nadal federer rivalry = seles graf rivalry?

[dominikk1985]

I would say that both rivalries are quite similar (minus the stabbing of course).
seles is similar to nadal and graf to roger.

lets compare:

graf won overall a ton more(like federer) but on a specific surface she got owned by seles. on other surfaces it was close to slight advantage graf.

IMO that is very similar to roger nadal.

hard,indoor grass: slight advantage federer (talking about prime-indoor moreso with a big advantage on carpet)
clay: nadal owns (even prime) federer

IMO there is some similarity between both rivalries.

 

[Sharpshooter]

Nadal owns him on outdoor HC 4-1 and on clay 10-2. Fed owns Nadal on indoor HC 3-0 BUT Fed can hardly take ownership of grass since it is only 2-1 and one of those victories was when Fed was in his prime in Wimbledon and Rafa made it to just his first Wimby final in 06. On grass they are even against each other.

But yeah there are similarities between the Rafa Fed rivalry and the Seles Graff rivalry.

 

[mistik]

i dont think it is similiar.seles never looked dominant against graf on any surface and she looked hopeless against Graf on grass from day one.Seles never had winning record against Graf.Nadal has a winning record against fed from day one.i wouldnt call it that much similiar.

 

[miyagi]

I dont know.....I think there rivalry is rather unique.....

The amount of criticism Federer has receieved for having such a lop sided head to head has been unprescendented.

Plus Nadal is more than competitive with Federer on any surface but just happend to dominate on clay (for the record I think Roger is the better player up to this point in their careers)

Nadal has been a bit of a thorn in the side of Federer for a number of years stopping him from achieve the grand slam, taking his favourite Wimbledon crown, then taking his #1 ranking.

So I kind of know what you mean but I dont actually think you are right, this situation is very unique and probably wont be repeated.

When Federer's career is over you wont find any article, any interview without Nadal being mentioned.

(btw so I dont offend anyone I think Federer has been intregal to Rafa's career too I think he pushed him to become the better player, better all surface player too! without Fed I doubt Rafa would be the player he is today either)

 

[NadalAgassi]

Peak Seles vs Graf:

French Open final: Seles wins 10-8 in final set
Wimbledon final: Graf wins 6-2, 6-1
In only 4 meetings in Seles's 2 best years ever 1991 and 1992, Seles lost 3 of 4, losing a match on every surface.

Peak Nadal vs Federer:

French Open final: Nadal wins 6-1, 6-3, 6-0
Wimbledon final: Nadal wins 8-6 in final set
In Nadal's 2 best years ever 2008 and 2010 he lost a total of 1 match to Federer.

I dont see any similarity personally.

 

[Warriorroger]

The OP has a point if you look at the dynamic of the rivalry not the the head to heads. Both Federer and Graf play/played a classic tennisgame which is/was about being two super athletes, a great forehand, and unbelievable footwork. Federer uses more shots (has more shots) than Graf, but she comes from a more versatile game before she stayed with a game that worked for her.

Nadal and Seles both lefthanded, both capable of creating unbelievable angles, difference is Nadal is much better athlete than Seles. Both mentally strong.

The difference between the head to heads IMO is the mental part. Where Federer used to work his way out of difficult matches with his talent, Graf and Seles did that with their minds. Federer is not used to do that and you see that in this stage of his career. If you compare that to '99 Graf against Venus Williams or Martina Hings/Lindsay davenport, it was Graf's mental game what got her trough the matches, to dig deep to use the old weapons one more time for the special occassion.

In terms of sheer exicitement both rivalries had fans on the chairs, watching great tennis and had fans at each other's throats for years and years to come.

 

[Joe Pike]

I would say that both rivalries are quite similar (minus the stabbing of course).
seles is similar to nadal and graf to roger.

lets compare:

graf won overall a ton more(like federer) but on a specific surface she got owned by seles. on other surfaces it was close to slight advantage graf.
...

1) On which surface Steffi "got owned" by Seles?
Seles was at her best on clay. So let's have a look how Seles "owned" Steffi:

FO 1989: Graf wins 63 36 63
Berlin 1990: Seles wins 64 63
FO 1990: Seles wins 76 64
Hamburg 1991: Graf wins 75 67 63
FO 1992: Seles wins 62 36 108
FO 1999: Graf wins 67 63 64

3-3 in matches, 85-85 in games.

2) And on which surface was it "close to slight advantage" Graf?
Grass maybe?

Wimbledon 1989: Graf wins 60 61
Wimbledon 1992: Graf wins 62 61

4-0 in matches, 24-4 in games.


May I say "moron" to you, yes?
Or do you prefer "dumb hater" ... ?

 

[Grass_for_cows]

As Hingis once put it, "What rivalry? I win all the matches."

Or maybe that's what makes the Fed/Nadal equal to Graf/Seles.

 

[Joe Pike]

As Hingis once put it, "What rivalry? I win all the matches."

Or maybe that's what makes the Fed/Nadal equal to Graf/Seles.

Yes, both Nadal and Graf won about two thirds of their matches against their opponents. Although Federer's stats is a little bit better than Seles's, IIRC.

 

[ibbi]

The comparison stands up on the most absolutely basic level, but no, they're not really the same at all. Seles took a total of 4 games of Graf on grass in their two encounters, Nadal gave Federer trouble there from the very first time. Steffi clearly had the advantage on hard courts, Federer has NEVER had that over Nadal, even before Rafa was a slam champion. Seles and Graf were also 3-3 on clay...we know how that is with Rafa and Roger.

 

[NadalAgassi]

I understand the OP's attempted point but in essence Graf overall owned Seles about as much as Nadal overall owns Federer.

 

[dannykl]

I understand the OP's attempted point but in essence Graf overall owned Seles about as much as Nadal overall owns Federer.

That's pretty true. Graf always has a winning head-to-head record against Seles even when Seles was number1.

Graf has clear advantage over Seles on fast surface like fast hard court, grass or carpet. Seles may have small advantage in slower surface like round bounce hard court or clay, but Steffi still is very competitive on these courts and we see their clay encounters are quite even in result.

Overall it is Graf who gets the upper hand, similar to Nadal who is leading Federer in career head-to -head. So if you want to talk of similarity, it is Graf who reminds me more of Nadal in the respect of winning results.

 

[Joe Pike]

I understand the OP's attempted point but in essence Graf overall owned Seles about as much as Nadal overall owns Federer.

Graf's H2H stats against Seles is actually even better than Nadal's against Federer.

 

[Laurie]

I wrote an article about the similarities between the two rivalries last year on Bleacher Report

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...fael-nadal-similar-paths-to-the-top-of-tennis

 

[Jchurch]

Peak Seles vs Graf:

French Open final: Seles wins 10-8 in final set
Wimbledon final: Graf wins 6-2, 6-1
In only 4 meetings in Seles's 2 best years ever 1991 and 1992, Seles lost 3 of 4, losing a match on every surface.

Peak Nadal vs Federer:

French Open final: Nadal wins 6-1, 6-3, 6-0
Wimbledon final: Nadal wins 8-6 in final set
In Nadal's 2 best years ever 2008 and 2010 he lost a total of 1 match to Federer.

I dont see any similarity personally.

How many times did they play off of clay those two years?

 

[tenis1]

Peak Seles vs Graf:

French Open final: Seles wins 10-8 in final set
Wimbledon final: Graf wins 6-2, 6-1
In only 4 meetings in Seles's 2 best years ever 1991 and 1992, Seles lost 3 of 4, losing a match on every surface.

Peak Nadal vs Federer:

French Open final: Nadal wins 6-1, 6-3, 6-0
Wimbledon final: Nadal wins 8-6 in final set
In Nadal's 2 best years ever 2008 and 2010 he lost a total of 1 match to Federer.

I dont see any similarity personally.

Lol at calling 17/18 years old Seles "peak". We never got to see peak Seles since her career was destroyed when she was 19.

 

[nothingfails]

That's pretty true. Graf always has a winning head-to-head record against Seles even when Seles was number1.

Graf has clear advantage over Seles on fast surface like fast hard court, grass or carpet. Seles may have small advantage in slower surface like round bounce hard court or clay, but Steffi still is very competitive on these courts and we see their clay encounters are quite even in result.

Overall it is Graf who gets the upper hand, similar to Nadal who is leading Federer in career head-to -head. So if you want to talk of similarity, it is Graf who reminds me more of Nadal in the respect of winning results.

It's not Seles' fault if Graf was injured or didn't make it to finals in Grand Slams she should have in 1991/92 (Wimbledon '92 doesn't count as Seles was told to shut up and never was her real self on the court that day). Seles won 8 of the 9 GS tournaments she entered post stabbing. Graf or no Graf, Seles would have won them anyways. Their career H2H is thus very misleading.
Back to the topic, I agree it's interesting indeed, never thought of the similarities before. Graf feared Seles as much as Federer does with Nadal. There's something mental about it, although Seles was always more agressive than Nadal.

 

[NadalAgassi]

Wimbledon '92 doesn't count as Seles was told to shut up and never was her real self on the court that day.

This one is classic. It is bad enough many Seles fanatics want to excuse every match she lost post stabbing due to the stabbing, but they want to make excuses for her losses pre stabbing too. Seles had just barely beaten Graf on clay a month earlier (10-8 in the 3rd) and you thought she was ever going to come close on grass, ROTFL! Then again no other way to create an illusion she was the GOAT to be when even her peak years record while #1 pales in comparision to many greats past at their peaks.

Seles won 8 of the 9 GS tournaments she entered post stabbing.

Incorrect. Seles won only 1 slam post stabbing.

Their career H2H is thus very misleading.

Lets break it down shall we:

Young pre pre prime Seles vs peak Graf (advantage Graf)- Graf leads 3-2
Peak Seles vs mostly slumping Graf (advantage Seles)- Graf leads 3-2
Peak Graf vs post stabbing overweight Seles (advantage Graf)- Graf leads 2-0
Prime age Seles settled back into tour vs aging injured nearly retired Graf (advantage Seles)- Graf leads 2-1

At every phase of their careers Graf was always ahead, even when she was an old physically beat up women literally on her last legs facing a mid 20s Seles, as well as when Seles was at her career peak and Graf was losing nearly every match to the likes of Sabatini.

Even so there are many players Seles fares even worse than vs Graf against- Venus, Serena, Davenport, three players whose power she could not cope with at all. Atleast with Graf she had the refuge of the backhand. Not to mention Hingis who also owned Seles even when she was 15 years old (I suppose you are going to use the stabbing excuse again).

Back to the topic, I agree it's interesting indeed, never thought of the similarities before. Graf feared Seles as much as Federer does with Nadal.

Yes which is why Seles and Nadal would never lose slam finals 6-2, 6-1 to Graf or Federer, and why Seles and Nadal could win a slam final with a bagel and breadstick set over Graf and Federer. It is why newcoming Seles and Nadal was winning most of their matches with Graf and Federer, and could barely lose a match anywhere once entered their primes. Oh wait that is only half true, wonder which half that is.

 

[NadalAgassi]

Lol at calling 17/18 years old Seles "peak". We never got to see peak Seles since her career was destroyed when she was 19.

Many fine players had their peaks at 17/18 or younger:

Tracy Austin
Martina Hingis
Hana Mandlikova
Maureen Connolly
Evonne Goolagong
Monica Seles

 

[nothingfails]

This one is classic. It is bad enough many Seles fanatics want to excuse every match she lost post stabbing due to the stabbing, but they want to make excuses for her losses pre stabbing too. Seles had just barely beaten Graf on clay a month earlier (10-8 in the 3rd) and you thought she was ever going to come close on grass, ROTFL! Then again no other way to create an illusion she was the GOAT to be when even her peak years record while #1 pales in comparision to many greats past at their peaks.



Incorrect. Seles won only 1 slam post stabbing.



Lets break it down shall we:

Young pre pre prime Seles vs peak Graf (advantage Graf)- Graf leads 3-2
Peak Seles vs mostly slumping Graf (advantage Seles)- Graf leads 3-2
Peak Graf vs post stabbing overweight Seles (advantage Graf)- Graf leads 2-0
Prime age Seles settled back into tour vs aging injured nearly retired Graf (advantage Seles)- Graf leads 2-1

At every phase of their careers Graf was always ahead, even when she was an old physically beat up women literally on her last legs facing a mid 20s Seles, as well as when Seles was at her career peak and Graf was losing nearly every match to the likes of Sabatini.

Even so there are many players Seles fares even worse than vs Graf against- Venus, Serena, Davenport, three players whose power she could not cope with at all. Atleast with Graf she had the refuge of the backhand. Not to mention Hingis who also owned Seles even when she was 15 years old (I suppose you are going to use the stabbing excuse again).



Yes which is why Seles and Nadal would never lose slam finals 6-2, 6-1 to Graf or Federer, and why Seles and Nadal could win a slam final with a bagel and breadstick set over Graf and Federer. It is why newcoming Seles and Nadal was winning most of their matches with Graf and Federer, and could barely lose a match anywhere once entered their primes. Oh wait that is only half true, wonder which half that is.

I meant pre-stabbing obviously. Seles won 7 out of the 8 slams she entered during her prime (where was Graf ?). That's all there is to it and the rest is history, including the obviously misleading H2H with Graf, who failed to show up in GS finals during that period of time.

 

[NadalAgassi]

I meant pre-stabbing obviously. Seles won 7 out of the 8 slams she entered during her prime (where was Graf ?). That's all there is to it and the rest is history, including the obviously misleading H2H with Graf, who failed to show up in GS finals during that period of time.

By your logic we could blame Seles for not showing up at Wimbledon 91, or not making more slam finals in 1990, 1996 or 1999 to play Graf and lose more often. It is all idle speculation, the H2H is a fact just as Seles's slam titles in 91 and 92 are as well. When you break it down the head to head makes total sense even ignoring possible matchup issues since Graf and Seles played on tour 6 full years together, Graf was the better player in 4 of those 6:

1989- Graf
1990- Graf
1991- Seles
1992- Seles
1996- Graf
1999- Graf

And if you want to include partial years for either player while both played then Graf in 95 and 98, Seles in 93.

And yet even in the 2 years Seles was the better overall player when it came to playing Graf she still lost 3 of her 4 matches with Graf including a slam final 6-2, 6-1 (on grass), a tournament final 6-4, 6-3 (on hard courts), a tournament final in 3 sets (on clay), and won one slam final 10-8 in the 3rd (on clay). If anything indicating Graf is a bad matchup for Seles. Thus there is no evidence or even hints of your speculated edge when they actually played each other. Yes Seles had an edge for 2 years in winning slams, thus doing better vs the field, but that is it.

Seles did indeed win 7 of 9 slam events from 91-early 93 (forget this that she played business when the one she missed was Wimbledon where she never came close to winning even at her best and obviously deserves no benefit of doubt if she doesnt show). Coupled with 12 overall losses (11 just counting 91 and 92). A nice run of course. However many players in history have had better runs than that- Graf in 88-89, Navratilova in 83 and 84, Connolly from 52-54, Court in 69-70, Lenglen from 1919-1926, Wills from 1926-1932, arguably Serena in 2002-2003.

 

[nothingfails]

By your logic we could blame Seles for not showing up at Wimbledon 91, or not making more slam finals in 1990, 1996 or 1999 to play Graf and lose more often. It is all idle speculation, the H2H is a fact just as Seles's slam titles in 91 and 92 are as well. When you break it down the head to head makes total sense even ignoring possible matchup issues since Graf and Seles played on tour 6 full years together, Graf was the better player in 4 of those 6:

This is not my logic, it's just that 1990, 1996 and 1999 were not peak Seles obviously. Neither was that 1992 Wimbledon final when she was told not to grunt. You're obviously biased and and dishonest. I'm focusing on peak Seles (where Graf failed to show up in most GS finals against Seles) whereas you're focusing on their overall misleading H2H.

 

[NadalAgassi]

This is not my logic, it's just that 1990, 1996 and 1999 were not peak Seles obviously. Neither was that 1992 Wimbledon final when she was told not to grunt. You're obviously biased and and dishonest. I'm focusing on peak Seles (where Graf failed to show up in most GS finals against Seles) whereas you're focusing on their overall misleading H2H.

LOL why only focus on peak Seles. Especialy when 91 and 92 wasnt even close to being peak Graf to compare her with (unless you think she had a 14 year peak or something). This thread is about overall Nadal and Federer. It isnt focusing on just Nadal of 2008 and 2010 which are arguably his only peak years. Nadad did well vs Federer in every phase of his career, owned him on one surface on every phase of his career, was competitive with him on all surfaces (unless you count indoor hard courts as a surface) at every phase of his career. Even non prime Nadal vs peak Federer this was true. So if this does not apply to Seles vs Graf in the same way, which it very obviously does not, it already proves the faulty heading of this thread.

And the 1992 Wimbledon final was in the midst of Seles's best year ever. It was also her only ever final on a surface she is mostly incompetent for a top player on (no other times past the quarters of Wimbledon). Of course it was her peak, especialy on that surface, stop talking out of your ass please. Even Seles's peak on grass simply isnt very good, and gets blown off the court if put on court with a multi Wimbledon Champion grass courter.

If you insist on narrowing down to just peak Seles, which makes no sense anyway given the overall context of Nadal vs Federer as a parallel, then that makes Seles look even worse in the comparision. Matches that actually took place, not fantasy matches and how you think they would have turned out, or matches you wish to rewrite like the 92 Wimbledon final, show Seles losing 3 of 4 matches, with her only win being 10-8 in the 3rd set, a blowout loss on grass, a blowout loss on hard courts, and a close loss on clay. Now try comparing that to Nadal vs Federer. The end.

 

[nothingfails]

LOL why only focus on peak Seles. Especialy when 91 and 92 wasnt even close to being peak Graf to compare her with (unless you think she had a 14 year peak or something). This thread is about overall Nadal and Federer. It isnt focusing on just Nadal of 2008 and 2010 which are arguably his only peak years. Nadad did well vs Federer in every phase of his career, owned him on one surface on every phase of his career, was competitive with him on all surfaces (unless you count indoor hard courts as a surface) at every phase of his career. Even non prime Nadal vs peak Federer this was true. So if this does not apply to Seles vs Graf in the same way, which it very obviously does not, it already proves the faulty heading of this thread.

And the 1992 Wimbledon final was in the midst of Seles's best year ever. It was also her only ever final on a surface she is mostly incompetent for a top player on (no other times past the quarters of Wimbledon). Of course it was her peak, especialy on that surface, stop talking out of your ass please. Even Seles's peak on grass simply isnt very good, and gets blown off the court if put on court with a multi Wimbledon Champion grass courter.

If you insist on narrowing down to just peak Seles, which makes no sense anyway given the overall context of Nadal vs Federer as a parallel, then that makes Seles look even worse in the comparision. Matches that actually took place, not fantasy matches and how you think they would have turned out, or matches you wish to rewrite like the 92 Wimbledon final, show Seles losing 3 of 4 matches, with her only win being 10-8 in the 3rd set, a blowout loss on grass, a blowout loss on hard courts, and a close loss on clay. Now try comparing that to Nadal vs Federer. The end.

Because it's irrelevant not to focus on peak Seles there. What's the point of including post-stabbing fat Seles in the H2H ? On the other hand Federer has always had a problem with Nadal even during Fed's prime, at least we agree on that. Anyway it's always beyond me how Graf fans are so dishonest and will never admit that she didn't benefit from Seles' stabbing.

 

[NadalAgassi]

Because it's irrelevant not to focus on peak Seles there. What's the point of including post-stabbing fat Seles in the H2H ? On the other hand Federer has always had a problem with Nadal even during Fed's prime, at least we agree on that. Anyway it's always beyond me how Graf fans are so dishonest and will never admit that she didn't benefit from Seles' stabbing.

I dont even care about Graf, nor am I a Graf fan. If I was a Graf fan do you think I would be starting threads that Serena at her best would overpower Graf easily except on clay (which I do firmly believe, with Seles you cant even speculate on that as even her peak vs Graf never came close to doing that). For me Graf is very overrated considering her consensus GOAT status, and I rate her only the 4th greatest all time behind Court, Evert, and Navratilova (although way above Seles obviously). I am simply pointing out the fact Seles vs Graf is absolutely nothing like Nadal vs Federer, unless you think Graf is Nadal by parallel.

Focusing on only peak Seles is stupid because:

1. This thread was not even focusing on just peak Nadal, heck not just even prime Nadal. It was focusing on all versions of Nadal. Nadal ever since 2005 has had a winning record vs Federer, has owned him on clay, has challenged him on every surface. This isnt just PEAK Nadal we are talking about vs Federer, it is any Nadal. So if you have to narrow down to just the 2 year peak of Seles, it is already proof she doesnt stack up in anyway in the comparision.

2. It wasnt peak Graf who peak Seles was facing, which even a general observer of the game who isnt a Seles nutter would recognize (Graf was playing better in 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 93, 94, 95, 96, and 99, than 91 and 92, so how is that peak Graf).

3. As already mentioned even this "peak only" Seles you want to focus exclusively on did not do anywhere near as well vs Graf as Nadal does vs Federer. She lost 3 of their 4 matches in 91 and 92, or 3 of their 5 if you want to go to early 93, lost a slam final 6-2, 6-1, lost a final on hard courts easily, even lost a match on clay. That in no way parallels how Nadal fares vs Federer. So instead even already restricing us to Seles's 2 year peak only vs Nadal's entire career, that still isnt nearly enough. So you then have to go even further and make excuse for some of Seles's poor showings in that 2 year peak only period (eg- your dismissing the Wimbledon final, LOL, and speculating on matches they didnt play rather than ones they did).

If you still dont get it there is no helping you. Bottom line Seles vs Graf is not and never was anything like Federer vs Nadal. That is an insult and disservice to Nadal to suggest he is merely the challenger to Federer that Seles was to Graf as far as head to head play goes.

 

[Joe Pike]

Lol at calling 17/18 years old Seles "peak". We never got to see peak Seles since her career was destroyed when she was 19.

You saw peak Seles at 17/18.
As you saw peak Hingis at 16/17.
And Austin at 16/18.

BTW, whose career was "destroyed"???
And please don't come up with this "stabbing" yadda-yadda ...

 

[Joe Pike]

It's not Seles' fault if Graf was injured ...

Neither was it Graf's fault that Seles was injured.

 

[Joe Pike]

... Graf feared Seles as much as Federer does with Nadal. ...

Yes, that why Graf had a winning record even against #1 Seles ...

 

[Joe Pike]

Because it's irrelevant not to focus on peak Seles there. What's the point of including post-stabbing fat Seles in the H2H ? On the other hand Federer has always had a problem with Nadal even during Fed's prime, at least we agree on that. Anyway it's always beyond me how Graf fans are so dishonest and will never admit that she didn't benefit from Seles' stabbing.

Graf didnt benefit from Seles's stabbing as much as Seles benefited from Graf's slump in 90-92 which clearly was caused by off-court distractions and from Graf's reconstructive knee surgery in 97 which virtually ended her career.

 

[TMF]

I would say Fed is more resemble to graf and rafa resemble to seles. Why?

-fed/graf has more slams than nadal/seles
-fed/graf are consider the GOAT by most fans
-fed/graf best surface is grass and nadal/seles best is clay(slower vs. fast surface)
-fed/graf both are older than nadal/seles
-fed/graf both don't grunt
-fed/graf both have one handed bh
-fed/graf play faster pace from their service game
-fed/graf hold more tennis records
-fed/graf have more fans(and more likeable)
-fed/graf both married to ex-tennis player

There's more...

 

[Dedans Penthouse]

Graf didnt benefit from Seles's [stabbing] as much as Seles benefited from Graf's slump in 90-92 which clearly was caused by off-court distractions and from Graf's reconstructive knee surgery in 97 which virtually ended her career.

smirking...you enthocentric psycho---LMAO!!!

Granted, Steffi's the all-time "top shelf" GOAT... but at the same time, who produced a knife-wielding PSYCHO who thrusted a steel blade into a rival WTA player ON BEHALF OF STEFFI GRAF=GERMANY'S NUMBER ONE PLAYER?????????????

Just sayin', .. ONE Monica Seles served as "the solution" vis-a-vis Steffi securing her #1 ranking ...versus 6-MILLION Monica Seles' as "the Deutchlandsolution" ... but that's for another time and another 'math' and another 6-million 'commas' to discuss at another time...dead or alive....whatever....

btw..give my best to your friend, gunther parche...

Sorry dude, but [size=+1]'dem's[/size] da facts.

 

[NadalAgassi]

If the stabbing had never happened quite possibly (likely) both Graf and Seles would be around only 16 slams and neither would even be a GOAT candidate at all. Which is about right IMO as neither deserve it. Navratilova, Evert, Court, and even Serena in their primes are a whole other level, in Serenas case maybe not as far as results but level of tennis.

 

[single_handed_champion]

If the stabbing had never happened quite possibly (likely) both Graf and Seles would be around only 16 slams and neither would even be a GOAT candidate at all. Which is about right IMO as neither deserve it. Navratilova, Evert, Court, and even Serena in their primes are a whole other level, in Serenas case maybe not as far as results but level of tennis.

... which is of course equal to 23.987 Slams, making her the de facto GOAT. :roll:

 

[NadalAgassi]

Navratilova, Evert, Graf, and Seles have all said Serena at her best plays at a higher level than any women in history. So have Bud Collins, John McEnroe, Mary Carillo, and others. Of course they know nothing about tennis according to you I guess. Unfortunately Serena hasnt had enough luck with health and has had a few slump periods, so will never be the greatest ever, but as far as peak level of play she could well be the best ever on a medium to fast surface. Steffi Graf couldnt even handle the serving, overall power, speed, and court smarts of a 17 year old tour rookie Serena in their biggest ever confrontation in a tier 1 final:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJE4vCj155o

And dont even get me started on Seles encounters with Serena, LOL!

 

[ninman]

Really, who cares? Federer's career has been much better than Nadal's so far, but neither player is retired. People will always keep banging on about this H-2-H thing, but the reality is Nadal was always just a bad match up for Federer.

 

[NamRanger]

Peak Seles vs Graf:

French Open final: Seles wins 10-8 in final set
Wimbledon final: Graf wins 6-2, 6-1
In only 4 meetings in Seles's 2 best years ever 1991 and 1992, Seles lost 3 of 4, losing a match on every surface.

Peak Nadal vs Federer:

French Open final: Nadal wins 6-1, 6-3, 6-0
Wimbledon final: Nadal wins 8-6 in final set
In Nadal's 2 best years ever 2008 and 2010 he lost a total of 1 match to Federer.

I dont see any similarity personally.

Classic case of trolling.


Nadal was never peaking when Federer was peaking and vice versa. The closest was 2007 where Federer was showing cracks in the armor and Nadal was on the rise. In both of their encounters it was close 4/5 set matches at the FO and Wimbledon.

 

[Dilettante]

Classic case of trolling.

(...)

2007 where Federer was showing cracks in the armor

It's me or Federer won 3 out of 4 slams that year?

 

[ninman]

It's me or Federer won 3 out of 4 slams that year?

You are by far the most stupid ignorant person I've ever "met".

 

[Dilettante]

You are by far the most stupid ignorant person I've ever "met".

Did not Federer win 3 out of 4 slams in 2007? Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[NamRanger]

Did not Federer win 3 out of 4 slams in 2007? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Yes, the point being is that Federer was still peaking, but starting to fall off at that point (lost to Canas, Volandri, and a bunch of nobodies in Master tournaments), while Nadal still wasn't at his peak yet (2008 and 2010 being better years).


Not to mention that other than the AO, Federer was struggling at all the slams (Wimbledon, FO, and USO before he got to the finals, dropping sets to people he normally destroyed like Ferrero, Robredo, should have honestly lost vs Davydenko, Isner, Lopez, etc.)

 

[ninman]

Did not Federer win 3 out of 4 slams in 2007? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Federer's best year by far was 2006, 16 finals from 17 tournaments entered, losing to only 2 players, and 12 titles won.

In 2007 Federer won only 8 titles, 2 masters series, and made 12 finals in total. He also lost in the RR stage of the tennis masters cup for the first time, and played his first five set match at Wimbledon since 2001.

Federer was beginning to come down from his peak in 2007, the fact that he won 3 out of 4 slams that year doesn't change that. 2008 was considerably worse for him, and he's never played that well since.

 

[Dilettante]

So when a player wins 3 out of 4 slams, he's coming down from his peak. Brilliant.

 

[ninman]

So when a player wins 3 out of 4 slams, he's coming down from his peak. Brilliant.

You're either pretending to be stupid, or you just are stupid. 2007 was a great year, but the signs were all there, back to back losses against Canas at the start of the year, back to back losses against Nalbandian at the end of the year. He may have played well in the majors, but his consistency outside of the majors was starting to drop.

In 2008 he made 3 out of 4 finals in majors, and almost won a 6th Wimbledon in a row, in 2009 he made all 4 finals losing 2 of them in 5 sets. Would you say those were peak years too?

 

[powerangle]

So when a player wins 3 out of 4 slams, he's coming down from his peak. Brilliant.

Peaking is relative.

Compared to 2006, yes Fed in 2007 already came down from his peak. Maybe still "prime" (though post AO that year his results already came down quite a bit), but certainly no longer "peak". Just like if Nadal were to only win FO this year, and doesn't win Wimbledon or USO (but makes finals), Nadal would have already come down, relative to his 2010. It would be a great year for just about any other player, but still Nadal would be coming down from his peak.

So yeah, peaking is relative. It's not rocket science.

 

[NadalAgassi]

Classic case of trolling.


Nadal was never peaking when Federer was peaking and vice versa. The closest was 2007 where Federer was showing cracks in the armor and Nadal was on the rise. In both of their encounters it was close 4/5 set matches at the FO and Wimbledon.

Who cares since for comparisions sake 92 wasnt even close to peak Graf either, in fact even further from it than peak Federer. So it is still an accurate comparision of peak Seles vs Graf and peak Nadal vs Federer.

 

[Dilettante]

You're either pretending to be stupid, or you just are stupid. 2007 was a great year, but the signs were all there, back to back losses against Canas at the start of the year, back to back losses against Nalbandian at the end of the year. He may have played well in the majors, but his consistency outside of the majors was starting to drop.

Yes, those losses to two Argentine players obviously define a player's year much, much better than the player winning 3 slams and being finalist in the 4th define that year.

-Hey fellas I won 3 slams and was finalist in the 4th, am I good or what.
-Good?? You lost to a couple South Americans this year, get outta here punk!!

Specially knowing that Nalbandian was playing with crutchs at the end of that year.

Compared to 2006, yes Fed in 2007 already came down from his peak.

Yeah, and compared to the star Rigel, the Sun is a small and cool inofensive beach ball. So I guess you are OK with the idea of going for a nice walk on the Sun's surface.

See? We all can be happy making own our phallacious comparisons.

So yeah, peaking is relative.

The ONLY thing in tennis higher to win 3 of 4 slams and being the 4th slam contender, is winning the all 4 slams in one year. So ****ing yes, Federer still was on a peak in 2007. I don't even know why I'm bothering to argue this, it's like trying to reason with creationists.

It's not rocket science.

Definitely not.

 

[powerangle]

Yeah, and compared to the star Rigel, the Sun is a small and cool inofensive beach ball. So I guess you are OK with the idea of going for a nice walk on the Sun's surface.

See? We all can be happy making own our phallacious comparisons.

How is that a phallacious comparison? Both are great years, yes, but 2006 is obviously better than 2007. It's not just the results, look at who he lost to as well. In 2006, Fed ONLY lost to Nadal and one other loss to Murray.
In 2007, Fed also lost to Canas, to Volandri, to Nalbandian, to Gonzalez... Fed could no longer bring it day in and day out as often as the previous year. And as you said in your previous posts, Canas and Nalbandian are just some "Argentines", then what business has Federer to lose to both of them, twice?

And what the heck? What does this have to with me walking on the sun? Did I not say 2007 was also a great year by any standard? I said it's still part of prime Federer overall but no longer was it Fed at his absolute peak. No one said that 2007 wasn't also impressive.

The ONLY thing in tennis higher to win 3 of 4 slams and being the 4th slam contender, is winning the all 4 slams in one year. So ****ing yes, Federer still was on a peak in 2007. I don't even know why I'm bothering to argue this, it's like trying to reason with creationists.

The slam results were the same, but outside of the slams Federer was already way less consistent. Fed was losing left, right, and center (for his lofty standards from the year before) to much "lesser" players.

And why are you getting so bent out of shape because someone disagrees with you?

 

[ninman]

How is that a phallacious comparison? Both are great years, yes, but 2006 is obviously better than 2007. It's not just the results, look at who he lost to as well. In 2006, Fed ONLY lost to Nadal and one other loss to Murray.
In 2007, Fed also lost to Canas, to Volandri, to Nalbandian, to Gonzalez...

And what the heck? What does this have to with me walking on the sun? Did I not say 2007 was also a great year by any standard? I said it's still part of prime Federer overall but no longer was it Fed at his absolute peak.



The slam results were the same, but outside of the slams Federer was already way less consistent. Fed was losing left, right, and center (for his lofty standards from the year before) to much "lesser" players.

And why are you getting so bent out of shape because someone disagrees with you?

It's so obvious that 2007 was not as good as 2006, still good, but clearly not as good, and 2008 was worse still.

 

[Dilettante]

And why are you getting so bent out of shape because someone disagrees with you?

Who, me? Seriously?

You didn't make that question when Ninman called me "stupid ignorant" a few posts ago just because I was saying Federer won 3 of 4 slams in 2007. Read the previous posts carefully.

If I were bent out of shape, which you don't really can say, but anyway, could it be not because someone disagrees but because Ninman's insults?

I've been in these boards for years, try to find any single post when I get upset just because someone disagrees. I'm not even upset by Ninman's insults, but I find rather funny your double standard when it comes to posters' attitude.

 

[powerangle]

Who, me? Seriously?

You didn't make that question when Ninman called me "stupid ignorant" a few posts ago just because I was saying Federer won 3 of 4 slams in 2007. Read the previous posts carefully.

If I were bent out of shape, which you don't really can say, but anyway, could it be not because someone disagrees but because Ninman's insults?

I've been in these boards for years, try to find any single post when I get upset just because someone disagrees. I'm not even upset by Ninman's insults, but I find rather funny your double standard when it comes to posters' attitude.

I didn't read Ninman's posts as I don't necessarily read through entire threads before posting. Sometimes scrolling through threads, some posts catch my eye. Your short sentence in the original post that I quoted you, caught my eye, so I replied. In any case, if he did insult you, then he is in the wrong.

In the same vein that I shouldn't assume that you get upset when someone disagrees with you (though your post was pointed and sarcastic towards me), you shouldn't assume that I have a double standard. You won't find a single post where I go by double standards.

All I ever did was reply to your post because I disagreed with it, and wanted to comment on it, and you came back with a snide/sarcastic remark about walking on the sun and arguing with "creationists".