Even if Federer reverses the Nadal H2H, there is still the Slam H2H

[AceSalvo]

2005-2008 and 2014-2016,they only met 6 times on HC,what's your insight ? GOAT Nadal ?

Updated for you.

Avg < 1 per Year out of 9 big HC events per year .

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

If you control for clay skew and matches on other surfaces where Federer lost, Federer is actually ahead in this stat as well.

Q.E.D.

I think we should correct for the injury skew instead.

 

[jm1980]

Fed reversing the H2H?

That isn't going to happen

 

[xFullCourtTenniSx]

How can Federer improve the head to head if Nadal never gets deep enough into tournaments to lose to Federer? Where was Nadal on hard courts in 2004-2008?

Sure, but beating Fed in 2013 was still really impressive, right?

Also good to note that 5 of the loses came in 2013 alone (18-14 looks a lot less lopsided than 23-14), yet in 2014, 2015, and the small bits of 2016 they played, Nadal couldn't make it remotely deep enough into tournaments to even entertain the idea of meeting Federer. That's how it's always been. Nadal will only make it deep enough in tournaments to meet Federer when it's on his terms (ie, he's playing well and it's on clay).

In 2010-2014, the head to head is 10-3. Take that time period out and you have 13-11, a very competitive head to head. Prior to 2010, the head to head was 13-7, a scary 65%. But of those 20 matches, 3 were on grass, 6 on hard, and 11 on clay (2-1, 3-3, 2-9). It's been 10 on hard courts and 4 on clay since then, and Federer has managed 7 wins for a 50% winrate (7-3 on hard courts and 0-4 on clay). If Federer wins another match or two on grass, he's definitively better on Nadal outside of clay, which is good enough to say he's the better player (Nadal is, after all, the king of clay, a title that will never be taken away from him without winning a decade's worth of French Opens). At the moment, he's just better than Nadal outside of clay (12-10 Federer).

I mean, if Nadal suddenly gets good enough on hard courts to keep meeting Federer and Federer never plays on clay courts again, he can easily turn the head to head around. The problem is, like I said earlier, Nadal can't go deep enough into tournaments outside of clay often enough to let Federer improve the head to head. If he could, the matchup could end up really lopsided in favor of Federer.

 

[xFullCourtTenniSx]

Updated for you.

Avg < 1 per Year.

Actually, they met twice on hard courts in 2014-2016 - 2014 Australian Open and 2015 Basel.

 

[AceSalvo]

Actually, they met twice on hard courts in 2014-2016 - 2014 Australian Open and 2015 Basel.

True.

2014 FO to 2016 Wimb

Thats the 2 year time frame I was talking about. I was not specific enough.

In your scenario it bring us to an avg of 1 per year.

To summarize, in Fed's best years they met only 7 times on HC?

 

[xFullCourtTenniSx]

True.

2014 FO to 2016 Wimb

Thats the 2 year time frame I was talking about. I was not specific enough.

In your scenario it bring us to an avg of 1 per year.

To summarize, in Fed's best years they met only 7 times on HC?

Even if it's not just his best years, Nadal couldn't make it deep enough to meet Federer in tournaments (at least in the majors).

 

[killerboi2]

He was visibly sweating and fatigued at the AO. Very clearly not 100% at all, struggling in 5 setter vs mug like Tipseravic.

He was also bombing out early at M1000 events to guys like Karlovic, Fish, Roddick. Guys he'd owned for years.

If you need any more confirmation, just use the visual test. Compare his very high level at 07 YEC to his comparatively low level at 08 AO, or 06-07 clay level compared to 08 RG.

Or compare his Wimbledon performance to his 03-06 level. Very sharp decline but still good enough to reach the slam finals. His only top level tennis that year was USO 08. He destroyed Djokovic and Murray in the SF/F, the latter who had owned peak nadal.

If he's constantly getting to slam finals and even winning a slam then he's just not in decline to the point where wins against him don't count. I'm not disputing that he had better years, but he was obviously far from done. As for Wimbledon, he beat everyone in straight sets. I don't know how you can really ask for more than that.

 

[xFullCourtTenniSx]

Nah I never really brought that. He made multiple slam finals, won a slam and lost only to Djokovic and Nadal in slams. Also made multiple m1000s finals and semis. He smashed his way through the field at Wimbledon, destroying some of the trash that he used to dominate in 2004-2007 yet again. If he did decline then it wasn't enough to say wins against him don't count. I bet if he had beat Nadal at Wimbledon, we wouldn't have heard nothing about his Mono.

So, just because a guy at 70% can dominate anyone without the potential to be an all time great, he must clearly be playing his best. Am I understanding your logic correctly? And if he beat Nadal at Wimbledon, people would've said "Wow, Federer beat Nadal even after dealing with mono!", because people knew he had mono at least 4 months prior to the finals. The New York Times had an article about it in March 9, 2008.

 

[KINGROGER]

If he's constantly getting to slam finals and even winning a slam then he's just not in decline to the point where wins against him don't count. I'm not disputing that he had better years, but he was obviously far from done. As for Wimbledon, he beat everyone in straight sets. I don't know how you can really ask for more than that.

I mean specifically regarding his matches vs Nadal. He was nowhere near his clay level of 06-07 where he was more competitive. Look at the RG final drubbing. He won a set in all the other encounters.

As for Wimbledon by that point he definitely had no confidence vs Nadal. The difference between how he started that final, and 06 is night and say.

Also if these recent wins don't count, then I'm removing any of Nadal's wins over Fed since 2011.

 

[killerboi2]

So, just because a guy at 70% can dominate anyone without the potential to be an all time great, he must clearly be playing his best. Am I understanding your logic correctly? And if he beat Nadal at Wimbledon, people would've said "Wow, Federer beat Nadal even after dealing with mono!", because people knew he had mono at least 4 months prior to the finals. The New York Times had an article about it in March 9, 2008.

I'm not saying he's playing his best. Nadal obviously isn't in the same situation now as Fed is in 2008 though like some people are saying. Nadal is done for good. Has been since 2015. He's never winning any slams again. Maybe you can say that wins around 2013 against Fed don't mean much yeah but 2008.

 

[KINGROGER]

I'm not saying he's playing his best. Nadal obviously isn't in the same situation now as Fed is in 2008 though like some people are saying. Nadal is done for good. Has been since 2015. He's never winning any slams again. Maybe you can say that wins around 2013 against Fed don't mean much yeah but 2008.

OK so we wipe off 2015 - for Fed leaving him on 10 wins
Then we wipe off Nadal's 2010 - results for a similar period. Leaving him on 13 wins.

13-10 H2H? Great. We reduced the H2H even further going by your own logic.

 

[NGM]

A lot of Nadal's fans are stupid beyond imagination and living in denial, just like OP.

 

[killerboi2]

OK so we wipe off 2015 - for Fed leaving him on 10 wins
Then we wipe off Nadal's 2010 - results for a similar period. Leaving him on 13 wins.

13-10 H2H? Great. We reduced the H2H even further going by your own logic.

2010? Lmao, Fed still has multiple slams, WTF, m1000s and time at no1 in him. Anyway let's go along with that for arguments sake only now let's do it with their slam head to head If we're wiping off the period from 2010 then I only think it's fair that we wipe off Fed's 2006 and 2007 where Nadal was barely out of his teenage years and Fed was in his prime. So that's 6-0 to Nadal, 6-1 if you wanna include Fed's AO 2017 win.

 

[xFullCourtTenniSx]

I'm not saying he's playing his best. Nadal obviously isn't in the same situation now as Fed is in 2008 though like some people are saying. Nadal is done for good. Has been since 2015. He's never winning any slams again. Maybe you can say that wins around 2013 against Fed don't mean much yeah but 2008.

Nadal's the second best performing player this year, and we haven't even touched the clay court season. You really think the king of clay won't bop everyone when they step into the sandbox when he's the 2nd best performing player this year? Nadal's only lost 2 matches at the French, one to Djokovic (who was dominating the tour, but might continue his descent) and one to Soderling (when he was injured). If Djokovic keeps dropping out early, there is nothing to stop Nadal from bagging his 10th French Open title. People thought Federer wasn't going to win anything during 2008 until he played the Portugal Open in Estoril. And you can't say he's never winning slams again when the field is this open. He nearly won the Australian Open.

 

[killerboi2]

Nadal's the second best performing player this year, and we haven't even touched the clay court season. You really think the king of clay won't bop everyone when they step into the sandbox when he's the 2nd best performing player this year? Nadal's only lost 2 matches at the French, one to Djokovic (who was dominating the tour, but might continue his descent) and one to Soderling (when he was injured). If Djokovic keeps dropping out early, there is nothing to stop Nadal from bagging his 10th French Open title. People thought Federer wasn't going to win anything during 2008 until he played the Portugal Open in Estoril. And you can't say he's never winning slams again when the field is this open. He nearly won the Australian Open.

He's not going do anything on clay or the FO. No longer has the stamina or movement. Gotta remember that Murray and Djokovic are coming back as well. They're not going to be in this muggy form forever. Ideally the mugs would be stepping up too but I can't guarantee that. I can see Fed beating him at FO as well. Murray has already beaten him a couple of times on clay since 2015 in the meaningless stuff and they way Nadal has drastically declined, I wouldn't be surpriesed if Murray takes him out at FO. Djokovic definitely can. Hell even Fed can. No chance of winning it this year.

 

[Rago]

I can see Nadal being a factor on clay but he's not made many improvements to his game except not facing many players in the top 10 in 2017 and hence the final runs on hard court.

 

[xFullCourtTenniSx]

He's not going do anything on clay or the FO. No longer has the stamina or movement. Gotta remember that Murray and Djokovic are coming back as well. They're not going to be in this muggy form forever. Ideally the mugs would be stepping up too but I can't guarantee that. I can see Fed beating him at FO as well. Murray has already beaten him a couple of times on clay since 2015 in the meaningless stuff and they way Nadal has drastically declined, I wouldn't be surpriesed if Murray takes him out at FO. Djokovic definitely can. Hell even Fed can. No chance of winning it this year.

Funny how poorly you're portraying your man when Federer is literally 5 years deeper into the same hole that Nadal is in. And yet Federer snuck a Wimbledon title, an Olympic silver, 3 major final appearances, and an Australian Open title from the same position. And Federer wasn't nearly as dominant on Wimbledon as Nadal is on clay.

 

[guanzishou]

What about WTF H2H?

 

[TMF]

It's about time Nadal fans should forget about the H2H and focus on Nadal winning another slam. It's not fun being stuck at 14 in nearly 3 years !

 

[Sentinel]

Federer still has a lot of work to do before proving he is better than Nadal.

There's also the SOG and 11 MC's and 9 RG''s.

In any case, this is no longer peakdal so any reversal of slam H2H is suspect. Federer has to go back in time and beat prime uninjured Nadal, that is the only way.

 

[Sentinel]

It's about time Nadal fans should forget about the H2H and focus on Nadal winning another slam. It's not fun being stuck at 14 in nearly 3 years !

For some, grasping at straws is a lot of fun.

 

[roysid]

How can Federer improve the head to head if Nadal never gets deep enough into tournaments to lose to Federer? Where was Nadal on hard courts in 2004-2008?



Also good to note that 5 of the loses came in 2013 alone (18-14 looks a lot less lopsided than 23-14), yet in 2014, 2015, and the small bits of 2016 they played, Nadal couldn't make it remotely deep enough into tournaments to even entertain the idea of meeting Federer. That's how it's always been. Nadal will only make it deep enough in tournaments to meet Federer when it's on his terms (ie, he's playing well and it's on clay).

In 2010-2014, the head to head is 10-3. Take that time period out and you have 13-11, a very competitive head to head. Prior to 2010, the head to head was 13-7, a scary 65%. But of those 20 matches, 3 were on grass, 6 on hard, and 11 on clay (2-1, 3-3, 2-9). It's been 10 on hard courts and 4 on clay since then, and Federer has managed 7 wins for a 50% winrate (7-3 on hard courts and 0-4 on clay). If Federer wins another match or two on grass, he's definitively better on Nadal outside of clay, which is good enough to say he's the better player (Nadal is, after all, the king of clay, a title that will never be taken away from him without winning a decade's worth of French Opens). At the moment, he's just better than Nadal outside of clay (12-10 Federer).

I mean, if Nadal suddenly gets good enough on hard courts to keep meeting Federer and Federer never plays on clay courts again, he can easily turn the head to head around. The problem is, like I said earlier, Nadal can't go deep enough into tournaments outside of clay often enough to let Federer improve the head to head. If he could, the matchup could end up really lopsided in favor of Federer.

>>>Also good to note that 5 of the loses came in 2013 alone (18-14 looks a lot less lopsided than 23-14),
Yep. 2013 has hurt Federer a lot in terms of H2H. Those 5 loses (IW, Rome, Cincinnati, London- WTF and Australian Open) dug a deep hole in H2H. AO was actually in 2014 but right after WTF, 2013. Interestingly 4 of the loses came on hard-court.

This was a year when Fed was at his worst and Nadal at his best.

 

[KINGROGER]

2010? Lmao, Fed still has multiple slams, WTF, m1000s and time at no1 in him. Anyway let's go along with that for arguments sake only now let's do it with their slam head to head If we're wiping off the period from 2010 then I only think it's fair that we wipe off Fed's 2006 and 2007 where Nadal was barely out of his teenage years and Fed was in his prime. So that's 6-0 to Nadal, 6-1 if you wanna include Fed's AO 2017 win.

Rafa's prime started in 2005.

H2H is clay skewed and most of their matches came when Fed was past his best. He's now slowly turning it around because Rafa declined since 2015 and they're on an even footing again.

Post above explains much better.

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

For some, grasping at straws is a lot of fun.

Yes, that's why the bad apples in your side (including That Madafaking Fool) were grasping at straws, since it had been 5 years for Fed.

 

[hoodjem]

Federer still has a lot of work to do before proving he is better than Nadal.

Not only does he have to reverse the H2H, he has to reverse the Slam H2H. The most efficient way of doing that would be to beat him at Slams (thus counting towards both the Slam H2H and the overall H2H). But, with a deficit of 6-7 (can't remember), and his advancing age, it is unlikely that he has enough time to ever do it.

Also, even if Federer overturns the Slam H2H, Nadal fans can simply think of another type of H2H that Federer is losing, perhaps such as the 'European mid-altitude clay H2H' and point to that as a reason for dominance over him.

So, Nadal fans can rest untroubled.

Talk about a preemptive strike?!.

I guess some persons are worried.

 

[mike danny]

It's quite surprising that this is the first time they have played 3 times ahead of the clay season and the first time they have played in all 3 of AO, IWand Miami.

 

[Gazelle]

Nah I never really brought that. He made multiple slam finals, won a slam and lost only to Djokovic and Nadal in slams. Also made multiple m1000s finals and semis. He smashed his way through the field at Wimbledon, destroying some of the trash that he used to dominate in 2004-2007 yet again. If he did decline then it wasn't enough to say wins against him don't count. I bet if he had beat Nadal at Wimbledon, we wouldn't have heard nothing about his Mono.

In 2008 he lost to Roddick for the first time in years. In 2008 he lost to Fish, Karlovic and Simon for the only time in his whole career (including post-2008). He also lost to Stepanek

Clearly something was wrong with him.

 

[cronus]

Raafa still has a lot of work to do before proving he is a man .

I agree, at least being able to get his girl knocked up once should help.

 

[D.Nalby12]

Even if Federer reverses Slam h2h too, there are still more Barcelona club titles. Federer can only dream of being GOAT.

 

[D.Nalby12]

A lot of Nadal's fans are stupid beyond imagination and living in denial, just like OP.

Op easily smartest trolls on forum. 95% people don't even get he is trolling.

 

[D.Nalby12]

No other poster exposes insane world of Nadalibans better than op. Give credit where it's due.

 

[AceSalvo]

GS H2H:

HC 3-1 Nadal played Fed in 1 out of Fed's 10 HC slams. Participation rate for Nadal 10%

Grass 1-2 Nadal played Fed in 3 out of Fed's 7 Grass slams. Participation rate for Nadal 42%

Clay 5-0 Fed played Nadal in 5 out of Nadal's 9 Clay slams. Participation rate for Fed 55%

Who can take this GS H2H serious when Nadals HC participation rate is ABYSMAL??

 

[AceSalvo]

Op easily smartest trolls on forum. 95% people don't even get he is trolling.

'Smart' and 'H2H' will never make it in one sentence unfortunately regarding OP's thread.

Then there is also smart reverse-trolling threads.

 

[tennisaddict]

Ao is hard court. I hate admitting that fact but thats the record that hurts me the most..1-3 on a hard court major.

Fed's resume would look much better if he had won 2008 Wimb and 2009 AO

But Rafa was displaying incredible fight then.

 

[tennisaddict]

Until roger squares up the h2h in australia or beats nadal at uso i wont be gloating about two masters 1000 wins. Not while at fo its 0-5 and roger seems to have thrown the white flag out on clay.

The ao record is a blemish. Nadal is very vulnerable in monte carlo if he plays federer and a win there could open the floodgates for federer whenever they play.

Any losses after 2010 to Rafa at majors is just par for the course given Rafa himself is a ATG.

The 2 losses are what is a blemish in Fed's record .

The masters wins and losses don't matter

If Fed won those 2 Matches, the major h2h would be 7-5 , with 5 of Rafa's wins in clay and 2 HC wins after 2012

 

[Tennisanity]

Ao is hard court. I hate admitting that fact but thats the record that hurts me the most..1-3 on a hard court major.

3 losses came there before Fed started using the new strategy.

 

[Tennisanity]

Roger has used this strategy before or tried to. French open 2008 springs to mind.

Also done it in basel 2014. And at wtf when he won 6-3, 6-0.

Roger at his best beats nadal and anyone else period. My worry is this 2 month break will snap the momentum.

Its a terrible idea. Id understand if he had not won anythhing so far but right now he is making a mistake.

He didn't really try to hit his BH flat and drive it in 2008. That is the key difference, probably coming from Lubijic.

 

[Tennisanity]

I think edberg deserves credit. Roger was trying this for a while it just wasnt working. He now has it down to perfection. One worry though is on grass and clay he wont have a true bounce all the time which will make it harder to take it that early.

Id like to see roger coming to the net more actual proper serve volleying more.

I think more important than either his improved BH mentality or his 2nd serve kick, is just his overall confidence. Don't think he ever really had this against Nadal from 2007 and onwards.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

It is bad for your health!

 

[Tennease]

Dustin Brown 2
Nadal 0

 

[Sentinel]

Dustin Brown 2
Nadal 0

That's not fair. Dustin has been avoiding Rafa on clay. This H2H is skewed without clay.

Dustin doesn't even play on natural surfaces like clay. Loser.

 

[roysid]

GS H2H:

HC 3-1 Nadal played Fed in 1 out of Fed's 10 HC slams. Participation rate for Nadal 10%

Grass 1-2 Nadal played Fed in 3 out of Fed's 7 Grass slams. Participation rate for Nadal 42%

Clay 5-0 Fed played Nadal in 5 out of Nadal's 9 Clay slams. Participation rate for Fed 55%

Who can take this GS H2H serious when Nadals HC participation rate is ABYSMAL??

Correction. Nadal played Fed in 2 of Fed's 7 Wimbledon wins. In their 3 meeting which Nadal won doesn't count into Fed's 7 grass slams.

 

[Kalin]

Hey, people somehow forget that Roger finally managed to reverse a very important H2H stat.... the actual Head-to-Head comparison:

They went from this:

To this:

Now if only Ivan stopped embarrassing team Fed in the Head department :

 

[guanzishou]

Ivan is GOAT Guru and GOAT's Guru.

 

[guanzishou]

Hey, people somehow forget that Roger finally managed to reverse a very important H2H stat.... the actual Head-to-Head comparison:

They went from this:

To this:

Now if only Ivan stopped embarrassing team Fed in the Head department :

You mean Hair To Hair ?[emoji23]

 

[sureshs]

There is also the lack of Olympics Singles Gold

 

[jwjh]

There's also the SOG and 11 MC's and 9 RG''s.

In any case, this is no longer peakdal so any reversal of slam H2H is suspect. Federer has to go back in time and beat prime uninjured Nadal, that is the only way.

There is also the lack of Olympics Singles Gold

sureshs, you really need to up your game.

 

[BHud]

Poor Thomas is just a butthurt little boy in his mama's basement looking for an argument. If you say the sky is blue, he will argue that it's a shade of purple.

 

[AceSalvo]

Correction. Nadal played Fed in 2 of Fed's 7 Wimbledon wins. In their 3 meeting which Nadal won doesn't count into Fed's 7 grass slams.

Good catch. The case for Nadal not showing up at Fed's slams is so loud.

GS H2H:

HC 3-1 Nadal played Fed in 1 out of Fed's 10 HC slams.
Participation rate for Nadal 10%

Grass 1-2 Nadal played Fed in 2 out of Fed's 7 Grass slams.
Participation rate for Nadal 28%

Clay 5-0 Fed played Nadal in 5 out of Nadal's 9 Clay slams.
Participation rate for Fed 55%

Who can take this GS H2H serious when Nadals HC participation rate is ABYSMAL??