Which has been greater at the US Open: Nadal's overachieving or Djokovic's/Federer's underachieving?

[Moxie]

Not obsessed just right.

Now you sound a bit like Cali to say that Rosol "almost" won another set. Well, he didn't. Also, in that post, you excuse that 2014 Wimbledon because of an injury to Rosol, but you discount that injury could have anything to do with Nadal's loss in 2012. You chock it up to "bruised ego," even though Nadal was laid up for 7 months after that. Rosol didn't even take the next week off. Again, with the double standards. SMH.

 

[Front242]

no its not your ridiculous, Federer clearly played god mode tennis and still lost to a average nadal at[ French open 2007,11 ] by the way I do think Djokovic and nadal are both better players than Federer, also does not matter if you think Djokovic better than nadal he's 3 slams behind him nadal will always be better than Djokovic until he pass him on slams just like nadal [19] Federer[ 20]

God mode tennis? Haha. Sorry to inform you but if Federer plays god mode tennis he wins and he didn't, so he lost. Even uncle phoney acknowledges this.

 

[Andy22]

No they don't, lol. I doubt they would say that.



How the hell are any of those 3 just as talented as the Big 3? You could make a case that Dimitrov at his very best would be in the same class as Federer and Djokovic (and better than Nadal), but his backhand is too shaky and his game is too robotic from the baseline.



Which shot is that exactly? Federer's forehand is clearly more potent, as this year's Wimbledon match demonstrated. Nadal's forehand is meant to draw errors. Federer's forehand finishes points.

Big difference. And you know that.

I doubt Federer would say he's more talented because he know he's not] second all three of these players are just as talented as big but never mastered the baseline menalty ect…. third its fact Federer makes more errors overall than goat nadal or Djokovic that's one of the reasons why they have good h2h against him they know how to win the longer points better which is true talent. nadal forehand destroyed Federer most their careers clearly much better, also choking 21 matches after having match points shows you lack the talent to end matches [goat choker]

 

[Front242]

Now you sound a bit like Cali to say that Rosol "almost" won another set. Well, he didn't. Also, in that post, you excuse that 2014 Wimbledon because of an injury to Rosol, but you discount that injury could have anything to do with Nadal's loss in 2012. You chock it up to "bruised ego," even though Nadal was laid up for 7 months after that. Rosol didn't even take the next week off. Again, with the double standards. SMH.

I didn't see any sign whatsoever of any injury in Wimbledon 2012 and your resident Nadal tard here even said the same earlier in this thread. Rosol clearly had a big plaster on the back of his neck and said his serve was affected. Given his serve was crucial to him winning that counts for a lot. You can be all defensive as you are and keep doing so like a true Nadal fan always does but the fact remains some of the tards here like to make out Rosol winning in 2012 was both (a) a fluke and (b) down to some imaginary Nadal knee injury. This is bs as I pointed out 'cos Rosol almost flew off to a 2 set lead again in 2014 and if that happened we can easily say he was going to beat him again.

Don't lie to yourself. Rosol beating him wasn't a fluke and he almost backed it up again the next time round also, proving Nadal is no great shakes on the faster grass in the first week which we all knew anyway for years and by no great shakes I'm being VERY generous and pc cos it's late here and I'm trying to be nice

 

[Andy22]

God mode tennis? Haha. Sorry to inform you but I'd Federer plays god mode tennis he wins and he didn't, so he lost.

he still lost playing B- grade nadal who was not even close to his best most likely 70/100.

 

[Front242]

he still lost playing B- grade nadal who was not even close to his best most likely 70/100.

Yes he lost. Well done. We all know that. We also know he wasn't playing god mode tennis at all.

 

[Moxie]

I didn't see any sign whatsoever of any injury in Wimbledon 2012 and your resident Nadal tard here even said the same earlier in this thread. Rosol clearly had a big plaster of the back of his neck and said his serve was affected. Given his serve was crucial to him winning that counts for a lot. You can be all defensive as you are and keep doing so like a true Nadal fan always does but the fact remains some of the tards here like to make out Rosol winning in 2012 was both (a) a fluke and (b) down to some imaginary Nadal knee injury. This is bs as I pointed out 'cos Rosol almost flew off to a 2 set lead again in 2014 and if that happened we can easily say he was going to beat him again.

Don't lie to yourself. Rosol beating him wasn't a fluke and he almost backed it up again the next time round also, proving Nadal is no great shakes on the faster grass in the first week which we all knew anyway for years and by no great shakes I'm being VERY generous and pc cos it's late here and I'm trying to be nice

None of this changes the fact that, as usual, you'll excuse Rosol's, or anyone else's loss due to being hampered by injury, and not even entertain that injury could have caused Nadal to be upset...by a real nobody in this case. That's what I'm calling you out on.

 

[Front242]

None of this changes the fact that, as usual, you'll excuse Rosol's, or anyone else's loss due to being hampered by injury, and not even entertain that injury could have caused Nadal to be upset...by a real nobody in this case. That's what I'm calling you out on.

I just told you why. Because the guy almost got off to a 2 set lead AGAIN the next time they played in 2014 so Nadal just clearly isn't that bloody great on fast grass and that's all there is to it. It has nothing to do with his knee/knees.

 

[Moxie]

Please cite some specific matches that Nadal should have won at those events. I can't think of one Wimbledon match he lost where he was the better player on that day. Nadal has tried very hard to win Wimbledon again but his game has not been good enough. The court is too fast for him to be comfortable.....at the Australian Open the court is too slow for him to beat Djokovic while at Wimbledon the court is too fast for him to seriously match the best players. Federer and Djokovic in particular have too much firepower for him on grass (look at the embarrassing demolition job Djokovic did on him in the 2011 final). The US Open provides the perfect balance where he can be offensive when he steps in but also have enough time to prolong points defensively (plus with the huge stadium and the winds and the elements he has an advantage with his propensity for stable muscle-ball to draw errors).

I'll give you examples, but first let's look at something you said above, as I bolded. Let's face it, beyond a few matches on clay, I doubt you would ever say that Nadal was the better player on the day. You've demonstrated your outrageous bias against Nadal in the very premise of this thread, and all over these forums. So I don't think you're really fit to judge. I would also point out that I'm not you. I don't so much trade in "should have won," as you do. I said that Nadal had left some matches on the table. That said, for example, the W SF v. Djokovic last year. Hell, even Darth said that Rafa was the better player in that match. The 2007 final was definitely one that Nadal does and should regret. The 2012 and 2014 and 2017 finals in Oz.

 

[Moxie]

I just told you why. Because the guy almost got off to a 2 set lead AGAIN the next time they played in 2014 so Nadal just clearly isn't that bloody great on fast grass and that's all there is to it. It has nothing to do with his knee/knees.

Not the point.

 

[Front242]

I'll give you examples, but first let's look at something you said above, as I bolded. Let's face it, beyond a few matches on clay, I doubt you would ever say that Nadal was the better player on the day. You've demonstrated your outrageous bias against Nadal in the very premise of this thread, and all over these forums. So I don't think you're really fit to judge. I would also point out that I'm not you. I don't so much trade in "should have won," as you do. I said that Nadal had left some matches on the table. That said, for example, the W SF v. Djokovic last year. Hell, even Darth said that Rafa was the better player in that match. The 2007 final was definitely one that Nadal does and should regret. The 2012 and 2014 and 2017 finals in Oz.

That's not what Darth said and you know it. It's been widely reported here that Nadal lost to Djokovic at barely 70% of his best at Wimbledon last year but just like this year against Federer, Djokovic played the big points better and therefore deserved to win both matches.

Btw yet again, it's beyond hilarious to hear Nadal fans moaning about the AO 2017 final. He was NEVER the better player in that match and it should never have even gone to a 5th set. And before you reply but he was up 3-1 in set 5, it should never have got that far anyway. He was soundly thumped in the sets he lost, especially set 3. Enough silliness for tonight. Bed time.

 

[Moxie]

Lol.....his only Australian Open win occurred because Federer fell apart.

While I agree that Roger's serve abandoned him in the 5th set there, you can't state unequivocally that Rafa wouldn't have beaten him anyway. He was deep in Roger's head at that point.

His 2008 Wimbledon win had more to do with Federer's flaws than his own strengths.

That's an opinion, but not so much one shared by the press and the general population.

His 2010 win had to do with Federer and Djokovic having horrendous losses prior to the final. I will grant that Nadal probably should have won the 2012 AO final over Djokovic (although Djokovic played like crap in allowing it to get to the point where Nadal's miss made the difference).

If a draw opens up, it does. I actually think that Djokovic was the better player, overall, in the 2012 final, and yes, he let Rafa back into the match, but it doesn't change the fact that Rafa had him in the 5th, and blew a routine FH.

At the US Open, Nadal was not the better player in the 2013 US Open final. In 2010 he beat Djokovic even though Djokovic had a 3-match win streak against him on hardcourts.

In 2013, Nadal was better in the first, the end of the 3rd, and the 4th. Djokovic was playing his best tennis for about a set and 3/4 only. As to 2010, your argument is based only on Djokovic's resume. The better player on that day (your phrase from above) was Rafa, no question. The win streak was in Bo3 matches...not the same, especially as Novak had only 1 Major at that point.

On clay Federer was clearly the better player in 2007 and 2011 (and probably 2006). Fed's level in the 2011 French Open was absolutely insane.....probably the best I have ever seen on clay from anyone. Yet he completely choked away the final.

The bolded above is possibly your most biased (and ridiculous) comment ever. I'll just say that perhaps you were in a coma for the whole of Rafa's 2008 clay season and leave the rest of his clay resume out of it. I'd have to re-watch the 2007 final to look at Roger's level, but I do remember that Roger had a real chance to take Rafa to 5 in 2011. Which is not to say that he would have beaten Nadal, but it surely was a real opportunity missed.

Nadal has been far more lucky than unlucky in his career. The injury problems are exaggerated given that everyone goes through them at some point. He has had far more bounce his way than not.

It's funny that you say injury problems even out in the course of a career, but you don't feel the same about luck. Perhaps you should rethink that idea. Nadal's injuries have been exaggerated? In their careers, since they played their first Major, Djokovic has missed 1 Major, Federer 4 (all since 2016, and 2 by choice,) and Nadal has missed 9. As to luck: the ball drops on one side of the net, or the other; the draw is easier or tougher; the draw opens up...over the course of 16- to 20-year careers, it does tend to even out. You ascribe a disproportion amount of luck to Nadal, as does Monfed, because you refuse to believe that it's talent. You've been singing that song for a really long time. And it get's more and more ridiculous as Rafa racks up the hardware.

 

[Moxie]

That's not what Darth said and you know it. It's been widely reported here that Nadal lost to Djokovic at barely 70% of his best at Wimbledon last year but just like this year against Federer, Djokovic played the big points better and therefore deserved to win both matches.

Btw yet again, it's beyond hilarious to hear Nadal fans moaning about the AO 2017 final. He was NEVER the better player in that match and it should never have even gone to a 5th set. And before you reply but he was up 3-1 in set 5, it should never have got that far anyway. He was soundly thumped in the sets he lost, especially set 3. Enough silliness for tonight. Bed time.

https://www.tennisfrontier.com/tenn...bledon-men’s-sf-djokovic-v-nadal.6099/page-43

Darth said it, and he said it in subsequent threads. I'm not saying he was in the least sorry that Nadal lost that match, only that he saw what happened. He said more than once that that had to be a painful one for Nadal fans. And it was. Note: on that thread, Federberg, Monfed and Cali also said some version of that. And I only skimmed a few pages.

As to the 2017 AO, I have never said that Roger wasn't the better player in that match. I thought Rafa was flat through most of it. Only saying that, given new life, and being up a break in the 5th, it's still a missed opportunity, no matter how you slice it. It's like the 2013 SF at RG Nadal v. Djokovic. Rafa was the better player, and should have won in 4. But Djokovic got new life by even getting it to a 5th, and he had a break. Did the better player on the day prevail? Yes, he did. But should Novak and his fans regret that one? Sure.

Nighty night!

 

[calitennis127]

no its not your ridiculous, Federer clearly played god mode tennis and still lost to a average nadal at[ French open 2007,11 ]

Why was Nadal only "average" in those matches? Throwing that little descriptor in there is a ridiculous, imjimmy-like way of making the ideal Nadal sound like the most unbeatable player in tennis histroy.

by the way I do think Djokovic and nadal are both better players than Federer,

I don't.

 

[calitennis127]

While I agree that Roger's serve abandoned him in the 5th set there, you can't state unequivocally that Rafa wouldn't have beaten him anyway. He was deep in Roger's head at that point.

That's not what I mean.....Federer was losing to Nadal at that point do to some big-picture macro issues. I am not talking solely about his serve going away in the 5th. Federer's whole approach to Nadal had been off for a while and things came to a head in that match, which showed with his crying outburst afterward. That match was not just about that match. It was a matter of many chickens coming home to roost.

In 2013, Nadal was better in the first, the end of the 3rd, and the 4th. Djokovic was playing his best tennis for about a set and 3/4 only.

That match came down entirely to Djokovic pulling his punch in the third set in two separate games when he had the chance to get the decisive break. Bottom line.

As to 2010, your argument is based only on Djokovic's resume. The better player on that day (your phrase from above) was Rafa, no question. The win streak was in Bo3 matches...not the same, especially as Novak had only 1 Major at that point.

And that was as many majors as Nadal had on hardcourts at the time (the only one being in Australia in 2009). Those three prior matches were all significant matches: Cincinnati, Bercy, and World Tour Finals (granted, Nadal is terrible at World Tour Finals but it still counts). Djokovic could have and should have played much better in that match than he did.

I'd have to re-watch the 2007 final to look at Roger's level, but I do remember that Roger had a real chance to take Rafa to 5 in 2011. Which is not to say that he would have beaten Nadal, but it surely was a real opportunity missed.

The big opportunity missed was not closing out the first set, which was a choke and a collapse on Federer's part.

As for Nadal's 2008 clay level, don't forget that he needed 4 hours to beat Djokovic in Hamburg and then benefited from yet another Federer fold in the final, which he only won in 3 sets. Don't act like he was more dominant than he was. I would take Federer's 2011 level over that.

You ascribe a disproportion amount of luck to Nadal, as does Monfed, because you refuse to believe that it's talent. You've been singing that song for a really long time. And it get's more and more ridiculous as Rafa racks up the hardware.

Oh please.....he has gotten his ass kicked plenty as well. How many Grand Slam finals have been as one-sided as this year's Australian Open? Not too many. Don't act like Nadal wins every tournament. What I have said is that he doesn't win the biggest matches at Slams and MS events because of natural shotmaking ability. I fully stand by that.

I also maintain that Djokovic and Federer are both more talented players than he is.

 

[Moxie]

Why was Nadal only "average" in those matches? Throwing that little descriptor in there is a ridiculous, imjimmy-like way of making the ideal Nadal sound like the most unbeatable player in tennis histroy.

Pot calling the kettle? You throw in those little descriptors about Nadal All. The. Time.

 

[calitennis127]

Pot calling the kettle? You throw in those little descriptors about Nadal All. The. Time.

I'm sorry I don't see how I do it in the same way. There is no reason to call Nadal in the 2007 or 2011 French Open Finals merely "average" as compared to some mythical unbeatable level. He played his usual way, the same way that got him that squeaky little victory over Federer at Hamburg 2008 in 3 sets (a match which Federer should have won going away).

Do you remember how Federer went up 5-1, 40-30 in the first set but still lost it?

 

[Nadalfan2013]

I look forward to reading Cali’s posts about Nadal in the next few years. If he’s this butthurt right now with Nadal reaching 19 slams, can you imagine how much more butthurt he will be when Nadal reaches 24 slams?

 

[Moxie]

That's not what I mean.....Federer was losing to Nadal at that point do to some big-picture macro issues. I am not talking solely about his serve going away in the 5th. Federer's whole approach to Nadal had been off for a while and things came to a head in that match, which showed with his crying outburst afterward. That match was not just about that match. It was a matter of many chickens coming home to roost.

And your point? Either way, Roger was going to lose, according to you, now. I thought your earlier point was that he merely fell apart in the fifth.

That match came down entirely to Djokovic pulling his punch in the third set in two separate games when he had the chance to get the decisive break. Bottom line.

Entirely? Look, we've already gone 10 rounds on that match over the years. And you've proven yourself as one who can rewrite history based on a couple of games. It only went 4, and Nadal won the fourth 6-1. Bottom line.

And that was as many majors as Nadal had on hardcourts at the time (the only one being in Australia in 2009). Those three prior matches were all significant matches: Cincinnati, Bercy, and World Tour Finals (granted, Nadal is terrible at World Tour Finals but it still counts). Djokovic could have and should have played much better in that match than he did.

Could have. Should have. Didn't. Mr. Sports Psychology, it's possible he wasn't ready to beat Federer and Nadal in the same Major. He's said as much. Moving on.

As for Nadal's 2008 clay level, don't forget that he needed 4 hours to beat Djokovic in Hamburg and then benefited from yet another Federer fold in the final, which he only won in 3 sets. Don't act like he was more dominant than he was. I would take Federer's 2011 level over that.

Now you really are making a joke of yourself.

Oh please.....he has gotten his ass kicked plenty as well. How many Grand Slam finals have been as one-sided as this year's Australian Open? Not too many. Don't act like Nadal wins every tournament. What I have said is that he doesn't win the biggest matches at Slams and MS events because of natural shotmaking ability. I fully stand by that.

You're not addressing my points. That injury doesn't even out, and that luck does. Nothing to say about that? All of those Majors missed? Now you're just acting like a politician and answering the question you wish you were asked. Well, I could mention the FO '08, when Fed only won 4 games, and got bageled, if you'd like. And I could say that Rafa has a higher winning pct. at Majors when he does participate, than either Fed or Joker. But I never said he wins every tournament, nor do I "act like it." I'd appreciate if you'd respond to what I actually said.

I also maintain that Djokovic and Federer are both more talented players than he is.

You've made it clear that you think so. I don't agree with you.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Nalbandian more talented than Rafa.
Rafa being average but only winning because of stamina.
Federer reaching a higher level of tennis on clay than Nadal.
@calitennis127 please don't ever leave this forum, this is pure comedy gold!