Djokovic vs. Nadal - Paris Masters 2009 Semifinal

Who will win?


  • Total voters
    41
  • Poll closed .

zagor

Bionic Poster
Does nadal have any chance of finishing the year number 1?
Yeah,I think he has to win WTF with one RR loss or get to the final without any RR loses while Fed has to lose all of his matches there.

So basically Nadal can only afford to lose one match and Fed has to lose all of them for Nadal to finish #1.Not impossible but not very likely either.
 

Blinkism

Legend
If you make me rank, I would say Davy. Reason being his MS title, which is better than consistency. Djokovic 2nd due to his ATP 500 title, Fed and Nadal are 3rd. If we include USO, Montreal and Cincy, Djokovic isn't even top 5.
My comment was really based on very recent stuff, basically month of November stuff.

I was just implying Djokovic should be the favorite in London if he wins Paris.

To win a 500, then a Masters, both indoors - he'd have to be the favorite.

Obviously, in the scope of the last few months, Djokovic is not one of the top, top, players, but I disagree with him not even being Top 5.

He made the finals in Cincinnati and the semi-finals at the USO.

I can only think of 3 players, Fed + Delpo + Murray, who might have better results than Djoko in that period of time.
 

Blinkism

Legend
Yeah,I think he has to win WTF with one RR loss or get to the final without any RR loses while Fed has to lose all of his matches there.

So basically Nadal can only afford to lose one match and Fed has to lose all of them for Nadal to finish #1.Not impossible but not very likely either.
No, Federer can win a match but then Nadal has to win London (with 1 match lost maximum).

He needs to get 1000 points more than Fed.

Fed can even make the semifinals by winning 2 round robin matches (400 points) and then Nadal can win the tournament undefeated (1500 points) and he'd be ahead in the rankings.

Also, Nadal's playing Davis Cup.

There's points up for grab there. In fact, Nadal could only win 800 points more than Federer in London but make up for it in Davis Cup and finish 2009 as #1.

It's more likely than you think, zagor.

Still, not too likely. It depends more on Federer than Nadal.

For the record, I'd hope that Nadal wouldn't become #1 without defeating Federer.
If Nadal meets Federer in the semifinals and beats him on the way to winning London, then he'd be more deserving of the #1 spot. Any other scenario would be a hollow #1 position, IMO, until Nadal actually beats Federer to take the spot away from him- like he did in 2008.
 
Last edited:

zagor

Bionic Poster
No, Federer can win a match but then Nadal has to win London (with 1 match lost maximum).

He needs to get 1000 points more than Fed.

Fed can even make the semifinals by winning 2 round robin matches (400 points) and then Nadal can win the tournament undefeated (1500 points) and he'd be ahead in the rankings.

Also, Nadal's playing Davis Cup.

There's points up for grab there.

It's more likely than you think, zagor.

Still, not too likely. It depends more on Federer than Nadal.

Yeah,I forgot about DC,thanks for the summary of possible scenarios :).

It's OK if Fed doesn't finish #1,I mean I want him to but winning FO and breaking Pete's slam record is more than enough as far as I'm concerned,can't get too greedy.
 

mandy01

G.O.A.T.
No, Federer can win a match but then Nadal has to win London (with 1 match lost maximum).

He needs to get 1000 points more than Fed.

Fed can even make the semifinals by winning 2 round robin matches (400 points) and then Nadal can win the tournament undefeated (1500 points) and he'd be ahead in the rankings.

Also, Nadal's playing Davis Cup.

There's points up for grab there. In fact, Nadal could only win 800 points more than Federer in London but make up for it in Davis Cup and finish 2009 as #1.

It's more likely than you think, zagor.

Still, not too likely. It depends more on Federer than Nadal.
Nadal can gain 40 points maximum at DC as far as I know..
 

Blinkism

Legend
Yeah,I forgot about DC,thanks for the summary of possible scenarios :).

It's OK if Fed doesn't finish #1,I mean I want him to but winning FO and breaking Pete's slam record is more than enough as far as I'm concerned,can't get too greedy.
Well, and this is coming from a Nadal fan (I don't know if other Nadal fans will agree), I think Fed's the real #1 and if Nadal is to surpass him it'd only be fair if he actually beats him fair-and-square in the process.
 

mandy01

G.O.A.T.
Yeah,I forgot about DC,thanks for the summary of possible scenarios :).

It's OK if Fed doesn't finish #1,I mean I want him to but winning FO and breaking Pete's slam record is more than enough as far as I'm concerned,can't get too greedy.
What I really like about Roger this year was that he took off time to rest and to finish a training block in Dubai..it was a gamble as far as the ranking was concerned but atleast he'll be well rested and not hurried during the off-season.
Besides,with his girls also being there he got to spend some quality time with them.
I was hoping he'd play well after the comeback which dosent seem to be the case so I dont have hopes for London but seeing all that he's given to us as fans-there really is nothing to complain about.
The guy deserves a break..
Damn..the events of this year still seem so surreal.:shock:
 

Blinkism

Legend
Nadal can gain 40 points maximum at DC as far as I know..
50 points actually, which would make the difference is Federer is 45 points ahead of Nadal after London.

There are some scenarios that make it possible (where Nadal wins 900 points more than Fed in London, as Fed is currently 945 points ahead of Nadal).

I doubt it'll come down to this, though.

This is all assuming somehow Federer plays poorly in London and Nadal plays every match like he did against Tsonga.

I fully doubt that.
 

mandy01

G.O.A.T.
Well, and this is coming from a Nadal fan (I don't know if other Nadal fans will agree), I think Fed's the real #1 and if Nadal is to surpass him it'd only be fair if he actually beats him fair-and-square in the process.
Why?
Nadal dosent have to beat Fed to justify his ranking at all..Tennis is about winning..be it against anyone..If Fed dosent perform well,its not Nadal's problem.
 

Blinkism

Legend
Why?
Nadal dosent have to beat Fed to justify his ranking at all..Tennis is about winning..be it against anyone..If Fed dosent perform well,its not Nadal's problem.
It's just more meaningful, I think.

Sort of how a boxer would have to beat the current heavyweight champion of the world to take the title of world champion.
 

P_Agony

Banned
Sorry but if you say this you are not objective.

1.Novak

2.Nadal

3.Davydenko

4.Stepanek
huh? You make no sense whatsoever. If we look after the USO, Davy is cleary #1 since he's the only one to win a Masters 1000 title. Next would be Djokovic with an ATP 500 title and a Masters 1000. If Djokovic wins Paris, he will move up to #1 with two titles. 3rd would be Nadal.
 

P_Agony

Banned
It's just more meaningful, I think.

Sort of how a boxer would have to beat the current heavyweight champion of the world to take the title of world champion.
There's a point in what you say, but mandy is also right. If Nadal is to regain #1 without beating Federer it'll still be perfectly legit. Tennis is a game of matchups and you can only beat who's in front of you.
 
Last edited:

TheTruth

G.O.A.T.
Anyone who gets to #1 deserves it, whether it's based on consistency or prowess.

At the end of the day no one remembers the circumstances for where a player is, or was when it comes to an actual achievement.
 

SikSerb

Hall of Fame
huh? You make no sense whatsoever. If we look after the USO, Davy is cleary #1 since he's the only one to win a Masters 1000 title. Next would be Djokovic with an ATP 500 title and a Masters 1000. If Djokovic wins Paris, he will move up to #1 with two titles. 3rd would be Nadal.
2 ATP 500 titles and possibly a 1000 masters event.
 

Blinkism

Legend
There's a point in what you say, but mandy is also right. If Nadal is to regain #1 without beating Federer it'll stil lbe perfectly legit. Tennis is a game of mathups and you can only beat who's in front of you.
Anyone who gets to #1 deserves it, whether it's based on consistency or prowess.

At the end of the day no one remembers the circumstances for where a player is, or was when it comes to an actual achievement.
I suppose, but I would still be happier should Nadal beat Federer in a "battle for #1".

It would do wonders for his confidence and would instill more fear into the hearts of his ATP peers- two things Nadal lacks now.
 

P_Agony

Banned
I suppose, but I would still be happier should Nadal beat Federer in a "battle for #1".

It would do wonders for his confidence and would instill more fear into the hearts of his ATP peers- two things Nadal lacks now.
Keep in mind that indoor courts are one place that's been sanctuary for Federer against Nadal. Nadal hasn't won a set against Federer in their two previous matches at the TMC.

Although with current Federer, anything is possible.
 

Blinkism

Legend
Keep in mind that indoor courts are one place that's been sanctuary for Federer against Nadal. Nadal hasn't won a set against Federer in their two previous matches at the TMC.

Although with current Federer, anything is possible.
All we can hope is that, if they do meet, they're both 100% and it's another epic and everyone can enjoy seeing some brilliant and dramatic tennis.

In reality, though, the match will probably be followed by months of trolling regardless of what happens....
 

mandy01

G.O.A.T.
All we can hope is that, if they do meet, they're both 100% and it's another epic and everyone can enjoy seeing some brilliant and dramatic tennis.

In reality, though, the match will probably be followed by months of trolling regardless of what happens....
I'm trying to think of all the "Federer/Nadal should retire" threads :lol:
*shudders*..I would rather the umpire wins if those two meet :lol:
 

P_Agony

Banned
All we can hope is that, if they do meet, they're both 100% and it's another epic and everyone can enjoy seeing some brilliant and dramatic tennis.

In reality, though, the match will probably be followed by months of trolling regardless of what happens....
You got that right :)

Personally I want to see Fed get some revenge on Joker though, this time with a forehand.
 

mandy01

G.O.A.T.
You got that right :)

Personally I want to see Fed get some revenge on Joker though, this time with a forehand.
LOL..yeah..would be cool if he can manage to force that forehand out of the locker room,into the court during The Finals be it against anyone :lol:
 

Telepatic

Legend
huh? You make no sense whatsoever. If we look after the USO, Davy is cleary #1 since he's the only one to win a Masters 1000 title. Next would be Djokovic with an ATP 500 title and a Masters 1000. If Djokovic wins Paris, he will move up to #1 with two titles. 3rd would be Nadal.
??
Djokovic is already #1 on this list, he won in Beijing and Basel (ATP 500 pts x 2), and he reached Paris finals (620 ATP pts, he can even win it for 1000 pts) and Shanghai semis (about 300 pts)

Davydenko is second since he won Shanghai (1000pts) and thats about it..

Nadal is third since he reached Shanghai finals (600 pts) and he reached Bejing/Paris semis (about 300 pts x2)

Stepanek is fourth since he reached Paris semis (about 300pts) and Basel semis.
 

rafan

Hall of Fame
the quickest, lowest-bouncing hardcourt at flushing (not to mention back to back days for a grinder like nadal)...like i said above the aus and olympics were yesterday....the tour is constantly, speedily, and effectively making adjustments, rafa isn't....let's give novak credit here, i don't think nadal was tanking, he was trying to get himself going emotionally, it was his game that had no answers, nothing to trouble novak
I think all the more reason to evaluate his current position. He has got to find a way to trouble players like Djoko the way he used to. Nadal is capable of progressing - but is uncle Tony?
 

namelessone

Legend
Damn. Djokovic tore Nadal up.
What were you expecting? He did beat Nadal 6-1,6-4 in Cincy where Nadal won only 5 games just like today. Nadal has also been beaten by DelPo twice,Davydenko,Cilic and almost lost to guys like Ljubicic,Blake(twice),Baghdatis,Almagro,Robredo. It's not that tough to beat Nadal on HC,especially nowadays. Rafa may be number 2 but he's playing like a guy ranked outside the top 20 at times.
 

LiveForever

Banned
What were you expecting? He did beat Nadal 6-1,6-4 in Cincy where Nadal won only 5 games just like today. Nadal has also been beaten by DelPo twice,Davydenko,Cilic and almost lost to guys like Ljubicic,Blake(twice),Baghdatis,Almagro,Robredo. It's not that tough to beat Nadal on HC,especially nowadays. Rafa may be number 2 but he's playing like a guy ranked outside the top 20 at times.
just making a general statement on the match. Nadal is doing rather well on hardcourts. He made several SFs and final in shanghai. The guy has never been an amazing fast court player. His form is nowhere near as poor as his fans are claiming it to be.
 

P_Agony

Banned
??
Djokovic is already #1 on this list, he won in Beijing and Basel (ATP 500 pts x 2), and he reached Paris finals (620 ATP pts, he can even win it for 1000 pts) and Shanghai semis (about 300 pts)

Davydenko is second since he won Shanghai (1000pts) and thats about it..

Nadal is third since he reached Shanghai finals (600 pts) and he reached Bejing/Paris semis (about 300 pts x2)

Stepanek is fourth since he reached Paris semis (about 300pts) and Basel semis.
Points wise, you are correct, but title wise you are wrong. I'm sure most players would happily trade one MS final and two ATP 500 titles for one MS title.
 

namelessone

Legend
So 6 UE are proof that he was playing well? That's the most laughable thing I've heard,that just shows that he didn't take any risks. Novak had 14 UE but 31 winners. Nadal made 13 winners in 2 sets. That's 6 per set. In his match with davydenko he made 9 winners in 2 sets. Those are pusher stats. Nadal of old,even on HC,would counterpunch,he would actually try to do something,with varying success of course. By comparison he made 28 winners/5 UE against Tsonga in 2 sets. That's playing well and mind you,he didn't play lights out yesterday because tsonga did have BP's.

Obviously DelPo,Djoker,other big hitters/big servers would have success against Rafa most of the time no matter how his form is. Let's forget about those guys for a while. But come on,struggling against guys like over the hill Blake(twice),Ljubicic,Baghdatis,getting broken by freaking mathieu(biggest choker ever),almost losing to almagro and robredo doesn't indicate great form,quite the contrary. I would expect young Rafa to struggle on HC against these guys,not a fresh HC GS champion. A guy who beats one top 10 player in 5-6 months and struggles in every tournament he enters isn't in great form. He had 3 very good matches in all these months after recovery: with berdych,monfils and tsonga.

Nadal got by all these months by willpower alone,because his game has been seriously lacking. Take away his ability to hang on and Nadal would have exited tournaments a lot faster with this type of mediocre/pusher game.
 

marc45

G.O.A.T.
He was very impressive in Monte Carlo, Barcelona and Rome too. 1 set dropped in 3 tournaments combined. In Madrid, I started to get concerned because he looked relatively slower compared to before, and that was before that 4 hour Djokovic match.
i'm wondering about his quickness as well...he appears to be in good shape and is moving quickly, but number one in the world when it comes to speed?... which he was...or is it simply all the players making him look slow on these hardcourts because they're being so aggressive and he's constantly on defense?...he moved very well coming forward off of his opponents drop shots this week, which says to me again that he should be attacking the net more
 

P_Agony

Banned
So 6 UE are proof that he was playing well? That's the most laughable thing I've heard,that just shows that he didn't take any risks. Novak had 14 UE but 31 winners. Nadal made 13 winners in 2 sets. That's 6 per set. In his match with davydenko he made 9 winners in 2 sets. Those are pusher stats. Nadal of old,even on HC,would counterpunch,he would actually try to do something,with varying success of course. By comparison he made 28 winners/5 UE against Tsonga in 2 sets. That's playing well and mind you,he didn't play lights out yesterday because tsonga did have BP's.

Obviously DelPo,Djoker,other big hitters/big servers would have success against Rafa most of the time no matter how his form is. Let's forget about those guys for a while. But come on,struggling against guys like over the hill Blake(twice),Ljubicic,Baghdatis,getting broken by freaking mathieu(biggest choker ever),almost losing to almagro and robredo doesn't indicate great form,quite the contrary. I would expect young Rafa to struggle on HC against these guys,not a fresh HC GS champion. A guy who beats one top 10 player in 5-6 months and struggles in every tournament he enters isn't in great form. He had 3 very good matches in all these months after recovery: with berdych,monfils and tsonga.

Nadal got by all these months by willpower alone,because his game has been seriously lacking. Take away his ability to hang on and Nadal would have exited tournaments a lot faster with this type of mediocre/pusher game.
You're mostly right, but I think you're being a little too hard on Nadal. He did make at least the semis of every recent HC tourney. That's not something that's easily achieved. You have to remember that Nadal was never a dominant HC player. Even when he won AO 09, he had to go through two tough 5-setters in order to get there. Nadal's way to play tennis does not fit with fast hard courts, and he will struggle against aggressive guys with great backhands. In fact, that was the problem for Nadal in RG this year as well against Soderling (and many players claimed RG this year felt like a hard courts more than a clay court). Frankly, I'm not sure Nadal can change much about his technique. His FH is just not as lethal on these courts as it is on clay, and he tends to slice his BH, and Nadal's slice isn't exactly the best out there. He could try to flatten out his FH, but it may hurt his clay results.

Nadal's main problem, IMO, is the serve. He did serve fairly well against Tsonga, but it's not enough. He needs more cheap points from his serve, less rallies.
 
So 6 UE are proof that he was playing well? That's the most laughable thing I've heard,that just shows that he didn't take any risks. Novak had 14 UE but 31 winners. Nadal made 13 winners in 2 sets. That's 6 per set. In his match with davydenko he made 9 winners in 2 sets. Those are pusher stats. Nadal of old,even on HC,would counterpunch,he would actually try to do something,with varying success of course. By comparison he made 28 winners/5 UE against Tsonga in 2 sets. That's playing well and mind you,he didn't play lights out yesterday because tsonga did have BP's.

Obviously DelPo,Djoker,other big hitters/big servers would have success against Rafa most of the time no matter how his form is. Let's forget about those guys for a while. But come on,struggling against guys like over the hill Blake(twice),Ljubicic,Baghdatis,getting broken by freaking mathieu(biggest choker ever),almost losing to almagro and robredo doesn't indicate great form,quite the contrary. I would expect young Rafa to struggle on HC against these guys,not a fresh HC GS champion. A guy who beats one top 10 player in 5-6 months and struggles in every tournament he enters isn't in great form. He had 3 very good matches in all these months after recovery: with berdych,monfils and tsonga.

Nadal got by all these months by willpower alone,because his game has been seriously lacking. Take away his ability to hang on and Nadal would have exited tournaments a lot faster with this type of mediocre/pusher game.
What I meant is he played solid and safe. I was comparing it with Cincinnati match where Nadal played worse, made a lot of unforced errors, and had BPs that he didn't convert (although as far as I remember, Djokovic saved all of them fair and square).

Nadal can play better on hardcourt, but against yesterday's Djokovic he would still lose in straights. And Nadal was a little lucky that Djokovic started messing around in the middle of the 2nd set. It could have been a bagel or breadstick had Novak kept the pressure.

But lightning fast HC is not Nadal's cup o tea. Let's wait until AO2010 before we judge his form.
 

Blinkism

Legend
Just to bring some closure to this thread, here's what Nadal had to say about this match and the tournament, in general.

"The good thing is I finished this tournament much better than I started...The confidence will not go away because I lost," said Rafa at the end of the match before giving Novak full credit for an incredible victory. "Nobody likes to lose, but you have to be realistic and accept when your opponent is better than you."

"He played extremely well," admitted Rafa. "He played unbelievable, in my opinion. I didn't play bad. That's the truth. But with this level of Novak’s, [it] is very difficult to play at this level, especially [on] this surface. I finish the tournament playing much better than [how] I started [it].
Hopefully Nadal takes this positive attitude with him to London.

It's been a good run, though, in Paris, and best of luck at the World Tour Finals!

Vamos Rafa!!!
 
Top