Hitman
Bionic Poster
Sure.
Nadal has won 1 indoor hard court tournament in his entire career.
- Thread starter csmoove899
- Start date
Sure.
safinmafia
Rookie
I see weak era has made people a little...uncomfortable.
killerboss
Professional
Oh yeah I forgot about 2-1 4-3 for a moment lmao. So Djokovic fans can't use the excuse anyway.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
It is what it is.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
I see correcting your categorizing of what weak era is got under your skin, and then you claim you are not dragging it out.
safinmafia
Rookie
I objected to the double correction, which was patronising.
But weak era...it is what it is, I suppose.
nolefam_2024
Talk Tennis Guru
1 hard court title indoor in almost 20 years career. lol. He can't be goat.
TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
And of course it would come via a fifth set TB. Can't beat those warrior points.
Djokovic_is_the_best#1
Bionic Poster
Still it doesn’t matter. As 9-1 and 2-0 at AO more than makes up for it. Don’t you think? Then you have the fact Novak has won all the big hard court titles multiple times being slams, masters and world tours.
In fact it’s only us open and Rogers cup that Rafa leads Novak in a hard court title event. Everywhere else Novak has way more titles and also owns the H2H in them tournaments as well.
FlamingCheeto
Hall of Fame
So many insecure Nole fans on here trying to flex their insecurities and false equivalencies, Nole himself would be ashamed and embarrassed at all of these Fedal undermining and bashing threads LOL
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Your opinion it was double correction, since I had already agreed that you can use it as an argument. My statement only expanded what I said, underlining what we are agreeing on. Now you tell me you don't want to drag it out, yet we are still talking about it. You want to talk about more or shall we park this here and move on?
killerboss
Professional
But no one is arguing against Djokovic's versatility. This "lack of indoor title" is irrelevant. It don't matter when it comes to GOAT.
safinmafia
Rookie
Whatever.
Djokovic_is_the_best#1
Bionic Poster
Fair enough. I’m curious though who do you rank in 1st place out of the 3 of them as it stands?
killerboss
Professional
Personal preference at this stage. Big 3 have cancelled each other out. In terms of GOAT- I'd say Sampras because he dominated all his main rivals.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
That works.
Djokovic_is_the_best#1
Bionic Poster
Fair enough. That’s true to be honest.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
And there are still peeps who believe 30.5 year old Fed was supposed to beat peak Nadal in those conditions
mike danny
Bionic Poster
About the same age Fed started being called a weak era champ and a fraud because of his losses to Djokodal
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Even with H2H's, you have no control over when you face your opponent.
Nadal inflated his H2H against Fed in 2013-early 2014 while he didn't return the favor in 2015-early 2016.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Nope, he was never Nadal's pigeon everywhere. And he doesn't have a 1-4 H2H at the AO.
They are 1-1 in AO finals and Federer wasn't supposed to beat Nadal in the other 2 matches they played. Plus, Federer leads Nadal 6-1 in titles there, so it's as meaningless of a H2H as you'll see.
Nadal made sure to keep his sweet H2H by dodging Fed on the fast USO in 2008-2009, while making sure to play him on the slowest HC at the AO.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Your only sensible post here LOL.
killerboss
Professional
The H2H looked hilarious at one point. Could have been luckier for Federer rather than Nadal that they never met at the USO. He was losing everywhere around the exact time you mentioned. Wimbledon, Australian Open, French Open.
Of course it is a big blemish on his illustrious career . 1 Indoor masters 16 years ago , seems funny to me .
0 WTF - biggest indoor gap
0 Paris masters
0 Shanghai
It just proves that he is not as complete as a player like Novak is .
Even when you look at Hard Courts as a whole Nadal is not shining there either
22 titles compared to Novak's 17 on clay . Hard Courts have 9 big titles in total and Nadal has won 16 in total 5 slams , 10 masters and 1 olympic gold .
Novak in comparison has won 2 FO and 10 masters , so not much worse than Nadal on Hard Courts but clay has 4 big titles and 1 slam compared to 9 big titles on HC and 2 slams .
Even tho Novak was overshadowed by Nadal on clay it shows that on HC even outdoors that Nadal wasn't all that special , still very good but nothing too crazy .
0 WTF - biggest indoor gap
0 Paris masters
0 Shanghai
It just proves that he is not as complete as a player like Novak is .
Even when you look at Hard Courts as a whole Nadal is not shining there either
22 titles compared to Novak's 17 on clay . Hard Courts have 9 big titles in total and Nadal has won 16 in total 5 slams , 10 masters and 1 olympic gold .
Novak in comparison has won 2 FO and 10 masters , so not much worse than Nadal on Hard Courts but clay has 4 big titles and 1 slam compared to 9 big titles on HC and 2 slams .
Even tho Novak was overshadowed by Nadal on clay it shows that on HC even outdoors that Nadal wasn't all that special , still very good but nothing too crazy .
safinmafia
Rookie
4 USOs say hi!
mike danny
Bionic Poster
The H2H looked hilarious because Nadal inflated his numbers in 2013-early 2014 when Fed was terrible, while not returning the favor in 2015-early 2016.
The H2H would be much closer nowadays if Nadal actually made it to Fed more often in his worst period.
Difference is that all those times Nadal was actually playing well. USO 2008 wasn't one of them. And of course Nadal doesn't make it to Fed then. Meanwhile a crap Fed makes it to Nadal at the French.
Ok so he won 4 USO it is impressive but so what ? I am talking about his HC career as a whole and 22 titles is really low for what is like 2/3 of the season . His 2 Wimbledons aren't that crazy either .
killerboss
Professional
Yeah whilst the "sensible" posters on the thread are coming up with silly excuses and trying to wish away real stats that GOAT is built upon like slam count, slam head to head and big moments in big matches, whilst emphasising irrelvant, silly, nothing stats like number of titles on the dudes worst surface rotflmao.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
These are not silly excuses, these are just facts.
And you didn't really respond to @Rosstour's 2014/2015 point. How come Nadal gets a pass here while Fed never did? And Fed was about the same age as Nadal in those years when the losses started piling up.
safinmafia
Rookie
guanzishou
G.O.A.T.
Wan trig po knee
Probably the reason he only has 1 title.
Best outdoor player and also one of the worst ATG indoors
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
And the Olympics only takes place every four years so it's not even like a player has that many opportunities to win it.
His lack of indoor titles affects his weeks at No1 and total number of masters title (including ATP finals) which is why in both measures he is significantly behind Djokovic. If he can win enough outdoor titles to compensate for his lack of indoor titles, then yes one can put forward an argument that his indoor titles does not matter but in case he didn't. Before Federer and Djokovic, Sampras was considered an legitmate goat candidate because he won enough Wimbeldons and US to compensate for his failings at French Open to hold the grand slam count and be in the top tier for weeks at No 1. Lendl was definitely stronger at Wimbeldon compared to Sampras at French but Sampras dominated his favourite slams sufficently to make up the difference.
There is one more fast low bouncing court (Paris, Cincinnati, Shanghai ATP finals, US open) compared to the three clay masters and one French open. Remove both this surfaces and the rest of the courts are still tilted in Djokovic's favour. Nadal's weakness in low bouncing/indoor courts has a strong correlation to the fact he is not that strong at the rest of the grand slams/masters compared to Djokovic so he was never going to win enough masters to compensate for his lack of indoor titles. The only reason why the grand slam count and masters count are so close is because he matured early as a player and Djokovic matured late. If Djokovic and nadal matured at the same time, I every much doubt that the stats will be that close
To answer the OP, nope it probably does not affect his ATG status but it definitely affects his Goat candidacy
There is one more fast low bouncing court (Paris, Cincinnati, Shanghai ATP finals, US open) compared to the three clay masters and one French open. Remove both this surfaces and the rest of the courts are still tilted in Djokovic's favour. Nadal's weakness in low bouncing/indoor courts has a strong correlation to the fact he is not that strong at the rest of the grand slams/masters compared to Djokovic so he was never going to win enough masters to compensate for his lack of indoor titles. The only reason why the grand slam count and masters count are so close is because he matured early as a player and Djokovic matured late. If Djokovic and nadal matured at the same time, I every much doubt that the stats will be that close
To answer the OP, nope it probably does not affect his ATG status but it definitely affects his Goat candidacy
Last edited:
Due to being so good on Clay Nadal collects enough points by May for WTF and a top 4 finish but this is the reason he is under Djokoerer for me. Nadal will always have the highest level in tennis, him at his peak on Clay is higher than anyone in history but across all surfaces he falls behind the other 2
Nadal being respectful as expected
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
Geez, is it weird that he has more USOs than the HC GOAT? Or are we comparing indoor titles to Slams now?
Azure
G.O.A.T.
Lmao only on TT is this ‘so what’ or ‘not that crazy’. You guys must be super achievers in your fields!
Bender
G.O.A.T.
The key thing here is that Nadal is far superior to Federer and Djokovic on clay, but on hards, Federer and Djokovic are more or less equals and in any case better than Nadal.
So on clay, Djokovic for example only really has to worry about Nadal. If Nadal has a bad day, then Djokovic can take the clay title, because Federer can be taken out by the field or by Nadal en route to the title match. The only real time Federer really ever posed a threat to Djokovic on clay was in 2011, after which his clay level dropped off a cliff and would be uncompetitive until 2019.
Nadal off clay, however, has to deal with both Federer and Djokovic. In order for Nadal to win a major HC title, either both Federer and Djokovic have to be out of sorts (USO 2017/2019), take each other out (USO 2010), or Nadal has to have by his standards a GOAT showing (USO 2010/2013). If you look at any other major HC title you'll see that Nadal will take one of the two out only to be beaten by the other. Since this is about his paltry indoors game, let's use the WTF as an example:
- WTF 2010: straight sets Djokovic, then loses to Federer in 3 in the final
- WTF 2013: beats Federer, then loses to Djokovic in straights in the final
Last edited:
You make a good point but i wouldn't say the tour is that weak , especially Medvedev and Zverev who are better than anybody from the ,, lost gen ,, , Tsitsipas is good on clay too . If Novak is vulturing so is Nadal on clay , besides Novak who can really beat him there especially at the FO . Novak's competition is harder on HC compared to Nadal's on clay , now you could say that Novak's competition is even easier on grass than Nadal's is on clay and i would agree but the big difference between grass and clay is you can't get a servebot to take you out on clay but it can happen on grass .
I am not sure this is a strong argument because Federer and Djokovic are six years apart and Djokovic came of age late. By the time he was a serious contender in Grand Slams, Federer was already no longer in his prime. In their primes, Federer and Djokovic were stopped by Nadal four times each in the French Open. Considering only on their prime periods, Nadal only faced Federer and Djokvic combined twice each at Australian Open and US open and I don't think there was any slam where Federer and Djokovci was in their prime at the same time). He was stopped many times from reaching them by other players (Murray 2010 Australian Open 2008 US Open, Del Potro US open 2009, Tsonga Australian Open 2008. Before 2008 he was losing to lesser players than Murray in hard courts) and injury problems. In their primes, Federer and Djokovic rarely lost at the French Open to players other than Nadal. That is why, ignoring the tied Grand Slam count, he has much less Grand Slam finals and semi finals compared to Federer and Djokovic
Last edited:
Djokovic has lost 7 times at the FO to Nadal. The fact they have played more matches there than the other 3 combined says a lot. Djokovic always walked into the lions den and same with Fed in his prime.
Yet Nadal has only met Djokovic twice at AO, twice at Wimbledon and 3 times at USO yes he leads 2-1 there but his last win on HC was there 8 years ago and he’s 0-9 since.
Nadal had good success against Peak Fed but when Fed got older he was better outside Clay yet Nadal wasn’t there to meet him very much.
Bender
G.O.A.T.
I didn't say they weren't all vulturing to some extent, just that Djokovic is in far better position to vulture than Nadal and Federer are. You could sort of argue that Nadal on clay up to 2020 (because who knows if it'll be business as usual in 2022) would've won RG in almost any other era as well with stronger competition because his peak was so high that even a diminished Nadal would have an extremely high level.
If you have a return like Djokovic does, then grass may be easier for an older player because the points are shorter and serves improve with age unless affected by injuries. In other words, on grass, you can servebot your way to 5-4, 6-5, or a TB, then rely on your superior return to clinch the set, without too much physicality. Federer in 2017-2019 had a better serve compared to his peak years, although how much of that comes down to Djokovic and Murray being absent and the rest of the tour being poor returners is up for debate. On clay however, if you can't stay in points physically, you're done, so it's tougher for older players unless your game is almost perfectly optimised for the surface.
I will agree that HC competition right now is definitely stronger in the sense that the field is slightly better on HCs than they are on clay (Medvedev is an extreme example). But again that's not so clear-cut because that's balanced out by the fact that neither Federer nor Nadal are really threats on HCs anymore like they used to be, whereas on clay Nadal still has Djokovic, Tsitsipas (to a lesser extent, who is nevertheless better on clay than he is on HCs), and up until this year, Thiem. There are some up and comers in Ruud and Alcaraz, but since they've only started making a mark on tour this year I wouldn't count that as competition for our purposes here.
Point being that whilst I agree competition on HCs is better than clay right now (ie this year), I think right up to last year it was pretty close, or at least too close for me to say.
You have to treat Nadal on HCs as a late bloomer (of Stanimal type), and an early bloomer on grass (of Hewitt type).
To give further details on my argument, and re your point about Federer and Djokovic's age gap--yes, this is true, but Federer's style is a good matchup against Djokovic's, which is why despite their age gap Federer has scored so many wins against Djokovic over the years--whereas Nadal despite being only a year older hasn't won a set since 2013. I believe if Federer, Djokovic, and Nadal were all the same age:
- on clay, Nadal would beat the other two almost always
- on hards, Djokovic will beat Nadal more often than not, Federer will beat Djokovic more often than not, and Nadal will split matches against Federer or even slightly win more than he would lose
- on grass, Federer will almost always beat Djokovic, will more often than not beat Nadal, and Djokovic will split matches with Nadal
Federer vs Nadal since 2017 is also an interesting one. People say it's because of Federer's improved backhand but it's an oversimplified explanation that I tend to disagree with. Other than tactical changes (which can only take you so far), it's Nadal's massive drop in speed and defensive skills that have swung that matchup in favour of Federer.
So despite the age gap, Federer and Djokovic still are major roadblocks for Nadal on HCs, whereas Nadal is the only major roadblock for Djokovic on clay.
In any event, my overall point is that Nadal is not as good on HCs as Federer and Djokovic are--and yet he has to get through both of them in order to win almost any HC title, whereas on clay Federer and Djokovic have only ever had Nadal to deal with due to Federer and Djokovic's clay primes never really overlapping other than in 2011.
Last edited:
I fail to see how Federer being a good matchup against Djokovic means despite his age, he is a major roadblock to Nadal at hard court especially since in this case the match up (and the mental ownage) is in Nadal's favour (especially in the period 2009-2014 period where Nadal was consistently beating Federer at Australian open and Federer only managing to reach one US open final since 2009). If you are talking about Nadal post 2017 decline, Federer hasn't really made the finals at the hard courts slams consistently enough to be a serious roadblock. Nadal also hasn't consistently made the hard court finals consistently enough to claim that it was only Djokovic stopping him in the same period
My point is that I think Djokovic is better than Nadal on his weaker surface and hence he is unluckier to have to face Nadal at the French at compared to Nadal having to face Djokovic at the hard courts (especially since he was beaten many times by other players in hard court slams whereas Djokovic was only really mostly losing to Nadal at the French) and he never really had to go through both of time at their prime at the same time (because of his age difference to Federer and Djokovic coming of age late) to win a hard court slam not to mention at the US open, it turned out that Federer and Djokovic was in the same half four times whereas Nadal and Federer was never in same half
Last edited:
Too much has been made of Nadal failing to beat Djokovic at hard court since 2013 in this and other threads. It is just a victim of circumstances. Leaving out Djokovic's win in the French 2021, the only reason why Djokovic has beated Nadal on clay more recently than Nadal beating Djokovic on hard courts is becasue Djokovic has met Nadal when he was totally out of form (2014-2016) whereas Nadal did not meet Djokovic when he was out for form (2017-to mid 2018). Djokovic is overall better than Nadal becasue he is better than him at more surfaces but neither of them has made much inroads in each other strongest surface since 2013
Similar threads
