>> Agreed. Rafa has reached the highest peak form since Sampras.
>
>
>
> The greater the time difference between the eras, the harder it is
> to compare them. Comparing Federer vs Tilden is almost
> impossible.
Sure, but Hoad v Federer using Hoad's racket/technology? It's logical
Hoad would look better because we've seen Hoad perform using that stuff,
and we don't know how Fed would adapt to those tiny poor quality
rackets. It would then come down to pure tennis skills with zero help
from racket material/strings. Sure it's possible Fed would be better,
but absolutely not a given.
>
> Sampras and the current big 3, did not play in the same era, and
> the comparisons are not that easy either. Even for them, there
> are some issues.
>
> For example, current tour is more standardized, unified, surfaces
> are homogenized, ATP pts mean something, they're more reflective
> etc.
Yes, & all of this makes it easier for higher ranked players to win v
lesser players. There are no wildcards like vastly differing surfaces &
many styles of opponent to contend with. Everyone knows exactly what to
expect when Rafa steps on court v Djoker or Murray, & the surface makes
no difference today. I can't remember ever seeing a surprising point
between these guys - every point is exactly what I expected.
I don't think we can logically assume guys in this era playing a more 1
dimensional game (albeit at very high level) would just easily dominate
in an era that had more varied surfaces & opponents. Logically it has to
be harder to prepare for many different surface speeds & opponents.
>
> But even if the Sampras vs Federer/Nadal/Djokovic comparisons are
> challenging, the comparisons between the big 3 are easier due to
> them being contemporaries.
>
> Having said all that, why do you believe it was Rafa who achieved
> greatest peak since Sampras and not Djokovic?
I could be wrong about Djoker, but my instincts tell me Rafa's peak was
better than Djoker & Fed. Rafa has lost only 4 times to Djoker in slams
while beating him like 10 times. 2 of the losses were epic matches like
6 hr AO final where Rafa had an easy pt to lead 5-2 in 5th, & this yr's
Wimbledon semi was a match Rafa could have won in 4 had he won 3rd set
t/b. Also Rafa had 2 pretty easy wins v Djoker in USO finals, beaten
him 6 times at FO etc.
>
> Djokovic won most ATP pts in history, achieved NCYGS, elo ratings
> have him ahead of others, and even in that 2011 season, when
> tutor peaks coincided, he beat peak Nadal half a dozen time in MS
> series finals, and in Wim, USO and AO finals. It's just one year,
> but it's long for a peak level.
Sure, & all of this makes me feel Djoker's peak may have been better
than Fed's.
It's not easy as we're talking about results v absolute peak form. I'd
like Djoker's claims a lot more if he beat Rafa in all 3 of their USO
finals rather than just 1. That's Djoker's best surface by far & those
losses tell me a lot.
>
> I say again, Sampras had a different approach in a differently
> organized tour, he was a slam player so any elo will be
> unfavorable to him, so we might as well ignore him, but these big
> 3 played in the same era, and they're totally comparable. I focus
> only on them.
Yes, that's the sensible way to approach it. Sampras & Mac did not play
in an era where the style was the same on all surfaces. If they did
they would have had far more success as you just use cookie cutter
approach everywhere you go & win in the end because you're better.
>
>
> Look at the top 5, their respective overall peaks.
>
> 1 Djokovic 01-02-2016, 2619
> 2 Borg 07-07-1980, 2604
> 3 McEnroe 08-04-1985, 2574
> 4 Nadal 09-09-2013, 2544
> 5 Federer 05-03-2007, 2540
>
> Nadal is ahead of Federer by a whisker, but not ahead of Djokovic.
>
>
> Best scores on single surface and overall and that comparison?
>
> 1. Clay, Nadal 24-02-2014 2664
> 2. Hard, Djokovic 01-08-2016 2662
> 3. Carpet, McEnroe 08-04-1985 2639
> 4. Overall, Djokovic 01-02-2016, 2619
> 5. Grass, Federer 16-06-2008, 2499
>
> That's interesting to see.
> And it's not wrong imo.
>
> Djokovic in 2015-16 was as dominant on hard virtually to the same
> level Nadal has been on clay during his best there.
Maybe, but that makes those 2 4-set losses in USO finals valuable
analysis tool.
>
>
> It's just that Nadal had up to 10 similar seasons, which is mind
> boggling. But as for level achieved? Pretty similar, almost
> identical.
>
> How is winning AO, USO, YEC, Indian Wells, Miami, Shanghai and
> Paris, with finals in Montreal and Cincinnati, not similar to
> winning FO, Monte Carlo, Barcelona, and Madrid/Rome.
But we don't see Djoker beating Rafa in 2 routine FO finals. Indeed the
h2h just at FO is 6-1 to Rafa, 2-0 in FO finals.
>
>
> In fact, it's more impressive within a context of a single season.
> Djokovic had some lesser losses, e.g. Karlovic in Doha ATP 250,
> that deceased his elo, Nadal's clay season was too short for him
> to even play ATP 250s.
>
> So I think, Djokovic's hard peak, it's very similar to Nadal's
> clay peak. Nadal's achievements are greater as he repeated and
> repeats near-peak performances almost every year, which is itself
> impressive on another level.
>
> But as for their very best, reaching almost peak invincibility on
> their best surfaces, they're similar.
In terms of results maybe, but if Djoker was as good on hard as Rafa was
on clay he'd have shut Rafa out in USO finals. That's the ultimate test
of hardcourt greatness - USO finals. Djoker has lost 5 of those to 3
different players - ouch. That's the same as Lendl. Now if he won all
of those or just lost 1 final I'd be firmly in his camp. That's too
many losses at the ultimate level in this game. The greats have to have
some aura of invincibility like Borg at FO/Wim (11-1 in finals), Sampras
at Wimbledon (7-0) etc
>
> As for overall, Nadal had impressive runs in 2008-09, 2010-11 and
> 2013 and maybe 2017.
>
> Respect for 2008-09.
>
> Howeever that which is his peak on paper, in terms of silverware
> won, FO, Wim, USO, won in 2010, he won against lesser opposition,
> Soderling, Berdych and pre-peak Djokovic.
>
> When he reached back to back FO-Wim-USO finals in 2011 he was
> crushed in two of those.
>
> Respect for 2013 again, but losing in Wim R1 negates the year a bit.
>
> 2017, losing AO to Fed and Wim to Muller, winning FO and winking
> USO without beating top 10 guys, that's not peak.
>
>
>
>
> So his peak in terms of silverware is 2010, part of his 2010-11
> season, where he was clearly dominated by Djokovic, everywhere,
> other than FO. Even in clay tune ups.
>
> So in terms of peak play you can only go by 2008-09 run. Nothing
> else is left.
>
> Is that so much more better level, subjectively, than the Djokovic
> of 2011 or 2015-16?
>
> Pehraps? But like I said, it appears to be subjective. Nadal had
> the luxury of having a pigeon in that season (similar to Djokovic
> having the same in 2011).
>
>
> So it does appear that the greatest peak ever has been Djokovic in
> 2015-16.
>
I look at 1995 & I see Agassi won AO over Sampras in the final, & then
won 4 hardcourt tune-ups leading up to USO v Sampras again. Even so
everyone knew Sampras would rise to his best & beat him, & that's what
happened. On paper/'silverware' you could make a case for Agassi in
1995, but Sampras was at his supreme best at Wim/USO.
I just think Rafa's best 'beast form' wouldn't lose a 6 hour AO final &
this yr's marathon Wimbledon semi to Djoker. I could be wrong, but
that's my assessment based on watching these guys over 10+ yrs.
Put it this way - if I was forced to bet my life on a tennis match I
would have to take peak 'beast form' Rafa over Fed or Djoker.