Was Nadal unlucky to have a precociously early grass prime/peak?

[jl809]

Nadal’s IRL grass career was a weird thing where he entered his prime aged 20 and left it aged 25. This was followed by 5 years of the kind of form you’d expect from a newcomer to the surface, but in his mid-late 20s, while he was still in his clay/HC prime.

If his career had followed a more “traditional” trajectory - I.e. he’d been relatively **** / meh on grass from 05-09 (like Djokovic and kinda Murray) instead, then become good in his early/mid 20s - would his career on grass be looked upon more favourably?

He probably wouldn’t have those long “last time beating..” records which the Djokobots frequently quote, and wouldn’t have had to face prime/peak Fed in 3 Wimbledon finals, which neither Djoker or Murray ever had to do IRL too.

So was Grassdal unlucky to be a child star who burned out early, like the Amanda Bynes of grass tennis?

 

[BauerAlmeida]

2012 and 2013 would be good opportunities for him to win. I don't think he beats Djokovic in 2014 and 2015. In 2016 maybe he can beat Murray but he simply wasn't playing great at the time anywhere to say it was strictly a grass thing. In 2017 he was back playing good tennis but wasn't beating Federer if he lost in 4 in 2019. In 2018 he was playing good too but lost a close match he had many opportunities in.

People love to bring up how Djokovic faced a declined version of Federer at Wimbledon, but Nadal failed to beat him in 2019 and it wasn't super close, so I don't see how he beats 2014 and 2015 Federer.


Nadal was in great form in 2007 and that form would have won him many other Wimbledons, but that's it. In 2006 he had an easy draw. If Djokovic's draw in 2021 and 2022 were easy, so was Nadal's in 2006. In 2011 he was playing very good but lost convincingly to Djokovic. In 2008 and 2010 he won and in 2012 he started the decline. 2007 is the year he was playing really good tennis on grass and went home emptyhanded.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Not as much as Becker.

(The man got to play his fanboy in a slam final, that alone cancels any and all bad luck he might've possibly have ever experienced in the whole multiverse...)

 

[The Blond Blur]

 

[jm1980]

Nadal always had his struggles on grass throughout his career. Even when he reached the late rounds, he would have his fair share of tough matches in early rounds when the grass was still slick:

2006 (F): 2R vs Robert Kendrick: 6-7, 3-6, 7-6, 7-5, 6-4
2007 (F): 2R vs Soderling: 6-4, 6-4, 6-7, 4-6, 7-5; 3R vs Youzhny: 4-6, 3-6, 6-1, 6-2, 6-2
2008 (W): -
2010 (W): 2R vs Haase: 5-7, 6-2, 3-6, 6-0, 6-3; 3R vs Petzschner: 6-4, 4-6, 6-7, 6-2, 6-3

As the tournament progresses, the grass gets worn down and the court slows down more and more, enabling Nadal to play his game with greater efficacy

The 2012-17 period was a cosmic correction of sorts, where Nadal actually lost the matches he should have lost earlier:

 

[Milanez82]

Nadal always had his struggles on grass throughout his career. Even when he reached the late rounds, he would have his fair share of tough matches in early rounds when the grass was still slick:

2006 (F): 2R vs Robert Kendrick: 6-7, 3-6, 7-6, 7-5, 6-4
2007 (F): 2R vs Soderling: 6-4, 6-4, 6-7, 4-6, 7-5; 3R vs Youzhny: 4-6, 3-6, 6-1, 6-2, 6-2
2008 (W): -
2010 (W): 2R vs Haase: 5-7, 6-2, 3-6, 6-0, 6-3; 3R vs Petzschner: 6-4, 4-6, 6-7, 6-2, 6-3

As the tournament progresses, the grass gets worn down and the court slows down more and more, enabling Nadal to play his game with greater efficacy

The 2012-17 period was a cosmic correction of sorts, where Nadal actually lost the matches he should have lost

Spot on. Great insight.

If Nadal faced same players in 06-07-08 that dumped him out in later years he is likely to lose in those years as well since his style can't do better(Rosol putting on that 5th set performance beats any version of Nadal at Wimbledon). Kyrgios and Muller were also top notch. I think Kyrgios served something like 37 consecutive 1st serves?

In any case, 2 slams and 3 finals are still a great achievement.

 

[Kralingen]

Way I see it Federer only stole one Wimbledon from him (2007) and Djokovic stole two (11/18). Injury in 09 stole a 4th. Think 06 Nadal would lose to most other Wimby winning levels

 

[Milanez82]

Way I see it Federer only stole one Wimbledon from him (2007) and Djokovic stole two (11/18). Injury in 09 stole a 4th. Think 06 Nadal would lose to most other Wimby winning levels

Better player won in 07

 

[Tennfan123]

Those are normal years to have your prime.

 

[TTMR]

Nadal learns players and is more likely to be abruptly overpowered and beaten by a guy he's never played before on the slick early grass.

Once Nadal learns a player it becomes a lot harder for said player. How did Rosol do in 2013? And if Nadal can get lackeys or nobody on a hot streak during the first week, he's golden the rest of the way (until he runs into Djokovic or 97 sq in Fed).

 

[TearTheRoofOff]

No but he was unlucky to have so many career ending injuries. Oh, what could have been.

 

[Nole_King]

Nadal always had his struggles on grass throughout his career. Even when he reached the late rounds, he would have his fair share of tough matches in early rounds when the grass was still slick:

2006 (F): 2R vs Robert Kendrick: 6-7, 3-6, 7-6, 7-5, 6-4
2007 (F): 2R vs Soderling: 6-4, 6-4, 6-7, 4-6, 7-5; 3R vs Youzhny: 4-6, 3-6, 6-1, 6-2, 6-2
2008 (W): -
2010 (W): 2R vs Haase: 5-7, 6-2, 3-6, 6-0, 6-3; 3R vs Petzschner: 6-4, 4-6, 6-7, 6-2, 6-3

As the tournament progresses, the grass gets worn down and the court slows down more and more, enabling Nadal to play his game with greater efficacy

The 2012-17 period was a cosmic correction of sorts, where Nadal actually lost the matches he should have lost earlier:

This. And the fact that Nadal often takes earlier rounds to build up momentum. I was always curious to see what would have happened if Nadal Federer (or for that matter Djokovic Federer) played on first day of the championship.

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

an all-time classic... my favorite gif ever ❤

 

[GabeT]

This is like asking whether Nadal would have won more had he played better. The answer is probably yes but the reality is that his level dropped

No reason to compare him with Novak who is on a completely different level. Like comparing Murray with Fed at W.

 

[jl809]

This is like asking whether Nadal would have won more had he played better. The answer is probably yes but the reality is that his level dropped

No reason to compare him with Novak who is on a completely different level. Like comparing Murray with Fed at W.

Not like that at all lol, it’s a question about timing. I’m only using Djoker as a reference point for the progression of level over time as it was more “traditional” development

Djokovic’s: early round losses in young years > Wimbledon finals and wins in mid/late 20s > more Wimbledon finals and wins in postprime (at a lower level than in his mid-late 20s)

We can add Federer in here too:

Federer: early round losses in young years > Wimbledon finals and wins in mid/late 20s > more Wimbledon finals and wins in postprime (at a lower level than in his mid-late 20s)

But then…

Nadal’s IRL: Wimbledon finals and wins in young years > early round losses in mid/late 20s > Wimbledon SFs /deep runs in his postprime (at a higher level than in his mid/late 20s)

My question was about it Nadal would have been better received if he’d had a progression like Djokovic’s.

 

[GabeT]

Not like that at all lol, it’s a question about timing. I’m only using Djoker as a reference point for the progression of level over time as it was more “traditional” development

Djokovic’s: early round losses in young years > Wimbledon finals and wins in mid/late 20s > more Wimbledon finals and wins in postprime (at a lower level than in his mid-late 20s)

We can add Federer in here too:

Federer: early round losses in young years > Wimbledon finals and wins in mid/late 20s > more Wimbledon finals and wins in postprime (at a lower level than in his mid-late 20s)

But then…

Nadal’s IRL: Wimbledon finals and wins in young years > early round losses in mid/late 20s > Wimbledon SFs /deep runs in his postprime (at a higher level than in his mid/late 20s)

My question was about it Nadal would have been better received if he’d had a progression like Djokovic’s.

But in the context of your post timing IS level. For Nadal to have had a more “traditional” arc he would have had to play better in years where IRL he didn’t.

 

[abmk]

If Djokovic's draw in 2021 and 2022 were easy, so was Nadal's in 2006.

Erm, what?
Nadal's draw wasn't great before the final, but Nadal in Wim 06 faced peak fed in the final. Played 2 excellent sets and 1 decent set.

Wim 06 Nadal > Wim 19/21/22 Djoko

Put Wim 06 Nadal in djoko's place and he wins all of those 3.

Put Djoko 19/21/22 vs fed Wim 06 and he gets beaten badly.

 

[jl809]

But in the context of your post timing IS level. For Nadal to have had a more “traditional” arc he would have had to play better in years where IRL he didn’t.

Exactly, and worse in years where he did play well IRL

 

[GabeT]

Exactly, and worse in years where he did play well IRL

Right, but since Nadal had more years that he played “badly” vs years he played well in effect you are asking if he would have won more if he had played more as a whole.
And this applies to all players, it’s not limited to Nadal at Wb

 

[jl809]

Right, but since Nadal had more years that he played “badly” vs years he played well in effect you are asking if he would have won more if he had played more as a whole.
And this applies to all players, it’s not limited to Nadal at Wb

2006-2011 - played well = 5 years (injured in 09)
2012-2017 - played badly = 5 years (injured in 15)

it’s a straight swap

 

[jl809]

Nadal always had his struggles on grass throughout his career. Even when he reached the late rounds, he would have his fair share of tough matches in early rounds when the grass was still slick:

2006 (F): 2R vs Robert Kendrick: 6-7, 3-6, 7-6, 7-5, 6-4
2007 (F): 2R vs Soderling: 6-4, 6-4, 6-7, 4-6, 7-5; 3R vs Youzhny: 4-6, 3-6, 6-1, 6-2, 6-2
2008 (W): -
2010 (W): 2R vs Haase: 5-7, 6-2, 3-6, 6-0, 6-3; 3R vs Petzschner: 6-4, 4-6, 6-7, 6-2, 6-3

As the tournament progresses, the grass gets worn down and the court slows down more and more, enabling Nadal to play his game with greater efficacy

The 2012-17 period was a cosmic correction of sorts, where Nadal actually lost the matches he should have lost earlier:

This is a very good point

 

[thepaint19]

2022 was the weakest Wimbledon ever, and Nadal made the semi-finals despite not being able to serve properly with the torn stomach muscle.
I think Nadal will win Wimbledon next year if healthy, especially since the foot treatment worked, and he already was within 10-8 5th Set of beating Djokovic at 2018 Wimbledon.

 

[Biotic]

Properly Rosolized =/= left prime

 

[GabeT]

2006-2011 - played well = 5 years (injured in 09)
2012-2017 - played badly = 5 years (injured in 15)

it’s a straight swap

Are you saying that Nadal would have won more if he had played in 2013 at the level he had in 2007?

 

[jl809]

Are you saying that Nadal would have won more if he had played in 2013 at the level he had in 2007?

Well, kinda. It's not easy because he was a totally different player in 07 to 2013 on all surfaces - he was much faster but with a worse serve and BH. So I'm not saying we'd literally put 2006 Nadal straight into 2011.

I guess it's more like how, from 2018 onwards, Nadal played similarly well on grass as on HC. He sort of plays all court tennis on there now, like Djoker. This is what I'm imagining - Nadal able to be as effective on grass in 2012/13/14 as he was on HC.

Asking another way, what if his grass career matched the progression of his HC career, as in, pretty **** in slams before the age of 22/23 (like Federer), then good in 09, then GOATing in 2010, then struggling with losing to Djoker from 2011 onwards (except in 2013)?

I feel like he'd still have 2 or 3 Wimbledons - some in 2009 and 2010 before Djoker got good, and another one in 2013. He'd still have the same number of years overall that he was good on grass. But he'd have more recent wins over Djokovic and Federer on that surface, which seems to be an issue for people on this site. I think people would look on that more favourably (he'd still have a win over prime Fed too, in 09)

 

[BauerAlmeida]

Are you saying that Nadal would have won more if he had played in 2013 at the level he had in 2007?

Nadal 2007 has a strong chance of winning Wimbledon 2013.

He owns Murray at slams so he definitely beats him. Vs Djokovic it would be a tough match. Their 2011 match would make the latter the favorite, but Nadal would definitely have a chance of winning, especially because at the time he was much stronger mentally and he was coming off their RG win.

 

[TheAssassin]

Having a 5 year prime instead of a decade long prime on the surface, how so bery unlucky...

 

[GabeT]

Nadal 2007 has a strong chance of winning Wimbledon 2013.

He owns Murray at slams so he definitely beats him. Vs Djokovic it would be a tough match. Their 2011 match would make the latter the favorite, but Nadal would definitely have a chance of winning, especially because at the time he was much stronger mentally and he was coming off their RG win.

Ok, but in that case what we are saying is that Nadal would have won more if he had faced a different, presumably weaker, competition. but that‘s true of every player, not just Nadal

 

[NoleFam]

Was his peak really that high or is it being exaggerated on here? @jm1980 pointed out how he escaped early on in matches in 2006, 2007 and 2010. Did Federer and Djokovic struggle to that extent at their peaks in early rounds to players of that caliber? I think his matchup advantage against Federer is why many people see it that way, plus he benefitted from the higher bouncing grass. I remember people (Navratilova) were complaining around 2006 about how much they slowed down the conditions. You don't think that helped Nadal? His struggles then and his defeats in early rounds between 2012-2015 suggest that he was a really good grass player, but not on the level of the greats.

 

[duaneeo]

Nadal always had his struggles on grass throughout his career. Even when he reached the late rounds, he would have his fair share of tough matches in early rounds when the grass was still slick:

As the tournament progresses, the grass gets worn down and the court slows down more and more, enabling Nadal to play his game with greater efficacy

Actually, the same can be said for Djokovic.

 

[jl809]

Was his peak really that high or is it being exaggerated on here? @jm1980 pointed out how he escaped early on in matches in 2006, 2007 and 2010. Did Federer and Djokovic struggle to that extent at their peaks in early rounds to players of that caliber? I think his matchup advantage against Federer is why many people see it that way, plus he benefitted from the higher bouncing grass. I remember people (Navratilova) were complaining around 2006 about how much they slowed down the conditions. You don't think that helped Nadal? His struggles then and his defeats in early rounds between 2012-2015 suggest that he was a really good grass player, but not on the level of the greats.

Actually, the same can be said for Djokovic.

Feel like this topic deserves its own thread, not this one

 

[NoleFam]

Feel like this topic deserves its own thread, not this one

Doesn't really need its own thread because he's wrong, as usual. In any year where he made a deep run at Wimbledon, Djokovic only once got pushed to 5 sets in a round before the QF. That was to Anderson in 2015, someone who would make a Wimbledon final 3 years later.

 

[Kralingen]

Doesn't really need its own thread because he's wrong, as usual. In any year where he made a deep run at Wimbledon, Djokovic only once got pushed to 5 sets in a round before the QF. That was to Anderon in 2015, someone who would make a Wimbledon final 3 years later.

Removing Cilic 2014, Sinner 2022 with the “pre-QF” qualifier is silly. Fact is he has never had a truly clean Wimby win aside from 2011, Federer has 6

 

[Djokovic_is_the_best#1]

It wouldn’t make much difference. Nadal had a shorter peak on grass. Ultimately this is his weakest surface where he has been much more vulnerable over the years.

Even in his best years he sometimes struggled to get out the first week. I feel no matter when nadal peak was he’d still just have 2 titles, maybe an extra one if stars aligned.

 

[NoleFam]

Removing Cilic 2014, Sinner 2022 with the “pre-QF” qualifier is silly. Fact is he has never had a truly clean Wimby win aside from 2011

Because it's the QF where you expect to meet top players and it's Cilic and Sinner, not Kendrick, Haase and Petzschner, but I know you're just trolling. Lol.

 

[duaneeo]

Doesn't really need its own thread because he's wrong, as usual. In any year where he made a deep run at Wimbledon, Djokovic only once got pushed to 5 sets in a round before the QF. That was to Anderson in 2015, someone who would make a Wimbledon final 3 years later.

You think only 5-set matches are tough matches where a player struggled?

 

[NoleFam]

You think only 5-set matches are tough matches where a player struggled?

Well yea...I mean those are the matches you are closer to losing, correct? You do have to win 3 sets.

 

[duaneeo]

Well yea...I mean those are the matches you are closer to losing, correct? You do have to win 3 sets.

Okay.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Michael Owen style.

 

[mahatma]

Recently I was watching 2018 semis full match again between Nadal and Djokovic to see where Nadal just lacks in grass.

TBH in a surface like grass against a player like Djokovic,who can change directions at will, you can't be going around your backhand a lot as you lose a lot of ground and it's ultra tough to comeback in the point in grass after losing your position.

That was the main thing which Nadal was not able to avoid. The score line looks close but had it been a without break match it would have been over in 4. Nadal had 5 break points in set 5 but in none of them he had any chance to win the point. Either he rec'd a tough first serve or some brilliant shot making by Novak in all 5 break points in set 5.

 

[RS]

Michael Owen style.

Lennox came later bud

 

[RS]

Was his peak really that high or is it being exaggerated on here? @jm1980 pointed out how he escaped early on in matches in 2006, 2007 and 2010. Did Federer and Djokovic struggle to that extent at their peaks in early rounds to players of that caliber? I think his matchup advantage against Federer is why many people see it that way, plus he benefitted from the higher bouncing grass. I remember people (Navratilova) were complaining around 2006 about how much they slowed down the conditions. You don't think that helped Nadal? His struggles then and his defeats in early rounds between 2012-2015 suggest that he was a really good grass player, but not on the level of the greats.

TTW say peak Nadal is closer to a peak Djokovic than peak Fed on grass.

 

[dking68]

Way I see it Federer only stole one Wimbledon from him (2007) and Djokovic stole two (11/18). Injury in 09 stole a 4th. Think 06 Nadal would lose to most other Wimby winning levels

2007??? Hahaha thats a joke, he never had any chance of winning it in the first place, he nearly lost to Youzhny in the fourth round and a young Robin Soderling in the third round

 

[NoleFam]

TTW say peak Nadal is closer to a peak Djokovic than peak Fed on grass.

TTW? I think you meant Federer fans.

 

[RS]

TTW? I think you meant Federer fans.

Nah TTW as well.

 

[The_Order]

It's freaking obvious to anyone who's been watching tennis for the last 20 years...

Replace Fed 14,15 + 19 with Fed 06-08 against Djok in those finals and he's toast.
Conversely, Replace 06-08 Fed with 14,15 + 19 Fed against 06-08 Nadal and he wins all 3...

4 Wimbledon titles each that way...

So yes, pure timing. It is what it is.

 

[Nadal_Django]

It's freaking obvious to anyone who's been watching tennis for the last 20 years...

Replace Fed 14,15 + 19 with Fed 06-08 against Djok in those finals and he's toast.
Conversely, Replace 06-08 Fed with 14,15 + 19 Fed against 06-08 Nadal and he wins all 3...

4 Wimbledon titles each that way...

So yes, pure timing. It is what it is.

If that helps you sleep at night.

 

[RS]

It's freaking obvious to anyone who's been watching tennis for the last 20 years...

Replace Fed 14,15 + 19 with Fed 06-08 against Djok in those finals and he's toast.
Conversely, Replace 06-08 Fed with 14,15 + 19 Fed against 06-08 Nadal and he wins all 3...

4 Wimbledon titles each that way...

So yes, pure timing. It is what it is.

Some Djokovic fans thinking 14-15 could beat 06-7 Fed. Thoughts?

 

[jm1980]

an all-time classic... my favorite gif ever ❤

Thanks, I had a great time making it

 

[Pheasant]

Nadal's peak on grass was from 2006-2010; that's it with 2006 being questionable. By 2011, his serve went down the drain(worst service hold percentage that year at Wimbledon until he really hit a tailspin from 2012-2015).

In 2009, he was injured and didn't play. So really, we are talking about 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2010. That's 4 peak years that would be pushed to a later era. Let's say those years become 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2016. I.e, he peaks 6 years later. What would he win? 2012 is very debatable here. 2013 is winnable. 2014 is debatable and 2016 is winnable. I'd say that he'd split 2012/2014, but win 2013 and 2016. That's 3 max. Ok, I'll give him 3.

Of course, we can play this game with anybody. What if Federer switched rackets earlier? What if Djoker switched his diet earlier? What if Nadal learned how to manage his schedule earlier?