Who has the better grass court resume?

Nadal


Wimbledon Titles: 2
Finals: 3
SF: 0
Other Titles: 1
W/L %: 77.3%

Djokovic

Wimbledon Titles: 3
Finals: 1
SF: 3
Other Titles: 0
W/L %: 81.2%

Murray

Wimbledon Titles: 2
Finals: 1
SF: 4
Other Titles: 6
W/L %: 85.7%

Nadal. He beat peak Federer and destroyed Murray three times at Wimbledon

Nadal has the better record

But for me, since 2002, Murray is the second best on grass after Roger

Jermaine has the better economics degree, though

Surely Nadal has the worst record? Ignoring everything else, as Jermaine has taught us, making 5 finals and only winning 2 is worse than making three finals and winning 2 ;-)?

It's close between Nadal and Djokovic - I'd give the edge to Rafa.

Overall I think Rafa is a more natural grass courter than Djokovic but MUrray is more of a natural talent than either of them on grass - but his resume is still the weakest.

In terms of resume:
Nadal
Djokovic
Murray

In terms of talent on grass:
Murray
Nadal
Djokovic

I was thinking about this before the final - would a win for Andy mean he leapfrogged Rafa in terms of grass court pedigree with his Queen's titles being the tiebreaker? I really talked myself out of it because Rafa was never that serious at Queen's - he just wanted a few warm-up matches. But I think given the quality of the other players Andy has faced at Queens (Tsonga & Cilic in particular) and the back-to-back wins against Djokovic and Federer for the Olympic Gold, I would put Andy above Rafa.

Djokovic's had to beat a previous multi-Wimbledon winner for all 3 of his Wimbledon titles, so I've got to put him higher than the other 2.

The ATP tweeted that Murray has won 12 matches the grass season in 4 of the last 5 years:
2012 12-2
2013 12-0
2015 12-1
2016 12-0
Not too shabby! Those 48 wins help explain how he got to 100 wins on grass when no-one else bar Federer and Hewitt have got near it.

How does Nadal's resume top Novak's?

Personally, I think Rafa comes third here. The other two are pretty even, with Novak's extra slam being balanced by Murray's success elsewhere and greater consistency.

But it's a fair point that Rafa has beaten Murray three times at W.

Peak for peak I would never fancy Murray to beat Rafa at W.

But I'd probably fancy Djokovic to beat Rafa.

And I'd fancy Murray to beat Djokovic.

Funny thing - matchups

I doubt peak for peak Djoko is going to beat Nadal on grass. Look at Nadal during 2008 Wimbledon and watch his footwork. To me, both he and Fed have the best footwork on grass; they hardly slip or fall. The 2008 Nadal had lethal FH and BH, making him very tough to beat which was why he beat Fed at Wimbledon that year. Nadal tended to be more aggressive on grass in those days(2007-2010) so he did beat Murray thrice and Djoko twice on grass.

Sadly, after his numerous injuries, his game on grass has deteriorated and he is never the same again on grass. I think Murray now is a better grass court player than Djoko and Nadal but he had the misfortune of meeting and losing to Fed at Wimbledon twice(2012, 2015). Had he won the 2012 title, there wont be doubts that he is the best grass court player among the three.

1) Murray
2) Djoko
3) Nadal

Murray > Nadal and about on a par with Novak

Born Slippy wrote:How does Nadal's resume top Novak's?

Personally, I think Rafa comes third here. The other two are pretty even, with Novak's extra slam being balanced by Murray's success elsewhere and greater consistency.

Totally agree BS, Rafa has been poor on grass really since he managed to get to the final in 2011. Rafa is a clear third. And there is very little between Andy and Novak in terms of resume. Andy is a more natural grass courter, but both are better fit to grass than Rafa.

Ok, fair enough, having thought about - you're both right - Rafa's resume is the worst.

However, I do think he is a more natural grass courter and more talented on that surface than Djokovic and I think BLB may be right in thinking peak Rafa beats peak Djokovic on this surface.

What Nadal does have going for him is that win over Feds in 08, when Feds was in his prime or very close to it. Considering Feds is at worst the second best grass court player of all time, that win is a bigger single win than anything Murray or Djokovic has achieved.

However, Nadal also has by far the most damaging losses on grass, having lost three times to ordinary players, and once to a teenage Kyrgios, a better version of which was demolished by Murray this year. The problem with Nadal's grass court record is how much it fell off a cliff post 2011, and for me that has to count against him. Given he has fewer slams than Djokovic and the same as Murray (with far fewer titles and a much less good win %), he has to rank below the other two for me. Yes good H2H against Murray, but you could certainly argue that was peak Nadal vs pre-peak Murray (Murray's best years on grass being 2012 and after). Certainly don't feel the win in 08 is particularly relevant to this discussion.

Murray vs Djokovic is tougher. In Murray's favour is more prowess outside the slams (OG, a record number of Queens titles), and a better win %. The H2H may be more relevant here (both closer to their peak certainly, Djokovic's peak on grass being - on evidence - 2011-2015) too. In Djokovic's favour is the fact he's won 3 wimbledon titles to Murray's 2. Murray also has the slightly better consistency, having reached quarters every year since 2008, and some excellent performances before that (beating Roddick when he was near his peak, leading Nalbandian before running out of steam, etc.).

I have said before that slams should be the first port of call in such discussions, and to me that gives Djokovic the very narrowest of edges. IF Murray could retain his title next year he'd leapfrog him fairly comfortably IMO.

Rafael Nadal Wimbledon

Aged 20: 2006 Runner up beaten by Federer 0–6, 6–7, 7–6, 3–6
Aged 21: 2007 Runner up beaten by Federer 6–7, 6–4, 6–7, 6–2, 2–6
Aged 22: 2008 Winner beats Federer 6–4, 6–4, 6–7, 6–7, 9–7 (Federer was nearly 27 at time).
Aged 23: 2009  Absent.  Injured.
Aged 24: 2010 Winner beats Berdych in straight sets in final.  Berdych had beaten Federer in four sets in quarter final & Djokovic in straight sets in semi-final.
Aged 25: 2011 beaten by Djokovic Mk II 4–6, 1–6, 6–1, 3–6
... injured during 2012 - Nadal never the same again.

Hence it can be argued that Nadal peaking 22 to 24 years became the grass GOAT.  Djokovic Mk II didn't consolidate his 2011 victory in 2012 nor 2013 suggesting he is not the grass GOAT.

Without injury Nadal would have likely broken every Wimbledon record known to mankind.

Borg won his first Wimbledon aged 20 but didn't have a peak Federer to contend with.  Borg won the next four Wimbledons before losing to a 22 year old McEnroe in 1981 aged 26.

Federer never had a major injury during his career so his performance level was smoother over the years.  He did suffer from mononucleosis during the first half of 2008 and he suffered a back problem towards the end of 2008.  So it could be argued that Federer 2008 at Wimbledon was a bit below par enabling Nadal to win. ...  It could be argued then from 2008 onward Federer suffered a small drop in performance level due to issues associated with mononucleosis and recurring back problems.

Born Slippy wrote:Surely Nadal has the worst record? Ignoring everything else, as Jermaine has taught us, making 5 finals and only winning 2 is worse than making three finals and winning 2 ;-)?

Nice one!

Murray's record outside Wimbledon shouldn't be accorded that much relevance in comparison with Rafa and Nole. He often entered Queens week in far better shape than Rafa who in his peak years, always entered Queens/Halle week after an all-conquering clay season and winning RG and was likely behind in his grass season preparation. To a lesser extent, the same holds true for Djokovic. After the clay seasons, Murray has simply put more effort into Queens than the other 2 which at the very least partly explains his better grass record outside Wimbledon. It would be misleading to use that as definitive evidence of his superior prowess.

I'd rank it Djokovic > Rafa = Murray

Djokovic's 3 titles puts him ahead of other 2 quite simply. He'd be counting his 4th if the exertions of his winning 4 consecutive slams didn't finally take their toll and for that, Murray is the lucky beneficiary. Nadal's abject form and baffling mental vulnerability over the last 5 or so years has done his legacy here some serious damage. I still won't put him behind Murray until Murray wins his 3rd cos Murray's level at Wimbledon hasn't exceeded Nadal's peak level.

mthierry wrote:Murray's record outside Wimbledon shouldn't be accorded that much relevance in comparison with Rafa and Nole. He often entered Queens week in far better shape than Rafa who in his peak years, always entered Queens/Halle week after an all-conquering clay season and winning RG and was likely behind in his grass season preparation. To a lesser extent, the same holds true for Djokovic. After the clay seasons, Murray has simply put more effort into Queens than the other 2 which at the very least partly explains his better grass record outside Wimbledon. It would be misleading to use that as definitive evidence of his superior prowess.

I'd rank it Djokovic > Rafa = Murray

Djokovic's 3 titles puts him ahead of other 2 quite simply. He'd be counting his 4th if the exertions of his winning 4 consecutive slams didn't finally take their toll and for that, Murray is the lucky beneficiary. Nadal's abject form and baffling mental vulnerability over the last 5 or so years has done his legacy here some serious damage. I still won't put him behind Murray until Murray wins his 3rd cos Murray's level at Wimbledon hasn't exceeded Nadal's peak level.

I like this post although I would put Murray ahead of Rafa because of the last 5 years where he bombed out regularly. Also do agree that Novak didn't look like himself this wimby and that the mental and physical toll of going 4 in a row and getting the French would result in a natural drop off at some point. He never looked very good or sharp since that RG final.

Nore Staat wrote:Rafael Nadal Wimbledon

Without injury Nadal would have likely broken every Wimbledon record known to mankind.

I'm feel the need to splutter and cough with outrage at this point.

Very good question - they are all pretty close and I can see reasonable arguments for ordering them pretty much in any order.

I personally would probably go Djokovic > Murray > Nadal.

Djokovic has three titles and has decent results behind it, so that puts him ahead for me.  Murray/Nadal are neck-and-neck for me.  Same number of W titles and Rafa more finals, but Andy sort of makes up for it in smaller tournaments, and with overall better Wimbledon consistency.

Nadal hasn't been the same grass player since the knee issues so it's a moot discussion. Up to 2010/11 he was on course to have a stellar grass career but since it's been woeful because he's lost confidence in bending low on grass.

Murray seems a more natural grass player to me...so I'd put him ahead. If you add up ATP points won (assume Queens = 6 X 500 for Murray) then Murray is ahead I think anyway although it's close with Djoko...haven't done the actual maths.

Djokovic > Murray > Nadal.

Djokovic has more Wimbledons so the better resume, to count Murrays Queens titles against him is a bit unfair as he hasn't played grass warm ups for a while.

Murray ahead of Nadal by virtue of Olympic gold and all his Queens titles. Seeing as they are tied on slams we have to look below.

I will say that Nadal probably had the best level on grass, but the stats don't back him up. Plus, he's awful on it now.

I agree with those that say 3 > 2=2.

But we need also to consider:

Nadal Mk I (pre-2012 Greek God from the loins of Zeus version) >> Nadal Mk 0.5 (Clapped-outicus wobbly knees version)
Djokovic Mk II > Djokovic Mk I
Murray Mk Lendl > Murray Mk I (mothers boy version)

Amazing actually how close Novak and Andy's win loss records are at Wimbledon:

Novak: 54-9
Andy: 53-9

Peak for peak, Djokovic and Rafa are in a totally different league to Murray no matter how much the Brits try to twist facts to fit him into the "Big 4".

ShankyCricket wrote:Peak for peak, Djokovic and Rafa are in a totally different league to Murray no matter how much the Brits try to twist facts to fit him into the "Big 4".

There is no big four in tennis currently. Only the big two - Djokovic and Murray. 2016 so far has Djoko on teo slam wins and a second round exit and Murray on one slam win and appearance in all three slam finals.

This is a very difficult one to answer. you could argue Djokovic because in his 3 Wimbledon finals he had to beat Federer twice and Nadal in the other one. Also, when you say no other titles for Novak it is important to remember that he has only played in Queens a couple of times, in fact I think the last time he played there was about 6 years ago??? He rarely ever plays any warmup tournament on grass. Who is to say he wouldn't have won Queens had he played during 2011 and 2015 during his golden runs. Of course nobody can answer that question but the fact he doesn't play a warm up tournament and that needs to be taken into account

I believe Murray is the most natural grass court player of the three but himself and djokovic have only met in that one Wimbledon final. My personal belief is tennis in the Olympics is a joke and shouldn't be there and that holds no weight in comparison to slam meetings. Also, I think that was a best of 3 set match that djokovic and murray played in the Olympics but I could be wrong. Murray also has the huge advantage of the home crowd at Wimbledon every year. Don't underestimate how important that is in helping a player knowing the whole crowd is behind you !!

In terms of Nadal, he won two wimbledons and one was against a prime Federer. Not only that but he was very close to getting the better of Roger in 2007, it went 5 sets. Nadal also beat Murray in all of their Wimbledon meetings and a few of them were in straight sets and very comfortable wins. I was actually surprised that Nadal used to handle murray with such ease at Wimbledon as Murray always seemed the most natural on the grass.

Ultimately its very hard to choose between them, the fall of Nadal at Wimbledon in recent years is a bit of a mystery but when he was at his peak, I would probably have favoured him slightly over the others.

However for me the most Wimbledon titles wins the day as its the biggest tournament and Djokovic has won 3 of them, all against Federer and Nadal. It is hard to imagine if Djokovic had played queens every year that he would not at least won a couple of those. We will never know but I suspect he would have won a couple at the very least.

Murray is the most natural on grass but his resume for me falls slightly behind (for now). Best to judge at the end of their careers, I think Murray may win another Wimbledon yet and if he does that could change the conversation. The big question for me is and a big asterisk is why could he never beat nadal on centre court???

If Nadal is to play Murray on grass now, I've no doubt that Murray would win. However, peak for peak, I think Nadal is still slightly better than Murray.

Most natural on grass? I dont know what that means, for In terms of movements, I would rate a peak Nadal a better mover or even best mover among the three on grass - speed, balance and footwork. Skills? They all have great skills to play on grass even though they dont S&V ( or just S&V as a surprise tactic). Perhaps Murray has a better slice than the other two.

Nadal beat Murray at Wimbledon because 1) he overpowered Murray in 2008 when Murray wasnt the same player that he is now on grass; 2) he outsmarted Murray in that Wimbledon 2010 SF even though Murray was already very competent on grass having won a title at Queens; and 3) Murray wasn't playing well in that 2011 SF and Nadal was playing slightly better than him.

Belovedluckyboy wrote:If Nadal is to play Murray on grass now, I've no doubt that Murray would win.  However, peak for peak, I think Nadal is still slightly better than Murray.

Most natural on grass? I dont know what that means, for In terms of movements, I would rate a peak Nadal a better mover or even best mover among the three on grass - speed, balance and footwork.  Skills? They all have great skills to play on grass even though they dont S&V ( or just S&V as a surprise tactic). Perhaps Murray has a better slice than the other two.

Nadal beat Murray at Wimbledon because 1) he overpowered Murray in 2008 when Murray wasnt the same player that he is now on grass; 2) he outsmarted Murray in that Wimbledon 2010 SF even though Murray was already very competent on grass having won a title at Queens; and 3) Murray wasn't playing well in that 2011 SF and Nadal was playing slightly better than him.

Yeah for me the 2011 loss by Murray was disappointing because he really underperformed and you can't claim that he was far off his best level in 2011 for Murray. I think when people talk about natural grass courter I am not really talking movement. I just think where Murray likes the ball is lower in his strike zone because of the differences between the two guys FHs. Also court positioning Nadal is naturally a guy who likes to step back and take a big swing and cut at the ball so he likes a little more time on his shots. Where Murray is more comfortable taking it early and redirecting pace.