What was a better year for Nadal-2013 or 2019?

Better year for Nadal

  • 2013

    Votes: 51 87.9%
  • 2019

    Votes: 7 12.1%

  • Total voters
    58
Let's see:

2013-10 titles, 2 slams, 5 masters tournaments, 14 finals overall. Wimbledon was the only time he lost before the semifinals that year.

2019-4 titles, 2 slams, 2 masters, one of his worst ever clay seasons (including arguably the worst match he ever played in MC semifinal), skipped lots of tournaments.

This is a VERY hard question.
 

ReeceSachs

Hall of Fame
IW-2013
MC-2013
Rome-2019
Madrid-2013
RG-Peaked higher in 13 but was more steady in 19. I will go 13 but not by a lot
Canada-2013
USO-2013
Wimbeldon-2019
Barcelona-2013
Clearly 2013 IMO.
Won Cincy in 13 and did not play in 19 and the post USO was good in 2013 we have to see if 19 can match it.
 
IW-2013
MC-2013
Rome-2019
Madrid-2013
RG-Peaked higher in 13 but was more steady in 19. I will go 13 but not by a lot
Canada-2013
USO-2013
Wimbeldon-2019
Barcelona-2013
Clearly 2013 IMO.
Won Cincy in 13 and did not play in 19 and the post USO was good in 2013 we have to see if 19 can match it.
In Rome I would give the advantage to 2013 to be honest. He just had much tougher competition in 2013 (including a GOATing Gulbis in the 1/8 final), but he played really well. Was GOATing in the semifinals against Berdych. In the final he was also playing at a very high level, though Federer was terrible. The only argument for 2019 can be that he bageled and breadsticked Djokovic, but I'm not sure it's enough. He still lost a set in that final.
 
So far @Indianwells007 and @RF-18. (well, the latter is a special poster, it looks like he just likes to go against logic)

So interesting to see if there are more of them.
Well they are wrong. That being said, if you said in 2013 that he would do this in 2019, you would be ecstatic. So while just looking at the resumes of the two years, 2013 is clearly better. But 2019 might be more impressive considering his age and the race.
 

ReeceSachs

Hall of Fame
Gulbis who showed up in Rome 2013 would have destroyed this year's Nadal something like 6-1 6-1. He actually almost bageled 2013 Nadal. I still have no idea how Nadal managed to win this match.
Not fair IMO. Gulbis is dangrous but could be slowed down if you could hold him off for a while. Nadal would have a chance IMO and he was playing well in Rome.
 

RF-18

G.O.A.T.
So far @Indianwells007 and @RF-18. (well, the latter is a special poster, it looks like he just likes to go against logic)

So interesting to see if there are more of them.
I think you can't read. The other poster told you Nadal didn't do as good in slams in 13 vs 19, and you hold him to seek help. I responded that indeed Nadal did better in slams in 19 than 13, wich he was looking at it result wise. What is your problem?
 

RF-18

G.O.A.T.
Well they are wrong. That being said, if you said in 2013 that he would do this in 2019, you would be ecstatic. So while just looking at the resumes of the two years, 2013 is clearly better. But 2019 might be more impressive considering his age and the race.
What am I wrong about?
 
I think you can't read. The other poster told you Nadal didn't do as good in slams in 13 vs 19, and you hold him to seek help. I responded that indeed Nadal did better in slams in 19 than 13, wich he was looking at it result wise. What is your problem?
This is true, and it is about slams, at least at this point. I dont care how Fed does as long as he has a shot at slams. Rafa did exactly that and more.
 
That said, Nadal did worse in 2013 slams because he was injured/sick/cautious in two of them. He did win both slams when healthy. In 2019, Nadal was healthy for all slams, yet in two of them got pwned by Djokovic and trolled by ancienterer respectively.
 

Yugram

Hall of Fame
Well, if the competition was like in 2013 then Nadal wouldn't have won anything this year.
Do we count 2013 Djokovic in "the competition"? If not, then I disagree.
If yes, then what’s the point of comparison? Of course a top tier ATG in his prime is better than 2019 Nadal.
 

Druss

Hall of Fame
The ONLY years one can argue are better than 2013 for Nadal, are 2008 and 2010. Only those few Djoko fans with an agenda (claiming players are peaking in their 30s) would say 2019 was better.
 

RF-18

G.O.A.T.
That said, Nadal did worse in 2013 slams because he was injured/sick/cautious in two of them. He did win both slams when healthy. In 2019, Nadal was healthy for all slams, yet in two of them got pwned by Djokovic and trolled by ancienterer respectively.
Edit: Never mind.
 
Well, for those who think only slams count, 2019 is a natural choice, no? Not that 'only slams' isn't stupid as it is.
And how exactly was Nadal better in slams this year? 2 titles are 2 titles. He didn't even play AO in 2013, so why should he get more credit for reaching a final in 2019 and getting totally destroyed in it? Djokovic fans hate it when Djokovic lose finals, but when it comes to other players they always act like "a final is a good result".

As for Wimbledon...Well, I guess people forgot what a tough clay season Nadal had in 2013. Very tough matches in almost every tournament. I doubt he even practiced before Wimbledon.
 
Went unbeaten in both of them, so the question is rather otiose. Basically like asking whether an immovable object is stronger than an unstoppable force.
 

RF-18

G.O.A.T.
And how exactly was Nadal better in slams this year? 2 titles are 2 titles. He didn't even play AO in 2013, so why should he get more credit for reaching a final in 2019 and getting totally destroyed in it? Djokovic fans hate it when Djokovic lose finals, but when it comes to other players they always act like "a final is a good result".

As for Wimbledon...Well, I guess people forgot what a tough clay season Nadal had in 2013. Very tough matches in almost every tournament. I doubt he even practiced before Wimbledon.
Exclude AO and Nadal still did better. SF > 1R. So the poster you said should seek help merely just stated a fact.
 
Well, for those who think only slams count, 2019 is a natural choice, no? Not that 'only slams' isn't stupid as it is.
For those who think only slams count, they are tied: there are no distinctions to be drawn between different versions of a calendar Grand Slam consisting of 84 straight golden sets.
 

Backspin1183

G.O.A.T.
Lol Nadal rarely lost in 2013, with one of those few losses coming at Vina Del Mar when he was still trying to find his match fitness.
 
Let's see:

2013-10 titles, 2 slams, 5 masters tournaments, 14 finals overall. Wimbledon was the only time he lost before the semifinals that year.

2019-4 titles, 2 slams, 2 masters, one of his worst ever clay seasons (including arguably the worst match he ever played in MC semifinal), skipped lots of tournaments.

This is a VERY hard question.
2019 definitely better. Funny how worked up this has got OP though lol
 
And how exactly was Nadal better in slams this year? 2 titles are 2 titles. He didn't even play AO in 2013, so why should he get more credit for reaching a final in 2019 and getting totally destroyed in it? Djokovic fans hate it when Djokovic lose finals, but when it comes to other players they always act like "a final is a good result".

As for Wimbledon...Well, I guess people forgot what a tough clay season Nadal had in 2013. Very tough matches in almost every tournament. I doubt he even practiced before Wimbledon.
So you give no credit to Djokovic reaching Rome final because Nadal humiliated him there? Ok if thats your position thats fine but 2019 for me definitely more satisfying than 2013. Nadal was a better player in 2013 so back then i expected him to beat every player everywhere. Now he is not the player he was yet still dominant at 2 Majors which is unreal.
 

Nadal_Django

Hall of Fame
Anger issues, panic attacks, paranoia... Based on the Nadal's match threads, the girl is a walking insecurity also. :( Nadal to lose to Sugita and every other member of the Top 300. :D
I think you can't read. The other poster told you Nadal didn't do as good in slams in 13 vs 19, and you hold him to seek help. I responded that indeed Nadal did better in slams in 19 than 13, wich he was looking at it result wise. What is your problem?
 
Correction, I'll give it a solid #4. Behind 2010 > 2013 > 2008
How can you rate 2013 as greater than 2008 ? He won 2 GS on both years but 2008 was a breakthrough year, winning his first Wimbledon then Olympics and becoming the World's number 1 for the 1st time.

I'd say 2008 is a lot greaterer betterer than 2013
 

victorcruz

Professional
How can you rate 2013 as greater than 2008 ? He won 2 GS on both years but 2008 was a breakthrough year, winning his first Wimbledon then Olympics and becoming the World's number 1 for the 1st time.

I'd say 2008 is a lot greaterer betterer than 2013
Take a wild guess why he would rate 2008 the worst. Dude is as transparent as it gets, I'm sure it has something to do with Djoker not being great yet.
 

James P

Hall of Fame
Let's see:

2013-10 titles, 2 slams, 5 masters tournaments, 14 finals overall. Wimbledon was the only time he lost before the semifinals that year.

2019-4 titles, 2 slams, 2 masters, one of his worst ever clay seasons (including arguably the worst match he ever played in MC semifinal), skipped lots of tournaments.

This is a VERY hard question.
I don't see the difference. Every season is pink on the inside.
 
Top