Do you think Djokovic would struggle with Nadal at AO 22?

[Sysyphus]

It's a matter of match-ups.

Nole might have been troubled by Medvedev, but would have surely comfortably defeated BULL.

Bull conversely is a handful for Daniil even when he is in mediocre form. He has excellent variety and tools and tricks in his bags to fluster Medvedev.

 

[zagor]

Just like he did in the U.S Open final right.

Novak was facing a pressure of CYGS there, is generally worse at USO (9 titles compared to 3) and Med himself was in better form at USO.

Wouldn't like Med's chances here against Novak even if Nadal is a tougher match-up for him than Novak.

My main point is that it is not some mortal lock Djokovic wins if he plays, regardless if Nadal still does or not. This is a guy who lost his last 3 major hard court events- Olympics, U.S Open, YEC. And he is now being handed an imaginary title by some.

He's a mortal lock to beat Nadal on HC is the point. Which even TTW Nadal fans well know, and were giddy Novak got deported.

As for Olympics, YEC and USO. The only relevant thing there is USO, Novak hasn't won YEC in years and always plays crap at Olympics.

This is AO we're talking about, Novak's pet slam.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

It's a matter of match-ups.

Nole might have been troubled by Medvedev, but would have surely comfortably defeated BULL.

Bull conversely is a handful for Daniil even when he is in mediocre form. He has excellent variety and tools and tricks in his bags to fluster Medvedev.

''Styles make fights, kiddo. They keep talking about my chin but I took those Maidana powerbombs before it became fashionable, mate. And on another note, Brook is going down.''

 

[mike danny]

Just like he did in the U.S Open final right.

My main point is that it is not some mortal lock Djokovic wins if he plays, regardless if Nadal still does or not. This is a guy who lost his last 3 major hard court events- Olympics, U.S Open, YEC. And he is now being handed an imaginary title by some.

He's rightfully being handed an AO title, an event he'd won 3 times in a row before this year. AO Novak is a different animal to USO Novak.

 

[mike danny]

AO 17 and AO 18 similar level tennis from fed, IMO. better shotmaking (particularly BH) in AO 17, better serving/consistency in AO 18.

Meh, AO 2018 was Fed's weakest slam win ever.

 

[Sysyphus]

''Styles make fights, kiddo. They keep talking about my chin but I took those Maidana powerbombs before it became fashionable, mate. And on another note, Brook is going down.''

"Mayweather was a chicken and ducked me, so I took on Canelo, who entered the ring at 237 pounds on fight night."

 

[Chanwan]

Do you think Djokovic would struggle with Nadal's game at AO 22? He seemed solid from the baseline and was very aggressive with his forehand against Medvedev. It definitely would not have been like AO 19. What do you guys think?

How can you say, it def. would not have been like AO 19? Rafa looked much better going into the final in 19 than this year, he was bullying his opponents back then.

Tennis is about match-ups and this one, we know pretty well by now. Rafa is 0-9 in their last 9 matches on HC and 0-19 in sets since the US Open 2013.
To me, he needs to win a set, before I start giving him a decent chance to beat Djokovic on a hard court again. Thanks to Djokovic, he didn't have to though.
Imo, he isn't consistent enough, doesn't move well enough nor does he serve well enough to have a proper chance vs. Djokovic (unless Djoko's level falls off a cliff). But again, he doesn't need to beat Djokovic, when Djokovic is a no-show.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

"Mayweather was a chicken and ducked me, so I took on Canelo, who entered the ring at 237 pounds on fight night."

Kell Brook refused to respond to the comment.

Because it wasn't scripted for him, Kiddo. Styles make tennis matches, and my win over cruiserweight Marcos Maidana was more stylish than anything Con Brook has accomplished. ''Flying in his training camp'' He will be flying on fight night. Into the crowd after I give him the jam.

 

[martinezownsclay]

He's rightfully being handed an AO title, an event he'd won 3 times in a row before this year. AO Novak is a different animal to USO Novak.

I mean I agree he would be nearly 100% to beat Nadal if they had played given the match up and that Nadal wasn't even great in Australia for him anyway, but I don't give him 100% against the field. I think we will see the rest of this year too, Novak's period of total dominance is over. There are numerous guys who can beat him, even if Nadal on hard courts (although he would have a good shot if they played at the U.S Open probably, but not most venues) isn't one of them. The only place he might stay pretty dominant is grass where nobody can play.

I don't buy at all imparticular he was a lock to beat someone who he lost to in pretty easy straight sets at the U.S Open. And that said player lost to Nadal is meaningless, each match up is different, and Medvedev by far has more trouble with Nadal than Djokovic up to now anyway. To each their own. And Medvedev should have actually won the final in straight sets, but the crowd, dynamics, and the weird comeback element and Nadal's determination carried to a different result. The crowd definitely got under Medvedev's skin, but the crowd would not have even been supporting Djokovic (do they ever), so that would not be an element in the hypothetical Djokovic match. Of note I cant' stand Medvedev, so not a Medvedev backer here.

 

[zagor]

I mean I agree he would be nearly 100% to beat Nadal if they had played given the match up and that Nadal wasn't even great in Australia for him anyway, but I don't give him 100% against the field. I think we will see the rest of this year too, Novak's period of total dominance is over. There are numerous guys who can beat him, even if Nadal on hard courts (although he would have a good shot if they played at the U.S Open probably, but not most venues) isn't one of them. The only place he might stay pretty dominant is grass where nobody can play.

I don't buy at all imparticular he was a lock to beat someone who he lost to in pretty easy straight sets at the U.S Open. And that said player lost to Nadal is meaningless, each match up is different, and Medvedev by far has more trouble with Nadal than Djokovic up to now anyway. To each their own. And Medvedev should have actually won the final in straight sets, but the crowd, dynamics, and the weird comeback element and Nadal's determination carried to a different result. The crowd definitely got under Medvedev's skin, but the crowd would not have even been supporting Djokovic (do they ever), so that would not be an element in the hypothetical Djokovic match. Of note I cant' stand Medvedev, so not a Medvedev backer here.

You make some salient points but this wasn't the Med of USO. He blitzed through the draw there and entered the final by going all out on 2nd serve.

He caught lightning in a bottle there. In AO he was struggling in nearly every match, FAA even had MP.

 

[Sport]

If this thread had less "woulds" it would become more testable, and thus it would be more relevant.

 

[Daniel Andrade]

It would have been a 4 set contest.

 

[martinezownsclay]

You make some salient points but this wasn't the Med of USO. He blitzed through the draw there and entered the final by going all out on 2nd serve.

He caught lightning in a bottle there. In AO he was struggling in nearly every match, FAA even had MP.

I think FAA will be better than Shap., if he isn't already.

 

[abmk]

Meh, AO 2018 was Fed's weakest slam win ever.

if you combine level+difficulty, then yeah.
But if you just look at level, AO 18 was not that much from AO 17.

 

[martinezownsclay]

if you combine level+difficulty, then yeah.
But if you just look at level, AO 18 was not that much from AO 17.

I do think the quality of the final of 18 was a clear notch down from both guys compared to 17, but beyond that not much different I agree.

 

[Sampras-Bruguera 1993]

with the way nadal looked those first 2 sets, it would have been over fast for him. Djoker better get his crap together though fast, because as long as hes not playing the slams, nadal will continue to pull ahead with only GenUseless around. Djoker could be looking at a 23-20 hole here. Nadal is gunning to put it out reach. Not just stop at 21

 

[NonP]

With little prep and the international drama hanging over his head? Not sure Novak would've gone far at this AO, let alone beaten Rafa.

Assuming usual circumstances... Djoker in 4 max.

One thing I'll say is that this AO adds extra legitimacy to Novak's RG triumph last year. The NextGen have proven once again they're pretty much useless, and even with that 5-setter vs. Tsits in the final Rafa was the toughest opponent Novak could've faced en route to his 2nd FO. Doesn't matter whether this was a lackluster Bull or not, a seasonal 60.1% of GW is still good enough to make you a serious FO contender* and downing not one but two members of the 60% Club (excluding Stef's Hamburg results after Wimbledon) is still an impressive feat, indeed the first one since Bruguera's at '93 RG.

Ergo... Novak's FOs >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bull's AOs.

*Y'all might have seen my list of FO champions and runner-ups who failed to top the 60% ceiling, but just counting up the names (9 out of 27 champs and 54 editions in the OE) gives you an inadequate picture of the historic importance of that magic 60% mark cuz most 1-timers fall short of a seasonal 60% in the year of their triumph. A prime example is Gaudio who won a mediocre 54.8% in '04, but just gets in with a rounded 59.6% in '05.

So here are the 1-time champs who did post a seasonal 60% (DC and WCT excluded) in the same year they won the biggie:

1968 Rosewall
1973 Năstase
1977 Vilas
1983 Noah
1995 Muster

And the ones who didn't:

1969 Laver
1972 Gimeno
1976 Panatta
1989 Chang
1990 Gómez
1996 Kafelnikov
1998 Moyá
1999 Agassi
2002 Costa
[2003 Ferrero, w/unrounded 59.9%]
2004 Gaudio
2009 Federer
2015 Wawrinka

Of that latter group Rod ('71 and '74), Chang ('95), Guga ('01), Dre ('95, '02 and '03), Ferrero ('01) and Fred ('05) won an unrounded 60% or higher at least once. (FYI Gimeno technically never did, but he turned pro in '60 and was considered one of the best dirtballers around.) Throw in '03/04 Fraud and '05 Gaudio if you round up. That still leaves us with 7 one-time OE champs who never posted a seasonal 60% even with rounding, plus Kodeš who benefited from depleted draws at RG due to the political machinations of the early Wild West days. (Unsurprisingly all the other multi-champs had at least one 60% season.)

In other words, out of all 54 FOs in the OE only 8 were won by supposed schmucks who couldn't the job done for a single season, and out of these 8 only '76 Panatta (57.9%) failed to crack the 60% mark even during his championship run... which is more than forgivable... because in the QF the Italian stud pulled off arguably the biggest upset of the OE by handing Borg his only loss at RG between 1974-81!

That's what it takes to win RG, kids, and how important the 60% benchmark is. And what a beast 1993-94 Pistol (60.3% and 60.1% respectively) was on clay!

 

[Bud]

No, Rafa's first two sets were awful. Djoker would have won both quickly and would definitely have pounced on the three break points half way through the third set. Rafa improved as the match went on last night but Djokovic would have had it finished before Rafa could really wind up

Disagree. Different opponent.
Nadal came in with a game plan that didn't work and he slowly worked his way out of a hole.

Nadal finally got his nose ahead in the match after nearly 5 hours in the 5th set.

He'll look at the videos of this match and come in with a different game plan the next time he plays Med.

 

[abmk]

I do think the quality of the final of 18 was a clear notch down from both guys compared to 17, but beyond that not much different I agree.

Cilic's lower than Nadal because of the 5th set. Fed not as much, though AO 17 final was a little better.
Fed was more consistent in AO 18 than in AO 17 in the previous rounds (even with weaker draw)

 

[Tennisgods]

Do you think Djokovic would struggle with Nadal's game at AO 22? He seemed solid from the baseline and was very aggressive with his forehand against Medvedev. It definitely would not have been like AO 19. What do you guys think?

No. Djokovic would have beaten Nadal. Lest we forget, Medvedev was two sets up. Djokovic certainly would not be losing from a similar position.

 

[Indigo]

Novak would beat Rafa but would lose to Medvedev eventually. However, he would for sure stop Rafa from winning 21. No way Rafa would have any chance against Novak. He would lose as always at AO.