Federer faced the very best of Nadal at the FO than Djokovic ever did

Holmes

Hall of Fame
The posters I talk to most are probably Poisoned Slice/Krag/TheNachoMan anyway. I don't think they fall that badly under that line.

My threads are not really Fedovic exclusive these days. Most others posters I talk with are just passing bar a few others.
Don't let him make you feel bad, he's probably the most disingenuous troll in the Fed fanbase. Gives the rest of us a bad name.
 
yeah, I agree OP is biased.
that's why I mentioned based on my criteria.
I don't think 07 djoko on clay was even the equal of Davy - who played great vs Nadal at Rome and played some good ball vs fed (though he did choke in the 3rd set). So 07 is definitely out for me. Not a contender.
Well guess we disagree on 2007 then. Nadal beat Djokovic and prevented him from reaching the final. He would of course be an underdog against Fed, but it is also not a foregone conclusion a la Anyone in a final vs Nadal. So as I see it, Rafa prevented Djokovic from an outsider shot at the title similar to 2008 (only that in 2008 his chances would ofc be higher). Someone reaching a final per definition is a contender for me if we are not talking extreme cases like Ferrer-Nadal 2013.
 

SonnyT

Legend
2010 was the first year that Nadal (age 25) put it all together and had statistically his best year. He won W and UO for first time.

If it weren't for Djokovic, he had an even better year in 2011, would've won 9 tournaments (vs 6 in '10). But Djokovic totally destroyed him.

'12-14 were not good years for Djokovic, who had sub-par 3 slams. But he snapped out of it with '14 Wim win over Federer, who would've beaten anybody else on the green lawns of Wimbledon. Then Djokovic returned to greatness in '15, when he won 3 slams.
 

duaneeo

Legend
'12-14 were not good years for Djokovic, who had sub-par 3 slams. But he snapped out of it with '14 Wim win over Federer, who would've beaten anybody else on the green lawns of Wimbledon. Then Djokovic returned to greatness in '15, when he won 3 slams.

Of course Federer would've beaten anybody else at Wimbledon, because if not for Djokovic, there wouldn't had been anyone else at Wimbledon for Federer to beat, lol.

And this thread is about facing the best Nadal. Nadal was mostly a non-factor in 2015...Djokovic's year of return-to-greatness.
 

AgassiSuperSlam11

Professional
I'm not a Fed basher but he played at the FO for six years without Nadal in the draw. Of course, he was still green 1999-2002, but he didn't go far in 2003 (1R) or 2004 (3R). In addition, he lost to Wawrinka in 2015. If he had won just 1 more FO, I think playing RG GOAT Nadal would've been a more effective excuse. In fact, I think Djokovic had it tougher since he had to face Nadal 6 times between 2006-2014.
 

SonnyT

Legend
Great point, Agassi. Those years w/o Nadal, and he didn't do anything.

Nadal & Djoko are a year apart, so Djokovic faced every version of Nadal there ever was, on clay or off. Don't try telling us that Federer had to face a more difficult one. Perhaps because Federer had such a negative H2H!
 

Razer

Legend
2010 was the first year that Nadal (age 25) put it all together and had statistically his best year. He won W and UO for first time.

If it weren't for Djokovic, he had an even better year in 2011, would've won 9 tournaments (vs 6 in '10). But Djokovic totally destroyed him.

'12-14 were not good years for Djokovic, who had sub-par 3 slams. But he snapped out of it with '14 Wim win over Federer, who would've beaten anybody else on the green lawns of Wimbledon. Then Djokovic returned to greatness in '15, when he won 3 slams.

Nadal turned 24 in 2010.
 

roysid

Hall of Fame
When Nadal was at his very best on clay,
Federer met him at the French Open in
1) 2005 Semi
2) 2006 Final
3) 2007 Final
4) 2008 Final
5) 2011 Final


When Nadal was past his prime on clay,
Djokovic met him at the French Open in
1) 2012 Final
2) 2013 Semi
3) 2014 Final
4) 2015 QF
5) 2020 Final
6) 2021 Semi
7) 2022 QF
2015 QF, 2021 semi nadal were weak and injured respectively.

2022 nadal not best but still good enough.

Rest of the versions of nadal are pretty good
 

mahatma

Hall of Fame
LOL, LMAO. chosing a period when he had old Fed, AWOL nadal and didn't even face his slam nemesis Wawa even once. :-D :-D
got beat by Wawa on both sides of that - RG 15, USO 16.

My point stays - no one did beat the best of Djokovic in slams. Deal with it :)
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Well guess we disagree on 2007 then. Nadal beat Djokovic and prevented him from reaching the final. He would of course be an underdog against Fed, but it is also not a foregone conclusion a la Anyone in a final vs Nadal. So as I see it, Rafa prevented Djokovic from an outsider shot at the title similar to 2008 (only that in 2008 his chances would ofc be higher). Someone reaching a final per definition is a contender for me if we are not talking extreme cases like Ferrer-Nadal 2013.

Djokovic was nowhere near Fed on clay in 07.
lost to Ferrer, Moya, Troicki on clay in 07.
got destroyed by Nadal in Rome, while Davy played Nadal close.
Djokovic went 5 sets vs WC Oliver Patience in 3R at RG.

Davydenko was clearly better than Djokovic on clay/RG 07, let alone Fed.
Hewitt/Moya whom beat Nadal beat along the way to the semi would have decent enough shot to beat Djokovic in RG 07. Hewitt had played Nadal close at Hamburg and Moya beat Djokovic in Hamburg.
If we put a dummy player in place of Nadal, Djokovic reaching final ain't a guarantee due to Hewitt/Moya.
and if we redo the draw and Djoko/Davy fall in same half, it gets worse as he won't reach the final IMO

2008 case is quite different (not just a higher chance vs Fed) as no one else apart from Nadal/Federer had a realistic chance of beating Djokovic at RG. He had also won Rome, reached semi at Hamburg (losing to Nadal in 3), reached semi at Monte Carlo (losing to Fed)

what exactly of note did Djokovic do on clay in 07 that it wouldn't be a foregone conclusion of loss vs Fed?
 

TheFifthSet

Legend
yeah, Djoko played excellent from down 0-3 in the 3rd set. But nadal did let his guard down a little bit.
and it'd be worth more if it had happened in set 1 or 2 than after going down 2 sets to love.

That's the natural assumption to make when Nadal lets slip a double break lead on clay, but I don't know if it rings true here. It was basically just winners and forced errors from Djokovic to claw back, and even get to SP after drawing level. If anything it was Djokovic that was the error-prone one to surrender the breaks. I mean he literally went from 2W 10UE's in the first three games to 19W 7UE's the rest of the set. To even show that type high of a gear against '08 Rafa on Parisian clay is immense stuff, even if it would've been more eye-opening had it come earlier.
 
Last edited:
Djokovic was nowhere near Fed on clay in 07.
lost to Ferrer, Moya, Troicki on clay in 07.
got destroyed by Nadal in Rome, while Davy played Nadal close.
Djokovic went 5 sets vs WC Oliver Patience in 3R at RG.

Davydenko was clearly better than Djokovic on clay/RG 07, let alone Fed.
Hewitt/Moya whom beat Nadal beat along the way to the semi would have decent enough shot to beat Djokovic in RG 07. Hewitt had played Nadal close at Hamburg and Moya beat Djokovic in Hamburg.
If we put a dummy player in place of Nadal, Djokovic reaching final ain't a guarantee due to Hewitt/Moya.
and if we redo the draw and Djoko/Davy fall in same half, it gets worse as he won't reach the final IMO

2008 case is quite different (not just a higher chance vs Fed) as no one else apart from Nadal/Federer had a realistic chance of beating Djokovic at RG. He had also won Rome, reached semi at Hamburg (losing to Nadal in 3), reached semi at Monte Carlo (losing to Fed)

what exactly of note did Djokovic do on clay in 07 that it wouldn't be a foregone conclusion of loss vs Fed?
He hadn’t done much before the FO as expected from a 20 years old but he was clearly on the rise. 2007 was his breakthrough playing a strong Wimbledon and reaching his first slam final later that year. He had trouble with Patience, but then straight-setted Dasco and played a good match (relative to who he was up against) against Nadal. I didn’t say it is likely he beats Fed at this point, but Fed is also not Nadal and he might have felt extra pressure with the chance of Nadal being out. Even if we give Djoko only 20% winning chance I would call this a contender.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I'm not a Fed basher but he played at the FO for six years without Nadal in the draw. Of course, he was still green 1999-2002, but he didn't go far in 2003 (1R) or 2004 (3R). In addition, he lost to Wawrinka in 2015. If he had won just 1 more FO, I think playing RG GOAT Nadal would've been a more effective excuse. In fact, I think Djokovic had it tougher since he had to face Nadal 6 times between 2006-2014.

Djoko facing Nadal in 06 or 07 is not much relevant since he wasn't a realistic contender in either. He'd have lost to other players in the draw on both occasions.
 
Last edited:

abmk

Bionic Poster
He hadn’t done much before the FO as expected from a 20 years old but he was clearly on the rise. 2007 was his breakthrough playing a strong Wimbledon and reaching his first slam final later that year. He had trouble with Patience, but then straight-setted Dasco and played a good match (relative to who he was up against) against Nadal. I didn’t say it is likely he beats Fed at this point, but Fed is also not Nadal and he might have felt extra pressure with the chance of Nadal being out. Even if we give Djoko only 20% winning chance I would call this a contender.

Djoko was considerably better on HC in 07 and clearly better on grass in 07 when compared to clay.
He had won Miami beating Nadal&Canas, made IW final (losing to Nadal)

I'd say more like 10-15% chance for 07 Djoko vs 07 Fed at RG.
Throw in that Djoko isn't even the 3rd best - would lose to davy.
and a chance to lose to Hewitt/Moya. That rules him out of realistic contention.

Fed needed one match to adjust to Nadal upset in RG 09 - the Haas one. but he played very well vs Monfils, well enough vs Delpo and GOATed in his 1st final chance to win RG. If he knew Nadal was out in RG 07 in advance, he'd grab at the chance big time after 05/06.
 
Last edited:

abmk

Bionic Poster
That's the natural assumption to make when Nadal lets slip a double break lead on clay, but I don't know if it rings true here. It was basically just winners and forced errors from Djokovic to claw back, and even get to SP after drawing level. If anything it was Djokovic that was the error-prone one to surrender the breaks. I mean he literally went from 2W 10UE's in the first three games to 19W 7UE's the rest of the set. To even show that type high of a gear against '08 Rafa on Parisian clay is immense stuff, even if it would've been more eye-opening had it come earlier.

I don't mean Nadal wasn't playing good But he relaxed a bit/let his guard down from the great level that he was playing at to merely good and Djokovic was able to take advantage with very good play. I do agree it was a great effort from Djokovic.

I charted the match in 2016:

I am not sure I'd agree with those UE stats btw - I am assuming you took it from TA.

I have it at 7 UEs

1st game: UE at 15-0, UE at 15-15
2nd game: UE at 0-0, UE at 15 all (interesting rally though), UE at 40-0
3rd game: UE at 0-0 and 0-15.

 
Are
Djoko was considerably better on HC in 07 and clearly better on grass in 07 when compared to clay.
He had won Miami beating Nadal&Canas, made IW final (losing to Nadal)

I'd say more like 10-15% chance for 07 Djoko vs 07 Fed at RG.
Throw in that Djoko isn't even the 3rd best - would lose to davy.
and a chance to lose to Hewitt/Moya. That rules him out of realistic contention.

Fed needed one match to adjust to Nadal upset in RG 09 - the Haas one. but he played very well vs Monfils, well enough vs Delpo and GOATed in his 1st final chance to win RG. If he knew Nadal was out in RG 07 in advance, he'd grab at the chance big time after 05/06.
are we talking a hypothetical of Nadal being out of the whole FO 07, or getting upset, injured etc. during the tournament? In the latter case Djokovic wouldn’t need to beat Davy, as Fed took care of him. Reaching a final with 10-15% winning chance still makes someone a contender in my book.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Are

are we talking a hypothetical of Nadal being out of the whole FO 07, or getting upset, injured etc. during the tournament? In the latter case Djokovic wouldn’t need to beat Davy, as Fed took care of him. Reaching a final with 10-15% winning chance still makes someone a contender in my book.

being out entirely.
again, it is 10-15% in a final assuming Djokovic gets to the final (incl. over Hewitt/Moya). not enough for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TMF

beltsman

G.O.A.T.
When Nadal was at his very best on clay,
Federer met him at the French Open in
1) 2005 Semi
2) 2006 Final
3) 2007 Final
4) 2008 Final
5) 2011 Final


When Nadal was past his prime on clay,
Djokovic met him at the French Open in
1) 2012 Final
2) 2013 Semi
3) 2014 Final
4) 2015 QF
5) 2020 Final
6) 2021 Semi
7) 2022 QF

Djokovic played prime Nadal at RG in 06, 07, and 08. He got destroyed each time.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Are

are we talking a hypothetical of Nadal being out of the whole FO 07, or getting upset, injured etc. during the tournament? In the latter case Djokovic wouldn’t need to beat Davy, as Fed took care of him. Reaching a final with 10-15% winning chance still makes someone a contender in my book.
Removing Federer and/or Nadal from the FO 07 then there's possibly of Nole ends up landing on Davydenko's draw.

Like abmk said, there are few players than was good enough to take Nole out besides Fedal.

That's said, I don't considered Nole a FO contender in 2007
 
Removing Federer and/or Nadal from the FO 07 then there's possibly of Nole ends up landing on Davydenko's draw.

Like abmk said, there are few players than was good enough to take Nole out besides Fedal.

That's said, I don't considered Nole a FO contender in 2007
You also excluded 2008, where he sure as hell was a contender (at least as much as Fed). On top, you said 2011 was prime Nadal while 2012 wasn’t.
 
being out entirely.
again, it is 10-15% in a final assuming Djokovic gets to the final (incl. over Hewitt/Moya). not enough for me.
Well in this case your criteria may make sense. Anywho, OP, apart from not talking at all about “being contenders” left out 2008 and 2012 for Novak and included 2008 and 2011 for Fed, which does not make sense and which was my initial point.
 

AgassiSuperSlam11

Professional
Djoko facing Nadal in 06 or 07 is not much relevant since he wasn't a realistic contender in either. He'd have lost to other players in the draw on both occasions.

Fed also defeated a pre-GS champion Nole in the AO, but Fed Fans still count it and give Fed credit for defeating Nole in all four slams.

Most importantly, Djokovic claimed in the press conference he had complete control of the match prior to injury (hilarious). Nole defeated some decent players in those draws and other than Fed there weren't many players who would've defeated him other than Nadal. Nole made the QF and SF those years which was deeper in the draw than when Safin and Fed defeated him in the AO.
 
Last edited:
While I agree Federer did face an overall better Nadal at RG than Djokovic, some of the specifics of your opening post are just silly. 2005 Nadal better than 2012, LOL! 2012 was easily Nadal's 2nd best year at RG at worst, after only 2008, and his best overall year of clay tennis ever. 2013 Nadal was also extremely good, better than 2005, and atleast on par with 2006 and 2007.
 
Djokovic was awful in set 3 and meh in set 1. If anything, Djokovic timed his peaks perfectly in that match to get those 2 sets to push it to a 5th set, especially with Nadal serving for the match in the 4th set. Nadal didn't choke, but wasn't at his sharpest in that game or the 4th set TB.
The 5th set netchord would be classified by me as a slipup/dip, not a choke, given the level was very good and the pressure Nadal was putting with his play.
'
Yes that would have been one of the most undeserving wins in a match in history if Djokovic had somehow won that day, given the overall level of play of both. The match stats say it all, Nadal was far ahead in winners, unforced errors (less), points won. The netchord thing was some sort of karma-tic justice setting things right if anything.

Mind you for Djokovic it sucks he didn't win as this would be by far his best ever win at RG, and bigger than any Federer and many other of the clay greats in the same range as him had, if he had won. Ultimately though he didn't and his actual best win at RG (a really crummy and out of prime Nadal twice, Murray, done on clay Federer in 2012, whatever) is below the biggest win of many of the best to never win RG clay players.
 

Nadal - GOAT

Hall of Fame
When Nadal was at his very best on clay,
Federer met him at the French Open in
1) 2005 Semi
2) 2006 Final
3) 2007 Final
4) 2008 Final
5) 2011 Final


When Nadal was past his prime on clay,
Djokovic met him at the French Open in
1) 2012 Final
2) 2013 Semi
3) 2014 Final
4) 2015 QF
5) 2020 Final
6) 2021 Semi
7) 2022 QF
You do know that Novak met Rafa at RG in 2006, 2007 and 2008 right?
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
2010 was the first year that Nadal (age 25) put it all together and had statistically his best year. He won W and UO for first time.
If it weren't for Djokovic, he had an even better year in 2011, would've won 9 tournaments (vs 6 in '10). But Djokovic totally destroyed him.
'12-14 were not good years for Djokovic, who had sub-par 3 slams. But he snapped out of it with '14 Wim win over Federer, who would've beaten anybody else on the green lawns of Wimbledon. Then Djokovic returned to greatness in '15, when he won 3 slams.
I wonder why
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Fed also defeated a pre-GS champion Nole in the AO, but Fed Fans still count it and give Fed credit for defeating Nole in all four slams.

Most importantly, Djokovic claimed in the press conference he had complete control of the match prior to injury (hilarious). Nole defeated some decent players in those draws and other than Fed there weren't many players who would've defeated him other than Nadal. Nole made the QF and SF those years which was deeper in the draw than when Safin and Fed defeated him in the AO.

counting that Fed win at AO in 07 doesn't mean others couldn't have defeated Djokovic - Roddick/Gonzo/Haas/Davy etc.
no one says Djoko was a realistic contender there either.
One doesn't brag about Fed's win being over a tough Djokovic either.

Nadal's wins over Djoko in RG 06,07 count, but doesn't mean Djoko was a realistic contender there.
Davy would've beaten Djoko in RG 07 and possibly Hewitt/Moya (Hewitt had taken Nadal to 3 in Hamburg and played Nadal nearly as close as Djoko at RG. Moya beat Djokovic in Hamburg 07)
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
While I agree Federer did face an overall better Nadal at RG than Djokovic, some of the specifics of your opening post are just silly. 2005 Nadal better than 2012, LOL! 2012 was easily Nadal's 2nd best year at RG at worst, after only 2008, and his best overall year of clay tennis ever. 2013 Nadal was also extremely good, better than 2005, and atleast on par with 2006 and 2007.

I'd put 2007 RG Nadal ahead of 2012 Nadal.
don't see 2013 nadal on par with 07, not at all.
05/06 maybe could be argued to be similar, but I'd put 05/06 a little ahead.
 
I'd put 2007 RG Nadal ahead of 2012 Nadal.
don't see 2013 nadal on par with 07, not at all.
05/06 maybe could be argued to be similar, but I'd put 05/06 a little ahead.

I mean 2012 looking at scores and results, was his most dominant clay season. That could be in part based on there being less clay depth than the late 2000s though.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
You do know that Novak met Rafa at RG in 2006, 2007 and 2008 right?
Already addressed this point. Please read the entire thread.

Also keep in mind during those years, the players who were the favorite to win the FO are

1) Nadal
2) Federer

and then....

3) Everyone


Depend on how you define contender, but I don't count player who has little chance of winning the whole thing. If you do then you might as well include 10 players
 

Nadal - GOAT

Hall of Fame
Already addressed this point. Please read the entire thread.

Also keep in mind during those years, the players who were the favorite to win the FO are

1) Nadal
2) Federer

and then....

3) Everyone


Depend on how you define contender, but I don't count player who has little chance of winning the whole thing. If you do then you might as well include 10 players
Ok.. agree about 2006 and 07 in this regard.

Though 2008 many believe Novak would have beaten fed had he got past Rafa at the SF.
 

mehdimike

Hall of Fame
on red clay you mean. Yes, thanks to the weaker competition.
Also Nadal choked vs Verdasco and lost to him at Madrid on blue clay in 12.
I still believe 2012 was his most attacking version as was required to beat Novak at RG.
And why no one talks about 2010 Nadal on clay? He was fully matured, fast, motivated and ruthless.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I still believe 2012 was his most attacking version as was required to beat Novak at RG.
And why no one talks about 2010 Nadal on clay? He was fully matured, fast, motivated and ruthless.

and yet when conditions were damp, his topspin had less effect and Djokovic was treeing off with Nadal on the defensive. Its why I don't think 2012 RG was the best version to handle Djoko. Obviously it still remains 2008.

2010 Nadal only played as well as needed at RG till the final. But yes, his final performance was great and certainly better than the 2012 RG final.
 

mehdimike

Hall of Fame
and yet when conditions were damp, his topspin had less effect and Djokovic was treeing off. Its why I don't think 2012 RG was the best version to handle Djoko. Obviously it still remains 2008.

2010 Nadal only played as well as needed at RG till the final. But yes, his final performance was great and certainly better than the 2012 RG version.
But we didn't see that much of his other versions in damp conditions. We just don't know how he would have fared.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
But we didn't see that much of his other versions in damp conditions. We just don't know how he would have fared.

don't see RG 08 Nadal losing 8 games in a row in any conditions vs Djokovic.
don't think RG 07 nadal does either, but that's close to RG 12 anyways.

more topspin/consistency and defense compared to RG 12.
07/08 nadal was facing more competition on red clay than in 12:

fed in MC 07, davy in Rome 07, hewitt/fed in Hamburg 07 and fed in RG 07
fed in MC 08, djokovic/fed in Hamburg 08 and djokovic/fed in RG 08

djokovic in Rome 08 and djokovic in RG 12. (throw in Dasco on blue clay if you really want)
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
'
Yes that would have been one of the most undeserving wins in a match in history if Djokovic had somehow won that day, given the overall level of play of both. The match stats say it all, Nadal was far ahead in winners, unforced errors (less), points won. The netchord thing was some sort of karma-tic justice setting things right if anything.

Mind you for Djokovic it sucks he didn't win as this would be by far his best ever win at RG, and bigger than any Federer and many other of the clay greats in the same range as him had, if he had won. Ultimately though he didn't and his actual best win at RG (a really crummy and out of prime Nadal twice, Murray, done on clay Federer in 2012, whatever) is below the biggest win of many of the best to never win RG clay players.

agree with the spirit that it wouldn't be the most deserving, but stats would've been closer if Djokovic had won.
Djokovic's actual best win at RG is v tsonga at RG 12 IMO.
 

AgassiSuperSlam11

Professional
counting that Fed win at AO in 07 doesn't mean others couldn't have defeated Djokovic - Roddick/Gonzo/Haas/Davy etc.
no one says Djoko was a realistic contender there either.
One doesn't brag about Fed's win being over a tough Djokovic either.

Nadal's wins over Djoko in RG 06,07 count, but doesn't mean Djoko was a realistic contender there.
Davy would've beaten Djoko in RG 07 and possibly Hewitt/Moya (Hewitt had taken Nadal to 3 in Hamburg and played Nadal nearly as close as Djoko at RG. Moya beat Djokovic in Hamburg 07)
The thread is about Fed facing the very best of Nadal. The fact remains that Fed is 0-8 in Bo5 Clay against Nadal and Nole is 2-9. Both players had to face a peak Nadal in clay and usually came out losing. My contention is Djokovic had it tougher because he didn't have the early window Fed had between 2003-2004 and later on when Nadal was weak in 2015 Djokovic defeated him while Fed lost to Wawrinka. The 2011 Nadal was a FO champion and Djokovic still registered clay wins against Nadal in Rome and Madrid.

The concept of 'realistic contender" is semantics once you reach the QF or SF you have a chance. BTW, you mention Gonzo and Haas which are two players that the "green" Djokovic did defeat in those RG tournaments. Of course, those players weren't known as much for their clay achievements but still were much higher ranked than Nole who was barely 19 at the time.

Where I have often agreed with Fed fans is homogenous court speeds and no M1000 grass tournament but to claim he had it more difficult than Nole in RG is quite trivial. Nadal did get that one big win in 2008 Wimbledon and Fed never got that one big win over Nadal in RG.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
The thread is about Fed facing the very best of Nadal. The fact remains that Fed is 0-8 in Bo5 Clay against Nadal and Nole is 2-9. Both players had to face a peak Nadal in clay and usually came out losing. My contention is Djokovic had it tougher because he didn't have the early window Fed had between 2003-2004 and later on when Nadal was weak in 2015 Djokovic defeated him while Fed lost to Wawrinka. The 2011 Nadal was a FO champion and Djokovic still registered clay wins against Nadal in Rome and Madrid.

The concept of 'realistic contender" is semantics once you reach the QF or SF you have a chance. BTW, you mention Gonzo and Haas which are two players that the "green" Djokovic did defeat in those RG tournaments. Of course, those players weren't known as much for their clay achievements but still were much higher ranked than Nole who was barely 19 at the time.

Where I have often agreed with Fed fans is homogenous court speeds and no M1000 grass tournament but to claim he had it more difficult than Nole in RG is quite trivial. Nadal did get that one big win in 2008 Wimbledon and Fed never got that one big win over Nadal in RG.

1. not semantics. basic common sense and analysis.
2. your point about 15 fed losing to Wawa is quite frankly rubbish, considering prime Djoko lost to the same Wawa.
3. Fed lost to Kuerten turning back the clock in RG 04. djoko losing to kohly in 09 is worse, bruh. Also remember Djoko lost to Melzer in RG 10.
4. Fed hadn't even made a slam semi by the time of RG 03 and surely wasn't winning it on his worst surface.
5. Fed faced prime Nadal 5 times when contender at RG, djokovic 3 times. (you could quibble about 14 RG)
6. Haas was much better on HC than on clay. Gonzo's AO 07 was his best run. he was nothing like that in RG 06. day and night.
and yes, he did do well on clay when in form, RG 03/09, winning some CC titles, Rome 07 final etc.
7. yes, Djoko beat Nadal in Madrid/Rome 11 and Fed beat him in Hamburg 07/Madrid 09. So what?
 

AgassiSuperSlam11

Professional
1. not semantics. basic common sense and analysis.
2. your point about 15 fed losing to Wawa is quite frankly rubbish, considering prime Djoko lost to the same Wawa.
3. Fed lost to Kuerten turning back the clock in RG 04. djoko losing to kohly in 09 is worse, bruh. Also remember Djoko lost to Melzer in RG 10.
4. Fed hadn't even made a slam semi by the time of RG 03 and surely wasn't winning it on his worst surface.
5. Fed faced prime Nadal 5 times when contender at RG, djokovic 3 times. (you could quibble about 14 RG)
6. Haas was much better on HC than on clay. Gonzo's AO 07 was his best run. he was nothing like that in RG 06. day and night.
and yes, he did do well on clay when in form, RG 03/09, winning some CC titles, Rome 07 final etc.
7. yes, Djoko beat Nadal in Madrid/Rome 11 and Fed beat him in Hamburg 07/Madrid 09. So what?

1-There is nothing you remotely bring up to claim that Fed had it more difficult than Nole in RG.
2-No the rubbish is that Fed had plenty of opportunities to win a second RG title. Of course, you're the same poster that criticizes Wilander for winning the AO after defeating the 2-time defending champion, the recent Wimbledon grass champion, and finally the world #1 but since the "draw" was weak it's not a real slam. Chris Evert and Jimmy Connors missed many AO and FO tournaments early on (due to WTT) and yet those champions still have legit titles.
3- Fed was already a GS champion. The preposterous argument that Fed fans make is that he to face a peak Nadal. However, if he really was a top clay courter he doesn't lose to Kuerten or lose in the 1R the year before. Djokovic attributed some of those defeats due to the gluten issue which was addressed the following year.
4-Fed also took straight set Bo5 losses to Mantilla and Jiri Novak in his home country. Remember, he had just made the Final of the Italian Open before RG in 2003 and still lost in the 1R.
5-????????????????????????? Djokovic faced a prime Nadal 9 times. I'll only remove 2015. Won't make any excuses about 2021 as Nadal should've numbed his foot as he did in 2008 Wimbledon. In fact, I'll give Nole credit for NEVER skipping clay seasons and events as Fed did both in 2017 and 2018. The 2020 Nadal won RG without dropping a set and was a three-time defending champion. Nadal was 26-0 in 2021 when he reached the FO SF and if wasn't for a tricky bounce and drop-shot during a set point he still could've won that match.
6-The fact remains that Nole was a "green" 19-year-old player who defeated higher ranked players. He made it to the QF in 2006 and if Nadal wasn't on his side of the draw he gets a serve-bot in the SF.
7- So what? Fed is 2-14 vs Nadal in Clay while Nole is 8-20 this is called "common mathematics" that Nole was more effective against Nadal in clay and did register two Bo5 wins against Nadal. As far as the 2009 Madrid win which Fed fans go Ape **** the match was played in high altitude and regarded as the weakest M1000 clay tournament for Nadal. Moreover, it didn't hurt Fed that Nadal had to play Nole for over 4 hours in the previous match which included Nole blowing match points.
 
Last edited:
1-There is nothing you remotely bring up to claim that Fed had it more difficult than Nole in RG.
2-No the rubbish is that Fed had plenty of opportunities to win a second RG title. Of course, you're the same poster that criticizes Wilander for winning the AO after defeating the 2-time defending champion, the recent Wimbledon grass champion, and finally the world #1 but since the "draw" was weak it's not a real slam. Chris Evert and Jimmy Connors missed many AO and FO tournaments early on (due to WTT) and yet those champions still have legit titles.
3- Fed was already a GS champion. The preposterous argument that Fed fans make is that he to face a peak Nadal. However, if he really was a top clay courter he doesn't lose to Kuerten or lose in the 1R the year before. Djokovic attributed some of those defeats due to the gluten issue which was addressed the following year.
4-Fed also took straight set Bo5 losses to Mantilla and Jiri Novak in his home country. Remember, he had just made the Final of the Italian Open before RG in 2003 and still lost in the 1R.
5-????????????????????????? Djokovic faced a prime Nadal 9 times. I'll only remove 2015. Won't make any excuses about 2021 as Nadal should've numbed his foot as he did in 2008 Wimbledon. In fact, I'll give Nole credit for NEVER skipping clay seasons and events as Fed did both in 2017 and 2018. The 2020 Nadal won RG without dropping a set and was a three-time defending champion. Nadal was 26-0 in 2021 when he reached the FO SF and if wasn't for a tricky bounce and drop-shot during a set point he still could've won that match.
6-The fact remains that Nole was a "green" 19-year-old player who defeated higher ranked players. He made it to the QF in 2006 and if Nadal wasn't on his side of the draw he gets a serve-bot in the SF.
7- So what? Fed is 2-14 vs Nadal in Clay while Nole is 8-20 this is called "common mathematics" that Nole was more effective against Nadal in clay and did register two Bo5 wins against Nadal. As far as the 2009 Madrid win which Fed fans go Ape **** the match was played in high altitude and regarded as the weakest M1000 clay tournament for Nadal. Moreover, it didn't hurt Fed that Nadal had to play Nole for over 4 hours in the previous match which included Nole blowing match points.

Implying Nadal of 2019 onwards was anything remotedly approaching "prime", even on clay, is ludicrous. The fact Djokovic was also past his prime (to a much lesser extent than Nadal) is moot, since that just means if there was better competition than a way past his prime Nadal, he would have an even harder time than he already does trying to win RG at that age.

Atleast you showed the decency to discount 2015 though as I have seen some laughable Djokovic fans even try to build up that win.
 
I do agree all arguments aside Djokovic IS a tougher opponent for Nadal on clay than Federer. That is pretty much a fact. Maybe not as much as the record suggests, but he is tougher for Nadal on the surface than Federer is.

However that does not automatically mean he is a superior clay courter. Nadal is just one person, and it is also established Djokovic is a tougher "match up" in general for Nadal than what Federer is, not just on clay.

The biggest problem for Djokovic when assessing his greatness on clay is his lack of a truly huge win at RG. Someone mentioned his biggest ever win at RG is beating Tsonga there once, which agree, which is pretty weak for someone of his calibre, and his calibre on the surface. Federer despite never beating Nadal at RG does have some better wins- Del Potro in 09, red hot Soderling in 09, and of course peak Djokovic himself in a super impressive result in 2011. He does have a lot of quality performances and wins outside of RG, and results wise has been very successful at RG, but is lacking in truly big quality wins at RG itself.
 

AgassiSuperSlam11

Professional
Implying Nadal of 2019 onwards was anything remotedly approaching "prime", even on clay, is ludicrous. The fact Djokovic was also past his prime (to a much lesser extent than Nadal) is moot, since that just means if there was better competition than a way past his prime Nadal, he would have an even harder time than he already does trying to win RG at that age.

Atleast you showed the decency to discount 2015 though as I have seen some laughable Djokovic fans even try to build up that win.

If Nadal was so past his prime, why did he go 28-0 in the FO between 2017-2020? He earned bagels against Nole in the 2019 Italian Open Final and 2020 FO Final. He won the 2020 FO without dropping a set which he did in 2017. There is a difference between "highest peak" and "prime." For example, Jimmy Connors was at his highest peak between 1974-1978 but that 1982-1983 version was still in "prime" level. Nadal won 2 slams in 2017, 2019, and 2022. This was not his highest peak as 2008 and 2010 but he still played in a prime level.
 

Halba

Hall of Fame
Nadals clay court prime finished this year. His hardcourt prime finished around 2014 but he managed to peak for a few majors after. His grass prime was over in 2010. OP has gotten it wrong.

Prime means major winning form as simple as that
 
If Nadal was so past his prime, why did he go 28-0 in the FO between 2017-2020?
Since the clay field (well the entire field, not just clay field) is so garbage by this point. I know this is something Djokovic fans don't acknowledge in general, so I expect you will oppose that, but it is simple truth. And since Nadal is the clay GOAT by a large margin, so even 50% of his old self he still is formidable.

Nadal in addition to being eons past his prime was also seriously injured (a real injury, not a phantom one pulled out of his ass like Djokovic's Australian Open "injury" this year) in the 2021 French Open. Yet that is still the better of Djokovic's two wins over Nadal at RG, considering how awful Nadal was at the time of RG 2015.
 

Federev

Legend
Federer was the best is totally fiction. Fed almost lost all his battles against Nadal & Djokovic, so his fans had to manufacture him as unbeatable tennis diety.

This was VERY TRUE.

Except when it wasn’t.

Like when he beat them at slams in
2006
2007
2008
2009
2011
2012
2017
2019

and beat them at BO3 in say …
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2014
2015
2017
2019

But otherwise he almost always lost to them.
 
Last edited:

AgassiSuperSlam11

Professional
Since the clay field (well the entire field, not just clay field) is so garbage by this point. I know this is something Djokovic fans don't acknowledge in general, so I expect you will oppose that, but it is simple truth. And since Nadal is the clay GOAT by a large margin, so even 50% of his old self he still is formidable.

Nadal in addition to being eons past his prime was also seriously injured (a real injury, not a phantom one pulled out of his ass like Djokovic's Australian Open "injury" this year) in the 2021 French Open. Yet that is still the better of Djokovic's two wins over Nadal at RG, considering how awful Nadal was at the time of RG 2015.
Wow, this is actually a compliment. It means Agassisuperslam tries to be neutral when stating opinions. There are some notable Djokovic fans here that will strongly disagree about me being a Djokovic fan. In fairness, I did want him to win the 2014 Wimbledon title since I thought it would be better for Tennis if he got the win to add parody.
 
Last edited:

abmk

Bionic Poster
1-There is nothing you remotely bring up to claim that Fed had it more difficult than Nole in RG.
2-No the rubbish is that Fed had plenty of opportunities to win a second RG title. Of course, you're the same poster that criticizes Wilander for winning the AO after defeating the 2-time defending champion, the recent Wimbledon grass champion, and finally the world #1 but since the "draw" was weak it's not a real slam. Chris Evert and Jimmy Connors missed many AO and FO tournaments early on (due to WTT) and yet those champions still have legit titles.
3- Fed was already a GS champion. The preposterous argument that Fed fans make is that he to face a peak Nadal. However, if he really was a top clay courter he doesn't lose to Kuerten or lose in the 1R the year before. Djokovic attributed some of those defeats due to the gluten issue which was addressed the following year.
4-Fed also took straight set Bo5 losses to Mantilla and Jiri Novak in his home country. Remember, he had just made the Final of the Italian Open before RG in 2003 and still lost in the 1R.
5-????????????????????????? Djokovic faced a prime Nadal 9 times. I'll only remove 2015. Won't make any excuses about 2021 as Nadal should've numbed his foot as he did in 2008 Wimbledon. In fact, I'll give Nole credit for NEVER skipping clay seasons and events as Fed did both in 2017 and 2018. The 2020 Nadal won RG without dropping a set and was a three-time defending champion. Nadal was 26-0 in 2021 when he reached the FO SF and if wasn't for a tricky bounce and drop-shot during a set point he still could've won that match.
6-The fact remains that Nole was a "green" 19-year-old player who defeated higher ranked players. He made it to the QF in 2006 and if Nadal wasn't on his side of the draw he gets a serve-bot in the SF.
7- So what? Fed is 2-14 vs Nadal in Clay while Nole is 8-20 this is called "common mathematics" that Nole was more effective against Nadal in clay and did register two Bo5 wins against Nadal. As far as the 2009 Madrid win which Fed fans go Ape **** the match was played in high altitude and regarded as the weakest M1000 clay tournament for Nadal. Moreover, it didn't hurt Fed that Nadal had to play Nole for over 4 hours in the previous match which included Nole blowing match points.

1. prime Nadal was from 2005-13 on clay. Ergo contender fed faced prime Nadal 5 times and contender djoko faced him 3 times. But since you are chosing to ignore that, that's your problem.

2. you actually missed mentioning Djokovic losing to Wawa in RG 15 while mentioning ~34 year old fed doing the same and now try to divert? Have some shame.
As far as Wilander goes, yes, AO was not the 4th best tournament in those years. The YEC was. That's a fact. Sorry that I exposed your ignorance and your narrow understanding of tennis based on 2010s doesn't work for the 80s.

3. lol, what? djoko had won AO in 08, faced off vs Nadal thrice in CC season 09 and lost to Kohly - much worse than losing to Kuerten. djoko also lost to melzer in RG 10. much worse than losing to Kuerten.
Fed wasn't a GS champion at the time of RG 03 in case that has to be specified. :rolleyes:

4. talk is about RG

5. lol, what? prime Nadal on clay is from 2005-13. maybe you could argue RG 14 to be prime Nadal. its a joke to think Nadal in RG 20 or 21 or 22 or 15 is prime Nadal on clay

6. Djoko would have lost to Mathieu or even Hewitt in RG 06 if nadal wasn't there. not Ljubicic. Mathieu and Nadal were involved in a big battle for 4+ hours. Hewitt also took a set off Nadal. But then you'd actually have to follow tennis/know about it than just picking stuff off atpworldtour.com or wiki.

7. Djoko was 3-10 vs prime Nadal on clay from 08-13
fed was 2-12 vs prime Nadal from on clay 05-11.

Djoko was little more effective vs prime Nadal. that's about it.
the other 5 wins of Djoko are vs past prime Nadal.
 
Top