Jump to content
Risto

Tennis Volume 7: Roger That!

Recommended Posts

Oh, being the first doesn't make you the best (as that was more a matter of age and timing than talent) but it does make Federer my favourite of the big three.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just can't have someone as the greatest of all time who has won as many non French open grand slams as Becker and Edberg. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

I just can't have someone as the greatest of all time who has won as many non French open grand slams as Becker and Edberg. 

That is nadal's problem. He is the best Clay player of all time. But is he a better player on general than sempras for example? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Does being first make you the best? I'm a biased Nadal fan, but I think at their peaks he was the best of the three, and I think Novak's peak was better than Fed's too. Tricky thing is their primes didn't entirely line up and the fact that Nadal just owns one surface makes it harder to say he's the best overall.

Actually novak's and nadal's peak was basically at the same time and Novak completly owned Nadal everywhere except clay. 

After fed stopped being number 1 Novak defeated Nadal close to 10 times in a row... 

On the other hand Nadal once or twice appeared on hardcourts serving really well and crushed his adversaries. However it is a really rare event... Novak and fed are much more consistent on all surfaces than Nadal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think in terms of peaks it was Federer up to 2008. When Nadal beat him in the Wimbledon final he took over for a few years (and that's where he won his non-French Slams) and then Djokovic from about 2011 onwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Jeor said:

I think in terms of peaks it was Federer up to 2008. When Nadal beat him in the Wimbledon final he took over for a few years (and that's where he won his non-French Slams) and then Djokovic from about 2011 onwards.

I am just talking from memory but I think it isn't accurate to say Nadal was the best in 2008 and 2009. At least in 2009 fed won Rolland garros and wimbledon... In 2008 Nadal only won Wimbledon and RL and I think fed was in the 4 grand slam finals... 

So nadal had his peak in 2010 and Novak in 2011... It is pretty close and in 2011 Novak destroyed Nadal. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, divica said:

In 2008 Nadal only won Wimbledon and RL and I think fed was in the 4 grand slam finals...

If memory serves, Djokovic won his first GS in Australia in 2008, beating Tsonga in the finals so Fed couldn't have played in that final, at least.

Edited by baxus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Yes, in 2008 Federer won US Open, lost to Nadal in French Open and Wimledon finals and to Djokovic in Australian Open semifinal.

Nevertheless, I wouldn't say it meant passing over the mantle of the best player in the world just yet.

Edited by 3CityApache

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, baxus said:

If memory serves, Djokovic won his first GS in Australia in 2008, beating Tsonga in the finals so Fed couldn't have played in that final, at least.

 

1 minute ago, 3CityApache said:

Yes, in 2008 Federer won US Open, lost to Nadal in French Open and Wimledon finals and to Djokovic in Australian Open semifinal.

Thought he lost to Novak in the AO final. 

So OK, 2008 is a difficult year to judge because Nadal always wins RL and the other 3 grand slams were divided... 

2009 was a fed year and 2010 was nadal's... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, divica said:

Actually novak's and nadal's peak was basically at the same time and Novak completly owned Nadal everywhere except clay. 

After fed stopped being number 1 Novak defeated Nadal close to 10 times in a row... 

On the other hand Nadal once or twice appeared on hardcourts serving really well and crushed his adversaries. However it is a really rare event... Novak and fed are much more consistent on all surfaces than Nadal. 

No they didn't. Nadal peaked young while Novak peaked later. And Nadal wrecked him on all surfaces until Novak hit his stride. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We might have a game on our hands...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

No they didn't. Nadal peaked young while Novak peaked later. And Nadal wrecked him on all surfaces until Novak hit his stride. 

Look at the previous posts. Nadal peaked in 2010 and Novak in 2011 where he destroyed Nadal about 10 times in a row

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, divica said:

Look at the previous posts. Nadal peaked in 2010 and Novak in 2011 where he destroyed Nadal about 10 times in a row

Lol no. He peaked out in 2010. His run was 2008-10. Then he began to fade as Novak went insane for a year and a half. Nadal has been peaks and valleys in the years after, but he was king during that stretch of time.

Honestly speaking, it’s just hard to adjust to this new math, because previously players had short runs and then they were done. What the big three have done is astonishing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Tywin et al. said:

Lol no. He peaked out in 2010. His run was 2008-10. Then he began to fade as Novak went insane for a year and a half. Nadal has been peaks and valleys in the years after, but he was king during that stretch of time.

Honestly speaking, it’s just hard to adjust to this new math, because previously players had short runs and then they were done. What the big three have done is astonishing.

In 2009 Nadal lost RL for the first time... He barely saved his season by winning the AO. 

He wasn t king of anything in 2009. Even in 2008 he only won 2 slams... 

Compared to 2010 where he won 3 slams that is his best year. And it didn t continue in 2011 because Novak beat Nadal in Every tournament except Clay (and I am not sure if he didn t defeat Nadal in minor clay tournaments) . I Don t have the statistics but in 2011 Nadal was at his peak and went to a lot of finals that he lost to Novak. 

I think that it is unfair to say that Novak didn t destroy Nadal at his peak... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, divica said:

In 2009 Nadal lost RL for the first time... He barely saved his season by winning the AO. 

He wasn t king of anything in 2009. Even in 2008 he only won 2 slams... 

Compared to 2010 where he won 3 slams that is his best year. And it didn t continue in 2011 because Novak beat Nadal in Every tournament except Clay (and I am not sure if he didn t defeat Nadal in minor clay tournaments) . I Don t have the statistics but in 2011 Nadal was at his peak and went to a lot of finals that he lost to Novak. 

I think that it is unfair to say that Novak didn t destroy Nadal at his peak... 

Historically all-time greats have short runs of pure dominance. Nadal won a third of his slams over that three year run. Novak is kid of odd because he had two runs, in which he won 8 slams split between two year and half runs. What throws the math off is that these three dudes have had insane longevity. Murray is the normal tennis star. Fed, Nadal and Novak are something else. They are unprecedented.

And on that note, Novak has regained control of the match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

And on that note, Novak has regained control of the match.

I wouldn't be entirely sure, he just had to defend two break points. Agut may still have some fuel in his tank i think. If not in the third, then maybe in the fourth set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Historically all-time greats have short runs of pure dominance. Nadal won a third of his slams over that three year run. Novak is kid of odd because he had two runs, in which he won 8 slams split between two year and half runs. What throws the math off is that these three dudes have had insane longevity. Murray is the normal tennis star. Fed, Nadal and Novak are something else. They are unprecedented.

And on that note, Novak has regained control of the match.

On that I agree.

Federer is also kind of normal where he had his period of dominance. The difference was that it lasted 4 years.

Novak is in his third period of dominance... It is really weird. 

Nadal besides being the best ever on clay can t be compared to Novak or Federer... Novak's last year is equal to the best year of nadal's and it only happened once for Nadal... Novak did it 3 times? It is completly different... 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, 3CityApache said:

I wouldn't be entirely sure, he just had to defend two break points. Agut may still have some fuel in his tank i think. If not in the third, then maybe in the fourth set.

You were saying?

29 minutes ago, divica said:

On that I agree.

Federer is also kind of normal where he had his period of dominance. The difference was that it lasted 4 years.

Novak is in his third period of dominance... It is really weird. 

Nadal besides being the best ever on clay can t be compared to Novak or Federer... Novak's last year is equal to the best year of nadal's and it only happened once for Nadal... Novak did it 3 times? It is completly different... 

 

I think the counter argument for Nadal would be that he owned his surface while the others didn’t, but other than that I agree. Honestly I expected Novak to blow past both of them, but that’s in part because he rose as they fell. The fact that Feds and Nadal and re-risen is insane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, divica said:

On that I agree.

Federer is also kind of normal where he had his period of dominance. The difference was that it lasted 4 years.

Novak is in his third period of dominance... It is really weird. 

Nadal besides being the best ever on clay can t be compared to Novak or Federer... Novak's last year is equal to the best year of nadal's and it only happened once for Nadal... Novak did it 3 times? It is completly different... 

 

I think in terms of peaks we also need to consider rankings rather than just Grand Slams. Between late 2008 to mid 2011, Nadal was No. 1 for over 100 weeks (having displaced Federer), much of it in a long consecutive block.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×