Perhaps there has been a post similar to this. I am not these boards every day but I would love to start a topic discussing if Nadal OR Federer did not exist and secondly and separately, what would happen if both did not exist. Now, I think Nadal would very well have 2 Wimbledons to go with his 3 French Opens. He would not have to push himself to catch Roger and thus he would probably play more Clay tournaments and less Hard Court tournaments (Feb-April). One could also argue that there would be a ton of points to be had by the rest of the field if Fed did not exist, but I think that Nadal would still clearly be number 1 for the last 3 years. Vice Versa, If Nadal did not exist perhaps Fed would have 3 straight French Opens assuming when he lost to Nadal in the Semis in 2005 he would have probably went on to beat Mariano Puerta, going on possibly a 4th straight French Open. Federer has only lost to Nadal at the French past 3 years. Perhaps HE would be considered the greatest clay courter of all time and surely the best player of all time. Most likely, he would have been at 15 Grand Slams. If both players did not exist, there would in my opinion be different players winning Wimbledon and French all the time the past 3 years and no one besides Djokovic NOW is dominant and all matches are pretty open. Djokovic would be the Wimbledon favorite. It's great to see 1 on 1 rivalries like BJORG-McEnroe, Sampras-Agassi, and now Nadal-Federer. Wouldnt it unbelieveable if Federer won Roland Garros and Nadal won Wimbledon? That is what I would love to see.