WTF Final: Djokovic vs Nadal

[brokenshoelace]

Ok unfortunately the ATP doesn't give us all the statistics, but these are telling nonetheless:

Nadal - Djokovic

Total points won: 52 - 67
Aces: 1 - 6
DF: 4 - 0
Break points created: 3 - 11

And I know for sure that Rafa only had three winners in the first set.

After the match Rafa said this:

"I think at the beginning he was playing much better than me. The first three games, no doubt. Even the fourth…After that I didn't see that difference. I felt I was playing aggressively, going for the shots. I had the control of the points a lot of times with my forehand after the [first] three games." :laydownlaughing

He's actually right.

Of course Novak was the better player throughout, and Nadal said as much, though you conveniently ignore that.

If you watch the match without biased eyes on, you'd notice just how many points Djokovic won by being a defensive wall. Nadal was hitting his inside out forehand as hard as I've ever seen him at times and it was still coming back with interest (as I've been saying all fall, these courts just don't react well to his shots and he hasn't been able to rectify that).

I'd say Novak clearly bossed things in the first 3 games and towards the end of the match, but truth be told, he didn't need to do anything special in between. Nadal overhit a lot, and had plenty of unforced errors. Now he always needs to get out of his comfort zone against Novak, but it was just one of those days when he wasn't executing well, and it's bound to happen against someone that good. I can't sit here, act like Federer fans against Nadal, and talk about how inexcusable Nadal's errors were. In fact, they were pretty excusable. He was forced to play a game he doesn't enjoy (hitting a lot to Djokovic's forehand, flatten out shots, etc...), and he's not going to be successful with execution every time. It's admirable how he was able to do it in Montreal and the US Open, but obviously there will be a day where it just doesn't click. Novak is simply a better hard court player so Nadal always needs to produce something special to win.

Nadal's serving was poor. That meant it was always going to be an uphill battle. The first set was actually decided by two double faults in a key game, and he never really recovered from there.

The result is logical really. Novak is better on this surface. If he brings his usual game (it wasn't necessarily his A game), and Nadal plays anything other than fantastic, that's what's going to happen. But yeah, I don't think Nadal's assessment is that outrageous. Though you might feel differently given the fact that you're sour over this season.

 

[Denis]

did you watch the match without biased eyes on? Come on, you cannot be serious when you are saying that there wasn't a difference in level yesterday. It's too bad we don't have much statistics to work with here.

I don't see how your post adds up to the assessment that there wasn't a difference between the two over the whole match. You seem to actually agree on that point: poor serving (because of pressure) lots of UE, because Djokovic forced him to overhit.. etc.

I think you are the one who is sour buddy, if you want to make this personal. As soon as someone steps up here for Djokovic, the poster gets mowed down. Is it really strange that I criticize a comment in which Nadal says that there wasn't much difference between the two when Djokovic won 6 - 3, 6 - 4 in a match that was from a statistical point of view lopsided in every single respect?

 

[huntingyou]

What gave Novak the match was the fact he defended extremley well, I lost count of how many IO forehands he lob back into the backhand corner.....it was unreal. The point of the match ilustrated this when Nadal his a routine put away volley only to witness Novak run like a demon in daylight and bring the ball back. The other point of the match was when Rafa was on Novak's serve at 15-30 and had him on the run only to witness Novak's net cord going barely over.

BS made an excellent post, he said Novak default game trounce Rafa's default game on this court and it's only a match if Nadal brings a fantastic level which he didn't. He did have the right attitude and at times dominate the rallies just to watch Novak stretch to his forehand side and float back the ball in to the corner.

 

[Denis]

Aha I see, Djokovic is a pusher.

Nevermind those backhand winners.

 

[Riotbeard]

Aha I see, Djokovic is a pusher.

Nevermind those backhand winners.

I don't think they are saying Novak is a pusher. If hunting is going to call Novak a pusher, then what is rafa?

Overall novak's defense was incredible. Evidenced by last point of the game, when rafa was "in control" hitting abusive inside out forehands, and had to overcook the third one, because he couldn't get it past Novak. Novak also played incredible offense in that match. I remember him stepping up a number of times and hitting down line forehands that put rafa on the defensive. To beat Rafa that convincingly you can't just defend well.

 

[brokenshoelace]

did you watch the match without biased eyes on? Come on, you cannot be serious when you are saying that there wasn't a difference in level yesterday. It's too bad we don't have much statistics to work with here.

I don't see how your post adds up to the assessment that there wasn't a difference between the two over the whole match. You seem to actually agree on that point: poor serving (because of pressure) lots of UE, because Djokovic forced him to overhit.. etc.

I think you are the one who is sour buddy, if you want to make this personal. As soon as someone steps up here for Djokovic, the poster gets mowed down. Is it really strange that I criticize a comment in which Nadal says that there wasn't much difference between the two when Djokovic won 6 - 3, 6 - 4 in a match that was from a statistical point of view lopsided in every single respect?

The problem is, like the media, you seem to have latched on to a "shock" headline while ignoring what the guy truly meant. If you want to ignore Nadal's point, and just hang on to "wasn't a difference in level" then sure...

What Nadal meant in difference in level was that he wasn't just routinely bossed around and couldn't do anything about it. What it came down to was poor serving (which he mentioned) and unforced errors. He even outright said "the score was 6-3 6-4 because Novak was better than me" but you ignore that...

What he was referring too was the dynamic of the rallies.

No, I'm not getting personal. Is calling someone's assessment biased a personal insult? Really? Even a fellow Novak fan called you out on "fanboyism" and hey, I don't blame you... it's been a frustrating season and you're happy it ended on a high. I just don't see how any of what I said constitutes a personal insult.

Your assessment is clearly biased by your fandom for Novak and dislike for Nadal, since you twisted something he said, or at least, didn't bother to read his explanation. I merely attempted to explain that. Sorry if I hurt your feelings.

 

[Denis]

Aha I see, Djokovic is a pusher.

Nevermind those backhand winners.

I don't think they are saying Novak is a pusher. If hunting is going to call Novak a pusher, then what is rafa?

Overall novak's defense was incredible. Evidenced by last point of the game, when rafa was "in control" hitting abusive inside out forehands, and had to overcook the third one, because he couldn't get it past Novak. Novak also played incredible offense in that match. I remember him stepping up a number of times and hitting down line forehands that put rafa on the defensive. To beat Rafa that convincingly you can't just defend well.

Exactly. The offense was incredible. Serve. Backhand. Forehand. Even the overhead didn't go wrong.

But defining a match on the basis of Novak's defense is a bit rich. It was one aspect of what won the match. The others being the serve and a smoking hot backhand.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Aha I see, Djokovic is a pusher.

Nevermind those backhand winners.

LOL not sure what's wrong with your posts today, but it's becoming unbearable to even discuss tennis with you.

So praising Novak's defense because he defended some of Nadal's inside out forehands insanely well is referring to him as a "pusher" now? Also, just for your general tennis information: Being able to defend well and being a pusher are two different things. I feel like I have to make this distinction in every thread. Nobody in the current top 10 is a pusher, not when they can crush the ball the way they do.

Please, take a breath and listen to yourself...

 

[Denis]

did you watch the match without biased eyes on? Come on, you cannot be serious when you are saying that there wasn't a difference in level yesterday. It's too bad we don't have much statistics to work with here.

I don't see how your post adds up to the assessment that there wasn't a difference between the two over the whole match. You seem to actually agree on that point: poor serving (because of pressure) lots of UE, because Djokovic forced him to overhit.. etc.

I think you are the one who is sour buddy, if you want to make this personal. As soon as someone steps up here for Djokovic, the poster gets mowed down. Is it really strange that I criticize a comment in which Nadal says that there wasn't much difference between the two when Djokovic won 6 - 3, 6 - 4 in a match that was from a statistical point of view lopsided in every single respect?

The problem is, like the media, you seem to have latched on to a "shock" headline while ignoring what the guy truly meant. If you want to ignore Nadal's point, and just hang on to "wasn't a difference in level" then sure...

What Nadal meant in difference in level was that he wasn't just routinely bossed around and couldn't do anything about it. What it came down to was poor serving (which he mentioned) and unforced errors. He even outright said "the score was 6-3 6-4 because Novak was better than me" but you ignore that...

What he was referring too was the dynamic of the rallies.

No, I'm not getting personal. Is calling someone's assessment biased a personal insult? Really? Even a fellow Novak fan called you out on "fanboyism" and hey, I don't blame you... it's been a frustrating season and you're happy it ended on a high. I just don't see how any of what I said constitutes a personal insult.

Your assessment is clearly biased by your fandom for Novak and dislike for Nadal, since you twisted something he said, or at least, didn't bother to read his explanation. I merely attempted to explain that. Sorry if I hurt your feelings.

Dude, you are twisting it just as much. If he says Novak was better than me, only to qualify it by saying it was only so the first three games, what do you expect me to do?

 

[Denis]

Aha I see, Djokovic is a pusher.

Nevermind those backhand winners.

LOL not sure what's wrong with your posts today, but it's becoming unbearable to even discuss tennis with you.

So praising Novak's defense because he defended some of Nadal's inside out forehands insanely well is referring to him as a "pusher" now? Also, just for your general tennis information: Being able to defend well and being a pusher are two different things. I feel like I have to make this distinction in every thread. Nobody in the current top 10 is a pusher, not when they can crush the ball the way they do.

Please, take a breath and listen to yourself...

The point you guys were making is that the win was solely because of Novak's defense ie breaking down Nadal. It's simply not true. Novak played strong offensive tennis and better than Nadal. He hit winners where Nadal didn't. Sure offense and defense of the other player are related, but you guys are just ignoring a large part of that match.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Aha I see, Djokovic is a pusher.

Nevermind those backhand winners.

LOL not sure what's wrong with your posts today, but it's becoming unbearable to even discuss tennis with you.

So praising Novak's defense because he defended some of Nadal's inside out forehands insanely well is referring to him as a "pusher" now? Also, just for your general tennis information: Being able to defend well and being a pusher are two different things. I feel like I have to make this distinction in every thread. Nobody in the current top 10 is a pusher, not when they can crush the ball the way they do.

Please, take a breath and listen to yourself...

The point you guys were making is that the win was solely because of Novak's defense ie breaking down Nadal. It's simply not true. Novak played strong offensive tennis and better than Nadal. He hit winners where Nadal didn't. Sure offense and defense of the other player are related, but you guys are just ignoring a large part of that match.

Please point out where I said the win was solely because of Novak's defense... My post is right on this page, so you should have an easy time finding wherever I said that (you actually won't, because I never did).

 

[brokenshoelace]

did you watch the match without biased eyes on? Come on, you cannot be serious when you are saying that there wasn't a difference in level yesterday. It's too bad we don't have much statistics to work with here.

I don't see how your post adds up to the assessment that there wasn't a difference between the two over the whole match. You seem to actually agree on that point: poor serving (because of pressure) lots of UE, because Djokovic forced him to overhit.. etc.

I think you are the one who is sour buddy, if you want to make this personal. As soon as someone steps up here for Djokovic, the poster gets mowed down. Is it really strange that I criticize a comment in which Nadal says that there wasn't much difference between the two when Djokovic won 6 - 3, 6 - 4 in a match that was from a statistical point of view lopsided in every single respect?

The problem is, like the media, you seem to have latched on to a "shock" headline while ignoring what the guy truly meant. If you want to ignore Nadal's point, and just hang on to "wasn't a difference in level" then sure...

What Nadal meant in difference in level was that he wasn't just routinely bossed around and couldn't do anything about it. What it came down to was poor serving (which he mentioned) and unforced errors. He even outright said "the score was 6-3 6-4 because Novak was better than me" but you ignore that...

What he was referring too was the dynamic of the rallies.

No, I'm not getting personal. Is calling someone's assessment biased a personal insult? Really? Even a fellow Novak fan called you out on "fanboyism" and hey, I don't blame you... it's been a frustrating season and you're happy it ended on a high. I just don't see how any of what I said constitutes a personal insult.

Your assessment is clearly biased by your fandom for Novak and dislike for Nadal, since you twisted something he said, or at least, didn't bother to read his explanation. I merely attempted to explain that. Sorry if I hurt your feelings.

Dude, you are twisting it just as much. If he says Novak was better than me, only to qualify it by saying it was only so the first three games, what do you expect me to do?

Again, he was referring to the dynamic of the rallies in the context of the question.

 

[Riotbeard]

Both of you guys should take a breather. You are arguing past each other.

 

[Denis]

Ok unfortunately the ATP doesn't give us all the statistics, but these are telling nonetheless:

Nadal - Djokovic

Total points won: 52 - 67
Aces: 1 - 6
DF: 4 - 0
Break points created: 3 - 11

And I know for sure that Rafa only had three winners in the first set.

After the match Rafa said this:

"I think at the beginning he was playing much better than me. The first three games, no doubt. Even the fourth…After that I didn't see that difference. I felt I was playing aggressively, going for the shots. I had the control of the points a lot of times with my forehand after the [first] three games." :laydownlaughing

He's actually right.

Of course Novak was the better player throughout, and Nadal said as much, though you conveniently ignore that.

If you watch the match without biased eyes on, you'd notice just how many points Djokovic won by being a defensive wall. Nadal was hitting his inside out forehand as hard as I've ever seen him at times and it was still coming back with interest (as I've been saying all fall, these courts just don't react well to his shots and he hasn't been able to rectify that).

I'd say Novak clearly bossed things in the first 3 games and towards the end of the match, but truth be told, he didn't need to do anything special in between. Nadal overhit a lot, and had plenty of unforced errors. Now he always needs to get out of his comfort zone against Novak, but it was just one of those days when he wasn't executing well, and it's bound to happen against someone that good. I can't sit here, act like Federer fans against Nadal, and talk about how inexcusable Nadal's errors were. In fact, they were pretty excusable. He was forced to play a game he doesn't enjoy (hitting a lot to Djokovic's forehand, flatten out shots, etc...), and he's not going to be successful with execution every time. It's admirable how he was able to do it in Montreal and the US Open, but obviously there will be a day where it just doesn't click. Novak is simply a better hard court player so Nadal always needs to produce something special to win.

Nadal's serving was poor. That meant it was always going to be an uphill battle. The first set was actually decided by two double faults in a key game, and he never really recovered from there.

The result is logical really. Novak is better on this surface. If he brings his usual game (it wasn't necessarily his A game), and Nadal plays anything other than fantastic, that's what's going to happen. But yeah, I don't think Nadal's assessment is that outrageous. Though you might feel differently given the fact that you're sour over this season.

I don't see any assessment of Novak's offense here. Anyway, whatever. I think Nadal's assessment was wrong as he didn't execute the rallies he had the upperhand in, and Djokovic did.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Here is the full account of what Nadal said:

"The thing that made the difference in today's match was the serve, I didn't serve well, he served well," Nadal said. "For the rest I felt that when I was playing, I was not far away off his level.
"At the beginning he was playing much better than me. After that I didn't see the difference.
"I felt that I was playing enough well to be little bit closer than the score. But at the end, I lost 6-3 6-4. I lost 6-3 6-4 because the opponent played better than me."

So to sum it up, he said:

- The serve made a difference, which is true.
- He said at the beginning Novak played much better than him, which is true.
- He said HE WAS NOT FAR AWAY FROM HIS LEVEL. Now if we're going to harp on "I didn't see the difference" then "I was not far away from his level" should really settle it: He didn't say I was "ON" his level. Meaning he actually acknowledges that Novak's level was superior, just not too superior.
- Felt he played well enough to be closer on the score and I agree, when you take into accounts the double faults he threw in the game he got broken in the first set, and the lucky net chord at 15-30 on Novak's serve after that.
- Said NOVAK WAS BETTER THAN HIM.

Now please, let's move on and not harshly crucify players for every comment they make.

 

[Denis]

Yeah, Im not going over these words again. Take them as you like.

 

[brokenshoelace]

I don't see any assessment of Novak's offense here. Anyway, whatever. I think Nadal's assessment was wrong as he didn't execute the rallies he had the upperhand in, and Djokovic did.

...because my post was a direct reply to your sarcasm regarding Nadal's comments. I was explaining why they weren't as outrageous as you claimed, and therefor, had to focus on the points to explain that. I highlighted Novak's defense to explain why, from my perspective, Nadal's comments aren't far fetched.

Regarding Novak's offense, go to the Nadal-Federer thread. Do you see me comment about Nadal's forehand giving Roger trouble? How Federer doesn't handle it well? No. Because after 1319059 meetings between the two, this goes without saying. The same applies for Djokovic/Nadal. Novak WILL dictate proceedings on hards. He will use his cross court backhand well and stretch Nadal on his forehand side.

To be clear: He did. And he was offensively better. There's no doubt about that. I don't think it was really up for debate either, so it really didn't occur to me to bring it up.

PS: That still in no way implies I said Novak won because of his defense, because I didn't. Plain and simple.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Yeah, Im not going over these words again. Take them as you like.

You can't say "again" but some of these words were curiously missing from your post. So you'd be going over them for the first time. Unless of course, you did go over them and just chose to leave them out of your post for the shock value. Cronin would be proud.

 

[Denis]

It's essentially the same. You can take it apart if you want, but he is essentially saying it was pretty close. I've seen closer matches so I quoted the essence of it.

 

[shawnbm]

I enjoyed the match. Novak was the better man on the day; he served better, defended better and his ROS was, as usual, superb. On hards he can more often than anyone make Nadal press and feel pressured. He did that yesterday and the scoreline was close to being 6-3. 6-2. I never felt Rafa had a hold of this match. He definitely looked to be really trying to increase velocity on the FH going to Nole's FH, pressed a bit at times and missed it more than he ever does with, for example, Roger. Against Roger he is comfortable during most of the match. He never seems to look as comfortable with Nole. It is what it is. Novak is playing phenomenally well these last months.