How will Rafa and Novak age?

[El Dude]

As I've pointed out before, Rafa (at 28) and Novak (at 27) are in the phases of their career which I call "plateau" - they are still capable of peak performance, although perhaps not as consistently and there's a sense of being overall a half-step down from their absolute best, yet without truly declining yet. They're both still by far the two greatest players in the game.

Most players peak around 21-26, then plateau in from 26ish to 31ish, with steep decline after - although every player is different. With Roger we see a rather typical pattern, although his peak perhaps starting a bit late for a great player, around the time he turned 22. His very best year was undoubtedly 2006 when he was 24-25, then he maintained a very high form for another few years before taking a noticeable step down in 2010, when he was 28-29 (some say his peak ended in 2007, but I think we also have to take into account the fact that it was in 2008 that Rafa became more of a complete, all-court player, and of course Novak and Andy had emerged as elite talents). Since then there have been fluctuations, with a higher form in 2012 followed by a huge dip in 2013, but overall he's been able to maintain a plateau from around 2010 to the present. We all thought he was in rapid decline last year, so who knows how long he'll be able to maintain his current level.

But what about Rafa and Novak? How long do you expect them to maintain their current form and when they start to slip, what do you think it will look like?

I've always thought that when both players start to slip, it will happen fast, because of their reliance upon their incredible movement. Novak is possibly the greatest defensive player in the history of the sport, and so if he starts slowing down he's going to lose a lot. Just as the incredible torque Rafa puts on the ball is unparalleled in tennis history; if he loses a bit of that, what sets him apart will diminish greatly.

On the other hand, both are complete players and can presumably adjust to slow their overall decline, just as Roger has been able to adjust this year (to some extent) with his more aggressive net game to mask the notable decline of his greatest weapon, his forehand. So it could very well be that they'll be able to maintain their current level, with no more than a slight and gradual decline for another few years yet and that, like Roger, they'll play as long as they love playing (and have a shot at winning a Slam).

I realize that we can't really know, but am curious as to what peoples thoughts are.

 

[atttomole]

Even though it is not easy to predict, I think he will age well. People have been talking about his demise for a long time, but it appears that he is more resilient than most people thought. The fact that he has had a number of breaks from tennis may be actually helping him. If am not mistaken, his previous break lasted 7 months (2012 to 2013), and he came back rested and destroyed the field in the North American hard court season.

 

[Federberg]

I suspect that both players, given their physicality will have a different decline path to Federer. While his decline has been steady and increasing, I have a suspicion that one day these guys are going to get on the court and the magic will be gone. When that moment is, however, is open to question. Given the changing demographic of pro tennis, they probably have years to go before it happens. My guess is that these two guys will be in the top 5 one year and the next will be ranked outside the top 20.. just my view..

 

[atttomole]

I forgot to add my thought on Novak. I agree with the fact that being so defensive, he may be decline fast by age 30. He hasn't had any long breaks from tennis like Rafa.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Rafa's decline will be exponential from the point of time that he plays a full schedule in an year
(not puny little schedule due to various injuries) and still gets ranked outside of top 5.

 

[atttomole]

Rafa's decline will be exponential from the point of time that he plays a full schedule in an year
(not puny little schedule due to various injuries) and still gets ranked outside of top 5.

Yes, but it appears those minor injuries do come almost every 2 years, which will give him the breaks that he needs.

 

[Kieran]

I'm not sure where the "rapid decline" comes in with Roger: except for 10 weeks, due to his back, he's been top 6 for 12 years. There's nothing rapid happening here at all. In fact, his endurance is noteworthy.

With Rafa, I suspect he goes completely bald before Roger drops out of the top 10. :laydownlaughing

Novak will last longer than Rafa because he seems to have phases where his intensity is absent and he's chilling along. He's not suffering constantly for it. Physically, he had some strange thing in Paris, but thankfully he has few injuries, fewer even than Federer. I think Novak will lose interest before he bothers to retire.

The notion that Rafa will retire around the same time as Federer isn't too far-fetched, given that somewhere in the next couple of seasons Rafa might get another serious injury that makes it a waste of his time to come back, or else requires surgery.

However, I suspect that absences are helping Rafa to an extent. His seven month injury break was prolonged through fever, he was ready to play before Oz, which meant that he was lean and hungry when he came back last season. This season, he's been cursed with back and wrist issues, but again, he'll be hungry as a wolf when he returns. So these absences help sharpen him - but they're becoming too frequent. This is why I wish he'd take care of his scheduling and skip rubbish like this Indian trinket thingy...

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

^ Have to agree with you on his scheduling and I also hope he skips that insane Indian trinket thingy.
His wrist appears to be taking more time to heal,than first expected.

 

[DarthFed]

In a way it has been rapid aside from 2012 and 2013. In 2012 he kind of turned back the clocks through Wimbledon and was highly motivated after very difficult losses in the 2nd half of 2011. In 2013 I think it was a lot of things and a nagging back problem was just part of it. 2014 looks more like 2011 but just a bit worse IMO. And as always I disagree with the Dude regarding Roger's career path. 2008- AO 2010 was the small step down, what came after was a large decline.

 

[El Dude]

I'm not sure where the "rapid decline" comes in with Roger: except for 10 weeks, due to his back, he's been top 6 for 12 years. There's nothing rapid happening here at all. In fact, his endurance is noteworthy.

I agree - not sure why you got the impression I said he was undergoing a rapid decline.

With Rafa, I suspect he goes completely bald before Roger drops out of the top 10. :laydownlaughing

Haha, no doubt.

Novak will last longer than Rafa because he seems to have phases where his intensity is absent and he's chilling along. He's not suffering constantly for it. Physically, he had some strange thing in Paris, but thankfully he has few injuries, fewer even than Federer. I think Novak will lose interest before he bothers to retire.

The notion that Rafa will retire around the same time as Federer isn't too far-fetched, given that somewhere in the next couple of seasons Rafa might get another serious injury that makes it a waste of his time to come back, or else requires surgery.

However, I suspect that absences are helping Rafa to an extent. His seven month injury break was prolonged through fever, he was ready to play before Oz, which meant that he was lean and hungry when he came back last season. This season, he's been cursed with back and wrist issues, but again, he'll be hungry as a wolf when he returns. So these absences help sharpen him - but they're becoming too frequent. This is why I wish he'd take care of his scheduling and skip rubbish like this Indian trinket thingy...

Agreed on the scheduling, as I said in the other thread. And Rafa does seem to follow a pattern: Come back from injury and down in the rankings, destroy everything in his path until he returns to #1, be upset in a Slam and/or injured, miss time, wash, rinse and repeat. But the problem is, as you say, this is happening at a more frequent rate and, the older one gets, the harder and slower comebacks are. At some point Rafa might just say, "F it, I'm going to hang on the beach with Xisca." Whether that is a year or two from now or five years from now, who knows - but I suspect he won't be playing five years from now.

In a way it has been rapid aside from 2012 and 2013. In 2012 he kind of turned back the clocks through Wimbledon and was highly motivated after very difficult losses in the 2nd half of 2011. In 2013 I think it was a lot of things and a nagging back problem was just part of it. 2014 looks more like 2011 but just a bit worse IMO. And as always I disagree with the Dude regarding Roger's career path. 2008- AO 2010 was the small step down, what came after was a large decline.

The thing is, it is hard to say when he started declining because Rafa came fully into his own in 2008, with Novak and Andy coming up behind him. Now certainly there was a big drop in win percentage from 2005-06 (95%) to 2007 (88%) to 2008 (81%). But he went back up a bit in 2009 (84%) and has basically been steady in the 83-86% range from 2009-2014, with the exception of 2013 (73%). In other words, his overall performance seems to support the idea that his decline has been minimal really from 2008 to 2014. Now clearly win% isn't everything, and we have to take into account his performance at big tournaments. All that said, I think he took a half-step down from 2006 to 2007, another half-step fro 2007 to 2008, and another half-step from 2009 to 2010, but it has been pretty steady since then - with the confusing exception of 2013. I suppose his Slam results in 2014, compared to 2010-12, point to further decline, but it isn't by much.

As a side note, here is how good Roger was in 2006: He played in 12 big tournaments, including four Slams, the WTF, and seven Masters. Of those 12, he only didn't make the final in one - Cincinnati, in which he lost to a 19-year old Andy Murray in the 2nd round. But that, to me, is just incredible: playing in the final of 11 out of the 12 big tournaments he played, in (and going 8-3...all three losses to Rafa, of course).

Even Novak in 2011 wasn't as dominant - he played in the finals of 9 of the 12 big tournaments (although went 8-1). Rafa in 2013 played in the finals of 9 of 12 big tournaments, going 7-2.

So yeah, it is clear that Roger was at his very best in 2006, with 2007 being a slight down-step, at least beyond he Slams and WTF (he went 4-5 in both years). But was he that much worse in 2008? Or was it simply that Rafa had come fully into his own? I think it is a bit of both, that he took a half-step down AND Rafa took a step forward. The fact of the matter is that Roger's winning percentage vs. everyone else also declined, so it isn't like Rafa was single-handedly responsible for his decline.

But I do tend to agree with Kieran, that his decline has been quite gradual since.

 

[Kieran]

Sorry Dude, I may have slightly misrepresented you:

We all thought he was in rapid decline last year, so who knows how long he'll be able to maintain his current level.

You didn't say he was in rapid decline, just that some of you thought it. Even still, to go down to 8th with a back injury isn't a rapid decline, no matter how briefly it lasted. Federer is exceptional in how he physically endures this tour. As I've often pointed out, Sampras and other high achievers have shown obvious signs of burn out - both physically and mentally - at a much younger age.

As for scheduling, I think that Rafa gluts, then busts. That seems to be his current pattern. I'm putting the current wrist injury down to fluke: maybe a mistimed shot on his backhand that hurt his right wrist, I don't think it could be a sign of wear and tear. I've seen it before, that players mishit a shot and damage their arm. Most famously, Becker at Wimbledon in 1996, a year where I believe he may even have won it, had his injury not occurred.

I think Rafa will play for the next 3 seasons, at least. I hope he plays only ATP in that period of time...

 

[El Dude]

Sorry Dude, I may have slightly misrepresented you:

We all thought he was in rapid decline last year, so who knows how long he'll be able to maintain his current level.

You didn't say he was in rapid decline, just that some of you thought it. Even still, to go down to 8th with a back injury isn't a rapid decline, no matter how briefly it lasted. Federer is exceptional in how he physically endures this tour. As I've often pointed out, Sampras and other high achievers have shown obvious signs of burn out - both physically and mentally - at a much younger age.

As for scheduling, I think that Rafa gluts, then busts. That seems to be his current pattern. I'm putting the current wrist injury down to fluke: maybe a mistimed shot on his backhand that hurt his right wrist, I don't think it could be a sign of wear and tear. I've seen it before, that players mishit a shot and damage their arm. Most famously, Becker at Wimbledon in 1996, a year where I believe he may even have won it, had his injury not occurred.

I think Rafa will play for the next 3 seasons, at least. I hope he plays only ATP in that period of time...

I think it wasn't clearly worded. If I remember correctly, we didn't know that Roger's back was bothering him so much until he started improving at the end of the year. At that point it became clear that his poor performance through the summer wasn't rapid decline but playing with an injury. So yeah, Roger's been pretty much the same player--with some minor fluctuations--since 2010, at least in terms of results (his play style has certainly become more Edbergian this year).

As for Rafa, the other thing to consider is how he was playing before he got injured. It wasn't great. He won Roland Garros, but just before that lost to Novak and was being dominated by Nishikori in Madrid before Kei was injured. He looked lost on grass, losing to Dustin Brown at Halle and then Kyrgios at Wimbledon. Watching him play, he looked a bit listless and uninspired.

Again, I think he plays best when he's down in the rankings a bit - that he thrives on that motivation. But he doesn't seem to be able to maintain being King of the Mountain for more than about a year at a time. He's had three reigns as #1, and they've all been somewhat similar in length: 46, 56, and 39 weeks.

I'm not taking anything away from him, just find the patterns interesting. Actually, Novak's three reigns haven't been any longer: 53, 48, and 11+ weeks. Roger has that freak 237-week reign. There's actually only been nine reigns in ATP history longer than Rafa's 56 week one: Connors twice, McEnroe once, Lendl twice, Sampras twice, Hewitt once, and Roger once.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

One thing is for sure, Nadal is increasing his dominance over Federer.
2014 AO is the biggest margin of victory between Nadal and Federer at a non-clay slam ever :clap

And Nadal also increased his dominance over Djokovic at the French Open this year (compared to 2013) :clap

And this year Nadal had his best Wimbledon result since 2011 :clap

Because of Nadal's knees being better now than they've been for years (Nadal's own words), there is no foreseeable end to Nadal's streak of slam-winning years 2005-.......

 

[Kieran]

In fairness to Rafa this year, I'm not convinced his back was great since Oz. There were a lot of times in Paris that he looked compromised on certain shots but he'd adjusted his game to cover them. In fact, it was only at Wimbledon, ironically, that I felt he was playing with physical looseness and I thought that had the dastardly Nick shown some signs of mental fragility on only about 3 points in the 3rd, that Rafa would have won that match, and then who knows? The points were the set point on Nick's serve, then some stupendous second serve at 4-5 down in the tiebreak, then maybe the set point.

This is after the fact, but it was a match decided by the tinchiest of margins and Rafa was looking physically good at Wimbledon. Nick was just unbearable. :nono

Novak's durability will come down more to his mentality, I think. Physically, he could be Federer-like, but does Nole burn the way Fedal do, to win things? More than once, I've compared him to Becker in this matter, and I feel he may go the same way.

Just on a side topic, I was watching Skyfall the other night, and the missus said that Becker has eyes like James Bond. I squinted and saw the resemblance. Now, wouldn't you think between them that Travis Bickle and James Bond could muster up a whole lot more of nastiness? :lolz: :laydownlaughing

 

[Front242]

One thing is for sure, Nadal is increasing his dominance over Federer.
2014 AO is the biggest margin of victory between Nadal and Federer at a non-clay slam ever :clap

And Nadal also increased his dominance over Djokovic at the French Open this year (compared to 2013) :clap

And this year Nadal had his best Wimbledon result since 2011 :clap

Because of Nadal's knees being better now than they've been for years (Nadal's own words), there is no foreseeable end to Nadal's streak of slam-winning years 2005-.......

It's the norm when discussing two all time greats that the one 5 years younger wins more matches. Duh. The longer Roger hangs around the uglier that h2h will get but as long as Roger is in the mix and happy playing I doubt he cares anywhere near as much about that overhyped stat as you do as you play the field and not one player funnily enough. And "2014 AO is the biggest margin of victory between Nadal and Federer at a non-clay slam ever" ? You really expect Roger to reverse the trend at the ripe old age of 32? Dream on.

Yes, maybe Nadal will make the 2nd week of Wimbledon next year!

 

[Kieran]

Come on, Front, Rafa hasn't only start beating Roger since the last couple of years. He's always won more matches than him, from the start. Try stay on topic and stop spinning myths... :nono

 

[NADAL2005RG]

^ Actually, Federer is better now than he was from 2011-2013 :idea:

 

[Kieran]

NADAL2005RG, stay on topic, please. This isn't a Fedal thread. All the other ones are, except this one...

 

[NADAL2005RG]

^ In order to measure Nadal's age-related "decline", looking at his performance versus the #1 and #3 ranked players in the world is valuable :idea:

 

[Kieran]

^ In order to measure Nadal's age-related "decline", looking at his performance versus the #1 and #3 ranked players in the world is valuable :idea:

There are other measures, such as his losses in Monte Carlo and Barcelona. Decline - real or other - doesn't only affect matches against two other players...