Did Murray stop Rafa from winning non-calendar year Grand slam? USO '08.

[LazyNinja19]

I've read this claim many times on this forum, that Federer helped Nadal win the RG 2011 by defeating Djokovic in SF.

If the above argument is true, then i can definitely make an argument that, Murray gifted Federer the USO 2008!

Nadal 2008 season

This year, Nadal won 8 titles, including RG, Wimbledon and the Olympics singles Gold!

This particular year, Nadal-Federer H2H was 4-0, where Nadal defeated Federer in 4 consecutive Finals,
1. Monte carlo Masters
2. Hamburg masters
3. RG
4. Wimbledon, and went on to win the 5th consecutive final at AO 2009!

Nadal also won the Toronto Masters that year. He won 5 consecutive titles at : Hamburg masters, RG, Queens, Wimbledon,and Toronto masters, compiling a 32 match winning streak, which is the longest across three surfaces in tennis history!

He then went on to clinch the World No.1 ranking, after the Olympics!

Rafa then reached the USO Semi-final, losing to Murray in 4 sets. Murray then went on to lose to Federer in the Final.

Clearly, Nadal had a great hold over Federer that year. Mentally, Federer was a wounded man in front of Nadal (clearly visible at the ceremony of AO '09)
He had defeated him in 4 consecutive finals, including Wimbledon and had displaced him from No.1 as well. Had they met in the USO finals, there's no doubt the Nadal would have won!

Djokovic on the other hand, had NEVER defeated Nadal in a Grand Slam match before RG '11. There was more chance of Rafa defeating Fed in USO '08, than Djoko defeating Rafa at RG '11.

Now, please based on the above arguments, vote.

And discuss!

 

[Backspin1183]

Yes, he did. That's what they do to each other. Nadal wasn't good enough to win 4 consecutive Slams. End of story.

 

[tennisaddict]

It is a joke to compare the young Murray loss with the monster Novak 2.0 loss.

For starters, Murray was not on a 40 match streak.

 

[LazyNinja19]

Yes, he did. That's what they do to each other. Nadal wasn't good enough to win 4 consecutive Slams. End of story.

I know. But the basis behind my thread is to refute the claim that "Federer saved Rafa from losing RG '11"

It is a joke to compare the young Murray loss with the monster Novak 2.0 loss.

For starters, Murray was not on a 40 match streak.

You did not understand what i'm trying to say. Please read again. It's not about Murray, actually. Read the poll options.

 

[Backspin1183]

I know. But the basis behind my thread is to refute the claim that "Federer saved Rafa from losing RG '11"



You did not understand what i'm trying to say. Please read again. It's not about Murray, actually. Read the poll options.

Yeah that one's stupid. Djokovic's had two opportunities to take down Nadal at RG since then and we saw he wasn't good enough to beat Nadal in Paris.

 

[tennisaddict]

I know. But the basis behind my thread is to refute the claim that "Federer saved Rafa from losing RG '11"



You did not understand what i'm trying to say. Please read again. It's not about Murray, actually. Read the poll options.

What i am saying is poll options are incorrect.

Fed saved Nadal, while Murray did not save Fed.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Yeah that one's stupid. Djokovic's had two opportunities to take down Nadal at RG since then and we saw he wasn't good enough to beat Nadal in Paris.

Yeah but Djokovic's level the past two years was not as good as in 2011 when he was playing out of his skin. Not sure why so many Nadal fans always seem to omit this fact.

 

[LazyNinja19]

What i am saying is poll options are incorrect.

Fed saved Nadal, while Murray did not save Fed.

The options are EXACTLY correct! Either both were saved, or both weren't!

This is your bias which makes you think that options are wrong. And this is what i wanted to prove.

 

[LazyNinja19]

Yeah but Djokovic's level the past two years was not as good as in 2011 when he was playing out of his skin. Not sure why so many Nadal fans always seem to omit this fact.

You could use that argument, IF Djokovic had that 2011 level throughout his career, but couldn't maintain it post 2011.

But the truth is that, 2011 was an anomaly/ a freak year!
No one can maintain that level for more than 1 season. The level of Djokovic post 2011 is still brilliant, but normal level of an elite player.

Hope you get my point.

 

[Djokovic2011]

You could use that argument, IF Djokovic had that 2011 level throughout his career, but couldn't maintain it post 2011.

But the truth is that, 2011 was an anomaly/ a freak year!
No one can maintain that level for more than 1 season. The level of Djokovic post 2011 is still brilliant, but normal level of an elite player.

Hope you get my point.

Yeah I get what you're saying and I agree. Happy new year by the way and to everyone else at TTW- let's hope for a great 2014

 

[LazyNinja19]

Yeah I get what you're saying and I agree. Happy new year by the way and to everyone else at TTW- let's hope for a great 2014

Same to you man!
This thread was to point out the obvious bias of Fed fans like tennisaddict above!

Just a query. I see your location is England. So why is Murray not your favourite player?

 

[The_Order]

Definitely Murray helped Fed and prevented Nadal from winning 4 in a row.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Same to you man!
Just a query. I see your location is England. So why is Murray not your favourite player?

Lol I wasn't aware that your favourite player had to be from the same country you were born in. I like Murray but I just prefer Djokovic. Last year's Wimbledon final was kind of awkward for me actually- my family were like " please don't say you want Djokovic to win!" and I was like "no I'll be happy if Murray wins" but really I wanted Novak to win the match lol. Having said that I was rooting for Andy to win in 2012 and I really felt bad for him afterwards. Tennis can be an emotional rollercoaster at times

 

[LazyNinja19]

Lol I wasn't aware that your favourite player had to be from the same country you were born in. I like Murray but I just prefer Djokovic. Last year's Wimbledon final was kind of awkward for me actually- my family were like " please don't say you want Djokovic to win!" and I was like "no I'll be happy if Murray wins" but really I wanted Novak to win the match lol. Having said that I was rooting for Andy to win in 2012 and I really felt bad for him afterwards. Tennis can be an emotional rollercoaster at times

Haha. I know what you're saying man. Individual sports can get a bit tricky in this regard.
If there was a top Indian tennis pro, i would probably want him to beat anyone but Nadal

 

[Chanwan]

The options are EXACTLY correct! Either both were saved, or both weren't!

This is your bias which makes you think that options are wrong. And this is what i wanted to prove.

Hahaha, just listen to yourself. Of course it's possible for only one of the options to be correct. I.e. one saved one, but the other didn't

 

[Chanwan]

You could use that argument, IF Djokovic had that 2011 level throughout his career, but couldn't maintain it post 2011.

But the truth is that, 2011 was an anomaly/ a freak year!
No one can maintain that level for more than 1 season. The level of Djokovic post 2011 is still brilliant, but normal level of an elite player.

Hope you get my point.

The point is that just because Djokovic' wasn't good enough to beat Nadal at RG in 2012-13 that does not mean that he would not have been good enough to do it in 2011, which, as you say, was a 'freak year'.

 

[Who Am I?]

Stupid logic tbh. Nole had defeated Nadal twice on clay and that too in straight sets each time, which is why many people think that Federer saved Rafa at RG, which happened to a clay tournament.

OTOH, Nadal did beat Federer in their last 4 matches prior to US Open 2008, but unlike Nole he didn't score 2 relatively easy victories over Fed on the surface of the slam. Fed-Rafa didn't even play on HCs that year, so this comparison is really moot IMO.

 

[Mainad]

In 2008, Nadal had yet to beat Federer on hardcourt but, then again, he hadn't beaten him on grass at the time of the Wimbledon final and he was to go on to beat him in the final of the next hardcourt Slam (2009 AO) so it's possible that Murray did save Federer from his third Slam defeat in a row to Nadal that year.

Like all these what-ifs and maybes, we can never know for sure!

 

[Chanwan]

In 2008, Nadal had yet to beat Federer on hardcourt but, then again, he hadn't beaten him on grass at the time of the Wimbledon final and he was to go on to beat him in the final of the next hardcourt Slam (2009 AO) so it's possible that Murray did save Federer from his third Slam defeat in a row to Nadal that year.

Like all these what-ifs and maybes, we can never know for sure!

Still, most would agree that the US Open surface in 2008 would be better for Fed's game versus Nadal compared to AO 2009.

And many Nadal fans have said that the loss to Murray that year was caused by burnout/tiredness after his 8 titles during the 4 previous months.

All in all, I would think Federer would have beaten him that year at the US, but it would have been close. And if he had that may even have turned around the AO 09... - just saying.

 

[LazyNinja19]

Stupid logic tbh. Nole had defeated Nadal twice on clay and that too in straight sets each time, which is why many people think that Federer saved Rafa at RG, which happened to a clay tournament.

OTOH, Nadal did beat Federer in their last 4 matches prior to US Open 2008, but unlike Nole he didn't score 2 relatively easy victories over Fed on the surface of the slam. Fed-Rafa didn't even play on HCs that year, so this comparison is really moot IMO.

But Djokovic had never beaten Nadal in a best of 5, in a Slam! So there is a very slight possibility of him doing it, in his first RG final against Rafa.

Regarding Fed, Nadal had absolutely demolished Fed's confidence that year. First, crushing him in RG final. Then, defeating him at Wimbledon, and then taking away his No.1 ranking.
Also, Nadal had defeated Fed in 4 slam finals, and 1 semifinal by that point. Whereas, Djokovic had NEVER beaten Nadal in a slam!

Also, Nadal DID beat Fed the next time they met on Hard court, i.e. AO '09.

Hahaha, just listen to yourself. Of course it's possible for only one of the options to be correct. I.e. one saved one, but the other didn't

Yes, that is done to point out the obvious bias which Fed fans have been using on this forum.
If you read my OP carefully, you'll understand why Nadal had a much bigger chance of defeating Fed at USO '08, than Djokovic defeating Nadal at RG '11.

 

[zam88]

Fed vs. Rafa in the USO final in 2008 would have been one hell of a fun match to have seen.

Given their history and Federer's mental state of getting beat by Rafa at Wimbledon, I could see where you could make the conclusion that Murray saved the tourney for Federer.

That 2008 Wimbledon was anyone's match though... basically a draw that had to get decided one way or another.

I imagine a USO match with those 2 in '08 would've been something to see... although I can't help but feel like Federer could have won that match.

Then again he donked off the final the next year to DelPo in what I consider to be one of the worst losses of his entire career that I still can't believe happened sometimes...

I think Murray did save him... and I feel strongly Federer saved Nadal in '11

 

[tennisaddict]

OP, you need to answer who will win a match between 2011 Novak vs 2008 Murray.

 

[Mainad]

OP, you need to answer who will win a match between 2011 Novak vs 2008 Murray.

There is a curious symmetry in their match-ups in those 2 years:

2008 H2H: Murray 2 - 1 Djokovic.

2011 H2H: Djokovic 2 - 1 Murray.

 

[mango72]

Yeah but Djokovic's level the past two years was not as good as in 2011 when he was playing out of his skin. Not sure why so many Nadal fans always seem to omit this fact.

While Nadal`s level in 2011 was not as good anywhere as 2008, 2010, early 2009, 2013, even early 2002 and mid 2007. While his clay court level was the absolute worst it was anytime from 2005-2013, by a gigantic margin. Dont see why Djokovic fans always seem to omit this fact.

 

[mango72]

In 2008, Nadal had yet to beat Federer on hardcourt but, then again, he hadn't beaten him on grass at the time of the Wimbledon final and he was to go on to beat him in the final of the next hardcourt Slam (2009 AO) so it's possible that Murray did save Federer from his third Slam defeat in a row to Nadal that year.

Like all these what-ifs and maybes, we can never know for sure!

Nadal never lost to Federer in a slam again after 2007, and even that was the gutsiest win over Federer`s career since Nadal mauled him off the ground that day, and Federer`s serve and big points play (and Nadal`s choking on all the big points) carried him through in unlikely fashion somehow. 2008 U.S Open was in the midst of a period Nadal would beat Federer in 3 slam finals in 7 months on 3 different surfaces. There is only one obvious conclusion to draw who would have won had they played at the 2008 U.S Open.

2011 French is not a good parallel since even with Nadal`s worst ever clay form, and Djokovic`s win streak over Nadal at the time, it would still only be 45% at best for Djokovic to beat Nadal in a RG final. Nadal was almost certain to beat Federer in any slam they potentially played at after 2007.

 

[sam_p]

Nadal never lost to Federer in a slam again after 2007, and even that was the gutsiest win over Federer`s career since Nadal mauled him off the ground that day, and Federer`s serve and big points play (and Nadal`s choking on all the big points) carried him through in unlikely fashion somehow. 2008 U.S Open was in the midst of a period Nadal would beat Federer in 3 slam finals in 7 months on 3 different surfaces. There is only one obvious conclusion to draw who would have won had they played at the 2008 U.S Open.

2011 French is not a good parallel since even with Nadal`s worst ever clay form, and Djokovic`s win streak over Nadal at the time, it would still only be 45% at best for Djokovic to beat Nadal in a RG final. Nadal was almost certain to beat Federer in any slam they potentially played at after 2007.

I tend to agree with your reasoning overall, however, it is impossible to know for sure what would have happened in 2011. Things happened the way they happened.

Given the horrible matchup and dominance that Nadal has had over Federer on outdoor surfaces except grass, there are tons of titles that Federer is lucky to have won without having to face Nadal. I am content though to agree that Federer has his impressive 17 GS titles, however they were won. I don't expect that Fed fanboys will similarly credit Nadal if/when he exceeds 17 GS titles though...

 

[ctoth666]

Of course Federer helped Nadal win the French Open in 2011 and probably every year they played the final. How can you refute that? Nadal owns Federer's butt. Djokovic has a perfect record against him in 2011, so he would've possibly beaten him. It's not that complicated, and making points about this or that and drawing conclusions from this and making parallels to this or that just muddies the waters.

 

[Djokovic2011]

While Nadal`s level in 2011 was not as good anywhere as 2008, 2010, early 2009, 2013, even early 2002 and mid 2007. While his clay court level was the absolute worst it was anytime from 2005-2013, by a gigantic margin. Dont see why Djokovic fans always seem to omit this fact.

Completely irrelevant. If Nadal couldn't play as well on clay in 2011 as he did in other seasons that's his problem not Djokovic's.

 

[TMF]

Very poor comparison. Nadal is known for showing up in the 1st half of the year and fade away after Wimbledon. OTOH, Federer played well after the Wimbledon every year. What Nadal failed to make the USO final is not an Earth shattering news, but Fed have been consistently making the FO final, and he is the one who save Nadal from facing the best player(Nole) at the time who would be the favorite in the FO final.

 

[NADALRECORD]

Nadal-Murray 2008 USO was played on 2 different courts. That's the US Open for ya. Very winnable match for Nadal. Anyway, Nadal going for his 3rd US Open title in 2014, and that may well be part of The Calendar Year Grand Slam.

 

[NADALRECORD]

Very poor comparison. Nadal is known for showing up in the 1st half of the year and fade away after Wimbledon. OTOH, Federer played well after the Wimbledon every year. What Nadal failed to make the USO final is not an Earth shattering news, but Fed have been consistently making the FO final, and he is the one who save Nadal from facing the best player(Nole) at the time who would be the favorite in the FO final.

Djokovic beat Nadal at Monte Carlo 2013 in straight sets, and Nadal looked rusty in 2013 Roland Garros and still beat Djokovic. So looks like Djokovic is completely incapable of beating Nadal at Roland Garros no matter what. So there is no logic in suggesting Djokovic would have beaten Nadal at 2011 Roland Garros. I give Djokovic no chance.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Djokovic beat Nadal at Monte Carlo 2013 in straight sets, and Nadal looked rusty in 2013 Roland Garros and still beat Djokovic. So looks like Djokovic is completely incapable of beating Nadal at Roland Garros no matter what. So there is no logic in suggesting Djokovic would have beaten Nadal at 2011 Roland Garros. I give Djokovic no chance.

Watch the 2011 Rome final highlights and then try telling me Djokovic would have had no chance.

 

[TMF]

Djokovic beat Nadal at Monte Carlo 2013 in straight sets, and Nadal looked rusty in 2013 Roland Garros and still beat Djokovic. So looks like Djokovic is completely incapable of beating Nadal at Roland Garros no matter what. So there is no logic in suggesting Djokovic would have beaten Nadal at 2011 Roland Garros. I give Djokovic no chance.

I don't understand why you are equating 2011 Nole/Nadal matchup with 2013 Nole/Nadal because it's not the same. Two years ago, Nole has his number, and was the better player than he is today. And remember, Nadal barely beat Nole at the FO this year, so I don't like his chances against a god mode 2011 Nole.

 

[Djokovic2011]

I don't understand why you are equating 2011 Nole/Nadal matchup with 2013 Nole/Nadal because it's not the same. Two years ago, Nole has his number, and was the better player than he is today. And remember, Nadal barely beat Nole at the FO this year, so I don't like his chances against a god mode 2011 Nole.

Pretty much this. Happy new year TMF

 

[TMF]

Pretty much this. Happy new year TMF

Happy New Year to you too.

 

[Chanwan]

But Djokovic had never beaten Nadal in a best of 5, in a Slam! So there is a very slight possibility of him doing it, in his first RG final against Rafa.

Regarding Fed, Nadal had absolutely demolished Fed's confidence that year. First, crushing him in RG final. Then, defeating him at Wimbledon, and then taking away his No.1 ranking.
Also, Nadal had defeated Fed in 4 slam finals, and 1 semifinal by that point. Whereas, Djokovic had NEVER beaten Nadal in a slam!

Also, Nadal DID beat Fed the next time they met on Hard court, i.e. AO '09.

If you read my OP carefully, you'll understand why Nadal had a much bigger chance of defeating Fed at USO '08, than Djokovic defeating Nadal at RG '11.

I disagree with that. I think both matches would be pretty even with Federer being a 55-45 favorite for the former and Djokovic a 55-45 favorite for the latter.

Reasoning:
Still, most would agree that the US Open surface in 2008 would be better for Fed's game versus Nadal compared to AO 2009.

And many Nadal fans have said that the loss to Murray that year was caused by burnout/tiredness after his 8 titles during the 4 previous months - i.e. he would be tired against Federer.

All in all, I would think Federer would have beaten him that year at the US, but it would have been close. And if he had that may even have turned around the AO 09... - just saying.

As for Djoko, he was in the middle of a 7 match winning streak vs. Rafa. And would go on to win the next three slam finals in a row against Rafa (i.e., proving he could beat him in a slam final). Of course, RG would have been even tougher, but his chances would have been pretty good.

All in all - both Nadal in 2008 and Federer in 2011 made it easier for the other to win that particular slam by virtue of losing/winning their semis respectively.

Forced to pick, I would still say Federer wins the match and that Nadal loses his for the reasons given above.

 

[Homeboy Hotel]

I stopped reading when I saw " Federer helped Nadal win the RG 2011 "

 

[Chanwan]

While Nadal`s level in 2011 was not as good anywhere as 2008, 2010, early 2009, 2013, even early 2002 and mid 2007. While his clay court level was the absolute worst it was anytime from 2005-2013, by a gigantic margin. Dont see why Djokovic fans always seem to omit this fact.

Well, if you say that, all the more reason why Djokovic 2011 would have beaten him at RG... - just saying

 

[LazyNinja19]

I disagree with that. I think both matches would be pretty even with Federer being a 55-45 favorite for the former and Djokovic a 55-45 favorite for the latter.

You're clearly biased in thinking this.
The poll options I provided, are unbiased. Nadal clearly had a big advantage over Federer that year, crushing him at RG, taking away his Wimbledon crown and No.1ranking.

And many Nadal fans have said that the loss to Murray that year was caused by burnout/tiredness after his 8 titles during the 4 previous months - i.e. he would be tired against Federer.

He didn't seem tired after epic AO '09 semi against Verdasco, in the final.

Can't the Djokovic loss to Fed at RG'11 SF be due to burnout after a season of 41-0. So by that logic, he would have been tired had he met Nadal in finals, no?

As for Djoko, he was in the middle of a 7 match winning streak vs. Rafa. And would go on to win the next three slam finals in a row against Rafa (i.e., proving he could beat him in a slam final). Of course, RG would have been even tougher, but his chances would have been pretty good.

At the time of RG '11, Djoko had defeated Nadal 4 times that year, all Masters finals.
At the time of USO '08, Nadal had defeated Federer 4 times in finals, including 2 Slams and 2 Masters finals! And later Nadal went on to win 5th consecutive final at AO'09.

And if he had that may even have turned around the AO 09... - just saying.

What if Djokovic had met Rafa in RG'11 final and lost. Then that might have even turned around Wimby and USO '11, with that logic. No?

All in all - both Nadal in 2008 and Federer in 2011 made it easier for the other to win that particular slam by virtue of losing/winning their semis respectively.

Agree only with this.

Forced to pick, I would still say Federer wins the match and that Nadal loses his for the reasons given above.

Then it's your opinion. With which, I respectfully disagree!

 

[victorcruz]

It's damn near impossible to beat Nadal on a best of 5 on Clay. Yes Djokovic was in 2.0 form, but there is no proof that he was going to do the impossible and defeat Nadal on his god-mode surface. Only speculation. Personally, I wish they had played because I feel Nadal would have beat him, and the rest of the year would have gone to a different tune

 

[Chanwan]

You're clearly biased in thinking this.
The poll options I provided, are unbiased. Nadal clearly had a big advantage over Federer that year, crushing him at RG, taking away his Wimbledon crown and No.1ranking.

Not any more than my judgement - being biased can also mean giving a 50-50 judgement that Rosol will beat Nadal the next time they meet

He didn't seem tired after epic AO '09 semi against Verdasco, in the final.

Can't the Djokovic loss to Fed at RG'11 SF be due to burnout after a season of 41-0. So by that logic, he would have been tired had he met Nadal in finals, no?

Sure could - my main reasoning with the US was the surface anyhow[/I]



At the time of RG '11, Djoko had defeated Nadal 4 times that year, all Masters finals.
At the time of USO '08, Nadal had defeated Federer 4 times in finals, including 2 Slams and 2 Masters finals! And later Nadal went on to win 5th consecutive final at AO'09.
First one included two straight sets defeats on the surface being played on. The latter included none of those



What if Djokovic had met Rafa in RG'11 final and lost. Then that might have even turned around Wimby and USO '11, with that logic. No?
Yes, it might have turned one or both matches around. Loses and wins build up depending on the previous matches. And I'm not saying that ND would def. have defeated Nadal at the RG that year, just that I give him the slight upperhand for the that particular year based on the previous four wins, including two on the surface


Then it's your opinion. With which, I respectfully disagree!

Everything is based on opinions, including your poll options.
As I said, it's completely possible for a) Federer beating Nadal at the US to happen without b) Nadal beating Djokovic at the FO to happen - and vice versa.

 

[mango72]

Completely irrelevant. If Nadal couldn't play as well on clay in 2011 as he did in other seasons that's his problem not Djokovic's.

And if your beloved Djokovic couldnt stop Nadal from winning the French every year even way past his clay prime and 25% what he used to be on the surface, and most times couldnt even make the final, that is his problem, not Nadals.

 

[mango72]

Very poor comparison. Nadal is known for showing up in the 1st half of the year and fade away after Wimbledon. OTOH, Federer played well after the Wimbledon every year. What Nadal failed to make the USO final is not an Earth shattering news, but Fed have been consistently making the FO final, and he is the one who save Nadal from facing the best player(Nole) at the time who would be the favorite in the FO final.

Nadal often plays very well at the U.S Open, and has won the Canadian Masters several times in your career so your analogy is badly flawed. After the U.S Open Nadal fades away pretty much every year, but not after Wimbledon.

Nadal played great tennis to win the U.S Open in 2010 and 2013, played very well in 2011 but was never beating Djokovic on a hard court that particular year, and was playing very well in 2008 too and was the clear favorite to win the title before the semis. Had Nadal gotten past Murray, Nadal would have been the heavy favorite with the bookies to beat Federer in the final, just as he was of the 4 players in the semis. Djokovic meanwhile would have only been even odds with the bookies before the 2011 French final with Nadal.

 

[Djokovic2011]

And if your beloved Djokovic couldnt stop Nadal from winning the French every year even way past his clay prime and 25% what he used to be on the surface, and most times couldnt even make the final, that is his problem, not Nadals.

This comment has absolutely nothing to do with what I was saying. Btw why do you refer to him as my "beloved Djokovic" just because I'm defending him? Aren't you doing the exact same thing with Nadal? Lmao. Anyway welcome to TTW- another Djokovic hater is just what this forum needs. :-|

 

[NADALRECORD]

I don't understand why you are equating 2011 Nole/Nadal matchup with 2013 Nole/Nadal because it's not the same. Two years ago, Nole has his number, and was the better player than he is today. And remember, Nadal barely beat Nole at the FO this year, so I don't like his chances against a god mode 2011 Nole.

Not much of a difference. In the lead-up to 2011 Roland Garros, Djokovic had beaten Nadal in 2 clay events. In the lead-up to 2013 Roland Garros, Djokovic had beaten Nadal in one clay event but it was the most important of all - Monte Carlo, Nadal's pet event. Yes you could look at Djokovic winning Indian Wells and Miami in 2011, but Miami was in a 3rd set tie-breaker, and it wasn't the first time Djokovic beat Nadal on hardcourt obviously.

Plus, whether people want to admit it or not, 2013 Djokovic was just as good as 2011 Djokovic. The only difference was Nadal was greater in 2013, and Murray was greater in 2013, although even in 2011 Djokovic got owned by a past-his-prime-Federer at Roland Garros and in the post-USO events Nishikori bagelled Djokovic in a deciding set, and Ferrer beat Djokovic 6-3 6-1 at the World Tour Finals. Tips also beat Djokovic. So I wouldn't say 2011 Djokovic was better than 2013 Djokovic.

 

[Chico]

The answer is clear and easy here:

1. Fed saved Rafa from losing RG'11 and denied Djokkovic from winning CYGS 2011.

2. Fed won USO 2008 deservedly. Nadal was never in position and good enough to win USO 2008 and never deserved any GS calendar or non calendar.

Didn't vote on the poll since this obvious option is missing.

 

[LazyNinja19]

The answer is clear and easy here:

1. Fed saved Rafa from losing RG'11 and denied Djokkovic from winning CYGS 2011.

2. Fed won USO 2008 deservedly. Nadal was never in position and good enough to win USO 2008 and never deserved any GS calendar or non calendar.

Didn't vote on the poll since this obvious option is missing.

Thank you for your opinion, but it wasn't needed!
I made this thread for posters who can reason intellectually.

Anyways have a nice day indeed.
Thank you!

 

[Djokovic2011]

Not much of a difference. In the lead-up to 2011 Roland Garros, Djokovic had beaten Nadal in 2 clay events. In the lead-up to 2013 Roland Garros, Djokovic had beaten Nadal in one clay event but it was the most important of all - Monte Carlo, Nadal's pet event. Yes you could look at Djokovic winning Indian Wells and Miami in 2011, but Miami was in a 3rd set tie-breaker, and it wasn't the first time Djokovic beat Nadal on hardcourt obviously.

Plus, whether people want to admit it or not, 2013 Djokovic was just as good as 2011 Djokovic. The only difference was Nadal was greater in 2013, and Murray was greater in 2013, although even in 2011 Djokovic got owned by a past-his-prime-Federer at Roland Garros and in the post-USO events Nishikori bagelled Djokovic in a deciding set, and Ferrer beat Djokovic 6-3 6-1 at the World Tour Finals. Tips also beat Djokovic. So I wouldn't say 2011 Djokovic was better than 2013 Djokovic.

Lol at Djokovic being as good in 2013 as in 2011- the delusion is strong in this post. What gets me is why so many Nadal fans can't simply concede that Novak would have likely won an encounter at the FO that year, after all it's not like we can go back in a time machine and see how it would have actually played out. It's almost as if by saying they think Djokovic would have probably won the match that Nadal's 2011 trophy will suddenly disappear or something. Don't worry guys he's still got it you don't have to worry lol! Very strange.

 

[ark_28]

The fact of the matter is big John suffered a shock loss in Round 1 that year so even if Nadal has gotten through Murray and then beaten Federer, without having to face Isner there would always have been an asterix next to his win.

 

[reversef]

Both options are correct: Both players deserve their title. I don't see how it can be contested: they beat the players in front of them. But also, it would have been much more difficult to beat the player who lost in the SF.