Originally Posted by federer express
lots of people have rightly said
1. nalbandian's game gives federer major problems
2. nalbandian has a winning record against federer
hmmm...whilst point #2 is undeniably true, i am not convinced by point 1. federer did not have a dominant record or set of performances until after winning his first slam, that being wimbledon 2003. before that he was just unfulfilled potential. since that first slam, he has become a different player, improving almost out of sight (in terms of consistency), whereas nalbandian's game has for me stayed quite static.
David beat Roger at the '03 US Open, during Roger's reign as wimby champ.