Skewed, irrelevant stats. Give me the stats without hardcourt matches, because that is so much more relevant.
Because that would make it relevant too right? Fact is, the numbers are skewed and CANNOT be compared to others, especially when you are discussing a player like Federer who in his peak years of 2003-2007 didn't lose a single match on grass, but it can't be helped the fact that there are only 2 tournaments a year on grass, one of which is very small, while Rafa plays 3 MS, 1 500 and 1 slam pretty much each year on clay.. I'm not saying Federer would achieve Rafa-like numbers on grass had he had the opportunity to play as many grass matches each year as Rafa, but this fact alone just makes this whole stat utterly pointelss to compare because it makes no sense to. This stat is only something that should be just looked at in awe, to tell Rafa congrats while keeping in mind that yes, it is a skewed stat. Not Rafa's fault, but it just shows what it is. Again, Federer is 4-1 against Murray, Djokovic and Nadal on grass. So many matches to compare..