Author Topic: Replace Federer with Djokovic from 2005-2008 . . .  (Read 653 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline pawan89

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 8497
  • Gender: Male
    • Onset of Chaos
Re: Replace Federer with Djokovic from 2005-2008 . . .
« Reply #20 on: May 07, 2013, 03:27:44 PM »
Nadal would most likely be the best at any time.
 
It would depend on which Djokovic he was playing too.
 
Djokovic 2.0 should be able to take some away from Nadal.

the problem with that assertion is that djokovic 2.0 is a result of facing nadal 0.5.......we all saw what happened when nadal regrouped in the 2012 clay season.......right?

as for this thread, nadal did not make his clay greatness beating just federer.........besides beating several other clay courters, he defeated djokovic everywhere on clay and prevented him from getting into another gear at a time when djokovic was on a real high off his first grandslam win........

hamburg '08, roland garros '08, montecarlo '09, rome '09, madrid '09 were all intense stuff and let me tell you nadal of 2011 would surely have lost hamburg 2008 and madrid 2009........

so let's not paint it as if he picked up his racket and started playing in 2011.......2008 was going to be a sensational year for him had nadal not confronted him repeatedly........   

2008 nadal hammered him on every surface including the fastest hardcourt of beijing........nadal was the reason why djokovic's peak got delayed by 2 years.......nadal defeated him so badly everywhere and left him dry by the end of 2009 clay season.......djokovic took 18 months to recover from that........

he messed with his rackets, messed with his serve and tried changing his diet........even though changing diet helped his cause, serbian media painted the whole episode as if gluten derailed his career........   

people forget past quite quickly........2008 nadal is an unforgettable phase in tennis history........


While I agree with your overall message about Nadal beating a well-established Djokovic in addition to Federer and many other players to establish his clay greatness, I don't quite agree that he "hammered" Djokovic into the ground and stunted his rise to dominance.

The record between them for 2008 was 4-2 Nadal. Fair enough Nadal had the upper hand. Both of Djokovic's wins: Cinicinnati (6-1 7-5) and Indian Wells (6-3 6-2) were 'comfortable' straight set wins. He already was able to comfortable handle Nadal in some places, particularly hard courts.

Of Nadal's 4 wins, two were straight set victories (RG:  6-4, 6-2, 7-6, and London: 7-6, 7-5) and the only one that comes remotely close to hammering, was his comfortable win in RG. The other two victories went the distance both times and were nowhere close to hammerings (Beijing Olympics 6-4 1-6 6-4, Hamburg: 7-5 2-6 6-2) and Djokovic still had dominant sets in between.

Just trying to make a point that he didn't hammer Djokovic into nothingness. If anything the fact that Djokovic was already able to push and stay on relatively even terms with Nadal helps Nadal's argument that he built his success on not just Federer but also a very capable Djokovic.