Rafael Nadal out of ATP Madrid Masters.
- Thread starter Silverbullet96
- Start date
yes, 11>7 in slam matches, the biggest stage of tennis. No out of form or age reasons either, both guys same gen close in age. If you want to argue djokovic has a higher peak than nadal at rg then feel freeAh yes, the higher peak....the good ol eye test, because we all know its objective. I mean we all saw how 2011 went between them, right?I give you real numbers, you give me eye tests. Lol
Hitman
Bionic Poster
LOL - Yes, because they were always in form when they played. Nadal sucked at RG 2015, Djokovic came into W 2007 with an injured foot and had to pull out, Nadal has never even beaten Djokovic at AO, and got a legit full win over him at W. When 10 out of 18 matches, take place in Nadal's backyard, of course he is going to have the advantage. Now imagine only two matches took place at RG and 10 took place at AO....but yes, lets not. Nadal has the higher peak on clay, no question, but he doesn't have the higher peak on HC, and on grass at best he is even, and that despite Djokovic never losing a match to him at W when both were healthy.
And at the end of the day, if you all still have is 11-7, when I can throw numerous dominant records at you to which you have no real answer, then it says it all. Getting to the match is just as important as winning the match, it is funny how some people continue to confuse boxing which is direct H2H combat sport with a tournament based knock out event like tennis, when you don't know who you are playing in the big latter matches. And no, Nadal isn't the best big match player of all time, he has losing records in AO, W and YEC finals....the best big match player of all time is Sampras. Pete lost only one slam final from 93 all the way until he broke the slam record in 2000.
Nadal has higher peak and is better big match player compared to djokovic so he has his argument. It’s not all about piling up wins, context and quality of wins matters too.LOL - Yes, because they were always in form when they played. Nadal sucked at RG 2015, Djokovic came into W 2007 with an injured foot and had to pull out, Nadal has never even beaten Djokovic at AO, and got a legit full win over him at W. When 10 out of 18 matches, take place in Nadal's backyard, of course he is going to have the advantage. Now imagine only two matches took place at RG and 10 took place at AO....but yes, lets not. Nadal has the higher peak on clay, no question, but he doesn't have the higher peak on HC, and on grass at best he is even, and that despite Djokovic never losing a match to him at W when both were healthy.
And at the end of the day, if you all still have is 11-7, when I can throw numerous dominant records at you to which you have no real answer, then it says it all. Getting to the match is just as important as winning the match, it is funny how some people continue to confuse boxing which is direct H2H combat sport with a tournament based knock out event like tennis, when you don't know who you are playing in the big latter matches. And no, Nadal isn't the best big match player of all time, he has losing records in AO, W and YEC finals....the best big match player of all time is Sampras. Pete lost only one slam final from 93 all the way until he broke the slam record in 2000.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
So we are looking at subjective things again to go against objective records. Nadal's peak is not higher on HC. Who in their right mind thinks any version of Nadal on HC is going to be beating the level Djokovic unleashed on him at Doha 2016. And before you say that was not a slam, tough, we are talking peak level overall on each surface. No version of Nadal on HC is beating Djokovic AO 2019 final either.
So it seems we are done here, you have the subjective eye test, I have actual real numbers and stats. Enjoy your day.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
That depends on the surface. Higher peak on clay sure. Highest peak on any surface sure. Higher peak on HC and grass definitely not. Better big match player also not certain. Both are very good here.
vernonbc
Legend
Rafa beat him twice on the hard court of the USO. Plus Rafa has other hard court accomplishments that Djoke doesn't - like the Canada Cincinnati USO sweep for instance, or an Olympic gold medal.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Great and now? Does this mean that he has a higher peak? Fed also has accomplishments on clay that Rafa doesn’t, shall we make a case that his clay peak is higher?
nadal has higher level at canada and uso and overall has higher level in tennis (rg>>> anyone else).So we are looking at subjective things again to go against objective records. Nadal's peak is not higher on HC. Who in their right mind thinks any version of Nadal on HC is going to be beating the level Djokovic unleashed on him at Doha 2016. And before you say that was not a slam, tough, we are talking peak level overall on each surface. No version of Nadal on HC is beating Djokovic AO 2019 final either.
So it seems we are done here, you have the subjective eye test, I have actual real numbers and stats. Enjoy your day.
2008 Nadal isn’t comparable to the best djokovic there? Ok then. He’s better at the USO too. He’s simply a better player when both are at their best, evidenced by the 11>7 slam h2h.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Make them equal on grass then if you want. 2008 Nadal also gets a little overrated from time to time. On HC it is not close, and indoors forget about it. Slam H2H is 8-2 on Clay, 1-2 on grass, 2-3 on HC, so give them equally distributed matches (like 3 on grass, 3 on clay, 6 on HC maybe) and it will be pretty much equal.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Explain how higher level Nadal has a losing record against top 10 players on HC over the course of his career? How hilarious that the guy with the highest peak actually has a LOSING H2H against elite competition over the course of his whole career on the main playing surface. You can pick and choose events all you want, we are talking surface here, and as I said, you know, I know, and person selling the hotdogs around the corner knows, that NO VERSION of Nadal on HC is beating Djokovic's Doha 2016 level, or the level he produced in the closing stages of AO 2016 or even the AO 2019 final. So what are you trying to hang onto here? Are we meant to go through every single weekly event to decide who peaked higher than who? LOL
Again the fact you need to resort to subjective points, basically your opinion to keep this conversation afloat should be your first major red flag.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
First of all you should quote me if you address a post to me otherwise I cannot respond if I don’t see it by chance. Second I never said that Nadal can definitely not win against Djokovic on HC in individual matches, I said his peak level on HC is definitely not higher than Djoko’s so the only thing you pointed out is that you didn’t understand my post.
HCs play differently just as different surfaces do. if we use your logic, Nadal at rg peaked higher than anyone so has highest peak of any player. Fact remains, nadal dominated djokovic on the biggest stage so he has his argument as his peak level is higher
Do you know what the word peak means? You’re a djokovic fanatic so probably not, but it isn’t referring to their whole careers
Last edited:
We don’t know that. Peak Nadal is close to djokovic in Australia (see 2012) and Wimbledon. uso Nadal has the edge. OTOH djokovic would lose 10/10 matches to peak Nadal at rg so he will never dominate him on the biggest stage. Djokovic better at keeping fit and inflating his stats, Nadal better at slams vs main rivals
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Peaking at one tournament doesn't mean you are overall greater. You do realize we have almost 11 months of events, yes?
Fact also remains, Nadal has failed to win a single match in Australia, and hasn't won a full completed match against Djokovic in Wimbledon, lost both completed matches. So yeah, that fact also remains. I admire how hard you are trying, despite digging yourself into this hole.
having a higher peak in tennis makes you a better player so yea it does count. What hole? Nadal has highest peak out the two (rg) Higher peak at USO and very close at Wimbledon. Only in australia does djokovic have the clear advantage even though 2012 was as close as it gets. fact remains, nadal has higher peak at slams and is the better big game player between the two. 11>7, no matter how many challenger level slams djokovic accumulates
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Having a higher peak in tennis makes you better? Then why does he have a losing H2H against top 10 players on HC over the course of his career? Why does the almighty with the higher peak suck that much against elite competition on the main playing surface, a less than 50 percent strike rate. You think because he did it at PC that makes him the greatest everywhere. LOL
As I said again, you are giving me subjective eye test opinions to say why you think Nadal is greater, I am giving you numerous records to objectively smash all that.
11>7 slam h2h including leading at 2 slams isnt eye test it’s verifiable fact. Nadal peaked higher than djokovic at the slams and did better on the big stage, that matters, not just bean counting.
wins over top 10, useless stats like this tell us nothing, that can include guys like Casper ruud and cam Norrie. Nadal has best record over big 3 which is his main claim to being GOAT along with his 22 slams and highest peak.
Legend of Borg
G.O.A.T.
Yea I'm gonna sit this one out.
ScentOfDefeat
G.O.A.T.
I solemnly (and half-jokingly) announced a few months ago that having a child would be the nail in the coffin for Nadal's career.
Now I'm starting to think it makes sense. His procrastination when it came to having a family makes even more sense now, as he doesn't seem to (like the other two members of the big three) draw strength, but rather stress, from the new situation in his life.
If you think about it, it's the only thing that really changed recently. He's always had injuries. Heck, numbing the foot was presented as a definitive solution for him and things were looking very promising. I think he just doesn't have the drive anymore, which is understandable.
Now I'm starting to think it makes sense. His procrastination when it came to having a family makes even more sense now, as he doesn't seem to (like the other two members of the big three) draw strength, but rather stress, from the new situation in his life.
If you think about it, it's the only thing that really changed recently. He's always had injuries. Heck, numbing the foot was presented as a definitive solution for him and things were looking very promising. I think he just doesn't have the drive anymore, which is understandable.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Nope, Nadal did not peak higher. He has a losing record at AO and W against Djokovic, you know full well that is a verifiable fact. Nadal has case only at RG and USO. That makes it 2-2 in who is better, I like how you just horde the clearly clay skew numbers with everything else to show how he dominated him at the slams...
Dude, Nadal has a LOSING H2H against Djokovic at AO and W, what warped reality does that mean Nadal peaked higher at the slam, when at half the slams he has not even won a single completed match? LOL. So your highest peak is just your subjective eye test opinion, which you are entitled to.
Wins over top 10 are useless because includes guys like Ruud and Norrie...so you're telling that despite having such guys around, Nadal still has a losing record against top 10 players on the main playing surface? LOL - You know you just made him look even worse.
Bottom line, Djokovic - More weeks at number one, more year ending number one, more YEC titles, more masters titles, NCYGS, Double career golden masters, winning H2H against all main rivals including Nadal, a 16-13 overall winning H2H against Nadal in finals across all levels, beaten Nadal in all four slams, dethroned Nadal as defending champion at RG twice, W and USO with Nadal failing to do it back, more top 10 wins, more top 5 wins, more top 3 wins, more titles overall, higher winning percentage....peaked higher on HC, and since we are being subjective as that is all you have left, Djokovic peaked higher on grass also with 7 Wimbledon titles....so yeah, you can have 11-7, but when Djokovic is waiting in W finals and Nadal is losing to scrubs outside the 100, and is waiting in AO finals, but getting taken out in first round by Verdasco in 2016 and dethroned as champion by McDonalds in the second round, what is Djokovic going to do?
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Honestly, he doesn't have anything left to prove to anyone. His legacy is set in stone.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
If people are penalizing Federer for once being 16-1 in slams vs Djokovic, I believe Nadal should be penalized as well.
He was actually in a better position to stop Djokovic than Federer was since he is actually a direct contemporary of Djokovic. At one point, the slam count was 14-6 in Nadal's favor. Yes, he stopped Djokovic at RG repeatedly, but he needed to do much better than that when there were 3 more slams left on the table at which Djokovic was always a strong favorite.
He was actually in a better position to stop Djokovic than Federer was since he is actually a direct contemporary of Djokovic. At one point, the slam count was 14-6 in Nadal's favor. Yes, he stopped Djokovic at RG repeatedly, but he needed to do much better than that when there were 3 more slams left on the table at which Djokovic was always a strong favorite.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Or maybe try not to get so defensive about something that seems to be obvious to some of us but not to you. You act like the fact that his confidence is centered around his success on clay is some kind of a negative. All of the big 3's confidence is somewhat built on their pet Slams. His is just more so at RG. This is clear when you see he's won 8 Slams outside of his pet Slam and they've both won 12.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
What do u know about Bayleigh? LolIt's all about Karma. Last year Novak was banned from 2 mayors and 6 masters. Rafa was cashing in big titles in the first 6 months without his biggest rival . Nadal fans were toxic in celebrating the demise and deportation from Australia and the whole North America swing. I told you all back then that Karma will balance the events out. Now Novak will probably win Wimbledon if he stays healthy and Rafa will win another major this year. Balance has been restored to the universe.
Djokovic_is_the_best#1
Bionic Poster
This is very true. Well said. Nadal didn’t do enough off clay to stop Djokovic becoming the GOAT. Fed has the age excuse to some extend to be fair but not Rafa
Djokovic_is_the_best#1
Bionic Poster
Yeah true. He’s cemented himself in most people’s eyes as the 2nd greatest player of all time. He’s had a magic career.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Absolutely. Well deserved icon of the game.
jl809
Legend
Edit: posted the wrong comment on the wrong thread. Here’s the one I meant to post here afterwards…
I think the biggest issue for Nadal is honestly the seeding. I genuinely wouldn’t be surprised if he won RG with absolutely no warmup tournament, but he would need a good draw to do so, and what these injuries have done is land him in a situation where he could be in a gruelling war from the 3rd round onwards and have to go through Djoker and Alcaraz B2B. That will make the lack of prep 1000000x worse as a problem
I think the biggest issue for Nadal is honestly the seeding. I genuinely wouldn’t be surprised if he won RG with absolutely no warmup tournament, but he would need a good draw to do so, and what these injuries have done is land him in a situation where he could be in a gruelling war from the 3rd round onwards and have to go through Djoker and Alcaraz B2B. That will make the lack of prep 1000000x worse as a problem
Last edited:
Dude you have to be trolling here. Nadal at rg played at higher level than anyone in history, therefore he peaked higher. He also peaked higher at uso. Never said he was better at ao/w but he’s very close . He was better in big matches too with 11>7 slams h2h, indisputable. Djokovic has better overall stats but Nadal/fed have higher peak level, their body failed them which is a point to djokovic but it all countsNope, Nadal did not peak higher. He has a losing record at AO and W against Djokovic, you know full well that is a verifiable fact. Nadal has case only at RG and USO. That makes it 2-2 in who is better, I like how you just horde the clearly clay skew numbers with everything else to show how he dominated him at the slams...
Dude, Nadal has a LOSING H2H against Djokovic at AO and W, what warped reality does that mean Nadal peaked higher at the slam, when at half the slams he has not even won a single completed match? LOL. So your highest peak is just your subjective eye test opinion, which you are entitled to.
Wins over top 10 are useless because includes guys like Ruud and Norrie...so you're telling that despite having such guys around, Nadal still has a losing record against top 10 players on the main playing surface? LOL - You know you just made him look even worse.
Bottom line, Djokovic - More weeks at number one, more year ending number one, more YEC titles, more masters titles, NCYGS, Double career golden masters, winning H2H against all main rivals including Nadal, a 16-13 overall winning H2H against Nadal in finals across all levels, beaten Nadal in all four slams, dethroned Nadal as defending champion at RG twice, W and USO with Nadal failing to do it back, more top 10 wins, more top 5 wins, more top 3 wins, more titles overall, higher winning percentage....peaked higher on HC, and since we are being subjective as that is all you have left, Djokovic peaked higher on grass also with 7 Wimbledon titles....so yeah, you can have 11-7, but when Djokovic is waiting in W finals and Nadal is losing to scrubs outside the 100, and is waiting in AO finals, but getting taken out in first round by Verdasco in 2016 and dethroned as champion by McDonalds in the second round, what is Djokovic going to do?
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Sorry the bit in bold made me spit on my green tea, you're funny. I like that, I like that a lot. I've always liked that about you.
D
Deleted member 758560
Guest
youre a funny guy sully i like you, that s why im gonna kill you last.. beckerserve, hitman?
RF-18
Talk Tennis Guru
13 HC slams vs 6, 7 wimbledons vs 2. 7 ATP finals. Record weeks at #1, record 7 time year end #1s, most masters in history, more career titles, won every tier 1 event multiple times, list goes on and on. He has smashed almost any tennis record. Yet you are talking Nadal peaked higher cause of one or two events. Roflmao. Cherry picking at its finest.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
youre a funny guy sully i like you, that s why im gonna kill you last.. beckerserve, hitman?
Hehe
D
Deleted member 758560
Guest
Hitman
Bionic Poster
none of the stats you listed has anything to do with highest playing level. When both guys met on the biggest stage, Nadal won 11/18 matches that’s a fact. He has higher peak at 2/4 slams and at any single event
Subway Tennis
G.O.A.T.
I’m a Nadal fan and I absolutely agree with you. Rafa has done the impossible time and time again, so this sounds harsh but he could and should have done more. 2012 AO and 2018 Wimbledon stand out for me. Great matches that could have been in the books for Nadal. Oh well.
ADuck
Legend
I'm not being defensive, I'm annoyed at you making misleading statements to suit your argument.
You're now misrepresenting what I was arguing against:
Rafa is more than capable of winning slams outside clay if he is fit and healthy, regardless of holding RG, thats proven by 2017 and 2022 AO.
Any players confidence, including Rafa's, is centred around winning anywhere. Rafa just happens to win more on clay, therefore he often gains confidence on clay. Whether this confidence translates to other surfaces is difficult to prove. All we know is that, logically, if Rafa is easily the best ever on clay, some of that skill should translate to other surfaces too considering in the grand scheme of things the surfaces aren't that different.
Confidence is important too, but this tired narrative that tennis is all about confidence is honestly annoying. Tennis is first and foremost about skill, and Rafa's ability to win on all surfaces is first and foremost about skill. Confidence is perhaps the extra ingredient needed to get over Fedovic in non-clay slams, but that confidence is more likely to be be gained by beating them on non-clay surfaces throughout the season, not clay.
Last edited:
AgassiSuperSlam11
Hall of Fame
Interesting how this went off topic rather quickly. Both the NY Times and CNN are both reporting that Nadal may miss the entire clay season which includes the FO. It appears my post last year which got me reported for using the word degenerative (common term used in medical and legal jargon-not derogatory) is accurate.
This means he should consider one last true run at a 3rd Wimbledon title by doing a Grass 250/500 and then Wimbledon. He can play Queens or Mallorca (backyard) and then Wimbledon. Of course, if he accomplishes it he can brag that he is the only player in the Open Era to win three or more slams on each surface. Even if he fails I always respect an athlete for trying to make history. Physically it would be difficult to see him play both slams if his Psoas muscle condition isn't improving much. The radiating pain hurts multiple body parts as lower back, pelvis, hips, and gluteus maximus (won't use proper language as it may get me reported again for obscene language).
This means he should consider one last true run at a 3rd Wimbledon title by doing a Grass 250/500 and then Wimbledon. He can play Queens or Mallorca (backyard) and then Wimbledon. Of course, if he accomplishes it he can brag that he is the only player in the Open Era to win three or more slams on each surface. Even if he fails I always respect an athlete for trying to make history. Physically it would be difficult to see him play both slams if his Psoas muscle condition isn't improving much. The radiating pain hurts multiple body parts as lower back, pelvis, hips, and gluteus maximus (won't use proper language as it may get me reported again for obscene language).
Phenomenal
Hall of Fame
Idk why is it so difficult to understand for second type guys you are described who not buying it
Ridicilous take for those, contrary to simple logic.After missing almost whole clay season Nadal winning RG or not is completely different thing. The truth is he is unable to play right now and explained it. So winning or losing at RG is irrelevant to prove a point. If he recovers and gets into form by the start of RG it will be just a recovery won't prove any point. Why would he want to miss tournaments and had zero preparation also worse seedings.
Only real explanation for the guys who thinks the second way they simply don't want him to play RG.
AgassiSuperSlam11
Hall of Fame
For those who are dubious one only needs to see that this is the first time in over 900 weeks he dropped outside of the Top 10. It's quite conspicuous to any rational and objective individual that he has multiple physical challenges at this point. I don't think he is going to Rome either. His body isn't responding to various treatments and his best hope might be to play the tune-up Lyon tournament then FO. However, even that is wishful thinking.
_phantom
Hall of Fame
Nadal doesn't play any tournament in the week preceding a slam so Mallorca or Lyon is off the table.
Mike Sams
G.O.A.T.
Nadal likely would've won RG 2015 if not for Djokovic.
AgassiSuperSlam11
Hall of Fame
This has been definitely the case for his career but if he is coming close to retirement, he might consider playing Mallorca as a swan song in his home turf. The proximity of Lyon and Paris makes it a little more feasible than what Djokovic did in 2021 when he played Belgrade and Paris back-to-back (and won both). Of course, as I said in the prior post this is likely "wishful thinking" as he hasn't shown sufficient improvement to return to the tour.
Similar threads
