Federer: Murray Number 1 Rival, Not Nadal.

Conquistador

Conquistador

Banned
The storybook career of Roger Federer continues on. Murray is the new world number 2, and by all accounts--is Federer's biggest rival. Federer has gone out of his way by criticizing Murray's game. To me Murray is Federer's biggest rival right now because of the head to head statistics. On paper-yes-Nadal is Federer's biggest rival because of their great matches--but look at Murrays head to head against the great Roger Federer.
 
I suppose you're right because generally speaking, Fed has been no rival at all for Nadal. 7-13, 2-6 in slams isn't much of a rivalry. It's a one-sided beatdown.
 
At USO you are probably right, but no way Murray could catch #1 by end of this year; a healthy Nadal is better than Murray so far.
 
2-6 in slams because nadal didn't make it far enough into slams to get owned by federer.

Wimbledon 2009
USO 2008
USO 2007
AO 2007
USO 2006
AO 2006
USO 2005
Wimbledon 2005

Where was nadal in the finals at these championships???? Huh???


Also, all the slams that nadal won were against federer, except for FO 2005. Federer actually had the balls to make it far into tournaments and meet nadal on his best surface (clay of course) where rafa has the edge.

Wimbledon 2008 was close, fed was having problems that year and rafa played great.

AO 2009, fed served like crap in the fifth, and ROGER FEDERER won more points in that match and still lost. You remember that ok?

You kids need to stop this (oh Sh1t, 2-6 in slams omg fed gets owned by nadal). You are making yourself look like an idiot
 
slicefox said:
2-6 in slams because nadal didn't make it far enough into slams to get owned by federer.

Wimbledon 2009
USO 2008
USO 2007
AO 2007
USO 2006
AO 2006
USO 2005
Wimbledon 2005

Where was nadal in the finals at these championships???? Huh???


Also, all the slams that nadal won were against federer, except for FO 2005. Federer actually had the balls to make it far into tournaments and meet nadal on his best surface (clay of course) where rafa has the edge.

Wimbledon 2008 was close, fed was having problems that year and rafa played great.

AO 2009, fed served like crap in the fifth, and ROGER FEDERER won more points in that match and still lost. You remember that ok?

You kids need to stop this (oh Sh1t, 2-6 in slams omg fed gets owned by nadal). You are making yourself look like an idiot
Click to expand...

What does how far Nadal made it in certain tournaments have to do with their head to head record? There isn't really an evidence at all that Federer's record in slams wouldn't be even worse had Nadal made it to the finals.
 
Fed already said a while back that Murray was the guy who he found hardest to beat. Not surprising since Murray has been spanking him regularly-what is it 5 times in a row now? Meanwhile Nadal has been injured. Nadal had 4 in a row v Fed before he got injured.
 
Claudius said:
Murray has beaten Nadal three times in a row on hard. He beat him at the US Open last year, an exhibition in the Middle East, and in Rotterdam.
Click to expand...

Well sure, you can cherry-pick your way to any outcome you desire, but the last time they met on a hardcourt Murray received a beating.
 
Conquistador said:
The storybook career of Roger Federer continues on. Murray is the new world number 2, and by all accounts--is Federer's biggest rival. Federer has gone out of his way by criticizing Murray's game. To me Murray is Federer's biggest rival right now because of the head to head statistics. On paper-yes-Nadal is Federer's biggest rival because of their great matches--but look at Murrays head to head against the great Roger Federer.
Click to expand...

Murray is not a rival for Federer. He never beat Federer in a GS. Fed no longer cares about anything else than Slams.

Antonio Puente said:
I suppose you're right because generally speaking, Fed has been no rival at all for Nadal. 7-13, 2-6 in slams isn't much of a rivalry. It's a one-sided beatdown.
Click to expand...

Uhh no... If Fed was 0-6 vs Nadal, that's a 1 sided beat-down. Plus, 4 of those Nadal won were on Clay.
 
slicefox said:
here is the argument:

federer > nadal because he has made more grand slam finals during the same period (2005 - 2009)

so fed > nadal in GS

got it?
Click to expand...

Here's the logical rebuttal: Rafa has more grand slams and significantly better numbers than Fed at the same age, and completely owns the guy head-to-head.

So, no.
 
ubermeyer said:
Murray is not a rival for Federer. He never beat Federer in a GS. Fed no longer cares about anything else than Slams.



Uhh no... If Fed was 0-6 vs Nadal, that's a 1 sided beat-down. Plus, 4 of those Nadal won were on Clay.
Click to expand...

I didnt know Federer was Tiger Woods.
 
Federer leads non-clay head to head against Nadal

Antonio Puente said:
I suppose you're right because generally speaking, Fed has been no rival at all for Nadal. 7-13, 2-6 in slams isn't much of a rivalry. It's a one-sided beatdown.
Click to expand...

Federer leads non-clay head to head 5 - 4 against Nadal. (Everyone knows that Nadal is better on clay, including Federer - for all other surfaces Federer is a nose ahead).
 
Murray's results vs Federer isn't anything to be worried about. At this point in his career, it's already been put out there that the slams are what Federer is worried about. Everyone knows he's not going to be playing all those tournaments to defend all those points like he did in the past. If Murray can put away Federer at the USO this year, I'll say Murray has Fed's number but at this point, Murray's not even in Federer's head. I think Federer's more worried about Roddick than he is Murray, he took him to 5 sets on his best surface. I don't think Murray has done that yet.

but with Murray in the picture, it sure makes the slams a hell of a lot more interesting.. as much as I love Federer's game, tennis is a hellova lot more interesting when it's not just Federer and Nadal winning everything
 
EndLy said:
Murray's results vs Federer isn't anything to be worried about. At this point in his career, it's already been put out there that the slams are what Federer is worried about. Everyone knows he's not going to be playing all those tournaments to defend all those points like he did in the past. If Murray can put away Federer at the USO this year, I'll say Murray has Fed's number but at this point, Murray's not even in Federer's head. I think Federer's more worried about Roddick than he is Murray, he took him to 5 sets on his best surface. I don't think Murray has done that yet.

but with Murray in the picture, it sure makes the slams a hell of a lot more interesting.. as much as I love Federer's game, tennis is a hellova lot more interesting when it's not just Federer and Nadal winning everything
Click to expand...

If Federer took that approach--his status and prominence in the rankings would drop--and then he would be playing the likes of Nadal in quarterfinal matches..Trust me--Federer wants to keep that number one ranking as long as he can. What a special player!
 
Claudius said:
Murray has beaten Nadal three times in a row on hard. He beat him at the US Open last year, an exhibition in the Middle East, and in Rotterdam.
Click to expand...

so basically he beat him at the US Open. we all know exhibitions don't count for anything and in Rotterdam Nadal was obviously injured. that said in the last year murray has been playing AT LEAST as well as rafa on hard if not BETTER
 
Nadal is a rival WHERE IT COUNTS MOST!!!

What the hell kind of "rival" has Murray been anywheres outside of these crappy 3 set hardcourt matches? Anyone?


Overral I dont care much for the h2h's.. If you dont prove your worth at the slams, then who cares about h2hs. Nadal has, Murray has yet to do so.


Murray is no rival. Hes a glorfied 3 set hardcourt player. Big deal.. He sucks on clay, he sucks on grass and he underperforms at slams.. RIVALS DONT DO THAT.


Murray is just a commercial until the nadal show comes back on.
 
Last edited:
TheNatural said:
Fed already said a while back that Murray was the guy who he found hardest to beat. Not surprising since Murray has been spanking him regularly-what is it 5 times in a row now? Meanwhile Nadal has been injured. Nadal had 4 in a row v Fed before he got injured.
Click to expand...

Huh injuried...what? Nadal was not injuried in Madrid. He was tired..different things. God the injury excuse can be only used so much. Nobody knew Nadal was injuried until French Open..Nadal's injury occured then do to a long schedule and his crappy knees, but he was still pretty healthy in Madrid. He was tired from his match with Djoker, not injured. Please let me guess Fed is really 0-13 against Nadal right?
 
GameSampras said:
Nadal is a rival WHERE IT COUNTS MOST!!!

What the hell kind of "rival" has Murray been anywheres outside of these crappy 3 set hardcourt matches? Anyone?


Overral I dont care much for the h2h's.. If you dont prove your worth at the slams, then who cares about h2hs. Nadal has, Murray has yet to do so.


Murray is no rival. Hes a glorfied 3 set hardcourt player. Big deal.. He sucks on clay, he sucks on grass and he underperforms at slams.. RIVALS DONT DO THAT.


Murray is just a commercial and until the nadal show comes back on.
Click to expand...

Sucks on grass? He destroyed the field at Queens and reached the Semi's at Wimbledon.

Underperforms at the majors? Since his breakthrough at Wimbledon 2008 he has reached a final, a semi, a quarter and a 4th round. This US Open will be his 4th real chance at a big one, it's not like he's been around for years challenging (it was pointed out he wasn't even a professional when Nadal and Federer started their dominance of the top 2 ranking positions, which he has now broken).

The US Open this year will represent a year of him being a big player in the majors, give him a chance!
 
Feña14 said:
Sucks on grass? He destroyed the field at Queens and reached the Semi's at Wimbledon.

Underperforms at the majors? Since his breakthrough at Wimbledon 2008 he has reached a final, a semi, a quarter and a 4th round. This US Open will be his 4th real chance at a big one, it's not like he's been around for years challenging (it was pointed out he wasn't even a professional when Nadal and Federer started their dominance of the top 2 ranking positions, which he has now broken).

The US Open this year will represent a year of him being a big player in the majors, give him a chance!
Click to expand...

Alright.. He doesnt suck on grass, but he is FAR from a great grasscourt player. He couldnt even get by Roddick and was humiliated in front of his home courtymen who actually hyped in up into thinking Murray was actually the favorite to win Wimbeldon. . Fed beats Roddick this year playing probably his best after Roddick beats Murray , and Nadal beats Fed last year along with the AO and the 4 RG titles.

And yes Murray hasnt proved his worth at the slams.. We know what Nadal has accomplished, he was HANDS DOWN the best player in the world prior to injuiry and has wholloped Fed at every slam to get his 6 slams.. Whats Murray done on par to this? What will Murray EVER DO on par to this? Nothing.

Murray cant whipe Prime Nadal's jock. All he can manage are these little crap HC tournaments Fed now doesnt even care about anymore.
 
Last edited:
GameSampras said:
Nadal is a rival WHERE IT COUNTS MOST!!!

What the hell kind of "rival" has Murray been anywheres outside of these crappy 3 set hardcourt matches? Anyone?


Overral I dont care much for the h2h's.. If you dont prove your worth at the slams, then who cares about h2hs. Nadal has, Murray has yet to do so.


Murray is no rival. Hes a glorfied 3 set hardcourt player. Big deal.. He sucks on clay, he sucks on grass and he underperforms at slams.. RIVALS DONT DO THAT.


Murray is just a commercial until the nadal show comes back on.
Click to expand...

Very good point here. Seriously say Fed and Murray meet twice more and Fed wins one and Murray wins one and never meet agian in a slam. So they end 3-7 and basically Murray will be that good hardcourt player who could beat Fed in the slam tournaments, when Fed's best years were past and he was only focusing on the slams. Honestly Murray is not a rival. Look at the slam results. He has to get to the point where he can meet Fed in slams yet.

Lets look at this he should have at least gotten to the semis in Australia, but he lost to the hot Verdasco. Thats no excuse you saw Nadal beat the "hot player".

Where was he in France? Losing to Gonzo..and then wimby losing to Roddick.

Murray doesn't get to the finals of the biggest venues. Fed has enough of the master series titles now to be happy and he comes into them with a less serious attitude. Yet he probably over the whole season has been equal to Murray in consistency, up until Murraywinning this one. Murray needs to meet Fed where it matters most and do damage. Hell Djokovic I still put ahead of Murray. Djokovic at least came through at a slam. Beat Fed and the hot Tsonga..more than Murray has done. Oh no wait he beat Nadal..on his worst surface. NICE!
 
GameSampras said:
Alright.. He doesnt suck on grass, but he is FAR from a great grasscourt player. He couldnt even get by Roddick and was humiliated in front of his home courtymen who actually hyped in up into thinking Murray was actually the favorite to win Wimbeldon. . Fed beats Roddick this year playing probably his best after Roddick beats Murray , and Nadal beats Fed last year along with the AO and the 4 RG titles.

And yes Murray hasnt proved his worth at the slams.. We know what Nadal has accomplished, he was HANDS DOWN the best player in the world prior to injuiry and has wholloped Fed at every slam to get his 6 slams.. Whats Murray done on par to this? What will Murray EVER DO on par to this? Nothing.

Murray cant whipe Prime Nadal's jock. All he can managed are these little crap HC tournaments Fed now doesnt even care about anymore.
Click to expand...

You have to love it when people think they know what's going on in a Country thousands of miles away, the British people thought Murray was the favourite for Wimbledon? I don't think ANYONE here realistically thought anyone but Federer would take the title after Nadal pulled out. There was a piece on the BBC website where commentators and journalists said who they thought would win and they all said Federer (except Pat Cash, an Australian, who said Murray).

Myself and Batz, two British Murray fans, said we expected Roddick to take care of Murray. Quite where you got "his home courtymen who actually hyped in up into thinking Murray was actually the favorite to win Wimbeldon" from, I have no idea.
 
GameSampras said:
Nadal is a rival WHERE IT COUNTS MOST!!!

What the hell kind of "rival" has Murray been anywheres outside of these crappy 3 set hardcourt matches? Anyone?


Overral I dont care much for the h2h's.. If you dont prove your worth at the slams, then who cares about h2hs. Nadal has, Murray has yet to do so.


Murray is no rival. Hes a glorfied 3 set hardcourt player. Big deal.. He sucks on clay, he sucks on grass and he underperforms at slams.. RIVALS DONT DO THAT.


Murray is just a commercial until the nadal show comes back on.
Click to expand...


Can that be my signature?
 
Feña14 said:
Sucks on grass? He destroyed the field at Queens and reached the Semi's at Wimbledon.
Click to expand...

Lol. Who did he beat in queens? James Blake..Juan Carlos Fererro. Those names scare me.

Outside of his win against Gasquet at Wimbledon he has not been any bit impressive. He nearly lost to Stan The Man at Wimbledon. Outside of Mardy Fish the rest are not even that great on grass. JCF is the biggest joke of a two time wimbledon quarterfinalist, everyone knows this. Especially considering now he is even worse than he was in 2007. I am sorry when Murray beats some big names on grass I will be impressed. Gasquet was impressive, but he showed for as good a returned he is once someone with a huge serve shows up he is screwed. Roddick handled him quite well at Wimby.
 
Nadalfan89 said:
Can that be my signature?
Click to expand...

LOL.. If you want..


Im sorry Im hard on Murray.. But jeesh man.. When people start talking "Murray as a rival" what are they thinking? Do people around here know what a rivalry is? Winning some 3 set Hardcourt tournaments and failing to reach slam finals and failing to beat who is put in front of him, that he SHOULD BEAT, is not consistent with being a rival.


Murray is very talented player.. But I dunno about this "rival" talk. We all know Fed isnt putting much emphasis on slamless tournaments these days.. Its obvious.. Murray has a long ways to go to even prove he is the best in the game or even 2nd best.. On paper he is.. Realistically he isnt. And sorry to say but he only grabbed the #2 ranking because Nadal went down. Sad but true.

Murray needs to prove his worth 10 times.. And winning Montrael he really isnt.. He had proved he can win Hardcourt tournaments. But PROVE TO US you can win the AO or USO or both.. Then we will talk guys
 
Last edited:
Murray is a rival for Federer, because Murray gets better and better and better. Murray is also very fit and has the defensive game to give Federer problems.
 
Conquistador said:
Murray is a rival for Federer, because Murray gets better and better and better. Murray is also very fit and has the defensive game to give Federer problems.
Click to expand...

Dude how much better do you think Murray will get. He is probably at his best playing ability he just needs to mentally get there. What is he becoming God now? I don't think Murray has much more to go...look at Novak for example.
 
egn said:
Dude how much better do you think Murray will get. He is probably at his best playing ability he just needs to mentally get there. What is he becoming God now? I don't think Murray has much more to go...look at Novak for example.
Click to expand...

I think he still has more room for improvement, his 2nd serve needs to get better, his first serve % needs to improve, he needs to pick where and when to be aggressive etc...
 
If Fed can win the USO this year, and do it by beating one of his 3 rivals (Djoker, Murray or Nadal) in the finals or SF, then I think the argument that he can't be GOAT because he has a losing record against these rivals will be permanently debunked. Bc Fed will then be 2-0 against Murray in GS finals, 1-0 against Djoker and while he will still have a losing record against Nadal, I think most ppl acknowledge that Nadal possessed a very lopsided matchup against Fed (lefty with heavy topspin) that gave Fed trouble and that he (Nadal) wasn't really the greater player. After this year, any losses Fed has against these guys can't really tarnish his record anymore bc let's face it he is FIVE years older than these guys. Murray and Djoker are now entering their PRIME, whereas Fed is already 1-2 years past his.
 
Im sure Murray is going to tweak his game here and there.. But is Murray going to become an overhwhelming tennis prodigy like a Nadal or Fed? I highly doubt that.. Thats not to say Murray has maxed out his abilities. He just doesnt seem like he is going to accomplish much more than 3-4 slams at best, mostly on hardcourts and more masters titles.. I could be wrong.. But he isnt the deadliest player, nor has the deadliest game which could help him capitialize more and achieve more. But if Nadal never resumes the level he was at, and Fed retires in the next season or so, anything can happen I guess. At this point, I would probably expect someone like Del Potro possibly will take over the reigns. Since we know Del Potro is still young yet he can play on both clay and hardcourts.. And his grass game may follow.. But the thing he has is the big overwhelming game in his favor. Hes just still very rough around the edges.
 
Last edited:
I think Federer and Nadal will go down as two of the greatest players of all time. Nadal already has 6 majors and Federer is the GOAT, comparing a young Murray who is just starting out as a big player is wrong on so many levels.

You say he could win 3-4 and I think that would be one hell of an achievement, not many players win a single major and to win a handful would be an amazing thing for himself and Britain. I don't think there's any point suggesting he will ever be on a level field with Federer and Nadal because if he is, he too will be high on the list of best players ever to play the game.
 
Nadalfan89 said:
Murray doesn't have the game for consistent slam wins. When was the last time such a defensive player won a slam?
Click to expand...

Hewitt? 2002?

I guess you can count Nadals early days at the French. But actually Nadal was aggressive there moreso than other surfaces at the time obviously
 
slicefox said:
ROGER FEDERER won more points in that match and still lost. You remember that ok?
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware of that, but then again in every match I've played (which has been a few over 30+ years) I was never aware (nor did I care) whether I won more total points than my opponent. All I cared about was winning the last point. ;)
 
Benefactor said:
What does how far Nadal made it in certain tournaments have to do with their head to head record? There isn't really an evidence at all that Federer's record in slams wouldn't be even worse had Nadal made it to the finals.
Click to expand...

9 of the their matches have been on CLAY. Do you not get that? Federer dominates FO but Nadal sucks on USO
 
GameSampras said:
Hewitt? 2002?

I guess you can count Nadals early days at the French. But actually Nadal was aggressive there moreso than other surfaces at the time obviously
Click to expand...

I think that's just a common misconception about Hewitt. He was actually quite agressive back then, much moreso than Murray.
 
well he hasnt made the final in 4 years of attempts. Where as he had made and won the FO his first attempt. And he is a very impressive player and has lost to some less than impressive people at the USO, like blake, youzhny, ferrer.
 
fed gets owned 2-6 in gs on every surface lol, no rivalry and murrays won his last 5 v fed, even novak is 2-0 v fed this year, making it 1-5 this year v top4, so fed better hope he dosent play one of them
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Nadal's performances have affected tournament significance
Replies
43
Views
4K
Deleted member 307496
D
F
Federer v Djokovic: Reframing the "GOAT" debate
2
Replies
59
Views
6K
underground
underground
jm1980
Pat Cash: "Federer not even the second greatest in his own era"
22 23 24
Replies
1K
Views
37K
Sunny014
Sunny014
TennisFan3
Federer says he has more drive than Nadal
Replies
26
Views
3K
ACE of Hearts
ACE of Hearts
M
Federer purposely playing 5 sets this year to improve his resume?
Replies
48
Views
3K
peakin11mugs
P
Back
Top