Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic: The great rivalry

[Madmick]

Nadal hasn't beaten Novak off clay in over 10 years now. Hasn't taken a set off him on hard court in that time. 19 straight sets won on hard court for Novak.

Keep in mind that Novak didn't even enter his prime until 2011.

The only matches Nadal has won off clay since Novak's prime started is 2013 Canada (in a 3rd set tie break) and 2013 US Open.

Surface head to head since 2011:

Hard: 13-2 Djokovic
Grass: 2-0 Djokovic
Clay: 11-9 Nadal

Novak's prime started well before 2011.

Djokovic Number of Major Wins (& Runner-Ups) before Jan-01-2011: 1 (2)
Djokovic Number of Major Wins (& Runner-Ups) after Jan-01-2011: 23 (11)
Djokovic Number of Tournament Wins (& Runner-Ups) before Jan-01-2011: 18 (31)
Djokovic Number of Tournament Wins (& Runner-Ups) after Jan-01-2011: 76 (105)



LOL at "rivalry". Reminds me of the rivalry between the Patriots and the Jets.

 

[MarloStanfield]

Those stats are pretty cool, I’m more a Lendl and Willander fan

 

[ferrisjso]

Djokovic Number of Major Wins (& Runner-Ups) before Jan-01-2011: 1 (2)
Djokovic Number of Major Wins (& Runner-Ups) after Jan-01-2011: 23 (11)
Djokovic Number of Tournament Wins (& Runner-Ups) before Jan-01-2011: 18 (31)
Djokovic Number of Tournament Wins (& Runner-Ups) after Jan-01-2011: 76 (105)



LOL at "rivalry". Reminds me of the rivalry between the Patriots and the Jets.

Djokovic was ranked third in the world for over 3 years before 2011. He was 24 in 2011. Early 20s is your prime for tennis. Djokovic was not a prospect gradually getting better he was clearly the worlds 3rd best player during that span consistantly making slam SFs and 3 slam finals. 2007 US Open Final was one of the closest straight setters I've seen that could have went the other way with a few bounces. He was right there with Federer and Nadal.

Djokovic discovering he had celiac disease and switching to a non gluten diet is attributed to him becoming number 1. He was already in his tennis prime. What changed is his durability what allowed him to win so many of the 5 set wars he got into with Nadal and Fed. Before the 2010 US Open his only win over Federer/Nadal in the Slams had come in the 2008 AO SF where he beat Federer in straight sets.

 

[Bojka]

Djokovic Number of Major Wins (& Runner-Ups) before Jan-01-2011: 1 (2)
Djokovic Number of Major Wins (& Runner-Ups) after Jan-01-2011: 23 (11)
Djokovic Number of Tournament Wins (& Runner-Ups) before Jan-01-2011: 18 (31)
Djokovic Number of Tournament Wins (& Runner-Ups) after Jan-01-2011: 76 (105)



LOL at "rivalry". Reminds me of the rivalry between the Patriots and the Jets.

You can just look at his winning %. His highest winning % prior to 2011 was 80%, which was the same as his winning % during his slump of 2017-first half of 2018. 2007, 2008, and 2010 he actually had lower winning % (77-79%) than during his slump when he was losing to guys like Taro Daniel and Hyeon Chung.

He was a top player prior to 2011, but he wasn't yet in his prime. The other user doesn't believe he was either. No one does.

 

[ferrisjso]

Djokovic Number of Major Wins (& Runner-Ups) before Jan-01-2011: 1 (2)
Djokovic Number of Major Wins (& Runner-Ups) after Jan-01-2011: 23 (11)
Djokovic Number of Tournament Wins (& Runner-Ups) before Jan-01-2011: 18 (31)
Djokovic Number of Tournament Wins (& Runner-Ups) after Jan-01-2011: 76 (105)



LOL at "rivalry". Reminds me of the rivalry between the Patriots and the Jets.

The Pats and Jets are a rivalry because of Parcells, Belichick and Spygate.

 

[Sweater of AV]

Djokovic Number of Major Wins (& Runner-Ups) before Jan-01-2011: 1 (2)
Djokovic Number of Major Wins (& Runner-Ups) after Jan-01-2011: 23 (11)
Djokovic Number of Tournament Wins (& Runner-Ups) before Jan-01-2011: 18 (31)
Djokovic Number of Tournament Wins (& Runner-Ups) after Jan-01-2011: 76 (105)



LOL at "rivalry". Reminds me of the rivalry between the Patriots and the Jets.

LOL at thinking your prime magically starts after you've made the semifinals of NINE grand slams and winning one.

Djokovic Number of Tournament Wins (& Runner-Ups) before Jan-01-2011: 18 (31)

You just proved my point. Only MadDonk would think someone only entered their prime after winning 18 tournaments.



Keep at it, slugger. You're doing great. Stick to baseball. Or tell us more about how you swam when you were four years old. LOL.

 

[Sweater of AV]

Another hilarious mental breakdown for MadDonk is on its way.

I'm glad you're enjoying the thread.

 

[Sweater of AV]

You can just look at his winning %. His highest winning % prior to 2011 was 80%, which was the same as his winning % during his slump of 2017-first half of 2018. 2007, 2008, and 2010 he actually had lower winning % (77-79%) than during his slump when he was losing to guys like Taro Daniel and Hyeon Chung.

He was a top player prior to 2011, but he wasn't yet in his prime. The other user doesn't believe he was either. No one does.

Oh yeah, his winning % of 82.4 in 2013 is drastically different from 80.4% in 2009. Lol.

And then of course by your logic he was no longer in his prime in 2017 but then jumped right back into it in 2018 and then fell out of it in 2019.

LOL.



Oh and I enjoyed "the other user." I'm glad you're afraid now of addressing me directly. This thread will be a gift for a long, long time.

 

[ferrisjso]

LOL at thinking your prime magically starts after you've made the semifinals of NINE grand slams and winning one.





You just proved my point. Only MadDonk would think someone only entered their prime after winning 18 tournaments.



Keep at it, slugger. You're doing great. Stick to baseball. Or tell us more about how you swam when you were four years old. LOL.

What's interesting is Djokovic was already a HOFer by the start of 2011. It'd be close but 1 slam, 3 F and 9 SFs and 18 titles is a lot.

Juan Carlos Ferrero who'll likely be inducted next year finished with 1 slam 3 finals,6 SFs and 16 titles.

 

[Bojka]

Oh yeah, his winning % of 82.4 in 2013 is drastically different from 80.4% in 2009. Lol.

And then of course by your logic he was no longer in his prime in 2017 but then jumped right back into it in 2018 and then fell out of it in 2019.

LOL.



Oh and I enjoyed "the other user." I'm glad you're afraid now of addressing me directly. This thread will be a gift for a long, long time.

I'm not sure why you think I would remember your username. Novak was in a slump in 2017-2018. He stopped caring about tennis and still had a better winning % than he did in 2007-2010 when you (and only you) think he was in his prime. I don't take you seriously so I didn't address you. I don't think you believe your own arguments so it's a waste of time debating you. And here I am wasting my time anyway.

edit: wiki puts his 2013 winning % at 89%

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Novak_Djokovic_tennis_season

 

[Sweater of AV]

I'm not sure why you think I would remember your username. Novak was in a slump in 2017-2018. He stopped caring about tennis and still had a better winning % than he did in 2007-2010 when you (and only you) think he was in his prime. I don't take you seriously so I didn't address you. I don't think you believe your own arguments so it's a waste of time debating you. And here I am wasting my time anyway.

edit: wiki puts his 2013 winning % at 89%

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Novak_Djokovic_tennis_season

Good, I'm glad you're responding directly instead of being a coward.

That was for grand slams + masters since grand slams are all you want to talk about and hilariously want to ignore everything else, including his 18 total titles prior to 2011.

As for me, and only me, you've already responded to posts from multiple people who also think you're an idiot. Well done dumbass.



If you want to include all matches then yes he still had a lower winning % in 2017 during his "prime" than he did in years before his "prime" started. Lmao.

Novak's prime started around 2008-09 whether you, or the only other donkey here agreeing with you, like it or not.

 

[Sweater of AV]

What's interesting is Djokovic was already a HOFer by the start of 2011. It'd be close but 1 slam, 3 F and 9 SFs and 18 titles is a lot.

Juan Carlos Ferrero who'll likely be inducted next year finished with 1 slam 3 finals,6 SFs and 16 titles.

Don't be silly. Novak only entered his prime when he reached number one in the world.

In fact, the only time a player can ever enter their "prime" is precisely when they have their best season. Oh and if they have poor results at some point after their prime started it's only because they didn't care specifically during that time frame. Lol.

 

[Sweater of AV]

A classic between prime Nadal and prime Djokovic. The win gave Nadal both the career grand and golden slams.



It's a shame a few posters have nothing better to do than try and tear down either of these two. They created the most competitive tennis ever witnessed.

Respect the two greatest to ever take the court.

 

[Sweater of AV]

Novak and Nadal's rivalry on grass was something to behold.

Novak managed to tie it at 2-2 when he squeaked by a post-prime Nadal at 2018 Wimbledon in a five set thriller.

 

[MDoza]

Peak Nadal >>> Peak Djokovic

Nadal just played a more physically taxing style, so he couldn’t maintain his peak for as long.

 

[gspieler]

Novak and Nadal's rivalry on grass was something to behold.

Novak managed to tie it at 2-2 when he squeaked by a post-prime Nadal at 2018 Wimbledon in a five set thriller.

Wait...what? A credible source informed me that Nadal is a scrub on every surface except clay. No way he could go 2-2 at Wimbledon against 7x Wimbledon champ.

 

[Sweater of AV]

Peak Nadal >>> Peak Djokovic

Nadal just played a more physically taxing style, so he couldn’t maintain his peak for as long.

Their peaks are pretty close imho but it's perfectly reasonable to think either of them had the greater peak.

The strongest overlap in their primes when both were (mostly) reasonably healthy was around 2008 to 2014. Both were already grand slam champions and the rivalry was already one of the best in the game. Over those seven years they are tied 17-17 which is similar to their overall rivalry; basically dead even with each holding a significant edge on their preferred surface. They had some fantastic matches during that time frame.

 

[ferrisjso]

Wait...what? A credible source informed me that Nadal is a scrub on every surface except clay. No way he could go 2-2 at Wimbledon against 7x Wimbledon champ.

No one said Nadal is a scrub on the other surfaces. Hes made 6 Australian finals, 5 Wimbeldon finals and 5 US Open Finals. That's a legendary career but doesn't compare well to Djokovic and Fed. Hes made 14 French Open Finals and won all 14. He tied Pete Sampras's old GS record with just the French. Hes on a completley different level on clay compared to the other surfaces.

 

[Sweater of AV]

Wait...what? A credible source informed me that Nadal is a scrub on every surface except clay. No way he could go 2-2 at Wimbledon against 7x Wimbledon champ.

They weren't all at Wimbledon but yes, Nadal is fantastic on all surfaces. The guy's won the career grand slam twice and has 8 grand slams off clay. He also beat the GOAT of grass courts at Wimbledon in his prime.

Those "credible" sources are some of the dumbest people on the forum. One of them characterizes Nadal as a "one-trick pony" while claiming Pete Sampras isn't.

 

[gspieler]

No one said Nadal is a scrub on the other surfaces. Hes made 6 Australian finals, 5 Wimbeldon finals and 5 US Open Finals. That's a legendary career but doesn't compare well to Djokovic and Fed. Hes made 14 French Open Finals and won all 14. He tied Pete Sampras's old GS record with just the French. Hes on a completley different level on clay compared to the other surfaces.

Exactly. The guy is a demigod on clay, and merely an ATG on everything else. But even if you erased every performance he ever had on clay, from his record, he still would probably crack the top 10 all time. The same if you were to remove a surface from Joker or Feds resume.

Bottom line is, Joker has surpassed Nadal, and certainly an argument exists that Fed is slightly more well-rounded. But Nadal is absolutely “on their level”.