How to statistically measure greatness in the OE. The Nadal vs Federer debate.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Beerus
  • Start date Start date
B

Beerus

Guest
Well, it's only my opinion.

1. The Slam count
2. The weeks at #1/YE #1

3. The YEC count

I've always believed that these stats matter the most. The 3rd stat is not as important as the first 2 stats, but it comes after them. I'd include the H2H only if it's too one-sided. Tennis isn't boxing. Beating the field means more. The Masters count comes after the YEC count, but I'd look at the Masters count if looking deeper is necessary.

This is why the Nadal vs Federer debate is complicated for me. Nadal has 22 Slams while Federer has 20 Slams. Federer has 310 weeks at #1 and 6 YECs. They both have 5 YE #1s, but I lean Federer there as he finished #1 four times in a row.

It feels that Federer should be overall ahead statistically, but 2 fewer Slams hurt his case a lot. He shouldn't have lost both the 2008 Wimbledon final and the 2009 AO final to Nadal.

All in all, I don't know who is greater between those two. It is probably Nadal, but he failed to surpass Federer in all relevant metrics like Djokovic did and that's why this debate will never die.
 
_41704776_nadal_federer1_416.gif
 
I think it's important to look at the slams accross the board rather than just checking the count. Something that is in Feds favour as well is he has performed alot better than Nadal accross all the four slams. 5+ at AO, Wimbledon and USO.
 
You can't please everyone while comparing these two. There are arguments for both.
What you want? A formula of sort? Like how many Grass 250s of Federer can counter how many clay 500s of Nadal and how many ATP finals of Federer counter how many masters 1000 of Nadal. Get serious dude, there is no such formula.

They are both in same tier, both have some things over each other.
 
Beerus said:
Well, it's only my opinion.

1. The Slam count
2. The weeks at #1/YE #1

3. The YEC count

I've always believed that these stats matter the most. The 3rd stat is not as important as the first 2 stats, but it comes after them. I'd include the H2H only if it's too one-sided. Tennis isn't boxing. Beating the field means more. The Masters count comes after the YEC count, but I'd look at the Masters count if looking deeper is necessary.

This is why the Nadal vs Federer debate is complicated for me. Nadal has 22 Slams while Federer has 20 Slams. Federer has 310 weeks at #1 and 6 YECs. They both have 5 YE #1s, but I lean Federer there as he finished #1 four times in a row.

It feels that Federer should be overall ahead statistically, but 2 fewer Slams hurt his case a lot. He shouldn't have lost both the 2008 Wimbledon final and the 2009 AO final to Nadal.

All in all, I don't know who is greater between those two. It is probably Nadal, but he failed to surpass Federer in all relevant metrics like Djokovic did and that's why this debate will never die.
Click to expand...
1. Titles (overall)
Nadal - more GS titles and more big titles. Federer - more total titles and more YEC titles.
Advantage Nadal.

2. No1 record
Both 5 YEn1. Nadal 101 weeks less than 310.
Clear advantage Federer.

3. Peak domination
Federer - one of the greatest show of dominance in tennis history, unparalleled prolonged domination lasting more than 3 years, 237 weeks on top.
Clear advantage Federer.

4. Career versatility
Nadal 2xCGS, Fed 1xCGS. Neither ever won all big titles. Nadal lesser than ATG performance indoors, abysmal YEC record for tier1 ATG, huge hole in his resume. Federer greater player in 4/5 biggest events.
Advantage Federer.

This is why Nadal will always be behind Federer.
9% more GS titles and Olympic gold is not nearly enough to compensate for all other advantages Federer has.
 
itrium84 said:
1. Titles (overall)
Nadal - more GS titles and more big titles. Federer - more total titles and more YEC titles.
Advantage Nadal.

2. No1 record
Both 5 YEn1. Nadal 101 weeks less than 310.
Clear advantage Federer.

3. Peak domination
Federer - one of the greatest show of dominance in tennis history, unparalleled prolonged domination lasting more than 3 years, 237 weeks on top.
Clear advantage Federer.

4. Career versatility
Nadal 2xCGS, Fed 1xCGS. Neither ever won all big titles. Nadal lesser than ATG performance indoors, abysmal YEC record for tier1 ATG, huge hole in his resume. Federer greater player in 4/5 biggest events.
Advantage Federer.

This is why Nadal will always be behind Federer.
9% more GS titles and Olympic gold is not nearly enough to compensate for all other advantages Federer has.
Click to expand...
If we use clear numbers, its 2 slams. If that is enough or not is not a matter. But if we convert slam wins into percentages, then it would be big issue. Murray is 33% slam behind Courier.

For me yes, Federer being better on all surfaces except clay vs Nadal on clay so I will go with Federer too.
 
nachiket nolefam said:
UTS has different categories though. In some type of categories Nadal is ahead and in others, Djokovic is ahead. Can't use it blindly.
Click to expand...
I kind of like the GOAT points because of how convoluted they are (and how they made sure to include everything that could help Novak's case :P)
 
aldeayeah said:
UTS still has Sexy Rogi ahead.

Ultimate Tennis Statistics - GOAT List

Open Era GOAT List (a.k.a. GOATometer) compares tennis player career achievements expressed by GOAT Points
ultimatetennisstatistics.com

It is in times like these that @Lew II would enlighten us with decisive metrics such as the amount of non-grass runner-up finishes in 2011-2016, and what it tells us. Alas, he is no more.
Click to expand...
Maybe he will join that other forum.
 
2003 to 2009 is the Federer era, and 2011 to now it's the Djokovic era.

I can't see how Nadal could possibly be ahead of either when he didn't even have an era of his own, rather he just interrupted the other's - his 2013 is the only equivalent season he has to Federer's 2004-2007, and Djokovic's 2011 and 2015 seasons, where he was winning big tournaments throughout the season and not just over 4-5 months.

One that's probably impossible to quantify is impact on popular culture.

Roger Federer, a shy bloke from Switzerland with long hair and a big nose, became the tennis equivalent of Michael Jordan.

Probably the only thing that's stopped him from becoming that little bit more of an icon is that he isn't American.
 
aldeayeah said:
I kind of like the GOAT points because of how convoluted they are (and how they made sure to include everything that could help Novak's case :p)
Click to expand...
I am saying in GOAT points, there are 6 categories. Nole is obviously leading all 6 of them.
But in 4 Fed is number 2 and Nadal 3
In 1 Nadal is number 2 and Fed 3
And in the last 1 Nadal is number 4 and Fed 5.

So even in GOAT list, there are different interpretations.

Obviously Nole is ahead in all 6. He is the absolute GOAT.
 
based on just your definition here, probably it wont be a mistake to say that overall fred is ahead by a whisker, coz slams yea ndal is ahead but in other two metrics its fred, and the gap in those two metrics is way bigger than gap in slams, hence its fred
 
Nadal biggest argument is slam h2h and pet slam dominance. Fed has higher peak at 3/4 slams, better consistency, more titles, more YEC, more versatile.

Slam total numbers doesn’t really matter too much at 20/22 level. Simple case of inflated stats and choking from fed.
 
That's correct.

1- Slams
2- Weeks and YE 1
3- YEC

H2H I would give importance in some cases only. If a player won most of their big matches across all surfaces and without a significant age difference.
 
aldeayeah said:
UTS still has Sexy Rogi ahead.

Ultimate Tennis Statistics - GOAT List

Open Era GOAT List (a.k.a. GOATometer) compares tennis player career achievements expressed by GOAT Points
ultimatetennisstatistics.com

It is in times like these that @Lew II would enlighten us with decisive metrics such as the amount of non-grass runner-up finishes in 2011-2016, and what it tells us. Alas, he is no more.
Click to expand...
He’s somewhere floating around the solar system.
0283729c692b6bac.gif
 
indeed fred is ahead of course if we agree that not only slams count..
lets apply 10-5-4 system (in f1 they used 10-6-4 many years ago but ok dont mind to give ndal adv. a bit and still hes behind)..
10 points - slams, 5-weeks, 4-yec..then..
20-22
300-200 (8-5.3)
6-0.. then the score is..
200-220
40-26
24-0...and the overall score is 264-246 in fred' favor
 
3 Criterias for Greatness

01. Grand Slam titles
02. Head to Head
03. Rank 1 Stats

The WTF is a glorified exho ever since they reduced it to all BO3, so that is not a factor anymore unfortunately. Plus the rank 1 stats do cover them, there is no need to highlight it separately unlike Slams and H2H which are pivotal.

Rafa has 1 & 2 covered, so he is ahead of Roger on the court unfortunately, off the court it is a different thing. Stature of a player is always judged on court + off court brand value combined, so in that case Federer is still in the conversation for overall stature in Tennis. But on court he has emerged 3rd, which means statistically he is below Nadal now sadly.
 
i had my own system for many years:

YE#1 = 100p
50 weeks (apr. a year) = 100p (1 week = 2p)
slam = 100p
WTF = OG = 40p
M = 20p
(slam F = 15p)
MM = 5p

bonuses:
NCYGS = 100p
CGS = 100p
GM = 100p
slam record = 100p
weeks record = 100p
YE#1 record = 100p
W% record = 100p
ATP points record = 100p
surface GOAT = 100p
....
if between 2 players
h2h = 100p
better on a single surface = 100p

all under 200-300 is to close to decide but more than 500 is good enough for a safe choice
......

preaty good ones:

Ultimate Tennis Statistics - GOAT List

Open Era GOAT List (a.k.a. GOATometer) compares tennis player career achievements expressed by GOAT Points
www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com

Ultimate Tennis Statistics - GOAT List

Open Era GOAT List (a.k.a. GOATometer) compares tennis player career achievements expressed by GOAT Points
www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com
 
Federer & Nadal battled for tennis supremacy in '08-10. Nadal won WB & AO from Federer, who didn't win any from Nadal.

Therefore, Nadal was the better of the two.
 
RF-18 said:
I think it's important to look at the slams accross the board rather than just checking the count. Something that is in Feds favour as well is he has performed alot better than Nadal accross all the four slams. 5+ at AO, Wimbledon and USO.
Click to expand...

Yes thank you! This is what i was going to say, but you beat me to it! Nadal lacks Federer's versatility in many ways than one! Aside from what you mentioned Nadal has never defended any of the other slams he has won even once, while Federer only failed to defend his worst (despite not having more than one career slams, like Nadal has now), Nadal only had one three-slam winning season and Federer had three of them, Nadal's best ever season can't quite hold a candle to Federer's 2006 (which is no even consensus exists which that season even is to even begin with, some say 2010, some say 2013 and some even suggest 2008, but none of the answers are obvious...), Nadal was has never had crazy streaks at the top of the rankings, because he was never consistent throughout the entire season on month-to-month basis or even week-to-week, most of the times when Federer was busy dominating anything, that isn't clay and even clay itself partially (where there was no Nadal around) Nadal was busy trying to learn how to properly play on grass and hard courts, furthermore look at secondary slam stats like number of SFs and QFs and see, who is ahead! He even lags Federer in finals of the slams reached being one behind (and he may as well be stuck on that number until the reminder of his career as there is a big chance his 2024 combeack campaign has all the chances to be disasterous, sending him into retirement quicker than anticipated...), there are way more statistical things like that, that shows who is more accomplished and consistent and that person isn't Nadal...
...If you want more details of what Federer has over Nadal, here they are:
31 slam finals vs. 30
46 slam SFs vs. 38
58 slam QFs vs. 47 (Federer even still have this over Djokovic let alone Nadal LOL...though Djokovic only lags one behind, so i expect it to change in 2024)
369 slam matches won vs. 314 (And Federer is also still leader on this one over Djokovic, which is once again something that will 100% change in 2024 and likely both at RG at the same time)
Minimum SFs reached at all 4 slams - Federer 8, Nadal - 7
Minimum QFs reached at all 4 slams - Federer 12, Nadal - 8
Minimum match wins at all 4 slams - Federer 73, Nadal - 58
Seasons reaching all 4 slam finals - Federer and Djokovic both at 3, Nadal big fat zero! LOL
Seasons reaching all 4 slam SFs - Federer - 5, Nadal only 2 once again LOL
Seasons reaching all 4 slam QFs - Federer and Djokovic tied at 8 both (Novak will probably pull ahead after the USO 2024) Nadal only at 5 (not AS bad, but still 3 shy of Djokerer...)
Finals at the AO (non-pet slam for either) - Federer 7, Nadal 6
Finals at the USO (2nd non-pet slam for either) - Federer 7, Nadal 5
And this is only a tip of the iceberg, i'm sure i could dig up more! And i didn't even list things, that are already mentioned earlier! LOL These are additional stats to what was already mentioned!
 
Last edited:
Holmes said:
The only correct answer is Nadal and time will only make this more evident as the monumental gap widens. Stop the madness and let Federer rest.
Click to expand...

Yes, especially after my long post above...i recommend you to read that one and repeat this aloud oncer again with the serious look on your face! Come on and entertain me! LOL
 
Stats stats stats:

Fed:
  • Weeks at number 1: 310 > 209
  • YECs: 6 > 0
  • Slam finals: 31>30
  • 5+ slams at 3 slams
  • Most dominant peak: Consecutive weeks at number 1 or other dominance metric for that time
  • Overall titles: 103 > 92
Ned:
  • Slams: 22 > 20
  • Masters 1000s: 36 > 28
  • Olympic Singles Medals: 1 > 0
  • Career slams: 2 > 1
  • H2H: 24 > 16
  • Greatest ever surface domination (any clay stat you like here tbh)
  • Career win %: 82.9 > 82
  • Consecutive weeks in top 10 other other metric for that time
 
jl809 said:
Stats stats stats:

Fed:
  • Weeks at number 1: 310 > 209
  • YECs: 6 > 0
  • Slam finals: 31>30
  • 5+ slams at 3 slams
  • Most dominant peak: Consecutive weeks at number 1 or other dominance metric for that time
  • Overall titles: 103 > 92
Ned:
  • Slams: 22 > 20
  • Masters 1000s: 36 > 28
  • Olympic Singles Medals: 1 > 0
  • Career slams: 2 > 1
  • H2H: 24 > 16
  • Greatest ever surface domination (any clay stat you like here tbh)
  • Career win %: 82.9 > 82
  • Consecutive weeks in top 10 other other metric for that time
Click to expand...
Fed has longetivity as well as peak over Nadal.

Nadal has masters and slams over fed.

Very hard.
 
nachiket nolefam said:
Fed has longetivity as well as peak over Nadal.

Nadal has masters and slams over fed.

Very hard.
Click to expand...
Tbh I think Ned has longevity as well. He won a slam and 7 M1000s aged 18-19 AND won 2 slams and competed for world number 1 aged 35-36. That’s a 17 year gap… And his weeks in the top 10 record reflects that too.

Fed was a much later bloomer but had a higher peak with better numbers for his peak too

Djoker is kinda more well rounded somewhere in between, a guy who got very good very young, stayed good when he was very old, and also had a good peak
 
Djokodalerer31 said:
Yes, especially after my long post above...i recommend you to read that one and repeat this aloud oncer again with the serious look on your face! Come on and entertain me! LOL
Click to expand...

Stats you forgot:

Slam count
Career slams
Olympic gold titles
Masters count
Dominance at best slam
Head to head
Slam head to head
# of slams at weakest slam
# of times beating opponent at their strongest slam

Just helping you get started on your analysis.
 
Last edited:
Djokodalerer31 said:
And this is only a tip of the iceberg, i'm sure i could dig up more! And i didn't even list things, that are already mentioned earlier! LOL These are additional stats to what was already mentioned!
Click to expand...

Another tip of the iceberg, startling stats at Hardcourt Slam semifinals:
Appearances in the SFs
Fed 25, Rafa 15
Occurrences of facing top5 (where heavyweights encounter the top 5)
Fed 17, Rafa 3
Occurrences of facing king of HC, Nole
Fed 8, Rafa 0
 
Holmes said:
Stats you forgot:

Slam count
Career slams
Olympic gold titles
Dominance at best slam
Head to head
Slam head to head
# of slams at weakest slam
# of times beating opponent at their strongest slam

Just helping you get started on your analysis.
Click to expand...

I forgot absolutely nothing, i specifically mentioned Federer's versatility, when you have a situation where one player tops almost every chart, you won't be arguing against him even if he has a few stats here and there against him (no matter how important they are!), Nadal lags behind so many metrics it makes him look like an amateur next to Federer and especially Djokovic!...
 
Djokodalerer31 said:
I forgot absolutely nothing, i specifically mentioned Federer's versatility, when you have a situation where one player tops almost every chart, you won't be arguing against him even if he has a few stats here and there against him (no matter how important they are!), Nadal lags behind so many metrics it makes him look like an amateur next to Federer and especially Djokovic!...
Click to expand...
Career slams, ability to beat your rival at their best slam, number of slams at your worst slam are all markers of versatility.
 
Djokodalerer31 said:
I forgot absolutely nothing, i specifically mentioned Federer's versatility, when you have a situation where one player tops almost every chart, you won't be arguing against him even if he has a few stats here and there against him (no matter how important they are!), Nadal lags behind so many metrics it makes him look like an amateur next to Federer and especially Djokovic!...
Click to expand...
But Nadal has a higher win % and more slams on his worst surface (plus a win against Federer on said surface)
 
BauerAlmeida said:
That's correct.

1- Slams
2- Weeks and YE 1
3- YEC

H2H I would give importance in some cases only. If a player won most of their big matches across all surfaces and without a significant age difference.
Click to expand...

This.

As soon as Nadal picked up the most slams, he finally moved ahead of Federer.

Historically Slams, Weeks at number one and year ending number ones were the most important factors. When slam count was tied, Federer's 100 extra weeks at number one was just too over bearing. You can't put Nadal ahead when Federer at the time had most weeks ever at world number one, while Nadal will go down for most weeks at number two, that just sounds strange.

AO 2022, and as Nike said it, it was advantage Nadal. He moved past Federer for good at that point, as Federer was already retired. Nadal was GOAT, if such a thing exists for a full year, meaning he had the biggest number on his side.
 
Neptune said:
Another tip of the iceberg, startling stats at Hardcourt Slam semifinals:
Appearances in the SFs
Fed 25, Rafa 15
Occurrences of facing top5 (where heavyweights encounter the top 5)
Fed 17, Rafa 3
Occurrences of facing king of HC, Nole
Fed 8, Rafa 0
Click to expand...
Yikes! Well, I guess I don't feel so bad about the fact that Fed only has 11 hard court titles now.
 
Beerus said:
Well, it's only my opinion.

1. The Slam count
2. The weeks at #1/YE #1

3. The YEC count
Click to expand...
thats EXACTLY how i see it. what also matters for me is the slam distribution, especially wimbledon, which is in my opinion the BY FAR most prestigious slam.
 
Hitman said:
This.

As soon as Nadal picked up the most slams, he finally moved ahead of Federer.

Historically Slams, Weeks at number one and year ending number ones were the most important factors.
Click to expand...
so you count or not that third metrics of bauer i.e. yec, im confused, if it counts then fred is ahead coz in worst case scenario for fred three wtf titles should worth one slam title, if it dont count then ndal is ahead when the score is 20-22 in slams, if we count only slams and weeks then with 21-20 score in favor of nadal fred is ahead slightly, ndal would be ahead if he had about 23 additional weeks (if we use objective 10-5 system, 10 pts for slams and 5 pts for weeks)...coz we should always look at both metrics and with going to 21-20 we again shouldnt forget to look at weeks and then make an overall conclusion)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Neptune said:
Got it, 1 slam > 10000 weeks @#1
Click to expand...
agree with you here, more correct estimation is to estimate every fluctuation in every metrics, for example, if 20-15 in slams is far from the same as 20-19, same way should be applied in weeks metrics too, i.e. 300-100 is not the same as 400-70 e.g., and so on..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
  • Poll Poll
Federer vs Nadal + Wawa
Replies
29
Views
2K
metsman
metsman
D
The Wawrinka and Hewitt
2 3
Replies
107
Views
6K
Poisoned Slice
Poisoned Slice
D
Nadal vs Djokovic
Replies
42
Views
3K
Phoenix1983
Phoenix1983
D
The problem with the Slam count
2 3
Replies
143
Views
9K
kevaninho
kevaninho
Kralingen
Djokovic 2018-2023 vs Federer 2004-2009
2 3 4
Replies
157
Views
11K
Dropshot777
Dropshot777
Back
Top