RaoKori; the rivalry

[George Turner]

Despite being polar opposites in terms of playing style, Raonic and Nishikori have remarkably similar careers

-One major final, in which they lost in straight sets.
-Three masters finals. Both lost to Djokovic twice and Nadal once. Apart from Kei's unfortunate retirement loss to Nadal in their Madrid final, these finals weren't close matches.
-68% career winning percentage
-Both have 8 wins against the big four. Raonic has played them 33 times in total, Nishikori 43 times.
-Both players have one major win over a big four player. Raonic 2016 Wimbledon vs Federer, Nishikori 2014 US open vs Djokovic
-Cracked the top 25 for the first time in 2011
-Raonic has a career high ranking of 3, Nishikori of 4. They both reached this peak at the age of 25
-Slid outside the top 20 last year as they suffered injury ravaged seasons.
-They are considered the most prominent members of the "lost gen"
-Raonic has reached 21 finals (8 wins) Nishikori 22 finals (11 wins)

Nishikori leads the H2H 5-2. However Raonic generally struggles against speedy players who can return well and move his slow body around the court, so Kei has the match up advantage.

In the exciting RaoKori rivalry who truly is the better player? And who do you prefer?

 

[SafinSucks]

Tokyo 2012 final, 3rd set, amazing stuff.

 

[Clay lover]

I don't think the latter is debatable. Raonic is sooooo boring.

 

[Bender]

Speed is a weapon, but Kei has achieved far more when you consider that he has fewer weapons and more injuries.

 

[George Turner]

Speed is a weapon, but Kei has achieved far more when you consider that he has fewer weapons and more injuries.

"Weapons" are sometimes over-rated. Compared to the big four Raonic has no backhand, no court coverage and no defensive game. Whatever weapons he has (big serve) it isn't enough to overcome these shortcomings when against the very best. It's hard to teach court coverage to a man built like Raonic and it's hard to teach him a good backhand when the shot just doesn't come naturally to him like it does to Murrovic.

I think both players have achieved close to as much as they could have given their talent levels.

 

[EdSWright]

One is manufactured in Japan, the other born in Japan.

 

[SpinToWin]

One is made in Japan, and the other is not a robot.

Right, the other is a servebot

 

[I Am Finnish]

I like their match up

 

[SpinToWin]

I like their match up

Sort of like those robotics fights that used to be a thing



"****!! Raondroid broke again!!!!"

 

[Yoneyama]

Nishikori I prefer for sure. Not a huge fan of him (has a nice backhand though!), but hes certainly better to watch than Raonic.

Raonic is literally a robot, and not the entertaining type.

 

[Purplemonster]

Both unlikeable personalities.

 

[Red Rick]

@George Turner could you add a poll?.

Nishi has the elusive Olympic medal

Raonic has the elusive Derp Face.


In any case, anybody who likes Raonic over Nishikori should be banned imo.

 

[chut]

Nishikori by far.

 

[SafinSucks]

Both unlikeable personalities.

Watch comedy shows then.
Tennis is all about the game.

 

[SinjinCooper]

Nishikori is everything that's wrong with modern tennis. One dimensional grindbot incapable of taking training and prep seriously enough to stay on the court.

Raonic has much bigger and better weapons, far more versatility, and a clear passion to improve.

Similar results, but Milos will pull away over time. He's simply more professional.

 

[Zebrev]

One of the best serves versus one of the best returns.

 

[Mainad]

-Both players have one major win over a big four player. Raonic 2016 Wimbledon vs Federer, Nishikori 2014 US open vs Djokovic.

Nishikori also beat Murray at 2016 US Open (aided by the infamous gong incident).

In the exciting RaoKori rivalry who truly is the better player? And who do you prefer?

In terms of results, Nishikori has 11 titles including 6 at 500 level whilst Raonic has 8 titles including 1 at 500 level. Raonic did beat Federer in 1 of his title matches whereas Nishikori never beat a Big 4 player in any of his title matches. He did however beat Raonic twice in title matches (both in Tokyo) whereas Raonic never beat Nishikori in any of his. Raonic may have had the higher peaks on occasion but overall advantage Nishikori IMO.

Playing style: Nishikori's ground game is more interesting to watch whereas Raonic's tends to suffer from serve-botulism. Advantage Kei again.

 

[underground]

Are we talking about the rivalry in terms of career achievements, H2H or number of withdrawals/retirements??

 

[clout]

Nishikori is everything that's wrong with modern tennis. One dimensional grindbot incapable of taking training and prep seriously enough to stay on the court.

Raonic has much bigger and better weapons, far more versatility, and a clear passion to improve.

Similar results, but Milos will pull away over time. He's simply more professional.

I'm Canadian but Milos and versatility should never be mentioned in the same sentence. Besides his serve, the rest of his game is subpar to slightly above average.

 

[clout]

Nishikori has way more game than Milos and he had the potential to win a slam or two. But the one thing Kei lacks at is what Milos is good at. And having all those injuries doesn't help either.

 

[Voriad]

-Both players have one major win over a big four player. Raonic 2016 Wimbledon vs Federer, Nishikori 2014 US open vs Djokovic

Nishi beat murray at the us open 2016

 

[Say Chi Sin Lo]

A rivalry in what, injuries/withdrawals/retirements

 

[Sudacafan]

Both cause me a mild form of anhedonia.

 

[Foot_Fault]

"Weapons" are sometimes over-rated. Compared to the big four Raonic has no backhand, no court coverage and no defensive game. Whatever weapons he has (big serve) it isn't enough to overcome these shortcomings when against the very best. It's hard to teach court coverage to a man built like Raonic and it's hard to teach him a good backhand when the shot just doesn't come naturally to him like it does to Murrovic.

I think both players have achieved close to as much as they could have given their talent levels.

Nishikori reached close to his talent levels? No way.

 

[chjtennis]

They are now competing for 'who's healthier' title which is a shame. They still have to try hard to match Cilic, who has achieved most from their generation.

 

[Meles]

Despite being polar opposites in terms of playing style, Raonic and Nishikori have remarkably similar careers

-One major final, in which they lost in straight sets.
-Three masters finals. Both lost to Djokovic twice and Nadal once. Apart from Kei's unfortunate retirement loss to Nadal in their Madrid final, these finals weren't close matches.
-68% career winning percentage
-Both have 8 wins against the big four. Raonic has played them 33 times in total, Nishikori 43 times.
-Both players have one major win over a big four player. Raonic 2016 Wimbledon vs Federer, Nishikori 2014 US open vs Djokovic
-Cracked the top 25 for the first time in 2011
-Raonic has a career high ranking of 3, Nishikori of 4. They both reached this peak at the age of 25
-Slid outside the top 20 last year as they suffered injury ravaged seasons.
-They are considered the most prominent members of the "lost gen"
-Raonic has reached 21 finals (8 wins) Nishikori 22 finals (11 wins)

Nishikori leads the H2H 5-2. However Raonic generally struggles against speedy players who can return well and move his slow body around the court, so Kei has the match up advantage.

In the exciting RaoKori rivalry who truly is the better player? And who do you prefer?

With all these Berdy threads and this one, TTW has gone Wedding Crashers where one attends funerals for action lol.

 

[Forehand_Slice]

Half a year later, nothing changed. Near even, with Kei slightly in front.

Raonic made a Masters SF, Nishikori a Masters Final.
Nishikori a 250 SF, Rao a 250 Final.

Nishikori is on a 7 Finals losing streak, Raonic on a 6 Finals losing streak.

Nishikori has 1 retirement and 2 withdraw.
Raonic has 2 withdraw and given 1 walkover.

 

[li0scc0]

"Weapons" are sometimes over-rated. Compared to the big four Raonic has no backhand, no court coverage and no defensive game. Whatever weapons he has (big serve) it isn't enough to overcome these shortcomings when against the very best. It's hard to teach court coverage to a man built like Raonic and it's hard to teach him a good backhand when the shot just doesn't come naturally to him like it does to Murrovic.

I think both players have achieved close to as much as they could have given their talent levels.

Raonic has overachieved. Considering the modern surfaces are painfully slow, yet a man with poor footwork, speed, volleys and backhand reached the top 5 is impressive.
Nishikori has everything but a serve, yet he's not disciplined enough for fitness and injury prevention.
It's not unlike Zivojinovic VS Wilander in a talent comparison.