Will Djokovic end up with a better career than Nadal ?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by tennisaddict, Sep 25, 2012.

?

Will Djokovic end up with a better career than Nadal ?

  1. Yes, Novak's career will be better or similar to Nadal

    32.8%
  2. No,Novak will fall short of Nadal by a good margin

    67.2%
  1. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,656


    Yes,but how boring would the tour be if everyone was a hardcourt specialist? If there were no variety at all? I mean we already get gypped out of a grasscourt season as it is. There are too many hardcourt tournaments,and it's monotonous.


    I don't think he's the most talented player,and I do think he is the least talented of the top 4. It just bugs me that he gets ripped on for having a favorite surface just because it's clay. I'd like it if he could win more on other surfaces,but it is not to be. He's not alone in being a surface specialist because the rest of the top players are too so he's in good company.


    And there's nothing wrong with me. Maybe I am getting bored with the lack of quality tennis this late in the year. The new season cannot start soon enough.
     
  2. dimeaxe

    dimeaxe Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Messages:
    575
  3. Gonzo_style

    Gonzo_style Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2012
    Messages:
    3,923
    Stop with that! :):)
     
  4. ChrisRF

    ChrisRF Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2011
    Messages:
    164
    We shouldn't overrate Agassi's achievement so much. He was really good and maybe one of the best returners of all time, but was it really harder to complete the career slam back then? Yes, if we only look on surfaces. But no way in terms of competition.

    He never would have won Roland Garros if he had to deal with Nadal, that ist almost sure. He took Wimbledon before Sampras raised his top level there and had absolutely no chance after that. And even at the US Open he could only hope that Sampras wasn't there (1999) or was out due to illness (1994). Only at the Australian Open he was really the best player for many years.

    But still he wouldn't have beaten a prime Federer at any Slam. Djokovic has to deal with Federer everywhere and Nadal on clay. So if he wins the career slam, it is a much higher achievement than Agassi's. For example, even if Federer ist past his prime now, I think Agassi had lost the 2011 US Open Semifinal against him very clearly.
     
  5. DropShotArtist

    DropShotArtist Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    Messages:
    1,227
    I wasn't making a prediction. Just reporting the facts.
     
  6. Ms Nadal

    Ms Nadal Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2012
    Messages:
    554
    Clarky, you are very harsh about Rafa. He tried his best you know. Djok got him last year but Rafa is going to make it up to us next year! :). Let's be positive now. I think Rafa needed a rest mentally and physically so he is having it now. So hopefully he will be recharged for next year and bring us lots of joy! :). That is how I am looking at it now. I am always pleased with what Rafa wins. I used to be a huge Roddick fan and he never used to win much. Rafa has spoiled me! :)
     
  7. Sabratha

    Sabratha G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    18,555
    Good thing he didn't have surgery, because in most cases after that happens the player is done.
     
  8. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,656


    The problem is Nadal is not 20 anymore. He is going to be 27 next year which is old for a tennis player. Time is up for him,and these injuries are just speeding up the process.
     
  9. Sabratha

    Sabratha G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    18,555
    Especially since he's been out of his prime for over two years. :twisted:
     
  10. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,656


    Yep. But so was Fed after only 4 years,and at 26 years old. :wink:
     
  11. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,667
    Even if Nadal stops playing now, Djokovic still has to win 7 more slams to at least surpass Nadal, and I don't think Nadal will stop playing any time soon, so Djokovic has very little chance to surpass Nadal..
     
  12. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,656


    But just because Nadal is playing doesn't mean he will be winning anymore slams.
     
  13. TopFH

    TopFH Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2010
    Messages:
    3,494
    You are talking about Fed's peak, Clarky. Fed was in his prime until the 2010 AO.
     
  14. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,656


    I'm just repeating what most of the Fedfans here have said.
     
  15. MichaelNadal

    MichaelNadal Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,154
    Location:
    Somewhere Epic
    Nadal is still leagues ahead of the field besides the other 3 you know who's. He wants to play to 2016 and there's no way he won't win between 1-3 more slams at the least if he's healthy.
     
  16. BauerAlmeida

    BauerAlmeida Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    566
    Location:
    Argentina
    Pfff.....If there's someone who's career grand slam is really worthy, it's Agassi's. He won in 3 different surfaces, and when the surfaces were actually different.

    It's not his fault if Sampras lost in Wimbledon before facing him, but he had to defeat Becker, McEnroe and Ivanisevic to win in his worst surface. Not like the draw open up for him.
    The Nadal thing makes no sense, so every player who didn't face Nadal to win Roland Garros it's as if he didn't win it?? I assume Borg's titles at Roland Garros are worth **** because he didn't face Nadal. And Agassi beat players like Courier or Moya at Roland Garros.
    And well, in Hard courts he got tired of wining.

    He also has at least one final in every grand slam besides from the time he won, so none of them can't be considered a fluke.

    He wouldn't have beaten prime Federer at any slam?? Seriously?? Why did prime Federer need 4 and 5 sets to beat 34 and 35 year old Agassi at the USO?? Agassi could perfectly beat prime Federer at both HC slams, probably too in clay. Federer would easily win at Wimbledon.

    Djokovic will win the career slam, but in any way it will be harder to achieve than Agassi's. Surfaces today are a joke.
     
  17. Steve0904

    Steve0904 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    16,175
    Location:
    The Shire
    You make a nice argument, but I disagree with the bolded part. You can use the USO 2005 as an example, but the Australian was Andre's best surface, and Fed played him there in 2005, and beat him convincingly in straights, so it's a wash really. I realize Andre was far from his prime, but he also beat him in straights in Miami in 2005. An event which Andre won 6 times. More than anyone else. I'm also not sure he would've beat him at RG. The only guy to stop Fed there in his prime was Nadal. He lost to Kuerten in 2004 of course, but he's not exactly terrible on clay. And he lost to Soderling in 2010, but Agassi plays nothing like Soderling. I know Agassi was pretty good on the clay himself, but I think he'd have a tough time beating Fed there.
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2012
  18. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,656

    Come on,dude. There is no way he will be playing in 2016. Look at all the physical problems he's having now. No way the injury woes won't get worse from now on as he gets older and slower.


    He also will not win 1-3 more slams of any kind as much as we would like him to. Being realistic about his chances are best instead of living in a fantasy land.
     
  19. cc0509

    cc0509 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    19,281
    Nah, Nadal should be able to win 1-3 more slams easily.
     
  20. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Agassi won his RG title at 29. Had he been roughly the same age as Nadal, Nadal might be all but finished as a top player by then, who knows at this point.

    Agassi won a Wimbledon title with Sampras, Becker, Ivanisevic, Edberg, defending Champion Stich, McEnroe all in the quarters. He beat Becker and a red hot Ivanisevic who had beaten Lendl, Edberg, and Sampras to do it. Seems pretty deserving to me. Sampras was good enough to win Wimbledon that year, he was just stopped for the only time it would turn out by his toughest grass opponent, and probably the 2nd best grass courter of the Sampras generation, Ivanisevic, who was in red hot form that event. Then Agassi beat that same person in the final, when most assumed in his form he would roll over Agassi, which was an impressive victory. Yes there is a good chance Sampras would have beaten Agassi had they played there, but it is a moot point in the end.

    How on earth do you know Agassi wouldnt beat prime Federer at any slam. 34 year old Agassi took prime Federer to 5 sets at the 2004 U.S Open, and then had peak Federer at 1 set all, down 4-2, 30-0 in the 3rd. That seems a pretty arrogant and baseless assumption to make.

    What is this stupidity of needing to beat Nadal and Federer at slams to justify them too, LOL! That is like saying Djokovics slams arent worthy since he wouldnt have ever beaten prime Sampras at Wimbledon or the U.S Open or prime Agassi at the Australian Open, which some would suggest.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 2, 2012
  21. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Exactly post. It seems ****s have no respect for any player in the history of tennis not named Roger Federer.
     
  22. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    4,188
    Location:
    London
    1. My point is that Borg won more slams than Connors despite the fact that Borg retired at age 26 and Connors at 43.
    2. Connors had enough time to win more slams when he was younger but he failed.

    Djokovic has very good chance to be No. 1 for another 3 seasons (2013,2014,2015). There is realistic possibility that Novak will have have much more weeks at No. 1 than Nadal, more seasons as player of the year etc etc....overall have better career than Rafa.
     
  23. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Weeks at #1 is not the main factor in a better career. If it were than Connors would be considered to have had a greater career and be greater than Borg but that isnt even close to the case since 11 slams > 8 slams, and since Borg was the clay court GOAT before Nadal. Djokovic would need to reach the same # of slams as Nadal at minimum and win the French before anyone might consider him as having the better career.
     
  24. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    35,458
    Location:
    New York
    Djokovic already has a better career than Nadal on hard court: 25 titles total, 10 masters, 4 slams is definitely superior to: 11 titles total, 5 masters, 2 slams which is what Nadal has on the surface. Djoko will retire as the second best player of his era on hard (after Fed).
    The reason why Djoko won't overtake Nadal overall is because he will never come even remotely close on clay (and will never dominate a surface the way Nadal has dominated clay) and may not even match Nadal's success on grass (seeing how grass is really Djoko's weakest surface).
    So no, I don't think Djoko will surpass Nadal overall. I think he will be a very deserving #3 overall and #2 on hard.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2012
  25. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    I agree with all that but I do think Djokovic will end up retiring as the Australian Open GOAT with 5 or more titles there (if he wins this January I already give him the nod over Agassi and Federer who also have 4 but never won 3 in a row), and he has a good chance of surpassing Federer as the 2nd best clay courter of this era by the time he retires.
    Overall he will definitely be 3rd.

    Surpassing Nadal on grass, no way. Even if he wins a 2nd Wimbledon, which I dont think he will, in fact Nadal is more likely to win more Wimbledons than Djokovic IMO, he would need to reach 5 Wimbledon finals like Nadal did, and that will never happen.
     
  26. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    35,458
    Location:
    New York
    Let's not put the cart before the horse here. Currently, Djoko has not won AO 3 times in a row either . He should win at least 4 total there though. It's his best event along with Miami (which he's won 3 times too) and I expect him to surpass Fed or any other active player in those 2 events by a comfortable margin by the time he retires. But I don't expect him to win the next 3 or 4 AO. I think Murray will win one and probably someone else too.
     
  27. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    I dont think he will win every Australian Open. I do think he will win atleast 2 more though, and that would more than cement him as the Australian Open GOAT as nobody else in the Open Era has more than 4. I do think Nadal could win another, and I do think Murray could win one. I think Murray is more likely to win at Wimbledon and the U.S Open than the Australian Open though.
     
  28. Steve0904

    Steve0904 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    16,175
    Location:
    The Shire
    I respectfully disagree with the bolded part. Djokovic has got too long a way to go to surpass Federer on clay IMO. Federers made 5 RG finals and he has a title. He also has 6 clay masters to Djokovic's 3(not sure) (Djokovic could surpass him here.) The only way Djokovic surpasses Federer on clay is if Nadal doesn't come back, or comes back a shell of what he once was on clay, and considering that would mean that Federer faced a tougher version of Nadal, it's kind of ass backwards when anybody talks about "weak" eras in regards to Federer.

    Djokovic would have to win RG and make the final until 2016 just to match Federer there in # of finals and titles. If he won 2 RG titles, and/or beat Nadal to get 1 or both of them then he would surpass Federer, but as of now, although Djokovic has a better chance of beating Nadal at RG than Federer ever did, he's still pretty far from beating him and Nadal is still king of clay as witnessed this year. He almost lost to Seppi and Tsonga as well this year.
     
  29. Sabratha

    Sabratha G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    18,555
    Djokovic is only 25 - you don't know what he will achieve in the tail end of his career.
     
  30. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Valid points but I could see Djokovic ending up with 6 or 7 Masters on clay (roughly equal to Federer) but he has won Rome which is an edge IMO. He also has major potential to have won all the current Masters, and he cant be blamed that much for not winning Hamburg which ended in 2008. Federer has only won Hamburg/Madrid which is basically the replacement, so at no given point of his career had he won more than 1 of the 3 current ones, never winning either Rome or Monte Carlo. As for Roland Garros I dont know if he will make 5 finals but he should make 3 or 4 anyway, and he should win atleast 1 Roland Garros. He might win 2 which would pretty much close any debate, but even if he wins 1 by beating Nadal in the final, that would push him over Federer in many peoples minds.

    In the end the two will be close but I do think Djokovic will atleast make it a strong debate vs Federer to the second best clay courter of this era by the time he retires. IMO as far as level of play he has been a better clay courter than Federer since 2008 now, with the exception of 2010 where both were crap and neither even in the top 5 clay courters that year probably. In 2008 he was playing better tennis at all clay events that season minus Monte Carlo where Federer was better, both had to play Nadal at Hamburg and Roland Garros though and Novak had to first. In 2009 Nadal and Djokovic were both much better than Federer until that MAdrid semi which ruined both IMO. Obviously no debate that Djokovic was overall better than Federer on clay in both 2011 and 2012.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 3, 2012
  31. tudwell

    tudwell Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2007
    Messages:
    4,406
    I'm gonna disagree here. Djokovic has played Nadal four times at Roland Garros and won a total of one set against him. Federer has only once not won a set against Nadal in five matches. Plus, Djokovic only won that single set when they were playing in a flood and probably shouldn't have been on court in the first place.

    Plus, Federer generally plays Nadal much closer on clay than Djokovic does. That obviously wasn't the case in 2011, but the only time Federer has looked as bad against Nadal as Djokovic did in his 2012 clay Masters finals was the 2008 French Open final. Generally, Federer gives Nadal a very tough match. It's actually surprising he's not more competitive in the head-to-head.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2012
  32. Sabratha

    Sabratha G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    18,555
    Almost every match Nadal has with Federer is a close encounter, really. Dating back to 2004 even.
     
  33. tudwell

    tudwell Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2007
    Messages:
    4,406
    I'm not sure I'd lump Federer and Djokovic in as the same era. They're obviously not terribly far removed, but really only 2008 and 2009 are years where they overlap as far as top clay-court playing. Since then, Federer's age has withered his clay ability by a good margin, and before that Djokovic was not a top clay-courter.
     
  34. Steve0904

    Steve0904 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    16,175
    Location:
    The Shire
    Good points, however I'd still give Djokovic an edge in terms of actually being able to beat Nadal on clay. Djokovic is just a much better matchup for Nadal on any surface than Federer is regardless of how many sets Federer's taken (excluding indoor HC).

    It's also misleading to look at Djokovic-Nadal matches at RG in 06, 07, or even 08, because Djokovic is a much better player now than he was then.
     
  35. The-Champ

    The-Champ Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    6,517
    Location:
    Sweden
    But Nadal was a much better player on clay back then than he is now. Peak Federer was very unlucky he had to face the Nadal that moved twice as fast and much better defender.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2012
  36. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    35,458
    Location:
    New York
    Fed still has the better record on clay (compared to Djoko), especially at RG (by a landslide). Djoko is showing great potential on clay especially in masters but he's only been there since 2008 (excluding his catastrophic 2010), he still has a lot to prove on the surface. To me, the biggest edge he has over Fed is winning 2 masters out of the 3 and especially 2 Rome which for me has much more weight than either Hamburg or Madrid prestige-wise.
     
  37. Steve0904

    Steve0904 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    16,175
    Location:
    The Shire
    Not sure about that. Nadal is so great on clay you can hardly tell if he was a better player in the past than he is now. He may have been faster, but he wasn't a better player. He dominated RG again in 2012, on par with his 2010, and 2008 campaigns. The only set he lost came in the pouring rain.
     
  38. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,656


    :shock:


    10thenyourenotpayingattentions
     
  39. Steve0904

    Steve0904 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    16,175
    Location:
    The Shire
    All I'm saying is he's about 2-3 levels above everybody on clay. It doesn't matter if it's 2005 or 2012.
     
  40. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,656


    I disagree with that. Especially when it comes to Cvac.
     
  41. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,715
    lol Djokovic only won 1 set from Nadal in 3 clay meetings this year (7-1) and you said he only won that set because it was raining.

    Do you have a split personality posting 2 opposing views?
     
  42. Sabratha

    Sabratha G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    18,555
    Djokovic is about half as good as Nadal is on clay.
     
  43. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    9,363
    Ehh.. .. Djoker will definitely win a French Open title. Or two.. hell Maybe 3. . Nadal won't dominate there much longer. And at this point, no one else is even close to Djoker or Nadal on clay so Nole will have quite a few more chances to give him 2 French Open titles at the very least which should firmly cement over Federer on clay. Not to mention Nole will manage some other clay titles as well.

    I look at it like this:

    AO- Nole will clearly be Australian Open GOAT by the time he retires. He will easily manage 2 more and then some. Hes much better then anyone else at this point at the AO. Murray is close, but I dont think Murray much better then he did in Australia this year, and it still wasn't enough to beat Nole who wasn't even at the top of his game there this year (and he still won it all mind you)

    French Open- 2 RG titles at the very least. How long can Rafa go there? He already 7, He may be able to manage 1 more (possibly 2) but I think one of those years, Djoker gets the best of him. No one else is even close to these two on clay at this point and Djoker has a good 3-5 years of opportunities there

    Wimbledon- I could see Nole winning another one possibly. Hes not a great grass court player but the field will be open there. Unless Nadal re-emerges.. I think disregarding the roof, if the weather stays good and the roof open Nole will still have a chance to grab one more wimbledon anyways before he hangs it up. Nole isn't great, but really neither is anyone else here outside of Fed (who's probably done now at wimbledon, unless the roof is closed of course or Rafa re-emerges)

    USO- Nole should manage 1-2 more at least. Though he clearly is not as good in Flushing as he is in Australia


    Nole will manage 9.. Maybe 10 slams by the time he retires. Not enough to pass Rafa but it will clearly put him in line as hands down 3rd of the post Sampras/Agassi era. He will be hands down the best slow hard court player of this generation, 2nd best clay, 3rd or 4th best grass, 2nd best fast hard court player.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2012
  44. Sabratha

    Sabratha G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    18,555
    No way is Djokovic winning a French Open title, he nearly lost to players ranked 20-30 this year there.
     
  45. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,656


    It's all about mileage. Cvac is still in his prime while Nadal isn't. I think Cvac will win RG for the next 3 years or more at this point.
     
  46. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,715
    So? He almost lost to Troicki at the US Open in 2010 when Troicki was ranked 47. He DID lose to Tommy Haas ranked 34 at Wimbledon 2009
     
  47. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,656

    Then who else is going to win there? With Nadal well past his prime and practically retired,Cvac is as good as gold at RG.
     
  48. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,715
    The poster was talking about him dominating this year and his ability on clay in 2012. Which is backed up by his results on clay. But you have to deny Nadal has been able to win anything since 2010 finished. This was not about the future it was about the recent past.

    And even with mileage so what? He killed Djokovic this year, next year with more milage maybe he loses a set in non rainy weather.
     
  49. Sabratha

    Sabratha G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    18,555
    Ferrer could have a golden run like Michael Chang did and snag a Roland Garros title.
     
  50. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,656


    Never gonna happen.
     

Share This Page