Nadal does best against Nole on slow, medium or fast paced HARD COURTS?

[Nathaniel_Near]

TOO LONG DID NOT READ VERSION

***​

Djokovic is overrated on faster HC's. Nadal and Murray are as good as him there. Djokovic might be the greatest ever on slower HC. Djokovic has an 8-2 ish record against Nadal in such conditions. Nadal has beaten Djokovic in many important events on non-slow HC conditions such as the Beijing Olympics and two US Open finals.​

***​

Here is an interesting question or two...

In what hard court conditions does Nadal do best and worst against Djokovic?

What sort of general speed and bounce of HC surface would Nadal favour if he could choose against Djokovic?

How important is the outdoors indoors factor?

And anything else you can think of...

I'll paste a conversation from another forum and the sort of lead in for the actual premise of this thread.


So here's an interesting (boring) discussion which I will continue later but in the meantime you guys might have some thoughts on it over on this far superior forum. Firstly though, the TL;DR version:

***​

Djokovic is overrated on faster HC's. Nadal and Murray are as good as him there. Djokovic might be the greatest ever on slower HC. Djokovic has an 8-2 ish record against Nadal in such conditions. Nadal has beaten Djokovic in many important events on non-slow HC conditions such as the Beijing Olympics and two US Open finals.​

***​

Omnipotence
"Nadal's form for 2013 was also spectacular; especially noteworthy are his 24 wins against top-ten players during the year.

2010 was Nadal's most successful year but it holds less gravitas than his 2008 accomplishments and the level he produced arguably wasn't better than the level he produced in 2013.

IIRC Nadal only achieved 11 top-ten wins in the 2010 season, and 4 of them came at the YEC's. He maintained his level of play through the 2011 season but had his confidence knocked by a player who raised his personal game to new heights and laid the proverbial smack-down on Nadal and Federer (and the tour) for almost the entire year.

Of course, the easy way out of explaining Nadal's 2011 results is that he declined or played worse, except it doesn't stand up to scrutiny when actually analysing his results throughout the year which are almost identical to 2010 except for one big difference: Novak Djokovic had truly arrived. Nadal's peaks and troughs are volatile, such as him producing form on clay in 2012 that is comparable to 2008.


Deal with it."


duong
"Imo, 2011 was the year where the top-4 in general has been at its best level-wise (including the rest after the top-4 2009 was the greatest year imo)

Federer also played great in 2011 imo, at least in slams and in the indoor-season.

I think it was his best in slams in the years after 2009.

I wouldn't say it was the absolute best of Nadal and Murray but it was not far.

I think the difference for Nadal between 2011 and the later years was that he had a better tactics against Djokovic, at least on hardcourts (on clay Djokovic never was as good as he had been in 2011 again)

Generally speaking I would say Nadal's best on clay was in 2008 (on grass 2007-2008) and on hardcourts in 2013.

Overall I can't consider 2010 as Nadal's best year : 2008 and 2013 were both better imo, I've personally finally defined 2013 as Nadal's best year."

Omnipotence
"I agree mainly with duong, though might prefer 2012 to 2011 in terms of ranking the recent strongest years in tennis.

2011-2012 was certainly the zenith in my mind for recent tennis history. On paper 2010 looks like Nadal's best year but the gravitas that surrounded his conquering of Federer in 2008 and the rounded excellence of his more developed and experienced game in 2013 mark them out as more impressive years for me. Nadal won the 2013 US Open often playing like Federer used to, with sheer expression, finesse and offensive brutality. He was maybe more zoned in during the 2010 US Open but his game was substantially less expressive. The level that Nadal displayed at those two events is certainly comparable."

Johnny Groove
"Rafa haters like to point to 2011 and say Nadal played his best and couldn't beat peak Djokovic and that means Nole is better, end of story

What a pathetic fallacy.

Yes Nadal played a very good level in 2011 and more importantly, w/o injuries. Yes Djokovic beat him up, but so what? What about every year before or since? One year does not make a champion. 10+ years makes a champion.

Nadal's peak at respective tourneys:

AO- 2009 though also 2012
RG- 2008, and 2010 can also be argued
Wimbledon- 2007, 2008, and 2010 were all very very good
USO- 2010 and 2013

So no, Nadal's peak was not in 2011. Prime, sure, but peak? No."

Omnipotence
"I'm not sure that is what everyone is saying. The recent additions to this thread suggest that Nadal maintained his level and Djokovic bettered him and the tour, and that following this period Nadal made tactical adjustments (which he did) and dealt with Djokovic.

Tennis is about call and response. Djokovic besting Nadal in 2011 does not mean Djokovic >> Nadal. It means he bested Nadal in 2011. The (deeply unfortunate) assumption from many (especially Nadal) fans is that the only way that Djokovic could have possibly bested Nadal is if Nadal drops his level and even quite substantially, which is disrespectful to Djokovic and just flat out wrong based on watching the tennis closely from both years and analysing the results. Nadal played about as well in 2011 as he did in 2010 and got bested. Is this a knock on Nadal? No.

Djokovic bested Nadal for one year - big whoop!** Since then, although Djokovic had been the dominant player on tour since 2011 relatively speaking, Nadal has had Djokovic's numbers in the Slams and has a better conversion rate for Majors entered.

Djokovic besting a Nadal who more or less maintained his 2010 form but had his confidence knocked due to bumping into a player who entered beast mode is no knock on Nadal, who is clearly the greater player and has better peak levels at RG, and arguably the US Open on HC (supposedly Nole's turf) and grass.

Djokovic besting Nadal in 2011 just means exactly that... that in the H2H sense he bested Nadal clearly for one year of their entire careers. Nice job from Djokovic, but he only achieved the feat once.

Nadal's peaks and troughs are volatile and his peak/prime and wtf-ever these designations actually mean have occurred in a non linear fashion. By the same token, mid/late 2011 - cinci 2012 forms a part of Federer's prime.

I agree with you in that one year is just one year and not too much should be extrapolated out of such a short window of time. Over the course of their careers Nadal is hands down the greater player, but Djokovic still has time on his side to launch his own assault on the upper echelons of tennis immortality.

-----

** In the H2H sense, that is. In reality, Djokovic has bested the likes of Nadal and Federer for several years, as his record as the #1 player in the world attests to."

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

duong
"Nadal was great in the first part of 2012 but he was injured from the middle of the year, it has a big influence on the impression about a year.

And Djokovic was clearly better in 2011, even if 2012 probably was his second year level-wise.

As for Federer, he had much better results in 2012 but I think level-wise he was not much different between 2011 and 2012.

2012 only was the best year for Murray, and still only in slams, it was not such a great year outside slams (comparing especially to 2008-209).

By the way, I like to use the ATP Ricoh matchfacts statistics to try to assess the level of a player independently from the level of the opposition (because the opposition against a multitude of players is not much different from one year to another),
and 2011 has something very strange, which is that the top-players had incredibly high stats of points won on return that year, which they didn't approach any other year.

If someone knew if it was a mistake from the ATP (in 2003 we know for sure that there were big mistakes for the stats on return in the ATP Ricoh matchfacts),
I would be glad to know about it


yes exactly, I agree, he was at his best physically in 2008 but tactically and technically on hardcourts he was much better in 2013. Not only the US Open, also Montréal-Cinci were very impressive, I don't even think he was better in the US Open 2010 than in the US Open 2013.


Yes, Nadal clearly improved in 2012 and 2013 tactically against Djokovic, and on hardcourts.

BUT yes, I do think that he would still have lost on hardcourts against Djokovic's 2011 level (and I do think that Djokovic was still a better hardcourt player in 2013 than Nadal except for the top-level which Nadal reached in the Us Open final ; in Montreal and Cinci Djokovic was clearly subpar and Nadal still hardly won in Montréal).

And on clay, considering that Nadal has not been impressive in recent years imo (except in the French Open 2014 final), I still do think that Djokovic in 2011 was perfectly able to defeat the Nadal we've seen on clay in the recent years (the one in 2008 was of course better than any level Djokovic could achieve on clay).

That said, a player has to be assessed over a carreer as you say, and clearly Djokovic's level outside of 2011 is great but not at all the level he had that year, and worse than the level Nadal and Federer could achieve for several years."

Omnipotence
"duong, you raise good points against the notion of 2012 being stronger than 2011. It was a more inconsistent year for the top four, but it was a year in which that top 4 all demonstrated exceptional form on their personal strongest surfaces.

Nadal's 2012 RG form was outstanding and his effort at the 2012 AO was inspired—he could only be stopped by a Djokovic playing one of his toughest matches and still riding somewhat on the wave of his 2011 explosion. Murray came of age mentally and played fantastically at Wimbledon, only being halted by Roger Federer, who himself beat the defending Wimbledon Champion (Djokovic) in the semifinals. The standard produced in that Wimbledon final was noteworthy. In the 2012 US Open, Murray finally got over the hump and won his first Major, and this was after cleaning house at the Olympic Games on grass where he bested Djokovic and put an admittedly seemingly fatigued Federer to the sword. 2012 shows instances of outstanding form from the trifecta + Murray on arguably their strongest surfaces.

This was not the case in 2011, but that season offered more consistency due to Nadal competing for the whole year and also it offered an instance of sustained legendary form from one player—Novak Djokovic.

For me, 2012 wins out slightly but I concede your points and see very clear and valid arguments for 2011. Both together form the zenith of the current era and Novak Djokovic was the one who got the best of it.


***

That's interesting, duong. Tennis is largely about call and response and continuing to find new adaptive answers for existing problems, but it's possible that Nadal's tactical astuteness may not have passed that legendary threshold required to have toppled Djokovic in his 2011 form. But ultimately I have to ask myself the question, how good is Djokovic really on faster HC, and the answer is that he's generally overrated by most there. I think Nadal's peak level on that sort of surface is comparable to Djokovic's so when I also factor his adapted tactics, I give Nadal the edge in the hypothetical match-up, though wouldn't dare to put money on it given how close a call it is. It's the Nadal DTL forehand that bothers me and sways the decision. Nadal's purest fire-power is more devastating than Djokovic's.

Long story short: Djokovic's level on fast hard-courts is not actually so hot after all.

Djokovic 2011 on clay was riding a wave of confidence against Nadal and may have even been favoured in the final. In 2013, he showed that he was again capable of maybe beating Nadal at RG, and the 2014 final was a strange and listless performance at times from Djokovic and not his best mental effort for whatever reasons...

The accuracy, power and consistency of Djokovic's CCourt backhand might have gotten the job done against Nadal regardless of what recent year we choose.

Still, the fact is that Nadal has played Fedovic eleven times at RG and won eleven of those matches."

duong
" "Long story short: Djokovic's level on fast hard-courts is not actually so hot after all."

Well maybe I don't know ...

imo the problem is that Djokovic has so often disappointed level-wise in slams, and on the opposite Nadal has reached his best level on fast hardcourts precisely in the US Open.

Then it's hard to compare because of that.

Anyway, outside of Nadal's US Open 2013 and 2010 level there's no doubt imo that Djokovic has played better on fast hardcourts many times than Nadal's level on fast hardcourts.

***
Imo in 2014 that's Nadal's level which killed Djokovic in the French open final more than Djokovic disappointing imo.

But in 2013, it's still hard for me to consider it as a real Nadal's win considering what happened on that special point where Djokovic made that stupid mistake to touch the net (and I still think this rule is stupid by the way : if the ball has already passed the net, I don't see it as a problem that the guy touches the net) ... even if imo Nadal was the better player during 4 sets and should have won in 4 sets (especially thanks to the heavy wind that day).

In 2012, I was not impressed by Nadal in the French open : I was rather very disappointed by Djokovic. Nadal was better yes, because Djokovic was bad imo.

In 2011, I would really have loved to watch a French open final between them : Federer is my favorite player and it was a great match (where Djokovic played with a bad tactics) but I knew when he won that he had made the best birthday gift to Nadal (and watching him say "happy birthday" to Nadal on court right after the match -and Nadal celebrating in the player's house- looked horrible to me for that reason)."

Omnipotence
Yes, definitely if we don't just talk of the Majors, then Djokovic has better career results on any type of hard-court than Nadal.

in 2014, Nadal's effort was stellar but Djokovic was more winded than usual, and the same happened in the 2014 US Open SF against Nishikori.

In 2012, Djokovic wasn't so impressive in the final, but Nadal's dominance in the tournament was real and he dealt with Djokovic in two Masters-1000 finals at MC and Rome.

I see what you're saying about 2013 and "net-gate". Nadal was superior for most of the match though and it's kind of amazing that Djokovic took it to 5 and had the early break of serve. That 5th set is a good example of Nadal's superior peak firepower, strength and explosiveness. Many of his 22(???) winners came out of absolutely nowhere in that 5th set—what a brutal and vulgar display of talent and shot-making that 5th set was from Nadal!

As for Djokovic on HC, it is interesting to consider, don't you think? He is a great champion with confidence who can play in more or less any conditions, so naturally he's achieved great results on whatever surface. But, is his best game on faster HC really any better than Nadal's or Murray's?

The game trended toward Djokovic (and others) in a rather convenient manner. The unlucky one here is Murray, who has a natural game for the slicker surfaces.

Typically, Nadal is less naturally and well suited to HC than Djokovic, but when he puts it all together his top form on the stuff is frightening—even on serve. Has Djokovic ever really produced scary good form at the US Open?? Even the 2011 US Open final was dicey.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

duong

"Still I think that without that netgate point, Djokovic would have won that fifth set.

Yes, Nadal played some great powerful shots in that set, but I think he also made errors and anyway, Djokovic also played great in that fifth set (not like previous sets) and imo what he did after the net gate was enough to keep the break.

I think one of the key issues is the bounce :

Wawrinka said it after playing Djokovic in the World Tour Final : he needs high balls to compete against Djokovic on hardcourts, he couldn't get them indoors.

And clearly high bounces have helped Nadal in recent years, because Nadal was great with low balls when he was young but he has struggled with them when getting older. On low-bouncing hardcourts he has always struggled a lot.

That's why I think that if the bounce hadn't got higher in the US Open as it did, Djokovic would still have been better.

I think part of the reason why you say that Djokovic hasn't been that impressive in the US Open is because Djokovic contrary to Nadal and Federer doesn't play with power but with fast shots with angles and changes of directions.

Especially as far as the US Open 2011 final was concerned it was like that, Djokovic was not at all the most powerful but he was impressive in another way.

That's why I think it's a bit unfair to say that he hasn't been that impressive in the US Open 2011 final.

And that's why I also think that the evolution of the hardcourt conditions has more helped Nadal than Djokovic."

Omnipotence
"Well the reason I say the 2011 final was dicey is because he needed an MTO and for a while Nadal threatened to beat Novak on fitness. But yeah, Djokovic blew out Nadal in that 4th set. Djokovic also barely squeaked by Federer in the semi-finals. Was Djokovic's tennis more impressive in the SF or the F?"

duong
"well the fitness point is one point that we have avoided speaking about but which might be indeed an absolute key point here.

Over the course of their carreer Nadal has often destroyed Djokovic physically ... but not in 2011 (and the AO 2012 final).

To speak honestly, I have always wondered about Djokovic and doping in 2011.

But of course that's a topic which raises many problems in a tennis forum ... considering the people's feelings and the level of the debate.

As for the US Open 2011 semifinal, to say the truth, I think Federer played great in that SF and struggled physically from the 3rd set,

BUT imo Djokovic's level clearly improved in the 3rd and 4th sets, the first set was very very tight and he had a letdown in the second set as often happened for him after losing one set against Federer, in the 5th set he clearly was the better player but he nearly let it go because of playing a very bad service game : I always find it funny that people speak of his great mental performance because he came back, but actually he would never have been there if he had not been mentally weak before

Then well, I think he was the clearly better player in both semifinal and final, despite facing two great opponents, that's my opinion."

Omnipotence
"OK, so if for arguments sake we agree that Djokovic in 2011 produced truly great play on faster HC in Slam conditions, would this be the only real instance of Djokovic producing such a standard on the surface type? Even in 2014, Federer got the best of Djokovic on the occasions that they played on medium to faster paced HC: Dubai, Shanghai. But Federer lost (although the match annoys me and I still feel he should have won) the IW Final. That was the extent of their meetings on HC's in 2014, though they should have faced of in the final of the YEC's.

There's limited proof of Djokovic's best form on faster HC, which suggests to me that he simply can't produce it that often. However, he has often produced magnificent performances at the Australian Open and at the YEC's in recent years, and the court at the 02 Arena isn't exactly fast, though there is some confusion on the actual conditions there—some think it's fast, some slow, some say it's slow with a low bounce, in which case your point about the bounce might be critical and it helps Djokovic produce outstanding form there. I think Djokovic might end up with 6-7 YEC's by the time he's done.

Djokovic on slower HC = Superb
Djokovic on faster HC = Very good but not outstanding...

...which is an assumption many make because many just think of Djokovic as an amazing HC player rather than remembering that there are a vast array of different HC conditions and that Djokovic has a very clear bias toward HC's that are on the slower side of medium, or outright slow.

There is less of this variance in clay and grass, though of course the variance is still there.

By virtue of the above, many assume that Djokovic has underachieved at the US Open, but I question this notion.

Perhaps Djokovic's game just isn't actually that suited to the US Open and a Nadal in top flight or a Federer in top flight (I know it's been a long time so it's no longer the case) should be favoured. If Murray and Djokovic face off this year at the US Open, I'm not sure who would win the match despite Djokovic's overwhelming recent H2H record against Murray.

Perhaps Djokovic's results at the US Open make perfect sense. He's had enough chances there to prove it isn't just bad luck and even last year he came up short against Nishikori when he had the chance to stamp true authority of dominance on the tour with another multi-slam winning season.

Good point BTW on Nole's mental strength; it's somewhat fickle.
----------------------------------------------------------------

About the thoughts on doping, it is tricky to discuss this topic on the tennis forums. I think doping is a problem in tennis that is being slowly addressed and that it's probably more widespread than people would like to believe (would .like. to believe)."

duong
"well I'm not sure, and anyway it would be wrong to use the example of the matches against Federer to assess that, because Federer is clearly much better on fast hardcourts.

Why not talk of Djokovic's past in Beijing and Shanghai conditions which are quite quick ?

I think Djokovic would be at his best on slow low-bouncing courts, that is quite the WTF conditions.

And I think he was at his best in 2011 then why not use that example if people constantly use Nadal's level in the US Open 2013 or 2010 or in the AO 2009 to assess his level on hardcourts ?

Djokovic is probably better on slow than on quick hardcourts, but I think he'd prefer a fast hardcourt against Nadal, as it was the H2H we started talking about, whatever the power of Nadal's forehand I think at his best he can bother Nadal more than Nadal would bother him on a fast hardcourt, on a slow hardcourt I think it would be tougher for Djokovic and it would be likely to be a matter of physical condition where Nadal imo has been clearly better carreer-wise.

And the opposite with Federer. Clearly Fed's peak on fast hardcourts was better than Djokovic's and the opposite on slow hardcourts.

As for the US Open, I think that if the bounce had been lower, Djokovic might have won the US Open 2013 final at least. And the wind clearly didn't help in the US Open 2012 and 2014 (but that's a constant problem in the US Open : I remember that Agassi-Federer match in 2004 in conditions where it was impossible to play good tennis, far far far far worse than what Djokovic had to endure in those matchs)."

 

[President]

I guess you are Omnipotence on MTF? Anyway, I would say that he does best against Djokovic on medium/medium-fast high bouncing courts, like the US Open, Olympics 2008, and Montreal. On the slow courts, more dead courts (like the AO or Miami, which IMO have a lower bounce than the Decoturf of the US Open series, but are also slower), Djokovic's depth of shot is too much for Nadal and Rafa has a hard time hitting through him, his ball doesn't have as much action on those surfaces so he can't push him back as easily.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

Omnipotence
"Oh I have nothing against using the 2011 example at all. My point is exactly that to be honest; that he has no more real examples of outstanding play on fast HC than Nadal.

Djokovic's sort of default level on the surface is better than Nadal's but when Nadal is on it I'm not sure at all. Both appear to have won five what we might term faster HC Masters 1000 titles (perhaps some of Djokovic's Paris wins should count??). Perhaps some of Djokovic's Paris 1000 titles were won in quite fast conditions?

So basically, I've not seen more proof from Djokovic than I have of Nadal for producing an outstanding level on faster hard-courts in general, but if you can think of more then of course, be my guest.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/players/...=N409&oId=D643

In there H2H, in terms of faster and slower paced HC perhaps the H2H reads as:

Slower HC: Indian Wells, Miami, London YEC's...

Nadal 2-8 Djokovic (!!)

Faster HC: Beijing, Beijing Olympics, Shanghai YEC's, London YEC 2009, US Open, Cinci, Canada Masters...

Nadal 5-5 Djokovic

Hopefully the counting is correct.

These aren't definitive and help is required to determine the actual speed of surfaces in some years such at the London YEC's in 2009 and 2010. Perhaps they are inconclusive and thorough examples of medium paced HC.


I'm unsure of where to place Paris Masters results as sometimes it has been notoriously slow but on other occasions it was fast for example in 2010(??).

So perhaps Nadal would actually prefer to place Djokovic on faster HC's.

Generally, Djokovic isn't unusually outstanding on fast HC's, and it isn't unbelievable that Nadal has more Majors on faster HC's. If one includes the Beijing Olympics then it's 3-1 to Nadal in terms of the very top events won and without the Olympics then it's 2-1. Djokovic excels against all competition including Nadal and Federer on slow HC and indeed it seems he enjoys it when a low bounce is combined with fairly slow conditions. Djokovic is probably the best ever slow HC player ever? He is very very clearly superior to Nadal and Federer in those conditions. On fast HC as they exist on the tour (with many torunaments covered earlier with the H2H analysis) Djokovic is probably not really any better than Murray or Nadal, although his default level is probably higher than Nadal's and he's won more on faster HC throughout his career if we also consider tournaments below Masters 1000 level. Murray has won 7 Masters 1000 titles on fast HC's compared to 5 for Nadal and 5+ (Paris conditions inconsistent) for Djokovic."

duong
"well I understand that it's not statistically proven but I still do think that Djokovic's characteristics fit a quick hardcourt better than Nadal, and also that Djokovic would prefer facing Nadal on a fast hardcourt rather than a slow one (if anything because it would avoid a grueling match which, imo, would generally the more enduring Nadal).

In recent years, where Nadal is supposed by many as being at his best on hardcourts, I've seen Nadal struggle a lot with quick and low bouncing balls, indoors, on grass, in Shanghai or Doha ... I've seen Djokovic play great indoors, in Shanghai and on grass.

And it's not easy at all to distinguish between fast and slow hardcourts, and also to quantify the impact of the low or high bounce, it has changed every year.

I guess you know that link :

http://heavytopspin.com/2013/11/19/t...-2013-surface/

What can we see ?

Grasscourt tournaments including Wimbledon had consistently many more aces than others.

After that, among big tournaments, you have Shanghai which was slow in 2010 but has accelerated since 2011 to become very quick since 2013. Djokovic won in 2012-2013 only to be defeated by Federer in 2014. Nadal had reached the final in 2009 before it had been accelerated. He lost in the semi to Del Po in 2013.

The only Masters 1000 which has been consistently quick over the years is Cincinnati, and Djokovic has reached 4 finals there (defeated by Federer and Murray in those finals), defeating Nadal twice. Nadal only had one final.

Paris ? Even if you exclude 2010 (the only year when the surface was especially quick in Paris), Paris could be considered as fairly quick since 2012 if you consider that there were respectively 16% and 12% more aces than normal. And Djokovic won in 2013 and 2014.

And what about the current assumption that the US Open would be the "fast hardcourt slam" and the Aus open the "slow hardcourt slam" ? Since 2011, it has not become obvious at all, and it has been pointed during the recent Aus open that the conditions had been much quicker in Australia since 2013, especially because of a change of balls. In the meantime, the US Open has looked consistently slow in recent years.

I mean apart from Cincinnati, grasscourt tournaments and in a lesser extent indoor hardcourt conditions (not necessarily because of courts being quick but because of the absence of air resistance to the ball) for quick conditions, and Indian Wells and Miami for slow conditions, the conditions in the other tournaments have tended to vary and you can't make a general classification imo.

Finally, about the US Open, what happened to Djokovic in 2012 and in 2014 tends to proove that Djokovic does have a problem with windy conditions (and by the way, he seems to love indoor conditions), then imo it's the main reason for Djokovic underperformoing in the US Open, and not the supposedly quick hardcourts of the US Open."

And finally a very interesting perspective on Djokovic's level since 2011:

MrMarble
"Yes Rafa was playing well in 2011 and I think he would have had a 3 slam year etc. But he also underperformed against Djoko.

In reality Djokovic's level has hardly dropped since 2011. Perhaps biggest difference was in confidence levels... when you suddenly get superhuman physical stamina that also increases your confidence. In 2012 it was down to Earth in confidence levels but his level of play or stamina hardly dropped at all. Don't get me wrong, Djoko's level has dropped since 2011 - but not THAT much. I think he now serves better than then."

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

All in all some interesting thoughts from duong who is right to point out that it isn't easy to categorise the speed of all the courts, though we can come to a fairly solid conclusion that IW and Miami are certainly slow and places like Dubai and Brisbane are certainly fast.

Assuming the bounce is neutral, perhaps Djokovic does best in the very slow conditions despite the trepidation regarding Nadal's ability to endure, does worst on more medium paced courts and after a certain threshold once again maybe thrives on much slicker courts?

Is Djokovic not so impressive as many assume though on medium-fast paced courts (which typically do not have too high a bounce) as many assume though.

Is Djokovic actually significantly—or at all?—superior to Nadal or Murray on courts trending toward the faster side?

 

[LazyNinja19]

tl;dr

mind blown..op had the time to write that wall of text.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

tl;dr version is basically:

Djokovic is overrated on faster HC's. Nadal and Murray are as good as him there. Djokovic might be the greatest ever on slower HC. Djokovic has an 8-2 ish record against Nadal in such conditions. Nadal has beaten Djokovic in many important events on non-slow HC conditions such as the Beijing Olympics and two US Open finals.

 

[President]

tl;dr version is basically:

Djokovic is overrated on faster HC's. Nadal and Murray are as good as him there. Djokovic might be the greatest ever on slower HC. Djokovic has an 8-2 ish record against Nadal in such conditions. Nadal has beaten Djokovic in many important events on non-slow HC conditions such as the Beijing Olympics and two US Open finals.

Yup, I agree with that. I think slow and low-medium bouncing are Djokovic's ideal conditions (AO and most indoor courts today fit that profile).

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

I guess you are Omnipotence on MTF? Anyway, I would say that he does best against Djokovic on medium/medium-fast high bouncing courts, like the US Open, Olympics 2008, and Montreal. On the slow courts, more dead courts (like the AO or Miami, which IMO have a lower bounce than the Decoturf of the US Open series, but are also slower), Djokovic's depth of shot is too much for Nadal and Rafa has a hard time hitting through him, his ball doesn't have as much action on those surfaces so he can't push him back as easily.

Yup, I agree with that. I think slow and low-medium bouncing are Djokovic's ideal conditions (AO and most indoor courts today fit that profile).

Yes mate.

Yeah, Djokovic is a master—no, a grandmaster!—of slower HC conditions and particular on more dead courts without a volatile bounce. In the H2H sense vs. Nadal, if Nadal can't get the ball to kick up suitably against Djokovic on a slower HC then typically he's in huge trouble. Nadal does (to some surprisingly) well against Djokovic in a variety of non-slow HC conditions, though the scales may again tip in Djokovic's favour when the courts become genuinely slick and/or the conditions are indoor, removing elements such as the wind or the blazing sun.

Murray arguably has more 1000 titles won on "official" fast HC surfaces than either Nadal or Djokovic, which lends extra credence to our theory that the trending conditions of the tour over the last several years has not really benefited Murray, or at least is far less well suited to him than to Nadal and Djokovic.

 

[President]

The indoor courts today are almost all tailored to Djokovic's game, they all have a dead bounce that doesn't take much action but are still quite slow. As duong said, Wawrinka complained about the bounce at the WTF as well. Without the high bounce, Djokovic's depth of shot is just overwhelming, and no one can tee off on his shots.

 

[Noelan]

All in all some interesting thoughts from duong who is right to point out that it isn't easy to categorise the speed of all the courts, though we can come to a fairly solid conclusion that IW and Miami are certainly slow and places like Dubai and Brisbane are certainly fast.

Assuming the bounce is neutral, perhaps Djokovic does best in the very slow conditions despite the trepidation regarding Nadal's ability to endure, does worst on more medium paced courts and after a certain threshold once again maybe thrives on much slicker courts?

Is Djokovic not so impressive as many assume though on medium-fast paced courts (which typically do not have too high a bounce) as many assume though.

Is Djokovic actually significantly—or at all?—superior to Nadal or Murray on courts trending toward the faster side?

Which one are you from MTF trolls /banned members?

 

[Backspin1183]

Too long. Not reading :lol:

Nadal does best against Djokovic on fast medium courts. If it's slow hard court, Djokovic is much better especially now that Nadal isn't as strong or fast as he used to be in his early 20s. On really fast courts it's almost 50-50, probably slight edge to Novak.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Djoker is a slow HC player par excellence.
He can hold his own on other surfaces, esp. clay, but does not excel on fast HC or grass.

 

[Djokovic2011]

tl;dr version is basically:

Djokovic is overrated on faster HC's. Nadal and Murray are as good as him there. Djokovic might be the greatest ever on slower HC. Djokovic has an 8-2 ish record against Nadal in such conditions. Nadal has beaten Djokovic in many important events on non-slow HC conditions such as the Beijing Olympics and two US Open finals.

I wasn't aware he was ever rated that highly in the first place Nathaniel.

 

[Sysyphus]

Against Nadal, Nole prefers a court that doesn't have a too volatile bounce. Murray also troubles him moar in faster conditions. Federuru too.

I wasn't aware he was ever rated that highly in the first place Nathaniel.

That's true. I don't think he has ever been considered much of a fast-court specialist to be sure. Many have noted how for instance Murray has a much better chance against him on faster hards. The same has been discussed quite some times with regards to the Naddy, but perhaps not everyone are as aware of it with Nadal seeing sa many think Nadal=slow-court-player.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

I wasn't aware he was ever rated that highly in the first place Nathaniel.

Whenever someone on here dares to say that Novak isn't as good at Cincy as he is at the AO, Chico/Noelan/whoever all crucify them.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

Well Djokovic2011, you yourself have often said in the past that Djokovic should be winning these US Open finals against Nadal by virtue of being the better HC player, except that's way too general. The evidence would appear to suggest that the difference in Nadal's, Djokovic's and Murray's ability on medium to medium-fast HC's is negligible—that's according to H2H's between the trio and top level tournament victories (Masters 1000 or higher).

 

[torpantennis]

Height of bounce is the most important thing for Nadal's success. Fast HCs often, but not always, tend to have high bounce. Hence IMO, Nadal does best against Nole on fast HCs.

Slow/low is the worst surface for Nadal. Examples: Paris Indoors & WTF.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

Yes, the deader the court the more suited it is for Djokovic in relation to Nadal no matter the surface speed. Is the bounce of the US Open surface (is it decoturf II?) actually that high though.. or more like average for HC's generally and not atypical?

Either way, across a multitude of conditions and circumstances, Nadal has done handsomely against Djokovic on non-slow HC of varying types.

 

[President]

Yes, the deader the court the more suited it is for Djokovic in relation to Nadal no matter the surface speed. Is the bounce of the US Open surface (is it decoturf II?) actually that high though.. or more like average for HC's generally and not atypical?

Either way, across a multitude of conditions and circumstances, Nadal has done handsomely against Djokovic on non-slow HC of varying types.

I think it's pretty high, higher than Plexicushion IMO but not Rebound Ace. Not as high as Indian Wells of course, but still above average from my observations.

 

[SpinToWin]

Yeah, Nadal prefers more lively surfaces when playing against Djokovic.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

From a thread I created a few months ago:

Default Is Novak as good on fast courts?


The general consensus seems to be that Novak is better on slow courts (slow HC) specifically and his AO successes would seem to bear this out. His unique combination of speed, athleticism, movement (sliding), and ability to hit thru the court would all be reasons why he would be at his best on slow pavement.

But to be honest I don't see a major difference in his level on faster harcourts and his recent fall season performances seem to showcase him as very good on fast courts as well as the 2 Wimbledons.

I think a lot of the perception has to do with some of his failures at the USO relatively (4 AO to 1 USO and could likely be 5-1) and the fact that Murray and even Nadal seem to perform a bit better against him on the faster hardcourts but I think besides speaking to the fact that Murray is objectively better on faster courts than slower ones, there is something else at play here.

I'm thinking attrition, lack of focus, and perhaps an aversion to the US crowd has punctuates some of Novak's losses in the Us Open (and Cincinatti) but really the AO in 2012 he could have easily lost to either Murray or Nadal and he could have easily won the USO 2012...I think he just for whatever reason struggles a bit in North America but I don't think it is just down to the speed of the court. I think Djoko is capable of equivalently great performances at the WTF that he is at the AO.

Moving to clay and grass, he has 2 Wimbledons and zero french opens. Of course, Rafael Nadal is the major reason for this and I do think Djoko is a great clay-courter and also I think clay showcases his athleticism and relentless shotmaking the best. But still I think you can make the case that relative to the field (all that really matters tbh) Novak is about equal on clay and grass. It would be stretching it to argue he is better on clay I think.

So I really think that some of it is just down to luck or attrition or whatever that Novak has floundered a bit at the USO and does so great at the AO. A small part of it maybe that the faster courts suit Fed and as of late especially Murray a little bit more (than the slower courts do.)

But ultimately, I think Novak brings a very consistent level of play on all surfaces and in general is about as good on slow or fast courts.

 

[Sysyphus]

Well Djokovic2011, you yourself have often said in the past that Djokovic should be winning these US Open finals against Nadal by virtue of being the better HC player, except that's way too general. The evidence would appear to suggest that the difference in Nadal's, Djokovic's and Murray's ability on medium to medium-fast HC's is negligible—that's according to H2H's between the trio and top level tournament victories (Masters 1000 or higher).

I agree, it's a bit too general look at all hardcourts as the same, but (I haven't looked at the hard stats here) wouldn't you agree that in recent years, Novak has been a better player than Nadal on courts like the USO (average or slightly faster hardcourts)? He's been very, very consistent there, and it seems slightly coincidental that Nadal sits on two titles there and Novak with one.

 

[Murrayfan31]

Novak likes all surfaces. Nadal prefers high bouncing surfaces. The speed doesn't matter much. It's all about Nadal trying to get the ball above Djokovic's shoulder. Outdoor day conditions help Nadal with that as well.

 

[Russeljones]

Novak likes all surfaces. Nadal prefers high bouncing surfaces. The speed doesn't matter much. It's all about Nadal trying to get the ball above Djokovic's shoulder. Outdoor day conditions help Nadal with that as well.

I disagree. Novak dislikes the loss of tactical supremacy he enjoys in slower conditions. In such circumstances he knows he can grind out the win, regardless of his opponent's form, simply because the latter cannot hit through him.

On faster courts the situation is changed only just slightly, due to Novak's excellent athleticism, but the grain of irrelevant entropy has become a handful of potentially malign randomness. Should he be facing the right opponent on the right day for said opponent, the perfect storm could be forecast and he would be powerless to stop it. This is alluding to something I've said a while ago about Novak's incredible consistency being his vulnerability. He doesn't have that extra gear to battle a redlining opponent in adverse conditions.

 

[Murrayfan31]

I disagree. Novak dislikes the loss of tactical supremacy he enjoys in slower conditions. In such circumstances he knows he can grind out the win, regardless of his opponent's form, simply because the latter cannot hit through him.

On faster courts the situation is changed only just slightly, due to Novak's excellent athleticism, but the grain of irrelevant entropy has become a handful of potentially malign randomness. Should he be facing the right opponent on the right day for said opponent, the perfect storm could be forecast and he would be powerless to stop it. This is alluding to something I've said a while ago about Novak's incredible consistency being his vulnerability. He doesn't have that extra gear to battle a redlining opponent in adverse conditions.

He is as well adapted as anyone to take on a hot opponent. But yes Nadal on clay is tough. Especially on RG Clay with windy and hot conditions.

 

[Start da Game]

nadal hates slow surfaces......he likes lively courts which assist his topspin quite well......people who know tennis inside out will tell you the same......

 

[adil1972]

which record will you prefer

5 consecutive wimbledon and 5 consecutive us open by federer

or

4 consecutive french open and 5 consecutive french open by nadal

 

[Murrayfan31]

nadal hates slow surfaces......he likes lively courts which assist his topspin quite well......people who know tennis inside out will tell you the same......

French Open is slow. Nadal likes slow surfaces as he can get more returns back and doesn't feel rushed. What he hates are fast and low bouncing surfaces.

 

[NatF]

Nadal has had his greatest success against Djokovic on fast courts.

 

[Start da Game]

French Open is slow. Nadal likes slow surfaces as he can get more returns back and doesn't feel rushed. What he hates are fast and low bouncing surfaces.

french open is fast clay.....watch it carefully this time......you will see the balls flying and zipping off the surface......the court size of philippe chatrier makes you feel the court is slow......he hates low bouncing surfaces sure but not fast surfaces......if fast surface + high bounce, then good luck beating him......

 

[Murrayfan31]

french open is fast clay.....watch it carefully this time......you will see the balls flying and zipping off the surface......the court size of philippe chatrier makes you feel the court is slow......he hates low bouncing surfaces sure but not fast surfaces......if fast surface + high bounce, then good luck beating him......

Nadal gets frustrated when he can't break serve. That problem is more likely to happen on a fast court. The ball kicking up in the air means it takes longer to bounce twice. Thus it gives Nadal more time. And BTW, the US Open is not a fast surface. See Shanghai for a fast surface.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

abmk...

This thread.. the opening few posts.


Post #5 specifically.

Well, take a read anyway.

 

[abmk]

abmk...

This thread.. the opening few posts.


Post #5 specifically.

Well, take a read anyway.

yeah, I'd include YEC 2009 as well ... The O2 in london was slowed down from 2011 onwards from what I could make out ...

even in 2010, federer's serve was close to unplayable there ...especially the wide one out on the deuce side ...

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

yeah, I'd include YEC 2009 as well ... The O2 in london was slowed down from 2011 onwards from what I could make out ...

even in 2010, federer's serve was close to unplayable there ...especially the wide one out on the deuce side ...

Probably true, in which case Nole has a slight edge, though it is slight. The thread is to demonstrate that Nole isn't that special on the faster HC (just merely very good). It's the slower HC where he's devastating. Of course, overall, he's a great HC player.

 

[NatF]

Probably true, in which case Nole has a slight edge, though it is slight. The thread is to demonstrate that Nole isn't that special on the faster HC (just merely very good). It's the slower HC where he's devastating. Of course, overall, he's a great HC player.

Fast HC are still probably his second best surface overall though.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Probably true, in which case Nole has a slight edge, though it is slight. The thread is to demonstrate that Nole isn't that special on the faster HC (just merely very good). It's the slower HC where he's devastating. Of course, overall, he's a great HC player.

Can someone explain why Djokovic does so well indoors though? I know people love to claim it's slow now, but is the entire fall season and WTF really slower than the US Open?

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

Can someone explain why Djokovic does so well indoors though? I know people love to claim it's slow now, but is the entire fall season and WTF really slower than the US Open?

I just think Nole loves the pure untouched conditions. We know he has his legitimate issues with producing his best game in the extreme heat or with the wind. He is a fantastic player indoors—waaay better than Nadal or Murray.

But yeh goes to show that bounce and "weather conditions" are important. It's interesting how mediocre Nadal often is indoors, as is shown by his career win %, but yet outdoors he's often barely containable H2H example would be Nadal-Federer outdoor vs indoor).

Nole relies on consistent rhythm more than Nadal, Federer or Murray, I'd say.

 

[Pocalypse]

Fast I think. Nadal has 2 USOs over 1 against Novak.

 

[abmk]

Probably true, in which case Nole has a slight edge, though it is slight. The thread is to demonstrate that Nole isn't that special on the faster HC (just merely very good). It's the slower HC where he's devastating. Of course, overall, he's a great HC player.

that has indeed been the case since 2011, but IMO he was better on fast HC in 07-10, when he was more aggressive ( well 2007-08 and parts of 09-10 )

 

[Murrayfan31]

Fast I think. Nadal has 2 USOs over 1 against Novak.

Yawn. What makes the US Open unique is the wide open atmosphere. Wind plays a big part.