Topic: 2012 ATP Australian Open

[Start da Game]

Just he wasn't fit? Lol, that is a huge difference, it's not "just". There are plenty of perennial underachievers who could do wonders, if only they weren't gassed out after one set of tennis

Besides, Nadal was already multi-slam winner in 2008, while Novak was just breaking through, he didn't have experience and was still developing far more than Nadal.

Bottom line, while Novak is certainly not "invincible", it's obvious that this matchup is on his racquet now, not on Nadal's like it used to be in the past.

you don't seem to get it.......what i mean by saying that he is "just" more fitter these days is that he isn't necessarily playing as well as he did in 2008, but is really cashing in on nadal's drop in level.......anybody can see that.......i said the same last year as well.......nadal dropped his level and djokovic just upped his fitness level......

remember that i am not making an excuse for rafa's results but rather making a strong positive case for rafa hitting back at djokovic! unlike the fedtard argument which always reflected excuses for every defeat and sounded like every defeat should be discounted for the reasons they state.......so there's a difference.......

djokovic's fitness struggle was a non factor against rafa in 2008 because rafa was thrice the player in 2008 than he is now and used to put the matches to bed before djokovic even got into the match.......djokovic squashed players like peak david ferrer 1, 3, 2 in 2008 AO.......against the same player at 30 years of age in 2012, he was on the brink of collapsing like in the murray match.......that alone should tell you that djokovic has simply shifted his game more towards defense and fitness.......

nadal din't allow him a sniff in any of their slam contests in 2008 and 2010(i will exclude 2006 and 2007 so that you don't complaint), something which even this so called version 2.0 of nole couldn't do to nadal in any slam.......djokovic only barely got past nadal yesterday who's clearly playing at a level or two below of what he is capable of.......

there is no such thing as match up, it's all subjective nonsense.......even if i am the only one standing on that viewpoint, i will believe it.......what if nadal starts striking his backhand like in 2010 and cuts down the errors? will he suddenly possess the match up advantage?

that's why there is no such thing as match up.......it's all relative like everything else in this world.......whoever first said that tennis is all about match ups is an utter clown.......

i will say this - "tennis is all about adaptability"........whoever adapts better is the winner.......

[Richard Miller]

Djokovic "barely got past" only because he played much worse than he did last year, if he played here like he did during last summer, it would've been three quick and easy sets.

Anyway, 2008 was four years ago, Nadal is 11 years on pro tour and is going to be 26 in a few months, if he's not playing his best tennis now, when is he going to? When he's 29? Time is running out

[Tennis4you]

Djokovic "barely got past" only because he played much worse than he did last year, if he played here like he did during last summer, it would've been three quick and easy sets.

Anyway, 2008 was four years ago, Nadal is 11 years on pro tour and is going to be 26 in a few months, if he's not playing his best tennis now, when is he going to? When he's 29? Time is running out

Nadal's form has not dropped in my opinion.  He played a nice semi-final and a nice final.  He just ran into a guy who is playing better.

[pawan89]

Djokovic "barely got past" only because he played much worse than he did last year, if he played here like he did during last summer, it would've been three quick and easy sets.

Anyway, 2008 was four years ago, Nadal is 11 years on pro tour and is going to be 26 in a few months, if he's not playing his best tennis now, when is he going to? When he's 29? Time is running out

Thank you, I am surprised no one has made this point yet.

Shankar would like to believe that Nadal was at his absolute worst and Djokovic at his absolute best. Djokovic has also struggled the last four rounds, dropping sets to Hewitt, taking longer than necessary against Ferrer, and a physically/mentally taxing 5 set battle against Murray before coming into the final. And even in the final, if you saw that first set he was anything but top form.

There's only so much you can argue with "IF"and "WHEN" Nadal plays top form again he'll beat Djokovic. They are all top players and they have an average top-quality that you have to figure in. If Nadal was only able to play top form in 2008 and he can't play that same tennis now, well that explains why he was number 1 in 2008 and not number 1 now. Shankar's Using the same Fedtard logic of "If Federer plays like he did in 2005-2006, he'll win all the grandslams". Well hello, reality check, he's number 3 and slamless for a reason because his average top form has dropped. And so you claim has Nadal's but that's not an excuse, if you want to say Djokovic is playing better than Nadal now that's just the reality.

[sid]

Djokovic "barely got past" only because he played much worse than he did last year, if he played here like he did during last summer, it would've been three quick and easy sets.

Anyway, 2008 was four years ago, Nadal is 11 years on pro tour and is going to be 26 in a few months, if he's not playing his best tennis now, when is he going to? When he's 29? Time is running out

Nadal's form has not dropped in my opinion.  He played a nice semi-final and a nice final.  He just ran into a guy who is playing better.

Also i think Nadal does not have that physical advantage any more.That's why Djokovic beat him after 5 sets with Murray.If Djokovic had the extra days rest,it would have been 4 sets or less.Djokovic is the fittest man on tour ATM.

[Richard Miller]

^^Yup, good point. Many people think a form is like some kind of suit, so a player wakes up in the morning and thinks "hm... which suit shall I wear today? 2008? 2009?" and that someone can "put on the best suit" at will.

Anyone can have a bad match or two, a bad tournament, but if your best form was last seen four or five years ago, that's not going to come back all of a sudden - there's a reason why it's been a while 

[Babblelot]

This is some funny s**t. Fed and Rafa fans discussing prime and form.

If Nole hadn't gone gluten free in 2011, we'd be having the same conversation today that we've been having for a few years now, because nothing else has changed: Rafa still beats Roger, Roger still owns the tour but for Rafa, Nole is about to pass out because it's above 70 degrees, and Murray hasn't gotten over the hump. The notion that Rafa is past his prime wouldn't be part of the discussion ...only Roger is past his prime because, yep, you guessed it, he's beating everyone but Rafa; in his prime,  you see, there wasn't a single player on tour Roger couldn't beat.

[FedFanForever]

Nadal has not had 11 years on the pro tour. If you look at his ATP activity, his first full year was 2005. That means 7 full years on the tour. Djokovic's first full year was 2006, so 6 full seasons for him. By contrast Federer's first full year was 2000, that gives him 12 full years on tour.

[Richard Miller]

Nadal has not had 11 years on the pro tour. If you look at his ATP activity, his first full year was 2005. That means 7 full years on the tour. Djokovic's first full year was 2006, so 6 full seasons for him. By contrast Federer's first full year was 2000, that gives him 12 full years on tour.

Almost 50 matches in 2004 according to ATP site, that's nothing to scoff at for an 18 year old. Most likely far better than any today's 18 year old.

[FedFanForever]

Nadal has not had 11 years on the pro tour. If you look at his ATP activity, his first full year was 2005. That means 7 full years on the tour. Djokovic's first full year was 2006, so 6 full seasons for him. By contrast Federer's first full year was 2000, that gives him 12 full years on tour.

Almost 50 matches in 2004 according to ATP site, that's nothing to scoff at for an 18 year old. Most likely far better than any today's 18 year old.

So Nadal has 8 full years on the ATP tour, that's a lot of mileage.

[sid]

Nadal Turned Pro in 2001
Djokovic Turned Pro in 2003
Murray Turned Pro in 2005
 

[FedFanForever]

Nadal Turned Pro in 2001
Djokovic Turned Pro in 2003
Murray Turned Pro in 2005

"turned pro" means you collected your first check from a Future/CH tournament, it doesn't mean from THAT point on you played a full pro schedule. Look up their respective ATP activity pages and you will see that the real first full year for them was:

Federer - 2000
Nadal - 2004
Djokovic - 2006
Murray - 2006

[Tennis4you]

Those are kind of interesting numbers as well. 

[Babblelot]

Those are kind of interesting numbers as well.

How are they interesting to you?

Just curious...

[FedFanForever]

It's interesting to know how much mileage these guys have on them, and the differences. Federer has played 1001 ATP matches already, that's huge.

[Babblelot]

It's interesting to know how much mileage these guys have on them, and the differences. Federer has played 1001 ATP matches already, that's huge.

OK, that's more informative 

Federer  1001   
Nadal    668   
Djokovic   512
Murray   441

[Tennis4you]

Those are kind of interesting numbers as well.

How are they interesting to you?

Just curious...

I think it is interesting to see how long they played a little on tour before they really got into it.  For example, Murray had just 1 year under his belt, that's impressive compared to everyone else at about 3 years.  I assume Murray started later in life than the other guys but I would need to look into that.

[Start da Game]

you all missed my point......nadal is still in his prime, no denying that......by saying that nadal is not playing at a level he used to, i am not making an excuse for his losses but rather making a case for him to make a strong comeback and turning the rivalry in his favour again.......i see rafa can hit back at nole.......

that's all i am suggesting and in no way want to discredit djoker.......he thoroughly deserves all this and there is no excuse for rafa to lose these many finals to him.......

one thing i would like to reinforce here is that this comparison of rafa's beatings with fed's is wrong because of two reasons.......

1. fed was never ahead in the entire rafa-fed rivalry and never looked like taking it to nadal, particularly at slams.......he scored couple of close wins on grass and that's it.......but nadal looks more promising in solving the puzzle ahead of him.......

2. fed is a talent oriented tennis player and nadal is a hardwork driven individual.......so in nadal's case it takes more time to recover from any setback......6 matches happened in a span of 3 months last year when djokovic found red hot form......nadal almost took him out in their 7th match this year after some thought in the off season and a few changes in his approach.......

so you can see the trend.......i think he will finally down djokovic at indian wells or miami, exactly the two events which served as the starting point of his fall from the top last year.......

[Richard Miller]

^^Nole said his focus is on Slams and Olympics now, particularly RG... so that will be the real test, not IW or Miami

[Start da Game]

^^Nole said his focus is on Slams and Olympics now, particularly RG... so that will be the real test, not IW or Miami

don't count on djokovic tanking if he finds nadal in the final of indian wells or miami.......he will fight till the last point because he knows the moment nadal tastes a win against him, he will be a different force to deal with.......so he would want to extend this streak as long as possible.......