Facts

roysid

Hall of Fame
For the first time since 2002, Federer is not in Wimbledon final (after 7 years).
For the first time since 2003, Federer is not in US Open final (after 6 years).

It's a sign of decline for the great champion.
 

roysid

Hall of Fame
Nadal has done great winning 3 slams in a year. But Federer has done it 3 times (2004, 2006,2007).

It's terribly hard. The last two before them were Wilander(1988) and Connors (1974).
 

joe sch

Legend
For the first time since 2002, Federer is not in Wimbledon final (after 7 years).
For the first time since 2003, Federer is not in US Open final (after 6 years).

It's a sign of decline for the great champion.

Also the first time he did not win a slam level championship.
Maybe its more a sign of dominance of other great champion named Nadal.
 

joe sch

Legend
Nadal has done great winning 3 slams in a year. But Federer has done it 3 times (2004, 2006,2007).

It's terribly hard. The last two before them were Wilander(1988) and Connors (1974).

The most impressive part of Nadals 3 slam level championship year is he did it against Federer, who many were claiming was the GOAT. When Federer achieved his 3 slam years, there were not other great champions to contend with and it was before Nadal reached his prime.
 

aphex

Banned
Also the first time he did not win a slam level championship.
Maybe its more a sign of dominance of other great champion named Nadal.

jizzinmypants.jpg
 

OKUSA

Hall of Fame
Federer of today is not Federer of 3 years ago, so stop saying he's super amazing still
 

Berdasco

Banned
Nadal has done great winning 3 slams in a year. But Federer has done it 3 times (2004, 2006,2007).

It's terribly hard. The last two before them were Wilander(1988) and Connors (1974).

But it was kinda easy for Nadal in 2010, wasn't it? Seemed like he coasted through all 3 slams, barring a couple of hiccups at W.
 

cknobman

Legend
The most impressive part of Nadals 3 slam level championship year is he did it against Federer, who many were claiming was the GOAT. When Federer achieved his 3 slam years, there were not other great champions to contend with and it was before Nadal reached his prime.

Im sorry but if I recall Nadal did not play Federer in a single grand slam tournament this year.
When Federer achieved his 3 slam years Rafa was playing too, was he not?
Also Nadal achieved his first 3 slam year after Rogers prime so I dont see how it is any different than Roger achieving his before Rafa's prime, both players were not in their primes.

Im not taking anything away from Rafa or Roger both of them are great players but your post is utter nonsense.
 
Soderling was in love with the net (as in hitting the ball into it) this US Open. Certainly not top 5 material, at least on hardcourts.
 

P_Agony

Banned
The most impressive part of Nadals 3 slam level championship year is he did it against Federer, who many were claiming was the GOAT. When Federer achieved his 3 slam years, there were not other great champions to contend with and it was before Nadal reached his prime.

Wow, where do you get that crap from?

Fed did not win a slam this year? Nadal beat Fed in all the slams he won this year?

Let me guess, Robredo also won 2 MS titles and is the favorite for the indoors season.
 

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
Nadal has done great winning 3 slams in a year. But Federer has done it 3 times (2004, 2006,2007).

It's terribly hard. The last two before them were Wilander(1988) and Connors (1974).
What Fed did has nothing to do with what Nadal did. Fed has never won 3 consecutive slams on 3 surfaces.
What Fed did, other players did as well (although not 3 times you're right about that).
What Nadal did, no other player has ever done.
 
Last edited:

roysid

Hall of Fame
Facts:
Among Federer's 3 slam winning year, twice in 2006 and 2007 he defeated Nadal in one of the slams Wimbledon. Rafa wasn't good enough to reach AO and USO finals. But he beat Fed in FO finals.

So twice a year Fed has won 3 slams and runner up in the fourth. Rafa is yet to achieve that.


Rafa this time didn't have to beat Fed at all. Fed wasn't good enough to reach FO, W and US finals (which he regularly did from 2004-2009).
 

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
The most impressive part of Nadals 3 slam level championship year is he did it against Federer, who many were claiming was the GOAT. When Federer achieved his 3 slam years, there were not other great champions to contend with and it was before Nadal reached his prime.
Maybe because Federer beat those other people so they could not become "great champions"?

And maybe Nadal is only winning now because Ryan Harrison hasn't yet reached his prime? :shock: The point is, you can say that about anyone since you don't know who's not at their prime yet.
 
Top