Tougher rivals: Fed or Pete?

[chjtennis]

Again you can make any number of excuses, Federer has won many titles on those surfaces as well but even you know that in this particular match up he has always had problems. Even on grass which is by far his best surface he was unable to thrash Nadal convincingly. As I said before, only surface he was totally comfortable against Nadal for the most of his career was indoor hard and it was partly because of Nadal's own inability to perform well on indoor hard. All said and done, numbers read,

Clay 13-2 Nadal
Outdoor hard 8-5 Nadal (3-1 slam)
Indoor hard 6-1 Federer
Grass 2-1 Federer

One can draw their conclusions from these numbers.


In 2017 Federer for the first time seems to have turned the tide on outdoor hard courts. We shall see how it goes in the future.

You still don't get it. The biggest reason for Fed's difficulties v Nadal had been his BH. With the bigger frame, he has got rid of that problem and Nadal cannot use that same tactic which had been an insurance v Fed any more. This has changed the whole dynamics of their matchup and I would favor Federer on any surface now except clay. It's really that simple. You need to watch their matches from the past and you'll see what I mean. I would still favor Nadal on clay, but on any other surfaces, Federer all the way.

 

[mike danny]

lol 2017 is the most relevant because Federer beat Nadal.

In 2017 first 3 matches Nadal was still far from his best, especially at IW and Miami. He played like crap in both those matches. Federer actually played far better in 2013 at Cincy and London in comparison. IW 2013 was admittedly poor performance from Fed.

Ok, when was Nadal at his best then on HC last year? At the USO where he faced the most laughable draw ever?

 

[zep]

Because you keep propping up that outdoor HC H2H like it means anything. It doesn't translate to Nadal being better on outdoor HC as 2017 has proven.

if it doesn't mean anything I suggest you ignore it? But from your passion to reply to my posts (not just this once mind you) it appears that it does matter to you.

 

[zep]

Federer against Nadal on HC: 11-9.

Federer against Nadal on grass: 2-1.

Whether you like it or not, Fed has the edge over Nadal on HC and grass. Spare me of the outdoor-indoor stuff, HC are hardcourts.

Sure, if you say so.

 

[mike danny]

if it doesn't mean anything I suggest you ignore it? But from your passion to reply to my posts (not just this once mind you) it appears that it does matter something to you.

Nah, my passion mostly springs from you cherry picking before 2017. I have seen one other poster to that too. Like somehow what happened before 2017 tells a better story than what happened in 2017 itself.

 

[mike danny]

Sure, if you say so.

Nadal has a problem if he really needs the lack of roof to succeed on HC.

 

[chjtennis]

No he absolutely does not. Only surface where Fed has had clear edge is indoor hard. Numbers back that up. Now after 2017 you could say that outdoor hard and grass were fairly even as far the rivalry goes.

What? You absolutely have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[zep]

You still don't get it. The biggest reason for Fed's difficulties v Nadal had been his BH. With the bigger frame, he has got rid of that problem and Nadal cannot use that same tactic which had been an insurance v Fed any more. This has changed the whole dynamics of their matchup and I would favor Federer on any surface now except clay. It's really that simple. You need to watch their matches from the past and you'll see what I mean. I would still favor Nadal on clay, but on any other surfaces, Federer all the way.

I think the role of the big frame is a bit exaggerated. Even with the big frame Nadal was 3 games from winning the AO final. The following two matches were a direct result of that match IMO. Nadal played well below his usual level and at that time he wasn't really high in confidence. Anyway, we'll see what the future holds. I hope they play in the final again.

 

[zep]

What? You absolutely have no idea what you are talking about.

lol what I said is backed up by numbers, what you said is backed up by excuses but whatever. Anyway, I am bored with this conversation. Bye

 

[chjtennis]

I think the role of the big frame is a bit exaggerated. Even with the big frame Nadal was 3 games from winning the AO final. The following two matches were a direct result of that match IMO. Nadal played well below his usual level and at that time he wasn't really high in confidence. Anyway, we'll see what the future holds. I hope they play in the final again.

There's nothing exaggerated about the bigger frame. Just watch their old matches and come back to me. Nadal kept going back to Fed's BH time and time again on crucial points. That doesn't work anymore and Federer himself said it's mostly due to the new racquet. Would you argue against the man himself?

 

[mike danny]

I think the role of the big frame is a bit exaggerated. Even with the big frame Nadal was 3 games from winning the AO final. The following two matches were a direct result of that match IMO. Nadal played well below his usual level and at that time he wasn't really high in confidence. Anyway, we'll see what the future holds. I hope they play in the final again.

But when Fed wasn't high on confidence that didn't matter to you.

 

[mike danny]

lol what I said is backed up by numbers, what you said is backed up by excuses but whatever. Anyway, I am bored with this conversation. Bye

Fed leads Nadal on 2 different surfaces. Deal with it.

 

[chjtennis]

lol what I said is backed up by numbers, what you said is backed up by excuses but whatever. Anyway, I am bored with this conversation. Bye

You 'backed it up' with some numbers arbitrarily made up by yourself. I asked you to actually watch their past matches. Which would give us better proof/ideas?

 

[mike danny]

I think the role of the big frame is a bit exaggerated. Even with the big frame Nadal was 3 games from winning the AO final. The following two matches were a direct result of that match IMO. Nadal played well below his usual level and at that time he wasn't really high in confidence. Anyway, we'll see what the future holds. I hope they play in the final again.

You must have missed all the BH winners in the 5th set of the AO 2017 final if you think the role of the big frame is highly exaggerated.

 

[zep]

Fed leads Nadal on 2 different surfaces. Deal with it.

Only an idiot would not differentiate outdoor and indoor hard courts. Anyone who's followed tennis knows that both surfaces plays quite differently. That is why they're designated separately even by the ATP. Otherwise they would just call everything hard court.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Only an idiot would not differentiate outdoor and indoor hard courts. Anyone who's followed tennis knows that both surfaces plays quite differently. That is why they're designated separately even by the ATP. Otherwise they would just call everything hard court.

Says the guy who compared Hewitt and Ferrer as players.

And no I'll never let that go.

 

[zep]

You 'backed it up' with some numbers arbitrarily made up by yourself. I asked you to actually watch their past matches. Which would give us better proof/ideas?

Are you out of your mind? I gave you the exact numbers not some half assed excuses, people can draw their conclusions from these numbers. Here they are again,

Clay 13-2 Nadal
Outdoor hard 8-5 Nadal (3-1 slam)
Indoor hard 6-1 Federer
Grass 2-1 Federer

 

[mike danny]

Only an idiot would not differentiate outdoor and indoor hard courts. Anyone who's followed tennis knows that both surfaces plays quite differently. That is why they're designated separately even by the ATP. Otherwise they would just call everything hard court.

Whatever. This whole H2H thing is idiocy anyway. no one is going to remember their outdoor HC H2H anyway with the exception of fanboys that will cling to it.

 

[zep]

Whatever. This whole H2H thing is idiocy anyway. no one is going to remember their outdoor HC H2H anyway with the exception of fanboys that will cling to it.

If it's idiocy don't indulge in a debate. I don't waste my time on things that I don't consider important. Bye

 

[zep]

Says the guy who compared Hewitt and Ferrer as players.

And no I'll never let that go.

Old grudge?

 

[chjtennis]

Are you out of your mind? I gave you the exact numbers not some half assed excuses, people can draw their conclusions from these numbers. Here they are again,

Clay 13-2 Nadal
Outdoor hard 8-5 Nadal (3-1 slam)
Indoor hard 6-1 Federer
Grass 2-1 Federer

Have you watched how Nadal beat Federer so many times since 2008? If you have, you should understand what I mean. Nadal established a clear blueprint to follow v Federer and he just executed it every time. Now that Federer has taken that away with his BH with new racquet, Nadal can't beat him on HC. Just deal with it.

 

[mike danny]

Have you watched how Nadal beat Federer so many times after 2008? If you have, you should understand what I mean. Federer took away Nadal's 'weapon' with his BH now, and Nadal can't beat him on HC. Just deal with it.

And the reason grass is only 2-1 is because they haven't played on grass after 2008.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Old grudge?

Never forget stupidity bro.

 

[zep]

Federer took away Nadal's 'weapon' with his BH now, and Nadal can't beat him on HC. Just deal with it.

Again, we will see. People also thought Federer would never be able to beat Nadal after 2013 or Nadal wouldn't win another slam in 2016. Nothing is so certain. That is why we watch sport.

 

[chjtennis]

And the reason grass is only 2-1 is because they haven't played on grass after 2008.

Also the grass season is not long enough, unlike clay season.

 

[chjtennis]

Again, we will see. People also thought Federer would never be able to beat Nadal after 2013 or Nadal wouldn't win another slam in 2016. Nothing is so certain. That is why we watch sport.

I think Federer will beat Nadal at least 8 times out of 10 on non-clay surfaces unless he gets completely washed up. As long as he stays reasonably competitive like now, he should be favored every time in non-clay encounters. We'll see.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Again, we will see. People also thought Federer would never be able to beat Nadal after 2013 or Nadal wouldn't win another slam in 2016. Nothing is so certain. That is why we watch sport.

Ferrer is a good guy though. Got to meet him. Spent about half an hour talking with me and a few others.

 

[Chanwan]

lol 2017 is the most relevant because Federer beat Nadal.

In 2017 first 3 matches Nadal was still far from his best, especially at IW and Miami. He played like crap in both those matches. Federer actually played far better in 2013 at Cincy and London in comparison. IW 2013 was admittedly poor performance from Fed.

A well playing Federer doesn't lose to Rafa in Cincy least of all in straight on indoor HC. Cincy was quite decent though, London was very poor.

 

[Deleted member 23235]

According to Agassi, it's Federer.

http://www.livemint.com/Sports/0rfI...etter-than-Pete-Sampras-Yes-says-Andre-A.html


Also the interview with the humble Chanpion.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/andre-agassi-roger-federer-pete-sampras_n_3984529

great article, thx for sharing (the first one).

Agassi's assessment is what i was gonna say...
sampras was tough, and hard to beat, but he had one game plan.. but if that game plan was off, or didn't match up well, oh well, next slam...

fed has alot of gears, a backup to the backup plan, and he does all the plans equally

in a head to head when they are both playing their best, i'd say sampras has the edge (ie. never gonna lose serve), but when both are playing suboptimally (say at 80% of their best), fed wins every time, and i'd guess that the matches you win when you're not at your best are the ones that define your career

 

[chjtennis]

great article, thx for sharing (the first one).

Most welcome!

 

[Chanwan]

I think the role of the big frame is a bit exaggerated. Even with the big frame Nadal was 3 games from winning the AO final. The following two matches were a direct result of that match IMO. Nadal played well below his usual level and at that time he wasn't really high in confidence. Anyway, we'll see what the future holds. I hope they play in the final again.

I can - and will say - that the AO being that close was a direct result of their previous history. And that their outdoor HC is in Rafa's favor is also a direct result of the clay beatings over the years.
The bigger frame got Fed over the hump and eventually led to a free mind, mindless of the beatings from yesteryear.

 

[Chanwan]

Are you out of your mind? I gave you the exact numbers not some half assed excuses, people can draw their conclusions from these numbers. Here they are again,

Clay 13-2 Nadal
Outdoor hard 8-5 Nadal (3-1 slam)
Indoor hard 6-1 Federer
Grass 2-1 Federer

Your "exact" numbers are off you know? Outdoor it's 8-6, indoor it's 1-5.

 

[TMF]

lol now another new criteria. So you mean unless you go on to win the title H2H doesn't matter? No one remembers the exact numbers but if one is talking about H2H every match counts whether it leads to a title or not.

If H2H really matters that much to you then you have to admit that Daveydenko is a much better/greater HC player than Nadal,

 

[zep]

Your "exact" numbers are off you know? Outdoor it's 8-6, indoor it's 1-5.

Shanghai was an indoor match, although technically it was outdoor.

 

[Chanwan]

Shanghai was an indoor match, although technically it was outdoor.

So Fed won Wimbledon 2012 indoor as well? Also, I'd be more interested in your response to my post 231.

 

[zep]

If H2H really matters that much to you then you have to admit that Daveydenko is a much better/greater HC player than Nadal,

In that particular match up yes, overall no.

 

[zep]

So Fed won Wimbledon 2012 indoor as well? Also, I'd be more interested in your response to my post 231.

I don't know what you are trying to argue here. Are you saying Shanghai wasn't indoors? or Federer didn't beat Djokovic indoors in WImbledon 2012? The final was part outdoor/part indoors. I don't see any confusion here, although admittedly Shanghai surface (deco turf) is different from your traditional indoor hard courts but the conditions were still indoors.

I can - and will say - that the AO being that close was a direct result of their previous history. And that their outdoor HC is in Rafa's favor is also a direct result of the clay beatings over the years.
The bigger frame got Fed over the hump and eventually led to a free mind, mindless of the beatings from yesteryear.

I have a different take on it. Sure, the bigger racket did help Federer, especially his BH but I think the 5th set turn around had more to do with him playing with nothing to lose attitude and Nadal not being as sharp as he usually is in big moments.

 

[Chanwan]

I don't know what you are trying to argue here. Are you saying Shanghai wasn't indoors? or Federer didn't beat Djokovic indoors in WImbledon 2012? The final was part outdoor/part indoors. I don't see any confusion here, although admittedly Shanghai surface (deco turf) is different from your traditional indoor hard courts but the conditions were still indoors.

I have a different take on it. Sure, the bigger racket did help Federer, especially his BH but I think the 5th set turn around had more to do with him playing with nothing to lose attitude and Nadal not being as sharp as he usually is in big moments.

I'd think conditions, such as bounce of the ball, are still a bit different on an outdoor HC with a roof on compared to a permanent indoor court/indoor court laid for the week.

That too, for sure. But the racquet (and Fed not losing to Rafa for 3 full years) helped that 5th set turnaround. He was more mentally free going into that final than he had in a long while vs. Rafa. But still not free enough to avoid lapses and doubt for most of the match. Since then, he's been set free and the bigger racquet has allowed him to deal effectively with Rafa's game plan.

 

[Clay lover]

To be fair their respective achievements indicate that Nadal is indeed an inferior HC player to Fed, but that doesn't in any way detract from Nadal's greatness. For a player initially known as a clay court specialist to have that much success against the goat relative to the rest of the field is a testament to his mental fortitude. Likewise, Djokovic deserves equal praise for faring so well against Fed.

Fed may be old, but the way he destroys the rest of the field regardless of his age shows that his talent transcends time, and anyone who is capable of stopping him must have serious game.

 

[zep]

I'd think conditions, such as bounce of the ball, are still a bit different on an outdoor HC with a roof on compared to a permanent indoor court/indoor court laid for the week.

That's a fair point. But conditions play a big part too, and Fed has always been money under the roof. Perhaps one should put a * and mention that alongside the numbers.