Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,281 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have often seen claims by fans of all big-3 players with differing agendas that Djokovic has somehow "protected" Federer's slam record by beating Nadal in 3 finals.

However, I want to challenge this view, because I don't think he has effected Nadal's major count that much more (negatively) than Federer's. I don't think it's as clear cut as that.

Djokovic has only beaten Nadal three times in big finals. It is very likely that Nadal would have won at least 2 of them against any other opponents imho. I'm on the fence about the US Open 2011. Nadal also lost out on YE No. 1 in 2011, the WTF title in 2013 and some MS1000.

Djokovic has beaten Federer 6 times in majors, threetimes more than he beat Nadal. Fed missed out on some chances for title wins here imho. I think he would have had excellent chances in the AO 11 against Murray without Plexicushionovic and Nadal already out. He'd be favourite against Tsonga in the AO 08, but showed some inconsistent level there, so it's difficult to say but he would be the favourite of course. He'd have a decent chance for the title at Wimbledon 2014, the toughest opponent from Djokovic draw might have been Cilic. He'd have a shot at Nadal at the USO, more so in 11 though due to better form. The only defeat where I would not give him any chance for the title after losing to Djokovic whatsoever is of course the FO 2012.

Now that's not all. Djokovic might have costed Federer a title even when he was beaten, due to the physical and mental challenge of playing him. That could arguably the case for the USO 2009, where Federer didn't last for 5 sets after having played Djokovic only the day before. He also got closest to beating Nadal at the FO after having beaten Djokovic at the FO, but Nadal would obviously still be the favourite.

Besides Djokovic prevented Federer from bagging 2 more YE No. 1 (2012 + 2014) which would have given him the record there, very likely 2 WTFs (same years), furthermore some MS1000 events.

I'm aware that all of this is hypothetical, but I think you can make a good case that Djokovic has cost Federer at least as many titles/ achievements as he did Nadal. He has made his own legacy at the cost of both ATGs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: atennisfan

·
Banned
Joined
·
858 Posts
What about rg09? Surely those clay battles with djoker affected his knees prior to major. Out of those djoker's wins no one looks as clear preventing from slam. Maybe w14, at very best fed would have 3 more slams (minus rg09). So 2. Nadal would have 4 more. Also add to this that rafa was mentally and physically drained after 18 month of battles vs djoker. He could have very well won one of W-Uso-Ao in 12-13.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,281 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
What about rg09? Surely those clay battles with djoker affected his knees prior to major. Out of those djoker's wins no one looks as clear preventing from slam. Maybe w14, at very best fed would have 3 more slams (minus rg09). So 2. Nadal would have 4 more. Also add to this that rafa was mentally and physically drained after 18 month of battles vs djoker. He could have very well won one of W-Uso-Ao in 12-13.
You must be kidding. AO 11 would be a (much) safer bet than Wimbledon 14 imho.

Nadal always injured when losing? He looked completely fine in that Söderling beating. :D Whatever happened there, had nothing to do with Djokovic, what are you smoking? :wavey:

Nadal didn't lose to Rosol because of Djokovic, he had close calls in most every Wimbledon campaign of his, but he edged them - not this time though. What, Djokovic is to blame for Nadal's injuries now? :rolleyes: Haven't heard that excuse so far! :yeah:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
858 Posts
What about rg09? Surely those clay battles with djoker affected his knees prior to major. Out of those djoker's wins no one looks as clear preventing from slam. Maybe w14, at very best fed would have 3 more slams (minus rg09). So 2. Nadal would have 4 more. Also add to this that rafa was mentally and physically drained after 18 month of battles vs djoker. He could have very well won one of W-Uso-Ao in 12-13.
You must be kidding. AO 11 would be a (much) safer bet than Wimbledon 14 imho.

Nadal always injured when losing? He looked completely fine in that Söderling beating.
Whatever happened there, had nothing to do with Djokovic, what are you smoking?


Nadal didn't lose to Rosol because of Djokovic, he had close calls in most every Wimbledon campaign of his, but he edged them - not this time though. What, Djokovic is to blame for Nadal's injuries now?
Haven't heard that excuse so far!
You should cut the sarcasm a bit. Rewatch rg-09..soder wasn't even playing that good, spraying ues all 4 sets. Not even close to the level of brands in rg2013
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,281 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
You should cut the sarcasm a bit. Rewatch rg-09..soder wasn't even playing that good, spraying ues all 4 sets. Not even close to the level of brands in rg2013
Whatever, this isn't the point here. It's just a bit rich to blame Djokovic for that loss, when that match happened a few weeks before the start of RG.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
858 Posts
You should cut the sarcasm a bit. Rewatch rg-09..soder wasn't even playing that good, spraying ues all 4 sets. Not even close to the level of brands in rg2013
Whatever, this isn't the point here. It's just a bit rich to blame Djokovic for that loss, when that match happened a few weeks before the start of RG.
Not only that match. Djokovic pushed rafa all clay season. I think they have played in 2 finals + madrid. Yeah, that's very theorethical, but nadal would have easily swept clay season like in 2010 without djoker...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,721 Posts
What about rg09? Surely those clay battles with djoker affected his knees prior to major. Out of those djoker's wins no one looks as clear preventing from slam. Maybe w14, at very best fed would have 3 more slams (minus rg09). So 2. Nadal would have 4 more. Also add to this that rafa was mentally and physically drained after 18 month of battles vs djoker. He could have very well won one of W-Uso-Ao in 12-13.
Your trolling is so boring. Blah blah blah Nadal was tired and injured. No one believes that, including yourself. He would have had no chance at those slams you mentioned.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,633 Posts
Neither.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,281 Posts
Discussion Starter #12

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,568 Posts
:haha: @ Faker fans continually picking out grammatical errors and stuff now. Great, simply great. I'd love these English language classes when Faker gets obliterated at the FO.

@OP - Good thread. We can't say for sure. The point is, Faker won 3 GS finals against Nadal so that is a DEFINITE 3 slam loss for Nadal...against Federer he has only played 2 GS finals and won 1(Wimbledon 2014)...AO 2008 he was sick anyway and wouldn't have beaten Tsonga. He was lucky to even get to Djokovic with his illness. USO 2010 and USO 2011 were SFs(with Nadal in the final!) as was AO 2011 so it's a bit hard to say he cost Federer those slams. Objectively, he's (directly) cost Nadal 3 slams and Federer 1 slam...of course the spanner in the works is that Nadal is about the same age as Faker whereas Roger is 6 years older so obviously if you factor all that in it becomes difficult..
 

·
Mostly unbiased analyst
Joined
·
3,982 Posts
:haha: @ Faker fans continually picking out grammatical errors and stuff now. Great, simply great. I'd love these English language classes when Faker gets obliterated at the FO.

@OP - Good thread. We can't say for sure. The point is, Faker won 3 GS finals against Nadal so that is a DEFINITE 3 slam loss for Nadal...against Federer he has only played 2 GS finals and won 1(Wimbledon 2014)...AO 2008 he was sick anyway and wouldn't have beaten Tsonga. He was lucky to even get to Djokovic with his illness. USO 2010 and USO 2011 were SFs(with Nadal in the final!) as was AO 2011 so it's a bit hard to say he cost Federer those slams. Objectively, he's (directly) cost Nadal 3 slams and Federer 1 slam...of course the spanner in the works is that Nadal is about the same age as Faker whereas Roger is 6 years older so obviously if you factor all that in it becomes difficult..
LMAO why "definite"? Do you know for a fact Nadal would have won those three finals if he faced someone other than Djokovic?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,568 Posts
LMAO why "definite"? Do you know for a fact Nadal would have won those three finals if he faced someone other than Djokovic?
Generally the two best players get to the final and you'd have to believe that the runner up would have won the tournament more often than not in a parallel universe where the winner didn't exist. Of course Nadal may have lost even in R32 or something but that is being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative.

To still answer your question though - I think Federer would have beaten Nadal at Wimbledon 2011...USO 2011 I guess Federer and Murray would have had a reasonable shot. AO 2012 I don't think anyone else would have beaten Nadal over 6 hours though.

The whole point is Djokovic beating Federer in a SF doesn't mean he cost him that slam because Federer would have had to win another match. Djokovic beating Nadal in a F however is DIRECTLY costing him the slam.
 

·
Mostly unbiased analyst
Joined
·
3,982 Posts
Generally the two best players get to the final and you'd have to believe that the runner up would have won the tournament more often than not in a parallel universe where the winner didn't exist. Of course Nadal may have lost even in R32 or something but that is being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative.

To still answer your question though - I think Federer would have beaten Nadal at Wimbledon 2011...USO 2011 I guess Federer and Murray would have had a reasonable shot. AO 2012 I don't think anyone else would have beaten Nadal over 6 hours though.

The whole point is Djokovic beating Federer in a SF doesn't mean he cost him that slam because Federer would have had to win another match. Djokovic beating Nadal in a F however is DIRECTLY costing him the slam.
You cannot simply pluck Djokovic from existence and assume everything would have played out the same way.

Without Djokovic the entire draw changes as seeds get shifted around.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,568 Posts
You cannot simply pluck Djokovic from existence and assume everything would have played out the same way.

Without Djokovic the entire draw changes as seeds get shifted around.
Well, exercises such as the one in the OP can only be done with that assumption. Otherwise it is impossible and rather pointless.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top