[grahampros]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

And yet...





That's a recent quote.

LOL..now that's funny. That's a quote from some hack on this site. Not anyone with any credibility. I'm not claiming to be an expert myself, but the the talk of Nadal's physical limitations were coming directly from credible folks in the game for years. I have yet to hear anyone with anyone creditably predict Nadal even in gerat health will win that many more French Opens.

[Kei_is_a_samurai]

Federer has reached 34 consecutive QF's.

Nadal has played in 33 slams total.

Says a lot.

[Corey Feldman]

Fed has played 6 US Open finals v SIX different opponents

has played 7 Masters Cup finals v SEVEN different opponents

lost 2 of those (both choked 5 setters v 2 diff Argies)

8 US Open quarter finals v Agassi, Nalbandian, Roddick, Berdych, Soderling x2, Tsonga, Blake

[TigerTim]

Why is their even a debate?

17>11
6 or whatever YEC fed has > 0
77 > 45ish
Masters equal, fed has like 200 more weeks at no.1
More finals of GS, more Wimbledons etc etc

This is as one sided as those stupid Schumacher vs fangio debates

[stewietennis]

I don't think the debate is about 17 vs 11 because the numbers are clear. Federer has achieved more in the primary categories. Nadal has kept pace in the secondary categores.

I believe the debate has more to do with how can Federer be the best ever if he loses over 60% of his matches against his main rival. Roger has an excellent record against the rest of the field. Nadal has a great record against the rest of the field, but not as good as Roger. That being said, Rafa still has a better winning percentage.

[atennisfan]

Originally Posted by stewietennis

I don't think the debate is about 17 vs 11 because the numbers are clear. Federer has achieved more in the primary categories. Nadal has kept pace in the secondary categores.

What secondary categories?

Originally Posted by stewietennis

I believe the debate has more to do with how can Federer be the best ever if he loses over 60% of his matches against his main rival. Roger has an excellent record against the rest of the field. Nadal has a great record against the rest of the field, but not as good as Roger. That being said, Rafa still has a better winning percentage.

Professional tennis is played mostly on HC, and yet most of Nadal's wins vs Fed (or anyone else) were on clay.

[Slice Winner]

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.

[evilmindbulgaria]

Originally Posted by Slice Winner

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

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.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by evilmindbulgaria

Great comparison since 9:8 is the same as 18:10 including every surface in a Grand Slam

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.

[Serverer]

Originally Posted by evilmindbulgaria

Great comparison since 9:8 is the same as 18:10 including every surface in a Grand Slam

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.

[Tag]

sampras the real GOAT

no bad h2hs

[TigerTim]

I thought he was banned

[TigerTim]

Originally Posted by Tag

sampras the real GOAT

no bad h2hs

Hewitt

[ssj100]

Originally Posted by TigerTim

Hewitt

No bad H2H with 10+ total games played?

[Tag]

Originally Posted by TigerTim

Hewitt

4-5 is a bad head to head?

i think the 'worst' head to head sampras had was 4-6 against krajicek