Originally Posted by NadalAgassi
I guess one can ponder whether it is worse to lose an additional 8 or 9 slams to someone (Federer to Nadal) or lose about 1 slam because of somebody (Nadal to Federer). I would have figured Nadal doing far more damage to Federer than vice versa is something so obvious even the stupidest of ****s would accept, but never underesimate Planet TW ****ville.
Djokovic is the one who has done by far the most damage to Nadal's career, not Federer. Without Djokovic, Nadal would likely be very close to Federer's slam record today, and likely to break it within the next 2 years. After all he did what Federer almost never do to Nadal, deny him major titles. Djokovic also kept Nadal from further time at #1 when he was actually really a potential #1 caliber player, not a clay only player producing crappy slam results at all but RG, who would only have been #1 (maybe) due to the abysmal joke field that is Federer's age peers in the mid 2000s.
Yes but wouldn't you say Fed had an excellent shot at winning 2008 AO and 2011 AO titles if Novak hadn't beaten him there? So he almost damaged Fed's career as much as he did Nadal's, the difference is one slam basically and as crazy as it may sound at this point, I still would have given Fed a shot against Nadal in 2011 USO if not for Novak (not in 2010 obviously), maybe 20-30% chance at most but still a chance.