Federer and the H2H

[timnz]

In how many slam finals did Davydenko beat Rafa.

How is that relevant to this thread? This thread is about H2H. Achievements aren't part of the scope - only H2H.

(Side note: Of course achievements are relevant when comparing players - but this thread is talking about H2H - My view is that H2H is very low down on the list of criteria in comparing players - but if someone says - well its about H2H - I will point out the weaknesses of it ie How do you deal with the Nadal, Daydenko, Federer situation (Nadal beats Federer, Davydenko beats Nadal, but Federer beats Davydenko - who is ahead?) if all you are talking about is H2H - unless you introduce career achievements - then H2H alone is not the way to establish relative superiority)

 

[NoleFam]

Fed winning 2 on clay (ATP 1000) against King of CLAY should not have happened either, one being in Nadal's own backyard.. it did though.. credit to both for what they did..

for your sake, I will include Nadal's Wimb win along with the Dubai and that brings it to 2-2 on each side with wins that should not have happened.. pretty even and least suprising.. but that's about it..

Federer struggled against Nadal in his first 3 hardcourt matches against him. Nadal was green and Federer was at his peak and a hardcourt master, and also 2006 was one of his best years in his career. I remember watching the 2005 Miami final and I knew then that Federer had a major problem in front of him. Nadal shouldn't have been challenging him on that surface, slow or fast, like he was considering he was average at best on that surface then. Of course he would have a losing record on clay, especially in a best of 5, but he probably should have been pulled off more victories in 2 out 3 on clay. The loss on grass I don't fault him for because Nadal wanted it badly and played excellent. That dismal head to head could be much better if Federer had put Nadal in his place early on and not let him run rampant on every surface believing he had a chance. Call a spade a spade.

 

[AceSalvo]

Federer struggled against Nadal in his first 3 hardcourt matches against him. Nadal was green and Federer was at his peak and a hardcourt master, and also 2006 was one of his best years in his career. I remember watching the 2005 Miami final and I knew then that Federer had a major problem in front of him. Nadal shouldn't have been challenging him on that surface, slow or fast, like he was considering he was average at best on that surface then. Of course he would have a losing record on clay, especially in a best of 5, but he probably should have been pulled off more victories in 2 out 3 on clay. The loss on grass I don't fault him for because Nadal wanted it badly and played excellent. That dismal head to head could be much better if Federer had put Nadal in his place early on and not let him run rampant on every surface believing he had a chance. Call a spade a spade.

interesting #'s when you even out those two unexpcetd win's from both sides..

10 - 0 Clay -- Nadal
2 - 3 Hard -- Fed
0 - 2 Grass -- Fed

nothing new to deduct from there other than what is known in general to a million tennis fans..

shoulda, coulda, woulda.. I dont see your point and the point in this H2H stat..

 

[moonballs]

It is a damn shame that by looking at the head to head one would think Nadal would have more than 17 slams by now...But in reality he doesn't.

 

[NoleFam]

interesting #'s when you even out those two unexpcetd win's from both sides..

10 - 0 Clay -- Nadal
2 - 3 Hard -- Fed
0 - 2 Grass -- Fed

nothing new to deduct from there other than what is known in general to a million tennis fans..

shoulda, coulda, woulda.. I dont see your point and the point in this H2H stat..

The point is that Nadal had an even head to head on hardcourt and eventually passed him on that surface. That should have never happened and shows that Federer lacks confidence when playing him if he isn't even ahead on one of his favorite surfaces. That's pretty much the bottomline.

 

[AceSalvo]

It is a damn shame that by looking at the head to head one would think Nadal would have more than 17 slams by now...But in reality he doesn't.

/thread.

 

[Druss]

Fine let's take the opposite route.

Hope you enjoyed Rafa's great playing records in 2015 and 2016 and dont attribute it to any decline.

I would include most of 2014 in there too!

 

[sbengte]

Some of this guys threads man. Like saying Sampras beat Djokovic's coach on clay so would beat him as well...

I wonder if he had a comeback to my post on Becker thrashing Sampras' coach Gullikson on grass and the inference we can derive from that. Too bad the thread got deleted.

 

[Deleted member 3771]

How is that relevant to this thread? This thread is about H2H. Achievements aren't part of the scope - only H2H.

(Side note: Of course achievements are relevant when comparing players - but this thread is talking about H2H - My view is that H2H is very low down on the list of criteria in comparing players - but if someone says - well its about H2H - I will point out the weaknesses of it ie How do you deal with the Nadal, Daydenko, Federer situation (Nadal beats Federer, Davydenko beats Nadal, but Federer beats Davydenko - who is ahead?) if all you are talking about is H2H - unless you introduce career achievements - then H2H alone is not the way to establish relative superiority)

Obviously the context of the h2h is very significant, particularly when 2 champs have played each other a load of times at the big events and at the finals of the big events.

Luckily we have Wikipedia to do the breakdown for us:

Head-to-head tallies
The following is a breakdown of their head-to-head results:

• All matches: Nadal, 23–11
• All finals: Nadal, 14–7
• Grand Slam matches: Nadal, 9–2
  • Australian Open: Nadal, 3–0
  • French Open: Nadal, 5–0
  • Wimbledon: Federer, 2–1
  • US Open: Have not met
• Grand Slam finals: Nadal, 6–2
• Tennis Masters Cup/ATP World Tour Finals matches: Federer, 4–1
• Tennis Masters Cup/ATP World Tour Finals finals: Federer, 1–0
• ATP Masters Series/ATP World Tour Masters 1000 matches: Nadal, 12–4
• ATP Masters Series/ATP World Tour Masters 1000 finals: Nadal, 7–3
• ATP World Tour 500/ATP International Series Gold matches: Tied, 1–1
• ATP World Tour 500/ATP International Series Gold finals: Tied, 1–1
• Best of five set matches: Nadal, 11–3
  • Five-set matches: Nadal, 3–2
• Winning the match after losing 1st set: Nadal, 6–2
• Best of three set matches: Nadal, 12–8
• Outdoor courts: Nadal, 22–6
• Indoor courts: Federer, 5–1
• Tie-breaks: Nadal, 11–10[57]

Head-to-head results on each court surface

• Clay courts: Nadal, 13–2
• Hard courts: Nadal, 9–7
  • Outdoor: Nadal, 8–2
  • Indoor: Federer, 5–1
• Grass courts: Federer, 2–1

 

[timnz]

Obviously the context of the h2h is very significant, particularly when 2 champs have played each other a load of times at the big events and at the finals of the big events.

Luckily we have Wikipedia to do the breakdown for us:

Head-to-head tallies
The following is a breakdown of their head-to-head results:

• All matches: Nadal, 23–11
• All finals: Nadal, 14–7
• Grand Slam matches: Nadal, 9–2
  • Australian Open: Nadal, 3–0
  • French Open: Nadal, 5–0
  • Wimbledon: Federer, 2–1
  • US Open: Have not met
• Grand Slam finals: Nadal, 6–2
• Tennis Masters Cup/ATP World Tour Finals matches: Federer, 4–1
• Tennis Masters Cup/ATP World Tour Finals finals: Federer, 1–0
• ATP Masters Series/ATP World Tour Masters 1000 matches: Nadal, 12–4
• ATP Masters Series/ATP World Tour Masters 1000 finals: Nadal, 7–3
• ATP World Tour 500/ATP International Series Gold matches: Tied, 1–1
• ATP World Tour 500/ATP International Series Gold finals: Tied, 1–1
• Best of five set matches: Nadal, 11–3
  • Five-set matches: Nadal, 3–2
• Winning the match after losing 1st set: Nadal, 6–2
• Best of three set matches: Nadal, 12–8
• Outdoor courts: Nadal, 22–6
• Indoor courts: Federer, 5–1
• Tie-breaks: Nadal, 11–10[57]

Head-to-head results on each court surface

• Clay courts: Nadal, 13–2
• Hard courts: Nadal, 9–7
  • Outdoor: Nadal, 8–2
  • Indoor: Federer, 5–1
• Grass courts: Federer, 2–1

Okay, but what that all tell us? That Nadal is better than Federer? Are you sure. Because if that is the case anyone who is leading Nadal is H2h Is better than Nadal.

 

[Henri Terouinard]

Indeed, Federer matchups against Nadal are pretty tough.

Fanny is that agaisnt all other players, Federer seems more dominant than Sampras. Roger's Win-Loss Ratio against all other players in exception of Nadal, Djokovic and Murray is monstruous*.

But against the Top4 players of both eras, Sampras is the one with better results. Generally speaking only Agassi gave him real tough times before his decline (out of top5), and still Pete is like 60% on H2H**.

The discussion about which one has been more dominant during their heydays is quite opened to me. Being the best among the best or the best against all the rest...

*Ok Federer never fought agaisnt a Wilander, an Edberg a Courier or a Becker (together much superior in rankings and titles if compared to Roddick/Safin/Hewitt/Ferrero).

**Same here, Pete only had an Agassi throughout most of his career, while Roger had a Nadal and a Djokovic (both Top7 GOATS in #1 weeks/years and titles Slams/Masters).

 

[Jonas78]

Okay, but what that all tell us? That Nadal is better than Federer? Are you sure. Because if that is the case anyone who is leading Nadal is H2h Is better than Nadal.

It tells us that Andy Roddick is the best in history! Federer is 1-0 vs Sampras. And Nadal is 23-11 over Federer. But Nole is ahead both Nadal and Federer H2H. But Roddick is 5-4 vs Nole! Roddick has to be the best player in history!