You are being harsh on Nadal here but I agree that winning on clay has helped him gain the mental edge.I mean, he was living rent free in Fed's head after the Hamburg-RG duet in 2008 or in Djokovic's head after that RG SF in 2013Simple anwer is that Clay is very pivotal to the Nadal's overall balance and sanity.
Even in his worst period of life he in the back of his mind knew that less than 12 months back I have a won a slam, I am still a force, this helped him a lot for 16 years with doubts never creeping in.
Even in the best years of Federer (05, 06, 07) and Djokovic (2011, 2014, 2019, 2020) Nadal took home the clay slam and that did wonders to his confidence.
Now imagine a scenario where a greater champ than Nadal exists on Clay or someone beats Nadal 2-3 times at his peak on clay ? This would ruin his rhythm outside clay too.
After losing 2009FO his confidence was not back until 2010FO win.
After losing 2015FO his confidence was not back until 2017FO win
After losing 2021FO now there are more doubts on him and it will take until the FO for him to win another slam if at all ...
So you see, he is truly Claydal a 1 trick pony, that 1 trick has helped him perform on some other stages as well. Without that trick he would be 2-3 tiers below, but then he is GOAT on clay and that helped him outside Clay to grab 7 slams, good enough!
Losing pet slam can dent your confidence bigtime, Nadal has never experienced a rival who could break him on clay consistently, Novak himself has not been a worthy rival, Fed was always "impotent" on clay vs Nadal, so thats just it, his clay dominance helped him win slams outside it, had there been an equal level clay courter to take slams from Nadal, he would has won maybe Agassi level slams in his career. I mean assume in an era with another 2 great clay courters with Nadal he takes home 7 french opens only, now how many wimbledons and USOs do you see him winning ?? 1-2 more ?? He would have ended up as a 8-9 slams winner if his Frenchs were 7 in total, those 13 FOs helped his confidence bigtime.
This is illogical. You know that if Nadal plays the clay season he is going to suceed unless he is in very poor form to begin with or he tanks a lot of matches. How do you suggest he should have been less focused on clay?What I meant is that he could have focused less on clay once he had the records and focus more on Wimbledon for example.I am not talking about skipping the clay season
People who grew up with nadal overestimate him as do those who grew up with McEnroe. In reality djokovic and Connors are bigger and stronger than nadal and McEnroeWhy is it so hard to believe that Nadal has a negative record against Top 10 in HC? Nadal's core, his meat and potatoes, is the clay season. That is where he expends most of his effort and has gotten most of his results. When he was young (up to about 7 or 8 years ago) he could still afford to spend more energy (when he wasn't injured) and could actually do great things (remember when he sweeped the 2013 summer HC season). He can't do that anymore, and it is unlikely he will ever do it.
To give some perspective, Federer's percentage on clay is only superior to Nadal on HC because he stopped really playing the clay season a few years back. If he hadn't it would probably be in the 40s.
In any case, the importance these percentages are given here is comical. Nadal still is Top 5 all time at the USO, and it looks like some people have yet to deal with it.
Nadal is more talented than Djokovic, because he suceeded at a younger age and didn't have to wait until Fed was washed out. I mean, Djokovic can't even do an overhead smash and his volley game is a joke compared ot Fed, for example. Djokovic was nowhere to be found when Fed was in his prime in Wimbledon.He is naturally less talented. You can try to be your best and Nadal has always tried that. It's not in his DNA to hit 20/30 aces on grass.
What does this have to do with my post? I wasn't talking about physical shape.People who grew up with nadal overestimate him as do those who grew up with McEnroe. In reality djokovic and Connors are bigger and stronger than nadal and McEnroe
Well, playing fewer tournaments once his body aged, just saying.This is illogical. You know that if Nadal plays the clay season he is going to suceed unless he is in very poor form to begin with or he tanks a lot of matches. How do you suggest he should have been less focused on clay?
This is illogical. You know that if Nadal plays the clay season he is going to suceed unless he is in very poor form to begin with or he tanks a lot of matches. How do you suggest he should have been less focused on clay?
Nadal is more talented than fed with your argument, djokovic had a better touch than nadal and he wins more than him on (fake) grass the (not more like once time) tecnhical surface.Nadal is more talented than Djokovic, because he suceeded at a younger age and didn't have to wait until Fed was washed out. I mean, Djokovic can't even do an overhead smash and his volley game is a joke compared ot Fed, for example. Djokovic was nowhere to be found when Fed was in his prime in Wimbledon.
So you are saying that Fed should have skipped more hardcourt tournaments to play more on clay, since that is the surface where he has achieved the least? And if not he is not talented enough? Or does your argument only work for Nadal? I remind you that Nadal has 7 slams outside of clay already, and is Top 5 at the USO, ahead of Djokovic himself.Well, playing fewer tournaments once his body aged, just saying.
I didn't say that. I said Nadal is more talented than Djokovic because Nadal achieved the Career Grand Slam under the same conditions (same generation) as Djokovic. Fed is from a different generation. Nadal succesfully challenged prime Fed on grass and on HC, but Djokovic really didn't. That's why Djokovic had to wait until Fed started exiting his prime to accumulate 95% of his slams. He just couldn't measure up to prime Fed.Nadal is more talented than fed with your argument, djokovic had a better touch than nadal and he wins more than him on (fake) grass the (not more like once time) tecnhical surface.
First, there is no point for Fed to have focused more on clay late in his career because he wasn't going yo beat Nadal there.If he couldn't do it in his prime, then much less late in his career.Second, I am not saying that Nadal's 7 slams outside of clay is not a great achievement, it's that you were saying in the first post I quoted you that Nadal has a negative record on hard courts vs top 10 because he has prioritized clay or something like it, that was the original argument.So you are saying that Fed should have skipped more hardcourt tournaments and play more on clay, since that is the surface where he has achieved the least? And if not he is not talented enough? Or does your argument only work for Nadal? I remind you that Nadal has 7 slams outside of clay already, and is Top 5 at the USO, ahead of Djokovic himself.
I am explaining the reason for Nadal to have a comparatively poor record against Top 10 on HC, and it is a reasonable argument. Nadal has had some incredible stretches on HC himself, and has some noteworthy achievements on the surface. But I am not surprised that has a negative record against the Top 10, because often his stores have been spent or severely diminished (in the form of energy or physical issues) during the clay season. Also, Nadal's clay game is not optimal for HC, his serve normally is not up to par (compared to Top 10 players), etc. What works for clay doesn't work elsewhere, so seeing Nadal still carry 7 titles outside clay is a huge success. Specially considering he beat Prime fed to win a couple of those, and Wimbledon 2008 is often cited as one of the best slam finals ever played.First, there is no point for Fed to have focused more on clay late in his career because he wasn't beating Nadal there.If he didn't back in his prime, then much less late in his career.Second, I am not saying that Nadal's 7 slams outside of clay is not a great achievement, it's that you were sayin the first post I quoted you that Nadal has a negative record on hard courts vs top 10 because he has prioritized clay or something like it, that was the original argument.
Ok, fair enoughI am explaining the reason for Nadal to have a comparatively poor record against Top 10 on HC, and it is a reasonable argument. Nadal has had some incredible stretches on HC himself, and has some noteworthy achievements on the surface. But I am not surprised that has a negative record against the Top 10, because often his stores have been spent or severely diminished (in the form of energy or physical issues) during the clay season. Also, Nadal's clay game is not optimal for HC, his serve normally is not up to par (compared to Top 10 players), etc. What works for clay doesn't work elsewhere, so seeing Nadal still carry 7 titles outside clay is a huge success. Specially considering he beat Prime fed to win a couple of those, and Wimbledon 2008 is often cited as one of the best slam finals ever played.
Out of the Big 3 yea since he was sandwiched between both guys. Fed had it nice from 2004-2007. Djokovic had it nice from 2015-present. Nadal was stuck with fed early on on grass while he was still learning the ropes off clay, then as soon as he hits his stride here comes Djokovic like a house of fire in 2011. Fed/Djokovic should have more slams than they currently do all things considered.
Of course, Nadal's constant foot/knee injuries didn't help either. That hurt him in 2009 right in the middle of his peak run
Djoko had a mental problem before the 2011. I think(and not only me) you are trying to defend nadal in every wayI didn't say that. I said Nadal is more talented than Djokovic because Nadal achieved the Career Grand Slam under the same conditions (same generation) as Djokovic. Fed is from a different generation. Nadal succesfully challenged prime Fed on grass and on HC, but Djokovic really didn't. That's why Djokovic had to wait until Fed started exiting his prime to accumulate 95% of his slams. He just couldn't measure up to prime Fed.
Djokovic net game is not bad at all. His overhead is laughable though. He goes to net much more than Nadal which is proven by so many stats. Would love to see who wins more percentage at net between Djokovic and Nadal. Surgical precision of Djokovic.Nadal is more talented than Djokovic, because he suceeded at a younger age and didn't have to wait until Fed was washed out. I mean, Djokovic can't even do an overhead smash and his volley game is a joke compared ot Fed, for example. Djokovic was nowhere to be found when Fed was in his prime in Wimbledon.
Strange argument, but could make senseDifference between 03-07 and 15-21 in rivals is
Fed's gen grew up with him facing same challenges and advantages, they were ahead of him and Fed had to bypass them.
Novak's next gen kids of the 90s did not grew up with him, when Thiem/Kyrgios/DImitrov/Medvedev arrived Novak was already a legend.
There is a big difference in having it easy, beating up your own age group is never easy but beating up unsettled kids who never won slams is easier.
Djokovic had a better drop shot tooDjokovic net game is not bad at all. His overhead is laughable though. He goes to net much more than Nadal which is proven by so many stats. Would love to see who wins more percentage at net between Djokovic and Nadal. Surgical precision of Djokovic.
Plus much better first and second serve.Djokovic had a better drop shot too
This is pretty indisputable I feel. Of course, physical maturity came sooner for Nadal than Djokovic, and the one year difference actually is a big deal in this case. But yes the ability to actually beat peak/prime Federer is something that is a feather in Nadal’s cap forever.I didn't say that. I said Nadal is more talented than Djokovic because Nadal achieved the Career Grand Slam under the same conditions (same generation) as Djokovic. Fed is from a different generation. Nadal succesfully challenged prime Fed on grass and on HC, but Djokovic really didn't. That's why Djokovic had to wait until Fed started exiting his prime to accumulate 95% of his slams. He just couldn't measure up to prime Fed.
No tennis historian in twenty or thirty years will say that nadal is at the level of djokovic and I love nadal more than him,but it's clear fed>djoko>nadalPlus much better first and second serve.
Nadal for me is a difficult to position but Djokovic for sure is ahead of Federer.No tennis historian in twenty or thirty years will say that nadal is at the level of djokovic and I love nadal more than him,but it's clear fed>djoko>nadal
Gianni clerici in a old post on republica exalted early 2008 djoko
Strange argument, but could make sense
Nadal for me is a difficult to position but Djokovic for sure is ahead of Federer.
Djokovic will have all the records. Very soon.A guy who loses to Moorey and Stan types at his peak is never ahead of Federer, so lets not get too carried away
Djokovic will have all the records. Very soon.
Except clay. That's different.
Totally disagree.Having all records won't make him better.
Federer is ahead and shall always be ahead.
Unless Novak become a bigger icon and mints more money as a bigger brand, he will remain behind.
We will see after 2 years what kind of gap Nole creates. Life is great if you are a Nolefam. Join us
I feel there are a few different issues going on. The first one is that what makes Nadal's game be so devastating on clay becomes less of an issue to opponents on other surfaces where a flatter, more precise shot is prefered. His serve and his receiving stance also becomes an issue on other surfaces, specially low bounce. His strokes (specially the FH) take longer to set up and longer to recover from. I feel that when he was really young Nadal could make up for these issues (as he did in WB08) because of his sheer athleticism and speed, but it is not until 2010 that he made some changes that allowed him to take the USO (the infamous serve that was really clicking in that tournament). I think it is by 2013 that Nadal truly perfected his HC game. He became much more aggressive, advanced his receiving position, etc. His results in the summer of 2013 confirm that. Honestly, after that I think Nadal has been going downwards outside clay except for specific tournaments, and his surprising results at the USO are simply thanks to the garbage competition.This is pretty indisputable I feel. Of course, physical maturity came sooner for Nadal than Djokovic, and the one year difference actually is a big deal in this case. But yes the ability to actually beat peak/prime Federer is something that is a feather in Nadal’s cap forever.
The bizarre part is why he was unable to sustain the AO/Wimby form he showed in those days into his mid 20s, losing to many non-Big 3 players, and why he couldn’t make any inroads at the USO until 2010. But yes in terms of being a prodigious talent Nadal has them all beat. I don’t like when he’s called just an athlete.
Djokovic's net game is not of the same caliber as Fed. I also think Nadal has a better percentage, but in general he attacks the net less, except in specific cases. For example, in the Wimbledon 2018 Semifinal, Nadal attacked the net more and had a better percentage than Djokovic. I feel Nadal was the better player in that match also, even if he lost.Djokovic net game is not bad at all. His overhead is laughable though. He goes to net much more than Nadal which is proven by so many stats. Would love to see who wins more percentage at net between Djokovic and Nadal. Surgical precision of Djokovic.
Djokovic had a mental problem, in which way?Djoko had a mental problem before the 2011. I think(and not only me) you are trying to defend nadal in every way
What a cheat you are. there are 10s of threads here that have shown Djokovic attacks more net, has more winners. liar with an agenda.Djokovic's net game is not of the same caliber as Fed. I also think Nadal has a better percentage, but in general he attacks the net less, except in specific cases. For example, in the Wimbledon 2018 Semifinal, Nadal attacked the net more and had a better percentage than Djokovic. I feel Nadal was the better player in that match also, even if he lost.
Regarding Djokovic's surgical precision, certainly not with his overhead or dropshots, which he tends to abuse.
Djokovic will have all the records. Very soon.
Except clay. That's different.
Calm down, Srjdan. I said that in general Djokovic attacks the net more, but I don't think he has a better conversion percentage. Are there reliable cummulative statistics on this? What I told you about the Wimbledon 2018 SF is true, however. Nadal attacked the net more and had a better conversion ratio.What a cheat you are. there are 10s of threads here that have shown Djokovic attacks more net, has more winners. liar with an agenda.
Before the 2008 had a mental problem against Fed and feeding problemDjokovic had a mental problem, in which way?
And like I said, as butthurt as some people are over it, that's NOT a bad thing the mission to devalue clay on here bc neither Federer or Djokovic have done anything as impressive on their surfaces is weak af "but clay".... Yeah he fn MASSACRED on it, please remind us more despite the fact that Federer and Djokovic have 3x the chance to win more slams since they are better on HC and grass, and they STILL have 20 slams like Rafa isn't as cute as you'd like to think bestie.
You are always so positive man
You are always so positive man
bwwwaaaNadal also has the most losses to journeymen and nobodies compared to Djokovic and Federer.
It's hilarious see how the fedal are objective. They fell in love for the tennis in the 2000s and they are still in the 2000s. If someone try to compare nadal with borg o Connors they talk about slam record, if someone try to compare him with djoko he wasn't in his prime despite he reached 5 slam in a row. Obviously agassi in his mummy form was nearly at his peak why forced fed to a difficult victory(and in his prime lost against Sampras)
bwwwaaa
djoko, the modern day Lendl: the champ nobody really cares about
Nadal did benefit post prime more than Federer though with 6 slams since 2017 or so . He was also absent in some periods of his prime as well.Of course he does, both Federer and Djokovic enjoyed stretches where there qas no ATG to compete with them at their peaks... Nadal never had that luxury barring 2010 when he swept 3 slams