Originally Posted by smoledman
We all know how dominant they are on their best surfaces. Nadal on clay. Federer on hard/grass. But how well do they do on their weakest?
Nadal has 10 big hard/grass titles
Federer has 7 big clay titles
But more importantly is Nadal has 4 grass/hard slams to only 1 clay slam for Federer.
4 > 1.
Pretty absurd comparison, don't you think Nads should have more titles if you are comparing him on 2 surfaces to Fed on 1. Not to mention there are how many slams a year off of clay on these 2 surfaces. So Nads has 3 chances to win on these surfaces, where Fed has 1 chance. And how many HC masters a year versus clay? Nice trolling with you.