Djokovic v Rafa.

Well I'm saying there's not enough evidence. I certainly agree Queens/Halle is not a perfect event to draw conclusions from, but I was seeking to counter the assumption that Nadal would very logically do better at grass tournaments, with another possibility. Not because I think I am right, but I could be. We don't have enough evidence either way. Also like I said he has had some scares at Wimbledon where he would have been out in a 3 set match. I do agree that often players look at Queens/Halle as a warm up, though Nadal won in in 2008 and Federer often has come from the RG final to winning Halle. Not saying Nadal woudn't win grass masters but it's not an automatic conclusion that he would either.

Nadal is clearly the 2nd best grass court player of this current generation, right behind Federer.

So why would it be illogical to assume he would benefit from more high level grass court tournaments and an actual grass season :confused:
 
Nadal is clearly the 2nd best grass court player of this current generation, right behind Federer.

So why would it be illogical to assume he would benefit from more high level grass court tournaments and an actual grass season :confused:

How many Queen and Halle he has won ?
 
So what is Wimbledon played on? Astroturf? All the grass tournaments have real grass as their surface. And Nadal :D has been the most successful grass-courter in the past 5 years. :-P

He's been bad for the past 2 years. A 2nd round exit to a guy ranked #100? :? And before that, getting smacked around by a guy who had never even made a Wimbledon final before? :|
 
The 2011 W loss was Rafa's worst slam loss by far. There is no shame in losing to Fed at W or to Djoko on hard but losing to Djoko on grass? Grrr. I totally identified with Rafa's dad's reaction... and I hope Rafa will have an opportunity for the revenge match one day.
 
Nadal is clearly the 2nd best grass court player of this current generation, right behind Federer.

So why would it be illogical to assume he would benefit from more high level grass court tournaments and an actual grass season :confused:

I told you why.

Furthermore, how many titles has Nadal won on grass? 3. That's not a lot. As far as titles won go, Hewitt and Roddick are ahead and I think Murray has also won 3 grass titles. Of course Nadal has won Wimbledon twice, but an extended grass season is not going to have any more slams, just best of 3 set tournaments, of which Nadal is behind Federer, Hewitt, Roddick and Murray.

Plus as I said how many time has nadal been 2 sets to 0 or 1 down at Wimbledon? That would be a loss in a best of 3.

Ultimately not enough data, because there's not enough grass.

The 2011 W loss was Rafa's worst slam loss by far. There is no shame in losing to Fed at W or to Djoko on hard but losing to Djoko on grass? Grrr. I totally identified with Rafa's dad's reaction... and I hope Rafa will have an opportunity for the revenge match one day.

Djokovic was very competitive in both their previous grass court matches so I wouldn't feel that bad. Nadal's been stretched to 5 sets by much worse players (even talking about ability on grass)
 
Nadal is clearly the 2nd best grass court player of this current generation, right behind Federer.

in a best of 5 scenario, absolutely , but not so in a best of 3

So why would it be illogical to assume he would benefit from more high level grass court tournaments and an actual grass season :confused:

because nadal is often in trouble vs big hitters/servers on grass and has gone down 0-2 or 1-2 in sets quite a few matches ...therefore in BO3 he is far more susceptible ..
 
I disagree about the backhand comment.

Nadal struggles more with Djokovic because Djokovic's deadly backhand turns Nadal's weapon into his weakness.
 
The 2011 W loss was Rafa's worst slam loss by far. There is no shame in losing to Fed at W or to Djoko on hard but losing to Djoko on grass? Grrr. I totally identified with Rafa's dad's reaction... and I hope Rafa will have an opportunity for the revenge match one day.

Well, I don't think he played badly. Just the second set really. Had he won the first set (and he was the better player I think), he could well have won. What was bad was that he let himself be rattled for way too long after what happened in the first set. But he won the third set 6-1 and the fourth was close.

But Nadal is perfect at Barcelona, but struggled/lost at Queen. And Queen is much more important than Barcelona since it's the only warm up tourney to prepare for Wimbledon.

Two things. His game works more naturally on clay, he doesn't really need to adapt to it (he does on grass). And Barcelona isn't the first clay tournament he plays in the year either, while Queens/Halle is the first one he plays on grass.
 
Nadal is a great slow surface player. He does not translate across all surfaces like Djokovic and Federer do, period. Stop trying to argue that Nadal is the greatest at everything, he isn't.

How many times has Nadal won Wimbledon?

Is that a slow surface?
 
Nadal has won Wimbledon once, in 2008.

His 2010 post-RG walk gave him the trophy but should not be part of any meaningful conversation. We all know what happened. Nadal has been asked about his second Wimbledon title multiple times and he does not seem to value it any higher than any of his RG cups (which he does not care much about either).

For some reason he only values his Wimbledon 2008 victory and his AO 2009 victory, possibly because they were the hardest won, and possibly because he beat the only player he truly respects. The USO 2010 title seems to be important to him based on what he says, but only as a career GS completion event and not as a tournament. He does not seem to like to refer to that cheesy title.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top