zagor
Bionic Poster
His grandfather passed away, he was mentally out of it.
Who would have won a hypothetical 2008 USO Fedal match?
- Thread starter Nadalgaenger
- Start date
His grandfather passed away, he was mentally out of it.
OldschoolKIaus
Hall of Fame
Fedr went full mad "No slams til now! Fick it!"-beast mode in SF and F at USO08.
I guess he would have destroyed the Nadal (who played horrible moonball tennis on hardcourt against Murray in SF) in 4 sets.
I guess he would have destroyed the Nadal (who played horrible moonball tennis on hardcourt against Murray in SF) in 4 sets.
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
No one can deny the actual match never happened, because Nadal was gassed. Plain and simple.
Fed was losing in QF in most tournaments leading upto the Open, including the Olympics I believe?
Nadal was on a ridiculous winning streak.
From the end of April till the USO in September ( Not even 5 months ), he won MC, Barcelona, Hamburg, RG, Queens, Wimbledon, Rogers cup and the Olympics, which finished a week before the USO begun.
8 tournament wins, and a SF in Cincinatti, and the signs were on the wall even in his 1R match where he was taken to 2 tie breaks.
I think had he won the breaker against Murray in the 2nd set of their match, he might have just been able to push through. But Federer would've been a step too far in that state IMO.
A fresher Nadal id give 60/40 on those courts, but for the OP, Nadal wasn't fit for another battle that year.
Great outfit he had though.
Fed was losing in QF in most tournaments leading upto the Open, including the Olympics I believe?
Nadal was on a ridiculous winning streak.
From the end of April till the USO in September ( Not even 5 months ), he won MC, Barcelona, Hamburg, RG, Queens, Wimbledon, Rogers cup and the Olympics, which finished a week before the USO begun.
8 tournament wins, and a SF in Cincinatti, and the signs were on the wall even in his 1R match where he was taken to 2 tie breaks.
I think had he won the breaker against Murray in the 2nd set of their match, he might have just been able to push through. But Federer would've been a step too far in that state IMO.
A fresher Nadal id give 60/40 on those courts, but for the OP, Nadal wasn't fit for another battle that year.
Great outfit he had though.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Stoopid of Nadl to play both Canada and Cincy, no?
mike danny
Bionic Poster
And followed it up with back to back chokes in slams.Haha nice comeback!
But he did topple the 2011 juggernaut in the most memorable match of the year
mike danny
Bionic Poster
2011 actually is the closest. I'm not giving it to Nadal. It's a 50/50 match. Nadal wasn't amazing in the final, even accounting who his opponent was.
I know each match-up is different, but how both played against Novak should be taken into account, IMO. Fed almost beat him, while Rafa was fighting for his life just to win a set, while the other sets weren't close at all. It really should have been a 6-2 6-4 6-4 win for Novak. The difference in these performances is too staggering to just lay it all on the different nature of these match-ups.
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
Absolutely. But in those days he was playing everything, with no one advising him to skip anything.
I think its something people forget, when they discuss the injuries hes had. He didn't help himself, but its easier said than done, especially when youre young.
Remember 2008 he had that crazy run over 3 surfaces winning everything from Hamburg Masters up till losing at the SF in Cinci.
A 32 match unbeaten streak over surfaces that's never been done before, or since.
I believe if there were no Olympics that year, Nadal wins the USO in 2008. It just made the schedule a bit too tight, although the Olympics were very important to him, so he cant be faulted there.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Players used to switch surfaces more often when the tennis tour with less structured in 70s/80s, it's nothing unique. What's special about it was winning the Channel Slam.
Should've just skipped Cincinnati.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Or should have just kipped Cincy.
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
To me, whats most special about it , is how the tournaments that year were squeezed tight together. He was going from tournament to tournament , mopping up.
MC was April 20-26 - Won
Barcelona April 28-May 4 - Won
Rome May 5-11 - 2R
Hamburg May 11-17 - Won
So 4 tournaments with no rest, apart from his early exit in Rome.
He then gets 1 week from Hamburg till RG starts.
RG May 25 - June 7 - Won
Straight to grass with Queens beginning June 9-15 - Won ( which to me was a big deal, as he faced Karlovic, Roddick, and Djokovic back to back ).
Then 1 week later Wimbledon begins, which he also wins.
Lets not say that's nothing unique now, in regards to the scheduling that year.
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
Couldve, but he probably felt he was on a roll and wanted to keep momentum.
A more experienced Nadal knows he doesn't need to play as much to maintain form.
If he had won Cinci and the USO, its up there with the best seasons ever IMO.
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
2008 USO would go to Federer. Remember Nadal needed his highest level to beat him at Wimbledon and 2009 AO. So, it was not easy at all for him to beat Federer outside of clay.
Standaa
G.O.A.T.
while these are fair points, I think playing Nadal in a third consecutive final after first being trashed at the FO and then dethroned at Wimby would have made him even more nervous than he was at the start of the Wimbledon final. the fact that he got to defend his USO crown before facing Nadal again in another GS final must have relieved him.
IMO, it would have been a toin coss depending on how much confident would Fed be going into the match. He would have been the favorite on paper.
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
You make no sense.
Obviously players need their highest level to beat their toughest competitor.
Nadal was in Feds head big time then, remember.
Sometimes that was all that was needed for Fed to crumble.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
You talk if Nadal could play half-assed and Federer would lose. But somehow, every time Nadal beat Federer off clay at the time he was in peak form. 2008 WB - peak, 2009 AO - peak, 2011 Miami - peak, 2012 AO - peak. WhenNadal was uninspired/drained, Federer beat him even on clay - 2009 Madrid. But sure, merely appearing on court would be enough for the moral bull.
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
I wouldn't have fancied Federer's chances that much. Nadal just defeated Roger at ''home.'' Yeah, looking like another defeat here.
After the double blows of RG and Wimbledon, I wouldn’t be the least surprised if Fed managed to lose, no matter how tired or out of form Nadal was. Fed was a train wreck at that time, somehow managed to pull it together to beat Djokovic and Murray to take the title, but neither of those guys is Nadal and neither was in great form (Murray especially who might as well have not even stepped out on court). Neither was in his head the way Nadal was then. Maybe Nadal’s draining summer would end up being too much and he’d lose, but the safe money, in my opinion, would be on Fed blowing it.
nolefam_2024
Talk Tennis Guru
Nadal beat fed in AO. I have Nadal coming out as winner in this one. Fed had Major issues handling Nadal during Nadal's peak.
nolefam_2024
Talk Tennis Guru
In fact you could say Fed never handled Nadal during Nadal's peak and wouldn't be wrong in the slightest.
nolefam_2024
Talk Tennis Guru
Fed beat world number 2 Nole and world number 1 Nole in RG 2011 and Wimby 2012. But not Nadal. Nadal was his kryptonite.
Sampras-Bruguera 1993
Legend
By late 2008-2009, Nadal was already in Fed's craw. It wasn't until years later when Nadal slowed down significantly (As he relied on defense and explosion far more than Fed) that Fed got a few late surge career wins in a row. Nadal during his peaks was just too insanely fast and explosive for Fed outside of indoor conditions. Even if Nadal was gassed by 2008 US Open, he could still just attack Fed's backhand all day and there is nothing Fed can do about it. Nadal was doing to Fed what basically everyone does to Tststipas today. LOL. Just attack the hell out of his backhand
Last edited:
terrible logic
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Nadal peaked in the head-to-head against Federer at 23-10, after their 2014 Australian Open semi final. Federer won 6 of the last 7 (4-0 in 2017), ending at 24-16 to Nadal. Nadal was trying to shorten points more later on, which helped him against the field, but not against Federer. Nadal needed his old style against Federer, i.e. high movement and mobility, high intensity, grinding, high balls to Federer's backhand.
nolefam_2024
Talk Tennis Guru
That style was Fed's kryptonite. I respect Rafa game too much vs fed.
Permitlady
Professional
hypo fed is always hard to beat
abmk
Bionic Poster
yeah, change of style vs 35.5+ old Federer so much more important than injury affected/recovering federer in 2013-early 14 (losing 5 matches). *rolls eyes*.
just a dishonest representation of their rivalry, Mustard.
At end of 2012, h2h was 8-6 to fed off clay and 2-12 to Nadal on clay.
If we exclude that 2013-early 2014 period, other matches h2h is 14-7 to fed off clay and 2-13 to Nadal on clay. Suddenly not looking as great for Nadal off clay, is it (though he was obviously dominant on clay)?
abmk
Bionic Poster
fed beat peak Nadal at Wim 07.
and beat prime Nadal many a times.
so you'd be beyond wrong.
Also I could flip it around and say healthy peak fed was 5-1 vs Nadal off clay in 04-07.
Last edited:
abmk
Bionic Poster
yeah, Nadal was playing just as well at USO 2008 as he was at AO 2009. *rolls eyes*
I mean you'd have to absurd to equate the 2.
Nadal had to play at his best/close to it to beat prime Fed off clay. Zero exceptions.
Its just sad level of analysis from people in multiple ways - aversion to federer and its also disrespect to Nadal's level of play actually required to beat prime Fed.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Ambk in here GIVING. lol
Mustard
Bionic Poster
That's some somersaults you've done in the second paragraph there, abmk. I said nothing, positive or negative, about Federer's physical condition in 2013, just pointed out what the peak head-to-head score was from Nadal's perspective.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
A lot of "off-clays" when it comes to Nadal's critics, I'm afraid. How about we do off-hardcourts, some time?
16 majors for Nadal
9 majors for Djokovic
9 majors for Federer
What dominance by Nadal. Take out hardcourt, and he's in another universe to Djokovic and Federer.
abmk
Bionic Poster
no, you offered sorry excuses for nadal getting beaten badly post AO 2014 with federer mostly being 35.5+, while ignoring the real factor of fed's injury affected/recovering period in 2013-early 14.
"Nadal was trying to shorten points more later on, which helped him against the field, but not against Federer. Nadal needed his old style against Federer, i.e. high movement and mobility, high intensity, grinding, high balls to Federer's backhand."
If you had just posted what the h2h was at end of AO 14, I wouldn't be critical of your post, though I would have pointed out that Nadal benefitted massively from fed's issues in 13-early 14.
abmk
Bionic Poster
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Federev
Legend
mike danny
Bionic Poster
abmk
Bionic Poster
yes, but Fed was not healthy in Miami 2004. That's why I mentioned healthy peak fed.
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
Federer in SF and F showed his best level all year, going 6-1 in sets vs Djokovic and Murray. Nadal was a bit gassed after the clay and grass season dominance + Olympics and Canada.
On paper, it should be clearly Federer. But this is Nadal and he had just destroyed him at RG and dethroned him at Wimbledon.
I still go with Federer but obviously, Nadal would have a good chance.
On paper, it should be clearly Federer. But this is Nadal and he had just destroyed him at RG and dethroned him at Wimbledon.
I still go with Federer but obviously, Nadal would have a good chance.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Fed would really have to play as bad as at 2019 Wimb to lose this one. But he was way better than that in 2008.
