Since 2011, RNadal No Longer The Best Of His Generation

[Deleted member 307496]

I don't get how. Nadal has 12 slams, Djokovic has 6 and Murray has 2.

 

[Smasher08]

overall I fail

Yes, unfortunately you do! :lol:

Would you like me to remind you what the Nads-Djok h2h is since 2011?

In fact would you like me to remind you what their h2h was during 2011??

Fact: day in and day out, Novak has been the player to beat from their generation since 2011.

To insist otherwise is Nadochistic denial.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Yes, unfortunately you do! :lol:

Would you like me to remind you what the Nads-Djok h2h is since 2011?

In fact would you like me to remind you what their h2h was during 2011??

Fact: day in and day out, Novak has been the player to beat from their generation since 2011.

To insist otherwise is Nadochistic denial.

No, insisting otherwise is logical. Nadal was simply a better player (in his prime) than either Novak or Andy on clay, meaning that he honed an entire surface and made it his own.

Novak honed plexicushion and improved on grass, clay and faster hard courts.

Murray has improved on everything besides clay since then, and (currently) is at a similar level as Novak on faster hardcourts, on a level below Novak on slow hardcourts and on a higher level than Novak on grass.

Nadal has gotten better on hardcourts, but unfortunately has declined on grass. His clay level has dropped too, but his recent results on slow hard show promise for the future.

Federer has declined in all aspects of the game but is still a threat on hardcourt IMO. He could take either Murray or Novak out at the US Open this year, and he also has a shot at Nadal too.

 

[Smasher08]

No, insisting otherwise is logical. Nadal was simply a better player (in his prime) than either Novak or Andy on clay, meaning that he honed an entire surface and made it his own.

Novak honed plexicushion and improved on grass, clay and faster hard courts.

Murray has improved on everything besides clay since then, and (currently) is at a similar level as Novak on faster hardcourts, on a level below Novak on slow hardcourts and on a higher level than Novak on grass.

Nadal has gotten better on hardcourts, but unfortunately has declined on grass. His clay level has dropped too, but his recent results on slow hard show promise for the future.

Federer has declined in all aspects of the game but is still a threat on hardcourt IMO. He could take either Murray or Novak out at the US Open this year, and he also has a shot at Nadal too.

We're no longer talking about "prime" or cumulative past accomplishments. That should be abundantly clear from reading the posts in this thread.

The point I keep making is simple:

Rankings don't lie. Novak has been the best player of that generation since 2011. The quality of his form has overtaken Nads generally, just about on clay as well. And Murray now holds 2 of the last 4 slams.

 

[jg153040]

You make fair points about their cumulative accomplishments. But I don't think you dispute the fact that, day in and day out, Nole is now the one to beat from that generation and Murray seems to be making his move.

AFAIK Tommy Haas is really the only one from Fed's generation who's still a factor at tournaments. But even then, The Hoss has yet to catch up to Fed.

I agree, Nole is better from 2011. Just saying that it doesn't matter. At the end only achievements will matter.

I mean Feds generation was better than him Until 2003.

I think even you would rather have Rafas trophy cabinet than Noles

 

[Omega_7000]

Rankings don't lie. Novak has been the best player of that generation since 2011. The quality of his form has overtaken Nads generally, just about on clay as well. And Murray now holds 2 of the last 4 slams.

True. Novak and Murray will be dominant in the foreseeable future...until a young gun comes along.

 

[Smasher08]

For those who still wish to revisionistically assert that RNadal was part of Federer's generation, take a gander:

One by one, Fred dismantled them and made them into nobodies. The same could have been said of RNadal until the end of 2010, but now Djoker and Mopey are the players to beat day in and day out for that generation.

 

[serengetisunset]

Nadal was the beneficiary of the post peak Fed and baby Novak era. He ceased to be a leader as soon as baby Novak grew up in 2011. Thanks to Federer who did the dirty work for him, he managed to win one slam in 2011 or else he would have gone slamless that year.

 

[Omega_7000]

Nadal was the beneficiary of the post peak Fed and baby Novak era. He ceased to be a leader as soon as baby Novak grew up in 2011. Thanks to Federer who did the dirty work for him, he managed to win one slam in 2011 or else he would have gone slamless that year.

True. Nadal at his peak was lucky to be in the void between baby Novak and past his prime old Fed.

 

[veroniquem]

Nadal is the best of his generation by a comfortable margin: 12 slams, 24 master titles, 57 titles overall. Djoko/Murray are great but they still don't come close. And so far, in 2013, Nadal has outperformed the other 2 as well (twice as many titles and finals).

 

[Omega_7000]

True. Nadal at his peak was lucky to be in the void between baby Novak and past his prime old Fed.

Correction. Nadal at his peak was lucky to win majors on hardcourt and grass in the void between baby Novak, Murray and past his prime old Fed.

 

[Agassifan]

Nadal won most of his slams in the weak era.

 

[Clarky21]

Nadal won most of his slams in the weak era.

Then what would you call Fed's era?

 

[Morj]

One thing Nadal fans are ridiculously stubborn about is that Nadal magically stopped playing at prime level immediately after 2010. That's a joke, 2011 is clearly part of his prime and it would actually have been the best year in his entire career if not for Novak.

In 2011 he reached more finals than 2010, showing that Nadal was playing at least at the same level he already was, if not higher. The only difference being that in 2011, he had to face prime Novak in each final. 2011 was the example of two players both meeting at their absolute peaks and one completely dominating the other.

 

[ledwix]

You're right Morj. Nadal fans should be proud that Nadal's prime has stretched all the way until about age 27 even though it began at 20 as a clay-courter who one might have been expected to slow down by 24/25. Federer had declined a lot by 27, and Nadal has declined a little as well. But he is still able to play 5 hour matches and win, and almost win a 6 hour match as well.

This whole peak/prime thing is fluid, as every player sees ups and downs. Federer had great success in 2009, but I think he played far better tennis in 2012 for instance. And Nadal had success in 2010 but played better in 2011 maybe.

 

[NatF]

Then what would you call Fed's era?

I think it was sarcastic? I assume so because Nadal and Federer played in the same era.

 

[Clarky21]

One thing Nadal fans are ridiculously stubborn about is that Nadal magically stopped playing at prime level immediately after 2010. That's a joke, 2011 is clearly part of his prime and it would actually have been the best year in his entire career if not for Novak.

In 2011 he reached more finals than 2010, showing that Nadal was playing at least at the same level he already was, if not higher. The only difference being that in 2011, he had to face prime Novak in each final. 2011 was the example of two players both meeting at their absolute peaks and one completely dominating the other.

BS. Nadal was not at his peak at any time in 2011. What you Nadal haters fail to realize is that prime or peak Nadal does not almost lose to 135th ranked Paulo Lorenzi on clay, does not go 5 sets against John Isner at RG, does not struggle with Pablo Andujar at RG, does not struggle against Ljub Job at RG, does not serve like Errani, does not turn into Carlos "Forehand Man" Moya at all times, does not consistently blow leads at every turn when he used to be a great front runner, etc... Keep telling yourself that 2011 was part of Nadal's prime/peak if you must, but anyone with 2 functioning eyes and who has followed his career at any length knows better.

 

[Clarky21]

You're right Morj. Nadal fans should be proud that Nadal's prime has stretched all the way until about age 27 even though it began at 20 as a clay-courter who one might have been expected to slow down by 24/25. Federer had declined a lot by 27, and Nadal has declined a little as well. But he is still able to play 5 hour matches and win, and almost win a 6 hour match as well.

This whole peak/prime thing is fluid, as every player sees ups and downs. Federer had great success in 2009, but I think he played far better tennis in 2012 for instance. And Nadal had success in 2010 but played better in 2011 maybe.

At no point in 2011 did Nadal play better than in 2010. That's rubbish, sorry.

 

[Fate Archer]

One thing Nadal fans are ridiculously stubborn about is that Nadal magically stopped playing at prime level immediately after 2010. That's a joke, 2011 is clearly part of his prime and it would actually have been the best year in his entire career if not for Novak.

In 2011 he reached more finals than 2010, showing that Nadal was playing at least at the same level he already was, if not higher. The only difference being that in 2011, he had to face prime Novak in each final. 2011 was the example of two players both meeting at their absolute peaks and one completely dominating the other.

Yes, quoted for truth.

 

[Morj]

BS. Nadal was not at his peak at any time in 2011. What you Nadal haters fail to realize is that prime or peak Nadal does not almost lose to 135th ranked Paulo Lorenzi on clay, does not go 5 sets against John Isner at RG, does not struggle with Pablo Andujar at RG, does not struggle against Ljub Job at RG, does not serve like Errani, does not turn into Carlos "Forehand Man" Moya at all times, does not consistently blow leads at every turn when he used to be a great front runner, etc... Keep telling yourself that 2011 was part of Nadal's prime/peak if you must, but anyone with 2 functioning eyes and who has followed his career at any length knows better.

I don't mean to come off as a Nadal hater, im just pointing out that statistically Nadal's 2011 would have been just as good, if not better than his 2010 if not for Djokovic. I will concede that he may not have been as invincible on clay as 2010, but that too could be a byproduct of Djokovic shaking him mentally.

Prime Djoko outplayed prime Nadal throughout 2011, thats a fact. But that was just one year, and Djoko's level clearly dropped after '11. Even a diehard Rafa fan should be able to accept that, even if only for one season, another player bested beat peak Nadal.

 

[Smasher08]

What a pathetic group of girls .....not one holds a candle to Rafa. Shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence .

Nice signature.

So . . . what does that make the gangly crybaby they used to beat up on?

 

[Smasher08]

Correction. Nadal at his peak was lucky to win majors on hardcourt and grass in the void between baby Novak, Murray and past his prime old Fed.

This. His small fringe of multiple accound wielding trolls have a lot of trouble realizing that Nads is essentially a surface specialist who, rankings wise, has spent virtually his entire career playing second fiddle to Fed and Djoker.

 

[Tennis Fanatic 070]

Suck it up, buttercup.

You're gonna pretend you're a Nadal fan again? I thought we were passed this.

 

[Smasher08]

For those who still wish to revisionistically assert that RNadal was part of Federer's generation, take a gander:

One by one, Fred dismantled them and made them into nobodies. The same could have been said of RNadal until the end of 2010, but now Djoker and Mopey are the players to beat day in and day out for that generation.

26 grand slams, so far, and still going -- 11 years after this ad was run. Not bad for a single generation.

And because it was spread out over 6 players, 5 of whom IIRC held the YE#1, that demonstrates a reasonably strong amount of depth.

Interestingly, Guga was able to beat the top two players of the previous generation in winning his MC/WTF -- one trophy that the best clay courter of the current generation has consistently failed to win, even when it was held on an outdoor hardcourt.

To contrast the current generation, they have now won 21 slams so far, divided among 4 players, two of whom failed to really go on a tear before age 24. Thus making this a comparatively weaker field than the previous generation.

The other thing to remember is that the current generation are now 26-27, meaning that they are post-physical prime. A next generation is just about due to start entering their prime and taking the previous current generation's place, clawing their first big wins over the next 12-18 months.

 

[m2nk2]

Btw, his name isn't RNadal, it's just Nadal. His firstname begins with an 'r' though.