Nadal avoiding hard courts or Federer avoiding clay?

[drm025]

I love how everyone talks about Nadal skipping tournaments and playing so much on clay to keep his win percentage high.

If you look at the tournaments for this year the total number of hard court tournaments is 37, clay court tournaments is 22, and grass court tournaments is 6.

Tournament Percentages:
Hard - 57%
Clay - 34%
Grass- 9%

Let's look at the total matches on each surface for Federer and Nadal after 2013 (not including carpet):

Federer:
Hard - 681 matches (64%)
Clay - 248 matches (23%)
Grass - 140 matches (13%)

Nadal:
Hard - 402 matches (52%)
Clay - 314 matches (40%)
Grass - 63 matches (8%)

Federer's plays 7% more on hard courts, 11% less on clay courts, and 4% more on grass courts compared to the layout of the tour. That's a total deviation of 22%.

Nadal plays 5% less on hard courts, 6% more on clay courts, and 1% less on grass courts compared to the layout of the tour. That's a total deviation of 12%.

Interesting, so the distribution of Nadal's career is actually closer to the actual layout of the tour. Federer deviates more on every single surface. If anyone is avoiding a surface, it's Federer avoiding clay....

If you are wondering if the tournament layout has changed since, say, 2004, the percentage of clay tournaments was actually slightly higher (35%)

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

This is a great point. The hardcourt match percentage for Nadal is further reduced due to the fact that earlier in his career he tended to, as a norm, not reach the later rounds on hardcourt tournaments. His early losses in Wimbledon in 2012 ans 2013 also affect the grass percentage a lot.

Basically, you are correct. This avoidance theory is moronic (to put it mildly).

 

[LazyNinja19]

Good analysis OP

But the no. of matches played by them, also depends on how deep they go in a particular tournament.
Generally, Nadal goes deeper in clay tournies, as compared to HCs.
And Fed goes deeper in HCs and Grass.

So that's bound to change their percentage of matches played per surface.

What it does tell, is that Nadal's percentage of reaching later stages of tournaments on ALL surfaces is pretty good.

 

[drm025]

If you think looking at the number of tournaments they have played on each surface as opposed to number of matches is more relevant, it strengthens my case.

Federer
Hard - 168 tournaments (64%)
Clay - 65 tournaments (25%)
Grass - 31 tournaments (12%)

Nadal
Hard - 101 tournaments (56%)
Clay - 63 tournaments (35%)
Grass - 16 tournaments (9%)

And what is the tour layout? Hard - 57%, Clay - 34%, Grass - 9%

Federer has about the same deviation from the tour and Nadal is practically DEAD ON.

 

[The_Order]

If you think looking at the number of tournaments they have played on each surface as opposed to number of matches is more relevant, it strengthens my case.

Federer
Hard - 168 tournaments (64%)
Clay - 65 tournaments (25%)
Grass - 31 tournaments (12%)

Nadal
Hard - 101 tournaments (56%)
Clay - 63 tournaments (35%)
Grass - 16 tournaments (9%)

And what is the tour layout? Hard - 57%, Clay - 34%, Grass - 9%

Federer has about the same deviation from the tour and Nadal is practically DEAD ON.

This is based on their whole career correct?

I think this needs to be stickied so that anytime one of those moronic federina's say Nadal is avoiding HC tennis and playing more on clay we can just send them here to cry like their idol.

Federer is avoiding clay because he knows who the master is on that surface, Nadal is not avoiding a damn thing despite not being as dominant on HC or grass.

 

[drm025]

This is based on their whole career correct?

I think this needs to be stickied so that anytime one of those moronic federina's say Nadal is avoiding HC tennis and playing more on clay we can just send them here to cry like their idol.

Federer is avoiding clay because he knows who the master is on that surface, Nadal is not avoiding a damn thing despite not being as dominant on HC or grass.

Yes, this is their whole career. And, yes I think Fed fans need to see this. But, I'm sure they will find a way to dissect the stats and pick and choose their way into making it suit them.

 

[The_Order]

Yes, this is their whole career. And, yes I think Fed fans need to see this. But, I'm sure they will find a way to dissect the stats and pick and choose their way into making it suit them.

Yeah, like that clown that cherry picked 2013 when Fed played two clay court tournaments after Wimbledon in a desperate attempt to keep his ranking up high enough for US Open and Nadal played more clay tournaments than usual because of his comeback lmfao.

 

[drm025]

Yeah, like that clown that cherry picked 2013 when Fed played two clay court tournaments after Wimbledon in a desperate attempt to keep his ranking up high enough for US Open and Nadal played more clay tournaments than usual because of his comeback lmfao.

Exactly and proceeded to tell me that my argument had gaping holes, lol.

 

[sunny_cali]

I love how everyone talks about Nadal skipping tournaments and playing so much on clay to keep his win percentage high.

If you look at the tournaments for this year the total number of hard court tournaments is 37, clay court tournaments is 22, and grass court tournaments is 6.

Tournament Percentages:
Hard - 57%
Clay - 34%
Grass- 9%

Let's look at the total matches on each surface for Federer and Nadal after 2013 (not including carpet):

Federer:
Hard - 681 matches (64%)
Clay - 248 matches (23%)
Grass - 140 matches (13%)

Nadal:
Hard - 402 matches (52%)
Clay - 314 matches (40%)
Grass - 63 matches (8%)

Federer's plays 7% more on hard courts, 11% less on clay courts, and 4% more on grass courts compared to the layout of the tour. That's a total deviation of 22%.

Nadal plays 5% less on hard courts, 6% more on clay courts, and 1% less on grass courts compared to the layout of the tour. That's a total deviation of 12%.

Interesting, so the distribution of Nadal's career is actually closer to the actual layout of the tour. Federer deviates more on every single surface. If anyone is avoiding a surface, it's Federer avoiding clay....

If you are wondering if the tournament layout has changed since, say, 2004, the percentage of clay tournaments was actually slightly higher (35%)

The layout of the full ATP tour is not really relevant. More accurate would be the representation of the mandatory tournaments. Players like Fed and Nadal have to play the Masters 1000 + 4 GS + WTF - That's 13 tournaments. And 4 mandatory ATP 500's.

If we count 4 GS + WTF + 9 Master's1000 + 11 Masters' 500.

We have a net total of 7 Clay tournies in a total of 25 - (28%)

The ATP 250's have 15/40 Clay (37.5 %).

It doesn't make much sense to count the 250's since they hardly play in any of them.

 

[tipsa...don'tlikehim!]

Great point

there was a similar thread months ago where Fed fans were ridiculed, it was a delight

basically, the percentage of tournaments won by Nadal on HC is > to Fed titles on clay.

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

If you think looking at the number of tournaments they have played on each surface as opposed to number of matches is more relevant, it strengthens my case.

Federer
Hard - 168 tournaments (64%)
Clay - 65 tournaments (25%)
Grass - 31 tournaments (12%)

Nadal
Hard - 101 tournaments (56%)
Clay - 63 tournaments (35%)
Grass - 16 tournaments (9%)

And what is the tour layout? Hard - 57%, Clay - 34%, Grass - 9%

Federer has about the same deviation from the tour and Nadal is practically DEAD ON.

/EndThread

 

[tipsa...don'tlikehim!]

Nadal haters owned

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

If anything, those numbers indicate Federer seems to be avoiding clay. I guess he cares about the H2H becoming even more ridiculous. :lol:

 

[reversef]

Great job, OP. Thanks for this thread.

 

[Warmaster]

I don't see how anyone is surprised by this. There are 4 important clay tournaments, 9 important hardcourt tournaments and 1 important grass tournament.

4/14: 28%
9/14: 64%
1/14: 7%

Which is pretty close to the tournament percentages you listed for Federer (8% deviation). Surely we're not blaming Federer for actually playing the important tournaments?

Oh look, I used stats to prove what I wanted.

When can we finally stop doing this on this forum....

 

[Steve0904]

I don't see how anyone is surprised by this. There are 4 important clay tournaments, 9 important hardcourt tournaments and 1 important grass tournament.

4/14: 28%
9/14: 64%
1/14: 7%

Which is pretty close to the tournament percentages you listed for Federer (8% deviation). Surely we're not blaming Federer for actually playing the important tournaments?

Oh look, I used stats to prove what I wanted.

When can we finally stop doing this on this forum....

When SOME Nadal fans actually learn math and how to interpret it. That may take a while.

 

[sunny_cali]

I don't see how anyone is surprised by this. There are 4 important clay tournaments, 9 important hardcourt tournaments and 1 important grass tournament.

4/14: 28%
9/14: 64%
1/14: 7%

Which is pretty close to the tournament percentages you listed for Federer (8% deviation). Surely we're not blaming Federer for actually playing the important tournaments?

Oh look, I used stats to prove what I wanted.

When can we finally stop doing this on this forum....

Precisely. I already mentioned this a few posts back. But as you would expect the Nadalette crowd is here to troll, not really to discuss anything worthwhile.

And, of course, neither of them are running away from the other -- but trolls see what they like.

 

[sam_p]

Wow, the bubble around Fed Fanboys is nearly impenetrable. Facts are of no use. It's like arguing with religious zealots. I'm starting to believe that we are dealing with a cult that has imbued Fed with false supernatural powers. Interesting as well the tremendous interest and dwelling on the fact that his wife is pregnant, like it's some sort of holy birth.

 

[jeebeesus]

If you had bum knees like Nadal wouldnt avoiding hard surfaces too?

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

Precisely. I already mentioned this a few posts back. But as you would expect the Nadalette crowd is here to troll, not really to discuss anything worthwhile.

And, of course, neither of them are running away from the other -- but trolls see what they like.

How many ATP 250 has Federer won in his career compared to Nadal?

Your main argument is that we shouldn't count ATP 250 and just focus on the big titles, but you conveniently ignore that crucial detail.

Troll...

 

[Povl Carstensen]

Deleted.
10 chx.

 

[sunny_cali]

How many ATP 250 has Federer won in his career compared to Nadal?

Your main argument is that we shouldn't count ATP 250 and just focus on the big titles, but you conveniently ignore that crucial detail.

Troll...

Good -- Feel free to discard all those titles. Most of them were when Fed was an upcoming player anyway.

Ha ha - no wolfie - You are the one who's been banned several times in several different avatars. Try harder.

 

[Povl Carstensen]

This

How many ATP 250 has Federer won in his career compared to Nadal?

Your main argument is that we shouldn't count ATP 250 and just focus on the big titles, but you conveniently ignore that crucial detail.

Troll...

does not answer or counter this:

I don't see how anyone is surprised by this. There are 4 important clay tournaments, 9 important hardcourt tournaments and 1 important grass tournament.

4/14: 28%
9/14: 64%
1/14: 7%

Which is pretty close to the tournament percentages you listed for Federer (8% deviation). Surely we're not blaming Federer for actually playing the important tournaments?

Oh look, I used stats to prove what I wanted.

When can we finally stop doing this on this forum....

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

Good -- Feel free to discard all those titles. Most of them were when Fed was an upcoming player anyway.

Ha ha - no wolfie - You are the one who's been banned several times in several different avatars. Try harder.

You are who needs to put the time and gather data, then present it convincingly instead of offering some half baked objection to the original argument.

Do you just want to discount ATP 250? Also ATP 500?

What difference does it make if many of those were in Federer's early days? Does that not count either?

But, most importantly, Federer has a reason to avoid Nadal on clay, whereas Nadal hasn't much of one to avoid Federer on hard, and a cursory look at the H2H proves this.

Try to leave your bias aside for a moment and stop being such a fanboy. Nadal has never avoided Federer in his career, rather the opposite.

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

This
does not answer or counter this:

Of course it does. If Federer has played many lower grade tournaments (where clay's percentage is higher) and his clay percentage is lower, how do you explain that?

 

[sunny_cali]

You are who needs to put the time and gather data, then present it convincingly instead of offering some half baked objection to the original argument.

Do you just want to discount ATP 250? Also ATP 500?

What difference does it make if many of those were in Federer's early days? Does that not count either?

But, most importantly, Federer has a reason to avoid Nadal on clay, whereas Nadal hasn't much of one to avoid Federer on hard, and a cursory look at the H2H proves this.

Try to leave your bias aside for a moment and stop being such a fanboy. Nadal has never avoided Federer in his career, rather the opposite.

Your fundamental premise as that of your Nadalettes reeks of bias/hate.

ATP500 are mandatory (at least 4 of them). ATP250's are not. How many times have Nadal/Fed met in a ATP250 event ?

Neither of them is avoiding the other. I am merely pointing that you have cooked up data to support your preconceived biases. Have I suggested that Nadal is running away from Federer ?

Fanboy - ha ha says the troll who's been banned a 100 times :twisted::twisted:

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

Your fundamental premise as that of your Nadalettes reeks of bias/hate.

ATP500 are mandatory (at least 4 of them). ATP250's are not. How many times have Nadal/Fed met in a ATP250 event ?

Neither of them is avoiding the other. I am merely pointing that you have cooked up data to support your preconceived biases. Have I suggested that Nadal is running away from Federer ?

Fanboy - ha ha says the troll who's been banned a 100 times :twisted::twisted:

Why don't you relax, chief. The point this thread proves is that the usual contention by some Federinas that Nadal avoids hardcourt is false.

I'm glad you agree.

 

[The_Order]

Your fundamental premise as that of your Nadalettes reeks of bias/hate.

ATP500 are mandatory (at least 4 of them). ATP250's are not. How many times have Nadal/Fed met in a ATP250 event ?

Neither of them is avoiding the other. I am merely pointing that you have cooked up data to support your preconceived biases. Have I suggested that Nadal is running away from Federer ?

Fanboy - ha ha says the troll who's been banned a 100 times :twisted::twisted:

Ok so glad you can admit Nadal is NOT avoiding Federer on HC or grass, that however is the absurd notion that most federinas are trying to drive home to cover for Federer's humiliating h2h record with Rafa.

Hence the reason for this thread. Federer however DOES avoid Nadal, every major post 2007 he has won without having to beat Rafa and YES it's Rafa's fault he lost early or withdrew before it started, I'm not saying it isn't, however it is also Federer's FAULT that he lost to Nadal in RG08, WIM08, AO09, RG11 & AO12. Federer knows he's not a sure thing against Nadal in any major so he therefore is looking to avoid him by tanking to Robredo.

 

[Amritia]

Fantastic stats DRM, puts a few myths to bed.

 

[octobrina10]

Players like Fed and Nadal have to play the Masters 1000 + 4 GS + WTF - That's 13 tournaments. And 4 mandatory ATP 500's.

GS tournaments are non-mandatory events for the ATP players. They are ITF tourneys.

 

[octobrina10]

I love how everyone talks about Nadal skipping tournaments and playing so much on clay to keep his win percentage high.

Rafa hasn't played "so much" on clay!
¤ Masters 1000 in Madrid and Rome are mandatory events.
¤ The Monte Carlo Masters is a non-mandatory tourney, but it's counted as playing an ATP-500* event.
¤ He usually plays in the Barcelona ATP-500, because it's his home-tournament. He is a member of the Barcelona tennis club.

*A commitment player, like Rafa, must play a minimum of four ATP-500 events during the ATP season.

 

[drm025]

I don't see how anyone is surprised by this. There are 4 important clay tournaments, 9 important hardcourt tournaments and 1 important grass tournament.

4/14: 28%
9/14: 64%
1/14: 7%

Which is pretty close to the tournament percentages you listed for Federer (8% deviation). Surely we're not blaming Federer for actually playing the important tournaments?

Oh look, I used stats to prove what I wanted.

When can we finally stop doing this on this forum....

Except what you did was pick and choose what you wanted from the stats, which is what I said you guys would do. My data represents ALL tournaments.

So now the representation of surfaces on the tour is only based on the big tournaments? Come on, dude, the fact is that 34-35% of all the tournaments played today are on clay, and thats the same percentage of Nadal's played tournaments that are on clay.

Remember, all of the players play the big tournaments. The variation in schedules comes from the NON-MANDATORY events that people enter, lol. That's why you don't only look at the big tournaments.

 

[tennisaddict]

Yeah, like that clown that cherry picked 2013 when Fed played two clay court tournaments after Wimbledon in a desperate attempt to keep his ranking up high enough for US Open and Nadal played more clay tournaments than usual because of his comeback lmfao.

If i call you an idiot, do you think you will feel good ? Avoid personal attacks. Yoi have no right to call anyone a clown. Dont think you can bully everyone.

It was the OP who took the last year's tournament distribution percentage . Did he take last 15 years distribution ?

If you want to count ATP 250 into the mix to suit your theory, it is childish.

anyone sensible knows that there are dime a dozen clay tournaments of no significance that keeps being played year round.

Not the same on grass. All hard court tournaments Fed plays are mostly mandatory or one of high significance.

If you have any doubts that Nadal does or does not skew clay, compare the distribution of matches with all time top 10 players or for that matter even with the current top 10, with the exception of Ferrer.

You wont do that, will you ?

 

[drm025]

Good -- Feel free to discard all those titles. Most of them were when Fed was an upcoming player anyway.

16 of Federer's 21 ATP 250 titles were in 2004 or later...

 

[sunny_cali]

Ok so glad you can admit Nadal is NOT avoiding Federer on HC or grass, that however is the absurd notion that most federinas are trying to drive home to cover for Federer's humiliating h2h record with Rafa.

Hence the reason for this thread. Federer however DOES avoid Nadal, every major post 2007 he has won without having to beat Rafa and YES it's Rafa's fault he lost early or withdrew before it started, I'm not saying it isn't, however it is also Federer's FAULT that he lost to Nadal in RG08, WIM08, AO09, RG11 & AO12. Federer knows he's not a sure thing against Nadal in any major so he therefore is looking to avoid him by tanking to Robredo.

Why is h2h humiliating ? It is what it is.

I agree with the rest of your post. I call BS on the bolded. Federer gutted his insides to play him beating Stan and Delpo at IW and WTF -- he could have easily tanked both. He could have tanked against Djoker in FO11 -- he didn't. If he cared about the H2H so much he would have retired post Wimby.

The fact is Fed cares less about his status as GOAT or H2H than his fans.

 

[drm025]

If i call you an idiot, do you think you will feel good ? Avoid personal attacks. Yoi have no right to call anyone a clown. Dont think you can bully everyone.

It was the OP who took the last year's tournament distribution percentage . Did he take last 15 years distribution ?

If you want to count ATP 250 into the mix to suit your theory, it is childish.

anyone sensible knows that there are dime a dozen clay tournaments of no significance that keeps being played year round.

Yes, insults are never ok, I agree.

In 2004, the percentage of clay tournaments was slightly higher at 35%. So it looks like no major changes since then, only that all carpet tournaments have since been replaced by hard court tournaments, so the percentage of hard courts has increased somewhat.

Counting all tournaments is childish?? I don't understand that.

 

[The_Order]

If i call you an idiot, do you think you will feel good ? Avoid personal attacks. Yoi have no right to call anyone a clown. Dont think you can bully everyone.

Fire away, I'd feel great because I don't GAF what anyone on an internet forum calls me.

As for bullying, LOL harden the **** up, that's not bullying, that's stating a FACT.

It was the OP who took the last year's tournament distribution percentage . Did he take last 15 years distribution ?

If you want to count ATP 250 into the mix to suit your theory, it is childish.

anyone sensible knows that there are dime a dozen clay tournaments of no significance that keeps being played year round.

Not the same on grass. All hard court tournaments Fed plays are mostly mandatory or one of high significance.

If you have any doubts that Nadal does or does not skew clay, compare the distribution of matches with all time top 10 players or for that matter even with the current top 10, with the exception of Ferrer.

You wont do that, will you ?

I won't because I can't be bothered.

Federer played 2 clay tournaments AFTER Wimbleodn last year, tell me when has he ever done that?

Also, when has Nadal ever played all those early clay tournaments apart from last year with his comeback?

You used last year because it worked toward your favor, however, it is plain obvious that both Fed and Nadal deviated from their normal calendar.

Now if you still think it's viable argument, then good for you, but you will continue to make a fool out of yourself.

 

[Warmaster]

Except what you did was pick and choose what you wanted from the stats, which is what I said you guys would do. My data represents ALL tournaments.

So now the representation of surfaces on the tour is only based on the big tournaments? Come on, dude, the fact is that 34-35% of all the tournaments played today are on clay, and thats the same percentage of Nadal's played tournaments that are on clay.

Remember, all of the players play the big tournaments. The variation in schedules comes from the NON-MANDATORY events that people enter, lol. That's why you don't only look at the big tournaments.

First of all, threads like this always end with ridiclous claims from either side and that's why I prefer not to engage in these endless discussions. The main reason for my post was in fact pointing this out.

However, since you apparently acquire a substantial amount of comedy value from my posts, I'll bite.

If you read my post carefully, you will have noticed I compared my percentages with the ones you listed (which includes ALL of Federer's tournaments). I'm not saying the entire tour is only represented by the biggest tournaments. I simply pointed out that Federer chose ALL his tournaments relative to the surface importance they have.

 

[Amritia]

drm, I think what they are trying to say, is that if you only count tournaments in April (which is an auspicious month), then 100% of Nadal's tournaments are clay.
Which shows how skewed Nadal's tournaments are, unlike Federer who's sweat smells like Swiss chocolate on Christmas morning.

 

[octobrina10]

All hard court tournaments Fed plays are mostly mandatory or one of high significance.

There are only 8 (+1) mandatory events in the ATP calendar: the Masters 1000, except the Monte Carlo Masters (plus WTF).
A commitment player must play a minimum of four ATP-500 events, including one after the US Open, but players can choose where to play.

 

[tennisaddict]

Yes, insults are never ok, I agree.

In 2004, the percentage of clay tournaments was slightly higher at 35%. So it looks like no major changes since then, only that all carpet tournaments have since been replaced by hard court tournaments, so the percentage of hard courts has increased somewhat.

Counting all tournaments is childish?? I don't understand that.

OP, can you show me any great player in recent history with 40 % matches on clay ?

 

[Amritia]

Imagine if the number of tournaments of hard court and clay were switched around.
2 Clay Slams instead of hard court, 6 Clay Masters instead of 3…. Nadal would be miles ahead any statistic.

Nadal haters should thank their lucky stars the tour is skewed towards hard courts in the way it is

 

[The_Order]

Why is h2h humiliating ? It is what it is.

I agree with the rest of your post. I call BS on the bolded. Federer gutted his insides to play him beating Stan and Delpo at IW and WTF -- he could have easily tanked both. He could have tanked against Djoker in FO11 -- he didn't. If he cared about the H2H so much he would have retired post Wimby.

The fact is Fed cares less about his status as GOAT or H2H than his fans.

Fed beat Delpo at WTF because he fancied his chances against Nadal there since he never lost to him before.

Fed doesn't like Stan very much, he even tried to cheat in that match at IW.

He didn't tank against Djoker in 2011 because he wanted to prove a point, he embraced the challenge and I think he hates losing to Novak more than Nadal tbh.

And Fed will not retire until it is plain obvious he can't compete at the top anymore. He is too arrogant and his ego will not allow him to retire. That and he loves playing so much so while the passion's still there he'll keep going.

Also the h2h is humiliating to him, never forget "oh God it's KILLING me". You don't say that for nothing...

 

[tennisaddict]

Fire away, I'd feel great because I don't GAF what anyone on an internet forum calls me.

As for bullying, LOL harden the **** up, that's not bullying, that's stating a FACT.
.

Your mental age is not on par , that is all i can say.

You may not care, but the forum has some conventions and rules.

 

[abmk]

When SOME Nadal fans actually learn math and how to interpret it. That may take a while.

pretty much this ....

 

[The_Order]

Imagine if the number of tournaments of hard court and clay were switched around.
2 Clay Slams instead of hard court, 6 Clay Masters instead of 3…. Nadal would be miles ahead any statistic.

Nadal haters should thank their lucky stars the tour is skewed towards hard courts in the way it is

I tried making this point before.

Here's their rebuttal:

If there were more clay slams than HC, then players would grow up playing with a clay court style and the competition would be much tougher for Nadal. He wouldn't be winning on clay as often.

Federer knew there were 2 HC majors and a grass major so he built his style to win on 3/4 majors rather than 1. It is Nadal's fault he chose to focus on clay despite knowing there's only 1/4 majors played on there.

That is one of the most ridiculous arguments I've ever heard and they say this despite the fact that Fed and Novak grew up playing on outdoor clay courts LOL.

 

[The_Order]

pretty much this ....

That's absolutely hilarious coming from you...

 

[The_Order]

Your mental age is not on par , that is all i can say.

You may not care, but the forum has some conventions and rules.

Then you best stick to them, before taking a swipe at my intelligence.

 

[drm025]

If you read my post carefully, you will have noticed I compared my percentages with the ones you listed (which includes ALL of Federer's tournaments). I'm not saying the entire tour is only represented by the biggest tournaments. I simply pointed out that Federer chose ALL his tournaments relative to the surface importance they have.

Yes, you compared my percentages which include all tournaments played to the percentages of only the big tournaments, so that's not a relevant comparison.

If we're only looking at the big tournaments, then I see no need to even talk about anyone avoiding a surface. There are mandatory events, and the ones you choose would only be the 500s. When's the last time that Federer played a clay 500 besides Hamburg? How many times has he skipped Monte Carlo? Would he skip it if it were on hard courts?

 

[drm025]

OP, can you show me any great player in recent history with 40 % matches on clay ?

I don't know how this is relevant. So now the amount of matches played on each surface by the great players determines how the surface distribution should be? Not Nadal's fault that the recent greats all struggled with clay, except for Federer who had a Nadal problem.

My only point was that everyone complains that Nadal plays too much on clay when clay only represent like "30%" of the tour.

The actual representation is 34% and that matches up with the tournaments Nadal has played. This is how the tour has been for both Federer and Nadal's generation. That is what is relevant.