Djokovic 19 consecutive sets won on hard.

Hitman

Hall of Fame
But isn't it pointless these stats ? It would be one thing if he hasn't beaten them anywhere in years , but tennis is played on many surfaces that suit different players, and Nadal has wins over them both in 2019.
It doesn't matter if it's on clay or grass for anyone who just enjoys tennis.
It's not a secret Nadal has never been as good a HC or grass player than the other 2 in his whole career.
The fact remains he was the only one able to dethrone Fed on grass, and he has beaten prime Djokovic on HCs.
He may look lost nowadays, but hasn't this gotten out of control how everything is seemingly only geared to HC stats ?
Those stats do matter, because they translate to big wins for his rivals, which had he won, he would be holding the slam record already, such as AO 2017 and AO 2019 finals. People talk about Nadal clay stats, about how he dominated Federer and Djokovic over the years, and those are legit also, because they include RG wins. When rivals get compared, people are interested to know the meaning behind the numbers.

Now, let me just say this, if he gets 21 slams, and has more slams than the others, then he will be seen widely as the GOAT, even if he continues to lose to Fedovic. Keep in mind there were people always talking about Federer not beating Nadal enough of clay, during his time at the top of the slam count also. No one is perfect, and people will pick at those things.
 
The fact that Nadal has only won 8 straight sets against Djokovic on clay (as mentioned up thread) really puts this streak into context. Absolute domination.
Please remind me when exactly did Nadal have the chance to face a past his prime Djokovic so many consecutive times on clay. Djokovic was at his peak in 2014-2016 and faced past his prime Nadal so many times during these years, it's not even funny. Prime Nadal had to deal with prime Federer and Djokovic on clay for most of the time. When Nadal was in his prime Djokovic also didn't have it easy against him on hardcourt.
 
Those stats do matter, because they translate to big wins for his rivals, which had he won, he would be holding the slam record already, such as AO 2017 and AO 2019 finals. People talk about Nadal clay stats, about how he dominated Federer and Djokovic over the years, and those are legit also, because they include RG wins. When rivals get compared, people are interested to know the meaning behind the numbers.

Now, let me just say this, if he gets 21 slams, and has more slams than the others, then he will be seen widely as the GOAT, even if he continues to lose to Fedovic. Keep in mind there were people always talking about Federer not beating Nadal enough of clay, during his time at the top of the slam count also. No one is perfect, and people will pick at those things.
Federer wasn't THAT bad though. He never lost so many consecutive sets to anyone. On the other hand, Federer was in his prime back then. Nadal isn't anywhere near his prime right now. (and unfortunately he aged much worse than Federer and Djokovic)
 

Hitman

Hall of Fame
Federer wasn't THAT bad though. He never lost so many consecutive sets to anyone. On the other hand, Federer was in his prime back then. Nadal isn't anywhere near his prime right now. (and unfortunately he aged much worse than Federer and Djokovic)
And you think a Federer who is five years older than post prime Nadal, is anywhere near his own prime now?
 
And you think a Federer who is five years older than post prime Nadal, is anywhere near his own prime now?
When he was losing to young Nadal he was. Now he obviously isn't. But unfortunately he still aged much better than Nadal did. Nadal was clearly the best young player between the big 3 and clearly the worst when past his prime.
 

Hitman

Hall of Fame
When he was losing to young Nadal he was. Now he obviously isn't. But unfortunately he still aged much better than Nadal did. Nadal was clearly the best young player between the big 3 and clearly the worst when past his prime.
So what? You don't detract that from Federer who has managed to keep himself in better shape. If Nadal physically couldn't, then that is on him. Federer is five years older, has significantly more mileage on him, has played a lot more in general....hardly had any breaks the way Nadal did. So if Federer is still doing better, then that is a plus, you cannot take that away from him just because Nadal cannot do it like Federer.
 
So what? You don't detract that from Federer who has managed to keep himself in better shape. If Nadal physically couldn't, then that is on him. Federer is five years older, has significantly more mileage on him, has played a lot more in general....hardly had any breaks the way Nadal did. So if Federer is still doing better, then that is a plus, you cannot take that away from him just because Nadal cannot do it like Federer.
Federer is also hurting his legacy by playing for so long. Being 0-3 against Djokovic in Wimbledon finals isn't a stat to be proud of when you are a player who is supposed to be Wimbledon GOAT. Actually, Djokovic is the only one of them who is only improving his legacy after his prime.
 

Hitman

Hall of Fame
Federer is also hurting his legacy by playing for so long. Being 0-3 against Djokovic in Wimbledon finals isn't a stat to be proud of when you are a player who is supposed to be Wimbledon GOAT. Actually, Djokovic is the only one of them who is only improving his legacy after his prime.
Federer wins AO 2017 beating his greatest rival and silencing a lot of the critics who said he couldn't win another major, or that he couldn't ever beat Nadal. Plus he avenged his AO 2009 loss.
Federer wins W 2017 without dropping a set, joins Borg as the only two players to win a slam on multiple surfaces without dropping a set. He also breaks the tie with Sampras for most Wimbledon titles
Federer wins AO 2018 and becomes the first player to reach the 20 slam mark
Federer becomes the oldest world number one in history
Federer does the Sunshine double for the third time in his career, and doubles his Miami title haul with wins in 2017 and 2019
Federer reaches 100 ATP tour levels titles with a chance to have the all the time record
Federer reaches 10 titles at a couple of events, joining Nadal as only players to do so
Federer cuts down his lopsided H2H with Nadal and makes it more closer
Federer beats Nadal at W 2019 to avenge his last loss to him there

Try not only to look at the negatives. If Federer had quit before, not only would his record have already been overtaken, but many of these wonderful moments would not have been seen by him, his fans and the tennis world. He has not hurt his legacy, only haters will look at the negatives while overlooking the positives.
 
Federer wins AO 2017 beating his greatest rival and silencing a lot of the critics who said he couldn't win another major, or that he couldn't ever beat Nadal. Plus he avenged his AO 2009 loss.
Federer wins W 2017 without dropping a set, joins Borg as the only two players to win a slam on multiple surfaces without dropping a set. He also breaks the tie with Sampras for most Wimbledon titles
Federer wins AO 2018 and becomes the first player to reach the 20 slam mark
Federer becomes the oldest world number one in history
Federer does the Sunshine double for the third time in his career, and doubles his Miami title haul with wins in 2017 and 2019
Federer reaches 100 ATP tour levels titles with a chance to have the all the time record
Federer reaches 10 titles at a couple of events, joining Nadal as only players to do so
Federer cuts down his lopsided H2H with Nadal and makes it more closer
Federer beats Nadal at W 2019 to avenge his last loss to him there

Try not only to look at the negatives. If Federer had quit before, not only would his record have already been overtaken, but many of these wonderful moments would not have been seen by him, his fans and the tennis world. He has not hurt his legacy, only haters will look at the negatives while overlooking the positives.
You keep mentioning the head to head with Nadal but ignore the fact that Federer's head to head against Djokovic only becomes worse. I think it is safe to say that at least in Wimbledon 2019 Federer clearly lost much more than he won. Some Federer fans just mention that semifinal against Nadal to feel better about the horrible loss in the final. You can call me a hater for writing this, that's your opinion. Maybe you think I'm also a Nadal hater because I think he hurts his legacy with all these losses now?
 

Hitman

Hall of Fame
You keep mentioning the head to head with Nadal but ignore the fact that Federer's head to head against Djokovic only becomes worse. I think it is safe to say that at least in Wimbledon 2019 Federer clearly lost much more than he won. Some Federer fans just mention that semifinal against Nadal to feel better about the horrible loss in the final.
Did everything I say just go over your head? You are already mentioning all the negative things, and saying Federer is ruining his legacy, and I said - Hey what about all of these positive things? And gave a list of them.

It seem you are intent to only look at it his extended time in a negative way while conveniently or even disrespectfully discarding all those great things he did, because he continued to stay on. Be a bit more balanced, your posts are way too extreme at times.
 
Did everything I say just go over your head? You are already mentioning all the negative things, and saying Federer is ruining his legacy, and I said - Hey what about all of these positive things? And gave a list of them.

It seem you are intent to only look at it his extended time in a negative way while conveniently or even disrespectfully discarding all those great things he did, because he continued to stay on. Be a bit more balanced, your posts are way too extreme at times.
Yes, that's true. This is the way I usually look at things. I don't ignore what you write, I just don't agree with all your points. Of course winning 3 more slams was great for him, this is too obvious to argue with that.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Federer is also hurting his legacy by playing for so long. Being 0-3 against Djokovic in Wimbledon finals isn't a stat to be proud of when you are a player who is supposed to be Wimbledon GOAT. Actually, Djokovic is the only one of them who is only improving his legacy after his prime.
He won 3 more Slams, multiple Masters and became the oldest #1 in OE history. How did any of this hurt his legacy?

Djokovic is freaking tough and I would say the 2019 match is the only one where it hurt him in some way because it was on his racket, but he still has 8 Wimbledon titles which is more than anyone in history, all time. He will retire with that record. At the end of the day, that's what pundits will be focusing more on than his head to head against one of the other greatest Wimbledon players in the Open Era.
 
Say Nadal gets the most majors won during 2020. The “GOAT” debate will rage on right? Over time, all three will retire and most likely each will have arguments that can be made versus the others. I think most likely all will have some valid points that can be made in their favor, as it is right now. This is why the Tier system is handy. All these all time greats can do is excel during their time. It becomes very difficult to anoint any one player as The greatest ever imo. That has been true for a very long time with this great sport and nothing will change that.
 
Last edited:

BGod

Legend
Lol, such pathetic trolling from you, Clarky. He has as many year end number 1 seasons as Djokovic. Who cares when exactly did they happen.
Periods of dominance, Nadal isn't the best of the 00 or 10s and worse yet here's the consecutive weeks at #1:

237-Federer
122-Djokovic
56-Nadal
53-Djokovic
52-Djokovic
48-Federer/Djokovic
46-Nadal

That matters, and 0 WTFs.

It doesn't matter how he wins. If he wins 21 slams hes the best.
Even more ridiculous that you think a style of play means they cant be goat.
Best, Greatest and Most Accomplished are not all one and the same. Best is based on talent and ability over an extended period of time. This is why Borg with his 11 Slams can still come up on that list. Greatest is legend status, again Borg comes up because of his matches, comebacks, etc. Most accomplished is debateable but that's where the total slam count lands on. That's the only area where you can't really argue, if Nadal has the most Slams he's the most accomplished Slam player and maybe in tennis. At this point, there's no way to make the argument Nadal is the greatest because of the lack of dominant periods. The guy had 56 consecutive weeks at #1 where Roger has 237 and Novak 122. Then overall weeks.
 
Periods of dominance, Nadal isn't the best of the 00 or 10s and worse yet here's the consecutive weeks at #1:

237-Federer
122-Djokovic
56-Nadal
53-Djokovic
52-Djokovic
48-Federer/Djokovic
46-Nadal

That matters, and 0 WTFs.



Best, Greatest and Most Accomplished are not all one and the same. Best is based on talent and ability over an extended period of time. This is why Borg with his 11 Slams can still come up on that list. Greatest is legend status, again Borg comes up because of his matches, comebacks, etc. Most accomplished is debateable but that's where the total slam count lands on. That's the only area where you can't really argue, if Nadal has the most Slams he's the most accomplished Slam player and maybe in tennis. At this point, there's no way to make the argument Nadal is the greatest because of the lack of dominant periods. The guy had 56 consecutive weeks at #1 where Roger has 237 and Novak 122. Then overall weeks.
Of course it matters to you, because you are a Nadal hater and only try to find reasons to bring it down. Now try to find a stat for Federer and Djokovic which comes even close to winning a single slam 12 times. (leave alone winning masters tournaments 11 times, 9 times). But of course you will just say dominance on your best surface doesn't matter, because you hate Nadal.

Anyway, you are a troll and you proved it many times. It's strange I'm even replying to you.
 

BGod

Legend
Of course it matters to you, because you are a Nadal hater and only try to find reasons to bring it down. Now try to find a stat for Federer and Djokovic which comes even close to winning a single slam 12 times. (leave alone winning masters tournaments 11 times, 9 times). But of course you will just say dominance on your best surface doesn't matter, because you hate Nadal.

Anyway, you are a troll and you proved it many times. It's strange I'm even replying to you.
Weeks at #1 is overall dominance. All you ever have is Nadal's dominance at a particular event. Notice how Novak and Fed supporters don't just point out Wimbledon or AO? They talk about overall dominance.

Weeks at #1
Spread of Majors
WTFs

In a debate format you'd be hard pressed with your platform (yes debate competitions exist and they fall on volume of information and presentation).
 
Weeks at #1 is overall dominance. All you ever have is Nadal's dominance at a particular event. Notice how Novak and Fed supporters don't just point out Wimbledon or AO? They talk about overall dominance.

Weeks at #1
Spread of Majors
WTFs

In a debate format you'd be hard pressed with your platform (yes debate competitions exist and they fall on volume of information and presentation).
Who cares? Nadal has won 19 slams, and you just try to show he is an absolute mug. Bringing down every tournament he won. You know Medvedev played a great final in USO 2019 but you only talk about that as a weak slam. Leave alone your absolutely ridiculous statement that Nadal winning an 11th and 12th RG titles didn't add anything to his legacy. Seriously, seek help.
 

BGod

Legend
Who cares? Nadal has won 19 slams, and you just try to show he is an absolute mug. Bringing down every tournament he won. You know Medvedev played a great final in USO 2019 but you only talk about that as a weak slam. Leave alone your absolutely ridiculous statement that Nadal winning an 11th and 12th RG titles didn't add anything to his legacy. Seriously, seek help.
Serious question, how much do you love Nadal? Tell me you've met him in person and gotten like a selfie or a signature. You're worth it.
 

Tony48

Legend
Please remind me when exactly did Nadal have the chance to face a past his prime Djokovic so many consecutive times on clay. Djokovic was at his peak in 2014-2016 and faced past his prime Nadal so many times during these years, it's not even funny. Prime Nadal had to deal with prime Federer and Djokovic on clay for most of the time. When Nadal was in his prime Djokovic also didn't have it easy against him on hardcourt.
Do you get prize for seeing how many times you can fit "prime" into one post? Your post is almost unreadable with all this prime garbage. Stop making excuses.
 
Do you get prize for seeing how many times you can fit "prime" into one post? Your post is almost unreadable with all this prime garbage. Stop making excuses.
These are not excuses, these are FACTS. Sad you can't accept that Nadal is nowhere near his prime starting from 2014. I repeat my question-when exactly during his prime Nadal had a chance to face an out of form Djokovic? Never happened, except maybe RG 2006 and Rome 2007. He always had to deal with the best versions of Federer and Djokovic.
 
Serious question, how much do you love Nadal? Tell me you've met him in person and gotten like a selfie or a signature. You're worth it.
ROFL. So you admit you got owned and have nothing to answer. I guess Nadal ruined your life so now you just can't do anything but troll him.
 

Tony48

Legend
These are not excuses, these are FACTS. Sorry if you can't accept that Nadal is nowhere near his prime starting from 2014. I repeat my question-when exactly during his prime Nadal had a chance to face an out of form Djokovic? Never happened, except maybe RG 2006 and Rome 2007. He always had to deal with the best versions of Federer and Djokovic.
From the ATP website:

Djokovic won his ninth consecutive match on hard courts against Nadal and extended his set win streak to 19 (since 2013 US Open final) against the World No. 1 with the 6-2, 7-6(4) win. The World No. 2 now leads the Open Era's most prolific head-to-head series 29-26.

Why didn't they mention your "fact" since it's apparently so imporant? Probably because it's an excuse.
 

Tony48

Legend
More newsworthy items regarding Djokovic's 19-set win streak:

In all eight matches they had played on hard courts since the 2013 US Open final, the Serb prevailed. Indeed, Nadal did not win one of the 17 sets they contested in that stretch. Make that nine matches and 19 sets now, a quite remarkable statistic.
 

Hitman

Hall of Fame
From the ATP website:



Why didn't they mention your "fact" since it's apparently so imporant? Probably because it's an excuse.
I read that article and then read the replies from the posters below it...it was like reading a TTW thread. :D
 

Tony48

Legend
When he was losing to young Nadal he was. Now he obviously isn't. But unfortunately he still aged much better than Nadal did. Nadal was clearly the best young player between the big 3 and clearly the worst when past his prime.
The ATP should stop all Federer and Nadal matches until Nadal ages better. It's too unfair to Nadal.
 
The ATP should stop all Federer and Nadal matches until Nadal ages better. It's too unfair to Nadal.
It's a simple fact. Djokovic during his prime faced an out of form Nadal MUCH more times than the other way around, and you find it hard to admit that. (and don't bring me this BS that Djokovic was a nobody before 2011)
 

Tony48

Legend
It's a simple fact. Djokovic during his prime faced an out of form Nadal MUCH more times than the other way around, and you find it hard to admit that. (and don't bring me this BS that Djokovic was a nobody before 2011)
Can you find any news articles that cite to this apparent fact? I'd love to read more about it.
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
It's a simple fact. Djokovic during his prime faced an out of form Nadal MUCH more times than the other way around, and you find it hard to admit that. (and don't bring me this BS that Djokovic was a nobody before 2011)
Again with the out of form Nadal-BS! lol! Hilarious! At the AO last year he was being touted as the next winner, had held serve 50+ straight times, but that all changed in the final against his nemesis, Djokovic! Spare me he wasn't prepared, ready, or too fk'n old! That's ridiculous after seeing him take out Medvedev who's beaten Nole a few times! It doesn't make sense junior! :-D
 

ghostofMecir

Hall of Fame
Against Nadal.

I don't believe Nadal had that streak against either Nole or Roger on clay.
Not only 19 straight sets, just complete helplessness on Nadal’s part. Nadal has broken only twice in these nineteen sets and has generated only 15 break points (5 of those today).

Dominance ratios of:

2.81
1.43
1.97
1.50
1.91
2.35
1.43
2.40
1.63

Even journeyman don’t get domianted to this level and it’s honestly shocking seeing as how good of a player Nadal is.
 
Last edited:
Again with the out of form Nadal-BS! lol! Hilarious! At the AO last year he was being touted as the next winner, had held serve 50+ straight times, but that all changed in the final against his nemesis, Djokovic! Spare me he wasn't prepared, ready, or too fk'n old! That's ridiculous after seeing him take out Medvedev who's beaten Nole a few times! It doesn't make sense junior! :-D
If you think Nadal is anywhere near his prime level then I feel sorry for you. You simply have no idea how high was Nadal's level when he was in his prime. I guess you also think that 2011 Djokovic (who lost sets to Nadal on hardcourt, in AO 2012 needed five sets to beat him) was a worse player than 2019 Djokovic. :-D :-D :-D :-D
 
Not only 19 straight sets, just complete helplessness on Nadal’s part. Nadal has broken only twice in thise nineteen sets and has generated only 15 break points (5 of thise today).

Dominance ratios of:

2.81
1.43
1.97
1.50
1.91
2.35
1.43
2.40
1.63

Even journeyman don’t get domianted to this level and it’s honestly shocking seeing as how good of a player Nadal is.
Maybe because Nadal is NOT a good player anymore? He was a great player and he wasn't dominated like that. Now he clearly declined.
 

Mike Sams

Legend
It's a simple fact. Djokovic during his prime faced an out of form Nadal MUCH more times than the other way around, and you find it hard to admit that. (and don't bring me this BS that Djokovic was a nobody before 2011)
None of that matters. At the end of the day, if you're able to make it deep enough in a tournament and show up against your nemesis then you're good enough to play the match. Welcome to the pros.
 

Mike Sams

Legend
If you think Nadal is anywhere near his prime level then I feel sorry for you. You simply have no idea how high was Nadal's level when he was in his prime. I guess you also think that 2011 Djokovic (who lost sets to Nadal on hardcourt, in AO 2012 needed five sets to beat him) was a worse player than 2019 Djokovic. :-D :-D :-D :-D
When was Nadal's prime?
 
Amazing double standards from Djokovic fanboys. First they complain that Nadal only gets cakewalk draws, that he is a totally undeserved #1. Now they suddenly use his #1 spot as a "proof" that he is at his peak. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
If you think Nadal is anywhere near his prime level then I feel sorry for you. You simply have no idea how high was Nadal's level when he was in his prime. I guess you also think that 2011 Djokovic (who lost sets to Nadal on hardcourt, in AO 2012 needed five sets to beat him) was a worse player than 2019 Djokovic. :-D :-D :-D :-D
So what do you say about Nole taking sets or beating Nadal on clay; even in his prime? The commentary is hypocritical and makes little to no sense! :-D
 

The Green Mile

Bionic Poster
Throughout those nine matches, Nadal has had 15 BP chances and has successfully only broke twice (WTF 13, IW 16). Djokovic on the other hand, has had 64 BP chances, converting 29 times in total. Would be nice to see how many unique games they were in...
 

Tony48

Legend
Amazing double standards from Djokovic fanboys. First they complain that Nadal only gets cakewalk draws, that he is a totally undeserved #1. Now they suddenly use his #1 spot as a "proof" that he is at his peak. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Quote the EXACT post that said this. If you post ANYTHING other than quoting the post being asked if you, it will neither be read, nor responded to.
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
Throughout those nine matches, Nadal has had 15 BP chances and has successfully only broke twice (WTF 13, IW 16). Djokovic on the other hand, has had 64 BP chances, converting 29 times in total. Would be nice to see how many unique games they were in...
Nole's good at getting to break points; surrounds his opponents with them, but all too often they escape! I'm breaking someone if I have L-40; Nole drops those too often! It's not like he's making errors; the op either comes up with something brilliant or something happens like a net cord or bad call by the linesmen! Nole's relentless and will continue to play like this I hope! :sneaky:
 
Top