Djokovic's competition in 2011-2015

  • Thread starter Deleted member 748597
  • Start date

abmk

Bionic Poster
Hey, Gasquet reached the Wimb semi, so why not Baghdatis? And even if he doesn't reach the AO F, he still reaches the semis, so not that big of a difference.

2015 Fed made his match more competitive in the first and 4th sets, but I don't think he was much better than Roddick in sets 2 and 3.

Fed USO 15 final wasn't better, let alone much better than Roddick 2006 USO final in sets2&3.
A little worse , even more so considering Roddick was up against a clearly tougher opponent in Fed of USO 06 final when compared to Djokovic of USO 15 final.
 

RS

Bionic Poster
I think I'm rating it where it deserves to be from that time period: at the bottom. Lol. Sorry. You guys you don't have to agree but I think it will be ok.
No I don’t care about the year I felt you underrated 2006 Nadal but it’s fine.

I don’t think it’s being looked past in general on this thread.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
2015 Djokovc would absolutely destroy 2006 Nadal, and I mean no disrespect. His draw was basically a cakewalk but that was the level of grass that year and he was able to get to the final. Yea he gave Federer a fight for 2 sets and lost the other two handily, and that's against the more favorable matchup.
Nah, that was just Nadal having an easy draw to the semis of Wimb, not at all indicative of the entire grass field in 2006.

Might as well talk about how bad the grass field was in 2015 given Murray's very easy road to the semis too.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Also @NoleFam , I probably wouldn't trust early 2015 Murray in a longer match. Crumbled vs Djokovic in the last set&half.
Crumbled vs Djoko at Miami in the 3rd set.

Didn't have the same stamina he had in 12-13.

Baggy did crumble after 2 sets in AO 06 final, but that was after a really tough draw including a tough 5-set semi (Roddick, Ljubicic&Nalby)

Stamina would be in favour of Baggy in case of a streetfight, which it would be vs 2015 AO Murray.
 

Sudacafan

Bionic Poster
2011

AO: Straight setted Federer and pigeon Murray
FO: Lost to an in-form older Fed who played prime level tennis
W: Beat prime Nadal
USO: Beat an in-form older Fed and prime Nadal

2012

AO: Beat pigeon Murray and prime Nadal in 5
FO: Beat Fed and deleted that match. Later lost to prime Nadal
W: Lost to an in-form Grass GOAT
USO: Lost to Murray in an underrated windy match

2013

AO: Beat peak Stan and pigeon Murray
FO: Lost to prime Nadal in 5
W: Barely beat peak Delpo and then lost to the British hero
USO: Beat peak Stan and then ruined his legacy giving Nadal the 2-1 H2H lead

2014

AO: Lost to peak Stan who later beat the injured man who plays tennis
FO: Lost to Nadal who recovered from injury
W: Had an overall tough draw and later beat good Federer
USO: Beat pigeon Murray and then lost to Nishikori roflmao (Yeah, this was a bad loss. Probably on par with his loss to PCB)

2015

AO: Beat peak Stan and pigeon Murray
FO: Straight setted washed up Nadal and later lost to peak Stan (Sadly, we can't call him the younger ATG)
W: Beat good underrated Federer
USO: Beat good underrated Federer and the crowd full of real tennis fans


Even in the recent vacuum era, he still had to beat strong Nadal in the Wimb 2018 SF to win the Slam after two years.
Am I missing something? Why do you have a Nadal avatar now?
Did you lose a bet?
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
I think I'm rating it where it deserves to be from that time period: at the bottom. Lol. Sorry. You guys don't have to agree but I think it will be ok.
2006 Wimb final Nadal not worse than 2011 Wimb final Nadal. Don't see why that would be.

I mean 2015 Fed was a more favorable match-up for Djokovic in 2015 than Stan, does this mean Fed still wasn't good?
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
No I don’t care about the year I felt you underrated 2006 Nadal but it’s fine.

I don’t think it’s being looked past in general.

I don't see how I'm underrating a player that before that tournament made it past the 3rd round of only one grass tournament and nearly lost to a qualifier in the 2nd round but ok.
 
Last edited:

RS

Bionic Poster
I don't see how I'm underrating a player that before that tournament never made it past the 3rd round of any grass tournament and nearly lost to a qualifier in the 2nd round but ok.
Later rounds are more relevant but fine. Nadal had those issues in 2007 and 2010 as well and we saw what happened late on.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
2015 Djokovc would absolutely destroy 2006 Nadal, and I mean no disrespect. His draw was basically a cakewalk but that was the level of grass that year and he was able to get to the final. Yea he gave Federer a fight for 2 sets and lost the other two handily, and that's against the more favorable matchup.

Lulz, baggy Wim 06 cakewalk, but baggy 07 Wim tough (because up against Djokovic?).

Fed anyways faced the clearly tougher draw on the other side. Good grass courters from 1st round itself. toughest before the final obviously Ancic in the QF. (semi was pretty easy though)
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
I don't see how I'm underrating a player that before that tournament made it past the 3rd round of onl7yone grass tournament and nearly lost to a qualifier in the 2nd round but ok.
Well, duh, he was 20.

How many grass tournaments did Becker play before 1985 Wimb?
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
Maestronians and @RS , I said what I said and I'm not taking it back. I'm not about to keep going back and forth about this. You don't agree with me and that's ok but I was not impressed with the overall field in 2006.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Maestronians and @RS , I said what I said and I'm not taking it back. I'm not about to keep going back and forth about this. You don't agree with me and that's ok but I was not impressed with the overall field in 2006.
You said there was no such year between 2007 and 2015, but what about 2010? :D
 

RS

Bionic Poster
Maestronians and @RS , I said what I said and I'm not taking it back. I'm not about to keep going back and forth about this. You don't agree with me and that's ok but I was not impressed with the overall field in 2006.
Fair enough i was not starting a fight btw i stated that from the go.
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
So? y point was he won Wimb despite playing very few grass events so why are people constantly mystified that 20 year old Nadal reached the Wimb final? :unsure:

I think you guys overrate 2006 Nadal on grass that's why. Becker was a grass prodigy like Nadal was a clay prodigy. They don't fall in the natural order so it doesn't make sense to compare players to them. The point is Nadal never even played a top 10 player on grass until the 2006 Wimbledon final. He wouldn't have been there in other years imo because he wasn't strong enough yet. I don't see why he gets overrated to this extent because he played Federer close for two sets, who let's face it, he was enjoying a good matchup against.
 

StrongRule

Talk Tennis Guru
14 was decent. Its 15 that was on similar level as 06/10 - relatively weak years, but Djokovic fans have a serious problem admitting that.
16 was worse than 06/10/15 obviously.

Lets see for example :
djoko faced peakrinka in AO 14 instead of errorinka in 15 AO
djoko faced prime level nadal in RG 14 (only at RG, not rest of CC season) - still better than peakrinka in RG 15
djoko faced stepanek, tsonga, cilic, dimi and 14 fed at Wim 14 - clearly tougher than anderson, 15 cilic and 15 fed
djoko lost to nishi at USO 14. even if he had won, he'd have faced peak Cilic > 15 USO fed.
Nadal didn't play well in RG 2014. I think it's not a crazy thing to say Wawrinka in RG 2015 was at least as good. (probably a better performance in the final)
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I think you guys overrate 2006 Nadal on grass that's why. Becker was a grass prodigy like Nadal was a clay prodigy. They don't fall in the natural order so it doesn't make sense to compare players to them. The point is Nadal never even played a top 10 player on grass until the 2006 Wimbledon final. He wouldn't have been there in other years imo because he wasn't strong enough yet. I don't see why he gets overrated to this extent because he played Federer close for two sets, who let's face it, he was enjoying a good matchup against.

Nadal had to hit 20 winners to 3 UEs in the 3rd set to clinch it in a TB, FFS. That's not about the matchup.
In fact, fed's slice was drawing errors from nadal's FH in this match. nadal's BH was on fire in this match.

Nadal played great in Wim 06 except for R2 till the final. Only 1st set in the final was nervous. 4th set not great, but decent (obviously not enough vs a rampaging federer who raised his level to close it out after losing set3)
Again blatant double standards to call Baggy of Wim 06 semi vs Nadal as cakewalk and Wim 07 QF vs Djoko as tough.
 
Last edited:

mike danny

Bionic Poster
I think you guys overrate 2006 Nadal on grass that's why. Becker was a grass prodigy like Nadal was a clay prodigy. They don't fall in the natural order so it doesn't make sense to compare players to them. The point is Nadal never even played a top 10 player on grass until the 2006 Wimbledon final. He wouldn't have been there in other years imo because he wasn't strong enough yet. I don't see why he gets overrated to this extent because he played Federer close for two sets, who let's face it, he was enjoying a good matchup against.
Borg also won Wimb at 20 and he was a clay prodigy too. :unsure:

Fact is, Nadal was already an established top player in 2006 and was starting to figure out other surfaces besides clay too. Who cares if he didn't play a top 10 player on grass? Baghy was already in good form as it was and he reached the top 10 after that Wimb edition anyway.

Djokovic didn't play a top 10 player at 2011 Wimb either, so I don't get your point.

You guys also overrate 2015 Fed too much, so it's par for the course. Nadal played a great middle 2 sets against the best on grass there was at that point. So I guess every good performance he has has to be dismissed because of "muh match-up"? But performances from old Fed against Djoko should be marveled at?
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Borg also won Wimb at 20 and he was a clay prodigy too. :unsure:

Fact is, Nadal was already an established top player in 2006 and was starting to figure out other surfaces besides clay too. Who cares if he didn't play a top 10 player on grass? Baghy was already in good form as it was and he reached the top 10 after that Wimb edition anyway.

Djokovic didn't play a top 10 player at 2011 Wimb either, so I don't get your point.

You guys also overrate 2015 Fed too much, so it's par for the course. Nadal played a great middle 2 sets against the best on grass there was at that point. So I guess every good performance he has has to be dismissed because of "muh match-up"? But performances from old Fed against Djoko should be marveled at?

ding ding ding ding

Just combine your post with mine and its a complete decimation of the double standards and wrong stuff talked about here.

Nadal had to hit 20 winners to 3 UEs in the 3rd set to clinch it in a TB, FFS. That's not about the matchup.
In fact, fed's slice was drawing errors from nadal's FH in this match. nadal's BH was on fire in this match.

Nadal played great in Wim 06 except for R2 till the final. Only 1st set in the final was nervous. 4th set not great, but decent (obviously not enough vs a rampaging federer who raised his level to close it out after losing set3)
Again blatant double standards to call Baggy of Wim 06 semi vs Nadal as cakewalk and Wim 07 QF vs Djoko as tough.
 

StrongRule

Talk Tennis Guru
Borg also won Wimb at 20 and he was a clay prodigy too. :unsure:

Fact is, Nadal was already an established top player in 2006 and was starting to figure out other surfaces besides clay too. Who cares if he didn't play a top 10 player on grass? Baghy was already in good form as it was and he reached the top 10 after that Wimb edition anyway.

Djokovic didn't play a top 10 player at 2011 Wimb either, so I don't get your point.

You guys also overrate 2015 Fed too much, so it's par for the course. Nadal played a great middle 2 sets against the best on grass there was at that point. So I guess every good performance he has has to be dismissed because of "muh match-up"? But performances from old Fed against Djoko should be marveled at?
True. 2011 Djokovic was also nothing special I guess. Just has a matchup advantage against Nadal. :unsure:
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
Borg also won Wimb at 20 and he was a clay prodigy too. :unsure:

Fact is, Nadal was already an established top player in 2006 and was starting to figure out other surfaces besides clay too. Who cares if he didn't play a top 10 player on grass? Baghy was already in good form as it was and he reached the top 10 after that Wimb edition anyway.

Djokovic didn't play a top 10 player at 2011 Wimb either, so I don't get your point.

You guys also overrate 2015 Fed too much, so it's par for the course. Nadal played a great middle 2 sets against the best on grass there was at that point. So I guess every good performance he has has to be dismissed because of "muh match-up"? But performances from old Fed against Djoko should be marveled at?

Borg is not a good example for various reasons and he dominated both clay and grass. He also had been to two Wimbledon QFs before that.

Ok he was starting to figure out grass and but he wouldn't make the final in stronger years imo.

Nice try buddy but Djokovic got his 1st top 10 win on grass at 19 and almost beat Ancic, another top 10 player, in the 4th round.

We don't agree and you will keep going and going like the energizer bunny but my opinion just isn't changing on this. Lol
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 748597

Guest
2015 > 2006, 2010

TKnK.gif
 
D

Deleted member 775898

Guest
Without Djokodal, Medvedev would be on 1-2 slams tops, Thiem maybe 4-5 slams. Does that qualify as ATGs for you?
I think Thiem would have only 2-3 Slams and Meddy would only have USO19 without Djokodal. Timmy has proven multiple times he isn't a lock for the big titles even against the Next Gen and Meddy so far only performs in the post Wimbledon tournaments.
 

Towny

Hall of Fame
I think Thiem would have only 2-3 Slams and Meddy would only have USO19 without Djokodal. Timmy has proven multiple times he isn't a lock for the big titles even against the Next Gen and Meddy so far only performs in the post Wimbledon tournaments.
Medvedev would only be on 1 IMO. I dont think he wins AO 19 even without Djokodal, though I guess it is possible (no one else was really in good form). I think Thiem gets RG 18, 19 and AO 20. So that would be 4, with his USO 20 title. The other possibilities would be RG 17 and USO 18 though I suspect Wawrinka and Delpo win those two.
 
D

Deleted member 748597

Guest
How would you rate Wim 15/USO 15 Federer in the final out of 10?
Higher than baby Claydal on grass, Lolddick, Berdych and Slumpovic who was just happy to be in the final.
 
D

Deleted member 775898

Guest
Medvedev would only be on 1 IMO. I dont think he wins AO 19 even without Djokodal, though I guess it is possible (no one else was really in good form). I think Thiem gets RG 18, 19 and AO 20. So that would be 4, with his USO 20 title. The other possibilities would be RG 17 and USO 18 though I suspect Wawrinka and Delpo win those two.
As I said, I think he chokes at least one of these, but I guess he'll never know for sure.
 

Druss

Hall of Fame
2011

AO: Straight setted Federer and pigeon Murray
FO: Lost to an in-form older Fed who played prime level tennis
W: Beat prime Nadal
USO: Beat an in-form older Fed and prime Nadal

2012

AO: Beat pigeon Murray and prime Nadal in 5
FO: Beat Fed and deleted that match. Later lost to prime Nadal
W: Lost to an in-form Grass GOAT
USO: Lost to Murray in an underrated windy match

2013

AO: Beat peak Stan and pigeon Murray
FO: Lost to prime Nadal in 5
W: Barely beat peak Delpo and then lost to the British hero
USO: Beat peak Stan and then ruined his legacy giving Nadal the 2-1 H2H lead

2014

AO: Lost to peak Stan who later beat the injured man who plays tennis
FO: Lost to Nadal who recovered from injury
W: Had an overall tough draw and later beat good Federer
USO: Beat pigeon Murray and then lost to Nishikori roflmao (Yeah, this was a bad loss. Probably on par with his loss to PCB)

2015

AO: Beat peak Stan and pigeon Murray
FO: Straight setted washed up Nadal and later lost to peak Stan (Sadly, we can't call him the younger ATG)
W: Beat good underrated Federer
USO: Beat good underrated Federer and the crowd full of real tennis fans


Even in the recent vacuum era, he still had to beat strong Nadal in the Wimb 2018 SF to win the Slam after two years.
I actually forgot Djokovic played Murray at the USO ‘14, kinda unusual for them (during 2011-16 i.e.) meeting before the semis. Come to think of it, the USO ‘14 had a very solid QF line-up:
Djoko - Muzza
Wawa - Nishi
Berdy - Cilic
Fedr - LeMonfs
Yet that slam is generally regarded as a bogus slam because it featured Cilic-Nishikori in F.
 

metsman

Talk Tennis Guru
yes, he would. Who would have stopped him if he played in the place of Murray? berdych who got bagelled by Murray? yeah, that's what I thought.



Gasquet did. So baggy could do that as well in his place.



2006 Wim Nadal vs 2015 Wim fed? fed has the higher top level, but not the physicality to sustain it for more than 2 sets/2 hrs. So the longer the match, the better for Nadal. Could go either way.

2006 USO Roddick in the final on a similar level as 2015 USO fed in the final (fed slightly better at best) (even if fed was better pre-final)
Also, importantly 2006 USO fed > 2015 USO Djoko by a significant distance
Would say 3rd set of 06 F by Nadal was better than any set Fed played in 2015 including the SF. Anyways, Nadal will overwhelm Federer off the ground, question is whether Nadal would get tight and Federer serves well enough to sneak things out. Saying 15 F Fed would easily win and overcome such a big physical gap is bs imo.
 
D

Deleted member 777746

Guest
Without Djokodal, Thiem and Med would have already become ATG - this era is much stronger than the weakest era of all time 2003-2007.
Vacuum Era is an easier way to describe
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Would say 3rd set of 06 F by Nadal was better than any set Fed played in 2015 including the SF. Anyways, Nadal will overwhelm Federer off the ground, question is whether Nadal would get tight and Federer serves well enough to sneak things out. Saying 15 F Fed would easily win and overcome such a big physical gap is bs imo.

@ the first point: argument could be made for that. You could also point to 2nd set of the Murray SF. fed serve was unplayable and played well off the ground (unlike 1st set)
Saying 15 Fed wins easily ovecoming physical gap is obviously BS.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Yeah to say nothing of Federer's route. Can't imagine Baggy beating that murderer's row of Groth, Simon, Agut.
Yeah, how could I forget about Simon and Agut? Such grass giants.

But actually beating guys whose games translate well to grass from R1 until and including QF in 2006 means the grass field was in shambles.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Borg is not a good example for various reasons and he dominated both clay and grass. He also had been to two Wimbledon QFs before that.
So you're telling me that the clay prodigy Borg was able to reach 2 Wimb QFs at 17 and 19, but Nadal reaching the final at 20 still boggles the mind? :eek:

Ok he was starting to figure out grass and but he wouldn't make the final in stronger years imo.
Depends on the draw. Not like 2008 Nadal had to beat titans to get to the 2008 final.

Nice try buddy but Djokovic got his 1st top 10 win on grass at 19 and almost beat Ancic, another top 10 player, in the 4th round.

We don't agree and you will keep going and going like the energizer bunny but my opinion just isn't changing on this. Lol
Yeah, I'm sure 2006 Nadal would be scared of the mighty Robredo on grass. Much better win than actually beating in form Baghdatis. FWIW, Nadal also beat Ancic in 2003 on grass one year later after Ancic had upset Fed in the 1st round. Yes, I know Ancic got better after 2003, but just saying.

Look, you can't keep up this top 10 above all else obsession and still claim Novak's 2014 Wimb draw was tough. You can't have it both ways.
 
Last edited:
Top