Levi_Ackerman
Legend
Are we sure he's still in his prime? He's 28. Rafa was already on a downward spiral at this stage, losing to Coric, Klizan, Berrer, Berdych etc.
Djokovic has always been a better player than Nadal.
- Thread starter Levi_Ackerman
- Start date
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Where was Novak in 2005 when Nadal was winning 10 or 11 tournaments or already having classic matches like Coria in Rome? Don't play dumb. It'll take another year or two at least before Novak declines. 2008 Nadal would be world #1 today but such is life. Novak is undoubtedly one of the best players of all time. I have no problems with that, but for about the past year, much like Serena, he's sitting at an empty buffet table. It is what it is.
Levi_Ackerman
Legend
Will you stop with the essays? I feel like you've got very important things to add, but the length of your posts put me off reading them.Thanks, same goes for you
His big-match excellence is so demonstrable that I can't bring myself to believe it's equal parts smoke-and-mirrors. That's what I meanhe plays a game with a lot of margin so I brought that up to acknowledge that there is some merit to the claim that Nadal isn't *as* unflappable as his game would have you believe. But not enough to kick him off the mental strength mountaintop. Of course, this is a matter of opinion and we seem to be reaching an impasse.
I'm not of the opinion that his mental shortcomings are the main culprit in his struggles with Rafa. Nadal, and I've said this before, seems to have been created in a lab to defeat Federer. Terrible match up. Federer is tough as nails and he along with Novak is my favourite active player. If you're expecting me to say something negative about his mental strength, then guess again, because I couldn't do that (expect in a DIRECT comparison w/Nadal or one or two other players in tennis history).
Definitely a parcel of truth to that, but regardless of how skewed the grand slam h2h is, Nadal is 13-1 against the other 3 at RG. That shouldn't be totally disregarded. Twice he came back from a set down to win. Several times, Federer and Djokovic imploded when faced with the prospect of beating Nadal. Case in point: Djokovic in the 5th set of 2013, the third set of 2014 (the casual flubbed volley on BP) and the multiple double faults on championship point.
Moreover, even outside of the French Open (and its silly to throw 14 grand slams in the waste bin), his h2h against them is 12-8, and 7-5 against Fedkovic. Clearly, the last few matches against Federer at Melbourne weren't really indicative of much, as his game was decrepit compared to how it was in his prime. But ask yourself this: in how many of his grand slam defeats to the three, did Nadal lose as the clear favourite? Arguably once, against Murray at the Open. How many times did he win the matches where he was either the underdog or it was a coin-flip? This has to be factored in. While a Federer-Nadal mental strength comparison is at least feasible (w/Nadal having the edge, IMO), a Nadal-Djokovic one doesn't make sense to me; Nole lost too many winnable slam finals and didn't have a high enough conversion rate in slams where he was the pre-tournament favourite.
Again, some of these points are so subjective that it's tough to tell how impartial the other side is (this applies to me as well), but I'll still indulge you here beyond merely stating that I disagree (ill still be wildly subjective, but Ill tell you why I disagree
As I see it, Nadals inconsistency in the majors relative to Federer and Djokovic are more a byproduct of a game that can be exploited on non-clay surfaces. In many of his early round exits, rather than suffering mental lapses, he got blasted off the court. I'm not remotely surprised that Nadal has lost more before the QF stage outside of Roland Garros. He can't overwhelm lower ranked players in the 3 other majors like Federer and Djokovic naturally can (not as often, at least.)
PS, just in case you think I'm using this as a springboard to argue that Nadal is the best player of his era (not saying you are) : I'm not, as he's not. Clearly that's Federer. The reason I am using big-match success to strengthen my argument is to isolate their mental strength from their pure tennis ability. If I have failed to do that, so be it, but I just want to clear that up.
Levi_Ackerman
Legend
So, you're saying Rafa peaked too early?
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Obviously you're trolling, but try not to make it so obvious. LOL.
The first 2 bolds from the top down are very arguable, if not slightly crazy. The better at the net part is a contradiction because you say you're leaning towards Djokovic but then give Nadal the outright nod in volleys and overhead. And better defense for Djokovic is ludicrous, and his is great, but Nadal's was absolutely insane in his prime. Can't look past the 9 RG's as the great @Sysyphus has already pointed out.
And I'd like to add another category here.
Footwork: Nadal, all day. The amount of FH's I've watched that guy hit off his serve that had no business being FH's is astounding.
Levi_Ackerman
Legend
I really wish people would stop saying that.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Nope, just that it should be obvious that Novak's rivals in 2015 are past their best. Novak is doing exactly what I'd do if I were him. Kick ass and take names. I'm happy with Nadal's career and have been for some time.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
WTF?!?!
And I don't mean the World Tour Finals.
And I don't mean the World Tour Finals.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Who is his uncle again? That's exactly the problem with his mentality now. According to Tio, Simon is probably better than Rafa too.
5555
Hall of Fame
Is it a fact or an opinion?
TheFifthSet
Legend
Well that might be more of a reflection on you, buuuuut.....this is your thread, so I'll respect your wishes and won't hijack it any longer. My bad.
/TFS out!
Levi_Ackerman
Legend
Oh, come on...
Levi_Ackerman
Legend
No. I don't think you're hijacking it. I just think you could put your points across without writing theses. By all means, stick around.Well that might be more of a reflection on you, buuuuut.....this is your thread, so I'll respect your wishes and won't hijack it any longer. My bad.
/TFS out!
Feather
Legend
People have short term memories! Sad but true. Rafa's defense is the best I have ever seen on a Tennis court. As a Roger fan, I know that.
Feather
Legend
If you don't want to read, don't read!
No offense meant, but I love the long posts of FifthSet.
Keizer
Hall of Fame
Cup8489
G.O.A.T.
Give credit where it's due, though. Djokovic, in terms of pure ability, is a better player than Nadal. His backhand is a much more useful shot, his forehand, while not on par with the best we've seen from Rafa, is undoubtedly one of the best out there. Good reliable serve with enough pace and variety that he can outserve most opponents. Only his net sense is really lacking, and that's improved significantly as well.
Nadal is the better tennis professional, because of his mentality and willingness to fight.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Djokovic is a better tennis player than Nadal in 2015. I don't suffer from a short-term memory.
Chicharito
Hall of Fame
Off clay yeah. But clay is a major part of tennis and the gap there is humongous.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
There are two components of finding out the truth: the facts and the way one acknowledges them.
While you are making (sometimes) sound remarks about the accuracy of the first part, you are guilty of abusing the second for your own benefit.
If using twisted logic everything (objective and subjective) can be disputed.
This is an opinion.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
But he's not. There is this myth that Nadal has won so much more than Nole but that's not true and it's becoming less and less true with every new win by Nole.
Nadal is great, incredibly great, at winning FO. That's it.
TheFifthSet
Legend
Thanks Feather, the encouraging words are always appreciated (and right back at ya
) Levi, understand that I'm an argumentative guy, so the long posts are therapeutic
but I'll make a concerted effort to be more succint in this thread, just for you 
JohnnyMac Fan!
Legend
Technically yes and so is Roger. That said, what made Nadal great was how effective he was with what he had.
D
Deleted member 733170
Guest
Thanks, same goes for you
His big-match excellence is so demonstrable that I can't bring myself to believe it's equal parts smoke-and-mirrors. That's what I mean
I'm not of the opinion that his mental shortcomings are the main culprit in his struggles with Rafa. Nadal, and I've said this before, seems to have been created in a lab to defeat Federer. Terrible match up. Federer is tough as nails and he along with Novak is my favourite active player. If you're expecting me to say something negative about his mental strength, then guess again, because I couldn't do that (expect in a DIRECT comparison w/Nadal or one or two other players in tennis history).
Definitely a parcel of truth to that, but regardless of how skewed the grand slam h2h is, Nadal is 13-1 against the other 3 at RG. That shouldn't be totally disregarded. Twice he came back from a set down to win. Several times, Federer and Djokovic imploded when faced with the prospect of beating Nadal. Case in point: Djokovic in the 5th set of 2013, the third set of 2014 (the casual flubbed volley on BP) and the multiple double faults on championship point.
Moreover, even outside of the French Open (and its silly to throw 14 grand slams in the waste bin), his h2h against them is 12-8, and 7-5 against Fedkovic. Clearly, the last few matches against Federer at Melbourne weren't really indicative of much, as his game was decrepit compared to how it was in his prime. But ask yourself this: in how many of his grand slam defeats to the three, did Nadal lose as the clear favourite? Arguably once, against Murray at the Open. How many times did he win the matches where he was either the underdog or it was a coin-flip? This has to be factored in. While a Federer-Nadal mental strength comparison is at least feasible (w/Nadal having the edge, IMO), a Nadal-Djokovic one doesn't make sense to me; Nole lost too many winnable slam finals and didn't have a high enough conversion rate in slams where he was the pre-tournament favourite.
Again, some of these points are so subjective that it's tough to tell how impartial the other side is (this applies to me as well), but I'll still indulge you here beyond merely stating that I disagree (ill still be wildly subjective, but Ill tell you why I disagree
As I see it, Nadals inconsistency in the majors relative to Federer and Djokovic are more a byproduct of a game that can be exploited on non-clay surfaces. In many of his early round exits, rather than suffering mental lapses, he got blasted off the court. I'm not remotely surprised that Nadal has lost more before the QF stage outside of Roland Garros. He can't overwhelm lower ranked players in the 3 other majors like Federer and Djokovic naturally can (not as often, at least.)
PS, just in case you think I'm using this as a springboard to argue that Nadal is the best player of his era (not saying you are) : I'm not, as he's not. Clearly that's Federer. The reason I am using big-match success to strengthen my argument is to isolate their mental strength from their pure tennis ability. If I have failed to do that, so be it, but I just want to clear that up.
I hear you 5th Set, but with all respect to you these arguments are another version of the h2h discussions we have around here.
You have created a reasoned premise why Nadal may indeed may have marginally more 'mental strength'.
My premise and counter is that this is so marginal that's it verges on irrelevant if you are indeed trying to quantify and measure such an intangible.
Federer has tons of grit it's just that we don't see it as much vis-a-vis Nadal as we are influenced by the results. Let's give credit to Federer for example in the Wimby 2008 where despite the fact he lost he still showed extraordinary mental strength. I hope you can see that you can lose while still having tons of so-called mental strength.
As I said earlier Murray is the weak link because when he folds he folds big time.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Have to disagree a bit here. Admittedly, Djokovic has won more H2H meetings post 2011 and frazzled Nadal more than any other player. Obviously 2011 itself was when Djokovic shell shocked the tour and I think everybody, especially and particularly Nadal needed time to adjust to that. Besides, no one could keep up that level for long as we saw at the end of 2011 and have seen every year since except maybe this one. That said, if we pick it up in 2012, Djokovic narrowly beats Nadal at his favourite slam venue, and then Nadal's trump card clicks on the clay. He goes 3-0 and IMO he won those matches mostly with his FH. It was particularly devastating in the biggest match of the clay season. The RG final. It was similar in 2013. Yes, Djokovic put on a show in MC, but then Nadal's FH clicks into gear in the RG SF. I thought his FH also was the main part of his win that day. And the rest of that year needs little explanation. Yes, Nadal's FH may not have been the main reason he won in Canada and the USO, but it was still damn good, and he still won regardless. That too, on 2 courts that Djokovic was "supposed" to win on. I don't know about you, but I certainly thought he would win Canada, and the USO even after Nadal had beaten him in Canada and won Cincinnati. Then Nadal struggles on the clay by his high standards in 2014. I'm not sure if Djokovic was favoured by the bookies at RG, but I certainly knew enough people (and I was one of them myself) that thought Djokovic would finally beat Nadal and as a consequence win RG. Again, he loses and mostly on account of Nadal's FH. I think Nadal's FH has done fine against Djokovic personally. Of course, I'm aware that Djokovic won on his preferred courts sometimes too, like Miami 2014 and WTF 2013, but my point is to show that usually when push came to shove Nadal (and his FH) came to play.
I would also disagree on the level front. I think Nadal reached very high peaks, at least comparable to Djokovic at the AO 2011 in any of the 3 HC slams he's won. AO 2009 was pretty ridiculous. As was USO 2010. I would put USO 2013 below both of the aforementioned ones because he beat Djokovic more with variety as you said, but his USO 2010 and particularly AO 2009 form (#1 to me on the list for Nadal) is comparable to Djokovic IMO.
Yes, I agree with the first part. I was just using Karlovic to show an extreme I guess you could say. But the second part is the all around excellence of Djokovic, and I disagree that we haven't seen anyone like him. That was my point of bringing those 4 guys up. All of those guys may have more "attackable" sides than Djokovic (i.e on the BH and the movement/defense although I'd really argue for Nadal and Borg) but on balance they're probably just as effective if not more so all around because they have that massive weapon as a trump card. In this way, I could also say, in reverse, that although Djokovic's BH is clearly the best of the 5, none of the others BH's are exactly chopped liver either in response to "I think the difference between Nadal's best strengths and Djokovic's is overblown."
And I don't really think it matters that Nadal had to redline to beat Novak on non clay surfaces. He probably had to because Djokovic is his most troublesome match up and generally Djokovic is favoured away from clay against him anyway. That's a big point for Nadal to win some of those matches and a mark against Djokovic for losing them whether Nadal had to redline or not.
I also think that many people (not you because I see you've already mentioned it) are missing that the mental part is HUGE and should be considered a sizable talent in its own right. That closes any perceived "talent" gap stroke wise anyway IMO. That's a very important "skill" that Djokovic has generally lacked when compared to Nadal I'd say.
Last edited:
TheFifthSet
Legend
Yes, well, the last two parts I wholeheartedly agree with. Murray is the weak link in nearly every respect and Federer was valiant in defeat, and not just then but in subsequent finals losses as well.
Fwiw I don't think the difference in mental strength is as big of a factor with Fedal as it is with Djokodal. Remember than in my OP i was only comparing the latter. Djokovic reached a level in his prime that only Fed has eclipsed in this era, proving that game-wise he at least belongs in that conversation. But mentality-wise he's a notch below Fed and two below Nadal. Murray is several dozen notches below any of them.
The_18th_Slam
Hall of Fame
Federer's prime: 2003 Wimbledon to 2010 Australian Open (spans 27 Slams)
Nadal's prime: 2007 French Open to 2013 US Open (spans 27 Slams)
Djokovic's prime: 2011 Australian Open to current (spans 19 Slams so far)
If the pattern keeps up, Djokovic's prime would extend till the 2017 Wimbledon.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
SHHH! Only today counts. Rafa is in his peak.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
But it is true to this point. Hence the 5 extra slams and the career slam overall. If Nadal is incredibly great at winning the FO, then he's incredibly great at winning one more thing than Djokovic is. At least to the extent that he's won RG as opposed to Djokovic's best slam, the AO. Think about it. Right now, the career slam and the 4 slams in the difference between Djokovic's and Nadal's best slams (9 to 5) make up the overall difference in slam count (14 to 9). I don't know about you, but I would call a career slam and 4 other slams a big gap right now.
mattosgrant
Banned
I do think peak Djokovic (2011 and 2015) is probably better overall than any Nadal skill wise. I don't think Djokovic pre 2011 was better than Nadal at that point though. He still was competitive enough game wise to win more than he did with improved fitness and mental fortitude sooner though.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Well, that's part of the whole GOAT debate, no? I think Slams are very important but I also think pro players play much more than just Slams.
For me Nole is already on par with Nadal on career achievements and is very likely to surpass him when all is said and done.
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
Boggles the mind, really. How is he on par?
mattosgrant
Banned
I think OP means game or skill wise though. Obviously Nadal was producing better results those years so in that sense was a "better" player, but OP feels Djokovic always had a superior game, abilities, and skill. Not that I think he is right, but I understand his vantage point.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Do I need to repeat myself?
By December will have more YE1. Already ahead in weeks at number 1. These are the best measures that take all tournaments played into account. If you use the ITF Champion the gap is even bigger in favor of Nole.
In Slams Nole beats Nadal in two of the four slams, ie has more titles. Depending on what value you give to reaching finals Nole can be said to equal Nadal in the USO. He already has a higher w/l percentage than Nadal in the USO.
It's true that Nadal still has more masters than Nole but not that many more and Nole has four WTFs, while Nadal has none.
I think people have not realized how much of Nadal's claim to being better than Nole relies on the results of a single tournament, the FO.
Last edited:
Feather
Legend
lolz, this is a classic observation . FIVE SLAMS mean nothing, I guess
swordtennis
G.O.A.T.
There Is Much Truth in this. Much Of the nadal game is based in The Confidence the stamina and sheer youthful exuberance.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
If you think Djokovic would have sniffed #1 from 05-09 you're crazy. Must be nice racking up those weeks now. I can't blame you though, If I was a Novak fan, id be saying exactly what you are, it comes with the territory.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
No one said they mean nothing. But YE1, weeks at number 1, WTFs, also mean something.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Who said anything about 05-09?
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
You without knowing it. Djokovic hit his prime in 2011 and is still in it. If he was in DBZ style Fedal battles from 05-2009 like Nadal during his prime, he'd have been second fiddle to Fed just like Rafa was. It's not as simple as "oh look at how many weeks he has", who in the hell is playing great tennis in 2015 besides Novak? Again, the man is just doing his job and he is indeed the best player in the world, but in 2014-2015 it's not saying that much with no great rivals. Nadal wasn't lucky enough to be at the best of his abilities at a time where the tour was either over 30 or more interested in having crazy haircuts and making headlines.
Tennisanity
Legend
Well 2011 proved that Nadal's absolute best is inferior to Djokovic's. Nadal reached more consecutive finals across all surfaces than any year in his career, thus proving he was at his absolute peak. He simply ran into a better player in those finals.
swordtennis
G.O.A.T.
Who really cares about 2005 2009. Seems fedal fans need to get sent back in time. The reality of today is not cutting it for them. Fantastic win by Nishikori last night. Full credit to the ninja.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Indeed, Novak can compete with Peak Fedal. I've already said he's one of the best of all time and I mean it. My point is weeks at #1 certainly wouldn't be the reason I'd be trumpeting that. The weeks he's getting right now are free money. Do you even see an end of it in sight? Who do you see challenging Novak? Who do you see in the pipeline that's promising?
Weaksauce. Hot sauce with water bro, come harder.
IMO 2015 Djokovic is not peak Djokovic. He is not even close to the 2011 level. I don't think he is playing better than 2012 or 2013, just that he has no competition. He won the AO playing average throughout. He was much better there in 2011 and 2012. He was also not very impressive in Wimbledon except in the final. I consider 2011 of Djokovic to be the best tennis year I have seen from any player and he is nowhere near that level now.
Levi_Ackerman
Legend
Y'all realise I (OP) do not think Djokovic is greater than Nadal. Right? Not yet anyway.
Peak Nadal
New User
Similar threads
