When did Djokovic play at a higher level at the AO, 2023 or 2026?

[messiahrobins]

But why did Nadal lose in straight sets to Djokovic yet again on HC, losing an embarrassing 19 straight sets on HC to his biggest rival if he had completely solved him? Does he have no self respect is what you are saying?

Have you seen the highlights, he was certainly trying here.

What part mate of 2015/2016 is irrelevant to this discussion is hard for you to understand?

I've no idea why you are getting so upset over this given you always say people can have their own opinion, seems to me a nerve has been struck. Calm down a bit and be less partisan, perhaps it will help if I explain what this debate is actually about?

To make it more simple the issue here is historic performance vs current form. That's the debate essentially. Your hypothetical arguments would therefore suggest Alcaraz thrashing Djokovic at last years USO was actually impossible? please explain that result given their hard court h2h up to that point.

 

[messiahrobins]

Can totally understand this, but I still like watching these all time greats later on. I wouldn't want to go without watching 2017erer or seeing those two matches Rafa played against Med in early 2022 (both extraordinary in 2 different ways).

The other reason i like watching these GOATs later on is we normally get the defining torch passing moment (even though we didn't really get this with the Big 3 because they outlasted 2 subsequent generations)

I was at IW 2022 Nadal v Alcaraz..that definitely felt the passing of the baton of the dominant player of his era to the next one. It felt significant and Nadals reaction post match sort of looked like he felt the same way.

Alcaraz of course later that season beat Rafa and Novak back to back on clay at Madrid, only player to have ever done that. He was 18.

Alcaraz is the real deal no question about that and definitely has taken the baton off Nadal much like Nadal did in 2008 at Wimbledon off Federer. I was not at that match but that match elevated Nadals aura and global reach and lifted his all court game to new levels not seen before when he was on while Federer slowly was declining.

Sampras v Federer 2001 another clear passing of torch moment. Lendl v Sampras 1990 USO another one looking back

 

[objection_]

and I am certain Nadal in that form would also have beat Djokovic at AO 2020.

He lost to Thiem in the QF....

 

[Hitman]

You are getting upset here lol and desperate as relying on a defacto exho tournament that's now defunct is really quote sad.

I actually thought u were more knowledgeable about the game than u now seem to be. Your whole argument is based on 2015 and 2016 and AO 2019.

If u think the Djokovic that was getting smashed by Wawrinka at the USO in 2019 was getting remotely close to Nadal that event then its just pure fanboysism I'm afraid.

I was there. I am telling you Nadal was simply a level above Djokovic at AO 2019 and I am certain Nadal in that form would also have beat Djokovic at AO 2020. I'm sorry these are just facts based on actual performances at the time not straight line graphs from 2015

Sorry, I would just like to ask why would Nadal willingly humiliated himself by allowing 0-17 to turn into 0-19 in sets played on HC since USO 2013?

You said he totally solved Djokovic, yes? So why he simply allow an already terrible run of sets and matches lost on HC continue?

I don't care about your hypothetical matches that never took place, talk about matches that actually took place please. Thanks.

Answer this question - If Nadal had completely solved Djokovic post 2019, why did he lose in straight sets yet again on HC the next time they played, why were all his wins only on clay? Real matches please, not fantasy matches you want to make in your head and present them as fact.

Telling me I am desperate and upset when I am simply asking a legit question, and you being unable to answer it, sounds like a bit projection. Lets focus on the actual subject and leave all these personal jabs to one side - why did Nadal allow this to happen?

 

[Subway Tennis]

I was at IW 2022 Nadal v Alcaraz..that definitely felt the passing of the baton of the dominant player of his era to the next one. It felt significant and Nadals reaction post match sort of looked like he felt the same way.

Alcaraz of course later that season beat Rafa and Novak back to back on clay at Madrid, only player to have ever done that. He was 18.

Alcaraz is the real deal no question about that and definitely has taken the baton off Nadal much like Nadal did in 2008 at Wimbledon off Federer. I was not at that match but that match elevated Nadals aura and global reach and lifted his all court game to new levels not seen before when he was on while Federer slowly was declining.

Sampras v Federer 2001 another clear passing of torch moment. Lendl v Sampras 1990 USO another one looking back

That would have been a lot of fun seeing Nadal vs Alcaraz live in Indian Wells! Do you go to IW a lot? Do you it's in the top handful of best viewing experiences in tennis now with the relaxed atmosphere and access to the players / practice courts?

 

[Hitman]

What part mate of 2015/2016 is irrelevant to this discussion is hard for you to understand?

I've no idea why you are getting so upset over this given you always say people can have their own opinion, seems to me a nerve has been struck. Calm down a bit and be less partisan, perhaps it will help if I explain what this debate is actually about?

To make it more simple the issue here is historic performance vs current form. That's the debate essentially. Your hypothetical arguments would therefore suggest Alcaraz thrashing Djokovic at last years USO was actually impossible? please explain that result given their hard court h2h up to that point.

All I am asking is, if you claim that Nadal completely solved Djokovic after 2019, why did he get crushed in straight sets on HC yet again?

It is not about being upset, it has nothing to do with 2015/2016, it has nothing to do with hypothetical matches that never took place. I am only interested in actual real matches that happened. Is that hard for YOU to understand my friend?

Are you finding it hard to admit that Nadal didn't actually solve Djokovic on HC after 2019, because the next time they played on hard he was hammered in straight sets?

Is your reasoning being that Nadal, the greatest fighter of them all simply wasn't trying, and just allowed himself to get beaten and make an already terrible 0-17 in sets played into an embarrassing 0-19 in sets played?

This isn't about people having their own opinion, it is about holding them accountable to questionable statements with facts and real accounts of history.

If you want to tell me Nadal wins hypothetical matches, you are entitled to your opinion on them....everyone is welcome to their opinions about fantasy matches....BUT we are talking REAL matches here, and no matter what you say, the below took place AFTER 2019 for real and Djokovic straight set Nadal....and sorry I don't take your explanation that Nadal wouldn't try to beat Djokovic, and stop the sequence of losses, that is not in Nadal's character.

 

[messiahrobins]

All I am asking is, if you claim that Nadal completely solved Djokovic after 2019, why did he get crushed in straight sets on HC yet again?

It is not about being upset, it has nothing to do with 2015/2016, it has nothing to do with hypothetical matches that never took place. I am only interested in actual real matches that happened. Is that hard for YOU to understand my friend?

Are you finding it hard to admit that Nadal didn't actually solve Djokovic on HC after 2019, because the next time they played on hard he was hammered in straight sets?

Is your reasoning being that Nadal, the greatest fighter of them all simply wasn't trying, and just allowed himself to get beaten and make an already terrible 0-17 in sets played into an embarrassing 0-19 in sets played?

This isn't about people having their own opinion, it is about holding them accountable to questionable statements with facts and real accounts of history.

If you want to tell me Nadal wins hypothetical matches, you are entitled to your opinion on them....everyone is welcome to their opinions about fantasy matches....BUT we are talking REAL matches here, and no matter what you say, the below took place AFTER 2019 for real and Djokovic straight set Nadal....and sorry I don't take your explanation that Nadal wouldn't try to beat Djokovic, and stop the sequence of losses, that is not in Nadal's character.

You really don't seem to understand the point. Maybe if I do it in bullet point form it will be easier to follow
1. ATP Cup is not a Grand Slam
2. ATP Cup is merely a warm up and was so irrelevant it got scrapped
3. Current form is more relevant than historic achievements
4. Djokovic post 2019 was declining from his 2015 levels and 2016 levels when he beat Nadals shadow 7 times
5. Nadal post 2016 was a far stronger player and while he lost AO 2019 to Djokovic in top form, Nadal Improved on his AO 2019 level whereas Djokovic declined
6. Nadal beat Djokovic 2 out of 3 times they met on clay in low bouncing conditions that favoured Djokovic (see RG 2012 final when rain came) . Back then Djokovic reeled off something like 6 games in a row as Nadal had no answers. 10 years later Nadal even on low treacle clay that negated his spin was often breadsticking Djokovic

Summary..Nadal had Djokovics number at end of their careers

 

[messiahrobins]

That would have been a lot of fun seeing Nadal vs Alcaraz live in Indian Wells! Do you go to IW a lot? Do you it's in the top handful of best viewing experiences in tennis now with the relaxed atmosphere and access to the players / practice courts?

Yes I go most years to IW as know a few people out in California who love tennis. Best event to go to IMHO. I love it. So much to do there. I may retire out there actually

 

[messiahrobins]

Sorry, I would just like to ask why would Nadal willingly humiliated himself by allowing 0-17 to turn into 0-19 in sets played on HC since USO 2013?

You said he totally solved Djokovic, yes? So why he simply allow an already terrible run of sets and matches lost on HC continue?

I don't care about your hypothetical matches that never took place, talk about matches that actually took place please. Thanks.

Answer this question - If Nadal had completely solved Djokovic post 2019, why did he lose in straight sets yet again on HC the next time they played, why were all his wins only on clay? Real matches please, not fantasy matches you want to make in your head and present them as fact.

Telling me I am desperate and upset when I am simply asking a legit question, and you being unable to answer it, sounds like a bit projection. Lets focus on the actual subject and leave all these personal jabs to one side - why did Nadal allow this to happen?

So you still harping on about 7 wins 2015 and 2016 lmao.

You are upset that's obvious. Look st the length of your posts and u keep posting the same video each time much to the amusement of many .

It's so simple an issue and you just for some reason have lost it big time. We are talking post 2019 mate. I fail to see what 2015 and 2016 has to do with anything.

Or forgive me if I've misunderstood..are u in fact saying Nadal was better in 2015 and 2016 than post 2019?

If you want to keep to real matches..2-1. Nadal solved the Djokovic puzzle. I mean it's there in black and white. Not Nadals fault Djokovic wasn't at AO Final in 2022 and instead had to beat the guy who on hard court had routined Djokovic 4 months earlier in straight sets.

The bottom line is Djokovic was never again the same player he was at AO 2019. Nadal was better post AO 2019 than he was at any time post FO 2014 including his amazing goat season of 2017

 

[Hitman]

You really don't seem to understand the point. Maybe if I do it in bullet point form it will be easier to follow
1. ATP Cup is not a Grand Slam
2. ATP Cup is merely a warm up and was so irrelevant it got scrapped
3. Current form is more relevant than historic achievements
4. Djokovic post 2019 was declining from his 2015 levels and 2016 levels when he beat Nadals shadow 7 times
5. Nadal post 2016 was a far stronger player and while he lost AO 2019 to Djokovic in top form, Nadal Improved on his AO 2019 level whereas Djokovic declined
6. Nadal beat Djokovic 2 out of 3 times they met on clay in low bouncing conditions that favoured Djokovic (see RG 2012 final when rain came) . Back then Djokovic reeled off something like 6 games in a row as Nadal had no answers. 10 years later Nadal even on low treacle clay that negated his spin was often breadsticking Djokovic

Summary..Nadal had Djokovics number at end of their careers

So you still harping on about 7 wins 2015 and 2016 lmao.

You are upset that's obvious. Look st the length of your posts and u keep posting the same video each time much to the amusement of many .

It's so simple an issue and you just for some reason have lost it big time. We are talking post 2019 mate. I fail to see what 2015 and 2016 has to do with anything.

Or forgive me if I've misunderstood..are u in fact saying Nadal was better in 2015 and 2016 than post 2019?

If you want to keep to real matches..2-1. Nadal solved the Djokovic puzzle. I mean it's there in black and white. Not Nadals fault Djokovic wasn't at AO Final in 2022 and instead had to beat the guy who on hard court had routined Djokovic 4 months earlier in straight sets.

The bottom line is Djokovic was never again the same player he was at AO 2019. Nadal was better post AO 2019 than he was at any time post FO 2014 including his amazing goat season of 2017

OK, firstly thank you for the above, and taking the time to put all that together. I appreciate it. Seriously, I do.

I have asked a simple question, and for a very successful high profile lawyer, your comprehension of the English language is baffling to me, I am talking only about post 2019, yet you continue to talk about 2015-2016. This has nothing to do with 2015-2016. You don't need to talk about the amusement of others, you should only speak for yourself and let others speak for themselves. Fair? Good.

Let's paint a picture for you, hopefully that might help, as you are a top level lawyer.

Imagine you are standing in a court of law, there is the Prosecution, there is the Jury and there is the judge. Can you picture it?

Now imagine you saying to the Judge and the Court - Nadal totally solved Djokovic post 2019.

A side note here, the statement Totally Solved means, he has worked out how to beat Djokovic everywhere, when Djokovic IS IN FORM. Do not confuse someone's form as the same as totally solving them. I believe this is your first basic mistake. You can beat a poor level player any day, but can you beat them when they are in form? - That, my friend is solving someone.

Any way, lets gets back to the court room

The prosecution shows the below as evidence of a match between Nadal and Djokovic that took place after 2019, a match that took place in 2020 when Nadal was world number one, which gets submitted in as proof as that Nadal yet again failed to win a single set from Djokovic on hard court, even past 2019.

The Jury sees it as submitted evidence and so does the Judge and they see a straight set win for Djokovic. The Judges asks if you can show actual evidence of Nadal solving Djokovic outside of clay to counter it, because totally solving someone means everywhere, remember the side note from before?

Your answer - I have no real matches where Nadal beat Djokovic outside of clay, but Trust Me Bro!

The Jury all look at each other and smile. The Judge holds back his smile and asks you the following question.

The evidence submitted shows Nadal was unable to beat Djokovic on HC after 2019, correct?

Your answer - Yeah, but that match doesn't count. The hypothetical match that took place in my head between them on hard court should be taken in as evidence and the real match needs to be thrown out because Nadal wasn't really trying because it wasn't a slam. Nadal the great champion that he is throws matches away.

The judge asks you - You do understand what Totally Solving someone means, yes? It doesn't mean continue to lose matches on HC.

The case gets thrown out.




Anyways, I hope your enjoyed the banter, I understand you being unable to answer the question made it drag on a bit, but it was fun. I'll leave it there.

And no worries, we're cool, lets catch up in the next thread.

 

[messiahrobins]

OK, firstly thank you for the above, and taking the time to put all that together. I appreciate it. Seriously, I do.

I have asked a simple question, and for a very successful high profile lawyer, your comprehension of the English language is baffling to me, I am talking only about post 2019, yet you continue to talk about 2015-2016. This has nothing to do with 2015-2016. You don't need to talk about the amusement of others, you should only speak for yourself and let others speak for themselves. Fair? Good.

Let's paint a picture for you, hopefully that might help, as you are a top level lawyer.

Imagine you are standing in a court of law, there is the Prosecution, there is the Jury and there is the judge. Can you picture it?

Now imagine you saying to the Judge and the Court - Nadal totally solved Djokovic post 2019.

A side note here, the statement Totally Solved means, he has worked out how to beat Djokovic everywhere, when Djokovic IS IN FORM. Do not confuse someone's form as the same as totally solving them. I believe this is your first basic mistake. You can beat a poor level player any day, but can you beat them when they are in form? - That, my friend is solving someone.

Any way, lets gets back to the court room

The prosecution shows the below as evidence of a match between Nadal and Djokovic that took place after 2019, a match that took place in 2020 when Nadal was world number one, which gets submitted in as proof as that Nadal yet again failed to win a single set from Djokovic on hard court, even past 2019.

The Jury sees it as submitted evidence and so does the Judge and they see a straight set win for Djokovic. The Judges asks if you can show actual evidence of Nadal solving Djokovic outside of clay to counter it, because totally solving someone means everywhere, remember the side note from before?

Your answer - I have no real matches where Nadal beat Djokovic outside of clay, but Trust Me Bro!

The Jury all look at each other and smile. The Judge holds back his smile and asks you the following question.

The evidence submitted shows Nadal was unable to beat Djokovic on HC after 2019, correct?

Your answer - Yeah, but that match doesn't count. The hypothetical match that took place in my head between them on hard court should be taken in as evidence and the real match needs to be thrown out because Nadal wasn't really trying because it wasn't a slam. Nadal the great champion that he is throws matches away.

The judge asks you - You do understand what Totally Solving someone means, yes? It doesn't mean continue to lose matches on HC.

The case gets thrown out.




Anyways, I hope your enjoyed the banter, I understand you being unable to answer the question made it drag on a bit, but it was fun. I'll leave it there.

And no worries, we're cool, lets catch up in the next thread.

the bolded part. How is that relevant to anything even if thats the only accurate part of your essay. If you are not relying on 2015/16, where do these 19 sets come from you are relying on.?

your terminology btw (prosecution doesnt apply in civil law) is all wrong but i digress as this is a tennis forum

You wanted to base your argument on actual matches. On that basis Nadal solved Djokovic post 2019. ATP Cup is utterly irrelevant as there was no pressure there and nothing at all on the line. If they played in my court in my back garden that really wouldnt be relevant.

I honestly have no idea if you watch matches live, if you did back then you would know the three times Nadal and Djokovic played actual matches (i note you avoided the question about Alcaraz and Djokovic btw ) they played in conditions tailor made for Djokovic (as all pundits said before the matches) and he got creamed 2 out of 3 times and was being bagelled the other time until Nadal broke a bone in his foot. Those are facts, they are undisputable.

You are entitled to your opinion of course, as misguided as it is on this occasion.