Nadal and Djokovic pro's and cons

[mxmx]

Nadal has been, at least for a while, seen as equal/greater/just below Federer. Djokovic caught up and may arguably take Nadal's (and Federer's) place.

Djokovic perhaps didn't have to face prime Federer as much as Nadal had to. While Nadal wins mostly on surfaces that needs to be vacuumed. Djokovic will probably be winning a lot more than Nadal, but the depth of field may be getting weaker and a prime rival hasn't really shown up.

Between the two, considering the above and factors of your own, who is AND will be seen greater? Perhaps Federer deserves this title more than they do. Or even Sampras for that matter because of peak levels or opponents they had to face on a everyday basis?

Personally (based on what I "saw" and HOW they play and handle themselves mentally):
- I cannot see Nadal as greater than Djokovic
- I cannot see Djokovic as greater than Federer
- It is hard to see who is greater between Sampras and Federer.

Results wise though, Djokovic will win.

 

[Arak]

Djokovic will end up with the highest numbers on paper. Who is better will always remain a matter of personal opinion. To me it’s Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Djokovic in this order.

 

[nov]

Djokovic will end up with the highest numbers on paper. Who is better will always remain a matter of personal opinion. To me it’s Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Djokovic in this order.

There is huge difference between what you like and who produce best results. If you put emotions aside, there is Djokovic best player. But you like players "Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Djokovic in this order".

 

[Arak]

There is huge difference between what you like and who produce best results. If you put emotions aside, there is Djokovic best player. But you like players "Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Djokovic in this order".

It’s not about what I like but about my personal opinion based on my own analysis and appreciation of someone’s game. I have no doubt that Djokovic will break all the records, even though he didn’t yet, but a year from now it’s going to be him holding all the records. I’m fine with that. In your opinion he’s the best player, but to me he’s not. I think there are better players than him. Breaking records is a circumstantial achievement dependent on many factors but excellence in play is an absolute value though it is also more subjective.

 

[TheNachoMan]

Djokovic perhaps didn't have to face prime Federer as much as Nadal had to.

AO 07, USO 07, AO 08, USO 09..Djokovic took his beatings and even won one.

And don’t say Fed’s prime ended in 2007. He was still very much in his prime in 09. Just a myth by Fed fans who want to discount Fed’s losses to Nadal

 

[mika1979]

Nadal has been, at least for a while, seen as equal/greater/just below Federer. Djokovic caught up and may arguably take Nadal's (and Federer's) place.

Djokovic perhaps didn't have to face prime Federer as much as Nadal had to. While Nadal wins mostly on surfaces that needs to be vacuumed. Djokovic will probably be winning a lot more than Nadal, but the depth of field may be getting weaker and a prime rival hasn't really shown up.

Between the two, considering the above and factors of your own, who is AND will be seen greater? Perhaps Federer deserves this title more than they do. Or even Sampras for that matter because of peak levels or opponents they had to face on a everyday basis?

Personally (based on what I "saw" and HOW they play and handle themselves mentally):
- I cannot see Nadal as greater than Djokovic
- I cannot see Djokovic as greater than Federer
- It is hard to see who is greater between Sampras and Federer.

Results wise though, Djokovic will win.

2011

 

[StannisTheMannis]

Djokovic will end up with the highest numbers on paper. Who is better will always remain a matter of personal opinion. To me it’s Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Djokovic in this order.

Quite funny how it was always about the achievements but now that Federer’s being taken down it’s about personal opinion.

 

[nov]

It’s not about what I like but about my personal opinion based on my own analysis and appreciation of someone’s game. I have no doubt that Djokovic will break all the records, even though he didn’t yet, but a year from now it’s going to be him holding all the records. I’m fine with that. In your opinion he’s the best player, but to me he’s not. I think there are better players than him. Breaking records is a circumstantial achievement dependent on many factors but excellence in play is an absolute value though it is also more subjective.

How you determine which is the best player?As far i understand, when you beat other player you are better, same with tournaments. These things are indisputable, everything else is about what you like.

 

[Arak]

Quite funny how it was always about the achievements but now that Federer’s being taken down it’s about personal opinion.

When did you ever see me post anything different? This has always been my opinion all along.

 

[mxmx]

There is huge difference between what you like and who produce best results. If you put emotions aside, there is Djokovic best player. But you like players "Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Djokovic in this order".

I disagree. If I use emotion, Agassi would have been better than Sampras. He was not.
I'm not a Federer fan yet give his game credit to basically be more or less equal to Sampras.

 

[Arak]

How you determine which is the best player?As far i understand, when you beat other player you are better, same with tournaments. These things are indisputable, everything else is about what you like.

Ok, so I wrote that Sampras is better player than Djokovic in my opinion. How do you determine that by match play if they never played each other? You can say Djokovic has more slams than Sampras, which would be correct.

 

[mxmx]

2011

1984

 

[Arak]

I disagree. If I use emotion, Agassi would have been better than Sampras. He was not.
I'm not a Federer fan yet give his game credit to basically be more or less equal to Sampras.

It is not emotional. It is a matter of opinion. Who is better, Pele, Maradona or Messi?

 

[zorglub76]

AO 07, USO 07, AO 08, USO 09..Djokovic took his beatings and even won one.

And don’t say Fed’s prime ended in 2007. He was still very much in his prime in 09. Just a myth by Fed fans who want to discount Fed’s losses to Nadal

Bear in mind that at AO 08 prime Federer was faced by a 20yo Novak. So, imagine peak Fed playing Felix Auger-Aliassime, currently best ranked 20yo.

 

[zorglub76]

It is not emotional. It is a matter of opinion. Who is better, Pele, Maradona or Messi?

You're comparing the styles of Pele, Maradona and Messi. You can't compare their results, because the results depend on the whole team those guys play with. With tennis, it's much easier, because your results reflect in 90% of times your skills.

 

[Arak]

You're comparing the styles of Pele, Maradona and Messi. You can't compare their results, because the results depend on the whole team those guys play with. With tennis, it's much easier, because your results reflect in 90% of times your skills.

90%? Yes probably. So hypothetical question: Djokovic is considered by his fans as the greatest ever. He is expected to hold all the records before the end of this year. What if, god forbid, he has an accident tomorrow and can’t play tennis anymore? He never achieves more than 19 slams and Federer and Nadal stay ahead. What then? Is he the greatest ever or not? In my opinion, he would still be. That’s why I said results are circumstantial.

 

[daphne]

Djokovic will end up with the highest numbers on paper. Who is better will always remain a matter of personal opinion. To me it’s Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Djokovic in this order.

Now when we know it we can be at peace.

 

[daphne]

It’s not about what I like but about my personal opinion based on my own analysis and appreciation of someone’s game

It means exactly what he said.

 

[daphne]

Quite funny how it was always about the achievements but now that Federer’s being taken down it’s about personal opinion.

Desperation and denial

 

[daphne]

How you determine which is the best player?As far i understand, when you beat other player you are better, same with tournaments. These things are indisputable, everything else is about what you like.

Not exactly! If you twist and turn it in your head and develop a perception based on a personal opinion it gives a totally different outcome. He has analysed it, you know!

 

[zorglub76]

90%? Yes probably. So hypothetical question: Djokovic is considered by his fans as the greatest ever. He is expected to hold all the records before the end of this year. What if, god forbid, he has an accident tomorrow and can’t play tennis anymore? He never achieves more than 19 slams and Federer and Nadal stay ahead. What then? Is he the greatest ever or not? In my opinion, he would still be. That’s why I said results are circumstantial.

Yes, that's why I say 90%. I think Borg is still in the GOAT race regardless of his numbers. The same as Monika Seles.

 

[Arak]

Yes, that's why I say 90%. I think Borg is still in the GOAT race regardless of his numbers. The same as Monika Seles.

I can disagree with you but I cannot say you are wrong. And you may very well have very valid arguments to support your stance.

 

[mika1979]

1984

Good book

 

[mika1979]

It is not emotional. It is a matter of opinion. Who is better, Pele, Maradona or Messi?

 

[mxmx]

It is not emotional. It is a matter of opinion. Who is better, Pele, Maradona or Messi?

Ronaldo.

If you read carefully, you will see that I basically agree.

If I'm honest to myself, Agassi is not better than Sampras. If I base it only on emotions, I may say that he is.

 

[mxmx]

Good book

McEnroe...not the movie or book.

 

[SonnyT]

Even if for some reasons, Djokovic will not be the Slams leader, he's still the best of the big 3.
- In 2010, Nadal dominated the tennis world; Federer couldn't do anything with him. Djokovic came along and emphatically dominated Nadal.
- In 2014, he ended Wimbledon's reign at Wimbledon, and took control there since. History will tell, but he might've done the same thing to Nadal at RG this year. And they can't do anything to him at his favorite major.
- The only one to win 4 majors in a row; the only one to have two sets of each.

Anyway, Nadal cannot be the GOAT. He built his whole resume on one tournament; goats have to be more versatile than that.

 

[Arak]

Ronaldo.

If you read carefully, you will see that I basically agree.

If I'm honest to myself, Agassi is not better than Sampras. If I base it only on emotions, I may say that he is.

Yes, I misread your post at first. Guilty as charged

 

[nov]

Ok, so I wrote that Sampras is better player than Djokovic in my opinion. How do you determine that by match play if they never played each other? You can say Djokovic has more slams than Sampras, which would be correct.

You cant because they played in different era. But you can compare their results at tournaments. Djokovic clearly ahead here.

 

[Deleted member 771911]

Nadal is declining, Novak is stable and has room to even improve a margin. Nole will end up greater.

 

[nov]

Nadal is declining, Novak is stable and has room to even improve a margin. Nole will end up greater.

Nothing weird here. Nadal game is based on power and running a lot, its imposible not decline at 35. Djokovic will play till his 40 or maybe less if slam race will be decided.

 

[mxmx]

They should speed up courts. Djokovic return vs Servebots may help the variation and balance the power.

 

[Deleted member 771911]

Nothing weird here. Nadal game is based on power and running a lot, its imposible not decline at 35. Djokovic will play till his 40 or maybe less if slam race will be decided.

I think Nole has such great depth of shot and precision and those factors might not be impacted by age and compensate to some degree for any loss of step.

 

[smalahove]

You're comparing the styles of Pele, Maradona and Messi. You can't compare their results, because the results depend on the whole team those guys play with. With tennis, it's much easier, because your results reflect in 90% of times your skills.

The thing that complicates tennis though, and makes the 90%-perspective less valid imo, is that tennis has gone through a significant change as a result of the the polyester string, which again has led to a deliberate choice by the governing authorities to slow the courts down. This is esp. important when assessing yesterday's ATG with the current ones. In addition, which is clear by watching both Nadal and Djokovic: this development has (almost) made obsolete technical skills, esp around the net, as it is a losing strategy to focus on developing these at the expense of f.inst. solid baseline technique.

What does the "best" player mean? It depends on what context you find relevant, and often that's why these debates go awry when one fails to clearly state this. Btw I do think there are metrics that are more important, or more precisely more historically/tradtionally relevant, than others when comparing players, such as # GS. But to me, comparing the big three is like comparing Messi and Ronaldo. One might end up with more trophies and goals than the other, but the fact is that they are vastly different player when it comes to playing style and strengths (/weakness). That is exactly how I see the big 3. At one time they were 4, and I understand why, because Andy is also a player that merits a place in the conversation (not as GOAT) based on his idiosyncratic playing style, which meshed well with the other 3.

Even though I'm not a big Djokovic fan, I hope he continues to play well, and that he is dethroned by a NextGen that actually deserves it. No one so far has even been close imo. Yes, Novak has lost the odd match, but besides Karatsev, no one has beaten him with a playing style that merits even the smallest of places in the conversation of the playing styles of the greats. (And Aslan will prob be a new Berdych imo)

 

[itrium84]

Djokovic will end up with the highest numbers on paper. Who is better will always remain a matter of personal opinion. To me it’s Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Djokovic in this order.

It's like with RG2021 - Novak just ended up with highest numbers on paper. He didn't really win the tournament. The best player is actually the one your personal opinion determines to be. Maybe Zverev is best player of RG2021, maybe Musseti, or even Federer, we will never know for sure. Numbers on paper are tricky.

 

[StannisTheMannis]

When did you ever see me post anything different? This has always been my opinion all along.

Sure Buddy.