Novel perspective on Nadal-Federer head-to-head [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Novel perspective on Nadal-Federer head-to-head

snoo
06-16-2009, 07:45 PM
One common objection to considering Federer as the (by now infamous) GOAT is that he has a loosing record against his major competitor.

So I did exercise my right to waste my time on vane tasks and looked at the following stat.

Starting from and including 2005 (the year in which Nadal forcefully won his first RG, thus establishing himself as contender in any GS) I looked at all the grand slams in which they BOTH played. Nadal defeated Federer in every single GS he won. Federer won GS's without playing against Nadal.

The result is:
2005: N1, F1
2006: N1, F2
2007: N1, F3
2008: N2, F1
2009: N1, F1

Total: Nadal 6 - Federer 9 (there are 4 slams in which Nadal didn't play).

The idea is to consider any GS in which they both enter as a "direct match" (Golf style). In this sense this stat (7-9) tells you their "head-to-head" on the big stage.

As any other stat, this one too is probably meaningless to the non tennis-fetichist.

Black Adam
06-16-2009, 08:06 PM
Nice try but that's a load of :bs:

Ariadne
06-16-2009, 08:22 PM
An interesting analysis. It certainly lends credence to the fact that their head-head in slams is skewed in favor of Nadal because of his lack of consistency in getting through to face Federer in non-French slams.

Commander Data
06-16-2009, 08:28 PM
As long as Nadal wins some more RG, things look pretty good for the Fed GOAT argument. Fed is the overall GOAT and Nanal the clay-GOAT. it is therefore okay to lose against Nadal on clay. For this to work Fed needs to keep his off-clay head-to-head positive.

NadalSharapova
06-16-2009, 08:28 PM
Keep hearing about the fact that fed has made the last 5 slam finals so I decided to analyse the last 5 slams.

Finals: Fed 5, Nadal 3

Wins: Fed 2, Nadal 3

Basically Fed will win until he faces Nadal, and if Nadal reaches final against fed, Nadal will win. simple formula.

scarecrows
06-16-2009, 08:31 PM
Keep hearing about the fact that fed has made the last 5 slam finals so I decided to analyse the last 5 slams.

Finals: Fed 5, Nadal 3

Wins: Fed 2, Nadal 3

Basically Fed will win until he faces Nadal, and if Nadal reaches final against fed, Nadal will win. simple formula.

and also

Fed loses only to nadal, Nadal can lose to any random clown :D

MrChopin
06-16-2009, 08:34 PM
That's an interesting point, but 14-6 essentially says the same thing.

What your point does highlight, however, is the flaw in the "Weak era" arguments. Nadal has been winning slams against the same competition since '05 and is still noticeably behind. Djokovic came in '08, but he was already top 3/4 by Wimbledon '07, since which Fed has won 5/10 to Djokovic's 1.

Ultimately though, you'll never convince Rafatards of the relative insignificance of the H2H, at least not while Rafa is winning that one stat while Fed holds most major stats...

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a223/Mr_Chopin/lifepreserverz4.jpg?t=1245183896

NadalSharapova
06-16-2009, 08:35 PM
and also

Fed loses only to nadal, Nadal can lose to any random clown :D

Shows Fed's success depends only on Nadal. Fed needs to pray that Nadal is out before he faces him.

Bottom line: Federer more consistent but Nadal more brilliant. (2/5 wins, 3/3 wins)

MrChopin
06-16-2009, 08:40 PM
Shows Fed's success depends only on Nadal. Fed needs to pray that Nadal is out before he faces him.

Bottom line: Federer more consistent but Nadal more brilliant. (2/5 wins, 3/3 wins)

Or rather that Fed can consistently beat everyone at the slams but Rafa, whereas Rafa loses to more players than just Fed.

scarecrows
06-16-2009, 08:42 PM
Shows Fed's success depends only on Nadal. Fed needs to pray that Nadal is out before he faces him.

Bottom line: Federer more consistent but Nadal more brilliant. (2/5 wins, 3/3 wins)

brilliant in losing to Soderling, Ferrer, Gonzalez and Tsonga?

it just shows that Fed hates playing Nadal, which everyone with at least 2 brain cells, that you dont have, has understood

Har-Tru
06-16-2009, 08:54 PM
As long as Nadal wins some more RG, things look pretty good for the Fed GOAT argument. Fed is the overall GOAT and Nanal the clay-GOAT. it is therefore okay to lose against Nadal on clay. For this to work Fed needs to keep his off-clay head-to-head positive.

Federer isn't the GOAT in my view, but good point.

NadalSharapova
06-16-2009, 08:56 PM
brilliant in losing to Soderling, Ferrer, Gonzalez and Tsonga?

it just shows that Fed hates playing Nadal, which everyone with at least 2 brain cells, that you dont have, has understood

Feds problem he hates playing Nadal. Nadal doesn't hate playing anyone, he owns fed, murray and djokovic

rubbERR
06-16-2009, 08:57 PM
Nadal sucks, end of discussion.

Myrre
06-16-2009, 09:22 PM
Nadal sucks, end of discussion.

+1

peribsen
06-16-2009, 09:47 PM
Or rather that Fed can consistently beat everyone at the slams but Rafa, whereas Rafa loses to more players than just Fed.

That is nothing but expected, since Fed is the GOAT and Rafa the guy who does his best to beat the GOAT (and the only one up to now to manage it consistently on big matches), but never pretending to be one himself. Knowing Rafa, the biggest menace to his career, second only to his knees, is that someday Fed will retire; Rafa's biggest turn-up seems to be proving he's good enough to deny some GS from the GOAT himself. Has anybody, ever, heard Rafa say he considers himself better than Federer (nr1 NOT being synonymous with better player)? If he did so, it wouldnt only be untrue, it could prove to be a huge mistake for his own career.

Joao
06-16-2009, 11:54 PM
Or rather that Fed can consistently beat everyone at the slams but Rafa, whereas Rafa loses to more players than just Fed.

I agree with you but I would rephrase it as: "Or rather that Fed can consistently beat anyone but Rafa at the slams and Rafa can be consistently beaten by anyone but Federer at the slams". Now which one of these situations would you rather be in? Be beaten by just THE one or by anyone?