Peak Federer Vs Peak Djokovic

[brokenshoelace]

Wimbledon and fast/indoor hards favor Federer significantly. Australian Open (and other slow/medium hards) I think Novak wins hands down. Clay is tricky because one guy actually has a French Open, and when Novak was playing at an insane level in 2011 (not unlike the one he's showing now. In fact, on clay, his level was higher than his level on clay this year), he lost to Roger. But, I'd still go with Djokovic narrowly.

 

[MikeOne]

i think most agree on slower hard courts, Novak wins; on fast hard courts, Fed has the edge. Where i think some are being a bit generous to Fed is on clay. Yes, Federer was second to Nadal for years but let's compare Fed vs Novak on clay:

Federer: FO: 4 finals, 1 win. Masters in clay: 2

Djokovic: FO: 4 finals. Masters on clay: 5

So Federer has the advantage at FO as he won it once but remember, he didn't have to beat Nadal..he beat Soderling. I think Djokovic would've been heavy favourite against Soderling, Wawrinka is a slam winner and a better player.

Djokovic has clear advantage on Federer in clay Masters wins and success against Nadal. Novak has beaten Rafa at least 5 times on clay, Federer twice. Some will say that Fed faced peak Rafa and Novak hasn't recently but i beg to differ. Rafa was at his peak between 2011-2013 and Novak was able to beat him several times during this span. In 11, Rafa was coming off an amazing year in 2010; in 2013, Rafa had an amazing year and we all know Novak had him down 4-2 on 5th set at FO.. clearly, Novak of 2011> was better suited to beat peak Rafa on clay.

I give edge to Novak on clay based on all of the above and i believe that by the time Novak retires, this won't be in doubt.

The other surface people are probably getting wrong is indoors. We all know how good Fed has been on indoors but what Novak has done since 2011 is pretty much sweep indoors season, he is just so good in indoors, he's won eoy masters 4 or 5 times already? and expect more. I think it's even here.

So on hards it's pretty even with Novak winning slower hards, Fed winning on faster hards; Grass edge to Fed; clay edge to Novak and pretty even on indoors. I have this very even, it's a good match up where i can't say either has a matchup advantage against on another.

 

[brokenshoelace]

There is no way someone can seriously suggest Nadal's clay peak was in 2011-2013. This is backed by nothing. Not numbers, not level, not dominance. In fact, the 2011 FO may have been his worst in terms of performance. I still remember the melodrama in the early rounds as he struggled in the early rounds, and the over the top press conferences and comments. I'm in no way suggesting he was past his prime or anything, but clearly, his best clay court tennis was in 2005-2008. I don't see how that's even a debate, although I agree with your point Mike, that people are selling Novak a little short on clay.

 

[Denis]

I'd favour Novak on both slow hards and fast hards except cinci. Clay and grass I give fed a slight edge. Indoors goes to Novak too.

 

[calitennis127]

There is no way someone can seriously suggest Nadal’s clay peak was in 2011-2013. This is backed by nothing. Not numbers, not level, not dominance. In fact, the 2011 FO may have been his worst in terms of performance. I still remember the melodrama in the early rounds as he struggled in the early rounds, and the over the top press conferences and comments. I’m in no way suggesting he was past his prime or anything, but clearly, his best clay court tennis was in 2005-2008. I don’t see how that’s even a debate, although I agree with your point Mike, that people are selling Novak a little short on clay.

 

Nadal put a pretty vintage whipping on Ferrer in the 2013 French Open final, and he also weathered Federer's best performance by far against Nadal at the French in 2011. And I don't know what was so impressive about Nadal at the 2006 French Open; do you not remember the match against Monfils?

 

[calitennis127]

Wimbledon and fast/indoor hards favor Federer significantly. Australian Open (and other slow/medium hards) I think Novak wins hands down. Clay is tricky because one guy actually has a French Open, and when Novak was playing at an insane level in 2011 (not unlike the one he’s showing now. In fact, on clay, his level was higher than his level on clay this year), he lost to Roger. But, I’d still go with Djokovic narrowly.

I don't see how it is narrow. Federer has demonstrated a higher ceiling in spurts but the level of consistency when you take into account how Federer's game has a tendency to bottom out and crash, while Novak can go for hours in long rallies with the strong backhand, is not really close. I don't think post-2011 Novak would have lost to Nadal 2005-2007 on clay.

 

 

 

[Moxie]

Broken_shoelace wrote:
Wimbledon and fast/indoor hards favor Federer significantly. Australian Open (and other slow/medium hards) I think Novak wins hands down. Clay is tricky because one guy actually has a French Open, and when Novak was playing at an insane level in 2011 (not unlike the one he’s showing now. In fact, on clay, his level was higher than his level on clay this year), he lost to Roger. But, I’d still go with Djokovic narrowly.

I don’t see how it is narrow. Federer has demonstrated a higher ceiling in spurts but the level of consistency when you take into account how Federer’s game has a tendency to bottom out and crash, while Novak can go for hours in long rallies with the strong backhand, is not really close. I don’t think post-2011 Novak would have lost to Nadal 2005-2007 on clay.

The question is clay between Roger and Novak.  I personally give Novak a bigger edge.  However, I think your last point is without reason:  that post-2011 Novak wouldn't have lost to Nadal 2005-7 on clay.  You always love to throw in something unprovable.  But this one isn't that hard.  The difference in 2011-Novak was primarily confidence, and a raised level in fitness.  Even if he'd been that player in 2005-7, no one was beating Nadal on clay at that point, and Novak wouldn't have, either.  You're pulling in a bit of a straw-man.

 

[MikeOne]

Calitennis127 wrote:
<blockquote>
Broken_shoelace wrote:
Wimbledon and fast/indoor hards favor Federer significantly. Australian Open (and other slow/medium hards) I think Novak wins hands down. Clay is tricky because one guy actually has a French Open, and when Novak was playing at an insane level in 2011 (not unlike the one he’s showing now. In fact, on clay, his level was higher than his level on clay this year), he lost to Roger. But, I’d still go with Djokovic narrowly.

I don’t see how it is narrow. Federer has demonstrated a higher ceiling in spurts but the level of consistency when you take into account how Federer’s game has a tendency to bottom out and crash, while Novak can go for hours in long rallies with the strong backhand, is not really close. I don’t think post-2011 Novak would have lost to Nadal 2005-2007 on clay.</blockquote>
The question is clay between Roger and Novak. I personally give Novak a bigger edge. However, I think your last point is without reason: that post-2011 Novak wouldn’t have lost to Nadal 2005-7 on clay. You always love to throw in something unprovable. But this one isn’t that hard. The difference in 2011-Novak was primarily confidence, and a raised level in fitness. Even if he’d been that player in 2005-7, no one was beating Nadal on clay at that point, and Novak wouldn’t have, either. You’re pulling in a bit of a straw-man.

broken is a little biased here as he has to somehow explain why Novak was able to beat Rafa so many times on clay post from 2011 onwards. It is very very clear that it was Novak raising his level and not Nadal losing steam. 2015 is the exception though, clearly Nadal was not at his best in 2015. I think broken is dead wrong on Nadal of 05-08 being better than Nadal of 11-13 on clay. During 05-08 Nadal had a great run but his competition was relatively weak. Who besides Federer was any good on clay? Ferrer? Nadal gave Ferrer some bagels on clay between 11-13. Who else? no-one. He was also not destroying all opponents all the time, i clearly remember Hewitt, Davydenko, Del Potro, Coria giving Nadal fits on clay; ferrero beating him, Moya beating him and Federer taking him to the brink and beating him a couple of times. Based on this, there is 0 evidence to support Nadal of 05-08 beating Novak of 11> on clay.

In 09, Soderling beat Nadal but what happened in 2010? Nadal destroyed Robin in finals. The fact that Isner took Rafa to 5 sets in early rounds of 2010 is 0 proof he had lost steam, Isner could've easily done the same to 05-08 Nadal had he served the way he did against Rafa in 2010. Let's also not forget how amazing Nadal played in last couple of sets to pull that win out Isner himself said it was ridiculous. Nadal's level on clay in 2010 was really high..

come 2011 and just because Novak beats him in finals of Rome and monte Carlo he's past his best? Novak was possessed and both Rafa and Toni admitted these losses had nothing to do with Nadal's level. Take Djokovic out, Nadal wins MC, Rome, FO, Barcelona etc..

come 2012 and Nadal started the year playing incredible tennis, taking Novak to a marathon 5 setter in finals on AO in Novak;s best surface. Nadal was simply at his best at he beginning of 2012. In 2013 Nadal had one of his best years ever, taking #1 away from Novak. I seriously see Nadal of 05-08 in all sorts of trouble against post 11 Djokovic, on any surface.

 

[britbox]

I enjoy your posts @MikeOne and @Calitennis127 is always a good read, even if I shake my head plenty of times... but this isn't one of your better ones.

...and we're all biased, I enjoy seeing Djokovic ripping Nadal a new one, and I like the rare occassions when Federer pulls one out against Rafa but...

You and Cali are living in cloud cuckoo-land on this. As it stands right now, even a prime Djokovic is struggling to enter the same conversation when considering a prime Nadal on clay. We're talking about a 9 times Roland Garros champion against a guy who has never won a clay court major. How can this fact be made any clearer than considering the numbers?

Personally, I think Nadal played his best clay court tennis in 2008. Maybe not his best tennis overall on the tour... but on clay he was as close to untouchable as it gets. No version of Djokovic, no version of Federer and I'm damned sure no version of John Isner or Nikolay Davydenko threatens that version of Nadal on the dirt.

This is the same guy who had an 81 match winning streak on Clay through to 2007.. unprecedented.

Davydenko gave Nadal fits on clay? When? He gave him a decent match once in Rome where he extended Nadal to a deciding set. Nikolay caused Nadal far more problems on hard courts than Clay.

Fererro? He beat Nadal when Rafa had blisters on his feet the size of a Himalyan mountain range... and as a top clay courter himself... he only sampled one victory in 6 attempts.
2011... Even Federer should have won that RG final. Nadal was there for the taking. Nadal was a long way from his best.

Talk of Djokovic beating a prime Nadal on clay shouldn't even merit a discussion right now. Let's see the Serb rack up one or two clay court majors first.

 

[ClayDeath]

I enjoy your posts @MikeOne and @Calitennis127 is always a good read, even if I shake my head plenty of times… but this isn’t one of your better ones. …and we’re all biased, I enjoy seeing Djokovic ripping Nadal a new one, and I like the rare occassions when Federer pulls one out against Rafa but… You and Cali are living in cloud cuckoo-land on this. As it stands right now, even a prime Djokovic is struggling to enter the same conversation when considering a prime Nadal on clay. We’re talking about a 9 times Roland Garros champion against a guy who has never won a clay court major. How can this fact be made any clearer than considering the numbers? Personally, I think Nadal played his best clay court tennis in 2008. Maybe not his best tennis overall on the tour… but on clay he was as close to untouchable as it gets. No version of Djokovic, no version of Federer and I’m damned sure no version of John Isner or Nikolay Davydenko threatens that version of Nadal on the dirt. This is the same guy who had an 81 match winning streak on Clay through to 2007.. unprecedented. Davydenko gave Nadal fits on clay? When? He gave him a decent match once in Rome where he extended Nadal to a deciding set. Nikolay caused Nadal far more problems on hard courts than Clay. Fererro? He beat Nadal when Rafa had blisters on his feet the size of a Himalyan mountain range… and as a top clay courter himself… he only sampled one victory in 6 attempts. 2011… Even Federer should have won that RG final. Nadal was there for the taking. Nadal was a long way from his best. Talk of Djokovic beating a prime Nadal on clay shouldn’t even merit a discussion right now. Let’s see the Serb rack up one or two clay court majors first.

we are also talking about a player who dominated the clay circuit for nearly a decade. that is unprecedented.

that is the stuff of the gods. cant see that happening in this sport ever again.

RG is generally considered the hardest slam to win by the players.

just ask john newcombe, Sampras, johnny mac, and all the current players you wish.

what Rafa accomplished on clay--a grueling surface-- for nearly 10 years running defies all imagination. and he managed to do it while sustaining endless injuries.

 

 

 

[DarthFed]

I’d favour Novak on both slow hards and fast hards except cinci. Clay and grass I give fed a slight edge. Indoors goes to Novak too.

I'd say Roger clearly over Nole on fast hard courts.  Dubai, Cincy, Shanghai, USO, etc. Roger in his prime would have the edge.  I actually think Nole would have the slight edge on clay.  There are arguments both ways and no way does one have a big edge over the other but I see Novak winning more often than Roger on clay H2H in the hypothetical prime vs. prime matchup.  I know 2011 matchup gets tossed around a lot but Roger played tremendous and the tournament was using a lighter ball than they did before or after.  Slow hards is big edge to Nole and grass is a decent edge for Roger.  I'd have called it a larger edge before seeing Nole on grass the past couple years.  He is very unique because the return is out of this world and he would have a serious chance on that surface, prime Federer and Sampras included, because he will be getting a lot of returns in play against anyone.

Indoors is kind of tough to rate because the speed of the surface has clearly changed just the past couple years.  Paris used to be lightning fast and the YEC when it was played at Shanghai was fast as well.  On those surfaces Roger would have the edge while on the current ones Nole does.

 

[MikeOne]

I enjoy your posts @MikeOne and @Calitennis127 is always a good read, even if I shake my head plenty of times… but this isn’t one of your better ones. …and we’re all biased, I enjoy seeing Djokovic ripping Nadal a new one, and I like the rare occassions when Federer pulls one out against Rafa but… You and Cali are living in cloud cuckoo-land on this. As it stands right now, even a prime Djokovic is struggling to enter the same conversation when considering a prime Nadal on clay. We’re talking about a 9 times Roland Garros champion against a guy who has never won a clay court major. How can this fact be made any clearer than considering the numbers? Personally, I think Nadal played his best clay court tennis in 2008. Maybe not his best tennis overall on the tour… but on clay he was as close to untouchable as it gets. No version of Djokovic, no version of Federer and I’m damned sure no version of John Isner or Nikolay Davydenko threatens that version of Nadal on the dirt. This is the same guy who had an 81 match winning streak on Clay through to 2007.. unprecedented. Davydenko gave Nadal fits on clay? When? He gave him a decent match once in Rome where he extended Nadal to a deciding set. Nikolay caused Nadal far more problems on hard courts than Clay. Fererro? He beat Nadal when Rafa had blisters on his feet the size of a Himalyan mountain range… and as a top clay courter himself… he only sampled one victory in 6 attempts. 2011… Even Federer should have won that RG final. Nadal was there for the taking. Nadal was a long way from his best. Talk of Djokovic beating a prime Nadal on clay shouldn’t even merit a discussion right now. Let’s see the Serb rack up one or two clay court majors first.

the point is, Nadal did have his troubles against inferior players than Novak between 05-08, he was more 1 dimensional  and he really didn't have much competition on clay during 05-08 except Federer, who Nadal matched up great against. I'm a huge Nadal fan but i don't try and make excuses and i don't ignore what i see right in front of my eyes. I was initially more of a Nadal fan than a Nole fan but from the beginning, i noticed Novak was a bad match-up for Rafa. The reason Nole couldn't beat him was because he wasn't as strong mentally and physically. The Novak of 05-08 struggled physically against Nadal, he even uses to say it was a physical test to play Rafa. I remember Novak taking a set off Rafa at Wimbledon and then retiring, looking tired by 2nd and 3rd sets on clay vs Rafa and having severe mental lapses regularly. Beating Nadal on clay back then required the stamina, fitness and mental strength Novak lacked. Novak's breathing problems were well documented, he retired from matches for questionable reasons and for a period even forgot how to serve! There were countless times novak looked lost on the court, out of breath, it was sad to see. Around 2011, Novak changed his diet, matured as a player and became a mental giant, which combined with improved fitness turned him into Nadal's worst nightmare. I always saw the danger a mentally and physically strong Novak presented to Rafa and i was not that surprised to see him beat Rafa in 7 straight finals during 2011-12; he has all the attributes as a player to counter Rafa's weapons and tactics. No surface was a safe bet anymore, for Rafa, even clay. Now understand that i'm not saying Novak is better than Nadal on clay, clearly that's a straw man. Without a doubt Nadal has accomplished much more than Nole on clay, no question. What i'm arguing is that Novak is all a time great with the perfect game to beat Rafael Nadal. Federer is owned by Nadal in h2h due to the match-up challenges but this doesn't mean he has accomplished less. Same thing with Novak, an in form Nole has an advantage against an in form Rafa on any surface. I believe Novak has a winning record vs Rafa on clay post 11 and it's not because nadal's level dropped, Nadal was really at his best between 11-13, without question. So it's the match-up britbox, match-up...

My other point is that even though Nadal's numbers were outrageous on clay between 05-08, he really did lack strong clay court competition. Who were his clay court threats back then? I would say Coria and Federer. Coria gave Nadal fits on clay but it didn't last as he retired. Sorry to say but Coria didn't have the game Novak has, even though Coria had a beautiful clay court game. Federer gave Nadal fits on clay during several matches despite the huge 1 handed backhand handicap.  Aside from these two, who was there? moya? ferrer? ferrero? Davydenko? Hewitt? Irrespective of his competition there is no denying Nadal was just amazing but i actually think post 11 Novak would beat 05-08 Nadal even more easily than he has handled 11-13 nadal. The reason i say this is that 05-08 Nadal was more defensive, less complete and less versatile than he was from 2009 onwards. Nadal improved in many areas post 08 and became considerably better on grass and hard courts. Now some say he became better on these surfaces at he expense of lowering his level on clay but i beg to differ, this is nonsense. Nadal simply wasn't going to continue winning 81 straight matches on clay forever, it's mentally exhausting and physically daunting. I clearly remember Nadal saying he was glad streak was over when Federer ended it, it was a curse and i believe it helped him relieve some pressure. Just because he wasn't winning 81 straight matches between 11-13, doesn't mean he wasn't as good. I think he was a better all around player post 08 and Nadal of 05-08 was more 1 dimensional. I truly believe that even though he has been a better clay court player than Novak, the 1 dimensional version of Nadal would be in SERIOUS trouble against post 11 Novak. The 08> version of Nadal has had a better serve, better volleys, better backhand, better slice and a more aggressive game. I believe 05-08 Rafa would be in serious, very serious trouble against 11-15 Djokovic on clay. Back then, that more 1 dimensional, more defensive game worked well against handicapped Roger and the rest of the field but i see it as very problematic against peak Novak. Again, remember, i'm not saying Nole > Rafa on clay overall, just talking H2H and zoning in on match-up.

Now this is just my opinion but this is how i see it.

 

[calitennis127]

Calitennis127 wrote:
<blockquote>
Broken_shoelace wrote:
Wimbledon and fast/indoor hards favor Federer significantly. Australian Open (and other slow/medium hards) I think Novak wins hands down. Clay is tricky because one guy actually has a French Open, and when Novak was playing at an insane level in 2011 (not unlike the one he’s showing now. In fact, on clay, his level was higher than his level on clay this year), he lost to Roger. But, I’d still go with Djokovic narrowly.

I don’t see how it is narrow. Federer has demonstrated a higher ceiling in spurts but the level of consistency when you take into account how Federer’s game has a tendency to bottom out and crash, while Novak can go for hours in long rallies with the strong backhand, is not really close. I don’t think post-2011 Novak would have lost to Nadal 2005-2007 on clay.</blockquote>
The question is clay between Roger and Novak. I personally give Novak a bigger edge. However, I think your last point is without reason: that post-2011 Novak wouldn’t have lost to Nadal 2005-7 on clay. You always love to throw in something unprovable. But this one isn’t that hard. The difference in 2011-Novak was primarily confidence, and a raised level in fitness. Even if he’d been that player in 2005-7, no one was beating Nadal on clay at that point, and Novak wouldn’t have, either. You’re pulling in a bit of a straw-man.

LOL.....so you accuse me of asserting something "unprovable" - namely, that post-2011 Novak would have beaten 2005-07 Nadal - and then you turn right around and state something equally unprovable - that post-2011 Novak would not have beaten 2005-07 Nadal. Did you not notice the contradiction there Moxie?

As usual, your reply does not provide any substance pertaining to the way their games would have matched up, and you simply fall back on this hollow cliche about Djokovic's "confidence" magically sprouting up in 2011. Furthermore, you talk as though Nadal never played a tight match between 2005 and 2007 on clay, and that is simply untrue. Let me list some:

• 2007 Rome semifinals against Davydenko: 7-6, 6-7, 6-4
• 2007 Hamburg semifinals against Hewitt: 2-6, 6-3, 7-5
• 2006 Rome final against Federer in which Federer had match points
• 2005 Rome final against Coria that went to a fifth-set tiebreak

I do not see any logical reason for ruling out the possibility that an improved Djokovic could have beaten Nadal on one of those days. It makes no sense to assert otherwise.

Also, Djokovic's confidence didn't just randomly pop up out of nowhere in January of 2011. There were concrete reasons for why he revitalized his career. It wasn't just some kind of therapeutic inner-awakening.

 

[Moxie]

You and Cali are living in cloud cuckoo-land on this. As it stands right now, even a prime Djokovic is struggling to enter the same conversation when considering a prime Nadal on clay. We’re talking about a 9 times Roland Garros champion against a guy who has never won a clay court major. How can this fact be made any clearer than considering the numbers? Personally, I think Nadal played his best clay court tennis in 2008. Maybe not his best tennis overall on the tour… but on clay he was as close to untouchable as it gets. No version of Djokovic, no version of Federer and I’m damned sure no version of John Isner or Nikolay Davydenko threatens that version of Nadal on the dirt. This is the same guy who had an 81 match winning streak on Clay through to 2007.. unprecedented. Davydenko gave Nadal fits on clay? When? He gave him a decent match once in Rome where he extended Nadal to a deciding set. Nikolay caused Nadal far more problems on hard courts than Clay. Fererro? He beat Nadal when Rafa had blisters on his feet the size of a Himalyan mountain range… and as a top clay courter himself… he only sampled one victory in 6 attempts. 2011… Even Federer should have won that RG final. Nadal was there for the taking. Nadal was a long way from his best. Talk of Djokovic beating a prime Nadal on clay shouldn’t even merit a discussion right now. Let’s see the Serb rack up one or two clay court majors first.

Not to hijack the thread, but thanks for that response, BB, and I have to add a couple of things to @MikeOne's post above.  I agree with you that 2008 was Nadal's absolute clay peak...he was playing like he'd invented a new game and hadn't told anyone else the rules.  But to Mike's assertion that there was no competition, that's forgetting about players now-retired, especially Guillermo Coria who was previously the best clay courter at the time; and Moya, Ferrero and Alberto Costa, all previous FO champs.  Broken was trying to remind us that 2011 at the FO was a crisis of confidence for Nadal, having lost twice on clay to Djokovic, and 4 times overall.  It was a struggle in the early rounds, and he's struggled more on clay ever since.    You can't be peak in 2008, and still be there in 2011-13, much less when we consider his run on dirt started in 2005.  (Lest we forget, Nadal lost to Horacio Zeballos - who? - on clay in 2013, before he lost to Djokovic at MC that year, their first meeting since his injury lay-off.)  The reason that Rafa was still able to win at the big moments is down to already high level, where even a dip still makes him better than basically everyone else.  But to say he was as good in 2011-2013 as before is ridiculous, with respect to clay.

To bring it back to topic, Djokovic was the only one who nearly forced Rafa to drop a set at the 2008 RG...he lost the 3rd 7-6(3.)  To his credit, when Nadal was, as you say, "untouchable."  This is one of the reasons that I give Djokovic more than just a slight edge on clay over Roger.  His game is more suited to it.  He has the stamina and will for long points, he's got excellent defense, which clay favors, and defense-to-offense.  He doesn't use the spin that gives Rafa the margin, but I think he'd pass Roger often enough.  Maybe I'll modify to 6-4 Djokovic on clay...because Fed is sturdier.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Broken_shoelace wrote:
There is no way someone can seriously suggest Nadal’s clay peak was in 2011-2013. This is backed by nothing. Not numbers, not level, not dominance. In fact, the 2011 FO may have been his worst in terms of performance. I still remember the melodrama in the early rounds as he struggled in the early rounds, and the over the top press conferences and comments. I’m in no way suggesting he was past his prime or anything, but clearly, his best clay court tennis was in 2005-2008. I don’t see how that’s even a debate, although I agree with your point Mike, that people are selling Novak a little short on clay.

Nadal put a pretty vintage whipping on Ferrer in the 2013 French Open final, and he also weathered Federer’s best performance by far against Nadal at the French in 2011. And I don’t know what was so impressive about Nadal at the 2006 French Open; do you not remember the match against Monfils?

I don't remember the match against Monfils because they didn't play. You're referring to Mathieu. Notice, I didn't say "FO," I said "clay." Nadal went the 2006 clay season undefeated. The performance against Ferrer in the 2013 final was far from vintage, even by Nadal's own admission. And even if it were, we're not talking about a few matches here, we're talking about his level on average. Clearly, Nadal was still phenomenal on clay in 2011-2014. Just not as good/dominant as he was before.

 

[brokenshoelace]

I think the mere fact that Cali and Mike bring up matches like Mathieu and Davydenko from 2005 and 2007 pretty much proves how Nadal was a better clay courter then. We're bringing up a match that Nadal won in FOUR sets (not five) to somehow raise the argument that maybe he wasn't quite as good as made out to be then? If going 4 sets is the most damning evidence you can find, then you just proved my point.

Oh he struggled with Davydenko? He won that match didn't he.

It's funny how you guys fail to bring up Isner, Ljubicic Andujar, and the host of others Nadal struggled with post 2008.

 

[brokenshoelace]

PS: Mike and Cali: Remember 2011 Djokovic losing to Federer at RG? Remember 2012 Djokovic going 5 sets with Seppi and Tsonga, with the latter blowing match points? Remember 2013 Djokovic losing to Dimitrov and Berdych? That's the Djokovic that would beat pre 2008 Nadal on clay because Nadal went to 4 sets with Mathieu and 3 sets with Davydenko? OK sure. Let's see Novak beat those players, as well as Wawrinka, and maybe add a RG trophy before we can raise that argument.

 

[ClayDeath]

people keep bringing up Rafa's competition. I have just one name for them:

Roger Federer. this is the man Rafa had to deal with. others just don't matter one way or another when you are having to battle the greatest in history.

that is all the competition you will ever need. Roger was a monster on every surface. his records say so.

that being said, there were other names too: andy murray and djokovic. their development would eventually happen but they have always been difficult adversaries.

 

[Moxie]

Moxie wrote:
<blockquote>
Calitennis127 wrote:
<blockquote>
Broken_shoelace wrote:
Wimbledon and fast/indoor hards favor Federer significantly. Australian Open (and other slow/medium hards) I think Novak wins hands down. Clay is tricky because one guy actually has a French Open, and when Novak was playing at an insane level in 2011 (not unlike the one he’s showing now. In fact, on clay, his level was higher than his level on clay this year), he lost to Roger. But, I’d still go with Djokovic narrowly.

I don’t see how it is narrow. Federer has demonstrated a higher ceiling in spurts but the level of consistency when you take into account how Federer’s game has a tendency to bottom out and crash, while Novak can go for hours in long rallies with the strong backhand, is not really close. I don’t think post-2011 Novak would have lost to Nadal 2005-2007 on clay.</blockquote>
The question is clay between Roger and Novak. I personally give Novak a bigger edge. However, I think your last point is without reason: that post-2011 Novak wouldn’t have lost to Nadal 2005-7 on clay. You always love to throw in something unprovable. But this one isn’t that hard. The difference in 2011-Novak was primarily confidence, and a raised level in fitness. Even if he’d been that player in 2005-7, no one was beating Nadal on clay at that point, and Novak wouldn’t have, either. You’re pulling in a bit of a straw-man.</blockquote>
LOL…..so you accuse me of asserting something “unprovable” – namely, that post-2011 Novak would have beaten 2005-07 Nadal – and then you turn right around and state something equally unprovable – that post-2011 Novak would not have beaten 2005-07 Nadal. Did you not notice the contradiction there Moxie? As usual, your reply does not provide any substance pertaining to the way their games would have matched up, and you simply fall back on this hollow cliche about Djokovic’s “confidence” magically sprouting up in 2011. Furthermore, you talk as though Nadal never played a tight match between 2005 and 2007 on clay, and that is simply untrue. Let me list some:

• 2007 Rome semifinals against Davydenko: 7-6, 6-7, 6-4
• 2007 Hamburg semifinals against Hewitt: 2-6, 6-3, 7-5
• 2006 Rome final against Federer in which Federer had match points
• 2005 Rome final against Coria that went to a fifth-set tiebreak

I do not see any logical reason for ruling out the possibility that an improved Djokovic could have beaten Nadal on one of those days. It makes no sense to assert otherwise. Also, Djokovic’s confidence didn’t just randomly pop up out of nowhere in January of 2011. There were concrete reasons for why he revitalized his career. It wasn’t just some kind of therapeutic inner-awakening.

LOL...I should have said this is the perfect thread for you, since it's fantasy tennis.  You like to talk fantasy tennis even on threads about things that actually happened.  I never said that Novak's confidence miraculously sprouted up in 2011.  I think we could all see the evolution of the elevation of his game to Nole 2.0:  especially starting with beating Roger in that 5-setter at the USO, then winning the DC.  (I have long been a proponent of the Davis Cup Bump theory.)  And that combined with his change in diet which had him feeling much better, and it was an upward spiral to the AO, then through all of 2011.  Even Toni Nadal has long-said that Djokovic had a game to trouble Rafael, and he did, when he improved other parts of his game and fitness.  However, I don't see that Djokovic's top level on clay has ever equalled Nadal's.  Had they met at their respective peaks, they would have played a lot of long matches, for sure.  I didn't realize that the qualifier on the bravado assertion that "post-2011 Djokovic would beat 2005-08 Nadal" was, er, "once."  As Broken says, you guys fairly prove the point with the examples of Nadal getting pressed, but still winning.  Nadal has the better net game, and Djokovic would have been passed fairly often, as was usual.  And Nadal would have been forced to adjust to his backhand earlier than he did.  Additionally, that Nadal was mentally sturdier than any version of Djokovic, and in the long clay slog, that goes far.  If Djokovic had taken him in that era, I still believe it would have been in 2-3 format, as Federer did, and probably on a drizzly day.  Look at their 2013 RG SF for the clues.  Djokovic was 2 years into his 2.0 form, and Nadal was "prime age," but no long "peak" on clay.  Nadal should arguably have won it in 4, and was the better player throughout, but Djokovic got hot at the right moments to take it to 5.  In the end, however, even with the break advantage, Novak didn't hold up in the long run.  Nadal was more patient and opportunistic.  That's how he beat him in the 2009 Madrid SF, too.  Surely Novak has been mentally stronger this year, but he's also running away with the field.  When he's challenged, he can let his emotions effect him.

 

[Billie]

LOL I thought that this is some fiction in which both players play their best yet people pick and chose what they consider players peaks.  If we are picking matches or tournaments, I'll pick Madrid 2011 and Rome 2011, MC 2013, even Rome this year as some of Nole's best clay matches.  And some are so hung up on that RG semi final in 2011 that they forget what happened the very next year when Nole met Federer.

And for those who think Nole is not mentally tough, please reconsider that notion.  What he had to overcome not only in his life but during tennis career, I doubt many people would do so well in his shoes.  This is Nole's deciding sets stat for his career:  .741 (140-49) which is 3rd best, only behind Nishikori (.792 84-22) and Borg (.744 119-41)  http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/performance-zone/win-loss-index/career/finalset/all/

As far as 5 set record is concerned, Nole is ranked 10th overall (only active player in front of him is Robredo at #8) with 25-8 .758

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/performance-zone/win-loss-index/career/5thset/all/

People make such a big deal about faster courts forgetting that Nole has 4 titles in Dubai, numerous finals in Cinci and USO (as many as AO finals).  I think that he has more problems having to play back to back weeks in the middle of hot American summer than what kind of surface it is.

It is funny to see how each person sees matchups between players and player careers, frankly we are all biased and can't be totally objective. B-)