Nadal is better than same age Federer at USO

[Objective observer]

Djokovic was much better in the first set of 08 vs 13, 13 Djokovic was a bit better on the surface in the middle two sets, but against an easier opponent for him as well as Nadal's depth of shot started to fall. So closer to even. 08 Djokovic was better in the final set, but the difference isn't meaningful. Overall, it's at worst even.

Good
If they were even then Nadal should have obvious edge due to matchup advantage
This is obvious
Federer was using the smaller racket and his backhand would be ruthlessly targeted

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Agree, in fact Nadal was 23-10 before 2015, but 2015-17 Federer reached a superior level.

 

[Objective observer]

Agree, in fact Nadal was 23-10 before 2015, but 2015-17 Federer reached a superior level.

In most of the matches that actually happened in 2004-14 Federer lost yet he still has the edge hypothetically LOL

 

[Dolgopolov85]

If Nadal and Federer were the same age Nadal would still win 3 titles but Federer won't win 5 in a row

Nadal 2010 USO> Federer 2005 USO(Elite serving Nadal vs Fed who was being broken at will by Grandpa Agassi)
Nadal 2013 USO > Federer 2008 USO(Beating gluten free experienced Djokovic> beating gluten baby Djokovic)
Nadal 2017 USO > Federer 2012 USO(clearly)

This shows Federer is lucky to not be same age as Nadal
Nadal would be unaffected

It will suffice to tackle the first and your so called 'objective' pronouncement right there. Nadal and Fed both conceded the exact same number of breaks in the respective matches (3). So much for only one of them being broken at will. But it gets better. Fed saved 3 out of 6 break points whereas Nadal 1 out of 4. So who defended his serve better? Should be very clear to all but an 'objective observer' like you.

Now coming to draws, before Agassi, Fed faced Hewitt, Nalbandian and Kiefer. Not amazing but at least a decent draw. Before Djokovic, Nadal faced Youzhny, Verdasco, Lopez. Funny how you Nadal fanboys and fangirls keep shrieking about Fed's weak era but blithely ignore every instance when Nadal profits from a weak draw. Same scenario in 2013 vs 2008. Djokovic again was pretty much the first worthy opponent Nadal faced in the USO. Effing Gasquet in the semi? Whilst Djokovic tired himself out seeing off a strong Wawrinka. If anything, one thing that is constant about Nadal's USO wins is the presence of a weak draw. OK, I think given his bad luck at the AO, his USO largesse balances things out. But we are not discussing that here. Same age Fed unarguably had a tougher path to the finals and you have nothing to show he played any worse than Nadal in the finals either. Especially 2008 was an imperious performance.

Lastly, I saved the biggest flaw in your argument for the end. How about 2004, 2006, 2007? Why did same age Nadal not fare as well as Fed in 2009, 2011 or 2012? Why exactly is he supposed to be excused for that? That's the final chink in your argument. Nadal sporadically profiting from weak draws at the USO in no way compares to Fed's incredible 5 straight USOs. Look, do we ever compare Fed at RG with Nadal? So why do you make an ass of yourself comparing Nadal to Fed at a tournament Fed clearly owns over him and stretching logic beyond belief to somehow contrive a scenario where Nadal supposedly owned Fed at USO? Be happy with what you have. No player has ever owned a slam the way Nadal has RG.

 

[Objective observer]

It will suffice to tackle the first and your so called 'objective' pronouncement right there. Nadal and Fed both conceded the exact same number of breaks in the respective matches (3). So much for only one of them being broken at will. But it gets better. Fed saved 3 out of 6 break points whereas Nadal 1 out of 4. So who defended his serve better? Should be very clear to all but an 'objective observer' like you.

Now coming to draws, before Agassi, Fed faced Hewitt, Nalbandian and Kiefer. Not amazing but at least a decent draw. Before Djokovic, Nadal faced Youzhny, Verdasco, Lopez. Funny how you Nadal fanboys and fangirls keep shrieking about Fed's weak era but blithely ignore every instance when Nadal profits from a weak draw. Same scenario in 2013 vs 2008. Djokovic again was pretty much the first worthy opponent Nadal faced in the USO. Effing Gasquet in the semi? Whilst Djokovic tired himself out seeing off a strong Wawrinka. If anything, one thing that is constant about Nadal's USO wins is the presence of a weak draw. OK, I think given his bad luck at the AO, his USO largesse balances things out. But we are not discussing that here. Same age Fed unarguably had a tougher path to the finals and you have nothing to show he played any worse than Nadal in the finals either. Especially 2008 was an imperious performance.

Lastly, I saved the biggest flaw in your argument for the end. How about 2004, 2006, 2007? Why did same age Nadal not fare as well as Fed in 2009, 2011 or 2012? Why exactly is he supposed to be excused for that? That's the final chink in your argument. Nadal sporadically profiting from weak draws at the USO in no way compares to Fed's incredible 5 straight USOs. Look, do we ever compare Fed at RG with Nadal? So why do you make an ass of yourself comparing Nadal to Fed at a tournament Fed clearly owns over him and stretching logic beyond belief to somehow contrive a scenario where Nadal supposedly owned Fed at USO? Be happy with what you have. No player has ever owned a slam the way Nadal has RG.

Why are you going off topic?
I am just talking about Nadal's level being higher than Federer
No need to complicate things with weak
draws and all that
Nadal would have won the tournament no matter the draw

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Why are you going off topic?
I am just talking about Nadal's level being higher than Federer
No need to complicate things with weak
draws and all that
Nadal would have won the tournament no matter the draw

I have refuted that too. And you can't cherry pick the only instances when Nadal won and compare it to same age Fed when the latter won it more times and also back to back.

 

[sbengte]

If Nadal and Federer were the same age Nadal would still win 3 titles but Federer won't win 5 in a row

Nadal 2010 USO> Federer 2005 USO(Elite serving Nadal vs Fed who was being broken at will by Grandpa Agassi)
Nadal 2013 USO > Federer 2008 USO(Beating gluten free experienced Djokovic> beating gluten baby Djokovic)
Nadal 2017 USO > Federer 2012 USO(clearly)

This shows Federer is lucky to not be same age as Nadal
Nadal would be unaffected

I too have a very objective observation.

Nadal's USO draws are better /cakier than same age Federer draws at USO.

/thread.

 

[Objective observer]

I have refuted that too. And you can't cherry pick the only instances when Nadal won and compare it to same age Fed when the latter won it more times and also back to back.

Where did you refute it?
What makes 2005 Federer better than 2010 Nadal or 2008 Federer better than 2013 Nadal?

 

[Objective observer]

I too have a very objective observation.

Nadal's USO draws are better /cakier than same age Federer draws at USO.

/thread.

How would you have made his draws tougher in 2010 or 2013? He would have easily beaten Federer both years

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Where did you refute it?
What makes 2005 Federer better than 2010 Nadal or 2008 Federer better than 2013 Nadal?

Everything is already there in the answer. Now you pretending Nadal would have overcome any draw given him in those years doesn't make it an objective fact, especially when his failures at USO in 2008, 2009 or 2011 show otherwise.

 

[Objective observer]

Everything is already there in the answer. Now you pretending Nadal would have overcome any draw given him in those years doesn't make it an objective fact, especially when his failures at USO in 2008, 2009 or 2011 show otherwise.

Are you serious?

Which player would have stopped him in 2010 or 2013 please tell me

 

[Dolgopolov85]

By the way, Fed swept through a moderately tough draw in AO 2007 without dropping a set. The only slam Nadal wins with that kind of ease is, again, RG. THESE are the facts, not the opinions you, OP, are trying desperately to pass off as objective assessments.

 

[sbengte]

How would you have made his draws tougher in 2010 or 2013? He would have easily beaten Federer both years

2010 : Easy : swap his draw with Federer's.

 

[Objective observer]

2010 : Easy : swap his draw with Federer's.

He still would have beaten Djokovic and then Federer in the final
Are you acting like Federer would be tough for him in 2010? Lol

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Are you serious?

Which player would have stopped him in 2010 or 2013 please tell me

And which player would have stopped Fed in 2008? Esp 2008 when the competition was very much in attendance and he still beat them all? You can't have it both ways. If you pretend Nadal's level was so mythically high, I can make the same argument for Fed. And actually I am on firmer ground because Fed usually did have to get through the best available competition in those years. From 2004 to 2007, Fed lost only one slam match off clay and that was against Safin in an epic five setter. You cannot possibly fluke that through draws or whatever. But of course, that goes against the Vamos agenda.

 

[Objective observer]

By the way, Fed swept through a moderately tough draw in AO 2007 without dropping a set. The only slam Nadal wins with that kind of ease is, again, RG. THESE are the facts, not the opinions you, OP, are trying desperately to pass off as objective assessments.

You are totally going off topic here
Nadal would have won USO 2010 or 2013 no matter the draw

 

[Objective observer]

And which player would have stopped Fed in 2008? Esp 2008 when the competition was very much in attendance and he still beat them all? You can't have it both ways. If you pretend Nadal's level was so mythically high, I can make the same argument for Fed. And actually I am on firmer ground because Fed usually did have to get through the best available competition in those years. From 2004 to 2007, Fed lost only one slam match off clay and that was against Safin in an epic five setter. You cannot possibly fluke that through draws or whatever. But of course, that goes against the Vamos agenda.

I am saying Nadal 2013 would stop Federer 2008
Anyway federer in 2008 was much worse than in 2004- 2007 according to his fans

 

[Dolgopolov85]

You are totally going off topic here
Nadal would have won USO 2010 or 2013 no matter the draw

Your topic is a steaming pile of rubbish, a transparent Vamos agenda pack of lies which ignores Fed's achievements while insanely talking up Nadal's. So I choose not to stick to it.

 

[OldschoolKIaus]

They never met at the UO so far, so we don't know anything and shouldn't extrapolate conclusions, no?

 

[Objective observer]

Your topic is a steaming pile of rubbish, a transparent Vamos agenda pack of lies which ignores Fed's achievements while insanely talking up Nadal's. So I choose not to stick to it.

You still haven't refuted any of the points and are instead choosing to get triggered lol

 

[Dolgopolov85]

I am saying Nadal 2013 would stop Federer 2008
Anyway federer in 2008 was much worse than in 2004- 2007 according to his fans

Not at USO he wasn't. And you can say what you want, it doesn't all hinge on your say so. Nadal lost to Murray who was beaten easily by Fed in 2008. We don't need 2013 Nadal. Nadal had won Wimbledon already in 2008. His confidence was sky high. He had the chance to get to Fed again at USO and blew it. Too bad.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

You still haven't refuted any of the points and are instead choosing to get triggered lol

I have refuted everything and comprehensively but I can't help a blind man see the light, sorry.

 

[Objective observer]

Not at USO he wasn't. And you can say what you want, it doesn't all hinge on your say so. Nadal lost to Murray who was beaten easily by Fed in 2008. We don't need 2013 Nadal. Nadal had won Wimbledon already in 2008. His confidence was sky high. He had the chance to get to Fed again at USO and blew it. Too bad.

That was because he was exhausted from Olympics

Anyway Nadal took out federer in AO 09
In the very next slam

 

[Dolgopolov85]

That was because he was exhausted from Olympics

Vamos! Let the excuses begin.

 

[Objective observer]

I have refuted everything and comprehensively but I can't help a blind man see the light, sorry.

You are avoiding the point

What makes 2008 Federer better than 2013 Nadal is what I'm asking stop sidetracking

 

[Objective observer]

Vamos! Let the excuses begin.

Not an excuse it's fact
Nadal owned federer in AO 09 the next time anyway

 

[sbengte]

He still would have beaten Djokovic and then Federer in the final
Are you acting like Federer would be tough for him in 2010? Lol

Soderling -> Djokovic -> Federer

We've seen how Nadal fares when he faces 3 top players back to back off clay...

 

[Dolgopolov85]

You are avoiding the point

What makes 2008 Federer better than 2013 Nadal is what I'm asking stop sidetracking

Got through a much tougher draw, no more proof is required. I don't believe your assertions about Nadal's level, for which you have, by the way, produced no evidence. You believe your claiming that nobody else could have beaten Nadal in 2013 is evidence when it's not. It's just your opinion. I think a Djokovic who didn't have to get through Wawrinka in 5 would have taken out Nadal. He did take him out in 2011 so it's not a reach.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Not an excuse it's fact
Nadal owned federer in AO 09 the next time anyway

And since when is a 5 set battle owning? Would you agree that Fed owned Nadal at AO 2017? Wait, I hear the excuses coming already...

 

[OldschoolKIaus]

He owned Nadal in the 5th set at AO17 like nobody else has done before.

1-3 -> 6-3

 

[Objective observer]

Got through a much tougher draw, no more proof is required. I don't believe your assertions about Nadal's level, for which you have, by the way, produced no evidence. You believe your claiming that nobody else could have beaten Nadal in 2013 is evidence when it's not. It's just your opinion. I think a Djokovic who didn't have to get through Wawrinka in 5 would have taken out Nadal. He did take him out in 2011 so it's not a reach.

Djokovic wasn't tired he just lost
Djokovic got through murray in 5 in 2012 AO and still beat Nadal so tiredness can't be an excuse

 

[Objective observer]

And since when is a 5 set battle owning? Would you agree that Fed owned Nadal at AO 2017? Wait, I hear the excuses coming already...

Yes you can say fed owned Nadal in 2017 lol but that doesn't change the point

 

[Objective observer]

Soderling -> Djokovic -> Federer

We've seen how Nadal fares when he faces 3 top players back to back off clay...

OK so according to you Nadal would lose to Federer in USO 2010 in the final if he faced Djokovic in the semi? LOL

 

[OldschoolKIaus]

If Nadal travels back in time, he would **** himself on fast hard courts. He couldn't deal with it with his age advantage.

If Federer travels forth ... no need to comment, we seen how an older Federer beat Nadal AO17 on fast surface.

Nadal -> lucky major winner outside RG.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Djokovic wasn't tired he just lost
Djokovic got through murray in 5 in 2012 AO and still beat Nadal so tiredness can't be an excuse

That was an incredible achievement by Djokovic but can't be done every time. It's not an excuse. You asked in an alternative scenario could somebody have beaten Nadal in 2013 and I gave you an answer. Yes, a fresher Djokovic who got the easy draw that Nadal did (in spite of Djokovic being no.1 then) would have had a much better shot at beating Nadal. Not my fault that you want to pretend Nadal is superman and still tell everyone how objective you are.

 

[Objective observer]

That was an incredible achievement by Djokovic but can't be done every time. It's not an excuse. You asked in an alternative scenario could somebody have beaten Nadal in 2013 and I gave you an answer. Yes, a fresher Djokovic who got the easy draw that Nadal did (in spite of Djokovic being no.1 then) would have had a much better shot at beating Nadal. Not my fault that you want to pretend Nadal is superman and still tell everyone how objective you are.

How did Djokovic lose due to tiredness
He was up a break in the third set and lost it fair and square
He then basically gave up and Nadal got all the momentum

 

[sbengte]

OK so according to you Nadal would lose to Federer in USO 2010 in the final if he faced Djokovic in the semi? LOL

Yeah, just like he lost to 36 year old grandpa Federer at AO '17 after facing Raonic, Dimitrov in prior rounds. LOL.

 

[OldschoolKIaus]

Nadals biggest achievement on fast hard courts:

 

[Dolgopolov85]

How did Djokovic lose due to tiredness
He was up a break in the third set and lost it fair and square
He then basically gave up and Nadal got all the momentum

Again, you are not getting it. A fresher Djokovic could have played the match differently. We are talking hypotheticals here. And because you asked for hypotheticals. I absolutely do not believe there is no hypothetical scenario where Nadal could not have lost USO 2013. Given that he had an easy draw and still needed four sets to beat Djokovic. If this was RG, I would pick Nadal blindfolded. Nadal has just never been that dominant off clay...except when he gets these tailormade draws at USO. Which, I reiterate, are the only times he won USO. The implication is obvious: without an easy draw, Nadal's prospects at the USO do get complicated whether you wish to admit it or not.

 

[Objective observer]

Yeah, just like he lost to 36 year old grandpa Federer at AO '17 after facing Raonic, Dimitrov in prior rounds. LOL.

Nice job dodging the question
Only a truly delusional person would believe Federer would beat Nadal USO 2010

 

[Jonas78]

Forget all that
Just compare the level of play

Forget level of play! Uninjured peak Nadal is undefeated, how can any player possibly beat him?

 

[Objective observer]

Again, you are not getting it. A fresher Djokovic could have played the match differently. We are talking hypotheticals here. And because you asked for hypotheticals. I absolutely do not believe there is no hypothetical scenario where Nadal could not have lost USO 2013. Given that he had an easy draw and still needed four sets to beat Djokovic. If this was RG, I would pick Nadal blindfolded. Nadal has just never been that dominant off clay...except when he gets these tailormade draws at USO. Which, I reiterate, are the only times he won USO. The implication is obvious: without an easy draw, Nadal's prospects at the USO do get complicated whether you wish to admit it or not.

Nadal was anyway favourite against Djokovic
He won Canada and cincinnati while Djokovic didn't and lost to Nadal in Canada

 

[junior74]

Forget level of play! Uninjured peak Nadal is undefeated, how can any player possibly beat him?

I believe this is what everything boils down to, in the end (no pun)

 

[Deleted member 757377]

In most of the matches that actually happened in 2004-14 Federer lost yet he still has the edge hypothetically LOL

If their life depended on it, they would choose 2015-17 Federer. Trust me.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

double

 

[Towny]

I am just talking about Nadal's level being higher than Federer

The whole problem with this thread is that it's basically just your opinion that Nadal is better than Federer at USO. Plugging that into a random hypothetical doesn't prove your original opinion is true or make it objective. It's called circular reasoning; assuming the conclusion is true in the premise of the argument. That's not to mention that your hypothetical outcomes are questionable as it is

 

[Towny]

If their life depended on it, they would choose 2015-17 Federer. Trust me.

Do you genuinely believe that even though pretty much every Fed fan on this board argues that Federer was better 2004-2007 we secretly believe he was better in 2015-2017?

 

[Jonas78]

I believe this is what everything boils down to, in the end (no pun)

Yeah why not just say it as it is lol? No point in picking out hypthetical matches when uninjured peak Nadal beats everyone, everywhere

 

[Objective observer]

The whole problem with this thread is that it's basically just your opinion that Nadal is better than Federer at USO. Plugging that into a random hypothetical doesn't prove your original opinion is true or make it objective. It's called circular reasoning; assuming the conclusion is true in the premise of the argument. That's not to mention that your hypothetical outcomes are questionable as it is

Literally everything is a hypothetical here
Saying federer is better in 2006 than 2015 is also a hypothetical BTW

 

[Jonas78]

Literally everything is a hypothetical here
Saying federer is better in 2006 than 2015 is also a hypothetical BTW

Well what do you think? Federer being peak in 2015 is a reality purely made up by some Djokovic fans, guess why?!? Even Bullzillions wouldnt argue Fed was peak 2015...

 

[Raining hopes]

While I don't know how a direct match would play out, but 2005,06,04,07,08( in that order )Federer are better than any Nadal at USO except 2010.

And even with 2010 , it's only debatable that Nadal was equal to Fred 2004, 05,06 at best not superior