How will Rafa and Novak age?

[Front242]

Come on, Front, Rafa hasn't only start beating Roger since the last couple of years. He's always won more matches than him, from the start. Try stay on topic and stop spinning myths... :nono

Sure he has but equally so he didn't lose any in straights sets either at slams besides RG '08 where he played like dog poop anyway as uncle Toni even said. Practically all the other slam matches had competitive sets but yet NADAL2005RG is too biased in Nadal worship to see that the losses are clearly getting more lopsided as Federer ages. Outside of the slams if you honestly think Federer played well at the WTF last year I dunno what to say. The losses are clearly a lot worse than they were years ago. Not winning a set in both of those, especially the WTF match shows a much more rapid decline than some think.

 

[DarthFed]

One thing is for sure, Nadal is increasing his dominance over Federer.
2014 AO is the biggest margin of victory between Nadal and Federer at a non-clay slam ever :clap

And Nadal also increased his dominance over Djokovic at the French Open this year (compared to 2013) :clap

And this year Nadal had his best Wimbledon result since 2011 :clap

Because of Nadal's knees being better now than they've been for years (Nadal's own words), there is no foreseeable end to Nadal's streak of slam-winning years 2005-.......

Yeah the 4th round of Wimbledon is his best result the past 3 years, and he's lost to Curly, Larry and Moe. How special is that :lolz:

 

[Kieran]

Come on, Front, Rafa hasn't only start beating Roger since the last couple of years. He's always won more matches than him, from the start. Try stay on topic and stop spinning myths... :nono

Sure he has but equally so he didn't lose any in straights sets either at slams besides RG '08 where he played like dog poop anyway as uncle Toni even said. Practically all the other slam matches had competitive sets but yet NADAL2005RG is too biased in Nadal worship to see that the losses are clearly getting more lopsided as Federer ages. Outside of the slams if you honestly think Federer played well at the WTF last year I dunno what to say. The losses are clearly a lot worse than they were years ago. Not winning a set in both of those, especially the WTF match shows a much more rapid decline than some think.

Yeah, but you're always spinning this BS about Rafa only beating him because Roger is five years older. It's nonsense.

And in this thread, it has nothing to do with how Nole and Rafa will decline anyway. Do you know when they will, and how?

 

[NADAL2005RG]

^ In order to measure Nadal's age-related "decline", looking at his performance versus the #1 and #3 ranked players in the world is valuable :idea:

There are other measures, such as his losses in Monte Carlo and Barcelona. Decline - real or other - doesn't only affect matches against two other players...

By all means, take into account whatever you want.

But that doesn't mean we exclude those two players as guides, especially when they are ranked #1 and #3. And that #3 is an especially valuable guide, as he's arguably playing better in 2014 than he was in 2013 and 2012 :clap

 

[Kieran]

The question being discussed is:

But what about Rafa and Novak? How long do you expect them to maintain their current form and when they start to slip, what do you think it will look like?

I think both of them have been in some sort of decline/resistance since 2010. They drop off, then fight like apes, then drop off again. These fluctuations have been interrupted by serious bouts of injury on Rafa's part, and Nole's transition into domestic bliss, more recently. They can't expect to rise to the top again so swiftly, either of them, in terms of ranking (I know, Nole is still #1) or winning majors, given that the rest of the field are no longer purring like poodles.

So there maybe a process of natural decline - and forced!

 

[Front242]

Come on, Front, Rafa hasn't only start beating Roger since the last couple of years. He's always won more matches than him, from the start. Try stay on topic and stop spinning myths... :nono

Sure he has but equally so he didn't lose any in straights sets either at slams besides RG '08 where he played like dog poop anyway as uncle Toni even said. Practically all the other slam matches had competitive sets but yet NADAL2005RG is too biased in Nadal worship to see that the losses are clearly getting more lopsided as Federer ages. Outside of the slams if you honestly think Federer played well at the WTF last year I dunno what to say. The losses are clearly a lot worse than they were years ago. Not winning a set in both of those, especially the WTF match shows a much more rapid decline than some think.

Yeah, but you're always spinning this BS about Rafa only beating him because Roger is five years older. It's nonsense.

And in this thread, it has nothing to do with how Nole and Rafa will decline anyway. Do you know when they will, and how?

Nah, you're only imagining that BS spinning which is equally nonsense. I made many valid points about the losses getting worse as Roger's getting older, especially notable in those two aforementioned recent losses at the AO '14 and WTF '13. If you honestly think Roger not winning a set in either is not proof of losses getting worse I give up.

No idea about Rafa and Novak's declines although you could say they both have declined this year so far though outside of each winning a slam. At the masters events both were a lot worse than last year. Can't keep winning forever.

 

[DarthFed]

I'm not sure where the "rapid decline" comes in with Roger: except for 10 weeks, due to his back, he's been top 6 for 12 years. There's nothing rapid happening here at all. In fact, his endurance is noteworthy.

I agree - not sure why you got the impression I said he was undergoing a rapid decline.

With Rafa, I suspect he goes completely bald before Roger drops out of the top 10. :laydownlaughing

Haha, no doubt.

Novak will last longer than Rafa because he seems to have phases where his intensity is absent and he's chilling along. He's not suffering constantly for it. Physically, he had some strange thing in Paris, but thankfully he has few injuries, fewer even than Federer. I think Novak will lose interest before he bothers to retire.

The notion that Rafa will retire around the same time as Federer isn't too far-fetched, given that somewhere in the next couple of seasons Rafa might get another serious injury that makes it a waste of his time to come back, or else requires surgery.

However, I suspect that absences are helping Rafa to an extent. His seven month injury break was prolonged through fever, he was ready to play before Oz, which meant that he was lean and hungry when he came back last season. This season, he's been cursed with back and wrist issues, but again, he'll be hungry as a wolf when he returns. So these absences help sharpen him - but they're becoming too frequent. This is why I wish he'd take care of his scheduling and skip rubbish like this Indian trinket thingy...

Agreed on the scheduling, as I said in the other thread. And Rafa does seem to follow a pattern: Come back from injury and down in the rankings, destroy everything in his path until he returns to #1, be upset in a Slam and/or injured, miss time, wash, rinse and repeat. But the problem is, as you say, this is happening at a more frequent rate and, the older one gets, the harder and slower comebacks are. At some point Rafa might just say, "F it, I'm going to hang on the beach with Xisca." Whether that is a year or two from now or five years from now, who knows - but I suspect he won't be playing five years from now.

In a way it has been rapid aside from 2012 and 2013. In 2012 he kind of turned back the clocks through Wimbledon and was highly motivated after very difficult losses in the 2nd half of 2011. In 2013 I think it was a lot of things and a nagging back problem was just part of it. 2014 looks more like 2011 but just a bit worse IMO. And as always I disagree with the Dude regarding Roger's career path. 2008- AO 2010 was the small step down, what came after was a large decline.

The thing is, it is hard to say when he started declining because Rafa came fully into his own in 2008, with Novak and Andy coming up behind him. Now certainly there was a big drop in win percentage from 2005-06 (95%) to 2007 (88%) to 2008 (81%). But he went back up a bit in 2009 (84%) and has basically been steady in the 83-86% range from 2009-2014, with the exception of 2013 (73%). In other words, his overall performance seems to support the idea that his decline has been minimal really from 2008 to 2014. Now clearly win% isn't everything, and we have to take into account his performance at big tournaments. All that said, I think he took a half-step down from 2006 to 2007, another half-step fro 2007 to 2008, and another half-step from 2009 to 2010, but it has been pretty steady since then - with the confusing exception of 2013. I suppose his Slam results in 2014, compared to 2010-12, point to further decline, but it isn't by much.

As a side note, here is how good Roger was in 2006: He played in 12 big tournaments, including four Slams, the WTF, and seven Masters. Of those 12, he only didn't make the final in one - Cincinnati, in which he lost to a 19-year old Andy Murray in the 2nd round. But that, to me, is just incredible: playing in the final of 11 out of the 12 big tournaments he played, in (and going 8-3...all three losses to Rafa, of course).

Even Novak in 2011 wasn't as dominant - he played in the finals of 9 of the 12 big tournaments (although went 8-1). Rafa in 2013 played in the finals of 9 of 12 big tournaments, going 7-2.

So yeah, it is clear that Roger was at his very best in 2006, with 2007 being a slight down-step, at least beyond he Slams and WTF (he went 4-5 in both years). But was he that much worse in 2008? Or was it simply that Rafa had come fully into his own? I think it is a bit of both, that he took a half-step down AND Rafa took a step forward. The fact of the matter is that Roger's winning percentage vs. everyone else also declined, so it isn't like Rafa was single-handedly responsible for his decline.

But I do tend to agree with Kieran, that his decline has been quite gradual since.

Well the drop in 2008 wasn't just Rafa and Nole related. He lost matches to Fish, Roddick, Blake, Karlovic, Stepanek, Simon, etc.

I'd break it out between slams and non slams. 2008 -2010 saw a small but definite drop in his play at slams and an enormous drop if we factor in the other tournaments. In 08, Roger played poor most of AO and RG but survived to the later rounds where he was routed by Nole and Rafa respectively. We won't dig into 08 Wimbledon but let's just say that wasn't exactly a vintage performance in the final. 2009 was much of the same, just small drop even at the ones he won I'd argue. But after AO 2010 it is an enormous drop off. You go from 23 straight semi finals and 18 of 19 finals to what's been 11 of 19 semis and 3 of 19 finals. I think that says it all right there.

 

[El Dude]

Come on, Front, Rafa hasn't only start beating Roger since the last couple of years. He's always won more matches than him, from the start. Try stay on topic and stop spinning myths... :nono

I was just looking through Roger's performances in 2004, when Rafa was just a pipsqueak, and had to laugh when I saw that one of his only six losses that year was to Baby Rafa.

Consider this:

Roger in 2004: 74-6 (93%)
Roger in 2004 vs. Rafa: 0-1 (00%)
Rafa in 2004: 30-17 (61%)

Roger in 2006: 91-5 (95%)....arguably the greatest year by a tennis player in Open Era history
Roger in 2006 vs. Rafa: 2-4 (33%)
Rafa in 2006: 59-12 (82%)

Roger in 2012-14: 172-39 (82%)
Roger in 2012-14 vs. Rafa: 1-6 (14%)
Rafa in 2012-14: 161-21 (88%)

OK, the point of the above is to show it really doesn't matter when Rafa and Roger have matched up, Rafa has always had the edge. EVen in 2004, when Roger had found his level and Rafa was just a talente up-and-comer - in their only meeting, Rafa won. Or in 2006, Roger's best year, and Rafa was #2 - Rafa still dominated. Then look over the last few years, and Rafa dominated. Roger's only winning year against Rafa was 2007 (3-2) and he had a couple where he broke even, 2010 and 2012 (1-1 each). But again, the thing here is the match-up. Age has exacerbated it over the last couple years, but it has always been there.

 

[DarthFed]

^ In order to measure Nadal's age-related "decline", looking at his performance versus the #1 and #3 ranked players in the world is valuable :idea:

There are other measures, such as his losses in Monte Carlo and Barcelona. Decline - real or other - doesn't only affect matches against two other players...

By all means, take into account whatever you want.

But that doesn't mean we exclude those two players as guides, especially when they are ranked #1 and #3. And that #3 is an especially valuable guide, as he's arguably playing better in 2014 than he was in 2013 and 2012 :clap

Who in the world would argue Roger is playing better in 2014 than 2012? 2014 is still his 2nd worst year out of the last 12 no?

 

[NADAL2005RG]

One thing is for sure, Nadal's 3rd best AO ever was 2014 :clap
And Nadal's 2014 French Open was better than his 2013 and 2011 French Opens :clap
And Nadal's 2014 Wimbledon was better than his 2013 and 2012 Wimbledons :clap

 

[Kieran]

NADAL2005RG, to try keep you on topic (for once ) what's your reply to this:

But what about Rafa and Novak? How long do you expect them to maintain their current form and when they start to slip, what do you think it will look like?

 

[DarthFed]

Come on, Front, Rafa hasn't only start beating Roger since the last couple of years. He's always won more matches than him, from the start. Try stay on topic and stop spinning myths... :nono

I was just looking through Roger's performances in 2004, when Rafa was just a pipsqueak, and had to laugh when I saw that one of his only six losses that year was to Baby Rafa.

Consider this:

Roger in 2004: 74-6 (93%)
Roger in 2004 vs. Rafa: 0-1 (00%)
Rafa in 2004: 30-17 (61%)

Roger in 2006: 91-5 (95%)....arguably the greatest year by a tennis player in Open Era history
Roger in 2006 vs. Rafa: 2-4 (33%)
Rafa in 2006: 59-12 (82%)

Roger in 2012-14: 172-39 (82%)
Roger in 2012-14 vs. Rafa: 1-6 (14%)
Rafa in 2012-14: 161-21 (88%)

OK, the point of the above is to show it really doesn't matter when Rafa and Roger have matched up, Rafa has always had the edge. EVen in 2004, when Roger had found his level and Rafa was just a talente up-and-comer - in their only meeting, Rafa won. Or in 2006, Roger's best year, and Rafa was #2 - Rafa still dominated. Then look over the last few years, and Rafa dominated. Roger's only winning year against Rafa was 2007 (3-2) and he had a couple where he broke even, 2010 and 2012 (1-1 each). But again, the thing here is the match-up. Age has exacerbated it over the last couple years, but it has always been there.

Yes but when you dig further into the stats it shows that Rafa just always owned him on clay. It took until 2008 for Rafa to make serious inroads off of it and after that it's been cake as Roger really hasn't put up much of a fight at a slam since 2009 AO (and even that was not much when we factor in Roger's level and the 5th set).

 

[NADAL2005RG]

NADAL2005RG, to try keep you on topic (for once ) what's your reply to this:

But what about Rafa and Novak? How long do you expect them to maintain their current form and when they start to slip, what do you think it will look like?

Stay classy Mr. Backseat Moderator.

 

[Kieran]

NADAL2005RG, to try keep you on topic (for once ) what's your reply to this:

But what about Rafa and Novak? How long do you expect them to maintain their current form and when they start to slip, what do you think it will look like?

Stay classy Mr. Backseat Moderator.

I'm getting sick of every thread being spammed by Fedal squabbling. Try contribute to the topic at hand. If you want to quote Fedal stuff, open up a thread for it...

 

[NADAL2005RG]

NADAL2005RG, to try keep you on topic (for once ) what's your reply to this:

But what about Rafa and Novak? How long do you expect them to maintain their current form and when they start to slip, what do you think it will look like?

Stay classy Mr. Backseat Moderator.

I'm getting sick of every thread being spammed by Fedal squabbling. Try contribute to the topic at hand. If you want to quote Fedal stuff, open up a thread for it...

You are squabbling, not I.
I used Federer as a reference point.
If you aren't mature enough to accept that, then what can I say?

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

NADAL2005RG, to try keep you on topic (for once ) what's your reply to this:

But what about Rafa and Novak? How long do you expect them to maintain their current form and when they start to slip, what do you think it will look like?

Stay classy Mr. Backseat Moderator.

I'm getting sick of every thread being spammed by Fedal squabbling. Try contribute to the topic at hand. If you want to quote Fedal stuff, open up a thread for it...

i agree strongly with this arc of thinking. idea:

 

[Kieran]

NADAL2005RG, to try keep you on topic (for once ) what's your reply to this:

But what about Rafa and Novak? How long do you expect them to maintain their current form and when they start to slip, what do you think it will look like?

Stay classy Mr. Backseat Moderator.

I'm getting sick of every thread being spammed by Fedal squabbling. Try contribute to the topic at hand. If you want to quote Fedal stuff, open up a thread for it...

You are squabbling, not I.
I used Federer as a reference point.
If you aren't mature enough to accept that, then what can I say?

You use Federer as your reference point in every thread, that's the problem.

Anyhow, this thread is about Nole, as well as Nadal. Any thoughts on Nole? His decline is something worth mulling over, don't you think?

 

[Front242]

NADAL2005RG, to try keep you on topic (for once ) what's your reply to this:

But what about Rafa and Novak? How long do you expect them to maintain their current form and when they start to slip, what do you think it will look like?

Stay classy Mr. Backseat Moderator.

I'm getting sick of every thread being spammed by Fedal squabbling. Try contribute to the topic at hand. If you want to quote Fedal stuff, open up a thread for it...

You are squabbling, not I.
I used Federer as a reference point.
If you aren't mature enough to accept that, then what can I say?

^ Nah, you just made another nonsensical biased blab about a younger guy still not far from his prime, especially if you take last year, beating an old guy who's well past it as if that's not to be expected and if that's a reference point as to greatness I'm a monkey's uncle.

How will Rafa age? He'll keep beating old Federer who in their last 2 matches didn't even win a set but that of course makes Rafa's decline look less than Roger's. Yes, good logic and well on topic.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

^ Ahh......are you really saying the #1 and #3 ranked players are not reference points to the #2's level of performance?

In future you better be very careful not to mention F_ _ _ _ _ _'s name in a thread not specifically related to F_ _ _ _ _ _. I could have sworn its a common occurrence lot

 

[El Dude]

Who in the world would argue Roger is playing better in 2014 than 2012? 2014 is still his 2nd worst year out of the last 12 no?

This continues to be off-topic, but I will say that the way you say this overstates 2014 as being poor. If you compare it to 2011, for instance, the only difference is that in 2011 he went out in a Slam QF vs. a Slam 4R, and he won the WTF. That's one round difference at a Slam--otherwise the same results (2 SFs, one F) and to be honest, I prefer this year's results overall because the 4R was at Roland Garros vs. the QF at Wimbledon. Also, his Masters results have been better this year - both years he had one win, but this year he's been to three other finals, whereas in 2011 he only made the one final that he won.

He also still has a chance at two more Masters and of course the WTF is still to be determined, so I'd say that if Roger wins the WTF this year--or even another Masters--then he's had a better year overall than 2011.

Yes but when you dig further into the stats it shows that Rafa just always owned him on clay. It took until 2008 for Rafa to make serious inroads off of it and after that it's been cake as Roger really hasn't put up much of a fight at a slam since 2009 AO (and even that was not much when we factor in Roger's level and the 5th set).

Yes, true. 2008 was also the year that Rafa became a more well-rounded player. As I've said before, Roger was the dominant player from 2004-07, but they were co-dominators in 2008-09, before it became Nadal and Djokovic as the two best from 2010 on.