StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Murray in 2015 was not even close to a good in-form player. He was pathetic in all 3 sets he lost and at most average in the 2 sets he won. (Djokovic should have won this in straights, really)
If Novak wins FO, is he top 3 all-time on clay?
- Thread starter Nadalgaenger
- Start date
abmk
Bionic Poster
probably a tad higher, but still not enough IMO.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Did you even watch the match? I remember Murray missing the easiest overheads on big points at least 3 times in the first two sets. Was totally destroyed in the fifth.
The strong opponent in this tournament was Wawrinka in the final, and guess what? Djokovic lost to him.
If he were to win the FO, he would have
2 FO 5 Rome 2 Madrid 2 MC including 7 wins against the King of clay.....
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
I saw it and I think it was a fairly up and down match. Murray had some great moments, though, and I think he'd also have beaten Nadal (not that that counts for much, though). Just not enough to be rated alongside 2009 Delpo or 2011 Djoker.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Nadal wasn't the king of clay in 2014-2016. Stop this BS already.
Start da Game
Hall of Fame
he would require 3-4 french opens by today's metrics to be considered inside top 5.........i consider rafa the greatest ever on clay but not by the margin many people think........
Who was in 2014?
| Madrid Open Madrid, Spain ATP Tour Masters 1000 Clay, outdoor 05 – 11 May 2014 | |||||
| – | 1R | Bye | |||
| 818 | 2R | Juan Mónaco | 56 | Win | 6–1, 6–0 |
| 819 | 3R | Jarkko Nieminen | 57 | Win | 6–1, 6–4 |
| 820 | QF | Tomáš Berdych (6) | 6 | Win | 6–4, 6–2 |
| 821 | SF | Roberto Bautista Agut | 45 | Win | 6–4, 6–3 |
| 822 | W | Kei Nishikori (10) | 12 | Win (3) | 2–6, 6–4, 3–0 ret. |
| Italian Open Rome, Italy ATP Tour Masters 1000 Clay, outdoor 12 – 18 May 2014 | |||||
| – | 1R | Bye | |||
| 823 | 2R | Gilles Simon | 30 | Win | 7–6(7–1), 6–7(4–7), 6–2 |
| 824 | 3R | Mikhail Youzhny (14) | 16 | Win | 6–7(4–7), 6–2, 6–1 |
| 825 | QF | Andy Murray (7) | 8 | Win | 1–6, 6–3, 7–5 |
| 826 | SF | Grigor Dimitrov (12) | 14 | Win | 6–2, 6–2 |
| 827 | F | Novak Djokovic (2) | 2 | Loss (3) | 6–4, 3–6, 3–6 |
| French Open Paris, France Grand Slam tournament Clay, outdoor 25 May – 08 June 2014 | |||||
| 828 | 1R | Robby Ginepri (WC) | 279 | Win | 6–0, 6–3, 6–0 |
| 829 | 2R | Dominic Thiem | 57 | Win | 6–2, 6–2, 6–3 |
| 830 | 3R | Leonardo Mayer | 65 | Win | 6–2, 7–5, 6–2 |
| 831 | 4R | Dušan Lajović | 83 | Win | 6–1, 6–2, 6–1 |
| 832 | QF | David Ferrer (5) | 5 | Win | 4–6, 6–4, 6–0, 6–1 |
| 833 | SF | Andy Murray (7) | 8 | Win | 6–3, 6–2, 6–1 |
| 834 | W | Novak Djokovic (2) | 2 | Win (4) | 3–6, 7–5, 6–2, 6–4 |
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
What is this cherry picking? Where are the early exists in Monte Carlo and Barcelona? And he only won Madrid because Nishikori got injured. He was getting destroyed before that. Should have been a 6-2 6-2 match.
merlinpinpin
Hall of Fame
Ha, ha, ha!
Gotta love these April fool threads popping up months out of season.
Great job, OP!
Gotta love these April fool threads popping up months out of season.
Great job, OP!
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
No way.
Nadal, Borg, Lendl, Kuerten, Wilander all stand well above Novak Djokovic on clay.
Nadal, Borg, Lendl, Kuerten, Wilander all stand well above Novak Djokovic on clay.
weakera
Talk Tennis Guru
Fed's peak... famous mythological creature...
I'm really referencing 2011, when Djokovic achieved one of the highest levels in history, and the maestro KO'd him in 4 sets.
TripleATeam
G.O.A.T.
Obviously he'd be ahead of every other 2-RG winner. The question is if he'd be ahead of Wilander, Lendl, and Kuerten. I'd say yes, probably, but by no means guaranteed. That'd be 2 RG in the era of Nadal.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Lendl and Wilander actually. And they both defeated better players than Novak to win their FOs.I say there is a decent argument to be made that Novak will go down as third best clay court player of all time if he wins the FO.
He has dominated clay Masters events even if his dominance has been overshadowed by Rafa. If he weren't playing in Rafa's era, he'd probably have 4-5 FO and an absurd amount of clay titles.
His major competition for top 3 are Lendl and Vilas. On paper, those guys have sexier stats, but the key point is that they DID NOT HAVE TO DEAL WITH NADAL THEIR ENTIRE CAREERS!
I'd say that Djokovic is easily top 5 without the second FO and is top 3 on clay if he wins.
Win/Loss Index | ATP Tour | Tennis
In-depth data analysis of the performance of ATP World Tour players. Featuring year-to-date, 52-week, and career data for the top players in men's professional tennis.www.atptour.com
Sure, they didn't have Nadal to deal with, but did Djokovic have the ATGs they had? No. So I don't see how this should be the decisive factor.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Nadal's level on clay in 2014-2016 dropped significantly. And that's a fact. The only one who didn't get a piece of the pie in that period was Federer because he was so fckin old.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
If he wins both without beating Nadal, what difference does it make?
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
How was Nadal even relevant to his 2016 title? He was not a threat that year and he withdrew after the second round. Djokovic never even thought about him as a potential threat. I doubt Nadal will be relevant this year as well.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Hilarious post putting Federer (And Kuerten) ahead of Borg who even has more FO than the 5 you unjustly assign to Federer.
He's got 7 wins against Nadal on clay....
MC 2013 2015
Madrid 2011
Rome 2011 2014 2016
FO 2015
The Guru
Legend
Absolutely ridiculous to include 2014 with 15-16
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Who cares about winning percentage? Kuerten was a little inconsistent but he has three FO against very strong draws. 2004 Federer wasn’t baby Federer btw, completely ridiculous (putting aside for the moment that Kuerten wasn’t really prime here either).Career win percentage on clay:
Djokovic 79.6% (5th all time in and had to compete against Nadal and Fed his whole career)
Kuerten 69.9% (35th all time, just ahead of Murray and ZverevHe never had to go through Nadal at RG and beat baby pre-prime Clayderer
I'll concede that Lendl has him statistically. But Ivan never had to deal with Rafa!
TripleATeam
G.O.A.T.
Era of Nadal doesn't necessarily mean he beat them. It's the same accolades I give Nadal for his US Open and Canada achievements. Didn't necessarily go through Djokovic or Federer every time, but he won those while they were playing and they're the best HC players ever.
Imagine I say every RG that Nadal won was impossible to win for Djokovic - then he could have won 09, 15, 16. He's 1/3 in those. That's not bad at all, especially when the best players after Borg are Kuerten (3/11 wins, only making it past the QFs 5 times) and Lendl (3/15 with 5 finals, and 2 extra QFs). Djokovic would have 2/16 with Nadal winning 12 of those, and with 5 finals, 5 extra semis, and 4 extra quarterfinals.
Nadal>>>>>Federer
Professional
Yeah I could see it as Rafa, Borg, Novak
BlueB
Legend
He didn't know how, but absolutely, 2nd to Nadal only.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
He has never won a FO title while beating Nadal.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
In 2014 his level was also lower than in 2010-2013. Easier to beat on clay then than in 2010-2013.
I mean, he won a masters title due to sheer luck.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
You didn't change your mind about RG 2020 yet?
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Nadal was absolutely terrible in MC, Barcelona and Madrid that year. A bit better in Rome but still struggled in almost every match. I mean, his level against Schwartzman in Rome this year was higher than his 2014 level before RG.
TripleATeam
G.O.A.T.
Because he made so many semis and finals that he lost to the greatest clay courter ever? It's a simple prospect, really.
Since Nadal is the best clay courter to ever grace the court, he's a very tough measuring stick to use. Put Kuerten up against Nadal in his finals, never wins a single one. Same thing with Wilander and Lendl.
What we can measure is what they could have won in absence of Nadal. If Djokovic wins another RG, in absence of Nadal he wins at least 3 more, but up to 5 more, with several extra finals to his name. That's better than Kuerten, Lendl, and Wilander could say. Now, obviously we can't just gift him those victories because they didn't happen, but Djokovic has an 82.9% win rate at RG, even losing 6 times to Nadal (he's only lost 8 times to people not named Nadal). Take away the Nadal matches and he has an 89% win rate. Even if another clay courter just as good as Djokovic showed up in Nadal's place and won 50% of the time against him (a Nadal-lite, if you will) and played him 10 times, he'd still have 3+ RGs and an 85% win rate.
The only thing that stopped Djokovic from being a clay ATG was Nadal - same with Federer. And if Djokovic wins 2 RG, he's definitely top 5.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Not yet. Have to see Nadal at this FO first. Djokovic isn't extraordinary himself either.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Good enough to win every tournament he enters...
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
Novak would not be top three on clay even presuming he wins another RG. As Lendl once said, "a guy who wins 3 FO's and nothing else on clay in their career is still better than Muster or Vilas. Those two won 100 clay titles between them, but only two French Opens between them."
So if Djokovic wins another FO, he's still standing behind these guys in line for second best clay courter after Rafa:
Borg Six FO's
Wilander, Lendl, Guga: Three FO's
So if Djokovic wins another FO, he's still standing behind these guys in line for second best clay courter after Rafa:
Borg Six FO's
Wilander, Lendl, Guga: Three FO's
abmk
Bionic Poster
@ bold part : except 14 RG nadal was still the weakest from 2005-14. and you can cut out 17 and 18 for djokovic seeing as he wasn't really in a position to win Nadal or no nadal.
till now basically count djokovic as having a decent enough chance to win RG from 2008-16. (19 is like in between, not 100% sure).
that's 1/9 overall, including 1/3 with nadal out.
Kuerten's prime on clay really began in 99. so its really like 3/4 (if we count. 97 seeing as he won it )99,00,01. (you can quibble a bit about 2004 as he displayed semblance of prime form)
Lendl - 81 - lost to borg in final
82 - lost to wilander (eventual winner) in 5 sets
83 - lost to noah (eventual winner) in 4 sets (probably the worst loss)
84 - won incl. beating wilander in straights and peak mac in 5 sets
85 - lost to wilander in final
86 - won - easy draw tbh, toughest was gomez in the QF
87 - won incl. beating wilander
88 - lost to svensson in QF
89 - lost to chang in 4R
92-94 is almost irrelevant for Lendl
80 he was only the 9th seed and ranked below in the FOs before that.
so that's 3/9 for Lendl. 3/8 if you remove Borg.
beating a good in-form player on clay:
djoko does not have the wins that Lendl had at RG : 84 wilander, 84 mac, 87 wilander
nor that fed had : 2009 delpo, 2011 Djoko
aleady gave the draws for kuerten in a previous post in this thread.
TripleATeam
G.O.A.T.
I don't include primes in my count. Not anyone's fault Kuerten could only muster up a few years of decent play but his own. The amount of slams they played, that's the amount they could win. In any one of those years you put 2008-2013 Nadal in there and he would have mopped up just as well as he did in real life, 09 excepted.
Put 08-13 Nadal in 1999-2004, Kuerten doesn't win a single RG. Same with Lendl's 82-87. You're right that Lendl went through some competition to get his wins, but he also lost to worse players than Nadal and Federer.
Count it.
Novak has made 9 RG semis, 13 RG quarterfinals. He's proved he's never been worse than top 4 on clay from 06-20. That's 15 years of being in the top 4. Djokovic's losses were 6 times to Nadal in the back-half of RG, 4 of which he could have ended up winning. Lendl didn't face anyone as good as 08-14 Nadal, except maybe 81 Borg. So let's say 81 Lendl is equal to 13 Djokovic.
Then Lendl makes 4 other semifinals, whereas Djokovic makes 8 other semifinals. Lendl faces McEnroe, Connors x2, Wilander x2, Mecir, Kriek, and Pernfors. Say what you will about Murray, but he's better than Mikhail Pernfors.
Djokovic, on the other hand, faces Nadal x4, Federer x2, Gulbis, Murray x2, Wawrinka, Thiem x2.
It's pretty clear which one of those lineups you'd rather face if you were Djokovic.
Switch Borg with Federer/Djokovic and let him play in the Nadal clay era and he wins next to nothing. Switch Federer or Djokovic with Borg and into his era (without Nadal and without each other), and they both easily win 6 or more RG titles.
But yes, in the end it is about numbers, so they cannot officially be considered Top 3.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
That's super disrespectful of Borg.
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
Borg was just as strong as Nadal at RG to the age of 25.
T
TheNachoMan
Guest
I’ve never watched more than 1 or 2 Borg matches so I can’t really comment. Only rating the ones I’ve seen play a lot
Beckerserve
Legend
He already is top 3. Joint 2nd with Federer.
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
FED didn’t know how to play clay until 2006
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Ahead of Fed. Easily
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Who is ahead of him? Besides Nadal, Borg?
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Novak would NOT lose to Wilander or Chang! Only pure power can beat him...
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Lol Rosewall would NOT be able to handle Nadal or Djoker
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
