Nadal is 3-1 vs. Federer on outdoor HC. What does this tell us ? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Nadal is 3-1 vs. Federer on outdoor HC. What does this tell us ?

fsoica
02-12-2010, 03:46 PM
Any significance for this kind of statistics ?

Miami 04 - Nadal
Miami 05 - Federer
Dubai 06 - Nadal
AOpen 09 - Nadal

As a different aspect, Nadal is 2-5 vs Djokovic on outdoor HC
and 0-3 vs Davydenko on outdoor HC.

bokehlicious
02-12-2010, 03:47 PM
Nadal >>>>> Federer :shrug:

fsoica
02-12-2010, 03:49 PM
It is quite interesting that all those results where in the first half of the year when, presumably, Nadal is fit.

When they played in Shanghai, apart from the indoors aspect, Nadal was, also presumably (I don't buy this theories) tired...

Sophocles
02-12-2010, 03:50 PM
That Nadal is shit indoors?

TheBoiledEgg
02-12-2010, 03:51 PM
one swallow doesnt make a summer

Roger does it time and time again on hard courts, always is there in slam finals
Nadal has fluke run every blue moon

SaFed2005
02-12-2010, 03:53 PM
Any significance for this kind of statistics ?

Miami 04 - Nadal
Miami 05 - Federer
Dubai 06 - Nadal
AOpen 09 - Nadal

It obviously tells us that Nadal is the most amazing player to ever be born in the history of the sport and that he is AMAZING on hardcourts and that nobody can beat him unless he is tired or injured. Isn't this the response you want to hear?

SaFed2005
02-12-2010, 03:56 PM
On a more serious note: When Nadal actually does make it to the finals to meet Federer, it means that he is playing really well at the moment and is on a groove. Basically he is on a hot streak, everytime he actually makes it to the final to meet Federer. If he is not playing well he loses earlier to any good hardcourt player.
On the other hand Federer constantly makes the finals, whether he is playing well or not. Just because he is in the finals of a tournament doesn't necessarily mean that he is playing well and that he is on a groove.

Persimmon
02-12-2010, 03:59 PM
Nadal is a horrible matchup for Federer and the main reason he has managed to so far win 6 slams in the era of the GOAT. If you can't beat Federer at the slams, you can't win slams in this era. Just ask Roddick, Davydenko, Hewitt, Murray.

Commander Data
02-12-2010, 04:00 PM
...If God had gifted Nadal with healthy knees he would own 6 straight US Open Titles and three CYGS?

Persimmon
02-12-2010, 04:02 PM
That Nadal is shit indoors?


This as well:o

tennizen
02-12-2010, 04:05 PM
On a more serious note: When Nadal actually does make it to the finals to meet Federer, it means that he is playing really well at the moment and is on a groove. Basically he is on a hot streak, everytime he actually makes it to the final to meet Federer. If he is not playing well he loses earlier to any good hardcourt player.
On the other hand Federer constantly makes the finals, whether he is playing well or not. Just because he is in the finals of a tournament doesn't necessarily mean that he is playing well and that he is on a groove.

I think people forget that Federer has not been making that many finals on hard courts either (outside of slams) since 2007.

HKz
02-12-2010, 04:13 PM
Any significance for this kind of statistics ?

Miami 04 - Nadal
Miami 05 - Federer
Dubai 06 - Nadal
AOpen 09 - Nadal

As a different aspect, Nadal is 2-5 vs Djokovic on outdoor HC
and 0-3 vs Davydenko on outdoor HC.

It gives even more evidence than H2H doesn't mean shit when looking at someone's whole career or pitting them up to the ATP. Because if the H2H actually meant something, it would suggest that Nadal is a better HC player than Federer. LMK when 1 slam on HC is more than 9.

MIMIC
02-12-2010, 04:15 PM
It tells us that Nadal is Federer's worst match-up.

bokehlicious
02-12-2010, 04:16 PM
I think people forget that Federer has not been making that many finals on hard courts either (outside of slams) since 2007.

Legends have their priorities, you shouldn't read too much into it... Only slams matter when you're in Fed's league :shrug:

lessthanjake
02-12-2010, 04:17 PM
It means a few things:

1. Nadal only reaches the finals of hard court tournaments when he is in extremely good form.
2. All of those matches were played on hard courts that react quite a bit to topspin, so Nadal was not really at a disadvantage from the surface.
3. Nadal matches up extremely well with Federer
4. Nadal is nowhere near Federer's level indoors.

Speed of Light
02-12-2010, 04:27 PM
It means that Rafa OWNS this fake king and has made him his bitch. Frauderer should better take Murka and the twins and flee to the swiss alps before Rafa recovers from his injuries and subjects him to further spankings and humiliations...

tea
02-12-2010, 04:27 PM
This tell us Rafito is three times better hardcourt player than Roger. Why, why on Earth the number of GS titles achieved between random two isn't always in direct proportion to theirs H2Hs?:hysteric:

fsoica
02-12-2010, 04:34 PM
It means that Rafa OWNS this fake king and has made him his bitch. Frauderer should better take Murka and the twins and flee to the swiss alps before Rafa recovers from his injuries and subjects him to further spankings and humiliations...

this is a mad world full of mad people we live in, right, mate ?

madmax
02-12-2010, 04:35 PM
uhm, probably means that Rafito is hardcourt god and is three times better on that surface than 9 times HC slam champion...or wait, rly?:unsure:

Commander Data
02-12-2010, 05:36 PM
It means that Rafa OWNS this fake king and has made him his bitch. Frauderer should better take Murka and the twins and flee to the swiss alps before Rafa recovers from his injuries and subjects him to further spankings and humiliations...

:haha:

somewhere there must be a clone facility for Nadulltards. Whenever one of this crazy people disappears a new one pops up.

...at least you are more funny then Foxy or Logical..

DrJules
02-12-2010, 05:37 PM
Any significance for this kind of statistics ?

Miami 04 - Nadal
Miami 05 - Federer
Dubai 06 - Nadal
AOpen 09 - Nadal

As a different aspect, Nadal is 2-5 vs Djokovic on outdoor HC
and 0-3 vs Davydenko on outdoor HC.

It is why titles are more significant than player head to head results. The player with the best head to head with ALL other players is likely to win the most tournaments.

They are all in the first half of the year when playing conditions are slower. In the second half I think the surfaces are usually prepared to be faster and at the US Open they use Wilson balls which I believe are more lively favouring attacking players.

SetSampras
02-12-2010, 05:37 PM
Thats its a shame Nadal's career had to end like this. Coming into his own just beginning to dominate and success on just about all the surfaces and at the peak of his career, to get injured and take 50 million steps back. I feel for the guy in this regard. Its not as though Nadal was at the end of his prime. He was at the PEAK of his career and the hands down #1 player in the world..


I dunno how the h2h between Roger and Rafa would have played out. I have my suspicions that current Fed could NOT beat pre 2009 injury Rafa most of the time. But its all what-ifs. Its kind of like saying, "well what if Sampras had to meet Agassi at the French and AO more often? What would the h2h be like?


Well what If Agassi had to deal with Sampras at all 5 USO's Sampras won or all 7 Wimbledons? You would have chalkd up another 10 or so wins for Sampras in the h2h column over Agassi. So its all a what if

r2473
02-12-2010, 05:40 PM
.....

Commander Data
02-12-2010, 05:41 PM
termite infection alarm.

Federer&Hingis
02-12-2010, 05:41 PM
Federer is still GOAT

Sunset of Age
02-12-2010, 05:45 PM
Thats its a shame Nadal's career had to end like this. Coming into his own just beginning to dominate and success on just about all the surfaces and at the peak of his career, to get injured and take 50 million steps back. I feel for the guy in this regard. Its not as though Nadal was at the end of his prime. He was at the PEAK of his career and the hands down #1 player in the world..


I dunno how the h2h between Roger and Rafa would have played out. I have my suspicions that current Fed could NOT beat pre 2009 injury Rafa most of the time. But its all what-ifs. Its kind of like saying, "well what if Sampras had to meet Agassi at the French and AO more often? What would the h2h be like?


Well what If Agassi had to deal with Sampras at all 5 USO's Sampras won or all 7 Wimbledons? You would have chalkd up another 10 or so wins for Sampras in the h2h column over Agassi. So its all a what if

I was getting worried about you, the first version of this post didn't contain the word 'Sampras'. Fortunately you managed to correct yourself. :worship:

SetSampras
02-12-2010, 05:48 PM
LOL.....


I disagree that h2hs do not mean anything. Obviously smaller more insignificant h2hs do not mean anything.. Roger's h2hs against Simon or Canas shouldnt mean a whole helluva lot. But the h2h vs Nadal means a big deal in determing GOAT immortality. To me Nadal stopped the bleeding with his own injuries or else if Nadal stayed peak the h2h probably at this point would be around 18 or 19-7 in favor of Nadal on all surfaces. Nadal told Federer that he was going to overtake Pete's slam record in the future at the post AO finals. Was this foreshadowing? Nadal was the only player to stop this from happening. Did he know he was going to go down injured by the AO. There were reports that Nadal was cutting practices short all through the AO due to his knees

Nr 1 Fan
02-12-2010, 05:52 PM
This learns us that outdoor HC is slower than indoor HC.

DrJules
02-12-2010, 05:52 PM
LOL.....


I disagree that h2hs do not mean anything. Obviously smaller more insignificant h2hs do not mean anything.. Roger's h2hs against Simon or Canas shouldnt mean a whole helluva lot. But the h2h vs Nadal means a big deal in determing GOAT immortality. To me Nadal stopped the bleeding with his own injuries or else if Nadal stayed peak the h2h probably at this point would be around 18 or 19-7 in favor of Nadal on all surfaces. Nadal told Federer that he was going to overtake Pete's slam record in the future at the post AO finals. Was this foreshadowing? Nadal was the only player to stop this from happening. Did he know he was going to go down injured by the AO. There were reports that Nadal was cutting practices short all through the AO due to his knees

I said titles are more important not h2h's are meaningless.

Just as well Krajicek was injured many times during the 90's or life could have been more troublesome for Sampras.

abraxas21
02-12-2010, 05:56 PM
:haha:

somewhere there must be a clone facility for Nadulltards. Whenever one of this crazy people disappears a new one pops up.

...at least you are more funny then Foxy or Logical..


can't kill 'em all... the only way is to destroy the mother ship....................
Fed will take care of that.

SetSampras
02-12-2010, 05:57 PM
I said titles are more important not h2h's are meaningless.

Just as well Krajicek was injured many times during the 90's or life could have been more troublesome for Sampras.

Im not so sure Krajicek would have ever been dominant and win outside of Wimbledon. But whatever. There is no shame in losing to Richard if you seen how he played in 96 at Wimbledon. He was in the zone and damn near unbeatable

MrChopin
02-12-2010, 06:06 PM
a.) Rafa > Fed
b.) Fed is not GOAT
c.) This is a weak era
d.) All of the above

nobama
02-12-2010, 06:28 PM
It tells us this thread is shit?

Nr 1 Fan
02-12-2010, 06:35 PM
Im not so sure Krajicek would have ever been dominant and win outside of Wimbledon. But whatever. There is no shame in losing to Richard if you seen how he played in 96 at Wimbledon. He was in the zone and damn near unbeatable

:topic:

Vida
02-12-2010, 06:37 PM
it tell us that on outdoor HC Nadal will win three matches out of four against Roger.

Arkulari
02-12-2010, 06:37 PM
Im not so sure Krajicek would have ever been dominant and win outside of Wimbledon. But whatever. There is no shame in losing to Richard if you seen how he played in 96 at Wimbledon. He was in the zone and damn near unbeatable

:spit: :spit: :spit:

Wimbledon 96 SF and F were the worst GS ones I've seen live, so knock it off please

if you think there's no shame on losing to a one slam wonder like Krajicek then by your own logic, there is no shame losing to a great champion like Rafa

and gosh people are creating the most ridiculous threads nowadays :o

scarecrows
02-12-2010, 06:40 PM
...at least you are more funny then Foxy or Logical..

Foxy hasnt posted since 2 days before the Murray- Nadal match :haha:

and he was online just an hour ago :haha:

Sophocles
02-12-2010, 06:44 PM
I said titles are more important not h2h's are meaningless.

Just as well Krajicek was injured many times during the 90's or life could have been more troublesome for Sampras.

He'd have no slams. So lucky with that weak era.

SetSampras
02-12-2010, 06:46 PM
:spit: :spit: :spit:

Wimbledon 96 SF and F were the worst GS ones I've seen live, so knock it off please

if you think there's no shame on losing to a one slam wonder like Krajicek then by your own logic, there is no shame losing to a great champion like Rafa

and gosh people are creating the most ridiculous threads nowadays :o



Ok so whos to say Djokovic or Del Potro arent one time grand slam winners? Krajicek was injured through the good portion of his career. Can I pull this thread up in a few years and say Federer lost to two mugs who only managed one slam?

Collective
02-12-2010, 06:50 PM
It means that Nadull is such a terrible matchup for Federer that he gets to moonball his ass even in a hardcourt.

Too bad for him that he isn't such a bad matchup for a lot others hardcourt players (i.e. Murray, Del Potro, Djokovic) who can beat him.

Sophocles
02-12-2010, 06:52 PM
Ok so whos to say Djokovic or Del Potro arent one time grand slam winners? Krajicek was injured through the good portion of his career. Can I pull this thread up in a few years and say Federer lost to two mugs who only managed one slam?

No. From September onwards, when Federer has achieved the Grand Slam and your tenuous grip on sanity has failed altogether, you will no longer be permitted Internet access by your doctors.

Arkulari
02-12-2010, 07:02 PM
Ok so whos to say Djokovic or Del Potro arent one time grand slam winners? Krajicek was injured through the good portion of his career. Can I pull this thread up in a few years and say Federer lost to two mugs who only managed one slam?

Feel free to do so :yeah:

My point is that you're gloryfing a player that isn't really that great just because he belonged to Sampras' era, I won't do that with Juan or Nole if they end up with just one Slam :shrug:

Har-Tru
02-12-2010, 07:07 PM
That they've never played on DecoTurf.

Castafiore
02-12-2010, 07:12 PM
and gosh people are creating the most ridiculous threads nowadays :o
I don't think so by a long shot but I'm guessing that you're just more annoyed with the recent series of gems. ;)

tealeaves
02-12-2010, 07:12 PM
nothing

Arkulari
02-12-2010, 07:18 PM
I don't think so by a long shot but I'm guessing that you're just more annoyed with the recent series of gems. ;)

I just wish that people keep creating threads that have been done to death, if you're gonna piss on some player or glorify other at least be original :shrug:

lessthanjake
02-12-2010, 07:24 PM
Im not so sure Krajicek would have ever been dominant and win outside of Wimbledon. But whatever. There is no shame in losing to Richard if you seen how he played in 96 at Wimbledon. He was in the zone and damn near unbeatable

Let me give you a list of some other comparably skilled players who were "in the zone and damn near unbeatable" in certain slams:

Marcos Baghdatis - 2006 Australian Open
Fernando Gonzalez - 2007 Australian Open
Robin Soderling - 2009 French Open

I could go on. Are you sensing a pattern? Federer crushes the lesser players who go on a tear in a slam and look "unbeatable." Sampras didn't.

Nr 1 Fan
02-12-2010, 07:36 PM
Let me give you a list of some other comparably skilled players who were "in the zone and damn near unbeatable" in certain slams:

Marcos Baghdatis - 2006 Australian Open
Fernando Gonzalez - 2007 Australian Open
Robin Soderling - 2009 French Open

I could go on. Are you sensing a pattern? Federer crushes the lesser players who go on a tear in a slam and look "unbeatable." Sampras didn't.


True, but so damn frustrating.

Commander Data
02-12-2010, 07:51 PM
Foxy hasnt posted since 2 days before the Murray- Nadal match :haha:

and he was online just an hour ago :haha:

:haha::haha:

philosophicalarf
02-12-2010, 07:54 PM
Any significance for this kind of statistics ?

Miami 04 - Nadal
Miami 05 - Federer
Dubai 06 - Nadal
AOpen 09 - Nadal



Miami and Aus are just about the two slowest hard courts on tour - only Auckland is noticeably slower (cos it still uses Plexi). Dubai is midspeed though, that's a good win.

Apemant
02-12-2010, 08:42 PM
Foxy hasnt posted since 2 days before the Murray- Nadal match :haha:

and he was online just an hour ago :haha:

Foxy is actually a GUY?? :eek: :eek: :eek:

william_renshaw
02-12-2010, 08:42 PM
Nadal starts as a clear favorite against fed on every surface, except maybe a fast indoor hard court.

But on any hard court nadal starts as underdog against murray, davydenko (in a best-of 3), djokovic, and potro.

Apemant
02-12-2010, 08:54 PM
Nadal >>>>> Federer :shrug:

Precisely; and since
- Davydenko >>> Nadal,
we can obviously conclude that it must be
- Davy >>>>>>>>>> Federer.

My conclusion is that Davy must have looked too bald to be a people's champ, so the ATP picked an obviously inferior player such as Federer and just fixed all his matches so he can 'break' :rolleyes: those Sampras' records.

The only thing that bugs me is that since
- Feliciano >>> Davy
it means that it's actually
- Feliciano >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Federer!

My working hypothesis is that the ATP was so jealous of LaLo's ravishing looks so they deliberately sabotaged him in some Dark Sinister Ways Yet To Be Revealed In Someone's Autobiography. But until further evidence is found, logic dictates that Feli Lopez is clearly the all time GOAT. :worship:

Fed=ATPTourkilla
02-12-2010, 09:07 PM
Miami and Aus are just about the two slowest hard courts on tour - only Auckland is noticeably slower (cos it still uses Plexi). Dubai is midspeed though, that's a good win.

I remember that Dubai match. It was a terrible defeat for Federer. He was easily the better hardcourt player at that stage of their respective careers. I think he won the first set 6-2 and then threw away the next two with some preposterous errors.

lessthanjake
02-12-2010, 09:49 PM
I remember that Dubai match. It was a terrible defeat for Federer. He was easily the better hardcourt player at that stage of their respective careers. I think he won the first set 6-2 and then threw away the next two with some preposterous errors.

Yeah he did win the first set 6-2 and then was pretty bad after that.

But yeah, that's a good and surprising win for Nadal. Its really the equivalent to Federer beating Nadal on clay. It shouldn't happen, but occasionally a better player on their best surface just doesnt play very well and the lesser player wins.

paseo
02-13-2010, 05:03 AM
Nadal is a horrible matchup for Federer and the main reason he has managed to so far win 6 slams in the era of the GOAT. If you can't beat Federer at the slams, you can't win slams in this era. Just ask Roddick, Davydenko, Hewitt, Murray.

It tells us that Nadal is Federer's worst match-up.

It means a few things:

1. Nadal only reaches the finals of hard court tournaments when he is in extremely good form.
2. All of those matches were played on hard courts that react quite a bit to topspin, so Nadal was not really at a disadvantage from the surface.
3. Nadal matches up extremely well with Federer
4. Nadal is nowhere near Federer's level indoors.

This learns us that outdoor HC is slower than indoor HC.

It means that Nadull is such a terrible matchup for Federer that he gets to moonball his ass even in a hardcourt.

Too bad for him that he isn't such a bad matchup for a lot others hardcourt players (i.e. Murray, Del Potro, Djokovic) who can beat him.

Here's your answer.

BlueSwan
02-13-2010, 05:10 AM
Any significance for this kind of statistics ?

Miami 04 - Nadal
Miami 05 - Federer
Dubai 06 - Nadal
AOpen 09 - Nadal

As a different aspect, Nadal is 2-5 vs Djokovic on outdoor HC
and 0-3 vs Davydenko on outdoor HC.
With the exception of the first match, those were all very close matches. Ironically, Nadal should probably have won the one that Federer won, but on the other hand Federer should probably have won the two last matches on the list.

Anyway, if Nadal had been right-handed, Federer would have utterly dominated their matches - at least outside of clay.

2003
02-13-2010, 05:21 AM
What it tells us is that over the course of the twos careers, Nadal is leading the head to head on outdoor hardcourt by 3 matches to 1.

Did this really need a thread?

Har-Tru
02-13-2010, 09:24 AM
Miami and Aus are just about the two slowest hard courts on tour - only Auckland is noticeably slower (cos it still uses Plexi). Dubai is midspeed though, that's a good win.

IW?

leng jai
02-13-2010, 10:06 AM
It means Nadull has won 3 matches against Fedclown on outdoor hard court and Fedclown has won 1 match.

R.Federer
02-13-2010, 10:32 AM
That those "hard courts" were really clay in disguise? :shrug:

Matt01
02-13-2010, 10:44 AM
That those "hard courts" were really clay in disguise? :shrug:


The excuses :lol:

federersforehand
02-13-2010, 10:49 AM
after madrid feds got nadals number (finally), he has his confidence back and has found a way to beat rafito. once roger finds a way, he never forgets, case in point: hewitt (9-2) (15-9) , roger will probably never lose to rafa again in his career i reckon, and i think this year will actually be feds ' peak year'. the tennis he played in aus open was far and away superior to what rafito can do; and feds confident enough to smash nadal now hes finally found a way around his bad left right matchup

thrust
02-13-2010, 11:01 AM
Nadal is a horrible matchup for Federer and the main reason he has managed to so far win 6 slams in the era of the GOAT. If you can't beat Federer at the slams, you can't win slams in this era. Just ask Roddick, Davydenko, Hewitt, Murray.

SO TRUE, ESPECIALLY SLAM FINALS! I was a bit surprised Nadal also leads Roger H-H on hard courts. Good for him!

samanosuke
02-13-2010, 01:05 PM
It means that for 10-20 years nobody will remember where did they play , who was the winner , H2H score . It will be remembered only GS wins and Federer will be bigger GOAT then he is now and Rafa will be great player but miles far from Roger

philosophicalarf
02-13-2010, 02:28 PM
IW?

Yeah, IW is usually in an unholy troicka with Miami and Aus in the slowness stakes. It is a little bit different though, far less humid cos of the desert air, much higher bounce (thus Isner's success last year, serve was unplayable until he ran into someone of near similar size in DelPot). Daytime it's probably a bit quicker on average, but the night matches are reaaalllllllllllllly slow.

Commander Data
02-13-2010, 02:29 PM
It tells us that Nadals game matches up that way with Federers game that he wins about 3 out of 4 matches on outdoor HC.

It also tells us that this Info is rather insignificant because it does not earn you ranking points nor money or titles. Tennis is not about how you match up with one player but how you do against different players. Federer clearly has the edge there.

So, as I said, insignificant play with numbers, is all it is. Nobody will ever care for this in a couple years....

BlueSwan
02-13-2010, 02:32 PM
after madrid feds got nadals number (finally)
I don't know about that. He didn't get "Nadals number" after beating him in Hamburg or any of the numerous times he's beaten him off clay. Federer won Madrid because of big serving and clutch play, it wasn't because he was blowing Nadal off the court and Nadal looked somewhat spent anyway.

I would still have Nadal as favourite against anyone on clay.

nobama
02-13-2010, 03:25 PM
Yeah, IW is usually in an unholy troicka with Miami and Aus in the slowness stakes. It is a little bit different though, far less humid cos of the desert air, much higher bounce (thus Isner's success last year, serve was unplayable until he ran into someone of near similar size in DelPot). Daytime it's probably a bit quicker on average, but the night matches are reaaalllllllllllllly slow.IW probably the slowest hard court out there. Can only imagine how much sand they put in the paint. :o

alal
02-13-2010, 04:13 PM
LOL.....


I disagree that h2hs do not mean anything. Obviously smaller more insignificant h2hs do not mean anything.. Roger's h2hs against Simon or Canas shouldnt mean a whole helluva lot. But the h2h vs Nadal means a big deal in determing GOAT immortality. To me Nadal stopped the bleeding with his own injuries or else if Nadal stayed peak the h2h probably at this point would be around 18 or 19-7 in favor of Nadal on all surfaces. Nadal told Federer that he was going to overtake Pete's slam record in the future at the post AO finals. Was this foreshadowing? Nadal was the only player to stop this from happening. Did he know he was going to go down injured by the AO. There were reports that Nadal was cutting practices short all through the AO due to his knees

On clay, Nadal is so good. But Federer is also good enough to go into later rounds to meet Nadal. While on other surfaces, Federer always go into later rounds, while Nadal will only get into that later rounds when he is in form and 100% fit. (Federer encountering a mono disease can still get into later rounds on clay and that is not fair to him to count on the H2H with Nadal)
So you are looking at the stat where in every match of that stat, Nadal is pretty much in form while Federer is sometimes in-form sometimes not (but still manage to get into later rounds). You can prove this by looking at how many times an in-form Federer progress only to see early exit by Nadal. Nadal cannot go into later rounds at slam if he is not in-form.
Apart from all above, you dont need to dominate everyone to be considered the best of all time. Nadal cannot dominate players Federer can. It is a matter of style of play. If you are a sports fan, you should understand this. It happens in every sport.

No offense to Nadal fans. Nadal is a great player in tennis history. And the incident of him only proves that this is not a weak era. On clay, Sampras will never get a game from Nadal. Deal with it!

SaFed2005
02-13-2010, 04:30 PM
In all honestly, there is no winning for Federer in this H2H or in general. Haters like the Samprastards will always make up excuses. What's funny is that its not even Nadal fans that discredit Federer's accomplishments, its mostly Sampras fans. A lot of Nadal fans are just fans of Sampras (they aren't really Nadal fans they just cheer for Nadal to see Federer lose).

Even if Federer does start beating Nadal, it will because Nadal is injured or tired or slow or whatever other excuses that Samprastards can come up with. If Federer still loses then its because Federer is a scrub or a mug or any of of those words. There is just no winning with haters. They will always turn or spin positive things into negatives no matter what.

The are so much in love with Sampras and really hate to see all his record being shattered by Federer. So they can never really appreciate Federer. Its kind of sad that they have to stoop so low to attempt to diminish Federer's accomplishments. If Federer does turn the H2H whats next? Once Federer beats the # of weeks at # 1 or the year end #1s... I wonder what they will do. I could never really understand some of the Sampras fans.... Why can't they appreciate both of these great champions instead of having to hate on one to try to boost the results of the other.

The way I see it they are both amazing players. Two of the greatest tennis players to ever be born. Nadal is also one of the best clay court players ever (maybe the best).

lessthanjake
02-13-2010, 05:31 PM
On clay, Nadal is so good. But Federer is also good enough to go into later rounds to meet Nadal. While on other surfaces, Federer always go into later rounds, while Nadal will only get into that later rounds when he is in form and 100% fit. (Federer encountering a mono disease can still get into later rounds on clay and that is not fair to him to count on the H2H with Nadal)
So you are looking at the stat where in every match of that stat, Nadal is pretty much in form while Federer is sometimes in-form sometimes not (but still manage to get into later rounds). You can prove this by looking at how many times an in-form Federer progress only to see early exit by Nadal. Nadal cannot go into later rounds at slam if he is not in-form.
Apart from all above, you dont need to dominate everyone to be considered the best of all time. Nadal cannot dominate players Federer can. It is a matter of style of play. If you are a sports fan, you should understand this. It happens in every sport.

No offense to Nadal fans. Nadal is a great player in tennis history. And the incident of him only proves that this is not a weak era. On clay, Sampras will never get a game from Nadal. Deal with it!

This is another point that should be made. Federer has made the finals of 18 of the last 19 slams. Obviously, he wasn't always in his top form, because no one is constantly in their top form. Yet he made the finals. Nadal doesn't make the finals if he isnt in his top form. So therein lies something else we should recognize. When Nadal and Federer have played, Nadal is basically always at his best, whereas Federer sometimes is, but sometimes isnt. There are a couple of instances of this going the opposite way (Madrid 2009 is an example) but Federer haters say those Federer wins mean nothing while ignoring that Federer has almost surely played Nadal more while not at his best than Nadal has played Federer while not at his best.