D
powerangle
Legend
I think peak-for-peak, in the pure physical game, Nole has the advantage. But Nadal is stronger mentally, which accounts for a lot and is very important in tennis. If Novak stops his mental walkabouts and plays his best free-flowing and swinging-from-the-hip tennis, then he has the advantage over Rafa, IMO.
Last edited:
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
Events where Djoko leads Nadal:
AO: 1-0
IW: 2-1
Miami: 3-0
Cincy: 2-0
Beijing: 1-0
Paris: 1-0
Events where Nadal leads Djoko:
DC (clay): 1-0
M-C: 2-1
Rome: 3-2
3rd clay: 2-1
RG: 6-0
Queen's: 1-0
Olympics (hard): 1-0
USO: 2-1
Events where they're tie:
Canada: 1-1
Wimbledon: 1-1
WTF: 2-2
Events where Djoko leads Fed:
AO: 2-1
IW: 2-0
Miami: 1-0
Rome: 2-0
Paris ind: 1-0
WTF: 2-1
Events where Fed leads Djoko:
Dubai: 2-1
M-C: 3-0
Cincy: 2-0
USO: 3-2
DC (hard): 1-0
Shanghai: 2-0
Events where they're tie:
RG: 1-1
W: 1-1
Canada: 1-1
Basel: 1-1
It is clear to me where Novak's strong points are. Slow/medium outdoor hard: AO, IW, Miami and indoor (Paris, WTF)
Fed dominates him on fast outdoor hard and Nadal on clay + USO.
AO: 1-0
IW: 2-1
Miami: 3-0
Cincy: 2-0
Beijing: 1-0
Paris: 1-0
Events where Nadal leads Djoko:
DC (clay): 1-0
M-C: 2-1
Rome: 3-2
3rd clay: 2-1
RG: 6-0
Queen's: 1-0
Olympics (hard): 1-0
USO: 2-1
Events where they're tie:
Canada: 1-1
Wimbledon: 1-1
WTF: 2-2
Events where Djoko leads Fed:
AO: 2-1
IW: 2-0
Miami: 1-0
Rome: 2-0
Paris ind: 1-0
WTF: 2-1
Events where Fed leads Djoko:
Dubai: 2-1
M-C: 3-0
Cincy: 2-0
USO: 3-2
DC (hard): 1-0
Shanghai: 2-0
Events where they're tie:
RG: 1-1
W: 1-1
Canada: 1-1
Basel: 1-1
It is clear to me where Novak's strong points are. Slow/medium outdoor hard: AO, IW, Miami and indoor (Paris, WTF)
Fed dominates him on fast outdoor hard and Nadal on clay + USO.
Last edited:
Noleberic123
G.O.A.T.
how about you actually try explaining why you think anyone else can beat peak novak besides federer
BringBackSV
Hall of Fame
How can that even be a serious question?
D
Deleted member 688153
Guest
Just in case you forgot (and on Fed's worst surface btw):
Name one.
At AO on Plexi or other clay-level HC, maybe.
Grass and fast (or even medium) HC = Novak gets rekt.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 688153
Guest
I doubt anybody could except:
-Nadal at RG
-Sampras on fast surfaces
-Federer anywhere except AO/Miami
forehand fan
Rookie
why separate a 1 year period? why not look at the whole career? ohh may because that is the only time djokovic has beaten nadal in a slam ?
kandamrgam
Hall of Fame
I was having a debate with another member regarding whether "streaks" matter or not. I believe "streaks" are overrated and it is below "h2h" in weightage, though overall both of them doesn't matter much overall. He believes "h2h" doesnt matter at all.
Funny that Nole's 7-0 record against Rafa is both a streak as well as h2h. Undoubtedly the worst meaningless stat ever
--------------
Oh, and btw, I believe Rafael's h2h streaks are the best.
He has 1 five match winning streak against Novak.
He has 2 five match winning streak against Andy.
He has 3 five match winning streak against Roger.
Last edited:
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Nadal leads on grass and clay, Djokovic would lead on HC if we're taking 2011 as peak Djokovic. I have to give Djokovic HC because I don't think he played his best tennis in the USO final in 2013. He's played better HC tennis than that and would win a bigger % of the really important matches if he did.
In Nadal's case, clay is obvious still. Novak could win a bunch of 3 set matches, but when it comes to RG it's nonsensical to not go with Nadal.
And grass would be interesting, but at his peak, Nadal was a better grass court player than Djokovic, hands down IMO.
Obviously there is a bit of a match up issue for Nadal, but it is focused on too much I think. To compare the Nadal-Djokovic match up to the Nadal-Federer one in terms of severity of the disadvantage, it is not even close. When Nadal is playing well he can rattle Djokovic regardless of Djokovic's (small) match up advantage. Federer on the other hand has to change up a long standing pattern by doing things he's not comfortable with, mainly taking his BH DTL.
Anyway, Nadal wins on grass most of the time IMO. He's just the better player. He was playing extremely well when he beat Federer in 08. Think he may have been 2 points away from winning in an easy straights at one point, and he should've closed it in 4 if he didn't get nervous in the 4th set TB. That match actually had no business going to 9-7 in the 5th.
In Nadal's case, clay is obvious still. Novak could win a bunch of 3 set matches, but when it comes to RG it's nonsensical to not go with Nadal.
And grass would be interesting, but at his peak, Nadal was a better grass court player than Djokovic, hands down IMO.
Obviously there is a bit of a match up issue for Nadal, but it is focused on too much I think. To compare the Nadal-Djokovic match up to the Nadal-Federer one in terms of severity of the disadvantage, it is not even close. When Nadal is playing well he can rattle Djokovic regardless of Djokovic's (small) match up advantage. Federer on the other hand has to change up a long standing pattern by doing things he's not comfortable with, mainly taking his BH DTL.
Anyway, Nadal wins on grass most of the time IMO. He's just the better player. He was playing extremely well when he beat Federer in 08. Think he may have been 2 points away from winning in an easy straights at one point, and he should've closed it in 4 if he didn't get nervous in the 4th set TB. That match actually had no business going to 9-7 in the 5th.
moonballs
Hall of Fame
Why does that matter? A record is a record. In tennis there is no such a thing as who wins last laughs the last outside a tournament.
Beside the turnaround is more of stopping the lopsidedness instead of creating a new lopsidedness in the opposite direction. You want to give the guy credit for not allowing the 0:7 growing into 0:8 or 0:9, you can certainly do that. But you have to realize nobody else had to do that from the no 1 seat.
moonballs
Hall of Fame
why separate a 1 year period? why not look at the whole career? ohh may because that is the only time djokovic has beaten nadal in a slam ?
Because a streak is a record. I am not using it as a sole metric to judge their matchup but it is an important one, because 2010 was Nadal's best year and he didn't get injured till June of 2012, if that. So 2011 is legitimately Nadal's peak year as well.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Outstanding poast sir! #Kudoz
moonballs
Hall of Fame
Streak matters in all sports. The calendar year grand slam is a streak.I was having a debate with another member regarding whether "streaks" matter or not. I believe "streaks" are overrated and it is below "h2h" in weightage, though overall both of them doesn't matter much overall. He believes "h2h" doesnt matter at all.
Funny that Nole's 7-0 record against Rafa is both a streak as well as h2h. Undoubtedly the worst meaningless stat ever
--------------
Oh, and btw, I believe Rafael's h2h streaks are the best.
He has 1 five match winning streak against Novak.
He has 2 five match winning streak against Andy.
He has 3 five match winning streak against Roger.
Whether a record is important is determined by how hard it is for some else to break it. Also an important record has to be accessible and desirable not just for the sake of the record itself. The grand slam is open to any top player to pursue every year. The "beating the current no 1 many times in a row" is open to any no2 or lower player to pursue. Unlike Olympic gold in tennis, nobody can claim winning slams and beating the no1 are not most desirable.
Just ask Fed or Rafa, Fed/rafa, do you want to beat Rafa/fed 7 times in a row in the slams and masters finals? Of course both will say yes. The only reason they haven't done it is because they have not been able to.
RF-18
Talk Tennis Guru
We saw what peak nole did to nadal in 2011.
Its completely absurd to claim that 2011 wasn't one of nadals best years in terms of consistency and level of play. He got to 4 consecutive GS finals, winning one of them, and 4 masters finals. In 7 of these nole wiped the floor with him except the incredible tight match in Ao 12.
Since djokovic taking his final steps, he is a better tennis player than nadal. He masters all parts of the game and is more talented offensively.
One of nadals main goals stepping in to a match against nole is to prevent him from reaching his high level and consistency, if he is not able to do this, nadal knows himself he is screwed because Nole just wipes the floor with him. Though nadal has been good at preventing these things, nole has gone winning majority of the matches against nadal and leads 12-10 in finals and 12-7 overall since 2011.
Its completely absurd to claim that 2011 wasn't one of nadals best years in terms of consistency and level of play. He got to 4 consecutive GS finals, winning one of them, and 4 masters finals. In 7 of these nole wiped the floor with him except the incredible tight match in Ao 12.
Since djokovic taking his final steps, he is a better tennis player than nadal. He masters all parts of the game and is more talented offensively.
One of nadals main goals stepping in to a match against nole is to prevent him from reaching his high level and consistency, if he is not able to do this, nadal knows himself he is screwed because Nole just wipes the floor with him. Though nadal has been good at preventing these things, nole has gone winning majority of the matches against nadal and leads 12-10 in finals and 12-7 overall since 2011.
Last edited:
RF-18
Talk Tennis Guru
Djokovic has two wimbledon titles, one of them by defeating Nadal in the final.
He also has more match wins at Wimbledon and higher winning percentage.
Nadal has more finals though.
Also I can't get how it even is a discussion who gets the edge at HC, have you forgot that nole leads 14-7? And most of these wins was pre 2011.
Djokovic IMO has the edge on all surfaces except clay. But thats how I see tennis, you guys maybe believe more in Nadals style of play, but I don't.
He also has more match wins at Wimbledon and higher winning percentage.
Nadal has more finals though.
Also I can't get how it even is a discussion who gets the edge at HC, have you forgot that nole leads 14-7? And most of these wins was pre 2011.
Djokovic IMO has the edge on all surfaces except clay. But thats how I see tennis, you guys maybe believe more in Nadals style of play, but I don't.
Last edited:
RF-18
Talk Tennis Guru
where have I insulted you?
You do say that phrase alot, I think its good and funny. It was not meant to harm you, but if you want me to remove it I will.
Chico
Banned
Thank you.
Last edited:
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
Yeah, great post. One question to the both of you (Steve that is) - and whoever else fancies answering.
Why is there a match-up issue between Rafole and if there is, exactly what is it?
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Because Djokovic is basically Davydenko on speed.
Chico
Banned
Terrible underrating of Djokovic. As usual.
kandamrgam
Hall of Fame
Every "positive" record is desirable. h2h is also desirable. You ask Roger/Rafa if they would want a winning record against each other. They will say yes. It's up to us to give it importance. In that respect I believe "streaks" dont matter as much as other positive records.
Here's another way of asking Roger/Rafa: would they want to have a winning record against each other "overall", or would they want 7-0 streak and end up on the losing side? I believe they would say they want the overall record. That is why streaks dont matter compared to overall record.
Or ask Seles, if she wants to win 3 Slams in a row like she did in 1991-92 or she wants to win 3 GS, one each in her teens, 20s and 30s like Graf did? If I were she I would pick Graf's.
That said CYGS is slightly different. It's cherished historically. Is counted as an achievement. All other streaks are overrated.
Last edited:
DRII
G.O.A.T.
uhm, no not at all...
tortoise meet hare! race not always to the swift!
there are numerous idioms (formed throughout time) that dispute your logic.
Chico
Banned
Agree. Novak has clear and undisputed advantage everywhere outside the clay. Even on clay, peak Novak with the equal and unbiased environment can go equally and beat Nadal quite often - see Madrid/Rome 2011 or MC/RG 2013 or Rome 2014, ...
kandamrgam
Hall of Fame
Nole > Rafa on hard
Nole > Rafa on grass
Nole > Rafa - Pascal Maria on clay
Isn't that what you meant?
DRII
G.O.A.T.
as has been the case with you, your logic is the inverse of reality and somewhat contradictory in itself.
Nadal does not redline or peak 95% of the time! thats one of the most imaginary statements i've ever seen on this forum
Nadal has the broadest 'midrange' of probably any player in tennis history. his base game is enough to disrupt and conquer his best peers most of the time. its his competition that usually needs to peak or redline in order to vanquish him, resulting in tremendous pressure being put on them.
i do agree that Nole's hypothetical peak is higher than Nadal's (as is Federer's) although Nole is somewhat limited by his lack of variety. but 'peak' is a hypothetical; we've never seen any player's actual peak, we can only extrapolate given what we have seen from them...
DRII
G.O.A.T.
the hate is strong with this one...
D
Deleted member 512391
Guest
I think that this is a wrong point of view. The fact that Nadal is a better (I would say much better, since he played five consecutive finals there and had to play Wimbledon GOAT in three consecutive matches) grass court player than Djokovic doesn't mean much when it comes to their matches. The problem for Nadal on grass is that he cannot hurt Djokovic as much as he can on clay and hard court, because the bounce is low (so he cannot exploit his backhand like he can on clay and he has less time to setup for his forehand because of the bounce and the nature of the surface). Also, he cannot use that lefty slice serve as effective as against Federer and he has less time to react to the Djokovic return.
Regarding your statement that Nadal "should've closed it in 4 if he didn't get" during the Wimbledon 2008 ... that simply isn't correct. By that logic, Federer should have won that second set because he was 4-1 up in one moment, but lost five consecutive games. It is what it is, there is no should/could etc.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
I'm just not sure it makes sense to me to speak of a match-up advantage to Nole, when Rafa leads the h2h and we're talking two all time great players, who both most likely will end up with double digits slams. Djoko is better on HC, Rafa's better on clay and their h2h reflects that.
But could you specify why you think Djoko has a match-up advantage/Rafa has a disadvantage rather than just saying Davy?
(to me, Djoko negates some of Rafa's strengths, the wide lefty serve and the CC forehand, because his backhand is strong enough to stand it's ground against both shots. But that's not a match-up advantage, that's more of a match-up equalizer imo).
NatF
Bionic Poster
I agree. Djokovic doesn't have a game that is especially good at beating Nadal (it's only good relative to everyone else).
uliks
Banned
Great post Chanwan.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
If by matchup advantage, you mean do I feel like Nadal is facing an uphill battle whenever he plays Djokovic, then maybe I agree with you. #mindchanged
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
thanks!
Glad to see I'm not alone in this.
hehe, now that rarely happens here! Good on you
President
Legend
If he doesn't, then who does? Compared to everyone else in the top 10, his game works very well against Nadal.
RF-18
Talk Tennis Guru
Where is the hate?
It's a matter of opinion, and legit opinion as Djokovic is also passing nadal in all kinds of records.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
Good post. Djokovic doesn't really have a match up advantage, he is just able to better deal with Nadal plan A attack. The backhand, and his ability to grind out with Nadal doesn't mean match up advantage, it just means Nadal has to do more to win against him.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
Exactly how I see it too, Novak can basically stand his ground, where most/everyone else fail - which is what makes for great matches in the first place.
President
Legend
If Nadal has a "matchup advantage" against nearly everyone else, does that just mean he is a better player than them? Seems kind of silly to call Djokovic neutralizing Nadal's weapons as "leveling the playing field" IMO, when that is clearly not the norm for Nadal against pretty much everyone else on tour. Djokovic's weapons naturally cancel out Nadal's "advantage", to me that is the definition of a matchup disadvantage (since the "advantage" is present against 9/10 players).
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
Who exactly is saying that?
Djokovic is one guy that is not Nadal's pigeon. The H2H says that Djokovic is no one's pigeon. His physicality is one of the few on tour that can match Nadal's, he causes Nadal to play his absolute best to beat him...there can be no bigger form of respect than demanding the best from your opponent everytime in order to gain the victory.
Nadal's plan A, which works against pretty much everyone else, doesn't work outright against Djokovic. He was, is, and forever will be Nadal's toughest rival.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
Of course. His plan A works. If plan A works, why go to plan B?
NatF
Bionic Poster
Likewise Djokovic's game works very well against everyone in the top 10 too - none have such against record against him as Nadal. I consider it an even match up. I think there's a difference between presenting a difficult match up and having a match up advantage.
BTW I like the avatar, awesome film one of my favorites.
President
Legend
That is true, but the disparity is not to the same extent. Nadal absolutely brutalizes Federer and Murray head to head, the other two members of the Big 4. In contrast, Federer's advantage over Djokovic head to head is relatively similar to Nadal's lead over Djokovic, and Djokovic does not own Murray to nearly the same extent Nadal does. Djokovic is clearly abnormally difficult for Nadal compared to any other top 10 or 20 player, even beyond what you would expect (because Djokovic is such a great player) IMO. I would call that a matchup advantage, but that is just semantics I guess.
Thanks, I can't take credit for the great artwork though. Definitely one of the more underrated films of the 2000's IMO!
Last edited:
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
You take this trolling thing a bit too seriously bro.
Prabhanjan
Professional
Peak-vs-peak? AO and FO are quite clear about who will take it. I believe Wimbledon may be split among them. It is the USO which throws in the spanner. In spite of Nadal winning it 2 times in his last 3 appearances, it is not a given that he would be winning in 12 and 14. Though Nole has underperformed in the USO finals, I would believe that the third win in favor of Nadal might be due to wind. Taking into account that Nole is not as much of a lock to win the AO as Nadal at FO, I think its advantage Nadal 
kandamrgam
Hall of Fame
I agree with Chanwan. Been saying this.
Djokovic is basically outplaying Nadal in his own game. Matching up to what Nadal throws at him. There is no match-up as far as game's dynamics goes. Djokovic has a better BH compared to Nadal's and that factor stands out in the results.
A true match up for Nadal would be someone like Del P. Del P's hard hitting style will extract weak short returns from Nadal's FH. This is in direct relationship with Del P's and Nadal's technique. It's a bigger match up for me than Fed-Nadal. Except Del P is hardly consistent to meet Nadal often.
Never call every win-lose h2h as match-up. Another case is Davydenko-Nadal. Davydenko just outplays him hitting clean winners from both wings.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
Exactly, Davydenko is one of the few players ever to make Rafa play a match a tempo that Rafa doesn't like, hence why he lost so many matches to him.
Similar threads
- Poll
