Nadal's 2010 Clay Slam (And the ones he missed every other year)

King No1e

King No1e

G.O.A.T.
In 2010 Nadal won Monte Carlo, Madrid, Rome, and the French Open back to back, completing his only Clay Slam. He comes awfully close every year, however:

2005: Skipped Hamburg
2006: Skipped Hamburg
2007: Hamburg, l. Federer
2008: Rome, l. Ferrero
2009: Madrid, l. Federer
Roland Garros, l. Soderling
2010: None
2011: Madrid, l. Djokovic
Rome, l. Djokovic
2012: Madrid, l. Verdasco
2013: Monte Carlo, l. Djokovic
2014: Monte Carlo, l. Ferrer
Rome, l. Djokovic
2015: Monte Carlo, l. Djokovic
Madrid, l. Murray
Rome, l. Wawrinka
Roland Garros, l. Djokovic
2016: Madrid, l. Murray
Rome, l. Djokovic
Withdrew from Roland Garros
2017: Rome, l. Thiem
2018: Madrid, l. Thiem
2019: Monte Carlo, l. Fognini
Madrid, l. Tsitsipas

In 2005, 06, 07, 08, 12, 13, 17, and 18, only 1 loss prevented him from achieving this rare feat.
 
Hitman said:
The main reason why he got it in 2010 was, he skipped Barcelona, so there was less wear and tear heading into the final few matches before RG.
Click to expand...
Oh, come on. I'm 99% sure he would have won all 5 tournaments had he played Barcelona. He lost only 2 sets during the whole clay season, and the match against Gulbis in Rome was the only time when he really was in danger of losing.

It's not like in 2009 when he had to face a very in-form Djokovic 3 times and then a GOATing Soderling in RG.
 
StrongRule said:
Oh, come on. I'm 99% sure he would have won all 5 tournaments had he played Barcelona. He lost only 2 sets during the whole clay season, and the match against Gulbis in Rome was the only time when he really was in danger of losing.

It's not like in 2009 when he had to face a very in-form Djokovic 3 times and then a GOATing Soderling in RG.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know the competition was weaker in 2010 than other years, but missing Barcelona certainly did help him stay fresh and motivated, because he had a week off between each event. MC, week off, Rome, week off, Madrid, week off.
 
Hitman said:
Yes, I know the competition was weaker in 2010 than other years, but missing Barcelona certainly did help him stay fresh and motivated, because he had a week off between each event. MC, week off, Rome, week off, Madrid, week off.
Click to expand...
He skipped it because he was worried about losing in RG 2009. But I doubt playing Barcelona would really make a big difference.

His other chance to win all 5 tournaments was in 2012, but the blue clay stopped him.
 
StrongRule said:
He skipped it because he was worried about losing in RG 2009. But I doubt playing Barcelona would really make a big difference.

His other chance to win all 5 tournaments was in 2012, but the blue clay stopped him.
Click to expand...

You mean 2010? The main reason he skipped it was because it was three weeks in a row, and that would mean too much competitive tennis in a very short space of time, which could then lead to injuries.

I don't really want to think about 2012, he lost very early there, so he was fresh for the following week. Not sure how it would have been if he had won the title, going through a tough field, then trying to do it all again in Rome a week later.
 
Hitman said:
You mean 2010? The main reason he skipped it was because it was three weeks in a row, and that would mean too much competitive tennis in a very short space of time, which could then lead to injuries.

I don't really want to think about 2012, he lost very early there, so he was fresh for the following week. Not sure how it would have been if he had won the title, going through a tough field, then trying to do it all again in Rome a week later.
Click to expand...
I think you are underrating the physical powers of prime Nadal. He was rarely getting tired back then. In 2013 he reached MC final, won Barcelona, Madrid, Rome and RG, and that's while playing very tough physical matches in almost every tournament against in-form Djokovic, in-form Ferrer at the masters, a GOATing Gulbis in Rome. Even against Dimitrov in MC it was a very physical match.
 
StrongRule said:
I think you are underrating the physical powers of prime Nadal. He was rarely getting tired back then. In 2013 he reached MC final, won Barcelona, Madrid, Rome and RG, and that's while playing very tough physical matches in almost every tournament against in-form Djokovic, in-form Ferrer at the masters, a GOATing Gulbis in Rome.
Click to expand...

Not really, I have seen his story from start to finish. I wouldn't compare his 2013 run to his 2012 run, from the plain and simple fact that Nadal didn't play the AO in 2013 and even missed out on Miami that year. Nadal's AO 2012 was brutal on his body.

Edit - Lets not forget the 9 months off he had, he was much fresher body wise in 2013 at that time, than he was in 2012, when he played a full 2011 season including winning DC.
 
Hitman said:
Not really, I have seen his story from start to finish. I wouldn't compare his 2013 run to his 2012 run, from the plain and simple fact that Nadal didn't play the AO in 2013 and even missed out on Miami that year. Nadal's AO 2012 was brutal on his body.

Edit - Lets not forget the 9 months off he had, he was much fresher body wise in 2013 at that time, than he was in 2012, when he played a full 2011 season including winning DC.
Click to expand...
The clay field in 2013 was also stronger than in 2012, and Nadal's form was a bit worse. I doubt 2012 Nadal would struggle so much in the first few rounds of RG.
 
StrongRule said:
The clay field in 2013 was also stronger than in 2012, and Nadal's form was a bit worse. I doubt 2012 Nadal would struggle so much in the first few rounds of RG.
Click to expand...

I don't agree that clay field was stronger in 2013 than 2012, Federer was much better in 2012 than 2013, and Djokovic was only losing on red clay to Nadal, he wasn't losing to the likes to Dimitrov and choking to Berdych in Rome.
 
Hitman said:
I don't agree that clay field was stronger in 2013 than 2012, Federer was much better in 2012 than 2013, and Djokovic was only losing on red clay to Nadal, he wasn't losing to the likes to Dimitrov and choking to Berdych in Rome.
Click to expand...
Federer was almost irrelevant in both years. He had a good run on the blue clay of Madrid, but what about red clay? He barely managed to reach the semifinals in Rome and RG, and was routined by Djokovic both times. That RG semifinal was a terrible performance from him. In 2013 he reached Rome final and RG 1/4 final, and again lost to the first decent opponents he met there. Federer was nowhere near his clay prime in 2012 and Nadal would have destroyed him had they met.

Djokovic was pretty much the only strong opponent in 2012. In 2013 there was again in-form Djokovic (in MC and RG for sure), a strong Ferrer at the masters, Dimitrov and Gulbis also pushed Nadal to the limits. Wawrinka also improved, though he wasn't a threat to Nadal. I'd call that a better field.
 
Great old article about Nadal's legacy on clay, about his mastery of that surface for so long (which was extraordinary at the time); how the Spaniard forever changed the assigned prototype of the king of clay, often said with negative connotations, and the undoubted influence that the "Bull" leaves to future generations to maintain the health and growth of clay-court tennis.

bleacherreport.com

Will Rafael Nadal's Influence Protect the Future of Clay Courts?

Rafael Nadal is the undisputed "king of clay." At the height of his clay dynasty, he has become more than his favorite surface’s conquering ruler...
bleacherreport.com bleacherreport.com
 
StrongRule said:
Federer was almost irrelevant in both years. He had a good run on the blue clay of Madrid, but what about red clay? He barely managed to reach the semifinals in Rome and RG, and was routined by Djokovic both times. That RG semifinal was a terrible performance from him. In 2013 he reached Rome final and RG 1/4 final, and again lost to the first decent opponents he met there. Federer was nowhere near his clay prime in 2012 and Nadal would have destroyed him had they met.

Djokovic was pretty much the only strong opponent in 2012. In 2013 there was again in-form Djokovic (in MC and RG for sure), a strong Ferrer at the masters, Dimitrov and Gulbis also pushed Nadal to the limits. Wawrinka also improved, though he wasn't a threat to Nadal. I'd call that a better field.
Click to expand...

The majority consider 2012 as Federer's last year as a relevant force on the clay. 2012 was the year of the big four, they were the guys everywhere. Sure, the pecking order was Nadal, then Djokovic, but Federer was a solid third place. There is not one player apart from those two who did better than Federer that 2012 clay season.

2013 clay season is not as strong, you only think it is strong because Nadal wasn't as solid as he was in 2012. If he was in 2012 form, he would have beaten all those aforementioned players in your post quite easily. A better field defined by a weaker Nadal isn't a better field, it is an even playing field, those two things are not the same.
 
Hitman said:
The majority consider 2012 as Federer's last year as a relevant force on the clay. 2012 was the year of the big four, they were the guys everywhere. Sure, the pecking order was Nadal, then Djokovic, but Federer was a solid third place. There is not one player apart from those two who did better than Federer that 2012 clay season.

2013 clay season is not as strong, you only think it is strong because Nadal wasn't as solid as he was in 2012. If he was in 2012 form, he would have beaten all those aforementioned players in your post quite easily. A better field defined by a weaker Nadal isn't a better field, it is an even playing field, those two things are not the same.
Click to expand...
That is because of his title in Madrid. But on red clay he actually played better in 2019 than in 2012, in RG for sure. I don't see how his presence in Rome and RG 2012 really made the competition stronger. As the game showed, he wasn't ready to compete with Djokovic from the baseline at all, and had he faced Nadal in the final it would have probably been a straight set win for Nadal. Sure, Federer had a good year in 2012 and was in form on hardcourt and grass, but on clay he wasn't ready to challenge the top players. I wouldn't even say he had a better season on red clay than Ferrer. (who also reached Rome and RG semifinals, don't see why should he be considered worse)

Nadal was worse in 2013, this is true. I doubt 2012 Nadal would struggle against Dimitrov, and for sure he would beat his first few opponents in RG much easier. Still he was in his prime. The big difference in the clay field came in 2014-2016 where some players indeed looked better because of Nadal's decline. Don't think it's that relevant to 2013 though. Ferrer and Gulbis were in good form. And Djokovic was a big threat at in RG.
 
StrongRule said:
That is because of his title in Madrid. But on red clay he actually played better in 2019 than in 2012, in RG for sure. I don't see how his presence in Rome and RG 2012 really made the competition stronger. As the game showed, he wasn't ready to compete with Djokovic from the baseline at all, and had he faced Nadal in the final it would have probably been a straight set win for Nadal. Sure, Federer had a good year in 2012 and was in form on hardcourt and grass, but on clay he wasn't ready to challenge the top players. I wouldn't even say he had a better season on red clay than Ferrer. (who also reached Rome and RG semifinals, don't see why should he be considered worse)

Nadal was worse in 2013, this is true. I doubt 2012 Nadal would struggle against Dimitrov, and for sure he would beat his first few opponents in RG much easier. Still he was in his prime. The big difference in the clay field came in 2014-2016 where some players indeed looked better because of Nadal's decline. Don't think it's that relevant to 2013 though. Ferrer and Gulbis were in good form. And Djokovic was a big threat at in RG.
Click to expand...

I think it is relevant to 2013 personally also. I think Nadal had come down off his crazy high 2012 level, which was absurdly good, and that allowed other players to match up a little better against him. I don't think Ferrer was that much more better in 2013 than he was in 2012, even in 2012 he made the semis of RG after a solid performance against Murray in the quarters. Gulbis being a one shot doesn't mean much, even in 2014 Gulbis had a decent run at RG.
 
Rafa said the doctor told him that his knee would be stiff and not have full mobility for the first half of 2013, so he did well to win plenty on clay with that issue, and probably didn't feel great until the North American summer.
 
Hitman said:
I think it is relevant to 2013 personally also. I think Nadal had come down off his crazy high 2012 level, which was absurdly good, and that allowed other players to match up a little better against him. I don't think Ferrer was that much more better in 2013 than he was in 2012, even in 2012 he made the semis of RG after a solid performance against Murray in the quarters. Gulbis being a one shot doesn't mean much, even in 2014 Gulbis had a decent run at RG.
Click to expand...
So a worse Nadal managed to play lots of physical matches. Ok, the 7 months break helped, but he also played 4 tournaments before MC in 2013, and had physical matches there as well. I think physically he could have won all 5 tournaments in 2010, probably in 2012 too. Don't think it's crazy to think that. I don't think an older 2017/2018 Nadal could do that. He clearly wasn't ready for it, and he was lucky to only lose once in both these years.
 
StrongRule said:
So a worse Nadal managed to play lots of physical matches. Ok, the 7 months break helped, but he also played 4 tournaments before MC in 2013, and had physical matches there as well. I think physically he could have won all 5 tournaments in 2010, probably in 2012 too. Don't think it's a crazy to think that. I don't think an older 2017/2018 Nadal could do that. He clearly wasn't ready for it, and he was lucky to only lose once in both these years.
Click to expand...

IMO if he physically couldn't do it in 2007 and 2008 where he was far more athletic and had much younger and less injured body, I am not just going to give it to him in 2010 or 2012, even if the competition isn't as tough those years. I haven't seen him do it with a younger more able body, not going to give it to him with all that extra wear and tear he was carrying with each subsequent year. I remember him saying in Hamburg 2007 that he felt his head was going to explode from trying to staying mentally focused since the first match back in MC.

So, we can agree to disagree on this and move on.
 
Before the RG12 final he was afraid for his knees, and he even feared that he would have to withdraw. It went fine, but he must have taken a lot of painkillers and the fact that he stopped his season after Wimbledon shows the state of his knees at the time. I know a lot of people think it was a fake injury, but being able to play and run doesn't mean you're fine. I think it must have been a hard time, and surely the short Madrid must have helped him.
Maybe without the blue clay, Nadal wouldn't have won RG in 2012.
 
Hitman said:
The main reason why he got it in 2010 was, he skipped Barcelona, so there was less wear and tear heading into the final few matches before RG.
Click to expand...
If he had repeated that, he would not have suffered so many early defeats at Wimbledon in the period 2012 -2015.
:confused:
 
Hitman said:
IMO if he physically couldn't do it in 2007 and 2008 where he was far more athletic and had much younger and less injured body, I am not just going to give it to him in 2010 or 2012, even if the competition isn't as tough those years. I haven't seen him do it with a younger more able body, not going to give it to him with all that extra wear and tear he was carrying with each subsequent year. I remember him saying in Hamburg 2007 that he felt his head was going to explode from trying to staying mentally focused since the first match back in MC.

So, we can agree to disagree on this and move on.
Click to expand...
I do think 2010 wasn't a sure bet at all, but IMO 2012 could've absolutely been the year. It's not like Madrid was any break for him - even though he lost, he still made the QF's and played a pretty physical match vs Verdasco. (Those were 2 out of the 3 sets he lost all clay season IIRC). Not at all crazy to see him bulldozing through the late rounds of a red-clay Madrid, and barely spending any more time overall than he did in just the Verdasco match.

Of course, these are all hypotheticals, so we'd never know what would've happened if Madrid were played on the usual surface. Who knows, maybe Djokovic could've GOATed his way to the title again. Or it could've still been Fed - after all he did pull it off in 09.
 
ibbi said:
What made it doubly amazing, and something that he's probably more rarely come close to accomplishing in these near miss years, is in 2010 I think he did that sweep for the loss of 2 sets.
Click to expand...
Losing 2009 RG made him thirstier and mentally delicious.
 
And he capped it off with one of his most underrated kits ever at RG 2010. That Soderling match was a STATEMENT.

MV5BNGU0ZDJmYzMtNTQyYS00NjNhLWJjZjEtMGYyYTY2ODJlZGMyXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTgxOTIzNzk@._V1_.jpg
 
tennisjedi said:
So had Nadal skipped Hamburg in 07, his win streak would've been even bigger. :eek:
Click to expand...
The closest Nadal came to winning all 5 major tournaments on the clay tour was in 2007.
Only he was one set away from achieving the feat but an inspired Federer stopped him and ended his undefeated 81 consecutive victories on clay.
8-B
 
King No1e said:
In 2010 Nadal won Monte Carlo, Madrid, Rome, and the French Open back to back, completing his only Clay Slam. He comes awfully close every year, however:

2005: Skipped Hamburg
2006: Skipped Hamburg
2007: Hamburg, l. Federer
2008: Rome, l. Ferrero
2009: Madrid, l. Federer
Roland Garros, l. Soderling
2010: None
2011: Madrid, l. Djokovic
Rome, l. Djokovic
2012: Madrid, l. Verdasco
2013: Monte Carlo, l. Djokovic
2014: Monte Carlo, l. Ferrer
Rome, l. Djokovic
2015: Monte Carlo, l. Djokovic
Madrid, l. Murray
Rome, l. Wawrinka
Roland Garros, l. Djokovic
2016: Madrid, l. Murray
Rome, l. Djokovic
Withdrew from Roland Garros
2017: Rome, l. Thiem
2018: Madrid, l. Thiem
2019: Monte Carlo, l. Fognini
Madrid, l. Tsitsipas

In 2005, 06, 07, 08, 12, 13, 17, and 18, only 1 loss prevented him from achieving this rare feat.
Click to expand...
How many losses of these were in finals?
If M1000 finals wouldn’t have been shortened to Bo3 starting 2007, I believe Rafa could have won more of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

nolefam_2024
Thiem Results since 2021 start
Replies
12
Views
634
ghostofMecir
ghostofMecir
Zarfot Z
  • Poll Poll
Best season for an individual in the past decade?
Replies
29
Views
4K
Povl Carstensen
P
Hitman
Title leaders at all big events in the Open Era
Replies
15
Views
930
DSH
DSH
nolefam_2024
Nadal after turning 20 vs Alcaraz after turning 20
2 3
Replies
143
Views
4K
DSH
DSH
M
Comparing Multisurface Tournament Wins in a Year
Replies
11
Views
1K
jokinla
J
Back
Top