After FO 2008 he bounced back and played excellent Wimbledon, he narrowly lost but you can't win them all.
After heartbreaking 2008 Wimbledon loss he won 2008 USO.
After heartbreaking 2009 AO loss he made 4 straight slam finals, winning 3 of them.
Fed along with say Lendl is one of the best ever in bouncing back after hard losses, no amount of spinning will change that.
This is just too hilarious, Nadal fans just can't seem to make up their minds regarding Murray, if he's supposed to be part of this strong era which would have radically reduced Fed count if Fed was the same/similar age how can he at the same time be Fed's victim he takes advantage of? Fed also beat Murray in 2 other slam finals, was Murray a slam final virgin then as well?
Don't forget, Fed also beat Novak in 2008 USO, I'd say beating two strong era players back-to-back in a slam on their best surface is impressive enough to warrant calling it "bouncing back".
Fed didn't rule anything (going by his standards anyway), he barely scraped by in FO and Wimbledon and served poorly against Delpo in the USO final, his level of play was a far cry from his 2004-2007 days except for Cinci tourney that year.
No, he took advantage of slam final virgin and his pidgeon Berdych, beat the same player (some called him clown when Fed beat him in 2009 FO final) Fed did in last year's FO final to win his FO and in USO final prevailed over subpar Novak who had serving issues and was winless against top 10 for the vast majority of the year, he capitalized
On top of it, in a sense of fairness we also have to mention Fed's lung infection in 2010 which disrupted his training and played a role in him losing to everyone and their brother in early HC and clay season and his injury at Wimbledon which played a role in him being on the brink of losing to grasscourt beast Falla.
Agree more or less though I do think Fed's mental toughness is overrated and his 5 set record doesn't tell the whole story, Nadal is tougher mentally but Fed is no slouch in that department either.