Federer-Nadal Rivalry Since 2009 Australian Open Final

[Towser83]

Originally Posted by Mustard

Yet Nadal is 2-0 vs. Federer at the Australian Open.

true, but both quite recent, federer had already won 8 of 9 hc slams in 2009. best of 5 hc is 2-1 to nadal. Shame there weren't more meetings earlier on in hc slams, then we'd have a better idea

[Mustard]

Originally Posted by Towser83

thanks! i thought rafter was the last before nadal, also didn't know it was only 3 times overall

Sorry, I missed one. Vincent Spadea was the first to bagel Federer at 1999 Monte Carlo.

[CEvertFan]

I agree that surface mastery comes into play when you look at the Fed/Nadal rivalry - Nadal has consistently owned everyone on clay and it also happens to be by far the surface where they've played one another the most. If the encounters were more balanced across all the surfaces then we'd be seeing very different numbers IMO.

Put it this way - if Chris Evert had played Martina Navratilova more times on clay (Evert's best surface just like Nadal) she would almost assuredly have the advantage in their H2H - the thing is they played more on Martina's best surfaces (grass/indoor carpet) hence the 43-37 H2H in Martina's favor.

Nadal is also another of the all time greats and is younger than Fed and can be a bit of a bad matchup for Roger as well - factor in all these things and you have the current H2H.

[tenniselbow1]

Originally Posted by Towser83

true, but both quite recent, federer had already won 8 of 9 hc slams in 2009. best of 5 hc is 2-1 to nadal. Shame there weren't more meetings earlier on in hc slams, then we'd have a better idea

Miami and the AO (venues 4/5 hard court wins over Roger) are the two slowest hardcourts on the tour.

Nadal losing to Federer in IW is 100 times worse for his case than if he lost at Cinci/Toronto/UO etc (faster outdoor hard courts).. It immediately questions his game vs Roger's on almost every hard court venue on the tour including how each would have fared if they had met at the US Open.

If Nadal was to win 1 of 10 matches on rebound Ace i'd be surprised.

[nadalwon2012]

Originally Posted by ledwix

Ah yeah I see. Matches outside of slams don't count. So if you wanna play that game, Nadal was 1-0 in slam finals against Djokovic in early years. Now Djokovic leads 3-1.

But of course Nadal is going to make it 10-3 in slam finals against Djokovic very soon and become #1 for the next 12 years right..

I said Nadal had won the last 5 slam encounters with Federer. That includes the 2012 AO semi-final. I never said anything about slam finals. So to follow the topic of h2h at slams, Nadal leads Djokovic 5-3 at the slams, and the 5 slam matches that Nadal has won includes wins at Roland Garros, Wimbledon and US Open.

[ChanceEncounter]

Originally Posted by Mustard

Yet Nadal is 2-0 vs. Federer at the Australian Open.

Incidentally, Nadal was pretty terrible on Rebound Ace. Nadal's success at the AO largely coincided with the switch to Plexicushion.

[jackson vile]

Originally Posted by tudwell

Whoa, never realized Federer went 5-2 against Nadal at one point. Other than 2006 and 2008, the head to head is pretty even.

Nope just a bad match up / old man syndrome

[sdont]

Originally Posted by kimbahpnam

didn't realize Federer leads the bagel count

Good point. Interestingly, he's bagelled Nadal once on each surface (grass, clay, HC).

[Xavier G]

Federer will be disappointed he couldn't win the Wimby final 2008 and the AO final 09 when he looks back at them. Nadal jumped out to a big lead early on in their rivalry largely built on their clay results.12 of Nadal's wins on clay, there's the stat right there. Fed would have been favourite to beat Rafa in the US Open 06, 07 for instance, if Nadal had made it far enough in the tournaments. 2-1 to Fed at Wimbledon, but 0-5 down to Rafa at the French and 0-2 at the Aussie. Federer can still beat anyone in the best of 3 sets matches, and he is superior to Rafa indoors too, but needs to be able to beat Rafa in a Slam event again. It's doubtful he can if Nadal is 100%, Nadal has a mental edge over the longer distances in a Grand Slam event and Roger is 30 now. Not quite the same Roger, great start to 2012 all said.

[Mustard]

Originally Posted by ChanceEncounter

Incidentally, Nadal was pretty terrible on Rebound Ace. Nadal's success at the AO largely coincided with the switch to Plexicushion.

Nadal, as a top 5 player, only played 1 Australian Open on Rebound Ace. Nadal has twice lost in the quarter finals on Plexicushion.

[Hitman]

My honest opinion. I think he's done ok for himself. Nadal played some great tennis to distance himself from Federer from 08 to 09, I think before then it was quite close. Nadal is still winning the slam matches, but I think Federer has done well since that AO 09 loss.

Lets compare that to that epic match in Madrid 09, between Djokovic and Nadal. Where Nadal handed Djokovic a bruising defeat.

Djokovic 10
Nadal 2

Amazing how Djokovic not only turned it around, but has outright dominated Nadal, who at that point was 14-4 against him. Incredible feat by Djokovic against the seemingly mental giant Nadal.