How will Djokovic perform against the young generation in 2023?

[Front242]

Did I say it was black-and-white? I have never ever said he "would" have won that match. Be fair. What I've always said is that, had Rafa not gotten injured, he was well-favored to win it, and signs tell us that there was a good chance he would have. You're not blind to trends, as a betting man


I'm guessing you watched that match, then. No one denies that Medvedev was pretty untouchable in the first set. But you can't pretend that he served or played at that level for the other 4. If you're being completely fair, you'd admit that the one who choked the 2nd set was Nadal, having break leads and mini-break leads, and blowing them. It's a set Nadal should have won, which would have evened the match. He served for that set at 5-3, and he held 5-3 in the TB. THAT is a choke. I don't think Medevdev much led for the rest of the match, only that he stayed close and held his own, even breaking back in the 5th. But that's not what anyone would call a "massive choke" on Medvedev's part. You wish he would have won one more set, but it isn't like he really led, going forward. He had one moment in the 3rd when he might have had a break to lead midway through the 3rd, but there's no guarantee he wouldn't have gotten broken back, since he had been so many times by Rafa, on the day, and before.

My point being, given Nadal's competitiveness, and history, had he not broken his back, tell me what percentage chance Wawrinka had at beating him on that day. Less than 50% for sure. Nadal was a much younger man, and Wawrinka was at least as delicate, mentally, as Medvedev.

I still can't agree there. Absolurely zero is a given EVER in sports. Federer won the USO 5 consecutive years 2004-2008 and was clearly favoured to win in 2009, especially when he reached the final and was then a massive favourite. Well look how that turned out...

A lot of broke dumbasses betting huge money on Federer. Statistically of course Nadal was the favourite but he was playing just fine till 0-2 in set 2 when the injury became clear and losing before then despite no apparent hampered movement so you can see favourite on paper is all the stats show. He may have won, he may not have won. Rosol, Brown and Kyrgios weren't favourites at Wimbledon either. See how this works? I'd quit my job and bet my house on 1 match if it was that easy.

 

[El Dude]

I created an alogrithm that assigns wins and losses, based upon the hypothesis of all players playing fully healthy. This is Rafael Nadal's "true" Slam and WTF record (with the adjustment if the WTF was played on clay, as it should be):

 

[Fiero425]

I created an alogrithm that assigns wins and losses, based upon the hypothesis of all players playing fully healthy. This is Rafael Nadal's "true" Slam and WTF record (with the adjustment if the WTF was played on clay, as it should be):

View attachment 7410

Which is why I wonder why people are so bent out of shape if Nadal drops a match even though we assume he should always win? Gotta spread the wealth or we wouldn't watch! Heaven knows I wasn't watching as much during the Fedal era of 2005-08! It was like the Martina and Chris show of the late 70's & early 80's!

 

[tented]

I created an alogrithm that assigns wins and losses, based upon the hypothesis of all players playing fully healthy. This is Rafael Nadal's "true" Slam and WTF record (with the adjustment if the WTF was played on clay, as it should be):

View attachment 7410

You forgot to include 2023.

 

[Fiero425]

He looked pretty good yesterday in Adelaide, destroying Lestienne 3 & 2! It's thought he looked heavier & stronger by Shriver & Annacone!

 

[Moxie]

It's just an overall farce TALKING about Nadal's injuries year in and year out! There's no shame in players who are seriously hampered with injuries like a Haas or Del Po, but when it concerns Nadal it's seems more of an excuse if he loses a match! His opponents are given little to no credit many times! Nadal says 'he's not injured, but a player w/ an injury!' WTF does that mean? I understand his foot defect, but if he's running like a deer, I don't ever want to hear about his defect after a loss! When you play as hard as Nadal has to as he continues playing a game of attrition, he's only breaking himself down and I just say "cry me a river!" Novak works hard to keep in tip top shape, but the few times he is injured, it's overlooked! The hypocrisy can be mind blowing at times on this site and others! Nadal has a record 22 majors, of which 14 are FO's! At times I find him to be a total drama queen out there; esp. when it seemed he would retire from that Fritz match at Wimbledon! I've heard the same about Novak from his detractors, assuming he's running game on his opponent! Heaven knows I think the same of Rafa! All top players have stolen a few matches w/ tactics you'd think would be below the dignity of a top flight player! Too much fame and fortune to be made! It's all out warfare and I doubt a true friendship w/the Big 3! Novak's jealous of Fedal Fandom and Fedal can't stand that Djokovic has taken over just about every meaniningful record on the books w/ no chance of them preventing the records to be extended! I have this thing with underdogs! I felt the same way about Lendl when he had to contend w/ the elites of his time, BORG, McEnroe, & Connors! He had just as much to overcome as Novak and I marvel w/ the similarities as they stole the show at the end of their respective careers; sans Borg of course!

Hang on for a second....how many times has Novak lost a match and complained of injury after, or pulled out with injury, only to come back to win a significant title later? Let me mention a few, off the top of my head: Loss at Olympics last summer, pulled out of mixed-doubles, due to injury. Doesn't blame the loss ¨specifically" due to injury, but implies it. Same with Olypmics loss in Rio...claims injury after he loses in singles and doubles, bails on mixed doubles, and decides not to play Cincy due to injury. Then makes the final not long after at the USO. What about when he retired out of Cincy v. Murray, in the final, 4-6 and 0-3...that's pretty bad, and he won the USO only a few weeks later? I could go on, but the point is, at least Nadal, when injured, is seriously injured and needs time off. Novak plays injured, then springs back up as if nothing. You ok with that?

 

[Moxie]

I still can't agree there. Absolurely zero is a given EVER in sports. Federer won the USO 5 consecutive years 2004-2008 and was clearly favoured to win in 2009, especially when he reached the final and was then a massive favourite. Well look how that turned out...

A lot of broke dumbasses betting huge money on Federer. Statistically of course Nadal was the favourite but he was playing just fine till 0-2 in set 2 when the injury became clear and losing before then despite no apparent hampered movement so you can see favourite on paper is all the stats show. He may have won, he may not have won. Rosol, Brown and Kyrgios weren't favourites at Wimbledon either. See how this works? I'd quit my job and bet my house on 1 match if it was that easy.

Federer lost healthy in that match. Del Potro was the man, on that day, and he's not an inconsiderable opponent. Rafa was injured, which you agree with. I have never said anything was a "given¨in sports. In fact, I'm against that position. My point, which you keep missing, is that all signs indicate that Rafa might otherwise have won that match, including evidence that we have since. This is about debating with El Dude about which is more likely: a) that Novak would have otherwise been #1 this year, or b) that Rafa would have won at least another Major if not injured. My point is that it's not as wide a difference as he claims. That's all.

 

[Front242]

Federer lost healthy in that match. Del Potro was the man, on that day, and he's not an inconsiderable opponent. Rafa was injured, which you agree with. I have never said anything was a "given¨in sports. In fact, I'm against that position. My point, which you keep missing, is that all signs indicate that Rafa might otherwise have won that match, including evidence that we have since. This is about debating with El Dude about which is more likely: a) that Novak would have otherwise been #1 this year, or b) that Rafa would have won at least another Major if not injured. My point is that it's not as wide a difference as he claims. That's all.

Well aware Federer wasn't injured in the USO 2009 final. My point was being a heavy favourite doesn't mean you'll win as that showed, along with the examples of losses at Wimbledon for Nadal. Of course Nadal might have won but I might not work my current job if my name was Elon Musk!

 

[Kieran]

Well aware Federer wasn't injured in the USO 2009 final. My point was being a heavy favourite doesn't mean you'll win as that showed, along with the examples of losses at Wimbledon for Nadal. Of course Nadal might have won but I might not work my current job if my name was Elon Musk!

And yet you’ll still insist that Novak would have been number one last year if he’d chosen to get vaxxed?

Is kind of one way traffic with you on this one, eh? If Roger had pulled up lame against a gimme in a slam final, you’d be singing a different tune…

 

[Front242]

And yet you’ll still insist that Novak would have been number one last year if he’d chosen to get vaxxed?

Is kind of one way traffic with you on this one, eh? If Roger had pulled up lame against a gimme in a slam final, you’d be singing a different tune…

He 100% would. I can't believe the Nadal fans on that. He barely needed any points to maintain that. He wasn't allowed play 6 tournaments ffs.

 

[Kieran]

He 100% would. I can't believe the Nadal fans on that. He barely needed any points to maintain that. He wasn't allowed play 6 tournaments ffs.

Your assumptions are all biased, brother - when it comes to tennis. You’re like us all, I suppose. On covid, I think we could clink a pint glass, Beamish most likely, to be ecumenical towards the Rebel County!

 

[Front242]

Your assumptions are all biased, brother - when it comes to tennis. You’re like us all, I suppose. On covid, I think we could clink a pint glass, Beamish most likely, to be ecumenical towards the Rebel County!

My assumptions regarding Novak are based on him being denied entry due to medical procedures incorrectly labeled as vaccines that do nae work, cap'ain! So make that a covid double or triple !

 

[Kieran]

My assumptions regarding Novak are based on him being denied entry due to medical procedures incorrectly labeled as vaccines that do nae work, cap'ain! So make that a covid double or triple !

Brother, you’ll need a vaccine for the amount I’ll drink!

 

[Moxie]

Well aware Federer wasn't injured in the USO 2009 final. My point was being a heavy favourite doesn't mean you'll win as that showed, along with the examples of losses at Wimbledon for Nadal. Of course Nadal might have won but I might not work my current job if my name was Elon Musk!

Well aware that being the heavy favorite doesn't make it a done deal, but also Rafa's always been a better fighter in the 5-set scrap. Which he's proven time and again. Roger not so much, so it's less of a good example, though I see why you offer it.

 

[Front242]

Well aware that being the heavy favorite doesn't make it a done deal, but also Rafa's always been a better fighter in the 5-set scrap. Which he's proven time and again. Roger not so much, so it's less of a good example, though I see why you offer it.

Look at Rafa's Wimbledon losses as heavy favourite. Flawed logic.

 

[nehmeth]

I think we’ve been through 3(?) cycles of NextGens during the Big 3 era, and this is the first post Fed. Been able to spend some time watching Adelaide this week. Rune lost to Nishioka. FAA lost to Popyrin. It’s a reminder that there are a lot more players that these youngsters are going to have to play through to get to Djokovic or Nadal. As Nadal and Djoker age, things are coming to an end. I just don’t think these 3 are the ones who will put a stake in the Serb’s heart.

 

[Fiero425]

I think we’ve been through 3(?) cycles of NextGens during the Big 3 era, and this is the first post Fed. Been able to spend some time watching Adelaide this week. Rune lost to Nishioka. FAA lost to Popyrin. It’s a reminder that there are a lot more players that these youngsters are going to have to play through to get to Djokovic or Nadal. As Nadal and Djoker age, things are coming to an end. I just don’t think these 3 are the ones who will put a stake in the Serb’s heart.

Carlos Alvaraz was fortunate Novak's early year absence helped his ascension to #1 so early! He got an opening w/ Nadal breaking down!

 

[Moxie]

Look at Rafa's Wimbledon losses as heavy favourite. Flawed logic.

Remind me which years those were, when he was the "heavy favorite." I can't actually think of one.

 

[Front242]

Remind me which years those were, when he was the "heavy favorite." I can't actually think of one.

I'm not talking heavy favourite to win the tournament but merely to beat all guys he lost to ranked over 100.

 

[Moxie]

I'm not talking heavy favourite to win the tournament but merely to beat all guys he lost to ranked over 100.

This is apples to oranges. I never said there is no such thing as an upset. I offer you a fairly one to one comparison, with logic attached, and now, you're going to go all over the map? Just forget it, then.