Federer 8-17 against Nadalovic at slams !!

sheq

sheq

Professional
Firstly, i am a federer fan and wanted him to win the title so much. However, i dont feel depressed because i give up on federer since many years. I comprehended that he is mentally too weak against favorites, against no1 ranking player. You can check the bets, you can check the scores, and you will see that roger is too good when he is upper hand, and he is against everyone except Nadal and Djokovic. There is too many words to say, but Federer 8-17 against Nadalovic at slams !! Can you believe this statistic ? During his proffesionel career, Federer has had two main and only rivals, and he has % 32 win/loss ratio at the biggest stage. I dont care what roger is doing or had done against Murray, Roddick, Safin, Hewitt, Ferrero etc. These guys has 1.6 slams avarage, nadalovic has 12 slams avarage !!

To summarize, i appreciate what roger is doing especially at this age, he loves the sport more than anyone in history. His game is the most beautiful one, he accomplished so much during his career. However, we have to rely on math and eyes, he cant be considered as the GOAT, he simply can not, surely one of the greates, but GOAT. Noone can be GOAT with %32 win/loss ratio against his two main rival during a 10 years span. BTW he is %41 win/loss ratio against these two, and these statistic is gonna be even worse by the time he retires.
 
I am not, if he cant protect the head to heads, its better he plays and we can see who is better. I am 0-0 against Nadal, see we are even.
 
tennis_pro said:
Are you one of those guys who think he should've retired after Wimbledon 2012 to protect the head to heads?
Click to expand...

What h2h protection would that have provided? Nadal only beat him in AO14 since then so he already had the h2h dominance in the majors...
 
If Dominik Hrbaty had been played more than 50 times with these guys, you might take some healty outcomes.
 
That dominance is all Nadal. Federer is relatively even with Djokovic it's only the last couple of years where Federer has been unable to score wins against him in slams. Let's no equate Federer's poor record against Nadal with his record against Djokovic...
 
tennis_pro said:
Are you one of those guys who think he should've retired after Wimbledon 2012 to protect the head to heads?
Click to expand...

Not to protect his H2H, but his legacy of winning in general! It's been 3 years since he's had a sniff of a Major! Roger's barely been holding on, subsisting on consistent results and sometimes showing moments of brilliance, but he's not gotten any closer with "SABR!" Five sets is five sets; will only get away with slashin' and dashin' for so long! I encourage it; esp. keeping points shorter, but Father Time is creakin'! Sooner or later it's gonna go horribly wrong, and I'd hate to see that happen! Sampras went 2 years w/o winning anything until he had an amazing USO in '02! It might have been a nice way to go out, but Nole was having none of it today! ;-)
 
Last edited:
The_Order said:
What h2h protection would that have provided? Nadal only beat him in AO14 since then so he already had the h2h dominance in the majors...
Click to expand...

18-10 for Nadal instead of 23-10 including 1 loss in a major and 1 loss at the WTF.
15-12 for Federer instead of 21-21 against Djokovic including 3 losses in majors and 2 losses at the WTF.

Btw I'm not saying he should've retired. It's just human nature for people to think that Federer is losing a lot now against these guys that they are better. How fast people forget. Look at Nadal. When he steps out on court nobody has in mind that he's a 14-time Slam champion but that he's a washed up guy.
 
Fiero425 said:
Not to protect his H2H, but his legacy of winning in general! It's been 3 years since he's had a sniff of a Major! Roger's barely been holding on, subsisting on consistent results and sometimes showing moments of brilliance, but he's not gotten any closer with "SABR!" Five sets is five sets; will only get away with slashin' and dashin' for so long! I encourage it; esp. keeping points shorter, but Father Time is creakin'! Sooner or later it's gonna go horribly wrong, and I'd hate to see that happen! Sampras went 2 years w/o winning anything until he had an amazing USO in '02! It might have been a nice way to go out, but Nole was having none of it! ;-)
Click to expand...

The difference is that Sampras' main rival was 1,5 years older than him. Federer has been so good against his generation that his main rivals are guys 5-6 years younger than him in Nadal, Djokovic, Murray. And now (obviously) as he's losing to them due to the age difference he's getting flak.

Also, Sampras had a very good draw at the 2002 US Open, played Agassi who was a good match-up for him and Andre played a long match against Hewitt in the SF the day before.
 
tennis_pro said:
18-10 for Nadal instead of 23-10 including 1 loss in a major and 1 loss at the WTF.
15-12 for Federer instead of 21-21 against Djokovic including 3 losses in majors and 2 losses at the WTF.

Btw I'm not saying he should've retired.
Click to expand...


This thread is about the majors and like I said, only 1 more Nadal victory in AO14...
 
If I am not wrong Federer won his last GS Final against Nadalovic was USO 2007, against Djokovic when Djokovic was barely in his 20s.
 
ForumMember said:
If I am not wrong Federer won his last GS Final against Nadalovic was USO 2007, against Djokovic when Djokovic was barely in his 20s.
Click to expand...

And the next Slam final he played him was in 2014.
Against Nadal he's only played once at Wimbledon/US after the 2008 Wimbledon final.
 
tennis_pro said:
And the next Slam final he played him was in 2014.
Against Nadal he's only played once at Wimbledon/US after the 2008 Wimbledon final.
Click to expand...
2009 AO immediately comes to mind. then 2011 FO also.

Edit - Sorry you were referring only to USO and Winby. But point was about all GS.
 
I agree Nadalovic is not on same generation, but still it shouldnt look that bad. Even during his 20's years he is still behind, or during his prime years 2004-2008 he is 5-6 against them. Still behind, there is too many exuces for this fact :/
 
ForumMember said:
2009 AO immediately comes to mind. then 2011 FO also.
Click to expand...

There are maybe 2 Slam finals when Federer still could've won and was the favorite - 2008 Wimbledon and 2009 AO. Other than that - against Nadal at the FO/AO after 2011 and against Djokovic later on Fed winning was against the odds.

The problem is not that Federer is losing now because it's normal but that he barely played Djokovic before 2008 when he was at his peak and Djokovic was 19-20 years old compared to now when they played MORE THAN 50% OF THEIR MATCHES in 2011-2015. Out of 42 matches 10 were in 2014-2015 this is just crazy.
 
Last edited:
tennis_pro said:
There are maybe 2 Slam finals when Federer still could've won and was the favorite - 2008 Wimbledon and 2009 AO. Other than that - against Nadal at the FO/AO after 2011 and against Djokovic later on Fed winning was against the odds.

The problem is not that Federer is losing now because it's normal but that he barely played Djokovic before 2008 when he was at his peak and Djokovic was 19-20 years old compared to now when they played MORE THAN 50% OF THEIR MATCHES in 2011-2015. Out of 42 matches 10 were in 2014-2015 this is just crazy.
Click to expand...

Fed got to play Nadal plenty of times when Nadal was a kid and he was in peak.

Nadal still owned him.
 
The_Order said:
Fed got to play Nadal plenty of times when Nadal was a kid and he was in peak.

Nadal still owned him.
Click to expand...

At the end of 2007 the h2h on grass was 2-0 Fed and on HC 3-2 for Fed. But Nadal got as many as SIX win on clay, that's why even then he led the h2h. So all lies, Nadal only started dominating Federer after 2008 when Federer was in decline.
 
tennis_pro said:
At the end of 2007 the h2h on grass was 2-0 Fed and on HC 3-2 for Fed. But Nadal got as many as SIX win on clay, that's why even then he led the h2h. So all lies, Nadal only started dominating Federer after 2008 when Federer was in decline.
Click to expand...
Federer was in decline since Nadal started dominated him? Yeah, it makes sense. :)
 
Bogus thread.

Djoker in slams versus Nadal: 4-9
Djokovic in slams versus Roger: 8-6 (and he is SIX YEARS YOUNGER)
 
mistik said:
All the greats would love to face with the likes Baghdatis,Gonzalez Hewitt type of playes in majors finals. İt would made the life so much easier not just physically mentally as well.
Click to expand...

You mean the same players who had Rafa's number ? Or would you prefer the Darcis, Kyrgios, Rosol, Brown, Berrer, Klizan group ?
 
I'd say that if Novak couldn't beat old post prime Federer then it would look bad on him.

Everything that Federer has achieved since he turned 30 has just been bonus icing on the cake IMO.
 
Fed is just a terrible big match player. When the stakes are high and he's up against his biggest rivals, you can count on him folding during the match. Sampras was so much better when it comes to handling big match pressure.
 
tennisaddict said:
You mean the same players who had Rafa's number ? Or would you prefer the Darcis, Kyrgios, Rosol, Brown, Berrer, Klizan group ?
Click to expand...
Only Krygios has a winning record against Rafa. I would prefer Sthavosky,Robredo,the bunch of all the players Fed lost 2013. You understand me ı guess.;)
 
mistik said:
Only Krygios has a winning record against Rafa. I would prefer Sthavosky,Robredo,the bunch of all the players Fed lost 2013. You understand me ı guess.;)
Click to expand...

I will go easy on you. These are not good times for Rafa. You guys need some encouragement after that Fog assault.
 
AngryBirds said:
Fed is just a terrible big match player. When the stakes are high and he's up against his biggest rivals, you can count on him folding during the match. Sampras was so much better when it comes to handling big match pressure.
Click to expand...

Sampras was almost retired when Federer got to number 1 in the middle of the so called Golden era.

With Djokovic, Nadall, Murray etc in full flight.

:cool:
 
tennisaddict said:
I will go easy on you. These are not good times for Rafa. You guys need some encouragement after that Fog assault.
Click to expand...
I will never forget this kindness from you and wont remind the facts again that Fed prime is against the weakest field the modern tennis times ever seen.
 
mistik said:
I will never forget this kindness from you and wont remind the facts again that Fed prime is against the weakest field the modern tennis times ever seen.
Click to expand...

You can parrot this how many ever times you want to make you feel better but the 17 majors will keep staring at you :)
 
Rusty Shackleford said:
Right. Federer declined from age 26 to age 27, then miraculously started playing some of his best tennis 7 years later. :)
Click to expand...

Age isn't the only factor. Federer got mono, lacked practice, started losing more and needed another 1,5 years to get back on track again. Then a back injury in mid 2010 screwed him up again.
 
sheq said:
Firstly, i am a federer fan and wanted him to win the title so much. However, i dont feel depressed because i give up on federer since many years. I comprehended that he is mentally too weak against favorites, against no1 ranking player. You can check the bets, you can check the scores, and you will see that roger is too good when he is upper hand, and he is against everyone except Nadal and Djokovic. There is too many words to say, but Federer 8-17 against Nadalovic at slams !! Can you believe this statistic ? During his proffesionel career, Federer has had two main and only rivals, and he has % 32 win/loss ratio at the biggest stage. I dont care what roger is doing or had done against Murray, Roddick, Safin, Hewitt, Ferrero etc. These guys has 1.6 slams avarage, nadalovic has 12 slams avarage !!

To summarize, i appreciate what roger is doing especially at this age, he loves the sport more than anyone in history. His game is the most beautiful one, he accomplished so much during his career. However, we have to rely on math and eyes, he cant be considered as the GOAT, he simply can not, surely one of the greates, but GOAT. Noone can be GOAT with %32 win/loss ratio against his two main rival during a 10 years span. BTW he is %41 win/loss ratio against these two, and these statistic is gonna be even worse by the time he retires.
Click to expand...
They say God smiles upon the dimwitted, so you're in luck, my dear fellow.
 
Roger's four best years were 2004-2007

In these years he lost a grand total of zero times in slams against Novak, and only lost to Nadal at RG (which is hardly worthy of shame, for obvious reasons).

Why we should fault him for sticking around and losing more often than not against these all-time greats in a period that was after his best years, that's beyond logic.
 
Sysyphus said:
Roger's four best years were 2004-2007

In these years he lost a grand total of zero times in slams against Novak, and only lost to Nadal at RG (which is hardly worthy of shame, for obvious reasons).

Why we should fault him for sticking around and losing more often than not against these all-time greats in a period that was after his best years, that's beyond logic.
Click to expand...
I dont fault him, i just say he is not good enough for prime Nadalovic. Of course he is not at his best now, and we cant match their best, but he is not like no52 player of the world, he is still great and 2007-2011 he was still at his 20's. Still, lost so many times to them. Plus, i dont care about clay court argument he lost fair and square to Nadal too many times, so see he is not that good.
 
sheq said:
I dont fault him, i just say he is not good enough for prime Nadalovic. Of course he is not at his best now, and we cant match their best, but he is not like no52 player of the world, he is still great and 2007-2011 he was still at his 20's. Still, lost so many times to them. Plus, i dont care about clay court argument he lost fair and square to Nadal too many times, so see he is not that good.
Click to expand...

Obviously you can't know any such thing seeing as he was born six and five years before them respectively. For this reason, the comparison is inherently faulty.
If Fed was born later and was 25 today, would he not be much better suited to defeat Novak? All reason says he would.

As for the clay losses to Nadal—yes, they were completely fair and square. And what does it mean then? That Nadal was a better clay player than Fed. Seeing as Nadal is the greatest clay player of all time, Fed's overall resume lives very well with that fact.
 
It means Federer cant be GOAT, it not that easy, you just say he is tennis god he is best ever etc. You just say, and i show the facts. Clay court doesnt count, before 2004 doesnt count, after 2007 doesnt count, against Nadalovic doesnt count. Yeah if we ignore these, he might be GOAT somewhere sometime far far away. I say he is great, he is definetely one of the greatest of all time, and for me he plays this sport so beautiful, more beautiful than anyone. His passion to this sport is great, he has a nice personality too. However, what i say is dont make him GOD, the besti GOAT etc because you cant.
 
sheq said:
It means Federer cant be GOAT, it not that easy, you just say he is tennis god he is best ever etc. You just say, and i show the facts. Clay court doesnt count, before 2004 doesnt count, after 2007 doesnt count, against Nadalovic doesnt count. Yeah if we ignore these, he might be GOAT somewhere sometime far far away. I say he is great, he is definetely one of the greatest of all time, and for me he plays this sport so beautiful, more beautiful than anyone. His passion to this sport is great, he has a nice personality too. However, what i say is dont make him GOD, the besti GOAT etc because you cant.
Click to expand...

Nobody serious would claim that Federer is GOAT. It is like saying that Rocky Marciano is GOAT due to his numbers (49:0). 10:23 also kills him; if it was 18:23, fine, but 10:23 is too much. You can't be GOAT if you have a boogie player that you can't find solution against. Great player, one of the best ever, but not a GOAT.
 
Sysyphus said:
Roger's four best years were 2004-2007

In these years he lost a grand total of zero times in slams against Novak, and only lost to Nadal at RG (which is hardly worthy of shame, for obvious reasons).

Why we should fault him for sticking around and losing more often than not against these all-time greats in a period that was after his best years, that's beyond logic.
Click to expand...

Novak only became a contender for the first time ever sometime in mid 2007, and even then he was eons from his peak, and arguably not even in his prime. If Roger gets a free pass for his age, it is silly to even evaluate Novak's performance in the 2004-2007 period seriously, other than it is great he was already challenging Roger (beating him in the Canadian Masters final, having set points in both the first 2 sets of the U.S Open final) like it is older Roger is challenging Novak sometimes today.

Nadal as well only really began to become a contender off clay at Wimbledon 2007, so midway through 2007.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

sheq
Federer 8-17 against Nadalovic at slams !!
Replies
44
Views
3K
sportsfan1
S
N
  • Poll Poll
Which grand slam run has been better- Roger Federer (2003 Wimbledon -2012 Wimbledon ) 17 slams or Novak Djokovic( 2014 Wimbledon- 2023 Rg) 17 slams.
Replies
20
Views
914
T007
T
M
Comparing Federer and Nadal's Losses at Grand Slams
Replies
6
Views
1K
mellowyellow
mellowyellow
P_Agony
The top 6 against each other in 2009
2 3
Replies
102
Views
8K
P_Agony
P_Agony
S
Federer's matches against other top 3 players outside the slams
Replies
3
Views
1K
tudwell
T
Back
Top