NeutralFan
G.O.A.T.
This i have been saying Nadal is mentally weakest amoung top 3 while Roger is strongest but ttw don't go for stats
We blame Federer for choking (and he has..nobody can deny this) but it seems Rafa is the among the worst when 0-2 down
- Thread starter Amitabh_Tennis
- Start date
This i have been saying Nadal is mentally weakest amoung top 3 while Roger is strongest but ttw don't go for stats
Forgive Me Father
Hall of Fame
It makes no sense to dabble over 0-2 set down records.
I made this point before.
1) Nadal was rarely down 0-2 sets
2) Nadal starts off every match with every bit of energy and intensity he has, so if he was down 0-2 sets, it'd be hard for him to get even more out of himself. 0-2 set comebacks often start with a favorite having a lull and then just finding his normal gear. Nadal always was at normal gear.
3) In light of the above two, if Nadal was down 0-2 sets, it was typically against some of the best performances of the year, making the comeback allthemore unlikely.
I'll say it this why:
You aren't supposed to win from 0-2 sets down.
It's very unusual and unlikely that you for TWO sets don't find your game yet, raise it without an opp. level drop, and then win 3 straight sets.
Usually it coinceedes with having underperformed against weaker opponents or opponents caving.
The reason why Nadal doesn't have many 0-2 set comebacks is simply, because he has been 0-2 sets down less often than Federer and Murray...
he is least likely to have an 'off day' at slams. He least frequently has, out of the Big 4.
If you check out the 0-2 set comebacks by Fed and Murray, they're full of wins against Benneteau, Stepanek, etc. you know, matches they should have won a lot easier and it took them just playing normal to get the win.
When Nadal goes down 0-2 sets, it usually and probably means, his opponent is playing some next level stuff. It won't be Benneteau or Stepanek.. but Djokovic ('11 WB, '11 USO), Fed ('06 WB), a red-hot Murray ('10 AO), or an injury ('09 USO, '11 AO, '13 WB, '14 AO) or completely out of shape/form ('15 AO).
That kind of stuff.
No mental failure to be seen here.
Also, Nadal's 0-2 set comeback against Müller at '17 WB was basically taken from him with a horrible linecall.
I made this point before.
1) Nadal was rarely down 0-2 sets
2) Nadal starts off every match with every bit of energy and intensity he has, so if he was down 0-2 sets, it'd be hard for him to get even more out of himself. 0-2 set comebacks often start with a favorite having a lull and then just finding his normal gear. Nadal always was at normal gear.
3) In light of the above two, if Nadal was down 0-2 sets, it was typically against some of the best performances of the year, making the comeback allthemore unlikely.
I'll say it this why:
You aren't supposed to win from 0-2 sets down.
It's very unusual and unlikely that you for TWO sets don't find your game yet, raise it without an opp. level drop, and then win 3 straight sets.
Usually it coinceedes with having underperformed against weaker opponents or opponents caving.
The reason why Nadal doesn't have many 0-2 set comebacks is simply, because he has been 0-2 sets down less often than Federer and Murray...
he is least likely to have an 'off day' at slams. He least frequently has, out of the Big 4.
If you check out the 0-2 set comebacks by Fed and Murray, they're full of wins against Benneteau, Stepanek, etc. you know, matches they should have won a lot easier and it took them just playing normal to get the win.
When Nadal goes down 0-2 sets, it usually and probably means, his opponent is playing some next level stuff. It won't be Benneteau or Stepanek.. but Djokovic ('11 WB, '11 USO), Fed ('06 WB), a red-hot Murray ('10 AO), or an injury ('09 USO, '11 AO, '13 WB, '14 AO) or completely out of shape/form ('15 AO).
That kind of stuff.
No mental failure to be seen here.
Also, Nadal's 0-2 set comeback against Müller at '17 WB was basically taken from him with a horrible linecall.
Rosstour
G.O.A.T.
Mentally weakest? How so?
I could see it, but only if we're counting his tendency to retire from matches he knows he is going to lose--that massive ego cannot take losing, so being injured is preferred.
But when he's mentally and physically in a match, I feel there's no one tougher.
I've said this many times but Rafa is the best vs "The Field"--the least vulnerable to shock losses of the Big3. But he's the weakest against the other B3.
Novak is the most vulnerable to The Field. But the strongest vs the other B3 members.
Fed is in the middle on both counts.
MadariKatu
Hall of Fame
Nadal the weakest against other big3 members? He's won %53,1 of big3 matches. Djokovic is at %52,8 and Federer %43,3. Djokovic's percentage goes much higher in finals (%59,6), with Nadal at %51,9 and Federer %37,2. Regarding "the field", I don't have the numbers, but my gut feeling is that Federer is the strongest.
There are many matches he knows he's gonna lose and still didn't retire. Going for some recent ones, vs Fritz at IW, vs Lloyd Harris in Wahington, vs Djoko at RG semi, AO final vs Djoko in 2019... he does have a tendency to get injured though, having to retire, both while going up and while down in the match.
_phantom
Hall of Fame
Among B3, Fed comes third against other B3 members and also the field. If you remove his win/loss against Nadalovic, his career win% is still lower than theirs. On an average, he is more likely to lose a match.
MadariKatu
Hall of Fame
Do you have those percentages vs the field?
_phantom
Hall of Fame
If you count B3 slam matches only (to respect the OP in a way), it's Nadal 65%, Djokovic 53%, Federer 32%.
Nadal leads at RG, USO. Even at AO. Only negative at WIM.
Djokovic leads at WIM, AO. Negative at 2 other slams.
Federer only even at USO. Negative at 3 other slams.
Last edited:
MadariKatu
Hall of Fame
I had forgotten op's premise of "in slams"...
Sorry, but those numbers seem wrong, or I'm not understanding something. How can Federer be %86 at slams, but only %32 vs the field??? Or is it %32 vs the other big3 members? If it's the latter, wouldn't it mean Fed is the strongest vs the field?
_phantom
Hall of Fame
Those are win% against other B3 members in slams.
Against the field in slams (removing win/loss against B3), it's very close but Federer comes third among B3. If we count overall career against the field, Federer is still the third among B3.
Last edited:
_phantom
Hall of Fame
All matches vs members of B3
Nadal 53%
Djokovic 53%
Federer 43%
Slam matches vs members of B3
Nadal 65%
Djokovic 53%
Federer 32%
All matches vs the field
Nadal 85.86%
Djokovic 86.16%
Federer 84.40%
Slam matches vs the field
Nadal 90.26%
Djokovic 91.04%
Federer 90.20%
King No1e
G.O.A.T.
Guess we'll have to work on that
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
but...... beri beri barrior, no?Performance in Grand Slam matches after going down 0-2
Borg - 6 wins in 13 matches - 46% win record
Federer - 9 wins in 38 matches - 23.68% win record
Djokovic - 6 wins in 27 matches - 22.22% win record
Sampras - 6 wins in 26 matches - 19.23% win record
Agassi - 5 wins in 32 matches - 15.62% win record
NIshikori - 4 out of 30 matches - 13% win record
Nadal - 3 wins in 24 matches - 12.5% win record
DC WG QF, RUS vs CZE: Safin d. Berdych 6-7(5) 4-6 6-3 6-2 6-4
Marat Safin VS Tomas Berdych | Head 2 Head | H2H | ATP Tour | Tennis
Head to head records for players in men's professional tennis. View rivalry results and stats for matches on the ATP Tour.
www.atptour.com
Aslan T
Rookie
King No1e
G.O.A.T.
Yep. I trust the judgment of our glorious, totally unbiased mod team.
B
Beerus
Guest
@Nadal_Django can post again.
Rosstour
G.O.A.T.
Rafa has been a distant third vs the other 2 for a long time now.
I understand that 2008-13 were the greatest years in tennis to many on this forum, but Rafa's absolute domination of Federer ended then. It hasn't been the case for almost ten years now.
Nadal goes 0-2 down when he gets outplayed. Medvedev clearly outplayed him in the first 2 sets of AO
Similar threads
- Deleted member 3771
- General Pro Player Discussion
