Djokovic IS still the #1 player despite his recent run

First topic message reminder :

Although Nadal is leading the race (and could widen the gap further today) and it could be argued he has been the best player since returning to the tour. The problem with this analysis is it doesn't reflect the 52 week nature of the rankings system, where a player needs to show consistency and remain healthy to compete on the tour week in week out.

After all if we look at the recent slams;
US open '12: Nadal (withdrawn due to injury), Djokovic (Finalist)
Aus open '13: Nadal (withdrawn due to injury), Djokovic (winner)
French open '13: Nadal (winner), Djokovic (semi-finalist)
Wimbledon '13: Nadal (tanked first round), Djokovic (Finalist)

So what does everyone think? Do you agree we should go with who we FEEL is the top player (Nadal seems to be the flavour of the month, with his career best hard court run) or go with the rankings system. I feel the rankings do not lie, while I appreciate Nadal may well soon overhaul Djokovic

[quote="emancipator"][quote="banbrotam"]

Sorry missed the earlier part, I was too flabbergasted with you thinking that Murray is some kind of outsider. Wasn't you the one who thought Rafa was going to sweep all before them at Wimby?

emancipator wrote:What a bizarre post. How can you compare Murray 2009 to Rafa 2013

Nadal's knees. Nadal's slam defeats, away from clay. Murray's new found Slam belief

emancipator wrote:What more does Rafa have to do put himself above Murray in the favourites' stakes?

Have more than zero slams since 2010, away from the dirt. Quite a significant omission, given that the way you put it - it looks like he's won the last six, rather than lost them  


But of course, you are correct

No it wasn't me. I wasn't on the board during that period.

Nadal's knees look to be in great shape. He's played (and won) more matches than anyone on tour since his return.

And Murray has won just one of the last 10 HC slams - the won in which Rafa was absent   (oh look I too can post emoticons)

 

emancipator - of course I'm right, I wouldn't be the emancipator if I weren't always right.  

We're talking about non-clay slams - which Murray has two of the current four, to Rafa's nil of the last six he entered

It's a simple comparison. Please keep up.

banbrotam wrote:We're talking about non-clay slams - which Murray has two of the current four, to Rafa's nil of the last six he entered

It's a simple comparison. Please keep up.

Why should the discussion centre around non-clay slams. Last I heard, the USO is played on HC, not grass. Do try to keep up.

Banbrotam, I agree with you that just because Nadal just won 2 successive hardcourt masters does not make him unbeatable at the US Open.

However, I don't think you should over-emphasise his lack of hardcourt slam titles for more nearly 3 years as a reason he won't win this time. He was in the final of the last 2 he played!

banbrotam wrote:

socal1976 wrote:But it is quite clear that Nadal is the best player in the world right now.

If he wins the US, then yes. Otherwise the jury's out.

I continue to be puzzled by this great celebration of a player who hasn't won a slam away from clay for 3 years

Yes, Nadal looks dangerous - but most of those who made the same optimistic mistake before Wimby are doing it again

It's not as though he's dominating everyone, say in straight sets, 2 and 2. If Isner can take him to two tie breaks over 3 sets then over seven rounds of 5 sets Rafa has many dangers to overcome

Rafa against any of the hard hitters in R16, will be a harder match for him as opposed to his two other Top 3 rivals. Simply because it's new territory for Rafa since his shock Wimby defeats

Well lets remember that Isner has been on a real hot streak with three straight top ten wins and playing on a lightening quick hardcourt. I don't look simply on the results in my analysis banbro. I agree that Murray and Djoko have established themselves as the better and more natural hardcourt players. But if you look at current form than Nadal has to be the favorite going into the open with 3 straight hardcourt masters victories. Additionally, part of my analysis is the marked improvement Nadal has made tactically and technically on a hardcourt. I have never seen Nadal postion himself so aggressively and blast winners on the return. He is playing remarkable first strike tennis contrary to his past matches on hardcourt. I don't put as much credence in his lengthy slump on the hardcourt because during that period he lost several major finals to Novak who was playing at a historic level, many of those losses like AO 2012 and IW and Miami in 2011 were by the tightest margins as well.

At this point I would put my favorites for the open as follows

1. Nadal
2. Murray
3. Djokovic

The last time Rafa and Murray met at a HC slam, Nadal won. Murray has improved from then. Who knows what will happen? But bantobram, you must clearly see that you are twisting stats to try and fit what you want to see. Rafa's failure to win HC slams the last time he competed also all tool part in the era of Djokovic mark II- the anti Rafa and he was solely the reason Rafa didn't win them. Though in Aus 2011 Rafa somehow conspired to lose to Ferrer which is bemusing.

ChequeredJersey wrote:The last time Rafa and Murray met at a HC slam, Nadal won. Murray has improved from then. Who knows what will happen? But bantobram, you must clearly see that you are twisting stats to try and fit what you want to see. Rafa's failure to win HC slams the last time he competed also all tool part in the era of Djokovic mark II- the anti Rafa and he was solely the reason Rafa didn't win them. Though in Aus 2011 Rafa somehow conspired to lose to Ferrer which is bemusing.

He did have a leg injury then as well as he pulled out of Dubai and didn't play competively again in 2011 till IW.

ChequeredJersey wrote:The last time Rafa and Murray met at a HC slam, Nadal won. Murray has improved from then. Who knows what will happen?

Precisely. No way to judge it. Rafa is in better form so deserves to be more of a favourite... But in terms of how they match up nowadays, god knows!

I just hope they meet so we get some answers. I hope they draw each other and both get to the semis.

banbrotam wrote:

socal1976 wrote:But it is quite clear that Nadal is the best player in the world right now.

If he wins the US, then yes. Otherwise the jury's out.

I continue to be puzzled by this great celebration of a player who hasn't won a slam away from clay for 3 years

Yes, Nadal looks dangerous - but most of those who made the same optimistic mistake before Wimby are doing it again

It's not as though he's dominating everyone, say in straight sets, 2 and 2. If Isner can take him to two tie breaks over 3 sets then over seven rounds of 5 sets Rafa has many dangers to overcome

Rafa against any of the hard hitters in R16, will be a harder match for him as opposed to his two other Top 3 rivals. Simply because it's new territory for Rafa since his shock Wimby defeats

What the hell.  You do know you're talking about Rafael Nadal - not David Ferrer? There are dangers to Nadal everywhere just as there have been and will be for any player in the field. I don;t know why you keep denigrating his win over Isner - a player whose serve can be untouchable when he gets into his serving rhythm. Even if it wasn't that impressive, it's merely a match-up issue at worst. I mean, Isner has taken Nadal to 5 difficult sets at Roland Garros of all places.

Your Wimbledon comparison is rather irrelevant for the simple reason Nadal is heading into the US Open in much better shape than he did at Wimbledon where he had next to no grass preparation. Would the hard hitters you're talking about include players like Berdych who he owns, unlike a certain Murray who doesn't quite enjoy the match-up? Who are these hard hitters that would be harder matches for him?

banbrotam wrote:This is getting hilarious. The same naive optimism is occurring now like it did 2 months ago - it's like groundhog day.

So Rafa is unstoppable following a tie break win over John Isner and close match over Novak at Montreal and of course his Wimbledon, er, performance?

Could you imagine the stick the likes myself and CC would have got, in 2009, we'd stated the same about Murray and at least he actually reached the previous Slam SF

Until Rafa proves himself away from the dirt, over five sets, he is 3rd favourite behind Novak and Andy and I'm sure he'd agree

I'm suspicious of his inability to beat a hard hitter over five sets and the toll than might take. As people were always fond of reminding us Murray watchers, slams are different.

And Rafa hasn't won a non clay one for three years

This is an even more absurd post. You're comparing Murray of 2009 with Nadal of 2013. 
You think he still has to prove himself to you on HC - never mind he's made 3 finals of the last 4 HC slams he's played, winning 1. And the small matter of his current HC winning run. There are no guarantees and everyone is entitled to their opinion about who's favourite for whatever reason but your attempt to brow-beat people into accepting your view has some really absurd rationalizations. You think Murray is a bigger favourite: no biggie. Why not accept those with a different opinion rather than make it out like Murray was just made favourite for Roland Garros? 

Janowicz for the Open. You heard it here first.

spdocoffee wrote:Janowicz for the Open. You heard it here first.

That would surprise me. I hope you are placing a bet on that, you'll be rich!

If Nadal does win it wont count anyway what with the ATP rushing in blue clay for this seasons north american swing