Mens Tennis Forums banner

How will it look?

Endless Federer-Nadal debates

246K views 4K replies 607 participants last post by  Zverevdadiii 
#1 ·
Roger Federer reached all four slam finals in 2007, Nadal reached 3 finals and a quarter final.

Roger won the prestigious Tennis Masters Cup. We will have to wait to see if Nadal can win the WTF.

Federer won 8 titles in 2007, including 3 grand slams.

Nadal won 3 grand slams in 2010, including the prestigious RG Wimbledon double. He also won 3 slams in a row.

Both players had interesting slam draws. Federer had to beat world number two Rafael Nadal in Wimbledon final, and a very on fire Djokovic in the US Open. Nadal had to beat Bird Itch in Wimbledon final and a very tired Djokovitch in Us Open final.

2007 was probably Federers least impressive 3 slam season, 2010 was Nadals best season so far one would have to think.

So who had a better season?

Discuss.
The floor is yours. Have at it.
 
See less See more
#1,101 ·
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

Rafa was a slam contender at all the slams from 2008 on (at least SF in every slam that year).
So if the Nadal-Fed h2h is so important, then Nadal should have stopped Federer from winning USO 2008, RG 2009, Wim 2009, Aus 2010, Wim 2012.
Then Fed would be on 12 slams, and Rafa on something like 16. In that case, the h2h would actually matter.

In real life, the h2h means nothing. Fed is clearly the better player, despite having a match-up issue.

Muzza has a winning h2h with Roger. Is he a greater player? Does it make Fed not the GOAT because of that?
Again, Muzz has never taken Fed out in a slam, so the h2h is almost meaningless.
 
#1,102 ·
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

Rafa was a slam contender at all the slams from 2008 on (at least SF in every slam that year).
So if the Nadal-Fed h2h is so important, then Nadal should have stopped Federer from winning USO 2008, RG 2009, Wim 2009, Aus 2010, Wim 2012.
Then Fed would be on 12 slams, and Rafa on something like 16. In that case, the h2h would actually matter.

In real life, the h2h means nothing. Fed is clearly the better player, despite having a match-up issue.

Muzza has a winning h2h with Roger. Is he a greater player? Does it make Fed not the GOAT because of that?
Again, Muzz has never taken Fed out in a slam, so the h2h is almost meaningless.
Great comparison since 9:8 is the same as 18:10 including every surface in a Grand Slam :yeah:

The moment Rafa-Fed H2H is mentioned Fedtards should humbly bow their heads,say "Too good", and walk away with the little dignity they have left.
 
#1,107 ·
#1,106 ·
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

I thought he was banned :confused:
 
#1,112 ·
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

You guys have totally missed my point.
Jeez.
For the h2h to mean anything, Nadal needed to actually get far enough in those slams I mentioned to stop Federer.
He wasn't able to, Fed leads 17 > 11 and thus the h2h is meaningless.
If Nadal ends up with more slams with Fed, the h2h will be a big deal. Until then, it's not.

See my logic?
I'm taking a slightly different approach to most people here, but the logic surely isn't difficult to follow.

Look at it this way: Muzza leads 9-8 in the h2h. He wasn't able to stop Roger from winning any slams. The h2h means almost nothing.
Nadal leads 18-10 or whatever it is. He stopped Fed from winning a few slams, but also wasn't able to stop Fed winning a shitload of slams.

The h2h by itself doesn't mean anything in the GOAT argument until it costs someone slams (or in Fed's case, the overall slam record).

If you flip it on its head, Muzza has a winning record against Fedsly. HOWEVER, Roger has won when it mattered, LITERALLY costing Muzzbot 3 slams.
Therefore, for Muzz, the h2h means dick squat, because it didn't gain him slams.

I'm using the slams = GOATness logic here, but everyone else does, so deal with it.
 
#1,113 ·
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (WTF vs Olympics)

You guys have totally missed my point.
Jeez.
For the h2h to mean anything, Nadal needed to actually get far enough in those slams I mentioned to stop Federer.
He wasn't able to, Fed leads 17 > 11 and thus the h2h is meaningless.
If Nadal ends up with more slams with Fed, the h2h will be a big deal. Until then, it's not.

See my logic?
I'm taking a slightly different approach to most people here, but the logic surely isn't difficult to follow.

Look at it this way: Muzza leads 9-8 in the h2h. He wasn't able to stop Roger from winning any slams. The h2h means almost nothing.
Nadal leads 18-10 or whatever it is. He stopped Fed from winning a few slams, but also wasn't able to stop Fed winning a shitload of slams.

The h2h by itself doesn't mean anything in the GOAT argument until it costs someone slams (or in Fed's case, the overall slam record).

If you flip it on its head, Muzza has a winning record against Fedsly. HOWEVER, Roger has won when it mattered, LITERALLY costing Muzzbot 3 slams.
Therefore, for Muzz, the h2h means dick squat, because it didn't gain him slams.

I'm using the slams = GOATness logic here, but everyone else does, so deal with it.
to be fair using your logic you have to consider the fact that Federer won a lot of his slams 2003/2004/2005/2006 years when Nadal was very young...... a few in which Nadal was not around at all
 
#1,120 ·
Nadal vs Fed slams won by age comparison

almost even at 26


Nadal

19 1
20 2
21 3
22 6
23
24 9
25 10
26 11
??

Roger Federer
21 1
22 3
23 5
24 8
25 11
26 12
27 15
28 16
29 16
30 17

So if Nadal can successfully recover from his injury, he has a decent chance to overtake Roger. There is no one to challenge him at FO. All he needs if a few other slams. What do you think?
 
#1,126 ·
Re: Nadal vs Fed slams won by age comparison

So if Nadal can successfully recover from his injury, he has a decent chance to overtake Roger. There is no one to challenge him at FO. All he needs if a few other slams. What do you think?
Rafa will only improve physically from now on, his knees getting stronger with each match. He is just in his first phase of domination on clay, he's about to enter the second phase of his career where every win on clay will be in straight sets with Rafa never being broken. You can expect another 4 RG-Wimbledon doubles. He will also start his domination on HC and indoors, and by the end of this second phase he will be known as the indoor GOAT. This second phase should start next season and will likely last 5 to 7 years, featuring 3 more titles at both the AO and USO and a 6 year being undefeated at the WTF. The third phase of his career will last for another 10 years after that, years during which Rafa will only win 2 slam titles a year, but he'll still remain #1 in the rankings based on his record setting 10 straight seasons with 8 Masters titles. Not counting his 3 additional Gold medals.
 
#1,121 ·
Re: Nadal vs Fed slams won by age

You can't really draw accurate comaprisons, because Federer played in a mug era where he had to beat guys like Phillipussy, Rodmug, Hewitt and Mugzalez for slams.
 
#1,125 ·
Re: Nadal vs Fed slams won by age comparison

Seems less and less likely after this year, to be honest. Sampras' 14 is more realistic for Rafa.
 
#1,130 ·
Re: Nadal vs Fed slams won by age comparison

Yeah. Unlike Fed who had good competition from his own generation and his younger generation, Nadal's own generation only has 2 good players. And his younger generation is full of clowns. With no faster and stronger young upcoming players, Nadal will bulldoze his way to more slams than Fed, unchallenged. For sure, man.
 
#1,132 ·
Re: Nadal vs Fed slams won by age comparison

Yeah. Unlike Fed who had good competition from his own generation and his younger generation, Nadal's own generation only has 2 good players. And his younger generation is full of clowns. With no faster and stronger young upcoming players, Nadal will bulldoze his way to more slams than Fed, unchallenged. For sure, man.
:haha:

Who would that competition be? Useless serve bot Roddick or a weaponless pusher Hewitt? Safin who cared about more about bitches than tennis? No fitness mug Fatbandian and slam clown Baldenko? Flukes like Gonzalez in slam final? :lol: Tough era indeed. The only competition the Geezer had was on on clay against baby Nadal and we all know how that turned out for him. Flukerer needed a serious injury to squeak out an RG title. :eek:
 
#1,136 ·
Re: Nadal vs Fed slams won by age comparison

Rafa was screwed from the beginning. The reason? Because there are 2 hard court slams per year and only 1 clay court slam.
 
#1,138 ·
Nadal could still do it, but if Fed wins 1 more it would be difficult to beat. It ultimately depends on Rafa's health though...

Sent from my SGH-T989 using VerticalSports.Com App
 
#1,149 ·
Toni Nadal: ´Roger Federer is better than Rafael Nadal. The ATP and ´favorable to the

Also raises the issue of why WTF cannot be played on clay. Yeah right. Not enough that his nephew was already enjoying the benefit of surface homogenization and slowing in general, even if the surface is a hard court. Now he wants even more of the slow stuff.

Agree with him on the GOAT debate point though.
 
#1,154 ·
Re: Toni Nadal: ´Roger Federer is better than Rafael Nadal. The ATP and ´favorable to

He's right on the surface part :shrug:

2 hardcourt slams, 1 clay one and the WTF is on hardcourt as well.
 
#1,159 ·
Re: Toni Nadal: ´Roger Federer is better than Rafael Nadal. The ATP and ´favorable to

He's right on the surface part :shrug:

2 hardcourt slams, 1 clay one and the WTF is on hardcourt as well.
AO is slow as hell, might as well call it clay.

Uncle Toni said:
for example, Davydenko has a favorable record but we all agree that Rafa is better than the Russian."
:lol:
 
#1,169 ·
Re: Toni Nadal: ´Roger Federer is better than Rafael Nadal. The ATP and ´favorable to

That's just stupid to say. AO might not be the fastest hardcourt, but it's still a hardcourt meaning it plays really fast compared to any clay court. It's definitely more favourable to Roger's game than to Rafa's.
:haha:. Hilarious attempt at trying to sound knowledgeable. AO's conditions are slower than sunny RG or even a normal RG. The way the ball slows down during the night and with the grainy surfaces, it's a slow hell. Saying the WTF should not always be on the same surface - why should RG or the AO then, huh? The WTF has always been the biggest indoor tournament.
 
#1,156 ·
He would clearly be speaking in Spanish so I wouldn't be surprised if he said faster courts or hardcourts rather than "super fast". The main point I guess is that more of the circuit is on surfaces that favour Fed - hard courts & a bit of grass - than those that favour Nadal - clay. Doesn't take away from why Federer is better than Nadal but it's just something that's a fact - there are 2 slams on hard court and only 1 on clay.

Really Federer fans should be happy with Toni - he's always saying how great Federer is and that the debate is only between him and Laver, not him and Nadal. Also both him and Nadal have always said they don't think much of the H2H situation.
 
#1,168 · (Edited)
I like the way in the same paragraph he celebrates history of tennis with Laver and says that tennis nowadays is mostly run on fast courts :rolleyes:

"Fedfans should be happy with Toni" ? no I'm happier with Rafael who has been more honest than Toni in recent years, as when he said in his book "against Fed, I know what I have to do, I only have to bring the ball back on court and play to his backhand, I'm much more scared by Djokovic and I had been since Djokovic emerged on Tour" ... and Toni is the manager who advices Rafael in those things, then he clearly thinks the same (I even think Rafa says that the long-term concern about Djokovic had been shared with Toni). From everything I heard, and he shows it again when he says that the idea against Fed was always to slow down the game, Toni is the strategist in the team, he thinks a lot taking some ideas sometimes from original origins.

As for the praising for Fed, you know Toni has always used the strategy of making his nephew "scared" of his opponents, and it has worked so well against Fed, why would he change ?

What Toni says will do very little for Fed's reputation but what Toni has made as Nadal's manager has done much more against that reputation.
 
#1,158 ·
I am starting to like that guy, at least he is honest and is saying facst, of course Rafa is not in GOAT discussion. H2H importance he totally blew away with Davydenko argument :D good one Tony:D

But about super fast surfaces well he probably didn´t watched much tennis before his nephew started on the tour:D

I think he meant surface ways that HC + indoor HC are major surface and Roger is better there than Rafa, but there is no more carpet, slower HC and clay wasn´t never dominant surface so don´t get his point here but o.k.
 
#1,162 ·
nadal has overachieved so much thanks to the help of the ATP.
Now he wants the WTF on clay so he can win one. :haha:

Uncle Toni such a disgusting person. Will do anything to win no matter the means. Those types of people disgust me. He should try to play by the rules and may the best and most talented player win.

The AO and USO surfaces have slowed down. nadal won because of that, it's a fact. Look at his record in the fastest court nowadays in Cincinnati. Didn't even reach the finals.
 
#1,163 ·
Why should the WTF always be the same surface? Seems a lot fairer to switch it every now and then, just like the olympics and just like there are differences in the surfaces of the different slams.
 
#1,164 ·
It is switched rather regularly from place to place, but not in time. Always at the end of the season. It's an important tournament, so it would be rather strange to have every warmup tournament available play on a different surface, wouldn't it? It's not as if we can move the entire clay season towards the end, to connect them.
 
#1,171 ·
Slowralian Open, Slowland Garros, Slowbledon and Ultra Slow Open. :eek: Correlation doesn't imply causation. I'm sure Sampras in his prime could have easily beat any recreational player on clay, but that doesn't mean clay suits his game. Likewise, Fed winning on slower surfaces doesn't mean that the surfaces are inherently beneficial to him.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top