Will Djokovic end up with a better career than Nadal ?

Will Djokovic end up with a better career than Nadal ?


  • Total voters
    142

Clarky21

Banned
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.



You know that mileage and wear and tear matters. I don't know why you keep denying that fact.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
Never gonna happen.
If he's not in Federer's half of the draw one year and Nadal is out, he could beat either Djokovic or Murray for the title. He has shown this year that he can take Murray out at Roland Garros, and he's shown in the past that he can beat Djokovic when he really needs to.
 

Clarky21

Banned
If he's not in Federer's half of the draw one year and Nadal is out, he could beat either Djokovic or Murray for the title. He has shown this year that he can take Murray out at Roland Garros, and he's shown in the past that he can beat Djokovic when he really needs to.



Ferrer will never beat Cvac at RG. He can barely manage to take one set off of him when they play much less the 3 it would take to beat him at a slam.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
Ferrer will never beat Cvac at RG. He can barely manage to take one set off of him when they play much less the 3 it would take to beat him at a slam.
Stranger things have happened.
 
N

NadalAgassi

Guest
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.

Good assessment. If I had to guess now I would say:

Australian Open- atleast 2 more
French Open- atleast 1, a decent shot at 2. It mostly depends on Nadal really.
Wimbledon- probably wont win another, but still could
U.S Open- should win atleast 1 more
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Ferrer will never beat Cvac at RG. He can barely manage to take one set off of him when they play much less the 3 it would take to beat him at a slam.

ferrer is 3-1 vs novak on clay , the one win for novak was a hard-fought 3-setter for novak in 2011 .... ferrer beat in him straights in their DC encounter in 2009 ....
 

Towser83

G.O.A.T.
You know that mileage and wear and tear matters. I don't know why you keep denying that fact.

yeah point is with supposedly destroyed knees and lots of mileage on the clock (you were saying Nadal wouldn't beat almagro etc) he still totally destroyed Djokovic winning 7 out of 8 sets in 3 meetings and only lost a set due to rain.

So Nadal can probably suffer a bit more milage and still win, because this year he won so comfortably.

And again the other poster was only talking about Nadal up to this year and saying he was miles better than everyone whether it was 2005 or 2012. You refuted that, which is obviously ridiculous.

You have no valid point.
 
N

NadalAgassi

Guest
Regardless of their career H2H I dont see Ferrer beating Djokovic if they play at RG. Ferrer is not strong enough mentally to beat the top players in the slams. His only 2 really big slam wins ever are his upsets of Nadal at the 2007 U.S Open and 2011 Australian Open, atleast one of which was heavily injury based. Beating Murray at the French Open is not a big win, Ferrer is supposed to beat Murray on clay. Djokovic although already generally better than Ferrer for many years was also not really in his prime at the time of those defeats, his prime being 2011-probably another few years after this one.
 

Steve0904

Talk Tennis Guru
I don't see how Djokovic goes above Fed on clay automatically if wins 2 RG titles. It's quite evident that if Nadal comes back even close to what he was Djokovic is unlikely to beat him, although I still maintain he has a better shot than Federer ever did. If he comes back, and he's not half as good as what he was, that would just mean that Djokovic bagged 2 RG titles in a "weak" clay era (for lack of a better word). The only difference between them then would be that Djokovic didn't have to play Nadal twice in the final, and Federer got "lucky" only once.

I hate to bring this up because it's very hypothetical, but I think without Nadal, Federer has at least 3 RG titles, and IMHO that's the only way Djokovic is getting 2. He had enough trouble with Seppi and Tsonga this year for gods sake, and he lost a set to Delpo in 2011 when he was only in the process of coming back. Delpo has pushed Federer hard there twice now, he could certainly do the same to Novak, and if he gets that close who's to say he won't beat him.

Nadal is getting older, but so is Djokovic, which means he's more likely to get upset. Say Djokovic makes the final the next two years. He'll be 26 this coming year, and 27 the next. Will he make the final again at 28 and beyond with his style of play even if the next generation is supposedly weak. I'm not so sure. If he does, all power to him, but given this scenario which I think is relatively likely he'll have to cash in 2 for 2 the next 2 years. I think he'll win at least 1 RG for the record. Now I could be totally wrong obviously, but these are just my thoughts.
 
Last edited:

5555

Hall of Fame
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.

I did not say that weeks at No. 1 is the main factor. It is a very important factor. Number of slams in the main factor but it is not the only factor which means that Djokovic does not have to reach the same number of slams as Nadal in order to have better career. Also, the ranking method in 1970s and 1980s was much different than in the last 20 years. It was a unreliable ranking method. Since 1990 "Player Of the Year" has always been the Year-End No. 1 unlike in 1970s and 1980s. So, your comparison is irrelevant.

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.

Is it fact?
 

Steve0904

Talk Tennis Guru
I think Djokovic has to win the French first, but I also think that if Nadal stays at 11 slams (big if IMO), and Djokovic can get to 9 or 10 along with other things like another YEC or two it will be very close. Djokovic could end up with more weeks at #1 as well, and he could end up beating Nadal en route to some slams thus cutting into the H2H. The problem for Novak is that I don't think Nadal is done. Djokovic has more potential to win more M1000 tournaments from here on out, but I don't think he's catching Nadal because Nadal has at least MC and Rome where he is the overwhelming favourite for now, and he has a few more slams in him I think. I'd give him 14 to put him on level with Sampras.
 
N

NadalAgassi

Guest
I did not say that weeks at No. 1 is the main factor. It is a very important factor. Number of slams in the main factor but it is not the only factor which means that Djokovic does not have to reach the same number of slams as Nadal in order to have better career. Also, the ranking method in 1970s and 1980s was much different than in the last 20 years. It was a unreliable ranking method. Since 1990 "Player Of the Year" has always been the Year-End No. 1 unlike in 1970s and 1980s. So, your comparison is irrelevant.

The only players considered above Nadal in history today by anyone are people with 11 slams or more. Nobody rates guys with fewer slams like Connors, Lendl, Agassi, anywhere near, and this despite that Connors and Lendl have numerous unbelievable stats in other areas which neither Nadal or Djokovic will ever get close to. So yes it seems pretty obvious Djokovic would need to atleast match Nadal's slam count for anyone to rate him higher.

As for the Player of the Year awards the ATP board at the time hated Connors so those in the 70s were just as irrelevant. It is a more a reflection on them than the ranking system.
 
N

NadalAgassi

Guest
I don't see how Djokovic goes above Fed on clay automatically if wins 2 RG titles. It's quite evident that if Nadal comes back even close to what he was Djokovic is unlikely to beat him, although I still maintain he has a better shot than Federer ever did. If he comes back, and he's not half as good as what he was, that would just mean that Djokovic bagged 2 RG titles in a "weak" clay era (for lack of a better word). The only difference between them then would be that Djokovic didn't have to play Nadal twice in the final, and Federer got "lucky" only once.

I hate to bring this up because it's very hypothetical, but I think without Nadal, Federer has at least 3 RG titles, and IMHO that's the only way Djokovic is getting 2. He had enough trouble with Seppi and Tsonga this year for gods sake, and he lost a set to Delpo in 2011 when he was only in the process of coming back. Delpo has pushed Federer hard there twice now, he could certainly do the same to Novak, and if he gets that close who's to say he won't beat him.

Nadal is getting older, but so is Djokovic, which means he's more likely to get upset. Say Djokovic makes the final the next two years. He'll be 26 this coming year, and 27 the next. Will he make the final again at 28 and beyond with his style of play even if the next generation is supposedly weak. I'm not so sure. If he does, all power to him, but given this scenario which I think is relatively likely he'll have to cash in 2 for 2 the next 2 years. I think he'll win at least 1 RG for the record. Now I could be totally wrong obviously, but these are just my thoughts.

Take away Nadal and Djokovic wins the 2008 and 2012 French titles too (sorry no way a totally crap Federer in 08 beats Djokovic, he has never beaten Djokovic on clay while in poor form), so in the hypothetical event he wins 2 that would mean atleast 4 without Nadal himself, probably more as he most likely loses to Nadal in some other finals, so that isnt really an edge for Federer in that case.

Djokovic should be a contender the next 4 years atleast, and with Nadal on decline he could quite well win 2 of those 4, with Nadal probably winning the other 2. It is quite easy to envision it. It is hard to picture anyone else winning a French anytime soon even if both have a small decline. Does anyone see Murray, Federer at this point, or Del Potro winning a French, LOL! I also believe if Djokovic does win 2 atleast 1 will be over Nadal in the final. Even if Djokovic only wins 1, but does it by beating Nadal in the final, and reaches another few FO finals and wins another couple Masters titles, that would also put him above Federer on clay, and given the importance you seem to give to facing Nadal or Nadal being around, it is hard to see you disagreeing with that.

As for Del Potro, Djokovic owns him completely. Unless he shows a drastic further upgrade in form he is not beating Djokovic on clay or hard courts, especialy in a major. His only win over Djokovic (outside a retirement after the 1st set) is on grass.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

tudwell

G.O.A.T.
How so? Cvac has beaten Nadal on clay and multiple times across every surface and at the slams. I see no comparison between the two at all.

The only set he's won against Nadal at Roland Garros was in torrential rain. Nadal tears him apart in normal conditions.
 

Clarky21

Banned
The only set he's won against Nadal at Roland Garros was in torrential rain. Nadal tears him apart in normal conditions.



How about last year when Nadal lost 2 consecutive clay finals to Cvac in straight sets? If not for Fed playing like a beast and taking him out in the semi,he would have beaten Nadal in the RG final last year as well.
 

Towser83

G.O.A.T.
Take away Nadal and Djokovic wins the 2008 and 2012 French titles too (sorry no way a totally crap Federer in 08 beats Djokovic, he has never beaten Djokovic on clay while in poor form), so in the hypothetical event he wins 2 that would mean atleast 4 without Nadal himself, probably more as he most likely loses to Nadal in some other finals, so that isnt really an edge for Federer in that case.

Djokovic should be a contender the next 4 years atleast, and with Nadal on decline he could quite well win 2 of those 4, with Nadal probably winning the other 2. It is quite easy to envision it. It is hard to picture anyone else winning a French anytime soon even if both have a small decline. Does anyone see Murray, Federer at this point, or Del Potro winning a French, LOL! I also believe if Djokovic does win 2 atleast 1 will be over Nadal in the final. Even if Djokovic only wins 1, but does it by beating Nadal in the final, and reaches another few FO finals and wins another couple Masters titles, that would also put him above Federer on clay, and given the importance you seem to give to facing Nadal or Nadal being around, it is hard to see you disagreeing with that.

As for Del Potro, Djokovic owns him completely. Unless he shows a drastic further upgrade in form he is not beating Djokovic on clay or hard courts, especialy in a major. His only win over Djokovic (outside a retirement after the 1st set) is on grass.

Erm "totally cap" federer in 2008 should have beaten peak Nadal in Hamburg and even had him on the ropes 4-0 in Monte Carlo in one set and twice a break down in the other. he also beat djokovic in Monte Carlo and did fairly well in RG til he got to the final. his problem was with Nadal and i don't think djokovic would have beaten him at RG that year.

Also i like the way you just take two future RG titles for djokovic to make 4 for him with the 2008 and 2012 titles you think he'd have won (i agree with 2012) But without Nadal Federer would have won in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009 and 2011. that's at least 5 titles in 7 years and i think he would have in 2008 as well for 6 titles in 7 years and 5 in a row.

At this point djokovic has made ONE RG Final and he almost got beaten by seppi and Tsonga. He should win RG but really there is no guarantee that he will have a consistent record there when he can come close to losing vs Tsonga and seppi in his best year there yet.
 

Towser83

G.O.A.T.
How about last year when Nadal lost 2 consecutive clay finals to Cvac in straight sets? If not for Fed playing like a beast and taking him out in the semi,he would have beaten Nadal in the RG final last year as well.


That was one year and its gone. Nadal is 12-2 on clay and last 3 matches djokovic got destroyed.

I might as well say what about us open and wtf 2010 as proof Nadal will beat djokovic on Harcourt.
 

tudwell

G.O.A.T.
How about last year when Nadal lost 2 consecutive clay finals to Cvac in straight sets? If not for Fed playing like a beast and taking him out in the semi,he would have beaten Nadal in the RG final last year as well.

That is entirely speculation. Djokovic has still yet to beat Nadal at Monte-Carlo, which is more similar to Roland Garros than Rome and especially Madrid. So Djokovic's results at those two tournaments do not necessarily correlate to his success at Roland Garros. Regardless, my point stands. The day Djokovic doesn't look like a lame duck against Nadal at Roland Garros is the day I will recant and admit he has a good shot at winning.

Plus, 2011 was one year. Every single other year has gone overwhelmingly to Nadal on the surface. He rarely loses sets to Djokovic on clay, let alone matches. It's more lopsided a head-to-head than Federer's against Nadal on clay.
 

Clarky21

Banned
That was one year and its gone. Nadal is 12-2 on clay and last 3 matches djokovic got destroyed.I might as well say what about us open and wtf 2010 as proof Nadal will beat djokovic on Harcourt.



How did Cvac get destroyed in any of those matches? The only one that was lopsided was MC,and that was a fluke because Cvac was mentally checked out before that match even began.
 

Towser83

G.O.A.T.
How did Cvac get destroyed in any of those matches? The only one that was lopsided was MC,and that was a fluke because Cvac was mentally checked out before that match even began.

He only won a single set which was due to rain. Using your curious benchmarks where someone having a match point on djokovic is not even troubling him, djokovic not winning a set is pathetic and he virtually wasn't in the match.
 

Clarky21

Banned
He only won a single set which was due to rain. Using your curious benchmarks where someone having a match point on djokovic is not even troubling him, djokovic not winning a set is pathetic and he virtually wasn't in the match.



Those matches were all very close except for MC,where Cvac didn't even show up. You really don't think Rome or RG were close matches? The match is always on Cvac's racket when he plays Nadal no matter what the surface is.
 

The Bawss

Banned
Hey *******s, I will have a better career than your idol.

djokotrollsmal.png


U mad, bro?
 

tudwell

G.O.A.T.
Those matches were all very close except for MC,where Cvac didn't even show up. You really don't think Rome or RG were close matches? The match is always on Cvac's racket when he plays Nadal no matter what the surface is.

The 6-4 6-3 scorelines of the first two sets at Roland Garros really don't show how lopsided it was. Nadal was dominating the match. He hit a bad spell and the court was sopping wet and that allowed Djokovic back into the match, but he quickly surrendered his fourth set lead when play resumed in normal conditions. Nadal is just fitter, more confident, and a better play on clay. It would take Djokovic's game coming together absolutely perfectly and Nadal being significantly below par, like in 2011, for Djokovic to even give Nadal a scare at Roland Garros.

You're absolutely nuts if you think the match is on Djokovic's racquet on clay. Nadal leads the head-to-head 12-2 and went 7-1 in sets this year. Djokovic had to play the best he ever has - a peak he hasn't come close to matching - to get those two wins, and that was probably the least confident Nadal had been since he missed Wimbledon in 2009. Nadal obviously has the match on his racquet when they play on clay, and you and maybe the FIBob are the only people in existence who would say otherwise.
 
Last edited:

Towser83

G.O.A.T.
Those matches were all very close except for MC,where Cvac didn't even show up. You really don't think Rome or RG were close matches? The match is always on Cvac's racket when he plays Nadal no matter what the surface is.

You said djokovic wouldn't have even won a set in the RG final if not for rain but now you're saying the match was close?! How is a match close when you are sure one player couldn't have even won one set under normal circumstances??

Seriously don't ever get a job as a painter and decorator - you will spend all your time painting yourself into a corner.

You just want to brag about how dominant Nadal was at RG but then that goes against this mantra you've built up.
 

Steve0904

Talk Tennis Guru
Take away Nadal and Djokovic wins the 2008 and 2012 French titles too (sorry no way a totally crap Federer in 08 beats Djokovic, he has never beaten Djokovic on clay while in poor form), so in the hypothetical event he wins 2 that would mean atleast 4 without Nadal himself, probably more as he most likely loses to Nadal in some other finals, so that isnt really an edge for Federer in that case.

Djokovic should be a contender the next 4 years atleast, and with Nadal on decline he could quite well win 2 of those 4, with Nadal probably winning the other 2. It is quite easy to envision it. It is hard to picture anyone else winning a French anytime soon even if both have a small decline. Does anyone see Murray, Federer at this point, or Del Potro winning a French, LOL! I also believe if Djokovic does win 2 atleast 1 will be over Nadal in the final. Even if Djokovic only wins 1, but does it by beating Nadal in the final, and reaches another few FO finals and wins another couple Masters titles, that would also put him above Federer on clay, and given the importance you seem to give to facing Nadal or Nadal being around, it is hard to see you disagreeing with that.

As for Del Potro, Djokovic owns him completely. Unless he shows a drastic further upgrade in form he is not beating Djokovic on clay or hard courts, especialy in a major. His only win over Djokovic (outside a retirement after the 1st set) is on grass.

I'm not sure it's clear cut that Djokovic beats Federer at RG in 08. Federer had just beaten Novak at MC which is the slowest of the slow, and sure he lost some sets en route to the French final, but he wasn't "total crap." Nadal just made it look that way. I think Federer's lost sets en route to all of his French finals. Federer lost 3 sets en route, and Djokovic lost 1, hardly a distinguishable difference.

And the part where we disagree is this. If Nadal comes back anywhere near what he was, based on what I seen of 2012, and because I don't think Novak will ever find his 2011 form again, he's not beating Nadal in a RG final or any other part of the tournament. I still give Djokovic a better shot than Federer, but neither of them have high hopes of pulling it off, and if he comes back less than what he was well I've already provided reasoning for that. And if I really wanted to get sticky I could say Federer could have 5 RG titles if not for Nadal, and that's even if we give Novak the 08 title, which is not totally clear cut IMO. I only said at least 3 to be nice.

I agree Delpo is unlikely to beat Novak, but so were Seppi and Tsonga.
 

Clarky21

Banned
You said djokovic wouldn't have even won a set in the RG final if not for rain but now you're saying the match was close?! How is a match close when you are sure one player couldn't have even won one set under normal circumstances??

Seriously don't ever get a job as a painter and decorator - you will spend all your time painting yourself into a corner.

You just want to brag about how dominant Nadal was at RG but then that goes against this mantra you've built up.


Yeah,I do think the match was close. Closer than the scoreline indicates,imo.


What mantra? That I think Cvac is better than Nadal?
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Take away Nadal and Djokovic wins the 2008 and 2012 French titles too (sorry no way a totally crap Federer in 08 beats Djokovic, he has never beaten Djokovic on clay while in poor form), so in the hypothetical event he wins 2 that would mean atleast 4 without Nadal himself, probably more as he most likely loses to Nadal in some other finals, so that isnt really an edge for Federer in that case.

Djokovic should be a contender the next 4 years atleast, and with Nadal on decline he could quite well win 2 of those 4, with Nadal probably winning the other 2. It is quite easy to envision it. It is hard to picture anyone else winning a French anytime soon even if both have a small decline. Does anyone see Murray, Federer at this point, or Del Potro winning a French, LOL! I also believe if Djokovic does win 2 atleast 1 will be over Nadal in the final. Even if Djokovic only wins 1, but does it by beating Nadal in the final, and reaches another few FO finals and wins another couple Masters titles, that would also put him above Federer on clay, and given the importance you seem to give to facing Nadal or Nadal being around, it is hard to see you disagreeing with that.

lol, without nadal, federer would have 5, possibly 6 and djoker would have 1, possibly 2 RGs, it wouldn't be close ....

even now, achievements wise, federer is by some distance ahead ........ 1 RG+ 4 other RG finals

djoker has one lone final @ RG, in which he was taken to 5 by seppi and had to fight off MPs vs tsonga ...

taken one set off rafa in 4 meetings there ....federer has taken 4 sets off rafa in 5 meetings @ RG....

As for Del Potro, Djokovic owns him completely. Unless he shows a drastic further upgrade in form he is not beating Djokovic on clay or hard courts, especialy in a major. His only win over Djokovic (outside a retirement after the 1st set) is on grass.

lol, if seppi can take him to 5 and tsonga can have MPs in the only year he's made the finals, delpo , who is a wayyyyyy better player on clay surely has a chance of beating him @ RG .... and of course a decent chance @ the USO ...
 

BauerAlmeida

Hall of Fame
If it wasn't for Nadal, Federer would have won RG in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2011. Add that to RG 2009, it's 5 RG titles.

If it wasn't for Nadal, Djokovic would have 2 RG, in 2008 and 2012. Considering Djokovic is only 25 and I can't see anyone bar Nadal beating him there in the next few years, I say they will end up with the same amount of RG titles or situtations when they would have won the titles if it wasn't for Nadal.
 

Towser83

G.O.A.T.
Yeah,I do think the match was close. Closer than the scoreline indicates,imo.


What mantra? That I think Cvac is better than Nadal?

So a close match where Djokovic didn't have a chance of winning a set. Heard it all now.

The mantra that Nadal cannot beat Djokovic.
 

Clarky21

Banned
So a close match where Djokovic didn't have a chance of winning a set. Heard it all now.

The mantra that Nadal cannot beat Djokovic.



What do you mean he didn't have a chance to win a set? He absolutely did have chances to win sets. What's funny is people bleated on about Cvac winning this & that,and when I agree with them about it,you act like I'm crazy. You're a funny guy,Towser. :lol:


And you thought after all the beatdowns Nadal took from Cvac over the past year and half,that Nadal would beat him again? I highly doubt you did.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Soderling made 2 FO finals, you can argue Nole is behind him, let alone Federer. And don't even get started with who had greater competition. Roger had a much better version of Nadal on clay from 2005-2009. Nole will benefit from a declining Nadal(especially his movement), so he does have an easy chance to win the FO in the future.
 

Gonzo_style

Hall of Fame
Soderling made 2 FO finals, you can argue Nole is behind him, let alone Federer. And don't even get started with who had greater competition. Roger had a much better version of Nadal on clay from 2005-2009. Nole will benefit from a declining Nadal(especially his movement), so he does have an easy chance to win the FO in the future.

Dumbest thing I've ever heard!
 

90's Clay

Banned
Nadal can't possibly continue his French Open domination to the same extent. Sure he probably will end up with another 1 or 2.. But thats where it ends. (especially if these constant injuries continue to derail him where he has to take off half the year, he will just call it a career in a season or two).

Its just not reasonable to think Nadal will own RG for another 4-5 years. Thats about the window Djoker has at managing 2 French Open titles. In fact, Im willing to bet Djokovic does beat Nadal at the French in the next year or two (Something Fed was unable to do). Djoker actually had his chance this year to take out Rafa before rain kind of saved Rafa. (though its not 100 percent that was the case).

So in the end if Djoker manages two RG titles (and manage to take out Rafa in the process at least once), along with his other clay titles, that definitely eclipses Federer's clay resume

And even if Nole doesn't take out Rafa, 2 French Open titles is greater then 1. Fed had a ton of French Open finals, but there is no points for second place. .. At the end of the day, Djoker will have had more titles more then likely and Fed only managed one french open title. . Hes only 24-25 years old, he has an easy 3-5 more years of opportunities to grab 2 titles there.


Now if Nole just ends up with one French Open title, then there would be still room for argument. But I bet he grabs two anyways before its all said and done. And chances are he will have beaten Rafa more times on clay then Fed managed to.
 
Last edited:

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Dumbest thing I've ever heard!
Soderling made 2 FO finals, you can argue Nole is behind him, let alone Federer. And don't even get started with who had greater competition. Roger had a much better version of Nadal on clay from 2005-2009. Nole will benefit from a declining Nadal(especially his movement), so he does have an easy chance to win the FO in the future.

Care to elaborate why you think Nadal will have the similar run on clay like he did from 2005-09.
 

MTF07

Semi-Pro
lol @ this talk of Djokovic winning multiple RG titles when he hasn't won any yet and only been to 1 final.

And don't just assume that because Nadal's days of domination are up that the next great clay champion isn't right behind him
 

Towser83

G.O.A.T.
Nadal can't possibly continue his French Open domination to the same extent. Sure he probably will end up with another 1 or 2.. But thats where it ends. (especially if these constant injuries continue to derail him where he has to take off half the year, he will just call it a career in a season or two).

Its just not reasonable to think Nadal will own RG for another 4-5 years. Thats about the window Djoker has at managing 2 French Open titles. In fact, Im willing to bet Djokovic does beat Nadal at the French in the next year or two (Something Fed was unable to do). Djoker actually had his chance this year to take out Rafa before rain kind of saved Rafa. (though its not 100 percent that was the case).

So in the end if Djoker manages two RG titles (and manage to take out Rafa in the process at least once), along with his other clay titles, that definitely eclipses Federer's clay resume

And even if Nole doesn't take out Rafa, 2 French Open titles is greater then 1. Fed had a ton of French Open finals, but there is no points for second place. .. At the end of the day, Djoker will have had more titles more then likely and Fed only managed one french open title. . Hes only 24-25 years old, he has an easy 3-5 more years of opportunities to grab 2 titles there.


Now if Nole just ends up with one French Open title, then there would be still room for argument. But I bet he grabs two anyways before its all said and done. And chances are he will have beaten Rafa more times on clay then Fed managed to.

What will be interesting though is if Djokovic does beat an old washed up Nadal and gets a better RG haul than Federer, the weak era argument people use to rate Sampras above Federer despite of record will turn on it's head and people will use it to put Fed above Djokovic at RG :lol:
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Nadal can't possibly continue his French Open domination to the same extent. Sure he probably will end up with another 1 or 2.. But thats where it ends. (especially if these constant injuries continue to derail him where he has to take off half the year, he will just call it a career in a season or two).

Its just not reasonable to think Nadal will own RG for another 4-5 years. Thats about the window Djoker has at managing 2 French Open titles. In fact, Im willing to bet Djokovic does beat Nadal at the French in the next year or two (Something Fed was unable to do). Djoker actually had his chance this year to take out Rafa before rain kind of saved Rafa. (though its not 100 percent that was the case).

So in the end if Djoker manages two RG titles (and manage to take out Rafa in the process at least once), along with his other clay titles, that definitely eclipses Federer's clay resume

And even if Nole doesn't take out Rafa, 2 French Open titles is greater then 1. Fed had a ton of French Open finals, but there is no points for second place. .. At the end of the day, Djoker will have had more titles more then likely and Fed only managed one french open title. . Hes only 24-25 years old, he has an easy 3-5 more years of opportunities to grab 2 titles there.


Now if Nole just ends up with one French Open title, then there would be still room for argument. But I bet he grabs two anyways before its all said and done. And chances are he will have beaten Rafa more times on clay then Fed managed to.

Let's wait until he can win 2 FO. You're just jinxing him.

And since you're always obsessed with today's weak/strong era between the top 4, don't forget to mention Nole will have any easy time than Roger(2005-09) since Nadal will never play at that level.:)
 

Towser83

G.O.A.T.
What do you mean he didn't have a chance to win a set? He absolutely did have chances to win sets. What's funny is people bleated on about Cvac winning this & that,and when I agree with them about it,you act like I'm crazy. You're a funny guy,Towser. :lol:


And you thought after all the beatdowns Nadal took from Cvac over the past year and half,that Nadal would beat him again? I highly doubt you did.

You've said numerous times if the rain hadn't come Djokovic would not have won a set in that final. So you must be pretty sure there was nothing Djokovic could have done to nadal to take a set off him.See on one hand when people say that Djokovic could have won you get mad inside and post that Djokovic was lucky to win a set, but then you remember you have to act like Djokovic isn't generally owned by Nadal on clay.

And hang on. I said many, many times that Nadal would eventually beat Djokovic again, both to you and *********s like DFTW. The idea that Nadal would never win another match against him was totally crazy. I gave him a chance at the AO, probably even earlier than that and before the MC final I said Nadal would win, I also said it before Rome and RG, though I hoped that at RG Djokovic could somehow turn it around.

I said all this multiple times, so yes I though Nadal would win again.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
Soderling made 2 FO finals, you can argue Nole is behind him, let alone Federer. And don't even get started with who had greater competition. Roger had a much better version of Nadal on clay from 2005-2009. Nole will benefit from a declining Nadal(especially his movement), so he does have an easy chance to win the FO in the future.

Disagree, not everything is about slams, Novak has 3 CC masters titles and a FO final, Soderling had two great runs at FO but he never even reached a CC masters final.

Regarding how much better version of Nadal on clay Fed faced is also debatable, in 2008? Definitely but it's debatable (to say the least) whether 2005 & 2006 version of Nadal is equal let alone better than say 2012 version of Nadal (this whole CC season Nadal lost only one single set IIRC).
 

Clarky21

Banned
lol @ this talk of Djokovic winning multiple RG titles when he hasn't won any yet and only been to 1 final.

And don't just assume that because Nadal's days of domination are up that the next great clay champion isn't right behind him



Who will win them other than Cvac? There's no one else who is even close to him on clay that can do it.
 

Gonzo_style

Hall of Fame
Care to elaborate why you think Nadal will have the similar run on clay like he did from 2005-09.

First, after that injury in 2009, Nadal in 2010 won 3 MS on clay, that wasn't happened in 2005-2009, and win RG without losing a set ( that only happened in 2008)!

Second, he lost only one set on RED clay this year, that's never happened before! And before RG final destroyed every player ( perhaps more convincingly than 2008)!

Nadal even in 2020 (if he still playing of course) will be one of the favorites for the title in RG!

Than why woild we belittle the importance of eventual Djokovic's victory vs Nadal and title in RG? Btw Djokovic is only ONE year younger than Nadal.
 

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
(answer to clarky) What are you talking about? A lot of players can upset Djoko at RG (and have in the past). Djoko is not even remotely unbeatable at that event. The only way Nadal is not the massive favorite at RG is if he doesn't enter the tournament. Which is unlikely to happen any time soon.
 

tudwell

G.O.A.T.
Disagree, not everything is about slams, Novak has 3 CC masters titles and a FO final, Soderling had two great runs at FO but he never even reached a CC masters final.

Regarding how much better version of Nadal on clay Fed faced is also debatable, in 2008? Definitely but it's debatable (to say the least) whether 2005 & 2006 version of Nadal is equal let alone better than say 2012 version of Nadal (this whole CC season Nadal lost only one single set IIRC).

Three sets. He lost in Madrid.
 

Clarky21

Banned
(answer to clarky) What are you talking about? A lot of players can upset Djoko at RG (and have in the past). Djoko is not even remotely unbeatable at that event. The only way Nadal is not the massive favorite at RG is if he doesn't enter the tournament. Which is unlikely to happen any time soon.



Who?


10char
 
Top