As expected , u didn't understand what I was saying. In a unilateral battle nadull is greater than fed on Slow courts if they meet . My point is apart from the USO 2010 nadull is pretty irrelevant this time of the year.
The meetings favor nadull predominantly. Nadull had treatment to the knee before MC but he chose to play the clay season. Was successful. He had treatment after Wimby and chose to sit out. Why. Because he isn't that successful at this period of the year for a number of reason.
Even uncle toni said the doctor told nadull to take a rest to regenerate the tendons n ligaments but he still chose to play the entire clay season. In 2009 he missed Wimby. However played the FO. Seems anytime he is destroyed by a flat hitter exposing his weakness he takes a break.
As for RG 08. Fed was declining even before he meet nadull. He had food poisoning any way taken to the hospital never recovered. Lost to his pigeons Roddick , radek Novak at the time.
So he was in a weaken state with no confidence and he tried something different under Jose higueras . It didn't work. Nadull level was high that year his absolute prime that year.
Fed didn't play too much baseline points that match.
Thus leading to that shoreline.
Never meet at the USO,
Fed is always declining even though in his prime he lost to mugs.
His achievements are severely tarnished by his constant failures against Rafa in the slams, which clearly proves that one man alone can easily dominate a weak field since Rafa dominated Federer who was collecting slams easily against mugs in the previous years.
The ranking are based on a 12 month period - not only dependent on a single ATP 500 tourney.
Likewise, if Nole is so good he wouldn't have LOST a best of 3 (in straight sets) on grass to Del Potro for whom grass is his worst surface.
12 month period or not, had Federer not played a measly 500 ATP in Rotterdam, he wouldn't be #1 regardless of having won Wimbledon.
Basically, a slam didn't make the difference to claim him the #1, it was a mug tournament win that gave him the #1 ranking.
as far as i can remember, fed became #1 again by beating djokovic in the semifinal and winning wimbledon against murray...
and at least fed is good enough to beat del potro on grass...
But he isn't good enough to beat 34 year old Haas on grass.
Let's see if we can get your creaking synapses moving with this: the point is not whether Novak/Rafa/Murray are better than Baghdatis/Roddick/Gonzalez. Of course they are. The question is whether they are better than Federer, & to determine that, we have to ask whether Bag/Rod/Gonzo are any worse than the people Novak/Rafa/Murray have beaten in winning slams - i.e., the Soderlings, Berdychs, & Tsongas of this world. It is abundantly obvious that they are not.
Reading comprehension isn't your forte. The point is not whether or not Novak/Rafa/Murray are better than Federer because that's not what I argued: the merit of winning slams against mugs is what I have been arguing. It is abundantly obvious that the current Rafa/Murray/Novak are far better than the opposition Federer faced in 2003-2006 which is why I said collecting so many slams so quickly doesn't make Federer as impressive as some think. It is still a difficult task to maintain a high level but had he been absent from that time and prime Novak/Rafa/Murray were there, either one of them would have collected several slams.
Also, if you think the previous field of Bag/Rod/Gonzo are no worse than the current players Novak/Murray/Rafa are beating then obviously what I have been saying is true because Novak/Murray/Rafa have been beating the Tsonga/Berdych/Soderling on the way to making slam fnals or winning slams.
Whether or not Nole/Rafa are better than Federer can be argued eventually because they are both over 5 years younger than Federer and have a long way to go in their careers; what can't be argued is the fact that they both beat Federer several times on their way to winning slams.
So if people want to argue that winning a slam in a time when Novak/Rafa/Federer/Murray are playing at a high level is easier than when Roddick/Gonzo/Bag/Hewitt were playing at their best then all I can do is laugh at the sheer stupidity of that notion.