Originally Posted by brent-o
21 finals is a small number? Hardly, especially at the age of 20. While I agree Federer's is obviously more impressive, you cannot deny Nadal had played a lot of finals and won them. And because he didn't have to pass through the period of maturing, that's less impressive?
Hey hey, slow down
Most of these finals were on clay (and there was quite a few small south-american tournaments there, remember)? Outside of clay he didn't play finals all that often. On clay he didn't loose the match for two years at all (which obviously also includes the finals) so you can't base a case on those stats for Nadal being specifialy strong in finals. WIth Federer it was very different
As for maturing, obviously I wanted to say that he may be one of those players who are the strongest as young and then start declining. So we have to wait and see how good a "big match player" he is