Fun take: 2007 Nadal was better than 2011 Nadal on all surfaces when healthy

Which of these seasonal showings of The Nadal was better on which surface when not rusty or injured?

  • 11 on clay, 11 on grass, 07 on hard

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 11 on clay, 07 on grass, 07 on hard

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    55
  • Poll closed .

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Of course 3 straight titles, 8 straight finals and 11 straight instances of losing to the eventual winner are better than 3 non-straight titles and 8 non-straight finals, plus Djokovic's best lost final is worse than Lendl's best and second best lost finals so that seals it. You're just enamoured with his BOATness so can't see.
I do believe Djokovic is the BOAT but that's beside the point. No secret there since it's in writing but your thread was trolling. 3 titles and 8 finals = 3 titles and 8 finals no matter how you cut it, especially when Djokovic made at least the SF for 11 straight years and beat every former USO champion of his era, after they won the title, except Wawrinka. That's 6 champs by the way.
 
Neither guy peaked for a prolonged period unlike Fed, so I guess it's a bit more debatable which years they were actually peaking.
Well, Djokovic obviously wasn't peaking in 2012-14 except selected tournaments. His fault, he was in physical prime so could have peaked more often but didn't for some reason.
The thing is that when Djokovic wins 1 slam in a year (like in 2012-2014) we only hear what a terrible year he had, even if he won like 6-7 titles that year, including WTF and many masters. But if Nadal wins 3 titles in a year Djokovic fans call him peak Nadal.

And this guy I was replying to actually tried to prove that Nadal was at his prime during 2016 clay season. :-D:-D:-D:-D
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Funniest thing is that if one says Djokovic was at his peak in 2013 you will find an absolutely ridiculous reason to why he wasn't.
That was his peak that year but his level fluctuated more than years like 2011 and 2015 obviously and some would say even 2012.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Well maybe the Fed fans thought it was time they passed the bouton. Lol. There's plenty of blame to go around.
Man I wish guys who are otherwise reasonable like you would take off the rose tinted glasses when it comes to this stuff lol. Yes there are many trolly Fed fans but y'all need to stop pretending like Nadal fans haven't be saying crap for the last 10 years on here and likewise that Djokovic fans weren't giving it from both barrels in years like 2015.

I do agree there's blame to go around which is why it's funny to see you talking about agenda's with Nadal_Django in a non ironic way...
 
I do believe Djokovic is the BOAT but that's beside the point. No secret there since it's in writing but your thread was trolling. 3 titles and 8 finals = 3 titles and 8 finals no matter how you cut it, especially when Djokovic made at least the SF for 11 straight years and beat every former USO champion of his era, after they won the title, except Wawrinka. That's 6 champs by the way.
Consecutivity is important, mate. The problem is that all of Djokovic's four losses during 2011-16 felt on his racquet but he mugged them up, that's a sad look. With Lendl, he only choked badly in 1983 final, was ultimately bested by opponent quality in the rest (but facing Connors, peak Mac, Becker, Wilander, it's not surprising). Perhaps it's a bit paradoxical, but losing a competitive match when it seems you couldn't have played better that day feels much better to me than losing one I knew I had the skills to win but couldn't summon them in due time, and naturally I extrapolate that to my view of greatness.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
The thing is that when Djokovic wins 1 slam in a year (like in 2012-2014) we only hear what a terrible year he had, even if he won like 6-7 titles that year, including WTF and many masters. But if Nadal wins 3 titles in a year Djokovic fans call him peak Nadal.

And this guy I was replying to actually tried to prove that Nadal was at his prime during 2016 clay season. :-D:-D:-D:-D
Double standards? On an internet forum? Shock lol.

I wouldn't call either years peak really, like I wouldn't call 2009 for Federer peak. They were in the peak age range but their form was lacking so it's a bit of a grey area, as long as there's consistency I don't mind.
 
The thing is that when Djokovic wins 1 slam in a year (like in 2012-2014) we only hear what a terrible year he had, even if he won like 6-7 titles that year, including WTF and many masters. But if Nadal wins 3 titles in a year Djokovic fans call him peak Nadal.

And this guy I was replying to actually tried to prove that Nadal was at his prime during 2016 clay season. :-D:-D:-D:-D
With Nadal's injury woes, he never really peaked all year long except in 2013 (but even then you have to exclude AO and Wimbledon), but in shorter spurts. At the same time, the length of his peak and prime on clay is unprecedented, in line with its quality.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Consecutivity is important, mate. The problem is that all of Djokovic's four losses during 2011-16 felt on his racquet but he mugged them up, that's a sad look. With Lendl, he only choked badly in 1983 final, was ultimately bested by opponent quality in the rest (but facing Connors, peak Mac, Becker, Wilander, it's not surprising). Perhaps it's a bit paradoxical, but losing a competitive match when it seems you couldn't have played better that day feels much better to me than losing one I knew I had the skills to win but couldn't summon them in due time, and naturally I extrapolate that to my view of greatness.
Yeah it's a toughie, if you only look at the record then Djokovic's consistency is laudable but the manner of his losses makes calling him the 4th best at the USO quite iffy. Having said that I confess I haven't watched much of Lendl's run at the USO to compare it so I'll have to take your word for it as far as "quality" of losses go.
 

Sabrina

Semi-Pro
With Nadal's injury woes, he never really peaked all year long except in 2013 (but even then you have to exclude AO and Wimbledon), but in shorter spurts. At the same time, the length of his peak and prime on clay is unprecedented, in line with its quality.
I always maintain that 2008 Monte Carlo - 2009 Rome was absolute peak Nadal. Not in a calendar year of course but still.
 
Last edited:
Yeah it's a toughie, if you only look at the record then Djokovic's consistency is laudable but the manner of his losses makes calling him the 4th best at the USO quite iffy. Having said that I confess I haven't watched much of Lendl's run at the USO to compare it so I'll have to take your word for it as far as "quality" of losses go.
It's not that they were all peak level but more than Lendl played as well as he could at that point, as opposed to annoying choked we've seen from Djokerer. A bit unclutch against Becker (won more points iirc), but quality brings it up and Becker had Lendl's number for a while, not surprising. 1988 Wilander final full of errors as they played more defensively but Mats was defending really well, if Lendl played at 1985-87 level I believe he would be able to hit through it but in 1988 he could not, still pushed it deep (could have easily lost in 4).
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Man I wish guys who are otherwise reasonable like you would take off the rose tinted glasses when it comes to this stuff lol. Yes there are many trolly Fed fans but y'all need to stop pretending like Nadal fans haven't be saying crap for the last 10 years on here and likewise that Djokovic fans weren't giving it from both barrels in years like 2015.

I do agree there's blame to go around which is why it's funny to see you talking about agenda's with Nadal_Django in a non ironic way...
The first line was a joke Nat and you know I don't put you in the group of fans like that. I've told you that many times. I thought it was obvious when I said there's plenty of blame to go around. Django replied to me and I replied back, and sorry but he kind of had a point.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Consecutivity is important, mate. The problem is that all of Djokovic's four losses during 2011-16 felt on his racquet but he mugged them up, that's a sad look. With Lendl, he only choked badly in 1983 final, was ultimately bested by opponent quality in the rest (but facing Connors, peak Mac, Becker, Wilander, it's not surprising). Perhaps it's a bit paradoxical, but losing a competitive match when it seems you couldn't have played better that day feels much better to me than losing one I knew I had the skills to win but couldn't summon them in due time, and naturally I extrapolate that to my view of greatness.
They are virtually equal at the USO, especially based on the competition they faced and beat, and Lendl winning 3 straight is not enough to separate him from the guy who matches him in titles and finals, especially when that player beat so many great players and USO champs, and made at least the SF for over a decade. Djokovic beat Federer, Nadal, Murray, Del Potro, Roddick and Cilic at the USO after they all had won at least one title and beat Wawrinka twice before he won 1. To imply he is not on Lendl's level does not add up.
 
I always maintain that 2008 Monte Carlo - 2009 Rome was absolutely peak Nadal. Not in a calendar year of course but still.
Peak when not injured or tired, and I'm not being sarcastic. Had Nadal not worn himself out by the USO and hurt his knee once again in late fall (Paris), a full yearly period of consistent dominance would be on the cards. Funny though that during that period he lost two BO3 matches in a clearly unclutch manner, something not associated with Nadal. (In honesty, it's clear Nadal saved his best clutchness for BO5 (BO3 on clay only), served him very well not to spend mental effort on everything like Djokovic in his prime.)
 

ReeceSachs

Hall of Fame
I'll take the polar opposite choice. 2011 Nadal didn't lose a match to anyone other than the peak version of Djokovic (which is understandable given how insanely good Djoker was in 2011). Meanwhile 07 Nadal got crushed by Federer (got bageled too).
2007 Nadal would get crushed on HC, no questions. He never got close to anything like making the USO final in 2011.
On grass both versions lost early in Queen's and made the Wimbledon final. This one is pretty much dead even as Nadal gave a bigger fight in 07 final (although Federer wasn't quite as scary in 07 final as he was in 06 or as Djokovic was in 11), but had more.difficulty in the early rounds. I'd give this a perfect 50/50, which means 2011 Nadal absolutely could win a Wimby final vs his 2007 self.
Djokovic wasn’t at his 2014/15/18 form in the 2011 final IMO. He got breasticked in set 3 and was only decent in set 4. It was only in set1/ 2 which Djokovic was close to his best form even more so the crushing 2nd set.
Federer was better in the Wimbledon 2007 final quite a margin.
 
They are virtually equal at the USO, especially based on the competition they faced and beat, and Lendl winning 3 straight is not enough to separate him from the guy who matches him in titles and finals, especially when that player beat so many great players and USO champs, and made at least the SF for over a decade. Djokovic beat Federer, Nadal, Murray, Del Potro, Roddick and Cilic at the USO after they all had won at least one title and beat Wawrinka twice before he won 1. To imply he is not on Lendl's level does not add up.
Djokovic should have been above Lendl - possible USO GOAT really - if not for chokeitis. Him being Lendl's equal puts him below for that reason. I already said how I feel about doing your best vs wasting chances.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
The first line was a joke Nat and you know I don't put you in the group of fans like that. I've told you that many times. I thought it was obvious when I said there's plenty of blame to go around. Django replied to me and I replied back, and sorry but he kind of had a point.
I don't know what's a Djoke anymore.

Ok fair enough man, the forum is making me a bit jaded these days aha.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Djokovic should have been above Lendl - possible USO GOAT really - if not for chokeitis. Him being Lendl's equal puts him below for that reason. I already said how I feel about doing your best vs wasting chances.
When did he choke? He came from match point down twice to beat Federer in 5 sets, beat Wawrinka in 5 sets before succumbing to Nadal, beat Federer in front of a hostile crowd and lost a tough one to Murray in tough conditions. The only choke you could say was 2007, his first final. Hard to call 2013 a choke when he lost in 4 sets instead of saying his level wasn't high enough against a great Nadal or 2012 in those windy conditions which is when he struggles. 2016 he wasn't 100% and was the beginning of injury woes and downfall. His record at the USO surpasses both Lendl and Nadal if you want to technical so I have no idea how you are reaching these conclusions.
 
When did he choke? He came from match point twice to beat Federer in 5 sets, beat Wawrinka in 5 sets before succumbing to Nadal, beat Federer in front of a hostile crowd and lost a tough one to Murray in tough conditions. The only choke you could say was 2007, his first final. Hard to call 2013 a choke when he lost in 4 sets instead of saying his level wasn't high enough against a great Nadal or 2012 in those windy conditions which is when he struggles. 2016 he wasn't 100% and was the beginning of injury woes and downfall. His record at the USO surpasses both Lendl and Nadal if you want to technical so I have no idea how you are reaching these conclusions.
Chokerer outchoked Chokeovic, doesn't render Djo champion of clutchness.

2012 - errors in TB - yeah wind so mury has wind too, you're a better player so do better than him. Surely Djoe would win if he took the first set.

2013 - loss acceptable but manner sucks, disgusting errorfest in 1st and 4th sets. Worse even than declined bones in 2012 AO SF with Nads.

2014 - lost to tiredikori with DR>1, nuff said. Sillyc is a pigeon, no matter how well he played all Djokovic would need is to put some pressure and see Marin crumble beautifully.

2016 - yeah level not great but neither was Stan, heck he cried before the match from all the nerves, if Novak kept his headspace cool it could have been a straight-set win before toenails reared their ugly... uh, sharp edges.
 

ReeceSachs

Hall of Fame
Rafa hit crosscourt too much in 2011, as he'd lost confidence, and only his physicality allowed him to have a decent year.
When Rafa is at his peak he's hitting forehand-down-the-line winners, and 2011 was too crosscourt and too reliant on court coverage.
2011 US Open Final was an example of Rafa putting his body through hell because he couldn't make himself go down-the-line, whereas in 2010 and 2013 US Open Finals Rafa completely took the racquet out of Djokovic's hands :)
Djokovic destroyed Nadal on his BH which is mostly so solid and he punished his slower positioning on the FH side. Nadal used the FH DTL to such effect in 12-13 which is partly why he figured out how to beat Novak again.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Chokerer outchoked Chokeovic, doesn't render Djo champion of clutchness.

2012 - errors in TB - yeah wind so mury has wind too, you're a better player so do better than him. Surely Djoe would win if he took the first set.

2013 - loss acceptable but manner sucks, disgusting errorfest in 1st and 4th sets. Worse even than declined bones in 2012 AO SF with Nads.

2014 - lost to tiredikori with DR>1, nuff said. Sillyc is a pigeon, no matter how well he played all Djokovic would need is to put some pressure and see Marin crumble beautifully.

2016 - yeah level not great but neither was Stan, heck he cried before the match from all the nerves, if Novak kept his headspace cool it could have been a straight-set win before toenails reared their ugly... uh, sharp edges.
Djokovic is a champion of cluthness which you seem to be fighting with tooth and nail it seems. If you don't believe me, he's twice come from match point down to win a Slam, is one of the best in deciding sets and is one of the best in tiebreaks. He's ranked #1 by the ATP in the OE in pressure situations. Why are you even arguing about this?

Was 2019 RG SF a choke also under similar circumstances? No he got outplayed in condtions where he struggles, same as 2012. A little credit to Murray wouldn't hurt who actually played a good match considering.

Still playing bad is not a choke.

Lost in 96 Farenheit temperatures and high humidity, another condition that he hates. Again the opponent dealt with it better than he did but that does not make it a choke.

Again he wasn't at his best physically and was getting medical timeouts the whole tournament, and wouldn't have even made the final even if it wasn't for his entire draw falling apart. Not a choke. Choking is losing from a winning position when the match is on your racket. None of these matches qualify.
 
Last edited:
Again he wasn't at his best physically and was getting medical timeouts the whole tournament, and wouldn't have even made the final even if it wasn't for his entire draw falling apart. Not a choke. Choking is losing from a winning position when the match is on your racket. None of these matches qualify.
I would rather strike the "from the winning position" bit. Maybe we need a different word for that, anyway not playing the required level to win when you're capable is a sign of some weakness. Sure I believe all of those matches were on Djokovic's racquet so he shouldn't have lost them so it looks poor that he did. Of course Federer has even more matches like that, he is the absolute champ of losing when he could've won.
 

Incognito

Legend
That was his peak that year but his level fluctuated more than years like 2011 and 2015 obviously and some would say even 2012.
Why? Because he lost more? Not because Nadal was playing or that Murray is actually the better on grass when both are playing well?
 

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
From RG 2010 to RG 2012 Nadal wins 8 slams out of 9 without Djokovic.
HC: Without Djokovic in 2011 Nadal won around 59% of games in. In 2013 almost 62%. In 2007 a bit under 56% of games.

The real story is that all of the Big 3 have been continuously evolving their games, and most of it has been about how to beat the other 2. That has caused the jockeying of position re #1, #2, #3. It's still going on right now. The moment one of them falls behind, all efforts go into getting the advantage back as much as possible in H2Hs. The guy who is #1 is a bit more passive about changing. Nadal is #2 right now in dominance, in spite of ranking, and he's working to change that right now. Stay tuned. A lot of answers will come early in 2020.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
Well maybe the Fed fans thought it was time they passed the bouton. Lol. There's plenty of blame to go around.
Some of the worst posters are Djokovic fans.

RF-18, Lew II, Nadal_Django, ABCD, CYGS, zvelf and many more.
 
Clay:

2007 Nadal: super dominant, routined everyone but the toughest opponents. Dominated MC and Barcelona, bested supercharged Davydenko in epic Rome SF, one loss in Hamburg final when he was fairly tired and Federer was zoning like mad, but responded with a brilliant RG capped off with a massively clutch performance against peak Federer in the final.

2011 Nadal: dropped a 2-6 set to Murray in MC (Rafa's best haven in BO3, wot ze hell?), dropped TB sets to Lorenzi in Rome and two to Isner at RG, struggled with past-prime Fedr more than with peak one in 07, oh and of course he lost twice to Djokovic but that's not even the main problem as I showed.

Grass:

2007 Nadal: struggled early on but found peak form in 4R/QF and gave still near-peak Fedr a great scare in the final, could've won if a few points went his way.

2011 Nadal: struggled less en route but completely fudged it up mentally in the final, 1/6 BP saved with a breadstick lolwot is this. Novak was good but with his dropping sets to Baghdatis and Tomic he certainly wasn't on the level of 07 Grasserer.

Hard:
aha, this one is the closest obviously but even there 07dal's superiority shines through:

2007 Nadal:

beat a solid Murray at AO then lost to supercharged Gonzo (same shyt happened in 08 vs Tsonga, it is ok), put up a masterful peak display in IW (didn't drop a set, broken only 3 times in 6 matches, umbilleevel), was strong in Miami and Canada losing to eventual champ Djokovic.

Was sick in Cincy (retired) and had his usual knee thing at the USO, outlasted by Ferrer, so those are excused. Back to strong for his standards (considering indoor weakness) in Madrid and Paris - got destroyed by eventual champ Nalbandian both times, but at least he made it that far.

Made YEC SF, lost to goating Fedr (could've played better but Fed was in unbreakable bot mode anyway, 80% 1st serve you kidding me)

2011 Nadal:

pulled hamstring, lost easily to Ferrer at the AO. Had the draw of gods at IW (no top 80 players xD) and started well vs Djo but then forgot how to hit 1st serve (ridiculous for someone serving as safely as nads) and got pwned badly - worse than 07. Played extremely well in Miami losing serve just once before F, gave his all vs BOATOV1C losing in 3rd set TB - better than 07. So far so good when healthy.

But then disgustery erupts: epic choke to Dodig (huh?) in Canada, destroyed himself in self-imposed epic vs Verdaco in Cincy and lost easily to Fish, made USO final looking ok but got pwned badly and had to engage 9000% mode to sneak a set, destroyed in Tokyo final by Murray (last two sets), botty loss to Mayer in Shanghai, destroyed by Fedr in YEC RR (lost RR 1-2 record).

Basically 11 Nadal only looks better cause of the USO, but it wasn't great given the pwnage (and that selfsame PEAKOV1C just barely escaped old bones in SF). Other than that, he sux'd pretty sad for his standards post-Wimbledon despite playing healthy, whereas 2007 Nadal maintained composure throughout the entire season except Cincy-USO when he was traditionally injured so it doesn't count.
Op is nonsensical: Bull was injured throughout 2007 and 2011 (and every other year), so we can’t know what heights of brilliance he would have hit if uninjured. But we know he’d have whitewashed the “opposition.”
 

Mike Sams

Legend
LOL! Typical Nadal fanatics trying to make excuses as always when he started getting pummeled routinely by The Djok in 2011!
You could bring any Nadal into 2011. Wouldn't have mattered. Djokovic would've eaten his lunch. He was too good for Nadal that year. And many other years after that.
 

Mike Sams

Legend
He was prime, but not peak. Credit to Djokovic for being in great form all year, but no matter the reason, a fact remains a fact-Nadal never played close to his peak level in 2011, at least after Miami.

It's just like Federer in 2008-he was at his prime, but not peak level.
LOL!!!!
 

Mike Sams

Legend
Rafa hit crosscourt too much in 2011, as he'd lost confidence, and only his physicality allowed him to have a decent year.
When Rafa is at his peak he's hitting forehand-down-the-line winners, and 2011 was too crosscourt and too reliant on court coverage.
2011 US Open Final was an example of Rafa putting his body through hell because he couldn't make himself go down-the-line, whereas in 2010 and 2013 US Open Finals Rafa completely took the racquet out of Djokovic's hands :)
Djokovic made Nadal into his subservient girlfriend at AO2019 when Nadal was playing god-level tennis throughout the tournament. LOL
 
HC: Without Djokovic in 2011 Nadal won around 59% of games in. In 2013 almost 62%. In 2007 a bit under 56% of games.

The real story is that all of the Big 3 have been continuously evolving their games, and most of it has been about how to beat the other 2. That has caused the jockeying of position re #1, #2, #3. It's still going on right now. The moment one of them falls behind, all efforts go into getting the advantage back as much as possible in H2Hs. The guy who is #1 is a bit more passive about changing. Nadal is #2 right now in dominance, in spite of ranking, and he's working to change that right now. Stay tuned. A lot of answers will come early in 2020.
Looks like we've stumbled upon an example of paradoxical game % stats that favour losing early (because if we remove USO, 2011 would still have better game % even though 2007 Nadal had firmly better HC results excluding the USO). I see it has to do with IW-Miami setting a great standard of dominance, so playing more rounds in later HC masters affected the % worse by sheer weight/number of less dominant matches. By the way, Nadal won 118/184=64,1% of games in AO 19, compare for example Djokovic's 153/249=61,4% in AO 13 - so who played better?
 

titoelcolombiano

Hall of Fame
I see what you did there....

You can try and claim competition for Fed in 2007... maybe, not really though - but there's also 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006.
 

Mike Sams

Legend
More like you are being delusional.
Nope. You people are just an odd bunch. Taking fandom to the weirdest levels. No idea about sportsmanship and no respect for the sport and zero respect for other players on the tour. Nadal fans are just weirdos all across. Not that Federer fans aren't bad as well but Nadal fans have gotten even worse lately over the past few weeks since the USO. Fanatics bumping up threads from 2011 to claim "I told you so" and all sorts of stupid sh*t.
According to the whacky Nad fans on here, Nadal would be 54-0 against Djokovic if he had been "peak" for all their meetings. LOL Effing whackos.
 

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
Nope. You people are just an odd bunch. Taking fandom to the weirdest levels. No idea about sportsmanship and no respect for the sport and zero respect for other players on the tour. Nadal fans are just weirdos all across. Not that Federer fans aren't bad as well but Nadal fans have gotten even worse lately over the past few weeks since the USO. Fanatics bumping up threads from 2011 to claim "I told you so" and all sorts of stupid sh*t.
According to the whacky Nad fans on here, Nadal would be 54-0 against Djokovic if he had been "peak" for all their meetings. LOL Effing whackos.
The weirdest of the weird howl at the moon right after their heroes win a major. The only thing that changes is that the most obnoxious guys in each fan group become super vocal when their guy wins. ;)
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
Nope. You people are just an odd bunch. Taking fandom to the weirdest levels. No idea about sportsmanship and no respect for the sport and zero respect for other players on the tour. Nadal fans are just weirdos all across. Not that Federer fans aren't bad as well but Nadal fans have gotten even worse lately over the past few weeks since the USO. Fanatics bumping up threads from 2011 to claim "I told you so" and all sorts of stupid sh*t.
According to the whacky Nad fans on here, Nadal would be 54-0 against Djokovic if he had been "peak" for all their meetings. LOL Effing whackos.
Don't label us all, good Mike :) he was enough for me with 2 slams lol
I agree that this overblown culture (from ALL fanbases) of putting other players down to try to build someone up is hilarious and circular in the fact that softening any of their abilities or acheivements, does the same to the other 2. At the end of the day they are far and away the 3 best players we will probably see in our lifetimes. None of them are invincible, each have succeeded in insane ways, and all have choked. We all need to chill until they retire, if Nadal is still surprising and it's almost 2020..... im certainly not crazy enough to count out the machine..... or the guy that was 1 point away from doing something unheard of just a few weeks ago.
 
Nope. You people are just an odd bunch. Taking fandom to the weirdest levels. No idea about sportsmanship and no respect for the sport and zero respect for other players on the tour. Nadal fans are just weirdos all across. Not that Federer fans aren't bad as well but Nadal fans have gotten even worse lately over the past few weeks since the USO. Fanatics bumping up threads from 2011 to claim "I told you so" and all sorts of stupid sh*t.
According to the whacky Nad fans on here, Nadal would be 54-0 against Djokovic if he had been "peak" for all their meetings. LOL Effing whackos.
To say Nadal played god level tennis in AO 2019 is a joke and you know it. But oh well, you are a person who never saw what is peak Nadal (in 2009 AO for example) and probably wasn't even born back then.
 

Ladron

New User
From RG 2010 to RG 2012 Nadal wins 8 slams out of 9 without Djokovic.
Djokovic wasn't relevant in 2010. Nadal won Wimbledon and beat Djokovic in the Us open 2010.

Djokovic then started winning slams against a Nadal that had reached the other side of the bell curve.
 
He was wayyy better on clay 05-08 than later even though he continues to have an amazing record on the surface. Stupidly dominant during that period.

Better on grass 07/08. I think he was better in the 07 final than 08, but Roger was better in 07.

Better all around on HC since 10. But peaked sporadically on HC so harder to assess. AO09 level was as high as any other HC level we’ve seen from him.

It’s an embarrassment for the tour that they still can’t beat these guys even though Federer hit his peak in 04, Nadal in 08, and Djokovic in 11.

Even when he had great seasons in 2010/13, his game was more consistent but never seemed to peak quite as high and in such electrifying fashion as during the RG07-AO09 period
 
Two very underrated matches between Nadal and Djokovic were Queens 08 and Madrid 09. Madrid 09 especially was some of the best tennis these guys have ever played against each other, kind of like Miami 11. Djokovic was prime but not peak in 09 but his ferocity and will to beat Nadal helped him generate a level close to his later peaks. The match effectively ended Nadal’s movement peak forever (movement to backhand side became a weakness thereafter), and set Djokovic back for more than a year (he said as much in an interview).

Only similar event I can recall between two players was RG17 between Murray and Stan which seems to have broken both players
 
Top