Nalbandian vs Davydenko- Who had a better career?

Who had a better career?

  • Nalbandian

    Votes: 29 61.7%

  • Davydenko

    Votes: 18 38.3%
  • Total voters
    47
aman92

aman92

Legend
Both hugely talented shotmaker though had vastly different trajectories. Nalbandian an early bloomer but injuries faded him down, while Davydenko's supreme fitness kept him going and made him a consistent feature of the top 5 the longer time.
Peak for peak Nalbandian probably was better and had a GS final and reached all GS semis while Davydenko has almost the double career titles. Both won the Tennis Masters cup too. Just seems a bit difficult to separate the two for me.
 
Very tough call. Nalbandian is revered around here, but peak Davydenko imo was more spectacular, and I count myself a pretty major Nalbandian fan.

Bettter career? Probably Nalbandian since he did reach a major final, at Wimbledon no less. But I value Davydenko's consistency and think he is the overall better player so I choose him.
 
TheAverageFedererFan said:
Nalbandian.
Won the TMC
1 Grand Slam Final and 4 Grand Slam Semifinals
More wins over the Big Four
#3 in the World
Click to expand...

I think it's pretty close. Davydenko also won TMC and reached #3 in the world.

Against the big 3:

Nalbandian: 8-11 against Federer; 2-5 against Nadal; 1-4 against Djokovic
Davydenko: 2-19 against Federer; 6-5 against Nadal; 2-6 against Djokovic
​
Of course, Nalbandian was also 7-5 against Davydenko.
 
Both won the year end masters, both were number 3 in the world at one point, but Nalbandian had a better record against the big four and a better record against Davydenko. However Davydenko had more career titles BUT didn't reach as many big matches (Nalbandian reached all four GS semis and one final). So as far as numbers go, Nalbandian is the better player by a small margin, but one could make a good argument for Davydenko based off of his consistency throughout his career as opposed to Nalbandian who was inconsistent in comparison.
nikolay-davydenko-after-his-loss-to-david-nalbandian-in-the-mens-of-picture-id121023004
 
Last edited:
But Nalbandian is the one of the most of unlucky and underachieved ones among players of last 15 years or so.

He was getting very close to winning slams in 2003-2004, then,.. suddenly surfaces abruptly changes at US Open and Wimbledon.
 
Last edited:
Arti said:
Nalbandian had a better record against the big four
Click to expand...

Nalbandian: 8-11 against Federer (42.1%); 2-5 against Nadal (28.6%); 1-4 against Djokovic (20%); 2-5 against Murray (28.6%); total: 13-25 (34.2%)
Davydenko: 2-19 against Federer (9.5%); 6-5 against Nadal (54.5%); 2-6 against Djokovic (25%); 4-6 against Murray (40%); total: 14-36 (28%)​

So, Nalbandian had a much better record against Federer, and that resulted in an overall better record against the big 4 than Davydenko. But Davydenko actually had a better record against Nadal, Djokovic, and Murray. It's a very close call for me between the two.
 
ultradr said:
But Nalbandian is the one of the most of unlucky and underachieved ones among players of last 15 years or so.

He was getting very close to winning slams in 2003-2004, then,.. suddenly surfaces abruptly changes at US Open and Wimbledon.
Click to expand...

He wasn't unlucky. He was immensely talented but lacked the killer instinct. Outrageous shotmaking and incredible hands.
 
Arti said:
Adapt or die.
Click to expand...
Purplemonster said:
He wasn't unlucky. He was immensely talented but lacked the killer instinct. Outrageous shotmaking and incredible hands.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but if you are one of top players at the moment, the last thing you want is any changes in current tour conditions.

P.S.: Killer Instinct: I think Nalbandian is still one of very few(if not only one) to beat
both Nadal and Federer back to back in single tournament. (it was indoor ).
 
Nalbandian more talent than Fed. Actually Davy was damn talented as well, gave Fed a fair bit of trouble. Maybe better question - bigger mental midget.
 
Nalbandian was better in my opinion. Nalbandian was actually the only player of his era who knew how to play Federer. Strange he didn't win a slam.
 
ultradr said:
Yeah, but if you are one of top players at the moment, the last thing you want is any changes in current tour conditions.

P.S.: Killer Instinct: I think Nalbandian is still one of very few(if not only one) to beat
both Nadal and Federer back to back in single tournament. (it was indoor ).
Click to expand...
Why single out nalbandian as unlucky? The whole tour went through a change. Davy was in the same generation as nalby (a year older in fact).
 
ultradr said:
Yeah, but if you are one of top players at the moment, the last thing you want is any changes in current tour conditions.

P.S.: Killer Instinct: I think Nalbandian is still one of very few(if not only one) to beat
both Nadal and Federer back to back in single tournament. (it was indoor ).
Click to expand...

Yes, but with that much talent he should have won multiple majors, the titles that really matter.
 
Peak to peak, I'd say Nalby. But your question asked about the career, so that means as a whole, obviously per the longevity, Davydenko wins it. After all, being able to keep fit and play longer is also a skill, massively underrated most times.
 
Jackuar said:
Peak to peak, I'd say Nalby. But your question asked about the career, so that means as a whole, obviously per the longevity, Davydenko wins it. After all, being able to keep fit and play longer is also a skill, massively underrated most times.
Click to expand...
He didn't last much longer than Nalbandian. I think Davydenko was pretty much done after losing that AO 2010 match to Federer.
 
MichaelNadal said:
Damn, I didn't realize Nalbandian had such a decent H2H against Federer, or that Federer worked Davydenko out so many times.
Click to expand...
Nalbandian faced Federer 5 times before 2004 and Nalbandian was legit in 02-03, Davydenko did so only once and Davydenko was really nothing before 2005 anyways. Nalbandian beat Federer thrice after 2003 (and once Federer was injured), Davydenko beat him twice.
 
metsman said:
Nalbandian faced Federer 5 times before 2004 and Nalbandian was legit in 02-03, Davydenko did so only once and Davydenko was really nothing before 2005 anyways. Nalbandian beat Federer thrice after 2003 (and once Federer was injured), Davydenko beat him twice.
Click to expand...

The federer-nalby h2h from 2004-07 was 7-3 to Federer. Nalby retired hurt from RG 06 match as well.
Counting from wim 03 onwards ( fed's first slam win ), its 8-5 to federer from wim 03-07.

Including 08 as well, its 10-5 to fed ...


Fed-davy was 8-2 from 2004-2010 AO.
from 2005 to before YEC 09 SF (7 matches ) , davy won only one set vs fed --- AO 06'

no prizes for guessing whom federer would rather face.
 
Madrid-Paris 2007 is like a Slam win

At Rg 2006 he got injuried in the SF a set and a break up vs Federer. I think that David was more feared than Nikolay. Not to mention SF at each Slam while the russian has like 4-5 victories at Wimbledon
 
User123 said:
He didn't last much longer than Nalbandian. I think Davydenko was pretty much done after losing that AO 2010 match to Federer.
Click to expand...
Calendar-wise, yes, not much longer. But if you look at how long he strolled around the top ranks, consistency etc., and add in few purple patches that he hit during his time, I'd say 60-40 to Davy.
 
TheAverageFedererFan said:
Nalbandian.
Won the TMC
1 Grand Slam Final and 4 Grand Slam Semifinals
More wins over the Big Four
#3 in the World
Click to expand...
Won the TMC - so did Davydenko
1 Grand Slam Final and 4 Grand Slam Semifinals - Davydenko did roughly the same in the Slams
More wins over the Big Four - well to be honest most of them were against pre 2004 Federer, Davydenko has a 6-5 lead on prime/peak Nadal
#3 in the World - as was Davydenko

Davydenko also won more titles and an additional MS.

My vote goes to Davydenko by a whisker.
 
abmk said:
The federer-nalby h2h from 2004-07 was 7-3 to Federer. Nalby retired hurt from RG 06 match as well.
Counting from wim 03 onwards ( fed's first slam win ), its 8-5 to federer from wim 03-07.

Including 08 as well, its 10-5 to fed ...


Fed-davy was 8-2 from 2004-2010 AO.
from 2005 to before YEC 09 SF (7 matches ) , davy won only one set vs fed --- AO 06'

no prizes for guessing whom federer would rather face.
Click to expand...
When did Nlbandian actually get injured at 2006 RG? Exactly when he was up a set and a break?
 
mike danny said:
When did Nlbandian actually get injured at 2006 RG? Exactly when he was up a set and a break?
Click to expand...
No, he got injured near the start of the second set as I remember from watching it, that's when his play dropped. Federer played extremely well to turn the 2nd set around and with the way he was playing to close the 2nd and at the beginning of the third, Nalbandian wouldn't have won even if he hadn't gotten hurt.
 
Davydenko technically did have the better career, since he won more titles.

People tend to over-rate Nalbandian based on his talent, he had the potential to win more. But he didn't.

This is hilarious though

 
Nalbandian actually could seriously trouble a peak/prime Federer, while Davydenko fared better with prime Nadal. I would pick Nalbandian for his miraculous 2007 indoors running.
 
ultradr said:
Yeah, but if you are one of top players at the moment, the last thing you want is any changes in current tour conditions.

P.S.: Killer Instinct: I think Nalbandian is still one of very few(if not only one) to beat
both Nadal and Federer back to back in single tournament. (it was indoor ).
Click to expand...

Yeah and Davydenko beat Nadal and Federer to win the World Tour Final 2009, also indoor. Also Soderling and Del Potro.

Before the WTF2009, he also beat back to back Djokovic and Nadal to win Shanghai.
 
Jackuar said:
Calendar-wise, yes, not much longer. But if you look at how long he strolled around the top ranks, consistency etc., and add in few purple patches that he hit during his time, I'd say 60-40 to Davy.
Click to expand...

Nalbandian was top 10 level between 2002-2008
Davydenko was top 10 level between 2005-2009

7 > 5 in favor of Nalbandian :)
 
Flash O'Groove said:
Yeah and Davydenko beat Nadal and Federer to win the World Tour Final 2009, also indoor. Also Soderling and Del Potro.

Before the WTF2009, he also beat back to back Djokovic and Nadal to win Shanghai.
Click to expand...

Madrid 07 - Clement, Berdych, Del Potro, Nadal, Djokovic, Federer
Paris 07 - Almagro, Moya, Federer, Ferrer, Gasquet, Nadal

10/10 - top 10 players
7/10 - top 5 players

Nadal got beaten 6-2 6-1, 6-4 6-0 :)
 
Both Davydenko and Nalbandian have won a Master Cup, but Davydenko went through a much stronger draw than Nalbandian.

The Master Cup 2005 that Nalbandian won was a total disaster. Safin, Nadal, Hewitt, Roddick and Agassi withdrew, that's how Nalbandian could enter the draw in the first place, as he was ranked 12th in the world at the time. In the final he defeated Federer, who was struggling with a foot injury, if memory serve. So nice title on paper, but in reality it was a draw as depleted as they come.

Meanwhile, the World Tour Final 2009 that Davydenko had the full cast with the exception of Roddick who withdrew and gave his place to Soderling. Davydenko lost to Djokovic in the RR but beat Nadal and Soderling to qualify for the semi-final. Nadal was in ok form at best but Soderling was good. In the semi he defeated Federer, it was his first victory other the Swiss. He defeated Del Potro in the final.

Davydenko was reaching new levels at that time. He had also previously defeated Djokovic and Nadal to win Shanghai. He went on to win Doha by defeating back to back Federer and Nadal, in one of the best 250 tournament in recent time. He lost in the QF of the AO to Federer, then injured himself (wrist) at Rotterdam and it was the end of him.
 
Pretty close, but I'll give the edge to Nalbandian. Two very good players at their best. Just because you don't win a Slam doesn't mean you're not serious competition for the players who do.
 
Interesting.

Nalbandian made a slam final and at least the semis of all 4 slams, while Davydenko made the semis of only 2 of the 4 slams. Nalbandian also has a vastly superior career win % (~66% to ~59% for Nikolay).

However, Davydenko won 1 extra Masters title and almost twice the total number of titles.
 
Well, Davydenko made more money, won more matches, won more tournaments, and has 3 1000's to Nalbandian's 2, so there's no real reason fatso should be the answer to this particular question.

Still, his slam final, and the fact that he's part of the grand slam semi final club, and those 2 weeks of tennis he played at the end of 2007, and the fact that he played finals on all 4 surfaces, and alllllmost won titles on all 4 surfaces doesn't leave much of a question to me with regards to who was best.
 
The most memorable match from Nalbandian, for me, was his win over Murray at Paris 2008. I recall Murray was the best player on the tour at the time, with his defensive skills, and it took a perfect match to beat him. Nalbandian did just that, delivering a really solid and conscient play, like he knew just what he had to do and actually performing it.
this one:

From Davydenko, probably some win against Nadal around 2008 or 2009. He simply said he would beat him, and went on to do it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

grafselesfan
  • Poll Poll
Better player- Davydenko or Nalbandian
Replies
10
Views
1K
flying24
F
soyizgood
  • Poll Poll
Better Career: Nalbandian or Davydenko?
2
Replies
57
Views
6K
Anaconda
A
TJfederer16
Davydenko vs Nalbandian
Replies
1
Views
655
Gaudio2004
G
clout
  • Poll Poll
Sascha Zverev vs Davydenko: Better Career (so far)
Replies
12
Views
834
nolefam_2024
N
D
  • Poll Poll
Better Player: Davydenko or Nalbandian?
2 3
Replies
102
Views
5K
skaj
skaj
Back
Top