Federer would win as his peak version would exploit the 2020 Nadal comparative declined movement and speed. Federer could not beat peak Nadal due to Nadal (as safin said) being able to run around like a rabbit getting everything back. Made him hit 5 extra shots per rally.Very interesting. Could peak Fed lose against the 34 year old player?
Federer lost to a weaker version of Nadal in the real life match
Yeah, it seems that everyone know this. Yet I'm getting bashed for calling it the Djokovic Open.Fed would do better and most likely push it to 5. Of that I'm certain.
It also depends on the conditions they're playing in. 2020 RG played similarly to Hamburg. Peak Fed would like to play Nadal in those conditions as opposed to the sunny ones.
You're getting bashed because Djokovic still got destroyed so it made no difference.Yeah, it seems that everyone know this. Yet I'm getting bashed for calling it the Djokovic Open.
Why 2006 Fed? Just because he was younger and dumber than his 2014-2018 self doesn't mean he was a better player.Very interesting. Could peak Fed lose against the 34 year old player?
It doesn't change the obvious fact that they made the conditions almost perfect for him. You don't always win, even in good conditions.You're getting bashed because Djokovic still got destroyed so it made no difference.
That is true, i just used 2006 Fed because a poster of another thread said 2006 Fed would humiliate 2020 Nadal.Why 2006 Fed? Just because he was younger and dumber than his 2014-2018 self doesn't mean he was a better player.
You don't get destroyed in good conditions.It doesn't change the obvious fact that they made the conditions almost perfect for him. You don't always win, even in good conditions.
Nadal that turned up in the final? Nadal definitely.
But people here watch Nada tennis and think 2006 Nadal was some joke.
The guy would run down 60% of the winners Nadal 2020 had against Djokovic. Let's see if 2020 Nadal can last 6+ hours against someone who was probably the most physical player ever in tennis.
Nadal can always spam FH CC to the BH with tons of spin mustard when things start to go bad. Fed has no way out of this loop.
No one slaughters any edition of a healthy Rafa at RG.Huge Rafa fan here but 2006 Fed would slaughter his 2020 version.
I think it would be a 5 setter actually.The gap in people's perception here (and even including my own this time ) and the real variables is actually stark.
Another exercise in what time/conventional thinking makes people forget
Just watched the extended highlights, the Federer from the first set of RG 2006 F would definitely bring a whole different kind of match for Nadal. Djokovic doesn't have the FH that Federer has, and when Federer dictates even the greatest defender ever can only hope to weather the storm.
Can't see 2020 Nadal run down the balls that 2006 was having to run down, nor can see Nadal switching up on aggression against Federer like he did against Djokovic as successfully, especially not when he would be having to defend a would be winner FH every 4th ball.
The point I am getting at is fundamental but essential to Fedal match up, and something that enabled Federer's recent success in it:
Federer is the natural aggressor, and more than the FH to BH strategy, it's Nadal's bonkers defence and never gonna give you a free point attitude that mentally tears him apart.
A Nadal who can't actually do regular eye popping retrieval would be easier to work with for him.
But then again 2020 F is quite a powerful performance from Rafael and Federer faded away in RG 2006 F.
Not that it would have mattered, no player past or present beats a well playing Rafael in RG.
Think the match would be like 2011 F, Federer with some chances and a set, but Nadal simply too strong in the end.
You clowns really have no business blathering about anything related to (CC) tennis. Here's the correct answer: any version of Fedovic has close to zero chance vs. any RG-winning iteration of Nadal at RG.
To remind you jokers one more time (though I'm beginning to wonder why I even bother) Fed has won 60% or more of his games on clay only once in his career ('05 - he came close in '03, '04 and '09 but you'd have to round up). And while Novak has done better - his career average stands at an impressive 59.0% thru last year - he has also struggled to clear the all-important 60% ceiling except four times when he won 61.4%, 63.0%, 62.2% and 61.9% in '08, '11, '15 and '20 respectively (and that last one is suspect for obvious reasons).
OTOH I just told y'all that this CC season may go down as Rafa's first since 2004 when he fails to keep his 60% Club membership. In case I still need to spell it out for you: Nadal's career average in GW% dwarfs Fed's or Novak's career high (save maybe '11 or '15) on clay. And while there's always a chance an underdog upsets the statistical fave on any surface we're looking at the one with the highest margin for error, and against its greatest champion in history to boot, but you blockheads think Fed would somehow "slaughter" or "smoke" last year's Rafa who had his 3rd most dominant run (behind '17 and '08) at RG? JFC.
Now it's easy to point to the '06 Rome final and say Fed's FH > Djoko's, but there's a reason why Fed was never able to push his nemesis to 5 at RG and as even some of you jokers should know Rafa now plays more like Courier, standing closer to the baseline and bullying his hapless opponent with heavy, crushing body blows which at least until this year had more than made up for his youthful counterpunching. Maybe you'd be foolish enough to bet on Fed's FH somehow going toe to toe with Rafa's on dirt but the rest of us should know better.
At best this match goes to 4. '20 Rafa (or at least the one that showed up in the final) probably KOs his '13 version in 4 as well so consider that a meeting halfway of sorts.
My fan bias aside, it'd be roger 2006 in 4 sets. Nadal 2020 was atleast 3 steps slower, much less fitter compared to 2006, yes even he, the greatest warrior of tennis world ages. All of 2006 Roger's "wannabe winners" against 2006 rafa who retrieved almost everything and frustrated him, would be "actual winners" against 2020 rafa. Plus, he had no problems playing 5,5 hour marathon with prime nadal on clay, so won't fail physically. As far as rafa's offence & shotmaking are concerned, as much as we all admire it, its nowhere near what prime roger could produce in that department. And hence, our warrior would find his game being played right into the hands of Federer.Very interesting. Could peak Fed lose against the 34 year old player?
Any time Nadal went forehand to forehand with peak Fed even at RG he would get bullied. Federer always dictated with his forehand and had Nadal on the run. Why do you think Nadal constantly went to Fed’s backhand? It’s because he was **** scared of going toe to toe with Fed’s strength which is smart. I don’t get how some of you idiots don’t realize how much slower Nadal is now compared to 15 years ago. It’s night and day. A 2011 Djokovic would also make mince meat out of a 35 year old Nadal.
C'mon, gentleman, you are grossly underestimating 2020 Rafa's clinical performance.My fan bias aside, it'd be roger 2006 in 4 sets.
When We're analyzing tennis as a sport, we should put our fan bias aside.
@JustMy2Cents , Ladies and gentlemen.
FH to FH exchanges are not represented exactly by FH winner to unforced error ratio.I see another of the lemmings has deluded himself into thinking he actually has anything new to show me. Let's see what the poseur has to say:
Sez the imbecilic fanboy who clearly has no clue about the basics to begin with. Hey genius, just for starters your pin-up boy lost the FH winner-UFE differential in every one of his beatdowns by Nadal at RG except once, and that 1-point advantage in '06 is dwarfed by your boy toy's 19 FEs vs. Rafa's 9. Not even in your worthless dictionary should that count as "dictat[ing]" of any sort, though you'll be sure to spin it in Fed's favor somehow.
Gawd where do these kids get the idea that their fanboy blather is remotely interesting for the grown-ups to bother with?
FH to FH exchanges are not represented exactly by FH winner to unforced error ratio.
And it's also completely disregarding the rest of the match-up where in most points Federer could hit a great forehand that would be a winner against most opponents (including 2020 Nadal) but only young Rafa had the speed to make him hit another one, and another one, and another one until he finally coughed up an error, driving up that UFE count.
Okay well maybe don't condescendingly reference stats that you know aren't relevant to his specific point if you're trying to refute him, that only makes you look like the wannabe expert.LOL, that's why I said "for starters." Just wanted to see how the wannabe expert would spin that one.
As to your 2nd paragraph, of course Fed would look to exploit his nemesis' diminished defense, but that's a lot easier said than done when Rafa would be likely pushing him further and further back with his amped-up groundies. Maybe Fed somehow still manages to play close to the baseline against this upgraded artillery, but I doubt it. Like I said that's actually the reason why Rafa was able to post his 1st and 4th highest GW%s ever at RG in the last 4 yrs ('17 and '20).
Okay well maybe don't condescendingly reference stats that you know aren't relevant to his specific point if you're trying to refute him, that only makes you look like the wannabe expert.
Maybe just maybe it's worth considering that none of this is written in stone which is why it's a debate the first place and that stats against the field or stats against different versions of each other don't definitively prove anything about a specific hypothetical.