Nadal: "if somebody says I am better than Roger..."

zagor

Bionic Poster
Interviews like that are why I like Rafa. So down to earth. Like others said though, he is only saying what we already know. Roger is better all around. Nothing wrong with being the second best of the current era though. The fact that he stood up to Fed from the start is what made me a fan.
Agree,I don't think he's being PC,fake etc. I think he honestly respects Fed and his achievements,maybe because he sure as heck knows better anyone on this forum how hard it is to achieve what Fed did and be such a big factor in the game for so long.

On court no doubt Nadal is very confident he can beat anyone but that's the way any top 10 player should feel IMO as the difference isn't that much(as Nadal himself said).
 
On court no doubt Nadal is very confident he can beat anyone but that's the way any top 10 player should feel IMO as the difference isn't that much(as Nadal himself said).
Yes, even Djokovic said it in serbian talk show year ago, about how small difference is between top players.

As my dad told me once, in every sport, there is a champion who has bad match-up.
 
Rafael Nadal is seriously a very nice, respectful and pretty intelligent guy off the court. I don't like his game, but otherwise he's very nice, funny and makes me laugh with his English.

Just a shame he's insulting his own fans..

He's also just plain right here, stating what a lot of people have stated, yet some don't want to hear. Rafa is an all time great, but not as good as Roger Federer.
 

Sentinel

Bionic Poster
Rafael Nadal is seriously a very nice, respectful and pretty intelligent guy off the court. I don't like his game, but otherwise he's very nice, funny and makes me laugh with his English.

Just a shame he's insulting his own fans..

He's also just plain right here, stating what a lot of people have stated, yet some don't want to hear. Rafa is an all time great, but not as good as Roger Federer.
Perhaps he's been reading this forum, and figured he needed to put his fans in the right place -- haha !!! (just needling you fellers!)
 
Nadal is right, most of the wins against Rog has come on his favorite surface, clay.
So?


Just a shame he's insulting his own fans..
A shame? How?

He's also just plain right here, stating what a lot of people have stated, yet some don't want to hear. Rafa is an all time great, but not as good as Roger Federer.
Yes. But on the flip side, why is it so important for some Fed fans to 'prove' this point beyond a doubt? Does it REALLY matter if some people believe that Rafa is better than Roger? Why should that be such an affront, it's an opinion isn't it?

In the same vein, it doesn't really matter either if Roger is better than Nadal. It doesn't change how I view either player because 'fandom' is a subjective thing. I don't prefer Rafa over Roger because of the number of times he's beaten Roger - although that's been quite an enjoyable to watch! :twisted: - in fact it has nothing to do with Federer.

What galls me is the notion that everyone must think Fed walks on water and if one doesn't then one has no taste/knowledge/whatever. And THAT is what insulting.
 
Rafa just likes to draft behind Roger. He has always played his best tennis as a theoretical underdog. His worst stint professionally came after he took over #1. He never wants to be the favorite. He prefers for Roger to be "the man" and lurk in his shadow. It's all a game, and it works for him.
GP
His worst stint professionally came after he took over #1 and until he fell from #1? That would be 2008 after Wimbledon until 2009 Wimbledon, right? You mean the period where he got to the SF of the USO, won he AO, won several HC tourneys afterwards, won most of the claycourt tourneys during the clay season (except the FO of course)? Oh yea, almost forgot, didn't he win the Olympics after getting the #1 ranking? That was his worst period ever?

I wouldn't call that his best period -- his best period was from just before the clay court season 2008 to just before trhe clay court season 2009 -- but it certainly wasn't his worst period ever. I'd say it was better than any other 1-year period he had after winning his first GS.

Nadal doesn't have any problems handling being the #1 player on the tour. If Federer weren't here, he would have been the uninterrupted #1 for a long long time.
 

Hitman

Bionic Poster
I think he was being honest here. Despite everything that Rafa has done, dominating the clay, winning slams on all surfaces, having numerous winning streaks, being number one in world, winning countless Masters 1000s...he is still the second best player of this era.

Any other era, Rafa would have likely had a few more slams, and been number one in the world for a lot longer. Yet despite everything, Federer is still head and shoulders ahead of everyone in sheer accomplishments.

I mean as good as Rafa's numbers and records are, Roger's are just insane. The undisputed King of Grand Slams, and I'm not just talking about 16 wins, but countless finals and semis to go with it, on all surfaces year in year out.

Of course Rafa will say that despite everything, Roger still won more than I have, and at this point in time, is the better overall player, taking the entire season in. And his real fans would acknowledge that...no point in reason with the ****s.
 
Yes. But on the flip side, why is it so important for some Fed fans to 'prove' this point beyond a doubt? Does it REALLY matter if some people believe that Rafa is better than Roger? Why should that be such an affront, it's an opinion isn't it?

In the same vein, it doesn't really matter either if Roger is better than Nadal. It doesn't change how I view either player because 'fandom' is a subjective thing. I don't prefer Rafa over Roger because of the number of times he's beaten Roger - although that's been quite an enjoyable to watch! - in fact it has nothing to do with Federer.

What galls me is the notion that everyone must think Fed walks on water and if one doesn't then one has no taste/knowledge/whatever. And THAT is what insulting.
It's not as much the Federer or Nadal is better argument. It's just that I do believe that if you consider Nadal a better player, you have the wrong parameters. I agree that everyone should just have his own favourite player, and I don't mind anyone being a fan of Nadal, or being a fan of Karlovic, Nalbandian, or Koelerer for that matter. Neither does Nadal.

I agree though with Nadal, that if you think Nadal is a better player, you are stuck with the wrong parameters. You defenitely don't have to enjoy Federer more, think he's nicer, has a more beautiful game, or think he's the GOAT. But it is a forum, so you'll always have debate, but I think the question who's better isn't up for debate.

The way Nadal said it, it was kind of an insult to his own fans who 'defend' him against the *******s on this forum. I wasn't seriously saying that Nadal insulted his fans intentionally, just that some people on this forum have no knowledge of tennis, according to their own idol.
 
Funny thing if Rafa said, "yes I am better than roger".. the forums would literally explode with trolls yelling "arrogant" until the end of time. Nadal is a humble champion and doesn't want to bruise GOAT's ego by bringing up their H2H. He will let tennis do the talking in finals.
 
Funny thing if Rafa said, "yes I am better than roger".. the forums would literally explode with trolls yelling "arrogant" until the end of time. Nadal is a humble champion and doesn't want to bruise GOAT's ego by bringing up their H2H. He will let tennis do the talking in finals.
So what you're saying is that Nadal is lying?
 
So what you're saying is that Nadal is lying?
It's pointless to compare tennis players before their careers are over. Nadal is 4 years younger than Federer too and will surely break many records. As far as better player argument, well obviously Federer has achieved more, but if you want to compare strictly H2H, then yes, Nadal can say he is better (in an individual match up, not achievement wise)
 
It's pointless to compare tennis players before their careers are over. Nadal is 4 years younger than Federer too and will surely break many records. As far as better player argument, well obviously Federer has achieved more, but if you want to compare strictly H2H, then yes, Nadal can say he is better (in an individual match up, not achievement wise)
You didn't answer the question.

Was Nadal lying when he said "if somebody says I am better than Roger, I think this person don't know nothing about tennis.". After all he used the word "better".
 

Hitman

Bionic Poster
You didn't answer the question.

Was Nadal lying when he said "if somebody says I am better than Roger, I think this person don't know nothing about tennis.". After all he used the word "better".
I don't think he was lying. I think he believes that Roger is the better player.

The fact he said that if someone says he is better, knows nothing about tennis, shows how strongly he feels on that matter. It's almost like he shut the door on that conversation/discussion himself.
 
It was a joke(notice the smiley I put),lighten up and don't take things so seriously.Tennis is just a game and this is just an internet forum.
Oh, sorry. It's just that we've had this history, you know, and sometimes it seems like you enjoy riding the coattails sometimes when my name is mentioned. But, if you say it isn't so, then I believe you:). Have a great day.
 
So?




A shame? How?



Yes. But on the flip side, why is it so important for some Fed fans to 'prove' this point beyond a doubt? Does it REALLY matter if some people believe that Rafa is better than Roger? Why should that be such an affront, it's an opinion isn't it?

In the same vein, it doesn't really matter either if Roger is better than Nadal. It doesn't change how I view either player because 'fandom' is a subjective thing. I don't prefer Rafa over Roger because of the number of times he's beaten Roger - although that's been quite an enjoyable to watch! :twisted: - in fact it has nothing to do with Federer.

What galls me is the notion that everyone must think Fed walks on water and if one doesn't then one has no taste/knowledge/whatever. And THAT is what insulting.
I always love when you post, because you state your points so eloquently and without offense.

The notion that Nadal fans like him because of the H2H is so ridiculous. Many of us were Nadal fans when he first came on the scene. We like him because we saw something different from everybody else, not just Roger. The H2H wasn't even a factor in the beginning and Nadal still had tons of fans.

It is irritating that some people think liking Nadal means you hate Federer. People should just respect others right to like whomever they choose. Why someone's personal likes is a problem stymies me. I wouldn't care if Nadal hadn't won any grand slams I'd still be a fan.
 
Yes, but I said having opportunities, most of the time he doesn't take them. For example Rome 2006 had 2 mp's, made an unforced error on both. RG 2006, won the first set 6-1 then collapsed, RG 2007 made 1 out of 17 break point opportunities, Monte Carlo and Hamburg 2008.

So basically out of 12 matches against Nadal on clay he's had opportunities to defeat him at least 7 times, but only won 2 of those matches. That's just on clay, off of clay you can add Wimbledon 2008, AO 2009, possibly even Dubai 2006 (possibly).

So in total out of 21 matches Federer has had the opportunity to defeat Nadal 15 times but only won 7 of those matches. That's called not taking your chances.
If you watch pro tennis you should know that matches between two top players aren't 6-0 6-0. There are missed break points very often, lots os UEs in key moments and even missed match points are not unusual. They're human, not machines, and they're playing another very good player.

Federer is the best player in the world, but Nadal is the second best player. Federer is better overall, but the huge gap you'd want to see is not there.
 
nadal makes a good point that federer's achievements>nadal's achievements so he is the better overall player, but on the match up issue, nadal prevails over federer due to his challenges to federer's game
 
You didn't answer the question.

Was Nadal lying when he said "if somebody says I am better than Roger, I think this person don't know nothing about tennis.". After all he used the word "better".
People like that generally avoid the actual question when they don't have an answer that supports their case :).
 
nadal makes a good point that federer's achievements>nadal's achievements so he is the better overall player, but on the match up issue, nadal prevails over federer due to his challenges to federer's game
What if they had met 15 times on clay and the H2H was 15-0 for Nadal, would that mean Nadal is the better player overall due to the match up? Hint, think about all surfaces. :)
 
I always love when you post, because you state your points so eloquently and without offense.

The notion that Nadal fans like him because of the H2H is so ridiculous. Many of us were Nadal fans when he first came on the scene. We like him because we saw something different from everybody else, not just Roger. The H2H wasn't even a factor in the beginning and Nadal still had tons of fans.
It is irritating that some people think liking Nadal means you hate Federer. People should just respect others right to like whomever they choose. Why someone's personal likes is a problem stymies me. I wouldn't care if Nadal hadn't won any grand slams I'd still be a fan.
Thank you muchly Truth, I'm shy now :oops::) And couldn't agree with you more.

Well it's just as important as you trying to show that it's pointless to prove it. You're part of the game and no different, as I am now by responding here. :)
:confused:
 
My favorite player is Nadal, and I don't like watching Federer because I think everything is too easy for him. However, I have no problem saying that Federer is the best player in the world. Nadal doesn't mind either. I'm sure that Nadal is satisfied with beating the best player in the world almost every time they play. I am too.
 
My favorite player is Nadal, and I don't like watching Federer because I think everything is too easy for him. However, I have no problem saying that Federer is the best player in the world. Nadal doesn't mind either. I'm sure that Nadal is satisfied with beating the best player in the world almost every time they play. I am too.
How can the best be beaten?
 
A

aprilfool

Guest
Unfortunately 2nd places don't count:shock:. Losing in the 1st round has the same importance as coming 2nd. Getting 2nd is worse even as it leads to grumpy wive syndrom.
Pardon the intrusion, but I beg to differ. In Roger's case, "2nd places" helped contribute to another GOAT-worthy record: 18 out of 19 finals.
Thus Roger holds the record for most consecutive finals (10) and is second with eight consecutive finals. The semi-final loss at the AO has to be considered a freak incident, as he'd now have nineteen consecutive slam Finals appearances. Not that 10 and 8 are too shabby.

Those records, and the twenty-three consecutive semis are not likely to be broken-ever. In fact there was a time when Rafa based his call of Roger-as-GOAT based strictly on his dominance/consistancy . "Just look at those numbers! No one has ever done that in the history" I believe were his very words.
 
outside of clay, what a rivalry.

fed has the edge on indoor hard, but these two titans are evenly matched on grass and outdoor hard.

i'm sure Nadal would see it this way.
 

jelle v

Hall of Fame
RAFAEL NADAL: You like this. You are focused on the Roger thing, eh? (laughter.)
Yesterday with the clay. Today with the if somebody says I am better than Roger, I think this person don't know nothing about tennis. That's my answer.
"don't know nothing".. that's a double negative.. :wink:
 
T

TennisandMusic

Guest
Huge Nadal fan here. I think Nadal's highest level is pretty much among the best that's ever been seen, if not the best, but it's pretty much impossible to argue he's been the best player this decade. I think the results clearly show that player is Federer. Not sure what the controversy is here.
 
I would say Federer's highest level could defeat Nadal's highest level in 3 / 4 slams. Therefore Federer is the best. For the ****s, W08, AO09 was not Federer's highest level and Nadal still barely beat him playing at his own highest level.
 

egn

Hall of Fame
Nadal makes that fed2009 guy who was posting here a while back look like nothing in the legion of *******s. Fed is lucking his biggest rival is leading the Fed is GOAT campaign. Poor Pete, Borg and Laver their rivals were always trying to beat them and get better Nadal on the other hand beats Fed but says he is better anyway and leads a campaign to have the world kiss the ground Fed walks on..
 
Top