Better Season: Federer 2005 or Nadal 2008?

Fed 2005 or Rafa 2008?

  • Fed 2005

    Votes: 26 63.4%

  • Nadal 2008

    Votes: 15 36.6%
  • Total voters
    41
Lew II said:
Yeah I know, we're always back to the same stuff that Federer played until 40 but was never peak after turning 26, when Djokovic and Nadal became the major threats in place of Roddick and Hewitt.
Click to expand...
Of course, this simplification and its scornful undertones have been addressed by a myriad of posters in thorough and eloquent fashion over what feels like an eternity now, but you just act like nothing has been said then rinse and repeat, trying to win with postulative endurance. Even this will just be another wasted paragraph. I feel like I've read the equivalent of 'Hewitt, Roddick, LOL' about 4,000 times now and you still insist on chucking it about as some sort of insanity test. It's almost as if your repetition is some weird form of gas-lighting. Of course, your reasoning will be because you believe the underlying sentiment to be true. The reasoning for that, however, is never really up for discussion, it's just there for your endless dictations.
 
King No1e said:
Peak Elo Ratings of the Top 5, Year-End 2005 and 2008
2005:
Federer - 2550
Nadal - 2552
Roddick - 2274
Hewitt - 2295
Davydenko - 2290
Total: 11961

2008:
Nadal - 2552
Federer - 2550
Djokovic - 2629
Murray - 2500
Davydenko - 2290
Total: 12521

2008 had tougher competition, so more losses are understandable. It's easy to do what Fedr did when your competition is Baby Nadal, Roddick, and Hewitt.

Mury GOAT
Click to expand...
2008 was a better year regardless of ELO or no ELO.
 
JaoSousa said:
This is generally the problem with Nadal's best seasons; In his three best ones, he had many perplexing losses. It really shows that his peak level on all three surfaces is incredible, but he struggles to be consistent on grass and HC. Clay is a lock almost every season.
Click to expand...
How much of a problem is it, though, when he's ahead of Roger in M1000s, only one behind in slams, and has a slightly greater overall win percentage. Yes, he lags behind in weeks at #1, but how important is that when he matches YE#1s - even with his relatively weak stats in the indoor circuit?
 
2005. Nadal didn't get going proper until the clay season. Federer was more dominant overall. If it was mid 08-mid 09 I might back Nadal though.
 
Lew II said:
How many slams 2005 Federer wins in 2008?

2008 AO - faces Djokovic in one of his best forms, plus Tsonga
2008 RG - faces Nadal in one of his best forms
2008 WI - faces Nadal in one of his best forms
2008 UO - faces Djokovic and Murray

I think he'd win just UO as it's what he actually did.
Click to expand...
How many slams does 2019 Djokovic win in 2008?
 
For consistent, (ridiculously) high level, it's Roger. Even of his four losses, outside of RG (to Rafa), the other three were razor-tight losses to opponents playing their A games.

For prestige, I'd go with Rafa. He has the same success in slams, with two final wins over Rog - one an annihilation, and the other, a victory in what many call(ed)the greatest match ever.

Plus, I think most would consider OSG more prestigious than a win at the ATP Finals.
 
2005 > 2008

OG and the H2H are the only things 2008 have over 2005.

2013 might be a better comparison.
 
2005 Fed, it's not really close in terms of overall dominance. The old man is just plain underrated these days because of his late career blunders and massive recency bias.

Nadal will easily end up with most slams but at no point did he dominate the field across all surfaces the way Fed and Novak did.
 
AnOctorokForDinner said:
Obviously Fred, but Doll is fairly close and that's impressive.
Click to expand...

He is? Based on what, his winning streak? Wimbledon title he barely won 9-7 in the 5th against a mentally scarred Fed?

In terms of peak level of play, it's close. Nadal was indeed amazing for one period in 2008 but in terms of the overall season? Not really a contest.
 
RS said:
How many slams does 2019 Djokovic win in 2008?
Click to expand...
He won AO/WI beating Big3 so he could do the same in 2008.

Multiple slams won by beating Big3:

2007 Federer / 2011 Djokovic - 3
2008 Nadal / 2013 Nadal / 2015 Djokovic / 2019 Djokovic 2

(2005 Federer 0)
 
Lew II said:
He won AO/WI beating Big3 so he could do the same in 2008.

Multiple slams won by beating Big3 in a year:

2007 Federer / 2011 Djokovic - 3
2008 Nadal / 2013 Nadal / 2015 Djokovic / 2019 Djokovic 2
Click to expand...
It was a question so you saying 2?
 
It's really close, IMO.

Nadal had the better competition, but Fed hsd to beat a top 5 player in every GS semi in 2005, which is why he couldn't win more than 2 slams. Nadal also lost to too many players that were not Big 3, so it isn't the fault of the competition that he lost more.

Nadal was supreme on clay, while Fed was much better on HC. On grass, they were about equal.

Overall, it took a higher level to beat Fed than it took to bwat Nadal, despite the impressive 32 match winning streak Nadal had in the middle of the year.

As a season though, 2008 > 2005 at the top, but 2005 had more exciting matches overall than 2008.
 
mike danny said:
It's really close, IMO.

Nadal had the better competition, but Fed hsd to beat a top 5 player in every GS semi in 2005, which is why he couldn't win more than 2 slams. Nadal also lost to too many players that were not Big 3, so it isn't the fault of the competition that he lost more.

Nadal was supreme on clay, while Fed was much better on HC. On grass, they were about equal.

Overall, it took a higher level to beat Fed than it took to bwat Nadal, despite the impressive 32 match winning streak Nadal had in the middle of the year.

As a season though, 2008 > 2005 at the top, but 2005 had more exciting matches overall than 2008.
Click to expand...

They were not about equal on grass lol.
 
People forget that Nadal of Wimby 08 could have beaten Fed in straight sets if not for the rain delay break ..... Fed said his temprement changed after that. Not to say Nadal has a higher peak on grass which he doesnt but still....
 
RS said:
People forget that Nadal of Wimby 08 could have beaten Fed in straight sets if not for the rain delay break ..... Fed said his temprement changed after that. Not to say Nadal has a higher peak on grass which he doesnt but still....
Click to expand...

...and Fed would have taken the second set if he wasn't a mental wreck, again Nadal was impressive but 2005 was Federer's actual grass peak they're not equal.
 
zagor said:
He is? Based on what, his winning streak? Wimbledon title he barely won 9-7 in the 5th against a mentally scarred Fed?

In terms of peak level of play, it's close. Nadal was indeed amazing for one period in 2008 but in terms of the overall season? Not really a contest.
Click to expand...

Well 2/3 of his season is. Pre-clay drags him down of course. 2008 MC - 2009 Miami would be properly close for a yearlong period.
 
NatF said:
Yeah Wimbledon is the one slam where Fed has not only a massive advantage over the field and in titles won but also clearly leads the h2h.
Click to expand...
Fed overall is 4-1 in slams against Nadal on grass and fast HC. A shame they have player way more often on clay and slow HC.
 
NatF said:
...and Fed would have taken the second set if he wasn't a mental wreck, again Nadal was impressive but 2005 was Federer's actual grass peak they're not equal.
Click to expand...
Federer 2nd serve return weakness (which costed him in the first 2 sets) had nothing to do with being a mental reck though. It was starting to gradually show anyway. He had the same issue at Hamburg and MC before Nadal beat him up at RG.
 
RS said:
Federer 2nd serve return weakness (which costed him in the first 2 sets) have nothing to do with being a mental reck though. It was starting to gradually show anyway. He had the same issue at Hamburg and MC before Nadal beat him up at RG.
Click to expand...

Federer had a clearly stronger return game in 2005 versus 2008.
 
NatF said:
Federer's had a clearly stronger return game in 2005 versus 2008.
Click to expand...
I have said Federer was better on grass in 05 than 08. Just talking about my orginial comment about 2008 Fed and 2008 Nadal and the mental part.
 
RS said:
I have said Federer was better on grass in 05 than 08. Just talking about my orginial comment about 2008 Fed and 2008 Nadal and the mental part.
Click to expand...

Don't think anyone said that Fed of 2005 is better than Nadal of 2008 because he needed five sets to beat a lesser Fed though. That certainly comes into it though.
 
NatF said:
Don't think anyone said that Fed of 2005 is better than Nadal of 2008 because he needed five sets to beat a lesser Fed though. That certainly comes into it though.
Click to expand...
Nobody said that here but elsewhere it has been. Federer is better on grass anyway so dont care about saying Nadal is a lock to win.
 
Last edited:
King No1e said:
I'd put OG a little above WTF, but not quite at Slam tier. Either way, it's the biggest non-Slam event.
Click to expand...
I think this can sometimes be an age thing. I remember tennis coming into the Olympics - and being very WTF about it and looking at early winners I'd say the players felt pretty much the same! So even now I find it hard to get worked up about it even though players now take it very seriously indeed. My guess is most would take an OGM over WTF which is surely the only relevant criterion.
 
RS said:
Nobody said that here but elsewhere it has been. Federer is better on grass anyway so dont care about saying Nadal is a lock to win.
Click to expand...

I mean...you chimed in to say that 2008 Nadal was being underrated when I and others were saying his form was no where equal to 2005 Fed.
 
NatF said:
I mean...you chimed in to say that 2008 Nadal was being underrated when I and others were saying his form was no where equal to 2005 Fed.
Click to expand...
No were near near equal is a wide exg that is why. I would think Fed would be a favourite but not to the point that it is not a close match.
 
I don't even think Nadal's 2010 is better than Fed's 05, not gonna put it over that amazing season because he lost one nail biter against Safin. Statistically it's an amazing season that only Djoker's 2011, 2015 and Mac's 84 are better than....besides Fed's own 04' and '06
 
RS said:
No were near near equal is a wide exg that is why. I would think Fed would be a favourite but not to the point that it is not a close match.
Click to expand...

Close match but winner never in doubt (y) Didn't say they no where near equal either I don't think.
 
2005. Fed barely lost matches. Even in three out of the four matches he did lose, two of them he had MPs and the third he was serving for the win.
 
Have to say also that Federer really wasn't destroyed at any time during 2005, even the four set semi final at RG, he had a chance to push to five.

Nadal was hammered by Youzhny and then Tsonga to start his 2008 season and then didn't even play the WTF. The middle part of the season for him was incredible, but the bookends were not.
 
Lew II said:
Yeah I know, we're always back to the same stuff that Federer played until 40 but was never peak after turning 26, when Djokovic and Nadal became the major threats in place of Roddick and Hewitt.
Click to expand...
He can still peak nowadays. He just does it less often, as you’d expect with age.

And Djokovic and Nadal were already major threats in 2007 (specifically Nadal). It’s just that Fed was too clutch at Wimbledon and the USO. So your post doesn’t make much sense. The idea that the era somehow leaped in several orders of magnitude from 2007 to 2008 is based mostly on Federer winning less tournaments in the latter. 2008 was still tougher, but not by that margin.

It’s very easy to fall back on the “Roddick, Hewitt, Baghdatis roflmao” argument but that wasn’t even a factor in the transition from 2007-2008.
 
Third Serve said:
He can still peak nowadays. He just does it less often, as you’d expect with age.

And Djokovic and Nadal were already major threats in 2007 (specifically Nadal). It’s just that Fed was too clutch at Wimbledon and the USO. So your post doesn’t make much sense. The idea that the era somehow leaped in several orders of magnitude from 2007 to 2008 is based mostly on Federer winning less tournaments in the latter. 2008 was still tougher, but not by that margin.

It’s very easy to fall back on the “Roddick, Hewitt, Baghdatis roflmao” argument but that wasn’t even a factor in the transition from 2007-2008.
Click to expand...

A massive chunk of the extra losses in 2008 were to players Federer dominated in 2004-2007 anyway.
 
NatF said:
Meh, that was after our back and forth.
Click to expand...
giphy.gif
 
dellealpi10 said:
In 2008, Nadal won at the best match of all time (Wimbledon Final). So, Federer 2005 cannot better than Nadal 2008.
Click to expand...
Using your logic, Rafa could have gone 7-0 in 2008, playing only Wimbledon, but have the superior year to a guy who went 81-4.

Truly inspired analysis!
 
I would honestly no joke take 2008 Nadal because both won 2 slams, and he beat Fed in Wimby, whereas in 2005 Fed lost to Rafa at RG.

I realize people are mocking H2H with extreme black and white hypotheticals to try to invalidate it as a metric, and it sure aint everything, but it isnt nothing either.

Id take the 2 slam year where I beat my main rival in the greatest match ever, over a 2 slam year where I lost to my main rival in our slam meeting .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

USO
1-4, 1-4, 1-4
Replies
12
Views
738
Third Serve
Third Serve
duaneeo
Players Born In The 90s In Slam Finals
Replies
12
Views
986
MeatTornado
MeatTornado
AnOctorokForDinner
  • Poll Poll
Who had the better Slam seasons by level: Federer in 2018-19 or Djokovic in 2024-25?
Replies
45
Views
1K
BauerAlmeida
BauerAlmeida
N
Top-ten wins for Djokovic in Slams from 2011-2015
Replies
19
Views
1K
Nathaniel_Near
N
JaoSousa
  • Poll Poll
Let us settle this once and for all: What is Nadal's best season?
2
Replies
87
Views
5K
mehdimike
mehdimike
Back
Top