Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
True, but you have to admit it wasn't until 2008 that he became really good on all surfaces. I guess everyone has different views on when a player's prime started though.
Was 2014 Australian Open Final the turning point for Nadal's career?
- Thread starter Charlemagne
- Start date
True enough about your last statement. I can't agree with it when I'm seeing Rafa beat peak Fed on hard courts, winning IW in 2007, winning two HC masters in 05 and nearly a 3rd. Reaching consecutive Wimbledon finals in 06-07.
For me the whole Rafa's prime begun in 08 seems like an excuse for his early HC slam losses in 05-07 and the reason Fed declined (although he lost to many others after 06 not just Rafa)
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Perhaps it would be fairer to say his prime started in '05 and his peak started in '08.
Perhaps it would be fairer to say his prime started in '05 and his peak started in '08.
I'd say his clay peak started even earlier in 05 maybe 06. Even peak Roger couldn't beat him at Rome or RG despite having MPs in 5th set and then winning first set 6-1 at RG.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Nadal at Wimb 2007 was pretty close to his grass prime.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Was he that much better on HC in 2008? He still failed to reach a HC slam final. And he was trashed by Tsonga in a HC slam SF.
On grass he was already good in 2006. I guess reaching 2 Wimb finals in 2006 and 2007 doesn't qualify him as being good on grass?
As a player im not sure he was near his prime though as still not that great on hard court
Sorry you are misguided. Nadal has beat federer everwhere on every surface in the biggest events. To use the excuse that federer wss post prime for a decade is desperation.
That being said if federer can beat nadal in indian wells this year, although not a final and both way past their best it will be hugely significant as unlike australia this year, indian welld conditions suit nadal more than federer.
But i expect nadal to beat federer with ease. If they make it to their last 16 match
Federer has done exactly the same to Nadal so no idea what **** you are going on about
Federer from now is huge favourite and has been since late 2014 on everywhere but clay.
Fed being post prime during most of those years isn't deperation it's actual fact
Isnt it 1-3 in australia? Doesnt nadal have wimning record in indian wells? Cincinatti as well?
Apart from grass and indoors nadal neats him routinely unless the court is low bouncing as in australia to negate the nadal top spin.
Nadal will rip federer apart in a few days time if fedefer makes it to face nadal. Nadal has no chance of wimning indian wells but he will severely expose federers limitations.
Federers tournament chances this year are limited to halle, cincinatti and wtf maybe. Wimbledon? No chance. Not with murray as world no.1.
Federer is brilliant on a low bouncing court. On high bouncing courts he cant beat nadal or djokovic. No chance he makes any impression in indian wells. Sorry
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Bolded no.1: at IW Federer and Nadal are tied at 1-1. With Federer winning in 2012 and Nadal in 2013 (over an injured Fed). Cincy record is irrelevant as Nadal and Federer only played there once in 2013, Fed's worst season. He avoided Fed completely at Cincy when Roger was in tremendous form like 2015.
Bolded no.2: if Murray is Federer's biggest threat at Wimb, Fed has nothing to worry about.
Bolded no.3: you mean he can't beat them now. Because he has victories over Djokovic and Nadal on high bouncing courts.
chut
Professional
I don't see how H2H is relevant is general, but especially when it comes to one event, it becomes really stupid. Especially in the case of Cinci (the real slam), a tournament Federer won 7 times and Nadal just once. Are we supposed to believe Nadal > Federer there? Really? Stop trolling.
And btw, Octobot always goes for the "he injured himself during practice before the match" but I don't remember Nadal being impaired until Wawrinka had him under water, leading a set and a break, when he suddenly coudln't movve and started serving around 120km/h serves.
And btw, Octobot always goes for the "he injured himself during practice before the match" but I don't remember Nadal being impaired until Wawrinka had him under water, leading a set and a break, when he suddenly coudln't movve and started serving around 120km/h serves.
IW is tied 1-1. AO is 1-1 when they were relatively even (even though Fed wasn't as good in 09) 2012 and 2014 victories is old man Fed so who gives a ****
Cincinatti in 2013 when Fed had a bad back and was number 6 LOL
On high bouncing has no chance? That's why he beat Nadal twice on clay, 3 times on slow HC... owned Djokovic 3 times on clay... yeah another **** point from you
Fed will destroy Rafa at IW with his attacking play. Same story as AO except he won't let Rafa have 2 sets.
Charlemagne
Hall of Fame
Total bs. Did you not watch Wimbledon SF of 2015? Murray was straight setted.
Charlemagne
Hall of Fame
Federer did beat Nadal in 2012 at IW, with aggressive first strike tennis. Not sure if he could replicate that today, but I do think Federer gets tremendous mental rest knowing that Nadal isn't the same Nadal- defensively, physically etc.
Yes we are talking about this weeks potential match up arent we?
Looking forward to them playing now. Bring it on. I fancy nadal to tear into rogento
Lol its 3-1 at ao. U cant cherry pick. Fedefer beat nadal this year but u cant say when nadal wind it doesnt count but when federer wins it means goathood lmao.
Federer has alot to prove still. By that i mean in relative terms in respect of comparing him to nadal and djokovic. All three have achieved things the other hasnt so there will always be a debate. That said if federer were to beat nadal this week then djokovic next match then i will concede debate over and we will have to refocus on the next generation and find domething to argue about.
2017 now mate
Me too. LMAO this Nadal isn't tearing into anything. Fed's servebotting and aggressive returning will be key here.
I don't see how you can hold those 2012 or 2014 losses against Federer. 30 and 32 years old vs prime Rafa on slow hard courts? Who was expecting him to win? Rafa had declined a lot by this year's final so it was a more even match up, where as in 12 and 14.
Had they met in 06 or 07 then Federer would've been heavy favourite 80/20. 09 was prime Federer vs peak Rafa so probably 60/40 Rafa favourite. 2012 and 2014 Rafa would've been like 90/10 favourite at that point.
2017 final I had Fed as very slight favourite 55/45 based on form and playing style.
AceSalvo
Legend
All this talk of Nadal beating Fed everywhere is funny because ATP tour is Slow and High Bouncing pretty much everywhere.
Lets talk when ATP courts equally favors first strike tennis.
Also, we are witnessing how difficult it has become for Nadal to win tournaments as he was approaching his 30's. In tennis, having physical advantage is of prime importance.
Lets talk when ATP courts equally favors first strike tennis.
Also, we are witnessing how difficult it has become for Nadal to win tournaments as he was approaching his 30's. In tennis, having physical advantage is of prime importance.
Two players well.past their best as in this year ao final...is it relevant? What you are essentially saying is any match between nadal and federer nowadays is irrelevant in their rivalry.
More relevant than any of their matches between 08 - 14 AO yes as Nadal was closer to his top level than Federer in those years. 2017 they were more even than they had been since 07.
Lol do you realise how desperate you sound
Its hilarious. In your alternate reality every beat down nadal gave federer doesnt count but the occasional win federer gets is significant wven if nadal has a days less rest after a gruelling 5 set match on a court tailor made for federer. Forgive me if i say it appears you are clutching at straws
About as desperate as you sound sayin 2017 AO is irrelevant, when most of Nadal's recent wins including 2 at AO came vs a 30-32 year old... and Nadal rarely beat down Fed except on clay so no idea what the hell you're on about.
Nadal is 5 years younger than Fed and both played a 5 setter... any day less rest is irrelevant
You cant hide behind age one minute then dismiss it the next. If u r using federers age as an excuse for a his nadal beatdowns then u cant claim federer is goat as the onlyvreason he has more majors is necause he is older and been on tour longer!! U are a hypocrite sir.
And if u think a days extra rest doesnt matter then u have clearlh not played tennis at any reasonable level.
When nadal beats federer in indian wells what will your excuse be?
Again, what beat downs? On clay? I don't give a ****. Nadal's clay GOAT, good for him.
Nadal and Djokovic aren't getting anywhere near 18 grand slams. Maybe 1-2 more each at most. They won't be winning them at 35 like Federer did.
Fed IS the GOAT.
If Nadal beats Fed at IW then he either played better on the day, played excellent or Fed played crap or a mix of the three. They're finally on an even playing field for the first time since 07. Both well past their best.
Australian open...nadal 3-1federer
Fremch open nadal 5-0 federer
Now you canno be a goat in any sport with a record like that on two different surfaces. Its beyond embarrassing. But federer ibthink recognises this as he said he is playing on until he is40 so perhaps wants to right 23 wrongs
You miscounted.
It's 18>14 Federer
5 > 1 Federer at AO
7 > 2 Federer at W
5 > 2 Federer at USO
9 > 1 Nadal at RG.
These are the only meaningful stats. Nadal lost in both the 2012/2014 finals anyway so those SF wins are IRRELEVANT. Only 09 is meaningful as it meant he won the title.
Fed IS the GOAT. It's a fact. Nadal will be the GOAT if he wins 4-5 more grand slams. Djokovic needs 6 more.
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
What's actually "beyond embarrassing" is this post. It's utterly jaw dropping that a guy with Roger's tennis resume isn't GOAT:
1. 7 Wimbledon's
2. 5 straight USO's
3. 5 AO's
4. 1 RG
5. 300+ weeks ranked #1
------------------------
Yup... cringe worthy and "beyond embarrassing" career stats and we're sooooo indebted to you for bringing this to our collective attention.
How many of those were when nadal and djokovic at their peak? 5 i think. Puts him third in the list fella. When all three at their best nadal and djokovic were the alphas.
Similar threads
- Poll
