What stands out more to you: Federer's more Grand Slam quarterfinals/semis/finals or Nadal's "conversion" of winning Grand Slams?

[McEnroeisanartist]

What stands out more to you: Federer's more Grand Slam quarterfinals/semis/finals or Nadal's "conversion" of winning Grand Slams?

Both have won 20 Grand Slams.

But, Federer has reached 3 more Grand Slam finals, 11 more Grand Slam semifinals, and 14 more Grand Slam quarterfinals.

Of course, Federer is older and thus has played in 18 more Grand Slams than Nadal.
Of course, we can all envision Nadal winning more Grand Slams than Federer eventually, but I am not sure Nadal will pass Federer for more Grand Slam finals, semifinals, and quarterfinals.

Shouldn't Federer get more credit for reaching the 2nd half of a Grand Slam so many more times than Nadal efficiently reaching the 2nd half of a Grand Slam and winning it?

 

[Milanez82]

How is Djokovic doing in those stats

 

[Djoker458]

What stands out more to you: Federer's more Grand Slam quarterfinals/semis/finals or Nadal's "conversion" of winning Grand Slams?

Both have won 20 Grand Slams.

But, Federer has reached 3 more Grand Slam finals, 11 more Grand Slam semifinals, and 14 more Grand Slam quarterfinals.

Of course, Federer is older and thus has played in 18 more Grand Slams than Nadal.

Shouldn't Federer get more credit for reaching the 2nd half of a Grand Slam so many more times.

Of course, we can all envision Nadal winning more Grand Slams than Federer eventually, but I am not sure Nadal will pass Federer for more Grand Slam finals, semifinals, and quarterfinals.

Shouldn't Federer get more credit for reaching the 2nd half of a Grand Slam so many more times than Nadal efficiently reaching the 2nd half of a Grand Slam and winning it?

I think nasals conversion of winning them is a skewed stat due to most coming all at one place.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

Well lets look at the slams overall. I mean if you look at their slam %

Aus Open:
Federer: 87%. Nadal 82%

French Open:
Federer: 81%. Nadal 97%

Wimbledon:
Federer: 89%. Nadal 81%.

US Open:
Federer: 86%. Nadal 85%.

It's Federer except the RG which checks out. Nadal is the clay GOAT and Fed beats him at the rest.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

I think nasals conversion of winning them is a skewed stat due to most coming all at one place.

Agreed, hence my post above

 

[Nadal15thslam]

Nadal played in a lot less slams because of his injuries and he still has 20 slams. Incredible.

 

[mehdimike]

Nadal played in a lot less slams because of his injuries and he still has 20 slams. Incredible.

Injuries during his prime years! Wimb 2009
USO 2012 and 2014, AO 2013. Even RG 2016 could be included!

 

[Deleted member 771911]

Whatever Nadal did

 

[AceSalvo]

18/19 consecutive GS finals stands out the most.

Also, 6 consecutive finals at one GS event. Not even the Clay GOAT could do this at his pet slam.

 

[skip1969]

I think longevity-wise, Fed's stats are amazing. Getting to so many Slam quarters, semis and finals in a career is a remarkable testament to his consistency and longevity. Plus, it points to his ability on all surfaces.

All the TTW fanboys do is count Slams. But history will take into account the entire scope of the players' accomplishments. The full resume. For Djokovic, his consecutive weeks at No 1 will be a huge feather in his cap. For Federer, it will be the insane amounts of Slam quarters, semis and finals he reached. Those are the sort of stats that will cement their places in history. It's the sort of stuff Nadal can't even touch, those stats that prove a complete dominance of the entire calendar for ridiculously long periods of time.

 

[boredone3456]

I think longevity-wise, Fed's stats are amazing. Getting to so many Slam quarters, semis and finals in a career is a remarkable testament to his consistency and longevity. Plus, it points to his ability on all surfaces.

All the TTW fanboys do is count Slams. But history will take into account the entire scope of the players' accomplishments. The full resume. For Djokovic, his consecutive weeks at No 1 will be a huge feather in his cap. For Federer, it will be the insane amounts of Slam quarters, semis and finals he reached. Those are the sort of stats that will cement their places in history. It's the sorts of stuff Nadal can't even touch, those stats that prove a complete dominance of the entire calendar for ridiculously long periods of time.

Djokovic also has his incredible Masters record on his side as well. If they all end up tied or close that might actually tip things in his favor.

 

[T007]

18/19 consecutive GS finals stands out the most.

Also, 6 consecutive finals at one GS event. Not even the Clay GOAT could do this at his pet slam.

That is one of the most underrated stats of Federer

 

[T007]

What stands out more to you: Federer's more Grand Slam quarterfinals/semis/finals or Nadal's "conversion" of winning Grand Slams?

Both have won 20 Grand Slams.

But, Federer has reached 3 more Grand Slam finals, 11 more Grand Slam semifinals, and 14 more Grand Slam quarterfinals.

Of course, Federer is older and thus has played in 18 more Grand Slams than Nadal.
Of course, we can all envision Nadal winning more Grand Slams than Federer eventually, but I am not sure Nadal will pass Federer for more Grand Slam finals, semifinals, and quarterfinals.

Shouldn't Federer get more credit for reaching the 2nd half of a Grand Slam so many more times than Nadal efficiently reaching the 2nd half of a Grand Slam and winning it?

If you put their best tournaments aside
Nadal won 7/43
Federer won 12/58.

Federers conversion rate in 4.9
Nadals is slightly above 6.

Nadals higher conversion rate is a result of his exceptional winning record at RG.

But with the consecutive QFs(36),SFs(23) and Finals (10 & 9 twice is incredible). By looking at the Current Gen who can't make QFs twice in a row speaks volumes about Federers record of doing it 36 times in a row.

 

[bnjkn]

None tbh. They're both kind of meaningless, in the sense that no one will remember that.

 

[T007]

What stands out more to you: Federer's more Grand Slam quarterfinals/semis/finals or Nadal's "conversion" of winning Grand Slams?

Both have won 20 Grand Slams.

But, Federer has reached 3 more Grand Slam finals, 11 more Grand Slam semifinals, and 14 more Grand Slam quarterfinals.

Of course, Federer is older and thus has played in 18 more Grand Slams than Nadal.
Of course, we can all envision Nadal winning more Grand Slams than Federer eventually, but I am not sure Nadal will pass Federer for more Grand Slam finals, semifinals, and quarterfinals.

Shouldn't Federer get more credit for reaching the 2nd half of a Grand Slam so many more times than Nadal efficiently reaching the 2nd half of a Grand Slam and winning it?

Federer had a even better conversion rate till his 30 winning 16/45 while Nadal 14/47.

Nadal and djokovics conversion rate improved in his their 30s as they won 6/10 slams they played with a weaker field at present compared to 2011-15 where Federer has to contend with a stronger field losing many SFs and Fs to peak djokovic,Nadal, murray and berdych.

 

[skip1969]

Djokovic also has his incredible Masters record on his side as well. If they all end up tied or close that might actually tip things in his favor.

Yeah, it'll be all of the other achievements that will ultimately put those two in the Nos 1 and 2 positions in the Open Era. Year end championships, weeks at No 1, Year end No 1, Slam quarters, semis and finals, ATP titles . . . And then there'll be those great years of almost complete dominance. Like 2005-2007 for Federer. 2011, 2015 for Djokovic.

I mean, in my view, it really is a two-horse race.

 

[FHtennisman]

Federer had a even better conversion rate till his 30 winning 16/45 while Nadal 14/47.

Nadal and djokovics conversion rate improved in his their 30s as they won 6/10 slams they played with a weaker field at present compared to 2011-15 where Federer has to contend with a stronger field losing many SFs and Fs to peak djokovic,Nadal, murray and berdych.

Agreed, the current "next gen" players can barely boast about any peak displays such as Soderling at FO '09, Tsonga at Wimby '11 etc.

 

[Tennisgods]

What stands out more to you: Federer's more Grand Slam quarterfinals/semis/finals or Nadal's "conversion" of winning Grand Slams?

Both have won 20 Grand Slams.

But, Federer has reached 3 more Grand Slam finals, 11 more Grand Slam semifinals, and 14 more Grand Slam quarterfinals.

Of course, Federer is older and thus has played in 18 more Grand Slams than Nadal.
Of course, we can all envision Nadal winning more Grand Slams than Federer eventually, but I am not sure Nadal will pass Federer for more Grand Slam finals, semifinals, and quarterfinals.

Shouldn't Federer get more credit for reaching the 2nd half of a Grand Slam so many more times than Nadal efficiently reaching the 2nd half of a Grand Slam and winning it?

Both incredible. These guys are awesome!

 

[SonnyT]

It's hard to assess Nadal's stats against another ATG, because he's the greatest at one Slam, but didn't win anything at all at 2 other Slams in over a decade.

 

[skip1969]

It's hard to assess Nadal's stats against another ATG, because he's the greatest at one Slam, but didn't win anything at all at 2 other Slams in over a decade.

Yeah, even when you look at his overall title count. It's something like 62 out of 88 of his titles are on clay. His career results just don't match up with Federer and Djokovic, whose dominance hasn't been so much about one surface.