PDA

View Full Version : Jeez!! If Fed beats Andy he'll be only 1700 pts behind Rafa


Agassifan
03-02-2012, 09:46 AM
Fed only defends 1350 (pre-french) + 1200 (french) + 360 (wimbledon)
Rafa to defend 3900 (pre-french) + 2000 (french) + 1200 (wimbledon)

Heck, he'll be 4600 points behind Nole
Nole to defend 4250 (pre-french) + 720 (french) + 2000 (wimbledon)
and Nole has to defend 3600 points by the end of the USO.

Not suggesting he'll get to #2 or #1, but there is a non-trivial possibility. If Rafa doesn't win the French, he'll likely lose #2 to Fed.

DjokovicForTheWin
03-02-2012, 09:49 AM
All depends on how well he does at IW, Miami.

Towser83
03-02-2012, 09:52 AM
All depends on how well he does at IW, Miami.

Yeah Federer is defending semis in both IWand Miami which is actually pretty hard to beat given his record at both events since 2006. Then he can pick up more points in MC and Rome but so can Nadal at Rome and Madrid and then Federe has RG finalist points to defend. So it's still pretty tough unless nadal bails out early in the next couple of masters.

Having said all this I think Dubai is Murray's title, Federer oly beats him in slams and WTF

DjokovicForTheWin
03-02-2012, 09:55 AM
Yeah Federer is defending semis in both IWand Miami which is actually pretty hard to beat given his record at both events since 2006. Then he can pick up more points in MC and Rome but so can Nadal at Rome and Madrid and then Federe has RG finalist points to defend. So it's still pretty tough unless nadal bails out early in the next couple of masters.

Having said all this I think Dubai is Murray's title, Federer oly beats him in slams and WTF

It's a pretty quick court. Roger will have his chances for tomorrow.

monfed
03-02-2012, 09:58 AM
Fed isn't improving his IW and Miami results, I don't think.
IW I can atleast entertain thoughts but Miami? Not a chance!

mandy01
03-02-2012, 10:03 AM
Fed isn't improving his IW and Miami results, I don't think.
IW I can atleast entertain thoughts but Miami? Not a chance!
I'm not sure if he'll even play Miami. And Nadal will have to lose before finals at IW & Miami plus maybe have a really off result at one of the masters for Roger to have any shot at all. I think Roger will only have a chance if he really picks up at Wimbledon-something he hasn't done for the past couple of years.

ThoughtCrime
03-02-2012, 10:04 AM
Yeah, but isn't this kind of a spoiler thread?

Murrayalmagrofan
03-02-2012, 10:06 AM
This thread is based around a big "IF". Murray is on his game right now....

Agassifan
03-02-2012, 10:08 AM
This thread is based around a big "IF". Murray is on his game right now....

No.. the IF is really small and worth only 200 points.

All-rounder
03-02-2012, 10:10 AM
Federer has to win a major if he wants to even think about top 2 ever again in his career.

Agassifan
03-02-2012, 10:11 AM
Federer has to win a major if he wants to even think about top 2 ever again in his career.

Not necessary at all. If Rafa loses the FO, he'll lose #2.

Daized
03-02-2012, 10:13 AM
If Fed avoids Nadal anything is possible.

jackson vile
03-02-2012, 10:21 AM
Fed only defends 1350 (pre-french) + 1200 (french) + 360 (wimbledon)
Rafa to defend 3900 (pre-french) + 2000 (french) + 1200 (wimbledon)

Heck, he'll be 4600 points behind Nole
Nole to defend 4250 (pre-french) + 720 (french) + 2000 (wimbledon)
and Nole has to defend 3600 points by the end of the USO.

Not suggesting he'll get to #2 or #1, but there is a non-trivial possibility. If Rafa doesn't win the French, he'll likely lose #2 to Fed.

Just think, last year at this same time all his fans were whining how it was the end of Federer and how he should just retire.

However, now they are licking their chops thinking that he could possibly capture the #2 spot at some point. Last year he said he was happy that the hardcourt season was over, now he is having a "ball". Plenty of points for Federer to "racket" up right now.

As you can see Federer is not some washed up old man past his prime.

merlinpinpin
03-02-2012, 10:21 AM
Federer has to win a major if he wants to even think about top 2 ever again in his career.

Clearly not. Mathematically, he can easily be #2 before RG if Nadal has a bad patch.

But anyway, he probably doesn't care about #2, except as a stepping-stone for a shot at #1. And for *that*, he sure needs a slam... ;)

CMM
03-02-2012, 10:23 AM
Is Monte Carlo on his schedule?
I'm surprised he chose to play so much this month (Davis Cup, Rotterdam, Dubai + the Roddick exho).

Cup8489
03-02-2012, 10:23 AM
Just think, last year at this same time all his fans were whining how it was the end of Federer and how he should just retire.

However, now they are licking their chops thinking that he could possibly capture the #2 spot at some point. Last year he said he was happy that the hardcourt season was over, now he is having a "ball". Plenty of points for Federer to "racket" up right now.

As you can see Federer is not some washed up old man past his prime.

Just think if jackson_vile actually posted something other than hateful garbage.

monfed
03-02-2012, 10:25 AM
Just think if jackson_vile actually posted something other than hateful garbage.

Actually the fault is yours,Cup, for entertaining such thoughts!

TMF
03-02-2012, 10:25 AM
Not necessary at all. If Rafa loses the FO, he'll lose #2.

If Nadal loses his #2, watch his fans(e.g. lolvile) start flooding this forum about Nadal decline immensely and Fed playing peak tennis.

DjokovicForTheWin
03-02-2012, 10:27 AM
Nadal is 25, he wouldn't be in decline even if he fell to #5. It would only be a testament to his capability as a tennis player.

niff
03-02-2012, 10:29 AM
Is Monte Carlo on his schedule?
I'm surprised he chose to play so much this month (Davis Cup, Rotterdam, Dubai + the Roddick exho).
No, it isn't.

Can't guess whether he'll add it or not. He should have played in 2010 when he was close to the Sampras no.1 record, but didn't. There's the Rome-Madrid double fortnight to prepare for this year too.

tusharlovesrafa
03-02-2012, 10:29 AM
All depends on how well he does at IW, Miami.
Muzza is the GOAT of Master 1000 tourneys on hard courts..He'll humiliate poor fed!!

dudeski
03-02-2012, 10:54 AM
Just think, last year at this same time all his fans were whining how it was the end of Federer and how he should just retire.

However, now they are licking their chops thinking that he could possibly capture the #2 spot at some point. Last year he said he was happy that the hardcourt season was over, now he is having a "ball". Plenty of points for Federer to "racket" up right now.

As you can see Federer is not some washed up old man past his prime.

Actually, it just shows we are in a weak area when a nearing retirement 4 years past his prime Federer can still get deep in almost every tournament. 2004 - 2007 on the other hand, now that was a strong area! I can't imagine this Federer making a single final back then.

Biscuitmcgriddleson
03-02-2012, 11:21 AM
Just think, last year at this same time all his fans were whining how it was the end of Federer and how he should just retire.

However, now they are licking their chops thinking that he could possibly capture the #2 spot at some point. Last year he said he was happy that the hardcourt season was over, now he is having a "ball". Plenty of points for Federer to "racket" up right now.

As you can see Federer is not some washed up old man past his prime.


Can you show us the posts? You've been known to pull things out of where the sun don't shine for fun.

Also, you sure that you're not mistaking Federer's 2009
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/151923-sony-ericsson-open-wrap-thank-god-the-hard-court-season-is-over

or 2010 comments regarding the hard court season?

http://allineedisapicketfence.wordpress.com/2010/04/01/quotable-quotes-thank-god-the-hard-court-season-is-over/

Towser83
03-02-2012, 11:25 AM
It's a pretty quick court. Roger will have his chances for tomorrow.

Yeah I do like the court speed, on the other hand I remember the match Fed lost to Murray in Dubai and from what I can remember, aside from Fed making too many errors, Murray served really well like he did today and when Murray gets a lot of first serves in he's pretty hard to break. Just get a feeling Fed will make too many errors, but I hope I'm wrong.

dudeski
03-02-2012, 12:14 PM
Yeah I do like the court speed, on the other hand I remember the match Fed lost to Murray in Dubai and from what I can remember, aside from Fed making too many errors, Murray served really well like he did today and when Murray gets a lot of first serves in he's pretty hard to break. Just get a feeling Fed will make too many errors, but I hope I'm wrong.

It's quite ok if a 4 years past his prime and nearly retired Federer loses to a peak Murray. Like I said, I can't imagine this Federer even making a final during the strong 2004-2007 area.

Tony48
03-02-2012, 01:10 PM
Murray is defending nothing. He's the most likely candidate to rise to #2.

jackson vile
03-02-2012, 01:24 PM
Federer has to win a major if he wants to even think about top 2 ever again in his career.

Stranger things have happened, Federer just maybe the opportunist and we saw what Nadal and Novak can do regarding each other. You can only play so many grueling matches like that before your body simply can't keep up anymore.

PollyBallGirl
03-02-2012, 01:40 PM
When does rafael nadalogram get the number 1 ranking? Must be soon because djokovic is defending champ of everything so if djokovic keeps losing to murray/federer then its like 'rafael nadalogram world number 1 for 103rd week.'

Clarky21
03-02-2012, 01:42 PM
When does rafael nadalogram get the number 1 ranking? Must be soon because djokovic is defending champ of everything so if djokovic keeps losing to murray/federer then its like 'rafael nadalogram world number 1 for 103rd week.'


He doesn't. There's your answer.

FlamEnemY
03-02-2012, 01:44 PM
OP, you have a very loose definition of "only."

PollyBallGirl
03-02-2012, 01:44 PM
He doesn't. There's your answer.

But rafael nadalogram is number 2 already so i thought 1 is next.

celoft
03-02-2012, 02:20 PM
Mathematically, he can easily be #2 before RG if Nadal has a bad patch.

But anyway, he probably doesn't care about #2, except as a stepping-stone for a shot at #1. And for *that*, he sure needs a slam... ;)

I concur.................

MichaelNadal
03-02-2012, 02:24 PM
Not necessary at all. If Rafa loses the FO, he'll lose #2.

Are u forgetting Federer was in that final?

Towser83
03-02-2012, 02:35 PM
Thinking about it you have

Masters wins - Nadal = 1 Federer = 1

Slams - Nadal = 1 Federer = 0

BUT Federer won WTF which is only 500 points less than a slam.

Nadal has 3 losing slam finals to Federer's 1 (in last 12 months) and 4 masters finals compared to none. Federer has 2 500 titles to Nadal's 1.

So really points wise they are not that far apart, as crazy as it is. That RG win was huge. If Federer had won that he would be pretty close to Number 2, so if he was to win a slam and nadal didn't it is very possible he could overtake him which seems odd, but it will need Djokovic to keep beating Nadal and keep titles out of his hands.

zagor
03-02-2012, 02:42 PM
Just think, last year at this same time all his fans were whining how it was the end of Federer and how he should just retire.

You're confusing Fed fans with Nadal fans. Whether it's the end of Fed or not regarding winning slams the vast majority of his fans want to see him play as long as possible.

We enjoy his tennis game first and foremost, something you'll never really understand.

However, now they are licking their chops thinking that he could possibly capture the #2 spot at some point.

Yes, one fan made a thread saying there's a non trivial possibility of Fed getting to #2 spot is all the Fed fans licking their chops.

Clueless as usual.

Last year he said he was happy that the hardcourt season was over, now he is having a "ball". Plenty of points for Federer to "racket" up right now.

He said that 4 years ago so no.

As you can see Federer is not some washed up old man past his prime.

Fed will turn 31 this year. According to you players decline at the age of 24-25 (which would make Fed 6 years removed from his peak) so again you predictably contradict your own nonsense.

PollyBallGirl
03-02-2012, 02:53 PM
You're confusing Fed fans with Nadal fans. Whether it's the end of Fed or not regarding winning slams the vast majority of his fans want to see him play as long as possible.



Are there really rafael nadalogram fans that want him retired? He makes every slam final. No way would anyone want him retired. He could win heaps of slams now if djokovic is failing.

DjokovicForTheWin
03-02-2012, 03:00 PM
Are there really rafael nadalogram fans that want him retired? He makes every slam final. No way would anyone want him retired. He could win heaps of slams now if djokovic is failing.

They don't want it, they whine about it just because Nadal is no longer winning everything, despite reaching every final.

PollyBallGirl
03-02-2012, 03:04 PM
They don't want it, they whine about it just because Nadal is no longer winning everything, despite reaching every final.

Yep well everyone has a nemesis and djokovic became nadal's nemesis. Only person i can think of that never had a nemesis was pete sampras.

tennis_pro
03-02-2012, 03:06 PM
He basically has to do at least as well in IW/Miami (or better) as he did a year ago and Nadal has to slip at the same time. The good news is that Fed's in good form while Nadal could be rusty in Indian Wells after a 5 week+ break.

tennis_pro
03-02-2012, 03:07 PM
Yep well everyone has a nemesis and djokovic became nadal's nemesis. Only person i can think of that never had a nemesis was pete sampras.

On the other hand what would his h2h against Nadal look like if he played 14 times on clay against him + 3 times on slow grass and a bunch of a joke clay-speed-like hard courts? Hell, Sampras would be 0-14 down just from the clay encounters.

Eternity
03-02-2012, 03:08 PM
Murray is defending nothing. He's the most likely candidate to rise to #2.

I agree. Why is all the talk about Fed becoming no. 2? Murray seems just as likely.

DjokovicForTheWin
03-02-2012, 03:08 PM
Yep well everyone has a nemesis and djokovic became nadal's nemesis. Only person i can think of that never had a nemesis was pete sampras.

Yeah Pete didn't have a nemesis in the form of a single player, his nemesis was an entire surface and countless nobodies who beat him there.

PollyBallGirl
03-02-2012, 03:08 PM
Feels weird to know rafael nadalogram will be fresh and rested. Good idea not to play in feb.

PollyBallGirl
03-02-2012, 03:09 PM
Yeah Pete didn't have a nemesis in the form of a single player, his nemesis was an entire surface and countless nobodies who beat him there.

Good point i never though of it that way (clay) :D

zagor
03-02-2012, 03:10 PM
Murray is defending nothing. He's the most likely candidate to rise to #2.

This.

10 chars.

celoft
03-02-2012, 03:10 PM
Pete's nemesis was clay.

Wake me up when Nadal wins something off clay.

Lendl
03-02-2012, 03:11 PM
Rafa will pass Djokovic before Roger passes Rafa.

Fed only defends 1350 (pre-french) + 1200 (french) + 360 (wimbledon)
Rafa to defend 3900 (pre-french) + 2000 (french) + 1200 (wimbledon)

Heck, he'll be 4600 points behind Nole
Nole to defend 4250 (pre-french) + 720 (french) + 2000 (wimbledon)
and Nole has to defend 3600 points by the end of the USO.

Not suggesting he'll get to #2 or #1, but there is a non-trivial possibility. If Rafa doesn't win the French, he'll likely lose #2 to Fed.

tennis_pro
03-02-2012, 03:11 PM
Good point i never though of it that way (clay) :D

Yeah, the *********s here think that Federer would actually be a "better player" overall if he sucked on clay thus miss all the clay encounters against Nadal and had a positive h2h against him, instead of making countless finals only losing to one man who happens to be the clay GOAT.

PollyBallGirl
03-02-2012, 03:16 PM
Yeah, the *********s here think that Federer would actually be a "better player" overall if he sucked on clay thus miss all the clay encounters against Nadal and had a positive h2h against him, instead of making countless finals only losing to one man who happens to be the clay GOAT.

Federer will probably get mad big praise for his french slam finals more after he retires and people don't see them as losses so much. I think federer must have made more french finals than almost everyone ever which is a big achievement. He might make like 3 more the way he is playing!

celoft
03-02-2012, 04:20 PM
Federer will probably get mad big praise for his french slam finals more after he retires and people don't see them as losses so much. I think federer must have made more french finals than almost everyone ever which is a big achievement. He might make like 3 more the way he is playing!

Borg and Nadal with 6 are the only ones with more FO finals than Federer.:shock:

Lendl, Wilander and Federer have 5 FO finals.

monfed
03-02-2012, 06:03 PM
I'm not sure if he'll even play Miami.

In a way that's good, but won't he lose those SF points? Does he plan to replace Miami with something else?


And Nadal will have to lose before finals at IW & Miami plus maybe have a really off result at one of the masters for Roger to have any shot at all. I think Roger will only have a chance if he really picks up at Wimbledon-something he hasn't done for the past couple of years.


True. Wimby's hurt Fed's ranking the most. Hopefully he'll atleast avoid a big hitter this time. :-|

NadalAgassi
03-02-2012, 06:11 PM
Having said all this I think Dubai is Murray's title, Federer oly beats him in slams and WTF

Yeah Murray is very hard for anyone to beat (including the top 3) except on clay or when it matters most (the slams and WTF).

NadalAgassi
03-02-2012, 06:15 PM
Yeah, the *********s here think that Federer would actually be a "better player" overall if he sucked on clay thus miss all the clay encounters against Nadal and had a positive h2h against him, instead of making countless finals only losing to one man who happens to be the clay GOAT.

The H2H has been broken down ad nauseum and what the *******s continually dont get is that Nadal not only owns Federer on clay but plays him even everywhere else. 7-6 on non clay surfaces for Federer, 3-2 in non clay slams for Nadal. The H2H edge for Nadal is not due to the unbalanced # of clay victories, but the fact Federer has been completely incapable to match Nadals dominance of him on clay on any other surface, thus overall big edge to Nadal. Unless you count indoors as a seperate surface, in which case Nadal owns Federer on two surfaces- outdoor hard courts and clay. If Federer sucked even worse than Sampras on clay (which he would have to in order to never play Nadal on it, even Sampras would reach Nadal atleast a couple times somewhere on clay), and Nadal skipped all indoor events, the H2H would still be heavily in Nadals favor.

bullfan
03-02-2012, 06:32 PM
Pete's nemesis was clay.

Wake me up when Nadal wins something off clay.

Nadal won 4 GS off of clay. You're confusing me...

monfed
03-02-2012, 06:52 PM
Yeah, the *********s here think that Federer would actually be a "better player" overall if he sucked on clay thus miss all the clay encounters against Nadal and had a positive h2h against him, instead of making countless finals only losing to one man who happens to be the clay GOAT.

Except that PollyBallGirl is a Samptard, way worse than a *******(but you probably already knew that ).

Oh and defending Sampras's utter failure on clay(not even making an RG final, losing first rounds to nobodies while in his prime) and comparing that with Fed's clay resume(5 RG finals, 1 W), losing practically every clay encounter due to a bad matchup to clay phenom Nadal(widely considered the joint clay GOAT if not the undisputed CGOAT), makes them look even more clueless.

And if Pete had no nemesis as the Samptards continually argue, then his failure on clay is even more amplified.
It just proves beyond doubt that Sampras sucked on clay. Period.

PollyBallGirl
03-02-2012, 08:17 PM
Except that PollyBallGirl is a Samptard, way worse than a *******(but you probably already knew that ).

Oh and defending Sampras's utter failure on clay(not even making an RG final, losing first rounds to nobodies while in his prime) and comparing that with Fed's clay resume(5 RG finals, 1 W), losing practically every clay encounter due to a bad matchup to clay phenom Nadal(widely considered the joint clay GOAT if not the undisputed CGOAT), makes them look even more clueless.

And if Pete had no nemesis as the Samptards continually argue, then his failure on clay is even more amplified.
It just proves beyond doubt that Sampras sucked on clay. Period.

I am not a samptard i just made a sampras thread, he's not my favorite player at all. I like agassi more than sampras. And agassi is his most famous opponent actually.
http://cdn.buzznet.com/media-cdn/jj1/headlines/2007/02/andre-agassi-steffi-graf.jpg

St. Bernard
03-02-2012, 08:42 PM
I don't think it's ridiculous for somebody to bring this up - obviously it is a possibility, I mean, Nadal has 4 1000's Finals, a win in MC, a win in RG and Wimbledon Finals. On top of that, a win in Barca.

That's 7100 points in 4 Months. He has a lot of points to defend.

Compare that to Murray's 2430 (who could possibly be #2 if he makes a Slam final) and Fed's 2910, Nadal has to play at an extraordinarily high level to maintain his points, and Fed + Murray don't have to do quite as much to defend points.

Not going to say it's a foregone conclusion, but it's definitely nothing to laugh off.

monfed
03-02-2012, 08:45 PM
I am not a samptard i just made a sampras thread, he's not my favorite player at all.

Your proRalph-AntiFed-proSamp(textbook Samptard trait) posts are a dead giveaway. :facepalm:


I like agassi more than sampras.

I like Ralph more than Federer... :lol:


And Agassi is his most famous opponent actually.


And Ralph is his most famous opponent actually.


Deary me. ROFL

tenniselbow1
03-02-2012, 09:15 PM
The H2H has been broken down ad nauseum and what the *******s continually dont get is that Nadal not only owns Federer on clay but plays him even everywhere else. 7-6 on non clay surfaces for Federer, 3-2 in non clay slams for Nadal. The H2H edge for Nadal is not due to the unbalanced # of clay victories, but the fact Federer has been completely incapable to match Nadals dominance of him on clay on any other surface, thus overall big edge to Nadal. Unless you count indoors as a seperate surface, in which case Nadal owns Federer on two surfaces- outdoor hard courts and clay. If Federer sucked even worse than Sampras on clay (which he would have to in order to never play Nadal on it, even Sampras would reach Nadal atleast a couple times somewhere on clay), and Nadal skipped all indoor events, the H2H would still be heavily in Nadals favor.

Dude why are you talking H2H's when your boy is on track of getting raped in the big stage like no other in the Open Era? Heard of the Rafail slam? All by someone of his own age and era, not 5 years older or younger. Fed approaching 31 and Andy have made it respectable and likely will do the same this year with Novak esp. if they face off on more even playing grounds and not the slow hard courts of the AO, IW and Miami. You honestly think Rafa is getting a single win on clay over Novak this year? Yeah dude drop the H2H story when you can, and get a reality check.

Povl Carstensen
03-02-2012, 09:23 PM
Just think, last year at this same time all his fans were whining how it was the end of Federer and how he should just retire.Not really true is it?

Polaris
03-02-2012, 10:16 PM
The H2H edge for Nadal is not due to the unbalanced # of clay victories, but the fact Federer has been completely incapable to match Nadals dominance of him on clay on any other surface, thus overall big edge to Nadal.

Unadulterated ********. Calling things facts, does not make them facts.

Number of non-clay Slams defended by Nadal:
0

Number of non-clay Slams defended by Federer:
Wimbledon defended 4 times.
US Open defended 4 times.
Australian Open defended 1 time.
WTF defended 4 times.

Compared with Nadal's 4 defenses of 1 Slam, Federer has 4 defenses of 2 Slams, and 4 defenses of the Masters Cup. The facts do not back your claim.

The great thing about being NadalAgassi is that one can post all manner of ******** while not being banned, because other more vociferous trolls can distract the moderators.

joeri888
03-03-2012, 01:33 AM
Federer needs to win Dubai and Indian Wells I feel. And he needs Djokovic to play Monte Carlo and win there. Not impossible, but unlikely.

joeri888
03-03-2012, 02:07 AM
Yeah Pete didn't have a nemesis in the form of a single player, his nemesis was an entire surface and countless nobodies who beat him there.

Krajicek's body didn't hold up and he wasn't consistent enough, but Pete hated playing him.

joeri888
03-03-2012, 02:18 AM
:lol::lol: Delusional Del Potro worshipping fool, as it stands now Nadal still has a winning H2H vs all his main rivals. Yes Djokovic has dominated Nadal in the last year, which he has everyone else, but that doesnt discount all that happened the many years before that. Even if Nadal ends up with a losing record vs Djokovic it would be nearly impossible for it be as bad as the Nadal-Federer career H2H and Nadal isnt the one who is the supposed GOAT either. Federer was losing almost all matches to Nadal even when he was the dominant #1, and not just on clay, he lost 2 of their first 3 non clay matches (and should have lost all 3 as he was down 2 sets to 0 and 5-3 in the one win). Nadal is losing to Djokovic while Djokovic is the best player in the World, there was never a period Nadal was losing regularly to someone he shouldnt have been.

In the end, achievements count, not h2h's. If Nadal wins 20 Slams, is he not the best ever, because Davydenko always beat him?

monfed
03-03-2012, 04:59 AM
The H2H has been broken down ad nauseum and what the *******s continually dont get is that Nadal not only owns Federer on clay but plays him even everywhere else. 7-6 on non clay surfaces for Federer, 3-2 in non clay slams for Nadal. The H2H edge for Nadal is not due to the unbalanced # of clay victories, but the fact Federer has been completely incapable to match Nadals dominance of him on clay on any other surface, thus overall big edge to Nadal. Unless you count indoors as a seperate surface, in which case Nadal owns Federer on two surfaces- outdoor hard courts and clay. If Federer sucked even worse than Sampras on clay (which he would have to in order to never play Nadal on it, even Sampras would reach Nadal atleast a couple times somewhere on clay), and Nadal skipped all indoor events, the H2H would still be heavily in Nadals favor.

According to NadalAgassi - Outdoor hard is a surface but indoor hard is not. (IMO neither are "surfaces",illogical comment to begin with). The reasonable thing to do would be to say if it's slow-hard,medium-fast or fast HC. That's the way it's always been back when the indestructibly-lucky Sampras was playing. Luckily for Sampras though AO was medium fast(with Rebound Ace) and USO was fast. Unluckily for Fed he had to face Ralph on plexicushion(a slow HC and not Rebound Ace) and USO has been slowed down too according to tournament officials. But again he/she won't take these FACTS into account.

- He/she won't acknowledge that Federer leads the indoor(a medium-fast/fast low bouncing HC) H2H as 4-0. In other words Ralph has NEVER won a match against him here and has won just ONE set in those 4 encounters getting completely destroyed by a 30 YO grandpa Fed in WTF 2011. Amazing ownage that, boggles the mind. Fed's ATLEAST beaten Ralph twice on clay(Fed's worst surface) ,BAGELLING him once no less. But NO, that doesn't count for this fine gentleman/lady.

- He/she will not acknowledge the existence of a slow HC(but will instead call it an "outdoor HC" which Ralph dominates against Fed(as if anyone questioned his dominance on slow HC in the first place)(2 wins in Miami and 2 wins in AO plexicushion prove it).

- Had the ATP not tampered with the HC slams WHILE Fed was winning(changing RA to plexicushion in 2008, slowing USO down PURPOSELY for profit),something they NEVER did during the time of the indestructibly-lucky Sampras, the H2H might have read a different story. But again he/she will not acknowledge this.


- The indestructibly-lucky Sampras is 4-6(a losing H2H) against his BAD MATCHUP Mr Richard Krajicek who destroyed Sampras in the prime of his career on his favourite surface(fast green grass of the 90s) something Ralph has NEVER done to Fed in a slam on Fed's favourite surface during his prime. But NO, Pete Sampras has a winning H2H against ALL his major rivals(as if Krajicek was a journeyman), which Fed can only dream of. Sampras clearly overcame his bad-matchup(Krajicek) as the H2H clearly indicates.

-He/she will not admit that the current grass H2H is 2-1 to Federer on SLOW HIGH BOUNCING grass(no prizes for guessing who that favours more).
But NO, Ralph dominates Fed on grass as well and will continue dominating now that Federer is at his grass-court peak.....OH WAIT.




Some minor(minor you say?) things NadalAgassi won't admit to -

-He/she will not acknowledge that Federer and Nadal are a good 5 years apart more importantly Nadal being the younger of the two. An absolute chasm of a difference for primes to coincide.

-He/she will not acknowledge that Nadal's the WORST matchup in tennis history to Federer. I challenge those who claim there was a worse matchup in history between two SLAM CONTENDERS where the more disadvantaged player OVERCAME their more advantaged opponent on his WORST surface.

-He/she will not acknowledge that Ralph NEVER faced Fed in the countless USOs in Fed's prime when Fed was destroying opponents left right n centre.




Federer's faults and weakness, folks -

A) AO changed from RA to plexicushion in 2008 by the authorities. Federer never complained vociferously about the court tampering. Dumb Fed.

B) USO slowed down according to the tournament officials. Couldn't you have been smarter about this,Roger?

c) Federer making countless clay finals only losing to Ralph. Federer should've lost in the first week(like senor Pete),never winning RG (like senor Pete) thereby not letting Ralph gain a significant mental edge. STUPID.FED.STUPID.




I'm almost done, but for more open-minded reasonable tennis fans here's my simple take on the H2H -

SLOW HC - Nadal(4-1)

Clay - Nadal(12-2)

SLOW Grass - 60-40 to Federer(anymore losses shouldn't reflect on Roger because he's CLEARLY past his prime on grass.Anyone who can't see this is plain blind, don't know what to tell you.) Current H2H stands at 2-1

Fast/Medium Fast HC - Federer(4-1). The one match he lost to Nadal in Dubai.

Fast Grass - Federer(a hypothetical I know but I can't see Nadal dominating Roger here if he couldn't even do it on slow grass).

Against a NIGHTMARE matchup, Fed's fared quite well methinks(not taking anything away from Nadal, just defending Federer against ridiculous claims)

Enough said. PHEW :-|

tenniselbow1
03-03-2012, 05:49 AM
Well done Monfed. Nice of you to summarize the facts for this troll. Any jackass who knows tennis, doesn't talk about outdoor vs indoor tennis and try to pose an argument in a forum of this nature at the moment. This dude's troll meter is running at full and frankly he's just incapable of coming up with a worthy defense in my opinion.

joeri888
03-03-2012, 05:59 AM
Well done Monfed. Nice of you to summarize the facts for this troll. Any jackass who knows tennis, doesn't talk about outdoor vs indoor tennis and try to pose an argument in a forum of this nature at the moment. This dude's troll meter is running at full and frankly he's just incapable of coming up with a worthy defense in my opinion.

And the thread wasn't even about H2H to begin with

mandy01
03-03-2012, 08:34 AM
B) USO slowed down according to the tournament officials. Couldn't you have been smarter about this,Roger?
Roger did complain about USO slowing down from 2006 itself.

tennis_pro
03-03-2012, 10:21 AM
LAWL the only reason the Nadal has achieved so much on non-clay surfaces is because the speed of those is a complete joke. Can you imagine a grinder winning 2 Wimbledons (and reach 5 finals and counting!!!), reach consecutive US Open finals losing 1 set in the first of those (!!) or collect all 4 majors in a span of a couple of years (!!), hell the only non-serve-and-volleyer who won Wimbledon in 1983-2001 was Agassi by playing super aggressive and occasionally by attacking the net.

THAT besides the fact that the Nadal for entire years could only meet Federer on Monte Carlo-like clay is the only reason he has a lead in the h2h and has a mental advantage over Federer. So, Nadalagassi you're WRONG about Nadal owning Federer on non-clay surfaces in Federer prime cause as far as I remember the non-clay h2h at the end of 2007 was 5-2 Federer with Federer the BIGGEST matches at the time (2 Wimbledon finals + 2 Masters Cup semis and a Miami final compared to Nadal winning a Miami R32 match and a Dubai final with Federer underperforming big time in both matches).

If Rafa is such a mental monster let's see what he does against Djokovic this year, against someone who has no mental block, is more or less the same age (can't wait for another 5 years to see a new great youngster pick on his game, of course if Nadal doesn't retire by then) and is a favorable match-up. Let's see how tough he is now.

If the ATP decided to keep the 90's speed on all surfaces we wouldn't be even having this discussion now.

kishnabe
03-03-2012, 10:32 AM
:lol::lol: Delusional Del Potro worshipping fool, as it stands now Nadal still has a winning H2H vs all his main rivals. Yes Djokovic has dominated Nadal in the last year, which he has everyone else, but that doesnt discount all that happened the many years before that. Even if Nadal ends up with a losing record vs Djokovic it would be nearly impossible for it be as bad as the Nadal-Federer career H2H and Nadal isnt the one who is the supposed GOAT either. Federer was losing almost all matches to Nadal even when he was the dominant #1, and not just on clay, he lost 2 of their first 3 non clay matches (and should have lost all 3 as he was down 2 sets to 0 and 5-3 in the one win). Nadal is losing to Djokovic while Djokovic is the best player in the World, there was never a period Nadal was losing regularly to someone he shouldnt have been.




Another pathetic and clueless fool. It was obvious I was only talking about the H2H aspect and that particular embarassing stigma on Federers career which idiot ****s like yourself always try and deny. Of course Federer is far more accomplished on all non clay surfaces, which makes the H2H stigma that much worse, he should be dominating Nadal off of clay, yet has always failed to do so. As for moderators if there were any half decent ones your sorry *** would have been history long ago.

Federer dominates the field way better than Nadal at his prime. It Nadal fauly for not getting there to beat him on the HC. Nadal lost to some inferior players and good players.

While Federer steam rolled Nadal conquerors.

H2H shows not greatness.....just a match up issue. I blame Federer for beating the field so well to reach all those Clay finals just to suffer in Nadal's hands.

If only Federer was pathetic on clay.....maybe we wouldn't be talking about the garbage of H2H on a player's greatness.

Just like Nadal 10 gs wins and multiple titles don't perish just because Novak has owned him the last 7 times.

Agassifan
03-03-2012, 10:32 AM
If Rafa had played Fed as many times after the FO as they did before the FO, the overall h2h will be in favor of Federer. Perhaps not overwhelmingly as it is right now, but like Fed/Nole.

Agassifan
03-03-2012, 10:33 AM
QFT: If only Federer was pathetic on clay like Sampras (or like Rafa on fast hard) we wouldn't be talking about the garbage of H2H on a player's greatness.

cc0509
03-03-2012, 10:34 AM
:lol::lol: Delusional Del Potro worshipping fool, as it stands now Nadal still has a winning H2H vs all his main rivals. Yes Djokovic has dominated Nadal in the last year, which he has everyone else, but that doesnt discount all that happened the many years before that. Even if Nadal ends up with a losing record vs Djokovic it would be nearly impossible for it be as bad as the Nadal-Federer career H2H and Nadal isnt the one who is the supposed GOAT either. Federer was losing almost all matches to Nadal even when he was the dominant #1, and not just on clay, he lost 2 of their first 3 non clay matches (and should have lost all 3 as he was down 2 sets to 0 and 5-3 in the one win). Nadal is losing to Djokovic while Djokovic is the best player in the World, there was never a period Nadal was losing regularly to someone he shouldnt have been.


So what? So Nadal is and has always been a bad match-up for Federer. At first it was strictly the match-up and then after so many losses it became mental for Federer as well as tactical. Big deal! All the greats have weaknesses and that is pretty much Federer's only one. Nadal losing 7 straight finals and 3 straight grand slams to the same guy is just as bad if not worse so don't go making up this BS that it is not as bad. Federer while in his prime was ahead of Nadal in their h2h off clay but Nadal who is in his prime lost 7 straight finals and 3 straight slams, that ain't better, sorry! But as with Federer, Nadal has so many other achievements it is not such a big deal in the grand scheme of things. Perspective.

TMF
03-03-2012, 10:41 AM
How the hell this thread has turned into a H2H discussion. I get so sick and tire of this meaningless topic when no one care H2H against one single player. Unless the ***** are so insecure about Nadal's bad H2H against Davydenko then I can understand why. All the sane fans are only concern about player's accomplishments, that's what count.

Too bad we have some trolls that always hijack a good thread.

cc0509
03-03-2012, 10:43 AM
How the hell this thread has turned into a H2H discussion. I get so sick and tire of this meaningless topic when no one care H2H against one single player. Unless the ***** are so insecure about Nadal's bad H2H against Davydenko then I can understand why. All the sane fans are only concern about player's accomplishments, that's what count.

Too bad we have some trolls that always hijack a good thread.

Because really what else do the Fed haters have other than the h2h vs Nadal?
There is not a lot else to choose from.

Clarky21
03-03-2012, 10:59 AM
]Because really what else do the Fed haters have other than the h2h vs Nadal?[/B]There is not a lot else to choose from.


True but Fed fans do the same thing to Nadal. They constantly bring up how many times he has lost to Humpty Dumpty in a row,constantly bring up the fact that he has never won the WTF,and constantly bring up that Nadal has never defended a title off of clay. Fed fans are just as guilty of doing this sort of thing themselves.

TMF
03-03-2012, 11:00 AM
Because really what else do the Fed haters have other than the h2h vs Nadal?
There is not a lot else to choose from.

Or they actually believe the greatest prize/legacy in the world for a pro tennis player is to have a positive H2H against one player. Winning slams and any other titles by beating the entire field are not as important. If they were in Agassi's shoes, they would give up 8 slams for having a 20-14 record against Sampras.

TMF
03-03-2012, 11:07 AM
True but Fed fans do the same thing to Nadal. They constantly bring up how many times he has lost to Humpty Dumpty in a row,constantly bring up the fact that he has never won the WTF,and constantly bring up that Nadal has never defended a title off of clay. Fed fans are just as guilty of doing this sort of thing themselves.

No, Fed fans bring up Nadal constantly losing to Nole and having a negative H2H against Davy is to illustrate that H2H record against one player means NOTHING. That's what Fed fans are trying to explain to Nadal fans, and I know some of them are enjoying it by giving Nadal fans a taste of their own medicine. TBH, Fed fans are not serious about H2H against one player(only Nadal fans), but more likely against the entire field. That's one of the difference between a Fed fan and a Nadal fan.

Biscuitmcgriddleson
03-03-2012, 11:09 AM
Because really what else do the Fed haters have other than the h2h vs Nadal?
There is not a lot else to choose from.

Well Nadal fans have a lot to be proud of. Like most weeks at number 1. Whoops meant number 2.

It really makes me laugh when they are all h2h this, h2h that. I remember when Woody Paige said about the Angels losing in the first round against the Red Sox in 08 that there isn't an award for best team during the season. Similar to Brad Pitt's remark as Billy Beane in Moneyball, "it ultimately doesn’t matter how many games you win if you lose the last game of the season." Basically, players will be judged on their own career stats and H2H is such a tiny part of that. Clinging onto one player having a positive H2H over the moster decorated player of all time doesn't magically give you wins/titles/records. Sadly, that is what Nadal fans are trying to do.

monfed
03-03-2012, 11:10 AM
True but Fed fans do the same thing to Nadal. They constantly bring up how many times he has lost to Humpty Dumpty in a row,constantly bring up the fact that he has never won the WTF,and constantly bring up that Nadal has never defended a title off of clay. Fed fans are just as guilty of doing this sort of thing themselves.

Fed fans do it as a retaliation, they don't bring up the H2H right away with Nadal. Quit stalling!

Towser83
03-03-2012, 11:12 AM
True but Fed fans do the same thing to Nadal. They constantly bring up how many times he has lost to Humpty Dumpty in a row,constantly bring up the fact that he has never won the WTF,and constantly bring up that Nadal has never defended a title off of clay. Fed fans are just as guilty of doing this sort of thing themselves.

I think the fact that Nadal has lost to Djokovic 7 times in a row can be fairly used to draw parallel with Federer's poor H2H record with Nadal, the point being the H2H doesn't always mean much. Nadal has won much more than Djokovic and will probably end his career with more. What you have to understand is that for years this argument has raged "Federer can't be the GOAT because Nadal owns him! (on clay, fairly even elsewhere)" So now Federer fans finally have a comeback which goes "well nadal is getting owned on every surface, so can he be better than Federer?"

In reality despite H2H in career terms it's Federer>Nadal>Djokovic.

The titles off clay thing is a bit pointless. The WTF is a hole in his record but I expect him to fill it one day.

dudeski
03-03-2012, 11:16 AM
No, Fed fans bring up Nadal constantly losing to Nole and having a negative H2H against Davy is to illustrate that H2H record against one player means NOTHING. That's what Fed fans are trying to explain to Nadal fans, and I know some of them are enjoying it by giving Nadal fans a taste of their own medicine. TBH, Fed fans are not serious about H2H against one player(only Nadal fans), but more likely against the entire field. That's one of the difference between a Fed fan and a Nadal fan.

That plus at least 30 IQ points.

cc0509
03-03-2012, 11:24 AM
True but Fed fans do the same thing to Nadal. They constantly bring up how many times he has lost to Humpty Dumpty in a row,constantly bring up the fact that he has never won the WTF,and constantly bring up that Nadal has never defended a title off of clay. Fed fans are just as guilty of doing this sort of thing themselves.

You are right Fed fans do the same type of thing re Nadal but that is partly due to retaliation after so many years of listening to the Nadal owns Federer hype. Now Nadal has his own match-up weakness with Djokovic so there is some karma there. No great player escapes without having some "issues" or weaknesses on his resume.

cc0509
03-03-2012, 11:25 AM
Well Nadal fans have a lot to be proud of. Like most weeks at number 1. Whoops meant number 2.

It really makes me laugh when they are all h2h this, h2h that. I remember when Woody Paige said about the Angels losing in the first round against the Red Sox in 08 that there isn't an award for best team during the season. Similar to Brad Pitt's remark as Billy Beane in Moneyball, "it ultimately doesn’t matter how many games you win if you lose the last game of the season." Basically, players will be judged on their own career stats and H2H is such a tiny part of that. Clinging onto one player having a positive H2H over the moster decorated player of all time doesn't magically give you wins/titles/records. Sadly, that is what Nadal fans are trying to do.

Yep..................

cc0509
03-03-2012, 11:26 AM
Fed fans do it as a retaliation, they don't bring up the H2H right away with Nadal. Quit stalling!

That is exactly what I just responded to Clarky and I did not see your post before I wrote my comment.

jackson vile
03-03-2012, 03:33 PM
I think the fact that Nadal has lost to Djokovic 7 times in a row can be fairly used to draw parallel with Federer's poor H2H record with Nadal, the point being the H2H doesn't always mean much. Nadal has won much more than Djokovic and will probably end his career with more. What you have to understand is that for years this argument has raged "Federer can't be the GOAT because Nadal owns him! (on clay, fairly even elsewhere)" So now Federer fans finally have a comeback which goes "well nadal is getting owned on every surface, so can he be better than Federer?"

In reality despite H2H in career terms it's Federer>Nadal>Djokovic.

The titles off clay thing is a bit pointless. The WTF is a hole in his record but I expect him to fill it one day.

There are a lot of parallels between Nadal and Federer, which their fans hate. However, what H2H shows is who is more dominate man to man. If this is a non issues surely those fans would stop entertaining such posts then and never use such arguments. However, it is quite the contrary which is only par for the course of "course".

Polaris
03-03-2012, 03:45 PM
A few people have already made this point, but perhaps it bears repeating because of the disproportionate emphasis on head-to-head that so many people have here. Head-to-head clearly reflects that when Nadal meets Federer, he wins two-thirds of the time. Nadal is excellent against Federer, you cannot spin that in any other way.

However, it masks two facts that people, especially new fans either don't remember or don't consider as important:
(1) Early in Nadal's career, Federer was nearly always in the important finals, be it on clay, or hard or grass.
(2) Early in Nadal's career, Nadal was not good enough to keep up his end of the bargain in most important non-clay events, and lost in the earlier rounds before he could run into Federer.

This indicates that, relative to the field, Federer was better than Nadal, in the period up to AO 2010.

Towser83
03-03-2012, 03:46 PM
There are a lot of parallels between Nadal and Federer, which their fans hate. However, what H2H shows is who is more dominate man to man. If this is a non issues surely those fans would stop entertaining such posts then and never use such arguments. However, it is quite the contrary which is only par for the course of "course".

Well yeah Nadal fans are going to bring up H2H and Djokovic fans will bring up the recent 7-0, and both have a point, but I don't think it's more important than overall achievements in the game, so still Federer>Nadal>Djokovic, as everyone has bad matchups against players

BULLZ1LLA2.0
03-03-2012, 04:01 PM
I think the fact that Nadal has lost to Djokovic 7 times in a row can be fairly used to draw parallel with Federer's poor H2H record with Nadal, the point being the H2H doesn't always mean much. Nadal has won much more than Djokovic and will probably end his career with more. What you have to understand is that for years this argument has raged "Federer can't be the GOAT because Nadal owns him! (on clay, fairly even elsewhere)" So now Federer fans finally have a comeback which goes "well nadal is getting owned on every surface, so can he be better than Federer?"

In reality despite H2H in career terms it's Federer>Nadal>Djokovic.

The titles off clay thing is a bit pointless. The WTF is a hole in his record but I expect him to fill it one day.

16-14 Nadal leads Djokovic H2H is a far more conclusive and powerful H2H argument than Djokovic's 7-0. H2H goes in streaks, commonly. Nadal won 5 in a row over Djokovic, by the way.

Facts remain,
Nadal leads Federer H2H.
Nadal leads Djokovic H2H.
Nadal leads Murray H2H.
Nadal leads Tsonga H2H.
Nadal leads Ferrer H2H.
Nadal leads Berdych H2H.
Nadal leads Fish H2H.
Nadal leads Tipsarevic H2H.
Nadal leads Del Potro H2H.

If any of those players are good enough to change those facts, then they that is exactly what will happen. If those players aren't good enough to change those facts, then Nadal has defeated them for life, man to man.

Towser83
03-03-2012, 04:04 PM
16-14 Nadal leads Djokovic H2H is a far more conclusive and powerful H2H argument than Djokovic's 7-0. H2H goes in streaks, commonly. Nadal won 5 in a row over Djokovic, by the way.

Facts remain,
Nadal leads Federer H2H.
Nadal leads Djokovic H2H.
Nadal leads Murray H2H.
Nadal leads Tsonga H2H.
Nadal leads Ferrer H2H.
Nadal leads Berdych H2H.
Nadal leads Fish H2H.
Nadal leads Tipsarevic H2H.
Nadal leads Del Potro H2H.

If any of those players are good enough to change those facts, then they that is exactly what will happen. If those players aren't good enough to change those facts, then Nadal has defeated them for life, man to man.

You forgot

Davydenko leads Nadal H2H :lol:

Btw, I'm sure nadal would trade the H2H for 16 slams, but focus on him being better "man to man" for the moment at least Federer has been better man to EVERY man.

BULLZ1LLA2.0
03-03-2012, 04:09 PM
You forgot

Davydenko leads Nadal H2H :lol:

Btw, I'm sure nadal would trade the H2H for 16 slams, but focus on him being better "man to man" for the moment at least Federer has been better man to EVERY man.

Nadal has time to change that. Davydenko only leads 6-4. His only claim to fame is looking tenuous right now. If he backed it with their slam meetings (there are none), then it would say something. No player on tour has a positive H2H over Nadal overall AND in slam meetings.

Nadal won't need to trade anything for 16 slams. He's only 25-years-old, and makes every slam final. Many, many opportunities await.

BULLZ1LLA2.0
03-03-2012, 04:10 PM
You forgot

Davydenko leads Nadal H2H :lol:



No, I didn't "forget". I listed the top 10.

Bartelby
03-03-2012, 04:15 PM
Davydenko was in the top ten and he has a better head to head so that's interesting even if it doesn't dent Nadal's career one iota.

The other problem is that you really need to make a division between recent H2H and historical H2H to see that Djoko is making headway.

DjokovicForTheWin
03-03-2012, 04:17 PM
Nadal has time to change that. Davydenko only leads 6-4. His only claim to fame is looking tenuous right now. If he backed it with their slam meetings (there are none), then it would say something. No player on tour has a positive H2H over Nadal overall AND in slam meetings.

Nadal won't need to trade anything for 16 slams. He's only 25-years-old, and makes every slam final. Many, many opportunities await.

Isn't it worse to have a losing H2H against a no slam nobody?

BULLZ1LLA2.0
03-03-2012, 04:18 PM
Davydenko was in the top ten and he has a better head to head so that's interesting even if it doesn't dent Nadal's career one iota.

The other problem is that you really need to make a division between recent H2H and historical H2H to see that Djoko is making headway.

Nadal won 5 in a row over Djokovic. Means nothing. Neither does 7-0.

If Djokovic is good enough he will lead the H2H. If Djokovic is not good enough, then Nadal will own Djokovic for life (backed up by Nadal having a far superior list of achievements).

Towser83
03-03-2012, 04:19 PM
Nadal has time to change that. Davydenko only leads 6-4. His only claim to fame is looking tenuous right now. If he backed it with their slam meetings (there are none), then it would say something. No player on tour has a positive H2H over Nadal overall AND in slam meetings.

Nadal won't need to trade anything for 16 slams. He's only 25-years-old, and makes every slam final. Many, many opportunities await.

And he also has time to slip behind in H2H to Djokovic, Delpo or be owned in his later years by a new player. Actually he'll probably retire before that happens, nadal nearly always plays things on his own terms (example go to play halle when you are almost certain to kill Federer in the final)

True he could get more than 16 slams. But if he doesn't he would gladly trade the H2H for 16 slams.

Btw, is it better to have a losing H2H vs someone out of the top 10, than in the top 10? hmmm

BULLZ1LLA2.0
03-03-2012, 04:21 PM
Isn't it worse to have a losing H2H against a no slam nobody?

No, just looks like a fluke. For a long time Simon led Federer 2-1. It is now 2-2. But Simon actually proved something by taking Federer to 5 sets in a slam. Davy needs to prove he can do something in a slam. He's probably the worst slam player in tennis history of those with an overall record so good.

BULLZ1LLA2.0
03-03-2012, 04:22 PM
In fact Simon led Federer 2-0 from 2008-2011.

DjokovicForTheWin
03-03-2012, 04:24 PM
No, just looks like a fluke. For a long time Simon led Federer 2-1. It is now 2-2. But Simon actually proved something by taking Federer to 5 sets in a slam. Davy needs to prove he can do something in a slam. He's probably the worst slam player in tennis history of those with an overall record so good.

How is it a fluke if a no slam nobody beats you 6 times?

Towser83
03-03-2012, 04:24 PM
No, just looks like a fluke. For a long time Simon led Federer 2-1. It is now 2-2. But Simon actually proved something by taking Federer to 5 sets in a slam. Davy needs to prove he can do something in a slam. He's probably the worst slam player in tennis history of those with an overall record so good.

3 matches is a lot different to 10, especially as Simon's wins were a few months apart I think. Nadal is also something like 1-6 on hardcourt to davydenko which is significant.

SLD76
03-03-2012, 04:48 PM
one bad h2h matchup vs:

most consecutive weeks at number 1
one week shy of tying weeks at number 1, 2 weeks shy of breaking the record

one year shy of tying most year's ending at number 1

consecutive slam finals
consecutive slam finals won
consecutive slam semis reached
consecutive slam QFs reached and counting
record 6 WTFs won
record slam finals won(16)
won 3 slams at least 4 times each
won 2 slams 4 times in a row concurrently
won 2 slams 5 times in a row
1 one shy of tying wimbledon slams won
tied with most USO won
record 5 dubai titles won
won 3 slams a year 3 times
made finals of all slams in one year 3 times
ended nadal's record clay match streak
ended djoker's 2011 match streak



I could probably name more, but those are the ones I remember off the top of my head and I probably got a few of those wrong (i.e. underestimated them)

Agassifan
03-03-2012, 05:11 PM
one bad h2h matchup vs:

most consecutive weeks at number 1
one week shy of tying weeks at number 1, 2 weeks shy of breaking the record

one year shy of tying most year's ending at number 1

consecutive slam finals
consecutive slam finals won
consecutive slam semis reached
consecutive slam QFs reached and counting
record 6 WTFs won
record slam finals won(16)
won 3 slams at least 4 times each
won 2 slams 4 times in a row concurrently
won 2 slams 5 times in a row
1 one shy of tying wimbledon slams won
tied with most USO won
record 5 dubai titles won
won 3 slams a year 3 times
made finals of all slams in one year 3 times
ended nadal's record clay match streak
ended djoker's 2011 match streak



I could probably name more, but those are the ones I remember off the top of my head and I probably got a few of those wrong (i.e. underestimated them)

you just forgot the following:

Most GS titles
1. Roger Federer 16
2. Pete Sampras 14
3. Björn Borg 11
4. Rafael Nadal 10
5. Jimmy Connors 8
= Ivan Lendl 8
= Andre Agassi 8
8. John McEnroe 7
= Mats Wilander 7
10. Stefan Edberg 6
= Boris Becker 6

GS finals
1. Roger Federer 23
2. Ivan Lendl 19
3. Pete Sampras 18
4. Björn Borg 16
5. Jimmy Connors 15
= Andre Agassi 15
= Rafael Nadal 15
8. John McEnroe 11
= Mats Wilander 11
= Stefan Edberg 11

Consecutive GS finals
1. Roger Federer 10
2. Roger Federer 8
3. Andre Agassi 4
= Rod Laver 4
= Rafael Nadal 4
5. Jimmy Connors 3
= Björn Borg 3
= Björn Borg 3
= Björn Borg 3
= Ivan Lendl 3
= John McEnroe 3
= Ivan Lendl 3
= Ivan Lendl 3
= Mats Wilander 3
= Jim Courier 3
= Jim Courier 3
= Pete Sampras 3
= Rafael Nadal 3
= Novak Djokovic 3

GS semi-finals
1. Jimmy Connors 31
2. Roger Federer 30
3. Ivan Lendl 28
4. Andre Agassi 26
5. Pete Sampras 23
6. John McEnroe 19
= Stefan Edberg 19
8. Boris Becker 18
9. Björn Borg 17
10. Rafael Nadal 16

Consecutive GS semi-finals
1. Roger Federer 23
2. Ivan Lendl 10
3. Novak Djokovic 7
4. Ivan Lendl 6
5. Novak Djokovic 5
= Boris Becker 5
= Nadal 5
8. Rod Laver 4
9. Tony Roche 4
= John McEnroe 4
= Andre Agassi 4
= Jim Courer 4
= Nadal 4


All Four Slams Per Year
Rod Laver 1969

Three Slams Per Year
Jimmy Connors 1974
Mats Wilander 1988
Roger Federer 2004
Roger Federer 2006
Roger Federer 2007
Rafael Nadal 2010
Novak Djokovic 2011


All Four Finals Per Year
Roger Federer 2006
Roger Federer 2007
Roger Federer 2009
Rod Laver 1969

All Four Semi-finals Per Year
Rod Laver 1969
Ivan Lendl 1987
Roger Federer 2005
Roger Federer 2006
Roger Federer 2007
Roger Federer 2008
Roger Federer 2009
Rafael Nadal 2008
Novak Djokovic 2011
Andy Murray 2011

Most consecutive matches won at one Grand Slam event:
1. Björn Borg (Wimbledon), 41
2. Roger Federer (Wimbledon), 40
= Roger Federer (US Open), 40
4. Pete Sampras (Wimbledon), 31
= Rafael Nadal (French Open), 31

Most consecutive Slams played:
1. Wayne Ferreira 56
2. Roger Federer 49
3. Feliciano Lopez 40
4. David Ferrer 38
5. Fernando Verdasco 35
6. Tomas Berdych 34
7. Albert Montanes 32
8. Philipp Kohlschreiber 30
9. Nicolas Almagro 29
10. Novak Djokovic 29

Most Grand Slam match wins
1. Jimmy Connors 233 wins
2. Roger Federer 232
3. Andre Agassi 224 wins
4. Ivan Lendl 222 wins
5. Pete Sampras 204 wins[/QUOTE]

Other Stuff:

Year-End Championships
1. Roger Federer 6
2. Ivan Lendl 5
= Pete Sampras 5
4. Ilie Nastase 3
= John McEnroe 3
= Boris Becker 3

Most Weeks at #1
1. Pete Sampras 286
2. Roger Federer 285
3. Ivan Lendl 270
4. Jimmy Connors 268
5. John McEnroe 170
6. Björn Borg 109
7. Rafael Nadal 102
8. Andre Agassi 101
9. Lleyton Hewitt 80
10. Stefan Edberg 72

Consecutive Weeks at #1
1. Roger Federer (1) 237
2. Jimmy Connors (1) 160
3. Ivan Lendl (1) 157
4. Pete Sampras (1) 102
5. Jimmy Connors (2) 84
6. Pete Sampras (2) 82
7. Ivan Lendl (2) 80
8. Lleyton Hewitt (1) 75
9. John McEnroe (1) 58
10. Rafael Nadal (1) 56

Year End #1
1. Sampras 6
2. Federer 5
3. Borg 4
4. Connors 3
= Lendl 3
= McEnroe 3


Highest Season Winning Percentage
1. John McEnroe (1984) .965 82–3
2. Jimmy Connors (1974) .959 93–4
3. Roger Federer (2005) .953 81–4
4. Roger Federer (2006) .948 92–5
5. Björn Borg (1979) .933 84–6
6. Ivan Lendl (1986) .925 74–6
7. Roger Federer (2004) .925 74–6
8. Ivan Lendl (1985) .923 84–7
9. Ivan Lendl (1982) .922 106–9
10. Björn Borg (1980) .921 70–6
= Novak Djokovic (2011) 0.921 70-6

Agassifan
03-03-2012, 05:20 PM
The only significant records that Fed hasn't beaten are

4 slams in a year
total weeks at #1

0.01% chance he gets the former, but he still has about a 5% chance at the latter.

SLD76
03-03-2012, 05:24 PM
The only significant records that Fed hasn't beaten are

4 slams in a year
total weeks at #1

0.01% chance he gets the former, but he still has about a 5% chance at the latter.


but yes, h2h against one player is all that matters.

Id also say that total number of titles won is significant but also a bit of apples to oranges give the depth of the game in his era vs when connors played.

joechiang
03-03-2012, 06:33 PM
I don't think it's 1700pts,dude.

devila
03-03-2012, 06:41 PM
federer doesn't beat top 3 opponents in slams. he only beat a messed up djokovic in the last 4 years. fed failed to win minor titles except when the draw had inconsistent opponents, or djoker was unhealthy and distracted by events like davis cup and obnoxious interviewers.

joechiang
03-03-2012, 06:49 PM
federer doesn't beat top 3 opponents in slams. he only beat a messed up djokovic in the last 4 years. fed failed to win minor titles except when the draw had inconsistent opponents, or djoker was unhealthy and distracted by events like davis cup and obnoxious interviewers.

When Djokovic was messed up at AO this year,Rafail still lost.PATHETIC!

sbengte
03-03-2012, 07:07 PM
No, I didn't "forget". I listed the top 10.

No parentheses = no panache.

Agassifan
03-03-2012, 07:55 PM
I don't think it's 1700pts,dude.

10435-8710 = 1725

Agassifan
03-03-2012, 07:55 PM
but yes, h2h against one player is all that matters.


You mean Davydenko is the true GOAT?

raphMODE
03-03-2012, 09:32 PM
you just forgot the following:
GS semi-finals
1. Jimmy Connors 31
2. Roger Federer 30

Most consecutive Slams played:
1. Wayne Ferreira 56
2. Roger Federer 49

Most Grand Slam match wins
1. Jimmy Connors 233 wins
2. Roger Federer 232

Most Weeks at #1
1. Pete Sampras 286
2. Roger Federer 285

Year End #1
1. Sampras 6
2. Federer 5
Didn't realize there are many of them being beaten very soon !!!
And some still possible !

merlinpinpin
03-03-2012, 10:58 PM
You mean Davydenko is the true GOAT?

Nope, that's obviously Hrbaty. But Davydenko sure is pretty close.

Russeljones
03-04-2012, 12:36 AM
federer doesn't beat top 3 opponents in slams. he only beat a messed up djokovic in the last 4 years. fed failed to win minor titles except when the draw had inconsistent opponents, or djoker was unhealthy and distracted by events like davis cup and obnoxious interviewers.

Got to find that chip fella, slice deeper!

celoft
03-04-2012, 07:13 AM
You forgot

Davydenko leads Nadal H2H :lol:

Btw, I'm sure nadal would trade the H2H for 16 slams, but focus on him being better "man to man" for the moment at least Federer has been better man to EVERY man.

I concur..............

dudeski
03-04-2012, 07:54 AM
you just forgot the following:

Most GS titles
1. Roger Federer 16
2. Pete Sampras 14
3. Björn Borg 11
4. Rafael Nadal 10
5. Jimmy Connors 8
= Ivan Lendl 8
= Andre Agassi 8
8. John McEnroe 7
= Mats Wilander 7
10. Stefan Edberg 6
= Boris Becker 6

GS finals
1. Roger Federer 23
2. Ivan Lendl 19
3. Pete Sampras 18
4. Björn Borg 16
5. Jimmy Connors 15
= Andre Agassi 15
= Rafael Nadal 15
8. John McEnroe 11
= Mats Wilander 11
= Stefan Edberg 11
...
...
...



Nice list. Also if remember correctly, 2005 TMC was the first final Federer lost in 2 years and it still took 5 sets and broken ankle for that to happen. He won 24 finals in the row doubling JMac and Borg previous record of 12! That's right. Doubling! 7 years ago in his peak Federer wasn't just breaking records, he was obliterating them.

Towser83
03-04-2012, 09:03 AM
Nice list. Also if remember correctly, 2005 TMC was the first final Federer lost in 2 years and it still took 5 sets and broken ankle for that to happen. He won 24 finals in the row doubling JMac and Borg previous record of 12! That's right. Doubling! 7 years ago in his peak Federer wasn't just breaking records, he was obliterating them.

I think in 2006 he made the finals of every single tournament he entered apart from 1, where he lost in cinci to Murray in the first round (I think). That's pretty insane

TMF
03-04-2012, 09:19 AM
I think in 2006 he made the finals of every single tournament he entered apart from 1, where he lost in cinci to Murray in the first round (I think). That's pretty insane

Losing to Murray at Cinci was a surprise since he was on a roll and everyone expected him to win. Since Cinci was a better suface for him than Toronto and he managed to win that event the previous week, fans start to doubt that he tanked that match. Fed even had to address to the reporter after being question(which he denied tanking the match).

Towser83
03-04-2012, 09:37 AM
Losing to Murray at Cinci was a surprise since he was on a roll and everyone expected him to win. Since Cinci was a better suface for him than Toronto and he managed to win that event the previous week, fans start to doubt that he tanked that match. Fed even had to address to the reporter after being question(which he denied tanking the match).

Didn't know people thought he tanked! It was a big upset back then, but i guess he was due an early loss sooner or later

jackson vile
03-04-2012, 10:01 AM
When Djokovic was messed up at AO this year,Rafail still lost.PATHETIC!

There is not much Nadal or Federer can do or anyone else for that matter. Novak is a superior player, and against Nadal he can still be that tired and win. So it simply does not matter how Nadal plays, he will have to wait for Novak to be in a really bad situation or take some serious risks with some luck in order to win.

Really Novak is going to win no matter what.

devila
03-04-2012, 10:10 AM
it's no one's fault journeyman murray beat his idol fed in 2006.

fed's ankle, his thigh, the darkness, mono and roddick hurt federer so bad, i'm sure.
funny how even with 6 slams after the year 2005, fed trolls still were bitter.

monfed
03-04-2012, 10:17 AM
it's no one's fault journeyman murray beat his idol fed in 2006.

fed's ankle, his thigh, the darkness, mono and roddick hurt federer so bad, i'm sure.
funny how even with 6 slams after the year 2005, fed trolls still were bitter.


Who's your favourite player, devila? :)

mellowyellow
03-04-2012, 10:22 AM
Didn't know people thought he tanked! It was a big upset back then, but i guess he was due an early loss sooner or later

It was an upset but it was certainly one that could have been contemplated. late Sunday final in Canada then to play Murray who was not ranked as high as his potential even then was showing. I didn't think it was a tank performance, he looked flat but with the Canada victory and the short turn around to play Murray early seemed a bit much. Just another example of Murray's record against Fed falling along the lines of "wins at opportune times" when he wins.

Nathaniel_Near
03-04-2012, 11:02 AM
Who's your favourite player, devila? :)

Probably used to be Roddick before he kept getting beat by Fedster. Now she/he takes any chance to talk badly of Fed and also his fans!:)

This is *the* most bitter member on the board, believe it.

Agassifan
08-24-2012, 01:15 PM
What a difference a few months make !!!

Towser83
08-24-2012, 04:45 PM
What a difference a few months make !!!

Yeah, it seemed insane that Fed could overtake Rafa. All the talk was "can he overtake Nadal and get to number 2 which means Djokovic might beat Nadal in the semis and Federer could beat Djokovic" And a lot of people thought it was a longshot. I even thought it was at times, other times I thought there was a bit of a chance.

But now, he's number 1. Insane and shows you how unpredictable tennis is.

smoledman
08-24-2012, 04:47 PM
Yeah, it seemed insane that Fed could overtake Rafa. All the talk was "can he overtake Nadal and get to number 2 which means Djokovic might beat Nadal in the semis and Federer could beat Djokovic" And a lot of people thought it was a longshot. I even thought it was at times, other times I thought there was a bit of a chance.

But now, he's number 1. Insane and shows you how unpredictable tennis is.

Or maybe it's just Maestro's last push and he'll fade after this...

Towser83
08-24-2012, 05:22 PM
Or maybe it's just Maestro's last push and he'll fade after this...

well yes that could happen.

Agassifan
08-24-2012, 06:54 PM
Or maybe it's just Maestro's last push and he'll fade after this...

Very possible. He is 31 in a tour where 26 year olds are fading.