Talk Tennis

Talk Tennis (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php)
-   General Pro Player Discussion (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/forumdisplay.php?f=13)
-   -   My case for Federer being better than Nadal (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=441676)

Prisoner of Birth 09-30-2012 11:39 PM

My case for Federer being better than Nadal
 
(I'm copying this from the "How lucky are we..." thread where I first posted it and also adding a bit more)

Grand Slams won since 2008 (when Federer left his prime and Nadal entered his).

AO - 1 for Federer, 1 for Nadal
FO - 1 for Federer, 4 for Nadal
W - 2 for Federer, 2 for Nadal
USO - 1 for Federer, 1 for Nadal

A past-his-prime Federer (26 years and 4 months old to 31 years and 2 months old) won as many times at 3 Grand Slams as in-prime Nadal (21 years 8 months old to 26 years 5 months old) has. The only difference is at the French Open where Nadal has won 3 more than Federer has. The only logical conclusion is that a past-his-prime Federer is EQUALLY good as an in-prime Nadal on Grasscourts and Hardcourts. Imagine how much better an in-prime Federer would be. And you get 5 Grasscourt Slams, 7 Hardcourt Slams, more than anything Nadal can possibly get close to in the whole of his career.

Now, can anyone really claim that Nadal is a better grass-courter or a better hard-courter than Federer is? I think it's glaringly obvious to anyone with a head on their shoulders that Federer's not-stellar record against Nadal is more a match-up issue than Federer's deficiencies as a player. And I don't understand why the GOAT can't have match-up issues with any player. What do you expect, should the GOAT have positive head-to-heads against every single player in the history of Tennis? Isn't that asking too much? One would have to be a God to be able to do that because people have weaknesses and a human player can simply not have no weaknesses which can be exploited by players with certain playing styles. Nadal is the definition of a Federer-killer. Left-handed, capable of insane topspin (probably more than anyone in history), incredible retrieving abilities, and, the best of all, a strong mental-edge over Federer who didn't figure Nadal out soon enough to deny Nadal said-mental-edge. Hence the head-to-head. And let's not forget how skewed it is by the number of matches they've played on clay (Nadal's best surface and Federer's worst) and the triple-surface-bagel Federer still has on Nadal. Not to mention, his 4-0 record on indoor hards. It's pretty obvious who the better player is.



And let me take a second to dissect this "head to head" thing.

What really happened : Nadal (18-10) Federer
Grass : 2-1 to Federer
Clay : 12-2 to Nadal
Outdoor Hard : 5-2 to Nadal
Indoor Hard : 4-0 to Federer

So that's
3 matches on Nadal's second-best surface and Federer's second-best surface
14 matches on Nadal's best surface and Federer's fourth-best (worst)
6 matches on Nadal's third-best surface (2nd worst) and Federer's third-best (2nd worst)
4 matches on Nadal's fourth-best (worst) surface and Federer's best

What could have happened : Federer (17-11) Nadal
Now, let's flip it so we have 14 matches on Federer's best surface (Indoor Hards), 3 on Federer's second-best (the same as Nadal's - Grass), 6 on Federer's third-best (the same as Nadal's - Outdoor Hards), and 4 on Federer's worst (Clay)

So now it's
Grass : 2-1 for Federer(stays the same, deducing from the actual ratio)
Clay : 4-0 for Nadal (it's 12-2 but logic dictates Nadal would probably win all 4 so I'm giving Nadal the benefit of doubt)
Outdoor Hard : 5-2 to Nadal (stays the same, deducing from the actual ratio)
Indoor Hard : 13-1 to Federer (the actual ratio would suggest a 14-0 to Federer but I'm gonna be logical and say Nadal wouldn't lose all 14 meetings. Again, giving Nadal the benefit of doubt)

So, where would that leave us? 17 wins for Federer, 11 wins for Nadal. So, hypothetically, if Federer had been as fortuitous as Nadal with regards to the surfaces the pair played their matches on, Federer would be leading the head-to-head by an impressive 17-11. Not so bad for being "Nadal's b**ch" eh?


There goes the "head to head" argument :)

TennisLovaLova 10-01-2012 03:04 AM

+ Federer is the blue clay GOAT

tennis_pro 10-01-2012 03:10 AM

Come on we've had this discussion a gazillion times already...the last time it was interesting was back in the 90's

The_Order 10-01-2012 03:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prisoner of Birth (Post 6928854)
(
So, where would that leave us? 17 wins for Federer, 11 wins for Nadal. So, hypothetically, if Federer had been as fortuitous as Nadal with regards to the surfaces the pair played their matches on, Federer would be leading the head-to-head by an impressive 17-11. Not so bad for being "Nadal's b**ch" eh?

If Nadal had been as fortuitous as Federer with regards to the surfaces of the majors, the major count could look like:

Nadal: 17 >> Fed:12

If you change the USO to clay Rafa would've won another 6 slams (7RG so 1USO + 6 more if it was on clay) taking his tally up to 17, then subtract the 5 USO from Federer to leave him with 12.

So yeah Fed is actually lucky in terms of surfaces and yes he is Nadal's b**ch. Nadal has beaten him at 3 of the 4 majors and the thought of losing to him at the USO scared Fed so much he choked MP against Djoker 2 years in a row so he wouldn't get embarrassed by Rafa again in a major final. Look at their outdoor h2h Rafa would've smoked him especially in 2010 final.

See I can play this game too :)

tennis_pro 10-01-2012 04:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Order (Post 6928984)
If Nadal had been as fortuitous as Federer with regards to the surfaces of the majors, the major count could look like:

Nadal: 17 >> Fed:12

If you change the USO to clay Rafa would've won another 6 slams (7RG so 1USO + 6 more if it was on clay) taking his tally up to 17, then subtract the 5 USO from Federer to leave him with 12.

So yeah Fed is actually lucky in terms of surfaces and yes he is Nadal's b**ch. Nadal has beaten him at 3 of the 4 majors and the thought of losing to him at the USO scared Fed so much he choked MP against Djoker 2 years in a row so he wouldn't get embarrassed by Rafa again in a major final. Look at their outdoor h2h Rafa would've smoked him especially in 2010 final.

See I can play this game too :)

Why not change all the remaining major surfaces to clay? Why not go full ret**d?

Prisoner of Birth 10-01-2012 04:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tennis_pro (Post 6928993)
Why not change all the remaining major surfaces to clay? Why not go full ret**d?

He already did. Let's give him an Oscar nominatin but not the statue.

Russeljones 10-01-2012 04:34 AM

This thread is really going to fall on deaf ears. We're sick of this comparison.

batz 10-01-2012 04:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prisoner of Birth (Post 6928854)
(I'm copying this from the "How lucky are we..." thread where I first posted it and also adding a bit more)

Grand Slams won since 2008 (when Federer left his prime and Nadal entered his).

AO - 1 for Federer, 1 for Nadal
FO - 1 for Federer, 4 for Nadal
W - 2 for Federer, 2 for Nadal
USO - 1 for Federer, 1 for Nadal

A past-his-prime Federer (26 years and 4 months old to 31 years and 2 months old) won as many times at 3 Grand Slams as in-prime Nadal (21 years 8 months old to 26 years 5 months old) has. The only difference is at the French Open where Nadal has won 3 more than Federer has. The only logical conclusion is that a past-his-prime Federer is EQUALLY good as an in-prime Nadal on Grasscourts and Hardcourts. Imagine how much better than in-prime Federer would be. And you get 5 Grasscourt Slams, 7 Hardcourt Slams, more than anything Nadal can possibly get close to in the whole of his career.

Now, can anyone really claim that Nadal is a better grass-courter or a better hard-courter than Federer is? I think it's glaringly obvious to anyone with a head on their shoulders that Federer's not-stellar record against Nadal is more a match-up issue than Federer's deficiencies as a player. And I don't understand why the GOAT can't have match-up issues with any player. What do you expect, should the GOAT have positive head-to-heads against every single player in the history of Tennis? Isn't that asking too much? One would have to be a God to be able to do that because people have weaknesses and a human player can simply not have no weaknesses which can be exploited by players with certain playing styles. Nadal is the definition of a Federer-killer. Left-handed, capable of insane topspin (probably more than anyone in history), incredible retrieving abilities, and, the best of all, a strong mental-edge over Federer who didn't figure Nadal out soon enough to deny Nadal said-mental-edge. Hence the head-to-head. And let's not forget how skewed it is by the number of matches they've played on clay (Nadal's best surface and Federer's worst) and the triple-surface-bagel Federer still has on Nadal. Not to mention, his 4-0 record on indoor hards. It's pretty obvious who the better player is.



And let me take a second to dissect this "head to head" thing.

What really happened : Nadal (18-10) Federer
Grass : 2-1 to Federer
Clay : 12-2 to Nadal
Outdoor Hard : 5-2 to Nadal
Indoor Hard : 4-0 to Federer

So that's
3 matches on Nadal's second-best surface and Federer's second-best surface
14 matches on Nadal's best surface and Federer's fourth-best (worst)
6 matches on Nadal's third-best surface (2nd worst) and Federer's third-best (2nd worst)
4 matches on Nadal's fourth-best (worst) surface and Federer's best

What could have happened : Federer (17-11) Nadal
Now, let's flip it so we have 14 matches on Federer's best surface (Indoor Hards), 3 on Federer's second-best (the same as Nadal's - Grass), 6 on Federer's third-best (the same as Nadal's - Outdoor Hards), and 4 on Federer's worst (Clay)

So now it's
Grass : 2-1 for Federer(stays the same, deducing from the actual ratio)
Clay : 4-0 for Nadal (it's 12-2 but logic dictates Nadal would probably win all 4 so I'm giving Nadal the benefit of doubt)
Outdoor Hard : 5-2 to Nadal (stays the same, deducing from the actual ratio)
Indoor Hard : 13-1 to Federer (the actual ratio would suggest a 14-0 to Federer but I'm gonna be logical and say Nadal wouldn't lose all 14 meetings. Again, giving Nadal the benefit of doubt)

So, where would that leave us? 17 wins for Federer, 11 wins for Nadal. So, hypothetically, if Federer had been as fortuitous as Nadal with regards to the surfaces the pair played their matches on, Federer would be leading the head-to-head by an impressive 17-11. Not so bad for being "Nadal's b**ch" eh?


There goes the "head to head" argument :)

I haven't read all your post, but what's Roger's head to head v Rafa in SLAMS? (you know slams, the things that used to matter more than anything to some Fed fans before Roger stopped winning them so much).

Roger has the same number of slam wins against Nadal as Andy Murray and David Ferrer.

So - I'm not quite so sure about 'there goes the head to head argument'.

Hood_Man 10-01-2012 05:34 AM

I don't think you really need to make a case for it, he did alright for a few years :)

Personally I'm not too upset by the H2H, at the end of Federer's last great year in 2007 it was 8-6 in Nadal's favour, with Federer having won 5 of their last 7 matches. That's hardly dominating.

Of course the H2H is more one sided now, Federer got worse as Nadal got better. For the past 4 seasons Nadal has been the better player*.

The Fed haters (a small but loud minority I'll happily admit) can bleat on about H2H's till the cows come home, I'm happy to enjoy seeing my guy win :D


*I can't wait to see how someone manages to twist this round and misinterpret what I've said into an attack. I could say Nadal was as heroic as Superman and someone would accuse me of making a joke about underwear...

Prisoner of Birth 10-01-2012 05:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by batz (Post 6929030)
I haven't read all your post, but what's Roger's head to head v Rafa in SLAMS? (you know slams, the things that used to matter more than anything to some Fed fans before Roger stopped winning them so much).

Roger has the same number of slam wins against Nadal as Andy Murray and David Ferrer.

So - I'm not quite so sure about 'there goes the head to head argument'.

Quote me saying, "Slams are all that matter." Then you have a point. Don't hold me liable for all the things others have said.

cknobman 10-01-2012 06:10 AM

Was this thread set up for intentional TDK troll bait? LOL he is going to have an aneurysm if this keeps up.

MichaelNadal 10-01-2012 06:13 AM

Dude, Federer is great, maybe if so many posters stopped beating Nadal down so much for no reason this place would have less *****. WE GET IT, Federer is a better player, sorry, still like Nadal much more.

Mike Sams 10-01-2012 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelNadal (Post 6929126)
Dude, Federer is great, maybe if so many posters stopped beating Nadal down so much for no reason this place would have less *****. WE GET IT, Federer is a better player, sorry, still like Nadal much more.

Who is the Warrior Reborn in January 2012, stated in your sig?

gmatheis 10-01-2012 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Order (Post 6928984)
If Nadal had been as fortuitous as Federer with regards to the surfaces of the majors, the major count could look like:

Nadal: 17 >> Fed:12

If you change the USO to clay Rafa would've won another 6 slams (7RG so 1USO + 6 more if it was on clay) taking his tally up to 17, then subtract the 5 USO from Federer to leave him with 12.

So yeah Fed is actually lucky in terms of surfaces and yes he is Nadal's b**ch. Nadal has beaten him at 3 of the 4 majors and the thought of losing to him at the USO scared Fed so much he choked MP against Djoker 2 years in a row so he wouldn't get embarrassed by Rafa again in a major final. Look at their outdoor h2h Rafa would've smoked him especially in 2010 final.

See I can play this game too :)

well if tennis was played with your feet instead of a racket rafa would probably beat federer even worse.

guess what .. it's not

roger 17 > rafa 11

argument over

RF20Lennon 10-01-2012 06:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelNadal (Post 6929126)
Dude, Federer is great, maybe if so many posters stopped beating Nadal down so much for no reason this place would have less *****. WE GET IT, Federer is a better player, sorry, still like Nadal much more.

Your avatar beats both end of story. :)

gmatheis 10-01-2012 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelNadal (Post 6929126)
Dude, Federer is great, maybe if so many posters stopped beating Nadal down so much for no reason this place would have less *****. WE GET IT, Federer is a better player, sorry, still like Nadal much more.

This is one of the best posts I've ever read from a Nadal fan. Nothing wrong with your favorite player not being the all time best, hell there's nothing wrong with liking someone like Tsonga who no one in their right mind would even argue is the best.

I'm a Roger fan, I believe his acomplishments have established him as the GOAT until someone outdoes him, but I'll admit all day long that Rafa is a great player too and probably the best clay court player ever (as long as it's not blue lol).

If Rafa can somehow win 7 more majors I'll gladly back him as the GOAT even though I'll still be a bigger Roger fan.

RF20Lennon 10-01-2012 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gmatheis (Post 6929192)
This is one of the best posts I've ever read from a Nadal fan. Nothing wrong with your favorite player not being the all time best, hell there's nothing wrong with liking someone like Tsonga who no one in their right mind would even argue is the best.

I'm a Roger fan, I believe his acomplishments have established him as the GOAT until someone outdoes him, but I'll admit all day long that Rafa is a great player too and probably the best clay court player ever (as long as it's not blue lol).

If Rafa can somehow win 7 more majors I'll gladly back him as the GOAT even though I'll still be a bigger Roger fan.

Seconded..

MichaelNadal 10-01-2012 07:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gmatheis (Post 6929192)
This is one of the best posts I've ever read from a Nadal fan. Nothing wrong with your favorite player not being the all time best, hell there's nothing wrong with liking someone like Tsonga who no one in their right mind would even argue is the best.

I'm a Roger fan, I believe his acomplishments have established him as the GOAT until someone outdoes him, but I'll admit all day long that Rafa is a great player too and probably the best clay court player ever (as long as it's not blue lol).

If Rafa can somehow win 7 more majors I'll gladly back him as the GOAT even though I'll still be a bigger Roger fan.

Thanks man. It just gets so annoying day in and day out seeing the same posts and threads with people feeling the need to talk about how much Nadal sucks compared to Federer. They act like Nadal fans shouldn't exist or something and it's childish. You're right on the money with the Tsonga comment, there's plenty of other people that deserve fans too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RF20Lennon (Post 6929181)
Your avatar beats both end of story. :)

So true :)

Mike Sams 10-01-2012 07:25 AM

Nadal is nothing more than a dirtballer who benefits from today's game of slowed down courts. His entire game is to force errors, run like a madman and moonball. If anybody wants to argue that Nadal is nothing more than a defensive pusher, go watch Nadal vs Djokovic Rome final this year and see how Nadal is terrified of actually trying to construct a point and instead is doing nothing but running for his life throughout the court and pushing the ball and waiting for Djokovic to make the error.
Garbage tennis! :lol:
It's the slowed down courts which allow him chances to win at the AO, USO and Wimbledon. The ballstrikers are being killed off and the grinders and pushers are at the forefront.
If Nadal wasn't such a bigtime grinder and pusher, he wouldn't be injured so much. He doesn't possess the talent to play any other way even despite how much he trains and practices to improve his game. He barely comes to the net unless it's an easy put away.
He can't win any hardcourt Masters tournaments anymore even despite the courts playing slower than molasses clay these days.
Basically all he can win is clay tournaments because clay rewards pushers and moonballers.:)

MichaelNadal 10-01-2012 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Sams (Post 6929233)
Nadal is nothing more than a dirtballer who benefits from today's game of slowed down courts. His entire game is to force errors, run like a madman and moonball. If anybody wants to argue that Nadal is nothing more than a defensive pusher, go watch Nadal vs Djokovic Rome final this year and see how Nadal is terrified of actually trying to construct a point and instead is doing nothing but running for his life throughout the court and pushing the ball and waiting for Djokovic to make the error.
Garbage tennis! :lol:
It's the slowed down courts which allow him chances to win at the AO, USO and Wimbledon. The ballstrikers are being killed off and the grinders and pushers are at the forefront.
If Nadal wasn't such a bigtime grinder and pusher, he wouldn't be injured so much. He doesn't possess the talent to play any other way even despite how much he trains and practices to improve his game. He barely comes to the net unless it's an easy put away.
He can't win any hardcourt Masters tournaments anymore even despite the courts playing slower than molasses clay these days.
Basically all he can win is clay tournaments because clay rewards pushers and moonballers.:)

Everyone today is playing on the same courts. Fail.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2006 - Tennis Warehouse