Thiem: Federer would have won 7 French Open if it wasn't for Nadal

[TMF]

Dominic Thiem: Roger Federer would have seven French Open titles if it wasn’t for Rafael Nadal

“First of all he is amazing on all surfaces and his record on clay is pretty stunning. He reached so many semi-finals and finals.
“If there wouldn’t be Rafa he would be on six or seven French Open titles. That was his only problem, I would say."


Even at 37 and haven't play on clay since 2016, Thiem believe Federer is the top 3 favorite this clay season.
“He’s one of the three top favourites [along with Nadal and Novak Djokovic],” he is quoted as saying by Metro.co.uk.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

I have him at five without Nadal. I'll be generous and say Djokovic would have beaten him in 2008.

2005, easily. 2006, easily. 2007, easily. 2011, easily. That's five.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Obviously in reality his career could have panned out differently had he won those, he may have retired earlier or lost other matches etc, but if we isolate each of those tournaments, Fed is winning each of them with no Nadal. For what it's worth.

 

[Im(moral) Winner]

I have him at five without Nadal. I'll be generous and say Djokovic would have beaten him in 2008.

2005, easily. 2006, easily. 2007, easily. 2011, easily. That's five.

And with his 2009 title included you would agree with Tim's statement.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

And with his 2009 title included you would agree with Tim's statement.

I was including that too but left it unsaid. 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011. Five total.

Also 20,000th poast! Officially a guru

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Is this tennis players imitate talk tennis members week?

 

[Red Rick]

Thiem's quote selection right up there with shot selection.

 

[ak24alive]

Is this tennis players imitate talk tennis members week?

Kyrgios will imitate you.

Spoiler

 

[Mainad]

He would have won at least 1 more Wimbledon and at least 1 more AO too so he would have been on 29 Slams by now!

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Kyrgios will imitate you.

Spoiler

 

[smoledman]

I don't like this type of thinking. I feel that Rafa's intial surge in 2005/2006 fueled Federer to be super-focused on 2 things:

1. improve his backhand
2. Lock down grass & hard

Look at what happened in those early Fedal years. Fed doesn't win Monte Carlo/Rome/RG, but he's sweeping everything else with EASE because Rafa is sharpening his skills to the point that he's now utterly destroying the rest of the tour(except Rafa).

To me in that period(June 2005 to end 2007), Rafa was that 'dread' figure in Federer's rear view mirror keeping him ultra focused on the task at hand. The only thing that derailed his off-clay dominance was f-en mono.

In fact, 2005 Miami was the first shot across the bow that got Fed's attention.

 

[I Am Finnish]

Even at 37 and haven't play on clay since 2016, Thiem believe Federer is the top 3 favorite this clay season.
“He’s one of the three top favourites [along with Nadal and Novak Djokovic],” he is quoted as saying by Metro.co.uk.


Fedr: oh Tim stop it

 

[smoledman]

it's not even relevant to discuss whether Fed is top 3 threat on clay this year. The Slice has Fed at #5 out of top 6 threats this year, which I think is reasonable.

 

[ak24alive]

Sorry I can't see the image.

 

[Jonas78]

7 is a little too much, but 4-6 would be likely.

 

[Luka888]

Would have, could have ... who knows? It didn't happen. Rafa was there and he is the clay GOAT .

 

[MeatTornado]

I always wonder if Roger would've gotten burned out if he was winning literally every major year after year.

Nadal made him stay sharp and keep improving.

 

[smoledman]

I always wonder if Roger would've gotten burned out if he was winning literally every major year after year.

Nadal made him stay sharp and keep improving.

Ding ding ding, we have a winner. One never knows the knock-on effect of changing a prior result. This is why time travel stories in science fiction are so interesting.

The fact is we don't get the Federer backhand of 2006-present w/o Nadal destroying it first in 2005 and causing Fed to build it up.

 

[BeatlesFan]

That was his only problem, I would say."

I'd say a man with 20 majors has no problems in his chosen sport. Dom needs to focus on winning his first at RG in a couple months. His chances hover around 4%, but crazier things have happened.

 

[smoledman]

I'd say a man with 20 majors has no problems in his chosen sport. Dom needs to focus on winning his first at RG in a couple months. His chances hover around 4%, but crazier things have happened.

It speaks volumes that even players like Thiem think Federer has 'problems' with 20 majors.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Ding ding ding, we have a winner. One never knows the knock-on effect of changing a prior result. This is why time travel stories in science fiction are so interesting.

The fact is we don't get the Federer backhand of 2006-present w/o Nadal destroying it first in 2005 and causing Fed to build it up.

Nadal didn't "destroy" Federer's BH in 2005, and the Major "buildup" that happened was the racquet change that happened because Federer stopped winning at a respectable age, so you are narrating stories that never were.

 

[BeatlesFan]

It speaks volumes that even players like Thiem think Federer has 'problems' with 20 majors.

Dom is 25 and should be fielding questions about his multiple slam wins instead of endlessly being asked about oldster Roger. Thiwm needs to write the script of his own career at this point....



Now watch him lose second round in MC.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

I don't like this timeline altering stuff. Take Rafa Nadal out and maybe Roger Federer is not born. I once imagined Roger serving coffee if Nadal did not exist.

 

[Centrius]

I guess Thiem forgot about Djokovic existence.

 

[MeatTornado]

I'd say a man with 20 majors has no problems in his chosen sport. Dom needs to focus on winning his first at RG in a couple months. His chances hover around 4%, but crazier things have happened.

Reactions like this to a benign and truthful answer are exactly why players are afraid to say anything real in their press conferences.

 

[TheIntrovert]

I don't like this timeline altering stuff. Take Rafa Nadal out and maybe Roger Federer is not born. I once imagined Roger serving coffee if Nadal did not exist.

Which cafe?

 

[Sport]

7? Impossible. Nadal only defeated Federer 5 times at RG. Thus, at most Fed could have won 6 RG without Rafa.

Btw, Thiem could already have won 2 RG if not for Nadal.

 

[KINGROGER]

5-6. 2008 probably only 60% favourite.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Which cafe?

He was working in Starbucks under the watchful eye of Tony Schiavone.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Making the Neo Frappuccino.

 

[Backspin1183]

Obviously in reality his career could have panned out differently had he won those, he may have retired earlier or lost other matches etc, but if we isolate each of those tournaments, Fed is winning each of them with no Nadal. For what it's worth.

True. I see him with less than 8 or 7 Wimbledon titles had he won 5 RGs. It's too tough winning these two Slams in a row even for all time great players. He'd probably get to 'only' 6 Wimbledon titles had he also become the king of clay, along with grass and hard court.

 

[VaporDude95]

I was including that too but left it unsaid. 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011. Five total.

Also 20,000th poast! Officially a guru

20,000? Jesus how do you find the time haha

 

[Wurm]

I guess Thiem forgot about Djokovic existence.

I guess you forgot what happened in 2011.

 

[True Fanerer]

Talk about exaggerating . We have to remember that Thiem uses the minus sign when spelling names though

 

[tennis_pro]

I guess Thiem forgot about Djokovic existence.

2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011 and one more after that depending on the draw

 

[Day_Tripper]

Federer is the most underrated clay court player of all time.

 

[chut]

Thiem gives Federer 1 more RG on the simple fact that he would be an absolute favorite to beat the all time record of 6 Rg wins. Maybe he's right or maybe he just likes to throw Djokovic under the bus

 

[mr tonyz]

I'd say a man with 20 majors has no problems in his chosen sport. Dom needs to focus on winning his first at RG in a couple months. His chances hover around 4%, but crazier things have happened.

Uhm , Thiem is absolutely right. In the context of French Open titles , Nadal was Federer's only problem. The fact that Fed went on to win 20 slams has absolutely nothing to do with what Thiem was saying.

For arguments sake you could say Federer had problems @ every slam that he didn't win also.Problems with whomever beat him.

 

[Artificial Grass]

it's not even relevant to discuss whether Fed is top 3 threat on clay this year. The Slice has Fed at #5 out of top 6 threats this year, which I think is reasonable.

The Slice had him at #6, if I remember correctly.

 

[Noletheking]

Yep he would've cleaned fo like he cleaned up every single slams against players not named Nadal(and Djokovic later on) who would've thought that? Brilliant reasoning Theim.

 

[Deleted member 743545]

Thanks to Nadal otherwise it would be an absolute disaster.

 

[Noletheking]

Thanks to Nadal otherwise it would be an absolute disaster.

Are you Argentinian?

 

[Deleted member 743545]

Are you Argentinian?

Nope.

Federer having more RG tittle than the like of Borg, Kuerten, Lendl, etc just sounds so wrong to me.

 

[Noletheking]

Like me you are a Maradona fan so I was wondering

Nope.

Federer having more RG tittle than the like of Borg, Kuerten, Lendl, etc just sounds so wrong to me.

 

[imageFAM]

 

[N01E]

 

[Centrius]

I guess you forgot what happened in 2011.

Djokovic had to lose a match eventually in that year.Don't you think?

 

[Centrius]

2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011 and one more after that depending on the draw

5 straight FO for Federer? Give me a break.

 

[tennis_pro]

5 straight FO for Federer? Give me a break.

Who beats him there? Moya, Almagro? Or maybe Djokovic LMAO? Djokovic can only beat a 35-year old Federer.

 

[King No1e]

1. Djokovic
2. Thiem
3. Zverev
4. Delpo
5. Federer