Nadal VS Federer: WHAT RIVALRY,?!???!

[Roger is Boring]

Rafael Nadal (ESP) vs. Roger Federer (SUI)

2006 ATP Masters Series Rome
6-7, 7-6, 6-4, 2-6, 7-6
Winner: Nadal


2006 ATP Masters Series Monte Carlo
6-2, 6-7, 6-3, 7-6
Winner: Nadal


2006 Dubai
2-6, 6-4, 6-4
Winner: Nadal


2005 Roland Garros
6-3, 4-6, 6-4, 6-3
Winner: Nadal


2005 ATP Masters Series Miami
6-2, 7-6, 6-7, 3-6, 1-6
Winner: Federer


2004 Miami
6-3, 6-3
Winner: Nadal


Nadal leads "RIVALRY" 5-1

DENIAL IS NOT A RIVER IN EGYPT!REPEAT AFTER ME:THERE IS NO RIVALRY!

VAMOOOOSSSSSSSSssssssSSSSSSSsssssssSSSSSSSSsssssss SSSS!!!!!!

[Ztalin]

3 of those matches were on Nadal's surface, clay.

If 3 of those matches were on Roger's surface, grass, then it would be 5-4.

Not Roger's fault that Nadal can't even get to the finals to play him on grass, is it?

It's kind of ironic, that if Nadal was better (on grass), Roger would actually be looking better in the head to head. Kind of sad actually.

[Zeph]

Fine then, there is no rivalry between nadal and fed.

Fed is just better.

When was the last time Fed didnt make it to a semi or a final of a major event. How many times has he lost a final that he made it to.

Nadal went out early in wimbledon and US open.

Im not even going to try to bring up more points considering how many times this has been covered.

[Andres]

Originally Posted by Ztalin

If 3 of those matches were on Roger's surface, grass, then it would be 5-4.

5+4 = 9. They played 6 times.

Math isn't your thing, right?

[dh003i]

Yep, stupid Nadal fans trying to use the 5-1 head-to-head record. Federer is playing exceptinally well, and is clearly second best on clay: I think he's closed the gap. He easily could have won today, didn't but could have. FO I say is 50-50.

The fact that Nadal never gets to Federer at the US or Aussie Open says something. And the fact that he never gets to Federer on grass also says something. How about we do tourney to tourney record? For every tournament they've both entered, what's the record in terms of Champion vs. Not Champion? You'll see a much more level playing field then.

As previous poster here has said, it is quite ironic that Federer looks worse in the head-to-head matchups because he's such a good clay-court player that he plays Nadal deep into many clay-court events, and that the h2h also looks better for Nadal because he's such a poor grass-court player that he never gets to play Federer.

Let them play on grass as many times as they've played on clay, and we'll see what their record will be.

Of course, Nadal fans really hate the fact that the French Open is considered the least prestigious GS, and the Wimbledon the most prestigious. To try to diminish the almost universally seen prestigiousness of the Wimbledon, they say it's "dated", or "sexist", or "boring" (all white), or that not as many matches are played on it (duh, grass is grass, and requires more maintenance than every surface).

[Chadwixx]

Nice job admins for moving this thread where it belongs.

[dh003i]

I think what Ztalen means is...

the h2h record is 5-1 Nadal...

If as many matches were played on grass as on clay (that is, if there were 3 extra matches, all played on grass), the record would be 5-4.

If 3 of those matches were played on grass instead of clay, I gaurantee you the record would be more like 4-2 Federer (5 - 3 = 2, 1 + 3 = 4). And probably if they play on grass, Federer wipes out Nadal completely, unlike the very very close matches between them on clay.

[tlm]

The only thing sad is the way you poor loser fed fans can turn everything around+avoid the truth.This is a good one,there is no rivalry fed is just better.

Now nadal has beaten fed 3 straight times in finals this year+5 out of 6 overall,i guess your right there is no rivalry.But of course there is always the endless shouldof couldof wouldofs!

If fed turns the series around on nadal i will give him credit,but untill that time with it being 5-1,it is obvious nadal owns fed pure+simple.This just kills you fed heads.

How do you boys explain this 19 year old kid taking the god down again+again+again.I am sure we will see another batch of weak excuses.

I dont know any player that can lose 5 out of 6 in any sport+ go around saying that you are better than the man that keeps beating you.

[D-man]

the spanker becomes the spanked..

[MR. 81]

Originally Posted by dh003i

Yep, stupid Nadal fans trying to use the 5-1 head-to-head record. Federer is playing exceptinally well, and is clearly second best on clay: I think he's closed the gap. He easily could have won today, didn't but could have. FO I say is 50-50.

The fact that Nadal never gets to Federer at the US or Aussie Open says something. And the fact that he never gets to Federer on grass also says something. How about we do tourney to tourney record? For every tournament they've both entered, what's the record in terms of Champion vs. Not Champion? You'll see a much more level playing field then.

As previous poster here has said, it is quite ironic that Federer looks worse in the head-to-head matchups because he's such a good clay-court player that he plays Nadal deep into many clay-court events, and that the h2h also looks better for Nadal because he's such a poor grass-court player that he never gets to play Federer.

Let them play on grass as many times as they've played on clay, and we'll see what their record will be.

Of course, Nadal fans really hate the fact that the French Open is considered the least prestigious GS, and the Wimbledon the most prestigious. To try to diminish the almost universally seen prestigiousness of the Wimbledon, they say it's "dated", or "sexist", or "boring" (all white), or that not as many matches are played on it (duh, grass is grass, and requires more maintenance than every surface).

I don't think AO is more prestigious than FO, not in Europe that's for sure

[Dan007]

Fed had 2 match points and still lost that match. Just pitiful.

[The Pusher Terminator]

Nadal Is The Most Exciting Freaking Player Of All Time!!!!!.......

Nadal Is The King!!! All Hail The New King!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Chadwixx]

Still gotta give fed credit for playing nadal so close. Nadal is no slouch, its not like fed lost to some chump.

Its hard to finish a match on the slow clay. You cant just pop an ace like u can on other surfaces, fed feels some pressure, nadal goes for broke. Ive been in that situation, you just cant seem to get the ball past your opponent.

Lets also keep in mind nadal had a very easy semi final where fed was out there along time. Feds conditioning must be up there to play that much tennis in a 20-30 hour span.

[ATXtennisaddict]

Most of Nadal's wins are on clay (his preferred).

If Roger played Nadal on his favored (grass), it wouldn't even be close (unlike their clay matches, I mean, look at their scores!!!)

I'd say 6-2,6-1 Fed on grass in any competition. That sort of score.

Bottom line:

Federer's good enough to reach the finals in clay.

Nadal's not good enough to reach the finals in grass.

Fed's more all-round.

[tlm]

I agree you have to give some credit to fed,this is nadals best surface+he came about as close as you can.

I have to say fed was right there but he still lost i dont understand the guy that is supposed to be far+away the best player not being able to close the deal with a 19 year old inexperienced player like nadal.

This is the 3rd straight loss in a final for fed vs nadal this year,so how can nadal not be the better player?

[Saito]

I think it's a rivalry just because Nadal puts up his best tennis to beat Fed.... on clay, which is Fed's worst surface and his best surface. I don't think people can say this isn't a rivalry just because Nadal has more wins, because IMO Fed and Nadal produce the best matches as of now.. my $.02...

[Shabazza]

Originally Posted by tlm

I agree you have to give some credit to fed,this is nadals best surface+he came about as close as you can.

I have to say fed was right there but he still lost i dont understand the guy that is supposed to be far+away the best player not being able to close the deal with a 19 year old inexperienced player like nadal.

This is the 3rd straight loss in a final for fed vs nadal this year,so how can nadal not be the better player?

Nadal is the better player on clay, no question (even if Federer could do win RG, which is unlikely)
But, his 2:1 lead over Fed on hard- doesn't mean Nadal is the better player overall, if he still lose to sombody else every now and then and doesn't manage to go to enough finals to close his gap to the nr.1 ranking significantly.

[ATXtennisaddict]

tlm>> Nadal's a clay monster with an awesome mental game. Credit goes to him.

That doesn't make Nadal >>> Federer though.

[TENNIS2]

Originally Posted by Roger is Boring

Rafael Nadal (ESP) vs. Roger Federer (SUI)

2006 ATP Masters Series Rome
6-7, 7-6, 6-4, 2-6, 7-6
Winner: Nadal


2006 ATP Masters Series Monte Carlo
6-2, 6-7, 6-3, 7-6
Winner: Nadal


2006 Dubai
2-6, 6-4, 6-4
Winner: Nadal


2005 Roland Garros
6-3, 4-6, 6-4, 6-3
Winner: Nadal


2005 ATP Masters Series Miami
6-2, 7-6, 6-7, 3-6, 1-6
Winner: Federer


2004 Miami
6-3, 6-3
Winner: Nadal


Nadal leads "RIVALRY" 5-1

DENIAL IS NOT A RIVER IN EGYPT!REPEAT AFTER ME:THERE IS NO RIVALRY!

VAMOOOOSSSSSSSSssssssSSSSSSSsssssssSSSSSSSSsssssss SSSS!!!!!!

I'm sure you are not really thinking what you're writing. But if your statement has a grain of truth then it would be the other way around, i.e, no rivalry since Fed is better than Nadal OVERALL. (A simple look at ATP ranking point will prove what I just said).

[oscar_2424]

So when Nadal beat Federer on dubai ( not clay) he got lucky or Fed was injured??? or tired