Nalbandian vs Davydenko- Who had a better career?

[eman resu]

Both such clean strikers of the ball.....if only they had better serves.

I think they had decent serves, especially Nalbandian. Not the best ones, of course, but it's not like it held them down. I really like Davydenko's service motion, for some reason. He changed it at the end of his carrer, though.

 

[mike danny]

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.

For Davydenko I nominate his win over Djokovic at 2009 Shanghai. A brilliant match and Djokovic was in good form in that part of the season. The Serb had just won Beijing and would go on to win Basel and Paris just after Shanghai.

 

[abmk]

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.

that's true, but remember that the YEC 05 final was a Bo5 final , federer had that aura of invincibility at that time.and it took enormous mental strength for nalbandian to close it out.
Federer's injury struggles hindred him from 3rd set onwards mainly. The 1st 2 sets were TBs.

davydenko's draw was definitely tougher, but the above narrows it down.

In any case, nalby's draws to win his 2 Masters were clearly tougher than davydenko's.

 

[aman92]

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.

Umm no way...The most memorable match for Nalbandian is his Masters cup win in 2005. Federer had lost 3 matches the whole year and was 2 sets to love up and yet somehow Nalbandian won it. Still feels incredible

 

[Flash O'Groove]

that's true, but remember that the YEC 05 final was a Bo5 final , federer had that aura of invincibility at that time.and it took enormous mental strength for nalbandian to close it out.
Federer's injury struggles hindred him from 3rd set onwards mainly. The 1st 2 sets were TBs.

davydenko's draw was definitely tougher, but the above narrows it down.

In any case, nalby's draws to win his 2 Masters were clearly tougher than Davydenko's.

If the draw was full (or half more full) and Federer wasn't injured, Nalbandian probably wouldn't have won the Master Cup. Actually the best of 5 sets was to his advantage too, considering he was playing an inured opponent.

There are no asterisk whatsoever for Davydenko's WTF title. It was a full draw with many inform players entering it, all of them motivated, and he won it by defeating Del Potro, Federer, Nadal and Soderling, who were in 7 of the 8 slam final spots of the year! You can hardly do better.

Nalbandian's Master 1000 are probably better, but not by much. Davydenko defeated Roddick and Nadal to win Miami, Djokovic and Nadal to win Shanghai. In any case, Masters 1000 are not equivalent to WTF/Master Cup. Federer's motivation during the fall Master's 1000 was particularly low, as was (is) Nadal.

 

[abmk]

If the draw was full (or half more full) and Federer wasn't injured, Nalbandian probably wouldn't have won the Master Cup. Actually the best of 5 sets was to his advantage too, considering he was playing an inured opponent.

davydenko wouldn't have won vs 2005 federer if federer didn't have injury problems either.
there's no way to tell nalby wouldn't have won if the draw was more half full.

There are no asterisk whatsoever for Davydenko's WTF title. It was a full draw with many inform players entering it, all of them motivated, and he won it by defeating Del Potro, Federer, Nadal and Soderling, who were in 7 of the 8 slam final spots of the year! You can hardly do better.

already said davydenko's was clearly harder. just saying closing it out vs peak federer who was invincible at that time was no mean feat. (81-3 that season and on a streak of 24 finals won in a row)

Nalbandian's Master 1000 are probably better, but not by much. Davydenko defeated Roddick and Nadal to win Miami, Djokovic and Nadal to win Shanghai. In any case, Masters 1000 are not equivalent to WTF/Master Cup. Federer's motivation during the fall Master's 1000 was particularly low, as was (is) Nadal.

nalbandian beat federer, djokovic, nadal, berdych in madrid.
he beat federer, nadal, ferrer in Paris.

both tougher draws than davydenko's.

the part about motivation is not true.
Federer crushed Canas (revenge match for IW/Miami earlier that year) at Madrid. He reached the Madrid final without having his serve broken.
It was only in the 2nd set that Nalby broke his serve to end that streak.
He won Basel as well in b/w Madrid and Paris.

no particular reason to say Nadal's motivation was low in indoor 07 season either. reached Paris final (l to Nalbandian), reached YEC SF (l to federer) and was of course stopped by nalbandian in Madrid (QF).

if anything, he was worse off in 2009 indoors , in terms of play and motivation (getting badly crushed by Cilic in Beijing and losing all 3 of his RR matches in the YEC, without winning a set in any of them)

 

[styksnstryngs]

Davydenko's head was second only to Andre in terms of shinyness, though.

 

[Mainad]

If the draw was full (or half more full) and Federer wasn't injured, Nalbandian probably wouldn't have won the Master Cup. Actually the best of 5 sets was to his advantage too, considering he was playing an inured opponent.

No excuses for Federer. He was serving for the title and got to 30-0 love. Only needed 2 more points. Injured or not, he should have closed it out from that position.

There are no asterisk whatsoever for Davydenko's WTF title. It was a full draw with many inform players entering it, all of them motivated, and he won it by defeating Del Potro, Federer, Nadal and Soderling, who were in 7 of the 8 slam final spots of the year! You can hardly do better.

It was an impressive performance but he could have done better if he had beaten Djokovic in the round robin.

Nalbandian's Master 1000 are probably better, but not by much. Davydenko defeated Roddick and Nadal to win Miami, Djokovic and Nadal to win Shanghai. In any case, Masters 1000 are not equivalent to WTF/Master Cup. Federer's motivation during the fall Master's 1000 was particularly low, as was (is) Nadal.

Nalbandian's back to back Masters titles in 2007 was certainly impressive but Davydenko's 2009 trumps it with his YEC win. They both achieved so much but maybe Nalbandian's Slam final at 2002 Wimbledon vs Davydenko's extra Masters title is the deal breaker.

 

[Mainad]

Davydenko's head was second only to Andre in terms of shinyness, though.

This guy begs to differ!

 

[styksnstryngs]

This guy begs to differ!

Jesus.

 

[Mainad]

Jesus.

No way. Jesus had a full head of hair.

 

[eman resu]

Umm no way...The most memorable match for Nalbandian is his Masters cup win in 2005. Federer had lost 3 matches the whole year and was 2 sets to love up and yet somehow Nalbandian won it. Still feels incredible

2005 was bigger, of course. I meant from a personal point of view. I wasn't following the circuit at 2005 and his win against Murray was huge, for me, at the time.

 

[Jackuar]

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

7 > 5 in favor of Nalbandian

Nalbandian was top 10 level (Rank 13 to 8) between 2002-2003 (Approx 7 months), them dropped to 1-ish briefly, again rank 13 to 8 between (2003-2005) -- for 1 year 9 mths (he was briefly hitting rank 4,5,6 at this time, probably a week or two at max each time), and Rank 3 to 13 (1 yr 10 months) - between 2005 and 2007 -- with equal time spent above between rank 3-8 vs rank 8-13. And finally 2007 end to 2009 start - 1 yr 3 mths approx. between ranks 7-14. And every now and then hitting the 20-ish mark (17 - 22). Sure he was top 10, "overall" "through a duration of" 7 years. But if you look closer, it was erratic, injury laden (has to be attributed to him only, can't ignore).

Davydenko was top 10 level (Rank 4 to 13) between 2005/05 to 2010/11 - that 5.5 years at a stretch(!) - and right through the purple patch of Fedal and rise of Djokoray. And 80% of that time was above rank 8 and approx. 3.5 years of top 5 level (rank 4 to 7)

Pick your choice.

 

[ultradr]

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).

Well, among the top 4-5 players of 2003-2004 when this abrupt surface changes came, like Hewitt, Safin, Roddick, Nalbandian,
Nalbandian was the only one without a slam.

These top players suddenly fell like flies (maybe except Safin) with surface changes at Wimbledon and US Open by 2003 and 2004 each.
Federer (and subsequently Nadal) took over shortly. It was too late.

 

[mike danny]

Well, among the top 4-5 players of 2003-2004 when this abrupt surface changes came, like Hewitt, Safin, Roddick, Nalbandian,
Nalbandian was the only one without a slam.

These top players suddenly fell like flies (maybe except Safin) with surface changes at Wimbledon and US Open by 2003 and 2004 each.
Federer (and subsequently Nadal) took over shortly. It was too late.

No, they didn't. Hewitt was in the QF and SF of Wimb in 2004 and 2005 and in the final and SF of the USO in 2004 and 2005.

Roddick won the USO in 2003 and was in the Wimb 2003 SF and reached the Wimb 2004 F.

 

[ChaelAZ]

Davydenko match fixing will always loom.

 

[mike danny]

Davydenko match fixing will always loom.

It was just one time and in a small event if I correctly recall.

 

[ChaelAZ]

It was just one time and in a small event if I correctly recall.

Yes, and he was officially cleared....but....so was Sharapova...and....ya know....

Maybe just me.

EDIT to add...Dologopov is going through the same thing right now with match fixing.

 

[ultradr]

No, they didn't. Hewitt was in the QF and SF of Wimb in 2004 and 2005 and in the final and SF of the USO in 2004 and 2005.

Roddick won the USO in 2003 and was in the Wimb 2003 SF and reached the Wimb 2004 F.

"fell" meaning ranking and start losing to Federer.

If surfaces didn't change these players would have won some of matches you mentioned.

Nalbandian is stark example of it.

 

[mike danny]

"fell" meaning ranking and start losing to Federer.

If surfaces didn't change these players would have won some of matches you mentioned.

Nalbandian is stark example of it.

Hewitt was a top 5 player in 2004 and 2005 and so was Roddick in 2003, 2004 and 2005.

So now losing to Federer is something they should be ashamed of?

 

[ultradr]

Hewitt was a top 5 player in 2004 and 2005 and so was Roddick in 2003, 2004 and 2005.

So now losing to Federer is something they should be ashamed of?

Hewitt and Roddick was #1 right?
The timing of Federer's rise and fall of Hewitt, Roddick and Nalbandian coincides with surface changes.
It must have been beneficial for Federer.

 

[abmk]

Hewitt and Roddick was #1 right?
The timing of Federer's rise and fall of Hewitt, Roddick and Nalbandian coincides with surface changes.
It must have been beneficial for Federer.

still all these wrong facts and beliefs I see.

Let see if some facts and reality observations can change your mind.

Hewitt had a bad year in 2003 - nothing to do with surfaces. (was knocked out at wimbledon as #1 seed by Karlovic)
He ended 2003 ranked #17.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lleyton_Hewitt_career_statistics

Roddick barely beat Federer for #1 ranking in 2003.
If he had not reached the semi in the Year Ending Championships, he'd have been #2.

Federer just raised his level tremendously in 2004 ( it started from the Year Ending Championships in 2003 actually)

Before 2004, Federer-Roddick had played 4 matches :

basel 2002 (fast) -- federer won in straight sets
wimbledon 03(fast) -- federer won in straight sets
canada 03(medium fast) -- roddick won in 3 sets
YEC 2003 (in b/w medium fast and fast) -- federer won in straight sets

so speed had nothing much to do with h2h in that case, in fact the only match roddick won was on the slowest surface of the 4.

......

as far as Nalbandian is concerned, he played federer tough on both fast and slow surfaces :

AO 03 (slow-medium) - nalby won in 5 sets
cincy 03 (fast) - nalby won in 2 TBs
USO 03 (medium fast to fast) - nalby won in 4 sets
AO 04 (slow-medium) - federer won in a competitive 4-setter
USO 05 (medium fast to fast) -- federer beat him convincingly in straight sets
rome 06 (slow) -- tight 3-set match that federer won
RG 06 (slow) -- nalbandian retired when down 5-2 in the 3rd set (1 set all) - match was competitive
madrid 06 (medium fast to fast) - federer beat nalby in straight sets, with a bagel in the 2nd set
madrid 07 (medium fast to fast) - nalby beat federer in 3 sets
paris 07 (medium) - nalby beat federer in 2 close sets
monte carlo 08 (slow) -- federer beat nalby in 3 sets
basel 08 (fast) - federer beat him in straight sets

there isn't much of a difference in their matches by speed.

only place where its non-competitive is grass ( where federer beats him easily -- did so in wim 11 )

nalbandian could play well on all of slow HC, fast outdoor HC , clay and indoors.

 

[lud]

Interesting how this poll turn around. At start Davydenko was in lead with 6 or 7 votes, now Nalbandian is in lead with 10 votes..

 

[Jaitock1991]

Davydenko had a better H2H record vs Nadal, so obviously he's had a better career.