Nadal is not Djokovic on clay

N

Newcomer

Hall of Fame
Lol at people writing Wawrinka would beat prime Nadal in RG 2015 final. Against 2015 Nadal he would have won, but not against any other version. Today's final showed the difference. Djokovic in 2015 was playing low balls to Wawrinka's backhand which is pretty much the ideal position for Wawrinka and he was able to dictate all the points. Nadal on the other hand was hitting high topspin balls, and Wawrinka was forced to defend too much, something he hates to do. This is the reason why Wawrinka couldn't up his level like he did in 2015. Nadal is just not Djokovic on clay.
 
Newcomer said:
Lol at people writing Wawrinka would beat prime Nadal in RG 2015 final. Against 2015 Nadal he would have won, but not against any other version. Today's final showed the difference. Djokovic in 2015 was playing low balls to Wawrinka's backhand which is pretty much the ideal position for Wawrinka and he was able to dictate all the points. Nadal on the other hand was hitting high topspin balls, and Wawrinka was forced to defend too much, something he hates to do. This is the reason why Wawrinka couldn't up his level like he did in 2015. Nadal is just not Djokovic on clay.
Click to expand...

I agree with you but weren't you posting before the final that you thought Wawrinka would win? :confused:
 
Newcomer said:
Lol at people writing Wawrinka would beat prime Nadal in RG 2015 final. Against 2015 Nadal he would have won, but not against any other version. Today's final showed the difference. Djokovic in 2015 was playing low balls to Wawrinka's backhand which is pretty much the ideal position for Wawrinka and he was able to dictate all the points. Nadal on the other hand was hitting high topspin balls, and Wawrinka was forced to defend too much, something he hates to do. This is the reason why Wawrinka couldn't up his level like he did in 2015. Nadal is just not Djokovic on clay.
Click to expand...

Weren't you fawning over Stan's undefeated record in slam finals a few days ago lol
 
The OP is correct but his title is a big strangely formulated. It would sound better as "Djokovic is not Nadal on clay".
 
Stanimal showed up in 2015, not in 2017. From the first 2 games you can tell Stan was not there...spraying shots.
 
Newcomer said:
I'm glad Nadal proved me wrong.
Click to expand...

You can never doubt Nadal when he is in decent form at the FO. There's no player who can beat him there when he's in good form. Bjorn Borg would probably be the only one who could get close.
 
cc0509 said:
You can never doubt Nadal when he is in decent form at the FO. There's no player who can beat him there when he's in good form. Bjorn Borg would probably be the only one who could get close.
Click to expand...
Can't compare Borg vs Nadal. It's two really different eras, played with different racquets. Nobody knows how each one of them would play in another era.
 
Newcomer said:
Lol at people writing Wawrinka would beat prime Nadal in RG 2015 final. Against 2015 Nadal he would have won, but not against any other version. Today's final showed the difference. Djokovic in 2015 was playing low balls to Wawrinka's backhand which is pretty much the ideal position for Wawrinka and he was able to dictate all the points. Nadal on the other hand was hitting high topspin balls, and Wawrinka was forced to defend too much, something he hates to do. This is the reason why Wawrinka couldn't up his level like he did in 2015. Nadal is just not Djokovic on clay.
Click to expand...
You have it backwards.

Djokovic is not Nadal on clay, but he's also the only guy to beat him seven times on that surface.

For me it is like this, on clay:

Nadal
Djokovic
Federer
Wawrinka

Everyone else.

But that's career.

Fed has not been a threat on clay for a few years.
 
Newcomer said:
Can't compare Borg vs Nadal. It's two really different eras, played with different racquets. Nobody knows how each one of them would play in another era.
Click to expand...

Obviously I mean that if the equipment, technology were the same. Borg is the only player I can see who would come close.
 
Nadal is not Nole on Hard Court.

What do you think ?

24034.jpg
 
Gary Duane said:
You have it backwards.

Djokovic is not Nadal on clay, but he's also the only guy to beat him seven times on that surface.

For me it is like this, on clay:

Nadal
Djokovic
Federer
Wawrinka

Everyone else.

But that's career.

Fed has not been a threat on clay for a few years.
Click to expand...
My statement wasn't wrong. It says Nadal is much better on clay.
 
Newcomer said:
Lol at people writing Wawrinka would beat prime Nadal in RG 2015 final. Against 2015 Nadal he would have won, but not against any other version. Today's final showed the difference. Djokovic in 2015 was playing low balls to Wawrinka's backhand which is pretty much the ideal position for Wawrinka and he was able to dictate all the points. Nadal on the other hand was hitting high topspin balls, and Wawrinka was forced to defend too much, something he hates to do. This is the reason why Wawrinka couldn't up his level like he did in 2015. Nadal is just not Djokovic on clay.
Click to expand...
This is true but Djokovic also hit shorter that day than he usually does(perhaps due to nerves or fatigue) which allowed Wawrinka to play with the rhythm he likes to have. Unfortunately for Novak he doesn't possess Nadal's topspin nor the variety of Federer and Murray to really disrupt his game.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
This is true but Djokovic also hit shorter that day than he usually does(perhaps due to nerves or fatigue) which allowed Wawrinka to play with the rhythm he likes to have. Unfortunately for Novak he doesn't possess Nadal's topspin nor the variety of Federer and Murray to really disrupt his game.
Click to expand...
Well, I have to admit Nadal is having the advantage of being left handed. But of course it's not just that. Just being left handed is not enough to win 10 RG titles.
 
kishnabe said:
Stanimal showed up in 2015, not in 2017. From the first 2 games you can tell Stan was not there...spraying shots.
Click to expand...

It's kinda hard to turn on the stanimal when your opponent pushes you all the way to the stands to hit your groundstrokes.
Enough with "stanimal didn't show up" crap. They're all at the mercy of how well Nadal is playing when they face him on that court.
 
cc0509 said:
That's true but he does have a winning record over Djokovic at the USO. Odd for somebody who is considered by many as the slow hc goat.
Click to expand...
i mean djokovic has a h2h against fed at wimbledon and I think many would regard him as a much better grass court player overall.
 
70後 said:
I do not believe that is the way it works.
Click to expand...

According to whom? I think Borg is the only player in tennis history who may have been able to challenge Nadal on clay. Maybe on a good day Kuerten could have given him a bit of a battle but Nadal is so superior in so many ways at the FO it's scary.
 
cc0509 said:
According to whom? I think Borg is the only player in tennis history who may have been able to challenge Nadal on clay. Maybe on a good day Kuerten could have given him a bit of a battle but Nadal is so superior in so many ways at the FO it's scary.
Click to expand...

Why exactly is it if the equipment and technology the same, Borg is necessarily the only person who can challenge Nadal on clay? I am not saying it isn't the case, but not for that reason.
 
70後 said:
Why exactly is it if the equipment and technology the same, Borg is necessarily the only person who can challenge Nadal on clay? I am not saying it isn't the case, but not for that reason.
Click to expand...

Borg was a beast on the red dirt. He's the second best player on clay in history. He's the only one I could see with a chance to beat prime Nadal on clay.
 
cc0509 said:
Borg was a beast on the red dirt. He's the second best player on clay in history. He's the only one I could see with a chance to beat prime Nadal on clay.
Click to expand...

I don't think that answers it. Second greatest in accomplishments and second best at output are two things. If the equipment and technology were the same, that will be the reason why Borg might or not beat prime Nadal on clay. Maybe Borg could, I don't know, however that will not be the reason.
 
kishnabe said:
Stanimal showed up in 2015, not in 2017. From the first 2 games you can tell Stan was not there...spraying shots.
Click to expand...
Stanimal is a fairytale or more accurately some mythical beast.

Nadal slayed that myth and beast today, and easily to boot.

giphy.gif
 
Gary Duane said:
For me it is like this, on clay:

Nadal
Djokovic
Federer
Wawrinka

Everyone else.
Click to expand...
For me, right now, it's like this:
  1. Rafael Nadal
  2. Rafa Nadal
  3. Rafito Nadal
  4. Ralph Nader
  5. Hafa Nada
  6. Humbalito Nadal
  7. nadl
  8. Kneed@l
  9. N@bull
  10. Rafa Garros
  11. Federer
  12. Djokovic
  13. Wawrinka
  14. Everyone else
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
What is Wawrinka's peak level?
Replies
12
Views
2K
Fedole
Fedole
Hitman
Fedovic best finals streak on clay
Replies
10
Views
709
spottishwood
spottishwood
skypadq
why some people say if djokovic had win 15 RG , he would not have done CYGS ?
Replies
20
Views
875
abmk
abmk
Lew II
Nadal has never beaten two top5 in the last two rounds of a non-clay tournament
Replies
23
Views
1K
Tennis_Hands
T
The_18th_Slam
  • Poll Poll
Which year was Djokovic's peak on clay?
Replies
18
Views
1K
Krish872007
Krish872007
Back
Top