If your life depended on the outcome of a match with a worst-case scenario, which of these two players would you trust?

Who do you choose?


  • Total voters
    43

Winner Sinner

Hall of Fame
Scenario;

Down by two sets, 0-5 in the third and 0-40, just like that, without knowing your opponent or even the surface on which you play to avoid possible conditioning in your choice (if you knew it was on clay the choice would be too easy, ditto on hard), in this scenario to whom between Djokovic and Nadal, or rather the two players who more than any other during their career have shown that they know how to overturn certain desperate score situations, would you entrust your slim hopes of survival?

*Obviously you can choose between Djokovic and Nadal with both at their peak.
 

Winner Sinner

Hall of Fame
I’ll chose death since this is an impossible to win for anyone to win while trailing 0-2 and 2 breaks and 3 mp downs.
What a naive answer, which of course you can only contemplate because you are aware that it is a hypothetical scenario.
I would like to see if your life really depended on the outcome of that hypothetical match if you would really answer in that way.

Giving yourself a 0.00001% chance is always better than 0%, assuming that with Djokovic and Nadal at their peak the chances are really that infinitesimal.
 

vive le beau jeu !

Talk Tennis Guru
we all know how it would go in both cases... :unsure:
bg,f8f8f8-flat,750x,075,f-pad,750x1000,f8f8f8.jpg
 
What a naive answer, which of course you can only contemplate because you are aware that it is a hypothetical scenario.
I would like to see if your life really depended on the outcome of that hypothetical match if you would really answer in that way.

Giving yourself a 0.00001% chance is always better than 0%, assuming that with Djokovic and Nadal at their peak the chances are really that infinitesimal.

Look kid , take your condescending behaviour somewhere else. I would have way higher probability of winning lottery than surviving such impossible escape job from your hypothetical scenario. I am a realist so I would pick death over a scenario where chances of my survival are like one one in 1000 billion , at least I’ll be in charge of my fate.
 
Last edited:

Winner Sinner

Hall of Fame
Look kid , take your condescending behaviour somewhere else. I would have way higher probability of winning lottery than surviving such impossible escape job from your hypothetical scenario. I am a realist so I would pick death over a scenario where chances of my survival are like one one in 1000 billion , at least I’ll be in charge of my feat .
But how can you come to such a conclusion if you don't even know who your opponent is?

It could be someone so bad that against Nadal or Djokovic peak version he would struggle to win a single point.

I repeat, you are literally naive, obviously here, because if that hypothetical scenario were real you would not have this snobbish (and touchy) behavior.
 
But how can you come to such a conclusion if you don't even know who your opponent is?

It could be someone so bad that against Nadal or Djokovic peak version he would struggle to win a single point.

I repeat, you are literally naive, obviously here, because if that hypothetical scenario were real you would not have this snobbish (and touchy) behavior.

Irrespective of the opponent probability of winning from such scenario is way less than winning lottery . It’s not me but who are naive and acting like Jim Carrey of Dumb and dumber “ oh so you’re saying i have a chance?” You think any top 200 players are joke that they would go 2-0,5-0 -40-0 to lose it?? get real dude, I am not a believer in superman , step outta your childhood and be a realist.
 

Winner Sinner

Hall of Fame
Irrespective of the opponent probability of winning from such scenario is way less than winning lottery . It’s not me but who are naive and acting like Jim Carrey of Dumb and dumber “ oh so you’re saying i have a chance?” You think any top 200 players are joke that they would go 2-0,5-0 -40-0 to lose it?? get real dude, I am not a believer in superman , step outta your childhood and be a realist.
But who says he's a top 200?

I'll put flowers on your tombstone that says "Rest in peace to the naive, snobbish and touchy man". :)
 

MeatTornado

Talk Tennis Guru
I'll pick Nadal because I'll roll the dice and take a chance it's on clay.

He has a worse chance of converting on grass/hard than Djokovic does, but at that point what's the difference between like 1% or 2%, all those situations are virtually impossible.

At least Nadal on clay I'd give like 5% odds.
 
Last edited:

Terenigma

G.O.A.T.
Djokovic easily.

The only arguement for Nadal would be if it's on clay and there is a 2/3 chance It's not and even ON clay Djokovic is literally the 2nd best player there of the past 20 years. Easy answer.
 

Pheasant

Legend
Lendl was down 2 sets to love to a guy at his very peak; the same guy that holds the record for the best winning pct in ATP history with a title record of 82-3. And to top it off, McEnroe slaughtered Lendl in straights in a pair of clay court championship matches a few weeks earlier. There was no way that Mac was losing the FO title match after that; especially after going up 2-0.

1984 FO Lendl is my answer. That ****ing match still ****es me off. Mac didn't even choke. Lendl raised his game 2 levels in this match; especially with his return of serve positioning. He also was able to pass Mac by returning 1st serves cross court with surgical precision.

2011 USO Djokovic would be my next pick.
 
Lendl was down 2 sets to love to a guy at his very peak; the same guy that holds the record for the best winning pct in ATP history with a title record of 82-3. And to top it off, McEnroe slaughtered Lendl in straights in a pair of clay court championship matches a few weeks earlier. There was no way that Mac was losing the FO title match after that; especially after going up 2-0.

1984 FO Lendl is my answer. That ****ing match still ****es me off. Mac didn't even choke. Lendl raised his game 2 levels in this match; especially with his return of serve positioning. He also was able to pass Mac by returning 1st serves cross court with surgical precision.

2011 USO Djokovic would be my next pick.

2-0 down and 2-0( 5-0, 40-0) down are different scenarios, there’s a reason why nobody even came close to pulling off such miracle.
 

jl809

Legend
If this were the start of set 3 and I had to pick one of Djokodal to come back from 0-2 down, I’m picking Djoker on a blind pick 100000% of the time.

However, at 0-2, 0-5, 0-40, where it really is curtains, Djoker would just give up imo. He’s not that guy. Whereas Nadal’s ability to compete for every point regardless of the scenario would at least make me think he’s going to give it a go
 

Winner Sinner

Hall of Fame
6-0, 5-0, 40-0. So what?

Forty years ago, the greatest comeback in tennis history took place. Trailing 6-0, 5-0, and 40-0, Barbie Bramblett managed to beat Ann Hulbert in the US Open qualifiers, canceling 18 match points. In another match, she even canceled 20. Her career would end in 1985, at just 21 years of age.

When she won the Orange Bowl in 1980, Barbara Christine Bramblett (known to all as Barbie) received a call from Nick Bollettieri. Just two years earlier, she had opened her own academy, and was scouting for talent. The blonde Texan had struck him. “But I thought that the training program I had followed up to that point would allow me to be successful,” recalls Bramblett, who is now 59 and teaches tennis at The Downtown Club in Houston. Who knows if her career would have been different if she had accepted Bollettieri’s proposal. She remained on the circuit for four years, with results that were all in all negligible: a best ranking of number 60, zero tournaments won, seven Slam appearances (with as many defeats in the first round) and no truly important victories, even if she can say she beat Lori McNeil and Helena Sukova, but only among the juniors. Barbie stopped playing in 1985, shortly before turning 21. “I was always traveling alone between Asia and Europe. I had no support, I was young and unprepared,” she says, “there was no one I could talk to after a defeat, I didn’t know the game.” Bye bye professionalism, with no regrets. For about twenty years she taught tennis and painting, only to let her personality explode when she was over forty, with a couple of degrees and the writing of two books.
Yet, her name remains engraved in the history of tennis: she is the author of the greatest comeback ever. A crazy feat, matured from the most extreme score situation: 6-0, 5-0 and 40-0. It was August 25, 1983 when she took to the court against Ann Hulbert, in the second round of the US Open qualifiers. A challenge between young promises, still eighteen years old. Born in 1965, Hulbert could still participate in the junior event: a couple of weeks later she would win the doubles title. A one-sided match, to the point that Barbie's mother left the stands when she realized there was nothing to be done. "At 5-0 and 40-0 I thought the match was over, and I was deeply embarrassed," Bramblett said in a couple of interviews, "but then my game suddenly improved, I would say it was a real miracle. Every ball landed on the line, I couldn't believe what was happening." She saved match points one after another. In the end there would be eighteen. “But at 5-4 I realized I had a chance to win.” And she would win: 0-6 7-5 6-3.
"My game suddenly improved, I would say it was a miracle. Every ball landed on the line, I couldn't believe what was happening." Barbie Bramblett
“The next time you’re down 6-0, 5-0 and 40-0 in a tennis match and think a comeback is impossible, think of Barbie Bramblett,” wrote the September 2, 1983 edition, before later reporting that the match against Hepner was postponed to Wednesday because of rain. Trailing 6-1 4-2, Bramblett managed to win the second set. “Some points lasted nearly three and a half minutes, with 90-shot rallies,” wrote the NY Times. “Hepner received two warnings for time violations; under WTA rules, a third violation would have been grounds for disqualification.” The third set was also a battle, but after coming back to 3-3, Barbie gave up the last three games. That would be enough for a lasting memory, but she wanted to do more: a few months earlier, she had made a similar comeback at the Nashville tournament. Trailing 6-2 5-0 against Kathy Holton, she would manage the feat of canceling 20 match points and winning with a score of 2-6 7-6 6-3. To date, the world record for match points canceled before winning a match. These feats will mark her forever, a bit like what happened to the legendary soccer player Antonin Panenka, who went down in history for having invented the chip penalty. They still look for him today, to ask him for a memento.
Barbie Bramblett has more or less the same fate, even though she has tried to break away from that memory by building a very respectable career. In 2007, she graduated from the University of Houston with a degree in History and English Literature. As if that weren’t enough, in 2012 she earned a Master’s degree in instructional design and technology. While teaching tennis, she worked as an instructional designer at the University of Houston’s School of Nursing, as well as developing and creating several websites. All this without forgetting her hobby of painting: her landscapes and portraits, painted in watercolor, have been exhibited in several shows. Barbie turned 59 on September 14 and recently celebrated the fortieth anniversary of that sensational comeback, but she wouldn’t make a drama out of it if there wasn’t someone to remember it. Unfortunately, or fortunately, at the time there wasn’t the information bombardment of today. No cameras, no internet, no social media. Just a short article in the newspaper that the web managed to track down, without even specifying the number of match points cancelled. “The chair umpire told me that when we shook hands. I knew I had cancelled match points, but when you are behind you don’t start counting them”. Someone else thought about it.
 

Winner Sinner

Hall of Fame
Statistics after going 0-2 down

Federer - 10 matches won out of 46 matches, 21,7%
Djokovic - 8 matches won out of 36 matches, 22,2%
Nadal - 4 matches won out of 25 matches, 16%

matches won after saving MPs (MPs saved)

fed - 22 (62)
no1e - 17 (49)
rafa - 17 (38)

hope this is correct
The answer then is Federer. :)

Sinner at only 23 years old has already won 9 matches after canceling at least one match point, canceling 21 match points in total.
 

GoatNo1

Hall of Fame
The answer then is Federer. :)

Sinner at only 23 years old has already won 9 matches after canceling at least one match point, canceling 21 match points in total.
fed had much more matches he was 0-2 than nole and rafa. in % nole is slightly better. and if you look at MPs fed had much more close matches there both players had MPs. he even lost most such matches, 24 or 25. rafa 9 and nole only 4 (one each to rafa, sinner, cilic and youzny, but never at slam there fed lost 6).
 
Last edited:

buscemi

Legend
The answer then is Federer. :)

Sinner at only 23 years old has already won 9 matches after canceling at least one match point, canceling 21 match points in total.
I don't know that this precisely answers the question. Those stats go to two questions: (1) who you'd want playing from a 2-0 deficit in sets; and (2) who you'd want playing from down match point(s).

Your question is who you'd want playing from down 2-0 in sets and down match point(s) in their third set. None of the Big 3 have done this.

The question then becomes which of the Big 3 has the most impressive win(s) from down 2-0 in sets and down in the third set. The biggest example that comes to mind is Nadal's comeback against Medvedev from 2-0 down in sets and down in the third set in the 2022 Australian Open final.

Does anyone know whether Federer or Djokovic have ever been down 2-0 in sets and down in the third set before coming back?
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Djokovic easily.

The only arguement for Nadal would be if it's on clay and there is a 2/3 chance It's not and even ON clay Djokovic is literally the 2nd best player there of the past 20 years. Easy answer.
Not that easily. Nadal on clay is easily the single guarantee in tennis history. Djokovic has lost to several players worse than him on every surface in important matches.
 

Terenigma

G.O.A.T.
Not that easily. Nadal on clay is easily the single guarantee in tennis history. Djokovic has lost to several players worse than him on every surface in important matches.

Nadal has also lost to many players worse than him too including a bunch of borderline unknown players who are only known because they beat Nadal at a slam. OP specified that there is no guarentee that it will be played on Clay. It could be any surface, any opponent and I think Djokovic is more capable of pulling off a comeback like that against a much wider field of players on every surface than Nadal is, especially since this is the peak version of both of them. Still an easy vote.
 

GoatNo1

Hall of Fame

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Nadal has also lost to many players worse than him too including a bunch of borderline unknown players who are only known because they beat Nadal at a slam. OP specified that there is no guarentee that it will be played on Clay. It could be any surface, any opponent and I think Djokovic is more capable of pulling off a comeback like that against a much wider field of players on every surface than Nadal is, especially since this is the peak version of both of them. Still an easy vote.
Even in his prime he lost to Murray, Wawrinka and Nishikori
 

GoatNo1

Hall of Fame
if some should win despite this scenario that means that both players must have MPs in the same mutch. and in matches there both players had MPs fed is 22-24 (maybe 25) so 47,8%, rafa 17-9 so 65,4%, muzza 16-8 so 66,7% and nole 17-4 so 80,1%!
 

The Blond Blur

G.O.A.T.
I’m taking RAFA here. Joker’s laid way too many goose eggs in big matches for me to pick him. He’s been straight setted 5x in GS Fs. That’s not counting all the times he’s DF on MP.

Edit: Ultimately it was this line that sealed it for me: “Obviously you can choose between Djokovic and Nadal with both at their peak.” At one point in time Joker actually had a negative win-loss record smack dab in the middle of his prime (6-7) and people were calling him the next Lendl. Obviously he eventually righted the ship but still, that never should have happened in the first place.
 
Last edited:

Rosstour

G.O.A.T.
I’m taking RAFA here. Joker’s laid way too many goose eggs in big matches for me to pick him. He’s been straight setted 5x in GS Fs. That’s not counting all the times he’s DF on MP.

Yeah I'll probably take Rafa too but a lot depends on who the match is against.
---------------------------------------
Fun fact--which member of the B3 has the most comeback wins from being down match point?
 

socallefty

G.O.A.T.
If the surface is fast/new grass (like Wimbledon 1st week) or indoors, I wouldn’t feel good about picking Nadal. An argument could be made that peak Djokovic wouldn’t be much of an underdog against any player on any surface except Nadal on clay and would likely be favored against almost everyone. He is also #1 on the ATP Career leaderboard for ‘Under Pressure’ while Nadal is good, but trailing at #3. Also Djokovic has beaten a player as good as Federer 3 times in Slams after being down match points, has a great record in 5-setters and TBs along with having the record for most Slams, Masters, #1 YE titles/weeks etc. He has a strong claim to be the better, most versatile player. Hard not to pick him.
 
If score is 2 set down choose novak
If score is 2set down 5-0 still choose novak.
But score is 2 set down 5 0 down 40-0l down choose Nadal.
Reason......JOKER Just takes time to shift gears.Nadal is always in his top game.
Novak at least 1 game sheild.
 

jl809

Legend
Wait it’s peak? Nadal no question then

Nadal at his peak is literally a lock on clay, and only vulnerable against peak Djoker and peak Fed on HC and clay

Djoker at his peak is vulnerable against peak Federer, peak Nadal and peak Stan on HC, vulnerable against peak Federer, peak Murray and peak Nadal on grass, and vulnerable against peak Federer and peak Stan on clay (+ guaranteed L against peak Nadal)
 
Last edited:
Top