Originally Posted by Towser83
I like how you highlighted the word destroyed by capatalising it, but apparently you have an odd definition of it. The only times Nadal has destroyed Federer are RG 2008 and Miami 2011 and maybe 2004. Even something like MC 2008 (7-5 7-5) is a fairly comfortable win but not a destruction.
I do agree Sampras had a lack of motivation though, but I think even if Federer had no Nadal to deal with, I think he'd still be motivated to deal with the youngsters like Djokovic and Murray. I don't think Federer has tired of the feeling of competeing and winning titles.
I doubt it.. Because Nole or Murray wouldn't have been breathing down Fed's in the slam count like Rafa has been for the past few years. Only injuries probably stopping Nadal from eclipsing Fed in slam count, and total domination in the h2h (worse then it is now)
Had Nadal not been around, I would wager Fed would have lost major motivation (around the same age Pete did). Possibly would have retired a few years ago