Originally Posted by veroniquem
I'm not arguing that. Once again, it's the specific Fed-Nadal match up we're discussing and in that specific match up it is highly unlikely Fed would have ever won most matches in straights.
you do realise
a) there is something known as winning in 4 sets ? fed winning in 4 would probably be the most common result in a fed-rafa 5-set match on hard/grass ...if both were at their peaks IMO
b) fed-nadal are 2-3 in matches that went to 5 sets ?
( fed won miami 2005, wimbledon 2007 and nadal won rome 2006, wimbledon 2008 and AO 2009 )
could 'easily' have been 3-2 if fed had not squandered those MPs in rome !