on, who said it? :mrgreen:

This is turning into a beatdown.

Johnny bagels nameless to take the first set in 18 minutes.

 

[Deleted member 21996]

This is turning into a beatdown.

Johnny bagels nameless to take the first set in 18 minutes.

Tennis lessons 101 right there!

all of the sudden it reminds me of the King of clay getting schooled in 2 sets on clay!!!

 

[TMF]

Nadal after losing to Novak said he has to continue to improve. He believe he can get better, it's comical for his fans to say rafa will soon turn 25 is declining when rafa himself don't think so.

Just let it go, you are not convincing to anyone.

 

[TMF]

It's amusing seeing *******s reaching so hard, clutching at straws. All this craps about 2005 Nadal would smoke 2011 Nadal...who are you kidding? You're trying to say that 2005 Nadal would beat 2011 Djokovic.

According to nards, the further you go back, the better Nadal was.
In other words, Nadal has been declining steadily since 2005.
:mrgreen:

Relax. Djokovic has gotten better. There's no reason to panic and think Nadal can't do the same. There's still lots of time and room for improvement. He's still very young. Have some faith in the guy.

They are contradicting themselves. When Federer owned the tour during his prime, they say Nadal was young, still learning, still figuring out how to compete outside of clay.

Now that argument doesn't suit them, so to defend rafa they have to say rafa 2005 was some kind of greek god.

 

[namelessone]

They are contradicting themselves. When Federer owned the tour during his prime, they say Nadal was young, still learning, still figuring out how to compete outside of clay.

Now that argument doesn't suit them, so to defend rafa they have to say rafa 2005 was some kind of greek god.

And this isn't true?

Nadal won 3 RG and numerous clay masters titles before making his first AO semifinal in 2008(he also made his first USO SF in 2008 ). So how is it a lie that he was masterclass on clay at the time(2005-2008 ) but not quite as good on HC? Also while young, Rafa met Roger twice on grass, during Roger's prime, 2006 and 2007. Basically Rafa only failed to meet Roger many times on HC cause, surprise-surprise, he wasn't as good yet.

I don't think Nadal of 2005 is made out to be some greek god, just saying that his 2005 clay self is better than his 2011 clay self. 2011-2010 HC Nadal is much better on HC for example than his 2005-2008 self.

It's only natural that with age(and it has been six years and a half since Nadal won his first GS) and getting a more complete game, that his clay game would suffer. In fact many people were speculating about this at the end of last year, you can find the threads about it.

 

[TMF]

And this isn't true?

Nadal won 3 RG and numerous clay masters titles before making his first AO semifinal in 2008(he also made his first USO SF in 2008 ). So how is it a lie that he was masterclass on clay at the time(2005-2008 ) but not quite as good on HC? Also while young, Rafa met Roger twice on grass, during Roger's prime, 2006 and 2007. Basically Rafa only failed to meet Roger many times on HC cause, surprise-surprise, he wasn't as good yet.

I don't think Nadal of 2005 is made out to be some greek god, just saying that his 2005 clay self is better than his 2011 clay self. 2011-2010 HC Nadal is much better on HC for example than his 2005-2008 self.

It's only natural that with age(and it has been six years and a half since Nadal won his first GS) and getting a more complete game, that his clay game would suffer. In fact many people were speculating about this at the end of last year, you can find the threads about it.

Nadal developed his game also made him a better player on clay, not jsut on other surfaces. What you're saying is Nadal mature and got better on other surfaces but decline on clay?
No, No! it doesn't work that way. He add more dimension to clay...bh slice, take ball to the rise, aggressive and play closer to the baseline, can hit topspin + flatter, improve volley.

No way a 1D 2005 Nadal is better than 2011 on clay. He has a lot more varieties in his game.

 

[Double_Fault]

Since players are getting stronger according to "tests by Djokovic's team", then Nadal 2011 will obviously beat Nadal 2005. However, Djokovic would win against both so it is irrelevant.

 

[NamRanger]

So if Nadal 2005 > Nadal 2011

and Djokovic > Nadal 2005


So does that mean Djokovic > Nadal period? Did the ********* namelessone really just concede that Djokovic is just a better player than Nadal on clay?! LOL.

 

[Double_Fault]

Djokovic > Everyone, period.

 

[single_handed_champion]

Everyone has not won Grand Slams or even gotten to the top 10. Hence Djokovic > Everyone means squat. :roll: