More Impressive Comeback of Federer or Nadal

M

McEnroeisanartist

Hall of Fame
What do you think was the more impressive comeback?

Federer devastated at losing the epic 2008 Wimbledon final to Nadal and seemingly passing the throne onto his career rival and then going on to win 4 of the next 6 Grand Slams, including one at each Grand Slam.

Or Nadal losing in the second round of 2012 Wimbledon to 100th Ranked Rosol, taking a 222 day break from tennis, and then returning in 2013 with winning 2 Grand Slams, five Masters Series tournaments, and posting a career best 75.7 season record.
 
Both are pretty impressive, but I would have to give the slight edge to Nadal. Taking that long of a break and then coming is really tough to do.
 
McEnroeisanartist said:
What do you think was the more impressive comeback?

Federer devastated at losing the epic 2008 Wimbledon final to Nadal and seemingly passing the throne onto his career rival and then going on to win 4 of the next 6 Grand Slams, including one at each Grand Slam.

Or Nadal losing in the second round of 2012 Wimbledon to 100th Ranked Rosol, taking a 222 day break from tennis, and then returning in 2013 with winning 2 Grand Slams, five Masters Series tournaments, and posting a career best 75.7 season record.
Click to expand...

Your every thread has an agenda, no?
Federer is the GOATest GOAT. Ok? :-|
 
Federer's comeback was due mainly to Nadal's injury.

Nadal's comeback was due to his sheer resilience and will to turn around the rivalry with Djokovic.
 
Tenez101 said:
Federer's comeback was due mainly to Nadal's injury.

Nadal's comeback was due to his sheer resilience and will to turn around the rivalry with Djokovic.
Click to expand...

He lost to Soderling fair and square. No injury. It's just an excuse after a loss, as usual.
 
TMF said:
He lost to Soderling fair and square. No injury. It's just an excuse after a loss, as usual.
Click to expand...

Do you think if Federer had faced Nadal at RG or any other slam that year, that he would have won? How many slams do you think Fed would have won that year if he had to go through Nadal in each tournament (like Nadal has had to go through Djokovic this year)?
 
TMF said:
So you think he never had mono but Fed and his camp lied? LOL

Fed's prime years are from 2004-2007. I don't think anyone except Fed-detractors say otherwise.
Click to expand...

So you think Nadal never had knee injury but his camp lied? LOL
 
TheAnty-vic said:
So you think Nadal never had knee injury but his camp lied? LOL
Click to expand...

I pointed out that specific loss against Soderling had nothing to do with his injury. It has to do with Soderling playing in the zone that day. A winning streak has to end sooner or later, so I don't see why one can't accept that Nadal is not invincible. Every player has their streaks snapped.
 
Tenez101 said:
Do you think if Federer had faced Nadal at RG or any other slam that year, that he would have won? How many slams do you think Fed would have won that year if he had to go through Nadal in each tournament (like Nadal has had to go through Djokovic this year)?
Click to expand...

This kind of thinking is worthless. Nadal never shows up in the latter rounds when he's injured/out of form so when he and Fed were the top 2 seeds and could only meet in the final, they never did unless it was on clay and to a lesser degree on grass.

Nadal gets Rosolized when he doesn't bother to show up so Fed very rarely got the chance to face a not-at-his-best Nadal. Fed, on the other hand, played 18 out of 19 Slam finals so no matter what his form was he reached the latter stages and Nadal, naturally, took advantage of some.

People talk about Nadal as a great champion and the biggest fighter in history but I feel he doesn't get critisized enough for losing to complete nobodies when he doesn't feel like he's in form. Fed on the other hand shouldn't get crap for losing to Nadal often cause at least he didn't chicken out in the 1st rounds when he was out of form.

Sampras had the exact same attitude. He was fantastic on fast surfaces and was incredibly hard to beat but who took care of him in the Slams? Not the Agassis (although Andre beat him 3 times), Edbergs, Beckers, Couriers -but guys ranked outside the top 10/20. Yzaga, Krajicek, Philippoussiss, Korda, Kucera and a bunch of complete no namers at the FO - these are only his prime years.
 
Last edited:
TMF said:
I pointed out that specific loss against Soderling had nothing to do with his injury. It has to do with Soderling playing in the zone that day. A winning streak has to end sooner or later, so I don't see why one can't accept that Nadal is not invincible. Every player has their streaks snapped.
Click to expand...

So I point out that specific loss of Fed against Nadal at Wimbledon '08 had nothing to do with injury. It has to do with Nadal playing in the zone that day. A winning streak has to end sooner or later, so I don't see why one can't accept that Federer is not invincible. Every player has their streaks snapped.

Sounds familiar, no? Btw I was talking about Rafa's injury last year, not '09.

Anyways, you get the point!
 
Tenez101 said:
Do you think if Federer had faced Nadal at RG or any other slam that year, that he would have won? How many slams do you think Fed would have won that year if he had to go through Nadal in each tournament (like Nadal has had to go through Djokovic this year)?
Click to expand...

Nadal failed his end of the bargain by not making the final, so your question isn't warrant. Tennis is about beating players in front of you and if you loses you go home. Fed was the best player and he won all 7 matches. It's Nadal's fault for not being good enough.
 
TheAnty-vic said:
So I point out that specific loss of Fed against Nadal at Wimbledon '08 had nothing to do with injury. It has to do with Nadal playing in the zone that day. A winning streak has to end sooner or later, so I don't see why one can't accept that Federer is not invincible. Every player has their streaks snapped.

Sounds familiar, no? Btw I was talking about Rafa's injury last year, not '09.

Anyways, you get the point!
Click to expand...

You need to address to the folks that said Federer was injured in Wimbledon 2008.

I've stated before that 2008 was Fed's bad year since he lost to many players(blake, fish, Roddick, Stepanek, Ivo...) that he once owned. It was bad to a point that he got a nickname as the "unforced error machine".
 
tennis_pro said:
This kind of thinking is worthless. Nadal never shows up in the latter rounds when he's injured/out of form so when he and Fed were the top 2 seeds and could only meet in the final, they never did unless it was on clay and to a lesser degree on grass.

Nadal gets Rosolized when he doesn't bother to show up so Fed very rarely got the chance to face a not-at-his-best Nadal. Fed, on the other hand, played 18 out of 19 Slam finals so no matter what his form was he reached the latter stages and Nadal, naturally, took advantage of some.

People talk about Nadal as a great champion and the biggest fighter in history but I feel he doesn't get critisized enough for losing to complete nobodies when he doesn't feel like he's in form. Fed on the other hand shouldn't get crap for losing to Nadal often cause at least he didn't chicken out in the 1st rounds when he was out of form.

Sampras had the exact same attitude. He was fantastic on fast surfaces and was incredibly hard to beat but who took care of him in the Slams? Not the Agassis (although Andre beat him 3 times), Edbergs, Beckers, Couriers -but guys ranked outside the top 10/20. Yzaga, Krajicek, Philippoussiss, Korda, Kucera and a bunch of complete no namers at the FO - these are only his prime years.
Click to expand...

PREACH IT!
 
tennis_pro said:
This kind of thinking is worthless. Nadal never shows up in the latter rounds when he's injured/out of form so when he and Fed were the top 2 seeds and could only meet in the final, they never did unless it was on clay and to a lesser degree on grass.

Nadal gets Rosolized when he doesn't bother to show up so Fed very rarely got the chance to face a not-at-his-best Nadal. Fed, on the other hand, played 18 out of 19 Slam finals so no matter what his form was he reached the latter stages and Nadal, naturally, took advantage of some.

People talk about Nadal as a great champion and the biggest fighter in history but I feel he doesn't get critisized enough for losing to complete nobodies when he doesn't feel like he's in form. Fed on the other hand shouldn't get crap for losing to Nadal often cause at least he didn't chicken out in the 1st rounds when he was out of form.

Sampras had the exact same attitude. He was fantastic on fast surfaces and was incredibly hard to beat but who took care of him in the Slams? Not the Agassis (although Andre beat him 3 times), Edbergs, Beckers, Couriers -but guys ranked outside the top 10/20. Yzaga, Krajicek, Philippoussiss, Korda, Kucera and a bunch of complete no namers at the FO - these are only his prime years.
Click to expand...

I have to say this is the way I've always viewed their rivalry as well. Nadal is a great player but he doesn't really get criticized as much as he should for losing early in various slams,even when in his prime, whereas Fed only just recently failed to reach the QF for the first time in nearly a decade. By the end of their careers Nadal may well end up passing Fed in many stats[slams,masters,career win/loss record etc] but consistency will never be one of them.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
I have to say this is the way I've always viewed their rivalry as well. Nadal is a great player but he doesn't really get criticized as much as he should for losing early in various slams,even when in his prime, whereas Fed only just recently failed to reach the QF for the first time in nearly a decade. By the end of their careers Nadal may well end up passing Fed in many stats[slams,masters,career win/loss record etc] but consistency will never be one of them.
Click to expand...

I forgot to add that the same applies to Djokovic (as for the Nadal-Djokovic rivalry I mean). 2011 was an exception as Djokovic just took everyone on no matter what. He took an in-form Nadal in 2 Slam finals after playing 5-setters in the SF (against Fed at the US and Murray at the AO) so there you go.

But where was Nadal in 2012 and early 2013? Yea yea yea he was injured. But he still wasn't there unlike Djokovic who failed to reach the SF of any Slam in mid 2010 for the last time (as for now). Then Nadal is in the form of his life and what would you know, he takes on Djokovic in Canada and the US.

Nadal just picks his tournaments - props to him for takin on every challenge (whether it's Federer on grass or Djokovic on hard) but we shouldn't diss Fed and Novak for losing to him when they were working their a**es off to win a couple of matches in EVERY tournament while Nadal withdraws or gets Rosolized (or Darcisized) in some so they don't get a chance for payback.

Nadal reminds me of a kid who plays tag with others, hits one of them, then when he almost gets chased down he shouts he doesn't want to play anymore.
 
Last edited:
"Nadal reminds me of kid who plays tag with others, hits one of them, then when he almost gets chased down he shouts he doesn't want to play anymore."

One of the best analogies I have ever read. Wow. Quite Breathtaking.
 
tennis_pro said:
I forgot to add that the same applies to Djokovic (as for the Nadal-Djokovic rivalry I mean). 2011 was an exception as Djokovic just took everyone on no matter what. He took an in-form Nadal in 2 Slam finals after playing 5-setters in the SF (against Fed at the US and Murray at the AO) so there you go.

But where was Nadal in 2012 and early 2013? Yea yea yea he was injured. But he still wasn't there unlike Djokovic who failed to reach the SF of any Slam in mid 2010 for the last time (as for now). Then Nadal is in the form of his life and what would you know, he takes on Djokovic in Canada and the US.
Click to expand...

True-I do think the h2h between Nadal and Djokovic would be a
bit closer than it is had they played a few more times during the second half of 2012 but it is what it is. What is also interesting is that Nole's consistency,at least in recent years, is also more impressive than Nadal's. He hasn't lost to any player in a slam other than Fed, Nadal and Murray since Wimbledon 2010. Obviously Nadal's overall career achievements are better than Djokovic's but this is still a great stat in my opinion.
 
"Federer reminds me of a kid who plays tag with others, hits one of them, then when he does get chased down, he shouts that his back was hurting & he had blisters on his pretty feet" - Antyvic
 
McEnroeisanartist said:
What do you think was the more impressive comeback?

Federer devastated at losing the epic 2008 Wimbledon final to Nadal and seemingly passing the throne onto his career rival and then going on to win 4 of the next 6 Grand Slams, including one at each Grand Slam.

Or Nadal losing in the second round of 2012 Wimbledon to 100th Ranked Rosol, taking a 222 day break from tennis, and then returning in 2013 with winning 2 Grand Slams, five Masters Series tournaments, and posting a career best 75.7 season record.
Click to expand...

Easily Nadal. Federer was clearly second fiddle to Nadal and could most of those titles when Nadal is injured or out of form.
Nadal had a great comeback and defeated world no 1 Djoker.
 
It is hard for me to take the OP's question seriously...Federer's "comeback" wasn't a comeback since he never left. Federer stepped up his game and played better after a tough loss while injury problems for Nadal removed one of Federer's main obstacles in the slams. That isn't a comeback.

The amazing feat of playing NO competitive tennis for 7 months to come back and have one of the more dominating seasons of the last decade is a comeback.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
True-I do think the h2h between Nadal and Djokovic would be a
bit closer than it is had they played a few more times during the second half of 2012 but it is what it is. What is also interesting is that Nole's consistency,at least in recent years, is also more impressive than Nadal's. He hasn't lost to any player in a slam other than Fed, Nadal and Murray since Wimbledon 2010. Obviously Nadal's overall career achievements are better than Djokovic's but this is still a great stat in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Barring the last 2 Wimbledons, where has Nadal lost to a lesser player in Slams?!
It's obvious, his knees can't take the low bounce on Grass anymore.

And why would the H2H be closer, had they played in remaining 2012. Nadal had won their previous 3 meetings. If anything, Nadal had the momentum in their H2H!
 
Djokovic2011 said:
True-I do think the h2h between Nadal and Djokovic would be a
bit closer than it is had they played a few more times during the second half of 2012 but it is what it is. What is also interesting is that Nole's consistency,at least in recent years, is also more impressive than Nadal's. He hasn't lost to any player in a slam other than Fed, Nadal and Murray since Wimbledon 2010. Obviously Nadal's overall career achievements are better than Djokovic's but this is still a great stat in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Except for this year's Cinci, Fed and Nadal have actually never met after Wimbledon outside the WTF. That's quite astonishing, when you think about it
 
sam_p said:
It is hard for me to take the OP's question seriously...Federer's "comeback" wasn't a comeback since he never left. Federer stepped up his game and played better after a tough loss while injury problems for Nadal removed one of Federer's main obstacles in the slams. That isn't a comeback.

The amazing feat of playing NO competitive tennis for 7 months to come back and have one of the more dominating seasons of the last decade is a comeback.
Click to expand...

Nadal was never "away". He just knew he would get slaughtered on hard courts so he decided to withdraw from tons of tournaments and waited for the proper moment (some challenger clay events) to make a "comeback". Then by some miracle after 3 weeks he wins a HC Masters when he couldn't do it for the previous 3 years.

I don't believe in magic miracles, bro. Nadal wasn't "forced out" for 7 months by some injury, it was his decision to take a break.
 
Chanwan said:
Except for this year's Cinci, Fed and Nadal have actually never met after Wimbledon outside the WTF. That's quite astonishing, when you think about it
Click to expand...

Nadal had to make sure that he could take on Federer and win. Any other edition in 2004-2012 (maybe apart from 2008 ) and Fed would be the favorite to win.
 
TheAnty-vic said:
Barring the last 2 Wimbledons, where has Nadal lost to a lesser player in Slams?!
It's obvious, his knees can't take the low bounce on Grass anymore.

And why would the H2H be closer, had they played in remaining 2012. Nadal had won their previous 3 meetings. If anything, Nadal had the momentum in their H2H!
Click to expand...

Yes Nadal should be given credit for winning those 3 matches but the fact is that they were all on clay whereas one would imagine that during the second half of the season Djokovic would be favourite to win the hardcourt encounters.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
Yes Nadal should be given credit for winning those 3 matches but the fact is that they were all on clay whereas one would imagine that during the second half of the season Djokovic would be favourite to win the hardcourt encounters.
Click to expand...

Maybe yes. But that didn't happen this year during the NAmerican HC season.

So there's no place for could've should've in sports!
 
Chanwan said:
Except for this year's Cinci, Fed and Nadal have actually never met after Wimbledon outside the WTF. That's quite astonishing, when you think about it
Click to expand...

Hi Chanwan. Yes it is interesting to see how all their meetings have been distributed-I actually think that had Nadal and Fed met last year at Cinci, Fed would probably have won such was his form at the time. I know it's been said before but I definitely believe the Fed/Nadal rivalry would've been closer had they played more during the second half of the year but what can you do?:)
 
tennis_pro said:
Nadal had to make sure that he could take on Federer and win. Any other edition in 2004-2012 (maybe apart from 2008 ) and Fed would be the favorite to win.
Click to expand...

Sure Federer would be the favourite to win. After all, he's 2-7 against Nadal on Outdoor Hard courts! :roll:
 
TheAnty-vic said:
Barring the last 2 Wimbledons, where has Nadal lost to a lesser player in Slams?!
It's obvious, his knees can't take the low bounce on Grass anymore.

And why would the H2H be closer, had they played in remaining 2012. Nadal had won their previous 3 meetings. If anything, Nadal had the momentum in their H2H!
Click to expand...

2013 Wimbledon, 2013 Wimbledon. 2012 US, 2013 AO, 2009 Wimbledon, 2006 AO (Nadal shouldn't get a free pass for withdrawals!!!! He would've lost in the 1st rounds if he decided to play, put that in your heads, people! And if you claim that he wouldn't THEN WHY DIDN'T HE PLAY, THEN?). A whole serie of HC losses in Slams when already was a flat-out top 2 player on grass/clay - to Blake, Youzhny, Gonzalez, Ferrer, Tsonga (dudes weren't top 10 at the time). 2005 Wimbledon - Muller.

When he bothered to play and win a couple of rounds when out-of-form he usually got destroyed by the opposition - 2010 Murray, 2009 US Del Potro, 2011 AO Ferrer.
 
TheAnty-vic said:
Sure Federer would be the favourite to win. After all, he's 2-7 against Nadal on Outdoor Hard courts! :roll:
Click to expand...

8 out of those 9 matches in January-April with the only meeting on faster US courts only this year. Also, 5 of them after January 2009. Gooby, please, throw your worthless stats out of the window when you don't know the context.

If Nadal was so good on outdoor HC why did he miss out on so many potential meetings with Fed in August-November for entire years?
 
Last edited:
tennis_pro said:
8 out of those 9 matches in January-April with the only meeting on faster US courts only this year. Also, 5 of them after January 2009. Gooby, please, throw your worthless stats out of the window when you don't know the context.
Click to expand...

Is Federer sleeping from Jan to April. :lol: :lol:
They were on HARD COURTS! That's all that matters, boy.
 
tennis_pro said:
2013 Wimbledon, 2013 Wimbledon. 2012 US, 2013 AO, 2009 Wimbledon, 2006 AO (Nadal shouldn't get a free pass for withdrawals!!!! He would've lost in the 1st rounds if he decided to play, put that in your heads, people! And if you claim that he wouldn't THEN WHY DIDN'T HE PLAY, THEN?). A whole serie of HC losses in Slams when already was a flat-out top 2 player on grass/clay - to Blake, Youzhny, Gonzalez, Ferrer, Tsonga (dudes weren't top 10 at the time). 2005 Wimbledon - Muller.

When he bothered to play and win a couple of rounds when out-of-form he usually got destroyed by the opposition - 2010 Murray, 2009 US Del Potro, 2011 AO Ferrer.
Click to expand...

If a player doesn't compete in a tournament, you know what's written there? Not applicable/ didn't play! How the hell is it losing?! Are you out of your mind? :lol:

If you're counting Nadal's 2005, then please go ahead and look aya Fed's stats in Slams from 1999- 2003 :lol:
 
TheAnty-vic said:
Is Federer sleeping from Jan to April. :lol: :lol:
They were on HARD COURTS! That's all that matters, boy.
Click to expand...

I'm not your "boy", sunny.

Some of the hard courts played on early in the season are as slow as clay, Miami in particular with AO a close second. If you watched tennis before 2013 you'd know that US hard courts are faster than those in IW, Miami or AO.

Btw if all that matters is the fact that they were hard courts, then why not include all of Federer's HC wins? What's the problem? Aren't indoor hard courts hard courts? Or does the fact that there's a roof under the court, no sun/wind to help Hafa's spinny moonballing game make indoor HC's less worthy?
 
TheAnty-vic said:
If a player doesn't compete in a tournament, you know what's written there? Not applicable/ didn't play! How the hell is it losing?! Are you out of your mind? :lol:
Click to expand...

Ah ok. So each time a player feels anything less than 100% at his best he should withdraw to avoid humiliation. Got it.

Nadal's a coward, that's what he is. He chickened out of these tournaments cause he knew he wouldn't stand a chance and he didn't want others to even out the h2h's with him. He's a master opportunist.
I'll give him that.

For me a withdrawal means you're not capable of winning a single match so it counts as a 1st round loss.
TheAnty-vic said:
If you're counting Nadal's 2005, then please go ahead and look aya Fed's stats in Slams from 1999- 2003 :lol:
Click to expand...

Nadal was ranked no 2 in 2005. Nothing suggesting he wasn't capable of beating anyone at the time based on his results/ranking. Now if you're having a go at Federer - let's see where Nadal's name is in the rankings when he's 31.
 
Last edited:
tennis_pro said:
I'm not your "boy", sunny.

Some of the hard courts played on early in the season are as slow as clay, Miami in particular with AO a close second. If you watched tennis before 2013 you'd know that US hard courts are faster than those in IW, Miami or AO.

Btw if all that matters is the fact that they were hard courts, then why not include all of Federer's HC wins? What's the problem? Aren't indoor hard courts hard courts? Or does the fact that there's a roof under the court, no sun/wind to help Hafa's spinny moonballing game make indoor HC's less worthy?
Click to expand...

You can count Indoors too, boy. Still 6-8 on Federer's GOAT surface HC :lol:
 
Tenez101 said:
Federer's comeback was due mainly to Nadal's injury.

Nadal's comeback was due to his sheer resilience and will to turn around the rivalry with Djokovic.
Click to expand...

Or maybe due to weak era? LOLbredo in USO Q and Gasquet in the S anyone? Not to mention Ferrer in FO final :lol:

I can even accept Gasquet in the USO semi because you can make an argument that he is a late bloomer but old way past his prime #22 ranked LOLbredo in USO Q and old way past his prime Ferrer in FO F that right there is 100% weak era. There is a very good reason why in 2013 was the first time ever 31 year old past his prime Ferrer made to his first slam final ever.
 
Last edited:
dudeski said:
Or maybe due to weak era? LOLbredo in USO Q and Gasquet in the S anyone?
Click to expand...

Being off for the time he was gave him the advantage, plus with Novak struggling mentally in the latter stages of a major, just made it that much easier for him. Next year will be different however. Unless of course he loses at AO early and takes 7 month vacation to fix that big Capy ego of his.
 
TMF said:
Nadal failed his end of the bargain by not making the final, so your question isn't warrant. Tennis is about beating players in front of you and if you loses you go home. Fed was the best player and he won all 7 matches. It's Nadal's fault for not being good enough.
Click to expand...

Regardless, we're not discussing whether Fed was the best player of 2009 or not. We're discussing whether Fed's "comeback" in 2009 or Nadal's comeback in 2013 is more impressive. The fact that Fed pretty much had to avoid his rival to win anything that year, whereas Nadal had to go through Djokovic for all of his major titles, leads me to support Nadal's case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Most Impressive Achievement of Federer and Nadal
Replies
35
Views
6K
ScottleeSV
S
M
More Impressive Career Turnaround - Federer or Djokovic
Replies
10
Views
2K
Morj
M
M
More Impressive Achievement of Federer and Nadal
Replies
4
Views
1K
Graf=GOAT
G
M
More Impressive Achievement of Nadal
Replies
29
Views
3K
The_Order
The_Order
M
More Impressive Achievement of Federer and Nadal
Replies
13
Views
2K
FrontHeadlock
F
Back
Top