Prime Federer vs Prime Nadal

[TheLoneWolf]

When Federer was in his prime Nadal was still winning on clay, but he wasn't at his best yet on grass (Wimbledon 06.) Not to mention hardcourt.

Assuming both their primes are past them (almost definitely true in the case of Federer, and potentially true for Nadal, although that's more arguable,) if they could be pitched against each other at both of their primes, what would you expect to have taken place?

I see Nadal taking clay clearly (undeniable,) Roger with a slight edge on grass, and a more marked advantage on hardcourt. All in all a very tight contest.

 

[davey25]

In the head to head matchup only? Nadal favorite on clay and grass, and Federer slight favorite on hard courts.

 

[abmk]

nadal huge edge on clay
fed edge on grass
fed clear edge on hard courts

 

[djokovicgonzalez2010]

nadal huge edge on clay
fed edge on grass
fed clear edge on hard courts

this. federer most of the time.

 

[abmk]

In the head to head matchup only? Nadal favorite on clay and grass, and Federer slight favorite on hard courts.

yep, nadal's favourite on grass because:

a) he is 1-2 vs fed on grass
b) he won by a whopping margin of 9-7 in the 5th set in 2008 wimby final

:roll:

 

[davey25]

yep, nadal's favourite on grass because:

a) he is 1-2 vs fed on grass
b) he won by a whopping margin of 9-7 in the 5th set in 2008 wimby final

:roll:

No because even when he was a baby in diapers on grass he nearly took the 2nd and 3rd sets of the 2006 Wimbledon final. Imagine Federer in 2002 giving prime Nadal that tough a match on grass, LOL! And since in the 2007 final where Nadal was still not quite totally prime and Federer was still in his absolute prime Nadal in the minds of most observers outplayed Federer overall despite Federer's huge serving edge but lost because of failing on the big points (and some would argue an injury early in the 5th set). I did not say Nadal was better on grass but given the matchup issue he would have the slight edge with both in their primes IMO. I am not going to bother arguing with you though knowing that you are the blindest ******* on the forum.

 

[djokovicgonzalez2010]

Since when was Federer prime in 2002???

 

[davey25]

Since when was Federer prime in 2002???

Of course he wasnt, that was my point. Federer in 2002 was about where Nadal in 2006 was on non clay surfaces in his own career.

 

[TheLoneWolf]

Since when was Federer prime in 2002???

I think davey25 was making the point that Nadal, far from his prime on grass in 2006, still was quite competitive against Fed at his prime. He does have a point, as Fed is considered by many the best (or close to the best) ever on grass, and in 2006 it's hard to argue he was at (or near) his prime.

 

[abmk]

No because even when he was a baby in diapers on grass he nearly took the 2nd and 3rd sets of the 2006 Wimbledon final. Imagine Federer in 2002 giving prime Nadal that tough a match on grass, LOL! And since in the 2007 final where Nadal was still not quite totally prime and Federer was still in his absolute prime Nadal in the minds of most observers outplayed Federer overall despite Federer's huge serving but lost because of failing on the big points (and some would argue an injury early in the 5th set). I am not going to bother arguing with you though knowing that you are the blindest ******* on the forum.

2006, nadal was not prime on grass, agreed, but even if he'd taken the 2nd set, there's no guarentee he'd have taken the 3rd ..mind you, the 3rd set he played was easily one of the best he's played on grass, 20 winners to 3 UFs and he only won it in a TB .

2007 nadal was already great on grass and his performance was up there with any in history on grass ..

funny enough, you don't even remember that nadal took a time-out in the 4th set and NOT the 5th , and he was moving darn well after that ....

and yes, fed's serving WILL give him that edge against nadal on grass

and yep, TheLoneWolf is a "*******" like me to give roger the edge on grass , ha ha ha . YOU are delusional enough to believe that even when rafa nadal playing at his VERY best against a federer who was playing well needed 5 sets to beat him 9-7 is going to lead their H2H on grass

its funny that you mention nadal played badly on important points in 2007, that is SO incorrect, it was roger who outplayed him on those...

whereas in 2008, while nadal did save some points with some great play, fed dumped quite a few 2nd serves on BPs into the net ...his returning was sub-par and not close to his prime level at all .. overall while he played well, I wouldn't put that down as his best at all

 

[TheLoneWolf]

2006, granted nadal played a sloppy game to give back fed the break in the 2nd ,

2007 nadal was already great on grass and his performance was up there with any in history on grass ..

funny enough, you don't even remember that nadal took a time-out in the 4th set and NOT the 5th , and he was moving darn well after that ....

and yes, fed's serving WILL give him that edge against nadal on grass

and yep, TheLoneWolf is a "*******" like me to give roger the edge on grass , ha ha ha

its funny that you mention nadal played badly on important points in 2007, that is SO incorrect, it was roger who outplayed him on those...

whereas in 2008, while nadal did save some points with some great play, fed dumped quite a few 2nd serves on BPs into the net ...his returning was sub-par and not close to his prime level at all .. overall while he played well, I wouldn't put that down as his best at all

I'm just giving my opinion, based on my own reasons and not yours. It might not be a particularly good opinion, but this thread is based on speculation anyway. For what is worth, I said "slight" edge. If someone that used to be touted as a one-dimensional wonder on clay can give "the GOAT" a run for his money on grass, that's quite a feat, wouldn't you say?

 

[abmk]

I'm just giving my opinion, based on my own reasons and not yours. It might not be a particularly good opinion, but this thread is based on speculation anyway. For what is worth, I said "slight" edge. If someone that used to be touted as a one-dimensional wonder on clay can give "the GOAT" a run for his money on grass, that's quite a feat, wouldn't you say?

what I meant to say is that saying a 6-time wimby champion , who's lost only 1 grass court match in the past 7 years, is 2-1 vs nadal on grass will have an edge vs nadal on grass is NOT fanboyism and davey25 is nuts ( as usual ) to suggest so ...

and yes, rafa improved tremendously on grass and has done darn well against fed.

 

[TheLoneWolf]

what I meant to say is that saying a 6-time wimby champion , who's lost only 1 grass court match in the past 7 years, is 2-1 vs nadal on grass will have an edge vs nadal on grass is NOT fanboyism and davey25 is nuts ( as usual ) to suggest so ...

and yes, rafa improved tremendously on grass and has done darn well against fed.

At the same time, you have to admit that Wimbledon 2007 could have gone Nadal's way as well, and that would give Nadal a slight edge over Federer. Given Fed's overall results though, I still give him a slight edge.

Looking forward to Wimby...

 

[davey25]

At the same time, you have to admit that Wimbledon 2007 could have gone Nadal's way as well, and that would give Nadal a slight edge over Federer. Given Fed's overall results though, I still give him a slight edge.

Looking forward to Wimby...

As could Wimbledon 2009 had Nadal simply been able to play. Amazing how Nadal could have easily had only 1 fewer Wimbledon than Federer despite being 5 years younger. Lets see how many Wimbledon titles Nadal has in a few years time.

Anyway Nadal and Federer's title count is not that relevant to who would be favored in a matchup. At this moment the slam title count is 16 to 7, the head to head though is 7 to 14.

 

[davey25]

what I meant to say is that saying a 6-time wimby champion , who's lost only 1 grass court match in the past 7 years, is 2-1 vs nadal on grass will have an edge vs nadal on grass is NOT fanboyism and davey25 is nuts ( as usual ) to suggest so ...

I did not accuse you of fanboyism due to your opinion of Federer having the edge over Nadal on grass. I accused it to you because of everything else you have said on this forum especialy Federer relative.

Say what happened to that 4 set win Soderling was going to post over Nadal in the French Open final even after going 5 sets with Berdych, LOL! That was a good one.

 

[abmk]

At the same time, you have to admit that Wimbledon 2007 could have gone Nadal's way as well, and that would give Nadal a slight edge over Federer. Given Fed's overall results though, I still give him a slight edge.

Looking forward to Wimby...

it could have, but it didn't.

 

[JeMar]

I'm probably just parroting what a lot of people have said, but I'll go with Nadal on clay 90/10, Federer on grass 65/35, Federer on outdoor hard courts 70/30, and Federer on an indoor hard court 75/25.

 

[Polaris]

nadal huge edge on clay
fed edge on grass
fed clear edge on hard courts

This is the truth.

 

[abmk]

I did not accuse you of fanboyism due to your opinion of Federer having the edge over Nadal on grass. I accused it to you because of everything else you have said on this forum especialy Federer relative.

Say what happened to that 4 set win Soderling was going to post over Nadal in the French Open final even after going 5 sets with Berdych, LOL! That was a good one.

umm, if you read carefully, you'd notice I mentioned nadal's serving as a key factor, I put up an if there ...

again, I'll put it up:

sod in 4 unless rafa serves exceptionally well

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=4729037&postcount=63

and rafa DID serve real well

Do I have to put up the list of your failed predictions ? oh never mind , that'll be too long, I could just bring up you making up stuff like sod was up 2-0 in sets vs berdych this FO, LOL !

 

[davey25]

I'm probably just parroting what a lot of people have said, but I'll go with Nadal on clay 90/10, Federer on grass 65/35, Federer on outdoor hard courts 70/30, and Federer on an indoor hard court 75/25.

I actually think prime Federer on an indoor hard court is even more than 75/25. More like 90/10 for Federer to win, 70/30 for Nadal not to get crushed. And outdoor hard court would depend alot on which types. Rebound ace would be much higher chance for Nadal than decoturf.

 

[davey25]

umm, if you read carefully, you'd notice I mentioned nadal's serving as a key factor, I put up an if there ...

again, I'll put it up:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=4729037&postcount=63

and rafa DID serve real well

Do I have to put up the list of your failed predictions ? oh never mind , that'll be too long, I could just bring up you making up stuff like sod was up 2-0 in sets vs berdych this FO LOL !

Yes so Nadal simply destroyed Soderling rather than losing in 4 sets since his serve was on fire that day. Good one. :lol: It had nothing to do with dominating Soderling in the rallies all day.

As for the Berdych semfinal I already explained what I meant. Soderling lost the 2nd set by so many sloppy errors but until the 3rd set was completely dictating play so should have gone up 2 sets to 0. Either way my only real observation from that match was it was obvious Soderling didnt have a hope in the final the way he played that match, which was already about 2 levels down from his Federer performance. And of course that is how it turned out.

 

[JeMar]

I actually think prime Federer on an indoor hard court is even more than 75/25. More like 90/10 for Federer to win, 70/30 for Nadal not to get crushed. And outdoor hard court would depend alot on which types. Rebound ace would be much higher chance for Nadal than decoturf.

My rationale for my percentage is that, while Federer's serve would surely be a force, Federer struggled with Nadal's serve even during his prime. I think we're bound to see a few tiebreakers with these two, and those have tended to be Federer's downfall in his H2H with Nadal.

 

[frisco]

Federer would wipe the floor with Nadal on any surface except clay. Even when Nadal was playing his best and Federer not close to his best and recovering from mono, it still took Nadal 9-7 in the 5th to win.

 

[kishnabe]

Nadal would dominate Federer on clay...but on Grass Federer has a slight edge....and on Hard Courts of any kind I give that to Federer!

 

[abmk]

Yes so Nadal simply destroyed Soderling rather than losing in 4 sets since his serve was on fire that day. Good one. :lol: It had nothing to do with dominating Soderling in the rallies all day.

I don't have to talk about rafa's "ground game" on clay ... jeez, do I ? fact is nadal's serve saved him on big points - notice sod was 0/8 on BPs, what was it last year again ? he took almost every chance he had !

As for the Berdych semfinal I already explained what I meant. Soderling lost the 2nd set by so many sloppy errors but until the 3rd set was completely dictating play so should have gone up 2 sets to 0. Either way my only real observation from that match was it was obvious Soderling didnt have a hope in the final the way he played that match, which was already about 2 levels down from his Federer performance. And of course that is how it turned out.

umm, that's a complete LIE, you just changed your tune once you realised you were found out:

LOL at all the votes for Soderling. Did you even see him play today or do you just hate Nadal so much that you are voting for Soderling. I dont like Soderling but I was thinking he had a shot before today but after seeing his very erratic semifinal today which he managed to turn from a straight set cruise to a 5 set nailbiter he doesnt have a prayer barring some major rediscovery of her earlier tournament form.

how on earth can it be a straight set cruise when he easily lost set2 ?

Todays performance was not encouraging for Soderling going into the final. He started off playing great and was on his way to a straight sets win then he choked and fell apart badly and nearly let Berdych come back to win the match. Playing like this he would have no chance vs even a subpar Nadal. It looks like Soderling has already lost the form he showed throughout the tournament and vs Federer.

nearly let berdych come back into the match ?

how can soderling nearly let berdych come back into the match when it was berdych who was up 2 sets to one ?

everything you said here screams out you thought/made it look like sod was up 2 sets to love

 

[TheLoneWolf]

Federer would wipe the floor with Nadal on any surface except clay. Even when Nadal was playing his best and Federer not close to his best and recovering from mono, it still took Nadal 9-7 in the 5th to win.

You are delusional. Federer didn't wipe the floor with Nadal in Wimby 2007, when he didn't even know what mono was. What about AO 09?

I stick to my original assessment: Too close to call.

 

[jigar]

Fed on every surface.. Just kidding..It is hard to tell.

 

[piece]

The edge people are giving Federer on outdoor hardcourts isn't justified. A hardcourt-pre-prime Nadal beat Prime Federer 2 out of 3 times on outdoor hardcourt. Thing is, I think that if Federer had executed like he did at the TMC against Nadal in these outdoor matches he would have beat him almost as easily as he did indoors. So i really think Federer playing his best would beat even '08 Nadal quite comfortably on outdoor hardcourts. The question then is whether we are comparing the two at their respective absolute bests or just in their primes. If it's absolute bests then this hypothetical definitely favours Federer:

Grass - Federer wins in 3 or 4 sets (with his form from 2003 wimby semi/final, or 2005 final, or 2006 earlier rounds)

Outdoor Hard - Federer wins in 3 sets (with his form from 2003 tmc final, 2004 us open final, or 2007 ao semi)

Indoor Hard - Federer wins in 3 sets (with his form from 2006 tmc semi/final, 2007 tmc semi/final, maybe other performances, basel 06, 08??)

Red Clay - Nadal wins in 3 or 4 sets (with his form from 2008 FO Final against Federer from 2006 monte carlo early rounds, 2006 rome final, 2007 hamburg final, patches of 2008 hamburg final, maybe 2002 hamburg final and 2004 hamburg vs hewitt).

Nadal even at his very best on any surface is susceptible to a shotmaker/big hitter who just isn't missing.

If we're talking primes rather than absolute bests, then I pretty much agree with JeMar's percentages, except outdoor hardcourt might favour Federer less and Nadal more.

 

[davey25]

Federer would wipe the floor with Nadal on any surface except clay. Even when Nadal was playing his best and Federer not close to his best and recovering from mono, it still took Nadal 9-7 in the 5th to win.

Yeah sure just like Seles in her prime would destroy the Williams sisters on grass right.

 

[caulcano]

When Federer was in his prime Nadal was still winning on clay, but he wasn't at his best yet on grass (Wimbledon 06.) Not to mention hardcourt.

Assuming both their primes are past them (almost definitely true in the case of Federer, and potentially true for Nadal, although that's more arguable,) if they could be pitched against each other at both of their primes, what would you expect to have taken place?

I see Nadal taking clay clearly (undeniable,) Roger with a slight edge on grass, and a more marked advantage on hardcourt. All in all a very tight contest.

On clay Nadal would win in 3 sets.
On grass Federer would win in 5 sets.
On hard courts Federer would win in 4 sets.

 

[BorisBeckerFan]

Obviously I have to say Fed but my only reservation is I don't think that we have seen Nadal's prime.

 

[Blinkism]

Prime Rib is good too.

 

[BorisBeckerFan]

I want prime rib.

 

[Tennis_Monk]

Now that we have figured out what happens when a Prime Federer faces Prime Nadal,

Let us expand the scope further and see

Prime Federer Vs Sub Prime Nadal
Some what Prime Federer Vs Mostly Prime Nadal
So So Federer Vs Ok Nadal
Some what Nadal vs Some what Federer

 

[BorisBeckerFan]

Injured Fed vs Nadal with mono would be interesting.

 

[piece]

Injured Fed vs Nadal with mono would be interesting.

Or ******** vs a nadal with confidence issues stemming from family trouble?

 

[BorisBeckerFan]

The possibilities are endless. Imagine if Nadal's dad was in jail for looting and Fed's dad had gambling debts and was being hunted down by the bookies. Who would win then?

 

[piece]

The possibilities are endless. Imagine if Nadal's dad was in jail for looting and Fed's dad had gambling debts and was being hunted down by the bookies. Who would win then?

Now you're being ridiculous. Federer's dad is the COAT (cuddliest looking human being of all time) and thus would never involve himself with shady activities of the sort you were considering. For evidence of his COATness, one need look no further than http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDDGlU3qm24&feature=related
at 4 mins 49 secs

 

[piece]

But come to think of it, that moustache is awful shady..

 

[gold soundz]

Now you're being ridiculous. Federer's dad is the COAT (cuddliest looking human being of all time) and thus would never involve himself with shady activities of the sort you were considering. For evidence of his COATness, one need look no further than http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDDGlU3qm24&feature=related
at 4 mins 49 secs

hahahaha coat.

 

[BorisBeckerFan]

If only I could be more ridiculous. He still owes 3 dollars from a game of dice.

 

[sh@de]

This depends on whether Fed had the mental block against Nadal yet. If Fed had yet to develop the mental block, I think he'd be the clear favourite on HC and have the edge on grass. On clay, Nadal would have a decent edge.

But if Fed already has the mental block... I think Nadal would be favourite on both clay and grass (by a lot on clay) and Fed only with a slight edge on HC.

 

[gold soundz]

This depends on whether Fed had the mental block against Nadal yet. If Fed had yet to develop the mental block, I think he'd be the clear favourite on HC and have the edge on grass. On clay, Nadal would have a decent edge.

But if Fed already has the mental block... I think Nadal would be favourite on both clay and grass (by a lot on clay) and Fed only with a slight edge on HC.

From what I saw in Madrid 2010 final, that mental block doesn't really exist any more. It'll just be Nadal's game that troubles him from this point forward I think. Until Nadal gets a big win against him, like in a slam.

 

[P_Agony]

No because even when he was a baby in diapers on grass he nearly took the 2nd and 3rd sets of the 2006 Wimbledon final. Imagine Federer in 2002 giving prime Nadal that tough a match on grass, LOL! And since in the 2007 final where Nadal was still not quite totally prime and Federer was still in his absolute prime Nadal in the minds of most observers outplayed Federer overall despite Federer's huge serving edge but lost because of failing on the big points (and some would argue an injury early in the 5th set). I did not say Nadal was better on grass but given the matchup issue he would have the slight edge with both in their primes IMO. I am not going to bother arguing with you though knowing that you are the blindest ******* on the forum.

You fail, and not only because of Nadal's H2H with Federer on grass, but because his H2H against the field as well.

For example, Nadal has just lost a match on grass, in straight sets, to Feli Lopez. That kind of loss never happenned to Federer since 2003. Federer has only lost once on grass since 2003 and even that was a tough, long, five setter that ended 9-7 in the fith set.

True, Nadal has Fed's number in the matchup issue, but Federer is overall a better grass court player. Nadal's loss at Queen's is evidence, among other losses on grass over the years (at Queen's and Wimbly).

 

[sh@de]

From what I saw in Madrid 2010 final, that mental block doesn't really exist any more. It'll just be Nadal's game that troubles him from this point forward I think. Until Nadal gets a big win against him, like in a slam.

Really...? He missed so many bp opportunities...

The match was pretty close on the whole. If Fed had taken a few more of the big points, he could've won the match. So I think the mental block still exists...

 

[Deleted member 3771]

Nadal won just about every important match, one exception was when he got injured at the Wimbledon 07 final when he was in control and cruising to victory.

Anyways most of their matches have been big finals- Slams or MS finals, and Nadal dominates both.

 

[dannykl]

Clay, Nadal has huge advantages.

Grass, it is almost equal.

Slow hard court, Nadal has slight edges.

Fast hard court, Federal has some edges, but not overwhelmingly.

 

[piece]

No because even when he was a baby in diapers on grass he nearly took the 2nd and 3rd sets of the 2006 Wimbledon final. Imagine Federer in 2002 giving prime Nadal that tough a match on grass, LOL! And since in the 2007 final where Nadal was still not quite totally prime and Federer was still in his absolute prime Nadal in the minds of most observers outplayed Federer overall despite Federer's huge serving edge but lost because of failing on the big points (and some would argue an injury early in the 5th set). I did not say Nadal was better on grass but given the matchup issue he would have the slight edge with both in their primes IMO. I am not going to bother arguing with you though knowing that you are the blindest ******* on the forum.

Federer on his non-best surfaces as of 2002 and Nadal on his non-best surfaces as of 2006 are not comparable. In 2005 Nadal won 2 masters series on hard and a 250 (was a 175 back then). He also lost in the 5th of another masters hardcourt final. In '06 he won Dubai, made the finals of Wimbledon and the semis of the TMC. Federer, as of 2002, on the other hand, had only won one tournament on clay, his worst surface (admittedly, it was a masters) and wasn't even consistently making r16s on clay. Also, compared to Nadal's 2 slams and 1 final Federer in 2002 had made it past the round of 16 only twice.

So even on their worst surfaces, Federer and Nadal's levels were uncomparable in these two years (02, 06). It's a terrible example on your part.

And Nadal in the 2007 final was at his peak on grass. He played better that year than he did in 2008 to win the title. So even if he was pre-prime on grass overall, he still managed to bring his best ever grass game to the final that year. Kind of like Fed who was pre-prime on grass in 2003 but still brought two of his best ever performances in the semi and final.

Also, Federer at wimby 2007 wasn't absolute prime fed. his performances from indian wells through to the tmc (where he really picked up his game) were decidedly lackluster (except for hamburg and parts of the FO). People were talking about how he was declining already in '07 even though he managed 3 slams just because of the obvious drop in his overall dominance and level of play.

 

[Cesc Fabregas]

17 year old Nadal destroyed Federer on hardcourts, so I go for Nadal.

 

[dh003i]

No because even when he was a baby in diapers on grass he nearly took the 2nd and 3rd sets of the 2006 Wimbledon final. Imagine Federer in 2002 giving prime Nadal that tough a match on grass, LOL! And since in the 2007 final where Nadal was still not quite totally prime and Federer was still in his absolute prime Nadal in the minds of most observers outplayed Federer overall despite Federer's huge serving edge but lost because of failing on the big points (and some would argue an injury early in the 5th set). I did not say Nadal was better on grass but given the matchup issue he would have the slight edge with both in their primes IMO. I am not going to bother arguing with you though knowing that you are the blindest ******* on the forum.

Stop making excuses for Nadal. Nadal was not undeveloped in Wimbledon 2006. He was already a 2-time GS champion.

Federer in 2002 had yet to even appear in his first GS final. No comparison.

Federer was not in his "absolute prime" in 2007, that would be 2005 and 2006. And anyone who says Nadal "outplayed" Federer is full of BS. 6-2 in the 5th set. It was not close in the end.