Nadal 0-14 against Federer/Djokovic outside of clay since 2013US/2014AO

Pantera

Banned
I think what bothers Djokovic fans is not so much the record as the mileage that Nadal fans try to get out of the record. It's such a low n that not much should be drawn from it. In a series of three matches, luck plays a big part. If they had played 10 matches at the US Open and Nadal had won seven of them, that would be far more meaningful. No Djokovic fan disputes that Nadal's 6-1 record against him at Roland Garros is a very strong indicator of Nadal's superiority there. But when there have been only three matches and it is a 2-1 split rather than 3-0, Djokovic fans are warranted in insisting that the overall record matters far more. Put it this way: which bothers you more about Nadal's record at Wimbledon - that Djokovic leads him 2-1 in the head to head or that Djokovic leads him 4-2 in titles, 6-5 in finals, and 9-7 in semi-finals?
Wimbledon is not an issue for me as its Nadals worse surface.

And how many times have Nadal and federer played at USO? Or Edberg and Becker? 3 finals is a big number. Nadal has thr bragging rights for now at USO.
 
Wimbledon is not an issue for me as its Nadals worse surface.

And how many times have Nadal and federer played at USO? Or Edberg and Becker? 3 finals is a big number. Nadal has thr bragging rights for now at USO.
Nah. Djokovic making eight finals to Nadal's four gives Djokovic the bragging rights for now at the US Open.
 

Pheasant

Hall of Fame
To be fair, Nadal’s peak has been over since 2010, IMHO. He had a 2017-Fed type of year in 2013. But Nadal’s days of going to 5 Wimbledon finals in a 6 year span are long gone. Peak Nadal was insanely tough on all surfaces when he was clicking.
 
Wimbledon is not an issue for me as its Nadals worse surface.

And how many times have Nadal and federer played at USO? Or Edberg and Becker? 3 finals is a big number. Nadal has thr bragging rights for now at USO.
Nadals weakest surface is indoor hard. 0 WTF's

And Nadal doesn;t have any bragging rights at UO. He isn't defending champion :-D. Nor has he ever beaten Fed who has more titles Your tying ur self up in knots again :-D

Fognini has the edge vs Nadal at USO
 

Pantera

Banned
Nadals weakest surface is indoor hard. 0 WTF's

And Nadal doesn;t have any bragging rights at UO. He isn't defending champion :-D. Nor has he ever beaten Fed who has more titles Your tying ur self up in knots again :-D

Fognini has the edge vs Nadal at USO
Federer keeps losing early so he doesnt get to play Nadal. Nadals weakest Major surface is grass.

It seems to bother you Nadal beat federer way easier in paris than federer managed yesterday
 
Neither have 3 USOs fella lmao
Your tying yourself in knots again... Nadal doesn't have 5 USO :-D

Also Nadal is screwed if he faces Fognini this USO. Fognini has the edge even winning him on clay this year! and winning h2h at USO... remember this is your own logic. Tying yourself in knots :cry:
 
Federer keeps losing early so he doesnt get to play Nadal. Nadals weakest Major surface is grass.

It seems to bother you Nadal beat federer way easier in paris than federer managed yesterday
Tying yourself in knots. By your own logic, Feds weakest surface is clay, so his loss is no problem :-D

And Fed won 5 USO so by definition went deeper more than Nadal :-D

The problem has been Fognini and the like taking out Nadal at USO :-D
 
Federer keeps losing early so he doesnt get to play Nadal. Nadals weakest Major surface is grass.
More knots. Nadal lost the current USO and couldn't face Djokovic in the final :-D

What if Delpo crushes Nadal at this USO again? What if Nadal faces Fognini, he is screwed
 
Runners up spots mean nothing im afraid. Nadal and Murray do not cherish their AO records. Nadal 2-1 djokovic at USO is kudos for Nadal.
Head to heads mean nothing, I'm afraid. It's performance against the field that counts. Have you ever seen an Olympic medal table? When teams are tied for number of golds, they rank them by number of silvers, not by number of events directly competed against. So, Djokovic ranks higher than Nadal in the US Open table.
 

Pantera

Banned
Head to heads mean nothing, I'm afraid. It's performance against the field that counts. Have you ever seen an Olympic medal table? When teams are tied for number of golds, they rank them by number of silvers, not by number of events directly competed against. So, Djokovic ranks higher than Nadal in the US Open table.
Not what the professionals say. Nadal leads USO table as he has bragging rights..djokovic even admitted that
 

Pantera

Banned
More knots. Nadal lost the current USO and couldn't face Djokovic in the final :-D

What if Delpo crushes Nadal at this USO again? What if Nadal faces Fognini, he is screwed
Nadal 2-1 Djokovic...nadal was injured last year...hate to bring reality to bear but alas that was the case. He is fit this year. No.4 on the way
 
Not what the professionals say. Nadal leads USO table as he has bragging rights..djokovic even admitted that
Nadals bragging rights to Djokovic: I didn't win the latest USO top that mate. And Fed I have two less titles than you. Best thing you have posted so far :-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry:
 
Nadal 2-1 Djokovic...nadal was injured last year...hate to bring reality to bear but alas that was the case. He is fit this year. No.4 on the way
Nadal only beat Djokovic at AO and wimbeldon because Djokovic was injured.... oh wait Nadal has never beaten Novak at AO or a full wimbeldon match :cry::cry::cry::cry:

Nadal is an inferior athlete to Djokovic so I am not sure about your claims he will be uninjured at USO. Nadal is very frail and an inferior athlete to Djokovic so I doubt Nadal will be fit come USO time.
 

Pantera

Banned
Nadals bragging rights to Djokovic: I didn't win the latest USO top that mate. And Fed I have two less titles than you. Best thing you have posted so far :-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry:
Nadal 2-1 djokovic at USO is current reality. Federer has 0 USOs in the peak of Nadal and Djokovic. I am not posting opinion just fact. Why is it upsetting u so much. I cant change history. Sorry
 

Pantera

Banned
Nadal only beat Djokovic at AO and wimbeldon because Djokovic was injured.... oh wait Nadal has never beaten Novak at AO or a full wimbeldon match :cry::cry::cry::cry:

Nadal is an inferior athlete to Djokovic so I am not sure about your claims he will be uninjured at USO. Nadal is very frail and an inferior athlete to Djokovic so I doubt Nadal will be fit come USO time.
Erm again...you post opinions im sticking to facts. Nadal and djokovic same age..nadal has better numbers. Please go to wikipedia and see for yourself.
 
Nadal 2-1 djokovic at USO is current reality. Federer has 0 USOs in the peak of Nadal and Djokovic. I am not posting opinion just fact. Why is it upsetting u so much. I cant change history. Sorry
Nadal has 0 USO in Novaks peak 2014-2019. Sorry :cry: And he went 7-0 in Novaks other peak year 2011 and even lost every single clay match played that year :cry:. Nadal has 0 RG wins at Novaks peak :cry:

sorry :cry:
 
Erm again...you post opinions im sticking to facts. Nadal and djokovic same age..nadal has better numbers. Please go to wikipedia and see for yourself.
As i suspected WIkipedia is saying Nadal is always injured so it confirms Nadal is an inferior athlete to Novak :cry:
 

tudwell

Legend
Well, he lost several times in the clay season this year. Rome was his first clay final, so you can throw that excuse out the window.
Yeah, I don’t see how waltzing to the French Open title and then resting for almost a month would leave him tired for Wimbledon. The only tiring match he even played at the French was the final – and that only for the first two sets.
 

weakera

Legend
Obviously this looks damning for Bull but I think this stat is heavily skewed by how many Djokodal matches there were from 2015-16 and how few through 2017-18. And Rafas obvious neo backhand difficulty, there's really no excuse for. I mean the losses count and it is what it is, but it's not necessarily as simple as saying Bull can't win off clay.
 

Pantera

Banned
Obviously this looks damning for Bull but I think this stat is heavily skewed by how many Djokodal matches there were from 2015-16 and how few through 2017-18. And Rafas obvious neo backhand difficulty, there's really no excuse for. I mean the losses count and it is what it is, but it's not necessarily as simple as saying Bull can't win off clay.
Nadal is a triple USO champion so that makes any remark he cant win off clay defunct.
 

JackGates

Hall of Fame
Obviously this looks damning for Bull but I think this stat is heavily skewed by how many Djokodal matches there were from 2015-16 and how few through 2017-18. And Rafas obvious neo backhand difficulty, there's really no excuse for. I mean the losses count and it is what it is, but it's not necessarily as simple as saying Bull can't win off clay.
Then maybe people will finally learn not to put too much stock into the h2h. That's the point of these troll threads anyway.
 

weakera

Legend
Nadal is a triple USO champion so that makes any remark he cant win off clay defunct.
I don't think anyone believes he can't win off of clay. What's amazing to me is that there is more doom and gloom regarding Rafael and his future right now than there would have been had he simply lost to Kyrgios or Querrey. Because he lost to maestro people want to freak out. People have a serious tendency to overreact to and dramatize whatever is happening in the moment. Yesterday wasn't Bull's day but he played a good tourney overall and could have gone farther with some luck or a different draw. There's no shame in being the third to strongest player in the tourney on what is supposed to be your weakest surface. He has had a good season and I think he'll have a very good chance in NY.
 

Pantera

Banned
I don't think anyone believes he can't win off of clay. What's amazing to me is that there is more doom and gloom regarding Rafael and his future right now than there would have been had he simply lost to Kyrgios or Querrey. Because he lost to maestro people want to freak out. People have a serious tendency to overreact to and dramatize whatever is happening in the moment. Yesterday wasn't Bull's day but he played a good tourney overall and could have gone farther with some luck or a different draw. There's no shame in being the third to strongest player in the tourney on what is supposed to be your weakest surface. He has had a good season and I think he'll have a very good chance in NY.
Im certain Nadal will win USO...he would have won last year but for injury and he looked by far the best player in Indian wells this year before injury.

I think for many Federer fans Roland Garros really hurt as many felt federer had cracked the Nadal code but that match proved he was as far away as ever if the bounce was high so many are trying to spin wimbledon as significant...when in fact his true grass court rival awaits tomorrow.

Nadal is looking fantastic. Making semi finals or better at every slam. If federer loses ill be super confident Nadal will overtake 20 Majors
 

JackGates

Hall of Fame
H2h is vital. Every player knows their h2h record v their rivals.
Are you crazy, I was trying to throw you bone, so 14-0 since 2014 wouldn't look bad for Nadal and you aren't even smart enough to see I was on your side? Jesus, this is what I get trying to be nice and defend you. You are on your own buddy, if you can't even recognize someone offering you a hand.
 

James695

Rookie
Obviously this looks damning for Bull but I think this stat is heavily skewed by how many Djokodal matches there were from 2015-16 and how few through 2017-18. And Rafas obvious neo backhand difficulty, there's really no excuse for. I mean the losses count and it is what it is, but it's not necessarily as simple as saying Bull can't win off clay.
Plenty of fedal matches in 2017 though! Could have won any 4 of those to get a win on the board.
 

weakera

Legend
Plenty of fedal matches in 2017 though! Could have won any 4 of those to get a win on the board.
Plenty for sure. No answer for neo backhand, uber aggressive maestro for whatever reason. No where near his W18SF level yesterday. No excuses, it is what it is, an indictment of Rafa as well as Moya, Roig etc
 

James695

Rookie
Are you crazy, I was trying to throw you bone, so 14-0 since 2014 wouldn't look bad for Nadal and you aren't even smart enough to see I was on your side? Jesus, this is what I get trying to be nice and defend you. You are on your own buddy, if you can't even recognize someone offering you a hand.
He thinks head to head is important....except that it’s not.

Let him sit on that HMS titanic listening to the music while you enjoy that spacious lifeboat.
 

DSH

Hall of Fame
His backhand was atrocious yesterday, his serve is not weapon, his forehand is erratic, his return serve sucks, his lateral movement has declined so much, he is very incosistent and his mentality in moments of truth, dissapear.

He only plays offensively when the match is almost over.

It hurts for Nadal, but he has not been able to counteract the changes and tactics that his two top rivals have been able to cancel his game.
But that is what has happened and continues to happen several years ago when he confronts them on a surface that is not clay.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
I know, I know... Age excuse, age excuses everywhere... Unuversal answer for all tennis troubles Fed had since first defeats from Rafole, ie when he becomes old at 27... And almost forgotten mono @KINGROGER tm :giggle:
Nole didn’t start beating Federer regularly in slams until he was 32-34 years old.

Nadal on the other hand, Fed should’ve won one of W08 or the first two AO matches. No excuses for those really. Yeah he was older in 2012 and it was a ridiculously slow court but he still had he game to do it.
 
Basically post 2014 Nadal is actually a clay specialist, relative to the other ATGs, whereas I would always contest that view of him from 05-13. Needs to get lucky and avoid Djok/Fed to win any more non clay slams.
 
Erm again...you post opinions im sticking to facts. Nadal and djokovic same age..nadal has better numbers. Please go to wikipedia and see for yourself.
LOL Nadal has better numbers where? You just started talking about past 10 years. Djokovic in that time has won AO FO Wimb USO WTF and all the masters. Nadal has won USO and FO :-D
 
Not what the professionals say. Nadal leads USO table as he has bragging rights..djokovic even admitted that
Nah, Djokovic leads the USO table between the two. I'll take the view of the IOC over your assertion of the views of professionals. By the way, your view that only winning the title counts has the logical corollary that head to head doesn't matter if the winner goes on to lose later in the tournament. So, Nadal's victories over Federer in the Australian Open 2012 and 2014 don't count - Nadal won neither tournament, and nothing else matters. This makes the head to head between Nadal and Federer 1-1 in Australia in your view. My view remains that it's 3-1 Nadal and that your position makes no sense.

For what it's worth, I've long been committed to the view that every match matters and that it's thus a huge mistake to think that only winning the title counts. I don't think there has ever been a player for whom making the final of a major event is an insignificant achievement. This doesn't always work the way I want it to. For example, my favorite player, Stefan Edberg, won the only match he ever played with his biggest rival, Boris Becker, at Roland Garros. It was a semi-final in 1989. Edberg lost the final to Chang; however, Edberg was the only one of the two to make the final. So, he leads the head to head with Becker 1-0 and he got a round further than Becker ever did - final to semi-final. However, Becker made three semis (1987, 1989, and 1991) and Edberg only made one (1989), and it's my view that there's a very good case for thus saying that Becker has a better record at Roland Garros than Edberg. It's at least very close overall. As it is between Nadal and Djokovic at the US Open, where, however, Djokovic has a clear if slight edge.
 
Im certain Nadal will win USO...he would have won last year but for injury and he looked by far the best player in Indian wells this year before injury.
You can't be certain of something that isn't certain. You may be confident, but much of that confidence is ungrounded. The people whose living depends on their opinion being right - the bookmakers - think that Djokovic is favorite for the US Open. Djokovic's odds are 6/4 (roughly a 35% chance) and Nadal's odds are 5/1 (roughly a 15% chance).
 
Last edited:

JoshuaPim

Rookie
Im certain Nadal will win USO...he would have won last year but for injury and he looked by far the best player in Indian wells this year before injury.

I think for many Federer fans Roland Garros really hurt as many felt federer had cracked the Nadal code but that match proved he was as far away as ever if the bounce was high so many are trying to spin wimbledon as significant...when in fact his true grass court rival awaits tomorrow.

Nadal is looking fantastic. Making semi finals or better at every slam. If federer loses ill be super confident Nadal will overtake 20 Majors
LMAO I've read some pretty hilarious stuff over the last 24 hours but this takes the biscuit.
 

King No1e

Legend
He went from the hunter to the hunted very quickly. Just in 2015 he had a winning H2H against both of them. Now both of them own him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSH

Pantera

Banned
You can't be certain of something that isn't certain. You may be confident, but much of that confidence is ungrounded. The people whose living depends on their opinion being right - the bookmakers - think that Djokovic is favorite for the US Open. Djokovic's odds are 6/4 (roughly a 35% chance) and Nadal's odds are 5/1 (roughly a 15% chance).
Much depends on tomorrow though. If djokovic loses he will be crushed i think. He has upped the ante with pre match comments
 

Pantera

Banned
Nah, Djokovic leads the USO table between the two. I'll take the view of the IOC over your assertion of the views of professionals. By the way, your view that only winning the title counts has the logical corollary that head to head doesn't matter if the winner goes on to lose later in the tournament. So, Nadal's victories over Federer in the Australian Open 2012 and 2014 don't count - Nadal won neither tournament, and nothing else matters. This makes the head to head between Nadal and Federer 1-1 in Australia in your view. My view remains that it's 3-1 Nadal and that your position makes no sense.

For what it's worth, I've long been committed to the view that every match matters and that it's thus a huge mistake to think that only winning the title counts. I don't think there has ever been a player for whom making the final of a major event is an insignificant achievement. This doesn't always work the way I want it to. For example, my favorite player, Stefan Edberg, won the only match he ever played with his biggest rival, Boris Becker, at Roland Garros. It was a semi-final in 1989. Edberg lost the final to Chang; however, Edberg was the only one of the two to make the final. So, he leads the head to head with Becker 1-0 and he got a round further than Becker ever did - final to semi-final. However, Becker made three semis (1987, 1989, and 1991) and Edberg only made one (1989), and it's my view that there's a very good case for thus saying that Becker has a better record at Roland Garros than Edberg. It's at least very close overall. As it is between Nadal and Djokovic at the US Open, where, however, Djokovic has a clear if slight edge.
Ok see we look at it differently which is fair enough as i like u back your view up and im glad u bring becker and edberg up. Becker was my favourite back then and i never liked Edberg but for me Edberg had the better FO record.

So in a sense we are both right as we have 25 years of forming a view on this.
 
Ok see we look at it differently which is fair enough as i like u back your view up and im glad u bring becker and edberg up. Becker was my favourite back then and i never liked Edberg but for me Edberg had the better FO record.

So in a sense we are both right as we have 25 years of forming a view on this.
Yes, this is not something that is resolvable just one way or the other - there is room for legitimate disagreement. I did like Becker in later years, and was happy he won the 96 Australian Open.
 
Top