Comparing Federer and Nadal's Grand Slam Wins

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by McEnroeisanartist, Apr 27, 2012.

  1. McEnroeisanartist

    McEnroeisanartist Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    2,180
    Comparing Federer and Nadal's Grand Slams at the same age (through 2007 Australian Open and 2012 Australian Open)

    Both have won 10 grand slams.

    Federer won 1 grand slam without losing a set and three grand slams losing only one set. Nadal won 2 grand slams without losing a set and two grand slams losing only one set.

    Federer won 4 grand slams without losing a set in the semifinals and the finals. Nadal won 2 grand slams without losing a set in the semifinals and finals.

    Federer won 3 grand slams defeating three top 10 ranked players in the grand slam. Nadal won 1 grand slam defeating three top 10 ranked players in the grand slam (zero if you don't count Federer)

    Federer won 8 grand slams defeating two top 10 ranked players in the grand slam. Nadal won 5 grand slams defeating two top 10 ranked players in the grand slam (two if you don't count Federer)

    Federer won 2 grand slams defeating two top 5 ranked players in the grand slam. Nadal won 2 grand slams defeating two top 5 ranked players in the grand slam (zero if you don't count Federer)

    Federer won 6 grand slams defeating a top 5 ranked player in the grand slam
    (5 grand slams if you do not count for Nadal) Nadal won 9 grand slams defeating a top 5 ranked player in the grand slam (2 grand slams if you do not count Federer)

    Yes, it is remarkable that Nadal has defeated Federer in 7 of his 10 grand slams, but its amazing how much less Nadal has played the top players in his grand slams than Federer did.
     
    #1
  2. Tammo

    Tammo Banned

    Joined:
    May 23, 2011
    Messages:
    3,875
    Since more than half of Nadal's slams are RG my conclusion is that most good clay courter are bad hard court and grass court players. And the top players are good hard and GC players but bad CC players
     
    #2
  3. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    WRONG! Neither Federer, nor Nadal, have won any Grand Slams. The only Grand Slam winners in the history of tennis are:

    Don Budge
    Maureen Connolly
    Rod Laver
    Margarete Court
    Steffi Graff
     
    #3
  4. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    16,640
    Location:
    Germany, Munich
    This. I mean come on:
    The Grand Slam = winning 4 in one year
    A GS tournament = any of the 4
    A major = see above
     
    #4
  5. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    30,950
    Location:
    New York
    I do not understand your logic of NOT counting Federer. Why not? He's not worthy enough of the top 5 (or 10) player status? :shock: How did that happen? If the idea is to not count a player just because he's a bad matchupo for the other one then in Fed's case Roddick shouldn't count either but I still don't see the logic of excluding any top player for any reason especially a #1 player!!
     
    #5
  6. dh003i

    dh003i Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,050
    I think the point was to show how few top-10 players outside of Federer Nadal has beaten in his Major victories.

    That is a weak point, imo, unless we also exclude slams Federer won beating exactly 3 top-10 players, of which one would be Nadal. Did Federer beat 2 other top 10 players at Wimbledon 2006 and 2007?

    The point still stands, even if we ignore all of the Federer-exclusions.
     
    #6
  7. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,052
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Top 10 players Federer beat in his winning majors
    2003 Wimbledon: Roddick (6)
    2004 Australian Open: Nalbandian (8 ), Ferrero (3)
    2004 Wimbledon: Hewitt (10), Roddick (2)
    2004 US Open: Agassi (7), Henman (6), Hewitt (5)
    2005 Wimbledon: Hewitt (2), Roddick (4)
    2005 US Open: Hewitt (4), Agassi (7)
    2006 Australian Open: Davydenko (5)
    2006 Wimbledon: Ancic (10), Nadal (2)
    2006 US Open: Blake (7), Davydenko (6), Roddick (10)
    2007 Australian Open: Robredo (6), Roddick (7), Gonzalez (9)
    2007 Wimbledon: Nadal (2)
    2007 US Open: Roddick (5), Davydenko (4), Djokovic (3)
    2008 US Open: Djokovic (3), Murray (6)
    2009 French Open: Monfils (10), del Potro (5)
    2009 Wimbledon: Roddick (6)
    2010 Australian Open: Davydenko (6), Tsonga (10), Murray (4)

    Top 10 players Nadal beat in his winning majors
    2005 French Open: Federer (1)
    2006 French Open: Ljubicic (4), Federer (1)
    2007 French Open: Djokovic (5), Federer (1)
    2008 French Open: Djokovic (3), Federer (1)
    2008 Wimbledon: Federer (1)
    2009 Australian Open: Simon (8 ), Federer (2)
    2010 French Open: Soderling (7)
    2010 Wimbledon: Soderling (6), Murray (4)
    2010 US Open: Verdasco (8 ), Djokovic (3)
    2011 French Open: Soderling (5), Murray (4), Federer (3)
     
    #7
  8. tlm

    tlm Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,454
    More of Nadal's wins came against tougher opponents.
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2012
    #8
  9. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Not counting Federer is laughable. If one bases it on the bad matchup theory then Safin, Hewitt, and Roddick should all be discounted for Federer (which leaves his competition for nearly all his slam wins as even more the royal sh1t until Djokovic starts to contend, as he almost never beat Nadal en route). Nadal would be discounted in any slam win for Djokovic from 2011 onwards. The examples are endless.
     
    #9
  10. Sentinel

    Sentinel Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Messages:
    28,812
    Location:
    Brave New World
    Federer being a tougher opponent for Nadal :confused::)
     
    #10
  11. tlm

    tlm Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,454
    Hey he is supposed to be the goat so that would be true then.
     
    #11
  12. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,686

    Exactly. This is where Fed fans trip themselves up time and time again. Fed is goat,and practically walks on water to a lot of these people,yet they try and discredit Nadal's wins over him while inadvertently dissing their dude in the process. Sorry,but beating Fed in one slam final much less several,is a huge achievement,even though these folks will always play it down as if it's so easy to do simply because it was Nadal who beat him. Doesn't Fed deserve more credit than you're giving him Fed fans?
     
    #12
  13. OddJack

    OddJack Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Messages:
    9,584
    Location:
    South
    Nadal is GOAT of the draw.
     
    #13
  14. ThoughtCrime

    ThoughtCrime Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2011
    Messages:
    268
    In the end a grand slam title is a grand slam title. Both fan bases should really cut the ******** and just deal with loses without trying to discredit the opponent or their own player in some cases.
     
    #14
  15. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,011

    I don't see what's the problem. It's sound obvious that the OP was referring to Grand Slam titles. I know you are well aware of what he was talking about but pretend to be lost. If someone said Federer is a 16 Grand Slam winners, I'm pretty sure everyone know exactly what it means.
     
    #15
  16. monfed

    monfed Guest

    Nadal gets enough credit as it is even after having a HUGE matchup advantage over Federer in the first place. Not to mention playing a majority of their matches on clay and slow HC, especially clay. Stop being so selfish.
     
    #16
  17. dh003i

    dh003i Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,050
    I agree with both of these posters. There is no reason to discount Nadal's victories over Federer, even if they are due to a matchup issue. You could say that Federer winning over a very pure server might be a matchup issue. After all, on a wooden court or a court where serve is insanely emphasized, the pure server would probably win, right? So matchup issue.

    Nadal's wins over Federer count as wins over a top 10, they are certainly impressive. Federer's wins over top 10s also count, etc.

    Overall, I actually think the "wins over top X" player argument is poor. If someone gets to a Major final, they are playing very well.
     
    #17
  18. nadal_slam_king

    nadal_slam_king Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2010
    Messages:
    4,458
    Nadal would beat Federer in 80% of their slam meetings even if Nadal chose to use his right-hand.
     
    #18
  19. Tenez101

    Tenez101 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    3,639
    Care to explain your reasoning there? You have to admit much of the Fed-Nad dynamic is driven by Nad's lefty forehand to Fed's righty sh backhand.

    Now...what would happen if Federer were left-handed? :shock:

    Edit: I'm assuming you meant "if Nadal was right-handed", not literally if Nadal suddenly chose to play a match against Federer right-handed today, since he's practiced left-handed nearly his whole life...?
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2012
    #19
  20. mandy01

    mandy01 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    11,518
    Now this is called circular logic. *******s are quick to dismiss Roger's success as being down to a weak era, then turn around and say he's the 'GOAT', ergo he becomes an extraordinarily tough opponent for Nadal even when playing on his worst surface against his worst match-up. Try harder, '****.
     
    #20
  21. nadal_slam_king

    nadal_slam_king Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2010
    Messages:
    4,458
    Federer's problem is with Nadal's extreme topspin. Obviously Nadal would possess that topspin even if Nadal played with the right-hand. And Federer's forehand is extremely error-prone vs Nadal, not just Federer's backhand. And even if you think its all about Federer's backhand, a right-handed Nadal would still be hitting to Federer's backhand.
     
    #21
  22. DeShaun

    DeShaun Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Messages:
    2,837
    Of Tennis Channel's Top 100 Players All Time, lefties comprise five out of the top twenty i.e. a twenty-five percent stake in this most elite segment from that population of all time greats. By contrast, lefties comprise only ten percent of the general human population.
     
    #22
  23. Tennis_Hands

    Tennis_Hands Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    3,677
    Location:
    Inside the service box - the business end
    So you basically say, that

    1) if Nadal was right handed, he would have had better forehand than Federer

    2) if Nadal was right handed, he would have been able to employ the same tactic against Federer, as the one he uses now

    Either way, I want to know who is your dealer?
     
    #23
  24. nadal_slam_king

    nadal_slam_king Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2010
    Messages:
    4,458
    Yes, obviously Nadal would have a great forehand whether he be left-handed or right-handed. The lasso forehand works regardless.

    Nadal can use any tactic, he'll still be a better baseliner than Federer.
     
    #24
  25. Gorecki

    Gorecki G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    13,209
    Location:
    Puerto y Galgo....
    Is that so? Please tell us again about the great achievements by all the spanish "Reverse Forehand" (lasso my big fat white knee) Right Handed clay courters...

    i mean the goat contenders like Moya, Berasategui and Bruguera....
     
    #25
  26. Sentinel

    Sentinel Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Messages:
    28,812
    Location:
    Brave New World
    lol, you've taken someone else's argument of GOAT and mixed it with my remark. Never called Fred GOAT.
    Fred played and won in a weak era with people like Roddick who caved in front of him.

    Being a fan of Fred and his style doesn't mean i think he's goat, nor does my belief that he "walks on water" imply anything else. Be honest in your arguments, please.
     
    #26
  27. jelle v

    jelle v Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Messages:
    2,965
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Wow.. just wow..

    A righthanded Nadal (actually Nadal is righthanded) would not be able to hit those cross-forehand moonballs to Fed's backhand. And yes, if he were playing right handed, that would be a disadvantage, because hitting a high bouncing moonball with lasso technique down the line is much more difficult than hitting it cross court..
     
    #27
  28. nadal_slam_king

    nadal_slam_king Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2010
    Messages:
    4,458
    Moonballs are like lobs, extremely high. Not sure what you think a moonball is.
     
    #28
  29. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    If Nadal was right handed he would never win a slam. Toni was smart.
     
    #29
  30. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    That's because you are a man of faith, and Federer is your god. So, you relish the conflation of Federer's 16 majors titles with those who actually did win "The Grand Slam." However, the fact is that Federer has "ZERO" Grand Slams. Not one! And, you know as well as I do that he never, ever, will.

    What you suggest would be exactly the same as saying Jack Nicklaus has 18 Grand Slams, or, Tiger Woods has 14 Grand Slams. That would not only be false, it would be disrespectful to the only player in the history of golf who actually did win "The Grand Slam," Bobby Jones. The term Grand Slam in tennis derived from The Grand Slam of golf which has always referred to winning all 4 major titles in the same year.
     
    #30
  31. tlm

    tlm Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,454
    I don't call him the goat only tards like you do, but beings so many consider him the greatest then rafa beat better opponents. Pretty funny you talking about circular logic lol.

    And yes rogers success was helped by weak opponents just read the list of his major wins, and next time try harder ****.
     
    #31
  32. Sartorius

    Sartorius Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,468
    The majors each are called "Grand Slam" tournaments. We (I presume TMF included, even if you see him as a worshipper) all know the difference between a Grand Slam and the Grand Slam. You're just nitpicking here, and being quite poor at it.
     
    #32
  33. DjokovicForTheWin

    DjokovicForTheWin Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Messages:
    5,811
    Yeah, but he's an old coot. Those of us who are not yet senile just have to tolerate him.
     
    #33
  34. tacou

    tacou Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Messages:
    6,999
    why wouldn't you include Fed for Nadal's stats? why don't your Fed stats say "# not including Nadal"
     
    #34
  35. beast of mallorca

    beast of mallorca Legend

    Joined:
    May 19, 2010
    Messages:
    7,741
    Because he's stupid that's why.
     
    #35
  36. Sentinel

    Sentinel Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Messages:
    28,812
    Location:
    Brave New World
    Fed should actually get double points for winning against Nadal (or quadruple) given how unbeatable Nadal is (for him).
     
    #36
  37. Sentinel

    Sentinel Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Messages:
    28,812
    Location:
    Brave New World
    I thought Nadal *was* right handed. :)

    But you are right about the second sentence.
     
    #37
  38. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,011
    If you're being so sensitive about how people use the term Grand Slam then it's you who worship Laver, and being insecure. It doesn't matter how people call it, but to understand what it means from the context is not a problem(only to you). Unless if it's confusing, then I can understand we need to be specific, but it's not! We all understand clearly, which wouldn't be disrespect to Laver. You are making a mouton out of a molehill.



    It would like me complaining about you saying Fed won 16 majors, not 16 slams. Fortunately I'm not insecure as you.

    Or to complain someone say the Texas Ranger won the pennant instead of winning the AL championship.

    Capiche ?
     
    #38
  39. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,011
    I've never heard any baseball fan had any problem with people using the two terms(pennant or AL/NL champion). But some tennis fans are strange.
     
    #39
  40. kandamrgam

    kandamrgam Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2014
    Messages:
    1,716
    Location:
    Nadal fan. Appreciates good tennis in general
    Ignoring the obvious mistake of "excluding Federer" which others have pointed, here is an updated list for the same age of 28 (through 2009 US Open and 2014 US Open).

    GS won facing tougher rivals:

    Federer won 4 grand slams defeating three top 10 ranked players in the grand slam. Nadal won 3 grand slam defeating three top 10 ranked players in the grand slam

    Federer won 10 grand slams defeating two top 10 ranked players in the grand slam. Nadal won 9 grand slams defeating two top 10 ranked players in the grand slam

    Federer won 3 grand slams defeating two top 5 ranked players in the grand slam. Nadal won 4 grand slams defeating two top 5 ranked players in the grand slam

    Federer won 10 grand slams defeating a top 5 ranked player in the grand slam. Nadal won 13 grand slams defeating a top 5 ranked player in the grand slam
     
    #40

Share This Page