Rafa vs. Novak

[El Dude]

I look at Nole - and even more so Andy - and think of these as players as being from a more recent vintage than Rafa...

You know Kieran, I've had the same thought. Rafa seems to have bridged Generation Federer and Generation Novandy, even though he's just exactly a year older than the latter players. I mean, Rafa played Andre Agassi, for chrissakes! Twice, no less, and once at a Slam.

On the other hand, Novak is starting a family with his first child on the way. While we can look at Roger Federer and say he continued as usual, being a father myself I know just how much it changes one's outlook and priorities.

As for Andy, the other day I had the stray thought that I could see him out-lasting Rafa and Novak, mainly because he hasn't been as successful as them therefore he might be hungrier. I certainly hope for Andy's sake this happens.

Now while Andy isn't Andre, Agassi did rise to the top when Sampras began to slip and was there battling with much younger players during a similarly weak generation before Fedal came. So just as Andre bridged the gap between the great players of the 80s and 90s and Federer and Nadal, hopefully at least one of Rafa, Novak, and Andy will do the same between their own generation and the hypothetical next great generation after this current young "Lost Generation." If I was a betting man I'd say it would be Andy, although who knows.

 

[El Dude]

While I respect a lot of the study you do of the game E.D., every so often you come up with a thread that's just meant to be provocative. That's my opinion. Since no Djokovic fan has taken the bait, I will respond.

If by "provocative" you mean deliberately sowing seeds of discord and trying to get people riled up then, no, that wasn't my intention.

If by "provocative" you mean asking a question that isn't easy to agree upon and may generate some (hopefully civil) debate, then yes, that is my intention.

You are entitled to whatever opinion you want, of course, but it differs from what I'm actually intending (or saying I'm intending! You could think I'm being disingenuous, but I'd hope you'd give me the benefit of the doubt).

 

[DarthFed]

Novak emerged onto the scene in 2007 which is just 2 years after Rafa did. So it's not that Rafa is that much older in tennis years. I think the reason we see him as being so much older is that his style of play and the injuries it has caused makes him more worn down than Nole. Rafa used to move better than he does now whereas Nole's movement hasn't appeared to slip yet but it will soon...

 

[El Dude]

Also, to add to Kieran's match count, Andy has played 583 matches - far fewer than even Novak.

 

[Kieran]

What about the stat regarding how often they face each other in the Big 4? It's unprecedented and I doubt it'll be repeated...

 

[Kieran]

Novak emerged onto the scene in 2007 which is just 2 years after Rafa did. So it's not that Rafa is that much older in tennis years. I think the reason we see him as being so much older is that his style of play and the injuries it has caused makes him more worn down than Nole. Rafa used to move better than he does now whereas Nole's movement hasn't appeared to slip yet but it will soon...

No, but it feels like Rafa is around much longer, maybe because he beat Fed in 2004 and was thrust into the role of main rival in 2005 when the rest of them weren't up to it. As El Dude says, Rafa faced Agassi, twice. Because he was so precocious, it feels like Rafa spans a couple of generations, and certainly pre-dates Nole in activity at the very top, and not just by a single year.

I'm not saying this to put Nole down, because he can't be put down. His development was more natural, and then he broke out unexpectedly in 2011. Rafa definitely has faced the pressure for longer and might face motivation and hunger issues before Novak does. I also agree with The Dude in this: hunger might make Murray outlast both of them...

 

[DarthFed]

Rafa and Nole should both be plenty hungry at this point. Rafa has something huge he hasn't accomplished yet (he hasn't won enough slams) and Nole badly wants to complete the career slam and get back to #1.

Nole in 2007 was by far the 3rd best player in the world and seemed poised to challenge the top 2 in the coming years which mostly didn't happen until 2011. But still he has been playing top tennis since 2007 while Rafa was playing top tennis since 2005 so there is more or less just 2 years difference in tennis age.

 

[El Dude]

Another thing to keep in mind about Rafa is that he rose to elite level very quickly - by the age of just-turning-19 when he won the French Open in 2005. While he played one tournament in 2002, he didn't really start touring until 2003, so he only had two "developmental years" as far as non-elite status goes, 2003-04. By 2005 he was the dominant clay court player, and he also won two hard court Master's besides.

Roger's develop was more gradual, as was Novak's - and both them started a year later than Rafa did.

 

[El Dude]

Rafa and Nole should both be plenty hungry at this point. Rafa has something huge he hasn't accomplished yet (he hasn't won enough slams) and Nole badly wants to complete the career slam and get back to #1.

I agree as far as right now goes, but I was talking about down the road, say 2-3 years from now. In other words, if I was to guess who of the three would play more matches after turning 30 years old, I'd bet on Andy. Rafa will either have nothing more to prove and/or be like a limping "old" warrior. I can see him being like an old scarred lion that doesn't have the power he once held, but no one really wants to face or get fired up.

Novak might be faced with either trying to adapt his game after his movement starts declining or focusing on family and other things and start thinking more and more about the latter. He might also be satisfied with his accomplishments, probably 8-10 Slams total by the time he turns 30, if not more.

Andy, on the other hand, will almost certainly still be far behind the other two in accomplishments and want to catch up a bit and have the hunger to fight with the weaker, younger generation before the next great players arise. Again, think of Agassi in his early 30s. Peter retired in 2002 around the time he turned 31, while Agassi - more than a year older - played on another 3-4 years.

 

[DarthFed]

Another thing to keep in mind about Rafa is that he rose to elite level very quickly - by the age of just-turning-19 when he won the French Open in 2005. While he played one tournament in 2002, he didn't really start touring until 2003, so he only had two "developmental years" as far as non-elite status goes, 2003-04. By 2005 he was the dominant clay court player, and he also won two hard court Master's besides.

Roger's develop was more gradual, as was Novak's - and both them started a year later than Rafa did.

Nole actually rose up pretty quick too. He was pretty unknown until 2006 and then quickly got to #3 in 2007. Roger is more the normal gradual rise with progress from 2001-2003 before becoming the dominant force.

 

[atttomole]

Another reason why Rafa seems to have been around much longer than Novak is that Rafa started dominating on clay as a teenager, and he went on amazing winning streaks on the surface, which also meant playing many more matches. Rafa has played finals in most clay tournaments that he entered. Novak had to wait a little before he became the best hard court player.

 

[nehmeth]

While I respect a lot of the study you do of the game E.D., every so often you come up with a thread that's just meant to be provocative. That's my opinion. Since no Djokovic fan has taken the bait, I will respond.

If by "provocative" you mean deliberately sowing seeds of discord and trying to get people riled up then, no, that wasn't my intention.

If by "provocative" you mean asking a question that isn't easy to agree upon and may generate some (hopefully civil) debate, then yes, that is my intention.

You are entitled to whatever opinion you want, of course, but it differs from what I'm actually intending (or saying I'm intending! You could think I'm being disingenuous, but I'd hope you'd give me the benefit of the doubt).

It's the #2 of option of provocative... and I trust that you mean to engender civil discourse. Sometimes, "stirring the pot" can also have other responses. To this point in their careers, Novak hasn't achieved the level of success that Ralf (or Roger) have. So a Djokovic fan trying to say otherwise wouldn't have a leg to stand on. To suggest that he's the better player now? Well that would be undermining the resiliency of Nadal, who after 2011 eventually found a way to gain the upper hand again. I won't ever count Ralf out until he hangs up his sneakers.

 

[atttomole]

Now la decimal!!

 

[DarthFed]

Technically Novak hasn't been better than Stan or Murray the last 12 months, not where it matters. He has 5 of 9 MS shields and the YEC but that doesn't mean he's been great. He is just mopping up when the pressure is low. There is a lot at stake for him at RG as far as his standing in the game. If he smashes Wafa in the final we could see another 2011 or something close to it. And if we get that it will be that much harder for Rafa to rebound as he was just 25 years old in 2011. Eventually there is no getting back up, just ask Roger from 2010 on.

 

[Moxie]

^Roger still won a Major title in 2012.

 

[DarthFed]

1 title in 4 years...that's an enormous drop from where he was and where Rafa and Nole are now.

 

[Kieran]

Enjoy the tennis, people! I'll see you all over the other side!

Vamos!!! :clap

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I am going against the general thinking and guessing that neither will make the finals.

2 months of propaganda come down to this. Let's hope you're right after calling me out on my Nadal-Wawrinka prediction (in a match that never happened) because after shoving the "unnamed player" down our throats in virtually every other post, and now this, I'm going to have a field day...

Stop exaggerating things. There is no propaganda here, much less for 2 months.
The "Early Talk on Rolland Garros" thread was started about 10 days ago and somewhere
in the middle of that thread, the notion of "unnamed player" originated.

I have made so many other posts and on so many other things as well. To say that
"unnamed player" is appearing in every other post is far fetched. May be it appears
to you that way as it is bothering you too much and causing you sleepless nights.
May be, you should try counting sheep (instead of thinking about goat).

Finally, nobody can "shove" anything to you. You were not born yesterday.
You can always ignore my posts.

Before you can have a field day based on my predictions, post your predictions
if you have the courage. Oh, I see, you can never go wrong if you don't make any
predictions. I forgot that. Sorry, I am an idiot.

 

[Moxie]

1 title in 4 years...that's an enormous drop from where he was and where Rafa and Nole are now.

"Eventually there is no getting back up, just ask Roger from 2010 on." I was reacting to that quote from you. But I suppose it does depend on what your definition of "up" is...

 

[DarthFed]

^ In 2012 Roger had a very good 7 month stretch but even after winning Wimbledon I don't think anyone was saying he was the best player in the world again despite the fact he got back to #1. I think most didn't expect him to keep that level up consistently for the following year or 2 and he hasn't.

In this discussion of Nole vs. Rafa we are talking who is the best player in the world now and predicting what is likely to happen in the near future. As of now it would be foolish to call Novak the best player in the world but in 2 weeks if he wins the big one then he absolutely is.