Better season: 2005 Federer or 2013 Nadal?

[MichaelNadal]

Just for my bestie Abmk

 

[The_Order]

My gosh! That's clearly better than anything Nadal ever did in 2013...

Well, maybe except blasting Djokovic with the ball at the net...

 

[Djokovic2011]

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...

You don't value consistency at all?

 

[NatF]

Just for my bestie Abmk

Dat volley

 

[The_Order]

You don't value consistency at all?

You don't think Nadal was consistent in 2013?

He had 24 top 10 wins... so did Novak...

Fed only 15 in 2005...

I just don't agree that ADuck was degrading the slams, all he's doing is trying to make a point that the player that won the most important titles had a better year. So it's total nonsense.

If Fed had won 3 slams in 2005 and ADuck was trying to argue that Nadal's extra Masters title makes up for it, then that would be degrading the slams...

 

[Djokovic2011]

You don't think Nadal was consistent in 2013?

He had 24 top 10 wins... so did Novak...

Fed only 15 in 2005...

I just don't agree that ADuck was degrading the slams, all he's doing is trying to make a point that the player that won the most important titles had a better year. So it's total nonsense.

If Fed had won 3 slams in 2005 and ADuck was trying to argue that Nadal's extra Masters title makes up for it, then that would be degrading the slams...

Of course Nadal was consistent but if slams are all that matter, as many Nadal fans have been stating in recent weeks, then surely 10 match wins > 0 match wins.

 

[Deleted member 779124]

If Nadal had a good run at AO or W then he would have a better case here.

 

[The_Order]

Of course Nadal was consistent but if slams are all that matter, as many Nadal fans have been stating in recent weeks, then surely 10 match wins > 0 match wins.

Slams are not all that matter... they are the most important metric. But there's something you're missing... you have to actually win them to count them.

I'd factor those 10 extra slam wins if Fed had managed to collect a 5th Masters trophy to even it up with Nadal's 2013.

But since Nadal win 2 slams + 5 Masters... then 2 slams + 4 Masters shouldn't be considered as "Pffft Fed CleaRLY FAAAARrrrrr BetteReR" especially when Nadal was competing with another player who was smoking the top 10 as bad as he was racking up 24 wins each... there's no other year where the top two are producing that level of tennis.

 

[mike danny]

Of course Nadal was consistent but if slams are all that matter, as many Nadal fans have been stating in recent weeks, then surely 10 match wins > 0 match wins.

Yeah, not winning a match at 2 of the 4 slams hurts Nadal here. An extra masters title isn't enough to make up for that.