Nadal 2005 vs 2009 vs 2011

Which season was better?

  • 2005

    Votes: 22 41.5%
  • 2009

    Votes: 5 9.4%
  • 2011

    Votes: 26 49.1%

  • Total voters
    53

Djokovic2011

Bionic Poster
Just wondering which of these Nadal seasons y'all consider to be better. With Sampras it's easy to work out his 6 best seasons(1993-98), with Federer it's 2004-07, 09, 17 and with Djokovic it's 2011-16 but where Nadal's best years are concerned it's not quite so clear cut. I mean 2008, 2010, 2013 and 2017 are obviously his top 4 followed by 2007 but which one comes next?

In 2005 he won 11 titles including RG and 4 Masters 1000s but failed to get past the 4th round at any of the other three majors and skipped the WTF entirely. In 2009 he won 5 titles including the AO and 3 Masters titles but failed to reach another slam final, didn't play Wimbledon and failed to win a single match at the WTF. 2011, which incidentally is the season with most ranking points, he only won 3 titles(RG, Monte Carlo and Barcelona) but did reach the Wimbledon and US Open finals which is a big plus compared to '05 and '09 as well as 4 more Masters finals although again he went out at the RR stage at the WTF.

Poll is up. Let me know which season you think is his sixth best.
 

User123

Hall of Fame
2011. 3 slam finals. And a gazillion of other finals too.
3 titles can't be called a good season. And even the titles he won: MC and Barcelona aren't tournaments anybody cares about, and even RG was undeserved. 2011 and 2014 RG titles did not really impress.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
3 titles can't be called a good season. And even the titles he won: MC and Barcelona aren't tournaments anybody cares about, and even RG was undeserved. 2011 and 2014 RG titles did not really impress.
Still, 3 slam finals in a season beats 2005 and 2009.
 

User123

Hall of Fame
Still, 3 slam finals in a season beats 2005 and 2009.
I think the right way is to judge by titles, not by finals and semifinals. So I'll go with 2005, with 2009 being very close behind. The first half of 2009 was amazing, especially that AO title. But the second half of the year was really bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: K-H

Djokovic2011

Bionic Poster
2011. 3 slam finals. And a gazillion of other finals too.
This is the season I'd give the edge to but I have a feeling a lot of Nadal fans will choose 2005 simply because he won eight more titles that year, including three more Masters. Be interesting to see which one comes out on top in the poll.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
2005 - He was not going to be anything serious in a non clay major

2011 - that he was going to lose to Djok every match was known well in advance

2009 - He was crazy good. Just that peak soderling has a higher level that he can bring in
 

User123

Hall of Fame
Nadal's 2011 would have been better than even than his 2010 season if it wasn't for one stunning guy...
For some reason Federer fans think 2008 was a terrible season for him, same as Djokovic fans think about 2013. Why? 3 slam finals and a semifinal is great, no? Without Nadal each one of them would have won 3 slams in that years.
 

NeverQuit

Rookie
2005 - He was not going to be anything serious in a non clay major

2011 - that he was going to lose to Djok every match was known well in advance

2009 - He was crazy good. Just that peak soderling has a higher level that he can bring in
Youre forgetting he was injured for the 2nd half of that season...
 

TheAssassin

Legend
For some reason Federer fans think 2008 was a terrible season for him, same as Djokovic fans think about 2013. Why? 3 slam finals and a semifinal is great, no? Without Nadal each one of them would have won 3 slams in that years.
They didn't go 0-6 in finals against one guy, they also lost to several players they hardly ever lost to in general. Nadal's only problem in 2011 was Djokovic. Clear difference.
 

User123

Hall of Fame
They didn't go 0-6 in finals against one guy, they also lost to several players they hardly ever lost to in general. Nadal's only problem in 2011 was Djokovic. Clear difference.
Sure. He was never straight setted by Ferrer in a slam, bageled by both Murray and Federer, lost to Tsonga, Fish, Dodig, Mayer...:rolleyes:
 
2011 by consistency - peak Djokovic was just too good for him at the time.

In 2005, Nadal had a superb clay season and two HC Masters to boot, but his results in non-RG Slams were weak - not a single QF - and he missed the YEC due to injury.

In 2009, Nadal was strong until RG, but then got kind of injured and lost to every top tenner he faced until end of season.

In 2011, after the AO injury, Nadal made every big final between IW and Wimbledon (that's 7 big finals in a row, only 2013 matches it for Nadal), winning 2 including RG. The 2nd half was relatively weak, but he still made the USO final, so surely better than 05 and 09.
 

NeverQuit

Rookie
For some reason Federer fans think 2008 was a terrible season for him, same as Djokovic fans think about 2013. Why? 3 slam finals and a semifinal is great, no? Without Nadal each one of them would have won 3 slams in that years.
Fed was great in 2008 aside from mono affecting his performance at AO and getting punked by peak Rafa at RG.
He played as good as ever at Wimbledon and USO.

2013 is a legitimate case for Nole as he played well below par , it was rather obvious to me at least.

Basically Nadal's best does not match well against best of Novak , Soderling and Delpo
So according to yourself Soderling was at his best for a whole one tournament in his whole career?
He already exited his peak a year later despite reaching RG final again ?!

2011 was peak nole and not peak Rafa...

As for Delpo , he was just coming off an injury , not much was to be expected.
 
For some reason Federer fans think 2008 was a terrible season for him, same as Djokovic fans think about 2013. Why? 3 slam finals and a semifinal is great, no? Without Nadal each one of them would have won 3 slams in that years.
2011 was Nadal's sixth best season - that's quite far from his best, but still good.

2008 is the same for Federer, being his seventh best season (now eighth by results, but level was certainly better than in 2017).
 

User123

Hall of Fame
Fed was great in 2008 aside from mono affecting his performance at AO and getting punked by peak Rafa at RG.
He played as good as ever at Wimbledon and USO.

2013 is a legitimate case for Nole as he played well below par , it was rather obvious to me at least.



So according to yourself Soderling was at his best for a whole one tournament in his whole career?
He already exited his peak a year later despite reaching RG final again ?!

2011 was peak nole and not peak Rafa...

As for Delpo , he was just coming off an injury , not much was to be expected.
Yes. 7 titles, including a slam, WTf and 3 masters is below par. But 3 titles is an amazing year. Great logic. Djokovic would have won 3 slams that year if not Nadal, you know. It would have been better than his 2015.
 

TheAssassin

Legend
Sure. He was never straight setted by Ferrer in a slam, bageled by both Murray and Federer, lost to Tsonga, Fish, Dodig, Mayer...:rolleyes:
He lost to Ferrer in a Slam before (and had some sort of an injury in their AO meeting), he was bageled by Federer (on clay and grass) before, he was demolished by Tsonga at a certain Slam few years earlier. The biggest upsets happened in the 2nd half of the season where Nadal simply tends to stink so it's not worth analyzing it any further. On the other hand Federer in 2008 and Djokovic in 2013 had way more unexpected losses. Much clearer drops.
 
Fed was great in 2008 aside from mono affecting his performance at AO and getting punked by peak Rafa at RG.
He played as good as ever at Wimbledon and USO.

...

2011 was peak nole and not peak Rafa...

...

2013 is a legitimate case for Nole as he played well below par , it was rather obvious to me at least.

Bias confirmed. Fed loses at peak, everyone else loses in bad form, such is the Nadalfan gospel, no?

Come on. Sure, tennisaddict posts a bunch of drivel, but why respond with some of your own?




As for Delpo , he was just coming off an injury , not much was to be expected.
Nadal had an abdominal injury in that semi, which is obvious to anyone except for those who can't doff their hater lens. Don't bother. Del Potro played extremely well, though, otherwise he wouldn't have been able to take even a diminished Nadal to the cleaners like he did.
 

NeverQuit

Rookie
Yes. 7 titles, including a slam, WTf and 3 masters is below par. But 3 titles is an amazing year. Great logic. Djokovic would have won 3 slams that year if not Nadal, you know. It would have been better than his 2015.
Well , yes , IMHO his level was way below his best that year.
He wasn't nearly as great as 2011&2015.

Do you really think a Nole who is playing well gets straight setted by Murray in a major final...
 

User123

Hall of Fame
He lost to Ferrer in a Slam before (and had some sort of an injury in their AO meeting), he was bageled by Federer (on clay and grass) before, he was demolished by Tsonga at a certain Slam few years earlier. The biggest upsets happened in the 2nd half of the season where Nadal simply tends to stink so it's not worth analyzing it any further. On the other hand Federer in 2008 and Djokovic in 2013 had way more unexpected losses. Much clearer drops.
I'm not surprised by the "logic" on this forum. 7 titles, including a slam, WTf and 3 masters, and just 9 loses in the year=terrible season. 3 titles, none of which was even fully deserved=amazing season.
 

TheAssassin

Legend
I'm not surprised by the "logic" on this forum. 7 titles, including a slam, WTf and 3 masters, and just 9 loses in the year=terrible season. 3 titles, none of which was even fully deserved=amazing season.
I never called either season terrible or amazing but even if I did that logic would still be far better than you suggesting Nadal's or anybody else's titles weren't fully deserved. Keep pushing your anti-Djoker agenda pal. :D
 

NeverQuit

Rookie
Bias confirmed. Fed loses at peak, everyone else loses in bad form, such is the Nadalfan gospel, no?

Come on. Sure, tennisaddict posts a bunch of drivel, but why respond with some of your own?






Nadal had an abdominal injury in that semi, which is obvious to anyone except for those who can't doff their hater lens. Don't bother. Del Potro played extremely well, though, otherwise he wouldn't have been able to take even a diminished Nadal to the cleaners like he did.
Im not a fan of any one particular player.

I can't speak for everyone but i didn't notice any noticeable decline between Federer's performance at 2008 Wimbledon and that of 2007.

In my subjective estimation Nadal was just too good that day.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
2011 by consistency - peak Djokovic was just too good for him at the time.

In 2005, Nadal had a superb clay season and two HC Masters to boot, but his results in non-RG Slams were weak - not a single QF - and he missed the YEC due to injury.

In 2009, Nadal was strong until RG, but then got kind of injured and lost to every top tenner he faced until end of season.

In 2011, after the AO injury, Nadal made every big final between IW and Wimbledon (that's 7 big finals in a row, only 2013 matches it for Nadal), winning 2 including RG. The 2nd half was relatively weak, but he still made the USO final, so surely better than 05 and 09.
only reason he didn't make any other slam quarters in 2005 was cause he ran into guys like Hewitt and Blake in the R16, doesn't mean anything. His AO level was as good as 11 if not better (since he got injured) and his USO level was as good as 09. The fact that he missed WTF in 05 means nothing considering he might as well have not shown up in 09 and 11 wasn't great either.

In terms of big tournaments, 05 was best on clay, in Canada, and post-USO
09 was best at AO/IW
11 was best at Miami (arguable with 05), Wimby, USO

Overall you probably have to go with 2011.
 

User123

Hall of Fame
I never called either season terrible or amazing but even if I did that logic would still be far better than you suggesting Nadal's or anybody else's titles weren't fully deserved. Keep pushing your anti-Djoker agenda pal. :D
Did you watch RG 2011? He played bad (by his usual RG standards) during the tournament and almost lost in the first round. He was lucky to win that one. Every multi slam winner has some lucky wins, you can't win everything just by skill. For Nadal it is RG 2011 and 2014 in my opinion.
 

Druss

Hall of Fame
I would have to go with 2009. His level of play in the first half of the season was impeccable. The best 12 month stretch Nadal ever had in terms of peak play and achievements was clay season 2008 to clay 2009.
 
Im not a fan of any one particular player.

I can't speak for everyone but i didn't notice any noticeable decline between Federer's performance at 2008 Wimbledon and that of 2007.

In my subjective estimation Nadal was just too good that day.
It's the fifth set, really. In 2007, after avoiding a break scare in the first few games, Federer was able to dig deep and produce a level nobody in this century could match on grass - there is no clear difference between Nadal's 2007 and 2008 final performances either, so "2008 Nadal would've been able to match it" isn't a sound argument. In 2008, Federer also saved a bunch of BPs throughout the fifth set, but was unable to raise his level afterwards, so Nadal continued to be superior and won in the end.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
2005 - Arguably had the best level on clay. Underrated HC level, ran into some tough opponents in slams but did well in Masters.

2009 - Awesome peak for the first 6 months, clearly the best when compared to either of the other years. But...garbage second half. Highest highs and lowest lows.

2011 - This was the most steady year in terms of performance across all surfaces. A step down from 2010 but still marvellous consistency. Only 3 titles but that mostly due to Peakovic.

At the big events:

AO: 2009 > 2005 > 2011
IW: 2009 > 2011 > 2005
MI: 2011 > 2005 > 2009
MC: 2005 > 2009 > 2011
Rome: 2009 > 2005 > 2011
Madrid: 2009 > 2011 > 2005 (DNP)
FO: 2005 > 2011 > 2009
Wimbledon: 2011 > 2005 > 2009 (DNP)
Can: 2005 > 2009 > 2011
Cin: 2009 > 2011 > 2005
USO: 2011 > 2005 = 2009
Shang: 2005 > 2009 > 2011
Paris: 2009 > 2011 (DNP) = 2005 (DNP)
WTF: 2011 > 2009 > 2005 (DNP)

That's a quick breakdown of how I see things roughly. So for fun, 3 points for top place, 2 for second and so on. No points for DNP. And 1.5 for tied.

2005: 23.5
2009: 29.5
2011: 25

It's close enough that I would give more preference to the slams. So I go with 2011.
 

King No1e

G.O.A.T.
2008 for Federer: He was still playing at a high level. Clearly better than 2017 or 2015 for example. Or 2003. In Slams he didn't really get "upset". In Australian Open he got thoroughly outplayed and outmatched by Djokovic. At RG he got embarrassed by Nadal, lost again at Wimbledon in the final, although he put up a hell of a fight, and played GoAT tennis at US Open. Not a bad season, just got pipped at the post many times.
2011 for Nadal: The best anyone could play and still end up #2. 0-6 in finals against Djokovic. Nadal was playing at his peak like in 2010, just that while Nadal had been dominating, Djokovic was reinventing himself. After going full God mode in 2010 US Open (yet still falling in the final to Rafa) Djokovic completely dominated him. It was all between those 2 people, Nadal and Djokovic, and Djokovic just kept winning. Take the 2011 US Open final. Not much difference in Nadal's game, but Djokovic didn't come in off of a miraculous career saver (he did come off an epic SF nevertheless), so a superhero fight ensued and Djokovic won. Djokovic continued it into early 2012, winning the Greatest Match Ever Played before Nadal found his footing and took control of the rivalry again.
2013 for Djokovic: Less dramatic opposite of 2011. Djokovic was playing as good as ever, but kept getting stopped by Nadal. He won Melbourne again. Then at RG despite losing to Nadal he played his heart out, like nothing we'd ever seen before. Wimbledon he just came up against a mountain. Andy Murray and practically all of Britain. And he got destroyed. 2013 US Open was again a reverse of the 2011 match, Djokovic played like a Superman, but Nadal had the kryptonite to repel him. And unlike the previous 2 season examples that I mentioned, Djokovic actually won the World Championship, finishing the year strong with a revenge win over his nemesis Nadal.
 

Hoshi

Rookie
2011 by a distance. Not his best level of play but it would have been an outrageous season if not for Novak hitting those crazy heights and matching up so well against Nadal.

2009 for me is a real lost year for Rafa. No injuries that year and he would have taken all four slams, I was convinced. Robbed of an absolute prime year by misfortune. Turned out to be a special year for Fed.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
2011 by a distance. Not his best level of play but it would have been an outrageous season if not for Novak hitting those crazy heights and matching up so well against Nadal.

2009 for me is a real lost year for Rafa. No injuries that year and he would have taken all four slams, I was convinced. Robbed of an absolute prime year by misfortune. Turned out to be a special year for Fed.
umm, no.

Nadal lost fair and square to Soderling in RG 09. (all those injury excuses were scripted by his camp as a coverup)

soderling hit him off court, nadal played a bit short.

To be noted that soderling converted 6 of his 7 BP chances

Only thing that was injured was nadal's pride after losing the match. He was perfectly healthy.
The injury thing is all cooked up BS from his camp and the ************* can swallow it, but not the others.

Here's the interview of nadal right after the match :

https://web.archive.org/web/20090621065546/http://www.rolandgarros.com:80/en_FR/news/interviews/2009-05-31/200905311243796048503.html

no mention whatsoever of any injury.

The excuses were crafted/planted by his camp later.
Would've lost to Delpo at USO, even without the abdominal injury, just that scoreline would have been better.

at Wimbledon, he'd have to go through a draw of Hewitt, Roddick, Murray and Federer to win it. Yeah, fat chance.
 

King No1e

G.O.A.T.
umm, no.

Nadal lost fair and square to Soderling in RG 09. (all those injury excuses were scripted by his camp as a coverup)



Would've lost to Delpo at USO, even without the abdominal injury, just that scoreline would have been better.

at Wimbledon, he'd have to go through a draw of Hewitt, Roddick, Murray and Federer to win it. Yeah, fat chance.
That last part.......what? Nadal's grass record as of now: 5 consecutive championship matches, titles in Stuttgart and Queen's, 20-match win streak at Wimbledon, back-to-back Wimbledon titles (missed one in the middle), "fat chance"
 

swordtennis

G.O.A.T.
2011 nadal was in the absolute worst form. He was also injured and burned out. He was playing way too much too. When I was at that rome final I was like how he even was able to walk on the court and to even get his racket on the ball. It was sad to see how shoddy his play was that year. He got back on track at the French open in 2012 tho. Then fell off completely on form until French open 2013. Then French 2014. Then French 2017. He was basically done career wise after 2014.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
That last part.......what? Nadal's grass record as of now: 5 consecutive championship matches, titles in Stuttgart and Queen's, 20-match win streak at Wimbledon, back-to-back Wimbledon titles (missed one in the middle), "fat chance"
yes, given the draw, fat chance.

if he had to face federer alone in the final, that'd be 50-50.
Given he'd have to go through Hewitt, Roddick and Murray to even get to Federer, yeah, fat chance.
 

ADuck

Hall of Fame
2011 was his best in terms of results because he was far more consistent compared to 2009, and in 2005 he wasn't even playing the big titles on hard or grass. However, he reached a higher peak in terms of form in 2009, however could not carry that form throughout the year due to injury and family issues. So I vote 2011.
 

aman92

Hall of Fame
In terms of achievement I'll have to give it to 2005...he won a slam each in all those seasons but he won 10 titles in 2005. And he was just a teenager! I think doing that sort of thing as a teenager is huge. If you personally ask Nadal, I am sure he'll rank the 2005 season ahead and consider 2009 and 2011 seasons a disappointment, especially after they came after his 2 best seasons in 2008 and 2010
 

peakin11mugs

Semi-Pro
Youre forgetting he was injured for the 2nd half of that season...
If you play you’re good enough. If you don’t play your not good enough. You don’t get paid. You don’t win anything. You don’t get ranking points

Is he really that injured or does he know he’s beat saving himself form clay which he will never miss?
 
Last edited:

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
2005 - He was not going to be anything serious in a non clay major

2011 - that he was going to lose to Djok every match was known well in advance

2009 - He was crazy good. Just that peak soderling has a higher level that he can bring in
Dude he was crazy good in 05 that was the start of his peak. Shame for him strong era opponents Hewitt and Blake too tough for him at HC majors. And of course his daddy Muller took him out at Wimbledon.
 

vanioMan

Legend
He made the SF of USO . Ran into Thor.

Basically Nadal's best does not match well against best of Novak , Soderling and Delpo
Long time since you've said something true on here. It doesn't indeed match well against Sod/Delpo, because it's just much better. With Novak it's kind of even.
 

Bender

G.O.A.T.
Results-wise 2011 because of the finals. Lack of actual titles is unfortunate.

Highest level of play--can go to any one of those three. Rafa at the AO 2009 was quite a spectacle, same goes with USO 2011 against Roddick (who was way past his best by then, but them passes tho), and Rafa was better at RG 2005 than he was in 2009 or 2011.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
2005. By far his best clay and HC form out of those years (aside from AO 09). 11 titles 89% win ratio.

Also lol at Federer’s 08 being peak level with 4 titles 15 losses. Only 08 USO SF/F were close to peak level.
 
Last edited:

metsman

G.O.A.T.
2005 by like a billion. By far his best clay and HC form out of those years (aside from AO 09). 11 titles 89% win ratio.

Also lol at Federer’s 08 being peak level with 4 titles 15 losses. Only 08 USO SF/F were close to peak level.
first and last sets of the SF were the only time he was close to peak level. Maybe the first set of the final. Maybe parts of MC/Hamburg too, but that's it. He was off basically all year.
 
Top