Nadal: "Djokovic is better than Federer on clay" [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Nadal: "Djokovic is better than Federer on clay"

jonathancrane
05-26-2009, 06:53 AM
http://www.elmundo.es/elmundodeporte/especiales/2009/05/roland_garros/consultorio/index.html

¿Quién crees que se encuentra mejor en tierra en este momento: Djokovic o Federer? ¿A cuál prefieres enfrentarte en la final? Intenta ser políticamente incorrecto y mojarte.... Muchas gracias
Creo que Djokovic. Le ha ganado a Roger en Roma y es el que ha conseguido mejores resultados de los dos esta temporada en tierra (finalista en Montecarlo y Roma, campeón en Belgrado). Yo miro al siguiente partido y no a una hipotética final. Eso, para mí, es mojarme. Lo otro es no ser realista, creeme.

-----------------

Discuss

prima donna
05-26-2009, 07:09 AM
Discuss what ? Your distorted translation of what Nadal actually said ? Firstly, it's important to understand the context in which the question was formulated: Who do you think is better on clay in this moment ? Secondly, Nadal basically supplied a politically correct response; that is, he cited Djokovic's victory over Roger in Rome, as well as his victory at Belgrade.

Of course, these sorts of threads are created in hopes of generating drama, not substantive discussion. Moreover, Djokovic's results have been superior to those of Federer, at least on clay.

FlavorNuts
05-26-2009, 07:15 AM
no kidding

jonathancrane
05-26-2009, 07:40 AM
Discuss what ? Your distorted translation of what Nadal actually said ? Firstly, it's important to understand the context in which the question was formulated: Who do you think is better on clay in this moment ? Secondly, Nadal basically supplied a politically correct response; that is, he cited Djokovic's victory over Roger in Rome, as well as his victory at Belgrade.


No. He said that. Headline of the link posted: 'Djokovic está mejor en tierra que Federer'
What do you expect, a title like: "Nadal thinks that Djokovic is a better player on clay at this moment because he beat Federer on Rome and he won Belgrade and reached the finals at MC & Rome"?


Of course, these sorts of threads are created in hopes of generating drama, not substantive discussion


Are you talking about your threads on Middle East?


Moreover, Djokovic's results have been superior to those of Federer, at least on clay.

Thanx for posting your opinion

modern tennis
05-26-2009, 07:49 AM
federer is a fast court specialist.

StanisKing
05-26-2009, 07:50 AM
And still managed to lose to the lesser guy on clay.
Djokovic is just tactically playing better to Rafa. He showed the way how to hurt Rafa.
the funny thing is that Roger use that and beat him :)

finishingmove
05-26-2009, 07:52 AM
madrid is red hardcourts.

roland garros is brown carpet.

u think it matters?

marcRD
05-26-2009, 07:53 AM
Mindgames.

StanisKing
05-26-2009, 07:54 AM
Mindgames.

I think that you are correct.
For the first time , Rafa is starting to be not as confident as he was.
Probably Madrid loss was much more important to him than most of us think here.

prima donna
05-26-2009, 07:55 AM
What do you expect, a title like: "Nadal thinks that Djokovic is a better player on clay at this moment because he beat Federer on Rome and he won Belgrade and reached the finals at MC & Rome"?
Well, I'd like to think that members of this forum would be sensible enough to discern relevant comments from irrelevant comments (in which case this thread would cease to exist) -- utopianism, I know.


Are you talking about your threads on Middle East?
My thread (singular, not plural) has generated more discussion than any thread you've created. I'd be willing to bet that. Not that your standards are particularly high, after all, you're appealing to the lowest common denominator of this forum: prepubescent children. We've all done it, but don't get defensive when someone with a rudimentary comprehension of the Spanish language is able to spot your theatrics.


Thanx for posting your opinion
Djokovic made the finals of Rome and Monte Carlo, not to mention his stunning SF performance against Nadal in Madrid; on the other hand, Roger's first final of the clay court season came in Madrid. Based on these facts, I don't think it's a matter of opinion: Djokovic's results, on clay, have been hitherto superior to those of Federer.

jonathancrane
05-26-2009, 08:13 AM
My thread (singular, not plural) has generated more discussion than any thread you've created. I'd be willing to bet that. Not that your standards are particularly high, after all, you're appealing to the lowest common denominator of this forum: prepubescent children. We've all done it, but don't get defensive when someone with a rudimentary comprehension of the Spanish language is able to spot your theatrics.

:lol: And that proof what? That you're right because your thread has a lot of responses? :lol:

Me defensive? You're the one who looks a bit angry right now. Calm down, this is not a war nor a fight between the light and the darkness




Djokovic made the finals of Rome and Monte Carlo, not to mention his stunning SF performance against Nadal in Madrid; on the other hand, Roger's first final of the clay court season came in Madrid. Based on these facts, I don't think it's a matter of opinion: Djokovic's results, on clay, have been hitherto superior to those of Federer.

Not so clear. Federer won a MS (on clay against the nº1 player and maybe the best ever on clay), Djokovic a 250 event

prima donna
05-26-2009, 08:26 AM
:lol: And that proof what? That you're right because your thread has a lot of responses?
You questioned the "substance" of a thread that I created several months ago, to which I replied that said thread had generated more substantive discussion than any that you've created and probably ever will create. It's nothing to boast about, so don't misinterpret my remarks as those of a braggart.


Not so clear. Federer won a MS (on clay against the nº1 player and maybe the best ever on clay), Djokovic a 250 event
If only judging results were such a simple task, alas one must factor into the equation not only one tournament victory but the results over the course of the entire clay season. Roger lost to Wawrinka and Djokovic at two prestigious clay court tournaments. Moreover, he struggled against Andy Roddick in Madrid, losing a set -- which is shameful on clay. Notwithstanding an impressive victory over Nadal, such results are mediocre.

Yes, Djokovic lost to Nadal in Monte Carlo, Rome and Madrid, yet those results don't tell the entire story. The simple fact is that two of those losses came in finals, while one of them came following numerous match points, hence one can understand why Nadal would consider Djokovic to be the "in-form" player of the tournament.

Bargearse
05-26-2009, 08:31 AM
I haven't watched any of the tournaments leading up to the French Open because I figured (and I was almost 100% accurate) that Nadal would win all of them with his eyes closed and his hands on his back side which to me is a bit boring.

Just how or why Federer beat Nadal in Madrid I don't know, but I'd hazzard a guess he played the same way he always does from the baseline and that Nadal wasn't feeling well.

I'm not an expert on what a player needs to do to beat Nadal on clay or other surfaces but I've often wondered if players with two handed backhands like Djokovic and Murray fare better with two handers. It seems they can handle the high top spin better than one handers. Anyone agree or disagree?

Also, I hear commentators always saying that the only way Federer can beat Nadal is if he gets to the net. Did he do that in Madrid? Does anyone agree with this? I'm not sure because as good as Federer is, he sometimes looks like he's wishful thinking at the net.

And still managed to lose to the lesser guy on clay.
Djokovic is just tactically playing better to Rafa. He showed the way how to hurt Rafa.
the funny thing is that Roger use that and beat him :)

Goldenoldie
05-26-2009, 08:32 AM
Interesting that Nadal's opinion of Federer's chances should follow that of Murray.
Coincidence, no doubt.

marcRD
05-26-2009, 08:54 AM
Djokovic is just tactically playing better to Rafa. He showed the way how to hurt Rafa.
the funny thing is that Roger use that and beat him :)

Djokovic is certanly not playing tactically better against Rafa, he has the weapons to potentialy beat him but couldnt find a way to do it in his 3 matches even when Rafa was subpar in Madrid. Federer on the other hand we all know doesnt really have the game to beat Rafa on clay and is Rafa is a horrible matchup for Federer, but he did try some interesting tactics in the final in Madrid and managed to beat a tired Rafa which really did surprise me.

Rafa is not a bad matchup for Djokovic and he is still down 4-14 against Rafa.

Rafa is a bad matchup for Federer and Federer is down by 7-13, considerably better record than Djokovic. Federer obviously has more creative answers of how to play Rafa than Djokovic.

Bargearse
05-26-2009, 09:06 AM
Djokovic is certanly not playing tactically better against Rafa, he has the weapons to potentialy beat him but couldnt find a way to do it in his 3 matches even when Rafa was subpar in Madrid. Federer on the other hand we all know doesnt really have the game to beat Rafa on clay and is Rafa is a horrible matchup for Federer, but he did try some interesting tactics in the final in Madrid and managed to beat a tired Rafa which really did surprise me.

Rafa is not a bad matchup for Djokovic and he is still down 4-14 against Rafa.

Rafa is a bad matchup for Federer and Federer is down by 7-13, considerably better record than Djokovic. Federer obviously has more creative answers of how to play Rafa than Djokovic.

I missed the Madrid final sadly and wonder what tactics did Federer employ to snag a rare victory against Rafa?

Har-Tru
05-26-2009, 09:13 AM
I haven't watched any of the tournaments leading up to the French Open because I figured (and I was almost 100% accurate) that Nadal would win all of them with his eyes closed and his hands on his back side which to me is a bit boring.

Just how or why Federer beat Nadal in Madrid I don't know, but I'd hazzard a guess he played the same way he always does from the baseline and that Nadal wasn't feeling well.

I'm not an expert on what a player needs to do to beat Nadal on clay or other surfaces but I've often wondered if players with two handed backhands like Djokovic and Murray fare better with two handers. It seems they can handle the high top spin better than one handers. Anyone agree or disagree?

Also, I hear commentators always saying that the only way Federer can beat Nadal is if he gets to the net. Did he do that in Madrid? Does anyone agree with this? I'm not sure because as good as Federer is, he sometimes looks like he's wishful thinking at the net.

Step by step.

I bet a beer with my flatmate that Nadal would win all his clay tourneys leading to RG bar one. Tasty beer. In Madrid, Nadal was tired after a 4-hour SF, the conditions didn't favour him (ridiculously fast) AND Federer played some very good two sets.

I think you're right about the two-handers.

Don't listen to the commentators. Going to the net? Nadal has the best passing shot of all time and it's not even close. Federer learned long ago he has to come in very selectively, and does so pretty well.

Har-Tru
05-26-2009, 09:13 AM
Djokovic is certanly not playing tactically better against Rafa, he has the weapons to potentialy beat him but couldnt find a way to do it in his 3 matches even when Rafa was subpar in Madrid. Federer on the other hand we all know doesnt really have the game to beat Rafa on clay and is Rafa is a horrible matchup for Federer, but he did try some interesting tactics in the final in Madrid and managed to beat a tired Rafa which really did surprise me.

Rafa is not a bad matchup for Djokovic and he is still down 4-14 against Rafa.

Rafa is a bad matchup for Federer and Federer is down by 7-13, considerably better record than Djokovic. Federer obviously has more creative answers of how to play Rafa than Djokovic.

:yeah:

TennisViewer531
05-26-2009, 09:15 AM
If you say so Rafa...

Daniel
05-26-2009, 09:43 AM
whatever

Vida
05-26-2009, 09:52 AM
it would be kind of cool to read a literal translation of what was asked and what he said, so that people who dont speak spanish can understand.

Bargearse
05-26-2009, 10:04 AM
Step by step.

I bet a beer with my flatmate that Nadal would win all his clay tourneys leading to RG bar one. Tasty beer. In Madrid, Nadal was tired after a 4-hour SF, the conditions didn't favour him (ridiculously fast) AND Federer played some very good two sets.

I think you're right about the two-handers.

Don't listen to the commentators. Going to the net? Nadal has the best passing shot of all time and it's not even close. Federer learned long ago he has to come in very selectively, and does so pretty well.

Thanks for the recap. No matter what the conditions, I always think Nadal will beat Federer. Nadal has, after all, beaten him on hard courts and grass courts and has learned a thing or two about how to play the faster surfaces. I think it's great that Federer won and am sure it will help his confidence, but I still don't think he'll win the elusive French Open.

Myrre
05-26-2009, 10:15 AM
We'll know who's best after the semis.

marcRD
05-26-2009, 10:30 AM
I missed the Madrid final sadly and wonder what tactics did Federer employ to snag a rare victory against Rafa?

Just go for broke with his forehand, play serve volley on aggresive 2nd serves, more drop shots, he gave Rafa little rythm and ran around his forehand whenever he could. Also he played alot to Rafa's backhand and served better than he has done in any match this year.

Deivid23
05-26-2009, 10:59 AM
Boring thread, you will only fish a few bored Fedtards

Commander Data
05-26-2009, 11:17 AM
http://www.elmundo.es/elmundodeporte/especiales/2009/05/roland_garros/consultorio/index.html

¿Quién crees que se encuentra mejor en tierra en este momento: Djokovic o Federer? ¿A cuál prefieres enfrentarte en la final? Intenta ser políticamente incorrecto y mojarte.... Muchas gracias
Creo que Djokovic. Le ha ganado a Roger en Roma y es el que ha conseguido mejores resultados de los dos esta temporada en tierra (finalista en Montecarlo y Roma, campeón en Belgrado). Yo miro al siguiente partido y no a una hipotética final. Eso, para mí, es mojarme. Lo otro es no ser realista, creeme.

-----------------

Discuss

If Fed would say that the typical suspects what whine that Fed is a sore loser.

BTW: I think the comment is rather irrelevant. Roland Garros will descide who is better on clay.

jonathancrane
05-26-2009, 11:17 AM
Boring thread, you will only fish a few bored Fedtards

And some bored Fedhaters too

rubbERR
05-26-2009, 11:23 AM
This thread is waste of good words.

Dini
05-26-2009, 11:24 AM
He's probably right.

modern tennis
05-26-2009, 11:38 AM
federer was covering his backhand by moving in his backhand corner alot more than usual and waiting for the nadal cross court forehand.

Matt01
05-26-2009, 11:47 AM
Just go for broke with his forehand, play serve volley on aggresive 2nd serves, more drop shots, he gave Rafa little rythm and ran around his forehand whenever he could. Also he played alot to Rafa's backhand and served better than he has done in any match this year.


That last one hardly being a tactical thing, though ;)

Farenhajt
05-26-2009, 01:10 PM
The only relevant opinion on this matter is the opinion of the first-class hands-on expert on claycourt tennis, and this is Rafael Nadal.

Also extremely glad he's generating waves of angry and sorrowful frustration in microscopic midget aka prima donna.

Jaz
05-26-2009, 01:18 PM
Just go for broke with his forehand, play serve volley on aggresive 2nd serves, more drop shots, he gave Rafa little rythm and ran around his forehand whenever he could. Also he played alot to Rafa's backhand and served better than he has done in any match this year.

Yup, Rafa looked completely useless when this happened and ran out of ideas several times.

I'm sensing that alot of mind-games are going on vs Federer right now.... The problem is that Federer ACTUALLY looks the most calm and better playing since the USO.

marcRD
05-26-2009, 01:44 PM
Well it will be interesting to see if Djokovic can survive 5 set clay matches before anything else.

finishingmove
05-26-2009, 01:54 PM
Well it will be interesting to see if Djokovic can survive 5 set clay matches before anything else.

we'll see today against lapentti

marcRD
05-26-2009, 01:57 PM
we'll see today against lapentti

No, I mean not when he wins in straight sets, lets say Federer-Djokovic or Del Potro-Djokovic goest to 4 long sets or a 5th set, you dont think he will be tired?

tennisfan444
05-26-2009, 02:00 PM
From a guy whose playing so well, it does seem a bit desperate. Why start the mind games now when hes clearly favored by a large margin? I don't think being at the top suits him, hes a bit like Tipsy he seems to thrive when hes the underdog.

finishingmove
05-26-2009, 02:00 PM
more of a chance to go 5 against lapentti than del pony if u ask me

not that any of it will happen.


the possible semifinal (and final) would also end in no more than 4 sets.

marcRD
05-26-2009, 02:17 PM
more of a chance to go 5 against lapentti than del pony if u ask me

not that any of it will happen.


the possible semifinal (and final) would also end in no more than 4 sets.

Why would that be so? I dont know why anyone would doubt Federer can take 2 sets against Djokovic on clay, I personaly think it is 60-40 to Federer but I wouldnt say it wont go to 5 sets.

finishingmove
05-26-2009, 02:23 PM
Why would that be so? I dont know why anyone would doubt Federer can take 2 sets against Djokovic on clay, I personaly think it is 60-40 to Federer but I wouldnt say it wont go to 5 sets.

two different things here.

i never said federer couldn't take 2 or even 3 sets, i said it's a match unlikely to go 5

philosophicalarf
05-26-2009, 02:25 PM
What's he supposed to say? He can either dodge the question completely, or give an honest answer. He's got a pretty good first-hand view too, having played Djokovic in Rome/Madrid/Monte Carlo.

Lleyton_
05-26-2009, 02:35 PM
Sore loser.

fred perry
05-26-2009, 02:53 PM
Rafa should not be forced to be in a position of stating the obvious in these interviews. it really should go without saying.

Arkulari
05-26-2009, 03:32 PM
what's with players and mind games lately? :scratch:
this is very weird coming from Rafa, he's not prone to speak much about other players and it's even weirder considering he's the ultimate favorite to win RG, so why now? :scratch:
I just don't get it

Corey Feldman
05-26-2009, 03:33 PM
smoking some good crack Rafa

Castafiore
05-26-2009, 03:35 PM
How is this a matter of "mind games"? :scratch:
Are some of you upset because he didn't give his usual "Federer is the best, no?" answer?

I do think that many of you are reading too much into a few words of players in pressers.
Federer says "Nadal is only human" and that's good for a 13-page (and going) long thread FFS.

pica_pica
05-26-2009, 04:16 PM
The press keep asking the players comments on each other, haha :lol:

Nadal: "Djokovic is better than Federer on clay."
Federer: "Nadal is only human."
Murray: "Nadal should make the final, Federer may have some problems."

l_mac
05-26-2009, 04:17 PM
what's with players and mind games lately? :scratch:
this is very weird coming from Rafa, he's not prone to speak much about other players and it's even weirder considering he's the ultimate favorite to win RG, so why now? :scratch:
I just don't get it

He was asked the question who do you think is better on clay at the moment, Federer or Djokovic, and who would you rather face in the final.

habibko
05-26-2009, 04:28 PM
hopefully they will both make the semis so we can put this question to rest once and for all.

zethand
05-26-2009, 04:38 PM
Who cares! If everything goes good, Nadal will win this. The interesting thing is who will be the surprise.. every year there is an unexpected player in QF or SF.

FedFan_2007
05-26-2009, 05:04 PM
Typical stupid press questions.

marcRD
05-26-2009, 05:08 PM
The press keep asking the players comments on each other, haha :lol:

Nadal: "Djokovic is better than Federer on clay."
Federer: "Nadal is only human."
Murray: "Nadal should make the final, Federer may have some problems."

Djokovic is missing, should be something like:

"I am ready to face Nadal in the final"

Arkulari
05-26-2009, 05:09 PM
:lol: :lol:
it won't be long before we heard Djoker talking :lol:

l_mac
05-26-2009, 05:12 PM
Didn't Nole already joke that he'd thanked Ana for putting him in Fed's half?

Arkulari
05-26-2009, 05:13 PM
:haha: :haha:
really? Linda, as usual, you're awesome when it comes to Djoker's statements!!! :D

Goldenoldie
05-26-2009, 05:21 PM
You pay your money and you take your choice! Last time out, if I remember rightly, Federer beat Nadal, Nadal beat Murray, and Murray beat Djokovic. Different surfaces, I know, but it only needs Djokovic to beat Federer and we have a closed circle!:D

marcRD
05-26-2009, 05:24 PM
You pay your money and you take your choice! Last time out, if I remember rightly, Federer beat Nadal, Nadal beat Murray, and Murray beat Djokovic. Different surfaces, I know, but it only needs Djokovic to beat Federer and we have a closed circle!:D

It would not be a closed circle because this is not a threesome. So you would have many crosses inside the circle.

Goldenoldie
05-26-2009, 05:27 PM
It would not be a closed circle because this is not a threesome. So you would have many crosses inside the circle.

No it's a foursome. Would you rather I called it a square?

asmazif
05-26-2009, 05:27 PM
Yeh, Djoko shouted "I love you Ana!" after she revealed the draw.

Black Adam
05-26-2009, 05:30 PM
You pay your money and you take your choice! Last time out, if I remember rightly, Federer beat Nadal, Nadal beat Murray, and Murray beat Djokovic. Different surfaces, I know, but it only needs Djokovic to beat Federer and we have a closed circle!:D
Djokovic already beat Federer this season.

Roddickominator
05-26-2009, 05:34 PM
Djokovic HAS shown better form than Federer this clay season. And IMO his performance against a PRETTY solid Nadal in the semi-final at Madrid was more impressive than Federer beating a wiped out and poor Nadal in the final.

marcRD
05-26-2009, 05:37 PM
No it's a foursome. Would you rather I called it a square?

Sure, why not? Or how about the four elements. Water, fire, earth and air.


Fire uses air to burn (too much air can just blow the fire away), water puts out fire (but sometimes fire boils the water to make it vaporize), air absorbs water
But it doesnt matter what you do with dirt, dirt is dirt. You cant burn it and if you wet it, it just becomes mud (still dirt)
Air just blows it around (but it is still dirt). So earth always has advantage over other elements.

Federer is fire, Murray is water, Djokovic is air and Nadal is earth. It works quite well with their h2h.

arm
05-26-2009, 05:39 PM
Sure, why not? Or how about the four elements. Water, fire, earth and air.


Fire uses air to burn (too much air can just blow the fire away), water puts out fire (but sometimes fire boils the water to make it vaporize), air absorbs water
But it doesnt matter what you do with dirt, dirt is dirt. You cant burn it and if you wet it, it just becomes mud (still dirt)
You can't burn it. Air just blows it around (but it is still dirt). So earth always has advantage over other elements.

Federer is fire, Murray is water, Djokovic is air and Nadal is earth. It works quite well with their h2h.

:haha: Best post so far. :shrug:

Though, the guy didn't say anything that senseless. :hug:

habibko
05-26-2009, 05:40 PM
Sure, why not? Or how about the four elements. Water, fire, earth and air.


Fire uses air to burn (too much air can just blow the fire away), water puts out fire (but sometimes fire boils the water to make it vaporize), air absorbs water
But it doesnt matter what you do with dirt, dirt is dirt. You cant burn it and if you wet it, it just becomes mud (still dirt)
You can't burn it. Air just blows it around (but it is still dirt). So earth always has advantage over other elements.

Federer is fire, Murray is water, Djokovic is air and Nadal is earth. It works quite well with their h2h.

vpXM9bj-WPU

Goldenoldie
05-26-2009, 05:49 PM
Sure, why not? Or how about the four elements. Water, fire, earth and air.


Fire uses air to burn (too much air can just blow the fire away), water puts out fire (but sometimes fire boils the water to make it vaporize), air absorbs water
But it doesnt matter what you do with dirt, dirt is dirt. You cant burn it and if you wet it, it just becomes mud (still dirt)
Air just blows it around (but it is still dirt). So earth always has advantage over other elements.

Federer is fire, Murray is water, Djokovic is air and Nadal is earth. It works quite well with their h2h.

To stretch this a bit further, water once covered the earth according to the Bible, and with the melting of the icecaps it may do so again.

sawan66278
05-26-2009, 05:50 PM
I really believe that this started earlier this year. Federer has NEVER given Rafa the respect that Rafa has given him. Everyone else has said that Rafa is the best or one of the best of all time on clay, and Federer cannot even acknowledge this.

YET, time and time again, Rafa has stated that "Roger's the best", "I hope you get #13", etc.

And, after the Aussie win, Federer, following his blubbering at the trophy ceremony (taking away from Rafa's enjoyment), stated that "the best player often does NOT win the fifth set"...and that continued to talk about his back.

This, combined with Federer's mind games in Madrid (making Rafa wait, etc.) are what prompted this candidness from Rafa.

I think there's been some tension between the two this year...and its all from Federer's juvenile response to Rafa's passing him in the rankings...and the media finally giving Rafa his props.

I wondered why Rafa did not congratulate Federer on his marriage (on his website, he always makes it a point to congratulate births, etc...of his fellow players). This time: nothing.

Methinks we are headed back to the relationship we saw in Rome many years ago...when Federer cried about "coaching" and the like.

pica_pica
05-26-2009, 05:52 PM
Sure, why not? Or how about the four elements. Water, fire, earth and air.


Fire uses air to burn (too much air can just blow the fire away), water puts out fire (but sometimes fire boils the water to make it vaporize), air absorbs water
But it doesnt matter what you do with dirt, dirt is dirt. You cant burn it and if you wet it, it just becomes mud (still dirt)
Air just blows it around (but it is still dirt). So earth always has advantage over other elements.

Federer is fire, Murray is water, Djokovic is air and Nadal is earth. It works quite well with their h2h.
:haha:
Oh God, I love this post! :lol: :rolls:

Farenhajt
05-26-2009, 05:53 PM
Sure, why not? Or how about the four elements. Water, fire, earth and air.


Fire uses air to burn (too much air can just blow the fire away), water puts out fire (but sometimes fire boils the water to make it vaporize), air absorbs water
But it doesnt matter what you do with dirt, dirt is dirt. You cant burn it and if you wet it, it just becomes mud (still dirt)
Air just blows it around (but it is still dirt). So earth always has advantage over other elements.

Federer is fire, Murray is water, Djokovic is air and Nadal is earth. It works quite well with their h2h.

Oh dear... It appears that tennis, as a cosmic phenomenon, has entered its apocalyptic days predicted by Unified Theory of Everything. We have the Four Riders representing Four Elements, and also Four Sides of the World (Federer is West, Murray is North, Nadal is South, Đoković is East), and Four Members of The Beatles (Rafa is Paul, Roger is John, Novak is George and Andy is Ringo - since he always beats about the bush 4m behind the front line). Is Mirka carrying little Damien? :scared:

marcRD
05-26-2009, 05:54 PM
To stretch this a bit further, water once covered the earth according to the Bible, and with the melting of the icecaps it may do so again.

That is Murray will have to wait for the north and south pole to melt to get his grand slam.

Also to stretch this metaphor even further it works with their style as fire is very aggresive and wind with storms and tornados is also very aggresive. Water and earth are way more passive, specialy earth.

arm
05-26-2009, 05:56 PM
That is Murray will have to wait for the north and south pole to melt to get his grand slam.

Also to stretch this metaphor even further it works with their style as fire is very aggresive and wind with storms and tornados is also very aggresive. Water and earth are way more passive, specialy earth.

:rolls: We should have a thread just about this. :bigclap:



Or not. :o

marcRD
05-26-2009, 05:56 PM
Oh dear... It appears that tennis, as a cosmic phenomenon, has entered its apocalyptic days predicted by Unified Theory of Everything. We have the Four Riders representing Four Elements, and also Four Sides of the World (Federer is West, Murray is North, Nadal is South, Đoković is East), and Four Members of The Beatles (Rafa is Paul, Roger is John, Novak is George and Andy is Ringo - since he always beats about the bush 4m behind the front line). Is Mirka carrying little Damien? :scared:

Mirka is about to destroy the beatles of tennis.

Goldenoldie
05-26-2009, 06:09 PM
I may not have many good points, but I know when to shut up! MarcRD, you got me beat!

pica_pica
05-26-2009, 06:13 PM
:haha: :lol: :rolls: :D
I like how this thread is heading to...

groundstroke
05-26-2009, 06:16 PM
Shame that Federer has beaten Nadal on clay this year and Djokovic hasn't. :worship:

zlaja777
05-26-2009, 07:23 PM
Realistic guy this Rafa...

GugaF1
05-26-2009, 07:53 PM
I really believe that this started earlier this year. Federer has NEVER given Rafa the respect that Rafa has given him. Everyone else has said that Rafa is the best or one of the best of all time on clay, and Federer cannot even acknowledge this.

YET, time and time again, Rafa has stated that "Roger's the best", "I hope you get #13", etc.

And, after the Aussie win, Federer, following his blubbering at the trophy ceremony (taking away from Rafa's enjoyment), stated that "the best player often does NOT win the fifth set"...and that continued to talk about his back.

This, combined with Federer's mind games in Madrid (making Rafa wait, etc.) are what prompted this candidness from Rafa.

I think there's been some tension between the two this year...and its all from Federer's juvenile response to Rafa's passing him in the rankings...and the media finally giving Rafa his props.

I wondered why Rafa did not congratulate Federer on his marriage (on his website, he always makes it a point to congratulate births, etc...of his fellow players). This time: nothing.

Methinks we are headed back to the relationship we saw in Rome many years ago...when Federer cried about "coaching" and the like.


Man you should be a script writer, novelist or something. Managed to take some simple words and seemingly random events and turned them into an interesting tension plot. I like it..lol .. But I believe it doesn`t fully respresent reality. Although, I agree with you, Federer has been feeling stings from Nadal`s major success.

But in this case, I just think that Rafa was asked an important question, one which is on the mind of most tennis fans at the moment. And gave an honest answer.

Okonsky
05-26-2009, 08:17 PM
madrid is red hardcourts.

roland garros is brown carpet.

u think it matters?

As they say clay Madrid is HC Indian Wells.

Okonsky
05-26-2009, 08:21 PM
I wondered why Rafa did not congratulate Federer on his marriage (on his website, he always makes it a point to congratulate births, etc...of his fellow players). This time: nothing.


Hola radio sawana. Write it again for posters sake.

You made the only one rellevant point ^^^. Wedding.

sawan66278
05-26-2009, 09:00 PM
Hola radio sawana. Write it again for posters sake.

You made the only one rellevant point ^^^. Wedding.

I really thought that was odd. Last year, he congratulated Nenad for the birth of his child. Federer's marriage? Nada.

Interesting...

tangerine_dream
05-26-2009, 09:07 PM
As Rafa got up to leave he turned and winked, "But Federer is betterer in bed."

MrChopin
05-26-2009, 09:09 PM
:mad::mad: How dare the press ask Humbalito this question! :mad::mad:

Good to see that some (re: Sawan) understand the reason for such a potentially candid comment, namely Fed's arrogance. It's so large that it can make arrogant comments for two people. :o

recessional
05-26-2009, 09:19 PM
I wondered why Rafa did not congratulate Federer on his marriage (on his website, he always makes it a point to congratulate births, etc...of his fellow players). This time: nothing.

Maybe he was angry he wasn't invited. :hug:

As Rafa got up to leave he turned and winked, "But Federer is betterer in bed."

:spit:

Sunset of Age
05-26-2009, 09:23 PM
I really thought that was odd. Last year, he congratulated Nenad for the birth of his child. Federer's marriage? Nada.

Interesting...

Nice to read you have access to Rafa's personal phone, correspondence, etc. :worship:

Might it have occured to you that they don't always disclose each and every chat they have between them to the outer world? :rolleyes:

As for that 'tension' between the two of them, shall I post those pictures of the Madrid trophy ceremony again (the two of them plucking confetti out of each other's hair, haha, you must have been disgusted)... or would you rather keep with reality like it is in your dreams? :p

sawan66278
05-26-2009, 09:35 PM
Nice to read you have access to Rafa's personal phone, correspondence, etc. :worship:

Might it have occured to you that they don't always disclose each and every chat they have between them to the outer world? :rolleyes:

As for that 'tension' between the two of them, shall I post those pictures of the Madrid trophy ceremony again (the two of them plucking confetti out of each other's hair, haha, you must have been disgusted)... or would you rather keep with reality like it is in your dreams? :p

I never said complete hatred...just tension. Federer's wedding was so secret even the media wasn't there. I'm talking about DAYS LATER...nothing on his site about the wedding.

Getta
05-26-2009, 09:39 PM
XbzkXgWzn4A

Bargearse
05-27-2009, 03:58 AM
This, combined with Federer's mind games in Madrid (making Rafa wait, etc.) are what prompted this candidness from Rafa.




Rafa is notorious for keeping players waiting. I recall at Wimbledon a couple of years ago, Federer waited in the tunnel for quite some time to go onto the court because Nadal was missing in action. There have also been many a complaint that Nadal takes an eternity between points doing weird things with his shorts and his drink bottles (strange placement thing = obsessive compulsive disorder). I'm glad to hear that Federer kept him waiting - it's definitely a gamesmanship ploy to annoy Nadal the way he has annoyed Federer in the past.

modern tennis
05-27-2009, 04:06 AM
federer is bitter that he is getting overshadowed by a player in his own era.

heya
05-27-2009, 10:06 AM
Federer will try to look genius if you pray for that to happen. Dogs will fly too.

Federer got lucky with uncaring and bad physical athletes in a Mickey Mouse draw. This happened since he showed his ugly personality and face in 1999. Sorry, tennis won't bring him superior intellect, graciousness and huge respect from non-fans.

ShotmaKer
05-27-2009, 10:18 AM
I never said complete hatred...just tension. Federer's wedding was so secret even the media wasn't there. I'm talking about DAYS LATER...nothing on his site about the wedding.

Rafa might have called him directly or congratulated him when they met at MC, who knows... But anyway, I think you're making a big deal out of nothing here.

Bargearse
05-27-2009, 10:30 AM
Rafa might have called him directly or congratulated him when they met at MC, who knows... But anyway, I think you're making a big deal out of nothing here.

I agree. Who cares if Nadal didn't congratulate Federer on his wedding? These two guys seem to be decent human beings and appear to have a friendly rivalry, however, that doesn't mean they have to be best buddies.

ShotmaKer
05-27-2009, 10:42 AM
I agree. Who cares if Nadal didn't congratulate Federer on his wedding? These two guys seem to be decent human beings and appear to have a friendly rivalry, however, that doesn't mean they have to be best buddies.

My point exactly

cc2monac
05-27-2009, 10:45 AM
completly agree with rafa! I'm sure nole will play the final this year

Criollo
05-30-2009, 05:54 PM
Bump.

SheepleBuster
05-30-2009, 05:55 PM
Rafa is an egomaniac. His "if I play my best I'll have chances, no?" line doesn't work for me. Never were in love with the guy's attitude and cheating ways but he does win convincingly. He is a great entertainer so that's all that matters. Who cares what he said about whom.

StanisKing
05-30-2009, 05:56 PM
completly agree with rafa! I'm sure nole will play the final this year

me too

:haha::haha::haha:

Dini
05-30-2009, 05:57 PM
You guys are evil. Have some mercy. :(

modern tennis
05-30-2009, 05:58 PM
djokovic losing doesnt make federer better than him on clay. djoko has had a better overall clay season than federer.

l_mac
05-30-2009, 05:59 PM
Bump.

:haha:

Rafa denied saying this in his presser, btw. He said he said that in his opinion Nole had had the better clay season, so far, of the two.

Jaz
05-30-2009, 05:59 PM
:D Dumbest thread/comment ever.

l_mac
05-30-2009, 06:00 PM
djokovic losing doesnt make federer better than him on clay. djoko has had a better overall clay season than federer.

Not if Fed wins today he won't. :D :wavey:

superslam77
05-30-2009, 06:01 PM
djokovic losing doesnt make federer better than him on clay. djoko has had a better overall clay season than federer.

This is a dumb comment even if Fed loses today.

bobbynorwich
05-30-2009, 06:02 PM
:haha:
:haha:
:haha:

MacTheKnife
05-30-2009, 06:02 PM
djokovic losing doesnt make federer better than him on clay. djoko has had a better overall clay season than federer.

You just won't give up. Try to post something credible at least once.

Fiberlight1
05-30-2009, 06:14 PM
:rolleyes:In all fairness... Fed probably would have lost today if he had played Kohls

Sunset of Age
05-30-2009, 06:17 PM
completly agree with rafa! I'm sure nole will play the final this year

Please continue, you're doing a fantastic job. :yeah:

:rolleyes:In all fairness... Fed probably would have lost today if he had played Kohls

Good point - that might well have been the case, as Kohli indeed played very, very good indeed. ;)

Sapeod
05-30-2009, 06:21 PM
djokovic losing doesnt make federer better than him on clay. djoko has had a better overall clay season than federer.

Kingfederer, for the last time, stop writing bullcrap :)

Garson007
05-30-2009, 06:30 PM
Some nice knee-jerk reactions in here. :yeah:

Djokovic might not have performed in this GS, but he -did- have a more consistent clay court master's swing. Too bad.

Jaz
05-30-2009, 06:33 PM
Once again, Djoker a complete failure at RG.

I would understand if he EVER did well at RG, but he never has historically. And today too..

Garson007
05-30-2009, 06:39 PM
Once again, Djoker a complete failure at RG.

I would understand if he EVER did well at RG, but he never has historically. And today too..
Uh, SF is bad? :confused:

ShotmaKer
05-30-2009, 06:45 PM
Djokovic might not have performed in this GS, but he -did- have a more consistent clay court master's swing. Too bad.

May be but the dude dit not win any masters on clay this year and did not make it to the second week here!

HeretiC
05-30-2009, 06:49 PM
Once again, Djoker a complete failure at RG.

I would understand if he EVER did well at RG, but he never has historically. And today too..

2SF and a QF are historically awful achievements. :yeah:

Steelq
05-30-2009, 06:49 PM
Once again, Djoker a complete failure at RG.

I would understand if he EVER did well at RG, but he never has historically. And today too..

:D Dumbest comment ever.


...

HeretiC
05-30-2009, 06:53 PM
...

:haha:

That would have been such a highly evolved example of self-criticism.

Arkulari
05-30-2009, 07:09 PM
he reached more finals on clay this year, but had by far a much worse clay season than last year, where he won Rome and got to RG SF :shrug:

Ilovetheblues_86
05-30-2009, 07:10 PM
Federer leads h-2h in clay 2-1.

Polikarpov
05-30-2009, 07:16 PM
Rafa jinxed Faker!

marcRD
05-30-2009, 07:42 PM
:rolleyes:In all fairness... Fed probably would have lost today if he had played Kohls

In all fairness Federer is better than Djokovic on clay.

marcRD
05-30-2009, 07:44 PM
Uh, SF is bad? :confused:

Becker, Rafter and Henman has been there and done that.

Djokovic still has alot to proof, I do not doubt he is good on clay but I doubt he is as good in a best of 5 set format.

DrJules
05-30-2009, 07:45 PM
Federer maintains record of going further than Djokovic every year that they have both played at RG.

JediFed
05-30-2009, 07:54 PM
The difference between the two is a round or so at RG. Now, can I get the point watchers to admit that Federer has already had a better clay court season by virtue of reaching the 4th round here at RG?

I echo the comments that a RG SF is a great acheivement. Right now Djokovic's performance at RG is about a Henman level. If it's a great acheivement, then Djokovic is not a clay courter.

Jaz
05-30-2009, 07:55 PM
Becker, Rafter and Henman has been there and done that.

Djokovic still has alot to proof, I do not doubt he is good on clay but I doubt he is as good in a best of 5 set format.

Exactly.

So Somehow... Djoker is better than Federer, but always gone out atleast one round earlier than Federer at RG?

Djoker fans can delude themselves in glory about being better than Federer on clay, but the record doesn't stack up.

Evenmore so, the only thing that matters is who can beat NADAL on CLAY. And djoker isn't the one (and never has).

FedFan_2007
05-30-2009, 08:11 PM
Djokovic will win the CYGS in 2010. :rocker2:

Fiberlight1
05-30-2009, 09:46 PM
In all fairness Federer is better than Djokovic on clay.

It's all subjective this point.. considering Djokovic BEAT Federer, Federer lost in the 3rd round at MC and Djoke lost to Nadal at Madrid.. Djoke is having the better clay season at least in terms of results, maybe not in points. If not for Nadal there is a slight possibility that he could have swept the clay masters so even though you say Fed is better overall, it could really go either way.

But as I said.. we shouldn't judge them by today's results as Kohl probably would have beat Federer playing the way he was.

Sunset of Age
05-30-2009, 09:52 PM
It's all subjective this point.. considering Djokovic BEAT Federer, Federer lost in the 3rd round at MC and Djoke lost to Nadal at Madrid.. Djoke is having the better clay season at least in terms of results, maybe not in points. If not for Nadal there is a slight possibility that he could have swept the clay masters so even though you say Fed is better overall, it could really go either way.

Fair points.
And like some posters have already pointed out, Rafa did NOT say that Djoko was the better player on clay than Federer during the entire clay season - he said that after He beat Djoko at MC as far as I know, and at that time, he was SPOT ON.

But as I said.. we shouldn't judge them by today's results as Kohl probably would have beat Federer playing the way he was.

Yep. Of course, you never know, as a player is only as good as his opponent allows him to play as well, but Kohli surely made a great impression with his fantastic performance today. You could very well be right. But in the end - we just DON'T KNOW. :)

andylovesaustin
05-30-2009, 09:57 PM
Maybe Rafa was talking about Nole having a better record on clay than Roger this season? :shrug: I recall some of the commentators saying the same thing?

I watched this one interview on ESPN, and Rafa still has huge Roger love. Rafa said Roger is still the best player in spite of Rafa being #1 in the world, so I have this feeling he doesn't think Nole is necessarily "better" than Roger on clay. According to this interview, Rafa doesn't think he's even better than Roger!

Sunset of Age
05-30-2009, 10:01 PM
I watched this one interview on ESPN, and Rafa still has huge Roger love. Rafa said Roger is still the best player in spite of Rafa being #1 in the world, so I have this feeling he doesn't think Nole is necessarily "better" than Roger on clay. According to this interview, Rafa doesn't think he's even better than Roger!

Rafa = Fedtard #1. :o :yeah: :hearts:

ShotmaKer
05-30-2009, 10:03 PM
But as I said.. we shouldn't judge them by today's results as Kohl probably would have beat Federer playing the way he was.

That we'll never know. If Fed makes it to the final again then the debate about who's better on clay is obviously over :shrug:

Still, his ticket to the final is not guaranteed at all!

MrChopin
05-30-2009, 10:11 PM
It's all subjective this point.. considering Djokovic BEAT Federer, Federer lost in the 3rd round at MC and Djoke lost to Nadal at Madrid.. Djoke is having the better clay season at least in terms of results, maybe not in points. If not for Nadal there is a slight possibility that he could have swept the clay masters so even though you say Fed is better overall, it could really go either way.

But as I said.. we shouldn't judge them by today's results as Kohl probably would have beat Federer playing the way he was.

I don't think it is that subjective.

The Djokovic-Fed 1-0 clay record is insignificant for several reasons. First, you can't determine who is better on a surface based on H2H. Simon's H2H against Fed is positive on hard... Second, Fed was dominating the match against Djokovic and went AWOL like he had done for a stretch before. Even if Djokovic won in the end, there is certain doubt as to whether Djokovic is better than Fed based on his one win against him especially given the nature of the win. Did this win earn him a win at a TMS or reward him at RG?

Points are meant to quantify results, so stressing a difference between the two is going to need some clarification. Djokvic had "great results" in the three clay masters and was more consistent than Fed, but the TMS points are only 1560 to Roger's 1540. Count RG and Fed is ahead. Fed has more points at the big four events, the events at which those of strong significance have played.

If you want to somehow talk "results" without any points, RG is clearly where it matters. Should Fed get S/F, it's clear he did better than Djokovic on the biggest clay stages, having gone deep in the slam and having grabbed a shield in Madrid.

Further, Fed got the big win. Consider the situation, conditions, Nadal's health... whatever you want, Fed still has the W over Nadal, not Djokovic. You can argue it any way you want, but Djokovic just took a beating from Kohli. The same thing happened against Safin last year at Wimbledon. The reason? He can't make the needed dent in Nadal. Nadal has been able to keep him down, something he has not done to Fed, and it's a relative blow to Djokovic's confidence. It has showed in Fed's somewhat renewed confidence, but even more, in Djokovic's subsequent crashes following tough losses to Nadal, both in '08 and '09. Doing consistently well and losing to Nadal seems to be rather insignificant compared to beating Nadal, at least for Djokovic.

And the "Kohli would have beat Fed today" is grasping at straws.

MacTheKnife
05-30-2009, 10:19 PM
And the "Kohli would have beat Fed today" is grasping at straws.

Agree with this completely. You can never make that statement with any degree of confidence. This sport is all about match ups and the way one guy plays against another is totally dependent on the individual match up.
I also don't believe you can really evaluate any player based on one, or even a few individual match results. You really have to look at the entire body of work.

Fiberlight1
05-30-2009, 10:23 PM
Agree with this completely. You can never make that statement with any degree of confidence. This sport is all about match ups and the way one guy plays against another is totally dependent on the individual match up.
I also don't believe you can really evaluate any player based on one, or even a few individual match results. You really have to look at the entire body of work.

Sometimes a player is just in the zone.. as was Kohls today. An example I can think of is Tsonga at AO 2008. Djokovic was lucky to avoid him on the night that Nadal played him.

Yeah, sure, you can call it grasping at straws but Djokovic definitely had the better opposition today..

Sunset of Age
05-30-2009, 10:24 PM
Agree with this completely. You can never make that statement with any degree of confidence. This sport is all about match ups and the way one guy plays against another is totally dependent on the individual match up.
I also don't believe you can really evaluate any player based on one, or even a few individual match results. You really have to look at the entire body of work.

Of course. Like I said before, a player only plays as good as his opponent allows him to, and it's just a shot in the dark to claim that Roger would have allowed Kohli to play as well as Djoko did today.
But in the end, saying that Kohli might have beaten Roger in his current form, is just as speculative as claiming that he might NOT have. :)

MacTheKnife
05-30-2009, 10:30 PM
Of course. Like I said before, a player only plays as good as his opponent allows him to, and it's just a shot in the dark to claim that Roger would have allowed Kohli to play as well as Djoko did today.
But in the end, saying that Kohli might have beaten Roger in his current form, is just as speculative as claiming that he might NOT have. :)

Exactly and hindsight is always 20-20. And any speculation on what would have happened had the two reversed opponents is just that, pure speculation.

ShotmaKer
05-30-2009, 10:32 PM
Once again, we'll never know what would have happened if Fed and Djoko's situation were reversed! But I tend to agree with Mac and SD!

Sunset of Age
05-30-2009, 10:39 PM
Sometimes a player is just in the zone.. as was Kohls today. An example I can think of is Tsonga at AO 2008. Djokovic was lucky to avoid him on the night that Nadal played him.

Yeah, sure, you can call it grasping at straws but Djokovic definitely had the better opposition today..

All of this is Packet & Parcel in any sports.
Sometimes unexpected upsets just happen.

That, imho, makes it even more incredible that some (:angel:) of the players have been able to have the continuous streaks that they manage(d). It only shows even the more what a fantastic players they indeed are.

Beating a top player once in a while is one thing. Claiming the top position, always being a favourite whatever the surface or circumstances, and actually being able to maintain that over a long period of time, is something completely different. :)

ShotmaKer
05-30-2009, 10:46 PM
Beating a top player once in a while is one thing. Claiming the top position, always being a favourite whatever the surface or circumstances, and actually being able to maintain that over a long period of time, is something completely different. :)

Could not have said it better!

luie
05-30-2009, 10:55 PM
It's all subjective this point.. considering Djokovic BEAT Federer, Federer lost in the 3rd round at MC and Djoke lost to Nadal at Madrid.. Djoke is having the better clay season at least in terms of results, maybe not in points. If not for Nadal there is a slight possibility that he could have swept the clay masters so even though you say Fed is better overall, it could really go either way.

But as I said.. we shouldn't judge them by today's results as Kohl probably would have beat Federer playing the way he was.
Garbage post.:o

Chiseller
05-30-2009, 11:00 PM
Kohlschreiber was in the zone? What? He played solid, that's it.
It was more of Djokovic being totally useless today.

Sunset of Age
05-30-2009, 11:02 PM
"I played really, really one of the best matches I ever play in a big tournament."- Direct quote from Kohls.

Sounds like he thinks he played a pretty good match

I see no reason to disagree with him on that. :shrug:

Fiberlight1
05-30-2009, 11:03 PM
Kohlschreiber was in the zone? What? He played solid, that's it.
It was more of Djokovic being totally useless today.

"I played really, really one of the best matches I ever play in a big tournament."- Direct quote from Kohls.

Sounds like he thinks he played a pretty good match

ShotmaKer
05-30-2009, 11:18 PM
What's the point anyway? Speculations won't lead anywhere, Kohli was a BAD match up for Djoko TODAY, no more, no less... Things happen folks!

Sunset of Age
05-30-2009, 11:20 PM
"I played really, really one of the best matches I ever play in a big tournament."- Direct quote from Kohls.

Sounds like he thinks he played a pretty good match

And so he did.

What's the point anyway? Speculations won't lead anywhere, Kohli was a BAD match up for Djoko TODAY, no more, no less... Things happen folks!

Spot on.

marcRD
05-30-2009, 11:33 PM
It's all subjective this point.. considering Djokovic BEAT Federer, Federer lost in the 3rd round at MC and Djoke lost to Nadal at Madrid.. Djoke is having the better clay season at least in terms of results, maybe not in points. If not for Nadal there is a slight possibility that he could have swept the clay masters so even though you say Fed is better overall, it could really go either way.

But as I said.. we shouldn't judge them by today's results as Kohl probably would have beat Federer playing the way he was.

Thats just bullshit, MC does barely count as Federer wasnt ready for clay season and had just got married. Djokovic beat Federer in Rome, but that was not a clear victory and Federer would have won it if he just had the head in the right place. It certanly doesnt make Djokovic nr2 on clay to beat Federer one time just as Federer beating Nadal on clay doesnt make him the nr1 on clay. If Federer gets to SF he will have more clay points than Djokovic for yet another clay season and thereby standing firm as the nr2 on clay.

If Kohli would beat Federer today? That is pure speculation, Federer played far better than Djokovic today and has the ability to cool hot lower ranked players down like he did against Tipsy and Berdych in AO, Andreev in UO and actually did it both to Acasuso and Mathieu in RG, his comeback skills are way better than Djokovic and he plays his best tennis in the best of 5 set format, you see Federer in a 5th set and it looks like he has been playing for some minutes while Djokovic looked tired already in the 2nd set against Kohli.

rubbERR
05-31-2009, 12:04 AM
Yes he is better than Federer at the moment, one result doesnt change anything, but of course if its MTF it changes.

marcRD
05-31-2009, 12:10 AM
Yes he is better than Federer at the moment, one result doesnt change anything, but of course if its MTF it changes.

You are right, one result doesnt change the fact that Federer is better and has produced greater results this year and the last 3 years on this surface, Djokovic beating Federer in Rome doesnt take away Federer from the nr2 spot.

Fiberlight1
05-31-2009, 12:25 AM
Thats just bullshit, MC does barely count as Federer wasnt ready for clay season and had just got married. Djokovic beat Federer in Rome, but that was not a clear victory and Federer would have won it if he just had the head in the right place. It certanly doesnt make Djokovic nr2 on clay to beat Federer one time just as Federer beating Nadal on clay doesnt make him the nr1 on clay. If Federer gets to SF he will have more clay points than Djokovic for yet another clay season and thereby standing firm as the nr2 on clay.

If Kohli would beat Federer today? That is pure speculation, Federer played far better than Djokovic today and has the ability to cool hot lower ranked players down like he did against Tipsy and Berdych in AO, Andreev in UO and actually did it both to Acasuso and Mathieu in RG, his comeback skills are way better than Djokovic and he plays his best tennis in the best of 5 set format, you see Federer in a 5th set and it looks like he has been playing for some minutes while Djokovic looked tired already in the 2nd set against Kohli.

Seems like you're giving Fed the benefit of the doubt without doing the same for Djokovic. You make excuses for Fed regarding marriage or "having his head in the right place". It's really all part of the game.. I could say Djokovic had a longer clay season, played more tournaments, more matches, etc so he wasn't physically prepared for the French. Unfortunately, it arrives with the territory, so we can't give Federer the benefit of the doubt about MC or Rome as he should have been more prepared, mainly mentally.

As for the speculation part, yeah. It is speculation, but isn't that what makes tennis fun? If it wasn't for speculation, Fedfan would have left a long time ago.:angel:

HeretiC
05-31-2009, 12:31 AM
This one beats that one, that one beats the other one, the other one won the more important title... blah blah blah. Everyone is going to try to spin it in own favor. That is why there are points. Federer will collect more points on clay, he is no 2 clay-courter in 2009. If Djokovic collected more he would have been no 2 player on clay(he was till today). End of story.

wilmar
05-31-2009, 02:19 AM
Maybe Rafa was talking about Nole having a better record on clay than Roger this season? :shrug: I recall some of the commentators saying the same thing.

You are absolutely right.:)

Q. I think you chatted with readers from the Spanish newspaper in El Mundo,and in that newspaper you said that you thought Djokovic right now was a biggerthreat than Federer. Could you commenton that?

RAFAEL NADAL: I never say that. No, I never say that. I always say if you ask me who had the betterclay season this year, was I think, my opinion, was Novak. Then the rest, no, after me. He played final in Monte‑Carlo, final in Rome, and semifinals in Madrid with very tough match against me, youknow.

So when he won in Belgrade, he played really good tennis. That's what's my feeling. But anyway, both are really good players,and ‑‑ but they are on other side of draw. I think about my draw.

So can Mods please change the thread title?
or we'll carry on this debate based on something Rafa didn't even mean or say.

marcRD
05-31-2009, 02:29 AM
Seems like you're giving Fed the benefit of the doubt without doing the same for Djokovic. You make excuses for Fed regarding marriage or "having his head in the right place". It's really all part of the game.. I could say Djokovic had a longer clay season, played more tournaments, more matches, etc so he wasn't physically prepared for the French. Unfortunately, it arrives with the territory, so we can't give Federer the benefit of the doubt about MC or Rome as he should have been more prepared, mainly mentally.

As for the speculation part, yeah. It is speculation, but isn't that what makes tennis fun? If it wasn't for speculation, Fedfan would have left a long time ago.:angel:

French open is the most important tournament during clay season, worth more than the whole rest of the season combined. Djokovic couldnt produce anything here and could not win any tournament except Djokovic open in Serbia. Djokovic has failed to put him in a position where he could be counted as the nr2 on clay, Federer losing in MC is just a minor event compared to Kohli trashing Djokovic in RG. Federer has played here in RG 5 years now without ever losing to anyone not named Rafael "GOAT of clay" Nadal and few times has he lost to anyone besides Nadal outside RG on clay. His resume continues to be way more impressive than Djokovic and he has for the 4th year in a row come by as the 2nd greatest player of the clay season if he gets to SF in RG this year.

There is little to debate, better luck next year to Novak to steal the kind of unimportant "clay nr2" title from Federer.

ShotmaKer
05-31-2009, 08:37 AM
As for the speculation part, yeah. It is speculation, but isn't that what makes tennis fun? If it wasn't for speculation, Fedfan would have left a long time ago.:angel:

That's another speculation! There's nothing more to debate, you can't change people's mind with speculations, and the way you used it here is totally useless. But anyway, the facts are there, and Djoko has won no masters on clay this season, and did not make it to the second week at RG. So how could he be better than Federer on clay so far?

faipalgugus
11-23-2014, 07:50 PM
I thought the serb was a baby in 2009? Seems like he had his chance in 2009 like Roger...

PileDrive
11-23-2014, 07:58 PM
I think Djokovic needs to beat Nadal on his way to winning RG to be considered such..Let's not forget Federer had to deal with peak Nadal on Clay 2005-2008-- worst matchup on his worst surface..

SerialKillerToBe
11-23-2014, 08:05 PM
I thought the serb was a baby in 2009? Seems like he had his chance in 2009 like Roger...

At 22 years old Frauderer was crashing out in the first round of RG :haha:

SerialKillerToBe
11-23-2014, 08:07 PM
I think Djokovic needs to beat Nadal on his way to winning RG to be considered such..Let's not forget Federer had to deal with peak Nadal on Clay 2005-2008-- worst matchup on his worst surface..

Are you saying Djoker didn't have to deal with DA'll from 2006-2008? :scratch:

tektonac
11-23-2014, 08:14 PM
both are good on clay.

pepita1964
11-23-2014, 08:16 PM
If Djokovic had 17 GS and Nadal likes to compare to him that Djokovic will have the same problem as Federer has for year with Rafa.
But Djokovic is still far from 14 GS so he is good guy.

SheepleBuster
11-23-2014, 08:17 PM
NoleTurds trying so hard to insert Nole in a greatest discussion... the slam choke artist, which I am a big fan of, needs to win more slams if he wants to be taken seriously. He should already have 10 slams, if he was not such a slam choker

samanosuke
11-23-2014, 08:20 PM
crane :sad:

i would even forgive you such trolling thread if you come back

miura88
11-23-2014, 08:21 PM
Gonna need that Coupe des Mousquetaires to get near surpassing Federer on clay.

IOFH
11-23-2014, 08:26 PM
Pro bump, still doesn't make Djokovic better than Fed on clay in 2009.

DjokerForCYGS
11-23-2014, 09:01 PM
Pro bump, still doesn't make Djokovic better than Fed on clay in 2009.

How do you know?
You didn't even follow tennis back then.
At least your post testify that.

Looner
11-23-2014, 09:04 PM
How do you know?
You didn't even follow tennis back then.
At least your post testify that.

And you did? Phahhahaha. Good one.

DjokerForCYGS
11-23-2014, 09:15 PM
And you did? Phahhahaha. Good one.

No, I took a hiatus from following tennis between 2001-2010. Though would never claim I know the ultimate truth, just like your Fedtard apprentices.

IOFH
11-23-2014, 09:16 PM
How do you know?
You didn't even follow tennis back then.
At least your post testify that.

What's Noles argument then? Beating Fed still reeling from one of the lowest points in his career since getting to the top (Miami 2009) in 3 in Rome? Almost beating a mediocre Nadal in Madrid? Fed won a masters 1000 and RG while Djokovic lost in straights to Kohlschreiber in round 3, you have to do some impressive mental gymnastics if you want to make yourself believe Djokovic was better on clay than Fed that season.

nolethebest
11-23-2014, 09:17 PM
NoleTurds trying t so hard to insert Nole in a greatest discussion... the slam choke artist, which I am a big fan of, needs to win more slams if he wants to be taken seriously. He should already have 10 slams, if he was not such a slam choker

:lol: It's and embarrasment that a fraudtard like you is calling yourelf "A big fan" of Novak to justify bashing Novak. Just stop please. Not to mention this thread was from 2009

:o

MasterPredictor
11-23-2014, 09:19 PM
Djokovic just needs someone to upset Nadal so he can do it the easy way like Federer. Nadal didn't wait for Federer to lose to claim his first Wimbledon Final, he beat Roger and truly earned it.

ManofSteel
11-23-2014, 09:21 PM
He said djokovic was the better clay player of the two in that particular season. Its not about who is overall better in clay.

IOFH
11-23-2014, 09:27 PM
Djokovic just needs someone to upset Nadal so he can do it the easy way like Federer. Nadal didn't wait for Federer to lose to claim his first Wimbledon Final, he beat Roger and truly earned it.

Mono-Fed 9-7 in the fifth.

He said djokovic was the better clay player of the two in that particular season. Its not about who is overall better in clay.

Before Djokovic lost in R3 at RG.

faipalgugus
11-23-2014, 09:28 PM
He said djokovic was the better clay player of the two in that particular season. Its not about who is overall better in clay.

I know, but a lot of Nole fans say that Federer has been lucky to see Nadal losing, while Djokovic has to beat him to win the French.

I wanted to show that in 2009, both Federer and Nole were at least equals on clay, both had the same chance in this tournament. But while Djokovic surrendered without much of a fight against Kohl, Federer struggled past Acasuso, Mathieu, Haas and Del Potro to finally take the title.

ManofSteel
11-23-2014, 09:34 PM
I know, but a lot of Nole fans say that Federer has been lucky to see Nadal losing, while Djokovic has to beat him to win the French.

I wanted to show that in 2009, both Federer and Nole were at least equals on clay, both had the same chance in this tournament. But while Djokovic surrendered without much of a fight against Kohl, Federer struggled past Acasuso, Mathieu, Haas and Del Potro to finally take the title.

Agreed with that.

JamieBlake
11-23-2014, 09:48 PM
He said djokovic was the better clay player of the two in that particular season. Its not about who is overall better in clay.

Yeah he said that, completely wrong title.

SerialKillerToBe
11-23-2014, 09:58 PM
Mono-Fed 9-7 in the fifth.

.

This proves you only recently started watching tennis. Mono-Fed didn't exist by the time Wimbledon was over.

SerialKillerToBe
11-23-2014, 09:58 PM
I wanted to show that in 2009, both Federer and Nole were at least equals on clay, both had the same chance in this tournament. But while Djokovic surrendered without much of a fight against Kohl, Federer struggled past Acasuso, Mathieu, Haas and Del Potro to finally take the title.

Fraud would have gotten his ass kicked by that Kohlscreiber. Or maybe not, Germans like to bend over frequently to the Fraud.

GSMnadal
11-23-2014, 10:00 PM
He's not. He is right now, but not overall. Even though this fact has nothing to do with Fed's RG title

IOFH
11-23-2014, 10:06 PM
This proves you only recently started watching tennis. Mono-Fed didn't exist by the time Wimbledon was over.

He existed in the sense that his preparation for the 2008 season had been seriously compromised bc of the mono, leaving him in a much weaker state athletically, naturally affecting his tennis throughout the year.

nolethebest
11-23-2014, 10:20 PM
He existed in the sense that his preparation for the 2008 season had been seriously compromised bc of the mono, leaving him in a much weaker state athletically, naturally affecting his tennis throughout the year.

how exactly huh? He was a match away from wining RG, and couple of games away from wining WIM. He just got outplayed in Finals by rafa.

MasterPredictor
11-23-2014, 10:23 PM
Mono-Fed 9-7 in the fifth.




That's what happens when you kiss Mirka. Nothing good comes from her lips.

Silverbullet96
11-24-2014, 05:37 AM
how exactly huh? He was a match away from wining RG, and couple of games away from wining WIM. He just got outplayed in Finals by rafa.

Speaks about his potential form in 2008 after playing his best ever tennis at the end of 2007.

Mountaindewslave
11-24-2014, 07:02 AM
old quote and possibly taken out of context (AKA about a particular season, their form)

obvs though in general Roger is a vastly superior clay court player over Novak, just has a terrible chemistry /matchup with Nadal on the surface. says a lot when a declined Federer beat Novak on clay in his absolute prime form

Houstonko
11-24-2014, 07:08 AM
I know, but a lot of Nole fans say that Federer has been lucky to see Nadal losing, while Djokovic has to beat him to win the French.

I wanted to show that in 2009, both Federer and Nole were at least equals on clay, both had the same chance in this tournament. But while Djokovic surrendered without much of a fight against Kohl, Federer struggled past Acasuso, Mathieu, Haas and Del Potro to finally take the title.

thats not really true when Djokovic has physical problems.

Overall Roger will still be the better clay player when all of them retire.

MrMarble
11-24-2014, 07:19 AM
Speaks about his potential form in 2008 after playing his best ever tennis at the end of 2007.
Wasn't Fed pretty much always beaten by Rafa though...

MrMarble
11-24-2014, 07:36 AM
old quote and possibly taken out of context (AKA about a particular season, their form)
Not possibly but absolutely... Rafa said this about 2009 clay season; that Djoko and him were better on clay than Fed.


obvs though in general Roger is a vastly superior clay court player over Novak, just has a terrible chemistry /matchup with Nadal on the surface. says a lot when a declined Federer beat Novak on clay in his absolute prime form
Imo Djokovic is overall better on clay... his stats prove it.

You can't just pick one match to draw conclusions... Federer as well was playing his best ever tennis at RG that year.

Litotes
11-24-2014, 08:33 AM
Why bump this thread? Djokovic is obviously better than Federer on clay these days. He wasn't in 2009, though. 2009 is Federer's only year as the very best player on clay. Will be interesting to see if Djokovic gets his in 2015, at the same age Federer was in 2009.

MrMarble
11-24-2014, 09:10 AM
Why bump this thread? Djokovic is obviously better than Federer on clay these days. He wasn't in 2009, though. 2009 is Federer's only year as the very best player on clay.
No that's the only year he won RG, doesn't necessarily mean that he was the best... best doesn't always win you know. Rafa, naturally, was the best claycourter even in 2009.

Rafa said that Fed was lucky to win RG while him + Djoko dominated rest of the clay season...

Johnbert
11-24-2014, 09:20 AM
Rafa said that Fed was lucky to win RG while him + Djoko dominated rest of the clay season...

MrWarble :facepalm:

djokovic couldn't win a clay-title 2009, fed beside rg won madrid against dull in the final. but djokovic dominated and fed was just lucky? problem can not be found?

and please post a source where dull said federer was lucky to win rg. never heard something like that from him...

Wi$$ard
11-24-2014, 09:28 AM
Djokovic is better on clay than Fed since 2008.

MrMarble
11-24-2014, 09:30 AM
MrWarble :facepalm:

djokovic couldn't win a clay-title 2009, fed beside rg won madrid against dull in the final. but djokovic dominated and fed was just lucky? problem can not be found?
Nadal had his reasons to believe that Djoko was playing at higher level than Fed... He should be the best judge of that.

When it comes to results Rafa&Djoko met at MC and Rome finals... plus Madrid SF which was record long and Rafa was spent after that in the final when facing Fed; the Madrid semi was the real final. Also Djoko & Fed did meet at Rome semis which Djoko won. So I see no reason to doubt Rafa's analysis.

IOFH
11-24-2014, 09:33 AM
That's what happens when you kiss Mirka. Nothing good comes from her lips.

One thing I can agree with you on.

Litotes
11-24-2014, 09:35 AM
No that's the only year he won RG, doesn't necessarily mean that he was the best... best doesn't always win you know. Rafa, naturally, was the best claycourter even in 2009.

Rafa said that Fed was lucky to win RG while him + Djoko dominated rest of the clay season...

Yes, he was the best in 2009. Winner of RG doesn't have to be but he won a Masters also, and accumulated 3450 ranking points points during clay season in just four tournaments to Nadal's 3280 in five tournaments and Djokovic' 1900 in five tournaments. All his ranking points were taken in tournaments with all the best players in the world present. Doesn't get much more conclusive than that.

As for your second sentence, this shows again how good a stats collector you really are. You have no eye for details. Thread was opened 26/5-2009. When do you think the RG final in 2009 was played? I'll save you the suspense. By 26/5 they were still playing R1 and no top player had yet lost. But perhaps you think Nadal foresaw Federer's win two weeks in advance and still think it was a lucky one?

IOFH
11-24-2014, 09:39 AM
Nadal had his reasons to believe that Djoko was playing at higher level than Fed... He should be the best judge of that.

When it comes to results Rafa&Djoko met at MC and Rome finals... plus Madrid SF which was record long and Rafa was spent after that in the final when facing Fed; the Madrid semi was the real final. Also Djoko & Fed did meet at Rome semis which Djoko won. So I see no reason to doubt Rafa's analysis.

You do realize he said this before Djokovic got bounced at RG by Kohli?

Sombrerero loco
11-24-2014, 09:58 AM
djokovic is better than federer on clay, thats for sure

federer won that RG title just because rafa lost, while djokovic has been close to beat rafa a couple of times(which we know would never happen to roger)

imo, if roger and novak faced each other in RG final, 70% of the times novak would take it

Fujee
11-24-2014, 10:07 AM
imo, if roger and novak faced each other in RG final, 70% of the times novak would take it

Hmmm not sure about that. I'd say 55-45 to Novak.

Litotes
11-24-2014, 10:14 AM
djokovic is better than federer on clay, thats for sure

federer won that RG title just because rafa lost, while djokovic has been close to beat rafa a couple of times(which we know would never happen to roger)

imo, if roger and novak faced each other in RG final, 70% of the times novak would take it

On current form I agree, but not if we're looking back. If Roger and Novak had faced each other in RG finals until now then it's very likely Fed had won in 2005-07 and 2009-11, Djokovic in 2008 and 2012-14.

Johnbert
11-24-2014, 10:15 AM
djokovic is better than federer on clay, thats for sure

federer won that RG title just because rafa lost, while djokovic has been close to beat rafa a couple of times(which we know would never happen to roger)

imo, if roger and novak faced each other in RG final, 70% of the times novak would take it

lol.

djokovic is 0-6 against dull at rg, fed 0-5.

djokovic was only once really close to beat him, 2013. but even this match should've been over after 4 sets, dull choked at 6*-5.

djokovic and fed met exactly 2 times at the french open (2011 and 2012). h2h 1-1. and you really think out of 10 matches djokovic would win 7???

imo this is absolutely 50/50 between these two...

MrMarble
11-24-2014, 10:25 AM
Yes, he was the best in 2009. Winner of RG doesn't have to be but he won a Masters also, and accumulated 3450 ranking points points during clay season in just four tournaments to Nadal's 3280 in five tournaments and Djokovic' 1900 in five tournaments. All his ranking points were taken in tournaments with all the best players in the world present. Doesn't get much more conclusive than that.
Ranking points doesn't tell either who is the best. Besides one who wins RG will likely have most ranking points as well so it's no further proof but saying the same thing.

Nadal & Djokovic played two clay masters finals and de facto final in Madrid. So essentially they played all de facto 3 clay masters finals, while Fed lost early at MC, lost to Djokovic in Rome and benefited at Madrid from Rafa & Djoko meeting at that legendary SF.

You must be new to tennis.


As for your second sentence, this shows again how good a stats collector you really are.
You keep telling that in your every post to me. What makes you such an expert... I haven't noticed you interpreting correctly a single stat we have discussed. Nor have I actually seen you provide any stats/graphs you did on your own.

You provided one graph and even that was straight from Hops' site, tennis28.com. I guess copying other people's stats makes you such a great expert here.


You have no eye for details. Thread was opened 26/5-2009. When do you think the RG final in 2009 was played? I'll save you the suspense. By 26/5 they were still playing R1 and no top player had yet lost. But perhaps you think Nadal foresaw Federer's win two weeks in advance and still think it was a lucky one?
Who said I'm talking about comments that the OP posted?
Nadal did say what I wrote and he did it after Fed winning RG. I don't remember how long after but after it was. That is only logical that he would think Djokovic being better on clay before Fed's RG title as well. What OP posted is not exactly same comments from Rafa I read back then.

Litotes
11-24-2014, 10:37 AM
Ranking points doesn't tell either who is the best. Besides one who wins RG will likely have most ranking points as well so it's no further proof but saying the same thing.


Fail again. Federer would not have the most ranking points on clay that year without his masters title.



You must be new to tennis.


Talking to yourself in the midst of a post addressed to someone else does not give a good impression either.


You keep telling that in your every post to me. What makes you such an expert... I haven't noticed you interpreting correctly a single stat we have discussed. Nor have I actually seen you provide any stats/graphs you did on your own.


That's not surprising. You haven't yet shown the ability to interpret stats correctly, so interpreting my comments is also most likely beyond you. I'm telling you so you can either a) put more work into it and get decent stats to show or b) save yourself the embarrassment and stop posting them altogether.


You provided one graph and even that was straight from Hops' site, tennis28.com. I guess copying other people's stats makes you such a great expert here.


I post only relevant stats. In several areas there aren't any.


Nadal did say what I wrote and he did it after Fed winning RG. I don't remember how long after but after it was. That is only logical that he would think Djokovic being better on clay before Fed's RG title as well. What OP posted is not exactly same comments from Rafa I read back then.


I don't know if this is a blatant lie or just you imagining your own dreams really happened. If you think Nadal said that, prove it.

Castafiore
11-24-2014, 10:39 AM
You two need to get a room.

MrMarble
11-24-2014, 10:47 AM
If Roger and Novak had faced each other in RG finals until now then it's very likely Fed had won in 2005-07
Djokovic had just turned 18 and was ranked around 440 in the world at 2005 RG... hardly a fair comparison.

Forehander
11-24-2014, 11:02 AM
Federer other than when playing against Nadal during his prime was quite brilliant on clay. 2006 was his best form I believe and he was hitting winners left and right against everybody looked completely unstoppable. Nowadays though yes Djokovic is the better on clay no doubt

MrMarble
11-24-2014, 12:41 PM
Fail again. Federer would not have the most ranking points on clay that year without his masters title.
I already explained to you that Nadal&Djokovic played a brutal semi which gave Fed the title. Besides I said: "who wins RG will likely have most ranking points" which is obviously true so it's your "fail again".



That's not surprising. You haven't yet shown the ability to interpret stats correctly, so interpreting my comments is also most likely beyond you.
yes sure... that's why you're at the receiving end in our arguments... having to make up pretty desperate stuff such as...

- Nadal-Federer h2h is comparable to 6-5 h2h
- Nobody as short as Ivanisevic (193cm) serves as many aces these days
- Counting Fed's career win% should start at age 21,9.

etc...

And you're not even very original, I've heard it all before.


I'm telling you so you can either a) put more work into it and get decent stats to show or b) save yourself the embarrassment and stop posting them altogether.
No, you're telling me because you see yourself as some sort of statistics authority and your bias prevents you to see the relevance of numbers and arguments. It's your own self denial, seriously.


I post only relevant stats. In several areas there aren't any.
In other words they don't support your Fed=GOAT preconception. Pretty much only one stat does. Still, I'm not certain if you have posted any stats of your own.


I don't know if this is a blatant lie or just you imagining your own dreams really happened. If you think Nadal said that, prove it.
No I'm sure he said it. Google is your friend...

Nadal also answered in 2010 after Federer's arrogant comment of "we will see who is the best on clay after RG" that "RG is not the whole clay season"... as I'm sure you don't remember...

You two need to get a room.
I agree. Sorry. :)
Litotes really needs to quit voicing in every other post his opinions on my bias and concentrate on arguments themselves, if he can. I'll try to not to answer his ad hominems.

Johnbert
11-24-2014, 12:52 PM
I already explained to you that Nadal&Djokovic played a brutal semi which gave Fed the title

just like the verdasco-nadal semifinal at the ao the same year gave fed the title. problem can not be found.

alfonsojose
11-24-2014, 12:54 PM
Why is this mess of a bump still going on? :zzz:

nole_no1
11-24-2014, 12:56 PM
Yeah and the water is wet

KingSlayer
11-24-2014, 01:22 PM
just like the verdasco-nadal semifinal at the ao the same year gave fed the title. problem can not be found.

Hello , AO is a GS , Nadal had an extra day of rest :wavey:

i am sure , his team tried everything to get him ready for that final

but he still wasn't 100%

nolethebest
11-24-2014, 01:27 PM
old quote and possibly taken out of context (AKA about a particular season, their form)

obvs though in general Roger is a vastly superior clay court player over Novak, just has a terrible chemistry /matchup with Nadal on the surface. says a lot when a declined Federer beat Novak on clay in his absolute prime form

Why are you overstating this? Could't you just say you think he's a better clay court player?

Their win % on clay, h2h against nadal, amount of clay titles, h2h against each other, say other wise :shrug:

Joey Tribbiani
11-24-2014, 01:55 PM
Better than Fed my ass. :spit:

Only Noletards could believe this.
Fed had to deal with peak Claydal, Djokovic couldn't even beat injured Claydal in many occasions.

And don't let me even start with Roland Garros 2011.. when we had PEAK Nole and PEAK Fed facing each other at the same time on clay, and what happened?

Peak Fed routined peak Nole.

Vinch
11-24-2014, 02:27 PM
Did Nadal use their h2h on clay to justify this?

PileDrive
11-24-2014, 02:35 PM
Yes, he was the best in 2009. Winner of RG doesn't have to be but he won a Masters also, and accumulated 3450 ranking points points during clay season in just four tournaments to Nadal's 3280 in five tournaments and Djokovic' 1900 in five tournaments. All his ranking points were taken in tournaments with all the best players in the world present. Doesn't get much more conclusive than that.

As for your second sentence, this shows again how good a stats collector you really are. You have no eye for details. Thread was opened 26/5-2009. When do you think the RG final in 2009 was played? I'll save you the suspense. By 26/5 they were still playing R1 and no top player had yet lost. But perhaps you think Nadal foresaw Federer's win two weeks in advance and still think it was a lucky one?

Are you seriously trying to convince me that 200 pts difference with a 4-peating RG Champion Nadal going out injured in the biggest event that makes Federer a better Clay Courter in 2009 :spit:.. That Nadal comebacks the following year and slap another 5 title run in RG proves the flukishness and extreme extenuating circumstances of 2009.Again you are no worse than Mrmarble at hiding behind statistical facade to fit your narrative...Sometimes you just have to eschew your numbers-fetish, and take things in vaccum..

Joey Tribbiani
11-24-2014, 02:39 PM
Did Nadal use their h2h on clay to justify this?

It doesn't matter.
Everybody knows Nadal is a great Champion but also he sucks when he talks (or troll, if you are a blind Nadal fan).

This is no different than when Rafa says 'Ginepri? Surely I'll have to play my best to have a chance, no?'

Doktor Carpet
11-24-2014, 02:39 PM
People seems to forget Federer dominated Nadal in RG between 05-07 and only lose those 3 matches because of stamina reasons.

So no, overall Djokovic isn't better than Federer on clay. He even lost to Federer on his goat year (2011), although right now he's better.

NSMv1924
11-24-2014, 02:46 PM
Better than Fed my ass. :spit:

Only Noletards could believe this.
Fed had to deal with peak Claydal, Djokovic couldn't even beat injured Claydal in many occasions.

And don't let me even start with Roland Garros 2011.. when we had PEAK Nole and PEAK Fed facing each other at the same time on clay, and what happened?

Peak Fed routined peak Nole.

Remind me what happened in 2012 at RG? The word routine comes to mind.

Joey Tribbiani
11-24-2014, 02:51 PM
Remind me what happened in 2012 at RG? The word routine comes to mind.

You're 32 and you can't understand the difference between PEAK vs PEAK and GOOD vs DECENT?

EddieNero
11-24-2014, 02:57 PM
Djokovic: 0 GS, 2-time runner-up, 5 M1000
Federer: 1 GS, 4-time runner-up, 6 M1000

vs Nadal at RG

Djokovic: 6 losses, 3 sets won
Federer: 5 losses, 4 sets won

Argument.

BankaiKenpachi
11-24-2014, 02:59 PM
I can't believe Fedtards trying to deny the opinion of Rafa on the matter of clay. When the greatest clay courter said Djokovic is better than Federer on clay, that is what it is. Nadal knows about clay more than anyone in this world and his opinion on clay should be taken as it is. Fedtards will bring 2011 as an example at every convenient opportunity but easily forget other defeats of Fraud.

NSMv1924
11-24-2014, 03:18 PM
You're 32 and you can't understand the difference between PEAK vs PEAK and GOOD vs DECENT?

It was 1 year later!!!

Joey Tribbiani
11-24-2014, 03:21 PM
It was 1 year later!!!

And?

Nadal ended up dominating and destroying everything on clay in one year to losing in the 4th round the next year.

Djokovic ended up dominating everything and everyone one year to losing a Slam final to Murray in the next year.

BauerAlmeida
11-24-2014, 03:33 PM
Better than Fed my ass. :spit:

Only Noletards could believe this.
Fed had to deal with peak Claydal, Djokovic couldn't even beat injured Claydal in many occasions.

And don't let me even start with Roland Garros 2011.. when we had PEAK Nole and PEAK Fed facing each other at the same time on clay, and what happened?

Peak Fed routined peak Nole.

LOL. It was hardly a routine. Routine is what Djokovic did to Federer in 2012. 2011 was a tough match, Federer was more clutch, but it wasn't a routine by any means. Djokovic served for the 1st and 4th sets.

swebright
11-24-2014, 03:40 PM
He's right because Novak is playing like him on clay.

Novak has made some effort in coming forward a lot this year as well as solid defence from baseline. Let's see how he plays against Rafa from now on. Novak realizes he shouldn't be playing 6 hours matches against Rafa these days. rafa might be willing to on the other hand.

Direwolf
11-24-2014, 03:59 PM
Djokovic almost defeated Rafa in 2013 what Federer couldn't even dream of. Federer kept losing to baby Nadal. :haha: 6-1 6-3 6-0. :spit: Novak could play blindfolded and still wouldn't lose with this scoreline. Also, Federer should thank Djokovic for pushing Nadal's knees to the limit in 2009 Madrid. Otherwise, Federer would have been RG-less. :bigwave:

Johnbert
11-24-2014, 04:07 PM
Djokovic almost defeated Rafa in 2013 what Federer couldn't even dream of. Federer kept losing to baby Nadal. :haha: 6-1 6-3 6-0. :spit: Novak could play blindfolded and still wouldn't lose with this scoreline. Also, Federer should thank Djokovic for pushing Nadal's knees to the limit in 2009 Madrid. Otherwise, Federer would have been RG-less. :bigwave:

who cares about "almost defeated"?! it's still a loss.

now 2008 dull is "baby dull" :haha:

and of course djokovic wouldn't lose with such a scoreline, because he would retire prior. :shrug:

and the last sentence is just :haha:

EddieNero
11-24-2014, 04:08 PM
Djokovic almost defeated Rafa in 2013 what Federer couldn't even dream of. Federer kept losing to baby Nadal. :haha: 6-1 6-3 6-0. :spit: Novak could play blindfolded and still wouldn't lose with this scoreline. Also, Federer should thank Djokovic for pushing Nadal's knees to the limit in 2009 Madrid. Otherwise, Federer would have been RG-less. :bigwave:

Djokovic never had MP against Nadal in aBO5 format on clay, Federer did.
Nadal 2008 hit absolute peak on clay, while Federer was still recovering physically from mono.

Stop embarrasing yourself, blind tard.

Litotes
11-24-2014, 04:40 PM
Are you seriously trying to convince me that 200 pts difference with a 4-peating RG Champion Nadal going out injured in the biggest event that makes Federer a better Clay Courter in 2009 :spit:.. That Nadal comebacks the following year and slap another 5 title run in RG proves the flukishness and extreme extenuating circumstances of 2009.Again you are no worse than Mrmarble at hiding behind statistical facade to fit your narrative...Sometimes you just have to eschew your numbers-fetish, and take things in vaccum..


You are not looking at 2009 in isolation. If you want to see who's best for just one single year, being defending champion of anything is kind of irrelevant. Nadal was best before and after, yes, and also obviously best in the early part of the 2009 clay season. But he finished it worse. And no neutral tennis fan would exchange Federer's 2009 clay results for Nadal's.

If it was an injury that cost him the chance of being the best clay player also in 2009, so be it. Injuries are part of life for professional athletes. They often take away chances to achieve things.

Litotes
11-24-2014, 04:43 PM
I can't believe Fedtards trying to deny the opinion of Rafa on the matter of clay. When the greatest clay courter said Djokovic is better than Federer on clay, that is what it is. Nadal knows about clay more than anyone in this world and his opinion on clay should be taken as it is. Fedtards will bring 2011 as an example at every convenient opportunity but easily forget other defeats of Fraud.

Perhaps you can produce evidence of Nadal actually saying this? Noone else has been able to.

Vinch
11-24-2014, 05:14 PM
Rafa must be delusional about his decline though.
When Fed was dominating the world of tennis, he had to deal with a better Rafa than Djokovic ever had. The only year where Rafa played close to aswell as he did on clay was 2012. Credit to Novak for making him doubt slightly in the 3rd and 4th set of the FO final.

My toughts on Rafa's level on Clay since 2011:

in 2011, Rafa's level was good but his confidence was at his lowest with all the loss to Djokovic.
in 2012, Probably one of his best year on Clay in terms of level of play and achievment.
in 2013, He was complete crap losing sets to mugs and random in almost every clay tournament. I mean "crap" as when you know what you can expect of him. Still had amazing results on the surface.
in 2014, Same level or worse than in 2013. He lost MC to Ferrer, Barcelona to Almagro, Almost lost Madrid to Nishikori, Lost Rome To Djokovic. Only the FO was ok.

MrMarble
11-24-2014, 08:06 PM
Are you seriously trying to convince me that 200 pts difference with a 4-peating RG Champion Nadal going out injured in the biggest event that makes Federer a better Clay Courter in 2009
Yes, that's exactly what he's saying. At the time the biggest fedtrolls just joked about it but this guy is serious... it's absurd. Next up he'll be calling Fed the king of clay no doubt.

You are not looking at 2009 in isolation. If you want to see who's best for just one single year, being defending champion of anything is kind of irrelevant. Nadal was best before and after, yes, and also obviously best in the early part of the 2009 clay season. But he finished it worse. And no neutral tennis fan would exchange Federer's 2009 clay results for Nadal's.
That was not the point was it... you didn't argue that he had most desirable results, which he did... you argued that he was the best clay courter at that time... better than Djokovic and Nadal...

I said:
No that's the only year he won RG, doesn't necessarily mean that he was the best... best doesn't always win you know. Rafa, naturally, was the best claycourter even in 2009.
Which you answered:
Yes, he (Federer) was the best in 2009. Winner of RG doesn't have to be but he won a Masters also,

It's like arguing with the biggest fedtard ever :lol:

Litotes
11-24-2014, 08:17 PM
I agree. Sorry. :)
Litotes really needs to quit voicing in every other post his opinions on my bias and concentrate on arguments themselves, if he can. I'll try to not to answer his ad hominems.


You're not doing very well so far. Three additional posts quoting me despite me not replying, and you were the one who started quoting me in this thread anyway, not the other way around. I can only encourage you to improve.

If you have too much time on your hands to do that, search some more for that mythical Nadal statement you claim to remember, or admit you misremembered. Don't think you can spin it any better than that.

janko05
11-24-2014, 08:18 PM
I believe Rafa...he knows his tennis

garad
11-24-2014, 08:20 PM
That was not the point was it... you didn't argue that he had most desirable results, which he did...




Applying common sense, I would say that best results = best player
What does "most desirable results" even mean? Is it a term you just concocted to avoid saying "best results"? If not, what is THE difference between the two?

nolethebest
11-24-2014, 08:59 PM
People seems to forget Federer dominated Nadal in RG between 05-07 and only lose those 3 matches because of stamina reasons.



:superlol: :superlol: No shit... Fed lost because of stamina and dominated nadal :haha:



Rafa must be delusional about his decline though.
When Fed was dominating the world of tennis, he had to deal with a better Rafa than Djokovic ever had. The only year where Rafa played close to aswell as he did on clay was 2012. Credit to Novak for making him doubt slightly in the 3rd and 4th set of the FO final.

My toughts on Rafa's level on Clay since 2011:

in 2011, Rafa's level was good but his confidence was at his lowest with all the loss to Djokovic.
in 2012, Probably one of his best year on Clay in terms of level of play and achievment.
in 2013, He was complete crap losing sets to mugs and random in almost every clay tournament. I mean "crap" as when you know what you can expect of him. Still had amazing results on the surface.
in 2014, Same level or worse than in 2013. He lost MC to Ferrer, Barcelona to Almagro, Almost lost Madrid to Nishikori, Lost Rome To Djokovic. Only the FO was ok.
Novak played nadal at Rg in 06, 07, 08, Fail to see your point considering fed played him those years as well.

And saying Novak played a worst nadal is just BS, cause their is no way to proof that and it's still nadal ffs.
Better than Fed my ass. :spit:

Only Noletards could believe this.
Fed had to deal with peak Claydal, Djokovic couldn't even beat injured Claydal in many occasions.

And don't let me even start with Roland Garros 2011.. when we had PEAK Nole and PEAK Fed facing each other at the same time on clay, and what happened?

Peak Fed routined peak Nole.

Ummm, so didn't Novak play nadal from 06-08 as well? :facepalm: And are you seriously calling this match routine 6-7(7), 4-6, 6-3, 6-2, 7-5 :o

MrMarble
11-24-2014, 09:05 PM
Rafa must be delusional about his decline though.
When Fed was dominating the world of tennis, he had to deal with a better Rafa than Djokovic ever had. The only year where Rafa played close to aswell as he did on clay was 2012. Credit to Novak for making him doubt slightly in the 3rd and 4th set of the FO final.

I'm not certain at all that Rafa's level has declined on clay... his confidence may have declined a bit but it appears to me that his form hasn't.

Here is his clay trend, measured by points won% which I think is the most accurate meter:

http://www.saunalahti.fi/~thetjt/stuff/tennis/Nadal%20clay%20trend.jpg

Follow the red line...

For the record: at RG+clay masters in 2009 Nadal's points won% was 55,4% while Federer's was 54,4%. That amounts to around 84% expected match win% for Federer and 89% for Nadal... but as we already concluded best player doesn't always win.

So it appears to me that Nadal's overall level has not declined much on clay, if at all. His movement and confidence might have but he has compensated it with more attacking groundgame (especially fh dtl) and better serve. He's overall still very dominant on clay despite some fluctuation on results. Djokovic has something to do with it.

Nadal's most dominant tournament on clay was 2010 MC, with total points won% of 63,7%
Djokovic's was 2011 Rome with 57% points won.

Ichbinmüde
11-24-2014, 09:16 PM
Djokovic almost defeated Rafa in 2013 what Federer couldn't even dream of. Federer kept losing to baby Nadal. :haha: 6-1 6-3 6-0. :spit: Novak could play blindfolded and still wouldn't lose with this scoreline. Also, Federer should thank Djokovic for pushing Nadal's knees to the limit in 2009 Madrid. Otherwise, Federer would have been RG-less. :bigwave:

Hey mate, check 2005-07 and 11. Seems you didn't watch much tennis these times.

@topic: Djokovic has a more 'versatile' game on clay and slips quasi nadalesk. I mean Federer has ten titles on clay and this is just one more than Djokovic (and he's 27 years old :secret: ).
Fed's effortless tennis doesn't suit to clay now. This really slow clay is a surface for hard-workers, like Ferrer or Nadal, meanwhile aesthetic is something like a malus. Inbefore Roger's natural declining he used to be very dominant on clay, merely Nadal could stop him at many tournaments (FO included).

Certainly Roger is the only active player who won RG besides Nadal, on the other hand Djokovic was many times very close to win it. Just a few points turned the direction to Nadal's subscription-win, when they played these 'brute' matches.
And if you take the period from 2011 till now, you can barely deny Djokovic has done much better on clay courts, especially at clay-masters.

Winners of the last 12 masters on clay:

Nadal (6)
Djokovic (4)
Wawrinka/Federer (both 1)

So I come to the conclusion Djokovic is better on clay as from 2011. I know this interview is from 2009 and I would certainly say 'this is bs' at this time, but Djokovic adapted his HC-tennis to clay. Nevertheless I'd say Roger's better than Novak on clay looking at their entire career and Novak needs to win his Golden Slam to initiate this debate again.

PS: Clay H2H between both is 3-3.

MrMarble
11-24-2014, 09:30 PM
Applying common sense, I would say that best results = best player
No, they are two different things as best player doesn't always win.

If Nadal doesn't win RG one year... that doesn't mean the player who wins it is suddenly superior claycourter to Nadal...

http://s28.postimg.org/xjc2uz3jd/scorecard.jpg (http://postimg.org/image/xjc2uz3jd/)

Salad
11-24-2014, 10:26 PM
The truth is that both of them are absolutely out of this planet clay courters that would've won multiple RGs in any other era, so arguing over who's better is just splitting hairs. Nadal's dominance of both on the surface is no mark against either and only speaks to just how frighteningly great Nadal is on the surface.

PileDrive
11-24-2014, 10:42 PM
People seems to forget Federer dominated Nadal in RG between 05-07 and only lose those 3 matches because of stamina reasons.

http://cdn3.sbnation.com/assets/3914361/Russ-Troll.gif

NadalPhan
11-25-2014, 12:06 AM
lol.

djokovic is 0-6 against dull at rg, fed 0-5.

djokovic was only once really close to beat him, 2013. but even this match should've been over after 4 sets, dull choked at 6*-5.

djokovic and fed met exactly 2 times at the french open (2011 and 2012). h2h 1-1. and you really think out of 10 matches djokovic would win 7???

imo this is absolutely 50/50 between these two...

I think Federer is the better of the 2, mainly because prime Fed never had the opportunity to face 2011-2014 Rafa on Clay like Nole did. 2006-2008 Rafa was a lot harder to beat on Clay.

Cloren
11-25-2014, 04:15 AM
I still give the edge to Federer for now.. Maybe if Djokovic wins RG beating Nadal, then I may change my opinion.

BankaiKenpachi
11-25-2014, 04:25 AM
I'm not certain at all that Rafa's level has declined on clay... his confidence may have declined a bit but it appears to me that his form hasn't.

Here is his clay trend, measured by points won% which I think is the most accurate meter:

http://www.saunalahti.fi/~thetjt/stuff/tennis/Nadal%20clay%20trend.jpg

Follow the red line...

For the record: at RG+clay masters in 2009 Nadal's points won% was 55,4% while Federer's was 54,4%. That amounts to around 84% expected match win% for Federer and 89% for Nadal... but as we already concluded best player doesn't always win.

So it appears to me that Nadal's overall level has not declined much on clay, if at all. His movement and confidence might have but he has compensated it with more attacking groundgame (especially fh dtl) and better serve. He's overall still very dominant on clay despite some fluctuation on results. Djokovic has something to do with it.

Nadal's most dominant tournament on clay was 2010 MC, with total points won% of 63,7%
Djokovic's was 2011 Rome with 57% points won.

Man, where do you get all those stats? Fedtards try to come up something cool and you come up with cold hard stats.

SerialKillerToBe
11-25-2014, 04:28 AM
I'm not certain at all that Rafa's level has declined on clay... his confidence may have declined a bit but it appears to me that his form hasn't.

Here is his clay trend, measured by points won% which I think is the most accurate meter:

http://www.saunalahti.fi/~thetjt/stuff/tennis/Nadal%20clay%20trend.jpg

Follow the red line...

For the record: at RG+clay masters in 2009 Nadal's points won% was 55,4% while Federer's was 54,4%. That amounts to around 84% expected match win% for Federer and 89% for Nadal... but as we already concluded best player doesn't always win.

So it appears to me that Nadal's overall level has not declined much on clay, if at all. His movement and confidence might have but he has compensated it with more attacking groundgame (especially fh dtl) and better serve. He's overall still very dominant on clay despite some fluctuation on results. Djokovic has something to do with it.

Nadal's most dominant tournament on clay was 2010 MC, with total points won% of 63,7%
Djokovic's was 2011 Rome with 57% points won.

This confirms that Djoker's best chance to win RG was 2011 and 2013 :sad:

tektonac
11-25-2014, 05:00 AM
I still give the edge to Federer for now.. Maybe if Djokovic wins RG beating Nadal, then I may change my opinion.

if roger could beat nadal at RG then nole should be able as well.

Cloren
11-25-2014, 03:39 PM
if roger could beat nadal at RG then nole should be able as well.

I don't think you understand my post.

monfed
11-25-2014, 03:40 PM
He's obviously better at beating Nadal on clay, that much is clear. But if Fed had met Nadal of RG 11 in his Rome 06 match, I'm sure he would've beaten him. And that Rome 06 Federer beats any version of gymnast on clay.

MrMarble
11-25-2014, 04:37 PM
He's obviously better at beating Nadal on clay, that much is clear. But if Fed had met Nadal of RG 11 in his Rome 06 match, I'm sure he would've beaten him. And that Rome 06 Federer beats any version of gymnast on clay.
Except that Nadal 2011 > Nadal 2006

monfed
11-25-2014, 04:45 PM
Except that Nadal 2011 > Nadal 2006

Not on clay, dont be a clown.

SheenKJohn
11-25-2014, 05:20 PM
Not on clay, dont be a clown.

You are asking too much from him :o

MrMarble
11-25-2014, 05:55 PM
Not on clay, dont be a clown.
Did my graph a few posts ago go over your head?