2003 Federer vs 2007 Nadal

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by AM28143, Jul 9, 2007.

  1. AM28143

    AM28143 Semi-Pro

    Jul 1, 2007
    Who plays better on grass: Federer when he was 21 or Nadal today at 21? Federer in 2003 plowed through his draw only dropping one set. Nadal in 2007 dropped eight sets throughout the tournment. However, watching Nadal's shoot making, volleying and even his serve yesterday, I'm begining to believe that Nadal might have beaten a Federer of 5 years ago. Federer's serve back then did not have juice it does now and his backhand was even more vulnerable. Is it possible to think that Nadal, a so called one surface wonder, is playing as well as any 21 year old on grass? And based on that is it possible that Nadal, if he stays healthy (which is still a big if), could become not only an all-time great clay court player, but an all-time great grass player? It will be intersting to see how his career unfolds throughout the years.
  2. Grimjack

    Grimjack Banned

    Feb 18, 2004
    Yes. Clearly the GOAT of 21 yr old grass court tennis players.

    I mean, 21 yr old Borg, 21 yr old Federer, 21 yr old Becker, 21 yr old McEnroe...all these guys pale in comparison to the 21 yr old grasscourt fiend that is Nadal, who hasn't won bugger-all and can barely escape the likes of Soderling and Youzhny.

    Good god, people.
  3. quest01

    quest01 Hall of Fame

    Jan 22, 2006
    I would go with Nadal 2007 because when Federer won in 03 he served and volleyed most of the time. I dont think he would get away with this style of play against Nadal.
  4. Gilgamesh

    Gilgamesh Semi-Pro

    Feb 18, 2006
    Anybody who still considers Nadal as a one surface wonder is an idiot. The man has reached the QF of both the AO and UO and two Wimby finals and he is only 21. He is no Gaudio.

    A Nadal yesterday almost beat Federer. Last year, he gave Federer trouble as well but I would never bet against Federer of any year during his dominance on grass.
  5. fps

    fps Legend

    Jun 30, 2007
    Brighton, England
    Or, if Nadal was put on the 03 courts maybe he wouldn't get anywhere cos they were faster. Or maybe one of them would be injured. Or not. Or maybe they'd play differently because they were playing each other rather than whoever Fed beat in 03. Or maybe this is completely unprovable and irrelevant./
  6. jkonecne

    jkonecne Rookie

    Mar 28, 2007
    If you're asking if they played when they were both 21, who would win? Could go either way, it would be close. However, you could tell that the 21 Federer had a far better chance of a future on grass than Nadal. His game just suits the grass better.
  7. slice bh compliment

    slice bh compliment G.O.A.T.

    Jul 13, 2004
    How would the Spanish Armada of 1588 do against the 3rd century BC Greeks? A nailbiter, I think.

    I think it's impossible to judge, but I'd say Raf or Rog circa 07 would beat the Roger of 03.

Share This Page