View Single Post
Old 03-03-2013, 06:31 AM   #60
The_Order
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,643
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hitman View Post
Nadal is better than his rivals. 11 is better than 17 isn't it?
Haha quality over quantity my friend. Nadal's had to beat top 4 opponents in all his slam wins, this isn't the case with Federer who's won 6 majors without facing the top 4 seeds.

Could you imagine if Nadal played in 6 majors these days and didn't have to face anyone from the top 4? He'd take them no problem.

Not to mention he's been forced to beat Federer to win 7 of his 11 majors whilst Fed has only had to beat Nadal for 2 of his 17 majors.

Nadal's had to deal with peak Federer right from the start and now peak Djokovic and despite this still has 11 majors. Fed didn't have to deal with a peak Nadal from the start which is why he racked up so many majors from 04-07.

If Rafa didn't have to face peak Fed AND peak Djokovic he would have WIM06, WIM07, WIM11, USO11 and AO12. That's 5 more majors at the age of 26! Now you could make the same argument for Fed and say if he didn't have to face Nadal he'd have 22 majors, but you must remember, Fed was in his peak and Nadal wasn't until 2008, Fed wasn't dealing with peak Rafa at RG from 04-07, but Rafa WAS dealing with peak Fed in those WIM finals he lost and he also actually won against peak Fed up there as well (which is something Fed couldn't do to Rafa at RG) and Rafa WAS dealing with peak Novak in 2011-2012.

To any unbiased fan, Rafa has had it MUCH tougher than Fed.
__________________
helloworld - "If Nadal wants to surpass Pete, he will need 34 slams, twice more than Federer to be in the same conversation with Sampras."
The_Order is offline   Reply With Quote