1H-Backhand
New User
Nadal hands down
The last 9 slams - Fed 3 - Rafa 3 - Novak 3 - Who was the most hurt during this period in regards to the slam race?
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
Nadal is a pale shadow of himself in one area specifically: speed. His movement has deteriorated from his lofty heights. Djokovic still looks to have maintained his movement, but that won't last for more than a year or so. Don't ever think one year in terms of tennis age past 30 isn't significant.
Red Rick
Bionic Poster
Federer is obviously the big winner.
Nadal has it going for him that 9 Slams ago the AO was coming up and now RG is coming up, but he's gained no ground on Federer while Djokovic is there to stop him again
Djokovic has only lost time, but momentum is on his side. Him breaking even in the past 2 years is largely his own fault though.
Nadal has it going for him that 9 Slams ago the AO was coming up and now RG is coming up, but he's gained no ground on Federer while Djokovic is there to stop him again
Djokovic has only lost time, but momentum is on his side. Him breaking even in the past 2 years is largely his own fault though.
tennisfan2015
Hall of Fame
Spot on. If Novk was around Fedr would be at 17 and Novk at 18, now.
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
Djokovic was in the draw for 2017 AO, Wimbledon, and 2018 AO. He was there EVERY time.
tennisfan2015
Hall of Fame
That was an injured Novk. You know well that it was the case. He has not faced him.
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
His back was so bad he didn't even practice on the USO grounds in 2017, but went to McEnroe's Academy to practice. Luthi said after the Montreal final where he lost to Zverev, that Fed could barely move for the week following that match.
There is no way Fed was winning the 2017 USO with a bad back. He barely beat Tiafoe and Youzhny, he wasn't going to win that event.
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
He should've stayed home with Jelena then.
Pheasant
Legend
His form was terrible. I watched those matches. I think the grind in Montreal is where he got injured. He was serving 90 mph towrds the end of his match with Zverev. I really wished that he played the faster courts in Cincinnati instead. Had he done that, I think that everything ends differently, including his health. . But again, woulda coulda shoulda is at play.
tennisfan2015
Hall of Fame
He should have.... still the fact is Fedr cleaned up during this weak period like a scavenger.
Never mind, Nadl and Novk will get to 21 in the end.
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
In the race to the slam record, yes, percentage is useless. But for an analyis of their level, they're closer now than they were after RG 2016.
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
Lol, a scavenger. That's what Djokovic has done beating worn out Anderson, 1 slam wonder Delpo and washed up Nadal
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
Well they would be. You can't carry on winning 2 slams for someone's 1 slam forever. Percentages means if you have a 1 slam lead at 2 slams to 1, if the other guy wins 10 slams you now have to win 20. It means if you start off with a lead you have to keep dominating for the rest of your career to keep that
No one is going to go on about a player winning a certain percentages of another players slams apart from you. It's simply who has the most
Benjamin Rio
Professional
US Open 2017 if he hadn't been injuried would have been his. He lost a slam in that occasion.
Nadal_Django
Legend
Healthy, mentally fresh and Pepeless Djokovic wins 2017 and 2018 AO, and is a huge favorite for the 2017 WB and USO. With 3 out of 4 he will be on #18 right now, one more or at least equal with Federer. No way, he isn't the "biggest loser" of this period of time.
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
I sometimes forget that I have a couple of posters on my ignore list. When I saw this post of yours, I knew it had to be in response to someone else's post but their post never show up on my screen.
Benjamin Rio
Professional
Benjamin Rio
Professional
Thought you were a Stanimal fan
I's Nadal who is increasing his total by winning the french open without any competition.
Djokovic is winning everything with one of his best competition coming from someone who is 37 years.
Just like Novak cleaned up in the 2014-2016, 2018-2019 weak period.
Djokovic won during the weakest era and won the last 3 vs mentally fragile Nadal, injured Delpo, mug Anderson and geriatric ancienterer well past his best.Mate, Fedr won during the weak era and won the last 3 with fcuked up Novk around. That's a fact. Your interpretations can be shoved up yours
Night Slasher
Semi-Pro
Nadal was most hurt imo. First he lost the match that could significantly increase his chances to equal Roger's record, the Australian Open final in 2017. He also lost two matches to Novak that would help him come closer to Roger and keep Nole at the distance. He failed both times and those were some of the most important matches he's ever played. Judging by what was at the stake, he is the biggest "loser" among these three.
Rodja and Nole did great actually.
Rodja and Nole did great actually.
Enceladus
Legend
Interestingly, Nadal never won the GS tournament at a time, when he had 3 GS titles less than Federer. He never breaked a 3-Slam barrier. It was during Wimbledon 2005, then from Wimbledon 2014 to AO 2017, Wimbledon 2017, AO 2018 and now in the period since Wimbledon 2018. Adversity?
Nadal could have been with an overiew most successful player in the period from the beginning of 2017 to the present day, but Fedovic he prevented it.
Nadal could have been with an overiew most successful player in the period from the beginning of 2017 to the present day, but Fedovic he prevented it.
RaulRamirez
Legend
Your point will get derided by some, but that is true.
RaulRamirez
Legend
I think that both can be true.
To one way of thinking, Novak was hurt the most because at the point he won the 2016 FO, he looked like he was well on his way to his 5th YE#1 in 6 years, and was clearly the top player in the world. Given where he was, I think both Rafa and Roger have to be thrilled that they won as many as Novak of the last 10 majors.
I think percentage means a little something. A lead of 10-5 is greater than a lead of 17-12, which is greater than a lead of 20-15 - though the same in pure slam differential.
(And Rafa, from another standpoint, has been the most hurt because he has been in the running more times during this period.)
The Fedfather
Legend
When people say Nadal, do they not consider that it was a really good thing for Rafa that he was able to get back to good form when Djokovic's went down the drain? In 2015 and 2016 things were not looking bright for Rafa at all but he turned it around and, managed to win 3 more Slams. I distinctly remember how it was a really big thing that Fedal are back and people weren't taking their resurgence for granted. Now suddenly this period turned out the worst for Rafa, even though Djokovic spent most of it watching from the sidelines as his rivals pull away from him?
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Rafa achieved the most he could without Djokovic AND Federer.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
This.
It's one thing to lose slams, but to have them won by the chaser and the one you're chasing is a huge blow.
Benjamin Rio
Professional
True but he was very lucky to have won the US open in 2017 as he was not playing well in Montreal and Cincinnati.
You didn't understand the question. Given that the 3 one 3 each who has been hurt most in the slam race. If Rafa would have won the 2 finals, the question would not be valid.
Smasher08
Legend
Neat observation. Fed was clearly harmed the most imo, since he should have been a lock for:
- USO '17 -- but for a back injury in Montreal, he was riding the best wave of his career since '07 and given what happened to the draw that year, he would have been a lock to make it 6 in a row over Ralphie in the F
- SW19 '18 -- but for the wheels seemed to have fallen off his game after Rotterdam '18, he would have faced players he otherwise had been beating, and had an opportunity to lay a drubbing on a not yet in form Djoker
- USO '18 -- another huge opportunity wasted, although 2018erer clearly wasn't 2017erer
- AO '19 -- if Djoker hadn't won the previous two slams, would he have been as confident and lights-out clinical in the F?
- WTF '17 and '18 + TRS '17 and '18 -- further drawing a clear line between himself and the other two active GOAT contenders.
He could also be the holder of as many as 24 slams,
. . . Which brings us to the one other way it hurt Fed: he would by now also be more or less neck and neck with Connors for number of overall titles, with no-one betting against him to beat it.
#ouch #dammit #thatslife
MeatTornado
Talk Tennis Guru
USO 2018 was a wasted opportunity?
You think that Fed would have beaten Djokovic-Nishikori-Delpo had he gotten past Millman?
Smasher08
Legend
Absolutely -- the key word being opportunity.
Had he gotten past Millman, he most definitely would have had an opportunity to beat the rest.
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
Five of eight, given that he didn't win the US Open 2014. Or six of 10 if you want to go back to Wimbledon 2014.
MeatTornado
Talk Tennis Guru
So every slam he's lost since 1998 is a blown opportunity?
Smasher08
Legend
EloQuent
Legend
Roger - I mean, he's 85. Ridiculous to be winning and all bonus. Really it was just in place of (some of the) slams he should have won in the previous half decade.
Nadal - hard to say he should have won more. He won 2 on clay, as expected, but his HC performance wasn't top level. Where he was faced with a higher level (by Cilic, Delpo) he lost.
Djokovic - looking back, Djokovic should have been dominant for the past 4 years. His comeback was inspiring, but that fall from mid16-mid18 cost him.
Nadal - hard to say he should have won more. He won 2 on clay, as expected, but his HC performance wasn't top level. Where he was faced with a higher level (by Cilic, Delpo) he lost.
Djokovic - looking back, Djokovic should have been dominant for the past 4 years. His comeback was inspiring, but that fall from mid16-mid18 cost him.
Bobby Jr
G.O.A.T.
It isn't even debatable. Nadal has been hurt the most by far.
With over two more years on his body/career he has gotten no closer to Federer's total when he absolutely had every right to expect he would have. Moreso, every single major Djokovic wins hurts him vs Federer and vs Djokovic who it looking likely to catch and overtake him.
Your explanation of why Federer has been hurt the most is completely void of logic. By all rights he should have not been competitive with Nadal/Djokovic for the last 3-4 years at least - every single tournament he's won, or that they have not won (regardless of whoever else did) is to Federer's sole advantage in the slam race.
Holding his advantage of 3 over Nadal for the last 2 years will be looked back on in the future as the most crucial and unexpected period of Federer's career in relation to Nadal.
End. Of. Thread.
duaneeo
Legend
The 9 previous slams before 2017 AO - 2019 AO are 2014 USO - 2016 USO. Novak won 5 of those 9 previous slams.
The thread's title asks 'who was the most hurt'. The poll question asks 'who should have gotten more'. Almost two different questions.
Bobby Jr
G.O.A.T.
Muppet post here sorry. Slams only count in total terms and you can only bridge numbers by winning a slam.
Whether is was 20 > 17 > 15 or 30 >27 >25 the amount of majors available to play and win to catch up is exactly the same and just as hard to achieve with whatever time each has left on their career clock.
Bobby Jr
G.O.A.T.
The thread title is the thread title like a book title is the book title.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Nadal.
He failed twice to swing by two Majors vs his main rivals in the Majors race.
He failed twice to swing by two Majors vs his main rivals in the Majors race.
Bobby Jr
G.O.A.T.
This is devoid of any objectivity in relation to the other players. Every thing you say here could be said about the others too.. Nadal at 2017 AO, 2017 Wim, 2018 Wim, 2019 AO.... all squandered opportunities in the same fantasy logic universe you just employed in relation to Federer.
By how things looked after FO16, certainly Djokovic. Most people thought Fedal was done back then, and Djokovic seemed unstoppable. But it took Djokovic nearly 3 years and 3 more slams just to get back to Status Quo.
Now Djokovic will need the whole career of Edberg or Becker at age32, which is not impossible, but a really really big ask.
Now Djokovic will need the whole career of Edberg or Becker at age32, which is not impossible, but a really really big ask.
Last edited:
EloQuent
Legend
OTOH, just in terms of pure slam count - if Ned won AO twice then it would be 19-19 now, not 20-17.
Benjamin Rio
Professional
I am big Fed fan. Never he would have beaten the Djoker at the Us open last year.
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
Why is nine the relevant number? Just because it doubles the period in question doesn’t make it so, as it makes no sense to start a list of slams Djokovic won with one he didn’t win.
tennisfan2015
Hall of Fame
How do you define a weak era? List the most important parameters and explain how (comparatively) is it the weakest, including every other era since 1970's.
Any response under 5000 words is going into a rubbish bin and will place you on my ignore list. The time starts now! Go.
Plamen1234
Hall of Fame
This.I remember in 2016 seeing a lot of people saying how Federer is done winning Slams and how Djokovic is going to continue to win Slams and that he will pass Nadal and Federer in GS soon.3 years later he is still behind Nadal in GS.After RG 2016 he was only 2 Slams away from Nadal and given how the things were going on back then many expected that he is going to pass him very soon.
