Is Thiem better than 2006 Federer on clay.

Plamen1234

Hall of Fame
No he isnt.Also I dont think you should hype Thiem so much.Some hyped Del Potro - Nadal match( I was hyped also ,dont know why) and look what happened.Thiem can either put very good performance or can lose easily in straight sets.
 

aman92

Hall of Fame
No he isn't. I am still confident of a Rafa victory on Sunday but I wasn't that confident in 2006 against the peakest of peak Federer who had gone very close to beating retrievedal at his peak.2006 and 2014 are the only RG finals I went in with almost 50-50 hopes of Rafa winning.
 

Druss

Hall of Fame
Nadal hasn’t lost a final at Roland Garros, facing the likes of Federer/Djokovic/Wawrinka in the past and I honestly don’t think he’s going to lose to Thiem (who is a lesser player even on clay) on Sunday.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
Let him win this FO first by beating Nadal in the process. Until he does it, it's all "talk."

I do think that Thiem is probably a better clay court player than Federer and I do think he'll probably finish his career with better clay court results. But time will tell.
 

EloQuent

G.O.A.T.
Let him win this FO first by beating Nadal in the process. Until he does it, it's all "talk."

I do think that Thiem is probably a better clay court player than Federer and I do think he'll probably finish his career with better clay court results. But time will tell.
Federer has a slam, 5 finals, 6 masters. That's a hard resume to beat, when you're 24 and don't have anything to show.

The myth that Federer is weak on clay is just that. Just Nadal is better than him. And he's better on other surfaces.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
Federer has a slam, 5 finals, 6 masters. That's a hard resume to beat, when you're 24 and don't have anything to show.

The myth that Federer is weak on clay is just that. Just Nadal is better than him. And he's better on other surfaces.
Maybe, we'll see. I think Thiem will probably finish his career with a few FOs and if he does, that will trump Fed's 1 FO and half a dozen Masters on clay IMO. Plus, Thiem already has one more win vs Nadal on clay than Federer does. But let the kid try and produce. He has a tough job ahead of him this Sunday to try and beat Nadal in a FO final as Nadal is in decent form(unlike in 2015.) If the kid can do it, major kudos to him.
 

Bukmeikara

Legend
Its all about match ups, that being said Federer should have an edge given his domination at the time + extra confidence
 

EloQuent

G.O.A.T.
Maybe, we'll see. I think Thiem will probably finish his career with a few FOs and if he does, that will trump Fed's 1 FO and half a dozen Masters on clay IMO. Plus, Thiem already has one more win vs Nadal on clay than Federer does. But let the kid try and produce. He has a tough job ahead of him this Sunday to try and beat Nadal in a FO final as Nadal is in decent form(unlike in 2015.) If the kid can do it, major kudos to him.
I'm not sure 2 slams is better than 5 finals. And I'm pretty sure that peak Federer would have won more matches against old Nadal.
 

ak24alive

Legend
Maybe, we'll see. I think Thiem will probably finish his career with a few FOs and if he does, that will trump Fed's 1 FO and half a dozen Masters on clay IMO. Plus, Thiem already has one more win vs Nadal on clay. But let the kid try and produce. He has a tough job ahead of him this Sunday to try and beat Nadal in a FO final as Nadal is in decent form(unlike in 2015.) If the kid can do it, major kudos to him.
I don't think if Thiem gets 2 RGs after Nadal's time then he can be called a better clay courter than Rog and Novak. Those guys were pretty good and Rog with his 5 finals was pretty good and if not for the great Nadal he would have had atleast 4 RG titles. Maybe if Thiem takes 3 RGs he will be considered a greater clay courter than Fed but still won't be a better clay courter than Rog.
Also a lot depends on how good the upcoming bunch of players are on clay because the present one(except Nad) looks nowhere as lethal as the competition Fed had at RG.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
I don't think if Thiem gets 2 RGs after Nadal's time then he can be called a better clay courter than Rog and Novak. Those guys were pretty good and Rog with his 5 finals was pretty good and if not for the great Nadal he would have had atleast 4 RG titles. Maybe if Thiem takes 3 RGs he will be considered a greater clay courter than Fed but still won't be a better clay courter than Rog.
Also a lot depends on how good the upcoming bunch of players are on clay because the present one(except Nad) looks nowhere as lethal as the competition Fed had at RG.
Let's just start with what happens this Sunday and see if Thiem can beat or if not beat, can challenge Nadal. IMO, Thiem will probably win a few FOs because somebody has to win them after Nadal is done. If he wins two or three FOs, IMO that will trump Fed's 1 FO. But he has to do it. He may not fulfill his potential and somebody else will come in from out of nowhere and win a bunch of FOs.

Let's see what the kid's got on Sunday and if he's learned anything from his previous RG losses to Nadal.
 

Ray Mercer

Hall of Fame
Let's just start with what happens this Sunday and see if Thiem can beat or if not beat, can challenge Nadal. IMO, Thiem will probably win a few FOs because somebody has to win them after Nadal is done. If he wins two or three FOs, IMO that will trump Fed's 1 FO. But he has to do it. He may not fulfill his potential and somebody else will come in from out of nowhere and win a bunch of FOs.

Let's see what the kid's got on Sunday and if he's learned anything from his previous RG losses to Nadal.
I dont like that debate either because Federer lost 5 times to peak Nadal at the French. He would have creamed anyone else. The competition today is a joke compared to a peak Nadal. Nadal would probably beat this Thiem when he was 15.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
I dont like that debate either because Federer lost 5 times to peak Nadal at the French. He would have creamed anyone else. The competition today is a joke compared to a peak Nadal. Nadal would probably beat this Thiem when he was 15.
You have a point. These type of debates can go on endlessly. If say Thiem wins 3 RGs, he'll be ahead of Federer at RG IMO. The end. But he has to do it. He may never do it. For all we know this could be the last RG final he makes?

I agree with you that the current clay field is pretty bad. If somebody doesn't stop Nadal, he could win RG for the next few years!
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
People here giving a 24 year old who just made his first final multiple slams. For all I know Thiem could win the next 5 FOs. But it's a bit premature.
Because somebody has to win the FO when Nadal is in a wheelchair Do you see many other decent clay court players who could do it? But yes, first of all, we need to see how Thiem does on Sunday and whether he's embarrassed or not. That's step one. :eek:
 

EloQuent

G.O.A.T.
Because somebody has to win the FO when Nadal is in a wheelchair Do you see many other decent clay court players who could do it? But yes, first of all, we need to see how Thiem does on Sunday and whether he's embarrassed or not. That's step one. :eek:
True, someone has to. But think about that, if Thiems only hope is "someone has to" then he's clearly not the same level as a Fedr.

And Thiem hasn't shown the consistency to win multiple years. There will be competition from Zverev, Tsitsipas, Goffin, whoever plays the Wawrinka part and goats at 29, or even journeymen on streaks.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
True, someone has to. But think about that, if Thiems only hope is "someone has to" then he's clearly not the same level as a Fedr.

And Thiem hasn't shown the consistency to win multiple years. There will be competition from Zverev, Tsitsipas, Goffin, whoever plays the Wawrinka part and goats at 29, or even journeymen on streaks.
Yes, Thiem has been an inconsistent clown so far but you never know what will be a player's breakthrough. They all have to start somewhere. He could be humiliated on Sunday and then never make another FO final. Or he could miraculously beat Nadal and win the next few FOs. Or he could lose to Nadal this year but win the FO next year. At the moment, the only thing we know is he's shown the most consistency out of the younger players at the FO in the past few years(2 SFS and a final consecutively.)

The funny thing is people on this forum say they want the younger players to step up, but I'm not sure they really do according to some of the posts I've been reading. They want the younger players to step up as long as those younger players don't beat their favorites, namely Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic! :pIt's a strange phenomenon.

In the meantime, hopefully Thiem won't get blown off the court come Sunday! :rolleyes:
 

EloQuent

G.O.A.T.
Yes, Thiem has been an inconsistent clown so far but you never know what will be a player's breakthrough. They all have to start somewhere. He could be humiliated on Sunday and then never make another FO final. Or he could miraculously beat Nadal and win the next few FOs. Or he could lose to Nadal this year but win the FO next year. At the moment, the only thing we know is he's shown the most consistency out of the younger players at the FO in the past few years(2 SFS and a final consecutively.)

The funny thing is people on this forum say they want the younger players to step up, but I'm not sure they really do according to some of the posts I've been reading. They want the younger players to step up as long as those younger players don't beat their favorites, namely Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic! :pIt's a strange phenomenon.

In the meantime, hopefully Thiem won't get blown off the court come Sunday! :rolleyes:
I do think he'll win eventually. I'm not sure about multiple. We're headed for a period of inconsistencies until a new star starts winning everything in sight.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
I do think he'll win eventually. I'm not sure about multiple. We're headed for a period of inconsistencies until a new star starts winning everything in sight.
When will that new star appear? We could be in the old folks' home by then! :rolleyes:
 

Jaitock1991

Hall of Fame
Yes, Thiem has been an inconsistent clown so far but you never know what will be a player's breakthrough. They all have to start somewhere. He could be humiliated on Sunday and then never make another FO final. Or he could miraculously beat Nadal and win the next few FOs. Or he could lose to Nadal this year but win the FO next year. At the moment, the only thing we know is he's shown the most consistency out of the younger players at the FO in the past few years(2 SFS and a final consecutively.)

The funny thing is people on this forum say they want the younger players to step up, but I'm not sure they really do according to some of the posts I've been reading. They want the younger players to step up as long as those younger players don't beat their favorites, namely Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic! :pIt's a strange phenomenon.

In the meantime, hopefully Thiem won't get blown off the court come Sunday! :rolleyes:
This. Great post!
 

West Coast Ace

G.O.A.T.
Uh, no. Anyone who has to stand that far back to return - and still coughs up a bunch of short returns - can't be better than Fed when he was at his best on clay.

Also, when it gets into a sneaky drop/counter-drop scenario, young Dom can only dream of having Fed's hands.

Sure, he hits harder and has beaten Nadal 2 out of 3. Totally different ballgame BO5.
 

Raining hopes

Hall of Fame
Please tell me you have not watched Rome 2006.Please.

Insane and I mean INSANE hitting from both men.

Watch the 4th set of the match, Fred ended up outplaying a well playing Rafa for a time stretch like I have only seen Djokovic do(and to a worse version)

Even For Rafa it is top 10 clay level in my eyes


Go ahead and see how absolutely Monstrous task it was to beat a Nadal playing near his best on clay.And FRED almost did it.


Thiem is good but he doesn't touch those peaks yet.


https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PeHzxH6PyfI&ved=0ahUKEwiCvafnlMXbAhUSeysKHYrCDkIQo7QBCCMwAA&usg=AOvVaw0qD8WETCWMMawobD1m6uba



Watch and observe
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Absolutely 100% not. I actually think peak Federer can beat this version of Nadal. He doesn’t retrieve as insanely as 05-09dal did and is more aggressive.
 

wangs78

Hall of Fame
If not for Nadal, Fed would very likely be the GOAT of all surfaces and have 30 Slams now. No peak Fed is definitely above Thiem on clay. And remember 2006 Fed played with a 90 sq in racquet.
 

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
At the moment, the only thing we know is he's shown the most consistency out of the younger players at the FO in the past few years(2 SFS and a final consecutively.)
I agree with you, but we should also remember that the only players ever to beat Nadal more then twice on clay are:

Djokovic
Gaudio
Thiem

Gaudio did it twice before 2004, so we probably should not think too much about him.

Granted, one of Thiem's wins was in 2016, a weak year for Rafa, and Federer's two victories came much earlier, when Nadal was really a different player. Even so, three wins is impressive on clay for a guy who is still fairly young.

However, he needs a bit win, another, over Nadal to solidify his clay rep.
 

ONgame

Semi-Pro
If not for Nadal, Fed would very likely be the GOAT of all surfaces and have 30 Slams now. No peak Fed is definitely above Thiem on clay. And remember 2006 Fed played with a 90 sq in racquet.
Without Nadal, Fed should win
FO: 05, 06, 07, 08, 11
AO: 09
W: 08
 
Last edited:

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
I agree with you, but we should also remember that the only players ever to beat Nadal more then twice on clay are:

Djokovic
Gaudio
Thiem

Gaudio did it twice before 2004, so we probably should not think too much about him.

Granted, one of Thiem's wins was in 2016, a weak year for Rafa, and Federer's two victories came much earlier, when Nadal was really a different player. Even so, three wins is impressive on clay for a guy who is still fairly young.

However, he needs a bit win, another, over Nadal to solidify his clay rep.

Two weeks ago I would have said people were crazy for thinking Thiem would be able to challenge Nadal at RG in a final but I've changed my mind after seeing both players(Thiem and Nadal) in this tournament and after hearing Thiem's positive comments(different attitude than he had six months ago about being able to beat Nadal.) I think Thiem may have a shot.
 
With out Nadal Fed should win
FO: 05, 06, 07, 08, 11
AO: 09
W: 08
Pretty sure Djokovic would have beaten him in 08, and a good outside chance in 07. If Nadal wasn't in the draw and they played in the final rather than the semi, Djokovic would likely have beaten him in 11, too. And if Nalbandian were in the other half in 07, he might not have got injured against Federer and so might have beaten him. And that's just the minor butterfly effects of Nadal being out of particular draws. The major butterfly effects of Nadal's absence from the tour entirely (if, say, he'd taken up football instead of tennis) are too unpredictable to speculate in so particular a way as you did with any degree of reliability.
 
I agree with you, but we should also remember that the only players ever to beat Nadal more then twice on clay are:

Djokovic
Gaudio
Thiem

Gaudio did it twice before 2004, so we probably should not think too much about him.

Granted, one of Thiem's wins was in 2016, a weak year for Rafa, and Federer's two victories came much earlier, when Nadal was really a different player. Even so, three wins is impressive on clay for a guy who is still fairly young.

However, he needs a bit win, another, over Nadal to solidify his clay rep.
True, but neither was on Nadal's preferred type of clay: sea-level, dry, sunny, and during the hottest part of the day. Only Djokovic has ever been able even to hold his own against Nadal in such conditions (and sometimes beat him in best of three) when Nadal was anywhere near his best. Federer could hold his own in 2006, but Nadal improved considerably in 2007 and somewhat further in 2008, and then he left Federer well behind in such conditions.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Pretty sure Djokovic would have beaten him in 08, and a good outside chance in 07. If Nadal wasn't in the draw and they played in the final rather than the semi, Djokovic would likely have beaten him in 11, too. And if Nalbandian were in the other half in 07, he might not have got injured against Federer and so might have beaten him. And that's just the minor butterfly effects of Nadal being out of particular draws. The major butterfly effects of Nadal's absence from the tour entirely (if, say, he'd taken up football instead of tennis) are too unpredictable to speculate in so particular a way as you did with any degree of reliability.
0 chance in 2007

Djokovic is winning in 2008 vs a Federer chasing the CGS? Based on?

Can’t compare how they did vs Nadal it’s not a like for like comparison.
 
0 chance in 2007

Djokovic is winning in 2008 vs a Federer chasing the CGS? Based on?

Can’t compare how they did vs Nadal it’s not a like for like comparison.
Based on the entire tournament, as Federer wasn't at his best throughout and probably still wasn't fully over mono. And most of the early part of 2008, in fact.

True about the matchup but that isn't so big a factor to think that 6-4 6-2 7-6 = 6-1 6-3 6-0. I agree that if they'd both lost by the same score against Nadal that would indicate that Federer would win a final against Djokovic, but when Djokovic is competitive and Federer is absolutely smoked, I think the opposite is likely. I'd give Djokovic about a 70% chance in the 2008 final. Clearly, you're unlikely to agree.

But, anyway, the major point is that no professional Nadal = changes to the history so profound that we just don't know what would have happened.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Based on the entire tournament, as Federer wasn't at his best throughout and probably still wasn't fully over mono. And most of the early part of 2008, in fact.

True about the matchup but that isn't so big a factor to think that 6-4 6-2 7-6 = 6-1 6-3 6-0. I agree that if they'd both lost by the same score against Nadal that would indicate that Federer would win a final against Djokovic, but when Djokovic is competitive and Federer is absolutely smoked, I think the opposite is likely. I'd give Djokovic about a 70% chance in the 2008 final. Clearly, you're unlikely to agree.

But, anyway, the major point is that no professional Nadal = changes to the history so profound that we just don't know what would have happened.
Yeah butterfly effect and all that.

Something tells me that if by some miracle someone took Nadal out, Federer would sense his chance and up his game vs Djokovic.

But you can surely pencil him in for 05-07. No one else his beating him there.
 
Top