Nadal vs Novak - who will leave the bigger impact on the sport?

D

Deleted member 763024

Guest
This isn’t merely about slam count, although one of them could retire with the slam record.

It’s a combination of success, capturing the public imagination with their fitness/playing style/charisma (e.g Borg), highlight wins/losses, example set on and off court etc

Who do you think leaves a greater legacy behind between these two?
 

Dartagnan64

Legend
Djokovic is the game's premier defender which you can admire but its not going to cause the girl's to swoon. Chicks dig the long ball.

The Nadal Forehand and the Federer Backhand have defined this generation. Just like the Sampras serve and the Agassis RoS did for the previous generation.
 

Towser83

G.O.A.T.
Nadal has more star attraction and will always be up there for the rivalry with Federer. In a way what Novak does has already been done. I think to leave a bigger impact than Nadal he not only has to surpass Nadal but Federer as well. If he has the most slams and other records then he will be surely seen as the GOAT. If he sits above Nadal and below Fed I think people will always remember Nadal as the nemesis of Federer and thus he will be seen as bigger than Djokovic even if Djokovic sits second in the slam count
 
D

Deleted member 763024

Guest
Nadal has more star attraction and will always be up there for the rivalry with Federer. In a way what Novak does has already been done. I think to leave a bigger impact than Nadal he not only has to surpass Nadal but Federer as well. If he has the most slams and other records then he will be surely seen as the GOAT. If he sits above Nadal and below Fed I think people will always remember Nadal as the nemesis of Federer and thus he will be seen as bigger than Djokovic even if Djokovic sits second in the slam count
Wonder if he ends up with the slam record but remains the lesser light like Sampras in comparison to Agassi
 
D

Deleted member 763024

Guest
Elaborate?
I mean we’re talking legacy here and cpaturing the public imagination.

Lendl was a hated figure when he was playing and not sure he’s remembered very fondly either now - other than his positive effect on Murray’s career.

In tennis circles perhaps; but even in tennis circles there are plenty of lesser players who are given credit for their revolutionary impact - take Jimmy Arias and his forehand for example
 

tacou

G.O.A.T.
Elaborate?
I'd like you to elaborate! Lendl was not very popular on tour and his achievements are often overlooked due to his under performing at majors.
He had a stellar career yet is legit never mentioned in GOAT discussions.

Novak obviously hasn't had the same issues at majors, but I think his legacy will suffer a similar same fate due to his being a couple years late to the Rafa/Roger party (though, if he passes Rafa/Roger, that can clearly change).

If Novak is Lendl (and I think it's a decent comparison in terms of legacy), then Nadal is Borg, and that comparison is way in favor of the bull.
 

joekapa

Legend
Lendl was the GRANDFATHER to todays game. His impact was bigger than any other player of yesteryear including my idol, Sampras. Agassi, has had a bigger impact than Sampras.

Lendl is today's game GRANDFATHER. Agassi is the FATHER, and Nadal and Djokovic, and , Murray are the offspring.

Of the three, in the future, Djokovic will have the bigger impact. Future tennis stars will look to Djokovic, the way Djokovic, without even knowing it, looked to Lendl.
 
I'd like you to elaborate! Lendl was not very popular on tour and his achievements are often overlooked due to his under performing at majors.
He had a stellar career yet is legit never mentioned in GOAT discussions.

Novak obviously hasn't had the same issues at majors, but I think his legacy will suffer a similar same fate due to his being a couple years late to the Rafa/Roger party (though, if he passes Rafa/Roger, that can clearly change).

If Novak is Lendl (and I think it's a decent comparison in terms of legacy), then Nadal is Borg, and that comparison is way in favor of the bull.
I don't think Novak is vilified as much as Lendl

Lendl's legacy was bringing extreme fitness into the sport and showing the future generation the benefits of being a power baseliner in the modern game.

Likewise Novak is blueprint sort of for future generations on how to elevate baseline-play to the highest level.His game doesn't have any weakness.
 

mwym

Rookie
Imagine a good coach with a young talented kid in future motivating him/her to reach beyond imaginable.

Your answer is right there.
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
Djokovic.

He will be to future generations what Lendl is for today's generation
Exactly! My blog on Nole actually references that as Lendl was winning more at the time and setting records, but played "3rd banana" to Borg, McEnroe, & Connors! This era it's all about Fedal and little else is written about tennis without them being invoked! Nole has a winning record over both, but is dismissed for the most part! People in the know will set things straight, but it isn't done enough in the world wide media of things! :unsure: :cautious: :rolleyes: ;)
 
D

Deleted member 763024

Guest
I don't think Novak is vilified as much as Lendl

Lendl's legacy was bringing extreme fitness into the sport and showing the future generation the benefits of being a power baseliner in the modern game.

Likewise Novak is blueprint sort of for future generations on how to elevate baseline-play to the highest level.His game doesn't have any weakness.
Or so it seems in the era of similar high-bouncing courts everywhere.

That might not always remain the case. The pendulum could swing back to greater variety in court speeds after the current stars retire and the sport is left searching again for new icons. And that inevitably favors greater technical variety than pure baseline skills.

Court speeds aside, the single handed backhand was supposed to die and never again show up in the top echelons of the sport after what Nadal, Djoko and Murray demonstrated. Yet here we are with upcoming stars like Theim, Tsits and Shapo all flourishing with their one-handers.

If future stars expect to get to the top and stay there emulating the hug-the-baseline acrobatics, that’s not going to work for them; they’ll need all the forecourt/net skills which are average to bad in Djokos game.
 
D

Deleted member 716271

Guest
Nadal has more star power and the rivalry with Fed, the inimitable style etc.

If Djokovic ends up as the best overall in terms of accomplishments and particularly slams that will speak loud enough to overwhelm the edge in "marketability" Or "style" though I think.

I also think Novak's reputation will increase after his playing days are over. He is very well spoken and thoughtful etc.
 

Raphael Nadal

Professional
Rafa will do something that won't be topped in the next 300+ years.
he'll win 15 French Opens :)
whereas everything Djokovic has done looks very likely to be topped in the near future.
 
D

Deleted member 763024

Guest
Djokovic has left a lasting legacy in tennis by creating a whole generation of players that try to play more like him than anyone else
Come to think of it, I’ve actually never heard of anyone other than Chung explicitly saying they either admired Djokovic growing up or modeled any aspect of their game after him.

Got any other examples? I’d be happy to learn
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
Nadal without a doubt....only the hardest of hard Djokovic fanboys will deny the same
Oh ITA, but it still won't be right! Djokovic is racking up the records Nadal can't touch, but Rafa will still enjoy immortality as if he was just plain unbeatable! :unsure: :cautious:
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
Djokovic has left a lasting legacy in tennis by creating a whole generation of players that try to play more like him than either of Fedal
That is directly contradicted by the current top 150 players with their preferences as we found out not too long ago.

As for Djokovic, he is not doing anything that already Borg didn't do, only with the available modern tech and training. Hardly the trailblazer that you picture him to be.

:cool:
 

tacou

G.O.A.T.
I don't think Novak is vilified as much as Lendl

Lendl's legacy was bringing extreme fitness into the sport and showing the future generation the benefits of being a power baseliner in the modern game.

Likewise Novak is blueprint sort of for future generations on how to elevate baseline-play to the highest level.His game doesn't have any weakness.
I agree with you on all points. But I do feel his overall impact on the sport is lesser than Nadal’s, and think the Lendl comparison is apt in that regard, too.
 

LordGoolbis

New User
Playing style - Djokovic
Media hype - Nadal
Djokovic.

He will be to future generations what Lendl is for today's generation
Absolutely spot on.

Come to think of it, I’ve actually never heard of anyone other than Chung explicitly saying they either admired Djokovic growing up or modeled any aspect of their game after him.

Got any other examples? I’d be happy to learn
Coric, aka “When I’m at my best, I am more like Djokovic, game-wise; when I’m not, I’m more like Murray.”
 
D

Deleted member 763024

Guest
Absolutely spot on.


Coric, aka “When I’m at my best, I am more like Djokovic, game-wise; when I’m not, I’m more like Murray.”
Ok, so 1.5 players so far (if you count Murray being half of Coric's inspiration). Where is this 'whole generation'?
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
That is directly contradicted by the current top 150 players with their preferences as we found out not too long ago.

As for Djokovic, he is not doing anything that already Borg didn't do, only with the available modern tech and training. Hardly the trailblazer that you picture him to be.

:cool:
Go down the list of players who cite Fed as their idol and tell me how many play more like him than like Djokovic

Djokovic's own idol is Sampras and their games are not really all that similar.
 
Last edited:

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
Go down the list of players who cite Fed as their idol and tell me how many play more like him than like Djokovic

Djokovic's own idol is Sampras and their games are not really all that similar
Yes, but that their game is similar to Djokovic's obviously is not because of Djokovic's influence on them, but purely based on what works best. If the THBH is more suitable for the current conditions, because it gives certain advantages in competition in the juniors, that is what they are going to use, not because of Djokovic. You got it backwards.

:cool:
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 763024

Guest
Yes, but that their game is similar to Djokovic"s obviously is not because of Djokovic's influence on them, but purely on what works best. If the THBH is more suitable for the current conditions, because it gives certain advantages in competition in the juniors, that is what they are going to use, not because of Djokovic. You got it backwards.

:cool:
You're right, just because most players play a 2HBH and more of a baseline game is not because of Djokovic but just what the dominant style on tour is given the uniformly slow surfaces out there today.

I'm yet to see any evidence that Djokovic has influenced/inspired a new generation of playeres.
 
D

Deleted member 763024

Guest
Was this thread necessary? As a general rule, Nadal and Djokovic fans seem to be very polite with each other.

This thread will create an unnecessary war in the Nadalovic/Djokodal family.
War in the Nadalovic/Djokodal family? They have the most pure love of any fans out here.
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
I don't think Novak is vilified as much as Lendl
That is directly contradicted by the current top 150 players with their preferences as we found out not too long ago.
Kids are easily impressionable and they will tend to pick whatever player is most hyped up by the media as their idol. And Fedal's gotten plenty of hype while Djokovic is often painted as the villain.

Just look at the most recent ATP CEO circus. Based on the information available, there is hardly a side that you can say is objectively in the right. Yet Djokovic has been thrown under the bus
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 763024

Guest
Kids are easily impressionable and they will tend to pick whatever player is most hyped up by the media as their idol. And Fedal's gotten plenty of hype while Djokovic is often painted as the villain.

Just look at the most recent ATP CEO circus. Based on the information available, there is hardly a side that you can say is objectively in the right. Yet Djokovic has been thrown under the bus
They tried hyping up this guy too. Seems he came off more like a clown than a role model.



/s
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
Yes, but that their game is similar to Djokovic's obviously is not because of Djokovic's influence on them, but purely based on what works best. If the THBH is more suitable for the current conditions, because it gives certain advantages in competition in the juniors, that is what they are going to use, not because of Djokovic. You got it backwards.

:cool:
You're right, just because most players play a 2HBH and more of a baseline game is not because of Djokovic but just what the dominant style on tour is given the uniformly slow surfaces out there today.

I'm yet to see any evidence that Djokovic has influenced/inspired a new generation of playeres.
This style existed before Djokovic of course, so I'm not saying he's some kind of trailblazer. And yes, partially it's also due to the conditions but I do think Novak was the one who demonstrated the viability of his game. And it's not just the 2HBH, but more:
  • Heavy emphasis on solid baseline play
  • Good movement
  • Balanced FH/BH instead of more weaponized FH wing like Fedal
  • Focus on topspin - the new players generally don't have a good BH slice
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
They tried hyping up this guy too. Seems he came off more like a clown than a role model.

/s
Instead of showing his good qualities, like his graciousness in defeat and general off-court demeanor, the media likes to focus on the the tantrums he throws on court
 
D

Deleted member 763024

Guest
This style existed before Djokovic of course, so I'm not saying he's some kind of trailblazer. And yes, partially it's also due to the conditions but I do think Novak was the one who demonstrated the viability of his game. And it's not just the 2HBH, but more:
  • Heavy emphasis on solid baseline play
  • Good movement
  • Balanced FH/BH instead of more weaponized FH wing like Fedal
  • Focus on topspin - the new players generally don't have a good BH slice
Points 1 & 2 - Agassi did too.

Point 3 - Bunch of players that have had excellent 2 HBH that were weapons. The only thing that is unique is I've never seen anyone transition from a BH cross court to a BH DTL as well as Novak. But again, no emulators there yet.

The last is a joke right. I mean it's been 20 years since the advent of luxilon. Everyone and their grandma hits with topspin.


Again, you mentioned he has inspired a generation of players. If so, these players would be happy to credit him like those who're inspired by Federer do... can you provide any evidence to that end?

So far we have Chung, Coric apparently and I'd like to add Yuki Bhambri who was having a good run last year.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
Kids are easily impressionable and they will tend to pick whatever player is most hyped up by the media as their idol. And Fedal's gotten plenty of hype while Djokovic is often painted as the villain.

Just look at the most recent ATP CEO circus. Based on the information available, there is hardly a side that you can say is objectively in the right. Yet Djokovic has been thrown under the bus
You are conflating several problems.

Firstly, his influence as a playing style and his influence as part of the Players council hardly have anything in common.

Kids may be impressionable but I have seen first hand how the kids come in with the intention to play like this or that player, only for the coach to tell them that he teaches only this (most often THBH instead of OHBH) and how it is easier for them, or it allows for faster results etc. That has nothing to do with how Djokovic plays.

Secondly, what have the problems around the ousting of Kermode to do with our here conversation? The only relevance is if you are trying to explain why Djokovic isn't popular. Putting the entire story aside, isn't that (if I understand correctly) a direct sign that you consider him as less influential than the ones he is compared with here, and if "yes" what exactly are you trying to prove?

:cool:
 
Last edited:

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
They tried hyping up this guy too. Seems he came off more like a clown than a role model.

/s
Tennis players would be one of the last people I would fashion into being ROLE MODELS! IMO you have to be a bit of a jerk to be competitive; esp. getting to #1! Edberg was probably the only one I could categorize as a true "good guy!" Being phony with fake humility like Fedal is not anything I'd want my child to emulate! The self-entitlement and ego is a staple of most top players; even a fave like Nole! They all have to be pampered and glorified at all times to keep them happy; all the time forgetting where they came from! It comes with the territory of being great I guess! I hadn't heard any disparaging words about Borg, but heaven knows I'll never go see that movie showing all his demons! :unsure: :cautious: :p ;)
 
D

Deleted member 763024

Guest
Instead of showing his good qualities, like his graciousness in defeat and general off-court demeanor, the media likes to focus on the the tantrums he throws on court
Novak is indeed gracious in defeat. Funnily more gracious losing than winning.
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
You are conflating several problems.

Firstly, his influence as a playing style and his influence as part of the Players council hardly have anything in common.

Kids may be impressionable but I have seen first hand how the kids come in with the intention to play like this or that player, only for the coach to tell them that he teaches only this (most often THBH instead of OHBH) and how it is easier for them, or it allows for faster results etc. That has nothing to do with how Djokovic plays.

Secondly, what has the problems around the ousting of Kermode to do with our here conversation? The only relevance is if you are trying to explain why Djokovic isn't popular. Putting the entire story aside, isn't that (if I understand correctly) a direct sign that you consider him as less influential than the ones he is compared with here, and if "yes" what exactly are you trying to prove?

:cool:
Not conflating anything. I am explaining why Djokovic isn't popular with the kids (and hence why few cite him as their idol), and that has everything to do with the media's portrayal of him. The Kermode debacle is just the most recent example of such biased coverage.

This is separate from his influence on the same kids' playing style, which actually goes in the opposite direction
 
D

Deleted member 763024

Guest
Tennis players would be one of the last people I would fashion into being ROLE MODELS! IMO you have to be a bit of a jerk to be competitive; esp. getting to #1! Edberg was probably the only one I could categorize as a true "good guy!" Being phony with fake humility like Fedal is not anything I'd want my child to emulate! The self-entitlement and ego is a staple of most top players; even a fave like Nole! They all have to be pampered and glorified at all times to keep them happy; all the time forgetting where they came from! It comes with the territory of being great I guess! I hadn't heard any disparaging words about Borg, but heaven knows I'll never go see that movie showing all his demons! :unsure::cautious::p;)
Having self-belief and confidence does not imply or necessitate being a jerk to others.

They may go hand in hand for many athletes so you are seeing causation where there is nothing more than correlation.

Roger is the perfect example of an athlete who doesn't have to be a jerk to others or intimidate others to be full of self-belief.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
Not conflating anything. I am explaining why Djokovic isn't popular with the kids (and hence why few cite him as their idol), and that has everything to do with the media's portrayal of him. The Kermode debacle is just the most recent example of such biased coverage.
That means that you recognise that he is not as influential. That a kind of answers the question we were discussing.

As for your other claim and taking the example with the situation with Kermode, I don't know how from his actions behind the back of top players he is suddenly a victim, but I am sure that that also has an explanation.

:cool:
 
Top