Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by joeri888, May 29, 2010.
Who's achieved more?
Olympics vs. 3 runnerup trophies at a Slam.
Federer for sure.
I think is almost even!Both of them have 9titles!1slam!5masters!The difference is that Rafa have olimpic gold and Fed have 3 finals at RG+a few more finals at masters!Anyway I think Fed have small advantage for now but Rafa is younger!We will see what the future will tell!
here are some statistics:
Fed on clay:Titles-(9) Finalist-(11)
Rafa on hard:Titles-(9) Finalist-(8)
I asked who achieved more, so being younger has little to do with that. On the other hand. If you want to know who's better, than Nadal is younger is an argument, but the fact there are twice as many HC tourneys is too. So Rafa needs to win 2 Slams, 10 MS titles on the surface.
I'd say Fed by a slim margin. Like you said, twice as many HC than clay.
I would say Federer for sure. He has really only had consistent problems with one guy over the years on clay, but Nadal has consistently had problems with a lot of guys on hardcourt.
Federer is 150/45 on clay = 77%
Nadal is 203/66 on hard = 75%
Olympics + Australian Open > runner up at a slam.
Wait, I don't see why you've started this thread when the way you've presented the question is flawed, what about Masters Series?
At RG, Federer is in a level of his own above everyone else (Except Nadal). It just so happens that Nadal is in a level of his own right above Federer.
At the USO, Fed has traditionally been at a level above everyone else, and Nadal is below him at the same level as the other top guys.
I'd say Fed on clay is better than Nadal on hard courts.
Federer on Clay, Nadal can't even get to the finals at the USO and only one Final apperance in 5 tries at AO. Federer has 4 Final Apperances out of 11 tries. If Nadal has any chance at a USO it's this year
Nadal is 23 years old this guys has time..
Nadal has reached nearly more on hard thn Fed on clay and es a few years younger.
Why does the OP ask a question he (or she) and everyone obviously knows the answer to?
Off course Federer accomplished more on clay comparitively.
He is a lot younger, but hardcourts are also a lot more common. Nadal has played in 35 hardcourt Masters events, compared to 29 clay Masters for Federer. Nadal has played in 13 hardcourt slams, while Federer has played in 11 claycourt slams.
I think his intention was to neutralize things, as they've both won as slam on those respective surfaces.
So yeah, Olympics or 3 slam runner ups?
Has Nadal even played the USO? Never seen him in a final yet.
At the moment. Roger on clay is better than Rafa on hard.
There are two hard court slams and Rafa has only made one final so far.
There is only one clay slam, and Roger has made four straight finals.
So at the moment, Roger is better on clay than Rafa on hard.
Roger is better on clay(4 FO finals) than Rafa on hard court(1 AO finals,0 USO finals).
Really is a useless thread, Federer easily.
on one hand, people are claming that federer is better on clay then Nadal is on hard. Fair enough, But these same people claim that the hard court field is deeper then the clay court field (which is true). So didnt Nadal have to go through a tougher field on harcourts then Federer had to go through on clay courts?
Yes, but so did Federer!
Yes. Fed is the 2nd best clay courter for 5 straight yrs.
See above - you can't say that about Rafa on hard. Fed lost RG to the eventual champ 4 times. Rafa at the USO... not so much...
Yes but Fed has a French Open...
I think the OP didn't include the AO or French since they just "cancel each other out" so to speak.
Separate names with a comma.