Comparing Federer and Nadal's First 10 Grand Slam Championships

M

McEnroeisanartist

Hall of Fame
I thought it would be interesting to compare how Federer and Nadal did in each of their first 10 Grand Slam Championships.

Each Grand Slam Won
Federer - 3 Australian Opens, 4 Wimbledons, and 3 US Opens
Nadal - 1 Australian Open, 6 French Opens, 2 Wimbledons, and 1 US Open.

Number of players Ranked in the Top 10 Defeated
Federer - 21
Nadal - 18
Note: If you take each other out, then it is Federer - 19, Nadal - 11
Note: Federer had three Grand Slams where he defeated 3 Top 10 Ranked Players in one Grand Slam. Nadal accomplished this once at the 2011 French Open defeating the 5th Ranked, 4th Ranked, and 3rd Ranked players. Federer would achieve this at the 2007 US Open.

Total Sets Lost in Grand Slams
Federer - 20
Nadal - 23

Total Sets Lost in Grand Slam Semifinals and Finals
Federer - 7
Nadal - 12

Number of Bagels (6-0 Sets) Delivered in Grand Slams
Federer - 21
Nadal - 9

Number of Bagels (6-0 Sets) Delivered in Grand Slams
Federer - 7
Nadal - 1
 
Hood_Man

Hood_Man

G.O.A.T.
Those are some terrific stats, and they really show off how dominant Federer was during his reign. I especially like the variety of his wins, 3-4-3.

Although for Nadal, I'm wondering if his 6 French Opens are skewing some of those "wins against top 10" stats. Possibly a lot of the top 10 weren't clay court specialists and didn't get far enough in the draw to reach Nadal. I'm sure some of the statisticians here will confirm or correct me on this.

21 bagels in Grand Slam matches... incredible...
 
L

...LikeTheWorld

New User
Hood_Man said:
Those are some terrific stats, and they really show off how dominant Federer was during his reign. I especially like the variety of his wins, 3-4-3.

Although for Nadal, I'm wondering if his 6 French Opens are skewing some of those "wins against top 10" stats. Possibly a lot of the top 10 weren't clay court specialists and didn't get far enough in the draw to reach Nadal. I'm sure some of the statisticians here will confirm or correct me on this.

21 bagels in Grand Slam matches... incredible...
Click to expand...

A Number 1 or 2 can't get a top-10 player before the QF.
 
PSNELKE

PSNELKE

Legend
Wow, he found all the stats in which Fed´s superior to Ralph, good job.

However I think I´ll give you one that outweighs all of them. - Ralph beat Fed in 7 times in his 10 GS wins.
 
TheTruth

TheTruth

G.O.A.T.
I don't understand why people take the time to compute these type of statistics. Especially ranking, all that matters is how each opponent played on the day.

For example, Murray is highly ranked, but plays horrible in major finals, so that to me is not a barometer for comparison, and then you can get someone in the top 100, who comes in and plays lights out, well beyond their ranking.

Other factors include experience, in fact experience can be the biggest measure. Are you playing an experienced player, or someone who's never been there?

Guess they have to write something.
 
Last edited:
N

nikdom

Guest
Heracles said:
What is impressive from Nadal side is that he had to beat Federer 7 times in his 10 slams won.
Click to expand...

Its not. Its just proof Nadal was lucky that the dominant guy in tennis had a matchup problem with him.

Otherwise, Nadal should have been beating everyone else Fed was beating and won the rest of the slams too.
 
H

Heracles

Banned
nikdom said:
Its not. Its just proof Nadal was lucky that the dominant guy in tennis had a matchup problem with him.

Otherwise, Nadal should have been beating everyone else Fed was beating and won the rest of the slams too.
Click to expand...

Nadal beat Djokovic 5 times, Murray 3 times, Soderling 5 times if you ask for the other members of the current top 5.

When Nadal won these slams, he beat everyonelse to get to Federer and to beat him.

Beating 7 times the guy who has the record of slams won and who was in his primes is an unreal statistics.
 
N

nikdom

Guest
Heracles said:
Nadal beat Djokovic 5 times, Murray 3 times, Soderling 5 times if you ask for the other members of the current top 5.

When Nadal won these slams, he beat everyonelse to get to Federer and to beat him.

Beating 7 times the guy who has the record of slams won and who was in his primes is an unreal statistics.
Click to expand...

And how many of those times was it on clay?

Also, how many of those times Nadal beat Roger did Roger go on to win 2 or more slams for the year?

If Nadal was indeed that dominant (and not just had a matchup advantage over a Roger who kept showing up at the FO) how come Roger was cleaning up the other slams at that rate?
 
L

...LikeTheWorld

New User
Compare the opponents in the final
Federer:
2003 Wim - Mark Philippoussis (unseeded, 0 GS)
2004 AO - Marat Safin (unseeded, 2 GS)
2004 Wim - Andy Roddick (2. Seed, 1 GS)
2004 USO - Lleyton Hewitt (4. Seed, 2 GS)
2005 Wim - Andy Roddick (2. Seed, 1 GS)
2005 USO - Andre Agassi (with 35 years) (7. Seed, 8 GS)
2006 AO - Marcos Baghdatis (unseeded, 0 GS)
2006 Wim - Rafael Nadal (2. Seed, 10 Slams)
2006 USO - Andy Roddick (9. Seed, 1 GS)
2007 AO - Fernando González (10. Seed, 0 GS)

Nadal:
2005 FO - Mariano Puerta (Unseeded, 0 GS)
2006 FO - Roger Federer (1. Seed, 16 GS)
2007 FO - Roger Federer (1. Seed, 16 GS)
2008 FO - Roger Federer (1. Seed, 16 GS)
2008 Wim - Roger Federer (1. Seed, 16 GS)
2009 AO - Roger Federer (2. Seed, 16 GS)
2010 FO - Robin Söderling (5. Seed, 0 GS)
2010 Wim - Tomáš Berdych (12. Seed, 0 GS)
2010 USO - Novak Djokovic (3. Seed, 2 GS)
2011 FO - Roger Federer (3. Seed, 16 GS)


Fed won against:
6 non Top-4 players (3 unseeded)
A 35 year old Agassi
3 times against Roddick
8 different players in 10 GS

Nadal won against:
3 non Top-4 players (1 unseeded)
6 times against Federer
5 different players in 10 GS
 
D

Deleted member 3771

Guest
...LikeTheWorld said:
Compare the opponents in the final
Federer:
2003 Wim - Mark Philippoussis (unseeded, 0 GS)
2004 AO - Marat Safin (unseeded, 2 GS)
2004 Wim - Andy Roddick (2. Seed, 1 GS)
2004 USO - Lleyton Hewitt (4. Seed, 2 GS)
2005 Wim - Andy Roddick (2. Seed, 1 GS)
2005 USO - Andre Agassi (with 35 years) (7. Seed, 8 GS)
2006 AO - Marcos Baghdatis (unseeded, 0 GS)
2006 Wim - Rafael Nadal (2. Seed, 10 Slams)
2006 USO - Andy Roddick (9. Seed, 1 GS)
2007 AO - Fernando González (10. Seed, 0 GS)

Nadal:
2005 FO - Mariano Puerta (Unseeded, 0 GS)
2006 FO - Roger Federer (1. Seed, 16 GS)
2007 FO - Roger Federer (1. Seed, 16 GS)
2008 FO - Roger Federer (1. Seed, 16 GS)
2008 Wim - Roger Federer (1. Seed, 16 GS)
2009 AO - Roger Federer (2. Seed, 16 GS)
2010 FO - Robin Söderling (5. Seed, 0 GS)
2010 Wim - Tomáš Berdych (12. Seed, 0 GS)
2010 USO - Novak Djokovic (3. Seed, 2 GS)
2011 FO - Roger Federer (3. Seed, 16 GS)


Fed won against:
6 non Top-4 players (3 unseeded)
A 35 year old Agassi
3 times against Roddick
8 different players in 10 GS

Nadal won against:
3 non Top-4 players (1 unseeded)
6 times against Federer
5 different players in 10 GS
Click to expand...

So in 10 slam finals, Nadal beat guys who ended their careers being the winner of 98 slams(equivalent), and Fred beat winners of 25 slams(equivalent).

Conclusion: Fed faced chumps in slam finals relative to Nadal, who faced champs.

Nadal gets a LOT of bonus Goat points for dominating Fed in slam finals, and these numbers are why the dominance of Fred in slam finals is a big factor in the GOAT discussion, even if he ends up with less slams than Fred.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
fundrazer

fundrazer

G.O.A.T.
Mate, that is a really dumb way to look at things. If you can't figure that out then I can't help your blinded fanboy eyes.
 
Cup8489

Cup8489

G.O.A.T.
Gentlemen, let the **** war begin!

I liked looking at those stats, but I'll be leaving this thread to avoid annoying posters like the ones coming out of the woodwork..

Carry on, Roger.
 
MichaelNadal

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
nikdom said:
And how many of those times was it on clay?

Also, how many of those times Nadal beat Roger did Roger go on to win 2 or more slams for the year?

If Nadal was indeed that dominant (and not just had a matchup advantage over a Roger who kept showing up at the FO) how come Roger was cleaning up the other slams at that rate?
Click to expand...

I get so sick of hearing that. How many of Roger's slams are on HIS best surface? :oops: it goes both ways. One surface isn't better than another.
 
N

nikdom

Guest
MichaelNadal said:
I get so sick of hearing that. How many of Roger's slams are on HIS best surface? :oops: it goes both ways. One surface isn't better than another.
Click to expand...

Yes, it goes every which way. That is precisely the question..... why wasn't Nadal frequenting Roger on HIS best surface, just like Roger was on Nadal's?

Huh? huh?
 
MichaelNadal

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
nikdom said:
Yes, it goes every which way. That is precisely the question..... why wasn't Nadal frequenting Roger on HIS best surface, just like Roger was on Nadal's?

Huh? huh?
Click to expand...

Uh because Federer is a more dominant tennis player? Why do we have to have this discussion every day all day just bc like 3 *********s act like Federer isn't a better player? You don't have to convince anyone on this board except the 3 retardo's that will never be convinced. No one has been as dominant or successful as Federer, but when Nadal DID get to finals, he always beat Federer with the exception of 2 occasions. 90% of Nadal fans won't argue the point that Federer is the goat. Some of you hardcore Federer fans need to start giving Nadal some credit too. Out of the 4 times they met in a slam OFF clay, Nadal won 2. It's not all about clay.
 
N

nikdom

Guest
Here's how the chips fall down

1. Roger's best surface is HC and worst is clay

2. Nadal's best surface is Clay and worst is HC

3. Roger gets deep into tournaments on Nadal's surface but loses to him.

4. Nadal rarely ever gets deep enough on Roger's best surface to challenge him.

5. So by NOT being a real challenge to Roger on HC, Nadal gets to look good with his lopsided H2H
 
MichaelNadal

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
nikdom said:
Here's how the chips fall down

1. Roger's best surface is HC and worst is clay

2. Nadal's best surface is Clay and worst is HC

3. Roger gets deep into tournaments on Nadal's surface but loses to him.

4. Nadal rarely ever gets deep enough on Roger's best surface to challenge him.

5. So by NOT being a real challenge to Roger on HC, Nadal gets to look good with his lopsided H2H
Click to expand...

Lmao. It's about the matchup. Had they met, whether it was first round or in the final, Nadal would have won at least half of the matches. The clay H2H between the two is FAR in Nadal's favor, but on HC and Grass there's not a big difference. Nadal can beat Federer more easily on HC and Grass than Federer can on clay. With more matches on HC and Grass the H2H would still be in Rafa's favor. Sorry.
 
Bud

Bud

Bionic Poster
nikdom said:
Here's how the chips fall down

1. Roger's best surface is HC and worst is clay

2. Nadal's best surface is Clay and worst is HC

3. Roger gets deep into tournaments on Nadal's surface but loses to him.

4. Nadal rarely ever gets deep enough on Roger's best surface to challenge him.

5. So by NOT being a real challenge to Roger on HC, Nadal gets to look good with his lopsided H2H
Click to expand...

Roger should be thankful. Otherwise, he'd have fewer HC majors ;)

We were all hoping for a Nadal/Federer USO final in 2010... however, Federer failed to make the final, losing to Djokovic :cry:
 
Cup8489

Cup8489

G.O.A.T.
MichaelNadal said:
Uh because Federer is a more dominant tennis player? Why do we have to have this discussion every day all day just bc like 3 *********s act like Federer isn't a better player? You don't have to convince anyone on this board except the 3 retardo's that will never be convinced. No one has been as dominant or successful as Federer, but when Nadal DID get to finals, he always beat Federer with the exception of 2 occasions. 90% of Nadal fans won't argue the point that Federer is the goat. Some of you hardcore Federer fans need to start giving Nadal some credit too. Out of the 4 times they met in a slam OFF clay, Nadal won 2. It's not all about clay.
Click to expand...

Thank goodness! A Rafa fan who has NOT lost his mind! More and more of you are falling to the crazy side.. glad to see a strong holdout.
 
N

nikdom

Guest
MichaelNadal said:
Lmao. It's about the matchup. Had they met, whether it was first round or in the final, Nadal would have won at least half of the matches. The clay H2H between the two is FAR in Nadal's favor, but on HC and Grass there's not a big difference. Nadal can beat Federer more easily on HC and Grass but Federer can't on clay.
Click to expand...

Now you're talking hypotheticals.

If Nadal was so good that he COULD beat Federer on HC, why wasn't he in the finals of the 2005 USO, 2006 AO, 2006 USO, 2007 AO, 2007 USO?

The same years he was dominating the French open.

You guys keep going to the 2 times he did beat Roger on his favorite surface... that's not the question. The question is why did he not show up more often to challenge him similarly? What was stopping him?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MichaelNadal

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
Bud said:
Roger should be thankful. Otherwise, he'd have fewer HC majors ;)
Click to expand...


Exactly. We have a winner.
Federer is more dominant overall NO DOUBT about it. The undisputed GOAT imo. But had he met Rafa in more GRAND SLAM FINALS, he'd be missing a few trophies, reguardless of the surface, so I don't think you guys should keep running to bring that up.
 
Bud

Bud

Bionic Poster
nikdom said:
Now you're talking hypotheticals.

If Nadal was so good that he COULD beat Federer on HC, why wasn't he in the finals of the 2005 USO, 2006 AO, 2006 USO, 2007 AO, 2007 USO?

The same years he was dominating the French open.
Click to expand...

Lol!

Errr.. Nadal was 19-21 in 2005-07... you can do the math on the other years.

You (always) conveniently forget that Nadal is 5 years younger than Federer.
 
MichaelNadal

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
Cup8489 said:
Thank goodness! A Rafa fan who has NOT lost his mind! More and more of you are falling to the crazy side.. glad to see a strong holdout.
Click to expand...

Thanks man, don't worry I know who the GOAT is.

nikdom said:
Now you're talking hypotheticals.

If Nadal was so good that he COULD beat Federer on HC, why wasn't he in the finals of the 2005 USO, 2006 AO, 2006 USO, 2007 AO, 2007 USO?

The same years he was dominating the French open.
Click to expand...

I just said it's about matchups. Federer is more dominant over the FIELD on HC and Grass, without a doubt. What im saying though is you can't say bc Federer reached more finals that he would beat Nadal had Nadal made said finals.
 
sunnyIce

sunnyIce

Semi-Pro
i dont understand. looked up the atp page.

at the end of 10 yrs on Tour, Rog had 12 slams, and rafa only 9. so how......?
 
N

nikdom

Guest
MichaelNadal said:
Thanks man, don't worry I know who the GOAT is.



I just said it's about matchups. Federer is more dominant over the FIELD on HC and Grass, without a doubt. What im saying though is you can't say bc Federer reached more finals that he would beat Nadal had Nadal made said finals.
Click to expand...

Why not? Roger was cleaning up those titles. And if Nadal was good enough to beat Roger, why wasn't he even in those finals?

So you want me to imagine that Nadal magically placed in the finals without having to face those he actually lost to, would beat Roger because of a matchup issue?

So matchup is not important when Roger is losing to Rafa in the FO finals, but because of matchup, in a hypothetical HC final that Nadal makes, he would win? Gimme a break...
 
OTMPut

OTMPut

Hall of Fame
PSNELKE said:
Wow, he found all the stats in which Fed´s superior to Ralph, good job.

However I think I´ll give you one that outweighs all of them. - Ralph beat Fed in 7 times in his 10 GS wins.
Click to expand...

Of course! Fed was so dominant that if you wanted a GS title, you had to go through him.
Who do you except Rafa to beat in his 10 GS wins? Murray? Hewitt? Gonzalez?
 
sunnyIce

sunnyIce

Semi-Pro
other stats. from 10 yrs on Tour.

RF - F 14, SF 16, QF 16

RN - F 12, SF 15, QF 16

so they are pretty close, no way is rafa 'much' faster than rog.
 
MichaelNadal

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
nikdom said:
Why not? Roger was cleaning up those titles. And if Nadal was good enough to beat Roger, why wasn't he even in those finals?

So you want me to imagine that Nadal magically placed in the finals without having to face those he actually lost to, would beat Roger because of a matchup issue?

So matchup is not important when Roger is losing to Rafa in the FO finals, but because of matchup, in a hypothetical HC final that Nadal makes, he would win? Gimme a break...
Click to expand...

Uh who said that? Their entire H2H is based on a matchup no? And im only turning YOUR logic against you. YOU'RE the one saying Rafa didn't get to the finals and BECAUSE OF THAT the H2H is skewed. So by that logic, yes, if we put Rafa in the finals of more HC matches and slams, you're telling me you'd put your mortgage on Federer beating Nadal? :confused: I have no problem admitting Federer is a better player overall, but even I wouldn't do that.
 
Bud

Bud

Bionic Poster
sunnyIce said:
i dont understand. looked up the atp page.

at the end of 10 yrs on Tour, Rog had 12 slams, and rafa only 9. so how......?
Click to expand...

sunnyIce said:
I used data from ATPtennis.com

2011 is RN 10th yr
2007 was RF 10th
Click to expand...

2011 isn't over yet ;)

And Rafa has 10 GS's not 9

- - -

The bottom line is they are very close in their rate of racking up slams.
 
Last edited:
PSNELKE

PSNELKE

Legend
OTMPut said:
Of course! Fed was so dominant that if you wanted a GS title, you had to go through him.
Who do you except Rafa to beat in his 10 GS wins? Murray? Hewitt? Gonzalez?
Click to expand...

You dot get the point. How many times did Fed beat Ralph in a GS final??
Compare this to Ralph and how many times he beat Fed.
 
N

nikdom

Guest
MichaelNadal said:
Uh who said that? Their entire H2H is based on a matchup no? And im only turning YOUR logic against you. YOU'RE the one saying Rafa didn't get to the finals and BECAUSE OF THAT the H2H is skewed. So by that logic, yes, if we put Rafa in the finals of more HC matches and slams, you're telling me you'd put your mortgage on Federer beating Nadal? :confused:
Click to expand...

Yes, but the matchup includes the characteristics of the surface. Fed's BH doesn't match up well with Nadal's FH on a high-bouncing surface. The same Fed who lost to Nadal at the FO faced Nadal on a fast indoor court in the year end masters and beat him easily. (2006 shanghai if I'm not incorrect)


I respect Nadal's achievements. Even outside of his H2H with Roger, Nadal has become an all-around champ. I have no problem if folks want Nadal to be appreciated for what he has done. He deserves it. But when the H2H is used to belittle Roger's achievements, that's when I think its being used unfairly as a sole yardstick of Roger's greatness or lack of it.
 
Bud

Bud

Bionic Poster
nikdom said:
Yes, but the matchup includes the characteristics of the surface. Fed's BH doesn't match up well with Nadal's FH on a high-bouncing surface. The same Fed who lost to Nadal at the FO faced Nadal on a fast indoor court in the year end masters and beat him easily.


I respect Nadal's achievements. Even outside of his H2H with Roger, Nadal has become an all-around champ. I have no problem if folks want Nadal to be appreciated for what he has done. He deserves it. But when the H2H is used to belittle Roger's achievements, that's when I think its being used unfairly as a sole yardstick of Roger's greatness or lack of it.
Click to expand...

Nobody is belittling Federer's achievements. We're merely pointing out that he's not the GOAT since he's not even the greatest in his era :)

Nadal owns Federer in and out of slams and always has. Federer has never had a positive H2H against Nadal on tour or in slams ;)
 
MichaelNadal

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
nikdom said:
Yes, but the matchup includes the characteristics of the surface. Fed's BH doesn't match up well with Nadal's FH on a high-bouncing surface. The same Fed who lost to Nadal at the FO faced Nadal on a fast indoor court in the year end masters and beat him easily. (2006 shanghai if I'm not incorrect)


I respect Nadal's achievements. Even outside of his H2H with Roger, Nadal has become an all-around champ. I have no problem if folks want Nadal to be appreciated for what he has done. He deserves it. But when the H2H is used to belittle Roger's achievements, that's when I think its being used unfairly as a sole yardstick of Roger's greatness or lack of it.
Click to expand...


That I can agree with, and don't even get why so many commentators and analysts are using it. It's really stupid actually. It's like everytime he loses to Rafa his achievements matter less and less. They are like OH MY, Rafa is really closing in now, etc etc. I watched the end of the AO-2009 yesterday and when it was over the commentators and analysts were REALLY laying into Federer about the whole Nadal thing, and I didn't get it at all.
 
N

nikdom

Guest
Bud said:
Nobody is belittling Federer's achievements. We're merely pointing out that he's not the GOAT since he's not even the greatest in his era :)

Nadal owns Federer in and out of slams and always has. Federer has never had a positive H2H against Nadal on tour or in slams ;)
Click to expand...


All I can wish for is that you guys get the same medicine you are doling out today.

Somewhere, somehow I hope when Nadal is at the twilight of his career, he gets thumped around by Djokovic or whoever else, ends up with a bad H2H, and you guys get the same disrespect from Djoker fans that you're doling out now.

;)

Enjoy it while it lasts...
 
Bud

Bud

Bionic Poster
nikdom said:
All I can wish for is that you guys get the same medicine you are doling out today.

Somewhere, somehow I hope when Nadal is at the twilight of his career, he gets thumped around by Djokovic or whoever else, ends up with a bad H2H, and you guys get the same disrespect from Djoker fans that you're doling out now.

;)

Enjoy it while it lasts...
Click to expand...

Lol! Don't be like that :)

The bottom line is nobody is arrogantly and constantly spouting off about Nadal being some GOAT while completely discounting reality and past champions' achievements.

If Nadal passes Federer he will still not be the GOAT since Federer is not the GOAT.

- - -

Want another reality check??

Federer has a negative H2H against 21 other players versus 5 for Nadal ;)
 
Last edited:
sunnyIce

sunnyIce

Semi-Pro
Summary - First 10 Yrs on Tour

Turned Pro - RF 1998, RN 2001

RF - W 12, F 14, SF 16, QF 16

RN - W 9, F 12, SF 15, QF 16

Summary - First 11.5 Yrs on Tour (Present Day)

RF - W 12, F 15, SF 18, QF 18

RN - W 10, F 13, SF 16, QF 18

Not too different, with Rog slightly ahead.
 
N

nikdom

Guest
Bud said:
Lol! Don't be like that :)

The bottom line is nobody is arrogantly and constantly spouting off about Nadal being some GOAT while completely discounting reality and past champions' achievements.

If Nadal passes Federer he will still not be the GOAT since Federer is not the GOAT.
Click to expand...

This is not about GOAT.

You have to give respect to Roger for his 16 GS titles and the way he achieved them. If it doesn't mean GOAT for you, that's fine... but accept that it is a remarkable achievement that has its merits.

Same way you will want respect for Nadal's achievements at the end of his career, whether or not he passes 16.

The GOAT debate is useless. You can find some flaw or the other in every GOAT candidate. There is never going to be a 'perfect' GOAT who never lost to anyone.
 
Bud

Bud

Bionic Poster
sunnyIce said:
Summary - First 10 Yrs on Tour

Turned Pro - RF 1998, RN 2001

RF - W 12, F 14, SF 16, QF 16

RN - W 9, F 12, SF 15, QF 16

Summary - First 11.5 Yrs on Tour (Present Day)

RF - W 12, F 15, SF 18, QF 18

RN - W 10, F 13, SF 16, QF 18

Not too different, with Rog slightly ahead.
Click to expand...

Nadal played 1 match on tour in 2002... and no GS matches

Why are you stating he started in 2001?

- -

Nadal started playing GS matches in 2003
Federer started playing GS matches in 1999

At the very least, use accurate information
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Comparing Federer and Nadal's Grand Slam Wins
Replies
39
Views
6K
kandamrgam
kandamrgam
M
Comparing Federer and Nadal's First 9 Grand Slams
Replies
5
Views
955
AJK1
A
M
Grand Slam Matches With Combined 15 Grand Slam Championships
Replies
1
Views
484
adil1972
A
M
Comparing Federer and Nadal's Grand Slam Performance
Replies
10
Views
1K
mellowyellow
mellowyellow
M
Since 2011 - Federer and Nadal have won same # of Grand Slams outside of their best Grand Slam
Replies
1
Views
268
EloQuent
EloQuent
Top