Federer vs Nadal Who Is Ahead As Of Now?

Federer vs Nadal Who Is Ahead As Of Now?

  • Federer is ahead

    Votes: 69 41.8%

  • Nadal is ahead

    Votes: 79 47.9%

  • Too close to call

    Votes: 17 10.3%
  • Total voters
    165
Neptune

Neptune

Hall of Fame
Fed vs Rafa

Slam Titles: 20 vs 22 (F+: 31-30, SF+: 46-38, QF+: 58-47)
Total Slam Points: 70855 vs 64600
Note: On Djokovic's strongest surface, Federer faced him nine times in hardcourt Slam before the final, while Nadal faced him zero times. I believe that kind of advantage in the Slam draw alone is worth more than two Slam titles.

YEC: 6 vs 0
Masters: 28 vs 36
OG: 0 vs 1
CGS: 1 vs 2
3-Slam Season: 3 vs 1
Total Titles: 103 vs 92
Big Titles: 54 vs 59

Weeks@1: 310 vs 209
Consecutive Weeks@1: 237 vs 56
Win%: 81.91% vs 82.96%
Top5 Wins: 104 vs 93
Top10 Wins: 223 vs 186
H2H: 16 vs 24
ATP Points: 164000 vs 149000
GOAT Points: 924 vs 885
Achievement ranking points: 131.0 vs 119.66

USO draw rigged for top two seeds? Espn reported 2011AUG10 and 2011AUG11.

One chart depicting 12 consecutive non-clay Slam draws highlights the absurdity of the rigging, just tip of the iceberg. (addons: From Miami08 to Doha11, Davydenko 6-0 making Rafa his pigeon on HC, but all the 6 HC slams they both participated, Davy is always on the same side as his master Fed, never on the same side as his pigeon Rafa.)
The math: 23 consecutive heads in coin tosses, Rafa truly requires assistance, particularly on hardcourts, to reach the finals.
jEOQTrs.png
 
Last edited:
To neutrals it’s close. Both have somethings the other doesn’t, overall stats support Rafa but personally I put Fed slightly ahead.
 
Honestly it's very close IMO. There are lots of contextual factors to consider which could give good arguments for either. I sometimes go back and forth in my own mind

That being said, 2 slams difference is a lot. With Nadal having more slams, masters and the H2H, I'd say he's ahead. Even if Federer has the weeks at #1 and the YECs.

I don't think there's a lot in it between them though.
 
It can't be Nadal when he didn't really even have his own era, he just occasionally interrupted the Federer and Djokovic eras.

In clay he's ahead of everyone ever but that's surface specific.
 
Neptune said:
Fed vs Rafa
Slam Titles: 20 vs 22 (F+: 31-30, SF+: 46-38, QF+: 58-47)
YEC: 6 vs 0
Masters: 28 vs 36
OG: 0 vs 1
CGS: 1 vs 2
3-Slam Season: 3 vs 1
Weeks@1: 310 vs 209
Consecutive Weeks@1: 237 vs 56
Win%: 81.91% vs 82.96%
Top5 Wins: 104 vs 93
Top10 Wins: 223 vs 186
H2H: 16 vs 24
ATP Points: 164000 vs 149000
GOAT Points: 924 vs 885
Achievement ranking points: 131.0 vs 119.66
Click to expand...

1. Titles. More GS and big titles - slight advantage Rafa.
2. No1 record. More weeks - clear advantage Fed.
3. Peak dominance. 2006 (2004-2007) - clear advantage Fed.
4. Career versatility. (Arguably) slight advantage Fed.

Federer is greater player than Nadal.
 
Towny said:
Honestly it's very close IMO. There are lots of contextual factors to consider which could give good arguments for either. I sometimes go back and forth in my own mind

That being said, 2 slams difference is a lot. With Nadal having more slams, masters and the H2H, I'd say he's ahead. Even if Federer has the weeks at #1 and the YECs.

I don't think there's a lot in it between them though.
Click to expand...
9% difference is not that much, imo.
 
MichaelNadal said:
Why are yall asking dumb questions lol? No one would trade DOWN 2 slams and a DCGS. Stop the mess.
Click to expand...
two slams won by ndal do count, but two slams won by gioco..dont, yea we know, its not really dumb coz each member out of three has strong equal case in his favor so we can turn it whatever we want lol, besides those mentioned slams again which won by gioco in so called CIE, if it can be turned against serbian wolf, as we see it quite often in here, same way it can be turned against spanish bull too, why not..coz it was won too in CIE, which gives us enuff fuel to start the car and enjoy the trip..:D
 
MichaelNadal said:
Why are yall asking dumb questions lol? No one would trade DOWN 2 slams and a DCGS. Stop the mess.
Click to expand...

Very debatable assertion.
Federer's 6 WTF are worthy of 1 Slam if not 2.
More important, Nadal having ONE and only ONE indoor HC title (Madrid 05), 0 Paris and 0 WTF is a colossal hole. He was never able to learn and adapt his game for these courts, that's a problem. Federer is still more versatile than Nadal in general. He has 5 titles in 4 of the 5 biggest tournaments. Nadal only has 5+ titles in 1 out of 5.
Federer also has 100 extra weeks at World Number #1. Big deal here. Some ATG players don't even have 100 weeks at number #1. That's a huge gap.

But Nadal has the positive H2H, an Olympic title and more Masters1000 (besides the 2 slams and DCGS)
The gap of M1000 (8) and the Double career slam make a big difference so I'd still put Nadal ahead but it's very very close. And debatable. I can see why fans would hesitate. Nothing wrong with that. If Federer had 21 instead of 20, I'd pick him over Nadal in a heartbeat.
 
Lauren_Girl' said:
Very debatable assertion.
Federer's 6 WTF are worthy of 1 Slam if not 2.
More important, Nadal having ONE and only ONE indoor HC title (Madrid 05), 0 Paris and 0 WTF is a colossal hole. He was never able to learn and adapt his game for these courts, that's a problem. Federer is still more versatile than Nadal in general. He has 5 titles in 4 of the 5 biggest tournaments. Nadal only has 5+ titles in 1 out of 5.
Federer also has 100 extra weeks at World Number #1. Big deal here. Some ATG players don't even have 100 weeks at number #1. That's a huge gap.

But Nadal has the positive H2H, an Olympic title and more Masters1000 (besides the 2 slams and DCGS)
The gap of M1000 (8) and the Double career slam make a big difference so I'd still put Nadal ahead but it's very very close. And debatable. I can see why fans would hesitate. Nothing wrong with that. If Federer had 21 instead of 20, I'd pick him over Nadal in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...
Yes.
 
I've said this a few times but I think three slams and the OG Singles outweigh Fed's greater success on two surfaces and the additional WTFs.

So Nadal needs one more slam. Now they're even or Fed is slightly ahead. JUST IMO. Why three slams? Just an arbitrary number I thought up LOL
 
Lauren_Girl' said:
Very debatable assertion.
Federer's 6 WTF are worthy of 1 Slam if not 2.
More important, Nadal having ONE and only ONE indoor HC title (Madrid 05), 0 Paris and 0 WTF is a colossal hole. He was never able to learn and adapt his game for these courts, that's a problem. Federer is still more versatile than Nadal in general. He has 5 titles in 4 of the 5 biggest tournaments. Nadal only has 5+ titles in 1 out of 5.
Federer also has 100 extra weeks at World Number #1. Big deal here. Some ATG players don't even have 100 weeks at number #1. That's a huge gap.

But Nadal has the positive H2H, an Olympic title and more Masters1000 (besides the 2 slams and DCGS)
The gap of M1000 (8) and the Double career slam make a big difference so I'd still put Nadal ahead but it's very very close. And debatable. I can see why fans would hesitate. Nothing wrong with that. If Federer had 21 instead of 20, I'd pick him over Nadal in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...

nachiket nolefam said:
Yes.
Click to expand...
Lol yall keep “debating” then :D
 
Towny said:
Honestly it's very close IMO. There are lots of contextual factors to consider which could give good arguments for either. I sometimes go back and forth in my own mind

That being said, 2 slams difference is a lot. With Nadal having more slams, masters and the H2H, I'd say he's ahead. Even if Federer has the weeks at #1 and the YECs.

I don't think there's a lot in it between them though.
Click to expand...
Haven’t seen you in here for ages.

A lot of us remember your legendary analysis of the shortcomings of the ELO system.
 
If we're focusing solely on achievements then Nadal is ahead with 2 slams. If we total the value of their secondary achievements (YEC + Masters + OSG) they come out roughly even. That leaves weeks at no.1 and minor titles where Roger leads. Personally, I'll take 2 slams over any amount of weeks @ no. 1.

Distribution of achievements by surface doesn't matter as any route to a slam is equally as impressive as any other. 14 RG's is as impressive as 8 WB + 6 AO and to argue otherwise is as a subjective argument with equally valid arguments for and against both sides. Therefore, it's more objective to leave it for what it is and celebrate that every player has their own strengths and weaknesses.
 
StrongRule said:
Both are ahead of Djokovic. Asterisk era "records" don't add anything to Djokovic's legacy. Just WOW, the guy can beat Tsitsipas and Ruud.
Click to expand...
As well as Federer and Nadal.

In the most competitive era of tennis, 2011-16, Djokovic led Nadal, Wawrinka and Federer 11-5-3-1.
 
Just by on court achievements Nadal is ahead ..... 22>20 & 24-16 seal it ..... Nothing else matters.

Off the court achievements added Federer is ahead in Stature...... His presence is still massive. As on 2023 Federer is still 1 on Forbes money earned list for the last 12 months.... a massive 95 Million $ he made. All of it off the court...... He is still the Boss brandwise...
 
No, no. In 2008-09, there were only Federer and Nadal. Djokovic was 21 and still had gluten problem. Murray, Wawrinka and Cilic were non-factors.

In 2011-16, all six were factors.
 
wtf titles and some other stuff for fred is like the equalizer denzel washington lol (the equalizer movie), so nothing is over, as legendary vietnam veteran john rambo would say
 
alexio said:
wtf titles and some other stuff for fred is like the equalizer denzel washington for that girl lol (the equalizer movie), so nothing is over, as legendary vietnam veteran john rambo would say
Click to expand...

wtf, masters are all useless in goat debates now, they are just accessories that gave a player ranking points and prize money, nothing more. The Best of 3 sets stuffs are not taken seriously anymore. Thats why Nadal's failure indoors are not an issue cause the public only sees Slams, H2H and Rank 1 stats, these 3 things. The importance of the masters and other tournaments are reflected in rank 1 stats, there is no need to count it again.
 
Razer said:
wtf, masters are all useless in goat debates now, they are just accessories that gave a player ranking points and prize money, nothing more. The Best of 3 sets stuffs are not taken seriously anymore. Thats why Nadal's failure indoors are not an issue cause the public only sees Slams, H2H and Rank 1 stats, these 3 things. The importance of the masters and other tournaments are reflected in rank 1 stats, there is no need to count it again.
Click to expand...
did you watch it btw, what do you think whos more tough casey ryback or equalizer?:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Nadal vs Federer at the same age (Nadal's age now 24)
Replies
4
Views
2K
813wilson
8
Sunny014
  • Poll Poll
Peak Federer vs Peak Djokovic vs Peak Sampras vs Peak Nadal ..... Who will end up as year end 1 ?
3 4 5
Replies
203
Views
8K
Sunny014
Sunny014
Winner Sinner
  • Poll Poll
[POLL] Kafelnikov vs Safin vs Medvedev...Who is the best Russian tennis player ever?
Replies
26
Views
951
Donkus_Reborn
D
Neptune
Big 4 at each of the big 3's peak 6-year span:
Replies
27
Views
2K
Neptune
Neptune
S
So now, tell me who is the best...
Replies
17
Views
1K
DashaandSafin
D
Back
Top