Rafa's Remarkable But Injury Blighted Slam Record

Starting at RG in 2008 when Nadal turned 22 and could be counted as a mature player his record in slams has been exemplary when he hasn't been injured.

2008 RG  Won beat Djokovic, beat Federer in final

2008 W Won beat Murray, beat Federer in final 

2008 US  Odd lost to Murray in semi's

2009 AO  Wonbeat Federer in final

2009 RG    Odd/injury Lost to Soderling

2009 W   Didn't play

2009 US   Lost to Del Potro

2010 AO   Retired injured against Murray

2010 RG   Won

2010 W    Won beat Murray in semi's

2010 US   Won beat Djokovic in final

2011 AO   lost to Ferrer

2011 RG   Won beat Murray, beat Federer in final

2011 W   beat Murray, lost to Djokovic in final

2011 US   beat Murray, lost to Djokovic in final

2012 AO   beat Federer, lost to Djokovic in final

2012 RG   Won beat Djokovic final

2012 W    Odd/injured lost to Rosol

2012 US   Didn't play

2013 AO   Didn't play

2013 RG   Won beat Djokovic in semi

2013 W    Odd/injured lost to Darcis

2013 US   Won beat Djokovic final

2014 AO   beat Federer, injured lost to Wawrinka in final

2014 RG   Won beat Murray, beat Djokovic in final

2014 W   Odd. lost to Kyrgios

2014 US   Didn't play

Of 27 slams played Nadal has won 11, lost injured or not played in 8, lost being questionably injured in 3, lost two "odd" matches and lost to Djokovic 3 times.

                      
                
            
    
      

To summarize - When Nadal enters and is fit he usually wins.

Djokovic's wins against Nadal at Wimbledon and the US in 2011 and the 2012 AO were stand out performances. In those tournaments Nadal still put out Federer and Murray twice on the way to defeat in the final.

Federer hasn't beaten Nadal in a slam since Wimbledon 2007 and has lost to Nadal 6 times since then.

Djokovic hasn't beaten Nadal in a slam since the 2012 AO  and has lost to him 4 times since then.

Murray beat Nadal with a retirement in the AO 2010 and has lost to him 5 times since then.

I think this is the closest anyone has got to kissing the arse of their favourite player.

The premise of this thread is this. Any Slam won since 2008 that doesn't have Nadal on the trophy is clearly asterisked with "Won by ........... at the expense of Nadal being 'Odd or Injured'

I have to say that more and more I am slowly getting fed up with tennis. I see the same thing repeated all over the place. Nadal never loses when fit. Federer only peaked from 2004-2007. Murray's career started circa June 2012. It's the same thing over and over again. I actually feel sorry for Djokovic in all of this as no-one has come forward with an excuse to his dip in form since January 2013.

But I don't actually blame fanboyism on this thread. The lack of youth coming through, courts staying the same and not offering variance, the same names at the top of the game. It's a rut. Nothing new or innovative is holding the interest of the tennis fan nowadays and threads like this expose that.

I feel like Sandra Bullock in Demolition Man in that ideological world when she quipped "What I wouldn't give for some action"

That's where I am with tennis.

How's the basement looking hawkeye? Have you left there yet   

Terrible article based on poor assumptions, rubbish analysis and completely incorrect conclusion.

Other than that..good stuff.

One of Hawkeyes best ever articles.

Draw your own conclusions from that.


Legend killer, this is exactly what I said when I stopped coming here. I'm only on now because I'm on holiday and it's raining. It's so tedious as a sport now. I used to argue about this with socal but he was excited about Novak so he couldn't agree, but the sport is in the deepest of ruts.

That's one reason why Rafa etc aren't getting beat up by young guns more and cause stupid articles like this to exist. Kyriakos should be what happens more often, not a freak result.

I hadn't realised that since 2010 - in 4 full years - Rafa has only won 1 Slam off clay.

Interesting stat, Hawkeye.   

legendkillarV2 wrote: I actually feel sorry for Djokovic in all of this as no-one has come forward with an excuse to his dip in form since January 2013.

As one of the few Djokovic fans on here, I feel it should perhaps be me offering this.

"Outside of 2011, this is probably about his normal level" seems rather uninspired as an excuse but it's my clearest thought on the matter.

Give me some time though, I'll try to come up with something more ridiculous better.

Where's socal when you need him?

"When Nadal enters and is fit he usually wins."

I was curious about this statement. Just to see how it how it holds up with the classic "Fed only wins when Nadal is not around"

To begin with, I'm dismissing the "fit" part. If Nadal enters a small, he's fit for it - as showed by the fact that if he's injured he's not entering the slam... Yes, he might get hurt during the event, but it's somehow part of the sport and bad luck.     

So, Nadal has entered 39 slams so far, winning 14 of them. Within the same 39 slams, Federer has won 15. So the more accurate and "irrefutable" summary should actually be "When Nadal enters, Federer usually wins it"   

(furthermore, it is no coincidence, just further proof: Fed - already lauded as a future great - only started to deliver at slam level...when Nadal started to enter slams!  )

Josiah Maiestas wrote:How's the basement looking hawkeye? Have you left there yet   

Thank-you for the concern. I am not in the basement but these are dark days for true tennis fans   

http://www.indiatimes.com/sports/tennis-and-badminton/rafael-nadal-injury-factfile-168835.html

Hawkeye, do you really have to write an "I love Nadal" article once a week. I think it's OK to do after a slam win or maybe a year end no 1, but your articles often add so little to the debate. At least it's a slight improvement on your thinly disguised weekly "I hate Murray" articles from days gone by.

If everyone wrote an article loving their favourite player once a week the board would be awash with dross.

Average article by hawkeye's standard even if I know that the sorrowful situation in which she is right now might have played a role in it. Cheerio.

bogbrush wrote:I hadn't realised that since 2010 - in 4 full years - Rafa has only won 1 Slam off clay.

Interesting stat, Hawkeye.   

So, off clay, Rafa has won less slams than Murray since 2010?

Wow.

Indeed.

It's not true that Hawkeye only brings statistics favourable to Nadal to the forum, today's she's alerted us to the fact that in the last 4 years Rafa off clay is behind Murray and neck and neck with Stan.

Danny_1982 wrote:

bogbrush wrote:I hadn't realised that since 2010 - in 4 full years - Rafa has only won 1 Slam off clay.

Interesting stat, Hawkeye.   

So, off clay, Rafa has won less slams than Murray since 2010?

Wow.

I'm not sure why 2010 is being used as a start date? But I will go with it   

Since 2010 (in 4 full years) Federer has only won one slam and that was on grass when Nadal went out to Rosol (   ) Remember? Fed laughed "Ha, ha ha" when it happened. Despite playing every slam since 2010 Federer hasn't won any slam on hard or clay. Since 2010 Nadal has beaten Federer at Wimbledon (grass) and twice at the AO (hard). Federer has never beaten Nadal in a slam during this time.

Since 2010 Murray has won his only two slams. At Wimbledon when Nadal went out to Darcis (   ) and at the US Open when Nadal didn't play (  ) Despite playing every clay slam since then Murray hasn't won any. Since 2010 Nadal has beaten Murray at Wimbledon (grass), the US Open (hard) and twice at RG (clay). Murray has never beaten Nadal during this time.

Federer and Murray have never been an obstacle to Nadal at slams during this time but Nadal has definitely been an obstacle to them. No wonder Federer laughed "Ha, ha, ha" when Nadal lost to Rosol at Wimbledon.

So, putting all the descriptive narrative and excuses to one side...

Rafa 1 non clay slam since 2010
Murray 2 non clay slams since 2010

Those are the correct figures, no? Question is, who will get to 2 non clay slams since 2010 first, Rafa or Wawrinka? Tough one.

Did he laugh? We're you there, or it was this something you dreamt up with Haddie and Wooffie at one of your "when shall we three meet again.." sessions?

How did he laugh again? Are you sure it wasn't 'he hee' or perhaps a subtle titter, or maybe a full on an evil 'wah hah hahhhh!"

bogbrush wrote:Did he laugh? We're you there, or it was this something you dreamt up with Haddie and Wooffie at one of your "when shall we three meet again.." sessions?

How did he laugh again? Are you sure it wasn't 'he hee' or perhaps a subtle titter, or maybe a full on an evil 'wah hah hahhhh!"

I reckon it was more of a Mr Burns style "Eeexxcelent" outburst whilst tapping the end of his fingers together whilst his hands were clasped.

bogbrush. Federer said himself that he couldn't help laughing as he was watching the Nadal/Rosol match. I can understand why   

Danny. The only descriptive narrative was about Federer and his reaction whilst watching Rosol beat his biggest rival   I have already talked about Murray's 2 slam wins when he didn't face Nadal and my illustrated chart shows how Nadal performed in all slams since 2008. Check it out and you will see the information you are interested in. ie what slams he won in the specific period you are interested in and how his loses were affected by injury. Notably this specific period also includes the 3 stand out losses to Djokovic      

Johnyjeep wrote:

I reckon it was more of a Mr Burns style "Eeexxcelent" outburst whilst tapping the end of his fingers together whilst his hands were clasped.

Maybe? But I imagine a more hysterical giggle. What a shame it wasn't filmed  

Henman Bill wrote:Hawkeye, do you really have to write an "I love Nadal" article once a week. I think it's OK to do after a slam win or maybe a year end no 1, but your articles often add so little to the debate. At least it's a slight improvement on your thinly disguised weekly "I hate Murray" articles from days gone by.

If everyone wrote an article loving their favourite player once a week the board would be awash with dross.

Most posters don't want the forum awash with dross. Not so sure HE feels that way.

Link HE?

Interesting article.

Being already well aware of the (unquestionably very impressive) number of Slam titles won by Nadal, I hardly needed to see them listed yet again.  So, no, that's not the bit I found interesting.

Instead ....what actually grabbed my attention was a roll-call of the many Slam defeats suffered by Nadal, some of the heaviest of which were at the hands of various very-low ranked players. These are just the sort of losses which any player of his status will prefer - understandably - to forget ; and to that end Rafa sure won't be sending a message of personal thanks to hawkeye for taking the time to remind us all.....

Three successive defeats at Wimbledon by players ranked outside the top 100 must be some sort of record, surely ....? One of them a wild card teenager.. And then the three losses at three successive Slam finals by the same player. Another unwanted streak. And of course the most unique of all for anyone ranked so highly - no title other than on clay ever successfully defended, including of course any Slam on HC or grass.

All players have many prominent failings and blots in their 'career copybook', some more unusual - or should I say "remarkable" - than others. I doubt that hawkeye's motive in penning the article was to highlight these failings. But it's what one might call the law of unintended consequences .............. 

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Henman Bill wrote:Hawkeye, do you really have to write an "I love Nadal" article once a week. I think it's OK to do after a slam win or maybe a year end no 1, but your articles often add so little to the debate. At least it's a slight improvement on your thinly disguised weekly "I hate Murray" articles from days gone by.

If everyone wrote an article loving their favourite player once a week the board would be awash with dross.

Most posters don't want the forum awash with dross. Not so sure HE feels that way.

"Dross"?   When the defending champion has just withdrawn from the US Open examining his record of injuries and withdrawels from slams could hardly be more pertinent.

LuvSports! wrote:Link HE?

Roger Federer has admitted he was 'laughing' as his archrival Rafael Nadal crashed out in the biggest upset of this year's men's singles - and says he is glad that big names can still be humbled by minnows.

Federer stressed that he was not mocking his Spanish rival but laughing at the audacity of Rosol's play, and said it was a positive thing that such shocks can still happen.

'This is not against Rafa but it was nice to see it's still possible,' said Federer.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-2167034/Wimbledon-2012-Lukas-Rosols-victory-Rafael-Nadal-Roger-Federer-laugh.html

  I'm not 100% certain Federer was being completely honest about his reasons for laughing...

I agree HE. A serious and thoughtful article would have been pertinent and welcome. But we got yours instead.

Dross was a bit harsh but it's the repetition and the quantity that makes it harsh. When I eventually take over and become the all powerful dictator of this forum I am introducing a rule that Hawkeye is only allowed to write 5 articles per year that mention Nadal or Murray.

bogbrush wrote:Did he laugh? We're you there, or it was this something you dreamt up with Haddie and Wooffie at one of your "when shall we three meet again.." sessions?

How did he laugh again? Are you sure it wasn't 'he hee' or perhaps a subtle titter, or maybe a full on an evil 'wah hah hahhhh!"

Hey you leave me out of it... I manage to get myself into my own trouble... stop making stories up about me BB

Fair enough, no harm intended.

HM Murdoch wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote: I actually feel sorry for Djokovic in all of this as no-one has come forward with an excuse to his dip in form since January 2013.

As one of the few Djokovic fans on here, I feel it should perhaps be me offering this.

"Outside of 2011, this is probably about his normal level" seems rather uninspired as an excuse but it's my clearest thought on the matter.

Give me some time though, I'll try to come up with something more ridiculous better.

Come on HMM, learn from HE, Try to find reasons why Djoko should be credited with 25 slams now.

I can help you

2007 USO, Federer cheated by winning the young predator with 2 tiebreaks, thats not acceptable for a veteran against a teenager.

2008 Wimbledon, Marat is Nole's childhood hero and hence he wants to gift a game on his retirement year.

2009 USO, ATP is now reconsidering Federer's Tweener as legal shot and hence a semifinal rematch or Del Po vs Djoko finals will be ordered soon

2010 USO, Djoko decided to gift a slam to his bunny before executing him mercilessly 7 times next year.

2011 FO, Do I even have to talk about this? we all know how Fabio Foginin cheated ATP and Djokovic by withdrawing and creating the greatest controversy of all time    

2012 FO, ahh Rain saved Rafa when Djoko was plundering everything on sight.

2012 Wim, Nole was still figuring out how by Maths Benny lost that match to Fed and hence lost focus on semis.

2012 USO, Ahh we all know how wind cheated Murray to his first title.

2013 FO, Oh Rafa showed no sportsmanship by claiming the lost point when he called Umpire for Djoko touching the net.

2013 Wim, Blame it on Del Po, suddenly came from nowhere and kept on playing a tennis match like a test match, and no gas was left for the finals.

2013 USO,Rafa cheated the tour by playing just 1 full season in 2 years and in comparison Nole was the only top 4 player to appear on all masters and slams and virtually had nothing left in the tank.

2014 AO, Bloody wawrinka didn't follow the script this time [actual script was to win 2 sets and lose the next 3], he cheated Nole's trust in him.

2014 FO, Rafa's form suggested he will bow out in the 2nd round, but he cheated everybody.

Danny_1982 wrote:

bogbrush wrote:I hadn't realised that since 2010 - in 4 full years - Rafa has only won 1 Slam off clay.

Interesting stat, Hawkeye.   

So, off clay, Rafa has won less slams than Murray since 2010?

Wow.

Now this is too much, HE already locked herself into her room after seeing this comment, you are a very rude person Danny   

All I can say is Nadal is yet to beat a fully fit Del Potro on Slam , he was injured in 2007 FO and 2011 Wimbledon, and even in that match Nadal only stole it by a whisker of winning 2 tie breaks, but we all know what fully fit Del Potro did to fully fit Rafa on 2009 USO.

Funny list. That said, he has been unlucky. I reckon injury has affected him in 8 out of those 27 slams, so to get to 14 slams despite that is remarkable. He's essentially had 1/3rd of his peak taken away from him. Without that, he would in all likelihood have the slam record.

IC, great effort on the Djoko excuses!

Do you want to take over as the main Djokovic cheerleader while JMDP is injured? I obviously need to go away and work on my game. 

invisiblecoolers. Why don't you do a complete slam record for Djokovic (and Federer) it would be interesting to see. I have shown how Nadal's results have been affected by injury not weather, mental weakness, off putting behavior by his opponant, losing a point in error etc. Del Potro is a sad case but has nothing to do with Nadal

lags72. Yes I deliberately drew attention to all Rafa's losses at slams. I wanted to highlight the pattern. I am shocked if you were not aware of his three loses to Djokovic and his strange losses at Wimbledon. They are constant conversation topics.

Some wanted to look at Nadal's slam results since 2010? This period includes the three stand out wins by Djokovic. Since the 2012 AO of the 11 slams Nadal could potentially have played he will have missed 3. Of the remaining 8 he has won 4, lost in the final injured in 1, and the other 3 are those odd/injury? losses at Wimbledon. More than any other player Nadal's slam record has been affected by injury. When fit his record is remarkable and his record against other slam winning players shows this.

Born Slippy wrote:Funny list. That said, he has been unlucky. I reckon injury has affected him in 8 out of those 27 slams, so to get to 14 slams despite that is remarkable. He's essentially had 1/3rd of his peak taken away from him. Without that, he would in all likelihood have the slam record.

Yes from the age of 25 to 28... he has been particularly blighted by injury. They are essentially the peak years. It also demonstrates great tenacity and mental strength to be able to take full advantage when he has been able to play. From what Nadal has said he found the loss to Wawrinka particularly hard to recover from mentally. He suffered an injury during the warm up to that slam final...

I think Rafa needs to reassess right now as a pattern is emerging.

Now I am no physical expert but it is common knowledge that Rafa has always been able to push himself to incredible physical feats to stay in points, turn them around and win them and likewise in slam matches over five sets. He has stood alone on that front. However, his body now can no longer take that beating and recover so readily. In recent years his career has been blighted by injury in one form or another and that tells me is body is crying enough. So where does Rafa go from here? Reign in the physical exertions and try to re-invent a new style of play? Not possible I think. Therefore by continuing in the only style he knows I would say it would be incredible (from here until his retirement) if he returns to full fitness that he won't break down again with another injury and so the cycle will continue. He needs to realise his body just cannot take the punishment it used to be able to take.

hawkeye : there is nothing "strange" about any of Rafa's losses at Wimbledon  - or indeed at any other of the non-clay Slams. And I was very well aware of them, rest assured. Rather, your article served as a reminder of just how relatively (I stress relatively) poor and skewed is his overall Slam record wrt his achievements at RG versus his achievements away from the red stuff.

I wouldn't go too heavy on the injury factor if I were you, simply because they are part & parcel of the life of any accomplished athlete. Some cope with injury better than others, and some are perhaps less fortunate than others. But..... as Jimmy Connors always said (no injury 'justifications' or coulda/shoulda/woulda from him!!) - and as repeated by many lesser mortals ever since - once you choose to step on to court, you've declared yourself fit to go, and to face whatever comes your way.

I always said he needed to reign in the clay season...he simply overplays from Mid March to early July...remember he's going deep most weeks. The effort kills him, as it would any player.

I actually think he would be relatively injury free had he paced his career better rather than chase everything on clay in the first halves of years. It's been his choice.

At the end of the day tennis history will find it hard to separate Federer and Nadal, they have both set remarkable achievements in their own ways. I don't see the point in trying to laud one over the other when both stand head and shoulders above the rest.

The most remarkable bit of all this lunancy/stupidity/wumming is the use of the word 'odd' as a bonefide reason for someone deleting any Rafa defeat from the history books.

Ahh we can't count that defeat. It's odd.

Another favourite was HE questioning the use of the start point as being 2010. Because how dare anyone use anything other than HE's own arbitrary starting point of 2008 at RG.

There are so many holes in this it would make a cheese grater look impermeable.

Very interesting points CC.

And of course there is the matter of the longer-term picture which in many ways is much more important than the here & now. Rafa has many, many years ahead of him, away from the constant grind of the Tour. He surely will not want his physical well-being to be a source of constant & debilitating problems in later life, purely for the sake of adding to his already stellar career achievements and causing permanent damage in the process .....??

hawkeye wrote:

Born Slippy wrote:Funny list. That said, he has been unlucky. I reckon injury has affected him in 8 out of those 27 slams, so to get to 14 slams despite that is remarkable. He's essentially had 1/3rd of his peak taken away from him. Without that, he would in all likelihood have the slam record.

Yes from the age of 25 to 28... he has been particularly blighted by injury. They are essentially the peak years. It also demonstrates great tenacity and mental strength to be able to take full advantage when he has been able to play. From what Nadal has said he found the loss to Wawrinka particularly hard to recover from mentally. He suffered an injury during the warm up to that slam final...

...and then decided to hide it for a set and half giving away no visible signs of discomfort or drop in performance whilst he was comprehensively outplayed.

Johnyjeep wrote:The most remarkable bit of all this lunancy/stupidity/wumming is the use of the word 'odd' as a bonefide reason for someone deleting any Rafa defeat from the history books.

Ahh we can't count that defeat. It's odd.

Another favourite was HE questioning the use of the start point as being 2010. Because how dare anyone use anything other than HE's own arbitrary starting point of 2008 at RG.

There are so many holes in this it would make a cheese grater look impermeable.

I think we could have safely let this be a suitable end to the whole thread ......   

By "odd", what HE actually means is he lost to someone other than Djokovic.

lydian wrote:I always said he needed to reign in the clay season...he simply overplays from Mid March to early July...remember he's going deep most weeks. The effort kills him, as it would any player.

Agassi has been a very notable critic of such play for a long time.

lydian wrote:I actually think he would be relatively injury free had he paced his career better rather than chase everything on clay in the first halves of years. It's been his choice.

It is very tough to do a what-if analysis. For example, if he played differently, could he have won more, won less, etc.?

lydian wrote:At the end of the day tennis history will find it hard to separate Federer and Nadal, they have both set remarkable achievements in their own ways. I don't see the point in trying to laud one over the other when both stand head and shoulders above the rest.

There is very little need to separate these two. They have arrived where they are following different career paths and have remarkable achievements individually. The desire for such artificial separation by fans causes the eternal GOAT debate and numbers get thrown around, h2hs analysed, sliced and diced, emotional states dissected on a couch, gamesmanship is put on the table, etc.

@HE... Nadal is not playing due to an injury. It does not diminish his achievements one iota. If the goal is re-state them, it has been done countless times in many fora. Instead of looking back, look forward, and see what it brings. Any other player winning a title does not reduce Nadal's in anyway.

It never ceases to amaze me just how much can be said  about one player
If the GOAT debate relied purely on how much good, bad, indifferent, plain nasty,  lies , accusations, assumptions  were said  about one man then Rafa would win it hands down. Every inch of his body from his thinning hair to the genetic foot problem has been discussed over and over.  Rafa has another injury he is out of the US Open as much to his disappointment as to his fans... plain and simple. If he never ever wins another slam off clay he has still broken more tennis records than ( apart from one other) the rest could waive a stick at.

Without clay Nadal only has 3 slams maybe 6-7 MS?

  Glad to see you can add up JM... I bet you wish you could do better eh   

Don't think he can HN , rafa has won 14 slams not 12.
Wimby twice. US twice. Aus once. 5 slams. Count it JM.

LuvSports! wrote:Don't think he can HN , rafa has won 14 slams not 12.
Wimby twice. US twice. Aus once. 5 slams. Count it JM.

Yes of course your right LS but I get so sick of reading his useless twoddle when it comes to Rafa.. he is one of those Im speaking of... never have so many had so much to say about so little. Rafa to me deserves so much better and there are times albeit I am an ardent fan of his.. Ill be glad when he retires if only to shut those up that despise him so and then realise what the game will sorely miss

Indeed, with 5 off-clay slams Nadal would be 11th on the all time Open Era list off that alone. But with Nadal it's put forward as a sleight on his tennis ability. Likewise his 8 non-clay Masters titles put him 7th on all time list alone and only 1 behind Murray. It's laughable to deride his achievements to be honest.