UnforcedTerror
Hall of Fame
Nadal's run top opponents:
Medvedev's run top opponents:
Delpo
Anderson
Medvedev's run top opponents:
Schwartzman
Zverev
Thiem
Nadal
Djokovic
Medvedev's 2020 Tour Finals vs Nadal's 2017 US Open - what title is more impressive to you?
- Thread starter UnforcedTerror
- Start date
MeatTornado
Talk Tennis Guru
Both pale in comparison to Jack Sock's Paris title
Tennis_Freak99
Legend
Medvedev was more impressive
Nadal's was legendary, Berrettini Open>>>>MemeFinals
Nadal's was legendary, Berrettini Open>>>>MemeFinals
ibbi
G.O.A.T.
I love how to this day Nadal gets the blame for all his 'top opponents' losing early. He beat Mayer who knocked off the 26th seeded Gasquet, he beat Dolgopolov who beat the 15th seeded Berdych, he beat Rublev who beat the 7th seeded Dimitrov and 9th seeded Goffin, he beat Del Potro who beat the 11th seeded RBA, 6th seeded Thiem, and 3rd seeded Federer, and then he finished it off by seeing off the dude who beat the 17th seeded Querrey and 12th seeded Carreno Busta. He beat the guys that beat all the top guys. The top opponents should be laughed out of the building, Nadal did what he had to do, as did Medvedev. Get over it already.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
Med for the lolz. But it's actually a serious contest.
Bo5 is what might make me lean to USO 2017 but the competition was abysmal there.
Bo5 is what might make me lean to USO 2017 but the competition was abysmal there.
TheAssassin
Legend
Same applies to every single tournament winner lol. He beat the player who beat that player who beat that other player... It doesn't mean they all weigh the same.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
At the end of the day a slam is a slam so Nadal’s carries more weight than Med’s regardless of the level of opponents.
Not to mention this could be done with a whole host of slam titles that weren’t all that impressive. Fed’s Wimbledon 2017 or AO 2006 being a couple of them.
Not to mention this could be done with a whole host of slam titles that weren’t all that impressive. Fed’s Wimbledon 2017 or AO 2006 being a couple of them.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Medvedev in turns of competition, but Nadal level-wise. He struggled against mug opponents early on and then destroyed opponents who played like mugs, but a genuinely good first set by del Potro prompted him to raise level (even as Delpo was running out of gas, but Nadal wasn't about to rely on it), and Rafito destroyed Juanito swiftly. Sure that Nadal would make sweet work of nervy Tim and turvy Med.
MusterCoriaKuerten
Rookie
Medvedev
Clay brat has vultured all of his US Open titles via rigged draws
Clay brat has vultured all of his US Open titles via rigged draws
ibbi
G.O.A.T.
Hmm, it doesn't apply to every tournament. He beat Mayer in the third round, Mayer beat Gasquet in the first round, he could have easily lost in the second before getting to Nadal. All these guys won multiple matches before they got to him. You don't fluke your way to a major. And no, they don't all 'weigh the same', but if you apply actual context rather than just looking at the most banal stats and results you can see it's nowhere near as bad as people here like to make out (I mean it's pretty bad, because Del Potro was utterly spent after about a set of the Nadal match
but a slam is a feat of endurance as much as anything else).
TheAssassin
Legend
I didn't say you fluke your way to a Major. Nadal deserves praise for taking his opportunities generally. But this logic can suger-coat any path to a title look decent. He beat the guy who beat that seed and so on. More likely than not the lower ranked player had to beat a seeded opponent to get further. But no top 25 opponents faced in the entire Slam cannot be something memorable for good reasons.Hmm, it doesn't apply to every tournament. He beat Mayer in the third round, Mayer beat Gasquet in the first round, he could have easily lost in the second before getting to Nadal. All these guys won multiple matches before they got to him. You don't fluke your way to a major. And no, they don't all 'weigh the same', but if you apply actual context rather than just looking at the most banal stats and results you can see it's nowhere near as bad as people here like to make out (I mean it's pretty bad, because Del Potro was utterly spent after about a set of the Nadal match
BackhandDTL
Hall of Fame
What about USO 2018 and 40% of Fred’s slams?
ibbi
G.O.A.T.
Sure it can, if the top 25 players play terribly, and the ones outside it don't. The highlights of that tournament were Rublev, Del Potro, Schwartzman and Shapovalov. None of whom ranked in the top 25, all of whom played beautifully and put on a show. Beating any of those guys will have meant at least as much as beating an ailing Federer who struggled to get past Youzhny and Tiafoe in 5.
WildRevolver
Hall of Fame
Federer fan still pissed that Rafa steamrolled Del Potro, after Del Potro steamrolled Federer. Not Rafa’s fault that he can handle Juan Man.
TheAssassin
Legend
Yes they had a good tournament. Del Potro really made many of us invested more than others on that occasion I'd say. However two of those players offered minimal resistance to Nadal while the other two never got close to him to begin with. And we are discussing champions' runs to the title. Not just in this thread but generally that's what impacts our ratings of the tournament the most, and that US Open didn't deliver. But a Slam is a Slam as always.
Considering it often takes a very strong, top player to beat an ailing Big 3 player these days I am not so sure.
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
This Nadal destroys Medvedev/Thiem.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
Would bagel Berrettini too
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
Nadal 2017 US Open level was above 2019.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
Yeah definitely
T
TheNachoMan
Guest
At least Medvedev beat a top 10 player....multiple times in fact
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
That one was for all the marbles.
MeatTornado
Talk Tennis Guru
nuff said
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
Sock didn't have anything left to prove after that. Says it all really.
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Medvedev and not even close in terms of difficulty.
Nadal obviously has the edge in terms of the weight of the achievement.
But that's what's unfair about the current obsession with slams. Many tournaments (WTF especially) are harder to win than some slams (with cakewalk draws and upsets of top players).
Had Thiem won today, his WTF victory would have been a lot more impressive than the USO, for example.
Nadal obviously has the edge in terms of the weight of the achievement.
But that's what's unfair about the current obsession with slams. Many tournaments (WTF especially) are harder to win than some slams (with cakewalk draws and upsets of top players).
Had Thiem won today, his WTF victory would have been a lot more impressive than the USO, for example.
Federer defeated Dimitrov - Raonic - Berdych - Cilic in 2017 W. It was decent draw - don't compare it with Nadal'uso run.
Beckerserve
Legend
It is called being salty Nadal haters. Makes 2017 even sweeter for his fans.
Beckerserve
Legend
Del potro and Anderson were far better than any of those at W 2017!!.
Beckerserve
Legend
Not bo5 though. Bo5 the ultimate test. I suspect had the semis been Bo5 on Saturday Nadal and Djokovic win in 5.
Boom-Boom
Legend
no excuse
Amritia
Hall of Fame
Beckerserve
Legend
No. Bo3 is much easier. You can get away with a 100 per cent first serve set like medvedev did v Nadal or have a hot 20 mins and win a set blazing winners and you halfway to winning.
B05 you cannot get away with a hit half hour as you have to keep a high level up for hours. Bo5 is the ultimate test. Always has been. Always will be.
Had WTF been Bo5 the final would have been Nadal v Djokovic.
Amritia
Hall of Fame
I think Med faced tougher competition for WTF title.
Nadal's 2017 USO was his easiest slam in terms of competition. However, it is quite an anomaly, as if you look at Nadal's slam wins he has faced GOATs in most of his Slam wins.
I'd still take a slam over WTF any day though, if you offered me the swap I'd reject it, sorry.
Nadal's 2017 USO was his easiest slam in terms of competition. However, it is quite an anomaly, as if you look at Nadal's slam wins he has faced GOATs in most of his Slam wins.
I'd still take a slam over WTF any day though, if you offered me the swap I'd reject it, sorry.
Start da Game
Hall of Fame
i am not sure i have seen a worse comparison than this.........one is a tournament with best of 3 format and players are allowed to lose two matches, the other is a grandslam tournament with best of 5 format and players are not allowed to lose a single match.........
FatHead250
Professional
WTF is a boring soulless tournament nobody cares about.
Aussie Darcy
Bionic Poster
As much as Nadal's 2017 USO is a meme, he played B05 all tournament while Medvedev didn't at this years WTF. We've seen many of the young guns (as well as others like Isner and Tsonga) play lights out for 1 week at Masters or ATP500's including beating multiple of the big 3 at B03 but none of them ever translated it to B05 format at a slam. And that still stands even now.
Last edited:
Beckerserve
Legend
I have always felt the WTF is a bigger deal for players who did not have a slam that season. Psychologically it stands to reason that players who may have not achieved what they wanted that year will be more hungry than slam winners that season.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Lol this place is a trip
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Decent but not great. Like I said this could be done with many a slam because the WTF is by default going to have a tough draw. So any and all "easy" slam runs are by definition worse than what Medvedev just pulled off. Not just Federer's, but Agassi's 03 AO for another example.
Aussie Darcy
Bionic Poster
That is a very hot but accurate take and does explain quite a lot. Both the ATP and the WTA have had periods of late where for 4 years straight, the champions hadn't won slams and had smaller results than those who had won slams in that year. Yet they went on to win the WTF/YEC. Your post does explain why they fought harder than those who had won slams. Interesting post.
Beckerserve
Legend
Medvedev is a prime example. His game style is so physical that he looks cooked after 3 sets and i feel both Nadal and Thiem would have beaten him in 5. I think he has yet to win a bo5 set match.
That said if he serves and volleys more and plays closer to the baseline and is more aggressive he will be a huge threat. But he seems to only do this when a set and a break down. In 30c heat in bo5 that will be fatal.
Beckerserve
Legend
I actually predicted Medvedev may win Paris Bercy and WTF precisely because he underperformed at USO and FO. While Thiem played well at USO got feeling Medvedev felt he should be winning the event once Djokovic went out.
NatF
Bionic Poster
It's not just the ranking it's how they played. Rublev and Del Potro only played one good set between them in the QF and SF. It was a dire event, no doubt about it. Weak slams have been common since 2016, the 2017 USO is probably the worst though lol.
Similar threads
