Nadal and indoor tournaments
- Thread starter Mainad
- Start date
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
My take...
Nadal is quite underrated indoors, just like how we talk about how much more Federer and Djokovic would have won on clay, it is clear Nadal would have a handful of big indoor titles in his trophy cabinet. Unfortunately for him, he has had to go up against the HC GOAT Federer and the second HC GOAT Djokovic just too many times. If he managed to get by one, the other stopped him.
Take those two out, he could have won a bunch of WTF, Paris 09, Shanghai 17, Basel 15 and I am sure a few others.
And yes, he cares dearly about winning everything...he is a champion, he was born to win, and I have seen him fight in extreme visible pain to compete for the one big title missing from his cabinet.
And I find the hyprocrisy funny here...all slams are equal because it is 2000 points right? Well then that makes WTF second biggest, and unarguably the biggest event outside of the slams since it gives 1500 points...funny how I see some trying to have their cake and eat it too.
Nadal is quite underrated indoors, just like how we talk about how much more Federer and Djokovic would have won on clay, it is clear Nadal would have a handful of big indoor titles in his trophy cabinet. Unfortunately for him, he has had to go up against the HC GOAT Federer and the second HC GOAT Djokovic just too many times. If he managed to get by one, the other stopped him.
Take those two out, he could have won a bunch of WTF, Paris 09, Shanghai 17, Basel 15 and I am sure a few others.
And yes, he cares dearly about winning everything...he is a champion, he was born to win, and I have seen him fight in extreme visible pain to compete for the one big title missing from his cabinet.
And I find the hyprocrisy funny here...all slams are equal because it is 2000 points right? Well then that makes WTF second biggest, and unarguably the biggest event outside of the slams since it gives 1500 points...funny how I see some trying to have their cake and eat it too.
D
Deleted member 757377
Guest
Fedovic and conditions, but I also think in autumn he rests after the RG-WI-UO effort.
EloQuent
Legend
Some stats. Nadal's indoor and outdoor HC record from 2005-2017. Just HC, no clay, grass, carpet.
Year Indoor Outdoor
2005 100%* 79%
2006 62% 77%
2007 67% 74%
2008 70% 85%
2009 64% 83%
2010 75% 83%
2011 71% 76%
2012 --** 85%
2013 78% 94%
2014 67% 78%
2015 77% 69%
2016 --** 64%
2017 67% 83%
As you can see, in all but two years Nadal did better outdoors than indoors. I'm afraid that Federer+Djokovic doesn't explain this career-long marked difference.
Stats are from Wikipedia with some excel calculations, if I made a mistake please correct me.
*Only one indoor HC event played in 2005: Madrid, which he won.
**No indoor events played in 2012 & 2016.
Year Indoor Outdoor
2005 100%* 79%
2006 62% 77%
2007 67% 74%
2008 70% 85%
2009 64% 83%
2010 75% 83%
2011 71% 76%
2012 --** 85%
2013 78% 94%
2014 67% 78%
2015 77% 69%
2016 --** 64%
2017 67% 83%
As you can see, in all but two years Nadal did better outdoors than indoors. I'm afraid that Federer+Djokovic doesn't explain this career-long marked difference.
Stats are from Wikipedia with some excel calculations, if I made a mistake please correct me.
*Only one indoor HC event played in 2005: Madrid, which he won.
**No indoor events played in 2012 & 2016.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 512391
Guest
While this is true, it has to be said that he hasn't been able to lift his game to a level that would allow him to beat these guys. Players like Nalbandian and Davydenko managed to win the tournament by beating peak or prime and definitely an in-form Federer, but I've never seen Nadal producing such a high level-performance at WTF (though he was impressive, for his standards, in 2010, but still lost the third set to Fed convincingly and barely passed Murray in the SF) and has fallen short every time even though he's had many chances, especially against Federer - 2006, 2007, 2010, 2011.
So, I'm not that convinced that he would've won all these tournaments even without Fedovic in the draw, he's simply more vulnerable under the indoor conditions which, imo, explains his not that impressive results at WTF or any other tournament under the roof (on hc).
Plamen1234
Hall of Fame
Conditions doesnt suit him - it is pretty clear.If he wasnt for Fed and Novak he would have won 1 WTF and few other indoor titles.
D
Deleted member 512391
Guest
I agree, 1 WTF sounds about right, but I don't think he would've won multiple titles there.
EloQuent
Legend
Random aisde, but why was Nadal better on HC in 2005 than in 06-07? And not really much behind 08 on. Just statistical noise?
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
I am not calling him an indoor God, but I also feel that the absence of Fedovic and he gets at least a couple, and we would not be saying he sucks so bad
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
Can't moonball to the opponent's backhand with the same success. His one trick is nullified.
Plamen1234
Hall of Fame
Most probably.Anyway it is not easy to predict what will happen in alternative situations.We can do the same about RG - if Nadal wasnt there how many titles would have Fed and Novak - nobody really knows that
Yeah take away both Fed and Novak and he’d probably win in 2010 and 2013. Maybe Paris 09 and Basel 15 as well but that’s about it.
abmk
Bionic Poster
Maybe he wins 1 YEC without one of Fed or Djokovic. But I don't see him winning multiple.
He probably loses Shanghai 17 to Delpo.
Don't think he wins Paris in 09 either. He wasn't that great in the 2nd half of 09. Monfils took Djokovic to a 3rd set TB, where Nadal got crushed by Djoko winning 5 games.
Djokovic had also eliminated Soderling in a 3-setter in Paris 09 in the QF. Soderling would beat Nadal soon in the YEC 09 RR.
Nadal also had to save 5 MPs vs Almagro earlier in the tournament.
Basel 15 is a definite possibility for Nadal. Probably wins that.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
Djokovic was not amazing end of 09 either, so his perfomance against Monfils, a known choker in finals isn't one will go with personally.
Nadal could have won WTF 07, 10 and 13 with peak versions of Fed and Djoko not around. WTF 10 was one of Fed best ever runs at any event.
07 he would have to get past González in the SF. Not easy on a fast HC.
D
Deleted member 512391
Guest
And Ferrer in the final, who beat him in their RR match.
abmk
Bionic Poster
didn't say Djoko was amazing. But he was playing some good tennis .He had considerably more trouble vs both Monfils& Soderling than vs Rafa.
Also, like I mentioned Rafa had to save 5 MPs vs Almagro early on in the tournament.
Considering all of that, I don't think Nadal would be favored to win Paris 09 without Djokovic.
Eliminating both Federer/Djokovic just makes it pretty poor. Take out just one of them to be more realistic.
Without Fed , Nadal is favorite to win 10. Without Djoko, Nadal is favorite to win 13.
07, it'd be a battle b/w Ferrer and Nadal. Ferrer had beaten Nadal in the RR and was in his best indoor form ever.
D
Deleted member 512391
Guest
He definitely doesn't suck with two finals and three more semifinals. What I meant to say is that some players were able to pass the obstacles like prime Fed...Nadal couldn't do it.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
Sure, never said it was. But take Federer out, and his chances massively increase to win.
True. But BO5 final back then at WTF, and it being a final helps Nadal.
D
Deleted member 512391
Guest
It being a final helps Nadal, I agree. Though Ferrer beat him at the USO that year, so I'm not sure about BO5 being an advantage for Nadal, especially on a surface that doesn't suit his game.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
You can talk about that Almagro match...bottom line he got past it. Nalbandian was pasting him in IW also, Nadal outplayed, Nalby choked...game over. I am not going to underestimate the choking ability of these guys personally. Regardless of Nadal's form, especially with Monfils.
I give Nadal adv, BO5, Nadal a better player.
This is all my opinion of course.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
Sure. I agree. I just do not think Nadal sucked that bad. That is like saying Roddick sucked on grass because he could not get past Fed. IMO.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
That was the one time I truly feel Nadal was injured. He was holding his knees and at one point collapsed to the floor in pain, holding the knee. I do not think he was fully fit in that match.
abmk
Bionic Poster
Nalby was an excellent HC player and a troublesome matchup for Rafa. Rafa being in trouble vs him is not an indicator that he was playing poorly per se in IW.
Rafa-Almagro have played 4 HC matches and Rafa won their other 3 HC matches in straights. So Rafa nearly losing to Almagro in straights in Paris indicates that his form wasn't upto par. So is him getting blanked by Djokovic, winning only 5 games.
And Djoko took out Soderling in the QF. If it was Soderling vs Rafa, there is a good chance Soderling takes out Rafa. (He did beat Rafa in the YEC on a somewhat similar surface a couple of weeks later)
Its not just Monfils that Rafa would have trouble with.
I'd personally give a slight edge to Ferrer given how he was playing, but I could see it going the other way too.
So that's fine.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
I get what you are saying, I just disagree, and I know you don't have an issue with that.
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
Nadal played in 2013 against a much better version of Djokovic than Murray faced in 2016.
Sometimes it is luck that defines who has a title and who does not.
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
He would have won at least two, or even three WTF titles without them: 2010, 2013 and 2015.
2006 and 2007 are not ruled out, either.
USO
Banned
Nadal has reached the final of the WTF on two occasions and lost to two indoor greats Federer and Djokovic. He was not as lucky as them because when they won their only FO they didn’t meet him in the final.
Basically Nadal would have won the WTF had he not met these two. Another thing also is that he has missed it many times and usually after the USO he doesn’t care as much for that whole part of the season.
I think Nadal is a solid indoor player but we will see if this will materialize into a few more titles.
Basically Nadal would have won the WTF had he not met these two. Another thing also is that he has missed it many times and usually after the USO he doesn’t care as much for that whole part of the season.
I think Nadal is a solid indoor player but we will see if this will materialize into a few more titles.
big ted
Legend
no secret rafa has a very polarized game style.. the same reason hes unstoppable on
clay is why his results arent that good on fast indoor courts (for an all time great)...
the opposite of sampras, rafas achilles heel is the WTF.. whether that means something
or not in the dispute for GOAT is another story.. (i personally think it does tho..)
clay is why his results arent that good on fast indoor courts (for an all time great)...
the opposite of sampras, rafas achilles heel is the WTF.. whether that means something
or not in the dispute for GOAT is another story.. (i personally think it does tho..)
clayqueen
Talk Tennis Guru
Nadal's lack of WTF titles is due more to being absent because of injury or playing and pulling out because of injury and nothing to do with Federer, Murray or Djokovic. Murray has never even beaten Rafa at the WTF.
WTF Finals Nadal vs
Federer 1-4
Djokovic 2-3 - hardly dominant
Murray 2-0
WTF Finals Nadal vs
Federer 1-4
Djokovic 2-3 - hardly dominant
Murray 2-0
Last edited:
clayqueen
Talk Tennis Guru
Can we conclude that Djokovic and Federer's styles are polarised because of their lack of singles Olympic Gold? Djokovic played 1 singles match at LC and lost to Kevin Anderson. Rafa played 3 big servers at LC, Raonic, Isner & Sock. Won 2 and lost 1 against Isner.
Last edited:
NonP
Legend
The comparison with Sampras is quite interesting and makes more sense than one might gather at first glance. (I explored this very topic in a group chat back in June, in a reply to @Bender much of which follows with added stats and minor editing.) Of course the stock retort is that at least Rafa reached two finals at the YEC while Pete couldn't even manage a single one at RG, but there are only 5 rounds in the former while a major requires 7 hurdles to clear. That's one caveat that has special bearing here as it's generally agreed that burnout was the big reason for Pistol's straight-set loss to his career pigeon Kafelnikov in the SF (more on this shortly) - not to mention that you can take one loss and still win the YEC (in fact Pete never won the whole shebang undefeated, three times thanks to Becker who may well be the best indoor player ever), but since Rafa didn't suffer a RR loss in the two years he reached the final we'll ignore this part - but the follow-up will be that YECs tend to attract superior opposition so let's look at each guy's actual draws.
Pete at '96 FO:
SF - Kafelnikov
QF - Courier
4R - Draper
3R - Martin
2R - Bruguera
1R - Gustafsson
Rafa at '10 YEC:
F - Federer
SF - Murray
RR - Djokovic, Berdych, Roddick
'13 YEC:
F - Djokovic
SF - Federer
RR - Ferrer, Berdych, Wawrinka
On paper Rafa's opposition does look somewhat more impressive, but when you dig deeper he's really got only one big win in the '13 SF vs. Fed. Two if you include the '10 RRer vs. Novak, which still is the same # of Pete's own big Ws at '96 RG against almost-turning-back-the-block Bruguera and Courier. (I'd say '96 Martin and '10 Murray more or less cancel each other out.) And while Kafelnikov in '96 won "only" 57.6% of his games on clay (excluding TBs) his conversion rate at RG was a stellar 64.3% (all FO stats in this post include TBs) - higher than Fed's 58.4% in '09 and just barely below Novak's 64.9% in '16 or Muster's 64.5% in his celebrated '95 season where he won 62.0% overall. There's no guarantee that even in-shape Pistol gets past this Kafelnikov at RG or, for that matter, Rafa vs. a comparable opponent at the YEC.
Plus Pete's '96 FO run isn't his only notable one on clay, in fact I personally like to nominate his '95 DC heroics as the single greatest achievement of his career. Let's look at his DC opponents on clay that year:
QF - Furlan, Gaudenzi
F - Chesnokov, doubles w/Martin vs. Kafelnikov/Olhovskiy, Kafelnikov again
We can dismiss the QF and you could add Chesnokov was past his prime by then, but Pete's victory over the scrappy Muscovite (who, like all good comrades, treated DC very seriously) was a hard-fought one, and when you couple that with his unexpected next-day doubles duty and the following day's masterclass against next year's FO champ (who FYI won a respectable 55.7% on clay in '95 which probably was higher as he played 6 of his 8 singles DC rubbers on the surface) you can easily argue that his performance in the '95 DC finals was as good as anything from Rafa in any indoor setting, if not even better.
Now one could counter that if we're counting Sampras' DC performance Nadal's five DC title runs must also be considered, but Rafa's major DC triumphs have come mostly on clay and when we compare players' indoor records we're almost invariably talking about their performance on hard/carpet. What else then? Rafa's '05 Paris is more or less equal to Pete's '94 Rome, while the former's '13 Brasil Open on clay is about as meaningful as the latter's '92 Kitzbühel or '98 Atlanta. Maybe you feel differently but I'm not seeing much of a gap between the two.
One thing I'll grant Nadal is his superior longevity/consistency, though even here I could argue that Pete's comparable resume in a shorter time frame is in fact a point in his favor. But the purpose of this analysis is not to argue Pistol was a better clay-courter than Rafa the indoor player, but to point out that these two were similarly strong (or not) in their prime and merely glancing at each's best FO/YEC records is a poor way of judging their actual respective prowess on clay/indoors. Both could play inspired tennis anywhere, but would fall short of other GOATs on their own weakest surface more often than not.
D
Deleted member 771911
Guest
Another way to spin this would be why haven't the rest of the big 3 and 4 managed to do quite so well on Clay?
abmk
Bionic Poster
@ bold part, no way.
Murray at YEC 2010 (more specifically the semi) > any version of Martin on clay. Its not even remotely close.
Nadal's win over Murray in YEC 10 is Nadal's most impressive win, not the one vs Fed in YEC 13 (injury affected season and played a well below par match) nor the one vs Novak in YEC 10 (with contact lens issues - starting from about ending stages of set 1?)
NonP
Legend
I won't pretend to have seen that Martin match or for that matter much of him on clay, but take a gander at this (YT page):
2 SPs on Pete's serve in the 3rd. Maybe Todd had one of those days when he punched well above his weight?
Also I was still following non-Slam action pretty closely in '10 and don't remember Muzz at that YEC pushing Rafa all that much harder than he did Fed in '08, if at all. I'm still thinking this is closer than you insist.
Anyhoo the gist of my post was that you can't just glance at Rafa's later rounds at the YEC and declare him superior to Pete on their worst surface. If you acknowledge that Rafa's win over Novak in '10 or Fed in '13 is less than meets the eye we don't disagree much.
BackhandDTL
Hall of Fame
I’m sure he will be fine without the Christmas all star exhibition.
One more non clay slam and it’s a done deal. Paris/Miami for bonus points.
One more non clay slam and it’s a done deal. Paris/Miami for bonus points.
Similar threads
