No one takes Nadal's place as my main rival ever, doesn't matter what Alcaraz does
- Thread starter Hitman
- Start date
Phoenix*
Professional
24+ year olds are in their prime until 37 at least. Pre 2011 is not relevant, Nadal is in his prime in 15/16.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
LOL. So you decide now which years are prime years? Most players are retired at 37 and those who aren’t are definitely not as good as with 23. Tell this to Fed, Sampras, Becker, Mac, let alone Borg, that 36/37 are prime years but 20-23 aren’t. Even for Nadal who has shown way better longevity than expected it is ridiculous to assume he was better with 35/36 than with 22-23. You only chose 24+ because Djokovic got 24 in 2011, completely random choice.
StannisTheMannis
Hall of Fame
Nadals main rival in 2000s was the English language. His main rival in 2010s was male pattern baldness
mike danny
Bionic Poster
While it's cherry-picked, it's still not a good look on Rafa and kind of puts a dent into his H2H greatness.
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
You do know that ********** are not known for using their gray matter very often, right?
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Not really. As I said, before 2011 and only on grass and clay it is 11-0 Nadal. Sure Djokovic has the longer period and rightfully leads the H2H, but every argument which includes the magic words “excluding clay” can clearly be ignored.
On another note, you often mention Federer’s worst period in 2013 to argue against the Fedal H2H, then we can also keep in mind that Nadal faced Djokovic 7 times in 2015/16, but only twice in 2017/18.
Znak
Hall of Fame
The "rivalry"
"Of their 59 meetings, 27 matches have been on hard courts with Djokovic leading 20–7, 28 on clay with Nadal leading 20–8, and 4 on grass where they are tied 2–2." Pretty even if you ask me.
uscwang
Hall of Fame
Not a popular opinion but guess he lost to Murray and Murray after all.
Mike Sams
G.O.A.T.
Good foot Rafa = 67-0 against Federer/DjokovicFunny how you need to use the most cherry picked stat ever in order to prove something.
I can also cherry pick. Nadal is 29-0 in head to head excluding matches where he was out of form.
Mike Sams
G.O.A.T.
Nadal 2013 was probably the greatest version of Nadal that ever existed
Curtennis
Hall of Fame
I’m a huge Djokovic fan. Why would we only count those two surfaces?The "rivalry"
Holmes
Hall of Fame
excluding losses?Funny how you need to use the most cherry picked stat ever in order to prove something.
I can also cherry pick. Nadal is 29-0 in head to head excluding matches where he was out of form.
Fiero425
Legend
Phoenix*
Professional
In their prime: 15-2 hc/grass; 8-11 clay
It's the main surface & Wimbledon. Everything that matters in tennis.
Last edited:
Znak
Hall of Fame
To who, to you? Again this is pure cherry picking
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
hard disagree
Phoenix*
Professional
Cherry picked both as developed players.
joekapa
Legend
Puhleeeeze. They are the same age ! Once Djokovic went into his stride, Nadal couldn't play him like he used to.
He even said it himself ! "In 2011 I was beating everybody, apart from Djokovic".......
TheNachoMan
Legend
vex
Legend
Eh this objectively isn’t true. Djokovic is plainly Nadal’s main rival by any metric you look at. Only nostalgia would lead someone to made Fed as Rafa’s top rival.And yet, Djokovic will still never be viewed as Nadal's main rival LOL
Imagine being both Federer AND Djokovic's main rival!?
#JustRafaThings
The Fedfather
Legend
I'm not a Fedal stan no more, but pales in comparison is a pretty ridiculous descriptor to use. The rivalry was media driven, for sure, but the point that was the core aspect of the rivalry doesn't stand up to any scrutiny. To this day Fedal have played some of the most significant matches in sport's history, and they are the rivalry that defined the late 2000s top tennis.
vex
Legend
^^^^ this
I can't remember last time Nadal beat Djokovic outside clay, could you help me bestie?“Since”
“Off”
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Fiero425
Legend
I can't remember the last time Novak led Rafa in the slam count, could you help me?
Novak never led b/c he started his ascent to greatness years after Fedal began their reign! The standing stuck in my head before it was even thought possible to be where it is today, Federer 17, Nadal, 15, & Novak @12 majors after winning 2016 FO over Murray! It was thought Fedal had survived Novak since all 3 seemed to be running down! After a Fedal redux thru 2017, it got to 20 majors all! Then Nadal for his 2 last year! Now tied again 22 ALL w/ Fed out of the race w/ 20 majors! The skies the limit since Novak no longer banned from Majors!
joekapa
Legend
This.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
The point was, in my opinion, the rivalry wasn't as good as the other two rivalries. I don't know know what description you think I should use. Lol.
The Fedfather
Legend
Pales in comparison
(idiomatic) To appear small or unimportant in relation to something else.
You can describe it as you'd like obviously, I'm just saying that particular description is a little ridiculous.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
surely there are better alternatives to “pales in comparison?”
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
This is the definition from Merriam-Webster, which is the only dictionary I use:
: to seem less important, good, serious, etc., when compared with (something else)
And I don't agree.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
You guys are too touchy. It's not that serious. Lol
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
this would be like saying Djokovic pales in comparison to Federer and Nadal as a player if someone believes those two are just a bit better
there’s a specific connotation used with that descriptor
CoolCoolCool
Hall of Fame
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
It's not but ok.
It's not that serious. The definition means less good or less impressive which is what I am saying.
Nadal_Django
Legend
Unpopular opinion: the so much criticised 2019 Wimbledon Final is realistically better drama, quality and everything wise, than the best match that the media hyped and promoted Fedal rivalry can ever offer.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
aight fair enough if that’s what you intended
Razer
Legend
Fedal rivalry indeed did pale in comparison because of its inevitability right from the start. As a big Fed fan for real in 2000s I can assure that most of the times I watched them live, Federer almost always disappointed me and even in his wins he seemed to look less convincing.
2004 - Faced Nadal for the first time and lost, Rafa was jumping here and there full of energy.
2005 - This is his famous Miami win - Fed found ways to lose this second set from this invincible position in his peak year, can you believe it ?
2006 - He was 2-4 in his best year to Nadal
He lost in Dubai at the beginning of the season and continued into the clay season. Shanghai was the only good convincing win which Federer ever had in those years to Nadal. Wimbledon too was pretty close. 2007 - Barely won wimbledon, the famous match on Half Grass-Half Clay, that too Federer was humiliated. See how he surrendered the first set and then lost this exhibition which the whole world was talking about. 0-40
08 - Wimbledon loss, then crying in 09, then stuggling till 17 when he finally found a way.
It was never a rivalry, was media marketed because the young spaniard was causing problems to Roger and everyone could see it, the media had seen 2-3 years of failure from Roddick, so they moved on to Nadal and pumped the rivalry, but it was a very 1 sided rivalry from the start, very uncomfortable for a Fed Fan.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
I don't think it's better quality but definitely more dramatic. You do have ATGs like Edberg saying that's the best match he's ever seen at Wimbledon, so I guess he'd disagree with me on the quality.Unpopular opinion: the so much criticised 2019 Wimbledon Final is realistically better drama, quality and everything wise, than the best match that the media hyped and promoted Fedal rivalry can ever offer.
The Fedfather
Legend
Nothing touchy about pointing out that you've exaggerrated. 'Pales in comparison' is in the spirit of 'nowhere near as good' rather than just 'not as good'. But if you didn't mean to exaggerate, then no objections from me.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Yes Nadal was 23-10 at one point. Federer actually made the rivalry closer in his mid to late 30s. Before that, it wasn't a close rivalry at all and much different than the rivalry Djokovic had with both of them in my opinion.Fedal rivalry indeed did pale in comparison because of its inevitability right from the start. As a big Fed fan for real in 2000s I can assure that most of the times I watched them live, Federer almost always disappointed me and even in his wins he seemed to look less convincing.
2004 - Faced Nadal for the first time and lost, Rafa was jumping here and there full of energy.
2005 - This is his famous Miami win - Fed found ways to lose this second set from this invincible position in his peak year, can you believe it ?
2006 - He was 2-4 in his best year to Nadal
2007 - Barely won wimbledon, the famous match on Half Grass-Half Clay, that too Federer was humiliated. See how he surrendered the first set and then lost this exhibition which the whole world was talking about. 0-40
08 - Wimbledon loss, then crying in 09, then stuggling till 17 when he finally found a way.
It was never a rivalry, was media marketed because the young spaniard was causing problems to Roger and everyone could see it, the media had seen 2-3 years of failure from Roddick, so they moved on to Nadal and pumped the rivalry, but it was a very 1 sided rivalry from the start, very uncomfortable for a Fed Fan.
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
Djokovic after winning the AOBasically this is what Djokovic is saying to Nadal...
The stone being the McDonald's of this world.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
By definition, I didn't exaggerate and "nowhere near as good" is your own definition. If there are no objections, I don't see the point in still talking about it.
Razer
Legend
yes...at the end of 2014 it was 10-23 for Roger ..... 30% wins
We used to brush it off with logics like having more titles/wins against the tour is important, not having a losing h2h to 1 man, and that too he using 5 years age advantage etc etc
But eventually that 1 man has more slams now. h2hs cannot be ignored at all because in the case of Federer this is what ruined his greatness, Rafa was a disease for Fed which he did not tackle in stage 1, he waited till stage 4, it was too late, the damage was done by 2014-2015.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
None of the matches from the other two Djokovic rivalries are even as good as the third or fourth-best Fedal match imo
Similar threads
