Nadal avoiding hard courts or Federer avoiding clay?

The_Order said:
Then you best stick to them, before taking a swipe at my intelligence.
Click to expand...

If you are intelligent, show me a counter argument as to why no one else has 40% of matches on clay.

Only clay court lovers like Ferrer, Almagro, Berlocq will have those kind of stats.
 
tennisaddict said:
If you are intelligent, show me a counter argument as to why no one else has 40% of matches on clay.

Only clay court lovers like Ferrer, Almagro, Berlocq will have those kind of stats.
Click to expand...

If you are intelligent explain how last season is a viable argument to refute the OP's claims?
 
The_Order said:
That's absolutely hilarious coming from you...
Click to expand...

it is ? :)

Let's know when you learn not to compare stats of 2 matches involving 4 different players directly while blindly ignore stats of 2 matches with a common player & run away like a coward when that comes up :twisted:
 
drm025 said:
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.
Click to expand...

No, when the whole tour has some kind of distribution while Nadal, Ferrer and Almagro have a different distribution, is not apparent to you ?

It is obvious that Nadal plays more clay . He also pretty much wins everything which skews it further, but it doesnt take away the fact that his records , h2h are skewed towards clay.

Comparing with tournaments is not a good measure and does not reveal anything.
 
abmk said:
it is ? :)

Let's know when you learn not to compare stats of 2 matches involving 4 different players directly while blindly ignore stats of 2 matches with a common player & run away like a coward when that comes up :twisted:
Click to expand...

I love to argue with you because I always win, but I've got a final to watch right now so, see ya.
 
tennisaddict said:
If you are intelligent, show me a counter argument as to why no one else has 40% of matches on clay.

Only clay court lovers like Ferrer, Almagro, Berlocq will have those kind of stats.
Click to expand...

Why would you not expect the clay GOAT to have the highest percentage of matches of clay of anyone? Now you're being ridiculous.
 
The_Order said:
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...
Click to expand...

It's amusing how you state your opinion's as fact. "Doesn't like Stan" - "too arrogant" "humiliating"..

And regarding the bolded -- he's never lost to Nadal at the USO either. Given that he has an ego and is as arrogant as you state, he should fancy his chances against Nadal there as well.
 
The_Order said:
If you are intelligent explain how last season is a viable argument to refute the OP's claims?
Click to expand...

I already told you OP took last year as the basis when he did his tournament analysis. Last year was an anomaly, I agree, but that was just to point to the OP you cannot take any one year and derive conclusion.

Please read my post.

Calling Federer's as skewed is a major fail logic.
 
tennisaddict said:
I already told you OP took last year as the basis when he did his tournament analysis. Last year was an anomaly, I agree, but that was just to point to the OP you cannot take any one year and derive conclusion.

Please read my post.

Calling Federer's as skewed is a major fail logic.
Click to expand...

I've pointed out multiple times that the distribution has been the same since 2004....
 
drm025 said:
Why would you not expect the clay GOAT to have the highest percentage of matches of clay of anyone? Now you're being ridiculous.
Click to expand...

And that is precisely what everyone is saying.

His clay GOAT ness is masking his relative weakness for a top player on other surfaces.

Contrast this with Fed, who has a balanced resume on all surfaces.

If you really need to further analyse, take away clay from Nadal and hard from Federer. See how their career index will look like.

Or see how much is the deviation with respect to the other surfaces.
 
tennisaddict said:
And that is precisely what everyone is saying.

His clay GOAT ness is masking his relative weakness for a top player on other surfaces.

Contrast this with Fed, who has a balanced resume on all surfaces.

If you really need to further analyse, take away clay from Nadal and hard from Federer. See how their career index will look like.

Or see how much is the deviation with respect to the other surfaces.
Click to expand...

Nadal has proven himself on all surfaces.

Anyway, take away Nadal's clay and Federer's hard, and they both have 14 big titles. This would give Nadal a more diverse spread of titles, while Federer would have half of his titles at Wimbledon.
 
sam_p said:
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.
Click to expand...

transpose the names Fed and Nadal and you have exactly the same argument. I personally don't understand why people can't just like, nay LOVE, and be fans both of them - I am. What Federer has accomplished is undeniable, what/'and will' Nadal has accomplished is undeniable. It's like people's self worth is based solely vicariously on the accomplishments of these players, so ya'll fight tooth and nail to the death for someone you've never met (and probably never watched in real life); who have no real direct influence other than one you create for yourself; and if informed something tragic happened to you, they'd answer "who?". Truth Bomb
 
Forehand Of Doom said:
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.
Click to expand...

I am as relaxed as can be. I agree that Nadal does not avoid HC and neither does Federer avoid clay. If he did the H2H wouldn't be that skewed.

No - I disagree that this thread "proves" anything. Some numbers were concocted to lend support to your pre-conceived biases.

Both Nadal and Federer have every right to chose the surfaces that best suit their style of play. It happens to clay for one and non-clay for another. Their distribution merely reflects their strengths.

If either of them has tanked (which I highly doubt) to avoid the other - I see nothing wrong with that either. It is smart to chose the battles that you can win!
 
Praetorian said:
transpose the names Fed and Nadal and you have exactly the same argument. I personally don't understand why people can't just like, nay LOVE, and be fans both of them - I am. What Federer has accomplished is undeniable, what/'and will' Nadal has accomplished is undeniable. It's like people's self worth is based solely vicariously on the accomplishments of these players, so ya'll fight tooth and nail to the death for someone you've never met (and probably never watched in real life); who have no real direct influence other than one you create for yourself; and if informed something tragic happened to you, they'd answer "who?". Truth Bomb
Click to expand...

Well said. Both are great.

I have seen nothing to suggest either guy has ever "avoided" anyone or anything. And both guys have proven themselves to be among the best ever across all surfaces.
 
To clarify, the point is not to prove that Federer has avoided clay. The main point was to show that Nadal hasn't avoided hard courts.
 
sunny_cali said:
I am as relaxed as can be. I agree that Nadal does not avoid HC and neither does Federer avoid clay. If he did the H2H wouldn't be that skewed.

No - I disagree that this thread "proves" anything. Some numbers were concocted to lend support to your pre-conceived biases.

Both Nadal and Federer have every right to chose the surfaces that best suit their style of play. It happens to clay for one and non-clay for another. Their distribution merely reflects their strengths.

If either of them has tanked (which I highly doubt) to avoid the other - I see nothing wrong with that either. It is smart to chose the battles that you can win!
Click to expand...

Alright then, fair enough.

Anyone would agree that it would be more difficult for Rafa to win the same number of slams as Fed, since Fed dominated 3 slams and Nadal oinly 1. So, what can we derive from the fact Nadal has the same number of slams as Fed at the same age?
 
Forehand Of Doom said:
Alright then, fair enough.

Anyone would agree that it would be more difficult for Rafa to win the same number of slams as Fed, since Fed dominated 3 slams and Nadal oinly 1. So, what can we derive from the fact Nadal has the same number of slams as Fed at the same age?
Click to expand...

That Nadal's domination of clay is so extreme that with a single clay major he is within 4 short of Federer ?
 
Forehand Of Doom said:
Alright then, fair enough.

Anyone would agree that it would be more difficult for Rafa to win the same number of slams as Fed, since Fed dominated 3 slams and Nadal oinly 1. So, what can we derive from the fact Nadal has the same number of slams as Fed at the same age?
Click to expand...

1) Federer demonstrated a concentrated domination of the tour like no one else in the Open Era.
2) Nadal demonstrated total and utter domination of clay like no one else in history.
3) Federer had a chance to be outright GOAT. He got 5 shots at Rafa at the FO. He failed to take any of those - it is a knock against him, no getting around it.
4) Rafa failed to get to many non-Clay Slams, but whenever he did he maxed out beating Fed across all the surfaces they met. Full credit to him.
5) Given that Fed dominated 3 Slams to Rafa's 1 at the same age - you would have to give Fed a slight edge at this point in time.
 
tennisaddict said:
Everything other than clay is worse for Nadal , while having 4 finals and 1 title for Federer is not good enough. Fair statement.
Click to expand...

He's talking about Fed at Nadal's age. Nadal had won all the slams (and 5 non-clay slams), but Fed had yet to win the French. That's all he said.
 
sunny_cali said:
1) Federer demonstrated a concentrated domination of the tour like no one else in the Open Era.
2) Nadal demonstrated total and utter domination of clay like no one else in history.
3) Federer had a chance to be outright GOAT. He got 5 shots at Rafa at the FO. He failed to take any of those - it is a knock against him, no getting around it.
4) Rafa failed to get to many non-Clay Slams, but whenever he did he maxed out beating Fed across all the surfaces they met. Full credit to him.
5) Given that Fed dominated 3 Slams to Rafa's 1 at the same age - you would have to give Fed a slight edge at this point in time.
Click to expand...

I have no problem with these points, which as far as I am concerned are statements of fact.

To me it comes to slam count at this point, and Federer is ahead.
 
Since 2005, Nadal has skipped at least 1 event from AO, Wimbledon, USO and WTF, but played every FO.

Nadal also never skipped MC, Rome and Madrid either. However he skipped many hard court MS.
 
lol @ including mickey mouse tournaments that top players don't/shouldn't play in your stats.

4 slams
1 wtf
9 masters tournaments

4/14 = 28.5% are on clay
9/14 = 64.3% are on HC
1/14 = 7.1%

owned :razz:
 
drm025 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Actually you are picking the stats that you want. The fact is that most 250s and 500s are meant for low ranked players ie not Nadal or Federer and are irrelevant to the discussion.

Ridiculing Federer for not playing Barcelona or some no-name clay tournaments in south america is laughable and desperate.

What we should do is combine the stats for the ratio of tournaments played by the top 4-8 players and see who deviates more from the mean. I'm sure it's Nadal.
 
Last edited:
WhiskeyEE said:
lol @ including mickey mouse tournaments that top players don't/shouldn't play in your stats.

4 slams
1 wtf
9 masters tournaments

4/14 = 28.5% are on clay
9/14 = 64.3% are on HC
1/14 = 7.1%

owned :razz:
Click to expand...

WhiskeyEE said:
Actually you are picking the stats that you want. The fact is that most 250s and 500s are meant for low ranked players ie not Nadal or Federer and are irrelevant to the discussion.

Ridiculing Federer for not playing Barcelona or some clay no-name clay tournaments in south america is laughable and desperate.
Click to expand...


Exactly. The next argument should be Nadal is from Spain and so we have to see the distribution of tournaments in Spain.
 
Someone post the stats for Djokovic and Murray.

Everyone plays a grass warmup and an AO warmup. And Fed plays Basel because he's Swiss.

On the other hand, no one but Nadal, other dirt ballers, and Rafa fan boys even take clay warm-ups seriously.
 
Last edited:
WhiskeyEE said:
Someone post the stats for Djokovic and Murray.

Everyone plays a grass warmup and an AO warmup. And Fed plays Basel because he's Swiss.

On the other hand, no one but Nadal, Ferrer, and Rafa fan boys take clay warm-ups seriously.
Click to expand...

Nadal's career strategy is to play Barcelona, Monte Carlo, Madrid, Rome and FO and rack up about 30 wins, 4 or 5 tiles and 4000-5000 points over the two months.
 
WhiskeyEE said:
Someone post the stats for Djokovic and Murray.

Everyone plays a grass warmup and an AO warmup. And Fed plays Basel because he's Swiss.

On the other hand, no one but Nadal, other dirt ballers, and Rafa fan boys even take clay warm-ups seriously.
Click to expand...

And Basel is only ATP500 in Swiss which the fans want to see their countryman(Federer). However, there are plenty of events in Spain which it doesn't hurt if Nadal skip one or two(e.g. Barcelona).
 
drm025 said:
To clarify, the point is not to prove that Federer has avoided clay. The main point was to show that Nadal hasn't avoided hard courts.
Click to expand...

Your point is moot because the argument is and always has been that Nadal lost early in HC tournaments, not that he avoided them entirely. As we all know, Nadal is extremely greedy and won't miss an opportunity to snatch an entrance fee.

I, however, don't think he necessarily avoided making finals. Just that he wasn't good enough to make them and that benefited him in the h2h.
 
WhiskeyEE said:
Actually you are picking the stats that you want. The fact is that most 250s and 500s are meant for low ranked players ie not Nadal or Federer and are irrelevant to the discussion.

Ridiculing Federer for not playing Barcelona or some no-name clay tournaments in south america is laughable and desperate.

What we should do is combine the stats for the ratio of tournaments played by the top 4-8 players and see who deviates more from the mean. I'm sure it's Nadal.
Click to expand...

I am picking stats when I include every tournament and you exclude some, gotcha. The 250s are real tournaments. Ask Federer, he's won 21 of them, going for 22 tonight. That's 27% of his career titles, more than a quarter. You know Nadal has only won 4 ATP 250 clay titles in his career right? That includes Sao Paulo during his comeback this year. So 3 before that. Just 3...

The FACT is that 34-35% of tournaments on the ATP tour are played on clay. Why don't you tell the directors of those tournaments that their tournament is meaningless?

I don't understand comparing Nadal's schedules with the other top players. Obviously the clay GOAT would play more clay matches than all of the other top players....
 
Last edited:
drm025 said:
I am picking stats when I include every tournament and you exclude some, gotcha. The 250s are real tournaments. Ask Federer, he's won 21 of them, going for 22 tonight. That's 27% of his career titles, more than a quarter.

The FACT is that 34-35% of tournaments on the ATP tour are played on clay. Why don't you tell the directors of those tournaments that their tournament is meaningless?

I don't understand comparing Nadal's schedules with the other top players. Obviously the clay GOAT would play more clay matches than all of the top players....
Click to expand...

There are 3 clay masters (including the optional Monte Carlo) before the FO. No one needs or wants to play Barcelona or the south american clay stretch. However, some minor tournaments are necessary. ie AO/Wimbledon Warmups, Basel for Federer, etc.

Including all tournaments does not make your stats important. You are purposely ignoring that top players do not generally play the meaningless clay tournaments. If we compared Federer and Nadal's ratio of tournaments played to other top players, Federer would be much closer to the mean.
 
WhiskeyEE said:
There are 3 clay masters (including the optional Monte Carlo) before the FO. No one needs or wants to play Barcelona or the south american clay stretch. However, some minor tournaments are necessary. ie AO/Wimbledon Warmups, Basel for Federer, etc.

Including all tournaments does not make your stats important. You are purposely ignoring that top players do not generally play the meaningless clay tournaments. If we compared Federer and Nadal's ratio of tournaments played to other top players, Federer would be much closer to the mean.
Click to expand...

And how many meaningless hard court tournaments do the top players play? AO-warmup and what else? Also, Djokovic has proved those warm-ups arent even necessary. Oh, he also won Wimbledon without a grass court warm-up. Yeah, "necessary" is your opinion. I include 250s for both hard and clay. That is fair.

Federer would be closer to the mean of the other top players because they have similar strengths... What does that prove?
 
drm025 said:
And how many meaningless hard court tournaments do the top players play? AO-warmup and what else? Also, Djokovic has proved those warm-ups arent even necessary. Oh, he also won Wimbledon without a grass court warm-up. Yeah, "necessary" is your opinion. I include 250s for both hard and clay. That is fair.

Federer would be closer to the mean of the other top players because they have similar strengths... What does that prove?
Click to expand...

Federer would be closer to the mean of the other top players because they have similar desires. Frankly, no one cares about Barcelona or flying to south america to compete in some 3rd world country for a meaningless clay title.

Top players generally play AO warmup, Wimbledon warmup, and Dubai because there is a large gap in the schedule between AO and Indian Wells. Federer also plays Basel and some play Tokyo or Beijing or whatever due to schedule reasons.

Djokovic winning proves that it isn't necessarily required, but arguing that it doesn't help to get accustomed to a surface before playing a slam on it proves how desperate and ridiculous your argument is.
 
WhiskeyEE said:
Federer would be closer to the mean of other top players because they have similar desires. Frankly, no one cares about Barcelona or flying to south america to compete in some 3rd world country for a 250 clay title.

Top players generally play AO warmup, Wimbledon warmup, and Dubai because there is a large gap in the schedule between AO and Indian Wells.

Djokovic winning proves that it isn't necessarily required, but arguing that it doesn't help to get accustomed to a surface before playing a slam on it proves how desperate and ridiculous your argument is.
Click to expand...

You know what else is ridiculous? Saying I made arguments that I didn't make... I said Djokovic showed it wasn't necessary.

Saying that no one cares about clay and calling countries in South America 3rd-world basically sums up your validity as a poster on this forum.
 
WhiskeyEE said:
Your point is moot because the argument is and always has been that Nadal lost early in HC tournaments, not that he avoided them entirely. As we all know, Nadal is extremely greedy and won't miss an opportunity to snatch an entrance fee.

I, however, don't think he necessarily avoided making finals. Just that he wasn't good enough to make them and that benefited him in the h2h.
Click to expand...

The comment about Nadal being greedy is really dumb, as it's the complete opposite.

Nadal could take residence in Monte Carlo or Dubai, and instead pays taxes in Spain (losing many millions of dollars in the process).

He has also refused private jets paid for by the Spanish Tennis Fedetation (public money) mentioning he wouldn't have felt comfortable due to the economic crisis.

He also has no problem playing Davis Cup matches even to his own detriment (unlike Fed).

Fed and Djokovic could learn a thing or two about not being greedy from Nadal.

Typical hateful uninformed comment from a notorious Federer fanboy.
 
Forehand Of Doom said:
The comment about Nadal being greedy is really dumb, as it's the complete opposite.

Nadal could take residence in Monte Carlo or Dubai, and instead pays taxes in Spain (losing many millions of dollars in the process).

He has also refused private jets paid for by the Spanish Tennis Fedetation (public money) mentioning he wouldn't have felt comfortable due to the economic crisis.

He also has no problem playing Davis Cup matches even to his own detriment (unlike Fed).

Fed and Djokovic could learn a thing or two about not being greedy from Nadal.

Typical hateful uninformed comment from a notorious Federer fanboy.
Click to expand...

That you Jackie? Good to see you! :razz:
 
WhiskeyEE said:
Federer would be closer to the mean of the other top players because they have similar desires. Frankly, no one cares about Barcelona or flying to south america to compete in some 3rd world country for a meaningless clay title.

Top players generally play AO warmup, Wimbledon warmup, and Dubai because there is a large gap in the schedule between AO and Indian Wells. Federer also plays Basel and some play Tokyo or Beijing or whatever due to schedule reasons.

Djokovic winning proves that it isn't necessarily required, but arguing that it doesn't help to get accustomed to a surface before playing a slam on it proves how desperate and ridiculous your argument is.
Click to expand...

Whereas everybody cares about Basel. Dumb comment again. You are a natural.
 
drm025 said:
Saying that no one cares about clay and calling countries in South America 3rd-world basically sums up your validity as a poster on this forum.
Click to expand...

I said no one cares about Barcelona and other meaningless clay tournaments like the south american stretch.

You have gotten completely owned and embarrassed and have now resorted to an ad hominem. How surprising.

You know what else is ridiculous? Saying I made arguments that I didn't make... I said Djokovic showed it wasn't necessary.
Click to expand...

Pot meet kettle.
 
Last edited:
WhiskeyEE said:
I said no one cares about Barcelona and other eaningless clay tournaments like the south american stretch.

You have gotten completely owned and embarrassed and are not resorting to an ad hominem. How surprising.



Pot meet kettle.
Click to expand...

Saying no one cares about certain tournaments is ignorant and shows your true colors. Why don't you get someone to back you up on that....

And yes, saying that small clay tournaments are worthless implies that you find clay worthless. Unless you mention meaningless hard court tournaments too..
 
drm025 said:
Saying no one cares about certain tournaments is ignorant and shows your true colors. Why don't you get someone to back you up on that....

And yes, saying that small clay tournaments are worthless implies that you find clay worthless. Unless you mention meaningless hard court tournaments too..
Click to expand...

Meaningless hard courts tournaments - Tokyo. Basel if you are not Swiss, etc.

Happy buddy?

I'm sure I could get Federer, Djokovic, Murray, and several other top players to back me up on that. The fact that they all skip them does exactly that.
 
WhiskeyEE said:
Meaningless hard courts tournaments - Tokyo, Beijing. Basel if you are not Swiss, etc.

Happy buddy?

I'm sure I could get Federer, Djokovic, Murray, and several other top players to back me up on that. The fact that they all skip them does exactly that.
Click to expand...

Again, ignorant. Nice talking to you.

Get another poster on here to back you up was what I meant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Federer and Nadal and Tournaments Won by Surfaces
Replies
7
Views
1K
viduka0101
viduka0101
M
Disproportion of Federer/Nadal Matches on Clay
Replies
1
Views
704
timnz
T
counterloop
Clay Courts vs Grass Courts
Replies
12
Views
3K
Overdrive
Overdrive
granddog29
Comparing Federer and Nadal by surface
Replies
7
Views
1K
mike danny
mike danny
anointedone
  • Poll Poll
Better surface for Nadal-hard courts or grass?
Replies
19
Views
2K
psamp14
psamp14
Back
Top