Will Novak pass Rafa?

[brokenshoelace]

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.

Yes, but the two players you mentioned are a combined 1-10 against him at Roland Garros. So the answer to your question is fairly obvious. Yes, he probably would win (as of right now...things can always change between now and June). He'd be the big favorite, as he always is.

 

[brokenshoelace]

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.)

Good post. By the way, Nadal would destroy Wawrinka in straights on clay. I wouldn't consider that a tough match in the slightest, especially at this point where Stan's movement has taken quite a few hits.

 

[Jelenafan]

I think the bigger question is what side of the draw Theim is in regarding Novak, not Nadal.. At this point I can’t see Novak beating them back to back to win RG, or even being the favorite versus Theim in the SF’s.

 

[Bonaca]

I think the bigger question is what side of the draw Theim is in regarding Novak, not Nadal.. At this point I can’t see Novak beating them back to back to win RG, or even being the favorite versus Theim in the SF’s.

It would be hard for both Novak and Nadal. Thiem the favorite, really?? Must be kidding?

 

[Jelenafan]

It would be hard for both Novak and Nadal. Thiem the favorite, really?? Must be kidding?

Yes, but Rafa has beaten Theim 3 straight years best of five in RG.

I’m genuinely puzzled you would think Novak would be the favorite in a matchup at RG versus Theim. It’s not a knock on Novak but The Austrian has been the finalist at the French Open the last two years, has beaten Novak 3 or 4 out of their last 5 encounters on red clay and bested him last year in the SF at Roland Garosvand twice there in 3 years. What makes you think Theim would be perceived the underdog on red clay?

 

[Bonaca]

Yes, but Rafa has beaten Theim 3 straight years best of five in RG.

I’m genuinely puzzled you would think Novak would be the favorite in a matchup at RG versus Theim. It’s not a knock on Novak but The Austrian has been the finalist at the French Open the last two years, has beaten Novak 3 or 4 out of their last 5 encounters on red clay and bested him last year in the SF at Roland Garos. What makes you think Theim would be perceived the underdog on red clay?

The Way Novak played and the time when they played.
His first loss in Paris was in his decline , so the other two at clay Masters.
Last year it was weird , I think he would have won that match under normal conditions.
Pure numbers don’t tell the whole story.

 

[Moxie]

Good post. By the way, Nadal would destroy Wawrinka in straights on clay. I wouldn't consider that a tough match in the slightest, especially at this point where Stan's movement has taken quite a few hits.

I was giving Stan a bit the benefit of the doubt, thinking he could keep Nadal on the court, but I looked back at their H2H after your post, and Wawrinka hasn't made a match of it for years, only beating Nadal on clay in 2015, when everyone was beating him. So I think you're right. However, if he ends up on Novak's side, and on a good day I do think he could beat up on Novak, though likely not cap him, just soften him up.

 

[Moxie]

The Way Novak played and the time when they played.
His first loss in Paris was in his decline , so the other two at clay Masters.
Last year it was weird , I think he would have won that match under normal conditions.
Pure numbers don’t tell the whole story.

I understand why you'd want to put a caveat on those matches, but he did lose those matches, and Thiem seems to be taking it to another level with his tennis. He's 26, so it would make sense if he's beginning to peak. Should they meet in a SF, all things being equal (meaning that we haven't seen the European clay season yet,) you'd have to give them even odds, at best. In a final odds might start to lean Djokovic, but I'd think Thiem would rather see Djokovic on the other side of the net in a Roland Garros final than Nadal. Whatever asterisk you want to put on it, Thiem would go into a match v. Novak knowing that he's beaten him there before, the easy way and the hard way.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

The Way Novak played and the time when they played.
His first loss in Paris was in his decline , so the other two at clay Masters.
Last year it was weird , I think he would have won that match under normal conditions.
Pure numbers don’t tell the whole story.

Last year the weather conditions were bad. But, handling them is part of the requirements and so there is no asterisk.

Actually, everytime the match was stopped, it was Thiem who had the upperhand and the stoppage only helped Novak to partially recover.
But, despite weather gods helping Novak, he could not pull it off.

There is NO ********************

 

[Jelenafan]

The Way Novak played and the time when they played.
His first loss in Paris was in his decline , so the other two at clay Masters.
Last year it was weird , I think he would have won that match under normal conditions.
Pure numbers don’t tell the whole story.

No worries , we agree to disagree. Just a little surprised that you seem to think it’s beyond the realm of the reasonable (“ Must be kidding”) to peg Theim the favorite on red clay versus Novak. I have no problem pegging Novak the favorite on HC and Grass with practically any matchup.

 

[Bonaca]

I understand why you'd want to put a caveat on those matches, but he did lose those matches, and Thiem seems to be taking it to another level with his tennis. He's 26, so it would make sense if he's beginning to peak. Should they meet in a SF, all things being equal (meaning that we haven't seen the European clay season yet,) you'd have to give them even odds, at best. In a final odds might start to lean Djokovic, but I'd think Thiem would rather see Djokovic on the other side of the net in a Roland Garros final than Nadal. Whatever asterisk you want to put on it, Thiem would go into a match v. Novak knowing that he's beaten him there before, the easy way and the hard way.

Truly spoken. Who really knows?
I am looking forward to the clay season and espacially RG!

 

[Bonaca]

Last year the weather conditions were bad. But, handling them is part of the requirements and so there is no asterisk.

Actually, everytime the match was stopped, it was Thiem who had the upperhand and the stoppage only helped Novak to partially recover.
But, despite weather gods helping Novak, he could not pull it off.

There is NO ********************

I never said Thiem didnt handle the conditions better,, he did and that is the reason he won. Thats my point.
Novak is known to be vulnerable and that is clearly one of his weakest aspects.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Novak vs. Thiem on clay is close to 50/50. I wouldn't be outraged with someone labeling one guy or the other as the favorite, and Thiem definitely has an argument. A lot would hinge on their form by May/June though.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Soon it will be GOATdal who has the most slam titles so this thread will be renamed “Will Novak pass Roger?” since he will be the one directly ahead of him.

 

[Front242]

Soon it will be GOATdal who has the most slam titles so this thread will be renamed “Will Novak pass Roger?” since he will be the one directly ahead of him.

He needs 2 for that. Good luck with "soon." Worked out great for you last month.

 

[Mastoor]

Unless Nadal gets to 27 Novak will.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

He needs 2 for that. Good luck with "soon." Worked out great for you last month.

Thanks for wishing us good luck, it’s very nice of you. When he wins the 2 additional slams it will be in part because of you.

 

[Ricardo]

The Way Novak played and the time when they played.
His first loss in Paris was in his decline , so the other two at clay Masters.
Last year it was weird , I think he would have won that match under normal conditions.
Pure numbers don’t tell the whole story.

post rubbish, as usual. Already shown that Thiem has the upperhand in recent matches, has the overall better results on clay, yet someone thinks Djoker is the favourite? every loss someone would put an asterisk to it, so nobody has ever won against Djoker fair and square....Djoker fans are the most blind of the bunch.

old news, 'he would've won'...….based on what la la land theory? he bloody got beat, by a guy who beat him multiple times previously.

 

[Bonaca]

post rubbish, as usual. Already shown that Thiem has the upperhand in recent matches, has the overall better results on clay, yet someone thinks Djoker is the favourite? every loss someone would put an asterisk to it, so nobody has ever won against Djoker fair and square....Djoker fans are the most blind of the bunch.

old news, 'he would've won'...….based on what la la land theory? he bloody got beat, by a guy who beat him multiple times previously.

It isn’t that simple Retardo, I mean Ricardo. Wuff

 

[Ricardo]

It isn’t that simple Retardo, I mean Ricardo. Wuff

name calling yeah bonehead? Djoker got beat fair and square, so what is that 'he would have won' crap coming from? oh you mean he never lost? all losses he would have 'won'.....bla bla bla, according to Djoker diehards, there is no need to play a match, just hand over trophies to Djoker so he can have the 'never lose' legacy because that's all your argument is about.

It's not 'that simple' what? so what else? it was a tennis match, and he got beat.....even at AO, he started to delay Thiem's rhythm just so the younger player would drop his level.....a lot of people didn't like it and basically it's a form of cheating. Essentially we are looking at a 'champ who cheated'.