Nadal on hardcourt vs Djokovic on clay

Who's the better player?

  • Total voters
    61
NoleFam

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
We know Nadal is greater, because he has 6 Slams and Djokovic has 2, while there are 2 Slams on hard and 1 on clay. However, who is really the better player on the surfaces in question?

Nadal
Win percentage - 78.4%
Grand Slam - 84.3%
Masters - 77.5%
vs top 10 - 50.3%
vs top 5 - 40.3%
Finals - 48.1%
Titles won percentage - 25/160 - 15.6%


Djokovic
Win percentage - 80.4%
Grand Slam - 84.4%
Masters - 80.1%
vs top 10 - 58.5%
vs top 5 - 50.0%
Finals - 56.3%
Titles won percentage - 18/76 - 23.7%
 
GabeT said:
Djokovic is what, top 5 in clay in the open era? Some might say a bit better?

he’s got the edge over nadal on this
Click to expand...

What's your list? Nadal, Borg, Lendl, Kuerten, Djokovic in some order...or Wilander instead of Kuerten? Can't be no less than 6 though. I say top 5 myself.

Hardcourt - Djokovic, Federer, Sampras, Agassi, Nadal - this is the order for most hardcourt Slams but Nadal wouldn't be in your top 5?

Yea based on this, he does. With another clay Slam with faster conditions than RG and he may have done more damage than in Paris.
 
NoleFam said:
What's your list? Nadal, Borg, Lendl, Kuerten, Djokovic in some order...or Wilander instead of Kuerten? Can't be no less than 6 though. I say top 5 myself.

Hardcourt - Djokovic, Federer, Sampras, Agassi, Nadal - this is the order for most hardcourt Slams but Nadal wouldn't be in your top 5?

Yea based on this, he does. With another clay Slam with faster conditions than RG and he may have done more damage than in Paris.
Click to expand...

Lendl over Nadal on HC.

Mac and Connors in terms of ability/on a per-match basis, but hardcourts weren’t as prevalent in their day so they lag behind in achievements.
 
The issue in both cases is that they both limited each other from reaching greater heights on these surfaces. Without Djokovic, Nadal probably has like 2 more AOs and another USO, and countless more HC masters. In addition, Federer also stopped Nadal from a good amount of masters HC titles.

Djokovic didn’t have two ATG clay courters in front of him like Nadal had in front of him on HC, but the one in front of him was so dominant that it had the same kind of effect.

So when one has the all time greatest clay courter in front of him and the other has 2 of the top 3 greatest HC players in front of him, its hard to judge who was better on these surfaces
 
Nadal > on bo5
Novak > on bo3

It’s close though. Fedovic fans tell me clay competition is weak in this era and hard is strong, wonder how that factors in :D
 
TheFifthSet said:
Lendl over Nadal on HC.

Mac and Connors in terms of ability/on a per-match basis, but hardcourts weren’t as prevalent in their day so they lag behind in achievements.
Click to expand...

I would put Lendl over him. Probably Mac since he won 4 USOs, beating all the best players to win them, and would have won more if AO was on hard and a Slam that players traveled to back then. He has a higher winning percentage and better record against top players as well. Not sure about Connors though.
 
LetWinner said:
The issue in both cases is that they both limited each other from reaching greater heights on these surfaces. Without Djokovic, Nadal probably has like 2 more AOs and another USO, and countless more HC masters. In addition, Federer also stopped Nadal from a good amount of masters HC titles.

Djokovic didn’t have two ATG clay courters in front of him like Nadal had in front of him on HC, but the one in front of him was so dominant that it had the same kind of effect.

So when one has the all time greatest clay courter in front of him and the other has 2 of the top 3 greatest HC players in front of him, its hard to judge who was better on these surfaces
Click to expand...

Federer didn't really stop Nadal from winning hardcourt Masters that often before 2017 when they both were past their primes. Before that it was 2005 Miami and 2012 IW. In 2017, he stopped Nadal 3 times. Of course, they stopped each other once at AO each. Nadal had a big head to head lead on outdoor hard over Federer before it turned in 2015.
 
NoleFam said:
I would put Lendl over him. Probably Mac since he won 4 USOs, beating all the best players to win them, and won have won more if AO was on hard and a Slam that players traveled to back then. He has a higher winning percentage and better record against top players as well. Not sure about Connors though.
Click to expand...

Connors is a tricky one because Nadal beats him in accomplishments and arguably even peak level (though Jimbo gets short-changed here, I’d say it’s closer than some think)…but still, based on dominance over their respective field(s) + how well they cashed in on opportunities available to them, I’d give it to Connors. Both had very stiff comp on HC.

One thing that bothers me about Nadal’s career on HC is how you can make a clear-headed argument for him never being the best on the surface over a full year (2019 being the closest he got).
 
TheFifthSet said:
Connors is a tricky one because Nadal beats him in accomplishments and arguably even peak level (though Jimbo gets short-changed here, I’d say it’s closer than some think)…but still, based on dominance over their respective field(s) + how well they cashed in on opportunities available to them, I’d give it to Connors. Both had very stiff comp on HC.

One thing that bothers me about Nadal’s career on HC is how you can make a clear-headed argument for him never being the best on the surface over a full year (2019 being the closest he got).
Click to expand...

Well Connors did win 3 USOs on hardcourt and won them back to back in '82 and '83. He has a much higher winning percentage too. He just play the USO his whole career on hard like others did where he could have more hardcourt Slams. Still, he went to a USO at age 39 so we know he was a beast on the surface.

Yea he doesn't actually have that. I probably would have said 2013 though would be his closest with his run in the NA hardcourt season. I can see why you pick 2019 being that he made both hardcourt finals but he was thrashed by Djokovic in 2019 AO. We remember the USO draw. So he won and made the final, but his level was better in both years.
 
The_Order said:
LOL Djokovic has never reached a level on clay compared to Nadal at AO09 and US10...
Click to expand...

It can be argued in your favor but then again Djokovic is 26-25 against the top 5 on clay and Nadal is 21-29 on outdoor hardcourt. Amazing that they played them the same number of times considering how many more matches on hardcourt Nadal played. Djokovic could win all big clay titles multiple times as well when Nadal didn't. We could limit it to outdoor hard, and he's still missing Miami and another Cincy.
 
Last edited:
NoleFam said:
It can be argued in your favor but then again Djokovic is 25-25 against the top 5 on clay and Nadal is 21-29 on hardcourt. Amazing Nadal only played them so few times considering how many more matches on hardcourt he played. Djokovic could win all clay big titles multiple times as well when Nadal didn't.
Click to expand...

You are arguing about consistency. The fact is, his level of play on clay has not reached the heights that Nadal's reached on HC.

And Nadal has won 2 AO and 4 USO... even more than Novak so don't know what you're on about with the multiple titles thing...
 
The_Order said:
You are arguing about consistency. The fact is, his level of play on clay has not reached the heights that Nadal's reached on HC.

And Nadal has won 2 AO and 4 USO... even more than Novak so don't know what you're on about with the multiple titles thing...
Click to expand...

Yes but that can't be measured. Lol. Results can. Consistency is plain as day but not peak level. Even so, I can say Nadal's peak level is greater and still say Djokovic is better because his results against the top players is better.

Djokovic only gets one shot at a clay Slam though, RG. He has 2 and he actually beat Nadal for 1 of his. Masters level, Djokovic is 11/43. Nadal is 10/75.
 
Theres tons more depth on hardcourts than clay as has been for years. For that matter alone combined with Nadal's peak level, its pretty easy take him over Nole in this matter. Nole is very good on clay but Nadal's had some fine results on hards too
 
NoleFam said:
Yes but that can't be measured. Lol. Results can. Consistency is plain as day but not peak level. Even so, I can say Nadal's peak level is greater and still say Djokovic is better because his results against the top players is better.

Djokovic only gets one shot at a clay Slam though, RG. He has 2 and he actually beat Nadal for 1 of his. Masters level, Djokovic is 11/43. Nadal is 10/75.
Click to expand...

Doesn't need to be measured...

You asked the question as to who is better.... you got the answer.

Your "shots at clay slam" argument... ok let's scrap US Open. Nadal has won 2 AO titles and 4 additional finals. Same as Novak at RG. But Nadal's highest level at AO was better than any of Novak's at RG.

He actually beat 35 year old ailing Nadal. If Novak was in Nadal's path in AO09 he would've been beaten comfortably. Same deal at AO17.

Novak on clay never has and never will reach the heights that Nadal did on HC.
 
The_Order said:
Doesn't need to be measured...

You asked the question as to who is better.... you got the answer.

Your "shots at clay slam" argument... ok let's scrap US Open. Nadal has won 2 AO titles and 4 additional finals. Same as Novak at RG. But Nadal's highest level at AO was better than any of Novak's at RG.

He actually beat 35 year old ailing Nadal. If Novak was in Nadal's path in AO09 he would've been beaten comfortably. Same deal at AO17.

Novak on clay never has and never will reach the heights that Nadal did on HC.
Click to expand...

But your idea that Nadal's best at AO was better than Djokovic's best at RG is subjective. I agree with you on this actually. Djokovic in 2016 RG was great himself. Still, I give it to 2009 AO Nadal but it's not something objective that can be proven.

Djokovic was 34 himself and for the better part of 3.5 hours, Nadal was not ailing. It was a dogfight and Djokovic came out on top. Yea Nadal would have beaten Djokovic in 2009 but you can't even say he would have beaten him in 2017 had they played. We'll never know.

I don't know about that. Djokovic beat Nadal at RG twice and every big clay Masters. Nadal has never beaten Djokovic at AO, Miami or Cincy.
 
NoleFam said:
But your idea that Nadal's best at AO was better than Djokovic's best at RG is subjective. I agree with you on this actually. Djokovic in 2016 RG was great himself. Still, I give it to 2009 AO Nadal.

Djokovic was 34 himself and for the better part of 3.5 hours, Nadal was not ailing. It was a dogfight and Djokovic came out on top. Yea Nadal would have beaten Djokovic in 2009 but you can't even say he would have beaten him in 2017 had they played. We'll never know.

I don't know about that. Djokovic beat Nadal at RG twice and every big clay Masters. Nadal has never beaten Djokovic at AO, Miami or Cincy.
Click to expand...

Anyone with a set of eyes would agree. This whole thread is subjective... if you're looking for a concrete, factual based answer you're nuts.

Again... Djokovic beat 2 of Nadal's worst versions at RG... Nadal never got that opportunity against 2 of the worst versions of Novak at the AO. If he did, he would have a couple of wins against him there as well.

Djokovic came out on top because Nadal was firstly not in good form compared to his usual standards and then as the match eventuated he started feeling pain. Djokovic 34 but never had the injury history Nadal has had, his body is clearly in far better shape at the comparable ages.

Doesn't change what's blatantly obvious.
 
The_Order said:
Anyone with a set of eyes would agree. This whole thread is subjective... if you're looking for a concrete, factual based answer you're nuts.

Again... Djokovic beat 2 of Nadal's worst versions at RG... Nadal never got that opportunity against 2 of the worst versions of Novak at the AO. If he did, he would have a couple of wins against him there as well.

Djokovic came out on top because Nadal was firstly not in good form compared to his usual standards and then as the match eventuated he started feeling pain. Djokovic 34 but never had the injury history Nadal has had, his body is clearly in far better shape at the comparable ages.

Doesn't change what's blatantly obvious.
Click to expand...

What you're arguing about peak level is subjective yes. Winning percentage, record against top 5 and top 10, and finals won, etc. is not. So if you're answer is based on peak, then that's fine but there is a difference.

Maybe one win. Two wins? Don't see it happening. The one win would have probably came earlier in his career like when Federer beat him. Nadal over 30 is not the athlete he was when he brought hell and high water to Djokovic in hardcourt matches in his 20s.

Djokovic won the match fair and square. He tore Djokovic to shreds months prior on that same court. What's good for the gander is good for the goose.
 
Backspin1183 said:
The 7 posters who voted Djokovic on clay @BlueB @Djokovic2011 @GabeT @Jokervich @Sudacafan @The Guru @Bubcay, can you explain how on earth is 2 RG titles more impressive than Rafa's 4 freaking USO titles? And he beat Djokovic in two of those finals. Even at AO, he has 2 titles.
Click to expand...
I looked at the percentages OP gave and all of them were higher for Djokovic.

Then I saw that the tennis calendar has more hard court tennis than it does clay court, which makes it unfair to compare absolute titles won. 2 freaking hard court slams and only 1 clay court slam. 5 masters on hard I believe, but only 3 on clay.
 
Backspin1183 said:
The 7 posters who voted Djokovic on clay @BlueB @Djokovic2011 @GabeT @Jokervich @Sudacafan @The Guru @Bubcay, can you explain how on earth is 2 RG titles more impressive than Rafa's 4 freaking USO titles? And he beat Djokovic in two of those finals. Even at AO, he has 2 titles.
Click to expand...
I always vote for Novak in these polls, no matter what the question is :unsure: :whistle:

But more seriously, my response was about HC and clay as surfaces so not limited to just slams. Nadal is a greater foe in clay than Novak or Fed are in HC so that stopped Novak from winning more RGs. But when you look at the overall Novak in clay vs Nadal in HC results I think Novak has a small edge. Look at the numbers OP posted
 
NeutralFan said:
Nadal has won more 2nd hc slam than Novak. (4-3) if there were two clay slams would Novak have won it more than Nadal?? I don't think so.that alone answer OP's stupid question.
Click to expand...

How is it a "stupid" question when Djokovic has won 26 matches against the top 5 while Nadal has only won 29 while playing 300+ more matches? Lol. It's a legit question.
 
GabeT said:
I always vote for Novak in these polls, no matter what the question is :unsure: :whistle:

But more seriously, my response was about HC and clay as surfaces so not limited to just slams. Nadal is a greater foe in clay than Novak or Fed are in HC so that stopped Novak from winning more RGs. But when you look at the overall Novak in clay vs Nadal in HC results I think Novak has a small edge. Look at the numbers OP posted
Click to expand...

Can you answer me this question, if there was a second clay slam Novak would have won it more than Nadal ?like Nadal has won it more than Novak? Also, I agree about Rafa's level being higher on clay but it's not as if Novak beat peak Nadal to win his RG so we should count his 2 RG greater than 6 hc slams or 3 slam / hc tournament.
 
NoleFam said:
What you're arguing about peak level is subjective yes. Winning percentage, record against top 5 and top 10, and finals won, etc. is not. So if you're answer is based on peak, then that's fine but there is a difference.

Maybe one win. Two wins? Don't see it happening. The one win would have probably came earlier in his career like when Federer beat him. Nadal over 30 is not the athlete he was when he brought hell and high water to Djokovic in hardcourt matches in his 20s.

Djokovic won the match fair and square. He tore Djokovic to shreds months prior on that same court. What's good for the gander is good for the goose.
Click to expand...

He tore Djokovic to shreds because he was in better form and mostly pain free...

You don't see 2 wins... of course not... but if he's losing to Chung and Istomin then he's losing to Nadal. AO09 wouldn't have been 'early like Federer' either given he was the defending champ there...

Nadal's record v top5/10 is lower because he's had to deal with 2 HC ATGs... Novak has only had to deal with 1 clay ATG. It's also a stupid way of looking at it, it basically says a win over Tsits on clay is equal to a win over Federer on hc... come on.

Novak's record v Federer on clay is 4-4... Nadal's record v Federer on hc is 9-11 (mainly due to 2017) and we all know how much better Fed is on HC compared to clay...
 
NoleFam said:
How is it a "stupid" question when Djokovic has won 25 matches against the top 5 while Nadal has only won 29 while playing 300+ more matches? Lol. It's a legit question.
Click to expand...

Answer me would Novak have won more second slam than Nadal if there were two clay slams ? Like Nadal has won more us open than Novak. That alone answer your questions.
 
Jokervich said:
I looked at the percentages OP gave and all of them were higher for Djokovic.

Then I saw that the tennis calendar has more hard court tennis than it does clay court, which makes it unfair to compare absolute titles won. 2 freaking hard court slams and only 1 clay court slam. 5 masters on hard I believe, but only 3 on clay.
Click to expand...
If you look at titles won % that takes care of the difference in number of tourneys in each surface
 
NeutralFan said:
Can you answer me this question, if there was a second clay slam Novak would have won it more than Nadal ?like Nadal has won it more than Novak? Also, I agree about Rafa's level being higher on clay but it's not as if Novak beat peak Nadal to win his RG so we should count his 2 RG greater than 6 hc slams or 3 slam / hc tournament.
Click to expand...
the question was about surfaces, not just slams. Otherwise we could just compare Novak’s 2 RGs with Nadal‘s 6 HC slams and be done with it
 
GabeT said:
the question was about surfaces, not just slams. Otherwise we could just compare Novak’s 2 RGs with Nadal‘s 6 HC slams and be done with it
Click to expand...

Slams are the pinnacle let's not pretend that .noone consider Murray equal hc player to Nadal because he is close in bo3 and percentages of matches won. Also, tell me how many RG did Novak win by beating peak Fedal like Rafa has won his hc slams by beating peak Fedovic? I am sorry but 2 RG without facing prime Fedal won't cut it for Djokovic.
 
The_Order said:
He tore Djokovic to shreds because he was in better form and mostly pain free...

You don't see 2 wins... of course not... but if he's losing to Chung and Istomin then he's losing to Nadal. AO09 wouldn't have been 'early like Federer' either given he was the defending champ there...

Nadal's record v top5/10 is lower because he's had to deal with 2 HC ATGs... Novak has only had to deal with 1 clay ATG. It's also a stupid way of looking at it, it basically says a win over Tsits on clay is equal to a win over Federer on hc... come on.

Novak's record v Federer on clay is 4-4... Nadal's record v Federer on hc is 9-11 (mainly due to 2017) and we all know how much better Fed is on HC compared to clay...
Click to expand...

Against Chung, that was a shell of Djokovic. Could barely play without feeling pain in every swing of the racket. Could have lost to a number of players that tournament and he shouldn't have even been playing before surgery. With Istomin, it was a clear defeat. Djokovic had a bad day but had not fallen completely off yet. Had he gotten through that match, he most likely goes deep into the tournament. Istomin played a great match although he caught Djokovic on an off day. Can't say Nadal beats him in a later round.

Nadal's record against Federer on hardcourt before 2015 was 9-6. 34+ Federer is 5-0. Not sure this bolsters your argument. He didn't have major problems with Federer on hardcourt until he got older. So no this is not really the reason why his record is below 500. It's because he struggled against a number of players on hardcout including Djokovic, Davydenko, Del Potro and later Federer.
 
NeutralFan said:
Slams are the pinnacle .noone consider Murray equal hc player to Nadal because he is close in bo3 and percentages of matches won. Also, tell me how many RG did Novak win by beating peak Fedal like Rafa has won his hc slams by beating peak Fedovic? I am sorry but 2 RG without facing prime Fedal won't cut it for Djokovic.
Click to expand...
Did you read the OP? the question asked is specifically about the surfaces NOT just the slams


not really interested in yet another debate on how slams are everything, that has been debated to death
 
NeutralFan said:
Answer me would Novak have won more second slam than Nadal if there were two clay slams ? Like Nadal has won more us open than Novak. That alone answer your questions.
Click to expand...

If the conditions were like Madrid then what do you think the answer is? Lol
 
GabeT said:
Did you read the OP? the question asked is specifically about the surfaces NOT just the slams


not really interested in yet another debate on how slams are everything, that has been debated to death
Click to expand...

So what makes a better player on surface? win % do we have to pretend that Bo3 counts as much as Bo5? Going by your absurd logic Murray is equal hc player to Nadal. A greater player has many variables like slam wins , big wins. Where is Novak's big win at RG against Prime Fedal? he can't be a greater player without a single win against prime Fedal at RG. What you are talking about is more consistent when you show us the % of the wins not greater.
 
NoleFam said:
Against Chung, that was a shell of Djokovic. Could barely play without feeling pain in every swing of the racket. Could have lost to a number of players that tournament and he shouldn't have even been playing before surgery. With Istomin, it was a clear defeat. Djokovic had a bad day but had not fallen completely off yet. Had he gotten through that match, he most likely goes deep into the tournament. Istomin played a great match although he caught Djokovic on an off day. Can't say Nadal beats him in a later round.

Nadal's record against Federer on hardcourt before 2015 was 9-6. 34+ Federer is 5-0. Not sure this bolsters your argument. He didn't have major problems with Federer on hardcourt until he got older. So no this is not really the reason why his record is below 500. It's because he struggled against a number of players on hardcout including Djokovic, Davydenko, Del Potro and later Federer.
Click to expand...

Yeah and in 2015 and 2021 Nadal was a shell of his usual self...

Nadal's record v Fed bolsters it quite significantly... obviously older Nadal was two steps slower than his peak... this allowed Federer to take ascendency. But Nadal at his best was more often than not too much for Fed to handle including on HC where his only real success came on indoor hc. Novak otoh, never had any real ascendency over Federer on clay... this includes younger and older Federer... so it's blatantly obvious Nadal better on HC than Novak on clay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Sport
  • Poll Poll
POLL: Nadal on clay vs. Djokovic on hard
2 3
Replies
148
Views
11K
BauerAlmeida
BauerAlmeida
Semi-Pro
  • Poll Poll
Who is better, Nadal on hardcourt or Federer on clay?
2 3
Replies
100
Views
12K
aphex
aphex
Lew II
  • Poll Poll
Djokovic on hardcourt > Nadal on clay?
2 3
Replies
134
Views
8K
Sephiroth
Sephiroth
M
Comparison of 64 Titles - Federer, Nadal, Djokovic - Comparison
Replies
8
Views
2K
robok9
robok9
Winner Sinner
  • Poll Poll
[POLL) Sinner 2024 vs Djokovic 2023
2
Replies
51
Views
2K
Winner Sinner
Winner Sinner
Back
Top