Nadal had the toughest competition out of any player in history

Who had the toughest competition

  • Federer

    Votes: 67 36.0%
  • Nadal

    Votes: 73 39.2%
  • Djokovic

    Votes: 46 24.7%

  • Total voters
    186
Nadal enjoyed 2 cheap US Opens .... made last rounds of wimbledon after struggling for many years in the 2010s... so much for having it tough.

Once upon a time oldies found it tough on grass vs youngsters, now things r reverse
The US open 2019 was tough against peak Medvedvev who had won 2 Masters 1000 in a row and defeated Djokovic at Cincinnati 2019. 33 years old Nadal defeated 23 years old Medvedev, 10 years younger than him. Federer never defeated any player 10 years younger than him in a Slam final. Federer's imability to stop the Next Gen is a gigantic asterisk in his resume.

Federer won many cheap USO like the 2004 one against weak Hewitt and the 2005 one against the mummy Oldgassi who couldn't even run anymore.
 
Last edited:
Yes, LOL. So Nadal wins a Slam against Djokovic and it doesn't count because he wasn't facing Federer right? LOL.

Federer won 13 Slams without facing either Nadal or Djokovic during his career.

Federer was at his peak at RG 2008, WB 2008 and the AO 2009. He simply had a lower peak level than Nadal. Without Nadal, Federer would have achieved a NCYGS between 2008 and 2009.

You just simply define peak in a way that it ends in 2007 to excuse Federer's losses to Nadal.

Peak actually ended prematurely in 07 because of Mono.
Otherwise 2008 could have been fought at a very high level .

Federer might have still lifted 3 slams in 2008 if it wasn't for MONO.

2009 was also a year when Federer made all 4 finals and won 2.

2010 was the first year when Federer was actually down,, thats when the peak was completely over.
 
The US open 2019 was tough against peak Medvedvev who had won 2 Masters 1000 in a row and defeated Djokovic in Cincinnati. 33 years old Nadal defeated 23 years old Medvedev, 10 years younger than him. Federer never defeated any player 10 years younger than him in a Slam final. Federer's imability to stop the Next Gen is a gigantic asterisk in his resume.

Federer won many cheap USO like the 2004 one against weak Hewitt and the 2005 one against the mummy Oldgassi who couldn't even run anymore.

Agassi in 2005 was still playing at a very high level,
If you want him to play like 1995 then not possible.
 
Federer could stop every player 10 years younger to him without breaking a sweat.

Only problem is Novak is an ATG and now the age gap prevents from winning.... it has been the same for nearly a decade.
 
Clearly.

Peak Fed played headcases and guys without weapons. Nadal matched up against ATGs for most of his prime.

He whipped those guys so bad on clay people thought Fedovic are two surface players. LMAOO
 
Nadal has a big mental advantage over his rivals due to his dominance on clay.
Every year even in Federer's prime and Novak's prime Nadal used to beat them black and blue at the French Open over 5 sets, so in their minds a defeat 12-20 months back to Nadal on clay was fresh as baggage and this increased every year and even on other turfs this showed since every court now is slow and baselining is what happens everywhere. So Nadal has a big edge.
 
Anyway, IMO both Federer and Nadal had it tougher than Djokovic.
Whatever Federer enjoyed against his own generation was all nullified by God sending 2 ATGs 5-6 years younger to spoil his second innings.
Nadal overall had it tough throughout from his teen years till today outside clay, on Clay he was Superman so he enjoyed a powerful presence.

Novak had it pretty easy because he is the top non clay player from his generation, the prev generation dude Federer is ageing and cannot beat him in 30s and young gen all toothless tigers......no wonder he won only 6 slams till his 27th birthday and today at 33 he is at 17, if he continues till 38 then all sorts of records are possible.
 
Nadal has a big mental advantage over his rivals due to his dominance on clay.
Every year even in Federer's prime and Novak's prime Nadal used to beat them black and blue at the French Open over 5 sets, so in their minds a defeat 12-20 months back to Nadal on clay was fresh as baggage and this increased every year and even on other turfs this showed since every court now is slow and baselining is what happens everywhere. So Nadal has a big edge.

Hasn't it been years and years since Nads has been beaten Fedovic off clay?

It's almost as your theory works in reverse, Nads loses confidence against them when playing on a non-clay surface.
 
Djokovic had to deal with 2 fellow GOAT contenders his entire career, as well as ATG Murray and Wawrinka with one of highest peak ever o_O
no doubt he’s had it tougher than any ATG before
 
Firstly I have to state I am a Federer and Nadal fan, and this is a very unbiased thread, but just what I have observed over the years. I would still say Federer is the greatest player followed by Nadal second, then either Djokovic or Sampras number 3.

Federer had a trouble free start to his grand slam wins, there weren't many notable opponents in the early years. It was a retiring Agassi, and Roddick and few others which weren't of the highest level. Nadal troubled Federer from the very first game. When Nadal and Djokovic started to emerge as multiple grand slam winners, Federer struggled. Federer also enjoyed a very weak era last year.

Djokovic hugely benefited from the end of Federer's career where his form was low, and the same with Nadal in the last few years. Nadal was obviously going to drop off quicker due to his style of play and the impact the body takes. So Djokovic enjoyed a free ride over the last few years, before 2017, and at one point held all four grand slams I believe.

Nadal had it very tough. He was playing on the men's tour when he was a child. He had to compete against who most people consider the greatest player of all time Roger Federer. Nadal was number 2 for so many years, but him and his uncle worked out a way to beat Federer at his own home, and he did so in Wimbledon 2008. Federer was untouchable on grass from 2003 to 2009, and was still in his greatest form in 2008 and Nadal had to battle on his weakest surface to beat him. He then had to compete with Prime Djokovic, against who I would probably consider the third greatest player of all time. So to think he had to compete with the greatest and third greatest players in history in their primes.
His competition was the best and second best players of all time so yes
 
Yes, LOL. So Nadal wins a Slam against Djokovic and it doesn't count because he wasn't facing Federer right? LOL.

Federer won 13 Slams without facing either Nadal or Djokovic during his career.

Federer was at his peak at RG 2008, WB 2008 and the AO 2009. He simply had a lower peak level than Nadal. Without Nadal, Federer would have achieved a NCYGS between 2008 and 2009.

You just simply define peak in a way that it ends in 2007 to excuse Federer's losses to Nadal.
And Nadal has won 10 slams without facing peak Fedovic. It evens out. Don't really think too highly of 2019 Federer and 2020 Djokovic at RG LOL. Those guys certainly aren't tougher than many guys Fed beat in 2004-2007 on HC/grass.
 
Hasn't it been years and years since Nads has been beaten Fedovic off clay?

It's almost as your theory works in reverse, Nads loses confidence against them when playing on a non-clay surface.

To some extent it should work in reverse, but it always work more in Nadal's favor because he is too strong on Clay and he has some wins vs others outside clay but on clay nobody has anything significant over him.

If somebody ever had an edge over Nadal on clay then you would have seen a very different Nadal mentally, but his mental strength is rock solid because of clay, he has a winning H2H over most people because he faces them a lot on clay and streamrolls them all ..... it helps on other courts.

Djokovic hardly steamrolls anyone outside of HCs and even there he has lost to guys or won close.

Federer used to steamroll ppl outside clay in his prime but now the defeats come a lot because he is 15+ years older to many of the guys on tour .... to some like Sinner he is a full 20 years older.

Thats is no joke. .... it would be like Djokovic playing Boris Becker .... a full difference of 20 years .... LOL
 
The very should not be part of that sentence!
:sneaky:

I agree :giggle:

But a high level for sure, he won the Aus open in 2003 and even after that he was reaching the last stages of slams, the courts favoured his style of play, the same style which Novak employs now..... so we cannot say like Agassi could not move.

He wasn't like Sampras, the courts would not favor Sampras but they favored Agassi.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSH
Federer playing Jannik Sinner/Felix would be similar to Becker playing Djokovic in 2007 or playing Gasquet in 2006 or Sampras playing Raonic in 2010..... wouldn't Becker/Pete have been spanked ?? ... now ask yourself will Federer be spanked or not ? ;)
 
Federer playing Jannik Sinner/Felix would be similar to Becker playing Djokovic in 2007 or playing Gasquet in 2006 or Sampras playing Raonic in 2010..... wouldn't Becker/Pete have been spanked ?? ... now ask yourself will Federer be spanked or not ? ;)
I expect him to beat Felix even now LOL.
 
Letting the Federer hate you have get to you.

Federer faced Scud and Baghdatis in 2 slam finals then you group Hewitt and Roddick and Agassi with them :rolleyes:
They're always quick to mention Fed's weakest opponents (while leaving out Nadal as an opponent obviously), but I don't see them mention the weak slam finalists Nadal and Djokovic themselves have faced.
 
Federer proved he could beat the best of the prior generation (Sampras, Agassi); decimated his own generation; hung with the ATGs younger than him; and continued to win slams into the era of the Next Gen.

GOAT competition for sure.
 
Federer proved he could beat the best of the prior generation (Sampras, Agassi); decimated his own generation; hung with the ATGs younger than him; and continued to win slams into the era of the Next Gen.

GOAT competition for sure.
Three generations younger actually, isn't it?

There's the PETE and Andre gen, his gen, then the Ned-Djoko gen, the lost gen, and the next gen. If we're lucky he'll play guys like Alcaraz who are firmly in the gen after.
 
Alcaraz is coached by Ferrero who is actually of the same age group of Federer.

Now that is a landmark in Tennis, Federfer will be playing guys who are young enough to be his kids.... lol
 
They're always quick to mention Fed's weakest opponents (while leaving out Nadal as an opponent obviously), but I don't see them mention the weak slam finalists Nadal and Djokovic themselves have faced.
Federer won 12/20 slams without facing big 4
Djokovic won 16/17 slams facing big4 o_O:whistle::whistle:
 
Federer proved he could beat the best of the prior generation (Sampras, Agassi); decimated his own generation; hung with the ATGs younger than him; and continued to win slams into the era of the Next Gen.

GOAT competition for sure.
2004-2009 Federer-Nadal slam H2H
-> 2 - 6
2011 - 2020 Federer-Djokovic slam H2H
-> 2 - 9

This is “hanging” with the next gen?:-D
 
Better than Novak Djokovic's record against Wawrinka and Murray (much lesser players) between 2012 - 2016 in slams. Gifted 5 slams to them.
Murray is an ATG... and its 5 losses to these players between 2011-2016

Federer lost to Kuerten, Safin, Del Potro, Soderling and Berdych between 2004-2010 :whistle::whistle::whistle::whistle:
 
Murray is an ATG... and its 5 losses to these players between 2011-2016

Federer lost to Kuerten, Safin, Del Potro, Soderling and Berdych between 2004-2010 :whistle::whistle::whistle::whistle:

No he's not, Lew.

Murray and Wawrinka are essentially where they are in the game because Novak Djokovic was incapable of beating them when he was supposedly at peak. He also lost to Nishikori, who is a weaker player than anyone you've mentioned, in the 2014 USO. All of this while supposedly at peak.

:-D
 
No he's not, Lew.

Murray and Wawrinka are essentially where they are in the game because Novak Djokovic was incapable of beating them when he was supposedly at peak. He also lost to Nishikori, who is a weaker player than anyone you've mentioned, in the 2014 USO. All of this while supposedly at peak.

:-D
And Federer is on 20 slams and 310 weeks at number 1 because he dominated a vacuum in tennis against likes of Roddick, Bagdhatis, Philippousis, Grosjean, Bjorkman, Nalbandian ... before big 2 fully matured:whistle:
 
No he's not, Lew.

Murray and Wawrinka are essentially where they are in the game because Novak Djokovic was incapable of beating them when he was supposedly at peak. He also lost to Nishikori, who is a weaker player than anyone you've mentioned, in the 2014 USO. All of this while supposedly at peak.

:-D
Cilic is a slam winner because of Novak ROFLMAO.
 
And Federer is on 20 slams and 310 weeks at number 1 because he dominated a vacuum in tennis against likes of Roddick, Bagdhatis, Philippousis, Grosjean, Bjorkman, Nalbandian ... before big 2 fully matured:whistle:

Everyone you've listed bar Roddick contributed to only 2 of Federer's slam victories.

Wawrinka, Murray and Nishikori (who then lost to Cilic) won 6 slams against the supposed GOAT Novak Djokovic at his peak.

:whistle:
 
Everyone you've listed bar Roddick contributed to only 2 of Federer's slam victories.

Wawrinka, Murray and Nishikori (who then lost to Cilic) won 6 slams against the supposed GOAT Novak Djokovic at his peak.

:whistle:
Federer won 14 slam matches vs those opponents minus Roddick... 10 in slams he won :whistle: :whistle: :whistle:
 
The US open 2019 was tough against peak Medvedvev who had won 2 Masters 1000 in a row and defeated Djokovic in Cincinnati. 33 years old Nadal defeated 23 years old Medvedev, 10 years younger than him. Federer never defeated any player 10 years younger than him in a Slam final. Federer's imability to stop the Next Gen is a gigantic asterisk in his resume.

Federer won many cheap USO like the 2004 one against weak Hewitt and the 2005 one against the mummy Oldgassi who couldn't even run anymore.
Don't forget 2007 US Open v Baby Nole who was in his first slam final at the ripe age of 20 and still had Federer on the ropes for two sets.
 
OK Lew.

Then I could pick weak opponents who Novak Djokovic faced in early rounds and state they were his main competition.

:whistle:
No you couldn't. The best players tends to make finals.

Fact is, the creme of Fed's crop was Roddick, his Main Man, who he played more often in slams than Nadal or anyone else from 03-07. By contrast, Nole's biggest rival in slams was Nadal, followed by Murray and Federer. Are we seeing the disparity here?
 
Back
Top