Originally Posted by dangalak
1. Nobody thinks that. It's a strawman.
2. Kuerten >>>> Federer? Please. More like >> at best.
3. I doubt Kuerten would've done that much damage against Nadal either.
1. Again it is obvious you are new here. MANY ****s think this and have said it repeatedly using almost those exact words.
2. Either way Federer is clearly above Federer on clay. Only a delusional **** would think otherwise.
3. Maybe he would have, maybe he wouldnt have. Frankly I am sick to death of the Nadal argument for Federer. People say poor Federer having to play Nadal on clay, nobody bothers to look at who Federer has actually beaten over the years at Roland Garros and it is hardly much of anyone apart from Djokovic in 2011, his one and only impressive win there ever. Anyway by that logic we would say Nadal is one of the best grass courters ever since he would have 4 Wimbledons without Federer, but nobody would say that, which just proves how stupid that line of logic is.
Kuerten might well have done so real damage to Nadal. His backhand is deadly and can handle heavy topspin easily so that would be one place Nadal can go with great success vs Federer he wouldnt be able to do effectively vs Guga.