This isn't a "Who's better?" thread or anything like that. I just thought it was an interesting analysis - and it really demonstrates how dominant Federer was on hardcourt, considering the smaller amount of attention he gets for it. Nadal on clay: From the 2005 Monte Carlo Masters until the 2010 Madrid Masters, Nadal put up the following numbers on clay: Titles: 25 (out of 29 that he participated in) Slams: 4 (out of 5 that he participated in) Masters: 13 (out of 16 that he participated in) Win-loss: 156-4 (97.5%) Slam win-loss: 31-1 (96.9%) Masters win-loss: 77-3 (96.2%) Longest streak: 81 Federer on hard: From the 2003 Tennis Masters Cup until the 2007 tournament in Dubai, Federer put up the following numbers on hardcourt: Titles: 27 (out of 34 that he participated in) Slams: 6 (out of 7 that he participated in) Masters: 9 (out of 12 that he participated in) Win-loss: 172-7 (96.1%) Slam win-loss: 46-1 (97.9%) Masters win-loss: 55-3 (94.8%) Longest streak: 56 It's evident that most of Nadal's numbers are slightly better. Some interesting parallels: Both had just one loss in a slam and three losses in Masters events during these time periods. It's also slightly unfair to Nadal to make this comparison now because if he wins Roland Garros, then he'll have increased the numbers in many areas. The point, however, is that I don't think people realize how dominant Federer was on hardcourt. He can lose to almost anyone these days, it seems, but in 05-06, he only lost once in a blue moon.