Hard, Clay, And Grass.

[Phillip=Tennis guy]

Which players are the best on these surfaces?


Grass: Federer (king of grass)

Clay: Nadal (king of clay gotta say)

Hard: Blake and federer (it's between these two)

 

[Dan007]

Well. Federer beats Blake on Hard Courts.

 

[Phillip=Tennis guy]

Well. Federer beats Blake on Hard Courts.

true......I'm just saying they both are pretty darn good on hard.

 

[anonymous2364]

are u kidding....

 

[Phillip=Tennis guy]

Is the word kidding in my post?

Why would I be?

 

[dmastous]

Which players are the best on these surfaces?


Grass: Federer (king of grass)

Clay: Nadal (king of clay gotta say)

Hard: Blake and federer (it's between these two)

The jury is still out on hard courts. I'd put Nadal in there until Federer can show he can beat him on hard courts. Blakes 2-0 record against Nadal is insufficiant information. I need a larger sampling to say he is Nadals equal if not better. As for Federer, he is hands down better than Blake.

 

[tuk]

Rigth now...
Grass, Hard: Federer
Clay: Nadal (of all time):mrgreen:

 

[Phillip=Tennis guy]

The jury is still out on hard courts. I'd put Nadal in there until Federer can show he can beat him on hard courts. Blakes 2-0 record against Nadal is insufficiant information. I need a larger sampling to say he is Nadals equal if not better. As for Federer, he is hands down better than Blake.

Federer is over nadal on hard any day.


Blake of coures isn't better than federer on hard.

 

[Dan007]

On Hard Courts, So far

Nadal beats Federer
Blake beats Nadal
Federer beats Blake.

It's really a battle between these 3.

 

[dmastous]

Federer is over nadal on hard any day.

Than why is Federer 1 out of 3 against Nadal on hard courts (Federer fan here btw...)?

 

[Phillip=Tennis guy]

Idk....ask Federer.

 

[dmastous]

Idk....ask Federer.

I'll re-quote your statement......

Federer is over nadal on hard any day.

Still support that?
You may be right, but we'll have to wait until Sept to see.

 

[Phillip=Tennis guy]

I'll re-quote your statement......

Still support that?
You may be right, but we'll have to wait until Sept to see.

Once more I will re-quote what I said.

Ask federer.

 

[The tennis guy]

Which players are the best on these surfaces?


Grass: Federer (king of grass)

Clay: Nadal (king of clay gotta say)

Hard: Blake and federer (it's between these two)

The speed of hardcourt has varied so much, more so than any time in history. Those super slow hardcourt in the spring didn't exist many years ago.

No one has a better hardcourt record than Federer in the last 3 years, like losing only 3 matches in 3 years. Blake is not even close.

 

[Phillip=Tennis guy]

true.

About Blake......once more I will say this again.

Blake is not better than federer on hard.

The two are just very good at hard.

 

[a guy]

Federer on everything apart from clay.

 

[lorenza]

federer has already proven himself to be good on hard courts with an amazing record in the last few years. blake (although he's won titles) still has a lot to prove on hard courts.

 

[Phillip=Tennis guy]

hmmmm.....

 

[BigServer1]

Federer holds longest match win streak on Hard (56 in think) and Grass (48 ). Nadal on clay (60). That's all I need to know.

 

[harryz]

Since Nadal has been on the tour

how many titles has he won on hard courts compared to Federer? Federer has two slams and several master's series events on hard courts. Nadal so far? Maybe by Fed's age he'll have won as many (which I strongly doubt) but overall Federer has proven himself to be better on hard courts despite the head to head results.

I just checked on google, and Federer has won 7 Master's Series events on hard courts. With his 3 US and 2 Australian Opens, that makes 12 major titles on hard courts. Nadal has won 1. In the next 4-5 years, when he's Federer's age, I'd doubt he'll win another 11. Let's see.

 

[OrangeOne]

A (pseudo) fed-nadal thread. how refereshing? This board never seems to compare the relative abilities of these two players! :/

 

[Amone]

The question I pose to you is this: What is Nadal's current record, realistically, for this year? 43-5. Let's count the losses, shall we?

- Against Federer, Wimbledon Finals
- Against Hewitt, Queens Semis (Withdrew, presumably to save his body for Wimby)
- Against Clement, Marseilles Semis
- Against Blake, Indian Wells Semis
- Against Moya, Miami R64

Now, investigate a little into Fed's yearly stats... 56-4. In short, the difference in loss numbers is nigh upon negligable. Admittedly, Fed only had 1 of those losses on hard. However, this year, Federer and Nadal have only MET on hard courts once this year.

So to say either is that much better than the other is just foolhardy.

Fed <? Nadal, Nadal <? Blake, and Blake < Fed. It's not hard to argue.

 

[Chang]

how many titles has he won on hard courts compared to Federer? Federer has two slams and several master's series events on hard courts. Nadal so far? Maybe by Fed's age he'll have won as many (which I strongly doubt) but overall Federer has proven himself to be better on hard courts despite the head to head results.

I just checked on google, and Federer has won 7 Master's Series events on hard courts. With his 3 US and 2 Australian Opens, that makes 12 major titles on hard courts. Nadal has won 1. In the next 4-5 years, when he's Federer's age, I'd doubt he'll win another 11. Let's see.

Isn't it 2 US titles 2004 and 2005

Nadal has won 2 Toronto and Madrid

 

[quest01]

Well there are a few great players on clay, grass, and hard courts. For one Nadal is the best clay courter right now. It’s also the only surface he has mastered and is actually any good on for that matter. On grass obviously I would have to go with Federer for one he has won 4 straight Wimbledon titles and hasn’t lost a match on this surface in 3 years. On hard courts I would have to go with Federer because he has won pretty much every hard court tournament since 2004.

 

[Bogie]

grass: federer

clay: nadal

hard: safin (playing as he was in 99-05)

 

[Rabbit]

A (pseudo) fed-nadal thread. how refereshing? This board never seems to compare the relative abilities of these two players! :/

LMAO....

 

[zhan]

federer is best on everything
federer is second best on clay
nadal is the best on clay
nadal is the second best on everything
blake is NOT the third best in everything
nalbandian is the third best in everything

 

[Duzza]

Blake isn't that good on Hard. I mean i watched Acasuso even take him to 4!

 

[zhan]

Blake isn't that good on Hard. I mean i watched Acasuso even take him to 4!

this new blake fever has thrown many people off...
its american media attention...

 

[Rabbit]

Blake's had some great results. I think there are a few to many bandwagoners around here. A guy has a good run and all of a sudden, he's best at this or loses a match and he's ready for retirement. Sports is more than one result.

 

[lorenza]

blake is really streaky and not that good. i think people just want him to succeed so much here in the states that they support him without really seeing that hes not that great of a player, IMO.

 

[lorenza]

federer is best on everything
federer is second best on clay
nadal is the best on clay
nadal is the second best on everything
blake is NOT the third best in everything
nalbandian is the third best in everything

that last statement i have to say i dont really agree with. nalbandian is good but third best in everything is stretching it a bit for me.