Djokovic vs Nadal - Peak YEARS at Slams

TheFifthSet

Legend
Peak Year Djokovic (whether 2011 or 2015) vs Peak Year Nadal (whether 2008, 2010, or 2013) out of 10. I think their slam peak years were 2011 and 2010, respectively.

AO: 2011 Djoko/2010 Nadal - Djoko 10-0
RG: 2011 Djoko/2010 Nadal - Nadal 9-1
Wimby: 2011 Djoko/2010 Nadal - Djoko 6-4
USO: 2011 Djoko/2010 Nadal - Djoko 6-4

YEC: 2011 Djoko/2010 Nadal - Nadal 7-3 (LOL).


Feel free to pick the years for each.
 

Third Serve

Talk Tennis Guru
2015 Novak was better than 2011 Novak. There’s an argument for 2008 Nadal being better than 2010 Nadal too.
2011 Novak was better at the Slams though imo

Only thing that goes against it is the indoor season but if we’re talking strictly the Slams, it’s a notch above 2015.

Only Wimbledon was better in 2015, I think. RG is about even—2015 had a great win against Nadal but played mediocre in the SF+F while 2011 never racked up such a big win but played clearly better in the match he lost. US Open is 2011 by a small but decisive margin. AO is obviously 2011.
 

TheFifthSet

Legend
Didn’t we literally just have this thread? :unsure:

No, that was a different premise.

I already said my piece in the “original” thread. I’ll just say that it’s comical that anyone thinks that Joker could beat peak RAFA at RG when during his own peak he lost to Fruad and Stanimal. Disgust.

Eh, match-ups plus I actually don’t think that. In the other thread I gave peak Nadal (RG ‘08) a 10-0 edge over any version of Djokovic. Plus I gave a rather generous win to Peak Nadal indoors in that other thread.

But I’m glad I made you laugh.
 

The Blond Blur

G.O.A.T.
No, that was a different premise.



Eh, match-ups plus I actually don’t think that. In the other thread I gave peak Nadal (RG ‘08) a 10-0 edge over any version of Djokovic. Plus I gave a rather generous win to Nadal indoors in that other thread.

But I’m glad I made you laugh.
Fair enough, but there are legitimately people here who do think that. For those unfortunate people it needs to be said, no amount of matchup dynamic is going to overcome the gulf in ability between the 2 peak for peak at RG. It doesn’t matter if it’s 2008 or 2010 RAFA, he was just too good those years. I mean 2010 RAFA is the only man in tennis history to complete the clay schlem. And he only dropped 2 sets for the ENTIRE CC season that year. I had to write that in all caps just so people know that wasn’t a typo :p
 

TheFifthSet

Legend
Fair enough, but there are legitimately people here who do think that. For those unfortunate people it needs to be said, no amount of matchup dynamic is going to overcome the gulf in ability between the 2 peak for peak at RG. It doesn’t matter if it’s 2008 or 2010 RAFA, he was just too good those years. I mean 2010 RAFA is the only man in tennis history to complete the clay schlem. And he only dropped 2 sets for the ENTIRE CC season that year. I had to write that in all caps just so people know that wasn’t a typo :p

Yeah, but ‘10 was also a pretty horribad clay year. Either way I don’t think 9/10 is so objectionable, and I gladly give 08 Nadal a clean 10-0.
 

The Blond Blur

G.O.A.T.
Yeah, but ‘10 was also a pretty horribad clay year. Either way I don’t think 9/10 is so objectionable, and I gladly give 08 Nadal a clean 10-0.
Regardless if it was weak or not, there’s just no way 2011, 2015, or any version of Joker for that matter beats 2010 RAFA. Not when he lost to players who’re significantly worse than 2010 RAFA. I mean he couldn’t even push Fed in 11 or Stan in 15 to 5, and yet he’s somehow going to beat a RAFA that didn’t drop a set all tournament?! I’m sorry there’s not a matchup advantage in the world that’s making up for that much difference in ability/level. 2010 RAFA wasn’t even broken in the F vs Sod.
 

Rago

Hall of Fame
2008 Nadal vs 2011 Djokovic
2010 Nadal vs 2015 Djokovic
2013 Nadal vs 2016 Djokovic

At most (being a bit generous), Nadal wins 50% of their matches.
 

Kralingen

Bionic Poster
Unfortunately Nadal has had 3 seasons in his entire career where he was acceptably good (decent Slam contending level) for at least 3/4 Slams (not even all 4)

2010
2017
2019

I can try to stretch in 2008 (giving him benefit of the doubt at USO because he was great at the Olympics)

but man the guy has proven that he can’t stay healthy and sustain form over a full calendar year at all. It’s kind of crazy. By contrast Djokovic has 8:

2008
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2021
 

TheFifthSet

Legend
Regardless if it was weak or not, there’s just no way 2011, 2015, or any version of Joker for that matter beats 2010 RAFA. Not when he lost to players who’re significantly worse than 2010 RAFA. I mean he couldn’t even push Fed in 11 or Stan in 15 to 5, and yet he’s somehow going to beat a RAFA that didn’t drop a set all tournament?! I’m sorry there’s not a matchup advantage in the world that’s making up for that much difference in ability/level. 2010 RAFA wasn’t even broken in the F vs Sod.
Yeah, 1 out of 10 times, o let’s have a cow.
 

The Blond Blur

G.O.A.T.
Yeah, 1 out of 10 times, o let’s have a cow.
Lol, ok I was literally being lighthearted with you in my first response after you quoted me. Now I’m supposedly having a cow? :unsure: I haven’t been aggressive towards you at all. I just rationally explained why I believe Joker’s not touching 2010 RAFA.
 

Rago

Hall of Fame
Unfortunately Nadal has had 3 seasons in his entire career where he was acceptably good (decent Slam contending level) for at least 3/4 Slams (not even all 4)
Precisely the reason why I'm not a fan of the argument that takes his 2009 AO and 2010 USO performances and has them magically transported to 2008 which a lot of his fans like to bring up in "peak" for "peak" discussions.

According to his fans, Federer and Djokovic are always peaking whereas Nadal gets to decide when he peaks. Hilarious.
 

TheFifthSet

Legend
Lol, ok I was literally being lighthearted with you in my first response after you quoted me. Now I’m supposedly having a cow? :unsure: I haven’t been aggressive towards you at all. I just rationally explained why I believe Joker’s not touching 2010 RAFA.

lolz I was too. that was an Uncle Buck quote. Anyhow a slightly worse version of ‘11 Djoko did alright against a slightly worse version of ‘10 Nadal (‘12 RG). I don’t think it’s that scandalous.
 
Last edited:

NonP

Legend
Regardless if it was weak or not, there’s just no way 2011, 2015, or any version of Joker for that matter beats 2010 RAFA. Not when he lost to players who’re significantly worse than 2010 RAFA. I mean he couldn’t even push Fed in 11 or Stan in 15 to 5, and yet he’s somehow going to beat a RAFA that didn’t drop a set all tournament?! I’m sorry there’s not a matchup advantage in the world that’s making up for that much difference in ability/level. 2010 RAFA wasn’t even broken in the F vs Sod.

You know this Djoker stan has long maintained that no version of Novak (or Fraud, for that matter) has any realistic chance against trophy-holding Bull at RG (though now I'd exclude last season's Rafa). And my boy is certainly not getting the better of a strong Bull a la '10, however (slightly) overrated '10 Nadal is (yes, thanks to his 27-0 run at RG).

But here's the thing: IRL it's impossible for anyone to play at his "peak" for a full match, let alone a 10-match series. In fact the very notion of two players peaking at the same time is rather dubious. On paper the highest "peak" any player could achieve is to be utterly untouchable on serve while doing enough to break your opponent's, kinda like what Goran did to Pete in their '95 Wimby SF. And he was as untouchable as they come, posting a truly outrageous 85.0% and 72.7% of URS in the 2nd and 4th sets respectively while losing all of 2 SPs combined and breaking arguably the 3rd best Pistol's serve in each of those sets. I seriously doubt anyone else including Sampras himself has ever duplicated such video-game #s against a worthy opponent, so does that mean his GC peak was lower than Goran's even though he won the match and of course their career Wimbledon H2H? Exactly.

Nor does it make much sense to hypothesize about a multiyear when we already know the results more or less. After all the ATP/WTA Tour is a yearslong grind where you must find ways to keep healthy, play into form and peak at the right time. Doesn't matter one whit how well you played leading up to the Grand (Slam) Finale if you're overtaken by your rival in the end. Fatigue, injury, rust, luck or whatever is part of the game, and if you fall short for whatever reason that's on you and no one else (barring an exceptional circumstance like Seles' stabbing). We tend not to think of day-to-day or even set-to-set consistency as a skill, but it sure is a more important one than this mythical peak which your fav player might reach maybe a few times a year, or for about half of a marquee match at most.

That's why I say the only kind of hypothetical worth discussing is a variation of the pre-OE pro tours where the contenders would barnstorm corners of the world playing at one venue after another, except that in this case those venues would be none other than the GS stadiums known to every tennis fan. So Djoker and Bull (or whoever) would duke it out in a 10-match H2H for about a month at the starting point of choice, take a few weeks' rest, move on to the next venue and so on till the last destination. It'd be just like a regular ATP/WTA season, but more concentrated except maybe for the RG-Wimby/Wimby-RG transition. If it were up to moi I'd work my way up like this: RG in June, July off, Wimbledon in August, ditto September, October in NY, more rest in November, and then the December holiday bonanza in Melbourne (give or take a couple weeks). And I could also throw in an indoor "year-end" championship, maybe in April as a warm-up/teaser for the upcoming tour or as a proper YEC after the AO which would move the rest of the tour at least back a month.

Under this format I don't see anyone going 10-0 anywhere against a fellow ATG. These guys/gals are just too good to be swept aside like that even on their worst surface, and the mini-season is long enough to result in an occasional bad hair day even for the top dogs on their home turf. I'm not necessarily talking fluctuating form or injury here - just partying a little too hard or sleeping on the wrong side the nite before could be the difference. Hell, one might even "tank" a match to save himself for the next one/series if he thought he'd built enough of a cushion. Maybe Borg/Bull vs. Boris/Pete on dirt could still end in a 10-0 blowout due to the surface's high margin for error, but I doubt it.

Per these rules/parameters this is how the Djokovic-Nadal tour would go, assuming Bo5 with maybe occasional Bo3 (say, when the outcome of the series is clear a la dead DC rubbers):

AO - Djoker 7-3 or 7.5-2.5 if fractions are allowed
RG - Bull 8-2
WIM - Djoker 7-3 or 6.5-3.5
USO - Bull 6-4

Dead even, though I'm becoming more and more convinced that the USO H2H would be closer to 5-all itself cuz your boy would be hard-pressed to maintain that serve for a whole month and in fact admitted as much when he revealed the reason for dropping it. But in that case I'd also be more inclined to give him a slightly bigger lead at RG, so we're back to square one.

After all is said and done, though, Djoker is the ultimate winner cuz the YEC would give him the decisive edge (obviously the margin doesn't matter but I'd say about 8-2). But that is assuming Bull would still be around for the finale, which brings us to....

Unfortunately Nadal has had 3 seasons in his entire career where he was acceptably good (decent Slam contending level) for at least 3/4 Slams (not even all 4)

2010
2017
2019

I can try to stretch in 2008 (giving him benefit of the doubt at USO because he was great at the Olympics)

Harsh, but fair. I mean we know for a fact that the only surface where Pig-Pen is a shoo-in for a whole season is dirt. Who's to say he's gonna be peaking for an entire tour/mini-season like this?

And before VB comes at moi I'm more than willing to admit my own boy Pistol was no model of consistency himself. I actually can think of at least 1-2 setbacks in every year of his prime:

1993 - shin splints at AO and bum shoulder at Wimbledon, though both are fairly minor compared to the rest (Edberg himself was playing with a sore back, for starters)
1994 - those damn Nike shoes which made him miss the American HC swing/flame out early at Flushing (a true tough break if there ever was one, but like I said part of the game), and strained right hamstring that forced him to retire from DC SF vs. Edberg
1995 - sprained ankle at MC that led to a crap CC season when he should've been at least a top contender a la '93/94/96, and cramping near the end of 1st rubber vs. Chesnokov in DC finals
1996 - slow start due to inflamed right knee that made him withdraw from '95 GSC, subpar returning all season (perhaps due at least in part to dealing with Gullikson's death), and that (in)famous incident vs. Corretja at USO
1997 - left-thigh strain at Rome and WTC and stomach bug prior to 3R match vs. Norman at RG, blowing probably his last realistic chance at a deep run there, and pulled left-calf muscle in DC finals, denying him a 2nd Cup
1998 - carryover from said year-end recovery (again) and pulled left quadriceps muscle during USO SF vs. Rafter (though I do think Pat would've eked it out regardless)
1999 - exhaustion from previous YE's historic quest for 6 straight seasons as #1, and of course the herniated disc that forced him out of USO
2000 - tore right hip flexor muscle in AO SF vs. Agassi, and left-shin tendinitis that almost made him pull out of Wimbledon

You get the picture. It's funny cuz most pros would agree these two on the whole are better athletes than Fraud and Djoker, but there's a reason why the other two boast more GOAT seasons and it sure ain't lack of consistency/durability. And the fact that Bull has never defended his YE #1 ranking (along with his meh indoor resume, yes) is indeed significant when they insist on grading the Big 3.
 

CoolCoolCool

Hall of Fame
2011 Novak was better at the Slams though imo

Only thing that goes against it is the indoor season but if we’re talking strictly the Slams, it’s a notch above 2015.

Only Wimbledon was better in 2015, I think. RG is about even—2015 had a great win against Nadal but played mediocre in the SF+F while 2011 never racked up such a big win but played clearly better in the match he lost. US Open is 2011 by a small but decisive margin. AO is obviously 2011.

His RG peak is 2013 imo. Agree about 2011 Djoker being overall better than in 2015.
 

Third Serve

Talk Tennis Guru
His RG peak is 2013 imo. Agree about 2011 Djoker being overall better than in 2015.
Honestly I would go with 2016 for RG. Yes Nadal’s injury and general poor form probably allowed that win to happen but focusing on just Novak’s play, he was hitting the ball really well and the SF might be his best match on clay. 2013 is definitely right up there though.

However, I think this thread is just looking at overall best seasons and seeing how each player performed at all of the Slams within those seasons. For example, 2006 was probably Fed’s best season but it didn’t necessarily contain his best AO or RG win.
 

The Blond Blur

G.O.A.T.
lolz I was too. that was an Uncle Buck quote. Anyhow a slightly worse version of ‘11 Djoko did alright against a slightly worse version of ‘10 Nadal (‘12 RG). I don’t think it’s that scandalous.
It’s not just scandalous. It’s an disgrace, an scandal, a outrage.
 

The Blond Blur

G.O.A.T.
You know this Djoker stan has long maintained that no version of Novak (or Fraud, for that matter) has any realistic chance against trophy-holding Bull at RG (though now I'd exclude last season's Rafa). And my boy is certainly not getting the better of a strong Bull a la '10, however (slightly) overrated '10 Nadal is (yes, thanks to his 27-0 run at RG).

But here's the thing: IRL it's impossible for anyone to play at his "peak" for a full match, let alone a 10-match series. In fact the very notion of two players peaking at the same time is rather dubious. On paper the highest "peak" any player could achieve is to be utterly untouchable on serve while doing enough to break your opponent's, kinda like what Goran did to Pete in their '95 Wimby SF. And he was as untouchable as they come, posting a truly outrageous 85.0% and 72.7% of URS in the 2nd and 4th sets respectively while losing all of 2 SPs combined and breaking arguably the 3rd best Pistol's serve in each of those sets. I seriously doubt anyone else including Sampras himself has ever duplicated such video-game #s against a worthy opponent, so does that mean his GC peak was lower than Goran's even though he won the match and of course their career Wimbledon H2H? Exactly.

Nor does it make much sense to hypothesize about a multiyear when we already know the results more or less. After all the ATP/WTA Tour is a yearslong grind where you must find ways to keep healthy, play into form and peak at the right time. Doesn't matter one whit how well you played leading up to the Grand (Slam) Finale if you're overtaken by your rival in the end. Fatigue, injury, rust, luck or whatever is part of the game, and if you fall short for whatever reason that's on you and no one else (barring an exceptional circumstance like Seles' stabbing). We tend not to think of day-to-day or even set-to-set consistency as a skill, but it sure is a more important one than this mythical peak which your fav player might reach maybe a few times a year, or for about half of a marquee match at most.

That's why I say the only kind of hypothetical worth discussing is a variation of the pre-OE pro tours where the contenders would barnstorm corners of the world playing at one venue after another, except that in this case those venues would be none other than the GS stadiums known to every tennis fan. So Djoker and Bull (or whoever) would duke it out in a 10-match H2H for about a month at the starting point of choice, take a few weeks' rest, move on to the next venue and so on till the last destination. It'd be just like a regular ATP/WTA season, but more concentrated except maybe for the RG-Wimby/Wimby-RG transition. If it were up to moi I'd work my way up like this: RG in June, July off, Wimbledon in August, ditto September, October in NY, more rest in November, and then the December holiday bonanza in Melbourne (give or take a couple weeks). And I could also throw in an indoor "year-end" championship, maybe in April as a warm-up/teaser for the upcoming tour or as a proper YEC after the AO which would move the rest of the tour at least back a month.

Under this format I don't see anyone going 10-0 anywhere against a fellow ATG. These guys/gals are just too good to be swept aside like that even on their worst surface, and the mini-season is long enough to result in an occasional bad hair day even for the top dogs on their home turf. I'm not necessarily talking fluctuating form or injury here - just partying a little too hard or sleeping on the wrong side the nite before could be the difference. Hell, one might even "tank" a match to save himself for the next one/series if he thought he'd built enough of a cushion. Maybe Borg/Bull vs. Boris/Pete on dirt could still end in a 10-0 blowout due to the surface's high margin for error, but I doubt it.

Per these rules/parameters this is how the Djokovic-Nadal tour would go, assuming Bo5 with maybe occasional Bo3 (say, when the outcome of the series is clear a la dead DC rubbers):

AO - Djoker 7-3 or 7.5-2.5 if fractions are allowed
RG - Bull 8-2
WIM - Djoker 7-3 or 6.5-3.5
USO - Bull 6-4

Dead even, though I'm becoming more and more convinced that the USO H2H would be closer to 5-all itself cuz your boy would be hard-pressed to maintain that serve for a whole month and in fact admitted as much when he revealed the reason for dropping it. But in that case I'd also be more inclined to give him a slightly bigger lead at RG, so we're back to square one.

After all is said and done, though, Djoker is the ultimate winner cuz the YEC would give him the decisive edge (obviously the margin doesn't matter but I'd say about 8-2). But that is assuming Bull would still be around for the finale, which brings us to....



Harsh, but fair. I mean we know for a fact that the only surface where Pig-Pen is a shoo-in for a whole season is dirt. Who's to say he's gonna be peaking for an entire tour/mini-season like this?

And before VB comes at moi I'm more than willing to admit my own boy Pistol was no model of consistency himself. I actually can think of at least 1-2 setbacks in every year of his prime:

1993 - shin splints at AO and bum shoulder at Wimbledon, though both are fairly minor compared to the rest (Edberg himself was playing with a sore back, for starters)
1994 - those damn Nike shoes which made him miss the American HC swing/flame out early at Flushing (a true tough break if there ever was one, but like I said part of the game), and strained right hamstring that forced him to retire from DC SF vs. Edberg
1995 - sprained ankle at MC that led to a crap CC season when he should've been at least a top contender a la '93/94/96, and cramping near the end of 1st rubber vs. Chesnokov in DC finals
1996 - slow start due to inflamed right knee that made him withdraw from '95 GSC, subpar returning all season (perhaps due at least in part to dealing with Gullikson's death), and that (in)famous incident vs. Corretja at USO
1997 - left-thigh strain at Rome and WTC and stomach bug prior to 3R match vs. Norman at RG, blowing probably his last realistic chance at a deep run there, and pulled left-calf muscle in DC finals, denying him a 2nd Cup
1998 - carryover from said year-end recovery (again) and pulled left quadriceps muscle during USO SF vs. Rafter (though I do think Pat would've eked it out regardless)
1999 - exhaustion from previous YE's historic quest for 6 straight seasons as #1, and of course the herniated disc that forced him out of USO
2000 - tore right hip flexor muscle in AO SF vs. Agassi, and left-shin tendinitis that almost made him pull out of Wimbledon

You get the picture. It's funny cuz most pros would agree these two on the whole are better athletes than Fraud and Djoker, but there's a reason why the other two boast more GOAT seasons and it sure ain't lack of consistency/durability. And the fact that Bull has never defended his YE #1 ranking (along with his meh indoor resume, yes) is indeed significant when they insist on grading the Big 3.
1f613355-c0ad-4a2d-a6a7-ed80085d9fa2_text.gif
 

Kralingen

Bionic Poster
I’m sorry I just don’t buy this Nadal USO peak > Nadal’s Wim peak. I would flip it the other way around.

Slight advantage to Djo at USO, slight advantage to Nadal at Wim.

I think it’s post fact analysis given Djoker’s 7 Wimbers and 3 USOs and Nadal’s 4 USOs vs only 2 Wimbers. But that is not analysis of the peak as a standalone entity.

When I analyze Nadal’s 2008 Wimbledon run it is more impressive in every facet than his 2010 USO run. MUCH Better opponents , better hold %, better movement, better shotmaking, better footwork, better everything.

When I analyze Djoker’s 2011 USO run, yes he was MP down to Federer but in flight he was more impressive than any Wimbledon. 2011/15 he had dogfights with Baghdatis and dropped 2 sets to KAndy in the run up, and while he was impressive in the later stages, the 2011 USO final showcased the best of Djokovic vs Nadal.

He broke Rafa 3 times in every single set he won… think about that. >50% RPW in 3/4 sets.

Plus Djokovic is a much more natural HC mover and shot maker and Nadal has the footwork, slice, defense advantage on grass (whereas these elements are neutralized on HC). Much easier for peak Djokovic to peak on HC than grass, and indeed Djokovic eventually solved Nadal on HC.

I haven’t a clue why it’s so accepted that Nadal’s 10 USO is this unimpeachable level (that involved beating exactly 1 top 10 player who fell off a cliff after 3 sets, and a serve that was never replicated again), while Nadal’s 08 Wim beating a rampaging Federer (a performance he did replicate in 2007) is viewed as inferior to peak Djo.
 
They are very close overall. Both dominate their pet slams at their peaks against each other. Then Wimbledon and us open is very close. You can argue even in both peak for peak are 5/5 or 6-4 either way. Djokovic 2015 vs 2008 Nadal at Wimbledon would most likely go to 5. I could see Nadal 2013/2010 vs Djokovic 2011 going 5 as well. It could comes down to a couple of long deuce games and who is a bit mentally tough in that moment.
 
Last edited:

CoolCoolCool

Hall of Fame
They are very close overall. Both dominate their pet slams at their peaks against each other. Then Wimbledon and us open is very close. You can argue even in both peak for peak are 5/5 or 6-4 either way. Djokovic 2015 vs 2008 at Wimbledon would most likely go to 5. I could see Nadal 2013/2010 vs Djokovic 2011 going 5 as well. It could comes down to a couple of long deuce games and who is a bit mentally tough in that moment.

Doubt it, 13 USOdal is a bit overrated. His 2010 version would def push 11 Djoker to 5 though.
 

lud

Hall of Fame
AO: 2011 Djokovic vs 2009 Nadal = 7-3 Djokovic
RG: 2016 Djokovic vs 2008 Nadal = 9-1 Nadal
WIM: 2015 Djokovic vs 2008 Nadal = 6-4 Djokovic
USO: 2015 Djokovic vs 2010 Nadal = 6-4 Nadal
 

The Blond Blur

G.O.A.T.
I’m sorry I just don’t buy this Nadal USO peak > Nadal’s Wim peak. I would flip it the other way around.

Slight advantage to Djo at USO, slight advantage to Nadal at Wim.

I think it’s post fact analysis given Djoker’s 7 Wimbers and 3 USOs and Nadal’s 4 USOs vs only 2 Wimbers. But that is not analysis of the peak as a standalone entity.

When I analyze Nadal’s 2008 Wimbledon run it is more impressive in every facet than his 2010 USO run. MUCH Better opponents , better hold %, better movement, better shotmaking, better footwork, better everything.

When I analyze Djoker’s 2011 USO run, yes he was MP down to Federer but in flight he was more impressive than any Wimbledon. 2011/15 he had dogfights with Baghdatis and dropped 2 sets to KAndy in the run up, and while he was impressive in the later stages, the 2011 USO final showcased the best of Djokovic vs Nadal.

He broke Rafa 3 times in every single set he won… think about that. >50% RPW in 3/4 sets.

Plus Djokovic is a much more natural HC mover and shot maker and Nadal has the footwork, slice, defense advantage on grass (whereas these elements are neutralized on HC). Much easier for peak Djokovic to peak on HC than grass, and indeed Djokovic eventually solved Nadal on HC.

I haven’t a clue why it’s so accepted that Nadal’s 10 USO is this unimpeachable level (that involved beating exactly 1 top 10 player who fell off a cliff after 3 sets, and a serve that was never replicated again), while Nadal’s 08 Wim beating a rampaging Federer (a performance he did replicate in 2007) is viewed as inferior to peak Djo.
Because 2011 RAFA had no problem breaking 2011 Joker. His problem in the 2011 F was holding his own serve. No way Joker gets close to > 50% RPW vs the 2010 USOdal serve. The difference in serving between 2010 RAFA vs 2011 is night and day.
 

Rago

Hall of Fame
You know this Djoker stan has long maintained that no version of Novak (or Fraud, for that matter) has any realistic chance against trophy-holding Bull at RG (though now I'd exclude last season's Rafa). And my boy is certainly not getting the better of a strong Bull a la '10, however (slightly) overrated '10 Nadal is (yes, thanks to his 27-0 run at RG).

But here's the thing: IRL it's impossible for anyone to play at his "peak" for a full match, let alone a 10-match series. In fact the very notion of two players peaking at the same time is rather dubious. On paper the highest "peak" any player could achieve is to be utterly untouchable on serve while doing enough to break your opponent's, kinda like what Goran did to Pete in their '95 Wimby SF. And he was as untouchable as they come, posting a truly outrageous 85.0% and 72.7% of URS in the 2nd and 4th sets respectively while losing all of 2 SPs combined and breaking arguably the 3rd best Pistol's serve in each of those sets. I seriously doubt anyone else including Sampras himself has ever duplicated such video-game #s against a worthy opponent, so does that mean his GC peak was lower than Goran's even though he won the match and of course their career Wimbledon H2H? Exactly.

Nor does it make much sense to hypothesize about a multiyear when we already know the results more or less. After all the ATP/WTA Tour is a yearslong grind where you must find ways to keep healthy, play into form and peak at the right time. Doesn't matter one whit how well you played leading up to the Grand (Slam) Finale if you're overtaken by your rival in the end. Fatigue, injury, rust, luck or whatever is part of the game, and if you fall short for whatever reason that's on you and no one else (barring an exceptional circumstance like Seles' stabbing). We tend not to think of day-to-day or even set-to-set consistency as a skill, but it sure is a more important one than this mythical peak which your fav player might reach maybe a few times a year, or for about half of a marquee match at most.

That's why I say the only kind of hypothetical worth discussing is a variation of the pre-OE pro tours where the contenders would barnstorm corners of the world playing at one venue after another, except that in this case those venues would be none other than the GS stadiums known to every tennis fan. So Djoker and Bull (or whoever) would duke it out in a 10-match H2H for about a month at the starting point of choice, take a few weeks' rest, move on to the next venue and so on till the last destination. It'd be just like a regular ATP/WTA season, but more concentrated except maybe for the RG-Wimby/Wimby-RG transition. If it were up to moi I'd work my way up like this: RG in June, July off, Wimbledon in August, ditto September, October in NY, more rest in November, and then the December holiday bonanza in Melbourne (give or take a couple weeks). And I could also throw in an indoor "year-end" championship, maybe in April as a warm-up/teaser for the upcoming tour or as a proper YEC after the AO which would move the rest of the tour at least back a month.

Under this format I don't see anyone going 10-0 anywhere against a fellow ATG. These guys/gals are just too good to be swept aside like that even on their worst surface, and the mini-season is long enough to result in an occasional bad hair day even for the top dogs on their home turf. I'm not necessarily talking fluctuating form or injury here - just partying a little too hard or sleeping on the wrong side the nite before could be the difference. Hell, one might even "tank" a match to save himself for the next one/series if he thought he'd built enough of a cushion. Maybe Borg/Bull vs. Boris/Pete on dirt could still end in a 10-0 blowout due to the surface's high margin for error, but I doubt it.

Per these rules/parameters this is how the Djokovic-Nadal tour would go, assuming Bo5 with maybe occasional Bo3 (say, when the outcome of the series is clear a la dead DC rubbers):

AO - Djoker 7-3 or 7.5-2.5 if fractions are allowed
RG - Bull 8-2
WIM - Djoker 7-3 or 6.5-3.5
USO - Bull 6-4

Dead even, though I'm becoming more and more convinced that the USO H2H would be closer to 5-all itself cuz your boy would be hard-pressed to maintain that serve for a whole month and in fact admitted as much when he revealed the reason for dropping it. But in that case I'd also be more inclined to give him a slightly bigger lead at RG, so we're back to square one.

After all is said and done, though, Djoker is the ultimate winner cuz the YEC would give him the decisive edge (obviously the margin doesn't matter but I'd say about 8-2). But that is assuming Bull would still be around for the finale, which brings us to....



Harsh, but fair. I mean we know for a fact that the only surface where Pig-Pen is a shoo-in for a whole season is dirt. Who's to say he's gonna be peaking for an entire tour/mini-season like this?

And before VB comes at moi I'm more than willing to admit my own boy Pistol was no model of consistency himself. I actually can think of at least 1-2 setbacks in every year of his prime:

1993 - shin splints at AO and bum shoulder at Wimbledon, though both are fairly minor compared to the rest (Edberg himself was playing with a sore back, for starters)
1994 - those damn Nike shoes which made him miss the American HC swing/flame out early at Flushing (a true tough break if there ever was one, but like I said part of the game), and strained right hamstring that forced him to retire from DC SF vs. Edberg
1995 - sprained ankle at MC that led to a crap CC season when he should've been at least a top contender a la '93/94/96, and cramping near the end of 1st rubber vs. Chesnokov in DC finals
1996 - slow start due to inflamed right knee that made him withdraw from '95 GSC, subpar returning all season (perhaps due at least in part to dealing with Gullikson's death), and that (in)famous incident vs. Corretja at USO
1997 - left-thigh strain at Rome and WTC and stomach bug prior to 3R match vs. Norman at RG, blowing probably his last realistic chance at a deep run there, and pulled left-calf muscle in DC finals, denying him a 2nd Cup
1998 - carryover from said year-end recovery (again) and pulled left quadriceps muscle during USO SF vs. Rafter (though I do think Pat would've eked it out regardless)
1999 - exhaustion from previous YE's historic quest for 6 straight seasons as #1, and of course the herniated disc that forced him out of USO
2000 - tore right hip flexor muscle in AO SF vs. Agassi, and left-shin tendinitis that almost made him pull out of Wimbledon

You get the picture. It's funny cuz most pros would agree these two on the whole are better athletes than Fraud and Djoker, but there's a reason why the other two boast more GOAT seasons and it sure ain't lack of consistency/durability. And the fact that Bull has never defended his YE #1 ranking (along with his meh indoor resume, yes) is indeed significant when they insist on grading the Big 3.
\thread

There's a reason why Nadal is yet to reach all four slam finals in a single calendar year while Federer and Djokovic have done so (multiple times).

But it's interesting to note that Federer and Djokovic are underrated in the athletics department due to being less explosive compared to say Nadal and Pete (who have set the bar very high).

Roger during his peak years had probably one of the finest first steps in the game and his footwork was a big factor in him being able to hit monstrous forehands; Djokovic on the other hand is basically elasto-man with some of his ridiculous gets. Both these guys can play for long hours in grueling conditions as well compared to Pete but Nadal is obviously the undisputed master here.
 

TheFifthSet

Legend
You know this Djoker stan has long maintained that no version of Novak (or Fraud, for that matter) has any realistic chance against trophy-holding Bull at RG (though now I'd exclude last season's Rafa). And my boy is certainly not getting the better of a strong Bull a la '10, however (slightly) overrated '10 Nadal is (yes, thanks to his 27-0 run at RG).

But here's the thing: IRL it's impossible for anyone to play at his "peak" for a full match, let alone a 10-match series. In fact the very notion of two players peaking at the same time is rather dubious. On paper the highest "peak" any player could achieve is to be utterly untouchable on serve while doing enough to break your opponent's, kinda like what Goran did to Pete in their '95 Wimby SF. And he was as untouchable as they come, posting a truly outrageous 85.0% and 72.7% of URS in the 2nd and 4th sets respectively while losing all of 2 SPs combined and breaking arguably the 3rd best Pistol's serve in each of those sets. I seriously doubt anyone else including Sampras himself has ever duplicated such video-game #s against a worthy opponent, so does that mean his GC peak was lower than Goran's even though he won the match and of course their career Wimbledon H2H? Exactly.

Nor does it make much sense to hypothesize about a multiyear when we already know the results more or less. After all the ATP/WTA Tour is a yearslong grind where you must find ways to keep healthy, play into form and peak at the right time. Doesn't matter one whit how well you played leading up to the Grand (Slam) Finale if you're overtaken by your rival in the end. Fatigue, injury, rust, luck or whatever is part of the game, and if you fall short for whatever reason that's on you and no one else (barring an exceptional circumstance like Seles' stabbing). We tend not to think of day-to-day or even set-to-set consistency as a skill, but it sure is a more important one than this mythical peak which your fav player might reach maybe a few times a year, or for about half of a marquee match at most.

That's why I say the only kind of hypothetical worth discussing is a variation of the pre-OE pro tours where the contenders would barnstorm corners of the world playing at one venue after another, except that in this case those venues would be none other than the GS stadiums known to every tennis fan. So Djoker and Bull (or whoever) would duke it out in a 10-match H2H for about a month at the starting point of choice, take a few weeks' rest, move on to the next venue and so on till the last destination. It'd be just like a regular ATP/WTA season, but more concentrated except maybe for the RG-Wimby/Wimby-RG transition. If it were up to moi I'd work my way up like this: RG in June, July off, Wimbledon in August, ditto September, October in NY, more rest in November, and then the December holiday bonanza in Melbourne (give or take a couple weeks). And I could also throw in an indoor "year-end" championship, maybe in April as a warm-up/teaser for the upcoming tour or as a proper YEC after the AO which would move the rest of the tour at least back a month.

Under this format I don't see anyone going 10-0 anywhere against a fellow ATG. These guys/gals are just too good to be swept aside like that even on their worst surface, and the mini-season is long enough to result in an occasional bad hair day even for the top dogs on their home turf. I'm not necessarily talking fluctuating form or injury here - just partying a little too hard or sleeping on the wrong side the nite before could be the difference. Hell, one might even "tank" a match to save himself for the next one/series if he thought he'd built enough of a cushion. Maybe Borg/Bull vs. Boris/Pete on dirt could still end in a 10-0 blowout due to the surface's high margin for error, but I doubt it.

Per these rules/parameters this is how the Djokovic-Nadal tour would go, assuming Bo5 with maybe occasional Bo3 (say, when the outcome of the series is clear a la dead DC rubbers):

AO - Djoker 7-3 or 7.5-2.5 if fractions are allowed
RG - Bull 8-2
WIM - Djoker 7-3 or 6.5-3.5
USO - Bull 6-4

Dead even, though I'm becoming more and more convinced that the USO H2H would be closer to 5-all itself cuz your boy would be hard-pressed to maintain that serve for a whole month and in fact admitted as much when he revealed the reason for dropping it. But in that case I'd also be more inclined to give him a slightly bigger lead at RG, so we're back to square one.

After all is said and done, though, Djoker is the ultimate winner cuz the YEC would give him the decisive edge (obviously the margin doesn't matter but I'd say about 8-2). But that is assuming Bull would still be around for the finale, which brings us to....



Harsh, but fair. I mean we know for a fact that the only surface where Pig-Pen is a shoo-in for a whole season is dirt. Who's to say he's gonna be peaking for an entire tour/mini-season like this?

And before VB comes at moi I'm more than willing to admit my own boy Pistol was no model of consistency himself. I actually can think of at least 1-2 setbacks in every year of his prime:

1993 - shin splints at AO and bum shoulder at Wimbledon, though both are fairly minor compared to the rest (Edberg himself was playing with a sore back, for starters)
1994 - those damn Nike shoes which made him miss the American HC swing/flame out early at Flushing (a true tough break if there ever was one, but like I said part of the game), and strained right hamstring that forced him to retire from DC SF vs. Edberg
1995 - sprained ankle at MC that led to a crap CC season when he should've been at least a top contender a la '93/94/96, and cramping near the end of 1st rubber vs. Chesnokov in DC finals
1996 - slow start due to inflamed right knee that made him withdraw from '95 GSC, subpar returning all season (perhaps due at least in part to dealing with Gullikson's death), and that (in)famous incident vs. Corretja at USO
1997 - left-thigh strain at Rome and WTC and stomach bug prior to 3R match vs. Norman at RG, blowing probably his last realistic chance at a deep run there, and pulled left-calf muscle in DC finals, denying him a 2nd Cup
1998 - carryover from said year-end recovery (again) and pulled left quadriceps muscle during USO SF vs. Rafter (though I do think Pat would've eked it out regardless)
1999 - exhaustion from previous YE's historic quest for 6 straight seasons as #1, and of course the herniated disc that forced him out of USO
2000 - tore right hip flexor muscle in AO SF vs. Agassi, and left-shin tendinitis that almost made him pull out of Wimbledon

You get the picture. It's funny cuz most pros would agree these two on the whole are better athletes than Fraud and Djoker, but there's a reason why the other two boast more GOAT seasons and it sure ain't lack of consistency/durability. And the fact that Bull has never defended his YE #1 ranking (along with his meh indoor resume, yes) is indeed significant when they insist on grading the Big 3.

I accept your logic and tried the barnstorming hypothetical, but no one wanted to participate :( so, stuck in hypothetical la la land (where a bit of kayfabe is required) we are.
 
D

Deleted member 765728

Guest
Peak Year Djokovic (whether 2011 or 2015) vs Peak Year Nadal (whether 2008, 2010, or 2013) out of 10. I think their slam peak years were 2011 and 2010, respectively.

AO: 2011 Djoko/2010 Nadal - Djoko 10-0
RG: 2011 Djoko/2010 Nadal - Nadal 9-1
Wimby: 2011 Djoko/2010 Nadal - Djoko 6-4
USO: 2011 Djoko/2010 Nadal - Djoko 6-4

YEC: 2011 Djoko/2010 Nadal - Nadal 7-3 (LOL).


Feel free to pick the years for each.
This is an interesting idea.

I would just change the following:

RG: 2011 Djoko/2010 Nadal - Nadal 10-0, don't really think that any version of Djokovic beats prime Nadal at RG, especially the 2010 version which was really, really good.
USO: 2011 Djoko/2010 Nadal - Nadal 6-4, still think Nadal's peak at the USO is a bit higher than Novak's, thus the edge for him.

YEC is an interesting debate. Nadal played really, really good there in 2010, beating the better version of Novak (2010) than the 2011 one (when he was dealing with all sorts of problems/injuries and was pretty average), so 7-3 or 8-2 is reasonable, as ironically as it may sound.
 

TheFifthSet

Legend
This is an interesting idea.

I would just change the following:

RG: 2011 Djoko/2010 Nadal - Nadal 10-0, don't really think that any version of Djokovic beats prime Nadal at RG, especially the 2010 version which was really, really good.
USO: 2011 Djoko/2010 Nadal - Nadal 6-4, still think Nadal's peak at the USO is a bit higher than Novak's, thus the edge for him.

YEC is an interesting debate. Nadal played really, really good there in 2010, beating the better version of Novak (2010) than the 2011 one (when he was dealing with all sorts of problems/injuries and was pretty average), so 7-3 or 8-2 is reasonable, as ironically as it may sound.

while Nadal’s 08 Wim beating a rampaging Federer (a performance he did replicate in 2007) is viewed as inferior to peak Djo.

Well-argued from both of y’all but ultimately I can’t envisage a version of Nadal that would have a big enough buffer off his serve to avoid getting broken at least once a set against Peak Djoker. You need the right type of opponent to catch Nadal, and that’s Djovak, in all of his Bosnian Pyramid-believing glory.


KAndy pushing Djoko isn’t good for my case, but that’s too different a match-up to extrapolate much and Djoko still broke him 5 times despite Anderson tree’ing (23.8% aces against is 2nd highest for Djokovic in a BO5 match).


08 Nadal is a slightly improved version of 07, the latter of whom lost multiple sets to multiple opponents and got a bit lucky that Youz got injured after building up a big lead. The 08 Murray demolition was tops, but not appreciably better than Djokovic’s effort against Cilic; Muzzah wasnt himself by that point, missed almost half his first serves and won 20% of second serve return points. We’re “name-over-forming” by touting him as a strong opponent here. Nadal also wasn’t totally blemish-free…Schuettler of all players served for the second set, Gulbis got to a third set TB after they split the first two and the opening set vs Kiefer was a 70 minute affair. So we’re left with Federer, who of course is the strongest win of the bunch and I would of course take 07-08 Fed over any version of Djoko at Wimbledon (though ‘15/‘08 would be close). At the same time I beat the familiar drum: match-ups. 07 Nadal is very unlikely to go the equivalent of 4 sets (as happened in 07) without surrendering a break to Peak Djoker, and while he’s going to dig into Djoko’s own service games I think Novak has the edge in the serve-return complex. Still 6-4 for me, for both events, but can understand it being a push at the USO.
 
Last edited:

Mustard

Bionic Poster
08 Nadal is a slightly improved version of 07, who lost multiple sets to multiple opponents and got a bit lucky that Youz got injured after building up a big lead.
2008 Nadal beat Youzhny 6-3, 6-3, 6-1 at Wimbledon. It was a demolition.
 
D

Deleted member 765728

Guest
Well-argued from both of y’all but ultimately I can’t envisage a version of Nadal that would have a big enough buffer off his serve to avoid getting broken at least once a set against Peak Djoker. You need the right type of opponent to catch Nadal, and that’s Djovak, in all of his Bosnian Pyramid-believing glory.


KAndy pushing Djoko isn’t good for my case, but that’s too different a match-up to extrapolate much and Djoko still broke him 5 times despite Anderson tree’ing (23.8% aces against is 2nd highest for Djokovic in a BO5 match).


08 Nadal is a slightly improved version of 07, the latter of whom lost multiple sets to multiple opponents and got a bit lucky that Youz got injured after building up a big lead. The 08 Murray demolition was tops, but not appreciably better than Djokovic’s effort against Cilic; Muzzah wasnt himself by that point, missed almost half his first serves and won 20% of second serve return points. We’re “name-over-forming” by touting him as a strong opponent here. Nadal also wasn’t totally blemish-free…Schuettler of all players served for the second set, Gulbis got to a third set TB after they split the first two and the opening set vs Kiefer was a 70 minute affair. So we’re left with Federer, who of course is the strongest win of the bunch and I would of course take 07-08 Fed over any version of Djoko at Wimbledon (though ‘15/‘08 would be close). At the same time I beat the familiar drum: match-ups. 07 Nadal is very unlikely to go the equivalent of 4 sets (as happened in 07) without surrendering a break to Peak Djoker, and while he’s going to dig into Djoko’s own service games I think Novak has the edge in the serve-return complex. Still 6-4 for me, for both events, but can understand it being a push at the USO.
While I agree about Novak's superiority when it comes to the serve/return combo, I think the surface plays a big role, too.

On grass and on an indoor hard court (removable courts we're talking about, of course, that don't take the spin well) with a (relatively) low bounce, Novak can find Nadal's forehand with that flat/hard CC BH of his with great success, while at the USO the balls often stay in Ned's hitting zone. Also, when he unleashes his FH on the DecoTurf, it can bounce viciously with tones of weight, which pushes Novak behind the baseline and makes him play defense, when he is clearly less lethal. He was never able to do it in Australia, only in patches probably.

Admittedly, I haven't looked at the data and this is just my impression drawn from watching their encounters, but it always looked to me that Novak struggles playing defense at the USO (compared to the AO anyway). So if a player serves like Ned did in 2010, and is confident enough to employ his forehand as an offensive weapon, it's very challenging for Djokovic to come out victorious. Thus I give a small edge to Ned, still.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TheFifthSet

Legend
While I agree about Novak's superiority when it comes to the serve/return combo, I think the surface plays a big role, too.

On grass and on an indoor hard court (removable courts we're talking about, of course, that don't take the spin well) with a (relatively) low bounce, Novak can find Nadal's forehand with that flat/hard CC BH of his with great success, while at the USO the balls often stay in Ned's hitting zone. Also, when he unleashes his FH on the DecoTurf, it can bounce viciously with tones of weight, which pushes Novak behind the baseline and makes him play defense, when he is clearly less lethal. He was never able to do it in Australia, only in patches probably.

Admittedly, I haven't looked at the data and this is just my impression drawn from watching their encounters, but it always looked to me that Novak struggles playing defense at the USO (compared to the AO anyway). So if a player serves like Ned did in 2010, and is confident enough to employ his forehand as an offensive weapon, it's very challenging for Djokovic to come out victorious. Thus I give a small edge to Ned, still.


Good post. Yeah, the many factors which differentiate Ashe from RLA certainly, at the very least, nudge things closer to Nadal’s favour at Flushing. Regardless, I’ll always feel it was fortunate of Nadal to face Djovak in his two best runs, one of which was before Djoko hit his stride, and both times when Djoko had the harder and more gruelling draw/tended to falter in big matches (something the “2>1 bud brigade” often omits).
 

Third Serve

Talk Tennis Guru
Good post. Yeah, the many factors which differentiate Ashe from RLA certainly, at the very least, nudge things closer to Nadal’s favour at Flushing. Regardless, I’ll always feel it was fortunate of Nadal to face Djovak in his two best runs, one of which was before Djoko hit his stride, and both times when Djoko had the harder and more gruelling draw/tended to falter in big matches (something the “2>1 bud brigade” often omits).
Isn't this on Djokovic, though? It's true that Djokovic was not at his peak in either of those instances, but in 2013, he has no real excuse for not being close to his best.
 

TheFifthSet

Legend
Isn't this on Djokovic, though? It's true that Djokovic was not at his peak in either of those instances, but in 2013, he has no real excuse for not being close to his best.

I think the rivalry is close even with both at their best (I’d peg it 6-4 Djoko in that hypothetical), so one being much closer to it than the other swings things enough for a single or even a select few matches fitting this criteria to not be perfect representations (and that includes ‘11, of course). That’s not to say ‘13 isn’t a point in Nadal’s favour, though.
 

Third Serve

Talk Tennis Guru
I think the rivalry is close even with both at their best (I’d peg it 6-4 Djoko in that hypothetical), so one being much closer to it than the other swings things enough for a single or even a select few matches fitting this criteria to not be perfect representations (and that includes ‘11, of course). That’s not to say ‘13 isn’t a point in Nadal’s favour, though.
OK wait I didn't read the previous post before replying. My bad. You're talking about best vs. best here.
 
Top