Did Nadal Hurt Federer More Than Federer Hurt Nadal?

[jga111]

Over the course of their careers, Nadal probably thought he would surpass Roger on pretty much all counts, not just slams.

And now?

I think Nadal is hurt, Uncle Toni is hurt, their whole family is hurt. They have failed. And against someone who should be done and dusted. The hurt in that family will be too much...

I think the answer to your question is emphatic.

 

[zagor]

I would say the slam count is not the most important tool, because Federer at the start and end of his career had very little competition, whilst Nadal competed in an era with Prime Federer and Prime Djokovic.

And prime Kevin Anderson.

 

[chut]

Let's play the VB style:

Nadal beat Federer 23 times and went on to win the trophy 17 times.
Federer beat Nadal 15 times and went on to win the trophy 15 times.

100%>74%, hence Federer hurt Nadal more than the opposite.

Now serious, obviously, Nadal hurt Federer more, it's not even in question.

 

[Shaolin]

Nadal hurt Fed more.

Fed would have hurt Nadal more but Nadal lost to randoms and journeymen so many times that Fed didn't get an equal chance.

 

[Steve0904]

In an absolute sense as far as GS total goes, sure, but if you were resigned to Federer never beating Nadal on clay after say 2006 or 2007 (like I was) it wasn't so bad. AO 2009 and AO 2017 balance each other out, and Federer leads 2-1 at Wimbledon. The only other slam that Nadal possibly stopped Federer from winning was AO 2014. I'm certain he would've lost to Djokovic in 2012 anyway. Federer also stopped Nadal from having bunches of weeks at #1/YE #1's so it's not like he hasn't hurt Nadal.

And it only shows in the H2H because Federer was good enough to make those French finals in the first place. If he had lost to someone else this thread wouldn't make sense at all.

 

[Tennisanity]

Nadal hurt Fed more because Fed was able to reach Nadal on his best surfaces more than vice versa.