MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Will have to throw Federer in here for AO07 against Roddick. Complete silliness.
Which player (in the last 25 or so years) played the highest level ever in a particular match?
- Thread starter zill
- Start date
Kralingen
Talk Tennis Guru
For me it’s Feddy boy in USO ‘04 tied with Rafito ‘08 clay vs. Almagro (the Fed match was good yes but Almagro was something else)
this one , lol
Did PETE ever have a Wimby match where he hit 80% first serve %? If so, that one. Although I guess his 2nd serve was a 1st serve too LOL
Did PETE ever have a Wimby match where he hit 80% first serve %? If so, that one. Although I guess his 2nd serve was a 1st serve too LOL
Autodidactic player
Professional
A bit over 25 years old, and over three matches, but how about Boris Becker beating world #3, #1 and #2 in a row to claim the Stockholm crown in 1994.
D
Deleted member 748597
Guest
Murray.
Ray Mercer
Hall of Fame
The beating Gonzalez dished out the year prior was also remarkable as was Gonzalez against Haas.
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
I think Pete wins both of those finals if he hadn’t had to deal with the super Saturday format - which placed the semi and final on back to back days.
The back-to-back format was a huge disadvantage to an older player like Sampras, playing against a 20yo opponent.
Further, the back-to-back zapped Pete of his explosiveness on serves, which he was heavily reliant on at that point in his career.
It was like asking a starting MLB pitcher to throw nine innings on back-to-back days.
Safin and Hewitt looked much better than they were, because Pete wasn’t PETE.
Ray Mercer
Hall of Fame
He's embarrassed Nadal and made him look like a challenger level player on that surface multiple times.
alexio
G.O.A.T.
wheres fiasco verdasco (from club100) in your list
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
I bet the best performer of the last 25 years was not wearing a Kmart sponsored t shirt. Sorry, Davy, you're out.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
wheres fiasco verdasco (from club100) in your list
The levels of both are extremely high but I think the thread is talking about blowout matches
InsideOut900
Legend
Almagro was probably worse than Fed here lol.
The most incredible stretch in this match were the last 3 games of the match. That was stuff I have never seen before on a clay court before.
Got the full match here, you can watch from 29:40 mark till the end:
If memory serves, Nadal also had a really good stretch late in the 1st and early in the 2nd or late in 2nd, early in the 3rd, can't remember which was.
Nadal was somewhat playable for stretches, but Almagro was straight up spraying.
I personally rate the semi the highest because Djoko played way better than the other two and is also a tougher match-up.
Up two sets and two break. The first set in particular was brutal. 6-4, but Nadal's level was off the charts.
2nd was also really good, played brilliant to get one of the breaks, but had less work to do because of Novak's poor showing.
Had a bit of an intensity dip in the 3rd after the double break, but Djoko just started swinging on every ball care-free. Nadal only made a couple UE in the 3rd set, yet nearly lost it, Djoko had like 21 Winners.
Against Fed, aggressive Nadal only really got started at 4-3 in the 2nd. Up until then he was mostly grinding and letting Fed self destruct actually. From that point on he went full berserk and won 8 games in a row.
sliceroni
Hall of Fame
Sampras 1999 Wimbledon final is the highest I’ve seen. Other ones that come to mind-Fed/Roddick Wimbledon semi 2003, Fed USO final 2004, Rafa RG final 2008, Nadal RG final 2020, and man Daniil ending Nole’s streak at the USO, the only reason he didn’t close out the match sooner was because the fkg crowd was screaming during his serves.
RaulRamirez
Legend
Ouch!
Kralingen
Talk Tennis Guru
I picked Almagro especially bc he genuinely made a top 15 player and actually quite a good clay player in Almagro literally look like he was chosen off the street in a competition. It’s a wonder he won even one game in every set. When I say domination that is probably the pinnacle of it. Like yes, Fed and Pete have destroyed opponents with bagels and completely taken the racket out of their hands. Djokovic has made opponents lose confidence in every single shot they have. Agassi has had matches where if the ball bounced anywhere more shallow than 3 feet before the baseline youre doomed.
but no one in the history of tennis has made a guy say “he’s going to win the tournament for the next 40 years” and act the way Almagro did.
also, I completely agree on the Djokovic match being the best challenge to Rafa. honestly, Novak could have had a set with a little more clutchness, he was outhitting Nadal in rallies and actually dictating for stretches. Obviously he went down with the scoreline he did, but it was an actual tennis match with competitiveness. ‘08 Nadal didn’t play competitive matches at RG.
by the same token Fed deserves a ton of credit for the Hamburg performance and I still have no clue how Ferrero beat Rafa in Rome even with the injury.
Last edited:
zill
Legend
when, how
And that wasn't peak Federer indoors. Still he did it to Nadal.
The Harkleroad
Rookie
That reminds me of one of my favorite matches ever and 2 of my favorite players:
Paris Final 2000. Philippoussis vs Safin. Safin won 3-6, 7-6 (7), 6-4, 3-6, 7-6 (8).
I miss those Bo5 Masters Finals
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Off the top of my head try 2008 US Open semi-final or 2010 Toronto (semi and final) or 2010 Shanghai final or 2011 Tokyo final or 2012 Olympic final or 2016 Rome final or 2016 RG semi-final or 2016 Wimbledon final.
Not saying he should necessarily win the poll but not even being included in your list just shows the usual disrespect and/or wilful amnesia regarding his game that is so woefully prevalent around here.
Last edited:
So, Nadal, the DC09 final against Berdych, the second set.
Of course Nadal loved to batter Berdych ever after the infamous Madrid 06 match and led the H2H 5-3, of course it was clay, but DC has a funny way of turning odds upside down. Plus, that was the year Nadal lost at the FO, the year he finished on his famous cold streak, winning exactly zero sets at the WTF. So you never knew, or so you thought.
Berdych started out playing well and looking competitive in the first set and carried on like that for about 6 or 7 games.
Then, Nadal suddenly shifted gears. It wasn't the rabbit run, no-matter-what-you-throw-at-me, I'll-just-about-scratch-it-out madman Nadal. It was the possessed, upright animal that's always there for a FH and topspins everything with an animal scream. He was just laying down the law and turned the BL into a wall. He completely obliterated the helpless Czech. You saw Berdych knew what this meant back in the day. It meant your ship was turning into a wreck and sinking. Slowly, inevitably, in a thick mud. And that's where he went.
DC Nadal on clay needs more attention, although I understand the occasion is always slightly provincial.
Of course Nadal loved to batter Berdych ever after the infamous Madrid 06 match and led the H2H 5-3, of course it was clay, but DC has a funny way of turning odds upside down. Plus, that was the year Nadal lost at the FO, the year he finished on his famous cold streak, winning exactly zero sets at the WTF. So you never knew, or so you thought.
Berdych started out playing well and looking competitive in the first set and carried on like that for about 6 or 7 games.
Then, Nadal suddenly shifted gears. It wasn't the rabbit run, no-matter-what-you-throw-at-me, I'll-just-about-scratch-it-out madman Nadal. It was the possessed, upright animal that's always there for a FH and topspins everything with an animal scream. He was just laying down the law and turned the BL into a wall. He completely obliterated the helpless Czech. You saw Berdych knew what this meant back in the day. It meant your ship was turning into a wreck and sinking. Slowly, inevitably, in a thick mud. And that's where he went.
DC Nadal on clay needs more attention, although I understand the occasion is always slightly provincial.
Oceans II
Professional
Most probably a version of Nadal at RG or possibly Djokovic at AO going by statistics and logic. With their dominance and against top competition, it extremely likely that one version over the years would have displayed the highest level. Makes sense too considering Nadal at RG20, 19, 17, 13, 12, 11, 08, etc and Djokovic at AO21, 19, 16, 15, 13, 12, 11, etc.
hoodjem
G.O.A.T.
All three of these are excellent choices.
maratha_warrior
Hall of Fame
2016 Doha Final .
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
A whole match, or a winning part of one?
I have huge admiration for the tennis Davydenko played at the 2009 WTF final. Absolute peak, though, albeit partial, is probably the tennis Tsonga played to come back from 2-0 against Federer at Wimbledon 2011. Simply unreal. 1h BH passer included, if I remember correctly.
I have huge admiration for the tennis Davydenko played at the 2009 WTF final. Absolute peak, though, albeit partial, is probably the tennis Tsonga played to come back from 2-0 against Federer at Wimbledon 2011. Simply unreal. 1h BH passer included, if I remember correctly.
TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
Silence. Djokovic has never been the bar.Davy is 2-6 against Djokovic though
TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
I suppose the only issue is whether or not Samperer's forms were, in any sense, actually as good as Nadal's. That the level could be shared just makes the level less anomalous. Depends how you look at things I guess. If it was shared between 30 people then that outlook would be difficult to maintain as the level would be more obviously baseline for an elite player.
Nadal_Django
Legend
Am amazed how the Fed nostalgia brigade finds these obscure decent performances by Federer 04-07 minions and promote them like crazy. Lol
Biotic
Hall of Fame
Nadal_Django
Legend
What about Ivo Minar 2005 Dubai First round.
InsideOut900
Legend
It's all about relative dominance.
Historically, highest level produced on each individual surface is roughly the same because at some point there was someone who was a perfect match for those conditions.
To differentiate what is equal and what is not, you simply look at how close everyone got to the highest standard.
This is a positive outlook on the situation because I will not say "there weren't enough talented claycourters, therefore only 1 or 2 reached the highest standard", I will say "they took the game to a new level, therefore, measuring up to them is the harder than on other surfaces".
I think the eye test is unreliable when comparing across surfaces because everyone looks for different things and often misses the fundamentals of what makes a great player on a certain surface in the first place. This is in respect to "purely offensive players always have higher peaks" btw.
Relative dominance doesn't care how you playstylewise, but how much better you are compared to others, therefore is fairly objective.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Most ATG's have prioritised grass and later HC compared to clay, we skipped a whole decade where there wasn't a dominating force on the clay. It's not a case of saying there weren't talented clay courters, it's a case of there was no Sampras clay equivalent in the 90's or since Borg besides Nadal. I don't think this metric is really the best TBH.
I think with Nadal it's easy to confuse the length of prime/peak with the height of it, surely Nadal's peak on clay is absurd but for single matches it's not clear if it was higher than other surface GOAT's on their best surfaces. Also clay tends to produce more dominant scorelines so it will look more impressive than relative equivalents on other surfaces.
Obviously Nadal has a very strong case for the highest level in a particular match but it's not open and shut.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Yep yep, clay never matters lol
alexio
G.O.A.T.
cheapest of the surfaces, let's face it
NatF
Bionic Poster
InsideOut900
Legend
Not really. He had one run that was distinctively better in 2008.
Plus he played a variety of players in his non-peak runs and was only taken to 5 sets twice before 2015.
You can pin that on the clay field being weak, but I dunno about that.
Peak is both pure zoning level and sustainability. Nadal has insane sustainability to his level.
Peak Nadal can arguably be matched pound for pound for shorter stretches, but not for more than 1 set per match from the samples we have. And even that is arguable.
If you watch some of Fed's performances, there was almost always 1 set where he was less than peak. Other versions of Nadal except 2008 would sometimes drop the set, 2008 Nadal could play like that almost start to finish and the match in straights with a higher probablity than others.
That's literally overcomplicating it for no reason.
Very strong case is good enough unless you hardcore want to prove a point.
Last edited:
NatF
Bionic Poster
Title is in a particular match though. I've not said anything about the clay field being weak...
You said earlier in Nadal's most impressive 2008 match he had a dip right? The opponents ability to hang with you and the help they get from the surface also help. Clay nullifies first strikes to an extent which allowed 2008'dal's brutal groundgame to completely take over. Flip side on grass against a good server, to an extent, the game is not totally in your hands even if you're playing GOAT'ing tennis.
I would put Fed's 2003 Wimbledon SF on similar footing to individual matches from Nadal's 2008 FO, not the entire tournament though.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
That's not what I was saying. Maybe try reading before you post
Oh it's definitely what you were saying lol. Why have to admit how ridiculous what Nadal did is for once?
NatF
Bionic Poster
Oh it's definitely what you were saying lol. Why have to admit how ridiculous what Nadal did is for once?
Glad your ban didn't make you any less of a tit. Maybe stick to posting WWE gifs, talking about the subtleties of tennis history and the impact surfaces have scorelines is a little beyond you.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
ForehandCross
G.O.A.T.
How can this even be a Question? Rafael Nadal on clay >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Any other player's highest level ever.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
NatF
Bionic Poster
Lets stick to talking about 1, 3 and 0 shall we?
Stay pressed. Slay. Have several seats.
Bring out the whole repertoire mate. You've still misread me and still look like a fool.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
