I think Nadal played better in the Rome 2006 final than the RG 2006 final.
This. Nadal was nervous. If Nadal lost the Rome Final, he would be even less confident. And Federer would be more confident.
I think Nadal played better in the Rome 2006 final than the RG 2006 final.
So did Federer though.
Nadal did enough, had he been pushed, he will have easily responded.
True.False.
Even Puerta was serving to take it to the 5th set in 2005.
Do you think Djokovic was beating Nadal at RG 2011, having beaten him back to back in Madrid 2011 and Rome 2011?
True.
Nadal has never played a 5 sets RG final against Federer (or any other player for that matter). Nadal convincingly defeated 2005 Federer in 4 sets, so your comment about the doper Puerta makes no sense. 2005 Federer did play Nadal and we all saw the result. He was an inferior clay player to Nadal even in 2005, so he had no chance.
Nadal defeated fairly easily Federer in both matches. Both 4 sets. No chance, as Nadal was already a superior clay player than Federer by 2005.Hindsight is always 20/20.
2005 and 2006 Nadal wasn't a favorite by a big margin. In 2006 they played a 4th set tb. So, there was a chance, maybe a slim chance, but still far from a certain outcome.
Only after that Federer kinda had no chance at RG.
LOL, what a horrible excuse. So now Federer lost a RG final to Nadal because "he wasn't playing at his best and Nadal wouldn't have won if Roger were playing at his best". Please. Federer was playing at his best the whole match, but he was surpassed by the superior clay player. No version of Federer can defeat 2006 Nadal at RG. 2006 was one of Nadal's prime years at RG. Federer can't defeat a well-playing Nadal at RG, as Nadal is the clay BOAT by a gigantic margin. Federer is not the clay BOAT, it is irrelevant whether he plays his best in a RG final, it is not enough to defeat prime Nadal.I think it’s widely regarded that Federer was in God mode in the first set of the 2006 final , if he kept that up then Rafa wouldn’t have won,
You must not have watched that match at all, I remember it like yesterday. Nadal was crushing the ball in that first set and playing unreal tennis but Federer had every answer. Against anyone else Nadal would won it 6-0 himself. Against that version of Federer he was annihilated , then the second set Federer dropped off completely and Nadal took over. Those are the facts. The best version of Nadal on clay was 2008, do you even watch tennis ?LOL, what a horrible excuse. So now Federer lost a RG final to Nadal because "he wasn't playing at his best". Please. Federer was playing at his best the whole match, but he was outplayed by the superior clay player. No version of Federer can defeat 2006 Nadal at RG. 2006 was one of Nadal's prime years at RG. Federer can't defeat a well-playing Nadal at RG, as Nadal is the clay BOAT by a gigantic margin.
Haha. So "annihilated" that Federer couldn't even reach a fifth set. LOL. Oh yes, the second set Federer dropped off. EXCUSES. He maintained the same level, but it is not enough against prime Nadal.You must not have watched that match at all, I remember it like yesterday. Nadal was crushing the ball in that first set and playing unreal tennis but Federer had every answer. Against anyone else Nadal would won it 6-0 himself. Against that version of Federer he was annihilated , then the second set Federer dropped off completely and Nadal took over. Those are the facts. The best version of Nadal on clay was 2008, do you even watch tennis ?
Wimbledon, luckiest ever victory for Djokovic and by a wide margin
2011. The first three sets could have gone either way.
But in reality, he wasn't close.
And no, if he had won Rome 2006, he still was not going to win RG 2006. There is a big difference between Rafa at Rome and Rafa at RG.
I think the confusion relates to two things. 7-1 includes a 2015 Fed Basel win and a 2019 IW Fed walkover win.LOL
This take of yours isn’t becoming less ridiculous, is it?
Let’s try learning how to count again.
Since 2017:
Federer def Nadal at AO, IW, MI, SH, WB
Nadal def Federer at RG
That’s 5-1
FIVE-ONE
This poster shamelessly keeps spreading fake stats from Nadal vs Federer H2H, even though she was called out for it on numerous occasions.I think the confusion relates to two things. 7-1 includes a 2015 Fed Basel win and a 2019 IW Fed walkover win.
1) Welcome back.This poster shamelessly keeps spreading fake stats from Nadal vs Federer H2H, even though she was called out for it on numerous occasions.
It is no a "confusion" it is a deliberately wrong statement. She said "since 2017". That's like saying that since 2017 they are 7-2 and including the AO 2014 SF because yes.I think the confusion relates to two things. 7-1 includes a 2015 Fed Basel win and a 2019 IW Fed walkover win.
The ATP website presentation is a bit misleading. It says that Nadal leads 24 to 16 up top but in the event breakdown it list 41 matches and includes the IW Fed walkover win. I have used the 7-1 reference a few times here myself (never said since 2017) but it looks like I should be saying 6-1. By the way, I was just trying to be helpful in my response and was not aware any previous history between commenters. Thanks.It is no a "confusion" it is a deliberately wrong statement. She said "since 2017". That's like saying that since 2017 they are 7-2 and including the AO 2014 SF because yes.
The 2019 IW match never occured and so Federer did not defeat Nadal, he advanced of round. 2019 IW did not add a victory of Federer over Nadal in the official H2H stats, just like the 2014 ATP finals did not add a victory of Djokovic over Federer in the official H2H stats. Federer was 15-23 against Rafa before IW 2019 and remained 15-23 against Rafa after IW 2019.
Are you so sure? I mean, he won the first set 6-1 at RG, and isn't this a bigger confidence boost for the ongoing match than if a month earlier he won a 5th set 7-5 or lost it 6-7?Maybe...
Rome 2006 was the defining moment of the Fedal rivalry and the history of tennis. It's with this win that Nadal truly became the monster on clay.
If Federer won Rome 2006, he would have won the FO 2006 and Nadal's aura of invincibility wouldn't have existed (or not yet). Federer would have the mental advantage against Nadal.
Fed really effed up in 2006 but 2005 was really good from Nadal. I can’t see many versions of Djokovic going five (only 2013 I’d say).2005-2006 he should’ve at least gone to 5th set vs developing baby Nadal
2011, even if wins first set I can see him choking and losing in 4, maybe 5. Similar to 2012 AO semi where he started great too and still choked every set after the first.
2006/2011
leaning towards 2011 just because of the balls and the surface that was the only year where clay didn't even play like clay, it was tailor made for Fed and still f*ked it up against a lesser Nadal than all the previous years
BS. Why can’t YOU count?This poster shamelessly keeps spreading fake stats from Nadal vs Federer H2H, even though she was called out for it on numerous occasions.
You said since 2017 though. Not 2015.BS. Why can’t YOU count?
From 2015-2019, Fed is 7-1 H2H against Nadal. Read it and weep:
Roger Federer VS Rafael Nadal | Head 2 Head | H2H | ATP Tour | Tennis
Head to head records for players in men's professional tennis. View rivalry results and stats for matches on the ATP Tour.www.atptour.com
Nobody shamelessly called me out on it because 7-1 is a fact from 2015-2019. Pathetic trolling and inability to count is your issue, not mine.
It's called a moral victory, bud.You said since 2017 though. Not 2015.
Plus, you’re counting a walkover.
Probably agree tbh.So did Federer though.
Nadal did enough, had he been pushed, he will have easily responded.
He was certainly fast but was he that good? I seem to remember Federer spraying forehands everywhere then screaming in frustration.Fed really effed up in 2006 but 2005 was really good from Nadal. I can’t see many versions of Djokovic going five (only 2013 I’d say).
2006/07 Federer with Djokovic' mental toughness would beat young Nadal on clay. Federer clearly had enough game then but mentally he wasn't good enough to go past clay warrior.
HAHAHAHATrue.
Nadal has never played a 5 sets RG final against Federer (or any other player for that matter). Nadal convincingly defeated 2005 Federer in 4 sets, so your comment about the doper Puerta makes no sense. 2005 Federer did play Nadal and we all saw the result. He was an inferior clay player to Nadal even in 2005, so he had no chance.
You then need to remember doped Puerta hitting harder than any Djokovic except 2011,16He was certainly fast but was he that good? I seem to remember Federer spraying forehands everywhere then screaming in frustration.
A good, focused Djoko could do it for sure. Puerta nearly did it and Nadal was better in the final.Fed really effed up in 2006 but 2005 was really good from Nadal. I can’t see many versions of Djokovic going five (only 2013 I’d say).
BS. Why can’t YOU count?
From 2015-2019, Fed is 7-1 H2H against Nadal. Read it and weep:
Roger Federer VS Rafael Nadal | Head 2 Head | H2H | ATP Tour | Tennis
Head to head records for players in men's professional tennis. View rivalry results and stats for matches on the ATP Tour.www.atptour.com
Nobody shamelessly called me out on it because 7-1 is a fact from 2015-2019. Pathetic trolling and inability to count is your issue, not mine.
Even your own fanbase is calling you out.You said since 2017 though. Not 2015.
Plus, you’re counting a walkover.
I think someone like 2013 or 2016 Djokovic would win against baby Nadal who had no serve or Bh. He had to evolve to become a better player.2
You then need to remember doped Puerta hitting harder than any Djokovic except 2011,16
Whose balls? Wilander said that Federer lacks the balls to play Nadal.2006/2011
leaning towards 2011 just because of the balls and the surface that was the only year where clay didn't even play like clay, it was tailor made for Fed and still f*ked it up against a lesser Nadal than all the previous years