Will the Nadal/FedererH2H be later seen as significant if Federer does not repair it? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Will the Nadal/FedererH2H be later seen as significant if Federer does not repair it?

fast_clay
06-10-2009, 01:02 AM
Just saying... cos.. many proclaimed GOATS owned their closest rivals at many big moments... It's still pigeon status no...?

Arkulari
06-10-2009, 01:21 AM
people won't remember their h2h in the future, it's not what they will be famous for, the rivalry yes, but not their h2h, just the slam wins/played :shrug:

Joao
06-10-2009, 01:28 AM
How many people nowadays know the H2H between McEnroe and Bjorg? Or between Connors and McEnroe, or Sampras and Agassi etc etc etc? I surely don't and don't really care ... so no in 20 years from now I won't remember Federer-Nadal's H2H either and so it won't be significant in my assessment of their respective careers!

finishingmove
06-10-2009, 01:29 AM
embrace yourself.


no it won't, because nadal will win more slams.

leng jai
06-10-2009, 01:30 AM
Nadull will be remembered for having a good H2H with Fedmug, but no one will care Fedmug had a bad H2H with Nadull.

fast_clay
06-10-2009, 01:35 AM
no one cares about Head to Heads like Becker and Edberg... just who got up at the important times... but, you dont even talk about their Head to Heads...

GOAT discussion usually comes under more scrutiny... periods of prolonged ownership at Championship level...

Everko
06-10-2009, 02:19 AM
Nadull will be remembered for having a good H2H with Fedmug.YES. but no one will care Fedmug had a bad H2H with Nadull.BULL.

...

SheepleBuster
06-10-2009, 02:21 AM
I feel this whole h2h thing is bs. Roger is on his way down whereas Nadal, Murray, and Novak are on their way up. Of course, Roger's going to lose more matches to him. But those guys don' have the balls to win the slams (except Rafa).

Arkulari
06-10-2009, 02:22 AM
let's see, right now, in the world beside Voo and a couple other MTFers, who remembers the Laver/Rosewall h2h? the Borg-McEnroe one? the Sampras-Agassi? is it mentioned anywhere in the media? does that change what people think about them? NO

the rest is just BS :shrug:

luie
06-10-2009, 02:26 AM
Nadull will be remembered for having a good H2H with Fedmug, but no one will care Fedmug had a bad H2H with Nadull.
Pretty much. If fed continues to win slams his H2h will be irrelevant.If nadull wins a Calender GS once , twice or close to the all time slam total it would be advantage for him. but if he doesn't achieve this it will not matter.Also it will dullen the blow because federer had to play either the best or second best clay courter in history during his time,simply because the lopsided H2H is a direct result of CLAYTONITE.

cool bird1
06-10-2009, 02:42 AM
Nope I was watching a progame and I think the guy name was Puage Gonzallea something like that and when Laver went pro he won the first set agist him then lost the next 15 or 20 sets.

But does that take away from lavers great achviment no.

FedFan_2007
06-10-2009, 02:48 AM
Not relevant, besides I feel Roger will make it more respectable in the end.

straitup
06-10-2009, 02:49 AM
Pretty much. If fed continues to win slams his H2h will be irrelevant.If nadull wins a Calender GS once , twice or close to the all time slam total it would be advantage for him. but if he doesn't achieve this it will not matter.Also it will dullen the blow because federer had to play either the best or second best clay courter in history during his time,simply because the lopsided H2H is a direct result of CLAYTONITE.

Exactly. The fact that 11 of their 19 head to head matches have been on clay really makes the head to head less significant.

fast_clay
06-10-2009, 03:05 AM
Nope I was watching a progame and I think the guy name was Puage Gonzallea something like that and when Laver went pro he won the first set agist him then lost the next 15 or 20 sets.

But does that take away from lavers great achviment no.

yeah... pancho was hardcore... pretty good 'guts' vs 'magic' parallel between Pancho/Laver and Nadal/Federer... but not a good parallel stylewise...

At Championship level... Laver owned everyone... then he turned pro and Laver got owned... them did some major owning himself of the same blokes in the next few years... but, got owned again from time-to-time... but... later on, when it counted, did a bit more complete ownership of a new breed...

i'd like to see Fed come back and do some professional owning... if only Nadal's healthy enough to join him... but, maybe that'll be in a QF down the road sometime... which'll be interesting in itself if in a GS...

FedFan_2007
06-10-2009, 03:08 AM
So Federer is penalized for his 7-13 vs Nadal, but gets no credit for having 6 Turkeys and umpteen pigeons which is probably more then anyone has ever had in tennis history. He basically owns 99.99% of the tour and isn't the GOAT because 2 players own the H2H right now? Bullshit.

fast_clay
06-10-2009, 03:10 AM
So Federer is penalized for his 7-13 vs Nadal, but gets no credit for having 6 Turkeys and umpteen pigeons which is probably more then anyone has ever had in tennis history. He basically owns 99.99% of the tour and isn't the GOAT because 2 players own the H2H right now? Bullshit.

he doesnt have to own him all the time... just once in his career if he might own nadal a few times in a row... in big matches...

shame about the ATP doing away with best of 5 finals, cos they were a good professional gauge...

andylovesaustin
06-10-2009, 03:17 AM
For me, Roger is pretty much the GOAT regardless of the H2H match-up with Rafa. I guess people can argue Laver, too, but they're pretty close.

I think Rafa will be remembered for his own merit.
As far as Rafa's success, I think it's going to depend upon how he handles losing the French so early--which he'd had never even lost a set before.

So as far as Rafa v Roger, it will depend upon Rafa's evolution as a player. Roger is already in a league of his own. Regardless,I think their rivalry as it's played out thus far will be talked about for a long time.

This Wimbledon is going to be interesting.

rwn
06-10-2009, 06:54 AM
he doesnt have to own him all the time... just once in his career if he might own nadal a few times in a row... in big matches...

shame about the ATP doing away with best of 5 finals, cos they were a good professional gauge...

2 Wimbledon finals in a row is good enough for me. :)

denisgiann
06-10-2009, 07:29 AM
If Fed was a clay clown.....he wouldnt actually meet nadal anywhere on clay and his record against him would have been positive.And if Nadal was so majestic on hardcourt...he would have been in many usopen finals...and get his ass kicked.....I think this proves how great player overall fed is.

theprodigy
06-10-2009, 07:37 AM
Who are the idiots who said yes?

Anyway, I think Fed still has something to prove against Nadal in non-clay GS Finals, but I do not think this is such a big "requirement" before he can be declared GOAT.

Other than that, overall H2H counts for shit.

buzz
06-10-2009, 07:41 AM
As far as Rafa's success, I think it's going to depend upon how he handles losing the French so early--which he'd had never even lost a set before.


No, he losts some sets before at the French even to Federer. He 'only' once won the french without losing a set

dodo
06-10-2009, 08:03 AM
Nadull will be remembered for having a good H2H with Fedmug, but no one will care Fedmug had a bad H2H with Nadull.
+1

Those who care, will know the reasons behind the lopsidedness (see recent JennyS thread). Except, obviously, Rafa fans.

oz_boz
06-10-2009, 10:11 AM
+2

To some, Fed would be greater if he lost every match before a potential loss to Rafa, instead of getting to next round in the tournament - just as if Rafa is greater for not having faced Fed in grass/indoor/fast hc finals in earlier years. Logic indeed.

MariaV
06-10-2009, 10:20 AM
Could you give it a rest already, guys? :zzz:
I voted poor - poor to crap thread. :shrug:

Commander Data
06-10-2009, 10:27 AM
I guess he will be mentioned from time to time by experts. that when they talk about the GOAT it is a bit a pity that he had no real solution for the Nadal problem.


It is still time to solve that riddle, though...

andylovesaustin
06-10-2009, 10:44 AM
No, he losts some sets before at the French even to Federer. He 'only' once won the french without losing a set


Wait, then what was that record Soderling broke?:confused:

I thought Rafa hadn't lost a set? But I don't keep track of stuff like that unless somebody brings it to my attention! :lol:
Usually, I just keep track of who wins!

Was it for consecutive sets won then?:confused:

My point is that I'm just curious to see how Rafa handles losing so early in the French. I know he's been having trouble with his knees, but a loss is still a loss. Plus, he's had back to back losses in Madrid and RG. So, we'll see what happens.

Also for Rafa, I would think it had to be a little draining just being ranked #2 as long as he was. How long was he #2 in the world? To "hang in there" with Roger had to be tough.

To me Roger has already established his record. Even though Rafa has established a great record considering his age, he's not at the same place Roger is in his career to where we can really draw any concrete long-term conclusions except his success on clay, for sure, and his emerging success on other surfaces.

There might be another player who steps-up to challenge them all.

Goldenoldie
06-10-2009, 11:04 AM
How many people nowadays know the H2H between McEnroe and Bjorg? Or between Connors and McEnroe, or Sampras and Agassi etc etc etc? I surely don't and don't really care ... so no in 20 years from now I won't remember Federer-Nadal's H2H either and so it won't be significant in my assessment of their respective careers!

I didn't know, so I looked it up.
McEnroe/Borg 7-7
Connors/McEnroe 14-20
Sampras/Agassi 20-14

Only surprise is that Borg and McEnroe didn't meet more often.

Also for the other seniors on this forum Laver/Rosewall 13-7

andylovesaustin
06-10-2009, 11:13 AM
I didn't know, so I looked it up.
McEnroe/Borg 7-7
Connors/McEnroe 14-20
Sampras/Agassi 20-14

Only surprise is that Borg and McEnroe didn't meet more often.

Also for the other seniors on this forum Laver/Rosewall 13-7

Wow! No wonder Johnny Mac seems to still be so bummed about Borg's retirement.

Now, I really understand why he feels robbed--or so he said in this ESPN documentary about Borg! :shrug:

Matt01
06-10-2009, 11:46 AM
If Fed was a clay clown.....he wouldnt actually meet nadal anywhere on clay and his record against him would have been positive.And if Nadal was so majestic on hardcourt...he would have been in many usopen finals...and get his ass kicked.....I think this proves how great player overall fed is.


:lol: Great logic.

If Nadal was majestetic on fast hardcourt, he would kick Fed's ass and not the other way round :wavey:

And besides. kicking Fed's ass on Dubai and Melbourne hardcourts already gets the job done for now.

JolánGagó
06-10-2009, 11:50 AM
How can someone be GOAT while at the same time being a pigeon to his biggest rival, to whom he's lost no fewer than 5/7 GS Finals :shrug:

MTF :yeah:

bokehlicious
06-10-2009, 11:52 AM
The same way Krajicek denied Sampras the GOAT tag...

born_on_clay
06-10-2009, 11:55 AM
Of coure it will
The GOAT is and will always be a pigeon to the Spanish ragging bull
Vamos !!!!

bokehlicious
06-10-2009, 11:58 AM
"to repair it" the moonballer from Manacor should reach more finals off clay (or drop in the rankings to meed Fed earlier) :shrug:

RonE
06-10-2009, 12:01 PM
The same way Krajicek denied Sampras the GOAT tag...

:lol: :yeah:

Also don't forget Sampras and Agassi. People keep raving on about how Nadal is 5-2 against Federer in grand slam finals but then I don't remember any of those same people mentioning that Pete had a 4-1 record against Andre in GS finals. For some reason this doesn't seem to have put a blemish on Agassi's achievements, but this is MTF we are talking about after all :shrug:

Matt01
06-10-2009, 12:03 PM
The same way Krajicek denied Sampras the GOAT tag...


This is BS and you know it.

bokehlicious
06-10-2009, 12:07 PM
This is BS and you know it.

Why? :confused: :shrug: because you're a Fed hater and it doesn't suit your process of thought? :scratch: :awww: :hug:

Matt01
06-10-2009, 12:13 PM
Why? :confused: :shrug: because you're a Fed hater and it doesn't suit your process of thought? :scratch: :awww: :hug:


No, because Krajicek won only one big final against Fed and won only one big title in his whole career :rolleyes:

Rafa on the other hand will, if his knee holds up, get close to Fed in big achievements soon.

DDrago2
06-10-2009, 12:17 PM
THe only way Rafa can become greater than Fed is by enging up with greater achievements then him

Those who want Fed to own Nadal basicaly want Fed to prove OMNIPOTENCE. Omnipotence exists only in the heads of children. The reality is that no player is perfect and does not have to own EVERYONE in order to be considered the best player

Bernard Black
06-10-2009, 12:25 PM
I think anyone with a shred of intelligence and zealous enough to look back at the history of the head to head between these players will make note of the age difference and the surface factor.

Fast_clay, you bored now your boys are out of the 20/20?

SerenaFederer
06-10-2009, 12:41 PM
:yawn: even my commentator keeps mentioning how the h-2-h is not indicative of everything since fed was consistently getting to all the majority of clay finals while nadal never got close to meeting fed at the us open or AO during the "majestic" years :shrug: 2006 and 2007 TMC show what fed in those years was able to do to rafa on a fast court :shrug: lopsided h-2-h simply because one player was so good he was always in the finals of everything even on clay, but kept meeting the same player on clay for the majority of matches is something will always take with a grain of salt unless they are true rafa lovers and fed haters...

bokehlicious
06-10-2009, 12:48 PM
Rafa on the other hand will, if his knee holds up, get close to Fed in big achievements soon.

getting 8 more slams (including USO) should indeed be a piece of cake for the mallorcan warrior (barring injury/tiredness :o) ;)

Matt01
06-10-2009, 12:50 PM
getting 8 more slams (including USO) should indeed be a piece of cake for the mallorcan warrior (barring injury/tiredness :o) ;)


I agree ;)

theprodigy
06-10-2009, 12:55 PM
THe only way Rafa can become greater than Fed is by enging up with greater achievements then him

Those who want Fed to own Nadal basicaly want Fed to prove OMNIPOTENCE. Omnipotence exists only in the heads of children. The reality is that no player is perfect and does not have to own EVERYONE in order to be considered the best player

This is worth repeating.

MacTheKnife
06-10-2009, 12:56 PM
How many people nowadays know the H2H between McEnroe and Bjorg? Or between Connors and McEnroe, or Sampras and Agassi etc etc etc? I surely don't and don't really care ... so no in 20 years from now I won't remember Federer-Nadal's H2H either and so it won't be significant in my assessment of their respective careers!

I do.. So yes it will be remembered by some, but most likely not by the masses. Mac was 7-7 vs Borg, but dominated the last 5 matches. He was 31-20 vs Conners, and the one that bothers us Mac fans was Lendl where Mac was 15-21.. So yes, if no one else, Fed's h2h against Nadal will always bug Fed fans.
O btw, Pete was 20-14 vs Andre.

pica_pica
06-10-2009, 03:00 PM
To be fair, every player has their nemesis. Federer has Nadal, Safin has Santoro, etc. Why so harsh on Federer? :rolleyes: Besides, greatness cannot be achieved properly without big obstacles. A nemesis in the form of another great player as Nadal, imo, only serves to solidify his GOAT status.

denisgiann
06-10-2009, 03:03 PM
:lol: Great logic.

If Nadal was majestetic on fast hardcourt, he would kick Fed's ass and not the other way round :wavey:

And besides. kicking Fed's ass on Dubai and Melbourne hardcourts already gets the job done for now.

Nadal never was majestic on hardcourts.He doesnt have the game to be.....If he was he would make slam finals as consistent as fed did on clay.But he couldnt even be there.....got it now? The sampras example is sound.If fed had his ability on clay he would never meet nadal there....and he would actually have a positive record.But who cares really...hes got himself an RG and moving forward while smooth style nadal got himself damaged knees from his floating game style.But tell me the truth now.....do you actually believe that a grinder has a chance of being the best ever? For one thing his joints have to be bionic just to be able to continue play like that.......

TennisGrandSlam
06-10-2009, 03:08 PM
No Need to compare.

Does anybody notice Boris Becker vs Edberg

Becker has overwhelming H2H against Stefan Edberg (25-10), but Edberg dominated ATP in the early 1990s.

FedFan_2007
06-10-2009, 03:10 PM
I can see andylovesaustin has dropped the Fed "drop shot king" meme.

fast_clay
06-10-2009, 04:09 PM
I think anyone with a shred of intelligence and zealous enough to look back at the history of the head to head between these players will make note of the age difference and the surface factor.

Fast_clay, you bored now your boys are out of the 20/20?

you cheeky british soapdodger... how can you bring up cricket on the eve of another great Ashes molestation delivered by Australia...

anyways, yeah.. was just throwing a lifeline out there for some nadal fanboys to cling on to and make fed fanboys angry...

i like watching trolls dance...

Matt01
06-10-2009, 06:20 PM
Nadal never was majestic on hardcourts.He doesnt have the game to be.....If he was he would make slam finals as consistent as fed did on clay.But he couldnt even be there.....got it now? The sampras example is sound.If fed had his ability on clay he would never meet nadal there....and he would actually have a positive record.But who cares really...hes got himself an RG and moving forward while smooth style nadal got himself damaged knees from his floating game style.But tell me the truth now.....do you actually believe that a grinder has a chance of being the best ever? For one thing his joints have to be bionic just to be able to continue play like that.......


That loss in January against a hardcourt clown like Nadal must have really hurt you... :p

But anyway: To answer your question: Yes, of course I think that Nadal has a chance...to answer the question with a "NO" and say that he doesn't have any chances to surpass Fedmug would be really stupid.

Henry Kaspar
06-10-2009, 06:25 PM
No, because Nadal is 4 years younger than him and it's just normal that the younger catches the older champ.

mitalidas
06-10-2009, 06:27 PM
It might be. Tennis afficionados will probably remember it.

When Andre's career slam is mentioned, like it has been in the last fortnight, I did not see any "..... BUT, he had a losing H2H with Sampras" mentioned in the same piece.
But when people wrote/write about Sampras in the GOAT debate, they are quick to write about the "Frenchless 14".

JoshDragon
06-10-2009, 07:21 PM
Yeah, I think it has to be. The main reason that Federer is not the indisputable GOAT is because of Nadal.

JediFed
06-10-2009, 08:45 PM
Depends on how well Nadal does. If Nadal never wins a thing from here on out, (a la Wilander), it won't really matter. People will chalk it up to matchup problems on clay.

If Nadal does better on hardcourts and challenges Fed, then I can see the advantage being negated.

The only case it will matter is if Nadal can get past Borg, with 11 wins on clay and grass. He's got 5 already.

Right now Borg > Nadal, and Nadal can't be the goat cause Borg is better.

GlennMirnyi
06-10-2009, 09:14 PM
Just saying... cos.. many proclaimed GOATS owned their closest rivals at many big moments... It's still pigeon status no...?

The answer you're looking for is yes.

lazybear
06-10-2009, 10:09 PM
If Roger can win two (or even one) more one of those big fancy cups, then the answer is no. I'm sure no one wrote that down before me, Nadal is just a horrible matchup for Roger. Yes, he can beat him at the biggest stages, we all know that, but is he a better player career wise because of that? Not really. That's not boxing. If he can match or surpass Roger's slams, then it's an entirely different story of course.

Cashif
06-10-2009, 10:19 PM
My answer in most of the case would be NO but since the GOAT factor comes in, YES it will have an impact on Federer legacy. How can a player who doesnt have a good record against his main rival can be called a GOAT???

Even if Federer is called a GOAT, there will always be question marks against his legacy because of his poor record against Nadal esp considering that he has lost in 5 Grandslam finals (2 in his fav surfaces)

Arkulari
06-10-2009, 10:46 PM
people won't remember the h2h, that's the truth :shrug:

Henry Kaspar
06-10-2009, 10:52 PM
How many people rank Connors above Rosewall, even though Connors owned Rosewall in the mid-70s?

fast_clay
06-10-2009, 10:56 PM
people won't remember the h2h, that's the truth :shrug:

Pub Conversation, 2023

Guy 1: yeah... federer was the greatest ever... easily...
Guy 2: huh...? f*** off mate... how could he be the greatest when his closest rival owned him all over the world...?

Har-Tru
06-10-2009, 11:17 PM
OP has a point. Other H2H are not mentioned because they don't go against the main current of opinion regarding one player (Laver over Rosewall, Sampras over Agassi). H2H at slams is crucial too, more than total H2H IMHO.

When debating GOATness and the like, H2Hs do count.

fast_clay
06-10-2009, 11:20 PM
How many people rank Connors above Rosewall, even though Connors owned Rosewall in the mid-70s?

20 years is a little different to 5... that is like a proper generation away... i mean Rosewall was busy most of the early part of his career ending the pro careers of players who played through the war years...... where i come from, Connors ought to be ashamed of himself that he couldn't put an old man away quicker...

DrJules
06-11-2009, 05:45 PM
Pub Conversation, 2023

Guy 1: yeah... federer was the greatest ever... easily...
Guy 2: huh...? f*** off mate... how could he be the greatest when his closest rival owned him all over the world...?

Only on clay does Nadal lead the head to head:

http://www.tenniscorner.net/index.php?corner=m&action=headtohead&player1id=FER001&player2id=NAR004

DrJules
06-11-2009, 05:49 PM
How many people rank Connors above Rosewall, even though Connors owned Rosewall in the mid-70s?

Rosewall was 39 when he played Connors 21 at Wimbledon 1974 / US Open 1974.

denisgiann
06-11-2009, 06:22 PM
Only on clay does Nadal lead the head to head:

http://www.tenniscorner.net/index.php?corner=m&action=headtohead&player1id=FER001&player2id=NAR004

Yes basically fed is penalized here...for being able to make finals in his worst possible surface.If he was less of a clay player and wouldnt make any clay finals he wouldnt have to face nadal.Then he would have a positive record against him.....and the universe wouldnt be ready to explode:p.......The logic in these forums sometimes is.....out of this world:rolleyes:.
And whats all this about grass season.its maximum two tournaments a guy can play on grass can this considered to be a season?In wimbledon you cant serve and volley anymore,lots of slugfest baseline points.Its like clay with chunks of grass on it....Tell me where is feds advantage in all this?If wimbledon was like some years ago...would nadal be able to make even the quarters?In usopen this shows clearly ...he is at the mercy of others.Now fed on the other hand has been making consistent finals in all surfaces(where in most of them...nadal was never there).That shows who is the superior player.Cause following your logic...nadal has a positive record against fed in usopen.....since he wasnt even able to make the finals..he never played against him.....so its all gooooood.IF he was making the finals but losing to fed in the end...he would be a mug........:rolleyes:

Caerula Sanguis
06-11-2009, 06:22 PM
Federer can not repair his record against Nadal. He might have a chance if he tanks Clay tournaments, but he won't.

manuel84
06-12-2009, 04:02 PM
"significant" is subjective.

Federer WILL break his tie with Sampras. Nothing else matters as much.