Will Novak pass Rafa?

[Bonaca]

First of all, there is no problem. I just think the question is odd, because it implies some doubt. So this tough draw consisting of Kyrgios, Thiem and Zverev...let me ask you something: Do you think Kyrgious would be able to beat Nadal on clay at RG? Zverev?

Nadal's draw at Roland Garros doesn't matter. Only two guys can beat him: Thiem and Djokovic. One has never beaten him at RG in 4 tries, and the other trails the head to head at RG 6-1, with his only win coming in Nadal's worst ever season. So again, since you've asked this question 3 times already, let me ask you, in order to hopefully answer it properly, what is it about this draw that makes you think Nadal wouldn't be able to win RG?

the only interesting question for me is how it would end if he has to play Thiem and Novak back to back on Chatrier. Clown and Zverev are no factor.
why is that odd to you?
Of course the draw matters. How could it not matter if he plays only one or both in the second week?
I only asked the question one time, rest was repeating for you.
Because of the two players you mentioned who can beat him everywhere.

 

[El Dude]

foregone conclusion? since when is anyone winning 5 slams after age 32 a foregone conclusion? you are just full of shit as usual. Actually it's a foregone conclusion that you will post something stupid, really really out of this world stupid.....very soon too.

Somebody give this man a hug. He clearly needs it.

 

[Ricardo]

Somebody give this man a hug. He clearly needs it.

See how I just nailed it? again, who thinks it's a foregone conclusion that a guy gets 5 slams past age 32? Pioline? bhahbhahahaha

 

[Moxie]

I asked him if he thinks that Nadal would win RG with the draw of this years AO.
The question is not who is the favorite or who has won the tournament 12 times. You got that?

I think no, so i asked for another opinion. What is your problem?

I saw Broken's response to you, and it was a fair one. I was wondering if you meant that if Nadal had the exact same draw as AO, which could be considered an equally tough one on clay, (though some results would likely be different,) and Novak had same or equally easy one for clay? I do agree with Broken, as to who are the only 2 that can best Nadal at RG, so that, in a sense what you're asking is who's side of the draw does Thiem end up on? If Rafa has to deal with someone like Stan before, as well, it could be tougher fortnight. If Rafa has to go through a lot of tough matches, and Novak has an easy path, and they meet in the final, that would then favor Novak more than usual. However, Novak is more vulnerable to upset at RG than Rafa is, in the same way that Rafa is more vulnerable at AO than Djokovic is there. Since the exact same draw is statistically unlikely to the point of nearly impossible, and if you shift Thiem (and Stan) onto Novak's side, the landscape changes considerably. Also, Novak's draw had players that would be much more troublesome on clay than on HC, (like Garin and Schwartzman, if you're going with the same draw.)

 

[Moxie]

And I guess you forgot that he came back a little over a month later and won Tokyo before reaching the quarters of Shanghai and then winning Paris. It clearly was not a severe injury.

And in case you are unaware, players pre-30 pull out of tournaments with injury too. Look at your own favorite. It happens all the time.

Not severe, but not as "fully healthy" as you claim. There have been lots more niggles (and a surgery) in the past few years than he's had since back when he was the Retirement King of tennis.

I asked you what young player meets the following two criteria to challenge Djokovic at Slams:

1) A daunting H2H match-up to the point of being a favorite against Djokovic most of the time, and

2) Someone you can trust to go far enough in Slams to meet Djokovic on a consistent basis.

Now can you throw out a single name who meets this standard? I'm not trying to be disrespectful here. I am just asking for a concrete answer to a clear-cut question so we can engage in a dialogue instead of some nebulous emoting session in which you express your vague sentiments.

As usual, you can't help biasing and limiting your question with (currently) unmeetable criteria. But you act as if the landscape won't change for the next 5 years, or that Novak isn't vulnerable to upset. That's unrealistic. Novak has the worst record, by a lot, of the Big 3 against the Next Gen. And some of those players are going to become more consistent at Slams in the next year or two. Your assumption is that a) Novak will have few/no injury issues at Majors, and b) that no one will improve enough to challenge him in next 5 or whatever years. My point about the Next Gen hasn't been so much about the one particular breakout, but that the onslaught will cause more upsets over time.

I appreciate the candor. All I'm saying is that you shouldn't offer some ridiculous rationale for why your desired outcome is likely to happen. I want Djokovic to have more Slams than Nadal but do you see me saying that some random young players in the top 50 are going to beat Nadal at Roland Garros? No.

I mentioned Tsitsipas, who is in the top 10. Where did I say anything about a random young player in the top 50 taking Novak down? When that has happened, it has surprised us all. Though, it has happened. Which is another thing that puts a lie to your painful contortions in formulating your question above.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Yes. When it is all said and done, it will be Nole 22, Roger 21 and Rafa 21.

Nope, it will be Rafa 23, Federer 20, Djokovic 17.

Consolation for Djokovic is that he will pass Federer in weeks at no.1.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Nope, it will be Rafa 23, Federer 20, Djokovic 17.

Consolation for Djokovic is that he will pass Federer in weeks at no.1.

My friend this means Rafa will have to totally reverse the non clay H2H vs Roger and especially Novak..my question to you is HOW?

 

[atttomole]

Nope, it will be Rafa 23, Federer 20, Djokovic 17.

Consolation for Djokovic is that he will pass Federer in weeks at no.1.

You have not been rampantly posting recently. Is it because Rafa didn’t win the AO? Is it because Djokovic is 2 behind Rafa? I remember you were posting as much as Trump tweets after the UO last year.

 

[the AntiPusher]

You have not been rampantly posting recently. Is it because Rafa didn’t win the AO? Is it because Djokovic is 2 behind Rafa? I remember you were posting as much as Trump tweets after the UO last year.

That can be the said the same as Fed Fans.. couldn't it

 

[Moxie]

That can be the said the same as Fed Fans.. couldn't it

Indeed. And it's not like much of anyone is posting atm.

 

[Front242]

Nope, it will be Rafa 23, Federer 20, Djokovic 17.

Consolation for Djokovic is that he will pass Federer in weeks at no.1.

Don't take up sports betting anytime soon. Highly unlikely Djokovic never wins another slam. HiGHLY. The problem with this is there's not a whole lot wishful thinking or trying to wind people up on a tennis forum can do to alter reality. Good luck with your prediction.

 

[Moxie]

Don't take up sports betting anytime soon. Highly unlikely Djokovic never wins another slam. HiGHLY. The problem with this is there's not a whole lot wishful thinking or trying to wind people up on a tennis forum can do to alter reality. Good luck with your prediction.

Likewise, GSM is trying to game that Rafa won't win another one, though he won't quite say it in print. Even betting the mortgage that Roger wouldn't win another Major would be foolish, and I don't think he will. The idea that Novak or Rafa is surely done for the rest of their careers really is wishful thinking, as you say.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Likewise, GSM is trying to game that Rafa won't win another one, though he won't quite say it in print. Even betting the mortgage that Roger wouldn't win another Major would be foolish, and I don't think he will. The idea that Novak or Rafa is surely done for the rest of their careers really is wishful thinking, as you say.

False accusation.

 

[Moxie]

False accusation.

Seriously? You said that you thought Novak would pass Rafa. I said you were riding a fine line. You said, as you have reiterated, that you think Roger will win one more. Implying that you thought Roger would still come out on top. The only possible answer for that is: Roger 21, Novak 20, Rafa 19. You have an irritating inclination to be coy and evasive about your predictions. So why don't you just tell us, then. Do you think Rafa is done winning Majors?

 

[the AntiPusher]

Seriously? You said that you thought Novak would pass Rafa. I said you were riding a fine line. You said, as you have reiterated, that you think Roger will win one more. Implying that you thought Roger would still come out on top. The only possible answer for that is: Roger 21, Novak 20, Rafa 19. You have an irritating inclination to be coy and evasive about your predictions. So why don't you just tell us, then. Do you think Rafa is done winning Majors?

Enough of going back and forth with that Rafa hater. If and when Rafa wins RG. Will he just opened up his shoulders and let it fly at SW19 and USO..plus will he give up his real estate license.( All the area that he stands behind the baseline)..which is why Novak and Fed are holding service so easily vs Rafa.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Seriously? You said that you thought Novak would pass Rafa. I said you were riding a fine line. You said, as you have reiterated, that you think Roger will win one more. Implying that you thought Roger would still come out on top. The only possible answer for that is: Roger 21, Novak 20, Rafa 19. You have an irritating inclination to be coy and evasive about your predictions. So why don't you just tell us, then. Do you think Rafa is done winning Majors?

Don't put words into my mouth. Novak passing Rafa can happen even if Rafa adds to his current tally.

 

[Moxie]

Don't put words into my mouth. Novak passing Rafa can happen even if Rafa adds to his current tally.

You as much as said it...I asked you about your claim that Novak would pass Rafa. I asked if you weren't treading a fine line, and your complete response was that you believed Roger would win one more. That means you think Roger 21, Novak 20, Rafa 19. I asked you if that was so and you never responded. Tell me that's not what you meant.

 

[calitennis127]

Not severe, but not as "fully healthy" as you claim. There have been lots more niggles (and a surgery) in the past few years than he's had since back when he was the Retirement King of tennis.

When are tennis players ever injury-free? In 2008 Nadal lost to Ferrero in Rome partially because of blisters. Then he went on to that BS win over Federer in Hamburg the following week where Federer blew a 5-1 lead in the first set.

Players in their twenties deal with injuries and pains too. It's not just Novak Djokovic at the 2019 US Open who has ever gotten injured.

As usual, you can't help biasing and limiting your question with (currently) unmeetable criteria.

The reason I am limiting the criteria is that we are talking about only 4 events per year where the matches are played over 5 sets. Being able to give Djokovic a little bit of trouble at a Masters event is totally different than beating him at a Slam (look at Bautista-Agut).

But you act as if the landscape won't change for the next 5 years,

I am not merely "acting" that way. I am saying emphatically that Djokovic has no reason to worry about the dynamic at Slams changing in the next 5 years barring the rise of a player we haven't yet seen.

I was the only person on this board saying that 5-7 years ago, and look at where we are now - with the same Big 3 that there was at the time. Who was the only person on this board who foresaw that? The poster whose message you are reading right now.

That's unrealistic.

That would be unrealistic for Nadal, but Djokovic is a better all-around player than Nadal. So the same standards don't apply to each.

Novak has the worst record, by a lot, of the Big 3 against the Next Gen. And some of those players are going to become more consistent at Slams in the next year or two.

What does that mean exactly? Losing in the 4th round instead of the 2nd or 3rd round?

What reason do you have to believe that any of them will be consistently making the quarters or semis tournament after tournament?

My point about the Next Gen hasn't been so much about the one particular breakout, but that the onslaught will cause more upsets over time.

Yes, and I have told you that's just your wishful thinking at work and that it is too nebulous to mean anything. Your posterboy for this change in the tennis landscape was Tsitsipas, whose victory over Djokovic in Shanghai you were utterly ecstatic about. What has ensued since? He has gotten trounced by Djokovic in Paris and flamed out early to Raonic in Melbourne.

That's a classic example of your nebulous generalities collapsing when you look at the specifics.

I mentioned Tsitsipas, who is in the top 10.

Yes, the guy who got pounded by Djokovic in Paris and then flamed out in the 3rd round of Melbourne right after you hyped him up.

Where did I say anything about a random young player in the top 50 taking Novak down?

That is one possible interpretation of your nebulous statements such as "My point about the Next Gen hasn't been so much about the one particular breakout, but that the onslaught will cause more upsets over time."

If we are talking about Slams specifically, that is a meaningless prediction without bringing up specific players who can trouble Djokovic over 5 sets at particular events.

 

[Moxie]

OK, Cali, you've said what you predict, and I've said what I do. You think the landscape won't change for 5 years to prevent Novak from continuing to win Majors, basically at will. I think that things will change, and to the point of hampering him from that, to some extent. There's no point in debating it beyond that. The rest is just wait and see.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

You as much as said it...I asked you about your claim that Novak would pass Rafa. I asked if you weren't treading a fine line, and your complete response was that you believed Roger would win one more. That means you think Roger 21, Novak 20, Rafa 19. I asked you if that was so and you never responded. Tell me that's not what you meant.

What non-sense? There is no such thing as "as much as said it". I don't even know what you mean by treading a fine line. You make all sort of assumptions and argue in vaccum.