Better season: 2005 Federer or 2013 Nadal?

[NatF]

You missed 1-1 vs Nadal (RG and Miami)
don't think Nadal had tougher competition.

Safin AO 05 >> Djoko USO 13
Nadal RG 05 > Djoko RG 13

Nadal not playing Murray at all in 2013 diminishes his competition abit despite the year on the whole being a great one.

 

[abmk]

Nadal not playing Murray at all in 2013 diminishes his competition abit despite the year on the whole being a great one.

True.
Nadal-Murray didn't face off in 12 nor 13.
Also Djoko had it clearly tougher in 13 than Nadal did.

I changed my post a bit in case people grumbled about focus on AO 05, RG 05 only.

AO 05 Safin, RG 05 Nadal, USO 05 Hewitt vs RG 13 Djoko, USO 13 djoko.

 

[Pheasant]

You missed 1-1 vs Nadal (RG and Miami)
don't think Nadal had tougher competition at all.

AO 05 Safin, RG 05 Nadal, USO 05 Hewitt vs RG 13 Djoko, USO 13 djoko.

Whoops. Yes. Nadal was a very big miss.

 

[mike danny]

Nadal not playing Murray at all in 2013 diminishes his competition abit despite the year on the whole being a great one.

Nadal also didn't play peak Stanimal nor peak Delpo at slam level.

 

[Third Serve]

Nadal also didn't play peak Stanimal nor peak Delpo at slam level.

coulda played peak Stanimal if Gasquet didn't tire him out

 

[Krish0608]

Barring a GOAT performance from Safin, 2005 would have been Federer's best ever year. It's certainly his PEAKest in terms of level. I'll go with Fed 2005 for this. A more fair / interesting comparison would be Fed 2005 vs Nadal 2010.

 

[RS]

Nadal not playing Murray at all in 2013 diminishes his competition abit despite the year on the whole being a great one.

Weird they never played at least once in 2012 and 2013.

 

[Djokovic2011]

@DSH: Reading through this thread it strikes me how much more level-headed you used to be.

Nadal winning his 21st major sent you completely doolally.

 

[Mivic]

We really need a Djokovic victory at RG to purge some of the dullards in these threads from the forum once again (and hopefully for good). Not sure I can take much more of thus buffoonery.

 

[abmk]

Weird they never played at least once in 2012 and 2013.

Its an Conspiracy, an Digrace, a Insult!

 

[DSH]

@DSH: Reading through this thread it strikes me how much more level-headed you used to be.

Nadal winning his 21st major sent you completely doolally.

Everything is a game and everyone plays the role they want.
It's nothing personal, 'pal'.

 

[InsideOut900]

Barring a GOAT performance from Safin, 2005 would have been Federer's best ever year. It's certainly his PEAKest in terms of level. I'll go with Fed 2005 for this. A more fair / interesting comparison would be Fed 2005 vs Nadal 2010.

He was better on clay and indoors in 2006. Better at the USO too.

2005 only better at AO, Hamburg (duh) and Cinci.

 

[Nadalgaenger]

Better question: Who wins at USO?
I’d say Nadal would have slight edge.
Baby Nadal won first two sets off peak Fed in Miami. 2013 was Nadal’s HC peak.

 

[abmk]

Better question: Who wins at USO?
I’d say Nadal would have slight edge.
Baby Nadal won first two sets off peak Fed in Miami. 2013 was Nadal’s HC peak.

Fed would have the edge

So called baby Nadal was 2nd best Nadal at Miami (after 2011).
Also USO plays nothing like Miami.

Fed also beat Nadal in straights on HC in IW in 12 in Nadal's peak year.

 

[MichaelNadal]

@DSH: Reading through this thread it strikes me how much more level-headed you used to be.

Nadal winning his 21st major sent you completely doolally.

It did that to the whole board, bestie

 

[abmk]

He was better on clay and indoors in 2006. Better at the USO too.

2005 only better at AO, Hamburg (duh) and Cinci.

Doha - 05 clearly. was toying around with everyone
AO - 05 clearly
Rotterdam extra in 05 - fairly dominant except for pretty competitive final vs Ljubicic
Dubai - even in the end. two very nerwy matches at first in 05. not so good 2nd match vs #488 in 06. dominant semi in 05 vs agassi and better final in 05 than in 06.
IW - similar. 05 if we're really insistent since he lost a set in 06 to Rochus in early round
Miami - 06 clearly even with clearly better competition in 05
Monte Carlo - 06 clearly. pretty good final vs Nadal as opposed to close match upset by Gasquet in MC 05
Hamburg - only played in 05. dominant. no set lost. default goes to 05
Rome - only played in 06. Best Rome, especially the final. default goes to 06
RG - marginally to 06
Halle - 05 clearly, 3 3-setters including vs Rochus in 06.
Wim - similar
Canada - only played in 06. good, but not especially great tennis. its possible he could've played better in 05
Cincy - 05 duh
USO - 06 clearly
Tokyo 06 vs Bangkok 05 - close 3-setter vs Suzuki in 06. Otherwise similar. So go with Bangkok 05
Madrid 06 - dominant, esp. SF/F. default goes to 06
Basel 06 - dominant in final. classic 3-setter vs Srichapan. default to 06
YEC 06 - 06 clearly

 

[ADuck]

It's the 2 extra slam SF's vs 1 master title. Could argue either way

 

[MichaelNadal]

Doha - 05 clearly. was toying around with everyone
AO - 05 clearly
Rotterdam extra in 05 - fairly dominant except for pretty competitive final vs Ljubicic
Dubai - even in the end. two very nerwy matches at first in 05. not so good 2nd match vs #488 in 06. dominant semi in 05 vs agassi and better final in 05 than in 06.
IW - similar. 05 if we're really insistent since he lost a set in 06 to Rochus in early round
Miami - 06 clearly even with clearly better competition in 05
Monte Carlo - 06 clearly. pretty good final vs Nadal as opposed to close match upset by Gasquet in MC 05
Hamburg - only played in 05. dominant. no set lost. default goes to 05
Rome - only played in 06. Best Rome, especially the final. default goes to 06
RG - marginally to 06
Halle - 05 clearly, 3 3-setters including vs Rochus in 06.
Wim - similar
Canada - only played in 06. good, but not especially great tennis. its possible he could've played better in 05
Cincy - 05 duh
USO - 06 clearly
Tokyo 06 vs Bangkok 05 - close 3-setter vs Suzuki in 06. Otherwise similar. So go with Bangkok 05
Madrid 06 - dominant, esp. SF/F. default goes to 06
Basel 06 - dominant in final. classic 3-setter vs Srichapan. default to 06
YEC 06 - 06 clearly

Bestie, it's 2022 bro, let's get out of the mid 2000's for like 10 minutes, please

 

[Backspin1183]

Zeballos, Darcis, Ferrer, Gasquet, worst Fed, GOATredo

 

[abmk]

It's the 2 extra slam SF's vs 1 master title. Could argue either way

you really can't when Nadal didn't play AO and got bundled out 1R at Wimbledon by frickin Steve Darcis.
it took peak Safin saving MP to the boot to beat fed at AO in 5 sets and then Nadal in RG 05 to beat Fed there.

 

[ADuck]

you really can't when Nadal didn't play AO and got bundled out 1R by frickin Steve Darcis.
it took peak Safin saving MP to the boot to beat fed in 5 sets and then Nadal in RG 05 to beat Fed there.

In terms of the actual titles won, Nadal was better ever so slightly.
In terms of overall consistency and level throughout the season, Fed is better perhaps by some margin.
Overall it's close, I don't see a problem going either way depending on what a person values.

 

[abmk]

In terms of the actual titles won, Nadal was better ever so slightly.
In terms of overall consistency and level throughout the season, Fed is better perhaps by some margin.
Overall it's close, I don't see a problem going either way depending on what a person values.

Slams. Fed >> nadal by a big margin not even close.
Masters - nadal has 1 more.
Nadal lost 7 times in 2013. 6 of those were in straight sets.
Fed lost 4 times in 2005. none of them were in straights. 2 of them he had MP, another 2 points away.

Unless you want to degrade slam play (winning 0 matches at 2 of the slams) and throw away consistency and level in favour of 1 masters title more, its no brainer.

@ bold part: Fed won 11 titles total in 2005 to 10 for Nadal in 2013, just FTR

 

[MichaelNadal]

In terms of the actual titles won, Nadal was better ever so slightly.
In terms of overall consistency and level throughout the season, Fed is better perhaps by some margin.
Overall it's close, I don't see a problem going either way depending on what a person values.

Maybe Abmk will get the message?

 

[ADuck]

Slams. Fed >> nadal by a big margin not even close.
Masters - nadal has 1 more.
Nadal lost 7 times in 2013. 6 of those were in straight sets.
Fed lost 4 times in 2005. none of them were in straights. 2 of them he had MP, another 2 points away.

Unless you want to degrade slam play (winning 0 matches at 2 of the slams) and throw away consistency and level in favour of 1 masters title more, its no brainer.

I'm not degrading anything. Just also looking at it through the lense of the actual titles won and their significance which is also a factor.

 

[abmk]

I'm not degrading anything. Just also looking at it through the lense of the actual titles won and their significance which is also a factor.

Fed won 11 titles in 2005 to 10 for Nadal in 2013.
Ignoring 0 matches won in 2 slams in degrading importance of slams.

 

[ADuck]

Fed won 11 titles in 2005 to 10 for Nadal in 2013.
Ignoring 0 matches won in 2 slams in degrading importance of slams.

The overall value of Nadal's titles > Fed's titles in that season because of the extra masters 1000's as opposed to Fed's 2 250's.

 

[The_Order]

Maybe Abmk will get the message?

No you can't... you just can't rate Nadal above peak Rogi

 

[MichaelNadal]

The overall value of Nadal's titles > Fed's titles in that season because of the extra masters 1000's as opposed to Fed's 2 250's.

No you can't... you just can't rate Nadal above peak Rogi

I really just feel bad for him at this point smh

 

[dapchai]

Maybe Abmk will get the message?

To be fair BB was epic with 8xxx and 9xxx series. It's products after that were a disaster...

 

[abmk]

The overall value of Nadal's titles > Fed's titles in that season because of the extra masters 1000's as opposed to Fed's 2 250's.

pretty thin margin though.
2 slam SFs, significantly higher consistency, overall level easily trump that. unless you want to degrade slams.

 

[The_Order]

So let's get this straight... Federer 05 was better than Nadal 13 because of what he didn't win...

Yep... the logic is stronk here....

2 slams + 5 Masters > 2 slams + 4 Masters

Cry all he wants... doesn't change the fact that Nadal won an extra Masters title...

 

[MichaelNadal]

To be fair BB was epic with 8xxx and 9xxx series. It's products after that were a disaster...

I miss Nextel walkie talkie phones

 

[abmk]

Maybe Abmk will get the message?

As opposed to the "genius" you who didn't get the message that I'm ignoring you after not replying to for so many times, fraudie fraud?
Here, let me put it in clear terms: You are on ignore list now.
Why? You won't discuss tennis in good faith. So its useless talking to you on this tennis board.

 

[The_Order]

pretty thin margin though.
2 slam SFs, significantly higher consistency, overall level easily trump that. unless you want to degrade slams.

More nonsense... how is that degrading slams?

Federer didn't win them. You either win them or you don't...

The trophy cabinet is the most important comparison... after that you can look at other factors as a TB...

 

[MichaelNadal]

As opposed to the "genius" you who didn't get the message that I'm ignoring you after not replying to for so many times, fraudie fraud?
Here, let me put it in clear terms: You are on ignore list now.

You can't ignore me bestie, im too epic

 

[dapchai]

I miss Nextel walkie talkie phones

I miss it when Moto + Nokia + BB dominated the phone industry before Android and Apple came to the scene...

 

[The_Order]

You can't ignore me bestie, im too epic

He acts like he's some sort of hero by putting you on ignore... hurls a few insults, then tells you he put you on ignore and runs away like a coward...

 

[The_Order]

I miss it when Moto + Nokia + BB dominated the phone industry before Android and Apple came to the scene...

Yeah but Android and Apple only took over because Moto + BB + Nokia got too old and fell out of their peak...

 

[dapchai]

Yeah but Android and Apple only took over because Moto + BB + Nokia got too old and fell out of their peak...

LOL good one. Aren't we now living in an inflation era of smartphones?

 

[MichaelNadal]

Mid 00 phones were everything lol. I had a pocket PC, for it's time that thing was BADASS.

I absolutely loved that phone.

 

[MissileBackHand99]

Nadal for me. People forget that he shut the 2012 season down after Wimby, and had the major knee/lower leg injury, resulting in surgery. ALL the "experts" SWORE that he was gonna retire, and that THIS injury would be the one that ended his career. Those roars got even louder when he pulled out of the Aussie Open.

Not only did Nadal come back, he had arguably his best season--10 titles, 2 Slams, 5 Masters titles, 3 Masters titles on Hardcourt, becomes only the 3rd male player to since 1990 to win Canada (beating Fed and Djoko back to back), Cincy (beating Fed again in a terrific match), and the US Open triple, etc. When judging these seasons, I think much more has to be taken into account than just analytics

 

[MichaelNadal]

Nadal for me. People forget that he shut the 2012 season down after Wimby, and had the major knee/lower leg injury, resulting in surgery. ALL the "experts" SWORE that he was gonna retire, and that THIS injury would be the one that ended his career. Those roars got even louder when he pulled out of the Aussie Open.

Not only did Nadal come back, he had arguably his best season--10 titles, 2 Slams, 5 Masters titles, 3 Masters titles on Hardcourt, becomes only the 3rd male player to since 1990 to win Canada (beating Fed and Djoko back to back), Cincy (beating Fed again in a terrific match), and the US Open triple, etc. When judging these seasons, I think much more has to be taken into account than just analytics

Plus it gave us the most epic tennis video of all time

This is seriously phenomenal.

 

[abmk]

05 Fed vs 08 Nadal would be a better comparision.
05 Fed is clearly better than 13 Nadal in so many ways - slams, consistency, average level, peak level. Nadal winning 1 masters more doesn't mean much.

Or if is just about winning slams+masters, is fed 17 clearly better than nadal 17? 2 slams each, but fed won 3 masters (IW, Miami, Shanghai) to 2 for nadal (Monte Carlo, Madrid).
Fed also has 4-0 vs Nadal in 17 , one more title, higher winning%.
This actually has far more arguments than 13 nadal vs 05 fed.

 

[abmk]

Nadal for me. People forget that he shut the 2012 season down after Wimby, and had the major knee/lower leg injury, resulting in surgery. ALL the "experts" SWORE that he was gonna retire, and that THIS injury would be the one that ended his career. Those roars got even louder when he pulled out of the Aussie Open.

Not only did Nadal come back, he had arguably his best season--10 titles, 2 Slams, 5 Masters titles, 3 Masters titles on Hardcourt, becomes only the 3rd male player to since 1990 to win Canada (beating Fed and Djoko back to back), Cincy (beating Fed again in a terrific match), and the US Open triple, etc. When judging these seasons, I think much more has to be taken into account than just analytics

Nadal 2010 > 2008 > 2013 year wise.
1st round loss to Darcis at Wim, no match at AO.

 

[MichaelNadal]

05 Fed vs 08 Nadal would be a better comparision.
05 Fed is clearly better than 13 Nadal in so many ways - slams, consistency, average level, peak level. Nadal winning 1 masters more doesn't mean much.

Or if is just about winning slams+masters, is fed 17 clearly better than nadal 17? 2 slams each, but fed won 3 masters (IW, Miami, Shanghai) to 2 for nadal (Monte Carlo, Madrid).
Fed also has 4-0 vs Nadal in 17 , one more title, higher winning%.
This actually has far more arguments than 13 nadal vs 05 fed.

 

[MissileBackHand99]

Nadal 2010 > 2008 > 2013 year wise.
1st round loss to Darcis at Wim, no match at AO.

And Fed lost to Stahovsky in the 2nd round at 2013 Wimby...as the defending champ. Miracle upsets happen in tennis every season

Nadal having any kind of success coming off that huge injury in 2012 (that again many SWORE was gonna end his career), would've been amazing. For him to have the incredible year he has, was unfathomable to consider happening at the beginning of the season. And that wasn't Nadal's first major injury either. He also was fantastic on hardcourts that year too (for all of those who swear he's a "clay court specialist")

 

[abmk]

And Fed lost to Stahovsky in the 2nd round at 2013 Wimby...as the defending champ. Miracle upsets happen in tennis every season

Nadal having any kind of success coming off that huge injury in 2012 (that again many SWORE was gonna end his career), would've been amazing. For him to have the incredible year he has, was unfathomable to consider happening at the beginning of the season. And that wasn't Nadal's first major injury either. He also was fantastic on hardcourts that year too (for all of those who swear he's a "clay court specialist")

no one is calling 13 as one of fed's best years. It was one of his worst, in fact.
No denying Nadal was very good on HC in 2013. Doesn't change what I said though.
I don't rate fed's 17 as better than fed's 09 just because he came off a big injury and operation (and he was MUCH older than nadal in mid-2012 end of 2012). fed's 09 was clearly better.

 

[mike danny]

Nadal for me. People forget that he shut the 2012 season down after Wimby, and had the major knee/lower leg injury, resulting in surgery. ALL the "experts" SWORE that he was gonna retire, and that THIS injury would be the one that ended his career. Those roars got even louder when he pulled out of the Aussie Open.

Not only did Nadal come back, he had arguably his best season--10 titles, 2 Slams, 5 Masters titles, 3 Masters titles on Hardcourt, becomes only the 3rd male player to since 1990 to win Canada (beating Fed and Djoko back to back), Cincy (beating Fed again in a terrific match), and the US Open triple, etc. When judging these seasons, I think much more has to be taken into account than just analytics

Nadal didn't beat Fed in Canada and beat Fed in his worst season in Cincy.

 

[MichaelNadal]

no one is calling 13 as one of fed's best years. It was one of his worst, in fact.
No denying Nadal was very good on HC in 2013. Doesn't change what I said though.
I don't rate fed's 17 as better than fed's 09 just because he came off a big injury and operation (and he was MUCH older than nadal in mid-2012 end of 2012). fed's 09 was clearly better.

It's amazing how literally everything Federer did is "clearly better" than Nadal to you, and somehow Nadal is on 21 slams

 

[The_Order]

Why is this salty Fed nut abmk keep repeating himself over and over and over and over....

Says 05 Fed was better level wise... consistency wise etc...

Nadal had 24 top 10 wins in 2013 compared to only 15 for Fed in 2005...

Oh and he did that while another guy had 24 wins v top 10 as well....

#2 Nadal had only 5 wins v top 10 in 2005...
#3 Roddick had only 2 wins v top 10 in 2005...
#4 Hewitt had only 4 wins v top 10 in 2005...
#5 Davydenko had only 5 wins v top 10 in 2005...

yeah competition was real tough back in 05....