Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Him or them?*Show up playing at least semi-decently" would be more correct
Impressive stretch of form over a period of time. (Nadal 08-09 related )
- Thread starter kevaninho
- Start date
TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
Yeah, you seem to love clinging on to this like a koala, and it's quite amusing.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Djoel.
Frankly, Novak only struggled because he wasn't up to par... once he improved to an ok level within the match, the likes of Dolgo, Gulbis, Goffin melted down. To be fair, Djo played well at the business end of his tournament wins, which is what matters most. Except AO (2015), that was meh just as Fed's 06.
That is the end of discussion about Federer's peak. Nothing is stronger than that.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Still, they must've played pretty well to take even a below par Djokovic to the brink. The point I was trying to make is that it wasn't like he cruised through every match 6-2 6-2 in 2015 - there were quite a few where he was really put through his paces, irrespective of how well he performed on the day. This notion that he had to simply "show up" to win tournaments is therefore quite obviously nonsensical.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
I assumed that wasn't meant to be taken literally, since nobody can just show up, you have to play some tennis. o.o
TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
That really, really is quite funny.
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
Mury goat!
Fedforever
Hall of Fame
This seems to be a virtue that goes almost unrecognised in tennis.
In English League Football there are always teams that can turn it on against the big teams and then lose to others that should be "easy". This is seen as a serious weakness and certainly not any kind of virtue.
Fedforever
Hall of Fame
I think it was the time when players just weren't bothering with the AO. I seem to remember Mac saying "the Australian I don't consider a Major any more" back in the early eighties.
He did once get defaulted from the AO - 1992 I think?
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
Murray since:
Madrid 2016 F
Rome C
RG F
Queens C
Wimbledon C
Rio C
Cincinatti F
US Open QF
Beijing C
Shanghai C
Vienna C
Paris Bercy C
WTF C
This was mighty impressive, considering Murrays limited ability IMO. He absolutely got every ounce of success that he possibly could've, and worked harder than probably anyone else on the tour.
Still, the competition wasn't the best during this time, but that's not the point of the thread of course.
He was a beast going for that number 1 spot.
You could even look at his 2015 run around the time he single handedly won Davis cup for GB. The guy was on fire, although yes he had a disappointing sunshine double in 2016.
But outwith that, he was going deep in most tournaments.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
I'll give Federer's too, just to complete the triangle:
Halle-2005-Dubai 2007.
Only missed a final once. In 20 months. Insane.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Somebody had already given Federer's best run. And it's still not as impressive as Djokovic's no matter how many times you repeat it.
titoelcolombiano
Legend
Rafa - legend!
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
That sounds very reasonable. Adding it pronto.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
I like this topic. Let's keep going:
Sampras had a pretty good stretch in 1994 when he did well on all surfaces. Here are his tournament results from AO 1994 - Wimbledon 1994.
AO - Won
Philadelphia - Lost, R32
Indian Wells - Won
Miami - Won
Osaka (not the player) - Won
Tokyo - Won
Rome - Won
RG - Lost, QF
Queens - Lost, F
Wimbledon - Won
There might be better ones out there, but I thought this one was pretty nice if we consider the polarized surfaces. Let me know if there are better ones out there for Pistol Pete.
Of course, Jimmy Connors' 1974 season deserves a mention as well. Sure, he played a ton of small events, but he still played well enough on the big stage that he would deserve a mention here.
AO 1973 (was played in December of that year, but I still consider it part of this season) - Won
Roanoke - Won
Omaha - Won
Little Rock - Won
Birmingham - Won
Salisbury - Won
Hampton - Won
Tempe - Won
Washington - SF
Manchester - Won
Nottingham - QF
Wimbledon - Won
Indianapolis (M1K of the time) - Won
Canada (M1K) - R64
South Orange - F
US Open - Won
Los Angeles - Won
San Francisco - QF
London - W
Johannesburg (M1K) - W
AO 1975 - F
Bahamas - W
Birmingham - W
Really, his ban from the French Open hurt him here. He had a real shot, considering he won in Indianapolis (clay) and also proved to be a strong contender on the dirt in later years. UTS actually has him at 11 on their clay GOAT list, so that's noteworthy, I guess.
Sampras had a pretty good stretch in 1994 when he did well on all surfaces. Here are his tournament results from AO 1994 - Wimbledon 1994.
AO - Won
Philadelphia - Lost, R32
Indian Wells - Won
Miami - Won
Osaka (not the player) - Won
Tokyo - Won
Rome - Won
RG - Lost, QF
Queens - Lost, F
Wimbledon - Won
There might be better ones out there, but I thought this one was pretty nice if we consider the polarized surfaces. Let me know if there are better ones out there for Pistol Pete.
Of course, Jimmy Connors' 1974 season deserves a mention as well. Sure, he played a ton of small events, but he still played well enough on the big stage that he would deserve a mention here.
AO 1973 (was played in December of that year, but I still consider it part of this season) - Won
Roanoke - Won
Omaha - Won
Little Rock - Won
Birmingham - Won
Salisbury - Won
Hampton - Won
Tempe - Won
Washington - SF
Manchester - Won
Nottingham - QF
Wimbledon - Won
Indianapolis (M1K of the time) - Won
Canada (M1K) - R64
South Orange - F
US Open - Won
Los Angeles - Won
San Francisco - QF
London - W
Johannesburg (M1K) - W
AO 1975 - F
Bahamas - W
Birmingham - W
Really, his ban from the French Open hurt him here. He had a real shot, considering he won in Indianapolis (clay) and also proved to be a strong contender on the dirt in later years. UTS actually has him at 11 on their clay GOAT list, so that's noteworthy, I guess.
ADuck
Legend
Agree. Turned into a thread of one-upping. As OP mentioned, we already know the greatness of Djokovic's and Federer's runs.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Where did I say it was as impressive as Djokovic's?Somebody had already given Federer's best run. And it's still not as impressive as Djokovic's no matter how many times you repeat it.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
Yeah you didn't. I don't think anyone disputes that mighty run by Djokovic to be the greatest 18 month run ever.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Still, I stand by my opinion that the competition was very weak during this period. After all you also wrote Nadal is much better than the others on clay which makes it easier for him. That means you also know that competition matters. This is why I put Djokovic's 2011 run higher-I really believe it was more impressive.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
You can stand by your opinion, I am not really interested in changing it. But I am allowed to defend his run how I wish.
I think when analysing then you have to factor in competition.
Objectively, yes it’s the best run.
However factoring in competition, 2011 is clearly superior from him imo.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Sure you do. Your opinion is worth just as much as mine.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Yes, and I also think Djokovic in 2011 played better than in 2015. Of course competition matters, because for example it is not fair to compare a clay season where the main opponent is peak Nadal with a clay season where the main rival is Murray.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
Keep one thing in mind. Never did I say Nadal's run on clay is overrated, what I said was that it not as compelling as if he had players on his own level. Yes, 2011 Djokovic run is more compelling to watch because of what happened that year, but when you say 2015 run is not impressive, it means you fail to acknowledge just how hard it is to bring that mental focus and stay fit and not suffer burnout week in week out. That is what I will not agree with. To have such a run, you cannot have any off days, and that in itself is a massive accomplishment.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Djokovic had off days in 2015 and especially in the first half of 2016 though. I actually remember him beating Thiem in Miami 2016 with 6 winners and 36 unforced errors. But even in off days his level was usually enough to win. As for the bolded part-I never wrote it is not impressive, I wrote that in my opinion it is just not the greatest run ever.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
No player in the history of tennis can play 100% all of the time, his so called off days you mention still weren't enough to break his overall game, because mentally he refused to yield. He willed his way through a lot of matches. You are seriously saying that a run from AO 2015 to AO 2016 where he contested every single final he played is not impressive? Do you know what kind of mileage he went through that year? How he managed to stay fit, mentally hungry and focused on the task at hand, day after day, week after week, month after month? To say that is not impressive is frankly bemusing to me. The kind of endurance you need to have no off days is just absurd....he didn't have any tanking moments. He went in to win each and every single time.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Did you read the last part of my comment? Saying the run is not the greatest ever is not the same thing as to say it is not impressive.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
Your comment above is what I am addressing.
Now, you don't think his run is special enough to be ranked where it is, and I do. So, we at at a stale mate, so tell me now, since we both know where the other stands, is there anything more we need to discuss on this particular subject, because I am now starting to feel like I am repeating myself.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Yes, I wrote it is a bit overrated. This is exactly a way to write I believe it's not the greatest run ever (like you are writing) in my opinion. I never wrote it is a bad run or something.
I guess I have nothing to add about this subject.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
OK then.
Absolutely. It’s head in the sand to ignore this key difference.
Benjamin Rio
Professional
Always trying to put down achievements made by Fed and Novak and make out Nadal is tbe greatest thing out there.
As impressive as Nadal run was in 2008 2009 2010 2013 it just doesn't match Fed's best seasons 2004 2005 2006 2007 and Novak's 2015 1st half 2016 and 2011.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Lol, and this comes from you? Seems like all you do is bring Nadal's achievements down.
Benjamin Rio
Professional
For Nadal fans when he wins it's the greatest era ever with the biggest competition even when he loses to world number 135 in the 1st round of the biggest tournament in the world or to a WC.
When Novak or Fed achieve incredible runs = weak era
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
It goes all three ways. I see Djokovic and Federer fans crying "Weak era" for Nadal, Nadal and Federer fans crying "Weak era" for Djokovic, and Nadal and Djokovic fans crying "Weak era" for Federer.
It just goes to show how naturally relative the term is and that we shouldn't dwell on it too much.
Benjamin Rio
Professional
Last edited:
Benjamin Rio
Professional
Based on facts
Based on facts Nadal has never dominated the tour the way Novak and Fed did.
Based on facts Nadal has never dominated the tour the way Novak and Fed did.
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
Based on facts, neither of these 2 guys done this....Won Hamburg ( clay ) defeating their 2 main rivals Federer + Djokovic, ending 17thy May, won RG (clay ) defeating Fed and Djoker in straight sets,ending 7th June, won Queens ( grass ) defeating Djokovic and Roddick,ending 15th June, won Wimbledon against the surface GOAT Federer ,ending 6th July, then in the same month winning Toronto Masters on HC and the Olympics on HC the following month.
This, to me, is what makes Nadals special. Once again its not a comparison, as we know Fed and Djokovic have had better runs, but for Nadal to go from winning 2 clay tournaments, then the next week winning against a very decent field on grass, following it up by winning Wimbledon v Federer was unbelievable. But to then go on and win the next masters on HC along with the Olympic gold, is pretty special.
I think when Federer won RG + Wimbledon the same year, it was almost a month between them, and when Djokovic reached the RG final and won Wimbledon in 2015, he also had a good few weeks between tournaments. This makes Nadals achievement all the more special, as im not sure its been done before, unless Borg or someone was winning them both so close together. I really don't know the facts there.
Benjamin Rio
Professional
I totally agree what did Nadal that summer in 2008 was pretty special. No one can take that away from him.
You can't compare different eras as grass was muck quicker in the nineties for example.
Fed was not having his best year in 2008 with losses to Blake Fish etc etc
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Roger_Federer_tennis_season
Benjamin Rio
Professional
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Nadal's best 52 week period was MC 2008-Madrid 2009. Not within a calendar year, but objectively speaking this was his best period of play. Absolute peak Nadal on every surface.
It all ended when he lost to Soderling at the FO.
It all ended when he lost to Soderling at the FO.
Benjamin Rio
Professional
In 2011 he was amazing as well. But Novak is simply a better player.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
LMAO, Nadal's level in 2011 was not even close to his level in 2008-2009.
Benjamin Rio
Professional
He was at his best and had a terrific season but lost to a better tennis player.
He lost many finals to Novak. IW Miami Madrid Roma Wimbledon Us open and still won MC Barcelona FO
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Rafael_Nadal_tennis_season
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
The way Djokovic was playing in 2011 he probably would've beaten the 2008-9 version of Nadal as well.
Benjamin Rio
Professional
Of course....Nadal was playing at his peak that year and was losing to a player feom his generation.
Similar threads
- Poll
