Peak Djokovic vs Peak Nadal

[tennis4jags]

I would say that, the rise of Djokovic in 2011 and onwards is really a disaster to Nadal's career. Otherwise by this time he would have crossed Federer's record of grand slams. This one has proved again and again, Nadal is very weak in mental superiority, hence he can't forget his lost against Djoker. Even h2h is in favor of Nadal, but I still feel that Djokovic own him and in 2015 will be completely one sided matches in favor of Djokovic!

 

[kandamrgam]

I would say that, the rise of Djokovic in 2011 and onwards is really a disaster to Nadal's career. Otherwise by this time he would have crossed Federer's record of grand slams. This one has proved again and again, Nadal is very weak in mental superiority, hence he can't forget his lost against Djoker. Even h2h is in favor of Nadal, but I still feel that Djokovic own him and in 2015 will be completely one sided matches in favor of Djokovic!

Are you sure Rafa is beaten in the mental department and his tennis game really holds up to Nole's? I think Nole has the game, and of course the mental strength too, but Nadal's mental strength is superior.

 

[kandamrgam]

^^ I'd say it's Davydenko taking time away from Nadal's big swings that is the match up.

Haha. That's much less of match up!

How about Nadal-Murray match-up? Nadal playing better than Murray is the match-up!

 

[tennis4jags]

Are you sure Rafa is beaten in the mental department and his tennis game really holds up to Nole's? I think Nole has the game, and of course the mental strength too, but Nadal's mental strength is superior.

Yes, am damn sure that Nadal's mental balance looses while playing against Djokovic. Am talking only while playing against Djoker, and this is very much visible in Nadal's body language

 

[DRII]

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.

absolutely agree!

i've stated before that Delpo is Nadal's most natural 'antilog'...

wish you were posting years ago

 

[Dedans Penthouse]

Novak Djokovic by far. How is this even a question.

:shock:

/end thread

 

[kandamrgam]

absolutely agree!

i've stated before that Delpo is Nadal's most natural 'antilog'...

wish you were posting years ago

Yup, I always believed that. Though I believe Potro is Nadal's biggest match-up issue, Safin would be an even bigger "threat". I mean Safin can beat Nadal more than Potro, considering Safin's BH is much superior.

Every BH players have created trouble for Nadal. Even miniature versions like Nishikori, Davydenko, Djokovic. Now add Safin'esque or Potro'esque big game to it. Deadly.

Luckily for Nadal, both of them are not consistent for different reasons. Cilic is another guy who has big game and a solid BH. Again, hardly peaks.

 

[Antonio Puente]

We've said this numerous times on this forum, but it's amazing how great everyone is in the hypothetical match vs. Nadal as opposed to when they actually meet Nadal on the court and in slams. The hypothetically peak Djoker will kick Nadal's @ss. Unfortunately when the real Djoker meets Nadal in a slam, it's usually a different story.

 

[Mr.Snrub]

2011 is way too ingrained in some peoples heads. You take that ONE year out, and I struggle to see how Djokovic has a higher level in any way, shape or form. (I don't see it with it either :lol but you get my drift.

Look how many times Novak was on the edge during that year:

Dubai - Birdman gets injured after taking the first set
Miami - Down in final set TB versus Nadal
Rome - Murray was serving for the match
US Open - Fed had 2 match points on his own serve

A few points here or there and the mythical 2011 starts looking pretty average. Kind of like 2012-2014

 

[Steve0904]

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.

I don't see much of a match up edge for Djokovic on any surface tbh. A small one perhaps, but it's more down to who plays better on the day. Once the grass dries out in the 2nd week, the bounce is not so low as to suggest that Djokovic would have a decided edge on grass IMO. It's not super fast and low bouncing like the 90's or early 2000's anymore of course. There is different footwork perhaps required for grass, and the slice and serve probably work better on grass, but I don't see Nadal struggling to keep up with Djokovic if he's playing his best. Nadal has also incorporated the slice well against Novak recently, and that would work well on grass. A well playing Nadal has proven that he more than matches even a well playing Djokovic on any surface. I still think the edge goes to Nadal.

As far as my other statement, I think there is a difference because breaks happen. Sometimes one guy breaks and the other breaks back. Those things happen. You could say that people get nervous like Nadal did as well I guess, but I think there's a difference. Up to that point, Nadal showed little to no signs of tightening up, but once he was 5-2 in the TB with 2 serves to come for the Wimbledon title, he hit a pretty regulation BH right into the bottom of the net, and DF'ed on the next point to get Federer back on serve. If Nadal had kept his nerves in check, that match is over in 4 most likely. Unless, as you say Federer could've or should've held serve to finish out the 2nd set and I understand that, but with the match as it turned out, it definitely could've finished in 4.

 

[Steve0904]

Outstanding poast sir! #Kudoz

Thank you.

 

[Steve0904]

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?

Well I think the why question is answered by Djokovic's physical gifts. Insane defense/flexibility allows Djokovic to make Nadal hit more balls than he needs to against any other player. A lot like what Nadal does to every player, Djokovic included. And of course you need the stamina and endurance to not get tired. Safe to say if Nadal can wear you out that's game over. Plus he can match Nadal for consistency from the back of the court most of the time. In contrast, Nadal usually has to play aggressive to beat Djokovic.

As to exactly what it is, it's minor IMO, but he definitely has the best chance of anyone on the variety of surfaces.

That is because he can change the direction of the ball very well, or more specifically if he gets into the standard Nadal pattern (read CC FH to opponents BH), his BH can hold up better than any other player in that scenario if it has to, and he can take it DTL to get to Nadal's BH quite often. Then he can establish his FH CC to Nadal's BH after he gets back to somewhere near the center of the court. This happened a lot in 2011.

That was the one shot that I believe has changed some of the dynamic between the 2. That shot has even paid major dividends against Federer. Djokovic's FH CC holds up much better now than it used to, especially in 09 and 10. Djokovic's overall FH has improved in fact. Nadal and Federer used to go to that shot to get errors in pressure moments, but it holds up better today.

Djokovic also plays just aggressive enough and with enough consistency that he makes Nadal pay for getting too defensive.

Watch this point for an illustration and take note of what happens after Nadal loops his BH into play. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=m0dDL0Jzknk#t=363

Another thing to notice is the angles that Djokovic can create to pull Nadal off the court instead of trying to over hit and make errors if you're not in the zone. He also rarely comes to net against Nadal so as not to give him a target to pass him, something Federer for example has done all too often.

And then there's the return. Can't forget about that. The depth of Novak's returns is crazy. He reads Nadal's serve and has the reach and the two hands to deal with any serve Nadal hits pretty well. And the depth sometimes doesn't allow Nadal to play his favourite pattern off the serve which is step around his BH to hit a FH as the second shot. That is Nadal's bread and butter.

So those I think are the major points of what Djokovic does to have the best chance to win against Nadal, but of course Nadal more than holds his own. With the margins at the very top as small as they are, these matches are usually wars of attrition and come down to a few critical points. As far as Nadal goes, he slices to throw off Novak's rhythm, and when his FH DTL is on (and his FH in general), it causes problems for Djokovic. Just look at the highlights of USO 13 for that.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

I don't see much of a match up edge for Djokovic on any surface tbh. A small one perhaps, but it's more down to who plays better on the day. Once the grass dries out in the 2nd week, the bounce is not so low as to suggest that Djokovic would have a decided edge on grass IMO. It's not super fast and low bouncing like the 90's or early 2000's anymore of course. There is different footwork perhaps required for grass, and the slice and serve probably work better on grass, but I don't see Nadal struggling to keep up with Djokovic if he's playing his best. Nadal has also incorporated the slice well against Novak recently, and that would work well on grass. A well playing Nadal has proven that he more than matches even a well playing Djokovic on any surface. I still think the edge goes to Nadal.

As far as my other statement, I think there is a difference because breaks happen. Sometimes one guy breaks and the other breaks back. Those things happen. You could say that people get nervous like Nadal did as well I guess, but I think there's a difference. Up to that point, Nadal showed little to no signs of tightening up, but once he was 5-2 in the TB with 2 serves to come for the Wimbledon title, he hit a pretty regulation BH right into the bottom of the net, and DF'ed on the next point to get Federer back on serve. If Nadal had kept his nerves in check, that match is over in 4 most likely. Unless, as you say Federer could've or should've held serve to finish out the 2nd set and I understand that, but with the match as it turned out, it definitely could've finished in 4.

It's not so much a match-up issue so much as it is the lack of one.
Unlike Federer, Djokovic is an ATG who does not have a match-up issue with Nadal, so he can go toe-to-toe with him.
Nadal has not had this before with anyone.

 

[Chanwan]

Yup, I always believed that. Though I believe Potro is Nadal's biggest match-up issue, Safin would be an even bigger "threat". I mean Safin can beat Nadal more than Potro, considering Safin's BH is much superior.

Every BH players have created trouble for Nadal. Even miniature versions like Nishikori, Davydenko, Djokovic. Now add Safin'esque or Potro'esque big game to it. Deadly.

Luckily for Nadal, both of them are not consistent for different reasons. Cilic is another guy who has big game and a solid BH. Again, hardly peaks.

I agree with both of you and have done so for years. Many Rafa-fans don't like to discuss - or rather, dismiss - Delpo's potential for doing some serious damage in 2010 (and beyond), but I believe he could have if not for the wrist injury.
Safin, yeah. He would be deadly vs. Rafa. I rewatched a 2004 match between him and Fed the other day and he has such effortless power on both wings that it boggles the mind - one of my all time favorites

 

[Chanwan]

Well I think the why question is answered by Djokovic's physical gifts. Insane defense/flexibility allows Djokovic to make Nadal hit more balls than he needs to against any other player. A lot like what Nadal does to every player, Djokovic included. And of course you need the stamina and endurance to not get tired. Safe to say if Nadal can wear you out that's game over. Plus he can match Nadal for consistency from the back of the court most of the time. In contrast, Nadal usually has to play aggressive to beat Djokovic.

As to exactly what it is, it's minor IMO, but he definitely has the best chance of anyone on the variety of surfaces.

That is because he can change the direction of the ball very well, or more specifically if he gets into the standard Nadal pattern (read CC FH to opponents BH), his BH can hold up better than any other player in that scenario if it has to, and he can take it DTL to get to Nadal's BH quite often. Then he can establish his FH CC to Nadal's BH after he gets back to somewhere near the center of the court. This happened a lot in 2011.

That was the one shot that I believe has changed some of the dynamic between the 2. That shot has even paid major dividends against Federer. Djokovic's FH CC holds up much better now than it used to, especially in 09 and 10. Djokovic's overall FH has improved in fact. Nadal and Federer used to go to that shot to get errors in pressure moments, but it holds up better today.

Djokovic also plays just aggressive enough and with enough consistency that he makes Nadal pay for getting too defensive.

Watch this point for an illustration and take note of what happens after Nadal loops his BH into play. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=m0dDL0Jzknk#t=363

Another thing to notice is the angles that Djokovic can create to pull Nadal off the court instead of trying to over hit and make errors if you're not in the zone. He also rarely comes to net against Nadal so as not to give him a target to pass him, something Federer for example has done all too often.

And then there's the return. Can't forget about that. The depth of Novak's returns is crazy. He reads Nadal's serve and has the reach and the two hands to deal with any serve Nadal hits pretty well. And the depth sometimes doesn't allow Nadal to play his favourite pattern off the serve which is step around his BH to hit a FH as the second shot. That is Nadal's bread and butter.

So those I think are the major points of what Djokovic does to have the best chance to win against Nadal, but of course Nadal more than holds his own. With the margins at the very top as small as they are, these matches are usually wars of attrition and come down to a few critical points. As far as Nadal goes, he slices to throw off Novak's rhythm, and when his FH DTL is on (and his FH in general), it causes problems for Djokovic. Just look at the highlights of USO 13 for that.

Another great post, Steve, but as firstservingman says below and I said in post 80 (which has been discussed over the past few pages), isn't it more of a lack of a match-up advantage? That Djoko can go toe to toe with Rafa when Rafa tries to impose his CC forehand pattern. That he can go toe to toe with him in terms of consistency and physicality.
That he's an all time great, who has a game that can match Rafa's.
What do you think?

 

[Steve0904]

It's not so much a match-up issue so much as it is the lack of one.
Unlike Federer, Djokovic is an ATG who does not have a match-up issue with Nadal, so he can go toe-to-toe with him.
Nadal has not had this before with anyone.

Yeah, that's my point really. It's more "even" than it is a severe disadvantage to Nadal.

 

[Steve0904]

Another great post, Steve, but as firstservingman says below and I said in post 80 (which has been discussed over the past few pages), isn't it more of a lack of a match-up advantage? That Djoko can go toe to toe with Rafa when Rafa tries to impose his CC forehand pattern. That he can go toe to toe with him in terms of consistency and physicality.
That he's an all time great, who has a game that can match Rafa's.
What do you think?

That is my point. That, at best, it's a minor advantage to Novak. Probably more even than anything. It's nowhere near Nadal-Federer. I just pointed out some of the things that Djokovic does that can make Nadal uncomfortable and thus even it up. In contrast, Federer does none or barely any of what I just said because he can't. He doesn't have the 2HBH or the defense or the return. The only time Federer can rattle Nadal is on low bouncing courts, preferably indoors, and that has all to do with the surface, not the type of shots that Federer hits. Nadal is almost completely at ease when he plays Federer apart from the fact that he knows how great Federer can play. He just has the game to stunt that most of the time. Also, Nadal naturally has match up advantages on everyone with the combination of being an ATG and being a lefty.

 

[moonballs]

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.

Logically your argument suffers a fallacy. Nobody is ever forced to make a choice between beating Nadal or whoever 7:0 or have the overall lead. Naturally a tennis player at that position wants both.

It is really very simple: a record is a record. If everyone wants to achieve the record and everyone is given a fair chance to achieve it, then the only reason a record still stands is because it is really hard. You don't have any argument to dismiss it because I will simply ask you two questions: "don't you want to win every match?" And "If you think it is nothing why haven't you or anyone else broken it?"

That's why streaks in general is meaningful. Nadal's 10 years slam winning record is a streak too. So is CYGS. (Again you say it is nothing, is it desirable? If answer is yes, why don't you break it?)

Specifically to this thread, who has the upperhand prime vs prime, that 7:0 streak is the most relevant stat. 2010 was Nadal's prime.

This discussion is not about who is the greater player. NAdal is still by far the better player than Nole. It just at Nole's prime he cleared dominated Nadal as the 7:0 streak shows.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Logically your argument suffers a fallacy. Nobody is ever forced to make a choice between beating Nadal or whoever 7:0 or have the overall lead. Naturally a tennis player at that position wants both.

It is really very simple: a record is a record. If everyone wants to achieve the record and everyone is given a fair chance to achieve it, then the only reason a record still stands is because it is really hard. You don't have any argument to dismiss it because I will simply ask you two questions: "don't you want to win every match?" And "If you think it is nothing why haven't you or anyone else broken it?"

That's why streaks in general is meaningful. Nadal's 10 years slam winning record is a streak too. So is CYGS. (Again you say it is nothing, is it desirable? If answer is yes, why don't you break it?)

Specifically to this thread, who has the upperhand prime vs prime, that 7:0 streak is the most relevant stat. 2010 was Nadal's prime.

This discussion is not about who is the greater player. NAdal is still by far the better player than Nole. It just at Nole's prime he cleared dominated Nadal as the 7:0 streak shows.

Excellent poast.
Any record in professional sports is meaningful, just some more than others.
7-0 streak vs Nadal including three GS finals is incredible. One of Novak's best records of that type IMO.

 

[Deleted member 512391]

I don't see much of a match up edge for Djokovic on any surface tbh. A small one perhaps, but it's more down to who plays better on the day. Once the grass dries out in the 2nd week, the bounce is not so low as to suggest that Djokovic would have a decided edge on grass IMO. It's not super fast and low bouncing like the 90's or early 2000's anymore of course. There is different footwork perhaps required for grass, and the slice and serve probably work better on grass, but I don't see Nadal struggling to keep up with Djokovic if he's playing his best. Nadal has also incorporated the slice well against Novak recently, and that would work well on grass. A well playing Nadal has proven that he more than matches even a well playing Djokovic on any surface. I still think the edge goes to Nadal.

Actually, they played a match on grass when Nadal was at his absolute (grass) peak, while Djokovic was still on his way to become a player he is now and he pushed him to the limits. It was the final at Queens in 2008 (the same year Nadal won both Queens and Wimbledon, playing amazing tennis) which Nadal won 7:6 7:5. Djokovic was a break up in each set (and was actually serving to take the match into third set, at 5:4). And it was against Djokovic who got straight-setted in the 2nd round at Wimbledon that year by unseeded Safin (on his worst surface).
Playing against post-2011 Djokovic is a whole different story because he is mentally much stronger. He neutralizes Nadal's serve much better than anyone and his return is especially effective on grass, when he hits it to the middle of the court, because the ball skids off the surface and bounces very low, putting Nadal in defensive position more than he would like to. And it's not the surface where Nadal can position himself 3 meters behind the base line while waiting for the serve - he can do that on clay, on fast/slow hard court. Djokovic's better serve, much better return, flatter shots and great movement makes him extremely tough for Nadal on grass, in my opinion.

By the way, I think that first week at Wimbledon, when Nadal usually struggles, is more due to the transitional period from clay to grass. He needs more time because he is not a natural grass court player, his movement and his game overall is not designed for grass, but his athleticism makes him a great grass player. Normal or worn out grass makes a little difference (grass at Wimbledon before 2001 was in much worse condition during the final stages of the tournament than it is these days) - it is an argument invented by those who still live in 90s and who claim that Nadal would have never been as successful on grass in 90s as he is now.

 

[Steve0904]

Actually, they played a match on grass when Nadal was at his absolute (grass) peak, while Djokovic was still on his way to become a player he is now and he pushed him to the limits. It was the final at Queens in 2008 (the same year Nadal won both Queens and Wimbledon, playing amazing tennis) which Nadal won 7:6 7:5. Djokovic was a break up in each set (and was actually serving to take the match into third set, at 5:4). And it was against Djokovic who got straight-setted in the 2nd round at Wimbledon that year by unseeded Safin (on his worst surface).
Playing against post-2011 Djokovic is a whole different story because he is mentally much stronger. He neutralizes Nadal's serve much better than anyone and his return is especially effective on grass, when he hits it to the middle of the court, because the ball skids off the surface and bounces very low, putting Nadal in defensive position more than he would like to. And it's not the surface where Nadal can position himself 3 meters behind the base line while waiting for the serve - he can do that on clay, on fast/slow hard court. Djokovic's better serve, much better return, flatter shots and great movement makes him extremely tough for Nadal on grass, in my opinion.

By the way, I think that first week at Wimbledon, when Nadal usually struggles, is more due to the transitional period from clay to grass. He needs more time because he is not a natural grass court player, his movement and his game overall is not designed for grass, but his athleticism makes him a great grass player. Normal or worn out grass makes a little difference (grass at Wimbledon before 2001 was in much worse condition during the final stages of the tournament than it is these days) - it is an argument invented by those who still live in 90s and who claim that Nadal would have never been as successful on grass in 90s as he is now.

I don't think much can be drawn from one match in Queens that Nadal won in a close straights in 2008 to say that Nadal would struggle with Djokovic at Wimbledon since 2011. Unless you see that big a difference in Djokovic, but I don't. He's definitely better, but it's not like he lit the world on fire at Wimbledon in 2011 or any year since. I could say for example that the tennis he played at Wimbledon in 2012 was better than 2011, he just ended up facing a tougher opponent in a SF. In fact, in 2011 he lost a 6-1 set to Nadal himself, a set to Baghdatis, a set to Tomic, and a set to Tsonga. His result in 08 is not indicative of the tennis he was playing that year anyway because aside from that year he hasn't lost before the QF's in any year since before 07. That result is more bad luck considering he drew Safin (even in 08) who would make the SF's and lose to Federer, and not some "regular" 2nd round opponent.

As far as the match up goes, I just don't see a big edge for Novak. Generally, if Nadal uses the slice which would work great on grass as long as he didn't float too many, and his FH is working, particularly the DTL one, it has always caused Novak some problems. Djokovic's return would cause Nadal trouble for sure, but if it wasn't really good a large majority of the time it wouldn't get Nadal playing extreme levels of defense either. And as you know by now these guys don't generally win matches against each other with just the serve or the return. It would be mostly a baseline game and in that scenario I would favour Nadal at his peak on grass. And as far as Nadal's return goes, I think that would be fine. Nadal at his peak was dealing with Federer's serve pretty well. He would do fine against Djokovic whose serve is nowhere near Federer's albeit very good.

I agree with your second paragraph 100%.

 

[Deleted member 512391]

I don't think much can be drawn from one match in Queens that Nadal won in a close straights in 2008 to say that Nadal would struggle with Djokovic at Wimbledon since 2011. Unless you see that big a difference in Djokovic, but I don't. He's definitely better, but it's not like he lit the world on fire at Wimbledon in 2011 or any year since. In fact, in 2011 he lost a 6-1 set to Nadal himself, a set to Baghdatis, a set to Tomic, and a set to Tsonga.

As far as the match up goes, I just don't see a big edge for Novak. Generally, if Nadal uses the slice which would work great on grass as long as he didn't float too many, and his FH is working, particularly the DTL one, it has always caused Novak some problems. Djokovic's return would cause Nadal trouble for sure, but if it wasn't really good a large majority of the time it wouldn't get Nadal playing extreme levels of defense either. And as you know by now these guys don't generally win matches against each other with just the serve or the return. It would be mostly a baseline game and in that scenario I would favour Nadal at his peak on grass. And as far as Nadal's return goes, I think that would be fine. Nadal at his peak was dealing with Federer's serve pretty well. He would do fine against Djokovic who's serve is nowhere near Federer's albeit very good.

First of all, I haven't said that I see "a big edge for Novak", only a slight edge (three wins out of five matches, for example). That down-the-line forehand that Nadal uses with success against Djokovic everywhere else is not that successful on grass, mostly because he has less time to react when he faces a flat shot (which bounces low and skids off the grass). He still has that relatively long back swing and that take-back always requires some extra time. He has that time everywhere else, but not on grass.

And if you think that not much can be drawn from their Queens match (or their Wimbledon 2007 match), how did you get the idea that Nadal would have no trouble against Djokovic and would actually have the edge?

Also, you are making a big mistake by comparing Djokovic's matches against the field and his matches against Nadal. Player like Tomic (or Murray, for that matter), when he is on, will most probably trouble Djokovic more than Nadal on grass with his slices and a flat hitting. On the other hand, player like Rosol has troubled Nadal in all their matches, where Djokovic barely loses few games against him. It's a match-up issue which says nothing about eventual Nadal - Djokovic match.

 

[Chico]

^^^^ You two above are so wrong, I don't know where to begin, nor I intend to. Will only say, that this is ridiculous underrating of Novak from both of you.

 

[Chico]

LOL, the poll went from 23-11 in Novak's favor, to 27-30 for Nadal.

Nadal trolls with multiple accounts are working overtime. :roll:

It is not an accident that OP - a known Novak's hater, made it anonymous.

 

[Steve0904]

First of all, I haven't said that I see "a big edge for Novak", only a slight edge (three wins out of five matches, for example). That down-the-line forehand that Nadal uses with success against Djokovic everywhere else is not that successful on grass, mostly because he has less time to react when he faces a flat shot (which bounces low and skids off the grass). He still has that relatively long back swing and that take-back always requires some extra time. He has that time everywhere else, but not on grass.

And if you think that not much can be drawn from their Queens match (or their Wimbledon 2007 match), how did you get the idea that Nadal would have no trouble against Djokovic and would actually have the edge?

Also, you are making a big mistake by comparing Djokovic's matches against the field and his matches against Nadal. Player like Tomic (or Murray, for that matter), when he is on, will most probably trouble Djokovic more than Nadal on grass with his slices and a flat hitting. On the other hand, player like Rosol has troubled Nadal in all their matches, where Djokovic barely loses few games against him. It's a match-up issue which says nothing about eventual Nadal - Djokovic match.

No, I guess you haven't, but that's the feeling I'm getting from your posts. Sorry about that. As it is, you see 3 out of 5 matches for Djokovic, and I would say that I see 3 out of 5 going to Nadal.

And I didn't say Nadal would have no trouble. I said that Djokovic's return could trouble Nadal, but it is not a particularly decisive shot as a stand alone since most rallies between the 2 get back to neutral anyway. And then of course, Djokovic can try to implement his usual patterns that cause Nadal trouble, just as Nadal will try to implement his, but when Nadal's game is working it has caused even Novak trouble and sometimes he hasn't been able to stop it which means Nadal is winning the tactics battle. I don't see the surface as some sort of obstacle for Nadal. He's hit plenty of DTL FH's on grass before, and if we're talking peak Nadal then that shot is working regardless whether he's playing Novak or not.

I just watched the highlights from the Wimbledon 2011 Final and the first two points shown are FH DTL winners from Nadal. And that Nadal was very low on confidence and had no idea how to play in general against the "new" Djokovic due to the 4 defeats beforehand. Djokovic mostly won that Wimbledon match because he was high on confidence and firmly planted in Nadal's head at that point. If you remove the repeated defeats before that I think Nadal peak for peak has an edge on grass in a hypothetical match with no mental demons. That is not to say that he wouldn't trouble Nadal. I just feel like Nadal would come out on top.

And as to the field thing, well yes I get that, but I still think Nadal would edge a peak for peak match up on grass because Nadal at his very best gives Djokovic trouble even if Djokovic is playing his best. Those "field" stats are just facts that show Djokovic wasn't playing some godly form of tennis in general at Wimbledon in 2011.

I'm just saying that trying to use a match that Nadal won in a close straight sets at his 08 peak in Queens against a Djokovic that was actually playing well himself, and then extrapolating to a major and saying that Djokovic would have an edge has a lot of holes in it. I don't think much can be taken from that match, or any of their other ones for that matter. I just feel like Nadal takes it, even against Novak on grass. And let's face it, in a peak for peak situation with such tight margins between the players and very few grass courts on tour, a lot of it is down to feel, and Nadal has done enough to prove to me that peak for peak he could beat Novak on grass the majority of the time. A slight majority, but a majority nonetheless.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

LOL, the poll went from 23-11 in Novak's favor, to 27-30 for Nadal.

Nadal trolls with multiple accounts are working overtime. :roll:

It is not an accident that OP - a known Novak's hater, made it anonymous.

Actually it was
I regret not making it public, just forgot to!

 

[The_Order]

LOL, the poll went from 23-11 in Novak's favor, to 27-30 for Nadal.

Nadal trolls with multiple accounts are working overtime. :roll:

It is not an accident that OP - a known Novak's hater, made it anonymous.

Why don't you get a clue.

Nadal has beat Novak 9 times in majors and lost only 3.

Nadal also has the superior record against Roger in majors as well.

He's won twice as many majors.

He is clearly the better player when at his best.

 

[okdude1992]

Well 2011 Djokovic was certainly better than 2011 Nadal. That was Novak's peak.

So the question is whether Nadal produced any tennis rivaling that in 2008, 2010, 2012, or 2013. I'd say he has (at least in the last few slam meetings against Nole). But one could say 2012-present Djokovic hasn't reached the same level he did in 2011, and 2011 Djokovic is better than any version of Nadal. I'd understand that view as well.

 

[Bender]

Well 2011 Djokovic was certainly better than 2011 Nadal. That was Novak's peak.

So the question is whether Nadal produced any tennis rivaling that in 2008, 2010, 2012, or 2013. I'd say he has (at least in the last few slam meetings against Nole). But one could say 2012-present Djokovic hasn't reached the same level he did in 2011, and 2011 Djokovic is better than any version of Nadal. I'd understand that view as well.

I think there is no real way of knowing.

2011 Rafa was in his prime, but as many of us have mentioned before, Rafa's peaks are more sporadic. He had a great 2010, and had a predictable not-as-good 2011. Don't get me wrong, his results were still incredible, second only to Djokovic himself, but to be honest his level of play wasn't all that great. Even if Djokovic had lost every meeting in 2011, I would have been rather unimpressed by his level of play overall. The only match that was really impressive in my memory was his Wimbledon match against DelPo. In fact, I think his results for most of 2011 were quite like AO 2014 - great results on paper, but the level that took him there was far from great.

We also know that Djokovic doesn't have a matchup advantage, but rather has a lack of a matchup disadvantage, unlike most of the tour. Both players have the weapons and the capability to beat each other, only that Djokovic maximises what he's got at every meeting, while Rafa usually only brings everything to their slam meetings.

Imagine if this question was asked in 2009 and not 2014, after their classic clash in Madrid. We'd have said Rafa is better by far, which we now know is inaccurate at best. There are just too many aspects to consider, and all we can provide are our biases wrapped in a few observations that will only ever tell us part of (but never all of) the story of this matchup.

 

[moonballs]

How can you guys define peak only by results? In 2011 Novak won all their encounters that doesn't automatically mean Nadal was not in peak form. This was the year between Nadal's three slam year and his injury in June 2012. And his results playing anyone not named Djokovic were as good as 2010. If you say NADAL left the foot off the gas padel after his first three slam year, first it is uncharacteristic of him; second, as the losses mounted he would be focusing in turning the tide. Yet he got beaten 7 times in a row all in slams and masters finals.

The question is not a goat discussion. It is simply about who has an edge in the match up. You don't beat someone 7:0 throughout the whole year on all surfaces without a clear edge in the match up.

 

[forehand fan]

How can you guys define peak only by results? In 2011 Novak won all their encounters that doesn't automatically mean Nadal was not in peak form. This was the year between Nadal's three slam year and his injury in June 2012. And his results playing anyone not named Djokovic were as good as 2010. If you say NADAL left the foot off the gas padel after his first three slam year, first it is uncharacteristic of him; second, as the losses mounted he would be focusing in turning the tide. Yet he got beaten 7 times in a row all in slams and masters finals.

The question is not a goat discussion. It is simply about who has an edge in the match up. You don't beat someone 7:0 throughout the whole year on all surfaces without a clear edge in the match up.

how can you say djokovic was not in his peak before or after 2011? in 2013 if djokovic wins all his matches against nadal he has a similar year as 2011. or maybe you want to say djokovic was in his peak only in 2011? basically you have 1 year supporting your case.. every other year supports nadal. that's why you are clinging to 2011

 

[beast of mallorca]

How can you guys define peak only by results? In 2011 Novak won all their encounters that doesn't automatically mean Nadal was not in peak form. This was the year between Nadal's three slam year and his injury in June 2012. And his results playing anyone not named Djokovic were as good as 2010. If you say NADAL left the foot off the gas padel after his first three slam year, first it is uncharacteristic of him; second, as the losses mounted he would be focusing in turning the tide. Yet he got beaten 7 times in a row all in slams and masters finals.

The question is not a goat discussion. It is simply about who has an edge in the match up. You don't beat someone 7:0 throughout the whole year on all surfaces without a clear edge in the match up.

And he beat Djoker , 6 out of 7 times they played after that --at the bigger stages even (FO, USO). He turned it around since then. Are you saying that the peak Djoker suddenly plummeted to mediocrity? That's why it is pointless to talk about these dream scenarios.

The peak for peak talk is Useless anyway for any 2 players. It will never ever happen. All we can appreciate is the present Rafa vs the present Djoker. Or the present Fed and Murray. We'll see, no ?

 

[MichaelNadal]

how can you say djokovic was not in his peak before or after 2011? in 2013 if djokovic wins all his matches against nadal he has a similar year as 2011. or maybe you want to say djokovic was in his peak only in 2011? basically you have 1 year supporting your case.. every other year supports nadal. that's why you are clinging to 2011

 

[DRII]

How can you guys define peak only by results? In 2011 Novak won all their encounters that doesn't automatically mean Nadal was not in peak form. This was the year between Nadal's three slam year and his injury in June 2012. And his results playing anyone not named Djokovic were as good as 2010. If you say NADAL left the foot off the gas padel after his first three slam year, first it is uncharacteristic of him; second, as the losses mounted he would be focusing in turning the tide. Yet he got beaten 7 times in a row all in slams and masters finals.

The question is not a goat discussion. It is simply about who has an edge in the match up. You don't beat someone 7:0 throughout the whole year on all surfaces without a clear edge in the match up.

horrible lack of logic on your part!

Nadal rarely has two great years in a row, usually due to injury/burn-out. so your 'uncharacteristic' diatribe is greatly misguided...

 

[tudwell]

After last year's U.S. Open final, I won't bet against Nadal when these two play in a major. Djokovic is a fantastic player and always has a shot to win, but Nadal is a cut above.

 

[NatF]

After last year's U.S. Open final, I won't bet against Nadal when these two play in a major. Djokovic is a fantastic player and always has a shot to win, but Nadal is a cut above.

Yes - Nadal like Federer before him has seemingly mastered peaking at the slams. Djokovic has unfortunately not done this and mainly peaks in masters and Bejing

*might of been a cheap shot :lol:

 

[moonballs]

how can you say djokovic was not in his peak before or after 2011? in 2013 if djokovic wins all his matches against nadal he has a similar year as 2011. or maybe you want to say djokovic was in his peak only in 2011? basically you have 1 year supporting your case.. every other year supports nadal. that's why you are clinging to 2011

Before 2011 he was held back by his glutten allergy issue in long matches. After 2011 he has been in peak form. But I don't recall Nadal beating him 7:0 in 2013.

 

[moonballs]

horrible lack of logic on your part!

Nadal rarely has two great years in a row, usually due to injury/burn-out. so your 'uncharacteristic' diatribe is greatly misguided...

But there was no injury in 2011! His 2009 slump doesn't automatically say his 2011 slump was caused by injury. He played the AO2012 final without any health issues, and he also won the 2012 FO. Rafa has been very good at letting people know his injuries. Did he say anything about injury in 2011?

 

[MichaelNadal]

Yes - Nadal like Federer before him has seemingly mastered peaking at the slams. Djokovic has unfortunately not done this and mainly peaks in masters and Bejing

*might of been a cheap shot :lol:

Are you, like cco, and Miss Angie, inferring that he "majors in minors"? :twisted:

 

[Chico]

Yes - Nadal like Federer before him has seemingly mastered peaking at the slams. Djokovic has unfortunately not done this and mainly peaks in masters and Bejing

*might of been a cheap shot :lol:

Agreed, he didn't master peaking at this year's Wimbledon indeed. :roll:

So much Novak hate and underrating in this thread.

You know Fedal fans are scared and extremely butthurt when they agree with each other and join together in bashing Novak.

#DominanceSince2011

 

[Djokovic2011]

Are you, like cco, and Miss Angie, inferring that he "majors in minors"? :twisted:

Are you MN?

 

[NatF]

Are you, like cco, and Miss Angie, inferring that he "majors in minors"? :twisted:

I might be...Djokovic needs 10 majors or he's underperformed in my opinion.

Agreed, he didn't master peaking at this year's Wimbledon indeed. :roll:

So much Novak hate and underrating in this thread.

You know Fedal fans are scared and extremely butthurt when they agree with each other and join together in bashing Novak.

#DominanceSince2011

Just banter man, don't take me too seriously

Novak was awesome in the final of Wimbledon this year but didn't really light it up anywhere else - for whatever reason.

 

[Chanwan]

That is my point. That, at best, it's a minor advantage to Novak. Probably more even than anything. It's nowhere near Nadal-Federer. I just pointed out some of the things that Djokovic does that can make Nadal uncomfortable and thus even it up. In contrast, Federer does none or barely any of what I just said because he can't. He doesn't have the 2HBH or the defense or the return. The only time Federer can rattle Nadal is on low bouncing courts, preferably indoors, and that has all to do with the surface, not the type of shots that Federer hits. Nadal is almost completely at ease when he plays Federer apart from the fact that he knows how great Federer can play. He just has the game to stunt that most of the time. Also, Nadal naturally has match up advantages on everyone with the combination of being an ATG and being a lefty (with an unconventional game).

Yeah, we pretty much agree - just added the last bit in brackets

 

[NatF]

Yeah, we pretty much agree - just added the last bit in brackets

A minor match up advantage, yet more evidence Djokovic majors in minors :lol:

 

[MichaelNadal]

A minor match up advantage, yet more evidence Djokovic majors in minors :lol:

Wow, you came out and said it!

 

[Djokovic2011]

Wow, you came out and said it!

At least he's also majored at the WTF these past few years. That takes away some of the pain from his travelling up Minor Lane a bit too often since 2012. :wink:

 

[Blitzball]

The answer is clearly peak Davydenko. He would wipe the floor with both of them. And if he somehow got behind, he would simply polish his head and blind Nadjoker with the reflection of the sun off that beautiful bald scalp-- that is if we're assuming they'd be playing outdoors.

 

[BringBackSV]

At least he's also majored at the WTF these past few years. That takes away some of the pain from his travelling up Minor Lane a bit too often since 2012. :wink:

Not buying that you believe this.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Not buying that you believe this.

Why not BBSV? The WTF is a highly prestigious tournament to win and you'd better believe I'm delighted Novak's won it the last three years. It's not all about the Slams you know.

 

[The_Order]

Why not BBSV? The WTF is a highly prestigious tournament to win and you'd better believe I'm delighted Novak's won it the last three years. It's not all about the Slams you know.

Spoken like a true Novak fan. Of course it's not all about the slam for you, but even if we don't just count on the slams, Nadal has the masters record...