Nadal: Novak Djokovic reached a higher level than Roger Federer

[tennisfanboy]

Nadal understands more about tennis than anyone in this forum.

Yes. Wrong choice of words. I meant he was not on the wrong side of Federer's peak play as much as he was on Djokovic's because of his match up advantage. Your opinions boil down to how you match up against a certain player no? It ain't objective.

 

[mike danny]

Nadal speaking the truth.

Also winning four majors in a row on three different surfaces also proves that your level is the highest ever, certainly higher than Federer ever could reach. So Nole has not only been the highest level Nadal has faced, but overall Djokovic has proven his tennis is unmatched. It's just facts.

Let's not go overboard.

Djokovic had the greatest 18 months out of anybody. Federer had the greatest 4 year run out of everybody.

4 years >> 18 months.

 

[tennisfanboy]

Yes. Wrong choice of words. I meant he was not on the wrong side of Federer's peak play as much as he was on Djokovic's because of his match up advantage. Your opinions boil down to how you match up against a certain player no? It ain't objective.

And Djokovic was beatable at his peak. His losses to Federer, Wawrinka etc prove that. Nobody can be invincible including Federer.

 

[RF-18]

Let's not go overboard.

Djokovic had the greatest 18 months out of anybody. Federer had the greatest 4 year run out of everybody.

4 years >> 18 months.

Djokovic has four in a row, his 2015 is better than any season of Federers. Djokovic IMO has shown he is capable of producing higher level of tennis thanks to this incredible dominance, especially holding all four majors at once. HOF recognizes this. You should read it.

 

[Spencer Gore]

If peak Djokovic had played during the weak era we would have been looking at 3 or 4 calendar year Grand Slams.

 

[tennisaddict]

Djokovic has four in a row, his 2015 is better than any season of Federers. Djokovic IMO has shown he is capable of producing higher level of tennis thanks to this incredible dominance, especially holding all four majors at once. HOF recognizes this. You should read it.

Djok had the best peak during a single year with Laver.

Fed had the best peak for 4 years and also the best peak over an entire career.

What is hard for you to understand ?

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Stating the obvious really.

 

[merlinpinpin]

Easy to say that when you got plot armor so thick, you can get stabbed 20 times and still come back to life so you can have some great times with your sexy aunt.

Still knows nothing, though...

 

[KINGROGER]

Post prime Federer is probably marginally better than or equal to peak djokovic at RG, definitely better at Wimbledon and marginally better at USO as evidenced by 2011-2012 period so I disagree with this.

 

[fundrazer]

If peak Djokovic had played during the weak era we would have been looking at 3 or 4 calendar year Grand Slams.

Assuming he doesn't go up against peak Safin or Roddick.

You're also assuming he'd beat Federer every time.

So no.

 

[KINGROGER]

Operating at peak level, Djokovic is clearly a better tennis player than Federer. But Roger's incredible longevity cannot be denied.

2011 RG
2011 USO
2012 Wimbledon
2012 Cincy
2015 Cincy


Proves this wrong. And that was Federer past his peak.

 

[NatF]

Not really that objectionable tbh. Though I do think Federer at his best was better on at least a couple of major courts

 

[Deleted member 77403]

Djoko had a lot of catching up to do.

Yes he did, you are completely right, which is what makes the feat outstanding.

 

[KINGROGER]

If peak Djokovic had played during the weak era we would have been looking at 3 or 4 calendar year Grand Slams.

Not really. He got a weaker era in 14-16 and lost out on CYGS to likes of Wawrinka, Nishikori, Querrey LOL.

Put peak Fed into this era and he quite possibly wins 12 slams in a row.

 

[tennisaddict]

Yes he did, you are completely right, which is what makes the feat outstanding.

Touche !

 

[Spencer Gore]

I don't think there is any unbiased tennis observer who thinks that Djokovic hasn't reached the highest level of play of the big 3.

Federer has to be respected for scooping up titles during a fallow period for great tennis players, Nadal has to be respected for owning Federer in the majors, but the highest level of tennis of the last 15 years was undoubtedly played by Djokovic.

 

[Tennisanity]

Highest peak levels:
1) Federer
2) Djokovic
3) Nadal

That's an unbiased objective assessment. It may hurt you if you're not a Fed fan, but you need to face the facts folks.

 

[Spencer Gore]

Highest peak levels:
1) Federer
2) Djokovic
3) Nadal

That's an unbiased objective assessment. It may hurt you if you're not a Fed fan, but you need to face the facts folks.

A 33% winning record for Federer against the other two in the big ones says otherwise.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

Touche !

Wait...I thought she was acknowledging just how awesome of a feat it was...

Right?

 

[BeatlesFan]

Well Rafael speaks truth..
It's simple maths.

TO be fair to Fed, Rafa-Nole are same age and Fed is 5 years older.

Actually Fed is six years older than Novak.

 

[Gary Duane]

Rafa "has a reputation for being a lot less intelligent than he really is" in Fedfans' alternate universe, not in the real world.

And there you are, turning a positive statement from me into an attack. Way to go...

 

[Gary Duane]

Actually Fed is six years older than Novak.

And Novak is 1 year younger than Nadal, but let's not worry about facts.

 

[clayqueen]

Highest peak levels:
1) Federer
2) Djokovic
3) Nadal

That's an unbiased objective assessment. It may hurt you if you're not a Fed fan, but you need to face the facts folks.

In your opinion.

 

[Deleted member 3771]

Djokovic has also been Rafa's toughest opponent of the big 4 in Grand Slams. Rafa has a 9-4 (69%)Grand slam record v Djoko, 9-3 (75%) vs Fed, and 7-2 (78%) v Murray.

 

[tennisaddict]

And there you are, turning a positive statement from me into an attack. Way to go...

May be @octobrina10 thinks Rafa is really not intelligent outside of the tennis court ?

 

[Red Rick]

Nadal openly stating that Djokovic is indeed Earth's Mightiest Warrior. Just replace the word invincible with that.

Nadal understands the truth.

Nadal confirms that Murrovic are Earth's Mightiest Warrior and the Savior of Tennis respectively, whereas Fedal, being a goat and a bull, are just cattle for slaughter in 2018

 

[Red Rick]

Djokovic has also been Rafa's toughest opponent of the big 4 in Grand Slams. Rafa has a 9-4 (69%)Grand slam record v Djoko, 9-3 (75%) vs Fed, and 7-2 (78%) v Murray.

I think Nadal is also the only one with wins over all the other big 4 members on any Slam they've played? Djoko has played but not beaten Murray at Wimbly and Fed has played but not beaten Nadal at RG.

Murray, well, I rather not talk about his record vs Nole at the AO

 

[mike danny]

I think Nadal is also the only one with wins over all the other big 4 members on any Slam they've played? Djoko has played but not beaten Murray at Wimbly and Fed has played but not beaten Nadal at RG.

Murray, well, I rather not talk about his record vs Nole at the AO

Nadal has played Djokovic at the AO, but hasn't beaten him.

 

[abmk]

I think Nadal is also the only one with wins over all the other big 4 members on any Slam they've played? Djoko has played but not beaten Murray at Wimbly and Fed has played but not beaten Nadal at RG.

Murray, well, I rather not talk about his record vs Nole at the AO

incorrect.
Nadal hasn't beaten Djoko at the AO

 

[cc0509]

Read his words carefully. Did he really make a statement, or is he nuancing his answer? I'd say the latter. Nadal has a reputation for being a lot less intelligent than he really is, because of his rather broken English.

Reading between the lines I'd say he is trying to give both players equal credit without saying too much. Very diplomatic.

Yes. All Nadal is saying that for him personally, Djokovic at his best was the tougher player. Who doesn't know that already? The match-up was a trickier one for prime Nadal. Nadal isn't the only player in the field. At the end of the day, that and $4.50 will get you a cup of coffee. Djokovic is still seven slams behind Federer which is a huge difference. He's also behind 79 weeks for weeks @ #1. At the end of the day, that's all that matters for tennis historians.

 

[tennisfanboy]

If you ask fed, he's going to say Nadal was his toughest opponent. Does it mean he achieved higher level than Djoker?

 

[Deleted member 716271]

The people who are saying Nadal just means that Djokovic was a tougher matchup on a personal level are not reading what he said.

‘But at a technical level, when Djokovic has been at the top of his game, I have to say that I’ve been up against an invincible player.’

 

[abmk]

The people who are saying Nadal just means that Djokovic was a tougher matchup on a personal level are not reading what he said.

‘But at a technical level, when Djokovic has been at the top of his game, I have to say that I’ve been up against an invincible player.’

yeah, may sound rude, but Nadal's evaluation of technical level is biased towards baseline play (regards serve and net play as less , calls Sampras, Goran etc. as boring).

 

[swordtennis]

It is callled the legend in your own mind affect on ttw. Ttw members know more than nadal does about tennis and his opponents. The worship of fed has reaally ruined fed fans. They really can not be tennis fans anymore unless therapy and checked into a betty ford type center.

 

[swordtennis]

The people who are saying Nadal just means that Djokovic was a tougher matchup on a personal level are not reading what he said.

‘But at a technical level, when Djokovic has been at the top of his game, I have to say that I’ve been up against an invincible player.’

I think fans of the fed read what they want to hear. A betty ford center for fed addicts is prob the only way to change that at this point. Tragic.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

yeah, may sound rude, but Nadal's evaluation of technical level is biased towards baseline play (regards serve and net play as less , calls Sampras, Goran etc. as boring).

that's fair I have no problem if people disagree with what Nadal says. But I'm just saying they shouldn't twist his words to mean something else.

 

[octobrina10]

May be @octobrina10 thinks Rafa is really not intelligent outside of the tennis court ?

I repeat. In the Fedfans' made-up stories.

 

[MichaelNadal]

So, what he is Beerus to Novak's Broly and Fed's Vegeta?

Beerus would slay Nadal

 

[tennisaddict]

The people who are saying Nadal just means that Djokovic was a tougher matchup on a personal level are not reading what he said.

‘But at a technical level, when Djokovic has been at the top of his game, I have to say that I’ve been up against an invincible player.’

When you look at the bolded parts, it is clear he is referring to his matchup alone.

 

[octobrina10]

And there you are, turning a positive statement from me into an attack. Way to go...

Hmm. I didn't know that you created that 'reputation'.

 

[merlinpinpin]

The people who are saying Nadal just means that Djokovic was a tougher matchup on a personal level are not reading what he said.

‘But at a technical level, when Djokovic has been at the top of his game, I have to say that I’ve been up against an invincible player.’

That's exactly what he's saying, actually--that when Djokovic is at the top of his game, Nadal is weaponless against him. Of course, he's now weaponless against Federer, too, but Djokovic has been doing that to him for much longer, so that's a perfectly logical assesment from his point of view.

 

[zagor]

The people who are saying Nadal just means that Djokovic was a tougher matchup on a personal level are not reading what he said.

‘But at a technical level, when Djokovic has been at the top of his game, I have to say that I’ve been up against an invincible player.’

He's still says "I've been up against" which seems to me to accent the individual match-up.

But still if he means higher overall level then that's fine too as far as I'm concerned. He still gave plenty of credit to Fed in the interview as well.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

That's exactly what he's saying, actually--that when Djokovic is at the top of his game, Nadal is weaponless against him. Of course, he's now weaponless against Federer, too, but Djokovic has been doing that to him for much longer, so that's a perfectly logical assesment from his point of view.

When you look at the bolded parts, it is clear he is referring to his matchup alone.

No.

 

[tennisaddict]

No.

That is not much of an argument, is it ?

He should have lost the " I've been up" part if you think he meant otherwise.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

He's still says "I've been up against" which seems to me to accent the individual match-up.

But still if he means higher overall level then that's fine too as far as I'm concerned. He still gave plenty of credit to Fed in the interview as well.

Yes it is fine and not that incendiary. But I don't understand the implication that it is about matchup solely. It seems obviously not that to me.

The question was who the best was that he had come up against. If it was just about the individual matchup, then Fed might not even be 2nd to Djokovic. As people here love to note, it might be Kafelnikov or whoever.

I'm surprised people can interpret something in such a different way. It is pretty straightforward. Obviously you can only play people as yourself, but these guys still have an idea of the level of the people they are playing outside of the individual matchup.

 

[tennisaddict]

Yes it is fine and not that incendiary. But I don't understand the implication that it is about matchup solely. It seems obviously not that to me.

The question was who the best was that he had come up against. If it was just about the individual matchup, then Fed might not even be 2nd to Djokovic. As people here love to note, it might be Kafelnikov or whoever.

I'm surprised people can interpret something in such a different way. It is pretty straightforward. Obviously you can only play people as yourself, but these guys still have an idea of the level of the people they are playing outside of the individual matchup.

Take away 2017.

Nadal had a tougher time playing Davydenko than Federer.

Does that mean Davydenko is at a technical level far superior than Federer ?

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Take away 2017.

Nadal had a tougher time playing Davydenko than Federer.

Does that mean Davydenko is at a technical level far superior than Federer ?

What?!?!?!? How did you get that? Please improve your reading comprehension, Jeez.

 

[zagor]

Yes it is fine and not that incendiary. But I don't understand the implication that it is about matchup solely. It seems obviously not that to me.

The question was who the best was that he had come up against. If it was just about the individual matchup, then Fed might not even be 2nd to Djokovic. As people here love to note, it might be Kafelnikov or whoever.

I'm surprised people can interpret something in such a different way. It is pretty straightforward. Obviously you can only play people as yourself, but these guys still have an idea of the level of the people they are playing outside of the individual matchup.

He still wiggles a bit too much though, he says maybe Fed is the best or it would be unfar to not consider him the best etc. but then ends up with Novak was invincible on a technical level.

It seems to me like he was trying hard to give credit to both players but still differentiate them somehow.

Still, I get what you're saying. Reading it again, I think you might be right.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

He still wiggles a bit too much though, he says maybe Fed is the best or it would be unfar to not consider him the best etc. but then ends up with Novak was invincible on a technical level.

It seems to me like he was trying hard to give credit to both players but still differentiate them somehow.

Still, I get what you're saying. Reading it again, I think you might be right.

And I wouldn't say people should agree just because Rafa said it. I think it is debatable. Even as a Djokovic fan, I can see the argument that Federer had a higher peak level. I think Djokovic dominated the Masters in a way Federer didn't but at Fed's peak they were a different deal being B05. Nadal might have meant also, by technically, that Novak has less exploitable weaknesses, which is true and probably adds to the feeling of playing an "invincible opponent" but Fed has stronger strengths, particularly the forehand and serve.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

Someone needs to call up Nadal and tell him to come here and explain himself by whatever methods are required....

If someone is ready to assign me the job, I'll do it.