Originally Posted by zagor
Beating any specific player, even be it Nadal doesn't validate a FO win, not to mention that most FO winners in tennis history wouldn't be able to beat Nadal either so I guess most of them are flukes then?
No, no one with an objective view would call a 5 time FO finalist winning FO to be a fluke, a fluke is for example Johansson winning AO.
johansson wasn't a fluke
he had the big serve and massive ground strokes, and reached later stages of grand slams more than once
injuries prevented him from achieving more (and forced him out early)
anyway, federer is a solid clay court player
however, his continued failure to defeat nadal is a massive black mark on his resume. no top player in history (off the top of my head) has such a horrible record against their main rival, especially in major finals
but, talking purely about federer's clay court game -
he never liked it up high on the backhand side. mantilla schooled him in 03(?), accauso nearly ended him in 09, so did haas
federer has the one RG, and he was bloody lucky to win that one. however, you take your opportunities when they arise
it has helped federer than clay plays far faster than it used to. the reverse is true of grass and hard courts of course
the year federer won (09), it was exceptionally fast, helping federer, who has become more and more reliant on his serve as the years have gone by
would federer win the FO in the 90s? late 90s, possibly. early 90s, doubt it. 70s or 80s, no chance
anyway, federer is certainly not in the top 5 players on clay in the open era. (he is when it comes to grass and hard court)
top 15-20, yes. top 10, doubtful