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.
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (Did their rivalry strangle the game?
Yet, Safin won a Slam against the mediocre 5 set player Federer, while Roddick & Hewitt faded away.
Strong 2005 era. LMAO
2 retired, not because they were satisfied with their
Slam success rate. They certainly weren't fighting very hard, unlike what Fed fans say.
LOL From 2004-2012, Roddick was so scared that he hid in Texas while most of the top 50 players went to Europe to play on clay. The reason wasn't "Fed is dominating clay". Guess which 2 players intimidated him.
Nalbandian suddenly quit during the 2006 French Open semi with Federer.
He was too unfit and afraid at age 24.
None of these weak 2004-6 players would reach a semi with Djokovic! LMAO
Watching tennis is one thing, understanding it - completely different. At 10 years of age all you could do is follow the score and understand who's winning the match.
The butthurt coming from your post is pretty strong. As much as you insult Rafa, the 18 times he smacked his bitch Federina are not coming back
Of course he is, most players are more talented than Federer. In fact, Nadal is so talented that he's been able to win 11 slams with his weaker hand. That's something Federer can only dream of.
Of course he is, most players are more talented than Federer. In fact, Nadal is so talented that he's been able to win 11 slams with his weaker hand. That's something Federer can only dream of.
I've said it many times : I think so, yes. Nadal is a freakish talent and the effect of work on his results is overrated, Fed is not as impressive and the effect of work on his results is underrated.
Very surprising coming from a Fed fan I must say. Well, In terms of tennis ability, Fed is more gifted. However in terms of athletic ability, Nadal is way more gifted than him.
Not just tennis talent. Athletic talent too. :shrug: Can anyone become a physical beast with freakish movement by just working as hard as Nadal? The clear answer is no.
Nadal hasn`t Federer`s touch. Not even close. Though you can give tennis talent hundred definitions and all of them would be different and to some extent correct the same time.
I rate someone's talent by his ability to adjust to unsuitable condition and in time when more or less everything suits to his style of play it's hard to talk about unbelievable talent. Could you imagine Nadal being so successful and comfortable on every kind of court 20 years ago ? I personally can't
I agree about physical talent. But this kind of talent could make him successful in other sports also. And how we are posting on tennis forum the obvious answer on your question is NO
Now that said about Nadal, his body is a great talent ... but also a big liability, because I agree with many Nadalfans that his knee problem is more about bad luck than about the fact that his game is physical (although I still think having heard physios about that that his steps on the ground are very bad for his legs, it's not only about a "defensive running style", it's also about how you run, and how you use your legs, and for that I think that his footwork and game are "too physical")
His congenital problems with his legs, the fact that his feet were too small ... are well-documented.
In my eyes, he's the Achilles of the Iliad : a semi-God with a "Achille's heel".
And Fed in my eyes is the Hector of the Iliad (I even made fun imagining what the other players were : Djokovic was Pâris if I remember well and Moya was Patroclus :lol: )
Federer is the more talented tennis player, Nadal is the more talented athlete.
Basically, Federer was born to play tennis, he understands the game like no other and thus can play at maybe the highest level the sport has ever seen (during his prime) without putting much strain on his body, which is why he could conceivably remain a top 10 player until his late 30s, 40yo. Nadal, on the other hand, could probably succeed in a lot of different sports with his freakish athletic ability/talent; he's probably the most natural player ever on a claycourt, but outside of clay he has definitely benefitted from playing in an era where surfaces are slow enough to let his main attributes (speed, stamina, athleticism) shine. He most definitely can't play at a top level as 'effortlessly' as Federer, he's really putting his body on the line out there with outrageous physical feats. Tennis doesn't come as natural to him as it does to Federer.
With that said, Federer is an amazing athlete too, and Nadal has a lot of talent for tennis of course, don't let his unortodox technique fool you. The reason why both have such an amazing resumé is because they're beyong gifted in one of these aspects (Federer tennis talent, Nadal athletic ability) but also extraordinary in the other aspect, and both extremely strong mentally.
Federer is the more talented tennis player, Nadal is the more talented athlete.
Basically, Federer was born to play tennis, he understands the game like no other and thus can play at maybe the highest level the sport has ever seen (during his prime) without putting much strain on his body, which is why he could conceivably remain a top 10 player until his late 30s, 40yo. Nadal, on the other hand, could probably succeed in a lot of different sports with his freakish athletic ability/talent; he's probably the most natural player ever on a claycourt, but outside of clay he has definitely benefitted from playing in an era where surfaces are slow enough to let his main attributes (speed, stamina, athleticism) shine. He most definitely can't play at a top level as 'effortlessly' as Federer, he's really putting his body on the line out there with outrageous physical feats. Tennis doesn't come as natural to him as it does to Federer.
With that said, Federer is an amazing athlete too, and Nadal has a lot of talent for tennis of course, don't let his unortodox technique fool you. The reason why both have such an amazing resumé is because they're beyong gifted in one of these aspects (Federer tennis talent, Nadal athletic ability) but also extraordinary in the other aspect, and both extremely strong mentally.
one evidence in my eyes that Nadal is greatly talented : his game is greatly effective, esp. his spinnning abilities ... but why can no other player play the same way ?
Fed has a great technique but which others can approach or emulate, see Dimitrov for his shots, "only" he lacks his footwork.
Nadal ? nobody can play like him !
Both because of his athletic abilities and his hand abilities imo. I think you need to be incredibly strong to play his game so effectively (usually players who play with a lot of spin tend to play too short, that's always been their problem, it also was a problem for Nadal initially on hardcourts).
As for the legend "Nadal could only play on grass because he worked a lot and completely changed his game" has he really changed his game that much ? and at just 17 years old (yes the age Quinzi will be in 2 months) he already reached 3rd round in Wimbledon defeating Mario Ancic ! His movement on grass has always been genious !
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (Did their rivalry strangle the game?
Without Nadal and Djokovic, Federer would have made a joke of tennis.Tennis would have been murdered by Federer being too good without adequate challenge.
Without Nadal and Djokovic, Federer would have made a joke of tennis.Tennis would have been murdered by Federer being too good without adequate challenge.
Djokovic appeared a bit "late" in Federer's career. But if it wasn't for Nadal Federer would have been the most dominant athlete at any sport and the undisputed goat. We would be talking about a guy having 20+ slams, 2 calendar grand slams, like 4 career grand slams, 10 slams in a row and 500 weeks in a row at number 1 maybe.
Good thing that Nadal appeared. As you said, Federer would have kill tennis if not.
Any of those 3 would have dominated easily tennis without the other 2, but because of his consistency and longevity Federer would have it even easier.
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (Did their rivalry strangle the game?
Nadal is an incredibly inspiring athlete and character, while it's a real shame that a person like Federer got so much exposure anywhere.
At least he used to play some good tennis, but now it's time for him to leave -- and it wouldn't have come a moment too soon.
There are just two bad things: Nadal's injuries and Djokovic's inexplicable slump after AO 2008. Hopefully, in good health, they will beat the old man into the ground and be done with it.
Nadal is an incredibly inspiring athlete and character, while it's a real shame that a person like Federer got so much exposure anywhere.
At least he used to play some good tennis, but now it's time for him to leave -- and it wouldn't have come a moment too soon.
There are just two bad things: Nadal's injuries and Djokovic's inexplicable slump after AO 2008. Hopefully, in good health, they will beat the old man into the ground and be done with it.
Re: Endless Federer-Nadal debates (Did their rivalry strangle the game?
Some of the answers here - including from posters I have a lot of time for - are out of Alice Through the Looking Glass. What is this distinction between technique & athleticism anyway? Er yeah Nadal runs a bit faster than Fed. And he's better at moonballing, sorry, topspin. And er, that's it. In every other respect - hand-eye co-ordination, touch, imagination & vision, technique, reflexes, suppleness, variety - Federer is superior to Nadal.
and what is this distinction between "tennis abilities" and "athlectic abilities" which I've so much read ?
Athleticism is a big big part of tennis nowadays, tennis is not in Nastase's time anymore (I'm also sorry about that like you ), it's a very physical sport :shrug:
Besides, Nadal has other abilities than the ones you mentioned.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Mens Tennis Forums
18.5M posts
87.7K members
Since 2002
A forum community dedicated to male tennis players and enthusiasts. Talk about everything from the ATP, NSMTA, to college Tennis and even everything about equipment. It's all here!