Nadal is really the best at beating his main rivals when it matters

[mike danny]

8-2 vs Fed
9-3 vs Nole
7-2 vs Murray

24-7 in GS vs them. Unbelievable.

Now with this stat I really want him to break the slam record.

Also he has won his last 4 slams beating Djokovic. Federer would only dream to ever have accomplished this vs Nadal

 

[bullfan]

8-2 vs Fed
9-3 vs Nole
7-2 vs Murray

24-7 in GS vs them. Unbelievable.

Now with this stat I really want him to break the slam record.

Also he has won his last 4 slams beating Djokovic. Federer would only dream to ever have accomplished this vs Nadal

U Suck for posting about a match result in general right after the match.

 

[robert.s]

He is, because he is the least likely to cave under pressure. It's not the talent, nor the techical skills that played the biggest part in those stats, but rather his mental toughness.

 

[Finesse4sum]

We get it...your frothing from the mouth. Anyway enjoy it while you can.

 

[mike danny]

Hey guys I am a Fed fan. But Nadal will surpass him. It is inevitable. Nor even Djokovic can stop him

 

[MasturB]

Djokovic beat Nadal Wimb 11, USO 11, AO 12.

If it wasn't for Roger, it might have very well be 5 in a row for Nole against Rafa.

Roger still has 2 wins on Rafa at Wimby... where it all matters most.

 

[robert.s]

Hey guys I am a Fed fan. But Nadal will surpass him. It is inevitable. Nor even Djokovic can stop him

He will surpass Federer in some areas, he will fall short in others. Fed has his records, Nadal has his share of records also. There's plenty of room for both in mens tennis.

 

[mike danny]

He will surpass Federer in some areas, he will fall short in others. Fed has his records, Nadal has his share of records also. There's plenty of room for both in mens tennis.

The momen he breaks the slam record, nbody will care anymore about other metrics.

It is the sad truth I'm afraid.

 

[tennisaddict]

Great stats.. However I will not let the h2h cloud my judgement.

Let him get to 18 majors and a couple of WTF.. then i will wholeheartedly say he has crossed Fed in accomplishments.

That said, Nadal is a warrior like no one before.

 

[tennis_pro]

Yea yea yea 23-7 excluding his FO wins = 10-7. Fantastic record. Nadal has always been about clay, that will never change. Every single record/stat/h2h that he has is related to one surface.

 

[robert.s]

The momen he breaks the slam record, nbody will care anymore about other metrics.

It is the sad truth I'm afraid.

Some will, some won't. I don't really care tbh... the average guy will prob. remember the slam count, the true fan will remember more and value more.

 

[robert.s]

Yea yea yea 23-7 excluding his FO wins = 10-7. Fantastic record. Nadal has always been about clay, that will never change. Every single record/stat/h2h that he has is related to one surface.

Almost total domination on one surface isn't something to be treated lightly. Clay is a very demanding surface.

 

[mike danny]

Yea yea yea 23-7 excluding his FO wins = 10-7. Fantastic record. Nadal has always been about clay, that will never change. Every single record/stat/h2h that he has is related to one surface.

I used to think that way. But it does not matter anymore. People were calling Nole the favorite for RG yet Nadal once again easily denied him.

It's not about clay anymore. Nadal simply rarely playes bad in a big match vs his main rivals.

Fed has the numbers for now, but I never felt he was like Nadal at beating his main rivals when it mattered.

 

[tennisaddict]

Almost total domination on one surface isn't something to be treated lightly. Clay is a very demanding surface.

While it is a creditable achievement, it did not elevate Nadal's tennis standing anymore than what was there before. A Wimbledon or an AO win would be much more valuable.

 

[tennis_pro]

Almost total domination on one surface isn't something to be treated lightly. Clay is a very demanding surface.

I'm not saying it doesn't count, just that there's a heavy skew towards 1 surfaces which accidently is his best one and his opponents' worst.

 

[mike danny]

I'm not saying it doesn't count, just that there's a heavy skew towards 1 surfaces which accidently is his best one and his opponents' worst.

Clay is not Djokovic's worst surface. He would have wonplenty or RG titles without Rafa.

He can also beat him on clay. He just can't do it at RG

 

[MonkeyBoy]

It's actually 9-2 against Federer.

 

[robert.s]

Yea, Nadal's tennis on clay, especially on RG, is a level above his tennis anywere else. But that's not news. It would be stupid for his fans to call Nadal the most complete player, since it's not a case. However, winning 9 out of 10 titles at one slam is something that will stand the test of time for a long, long time and such a performance should be appreciated, not diminished in any way.

 

[Gonzo_style]

Spoilers everywhere LOL

 

[sam_p]

Yes OP, and it is because he is a dramatically better tennis player than Fed, Djoker or Murray...

 

[Sartorius]

Almost total domination on one surface isn't something to be treated lightly. Clay is a very demanding surface.

It should not to be treated lightly indeed, but also not to be overblown, especially by claiming it's harder to do it on clay. I would say Nadal finds it very comfortable to be "mentally strong" on clay than he does on other surfaces. What is "very demanding" changes depending on the player.

I wholeheartedly agree about praising Nadal's performances in big matches, but also wholeheartedly disagree when it comes at the expense of Federer. People forget his rivals are not only Nadal, Djokovic and Murray; and also disregard he has not done so bad against them.

 

[ctoth666]

While it is a creditable achievement, it did not elevate Nadal's tennis standing anymore than what was there before.

THIS. Can we get this comment put on a banner on the homepage?

Nadal's victory has not proved anything that hasn't already been proved, and when we get into discussions about the greatest ever and all that jazz, this is an IRRELEVANT result. By winning the French Open for a ninth time, Nadal has done the unthinkable: he has trivialized the value of a slam. When you go from the French Open, like last year, and go lose in the first round of Wimbledon, that really hurts. The problem here is that the competition is weak. Djokovic is a great player, and yeah he beat Nadal a few weeks ago, but what kind of performance was that today? It was a joke. And Murray played horrible tennis. And Ferrer folded. There's something missing from the game today, and Nadal is just taking out the trash. Good on him, but not something to build a legacy on. Wake me up when he wins Wimbledon again or wins the WTF or Miami.

 

[mike danny]

THIS. Can we get this comment put on a banner on the homepage?

Nadal's victory has not proved anything that hasn't already been proved, and when we get into discussions about the greatest ever and all that jazz, this is an IRRELEVANT result. By winning the French Open for a ninth time, Nadal has done the unthinkable: he has trivialized the value of a slam. When you go from the French Open, like last year, and go lose in the first round of Wimbledon, that really hurts. The problem here is that the competition is weak. Djokovic is a great player, and yeah he beat Nadal a few weeks ago, but what kind of performance was that today? It was a joke. And Murray played horrible tennis. And Ferrer folded. There's something missing from the game today, and Nadal is just taking out the trash. Good on him, but not something to build a legacy on. Wake me up when he wins Wimbledon again or wins the WTF or Miami.

The point is Nadal has showed once again that in the slams, nobody will ever have his number, not even Djokovic

 

[Start da Game]

8-2 vs Fed
9-3 vs Nole
7-2 vs Murray

24-7 in GS vs them. Unbelievable.

Now with this stat I really want him to break the slam record.

Also he has won his last 4 slams beating Djokovic. Federer would only dream to ever have accomplished this vs Nadal

my appreciations to you for such an honest analysis......ignore all the fools, you are right......nobody has ever been this good at beating their best rivals when it really matters......

 

[Shady_Sawyer]

my appreciations to you for such an honest analysis......ignore all the fools, you are right......nobody has ever been this good at beating their best rivals when it really matters......

remove clay slams ....

 

[Graf=GOAT]

8-2 vs Fed
9-3 vs Nole
7-2 vs Murray

24-7 in GS vs them. Unbelievable.

Now with this stat I really want him to break the slam record.

Also he has won his last 4 slams beating Djokovic. Federer would only dream to ever have accomplished this vs Nadal

He's a mental titan, I'll give him that. But his game is still highly unattractive, brutish and one dimensional. Not to mention all of Nadal's on court antics, his PR machine and his dull girlfriend. He's not good for tennis. He has many slams, but no charisma. He's the least marketable world #1 of all time.

 

[bullfan]

He's a mental titan, I'll give him that. But his game is still highly unattractive, brutish and one dimensional. Not to mention all of Nadal's on court antics, his PR machine and his dull girlfriend. He's not good for tennis. He has many slams, but no charisma. He's the least marketable world #1 of all time.

Bitter much.... Of course, I've seen your posts that were part of a deleted thread, that showed a sad sad sad aspect of your character.

 

[Thetouch]

He's a mental titan, I'll give him that. But his game is still highly unattractive, brutish and one

As if guys like Novak, Murray, Tsonga or Ferrer have invented tennis again.^^ They don´t play more attractive either and even the glorified Federer doesn´t look as gracious anymore.

I have to give Nadal credit. He is a monster, a real monster because of his mental strength. It is NOT that easy to win every year the same GS as people may think, because everybody is waiting for Nadal to fail but he DOESN´T. The PRESSURE is always on him and it won´t drop for the next years. And just for the records: 2 Wimbledon, 2 US Open and 1 Aussi don´t sound that bad to me.

Whether Nadal breaks Federer´s 17 Slam record or not doesn´t really matter, his competitors were already tougher since he beat at least like 5 players (who have won like more than 30 slams in total) in order to achieve his slam victories. So either he is the best player in modern tennis or the competion is just weak but if that is the case then it has been weak for manny years. ;-)

 

[The_Mental_Giant]

25-7, rafa is 9-2 against fed in slams.

 

[veroniquem]

Not only isn't it easy but it's almost unthinkable to win a slam 9 times for only 1 loss. This is a precedent. There is a reason why no one else has done it before. Nadal is indeed a "monster", that is, someone who is able to push the limits beyond what normal humans could do.
-10 consecutive years at winning masters
- 10 consecutive years at winning slams
- clay slam: 3 masters + RG
- hard court sweep: 2 masters + USO
- Queen's and W back to back
- more than 1 slam on all surfaces
- slams on different surfaces in same season
- 9 titles at 1 slam (only 1 loss)
- Olympic Gold

Regardless of what you think of Nadal personally, those records are setting new standards and not just on clay.
And people used to say that Nadal would be another Borg and completely washed out by his late 20s!!!!!!!!!
Nadal is nothing less than superhuman, no contest.

 

[monfed]

Hey guys I am a Fed fan. But Nadal will surpass him. It is inevitable. Nor even Djokovic can stop him

No you're not. :lol:

 

[monfed]

THIS. Can we get this comment put on a banner on the homepage?

Nadal's victory has not proved anything that hasn't already been proved, and when we get into discussions about the greatest ever and all that jazz, this is an IRRELEVANT result. By winning the French Open for a ninth time, Nadal has done the unthinkable: he has trivialized the value of a slam. When you go from the French Open, like last year, and go lose in the first round of Wimbledon, that really hurts. The problem here is that the competition is weak. Djokovic is a great player, and yeah he beat Nadal a few weeks ago, but what kind of performance was that today? It was a joke. And Murray played horrible tennis. And Ferrer folded. There's something missing from the game today, and Nadal is just taking out the trash. Good on him, but not something to build a legacy on. Wake me up when he wins Wimbledon again or wins the WTF or Miami.

Great post. #weakclayera

 

[monfed]

Almost total domination on one surface isn't something to be treated lightly. Clay is a very demanding surface.

Why you getting defensive? IDK why Nadal fans put words into our mouths such as "clay doesn't count, clay is a useless surface". We never said that, we're saying to you that clay is a minority surface and Nadal's stats come from there mostly. He isn't the greatest allround player , not by a long shot.

 

[clayqueen]

Why you getting defensive? IDK why Nadal fans put words into our mouths such as "clay doesn't count, clay is a useless surface". We never said that, we're saying to you that clay is a minority surface and Nadal's stats come from there mostly. He isn't the greatest allround player , not by a long shot.

Why is clay a minority surface any more than grass which only has one slam a year, no M1000 and a couple of 250s?

 

[dooknookem]

we're saying to you that clay is a minority surface and Nadal's stats come from there mostly.

woa there watch it you court supremacist

 

[monfed]

Why is clay a minority surface any more than grass which only has one slam a year, no M1000 and a couple of 250s?

If you take out both clay and grass using your logic that grass is a minority surface, then Nadal is behind both Pete and Fed in HC slams.

 

[Thetouch]

He isn't the greatest allround player , not by a long shot.

I don´t think it was said he is.

But since you brought it up, Federer has won like 53 hardcourt titles - Nadal 45 clay titles. They are pretty much the same (23 to 19 titles on grass and hardcourt/clay) when it comes to their prefered surfaces. Only difference: Nadal 2 Wimbledon, Roger 1 French. ^^

 

[monfed]

I don´t think it was said he is.

But since you brought it up, Federer has won like 53 hardcourt titles - Nadal 45 clay titles. They are pretty much the same (23 to 19 titles on grass and hardcourt/clay) when it comes to their prefered surfaces. Only difference: Nadal 2 Wimbledon, Roger 1 French. ^^

Fed having 53 HC titles is understandable because there are 2 HC slams and 5 HC MS. The tour's majority surface is HC.

Nadal winning 45 clay titles when there are essentially 3 MS titles and 1 slam indicates his winnings is skewed towards clay.

Cmon man dont be so allergic to logic! :lol:

 

[Thetouch]

Fed having 53 HC titles is understandable because there are 2 HC slams and 5 HC MS. The tour's majority surface is HC.

Nadal winning 45 clay titles when there are essentially 3 MS titles and 1 slam indicates his winnings is skewed towards clay.

Cmon man dont be so allergic to logic! :lol:

Haha "logic", ok dude just let it be. ^^

First of all, don´t take me as a fan of Nadal´s, because I am not but I am just trying to be as objective as possible. But I somehow doubt you are objective enough since you sound mad. ;-)

The truth is that an clay King like Nadal was able to win 19 titles outside of clay, including 5 GS titles by even beating Federer in Wimbledon and other majors. Guys like Hewitt, Murray or Roddick have won like 30 career titles in total, let alone guys like Nalbandian, Safin, Tsonga or Warinka who have hardly won over 10 career titles in total. This shows that Nadal isn´t just CLAY only. You are trying to downplay his victories. ;-)

 

[BeGreat]

He is, because he is the least likely to cave under pressure. It's not the talent, nor the techical skills that played the biggest part in those stats, but rather his mental toughness.

yeah...and you know this because???

 

[BeGreat]

Yea yea yea 23-7 excluding his FO wins = 10-7. Fantastic record. Nadal has always been about clay, that will never change. Every single record/stat/h2h that he has is related to one surface.

exactly. 7 of federe's 17 slams have been on grass. if you exclude those, he's only got 10 slams! which means he hasn't even broken the record yet!

 

[gambitt]

Are people seriously still counting Fed as a main rival? I bet in 3 years some people will be saying "oh wow, Nadal is 15-2 vs Fed in slams" after beating 35 year old Fed in R4.

 

[monfed]

Haha "logic", ok dude just let it be. ^^

First of all, don´t take me as a fan of Nadal´s, because I am not but I am just trying to be as objective as possible. But I somehow doubt you are objective enough since you sound mad. ;-)

The truth is that an clay King like Nadal was able to win 19 titles outside of clay, including 5 GS titles by even beating Federer in Wimbledon and other majors. Guys like Hewitt, Murray or Roddick have won like 30 career titles in total, let alone guys like Nalbandian, Safin, Tsonga or Warinka who have hardly won over 10 career titles in total. This shows that Nadal isn´t just CLAY only. You are trying to downplay his victories. ;-)

Possibly a Fed hating fresh green troll! :lol:

 

[agreed]

Stan was from fed's weak era. He beat fed again.

Nadal has one tournament.
Unlike fed, Novak will win everything else and more slams.
He's not a spoiled phoney like fedal.... Fedal can stink while playing their best, like today and in 2012 Wimbledon, but djokovic will continue dominating tennis.
Spare us the nadal clay tourney crap speech, "I'm sorry, Novak". Sure, rafa!

7 month vacation and meltdowns half the year doesn't make
Nadal a warrior.

Djokovic lasts longer than a 3 week clay court time period and doesn't wear down if he cares to have a fitness overhaul and good practice partners. His untalented brother pushed hack shots to him and caused him to decline badly because he became stagnant and repetitive.

 

[Thetouch]

Possibly a Fed hating fresh green troll! :lol:

Possibly a 12 years old spoiled fan boy, who is crying right now.

 

[agreed]

Fed fanatic boys are touchy when they fake being novak's fans.

 

[WalterWhite]

 

[Bender]

He's a mental titan, I'll give him that. But his game is still highly unattractive, brutish and one dimensional. Not to mention all of Nadal's on court antics, his PR machine and his dull girlfriend. He's not good for tennis. He has many slams, but no charisma. He's the least marketable world #1 of all time.

Lol Rafa is the least marketable world number 1, when Djokovic, when he was number 1, was less marketable than Murray?

You have many posts, but no sense.

 

[Mustard]

Beating his biggest rivals on the biggest stages so often, is one of Nadal's greatest legacies. A combined 25 wins in majors over Djokovic, Federer and Murray is crazy.

 

[cc0509]

Stan was from fed's weak era. He beat fed again.

Nadal has one tournament.
Unlike fed, Novak will win everything else and more slams.
He's not a spoiled phoney like fedal.... Fedal can stink while playing their best, like today and in 2012 Wimbledon, but djokovic will continue dominating tennis.
Spare us the nadal clay tourney crap speech, "I'm sorry, Novak". Sure, rafa!

7 month vacation and meltdowns half the year doesn't make
Nadal a warrior.

Djokovic lasts longer than a 3 week clay court time period and doesn't wear down if he cares to have a fitness overhaul and good practice partners. His untalented brother pushed hack shots to him and caused him to decline badly because he became stagnant and repetitive.

Yeah, Novak is dominating tennis. He hasn't won a slam since World War 2! Some dominance!