How Many GS titles would Fed have if he & Rafa were the same age?

[Dedans Penthouse]

Fed's got 16 GS titles under his belt. Fed's almost 5 years older than Rafa.

But what if they were the same age and entered the tour together?

How many GS titles would Federer have? _____
And how many GS titles would Nadal have? _____

and don't try to derail this into a Fed/Pete squabble...it ain't about Fed/Pete

(besides, I'm just trying to stir up trouble between the *******s and *******s)

 

[Nadalfan89]

I firmly believe that Nadal would have more GSs than Federer.

 

[clayman2000]

Nadal has one, maybe two more Wimby's. Thats really it

 

[hoodjem]

Are you suggesting that Fed would have fewer?

 

[Ripper014]

Well lets see... up til a year or so ago Federer competed with Nadal on a pretty even playing field... and this is Federer on the downside of his career... so I will let those smarter than me decide what they think.

The thing about Federer that people seem to forget is that he not only maintains a high level of tennis but he has been able to do it over an extended period of time.

There is no doubt that Nadal can play at a high level... but can he keep this style of play at a high level over an extended period..? I doubt it... it just takes too much out of his body to continue to play this style of tennis.

 

[Rippy]

Fed would almost certainly have fewer. But... loads of hypothetical scenarios would result in people have fewer slams.

 

[Berundi]

Federer would have even more slams

 

[rovex]

Federer would have even more slams

He totally would. He'd crush Nadal at the french open like he has been doing the last few years.

 

[Berundi]

^^^ quiet everyone, genius at work ... LOL

 

[yellowoctopus]

I would theorize that Mr. Federer would have a little more titles, and more chance of getting a calendar slam, because:

1) The peak of Federer's career comes later, and it (the peak) seems much more dominating than that of Nadal, in every surface.

2) Federer's career should last a little longer. He has more chance of winning more grand slam titles during his decline than Nadal.

 

[specmaster17]

nadal would have more because he seem to improve to the type of surface and players he plays.

Fed does to but not as fast

 

[edberg505]

nadal would have more because he seem to improve to the type of surface and players he plays.

Fed does to but not as fast

Right, because Federer usually got stopped by the likes of Tsonga, Ferrer, Youzhny, Gonzalez and Blake at slams.

 

[pvaudio]

nadal would have more because he seem to improve to the type of surface and players he plays.

Fed does to but not as fast

So, about his consistency on hard courts, grass and clay? Right. Nadal is consistently unbeatable on clay, very good on grass, and just top 10 good on hard court. Federer is top 5 good on clay, and #1 good on both grass and hard court. Federer didn't need to improve to any surface because he would still beat everyone on them. I think people are forgetting that Nadal's best GS final streak occurred this year (tied with 2008 ) which is TWO. I think you already know what Federer's best GS final streak is.

 

[davey25]

This is interesting. Lets break it down if both were born in 1986:

2005 when both turn 19: Nadal still wins the French.

2006 when both turn 20: Nadal still wins the French. Loses Wimbledon final to Berdych probably (Berdych actually owned Nadal around this point before the tables turned next year).

2007 when both turned 21: Nadal wins the French and Wimbledon easily now.

2008 when both turned 22: Federer didnt even emerge until Wimbledon the year he turned 22. Djokovic still easily wins the Australian. Federer of Wimbledon 2003 was a bit better than Wimbledon 2008 so I am guessing he edges Nadal in a 4 or 5 set thriller in Wimbledon final. Nadal still wins the French of course. 2003 Federer would have won the U.S Open if he didnt run into his then nemisis of a younger Nalbandian, so I am guessing he wins it this year beating Djokovic and Murray still.

2009 when both turned 23: a younger Federer probably takes advantage of Nadal going 5 sets with Verdasco the previous round to win the Australian Open final. At the French he lost to a hip busted Kuerten in 2004. He wasnt that good on non Hamburg clay yet, so Del Potro wins the French now facing a the Federer of 04.
Younger Federer wins Wimbledon easily with Nadal out, and wins the U.S Open final over Del Potro.

2010 when both turned 24: Federer of 2005 easily wins the Australian Open, he was playing far better at the 05 event than 2010 but lost to an insane Safin in one of the best matches of the decade. Nadal still easily wins the French. I think both the 2008 and 2010 Wimbledon finals would have been toss ups with a 2003 and 2005 Federer and since I gave 2008 to Federer I will give 2010 to Nadal.

As for some others, with both Federer and Nadal born in 1986:

2005: Roddick wins Wimbledon, Hewitt wins U.S Open probably
2006: Davydenko wins Australian Open, Roddick wins U.S Open
2007: Roddick wins Australian Open, Djokovic wins U.S Open

So I believe Nadal if they were both born in 1986 the slam tallies currently would be:

Nadal- 5 French Opens, 2 Wimbledons
Federer- 2 Wimbledons, 2 U.S Opens, 2 Australian Opens, 0 French Opens
Roddick- 1 Australian Open, 1 Wimbledon, 2 U.S Opens total (3 more than now)
Djokovic- 1 Australian Open, 1 U.S Open (1 more than now)
Murray- slamless (same as now)
Del Potro- slamless
Berdych- 1 Wimbledon
Hewitt- 2 U.S Opens (rather than 1 Wimbledon, 1 U.S Open)
Davydenko- 1 Australian Open

 

[Justdoit10]

Federer would have way more!

 

[TMF]

^^
Davey25 forgot about Roddick. He takes 2005 SW19 since Roger/Nadal at 19 are not even good enough to make the final. He also takes 2006 USO. So that makes it 2 slams for roddick.

 

[oscar_2424]

Fed's got 16 GS titles under his belt. Fed's almost 5 years older than Rafa.

But what if they were the same age and entered the tour together?

How many GS titles would Federer have? _____
And how many GS titles would Nadal have? _____

and don't try to derail this into a Fed/Pete squabble...it ain't about Fed/Pete

(besides, I'm just trying to stir up trouble between the *******s and *******s)

Maybe 2 or 3.

 

[kraggy]

This is interesting. Lets break it down if both were born in 1986:

2005 when both turn 19: Nadal still wins the French.

2006 when both turn 20: Nadal still wins the French. Loses Wimbledon final to Berdych probably (Berdych actually owned Nadal around this point before the tables turned next year).

2007 when both turned 21: Nadal wins the French and Wimbledon easily now.

2008 when both turned 22: Federer didnt even emerge until Wimbledon the year he turned 22. Djokovic still easily wins the Australian. Federer of Wimbledon 2003 was a bit better than Wimbledon 2008 so I am guessing he edges Nadal in a 4 or 5 set thriller in Wimbledon final. Nadal still wins the French of course. 2003 Federer would have won the U.S Open if he didnt run into his then nemisis of a younger Nalbandian, so I am guessing he wins it this year beating Djokovic and Murray still.

2009 when both turned 23: a younger Federer probably takes advantage of Nadal going 5 sets with Verdasco the previous round to win the Australian Open final. At the French he lost to a hip busted Kuerten in 2004. He wasnt that good on non Hamburg clay yet, so Del Potro wins the French now facing a the Federer of 04.
Younger Federer wins Wimbledon easily with Nadal out, and wins the U.S Open final over Del Potro.

2010 when both turned 24: Federer of 2005 easily wins the Australian Open, he was playing far better at the 05 event than 2010 but lost to an insane Safin in one of the best matches of the decade. Nadal still easily wins the French. I think both the 2008 and 2010 Wimbledon finals would have been toss ups with a 2003 and 2005 Federer and since I gave 2008 to Federer I will give 2010 to Nadal.


So I believe Nadal if they were both born in 1986 the slam tallies currently would be:

Nadal- 5 French Opens, 2 Wimbledons
Federer- 2 Wimbledons, 3 U.S Opens, 2 Australian Opens, 0 French Opens
Djokovic- 1 Australian Open (same as now)
Murray- slamless (same as now)
Del Potro- slamless
Berdych- 1 Wimbledon

cool analysis, can you run one on the scenario where both are born in 1981?

 

[davey25]

Now if both were born in 1981:

2000 when both turned 19: a peak Kuerten takes the 2005 Nadal at the French most likely.

2001 when both turned 20: since I think Kuerten would have been closely matched with even the 05-06 Nadal on clay and I gave Kuerten 2000 FO I will give Nadal the 2001 FO. I dont think the 06 version of Nadal would win Wimbledon with Agassi, Ivanisevic, and Rafter all in the late rounds.

2002 when both turned 21: The field this year was a joke, joke, JOKE. The worst year of mens tennis ever. Johansson winning the Australian Open, a past his prime Costa the French, the worst Wimbledon in mens tennis history, Schalken one of the top men in the World this year, ugh. Nadal wins the Australian Open (yes the same Nadal that got spanked by a playing out of his mind Gonzalez). Nadal of course romps to the French Open. And Nadal easily wins Wimbledon which was won by Hewitt over Nalbandian. Sadly injury probably costs Nadal the U.S Open title and a Calendar Slam which was contested by an aging Sampras vs aging Agassi.

2003 the year both turned 22: Nadal doesnt run into a tournament of a lifetime Tsonga or a top form Djokovic but instead gets a 33 year old Agassi, Schuettler, injured Roddick, or 30 something Ferreira. 2008 Nadal wins the Australian Open again. Nadal wins the French again though Ferrero gives a decent final. Same as 2008, Federer in a 4 or 5 set thriller in the Wimbledon final. I say 22 year old Nadal would not be able to overcome Roddick or Nalbandian at the U.S Open this year.

2004 year both turned 23: Nadal no longer burdened with the marathon the previous day vs Verdasco takes down even a younger Federer in the Australian Open final this year. The field at the 2004 French is so pathetic Nadal wins with his injury too before withdrawing from Wimbledon. Federer easily wins Wimbledons and U.S Open just as was.

2005 year both turned 24: Safin wins the Australian just as was, Nadal wins the French just as was when he was turning 19, Nadal ekes past Federer in the Wimbledon final (like my original breakdown when I split the 08 and 2010 finals between Nadal and younger Federer).

So in this scenario they would have:

Nadal- 5 French Opens, 2 Wimbledons, 1 Australian Open
Federer- 2 Wimbledons, 1 U.S Open


Federer actually fares better comparatively IMO if both were born in 1986. He avoids Nalbandian at the 03 U.S Open, Safin at the 05 Australian Open, then gets Nadal coming off a 5 setter in 2009 (now with 22 year old legs) rather than not as in 2004.

 

[Justdoit10]

lol this question violates numerous scientific and mathematical concepts.

 

[davey25]

^^
Davey25 forgot about Roddick. He takes 2005 SW19 since Roger/Nadal at 19 are not even good enough to make the final. He also takes 2006 USO. So that makes it 2 slams for roddick.

Yes that is true. If both are born in 1986 then the other slams those years:

2005: Roddick wins Wimbledon, Hewitt wins U.S Open probably
2006: Davydenko wins Australian Open, Roddick wins U.S Open
2007: Roddick wins Australian Open, Djokovic wins U.S Open

I forgot about those.

 

[TMF]

lol this question violates numerous scientific and mathematical concepts.

Davey25 was wrong about the 2 sisters making the FO final this year. So making a prediction as complicated as this one, it isn’t a surprise his analysis and calculation can be way off.

 

[davey25]

Davey25 was wrong about the 2 sisters making the FO final this year. So making a prediction as complicated as this one, it isn’t a surprise his analysis and calculation can be way off.

and you were wrong on:

1. Henin and Clijsters returning to take over the tour.

2. Serena's slam winning days being done after last year since the "superior" Clijsters was back (haha)

3. Nadal having a tough time on clay this year and being threatened by all of Federer, Soderling, Djokovic, Del Potro on clay this year.

4. Nadal possibly never winning another slam (one of your gems late last year).

5. Henin winning the French Open this year.


Need I go on further.

 

[kraggy]

Now if both were born in 1981:

2000 when both turned 19: a peak Kuerten takes the 2005 Nadal at the French most likely.

2001 when both turned 20: since I think Kuerten would have been closely matched with even the 05-06 Nadal on clay and I gave Kuerten 2000 FO I will give Nadal the 2001 FO. I dont think the 06 version of Nadal would win Wimbledon with Agassi, Ivanisevic, and Rafter all in the late rounds.

2002 when both turned 21: The field this year was a joke, joke, JOKE. The worst year of mens tennis ever. Johansson winning the Australian Open, a past his prime Costa the French, the worst Wimbledon in mens tennis history, Schalken one of the top men in the World this year, ugh. Nadal wins the Australian Open (yes the same Nadal that got spanked by a playing out of his mind Gonzalez). Nadal of course romps to the French Open. And Nadal easily wins Wimbledon which was won by Hewitt over Nalbandian. Sadly injury probably costs Nadal the U.S Open title and a Calendar Slam which was contested by an aging Sampras vs aging Agassi.

2003 the year both turned 22: Nadal doesnt run into a tournament of a lifetime Tsonga or a top form Djokovic but instead gets a 33 year old Agassi, Schuettler, injured Roddick, or 30 something Ferreira. 2008 Nadal wins the Australian Open again. Nadal wins the French again though Ferrero gives a decent final. Same as 2008, Federer in a 4 or 5 set thriller in the Wimbledon final. I say 22 year old Nadal would not be able to overcome Roddick or Nalbandian at the U.S Open this year.

2004 year both turned 23: Nadal no longer burdened with the marathon the previous day vs Verdasco takes down even a younger Federer in the Australian Open final this year. The field at the 2004 French is so pathetic Nadal wins with his injury too before withdrawing from Wimbledon. Federer easily wins Wimbledons and U.S Open just as was.

2005 year both turned 24: Safin wins the Australian just as was, Nadal wins the French just as was when he was turning 19, Nadal ekes past Federer in the Wimbledon final (like my original breakdown when I split the 08 and 2010 finals between Nadal and younger Federer).

So in this scenario they would have:

Nadal- 5 French Opens, 2 Wimbledons, 1 Australian Open
Federer- 2 Wimbledons, 1 U.S Open


Federer actually fares better comparatively IMO if both were born in 1986. He avoids Nalbandian at the 03 U.S Open, Safin at the 05 Australian Open, then gets Nadal coming off a 5 setter in 2009 (now with 22 year old legs) rather than not as in 2004.

Good stuff. Of course what remains to be seen is how Nadal fares over the next 5 yrs. My feeling is that Nadal was an early bloomer and Federer from 26-29 will turn out to be a better player than Nadal from 26-29. So in both scenarios we are not accounting for the slams Fed would win in the later yrs.

 

[davey25]

Good stuff. Of course what remains to be seen is how Nadal fares over the next 5 yrs. My feeling is that Nadal was an early bloomer and Federer from 26-29 will turn out to be a better player than Nadal from 26-29. So in both scenarios we are not accounting for the slams Fed would win in the later yrs.

You would be right if that turns out to be the case. The jury is still out on how Nadal will hold up. I understand the detractors views but I think he might surprise people in this regard (like he has already to some degree). Will be fascinating to see how it plays out.

 

[Dedans Penthouse]

Let's look at Fed's 16 and Rafa's 8 at present. And note the "rafa" injury factor in one or two GS tourneys (c'mon nadalettes & federittes, fair is fair)

And btw, BOTH would be obviously rightfully cited as all-time-greats at the conclusion of their respective careers; that said:

At present:

Fed=16
Rafa=8

Scrunched-up-face-Fed: 16 Grand Slam championships
Scowled-faced-Rafa: 8 Grand Slam championships

IMHO, throw one additional Aussie Open Rafa's way (making it 15-9 Fed?) and 2 additional French Open titles Rafa's way (making it 12-12?), and taking into account that James Blake is Rafa's "Daddy" come the U.S. Open and that Rafa has no US Open "adjustments" to consider (just tryin' to stir up trouble between the nadalettes-vs-*******s), it would seem that Fed given his "all-court" dominance esp. during his earlier GS years would get the nod....13-12 FEDERER.

My 'math' is admittedly anything but accurate, but I just wanted to throw this out there and let the more erudite Fed-Rafa afficianados put the true numbers to the test. Thx for your input.

Both=tennis is for the better.

 

[fps]

which way round we doing it? federer born later or nadal earlier??

bear in mind that federer came into his own later than nadal.

 

[Semi-Pro]

which way round we doing it? federer born later or nadal earlier??

bear in mind that federer came into his own later than nadal.

Exactly, which is why real age is somewhat irrelevant. In tennis years of age they are around 2 or maybe 3 years apart.

 

[flyinghippos101]

Can you run a simulation if both were born in 1952?

 

[rk_sports]

Just like we all NEED rivalries, if they both were of same age, it is possible that we had more great match-ups at finals

Just like when Fed is a step slower, Nadal is at his peak

It's just a shame that they both were not their best for most of their rivalry

Oh well.. its just a loss to us the tennis fans .. we've to brace for more one sided finals to come

 

[tennis_guru]

On Pluto they're the same age. So really it has to do with the earth's orbit, in which case age is quite meaningless.

 

[fps]

Exactly, which is why real age is somewhat irrelevant. In tennis years of age they are around 2 or maybe 3 years apart.

i wouldn't say that, i think federer being 4 1/2 years older than nadal has a lot to do with the way their matches go. it's just that federer discovered his game at a later age. physically they are waaay different at this point.

 

[bluegrasser]

Fed's got 16 GS titles under his belt. Fed's almost 5 years older than Rafa.

But what if they were the same age and entered the tour together?

How many GS titles would Federer have? _____
And how many GS titles would Nadal have? _____

and don't try to derail this into a Fed/Pete squabble...it ain't about Fed/Pete

(besides, I'm just trying to stir up trouble between the *******s and *******s)

Good question - have at the completion of their career / I'd say King Fed = 12 & Rafa = 14 IMHO *

* I mean, right now they have #24 combined.