McEnroeisanartist
Hall of Fame
Sorry, the second number was Bagel Sets in Grand Slam Semifinals and finals. Remarkable dominance by Federer.
Comparing Federer and Nadal's First 10 Grand Slam Championships
- Thread starter McEnroeisanartist
- Start date
Sorry, the second number was Bagel Sets in Grand Slam Semifinals and finals. Remarkable dominance by Federer.
sunnyIce
Semi-Pro
what do you mean accurate stats? i'm not sitting here recording data. i have to go by what ATP shows. so what do you want me to do if he didnt play GS?!?!? Obviously he thought and his team thought he was good enough to go pro at 15. Most players play challengers and futures the first 2-3 yrs of their pro careers anyways. its nadals problem he couldnt get into GS.
Sharpshooter
Banned
Fed's lucky Roddick had a matchup problem with him. Nice try but two can play that game, thanks for losing.
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
And Davydenko, and Hewitt, and Soderling and....
Was Federer a bad match-up for everyone on tour? Thanks for playing, you lose.
Bud
Bionic Poster
Comparing their first 10 years
Here's the proper way to conduct an analysis.
Grand Slam wins (based on the year when each player started participating in GS tournaments)
Nadal:
2003 - 0 (age 17) - first major was Wimbledon 2003
2004 - 0
2005 - 1
2006 - 1
2007 - 1
2008 - 2
2009 - 1
2010 - 3
2011 - 1
2012 -
Federer:
1999 - 0 (age 17) - first major was the FO 1999
2000 - 0
2001 - 0
2002 - 0
2003 - 1
2004 - 3
2005 - 2
2006 - 3
2007 - 3
2008 - 1
Based on this, you can't compare their first 10 years playing slams until the end of 2012 since 2011 is only Nadal's 9th year (season) since playing his first slam in 2003.
At 9 years (seasons) playing slams, Federer had a total of 12 slams
At 8.5 years (seasons) playing slams, Nadal has a total of 10 slams and is the defending champ at the two remaining slams in 2010.
However, Nadal started playing slams on tour nearly a year sooner than Federer.
Here's the proper way to conduct an analysis.
Grand Slam wins (based on the year when each player started participating in GS tournaments)
Nadal:
2003 - 0 (age 17) - first major was Wimbledon 2003
2004 - 0
2005 - 1
2006 - 1
2007 - 1
2008 - 2
2009 - 1
2010 - 3
2011 - 1
2012 -
Federer:
1999 - 0 (age 17) - first major was the FO 1999
2000 - 0
2001 - 0
2002 - 0
2003 - 1
2004 - 3
2005 - 2
2006 - 3
2007 - 3
2008 - 1
Based on this, you can't compare their first 10 years playing slams until the end of 2012 since 2011 is only Nadal's 9th year (season) since playing his first slam in 2003.
At 9 years (seasons) playing slams, Federer had a total of 12 slams
At 8.5 years (seasons) playing slams, Nadal has a total of 10 slams and is the defending champ at the two remaining slams in 2010.
However, Nadal started playing slams on tour nearly a year sooner than Federer.
Last edited:
IvanisevicServe
Banned
So none of the overzealous Nadal fans see the contradiction in basically saying Federer was a lucky "paper champion" who racked up all his slams against guys who weren't "real competition?"
But Nadal's greatness hinges on him having beaten that same paper champion, Roger Federer.
Unless Federer is the second greatest of all-time, Nadal beating Federer doesn't build an argument for him as the GOAT.
And what's more, Nadal was never as dominant against the field as Federer was in 04-07. So that "weak competition" Federer always beat still gave Nadal more problems than Federer.
And it's interesting Bud points out Federer's losing H2H against 21 other players. The vast majority of those guys are now retired and built their lead on Federer in 99-03. What's that tell you about the pattern of development for Federer, as opposed to the 18-19 year old Nadal who won the French Open, 4 Masters titles, and lost only 10 matches in 2005?
We need to stop talking about "age." Nadal matured as a tennis player at a much younger age than Federer.
But Nadal's greatness hinges on him having beaten that same paper champion, Roger Federer.
Unless Federer is the second greatest of all-time, Nadal beating Federer doesn't build an argument for him as the GOAT.
And what's more, Nadal was never as dominant against the field as Federer was in 04-07. So that "weak competition" Federer always beat still gave Nadal more problems than Federer.
And it's interesting Bud points out Federer's losing H2H against 21 other players. The vast majority of those guys are now retired and built their lead on Federer in 99-03. What's that tell you about the pattern of development for Federer, as opposed to the 18-19 year old Nadal who won the French Open, 4 Masters titles, and lost only 10 matches in 2005?
We need to stop talking about "age." Nadal matured as a tennis player at a much younger age than Federer.
N
nikdom
Guest
Not having any talent is not a match up problem.
There is a specific tactical issue with Fed-Nadal which is the Nad FH vs Fed BH.
It wasn't like Roddick was beating everyone in sight but ran into Fed who kept targeting something specific in Roddick's game.
The only place where Roddick was even a factor to Roger was at Wimby where the serve kept Roddick in play. Everywhere else, he didn't even get far enough to challenge Roger.
Roddick just got hammered like Blake, Ferrer, and a whole host of folks who couldn't hold a candle to Roger.
Bud
Bionic Poster
No, I simply started the clock at the year that each played their first major.
They both started playing majors at 17 years of age. Federer started in 1999 (at the French Open) and Nadal started in 2003 (at Wimbledon).
Do you have an issue with that?
Sharpshooter
Banned
No he can beat Hewitt and Davydenko and Sod, BUT if Roddick was a bad match up for him, perhaps he wouldn't have won as many Wimbledons, AO's and USO's so Fed was lucky that Roddick was a bad matchup for him because he basically went through Roddick in most of his slam wins. So it is again you who loses HAHAHAHA!
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
sunnyIce
Semi-Pro
dude, you are conveniently manipulating the info to suit your argument. you are using the age argument to show rafa is doing more earlier. when in fact you should look at the total matches played and time on tour.
i dont know why rafa did not play majors earlier. maybe his team decided to hold him back, may he wanted to wait, maybe he was not good enough to get to qualies. whatever it may be he still had full schedules and played ton of matches before he entered slams. how can you discount that by using age. what does that have to do with anything?
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Whooooooooo caresssssssss? It's like this board is one big circle of Nadal fans vs Federer fans throwing stones in glass houses. You're not going to make Bud a Federer fan and he isn't going to make you a Nadal fan.
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
Wtf are you smoking? He beat Hewitt, Davydenko and the others just as often as he did Roddick. And as far as I remember Roddick is dead even in the h2h against Hewitt. So you got nothing to support your arguement besides the fact that you just took it out of your a**.
You lose even more so cause you fail to realize that you did, sucka!
Mouhahaha!
Bud
Bionic Poster
Wow... are you telling me I conducted that analysis unfairly?
Rafa started playing GS tournaments in 2003 at the age of 17
Federer started playing GS tournaments in 1999 at the age of 17
Yet, for some unknown reason, you want to start Rafa's career in 2001 (age 14-15), when he hadn't even played a single match on tour. In 2002 (age 15-16), he only played 1 match on tour and zero GS tournaments.
Then, you have the nerve to insinuate I'm manipulating information to suit my purposes
Are you insane?
Last edited:
sonicare
Hall of Fame
Nobody is belittling Federer's achievements. We're merely pointing out that he's not the GOAT since he's not even the greatest in his era
Nadal owns Federer in and out of slams and always has. Federer has never had a positive H2H against Nadal on tour or in slams
Oh mighty one, then please aware all of us who the greatest player is of rogers era? Obviously it is not roger, so who is it?
All of us are waiting with bated breath to be enlightened by your knowledge.. you son of god.
sunnyIce
Semi-Pro
Wow... are you telling me I conducted that analysis unfairly?
Rafa started playing GS tournaments in 2003 at the age of 17
Federer started playing GS tournaments in 1999 at the age of 17
Yet, for some unknown reason, you want to start Rafa's career in 2001 (when Nadal was 15), when he hadn't even played a single match on tour. In 2002, he only played 1 match on tour and zero GS tournaments.
Then, you have the nerve to insinuate I'm manipulating information to suit my purposes
Are you insane?
where am i...? hahahaha....unbelievable. i'm outta here, no thanks.
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
I'm reading this for the 20th time and still can't see how this makes sense.
Besides, Federer played Hewitt 5 (FIVE) times in Slams in 2004-2005, more often than he did against Roddick. So is Hewitt also a bad match-up for Federer? Heck, Hewitt had a 7-2 lead in the h2h over Federer before 2004, so what happened? Suddenly became a bad match-up or what
? You're such a mental cripplehe's right...and his 5 wins is in his fave court, FO CLay court, which he's the best in History, and Fed's weakest surface, yet he met Nadal in 4 FO finals...
and the Grand slams ain't being played by only Nadal and Fed, it's about winning to other players, consecutive records of Fed proved it, 23 SFs, 10 consecutive Finals, appeared in all GS finals, it's just that fed can't really beat Nadal in FO.. though he beaten Fed in Wimby, and AO, he's somewhat past his prime, and if Prime VS Prime, i don't think Nadal can beat more than once Fed other than FO,..but if Nadal and Fed in FO, it's gonna be like Nadal will win 9/10..
Sharpshooter
Banned
Hey pea brain, Roddick has more talent in his little finger than you will ever have. Show some damn respect yourself you keep whining that Fed gets no respect, if Roddick wasn't in the Fed era he'd have at least 6 majors by now.
WTF, Fed always has the same tactic against Roddick, just block the serve back into play and use the slice to unsettle him.
No, he wasn't beating everyone in sight but he was good enough to make it to 3 Wimbledon finals and a Semi where he lost to Federer in each of those encounters. He was good enough to make it to 2 Australian Open semi's in which he lost to Federer and met him twice in the US open and lost to him twice there as well, one being a Final.
Wrong. I just proved it so I won't type it again.
LOL Roddick wasn't a factor in majors but Blake and Ferrer were now I've heard it all
Out of all the names you could have brought up you had to bring up the 2 most insignificant, you might wanna throw Davydenko in there as well yeah?
Bud
Bionic Poster
Yeah, thanks for playing
Next time, use the correct information and conduct a fair analysis
Last edited:
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
illuminati
Rookie
nadal is 4-1 vs federer on outdoor hardcourt.
thats incredible dominance.
thats incredible dominance.
you do know a lot ha...do know a lot of stupidity....hahaha
Bud
Bionic Poster
Federer's single win was in the 2005 Miami final, when he was down 2 sets to 18 year-old Nadal... and then came back to win in 5 sets
Nadal really choked that match away. Luckily, he was able to leave it in the past.
Last edited:
sonicare
Hall of Fame
Federer's single win was in the 2005 Miami final, when he was down 2 sets to a 17 year-old Nadal... and then came back to win in 5 sets
Nadal really choked that match away. Luckily, he was able to leave it in the past.
Answer this
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=5739582&postcount=67
Sharpshooter
Banned
I'm reading this for the 20th time and still can't see how this makes sense.
Besides, Federer played Hewitt 5 (FIVE) times in Slams in 2004-2005, more often than he did against Roddick. So is Hewitt also a bad match-up for Federer? Heck, Hewitt had a 7-2 lead in the h2h over Federer before 2004, so what happened? Suddenly became a bad match-up or what
Dud your using Hewitt to explain how great Fed is? Stop embarrassing yourself, Hewitt is a pusher. Anyway, Roddick has encountered Fed more times throughout their careers, don't just count 2 years. Both Roddick and Hewitt have met Fed in majors 8 times. BTW Hewitt's 7-2 h2h lead was before they even played at a major LOL it doesn't even matter.
And LOL at how what I wrote doesn't make sense, that's all you've got, pathetic.
It makes perfect sense you just don't want it to. You ****s keep flapping your gums about how Nadal is "just a bad matchup" for Fed and that's the reason he owns him. Well if that is the case then Fed is "just a bad matchup" for Roddick.
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
Federer's single win was in Miami when he was down 2 sets to a 17 year-old Nadal... and then came back to win in 5 sets
Nadal really choked that match away. Luckily, he was able to leave it in the past.
First of all you 2, this is the wrong thread to post h2h on hard courts.
Second of all, for such a stat freak get your stats right. Nadal in Miami 2005 was NOT 17, he was 2 months short of his 19th birthday. I can't believe such a smelly little kiddo like you is 43 years old, the amount of ****ism you post here and the way you're always manipulating stats is just hilarious.
I remember once reading a thread about you proving that Nadal is better volleyer than Federer based on some skewed stats
I was like please more of this goof! Sharpshooter
Banned
Man come on they were always insignificant when it came to majors. Roddick is in another league.
why has nadal never beaten Federer after the first week of july? Can someone answer this? That's 1 slam, 4 masters and 1 yr end championship every year.
Actually, Nadal has beaten Federer only ONCE in the last 6 months of the tennis tour from 2004 till now -- that's roughly 50% of the touring season!!!
Actually, Nadal has beaten Federer only ONCE in the last 6 months of the tennis tour from 2004 till now -- that's roughly 50% of the touring season!!!
yes, but do you claim to have more talent than the pinkies of Ferrer or Blake?
Sharpshooter
Banned
Do not twist words, I said they were insignificant at the majors and they were, I did not say they had no talent like he did about Roddick. Learn to read.
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
There are 3 kinds of people.
1) - cool bros
2) - idiots who realize they are idiots
3) - idiots who don't realize they are idiots
This is why - you said that Federer was a bad match-up for Roddick, I responded that Davydenko, Soderling, Hewitt (and tons of more) have also a paethetic record against Fed especially in 2004-2007, I proved it by providing some data. Now you come up with "Hewitt is a pusher" hahaha I mean how dumber can you get
?So if pushers don't count => Nadal doesn't count => game over you lose haha
Lol you smelly little fart
let me explain this to you since your brain is too small to put simple pieces of information into piecesYou can be a bad match-up against ONE player, TWO at most. If you're starting to be a bad match-up against 4, 5, 6, etc. you can consider yourself as sucky since tons of players can beat you.
Federer has ONE Nadal who is a bad match-up for him, he's dealing with the rest of the tour just fine.
Nadal has ONE Davydenko who is also a bad match-up for him, he's dealing with the rest of the tour perfectly fine.
Now Hewitt, Davydenko, Roddick, Gonzalez, Blake all having a 0-something record against Federer means that they are 2 leagues behind Federer.
Last edited:
Sharpshooter
Banned
How many times have they played after July. Let me guess the 3 WTF meetings?
N
NadalAgassi
Guest
Well last year it is because Federer blew 2 match points vs Djokovic in the U.S Open semis and thus did get to the U.S Open final to lose to Nadal. Just like how he lost to Berdych at Wimbledon and thus did get to lose the Wimbledon final to Nadal. A strategy to preserve the head to head from getting even worse perhaps? :shock:
Sharpshooter
Banned
There are 3 kinds of people.
1) - cool bros
2) - idiots who realize they are idiots
3) - idiots who don't realize they are idiots
This is why - you said that Federer was a bad match-up for Roddick, I responded that Davydenko, Soderling, Hewitt (and tons of more) have also a paethetic record against Fed especially in 2004-2007, I proved it by providing some data. Now you come up with "Hewitt is a pusher" hahaha I mean how dumber can you get
So if pushers don't count => Nadal doesn't count => game over you lose haha
Nadal is no pusher pal. His game is miles above the level Hewitt ever reached.
And yes you certainly fall into category number 3.
Roddick played Fed in more finals than those guys combined you half wit. Maybe your data failed to show you that.
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
It's a 2-time Slam champion, a former world no 1 you're talking about. You can't take him out of the equation just like that.
As for Roddick, it's not like you take out Federer and he collects those Slams on hard courts and grass court since there would be at least 3-4 guys who'd have as good of a chance as Roddick like Davydenko, Hewitt, Nadal, Djokovic, Gonzalez. Many times it was the luck of the draw.
2004 Wimbledon - Federer beat Hewitt in the QF and Roddick in the FINAL
2005 Wimbledon - Federer beat Hewitt in the SF and Roddick in the FINAL
What's the difference if you put Roddick in the QF/SF and Hewitt in the final? None. There's your answer. Hewitt was there to challenge Federer, even more so than Roddick.
Last edited:
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
Nobody is belittling Federer's achievements. We're merely pointing out that he's not the GOAT since he's not even the greatest in his era
Nadal owns Federer in and out of slams and always has. Federer has never had a positive H2H against Nadal on tour or in slams
That's a great point. Mentioning a great stat of Nadal's does not belittle Federer, or vice versa.
It's similar to the many times I've seen 16>9 in this board. That's not belittling Rafa. That's one of Roger's great achievements.
Of course some people don't think Roger is the GOAT. I don't even believe in that GOAT stuff. I don't think anyone deserves that title, because there are too many factors that would have to be factored in.
and that's Federer's fault?
Federer has won 5 slams, 7 masters and 5 WTF after the 1st week of july, and nadal hasn't beaten him even ONCE?
if you factor in the last 6 months, then make it 10 slams, 7 masters etc, since 2004, and you're telling me that Nadal has beaten him only ONCE in the last 6 months of the season?
what;s nadal's record in the last 6 months of each year since 2004?
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
LOL and how many times did Nadal fail to play Federer in the second half of the year because someone else took care of him?
Last edited:
what about before that? Nadal was a 7-time slam champion + 18-time master's title holder.... and you're telling he hasn't beaten Federer even ONCE after the month of july, EVER in his career?
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
Some Nadal fans and their logic is just beyond imagination. I wouldn't think of such retarted comments if I tried.
Sharpshooter
Banned
Lol you smelly little fart
BWHAHAHAHA LOL I'm getting to you aren't I?
Which is further proof of Fed's weak era.
The h2h between Rafa and Davydenko is 4-6, hardly the signs of a bad match up. In fact if that makes Davydenko a bad matchup for Rafa then Murray is another "bad matchup" for Fed.
sonicare
Hall of Fame
He won 2003 wimby by serving and volleying. Something rafa cant even do in practice, never mind at wimbledon..LMAO.
Sharpshooter
Banned
Sure, I can't take it anymore
Lol at that logic again, once I think you can't think of anything dumber, you never fail to do better each time
Let me put it this way - are Roddick, Federer, Hewitt, Safin all bad match-ups for Sampras because of the h2h? Murray is 6 years younger than Federer, if he's the part of this "new tough generation" he should win more than lose, right
I believe a couple years from now when Nadal will lose more matches than win against the new hungry generation we can easily say that it's all bad match-ups LOL
Again you guys try and put words into my "posts". Never said they were a bad matchup for Sampras, just going by your 6-4 h2h logic which is only 2 more wins being a bad matchup then Murray must be a bad matchup for Fed going by that logic.
As for your "new tough generation" comment about how Murray "should" be beating Fed, that's really not the case, Fed is far more experienced than Murray and should actually have a leading h2h against him.
Surely you could've found somebody with a dominating h2h against Nadal to backup your bad matchup story ...oh wait
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
1) Davydenko, Gonzalez - I'm not saying they would do better than Roddick IN EVERY CASE. But look at 2007 AO - Roddick takes I believe 6 games from Federer, Gonzalez really pushes him hard though. So take out Fed and that Slam belongs to Gonzalez.
2) You can take whichever Slam you like, Federer doesn't give a f if he has to beat Hewitt, Roddick in the SF, F or Roddick, Hewitt in the SF, F. The fact that he faced Roddick in the final more has to do with the draw mostly.
Further proof = Roddick played Federer 10 times in 04-07 (5 times in Slams) but Hewitt played him 11 (6 times in Slams). H2h between Roddick and Hewitt at the end of 2007 was 6-3 Hewitt (2-1 in Slams for Hewitt), even at 2009 Wimbledon a cripple Hewitt took an in-form Roddick to 5 sets. It's always been Hewitt>Roddick
Last edited:
Similar threads
