How impressive is Nadal's 50-29 record vs. rest of top 4? - Page 4 - MensTennisForums.com

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #46 of 143 (permalink) Old 07-24-2012, 05:54 PM
Banned!
 
Corey Feldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 95,412
                     
Re: How impressive is Nadal's 50-29 record vs. rest of top 4?

Good old clay
Corey Feldman is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #47 of 143 (permalink) Old 07-24-2012, 06:10 PM
Registered User
 
Silvester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Age: 33
Posts: 1,371
                     
Re: How impressive is Nadal's 50-29 record vs. rest of top 4?

Quote:
Originally Posted by eclecticist View Post
see, the thing is, so many of his matches against the top 4 are played on clay because the rest of the top 4 (barring perhaps murray) can consistently get to the SF and F of clay events, whereas nadal is not nearly as consistent in getting to the SF and F of non-clay events compared to fed and djoko.

so in way the rest of the top 4 are punished rather than rewarded for their consistency on all surfaces by reaching late rounds at clay events where they continually lose to nadal, but nadal hardly gets to lose in the late rounds at non-clay events because he isn't good enough to get there consistently in the first place. this is also why the fed-nadal H2H is pointless, off clay nadal has a losing record against fed (although only slightly)

This

He probably has more losses outside of Clay to lower ranked guys than the rest of the top 10. He has a losing record against Davydenko for $#@# sakes. Had they played 10 more matches on Clay he probably wouldn't, but because most matches were on Hard he does.

His record against a guy like Hewitt 6-4 overall with 6 wins on Clay, 4 losses outside of Clay.

Last edited by Silvester; 07-24-2012 at 06:16 PM.
Silvester is offline  
post #48 of 143 (permalink) Old 07-24-2012, 06:43 PM
Registered User
 
evilmindbulgaria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,618
                     
Re: How impressive is Nadal's 50-29 record vs. rest of top 4?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silvester View Post
This

He probably has more losses outside of Clay to lower ranked guys than the rest of the top 10. He has a losing record against Davydenko for $#@# sakes. Had they played 10 more matches on Clay he probably wouldn't, but because most matches were on Hard he does.

His record against a guy like Hewitt 6-4 overall with 6 wins on Clay, 4 losses outside of Clay.
Beijing Olympics was played on clay

RAFAEL NADAL and GRIGOR DIMITROV

Rafa winning at least one slam in 10 consecutive years is the best achievement in Open Era tennis since Laver won all 4 Grand slam tournaments in the same year!


Don't ever underestimate the heart of a champion!
evilmindbulgaria is offline  
post #49 of 143 (permalink) Old 07-24-2012, 06:44 PM
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
Mechlan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,153
                     
Re: How impressive is Nadal's 50-29 record vs. rest of top 4?

It's a very good record. Sampras also has a great record against all of his major rivals.
Mechlan is offline  
post #50 of 143 (permalink) Old 07-24-2012, 06:49 PM
country flag HKz
Hakeem
 
HKz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Mesa
Posts: 5,234
                     
Re: How impressive is Nadal's 50-29 record vs. rest of top 4?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GSMnadal View Post
Skewed, irrelevant stats. Give me the stats without hardcourt matches, because that is so much more relevant.
Because that would make it relevant too right? Fact is, the numbers are skewed and CANNOT be compared to others, especially when you are discussing a player like Federer who in his peak years of 2003-2007 didn't lose a single match on grass, but it can't be helped the fact that there are only 2 tournaments a year on grass, one of which is very small, while Rafa plays 3 MS, 1 500 and 1 slam pretty much each year on clay.. I'm not saying Federer would achieve Rafa-like numbers on grass had he had the opportunity to play as many grass matches each year as Rafa, but this fact alone just makes this whole stat utterly pointelss to compare because it makes no sense to. This stat is only something that should be just looked at in awe, to tell Rafa congrats while keeping in mind that yes, it is a skewed stat. Not Rafa's fault, but it just shows what it is. Again, Federer is 4-1 against Murray, Djokovic and Nadal on grass. So many matches to compare..

Federer / Haas / Safin / Gaudio / Kuerten / Youzhny / Nadal / Gonzalez / Ljubicic / Hewitt / Soderling / Wawrinka / Coria / Nalbandian / Kohlschreiber
HKz is offline  
post #51 of 143 (permalink) Old 07-24-2012, 07:00 PM
Registered User
 
Fujee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,674
                     
Re: How impressive is Nadal's 50-29 record vs. rest of top 4?

Quote:
Originally Posted by HKz View Post
No it isn't fair, but you see how what proportion of his wins come off clay compared to the other surfaces. Regardless, this fact alone makes it very difficult to compare, especially considering a surface like grass is barely played on, because Federer is what, 4 wins 1 losses against Novak, Andy and Rafa on grass?
Yeah, well said.

Eufemiano Fuentes

“I worked with cyclists but also footballers, boxers, tennis players and athletes,”


For Posterity

Quote:
Originally Posted by Certinfy View Post
I honestly don't think Brown has much of a chance at all, think he might get a set at best though.
Fujee is offline  
post #52 of 143 (permalink) Old 07-24-2012, 07:41 PM
country flag rwn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 612
                     
Re: How impressive is Nadal's 50-29 record vs. rest of top 4?

It is impressive.

Unfortunately for him, tennis has a knock-out system, that means H2H is nice for staticians and nothing more.

In the end it only matters who wins the tournament.
rwn is offline  
post #53 of 143 (permalink) Old 07-24-2012, 07:59 PM
Registered User
 
superslam77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: out of this world
Posts: 6,485
                     
Re: How impressive is Nadal's 50-29 record vs. rest of top 4?

yes the clay is brought up because tards like to use the h2h as a reference or likelyhood on all surfaces or to claim his idol is some kind of goat or to diminish other players. we just point out the huge difference on a non clay surface.

if h2h was so important fed and nole would have dodged all clay matches.

this doesn't warrant bad reps from evilmindbulgaria. you gonna get yours back soon.

justin bieber is not the best in history.
funk was better than rap.
techno not better than classic rock.

numbers are not everything.
superslam77 is offline  
post #54 of 143 (permalink) Old 07-24-2012, 09:02 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Budapest
Posts: 2,528
                     
Re: How impressive is Nadal's 50-29 record vs. rest of top 4?

It's extremely impressive, but Nadal's haters will never be impressed with anything he does. Nadal isn't allowed to be proud of his achievements on clay, but Federer's achievements on grass are legendary.
LoveFifteen is offline  
post #55 of 143 (permalink) Old 07-24-2012, 09:29 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,940
                     
Re: How impressive is Nadal's 50-29 record vs. rest of top 4?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveFifteen View Post
It's extremely impressive, but Nadal's haters will never be impressed with anything he does. Nadal isn't allowed to be proud of his achievements on clay, but Federer's achievements on grass are legendary.
Haha - so true. Nadal dominates a surface which is preferred by a great number of the world's top players - most S.Americans and Southern Europeans - has WAY more tournaments on it and thus presents far more opportunities for him to be upset, yet it's just a thing he has - "it's Nadal and clay". Fed has a great record on a surface that most players get to play 1/2 matches a year on and his achievements are way better. Even though Sampras is still a comparable grass legend if not arguably better as he faced more dangerous grass courters in his time...

As to the H2H - yes the clay helps but it's still might impressive. Has had big wins on HCs and grass against all 3 of the rest of the top 4 so not like he can't beat them there either. Mainly just highlights again how insane his clay records are... in 8 seasons he's lost 4 times on clay to Murray, Fed and Novak - and probably won well over 20 I guess....
Ash86 is offline  
post #56 of 143 (permalink) Old 07-24-2012, 10:24 PM
Registered User
 
Looner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 13,204
                     
Re: How impressive is Nadal's 50-29 record vs. rest of top 4?

Ash, the point is clay is NOT preferred by the players against which RN has a positive H2H, that is ND, RF and AM. How is that hard to understand ?


The "Who plays tennis?" thread


Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocket Rod Laver
Roger is like a good red wine, he’s getting better with age.
Looner is offline  
post #57 of 143 (permalink) Old 07-24-2012, 10:29 PM
Registered User
 
IOFH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Age: 26
Posts: 3,610
                     
Re: How impressive is Nadal's 50-29 record vs. rest of top 4?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash86 View Post
Haha - so true. Nadal dominates a surface which is preferred by a great number of the world's top players - most S.Americans and Southern Europeans - has WAY more tournaments on it and thus presents far more opportunities for him to be upset, yet it's just a thing he has - "it's Nadal and clay". Fed has a great record on a surface that most players get to play 1/2 matches a year on and his achievements are way better. Even though Sampras is still a comparable grass legend if not arguably better as he faced more dangerous grass courters in his time...
Federer's 65 wins in a row over 5+ years > Nadal's 81 wins in a row over 2+ years

Way easier to upset the best grass-court player on grass than to upset the best clay-court player on clay.
IOFH is offline  
post #58 of 143 (permalink) Old 07-24-2012, 10:34 PM
country flag HKz
Hakeem
 
HKz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Mesa
Posts: 5,234
                     
Re: How impressive is Nadal's 50-29 record vs. rest of top 4?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash86 View Post
Haha - so true. Nadal dominates a surface which is preferred by a great number of the world's top players - most S.Americans and Southern Europeans - has WAY more tournaments on it and thus presents far more opportunities for him to be upset, yet it's just a thing he has - "it's Nadal and clay". Fed has a great record on a surface that most players get to play 1/2 matches a year on and his achievements are way better. Even though Sampras is still a comparable grass legend if not arguably better as he faced more dangerous grass courters in his time...

As to the H2H - yes the clay helps but it's still might impressive. Has had big wins on HCs and grass against all 3 of the rest of the top 4 so not like he can't beat them there either. Mainly just highlights again how insane his clay records are... in 8 seasons he's lost 4 times on clay to Murray, Fed and Novak - and probably won well over 20 I guess....
Holy crap, such biased comments as usual. It has nothing to do with what you mentioned, winning mainly on clay is not a knock on Rafa or anything. The issue here is the fact that the proporation off clay is heavily favored towards Nadal and not correctly proportioned similarly to the other 3 and including other surfaces.. Aside from the WTF, they barely meet indoors, grass is 1 GS and maybe 1 250 event, etc. It makes the comparison between Nadal and the H2H records the other three individually have pointless. It should only be viewed on its own.

Federer / Haas / Safin / Gaudio / Kuerten / Youzhny / Nadal / Gonzalez / Ljubicic / Hewitt / Soderling / Wawrinka / Coria / Nalbandian / Kohlschreiber
HKz is offline  
post #59 of 143 (permalink) Old 07-24-2012, 10:50 PM
Banned!
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,672
                     
Re: How impressive is Nadal's 50-29 record vs. rest of top 4?

Not very impressive as he wins most of those matches on clay.
Honestly is offline  
post #60 of 143 (permalink) Old 07-24-2012, 10:51 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,940
                     
Re: How impressive is Nadal's 50-29 record vs. rest of top 4?

Quote:
Originally Posted by IOFH View Post
Federer's 65 wins in a row over 5+ years > Nadal's 81 wins in a row over 2+ years

Way easier to upset the best grass-court player on grass than to upset the best clay-court player on clay.
You're probably the only one who thinks that. 81 on clay is far more impressive. a) It's a lot more - 81 matches is a lot. b) That's over Masters. 500s, slams - lots of events, lots of players. Fed's are Halle and Wimbledon - winning best of 5 matches on grass at his peak wasn't that hard for him and an upset hard to pull off. That leaves winning Halle 5 years in a row - Nadal's won MC 8 years in a row - a best of 3 tournament; won Barcelona 5 yrs in a row too...

Both are great but the 81 on clay is more impressive.
Ash86 is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome