The truth about the Roger Federer-Rafael Nadal rivalry

[raisethe3]

All are valid points.

But the last one I bolded made more sense to me because when I watched all the Fed-Nad matches, Nadal always seems to play his best and go after every point (ex: AO '09 Final)

But my question is, why isn't he putting much effort on like Murray, Del Po, etc? I know its not their game that's giving him trouble. You can't always just say "oh no, my physical health is giving me problems" excuses all the time. I mean seriously, every time Nadal loses to someone, the camp brings up an excuse and say he got tendinitis, or something, whatever. This seems to only occur in other matches when the opponent is not Federer.

I agree with most of what you said, but you sort of make it sound like Federer is an easy win for Nadal, and that couldn't be further from the truth.

1) If it was so easy for him to beat Fed, he wouldn't have lost to him 7 times on all surfaces.

2) Nobody has challenged Nadal on clay like Federer did (no, don't even think about saying Djokovic), and many had the chance. I believe Fed is the only active player to beat Nadal on clay more than once. Plenty of their matches were very close, such as Hamburg 08 final and Rome 06. In both matches Fed either had match points or was having huge leads. Fed has won many sets in most of their matches and made it close more times than not. Nadal's only easy match against Fed was the FO 08 final when Nadal was at his very best and Fed was at his very crap (not just in the final, the whole tourny he played like crap - god knows how he even eached that final).

3) Nadal go bageled by Fed, twice, and on clay in one of those times. You don't receive a bagel from someone who's easy to beat.

Federer is indeed a great matchup for Nadal. Fed's game suits Nadal very well and not vice versa. But Federer is still Federer, thus a tough match for anyone, and at his very best (and when he's confident) can beat anyone on any surface. I'm sure that Nadal knows he has to play his best against Fed everytime they meet to have a chance.

 

[TMF]

All are valid points.

But the last one I bolded made more sense to me because when I watched all the Fed-Nad matches, Nadal always seems to play his best and go after every point (ex: AO '09 Final)

But my question is, why isn't he putting much effort on like Murray, Del Po, etc? I know its not their game that's giving him trouble. You can't always just say "oh no, my physical health is giving me problems" excuses all the time. I mean seriously, every time Nadal loses to someone, the camp brings up an excuse and say he got tendinitis, or something, whatever. This seems to only occur in other matches when the opponent is not Federer.

Rafa’s camp makes excuses for being tired or injured after losing to someone else, but he also had the same excuses when losing to TMF – When Roger snapped his 81 matches winning streak on clay, his team claim he was tired! When Roger beat him in Madrid, his team claim he was tired! Roger beat him in 2007 SW19, they claim he was injured!

 

[Justdoit10]

Wilander is so bitter. LOL.

 

[Cyan]

Rafa’s camp makes excuses for being tired or injured after losing to someone else, but he also had the same excuses when losing to TMF – When Roger snapped his 81 matches winning streak on clay, his team claim he was tired! When Roger beat him in Madrid, his team claim he was tired! Roger beat him in 2007 SW19, they claim he was injured!

I see a trend.

 

[OddJack]

Ali won those matches fair and square. Parkinson or not, he earned the titles.

Nadal won those matches against Rodge and deservedly so.

But people who say Rodge has nothing to do with his injuries are wrong. He had to dig deeper to catch up with him and when he did he was spent already. He could not win two majors in a year except for his best year 2008, he could not win easy points by his serves, so what did he had to do? Play more matches, which he did and... Grind.

Nadal is not going to win another major, and at 6, he's going to end up below Sampras, Borg, Agassi, Lendl, connors, JMc..

And when he ends up down there if you bring up H2H all you will get is half a smile.

like this :/

 

[bruce38]

Nadal is paying the price for keeping up with Roger. It's not easy to do.

 

[FedererUberAlles]

I think that those who believe that Federer is not the greatest because of his record with Nadal should read about Simpson's paradox. I believe it is relevant in this case.

 

[djokovicgonzalez2010]

You know... I like pushers. I like watching them. The more defensive the better

 

[abmk]

If Murray and Nadal both play at there best on clay, Nadal wins in straight sets everytime.

agree, murray is no match for nadal on clay

 

[kraggy]

I wonder if Murray could beat Nadal on clay if he was really really on his game.

I think he could if Nadal is not on his top game. Nadal top game on clay, Murray could get bageled. Murray definitely has the better hard court game and on hard courts I would pick him to beat Nadal if both were on their A+ game. But on clay, Nadal's A+ game would be too much for Murray. It's too much for Fed and you have to believe that Fed is a waay better clay courter than Murray.

 

[kraggy]

I too find it ridiculous that people are first of all

1. Completely ruling Nadal out

2. Claiming that everything he did in life was to defeat Federer


Nadals long battles with Federer are the least of his worries. Nadals biggest problem is that he would play with the same intensity vs an Andreas Seppi as he would against a Federer! The miles Nadal puts on his body are because he spend so much effort in every win no matter how inconsequential that win is . That's how he is geared. Prior to 2009 , I would reckon that Nadal would probably go all out even in an exho match. That's the kind of mentality he has!

I don't think there is any doubt now that Fed is GOAT but having a healthy Nadal around adds even more credibility to Feds resume. That even with a rival like Nadal around, he was able to win 1-2 slams a year. I think Fed getting to 19 slams with healthy Nadal around will bring him more respect than Fed getting to 23 slams with no Nadal around. I think that will be the difference between whether Fed is considered leader of the elite group (Sampras, Laver etc) or he is considered so much superior to any player that every played that even Sampras/Laver etc are now considered 2nd tier!

 

[Spider]

Thing is, if Nadal is at his very best, he beats everyone in straights on clay. Federer beats everyone but Nadal in straights on grass, Nadal loses in 5. On hards, Federer goes 60-0 for the season, only losing 1 set to Nadal and 1 to Del Potro if he also plays his best.

My point: Nobody 'always' plays their best, and Nadal who plays good tennis on clay doesn't necessarily beat everyone on everyday. Best Nadal, yes, no doubt. But good Nadal, the one that normally shows up.. who knows, if Federer can take him on..

I agree with your assessment of Murray's chances in general though.

So, that in a way means, Murray will be straight setted because others have been? Sorry I don't buy that.

About your second point, I do agree, nobody ever plays their best tennis everyday, I agree with that. My point is Murray playing what he capable of is a real danger to even an inform Nadal on clay.

If we see the second set between Murray and Nadal at MC last year (and till that point Nadal had just cruised in all his matches), when Murray turned it on in the second set (I am talking about that level of play), Nadal who at the point, was 5-2 up in second set, ended up losing four of the next five games. The tie break required exceptional tennis for Nadal to beat Murray.

There is no question, if Murray brings this game, even a prime Nadal, on clay, will have his hands full (there is no match up problem like we usually see when Nadal faces Federer).

Again, I am not saying Murray will do better than Nadal or Federer, they will be a lot more consistent with their performance and will more points (perhaps), what I am saying is Murray might be a lot bigger threat to an inform Nadal than Federer.

 

[abmk]

If we see the second set between Murray and Nadal at MC last year (and till that point Nadal had just cruised in all his matches), when Murray turned it on in the second set (I am talking about that level of play), Nadal who at the point, was 5-2 up in second set, ended up losing four of the next five games. The tie break required exceptional tennis for Nadal to beat Murray.

yep, that proves everything :roll:

there have been loads of players who've turned it on against nadal on clay for a set or more, PHM,hewitt took a set of him at RG 2006, hewitt nearly got him in hamburg in 2007, davydenko in rome 2007, djokovic multiple times, federer multiple times, ferrer multiple times, doesn't mean they're going to beat him

There is no question, if Murray brings this game, even a prime Nadal, on clay, will have his hands full (there is no match up problem like we usually see when Nadal faces Federer).

geez, no, let me know when murray first reaches the final of a clay-court tournament

djokovic,davydenko etc matchup better against nadal on clay than murray , are much better CCers than him, yet haven't beaten him even once

Again, I am not saying Murray will do better than Nadal or Federer, they will be a lot more consistent with their performance and will more points (perhaps), what I am saying is Murray might be a lot bigger threat to an inform Nadal than Federer.

LOL, NO, he is a MUCH MUCH inferior CC to federer, let alone nadal ! matchup matters when the 2 players are on a somewhat similar level, in this case it doesn't

 

[swordtennis]

Rafa’s camp makes excuses for being tired or injured after losing to someone else, but he also had the same excuses when losing to TMF – When Roger snapped his 81 matches winning streak on clay, his team claim he was tired! When Roger beat him in Madrid, his team claim he was tired! Roger beat him in 2007 SW19, they claim he was injured!

Anyone who is a fan of TENNIS ignores the excuses. They are boring, tired, old and worn out. Basically have reached joke level. My response to the excuses now are RETIRE if it cronic.
Constant excuses will only hurt legacies.