Nadal - Djokovic H2H off clay

[TheFifthSet]

The thread mentions the "surface skewered" analogy but honestly compared to many tennis rivalries I actually think all "Big 3" rivalries were proportional compared to some of the biggest rivalries. Instead of starting a new thread about "surface skewered" take a look at some of the recent and older h2h surface distributions:

Medvedev-Zverev: Both split all 12 matches and all of them were played in HC. Zverev being the better clay player gets hurt without even 1 clay match. This was 100% surface distribution.

Medvedev-Nadal: All 6 played in HC and Nadal still leads 5-1. This is another 100% surface distribution.

Medvedev-Tsitsipas: 8 of the 10 matches are played in HC (80% distribution) while only 2 in clay. This helps Medvedev and his 7-3 lead.

Medvedev-Djokovic: 8 of the 10 matches played in HC (80% distribution) while one played in both grass and clay.

Osaka-Serena: All four matches played in HC (100% distribution) which helped Osaka lead 3-1. If one match played in grass or clay maybe tied 2-2.

Venus-Davenport: 20 out of their 27 matches played in HC (74% distribution) and this happened with 4 major surfaces. Davenport won 14-13 while Venus went 4-0 in grass. A very competitive rivalry.

Sabatini-Arantxa: One of the few examples of a clay skewered h2h. The distribution was 61% clay (14 out of 23) this helped Sabatina who was 10-4 in clay and 12-11 overall. Arantxa still lead 3-2 in slams.

Martina-Evert: Arguably the greatest tennis rivalry ever (or right up there) saw them play 80 times with 35 being played in low-bouncing and fast carpet which helped Martina. Once again, this is an era with four surfaces. Martina won the rivalry 43-37, and no excuses since Martina did have the edge 3-1 in USO. Evert's best surface was clay and got Martina only 14 out of 80 times, if you add 6 more to make it 25% (equal distribution) then it might be a different final H2H.

Lendl-Connors: 19 out of 35 matches played in HC (55% distribution) and in the era of 4 surfaces. Connors was 2-0 against Lendl in Grass and lost his final 17 matches off grass against Lendl. Perhaps if he had played a few more grass matches that could've turned that one-way-traffic around.

Lendl-Becker: Lendl won the h2h 11-10 but took a beating in Slams 1-5 and (4-7 BO5 overall). However, 11 of the 21 matches were played in carpet (52% distribution) and only 1 played in clay. Lendl was great in carpet but definitely would've benefited if he got Becker more often in clay especially RG.

Sampras-Edberg: 8 of the 14 matches played in HC (57% distribution with 4 surfaces) and no matches played in clay which hurt Edberg. However, Edberg was still 3-0
against Sampras Bo5.

Serena-Capriati: 8 of the 17 played in HC (47% distribution) with Serena winning 10-7 yet going 3-4 in slams.

Borg-Mcenroe: They split their 14 matches with Mcenroe going 3-1 in slams. However, 8 of the 14 matches played in Carpet (57% distribution) with 0 matches played
in clay. If Borg got Johnny a few times in clay the final h2h would likely be different.

There are definitely many more examples not listed above. As a result, when you have between 40-49% surface distribution in a three-surface environment the skewered argument is as another poster stated, "splitting atoms."

Edit: Added Sabatini-Arantxa.

The fact that skews exist elsewhere doesn’t mean there isn’t a surface skew within the Djokovic-Nadal rivalry…it just plainly means they exist elsewhere. Which, sadly, does leave us with the difficult task of examining each H2H individually before jumping to conclusions about its importance.

 

[Texas Tennis Fan]

unless I misunderstood, the content that follows the first sentence is a non sequitur.

There might be a talent and surface skew…but there’s definitely a surface skew.

The surfaces are the surfaces and they have not changed significantly for decades though people will argue that everything has slowed down and Nadal did have the benefit of the surface at the USO being the same as Canada with a high bounce and slow surface. It is not as if Nadal was focusing on clay courts when 75% of the tournaments were on clay and then they switched in 2010. Nadal and Uncle Toni made their bed of being great on clay and not so good on other surfaces by their choices of what to focus on. (Again, Nadal is one of the three best to ever play the game, in my opinion even with his clay skew that is skewed from the surfaces that everyone plays on).

 

[Texas Tennis Fan]

My point is that the surface skew makes up for whatever form skew (if any) there was—also fairly simple.


@Hitman already addressed early 2018, so which years are we talking about other than 2017? 2010? Nadal didn’t hit his stride on HC until the summer, and right as he did they played at the USO.

‘09? Post-AO (where Nadal would have been favoured, yes) Djokovic was actually the better player on HC by and large, and would have been favoured at the USO and possibly the next AO too.


09-10 were ironically years where the H2H surface distribution matched the tours lol, and despite those better results he trailed the HC H2H.

Being 'out of form' is on Nadal and his team. That is a poor excuse. I have never lost a match when I played every point to the top of my game. So, I was out of form, I guess, when I lost those 150 matches! LOL! Djokovic had a far better excuse in 2017 when he had elbow problems resulting in surgery.

 

[The_Order]

My point is that the surface skew makes up for whatever form skew (if any) there was—also fairly simple.


@Hitman already addressed early 2018, so which years are we talking about other than 2017? 2010? Nadal didn’t hit his stride on HC until the summer, and right as he did they played at the USO.

‘09? Post-AO (where Nadal would have been favoured, yes) Djokovic was actually the better player on HC by and large, and would have been favoured at the USO and possibly the next AO too.


09-10 were ironically years where the H2H surface distribution matched the tours lol, and despite those better results he trailed the HC H2H.

09 AO + IW? After Nadal's injury he was pretty much losing to everyone...

2010 WTF...

08 Miami he was in Nadal's half...

2013 Cinci

Since Moya has become Rafa's coach both Novak and Rafa have made it to 15 sf+ at big hc events... So Rafa has been there many times in recent years for him to take on... not Nadal's fault he couldn't reach him more often on his preferred surface...

 

[TheFifthSet]

Being 'out of form' is on Nadal and his team. That is a poor excuse. I have never lost a match when I played every point to the top of my game. So, I was out of form, I guess, when I lost those 150 matches! LOL! Djokovic had a far better excuse in 2017 when he had elbow problems resulting in surgery.

Indeed, but I’m not discounting those matches; I’m merely saying that Djokovic, too, had his fair share of misfortune (which we seem to agree on). At the end of the day the H2H is certainly not unfair to Nadal (which we also agree on).

 

[TheFifthSet]

The surfaces are the surfaces and they have not changed significantly for decades though people will argue that everything has slowed down and Nadal did have the benefit of the surface at the USO being the same as Canada with a high bounce and slow surface. It is not as if Nadal was focusing on clay courts when 75% of the tournaments were on clay and then they switched in 2010. Nadal and Uncle Toni made their bed of being great on clay and not so good on other surfaces by their choices of what to focus on. (Again, Nadal is one of the three best to ever play the game, in my opinion even with his clay skew that is skewed from the surfaces that everyone plays on).

Yes, I hear ya (‘cept for the part about Rafs being ‘not so good’ on other surfaces).

 

[The Blond Blur]

And my point is that the surface skew makes up for whatever form skew (if any) there was—also fairly simple.

Bolded: Then we’re cool on that front. My issue is when people cry about “the surface skew” but then brag about of the 2015-2016 wins as if those wins were something to be proud of.

@Hitman already addressed early 2018, so which years are we talking about other than 2017? 2010? Nadal didn’t hit his stride on HC until the summer, and right as he did they played at the USO.

In 2017 RAFA made the AO F, IW QF, Miami F, USO F, and Shanghai F. Based on how Joker was performing that year RAFA would have been favored in all those tournaments had they met. As far as 2010 goes, sure RAFA didn’t hit his stride on HC until the summer, but he was still performing better than Joker was on HC and again would have been favored in any H2H encounter that year. And given how Joker’s woes continued into 2018 he was actually very fortunate that RAFA got injured in the AO otherwise he wouldn’t have been favored in any early season HC encounter. For PETE’s sake the man lost to Taro Daniel on HC.

‘09? Post-AO (where Nadal would have been favoured, yes) Djokovic was actually the better player on HC by and large, and would have been favoured at the USO and possibly the next AO too.

Joker was defending champ and bowed out to Roddick in the AO. And based on how Nadavic were looking that tournament he would have lost to RAFA. In the spring HC season we’re in agreement that RAFA would have been favored there but they didn’t meet and RAFA did win IW. RAFA was injured during the 09 USO so sure he’d have been favored there. Disagree on the 2010 AO though. Joker lost to Tsonga who was clearly playing at a lower level than Murray that tournament.

09-10 were ironically years where the H2H surface distribution matched the tours lol, and despite those better results he trailed the HC H2H.

The HC H2H was basically 50-50 during that timeframe, but again there many times where RAFA was in much better form like in early 09 and Joker didn’t make it to him. And 09 also includes the fall indoor season where RAFA was losing to everyone. Pretty sure he didn’t win a single set in any of his matches in the YEC that year.

Like I said in the beginning of this poast, I’m cool with acknowledging a surface skew if the opposing side is willing to admit there was a form skew. Especially during the 2015-2016 period.

 

[TheFifthSet]

I agree , it's like they want the matches to be exactly distributed like how the tour is arranged , which is never gonna happen

I personally don’t want that, nor does it have to happen. What I want for its importance to be acknowledged when discussing these H2H’s. The fact that you’ll almost never get a proportionate distribution is kind of an admission that H2H’s are flawed and can rarely be taken at face value.

 

[King_ Zeglan12]

Kind of how most things are on TTW really.



Hey, what's worse, that or losing to players outside the top 100 at Wimbledon for several years straight?

I'd still say the HC losing streak but that's me... Good idea for a new thread lol

 

[King_ Zeglan12]

The reason that this disparity is so significant is that almost half of Nadal vs Djokovic matches have been on clay (48%) and yet Djokovic still leads the h2h. If it had been balanced in terms of court meetings over the years, Djokovic would have a lead of 10 wins over Nadal (34.5 to 24.5) and probably worse since a lot of the hardcourt and grass meetings would have been in the last 10 years when Djokovic has a crushing record against Nadal.

Almost half of the matches being on clay has equally the draw's fault as it was Nadal's, they both will always draw each other in the CC events like clockwork

 

[King_ Zeglan12]

I personally don’t want that, nor does it have to happen. What I want for its importance to be acknowledged when discussing these H2H’s. The fact that you’ll almost never get a proportionate distribution is kind of an admission that H2H’s are flawed and can rarely be taken at face value.

I agree, as always stats taken out of context are just meaningless

 

[TheFifthSet]

Bolded: Then we’re cool on that front. My issue is when people cry about “the surface skew” but then brag about of the 2015-2016 wins as if those wins were something to be proud of.

Cool, no chest-beating here.

In 2017 RAFA made the AO F, IW QF, Miami F, USO F, and Shanghai F. Based on how Joker was performing that year RAFA would have been favored in all those tournaments had they met.

‘17 was already conceded, but you can’t have your cake and eat it too with Shanghai: it’s one of Djoko’s better Masters, yet they’ve never met at that venue. How about all the other years Djokovic was romping there?

Fwiw they’ve also also only met once in Bercy, even though it’s one of Djoko’s best tournaments, and Nadal is about as hapless in any given year indoors (save for a few) as Djoko was in ‘17 overall.

As for IW, no, I wouldn’t pencil Nadal in for a win. The court was playing quick that year, Djokovic had the best win out of the two (against Delpo, not that it means much but point remains), and both were ineffectual in their losses (and no reason to think Nadal would be any less likely to lose to Kyrgios). That’s 60-40 Nadal at best without considering possible mental scarring from the other matches on HC.

As far as 2010 goes, sure RAFA didn’t hit his stride on HC until the summer, but he was still performing better than Joker was on HC

Hardly, AO is at best a wash (I would favour Djokovic in a direct match-up)…Nadal made the final of Doha, but Djoko won Dubai…again, at best a wash…slight edge to Nadal at IW, but both lost to Ljubicic and Rafa was nearing the end of a 1-11 streak against Top 10 on HC…edge to Nadal in Miami…slight edge to Djokovic in Canada/Cincy but splitting hairs there. Neither were in convincing form til Nadal hit a purple patch at the USO, and given their ranking they could’ve only met in SF/F…neither showed good form in the business end of big HC tournaments in practically any of these tournies.

and again would have been favored in any H2H encounter that year.

Disagree for above reasons. Besides, they already faced off twice, and both were in career-best editions of Nadal at those tournaments (with ‘13 a close second in both IMO). They could’ve of course played more, but how it would have panned out isn’t conclusive.

And given how Joker’s woes continued into 2018 he was actually very fortunate that RAFA got injured in the AO otherwise he wouldn’t have been favored in any early season HC encounter.

Sure but you can’t reasonably say Nadal would have smoked Djoko but for injury without factoring in that the only reason it would have been a gimme hypo win is because Djokovic himself was…recovering from injury, lol.

Joker was defending champ and bowed out to Roddick in the AO.

And Djokovic was in good form from Cincy ‘09-end of the year (straight-setted Rafa in Cincy fwiw), so who do you see being favoured at the USO?

In the spring HC season we’re in agreement that RAFA would have been favored there but they didn’t meet and RAFA did win IW.

IW yes, Miami no - we’ve seen the gap between them in Key Biscayne and there is a precedent to Nadal winning IW (in dominant fashion, even) b4 losing to Djoko there.

RAFA was injured during the 09 USO so sure he’d have been favored there.

Ah, missed this.

Disagree on the 2010 AO though. Joker lost to Tsonga who was clearly playing at a lower level than Murray that tournament.

Agree to disagree then. Tsonga was a tricky match-up for Djoko in those days (think he had won 3 of the previous 4 heading in) and he served far better in the QF than the semi, where he seemed clearly hampered against Fed…lowest serve speeds I can recall seeing from him.

Neither Djoko nor Nadal were ‘well’ in their defeats, but Nadal was too indisposed to even play on for three more games…

And 09 also includes the fall indoor season where RAFA was losing to everyone. Pretty sure he didn’t win a single set in any of his matches in the YEC that year.

Even in a good year, Nadal will generally be the underdog against Djoko indoors…you can’t find a set of conditions (I’d say even clay) where there’s a bigger average gap in level between the two.

To his credit Nadal does have two wins, but one was while Djoko was in the middle of five consecutive straight-set defeats that consisted of the following scorelines:

6-4 7-6, vs. Nalby (who was in red-hot form, so not the worst showing on its own).
6-3 6-2, vs. Santoro
6-4 6-4, vs. Ferrer
6-4 6-2, vs. Nadal
6-4 6-4, vs. Gasquet

If we’re disregarding ‘09, then Djoko’s form in ‘07 fall was at least as bad.

The other one was the alluded-to ‘10 YEC where Nadal was the best he’d ever been at that tourney.

Like I said in the beginning of this poast, I’m cool with acknowledging a surface skew if the opposing side is will to admit there was a form skew. Especially during the 2015-2016 period.

Sadly I can only meet you halfway lul. I think there’s a small form skew, but a big enough surface skew to say conclusively the H2H isn’t unfair to Nadal…if you want to call it even I won’t make a huge fuss, but remember I wasn’t even bragging about the H2H ITT…my initial comments were addressed to two posters that argued that a) there wasn’t a surface skew or b) that Nadal is behind because of ‘15-‘16 without mentioning the surface skew.

 

[The Blond Blur]

Cool, no chest-beating here.



‘17 was already conceded, but you can’t have your cake and eat it too with Shanghai: it’s one of Djoko’s better Masters, yet they’ve never met at that venue. How about all the other years Djokovic was romping there?

Fwiw they’ve also also only met once in Bercy, even though it’s one of Djoko’s best tournaments, and Nadal is about as hapless in any given year indoors (save for a few) as Djoko was in ‘17 overall.

As for IW, no, I wouldn’t pencil Nadal in for a win. The court was playing quick that year, Djokovic had the best win out of the two (against Delpo, not that it means much but point remains), and both were ineffectual in their losses (and no reason to think Nadal would be any less likely to lose to Kyrgios). That’s 60-40 Nadal at best without considering possible mental scarring from the other matches on HC.




Hardly, AO is at best a wash (I would favour Djokovic in a direct match-up)…Nadal made the final of Doha, but Djoko won Dubai…again, at best a wash…slight edge to Nadal at IW, but both lost to Ljubicic and Rafa was nearing the end of a 1-11 streak against Top 10 on HC…edge to Nadal in Miami…slight edge to Djokovic in Canada/Cincy but splitting hairs there. Neither were in convincing form til Nadal hit a purple patch at the USO, and given their ranking they could’ve only met in SF/F…neither showed good form in the business end of big HC tournaments in practically any of these tournies.



Disagree for above reasons. Besides, they already faced off twice, and both were in career-best editions of Nadal at those tournaments (with ‘13 a close second in both IMO). They could’ve of course played more, but how it would have panned out isn’t conclusive.



Sure but you can’t reasonably say Nadal would have smoked Djoko but for injury without factoring in that the only reason it would have been a gimme hypo win is because Djokovic himself was…recovering from injury, lol.




And Djokovic was in good form from Cincy ‘09-end of the year (straight-setted Rafa in Cincy fwiw), so who do you see being favoured at the USO?




IW yes, Miami no - we’ve seen the gap between them in Key Biscayne and there is a precedent to Nadal winning IW (in dominant fashion, even) b4 losing to Djoko there.


Ah, missed this.



Agree to disagree then. Tsonga was a tricky match-up for Djoko in those days (think he had won 3 of the previous 4 heading in) and he served far better in the QF than the semi, where he seemed clearly hampered against Fed…lowest serve speeds I can recall seeing from him.

Neither Djoko nor Nadal were ‘well’ in their defeats, but Nadal was too indisposed to even play on for three more games…





Even in a good year, Nadal will generally be the underdog against Djoko indoors…you can’t find a set of conditions (I’d say even clay) where there’s a bigger average gap in level between the two.

To his credit Nadal does have two wins, but one was while Djoko was in the middle of five consecutive straight-set defeats that consisted of the following scorelines:

6-4 7-6, vs. Nalby (who was in red-hot form, so not the worst showing on its own).
6-3 6-2, vs. Santoro
6-4 6-4, vs. Ferrer
6-4 6-2, vs. Nadal
6-4 6-4, vs. Gasquet

If we’re disregarding ‘09, then Djoko’s form in ‘07 fall was at least as bad.

The other one was the alluded-to ‘10 YEC where Nadal was the best he’d ever been at that tourney.



Sadly I can only meet you halfway lul. I think there’s a small form skew, but a big enough surface skew to say conclusively the H2H isn’t unfair to Nadal…if you want to call it even I won’t make a huge fuss, but remember I wasn’t even bragging about the H2H ITT…my initial comments were addressed to two posters that argued that a) there wasn’t a surface skew or b) that Nadal is behind because of ‘15-‘16 without mentioning the surface skew.

Yeah, we’re definitely going to have to agree to disagree lol. And I never said the H2H wasn’t unfair to RAFA. There’s just no way anyone can convince that Joker wasn’t extremely fortunate to not make it to RAFA (or Ol’ Rog for that matter) when he was in his slumping Crapovic form. Basically if people are going to cry about the surface skew I’ll be right there to throw that fact back in there faces. They both have had advantages that skew the H2H one way or another. My point that I keep going back to is that those advantages basically even things out. It’s mostly the Joker fans who won’t admit that his form skew evens the H2H out. I mean it’s basically a 50-50 split as is. That’s why I’m even in this thread because I knew a lot of them wouldn’t acknowledge that.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Yall are literally arguing over scraps lol

 

[The_Order]

Yeah, we’re definitely going to have to agree to disagree lol. And I never said the H2H wasn’t unfair to RAFA. There’s just no way anyone can convince that Joker wasn’t extremely fortunate to not make it to RAFA (or Ol’ Rog for that matter) when he was in his slumping Crapovic form. Basically if people are going to cry about the surface skew I’ll be right there to throw that fact back in there faces. They both have had advantages that skew the H2H one way or another. My point that I keep going back to is that those advantages basically even things out. It’s mostly the Joker fans who won’t admit that his form skew evens the H2H out. I mean it’s basically a 50-50 split as is. That’s why I’m even in this thread because I knew a lot of them wouldn’t acknowledge that.

So much is being made about this off clay h2h...

As far as I'm concerned, the off clay slam h2h is 5-3 in favour of Djokovic... could easily have been 4-4 or even 5-3 in favour of Rafa...

Novak had 4 chances to meet Nadal at the AO when Rafa was there waiting for him in the final and he failed to make it happen...

Blame Nadal for not making it to Novak more often at Wimbledon... that is on Nadal for being crap there for too long. This year it would have happened had Nadal not got himself injured again.

US Open, well Nadal has been the better player there anyway...

All the Bo3 losses I personally don't really care about too much to be quite honest...

 

[TheFifthSet]

Yeah, we’re definitely going to have to agree to disagree lol. And I never said the H2H wasn’t unfair to RAFA. There’s just no way anyone can convince that Joker wasn’t extremely fortunate to not make it to RAFA (or Ol’ Rog for that matter) when he was in his slumping Crapovic form. Basically if people are going to cry about the surface skew I’ll be right there to throw that fact back in there faces. They both have had advantages that skew the H2H one way or another. My point that I keep going back to is that those advantages basically even things out. It’s mostly the Joker fans who won’t admit that his form skew evens the H2H out. I mean it’s basically a 50-50 split as is. That’s why I’m even in this thread because I knew a lot of them wouldn’t acknowledge that.

Even though I disagree that it evens out perfectly, it’s fine and dandy if you think so…again I ain’t concerned with the H2H on its own, it doesn’t reveal much more or less than what their career accomplishments already evince and the differences regarding specific circumstances are largely academic. I reared my head in this thread only to counter comments that argued it’s to the contrary or denied the evident surface skew.

Though tbh I do think it’s mildly amusing that Nadal ended up getting passed in the H2H when his H2H superiority was so often brandished as a cudgel with which to beat Fed fans.

 

[The Blond Blur]

Even though I disagree that it evens out perfectly, it’s fine and dandy if you think so…again I ain’t concerned with the H2H on its own, it doesn’t reveal much more or less than what their career accomplishments already evince and the differences regarding specific circumstances are largely academic. I reared my head in this thread only to counter comments that argued it’s to the contrary or denied the evident surface skew.

Though tbh I do think it’s mildly amusing that Nadal ended up getting passed in the H2H when his H2H superiority was so often brandished as a cudgel with which to beat Fed fans.

Well the difference there was that the Fedal H2H was never that close. The Nadavic H2H is literally 30-29 which given that 59 is an odd number is as close as it gets. If RAFA was only one win up on Ol’ Rog it really wouldn’t be a big deal. That and RAFA managed to score big wins against Ol’ Rog in grass and HC GS Fs, but Ol’ Rog never had a big win on clay against RAFA. Rome 06 was the closest he came.

 

[King_ Zeglan12]

Yeah, we’re definitely going to have to agree to disagree lol. And I never said the H2H wasn’t unfair to RAFA. There’s just no way anyone can convince that Joker wasn’t extremely fortunate to not make it to RAFA (or Ol’ Rog for that matter) when he was in his slumping Crapovic form. Basically if people are going to cry about the surface skew I’ll be right there to throw that fact back in there faces. They both have had advantages that skew the H2H one way or another. My point that I keep going back to is that those advantages basically even things out. It’s mostly the Joker fans who won’t admit that his form skew evens the H2H out. I mean it’s basically a 50-50 split as is. That’s why I’m even in this thread because I knew a lot of them wouldn’t acknowledge that.

Agree , if Djokovic made it to Nadal 4 times in early 2017, all these off clay no wins, no sets would be thrown out of the window and who knows Nadal might have even won WIM 18 SF with these extra factors

 

[TheFifthSet]

Well the difference there was that the Fedal H2H was never that close. The Nadavic H2H is literally 30-29 which given that 59 is an odd number is as close as it gets. If RAFA was only one win up on Ol’ Rog it really wouldn’t be a big deal. That and RAFA managed to score big wins against Ol’ Rog in grass and HC GS Fs, but Ol’ Rog never had a big win on clay against RAFA. Rome 06 was the closest he came.

Hence mildly amusing instead of just simply ridiculous lol

 

[King_ Zeglan12]

While the general H2H is evenly matched , there is a RG skew in the slam H2H , this is mainly due to the draws pairing them in the opposite halves and Djokovic not being good enough to reach Nadal in 09-10,
Don't blame Nadal for the draws lol

 

[abmk]

In 2017 RAFA made the AO F, IW QF, Miami F, USO F, and Shanghai F.

IW 4R - nadal lost to fed. djokovic lost to Kyrgios.

As for IW, no, I wouldn’t pencil Nadal in for a win. The court was playing quick that year

IW wasn't playing quick in 17. It was typical. I was there at Indian Wells that year.
ok speed in day time - medium slow. on the slower side at evening/night time. Wawa was struggling to an extent to hit past Nishioka in the evening time with conditions cooler.

 

[jl809]

HC is the playing surface for 9 of tennis’ 14 (64.3%) premier tournaments, clay only 4 (28.6%)…with HC being Djoko’s best surface, and clay his worst, while clay is Nadal’s best and HC his second-worst. There’s clearly a surface skew.

I hope you are joking here.

Clay comprises only 1/4 of the ATP tour, so why are they meeting on clay so much? Again, the balance would be that 1/4 of the time they would meet on clay, and the rest off of clay. And don't give me the argument that if only the ATP tour was 50% clay, then Nadal would be way ahead. That is a poor argument.

Alrighty. Some people prefer H2Hs that reflect actual matchup ability across surfaces and accommodate for the fact the tour is skewed towards one surface. Some people clearly don’t.

Presumably the latter don’t mind that Federer and Nadal have only played 4 times on grass to 16 on clay - after all, there are 4 times more big clay tournaments than grass ones - and that Nadal’s resulting 24-16 H2H misleads casuals as to Fedal’s respective ability/adaptability/matchup across sufaces. Federer should have just prioritised the clay more over “rare” grass

Nadal when he was training knew that 1/4 of the tour was clay and yet he still focused his game on clay where there is a lot less competition. Then he conveniently avoids a substantial portion of the hard-court season, claiming injuries or fatigue that mysteriously disappear EVERY YEAR on clay. He is one of the 3 greatest players of all time; why not try to get better on hard court like Djokovic has on clay rather than play games like this?

Kuerten, Puerta, Coria, Federer, Ferrer, Djokovic… even Thiem more recently when there was no HC competition from 17-18…
If you’re doing the conspiracy theory stuff, we’re done here

 

[kevaninho]

That again comes to the point that Nadal has often made it to Djokovic when he was playing his best tennis on HC, but failed many times when he wasn't playing his best. While reverse is not true for Djokovic who has made it to Nadal on clay many times when he was playing well and many times when he was not playing well. So you are kind of telling us what we already know....Djokovic is the more consistent player.

Are we just going to forget all about 2015/16?

No one can say Nadal was playing great stuff then. And even the times he showed flashes, he was a nervous wreck on big points.

2015 China Open final, WTF semi final, 2016 Doha final, and Indian Wells final.

4 meeting from recent memory, where Djokovic was at his peak , and Nadal was up and down regards to form, yet he ploughed through to latter stages, only to be blitzed by Djokovic.

I dont think its fair to say that Nadal hardly reaches latter stages when hes off form. There are probably many more examples , but you cant overlook these.

 

[kevaninho]

He lost to Berdych in straights at Wimbledon and MELZER from 2-0 up. He had ZERO top 10 wins until match against Federer and needed two MPs. And I never compared with 2015 Nadal. 2017 was the worst year for Djokovic and 2015 for Nadal. 2016 2nd the worst for Nadal and 2010 for Djokovic.




This doesn't make ANY sense. So what if Nadal had already won all that in 2015/2016 and Djokovic hadn't in 2006?? How is that an argument in favor of Nadal. In 2006 Djokovic was a kid that hadn't achieved anything and Nadal faced him. Djokovic never had that luxury with Nadal. Even slump Nadal never left the top 10 in 2015/2016. Most players would rather face Nadal of 2003 than Nadal of 2015/2016. Djokovic in 2006 was an average player.

The difference being, that one was a young man , who hadnt found his peak level yet, and the other was a guy who had won 14 slams, past his peak, and was coming back from serious injury.

Do you not see any difference?

 

[BauerAlmeida]

The difference being, that one was a young man , who hadnt found his peak level yet, and the other was a guy who had won 14 slams, past his peak, and was coming back from serious injury.

Do you not see any difference?

Yeah, there's a difference. How is that difference relevant? Or how does it help Nadal? In any case, it helps Djokovic as he was a nobody at the time while Nadal had already achieved all that.

 

[King_ Zeglan12]

Are we just going to forget all about 2015/16?

No one can say Nadal was playing great stuff then. And even the times he showed flashes, he was a nervous wreck on big points.

2015 China Open final, WTF semi final, 2016 Doha final, and Indian Wells final.

4 meeting from recent memory, where Djokovic was at his peak , and Nadal was up and down regards to form, yet he ploughed through to latter stages, only to be blitzed by Djokovic.

I dont think its fair to say that Nadal hardly reaches latter stages when hes off form. There are probably many more examples , but you cant overlook these.

Draws are never considered in the same vein as other factors , clay events always paired up Djokovic and Nadal when possible while off clay was not quite the same

 

[Hitman]

Are we just going to forget all about 2015/16?



No one can say Nadal was playing great stuff then. And even the times he showed flashes, he was a nervous wreck on big points.

2015 China Open final, WTF semi final, 2016 Doha final, and Indian Wells final.

4 meeting from recent memory, where Djokovic was at his peak , and Nadal was up and down regards to form, yet he ploughed through to latter stages, only to be blitzed by Djokovic.

I dont think its fair to say that Nadal hardly reaches latter stages when hes off form. There are probably many more examples , but you cant overlook these.

No, we are not. But we are talking overall here, 2015/2016 doesn't account for the entire 15 years of the rivalry.

A significant amount of the time, he hasn't. Two years doesn't really overhaul that, brings it closer to parity, but it doesn't fully balance it.

 

[kevaninho]

Yeah, there's a difference. How is that difference relevant? Or how does it help Nadal? In any case, it helps Djokovic as he was a nobody at the time while Nadal had already achieved all that.

Cos youre mentioning that Nadal feasted on 2010 Djokovic, as if their situations were similar.

2010 Djokovic wasnt a 14 time slam champion and former world number 1.

Nadal was beating Djokovic aplenty before 2010. The situation with Nadal was clearly different. Infact alot of people claimed he was finished in 2015.

Youre the one who compared the Nadal beatdowns in 2015 to Nadal beating Djokovic in 2010 LOL

 

[BauerAlmeida]

Cos youre mentioning that Nadal feasted on 2010 Djokovic, as if their situations were similar.

2010 Djokovic wasnt a 14 time slam champion and former world number 1.

Nadal was beating Djokovic aplenty before 2010. The situation with Nadal was clearly different. Infact alot of people claimed he was finished in 2015.

Youre the one who compared the Nadal beatdowns in 2015 to Nadal beating Djokovic in 2010 LOL

Yeah, because the situations are similar. Both players were at their best beating a player who was having one of their worst seasons ever.

If the player won most of his titles before or after said season is totally irrelevant. I mentioned that because people act as if a top Djokovic beat a not-so-good Nadal but it never happened the other way around when it clearly did.

 

[Garro]

Eh what?
Meetings in Nadal's worst patch :- 7 (between 2015 and 2016)
Meetings in Djokovic's worst patch :- 1 (between 2017 and April 2018)

First, we're talking about off clay though, which means 4 matches between that time span, not 7.

Second, the significance of this is often overstated, because Nad has lost very badly to Novak on hard court outside of that time span (2013 Beijing, WTF, 2014 Miami, 2019 AO)
2016 Indian wells Nadal actually pushed Djoker more than any of the matches I listed, not to mention some of their early hard court matches.

And speaking of that....many of Rafa's hard court wins against Novak were pre-prime Novak for sure.
His very first masters final at Indian Wells, his first appearance at the Tour Finals in 07, or during Djokovic's 2010 season where he served more double faults than aces that year.

Surely that (more or less) balances out those 4 matches between 2015 and 2016, no?

 

[King_ Zeglan12]

Yeah, because the situations are similar. Both players were at their best beating a player who was having one of their worst seasons ever.

If the player won most of his titles before or after said season is totally irrelevant. I mentioned that because people act as if a top Djokovic beat a not-so-good Nadal but it never happened the other way around when it clearly did.

Sure , Djokovic had one of his worst seasons but his play in the final was prime level and he did play better than Nadal in 2011 ,IMO

 

[King_ Zeglan12]

First, we're talking about off clay though, which means 4 matches between that time span, not 7.

Second, the significance of this is often overstated, because Nad has lost very badly to Novak on hard court outside of that time span (2013 Beijing, WTF, 2014 Miami, 2019 AO)
2016 Indian wells Nadal actually pushed Djoker more than any of the matches I listed, not to mention some of their early hard court matches.

And speaking of that....many of Rafa's hard court wins against Novak were pre-prime Novak for sure.
His very first masters final at Indian Wells, his first appearance at the Tour Finals in 07, or during Djokovic's 2010 season where he served more double faults than aces that year.

Surely that (more or less) balances out those 4 matches between 2015 and 2016, no?

If we go pre prime Novak by 2011, then we can say majority of Djokovic's wins over Nadal on clay has been on post physical prime Nadal and his HC domination also began at the same time(late 2013)

 

[TheFifthSet]

Alrighty. Some people prefer H2Hs that reflect actual matchup ability across surfaces and accommodate for the fact the tour is skewed towards one surface. Some people clearly don’t.

Presumably the latter don’t mind that Federer and Nadal have only played 4 times on grass to 16 on clay - after all, there are 4 times more big clay tournaments than grass ones - and that Nadal’s resulting 24-16 H2H misleads casuals as to Fedal’s respective ability/adaptability/matchup across sufaces. Federer should have just prioritised the clay more over “rare” grass

I am not sure how this was relevant to any specific argument I made.

 

[Texas Tennis Fan]

Almost half of the matches being on clay has equally the draw's fault as it was Nadal's, they both will always draw each other in the CC events like clockwork

Assuming the draw is really not pre-arranged, there might be a small disparity in matches on surfaces that could favor one or another player. The problem is that Nadal and Djokovic have played more matches than anyone and there is this large clay-skew (the story of Nadal's career) in this enormous number of matches. That is not an accident.

So why is this? Contributions to the clay skew in their matches: 1) Djokovic goes deeper into all courts, including clay, so the two are more likely to meet there. (This is a weakness on Nadal's part for not making tournaments as deep in as Djokovic and this is documented); 2) Nadal is less likely to play hard court tournaments where he might meet Djokovic in the US swing after AO and in the summer swing in North America and the indoor swing as in Paris, Shanghai, etc. (this is also Nadal's weakness, because he does avoid playing those at a MUCH higher rate than he does in the clay court season in which he has missed almost no clay court tournaments and especially no RG since 2004); 3) Nadal could have injuries and miss tournaments which would be more believable if the injury times were equally spread throughout the season, but it is not; in fact one could say Nadal is one of the least injured players on the tour if you only look at the clay season (I consider this a Nadal weakness also since that is not the way injuries happen and he can merely state an injury or a flair-up of his foot when he is not "in-form' and thinks it is unlikely for him to win); 4) Nadal can overtly avoid Djokovic like it is suggested that he did in Wimbledon where he stated not that he was unable to play, but that he was unable to win (I am not saying he was not somewhat injured, but if you can play, then you ought to, IMO).

So this is gamesmanship of an unsavory kind that most objective people would not agree with if they look at the numbers. I can understand why Nadal would not want to play Djokovic since he has not beaten him in 9 years off of clay, nor Federer since 2014 in the last several years of Federer's play.

 

[AgassiSuperSlam11]

As for the Fedal surface distribution I don't see the skewered as impacting the H2H as others have said. It was essentially 50-40-10 with 60% played off Clay. The fact remains that Nadal beat Fed at Wimbledon on his 3rd try while Fed went 0-8 in BO5 clay against Nadal. I believe he even blew 2 Championship points at the Italian Open. Moreover, Nadal was still 3-2 BO5 HC and still ended up+8 in the overall H2H. Did Fed make it more respectful after changing to a bigger racquet and returning better off the BH? Yes, it became a much more respectful final tally.

 

[The_Order]

As for the Fedal surface distribution I don't see the skewered as impacting the H2H as others have said. It was essentially 50-40-10 with 60% played off Clay. The fact remains that Nadal beat Fed at Wimbledon on his 3rd try while Fed went 0-8 in BO5 clay against Nadal. I believe he even blew 2 Championship points at the Italian Open. Moreover, Nadal was still 3-2 BO5 HC and still ended up+8 in the overall H2H. Did Fed make it more respectful after changing to a bigger racquet and returning better off the BH? waiting for Nadal's defence to decline, Yes, it became a much more respectful final tally.

FTFY

 

[AgassiSuperSlam11]

FTFY

I actually appreciate this response to dispel the myth that "AgassiSuperslam" is part of the "Rafan" fraternity. Although I respect both Nole and Nadal actually partisan to the youngest generation as Alcaraz, Sinner, and FAA. You can't be a real "Rafan" if you supported Nole against Fed in the 2014 WImbledon FInal.

 

[Texas Tennis Fan]

FTFY

There is still a skew there though not as much. If off of clay had been 75% as with the tournament distribution, then Nadal's lead would be just a couple or so assuming their winning percentage off clay was similar.

So why is Nadal have a significant and in Djokovic's case huge clay skew in h2h. For all the reasons I mentioned earlier. This is just not a coincidence. There are enormous numbers of matches played against both Federer and Djokovic and there is a h2h skew to clay which shows THIS WAS BY DESIGN, NOT ACCIDENTAL.

 

[Texas Tennis Fan]

09 AO + IW? After Nadal's injury he was pretty much losing to everyone...

2010 WTF...

08 Miami he was in Nadal's half...

2013 Cinci

Since Moya has become Rafa's coach both Novak and Rafa have made it to 15 sf+ at big hc events... So Rafa has been there many times in recent years for him to take on... not Nadal's fault he couldn't reach him more often on his preferred surface...

Nadal is making it much deeper into non-clay matches with Maya, so good for him.

 

[Texas Tennis Fan]

Yeah, we’re definitely going to have to agree to disagree lol. And I never said the H2H wasn’t unfair to RAFA. There’s just no way anyone can convince that Joker wasn’t extremely fortunate to not make it to RAFA (or Ol’ Rog for that matter) when he was in his slumping Crapovic form. Basically if people are going to cry about the surface skew I’ll be right there to throw that fact back in there faces. They both have had advantages that skew the H2H one way or another. My point that I keep going back to is that those advantages basically even things out. It’s mostly the Joker fans who won’t admit that his form skew evens the H2H out. I mean it’s basically a 50-50 split as is. That’s why I’m even in this thread because I knew a lot of them wouldn’t acknowledge that.

But 'form skew"? isn't that on Nadal and his team? I could say that Djokovic never lost a match when he is 'in-form." No kidding, Captain Obvious. That is almost a tautology as in 'Nadal doesn't win when he plays poorly.' That is not an explanation; that is an excuse.

 

[Texas Tennis Fan]

Yall are literally arguing over scraps lol

I like you MN, but explain why Nadal manages to have 48% of his matches (the greatest number between two players ever) on his favorite surface when 25% of the tournaments are on clay? And 40% against Federer. It is a shame, because Nadal is too great of a player to play these sorts of games.

 

[The_Order]

Nadal is making it much deeper into non-clay matches with Maya, so good for him.

Right. So it's Djokovic's fault for not reaching him more often...

 

[The_Order]

I like you MN, but explain why Nadal manages to have 48% of his matches (the greatest number between two players ever) on his favorite surface when 25% of the tournaments are on clay? And 40% against Federer. It is a shame, because Nadal is too great of a player to play these sorts of games.

Nadal made it to 5 US Open finals... Federer didn't meet him once...

Nadal made it to 6 AO finals... Federer made it to him only twice...

Nadal made it to WIM finals in 2010 and 2011... no Federer to meet him...

That's 11 matches right there... not to mention all the non slam off clay events Nadal made it to the final and Federer didn't reach him...

Then there's the times Fed was in Nadal's half/quarter of the draw and didn't reach him...

As for clay, Nadal has pretty much been a constant. Basically always there, always going deep in majority of the clay events he enters. No wonder they've played as many times as they have on clay...

 

[MichaelNadal]

I like you MN, but explain why Nadal manages to have 48% of his matches (the greatest number between two players ever) on his favorite surface when 25% of the tournaments are on clay? And 40% against Federer. It is a shame, because Nadal is too great of a player to play these sorts of games.

Bc Djokovic would be the clay GOAT without Nadal

 

[The Blond Blur]

But 'form skew"? isn't that on Nadal and his team? I could say that Djokovic never lost a match when he is 'in-form." No kidding, Captain Obvious. That is almost a tautology as in 'Nadal doesn't win when he plays poorly.' That is not an explanation; that is an excuse.

In 2015-2016 RAFA was past his prime and Joker was at his peak. Joker got to pile up a ton of wins during that time. In 2017 when Joker was no longer in his prime and RAFA had regained his form by reinventing his game Joker was nowhere to be seen. Had Joker been able to make it to RAFA then he would have been crushed. If that went over your head that’s on you.

 

[Texas Tennis Fan]

Right. So it's Djokovic's fault for not reaching him more often...

No, just said it was deeper. Not as deep as Djokovic in the slams normally.

 

[Texas Tennis Fan]

Bc Djokovic would be the clay GOAT without Nadal

No following the reasoning.

Look, think of a dice that has 4 sides on it. You might get a 1 two or three times in a row by coincidence. But if you roll the dice 59 times, then the chance of getting a 1 (for clay) 48% percent of the time is vanishingly small. Therefore, it is not an accident. It may be because Nadal has not made it deep enough to meet Djokovic in non-clay tournaments and this has often happened. But it is also because he avoids hardcourt tournaments while almost always making the clay court ones.

So you guys can deny all you want, but the statistics is on my side.

 

[GabeT]

Sigh, is this still on?
Let it go people.

Nadal is better at clay. Novak is better at grass and HC

end of story

 

[The_Order]

No, just said it was deeper. Not as deep as Djokovic in the slams normally.

Djokovic has won 1 more hc slam than Nadal since Moya. Next.

 

[Hitman]

Sigh, is this still on?
Let it go people.

Nadal is better at clay. Novak is better at grass and HC

end of story

Exactly. Nadal on clay, Djokovic everywhere else.