Coric 18 versus Nadal 18...who would win?

Ye haah and they didn't let me forget it for a while

Tenez wrote:Are yuo saying only one poster is serious about tennis on v2?

I thought they were  undercover v2-ers, too
HM - Murdoch
BS - Born Slippy
SL - Sports Lover
TB - now, couldn't work that one out

Haha nah it was joke names.

HM - Holding my groin.
BS - Babestation XD
SL - can't remember this one.
TB - The Bulge (a nickname we made up for him)

noleisthebest wrote:

summerblues wrote:Whether or not a player is clean is entirely irrelevant for this discussion.

Technically speaking yes, as both Nadal and Coric are obvious steroid users.

It is just irrelevant, period.  Irrespective of whether or not this player or that may be doping.

When a doped athlete (say Armstrong) performs well, it is much simpler to just say "he performs well (but it is because of his doping)" than to say "he does not perform well" and really mean something like "after I adjust his doped performance to what it would be without doping, it is not that good".  You are doing the latter, which leads to childish discussions.

SB, is it complicated to create an xl tables here....ideally a live table (auto-updating)....I am working on something fun which I would like to insert here.


I will have a look but as you have some experience already, it woudl be welcome. Cheers

I have no idea about auto-updating.

I only create static tables and I normally do it by creating a spreadsheet in which I enter the data in various cells, also the appropriate formatting characters, then concatenate the whole thing to a one string, and then just copy and paste the string in here.

It is a touch painful to do, and there may be better ways to do it.

Ok. Thanks....

Tenez wrote:

Kim Jong-Un wrote:

Tenez wrote:

Kim Jong-Un wrote:Why only speculation on these comparisons Nadal, but not for Federer or any other player ?
You didn't even answer my question for either player clearly, do you think Kokki would be able to beat Nadal or Federer in Rome 2006 ?

It's not difficult to understand. Federer on a good day could handle anyone anywhere...including Nadal as remember fed had 2 MPs on this Rome final....even crushing Nadal 62 in teh 4th set. So the issue Fed had v Nadal was essentialy a fitness, never say die attitude Nadal had. He was the only one who coudl run as much then.....nowadays all those youngsters can.

What's bizarre is that you still cannot see the main obvious points. Those new guys can run as much and as long as your man....but they can do more with the ball that Nadal coudl then.

So to get this clear: you think Kokki now would beat both Federer and Nadal Rome 2006-level ?
Instead of answering like a politician, perhaps answer the question directly, then do your explaining

Is it me being a politician or you being a slow learner? I said I am convinced (can't prove it though) that Kokki woudl beat Nadal 05. Federer is different as it is down to his form of the day.

You can see that if you had asked whether nadal 05 coudl have beaten Federer 05, the answer is certainly not obvious....even if we have a reference that says yes. Nadal managed to snatch a win in the jaws of defeat. So even then there is no clear answer. The bottom line what is clear is that Federer is simply not used to playing this new powerful game. It really grates him.....and he got that problem later from Djoko and Murray...like he had it before from Hewitt.

Listen.....you will see very soon Kokki and Coric beating Nadal....and no excuse will be allowed!

Have a feeling Bogbrush may enjoy this one !
Kokki is referring to Kokkinakis btw

noleisthebest wrote:I don't see why it's so hard to understand...Nadal would have annihilated Laver, Borg, McEnroe but does it mean he is a better tennis player?

Using the old crappy equipment?

Not sure how Nadal hits almost any of his bread & butter shots with Borgs Donnay Head or an old wooden Slaz.


That said, obviously you're citing time machine match ups, not if they grew up contemporaneously, so I guess he wins.

the most underestimated aspect in comparing eras is not so much the technology difference, nor training and technique improvement, though they certainly are extremely important, but who you play against when you are a teen and arrive in the pro circuit. That experience is priceless and playing as a teen versus the then top guys like Borg or McEnroe is completely different as arriving on the tour and having to face the latest top players. fitness and technology will not give you the feel and pace of the ball sent by Borg as opposed to Federer or Nadal.

It's being exposed to the latest players young which will form the athlete and give him the clues to where to improve to beat those top players. Coric, Kokki and other youngsters are learning faster than Djoko and Federer....Federer solved the fast SVer of his era, Nadal sorted Federer, Djoko sorted Nadal...and I am in no doubt that Djoko will be "sorted" soon.

bogbrush wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:I don't see why it's so hard to understand...Nadal would have annihilated Laver, Borg, McEnroe but does it mean he is a better tennis player?

Using the old crappy equipment?

Not sure how Nadal hits almost any of his bread & butter shots with Borgs Donnay Head or an old wooden Slaz.


That said, obviously you're citing time machine match ups, not if they grew up contemporaneously, so I guess he wins.

In terms of technology changes, I think it's pretty obvious that Nadal with this technology would beat Borg with the technology he used.

Tenez wrote:Coric, Kokki and other youngsters are learning faster than Djoko and Federer....Federer solved the fast SVer of his era, Nadal sorted Federer, Djoko sorted Nadal...and I am in no doubt that Djoko will be "sorted" soon.

Given the lack of young stars, I think Djokovic will be 'sorted' when he starts to decline.
However I think the idea that Coric or Kokkinakis are at the same level of Nadal vs Federer match-ups in 2005/2006 is ridiculous. Kokkinakis is not even in the top 100 now, and apparently he would have beaten Federer and Nadal in the French Open in 2005 ?
Without huge changes in technology, there's no way the progress could be that fast. Federer and Nadal are clearly worse now than they were in 2005, and Kokkinakis and Coric would probably be underdogs playing against them now.

But again Kim you are completely oblivious of how the game moved in the last 10 years.

10 years is huge when you have 1000s of players trying to improve...and improving year in year out.

You did not even realise that that Nadal and verdy were playing at over a 12% faster rate yesterday than 5 years ago. Imagine how easy it woudl have been for today's Verdy to beat that 2009 Nadal as he was already close to beat him back then.

But typically you only see the Ws and the Ls without paying attention to the details of those Ws and Ls.

Remember Potito Starace in 2006/7/8? He was taking sets of Nadal!!! Where is he now? Typcally a player who could not sustain the infernal improving rate of players. Go and check the 2006 ATP top 100 ranking and you will see many names gone to oblivion. Not because they declined, just because they coudl not adapt to the improvement of 1000s of players trying to play better today than yesterday.

bogbrush wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:I don't see why it's so hard to understand...Nadal would have annihilated Laver, Borg, McEnroe but does it mean he is a better tennis player?

Using the old crappy equipment?

Not sure how Nadal hits almost any of his bread & butter shots with Borgs Donnay Head or an old wooden Slaz.


That said, obviously you're citing time machine match ups, not if they grew up contemporaneously, so I guess he wins.

Yes, I meant the new equipment.

I don't think Nadal would be able to play with wooden racquets, though I'd love to see him try and hit his lassoo FH from 4m behind the baseline with Mac's Dy lop Maxply (got one at home, bought it on Ebay, like new - it's a beauty!)...against the 50+ old Mac.

It would be priceless!

noleisthebest wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:I don't see why it's so hard to understand...Nadal would have annihilated Laver, Borg, McEnroe but does it mean he is a better tennis player?

Using the old crappy equipment?

Not sure how Nadal hits almost any of his bread & butter shots with Borgs Donnay Head or an old wooden Slaz.


That said, obviously you're citing time machine match ups, not if they grew up contemporaneously, so I guess he wins.

Yes, I meant the new equipment.

I don't think Nadal would be able to play with wooden racquets, though I'd love to see him try and hit his lassoo FH from 4m behind the baseline with Mac's Dy lop Maxply (got one at home, bought it on Ebay, like new - it's a beauty!)...against the 50+ old Mac.

It would be priceless!

If the technology was different, Nadal would have developed a different game, he's not stupid.

Kim Jong-Un wrote:If the technology was different, Nadal would have developed a different game, he's not stupid.

Sure but that does not mean he would have been successful at it.

His game was developed to win the FO...not much else. He was lucky that his popularity there forced other slams to slow things down though Wimby had already decided to slow things down to avoid too much SVing.

When Nadal got beaten by Djoko he was not able to adapt. By being hyper physical and consistent he managed to make the most of Djoko's slumps but he still has not found the solution to Djoko's game. And now he will struggle to find the key to the new generation coming up....cause he is simply too 1D.

He was also bloody helped with his physical game by the tour turning a blind eye on the 25s rule.

Watching some rallies of the 5h20mn AO match between him and Verdy made me realise again how the tennis world wanted him to win at all cost...including moving the goal posts!

Tenez wrote:
Sure but that does not mean he would have been successful at it.

That is true, there are no guarantees either way- you can't be sure he wouldn't have been successful at it.

Tenez wrote:
When Nadal got beaten by Djoko he was not able to adapt.

Slam record of Nadal vs Djokovic after AO 2012: 4-0 Nadal

It is BTW very clear why the recent match between those 2 was faster as it is clear that Nadal simply can't afford nowadays to play slower and run as much as in the past, not because he is declining but because he woudl be starved of oxygen very quickly. he therefore has to take more risk, playing faster.

And that makes him very nervous!

Kim Jong-Un wrote:
Slam record of Nadal vs Djokovic after AO 2012: 4-0 Nadal

As I said, those 4 wins are extremely weird as they are explained by Djoko drop of form more than Nadal doing something different.

Tenez wrote:

Kim Jong-Un wrote:
Slam record of Nadal vs Djokovic after AO 2012: 4-0 Nadal

As I said, those 4 wins are extremely weird as they are explained by Djoko drop of form more than Nadal doing something different.

Yeah, really annoying how whenever Nadal wins it's either 'weird' or some sort of excuse
Nadal made improvements to his game, with the forehand down the line especially hurting Djokovic. I think even Bogbrush noted the aggressive intent Nadal played with in that match-up after 2011.
Tenez, you think Nadal and Djokovic both improved after 2011, right ?

Kim Jong-Un wrote:

Tenez wrote:

Kim Jong-Un wrote:
Slam record of Nadal vs Djokovic after AO 2012: 4-0 Nadal

As I said, those 4 wins are extremely weird as they are explained by Djoko drop of form more than Nadal doing something different.

Yeah, really annoying how whenever Nadal wins it's either 'weird' or some sort of excuse
Nadal made improvements to his game, with the forehand down the line especially hurting Djokovic. I think even Bogbrush noted the aggressive intent Nadal played with in that match-up after 2011.
Tenez, you think Nadal and Djokovic both improved after 2011, right ?

Again you can't see beyond your Ws and Ls. What improvement did he make to push Djoko to smash that ball and touch the net afterwards in that FO final?

That's just an example.

Having said that Nadal played well in the summer of 2013 but Djoko was well below par in that whole summer...in particular in that USO final, where Djoko completely collapsed.

Your player is actually not consistent enough in his health to have a proper idea. He is constantly withdrawing from the game and then reappear fitter than ever. Not a good way to really get a proper view on his form. I remember begining 2013...he was awful and then played teh best tennis of his life in the summer.

Tenez wrote:What improvement did he make to push Djoko to smash that ball and touch the net afterwards in that FO final?

That's just an example.

No that's not 'just an example'- that's totally misrepresentative.
Out of the 4 wins you've taken the closest one- and then pointed to a silly mistake Djokovic made in that match.
In that semi-final, Nadal missed an easy forehand in the 4th set at 6-5 30-15 serving for the match, that would have probably won him the match. So we can all play this 'oh what happens if he didn't do this'.

Nadal Djokovic matches are close ones on the whole, especially in Slams.
However Nadal vs Coric both aged 18 or 19 is not close at all. You massively overestimate how quickly the game progresses and people improve.
Nadal is not as good as he was a few years ago, and Coric has not shown himself yet to be anything great.