Originally Posted by zagor
I definitely also agree with this, however there's one issue I'd like to adress that I think no one did here. Most of Nadal's wins over Fed on HC came in Miami and it's such a specific surface that I'd even go as far as to say that it might even be worse for Fed to play Nadal than clay.
I know you might consider it to be a stretch but let's look at their matches there, two of Nadal wins in Miami over Fed were beatdowns and third one was supposed to be one before a miraculous come back from the dead for Roger. Let's imagine for a moment that 2005 Miami final wasn't a best of five(like it isn't today), that would be 3 straight set beatdowns Nadal gave Fed there out of 3 matches played.
I mean even this year look at how Fed faired against Nadal in Miami compared to Madrid(I know not the best example considering you could make a similar argument for it) and RG(better example).
Of course that has no relation to Dubai match (reasonably fast HC) which was a big win for Nadal considering all the circumstances.
I would agree with this but for one problem. If Miami is such a good surface for Nadal, why has Nadal never won it.