PDA

View Full Version : Nadal wins head to head against all the TOP 10 players!!!


Nadalator
02-22-2009, 01:17 PM
Wow!

Since tomorrow Nadal dominates the head to head against all the top 10 players! Amazing!

Nalbandian is falling from the top 10 this and Monfils is the new guest :-P

Nadal head to head against the top 10.

Federer 13-6
Djokovic 10-4
Murray 5-2
Davydenko 3-2
Roddick 4-2
Del Potro 3-0
Simon 3-1
Verdasco 7-0
Monfils 4-1

Nadal is 52-18 against the top 10! Wow!

Has any number 1 had a favourable head to head against every top 10 player???

LanceStern
02-22-2009, 01:48 PM
Federer? I don't know because he might not have had a favorable head 2 head vs. nalbandian and hewitt. When he finally got that, Nadal showed up.

That's a very impressive stat of Nadal's. Should be no reason why he's not number 1

P_Agony
02-22-2009, 02:09 PM
I see Murray changing that record...Murray owns Nadal and Federer on hard courts.

But interesting to see Davydenko is the top 10 who gives Nadal the most trouble.

beneszilo
02-22-2009, 02:43 PM
52-18 WOW That is impressing!

sheq
02-22-2009, 03:12 PM
wow that'S an extraordinary statistic

Love Game
02-22-2009, 03:37 PM
Wow!

Since tomorrow Nadal dominates the head to head against all the top 10 players! Amazing!

Nalbandian is falling from the top 10 this and Monfils is the new guest :-P

Nadal head to head against the top 10.

Federer 13-6
Djokovic 10-4
Murray 5-2
Davydenko 3-2
Roddick 4-2
Del Potro 3-0
Simon 3-1
Verdasco 7-0
Monfils 4-1

Nadal is 52-18 against the top 10! Wow!

Has any number 1 had a favourable head to head against every top 10 player???

Interesting stat! :)

janipyt05
02-22-2009, 04:08 PM
Andy Murray who

Cyan
02-22-2009, 07:44 PM
I see Murray changing that record...Murray owns Nadal and Federer on hard courts.

But interesting to see Davydenko is the top 10 who gives Nadal the most trouble.

On clay, grass and slow Hard Courts, wont be easy for Murray to beat Rafa.

Spider
02-22-2009, 08:36 PM
Thats an impressive record and shows utter dominance against his opponents. A 75% winning record against your closes rivals, wow, simply impressive!!

Did Federer have this record (winning against your nearest rivals). I ask because Nadal broke into the top 10 in 05 and has been Fed's biggest rival since then. And prior to that Nalbandian (and Hewitt) lead the head to head versus Federer till Fed found a way to beat these guys. So I was wondering whether Fed held this record during his reign as the world number one player? I would appreciate your input.

Spider
02-22-2009, 08:40 PM
In other word did Hewitt and Nalbandian get out of the top 10 (before Nadal entered into the scenes) during Fed's reign?

Rickson
02-22-2009, 08:42 PM
That's bad news for Rafa regarding Roger. Rafa now has the curse of 13 working against him and until he takes his licks, he's in some trouble.

danb
02-22-2009, 08:49 PM
Well, Rafa still can't do ballet so Fed is the better player (kidding).
Then, let's remember, according to tennis experts Murray owns Rafa (???!!!???) on HC

LanceStern
02-22-2009, 09:42 PM
Murray currently owns Fed and Nadal on Hardcourts in 3 setters (and technically 5 setters for Nadal)

Noveson
02-22-2009, 09:47 PM
Wow that is a crazy statistic

helloworld
02-22-2009, 10:20 PM
Wow!

Since tomorrow Nadal dominates the head to head against all the top 10 players! Amazing!

Nalbandian is falling from the top 10 this and Monfils is the new guest :-P

Nadal head to head against the top 10.

Federer 13-6
Djokovic 10-4
Murray 5-2
Davydenko 3-2
Roddick 4-2
Del Potro 3-0
Simon 3-1
Verdasco 7-0
Monfils 4-1

Nadal is 52-18 against the top 10! Wow!

Has any number 1 had a favourable head to head against every top 10 player???

Wow, your name says it all. :)

chrisdaniel
02-22-2009, 10:29 PM
That is very, very impressive.

crazylevity
02-22-2009, 10:34 PM
Federer holds the record of 26 consecutive matches won against top ten ranked opponents. The streak lasted from October 2003 to January 2005, when he lost to Marat Safin in a semifinal of the Australian Open.

Nadal's statistic is very impressive as well, though. Funny that with that record against top ten opponents, he hasn't won a Masters Cup yet. I think the most impressive thing to achieve against top ten opposition is to go unbeaten at the Masters Cup.

babbette
02-23-2009, 08:44 AM
You better recongnize! :mrgreen:

I miss him.Does anyone look like him and is willing to go out with a desperate girl?:(

edmondsm
02-23-2009, 09:12 AM
That is an amazing stat. I can't believe how many time Nadal and Djokovic have played already. Not that far off from the number of times he's played Federer

allcourter2008
02-23-2009, 09:59 AM
It's a very impressive statistic, but lets keep in mind that 24 of the 58 wins (+41%) were on clay.

Cyan
02-23-2009, 10:01 AM
Federer holds the record of 26 consecutive matches won against top ten ranked opponents. The streak lasted from October 2003 to January 2005, when he lost to Marat Safin in a semifinal of the Australian Open.

Nadal's statistic is very impressive as well, though. Funny that with that record against top ten opponents, he hasn't won a Masters Cup yet. I think the most impressive thing to achieve against top ten opposition is to go unbeaten at the Masters Cup.

Indoors is Rafa's worst surface.

icedevil0289
02-23-2009, 10:02 AM
It's a very impressive statistic, but lets keep in mind that 24 of the 58 wins (+41%) were on clay.

that's true, but than that also means that 59% of the wins were not on clay and for someone who was labeled only a clay courter, that is impressive.

allcourter2008
02-23-2009, 10:08 AM
that's true, but than that also means that 59% of the wins were not on clay and for someone who was labeled only a clay courter, that is impressive.
Of course it's still very impressive, but if you take clay out of the picture Nadal's stat against the top10 is 28:17.

LanceStern
02-23-2009, 12:02 PM
I don't want to diminish from Nadal's awesome stat there at all, but that does paint the picture a little bit better for me.

Then again, his clay court record is unbeliavable to (like 105+ Wins / 2 Losses the past few years?).

tahiti
02-23-2009, 12:19 PM
Interesting statistics, I suppose that's why he's no. 1.

Nadal is improving on indoor courts but he really plays best in "home conditions", hot and clay.

jackson vile
02-23-2009, 12:26 PM
Of course it's still very impressive, but if you take clay out of the picture Nadal's stat against the top10 is 28:17.

You are kidding me right, that is about the most moronic thing I have ever heard of.

Get your head out from where the sun don't shine!

Try as they might, twist as hard as they can, they can't stop Nadal from dominating their favorite players.

DEAL WITH IT

Gorecki
02-23-2009, 12:31 PM
Andy Murray who

Andy "i bageled the world's number one , the same one who was aced 7 times by a man 36 years old man with ciatica" Murray... you never heard of him?

svijk
02-23-2009, 12:31 PM
don't know how you guys have time to do this but thats a great stat and a great pointer (clay ct wins). useful thread unlike many other out there. can't believe someone actually started a thread on who has the best smile???? dumb.

allcourter2008
02-23-2009, 12:35 PM
You are kidding me right, that is about the most moronic thing I have ever heard of.

Get your head out from where the sun don't shine!

Try as they might, twist as hard as they can, they can't stop Nadal from dominating their favorite players.

DEAL WITH IT
How old are you? 12, or 13?

veroniquem
02-23-2009, 09:43 PM
Well, Rafa still can't do ballet so Fed is the better player (kidding).
Then, let's remember, according to tennis experts Murray owns Rafa (???!!!???) on HC
Nobody owns Rafa. That's why he has a winning record vs the top 10. Very impressive statistic. Against the whole (current)tour Nadal has only 2 losing head to heads (I'm not counting single encounters as that's not very significant): Nalby and Blake and even those would not qualify as "ownage": 2-0 for Nalby and 3-2 for Blake.

veroniquem
02-23-2009, 09:54 PM
How old are you? 12, or 13?
Older than you and less dumb for sure. Hey let's take indoor hard out of the picture for Fed and he has never won the Master Cup, interesting, hum? Heck let's take all hard court stats out of the picture for Fed, wow he has only won 5 slams, fewer than Nadal and all on one surface, that's really bad + he's lost 4 slam finals, ah what a loser!

veroniquem
02-23-2009, 10:07 PM
Murray currently owns Fed and Nadal on Hardcourts in 3 setters (and technically 5 setters for Nadal)
Technically Murray owns Rafa in best of 5 because he won ONE match? (they're actually 1-1 in best of 5 on hard court) Interesting way to look at things. And Murray doesnt "own" Rafa in best of 3 either as he has only won 1 of them vs 3 for Nadal. Murray owns Federer in best of 3 as he has won 5 of those matches vs only 1 for Fed, that would qualify as ownage, yes.

edmondsm
02-23-2009, 10:30 PM
Nobody owns Rafa. That's why he has a winning record vs the top 10. Very impressive statistic. Against the whole (current)tour Nadal has only 2 losing head to heads (I'm not counting single encounters as that's not very significant): Nalby and Blake and even those would not qualify as "ownage": 2-0 for Nalby and 3-2 for Blake.

Older than you and less dumb for sure. Hey let's take indoor hard out of the picture for Fed and he has never won the Master Cup, interesting, hum? Heck let's take all hard court stats out of the picture for Fed, wow he has only won 5 slams, fewer than Nadal and all on one surface, that's really bad + he's lost 4 slam finals, ah what a loser!

Technically Murray owns Rafa in best of 5 because he won ONE match? (they're actually 1-1 in best of 5 on hard court) Interesting way to look at things. And Murray doesnt "own" Rafa in best of 3 either as he has only won 1 of them vs 3 for Nadal. Murray owns Federer in best of 3 as he has won 5 of those matches vs only 1 for Fed, that would qualify as ownage, yes.

Very good posts. Although I will say, if anybody owns Nadal, it is my boy Nalbandian. David was past his prime and only on a hot streak, and Nadal got obliterated on both occasions. Vamos!!!!:twisted:

veroniquem
02-23-2009, 10:39 PM
Very good posts. Although I will say, if anybody owns Nadal, it is my boy Nalbandian. David was past his prime and only on a hot streak, and Nadal got obliterated on both occasions. Vamos!!!!:twisted:
Yep Nalbandian can be proud of himself: his record vs Rafa is the best there is!

edmondsm
02-23-2009, 10:52 PM
Yep Nalbandian can be proud of himself: his record vs Rafa is the best there is!

It's really too bad that all tournaments don't take place on carpet in an air-conditioned indoor arena. If that was the case, David would be GOAT. Maybe he needs to convert to racquetball.

ESP#1
02-23-2009, 11:02 PM
I wonder if Nadal could beat Nalbandian now, I get the impression that Nalby has his number but who knows,

edmondsm
02-23-2009, 11:40 PM
I wonder if Nadal could beat Nalbandian now, I get the impression that Nalby has his number but who knows,

I would put my money on Nadal regardless of venue.

roddickfan90
02-24-2009, 01:44 AM
against roddick, they played twice on clay and when rod was injured.

roddickfan90
02-24-2009, 01:51 AM
and actually,if you take away clay, nadal dont have a great record over top 10, but a great stat none the less

veroniquem
02-24-2009, 05:51 PM
It's really too bad that all tournaments don't take place on carpet in an air-conditioned indoor arena. If that was the case, David would be GOAT. Maybe he needs to convert to racquetball.
I don't know, I think David is struggling with consistency even indoors.

veroniquem
02-24-2009, 05:53 PM
I wonder if Nadal could beat Nalbandian now, I get the impression that Nalby has his number but who knows,
Let's not get carried away now, both wins were back to back in fast indoor tournaments. We'd have to see what happens on other surfaces and also in best of 5 (both matches were in best of 3)

rubberduckies
02-24-2009, 06:50 PM
Very good posts. Although I will say, if anybody owns Nadal, it is my boy Nalbandian. David was past his prime and only on a hot streak, and Nadal got obliterated on both occasions. Vamos!!!!:twisted:

Fed got beaten by Nalbandian in those same tournaments. So did everybody else. Does Nalby own Fed?

luckyboy1300
02-24-2009, 07:15 PM
Wow!

Since tomorrow Nadal dominates the head to head against all the top 10 players! Amazing!

Nalbandian is falling from the top 10 this and Monfils is the new guest :-P

Nadal head to head against the top 10.

Federer 13-6
Djokovic 10-4
Murray 5-2
Davydenko 3-2
Roddick 4-2
Del Potro 3-0
Simon 3-1
Verdasco 7-0
Monfils 4-1

Nadal is 52-18 against the top 10! Wow!

Has any number 1 had a favourable head to head against every top 10 player???

impressive! however let nadal break first the record of 27 consecutive wins against top 10 players then we can talk again about serious domination of the top 10 players.

edmondsm
02-24-2009, 07:17 PM
Fed got beaten by Nalbandian in those same tournaments. So did everybody else. Does Nalby own Fed?

Has Federer played and beaten Nalbandian elsewhere? Yes. Has Nadal? No.

And what I posted wasn't even a slight against Nadal, it was more of a compliment. I said "if anyone owns Nadal, it's Nalbandian." Of all the great players out their, the only one that has truly handled Nadal in their meetings is Nalbandian. And it isn't really even ownage, they've only met twice.

veroniquem
02-24-2009, 07:20 PM
impressive! however let nadal break first the record of 27 consecutive wins against top 10 players then we can talk again about serious domination of the top 10 players.
I disagree. I find overall winning head to heads vs the top 10 a more impressive record. 27 consecutive wins if you have losing records vs some of the top 10 just means you didn't get to meet the guys that bother you for a few months, not being dominated by anyone is more difficult to achieve IMO.

luckyboy1300
02-24-2009, 07:29 PM
I disagree. I find overall winning head to heads vs the top 10 a more impressive record. 27 consecutive wins if you have losing records vs some of the top 10 just means you didn't get to meet the guys that bother you for a few months, not being dominated by anyone is more difficult to achieve IMO.

top 10 change every now and then. the player who totally owns you might drop out some time, screwing the record. well, to each his own. nalby and blake were top 10 last year too. during those 27 wins federer had met nalby, hewitt, henman, and agassi, all of them having very good h2hs vs federer before the run, so i don't know how your statement holds in this situation.

veroniquem
02-24-2009, 07:36 PM
top 10 change every now and then. the player who totally owns you might drop out some time, screwing the record. well, to each his own. nalby and blake were top 10 last year too. during those 27 wins federer had met nalby, hewitt, henman, and agassi, all of them having very good h2hs vs federer before the run, so i don't know how your statement holds in this situation.
It's a very good record I'm sure but I'd also take overall highest win % if I had a choice. Was the 27 consecutive wins in 2006? It was definitely an extraordinary year by any standards! However careerwise Nadal's win % is higher than Federer's. Would you rather have a couple amazing years or a more consistent high level overall? I don't know, it's a matter of opinion I guess.

luckyboy1300
02-24-2009, 07:38 PM
It's a very good record I'm sure but I'd also take overall highest win % if I had a choice. Was the 27 consecutive wins in 2006? It was definitely an extraordinary year by any standards! However careerwise Nadal's win % is higher than Federer's. Would you rather have a couple amazing years or a more consistent high level overall? I don't know, it's a matter of opinion I guess.

t'was from late 2003 until safin stops it in 2005 ao semis. so he's undefeated in the whole year of 2004 vs top 10 players. oh well to each his own i guess.:)

edmondsm
02-24-2009, 08:21 PM
It's a very good record I'm sure but I'd also take overall highest win % if I had a choice. Was the 27 consecutive wins in 2006? It was definitely an extraordinary year by any standards! However careerwise Nadal's win % is higher than Federer's. Would you rather have a couple amazing years or a more consistent high level overall? I don't know, it's a matter of opinion I guess.

Federer averaged more then 2 slams a year over six years, and was #1 for the majority of that stretch, and you are saying that he had a "couple amazing years"? You would take Nadal's career over Fed's? If I didn't know better, I would think you were joking.

flying24
02-24-2009, 08:48 PM
Federer averaged more then 2 slams a year over six years, and was #1 for the majority of that stretch, and you are saying that he had a "couple amazing years"? You would take Nadal's career over Fed's? If I didn't know better, I would think you were joking.

If Federer only had a couple amazing years than Nadal must have had no amazing years since Federer has had FOUR years clearly greater than Nadal's thus far best year (2008 ).

veroniquem
02-24-2009, 09:01 PM
t'was from late 2003 until safin stops it in 2005 ao semis. so he's undefeated in the whole year of 2004 vs top 10 players. oh well to each his own i guess.:)
Really? Interesting. But now you said it , of course, it had to be before Nadal emerged, I should have thought about that!

veroniquem
02-24-2009, 09:10 PM
Federer averaged more then 2 slams a year over six years, and was #1 for the majority of that stretch, and you are saying that he had a "couple amazing years"? You would take Nadal's career over Fed's? If I didn't know better, I would think you were joking.
We'll have to wait a few more years for me to answer your question (hey I wouldn't spit on Federer's career no matter what!!) but right now sure it's a no brainer because at 22 Federer had achieved much less than Nadal (fewer slams, fewer titles, no prestigious feats like RG-W back to back, fewer weeks at #1). So I would be crazy to choose to be 22 year old Federer vs being 22 year old Nadal. (I cannot say about 27 year old Nadal as I don't know yet what that will be like). On a more subjective note, I would choose Nadal because I find him more charismatic than Federer (as a young male I'm sure I would want to be as popular as possible with the female crowd!), less "bottled up" emotionally and more fairplay.

luckyboy1300
02-24-2009, 09:22 PM
Really? Interesting. But now you said it , of course, it had to be before Nadal emerged, I should have thought about that!

still, if nadal is to be said as "dominant" against top 10 players, he should at least get close to beating that record. top 10 players change every now and then, as i've said. therefore h2hs against current top 10 players does not show overall dominance. nadal has only been beating most of those players before they hit their top 10 spots (murray, monfils, simon, del potro etc.), so yeah h2h will be misleading. the consecutive streak, however, clearly shows a player beating another player while "exactly" being in the top 10, clearly showing more of a "dominance".

koalakoala
02-24-2009, 09:35 PM
I am new to this forum but I think people here are just getting bored with Roger and Nadal resting.

Hey, guys, get better and come out to play. So we can have real matches to talk about.

veroniquem
02-24-2009, 09:45 PM
still, if nadal is to be said as "dominant" against top 10 players, he should at least get close to beating that record. top 10 players change every now and then, as i've said. therefore h2hs against current top 10 players does not show overall dominance. nadal has only been beating most of those players before they hit their top 10 spots (murray, monfils, simon, del potro etc.), so yeah h2h will be misleading. the consecutive streak, however, clearly shows a player beating another player while "exactly" being in the top 10, clearly showing more of a "dominance".
There are a few changes in the top 10 but also players who stay there for a long time (like Djoko and Federer). Also I'm not sure what you're driving at with the "wins before they reached top 10" accusation as Nadal has beaten a lot of those top 10 players very recently ( Monfils, Simon, Federer) and even Murray and Djokovic, Nadal beat them in the summer of 2008, it's not that long ago frankly.

edmondsm
02-24-2009, 09:50 PM
We'll have to wait a few more years for me to answer your question (hey I wouldn't spit on Federer's career no matter what!!) but right now sure it's a no brainer because at 22 Federer had achieved much less than Nadal (fewer slams, fewer titles, no prestigious feats like RG-W back to back, fewer weeks at #1). So I would be crazy to choose to be 22 year old Federer vs being 22 year old Nadal. (I cannot say about 27 year old Nadal as I don't know yet what that will be like). On a more subjective note, I would choose Nadal because I find him more charismatic than Federer (as a young male I'm sure I would want to be as popular as possible with the female crowd!), less "bottled up" emotionally and more fairplay.

Fairplay? You don't think Fed plays fair?

Anyway, you weren't talking about Federer at 22. You said Federer had "a couple amazing years" and you would rather take Nadal's career over his because he was "more consistant." Federer hardly had a couple amazing years by 22, so you were obviously referring to his slam winning years. (Somehow clumping 6 years into 2).

All that is personality aside. I guess if you put alot of weight on the stuff the players say then you could conjur a way to want to be Nadal over Federer. And if we look at things your way, yes at 22 I would rather be Nadal then Fed. But we can't really do that because we know that after 22, Federer won 13 slams.

So in hindsight there is pretty much no way that I could take Nadal's career over Fed's. Federer is 27 and still playing in slam finals. If Nadal is playing in slam finals at 27, I'll admit I was wrong.

veroniquem
02-24-2009, 10:00 PM
Fairplay? You don't think Fed plays fair?

Anyway, you weren't talking about Federer at 22. You said Federer had "a couple amazing years" and you would rather take Nadal's career over his because he was "more consistant." Federer hardly had a couple amazing years by 22, so you were obviously referring to his slam winning years. (Somehow clumping 6 years into 2).

All that is personality aside. I guess if you put alot of weight on the stuff the players say then you could conjur a way to want to be Nadal over Federer. And if we look at things your way, yes at 22 I would rather be Nadal then Fed. But we can't really do that because we know that after 22, Federer won 13 slams.

So in hindsight there is pretty much no way that I could take Nadal's career over Fed's. Federer is 27 and still playing in slam finals. If Nadal is playing in slam finals at 27, I'll admit I was wrong.
Hey I'll let you be Federer and I'll be Nadal, no problem. I totally respect your preference. Now we just have to play each other and see who wins :)
(I meant fairplay as in more gracious in defeat, I find both of them fairplay on the court)

edmondsm
02-24-2009, 10:23 PM
Hey I'll let you be Federer and I'll be Nadal, no problem. I totally respect your preference. Now we just have to play each other and see who wins :)

It's on. For realism, you have to play lefty.:) Are you lefty?

veroniquem
02-24-2009, 10:34 PM
It's on. For realism, you have to play lefty.:) Are you lefty?
I'm not but that's perfect, I'll just have to switch like Nadal did, then I'll be exactly like him, a righty playing lefty! (I'd better start practising now, I might be ready in 10 years or so :-?)

luckyboy1300
02-24-2009, 11:28 PM
There are a few changes in the top 10 but also players who stay there for a long time (like Djoko and Federer). Also I'm not sure what you're driving at with the "wins before they reached top 10" accusation as Nadal has beaten a lot of those top 10 players very recently ( Monfils, Simon, Federer) and even Murray and Djokovic, Nadal beat them in the summer of 2008, it's not that long ago frankly.

whatever. still i don't think this is a nadal-only feat. pretty sure federer, as well as other former number 1s, had a positive h2h against their top 10 oppositions before at some point during their number 1 stay. for me the true meaning of domination against top 10 players is the winning streak against them.

rubberduckies
02-25-2009, 04:55 AM
whatever. still i don't think this is a nadal-only feat. pretty sure federer, as well as other former number 1s, had a positive h2h against their top 10 oppositions before at some point during their number 1 stay. for me the true meaning of domination against top 10 players is the winning streak against them.

After looking into it a little, it seems that Federer may actually never have achieved this feat. In fact, it seems he lost out on attaining this distinction by the very narrowest of margins on multiple occasions.

I looked at the 3 players most relevant to Fed's h2h against the top 10: Hewitt, Nalbandian, and Nadal.

Federer gained winning h2h against Hewitt at the TMC 2004, which happened around Nov 15. Before that, Hewitt had an equal or better h2h.
Federer gained winning h2h against Nalbandian in Madrid 2006.
Federer has never had a winning h2h against Nadal.

Federer entered top 10 on May 20, 2002 (he dropped out and re-entered permanently later that year, but that isn't relevant to this).
Hewitt was already in top 10 with a winning h2h against Roger.
Hewitt drops out of top 10 intermittently from Nov 2003 to May 2004.
During this time, Nalbandian is always in the top 10 (always ranked 8th or 9th, to be precise, and he had only re-entered the top 10 on Sep 3 of that year, exactly two months prior to when Hewitt dropped out).
Hewitt would not leave the top 10 again until 2006, but Fed gains winning h2h against him in Nov 2004.
At the time, Nalbandian is in the top 10 and has a winning h2h against Fed.
Nadal entered the top 10 on April 25, 2005. Since that time, Roger has never held a winning h2h against all of the top 10.
Two weeks later, on May 9 2005, Nalbandian drops out of the top 10 after having been at the 9th or 10th spot from Nov 2004 to May 2005.


So that covers all of Federer's stay in the top 10 up to this point. Indeed, he missed the boat by the very narrowest of margins.

Spider
02-25-2009, 07:53 AM
After looking into it a little, it seems that Federer may actually never have achieved this feat. In fact, it seems he lost out on attaining this distinction by the very narrowest of margins on multiple occasions.

I looked at the 3 players most relevant to Fed's h2h against the top 10: Hewitt, Nalbandian, and Nadal.

Federer gained winning h2h against Hewitt at the TMC 2004, which happened around Nov 15. Before that, Hewitt had an equal or better h2h.
Federer gained winning h2h against Nalbandian in Madrid 2006.
Federer has never had a winning h2h against Nadal.

Federer entered top 10 on May 20, 2002 (he dropped out and re-entered permanently later that year, but that isn't relevant to this).
Hewitt was already in top 10 with a winning h2h against Roger.
Hewitt drops out of top 10 intermittently from Nov 2003 to May 2004.
During this time, Nalbandian is always in the top 10 (always ranked 8th or 9th, to be precise, and he had only re-entered the top 10 on Sep 3 of that year, exactly two months prior to when Hewitt dropped out).
Hewitt would not leave the top 10 again until 2006, but Fed gains winning h2h against him in Nov 2004.
At the time, Nalbandian is in the top 10 and has a winning h2h against Fed.
Nadal entered the top 10 on April 25, 2005. Since that time, Roger has never held a winning h2h against all of the top 10.
Two weeks later, on May 9 2005, Nalbandian drops out of the top 10 after having been at the 9th or 10th spot from Nov 2004 to May 2005.


So that covers all of Federer's stay in the top 10 up to this point. Indeed, he missed the boat by the very narrowest of margins.

This is interesting, thanks for doing this research.

It looks like Nadal has always been a nightmare for Federer in every aspect now, never really allowed him to get the winning head to head with his closest rivals :)

veroniquem
02-25-2009, 08:24 AM
After looking into it a little, it seems that Federer may actually never have achieved this feat. In fact, it seems he lost out on attaining this distinction by the very narrowest of margins on multiple occasions.

I looked at the 3 players most relevant to Fed's h2h against the top 10: Hewitt, Nalbandian, and Nadal.

Federer gained winning h2h against Hewitt at the TMC 2004, which happened around Nov 15. Before that, Hewitt had an equal or better h2h.
Federer gained winning h2h against Nalbandian in Madrid 2006.
Federer has never had a winning h2h against Nadal.

Federer entered top 10 on May 20, 2002 (he dropped out and re-entered permanently later that year, but that isn't relevant to this).
Hewitt was already in top 10 with a winning h2h against Roger.
Hewitt drops out of top 10 intermittently from Nov 2003 to May 2004.
During this time, Nalbandian is always in the top 10 (always ranked 8th or 9th, to be precise, and he had only re-entered the top 10 on Sep 3 of that year, exactly two months prior to when Hewitt dropped out).
Hewitt would not leave the top 10 again until 2006, but Fed gains winning h2h against him in Nov 2004.
At the time, Nalbandian is in the top 10 and has a winning h2h against Fed.
Nadal entered the top 10 on April 25, 2005. Since that time, Roger has never held a winning h2h against all of the top 10.
Two weeks later, on May 9 2005, Nalbandian drops out of the top 10 after having been at the 9th or 10th spot from Nov 2004 to May 2005.


So that covers all of Federer's stay in the top 10 up to this point. Indeed, he missed the boat by the very narrowest of margins.
Amazing research, thanks for the effort, it's very interesting.

rubberduckies
02-26-2009, 11:37 AM
This is interesting, thanks for doing this research.

It looks like Nadal has always been a nightmare for Federer in every aspect now, never really allowed him to get the winning head to head with his closest rivals :)

Amazing research, thanks for the effort, it's very interesting.

No prob. ATP site is pretty good with this info.

devila
02-26-2009, 02:06 PM
Federer was beaten by a self-destructive Roddick, who gained 10 kilograms and injured his muscles and neck spinal disk because of the bad fatty food intake (4-year-long embarrassment).
Blake, Simon, Murray and Nadal were all top 10 winners.
Tsonga was gifted by the wrong umpiring in Paris Masters Series against
Roddick. He was serving 2-1 30-40 against Tsonga. Otherwise, Roddick would have wins over 6 top ten players. Roddick also withdrew from 2 tournaments with Murray in his draw and 2007 match.
He withdrew from Rome semifinal , along with Stepanek and Almagro's illnesses helping Djokovic.