Originally Posted by zam88
If federer could have only:
known he could not beat rafa on clay and thus tanked almost all clay semis except for the 09 RG when Rafa was knocked out, and then quit overall after 2010 AO he could have had +H2H against Djoker and Murray (and a near even record against rafa) and 16 majors.
and somehow i think that would've been better to a lot of the people here on TT than him staying around, making more clay finals (that he lost to the clay freaking GOAT!... do you realize if Nadal were just a great clay player and not the Cgoat that federer would have 3 french open titles and a CYGS?) and winning more masters and even another major.
You do realise that Nadal's outdoor HC record against Federer is 5-2 right? It should've been 6-1 if it wasn't for that massive choke in Miami 2005 where Rafa was up 2 sets and a break in the third.
Truth is, Nadal hadn't developed his game well enough to make it to HC slam finals and your argument that Fed "would've" beat Rafa if he did is absolute rubbish. Fed is LUCKY that Rafa wasn't making those HC slam finals because teenage Rafa was beating peak Federer in HC matches.
Rafa made his first HC slam final at age 22, the same age as Federer, but for some reason you expect Rafa to have been better than Federer at HC majors when age 17-21? LOL.
Federer played as well as he ever did apart from his serving in the 09AO final and still lost. Federer also was playing very well in 2012 AO and still lost when he met Rafa. Peak Federer was struggling to beat an early 20's Nadal at WIMBLEDON his "backyard" slam.
As for "taking away" Rafa's clay wins, why don't you take away Fed's indoor wins?
And when Rafa was making HC and grass slam finals in 2010 onwards where was Federer? Rafa made it to WIM2010, USO2010, WIM2011, USO2011 and AO2012 finals. He only played Federer in 2012 AO because ot was a semi and Rafa beat him there. Just like he would've beat him at any of those other tournaments had Fed managed to turn up.
Originally Posted by zam88
Fed's prime did not meet up with Djoker's prime or Murray's prime... if anything it's shocking that way post prime federer can still beat and or make it REALLY uncomfortable for these prime 25 y.o. players.
If Federer chooses to continue playing, then yes, he's going to end up with a -H2H against the other top 3.
Should he quit?
what's better... quitting now to preserve H2H? quitting in 2010 to preserve H2H? or getting possibly another major (which is entirely possible)
And it's not shocking that the following TEENAGERS beat PEAK Federer:
Berdych, Nadal (many times), Murray and Novak (actually think he might've just turned 20). Gasquet also did it IIRC.
It's not shocking that a 34+ year old Agassi pushed peak Federer to the limit in majors? LOL.
Murray's h2h against Federer before 2010 was 6-4
And if Fed retired in 2010, it would not help his case against Rafa whatsoever because he lost in HC and Grass slam finals to Rafa. Fed has never beat Nadal in a HC major. EVER. That's a fact that you have to live with.
So really, if he quit after 2010 AO, he'd have a +ve h2h against only Novak who was only aged 19-22 and even that h2h record wouldn't have been that great (9-5 IIRC).
In 2010 Federer was 28 turning 29, he was not old, not even in tennis terms it's just a lame excuse you ****s bring up all the time but to no avail.