Nadal's Deceptive Head-to-Head Lead Over Federer

The overall H2H wouldn't even be a real narrative if Fed hadn't buckled in nearly every slam final. The clay skew would be more understood if Roger simply did his job and won Wimbledon 2008 & Australia 2009 like he should have.

If Roger magically had 10 more wins from more meetings at Wimbledon, Halle, Cincy, Shanghai, Basel, etc. and actually lead the H2H 26-24, it wouldn't really change anything about how their rivalry is viewed.
 
The Blond Blur said:
Giving context would including the fact that Joker racked up tons of wins against a bad RAFA in 2015-2016, getting to avoid in him in most of 2017-2018 when he was bad, and have played a total of 2 matches on HC since 2019. That whole RAFA hasn’t beaten Joker on HC since 2013 becomes a lot less impressive with actual context. And outside of 2017 RAFA has been dominant against Ol’ Rog.

Your piece of paper is irrelevant in this discussion.
Click to expand...
Sure, I can write a dissertation on every match they have ever played, but no one would read such a book. Should you point out that Nadal may have been injured in the final set of RG 2021? Or I that Djokovic had played a lot more tournaments in a short period of time than Nadal in RG 2020? Each match has its own context and I can get that granular on any one match, but it is the overall context that matters more. Clay is clearly Nadal's best surface and by accident or by intention, he has managed to play Federer and even more so Djokovic on that surface far more often than the frequency of the tournaments.
 
MeatTornado said:
The overall H2H wouldn't even be a real narrative if Fed hadn't buckled in nearly every slam final. The clay skew would be more understood if Roger simply did his job and won Wimbledon 2008 & Australia 2009 like he should have.

If Roger magically had 10 more wins from more meetings at Wimbledon, Halle, Cincy, Shanghai, Basel, etc. and actually lead the H2H 26-24, it wouldn't really change anything about how their rivalry is viewed.
Click to expand...
I beg to differ. People on this site, typically just look at the overall 16-24 H2H and often say this means Federer is lower down the GOAT debate than Nadal. If Federer led H2H 26-24 that argument would disappear.
 
Texas Tennis Fan said:
Sure, I can write a dissertation on every match they have ever played, but no one would read such a book. Should you point out that Nadal may have been injured in the final set of RG 2021? Or I that Djokovic had played a lot more tournaments in a short period of time than Nadal in RG 2020? Each match has its own context and I can get that granular on any one match, but it is the overall context that matters more. Clay is clearly Nadal's best surface and by accident or by intention, he has managed to play Federer and even more so Djokovic on that surface far more often than the frequency of the tournaments.
Click to expand...
While more than holding his own off clay against them, especially against Ol’ Rog.
 
Texas Tennis Fan said:
I beg to differ. People on this site, typically just look at the overall 16-24 H2H and often say this means Federer is lower down the GOAT debate than Nadal. If Federer led H2H 26-24 that argument would disappear.
Click to expand...
I'm saying what people typically do today would be different if their earlier big matches went differently. If Fed had an overall H2H lead but still lost all those big finals then the H2H wouldn't be pointed to, it would just shift to the slam H2H.

There's only like 2 or 3 H2Hs in the entire sport that tennis fans know about. It's not a relevant stat unless it helps whatever argument you're trying to make.
 
Nadal_Django said:
closeup-of-pork-ribs-grilled-with-bbq-sauce-and-caramelized-in-honey-picture-id1086140442
Click to expand...
... are those rusty peak injured bull ribs caramelized with golden maple syrup? :giggle:
 
MeatTornado said:
I'm saying what people typically do today would be different if their earlier big matches went differently. If Fed had an overall H2H lead but still lost all those big finals then the H2H wouldn't be pointed to, it would just shift to the slam H2H.

There's only like 2 or 3 H2Hs in the entire sport that tennis fans know about. It's not a relevant stat unless it helps whatever argument you're trying to make.
Click to expand...
That is a good point. And certainly some matches are more important than others. It is still a relevant context that the surfaces have been skewed.
 
MeatTornado said:
The overall H2H wouldn't even be a real narrative if Fed hadn't buckled in nearly every slam final. The clay skew would be more understood if Roger simply did his job and won Wimbledon 2008 & Australia 2009 like he should have.

If Roger magically had 10 more wins from more meetings at Wimbledon, Halle, Cincy, Shanghai, Basel, etc. and actually lead the H2H 26-24, it wouldn't really change anything about how their rivalry is viewed.
Click to expand...

It's always amusing when Djokovic fans strike back with his H2H lead over Wawrinka, when someone says 1-4 in the 5 last slam meetings.
 
kevaninho said:
Are they skewed wins for Djokovic or Federer, if its on their favourite surface , when they beat Nadal?
Click to expand...
It would be if 40% or 47% of their matches were on grass. I am glad you are coming around to the clear logic of this. By the way, even if Djokovic had played 47% of his matches against Nadal on grass or at the AO, I would point out his win percentage against Nadal is skewed.
 
junior74 said:
It's always amusing when Djokovic fans strike back with his H2H lead over Wawrinka, when someone says 1-4 in the 5 last slam meetings.
Click to expand...
Small numbers and Wawrinka can go Top Shelf mode. That has not one thing to do with this post. All the players have unusual losses. At least those against Wawrinka were in the late stages of tournaments or finals. What about Nadal's consistently early losses before reaching Djokovic, as in the AO 2021?
 
I've always said Fed did well to make the head to head look more respectful later on in their careers. It was starting to look silly at one point, espeically with the 3-0 AO h2h.
 
MeatTornado said:
The overall H2H wouldn't even be a real narrative if Fed hadn't buckled in nearly every slam final. The clay skew would be more understood if Roger simply did his job and won Wimbledon 2008 & Australia 2009 like he should have.

If Roger magically had 10 more wins from more meetings at Wimbledon, Halle, Cincy, Shanghai, Basel, etc. and actually lead the H2H 26-24, it wouldn't really change anything about how their rivalry is viewed.
Click to expand...
Yeah man, as if Federer was supposed to win every slam final outside Roland Garros.Such a robot this RF dude should have been :D
 
Yet again I am forced to repeat myself, but I dunno what is with the recent trend of exaggerating on Fed's losses in AO 2009 or Wimbledon 2008.I mean get real people, nobody can win countless Wimbledons in a row or HC finals in a row, you win some, you lose some.If anything, one can point fingers on 40-15s of 2011 USO or 2019 Wimbledon because those were winnable from that position instead of using 2 matches lost in 5 sets as if he lost meekly in straights or something and as if those matches prove inferiority of any kind.
 
Texas Tennis Fan said:
Small numbers and Wawrinka can go Top Shelf mode. That has not one thing to do with this post. All the players have unusual losses. At least those against Wawrinka were in the late stages of tournaments or finals. What about Nadal's consistently early losses before reaching Djokovic, as in the AO 2021?
Click to expand...

Sometimes rivalries change their nature. 1-4 in the last five slam meetings (while being world #1 in four of those) is not insignificant. The match Djokovic won, was a 5-setter in AO15, while playing perhaps his best tennis ever.

Nadal has a lot of early losses, not least in Wimbledon.
 
Red Rick said:
Nadal leads Fed on outdoor HC lol. Indoor HC is overrepresented between them.

Nadal led Fed 8-2 on outdoor HC untnil injuries ruined his legs.
Click to expand...

HC actually plays little in Fedal's H2H legacy. They never met at the US Open, Canada, or Paris, and met only once at Cincinnati (2013) and Shanghai (2017). They've met (at least twice) in the final of every big grass and clay tournament, but at the big HC tournaments the finals were more sparse: the AO (2009/2017), WTF (2010), Miami (2005/2017), and Shanghai (2017). 2017 (way past both players' prime) is the only year they met in multiple HC finals.
 
Imagine Rafa reads ttw... He would find out that he has age advantage over Federer so he would beat him even in last matches... Novak obviously read ttw regularly so he beats Federer here and there...
 
TheFifthSet said:
Talking injuries: three of those matches occurred from 13-14 when Fed was battling injuries and/or just starting up with the new frame.

So that’s 30% of those 10 matches. Add Miami ‘04, where Fed had heat stroke. 40%, 50% of Nadal’s wins.

Those four outdoor HC losses Nadal took in ‘17 weren’t injury-related and he ended the year as #1. AO ‘17 was Fed’s first tournament back and he played three five-setters so Nadal’s legs being gone doesn’t really cut it as an excuse IMO, and the other three matches Federer simply played ridiculously. Including the cluster of matches from 13-14 but not the ones in 17 is selective, at the very worst they cancel out (but even that’s a bridge too far, Nadal was far better in ‘17 than Fed was in ‘13).

8-6 on outdoor HC’s with most of those matches occurring after Fed’s best years (only 4 by the end of 2010) isn’t that damning.
Click to expand...
They all separate that 2017-2019 matches but always make sure to include Fed's worst stretch.

When Fed beats Nadal, the latter's legs are gone. When Nadal does it, Fed is always at his best, just an overrated weak era mug.

Also Nadal dodged another beating at IW 2019 LOL.
 
MeatTornado said:
So are you calling Nadal a robot then?
Click to expand...
No.He played the best slam finals of his career on those respective surfaces and won, having all the momentum on his side in the rivalry at that point in time.The Delpo loss at the USO is the true bad one for Fedr but every reign has an end :D
 
junior74 said:
No sane person would say so. But this is TT, baby!

What we can say, factually, is this:
In the 6 years when Stan went 4-1 against Djokovic in slam matches, Djokovic won ten - 10 - slams!

Yet the 19-6 is held up high every time anyone mentions Djokovic became Wawrinka's slam pigeon.
Click to expand...
We need more controversial statements like that around here given that peak best out of 4 thread yesterday :confused:
 
Texas Tennis Fan said:
No. This is not picking out a year here or there like you are. This is giving context to their whole career and the times that they have played having been far more often on Nadal's favorite court.

An I have a Masters of Philosophy.
Click to expand...

If you want context, i'll give you some.

USO 2013 where Fed THREW his match to Robredo so he wouldn't have to lose to Rafa later on.
That was on hard, one of his best surface.

Thus, what does your philosophy knowledge tell you about Fed's character ?

To put it into some more context, that would be the equivalent of 2005 Rafa throwing his earlier rds at RG so he wouldn't have to lose to Fed in the semis.

Surely, that would be a possibility, right ? LOL
 
Last edited:
terribleIVAN said:
If you want context, i'll give you some.

USO 2013 where Fed THREW his match to Robredo so he wouldn't have to lose to Rafa later on.
That was on hard, one of his best surface.

Thus, what does your philosophy knowledge tell you about Fed's character ?

To put it into some more context, that would be the equivalent of 2005 Rafa throwing his earlier rds at RG so he wouldn't have to lose to Fed in the semis.

Surely, that would be a possibility, right ? LOL
Click to expand...

Don't answer trolls lol
 
Federer = insecure prima dona, obsessed with his hideous facial features to the extreme of extensive plastic surgery, yet still attempting to project a tough guy demeanour.

The very definition of fakeness.
 
Last edited:
I agree it is clay centric but problem with Fed and Rafa rivalry is that Rafa was indeed in Fed head during that time.
Outside of Indoors Fed was not sure to win everything.
Rafa was ranked most of the times number two and number one so only way they were going to meet was final and in final Rafa always have another level see Wimbledon 2010.
Fed problem was not that Rafa ducked him, I am telling you if Rafa made Wimbledon 2009 final, result was going to be same like 2008.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Bender
Nadal's Deceptive Head-to-Head Lag Behind Federer
Replies
5
Views
615
TripleATeam
TripleATeam
Lew II
Nadal should lead the h2h with Djokovic
2
Replies
64
Views
5K
MichaelNadal
MichaelNadal
D
Federer Nadal H2H
Replies
22
Views
6K
jg153040
J
L
NADAL V FEDERER H2H
2
Replies
97
Views
6K
anhtuanngo
anhtuanngo
beard
  • Poll Poll
Nadal - Federer H2H clay skewness... numbers
2
Replies
85
Views
5K
mike danny
mike danny
Back
Top