What was Federer's best chance against Nadal at Roland Garros ?

RoS

Rookie
So did Federer though.

Nadal did enough, had he been pushed, he will have easily responded.
No

Federer after the first set played badly. He just had a burst of pride at the end of the 4th set and that's all. In Rome, Federer was scintillating during the 4th and 5th set.
 

Sport

G.O.A.T.
False.

Even Puerta was serving to take it to the 5th set in 2005.
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.
 

RoS

Rookie
Do you think Djokovic was beating Nadal at RG 2011, having beaten him back to back in Madrid 2011 and Rome 2011?
Yes. Djokovic 2011 was the best Djokovic ever.

And if Nadal struggled with Federer in the final, he would have struggled more against Djokovic (who has a better backhand and a better return than Federer, and had the mental hold on Nadal)

Federer saved Nadal.
 

Biotic

Hall of Fame
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.
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.
 

Turing

Rookie
It's probably between 2005 and 2011.

2005 the rivalry was still largely a blank slate and it was their first meeting on clay, so this was probably his best chance to capitalize on Nadal's inexperience and establish the dynamics of the rivalry.

2011 he had the most favorable conditions with the lighter balls, but choked.

2006 and 2007 he had no chance in those hot and sunny conditions and after choking in Rome to give Nadal the mental edge.
 

FlamingCheeto

Professional
2019 he actually played GREAT in the wind, lots of amazing rallies he should have/would have won against anyone but Rafa on that day.
 

Pheasant

Hall of Fame
Federer lost all of the RG matches to Nadal, including his peak run from 2005-2007. I guess I'm missing the point of this thread. Are you asking which match was the closest? Or are you asking which match would have the best chance of going Fed's way if they replayed each other?

2006 rematch. That's Fed's best chance, maybe a 1-5 chance at best. Next best is 2007, followed by 2005.
 

Sport

G.O.A.T.
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.
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.
 
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, but Rafa does what Rafa does and finds a way. 2011 was again a missed opportunity, after what Federer did to Djokovic at the absolute peak of his career in the semi final I think even the biggest Fed doubters started to think he had a chance to win. Losing that first set in that position was absolutely criminal however, may not have won in the long run but deserved 5 sets !
 

Sport

G.O.A.T.
A rational question is "which match was the closest?", not "what match was Federer's best chance to beat Nadal at RG?". Federer never had any chance to beat Nadal at RG, he never even puched Nadal to 5.
 

Sport

G.O.A.T.
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,
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.
 
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.
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 ?
 

Sport

G.O.A.T.
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 ?
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.

I didn't say 2006 is the best version of Nadal. I said it is one of his prime years, which is an undeniable fact. Do you even watch tennis?

Nadal is the clay BOAT, not Federer. Federer can't touch prime Nadal in a RG final, regardless of Federer's level.
 

Sport

G.O.A.T.
Hypothetical peak Federer: "annihilates" any version of Nadal at RG bar 2008.
Real-life peak Federer: can't touch Nadal at RG, and never even pushed him to 5 sets, as demonstrated between 2005 and 2011 (5-0 losing H2H).

Typical fanaticism of some fans. Hypothetical peak Federer wins virtually every match. Asserting that peak Federer has a higher clay level than Nadal bar 2008 is a desperate attempt to deny reality.
 
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 don’t think it’s possible to definitively say that. The big difference in the first set of the 2006 RG final and the rest of the match was Federer, not Nadal. Fed has shown that he is capable of playing at the level to beat Nadal at RG, but that he’s also not mentally capable of sustaining it. If he had won Rome that would have meant that he was capable of adapting and not resigning himself to his “predetermined fate” of losing a physicality matchup against Nadal, backhand vs forehand. Unfortunately, peak Fed’s biggest weakness was his arrogance: to either win how he wanted to play against his opponent or not at all.
 

brc444

Rookie
LOL

This take of yours isn’t becoming less ridiculous, is it? :sneaky:

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
I think the confusion relates to two things. 7-1 includes a 2015 Fed Basel win and a 2019 IW Fed walkover win.
 

Yugram

Legend
I think the confusion relates to two things. 7-1 includes a 2015 Fed Basel win and a 2019 IW Fed walkover win.
This poster shamelessly keeps spreading fake stats from Nadal vs Federer H2H, even though she was called out for it on numerous occasions.
 
D

Deleted member 743561

Guest
This poster shamelessly keeps spreading fake stats from Nadal vs Federer H2H, even though she was called out for it on numerous occasions.
1) Welcome back. :)

2) What brought about your ban?

3) Have you learned a valuable lesson?
 

Sport

G.O.A.T.
I think the confusion relates to two things. 7-1 includes a 2015 Fed Basel win and a 2019 IW Fed walkover win.
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.
 

brc444

Rookie
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.
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.
 

Sephiroth

Hall of Fame
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
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
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.
 

ChrisRF

Hall of Fame
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.
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?
 

Third Serve

G.O.A.T.
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.
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).
 

malbaker86

Hall of Fame
Going into the match, I wanna say 2011. He had the FO and career GS monkey off his back and Rafa was “struggling” going into the match

Now as far as after the match started, I say 06. Should of went up 2 sets to 1 but wet the bed on BP as usual in the 3rd set
 

Incognito

Legend
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
It was a lesser Nadal but that wasn’t peak Federer either. I believe Fed of 2005-2007 would have beaten 2011 Rafa at RG.
 

duaneeo

Legend
I can't believe people are saying 2011. No way did Federer have the mentality to beat Nadal at RG in 2011, lol.
 

clout

Hall of Fame
2005-2007 for sure. Those were Fed’s true peak years and Rafa was still basically a kid, Fed should’ve never let Rafa beat him the way he did, even on clay. He was simply the best tennis player at the time.

Those three RG losses to under drinking age Nadal followed by 2008 WI, 2009 AO, and some of those Djoker losses later on really changed the way some ppl looked at Fed compared to Djokodal.
 

BeatlesFan

Bionic Poster
This poster shamelessly keeps spreading fake stats from Nadal vs Federer H2H, even though she was called out for it on numerous occasions.
BS. Why can’t YOU count?
From 2015-2019, Fed is 7-1 H2H against Nadal. Read it and weep:


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.
 

Third Serve

G.O.A.T.
BS. Why can’t YOU count?
From 2015-2019, Fed is 7-1 H2H against Nadal. Read it and weep:


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.
You said since 2017 though. Not 2015.

Plus, you’re counting a walkover.
 

King No1e

G.O.A.T.
2006. In 2011 he played as well as he possibly could but by then Nadal had a complete death grip on the rivalry, both tactically and psychologically.
 

D.Nalby12

G.O.A.T.
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.
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
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).
He was certainly fast but was he that good? I seem to remember Federer spraying forehands everywhere then screaming in frustration.
 

Feather

Legend
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.
Disagree! Roger Federer's best on clay was not enough to beat 2006 Rafa Nadal on clay. It's not just mental toughness. In the same year at Wimbledon, Roger beat Rafa. How come he did that if he was "mentally weak" ? That too just few weeks after losing to Rafa at RG. Roger missed Rome 2006 by a whisker but that's not due to mental toughness or the lack of it.
 

aman92

Hall of Fame
2011 obviously.. Nadal was low on confidence and Federer played possibly his best clay court match in the semis. Should have won one of the first 2 sets
 
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.
HAHAHAHA
 

InsideOut900

Hall of Fame
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).
A good, focused Djoko could do it for sure. Puerta nearly did it and Nadal was better in the final.

Coria and Fed himself did it in Rome and Nadal was no worse in Rome 05/06 than RG imo. Maybe a bit better at RG 05.

I see 2011/2013/2016 and maybe the 2015 version from earlier rounds doing it to be specific.

Nadal wasn't peak outside of set 3 of the RG 05 semi, but Fed esentially gifted sets 1 and 4 with a gazillion FH UEs.

Lost his serve 4 times in set 1, though he played quite well on return, blew a break lead in the 4th with bad errors and generally speaking played poorly from 3-1 in the 4th until he lost.
 
Last edited:

Yugram

Legend
BS. Why can’t YOU count?
From 2015-2019, Fed is 7-1 H2H against Nadal. Read it and weep:


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.
You said since 2017 though. Not 2015.

Plus, you’re counting a walkover.
Even your own fanbase is calling you out.
 

ibbi

Legend
In 2006 he spent like 5 fewer hours on court heading into the final, couple that with the breadstick opening set, and you'd think that was a pretty good chance.

In 2007 he carved out that immortal, legendary break point conversion stat line, so obviously the chances were there.

In 2011 you had the fancy Babolat balls and the wet conditions on final day.

All good chances for different reasons.
 
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
Whose balls? Wilander said that Federer lacks the balls to play Nadal.
 
Top