Nadal's insane run from 2nd set of RG 2006 final to end of 3rd of RG 2009 - 55 sets played, 54 sets won, including 16 breadsticks and 4 bagels

Hitman

Hitman

Bionic Poster
This is an absolutely insane run of dominating sets. Nadal from that second set at RG 2006 final, only lost one set, the following year to Federer in the final, until he faced Soderling at RG 2009.

2006 - 1 breadstick (from 2nd set of final on)
2007 - 3 breadsticks, 1 bagel
2008 - 9 breadsticks, 3 bagels
2009 - 3 breadsticks

Total = 16 breadsticks, 4 bagels

He wasn't only making taking a set the most difficult task around, he was making winning games a heck of a battle also.

324 games won, 140 games lost. An almost 70% winning percentage in games won.

648106-une-statue-de-rafael-nadal-inauguree-au-stade-roland-garros.jpg
 
His 2009 clay season remains a mystery to me till this day. He was just pushing and grinding, some of his worst clay performances during his prime for sure. He was incredible at AO and IW and I don't know what happened after that.
 
Pheasant said:
Wow. That was some insane stuff by Nadal. He lost 1 set in 4 years at RG. That beats what Borg did

Borg, 1978-81 RG run
28-0 record
84-5, .944 in overall sets
533-210, .717 in overall games
21 bread sticks
10 bagels

Borg still managed to lose 5 sets during his run.
Click to expand...
No you are wrong

He lost one set in this time frame. He lost many in 2006 and 2009.
 
Pheasant said:
Oh yeah. The 2006 and 2009 seasons weren't full during that run. Borg's run was very impressive, since it includes the full year for each of the 4 years.
Click to expand...
Yes Borg's best run is equal to Nadal's best. Neither better nor worse. Borg was a wall based on the stats found on tennis abstract. Probably best baseline player of all time.
 
He had another run that was quite the same in sets and BETTER in games:

From R128 in 2016 to R32 3rd set in 2019:

55-1 sets (49-1 with starting in 2017, after stopping at his 2016 walkover).
332-15 games (72.6 %) discounting the w.o.; 296-116 (71.8 %) counting it.
15 breadsticks and 4 bagels.

It also was the best run of consecutive sets won with 38 (32 with stopping at the walkover).

The undisputed best consecutive sets run of his RG career followed very soon:

From the 2019 final (3rd set) to the QF of 2021 he won 36 sets in a row, including 6 breadsticks and 6 bagels!
219-93 games (70.2 %)

It gets even more impressive if we consider that those two runs followed almost directly after one another.
 
mehdimike said:
His 2009 clay season remains a mystery to me till this day. He was just pushing and grinding, some of his worst clay performances during his prime for sure. He was incredible at AO and IW and I don't know what happened after that.
Click to expand...
His mind was all over the place due to the family issues.
He was merely a 22 year old kid back then, barely 3 years removed from his teens.
 
Pheasant said:
Oh yeah. The 2006 and 2009 seasons weren't full during that run. Borg's run was very impressive, since it includes the full year for each of the 4 years.
Click to expand...
As you said, Borg's best 4-year-run was 5 sets lost (1978-81). That's the 2nd best in tennis history at a single Slam, together with Federer at Wimbledon (2003-06).

Nadal is the best with just 3 sets lost at RG from 2017-20. His own 2nd best run is 7 sets from 2005-08.
 
SpinWizard said:
And people still act as if Rafa on clay is not the highest tennis peak ever...

With all due respect to people like Roger and especially Novak. They were more versatile than Rafa, but clearly if we count the highest peak ever it has to be Nadal on clay, especially when it comes to Roland Garros.
Click to expand...
Who said that

No one acts that way
 
There was once a guy who won 30 Slam matches in a row from 2015W to 2016W. He also won 43 out of 44 Slam matches between the 2015AO to 2016W. Name escapes me, but I believe he answers to GOAT.
 
mehdimike said:
His 2009 clay season remains a mystery to me till this day. He was just pushing and grinding, some of his worst clay performances during his prime for sure. He was incredible at AO and IW and I don't know what happened after that.
Click to expand...
My own theory is that he abbreviated his swing early in 2009 to avoid getting rushed on fast surfaces (YouTube practice vids of various years basically confirm the change), which did result in greater hard court success but just took away a bit of the loop and the subsequent oomph and heaviness from his forehand, which are necessary on clay. I always felt his 2009 clay court matches displayed a greater difficulty to put the opponent away and as a result more running, which strained his knees more, causing his suboptimal RG form and absence from Wimbledon.

In 2010 he realized his mistake, the loop was back, and the rest was history.
 
mehdimike said:
His 2009 clay season remains a mystery to me till this day. He was just pushing and grinding, some of his worst clay performances during his prime for sure. He was incredible at AO and IW and I don't know what happened after that.
Click to expand...
Toni went crazy and pushed his nephew to the limit.
He prevented Nadal from winning at least 3 Major titles that season.
 
ChrisRF said:
He had another run that was quite the same in sets and BETTER in games:

From R128 in 2016 to R32 3rd set in 2019:

55-1 sets (49-1 with starting in 2017, after stopping at his 2016 walkover).
332-15 games (72.6 %) discounting the w.o.; 296-116 (71.8 %) counting it.
15 breadsticks and 4 bagels.

It also was the best run of consecutive sets won with 38 (32 with stopping at the walkover).

The undisputed best consecutive sets run of his RG career followed very soon:

From the 2019 final (3rd set) to the QF of 2021 he won 36 sets in a row, including 6 breadsticks and 6 bagels!
219-93 games (70.2 %)

It gets even more impressive if we consider that those two runs followed almost directly after one another.
Click to expand...

inflation era and asterisk era that Nadal was able to do the latter when not at prime level (except for RG 2017)
 
Hitman said:
This is an absolutely insane run of dominating sets. Nadal from that second set at RG 2006 final, only lost one set, the following year to Federer in the final, until he faced Soderling at RG 2009.

2006 - 1 breadstick (from 2nd set of final on)
2007 - 3 breadsticks, 1 bagel
2008 - 9 breadsticks, 3 bagels
2009 - 3 breadsticks

Total = 16 breadsticks, 4 bagels

He wasn't only making taking a set the most difficult task around, he was making winning games a heck of a battle also.

324 games won, 140 games lost. An almost 70% winning percentage in games won.

648106-une-statue-de-rafael-nadal-inauguree-au-stade-roland-garros.jpg
Click to expand...
Thats an insane stat!
 
mehdimike said:
His 2009 clay season remains a mystery to me till this day. He was just pushing and grinding, some of his worst clay performances during his prime for sure. He was incredible at AO and IW and I don't know what happened after that.
Click to expand...
injuries primarily and his Parent's divorce. Dude wasnt mentally locked in at all. Then when he started losing more, he lost confidence. Just a vicious cycle
 
Clay lover said:
My own theory is that he abbreviated his swing early in 2009 to avoid getting rushed on fast surfaces (YouTube practice vids of various years basically confirm the change), which did result in greater hard court success but just took away a bit of the loop and the subsequent oomph and heaviness from his forehand, which are necessary on clay. I always felt his 2009 clay court matches displayed a greater difficulty to put the opponent away and as a result more running, which strained his knees more, causing his suboptimal RG form and absence from Wimbledon.

In 2010 he realized his mistake, the loop was back, and the rest was history.
Click to expand...
Thats interesting. But then he didnt have great results on HCs either post IW in 2009-IW2010
 
The only opposition Borg got on clay was Vilas, who was 5-17 against Borg and never defeated him at a slam.

Nadal got Federer & Djokovic, two greats who could have been masters at RG w/o Nadal.
 
SonnyT said:
The only opposition Borg got on clay was Vilas, who was 5-17 against Borg and never defeated him at a slam.

Nadal got Federer & Djokovic, two greats who could have been masters at RG w/o Nadal.
Click to expand...
Maybe about fedkovic

Borg beat lendl in 81 in five.
 
Nadal's dominance at RG is legendary, but it's bizarre to craft a time frame like this: "from 2nd set of RG 2006 final to end of 3rd of RG 2009." Talk about cherry picking. Stick with whole tournaments, please, or at the very least, whole matches.
 
nolefam_2024 said:
Yes Borg's best run is equal to Nadal's best. Neither better nor worse. Borg was a wall based on the stats found on tennis abstract. Probably best baseline player of all time.
Click to expand...

At the 1981 French Open, Borg beat an American named Terry Moor 6-0 6-0 6-1 in the round of 16. (Moor handily defeated an aging Nastase in the previous round, so he must have been able to play a little.) Here's what Moor said about his first Borg encounter: "The man is on another level. Maybe it has something to do with who he is, but everything was so deep, so high. Other guys, once in a while they miss. I felt lost. The thing was he looked bored. I have no idea how people beat him. I don't see how they win games."

I believe that Borg would have won a few more FOs had he remained active beyond 1981. I don't see any possibility that he would have reached 14 titles, however. As shown by the 1981 final, Lendl was already able to mount a credible challenge, and Lendl would only improve as the 1980s progressed. And Wilander was on the way too. But the most important factor was that the technology of the game was changing. As shown by his ill-fated comeback attempt in 1991, Borg was unable to adapt to modern rackets, and there's no chance that he could have continued to dominate on clay while using a wooden racket against guys armed with composite weapons. (McEnroe suffered from this evolution in tech as well, and he did manage to switch rackets reasonably well.)

Thus, another reason that Nadal was able to dominate for so long, in addition to his own skill margin on clay over the field, is that the game itself was relatively stable during his reign. Changes were small, incremental -- no giant leaps in tech or training that might have created a big opening for a new generation.
 
JMR said:
At the 1981 French Open, Borg beat an American named Terry Moor 6-0 6-0 6-1 in the round of 16. (Moor handily defeated an aging Nastase in the previous round, so he must have been able to play a little.) Here's what Moor said about his first Borg encounter: "The man is on another level. Maybe it has something to do with who he is, but everything was so deep, so high. Other guys, once in a while they miss. I felt lost. The thing was he looked bored. I have no idea how people beat him. I don't see how they win games."

I believe that Borg would have won a few more FOs had he remained active beyond 1981. I don't see any possibility that he would have reached 14 titles, however. As shown by the 1981 final, Lendl was already able to mount a credible challenge, and Lendl would only improve as the 1980s progressed. And Wilander was on the way too. But the most important factor was that the technology of the game was changing. As shown by his ill-fated comeback attempt in 1991, Borg was unable to adapt to modern rackets, and there's no chance that he could have continued to dominate on clay while using a wooden racket against guys armed with composite weapons. (McEnroe suffered from this evolution in tech as well, and he did manage to switch rackets reasonably well.)

Thus, another reason that Nadal was able to dominate for so long, in addition to his own skill margin on clay over the field, is that the game itself was relatively stable during his reign. Changes were small, incremental -- no giant leaps in tech or training that might have created a big opening for a new generation.
Click to expand...
Yes exactly. Big 3 all have set records that old gen especially in 70s to 2000s couldn't because of rackets string changes.

But what a quote. Everyone says borg looked bored playing vs people on clay. He was like a wall. His backhand topspin is revolutionary. It just have felt mission impossible to get weak return from his backhand ever.
 
How would borg have played with modern rackets on comeback through. As people say he was like a wall, that means he had less urgency to win the pt unlike someone like Lendl. He started the modern baseline tennis.

Modern tennis players have urgency to finish pts early and serve exceptionally well. That's where probably guys like borg lost out when the game started changing soo fast.
 
JMR said:
Nadal's dominance at RG is legendary, but it's bizarre to craft a time frame like this: "from 2nd set of RG 2006 final to end of 3rd of RG 2009." Talk about cherry picking. Stick with whole tournaments, please, or at the very least, whole matches.
Click to expand...
I mean sir……. you can do his whole career at RG and no one else comes anywhere close to that kind of dominance anywhere. He just lost his 4th ever match on clay in a BO5 in his ENTIRE LIFE at age 38.
 
MichaelNadal said:
I mean sir……. you can do his whole career at RG and no one else comes anywhere close to that kind of dominance anywhere. He just lost his 4th ever match on clay in a BO5 in his ENTIRE LIFE at age 38.
Click to expand...
Nadal gave Zverev one of his greatest achievements that he will remember for the rest of his days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Federer lost only 16 sets out of 55 matches on grass
Replies
13
Views
2K
my_forehand
M
abmk
Best performance vs Nadal in a RG final ?
Replies
31
Views
2K
insideoutforehanders
I
mehdimike
Which one of Nadal's records at RG is the most impressive one?
Replies
39
Views
2K
Tano
T
Lozo1016
Alexander Zverev In The Last 2 Sets
Replies
36
Views
1K
Spin Diesel
Spin Diesel
AnOctorokForDinner
Rarely mentioned nigh unbreakable records by past greats and others (Open era)
Replies
13
Views
1K
AnOctorokForDinner
AnOctorokForDinner
Back
Top