Djokovic or Nadal, who is the better US Open player?

[Third Serve]

4 in a 8 attempts is a zone.

Odd definition. By that logic, winning 2 in 2 attempts would be quite a bit more of a zone.

I personally put a lot of emphasis on repeated titles won at the event. I think it’s a better hallmark of dominance because that means you can completely lock down a Slam for more than a year straight. From 2004-2008, for example, the USO was absolutely Fed’s zone. Or the AO from 2011-2016. Or RG from 2005-2014 and 2017-now. The USO was also basically PETE’s zone from 1993-1996.

You can’t list similar stats for Nadal because he’s had lengthy periods of time between his wins. Maybe you could do it for Nadal 2017-2019, though. But I highly emphasize maintaining control over a Slam for a period of time when we’re talking dominance or having the tournament as your zone.

Doesn’t make him less of a USO player because attaining results throughout your whole career is just as valid as attaining them within a short period of time. But it just means that you’ve dominated the tournament less. Again, this isn’t really a mark against him.

 

[Winner]

4 in a 8 attempts is a zone.

I'm a Nadal fan and your claim of Rafa owning USO is BS. He has 4 titles, but he's been irrelevant to often when he was playing it (twice in the decade). If you own a Slam, you're not losing to Fognini or Pouille. If you own a Slam, you have Fognini and Pouille invited to VIP hospitality on tournament site to serve them bagels.

 

[MichaelNadal]

I'm a Nadal fan and your claim of Rafa owning USO is BS. He has 4 titles, but he's been irrelevant to often when he was playing it (twice in the decade). If you own a Slam, you're not losing to Fognini or Pouille. If you own a Slam, you have Fognini and Pouille invited to VIP hospitality on tournament site to serve them bagels.

He doesn't own it but he's damn sure the man there

 

[DSH]

He doesn't own it but he's damn sure the man there

 

[Amritia]

Debatable. Agassi 2005 USO was on par.

Lol.

Agassi 2005 played 3 5-setters in a row: R4 vs Malisse, QF vs Blake, and SF vs Ginepri.

Firstly going to 5 vs Malisse and Ginepri is hardly a sign of great form.
Secondly he was 35 years old, so that string of matches must have been very tiring.
Thirdly USO had SF on super Saturday, and final on Sunday. So 35 year old Agassi had no rest at all from the SF 5 setter before facing Federer.

It's a sign of how weak Federer's competition in this period was, that citing an exhausted guy way past his prime is an example of 'tough competition'. A few weeks before the USO, a teenage Nadal beat Agassi in Canada Masters.

 

[MichaelNadal]

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Lol.

Agassi 2005 played 3 5-setters in a row: R4 vs Malisse, QF vs Blake, and SF vs Ginepri.

Firstly going to 5 vs Malisse and Ginepri is hardly a sign of great form.
Secondly he was 35 years old, so that string of matches must have been very tiring.
Thirdly USO had SF on super Saturday, and final on Sunday. So 35 year old Agassi had no rest at all from the SF 5 setter before facing Federer.

It's a sign of how weak Federer's competition in this period was, that citing an exhausted guy way past his prime is an example of 'tough competition'. A few weeks before the USO, a teenage Nadal beat Agassi in Canada Masters.

Nadal 2019 AO.
Point?
Dominance doesn't always equate level... and the opposite as well.

 

[mike danny]

USO ain't a Nadal zone. He has the most titles there this decade, but it's not really his zone. It's the most wide-open of all the four Slams, clearly. No one's really dominated it since Fed won five in a row back in 2004-2008. When people have won multiple titles there, they've been spaced out quite a lot.

Forget dominating. No one has defended it since Fed 12 years ago.

 

[mike danny]

Odd definition. By that logic, winning 2 in 2 attempts would be quite a bit more of a zone.

I personally put a lot of emphasis on repeated titles won at the event. I think it’s a better hallmark of dominance because that means you can completely lock down a Slam for more than a year straight. From 2004-2008, for example, the USO was absolutely Fed’s zone. Or the AO from 2011-2016. Or RG from 2005-2014 and 2017-now. The USO was also basically PETE’s zone from 1993-1996.

You can’t list similar stats for Nadal because he’s had lengthy periods of time between his wins. Maybe you could do it for Nadal 2017-2019, though. But I highly emphasize maintaining control over a Slam for a period of time when we’re talking dominance or having the tournament as your zone.

Doesn’t make him less of a USO player because attaining results throughout your whole career is just as valid as attaining them within a short period of time. But it just means that you’ve dominated the tournament less. Again, this isn’t really a mark against him.

Can't call it a zone when the guy has never even defended a USO title.

 

[Beckerserve]

I'm a Nadal fan and your claim of Rafa owning USO is BS. He has 4 titles, but he's been irrelevant to often when he was playing it (twice in the decade). If you own a Slam, you're not losing to Fognini or Pouille. If you own a Slam, you have Fognini and Pouille invited to VIP hospitality on tournament site to serve them bagels.

4 titles in 8 attempts is owning. Becker was said to own W. 4 is more than 3. End of debate right there.

 

[Sabratha]

Djokovic:
3x Win
5x Final
3x Semifinal
0x Quarterfinal
2x R16
2x R32
0x R64
0x R126

Win-Loss: 75-12 (86.2%, including the PCB disqualification)

Nadal:
4x Win
1x Final
3x Semifinal
1X Quarterfinal
2x R16
2x R32
2x R64
0x R126

Win-Loss: 64-11 (85.3%)

Nadal has 1 more USO slam and he leads the USO H2H with 2-1. However, general consensus is that Nole's peak play at the USO (2011/2015) was at a higher level than Nadal's peak play (2010/2013) and he has the better overall results (reached the semis or further more often and has a better win percentage). Who do you consider the better US Open player in their peak and over their careers?
I would say peak USO Nole (2011-2015) is comfortably better than peak USO Rafa (2010-2013) and it took some flukes (easy draws for Rafa, Nole being in a slump post RG16 up to Wimby 2018, having to face his stylistic nemesis Wawrinka several times and being disqualified for hitting a line ref) to have Rafa above Nole in the US GS tally.

Nadal. He's got the extra title to his name.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Nadal. He's got the extra title to his name.

The mental gymnastics in his post lol

 

[Amritia]

Nadal 2019 AO.
Point?
Dominance doesn't always equate level... and the opposite as well.

A 35 year old who has just played 3 5 setters in a row, including a SF 5 setter the day before a final, is not a difficult opponent.
The fact he went to 5 sets against Mallise and Ginepri, and lost to a teenage Nadal on hard courts a few weeks before just show he was past his best regardless, even if he hadn't been fatigued.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

A 35 year old who has just played 3 5 setters in a row, including a SF 5 setter the day before a final, is not a difficult opponent.
The fact he went to 5 sets against Mallise and Ginepri, and lost to a teenage Nadal on hard courts a few weeks before just show he was past his best regardless, even if he hadn't been fatigued.

If only peak counts than fedr goat anyway :3

 

[Sport]

Why do you consider Nadal 2010 equal to Nole 2011? In fact, I consider the 2011 final the result of Nole reaching his peak (which is higher than Nadal's in non clay slams).

Nope, it isn't. Nadal has a higher peak level at the USO than Djokovic. Why do you think Djokovic 2011 equal to Nadal 2010 and Nadal 2013? In fact, I consider the USO 2013 final a result of Nadal playing at his peak (which is higher than Djokovic's one at the USO).

Nadal leads the H2H 2-1 over peak Djokovic at the USO and has more USO titles than Novak. That ends the discussion for any objective tennis fan. But unobjective Djokovic fans put the "he wasn't at his peak" excuse for any match that Novak loses to Rafa at the USO.

Djokovic loses to Nadal at the USO? No problem, let's put the "he wasn't at his peak" excuse. Djokovic is supposedly at his peak only when he wins, if he loses he can't be at his peak. With that rethoric strategy Djokovic always wins the peak debates.

Why Djokovic was at his absolute peak both at the USO 2010 and USO 2013:

USO 2010: Djokovic was already at his peak in the USO 2010. He had dramatically improved and beat Federer in the USO SF. In the USO 2009 SF, Djokovic lost in 3 sets to Federer. But in the USO 2010 SF Djokovic beat Federer with the same result than in the USO 2011 SF (5 sets), indicating that he already had peaked. It's not like Djokovic was non-peak the 31th of December of 2010 and suddenly became peak the 1st of January of 2011. He peaked in the last months of 2010, at the USO 2010.

USO 2013: Djokovic would have likely won 3 Slams plus the ATP finals without Nadal in 2013, and people would hype 2013 as one of Djokovic's best years. Only because Djokovic lost to Nadal both the RG 2013 SF and the USO F, it doesn't follow that he was non-peak.

 

[RS]

Nope, it isn't. Nadal has a higher peak level at the USO than Djokovic. Why do you think Djokovic 2011 equal to Nadal 2010 and Nadal 2013? In fact, I consider the USO 2013 final a result of Nadal playing at his peak (which is higher than Djokovic's one at the USO).

Nadal leads the H2H 2-1 over peak Djokovic at the USO and has more USO titles than Novak. That ends the discussion for any objective tennis fan. But unobjective Djokovic fans put the "he wasn't at his peak" excuse for any match that Novak loses to Rafa at the USO.

Djokovic loses to Nadal at the USO? No problem, let's put the "he wasn't at his peak" excuse. Djokovic is supposedly only at his peak when he wins. With that rethoric strategy Djokovic always wins the peak debates.

Why Djokovic was at his absolute peak both at the USO 2010 and USO 2013:

USO 2010: Djokovic was already at his peak in the USO 2010. He had dramatically improved and beat Federer in the USO SF. In the USO 2009 SF, Djokovic lost in 3 sets to Federer. But in the USO 2010 SF Djokovic beat Federer with the same result than in the USO 2011 SF, indicating that he already had peaked. It is not like Djokovic was non-peak the 31th of December of 2010 and suddenly became peak the 1st of January of 2011. He peaked in the last months of 2010, at the USO 2010.

USO 2013: Djokovic would have likely won 3 Slams plus the ATP finals without Nadal in 2013, and people would hype 2013 as one of Djokovic's best years. Only because Djokovic lost to Nadal both the RG 2013 SF and the USO F, it doesn't follow that he was non-peak.

 

[BackhandDTL]

Nope, it isn't. Nadal has a higher peak level at the USO than Djokovic. Why do you think Djokovic 2011 equal to Nadal 2010 and Nadal 2013? In fact, I consider the USO 2013 final a result of Nadal playing at his peak (which is higher than Djokovic's one at the USO).

Nadal leads the H2H 2-1 over peak Djokovic at the USO and has more USO titles than Novak. That ends the discussion for any objective tennis fan. But unobjective Djokovic fans put the "he wasn't at his peak" excuse for any match that Novak loses to Rafa at the USO.

Djokovic loses to Nadal at the USO? No problem, let's put the "he wasn't at his peak" excuse. Djokovic is supposedly at his peak only when he wins, if he loses he can't be at his peak. With that rethoric strategy Djokovic always wins the peak debates.

Why Djokovic was at his absolute peak both at the USO 2010 and USO 2013:

USO 2010: Djokovic was already at his peak in the USO 2010. He had dramatically improved and beat Federer in the USO SF. In the USO 2009 SF, Djokovic lost in 3 sets to Federer. But in the USO 2010 SF Djokovic beat Federer with the same result than in the USO 2011 SF (5 sets), indicating that he already had peaked. It's not like Djokovic was non-peak the 31th of December of 2010 and suddenly became peak the 1st of January of 2011. He peaked in the last months of 2010, at the USO 2010.

USO 2013: Djokovic would have likely won 3 Slams plus the ATP finals without Nadal in 2013, and people would hype 2013 as one of Djokovic's best years. Only because Djokovic lost to Nadal both the RG 2013 SF and the USO F, it doesn't follow that he was non-peak.

The problem is they try to hold Djokovic to the same standards as Nadal at RG.

which is simply a bad idea. Sure he wasn’t at his “peak” but he was still in his HC prime. 2010 he played a good match and he PEAKED in his next slam. 2013 he peaked at the AO and at RG.

His peak/prime stretch at HC slams don’t match the peak/prime stretch at RG for Nadal simply because Nadal is way too good at his pet slam. Doesn’t mean Djokovic was crap in those matches. it just means he’s not dominant as Nadal.

 

[Sport]

I would say on par.

Peak level, Nadal 2010 = Djoker 2011

Nadal’s 2017 and 2019 USO are comical to say the least. Djokovic 2018 pretty much in the same ballpark.

4 > 3 (titles) and 2 > 1 (H2H), so not on par at all. That's like saying that Nadal is on par with Federer at the USO with 1 less title. He isn't. Federer is the best USO player ever along with Pete(r) Sampras, because 5 > 4. Analogously, Nadal is objectively a better USO player than Djokovic because 4 > 3.

And the 2019 USO was comical in what sense, that it made people realize Nadal was sure catching 20 Slams? Both the USO 2017 and USO 2018 hasd admittedly weak draws, with Nadal only defeting Del Potro and Djokovic only defeating Del Potro in their respective titles. There was nothing "weak" about the USO 2019, despite that it made Nadal detractors get angry because he got closer to 20.

The USO 2019 was a strong title win for Nadal and one of his most epic victories. 33 years old Nadal suceeded in stopping the Next Gen (Medvedev). Saying that the USO 2019 was a "weak" title for Nadal makes so little sense as saying that 28 years old Federer had a "weak" draw at the AO 2010 when he stopped the Next Gen Andy Murray. At the USO 2019 Medvedev was at his absolute peak and Nadal was old, slow and tired, and still prevailed. Medvedev had won 2 Masters 1000 in a row and had recently defeated Djokovic in Cincinnati before reaching the USO final. Medvedev was like a robot in the USO 2019 final, making a lot of winners and also being a defensive wall reaching all of Nadal's shots. In the post-match interview Nadal said that he was so tired and that he had problems to breath in the 5th set (everyone saw how Nadal needed to take deep breaths to recover during the last set). Even Moyá (Nadal's coach) said that after the match Nadal could barely move because his legs were in intense pain.

The USO 2019 final is also the most epic USO final of the 2010s decade in terms of drama and close result, as it was the only 5 setter in the aforementioned decade.

 

[BackhandDTL]

How was 2019 USO comical?

Djokovic can’t even beat the guy that Nadal beat in the final, and that was peak Medvedev.

Cilic in the 4R is tough, imo.

2017/18 USO are both crapola draws though, that’s true.

 

[Deleted member 758560]

4 > 3 (titles) and 2 > 1 (H2H), so not on par at all.

at all it means 5-2 (wimby titles ralph vs djo), or 8-5, for example.. but 4-3, 2-1, 5-6..it's called almost on par (very close) but this deffo can't be considered as at all, feel the difference, so to say

 

[ewiewp]

Djokovic:
3x Win
5x Final
3x Semifinal
0x Quarterfinal
2x R16
2x R32
0x R64
0x R126

Win-Loss: 75-12 (86.2%, including the PCB disqualification)

Nadal:
4x Win
1x Final
3x Semifinal
1X Quarterfinal
2x R16
2x R32
2x R64
0x R126

Win-Loss: 64-11 (85.3%)

Nadal has 1 more USO slam and he leads the USO H2H with 2-1. However, general consensus is that Nole's peak play at the USO (2011/2015) was at a higher level than Nadal's peak play (2010/2013) and he has the better overall results (reached the semis or further more often and has a better win percentage). Who do you consider the better US Open player in their peak and over their careers?
I would say peak USO Nole (2011-2015) is comfortably better than peak USO Rafa (2010-2013) and it took some flukes (easy draws for Rafa, Nole being in a slump post RG16 up to Wimby 2018, having to face his stylistic nemesis Wawrinka several times and being disqualified for hitting a line ref) to have Rafa above Nole in the US GS tally.

I don't know who is more unlucky ? Novak at US Open or Rafa at Aussie Open?

However, Rafa's strong seasons tend to be confirmed by US Open win....

 

[TMF]

I don't think Djokovic will go deeper, much less win another US Open.

Add your final thought on who's the superior player at this slam

 

[clayqueen]

I don't know who is more unlucky ? Novak at US Open or Rafa at Aussie Open?

However, Rafa's strong seasons tend to be confirmed by US Open win....

How many times ahs Djokovic been injured at the USO. Rafa's participation at the AO has been plagued with injury since 2010 and he's missed one or two due to injury.

 

[messiahrobins]

How many times ahs Djokovic been injured at the USO. Rafa's participation at the AO has been plagued with injury since 2010 and he's missed one or two due to injury.

How many US Opens has Nadal played and how many US Opens has Novak played?
How many AO's have they both played?

 

[duaneeo]

If Djokovic was the better US Open player than Nadal, the 'HC GOAT' would have more US Open titles than Nadal. The fact that he doesn't says he's not the better USO player than Rafa, and/or he's not the HC GOAT.

 

[messiahrobins]

If Djokovic was the better US Open player than Nadal, the 'HC GOAT' would have more US Open titles than Nadal. The fact that he doesn't says he's not the better USO player than Rafa, and/or he's not the HC GOAT.

Ultimately it really does depend on the AO v USO in terms of prestige, id love the players to be given an anonymous poll on this

 

[Torben]

This one should be a no-brainer, but Djokovic fans have always been in denial about it.

You are right.

They will deny it and funnily enough, try to justify it with twaddle.

 

[TMF]

Ultimately it really does depend on the AO v USO in terms of prestige, id love the players to be given an anonymous poll on this

History of USO was always a prestige tournament. Unlike AO, many players- Connors, Agassi, Lendl, McEnroe, Borg, etc. have skipped the AO in favors of the other 3 slam tournaments. Even Navratilova skipped the AO in her early career, and then skipped again in her late career to focus on Wimbledon and USO.

USO > AO imo

 

[gameovais]

They may have skipped the AO in the past - but no one is going be skipping it anymore. The Aussies have run way ahead of the other 3 slams in so many ways.

AO also happens at the start of the year when players are the most fresh and healthy (unless they're coming back from injuries).

As for Nadal vs Djokovic at US Open, when Djokovic won the title last year he pulled out in front of Nadal. His overall resume is much better than Nadal in NYC because 5 finals is way above 1 final.

 

[GabeT]

Both with 4 titles, but Novak has more Fs and win%. Small difference

 

[GabeT]

Ultimately it really does depend on the AO v USO in terms of prestige, id love the players to be given an anonymous poll on this

AO was dominated by the Big 3 during their reign (2004-2023). Only twice did another player win in that time span. I think like 7 other players besides the Big 3 won the USO in the same years. Whether it was because the Big 3 were more tired or generally less interested the result is the same

 

[ChaelAZ]

Still Nadal.

 

[pirhaksar]

Both are equal for me. I do think going deep and making many finals is an equally relevant measure of strength on the surface. It is precisely for this reason I think RF is the grass goat for me even even if he had 7 wimbledons tied with Pete.

 

[messiahrobins]

AO was dominated by the Big 3 during their reign (2004-2023). Only twice did another player win in that time span. I think like 7 other players besides the Big 3 won the USO in the same years. Whether it was because the Big 3 were more tired or generally less interested the result is the same

Shame no journalist will ask them as fans would love to know what events players feel are most prestigious, likely there would be different answers as well.

 

[GabeT]

Shame no journalist will ask them as fans would love to know what events players feel are most prestigious, likely there would be different answers as well.

My sense is that all agree Wimbledon is the most prestigious and then the rest are the same or vary depending where you grew up. The fact that Cilic and Thiem won the USO during the Big 3 era tells me that something about it makes it a bit less of a priority than other slams for the top players

 

[messiahrobins]

My sense is that all agree Wimbledon is the most prestigious and then the rest are the same or vary depending where you grew up. The fact that Cilic and Thiem won the USO during the Big 3 era tells me that something about it makes it a bit less of a priority than other slams for the top players

Interesting. Ive been to both, got the feeling the players took the USO more seriously but much preferred the atmosphere at the AO, but as generations pass i can see why younger players would see the AO as bigger as certainly on site it feels a bigger event.

 

[FeroBango]

Fedr

 

[GoatNo1]

USO	No1e	Rafa
titles	4	4
F	10	5
SF	13	8
QF	13	9
wins	90	67
top10 wins	16	7
W%	86,5%	84,8%
h2h	1	2

worth to know:
nole met fed 6 times and rafa never met him at USO
both times nole lost to rafa he had 5 sets SF with fed and wawa while rafa had 3 easy sets vs much easier opponents
nole was controversially DQ at USO20 and banned from USO22 both times as huge favorit, so the race is asterisked
last USO match was 2013 and since then rafa has never won a set on HC vs nole, nole is 9-0 in matches and 19-0 in sets on HC since then

 

[GrandSlam24]

A semi-final in 2013 was a 5 set match against Wawrinka. Federer was only 2010.
I love it when you write ASTERISKED

Banned, not bunned

 

[GoatNo1]

A semi-final in 2013 was a 5 set match against Wawrinka. Federer was only 2010.
I love it when you write ASTERISKED

Banned, not bunned

yes wawa.... i wrote about it many times but not now, did it to fast. fed was in 2010 and 2011 but nole won 2011, rafa had muzza in 4 in SF if remember correctly

 

[GrandSlam24]

yes wawa.... i wrote about it many times but not now, did it to fast. fed was in 2010 and 2011 but nole won 2011, rafa had muzza in 4 in SF if remember correctly

I saw the sick Wawrinka match live on TV. That was in my first year as a Djokovic fan. I've been a fan since the Wimbledon 2013 semi-finals.

I was a Connors fan until 1993 and then I hadn't watched men's tennis for 20 years. I followed Steffi until 1999.

I watched the Wimbledon final in 2012. Unfortunately Federer won. But I was in favour of Murray.
Until I switched to Novak, I was officially a Murray fan for 1 year. But not really.

The first time I ever consciously noticed Novak was the US Open final in 2012, when I was already slightly in favour of Novak.
Something fascinated me. He could have won all of the first 4 sets.