Nadal has beaten #1 at every slam title, except for RG 2010 (but he beat Soderling!)

[NADALRECORD]

Of the slam titles Nadal won, he was ranked #1 in the following:
2009 Australian Open
2010 Wimbledon
2010 US Open
2011 Roland Garros

So which of the remaining 9 slam titles did Nadal beat #1 at?
2005 Roland Garros = Federer
2006 Roland Garros = Federer
2007 Roland Garros = Federer
2008 Roland Garros = Federer
2008 Wimbledon = Federer
2012 Roland Garros = Djokovic
2013 Roland Garros = Djokovic
2013 US Open = Djokovic

So the only slam title Nadal didn't beat #1 at was:
2010 Roland Garros

And there surely is no greater feeling than beating Soderling (a year after Soderling inflicted Nadal's only Roland Garros loss ever).

 

[tennis_hack]

Of the slam titles Nadal won, he was ranked #1 in the following:
2009 Australian Open
2010 Wimbledon
2010 US Open
2011 Roland Garros

So which of the remaining 9 slam titles did Nadal beat #1 at?
2005 Roland Garros = Federer
2006 Roland Garros = Federer
2007 Roland Garros = Federer
2008 Roland Garros = Federer
2008 Wimbledon = Federer
2012 Roland Garros = Djokovic
2013 Roland Garros = Djokovic
2013 US Open = Djokovic

So the only slam title Nadal didn't beat #1 at was:
2010 Roland Garros

And there surely is no greater feeling than beating Soderling (a year after Soderling inflicted Nadal's only Roland Garros loss ever).

Correction, parental divorce inflicted Nadal's only loss at RG. Soderling had nothing to do with it - healthy Nadal is undefeated.

 

[TheAnty-vic]

Federer fans coming and saying RG doesn't count, in 3....2.....1

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

I am particularly partial to the choice of photo.

 

[NADALRECORD]

Surprisingly, after beating Nadal at 2009 RG, Soderling also beat Nadal at 2009 World Tour Finals 64 64.

Nadal responded by beating Soderling at the following:
2010 Roland Garros 64 62 64
2010 Wimbledon 36 63 76 61
2011 Roland Garros 64 61 76

 

[Djokovic2011]

To defeat the number one player in that many slams is very impressive. Nadal is probably the greatest big match player I've ever seen so kudos to him.

 

[NADALRECORD]

The only slam final I've ever felt nervous before was the 2010 Roland Garros final. All the other slam finals I was looking forward to.

 

[TheAnty-vic]

Of the slam titles Nadal won, he was ranked #1 in the following:
2009 Australian Open
2010 Wimbledon
2010 US Open
2011 Roland Garros

Interesting. So Nadal has won the Career Slam, while being the No.1 player in the world. Very impressive!

Has even the "Goat" done that? :roll:

I guess not! 8)8)

 

[NatF]

Interesting. So Nadal has won the Career Slam, while being the No.1 player in the world. Very impressive!

Has even the "Goat" done that? :roll:

I guess not! 8)8)

If you were a reasonable poster you would have noticed no one has brought Federer into this or attempted to discredit this stat of Nadal's.

But instead you've decided to be a tool as usual.

Bravo.

 

[Sid_Vicious]

Well, its not like he had to fight the odds as much as you make it sound like. Every guy and his dog knew that despite Nadal's number 2 ATP ranking, he was (and still is ) the number 1 clay court player on tour.The most impressive ones are WIM 2008 and USO 2013 and even those were events in which Nadal had the momentum going in.

 

[TheAnty-vic]

If you were a reasonable poster you would have noticed no one has brought Federer into this or attempted to discredit this stat of Nadal's.

But instead you've decided to be a tool as usual.

Bravo.

Regarding discrediting Nadal, my first comment was "Fed fans coming in 3--2--1". So obviously, they haven't come yet. I'm not just saying it without any reason. It is what happens in MOST of the threads.

Regarding Federer, I didn't even mention him. With "Goat", I meant Laver! Lol:roll:
You know, there were no rankings in his time. So officially, he hasn't won all 4 slams while being "World no.1" :mrgreen:

 

[tennisaddict]

He likes to be the eternal bridesmaid , so he can claim he beat the Number 1's.

 

[NatF]

Regarding discrediting Nadal, my first comment was "Fed fans coming in 3--2--1". So obviously, they haven't come yet. I'm not just saying it without any reason. It is what happens in MOST of the threads.

Regarding Federer, I didn't even mention him. With "Goat", I meant Laver! Lol:roll:
You know, there were no rankings in his time. So officially, he hasn't won all 4 slams while being "World no.1" :mrgreen:

We both know you were sarcastically talking about Federer

They will come, I hope they don't but it is inevitable. You troll plenty of threads yourself though so it's a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Laver was unofficially #1 at the time in 1969. I doubt few would say he wasn't the best player in the world.

 

[TheAnty-vic]

We both know you were sarcastically talking about Federer

They will come, I hope they don't but it is inevitable. You troll plenty of threads yourself though so it's a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Laver was unofficially #1 at the time in 1969. I doubt few would say he wasn't the best player in the world.

Exhibit A

He likes to be the eternal bridesmaid , so he can claim he beat the Number 1's.

Btw NatF, if you see my posts prior to AO, I have been a very cordial & well behaved poster.
But sadly post AO, with the amount of Rafa hate on this forum, I have decided to talk to posters the way they are. Nice to nice ones and troll to trolls!

 

[NatF]

Exhibit A



Btw NatF, if you see my posts prior to AO, I have been a very cordial & well behaved poster.
But sadly post AO, with the amount of Rafa hate on this forum, I have decided to talk to posters the way they are. Nice to nice ones and troll to trolls!

There's been alot of trolling from Rafa fans as well. No thread is safe from the branding of 23-10.

The more people who rise above it the better.

 

[TheAnty-vic]

There's been alot of trolling from Rafa fans as well. No thread is safe from the branding of 23-10.

The more people who rise above it the better.

I tried, believe me.

Check out this thread which I created, just to invite people to post Positive comments. But sadly, no one cares about such threads.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=491203

 

[DRII]

And there surely is no greater feeling than beating Soderling (a year after Soderling inflicted Nadal's only Roland Garros loss ever).

and we'll see what happens the next time Nadal meets Wawrinka in a slam...

 

[NatF]

I tried, believe me.

Check out this thread which I created, just to invite people to post Positive comments. But sadly, no one cares about such threads.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=491203

I didn't even see that thread, shame no one took part.

I just prefer in general to sarcastically attack the posters who troll, without bringing in the players. Like I did with you earlier haha

 

[PhrygianDominant]

Interesting. So Nadal has won the Career Slam, while being the No.1 player in the world. Very impressive!

Has even the "Goat" done that? :roll:

I guess not! 8)8)

It's kinda hard to beat #1 when you are number 1.

But seriously Nadal is probably the best second fiddle I have ever seen.

 

[cknobman]

This would have been an impressive achievement if he had not lost so many times to lower ranked players in the slams he had not won

 

[Backspin1183]

This would have been an impressive achievement if he had not lost so many times to lower ranked players in the slams he had not won

When you're the world #1 which Nadal is, every other player is ranked lower.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

For me, he is the best big match player I have ever seen. So, this does not surprise me one single bit.

 

[zam88]

really kind of miss Soderling being around.. too bad he could never come back.

What happened to tipseravic?

With all the turnover in the top 10, it's definitely amazing that Fedalovicurry have been constants for a REALLY long dang time.

I don't have a good historical perspective on tennis... is this somewhat normal for there to be a couple guys on top that really stick it out for a long time?

 

[tennisaddict]

So which of the remaining 9 slam titles did Nadal beat #1 at?
2005 Roland Garros = Federer
2006 Roland Garros = Federer
2007 Roland Garros = Federer
2008 Roland Garros = Federer
2008 Wimbledon = Federer
2012 Roland Garros = Djokovic
2013 Roland Garros = Djokovic
2013 US Open = Djokovic

He already gets credit for the 8 FO. So this is double or triple counting the achievements.

If you exclude the FO, where there is pitiful competition, i see only 2 great victories, won by a whisker though

- 2008 Wimbledon , won 9-7 in the 5th set
- 2013 USO, when Novak choked when he was to go 2 sets to 1.

 

[NADALRECORD]

It's kinda hard to beat #1 when you are number 1.

But seriously Nadal is probably the best second fiddle I have ever seen.

For most of Federer's reign at #1, he was losing to #2. So I don't consider Federer a better #1 than Nadal. Plus I think Nadal will end up with 5 year-end #1s (he has 3 of them already - 2008, 2010, 2013) which will tie Federer.

 

[WhiskeyEE]

For me, he is the best big match player I have ever seen. So, this does not surprise me one single bit.

Sampras?

7-0 in Wimbledon finals, 14-4 in slam finals, 5-0 in WTF finals.

 

[NADALRECORD]

He already gets credit for the 8 FO. So this is double or triple counting the achievements.

If you exclude the FO, where there is pitiful competition, i see only 2 great victories, won by a whisker though

- 2008 Wimbledon , won 9-7 in the 5th set
- 2013 USO, when Novak choked when he was to go 2 sets to 1.

2008 Wimbledon, Nadal was up 2 sets to love, and choked but was still skillful enough to win.

2013 USO, Nadal beat Djokovic 6-1 in the 4th set. Not even close. No chance for Djokovic to choke, he was just mauled.

And why do you exclude Roland Garros? If you are going to exclude any slams it should be the artificial surfaces (AO and USO) as there were no hardcourt slams when Laver won them all.

 

[NatF]

Sampras?

7-0 in Wimbledon finals, 14-4 in slam finals, 5-0 in WTF finals.

It helps his slam final conversion rate that he didn't make any on his worst surface.

 

[NADALRECORD]

Now that Nadal's worst surface is grass, it looks very impressive the way he's won 2 Wimbledons and made 5 Wimbledon finals overall. Compare that to Sampras at Roland Garros :lol:

 

[Death Master]

For me, he is the best big match player I have ever seen. So, this does not surprise me one single bit.

he lost a couple or 3 that he should not have but it is what it is.

he has time to make that up.

 

[NatF]

Now that Nadal's worst surface is grass, it looks very impressive the way he's won 2 Wimbledons and made 5 Wimbledon finals overall. Compare that to Sampras at Roland Garros :lol:

The highest level of tennis I've seen from Nadal off clay is on grass.

 

[slice bh compliment]

Federer fans coming and saying RG doesn't count, in 3....2.....1

Haha, i consider myself a big federer fan. Why would the french open not count? That is silly.

Sampras?

...5-0 in WTF finals.

Back in the "era of shorter rallies" I do remember Pete lost the 1993 aTp YEC final to stich in germany (wtf/masters cup/year-end chps/atp tour world championships).

Iirc, Both went undefeated in group play, then pete trounced medvedev in the semi. Stich should have lost to Goran in the other semi but made a big comeback and scraped it in the third set breaker, something like 12-10 or 13-11.

I remember thinking stich would not give pete much of a final, but he took it in front of his home crowd. Four awesome sets.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

Sampras?

7-0 in Wimbledon finals, 14-4 in slam finals, 5-0 in WTF finals.

I do rank Sampras very very highly, I am a massive fan. And you make a very valid statement.

But Nadal's got some good numbers on his side also.

8-0 in RG final, 13-6 in slam finals across all surfaces (lower percentage than Sampras, but played more finals on his worse surface), OG final, several Davis Cup deciders (I know Sampras has that iconic win on clay in Davis Cup also), numerous Masters series finals.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

he lost a couple or 3 that he should not have but it is what it is.

he has time to make that up.

Well, you can't win them all. No one can. But for me, overall, he has demonstrated himself to be the best in big match situations.

 

[drm025]

To compare, Federer has beat the #1 or #2 (when he was number 1), in 5 of his 17 victories. All at Wimbledon, Roddick, Hewitt, Nadal twice, and Djokovic.

Nadal has done this in 9 of his 13 wins. And at least once at each slam.

 

[WhiskeyEE]

It helps his slam final conversion rate that he didn't make any on his worst surface.

Surface homogenization helps Rafa's conversion rate, assuming he would have even made finals off of clay without it.

 

[drm025]

Surface homogenization helps Rafa's conversion rate, assuming he would have even made finals off of clay without it.

Well the fact that he's 8-0 at RG and 5-6 elsewhere, suggests that the surface still plays a big factor.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

Surface homogenization helps Rafa's conversion rate, assuming he would have even made finals off of clay without it.

I agree with the surface homogenization part. But we can only speculate how Rafa would have done in another era. But one thing we can say is, Rafa has the mentality of a champion, and that would be true in any era. That is first thing that is required to win.

 

[WhiskeyEE]

Well the fact that he's 8-0 at RG and 5-6 elsewhere, suggests that the surface still plays a big factor.

Imagine 8-0 and 0-11 (or 0-2 or however many non-clay finals he would've made) without surface homogenization :shock:

 

[tennis_pro]

Imagine 8-0 and 0-11 (or 0-2 or however many non-clay finals he would've made) without surface homogenization :shock:

Nadal would never reach 11 Slam finals outside of the FO if all the surfaces were nearly as fast as they used to be. A half decent player with a brain would serve him off the court on a fast surface. I'd love to hear Nadal's opinion about the speed then if even when it's a joke compared to 20 years ago he still complains a lot.

 

[drm025]

Imagine 8-0 and 0-11 (or 0-2 or however many non-clay finals he would've made) without surface homogenization :shock:

Speculation at best.

 

[Start da Game]

Of the slam titles Nadal won, he was ranked #1 in the following:
2009 Australian Open
2010 Wimbledon
2010 US Open
2011 Roland Garros

So which of the remaining 9 slam titles did Nadal beat #1 at?
2005 Roland Garros = Federer
2006 Roland Garros = Federer
2007 Roland Garros = Federer
2008 Roland Garros = Federer
2008 Wimbledon = Federer
2012 Roland Garros = Djokovic
2013 Roland Garros = Djokovic
2013 US Open = Djokovic

So the only slam title Nadal didn't beat #1 at was:
2010 Roland Garros

And there surely is no greater feeling than beating Soderling (a year after Soderling inflicted Nadal's only Roland Garros loss ever).

nothing ever came easily to the great man......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8d9dDQX8_s

 

[tennisaddict]

To compare, Federer has beat the #1 or #2 (when he was number 1), in 5 of his 17 victories. All at Wimbledon, Roddick, Hewitt, Nadal twice, and Djokovic.

Nadal has done this in 9 of his 13 wins. And at least once at each slam.

Einstein, that was because Fed was number 1 for 302 weeks. He was not a bridesmaid like others. Always the hero.

 

[tennisaddict]

2008 Wimbledon, Nadal was up 2 sets to love, and choked but was still skillful enough to win.

2013 USO, Nadal beat Djokovic 6-1 in the 4th set. Not even close. No chance for Djokovic to choke, he was just mauled.

And why do you exclude Roland Garros? If you are going to exclude any slams it should be the artificial surfaces (AO and USO) as there were no hardcourt slams when Laver won them all.

Sorry.

2008 Wimb - Fed was 2 points from winning ultimately

2013 USO - Novak was the better player till the end of the 3rd set. In the 3rd set he was up a break first and then was 4-4, 0-40 on Nadal's serve and from there epic choke happened.

Nadal was blasted the second and the third set till that point. You should watch the match again. It was Nadal who was mauled.

I already explained he gets more than enough credit for RG, where there is pitiful competition.

 

[drm025]

Einstein, that was because Fed was number 1 for 302 weeks. He was not a bridesmaid like others. Always the hero.

That's why I said number 1 or number 2....

Now the stat is even, it's how many times did you beat the best player in the world other than yourself.

Federer 5 of 17, all on grass
Nadal 9 of 13, at least once at every slam

 

[NatF]

That's why I said number 1 or number 2....

Now the stat is even, it's how many times did you beat the best player in the world other than yourself.

Federer 5 of 17, all on grass
Nadal 9 of 13, at least once at every slam

To be fair he's beaten Djokovic in USO runs twice and both times Djokovic was clearly the second best hardcourt player in the world at that time.

 

[drm025]

To be fair he's beaten Djokovic in USO runs twice and both times Djokovic was clearly the second best hardcourt player in the world at that time.

True, but still doesn't change the probability that Federer would have struggled against Nadal, if not due to the matchup alone then also because I would imagine Nadal would have put up more of a fight.

 

[Fed_Djoker_Fan]

Of the slam titles Nadal won, he was ranked #1 in the following:

2009 Australian Open

2010 Wimbledon

2010 US Open

2011 Roland Garros



So which of the remaining 9 slam titles did Nadal beat #1 at?

2005 Roland Garros = Federer

2006 Roland Garros = Federer

2007 Roland Garros = Federer

2008 Roland Garros = Federer

2008 Wimbledon = Federer

2012 Roland Garros = Djokovic

2013 Roland Garros = Djokovic

2013 US Open = Djokovic



So the only slam title Nadal didn't beat #1 at was:

2010 Roland Garros



And there surely is no greater feeling than beating Soderling (a year after Soderling inflicted Nadal's only Roland Garros loss ever).

Should be some record or something? Anyways amazing feat

 

[NatF]

True, but still doesn't change the probability that Federer would have struggled against Nadal, if not due to the matchup alone then also because I would imagine Nadal would have put up more of a fight.

I don't think Djokovic put up much fight in some of his recent slam finals against Nadal or Federer did at the FO 08. Nadal didn't make it to Federer, it's not his fault. Especially considering he beat other inform hardcourt players anyway.

 

[tennisaddict]

That's why I said number 1 or number 2....

Now the stat is even, it's how many times did you beat the best player in the world other than yourself.

Federer 5 of 17, all on grass
Nadal 9 of 13, at least once at every slam

So when Fed wins , he is responsible when the No.2 does not reach the final and Nadal should get more credit when he wins because Fed is consistent in reaching the finals ?