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

chjtennis

G.O.A.T.
When we talk about H2H supremacy between these 3 greats, we have to consider various factors + their ages. Federer is 5 years older than Nadal and 6 years older than Djokovic. That should make him clear underdog against the other 2. However, Federer still makes it close against Djokovic and beats Nadal everywhere outside clay. That should be an indication of the following facts;

1) Peak for peak, Djokovic v Federer with RF97A is even, or Federer has the edge by slightest margin. Being 6 years senior at the age of 38, Federer still pushes Djokovic all the way and sometimes beats him. I have never seen Federer as tired as he was during the 5th set of Wimbledon 2019 final, and that should make it clear he is physically nowhere near his prime. However, Federer is still physically fit, strong and quick enough to beat most of the other players who are just not as good as he is. In Djokovic, however, we have a player who is just good as Federer but 6 years younger, so Djokovic is expected to beat 38 yo Federer quite comfortably, but the fact that it is so close most of the times and, in fact, Federer beats him sometimes suggests that they are almost equal or Federer is better by the slightest margin of the two. These guys are like Mayweather and Pacquiao of boxing, still able to beat the best of the young and prime champions while being in their 40s themselves. Obviously, they are slower and physically not as good as they once were, but modern science has kept them in decent condition still, just enough to make them competitive at their advanced ages. If Hopkins is any indication, Mayweather and Pacquiao can maintain their supremacy well into their mid 40s. I don't know how that can translate into tennis, since tennis is a different sport from boxing, but it may be possible for Federer to stay relevant for another couple of years. We'll find out in due time, but that doesn't mean Federer should be expected to be at the same stage of his career as Djokovic or Nadal. He is 6 and 5 years older than the other 2 and that should be considered as a big factor when thinking of the peak for peak level of these 3 all time greats;

2) Peak for peak, Nadal has perhaps never been better than either Djokovic nor Federer with this bigger racquet and let's talk about Nadal v Djokovic rivalry first. Since Djokovic entered his prime in 2011, he has been dominant against Nadal and it should be clear. They are 1 year separated in age and that makes age a non-factor when talking about their rivalry. We can simply use their H2H as it is between them because they are from the same generation and not much has changed in their playing style or equipment. It is clear Nadal has been more consistent on clay, especially at RG, than Djokovic, but Djokovic has been better on other surfaces, even though Nadal has more USO titles. If they played at their peak level, it seems Djokovic dominates Nadal everywhere other than clay, but even on clay, they are quite even. Djokovic choked at their FO encounters a few times and lost more, but in other events, peak Djokovic has beaten peak Nadal plenty of times to make anyone confidently say at least they are even, but to be honest, I feel peak Djokovic beats peak Nadal anywhere, including clay. It won't be easy, because these two greats are very evenly matched, but Djokovic seems to have that extra bit of ability to just beat Nadal, even on clay. It seems Djokovic is closely but clearly above Nadal in terms of peak level, even on clay;

3) Peak for peak, when given a bigger frame that he is using now, Federer seems to hold advantage over Nadal everywhere except for clay. It has become clear in recent years since Federer switched to 97 sq inch frame, that heavily one sided H2H in favor of Nadal between these two was probably due to 2 factors - their more frequent meetings on clay and Federer's BH being a liability against Nadal's heavy topspin. When these 2 factors were removed by switching to a bigger frame and not playing on clay, Federer has beaten Nadal in every match except, of course, for their FO 2019 SF encounter, despite Federer being 5 years senior. Nadal enjoyed playing Federer on clay with Federer using a 90sq inch racquet as his advantage for a long enough period to build big H2H lead which eventually became big psychological block to Federer. Of course, it's not like Nadal is much inferior compared to Federer in terms of ability, it has always been extremely close between the two, but at this level, tiny little bit of factors change the outcome completely and that's exactly what has happened in the dynamics between their rivalry.

Overall, peak for peak, it seems Federer with the current racquet is quite even or slightly superior against Djokovic, and superior to Nadal, everywhere outside clay. Between Djokovic and Nadal, Djokovic is better than Nadal everywhere, even on clay, but just choked and lost at RG more than he should've. I think this should be quite an objective analysis of any serious tennis fans, peak for peak, H2H among these 3 greats.
 
Last edited:

AceSalvo

Legend
Lol, this is approaching the comical territory. No doubt Fedovic are on a payback trip with no destination in sight.

Another 4 years and it will be a "decade". Big implications right there.
 
Last edited:

beard

Hall of Fame
Aaaand another one
The Nadal GOAT talk has no meaning really . He cannot even get a set in like 20 attempts against djokovic ???
Yep

All these losses add further weight to the “inflation era” talk. he can’t beat his main 2 rivals anywhere but clay but vultures 2 USO when both are injured.
Another twist in tennis thriller... Fed fans are all about approving importance of h2h... Another thing that punched them back in face (as, only slams matter, 17>14...)... :laughing:

Ok now all 3 fanbases predominantly agrees... h2h matters... ;)
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
Another twist in tennis thriller... Fed fans are all about approving importance of h2h... Another thing that punched them back in face (as, only slams matter, 17>14...)... :laughing:

Ok now all 3 fanbases predominantly agrees... h2h matters... ;)
Titles, strength of competition, diversity of surfaces matter together with h2h. What is that you need clarification with ?
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
This fight between Fed fans and Nadal fans is useless anyway since Djokovic will be the one winning the AO anyway.
 

AceSalvo

Legend
4 time USO champion.
Convenient when Djokovic was having a death match against Fed and Stan in the SF while Nadal was on his cushion chair playing Youzhny/Gasquet. Nadal didn't even have to move a muscle.

Then a Surgery-ridden-Delpo/Kandy and Berretini/Madlad combo.

I am still in disbelief how someone could get this lucky at a slam. Its a fact USO draws "always" favored Nadal for a very long time.
 
Convenient when Djokovic was having a death match against Fed and Stan in the SF while Nadal was on his cushion chair playing Youzhny/Gasquet. Nadal didn't even have to move a muscle.

Then a Surgery-ridden-Delpo/Kandy and Berretini/Madlad combo.

I am still in disbelief how someone could get this lucky at a slam. Its a fact USO draws "always" favored Nadal for a very long time.
Balances his bad luck/tough draws at the AO though. Overall 5 HC slams sounds about right for him, IMO.
 
Convenient when Djokovic was having a death match against Fed and Stan in the SF while Nadal was on his cushion chair playing Youzhny/Gasquet. Nadal didn't even have to move a muscle.

Then a Surgery-ridden-Delpo/Kandy and Berretini/Madlad combo.

I am still in disbelief how someone could get this lucky at a slam. Its a fact USO draws "always" favored Nadal for a very long time.
So we ignore the fact that Medvedev played a great final in USO 2019? Lol, Federer fans do everything to bring Nadal down.
 

AceSalvo

Legend
Balances his bad luck/tough draws at the AO though.
huh? Just one tough draw. Bad luck is "Fed losing to Nadal 5 times at the FO and Fed losing CP's at Wimb". Nadal is not even close in that area.

2008, Nadal got the weakest QF and SF
2009, Simon in QF and Dasco in SF
2010, retired
2011, went out to Ferrer and would have face Murray while Federer faced Djoko
2012, tough one for Nadal
2014, Diomitrov in QF and back-from-injury Fed in SF
2015, lost to Birdman
2017, Fed got Wawrinka (USO16 Champion) in his half
2018, lost to Cilic
2019, Tiafoe in QF and first time SF Tsitsipas.
 

AceSalvo

Legend
So we ignore the fact that Medvedev played a great final in USO 2019? Lol, Federer fans do everything to bring Nadal down.
Medvedev played as good as Philippoussis and we know how Fed haters have treated Philippoussis. Its no different. Why only Fed haters are entitled to special interpretations??
 
huh? Just one tough draw. Bad luck is "Fed losing to Nadal 5 times at the FO and Fed losing CP's at Wimb". Nadal is not even close in that area.

2008, Nadal got the weakest QF and SF
2009, Simon in QF and Dasco in SF
2010, retired
2011, went out to Ferrer and would have face Murray while Federer faced Djoko
2012, tough one for Nadal
2014, Diomitrov in QF and back-from-injury Fed in SF
2015, lost to Birdman
2017, Fed got Wawrinka (USO16 Champion) in his half
2018, lost to Cilic
2019, Tiafoe in QF and first time SF Tsitsipas.
If you think Verdasco in AO 2009 was an easy opponent then you really should quit watching tennis. You are nothing but a hater.
 

AceSalvo

Legend
If you think Verdasco in AO 2009 was an easy opponent then you really should quit watching tennis. You are nothing but a hater.
LOL. So my post got deleted. Some touchy people around here who don’t like the truth.

“Doesn’t take a hater to say Nadal had easy draws. What difficulty player Nadal ends up playing is a different story.

Doesn’t take a hater to say Dasco is a known choker. Less a hater than those who claim Hewitt/Roddick/Safin weak era competition.

Easy for you guys to claim others are hating when all the hate was thrown around Fed. Goes both ways, I guess.”
 

titoelcolombiano

Hall of Fame
Big deal - Rafa prefers slower courts, Djoker and Fed prefer faster courts. Do we not know that already? Rafa has performed better off clay than Djoker and Fed have performed on it combined over their whole career. I love it how every stat trying to detract from Rafa's greatness has to have a caveat put in there like ''off-clay'' or ''since 2014'' - lol. Keep cherry picking. Leaving out the second most prolific surface on tour or picking a specific date in time to fabricate an 'embarrassing' stat is amusing.

Also, I am loving how Fed fans are all of a sudden quoting H2H related stats... so it does matter afterall ;)
 
Last edited:

The_Order

G.O.A.T.
huh? Just one tough draw. Bad luck is "Fed losing to Nadal 5 times at the FO and Fed losing CP's at Wimb". Nadal is not even close in that area.

2008, Nadal got the weakest QF and SF
Dafuq you on about? Fed didn't even take a set off Novak in the 08AO. Tsonga did...

2009, Simon in QF and Dasco in SF
Dasco was an incredibly difficult opponent that night... Then after a 5 hour battle, still took care of your boy and made him cry. Who did Fed face on his way to the final? Deer in headlights Delpo and his pigeon Roddick?

2012, tough one for Nadal
Yeah and came within a bee's dick of winning the whole thing.

2014, Diomitrov in QF and back-from-injury Fed in SF
What's easy about Dimitrov? He took care of your boy in last year's US Open...

2017, Fed got Wawrinka (USO16 Champion) in his half
Wawrinka who didn't play anywhere near his best at the AO while Grigor put in the performance of his career...

Why no mention of QF opponents this time? Oh yeah, because Fed got Mischa Zverev while Nadal had to face world #3 Raonic (who took care of Fed at Wimbledon the previous year).
 
D

Deleted member 763691

Guest
Rafa didn't even win a slam in 2015 and 2016 (and during those 2 years at slams he only lost to Djokovic at 2015 Roland Garros, and never lost to Federer at a slam), so Federer/Djokovic's wins over Rafa in those years are irrelevant.....as even Berdych, Raonic, Cuevas, Coric, Pouille, Dimitrov, Troicki, Lopez, Fognini and Verdasco were beating Rafa, and even Wawrinka and Murray on clay were beating Rafa in straight sets :)
So this thread subject is irrelevant because it contains 2015 and 2016, and beating Rafa in those 2 years was no achievement, as you saw the players I listed above.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Clay lover

Hall of Fame
I think it's a pretty known fact that Federer and Djokovic now have Nadal's number on non-clay courts and we don't need another agenda-driven post to remind us of that. I still contend that, early on in his career, Nadal relied more on his athleticism than the other two on hardcourts to make up for the inherent disadvantage of playing a spin-oriented game. It's only natural that age has taken more of a toll on Nadal's hardcourt game than the other two as he relied the most heavily on his speed and athleticism on it. I'm not even defending him--in fact I'm doing quite the contrary, his decline against the big 2 shows the limitations and inflexibility of his hardcourt game when compared to them--he just doesn't have the serve, shot-making or ability to flatten out shots and end points quickly to make up for the loss of his athleticism.

All these being said, it would be unwise to disparage his achievements--I believe that one should also be rewarded for doing well against the rest of the field since tennis is not just about three players. If Nadal beat Robredo /Del Potro who beat Federer, or beat Medvedev who beat Wawrinka who beat Djokovic, then sorry, he deserves the title.
 

Lew II

Legend
Big deal - Rafa prefers slower courts, Djoker and Fed prefer faster courts. Do we not know that already? Rafa has performed better off clay than Djoker and Fed have performed on it combined over their whole career. I love it how every stat trying to detract from Rafa's greatness has to have a caveat put in there like ''off-clay'' or ''since 2014'' - lol. Keep cherry picking. Leaving out the second most prolific surface on tour or picking a specific date in time to fabricate an 'embarrassing' stat is amusing.

Also, I am loving how Fed fans are all of a sudden quoting H2H related stats... so it does matter afterall ;)
But fast courts are 3 times more relevant than slow courts (AO, UO, WI, YEC, Olympics, 6 masters vs RG and 3 masters, one of which not mandatory).

Can Nadal say he's the best in tennis if he's the third best of his era 9 months a year? He needs the slam record just to enter the discussion.
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
Rafa didn't even win a slam in 2015 and 2016 (and during those 2 years at slams he only lost to Djokovic at 2015 Roland Garros, and never lost to Federer at a slam), so Federer/Djokovic's wins over Rafa in those years are irrelevant.....as even Berdych, Raonic, Cuevas, Coric, Pouille, Dimitrov, Troicki, Lopez, Fognini and Verdasco were beating Rafa, and even Wawrinka and Murray on clay were beating Rafa in straight sets :)
So this thread subject is irrelevant because it contains 2015 and 2016, and beating Rafa in those 2 years was no achievement, as you saw the players I listed above.
Yeah Federer and Nadal played a grand total of 1 time in 2015-2016.

And Djokovic has been pwning Nadal since 2013 so Nadal's form is irrelevant. 19 sets in a row on HC lost for Nadal and Djokovic counting back to 2013, this is a JOKE for a guy who's the world no 1. I guess Nadal is the world no 1 when it comes to beating Berrettini in the USO SF.
 

vanioMan

Legend
Yeah Federer and Nadal played a grand total of 1 time in 2015-2016.

And Djokovic has been pwning Nadal since 2013 so Nadal's form is irrelevant. 19 sets in a row on HC lost for Nadal and Djokovic counting back to 2013, this is a JOKE for a guy who's the world no 1. I guess Nadal is the world no 1 when it comes to beating Berrettini in the USO SF.
I just love it when some fans of other players devote 90% of their time to post about Rafa. Just admin you love the guy already, no one will blame you ;)

 
D

Deleted member 763691

Guest
Yeah Federer and Nadal played a grand total of 1 time in 2015-2016.

And Djokovic has been pwning Nadal since 2013 so Nadal's form is irrelevant. 19 sets in a row on HC lost for Nadal and Djokovic counting back to 2013, this is a JOKE for a guy who's the world no 1. I guess Nadal is the world no 1 when it comes to beating Berrettini in the USO SF.
But Djokovic played Rafa FOUR times on hardcourt in 2015-16, so that means of the 14 match losing streak FIVE of them took place during 2015-16 :)
Anyway, who cares what someone does in best-of-3-sets......Kyrgios leads Djokovic 2-0 in best-of-3-sets!

From 2014-2020, Rafa is 1-1 vs. Federer in hardcourt slam meetings, and Federer's only win was a 5-setter which Rafa was up a break in the 5th Set of.
And Rafa's win was a straight sets victory in the 2014 Australian Open SF!

From 2014-2020, Rafa is 0-1 vs. Djokovic in hardcourt slam meetings, and Djokovic's win was dubious because of Rafa's lack of conditioning-
"....because of the things that happened to me in terms of surgery, then what happened in Abu Dhabi, I was not able to work that much the defensive game. I worked a lot on the offensive game, but not that much on the defensive game.
To play against a player like him, playing the way he played tonight, I needed that defensive game to finally have the chance to be offensive, no?"
 
Last edited by a moderator:

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
But Djokovic played Rafa FOUR times on hardcourt in 2015-16, so that means of the 14 match losing streak FIVE of them took place during 2015-16 :)
You'd have a point if half of the matches were in 2015-2016 and not like 20-30%. The only difference that it made was that Nadal got owned some extra in 2015-2016 due to his level being lower than average and Djokovic's being higher than average.

You can't excuse 19 sets lost in a row on a particular surface no matter what happened.
 
Last edited:

titoelcolombiano

Hall of Fame
But fast courts are 3 times more relevant than slow courts (AO, UO, WI, YEC, Olympics, 6 masters vs RG and 3 masters, one of which not mandatory).

Can Nadal say he's the best in tennis if he's the third best of his era 9 months a year? He needs the slam record just to enter the discussion.
He's not the third best though, he is the best at RG and (out of the three) second best at the US Open. He's also won Canada fairly regularly and is the only one of the three to win the Canada, Cinci, US Open swing in the same season as well as the only one of the three to win the channel slam twice.

There's also a problem with taking the current surface and speed configurations and projecting it into the past. There has never been constistent surfaces or speeds at slam level. There was a time when there were three grass slams, there were a time when there were two clay slams and we live in a time now where there are two hard slams. The speed at Wimbledon has changed dramatically over the last 20 years and the speed at AO has varied a bit too since it changed to hard courts.

This is why the current ''slam distribution'' argument is irrelevant (other than winning them all which Rafa has done). No one looks back and puts an asterisk next to Laver's grand slam because three of the four were won on grass, very few hesitated to call Sampras the GOAT at the end of the 90's even though he didn't win RG and no one will look at distribution as a factor in the future.

Total slams, YE # 1 and weeks at number 1 are the most often mentioned stats when we are talking greatness. If we look at the three (Rafa, Djoker, Fed) only, Rafa is 2nd, equal 1st and 3rd in these categories and he is far from done.

Whilst we are on the topic, I'm curious for those that do consider distribution important, is 12-4-2-1 really that different from 7-5-3-1? Let's not confuse utter RG dominance like never before seen at a slam with failure at the other three.
 

Lew II

Legend
He's not the third best though, he is the best at RG and (out of the three) second best at the US Open. He's also won Canada fairly regularly and is the only one of the three to win the Canada, Cinci, US Open swing in the same season as well as the only one of the three to win the channel slam twice.

There's also a problem with taking the current surface and speed configurations and projecting it into the past. There has never been constistent surfaces or speeds at slam level. There was a time when there were three grass slams, there were a time when there were two clay slams and we live in a time now where there are two hard slams. The speed at Wimbledon has changed dramatically over the last 20 years and the speed at AO has varied a bit too since it changed to hard courts.

This is why the current ''slam distribution'' argument is irrelevant (other than winning them all which Rafa has done). No one looks back and puts an asterisk next to Laver's grand slam because three of the four were won on grass, very few hesitated to call Sampras the GOAT at the end of the 90's even though he didn't win RG and no one will look at distribution as a factor in the future.

Total slams, YE # 1 and weeks at number 1 are the most often mentioned stats when we are talking greatness. If we look at the three (Rafa, Djoker, Fed) only, Rafa is 2nd, equal 1st and 3rd in these categories and he is far from done.

Whilst we are on the topic, I'm curious for those that do consider distribution important, is 12-4-2-1 really that different from 7-5-3-1? Let's not confuse utter RG dominance like never before seen at a slam with failure at the other three.
Top10 met in USO, Canada and Cincinnati:

Djokovic 49
Nadal 27

Djokovic clearly underachieved. You can't argue that Nadal is better than Djokovic anywhere on hardcourt with a 19 sets losing streak, come on...
 

titoelcolombiano

Hall of Fame
Top10 met in USO, Canada and Cincinnati:

Djokovic 49
Nadal 27

Djokovic clearly underachieved. You can't argue that Nadal is better than Djokovic anywhere on hardcourt with a 19 sets losing streak, come on...
I'm not going to argue that Djokovic isn't the hardcourt King because it is not true, but there are specific instances that go against the grain in this rivalry:

US Open
Titles: Rafa 4-3
H2H: Rafa 2-1

Canada
Titles: Rafa 5-4
H2H: 1-1

Olympic Games
Titles: Rafa 1-0
H2H: Rafa 1-0

There is not one clay tournament that Djokovic has the better of Rafa in any way.
 
Top