If Nadal wasnt declining in 2011 then should I say Federer was declining in 2007 when he won 8 titles and 3 slams?Nadal isn't really in decline in my opinion. He was in 2011 in 3 slam finals and in many finals of ATP 1000 master tournaments. The problem wasthat he lost to Nole every time. If Djokovic hadn't play so well in 2011, Nadal would probably have won 3 slams last year. Probably Nadals game in 2010 was better, but 2011 wasn't that bad.
Sampras started to decline when he was 2 years older than Federer and Agassi in 2006? Really? :lol:Nadal (still at or near his peak, IMO)
Roddick (2006 or 2011, depending on your prejorative. Declined very slowly)
Nalbandian (2006, though it's hard to say what his 'peak' was)
It's what the definition of decline is. If player X plays great tennis as good as ever, but a competitor improves strongly. Than I don't really consider it a decline of player X. Than I think that his competitor has improved, but not necessarily that player X declined. I consider a decline when the personal quality of tennis of player X goes strongly down.If Nadal wasnt declining in 2011 then should I say Federer was declining in 2007 when he won 8 titles and 3 slams?
Nadal's 2011 actually reminds me more of Fed 2008, Nadal had 3 titles and Fed 4, Nadal 3 slam finals and Fed 3 slam finals, Fed dominated by Nadal and Nadal dominated by Djokovic and so on.