Calm down man, the point that some are making is that Nadal in his best year was not as dominant as Federer was. Remember in 2007 when federer had 3 slams 2 masters and the masters cup and still was said he was not as dominant as in 2004-2006. Nadal was very good on slams and clay masters bu on the other tournaments he wasn's so dominant like the Federer's 2006 or Mcenroe's 1984 when he had just 3 freaking losses while Nadal has 8 losses until now.
Fed's prime:
2004: Enters 17 singles tourneys, was 74-6 end of the year(3 GS WON,TMC, 3 MS)
2005: Enters 15 singles tourneys, has just 4 losses that year(3 GS won, 4 MS)
2006: Entered 17 tourneys, just 5 losses(3 GS won, 4 MS, TMC)
2007: Entered 16 tourneys, with 9 losses(3 GS won, 2 MS, TMC)
In 2008 he entered 19(15 losses,2 at TMC), in 09' he entered 15(12 losses overall,2 at TMC), in 2010 he has 20 so far(11 loses) but will play probably play shanghai,paris and TMC.
Obviously Fed has outperformed Nadal in consistency, but at the majors IMO, cause Fed rarely played minor events whereas Nadal was more inclined to play small events in the 2004-2007 period and even beyond that. People here are talking about win percentages, not taking into consideration that Fed actually plays few tourneys for a pro(I'm talking about singles). He had a high efficiency in his prime cause he scheduled wisely and played on preferred surfaces 70% of the time.
We don't even know Nadal's prime yet(let's say 2008 and 2010 so far) but since he started winning slams,
Nadal has usually played more tourneys than Fed, more often than not on his worst surface. Not to mention the fact that they are five freaking years apart and their development has been quite different.
In 2005 Nadal played 21 tourneys, had 10 losses(88,76% win percentage)
In 2006 Nadal played 16 tourneys, had 12 losses(83,1 % win percentage)
In 2007 Nadal played 20 tourneys, had 15 losses(82,35% win percentage)
In 2008(peak year let's say) he played 20 tourneys, had 11 losses(88,17% win percentage), one of those losses being a retirement in Paris and the other him being dead on his feet in chennai final.
In 2009 he played 17 events, had 14 losses(3 of those coming in TMC) with a 82,93% win percentage.
In 2010 he has played 20 events so far and has 8 losses and is 88,41% at the moment.
There's no doubt that Fed was and still is more efficient in picking his battles but tbh, considering the fact that Nadal is still growing as a player,that he plays 60% of his matches on his worst surface and on average, enters more tourneys, I'm surprised at the high win percentage he's had over the years.
Also, and I shouldn't even be saying this, it matters what you win more than what you lose. In theory, you could win 4 GS and have 15 losses in other tourneys in the same year but you would clearly be the most successful player that year, no matter what your overall win percentage would be. Nadal could enter 5 minor tourneys in a row right now, play 2-3 rounds in each, gain a couple of million bucks, lose/tank while bringing his win percentage down quite a bit but in the eyes of most he would still be the most successful player right now.
