torpantennis
Legend
This thread was about Fed/Nadal stats. Let's not derail a good objective thread. Simply exclude all Fedalovic matches, that will mostly exclude the level of competition away from the stats...
Federer/Nadal improvement and decline: ATP Matchfacts
- Thread starter NatF
- Start date
This thread was about Fed/Nadal stats. Let's not derail a good objective thread. Simply exclude all Fedalovic matches, that will mostly exclude the level of competition away from the stats...
What's about man kicked his *** in RG, something Djokovic could not do?
but I agree Djokovic is tougher for Nadal since his backhand abuse and grinding strategy not works efficiently against Djokovic like it works against Federer.
I always said Djokovic has all tools to beat Nadal at RG irrespective of Nadal's form since nobody neutralises Nadal like Djokovic does but you know he lacks mental toughness.
Little less choking and self destruction after umpires bad call back in 2013 would have opened doors for tier 1.
Last edited:
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
What does this even mean??
10monosods.
kandamrgam
Hall of Fame
On your signature, I don't think McEnroe has actually said Nadal is the GOAT
This article seems to suggest McEnroe recently called Federer the GOAT, although I can't see a quote;
http://www.**************.org/John-McEnroe-Roger-Federer-the-GOAT-Tennis-isnt-the-Same-Without-Rafael-Nadal-articolo21289.html
And I didnt say that either. I meant "who puts Nadal greater or goat". Greater is with respect to Federer of course. McEnroe alluded Nadal is potentially greater than Federer. I know what he meant. He was more pointing to. Also I had read that article, the guy is quite fickle. He just means probably everybody has a case.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
I must've missed the four occasions when he beat Nadal in Masters finals.
NatF
Bionic Poster
I don't pay much notice to these guys, they're trying to promote the sport. Just found it interesting that a level headed guy like you seemed to take it seriously
kandamrgam
Hall of Fame
I don't pay much notice to these guys, they're trying to promote the sport. Just found it interesting that a level headed guy like you seemed to take it seriously
I am not serious! I fully understand the intentions of guys like Wilander or McEnroe when they pick a favourite for goat. That's what I said there. Personally to me there is no goat. It nice to play this greatness card. Quite fun
Last edited:
NatF
Bionic Poster
I'm just having a little bit of banter with you
What do you think of these stats in terms of comparing different players? Would you assume a 115 = a 115?
Interestingly Murray's best numbers were in 2009 and 2011, despite 12 and 13 being considered his best seasons.
He beat Nadal at RG, something Djokovic never managed you little troll!
torpantennis
Legend
No, declined Federer does not DOMINATE the rest of the tour. IMO the biggest decline in his game has indeed been in the way he wins the lesser players. He used to humiliate them, like using the first rounds of the slams as practice rounds to try things out, rather than as "serious" matches. That's how confident he was, back in the day.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
The discussion was about clay, not RG specifically. Peak Djokovic > peak Soderling. Who's the troll now?
NatF
Bionic Poster
The discussion was about clay, not RG specifically. Peak Djokovic > peak Soderling. Who's the troll now?
I think peak Soderling on clay might be better than Djokovic.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
:shock::shock::shock: Rome 2011 says hi mate. :wink:
NatF
Bionic Poster
Doing it in a slam counts more, Soderling demolished Federer and Nadal at the FO in 2009 and 2010.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
But like I said, we were talking about clay in general, not just RG specifically. :wink:
The discussion was about clay, not RG specifically. Peak Djokovic > peak Soderling. Who's the troll now?
How can you prove this?
Sod. managed to take 3 sets from peak Nadal.
Could so called peak Djokovic manage this against post prime Fed? :lol:
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
What is your definition of peak performance? Are you trying to say that Soderling is a better clay court player than Djokovic?
Low quality trolling again.
Same Djokovic failed to beat post prime Old Federer at RG while Sod demolished Federer year before.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Soderling displayed a level those days that is easily as high as Novak's Rome 2011 final level.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
No he's not saying Sod is overall a greater clay player than Novak.
He's saying Sod's highest level on clay (particularly at RG) is higher than Novak's. He uses the fact that Sod beat both Nadal and Federer at RG whilst Djokovic hasn't managed to do so despite having more bites at the cherry to back up his argument.
Imv. peak Sod. > peak Djokovic on clay.
He still Only one man managed to take 3 sets against Nadal at RG over 10 years.
Achievements wise they belongs to same tier with 0 FO titles, 2 Finals with Djokovic has edge with Masters title as you said earlier.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Federer wasn't playing like he was post prime in that match, in fact it was arguably his best ever clay court performance You really seem to have some weird grudge against me for some reason. :shock:
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Djokovic is the more accomplished player on clay overall.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Agree to disagree on that one mate.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Yes he is, but that's not what the discussion was about. It was about peak level of play. Peak means absolute best level of play and Soderling delivered higher level performances than Novak at RG.
NatF
Bionic Poster
That's largely irrelevant to the current discussion though.
Fair enough that you disagree. But I personally think Soderling in the form he was in would of beaten Rafa even more badly at Rome in 2011.
No, I'm just saying his peak level was higher or equal to Djokovic's at least.. Is that hard to grasp?
Achievements which are results of sustained level and peak level of play are completely different things.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Do you only care about finals? What about the 4 semi-finals that Novak reached, one of which was the real final anyway? And 5 Masters 1000 > 0 Masters 1000.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
If only Novak had beaten Fed at RG 2011. Then people would say that Djokovic's peak level was definitely better than Soderling's at RG. If only...........
Federer played his best because he beat Djokovic on clay, give me a break.
I have seen some Murray fans claiming Federer's 2012 Wimbledon performance was his best. This talk belongs to same category of excuse making.
How illogical is it to believe Federer played his best matches on clay and grass at 30-31 just because he beat overrated players from this era?
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
I've seen lots of people say that was possibly Fed's best ever clay performance so it's not just me. Have a beer, take a pill and chill out.
NatF
Bionic Poster
They'd just claim Fed was old...:lol:
The fact is he didn't and Soderling's had the more impressive performances at the FO. You just got to deal with it man
I can't feed your insecurity more.
Read my post carefully, I said they belongs to same tier with 0 majors on clay but slight edge to Djokovic for his masters.
Never saw bigger insecure clown than you before, even worse than Chico.
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
He's a typical big hitter who can get hot occasionally and destroy his opponents, but can't sustain that level of play long enough to win titles. These few big matches provide too small of a sample size to gauge their "peak" level of play.
Soderling is who he is. Beating Nadal at RG will probably be the biggest achievement of his career. He's got a total of 2 wins against Federer and Nadal on clay in 10 tries. He's got 2 clay titles, both of them ATP 250. You cannot look at these achievements and claim he's a better clay courter than Ferrer, let alone Djokovic. Enough of the "peak" nonsense. Many players can look godly for a match or two; it doesn't really mean much in the grand scheme of things.
Last edited:
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
2 finals + 4 SFs + 5 Masters >>> 2 finals + 0 semi-finals + 0 Masters.
Only one clown around here I'm afraid and it ain't me baby boy.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
They'd just claim Fed was old...:lol:
The fact is he didn't and Soderling's had the more impressive performances at the FO. You just got to deal with it man
I can deal with it mate. What I can also deal with far better is the fact that Nole's record at RG is better than Soderling's. You'd better believe I'm getting my eight hours every night! :wink:
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
NatF
Bionic Poster
No one is suggesting that Soderling is a better clay court player with a better overall record at the FO. But his runs to the final were more impressive. That is all.
I'd have to agree, 1 or 2 matches cannot determine your "peak" level. And if it can, then peak is pretty worthless, because I'm pretty sure all of the top players could reach that level for one match. You have to be able to sustain it. Why doesn't anyone talk about "peak" Tsonga at the AO? You see the 2008 sf? Ridiculous, though I doubt many would argue that his "peak" level at the AO is very high based on that one match. It's called red-lining.
kandamrgam
Hall of Fame
Number of RG finals Soderling played = 2
Number of RG finals Djokovic played = 2
Players Soderling beat to make it to RG finals = peak Nadal, prime Federer
Players Djokovic beat to make it to RG finals = past his prime Federer
Number of RG finals Djokovic played = 2
Players Soderling beat to make it to RG finals = peak Nadal, prime Federer
Players Djokovic beat to make it to RG finals = past his prime Federer
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
Number of RG finals Soderling played = 2
Number of RG finals Djokovic played = 2
Players Soderling beat to make it to RG finals = peak Nadal, prime Federer
Players Djokovic beat to make it to RG finals = past his prime Federer
Yes, because those RG finals were all their careers on clay consist of. Nothing else exists to assess their clay performance. Only these four tournaments.
kandamrgam
Hall of Fame
I'm just having a little bit of banter with you
What do you think of these stats in terms of comparing different players? Would you assume a 115 = a 115?
Interestingly Murray's best numbers were in 2009 and 2011, despite 12 and 13 being considered his best seasons.
Aah, if they came against the same opposition, I would say yes emphatically. After all maximizing hold% and break% is winning all about.
kandamrgam
Hall of Fame
NatF
Bionic Poster
Did you once say you thought win/loss record is the best way to judge level of play?
kandamrgam
Hall of Fame
Oh I did. Not the best way. But the easiest and most reasonable way. Again competition matters. Also both of them tell similar story, no? Dont know which is a better metric. Can't we use both?
Last edited:
Similar threads
