Nadal skipped 8 slams, plus withdrew from many others (including 2016 RG after winning 2nd Round).... Do asterisk fans put an asterisk on those too?

[Deleted member 788697]

2003 Roland Garros
2004 Roland Garros
2009 Wimbledon
2012 US Open
2013 Australian Open
2014 US Open
2020 US Open
2021 US Open

 

[Lleytonstation]

Only those that Djoker ended up winning.

 

[MeatTornado]

Well now that you mention it perhaps there should be an asterisk on Nadal's 2017 & 2019 USO wins

 

[insideguy]

I put an asterisk on every slam. In my opinion no one has legitimately won one ever.

 

[Kralingen]

Just unbelievable disrespect to Nadal here. I’ll have you know that I’m literally shaking.

How could you fail to mention each one of the 1986-2002 versions of AO, RG, Wimby, and USO? How could you look past the horrific moral curse on poor Rafa who was born a feeble baby and had to go through puberty before becoming the Bull?

In a just, morally fair world, Nadal would have rightfully won each Slam from 1986-2021.

 

[Deleted member 788697]

I don't put an asterisk on any slams, because I know the asterisk will only ever exist in my head, never in reality....

 

[dapchai]

Looks like the USO is the only slam that Nadal's skipped two years in a row since he became a slam winner...

 

[pj80]

no because if he'd played, he'd be rekt either way by novak,,,

 

[Deleted member 788697]

Actually Nadal leads Djokovic 2-1 H2H at the US Open.
And 2012 Nadal pushed Djokovic to SIX hours at the AO..... so Nadal skipping 2013 AO is also a huge deal.

 

[Bender]

Just unbelievable disrespect to Nadal here. I’ll have you know that I’m literally shaking.

How could you fail to mention each one of the 1986-2002 versions of AO, RG, Wimby, and USO? How could you look past the horrific moral curse on poor Rafa who was born a feeble baby and had to go through puberty before becoming the Bull?

In a just, morally fair world, Nadal would have rightfully won each Slam from 1986-2021.

I asterisk all of Sampras' YEC wins because he never had to face the Nadal to win any of them.

 

[Kralingen]

I asterisk all of Sampras' YEC wins because he never had to face the Nadal to win any of them.

Without doubt a valid asterisk. There is a strong likelihood Petros would suffer an abdominal injury laughing uncontrollably at Nadal's return position and have to pull out.

 

[FedrMatt]

Well now that you mention it perhaps there should be an asterisk on Nadal's 2017 & 2019 USO wins

2017 for sure. Kevin Anderson in the final? Lol

Remember when he climbed up into the stands after his SF win? I almost died from cringe.

 

[jondice]

The fact that Rafa won his 20 slams while competing in fewer total slams compared to Fed and Nole is the only relevant stat I need.

Oh, and all asterisks need an asterisk from now on.

 

[Deleted member 788697]

2017 for sure. Kevin Anderson in the final? Lol

Also Nadal has beaten former US Open champions in all his US Open title runs except for 2010 (but he beat Djokovic in the Final).

 

[TearTheRoofOff]

I'd definitely put an asterisk against those slams, with the caveat that they were made much more enjoyable.

 

[InsideOut900]

2003 Roland Garros
2004 Roland Garros
2009 Wimbledon
2012 US Open
2013 Australian Open
2014 US Open
2020 US Open
2021 US Open

It's about Slams where the clear cut favourite withdrew and the chance someone won if the main favourite is present was slim

Also, hi to the boards, whichever former banned user you are

 

[Indigo]

It was Nadal's own decision. Novak was assassinated.

 

[Diminic D'Coco]

It was Nadal's own decision. Novak was assassinated.

you know... Hyperbole is not really a argument. furthermore makes you look like a short bus rider...

 

[Deleted member 788697]

It was Nadal's own decision. Novak was assassinated.

Nadal deserved to play those 8 slams, whereas Djokovic doesn't even deserve to be in the country!

Also, hi to the boards, whichever former banned user you are

I'm not a banned user, I asked to have my account deleted (because I have an account with the same name on another forum and it was hacked into and misused and damaged my clean reputation) so I could begin this new account.

 

[T007]

2003 Roland Garros
2004 Roland Garros
2009 Wimbledon
2012 US Open
2013 Australian Open
2014 US Open
2020 US Open
2021 US Open

In most of these he wasn't even a contender or the man to beat.

 

[Andy Murray Is Goat]

2017 for sure. Kevin Anderson in the final? Lol

Remember when he climbed up into the stands after his SF win? I almost died from cringe.

You cringe at winning a grand slam? I’d take a grand slam win over Anderson any day, I’m sure Monfils Nishikori Tsonga Berdych Nalbandian and Ferrer would train anything for just one. You lot on these threads talk too much.

 

[FedrMatt]

You cringe at winning a grand slam? I’d take a grand slam win over Anderson any day, I’m sure Monfils Nishikori Tsonga Berdych Nalbandian and Ferrer would train anything for just one. You lot on these threads talk too much.

I cringe at a guy acting like he won a slam after a semi final win.

I knew right then that the final was a straight-sets formality.

 

[ScottleeSV]

Asterisk should be a banned word on these forums. Just pathetic.

 

[Sport]

Well now that you mention it perhaps there should be an asterisk on Nadal's 2017 & 2019 USO wins

I don't know how. Both Federer and Djokovic psrticipated at the USO 2019. They simply weren't good enough to reach Nadal. And 33 years old Nadal had to defeat an opponent 10 years younger than him that was in an impressive winning streak: Dannil "the Bear" Medvedev. Medvedev had won 2 Masters 1000 in a row (including a victory over Djokovic in the Cincinnati final) and was a man on a mission. But once again, against all adversities, Nadal delievered a masterclass in an epic 5 sets final. The USO King of the 2010s, Mr. Rafael Nadal, did it again.

 

[Deleted member 788697]

In most of these he wasn't even a contender or the man to beat.

Nadal was defending champion 2009 Wimbledon, and had won in 2008 and 2010!
Nadal was defending champion at 2014 US Open and 2020 US Open!
Nadal was likely to win 2004 Roland Garros, because he won it in 2005.
And he was a contender in all 8 slams that he skipped.

Fed and roddick both would have beat him in 2009 wimbledon. Federer was playing avg in 2008 Final but it still took Nadal 5 sets to beat him. I don't think he could have beaten Federer/Roddick if he would have reached Final.

Again do you realize Nadal won Wimbledon in 2008 and 2010?
And 2009 Wimbledon Final was a joke, the worst Federer has ever played in a Wimbledon Final, was all serve.

Nadal won in 2005 as the clay field was dead. Nadal clay Game peaked from 2005 onwards and he wasn't that good in 2003-4.

Nadal beat Federer at 2005 Roland Garros, and hardly any of the champions in history would have a hope of beating Federer at Roland Garros.
Federer would win between 5 and 10 French Opens in any other decade. Djokovic too obviously.

 

[T007]

Nadal was defending champion 2009 Wimbledon, and had won in 2008 and 2010!
Nadal was defending champion at 2014 US Open and 2020 US Open!
Nadal was likely to win 2004 Roland Garros, because he won it in 2005.
And he was a contender in all 8 slams that he skipped, except for maybe 2003 Roland Garros.

Fed and roddick both would have beat him in 2009 wimbledon. Federer was playing avg in 2008 Final but it still took Nadal 5 sets to beat him. I don't think he could have beaten Federer/Roddick if he would have reached Final.

 

[Andy Murray Is Goat]

I cringe at a guy acting like he won a slam after a semi final win.

I knew right then that the final was a straight-sets formality.

So you even play tennis?

 

[FedrMatt]

So you even play tennis?

I’ve been playing for around 13 years

 

[T007]

Nadal was defending champion 2009 Wimbledon, and had won in 2008 and 2010!
Nadal was defending champion at 2014 US Open and 2020 US Open!
Nadal was likely to win 2004 Roland Garros, because he won it in 2005.
And he was a contender in all 8 slams that he skipped.

Nadal won in 2005 as the clay field was dead. Nadal clay Game peaked from 2005 onwards and he wasn't that good in 2003-4.

Being a defending champion does Guarantees you a victory next year that on HCs where he has failed to beat djokovic in last 9 years.

His form was very poor in the 2nd half of 2014 and it continued for next 2 years till 2017.

Except clay I wouldn't give him much chance to win anywhere else in the events you have mentioned.

 

[The_Order]

It was Nadal's own decision. Novak was assassinated.

You saying it hasn't been Novak's decision to not get vaccinated?

He knew the rules... just like all of the other players...

 

[The_Order]

Fed and roddick both would have beat him in 2009 wimbledon. Federer was playing avg in 2008 Final but it still took Nadal 5 sets to beat him. I don't think he could have beaten Federer/Roddick if he would have reached Final.

Rubbish... Fed was in his best ever form on grass leading up to the WIM08 final and he certainly did not play average... what a dumb thing to say.. I guess another troll that I should ignore going forward...

 

[Andy Murray Is Goat]

I’ve been playing for around 13 years

Well explains it

 

[LETitBE]

It's about Slams where the clear cut favourite withdrew and the chance someone won if the main favourite is present was slim

Also, hi to the boards, whichever former banned user you are

you forgot to say alot

 

[Gazelle]

No Pfizer.

 

[NADAL_VS_FED]

No. He was injured. Not durable enough. He couldn't handle the grind of the tour.

 

[Krish872007]

Any Slam I didn't take part in should be automatically asterisked.

I have been forcibly prevented from participating! By virtue of not being good enough, but details don't matter

 

[mike danny]

Nadal was defending champion 2009 Wimbledon, and had won in 2008 and 2010!
Nadal was defending champion at 2014 US Open and 2020 US Open!
Nadal was likely to win 2004 Roland Garros, because he won it in 2005.
And he was a contender in all 8 slams that he skipped.

This is a joke, right? That's like saying Fed should have won 2002 Wimb because he won it the year after.

Nadal wasn't the favorite at 2009 Wimb. Not with the draw he had, that's for sure.

 

[Deleted member 788697]

This is a joke, right? That's like saying Fed should have won 2002 Wimb because he won it the year after.

Nadal wasn't the favorite at 2009 Wimb. Not with the draw he had, that's for sure.

I'm saying there was no asterisk on any of the slams Nadal missed, and there will be no asterisk on any of the slams Djokovic misses.
And the reason why asterisks never stick, is because nobody will ever be able to prove that Djokovic would have won this 2022 AO, just as nobody can prove that Nadal would have won 2009 Wimbledon.
Indeed, fan-made asterisks are a joke.

"asterisk fans." That made me laugh.

I'm not on Novaxx side, but the obvious difference is that not playing was due to someone else's decision. On one level. On another level you could say it was his decision.

Indeed Djokovic chose not to get the vaccine, while most other players got the vaccine so they could play.
That was 100% Djokovic's choice, and he'll most likely retire from tennis very soon if he continues to make that choice.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Nadal was defending champion 2009 Wimbledon, and had won in 2008 and 2010!
Nadal was defending champion at 2014 US Open and 2020 US Open!
Nadal was likely to win 2004 Roland Garros, because he won it in 2005.
And he was a contender in all 8 slams that he skipped.


Again do you realize Nadal won Wimbledon in 2008 and 2010?
And 2009 Wimbledon Final was a joke, the worst Federer has ever played in a Wimbledon Final, was all serve.


Nadal beat Federer at 2005 Roland Garros, and hardly any of the champions in history would have a hope of beating Federer at Roland Garros.
Federer would win between 5 and 10 French Opens in any other decade. Djokovic too obviously.

Hello trollalot.

 

[Kralingen]

An exhausted Nadal took Djokovic to 10-8 in the 5th of Wimbledon 2018, even though the roof was closed on a sunny day, and Nadal is the greatest outdoor natural surface player of all time...

Nadal also won 51 net points in USO 2019 final while Federer won 51 in Wimbledon 2019 final.

and Djokovic needed a 98 minute 3rd set just to beat an injured Nadal at Roland Garros 2021.

Nadal is GOAT alot

 

[mike danny]

Rubbish... Fed was in his best ever form on grass leading up to the WIM08 final and he certainly did not play average... what a dumb thing to say.. I guess another troll that I should ignore going forward...

Any evidence to support this? He also didn't lose a set in 2006 on his way to the final.

 

[Krish872007]

An exhausted Nadal took Djokovic to 10-8 in the 5th of Wimbledon 2018, even though the roof was closed on a sunny day, and Nadal is the greatest outdoor natural surface player of all time...

Nadal also won 51 net points in USO 2019 final while Federer won 51 in Wimbledon 2019 final.

and Djokovic needed a 98 minute 3rd set just to beat an injured Nadal at Roland Garros 2021.

Nadal is GOAT alot

Djokovic also needed almost 6 hours to beat mentally injured Nadal at the Australian Open in 2012!
Nadal in his worst season (2015) was also level at 5-5 in the first set with Djokovic at Roland Garros, and later in the year level at 3-3 in the final set with Federer in Basel on indoor hard courts. In fact he was even level at 0-0 in the first set with Djokovic in Doha 2016.
Nadal also led Federer 3-1 in the fifth set of the 2017 Australian Open Final despite having sat out most of the second half of 2016, and went on to win 2 Slams anyway

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

i've actually a big fat asterisk stamped all over the nadal...

Spoiler

 

[NatF]

Any evidence to support this? He also didn't lose a set in 2006 on his way to the final.

I presume he means "still at his best" rather than that being his literal best. I would disagree but would still back 2008 Fed against any Wimbledon winner since then tbh lol.

 

[mike danny]

I presume he means "still at his best" rather than that being his literal best. I would disagree but would still back 2008 Fed against any Wimbledon winner since then tbh lol.

Me too. Quite underrated sometimes.

 

[NatF]

Me too. Quite underrated sometimes.

Athleticism and ballstriking was still there, just not enough belief and conviction in his execution until he had nothing left to lose.

 

[PilotPete]

Nadal was alive in 1986. He chose not to play, that's on him.

 

[tennis_pro]

The same physical style that helped Nadal win a bunch of Slams led to several withdrawals. That's it.

 

[bluetrain4]

"asterisk fans." That made me laugh.

I'm not on Novaxx side, but the obvious difference is that not playing was due to someone else's decision. On one level. On another level you could say it was his decision.

 

[BGod]

Literally none of those would he have been favoured to win and in most he was simply too injured to legitimately compete. 2020 USO is the ONLY one which was skipped due to tight scheduling between USO and French. So yeah, not at all like 2020 Wimbledon being cancelled and 2022 AO being blocked.