Hey everyone, I was just curious if you guys still count the H2H between Roger and Nadal? This thread was inspired by a Nadal fan on the boards (Champ) as he stated that he doesn't add to the H2H anymore as Fed is too old at this point.
I personally think the head to head should be 18-10 which was the last year that Roger was playing really good tennis (2012). At the most, I believe 20-10 is a fair representation that Nadal wins every 2/3 matches between them over the course of the years.
I mean you saw the visible decline in Fed last year where he dropped out of the top 4 and many predicted that he could be out of the top 10. However, Federer never ran away and still faced Nadal 4 times in his worst year and one of Nadal's greatest years. This proves that Roger is not afraid of Nadal and doesn't tank as some fans accuse him of committing the act.
I mean Roger lost in straight sets this year at the AO and people say that is because Nadal got better. This is only partly true as Federer clearly declined at the AO as well. In 2012, he was on a hot streak and lost in 4 sets but had many chances to stretch it to 5 sets. In 2009, he blew many chances but still lost in 5 sets and that was Nadal playing some of his best tennis.
I truly believe that at the peak of their powers, every GS would go to 5 sets and the French would go to 4 sets.
However, because of the age gap we could not see peak to peak between these two great champions. So, do you keep counting the losses or do you not care anymore?
I understand when some fans say that of course it should count as Roger has a chance to beat him as well and it should be a credit to Nadal to beat him. They also say that if Federer didn't want the H2H to get worse, he should have retired.
These are some valid points but I am just stating that I think 30-10 or 40-10 or whatever the number will be at the end, is not the true H2H.
Please state your reasoning if you disagree or agree. Thanks.
I personally think the head to head should be 18-10 which was the last year that Roger was playing really good tennis (2012). At the most, I believe 20-10 is a fair representation that Nadal wins every 2/3 matches between them over the course of the years.
I mean you saw the visible decline in Fed last year where he dropped out of the top 4 and many predicted that he could be out of the top 10. However, Federer never ran away and still faced Nadal 4 times in his worst year and one of Nadal's greatest years. This proves that Roger is not afraid of Nadal and doesn't tank as some fans accuse him of committing the act.
I mean Roger lost in straight sets this year at the AO and people say that is because Nadal got better. This is only partly true as Federer clearly declined at the AO as well. In 2012, he was on a hot streak and lost in 4 sets but had many chances to stretch it to 5 sets. In 2009, he blew many chances but still lost in 5 sets and that was Nadal playing some of his best tennis.
I truly believe that at the peak of their powers, every GS would go to 5 sets and the French would go to 4 sets.
However, because of the age gap we could not see peak to peak between these two great champions. So, do you keep counting the losses or do you not care anymore?
I understand when some fans say that of course it should count as Roger has a chance to beat him as well and it should be a credit to Nadal to beat him. They also say that if Federer didn't want the H2H to get worse, he should have retired.
These are some valid points but I am just stating that I think 30-10 or 40-10 or whatever the number will be at the end, is not the true H2H.
Please state your reasoning if you disagree or agree. Thanks.
